THE COVENANT OF GRACE, Not ABSOLUTE, but CONDITIONAL, Modestly asserted.

WHether the Covenant of grace be con­ditional or absolute, is, saithVind. Ley Lect. 26. pag. 249. Mr. Burges, a very troublesome questi­on. So indeede it proves in places where it is vented. It troubles the faith of some, the lives of others, and the peace of very many.

New England hath felt the troubles it occasioned; And many places in old England are now suffering. I could therefore from my heart have wished that either none at all had broached it in these parts, or if it must have beene published, some other, rather then you, my dearest Friend and Reverend Brother, might have beene the Author of that, meerly out of the great respect and entire affection I beare unto you. But seeing you have not only set it on foote, but when a modest defence was made of the contrary Doctrine, without any either bitter invective against your tenent, or so much as reply unto your Arguments; you in divers Sermons renewed the quarrel, replied unto the Arguments of the contrary side; not sparing to asperse them in too open a manner.

I thought it my duty I owe to truth, oppugned by, not­withstanding my love unto you, to let you know, both wherein your Reply appears unsatisfactory unto me, and [Page 2] wherein offensive. Of the latter in the first place, which is as followes.

First, in the whole series of your discourse, you seemed to me to rank those of our Divines, who hold the covenant of grace to have conditions, in the same file, with Arminians, as if both had maintained the same conditionate redemp­tion or salvability; wherein, whether you dealt fairly, I refer it to your conscience to consider. Now, though I do not doubt, but that you know full well already how farre we differ from them: yet shall I set downe the diffe­rence in some particulars, and then endeavour to satisfie your Arguments, so farre as they seeme to reflect upon our Tenents. The Salvability or potentiall and conditionate redemption maintained by the Arminians, may (I conceive) be reduced to these four particulars.

1. That Christ in dying, intended not the salvation of any particular persons.

2. That the end of his death was not to bring some a­ctually to salvation, but only that God thereby might have power (his justice being satisfied) to give remission of sins to sinful man, on what conditions he pleased. So that Christ might have had his end, though never a man had been actually saved.

3. That this is the will of God, that none should enjoy remission of sins, but on condition of faith.

4. That Christ hath purchased faith and regeneration for none, but remission and reconciliation for all, which they shall actually partake of, who do believe. Nor is there neede of infusing any spiritual vitall, principle into the hearts of men to enable them to believe, they may doe it of themselves.

The third excepted, which of these positions is maintained by any of those our Divines that hold con­ditions to be in the new Covenant? Nay, they all main­taine that Christ in dying, intended the actual salvation of particular persons, viz. of all those whom God from all e­ternity had chosen. That for all those Christ hath ob­tained the actuall application of salvation to them, as well [Page 3] as the purchase of it for them; which actual enjoyment of salvation, being according to Gods appointment to be obtained in a way of faith, or upon condition of faith, by or through faith, as the Scripture speaks. They further averre, that the Lord Jesus Christ by his death, hath also obtaind at God the Fathers hands, that the blessed Spirit should in time work this faith in the hearts of his chosen, that so through faith they might come actually to partake of all the benefits which he hath purchased for them.

So then, Arminians maintain conditions to be performed by us of our own power: Such ours disclaim, maintaining that it is God that worketh in us both to wil and to do. Ar­minians maintain conditions so as if the efficacie of Christs death were pendulous thereon; This also ours disavow, maintaining that Christ hath purchased both salvation to be given upon condition, and ability also to be given to perform that condition.

Ames coron. artic. 1. c. 1. § 4 Arminians maintaine conditions preceding Gods very electing us to salvation. But ours maintaine conditions antecedent of actual salvation indeed, but consequent in regard of Election.

The difference between our Divines and the Arminians about conditions being thus great, as hath beene shewed, I think it would have been fair dealing in you to have seve­red them, & not have crowded them together into one and the same refutation, as if they had mantained one and the same thing. Do you not think the friends of Pemble, Preston, Ames, Perkins, Ball, &c. would take it ill to have them refuted under the title of Arminians, and for main­taining Arminian Salvability (a notion more abhorring to their spirits then to your owne, and which some of them have expresly written against?) yet do they all hold conditions in the Covenant. And you refute all such, who hold so, under that head and title. I challenge you to shew me any one of ours, that in pleading for conditions in the Covenant, doth in the least degree assert that con­ditionate Redemption or Arminian Salvability.

Before you come to our Arguments, you tell us, that [Page 4] though you are against conditions, yet you hold that God hath his order and method in conferring of his benefits. And that in regard of this order one benefit may depend upon an other, &c. And that none are saved but such as do repent and believe.

I was heartily glad to heare so much from you: for this is the maine I contend for, That God gives faith, and then salvation; And that salvation depends on faith, and ther­fore in order of nature followes faith. And here I would argue ex concessis. Those benefits which according to that method and order of conferring that the Lord hath set down to himselfe, must goe before other, and on which others do depend; Those (I say) are required in us, before the other which do depend on them, and follow them, can be obtained by us.

But faith and repentance are benefits which according to this method of God are given before Salvation, and on which salvation doth depend.

And therefore faith and repentance are actually requi­red in us, before we can actually partake of Remission, Re­conciliation. Justification, and other benefits and branches of Salvation purchased by Christ.

It this were granted, that they are required, and that to the obtaining of Salvation (which must needs be granted, the benefit of Salvation not only following them, but also depending on them as you confesse) let them be required, as conditions, or as something else in Gods method and order; I would not strive about termes. But I feate that you had here your reserve, and that you understand this priority of one benefit before an other, and this depen­dance of one benefit upon an other, either in reference to the manifestation of salvation, or the perfection of that, and not in reference to the beginning and being of them; for so much some following passages hint out unto us; of which we shall speak more when we come unto them. Not long after, you challenge Malice it selfe to shew, if it can, any one of your side that maintains salvation without repentance and faith.

[Page 5] And here Sir, if I should produce some that doe as­sert it, should I not very prittely get me the odious name of malicious? Wel, the Lord give us to hate the affect and fact as much as we doe the name. Truth is truth, and must be discovered. And I would to God there were not too many expressions vented both in Pulpits and Pres­ses, too much tending this way.

I find in Mr. Saltmarsh, Free grace. p. 102. Do not the promises belong to sinners as sinners? And p. 104. The pro­mises of Christ are held forth to sinners, as sinners; not as re­penting sinners, or humble sinners. p. 105. Whatever promise hath a condition in it, is ours in Christ, who only is the condi­tioned person for all promises. p. 84. So as we are to believe our repentance true in him, who hath repented for us. p. 126 All the conditions were on Christs part, none on ours. So p. 153 In the new Covenant God gives himself freely in Christ, undertaking all both with the Father and the Soule, nothing being required on mans part. Occasional word: That those Ministers who presse repentance and faith, do overheate the wine of the Gospel with conditions and qualifications, so the poore soules cannot taste it. So also in Doctor Crispe, I meet with many such like, or the same passages, as in his Christ alone exalted. vol. 1. p. 120. Christ belongs to sinners as sinners. p. 211. He receiveth sinners as sinners. p. 164. All the tie lies on Gods part to do every thing that is mentio­ned in the Covenant. p. 73. Hast thou but a mind to Christ, come and taste of the water of life freely; there is nothing looked for from thee to take thy portion in this Christ. And in his second Volume, p. 420 We are justified without works not only without the concurrence of them to justification, but even without the being of them, and presence in the person to be justified. I might name many more, but these may suffice; and I pray consider seriously whether from most, if not all those asser­tions doth not follow by natural and necessary consequence that monstrous conclusion now enquired of, viz. that wee may be saved without faith and repentance. Or, that faith and repantance are not necessary to salvation. Truly they speak so fully to this particular, in my apprehension, that [Page 6] all that I can see left you to save your selfe is, not to own these men for men of your side, which I should be heartily glad to heare. But consider one passage more frequent, as in these Authors, so in your owne Sermon; This, That the Covenant of free grace is as free as that with Noah. Now concerning that we know, that men are partakers of the benefits promised in it, though they neither know nor be­lieve any such Covenant. And if this of salvation be as free, wil it not thence follow, that men may be saved in it though they never believe it, or so much as know it? To me it seems to follow without any constraint at all, as I shall la­bour to manifest by reducing it to an Argument, which I forme thus.

By vertue of the Covenant with Noah, men are sure to be saved from an universal deluge, though they neither know nor believe such a Covenant.

Therefore if the new Covenant be as free as that with Noah, a man may be saved in it, though he neither know it, nor can believe it: More of this particular you may read in Mr. Gataker against Saltmarsh, both in the former Treatise pag. 25. and in the Rejoynder pag. 11, 13, 88. where he clearly sheweth this very inference to be unconstrained, and makes good the charge now in debate against Mr. Salt­marsh: which Reverend Author, if you had any reference unto in that unsavory and noisome passage in your Ser­mon, I challenge malice it self, I must needs tell you, you were exceedingly to blame.

Come wee to your Arguments, whereby you labour to prove, that no conditions are annexed to the purchases of Christs death in regard of application. Your first was from those places of Scripture, which declare the all sufficiency of Christs death, and the perfection of that in regard of im­petration, as Heb. 10. 14 and 1, 3, 9, 12 Unto which may be added your second head of Scriptures, viz. those which hold out unto us Gods acceptation of this price and acquiesence in it: as, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well plea­sed, &c.

[Page 7] Now these doe prove, that the price paid by Christ was perfect and sufficient; yea, that it did fully impetrate, merit and purchase at the Fathers hands, the perfect and complete redemption of his Elect; So that God lookes for nothing more to be done, or suffered towards the making up of the price, but rests fully satisfied with the sufferings of his Son. But they are of no force at all to take off any requisite necessary to the application of this purchase, be it qualification, condition, instruments or agent: for instance, If I should on your ground argue, Jesus Christ hath by himselfe purged our sins, and perfected &c. Therefore there is no neede the Gospel should be preached unto men, or that the spirit of grace be sent unto them to regenerate them; I doubt not, but you would deny my inference, as well you might. So where you reason, Christ by dying hath paid a perfect price, which was also accepted of God the Father. Ergo, there are no conditions annexed to the purchase of his death; you must give me leave to deny your Argument. And the reason is, because they are not annexed as any part of the price, to make up it complete: But only as the way and manner in which, the means and instrument by which, the terms and condition on which, and according to which God doth give, and man receives salvation purchased: Notwithstanding that, Christ hath thus perfectly purchased it, yet himself doth tell me, that unlesse I repent, I shall perish, Luk. 13. 3, 5. And If I believe not, I shall be damned, Mark. 16. 16. As for that maxime you cited in the prosecution of your Ar­gument,Impetration is the foundation of application. Impetratio est fundamentum applicationis, it makes for us, and not at all against us. For if it be fundamentum, the foundation, then it is not ipsa applicatio, the applica­tion it self, which is the monster your side doe hug and suckle. It makes indeed against Arminian salvability; for which end it is used by our Authours, viz. to shew that though impetration and application may be distinguished, yet they cannot be separate or divided in their object. But that for whomsoever Christ doth impetrate, to him the benefits impetrated must be applyed; for application (say [Page 8] they) is the end of impetration, and impetration the foundation of application. So that the Arminian doctrine of conditions to be performed by mans owne power, which make the issue of Christs death to be uncertaine and pen­dulous on mans free will, is wholly razed thereby: but our doctrine of conditions purchased for us by the death of Christ, and to be wrought in us by the Spirit of Christ are no way shaken. The purchases of Christs death may be surely applied to them for whom they are purchased, though they be applyed conditionally.

Nor is that other maxime of any more strength, positâ causâ totali sequitur effectus, the totall cause being put, the effect followeth; for if you speak of mans actual salvation, or the application of salvation unto man, you cannot say that Christs death is the total cause of it. The whole and sole meritorious cause it is; But I hope Gods grace is the impulsive cause, Christs spirit the efficient cause, and faith the instrumental cause. And, bonum est ex integris causis, Good doth arise from all causes entire. Now though an in­strument be the meanest of causes, yet is it necessary in the way of an instrument, nor can the effect be in act before it be used.

Your third head contained such Scriptures as speake of Christ and salvation, as of a gift, a free gift: In pursu­ance of which you delivered, Christ is given, freely given of God. And if by grace, then not of works. And what can be laid on the creature that is not a worke. If but a Rose, not free. To be freely and by condition, is an absolute and flat contradiction.

For answer, the Covenant with Adam, in a passage be­fore, you aver to be conditional; And in a passage following, you seeme to intimate, that it is free, by saying that he could not have merited, had he kept the condition. It seems then that to be free, and yet to be conditional, as flat a contradiction as it is, you your selfe have admitted in the Covenant with Adam.

Did you seriously consider what you spake when you said, if but to pay a rose, the tenure is not free? Certainly [Page 9] my Country men in Glocester-shire account that a very free tenure, nor think I them therein mistaken. And if some Gentlemen should bestow on you an hundred pound a year, on condition you should be more liberal to the poor to the expence, not of a rose or two, or a penny or two, but (it may be) ten or twenty pound a yeare, which un­lesse you constantly exhibite, you were to lose the prin­cipal. If for all this condition you should not say that this were a free gift, I should account you fowly unthankful. If my memory faile not, our ancient godly Divines use those similitudes of a Rose or pepper corne, to set out the condition, not of faith, but of good works, which they maintaine to be required under the Gospel as a consequent condition. By which expression of theirs, they do, (as you say) destroy the freenesse of grace. But your bare saying so doth not prove it. The truth is, the Arminians and Papists were more beholding to you for some passages in your Sermons, then our ancient godly Protestant Di­vines.

But come wee to your Argument, which if not taken out of Doctor Crispe, is yet certainly the same with his, vol. 1. p. 64. & p. 179. By gift, and on condition, is a flat contradiction.

But take heed that you and the Doctor make not the Scriptures to speake absolute and flat contradiction, which say, wee are saved by grace through faith. Eph. 2. 8. And therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace. Rom. 4. 16. And being justified freely by his grace through faith in his blood. Rom. 3. 23, 24. And in the very place cited by you and the Doctor, Rom 11. 6. If by grace, then it is no more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be by works, it is no more of grace, otherwise works are no more works; where it followes, what then? Israel hath not ob­tained what he seeketh for. And if you ask, wherefore? the Apostle will tell you Rom. 9 32. Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. So like­wise, Where is boasting then? it is excluded. By what Law? of works? Nay, but by the law of faith. Rom 3. 27. [Page 10] And to him that worketh not but believeth, Rom. 4. 5. The Scriptures joyn faith and free grace; yea they tell us, that freenesse of grace is upheld by that requisite or condition of faith. But you call it a flat contradiction. The Scrip­tures oppose faith and works. But you say, What can be laid upon the creature, that is not a work? You would beare men in hand that we teach contradictions. But I am sure these passages of yours contradict the Scripture.

Again, did not Christ lay repentance and faith upon the creature, when he said, repent and believe the Gospel? Matth 4. 17. Mark 1. 15. yea, doth he not lay it on them upon paine of damnation, when he doubles it Luke 13. 35. except ye repent ye shall perish? Did not the Apostles lay something on the creature, when they thus answered their troubled converts, who in anguish of spirit came with these queries to them, men and brethren what shal we doe? Acts [...]. 37. And Sirs, what shall I do to be saved? ch. 16. 20. I say, when they thus answered them, repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and be converted; Did they not require something of them, and lay something on them? And did Christ or his Apostles (think you) preach any thing contradictory to free grace, or free gift? I hope, whatever contradictions you pinne on our Sermons, you will take heed what you fasten on the sayings of Christ and his Apostles, whose doctrine we must take leave to be­lieve and follow, how contradictory soever it be deemed in the world. Do not say here, that Christ did not re­quire them, nor his Disciples presse them, as conditions, or as a worke (which is the Doctors evasion) for you your selfe know that we disclaime faith as a worke, as much as you. Wee maintaine not any worthinesse, excellency or merit in faith. I desire you to shew me if you can, in any of ours, that faith doth justifie as a work done by us or for any worthinesse or excellency that is in it. I am sure that I can shew you the contrary, and you may also see it if you be pleased to peruse Mr. Gatakers rejoynder to Salt­marsh. p. 51. 53. This is that we maintaine, that faith is so required of God, that if we have it, we shall have sal­vation; [Page 11] and if we have it not, we cannot have salvation, and that not only in knowledge, but in the being of it: not only the evidence, declaration, and manifestation of that (which is the Doctors opinion. p. 168. and I feare is also yours) but not the receipt, benefit, or being of it, and that because it is required to the very obtaining of it, not in any meritorious, but in an instrumentall way.

Now do not the Apostles averre as much when they answer this quaerie, what shall I do to be saved? thus, repent and believe &c. do they not in these answers lay repentance and faith on the creature as things required of God in them that would be saved, and that towards the obtaining of their salvation, not the evidencing or mani­festing it only to themselves. And when the Apostle saith, the Jewes came short of righteousnesse which the Gentiles attained unto, because they sought it not by faith as the Gentiles did Rom. 9. 31. Doth he speak of the manifesto of Righteousnesse, and not rather of righteousnesse and ju­stification it selfe, the being of it? Certainly the Jewes fel short, not only of the assurance, but of the essence and being of righteousnesse, and that because they sought it not by faith. So that faith is required of God from the creature so, and laid on the creature so, that by it the creature must seek everlasting righteousnesse, the being of it, or he shall for ever goe without it.

But for the thing it selfe, that a gift may be free, and yet conditional, is no such contradictory proposition, but that both parts may be true, well stand together, and up­hold rather then destroy each other; you might have seen in our Authors, if you had beene pleased to look in to them, or to have called to mind what I perswade my self you have formerly read in them.Camero in Ps. 68. inter Arg Solut. Med. ult Camero would have infor­med you that all conditions do not destroy free grace, Sed eae quae possunt habere rationem meriti, but only such as are meritorious.

And DoctorPrideaux Ser [...] Draught of the brook. And Perk. Ref. Cath. of Merit. Prideaux, That to a meritorious worke, foure things are required, which are all of them wating in our conditions.

[Page 12] First, it must wholly and entirely proceede from the undertaker. The person that will merit, must doe it of himselfe, out of his owne strength and power: So was the condition of works to have been performed. Man had strength conveyed to him in created nature, and was to have kept the condition by this his strength. But thus it is not in the conditions of the Gospel: we receive strength from grace, to performe the conditions of grace. God who requires them of us, works them in us; he gives to repent, he gives us to believe: which I think is the Crowne of free grace, that gives us a crowne upon our bare receiving it, and gives us also withall a hand to take it.

Secondly, It must be a mans owne, no way due or belonging to the person of whom we me merit Suppose a tenant be three or foure years rent behind with his Landlord, to the value (it may be) of one hundred pound, or two hundred pound; and having nothing to pay, should be freely forgiven by his Landlord, only on this conditi­on, that he carefully pay his rent for time to come. Shall this person say, the gift was not free because upon this condition? Why the condition is due unto the Landlord, whether he forgive what is past or no, and therefore, can no way detract from the freenesse of the gift. So is our faith due, our repentance is due (the fall, and the recove­ry by Christ supposed) to God from us, whether he for­give and justifie upon them or no. And therefore the fre­nesse of the gift of righteousnesse is no way impaired by the requirement of them. When we have done all wee are commanded, we must say we are unprofitable servants, Luk. 17. 10. unprofitable saithPanstr. Cathol. tom. 3. l. 14. c. 16. & 21. ad 25. Chamier to our selves, we have not earned so much as thanks for our selves; and that because we have done no more then whats our duty. Ibid. 9. 38. Opposita sunt solvere debitum et mereri: To pay or discharge a debt, and to merit or deserve, are opposite.

Thirdly, It must be some way profitable or advantageous to the person of whom we merit.

[Page 13] Now this also failes: for, can a man be profitable to God, as a wise man is profitable to himselfe? Is it any gaine or plea­sure to him, that thou makest thy waies perfect? Job 22. 2. & 35. 4, 5. What profit is it to the Sunne, that wee receive its light into our houses? or to the spring, that we drinke of its water? God is no way indamaged by our impenitency, nor advantaged by our returne in to him; All the emo­lument accrues to us our selves. And therefore though he require our return unto him, and beliefe on him, if we will be saved by him, yet is his gift of salvation neverthelesse free, because he is no way the gainer by the things required Nay, the conditions required by him are matter of further charge and expence unto him, he being the worker and donor of them, as was shewed in the first particular. Suppose that some rich person should a­dopt a poore mans child to be his heire, upon condition that the child be sent home unto him, to live with him, and to be trained and bred up in learning by him. Shall the young man say, it is not free? because it is upon con­dition, he leaves his fathers cottage for it, he goes to school for it &c? Alas, what profit are either of these to his for­ster father? Nay, rather they are matter of further charge to him; For by reason of these, he is at cost for his food, apparel, schooling, and other necessaries to his breeding and education: So when the Lord who chuseth amongst his enemies those whom he adopts to be heirs of salvation, doth require of them, that they repent of their sin, beleeve on his Sonne, leave off all their vaine wayes, and learne to be like himself who is their father: These heires of grace cannot say that their inheritance is not freely given, because it is given on these termes and conditions: for the things required are no way profitable to God who doth require them; but rather matter of further cost and charge unto him, who sends his word, his messengers, his graces, his spirit for the working of them.

4. It must be some way proportionable to the reward we [Page 14] expect for it, which also failes in our conditions; for what proportion is there between our repentance and remission, between our faith and justification. As the Apostle, our light afflictions, 12 Cor. 4. 17. which are but for a moment, work forth unto us an exceeding, and eternal weight of glory. So may we also say of our repentance and faith. If the Landlord should say to his Tenant (one hundred or two hundred pound indebted to him) These summes you owe, and I do not see where you have a penny to pay, I might use extre­mity towards you, cast you into prison, and there let you rot; but I will not deale so severely with you. Do but make an ingenuous acknowledgment of what you owe, and that you will be beholding to me, and I will freely remit it. Shall this person say, he was not freely forgiven, be­cause it was on this condition, his acknowledgment? Alas, what proportion is there betweene the debt and the acknowledgment? Thus God seemes to speak to us in the matter of repentance.Jer. 3. 13. Only acknowledg thine iniquities.

The summe of all is, That a man gives freely, which he gives on condition, when withal he gives ability to perform the condition; else salvation given for, and through Christ would not be free.

But such are the conditions we pleade for, as our duties, so Gods gifts and graces: and therefore the gift of sal­vation, notwithstanding them, is free.

Againe, That we give on condition, the condition be­ing the parties duty to whom we give, is free, else the por­tions that parents give dutiful children would not be free gift.

But such are the conditions maintained by us; such as we owe of duty to God, whether he give or no; he giveth therefore freely, though he require them.

