Quakerism the Path-Way to Paganism

CHAP. XI Of the necessity of this Light to Salvation.

1. WE told above Chap. IX. §. 2. how this Quaker laid forth his new doctrine, in three Propositions; the first whereof we examined Chap. IX. the second Chap. X. Now the third should come under our consideration, which, as he did word it Pag. 79. was concerning an Universal Gospel, (for our Quakers are great universalists) for these are the words thereof. That God doth by this light and seed, invite, call, reprove and exhort all and every man, and contendeth, as it were, with them, in order to salvation: If this be received, and not resisted, it worketh the salvation of all, even of these who never heard of Adam's fall, nor of Christ's coming, because it maketh them sensible of their misery, and inwardly maketh them partakers of Christ • s sufferings; and being partakers of his resurrection, are made pure and just, &c. Thus is clearly pointed forth an Universal Gospel, which indeed is no Gospel, or at least not that Gospel, which we have revealed to us in the word of God. And by this doctrine, the whole Gospel, revealed to us in the word, is wholly useless or unnecessary: So that by this one Proposition, the whole Gospel of the grace of God is made null and void; and the great blessing of a preached Gospel, and the rich advantage of the Gentiles, in the days of the New Test. and under the dispensations thereof, beyond what they were capable of, in the days of the Old Test. is undervalued, yea & annihilated; & all the boasting, rejoicing and glorying of the Apostle, in his being made instrumental in preaching of this Gospel to the Gentiles, and in suffering so much upon the account thereof, Rom. 1:1, 5, 14, 15, 16. & 11:13. & 15:15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 29. 1 Cor. 1:17. & 2, 3, 4, 5. & 3:9, 10. & 4:1, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. & 9:16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. & 15:1, 2, 3. &c. 2 Cor. 1:4—13. & 2:13, 14, 15, 16, 17. & 3. throughout, & 4:1—15. & 5:18, 19, 20, 21. & 6:1—11. with other places innumerable, made his folly and vainity, and a glorying in a thing of naught. O what desperado's must these Quakers be, who thus undervalue and trample upon the riches of the wisdom and grace of God, and instead of the true Gospel, give us pure Paganism?

2. After his prosecution and confirmation (such as it was) of the two first propositions, we exp • cted some proof and confirmation of this Third proposition▪ but instead thereof, we have Pag. 106. a distinct proposition put in its place, which is thus worded. The third proposition is, That by this Grace, Light and Seed, God worketh the salvation of all, and that by this, they are made partakers of the benefit of Christ's death, and of salvation acquired by him. And this Proposition he devideth in two Pag. 107. The first part thereof he says, is That they, to whom the Gospel is preached, are not saved, but by the inward operations of this light and grace. The second is, That by the operations hereof the most part of such, as never had the outward Gospel preached unto them, and were ignorant of the history of Christ, were saved, and some such now may be saved. Why he did supercede the direct probation of that, which was his first third proposition, I know not: Possibly he thought, that it was sufficiently confirmed by what he said, in confirmation of the first and second. And if so, I suppose the Reader will see, by what I have replied, its manifest untruth and falsehood.

3. But as concerning his last third Proposition, which he divideth in two, we shall examine it, in its parts: And in this Chapter, we shall consider what he saith on the first part, referring the examination of the second part, unto the next Chapter.

4. As to what concerneth the operations of this Light, whereof he talketh, before I come to a particular examination of what he speaketh here thereof, I must turn a little back, and consider some things, that remain to be examined of what he was pleased to set down, for clearing the question (as he said,) and explaining his meaning in these Propositions, which seem to relate to what he is here about to prove; lest he blame me, for passing over anything, he was pleased to say, for clearing of his meaning. I must therefore turn back to Pag. 90. of his Apology §. 17. where he tells us, he must speak some things of the way, how this seed worketh in the hearts of men, and this he saith, he the rather doth, that it may thereby appear, how they ascribe all their salvation, unto the Grace and Spirit of God; and differ from Pelagians and Arminians. In this design, if he be in case to effectuate the thing, I cannot but commend him; and because I am loath to Father anymore upon them, then their expressions give me just ground, I shall the more narrowly take notice of what he saith.

5. To this question, If equal and sufficient grace be given to all, must not the cause, why one is saved and another not, be in man, who useth grace well, when the other doth not? This is a question, which, I confess, I see not, how any Pelagian, Arminian, Jesuit or Quaker can so answer, as to ascribe the salvation of man, unto the pure Grace & Spirit of God. Let us see what he answereth, Grace (sais he) and light granted to all is sufficient to save all, and of its own nature will save all, and contendeth with all, and operateth so as it may save all. He who resisteth, is the cause of his own damnation; who resisteth not, it becometh his salvation: In him that is saved, the work is of grace, not of man; and that which is man's, is rather a passion, than an action.—The first progress is not by co-operating, but by not opposeing or counter-working. Moreover we believe (saith he) that in that special time of every man's visitation, as man of himself is wholly impotent for working with grace; so neither can he make the least progress out of his natural state, till grace lay hold on him. So that it is possible for him to suffer and not resist, as it is also possible for many to resist. But this answer is not satisfactory: For (1.) By what Scripture it can be asserted, that the Spirit of God, or his Grace, is given to all, and that in a measure sufficient to save all; even as well to such as are without the Visible Church, and live in heathenism, as to such as are within the visible Church, and are actual believers. I am yet to learn. (2.) what meaneth he by that sufficient to save all ? A thing may be said to be sufficient for such an end or work, ei • her Absolutely, or only in a certain respect : That which is absolutely sufficient is • ha • which alone, without the concurrence of any other thing, can effectuate or attain that end, unto which it is said to be sufficient: That which is only sufficient in a certain respect, or in its own place and order, is that which alone can never attain or effectuat the end; but only in so far as its own sphere can reach; and so it is only sufficient in its own kind, and no more; it can help so far but no further. (3.) The Jesuits, I know, with their foreman Molina, make much of the distinction of grace, into that which is only Sufficient, and that which is effectual or efficacious : and with them the Arminians join themselves, in the asserting of this distinction, and in the explication thereof: other Papists also, such as the late Thomists, and Iansenists, do use this distinction, but diversely explained, and both in a way far different from the way of the Molinists, and Arminians. Now because our Quaker, in this mater, so far as I see, joineth with the Jesuits and Arminians; and is not pleased to give us his plain and full meaning, we must see what way these Jesuits and Arminians explain this mater, that we may thereb • come to understand his meaning the better. The Jesuits foreman Molina will have that called sufficient grace, which alone, without anymore on God's part, can produce the effect; so that thereby alone, man may be wrought up to Faith & Conversion, if he will; and this Quaker ordinarily saith, if he do not resist, which is one and the same thing upon the mater. This Sufficient Grace and Help, is said to be given as well to such as shall never be converted, as to such as shall be converted; and this saith our Quaker also. This Sufficient Grace is with them distinguished into that which is Effectual, when the effect and work followeth; and that which is Ineffectual, when the effect and work followeth not. So that the difference betwixt Sufficient and Effectual grace is only taken from the Effect, and this effect doth wholly depend upon Mans will; and man's will maketh this difference, or maketh this sufficient grace, become Effectual, or ineffectual, & nothing else; for there is nothing in that grace, which is called Effectual, more then in that which is Sufficient; Sufficient grace being, upon God's part, absolutely sufficient to work the effect, if man will be tractable, and not resist, but concur and comply therewith, without any further addition of grace, yea and without any other requisite, beside the actual consent of man; and no more can be said of that grace, which is called Effectual. And thus all the difference is from the Event, and the Event doth wholly depend upon man; so that when the same measure of Sufficient Grace is given to two persons, the one believeth, because he willingly consenteth, the other believeth not because he will not comply, but resist: yea they tell us, that it may so fall out, that he who believeth not, may have a greater measure of that Sufficient Grace, then he who believed; and this man's will was better natured, and more pliable, then the will of the other; and he complied because he would, when he might, had he pleased, refused, and not have been converted, not only in sensu diviso, as they speak, but even in sensu composito. With these the Arminians do wholly agree, upon the mater; for they say, that Sufficient grace is the same with Effectual, only distinguished by the effects following the one, and not the other, through man's free will consenting, when the other put a bar in the way. They will not have the Efficacy of grace placed in any omnipotent manner of its operation, nor in the determination of the will of man thereby, but in its obtaining the effect through man's not resisting, when he might resist if he pleased; so that of two, having the same measure of sufficient grace, (then which no more is requisite, on God's part, for effectuating the work) the one believeth, because he doth put no bar in the way; the other believeth not, because he resisteth, and doth put a bar in the way. (4.) Hence it is manifest, why this answer of the Quaker, who taketh part with Jesuits and Arminians, cannot satisfy: to wit, because all the actual efficacy of grace is made to depend on man's will; for, as we saw, the same Sufficient Grace, that is bestowed upon two Persons, can of itself produce the actual conversion of neither, but must leave both to their free liberty and choice; and one believeth, not properly and immediately by the power and efficacy of this grace, even suppose it were in a greater measure, (for then it should work the same effect in both,) but because his will did freely of its own accord, consent and yield, when it might have done otherwise, even in sensu composito, as they speak; and the other believeth not, because he opposeth and resisteth, when he might, had he so thought good, have yielded. If our Quaker should run to the foreseen congruity and contemperation of the call of God with Free will, which Bellarmine and Vasques devise, to alleviat the mater, it will be of no advantage: for first, this Scientia Media, by which they imagine God to foresee what will be, in such and such cases, is groundless; and Next, at the long run, the crown is put upon Man, & not upon the Grace of God; for this Grace, tha • becometh congruous, as coming in a good day, when the man is in a good mood, and pleasant disposition, worketh no more, as to itself, then it did, upon another, whom it found not in so good a temper, but worse disposed; so that man may thank his good disposition, that the grace of God was Congruous, and so Effectual; and not incongruous, and so Ineffectual. So that Effectual Grace & Sufficient Grace is still the same, Physically, and as to its real entity; and all the difference is from man's good or evil disposition, whose evil disposition can make a Greater measure of grace Ineffectual, and good disposition can make a Lesser measure Effectual, if it come in its congruous season. From whence we see, it is clear as the sun, that man's Free Will, and not the Grace of God, according to our Quakers, is to be praised for Faith, Repentance, & Conversion; and man's free consent maketh that grace Effectual, which otherwise would have been Ineffectual; & his Opposition or Resistance maketh that grace Ineffectual, which otherwise might have been Effectual. And thus, their Sufficient grace is, with them, absolutely sufficient upon God's part, and all its Efficacy and Effectualness dependeth upon, and hath its being from, man's free Consent. Will this Quaker, or any of his Masters, the Molinists, or Arminians say, that beside that Sufficient Grace, which is made common to all, there is necessarily required a further work of Preveening Grace upon the will of man, physically determining the same, and certainly and efficaciously effectuating the actual consent thereof, and removing or overcoming its Opposition, or Resistance? As for the Gratia Cooperans, which they say, he who believeth and complieth with the call, hath, and which the other, who resisteth, wanteth, it doth not help them; for it is also made to depend wholly upon man's Consent; so that God cooperateth, because the man consenteth; and cooperateth not in the other, because he resisteth; and it is made the same upon the mater with Sufficient Preventing Grace, only now having a new denomination, because of its cooperating with man's will, which goeth before, and upon which it dependeth. I know, the Arminians say, that God worketh upon the will, granting to it a Supernatural Power, to obey and yield; but yet they will not grant, that this grace shall determine the will, and certainly and efficaciously bow, and incline the will to consent: for the will must still retain its power to obey, or not, as it pleaseth; and all the work of grace upon the will must remain resistible; and be nothing but Moral Swasion; so that when Antecedent & Preveening Grace hath done all it can do, it may so fall out, that no conversion shall follow; so that conversion is still contingent and uncertain, (though not in respect of the foreknowledge of God, yet) in respect of its dependence upon that cause, and doth not follow necessitate causae, five consequentis ; because for all that grace, man was always free to resist; and the grace, ( Preventing, I mean, and Antecedent ) granted to him that resisteth, was equal to that, which was granted, to him that yieldeth: And therefore, with them, there is no grace granted, that Effectually or Efficaciously & Certainly taketh away the wills resistance, & causeth it infallibly to bow and yield; otherwise their Sufficient grace should not be simply, and absolutely sufficient, but only so far, and in its own kind. And seeing they deny any concession of more Prevening and Antecedent Grace, then what is purely sufficient, as all Papists must do, who will follow the Council of Trent. Sess. 6.. can. 4. & 5. It is undeniable, that with them, and our Quakers, who follow them, the Efficacy of Grace is from man, and man must thank himself and his own Free Will, that he is saved, if not wholly, because of cooperating grace, which is yielded to, yet principally. (5.) So that though he who resisteth is clearly guilty of his own damnation; yet that Grace, which is only Sufficient, cannot be truly and simply called that man's Salvation, who resisteth not; but his salvation must principally, or rather only, be ascribed to himself, for that Sufficient grace did no more upon its part to him, who resisteth not, than it did to him, who resisteth; and it hath no more Influence or Efficacy, as from itself, upon the one, than upon the other. It cannot then be said, that the Salvation of him, that is saved, is merely of grace, and not of himself; seeing he and not grace made the difference, and made Sufficient grace become Effectual. (6.) Nor is it true, that Man is wholly passive, with our Quakers ; for the man's actual consent is requisite, and his non-resistance is rather an Action than a Passion, as it is in the will; for not only the will must positively will this non-resistance; but this non-resistance in the will is a positive yielding: for, in Scripture construction, a suspension of actual consent is a resistance, and a non-yielding. (7.) Hence we see, that it is all one thing, whether the first progress (as he speaketh) be by cooperating, or only by not counterworking; for whatever way we name it, the will is positively acting: when the will yieldeth, it doth it willingly, and when it doth not repugn nor resist, it yieldeth; non-resistance is a kind of consenting. But whatever we call it, it is, according to the Quakers, with the Jesuits or Molinists, and Arminians ; (with whom we may join as to this, the Lutherans ) that upon which dependeth the efficacy of grace; and itself is not the proper Effect of grace, because they will not grant, that God, whatever way he work upon the will, doth, by his Preventing and Antecedent grace, produce and infallibly effectuate this Non-resistance, or Consent; or that he doth more by this Grace; to produce and effectuate this non-resisting in him that yieldeth, than in him that yieldeth not. (8.) Though the man can make no progress out of his natural state, until grace lay hold upon him (as sufficient grace, in the judgment of Quakers and Arminians layeth hold on all) he can and may resist; and all that grace of God can cause no progress, till the man, of his own Free accord and good will, yield and lay aside his resistance: And this yielding, or laying aside of the resisting humore, is not caused by grace; because the same measure, yea a greater measure, of the same grace, could not cause it, in another, who would continue in his unwillingness and resistance. (9.) Though it be possible for man, in that case, to suffer, and not resist, because it is possible with Quakers, Jesuits and Arminians, that Lord Free will shall be good natured and well disposed; yet all the grace of God cannot make it certain and infallible; for Grace, must not enter within the Wills Jurisdiction, but stand cap in hand, without doors: Lord Free will must not be encroached upon. (10.) One thing more, I would desire to know of this Quaker, what he meaneth properly by this Sufficient grace ? Hitherto he hath given us big words; but yet, upon the mater, nothing but the mere Light of Nature, or some common gifts and favoures, wherein he is worse, then some Arminians, Pelagians and Jesuits ; who will grant the necessity of the outward preaching and dispensation of the Gospel, which this our Quaker plainly slighteth and undervalueth. But among the • all, where is that grace of God, that effectually draweth, teacheth and causeth the soul to come and consent? where is that heart of flesh, &c. Ier. 31:33, 34. & 32:39, 40. Ezech. 11:19, 20. & 36:26, 27. John. 6▪ 44, 45. Phil. 2:13. Ephes. 1:18, 19. 2 Thes. 1:11. 2 Pet. 1:3. Psal. 119:36. 1 King. 8: verse. 37. • Thes. 5:23. 1 Cor. 3:5, 6. 2 Tim. 2:25. Col. 1:12.13. It seemeth all our prayers must be made to Lord Free will; for that is the supreme Master of all, if the doctrine of our Quakers, and their Masters the Jesuits and Arminians, be true.

6. Next the saith, That though our nature be corrupt and polluted and prone to all evil; yet grace can work upon it, as fire can make iron soft. But can grace change the will, with him? Can grace work upon it immediately, and cause it bow willingly and consent? Why doth he not say this? No Arminian, Pelagian, Socinian nor Jesuit will say, that grace cannot work upon nature, He addeth, as iron removed from the fire, returneth to its old hardness; so the heart of man, when it resisteth, or recedeth from grace, returneth to its old condition. And will not Arminia • s say the same? Is not this manifest pleading for the Apostasy of the saints? It seemeth then, grace can make some change upon nature, but cannot alter it; as fire, though it can make iron warm and soft, yet it cannot change the iron; so, for all that grace can do, corrupt nature shall remain corrupt nature still, though a little softened and mollified: is this all that grace doth? Where is then the new heart? and where is the heart of flesh, that grace worketh? He saith, the • eart of man returneth to its old condition, when it resisteth. But doth not grace take away this resistance? It would seem then, that, at the first, the heart resisteth not; and how can this be, seeing the heart naturally is prone to all evil, yea is enmity against God, and is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be?

7. He adduceth Pag. 91. some similitudes, which may serve indeed to illustrate what is already confirmed; but are of no use to confirm anything, that is in question: Yet let us see, what the mater is. He compareth a man in his natural state to one, that is very sick. Which already discovereth the man's vanity, and d • clarth his simile to be a dissimile ; for man, in his natural state, should be compared rather to one that is dead; for the Scripture doth so point him out John. 6:53, 57, and 5:21, 24, 25. Ephes 2:1, 5. and so is he indeed. What would he say more? He compareth God to a Physician, that putteth the Physic in the sick man's mouth; and layeth him on his bed; and if the sick man will but be passive, the physic will work; but if he be unwilling, and rise up, & eat what he should not eat, it cannot work because he hindereth its operation, and so though the physic of its own nature be wholesome, & tend to health; yet it proveth deadly to that man, & he is the cause of his own death: & yet if he had been quiet & passive, the physic had wrought; & he could not have said, that he healed himself, but that the physic did it. Ans. (1.) Physic cannot work upon a dead man, but must have some strength of Natu • e concurring and cooperating? How agreeth this simile with his own doctrine? He told us before, that in the first progress man doth not co-operat, and yet here nature must co-operate, or nothing will be done (2.) Bodily physic worketh only upon the body and humors, but reacheth not the will of the man; but the soul humors lie most in the will; and grace, that would cure these, must work upon the will; for till the will be cured, the man is never cured. So that (3.) This simile doth more sufficiently demonstrate him to be a Pelagian, Arminian and Jesuit, than anything, he hath yet said; for let the physician give what physic he will, the patients will is wholly at liberty; so let God work what he will, and employ all his grace, the man's will is at freedom; and so at freedom, that all that God can do shall not avail; the man will, if he be ill disposed, hinder the physic to work; as the patient may do, in the similitude. (4.) Though the man cannot properly say, that he purged away his own humors, because the physic did that; yet he was truly the concurring cause of his own health, and may thank himself therefore: For had he been so ill disposed as his neighbor, all the physic should not have saved his life, more than it saved his neighbors, who hindered its operation. (5.) Have we not here enough to Demonstrate to us, how devoted the Quakers are unto Lord Free will ; And how, according to them, Christ and the grace of God must be beholden to Free will, for every soul, that is saved; and must come pray and beseech Free will, to be good, and quiet, that grace may work, and Christ may not miss his errand. O desperate doctrine! O proud man! Our Salvation then is not to be referred unto the Power of God, contrary to what Christ saith, Mat. 19:26.

