THE Lightless-Starre: OR, Mr. JOHN GOODWIN discovered a Pelagio-Socinian: And this by the Examination of his Preface to his Book entitled Redemption Redeemed. Together with An Answer to his Letter entitled Confidence Dismounted. By RICHARD RESBURY, Minister of the Gospel at Oundle in Northamptonshire. Hereunto is annexed a Thesis of that Reverend, Pious, and Judicious Divine, Doctor Preston, sometimes of Immanuel College in Cambridge, concerning the Irresistibility of Converting Grace.  
Now as Jannes, and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the Truth; Men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the Faith.  
But they shall proceed no further; for their folly shall be made manifest unto all, as theirs also was.  2 Tim. 3. 8. 9 
London, Printed for john Wright at the Kings-Head in the Old-Bayly. 1652.   

The Epistle to the Reader.  
Reader,  
I Shall not long detain thee in the p●rch; only give we leave in a few words to acquaint thee with the Occasion and scope of this following discourse.  
For the Occasion, Mr. Goodwin having taken upon him to be a Champion in the Tents of most Anti-evangelieall, and often-routed Errors, and in a pompous Treatise, by him published, having thrown much defiance in the face of Truth and her Assertors: many of them triumphing in glory after their Warfare, others still in Conflict here below. Upon perusal of this piece of his, I found it a mere white● sepulchre, specious in the style and pretence of holiness, but made up for the substance, of roiten Errors, by broken Arguments, and perverted Scriptures seemingly supported. Whereupon I thought it very seasonable, having by me a little Manuscript comprising certain main Truth's opposite to his Errors, to send it abroad, if through the blessing of God it might help to establish some, and prevent those snares of death which he had spread. And I hope the Lord hath blest it unto divers. The Title of that small piece and the Epistle reflecting upon Mr. Goodwin and his Book, he found himself very angry, and in great Indignation prints an invective Letter, penned by him sitting in the scorners chair, sends it to me, requiring satisfaction for a charge of some particulars in mine Epistle against him. The particulars charged upon him were; sometimes Imperial dictates, instead of Arguments; sometimes monstrous Conclusions; sometimes wrested Quotations; sometimes uncoth Philosophy; sometimes consequential Blasphemy: to these I may now add, frequently, packing Sophistry. And he will needs persuade himself that his book is so clear of these crimes, as that I had not looked into it when I put in this charge against it Now though I had no thoughts of writing any thing against his Book, partly conscious of mine own weakness, partly he having provoked so many of the ablest of men, the University of Cambridge, the Assembly of Divines, and indeed the whole Orthodox name; yet he pressing upon Me in his Letter after much scorn, and high contempt, to give instances of my charge against him, I thought myself in equity obliged so to do, for their satisfaction especially who have not read his Book; for as for such as shall read it, they, if judicious, and impartial, will easily observe the particulars over and over. Hence jovercame myself, otherwise unwilling to think of such an answer to his Letter, as wherein I might give him the instances he required; but weighing withal how useless it would be to the public, only to answer a taunting Letter, and produce those particulars, I thought it expedient to add something further that might be of real usefulness to Christianity, and thereupon resolved the Examination of his Preface, which abounding with two pernicious Errors, Socinianism and Pelagianism, was most necessary to be called to Account; as likewise the examination of the four first Chapters of his Book, wherein is the Foundation of his Building, but a miserable sandy one. The former through the good hand of God upon me, I have dispatched, and here present it to thee; the latter, I hope, though in the midst of many employments and encumbrances by degrees to perform too, if not happily prevented by some better furnished for the Work. Thus for the Occasion; now for the Scope: It is partly to discover those dangerous Errors all along carried on in his Preface against the Grace of God; and the authority of Scripture, against both which Mr. Goodwin hath enormously ex alted the Reason and Will of man: partly to lay before thee, and clear up the main Doctrines of Gospel-Truth against those his Errors. And forasmuch as the Doctrines of the Grace of God were with much strength, clearness, and evidence of the Spirit maintained by those famous Lights of the Church who lived in the time of Pelagius, and the times immediately succeeding, especially Augustine and Prosper, and the Fathers assembled in the Milevitane Council, where Augustine was present, and in the second Arausican Council, I have therefore distinctly laid down the several states of the Pelagian Heresy, and the refutation thereof out of the forenamed Champions for the Truth of Christ, not for their Authority, but for their strength, clearness, elegancy, and excellency of Spirit, debasing Man, exalting God, and assigning their peculiar Privileges to the Elect of God. In perusal whereof thou wilt find Mr. Goodwin a son of Error, a disciple of Pelagius, and easily find a wide difference between the spirit of his Pen, and that of these renowned Ancients, the Assertors of the Churches Faith. Reader, I hope thou wilt think it worth thy labour, when thou hast made trial, to take a view of the main Doctrines of Grace, as by such excellent hands laid out, against such dangerous and destructive Errors, so many Ages since. As for my charge against Mr. Goodwin, thou shalt find it made good in the particulars in my Answer to his Letter, wherein thou wilt find him guilty of absurdities enough, and yet the particulars there produced are but some glean for Instanc●s. I have only One thing more to advertise thee of. It is very likely Mr. Goodwin will make what hast he can to reply upon this my Essay against him. My intention is (the Lord assisting) and as I may gain fr●● many employments, and distractions, leisure for the same, to go through his four first Chapters, before I will take any notice of what he shall reply; thou shalt find him in this discovery that I have made, a Star without Light, in that which I hope to make, a Builder without a Foundation. For where as in those Chapters should be the Foundation of his after-discourse, what a miserable One he hath there laid, I hope God will in time discover: and indeed I cannot still but expect, that my further endeavours will be prevented by some more strenuous Undertaker, raised up by the Lord in zeal to his Truth, however, till such a blessing shall appear, I shall be moving, though very slowly, onwards. Now the Lord command his blessing upon thy spirit in the perusal hereof, sanctifying thee by his Truth.  
Reader, I am Thy servant for the Truth of the Gospel, RICHARD RESBURY.   

An Answer to Mr. JOHN goodwin's LETTER, Vainly by him Entitled, Confidence dismounted.  
Sir,  
WHy you had not my Answer sooner, you may find in my Epistle to the Reader, viz. Because I intended something else besides an Answer to your Letter; which indeed I should not have answered at all, but only to make good the particulars of my charge, which you challenge me to. I shall therefore touch upon other things, as no better than impertinent, generally, and hasten to that.  
First, you find some exception against my reflection upon you in the Title and Epistle of my former Book, that you never saw my face, never heard of my name before; Your meaning, I suppose, is, to render me a son of the Earth, an obscure and worthless man. I confess myself such an one: But what if God will by the foolish and weak things of the World confound the Wise and Mighty? You might have made this construction thence, that I had no animosity against your person upon any private interest, you having never done me harm neither, which you mention as another aggravation; but only upon the public interest of Truth and Christianity did I touch upon you.  
Secondly, whereas the main of your grief and distaste is, that I have uttered hard sayings against the Truths of God. If they had been Truths which you defended, you had said something. That which follows, representing me according to the practice of the Heathen, clothing the Christians in Wolves, and Bears skins, etc. As likewise your high scorn of my expectation to give any stop to your Gangrene, may pass for a strain of Mr. john goodwin's Rhetoric: But whereas you charge the Truths of God by me maintained, as monstrous Principles, uncouth, hard, and horrid Notions concerning God, this passage I must put amongst your consequential Blasphemies.  
In the next place you declaim against my Book as a dead Drug, lying upon my hands; it is now in the hands of men, let it answer for itself: But whereas you so magnify yourself, as though you was another Luther, a man of such name, weight, and worth, that great preferment is little enough to discourage any to oppose you, you are in a pleasing dream. It is not unlikely but divers hands will be against you; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what term? only as an Ishmael 〈◊〉 ●…nitie. After this you tell me, it 〈◊〉 reasonably be thought by any thing in my Book, that I ever looked so much as a line of your Book in the face. I see your mighty reason deludes yourself as much in your conjectures, as it strives to do others in your Doctrines. Truly, Sir, I was not so scared with your Medusa's head, but I durst look upon it. And still I must tell you, there are those. Truths maintained in that little Book of mine, which overturn your Babel. In the next place you tell me, that I, or some Factor of mine, purchased the Outcries of two Diurnalists, whereas indeed I neither knew, nor thought of any such thing till I saw it done: but howsoever, it is a thing of common course, and for aught I know without offence, for them to give notice of such Books as are newly printed.  
After this you fall into a raving fit of pride and bitterness, where I leave you to come to yourself. Then you beseech me by the love I bear, or pretend to bear to the Lord Christ (which, comparing your sweet water with your bitter, I conceive a Pharicall profanation of the name of Christ) to tell with what goodness of Conscience, etc. I can say that the main Truths of God, concerning his Electing and Redeeming Grace have been highly assaulted by you. For answer, I refer you to my instances of your consequential Blasphemies, at the end of this my Rescript, and so your admonition here subjoined may pass. After this you run your descants, that I termed you an unhappy man. But, Sir, to let aside your trifling, I therefore call you an unhappy man, because you are a bold instrument to serve Satan against the Truth, and that not only whiles you live, but in after Ages too, when your bones shall be as rotten in the Grave, as your Errors are now in the World.  
Next you tell me what a daring hand you have for the Truth. Happy was you if you said true; less unhappy, if the contrary was not true, That your hand is daring against the Truth. For the Title of your Book, Redemption Redeemed, whether right or no, you shall be judged you say by a straighter Rule than my notion: No doubt, and that to your shame.  
In the next place, you tell me that I little know what Arminianism indeed meaneth. If I be amongst those that know not the depths of Satan, I am not much the worse; but so much I know of it, as I know that Arminius and Mr. Goodwin are Master and Scholar against the Truth of the Gospel. Then you tax me for dictating rather than arguing. Sir, I was then doing another thing, than taking your book to task; I doubt not but you shall find that in this following discourse I have argued with you.  
In the next place you resent it very deeply, that I should pray that the Lord would rebuke you. Our Saviour divers times rebuked his Disciples, and Satan in one of his great Apostles: why we may not pray that in Mr. Goodwin he would rebuke the spirit of Error, I know not: I think we pray it in effect as often as we pray, that His Kingdom may come.  
After this you challenge me to show you, where you at all, much less seriously, despise the peculiar Grace of God, & boldly bid defiance to it. I answer, the whole bent of your discourse, is both against it, & against Election the ground of it, & carried on with much defiance; And even here where you would wipe off this spot, you show what an adversary you are to it, by a famous contradiction. You demonstrate (you say) the peculiarity of it; that is, in your interpretation, the signal excellency & glory of it to consist in this, that it encompasseth the whole world about, and particularly addresseth itself to every creature of Mankind. A worthy demonstration! peculiar, because common; such a thing is light, because it is darkness. Would any man have thought that Mr. goodwin's Logic could not distinguish between particular and peculiar? And that what is common, that is, belonging to all (suppose particularly presented and tendered) should yet be peculiar, that is, belonging only to some?  
I do not much wonder that you have proved all Orthodox Writers of Primitive and Modern times to be with yourself Pelagian, forasmuch as you can prove one opposite species to be another, therefore the same because opposite; here is a way of demonstration, which neither Euelide nor Arch●●ede ever dreamt of.  
Concerning the saving Grace of God, you say that we hold it so decreed to them that shall be saved, that there is an absolute nenecessity for them to embrace it: You know that we maintain the necessity flowing from the Decree of God. In this argument is an hypothetical necessity. For your own Tenet here it may well be added to your monstrous conclusions. For your challenge of the University, here you lay down my words, where you make much a do about the word it, when I say that you may set it off bravely, what this it should refer to. Briefly, it is an indefinite expression very usual, as much as if I had said, that you might set off the matter bravely. Then you deny that you challenge the University: It is evident hence that you do; because though disjunctively you desire their attestation or contestation, yet so confident are you, that if your doctrine be not (as indeed it is nothing less) the Truth of God, you are an high Blasphemer more than once.  
Upon this occasion you inform me of some gracious characters found in Arminius, and hereupon I must crave leave to inform you, that Pelagius was an errand Heretic, though a man so far of name for Piety, that Austin in his first Writings against him, forbore to name him, that he might preserve his honour. By this time you are come to the particulars of my charge, and here you are very willing to tell me that I had not read your book. Truly, Sir, I had been a very adventurous man, if I had proclaimed you a nourisher of those evil beasts, and had not taken notice of their dens, that I might point them out when called thereto. Though this I will grant you (how much or little soever I had read) a man need not read one quarter of your Book to make good such a charge. But why did I not with one pointed Argument draw blood of this evil beast? That which then I had to do, was only to give warning against it, and the book by me published doth afford many Arguments against your Doctrines, though it be no formal answer to your Book.  
And whereas here you twit me proverbially in these words, Is it fair for you to say, that you never indeed read all Chrysostoms' Works, whereas you never read so much as one line of them? I shall for answer return you a few lines out of chrysostom, which methinks run very cross to your Doctrine (in your long digression contended for, but all in vain) of the apostasy of True Believers. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
Chrys. Ser. 3. in 2 Cor. 1. v. 22, 22.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I care not if I English it for the Readers sake. Again by what is past, what is to come is confirmed; for if it be he that establisheth us in Christ (that is, that suffers us not to be moved aside from the Faith in Christ) and he that hath anointed us, and given the holy Spirit in our hearts, how shall he not give us the things to come? For if he hath given the beginnings, and the foundations, and the root, and the fountain (as the true knowledge of himself, the participation of his Spirit) how shall he not give us the rest? For if those things be given for these, much more he that hath given these will also give those. And if he gave us these things whilst we were yet enemiet, much more will he freely give those things to us being made friends: Wherefore he said not simply the Spirit, but called it the Earnest, that thence thou mightst trust boldly for the whole; for except he would give the whole, he would not have chosen to give the Earnest, and to lose it vainly, and to no end.  
In that which next follows, you please yourself with vain talk, than you pick a quarrel with me for my Antithesis, when I say Mr. goodwin's boldness will excite modesty, you like it better to oppose impudence to modesty, take what you like; I hoped a soft word might have found pardon.  
Hence you pass to the particulars of my Charge, all which I shall give you in a Catalogue by and by, mean time touching upon particulars.  
First, Imperiall dictates, the sum of what you say here is, 1. That you abound with Arguments no less than Newcastle with Coles: Well, sometimes good Homer may be taken napping. 2. You fly upon the Assembly of Divines, as if the Confession of Faith by them set forth was not proved. Sir, by Scripture it is proved, but whether all those Scriptures you will allow, or not, I cannot tell; this I know, they are many of them above, many of them cross to your reason, and therefore it is not according to your rule to allow them.  
Secondly, monstrous Conclusions, these you tell me are the genuine issue of mine own Principles, you shall see the contrary presently. Then you give me as my Prophets, and Founders of my Faith, in Election, etc. Calvin, Musculus, Bullinger, Martyr, etc. And this, etc. takes in Beza, Luther, Piscat●r, Pareus, Zanchy, Perkins, Twisse, A●es, Rivet, and whom not of savoury name and eminent service in the Church of God, since her coming out of mystical Babylon? These not Founders of Faith, but blessed Instructers in the Faith, and Defenders of it; the Synod of Dort, the only Synod of eminency since the Protestant name, you grant me a little after. Who now are the men of your Faith? What obscure names compared with these? Armi●ius that bold corrupter of the Truth, Bertius the Apostate, Tilenus his brother in Apostasy, Corvinus Squire of the body to Arminius, with such like.  
Thirdly, your wrested Quotations; if I should instance in the Scriptures wrested by you, together with Authors, I must instance your whole Book— Tolli tota theatra jube,— I shall therefore in this place give you a taste of Quotations out of Authors only. The special reason of your quoting Authors, you say is to show, that your Doctrine wants not an arm of flesh to stand by it; that is, that it hath been held by Orthodox and pious men; but the defence of the truth by Orthodox and pious men, according to the Word of God, is the arm of the Spirit rather than an arm of Flesh: indeed it hath been only an arm of Flesh that hath stood by your Doctrines.  
2. That the greatest opposers of your Doctrine were inconsistent with themselves; in this endeavour you show not them inconsistent, but yourself a Juggler.  
Fourthly, uncouth Philosophy. This by and by with the rest of his fellows.  
Fifthly, Consequential blasphemies, here you want my Heifer to plow with, to finde out the riddle; and than you sweat and trifle, and seem to be wand'ring in a filthy dream, your expressions are so immodest and unchaste. I will tell you my riddle briefly. I suppose you rather blinded with error than sinning of malice against the truth, and therefore your blasphemy not intentional: but upon supposition that they are the truths of God which you oppose, (as indeed they are his main Gospel's Truths) your revile are so high against them, as they amount to no less than high blasphemy, such as Paul was guilty of, when yet he sinned of ignorance and unbelief; which I was willing to allay with the term consequential; but forasmuch as you are at such a loss about that term, I am content you substitute, blasphemy express. Neither do I pass that your Critic Learning will here find fault with my Antithesis again.  
Here you take occasion to tell me of a Triumphant Argument of yours against Eternal Reprobation, that it contains this blasphemy in it, That God should reprobate himself. Him I here is a Gorgon indeed! Sir, we shall see the vanity and ridiculous foppery of this Argument when we come to examine it in your Book; in the mean time let me put one question to you that teach that God created all things at once, and that from eternity, did he create himself.  
In the next place you modestly and humbly (as you say) entreat me to show you one instance of any of these, yet your humble modesty subjoins that I may take ten Universities to my assistance; I shall Sir give instance of every one of them, and borrow no help in a case so obvious and gross of any one University. But than you require an impossibility, that I would show you one spot of your darkness, but that I would not show you darkness. Sir, whilst I show you those things, I have nothing but darkness to show you: Indeed here ten Universities cannot assist me to satisfy your contradiction. Then you would know why I call your Doctrine Arminianism, and being one that loves to hear yourself talk, you run an idle wordy descant hereupon. I have showed you in the following discourse, wherein your Doctrine is not Arminianism only, but Jesuitism, Pelagianism, and Socinianism, as I had occasion from your Preface, and I hope to show you more of the same kind hereafter from your Book. As for my Sermons you have promised to destroy them by the fall of the Synod of Dort upon them, crushing them into Atoms no doubt. Sir, when this great wrack comes, I shall believe the Astrologers of our times, that the last Eclipse of the Sun portended some notable thing. In the mean time I thank you that you have given me the Synod of Dort, now for a recompense take you the Council of Trent.  
You tell me the nineth to the Romans is a wrong field wherein to dig for absolute Reprobation; but your word is no whit currant with me. You add, that I myself making my Elect ones liable to be seduced by a spirit of Error, do little less than shake the foundation of absolute Reprobation. Here first profanely you call them mine elect, than you argue to this purpose, this liableness to seduction is such, as indangereth the salvation of the seduced, or not. If not, 1. Care against it is in vain, because thus, Men whether Elect, or not Elect, will be liable thus far at least to be seduced, though all errors in the world were suppressed. For answer; 1. Men not elect shall certainly deceive themselves, and be seduced by Satan to the loss of salvation. Your limitation (thus far at least) in reference to such, is very Atheological, nor will your Parenthesis concerning my notion salve your error here. 2. Granting what you say for the elect, yet there is a latitude in this liableness, and spirits of error are instruments fitted to seduce further, than otherwise they were likely to be; and therefore care is to be had against them, because their salvation as the end enjoins the care of all means tending to that end, and against all things that tend to cross that end; though it be familiar to you in spite of all Logic to argue from the end to the exclusion of the means, whereas the end infers them; again, because the more they are seduced, the more they dishonour God. 2. Care against it is for their hurt, say you; to this end you add that according to my principles, all the sins of the Elect shall work for good to them, and not only be forgiven them immediately upon the Commission. But, 1. Where do I say they shall be forgiven them immediately upon the Commission? 2. Suppose the sins of the Elect in the conclusion turn to their good, even their sins not excluded that comprehensive promise, All things shall work together for good to them that love God; What then? Then you say a care of preventing their seduction would be a care to keep them from a certain benefit. For answer, let me tell you out of what School you had this Argument, truly out of the same with that profane Caviller, Rom. 3. 5. & 7. who argues thus; but our unrighteousness commends the righteousness of God, therefore is God unrighteous if he take vengeance? and if the truth of God hath abounded through my lie to his glory, therefore should I do ill to forbear lying. 2. Your● Sophistry is gross and sordid, things in themselves evil, though accidentally of good issue are to be avoided, and what puny Sophister knows not this? Art thou a Master in Israel and knowest it not? And now having thus far wandered in the first member of your distinction, you come to the second, that if this liableness to seduction may end in the destruction of the Elect, than Election staggers, and if so, then Reprobation too: I answer, no such liableness do I understand, as that any one of the Elect ever did or ever shall perish. Then you tell me, but that you are unworthy to teach me, I might have learned from the 359. and 360. pages of your book, how impertinently I cited these words of the Apostle, the foundation of God stands sure, there will be time and place I doubt not, to show the falsehood of your interpretation there, in the mean time you are unfit indeed to teach me or any man else, because you are such a stranger to the Truth, but ere long you hope to vindicate the nineth to the Romans from the monstrous and horrid Doctrine of absolute Reprobation. Once again, the Lord rebuke thee thou devouring tongue: In the close, you profess your hopes, that I will be more tender of your name and reputation; the Lord make me tender of his Truth, and in tenderness thereof a poor instrument in his hand to blast your errors, whereupon if your name be built, it must take part with them. Now Sir, I have only a basket of your rotten figs and wild grapes to present you with, accordding to the particulars of my charge.  
A taste of M. goodwin's lovely Doctrines and Discourse in some few Instances gathered here and there (for the most part in his own words, always in his own sense, where for brevity sake the words are altered) where we have,  

1. His Imperial Dictates.  
1. DOubtless many persons both of men and women have been propagated and born into the world, whose parents were not determined to their generation. pag. 7.  
2. He (that is, God) hath indeed determined indefinitely, and in the general, that bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days, but if we speak of any particular persons, who being bloody and deceitful came thereby to an untimely end, neither their sin, or their suffering by an un imely end, was determined by God. p. 9  
3. The actions and motions of natural causes are not ordinarily by the concurrence of God determined. p. 12. The like for the motion of brute Creatures (p. 13) in these words; Nor are the motions or actings of the second kind of causes mentioned, as of birds, beasts, etc. any whit more determined than of the former by the presence of God with them in their actions, the concurrence of God with the Lamb when it runs to the dam, and when it flies from the wolf, is doubtless one and the same. Ibid.   