3. That we give on conditions, the conditions being no way beneficial to us who give, no way equivalent to the thing we give, nor any way causal of our giving, we give most freely.

But such also are the conditions defended by us, as hath [Page 15] beene made apparent, they no way benefit the Lord at all, they are infinitely disproportionable to the gift of salvation he bestowes, nor do they any way move him to bestow salvation; but rather his will and purpose to bestow salvation, moves him to bestow them, that by receipt of them, his people might be fitted for the salvation he in­tends them.

And therefore notwithstanding that they are requi­red, the gift of salvation is most free.

Thus have we done with your Argument, from the free­nesse of grace (which, that it may well stand with our con­ditions, I hope is well cleared) as also with your Argu­ments taken from scripture. We come now to those you fetch from Reason The first of which was taken from the intent of Christ in dying, which the Scriptures hold out to be the salvation of those for whom he died. Now (say you) if he died conditionally, it will follow that he willed not their salvation at all, but their damnation, as much or more then their salvation; for he wills their salvation if they believe, otherwise their damnation: and it is natural to them not to be­lieve.

This and all that followes in the Argument, may make against the Arminians, who hold that Christ hath purchased salvation for us, but not faith, and that he died for us conditionally (i. e.) that we should be saved if we did believe but did no way procure for us, that we should believe; and accordingly it is used by our Authors, though in other terms, to destroy the Arminians conditionality; as you may see in [...] Owen. But conditional redemption, in which the conditions are purchased, as wel as the salvation (which is that we maintain) it no way oppugneth. Put case an outlandish man should procure for his Sonne some inheritance in our Country to be enjoyed by him upon his infranchisement; you cannot say he intended his Sons non-enjoyment of it as much as enjoyment, because of the condition of his Infranchisement, if that the Infranchise­ment be procured by the father as wel as the inheritance. The purchasers intent (I hope is) ful and firme. Not­withstanding [Page 16] the conditionality of the purchase, when the condition is purchased, as well as the thing. So when we maintaine that Christ hath procured salvation for us, to be enjoyed conditionally, if wee doe believe. You cannot inferre thence, that he intended our damnation as much as salvation, because we have no power to believe; for wee maintaine also, that Christ hath purchased for us, that wee shall believe.

Sir, Arminians say, That Christ died for us that we might be saved if wee doe believe; [...] p. 112. we, that Christ died for us, that we should believe, and believing, have life through his name.

Dare you say that Christ died for any so absolutely, as that they should be saved whether they did believe or no? I hope you will not, though your parallelling the new Co­venant with that with Noah doth naturally yeild such an inference, as hath already beene shewed.

Your second Argument was the same with one you used in your former sermons, where you asserted the absolute­nesse of the new Covenant, viz. That this conditionality in­fers a liberty of will.

But Sir, that those who plead for conditions are no way maintainers or abettors of free will, their writings suffici­ently declare.

Gataker Re­joynd. p. 31. You make men believe that we preach not repentance as the grace of God by his Spirit, wrought in our hearts in and for Christ, which is most untrue; and who of us denies faith to be the gift of God, or that God out of his love to us in Christ, freely worketh it in us, that therby we may be enabled to receive Christ. That we are not only halfe dead, but quite dead, and can do nothing that is good until the spirit quicken us; cannot goe to Christ til God the Father draweth us: cannot be­lieve on Christ nor repent of sin until the Lord give it unto us, and enable us thereto, is a doctrine I have long agoe learned from their Sermons, and often meete with in their writings. And as for the inference, he which chargeth the Patronage of free will on that kind of preaching, that holds out life and salvation upon condition of faith and re­pentance, [Page 17] let him looke to it how he will quit Christ and his Apostles from that charge, whose Sermons are full of counsels, commands and calls, that require men to re­pent and believe, if ever they would be saved. Sir, condi­tions to be performed by us of our owne strength and pow­er, which the Arminians maintaine, argue a power in mans will indeede. But conditions purchased by Christ for us, and to be wrought by his Spirit in us, which we maintain; Inferre no power of free wil at all.

Your third Argument was taken from election. That from this conditional redemption would follow, that men are elected but conditionally, so that Gods election should be un­determined and uneffectual, and the will of God should be made subordinate to the will of the creature.

Sir, God may be said to elect conditionally two wayes.

1. So as that the condition be considered as anteceding his election, moving him to will salvation to such a per­son. This conditionality indeed subordinates the will of the Creator to the creature, and causeth election to be undetermined and ineffectual. But such kind of conditi­ons, we oppugne as Arminian.

Or 2. so, as that the condition preceede indeed the actual enjoyment of the benefits to which men are elected, but followes election it self. And this consideration of conditions of election we propugne, as no way evacuating either the efficacy or determinatenesse of Gods election, nor yet in any wise subjecting the wil of God to the will of man therein. Hear what Dr. Ames saith to this very thing. Fidem ponī ut conditionem sa­lutem quidem antecedentem; sed electionem ipsam conse­quentem nun­quam à nostris negatum fuit; summā verò cum religione constanter trae­ditum. Cor. de Elect. c. 1. §. 4. p. 7. It never was denied by our Divines, that faith was maintained as a condition antecedent indeed to salvation, but consequent unto, or following election it self; (i. e.) but hath been constantly religiously maintained. No Sir, our doctrine concerning conditions, doth no way destroy the certainty of election. But on the contrary, the doctrine of election doth con­firme this our Tenent of Conditional Redemption. For so as God from all eternity purposed salvation unto us, and elected us thereto: So did Christ purchase it, and so is it [Page 18] actually to be applied. But God2 Thes. 2. 11. hath from the beginning chosen us to salvation through sanctification of the spirit, and beliefe of the truth. And heretofore Christ did purchase it to be obtained that way, and that way it is actually to be enjoyed. So that till we be brought over, to the beliefe of the truth and some degree of Sanctification; we can­not be said actually to partake of any part of the salvation purposed or purchased. That God elects for faith fore­seene, we uterly deny; but that he electeth through or by it, i.e. salvation to be obtained through or by it, we religi­ously maintain.

Your fourth Argument runnes thus, If the purchases of Christs death have any condition annexed to them in regard of application, then these conditions share with Christ in the busi­nesse of salvation. It is the same with another of your Ar­guments used in your former lectures, and neere of kinne to that of Doctor Crispe, vol. 1. p. 168. Then Christ justifi­eth not alone. Is faith Christ himselfe? if not, then Christ must have a partner to justifie.

But the sequel both in yours and the Doctors Argu­ment is notoriously false; and that because conditions are not required in the same way of causality that Christs righ­teousness is. For that is required as a meritorious cause, pur­chasing and procuring mans peace; faith is an instrument apprehending it, and Christ the cause of it; repentance as a way leading to it, or qualification fitting a person for it. Now when an effect depends on divers causes of a diffe­rent kind, the necessity of the one, argues not the in­sufficiency of the other; but the one may be sufficient in its kind, though the other be required. The wounded person must apply the plaister to the wound, if he wil have it heale him. The diseased person must drink the potion, must travel to the bath, and bathe himselfe therein, if he will have either the potion to purge him, or the bath to cure him: Yet would it be great weaknesse in either of these, to say, that the plaister, the potion, the bath were not sufficient, because they were required to goe unto the one, to take and apply the other; for their taking, [Page 19] going, drinking, applying, are not required in the same sanatory and medicinal way as the bath, the plaister, or the portion are; but only in an instrumental way, to bring these home to him, that so they might worke upon him. So, nor is my repentance and faith required in any satisfactory or meritorious way, to satisfie Gods justice to­gether with Christ, or merit remission for me; no, Christ doth that alone, they are only required to fit me for Christ, and bring me to Christ. Did we ascribe any merit or worthinesse to our conditions, then you might say indeed that we made them partners with Christ; but we abhorre this as much as you. Faith, saith Mr.Rejoynder p. 47. Gataker, af­fords not the least mite towards the making up of that price, wherewith our debt is to be discharged.

That this answer would be made unto your Argu­ment, you your selfe foresaw; and therefore to Anti­cipate it. You say, — But some distinguish betweene Conditions, and meritorious Conditions, &c. Unto which you reply, That this is a most weake evasion, for Papists themselves ascribe no merit to the preparations they plead for; and cite for it Conc. Trid. Sess. 6. c. 8.

And here Sir, is a second calumnie. For as before you ranked us with Arminians, so here you would insinu­ate that we joyne hands with Papists in maintaining of this conditional redemption. But as I hope I have vindica­ted it from the charge of Arminianisme; so I doubt not also to cleare it from this of Papisme.

Is it enough, my good friend, to make a thing evil, to say that Papists hold so? Why did you cite Aestius and Lessius, both Papists, among the Champions of your opi­nion? Papists agree with us, and wee with them in many things. Nor call we that Popish where they are sound, and agree with us, but that only wherein they being erroneous we dissent from them, and protest against them. Now whe­ther or no Papists maintaine any meritoriousnesse in the preparations they defend, sure I am, that Protestant Authors chiefly oppose this meritoriousnesse of them, as I shall prove unto you.

[Page 20] First then, consider that what Chemnitius replie, to that very place and passage of the Counsel that you cite, If I have not mist your quotation. His words are these.

Si igitur haec esset mens et sententia Sy­nodi, quod simpliciter vellet monstrare il­lum, de quo jam diximus, modum et ordi­nem, quo juxta Scripturae traditionem Deus utitur quando homines vult deducere ad ju­stificationem; et si illa quae Scriptura tradit procedere, tribuerent non viribus liberi arbi­trii, sed gratiae Dei, et operationi Sp. Sancti, nec in illis praeparationibus constituerem meritum aut dignitatem, propter quam justi­ficemur: facilè posset de vocabulo praepara­tionis, dextrè juxta Scripturam intellecto, conveniri. Exam. part 1 p. 172. If therefore this were the minde and judgment of the Synod, that it would simply shew that manner and order which God doth use according to the Doctrine of the Scripture, when he intends to bring men to justifica­tion; and if they would not attribute those things which the Scripture teacheth do go before it, to the strength of free will, but to the grace of God, and operation of his Holy Spirit, nor place any merit or worth in those preparations for which wee may be justified; we might easily be agreed concerning the word preparation, rightly under­stood according to the Scripture.

Out of which of Chemnitius, I observe three things. (1) That however in that Session they did daube over the matter, yet they did hold a dignity, worth, and me­rit of congruity to be in these preparations, which the same Chemnitius doth afterwards prove at large, spending three or foure leaves therein. (2) That Chem­nitius held something, some worke wrought by the Spi­rit in man to precede his justification, or his reception of justification; for in the following paragraph, thus he speaks.

Falsum est i­gitur quod in 9 canone no­bis tribuunt, quasi docemus nullum pla­ne motum voluntatis divinitus donatum et excitatum, praeced ere acceptionem justi­ficationis: Omnino enim docemus poenitentiam et contritionem praecedere. Non dicimus, praecedere tanquam meri­tum, quod suâ dignitate cooperatur ad justificationem consequendam, sed sicut sensus morbi aut dolor vulneris non est meritum sanationis, sed urget et impellit ad desiderandum, quaerendum, et sucipien­dum medicum. It is therefore false, which in the ninth Canon they attribute to us, as if we taught that not any motion of the will given by God, and excited by him, doth goe before our receiving of justification: for we doe altogether teach that repentance and contrition doe goe before. Wee doe not say, that they goe before as a merit, which by [Page 21] its worth doth cooperate to the obtaining of justification; but as the sense of sicknesse or griefe of a wound, is not any merit of the cure, but doth raise and stirre up to desire, seeke out and welcome the Physician. For the whole hath no neede of the Phsitian, but they that are sick, as Christ saith.

And in this sense, those things (as the Scripture saith) do go before.

3. That he could easily have agreed with those Tridentine Fathers about preparations (the word prepa­ration being rightly understood, and according to Scripture expressions;) if they would not have ascribed them to the strength of free wil, nor have put the worth and merit of ju­stification upon them. By this (I think) it is plaine, that they were meritorious preparations that Chemnitius did oppose in his writings against the Papists. And truly I wonder, that you should cavil at that distinction I gave between a condition and a meritorious cause: And more, that, you should say that Papists ascribe no merit to conditions, and preparations. You know the question concerning the conditional promises of the Gospel is handled under that concerning the necessity of works, where our Writers grant a necessity of presence, but not of efficiencie, which Bellarmine contends for. Now I pray, what doe they under­stand by that efficiency, but a meritorious efficiency? or, what other then that can be ascribed unto works? yea, that our Authours understand merit by that efficiency, they de­ny. Adde to Chemnitius, Chamier, and consider two pas­sages in him.

At Evangelium non promittit salutem absque ulla conditione legis observandae; neque id nostrumquisquam docuit: modò ne conditio pro merito sumatur. tom. 3. l. 15. c. 2. § 9. nam et fidei conditio non est antecedens sed consequens, quia nullum fidei meritum attenditur, sive fides non est causa salutis. But the Gospel doth not promise salvation without any condition of observing the law, nor did ever any of ours teach that: so that he do not take the word condition for merit. And in ch. 5. Sect. 11. For the con­dition of faith is not antecedent, but consequent, because there is no merit of faith considered, or faith is not the cause of salvation. To these joyne Do­ctor Ames, who saith.

[Page 22] Non negamus bona opera ullam rela­tionem habere ad salutem; habent enim relationem adjuncti consequentis, et effecti ad salutem (ut loquuntur) adeptam; et adjuncti antecedentis, ac disponentis ad salutem adipiscendam; atque etiam argu­menti confirmantis, fiduciam ac spem salu­tis: sed negamus ulla opera nostra causam esse posse meritoriam justificationis ac sa­lutis. Bel. ener. tom 4. lib. 6 cap 6. We doe not deny that good works have any relation to salvation; for they have the relation of an adjunct consequent, and of the effect to sal­vation obtained (as they speake;) and of an adjunct antecedent, and dis­posing to salvation to be obtained; and also of an Argument confirming our assurance and hope of salvation: But we deny that any works of ours can be a meritorious cause of justification and salvation. And in the Chapter be­fore, Pro­missiones cum conditione obedientiae ut causae juris quod habemus ad rem promis­sam, sunt propriae legis: sed promissiones cum conditione obedientiae, ut adjuncti aut effecti rei promissae, vel dona [...]ionis e­jus, locum suum habent in benignissimae gratiae regno, ubi meritis nostris nullus habetur locus. cap. 5. §. 2. Promises with a condition of o­bedience as the causes of that right which we have to the thing promised, are proper to the law; but promises with condition of obedi­ence, as of the adjunct or effect of the thing promised, or the donation of it, have place in the most bountifull kingdome of grace, where there is no place found for our merits.

Bishop Davenant shall be the next, who averring re­pentance, faith and love to be necessary to justification, adds by way of explication, and in opposition to the Po­pish sense of necessity,

Haec et hujusmodi opera cordis inter­na sunt omnibus justificatis necessaria: non quod contineant in se efficaciam seu meri­tum justificationis, sed quod juxta ordina­tionem divinam vel requirentur ut conditi­ones praeviae seu concurrentes, sicuti poeni­tere et credere; vel ut effecta à fide justifi­cante necessariò manartia, ut amare Deum, diligere proximum. De just. act. cap. 30. Q. 1. Argum. 1. These and the like inward works of the heart are necessary to all that are justified: not because they conteine in themselves that efficacy or merit of justification; but because accor­ding to Gods ordination either they are required as conditions preceda­neous to, or concurrent with justi­fication, as to repent, and to be­lieve; or else as effects necessarily flowing from justify­ing faith, as to love God, to love our neighbour. And in his next Chapter, stating this question, whether good works may be said to be necessary to justification and salvation? he sets downe in his first and second conclusions, that in con­troversies with Papists, and Sermons to vulgar people, wee [Page 23] should not use such expressions without due explication of them, and that because both Papists and people wil be ready to understand them necessarily as meritorious cau­ses of salvation. Shewing by example of the Ancient Fa­thers how careful they have beene to forbeare some forms of speech, by reason of the corrupt sense of hereticks: to which purpose he alledgeth that of Hierom; that which may well be spoken, is not sometimes to be spoken by reason of the Ambiguity.

Neverthelesse in his fifth, sixth and seventh Conclusions he maintains, that they are necessary thereto, though not as meritorious causes, yet as previous and concurrent conditions. Let Mr. Perkins be the first wee name for this particular; who in his Reformed Catholick, besides the head of Merit, (which wholly makes for us, and shewes sufficiently the Papists to be Patrons of merit) in that of Repentance, spea­king of the differences between us and Papists, therein saith, The fourth abuse is touching the effect and efficacy of Repentance; for they make it a meritorious cause of remission of sin, and of life everlasting, flat against the Word of God. And a little after: They ascribe to their contrition the merit of congruity, which cannot stand with the sufficient merit of Christ. We for our parts hold, that God requires contrition at our hands, not to merit remission of sins, but that we may acknowledge our owne unworthinesse, be humbled in the fight of God, and distrust all our own merits; and further, that we may make more account of the benefit of Christ, wher­by we are received into the favour of God, and more careful­ly shun sin for time to come. But we acknowledge no con­trition at all to be meritorious save that of Christ. I might adde to these, learned In Psal. 68 in solut. arg. med. ult. Camero, and repeate that which I cited out of him before, it being the very distinction which you call a most weake evasion; and the defence of which, we are now upon. As also renowned Tract. of Justif. Sect. 2. c. 1. Per modum causae efficientis & meritoriae, impetrando, pro­merendo; & suo modo inchoando justificationem. Pemble, who spends a whole Chapter in refuting that opinion of Bellarmine, and the Romanists; viz. That faith justifies us as an efficient and meritorious cause obtaining, deserving, and in its kinde beginning justification. But I shall con­tent [Page 24] my self with the recitall of two more, who handle the very Question now in controversie, Whether the Promises of the Gospel be absolute or conditional? And determine that they are absolute, not conditionall. The first of these is Broachman, who saith, Non controvertitur an pro­missiones Evangelicae ut sint fru­ctuosae & salutares, requirant fi­dem: Nocum est illud Christi, Mar ult 6. Johan. 1. 16. Nec in controversiam vocatur, An pro­missiones Evangelicae ita gratui­tae sint & absolutae, ut absolvant hominem à dolore serio ob pec­cata, et ab omni studio b [...]norum operum? Infans enim sit opor­tet in Scriptu [...]is, cui non inno­tuerae bae Spiritus sancti assertio­nes: Rom. 6. 1, 2. & 8. 1. Tit. 4. 10. Genuinus autem quaest: o­nis status est, An Evangelium propter ullam nostram dignita­tem, intentionem, opus, me itum, ullámve in nobis dispositionem, promi [...]tat nobis gratiam, miseri­cordiam, remissionem peccato­rum, & vitam aeternam; an ve ò per & propter Jesum Christum fide apprehensum? Syst. tom 2. art. de Evang. c. 2. It is not con­troverted, Whether the promises of the Go­spel, that they may be fruitfull and saving, do require faith: Neither is it called into controversie, Whether the promises of the Gospel be so free and absolute, that they dis­charge a man from a serious sorrow for sins, and from all study of good works? For he must be an infant in Scripture, that is not acquainted with these assertions of the holy Spirit. But the true state of the question is, whether the Gospel for any our worth, inten­tion, work, merit, or any disposition in us, doth promise to us grace, mercy, remissi­on of sinnes and eternal life; or rather for and through Jesus Christ apprehended by faith. And againe, in answer to Bel­larmines fifth objection, which was, that the promises of the Gospel doe alwayes re­quire the condition of Faith: Thus hee saith; which wee grant. And further a­verrs, that this condition of faith will stand with his Assertion of absolute pro­mises: For saith he, We warned you in the beginning, that it is not controverted, Whether the promises of the Gospel doe require faith, which wee willingly grant:An in gratuita remissione pec­catorum, requiratur conditio fidei, ut aliquod opus nostrum, aut aliqua in nobis dispositio; cui ut cau [...]ae efficienti, adjutanti, aut cooperanti, ascribatur gra [...]uita remissio peccato­rum; quod rotundè negamus But whether in the free remission of sins, the condition of Faith be required as any work of ours, or certain disposition in us; to which, as to an efficient, helping, or cooperating cause, the free remission of sins may be ascribed; which we do roundly deny.

The other is Mr.Vind. Leg. Lect. 26. p. 249. Burges, who as­serts the same out of Broachman, as I [Page 25] conceive. By these Citations I hope it will more then sufficiently appear to an eye not strangely possest with prejudice,

1. That the distinction between a Condition and a me­ritorious Cause, is no slender and weak Evasion, but a maine and fundamental Distinction in this Controversie, such as on which the very hinges of the Controversie doth turn.

2. That your saying. That Papist ascribe not any me­ritoriousnesse to conditions, &c. is most false, if there be any truth in these Protestants collections; yea, that it doth asperse these reverend Protestant Authours fore-named, who oppose the Papist in the very parti­cular.

3. That those of our Divines who maintain condition­al promises in the Covenant, whilst withal they exclude all claim of dignity, worth, merit, or any such causality from these conditions, do not joyne with Papists, as you would make the people believe, but with Protestants a­gainst Papists; and differ not one hairs breadth from those who aver the Covenant to be absolute, not condi­tional: for by the Conditions which they deny, they un­derstand meritorious Conditions.

4. That in rejecting this distinction between a Condi­tion and a meritorious Cause, and asserting the Cove­nant to be without, not only meritorious conditions, but all other also: you oppose all Orthodox Divines that e­ver I met with, not only those that hold the Covenant to be conditional, but those also who in terminis aver the absoluteness of it, (for by the conditions they reject, they understand meritorious ones, as hath been shewed) and joyn with Mr. Saltmarsh, Dr. Crisp, and such other whom the Othodox, not out of malice, but for distin­ction sake, and for the due desert of some of their Tenents do call Antinomians.

But let us see what further strength you bring to the battering of this distinction: for your charge of Popery will not hold. You add therefore farther; Did Adams [Page 26] doing merit life? None will say it. Yet the Grace of God is more shewed in the latter then in the first Covenant. There­fore in it no conditions at all.

Sir, The Apostle saith, To him that worketh the reward is reckoned, A Reward of is Justic. Ball. [...]ov. p. 25. not of grace, but of debt, Rom. 4. 4. I know some hold the Covenant with Adam, wherein works were in­joyned, to be a Covenant of Grace. I have heard Mr. Symonds of Holland deliver that in a Sermon at Rederith, and thereupon divide the Covenant of Grace into the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Faith. Cer­tainly, had Adam kept the condition of the first Covenant, he had done no more then his Duty; nor had he profited God at all; besides, there would have been small or no proportion between that his Work and the reward; all which are required to merit proper. So that in some sense that may be called a Covenant of Grace. Never­thelesse in the latter Covenant of Faith, the grace of God is so far more fully, richly, and gloriously manifested, then in that of Works, as that it obtaineth the title of the Covenant of Grace. The Apostle saith, it was by Faith, that it might be by Grace, Rom. 4. 16. And the Scripture being so plain for it, I ought to believe it, though I could not make it out to others, wherein it was freer, nor yet apprehend it my self.