8. His next simile is of persons lying in a deep cave, where their senses are stupefied, so as they are scarce sensible of their own misery. But neither doth this simile come home: for men an • women naturally are dead: and though they cannot but feel something of their misery; Yet are utter strangers to the rise thereof, and to the greatest and most special part of their misery. I do not think (saith he) that any of them, by laboring to deliver themselves, can move God to compassionate their case, & send help, as seeing them willing to be saved, and doing all they can, as say the Pelagians, Socinians and Semi-Pelagians: nor do I imagine, that the deliverer setteth a ladder to the bottom of the cave, saying, if any will be delivered, let him use his own strength and come up upon the ladder, as say the Jesuits and Arminians. Ans. The man would fain wash his face, that he might appear to be neither Pelagian, nor Semipelagian, nor Socinian, nor Arminian, nor Jesuit ; but he hath appeared already so deeply died in their errors, that his labor is in vain; for when he hath said so much of a Sufficient Grace common to all, say what he will, he shall never rid himself of that foul company: and when all the explication, or discovery of the nature of that Sufficient Grace, issueth in what is merely Natural, as we have seen, he is but beating the air, in laboring thus to cheat his Reader. And I would fain know, what he will do with his former doctrine concerning the Talents? And what doth his Light within, his Christ and all serve for now? I pray him, the next time he writeth, to reconcile these. But how proposeth he the case? I suppose (saith he) the Redeemer cometh at certain times, and manifestly declareth unto them, what and how great their misery is, if they remain in that place, yea and impresseth upon them a certain sense of their misery and not only so, but apprehendeth them, draweth them out, and plucketh them up, that he may bring them out of their misery; and if they resist not, they will be saved. Ans. (1.) The Lord's coming at certain times to convince all and every man of his misery, in reference to his salvation, and delivery, is but a dream for Paul tells the people of Athens, Act. 17:30. that God winked at the times of ignorance, but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. (2.) It is also a groundless imagination to think, that God impresseth upon every man breathing a sense of his misery. (3.) If God draw them up, and pluck them out of that pit, they must be out of it, whether they resist or not: Or doth he imagine, that God by the Sufficient Grace, which he bestoweth, plucketh them only half up, and, when they begin to resist and spurn, letteth them fall again, that they may perish in the pit? But how or what way doth God thus pluck all men half out of the pit? I wish he would explain this, and then we should see, whether his hands be clean of Pelagianism, &c. or not. (4.) Though he will not say, that he is a Pelagian, or Semipelagian, or Socinian, or Arminian, or Jesuit ; yet he must put the crown of Salvation on Free wills head, and sing praises to Free will, that was so good and kind, as not to spurn and resist. But whence came this Non resistance? Not from the arm of him, that was pulling them up, but from their own innate kind and gentle disposition, he must say; Then glory and thanks must be given to this kind disposition, that the man is saved, outright, and brought fully out of the pit: for what grace did, was but half work, and a common thing, that others, who are lying in the pit, met with, as well as he. And yet this is the man, that would make us believe, that he is neither Pelagian, nor Semipelagian, not Arminian, &c. but his speech bewrayeth him to be that, and worse: For wherein doth his doctrine differ from all the Papists, who are this day against the Iansenists, upon this account, that these assert Christ's grace, to be adjutorium quo, that is, such help as maketh the man to will; and so effectuateth the actual will and consent?

9. He obviateth and Objection Pag. 92. It might be objected, that grace should hereby be frustrated ; And indeed grace is at man's devotion, by his opinion; for if man will not, grace shall never save a soul, for grace cannot change the Will, nor come near to its Territory: And man, being always left at his natural corrupt liberty, and his corrupt nature being enmity to God, and all the ways of God; how is it imaginable, that any one soul can be saved? Thus the great exalters of Universal Grace, give us, in end, no grace at all, but such, as cannot save. What saith he to this? He saith, grace is not frustate, because God gets his glory. But had not God gotten glory, though this grace, that makes Salvation (with this Quaker ) possible, had never been heard of? Had not God gotten the glory of his justice, though never one of Adams sons had been saved? He told us before Pag. 90. that grace of its own nature will save all, and worketh with everyone that it may save them. And as to this, which is its native and proper design and end, it can be frustrated by man's refractariness; and so grace attaineth nothing of its proper end, but as man will. What he speaketh of the Suns hardening clay, and softening wax, is but a further confirmation of what we say, of this Quaker, to wit, that as the Sun can never soften clay, so, with this Quaker, all the grace in heaven shall never soften a man's heart, till man, of himself, without the grace of God, lay aside his hardened disposition, and take on a new Nature, and become wax, that the Sun of grace may melt him: Was ever Pelagius more a Pelagian, or Arminius, more an Arminian, than is this man? Grace with him, is but a general common thing, concurring with a general Influence, as is the influence of the sun, causing the dunghill stinck, and the flower to smell well; and as the nature of the flower is the immediate cause of the good smell, so man's good nature and disposition is the immediate particular and proper cause of all the good that is done. All which he confirmeth, in the close of that paragraph, saying, so the Sun of righteousness shineth upon everyone, dureing the time of his visitation, that they may bring forth good fruit, and send forth a good smell: And by the rays hereof their hearts can be mollified and warmed; but if they suffer that day to pass, the same sun doth more harden them, as clay, &c. But the Sun can never make a thistle bring forth grapes, or a carcass to smell as a rose; so neither can the Sun of righteousness, by this Man's opinion, cause a dead man live, or a rotten withered branch bring forth fruit: And the change of the corrupt nature of man is not from the Sun of righteousness, but from himself: and it lieth at the man's own door, and is in his option, whether he will bring forth fruit or not, let the sun shine, as it will. And further, let him explain to me, How grace can properly harden a man. I know, that by accident of man's corruption, abusing it, the man may thereby grow worse, but this is not the proper work of grace: as the heat of the sun hardeneth the clay, as natively and properly, as it causeth the flower to smell fragrantly. However we see clearly, what are this man's thoughts of grace: and let any tell me, if ever a Pelagian, Semipelagian, Socinian, Arminian, or Jesuit, spoke more to the undervalueing and disparagement of the grace of God?

10. Finally he tells us, §. 18. that he acknowledgeth, that God doth operat in some, in a certain special manner, in whom grace so far prevaileth, that salvation necessarily followeth, and God suffereth them not to resist : This, I confess, is the expression, that seemeth most orthodox, of any he hath yet had, in this matter; and yet Arminians will say the same. But is it not thus with all, whom God effectually Draweth and Converteth? Or are there any really converted and saved without this special operation of grace? If it be not thus with all, then all are not alike beholden to God and his free grace, for Conversion: and out of what Scripture can we learn this? If it be thus with all, and it must be so with all, who are truly converted; why doth he trouble us with his Sufficient Grace, which alone, without this special manner of operation, never brought a soul to heaven? Was ever, or will ever, a man, that is born in sin, be converted, till grace take away that resistence, which is in him naturally? And did ever that sufficient grace alone do it? Yet (saith he) in that none did want that measure of grace, whereby they might be saved, they are made justly inexcusable—and they that perish, while they remember the days of Visitation, wherein God by his Spirit and light did strive with them, are forced to c • nfesse, that t • ere was a time, wherein the door of mercy stood open, and that they are justly condemned. Ans. (1.) We see no ground for such a day of Visitation, as he dreameth of, granted to all and every son of Adam, as appeareth from what was said above, upon that h • ad. (2.) That no man shall have an • just ground of pleading his excuse, before God, when condemned, we nothing doubt; though we feign no devices of our own, to this end. (3.) what sense or remembrance of a day of Visitation, wherein mercies door stood open, Heathens, and such as never heard of Christ, can have, we are yet to learn. (4.) Nor do we understand, how that grace can absolutely be called Sufficient, which removeth not the greatest of impediments, that is to say, Mans Reluctancy. But Quakers, & their brethren, the Arminians & Jesuits, can imagine strange things.

11. We come now to see, what way he proveth the necessity of this light unto salvation, or how such as hear the Gospel are saved by the operations of this Light. Pag 107. &c. He citeth that John. 3:3. except a man be born again, or from above, he cannot see the Kingdom of God. And what can this evince? That the outward preaching of the Gospel alone, the literal knowledge of Christ, & historical faith in him, doth or can save a soul, we never said; though he falsely insinuateth so much, in the following words: Yet we see here the man's wicked design; to wit, to cry up this grace, to the end he may destroy all the Ordinances of Christ, which he hath appointed as means, whereby he is pleased to bring about this effect. We never said, that the external preaching of the Gospel alone could save any; yet we know, that by the foolishness of preaching the Lord saveth such as believe 1 Cor. 1:21. And Paul tells us, that he begot the Corinthians through the Gospel 1 Cor. 4:15. And he begot ( Philem. 10.) Onesimus, in his bonds. The word, becoming engraffed, is able to save souls I am. 1:21. But the main thing here to be noticed, is that this can make nothing for his point: we grant, that a man must be regenerated by the Grace and Spirit of God; but we deny that anything, call it as he will, that is common to all the Heathen, is the Seed, or Cause of this new birth. It is wholly from above, and of the Spirit, who is not given to all persons: only such as were foreknown, are predestinate to be conform to the image of Christ, and they who are thus predestinated are effectually called Rom. 8:29, 30. Se also Ephes. 1:4, 5. It is they only, who are given of the Father to Christ, who will come to him John. 6:37. & 17:19, 20; For they only partake of that, which is obtained by Regeneration, viz. the New Creature Gal. 6:15. the New Man Ephes 4:24. the Image of God Col. 3 10. the Divine Nature 2 Pet 1:4. the Spirit Gal: 5:17. the Inner man Rom 7:2 • . the Law of the mind verse. 24. When he hath proven, that this Common and Sufficient Grace is able to effectuate this new birth, then he shall speak something to the purpose: But neither he, nor his Masters, the Pelagians, Jesuits nor Arminians, shall ever be able to do this.

12. What he saith of the necessity of this New birth, and its preferableness to any external knowledge of Christ, from 2 Cor. 5:16, 17. we shall not oppose: only we must say, that it is wild and unreasonable, from that place to infer, that the knowledge of Christ, is but like the Rudiments, that children use, which must be laid aside, when they attain to more perfection; seeing the knowledge of Christ is our life John. 17:3. and he who knoweth him, knoweth the Father John. 10: • 8. & 14:9, 10, 11, & 17:21. His granting that every similitude halteth, doth not much alleviate the mater; for he addeth, that such, as do not advance above the outward knowledge of Christ, shall never inherit the kingdom of heaven. Unless by the outward knowledge of Christ, he understand a mere literal, superficial, book-knowledge; which indeed will nor avail unto salvation; and yet the want of which maketh the case of Heathens, and such as are without the Church, desperate.

13. He tells us afterward Pag. 108. that the new creation, whereof the Apostle speaketh 2 Cor. 5:16, 17. proceedeth from the operation of this Light and Grace. And this is the thing, which he should prove; for we deny it, of the Light and Grace, whereof he talketh, and which he will have common to all men breathing. His saying, that the Word, of which he spoke, is lively and penetrating &c. Is no proof. For that word, is not a Word, or Seed, or Grace, implanted in every man, as we shown. He addeth, this seed is called, the manifestation of the Spirit given to every man to profit; for it is written, that by one Spirit, we are all baptized into one body. And Peter ascribeth this birth unto this seed 1 Pet. 1. being born again not of corruptible seed, &c. Ans. (1.) If this Seed be the manifestation of the Spirit, whereof Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 12:7. It is not common to all the world; for the Apostle is there speaking of the Church, whereof the Corinthians, (who were sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints 1 Cor. 1:1.) were a part; and being an homogeneal part, are called the Body of Christ 1 Cor. 12:27. Where doth this Quaker read, in the Scriptures, that Heathens, and such as are without the Church, are called the Body of Christ? (2.) Nay, if this seed be the manifestation of the Spirit, it is so far from being common to all men, that it is not common to all Church members: For these gifts (as they are called verse. 4.) were peculiar only to some members of the Church, & given in order to Administrations & Operations verse. 5, 6. & are particularly specified verse. 8, 9, 10. Therefore saith the Apostle verse. 11, 12. But all these worketh that one and the self same Spirit, divideing to every man severally, as he will; for as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ. Which is abundantly confirmed by the scope and whole contexture of the discourse. (3.) The Apostle, for pressing of union and concord, among the members of the Church of Corinth, with an edifying use of their several gifts, saith verse. 13. That by one Spirit all we are baptized into one body, &c. that is, that by baptism, all the Professors of the Name of Jesus, are outwardly made members of the visible body of Christ; and such, as are really baptized by the Spirit and made partakers of his grace, are made members of the invisible & mystical body of Christ; and so should lay forth themselves, in the use of their gifts and graces, for the common good of the whole body. And what, I pray, can this make for the Quakers point? Doth the Apostle say, that this is common to all such, as never were baptized, nor heard thereof, or did never partake of the other Sacrament, imported by these words made to drink &c. in the end of the verse, as some suppose? And if not, what way will this Quaker hence prove, the operation of the new birth, by that which is common to all men breathing? The Apostle, it is true, saith here, whether Jews or Gentiles: Yet he meaneth only such, as are comprehended under we ; that is such, as were already members of the Church. Will this Quaker say, that all and every man are baptized by the Spirit, and have been made to drink into one Spirit? Then I suppose, he will next say. That all must needs be saved. (4.) As for that Word, or Seed, whereof Peter speaketh, everyone may see, that will believe Peter himself Chap. 1. verse. last, that this word of the Lord, which is the incorruptible seed, & which liveth & abideth forever, is not anything abiding in all men; but is that, which is preached by the Gospel.

14. He proceedeth and saith, Though this seed, in the first manifestation, be small, as a grain of mustard seed Mat 13:31, 32. and though it be hid in the earthy part of man's heart, yet life and salvation is hid in it, and is revealed according as they yield unto it: And in this seed the kingdom of heaven doth potentially lurk, to be produced, or rather exhibited, as it getteth ground, is nourished, and is not suffocated. Answ. (1.) Are not these noble proofs? Do the Quakers think, that we are bound to take their groundless and inconsistent assertions, for probations? (2.) How can this seed have its manifestation; and yet be hid and latent? (3.) Hath a natural, carnal, unregenerate and heathen man, a spiritual part of an heart? or is the heart of every man partly earthly, and partly heavenly? and why doth this seed lie hid in the earthy part, and not in the heavenly part of the heart? are these anything but Quakers dreams, or new Pelagian Notions, sufficiently confuted above? (4.) This must needs be a hid salvation which is hid in a seed, which is hid in the earthy part of man's heart, and that even in its first manifestation; What idle fancies do these men feed upon? (5.) This hid salvation must be a wonderful salvation, for it is revealed, according as these, in whom it is hid, yield unto it. But must it not first work & appear in its operations, before men can yield to it? who can yield to a latent lurking thing, that worketh not, nor appeareth not? (6.) If Salvation be hid in this seed, the kingdom of heaven is more then potentially in it; for we say not that an apple is hid in the seed, especially seeing he saith, that this kingdom of heaven is not produced, (as the seed can produce, in its way, a tree & its fruit) but rather exhibited. (7.) This seed, he saith is already hid in the earthy part of man's heart: and if so, sure, it hath ground: how can he then say, that it is exhibited, as it getteth ground? (8.) The sum of all is pur • Pelagianism, or worse; viz. that there is something in every man, which is sufficient of itself to Produce Grace & Glory, Life and Salvation, if man will be but that well natured, as to suffer it to work, & not suffocate it; so that there is no need either of the outward Preaching of the Gospel, or of the inward Operation of the Spirit upon the mind (which Pelagius at length did acknowledge) let be of the special Operation of the Spirit of grace, renewing the will, and creating a new heart of flesh, &c. This is doctrine for Pagans indeed.

15. But how is this proven? He citeth Luk. 17:20, 21. and would have n • believe, that Christ saith there, that the Kingdom of Heaven was in the Pharisees. But judicious Calvin thinketh, these words were spoken to the disciples, upon occasion of that question of the Pharisees. And though we take them as spoken to the Pharisees, it will not hence follow, that this Kingdom was already in them, though the greek preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be used, which (as was shown above) doth not always carry this import, as might be evidenced by a number of places, as Luk. 14:1. Mark. 13:24. where it importeth after. So Mat. 20:26. Luk. 16:15. Rom. 16:7. 1 Cor. 2:6 Rom. 8:29. 1 Thes. 5:12. where it signifieth among : and he might have found it rendered in the margin of our bibles among ; so that the meaning is, the Kingdom of God, (which they imagined would be some outwardly glorious and splendid thing, and therefore could not be in and with Christ) was already near unto them, and among them: for thus he cleareth it afterward verse. 22. saying unto his disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and ye shall not see it. Whence we see, this could be nothing, that was within the carnal part of the heart of every man. We reject therefore with detestation that which he saith afterward, to wit; That Jesus Christ, the hope of glory, who becometh wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption, is in the heart of every man, in that little seed, as man is potentially in the embrio ; as cursed Pelagianism, and doctrine for Pagans.