2. His monstrous Conclusions.  
1. It is a thing as unquestionable as that the Sun is up at noon day, that reason and understanding in men are competent to judge of the things of God, of all of them that are contained in the Scripture, according to the degree of their manifestation there. Praf. pag. 10.  
2. Men that act according to the true principles of that reason which God hath planted in them, cannot but believe and be partakers in the precious Faith of the Gospel. pag. 11.  
3. The Scripture knows not the Word natural, in any sense whereby it distinguisheth the unregenerate state of man from the regenerate. pag. 12.  
4. By the Natural man, 1 Cor. 2. 14, is understood the weak Christian: by the Spiritual man, the grown Christian: by the Things of God, only deep Mysteries. pag. 13.  
5 God doth require of me no more belief in the Mystery of the Trinity, Incarnation of Christ, and such like, than my reason is able to apprehend. pag. 17.  
6. The days of man's continuance on earth are not determined as so many and no more by any decree of God. Book pag. 9 Such Decrees are fitter to make an Alcoran divinity than Christian. pag. 11.  
7. The Apostle Paul acquits himself and all others of all such irregular acts whereunto they are necessitated, though by an inward principle. pag. 13.  
8. God might, and did absolutely determine the giving up of Christ to suffer death upon the cross, and yet not determine either that Herod or Pontius Pilate, or any other persons by name, should have acted this his determination. pag. 23.  
9 When a man's person, house, or goods are consumed by fire, there is no competent ground to think that these were determined by God. pag. 25.  
10. As hands, eyes, ears, grief, repentance, etc. are attributed unto God, which according to their proper signification agree not to him: so Prescience or Foreknowledge, Election and Reprobation. pag. 29.  
11. Intentions, Purposes, and Decrees, as well as Knowledge, or Foreknowledge, are only Anthropopathetically ascribed unto God. pag. 32.  
12. God doth not always decree what he purposeth, and intendeth to effect, because he judgeth it meet to act only to a certain degree of efficiency, fo● the effecting and obtaining of some things, by which if he cannot effect or obtain them, he judgeth it not meet to act any further. pag. 36.  
13. God never starveth his ends for want of means, and yet the things themselves are many times not obtained. Ibidem.  
14. The object of God's Foreknowledge is far larger than the object of his intentions, or decrees: the object of his decrees, only such things which he purposeth to effect without any exception: the object of his intentions or purposes, such things only which he desireth and intendeth to give being unto, but with condition and limitation. pag. 39  
15. Love, and Hatred, Mercy, and Justice, in God towards his Creature, do not argue any different affection in him, but only a different dispensation, so that we may truly affirm that he both truly hates and loves at once, one and the same person. pag. 44.  
16. If God reprobated any from Eternity, It must be himself. pag. 45.  
17. When God prevails by his Word and Spirit with men in time to believe, and during this their believing continues the same means towards their further establishment, he is said to have elected them. Again, when God upon men's neglect, refusal, or abuse of the means of Grace, shall withdraw these means to such a degree that they fall to open profaneness, etc. he is now said to have reprobated them. pag. 62.  
18. The love of God in Election is primarily and directly pitched upon a certain species of men, and not upon the persons of men, save by accident and indirectly only, & in a Consequential way; so that it argues no change in God, though one while he love, and another while hates the same person, because no person is the object of his Elective love, but only as righteous, nor any person the object of his reprobating hatred, but only as wicked. pag. 64.  
19 The Apostles meaning in this Antithesis, not of Works, but of him that Calleth, is plainly this, not of Works, but of Faith. pag. 463  
20. Elect through sanctification of the Spirit etc. this implies, that such a state and condition as this, is that very state wherein what persons should at any time be found, God in his eternal Counsels judgeth it meet to confer the honourable title of Elect upon them. Ibidem.  
21. To choose us in Christ signifies to intend purpose or decree to choose us, as being, or when we should be in Christ by believing. Ibidem.  
22. Though sober men will not, yet God may intend, and will, that which he knows shall never come to pass. pag. 424.  
23. When God foresaw that the good gifts which he bestows upon some men would be abused by them, yet his love in giving is no whit less, because it is not in his power to have done more to the preventing of such abuse than he hath done. pag. 426.  
24. The utmost extent of the power of God is to proceed no further in vouchsafing Grace or the means of Grace, than to leave men a power of rejecting the Grace offered, and so of ruining themselves. pag. 427.  
25. It may be as truly and properly said of God, when he vouchsafeth the least sufficiency of means unto some men, as when he affordeth the greatest unto others, that he doth what he is able to do, as well for the one as the other. pag. 430.  
26. When we teach that Christ died for all men, we mean that he wholly dissolved and took off from all men the guilt and condemnation that was brought upon all men by Adam's transgression, so that now no man shall be condemned but for such sins only which shall be actually committed by him, o● for such omissions which was in his power to have prevented. pag. 433.  
27. In this sense we desire to be understood when we affirm that God intends the salvation of all men without exception by the death of Christ, that upon this account he vouchsafeth sufficiency of means unto all men (considered as men, and before their wilful sinning that most heinous and unpardonable sin) whereby to be saved. pag. 448.  
28. All the acts and actings of God in one kind or other are jointly and severally one and the same thing with his Nature, Essence, and Being pag. 447.  
29. The doctrine of Universal Redemption, reserves Infants, and such as are defective in discretion, from the vengeance of eternal fire. pag. 478  
30. This Doctrine presents God in his decree of Reprobation, as truly and really intending the salvation of men, as in his decree of Election. pag. 479.  
31. Regeneration (which the Scripture appropriates only to years of discretion) relates not to the natural generation as such, but to the spiritual state of men, who being degenerated from the innocency of their childhood (wherein they are, if not simply, and absolutely, yet comparatively innocent, harmless, free from pride, malice, etc.) have need to be reinstated thereinto. pag. 330.  
32. For the dismembering of the body of Christ, for the interchange of members betwixt Christ and Satan, for the frequent repetition of Regeneration, there is no inconvenience, nothing unworthy of God, or of Christ in these things. pag 327, 328, 329.  
33. To refrain sinning customarily, & against Conscience, which kind of sin only excludes from the kingdom of God is no great matter of difficulty to the Saints. pag. 337.   

3. His wrested Quotations.  
1. Against the transient Actions of God in time, this following Quotation out of Peter Martyr: God moves the heart of man at a certain time, whereas he moved them not before, which notwithstanding we question not, but he doth without any change of himself. pag. 48.  
2. Against the infallibility of effects by Free-working causes, this following Quotation of Austin: God so governeth all things which he hath created, that he suffereth them to excercise and act their own proper motions. pag. 53.  
3. Against the determination of the Will by any act of God, this following Quotation out of Gaudentine: Doubtless it is no less than high Sacrilege so much as once to think, that God, who is not only good and just, but Goodness and Justice itself, should either command, or constrain that to be done which himself condemneth. pag. 54.  
4. Out of Peter Martyr to the same purpose: God indeed draws all things, but yet he yields after such a manner that he troubles or disturbs nothing: so things, though in respect of their natures they incline indifferently unto either side, yet are they by God bowed more unto one. Ibid.  
5. To the same purpose out of Polanus. God so worketh by the means of Nature, that he worketh nothing contrary to their nature, and therefore the Providence of God constraineth not the will of the creature. pag. 55. I forbear more to that purpose in the following pages.  
6. For Universal Redemption, out of Austin. Against the wound of Original sin, wherewith in Adam the nature of all men was corrupted, and become dead, etc. the death of the Son of God is a true, potent, and singular remedy; who being not liable to the debt of death, and the only person without sin, died for those that were sinners and debtors; therefore as to the greatness and potency of the price, and as far as concerns one (and the same) cause of Mankind, the blood of Christ is the Redemption of the whole World, but they who pass through this world without the faith of Christ, and the Sacrament of Regeneration, are strangers to this Redemption: therefore whereas by reason of one nature of all men, and one cause of all men truly undertaken by our Lord, all men may truly be said to be redeemed; yet all men are not brought (or rescued rather) out of Captivity, the propriety of Redemption is doubtless with them, out of whom the Prince of the world is cast forth, and who are not more vessels of the Devil, but members of Christ, whose death is not so bestowed upon mankind, that they who never come to be regenerate should belong to the redemption thereof; but so, that what by one only example is done for all, might be celebrated in particular persons by a particular Sacrament, for that cup of immortality which was tempered and made of our infirmity, and the divine power, hath in it wherewith to profit all men, (or has indeed in itself, that it may profit all men) but if it be not drunk it profits not. p. 524.  
7. Out of the Synod of Dort. God commiserating mankind being fallen, sent his Son, who gave himself a price of redemption for the sins of the whole world,— and a little after, Since that price which was paid for all men, and which will certainly benefit all that believe unto eternal life, yet doth not profit all men, etc. And again, So then Christ died for all men, that all and every man might by the mediation of Faith through the virtue of this ransom obtain forgiveness of sins, and eternal life. p. 546.   
I shall trouble neither you nor the Reader with any more of your wrested Quotations, this last gives light to discover how far you are from integrity in your Quotations; for you know abundantly the Synod of Dort understood these general expressions not universally, but indefinitely, as did other Authors the like expressions; we might add the same wresting of Quotations out of Calvin and others, for falling away from the state of grace, but he that shall instance all that you wrest, shall leave little behind.  

4. His uncouth Philosophy.  
1. That's but a pretty strain of Physics, p. 1. Trees that are throughly and deeply rooted in the earth, will grow and flourish though the dew or rain from heaven should seldom or never fall upon them.  
2. For future Contingents at the same time when God knoweth that they will come to pass, he knoweth also that there is no necessity that they should come to pass, that they may well be prevented, in which respect in case they should not come to pass, the knowledge of God should suffer no defeiture, p. 27.  
3. Purposes and intentions in their propriety, as in men, ever suppose that the things purposed and intended shall be effected, no man ever intending that which he certainly knows beforehand never will be effected; but it doth not follow from hence, that purposes attributed unto God must be attended with expectance that the thing said to be purposed by him shall come to pass; to reason thus, God intended not the salvation of all men, because he certainly knows that all men will not be saved, is to reason weakly. p. 33.  
4. God doth not will the conversion of Peter before he is converted, nor the glorification of Peter before he be glorified, though he willed or rather willeth both the one or the other from eternity. p. 51.  
5. God wrought as much towards the making of Peter a believer before he did believe, as he did when he was actually brought to believe. ibid.  
6. It is impossible that God should act any thing in time other than what he acted from eternity. p. 59  
7 Though the earth and heavens receive their beings in two several days, yet that which God did towards their productions was done by him at once; and though no plant of the field was actually produced before it was in the earth, yet in respect of what God contributed towards their actual production they were produced before. p. 49.  
8. That which depends upon any deliberate or elective act of the will of man, cannot be said to be positively, peremptorily, or absolutely declared by God. p. 185.   

5. His Consequential Blasphemies.  
1. In case any such assurance of the unchangeableness of God's love were to be found in, or could be regularly deduced from the Scriptures, it were a just ground to any intelligent man to question their authority, and whether they were from God or no. p. 335.  
2. That Doctrine which denies that Christ died for all men without exception, directly tends to divide between the Creature and his Creator, and to raise jealousies and hard thoughts in the former against the latter. p. 475.  
3. The same Doctrine represents God as engaged to the days of eternity in counsels and purposes of blood, yea of the blood of the precious souls of men, and this without any consideration or respect had to any the future sins of those against whom it supposeth him so implacably and unmercifully engaged, p. 478  
4. The Doctrine of Perseverance hath been found a mere Impostor, an appearance of Satan in the likeness of an Angel of light.   
I tell the Reader, that to these I may add your packing Sophistry, which is so frequently found throughout your Book, as cannot but be obvious to every intelligent Reader, I shall therefore point at some certain heads rather than trouble myself to single out instances: Sometimes you transform your Adversaries Doctrines; sometimes you confound the immanent and transient actions of God together; sometimes again you confound absolute and conditional necessity, the determination of the will of man by God with coaction; these things and the like are nothing rare in your discourse. And now Sir, after all this unpleasing, but necessary conflicting, I humbly beseech the Father of Mercies to pardon unto me whatsoever it is, wherein I may have swerved from the rule of Righteousness, as likewise to vouchsafe both to you and me such further light and assistance of his Spirit, as that we agreeing together in the truth and purity of the Gospel, I may cheerfully and with much rejoicing, subscribe myself,  
Your affectionate friend and brother in Christ, Rich. Resbury. From my Study, April 17. 1652.   

The lightlesse-Star. OR, Mr. john Goodwin discovered a Pelagio-Socinian.  

CHAP. I.  
The Examination of the Preface.  
THat which we have to do in the Examination of this Preface is, to discover the errors of it, and to clear up the truth against them. The errors wherewith it is fraught, are of two sorts, yet near a kin, and mutual supporters each to other; both very dangerous, and against the very heart of Christianity; Socinian, against the authority of the Scriptures; and Pelagian against the grace of God. According to our intention for the discovery and refutation of these, we shall diligently insist upon those passages in this Preface, where those monsters appear, passing by, or lightly touching upon the rest, to avoid tediousness and impertinency: And therefore, whereas we have four parts of this ensuing Discourse, the first, his invitation to read his book, the second, his motives thereunto, the third a prevention of objections there-against, the fourth an Apology for his change of judgement, as he calls it. The first part, or his invitation we shall pass by (what ever observations might be made, showing the spirit of the Author) as but the sounding of his trumpet to bid battle to the truth. Upon the same account for his first motive to read his Book, which is a long and plausible discourse against error in general; we shall not speak much to it; only a word or two for caution about it. It is, though a discourse against error, yet itself very erroneous. 1. In the aim and tendency of it, which is insensibly and by covert insinuations, to instill those errors into the Reader, which afterwards are more openly contended for. 2. In the Contexture of it, which manifests together with his ensuing discourse, what was the aim of it. To make this clear, we shall take notice of a passage or two in it, and then add some thing afterwards expressed, which will satisfy, concerning the aim we speak of. 1. For the insinuation of his Socinian doctrine against the authority of the Scriptures, we have this expression from him; That a man or woman, who have for many years professed the Gospel, may in process of time come to discover vanity in some erroneous principle or tenet, wherewith their judgements had been leavened, for some considerable space formerly, and so grow into a disapprobation or contempt of it; and yet may very possibly think and suppose, that the Gospel's favours or countenanceth it, and that otherwise they should never have owned nor approved it. What Socinianism is here vented, against the authority of the word of God, we shall show hereafter; where we have occasion to insist against this error, and therefore desire the Readers patience till he shall meet with it in due place.  
2. For the insinuation of his Pelagianism exalting the nature of man against the grace of God; generally his high declaiming against error, as the only cause of sin, is secretly to undermine the doctrine of original sin, as to the corruption of the will. Particularly, we shall transcribe a passage or two wherein he so derives both our ignorance and sinfulness from error, voluntarily by ourselves, in our own persons contracted, as thence he evacuates the Scripture-doctrine concerning both our natural blindness of mind, and corruption of will, to this purpose, he hath this passage, That error, and all mis-notions of God, etc. pollute, corrupt, and embase the mind and understanding of a man, by their union, and communion with them; as a person of a noble house and blood, stains his honour, and reputation by coupleing himself in marriage with a woman of base parentage and conditions. This is a clear insinuation, as if the understanding in the natural man was in a state of great excellency and honour, contrary to the doctrine of original sin concerning it, there is none that understands, etc. vain man would fain be wise, though he be borne like a wild Asses Colt. But of this more hereafter; Another passage of like import, speaking of erroneous and lying apprehensions and conceits concerning God, he adds wherewith men willingly suffer their minds and consciences to be embased and corrupted even to a spiritual rottenness and putrefaction. Again, that error disposeth the soul which drinks it in, and converseth with it, to a spiritual death. In both which he supposeth nothing less, then that the soul is by original sin, through the corruption of the will in a state of spiritual death, rottenness and putrefaction.  
And thus having showed from his discourse itself his erroneous aim and insinuation accordingly. It is now time for me further to show the same by what is afterwards expressed, as I promised, which I shall do by quoting his own words, which in the tenth page of this preface are these.  
It is a thing as unquestionable, as that the Sun is up at noonday, that Reason and Understanding in men are competent to judge of the things of God, at least of some, yea, of many of them; or rather indeed of all that are contained in the Scriptures, according to the degree of their discovery and manifestation there: And after some instances whereby he would confirm this doctrine, he comes to this conclusion pag. 11.  
Therefore certainly those noble faculties and endowments of Reason & Understanding in men, as they are sustained, supported, and assisted (here are, as ever, words enough) by the spirit of God in the generality of men, are in a capacity of apprehending, discerning, understanding (plenty of words still) the things of God in the Gospel; yea, and evident it is from the Scriptures, that men act beneath themselves, are remiss and slothful in awakening those principles of light and understanding, that are vested in their natures, or else willingly choke, suppress, and smother them (who may complain for want of words, but this is his perpetual manner, which I shall not need after these hints to take much notice of) if they remain in the snare of unbelief. Then after a little more discourse he hath (with reference to a text of Scripture which will not own his inference) these words; Which clearly implieth that men who act and quit themselves, according to the true principles of that reason, which God hath planted in them, cannot but believe and be partakers in the precious faith of the Gospel. To the same purpose in the fourth chapter of his book, pag. 41. He professeth his opinion, That that life and salvation, which Christ in reality of design, and with semblable acceptance in the sight of God, had from the beginning purchased by his death for men; did, or doth (as it were) in the first break, or dawning of it, appear and discover itself in those principles of natural light, reason, judgement, conscience, understanding, etc. which are found in the generality of men upon their coming into the world: Then he tells us, That men generally, as they grow up in the world, convert those principles of light and understanding to make provision for the lusts of the flesh; and that partly by an un-man-like ossitancy, partly out of an inordinate propenfity to comport with the world, they suffer their judgements and understandings to be corrupted, adulterated, embased, and abused by many false and foolish Principles, and notions, which turn them quite a side from a regular and due prosecution of that life and salvation, which is in Christ for them, and might have been obtained by them; and that ignorance, or incapacity rather, of the things of eternal life which is in men, they have voluntarily contracted and brought upon themselves. By this time, Reader, thou wilt discern something of the mystery of iniquity lurking in this discourse of his against error; the refutation of what is here averred, we must defer a while, till we shall meet with it in its proper place, where, the Lord assisting, we are resolved to grapple close with Master Goodwin, and to make it (we hope) clear as the Sun, that he is not only a Teacher of falsehood, but of the Pelagian Heresy; in the mean time we must follow him, as he goes on, and in the first place we shall find him a Socinian.   