But my good friend, the businesse is not so difficult but that it may be, and hath been already dispatch'd by some of our side, and the freenesse of the latter above the former, notwithstanding the conditionality of both, at large discovered. And that not by excluding faith, or the condition of faith from the latter (as you would have it) for that would interfere with that of the Apostle now cited, By Faith, that it might be of Grace; where Faith is taken in, not left out to make out the freenesse. Nor yet only because faith is given of God, and so ability to keep the latter Covenant is given, which is something. For though that strength Adam had to keep the first Covenant was freely bestowed on him by God in his Creation, yet when God was pleased to enter into a Covenant with [Page 27] him, he had it in him, and was to work in his own strength and power. Whereas in the New Covenant God finds man in an impotent, weak, and dead condition, and graciously promiseth to work in him ability to do what he requireth: This (I say) is something that serves to shew the freenesse of Divine Grace in the new Covenant; for the Apostle saith expresly, Ephes. 2. 8. We are saved by Grace through faith, and that not of our selves, it is the gift of God; where the giving of the thing required, to wit, Faith, is introduced by the Apostle to shew the freeness of Grace.

But the superabundancy of Grace in the latter Cove­nant appears mostly in this, that in the former, the mat­ter of mans Justification had been something of his own, his own exact and perfect obedience to the Law of God; but in the latter, the matter of it is an others, the perfect Righteousness of Christ. In the one, man runs into him­selfe for the price of his life and happiness: But in the o­ther, faith carries him out of himself unto another, the Lord Jesus Christ for all. In the one, the condition it self and the keeping of it, was to have been the matter of mans Righteousness, the ground of his Justification. In the other, it is only the Instrument and Mean. In the one, the condition it self (Works) procured life, in and of them­selves, without any reference to any other; but in the o­ther, Faith is looked on, not as a Work, but as an Instru­ment; nor doth it save for any excellency, worth, or vertue that is in it; but only because it layes hold on Christ. I cannot better expresse my self then in Mr. Ga­takers words, Rejoynder. p. 46, 47. In the one, Works are con­sidered, as in themselves performed by the Parties to be ju­stified and live. In the other, Faith is considered and requi­red, not as a work barely done by us, but us an Instrument whereby Christ is apprehended, in whom is found, and by whom that is done, whereby Gods Justice is satisfied, and life eternal meritoriously procured for us; so that they differ as much as these two Propositions. 1. Pay your debt of a thou­sand pounds and be free. 2. Rely on such a friends satisfa­ction [Page 28] made for it, and be as free as if you had made full pay­ment and satisfaction your self. All this and more you may find in that reverend Divine, your contempt of whom, and all other not of your way, sads the hearts of your friends, and makes them fear that which they are loath to suspect concerning you.

You proceed, and tell us that though it be not merito­rious,Conditio Ante­cedens est effe­ctiva. yet if it be Antecedent, it must be Effective; For an Antecedent condition is effective.

Sir, By your own maintaining faith to be an instru­ment in the work of our salvation (which I think is more then a condition, though no more I believe then truth) you must of necessity grant it both a precedency and effi­ciency therein; for instruments are alwayes reckoned to the efficient cause, and in order of nature precede the ef­fect. And thus I conceive that faith is effective in the work of our salvation, as an instrument receiving Christ, not as a condition. Conditions are not effective, but in­struments are. As for that ofTom. 3. l. 5. c. 5. §. 2. Chamier, that a conditi­on▪ Antecedent is effective; I conceive he means meri­torious, the passage cited out of him already leading me to that conjecture: For (saith he) the ibid. §. 16 Condition of faith is not Antecedent, but consequent, because no merit of faith is considered, or faith is not the Cause of Salvation. Now that Conditions are meritorious, yea or so much as impulsive, is altogether denied by the Assertors of conditions, who allow no causality at all to them. It rests on you to prove that the Antecedency of a condition doth infer its causa­lity: For though Chamier aver it, yet I see no ground for that his assertion, especially in such conditions, as those we maintain in the New Covenant.

Your first Argument runs thus: If Conditions be an­nexed, &c. Then no man can be sure of the benefits purcha­sed whiles he lives; for the conditions must be performed, &c. To which we may add two Arguments of your former Ser­mons, the first the very same with this: If salvation were on condition, then none could be sure of salvation, for none can be sure to hold out in performance of the Condition. The [Page 29] other, If any condition be required, then none can be saved, for none can perform the condition. Adam could not abstain from one tree when he was in the state of Innocency. Much lesse.—

First, Sir, your instance of Adam, we conceive it unsound. That he did not abstain, we finde by woful ex­perience; but that he could not, we deny. Recepit posse si vellet, non autem velle ut posset, saith a Father. Adam had power to have abstained if he would, only his will was not confirmed in good; whereupon it came to passe that he freely fell.

Secondly, Your weapon may be turned against your self: For whereas you hold, That none are saved but such as believe, it may be objected unto you out of your own Argument, Then none can be saved, for none can believe; or, Then none can be sure of Salvation, because none can bee sure to hold out in belie­ving.

Thirdly, It seemes to me directly to crosse the Apostle, who tells us, That it was of faith, that the Promise might be sure to all the Seed, Rom. 4. 16.

Fourthly, Whereas you say, That if Conditions be re­quired, then none can be sure, because none can bee sure to hold out; Do you not seem to intimate that salvation is sure to the Elect, whether they hold out in the faith or not? which is the Monster Arminians would father upon our Tenents.

For answer therefore to your Argument, the main of it may wound an Arminian, who holds falling from grace: but as for those who hold no such uncomfortable Do­ctrine, it no way toucheth them. We say with David, 2 Sam. 23. 5. Although my house be not so with God, yet he hath made with me an everlasting Covenant ordered in all things and sure. For he hath promised to circumcise our hearts, to write his Lawes in our hearts, to give us a new heart, and then through grace, after our recovery, we may do that which in our sick, dead, and corrupt [Page 30] estate we could not do; namely, keep the condition in an Evangelical way, wherein though exact perfectnesse be required, yet is repentance admitted, and sincerity accepted.

Again, he hath promised to put his fear in our hearts, that we may not depart from him, Jer. 32. 40. And we are confident that he who hath begun a good work in us, will perform it to the day of Christ, Phil. 1. 6. Qui operatur ut accedamus, idem operatur ne discedamus. We answer there­fore the main of your Argument, even as wee answer the Arminians, That though in regard of our own strength, which is weak, we may fear, yet in regard of Gods ma­nutenency we are sure. Who will keep us, not without, but by and through the Means he hath appointed us, even faith; by which, as he brings us into a state of Sal­vation, so through the same he will keep us by his Al­mighty power unto salvation, 1 Pet. 1. 5. We are as sure of perseverance in observation of the condition as of Salvation; holding both of God by like tenure of free promise.

Salvation, you see then, may be obteined, notwith­standing the conditions required, because God hath pro­mised to give ability to perform them, and to persevere in the performance of them. This you foresaw would be replied, and therefore anticipate it by saying, But God hath promised to give faith. To which you rejoyne, I de­mand, Whether that Promise be absolute or conditional? And anon, There is no reason why one Promise should be more absolute then another.

But 1. Sir, Whether absolute or conditional, a Pro­mise it is, and such as doth assure the soul of the conditi­on on which salvation is given. So that Salvation is sure, notwithstanding the conditionality of the Cove­nant, and the sinewes of your Argument are cut in two.

2. For your Quaerie, Whether it be conditional or abso­lute? I conceive it absolute. Christ procured Salvation for us to be bestowed conditionally, if we do believe; but faith [Page 31] it self hath he absolutely procured without prescribing of any condition; Quum promissi­ones de perseve­rantia obsolutas esse negant, sed conditionatas tantum, &c. Ames. Cor. p. 389. so that it is equivalent to an absolute purchase in respect of the event and issue. Owen Universal Redemp. l. 3. c. 1. & 2. For my part, I cannot imagine how any condition (I mean Antecedent condition, for a Conse­quent condition they may admit of) can be annexed to those Promises, I will write my Lawes in their hearts, and I will put my fear into their hearts, and I will take the sto­ny heart out of their bodies. &c. unlesse free wil be gran­ted. And therefore I conceive those promises to be ab­solute in regard of Antecedent conditions. Now where­as you say, There is no reason why one Promise should be more absolute then another; the will of the Covenant Maker to have it so, is it self a sufficient Reason. Is it not the will of God to give Christ absolutely, & then salvation for Christs sake to them that do believe in him? Shall I say here, That there is no reason why one gift should be more ab­solute then another? He who worketh all things accor­ding to the counsel of his own will, hath infinite reason both for his will and working. In the mean while, Sir, your Reason from the certainty of Salvation, is (I think) sufficiently discovered to have nothing of force against Protestant conditional Redemption.

Your last Argument was taken from the Analogy or Resemblance betwixt Christ and Adam; As by the one, sin is conveyed; so by the other Righteousnesse: but by the one sin and death are conveyed without Condition; Ergo.

I doubt not Sir, but that you will remember the old rules; viz. 1. That similitudes run not on all four. 2. Nor are Argumentative. I might as well argue hence, That all mankind are redeemed by Christ, because they were all destroyed by Adam: Or that all were not corrupted by Adam, as Peter Martyr on the place tels me, Ambrose and Origen did hence hold, because all are not repaired by Christ: Or with Bellarmine, That Adam conveyed inhe­rent sin to his posterity whereby they perish, and there­fore the Righteousnesse of Christ conveyed for our reco­very [Page 32] must be inherent. We should many wayes clip the truth of God, if we should every way make these lines run parallel. Hear Peter Martyr to the very point, This Analogy holds true only in the general: In Cap. 5. ad Rom. v 14. In illa verba Qui est typus su uri. but in respect of the particular, and the kinds, there is great difference. Adam conveyes sin by Propagation to his Posterity: But Christ con­veyed Righteousness by faith.

After this you had a passage concerning actual Righ­teousnesse and actual Reconciliation, to this purpose: Ʋnlesse men will grant that Christ purchased a salvability, the salvation purchased must be actual; for Inter actum & potentiam non datur medium.

Sir, I know none of ours that deny, that Christ pur­chased actual salvation for those for whom he dyed; i.e. That in time they should be actually saved in that way and method agreed on between the Father and the Son. The thing we deny is, That the salvation purchased, is a­ctually theirs for whom its purchased before they come a­ctually to believe. You must give us leave to distinguish between the Purchase and the Possession: the Grant or Donation of a Benefit, and the actual exhibition and reception of it. The child may have an Inheritance pur­chased for him, and bequeathed to him before he is born, but he must be born before he can enjoy it. Abraham had the grant and Donation of Canaan, long before his had the actual possession of it. Hear we Dr. Ames in this particular;Donatam igi­tur & gratiam & salutem om­nes & singuli habent; quam­vis rei donatae possessionem non habent ante fi­dem. Cor. p. 126, 127. All and each have grace and salvation given, though they have not the possession of the thing given before faith.

Now unto these Arguments let us add one or two more out of your former Sermons about the absoluteness of the Covenant; many of which having fallen in with those already discussed, and not above one or two re­maining.

The first, If any thing were required on our part, then beasting could not be excluded. This also Dr. Crisp vol. 10. p. 71. If any thing were done on our parts to partake of Christ, we might have wherein to boast, Rom. 4. 2.

[Page 33] But I pray consider seriously how crosse this your Ar­gument is to the very Text: For did not Abraham, the party spoken of there, do something for his part to partake of Christ, when he believed? yet was he excluded from boasting. And doth not the Law of Fath, the Gospel, require faith on mans part, that Righteousnesse may be im­puted? why else is it called a Law? Yet the Apostle saith expresly, that by this Law boasting is excluded, Rom. 3. 27. If indeed we could do any thing in a merito­rious way, we might boast, not otherwise. The begger I hope, hath little to boast of, and yet doth he both crave and receive his Almes. The sinner hath lesse: for as that he doth can no way merit, no more then the beggers craving and receiving; so nor can he do that, untill the Lord inable him. God must give him both a mouth and a hand, before he can speak for Christ to take him. Yet both he must have, before he can receive, the Lord having set down to himself (as you your self ac­knowledg) such a method and way of giving.

The other which seems to be of more strength, and I think the strongest you bring, is this, If the Promise of Salvation were upon condition of believing, then men should believe before they be justified, contrary to Rom. 4. 5. where it is said, God justifies the ungodly. Now no where in Scrip­ture Believers are called ungodly; The same almost totidem verbis you may read in the Doctor, vol. 1. p. 170, 171.

Now for answer unto ths, I desire you to consider, what the Papists say concerning this Justification of the wicked. That wheresoever in Scripture God is said to justifie the ungodly, it must be understood that he also makes the ungodly just and righteous; for otherwise the judgment of God would not be according to truth, and the Lord should do that himself which he forbids his crea­ture to do, and abhors in his creature when ever he doth it, Exod. 23. 7. Isaiah 5. 23. Deuter. 25. 1. Prov. 17. 15. And lest you should think light of it,Fas est ab hosto doceri. because it comes from them, though it is right to learn even from an enemy; hear what the learned Pemble saith of this [Page 34] very rule cited by him.§ 1. c. 3. of Ju­stific. We embrace this rule (saith he) and the reason of it, acknowledging that where ever there is Justification, there must be Justice some way or other in the party Justified▪ The God of truth should otherwise call darknesse light, and evil good. And therefore both that Author, as also Paraeus and Chamier, tells us, that the Righteousnesse of Christ imputed to this ungodly person is the ground of this gracious sentence of God, whereby he doth absolve, acquit, and justifie him. So that the person, though he be ungodly and unrighteous in himself, and so unjustifiable, yet is he godly, just, and righteous in Christ and through the Righteousnesse of Christ im­puted to him justifiable. Let this then be agreed on; i.e. 1. That the ground of this gracious sentence of God, whereby he justifies the ungodly must be some kind of Righteousnesse. And 2. That it is the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to the sinner. The Quaerie then will be, Whether this Righteousnesse of Christ be imputed to the sinner before he doth believe, or not till he believeth? Now I think the Scriptures are very clear for the latter, that Righteousnesse is not imputed to the sinner til he doth be­lieve: that very Text it self confirmes it, To him that be­lieveth on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for Righteousnesse. It is to him that believeth that Righte­ousnesse is imputed; and again, His faith is counted, &c. Take faith how you will, it must come into the imputati­on, the imputation is not without it. So again, Abra­ham believed God and it was accounted to him for Righte­ousnesse, ver. 3. When was it so accounted? Certainly when he believed: It was whilest he was in uncircumcisi­on indeed, but not whilest he was in unbelief: He received Circumcision (saith the Apostle) the Seal of the Righteousness of faith, which yet he had being uncircumcised. As he had Righteousnesse then, so had he faith too, for it was a Righteousnesse of faith. And as it was imputed unto him upon believing, so shall it be imputed unto us if we believe on him who raised up Jesus, vers. 24. Hence it is called the Righteousness of faith, for that it comes to [Page 35] be ours through faith. Faith takes it, receives it, puts it on. The Righteousnesse of God by Faith, Phil. 3. 9.

We answer then that place in the Romans thus,

1. An ungodly person may be taken either for one who is wicked,We grant that God doth ju­stifie an un­godly person but in sensu di­viso, not in sen­su composito; so as he makes the lame to leap, the blind to see Isai. 33. 6. Mat. 11. 5. By or­der of Nature he is first a be­liever, and then is justified. Ru­therford Survey of Antin. p. 110 and goes impenitently on in his wickedness, never once looking after Christ; a sinner continuing in his impenitency and unbelief. Now such an ungodly per­son God doth not justifie; for it is against both his truth and justice.

2. It may be taken for one that is ungodly and unju­stifiable in himself; but yet believing on Christ, is through him and his satisfaction Just, and so justifiable. Such an ungodly person God doth Justifie; and thus Ames, Paraeus, Bishop Downam, and those other Divines I have in their descriptions of Justification, make not a sin­ner simply, but a believing sinner to be the subject of Ju­stification, or the person to be justified.

Now whereas you say, That no where in Scripture a Believer is called ungodly. I conceive it false, He is cal­led so there: For who is the ungodly person spoken of there, but Abraham? and he was justified (as hath been shewed) when he did believe. Besides, God the object of faith Justifying, who is described there to be the Justi­fier of the ungodly is said in ver. 26. of the foregoing Chapter, to be the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. I beseech you tell me, doth not the Apostle speak of one and the same Justification in both places? Doth he not in both places describe one and the same person, the per­son that is justified? Him then whom he calls a Believer on Christ in one place, the same he calls an ungodly person in the other; and whom he cals an ungodly person in this, in that he stiles the same a believing person. Certainly, seeing (as it is Chap. 3. vers. 30) that it is one God that ju­stifies both the Circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcisi­on through faith, i.e. All that are justified, both Jew and Gentile, circumcised or uncircumcised, by or through one and the same mean of faith. It must needs be that the ungodly person spoken of in the next Chapter, is such an [Page 36] ungodly person, as hath faith, and doth believe; or else God should justifie some without faith, to which the for­mer place doth aver the contrary. That place in the Ro­manes then concerning Gods justifying the ungodly, will not bear the Position you ground upon it; viz. That sinners are justified before they do believe; or that we do not believe, that we may be justified, as the Doctor expresseth it, an assertion as rotten as the foundation on which it is built; and expresly contrary to the Apostle, who tells us, Galat. 2. 16. that hee had believed on Christ, that so he might be justified by the Faith of Christ.

Thus have I given you an account of some, and those of the main of your Arguments, both wherein they have not satisfied me concerning the Tenent you endeavoured to maintain, and wherein also they have offended me, whilst they wounded that I hold for truth through the sides of Popery and Arminianism. I shall now shew you some grounds of my belief on the contrary: first taking leave in a word to state the Question, and to set downe how, and what I hold concerning it

First then, I distinguish between both a condition and a meritorious cause, as also between it and an impulsive cause. By condition, I understand neither any thing meriting Justification at Gods hands in the least degree, nor yet any thing moving the Lord to Justifie or bestow Salvation on us.

Secondly, By Conditions I understand the restipulation or repromission in a Covenant, the termes and Articles of Agreement in a Covenant betweene equals, and the thing commanded or required in a Covenant betweene Superiors and Inferiors, such as is the Covenant between God and man.

Thirdly, Whereas there are conditions, yet I assert them not in any rigid and legal, but in an Evangelical way. Not so, as if they were not strictly and in a rigid exactnesse perfectly kept, there were no hope of Salvati­on; but so, as if that they be not in some measure sin­cerely [Page 37] observed, there is sure damnation. Mr. Ball will tell you, thatNew Cov. p. 26. whereas in the Covenant of Nature, perfect o­bedience is exacted, so that if there be the least failing in a­ny jot or tittle, and that but once, a man can never be justi­ed thereby, nor can the breach be made up by any repentance. In the Covenant of Grace, perfect obedience is indeed required, yet so as Repentance is admitted, and sincerity accepted. Conditions in this Evangelical way I plead for, and con­ceive, That God in the New Covenant doth not promise life and salvation absolutely unto his chosen, whether they believe and repent or no: but doth require from, and command them to repent and believe, if they will be par­takers of the benefits purchased by his Son, and promi­sed by himself in that his Covenant: which that they may do, he himself of his own grace, and for his own Sons sake bestowes faith and repentance on them. Nor have they a right to any actual enjoyment of these benefits un­till they do actually repent and believe.

The Grounds of my perswasion in this particular follow.

1. That Covenant, wherein is a mutual stipulation, is conditional. But such is the new Covenant; therefore that is conditional. As on Gods part life and salvation are promised, so on mans repentance, and faith, and per­severance therein are required, and to be promised. Mar 1. 15. Chap. 6. 12. Acts 2 38. chap. 3. 19. chap. 20. 21. John 6. 28, 29. chap. 3. 15, 16. John 8. 24. Rom. 10 6, 7, 8, 9 John 8. 31. Chap. 15 5, 6, 7, 10. Heb. 3. 6. Chap. 10, 38. He cannot see wood for trees, that doth not take notice of these Evangelical commands, wherein performance of Gospel conditions, and perseverance in that performance are required, they every where so abundantly occur. Choose we out one of the places named, and a little insist on it; that Rom. 10 9. the rather for that in your an­swer to Mr. S. you make some reply thereto. How (say you) do you prove, that Rom. 10 9. is set down the forme and tenure of the New Covenant? I deny it; The Apostles intent is. &c.

[Page 38] Sir, It is clear, as Calvin notes, that the Apostle here opposeth the Righteousnesse of faith to the Righteous­nesse of Works. It is also clear, that in describing the Righteousnesse of Works he setteth downe the very tenor and form of that Covenant, The man that doth them shall live by them, ver. 5. And in opposition thereunto, de­livers this to be the speech of the Righteousnesse of Faith, If thou confessest with thy mouth, and believest with thine heart, &c. If then it be granted, which cannot be denyed, that in these words, The man that doth them shal live by them, the tenor of the Covenant of Works is con­tained; it must needs follow by the rule of opposition, that in these words, If thou confessest and believest, &c. the tenor of the Covenant of Grace is also contained. Be­sides, when the Apostle saith, The Word is nigh thee, &c. That is the Word of faith which we preach, That if thou con­fesse, &c. What (I pray you) doth he mean by the Word of Faith, but the Gospel? or what else did the Apostle preach but the Gospel? The sum of which he saith to be this, If thou confesse, if thou believe. &c.

Sir, That Word or Gospel which the Apostle prea­ched, wherein he held out the Righteousnesse of faith, and which he set in opposition against the Covenant of Works; That same must needs be the Covenant of Grace. But such is the word here; the tenor whereof he saith is, If thou confesse, &c. Ergo, It is the Covenant of Grace. And whereas you say, That the Apostles intent there is to shew Gods order and method in fulfilling the promises of the Covenant, and to describe those whom he will bring to Glory: though it make nothing against us; for if that were his intent, he might have his intent, and describe both the one and the other, in setting down the Covenant. (The conditions which lead to annexed promises, holding out Gods method unto us, and the counterpane of the Co­venant or Conditions engraven on the heart, being the best character of a person to be glorified.) Though (I say) this makes nothing against us; yet if you consider the sense of the Apostles discourse, both in the latter end [Page 39] of the the foregoing Chapter, and in this; or if you please to consult with Junius Parallels, where he hath aLib. 2. Par. 16. whole Parallel about this place; you shal find that the Apostles intent and scope is otherwise then you say; namely, to prove unto the Jew, even out of Moses, that the end of the Law was not that they might be justified thereby, but that by the impossibility of keeping it, they might be driven to seek Justification from Christ by faith in another Covenant; which Covenant of faith Moses (though ob­scurely) did intimate unto them in those expressions, Say not in thy heart, &c. The Word is nigh thee. By which he meant no other then that Word of Faith, Gospel, or Covenant of Grace which the Apostle preached; the sum whereof was, That if thou confesse and believe, thou shalt be saved.