16. He tells us Pag. 109. That the Calvinists take grace to be a certain irresistible power; & therefore reject this little seed of the Kingdom, & despise it, as an contemptible insufficient thing, and unprofitable to salvation. And why not, seeing Scripture speaketh of Grace, as a Drawing and Teaching of the Father; as a Quickening of the dead; as a giving of a New heart; as Enlightening • he mind spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, as a Renewing of the will, and by almighty power determining it, to that which is good? See John. 6:44, 45: Ezech. 36:26 27. & 11:19. Phil. 2: verse. 13. Deut. 30:6. Ephes. 1:17, 18, 19 Act. 26:18. 1 Cor. 2:10, 12: And as for this Seed, which he talketh of, the Calvinists, as he calleth them, cannot but reject it; and all that are not one with Pelagians, Jesuits & Arminians, the sworn enemies of the grace of God. But to astonish his Reader, he addeth, That the Papists Socinians and Arminians, on the other hand, do extol nature and Free will, and deny this little seed, & small manifestation of Light to be that supernatural and sawing grace of God▪ given to all unto salvation. But poor man, he bewryeth his ignorance, not knowing, that Pelagius called the posse, the grace of God; and that Arminians plead for a Supernatu • all grace granted to all, whereby they have a power to do what is commanded; See Act. Synod. Remonst. de gratia Pag. 14, 15. Praeterea minime quoque diffitemur, Spiritum Sanctum immediate agere in voluntat • m▪ in illam vires infundendo, ac potentiam supernaturalem ad credendum : and again, Si per gratiam habitualem intelligere libeat potentiam supernaturalem, concessam voluntati, ad hoc ut credere & been agere possit, eam libenter admittimus. Yea Pag. 62. they say, that this power of believing is con • erred by irresistible grace, See their Apology Pag. 117. b. Let this Quaker now tell me, wherein he d • ffereth from the Arminians? Doth not he and they conspire to put the crown of salvation on man's head, that man may have all the praise of willing and doing, while as God gave to all in common a power to will and to do, by wh • ch all might, if they would, believe and be saved, and which could do no more; and thus we need not notice what he addeth further there, to this purpose; only I observe his sarcastical scoff, at the Calvinists, as he calleth them, wherein he bewrayeth much ignorance, or malice, or both: For it is most false, that they cry up such a Savior, as repareth little or nothing within, and giveth ground of certanety of Salvation to such as live in sins. I value not his commendations of this Light, being all founded on pure ignorance and presumption; though he blasphemously Pag 110. misapply these Scriptures John. 3: verse. 20. Psal. 1 • 8:22. Mat. 21:42. Mark 12:10. Luk. 20:17. Act. 4:11. as speaking of his Pelagian dream. Nor do I regard his saying from experience, that that stone, which the builders rejected, is become the head of the corner; though he, taking God's blessed name in vain, ascribeth, upon this account, glory to God; for his delusions are no ground of our fai • h, nor confirmations to be regarded by us. And whereas he boasteth of their being sent forth, as the first fruits unto God, in the day, wherein he is to arise & contend with the nations, to preach this everlasting Gospel ; he but foameth out his own shame; for we have seen already what a Heathenish Gospel this is, which he preacheth. Nor do I take any notice of this man's undervalueing of all preachers, that are not of his mind, this being the usual strain of all broachers of pernicious doctrine, to fill the minds of the less knowing, of whom they think to make a prey, with prejudices against the Faithful assertors, and maintainers of truth. What he addeth further Pag. 110. in commendation of themselves, is but a proclamation of his pride and vain glory. And that sum of the Gospel, which the Quakers preach, repeated so often Pag. 110. and 111. to wit, That they call, request, & invite all, to turn in unto the Light within them, & believe in Christ, as he is in them, is enough, and more then enough, to make all wise men abhor their doctrine, and all that love their souls to keep far from them; seeing, by what we have said, it is apparent, what this Christ within every man is, and what is this Light, to which he would have all turning in; to wit, nothing but Pelagian or rather Heathenish darkness, which overturneth the Gospel, and its whole administration; for it is but that which every man's conscience can teach: and what the conscience of an Hannibal, Caesar, Catalin, yea or of the most polished heathen, can teach of that Salvation, Light, Life and Immortality, which is brought to light by the Gospel, who but Quakers can imagine? And though this conscience even of a natural heathen wakened, and armed by God in Justice, would make them tremble, as Quakers do, as he saith; yet this will not prove, that it could inform them of the way of salvation by a crucified Christ, without ever hearing of the same preached; as he ignorantly imagineth. And we deny not, that to be a most sure truth, which Paul saith 2 Cor. 13:5. but see not of what advantage it can be to him. And this is all which we have for probation of the first part of his Position.

CHAP. XII. Of the Salvation of Heathens without hearing the Gospel.

1. THe second part of this Quakers last Assertion, is set down and prosecuted §. 25. Pag. 111. It is this in short, That by the working of this light and feed, some have been saved, and may yet be saved, who never heard▪ or shall hear of Christ, or the Gospel externally preached. And this must be true with this Quaker, though the Apostle faith the contrary, Rom. 10:14. How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe on him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? v. 17. So then, faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. And though he tell us Ephes. 2:12. that the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision—were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the Common wealth of Israel, strangers from the Covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. And 1 Cor. 1:20, 21, 22, 23.— That God mad foolish the wisdom of this world; for after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe: For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Greeks foolishness. And though Peter tell us Act. 4:12 That there is not salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

2. The first Argument, whereby he would prove this, is deduced from some things formerly asserted by him; and is thus set down Pag. 112. They, to whom the Gospel, which is the power of God unto Salvation▪ is made manifest, may be saved, what ever external knowledge they want. But this Gospel is preached in every creature, under whom are comprehended even they, who want the outward knowledge. Therefore, &c. Answ. (1.) This doth not conclude that any such have been, or shall be saved: a may be will not evince a shall be, (2.) The Major in his sense is false, & non-sense, for it is made up of inconsistencies, to wit, that • he Gospel, which is the power of God, can be made manifest; and yet such, to whom it is made manifest, may not hear of it. And the man, it seemeth, was aware of this, and therefore used these sophistical and ambiguous words, quacunque externâ scientiâ careant, whatever outward knowledge they want. (3.) The minor is false, as we cleared above, and vindicated that abused place of Paul, Col 1:23. And the Gospel, whereof he speaketh there, is a Gospel, which was heard, and whereof Paul was a Minister, verse. 23. and was the word of God, which he was commissionated to preach, verse. 25. the mystery, which was formerly hid from ages and generations, verse. 26. and which he preached by warning and teaching verse. 28. And as this could not be without the knowledge of Christ, so it is certain, that Paul did not preach this to every creature, for Chap. 2:1. he speaketh of some, that had not yet seen his face in the flesh See Beza on the place.

3. A main argument he bringeth from Tit. 2:11. for the grace of God, that bringeth salvation, hath appeared unto all men. But that particle, all, doth not always carry an universal sense, as we manifested above Chap. VIII. And until he prove, that it is thus universally to be taken here, he can prove nothing. And whatever he think, who is not, it seemeth, very well acquainted with the laws of dispute, a negation is sufficient to elide a naked affirmation; and he that affirmeth, must prove. Nor regard we his saying, that the interpreting of this particle, as importing genera singulorum, is abusing of the Scripture; or that this universal particle cannot be taken for an indefinite; Seeing there are so many instances thereof in the N. T. as Mat. 4:33. and others formerly cited. And his grounding his opinion upon mistaken and thus misinterpreted words and sentences, is not a founding of it upon express Scripture; but upon abused and perverted Scripture. Let him consider, what Beza (a man better acquainted with the Greek tongue, than he is) saith in his Annot. on 1 Tim. 2:1. where he tells us, that he hath observed almost in every page, that the universal particle is taken for an indefinite, and is used to take away a difference, as Rom. 1:16. it is used to take away the difference, that was betwixt Jew and Gentile: and 1 Cor. 6:12. where it removeth the Jewish distinction of meats. And he tells us moreover, that this manner of speaking is used among the Latins, as well as among the Greeks, as by Cicero in orat. pro Roscio Amerino: Non omnem fr • gem, neque omnem arborem in omni agro reperire possis. And by Virgil. Non o • nis fert omnia tellus. And as for this passage of Paul to Titus, the context cleareth, that the universal is to be here taken for an indefinite: For he was before speaking of Servants; and here he showeth, that the Gospel is revealed unto them, as well as to others, to the end, they should know how to carry themselves, so as to adorn the doctrine of God our Savior, in all things. And if he read that Epistle, he will find the universal particle, oftener than once, taken for an indefinite, as Tit. 1:16. & 2:15. & 3:1, 2. And beside, what will all this make for his point? He must prove, that it was thus, as well under the Law, as now it is under the Gospel; and sure, no such thing can hence be made to appear; for these universal particles, in this matter, do denote the largeness of the extent of the Gospel administration, beyond what was under the Law, as we observed and proved above: And in this same Epistle Chap. 1:3. he saith, That in due times, God manifested his word through preaching, which was committed unto him. Out of which words also we learn, that this Gospel and word is manifested through preaching of men, such as Paul, to the outward ears of people, contrary to what this man imagineth. And so, if this Gospel or Grace of God, hath appeared to every man, without exception, every man, without exception of any, hath outwardly heard the Gospel, preached by men, sent of God to speak with an audible voice: Yet I suppose, this Quaker will blush to say, that every man, all the world over, heareth Gospel preachers, or men sent to preach the Gospel, & hath heard such since the beginning. And if he say not this, and prove it not too, he must quite his Assertion, and laugh at his own rididiculous folly and boldness, or rather weep over it. What he saith Pag. 113. of our taking All for the lesser part, is both false, and Childish pedantry in him; for we say, that it is taken in this matter indefinitely, and so doth neither import a greater nor a lesser number, or part; as when Christ is said to have cured all diseases ; though upon the matter, the number of diseases he cured, being within the confines of Judea, for the most part, was the far lesser part, in comparison of all the diseases, that were through the whole world; yet we say not, that the particle all there denoteth the lesser number, but that it is taken indefinitely. I must also take notice here, that when the Apostle only saith, that the grace of God, that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, that is, was preached, and plainly declared and made manifest in the Gospel administration, he dreameth of a saving grace given to every man, and received by every man: and so what the Apostle speaketh of Outward grace, or of the Outward Dispensation of grace, he understandeth of Inward grace, wrought and rooted in the heart. Finally, neither can he hence prove, that ever any without the Church was or shall be really saved; for, as we said, a possibility, or may be, will not infer a shall be, or must have been. And will he say, that this grace; which teacheth to live soberly, righteously and godly, in this present world, hath appeared to all heathens, who never understood the right way of worshiping of God, in Christ, according to his word? Whatever the light of nature might teach them darkly, concerning Sobriety and Temperance, as to themselves; and concerning Righteousness in their dealings with others; as also concerning the unreasonableness of their Idolatry Act. 14:16, 17. & 1 • .29. R • m. 1 20, 21, 23, 25, 28. Yet it could never acquant them with the Instituted and Prescribed Worship of God, and with true Gospel godliness, or with any essential and necessary part thereof.

4. Another argument, to prove this possibility of salvation to heathens, he bringeth from Rom. 5:18. Therefore, as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life : And he will needs have all men in the last part, to be of as large an extension, as it is in the first part; little considering, that hereby, he shall not only prove a possibility of salvation to all men (which is the thing he intendeth here) but also, that all men are and shall be actually saved; for judgment came upon all the posterity of Adam, not potentially only, but actually: and this Justification of life; is actual and real justification, through the imputed righteousness of Christ, which whoever hath shall really obtain life. But he perverteth the words of the Apostle, to evite this absurdity, when he frameth his argument thus, If all men received by Adam evil leading to damnation; then all men did also receive benefit by Christ, leading to justification ; while as the Apostle saith, that judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; and Beza well showeth, that it is reatus or guilt, or judgment, that is here to be understood, as is clear from verse. 16. for the judgment was by one to condemnation : & the free gift, (which must also here be supplied from verse. 16) came upon all men unto justification of life ; So that it was not anything, having a kind of tendency or manuducency unto Condemnation, or Justification, which yet might fail; but it was that which is necessarily attended with Condemnation in the one, and Justification in the other; or rather was Condemnation and Justification itself, as the Syriac version hath it. But whatever this man imagineth, the sense and meaning of the place is clear, that as all, whom Adam represented, did by his one Offence incur Condemnation; so all, whom the second Adam Christ Jesus did represent, did by his Righteousness obtain Justification; as we cleared above, on another occasion; and therefore need say no more to i • now.

5. He citeth to this same purpose Isaiah. 49▪ 6. Where Christ is said to be given for a Light to the Gentiles: But its impertinency is obvious; for though Christ be given fo • a light to the Gentiles, who under the Gospel dispensation, are not excluded, as they were under the law; yet it will not follow, that all such Gentiles, as never once hear of his name, or have this Gospel declared unto them, may as well be saved, as such who are brought within the Church, and have this light of the Gospel, which bringeth life and immortality with it, shining among them. And further, Christ becometh a light to the Gentiles, by opening the blind eyes, by bringing out the prisoners from the prison, and them that fit in darkness out of the prison house, as the parallel place Isaiah. 42 6.7. cleareth. And all this is done by preaching of the Gospel, as we see in Paul's commission Act. 26:18. And as this same Prophet cleareth Isaiah. 61:1, 2, 3. Where Christ himself (as we see Luk. 4:18.) by preaching good tidings unto the me • k, bindeth up the broken hearted, and proclameth liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound▪ &c.

6. In the next place, he assayeth to prove, that some such have been really saved, and he saith, that to think otherwise is against all charity, and he seeth not how it can be made good. But our charity is not to be blind, but is to be ruled by the word: And he should know, that he is now the affirmer, and should prove what he asserteth. What saith he to Act. 4:12? He answereth. That though outwardly they do not know, yet inwardly feeling his power and virtue, they know inwardly his name really, redeeming them from sin and iniquity, and so may be saved. But how proveth he, that such as are without the Church and Covenant, and hear not of Christ in the Gospel, and have no external knowledge, can have any inward feeling of the power of Christ, as a Savior? And how can he show to us, that this gloss doth agree with, and not manifestly cross, the scope of Peter, in that place? Both these I deny, and in this he goeth further than Vasques, and other Papists, who say that even heathens and such as have no faith in Christ may get of his grace to do things morally good. See Estius also in secund. sent. dist. 41. §. 3. His adding Pag. 114 that salvation is not in a literal knowledge ; is impertinent; for he should prove, that salvation is, where there is no literal knowledge, nor means thereunto. His supposing, that there can be a real inward and experimental knowledge of Christ, where there is no outward or literal knowledge, is but a dream, which we cannot receive without clear proof. His argument is a plain non-sequitur, If (saith he) a distinct & outward knowledge of Christ be necessary to me, before I receive any benefit by him, then, by the rule of contraries, it will follow, that I can incur no damage, unless I have a distinct knowledge of him. For when capt • ves are in prison, and one offereth to redeem them upon such & such conditions, and he thinketh good to make known the conditions to some, and not to others; can any ra • ional man think, that because the ignorance of these conditions is prejudicial to the redemption of some, that therefore these same can be accou • ted no prisoners, until they hear of these conditions? Redemption, which Christ bringeth with him, supposeth persons already lying in bondage, slavery and misery; and is not offered to persons, that are free at liberty. But if the man will here understand that damage, which followeth upon a rejected Mediator, and the woe of Bethsaida above the woe of Tyrus & Sidon ; & the woe of Capernaum above the woe of the men of Sodom, I shall grant his consequence to be good; though it be absurd and ridiculous, in a general sense. His question, asking, why such as never heard of Christ's death & resurrection cannot be saved, as well as such, as never heard of Adam's first sin, can be damned therefore ? Is no proof: And the answer is manifest, because, all were naturally and foederally in Adam : But all are not so in Christ: And it hath pleased the Lord to appoint this way of salvation by faith in Christ, which cannot be without knowledge of Christ, and the Lord hath thought it good to apply the benefits of Christ's death by bringing such, who are to partake thereof, within the bond of the Covenant, within the visible Church, and under the administrations of the Gospel; and so to join to the Church such as should be saved Act. 2:47. Therefore the Lord saith Isaiah 53:11.— by his knowledge (or by knowledge of him) shall my righteous servant justify many. And the predestinated ones are made partakers of the Redemption purchased by Christ, according to the riches of God's grace, wherein he hath abounded towards them, in all wisdom and prudence: having made known unto them the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in himself Ephes. 1:7, 8, 9. And if the will and good pleasure of God, so ordaining maters, for the praise of the glory of his grace, will not satisfy this Quaker, but he will frame a Gospel, out of his own brains, we cannot help it; but must tell him, we will rather believe God, and submit to his wise dispensations, than embrace the delusions of fantastical Quakers, who purpose to overturn the whole Gospel of the grace of God, and destroy souls. His simile, of medicine, curing such as know not whereof it is made, nor by whom, is but a further evidence of his desperate design to destroy the Gospel: for medicine will as well cure such as know nothing of its composition or Author, as such as know both: And thus he would infer, that the Gospel is not more necessary to the Salvation of souls, than the knowledge of the composi • ion and Author of a me • icament is to its working on humors. But alas! the silly man knoweth not the way of the Gospels worki • g on souls, but supposeth it to be in a physical manner, as medicine worketh on the humors of the body, wherein he declareth his intolerable folly and ignorance, beside his desperate design.

7. But he alleidgeth against us, the Instance of Infants and deaf persons ; to very little purpose, seeing, his question is of • dult persons, and of such also as have ears to hear: And as for Infants, we grant no salvation to such, unless they be within the Covenant, and born within the visible Church; not to all such either, that die in infancy, but to those only, who belong to the election of grace: And the same we say of deaf persons. And we except both these from the necessity of outwardly hearing the Gospel: And every exception destroyeth not the Rule, but confirmeth it rather, in all cases not excepted. His saying, that being within the Church and partaking of the Sacraments give no certain title unto Salvation, is impertinent: for we say not that all such as are within the Church, and partake of the Sacraments, shall cer • ainly be saved; but only, that there is no salvation without the Church. We know, that many are members of the Visible Church, who are n • t members of the Invisible Church. But we know likewise, that none are members of the Invinsible Church actually, who are not members also of the visible Church. His question Pag. 115. Why our charity doth not extend to those without the Church, to whom the hearing of the Gospel is impossible, a • well as to such within the Church ? Receiveth a short answer; to wit: Because we have no ground; and Christian charity must be ruled by the word of God, and not by the phancie of a deluded Quaker. He multiplieth his Questions, instead of probations, according to the usual manner of the Quakers ; for he asketh again, Is not one in China and India as excusable, for not knowing that which he never heard, as a deaf man ? To which we answer▪ Yes: But we deny, that the one may be as well saved, as the other; being within the Covenant and Church. Of Salvation, are we here speaking, and not of persons being excusable or inexcusable. We know that to be true; which Paul saith Rom. 2:12. As many as have sinned without Law, shall also perish without Law. And we know, that albeit God will not challenge the Indians, or men of China, who never had any possible opportunity of hearing the Gospel, for ignorance and contempt of the same; yet they may and will perish, being without the saving means of grace; and if he think other ways, let him go preach up the Light within among them, and not labor to blind our eyes, that we ma • not see the sun, with his smoking snuff.

8. He hath another proof from Act. 10:34. But how will he prove, that Cornelius, conversing so much among the Jews, had no knowledge of the Messias, and of salvation through him; though he did not as yet know, that Jesus of Nazareth was the true Messiah? Do we not find, that Peter cleareth up to him, that great question, and tells him, how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power &c. And this Jesus of Nazareth Peter Preached unto him, and told him, that to Him gave all the Prophets witness, that through his name, whosoever believeth in him, shall receive remission of sins, verse. 38—43. And by this instance, Peter was brought to understand, that now, under the Gospel administration, in every nation, he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him: so that the benefit of Christ the Mediator was not now restricted to one Nation, as of old under the Law. Peter had yet too much of that national prejudice, which the Jews had against the Gentiles, sticking in him; and so thought, that all, except the Jews, were always to remain as our casts, and to have no share or interest in the Gospel blessings, and the good things of the Messias; but now he is made to understand the matter aright. Our Quaker may, if he will, read Calvin and Beza both upon the place; and see his Imagination confuted.