CHAP. II.  Goodwin. 
THe second thing (▪ good Reader) wherewith I desire to possess and fill thee, judgement and conscience, heart and soul, and all that is within thee, to strengthen ttine hand to a diligent perusal of the Treatise ensuing is, the high necessity that lieth upon thee (as it doth upon all the world besides respectively) to awake, raise, and engage all those worthy faculties, and endowments which God hath vested in thee, reason, judgement, memory, understanding, about the things of thine eternal peace; and because this Iron I fear hath of late been much blunted with the earthly conceits, and suggestions of many, I am desirous to put so much the more strength to it; but to me it is the first borne of wonder and astonishment, that amongst men, professing the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the wisdom of God; yea, amongst the Teachers themselves of this wisdom; men should be found, who think they do God and men very good service, in persuading men wholly to lay aside their reasons, judgements, understandings in matters of Religion, and not to make use of, or engage any of these in their inquiries after matters of a Spiritual, or supernatural concernment; doubtless Satan is a debtor to those persons, who have seasoned the world with the unsavoury salt of such a Principle as this, for all the religious respects, and high entertainment, that have of late been given by many amongst us, to all those wicked, senseless, sapless, hideous, and blasphemous Doctrines and Opinions, which like the dead Frogs of Egypt make the Land to stink; for if men may not interpose with their reasons, and judgements, to distinguish between Spirit and Spirit, Opinion and Opinion, why should not one Spirit be believed as well as another? and one Opinion received as well as another? or if the difference be not to be made by the interposure and exercise of reason in a man, I demand, by what other principle or means ought it to be made? If it be said partly by the Word of God, and partly by the Spirit of God. I answer;  Resbury. 
Now he begins to come closer to his work, and by bolder steps than hitherto, moves on to the open venting of such Doctrines, as he durst but nibble at till now. In his first motive he hath made such a long discourse against Errors, as he begins to grow confident, that in the second, to which he is now come, he may broach error without suspicion.  
Here we have an hideous outcry against such, as teach the laying aside of natural reason, in inquiries about matters of Religion, and of a 
* Let it be here observed, that he useth Spiritual, and supernatural for one and the same, which will be of use afterwards.  spiritual and supernatural concernment; and to make it sound the better, he tells us of such worthy faculties, reason, understanding, etc. in reference to these inquiries, as if he had never heard any thing of Original sin, the blindness, darkness, perverseness, folly, brutishness of the Natural man; and then, as is the manner of all Seducers, and Heretics, he draws his charge confused and in general terms, and therein vents the bitterness of his spirit to the full against all the Orthodox, that is generally, the Ancient Fathers, the Schoolmen of best note after them; and in the last place the eminent Lights of the last Age's reformation, and of this present Generation, these must be Factours for Satan, seasoners of the World with unsavoury salt, the abettors at least of all those borrid opinions, and blasphemies which have darkened our Land. What Jesuit hath a blacker mouth, or a stronger breath? But let us inquire into his Doctrine, and the mystery of deceit working in the bowels of it, and that by distinct proceeding in particulars, which he hath fraudulently wrapped up together in general.  
1 Then it is true, that in some sense Reason is to be made use of in these inquiries of Religion, and Spiritual concernments, as  
1 Suppose an Heathen, not yet owning the true God, and his Word, he is by arguments propounded to his reason to be dealt with; by the Book of the Creation to prove the one true God, as likewise by extrinsecall arguments to be drawn to read the Word of God, that by the word itself, as the Spirit shall please to enlighten by it, he may come to own the Divine Canon, for the true word of the true God.  
2 Granting the Scripture the un-erring Word of God, in whatsoever it shall deliver, we are diligently to employ our reason, in searching into the mind of God by the Scriptures, as our light to enlighten, and rule to direct our reason, as that word, which is able to make wise unto Salvation, and to make the man of God perfect, throughly furnished to every good work. And in two things here are our reasons to be exercised; 1. The Grammar of the Scriptures, or the forms of expression, to find out the truth of them. 2. The Logic of the Scripture, or the true discourse thereof, and this in three things; the Scope, the Context, and Selfe-consent; Scripture compared with Scripture, the more obscure places interpreted by the clearer, and so in all the analogy of faith held. Now, Sir, you know very well that in this sense, and upon these terms, none of those, against whom you bend your stile, deny the use of reason, for they do not teach that men in seeking into the meaning of the Scripture must become either fools, or madmen, or Enthusiasts. And was it in this sense only that you require the use of reason, or in any such sense as preserves the due authority of the Word, as for itself to be believed, as the perfect rule, you had never raised such Tragedies about the use of reason, or the laying it aside, as here you have; but we shall now pass to the enquiry, in what sense it is to be laid aside, and there I am afraid we shall find you requiring the use of it, so as to evacuate the authority of the Word, therefore we say,  
2. It is true, that in some sense man must lay aside his reason, in matters of religion, and in inquiries after matters of Spiritual, and supernatural concernment; as,  
1 That our assent to such truths, as the Scriptures hold forth, may be the assent of Faith, the immediate ground of it must not be the Selfe-evidence of the thing testified by the Scriptures unto reason, but the authority of God testifying. Hence that known Doctrine of the Schools, that the formal object (I like as well to say the proper ground) of faith is the first truth, or God himself revealing his mind. Hence suppose a truth taught in the Scripture is likewise demonstrated to my reason by Philosophical arguments; (as for instance, That God created the world, that is, made it of nothing;) so far is my assent to this truth, the assent of Divine faith, as it is grounded upon the authority of Divine testimony that assent which is grounded upon Philosophical demonstration, is not Divine faith, but only Humane knowledge. He that trusts a man no further than he sees him (as we say Proverbially) trusts him not at all. Hence the Apostle, Through faith we understand 
Heb. 11. 3  that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things that do appear. It is only the Christian, sure, not the mere Philosopher, that by faith understands this, though haply both of them may understand it by demonstration, but the Christian alone by Divine testimony for its own authority assented to.  
2 We may not oppose our natural conceptions to the Word of God, or make our apprehensions beforehand the rule of what we will receive, for the Word and revealed Will of God, and what we will reject; but what the Grammar, and Logic of the Word holds forth, must be the rule of our apprehensions, whether we can discern how in reason the things affirmed should be, or not (we must not Afferre sensum Scripturae, but refer) otherwise we subject the authority of God's Truth to our own apprehensions, and believe him not, because he hath said it, but because we by reason see it; neither shall we ever otherwise embrace the Word of God, for as much as the Word itself teacheth many things; 1. Above reason, Great is the mystery of godliness, saith the Apostle; yet it is no great mystery, if reason may comprehend it. What reason of men or Angels could ever have thought of such a thing, as the three Persons of the Godhead, as the Personal union of God and Man in the Mediator, the imputation of the Mediators righteousness to believers; of Adam's sin to his Posterity, with many others? or who comprehends clearly these things, at least some of them, when revealed in the Word?  
2 Many things against reason, that is, cross to the apprehensions of corrupt reason, as it is now in all natural men; The minding of the flesh is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be. The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are Spiritually discerned. (Your fruitless attempt to avoid the strength of this text of Scripture, we shall consider in due place.) It is one virtue of the Word preached, to cast down the reasonings of the natural man, 2 Cor. 10. 5. Many others of like import we shall have occasion afterwards to mention. On the one hand such is the blindness and wickedness of man by Original sin, which are withal daily increased by themselves and Satan; on the other hand, such is the mysterious height, and transcendent purity of the Word of God, that man's reason must receive light from it, is not a light, otherwise then as enlightened by it, whereby to judge of it.  
And as the truth we are now upon is evident by the Word, so is it by all experience; name me any one people, or any one person, since man was Created upon earth, that without the word or voice of God for direction, by the light and ducture of reason, either worshipped the true God, or did not fall upon a most abominable way of Worship, or light upon the Gospel-way of Salvation, to omit all other deviations. Nay, you yourself, who lean so much to your own wisdom, and are so much in advancing the Rush-Candle of reason, against the Sun of the Scripture, are amongst others an evidence, even in this the Masterpiece of your reason, the Treatise in hand, of the incompetency of man's reason not enlightened by the Word, through the Spirit, to judge of the things of the Spirit of God, whilst you fall so wretchedly foul upon the main Doctrines of Predestination, Redemption, Perseverance, etc.  
Now if in this sense Mr. Goodwin acknowledged that reason is to be laid aside, why doth he raise a Controversy with those, who in the other sense, formerly specified, not only grant, but urge the use of it? But that Master Goodwin in this sense denies the laying it aside, and exalts it as the Judge of the Word beside, and above the word, seems in the first place not obscurely insinuated, in the second place openly expressed, by some passages of his Pen.  
For the first not obscurely insinuating it, what shall we say to that Doctrine of his, which he says is much to be observed, Pag. 5. of this Preface? That a man or woman, who have for many years professed the Gospel, may in process of time come to discover vanity in some erroneous Principle, or Tenet, wherewith their judgements have been leavened for some considerable space formerly, and so grow into a dis-approbation or contempt of it, and yet may very possibly think the Gospel favoureth, or countenanceth it, and that otherwise they should never have owned, nor approved it.  
Hence it appears, that in your account error may be discerned by reason, which yet shall be thought by the Gospel to be owned, so that the Gospel shall not be the rule by which to judge of truth and error, but reason shall be the rule by which to judge, whether the Gospel itself (to wit, that sacred Writ which is received in the Church of God for the Gospel) be true or false. Then you go on to the same purpose; Now when a person shall be brought into the snare of such a conceit, or imagination as this, that the Gospel in some of the veins or carriages of it, teacheth, or asserteth things that are vain. But before you go any further (allowing the Divine authority of the Gospel) it is impossible that such a conceit should have place, that the Gospel in any of the veins or carriages of it should assert any thing that is vain. He goes on; Or if no good consistency with reason or truth; here is your rule, to judge of any opinion in matters of Faith, and that whereby the Gospel itself must be called to an account, the consistency or inconsistency of it with reason; so far it must be truth, as vain man's blind reason judgeth it consistent with itself. You conclude, He is in a ready posture to throw from his soul all credence of the Divine authority of the Gospel, and to esteem it no better than a Fable devised by men; so far then as you comprehend by reason, the things taught in the Gospel, to be agreeable to reason, neither above it, nor cross thereto, so far you will embrace the Gospel; if any thing you find in it otherwise, you are in a ready posture to esteem it no better than a Fable: I doubt you are so indeed by your discourse here, and otherwhere, for most certain it is, that there are many things in the Gospel both above your reason, and cross to it.  
But Sir, allowing the divine authority of the Gospel, It is impossible that any man should discover an error in matter of faith, and religion, but he therein discerns it to be dis-owned and condemned by the Gospel, and the Gospel itself was the rule and the light whereby he discovered it; and the fruit of his discovery will not be (as you reason here) the blame of the Gospel, but of his own former ignorance of the Gospel. But if here you have not spoken openly enough, you have discovered yourself fully, pag. 335. of your book, where disputing against a main Gospel-truth, namely, the unchangeable love of God to the Saints, your words are these. Besides whether any such assurance of the unchangeableness of the love of God, to him that is godly, as the objection speaks of, can be effectually and upon sufficient grounds given unto men is very questionable; yea, I conceive there is more reason to judge otherwise then so. But let us hear what you say next; Yea, (that which is more, it is indeedmore then enough) I verily believe that in case any such assurance of the unchangeableness of God's love were to be found in, or could regularly be deduced from the Scriptures, it were a just ground to any intelligent and considering man to question their authority, and whether they were from God or no. Now have you spoken out; evident it is, as the light of the sun, that you make man's reason (blind and corrupt as it is) a rule above the Scriptures, whereby to try them, and the only touchstone of them; for that which may be found in, or regularly deduced from the Scriptures, must needs be the voice of the Scripture in concordance with itself, by what rule now shall we question it, but that of our reason, as above it?  
Now Sir, you must give me leave to tell you that your own pen hath proclaimed you a very Socinian. And now let us see, whether this conclusion leads, even to the utter overthrow of the Scriptures: By the same reason that you may question this doctrine, found in, or regularly deduced from the Scriptures, you may question any other, and the authority of the Scriptures thereupon; a ready way for all Heretics and erroneous Teachers. The Papists may question the authority of the Scripture, if God's hatred against Image-worship, may be found in, or regularly deduced from the Scriptures; you may question the authority of Scriptures, if holiness of life, or whatsoever other truth (as well one as another) may be found in, or regularly deduced from them. Let me advise you a more compendious way to maintain your errors against personal election, and reprobation, against the dominion of God therein expressed, against the confinement of redemption to the elect, against the perseverance of the Saints, against the efficacious influence of grace upon the will of man; and even this error concerning the light and ability of the natural man, for discerning and applying the things of the spirit of God, held forth in the Gospel; trouble not yourself to torture the Scriptures, that they may seem to witness for you; but for as much as they speak so much against you, question their authority, and whether they be from God, or not. And why should you not do as your elder brethren of the Socinian-family have done before you? Let us first see their doctrines, as like to yours, as one egg is like another, what saith Smalcius? It is certain, that whatsoever is contrary to reason, is neither extant in the holy Scriptures, neither can it be gathered from them, De Christo vero & naturali Dei filio, C. 6. What saith Ostorodius, another head of that Tribe? If reason or understanding expressly prove the Trinity of persons in God to be false, how may it come into the mind of any man, right in his wits, that yet notwithstanding it is true, and may be proved by the Word of God? Now add Mr. goodwin's doctrine, and see if it speak not the same language. I verily believe (by the Secinian not Apostolical faith) that in case any such assurance of the unchangeableness of God's love, was to be found in, or could regularly be deduced from the Scriptures, it was a just ground to any intelligent and considering man, to question their authority, and whether they were from God or no? These doctrines, plainly allow not the Scripture in the Grammar and Logic of it, the rule and light to guide and conclude man's reason; but exalt the reason of man, as judge above it; whence, whatsoever Article of faith they dispute about, nothing is more usual with them then this objection, this or that is false, because contrary to reason.  
We have now seen their doctrines, let us see their deductions, which likewise must be yours, your doctrine being the same. Hence they proceed to deny many Articles of the faith, because contrary to reason, at least in their apprehensions. The Racovian Catechism, the body of their Theology, or Heresy rather, rejects the doctrine of the three persons in one essence, p. 49. the two natures in the one person of Christ, pag. 55. Danies that Christ by his death satisfied for us, and merited eternal life for us, pag. 261. And all, because these are contrary, say they, to right reason. Smalcius against Franzius opposeth Original sin, because (if he say true) it is utterly contrary to reason, that an innocent person by once sinning should infect all his posterity. These for a touch of your Doctrine, and whither it leads.   

CHAP. III.  Goodwin. 
COncerning the Word of God, it is to be acknowledged, that this is to be in special manner interessed in all our dijudications between Doctrine and Doctrine, Opinion and Opinion, in matter of Religion.  Resbury. 
Why do you not acknowledge it the perfect rule?  Goodwin. 
And that this is the fire which must try every man's work of what sort it is, and must separate the vil● from the precious.  Resbury. 
Do not you sit then as a Refiner by fire, of this fire itself, by your reason, so as to reject any thing that may be found in the Scripture, or regularly deduced therefrom?  Goodwin. 
But as the Plummet and Rule do not measure the work of the Architect, or discover whether it be true and square, or otherwise of, and by themselves, but as they are regularly applied hereunto, either by the Workman himself, or some other, capable of making such an application; however true it may be that a sufficient test or proof of the work cannot be made without the use of the Plummet and Rule about it. In like manner, though the Word of God be of sovereign use and necessity for the measuring of Opinions and Doctrines, and for the discovery of what is strait, and what crooked in them, yet he that desires to reap the Spiritual benefit, and advantage of the usefulness of it in this kind; must first understand the mind and sense of God in it aright; and secondly, Be dextrous, and expert in making a due application of it, being rightly understood, to the Doctrines, or Opinions, the soundness or unsoundness whereof he desires to understand by it.  Resbury. 
To what end are these waste words? 1. The Scripture is the rule, and reason is the eye; but as the Scripture is the rule, so is it the light too, by which this eye must be enlightened, otherwise it is too dark to apply this rule. It is by the Scriptures that a right understanding is had of them, and a dextrous faculty for applying them, they being the means by the Holy Ghost appointed, and sanctified, for enlightening and sanctifying the reason of man. The Scripture is not only a rule for trial, a● is that of the Architect, but for instructing too; it is such a rule, as gives rules for instructing and directing in all matters of Religion, and even for the use of itself, as a rule; and indeed that you may the less wonder hereat, all Arts are such rules, as give rules for understanding themselves.  
Suppose this Geometrical question was to be debated ', whither in a right angled Triangle the square of the Hypolemise be equal to the square of the sides? I think you will grant, that we must fetch the demonstration from Geometry itself, and the demonstration must conclude us; we must not say, though this proposition be demonstratively concluded in Geometry, yet we will question it, only indeed here is the difference; A Geometrical demonstration renders the conclusion not only agreeable to Principles, and former propositions in Geometry, by which it is demonstrated, but withal clear to reason; but the conclusion of a Divine truth by Scripture is many times obscure to reason, though clearly agreeable to Principles, and other Doctrines in Scripture, because even those Principles and Doctrines proving it, are to man's reason▪ not for want of light in them, but through the blindness of it obscure. Yet shall reason see the legitimacy of the proof, from Principles and Doctrines, in Scripture laid down, when it hath very obscure apprehensions, both of the thing contained in the conclusion, and the things contained in the Principles and Doctrines proving it; these things faith believing upon the authority of the word affirming. 2. You deal with the Scriptures, as he, that because the rule and plummet doth not verify the judgement, which he made by his eye at a guess, he will therefore by his eye question the rule and plummet themselves; whilst you take liberty to question the authority of the Scriptures, and whether they be from God or not, upon supposal of something found in them, or regularly deduced from them, which relisheth not with your reason.  Goodwin. 
For first, it is not the letter, or form of words, as separated, or considered apart from the spirit, notion, or sense of them, that is the touchstone, or rule of trial for Doctrines, yea, the letter and words are only servants to the sense and notion, which they contain and exhibit, and were principally, if not only, delivered by the Holy Ghost unto men for this end, that by them the sense, mind, and Counsel of God in all the particularities of them, which are held forth in the Scriptures, might be communicated and conveyed to the reasons and understandings of men; so that in case a man had the sense and mind of God upon the same terms of certainty & of knowledge, without the letter on which he hath it, or may have it by means of the letter, he should be as richly, as completely qualified, hereby to discern between Doctrines, as he now can be by the opportunity and advantage of the letter.  Resbury. 
Words to no purpose still; 1. If the Letter and words of the Scripture be servants to the Sense and Notion, and so forth, as you declare, then is not that sense, which the letter and words exhibit (that is, the Grammar of the Scripture) in conjunction with the scope, context, and concordance thereof, that is, with the Logic of the Scripture, by man's reason to be questioned, but reason is to be captivated to the authority thereof. 2. I hope you do not think of any way for obtaining the sense and mind of God, otherwise then by the letter; if an Angel from Heaven should preach any other Doctrine, let him be accursed.  Goodwin. 
Now if the Scriptures themselves be upon no other terms, nor in any other case serviceable, or useful unto men, for the trial of Doctrines and Opinions, but only as and when they are clearly understood by them, it clearly follows, that whatsoever is requisite and necessary to bring men to a true understanding of the Scriptures, is of equal necessity for the distinguishing of Doctrines, and to interpose, or be made use of in all affairs and concernments in Religion; if then the reasons, judgements, and understandings of men must of necessity interpose, act, argue, debate, and consider before the true sense and mind of God in any Scripture can be duly apprehended, understood, and believed by men, it is a plain case that these are to be used, and to be interessed in whatsoever is of any religious consequence, or concernment to us. That the mind of God in the Scriptures cannot be duly apprehended, received, or believed by men, but by the acting and working of their reasons, minds, and understandings, in order hereunto, is evident from hence, viz. because the mind of God cannot be thus apprehended, or believed by men, but by means of an intellectual or rational difference tasted, or resented by them, between this mind of his, and all other minds, meanings, or senses whatsoever, that may be supposed to reside, or be in the words.  Resbury. 
If you was not a man, whose ear is chained to the music of his own Tongue, you might spare the greatest part of your words, and yet speak as much as you do. In what sense Reason is to be used, in what sense to be laid aside, we have seen already, as likewise the use and necessity of the Word of God, for begetting in man's understanding that intellectual, or rational difference tasted, or resented by him which you speak of, the Word being the rule and light to the understanding, as to matters of religion.  Goodwin. 
For example, If there be another sense to be given of such, or such a passage of Scripture, either contrary unto, or differing from that, which I conceive to be the mind of God here, which hath the same rational, or intellectual savour and taste with this, that is, which as well suits with the words, agrees with the Context, falls in with the scope and subject matter in hand, is as accordable with Scripture-assertion elsewhere, co●ports as clearly with the unquestionable Principles of reason, and the like; how is it possible for me in this case to conceive or believe, especially with the certainty of faith, that my sense is the mind of God, and consequently the true sense of that place, rather than that other, which hath all the same Characters, Symptoms, and Arguments of being the mind of God, which none hath, therefore it must needs be by the exercise and acting of my reason and understanding, and by the report which they make of their discoveries in their inquiries, that I come regularly to conclude, and to be satisfied, that this is the mind of God in such or such a Scripture, and none other.  Resbury. 
1 In our inquiries into the true meaning of any text of Scripture, the word itself by the forms of expression, scope, context, and agreement with Scripture-assertion elsewhere, is our Card, and compass, by which reason is to steer her enquiry, not reason the Judge above, or against the word.  
2 Such an example do you here give, and so do you state it, as it labours of a most evident contradiction. For how is it possible that two different, much less contrary senses, should have▪ the same intellectual taste, or savour, should as well suit with the words, agree with the context, and have those other Characters, which you name, one as another? Secondly, suppose such a thing possible, how is it yet possible that reason should determine which is the true sense? If both senses have both Scripture and reason equally for them, as is here supposed, whence shall reason frame a judgement for this rather than that, or for that rather than this? I believe you made great haste, when you made so little speed. One thing further let me mind you of, that whereas you begin with intellectual savour and taste, and conclude with the unquestionable principles of reason, you might in both have spared your pains, for where the other Characters are found, they will conclude the sense, and if reason shall discern them, she must needs see there is reason to conclude with them.  Goodwin. 
If it be here objected, and demanded; But is it meet, or tolerable, that the reason of man should judge in the things of God? or that the understandings of men should umpire, and determine in his affairs? I answer;  
1 If God pleaseth to impart his mind, and Counsels in his Word and writing unto men, with an injunction, and charge, that they receive and own them, as from him, and that they take heed they do not mistake him, or embrace either their own conceits, or the minds of others, in stead of his, in this case for men to put a difference by way of judging and discerning between the mind of God, and that which is not his mind, is so far from being an act of Authority, Presumption, or unseemly Usurpation in men, that it is a fruit of their deep loyalty, submission, and obedience unto God. When Christ enjoined the Disciples of the Pharisees, and the Herodians, to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are Gods; he did not only give them a warrant, and Commission to judge and determine what, and which were the things of God, as well as which were the things of Caesar, but laid a charge upon them also, to put this warrant in execution; and this not only by judging actually which were the things of God, but by practising and acting also, upon and according to this judgement.  
2 To judge of God, and of the things of God, in the sense we now speak, is but to acknowledge, own, and receive God, and the things of God, in their transcendent excellency, goodness, and truth, and as differenced in their perfections respectively, from all other beings and things; the poorest and meanest subject that is may lawfully, and without any just offence, judge his Prince, yea, or him that is made a lawful judge over him, to be wise, just, bountiful, etc. at lest when there is sufficient ground for it.  Resbury. 
Here according to your manner, you spin out your discourse by trivial Objections, and Answers; for your answer it is true, allowing the Scripture the honour to guide and rectify reason by her assertions, and by her authority to conclude it: but both the Objection and Answer tedious, because impertinent.  Goodwin. 
If it be yet further demanded; But is the reason or understanding of man competent to judge the things of God, as (for example) to determine, and conclude what is the mind of God in such or such a passage of Scripture, or in such and such a case? Doth not the Scripture speak of men in their natural condition, calling them darkness? affirming likewise, That the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not? and elsewhere doth it not inform us, that the natural man perceiveth (or receiveth) not the things of the Spirit of God, because they are foolishness unto him? neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned? And how many Heathen Philosophers, Heretics, and others undertaking to judge of the things of God in the Gospel, by the light and strength of their own reasons, and understandings, have miscarried, to the everlasting perdition of their own souls, and as is much to be feared, of many others also? to all this I answer by degrees.  Resbury. 
More spinning still; He that hath an opinion to broach that may not abide the light, must not presently lay it down in terms, but by winding discourses and fetches about usher it in. Master Goodwin is no Novice at this Artifice. Hence we had before such a long and plausible discourse against Error in general, wherein were couched many insinuations against the darkness and impotency of the natural man's understanding; then a confused and clamorous Discourse about the necessity, interest, and use of reason in matters of Religion, and of a Spiritual or supernatural concernment, till at last he came boldly up to vent his Socinian Error. After which again, no little impertinent objecting and answering, and having by this time, as he hopes, discomposed the judgement, and scattered the intention of his Reader, he is now hastening to speak out, what he durst but mutter all this while, and make for at a distance, by way of glancing, rather than asserting his Pelagian Doctrine, for which even his Socinian Doctrine hath been making way, and must still be employed in this service. And now good Reader, we are approaching that corrupt Tenet of his, which we gave notice of at the end of his Discourse against Error, and which we then promised to call to account in its proper place.   