Come we to some other Texts formerly alledged to prove a stipulation in the Covenant of Grace, and repli­ed unto by you in your Sermon. That out of Gen. 17. touching the Covenant with Abraham was one. To which you say, If any condition were required, then that of Circumcision, which ought also to be performed by all un­der the Gospel; so we should obtrude Judaism upon Christi­ans.

First, (My good friend) Are intimations of preaching Judaisme, Papisme, and Arminianism no calumnies? Con­sider (I pray you) how you besmear the adversaries of your Opinion to bring an odium upon them.

Secondly, What you reply, serves only, ad faciendum populum, there being no manner of Answer made unto the Argument. For whether Circumcision belong to us or no, it was required of Abraham and his Seed; and the soul that refused to take it, is said to break the Covenant, and was to be cut off, ver. 14. So that the Argument remaines firme against you; yea, not at all reply­ed unto; which is this; The Covenant with Abraham was the Covenant of free grace: But in the Covenant with Abraham there was a Condition required of the federates, Abraham and his Seed: Therefore in the Covenant [Page 40] of free grace, there is a Condition required of the Fe­derates.

Thirdly, As for that you say, We distinguish between the external Signe of the Covenant, and the substance of it. The one is alterable, the other remaines stil the same. Now Circumcision was but the external Sign of Abra­hams part. The things or duties God did especially re­quire of Abraham, were faith and sincere obedience, Rom. 4 3. Gen. 17. 1. Now these belong to Christians, as much as to Jewes, and to presse them on Christians is no Judaism.

Circumcisio erat signum obligatorium foede­ratorum, seu restipulationis Abrahami, obligans eum & postoros ad fidem & obedientiam foede­ris Deo praestandam. Peraeus in Gen. 17. 11. Who adds, that both Sacraments, Circumcision and Baptism, do agree, as in other ends, so in this, Quod utroque fit obligatio solennis ad fidem & obedientiam oederis Deo praestandam. Ibid. Circumcision was a Sign obligatory to those which were in Covenant; or a to­ken of the restipulation of A­braham, obliging him and his posterity to faith and obedi­ence of the Covenant to be per­formed to God. saith Paraeus.

Fourthly, I conceive that mandate from the external signe of Circumcision to reach to us Christians. Though not in the letter, yet in the Analogy, and by vertue of it Christians stand to be baptized themselves; also to bring their seed to partake of that Sacrament, which as the Apostle teacheth us, is our Christian Circumcision; and he that wilfully refuseth may be said to break the Co­venant, as well as he that formerly refused Circumcision. The same Covenant which gave a Commandment or Word of Restipulation for that Circumcision of Abra­ham and his Seed, giveth the same commandment or Word of Justification for Baptism of Believers and our seed, saith Grounds and Ends of Infant Baptism p. 38. Mr. C [...]tton of New England.

The next places of Scripture to prove a stipulation were Heb. 8. 10. Heb. 2. 23. To which you reply by Inter­rogation: Is there any condition on mans part intimated here? Doth not God promise to do all? Doth he say, If you will be my people?

1. Sir, what you me an by that expression, Doth not [Page 41] God promise to do all? I wist not, Mr. Saltmarsh saith, It is enough for us to believe that Christ hath repented for us, believed for us. But I hope you are not so far gone. If you by it understand Gods gracious inabling of his crea­ture to perform the conditions he himselfe requireth, I readily joyne with you. It is he gives us to repent and to believe, as hath been said already. But then I hope you will distinguish between, Gods gift and mans du­ty; though the Ability be given of God, the Exercise of it, or work is mans. It is man himself that believeth and repenteth, though he receive ability from the Lord for both.

2. We answer your Demand, Is there any condition on mans part? Yes, that there is; namely this, They shall be my people. Can they be his people without dutiful sub­jection and obedience to him? Here is this then, that God requires of them, that if they would have him to be a God to them, to pardon them, defend them, save them, &c. then they should take him for their God, depend on him, submit to him, obey, worship, and serve him, and carry themselves towards him as become his people:Hos. 2. 23. They shall say, Thou art my God: Upon which Paraeus glosseth,Dicere Dei est efficere; dicam ego, i. e. efficiam populum meum. Dicere nostrum est fides & obe­dientia nostra. God saith, we are his people, making us to be his people. Our faith and our obedience is our saying, The Lord is our God. Nor is it material that God doth not for­mally condition with them, saying, If you will be my people, &c. The restipulation required, is no whit the lesse firm, when in the next Chapter the Prophet saith, Chap 3. 3. Only thou shalt abide for me many dayes; and not, if thou wilt abide for me: it was neverthelesse a conjugal Compact. The cause of this kinde of expression may be either 1. for brevities sake: or secondly, as Mr. Ball notes, God enters into Covenant with man, not as his equall, but as his Superiour or Soveraign, appointing man his conditions in form of commands, which it's mans duty to accept of and obey: Or 3. Which I should rather chuse, to intimate thereby his gracious purpose of giving ability to perfom the Conditions, I will put my Lawes in [Page 42] their hearts. They shall be my people; i e. I will not only require of them, that they know my Lawes, and obey me as becomes my people; but by my Grace, I wil cause it to be wrought within them. Whether way you take it, either for Gods command injoyning them to be his peo­ple; or for his promise to make them his people, it is not much material; this still remaines either way, that they were to be his people. And this we have, even from the most absolute Promises, those of taking the stony heart away, giving a heart of flesh, a new heart, circum­cising the heart, writing the Law on the heart; which admit not, as I conceive, any antecedent condition, yet do they clearly shew that these things are required. This new heart is required, the writing the Law on the heart is required, and so of the rest: God doth require them in his people, and without men have them, they cannot be the people of God, nor expect salvation from God.

These things (Sir) perswade me, notwithstanding all that you have hitherto replied, to adhere still to what I have formerly conceived and delivered concerning these Texts; viz. That they do hold out a stipulation in the Covenant, and then it will be conditional. Now be­cause this work is swollen bigger by the one half al­ready then (when I set pen to paper) I intended it should have been, I shall briefly add some more Arguments, and draw toward a close: And because we are upon sti­pulations in the Covenant, add we an Argument or two of that nature.

1. That Covenant which is mandatory as well as pro­missory, and contains a Law as well as a promise, that Covenant hath a stipulation which they must subscribe to, who will be federates and Covenanters therein; for whenever the Lord annexeth a command unto a Promise, the Promise is not absolute but conditional: there is something required in the command of him who will en­joy the benefit of the Promise. Now the New Covenant is of this nature; it is not a meer Promise (as some would [Page 43] have it) but a Law as well as a Promise, and therefore called by the Apostle, The Law of faith, Rom. 3. 27. Lex fidei do­ctrina fidei. quae fidem exagit, per quam sine operi­bus expectatur à Deo justitia. Alio nomine lex Evangelii. Par. & Mart. in loc. The Law of faith is that Doctrine which doth require faith to the obtaining of that Righteousnesse which is freely impu­ted, saith Paraeus. That is the Law of Works which teach­eth that Righteousnesse is to be obtained by Works but the Law of faith teacheth, it is to be hoped for from the mercy of God alone, saith Martyr. The Doctrine teaching Righteousness by faith, is that which the Word of the Gospel doth bind us to if we will be saved, saith Bernard in his Thesaur. The Condition which offereth and promiseth Salvation, is this Condition, If wee believe. Wilson in his Dictionary on the words.

2. That Covenant which man is forbidden to break, commanded to keep, and wherein man is tyed and bound unto God; that Covenant must needs have conditions and restipulations on mans part; for it is in regard of the things required from man, that man is said to break or keep, or be bound by the Covenant. But such is the New Covenant. Abrahams was such, My Covenant shalt thou keep, Gen. 17. 9. Davids was such (though you a­verred the contrary in your Sermon) Psal. 132. 12. If thy children will keep my Covenant. Such was Israels, Ezek. 20. 37. I will make you to passe under the rod, and bring you into the bond of the Covenant: and what Cove­nant doth he mean but that mentioned, Ezek. 36. 26. and Hos. 2.? The places considered seem to me to hold out one and the same. Such is also that administration of it under which we are. The Romans wereRom. 6. 20. free from righ­teousness, before they believed on Christ, and entred in­to Covenant with him; but after they were baptized in­to Christ they wereVer. 18, 19, 20 Servants unto Righteousnesse. The stile of Gods people formerly was, they were Covenant keepers, Psal. 25. 10. Psal. 103. 17. And is it not as pro­per to them now, as it was then? May not the people of God under the Gospel be guilty of breach of Covenant, and that not only in regard of their Covenants with men, nor yet in regard of those necessary engagements which [Page 44] occasionally they make unto the Lord, but in regard of their Baptism,See Dr. Preston N. Coven. p. 458 459. 500. &c. and that solemne Covenant between God and them, which Baptism doth seal. I have not quite for­gotten Mr. Perkins Catechism, which I learned when I was a child, where I was taught in the fift Principle ex­pounded, to answer this Question, How comes it to passe that many after their Baptism for a long time feel not the effect and fruit of it, and some never? Thus answered, The fault is not in God who keeps his Covenant, but the fault is in themselves, in that they do not keep the condition of the Covenant, to re­ceive Christ by faith, and repent of all their sins. And a little after, How if a man never keep the Condition to which he bound himself in Baptism? Answer, His damnation shall be greater, because he breaks his Vow made unto God. Mr. Per­kins you see, teacheth Conditions in the New Covenant, in regard of which it may be kept or broken by us Chri­stians.

3 This brings to my mind another Argument; That Covenant wherein a Promise is required of the federates, which Promise they do also seal to God in receiving of the Covenant Seal, that Covenant hath a restipulation; But such is the new Covenant. For the confirmation of the Minor, I desire you to consider how in the Primitive times growne persons were required to professe their re­pentance and faith in Christ before they were admitted unto Baptism. Repent (saith Peter, Acts 2) and be bap­tized: Whence also it is called the Baptism of Repentance; Mark 1. 4. Acts 19. 4. And John is said to Baptise men unto repentance, Mat. 3. 11. So when the Eunuch desired Baptism of Philip. Acts 8. 36, 37. saying, What doth hin­der me to be baptized? Philip replyes, That if he believed with all his heart, he might; whereupon followed both his confession of Faith and Baptism. The Baptist also re­quires those whom he baptized to bring forth fruits wor­thy amendment of life. From which places Zanchy and Piscator collect, that faith and Repentance and new obe­dience, were required of all those grownpersons who were baptized, they were to make profession of their repentance [Page 45] and faith, and to make Promise of new Obedience. Take Piscators note upon Matth. 3.Baptismus nul­li adulto con­ferendus est, nisi priu [...] ediderit confessionem peccatorum & fi­dei in Christum; ac praterea pri­missionem san­ctae vitae. in Mat 3. Obs. ex ver. 6, 8, 10. Baptism is to be admini­stred to no person that is of years, unlesse he shall first of all make a confession of sins, and of faith in Christ, and withal a Promise of leading a holy life. These Professions were afterward for the ease of the party to be baptized, turned into Interrogations and Answers: The Minister deman­ding of the party to be baptized, Dost thou believe in God? the party was wont to answer, I do believe. The Mini­ster again inquiring. Dost thou renounce the Divel? &c. he replyed, I do renounce. Which Answer when Infants could not make of themselves, they had Parents and Spon­sors who made it for them. Thus was there a formal sti­pulation required of growne persons at their first admis­sion into Covenant and the administration of the seal of the Covenant to him.

Farther, As before baptism, growne persons did thus professe and promise, so by being baptized did they seal. For this Seal of Baptism, as it is Gods seal to us assuring us of remission and other benefits promised in the Cove­nant: so is it also the Christians Seal unto God, whereby he seals the promise of Repentance, Faith and new Obe­dience: Hence are they said to be baptized into Christ; into his Death, into the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

Baptizari in nomen alicujus est illi consecrari ad cultum, ut quis ab il­lo tanquam suo Domino denominatur ciusque servitio se totum ad [...]rcat. Pis­in Marth. 28 v. 19. To be baptized into any ones name is, to be consecrated to his Worship; so that he is named from him as from his Lord, and that he de­dicate himself wholly to his service, saith Piscator. And learned Zanchie ha­ving at large expressed the same in se­veral particulars, doth briefely sum up all, Est tess [...]a & nota qua sicut differi­mus ab iis omnibus Gentibus, sic eti­am protestamur velle differre, & cum solo populo Dei communionem [...] be­re, ac foederis quod sancitum est in Christo inter Deum & nos conditio­nes servare velle. In cap. 5 ad Ephes. de Bapt. cap. 3. Thes. 37. Baptism is a note and mark where­by we do protest that we will observe the Conditions of that Covenant which in Christ is established between God and us. Baptism is (saith Bishop Dave­nant) ABaptismus est pactum purioris cum Deo, curandum itaque ut quod semel gestum est in baptismo Sacram entali­ter semper in vita peregatur veraciter, Dav. in Colos. 2. v. 1 2. Cor. 2. Covenant made with God of [Page 46] loading a more holy life, therefore we must take care that what was once Sa­cramentally done in Baptism, may be performed truly throughout our whole life.Quemadmodum milites jurant in nomen Imperatoris, atque ita illi obstring untur, ut postea non liceat eis versa [...]i in castris hostium, quod si secus fecerint sit Capital: ita nos in baptismo obstring imur Christo, ju [...]amusque nos postea nunquam de­fecturos ad Diabolum. Martyr in Rom 6. 3. As Souldiers (saith Martyr) swear in the name of the General, and are so bound to him, that it is not lawful for them afterwards to be conversant in the enemies tents, if they do, the offence is capital: So by Baptism we are obliged unto Christ, and we swear that we will not afterwards at any time revolt to the Divel. So also Paraeus,Notum est ex catechesis nos bap­tizari in nomine Sacrae Sanctae Tri­nitatis tanquam unius Dei, quia in fi­dem, cultum, obedientiam Dei nomi­ne astringimur, & nos haec ipsa Deo restipulamur. Baptizamur in mor­tem Christi dupliciter: Primùm re­spectu Dei, quatenus is beneficia mortis Christi baptismi signaculo nobis donat & obsignat: Deinde quantum ad nos, restipulando fidem tantorum beneficiorum Christi, & mortificationem peccati virture mor­tis Christi, ne nobis dominetur. Paraeus in loc. It is known from the Catechisme, That we are bap­tized in the name of the Trinity, because we are bound in the name of God to faith in, to Worship and obedience of God; and we do also promise again these things un­to God. We are baptized into the death of Christ in a double respect; first, in re­spect of God, in as much as he doth by the Seal of Baptism, give and seal to us the benefits of the death of Christ. Secondly in respect of our selves, by promising a­gain faith to believe these so great benefits of Christ, and the mortifying of sin by the power of the death of Christ, that it reign not over us any more. With these forementioned doth also Mr. Byfield concur, who tels us, that Baptism is a Byfield in Col. [...] v. 12. Bond that tyeth us to the desires and endeavours after the beginning and finishing of our death to sin and Spiritual life, according to these Authors sense of the places forena­med. Baptisme sealeth our promise of Repentance, Faith, and new Obedience to God, as well as his promise of remission unto us. It is our pledge, our Covenant­mony, and military oath, whereby we do tye and bind our selves to the service of the Most High; which I can­not possibly conceive how it should be such, if there were no restipulation, or repromission in the Covenant, as you maintain.

[Page 47] Thus much at present concerning Restipulation in the Covenant; passe we on to some other Arguments: and because I remember you told me, that I had in my Sermons a number of Citations out of the Old Te­stament, you shall hear some more of the Argu­ments I used then, for some of them I have set down already.

To what hath been said add then, Gods mercies are to be obtained in Gods way, that way and manner which God hath from all eternity pitched on therein to bring men to the enjoyment of these mercies: But God hath from all eternity purposed to give Remission, Justificati­on, Adoption, &c. as through Christ (for he hath predestinated us to the Adoption of children, through Jesus Christ, Ephes. 1. 5, 7.) so through faith in Christ▪ and in a way of repentance, Rom. 3. 25, 28. chap. 8. 28. Acts 13. 38, 39, 48. chap. 5 31. chap. 11. 18. Therefore till men actual­ly repent and believe, they cannot actually partake of re­mission, Adoption, Justification, and those other benefits and purchases of Christs passion.

Againe, those mercies which the Prophets and Apo­stles propose and promise unto men, not absolutely, but on termes of Repentance and Faith: they are not abso­lutely, but upon performance of the proposed termes to be expected; but the faithful messengers of God, both in the Old and New Testament, do both proffer and promise remission in this manner.

Look into the Sermons of the Prophets, and we shal find in their fullest and highest descriptions of free grace and offers of mercy, they still require repentance of men. So Isai. 1. Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow. But when? when they should seriously set upon the practice of Repentance: for so in the words foregoing, Wash ye, cease to doe evil, &c. Come now and let us reason. No parley at all before this to be expected So cha. 55. a place much insisted on by Dr. Crisp for to prove the absolute freenesse now in hand. There are many things required, as thirsting, coming, hearing, seeking, [Page 48] calling, forsaking of sin, and turning unto God. So the other Prophets, Jer. 3. 12, 13, 14. Ezek. 18. 31, 32. chap. 33. 11. chap. 36. 26, 27. Zach. 1. 3. Now whereas you told me, That these were proofs out of the Old Te­stament, I hope you neither deny proofs thence to be au­thentical, nor yet the Prophets then to have been Prea­chers of free grace. The Covenant (I hope) was for substance the same then that it is now; not a conditional one then,Luth. Gal 3. vers. 19. All the Faithful have had al way one and the self same Gospel, and by that they were saved. and an absolute one now. The Fathers of the Old Testament (saith Luther) before Christ appeared in the flesh, had him in the Spirit, believed in him, and were sa­ved by him as we are, according to the saying, Jesus Christ is one yesterday, to day, and shal be the same for ever. Luther in Galat. c. 4. v. 2.

Come to the New Testament, and we shall find that salvation was held out in the same manner then. Christ and his fore-runners were Preachers of Repentance▪ So also Pemb. vind. fid. 138 p. Treat. of Justif. Sect. 4 cap. 1. yea, the Commission for preaching of the Gospel which is still on record, doth shew how it was then, and is still to be published, not without, but on terms of Repentance, Luke 24. 47. That Repentance and remission oft sin should be preached to all Nations. The rule of which their commis­sion the Apostles observed, as they themselves tell us, Te­stifying both to Jewes and Gentiles repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, Acts 20. 21. Nay it would be no difficult task to pick out most conditional Particles out of their, and our Saviours Sermons, &c. scil. Mark 9. 23. Acts 8. 37. [...], Matth. 6. 14. Rom. 10 9 [...], si modo, Coloss. 1. 23. [...], Matth. 6 15. John 8. 24 Matth. 18. 3. [...], Mark 11. 26. [...], Mark 5. 36. If, but if, unlesse, except only si, sin, modo, dum, dummodo, were conditional, when I learned my Grammer.

3. The Office of the Ministry, what is it for, but to prepare people for mercy by working something in them that may fit them for the receipt of the benefits promised in the New Covenant. As John was, so are they to be Christs Harbingers, and are to make ready a people prepared for the Lord, Luke 1. 17. To preach to them that they might be sa­ved [Page 49] 1 Thess. 2. 16. To open their eyes and to bring them from darknesse to light, and from the kingdom of Satan unto God, that they may receive remission of sins, &c. Acts 26 18. Thou hast ascended up on high, thou hast lead captivity captive, and hast received gifts for men, even for the rebel­lious, that the Lord God may dwell among them, Psal. 68. 18 On which Dr. Crisp thus glosseth, Vol. 2. p. 410. Who is that Them? The Rebellious saith the Text: And p. 412. The Holy Ghost doth not say that the Lord takes Rebellious persons and fits and prepares them by Sanctification, and then when they are fitted, he will come and dwell with them; but even then, without any intermission, without any stop, even when they are rebellious the Lord Christ hath received gifts for them, that the Lord God may dwell among them: Thus the Doctor. But certainly the Apostle Paul was more acquainted with the mind of the Holy Ghost then Dr. Crisp: now he, E­phes 4. 8. alledging this of the Psalmist, openeth it far otherwise, and delivereth it, so as to me it seemes full for the confirmation of that we have in hand: When (saith he) he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts to men: I hope he gave no other then what he received for them. Now what gave he? It followes, He gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evan­gelists, and some Pastors and Teachers: and for what end? For the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ; till we come, &c. He did not then receive this gift, that though they were rebellious, the Lord God might dwell among them whilst they remained so, as the Doctor avers. But on the contrary, he received and gave abroad these gifts of the Ministerial function, that thereby people might bee ta­ken off their rebellious principles, and broken off their rebellious practices, and fitted for the communion with the Most High: The sum is, the Ministers of the Word are sent on this businesse to prepare people for the Lord, for remission and salvation; therefore there is something required of them, some work to be wrought in them, on them, before they can actually partake of remission or [Page 50] salvation from the Lord, or enjoy communion with the Lord.

4. That which these Ministers of the Gospel have di­rected sinners to do for the obtaining of Remission, Justi­fication, and Salvation, that in order of nature is to be done before Remission, Justification and Salvation can a­ctually be obtained: But the Ministers of the Gospel have directed sinners to repent and believe for the obtain­ing of, &c. Acts 2 38. chap. 3. 19. chap. 16 30, 31. Gal. 2. 16. Nor was it remission or justification in cognoscend, only, that they were directed to seek in this way of faith and repentance. Can any imagine that the meaning of that Query of the Jaylor, Sirs, what shall I do to be sa­ved? should be no more then this, What shall I do to be certified and assured of my Salvation? Besides, that Justification, that Paul did himself, and directed others to seek by faith, Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 2. 16. was such in which works have no hand. But to Justification in cognoscendo, or in foro conscentiae, to the evidencing to us, and assu­ring us that we are justified, works do concur, James 2. 16. 24. A man is justified (assured of Justification) by Works, and not by faith only. So that the other Justifica­tion must be of another and different kinde, works being wholly excluded from having any thing to do therein.

