An answer to the Preface.

I had thought by that touch you give upon universall Gratians (as you call them) in the 5. [a] Argum. * that you had been an opposite to the universall Re­demptionists, the Pelagians, Semi-Pelagians, and Arminians. But I finde your doctrine in this point to be very consonant and neere of kinne to theirs.

Herein you agree with them; So [...]sher delivers their sense. who do thus say, that the benefit of Christs satisfaction is to be extended so farre, as that God for his part is actually re­conciled unto men, and doth really discharge men from their sins, before they believe.

You differ in this onely, that they say to all men God is so reconciled and gives a discharge, before faith comes; you say he is reconciled to all the Elect and dischargeth them before faith comes.

To deny this proposition in the sense you meane it, That we are justified before God, before (you mean in time) the act of our believing, doth nothing de­rogate from the honour of the Father or his Son. [b] Forthe Father hath com­mitted all the businesse of the Church to Christ, Matth. 11.27, 28. 1 Cor. 15. [Page 3]sends us to be advised & guided by Christ, Mat. 17.5. And Christ is honoured in that he must find the price of our redemption & finde an hand for us to re­ceive it. So that the salvation and the application by faith, is all of the gift of Christ, and of the power of Christ. Ephes. 2.8. By grace are ye saved through faith, (see Gods favour and Saints faith conioyned) and that not of your selves, it is the gift of God, who works to will and to do, Phil. 2.13.

Argument. I.

LEt me speake for those that are not able to speake for themselves; I meane the little Babes, to whom belongs the Kingdom of God; I argue thus: Infants doe not beleeve: [a]But Infants are justified: Therefore some that do not believe, are justified. Which if it be granted, it will follow, that some are iustified before they believe. That infants are iustified, need no proofe *; That infants beleeve not, must be proved, [b] (although the Church of England hath long since put it out of doubt) First, Faith cometh by hearing, Rom. 10.17. How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? shall we say, that infants in the Wombe hear the Word? Secondly, Faith is a Knowledge, as some say; a Perswasion, as others; a Trust, as others: But Infants are capable neither of Trust, Perswasion, or Knowledge; there­fore Infants are not capable of Faith. But some have said, that infants hear the Word of God, beleeve in God, and love God, in an unknowne way; [c] as sometimes John Baptist sprang in his Mothers Wombe for joy, at the salutation of the Blessed Virgin: But Saint Augustine did answer long agoe not more wittily then truly, That this was done by a singular Miracle. Neither doth this conclude, other infants to beleeve any more, [d] then we may con­clude, all Asses to be good Counsellors, because we read, that Balaams Asse spake more wisely then her Master.

An Answer to Argument I.

Justified infants do beleeve. [a] Such an infant may be filled with the holy Spirit, Luk. 1.15. And where is the Spirit, there are its fruits; one of which is faith, Gal. 5. The inbeing of grace no way depends upon the growing of the body: we know a reasonable spirit is the subject of grace, and without re­spect to age. The Angels were full of grace as soone as made. Grace doth but perfect reason: The soule of an infant is full of reason; Ergo, why not capable of grace, that doth not hurt, but help reason? how more capable is the soule of a man asleep of faith, then the soule of an elect waking childe? Yet, 1. God hath appeared to men in dreams, why not to a waking childe, re­vealing Christ unto it? 2. The habit of faith saves, else a believer dying in his sleep, cannot be saved; All infused habits depend not on organicall know­ledge that enters by sense. 3. Godly men in their deepest sleep have oft the most rationall and divine notions: Ergo a childe may, awake; smiles are [Page 4]the property of reason: they will smile.

Infants do not believe, [b] because Rom. 10.17. Answer, that is spoken de Adultis, of ripe in yeares; for there is mention of confession and supplica­tion: The expression is affirmative, not negative: By this argument, be­cause it is said the spirit is given by hearing, 2 Cor. 3. Ergo, it could not be given to Iohn Baptist without hearing.

This confirmes that spoken afore, [c] that Iohn was filled with the holy Spirit from the womb: now manifesting an apprehension of Christ, by that motion the body was organized unto, namely leaping in the mothers wombe.

For that of Augustine: 1. If men are to be urged in this point, then the whole streame of all sound Divines run to this effect: We are elected before all time: Created in the beginning of time: Justified in the fulnesse of time: Glorified after all time: That the first is the decree, the other the execution.

2. Augustines speech must be interpreted, that he meanes by miraculum, mirandum, or else his speech is false, (as in many things he mistooke) for a miracle is Mutatio naturae rei: of the water into wine: Moses rod into a Serpent. Now Iohn in the womb was not altered in nature.

1. [d] It is not said that the Asses soule was capable of humane reason and speech: The voice or fitnesse of speech was created in his mouth. But it is said Iohns soule was filled with the holy Ghost. This infusion of the holy Spi­rit, in regard of Gods acting, is the same with his infusion of the Spirit into all other believers; though the subiect not like to all other believers in regard of body. But the Lord did not make the asse speake as he makes man to speake. He makes man speake, by the naturall instruments of speech. And speakes reason from a reasonable soule. But the asses speech was created a­bove the power of nature.

And for that speech that Iohns condition doth no more conclude that other in­fants do believe any more, then we may conclude all asses to be good counsellours, because we read that Balaams asse spake more wisely then his Master: We answer, 1. This will conclude, that as all asses would so speake, if God did worke alike in them by creation; so all infants would believe if God did work alike in them by infusion, as he did in Iohn. Yea,

2. We can conclude more a fortiori; If God doth put the spirit of faith (for so it is called 2 Cor. 4.) into Iohn, whom he intended should live to be a man to see Christ and heare of him, if not hear him; how much more will he put the spirit of faith into elect infants that shall never grow up to man­hood, but die in their childehood?

3. We can conclude that some one hath had faith in infancy. But you can give us on instance of any one that hath beene iustified in infancy without faith; I say no instance of example. As for your Arguments, we will answer to them in order.

4. It seemes more infants then Iohn have had saving grace in their infancy, Mar. 10. Else how were they pronounced blessed, and that to them did be­long the Kingdom of heaven; and were actually blessed of Christ?

Argument II.

An answer to Argument II.