9. Next he tells us, that Job was a perfect man, &c. and inquireth, who taught him? How did he understand the fall of Adam? Out of which Scripture did he draw all that excellent knowledge? And then answereth, That it was this inward grace that taught him. But all this is founded upon a very improbable conjecture, to wit, That Job was coaetaneus with Moses, and so was without the Church, which the Lord erected among the • ewes: Whileas it is much more probable, that he lived before the children of Israel were brought out of Egypt ; and that for this one reason, That in all this book, where so much is spoken by Job, and by his friends, of God's power, and faithfulness, there is not one word of God's delivering his people out of the furnace of Egypt; which would not have been omitted, it being so apposite to what is there oftentimes handled, if so be it had been done before this time. His questions then may easily be answered, without that inward common grace, which he dreameth of; to wit, that God taught Job, as he did other holy men before the giving of the Law; and that without Scripture, which was not then written. His supposing thereafter Pag. 116. that Job speaketh of this light Chap. 24:13. is another of his fond imaginations. What he saith next of Job's friends, receiveth the same answer, that we gave to what he said of Job, seeing the ground of the mistake is the same, in both, and requireth no new consideration.

10. Then he tells us, how Paul Rom. 2. saith, that the Gentiles did those things, which are contained in the Law : and hence inferreth, that they feared God and wrought righteousness. Ans. (1.) That the Gentiles were not without all knowledge of what was just and unjust, honest and dishonest, is most certain; for so much was remaining engraven in their hearts, that could not be delete: and this was evidenced by their commanding and forbidding, by their Laws, some things commanded and forbidden by the Law of God, as appeareth by their Laws against Theft, Adultery, Manslaughter, and the like; which yet was not universal. It is in the original only thus, they do by nature the things of the Law ; And as Beza well observeth, this differeth from doing what the Law commandeth, being a doing of what the Law doth, that is commanding or prohibiting what the Law commandeth or prohibiteth: And therefore is it added, these, having not a Law, are a Law unto themselves. (2.) Hence it appeareth, that it will not follow, that they therefore feared God, and wrought righteousness; for the same Apostle tells us, Chap. 1:21. that when they knew God, they glorified him not, as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Is this to fear God, and work righteousness? And though hereby the Apostle evinceth the Gentiles to be without excuse: Yet he tells us, Chap. 3:9. that he hath proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. And will this Quaker contradict the Apostle; and say, it is not true, that the Gentiles are under sin, though the Apostle hath charged it home upon them; for they feared God and wrought righteousness? This were indeed blasphemous boldness, suiteing only a Quaker. But he thinks that verse. 13. confirmeth all; where Paul saith, the doers of the Law are justified. As if Paul were speaking that of the Gentiles, which is spoken of the Jews, who heard the Law, which the Gentiles did not: And as if Paul did hereby insinuate, that any man, Jew or Gentile, could be justified, as a doer of the Law, that is, by his own obedience, which is diametrically opposite to his whole dispute and scope, in this part of the Epistle, and to his conclusion set down Chap. 3:28. Therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law. Vers. 20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law shall no flesh be justified in his sight. What shall we think of this Quaker, who thus maketh the Apostle contradict himself; and inferreth out of the Apostles words perverted, the contrary of what the Apostle himself (who knew the force of his own premises best) concludeth? And what boldness, and blasphemy is comparable to this? And withal he will be yet so bold as to tell us, that nothing is more clear ; and that the Apostle verse. 9, 10.11. doth confirm this doctrine ; yea and Pag. 117. declare moreover, that unless we suppose the Apostle to have spoken other ways, then he thought, we may saifly conclude, that those Gentiles were justified, and partakers of glory, honor and peace; and that by their own works. O what miserable miscreants must these men be, that dar thus expose the Apostle, yea the Spirit of God, speaking in him, and by him, to open laughter, as proving and concluding contradictories, and that by the same medium and premises, which is hardly supposable of a man in his wits, and that knoweth what he saith? His repetitions Pag. 117. I wave, they being formerly confuted: and repititions being jejune probations, need not be again examined. He doubts, whether we can prove, that all the Patriarchs, and holy men before Moses, had any distinct knowledge either of Adams fall, or of the coming of the Messias, (for I see not what else he can understand by his, vel hujus, vel illius, these being the only two things, spoken of by him immediately before; and his following words confirm this.) And if he doubt whether we can prove it, it is no great matter, if he doubt not himself of the thing: And if he do doubt of the thing, Where is his charity to the Patriarchs and Saints? What charity can this be, which is so large to Heathens, and so straitened to the Saints of God? Can this be divine charity? No, it is a Pagans charity, suiting him, who would have us all turn Pagans. But seeing the Scripture tells us, that they all obtained a good report by faith, which is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen, Heb. 11:1, 2. And that they all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, verse. 13. And Christ himself tells us, that Abraham saw his day John. 8:56. what needs us more proof? These and the like passages satisfy us, concerning their knowing as much, as was then requisite, in order to salvation. And that the Gentiles, who never heard of Christ, know so much, is that which he should prove, and doth it not, nor never shall.

11. He tells us, that the Jews, even after David's days, who prophesied more largely of Christ, than did others before, could not out of all these prophecies discern Christ, when he came, Act. 3:17. 1 Cor. 2:8. Yea Mary herself did not know, that her Son was about his Fathers work, when disputing with the Doctors; and the Apostles, that long conversed with him, and saw his miracles, did not believe, what belonged to his death and resurrection. Ans. Is not this a wonderful proof, that the holy Patriarchs had no saving knowledge of, and faith in the Messias, who was to come, because the wicked Jews did crucify him, when he came? Who would not simile at this? But David had many clear prophecies of the Messias, and yet they did not understand these? And what then? Ergo they were saved without the understanding of these prophecies? or therefore, others did not understand them, and savingly believe them? who will receive any of these consequences? But mary herself understood not some things, not yet the Apostles. And what then? did they not understand so much as was then revealed, and necessary to salvation? And did they not understand after Information? Poor man, he goeth far to fetch wa • er, to no purpose. Will anything here said bring the least relief unto his desperate cause: and prove, that Heathens now, without the Church, can be saved without the knowledge of Christ? Quakers can dream waking, I see.

12. But Pag. 118. §. 27. he saith, that several of the Gentiles, by this inward light, were sensible of the damage, that came by Adam's fall. Answ. And what then? were they also sensib • e of the advantage that came by Jesus Christ? and, will all that are sensible of their damage, suffered by Adam's sin, be saved? This is a wide door to salvation indeed; but the Scripture tells us no such thing. His citeing of a • aying of Plato, and another of Pithagoras, and a third of Plotinus, and a fourth of we know not whom, whether truly or not, is uncertain; not doth he name the places, where they say so, that some, who might be so curious, as to know the truth, might try; is to as good purpose, as if he did thresh the water; for whatever apprehensions these Heathens had of the misery of man, (and • et a very small knowledge, and reason, considering what was obvious to all their eyes, might soon have made them say all, that he citeth of them here, viz. that men's soul is fallen into a dark cave, where it converseth with shadows. And that man wandereth in the earth, as a stranger exiled from God : and that man's soul is like an extinct coal : and that the souls wings are clipt, so as it cannot flee to God) He tells us nothing of their apprehensions of a way of Redemption, out of that misery; and the knowledge of this, we say, is necessary unto Salvation. Yes, in the following words he tells us, that they also knew Christ, as a remedy to deliver them, though not under that denomination. Then sure they had not this knowledge by Revelation. For divine Revelation would have given the knowledge of Christ under the right denomination; but by natures light: And if Natures Light will lead people to a crucified Christ, we may burn the bible. But how proveth he this? He tells us, that Seneca Epist. 41. speaks of an holy Spirit, that is in us, that teacheth us, as we receive him. What is in this true or false, • cannot judge at present, not having that book by me: only I must tell him, that the Scriptures speak of no holy ghost in every man: And that the Holy Ghost, and Christ Immanuel, God-man, is not one and the same: and that faith in Christ is required unto salvation. And might no • Seneca mean hereby Reason, which the Scriptures tell us, is now corrupt and carnal and an enemy to the Gospel? Sure, that passage he citeth next of Cicero's, out of Lactan. Too long here to translate and insert, is speaking of nothing, as the words clear, but of Reason, and it is expressly called so, recta ratio, given to every man. Is this the Quakers Gospel-Teacher, Savior, Christ and Redeemer? Why doth he else where seem to cry out against the Socinians ? When here he crieth up so much, with them and with heathens, pure Reason. Is this the Holy Ghost▪ that acts, leads, and guides them, and teacheth them all their divinity? poor souls! Are they so in love with paganism; that for its sake, they will renunce all Christianity?

13. There is a mighty argument following, which must be noticed: it is this. The Heathens call this (Reason, or I know not what) wisdom, and this is the name, that is given to Christ in the Scriptures, Prov. 1:20. & 8, 9, 34. Ergo what? Therefore t • e Heathens knew Christ. Is not this a noble argument, well becoming such, as pretend to rare light and knowledge, and to nothing less, then Revelations and Inspirations? It is no wonder, that they say, Christ is in them, for they are possessors • f wisdom, and Christ is called wisdom. Did he ne • er read, that the wisdom of this world is foolishness, and that the world by wisdom knew not God ? And was this Christ, because he is elsewhere called wisdom? did he never read, that God would destroy the wisdom of the wise ? and is the meaning of this, that God would destroy Christ, because Christ is somewhere called wisdom? What notions of men destracted, or rather judicially given up of God, are these? Hence (saith he further) such among the Gentiles, as left that which was evil, and turned to that, which was good and justice, were called Philosophers, that is, lovers of wisdom. But what if he be mistaken, in the ground or reason of this name given or assumed? And whether he be mistaken, or not, what can he make of it? Belike he would say, They were lovers of Christ, for Christ is called wisdom. Is not this man a noble advocate for Heathens, and worthy of his hire? Are not these all very strong arguments, to prove that Heathens knew Christ, though not under that notion; and therefore may be saved? But Phocilides (who knoweth where?) said, (saith he) that that was best wisdom, which was had by inspiration of God. And could not blind nature have told him so much▪ Was this such an excellent piece of knowledge, that it may truly be called saving? And was this the knowledge of Christ, under some other denomination? Could not the devil say as much? And may he therefore also be saved? What were this man's thoughts busied about, when he wrote these things? was he dreaming; Or in a rapture of Quakerisme ▪ or sunk into his introversion, where he lost all human Reason?

13. Then Pag. 119. he saith he could produce many such. But to what purpose? To prove, saith he, that they knew Christ by his work working in them, by which they were turned fr • m unrighteousness to righteousness, and made lovers of his power, and whereby they felt themselves delivered from evil. If this be the conclusion, that he would pro • e, why hath he not brought one testimony to this end? what he hath hithertill adduced, agreeth as well with this conclusion, as harp doth with harrow. But the Ap • stle he addeth saith, they did show the work of the law written in their hearts: and therefore as all were doers of the law; so without doubt, they were justified. We spoke to this before; and this man is tedious in his repetitions, for want of arguments? only I note, that I see now, he concludeth that all the Heathens were saved: for they were all ( • ith him) doers of the law; and that because, they had all the work of the law written in their hearts; and so were all justified. Happy Heathens, if so. and if so, it were better to be Heathens, than Christians; for all Christians are not justified and saved, though they have the same Law written in their hearts, which the Heathens had, and something more revealed to them in the Gospel. What he citeth in the words following out of Justin. Martyr, Clem. Alexand. and Augustine. I am not in case at present to consider: only I see not, what Augustine's saying he read in some Platonics books some words of John. 1. can evince; seeing there were many Platonics in those days, who were not utter strangers to what the Evangelists wrote, and they could transcribe words and sentences, according to their own fancy: And what can follow from hence? Supposeth he, that th • Platonics spoke by the light within them, what the Evangelists spoke as acted by the Infallible Spirit of God? Or that it was the same Spirit acting both? Quakers, I see, are great supposers, but ill provers. And as Bernard said of some, who laboring to prove Plato to be a Christian, they proved themselves to be heathens; so we may say of this Quaker. I find also that Casaubon, Exercit. • . in Baron, citeth out of that same lib. • 8. c. 47. August. de civit. Dei, out of which our Quaker here citeth some words, as for h • m, a sen • enc • of a far contrary import, • hewing us, that in no age, any did belong to the spiritual Jerusalem, but such, to whom Christ was revealed : And t • e said Casaub • n addeth a good caveat as to other Fathers▪ speaking of this mater, which our Quaker would do well to notice. And as for his Arabic book (which who have ever seen, I know not) it is no Canonic Scripture to me. And when this Iokdan (of whom that book speaketh) lived, or where he was borne and educated, he telleth us not; and till he clear us in this, he saith nothing; for a man, trained up in Christianity in his infancy, may by providence be cast in some Island, and so be separated from all company, and enjoy God's company, and be no heathen, but a Christian still: I think this is not impossible.

15. In fine §. 28. Pag. 120. resuming what he thinks (through a mistake) he hath sufficiently pro • ed, he tells us, that this is the Gospel, and the Christ, which is revealed in them, and which they must preach. Whereby we have a further proof, that the Quakers Gospel is pure Paganism ; Yet he must cite some words of Augustine Conf. lib. 11. Chap. 9. in favors of this light, which he pleadeth for: the impertinency of which is discovered by the bare reading of them. And he must also cite some words of Buchanan de jure Regni apud Sc • tos, where speaking of that, whereby we difference betwixt that which is honest and that which is dishonest, he calleth it a divine thing. And no wise man will call it a diabolical thing. Doth Buchanan call this, Christ, and the Gospel? He was a better Christian than so. And hence also, we have further confirmation, that the Quakers Gospel is the pure light of Nature; and so the Quakers are nothing but Pagan-preachers, leading poor silly souls from the Gospel, away to Paganism, & to the blind light of Nature, that is among Pagans. Let wise men heed these things, and beware of these men, called Quakers ; for this their advocate hath sufficiently discovered to us, what they are. What he addeth, asserting that their ministry is the same with the Apostles Act. 26:18. and that the righteous one, of whom James speaketh Chap. 5, 6. is in every man, is but a wicked perverting of the Tru • h, and a profane abusing of the Scriptures, to countenance their diabolical positions, and Antievangelick assertions; for which, if they repent not▪ the Lord will judge them.

CHAP. XIII. Of Justification.

1. WE come now to that, which hath been by Heretics principally called into question, being one of the chief articles of Christian Religion, The doctrine of Justification of a sinner before God: which by some hath been accounted, and that deservedly, one of the greatest questions, whereby divine Theology is distinguished from human philosophy; the Gospel from the Law; the Church of Christ from Jews, Turks and Pagans; and the truly Reformed from Papists Yea Bellarmine with Pighius confess, that upon this hinge, turn all the controver • ies, which are agitated betwixt us and them. Gerhard, the Lutheran, saith, that this is a Castle and chief strength of our whole • doctrine & Religion, that if his truth be darkened, adulterated, or overturned, it is impossible, that other heads of doctrine can be keeped pure. And Luther himself said, that this Article of justification is diligently to be taught and learned; for if it be lost, we can resist no heresy, no false doctrine, how ridiculous so ever and vain: whence it cometh to pass, that all, that hold not this article, are either Jews, or Turks, or Papists, or Heretics. And again, if it fall and perish, all the knowledge of truth falleth too, and perisheth: but if it flourish, all good things flourish with it. Religion, True worship, and the Glory of God. The Church of Bohemia, in their Confession, tells us, that this head of doctrine is accounted by them, for one of the chiefest and most weighty, as being that, in which the sum of the Gospel is placed, and in which Christianity is founded▪ the precious and most noble treasure of salvation, and the only and lively consolation of Christians is contained. The matter being thus, we have great cause to contend earnestly for the faith, in this point, once delivered to the Saints; And to examine narrowly what this Quaker delivereth, as the sentiment of all the Quakers, upon this head of doctrine, which he delivereth in short, in his Seventh Thesis, and more largely in his Vindication thereof, in his Apology.

2. What that is, in this matter, which the Orthodox maintain; may be seen in their Confessions, and disputs against Papists and Others, and particularly, with great plainness, and succinctness in our Confession of Faith, first agreed upon at Westminster, and thereafter approven by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland Chap. XI. §. 1. in these words [ Those whom God effectually calleth, he also freely justifieth (Rom. 8:30. & 3:24.) not, by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous: not for anything wrought in them, or done by them; but for Christ's sake alone: not, by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, nor any other Evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them (Rom. 4:5, 6, 7, 8. 2 Cor. 5: verse. 19, 21. Rom. 3:22, 24, 25, 27, 28. Tit. 3:5, 7. Ephes. 1:7. Ier. 23:6. 1 Cor. 1: v. 30, 31. Rom. 5:17, 18, 19.) they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by Faith: whic • faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God (Act. 10:44. Gal. 1:16. Phil. 3 9. Act. 13: • 8, 39. Ephes. 2: • , 8.) Read and ponder what followeth in that Chapter. So in the greater Catechism Q. 70. What is justification? Answ. Justification is an act of God's free grace unto sinners (Rom. 3:23, 24, 25 and • :5.) in which he pardoneth all their sins, accepteth and accounteth their persons righteous in his sight (2 Cor. 5:19, 21. Rom. 3▪ 22, 24, 25, 27, 28.) not for anything wrought in them or done by them (Tit. 3.5. Ephes. 1:7.) but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them (Rom. 5:17, 18, 19. & 4: verse. 6, 7.8.) and received by faith alone (Act. 10 53. Gal. 2:16. Phil. • 7.) Add to this Q. 72. What is justifying faith ? A. justifying faith is a saving grace (Heb. 10:39.) wrought in the heart of a sinner by the Spirit (2 Cor. 4:13▪ Ephes. 1▪ 17, 18, 19.) and the word of God (Rom. 10: • 4.17.) whereby he, being convinced of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself, and all other creatures, to recover him out of his lost condition (Act. 2: • 7. and 16:30. John. 16:8, 9. Rom. 5:6 Ephes. 2:1. Act. 4:12.) not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the Gospel (Ephes. 1:13.) but receiveth and resteth upon Christ, and his righteousness therein held forth, for pardon of sin (I • h 1:12. Act. 16:31. & 10:53.) and for the accepting and accounting of his person righteous in the sight of God for Salvation (Phil. 3:9. Act. 15:11:) And Q. 73. How doth faith Iustifie a sinner in the sight of God ? Answ. Faith justifieth a sinner in the sight of God, not because of these other graces, which do always accompany it, or of good works that are the fruits of it (Gal. 3:11. Rom. 3:28.) Nor as if the grace of faith, or any act thereof, were imputed to him for his justification (Rom. 4▪ 5. with Rom. • 0:10.) but only as it is an instrument, by which he receiveth and applieth Christ & his righteousness (John. 1:1 • . Phil. 3:19. Gal 2:16.) With all we will be h • lped to understand the orthodox truth in this matter, by considering two other questions to wit Q 75. What is Sanctification? A. Sanctification is a work of God's grace, whereby they, whom God hath before the foundation of the world chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit (Heb. 1:4. 1 Cor. 6.11. 2 Thes. 1:13.) applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them (Rom. 6:4, 5.6.) renewed in their whole man after the image of God (Ephes. 4:23, 24.) having the seeds of repentance unto life, and of all other saving graces put into their hearts (Act. 11:18. 1 John. 3:9) and those graces so stirred up, increased and strengthened (Iud. verse. 20. Heb. 6:11, 12. Ephes. 3:16 17, 18, 19. Col. 1:10, 11.) as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life (Rom 6: to 14. Gal. 5▪ 24, with Q. 77. Wherein do Justification and Sanctification differ? Answer Although Sanctification be inseparably joined with Justification (1 Cor. 6:11. and 1:30.) Yet they differ, in that God in Justification imputeth the righteousness of Christ (Rom. 4:6, 8.) in Sanctification his Spirit infuseth grace▪ and enableth to the exercise thereof (Ezech. 36:27.) In the former, sin is pardoned (Rom. 3:23, 25.) in the other it is subdued (Rom. 6:6, 14. the one doth equally free all believers from the revenging wrath of God, and that perfectly in this life, that they never fall into condemnation (Rom. 8:33, 34.) the other is neither equal in all (1 John. 2: v. 12, 13, 14. Heb. 5:12, 13, 14.) Nor in this life perfect in any (1 John. 1:8, 10.) but groweth up to perfection (2 Cor. 7:1. Phil. 3:12, 13, 14.] • hus we have the orthodox doctrine, in this point, fully cleared, and confirmed.