5. They who are in an estate of wrath and death un­til they do believe, and then upon their believing passe out of that estate into an estate of life; they are not actually justified till they do believe: But the Elect are in such an estate of wrath and death till they do actually believe Ephes. 2. Children of wrath, Dr. Preston N. Coven. p. 398. When a man doth this, at that very hour hee is entered into Covenant, he is translated from death to life. even as others. Tit. 3. 3. and then when they believe, they passe out of that estate. 1 John 3 14. We know we are passed from death to life. Under the power of death we were then, otherwise we could not have passed from it. And when passed we from it? the same Apostle in his Gospel tells us, John 5. 24. chap. 3. ult. in one of which places he assures us, that he that hear­eth and believeth, is passed: and in the other, He that be­lieveth [Page 51] not, the wrath of God stil abides on him; which terms of passing and abiding, clearly shew that all the Elect are, and continue actually in that woful estate, until they do believe. I hope you will not say, they passe in their own sense and apprehension, and so are children of wrath according to their apprehensions. The Apostle saith, They are children of wrath even as others: and certainly others are not only sensibly and appearingly so, nay, perhaps neither of these wayes, but really so. For my part, I conceive no difference between a vessel of Election and a vessel of wrath, but only in regard of Gods purpose and Christs purchase, which til it be brought into act doth make no real change in the parties state and condition.

6. Until men come actually to have Christ, to be uni­ted unto him, and one with him, they cannot partake of Justification, nor have any right thereto, 1 John 5. 12. He that hath the Son hath life, he that hath not the Son, hath not life. But until men have faith they have not Christ, nor are united to him, for by faith they receive him, John 1. 12. go to him, John 6. 35, 37. Feed on him; dwell in him, and he in them, John 6. 40 56. By faith they live in him, and he in them, Gal. 2. 20. By faith he dwelleth in their hearts, Ephes. 3. 17. Ergo, Until men have faith, and by faith do actually believe on him, they cannot partake of Justification through him, John 3. 36.

I remember that when in a private conference I pressed some of these places of Scripture, in stead of answering to them, you demanded, Whether the Elect had no benefit by Christ, nor right to Christ before they did believe? To which I replyed,

1. That though there be a purpose in God to give sal­vation to them, and a purchase of it by Christ for them, yet had they no right thereunto until they had faith.

2 That they might have benefit by Christ before they had right to Christ, as in the instant of their Conversion, when the Spirit of Christ did work faith and repentance [Page 52] in them. That first Benefit (they had (I conceive) in order of nature, though not in time, before they had right, it being the very conveyance of right over to them, and stating them therein,) must precede their having of right, or otherwise they should have right before they had it. This you told me then was grosse nonsense; and since you have averred in Pulpit, that to say men have benefit and not right, is palpable nonsense.

But 1. Sir, Whether nonsense or no, what is it you say to the places cited? These Texts tell me plainly that unlesse I have faith, I have not Christ, and that unlesse I have Christ I cannot have life, no nor right to, or interest in it; unlesse a man may have right to, and interest in life through Christ, and yet for all not live, but perish e­verlastingly: which I think will be worse then nonsense to aver: So that the Argument remains firm and unan­swered.

2 For your Crimination, though you might have dealt more fairly, and produced the manner of our asserting it, as well as the assertion it self; yet we must be content to take what you give, and as you give it, and shall cast it up into the sachel to the other Legacies you have be­stowed on us; as Arminianism, Papism, Judaisme, absolute contradictions and weak evasions, &c.

3 For the grosse and palpable nonsense it self, Benefit and not right. I must professe unto you, that as grosse and palpable as it is, my dull pate doth not yet appre­hend it. All the while the father lives, the child hath be­nefit by his fathers means, but what right he hath thereto I know not: the coats he wears, the food he eats, are not his own by right, I think, but his Fathers; yea when the fa­ther dies and gives a Legacy to his child to be paid at such an age, until the child come to that age it cannot chal­lenge the Legacy or portion given him by his father, nor dispose of it, if he dye before, yet hath he benefit thereby; if he hath jus ad rem, a right to the thing, he hath not jus in re, a right in the thing, until that period of time, not­withstanding the Donation of his father. But to come [Page 53] yet nearer to the matter in hand. Suppose that some poor woman cast in prison for debt, where she is like to perish, should haply meet with a rich friend, who pity­ing her sad condition, and taking an affection to her, should procure her inlargement out of prison, intending to wed and marry her: I hope here it would be no non­sense to say, that this woman had benefit by this in­tended husband, before she had right to him, and inte­terest in him: for, till the match or contract she cannot have any right in him at all. The case is ours, we are in­debted to God, and in prison too, the Lord by his Spirit delivering us, doth make us his heavenly Bride. This first benefit, our delivering out of bonds, we must have in some measure from Christ, in order of Nature, before we can give our consent to the Match, and by faith take the Lord Jesus for our husband. May we not say in this case that we have benefit? viz. the grand benefit of Re­generation by him, before we have right to him? Is it nonsense to say so? I am sure Mr. Thomas Goodwin writes something after this manner,Christ set forth in his Death, &c. p. 28. The promises of forgivenesse are not as the pardon of a Prince, which meerly contein an ex­pression of his royal word for pardoning; so as we in seeking of it, do rest upon, and have to do only with his word and Seal, which we have to shew for it: but Gods promises of pardon are made in his Son, and are as if a Prince should offer to par­don a Traitor upon mariage with his child, whom in, and with that pardon he offers in such a relation, so as all that would have pardon, must first seek out for his child: And thus it is in the matter of believing; the reason of which is, because Christ is the grand promise, in whom all the Promises are Yea and Amen. 2 Cor. 1. 20. The Interest in a heiresse Lands goes with her person, and with the relation of mariage to her: so all the Promises hang on Christ, and without him, there is no interest to be had in them. So Mr. Reynolds Life of Christ p. 466. tells me, That till there be this consent on our side, it is but a wooing, there is no marriage, no Covenant made. Pag. 478. That our union and communion with Christ, is on our part the work of Faith, whose office it is to unite to Christ [Page 54] and gaine possession of him. Yea, Luther also on Gal. 2 20. Faith therefore must be purely taught, namely, that thou art so entirely joyned to Christ, as that thou maist say, I am one with Christ, his righteonsnesse and Victory are mine, &c. For by faith we are joyned so together, that wee are become one flesh and one bone. So that this faith doth couple Christ and me more neer together, then the husband is coupled to his wife. And Dr. Preston New Coven. p. 458. avers the same.

Sir, these men know how to write sense; now they tel us, that our right comes through our marriage with Christ, and that spiritual match is not made up untill we believe, which be the two main pieces of that you call grosse non­sense For, as for the third, that we cannot believe till God for Christs sake vouchsafe us that benefit, that they all maintain it, I need not tell you. In fine your nonsense bespeaks you in this Argument, which perhaps may puzzle both your senses and intellectuals solidly to an­swer.

All that be united unto Christ, and quickned by him, before they have right to him, do receive special benefits from him before they have right to him: But all the Elect are united unto Christ and quickned by him, before they have right to him, or to salvation through him: Ergo, All the Elect do receive special benefits by Christ, before they have right to him, or to salvation through him. Or, All that have union before they have right have be­nefit before they have right; But all the Elect have union before they have right; Ergo, All the Elect have benefit before they have right.

But we have right to those benefits (say you) by ver­tue of Gods Largess and Donation. The same I also find in Jus & pro­prictas doni ex donantis benefi­ca largitione re­sultai: acciperet aliàs non suum donatorius quum rem donatam teneret. Cor. p. 127. Dr. Ames.

But this I conceive to hold true onely in absolute Grants; for if the Gift or Grant be conditional, then is there a right unto the benefit granted, when that conditi­on is wrought in the Legatee, and not before. Swynborn in his Treatise of Testaments, p. 150. tels us, That if the [Page 55] Testator give his daughter an hundred pounds, if she marry with advice and approbation of her Uncle, in case the party marry without advising with her Uncle about it, she loseth her right to the Legacy given her; (which by the way, may shew the weakness of that Argument that is ta­ken from the word Testament, which some use against Conditions: as if Conditions could not stand with a Te­stamentary disposition) Now such is Gods grant of salvation: it is made in Christ, it is made in him unto Believers; it is not made to sinners, as sinners, as some aver, but to repenting and believing sinners, John 6. 38. 39, 40. This is the will of him that sent me, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on him, have everlasting life. The Grant being made unto us as Believers, I conceive we have not right unto the benefit granted until we doe believe. Sure I am, we cannot have right, but by and through our union to him; which union being an ine­stimable benefit, we cannot have right before we have be­nefit.

7. Because you are so ready to charge your Adversa­ries with nonsense and contradictions,Qui alterum incusai probri ipsum se intueri oporiet. let us mind you of the old rule, He that accuseth another of dishonesty, must look well to himself: and let the inconsequences which necessarily follow from your Doctrine be our last Argu­ment. I beseech you therefore to read me those riddles your Tenents seem to me to contain; and to lead me out of those mazes and Meanders which I think your Positi­ons lead unto, at least to deliver your self out of them; for perhaps my senses may not lead me to follow your clue unlesse I see better solutions then I have seene or heard from you hitherto. I beseech you tell me then,

1. How there can be Many, yea or any true Believers who were never humbled, when yet all men must see their Righteousnesse drosse and dung, must be schooled by the Law to know their need of Christ, before they can or will make out unto him?

2. How the same man may be actually reconciled to God, have wrath removed from him, and be beloved of [Page 56] God with the love of complacency,See this distin­ction of com­placency and compassion confirmed by Rutherford his Survey of Anti­nomianism. and yet at the same time in regard of the same evil works, be an enemy unto God, a child of wrath, and have wrath abiding on him?

3. How the same man may be actually justified and quickned, and yet actually dead in regard of the same sins, at the same time?

4. How the same man at the same time can be a mem­ber of Christ, one in him, and united to him, as he must be who is actually justified, and a member also of the divel, as he cannot but be who still remains an ungodly, impeni­tent, and unbelieving person?

5. How faith in the work of Justification serves for a­ny farther use then to assure us that we are justified, see­ing it doth not concur to the essence and being of it, or to the constituting of us in a state justifiable? and how we are said to be justified by Faith and not by Works, when Works assure us of our being justified as well as Faith.

6 How in the Petition, Forgive us our debts, we can pray for any thing more then assurance of pardon, when actual pardon is passed long before? And how sins can be actually pardoned before they be committed, and the guilt removed before it is contracted?

7 How God who promiseth pardon to Believers only, and condemneth thousands for their impenitency and un­belief, can without blemish of his Honour, Truth, and Justice, give pardon to any in his impenitency and unbelief?

8 How a man can be said to be bound by Covenant, to keep or break the Covenant, when yet in the Co­nant there are no conditions on mans part required to be performed?

9 Why it doth not follow from your Tenents, that a man may be actually Justified and saved without faith, when yet you maintain actual Justification before faith and faith to be required not to the essence of it, or interesting of persons in it, but only to the assuring them of their in­terest therein?

[Page 57] 10. Why it follows not also from them, that Christians may live as they list, seeing you hold that no conditions are on their part required, so that they cannot break the Covenant? Whether Doctor Preston dares the Be­liever to sin if hee can, I yet finde not; but this I find, That hee holds that the Believer may both sin, and by sinning may break the Covenant, as you may find in his Treatise of the New Covenant. p. 458, 459 460. &c.

These are some of the many (for more might be na­med) straites and intricacies, your Positions lead your self and your followers into; out of which, how you will rid your self I wot not: but sure I am, that your Solu­tions hitherto given, do yeild no manner of real satisfa­ction, not only, not to my self, but not to any other of your godly and intelligent Auditors, that I have yet met with.

Toward the close of your Sermon, you ushered in your Authorities with this Objection, But many good Divines call it a Conditional Covenant.

But Sir, you are meal mouthed in the very Objection; for not only many, but the most part of Divines call it so. All that I have ever yet met with, Dr. Crisp, Mr. Salt­marsh, and your self exepted. As for those Authors you bring, I shall by and by shew your fowle play in citing some of them, and your mistake of others; and discover most, if not all of them to be on my side, and to be only against meritorious Conditions. The like mincing you u­sed in a passage in the beginning of your Sermon; viz. That some good Divines say; That Faith and Repentance are the way to glory. Whereas if you be pleased to rub your poll, I believe you may call to mind, not only that some, but most good Divines call these Conditions, and say as much of good Works as you here allow to Faith; namely, that they are via ad regnum, the way to the Kingdom, though not Causa regnandi, the cause of reign­ing. I am sure Mr. Perkins, Dr. Preston, Bishop Dave­nant, and most others I have read, do call them so. But [Page 58] you are politick in these expressions; for thereby you would perswade your hearers, that you had many on your side; like some Travellers who passing on in solita­ry wayes, keep a whistling and a hooping as if they had a great deal of company, whereas alas they are either wholly alone, or at most have but one or two Compani­ons.

Now Sir, for your reply to this Objection, we shall refer it to the close of all, and at present shall look into the Authours you bring, and see whether they stand for the opinion for which you cited them, or rather against it, as shall be made to appear; and then shall add some o­thers to them.

You begin with the Fathers, but there you are spa­ring in your citations; you tell us the Question was rarely agitated then. But you might have said, that the Fa­thers, if they faulted in any thing about the matter in Controversie; it was in giving too much to Faith, Repen­tauce and good Works, by their hyperbolical commendati­ons of them, stiling them meritorious, and the like; as both Mr. Gataker in his Rejoynder to Mr. Saltmarsh, p. 53. and Bishop Davenant, de Justit. Actual. cap. 53. Men better vers'd in the Fathers then you or I, will tell you. That you bring out of Augustin, makes not at all against conditions in the Covenant, but against the power of free will asserted by Pelagius. The same Authour will tell you,

Qui creavit te sine te, non salvabit te sine te. Quemcunque trahit vo­lentem trahit. Nostra fides justos ab injustis, non operum, sed ipsius fidei lege discernir. In quo dormit fides, non vigilat Christus. Justifi­catio per fidem Jesu Christi data est, datur, & dabitur credentibus ante legem, sub lege, & post legem eadem. Credendo invenimus quod Judaei a­miserunt. He that made thee without thee, will not save thee with­out thee (as I have often heard out of Pulpits when I was a Scholer.) And Whomsoever he draweth, he draweth him being willing. Our faith distinguisheth the just from the unjust, not by the Law of Works, but of Faith it self. Christ is not awake in him in whom faith doth sleep. The Justification by the Faith of Jesus Christ hath been given, is given, and shall be given to Believers, before, un­der, [Page 59] and after the Law. By faith we find that which the Jewes have lost. And elsewhere answering the Objecti­on of the Pelagians, from the command of faith and re­pentance, whereby they would prove that we had pow­er to do them, else the command of them would be to no purpose; he saith, By commanding, he (God) doth admo­nish us to do what we can, and to beg for that which we are not able to do.Jubendo monet & facere quod possumus, & petere quod non possumus. O homo, in praeceptione cog­nosce quid debeas habere, in correptione cognosce tuo te vitio non habere; in o­ratione, unde accipias quod vis habere. De Cor. & gra. c. 3. Know O man (saith he in ano­ther place) by the precept, what thou oughtest to have; in the reproof, that 'tis through thy owne fault that thou hast it not; in the prayer learne from whence thou maist recieve that which thou wouldest have. He shews in another place in what respect the Apostle saith, The Justificati­on of life came upon all men;Non quia omnes in eum credunt, sed quia nemo Justificatur nisi in e­um credat. Itaque omnes dictum est, ne aliquo modo alio praeter ipsum quisquam salvus fieri posset, credatur. De Nat. & grat. c 41. Not because all men do believe in Jesus Christ, but because no man is justified except he do believe in him. It is therefore said, all men, that it might not be thought that any one might be saved by any other meanes whatsoever, but by him. Yea, this Champion of free grace, hath so many high, yea, haply over high commendations of faith, that out of him Bellarmine produceth not one or two, but many Citations to prove a meritorious caue sality of faith in the work of Justification, as you may se­in his first Book de Justific. c. 17.

2. Prosper I have not, yet by the allegations I have read, cited out of him, I cannot conceive that Author to be a­gainst Conditions, but rather for them. I shall name a sentence or two.

Fides est justitiae fundamentum quam nulla bona opera praecedunt, sed ex qua omnia procedunt. Inde, i.e. ex Doctri­na Apostolica, capit quisque vitam, quam parit una fides. Faith is the foundation of Righteousness, which no good works go before, but from which all do proceed; from thence (i.e. from the Doctrine of the Apostles) every one doth receive life, which faith alone doth bring forth.

3. Add to Prosper, Jerome in Psalm 5.Hoc ergo bys­sopo asperges me, quando vit tutem Sanguinis ejus effundes su­per me, quando & fidem habita­bit Christus in me. Moses di­stinxit in Levitico inter utram­que justitiam, fidei scilicet at­que factorum, quod altera operi­bus, altera dola fidei credulitate accedente fiat. Therefore thou shalt besprinckle me with this hysop, when thou shalt poure [Page 60] upon me the vertue of his blood, when Christ shall dwell in me by faith. And Moses distinguished in Leviticus between the Righteousnesse of Faith and Deeds, that the one is by works; the other only by the credulity of faith.

4. So Ambrose.Secundùm propositum gratiae, sic decretum est à Deo, ut cessante lege, solam fidem gratia Dei pos­ceret ad salutem, in Rom. 4. Haec lex (scil. Spiritus) dat libertatem, solam fidem poscens. Idem. in 2 Cor. 3. According to the purpose of Grace it is so decreed by God, that the Law ceasing, the Grace of God should require faith alone to Salvation. And this Law (to wit of the Spirit) doth give liberty, requiring Faith alone.

5 Chrysostom, as I find him cited by Bishop Downham. [...]. Thou obtainest Righteousnesse, not by sweat and labour, but receivest it by gift from above, bring­ing one thing only from within; viz. to believe. Nothing therefore in us doth concur to the Act of Justification, but only faith; in Rom. 1. 17. and again in Rom. 3. 27. What is the Law of Faith? to save by Grace: Here he sheweth the power of God, that he hath not only saved, but justified, and brought to glory, and that not requiring works, but seeking faith only.

6. Theodoret, cited by the same Author. Our Lord Christ hath by his bloud procured our salvation, Solam à no­bis fidem exigens, requiring of us faith alone; in Rom. 3. 25.

7. Theophylact, in Rom. 4. 5. Doth he that is to be justi­fied bring any thing? Faith only. By these I hope it doth sufficiently appear, That the Fathers held not Redempti­on to be absolute, as if nothing were required from us in regard of Application; but on the contrary, that faith was required of us if we would be partakers of the Salva­tion purchased; that it was required of us before our a­ctual Justification, and did concur thereto.

Passe we from these to later Writers, among whom, let Martin Luther be the first. Now it is true, that in the place you cited, he saith, The Promises of the Law are conditional, but the Promises of the New Testament have no such conditions, nor require any thing of us, nor depend up­on [Page 61] on any Conditions of our worthinesse. But here I conceive he excludes meritorious Conditions, partly, because he ex­presseth himself very cautelously, saying, No such con­ditions, and no conditions of our worthinesse. And also be­cause he doth elsewhere often aver, that something is re­quired of us. I might here mind you of what Chemnicius saith in the place before cited, who being a Lutheran, could not but be better acquainted with Luthers Tenents then you or I; namely, that Luther was not against Preparations of order, but only Preparations of merit; and for proof of it, cites him on the third Chapter to the Galati­ans, where we find vers. 30. this passage, The use of the Law is to terrifie and fright to Christ, who is the end of the Law for Righteousnesse. And vers. 2. Christs coming pro­fits neither the carelesse nor the desperate, but only such who have been tormented and terrified with the Law for a time, and now with sure trust come to Christ. Which passages do clearly shew, that he held, there ought to be a work of the Law upon the heart before its close with Christ, not to make it worthy of Christ, but to make it long and gasp after Christ. I might tell you also, How in a Letter written to Mr. Gasper Guttil, and translated by Mr. Ru­therford, the same Martin Luther vehemently inveighs against those who would have the Doctrine of Grace to be preached in the first place, and afterwards the reve­lation of wrath, calling it a new method, a curious crotchet, and the broachers of it jugling Gypsies; and averreth ex­presly, that the Apostles method, Rom. 1. 2, 3. was directly opposite thereto, which was first to denounce the wrath of God from heaven, and make all the world sinners and guilty before God; then when they see this, to teach them farther how they may obtain grace and be justified. As also that notable place on Gal. 2. 16. The true way to Christianity is this, that a man do first acknowledge himself by the Law to be a sinner. A little after, When a man is thus taught and in­structed by the Law, then he is terrified and humbled, then he seeth indeed the greatness of his sin, and cannot find in him­self one spark of the Law of God; therefore he justifieth God [Page 62] in his Word, Like to which he hath ano­ther passage: The true office of the Law, which can be never enough magnified, is to shew us our sins, to humble us, kil us, bring us down to hel, that we may be justified. Cha. 3 vs. 23. ad fi­nem. and confesseth that he is guilty of death and eternal damnation. The first part then of Christianity is the preaching of repentance, and the knowledg of our selves. And some few lines after, The Law doth nothing else but utter sin, terrifie and humble, and by this meanes prepareth us to Justification, and driveth us to Christ. And about two leaves after, Being thus terrified by the Law, the man ut­terly despaireth of his own strength, he looks about, and sigh­eth for the help of a Mediator and Saviour. Here then cometh in good time the healthful Word of the Gospel, and saith, Son, thy sins are forgiven thee, believe in Jesus Christ cruci­fied for thy sins. These sayings of Luther, Sir, do fully assure me that Luther held a necessity of Legal sorrow and humiliation in persons to be justified, and that to pre­pare them for Justification, which is directly against the second Position of your former Sermons, concerning the absolutenesse of the Gospel, wherein you pleaded what you could, against the necessity of such legal sorrow, and humiliation.