1. THe Argument is false in the forme. For, 1. [a] The conclusion is uni­versall, (i.) that all iustified persons are iustified before they believe; which must not be in an argument in the third figure. For though expresly the proposition is but indefinit, yet you supposing it to be In re necessariâ, you yeild it to be universall. For if the conclusion in this figure may be universall, then I may inferre many falshoods. As thus, Every man is rationall; every man is a living creature; Ergo, every living creature is rationall. For the the Minor terme must be the subiect of the conclusion, and the Maior terme the predicat. So by such a kinde of argument as this I would inferre: All ef­fectually called are saved: All effectually called do sin; Ergo, all that sinne are saved.

2. There is another fault in the forme of the argument, which much con­cludes against you, which is this. The Minor terme as we said, must be the subiect of the conclusion, the Maior terme, the predicat; now believing is the Minor terme, and justification is the Maior; and then the argument will according to rule be thus,

He that is in Christ is iustified: we must be in Christ before we believe: Er­go we must believe, before we can be iustified.

I answer artificially to Syllogismes because you pretend art, and use Syllogismes.

2. The argument is false in the matter, namely in the Minor proposition: [b] If by the word before you understand time, that we must be a certaine time in Christ, before we believe. For that cannot be: But in the same moment, that [Page 6]we be actually in Christ, Christ is actually in us, Rom. 8.1. to the end of verse 10. For Christ to be actually in us, or we in him, is an union; union is the uniting of two into one, Ephes. 2.13.14.15. Ergo, we cannot be in him to be one with him, but he must be in us, one with us: Take up all the comparisons of this union, they wil import as much: As marriage; Is not marriage a mutual consent? Is the man married to the woman, and not the woman to the man? They twaine shall be one flesh, can this be true of one, and not of the other? Hath Christ our nature? Have not we his? Are we not (as the Apostle speaks) ioyntly one spirit? 1 Cor. 6.17. Or of a Vine and branches. If the Vine be united to the branches, are not the branches to the Vine? Or of a body and members. If the body be united to the members, are not the members to it?

Let any reasonable man under heaven tell me, nakedly, particularly, and plainly, how actually we (I speak of true Christians) are in Christ, or Christ in us, either Physically or morally, call it what you will, but all is under the operation and notion of the Spirit of faith. 1. Physically, is there any thing of Christ in us? This can be no other then the spirit of Faith: The habit of the graces of the Spirit, one of which is faith, Ephes. 3.17. For Christ him­selfe is in heaven. Are we any how peculiarly as true Christians in Christ? This can be nothing else, but the actings of our faith carying & casting of our confi­dence, hope & expectation and desires & love upon him, Heb. 6.18.19. Most plainly, Eph. 3.17, 18. we have both Christ being in us, & we in him by faith.

2. Morally, if the Lord imputes Christs righteousnesse to me a true Chri­stian, my sinnes unto him, as 2 Cor. 5. ult. and so reputes me iustified actu­ally in him, he doth all this under the notion of faith, Rom. 4.3. If any say, But we are eternally iustified in Gods election or purpose: We reply, iust so, as we eternally believe in Gods purpose. For he hath purposed eternally both equally. He that eternally purposed to iustifie, did eternally purpose to iustifie by Faith. Though the purpose it selfe be not for any foreseen merit of faith. Now if purpose of iustifying, be actuall iustifying, then purpose is no purpose; or if actuall iustifying be a purpose, then act is no more act. For while purpose is, there is no act, whiles act is, it is no more a purpose. As we see in all humane things: we purpose till we go a iourney, when we go it, we no longer purpose, but go it. So in divine things, Ephes. 3.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.

The proofe of this Minor is, [c] to believe is a fruit of the Spirit, &c. Here is supposed that either the Spirit must be in us a time, 1 before it brings for the fruit of faith; 2 (for in your argument you intend a difference of time) or that the Spirit or grace of faith must have long previous changes and prepa­rations, 3 before it can act any thing: As sap in a stock of a tree. But for the 1. The Spirit in the essence being God, cannot be said at any time to be out of any man, good or bad. It were contrary to its infinitnes to be excluded out [Page 7]of any thing, or any nothing. It must needs fill all things, as it must needs be God. If by the Spirit you meane the creating act of the Spirit, that whiles it is every where, it create in this or that man, the habit of saving graces, it doth it just then when Christ comes. For you say Christ and Spirit in a saving manner comes together. So [e]. For the 2. The Spirit needs no previous antecedent change or preparations: If an angelicall Spirit is full of under­standing, and act as soone as it is created; then the Spirit eternally God, is eternally all act. For the third: Faith it selfe is the fruit of the Spirit, as all the habits of graces are, by which the Spirit is said to be in Saints; so that as soon as faith is in a Saint, there is a fruit. And faith being above reason and senss, 2 Cor. 5. it acts without being beholding to reason or sense. So that all this Argument proves no before of time.

You further prove the Minor: Secondly, (say you) if faith be a good fruit, it is required that men must be good trees, before they can bring it forth.

Answ. I do intreat you, [d] and all ingenuous men to consider whether this be a safe expression, to say either that men bring forth faith, when as but now you said, it was a fruit of the Spirit, or that men can be good before they have faith, when as faith is that which makes the difference between good men and bad men, regenerate and unregenerate, Act. 15.9. And therefore so com­monly are good men in the new Testament called by the name of believers: So that as soon as faith comes in, the tree is good, it is made a vine, a fig tree, and so brings forth true grapes and figs: If men have not faith, let them have what goodnesse they can, all is naught, Heb. 11.6. Which place we shall further vindicate, when we come to your reply to it.

For your last Argument: He that hath the Spirit of Christ, hath Christ, &c. 1. It is false in the forme, just as your 1. Argument noted with [a]

For 1. as that, so this, is all universails (as you intend it) in the third figure. [e] 2. As in that the conclusion according to rule, was to be inverted, so this: So that the right conclusion is this: Therefore we believe before we have Christ. For the Maior terme must be the predicat in the conclusion. And this con­clusion is true, not onely according to forme, upon your premises, but ac­cording to matter in order of nature: For when Christ comes to give him­selfe in marriage to us, he gives us the hand of faith to take him by the hand of his saving power; the sun is seen by its own light, and quickning life; so Christ is received by the power of his own light and life of grace.