3. Let us next see, wh • t is the opinion of the Q • akers, in this matter: And before we examine particularly, what this Man, with whom we deal, saith, we shall shortly see what other Quakers have maintained before. Mr Clapham in his book against the Quakers Sect. 5. tells us, that I. Nayler, in his Love to the lost P. 3. joineth with the Papists, and pleads for our being made righteous, by God's putting in righteousness in us, and by righteousness wrought in the creature. And P. 50. with Papists, he confounds Justification, Sanctification and Mortification; and argueth for it, as they do. So Mr Stalham, in his book against them Part. 1 Sect. 22. showeth out of their own words, what friends they are unto the man of sin, by laying the bottom of a believers justification, not upon Christ's obedience, but upon sanctification. And Sect. 25. he tells us, that I. Nailer said, that the man of sin is discovered in them, who say, believers are pure and spoteless too, by reason of imputation: and in his Love to the lost p. 51. that men are so justified, as they are sanctified and mortified, and no further. And that F. Howgil, in The inheritance of Jacob Pag. 29. hath these words Christ fulfilled the Law, and he fulfils it in them, who know him and his work, and herein man becomes to be justified in God's sight by Christ, who works all our works in us and for us. Mr Hicks in his 2 Dialogue Pag. 4. tells us, that Isaac Pennington asks this question, Can outward blood cleanse ? And saith, Therefore, we must inquire, whether it was the blood of the veil, that is, of the human nature, or the blood within the veil viz. of that spiritual man, consisting of flesh, blood and bones, which took on him the veil; or human nature? It is not the blood of the veil, that is but outward; and can outward blood cleanse ? And that Edward Billing most wickedly said, that the mystery of iniquity lies in the blood of Christ. And that these words frequently drop from their mouths, dost thou look at Christ's death afar off? What will that blood avail? Didst ever see any of it? That carnal blood cleanse? If thou hadst a great deal of it, would it do thee any good ? If such, as speak thus of the precious blood of Christ, can have right thoughts of Justification, the sober may easily judge. And what intimation Edward Burroughs giveth about this, may be seen there P. 18,—22, &c. I love not to transcribe the words, only that which he hath Pag. 26. seemeth to be plain. Thou beast—who would have another righteousness, than that which Christ works in the saints and by them. He tells us likewise ib. Pag. 31. that Will. Pen Sandy foundation Pag. 29.30. hath these words, Obedience to justification ought to be as personally extensive, as was man's disobedience to condemnation: In which real (not imputative) sense, those various terms of Sanctification, Righteousness, Resurrection, Life, Redemption, Justification, &c. are most infallibly understood; for impute, or imputing signifies no more in Scriptures, but to express men really and personally to be that which is imputed to them, whether as guilty or remitted: For any to be justified from the imputation of another's righteousness, is both ridiculous and dangerous, whence came that usual saying amongst many professors of Religion, That God looks not upon them, as they are in themselves, but as they are in Christ. And Pag. 25 (See Mr Hicks Pag. 51. &c.) Justification 〈◊〉 not from the imputation of another's Righteousness, but from the actual performing and keeping of God's righteous statutes, and Pag. 25, 30. It is a great abomination to say, God should condemn and punish his innocent Son, that he having satisfi • d for our • inns, we might be justified by the imputation of his perfect Righteousness. And again, I caution and warn men by no means to entertain this principle (of Christ's dying to make satisfaction to divine Justice) by whomsoever recommended. And again Pag. 26. He (i. e. Christ) fulfilled the Law, only as our pattern or example. And ib. Christ is so far from telling us of such a way of being justified, as that he informs us, the reason, why he abode in his Fathers love, was his obedience: he is so far from telling us of being justified by virtue of his obedience imputed, that unless we keep the commands, and obey for ourselves &c. And P. 30. was not Abraham justified by • orks? we must not conceive as the dark imputation of this age, that Abraham's personal offering was not a justifying righteousness ? Ib. p. 30. I do say, Abraham had not the imputation of another's righteousness to him, his personal obedience was the ground of that just imputation. And elsewhere Apol. p. 148. justification by the righteousness, which Christ fulfilled for us, in his own person, wholly without us, we boldly affirm to be a doctrine of Devils, and an arm of the sea of corruption, which doth now deluge the world.

This is su • ficiently plain. And Sand. found. Pag. 30.31. I farther tell thee, that Justification by an imputed righteousness, is both irrational, irreligious, ridiculous and dangero • s: and Pag. 27.29.30. Justification goes not before, but is consequential to the mortifying of lusts, and the sanctification of the soul. More might be added, but here is, I suppose, enough to discover, how these Quakers homologate, in the point of Justification, with Papists, Socinians, and Arminians, in denying the imputation of Christ's Righteousness in Justification, and substituting another ground, or formal reason thereof, even works done by us. And how dangerous an error this is, undermineing the very cardinal point of Christianity, every true Christian may know. The Quakers in this are one with their Predecessors, the old Anabaptists too.

4. We come now to our Quaker, and must see, how he expresseth himself in this matter: In his Thesis he saith, who receive the illumination of this light (that is, as we evinced above, the dim light of nature) it (that must be the Light or the Natural Conscience) becometh in them a holy pure and spiritual birth, produceing piety, righteousness, purity and other excellent fruits, most acceptable to God. This, sure, is a wonderful metamorphosis. But how cometh it, that this light is so much beholden to man, in whom it is, that if he do not resist it, but receive its illumination religiously, it will become a glorious and mighty powerful thing; but if he do resist it, and receive not its illumination, it remaineth what it was? Is this the Christian New birth, and Regeneration, whereof the Scripture speaketh? Is this to be borne of the Spirit? There is no infusion of any gracious principle or habit of grace and virtue here; for the seed of all was in the man from his mothers womb, and his kind nature, in receiving the illumination of this connatural light, blew the coal, and it became a burning fire, warming the soul into all Christian virtues. Is this Gospel doctrine? or rather is it not Pelagian-quakerisme▪ What followeth upon this? By this holy birth (saith he) to wit, Christ Jesus formed within (a goodly title; but it is but the Quakers Jesus; that is, blake Nature, or the product of Corrupt nature,) produceing his works in us, (these, sure, are nothing but works of darkness) as we are sanctified, so are we justified in the sight of God. Then Justification, and Sanctification, • tand upon one and the same ground; and if there be any difference betwixt them, Justification must follow Sanctification. Thus it is manifest, how he homologateth with other Quakers, and how they all agree with Papists, in the doctrine of Justification. He addeth (and one may wonder at the man's confidence and boldness) according to the Apostles words, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. But if either his sanctification or Justification, as now explained to us, be either in the name of the Lord Jesus, or by the Spirit of God, I am far deceived: Nay, it is manifest, that they are rather by the Power and Authority, Virtue and Efficacy of Free will, and the Natural Spirit of man, receiving kindly the Illumination of that natural Light, in every man, and so transforming that natural thing to produce such works, as by which the man is both Sanctified and justified. Though this be the native sense and import of his words; yet mark his effrontedness. Therefore (says he) it is not done by our works, produced by our will, nor yet by good works, considered by themselves. What a shameless man is this, to deny these works to be man's own works, which flow from a principle, borne and brought into the world with him; and not only so, but actuated, and transformed into a new pure and spiritual spring, by the sole will of the man, not resisting its light, but receiving the same. If these be not properly the man's own works, it is a great question, if man have any works, that can be called his own. But let it be so, that they go under the name of works done by a new infused principle (and yet the Quakers are more Pelagian, then the Jesuits, and all the Papists ; for these acknowledge infused habits, which Quakers know nothing of) yet they may be called man's works, and works produced by man's will; to wit, now regenerated and principled of new; otherwise they are produced in man, and man's will hath no elicit or imperat acts thereanent, This is indeed Phanaticisme in folio. But how can men be Sanctified, or Justified (according to the Quakers, ) by that which is none of theirs, nor wrought by them? Again, he must know, that the Scripture excludeth all these holy works, even produced by that new principle, from being the ground or formal reason, or ratio formalis objectiva, of our Justification; as all our Divines show, writing against the Papists, on this head: And in this he giveth further evidence of his conspireing with Papists against the truth. Finally, I wish he had explained that to us, nor by good works considered in themselves, for it importeth, that good works considered some other way, possibly in conjunction with some other thing (and what that is, I know not,) are the ground of our Justification: But seeing Justification and Sanctification, stand upon the same ground, with him, he must also say, that we are not Sanctified by good works considered by themselves: and if good works, or works of Sanctification and holiness, considered as such, will not ground the denomination of Sanctification, I would fain know what will?

5. But if they neither be Sanctified, nor Justified by these good works, by what are they Sanctified, or Justified? It is by Christ (saith he) who is the gift, and the giver, and the cause produceing the effects in us. But this Christ is nothing else but a Creature, produced in man, by man's industry and goodwill, not stubbornly resisting, but piously receiving the illumination of the light; and that out of this light, which is in every Son of Adam ; for he told us, that this Light, when thus religiously entertained, becometh a holy, pure and spiritual birth; and this is the Christ formed in us, who is the gift and the giver, and producer of all the fruits of holiness, which are acceptable unto God: Are we not then Justified by our works, when Justified by this Christ, or Principle produceing these works in us; especially seeing this Christ, is a Christ formed within; and not that Christ, who laid down his life a ransom for sinners, and offered up himself a sacrifice to divine justice, to satisfy justice and the Law, by his Obedience and Death, for the Redemption of his people? We heard lately, that this Christ, and his Blood, is far off, in their account, and cannot cleanse, or do us any good. But further I think, that, even in this, Quakers are far worse then Papists ; for when Papists will have us Justified by works, they speak of works wrought in the soul by the Spirit, real works of grace, flowing from an inward principle of grace; but our Quakers, though they give goodly words, yet really their works, by which they are Sanctified and Justified, are but works wrought (at best) by the Power of Nature: For that Light within every man, (as was shown above) is but pure Nature, and whatever is borne of or proceedeth from this seed, is but Nature; for that which is borne of the flesh, it flesh, John. 3:6. And from nothing that is in man by nature, or in all men, can that which is heavenly and spiritual spring: unless we turn Pelagians, this is to be held. And that Light within them, if its eyes were not blinded with prejudice, though it be not sanctified, nor of the Spirit, might even cau • e them understand so much. And when all the Efficient cause, that we hear of from him, produceing this pure and spiritual birth, or educeing it out of its matter, or causing its change, and being some other thing than it was, is only man, and man doing nothing but receiving the illumination of this light; can we suppose, this to be anything else, than a pure product of nature, which Heathens and Pagans, Turks and Tartars, who never heard one word of Christ, may be partakers of? And can this Sanctification and Justification, be that mentioned in the Scriptures, when it is common to infidels, who are without God and without Christ, in the world, if they will but obey the light of nature? Is this which he talketh of, to be borne of God? No certainly, but rather it is to be borne of blood, or of the will of the flesh, or of the will of man; but so are not any borne, that receive Christ, and believe in his name, John. 1:12, 13. One thing more, Seeing this Light, which the Quakers say, is in every man, is in Devils, and that in a greater measure, than in man; may it not also be said of them, that if they will receive this light, and not resist it, it shall become an holy, pure and spiritual Birth, and Christ formed within? And shall not they likewise, upon this account, be capable of this Sanctification and Justification? (I must still put Sanctification first, that I may speak according to the Quakers Language:) and shall we have no other Sanctification and Justification. preached to us by Quakers, than what Devils are capable of, and have the real feed of already? O poor deluded wreatches? Is this the top of all their endeavors, and the upshot of all their hopes? Sall we get nothing, at most, but a Paganish Justification and Sanctification?

6. He closeth his Thesis thus, who (i. e. Christ) when he reconciled us, while enemies, according to his wisdom, doth save and justify us this way, as the Apostle saith else where, He hath according to his mercy saved us, by he lawer of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost Ans. But what way did he reconcile us, while enemies? was it by his blood, and by his cross? Ephes. 2:16. Or by the blood of his cross; or in the body of his flesh, through death? Col. 1:20, 22. Or was it by his death? Rom. 5:10. If so, then sure, he died for the ungodly Rom, 5:6. And for sinners verse. 8. that they might be reconciled to God by his death verse. 10. And then the grace of God, and the gift by grace must abound unto them, verse. 15. and that unto justification verse. 16, 18. Then, sure, Christ died in their room and place, as their Cautioner, and Surety; and as their Surety made satisfaction to justice, that they should be redeemed and delivered from Law, Justice and Wrath; for what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh, That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, Rom. 8:3, 4. And if so, as the Scriptures do richly witness; then that mediatory Righteousness of Christ the Redeemer, and Cautioner, must legally be made over unto them, to the end that they may be legally acquit, and freed from the Accusation and Condemnation of the Law: And by virtue of that Righteousness of Christ the Cautioner, imputed unto them by God, they, as clothed therewith by faith, and appearing therein, must be Justified before God, and not by anything wrought in them, at what hand so ever: And thus all that he hath said, in his Th • sis, is overturned. (2.) It is true, that the Lord in wisdom hath ordered things aright, and appointed the way, how we should be partaker of the benefits, which he hath purchased, and particularly of Justification and Sanctification: But that the wisdom of God hath appointed, that we should be Justified, by anything done by us, whether from a principle of Nature or of Grace, wrought in us even by the Spirit of God, as the formal objective reason, or that, upon the account of which, we can be accounted Righteous, and Absolved from Accusation, and have our inquities pardoned, is not revealed to us in all his word; but the contrary rather, as hath been seen. (3.) Nor doth these words of Paul to Titus Chap. 3:5, 6. any way confirm his fancy; but rather establish the contrary truth: to wit, that all the favors, which God conferreth upon us, in order to salvation, are of free grace, and not by works of righteousness (or works, which are done in righteousness, and righteously, as the words in the original bear) which we have done: Grace and Mercy here are set in opposition to all our works, yea to our best works; and therefore, if Justification be an act of God's grace, (as the Scripture saith it is) it is not, nor can it be, because, or upon the account of our works of righteousness. And if in and through or by Justification, there is pardon of iniquity, as there is Rom. 4:5, 6, 7. And if pardon of iniquity be a merciful and gracious act in God, being an act of his free grace and mercy Ephes. 1: verse. 7, 8. it is manifest, that Justification is not upon th • account of our works. Ther • fore, we are said to be Justified freely by his grace, through the redemption, that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 3:24. Moreover, the judgment of God is always, (as in condemning of sinners, so in justifying of believers) according to truth Rom. 2:2. And in the matter of justifying of the ungodly, the righteousness of God is declared ; and it is all so contrived, that he might be just, and the justifier of him, which believeth in Jesus Rom. 3:25, 26. Therefore cannot Justification pass upon the account of anything framed, and done in us, or by us; because, that is not, nor can it be, that which will pass for a Righteousness, in the eyes of God, and a Righteousness answerable to the Law, in all points; it being, when it is at its best, but imperfect; nor can it have any merit or deserving in it, to compensat for former transgressions, being always that only, which we are obliged unto; so that when we have done all, we must say, that we are but unprofitable servants, Luk. 17: verse. 10. we have done but what was our duty to do.

7. Having thus briefly dispatched his Thesis, wherein we see his opposition to Justification by, and upon the account of, the Righteousness of Christ imputed, and therein his harmony and agreement with Papists, Socinians and Arminians : we come now to consider what he says, more largely, in his Apology Pag. 122. &c. In the beginning, he tells us that the handling of this doth well follow his treating of universal Redemption, and universal grace: And I shall not quarrel with his Method, were his doctrine orthodox; but seeing few, who plead for the universality of the death of Christ, and who contend for the universality of grace, are found sound and orthodox, in the point of Justification, we migh • • pon this ground, though we had gote no taste of his judgment in the Thesis, suspect his doctrine of Justification. But after trial, we will be better able to judge. He saith truly, that there are many controversies moved already about this point; and the more blame worthy is he, who doth not diminish, but increase these rather, as to some things; though in the principal, he liketh the Popish way better than ours. He promiseth first to state the controversy, so far as concerneth them, and to explain their judgment; and then, he saith, he will confirm it by Scripture testimony, and the certain experience of all that are really justified: we must see how he performeth what is promised.