But passe we over these, and consult we Luther about that necessary mean of faith; Let the Question be, whe­ther in the Gospel faith be not required to the actual en­joyment of Justification, and Remission, and to the ob­taining of a right thereto, and interest therein? Or whe­ther we may have a right to, and interest in, or actual enjoyment of these benefits without faith, or before faith? We wil not go beyond his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians for the discovering of his mind herein; and begin we where we left, Chap. 2. ver. 16. Here is to be noted, that these three, Faith, Christ, and Acceptation, or Imputation must be joyned together; Faith taketh hold on Christ, and hath him present as a Ring doth a precious stone; and whosoever shall be found having this confidence in Christ apprehended in the heart, him will God account for Righteous. This is the mean, and this is the merit whereby we attain the remission of sins and Righteousnesse. So on vers. 20. of the same Chapter, a place cited already, he teacheth that it is through faith we are united to Christ, and come to call [Page 63] the benefits we have by him, ours, Cap. 3. 13. about the middle. For as much then as Christ reigns by his grace in the hearts of the Faithful, there is no sin, no death, nor curse. But where Christ is not knowne, there all these things do still remain; Therefore all they that believe not, do lack this inestimable benefit, and glorious Victory. And on ver. 14. We are all accursed before God, before we know Christ; and there is no other way to avoid the Curse but to believe. A little after, This gift of the Spirit, we receive not by any other Merits then by faith alone: Ver. 26. Faith in Christ maketh us the children of God. And Verse 28. comparing our believing to the looking on the brasen Serpent, saith thus, This is true faith concerning Christ, and in Christ, whereby we are made members of his body, flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone. In him therefore we live, move, and have our being: Christ and our faith must be throughly joyned together. Vers. 29. If ye be Christs, then are you Abrahams Seed; that is to say, If ye believe, and be baptized into Christ; If ye believe I say, &c. then are ye the children of Abraham, not by nature, but by Adoption. Yea, in the place first cited, with which we shall conclude this testimony, cha. 2. 16. Because thou be­lievest in me (saith the Lord) and thy faith layeth hold on Christ, whom I have freely given unto thee, that he might be thy Mediator and High Priest, therefore be thou justified and righteous. Wherefore God doth accept or account us as righ­teous only for our faith in Christ. Because we do apprehend Christ by Faith, all our sins now are no sins; But where Christ and faith bee not, there is no remission or covering of sins, but meer Imputation of sinne and Condemnati­on.

I hope Sir, in those places Luther speaks plainly e­nough to the purpose in hand, and doth sufficiently de­clare his belief in this particular to be, that faith is requi­red to our justification, and that to the obtaining of it, that it doth marry us to Christ, and so state us in a right unto his benefits, that till we have this faith, we are accur­sed caitiffes, under death, wrath and condemnation, and that before God, or in his sight. Nay Sir, he doth say, [Page 64] that it is because of our faith, and for our faith, and that faith is the merit by which we have it; which though I doubt not but may passe with a favourable construction, yet are higher titles of Honour then any of our Di­vines do give unto her in pleading for Conditions in the Covenant.

Your next Author was Peter Martyr, his Commen­tary on the Epistle to the Romans I have; where I meet with that common place, De Justificatione, in it the pas­sage you cite; viz. Negamu: te­stamentum Dei de remissione peccatorum in Christo habere adjunctā conditionem. Com. in Rom. c. 11. p. 1281. We deny that the Testament of God concerning the remission of sins in Christ, hath a condition an­nnexed to it.

But first, I conceive, that Martyr here denies only a condition of Works, or a Legal condition. Such legal con­ditions Pighius did plead for. And that these are the conditions which Martyr doth deny, his owne words in the very same page do clearly expresse. For having in the line next after the passage you quote out of him, al­ledged that of the Apostle at large, Gal. 5. 15, 16, 17. hee presently from this Testimony drawes this inference, as an Explication of his former negation of conditions in the Testaments, Haec verba clarissimè docent; These words do most clearly teach, that the Testament which God made with Abraham, was pure and absolute; et sine ulla legali con­ditione, and without any legal condition. But that he should deny the condition of faith, or that faith was required to Justification, that common place shewes not, but rather the contrary; for about some leaves after, speaking of that, Rom. 4. It shall be imputed to us, as it was to Abraham, if we believe; he thus saith,

Nonne hic satis perspicuè dicitur, o­portere nos credere, illum Jesum Chri­stum, quem Deus refuscitavit, mortuum fuisse & resurrexisse, ut nos justificare­mur, & nobis omnia delicta condona­rentur. Pag. 1292. Is it not here clearly enough said, That we must believe, that that Jesus Christ whom God raised againe, died and rose again, that we might be justi­fied, and that all our sins might be for­given us? And a little after; Omnis qui vi­det filium & credit in eum, habet vitam aeternam. Sic ergo inferimus, At e­go credo in Filium Dei, ergo hab [...] Jam, et [...]abebo id quod promisit. p. 1293 Eve­ry one that seeth the Son and believeth on him, hath eternal life. Thus there­fore [Page 65] we infer, But I believe on the Son of God, therefore I now have, and shall have that which he hath promised. Nisi fides desit, qua oblata apprehen­damus, per promissiones justificamur. Pag. 1294. Ʋnlesse faith be wanting wher by we may apprehend the things offered, we are justified by the Promises. Martyr in that common place reasons wholly against Justification by works. And the condition there spoken of, unlesse we will do apparent injury to the Author, we must understand the condition of works, or of the Law, which both there, and in this eleventh Argument he excludes, both from the Covenant with Abraham, and the work of Justification.

2. Let but Martyr expound himself, and then it will appear what conditions he denies, and in what manner; nor shall I lead you any further for discovery of this, then this his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Look then Chap. 10 on those words, For righteousnesse to every one that believeth; and you shall find the difference be­tweene the Law and the Gospel, thus set down by him.

Lex recipitur faciendo & exactissimè praestando quod praecipitur; Evangelium autem per vivum & effic [...]cem fidei assen­sum. Moses quoque Deut. 30. de eadem lege scripsit, se prop [...]suisse populo vi [...]am & mortem; manifeste docens, si reci­peretur lex & impleretur, vitam & quidem ae [...]ernam secum fore allaturam. Verum cum excludamur hoc commodo, misericors Deus aliud verbum providit, nempe fidei; quod si assentiendo recipiatur, vitam se­cum habet. Ex hoc loco apparet pro­missiones legis datas ex hypothesi, seu conditione praecedentium operum. In Evangelio autem si promissionibus anne­ctantur opera, ea non sunt accipienda vel ut merita, vel ut causa illarum promissi­onum: sed ita statuendum est, ut illa Dei dona quae promittuntur post opera sequantur, cametsi non perfecta fuerint & absoluta ut à lege imperantur. P. 1026, 1027. The Law is received by doing, and most exact performing that which is commanded: But the Go­spel by a lively and efficacious assent of faith. Moses also Deut. 30. wri­teth concerning the Law, that hee had set before the people life and death; manifestly teaching that if the Law be received and fulfilled, it will bring eternal life with it: But seeing we are shut out from this be­nefit, the merciful God hath provi­ded another word, to wit of faith; which if by assenting to it, it be recei­ved, bringeth life along with it. From this place it appeareth, that the promises of the Law were given from the supposition or condition of [Page 66] Works going before. But in the Gospel, if works are annexed to the Promises, they are not so to be understood, as either the merit or causes of those Promises. But we must thus con­clude, That these gifts of God which are promised, follow af­ter the works, though they be not perfect and absolute as they are commanded in the Law. This place, (I hope) will shew that Peter Martyr was only against the condition of Works, and there too against their merit or efficiency; for as for their presence, he allowes that they are required in the Gospel. But as as for the condition of faith, he is not at all against it. Turne to one place more, Rom. 8. If we suffer with him, &c. Where setting down the differen­ces between the Promises of the Law and of the Gospel, he saith, Non in eo discrepant, ut quidam pu­tant, quod Evangelicae non habeant ad­jectas conditiones; Legales autem si­ne conditionibus nunquem offerantur. Quemad modum enim dicitur, Honora patrem & matrem, ut sis longaevus super terram; & si volueritis, & audi­eritis me, bona terrae comdedatis. Ita in Evangelio etiam legimus: Remit­tite & remittetur, Date & dabitur, &c. quare cum hoc discrimen non sit, aliud quaerendum est. Quamobrem apparet diligenter intuenti, conditiones leges potuisse causas esse consecutionis prae­miorumquae promittebantur. Nam fi [...]illae perfectae & absolutae fuissent, ut erant à e [...]e imperatae, cum ipsis prae­mils comparari potuissent et meriti ra­tionem habuissent. Sed cum illae pre­stari ab hominibus non potuissent, De­us ex sua misericordia subjecit promi [...] ­siones Evangelicas illorum loco: quae quamvis conditiones adjectus habent, tamen offeruntur gratis. Pag. 667. Quare si haec tria conjungis, praemiae E­vangelica promitti gratis; conditiones illis non posse aequari, & promissiones oportere esse firmissimas; & meriti ra­tionem auferes, quo discrimine illa à se­galibus differant, facilè cernes. Pa. 668. They do not differ in this, (as some think) that the Promises Evangelical have no conditions annexed; but the Legal Promises are never offered without conditions; for as its said, Honour thy Father and thy mother, that thou maist live long upon the earth. And if ye be willing and obedient ye shall eat the good of the Land. So we read al­so in the Gospel, Forgive, and it shall be forgiven; give, and it shall be gi­ven, &c. Wherefore seeing this is not the difference, we must seek out some other. It appeareth therefore to him that diligently considereth, that the conditions of the Law might bee causes of the obtainment of the rewards promised: for if they had been perfect and absolute, as the Law required them, they might be compared with the rewards themselves, and had also had esteem of merit; but seeing these can­not be performed by men. God of his mercy gave in their stead Evangeli­cal Promises, which although they [Page 67] have conditions added, yet are offered freely. Wherefore if thou joyne these three things together, that the Evan­gelical rewards are promised freely, that the conditions cannot be compared unto, or equalized with them, that the Promises must be most firme, and take away the account of merit, you may see where­in these differ from those of the Law.

And thus I hope it is manifest, that they were conditi­ons of Works which Peter Martyr did deny; that he did not deny them simply neither, but only as meritorious and causal of the benefits promised; that he held faith to be the Requisite or the Condition of the Gospel. So that you must give me leave to take Martyr from you too, and put him down with the forenamed Authors, for a patron of our Cause.

3. Next unto Peter Martyr, you cite Olevian, but whe­ther with any more advantage to your Cause then the former, or disadvantage to us, is the businesse of our pre­sent enquiry.

If you please with second thoughts (which are most commonly the best) to look into him, you shall find that when he denies conditions in the Covenant, they are on­ly such as, first, are performed by and proceeding from our own strength; which we with him do acknowledg to be none, and therefore also deny the same. 2. Which arise from, or carry along with them a consideration of dignity, or worthinesse in our selves. 3. Are of a meri­torious nature. Such conditions as these, we together with him disclaim. That these are the conditions which he doth deny, is so clear and plain, that he which runs may read. If you begin with his definition of the Covenant of Grace, you shall find him in the close thereof expres­sing himself thus; [...] conditi­onem aut stipu­lationem ulli [...] bonae cogitatio­nis ab ipsorum viribus. De subst-foed. grat. p. 3 edit. Gen. Anno 1585. Without the condition or stipulation of any good thoughts from their own strength. Having spoken concerning God, who makes the Covenant, he comes afterward to consider the persons with whom this Cove­nant is made, and shewes that the very Elect themselves [Page 68] to whom it doth especially belong, are by nature children of wrath, dead in sins, such whose hearts are hearts of stone, unable to think a good thought of themselves, meer darknesse, enemies to God, slaves to sinne and Satan:

Qui cum tales sint, nolle se, ait Domi­nus, ejusmodi [...]oedus cum illis percu­tere, cujus vel minima pars in ipsorum viribus fundata sit, Pag. 12. Now forasmuch as they are such, God (saith he) promiseth he will not make any such Covenant with them, which in the least part thereof should be founded on their own strength to perform it.Quamobrem, ne concidat foedus apud mileros homines, in peccatis mortuos, corda habentes lapidea, qui legi Dei non subjiciuntur, & ne possunt quidem, Rom 8. qui denique non idonei sunt ad cogitandum quicquam boni ex se ipsis 2 Cor. 3. Sed ut firmum maneat, ejus­modi foedus promittit, cujus universa essentia à se solo dependeat, & in Chri­sto suo fundata sit. — Modum eti­am exequendi sui decreti in nobis ejus­modi promittit, cujus vis & efficacia non à corrupto homine, sed à se solo Proficiscatur. Pag. 13. Wherefore lest the Covenant should fail and be of none effect, men being miserable, dead in sins, having hearts of stone, such as are not subject to the Law of God, nei­ther in deed can be, Rom. 8. Who are not able of themselves to think any thought that is good: but that it may remain firm and everlasting, he pro­miseth such a Covenant, the whole es­sence whereof doth depend on himself a­lone, and is founded in his Son Jesus Christ. — He promiseth also such a manner of executing in us this his de­cree and purpose, the strength and efficacy whereof doth not proceed from corrupt man, but from himself alone. A little after, he sums up all that he had said concerning the nature and substance of the Covenant, thus, Wherefore, if you look upon God, the efficient cause, and those to whom he promiseth the Covenant; or if you consider the matter and form thereof, you shall still find it is a Covenant of free grace, and that it doth notNullā que con­ditione nostrae dignitatis, me­ritorum, aut propriā virium niti. Pag. 14. Depend on any condition of our worthi­nesse, merits, or our proper strength. — The most mer­ciful God did see the promise would be vain in respect of our vanity, which should depend on the condition of our own strength. What here he doth deliver so plainly, and in such expresse termes, you may (if you please to look into him) find him afterwards P. 211, & 215 repeating againe and again.

Sir, By these passages you may see you have not gain­ed [Page 69] any thing by Olevian, nor your Adversaries lost by what he speaks against conditions in the Covenant.

Now that you may further see, that he speaks rather on their side whom you oppose, then for you; I shall in­treat you to consider some other passages in him.

1. He tells us that in this Covenant there is, and must be a mutual consent between God and us, yea, a consent testified by both parties: for immediately after his defi­nition of the Covenant in the substance of it (which wee mentioned before) he comes to consider the administra­tion of it, which he saith is dispersed by the Lord, by voice and visible signes,Pag. 3. In testimonium mutui consensus inter Deum & nos; In testimony of this mutual consent which is between God and us. The same he doth elsewhere more largely repeat, as I shall shew you by and by. How both parties do give their consent in making the Cove­nant, he doth afterwards declare, and withal the free­nesse of the Grace of God in both.

Universa substantia foederis gratuita est: Quoad Deum, is propriè foedus nobiscum percuti [...], cum promissionem recon­ciliationis gratuitae in Evangelio oblatam per Spiritum Sanctum cordibus obsignat, & renovationem ad vitam aeternam inchoat, in [...]ies promovet, ac tandem perficit, Quoad nos, qui mortui eramus in pecca­tis, recipitur foedus, dum gratis nobis do­natur Spiritus Sanctus, per quem excitati è morte in vitam, fit, ut non modo velimus & possimus credere gratuitae promissioni de reconciliatione per Christum, & instauratione nostri ad adeundum haereditatem regni Coele­stis; sed etiam ut credamus, seu ipsam fidem ac­cipiamus. Pag. 15. The whole substance of the Covenant (saith he) is free: In respect of God, he properly makes the Covenant with us, when he doth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit seal the Pro­mise of free reconciliation offe­red in the Gospel, and beginneth our renovation to eternal life, doth daily carry it on, and at last doth perfect it. In respect of us who were dead in sins and trespasses, the Covenant is re­ceived when the Holy Ghost is freely given to us, whereby be­ing raised from death to life, it comes to passe that we not only have a will and power to believe the Promise of free grace concerning reconciliation by Christ, and the renewing of us, that we may enter into the inheritaace of the heavenly King­dome; but also do believe or receive faith it self. So that [Page 70] the freenesse and absolutenesse of the Covenant doth not consist in this, that there is no condition or duty required on our parts, but none that is to be performed by our own strength; as he some few lines after doth expresse himself.

Atque ita totum haec foedus merè esse gratuitum, & nullâ conditione no­strarum virum, sed gratuita Dei mise­ricordia in Christo, per fidem, quam ip­se donat, apprehensa, constare, certum est; oblatio duplicis promissionis in Christo, remissionis scil. peccatorum, & sanctificationis, atque ipsius Christi do­natio, quoad Deum, est gratuita: ac­ceptatio ex parte nostra etiam est gra­tuita, quia est Dei actio in nobis, qua promissionem suam obsignat cordibus, ut acti agimus, &c. Pag. 16. Thus (saith he) it is certain, that this whole Covenant is meerly of free Grace, and doth not de­pend on any condition of our owne strength, but on the free mercy of God in Christ, apprehended by faith, which himself doth bestow; The offer or tender of a double Promise in Christ, to wit, of the remission of sins, and sanctification, and so the donation of Christ himself, is, in respect of God, most free. The accep­tation on our part is also free, because it is the action of God in us, whereby he doth seal the Promise to our hearts; so that being acted by him, we do act; being by him made Be­lievers, we do believe; and being quickned or created by Christ unto good works, we do walk in them.

Thus far Olevian in that place: and who is there Sir, of these whom you oppose, that doth not say the same with him? So that your quoting of him is at least to lit­tle purpose for your opinion: I might farther shew you, that he in another place, repeating the same thing, adds, Pag. 211, 212 213, 216. once and again, that God in giving faith to his Elect and chosen ones, doth thereby give with it to them also universam substantiam foederis, the whole substance of the Covenant. So that the remission of sin promised in the Covenant is not Antecedent but Consequent to faith; which in effect is as much for the conditionality of faith in reference to the pardon of sin, & the salvation of souls, as is contended for by those whom you oppose; but I will not insist on that. I shal, for your and the Readers better informati­on and satisfaction touching the judgment of this learned Divine in this point, entreat you to observe.

2. That as he doth plead for a mutual consent of both [Page 71] parties in the Covenant; So he doth withal maintaine, that when God for his part performes the federatory a­ction (as his phrase is) Prius assensum à nobis stipulatur: he doth first require our assent to the Promises and Duties or Conditions of the Covenant.Quia foedus non inter invitos, sed volentes contrabi­tur, testimonia visibilia instituit, quibus & as­sensum nostrum in gratuitum foedus in verbo obla­tum stipuletur, quem ut ipsemei in elect is operatur, ita publicè ad suam gloriam apparere, vult, & fi­mul in verbo oblatum foedus symbolis (solemni contestatione prius facta, velle vim, ipsos esse suum populum) obfignat. Part 2. p. 311. Quia Deus non aliis jurat quam credentibus, ideo cum ad actionem foederatoriam descendit, prius assensum à nobis stipulatur, mandando ejus testificationem so­lenni ritu, quam ad promissionis obsignationem at­que impletionem ipse descendat. Pag. 302. vide plura pag. 304, 305. ad 320. Thus hee expresseth himself more then once, shew­ing withal, that this Position is most agreeable to the Scrip­ture of the Old and New Te­stament; alledging to this purpose, that voluntary and federal Contract betweene God and the people expressed by Moses; Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his wayes, and to keep his Statutes, and his Com­mandments, and his Judgments, and to hearken unto his voyce. And the Lord hath this day avouched thee to be his pecu­liar people as he hath promised thee. Deu. 26. 17, 18. Setting down at large several Reasons why the Lord is pleased thus to proceed in the administration of his Covenant, and that in reference to both the Elect and Reprobate; those which are sincere, and those which are but hypocri­tical professors of, and parties in the Covenant.

So that if you lay all the passages of Olevian together, you may (at least wise the indifferent Reader may) see that you have gained nothing by him, nor have your Ad­versaries lost him.

4. Having dispatch'd Olevian, in the next place I turn to Zanchy, whom you alledg as being fully for you. And I confesse, at the first sight looking on him with a bare superficial glance, he doth seem wholly to be yours, especially if you pitch on one passage, and do not com­pare it with others in the same place. 'Tis true, he doth affirm that God saith,Sine ulla in­terjecta vel poe­ni tentiae vel fi­dei conditione absolutissimè ait Desponsabo te mihi in perpetu­um. In Hos. 2. onal. in v. 21, 22. § 1. Most absolutely without any condi­tion of Faith and Repentance inserted, I will betroth thee to [Page 72] me for ever. But if you please seriously to weigh what he delivereth in his Commentary on the same Chapter, and compare one thing with another, you shall find, that

1. The absolutenesse which he speaks of lyeth in this, not that faith and repentance are not required on the Churches part to make up the match; but that the ma­king or dissolving of the Matrimonial federal Contract between the Lord and the Church shall not depend on any condition to be performed by the Church of her owne power and strength, for the Lord doth undertake even for the Church, to work in her Faith, Repentance and [...]ll other Graces requisite to the making and perpetuating of the match, that it bee not broken▪ so he speaks, and doth declare himself in the end of that very Paragraph, the beginning whereof you take hold of as serving, our turne.

Promittit & novum connubium, & omnia quae ad hoc connubium etiam ex parte exotis contrabendum, [...]um confirmandum inperpetuum pertinent. God promiseth both a new Marriage, and also all things which even on the [...] are ne­cessary for the making and confirming of [...] the Match. And more fully af­terwards, Promittit se effecturum & perpetuo connubio simul ei copulati. Perpe [...]uum autem esse non potest connubium, nisi sicut in Deo, sic etiam in nobis perpe­tua sit fides & Spiritus Christi, per quem hoc connubium & contrahitur, & conservatur. Ergo promittit se effectum ut perpetua in nobis e [...]ect [...]s, sit fides, & Spiritus Christi. Ibid [...] §. 25. He promiseth, That he will cause that we shall be joyned to him in a perpetual mariage. But the mariage cannot be perpetual, unlesse as in God, so also there be in us Faith and the Spirit of Christ continuing to the end, by which this marriage is both contract­ed and preserved. Therefore he doth promise that faith and the Spirit of Christ shall continue in us. You may there at large see him assert,§. 26, 27, ad 33. That there are connubi [...] le­ges, as he calls them, Lawes of the marriage, or conditi­ons thereof which are to be observed by the Church for her part which God doth undertake to write in her heart, that so the marriage may be made and continued. And what doth Zanchy, I pray you, here say more, then any of those whom you oppose? or who is there of those a­gainst [Page 73] whom you alledge him, that doth not assert the ve­ry same? If you look back into his Commentary on the same Chapter and verse, you shall find him speaking the same thing, and explicating himself, in what sense he saith 'tis a Promise without a Condition.Notandum, hanc esse simplicem & evan­gelicam sine ulla conditione promissionem. Hic enim nihil exigit Deus, sed simpliciter promittit quod velit ipse ecclesiae suae facere; adeo ut promittat etiam fidem, sine qua reli­quae promissiones in nobis locum habere non possunt. It is to be noted, (saith he, explicating those words, I will betroth thee to me) that this is a simple and Evangelical promise, without any condition; for here God doth exact nothing; (to wit, to be done by their owne strength) but doth simply promise what he himself will do to his Church; so that he doth promise faith it selfe, without which the rest of the Promises can have no place in us.