2. This argument in the Maior or 1. Proposition clasheth against the proofe of the Minor, or 2. Proposition in the beginning of the 2. Argument, noted with [b]. For there you say, we must be in Christ before we believe. To believe is a fruit of the Spirit, &c. whence it followes by your Argument, that [Page 8]we must in your sense have Christ before we have the Spirit, or else the Spi­rit must be in us a barren Spirit without its fruits, or idle without working, which may not be imagined.

Yet here you make the having of the Spirit to be the proofe, if not the cause, that we have Christ. For you make having the Spirit to be the Medius Terminus, the sinew of your argument, which you know in point of art includes some­times the cause, sometimes the signe.

Therefore of necessity you must yeild your selfe mistaken in one of these assertions, unlesse you will close with us, that Christ, and the saving worke of the Spirit, and faith, and consequently iustification, come unto and into a man all at the same time.

Argument III.

An Answer to Argument III.

ALl the Elect of God are iustified before God. [a] This is an ambiguous pro­position: Therefore we must pumpe out your meaning. If you meane all the elect are iustified before God, that is, in Gods thoughts, ever since they were elected, then you may as well say that all the elect do believe before God, in Gods thoughts ever since they were elected, for both are equally within the eternall decree of God. And so you gaine no before of time of iu­stification before faith.

If you mean that after the elect are borne before they are new borne, by faith, they are iustified before God, that is, in Gods thoughts or opinion: You may say as well, so the elect after they are borne before new borne by faith, are before God, in Gods opinion, children of the devill, of the world, and of wrath, even as others. So evidently, Ephes. 2.1, 2, 3. to end of ver. 8. And you hath he quickned who were dead in trespasses and sins, wherin in times past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the ayre (observe) the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the flesh, (observe now) and were by nature the children of wrath as well as others. Till when was there no difference between them and others? Till [Page 9]grace came, and faith came, and put them into Christ, ver. 4.5, 6, 7, 8. The whole Chapter is to the same effect, ver. 12. to end of 18. They are without God, without Christ, till they be in Christ, till Christ preached peace unto them and gave them his Spirit, and then they come nigh and have accesse by one Spirit unto the Father. Heed also, 1 Cor. 6 9.10, 11. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicatours, &c. And such were some of you. Till when? Till now that ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are iustified. See he puts now sanctification before iustification, that men may not conceive that they can be one minute severed. All this while God thinks what he speaks, (for he cannot lie) therefore before conversion we are no more actually iustified, then we are actually un­iustified.

If you say, in Gods predestination we are eternally iustified; we say as truly, in Gods predestination we are eternally fallen in Adam. For both are equally eternally fore-ordained, or else somewhat comes to passe that God did not foreknow, or could not hinder, which would argue ignorance and impotency in God; which to say were blasphemy.

To the Minor proposition of the argument to prove that all the elect are iu­stified before God, (before faith comes, [b] for it is your meaning all along this dispute) And to the proofe that the elect cannot be charged with any thing: for which you alledge, Rom. 8.33. We answer, 1. That whiles they are meerly elected before iustification by faith, they stand charged with many things. God himselfe chargeth them with many heavy things, as but now you heard out of Ephe. 2. As 2 Cor. 13.3, 4. [...]. Paul saith to them in whom Christ was mighty, that they were refuse unlesse Christ by faith were in them. They were but drosse till the substance Christ by faith were in them.

2. That the text you alledge is cleerly against you, look on it well and submit: Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect? Why Saint Paul? Because it is (saith he) God that iustifieth: what iustification Paul do you meane? a iustification mentall in God, or a iustification actuall received by the believer? He shewes us he meanes an actuall iustification received and applied by the believer. For ver. 30. it is a iustification, following vncation according to Gods purpose; that is as effectuall as ever he purposed to call: And ver. 34. such a iustification as hath Christs death and resurrection and in­tercession and strengthening in tribulations accompanying it.

Argument IV.

An Answer to Argument IV.

YOu say, [a] they that have their sins taken away are iustified; you prove it Rom. 4.7. Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgiven, and whose sin is covered. By this you intend to prove a man is iustified before he believes. But your own expressions and allegations are against that. 1. Expres­sion. For sins are not ta­ken away (which is a Physicall act) by Gods meere mentall thoughts of iusti­fying; but when he pronounceth the blessing of justification he saith withall, in whose heart is no guile, Psal. 32.1, 2. which is the place the Apostle quotes, Rom. 4. See reall actuall iustification take our sinnes from us, and our hearts from our sins. 2. Allega­tion. And with the same breath almost with which the Apostle saith, Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgiven, he saith also, To him that be­leeveth on him that iustifieth the ungodly, is his faith counted for righteousnesse, Rom. 4.5, 6, 7.

You go about to prove that the elects sins are taken away before they be­lieve, [b] by that, Isa. 53.8. 1 Pet. 2.24. Eph. 1.29. What do you intend by these generall places? would you by the two first places have it that Christ takes away the sins of all the Jewes, contrary to Rom. 11.7. &c. or by the third place, that Christ takes away the sins of the whole world? contrary to Rom. 8.30. yet either you must take them in that false generall sense, or else they make nothing to prove justification before faith. That place you alledge out of Rom. 6.6. is flat against you. For if sinne be not destroyed, till crucified, then not till mortified. For crucifying signifies mortifieation, which is a part of sanctification, Gal. 5.22, 23, 24. And the body of sinne signifies not the guilt, but the filth and power, Rom. 7. And therefore this place supposeth justification by faith, even as faith is mentioned to precede that crucifying, in the place last alledged.

Yet in the close you seeme to triumph, [c] as if you had sheerly carried away the gerland upon the hornes of an unanswerable Dilemma. Saying, if we say Christ did take away sinne, did bear them, did destroy the body of sin, you desire no more. Thus you. We answer; Christ doth take away sinne, doth bear the sins of men, but for whom? onely for the elect. And when doth he take away sinne, and make his bearing to lighten men? Even when comes that justifi­cation [Page 11]by faith, that, as you say, brings with it a crucifying of the body of sinne; when comes that iustification, mentioned Rom. 5.1, 2, 3, 4.