8. What he saith §. 2. of the Papists depraving of this truth, we hear; but are ready to suppose, that howbeit he do not with them stand up for the merit ( ex condigno, as it is called; and yet many Papists reject this, and are satisfied with meritum ex congruo, in the mater of Justification; and some reject both, as may be seen in Stapleton Prol. ad lib. 5. de justify. ) of good works; nor approve of the vulgar Papists, placeing their Justification, in things that are neither good nor evil, or in things, that are rather evil as good, (as he thinketh to be evident from their doctrine of the Sacraments, and Indulgences, &c.) but commend our Reformers, for opposeing these Abominations: Yet as to the main controversy, handled betwixt our Reformers, and the Papists, viz. what is Justification : and what is the formal reason Objective; or the formal cause (as some speak;) or Material cause (as others speak;) or that, because and upon the account of which, men are Justified, in the sight of God; this Quaker joineth with the Papists. The Council of Trent. Sess. 6. Chap. 7. tells us, That Justification is not only remission of sins, but also Sanctification and renovation of the inner man, by a voluntary susception of grace and gifts; whereby man of unjust becometh just, of an enemy becometh a friend, that he may be an heir, according to the hope of eternal life. Why doth our Quaker embrance this, upon the matter, and give a worse Justification; even a Justification, wherein there is no mention made of remission of sins? Why doth he, with this Synagogue of Satan, confound Justifi • ation and Sanctification? He knoweth, how Bellarmine de Iustif. lib. 2. Cap. 2. briefly stateth the question, betwixt us and them, in these words. Whether the formal cause of absolute Justification, be a righteousness inherent in us, or not ? If this Quaker be no Papist, why doth he conspire with them, in this cardinal point of difference? Why doth he and the rest rise up so much against the Imputed righteousness, as do the Papist, following the Council of Trent, as we see Pag. 125. he doth, showing his teeth against our Confession of faith ? And there also, I cannot but take notice of a base falsehood, and deceit, when he would make his Readers believe, that the Papists do not place Justification in any real inward renovation of soul, more then the Protestants; while as we have seen the contrary out of the Council of Trent. and Bellarm. and multitudes moe might be cited. But what needs more, when we have the words of that Council, which all Papists must stand to: and in that forecited Chapt. the same Council saith; The only formal cause is the righteousness of God, not that, by which he himself is righteous; but whereby he maketh us righteous, to wit, by which, we are renewed in the Spirit of our mind; and are not only repute, but truly are called, and are righteous or just. It is true, that they say, that this grace and charity, that is infused in Justification, is through the merit of the most holy suffering of Christ: And in this they are more orthodox, and less Socinian, than are the Quakers ; to this Mans shame be it spoken: Yet still they make Justification to consist in the Infusion of grace, and Renovation of the soul.

9. He beginneth his explication of their judgment Pag. 126. §. 3. And telleth us first. That as it appeareth from the explication of the former thesis, they renunce all natural power in themselves, for delivering of themselves out of their lost condition. And in our examination thereof, in its several parts, we have manifested the contrary: And whether this be not a palpable untruth, the Reader is free to judge. He faith moreover. That they deny remission of sins, or justification to be had by any work of theirs ; &c. And what is this to the point, seeing they say, that we are justified by an Inherent Righteousness, and not by Righteousness Imputed?

10. He giveth us, in the next place, good words about the satisfaction of Christ: which if he would stand to, and not deceive us with Socinian glosses, and metaphorical senses he should withal overturn his own doctrine about justification; as we did show lately §. 6. In the third place, he sai • h several things, that are not true, as first. That all men, that have come to man's age, (except Christ) have sinned, insinuating, that none else have sinned, nor are capable to sin, until they come to Mans age: and so denieth original sin, and denieth that the wicked actions of young children, and young girls, who are not yet come to be men and women, are sins. Then says he, Therefore all have need of a Savior, to take away God's wrath, due for sins. Have none need of a Savior, but these only, who are come to man's age, qui aetatem virilem adepti sunt ? Doth the Scripture make any such restriction? Where is then his universal Redemption, that he pleaded For? He addeth, In this respect therefore, he is truly said to have born the sins of all, in his own body, on the tree. In what respect is this? Is it in respect, that all have sinned? but what sense is there here; or truth either? did he bear the sins of none, but of such as are come to man's age? what becometh then of infants, boys and girls? and if he bear all their sins, they must, upon that account, be freed from the guilt of sin, and justified; and so we shall have an universal justification, as well as Redemption; and this is confirmed indeed, by the following words; to wit, therefore he is the sole mediator, removing the wrath of God, that our bypast sins may not meet us, seeing the • are pardoned by virtue of his sacrifice. For this he understandeth of all, for whom Christ died. But he tells us afterward, that remission is no other way to be expressed. And I would ask, whether there be any remission in or by justification? and if so, why are we not justified upon the account of the Righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and received by faith? Then followeth a word, which undoeth all (not to mention his parenthesis, were he saith, some may partake of this remission, who have no knowledge of the history of Christ, sufficiently above spoken unto) Christ (saith he) hath by his death and passion reconciled us while enemies, unto God, that is to say, he offereth unto us reconciliation, and maketh us capable thereof. If this be all, it is but the Arminian Reconciliation, he hath been speaking of; yea and nothing but what a Socinian may say. Sure the Apostle speaketh other ways of this Reconciliation; as of that, which certainly is attended with Justification, & with such a Justification, as hath life following, saying Rom. 5:8, 9, 10. But God commendeth his love towards us, that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us: much more then being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him, for if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God, by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by • is life. The reconciliation then, which was had, by the death of Christ, the Son of God, was not a mere offer of reconciliation, nor a mere capability for it; But that which was a certain forerunner of salvation, and that which Salvation must necessarily, with a much more, follow. He citeth 2 Corinth. Chap. 5: verse. 19, 20. and tells us, that the Apostle insinuateth, that seeing the wrath of God is removed by Christ's obedience, the Lord is ready to be reconciled with them, and pardon their sins, if they repent. Which is a manifest perversion of the scope and meaning of the Apostle, who is there showing, how the Reconciliation of sinners unto God is brought about, both upon God's part, and upon man's part; not of all the world, but of the Elect scattered over the face of the earth, and from the beginning of the world, & how they were brought into peace with God, through Jesus; & so it is a limited world, as appeareth by the us used ver. 18. And again more fully ver. 21. for he hath made him sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. And therefore it is onl • that world, he understandeth here, for whom Christ was made sin, having their sins imputed to him, as their cautioner and sponsor; & who by virtue hereof are clothed in due time, with his righteousness, imputed unto them, and so are made the righteousness of God, in him. Now all this was not a mere may be, or a mere possible or potential thing, but such as was attended with a non-imputation of trespasses: nor doth it import only a readiness in God to be reconciled with all, upon conditions; as if there were none in particular, whose sins the Lord did bear, and for whom he offered up himself a satisfactory sacrifice to the justice of God, purchasing unto them faith to be granted in due time, whereby they should come • o be actually reconciled unto, and brought in favor with God, when through his grace they should yield unto the beseachings of Christ's messengers, to whom the Word, Ministry, or Administration of this Reconciliation is committed, as to Ambassadors for Christ, sent forth to beseach in Christ's stead. By all which the Apostle is clearing, how all things are of God, and particularly all the new things which the new creature, the man in Christ, is made partaker of verse. 17, 18. And moreover we see, verse 14, 15. that these all, for whom Christ died, are one time or other, made alive unto God, through grace communicated to them from their Head, Christ, As it followeth. And that he died for all, that they which live, should not hence forth live unto themselves, but unto him, which died for them, and rose again. And who will say, that it shall, at any time, be said, with truth, of all the world, that they are thus alive?

11. He tells us next of a double Redemption, both which he says are perfect in their own nature, and as to us cannot be separated ; Then all, certainly, must be redeemed the one way, who are redeemed the other way. What is the first? That (says he Pag. 127.) made by Christ, in his crucified body without us—and by this, Man, as he standeth in the fall, is put in a capacity of salvation, and hath transmitted into him, a certain measure of power, of grace, and of the virtue of the Spirit of life, which is in Christ, which is able to overcome and eradicat the evil seed Ans. 1. The Redemption made by Christ on the cross, and by his obedience and sufferings, we cheerfully acknowledge; But that it was a Redemption made for all • , we abundantly disproved above Chap. VIII. (2.) That there was any such Power, Grace, or Virtue of the Spirit of life purchased hereby, and granted to all, is false, and abundantly above disproved likewise. See Chap. X. (3.) To imagine, that every son of Adam hath power granted to him to subdue, and root out natural corruption, is but pure Pelagianism, Arminianism, & Iesuitisme ; but not the truth, revealed to us in the word of God; & is to wedge war against th • pure grace of God, and the free operations thereof; & to set the crown of salvation, upon the head of the creature: all which we made manifest above, at several occasions.

12. What is the Second Redemption, that is inseparable from the other? It is that (says he) which Christ worketh in us: And what is that? It is that (says he further) whereby we possess and know, that that pure and perfect redemption is in us, purifieing us, delivering us from the power of corruption, and bringing into favor, union, and familiarity with God. Answ. (1.) That the Lord Jesus Redeemeth by Power, through his Spirit, from sin and corruption, all such as he hath Redeemed by Price, from Law and justice, we willingly grant: But how can he say, that these two are inseparable, seeing then they must be of equal extent; and so, as the first Redemption was, in his judgment, for all and every man; the second must extend to all and every man; and so all and every man must be delivered from the power of corruption; and consequently must be saved. Again, how can he say this, who pleadeth afterward for the Apostasy of the Saints? But (2.) This purifying and delivering from corruption, as would appear by his words, is not wrought by the second Redemption; but only a knowing that that pure and perfect Redemption is in us, purifying us &c. And so all that is had by this second Redemption, is but a sight of what the fruit of the first Redemption is doing: So that by the first Redemption, not only man hath power, to subdue corruption, but he actually doth subdue it, without any new grace or divine help, and by the second Redemption he is only delivered from darkness, which hindered his actual perceiving of the operation of the gift and grace bestowed, upon the first Redemption. (3.) whether is this second Redemption necessary unto salvation, or not? I suppose he will say, yes. Then what shall become of the child of God, that walketh in darkness, & hath no light? what shall become of them, that have true grace, and grace uniteing them to Christ, & to God through Christ, & yet through darkness (the Lord dispensing so, partly as a punishment, & partly for trial & exercise) can see and acknowledge no such thing?

13. He tells us over again, that by the first Redemption, all mankind was so far reconciled unto God, that they were made capable of salvation, and had the offer of Gospel peace: citeing for this Ephes. 2:15. 1 John. 4:10. Ezech. 16:6. 1 Pet. 2:22, 24. & 3:18. Tit. 2:14. Phil. 3:10. Ans. (1.) we have seen before, at several occasions, that the Redemption of Christ is a far other thing, and hath far other effects, even remission of sins, 2 Cor. 5:19. actual reconciliation, grace and glory. Dan. 9:24, 26. Col. 1:19, 20. Ephes. 1:11, 14. John. 17:2. Heb. 9:12, 13. 2 Cor. 1:20. (2.) The very texts cited by himself make against him: for Ephes. 2:15. he died to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace : and this was not a mere capacity. See verse. 13. but now in Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ. Was this only a capacity of coming near, or a mere offer of it? deluded souls may think so, but the words are plain: let him see also Ephes. 1:7. & 2:5, 6. The next place he citeth is 1 John. 4:10. Where God is said to have sent his son to be a propitiation for our sins : and sure, a Propitiation doth work more then a mere possibility of friendshipe; and he was so a Propitiation, as that for the same persons, he is an Advocate with the Father 1 John. 2:1, 2. His next passage is Ezech. 16:6. And doth he think, that when God saith to any, lying in their blood, live, that that creating word giveth nothing but a mere capacity to live? See verse. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. But this properly is to be understood of God's dispensation of love to that visible Church, as such, and so is not very pertinent to the purpose in hand. His next passage is 1 Pet. 2:22. (he would say, 21.) 24. And what can be more clear against him, seeing the Apostle saith verse. 24. that he bear our sins, for this end; that we being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness : and then addeth, by whose stripes ye were healed ? See also Chap. 1: verse. 18. Where he saith, that we are redeemed from our vain conversation, See also Chap. 1:2, 4. He citeth next 1 Pet. 3:18. Where it is expressly said, that Christ hath once suffered, that he might bring us to God, and not put us in a bare capacity. Was this man's mind present, when he wrote these citations? Why did he not cite also Col. 1: verse. 14. Gal. 1: verse. 4. & 3: verse. 13, 14. & 4. verse. 5. If he would cite passages against himself. As also Revel. 5: verse. 9, 10. & 14.3, 4. & Tit. 2: verse. 14?

14. He explaineth over again his Second Redemption, and addeth that hereby we are really Justified. That is, when we are sanctified, we are Justified, or Justified by sanctification; as say the Tridentine Papists. Then he tells us, That both the Redemptions are the cause of Justification, the first the procuring cause, and the last the formal cause. And just so say they, as we saw above out of the Council of Trent, and may be seen in Bellarmine, who de justify. lib. 1. Cap. 2. proveth that Jesus Christ is the meritorious cause of Justification; and is sounder here, than I suppose this Quakers is, who complyeth more with Samosatenians & Socinians, against whom Bellarmine there disputeth: And the Council of Trent said, that Christ did merit justification to us by his most holy passion, on the tree of the cross ; Wherein doth this man now differ from Papists, the worst of them, I mean such as follow the Council of Trent ? There are some Others, that may shame this Quaker, in this point; As Contarenus, a cardinal, who, in his Treatis of Justification, cleareth and determineth the question thus. Because by faith, we attain to a twofold •• ghteousness, one inherent—whereby we are made partakers of the divine nature; th • other the righteousness of Christ, given and imputed to us, because insert in Christ, and we put him on. The question is, unto which of these we ought to lean, and account ourselves justified before God. And I (saith he) wholly think, that it is piously and christianly said, that we ought t • lean to, I say lean to, as to a firm thing, which may uphold us, the righteousness of Christ, gifted to us, and not to grace and holiness inherent. So also Pighius, de fide & Justification, may shame this Quaker.

15. In the fourth place. Pag. 128. For clearing of his meaning he tells us, that by this Justification, they do not understand simply good works, nay not as done by the holy Spirit. But did ever man in his wits understand it so? The question is, whether good works be the formal cause; or the formal objective reason of Justification? And this he granted above, and asserted with the worst of Papists. But he saith with protestants, that these are rather the effects of Justification; then the cause. This is better said: but way then said he lately, that by the Second Redemption, whereby we are Purified, Liberated and Redeemed from t • e power of corruption, we become justified formally; or that that second Redemption was the formal cause of our justification? And what will he now have to be the formal cause of our justification? Christ formed within us, this inward birth, produceing righteousness and holiness in us, with which the Father is well pleased. Ans. But this is only an inward Principle of grace, and the sanctification, which is defined in the Larger Catechism, as we saw above; and by this himself afterward tells us, we are parkers of the divine nature; and this, as Contarenus said with truth, belongeth to an Inherent Righteousness: and so still he holds with the Tridentine Papists, who will have us justified by a Righteousness inherent in us; and that in opposition to a Righteousness imputed. And when afterward he saith, that Bellarmine and others dispute against this, and other Papists understood it not, he should have named the place (2.) That God is well pleased with this, will say nothing, for he is well pleased also with good works, that flow from this Principle, betwixt which two, this Quaker would distinguish, in this question. He addeth, This is to possess whole Christ, who is the Lord our righteousness Ier 23:6. and to put on Christ. Ans. Yet this is not to put on the righteousness of Christ in Justification, and to be clothed with his Righteousness, in appearing before Justice. This is not to make the Lord our righteousness, as Ier. 23:6. nor to say with Paul. Phil: 3:9. and be found in him, not having min • own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness, which is of God by faith. Further he says, hereby we are made one with him, as branches into the vine; and we have right to all things, which he did and suffered for us, so that his obedience, righteousness and death is ours. Ans. All this is true by faith uniteing us to Christ. But we are not so properly by Christ formed within us; for this is a consequent of, and in nature, though not in time, posterior to our union to Christ by Faith, which is brought about in effectual calling: and as a consequent of this union followeth also Justification; the formal objective reason of which is not either this union, or begun san • tification, but the Righteousness of Christ, or his Obedience and Suffering made over and imputed to the believer by God. Seeing in these matters, he seemeth to be an utter stranger, I would advise him to read our Larger Catechism better, if he think not himself too far advanced, to turn a catechumene again. What followeth Pag. 128. is but a specimen of the Quakers Spirit, in abusing of Scripture with their senseless allegorick glosses, and hath no Interest in this queston; and therefore I have nothing to do with it.

16. He tells us next, that though we be not justified for good works, yet we are justified in them: and they are necessary, as causa sine qua non. Ans. That good works are called for from Justified persons, we acknowledge; but what Interest they have in putting us into a state of Justification, we see not. His giving them an interest of a causa sine qua non, contradicteth what he said before: for he would have us Justified by Christ formed within; and this is antecedent to good works, as the tree is unto the fruit. And he also said in the preceeding Pag, that good works follow Justification, as the effects thereof: and how then, they can come in, as a causa sine qua non, he must help us by his next to understand; and clear to us, how the Effect can be the causa sine qua non of the Cause: But this man must have liberty to contradict himself. He must also explain to us, what that is, to be justified in good works : That a man may be in a justified state, while do • ng good works, we understand very well; but how other ways, he can be justified in good works, I see not, unless by Justification he mean, not a justification as to state, but a justification as to particular actions, which is impertinent.

17. In the last place he saith, that if he and his fraternity held the same opinion about good works, that Protestants hold, they would easily confess, that they were not only not nec • ssary, but that they were noxious. Though Protestants assert the necessity of good works, in justified persons, come to age; they assert notwithstanding their noxiousness in Justification; that is if they be considered, as any part of that Righteousness, upon consideration whereof the person is declared just, & Justified before God; or as any part of the formal Objective reason of Justification; or, as others speak, as any part of the formal cause of Justification. But what is his ground? for they affirm, saith he, that the best works of saints are corrupted and defiled. It is true, we say indeed, that our best works are not perfect, but have ad mixture of dross, and of much imperfection; but that is not all the cause, why we deny such an interest to works in Justification, as Papists, and he plead for; but this Interest we deny to works mainly because, it would spoil Christ of the glory of our Justification, and of being our Righteousness, that is due to him; and give man ground of boasting, which by Gospel Justification is wholly excluded. But do not Quakers say the same of good works? we judge (saith he) the best works, done by man, intending conformity unto the Law, in his own strength, natural power, and proper will, to be such, that is, polluted. But protestants do not account these properly good works, but only materially such, as not flowing from a principle of grace, and from the Spirit of sanctification. What doth he say of these? These are pure and holy (says he) as is the root they come from, and therefore God accepts them, and justifieth us in them, and rewardeth us for them of his proper and free grace. But the question is, whether they be perfect, and can stand before the tribunal of Justice, and so become any part of that Righteousness, answering the Law, which requireth perfect conformity in all points, which is the formal objective reason of our Justification before God, whose judgment is according to truth?

18. Thus we have seen his explication of their Opinion, which in short is this, That the formal objective reason, or, as he with others speak, the formal cause of Justification, is a Principle of grace within, or Christ formed there; that is, the spring and principle of good works, which is begun sanctification. This I say, is it, according to his words; but if we • emember what was said to this above, and consider what this Christ within is, according to the Quakers principles, we shall find, that, in this point, their judgment is more d • testable, than is that of Papists; for this Christ within, is formed of mere Nature, and that without any assistance of divine grace, by the mere Rational power, and will of man, yielding unto the dictates of that Light, which is, as well in pagans, that scarce have the use of reason, as in Christians, and in all alike; and so it is a Christ formed within, whereof Pagans, Turks and Indians, that never heard, nor never shall hear, the least sound of the Gospel, are capable, and by virtue whereof, they, as well as Christians, can come to be justified: So that, in short, the justification, which Quakers maintain, is a Pagan-justification, resulting from a Pagan-sanctification; and if this be not many degrees more damnable & abominable, then the doctrine of Tridentine Papists, let any of understanding judge.