2. You may observe, That when he saith, The Promise is made without any condition, his meaning is, without any Condition in us Antecedaneous, as a moving cause, inducing or inclining the Lord to en­ter into this Covenant, and to make this matrimonial Contract: all the cause thereof the Lord finds in, of, and from himself; in which regard he prevents us, not we him. Thus he doth afterwards clearly expresse him­self. Innuit illa dictione, Ego, Deum es­se authorem nostrae reconciliationis, & consequentur nostrae salutis. Ipse est qui prior venit ad nos, & nos sibi ipse desponsar. Nos non ipsum praeve ni­mus aut quaerimus in sponsum, sed ip­se praevenit nos ut desponset nos sibi. Ego, inquit, desponsabo te; huc illud 1 Joh. 4. Non quod nos prius dilexeri­mus eum, sed ipse prior dilexerit nos. Vae nobis si Deus nos non praeveniret, § 5. Desponsabo. By that word, I wil betroth thee; he doth give us to understand, that God is the Author of our Reconci­liation, and consequently of our Sal­vation. He it is that doth first come to us and betroth us to himself. Wee do not prevent him, or seek him to be our husband; but he preventeth us, that he may betroth us unto himself. 1 John 4. Not that wee loved him first, but he loved us first. Wo be to us, if God did not prevent us. Thus Zanchy, and what have you gained by him in this parti­cular, or your opposites lost? Do they not speak the same things? and when they assert Conditions, yet [Page 74] deny them to be on our part antecedaneous, or any mo­ving causes, acknowledging that all doth proceed from the meer good pleasure of God, according to the purpose which he purposed in himself, and thatDeut. 7. he loveth his peo­ple with whom he makes the Covenant, because he loveth them, as Moses sometime said to Israel.

3. That in denying of Conditions, he doth deny con­ditions that are meritorious, and that the Covenant it self, as also the Promises are free without respect unto, or dependance on any thing that is of merit in us. Thus in the very next page setting down the substantial or es­sential heads of the Covenant, he delivereth his mind; Ratio foederis faciendi seu pro­mittendi, est, qua Deus ex gratia, extra nostra merita foedus hoc nobiscum init; foedesque hoc nullis nostris suffultum est me­ritis. Pag. 44. §. 3. Ratio. The manner of making the Covenant, or of promising, is, that God of his free grace, without any merits of ours, doth make this Covenant with us, and it doth not depend on any merits of our own at all. And do not those whom you oppose, and think to strengthen your opposition against them by Zanchies Authority, produced and urged for you; do not (I say) they speak the same thing with him in this particular? Hitherto I shewed, that Zanchy is not so much for you, as you would make the world believe he is; I shall now make it appear, that in the same place, however he doth not use the word Condition (which yet he doth in other places) yet he speaks the same thing for substance which they do against whom you alledg him. And that there are such conditions required on the Churches part as wee plead for, Consider with me to this purpose.

1. His explication of that phrase, I will betroth thee to me.Foederis vinculo se unit cum populo, & populus vicissim u­nitur Deo: sicut sponsus cum sponsa, & sponsa cum sponso, fide conjugii utrinque data. P. 43 §. Cum autem. When God doth make a new Covenant with any people, he is said to betroth them to himself, because that by the bond of the Covenant he will u­nite himself to that people, and they are likewise joyned to God, as the Bridegroome is to the Bride, and the Bride to the Bride­groom, faith of the Marriage being given on both sides, or by both parties. And

[Page 75] 2. His definition of the Covenant, which he doth after­wards largely insist on, setting down the chief and essential heads thereof. Ibid. 43. Col. [...]. The Covenant of God with man, (saith he) is mutua pactio, a mutual agreement between both parties; wherein God of his meer grace, and for Christs sake, doth promise two things; 1. That he will be a God to us, or re­ceive us into his favour, pardoning all our sins for Christs sake, and impute his righteousnesse unto us. 2. That he wil bestow the Kingdom of Heaven on us for our inheritance; And doth also require of man two things; 1. Faith, 2. O­bedience, that he order his life according to the pleasure of God: and both parties do by outward signes confirm Fidem sibi invicem datam. You may find the same thing delive­red by him in the first and second Heads of the Covenant. Ex parte nostri substantia foe­deris est id quod à nobis stipula­tur, & nos pre­mittimus. &c. p. 45. And in the next page, The substance of the Covenant on Gods part, (saith he) is that which God of his free grace doth offer and promise us; on our part, that which he doth re­quire of us, and which we promise to perform, That we do em­brace this reconciliation offered and promised, That we will be his people, &c.

Now Sir, if you will be pleased to consider these seve­ral assertions of Zanchy, in this very place which you your self did quote, 1. Faith is that Grace which is on the Churches part necessary to make up the marriage Co­venant between the Lord and her. 2. This grace the Lord doth promise absolutely to give, it being that grace without which the rest of the Promises have no place in us. 3. It is also our duty; God doth in the Covenant command it, we promise to perform it. 4. It is that wherein, on our part, the substance of the Covenant doth consist. Lay them altogether, and you may clearly see here is an acknowledgment of the thing, faith is the con­dition of the Covenant, though he doth not give it the name. But to give you a further taste of him, that it may be out of all question that he doth assert conditions, both name and thing; I shall only intreat you to peruse In 1. Epist. Joha. cap. 1. loc. de rem. peccat. q. 6. one place more in him; where he doth largely handle that great blessing and benefit of the Covenant, the re­mission [Page 76] of sins;Quibus condi­tionibus remis­sio peccatorum offeratur & conferatur. in the sixth place he comes to consider, On what condition it is offered and conferred; and mentions three: 1. The first and chief, is the true and constant practice of Repentance. 2. Confession and acknowledg­ment of our offences to those whom we have injured and wronged. 3. A brotherly forgiving of those which have sinned against and offended us. Where he doth withal maintain, thatSunt conditiones non propter quas, sed citra quas peccatorum remissio non obtine­tur.— Et si citra bas conditiones obtine­ri remissio peccatorum non potest, non ta­men propter eas tanquam propter merita. Ideo Johannes ait, Si confiteamur, ecce con­ditionem; non tamen ait, propter confessi­onem— Nam etiam citra fidem haberi non potest justificatio, non tamen propter dignitatem fidei haberi eam dicimus, sed gratis. — Deinde illud notandum est, etiam has conditiones quas requieit à nobis Deus, donari nobis à Deo, & esse dona Dei; non ergo meritis ullo modo, sed soli Dei gratiae danda est remissio peccatorum. they are condi­tions not for which, but without which the remission of sins is not obtained; denying them to be conditions meritorious. There­fore S. John saith, If we confess, behold the condition; yet he doth not say, for our confession, he will forgive. Justification cannot be had without faith; but we do not say, it is obtained for the worth of our faith; but freely, or of free­grace. Moreover this is (saith he) to be noted, that even the ve­ry conditions which God requireth of us, are given to us by God: Therefore the remission of sins is not to be ascribed in any sort to our Merits, but to the grace of God alone. You have here Zanchy, speaking as fully and as plainly for Conditions, as any of those whose Doctrine you oppose, in which regard I must intreat you either to quit your claim to this Author, and leave him to stand on our side against you; or else to change your mind and judgment, come over to us, and then Zanchy is yours when you are ours.

5 The Testimony of learned Junius is next produced by you, as that which seemes to be most for you of all the Authors; and yet not so much as is pretended. The oration of his which you mention, I have not. In his Parallels he doth indeed make mention of it,Ʋsum istius nominis in hac significatione Classicis autho­ribus non fuis­se incognitum ante in oratione quadam demon­stravimus. Pa­tal. l. 3. c. 9. as that wherein he had proved, that the Hebrew word, [...], oft time, in the Scriptures of the old Testament; and the La­tine [Page 77] word Foedus, both according to the Etymology and use thereof in classical Authors, are not restrained to those federal promises wherein there is a mutual stipulati­on between divers parties expressed, but for such declara­tions and dispositions as proceed from one alone, so that the Hebrew word might well be rendred by the Apostle, [...]. Now this is a thing which is not denied, but ac­knowledged and granted by those, which yet neverthelesse do assert a mutual stipulation, and conditions (in that re­gard) in the Covenant of Grace. So that if this be the scope and drift of that Oration, as it seems to be by his mentioning of it for this end and purpose; it is alledged by you to little purpose, seeing it doth neither make for you, nor against us. In prosecution of this, which is the main drift of that Parallel, and as I conceive by his own citing of it, of the Oration also; he adds,Dei gratiam luculentiorem homini­bus explicatam esse, quòd suis non foe­dus, sed Testamentum dederit. Quiae foedus conditiones mutuas fuisset ha­bitum, quas si altera pars non praestet, foedus est irritum. Testamentum ve­rò liberalitatis & gratiae, citra ullam conditionem instrumentum est, ex quo haeredes vocantur & instituuntur citra contemplationem ullius officii quod ab ipsis proficissi possit. That the grace of God is manifested much more clear to men, in that he doth not give a Co­venant, but a Testament to those that are his: For the Covenant would have Conditions, which if either part do not perform, the Covenant is made void. But a Testament is an instru­ment of liberality and grace, without any condition; by which men are called and appointed heirs, without respect to any duty which might proceed from them. By this passage of Junius you may take notice, who that Vir maximus is whom Dr. Ames cites, in that place of his Coronis, which is quoted by you. Now as for this place of Junius, we must either expound it of merito­rious Conditions (which those words, without respect to any duty, seem to intimate;) or of Conditions Legal, to be performed by our own strength, such as were in the Co­venant of works: for Conditions Evangelical and not Meritorious, he doth in expresse termes aver in the new Covenant or Testament.Substantia u­triusque resta­menti una qui­dem at (que) com­munis est in Christo Jesu; eaque partibus duabus comprehensa pro ut Abrahamo primum, Gen. 17. deinde vero posteris illius fuit exposita; una, promis­sionis, quum Deus inquit, futurus sim ipsis D [...]us: altera, conditionis appositae, qua De­us petit ut nos viciss [...]m pareamus ad stipu­lationem ip [...], quam [...]i, & ipsi e [...]unt mi­hi populus. Par. l. 3. c. 8. The substance (saith he) of ei­ther Testament, is one and the same, common in Jesus Christ; [Page 78] and that consists of two parts; as it was first manifested to Abra­ham, Gen. 17. and afterwards to his posterity; the one containing the Promise, when God saith, I will be their God; the other the condition added, wherein God requireth, that we should in like manner obey him, when he saith, And they shall be my people. And if you please to peruse the Chapter, out which the next Quotation in the Margent is cited at large, or the passage it selfe that is alledged, you shall finde him acknowledg­ing, that theHujus promissionis Evangelicae antecedens sive [...] conditio poterat multorum animos deterrere, ac potius om­nium si legis [...] in carne nostra (ut necesse est) expendissent; cujus [...] inde à principio sermonis hujus conditionem Moses expresserat, dicens, nondum dedit vobis Jehova mentem ad cognoscendum. —Ne igitur impossibilem conditionem propositam sibi à Deo fuisse quererentur, commoditatem istius Moses his ver­bis explicat; Nam praeceptum hoc quod ego praecipio tibi, &c. quasi dicat, hactenus proposui tibi partem priorem foederis, ut obsequaris Deo: sed quia altera quaeque pars foederis est tibi necessaria, ut Deus tuus quasi novo foedere (quod tamen reipsa unum est) suis partibus erga te defungatur cum tu ipse non possis; & circumcidens cor tuum inscribat ei legem suam & foedus suum ad obedien­tiam fidei. Par. lib. 2. part 16. Covenant of the Gospel hath its conditions annexed, as well as the Covenant of Works; and withal such a condition, as to man in himselfe is im­possible, though in re­gard of the Lords gra­cious promise, who doth undertake to work in his own Federates the very condition it selfe, 'tis to them through power of his grace and efficacy of his Spirit, made profitable and easie; where when he had fitly shewed the agreement between Moses, setting down the tenor and condition of the Covenant which God did make with Israel, (besides the Covenant which he made with them at Horeb) and S. Paul expressing the tenor of the Gospel, which is a declaration of the same Covenant of Grace which Moses mentioneth, he doth thus para­phrase those words of the Covenant, which both do ex­presse; Hoc praeceptum fidei quod clo­quor neque oc­cultum, neque longinquum, & cum id ipsum in ore tuo, & cor­de tuo gratiosè Deus ind [...], si tantum fide po­tes prehendere. The word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thine heart; i.e. This Commandment of faith which I declare is neither hidden, nor far off from thee, seeing God doth graciously [Page 79] put it into thy mouth, and into thy heart, if thou by faith wilt lay hold of it.

Thus you have Junius against Junius, or rather Junius expounding himself, telling you in plain termes that he holds conditions in the New Covenant, which God of his free grace gives his Creature to perform. So that the former place, where he excludes conditions from the Co­venant, must (as I said before) be understood of legal and meritorious conditions, which sort of conditions we shut out of the Covenant as well as he.

6. Leave we Junius, as much, if not more on our side then on yours, and come we to the next, Dr. Ames, (for as for Estius and Lessius, though I value one, the for­mer of them, yet I shall not look after them at present, not for that I doubt they are against me, but for that I care not much to have them for me, being by you up­braided already with joyning with Papists, though it seems you can your self accept of the patronage of Papists when you can get it.) Come we, I say, to Dr. Ames: and I could willingly chide you for open fowle play in citing an Author expresly against his own words in the very place you cite out of him. Immediately before your very cita­tion, Ames hath these words,

Concedimus, hominis officium requiri, il­lud insuper contendentes, Deum hujus pre­missionis vi effecturum in suis, ut officium illud faciant, quatenus necessariò est facien­dum Cor. act. 5 p. 400. We grant that mans duty is required, maintaining this withal, that God by vertue of this promise will cause those that are his, that they shall perform the duty, as far forth as it is necessary to be done. And immediately after your Quotation (which is verbatim the same with that Junius delivereth in his Parallel, where he mentions his Oration that you alledge, he doth thus expresse himself; The whole disposition is af­ter the manner of a Will and Testa­ment, To [...]a dispositio Testamentariam habet [...], ut simpliciter [...] conditio; atque hac ratione, ad mo­dum foederis aliquando proponitur: qui tamen proponendi modus non sic est ac­cipiendus, ut Testamenti naturam in ul­la parte mutet. Utrumque à nostris opti­mè conjungi solet, quum justitiam ac vitam, sub conditione fidei promitti do­cent, & fidem ipsam electis dari, vel con­ditionem foederis in ipso foedere simul promitti. Pag. 40. as it is considered simply, either in whole, or according to the part of it; but if the benefits that are bequea­thed, be compared within themselves, [Page 80] then one is to the other as it were a condition. And in this respect it is sometimes propounded after the man­ner of a Covenant: which manner of propounding is not so to be taken, as that it should in any part change the nature of a Testament. Our Di­vines are wont excellently to joyn both together, when they teach that righ­teousnesse and life are promised upon condition of faith, and that faith it self is given to the Elect, or that the condition of the Covenant is also promised in the Covenant. How plain­ly on both these places doth Dr. Ames expresse himselfe for that conditionality in the Covenant which we main­tain; and that in the same place whence you fetch your proof against us? Was it for this, my good friend, that you took the paynes to write so much out of the Doctor? and that you shewed me your written copy, and not the book when I was with you, lest if you had brought the book, the place it self should have spoken & answered for it selfe? Whether this were the cause or no, I leave it to your conscience; but assuredly your carriage in this and that other passage about Chamien, whom you would not take notice of to hold conditions proper (though it fol­lowed immediately your allegation out of him) until I read it to you, and then would not look upon it, nor hardly hear it, but put it off with saying, that he did eat his owne words. I say, these carriages make me and mine, and your dear friend who was with me, fear that your Opini­on sticks more in your will then in your mind. Your eies and ears are open and ready to entertaine any Author, though a Popish one, that makes for your opinion; but if he be against your Tenent, though he be never so god­ly, hardly have you patience to look upon him. Well (Sir) what hath now been, as also what was for­merly alledged out of Dr. Ames, do abundantly prove him to have been for that conditionality of the Covenant we defend.

[Page 81] 7. Passe we on to Doctor Preston, where againe you may be blamed, for when the Doctor laid down a distin­ction betweene the Covenants, or rather between the Pro­mises of the same Covenant; viz. the promise of Grace, which he calleth an absolute Covenant made with the E­lect, Jer. 31. Ezek. 36. and the Promise of life which he cals a conditional Covenant made with all, Mark 16 If thou believe, thou shalt be saved. You run away with a piece, and put downe Dr. Preston for a defender of the absolutenesse of the Covenant, though both there, and in his Treatise of the Covenant (of which I believe you were not ignorant) he writes many leaves to the contrary. But I hope you will wipe this Author also out of your list, after I have rehearsed some passages unto you out of him. Look then either in that, or the Sermon foregoing (for I have not the Book now by me) and you shall find Dr. Preston as­serting faith to be required, and that precedently to our being in Covenant: For thus he writes, That which is required of them is only, that they take it. And there is nothing precedently required or looked for on our parts, but taking and applying of it. So page 18 The taking of Christ makes Christ ours. — Faith is that whereby the right of Christ is made ours unto salvation. Pag 62, 63 he tels us of the reconciling and justifying act of faith; which, he saith is direct, and is that whereby we take Christ; as well as of its pacifying act, which he calls reflex, and saith it is that whereby we know we take him: yea, he tells us, that Humiliation is required, not as a qualification: but as our sense of sicknesse is required to our seeking of cure, so this to our seeking of Christ, without which wee will never come to Christ. And would you know what this taking of Christ is, which he saith is precedently requi­red? He tells you toward the latter end of the first Ser­mon, that it is to know Christ rightly, as Prophet, Priest and King.—To obey him.—To forsake all other for him. — To pitch on him with our whole deliberate and sincere will. More­over after this our receipt of him, We are (saith he) re­quired to obey him, to be holy as he is holy, to forsake all; [Page 82] which he calls after-clap conditions, and hard conditions. And pag. 25. Those that be humble and see Gods wrath what it is, that have their consciences awakened to see sin, will come in and be glad to have Christ, though on these conditi­ons: but the other will not. If you will have Christ on these conditions, you may. But we preach in vain, all the world refuseth Christ, because they will not leave their Covetous­nesse, Pride, &c. And all because they be not humbled. Now whereas he excludes conditions in some passages, he tells you in what sense he excludes them. Pag. 15. When we exclude all conditions, we exclude such a frame and habit of mind, which we think is necessarily required to make us wor­thy to take him. By which it appears clearly, they were meritorious conditions he excluded. To these I may add how in his Treatise of the New Covenant, page 217. he gives this for his fourth Reason, why uprightnesse is re­quired; viz. That there might be an integrity on both sides; A Covenant, as on Gods part, so on ours: That as he promi­seth he will be all-sufficient, so he requireth this again on our parts, That we be altogether his. And pag 357. That the Condition God required of Abraham was, that he should be­lieve; where he spends many leaves in shewing that, and why faith is the condition of the New Covenant, Page 389. That Repentance, the condition required of us, is part of the Covenant, both on Gods part and on ours. The condi­tion that is required of us, as part of the Covenant, is the do­ing of this, the action. But the ability whereby we are able to perform these is a part of the Covenant on the Lords part. Pag. 398. That when we do believe, at that very hour we enter into Covenant, and are translated from death to life: And pag. 458. When the heart gives her full consent, and takes the Lord for her God and Governour, then is the Con­tract made up between them.

These passages (Sir) abundantly satisfie me concerning that holy and reverend Author, that he held faith to be the grand condition of the Gospel, precedently required to, not only our knowing our selves in state of Grace, but our very being therein, and right thereto. If he say, [Page 83] that the Covenant, that is, one part of it, viz. the Pro­mise of Grace, is absolute; he saith no more then others, for I know none of our side that hold that part to be an­tecedently conditional. Some call it a Free, others an Absolute promise, others a Covenant with Christ for us, &c. Yea, in regard of the freenesse and absolutenesse of it, they grant the Covenant in respect of the Elect to be e­quivalent to an absolute Promise, and the purchase e­quivalent to an absolute purchase (as you may see Owen Ʋniv. Redempt. lib. 3. c. 2.) the conditions on which salvati­on is promised, being purchased and promised as well as the salvation. Notable are the expressions of Mr. Ruther­ford in this particular,Survey of An­tinom. p. 129. We teach faith a condition on our part, and also a grace promised: Christ brings himselfe, his righteousnesse, and the condition of faith too, which doth receive him. As if some Prince should freely promise to mar­ry some maid of low estate, on condition she wear a gold chain, with a rich Jewel of the Crown in it, and withal should bind himself to give her both the chain and a will to wear it. A­gain, He is both without doors knocking, and within doors o­pening, yet he never cometh in, but upon condition we open, which condition is also his own work. He offers Righteousness so the sinner believe, and he works belief that the sinner may have Righteousnesse, pag. 109. Thus you see others as well as Dr. Preston, assert the absolutenesse of the Cove­nant in that part; who yet still maintain the other part, viz. the promise of life and salvation to be conditional; which as hath been already shewed, Dr. Preston doth maintain.

8. As for Mr. Socin. Disc & Consut p. 225. Walker, he denies not all kinds of conditions in the place cited, but only Conditions Legal, and conditions for which; meritorious ones: but conditi­ons which are as a means by which the free gift is received, and as a qualification whereby one is made capable and fit to receive and enjoy the free gift; such he granteth, and cal­leth them Conditions in the place cited by you; saying, There is no condition of the Covenant propounded, but only the way and means to receive the blessing, or the quality and [Page 84] condition by which men are made capable and fit to enjoy the blessing: which is as much as I plead for under that Title.

As for Mr. Strong, though both what I have heard from him my self, and also what I have heard from others who have seen his Sermon, induce me to believe that he is not against our conditions, yet having not his Ser­mon, I must be altogether silent at this time concerning him.

By this (Sir) you may see, that I have looked in­to the most of the Authors which you cited, and amongst them all I must professe unto you, that I find not one that speaketh fully for you, but more against, then for your Tenent: and for that sort of conditions, whose cause I plead, I must intreat you therefore to shake hands with them, and leave them to stand on my side. To them I shall add some few more.

1 Mr. Perkins shall be the first, who puts down con­ditions in the very description of the Covenant, saying, Order of the causes of Sal­vation. c. 31. The Covenant of Grace is that, whereby God freely promi­sing Christ and his benefits, exacteth again of man that he would receive Christ by faith, and repent of his sins. In the Covenant of Grace two things (Ref. Cath. tit. of Justif. Diff. 2. 2. saith he elsewhere) must be considered the substance thereof, and the condition. The Sub­stance of the Covenant is, that Righteousnesse and life everla­sting is given to Gods Church and people by Christ. The Condition is, that we for our parts are by faith to receive the foresaid benefits, and this condition is by grace as well as the substance.