Argument V.

An Answer to Argument V.

IT is plaine by the place you alledge, Rom. 5. [c] That you meane not a ma­king of us sinners in the first Adam, by Gods bare decree accounting us so. And if you do not so meane, but meane that we are actually accounted sinners in the first Adam, since we came from his loines, before we had done good or evill: I admire how you dare affirme a thing so contrary to Scrip­ture: For the Apostle most evidently affirmeth in that Rom. 5. That though all that are come of Adam, have not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression, ver. 14. that is, have not sinned actually in their particular per­sons, as infants not any sinne, nor any men that particular sinne of Adam, yet ver. 12. it is said expressy that death passed over all men, for that all have sinned, or the Greeke will beare it, In whom all have sinned. [...]. The former part of the verse favours this reading in these words: As by one man sinne entred into the world. Then concludes all have sinned. Which how can it be true of infants in their conception, as Psal. 51. unlesse they be said to sinne in Adam?

But however we read, the same conclusion will necessarily follow, that all; children and all; in the wombe, even Jacob and Esau, have sinned ori­ginally in the common nature at first existing in that publike father of man­kinde: I say originally; As true as we have our bodies from our Grand­fathers, so from the first Adam we had all the same corrupt senses and appe­tite in him: though actually in our own persons we sinned not that sinne, nor [Page 12]do infants (as Jacob and Esau) actually sinne, as persons of ripe years when (as the Law speakes) they are capaces doli; can do evill, and give a seeming reason for it.

So then, in briefe, our answer is: That Adams sin is imputed to all, be­cause all did originally commit it: All our natures were at and in the com­mitting of it; which natures we lineally derive from him. And that you say, we are made sinners in the first Adam, simply and absolutely, before we have done evill, the Scripture saith no such thing, but the contrary, that in him we are all sinners. Therefore, to retort the Argument upon you, we are not made righteous in the second Adam, till we partake of his nature; that is, his Divine nature, as 2 Pet. 1.4. which is that by which we escape corrup­tion through lust. A part of which is faith; after reckoned up, and commen­ded to them, to whom Peter writes, in verse 5. immediately following.

To that you urge out of 2 Cor. [b] 5.19. I answer, the Scripture is no friend to universall redemption: And then what will follow on your behalfe? Surely no more will follow, or can follow but this, that in Gods ordinary way of Gospell administration, God is in Christ, reconciling them of the world to himselfe, that are perswaded by him to believe and receive the word of re­conciliation: So evidently, immediately before and after that 19. verse.

Yet you say, [c] This Argument did so wring Cardinall Bellarmine, that he con­fessed Christ may be put on without a proper act of our soule. Surely then, the saddle was closer, and harder put on him by some other, then you have tackied it: or he was more artificially wrackt, then you here stretch him.

But I am willing to imagine the urmost, you would, or could make of this Argument: It may be you have this in your thoughts, that, as in Adam, chil­dren are accounted sinners, though they cannot act sin, so, in Christ, chil­dren may be accounted righteous, though they cannot act faith.

To which I answer: As there is a naturall habit of corruption in infants, that makes a foundation of a just relation of Adams sinne to them; (For where there is no habituall corruption of nature, there is no imputation of Adams sinne, as we see in Christs conception and humane nature: He was not accounted a sinner in himselfe, but is for them that are saved by him; but in himselfe he was, and accounted most holy) So there is habituall faith in elect infants dying in their infancy, through which they are accounted righteous in Christ; as we have reasoned to the 1. Argument.

But that I am loath to wade too deep that little ones should not follow, more might be said: If it might be said in some sense Christ can be appre­hended without a proper act of our soule, that is, as it is a meere peculiar act of our soule; yet not without an act of Gods grace in that soule: Till that be put into the soul, no more is done in any particular elect person then what [Page 13]was done in the eternall election, which the Scripture calls a purpose, Rom. 9. And a purpose is not the practise of the thing purposed; and of that act of grace the soule of the youngest elect infant is in a faire capacity. For the [...] intelligere, the naked act of understanding depends not on the organs of the senses; So the Ar­tists that handle of the nature of the rea­sonable soule. no nor doth the representing of an intelligible object to the under­standing depend upon the senses, when God will in the darke, or in a dreame represent as in a vision of the minde, the species or images of some spirituall thing that sense never apprehended. How much lesse doth the acts of grace in this act of understanding depend upon the body or senses? So that though the body be a childe, great may be the actings of the gratiated soule.

Argument VI.

An Answer to Argument VI.

YOur sixth Argument, as you prove it, will answer it selfe: That Heb. 10.11, [a] 12, 13, 14. shews expresly, that though Christ did make ready the satisfaction for the common nature of men, before they knew of it, that after should beleeve: yet it is not brought home, and made available, to any par­ticular person, but to the sanctified. The sanctified ones, for ever in all ages, and for eternity, have the satisfaction, not onely prepared, but perfected to them. See you Pareus, &c. on the place, whether I deale not clearly with the place.

That place also Matth. 3.17, is for us against you. It is, in whom, not with whom. So that it imports that he is onely well pleased with all he studes in Christ: Else he doth not acquiescere rest pleased, but is earnest till somewhat else be done, 2 Cor. 5.20. This interpretation is as old as Augustines time; whom I name because you named him. But look to the Scripture, which to shew that God is well pleased, only with those that are actuall in Christ, addes to this speech, Matth. 17.5. Hear ye him, to draw men into Christ, that with them God may be wel pleased. Till men be actually in Christ, God is not well pleased with them though they be elect. See a notable place, Rom. 9.25. I [Page 12] [...] [Page 13] [...] [Page 14]will call them my people, which were not my people, and her beloved which was not beloved; who were they? Them whom he had called, ver. 24.

Argument VII.

Here is an end of the seven Arguments, which (if need had required) might have been seventie. Now I will answer the Objections.

An Answer to Argument VII.

IF we are not justified in his sight before we believe, [a] then we are un­just, sinners, workers of iniquity: Answer. So we are, As we have shewed out of Ephes. 2.2. Where we are said to walke after the course of the world, to be guided by the Spirit that ruleth in the children of disobedience, and to be children of wrath as well as others, till we be in Christ by faith. v. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. So 1 Cor. 6.9.10.11.