CHAP. IU.  Goodwin. 
IT is a thing as unquestionable, as that the Sun is up at noon day, that reason and understanding in men are competent to judge of the things of God, at lest of some, yea, of many of them, or rather indeed of all that are contained in the Scriptures, according to their degree of discovery and manifestation there; for doth not God himself own them in this capacity, when he appeals, and refers himself unto them in several of his great and important affairs, authorising them to judge in the case between him and his adversaries? And now O inhabitants of jerusalem, and men of judah, judge I pray you betwixt me and my Vine-yard, what could have been done more to my Vine-yard, that I have not done in it. So again, Hear now O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? In these and such like appeals, ●e supposeth the persons appealed unto to be as capable, or (however as well capable, of the equity and righteousness of his ways (and consequently to be in a regular capacity of justifying him) as of the unworthiness, and unrighteousness of their ways against whom he standeth in the contest. So our Saviour, to the chief Priests and Elders in his Parable, When the Lord therefore of the Vine-yard cometh, what will he (or rather, what shall he) do unto those Husbandmen? they say unto him, he will miserably destroy those Husbandmen, and let out his Vine-yard unto others, who shall render him the fruits in their season; We see these Priests and Elders, though men of great unworthiness otherwise, and far from believing in Christ, were yet able to award a righteous judgement, and such as our Saviour himself approved, yea, and put in execution not long after, between him and his Husbandmen; so in another place to the Hypocritical jews, Ye Hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky, and of the earth, but how is it that ye do not discern this time? yea, and why even of (or from) yourselves judge ye not what is right? in which passage (amongst other things) be clearly implieth these two.  
1 That had they set their minds upon things that most concerned them, they were in a sufficient capacity, by the direction and help of those Characters and Signs, which their own Prophets had long before delivered, clearly to have discerned, that the days and times in which they now lived, were indeed the days of their Messiah.  
2 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from themselves, that is, out of natural and inbred Principles, whereby they were enabled to judge of things commodious, and expedient for them in like cases, they were in a capacity to have come to this issue and conclusion; That it was now high time to compromise that great and weighty controversy, which had of a long time been depending between God and them, by Repentance. The Apostle Paul willeth the Corinthians in one place to judge what he saith; in another, he directeth, That in their Church-meetings the Prophets should speak, two or three, and that the rest should judge; in both which places ●e clearly supposeth in them a competency of judicature, or discerning about spiritual things. And when in his defence before Agrippa, be demands of him, and the rest that were present, Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead? he clearly supposeth, that the Resurrection itself of the dead, which yet is one of the great and deep Mysteries of the Gospel, was nothing, but what they consulting with the light of reason, and understanding in themselves, (for they were not supernaturally enlightened) might judge probable enough, and no way unlike to be effected. When God commands, and calls upon all men every where to repent (and so to believe) he must either suppose them in a capacity to distinguish, and discern between the things, whereof he would have them repent, and so between what he would have them to believe, and what not; or else speak unto them as no otherwise capable of such his Commands, than the stones in the earth, or Beasts of the field; and how then is the Commandment holy, just, and good? therefore certainly those noble faculties, and endowments of reason, and understanding in men, as they are sustained, supported, and assisted by the Spirit of God in the generality of men, are in a capacity of apprehending, discerning, and understanding the things of God in the Gospel.  Resbury. 
We have here an Answer to the Objection, first begun with an hardy and venturous assertion, with great confidence set off, that the natural man may discern of all the Truths of God contained in the Scriptures, according to their degree of discovery, and manifestation there, that is, according as they are more or less clearly laid down there; That it is affirmed here of natural men, is evident both from the Objection itself, and the Answer in divers passages of it. Secondly, This assertion endeavoured to be proved by several instances, but neither any of them, nor all together reach the proof, there being nothing at all in them thus applied, but mere fallacies.  
1 From the part to the whole; Suppose these instances were obvious enough to the Natural man, it doth not therefore follow that he can discern all Scripture-truthes, this is too slender an induction of particulars to prove the general; And as all of them together labour of this fallacy,, so the last instance particularly. Suppose the natural man may discern some things to be believed, and repent of, it doth not thence follow, that he may discern all things of that kind.  
2 From unequals, as if equals; 1. The Natural man hath light to discern some particulars of the Law of God unto Conviction, yet in divers cases this light is very glimmeting, and vanishing; it doth not hence follow that he hath light to discern all the Mysterious truths of the Gospel. Instances belonging to the Law are, the first, second, and third. 2 By Natural light may in divers cases a Prophecy fulfilled be discerned, comparing the event with the Prediction of it. Thus in the fourth instance might the days of the Messiah have been discerned by the jews, who owned, and conversed with those Prophecies, which foretell them, and that being discerned, a granted duty likewise, depending on it, must needs be discerned, as that the Messiah was to be embraced, and sins to be repent of; but neither doth it hence follow, that all Gospel Mysteries might be discerned: as for your observation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaning may very well be, why not without a Monitor? 3. Suppose by Natural light the Omnipotency of God may be discerned, and thence the possibility of the Resurrection of the dead (for that is it the Apostle urgeth;) why should it be incredible to men, as though impossible with God? Still will it not hence follow, that more Mysterious Gospel truths may be discerned, though many Attributes of the Divine Nature may in some measure be discerned by Natural light, and works thereon depending; yet doth it no wise hence follow, that therefore all Gospel truths are discernible; of this kind is the fifth Instance, there being a great disparity betwixt these and those.  
3 From the Argument to the Question, this in the fourth Instance, the Question to be proved is of Natural men, the instance here for proof of it is of the Saints; an Argument altogether impertinent. Ignoratio Elenchi.  
4 From the Object: The Command of God, to the Adjunct related to it, man's ability for discerning it, the Command, or Expostulation equivalent: Why do ye not discern? and why of yourselves do ye not judge? and when God calls men to believe, and repent, he must suppose them in a capacity to distinguish and discern betwixt the things, etc. For answer hereto from the command of discerning, to the power of discerning, there is no consequence, except God who commands, give that power, man commanded cannot understand many main things; otherwise why doth David pray so earnestly, that God would open his eyes, that he may behold the wonderful things of his Law▪ Psal. 119. ver. 18. That he would give him understanding, that he might keep his Law, ver. 34? Why doth the Apostle pray for the Ephesians, That God would give unto them the spirit of Wisdom, and revelation in the knowledge of Christ, that the eyes of their understanding being enlightened, ●●ey might know what is the hope of his calling, 1 Ephes. 17, 18? Why doth the same Apostle teach, That the Natural man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God? adding the reason, because they are spiritually discerned; If the Natural man can discern all the truths of God, all Gospel Mysteries. In a word, to argue from the command in general, to ability for performance in things of Spiritual nature is an old Pelagian error; the Lord commands the jews to make to themselves new hearts, but otherwhere he declares himself the Maker thereof; to circumcise their hearts, but otherwhere it is his promise to do it. Christ commands the jews to believe on the light, john 12. 36, yet could they not, as being hardened, and of whom it was long since Prophesied that they should not 39, 40. A thousand instances might be given to confirm this truth: but we shall have more occasion afterwards; in the meantime, when the Pelagians were thus wont to argue, from the command to the power, as Austin every where refutes them, by the promise of God to work in the Elect by peculiar grace, what he requires, and by the prayers of the Saints, and by their thanksgivings, and the like; so he lays down this general conclusion. Nothing do I see in the Holy Scriptures commanded by the Lord to man, for the proving of his free will, which may not be found either to be given of his goodness, or to be desired, for manifesting the aid of Grace, Lib. 2. contra d●as, Episto. Pelag. c. 10. And in his Book, De correp. & gratia, c. 2. Against that Pelagian clamour, why are we commanded to turn from evil and do good, if we do it not? but God works in us both to will, and to do: he answers; Let the Sons of God know, that they are acted by the Spirit of God, to act what is to be acted, and when they have acted it, to him let them give thanks, by whom they were acted, for they are acted that they may act, not that they may act nothing, and this is showed to them, what they ought to act, that when they have acted, as they ought to act, that is, with love, and with the delight of righteousness, they may rejoice to have received that sweetness, which the Lord hath given, that the earth might bring forth her fruit; but when they act not, whether by not doing at all, or by not doing out of love, let them pray that they may receive what yet they have not, For what shall they have that they shall not receive, or what have they that they have not received? A little after, Cap. 3. he concludes, that in the command man is to take notice what he ought to have in the reproof, that it is his own fault that he hath it not, in prayer, whence he is to receive what he would have.  
5 From Disparates, as one and the same, he affirms such a knowledge in the power of the Natural man, as whence he may repent and believe, nay must, for thus he infers; that men, who act and quit themselves according to the true Principles of that reason, which God hath planted in them, cannot but believe, and be partakers of the precious faith of the Gospel; and repentance he requires before faith, as is evident in that passage of his, God calls upon all men every where to repent, and so to believe; if they cannot but believe, and that they may believe they must repent; then from this knowledge in the Natural man's power, both faith and repentance necessarily ensue. That this knowledge is in the power of the Natural man, according to his Doctrine, is evident, because the Objection and Answer is about the Natural man, whence he infers this conclusion.  
Now for answer, here is the fallacy, he confounds that knowledge which may be in the Natural man, with that which cannot be but in the Spiritual.  
There is a twofold knowledge about Spiritual things: The 

1 Natural.  
2 Spiritual.   The former Historical, or of Logical apprehension of Propositions rather than of things; or of Propositions only distinctly, of things contained in the Propositions confusedly, and afar off; as when a man reads an History of persons, places, etc. but sees them not with his eye.  
The latter Inivitiuè, or of Spiritual Vision, the things themselves in the light of the Spirit, beheld, as it were by Vision, distinctly, and at hand; the former like that knowledge which the Queen of Sheba had of Solomon in her own Country, only by hearsay; the latter, like that which she had of him at jerusalem, by the sight of her eyes, 1. King. 10. 4, 5, 6, 7. then she believed, than she admired, not till then. This is the knowledge, whence springs faith, and repentance, and this is peculiar to the Saints, 1 Ephes. 17, 18. 1 Cor. 2. 9, 10, 11, 12. Mat. 16. 17.   

CHAP. V.  Goodwin. 
YEa, and evident it is from the Scriptures, that men act beneath themselves, are remiss, and slothful in awaking those Principles of light and understanding, that are vested in their natures, or else willingly choke, suppress, and smother them, if they remain in the snare of unbelief; Pray for us, (saith Paul so the Thessalonians) that we may be delivered from unreasonable and evil men, for all men have not faith. By unreasonable (or as the word signifieth absurd) and evil men, he plainly meaneth, not men who naturally, or in actu primo were unreasonable, such as those, were not like to endanger him, or to obstruct the course of the Gospel; but such as were unreasonable, Actu secundo (that is) persons who acted contrary to the light and principles of reason, and hereby became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, industriously evil, or wicked; that there were such persons as these abroad in the world, he gives this account, For all men have not faith; which clearly implieth, that men who act, and quit themselves according to the true Principles of that reason, which God hath planted in them, cannot but believe, and be partakers of the precious faith of the Gospel. To this purpose that passage in chrysostom is memorably worthy; As to believe (the Gospel) is the part of a raised, and nobly ingenuous soul; so (on the contrary) not to believe is the property of a soul most unreasonable, and unworthy, and depressed, (or bowed down) so the sottishness of bruit beasts.  Resbury. 
Reader, here we must grapple close with him; observe in his own words what here he saith about the understanding of the Natural man, and his power to make use of it for repenting, and believing: now one of these two he must needs affirm, either that he may so use his natural understanding, as thence, without any peculiar and higher work of the Spirit of God, he may repent, and believe, or rather he must; or else upon such use of it, as he may make, he shall certainly receive such a work of the Spirit upon his soul, as thence not only may, but must faith and repentance be produced: whether of these he affirms, I charge it with 1. Evident falsehood, 2. With Pelagianisme.  
First, for the falsehood of both these I shall use only four Arguments to evince it.  
I.  
From the doctrine of Natural corruption.  
If we be not sufficient of ourselves, as of ourselves, to think a good thought; If there be none in the state of natural corruption that understands, that seeks after God; If that that is borne of the flesh be flesh; If in this flesh there dwells no good thing; If the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God, but they are foolishness unto him, neither can know them, because they are Spiritually discerned; If the flesh, and the lustings thereof be contrary to the Spirit, and the lustings thereof; If in the regenerate with the flesh, the Law of sin is served in opposition to the mind, serving the Law of God; If vain man though he would fain be wise, yet is borne like a wild Ass' Colt; If the natural man be dead in trespasses and sins; If he be darkness; If the minding of the flesh be enmity against God; If it be not subject to the Law of God, neither can be, so that they that are in the flesh cannot please God; then in neither of those senses is faith and repentance in the Natural man's power.  
But the Antecedent, or the former is true.  
Therefore the Consequent, or the latter.  
As for those frivolous exceptions, which you have against some of these particulars concerning natural corruption, we shall blow them away when we come to them, for they are light chaff.  
II.  
From the Doctrine of the Natural man's subjection to Satan.  
If Satan be the Prince of the world, the god of the world; If the course of the world in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh, be according to the Prince of the power of the Air, the spirit that works effectually in the children of disobedience; If Satan, the strong man, have such possession of the Natural man, as without the peculiar work of the Holy Ghost, as the stronger, he cannot be dispossessed.  
Then is not repentance, and faith, in either of the two named senses in the power of the natural man.  
But the former is true.  
Therefore the latter.  
III.  
From the subjection of the Natural man to the Law, as the Covenant of Works.  
If in this estate of natural corruption and subjection to the Devil therein, all Natural men be under the Law, as the Covenant of Works, and the Law only reveals sin, and wrath, stirs up and increaseth fin, but gives no strength against it; When we were in the flesh, the motions of sin, which were by the Law, did work in our members, Rom. 7. 5. Sin took occasion by the Commandment, and wrought in me all manner of concupiscence, ver. 11.  
Then as formerly.  
But the former is here true likewise.  
Therefore the latter.  
IV.  
From the Doctrine of Regeneration.  
If Regeneration be (as the word sounds) a New Birth, a birth of the Spirit, in opposition to the natural Birth, as the birth of the Flesh; a birth not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God; a quickening of such as were dead in trespasses and sins; a resurrection from the dead, a new creation; If none can come unto Christ except drawn of the Father; If not of works that we have done, but of his own grace; If not of him that wils, nor of him that runs, but of God who showeth mercy; If a calling out of darkness; If translating from the power of darkness, a taking away the heart of stone, and giving a● heart of flesh. Then as formerly.  
But the former is true.  
Therefore the latter.  
Further consideration of the falsehood of this Doctrine we shall have in that which follows, showing the Pelagianism of it.   

CHAP. VI Now for the Pelagianism of this Doctrine.  
1 SUppose it acknowledge no supernatural grace, (and therefore no grace) but only toying with the word Grace, ascribes saving virtues and operations to Nature, and an assistance from God, proportioned and attempered to the heedful exercise and improvement of natural abilities, then is it evidently Pelagian, and that of the first stamp.  
But if this be not the spirit of this Doctrine those conclusions here laid down are very closely expressed.  
1 That men act beneath themselves, (and here he speaks of the generality of men) are remiss, and slothful, in awakening those Principles of light and understanding that are vested in their Natures, or else willingly choke, suppress, and smother them, if they remain in the snare of unbelief.  
2 That men who act, and quit themselves according to the true Principles of that reason which God hath planted in them, cannot but believe, and be partakers of the precious faith of the Gospel. Let us now add a further explication in his own words presently after, and this will yet more clearly appear to have been his meaning which we here suppose; his words are as followeth. That about the efficacy of the Grace of God vouchsafed unto men, there is a great abuse of the word Natural, and so of the word Supernatural, a word not found in the Scriptures, either formally, or virtually; (the gross falsehood whereof we shall see in due place) and that the Scripture knoweth not the word Natural in any such sense, wherein it should distinguish the unregenerate state of a man from the regenerate, (as false as the former, as in due time shall be demonstrated.) Now this Commentary of his own is so manifest for the sense we here suppose, as needs no insisting upon; for if the efficacy of Grace be not supernatural, than neither is Grace itself as the Principle, nor any effects of Grace, as to believe, repent, etc. supernatural; for the principle, operation, and effects are all of one kind, natural or supernatural; and so Grace is nothing else but a natural endowment, and improvement.  
But then, what shall be his meaning afterwards in his explication of the Parable of the Talents, where he speaks thus: That in case men will stir up, and lay out themselves accordingly, in the improvement of such abilities and gifts, as shall from time to time be vouchsafed to them, they may by virtue of the bounty, and gracious decree of God in that behalf, attain, and receive from God what proportion, and measure of the Spirit and Grace of God they can desire.  
I answer; The work of this Spirit of Grace upon their hearts, if it be supernatural, he contradicts himself, who will not allow that word either formally, or virtually about the efficacy of Grace; if he do not contradict himself, this work of the Spirit must be nothing slse but such an influx, as is attempered, and proportioned to man's Natural acting, and therefore natural. But this was the frequent manner of his great Apostle Pelagius, to play fast and loose at every turn with the words Grace, and Nature. I much suspect that very Doctrine of Pelagius, which Austin lays down in his own words, Lib. de great. Christi, etc. c. 4. to be here touched: We, saith Pelagius, distinguish thus these three; In the first place we appoint, to be able; in the second, to will; in the third, to be; To be able, we place in Nature, to will, in free Choice, to be, in effect. That first, to be able belongs properly to God, who hath conferred it upon his Creature; the two others, that is, to will, and to be, are to be referred unto man, because they descended from the fountain of Free will; therefore in the will, and in the good work, the praise is of man, yea, both of man and God, who hath given to him the possibility of the will itself, and of the work, and who always helps that possibility itself with the aid of his Grace, but that men may be able to will good, and to finish it, this is only of God. See now what Austin here advertiseth, concerning Pelagius his Concession of Grace, (which, how rightly it suits Master Goodwin, let the Reader judge. Whensoever (saith he) we hear that he confesseth the aid of Divine Grace, we ought to know, that he neither believes our will, nor our action to be helped hereby, but only the possibility of the will, and work; which alone of these three he affirms that we have of God, and this in nature, as is manifest.   