2. Mr. Reynolds shall be the next; in his Treatise of the Life of Christ, p. 399. he calls Faith the conveyance: and p. 403. We expect Justification by faith in Christ.— Faith unites us to Christ, and makes his death, merit, life, kingdom, sonship, victory, benefits to become ours. You may see p. 451, 452, 453. That to marriage between Christ and his Church, whereby the Church hath a right and pro­priety created, to the Body, Name, Goods, Table, Possession, and Purchases of Christ,— is essentially required consent, [Page 85] which consent must be mutual; for though Christ declare his good will when he knocketh at our doors, yet if we keep at di­stance, stop our ears at his invitations, there is then no Cove­nant made. It is but a wooing, and no marriage, &c. Pag. 465, 466, 467. That the office of Faith is to unite to Christ, and give possession of him, till which union by Faith be made, we remain poor and miserable, notwithstanding the fulness that is in Christ. Pag. 478, 479. and to name no more, pag. 512. setting down the difference between the two Covenants, he saith, They differ in the Conditions, for in the old Covenant, legal obedience; but in the new Faith only is required, and the certain consequent thereof Repen­tance.

3. Mr. Ball shall be the third, who saith, Treat. of the N. Cov. p. 17. The Cove­nant of Grace doth not exclude all conditions, but such as will not stand with grace: and pag. 18. The stipulation re­quired, is, that we take God to be our God; that is, that wee repent of our sins, believe the Promises of mercy, and embrace them with the whole heart, and yeild love, fear, reverence, worship, and obedience to him according to the prescript rule of his Word: and p. 20. If then we speak of Conditions, by conditions we understand whatsoever is required on our part, as precedent, concomitant, or subsequent to Justification. Re­pentance, Faith and Obedience, are all conditions. But if by conditions we understand what is required on our part, as the cause of that God promised, though only instrumental, Faith or belief in the Promises of free mercy is the only con­dition.

4. Let learned Pemble be the fourth, who speaking of the difference between the Law and the Gospel, saith, Of Justif. §. 4. c. 1. The diversity is this, The Law offers life unto man upon condition of perfect obedience, cursing the transgressors there­of in the least kind with eternal death. The Gospel offers life unto man upon another condition, viz. Repentance and Faith in Christ, promising remission of sin to such as repent and believe. That this is the main essential difference be­tween the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace, we shall endeavor to make good against the Romish Apo­stacy. [Page 86] And about a leaf after, Hence we conclude firmly, that the difference between the Law and the Gospel assigned by our Divines, is most certain and agreeable to the Scriptures, viz. That the Law gives life unto the Just upon condition of perfect obedience in all things: The Gospel gives life unto sinners, upon condition they repent and believe in Christ Je­sus. Where you may take notice, that he layes it down not as his own private opinion, but as the general Te­nent of all the Orthodox Divines in his time, and that in opposition to our Popish Adversaries. It was then no Popery to hold conditions in the Covenant: and as he of the Divines of his time, so may I of the Divines of this present age. See their consent and harmony here­in, Larg. cat. p. 9.

5. Doctor Downam shall be the fifth; Tract. 1. of Justif. l. 6. c. 8. §. 10. That which is the only condition of the Covenant of Grace, by that alone we are justified. But Faith is the only condition of the Covenant of Grace, which is therefore called, Lex fidei. And l. 7. c. 2. Sect. 6. Our Writers distinguishing the two Covenants of God, that is, the Law and the Gospel, whereof the one is the Cove­nant of Works, the other is the Covenant of Grace, do teach that the Law of Works is that which to Justification requi­reth Works as the condition thereof. The Law of Faith, that which to Justification requireth faith as the condition there­of. The former saith, Do this and thou shalt live; the latter, Believe in Christ and thou shalt be saved.

6. Doctor Davenant doth also fully expresse him­selfe several times to the like purpose, and may in the sixth place be added to the former. His words are these:

In fodere Evangelico aliter se res habet; nam in hoc foedere ad obtinen­dam reconciliationem, justificationem & vitam aeternam, non alia requiritur conditio quam verae & vivae fidei: Sic Deus dilexit mundum. Joh. 3. 16. Rom. 4. 5. Gal. 3. 8. Justificatio igitur & jus ad vitam aeternam ex conditione solius fidei suspenditur. De just. act. c. 30. in resp. ad ob. 3. In the Covenant of the Gospel it is otherwise; for in this Covenant, to the obtainment of reconciliation, Justifica­tion, and life eternal, there is no other condition required then of true and lively faith; God so loved the world, John 3. 16. Therefore Justification, and the right to eternal life doth de­pend [Page 87] on the condition of faith alone. Where he doth after­ward thus briefly shew the difference betweene the Law and the Gospel, considered as two distinct Covenants; Lex in conditione operum habet ipsam vim & formam icti foederis: At E­vangelium in Mediatoris sanguine fide apprehenso collocat ipsam vim & for­mam foederis. Ibid. The Law (saith he) hath the very strength and form of a Covenant made in the condition of Works. But the Gospel placeth the very strength and form of a Covenant, made in the blood of the Mediator apprehended by faith. What can be said more expresly then this? I will not trouble you with repeating what hath been already deli­vered out of him in his next Chapter, but only mention one passage or two out of him: Promissio vitae aeternae juxta pactum Evangelicum & foedus gratiae, pendet ex conditione fidei. Id. cap. 32. in sol. ad ob. 1. p. 407. The Promise of eter­nal life according to the Covenant of the Gospel, and of Grace, doth depend on the condition of faith. A little before, explicating in what sense we deny good works to be re­quired as conditions of Salvation, Si per conditiones salutis intelligamus conditiones foederis quibus recipimur in favorem Dei, & ad jus vitae aeter­nae: haec enim pendent ex solo condi­tione fidei Christum Mediatorem ap­prehendentis. Ibid. p. 406. he thus speaks, If by conditions of sal­vation, we understand the conditions of the Covenant, whereby we are received into the favor of God, and to the right of eternal life: for these depend on the only condition of faith apprehending Christ the Media­tor.

7. With the fore mentioned Divines doth the learned De trip. foed. Thes. 8, 9. In foedere na­turae exigitur Justitia natu­ralis, at in foe­dere gratiae ex­igitur tantum fides. Cameron fully agree, who handling the agreement and differences of the Covenant of Nature and of Grace, ob­serves they both agree in the extrinsecal form, that to each there is annexed a restipulation, though in the thing it self required in each by way of stipulation, they differ; for that in the Covenant of Nature, natural Righteousnesse is requi­red; but in the Covenant of Grace faith alone is required. Whereupon in the conclusion of his whole Discourse concerning that Subject, he gives this definition of the Covenant of Grace; It is Foedus gra­tiae est illud quo Deus pro­posita conditi­one fidei in Christum, remissionem peccatorum in ejus sanguine, & vitam coelestem pol­licetur, idque eo fine ut ostendat diviti­as misericordiae suae. Thes. 82. that wherein God on the Condition of faith in Christ proposed, doth promise the [Page 88] remission of sins in his blood, and life everlasting in heaven, and that for this end, that he might shew the riches of his mercy.

8. Unto these I may add Paraeus, who observes that the Apostle doth make mention of faith, thatIn 3. ad Rom. 23 in illa verba, Per fi­dem. he may teach us, fidem esse conditionem, that faith is the conditi­on under which Christ is given unto us, as the propitiation for sins, and that it is the Instrumental cause by which a­lone we obtain the propitiation in Christ. And elsewhere setting down the difference between the righteousness of the Law, and of faith, or of the Gospel. He saith,

Ex illa vitam nemo consequitur, quia conditio faciendi omnia leg [...]s, nul­li est possibiis extra Christum. Ex hoc fructum & vitam consequi facile est, quia conditio confitendi Dominum Je­sum, & credendi ejus Resurrectionem prope est, in ore, & in corde nostro. In cap. 10. ad Rom. v. 9. By that no man doth obtaine life, because the condition of doing all things required by the Law is not pos­sible to any besides Christ. It is easie to obtaine the fruit, and reape life by this, because the condition of confessing the Lord Jesus, and believing his Resurrection, is nigh in the mouth, and in the heart.

9 The learned Chamier, that great Assertor of the truth of God against the Romish corrupters of it, is the next. Nos legis & Evangelii discrimen cum quaerimus utrumque nominare contracta illa significatione, secundum quam Paulus oponit legem operum, legi fidei. Hoc est, legem operum propone­re salutem sub conditione legis per fici­endae. At legem fidei candem prepo­nere, sub conditione tantum credendi in Christum: nimirum, ut u [...]rinque con­ditio sumatur codem sensu. Tom. 3. lib. 15. cap. 3. § 26. He disputing with Bellarmine concerning the difference between the Law, and the Gospel, speaks as fully and plainly as any of the rest forenamed Protestant Di­vines, That the Law of Works doth propose salvation upon condition of ful­filling the Law. But the Law of Faith doth propose it upon condition on­ly of believing in Christ; the word condition being taken in the same sense in both sides. And having distin­guished conditions that are in Con­tracts and Covenants, that some are precedent, others are consequent; the former being such as are essential to the Contract or Covenant; yea, constituting the very essence [Page 89] and foundation of it. The other being such, the defect or want whereof doth make the Contract or Covenant to be void and of none effect, though they do not make the Covenant and Contract it self.§ 27, 28, 29. He doth apply it to his present Subject, The Law of Works requireth the fulfil­ling of the Law as a condition antecedent, without which any man hath not, either the actual possession of, nor so much as a right to eternal life. The Law of faith doth not admit works as such a condition antecedent, but only consequent, so that they are necessary, ex vi donatae jam propter fidem vitae, by vertue of that right to eternal life, which is already confer­red on them through faith; Where you see Chamier doth clearly assert Faith to be the condition by which we doe receive the right to life, given us by grace; Works the condition consequent in the Covenant of Grace.

10. Mr. Bayn on the Ephesians, Remission of sin is com­municated from Christ in manner following. 1 Christ sen­deth his Ministers, as Legats, with the word of reconciliation or pardon, inviting them to believe on him, that they may re­ceive forgivenesse of sins. 2. He doth work together by his Spirit, making those who are his children, believe on him, if they may find forgivenesse in him. 3 He doth communicate to them the forgivenesse which himselfe had procured and ob­tained for them. And on that fourth verse, God doth not bind any directly and immediately to believe salvation but in a certain order, for he binds them first to believe on Christ to Salvation, and then brings them in Christ to be­lieve that hee loved them, and gave himselfe for them.

11. Mr. Burroughes upon Hosea, upon those words, I will betroth them unto me; how frequently hath he those words, It must be mutual, it must be mutual in every par­ticular branch of it. He shewes it must be mutual on the Churches part, as well as on Gods part; and how can it be so without stipulation. In Moses his self-denial. p. 188. Faith hath the greatest honour above all other Graces to be the condition of the Covenant.

12. Last of all, it is the general Tenent of our brethren [Page 90] in New England, as appears by Mr. Bulkly of the Cove­nant. pag. 280, 281. where he handles that very Que­stion. And also by the Catalogue of Errors that did arise there, and were condemned by an Assembly at the Church of New Town, August 31. 1637. attested by Mr. Weldes, Err. 27. It is incompatible to the Covenant of Grace to joyne Faith thereunto. Err. 28. To affirm there must be faith on mans part to receive the Covenant, is to undermine Christ. Er. 37. We are completely united to Christ, before, or without any faith wrought in us by the Spirit, Err. 38. There can be no true closing with Christ in a Promise that hath a Qua­lification or a condition expressed, Err. 82. Where faith is held forth by the Ministers as the condition of the Co­venant of Grace on mans part, as Justification by San­ctification, and the acting of faith, in that Church there is not sufficiency of bread. By condemning these opinions for Errors, they declare their judgments to be for condi­tions in the Covenant.

You see (Sir) with what a cloud of witnesses we are compassed, and how the stream of Protestant and true Religion hath run in this channel: certainly, it should be some more then ordinary cause that should make us run counter to so many grave, learned, and god­ly Authors. Well, let us see what moves you to dis­sent. First, Many of them confesse it to be conditions improperly. Secondly, Many are driven to eat their own words. Now if both these were true, would they be of moment to make you dissent from your godly bre­thren? Is propriety of speech such a Jewel, that for the preservation of it the good names of the godly and orthodox Divines, and the peace of the Church must be said to stake? But who (my good friend) shall be judge of this propriety? Certainly, if it shall conti­nue for language that was in the Doctors time, you will be cast;Penes quos est vis [...] lo­q [...]di for I am sure conditions in the Covenant hath been, and is the language most in use among the Or­thodox.

I remember when I had some conference with you in [Page 91] your Committee house about your Sermon, you told me, Pemble was for you, and Chamier for you, and all Po­lemick Writers were for you: and now the contrary proves true, and they are brought against you, now they speak improperly, and are sometimes forc'd to eat their words. I am sure you speak not properly when you told me that they balked the word Condi­tion.

But proceed we to the other Grounds. You go on and tell us, that another thing that causeth your distance was, the vigilancy of the Adversary, who was ready to make use of such expressions for defence of their Tenents. This I confesse is of more weight then the former, for we should be careful that we minister not the least advantage to the Adversary. Bishop Davenant, as hath been heard al­ready, would not have us in conference with Papists, use such speeches as these, That Works are necessary, and the like, because they will be apt to understand merit by them: yet neverthelesse that reverend Author doth use the word Condition, and very frequently: it seems he thought there was no such peril in the use of it. Again, the adversaries you speak of, must be either Papists or Arminians. Now as for Papists, you have delivered us from all fear that way, by telling us they stand not for a­ny merit in the preparations they plead for; now if they took any advantage from the word Condition, it would be to approve of merit. As for Armininas, they may take as much advantage from all Commands, Calls, and Counsels to Faith and Repentance to prove their free will, as from conditions: So then these also must be laid aside. Besides, if there were danger in the expression, can it not be qualified, so as that neither Papists nor Ar­minians may take any ground therefrom for the spread­ing of their Errors? must it needs be wholly cast away? Moreover, is there not as great a care to be had of Anti­nomians and Libertines, with whom our English Church begins to be pestred? and may not these spiders in­crease their venome on your own gay flowers of abso­lute [Page 92] freenesse, to the poysoning of the power of godli­nesse, both in their own and other mens conversations? May they not say, Seeing no conditions are re­quired, nothing on our part is to be done, I may live as I list, for I cannot break the Covenant?

Sir, This is an inference not onely may be made, but hath been made by too many in these loose times. I have heard sad stories of it whilst I lived in London; I have knowne the persons there that have cast off Sabbaths, Duties, Ordinances, with this inference: and scoft at the followers of them; calling them, Duty­mongers, Men of an Old Testament spirit, and the like.

You cannot be ignorant that such a horrid inference is practically made from that Doctrine: And however you may think you have a salve for it in your thoughts (which how sollid it may be I much question) yet how can you remedy it in the hearts and lives of others? Oh do not destroy by one Sermon more then you can build by ten.

But last of all, that that most moveth you is your compas­sion to vulgar hearers, who hearing of conditions, take not hold on the Promise because they have not the condition. Now here, in the bowels of this compassion, I do be­seech you to consider what you do, and tell me seriously, Dare you bid a sinner, whilst he goes on impenitently in his evil way, never repenting of it, nor turning from it, nor looking after Christ; dare you (I say) offer such a wretch the precious blood of our blessed Saviour? And dare you bid such a one, continuing such, to lay hold on the promise of mercy? Dare you tell him, That the Gospel belongs unto him even while he is such? Dare you say, Here Drunkard, Swearer, Whore master, here is salvation for thee, here is a Christ for thee, here is life for thee, though thou go on in thy swearing, drink­ing, whoring; Salvation is thine, take it, assure thy self of it, it is thine? If you do, fare you well. I dare not, lest I strengthen the hands of the wicked; Old and New [Page 93] Testament are both against it. But if your meaning be, that such a sinner should alter his mind, leave his course, repent him of his evil way, give up himself wholly to Christ, and then, though never so foul, here was water to cleanse him, and bloud to purge him, mercy to pardon him, and a Christ to justifie him. If your mean­ing (I say) be this, what do you but hold out mercy con­ditional, even as we do, and to what end have you raised all this dust and stir?

To conclude, The peace of the Church, and edifica­tion of souls should be most dear unto us; things wee should both preach and pray, study and labour for, and by all means possible endeavour to procure, preserve, and propagate. Now I do beseech you (my dear bro­ther) seriously and sadly to consider, whether your pre­sent Tenent, and the broaching of it, doth not make a disturbance in the one, and a stop and hinderance in the other? My heart akes to think of the late stirs in the New England Churches, occasioned by Master Wheel-write, Master Hutchison, and their followers, especi­ally when I consider, that this very Tenent, No Con­dition in the Covenant, had a great influence there­on, if it were not the maine cause thereof. For here began they to look upon all those faithful Ministers of Christ, who maintained conditions, as no Preachers of free Grace, no Gospel Ministers, Legal Teachers, not yet acquainted with the Gospel Covenant, not a­ble to give sufficient bread to their people, as appears by the examinations of Master Hutchison, and others in the book fore mentioned. Thereupon they fell to a neglect of their Sermons, contempt of the publick Ordi­nances, siding and faction, till in the end, for troubling of the Church her peace, they were some of the chief of them cut off and banished. May not (my dear brother) the like use be made of your present Doctrine? Yea, is it not (think you) already made by divers? Are not the hearts of many taken off thereby from their faithful Mi­nisters and Pastors whom before they loved, prized, [Page 94] hearkened to, received good from, yea haply received their conversion by (if they be indeed converted?) are not (I say) their hearts taken off from these their spiri­tual Fathers, so that they neglect their Sermons, con­temne their counsels, call them, nick-name them Legal Teachers, and Ministers of the Old Testament? when yet I hope you your selfe cannot in your conscience but acknowledg them for the true Ambassadors of the Lord Jesus. May not this ill issue of your Doctrine lye heavy on your spirits? Again, may not the Writings of Pemble, Preston, Perkins, and other our Worthies now with God, for their holding of Conditions, and professing the conditions of Faith and Repentance, as without which we cannot have life, be laid aside and neglected? Nay, are not these Authors themselves contemned as men of darker times, and not acquain­ted with such cleare light as now shineth, though you know there is more of the power and marrow of Christianity in one of their pages then in ten leaves of your new lighted Meteors? Beside, are not many of the godly who love you, and were hearers of you, driven from your Lectures, or at least cannot come to them without fear and jealousie? others thereby amazed, not knowing whom to follow? and most called away from the practice of Religion, to that needlesse disquisition of a curious speculation? When he builders clash, the Building must needs be inter­rupted; and when the Witnesses disagree, the Jurors can bring in little better then an Ignoramus in their Bill.

I do beseech you (Sir) to consider how by this your Tenent the names and Doctrine of Gods faith­ful Ministers, dead and living, are aspersed, the minds of the godly troubled, the peace of the Church disquieted, the hands of the wicked strengthened, the mouthes of the Adversaryes opened, and the hearts of your friends exceedingly sadded;This Book was delivered unto Mr. Eyre in the Authors life time, some years since, be­fore his Book against Mr. Woodbridge, Mr. Crauford, and Mr. Baxter came forth. and to draw back your foot before you are gone too far. By [Page 95] the wicket of an interpretative absolutenesse, I should hope that you might yet recover your self in safety; however, by the door of retractation I am sure you may: and though that work be an unpleasing businesse to flesh and blood, yet is it one of the noblest Offices of a Christian souldier, in which spiritual warfare, as well as in temporal, as much honour may be gained by a good Retreat, as by a couragious Incounter, or prospe­rous Victory.

A Funeral Sermon.

COncerning the very sad occasion of our present meeting, there is no need that I speak unto you, seeing it is, or may be knowne unto you all, that we have at this time accompanied, though not a very aged, yet an able, faithful,Job 30. 23. painful, and godly Minister of Jesus Christ unto his grave, that house prepared for all the li­ving, where, as to his body, he is to rest until that great day,John 5. 28, 29 when all that are in their graves, shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and shall come forth, they that have done good to the Resurrection of life, they that have done evil to the Resurrection of damna­tion: at what time the faithful Ministers of Jesus Christ, how much soever contemned, cloud­ed and cloathed with reproach in this world,1 Pet. 5. 2, 3, 4 who have fed the stock of God, taking the o­versight thereof not by constraint, but willingly, not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being Lords over Gods heritage, but being example: to the flock, when the chief Shepherd shall appear, they also shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away. Yea, they shall then, together with all other Gods servants, enter in all fulnesse into the joy of their [Page 100] Lord, and be possessed of an inheritance incorrupti­ble and undefiled, that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for them.

The Holy Ghost tels us in Eccl. 7. 11. That a good name is better then precious ointment; with that rich Embalming is our dear Brother gone unto his grave, which will make his memory sweet and precious e­nough to all that knew him, and love God. And of such a one, who is buryed with this sweet Odour the Holy Ghost witnesseth in the end of that verse, That the day of death is better then the day of birth. The day of Birth brings every one to an afflicted dying life, but the day of death bringeth every such one, yea every child of God to an everlasting life of never dying glory.

Whether you that are the Inhabitants of this place were sensible of your blessing in the enjoying the Ministry of this our deceased Brother, or are apprehensive of your losse in his departure from you, I cannot say, (for you are all strangers unto me;) but this I am sure of concerning very many, who have occasionally enjoyed the fruit of his Labours, that they sadly bewail the removing of one so furni­shed with skil and will to declare the truth of God, and to oppose the old Superstitious, and new, or rather renewed Errors which on the right, and left hand do oppose the Progress of a blessed Re­formation amongst us.

And upon this Account my heart greatly mourneth over this brother of ours whom God hath taken away from us, by whose death a great breach is made amongst us of the Mini­stry [Page 101] in these parts at this time, wherein open profanenesse and pernicious Errours do so much a­bound.

When wee consider our Brothers Ministerial Qualifications and Graces, his Ability and Humili­ty embracing and beautifying each other; his conscionable and Christian circumspection over himselfe and his Doctrine, it is very doubtful whe­ther he were more ripe for life, or fit for death: Questionlesse this our Brother after he had notice of deaths approach towards him, could not but be sensible of the Apostle Pauls strait, between a de­sire of living to do good to others, and dying to receive good for himselfe; of serving the Lord Christ in life,Phil. 1. 23 and possessing the Lord Christ more fully in death: yet I am confident, that in this case he did prostrate himself obedientially at the feet of the will of God. And seeing the Lord hath now declared his purpose to make this our dear Bro­thers gain our losse, we must likewise submit with­out murmuring and repining, and say, The will of the Lord be done. But though we are thus to qui­et our selves in the will of God, and to part with our Brother in all humble submission thereunto, yet are we not to part with him without sense of, and sorrow for ours and the Churches damage in his removal from us. Indeed, there is no cause why we should mourn as men without hope of, and comfort in the blessednesse of this our Bro­ther, who now sleeps in Christ, and enjoyeth his [Page 102] presence, yet there is cause and warrant too to mourne as Christians, that so precious an instru­ment of good in the Church of God is taken from us.

And that it may appear that wee have Scripture warrant for such our mourning at this time, I shall speak something through Gods strength, from a Scripture which upon this sad occasion the Lord hath guided my Meditations unto, which we find in Acts 20. 37, 38.