But then saith the obiection: If we be workers of iniquity, God hates us, Psalm. 5.

1. Answ. We know no middle between Gods love and hate. And the text saith plainly, that till they be called, they are, in regard of actuall love, a people not beloved, Rom. 9.24.25. ☞ Some reply that this is meant of the Gentiles.

To which, 1. We reply, that that is all one; In the Gentiles we see those that were not beloved afore the call, are beloved after.

2. That the text names Jewes and Gentiles, and brings that of Hos. to prove it, with which if we go on to end of 3. chap. of Hos. it is fully proved: Chapters are of late invention.

Besides that 9. of Rom. we alledge that Ezekiell 16.8. It was a time of love.

This text is urged against us, but you may see it is for us. For it should seeme it was not the time of love till God passed by her, and spread his skirt over her, the righteousnesse and excellency of Christ.

In order of nature, she lay in her blood before justified and loved. But in order of time, at the same time, yea minute of time, she was in her blood, was justified and loved. At the same time, the soule is created in man. But in order of nature, the understanding acts before the will.

And whereas it is said, Esau have I hated, not Jacob: But Iacob have I loved. This the Apostle applies peremptorily to Election and reprobation: Now Election is every where in Scripture called a purpose. If any where it be called a love, we must be forced to ioyn both together, unlesse we will set the Scriptures together by the eares, and say; It is a purpose of love: Now a purpose is not an act, nor an act a purpose; Gods decree is not the execution, nor the execution the decreeing.

2. Answ. Isay 1.13. Your incense is abomination to me, the calling of Assemblies, I cannot away with it, it is iniquity, even the solemne meeting, your new moones and your appointed feasts my soule hateth, &c. And all because their hands were full of blood.

But ver. 18. Come now let us reason together; though your sins be as scar­let, they shall be as white as snow.

See here is as much said of hating those that should be pardoned, ver. 25. as of Sodom and Gomorrah, ver. 10. God cannot hate the essence of the Devill, being his creature, but onely his manners. So of the iustified before iustified, as we have shewed.

Answ. [b] What absurdity can be conceived by one principled with Divi­nity? For though man could fall in the first Adam; yet he cannot fall from the second Adam, being once in him: For the gifts and calling of God, Rom. 11.are with­out repentance. We can perfectly sinne being out of Christ, and so deserve to be hated. But we being in Christ, have a perfect righteousnesse in him, that saves them to the utmost, that is, for ever, that come to God by him, see­ing he ever lives to make intercession for them, Heb. 7.25. So that as he breaks the power of corrupt nature, that it cannot sinne perfectly with a full will, Rom. 7. so he perfectly pardons all sinne, that there is no condemna­tion. Rom. 8.1.

Objection 1.

Objection 2.

Objection 3.

Obiection 5.

Sermon I.

PAg. 1. You say, I will shew how God comes to be reconciled to men; beare with the terme reconciled, although improperly spoken of him that was never an enemy: So you.

Answ. 1. If God were never an enemy, why say you, I will shew you how God comes to be reconciled? How can there be any going or coming of his love to man, if he never an enemy to him?

Answ. 2. Reconciliation and enmity are relatives; as a father and a son; take away the relation of a father, and the relation of a son is gone, and so on the contrary. So if you deny that there was ever any enmity between God and man, you must needs utterly deny all reconciliation between God and man. Re signifies (as you know) again, Con signifies together, Of Cicociliation to call or move to. How is there a moving to, where there was never any re­moving? How a together of those that were never asunder? How an again, unles there had been once an onenes or an agreement, which had been bro­ken to pieces, and now is made up againe (as the of [...] alius, [...] permuto, Thence [...] Commu­tatio, thence [...], commuta­tio, contra­ctus, Thence [...] A contra­cting a­gaine. Greek word beares us out in all this) and so there is reconciliation? But whiles I am speaking these things, I know you are gone for an appeale from the bar of reason (in mat­ters of faith) to the tribunall of Scripture. I go with you, for that is nothing else but a better, a divine reason.

Say you that God was never an enemy to the Elect; and you make the fall of Adam (in whom the Elect are included) a fiction, you make the sto­ry of the Gospell touching Christ suffering a fable, as that Pope did, that said blasphemously, How much have we gotten by that fable of the Gospel! you [Page 22]make Christs passion (if you grant he did suffer for the sins of the elect) to be a very vanity, a more then needs.

You overthrow the nature of God, Hab. 1.13. whose purity cannot indure any sinne as sinne, in whomsoever it is, but reproves it sharply all along the Scriptures in all his Elect.

And you deny many Scriptures that testifie that God was at enmity with his Elect as well as they with him till they were believers, Ephes. 2.2.3. As they are said to walke as the worldly children of disobedience, so in regard of God they are said to be children of wrath. All spoken of the Elect, for they were now truly converted. Weigh the place, weigh also that Isay 63.10.11. Therefore he was turned to be their enemy, then he remembred the dayes of old, &c. That is, to have mercy on them.

Obiect. Nor is it available for you to say that Christ died to reconcile us to God, not God to us.

Answ. For if that had been all the businesse, God might have reconciled our stubborne natures into a love of him by the meere sanctification of his Spirit, without the sufferings of Christ, as at first he made the blancke and worthlesse nature of Angells and Adam holy of innocent without the merits of a Saviour. Till con­version comes, God is as well at enmity with the Elect, as the Elect with him. Yea indeed had not Gods enmity against Eve concurred with Eves enmity against him, it is a question whether Eve (the mother of all the Elect) had fallen when she did: We speake of the meanes and execution of the decree.

For if whiles Eve was talking with Satan, God had not upon displeasure (though iustly) withdrawn himselfe and left Eve to her selfe, she had not in all likelyhood then have eaten of the forbidden fruit.