19. After this, he layeth down three Propositions, the confirmation of which will, as he thinketh, prove his point. The first is this Pag. 129. The Obedience and Passion of Christ is that, whereby the soul obtaineth remission of sins, in that it is the cause pr • curing that grace and seed, by whose inward operations, Christ is formed within, and the soul is made conform unto it, and so just and justified: And in respect of this capacity and offer of grac • , God is said to be reconciled, not that he is actually r • conciled, or justifieth any, or holdeth any justified, who remaineth in his sins, ungodly, impure and unjust▪ Ans. (1.) To say, that the obedience and suffering of Christ procureth remission of sins, in that it procureth that grace and seed, &c. is but a Socinian and Arminian untruth, destroying the Satisfaction of Christ; and upon the mater, saying, that Christ, by his Obedience and Death, did not fully discharge the debt of all those, that are justified; & did not make a Proper, Real and Full Satisfaction, to justice, in their behalf, contrary to Rom. 5:8, 9, 10, 19. 1 Tim. 2:5▪ 6. Heb. 10:10, 14. Dan. 9:24, 25. Isaiah. 53:4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12. Nor doth the Scripture speak so of the mater: see Ephes. 1:7. In whom we have redemption, through his blood, the forgiveness of sins. So Col. 1:14. See also. Col. 2:13. Ephes. 4:32▪ Mat. 9 2, 5. Mark. 2:59. Luk. 5:20, 23. & 7:48. Mat. 26:28. Heb. 9:22. It is true, the method of the Gospel requireth, that the Persons be first united to Christ by faith, before they can obtain these benefits of his Redemption; but this is not the thing, he speaketh of. (2.) This grace and seed is, with him, common to all flesh: But the Scriptures tell us not, as we have shown above, that Christ's righteousness was for all, or that all receive grace, by virtue thereof. (3.) Christ formed within by the inward operations of that grace and seed, which is common to Pagans, is but a Natural Christ, and Birth: for such as the cause is, such must the effect be: And so, what followeth upon this, is but a Pagan righteousness and Justification. (4.) It is false, as we have already manifested, that God is said to be Reconciled only in respect of this capacity, and offer of grace. (5.) We say not, that God justifieth any remaining in their sins; yet we grant, that the Justified may commit sins, and thereby fall under God's fatherly displeasure, Psal. 89▪ 31, 32, 33. & 51:7, 8, 9.10, 11, 12. & 32:5. 1 Cor. 11:30, 32. Luk. 1:20. Mat. 26:75. and yet withal remain, in the state of Justification, Luk. 22:32. Heb. 10:24. for we approve not of Antinomians, in this mater.

20. The Proposition we have heard, and what he would properly assert thereby, we are yet to learn: Possibly his proofs will help us to understand it. The first proof Pag. 130. us from Rom. 3:25. Here, says he, the Apostle showeth the efficacy of Christ • s death, viz. that by it, and faith in it, remission of by past sins is obtained. And what then? This is it in which, and for which the long suffering of God is exercised toward men. And what then? Therefore though men by their daily sins deserve eternal death, yet by virtue of the sacrifice of Christ, grace and the seed of God move them in love, dureing the day of their visitation,—that they may be redeemed from evil. Here are Quakers dreams, whereof the text maketh no mention, and dreams that have no sense, but with men of distracted brains.

21. We are nothing the wiser by this proof, let us see the next. If God (saith he) should be totally reconciled unto men, and repute them just, while they were actually unjust, why doth he so oft complean of his people, as Isaiah 59:2. where there is perfect and complete reconciliation, there is no separation; or it will follow, that sins can make no separation, and that their good works and worst sins are the same, in God's account, This giveth too great liberty to sin. And in the margin, he saith, he speaketh not here of persons not yet converted, whom Antinomians, their adversaries, say were justified from the beginning; but of persons converted, according to Protestants, who may fall into grievous sins, and yet are said by them, to remain perfectly and wholly justified. Answ. (1.) Here begin we to understand something of his Proposition, and of its design: And for answer we say, That there is a twofold unrighteousness; one of State, or of Person, another of Condition, and particular Actions. As to the first, no unrighteous person is justified; because, before Justification, he must be clothed with the imputed righteousness of Christ, and so constituted just; and in Justification declared just, because constituted just. And as to the second, though such an one, as committeth sin, be in so far unrighteous, as to his actions; and in that, not justified, or approven of God: Yet, being united to Christ by faith, and thereby put in a justified state, he remaineth in God's account, a justified person, as to his State, which is not broken off by these sins. This may be further cleared, when we come to speak of perseverence. (2.) Not to insist on Isaiah. 59. and other such Scripture places, which may be understood of the generality and body of a Church, which are God's people by profession, but not by real union, through faith; and so speak nothing to the point in hand: We say, that sin in the justified, though it maketh a separation from God, in respect of his fatherly smileing countenance, & so procureth fatherly displeasure, wrath and anger, and sad chaftnings; Yet maketh not a separation from the state of favor; nor putteth them again into that state of separation, wherein they were before conversion. (3.) We grant, that sins in the Regenerat can so far make a separation, as that by such sins, the regenerate may incur God's displeasure, Esa. 64:5, 6, 9. 2 Sam. 11:27. grieve the Spirit of God Ephes. 4:30. lose some measure of their graces and comforts Psal. 51:8, 10, 12. Revel. 2.4. Cant. 5:2, 3, 4, 6. have their consciences wounded Psal. 37:3, 4, & 51:8. and bring temporal judgments on themselves, 1 Cor. 11:32. Psal. 89: ver. 31 32. (4.) Hence we see a manifest difference, betwixt their best works and worst sins, even in God's account. (5.) And also we see, how false it is to say, that our doctrine openeth a door to licentiousness. (6.) Though he call Antinomians his adversaries; Yet he and they agree in this principal thing against the Orthodox, that both say there is no difference to be put, betwixt God's Fatherly-displeasure, and his Law-wrath.

22. His third argument followeth, which in sum, is this, The Gospel requireth faith and repentance, and other like conditions, before Justification; which is in vain, if we be justified before. Ans. This saith something against Antinomians, who plead for a Justification before faith: But the man knoweth, that we are not of that judgment; for our Confession of faith saith Chap. 11. § 4. That though God did from all eternity decree to justify all the elect (Gal. 3:8, 1 Pet. 1:2, 19, 20▪ Rom. 8:30) and Christ did, in the fullness of time, die for their sins, and rise again for their Justification (Gal. 4:4. 1 Tim. 2:6. Rom. 4:25.) yet they are not justified, until the holy Spirit doth, in due time, actually apply Christ unto them (Col. 1:21, 22. Gal. 2:16. Tit. 3:4, 5, 6, 7.) What followeth in that Page 131. speaketh nothing against us; for we maintain not Antinomian doctrine. But Pag. 132. he saith, that the Intercession of Christ should be made vain and unnecessary, if he should pray for such, as are already reconciled and perfectly justified. Ans. Neither doth this make against us: for we say not, with Antinomians, that sins not yet committed, are actually pardoned. And as for the state of Reconciliation, and Justification, which we own; as it maketh not after-sins to be already pardoned, so it rather establisheth the use and necessity of Christ's intercession, to the end, they, who are justified, may obtain remission of these after-sins, after the Gospel method; that is, after they have repented of them, and gone by faith to the blood of Christ; and that they may get grace to recover them out of sin, by Faith and Repentance. And this may serve for confutation of what followeth, being nothing but a repetition of his corrupt doctrine, and a renewed act of his wonted manner of perverting Scripture, to the countenancing of his dreams, without any color of verity.

23. He says next, he will answer Objections, and proposeth one Pag. 133. §. 6. And that he saith, is taken from 2 Cor. 5:18, 19. whence he says, they (and who these are. he telleth not) infer that Christ perfected totally the work of reconciliation, while he was upon the earth. Ans. If the meaning of the Objection be, that Christ did so perfect the work of reconciliation, on earth, that there was nothing to be done by man, in order to his actual Justification, and reconciliation with God; we own it not: And by his answer it seemeth this is the meaning thereof. Of the place we spoke above, and rejected his corrupt sense thereof, which here again he repeateth. The next Objection is from verse. 21. and he thus frameth it, As our sin is imputed to Christ, so is his Righteousness imputed to us, though we be not just; and we are just only by imputation, as Christ was a sinner. How this is brought in here, I see not: but he must take his liberty. Let us hear what he answereth. Albeit (saith he) Christ is said to have borne our sins, and to have suffered for them, and to be reputed among men, for a sinner; Yet God did not repute him a sinner, for he was holy. Ans. That Christ was personally and inherently holy, is very true; and that God looked upon him, as such, is true also; but yet, as a Cautioner, taking on the debt of his people, he became imputatively a sinner; And the Father constituting him thus a cautioner, in the room and place of the chosen ones, is here said to have made him sin, who knew no sin, that we through him might be made the righteousness of God. He addeth. Nor did Christ die, that we might be accounted just, though no more really just, than Christ was really unjust. Ans. Nor do we speak so; but this we say, as Christ, who was inherently and personally holy; Yet, as our Cautioner, was by imputation accounted a sinner, our sins being laid upon him, and caused to meet upon him, as Esa. 53:6. So, though we be unrighteous in ourselves, and inherently sinful and guilty; Yet, by imputation of Christ's righteousness, we are really accounted just. He proceedeth, If we be made just, as Christ was a sinner, by imputation, then, as there was not the least sin in Christ, so there is no necessity for the least righteousness in us. Answ. Neither is there any necessity of our righteousness, (if we except faith closing with Christ) in order to our becoming Righteous by imputation, or being justified upon that account. But as to other ends and uses, he knoweth we plead for a necessity of inherent righteousness. He saith, This is to be understood only in that he did undergo torments in soul and body, which were due to our sins, that we might be partakers of that grace, which he by suffering obteaned for us, by the operations of which grace, we are made the righteousness of God in him. Ans. This is said but not proven; and is contradictory to the native import of the words, and scope of the place: His undergoing the punishment due to our sins, as our Sponsor and Cautioner, presupposeth his standing in our room, and being charged with our guilt, else he could not have suffered, and paid our debt, as our Surety, He proveth, That this righteousness is meaned of infused righteousness, because the Apostle speaketh of such a righteousness in the 14, 15, & 16. verses of the following Chapter. Answ. This Argument is fit for a Quaker, and for a desperate cause; but a wise man will laugh at it. But saith he, There should be concord betwixt light and darkness, and betwixt righteousness & unrighteousness, if men were said to be in Christ by an imputative righteousness without them, while they are actually unjust. Ans. He knoweth, that though we say, persons are justified only by a righteousness imputed, whereby they are declared to be really righteous in the sight of God, & accepted of as such: Yet we say with all, that the same perso • s are really sanctified; & that sanctification is inseparably joined with Justification: And so the discord is in his own imagination. But he loveth to drink in Bellarmine's muddy waters. He saith, that Christ would never, in all his sermons, have people resting upon such a righteousness; but did always recommend to them good works, as instruments of Justification. Ans. This is a notorious untruth. See John. 6:29. & 9:35, 36. & 10:38. & 12:36. & 14▪ 1. & 16:9. Nor do we regard his saying, that to his observation, there is no mention of the imputed righteousness of Christ in the Scriptures : For his observation is small, and of little worth: But were he as much acquainted with the Scriptures, as he is with Popish writers, and Quakers vanities, he would be in case to speak other ways; However we know, this is Bellarm: argument de Iustif. lib. 2. c 7. And Protestants have abundantly confuted it, pointing him to Rom. 4▪ 5, 6, 11. & 5▪ 18, 19. 2 Cor. 5:19, 21. Rom. 3:23, 24, 25, 27, 28. Ier. 23:6. 1 Cor. 1▪ 30.

24. His second proposition followeth Pag. 135. which is this. That by this inward birth, or Christ formed within, we are formally justified. That is, in Bellarmine's words. That Inherent righteousness is the formal cause of our Justification. Let us hear, what way our Quaker proveth this. He adduceth 1 Cor 6:11. which is Bellarm. 3. Argument. But what saith he of this place? Justification here (saith he) must be understood of making really just. And if by really just he mean inherently just; as he must, or speak non-sense, I inquire, why so? Otherwise (saith he) washing and Sanctification must be also understood imputatively. What necessity is there for this? for (saith he) in the foregoing verses the Apostle was showing, how no unrighteous person shall inherit the Kingdom of God. Very good, what then? And here he subsumeth, saying such were some of you &c. And what then? And because they were now washen and sanctified therefore they were also justified. Though this may be true, in one sense; to wit, that their sanctification and washing was a proof and evidence, that they were justified, because all justified persons are also sanctified and washen: Yet it is not true in the Quakers sense, to wit, that by their Sanctification they were justified; that is, really made inherently just, and thereupon justified: And where findeth he his, because and therefore, in the text? He proceedeth, for if this justification were not real. (And who saith, that it is imaginary; or a fictitious thing? He should have said, if this justification were not a making inherently holy;) then it might be said, that the Corinthians, not having left their evil courses, but abiding in them, were justified. Ans. This consequence is false, and hath no appearance of truth in it: we say with him, that there was a real change upon the Corinthians, and that their faith was not a mere fruitless assent; but this real change was in Sanctification, and not in Justification.

25. He tells us next very gravely, that he could never read or see, nor with any color of reason conceive what could evince justification to be here taken imputatively. And what wonder, seeing no man ever spoke of a justification here taken imputatively: As if there were two justifications, one real, another imputative; will he name the man that speaketh so. But if his meaning be, that he never read nor saw, nor could conceive, what could evince Justification to be taken here in the orthodox sense: We cannot help it; for when men put out their own eyes, or give up themselves to the Devil, that he may do it, what remedy? Justification, with we, being always (at least most rarely otherwise) in Scripture taken in a farensical sense: And though it were granted, that here, and some where else, it did import the same, that sanctification doth; yet this man could not hence prove, that the word Justification did never signify another thing, seeing one and the same word may signify various things in Scripture; nor could he hence prove, that this was the proper import of the word, seeing the Apostle is not here defineing the nature of Justification, but showing what a change was made upon them, both a real and relative.

26. But, as a learned grammarian, he tells us, that the word Iustificare is either derived from the substantive Iustitia, or from the adjective Iustus, and both these are used to signify truly & really, not suppositively, that virtue of the soul, which is expressed by the word Iustitia. Yea the adjective Iustus signifieth a man, in whom that virtue is: for not only is it a great impropriety, but a lie, to call a man just, who is suppositivly and not really such. And Iustisico formed from Iustitia signifieth him, who is made just, seeing it is but a composition of the verb Facio, and of the adjective Iustus ; and so Iustifico, is Iustum facio, I make just, and Iustificatus is justus facius, made just. • o all which, I Ans. (1.) If this man would have given us a seasonable taste of his gammatical pulp, he should have shown us, that the Hebrew and Greek words, which are rendered in the latin by Iustifico and Iustificatus, have this import, that he would prove the latin words to have; for whatever he may think with Bellarmine (who hath helped him here) of the latin vulgar version, as it is called, we do not account it authentic. So that though all that he hath said were true, it would prove nothing, but that these latin words were not fit enough to express the Hebrew and Greek words by. (2.) But he must know, that use is the master of words, and that they go not always by the rules of etymology: and he cannot but know, that Iustifico and Iustificatus do usually import a judicial, or juridical absolution, by the sentence of a judge, from what was laid to the charge of the impanelled; as they do also signify in our own language. When do we say, that a man is justified, by infused justice? Or let him tell me, when or in what sentences, we use these words, when we would signify thereby infusion of righteousness, or making just? Let him consider these passages of Scripture, & see how his sense will agree; Exod. 23▪ 7 Deut 25:1, 2. 2 Sam. 15:4. 1 King. 8:3 • . Psal. 82:3. Isaiah. 5:22. & 50▪ 8. Luk. 7:29. & 10:29. & 16:15. Dan. 8:14. Job 32:2. & 9:2. & 33:32. Isaiah. 53:11. Dan. 12:3. Mat. 12:37. Ier. 3:11. Gen. 44:16. Prov. 17:15. Not to mention other passages, where justification of a sinner before God is handled, because he may think to affix his vain gloss unto them; as we have seen in part, and shall see more (3.) How Iustifico, I Iustify, can signify him, who is made just, I would fain know, of what Master he hath learned.

27. This man will needs be the master of words, and therefore he will have Iustifico to be like sanctifico, honorifico, sacrifice. Ans. And why not also as verifico ? Sure, honorificare signifieth not to infuse honor, but publicly to declare our respect, for such a person: and he knoweth the common saying, honor magis est in honorante, quam in honorato. And Sacrifico signifieth sometimes I sacrifice, and offer in sacrifice, and ask God pardon. Is that to make holy? But says he, all these are spoken of a subject really endued with that virtue, from which he hath that denomination. No man is said to be sanctified, who is really profane; so nor can any man be said to be Justified, who is not really just. Ans. And do we say, that a man is said to be Justified, who is not really just? No. He is really just by Righteousness imputed, and then declared and pronounced just, by Justification: But he should show, that as to sanctify, signifieth sometimes, to infuse holiness, so to Iustify is to infuse righteousness; or that a man cannot be denominated Justified, but upon the account of infused and inherent righteousness, as one cannot be denominated sanctified, without inherent holiness. But this is too hard for him.

28. His perverseness discovereth itself, in the following words, where playing with the forensical use of the word Iustify, he says, it is, as when one really guilty is freed from the punishment, and so he is Justified. that is, put in the place of him, who is just ; Insinuating hereby, that in our justification there is nothing but a freedom from punishment, while as we say, that the cautionary righteousness of the Lord our Surety is imputed to the believer, and he thereupon Justified. He proceedeth, and telleth us, that this use, (to wit forensical) of the word proceeded from this supposition, that none should be liberated but innocents. Ans. Rather from this supposition, that none ought to be absolved, but either he who is not guilty of what is charged, or hath satisfied the Law and accusation by a Cautiner. What he addeth is nothing to the purpose: Hence we say, (saith he) I shall Iustifie this, or that, meaning that such a thing is Iustifiable. For believers are Justifiable, by the imputation of Christ's righteousness. What he citeth out of Pareus against Bellarm de justify. p. 469. where Pareus is showing how Bellarmine at length cometh to his hand, is nothing to the purpose, for when he says, we are not formally righteous or so called, by the imputation of Christ's righteousness, his meaning is, that thereby we are not made such, as never sinned; as his following words import: but that the Righteousness of Christ is not so imputed to us, as that it becometh the formal objective reason of our Justification, Pareus saith not. The matter is cleared thus; though a man, who is not solvendo, cannot be made, by his cautioners paying of the debt for him, one that is formally just, and that hath never failed in paying his debt, nor can the cautoners payment be so imputed to him, when he is absolved; yet the Cautioners payment is so imputed to him, as that thereupon he is absolved and justified; and so declared one that hath paid his debt, by his cautioner; and consequently free from any execution of the Law against him; & that payment of the cautioner is so imputed to him, as that it becometh the Formal Objective Reason, why he is absolved.