CHAP. VII.  
2. SUppose it acknowledge no habitual grace upon the will renewing it, nor effectual acting, and determining it, but all the assistance of grace acknowledged (be it natural or supernatural) is only for enlightening the understanding, and exciting the will to determine itself; whence it may come to pass, that the will may, as to the event, obey, or not obey the call of God. This is partly no more than what Pelagius acknowledged, partly opposite to that grace, which the Orthodox Fathers maintained against him.  
1 Observe here, that he puts all upon the Understanding, as if all the assistance of grace necessary, was only for enlightening it.  
2 That Pelagius himself was driven to acknowledge thus much, and withal, exciting grace, whatsoever he meant thereby.  
3 That the Father's opposing his Heresy, required and maintained that grace, which by supernatural efficacy, did not only enlighten the understanding, and excite the will; but likewise did, by an efficacious impression, give both a new and spiritual power to the will, as likewise the acting of that power; and the same grace that gave the power, gave likewise the acting of that power, and was both preventing and effectual, and peculiar, and of infallible issue for conversion, and therefore not common to those who were converted, with those who were not, but peculiar to the converted. But let us see the truth of what is here asserted.  
And first, What Pelagius acknowledged (as much for ought I can discern as Mr. Goodwin,) August. lib: de gratiâ Christi contra Pelag. & Caelest. chap, 10. Thus reports him, When he had a long time affirmed, that not by the aid of God, but of ourselves in ourselves, the will is made good; he objected against himself, out of the Epistle to the Philippians chap. 2. and how (saith he) shall that of the Apostle stand, It is God that works in us, both to will and to do; Then, that he might, as it were, answer this objection, which he saw so vehemently against his opinion; going on he adds, He works in us to will what is good, to will what is holy, whilst he inflames us, who are addicted to earthly things, after the manner of the dumb beasts, loving only the things present, with the greatness of the glory to come, and with promise of rewards; whilst by the revelation of wisdom he stirs up the listlesse Will to desire after God, whilst he exhorts us to all that is good. To the same purpose, c. 7. and c. 41.  
2 What Austin requires in his answer hereto, when he had first discovered his subtlety, that all that he intends here, by revelation of wisdom, and exhortation may be nothing else but (according to his former doctrine) 
Effectual and determining grace upon the Will.  the law of God and doctrine of his word; (as all that Mr. Goodwin means by his concession of grace is nothing but what is natural) He adds, But no such grace will we own: Let him at length acknowledge that grace, whereby the greatness of the glory to come, is not only promised, but is withal believed, and hoped for; nor only is wisdom revealed, but withal it is beloved; nor only is all that is good exhorted to, but persuaded; for all have not faith, who by the Scriptures hear the Lord promising the Kingdom of heaven; neither are all persuaded, who are exhorted that they would come to him, who saith, Come unto me all ye that labour. 
No potential grace but what is effectual, that grace which gives to be able to obey the call of God, gives effectually to obey. The grace of Christ not common, but peculiar to all those and only those, who are converted by it. The power of conversion from God.  But who they are that have faith, and who are persuaded to come to him, he hath shown clearly enough, where he saith, No man can come unto me, except the father draw him; and a little after, where he speaks of unbelievers, I have said unto you (saith he) that no man can come to me except it be given him of the father, john 6. 44. and 65. This grace Pelagius must confess, if he will not only be called, but likewise be a Christian. Harken to this Mr. Goodwin, lest your Christianity be called into question. And chap. 12. speaking of the same grace; by this grace, saith he, we not only know what to do, but we do what we know; nor only do we believe what we should love, but we love what we believe. Then he goes on chap. 13. If this grace must be called doctrine, let it be so called, but so, as that we believe, that God pours it into the soul more deeply and inwardly by an unspeakable sweetness, not only by those who plant and water outwardly, but also by himself, who gives the increase in secret, so as not only to show the truth but to bestow love. For so doth God teach those who are called according to his purpose, giving at once both to know 
The teaching of divine grace, effectual upon the wil  what they should do, and to do what they know; whence the Apostle to the Thessalonians 1 Epistle 4. 9 But concerning brotherly love, ye need not that I write unto you, for ye are taught of God to love one another: And that he might prove that they were taught of God, he adds presently, And indeed ye do it towards all the brethren, which are in Macedonia; Showing this to be a most certain evidence, that they are taught of God, if they d●e what they are taught. After this manner, Are all taught, who are called according 〈◊〉 purpose, as it is written in the Prophets, They shall all be taught of God.  
But he that knows what he ought to do, and doth it not, hath not yet learned of God according to Grace, but according to the Law; not according to the Spirit, but according to the Letter. Then chap. 14. speaking of the same effectual teaching of grace, Of this manner of teaching, saith he, the Lord says, Every one who hath heard and learned of the father, comes to me; whosoever therefore hath not come, it is not rightly said of him, he hath heard indeed, and learned that he should come; but he will not do what he hath learned: In no wise is it 
The efficacy of grace determining the wi● in its motion, & operation takes not away the liberty of the will  rightly said of that manner of teaching, whereby God teaches through grace; For (if as the truth speaks) every one, who hath learned, comes; whosoever comes not, he hath not learned; but who sees not, that each one comes and comes not, by the liberty of the will? but this liberty may be alone, if it comes not; but if it come; assisted it must be; and so assisted, as not only that it may know what is to be done, but that likewise it may do what it knows. And hence, when God teacheth not by the letter of the Law, but by the grace of the spirit; he so teacheth, that what any one hath learned, he doth not only see by knowing, but also desire by willing, and perform by doing; and by that divine manner of teaching, even the Will itself, and the operation itself, not only the natural possibility of willing, and working is assisted. For if only our power was helped by grace, the Lord would have said thus, Every one who hath heard, and learned of the father, may or can come to me: but he saith not so, but d●th come to me: A power of coming Pelagius places in Nature, or even as he hath now begun to speak, in Grace, of what kind soever he accounts it, by which, as he saith, the possibility itself is helped, 
That aid of grace which gives the power of coming to Christ, gives the act likewise.  but to come is now in the will, and the work; But it follows not, that he that can come doth come, except he will it, and do it.  
But every one who hath learned of the father not only can come, but doth come, where there is now both the advance of possibility, and the affection of the will, and the effect of the action.  
Reader, It is easy for thee to observe from these testimonies out of this most learned and pious Father, how powerful upon the will, how effectual in the work, how infallible, how peculiar, the grace of God is, according to what I affirmed before, and all with clear evidence, and much strength of Scripture made good: But indeed this great assertion of Grace doth so abound in this doctrine, which he doth most strenuously maintain, that it is very hard to make an end of quotations out of him, not so much for his authority, as for his demonstration by Scripture, and his singular excellency in discussing it. We shall add a little more, and but a little. In his book the grati● & lib. arbitr. c. 16. It is certain, that when we 
Effectual grace upon the will determining it in its motion.  will, we will, but it is he who makes us to will what is good; of whom it is said, that the will is prepared of the Lord: of whom it is said, It is God who worketh in us both to will and to do. It is certain, that when we do, we do, but he makes us to do, affording most effectual strength to the will; who hath said, I will make you to walk in my Statutes, and ye shall keep my judgements and do them: When he saith I will make you to do, what saith he else, but that 
Habitual and renewing grace upon the will together with effectual.  I will take from you the heart of stone, whence ye did not; and will give you an heart of flesh, that you may do. And what is this, but I will take away your hard heart, whence ye did not, and I will give you an obedient heart, whence you may do? here we have both the renewing, and acting of the will; and this certainly and infallibly. To the same purpose, cap. 17. Speaking of Peter, that he had no strong love, when he denied his Lord, and yet he had a small and imperfect love, when he said to the 
Preventing and subsequent grace, operating and co-operating grace, preventing and operating; whence the first act of grace subsequent, and co-operating; whence the following act, to which following acts, this grace is preventing, and operating, subsequent, and co-operating, only in respect of the first preventing and habitual grace all along.  Lord, I will lay down my life for thee, for he thought he could do what he felt himself too will. He adds, And who had begun to give that, though small love? but he, who prepares the will, and perfects by working with us, what he begins by working in us: Because he, as the author, works in us to will, who, as the finisher, works with us, when we will. Whence saith the Apostle, I am confident that he, that hath begun a good work in you, will perfect it to the day of jesus Christ. Phil. 1. 6. Therefore that we may will, he works without us; but when we will, and so will, as that we do, he works with us: But without him, either working that we may will, or working with us, when we will, we have no strength to the good works of piety. Chap. 18. upon that text of Scripture, Let us love one another, for love is of God, 1 Joh. 4. 7. Why is it said, Let us love one another, for love is of God, but because by the Command free will is admonished to seek the gift of God; When it is said, Let us love one another, there is the Law; when it is said, for love is of God, there is Grace: Grace makes us lovers of the Law, but the Law itself without Grace makes us only offenders. Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you; If ye have not chosen, doubtless ye have not loved, for how should they choose him whom they loved not?  
And Chap. 19 In john, the light saith, Behold what great love the Father hath given us? In the Pelagians, darkness saith, We have love of ourselves; which if they had true, that is, Christian love, they would know whence they had it, as the Apostle knew, who said, We have not received the spirit of this world, but the Spirit of God, that we might know the things that are freely given us of God; john saith, God is love; and the Pelagians say, that they even have God himself, n●● of God, but of themselves. And when they confess, that we have the knowledge of the Law from God, they will have love to be of ourselves; neither do they hear the Apostle saying, Knowledge puffesh up, but charity (or love) edifies. But I must take off my hand, he is so abundant in all his Polemique Writings against Pelagius, and his followers, that the Quotations would be Voluminous which might be taken out of them; I shall therefore conclude with the determination of the Milevitane Council, at which Austin himself was Precedent, and subscribed, Can. 4. Whosoever shall say, that the Grace of God by Jesus Christ our Lord, helps against sinning in this regard only, because by it the meaning of the Commands is revealed, and opened to us, that we might know what we ought to desire, and what to eschew, but that by it is not performed, that what we know aught to be done, we also love to do, and are enabled thereunto, Let him be Anathema; for when the Apostle saith, Knowledge puffes up, but charity edifies, it is very wicked to believe, that we have the grace of Christ for that which puffeth up, but that we have it not for that which edifies, when both is the gift of God; both to know what we ought to do, and to love that we may do it, that charity edifying, knowledge may not be able to puff us up; but as it is written of God, That be teacheth man knowledge, so is it written likewise, that Love is of God. Here we have the Doctrine of the Church in that age against the Heretics in this point.   

CHAP. VIII.  
3 LEt what Grace soever, how true and genuine soever, be acknowledged from God to man, yet that Doctrine that teacheth, that it is given according to men's merit, in the sense of the Fathers against Pelagius, is Pelagian; but such is Mr. goodwin's Doctrine. Evident it is, that he makes faith, and whatsoever he calls Grace, so to depend upon the good use of the natural understanding, as upon that account it is given unto men, how far, and in what sense soever it is given; and as evident it is, that no good use can be made of the understanding in order to Grace, without some good use of the will; for except a man will, he shall not, without the use of his will he cannot provoke, and stir up himself, so much as to meditate of God, and the things of God; but whosoever teacheth Grace to be given upon, or for the improvement of the Natural will in any kind or degree, falls under that so famously damned Doctrine of Pelagius, That Grace is given according to merits; for clearing this, let us briefly represent the Pelagian Heresy in its fourfold state, and the Doctrine of Austin, and other Fathers, and in them the Doctrine of the Church there-against.  
In the first place, Pelagius denied all aid of supernatural Grace (which Mr. Goodwin denies at this day, if he mean as he speaks) affirming, that the natural strength of Free will was sufficient to fulfil the Commands of God, and to obtain eternal life, denying Origin all sin to the last.  
In the second state he admitted the aid of Grace, but 1. He acknowledged this aid only in the Law, and external Doctrine, as also in the example of Christ. 2. He ascribed only this to it, that by it man might more easily fulfil the Commands of God, which without it he could fulfil. He likewise by Grace understood remission of sins.  
In the third state, he at least seemed to admit inward illumination of the understanding, 
Many Learned men hold, that at length he came to this, a special work of inward illumination by the Spirit above what he acknowledged in the second state; but he that shall weigh well what Austin saith, Lib. d● Gr. Christi, c. 7. 10. 22, 23. 41. may well doubt of it.  and inward excitation of the will; but this likewise, that man might be able the more easily to fulfil the Commands of God, which without it he might do, ever denying the infusion of grace into the will, withal holding, that this Grace was given according to merit, that is, upon the good use of Natural power before hand; against this Grace thus limited, we have out of Austin, and the Milevitan Council newly spoken.  
The fourth and last state was in the hands of certain Pelagian Bishops, who wrote two Epistles against Augustine's Doctrine, which he answers in four Books; their Doctrine the Father lays down in these words: They will have the desire of good in man to begin from man, that the grace of finishing may follow the merit of this beginning, if yet this at the least they will have.  
They differ from the last recited, in this; That they require this Grace, as simply necessary to the consummation of those virtues, the beginnings whereof were in Nature; but for the first motion unto good they required no internal grace; of this, Austin, Lib. 2. Contra duas Epistolas, Pelag. l. 8, etc. where after the stating of the question, in the prosecution of his answer, he strongly concludes all along against them, and therein against Mr. Goodwin, (taken in the best sense) that he that teacheth, that any the least motion to good in man prevents the Grace of God, he teacheth that ●●igmatized Doctrine of Pelagius, that Grace is given according to merits, which as otherwhere formerly, so here again he with much clearness refutes.  
The Question is stated in these words: Now 
Subduing Grace.  that is the thing which we have to attend, whether or no God inspires into man unwilling, 
Man unwilling, and resisting, by Grace made willing, and consenting, the least desire of good how small and imperfect soever from grace  and resisting the desire of good, so that now he be not resisting, he be not unwilling, but consenting unto good, and willing good. A little after, for this they think is to be objected against us; That we say, God inspires into man unwilling, and resisting the desire not of how great good soever, but of imperfect good. It may be then that they themselves so far keep a place for Grace, that they think without it a man may have a desire of good, but that good imperfect; but for perfect good, he cannot more easily have the desire of it by Grace, but without Grace he cannot at all have the desire of it. Having thus stated it, he refutes the Pelagian tenet.  
But so likewise they say, the Grace of God is given according to our merits, which in the East Pelagius fearing to be condemned, by the Acts of the Church condemned; for if without the Grace of God, by us begins the desire of good, that beginning shall be merit, (see here in how large a sense the Fathers take Merit in this Controversy) to which as of due the aid of Grace comes, and so the Grace of God shall not be freely given, but our merit shall be given.  
But the Lord, that he might answer Pelagius yet to come, saith not without me something ye may do, with much ado, but he saith, Without me ye can do nothing. And that he might answer these likewise yet to come, in the same Gospel-sentence, he saith not, without me ye can finish nothing, but, ye can do nothing, Joh. 15. for if he had said finish, they might have said, That the aid of God was necessary not to begin that which is good, this being of ourselves, but to finish it; but let them hear the Apostle too, for the Lord, when he saith, Without me ye can do nothing, in this one word comprehends the beginning, and the end. But the Apostle, as the expounder of the Lords saying, distinguisheth each more plainly, saying, Because he that hath begun a good work in you will finish it, until the day of Christ jesus, Philip. 1. But in the Holy Scriptures, in the same Apostle, we have found yet more than this, whereof we speak, We now speak of the desire of good, which if thou wil●c have begun by the will of man, but perfected by the Lord. See what may be answered to the Apostle, saying, for, we are not sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God.  
To think any thing, saith he, to wit, good; but to think is less than to desire, for we think all that we desire, but we do not desire all we think, because sometimes we think what we desire not.  
Since therefore it is less to think then to desire, for a man may think of good which as yet he desires not, and afterwards may by profiting desire, what before without desiring he thought of, how unto that which is less, that is to think any thing that is good, we are not sufficient as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, and unto that which is greater, that is, to desire any thing that is good are we sufficient by our freewill, without the Divine aid? for neither here doth the Apostle say, not that we are sufficient to think what is perfect, as of ourselves, but to think any thing, (saith he) contrary whereto is nothing: Whence is that of the Lord, Without me ye can do nothing. Then alleging the misinterpretation of Prov. 16. 1. by the Pelagians, where they read, The preparation of the heart is of man, and interpret it, that it belongs to man, to prepare the heart; that is, to begin good without the aid of Divine grace.  
far be it from the sons of the Promise (saith he) so to understand it, as though when they hear the Lord saying, Without me ye can do nothing, they should, as it were, convince him, and say, Lo, without thee we can prepare the heart; or when they hear from the Apostle Paul, Not that we are of ourselves sufficient to think any thing as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God. They should as it were convince him likewise, saying, Lo, we are sufficient of ourselves to prepare the heart, and by this, to think some good; far be it from any so to understand it; but the proud defenders of their own free will, and the forsakers of the Church's faith. Man prepares the heart, but not without the aid of God who toucheth the heart; he concludes this Chapter with this memorable sentence.  
Many good things God doth in man which man doth not; but none doth man, which God doth not make man to do. Then c. 9 Therefore the desire of good would not be in man from God, if it was not good; but if it be good it is not, but from him in us, who is unchangeably good. For what is the desire of good, but love? of which john the Apostle speaks without any doubtings, saying, Love is of God; neither the beginning thereof of ourselves, and the perfection thereof of God, but if love be of God, the whole is unto us of God; for God keeps us from that madness, that in his gifts we should make ourselves first, and him last, because his mercy hath prevented me; for if without him we can do nothing, truly we can neither begin, nor finish. That we may begin, it is said, His mercy shall prevent me; that we may finish, it is said, His mercy shall follow me; then in the close of this Chapter, speaking of man's purpose; The good purpose of man, (saith he) subsequent grace assists, but except grace had gone before, it had not been. The care of man likewise, which is said to be good, though when it hath begun to be, it is helped by grace, yet doth it not begin without grace, but is inspired by him of whom the Apostle saith, But thanks be unto God, who hath put the same care for you in the heart of Titus; if it be the gift of God, that one man hath care for another, whose gift else shall it be, that a man hath care of himself? Then c. 10: which since it is so, I see not any thing in the Holy Scriptures commanded man of God, whereby his free will is proved, which is not found either to be given of his goodness, or to be required for the demonstration of the aid of grace; neither doth man at all begin to be changed from evil to good, by the beginning of faith, but as free mercy, and that which is not owing to him doth it in him.   

CHAP. IX.  
THis leads us to an after state of Pelagianism 
The Massilian state of Pelagianisme.  in the hands of the Massilians, which was much one and the same with that in the hands of these Pelagian Bishops.  
Of them, and their tenets, we have in Prospers Epistle to Austin about the Relics of the Pelagian Heresy, as likewise in the Epistle of Hilary of Arles. That opinion of theirs, which we shall here take notice of, as falling in with this lost state of Pelagianism, and pertinent to our present business, we shall lay down in Prospers words; (if I be not deceived they speak Mr. Goodwin) Thus he relates. Some of these do so far not decline from the Pelagian paths, that when they are constrained to confess that Grace of Christ which prevents all humane merits, le●t if it be rendered to Merits, in vain should it be called Grace, this Grace they will have to belong to the condition of every man, wherein the Grace of the Creator doth so order him, who before deserved nothing, as not existing of a free and rational will, that by the discerning of good and evil, he may direct his will both to the knowledge of God, and to the obedience of his Commandments, and come to this Grace, whereby in Christ we are borne again, to wit, by the power of Nature, by ask, seeking, knocking, that therefore may he receive, therefore may he find, therefore may he enter in, because he used the good of Nature well; so that he deserved to come to this saving Grace, by the help of initial grace? Let Mr. goodwin's doctrine be considered, where he denies the word Supernatural as formerly, and his conclusions, upon which we are all this while, together, with his explication of the Parable of the Talents, and see wherein he differs from these here described.  
Hilary relates it thus, They agree that all men perished in Adam, neither can any man thence be freed by his own free will; But this they affirm to be agreeable to truth, and meet to be preached, that when the occasion or opportunity of obtaining salvation, is declared to them that are utterly down, and never able by their own strength to rise, that by that merit, whereby they may will, and believe, they may be healed of their disease, and may obtain the increase of faith, and the effect of their thorough holiness: But to begin any work, much less to finish it, they grant that no man is sufficient to himself. Then he adds to this purpose, That to believe, and will their own healing by Christ, to seek to the Physician for cure. These things they number not amongst works, but these they will have to prevent the healing grace of Christ.  
Upon the relation made in these two Epistles, Austin wrote his book, De praedestinatione sanctorum, & de bono perseveranti●, where he with great strength and clearness refutes these opinions, proving at large, what Prosper briefly hints in his Epistle, that in those relics of the Pelagian pravity, is nourished a strain of no mean virulency, if the beginning of salvation shall be evilly placed in man; If the will of man shall wickedly be preferred before the will of God; If therefore any man shall be aided, because he would, and not therefore he would, because he was aided; If he that is originally evil, shall evilly be believed to begin the receiving of good, not from the highest good, but from himself, If God be pleased from some other thing then what he hath given.  
We have therefore thus showed the several states of the Pelagian Heresy, that our new Pelagians, the Arminians might be unmasked.  
And because the Doctrine of Grace is so excellently cleared by Austin, and some other Fathers against these sacrilegious Tenets, I shall yet bring some things more out of their rich treasures. Austin therefore, lib. de praedestinatione sanctorum, c. 2 thus states the Question, That according to his adversaries, faith is not given of God to us, but it is increased by God in us, by that merit whereby it begun of us. Against this he argues.  
1 Here they depart not from that Doctrine which Pelagius himself was forced to condemn, in a Court of Bishops in Palestine, to wit, That the Grace of God is given according to our merits; As though it belonged not to the Grace of God, that we have begun to believe, but rather belonged to his Grace, which for our beginning is added to us, that we should believe more fully and perfectly; and hence we in the first place give the beginning of faith to God, that the fulfilings of it may be recompensed to us, as likewise whatsoever else we faithfully ask. But against this, why do we not rather hear, Who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed again unto him? for of him, and through him, and to him, are all things, Rom. 11. The beginning itself of our faith then, of whom is it but of him? for it is not, this excepted, of him, are all the rest, but of him, and through him, and to him, are all things.  
2 Truly was it said of the Apostle, To you it is given not only to believe, but to suffer for Christ; he showeth both to be the gifts of God, because he saith both are given; neither doth he say, that ye might more fully and perfectly believe in him, but that ye might believe in him.  
3 Neither did he say that himself had obtained mercy, that he might be more faithful, but that he might be faithful, for he knew, that he did not first give the beginning of his faith to God, and had the increase thereof recompensed to him, but by him was he made a believer, by whom he was made an Apostle: For being averse from the faith, which he wasted; & most vehemently adverse thereunto, he is of a sudden converted unto it, by a more powerful grace: Nor only made of unwilling, willing to believe; but of a persecutor, a sufferer, in the defence of that faith, which he did persecute, For unto him it was given of Christ, not only to believe on him, but likewise to suffer for him: And therefore commending that grace, which is not given according to any merit, but makes all good merits (we saw formerly in how large a sense the Fathers understand this word Merit) he saith.  
4 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing, as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God. Let them attend here, and weigh these words well, who think the beginning of faith is from ourselves, the accomplishment from God. For who doth not see, that thinking is before believing? for no man believes any thing, unless he have first thoughts that it is to be believed; For although certain thoughts do most hastily, most swiftly fly before the will of believing, and it presently so follows, that it doth even most closely, as it were, accompany them, yet must it needs be, that whatsoever is believed, is by a preventing thought believed, although to believe is nothing else but to think with assent; for not every one that thinks, believes: when many therefore think, that they may not believe; but whosoever believes, thinks; and by believing thinks, and by thinking believes. Wherefore as to things that belong to religion and godliness, of which the Apostle spoke, if we be not sufficient to think any thing, as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, certainly we are not sufficient to believe any thing, as of ourselves, which without thinking we cannot, but our sufficiency, whereby we begin to believe, is of God.   