And so since, had not God taken displeasure at the sins of Elect, he had not suffered the doctrine of the Law so many hundreds of years to tyran­nise and terrifie them in so many ages so much before their conversion, be­fore the fulnesse of the Gospel was revealed, as he hath done. And why doth God deferre the Call of so many Elect till the 6.9. and 11. hour of the day (and doth not call all at the 3.) but for this as one maine reason, to shew his enmity against sinne in all men? And why when he begins to call, doth he suffer them to lie so long brined oft times in hellish terrour, as we know some by wofull experience lie long so, notwithstanding the holding forth Christ never so much to them? one reason must needs be Gods enmity against sin, and so to chase men from it. Not to enlarge by way of discourse. The text is most evident that God doth walke in an enmity against the sins of his Elect till conversion, Levit. 26.40, 41, 42. If they shall confesse their iniquity, &c. with their trespasse which they have trespassed against me, and that also they have walkea contrary unto me, and that also I have walked contrary unto them (marke [Page 23]that) and have brought them into the land of their enemies, if then their uncir­cumcised hearts (marke that) he humbled, and then they accept of the punish­ment of their iniquity, (observe that too) Then will I remember my Cove­nant, &c.

You goe on in that, 1. Pag. 10. I will shew you how God comes to be reconciled to men; 2. How we come to be reconciled unto God.

Answer. Here you make these two reconciliations, not onely two di­stinct things, but doe also conceive them to be two severall and divided, and separated things, so that God to an elect person may be a long time, if not from all eternitie, actually reconciled, before that elect person be actually reconciled to God. This appeares plainely by your own words in this first Sermon. pag. 21, 22, 23. where you thus lay open your self; ‘For us to say, or thinke that Christ purchased the love of his father for us, is that which I am confident the Redeemer of the world will not challenge unto himself, but say (as in another case) It is not mine to give, but it was given to them, to whom it is given before the foundation of the world was layd. Gods love was before the gift of his Sonne. Did God love Paul with as great love when that he persecuted the Church, as when he preached the Gospel? I will answere boldly, He did.’ So you.

I will at this present only reply to the distinction it self, answering the other passages in order after, as I shall trace you page after page.

I say then, That actually, God cannot be said to be reconciled to man, whiles a man is not reconciled to him. The word Reconci­liatio. q. d. Re-con­ciere. [...], sign. con­tractum vi­cissitudi­narium. [...] in compositi­one signif. habitudi­nem & maiorem significa­tionem. Reconciliation, both in English, Latine and Greek (which is the word the holy Ghost useth) signi­fies emphatically and fully, A making two severall persons to be at one a­gain, that were fallen at oddes. Two are not Reconciled, whiles one stands out. Galat. 3.19, 20. The Apostle speaking of Reconciliation, saith, that Christ is not the Mediatour of one, therefore as God is one party, so trans­gressors are the other party, both which are reconciled by the Promise lea­ding to Christ, that were at oddes by the transgression of the Law. So 1. Tim. 2.5. There is one Mediatour between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus; affirming evidently, that there is but one onely mediation of Reconciliati­on, and that of two parties, God and man into one. So Ephes. 2.1, 2, 3, 12, 13, &c. We are Children of disobedience to God; God is a God of wrath to us, till faith in Christ comes, and then each to other at once are reconciled. So Rom. 5.1, 2. It is as evident as evident may be, That by faith in Christ, both God is reconciled to us; Being Justified by Faith, we have Peace with God, that is as the [...]. We finde peace in God, wee finde God at peace. Greek is, from God, God is at Peace with us; as also we are [Page 24]reconciled to God, By Christ we have accesse by Faith into this grace wherein we stand, and reioyce in hope of the glory of God.

We confesse with the godly Learned, that there is of the elect a purposed Justification, or Reconciliation, in Gods eternall Decree, and a virtuall Jn­stification, or Reconciliation, in Christs Refurrection. He rose again for our Justification. Then Christ had an acquitance from his Father for all the debts of the Elect, for which he had payd. Before Christs suffering, the Father trusted the Sonne to satisfie for them he saved in the old Testament. After Christs suffering, the Son trusted the Father to save all the Elect by virtue of that Suffering, that should beleeve for time to come, till the worlds end. Both these are before our actuall Reconciliation to God. Before we Beleeve. The 1. is but that designing of the thing; the 2. the preparing. But that 3d, namely actuall Justification, or Reconciliation, of God to us, is the finishing at the same instant, that we are actually reconciled to God. The two former prepare the Iustification, or Reconciliation, the last onely makes the iustified man, makes God and man to be reconciled.

You see we are ingenuous to yeeld what with truth may be yeelded. But further we cannot; as to say, God is actually reconciled to us before we are to him: you have heard the Scriptures, and Divine reason cleer against it. And therefore tremble you to say, That God loved Paul with as great love when he persecuted the Church, as after when he preached the Gospel. For pur­pose, or preparation of a ground of love, is not so great as actuall Love. To purpose to wooe, is not equall unto the Love of wooing. Likewise trem­ble to say. That Christ did not purchase his Fathers actuall Love. For wee are not actually loved, till actually found in him.

If it were so, that God were alwayes reconciled to us, why doe you con­demne your selfe in your own words next following, pag. 11. ‘I conceive, (say you, and consider what you say) the drooping Conscience that sits in darknesse, under the clowdy apprehension of an angry Junge, &c. At­tentive to heare how God may be reconciled.’ So you. How is God an angry Judge? how is there a may be of his Reconciliation to us. (terms [Page 25]importing future time) if he was never at enmitie with us? If it were so, that God may be reconciled to us from all eternitie, and so before we were in Christ, why doe you say in pag. 11. 812. ‘that God is freely and fully reconciled to the Elect, and loveth them in Christ?’ your words following of persons polluted and sinfull, being in Christ, import an actuall being in Christ, as sure as an actuall pollution, when they come to him. So much of this distinction.

Pag. 12 You say that God is freely and fully reconciled to the elect, and loveth them in Jesus Christ without any previous dispositions, without any qualifications, without any performances of Conditions on their parts, unlesse to be polluted and sinfull be a previous condition, or qualification.

Answer. The Lord expresseth it as the Cardinall condition of the Go­spel, that men must as well feel their sinnes, as be sinners. Matth. 11.28. Come to me ye that are weary, &c. Which Christ explaines, Luke 15.7. Joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth (which is a sense of sin at the least) then over ninety nine Iust persons that need no repentance: who are they, but such as think they have no need? whom Christ calls not, Matth. 9.13. speaking to the Pharisees, who justified themselves. Luke 16.15.