29. He wonders, that we should place our hope and confidence, in a matter of such moment, upon a figurative use of a word, and exclude that, or at least not account it necessary, without which we cannot see God. Ans. We deny, that our use of the word is figurative; and though it were, yet the thing imported thereby, is such a sure ground, that if he miss it, it may cost him his soul. We account not holiness and good works unnecessary; but only exclude them from being any part of the Formal Objective Reason in our Justification. And though he could not but know this; Yet he would maliciously calumniate us. Then he tells us, that the word is sometimes used in Scripture of them, who arrogat righteousness to themselves, though it do not belong to them, citeing Exod. 23.7, Job 9:20. & 27:5 Prov. 17:15. Isaiah. 5:23. Luk 10:29. & 16:15. John. 11:2, 3, 22. Ier. 3:11. Ezech. 16:5. & 15:2. Ans. Though impertinency enough might be observed here, Yet this satisfieth us, that both in some of those places, and others cited by us before, the word is not taken in his sense. I wonder how he can say, that all these places speak of men Justifying the ungodly, when the very first is spoken of God himself: And some of them speak of a not justifying, as Job 9:20. & 27:5. Many of them speak nothing of Justifying at all, as Isaiah. 5:23. John. 11:2, 3, 22. Ezech. 16:5. & 15:2. So unhappy is the man in his citations.

30. But Pag. 137. He cometh to speak of the word, as used in those places of Scripture, where the matter of Justification is handled; And in the very entry, he ushereth his way with a false, ignorant, calumnious insinuation, as if we held, that Justification were but supposititious and imaginary, and not real; when as, by what we have already said, the judicious may see, that the Justification, he pleadeth, for is no real thing; but a popish dream. And another ignorant cheat he useth, saying, that the signification, which he putteth on the word, is genuine, and ours but figurative ; Whileas our sense of it is proper, ordinary, & for anything I know, constant; sure he hath given no one instance to the contrary; and his is fictitious, forged at Rome, confirmed by no appoven author. But says he, In pauls Epistles to the Romans, Corinth. Galat. and else where, where this doctrine is handled, he saith frequently, that we are not justified by the Law, nor by the Law of Moses; and here the word may be taken in its proper and genuine sense, without any absurdity. Ans. But what is this proper and genuine sense? Is it that we are made just by infused righteousness? Then this absurdity will follow, that the Apostles meaning is, the Law doth not infuse righteousness; and who dreamed, that it did. Is it, that we are declared just, because of Inherent Holiness and Righteousness; then this proper and genuine sense should be a perfect contradiction to what Paul saith: or his meaning must be, when he saith, we are not Justified by the Law, that we are indeed justified by Inherent Holiness, or Conformity to the law. What more? The meaning of these words, we are Justified by faith (says he) may by, we are made just by faith purifieing the heart. Ans. Then the Apostles should contradict himself; for if we be thus made just by faith, we are made just by works: and further, purifying of the heart, cannot otherwise be understood, but of renewing the heart ; but Justifying signifieth not making just. Again says he, When we are said to be Justified by grace, by Christ, by the Spirit, what absurdity to understand this of making just? Ans. Of being Justified by the Spirit▪ we read • ot, for these words by the Spirit mentioned 1 Cor. 6:11. are to be referred to washing, and sanctification. When we are said to be Justified by grace it is by the gracious and free favor of God (as our Divines make good against the Papists ) and that, with the circumstances of the places, are against such a Justification. Nor must we anywhere so interpret any passage, as to make it cross or contradict other passages. When we are said to be Justified by Christ, the meaning is clear against his sense.

31. He citeth again 1 Cor. 6:11. (not 11:6.) and then tells us, that Thysius thinketh, that Justification here includeth sanctification, as its consequent, and that Zanchius, in Ephes. 2:4. thinketh it is the same with sanctification. And that Bullinger on the place says, the Apostle in diverse words expresseth the same thing. Ans. (1.) None of these Divines confound them, and make them one, as this Quaker doth; but distinctly and orthodoxly explain the nature both of Justi •• cation and Sanctification. (2.) As I said above, though this were granted, that the word Iustify should import the same with sanctify, in this or that place; Yet unless he made it manifest, that it always so importeth, and can never be taken in another sense, he could not make good his Assertion and Opinion; So that in all this work, he is but beating the wind. (3.) Thysius had no ground to speak so, seeing sancti •• cation is as well expressed, as Justification, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified (4.) Bullinger saith no more than what Calvin ; saith, & yet Calvin distinguisheth them, in his Comment on the place, Zanchius saith no such th • ng, in the place cited.

32. In the next place Pag. 138. he citeth with Bellarm. Rom. 8:30. And saith, that either Sanctification must be excluded, or Justification must be taken in its proper sense. Ans. (1.) There is no necessity for either; for Sanctification is comprehended under Vocation, which is saving and effectual; otherwise the links of this chain could be broken; for a common and ineffectual call is not attended with Justification, and Glorification: And effectual Vocation is by infusion of grace, and the Spirit of holiness and a real change. (2.) Sanctification might be comprehended under the word Justified, it being a necessary and inseparable consequent, and that without any prejudice to the native, usual and constant import of the word Justified. (3.) Thereafter verse. 33.34. the Apostle cleareth, in what sense he took Iu • tified, when he opposeth it unto condemned, a forensical term; and to accused, another. His citing of some Protestants so saying. I pass, finding no argument alleiged by them, to enforce this acceptation. Melanthon's saying that to be Justified by faith, doth not only signify to be pronounced just, but to be made just. May admit of a safe interpretation: for he saith not, to be made just by inherent righteousness. And it is certain, that all that are Justified, are first made just, not by inherent righteousness, but by the Imputed righteousness of Christ. What he citeth out of one Martinus Boraeus, I cannot examine, having never seen the book, Bucer's words cited make nothing for him. B. Forbes's words I will not justify, but judge that Cardinal Contarenus spoke more orthodoxly, then he. The Fathers so taking the word sometimes moveth not me, more nor it did Calvin. Chemnitz and Zanchius, cited by himself. And further, if to justify signify to make righteous ; to accuse, and to condemn (which are opposite terms) must signify to make unrighteous, or unjust.

33. After this §. Pag. 140. he bringeth in his conclusion from what he hath said, and it is a bold one. Having now sufficiently (saith he) proved, that by Justification, must be understood, to be made really just. This is concluded, like a Quaker, with unparalleled falsehood, impudency and boldness. He undertook only to prove, that the word might, without absurdity, be so understood, and how weakly he hath done this, we have seen: But now he wonderfully concludeth a must be, from a may be, and that too no ways satisfyingly proved. But I have said already, that the believer, who is Justified, may be said to be really made just, but not in his sense, nor because, of the import of the word, as he alleigeth; but because the judgment of God is according to truth, and God will not justify an unjust man. The Justified person therefore is first made just, not by Inherent Holiness and Righteousness, but by the Righteousness of Christ Imputed to him, and Received by faith. What saith he next? I do confidently affirm from real and sensible experience (but the delusory sensations, or impressions of an erroneous Spirit, on the minds of persons, given up to strong delusion, is no demonstration to us of the verity of what they boldly affirm) that the immediate, next and formal cause, whereby a man is Justified, in the sight of God, is the revelation of Christ in the soul, who converteth and reneweth the mind; and he, who is the Author of this work, being so formed and revealed, we are truly Justified and accepted in the sight of God. Ans. (1.) Who seeth not, that these things, as here expressed, are not such, as can fall under the inward sensations of the soul? Can the soul feel what is the Immediat, Nearest, or Formal Cause, of God's acts? What needs more proof of a desperate delusion? (2.) If the revelation of Jesus Christ be such a cause of Justification, Justification cannot be a making just; for it is not, as he says, the revelation that converteth and reneweth, but Christ revealed: and if Christ revealed maketh the change, • ustification doth it not; nor can Justification be a declareing of one righteous because of inherent righteousness; for here the man is Justified, upon the revelation; and yet the man is not renewed, for he is not renewed by the revelation, but by Christ revealed, and the Revelation of Christ, is before this Operation of Christ. (3.) If the man be not justified, till Christ be formed in him, as his last words seem to say, then the revelation of Christ cannot be the Immediat cause of Justification because that is before this forming of Christ in the man, for it is before the work of Christ reforming, and renewing the mind. (4.) I see all this Renovation is but upon the mind, and this Formation of Christ is but a Revelation in the mind; But where is the work of grace upon the will? This would say, that the Papists opinion is more tolerable then this, for they include graces seated in the will. (5.) Where doth the Scripture speak of Justification after this manner? We are oft said to be justified by faith; but never are we said to be justified by such a Revelation. (6.) Therefore I may as confidently affirm, that this his sensation is but a sensible delusion of Satan, the grand enemy of the Grace of God, and of the Gospel.

34. Yet he goeth about to prove this, and tells us first, that this method of salvation is set down by Paul Rom. 5:10. for, saith he, The Apostle doth signify, that reconciliation is made by the death of Christ. Ans. This is true of that Reconciliation, which is actual, and is had by faith in the death of Christ; but not of that Reconciliation, which he imagineth; whereby, to wit, God is prone to Receive and Redeem man. What next? He affirmeth Justification, that is, Salvation, to be in Christ's life. Ans. And what ground is there for this Interpretation, seeing the sense is obvious; to wit, that seeing by the propitiatory death of Christ, believers, laying hold upon him by faith, are brought into a state of Peace and Reconciliation with God, they need not fear, but they shall be brought thorough all difficulties and steps, to the enjoyment of life eternal, and full salvation, Christ being now alive, to bestow all that he hath purchased? What more? He saith, That this life of Christ is something inward and spiritual in the heart, whereby he is renewed and brought out of death, where naturally he lay; and raised up, and revived unto God, the same Apostle showeth Ephes. 2:5. Ans. This is nothing but a palpable perversion of the words of the Apostle: for the life can no more be understood here of some inward thing, wrought in man, than Christ's death can be so interpreted. And if he had so expounded the words, he had spoke more like himself above; as also more like other Quakers, who talk of Christ's sufferings and death, &c. as all done within man. (2.) That the Apostle Ephes. 2:5. is speaking of believers being by grace quickened together with Christ, and risen together with him, &c. is true: But what saith this, for the corrupt gloss of Rom. 5:10. where the life of Christ is only spoken of; and that as it, by which believers may be assured of their salvation? (3.) What is there in all this, for Justification by the Revelation of Christ within, reforming the mind, &c, Hath the man forgote his Conclusion already? Ay but, says he, the Apostle mentioneth a Revelation of this inward life, 2 Cor. 4:10, 11. and this inward life is that whereby, he said, we were justified Ans. The life of Christ is indeed said by Paul 2. Cor. 4:10, 11. to be made manifest, in and by its effects supporting & carrying the persecuted Apostles, through so many miseries and deaths: But who, except a Quaker, could say, that the Apostle says, we are justified by this life? And what vestige is there of this, in the Apostles words?

35. In the next place he citeth Tit. 3:5. And hence thus argueth, we are justified by that, by which we are saved. Ans. Yes, by the grace of God we are freely justified and saved, and that without works of righteousness, which we have done. Here the Apostle (says he moreover) doth manifestly ascribe the immediate cause of Justification, unto the inward work of regeneration, that is, to Christ revealed in the soul, by which we are formally accepted of God. Ans. (1.) What immediate cause is this? That a soul must be wrought up to faith in Christ, before it can be justified, we grant; and that this faith must be wrought by the operation of the Spirit, is also true: But that this faith, or any other work of the Spirit in the soul, is the Formal Objective Cause of Justification, the Apostle saith neither here, nor elsewhere. (2.) To say, that we are formally accepted of God, that is, as fully righteous, with a righteousness answering the Law, in all points, and satisfying justice for b • gones, (as he must mean, or he speaketh not to the point) by this work of Regeneration, is but a jejune begging of what is yet in question: sure, there is no word of this here.

36. In the third place he citeth 2 Cor. 13:5. And saith, That it appeareth here how earnestly the Apostle would, that they should know Christ in them. Ans. The Apostle, to the end, that the Corinthians, who at the instigation of false Teachers, were beginning to have undervalueing thoughts of him, might be convinced, that he was an Apostle of Christ, and so continue in esteeming of him as such, doth here press them to go in to their own hearts, and see, if there were any fruits and effects of Christ's living among them by his Spirit, through his ministry, that, if not, they might not account themselves Christians, but persons rejected. And what would this say? It appeareth hence 2. (says he) that the cause of reprobation, or of non-justification, was the want of the inhabitation of Christ revealed: And, by the rule of contraries, where Christ is inwardly known and revealed, there the persons are approven and justified: And nothing can be more clear. Ans. (1.) By what rule, law, or authority, doth he make Reprobation, and No-Jus • ification equipollent terms? This must be licentiâ Quakerorum, whereby they have a privilege, contrary to Scripture, and all Reason, to coin words, phrases, and opinions, in divinity, at their pleasure. (2.) The want of the effects, and evidences of Christ dwell • ng in them by his Spirit, is not here given, as the cause of their being in an evil state, re • ected and disapproved of God, but as a mark and evidence: And marks and evidences are not always taken from the Immediat, Nearest, and Formal cause. (3.) It is very true, that by the rule of contraries, where Christ is indeed revealed and working in the soul, that soul is justified; but it is most false, that therefore, Christ revealed in the soul is the Formal Cause, or to speak more properly, the Formal Objective Reason, of Justification; for himself said above, that good works were properly the effects and fruits of • ustification: and yet he knoweth, the fruits and effects may be an evidence of the cause in being. (4.) And so, there is nothing more plain and evident, then that this citation is impertinent, and his argueing therefrom a non sequitur ; and that he is still the old man, a Quaker-disputant.

37. As a parallel place he citeth Pag. 142, Gal. 4:19. And saith, this Christ is the inward hope of glory, Col. 1:27, 28. And what is the hope of Glory, must be that, to which we nextly and immediately lean unto in Justification. Answ. And how is this proven? We must believe it, because he saith it; and so there is an end. When the Apostle saith Phil. 1: v. 28. And in nothing terrified by your adversaries, which is—to you an evident toaken of salvation, he pointed at something, which might be looked upon, as a ground for hope of glory; must we also lean to that in justification? After some lines, wherein, after his usual manner, he must extravage, he saith, And such as feel Christ, after this manner raised, and reigning in them, have a true ground of hope to believe, that they are justified. Which is very true, because these works of Christ are inseparable fruits and effects of Justification. After some few words again, to no purpose, he tells us that Borhaeus & Claudius Albericus Inuncunanus & Essius (three, whose books I never saw, and whose names I never heard, before I read this Quakers book) are for Justification by this Revelation: And he calleth them Protestants: but if so I have read of some Papists more sound, then they are, if their meaning be one and the same with this Quakers. And finally he citeth some words of Mr. Baxter's Aphorisms. But he cannot be ignorant, that Mr Baxter's notions, in this particular, are little satisfying; beside that Mr Baxter himself will have none citeing that book, as expressing his plain and full meaning. And if he would put the mater to the issue of trial by human testimony, we should give him Twenty for one.

38. Now followeth his Third proposition, wherein he asserteth two things, first. That good works; seeing they naturally proceed from this birth, as heat from the fire, are absolutely necessary unto justification, as a causa sine qua non, & in which we are justified, and without which we cannot be justified. Secondly, That such good works are pure and perfect. These he cometh to prove Pag. 144. &c. And they would appear to be a contradiction; for seeing good works are the fruits of this birth, and by the birth we are justified, good works must follow justification, and so cannot be a cause; no not a causa sine qua non, for even a causa sine qua non must be before the effect. Again what is that to say, in which we are justified ? Is the meaning only, that these works are approven of God, & we, upon the account of them, so far as they are done according to a Gospel rule? What will this say, for justification of State, whereof we are here speaking? finally, How can it be said, that without good works we cannot be justified, seeing we are justified by the Birth, and the Birth is but the cause of good works; and so it hath been said, that good works are the Effects and Consequences of Justification? This would suspend justification until good works appeared, & so we should be justified by the Bi • th only Initially, or in a preparatory way, but not fully. And further, in this, he is worse then Papists, who will not say, that the good works by which we are justified, are such as can stand before God's tribunal, if He follow the strick rigor of Law, and not the Gospels admixture of mercy.

39. Let us hear his proofs: The first is our of James 2. whence he frameth this Argument. If no man be justified without faith, and no faith be lively and valide unto justification without works; then works are necessary unto justification: But the former is true, &c. Answ. (1.) Though it be true, that no man, at least come to years of discretion, is justified without faith, as an instrumental cause laying hold on, and applying Christ and his righteousness; yet this faith is not the Causa formalis objectiva of justification; and far less can works be a part of this cau • e, seeing they are but fruits and consequences of this faith. (2.) These words, and no faith is lively and valide unto justification, without works, may admit of a double sense; either the meaning may be, that no faith is valide unto justification, but that which is true and lively, and apt to produce good works; or that no faith is valide unto justification, but that which is actually produceing good works, and in so far as it is attended with good works. If the first be the meaning, then it is apparent, that good works cannot be said to be necessary unto justification, as a cause thereof, for it may be in actual • eing, when they are but in potentia. If the last be the true sense, this place of James will not evince it; for Abraham was justified before he offered up his Son Isaac : And then it would follow, that no man is justified in his sleep, or when he is not actually doing some good work. (3.) Thus we see, and the place of James is clear for it, that good works are only necessary, in the person justified; and necessary to prove the truth and reality of a justif • ing faith, to the man self, and to others: And so notwithstanding hereof that is always true, that the Scripture saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, James 2:23. Gen. 15:6. Rom. 4:3. Gal. 3:6.

40. His second proof is from several Scriptures, as Heb. 12:14. Mat. 7:21. John 13:17. 1 Cor. 7:19. Revel. 22:1 • and he thus frameth it, If these only shall enter into the Kingdom, who do the will of the Father; if these only be called wise builders & blessed, that do the sayings of Christ &c. then good works are necessary to salvation and to justification, The former is true &c. Answ. Not to quarrel at the Proposition, as containing words in it, which are not in the places cited. We shortly answ. that not one of these places speak of Justification, or mention the necessity of works thereunto: But only of their necessity unto final salvation; which we deny not: And if his Argument hold, no man shall be justified, before he be in heaven: All therefore that can hence be concluded is, that good works are necessary in the person justified, in order to glory; but not that they are necessary unto justification.

41. These two are all his arguments, and how slender proofs they are of what he undertook to prove, let any judge. He cometh in the next place §. 10. to answer some Objections, The first is taken from Luk. 17:10. When ye have done all that is commanded, say, we are unprofitable servants. Which is a clear proof, that our works, being but a doing of that, which is commanded, and so a doing of duty; and such as bring no advantage unto God, as a reparation of his Glory, or satisfaction to his justice for the wrongs done; and therefore can have no interest in that, which is the causa formalis objectiva of our justification; or in that, which we must lean to, as the ground of our justification before God; or in that, upon which we may expect absolution from the sentence of the Law, and freedom from the wrath and curse of God, due for the breach of the Law. What says he to this Argument? He grants,