CHAP. X.  
From these Scripture-Texts he proceeds to Scripture-arguments, we shall lay them down in his own words, for in better we cannot.  
WE must take heed, Brethren, lest man extol himself against God, when he 
1. From God's promise to Abraham.  saith, that he doth that which God hath promised.  
Is not the faith of the Gentiles promised to Abraham? and he, giving glory to God, believed most fully, because he that had promised was able to perform, he therefore performs the faith of the Gentiles, who is able to perform what he promised.  
In the tenth Chap. speaking of this same thing, It is (saith he out of the Apostle) of faith, that according to grace the Promise may be firm to all the seed; not from the power of our will, but from his own Predestination, for he promised not what men, but what himself would do, because though men do those good things which belong to the Worship of God, he makes them to do the things he hath commanded; they make not him to do what he hath promised, otherwise that the promises of God may be fulfilled, it is not in the power of God, but of man, and what is promised by the Lord, is by them returned to Abraham; but so did not Abraham believe, but he believed, giving glory to God, because he that hath promised is able to do; he doth not say to foretell, he doth not say to fure-know, for the deeds of another he may foretell, and foreknow, but he saith he is able to do, and therefore not the deeds of others, but his own.  
We return now to the second Chapter, 
The whole of faith from God.  where it follows; Furthermore, if God work our faith, acting in our hearts after a wonderful manner that we may believe, shall we fear left he should not be able to do the whole? and therefore man shall challenge the first part to himself, that he may merit to receive the last from him? See if any thing else be done by this means, but that the Grace of God, which way soever, may be given according to our merit, and so Grace shall be no Grace, for thus it is returned as due, it is not freely given; for this is owing to him that believes, that by the Lord faith itself may be increased, and faith increased may be the reward of faith begun.  
Neither do they observe when thus they speak, that that reward is imputed to believers, not according to Grace, but according to debt. (We see here again the large signification of the word Merit, for any thing that may be supposed in man of himself, as a motive to God for giving his Grace) But why the whole should not be ascribed to man, that he that could begin what he had not, might himself likewise increase what he had begun, I cannot at all see, but only, because they cannot resist most manifest Divine testimonies, by 
Godliness from faith.  which faith, whence godliness takes its beginning, is showed to be the gift of God; As, according as God hath distributed to every one a measure of faith; and, peace to the Brethren, and love, with faith from God the Father, etc. Unwilling therefore to oppose these so clear Testimonies, and yet willing that of himself it should be unto himself that man believes, he doth, as it were, compound with God, that part of his faith he may take to himself, and part he may leave to him; and which is yet more losty, the first he takes to himself, that which follows he gives to him, and in that which he saith belongs to them both, he makes himself first, and God last.  
Of that mind was not that godly and humble 
2. From differencing grace.  Teacher, most blessed Cyprian I mean, who said, In nothing may we glory, for as much as ours is nothing; which that he might show, he brought in the Apostle saying, But what hast thou that thou hast not received? but if then hast received, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received? By which testimony especially was I also convinced, when I had been in the like error, thinking faith, by which we believe in God, not to be the gift of God, but of ourselves, to be in ourselves, and that by it we obtained the gifts of God, for living soberly, and righteously, and godly in this present world.  
This testimony therefore of the Apostle, where he said, for the repressing of man's haughtiness, What hast thou that thou hast not received? suffers not any of the faithful to say, I have faith which I received not. But neither may this be said, Although I have not perfect faith, yet I have the beginning thereof, whereby I first believed in Christ, because here likewise the answer is; But what hast thou that thou hast not received, and if thou hast received, why dost tho● boast, as if thou hadst not received? In this most evident intention of the Apostle, whereby (as by the context it appears) he speaks against the pride of man, that no man may glory in man, and therefore not in himself, but in the Lord, to imagine the natural gifts of God, whether entire and perfect nature, as in its first condition it was gifted, or whatsoever relics of corrupt nature, I think it too absurd; for by these gifts, which are common to all men, is one man differenced from another? Here he first said, Who hath made thee to differ? then he adds, What hast thou that thou hast not received? because a man pu●t up against another might say; My faith hath made me to differ, my righteousness, or whatsoever other thing. This good Teacher meeting with such thoughts, What hast thou, saith he; that thou hast not received? Of whom? but of him who hath made thee to differ from another, to whom he hath not given, what he hath given unto thee; But if thou hast received, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received? Is he doing any thing else, but that he that glories may glory in the Lord? But nothing is so contrary to this intention, as for any man so to boast of his merits, as though he had done them to himself, and not the Grace of God; but that Grace which differenceth the good from the bad, not that which is common to good and bad.  
From Election, many hear the word of 
3. From Election▪  truth, some believe, others gainsay; these therefore will believe, these will not, who knows not this? who denies? But for as much as in some the will is prepared of the Lord, in others it is not prepared, verily we must distinguish what comes from his Mercy, and what from his Judgement. What Israel sought (saith the Apostle) he obtained not, but the election hath obtained, and the rest were blinded. Behold Mercy and Judgement, Mercy in the▪ election, which hath obtained the righteousness of God; but Judgement upon the rest which were blinded, and yet these, because they would, believed; these because they would not, did not believe; therefore Mercy and Judgement are done even in the wills themselves; for Election is of Grace, not verily of Merits. Therefore freely hath the Election obtained what it hath obtained, there was not something of theirs that went before, which they first gave, and recompense was made to them, for he saved them for nought, but to the rest who were blinded (as it is not there concealed) retribution was made.  
All the ways of the Lord are Mercy and Truth, but his ways are unsearchable; unsearchable therefore are, his Mercy, whereby he freely acquits, and his Truth, whereby he justly condemns, cap. 7.  
But haply they say, the Apostle distinguisheth faith from works, and Grace, he saith, is not of works, he doth not say, it is not of faith, true; but Christ saith, Faith likewise is the work of God, Joh. 6. So therefore the Apostle distinguisheth Faith from Works, as in the two Kingdoms of the Hebrews, judah is distinguished from Israel, when as yet judah is Israel; for ye are saved by Grace through faith, and that not of yourselves, it (even faith) is the gift of 
4. From the efficacy and peculiarity of Grace, depending upon election.  God, and faith is not of works, lest any one should boast, and all that the Father hath given me shall come unto me. What is this shall come to me, but shall believe in me? but that it may be done, the Father gives; No man can come to me, except the Father, which hath sent me, draw him: And they shall all be taught of God, and every one that hath heard of the Father, and learned, comes to me. If every one that hath heard of the Father, and learned, comes, truly who comes not, hath not heard of the Father, nor learned: for had he heard, and learned, he would come.  
far removed from the apprehensions of the flesh is this School in which the Father is heard, and teacheth to come to the Son. There is likewise the Son himself, because he himself is the Word of the Father, whereby he so teacheth; neither deals he with the ear of the flesh, but of the heart; there is together likewise the Spirit of the Father, and the Son, for neither doth he not teach, nor doth he teach apart, because we say, the works of the Trinity are inseparable, and he is verily the Holy Ghost, of whom the Apostle saith, Having the same Spirit of faith. far removed (I say) from the apprehensions of the flesh, is this School, in which God is heard, and teacheth; we see many come to the Son, because we see many believe in Christ, but where, and how they have learned this of the Father we see not, verily this grace is secret, but that it is grace who doubts?  
This Grace therefore, which by Divine bounty is after an hidden manner given unto 
Grace preventing. subduing, renewing, effectual.  the hearts of men, is by no hard heart refused, because it is therefore given, that the hardness of the heart may first of all be removed; when therefore the Father is inwardly heard, and teacheth to come to the Son, he takes away the stony heart, and gives a heart of flesh, as he promised by the Prophet Ezek. 36. for so doth he make the sons of the Promise, and the Vessels of Mercy, which he hath prepared unto glory; why therefore doth he not teach all that they may come to Christ? but because all whom he teacheth, in mercy he teacheth; but whom he teacheth not, in Judgement he teacheth not, because, he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens; but he hath mercy, bestowing good, he hardens, recompensing according to desert. But why he teacheth not all, the Apostle opens so far, as he thought fit to be opened, Rom. 9 22, 23. Hence it is that the word of the Cross is foolishness unto them, that perish, but to those that are saved, the power of God. All these God teacheth to come to Christ, all these he will have saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth; for if he would have taught those to come to Christ also, to whom the word of the Cross is foolishness, without doubt even they had come too, for he neither deceives, nor is deceived, who saith, Every one that hath heard, and learned of the Father, comes to me; far be it therefore that any man should not come who hath heard, and learned of the Father.  
When therefore the Gospel is preached, some believe, some do not believe; but they that believe whilst the Preacher sounds without, they hear, and learn of the Father within; but they that believe not, they hear without, not within, neither do they learn; that is, to the one it is given to believe, to the other it is not given, which afterwards is more openly spoken; No man can come to me, except it he given him of the Father. Therefore to be drawn by the Father to Christ, and to hear and learn of the Father, is nothing else but to receive the gift of the Father, whereby to believe in Christ. For he did not distinguish Hearers of the Gospel from no Hearers, who said, No man can come to me, except it be given him of the Father; but Believers from unbelievers: Faith therefore both begun and finished, is the gift of God; and that this gift is given to some, and not given to all he cannot doubt, who will not oppose most manifest holy Scriptures.  
Chap. 12. When we come to little ones, and to 
5. From the salvation of Infants.  the Mediator betwixt God and man, the Man Christ Jesus, all assertion of humane merits going before the Grace of God, falls to the ground, because they are not distinguished from the rest by any good preceding merits, that they should belong to the deliverer of men, nor he by any preceding humane merits, (when he is a man also) was made the deliverer of men.  
For Infants; Original sin being by the Grace of God forgiven, or by the Judgement of God not forgiven, when they die, they either pass by Regeneration from an evil to a good state, or by Original corruption, from an evil to an evil state. And Lib. de bono persever. Whereas the Apostle saith, It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy; who relieves little ones, whom he will, when they neither will, nor run; those whom he chose in Christ before the world was made, as to whom he freely would give Grace; that is, no merits of theirs, whether of faith, or works preceding; whom he wills not to relieve, he relieves not, of whom in his own predestination he hath otherwise judged; secretly indeed, but justly, for there is no iniquity with God, but his judgements are unsearchable, and his ways past finding out. As of those two twins (jacob and Esau) of whom the one is taken, the other is left, their end is different, their merits the same; in whom yet so the one is freed by the great goodness of God, that the other is condemned without any iniquity in God; for is there iniquity in God? in no wise; but his ways are past finding out; therefore let us without wavering believe his mercy in those that are freed, his truth in those that are punished; neither let us search things unsearchable, nor think to trace what is untraceable.  
Now whereas it was objected by the Massilians, or Semi-Pelagians, that Infants were dealt with according to future merits foreseen, if they had lived; First, he rejects this as a most absurd conceit; that any should be judged not only according to his merits whilst he was in the Body, but according to those merits which he should have had, if he had been longer in the Body, (by merits here as frequently, he means only deeds, good or evil) whence it should come into their thoughts (saith he) whose wills are not contemptible, wondering, and astonished, I cannot find. A new kind of absurdity, saith Prosper, relating it, to imagine things to come which are not to come, and that what things are not to be, should be fore-known, and that what things are foreknown should not be done. After his rejection of this Opinion, he refutes it, both in his Book De praedest, & de bono Persever. and otherwhere I shall glean a little, Lib. de praedest. Sanct. Cap. 12. We shall all appear before the judgement Seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad, 2 Cor. 5. 10. What he hath done (saith he) not what he might afterwards do, but whence this should come into the mind of such men, that things to come, which are not things to come should be punished, that to merits of Infants should be honoured, I cannot tell. To this time of the Body belongs Original sin.  
2 Why then may we not say, that the Gospel is preached in vain, with so much labour and sufferings of the Saints; if men may be judged, even those that have not heard the Gospel, according to that contumacy, or obedience which God fore-knew they would have had, if they had heard? and so Tyre and Sidon should not have been condemned, because, if those wonderful things and signs had been done amongst them, (which were done in those Cities to which the Lord speaks of this matter) they had repent in sackcloth and ashes, Lib. De Bono persever. c. 9  
3 Then neither may we rejoice in those whom we know to have departed in a right saith, and a good life, lest they should be judged according to some wickednesses, which they were to commit, if a longer life had been granted to them; neither are they to be grieved for, and detested, who have finished this life in infidelity and wretched manners, because haply, if they had lived, they would have repent, and have lived in godliness, and according to those things they were to be judged, Epist. 107.  
These two Arguments are in force against our Adversaries, because they hold, that a righteous man, a true believer may fall utterly, and finally from Grace, and that it is in the power of the unrighteous to repent.  
Our Saviour himself is likewise a most 
6. From the person of the Mediator.  clear light of Predestination and Grace, he the Mediator of God and man, the man Christ jesus, which that he might be, by what foregoing merits, whether of Faith, or Works, did his humane Nature obtain? Give answer I pray, that man, that he should by the word coeternal with the Father, be taken into the unity of Person, and become the only begotten Son of God, whence might he merit this? What did he before, what believed he, what asked he, that he should come to this unspeakable excellency? Let man reply against God here, if he dare, and say, and why not I? and if he shall be answered, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? and yet shall not refrain, but shall increase his impudence, and say, What do I hear? Who art thou, O man? when I am, what I hear, that is, a man, which he is likewise, of whom I am speaking, and why am not I the same that he? But he is such an one, and so great by Grace; Why is Grace different where Nature is common? certainly there is no acception of persons with God; what, I say not Christian, but madman would speak thus?  
In our Head then may the fountain of Grace appear, whence according to the measure of every one, it diffuseth itself through all his Members; by that Grace, from the beginning of his faith, is any man made a Christian, by which Grace from his beginning was that man made Christ, and of the same Spirit was this man borne again, of which he was borne. As therefore he the only one is predestinated to be our Head, so we many are predestinated to be his Members. Let Humane merits here be silent, which have perished by Adam, and let that Grace of God reign, which reigns by Jesus Christ our Lord, the only Son of God our Lord; whosoever he is, that in our Head can find the foregoing Merits of that singular Generation, let him inquire in us his Members, the foregoing merits of multiplied regeneration; for that Generation was not recompensed to Christ, but given, that free from all Obligation of sin, he should be borne of the Spirit, and the Virgin; so that we should be borne again of Water, and the Spirit, it is not recompensed to us for any merit, but freely given, for he hath made us to believe on Christ, who hath made Christ for us, on whom we believe; he makes in men the beginning of faith, and the finishing in jesus, who hath made the Author of faith, and the finisher Jesus, Lib. de Predest. Sanct.  
Lib. de Grat. & Lib. Arbit. c. 14. Thus he states the Question. But when these, not Defenders, 
7. The corruption of Nature expressed in hardness of heart.  but blowers up, and tumblers headlong of free will, have been convinced, that neither the knowledge of the Law of God, nor Nature, nor only the remission of sins, is that Grace which is given by jesus Christ our Lord, but it makes that the Law be fulfilled, (scil.. Evangelically) that Nature be healed, that sin reign not, when in these things they are convinced, they betake themselves to this, that which way soever they may endeavour, to show that the Grace of God is given according to our merits, for they say, that though it be not given according to the merits of our good works, because by it we perform good works, yet is it given us according to the merits of a good will; because, say they, the good will of man praying goes before, before which was the will of man believing, that according to these merits might follow the Grace of God, hearing and answering prayer. In answer whereto.  
If Faith be only of Free Will, and not given of God, why do we pray for those that will not believe, that they may believe? which we should do altogether in vain, did we not most rightly believe, that the Almighty God could convert to believing, even wills perverse and contrary to faith. The Lord knocks indeed at the door of free Will, when it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, but unless he could take away the hardness of the heart, he would not say by the Prophet, I will take from them the heart of stone, and give unto them a heart of flesh; which that it was prophesied of the New Testament, the Apostle shows clearly, where he says, Ye are our Epistle, written not with Ink, but with the spirit of the living God; not in Tables of stone but in the fleshly tables of the heart, 2 Cor. 3. Can we say then without manifest absurdity, that the good Merit of a good Will in man hath gone before, that the heart of stone might be pulled from him; when this very thing, the heart of stone, signifies nothing else, but a most obstinate Will, and is altogether inflexible towards God? For where a good will goes before, now verily the heart is not stony.  
Lib. de great. Christic. 7. Where we have first 
8 From the increase of sin by the Law in the natural man.  Pelagius his doctrine of Grace: God (saith he) assists us by his doctrine and revelation, whilst he opens the eyes of our hearts, whilst that we might not be taken up with things present, he shows unto us things to come, whilst he discovers the snares of the devil, whilst he enlightens us with his various and unspeakable gift of heavenly grace. And then concluding this profession of his with a kind of absolution; He that saith this (saith he) doth he seem to thee to deny grace? Now follows Augustine's Answer, where he shows, the increase of sin in the natural man by the Law, This is (saith he) to place the grace of God in the Law and Doctrine. Hence it appears he acknowledgeth, that grace by which God shows, and reveals what we ought to do, not whereby he gives unto us, and aides us that we may do; Whereas the knowledge of the Law, if the help of grace be wanting, is of force only hereunto, that the command may be transgressed; F●r where there is no law, saith the Apostle, there is ●o transgression, and I had not known lust, had not the Law said, thou shalt not lust, and hence, so different is the Law from Grace; that not only is it of no advantage, but withal, of greatest damage; when Grace helps not, the Law commands, rather than affords help; it teacheth that the disease is, it healeth not: Nay, therefore rather because it is not healed, it is increased, that with greater care and diligence the medicine of grace may be sought after.  
More fully to this purpose, lib. de great. & lib. de arbit. c. 11. How is it that these vainest of men, and most perverse Pelagians say, that the law is the grace of God, whereby we are assisted not to sin? What is it that these wretches say, who without all doubt say contrary to so great an Apostle? He saith, that sin receives strength against man by the Law, and that it kills him by the command, though the commandment be holy, & just, and good, and that by good it works death to him, from which he should not be freed, if the Spirit did not quicken, whom the Letter kills: Yet these unteachable ones, blind against the law of God, and deaf against the voice of God, they say the kill lett●r quickens, and contradict the quickening spirit.  
Epistle 107. ad Vitalem, upon that Text, Col. 1. 13. Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, 
9 From the subjection of the natural man to the devil.  etc. How had we (saith he) free will to decline from evil, and do good, when it was under the power of darkness, whence, as the Apostle saith, God delivered us? He it was then that made us free; This power of darkness, what is it, but the power of the devil and his angels? who, when they had been Angels of light, not abiding in the truth by their free Will, but falling from it, became darkness; to this power of darkness therefore is mankind subjected, by the ruin of the first man, in whom we all fell, who by this power was persuaded to transgression. This power of darkness, the devil, who is likewise the Prince of the power of the air, works in the hearts of the children of unbelief (or disobedience:) This ruler of darkness ruling them at his own will, which neither hath he free to do good, but hardened to the utmost of evill-willing, in way of punishment for his wickedness; What is it then that this power works in the children of distrust (or disobedience) but his own evil works first of all? and above all, distrust and unbeleef; whereby they are enemies to the faith, by which he knows they may be cleansed, they may be healed, they may be born again in eternity, or unto eternity, most perfectly free, which he most vehemently envies unto them.  
And therefore some of them, by whom he desires more fully to deceive, he suffers to have some, as it were, good works, for which they are praised; but because the Scripture saith most truly, Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, and without faith it is impossible to please God, not men: This Prince endeavours nothing so much, as that they may not believe in God, and that they may not come to the Mediator by believing, by whom his works are destroyed. But the Mediator entereth into the house of this strong man, that is, having mankind under his dominion; and first, he binds him, that is, he bridles and restrains his power with the stronger chains of his own power, and so he rescues all his vessels, which soever he fore-ordained to rescue, freeing their Will from his power, that he not hindering, they may believe upon him with free Will: Wherefore this is the work of Grace not of Nature; the work I say of grace which the second Adam brought to us, not of nature, which the first Adam in himself quite destroyed; the work of Grace taking away sin, and quickening the dead sinner, not the work of the law, showing sin, but not making alive from sin; this is the work of grace, which whoso receive, are made friends to the wholesome doctrine of the holy Scriptures, though they were enemies, not the work of the same doctrine, which whoso hear and read, without the grace of God are made worse enemies thereof. Whence the Lord jesus distinguishing believers from unbelievers, that is, the vessels of mercy, from the vessels of wrath; No man, saith he, can come to me, except it be given him of my father, and presently as he said this, his disciples were offended at his doctrine, who afterwards followed him no more: let us not say therefore, that Doctrine is Grace, but let us acknowledge Grace, which makes Doctrine profitable, which Grace if it be wanting, we see that doctrine is even hurtful. 
10 From the thanksgiving & prayers of the Saints, and of the church.   
Lib. de praedest. Sanct. c. 19 The Apostle gives thanks to God for those that believed, not verily because the Gospel was preached to them, but because they believed, I (saith he) having heard of your faith in Christ jesus, and love to all the Saints, cease not to give thanks for you, etc. Ephes. 1. their faith was new and lately begun by the preaching of the Gospel, which faith being heard of, the Apostle gives thanks to God for them: if he should have given thanks to man, for that which he either knew or thought was not performed by him, it would have been rather flattery or mockery, then giving of thanks, Let us not be deceived, God is not mocked, faith, even beginning, is his gift, that the Apostles thanksgiving be not deservedly judged false or of false glorying.  
The like instance for thanksgiving, he brings from 1 Thes. 2. Then for Prayer, c. 20. That the beginning of faith is the gift of God, the Apostle admonisheth us saying, withal praying for us, That God would open unto us the door of his word, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds, that I may make it manifest, as jought to speak, Col. 4. How is the door of the word opened, saith he, but when the sense or understanding of the hearer is opened, that he may believe? and faith being begun, he may admit those things which are preached, and disputed for building up of wholesome doctrine, lest the heart being shut up by unbelief, he may disallow and reject the things that are spoken: whence to the Corinthians, I will stay at Ephesus (saith he) till Pentecost, for there a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and there are many adversaries, 1 Cor. 16. What may we here understand, but that the Gospel being there first of all preached by him, many believed? and there were many adversaries of the same faith, according to that of the Lord, No man comes unto me, except it be given him of the father, and to you it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven, to them it is not given: The door than is open in them, to whom it is given; but there are many adversaries of them, to whom it is not given.  
More fully yet, Epist. 107. to Vitalis, wilt thou forbid the Church to pray for unbelievers, that they may be believers, for those that will not believe, that they may will to believe? for those that descent from his Law, and doctrine, that they may consent thereto? that God may give unto them what he promised by his Prophet, an heart to know him, and hearing ears? which they had certainly received, of whom our Saviour saith, he that hath ears to hear let him hear? What, wilt thou not, when thou hearest the Minister exhorting the people to pray to God, or himself with a loud voice praying, that God would compel the unbelieving Nations to his faith, say Amen? What wilt thou blame the Apostle Paul for having such desires for the unbelieving jews, Brethren saith he, my hearts desire and Prayer to God for Israel, is, that they might be saved? The same Apostle to the Thessalonians 2 Epist. 3. Finally brethren pray for us, that the word of God may run and be glorified, even as it is with you, and that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men, for all men have not faith; How should the word of God run and be glorified, but by the conversion of them to the faith, to whom it is preached? since he saith to believers, as with you, surely he knows, that this is done by him, whom he will have prayed unto, that he may do it; as likewise that he may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men, who should not believe, notwithstanding their prayers; wherefore he adds, for all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith. Because they were to believe who were ordained to eternal life, but God makes such as do not yet believe to believe, by the prayers of believers, that he may show i● i● he that doth it. In the same Epistle, more towards the ●…ginning, In vain and for fashion sake, rather than truly, do we pour out prayers to God for such (speaking of Infidels) if it belong not to his Grace, to convert to his Fai●● the Wills of men contrary to the Faith; 〈◊〉 vain and for fashion sake, rather than truly do we give thanks to God, with gr●●● representation of joy, when any of them believe, if he do not work this in them. We pray not at all, but make a feigned show of prayer if we believe, that not he, but we ourselves do the things we pray for; we give no● thanks at all, but make a feigned show of thanks, if we do not think, that he doth that, for which we give thanks; And whilst with men we ●…fend freewill, with God we lose the benefit of prayer; and we do not render tr●● praise, whilst we do not acknowledge true gr●●●.  
If we will truly defend freewill, let us no● oppose that whereby it is made free; for he that opposeth Grace; by which our Will is freed to decline from evil, and to do good, he will have his Will to be still captive. A little after upon that Text, who hath delivered from the power of darkness: So it com●●●o pass th●● neither are they made believers but by fre● Will, and yet by hi● Grace are they made belee●ers, who from the power of darkness freeed their Will? So the grace of God is not denied, but is showed to be true, without any humane merits foregoing, and free Will is so defended, as that it may be well settled with humility, not by haughtiness cast headlong, and he that glories not in man, whether any other or himself, but in the Lord he may glo●….   