It is true, that the qualifications in man to prepare him for Christ (as Iohn, by telling men they needed to repent, calling them generations of Vipers, and telling them, That the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand, Mat. 3. is said to make ready a people prepared for the Lord) must be from God. If there be the qualifications onely of illumination, conviction, and humiliation, (for a man blinde, or stubborn, defieth Christ) they are the common workes or graces of the Spirit of God, which may be in a reprobate Esau, Iudas, &c. Heb. 6.4. And therefore we cannot be understood in these to ascribe to man, either merit or efficacy towards his owne salvation. If they be the qualifications of Conversion-graces, as of faith, &c. they come in a speciall manner from the Spirit of Christ, as the divine nature of Christ, and so cannot be imagined to be of man, though in man, and acting upon man, and man by them. For we cannot say, that Faith or beliefe doth beleeve, repentance doth repent, love doth love; but men acted and moved by these graces, are said to be Beleevers, penitent, and lovers of God, So that though there be no qualifications on mans part, from man, yet on mans part from God. And though there be no performances on mans part by meer man, yet there are performances on mans part in man from Christs Spirit: when Christ will come and close with the soul actually, then doth he act de­sires, and faith into it, to make way for himself. Rev. 3. Christ knocks be­fore he let in. Christ opens Lydia's heart, then comes in. And Ephes. 2.8. [Page 26] By grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of your selves, it is the gift of God: where it is evident, that besides the riches of Gods free favour, ex­plained in vers. 9. there must be Gods gift of Faith, to bring us unto, and in­to Christ. So Iohn 6.37. Him that commeth will I in no wise cast out. There must at least be a restlesse desire, that the soul cannot sit still without Christ; (though that be an effect of the Fathers gift, in the same verse; All that the father giveth me, shall come to me) and then Christ will not cast him out, or leave him out, but receive him in. The holy Ghost in that 11. Matth. 28. Come, that is, beleeve, ye that are weary and heavy laden, that is, weary of finne, and desire to come out of it; compared with Matth. 5. where there is such frequency and varietie of expressions of desires, under the notions of poverty, mourning and hunger, and compared with Iohn 3. where there is oft mention of faith, as necessary to bring into Christ; and unto salvation; I say, the Holy Ghost by these places sets forth unto us that there is a double condition of the Gospel, Viz. Qua, & Quae. 1. The qualification in which a man comes to Christ (that is, a sensible need of Christ.) 2. The qualifi­cation which brings a man to Christ, that is Faith, required unto salvation; but both of and from the Spirit, yea from the Spirit, as Christs Spirit, as sent by the Mediatour, when effectuall. So that still all is of God. But that which Christ doth to men before they come unto him, and into him, can­not be denied. And this method of the Lord, is much for our comfort, that the King comes not, sine magno strepitu, multo pulvere, without some hurry, somewhat to doe, that we may know the commings in of the Lord, and not derive all assurance from phanatick Enthysiasmes, & phantastick dreams, that are neither from the word and work of Christ, nor warranted there by him.

You think to comfort a sinner by this, that Christ is his without any qua­lifications, performances, or conditions on mans part: But if there be no conditions, qualifications, &c. performed by Christ in mans behalfe, as to put into him desires, faith, love, &c. How shall he know but that he is still a miserable sinner, uniustified? How shall they say to their comfort, as 2 Tim. 1.12. I know whom I have beleeved, unlesse they doe beleeve? And that Rom. 8.28. Wee know all work together for good to them that love God, unlesse they feel their Love to God? And that 1 Epist. Iohn. 3.14 By this we know we are translated from death to life, because we love the Brethren, unlesse they doe love the Brethren? But of these markes and signes in another place, if God permit.

This Position being your main ground, together with the foresaid di­stinction, I have been the longer in, confuting the one, and cleering the o­ther. I shall be briefer in taking down your props and superstructures, and [Page 27]that plainly and lovingly. You offer to bring many Proofes, for the afore­said unqualified Proposition.

2. Part. Or Sermon, Reconciliation of man to God.

Answ. 1. There are no such termes of distinction in all the Scripture. Those places you bring for it, Rom. 5.10. Ephes. 2.16. Colos. 1.21. 2 Cor. 5.18, 19. let all men read and iudge whether there be the least hint of any such thing.

For is this any argument, that because the Apostle saith to the Romans, Ephesians, and Colossians, that they were already reconciled, and tells the Corinthians, that he was now but a perswading them to be reconciled, that therefore the Corinthians had one reconciliation, and were to have another? For nakedly this is the sense of your inference. For these are your very words, you having quoted the former places.

Now (say you) compare we these three places fore-mentioned, with that which we find, 2 Cor. 5.20. In the former places the Apostle told us, we were reconciled, and in this place he beseecheth us to be reconciled: So you. If you mistook your selfe, and intended to make the parallel between the 18. verse of 2 Cor. 5. God hath reconciled us to himselfe, and verse 20. We pray you in Christs stead to be reconciled. Meaning herein, that the same Corinthians were reconciled, and were yet to be reconciled. Know that in that 18. verse the Apostle speakes of his, and his fellow Ministers reconcilia­tion; verse 19. of the reconciliation of others in the world. And therefore [Page 40]ver. 20. intreats and beseecheth the Corinthians, that were not yet converted, to be reconciled. For as for the other, they were Saints, and a Church of God, Chap. 1.1. and therefore actually reconciled.

2. Answ. If our first reconciliation be originall, that is, hath a begin­ning, like as originall sinne: then our first reconciliation is not before the foundation of the world; much lesse our second, which you call actuall.

And whereas in your first part, or Sermon, you mention another reconor­liation before both these, namely Gods reconciliation of himselfe to us, we ask you what shall be the obiect of this reconciliation, seeing that our nature and persons are not (say you) reconciled but by the other two, namely, by that originall and actuall reconciliation.

3. By bringing both ends of your Book together, we perceive that the whole frame of your mouldring foundation is this. 1. God is reconciled to man, Serm. 1. Page 2. And this containes such a love as Christ never pur­chased. Page 21. Yea that God was never an enemy, page 2.2. There is reconciliarton of us to God: and this is two-fold.

1. Originall, of our natures, 2 Serm. Page 2. And of this you lay down this Proposition, That we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, without any previous conditions in us, page 3. Here you admit Christs sufferings: but Christs grace and spirit of faith is excluded.

2. Actuall Reconciliation of our persons, page 2. And of this you lay downe this position, page 5. of your 2. Part or Sermon. Mans actuall re­conciliation (say you) to God, requireth previous conditions and qualifi­cations to be wrought in man by the Spirit of God, before man can be actu­ally reconciled to God, or Gods reconciliation manifested unto him. For there are (say you) three sorts of conditions. 1 Antecedent. 1 Know­ledge of sin. 2 Knowledge of the depth of misery by sin to such. 2 Pre­sent. 1 Without believing (the soule remaining in the body) cannot bee reconciled to God. John 3.36. That by believing the soule is actually re­conciled to God, Iohn 3.33 John 1.12. Rom. 5.1. Thus you. Your third sort of conditions are rather effects than conditions. therefore I mention them not.

Thus (brother) after you have filled the bellies of your auditory with crudities; (I am loath to say poyson) in your after service, or second course you bring somewhat that is wholsome, in that one dish of actuall recon­ciliation. All the rest we must vomit up, or we die. To that end I goe on to administer my Dosis.

1. Ans. That there is but one only reconciliation; namely, that of God and man into atonement by faith in the one & only. Mediator Jesus Christ. We proved afore On page 2 of 1. Ser­mon. that the Scripture would yeeld you this one only, & not two; [Page 41]much lesse will it now allow you three: one being enough; and therefore one onely held out to us in the word, whereof we have said so much already, that we shall add the lesse now. 1. The quarrell between God and us is but one, namely our fall in Adam, and continuance in that condition, Rom. 5. it's the businesse of the Chapter. 2. The satisfaction is only one, and made at once, Rom 6.10. In that Christ dyed, he dyed unto sinne ONCE. Likewise reckon yee also your selves dead to sin, but alive to God. Hebr. 7.27. Christ nee­deth not dayly to offer up sacrifice: for this he did ONCE. Heb. 9.12. Christ by his owne bloud entred in ONCE into the holy place, having obtained eternall re­demption for us, (mark that clause) Heb. 9.26. But now ONCE in the end of the world, hath he appeared to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himselfe. And ver. 28. Christ was ONCE offered to beare the sins of many, and unto them that look for him he shall appear the second time without sin unto salvation. 1 Pet. 3.18. Christ hath ONCE suffered for sins; the just for the unjust; that be might bring us to God. And so in the fourth of Ephesians, the Apostle much runs upon one: That as every Christian hath but one God the Father, and one Lord (Jesus Christ) and one and the same holy Spirit: so every one hath one calling, one, hope, one faith, and one Baptisme, as a seale of those. Out of all we conclude, that if Christ did not at once make a full reconciliation for all that shall bee found in him; then is he an insufficient Saviour. If he did make a full and sufficient satisfaction, whereof they have benefit by the individuall act of ju­stification, Rom. 5.1. then is he fully within the atonement in an instant.

2. Answ. Reconciliation, [...], That is, the Eccle­siasticall, Church polity. No members of a Church. Ismael in the Church circumci­sed. His posteritie out of the Church not cir­cumcised. and non-reconciliation are immediate contra­ries: therefore either a man is wholly reconciled, or nothing reconciled. This immediate contrariety the Apostle toucheth and intimateth, 2 Cor. 6.14. where the Apostle makes the opposition between believers, and unbelie­vers, to be as between righteousnes and unrighteousnes, light and darknes, Christ and Belial. And the Apostle toucheth our conclusion or inference, that a man is either wholly irreconciled, or reconciled, Eph. 2.11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Remember that ye in time passed were Gentiles in the flesh who were called uncir­cumcision, &c. that at that time yee were without Christ, being aliens from the common-vvealth of Israel, (or rather * Politie of Israel) and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, vvithout God in the vvorld. But now in Christ Jesus, ye vvho sometimes vvere far off, are made nigh by the bloud of Christ: For hee is our peace, vvho hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished the enmity, even the Law of Commandements, contained in ordinances, for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace, and that hee might reconcile both unto God in one body by the crosse. O golden place to our purpose! Read it, and read it; and weigh it and read it. See 1. the Apostle sets down once and a­gain [Page 42] a time in this life wherein they were not reconciled. 2. Saith, that the they were afar off. 3. That as they were without hope, so without Christ; as without Christ, so without God; God and they were not reconciled. And 4. That the bloud of Christ, the cresse of Christ (by the preaching of peace, verse 17.) had made believers (verse 8.) Jewes and Gentiles, one among themselves, and both one with God at Peace. I know not what can be plai­ner to convince, that we are either altogether at peace; God with us, and us with God; or else not at peace at all.

3. Answ. I remember it was the maine argument of the Orthodox a­gainst the Arminians, that if we might fall totally (as the Arminians said) from grace, and yet not finally; that they should produce the evidences of Scriptures set downe of one totally fallen, and not finally. If the Scripture set down none, but of those that were totally off, or finally on, then the Ar­minian truth was not sound. So may wee argue, that the Scriptures set down no discoveries of one halfe reconciled, or two parts reconciled, and not the third, (for you make three reconciliations one after another) but set down a demonstration to know whether we are wholy unreconciled, or who­ly not. And therefore either we are wholly reconciled, or wholly not, for the time, till Christ comes and makes the change. This demonstration set down in the Scripture is onely from the act of actuall iustification by faith in Christ, Rom. 5.1. By this we are blessed, or else not blessed, Rom. 4.6. Faith makes that there is no difference between us and others in state of salvation, or else there remains the difference, that we are not in state of salvation, for the time, till God comes and alters the case through faith. This is evident Acts 15.9.11. And put no difference between us and them purifying There is a purity by faith as well as of imputati­on, & of sanctifica­tion. Rom. 4.3.their hearts by faith. But wee believe that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved even as they.