CHAP. XI.  
To this l●st state of Pelagianism in the hands of the M●ssili●ns we may subjoin the Doctrine of a certain Abbot in his thirteenth Collation published by Cass●an, against whom Prosper hath vindicated the truth according to the Doctrine of Austin, in his book● contra Collatorem; we shall glean a little ●ere▪ yet so much as shall state the error, and refu●e it.  Collator. 
TH● beginning not only of acts, but even of good thoughts is from God, who both inspires in us the beginnings of an holy Will, and withal gives us the strength and opportunity of finishing those things which 〈◊〉, rightly desire. A little after, not a little ●…ssing this assertion of his own, It is not easy 〈…〉 humane reason to discern, how the Lord gives to 〈◊〉 that ask, is found of those that seek, and c●…, unto those that knock; and again, is found of those that seek not, appears openly amongst those, who asked not for him.  Prosper, 
Here as by an inscrutable diversity is a definition brought in, by which it is taught, that ●any come to grace without grace, and that some have this affection of ask, seeking, ●nd knocking by the watchfulness of free Will, which yet in others, is with so great frowardness affirmed to be blinded, as that it cannot ●e called back by any exhortations, except it ●e brought over unwilling, by the force of him ●hat draws it; as though this was not done ●y the whole work of manifoldly-various grace in the minds of all, that of unwilling, ●hey are made willing. This Disputer hath quickly forgotten his former definition, etc.  
Thou hast no fuller agreement, neither with the Heretics, nor with the Catholics (that is the Orthodox) they defend the beginnings of ●ree Will, in all the righteous works of men; We believe the beginnings of good thoughts ●o come forth always from God: but how is ●t that thou dost not observe thyself to fall ●nto that damned opinion? That, whether thou wilt or not, thou shalt be convinced to say, ●hat the grace of God is given according to ●ur merits, when some thing of a good work from men themselves shall go before (as ●hou affirmest) for which it shall obtain grace.  Collator. 
Neither yet doth any man enjoy health when he would, ●r is ●e freed from the disease of his sickness at the desire of his will.  Prosper. 
Thou teachest therefore that a man cannot indeed of himself lay hold on health bu● that he hath of himself the desire of health, an● of his own accord only, comes to the Physician and th●● this very thing, that he doth com● is not of the Physician; As though the soul● itself did not languish; and she being sounds provided a remedy for her body: But th● whole man by her, and with her is fallen into the depth of his misery, where till she receiv● the knowledge of her calamity by the Physician, she delights to lie always loving her errors, and embracing falsehood for truth whose first step to health is, that she begin t● displease herself, and to hate her old weakness, the next, that she desire to be healed, and know by whom she is to be healed; whic● things do so go before her health, that by hi● are they planted in her, who is about to heal● her.  Collator. 
These two, the Grace of God, and Free Will, se●● indeed contrary the one to the other, but they both agree together; and that we ought to have an eye t● both alike, we gather by the law of piety, least withdrawing one of these from man; we may seem to hav● transgressed the rule of the Church's faith.  Prosper. 
The Church's Rule is, the Apostle publishing it, No man can say that jesus is the Lord but by the 
1 Cor. 12.  holy ghost.  
The Church's Rule is, But what hast thou 〈◊〉 thou hast not received? but if thou hast receive● 
1 Cor. 4.  it, why dost thou boast, as if thou hadst not received it?  
The Church's Rule is, By the grace of God, I 〈◊〉, that I am, and his grace ●as not in vain in me, 
1 Cor. 15▪  〈◊〉 I laboured more th●n they all, yet not I, ●ut the ●…e of God, which was with me. And I have ob●…ed 
1 Cor. 7. 25  mercy of the Lord to be faithful.  
The Church's Rule is, That we have this trea●…t 
2 Cor. 4. 7.  in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power ●…y be of God and not of us.  
The Church's Rule is, By grace yes are saved 
Ephes. 2.  borough faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the ●…ift of God, not of works, lest any man should ●…st.  
The Church's Rule is, In nothing be ye terri●…ed 
Phil. 1  by your adversaries, which is to them a cause of ●…erdition, b●t to you of salvation, and that from God; ●…se to you it is given through Christ not only to ●…eleeve in him, but also to suffer for him.  
The Church's Rule is, Work out your own sal●…tion 
Phil. 2.  with fear and trembling, for it is God that ●…orketh in you to will and to do according to his good ●…easure.  
The Church's Rule is, Not that we are of our 
2 Cor. 3.  ●…elves sufficient, to think any thing, as of ourselves, ●…t our sufficiency is of God.  
This Rule God establisheth, saying, No man 
John 6.  〈◊〉 come to me except it be given him of the father: And All that the father hath given me shall come unto ●…e; And Without me, ye can do nothing. And Ye 
john 15. Luk. 10.  ●…ave not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and no man ●…th known the father but the son, and be to whom ●…e son will reveal him. And As the father quick●…s the dead, so the son quickens whom he will. And blessed art thou Simon Barjonah, for flesh and ●…lood hath not revealed this to thee, but my father which 
john 5. Mat. 16.  〈◊〉 in heaven. By this rule the Will is taken from ●…o man, because the efficacy of grace works not this in the wills of men, that they be not; b●… that of evil, they be good; and that of unbeleeving, they be believing; and they who we●… of themselves darkness, are made light in th●… Lord; that which was dead, is quickened that which was down, is raised; that whic●… was lost, is found: This we believe, the gra●… of our Saviour doth in all men whomsoev●… who are delivered from the power of darkness, 〈◊〉 translated into the Kingdom of the Son of God's lov●… without the exception of any person.  Collator. 
When God sees us will to turn towards good, 〈◊〉 meets us, he directs us, he strengthens us.  Prosper. 
Who sees not this Doctrine assigns meri●… to free Will, by which grace is prevented, upo●… which grace waits, as an handmaid, rendrin●… desert, not bestowing a gift, which doctr●… was in a Synod of Bishops in Palestine by Pel●… gius himself condemned with a curse; fo●… in him who begins to will good, and desir●… to▪ depart from iniquity, and errors, w●… profess the grace of God works this very●… thing.  Collator. 
We are not to believe that God created man such 〈◊〉 one, as that he never could will, nor do good, for t●… would he not have permitted him a free will, if he 〈◊〉 granted to him only to will, and to be able to do evi●… but neither to will, nor to be able to do good.  Prosper. 
That the first Man was created upright, without all sin, in whom the nature of al● men was created together, there is no doub●… and that he received such a free will, that if he would not forsake the Lord assisting him, he might persevere in that good, which naturally he had received, because he would: and by the merit (hear the large sense again of this word merit, for a good work) of voluntary perseverance arrive at that blessedness, that neither would he, neither could he fall into a worse condition, but by free will itself, by which, as long as he would, he continued good, he departed from the Law propounded to him, neither did he fear the punishment of death denounced against him, forsaking God, and following the Devil, rebellious against the Lord his Preserver, obsequious to the enemy his destroyer.  
Hitherto we have had an excellent and clear passage, about man's uprightness by Creation, now follows the like for his corruption by the fall; Adam therefore was, and we all were in him; Adam perished, and all perished in him, The Son of man came to seek and save, that which was lost, Luke 19 for in that ruin of the Universal Transgression, neither the substance of man's nature, nor the will is taken away, but the light and ornament of virtues, of which by the deceit of the envious one, it is stripped naked, but those things being lost by which he might have come to an eternal, and inamissible incorruption of soul and body, what remained to him, but only what belongs unto temporal life, which is wholly of Damnation and Punishment? wherefore it behoves that they, that are borne of Adam, be borne again of Christ, lest any man be found in that Generation which is lost; the first Man lost faith, lost continence, lost love, is despoiled of wisdom, and understanding, is void of counsel and strength, and by wickedly following after higher things, is cast down from the knowledge of truth, and the piety of obedience, not so much as fear to himself remaining, that he might abstain from things forbidden, at least through the fear of punishment.  Collator. 
That he might show the possibility of good to be in Man, reproving the Pharisees, he saith, Why do ye not of yourselves judge what is good? which verily ●e would not have said, had he not known, that they were able by Natural judgement to discern what was right. This is one of Mr. goodwin's grand objections, as we have seen before, let us now see the answer.  Prosper. 
Now he ascribes not only the willing of good, but the possibility too, to free will, as though therefore understanding was required of them, therefore Righteousness was demanded, because they can bring forth these things, from the endowments of Nature, not from the gifts of God; but these things are commanded man, that by the very command of God, whereby what he hath received is charged upon him, he may acknowledge that he hath lost it by his own fault, and therefore that the requiry of it is not unequal, though he be unable to pay what he owes; but let him fly from the Letter-killing, to the Spirit-quickning, and that ability which before he found not in Nature, let him seek from Grace, which if he do, i● is the great mercy of the Lord, if he do it not, it is a just punishment of sin.  Collator. 
It cannot be doubted, but there are in every soul naturally some seeds of virtues, planted there by the benefit of the Creator.  Prosper. 
Then did Adam only transgress, and in his sin no man (beside) sinned, then are we conceived in no iniquities, neither did our Mothers bring us forth in any sins; we were not by nature the Children of wrath, neither were we under the power of darkness, but virtues naturally remaining in us, we were rather the Children of peace and light. God is principally virtue, to whom it is no other thing to have virtue, then to be virtue; of him when we are partakers, Christ dwells in us, who is the virtue of God, and the wisdom of God, Faith, Hope, Love, Continence, Understanding, Counsel, Courage, and all other virtues dwell in us; but when we go● back from this good, all things arise contrary to us, from us; for Beauty departing, what succeeds but deformity? Wisdom going away, what stays behind but folly? where Righteousness reigns not, what bears rule but iniquity? The seeds therefore of virtue, which by the benefit of the Creator were planted in us, were by the transgression of our first Father overturned, neither can they be had, but by his restoring who gave them; for the nature of man is reformable by the former thereof, and capable of those good endowments which it had, that by the Mediator betwixt God and men, the Man Christ jesus, in that very thing which remains to it, it may recover what it hath lost; but there remains to it a rational Mind, which is not virtue, but the dwelling-place of virtue; for by the participation of Wisdom, Justice, and Mercy, we are not Wisdom, not Justice, nor Mercy, but wise, and just, and merciful, which good things, though our rational (Soul) be possessed of Vices, and we transgressing, the unclean Spirit hath seized the Temple of God, yet may they again flow together into our rational (Soul) by him who casts forth the Prince of this World, and binding the strong Man, takes away by force his vessels, and the spirit of this world being chased away, giveth unto us that Spirit which is of God, that we may know the things that are freely given us of God; but he that hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. Thus far against any seeds of good in man by nature since the fall; then he shows the ground of mistake in his Adversary, as follows; But I conceive he is deceived with the semblance of truth, and mistakes, through a show of false virtues, whilst he thinks that those good endowments, which cannot be had, but by the gift of God, are found even in the minds of the wicked; therefore, to wit, because many of them are followers of righteousness, temperance, continence, and kindness, all which they have not in vain, nor unprofitably, and much honour and glory do they in this life obtain by them; but because in those pursuances they serve not God, but the Devil, though they have a temporal reward of vain glory, yet do they not belong to the truth of those blessed virtues. And it is most manifest that in the minds of the wicked no virtue dwells, but all their works are unclean, and polluted, they having not Spiritual, but Natural, not Heavenly, but Earthly, not Christian, but Devilish wisdom; not from the Father of Lights, but from the Prince of Darkness, whilst by those very things, which they could not have, but by the gift of God, they are brought into subjection to him who first departed from God; he therefore that saith, that the seeds of virtue are naturally in every soul without the work of Grace, what doth he endeavour to show, but from those seeds some twiggs of merit sprouting, going before the Grace of God?  
These few glean I have made out of Prospers Dispute against the Collator, as pertinent to the Argument I have in hand, concerning the utter impotency of the Natural man, to any thing that hath order to, and connexion with eternal life; as likewise concerning the preveniency, efficacy, and peculiarity of Grace; I shall shut up this Discourse with certain determinations of the second Arausican Council, which Council was held about the middle of the fifth Century.  Canon 3. 
If any man saith, That the Grace of God may be conferred by Humane invocation, but not that Grace itself makes that it be invoked by us; he contradicts the Prophet Isaiah, or the Apostle saying the same, I was found of those that sought me not; I appeared openly to those, who asked not for me.  Can. 4. 
If any man contends, That God expects our will that we may be cleansed from sin, but doth not confess, that by the infusion and operation of the Holy Ghost it is brought to pass in us, that even we will be cleansed, he resists the Holy Ghost, affirming by Solomon, that the Will is prepared by the Lord; and he resists the Apostle wholsomely preaching that, It is God that works in us to will, and to do, according to his good pleasure.  Can. 5. 
If any man saith, that as the increase, so the beginning of faith, and the very affection of believing, by which we believe upon him, who justifies the ungodly, and come to the Regeneration of Baptism, is not in us, by the gift of Grace; that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, correcting our will, from infidelity to faith, from ungodliness to godliness; but naturally he is an Adversary to the Apostles determinations, blessed Paul saying, We are confident that he that hath begun this good work in you, will finish it, until the day of our Lord jesus Christ, and that, to you it is given for Christ, not only to believe, but to suffer for him; And, ye are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. For they that say, that faith whereby we believe on God is natural, do after a sort define all that are strangers to the Church of Christ, to be Believers.  Can. 6. 
If any man saith, That Mercy from God is bestowed upon us, believing, willing, desiring, endeavouring, labouring, watching, caring, ask, seeking, knocking, without the Grace of God, but doth not confess that it is wrought in us, by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Ghost, that we may believe, will, or be able to do all these things as we ought to do, and doth subjoin the aid of Grace, either to humility, or man's obedience, and doth not agree that it is the gift of Grace itself, that we are obedient and humble; he resists the Apostle saying, What hast thou that thou hast not received? and by the grace of God I am that I am.  Can. 7. 
If any man avouch, That by the strength of Nature we can think any good that belongs to the Salvation of eternal life, as we ought, or that we can choose, or consent to the saving, that is, Evangelicall preaching without the illumination, and inspiration of the Holy Ghost, who gives unto all sweetness in consenting to, and believing the truth; he is deceived by an Heretical spirit, not understanding that voice of God in the Gospel, saying, Without me ye can do nothing; and that of the Apostle, Not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to think any thing, as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God.  Can. 8. 
If any man contend, That some may come to the grace of Baptism by Mercy, others by freewill, which, as it is evident, is depraved in all that are borne of the transgression of the first Man; he is proved an Alien from the right faith; for he doth not affirm that the free will of all men is weakened by the sin of the first Man, or certainly he thinks it so hurt, as that yet some may be able to search out the Mystery of eternal life by themselves, without the revelation of God; which, how contrary it is, the Lord himself proves, who testifies, not that some men, but that no man can come unto him, but whom the Father draws. As he saith likewise to Peter, Blessed art thou Simon, the son of jonah, for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And the Apostle, No man can say, that jesus Christ is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.  Can. 9 
It is of the gift of God, both when we think rightly, and keep our feet from falsehood and unrighteousness, for as often as we do good, God works in us, and with us to work.  Can. 10. 
The Divine aid is always to be implored, even by the regenerate, and the Saints, that they may come to a good end, or that they may abide in a good work.  Can. 19 
The nature of man, though it should remain in that integrity wherein it was Created, yet could it in no wise keep itself without the aid of the Creator, whence since without the Grace of God it could not keep safe that health which it received, how without the Grace of God shall it restore what it hath lost?  Can. 20. 
Many good things are done in man, which man doth not, but no good things doth man, which God doth not make man to do.  Can. 22. 
No man hath of his own, but a lie and sin, but if any man have truth and righteousness, of that fountain it is, which we ought to thirst after in this wilderness, that being, as it were, bedewed with some drops from it, we may not ●aint by the way.  
To the same purpose with these, is the five and twentieth Canon, which because it is something long, and we have in these sufficient, I forbear to transeribe.   

CHAP. XII.  
ANd now, Reader, thou mayest tax me for my prolixity in this Argument, let me plead my excuse in a word or two. 1. We shall be shorter in many other things hereafter, which, we may the better be, because we have been so long here. 2. Thou hast by this discourse something to recompense the length of it; as 1. The several states of the Pelagian heresy declared: 2. The doctrine of natural corruption, how utterly impotent unto all saving good man is thereby, dead in sin, under the power of the devil, altogether in the dark about, averse from, adverse to the things that according to the mystery of godliness accompany salvation. 3. The doctrine of saving grace, if thou be'st any thing attentive thou mayst observe that,  
1 For the nature of it, It is by the supernatural operation of the spirit, plainly of divine original, and extraction, in opposition to what is natural to fallen man.  
2 For the Subject of it, that the Understanding is the subject of internal illumination by the holy ghost; that the Will is the subject of renewing, of regenerating, of quickening, of so●…ing, of subduing, of healing, of rescuing, of effectual, of determining, of transforming, of cleansing, of infranchising Grace.  
3 For the Distinctions of Grace.  
First, Prevenient, and Subsequent; that prevenient grace, finds many unwilling, and resisting; makes him of unwilling, willing; of resisting, obeying: that subsequent Grace carries on, what by prevenient Grace was begun in man; that subsequent grace, though in reference to that first grace, whereby conversion was wrought, it be subsequent, yet in reference to all after gracious operations by man, it is prevenient all along.  
Secondly, Operating, and Co-operating, operating the same with prevenient, and cooperating the same with subsequent; so that co-operation is on God's part all along, in reference to all gracious operations by man, pre-operation, and on man's part it is sub-operation; Man all along depending upon the grace of God, upon the inspiration of the holy Ghost; so as the whole of every gracious operation, and work in, and by man, is of God; and by man moving under the power and efficacy of the divine motion, upon his understanding and will, as the lower wheel, under and by the motion of the higher, the whole motion by both performed.  
Thirdly, Sufficient and effectual, not only sufficient or habitual grace is from God● but Effectual or acting grace, upon the Will of man; the Lord giving not only a power to will, but to will itself, and to do; certainly and infallibly determining the will of man, without all impeachment of its freedom, nay, raising it thereby to its greatest freedom, being delivered from the bondage of sin and Satan, by the son made free: nay, where ever there is sufficient grace, to wit, a power for saving operation, there is likewise effectual grace, thence the operation itself certainly and infallibly.  
Fourthly, Common and peculiar grace. Saving grace, or grace of saving kind is common to all the regenerate, and peculiar to them only, this is evident from the last.  
Add hereto, those celebrated doctrines against the Pelagians, belonging to the doctrine of prevenient, and subsequent, operating and cooperating, sufficient and effectual grace. 1. That the grace of God is not given according to man's merits; That is, takes no rise from any thing in man, but is altogether free, preventing all good, and is the author of all good in man. 2. That grace is given to every act, a new inspiration of the holy Ghost upon the will of man, for producing every holy operation in Man.  
Add further, for perseveting grace, that it depends upon election, is a fruit of it, and that the election of God and Grace thereon depending, is merely arbitrary, no other account to be given thereof then merely his will. And herein thou mayst behold those remarkable doctrines of the Schools, in the hands of the best Schoolmen.  
1 Concerning original sin, that man by the fall, was in the first man, wholly despoiled of supernaturals, stripped of the garments of grace (which they have from Ambrose) and sorely wounded in his naturals, and then distinguishing the soul into a double region; the higher, that of the Understanding and Will, the lower that of the Sense and Appetite, and distributing the sensual Appetite, into two Faculties, the concupiscible, we may call it, the desiring faculty; and the Irascible, we may call it the attempting faculty. They have found four sore wounds in the soul of man by original sin: In the Understanding, ignorance; in the Will, wickedness; in the Desiring Faculty (whose proper virtue it is to be rightly affected towards things pleasing to sense) Concupiscence, viz. Inordinate desires after such things; in the Attempting Faculty, (whose proper virtue it is to contend against evil, and for good, with wrestling against difficulties) weakness.  
2 Concerning the Grace of God. 1. That grace is the fruit of election. 2. That the acceptation of grace is the fruit of election. 3. That grace is the leader of the Will. 4. That not only exciting, but aiding grace, that is renewing, and acting grace must be acknowledged. 5. That the beginning of every good work. 6. That the progress of every good work. 7. That the consummation of every good work. 8. That the whole of every good work is from God. 9 That faith, and every Theological or Christian virtue is by divine infusion and inspiration. 10. That man cannot without the aid of grace, resist temptation one moment, with many others of the like kind, wholly agreeing with the doctrines of the Fathers formerly all edged.  
Hence likewise, we may observe the doctrine of the merit of congruity, and that so highly extolled by the Jesuits, and Arminians, that he that doth what lies in him by the strength of nature, towards eternal life (Mr. goodwin's own doctrine in that paragraph we have been upon all this while) shall thereby obtain grace at the hands of God; are one and the same, and both of them one with that of Pelagius, and for which he hath passed for an Heretic this one thousand two hundred years; that grace is given according to merits, and thus by the best of the Schoolmen is this Doctrine censured.  
Reader, these things and much more, if thou be'st any thing attentive, thou mayest in this Discourse observe excellently cleared, and strongly proved by Austin, Prosper, and the Fathers in the forementioned counsels. I have now done with this Paragraph; as for that saying of chrysostom, with which he concludes here, it is true, but impertinent. It is the property of a soul unreasonable and unworthy not to believe, but such are the souls of all natural men.   

CHAP. XIII.  Goodwin. 
SEcondly, Whereas it was objected, that men in their natural estates, are by the Scriptures termed darkness, and in this respect presented as unable to comprehend the light of the Gospel: I answer, there is in the controversies about the extent and efficacy of the grace of God vouchsafed unto men, as great abuse of the word Natural (and so of the word Supernatural, a term not found in the Scriptures, either formally or virtually) as there is of the word Orthodox, in this and many others. The Scripture knoweth not the word Natural, in any such sense or signification, where in it should express or distinguish the unregenerate estate of a man, from the regenerate: Our Translators indeed render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ‑ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (in the Scripture adjoining, of which a 〈◊〉 presently) the natural man, but quo jure nondum liquet. And however the whole carriage of the context round about, maketh it as clear as the light (as I have elsewhere argued and proved at large) that it is not the unregenerate man, but the weak Christian, that is there spoken of, and termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as a little after (in the same contexture of discourse) he is termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, carnal, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a babe or youngling in Christ. If therefore, by the natural estate of men, the objection meaneth the unregenerate state of men, according to the whole compass and extent of it, and under all the differences which it admitteth, I absolutely deny that the Scripture any where termeth natural men, darkness.  Resbury. 
1 The word Natural (and so Supernatural) is as much abused, as the word Orthodox, that is, they are both rightly used in the sense which he opposeth.  
2 How vainly he quarrels at the translation of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Natural, and falsely interprets it of the weak● Christian, we shall see in its proper place:  
3 Whereas he denies the word natural to be found in Scripture in any such sense as should distinguish the unregenerate state of man from the regenerate, and the word supernatural in the argument of the efficacy of grace to be found either formally or virtually: I must charge this bold assertion of his, 1. With selfe-contradiction. 2. With notorious falsehood. 3. With rank Pelagianisme.  
First, With selfe-contradiction: pag. 9 of his Preface he chargeth them with great errors, who will have reason laid aside in inquiries after matters of a spiritual and supernatural concernment, which he there makes the same with matters of Religion; what is then spiritual, and what is of religious nature, by your own confession there, is supernatural. But all Christian graces (Faith, Hope, Love, etc.) are spiritual and of religious nature; therefore, grace and the efficacy of it, are supernatural. Virtually then at the least, this word supernatural is found in Scripture, in this argument of the efficacy of grace, for those graces are by the efficacy of a gracious influx, and in them is there an efficacious virtue of spiritual nature, otherwise, how are they spiritual?  
2 With notorious falsehood, so obvious, that was not the sword upon his right eye utterly darkening it, I cannot imagine how such a doctrine should have escaped his pen. Let us bring it to the touchstone of the Scriptures, singling out of many texts a few, john 3. 5, 6, 7, 8 Is not there a first, and second birth; the first natural, the second supernatural? and is not this the effect of grace? is it not by divine impression upon the soul by the spirit of God, that any one is borne of the spirit? john 5. 25. The hour is coming, and now is, that the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that ●èare shall live. Is not the conversion of a sinner here set forth to be a spiritual resurrection? and is not a spiritual resurrection both as spiritual (by your own grant) and as a resurrection supernatural? Eph. 2. 5, 6. Is it not a supernatural work, To quicken such as were dead in trespasses and sins, to raise them up together with Christ, and make them sit together in heavenly places in Christ jesus? This union with Christ, and these spiritual advancements of the soul in Christ, are they not supernatural, and by the efficacy of grace? Ephes. 4. 22, 23, 24. Is not that change, In putting off the old man, in being renewed, and putting on the new man, which is created, etc. by the operation, and efficacy of Grace, and is it not supernatural? 1 Cor. 2. 9 to the 15.  
Is not that revelation of the spirit discovering what eye hath not seen, etc. Searching the deep things of God, things as far above the spirit of the natural man, as the things of man, are above the spirit of a beast? Things which the spirit of the World, that is, that spirit which is common to men, cannot discover, things, that can no otherwise be discovered but by Spiritual light, things, which the Natural man therefore cannot receive, because they are Spiritually discerned; Is not the revelation of these things supernatural? A revelation which flesh and blood makes not, Titus 3. 5. The washing of Regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. Doth it report nothing supernatural to your ear? We might add, 2 Cor. 5. 17. that new Creation there; and jam. 1. 18. that new generation there; and job. 6. 44, 45. that drawing, and teaching of the Father, with many others of like kind; are all these natural, nothing in these above the power and operation of Nature, and that in this corrupt state? By this time I hope it appears, that the word Natural belongs to the unregenerate, and that Regeneration is by supernatural operation, and that the unregenerate, or Natural man, as such, is in Scripture Language darkness.  
Thirdly, with rank Pelagianisme, I call it rank, because thus far it agrees with the first and second state formerly declared, as to admit no supernatural operation upon the Soul, for conversion, or recovery from sin, if this be not your meaning, I pray disclose your Riddle, for no man I think can judge otherwise by your words.  Goodwin. 
Those Ephesians of whom the Apostle saith, They were sometime darkness, had been not only, or simply unregenerate, but had walked in sins and trespasses, according to the course of this world, and after the Prince that ruleth in the Air, that worketh effectually in the Children of disobedience, by whom their understanding had been darkened, and they possessed with many false, wicked, and blasphemous conceits concerning God, and the Gospel, etc. All which imply on unregenerate estate most dangerously encumbered, and from whence it argued the high and signal grace and favour of God, that even they should be delivered. The Jews also, (Joh, 1. 5.) are termed darkness upon a like account, viz. because they were strangely and desperately prejudiced, and prepossessed with erroneous Notions, and conceits against Christ, and about the estate of their Messiahs first coming unto them, they expecting the form of a great Monarch, rejected, and Crucified him in the form of a Servant; it was this darkness, which they had through an oscitant, loose, and sensual converse with their own Scriptures, voluntarily suffered to grew, and spread itself upon the face of their minds and understandings, that was a snare upon them, and occasioned the sad event here mentioned, viz. That when the light shone upon them (i. e. when sufficient and pregnant means were vouchsafed unto them, to have brought them to the knowledgement of their Messiah) they comprehended it not, i. e. did not by the means of it come to see, and understand that, for the sight and knowledge whereof it was given them; for that (by the way) is to be observed, that the Evangelist doth not say, that the darkness, in which the light shined, could not, or was not able to comprehend it, but only that it did not comprehend it.  
Now it is a known Principle in reason, that a Negatione actus, ad negationem potentiae non ●alet argumentum, there may be a defect in action, or performance, where there is no defect of power for action. And the very observation and report which the Evangelist makes of the Non-comprehension of the light by the darkness, in which it shone, plainly enough imports, that the defectiveness of this darkness, in not comprehending the light, did not consist in, or proceed from any Natural or invincible want of power to comprehend it, but from a blindness voluntarily contracted, and willingly, if not wilfully persisted in; for how can it be reasonably supposed, that this Evangelist, who flieth an higher pitch than his Fellows, in drawing up his Evangelicall Tidings for the use and benefit of the World, should in the very entrance of his Gospel, and whilst he was thundering out on high, (as one of the Fathers speaks) the Divinity of Christ, insert the relation of a thing that had nothing strange, nothing more than of ordinary and common observation in it? or is any thing more than ordinary, or what is most obvious, that men do not fly in the Air like Birds, or that Fishes do not speak on the earth like men? Or is it a thing of any whit the more savoury consideration than these, that men void of all capacity, and destitute of all power to comprehend the light, should n●t comprehend it? but that there should be a Generation of men, whom it so infinitely concerned to comprehend the light, to acknowledge and own their Messiah being now come unto them, and who withal had a rich sufficiency of means to have done the one, and the other, should notwithstanding be so stupid, and unlike men, as not to comprehend this light, nor to acknowledge or own this their M●ssiah, is a matter of high admiration, and astonishment, and the mention of it very commodious, and proper for the subject of the discourse which the Holy G●●st had now in hand (as might be showed more at large) but I fear the Reader hath more than his burden of an Epistle.  Resbury. 
1 Here you answer certain Objections against your new Doctrine, and in the first place (if I mistake not) you contradict yourself, by the genius of your discourse, granting that in the Call of the Ephesians there was a supernatural work, for as much as you affirm that their state, which was of darkness, was not such as natural to fallen man, whom you will have, it seems, merely in his Natural state, a Child of Light rather than of Darkness (as Prosper upbraids the Collator) so that howsoever nothing supernatural be required, for bringing men to faith and repentance generally, yet here it must be admitted; if so, then is the word supernatural virtually found in the Scriptures.  
2 Your supposal of their unregenerate state so dangerously encumbered above the unregenerate state of the generality of men, that thence this difference should arise, That though they were darkness, yet these are not, is false and frivolous; for,  
1 These very sins and trespasses, whence you argue the special aggravation of their condition, were the very same wherein the whole world walked— according to the course of the world, and in the same subjection to the Devil was the world— according to the Prince of the power of the Air, the Spirit that wrought in the children of disobedience; Such were all unregenerate, needs must the course of the world be according to that Prince, who is the Prince of the world, the god of the world. Nay, the Apostles, and first converted jews, borne and bred in the visible Church, before conversion, had their conversation among them, and were children of wrath together with them; here was then nothing peculiar to them in their unregeneracy of force to quit the Natural man of this charge of darkness.  
2 These sins and trespasses, wherein they walked were the fruits of Natural corruption, whereby all men are dead in sin, they here, though dead in actual sins, yet dead by original sin; Thus the Apostle describes this sinful conversation to be in the lusts of the flesh, and a fulfilling the wills of the flesh, and of the mind, all these sins of theirs were the works of the flesh; and what is the flesh but corrupt Nature found in all men, to them derived from the first man? joh. 3. 6. That which is borne of the flesh, is flesh, diametrically opposed to the Spirit, which is the fountain of Spiritual light and life; and that which is borne of the Spirit, is spirit; without which Spiritual birth, Nicodemus his gross apprehensions there, show the darkness of the Natural man; this flesh, or corruption of Nature, called likewise the Old man, made up of many deceitful Lusts, the fountain of this evil conversation, Ephes. 4. 22. called by the same Apostle, The Law of the Members, contrary to the Law of the mind, but of the mind renewed (for otherwise, walking in those abominable ways whilst unregenerate, they fulfilled the desires or will● of the mind, in fulfilling the will of the flesh, called, The Body of death. Likewise, Rom. 7. through which the Natural man is dead; nay, so much as remains of it in the Spiritual man, so much death there is still, as the Apostles complaint testifies; this the fountain of whatsoever sins the Apostle, now regenerate, was pestered with; the fountain then of all sins, and only of sin in unregeneracy. The deadly strength of this corruption we see further by singular instance in David, a Person so holy, yet how upon advantage and surprisal did it prevail against him, to put forth those deadly fruits of Adultery, and Murder, which sins he derives from Natural corruption, that had seized him in the womb, Psal. 51. Further, the Apostle charging corruption of Nature upon all Mankind, jews and Gentiles, not one excepted, Rom. 3. he makes up his charge of most hideous sins— Their throat an open Sepulchre, the poison of Asps under their lips, their mouth full of cursing and bitterness, their feet swift to shed blood, etc. because of those strong inclinations which are in all men through Original sin, to these great transgressions; and where ever sins of this, or any other kind are actually committed, they are the fruits of this corruption; where they are not committed, it is from the restraining hand of God, at least, upon men. It was then by the corruption of Nature common to all, that these Ephesians were dead in trespasses and sins, covered over therewith, as with the deadly streams of that spring of death running over them; but the state of death is a state of darkness to the utmost. Add, that all unregenerate men, in the state of death and darkness, through corruption, are likewise in the possession, and under the dominion of the Prince, and of the power of darkness, by whom the remainders of Natural light (which is far from Spiritual, holy, saving light are more and more darkened, and the capacity of Historical light more weakened; the Doctrine then of the Natural man's darkness, even in a state of death maintained, as we saw before by the Fathers, against the Pelagian●, stands firm upon Scripture-foundations, against which your attempts are as vain, asimpious; so much for your first instance.  
Now for the second Instance of the jews, you say, 1 joh. 5. it is manifest that darkness is there charged upon all men made by him, ver. 3, 4, 5. and is not the like charge of darkness upon all? otherwhere, 1 Cor. 2. 12. 14. and job 11. 12. vain man would fain be wise, though he be borne (he is so by nature then) like a wild Ass' colt. The men of your Doctrine are deep in this condemnation of vain men: to no purpose than is your Discourse, applying this darkness to the jews only, telling us of these and these things more than ordinary in them, making for this darkness in them; As for your observation, that the Evangelist doth not say, (the darkness could not, but did not comprehend the light) you discover high Pelagianism again, for though you interpret this of the jews, whose unregenerate estate you will have by strong and desperate prejudices against Christ to be much more encumbered, then is the unregenerate state of men generally, yet you will not allow that these could not comprehend that light.  
2 This observation of yours is very vain▪ as appears by your trifling argument, viz. That the consequence holds not from the denial of the Act, to the denial of the Power. For,  
1. From the universal denial of the act, without exception, the consequence holds strongly to the denial of the power, because God gives no power in vain, but here is an universal denial of the Act, as we have seen by the context; this non-comprehension being charged upon all men, and it is evident in experience, except Mr. Goodwin, shall produce that natural man, which comprehends this light.  
2 The Power itself is otherwhere, and that very clearly denied, as we have but now seen, in our discourse of natural corruption, and the natural man's subjection, to the powers of darkness in consent with which Scriptures this must be interpreted.  
As for your following Discourse it is not worth a deaf nut, though you flourish it as much as you can: an ill face needs a good dress; trivial matter must have words to set it off; the sum of your Rhetorication is, that if there be that natural darkness and impotency upon all men, it was impertinent for the Evangelist to charge it upon the jews, especially when he was entering upon Gospell-doctrine, beginning with that high and main doctrine, the Divinity of Christ. But 1. His charge is here upon all men as we have seen, not upon the jews alone, 2. Is it such a wonder, that he that is about to set forth Christ, as man's redeemer, should teach the doctrine of natural impotency and corruption, without which all other doctrines of Christ were in vain? you may do well upon the account of your proper reasoning, here to strike out the two first, and half the third chapter of the Epistle to the Ro●ant, yourself, and brethren in error with you, are proof sufficient how necessary that doctrine is, when notwithstanding it is so plainly and frequently taught, yet it is so strange to you; and now what was your drift in your former plausible discourse against error is manifest, namely, that which we there mentioned to undermine the true doctrine of natural darkness, and impotency. You conclude this Section, That you fear the Reader, hath more than his burden of an Epistle: you need not doubt it, except there had been more truth and worth in it.   

CHAP. XIV.  Goodwin. 
Thirdly, Concerning that Scripture (1 Cor. 2. 14.) but the natural man perceiveth not, etc. if, Reader, thou conceivest there is any thing in it spoken with any intent to disable Reason or Understanding in a man so far as to divest them of all capacity and power for the apprehending, conceiving, or believing any the things of God; yea, or particularly, of such of the things of God, the discerning and believing whereof is of absolute necessity for salvation; thou mayst if thou pleasest, deliver thy judgement from the mistake by the perusal of a few pages in a discourse formerly published, where thou wilt find this passage of Scripture opened at large, and driven home to its issue, here I clearly demonstrate these three things.  
1. That the place speaketh not of the natural, i. e. of the unregenerate man, but of the weak Christian, the babe in Christ.  
2. That the things of God here spoken of are not such things, the knowledge or discerning whereof is of absolute necessity to salvation, but the high or deep things of God, of the true and worthy discerning of which, only the Spiritual man, i. e. the strong and well grown Christian is De praesenti, and immediately capable.  
3. (And last) that the incapacity of these things of God which is here asserted to be in the Natural man or weak Christian, is not an utter or absolute incapacity, or such, which by a diligent use of means he may not very possibly and according to the ordinary course of providence out-grow, but only a present or actual incapacity or indisposition, which is regularly, and (at it were) of course curable: these things I there evince from the express tenor, and carriage of the context.  Resbury. 
For his explication of 1 Corinth. 2. 14.  
1. He saith, the place speaks not of the Natural i. e. the unregenerate man, but of the weak Christian, the babe in Christ. That the place speaks of the Natural or unregenerate man, is evident against his demonstrations he tells us of, which indeed are of no affinity with Euclia's, we have only night for a vision in them.  
1. Of him that hath not the spirit of God, v. 11. But the spirit of the world opposite to the spirit of God, v. 12. 2. The things of the Spirit of God are foolishness unto him, and what things are these? why the things that are held forth in the preaching of Christ crucified, v. 2. Now to whom is the preaching of Christ crucified foolishness? to them that perish, V. 18. But to them that are saved, the power of God, to the uncalled, i. e. the unregenerate, foolishness, but to the called of God, the power of God, and the wisdom of God, v. 23, 24.  
2 The things of God here (he saith) are such, as are not absolutely necessary to salvation, but the high and deep things of God. But 1. The things absolutely necessary to be known, are as high and deep as any; the Trinity of the persons, the union of the two Natures in the Mediator, the oblation and intercession of Christ, the imputation of his righteousness, etc.  
2 These are the things absolutely necessary to salvation, for they are the things in the preaching whereof, Christ crucified is preached, v. 2. the things of the hidden wisdom of God ordained to the glory of the Saints, v. 7. the things freely given of God to the Saints, v. 12. Whereas you say in the close here, that the spiritual man only, that is, the strong and well grown Christian is, de praesenti, and immediately capable, etc.  
1 If only the strong and well grown Christian be the spiritual man, then is the mere natural man a weak Christian, and so all the world by nature Christians, i. e. believers: welcome all, Turks, and Insidels, to Mr. goodwin's Church.  
2 Whether do you allow the spiritual man, to be above the natural man or not? if not, (as indeed you cannot, if you will be constant to yourself as here, so formerly, neither can you deny it, if you will be constant to yourself, as formerly we observed; but you are a famous self-subverter, then is the Natural man capable, de praesenti, etc. Contrary to your own interpretation of the Apostles express doctrine here; if you do allow him above the natural man, than you grant the word Supernatural virtually in that sense, wherein you formerly denied it; so that you are full of interwoven contradictions, at every turn refuting yourself.  
3 You deny here an utter incapacity of these things in the Natural man, etc. but such as he may out-grow, according to the ordinary course of providence.  
1. Your Doctrine is evidently false. 1. These things of the spirit of God are discerned by another light, and another principle than the Natural man hath, He neither knows, nor can know them, saith the Apostle, because they are spiritually discerned: and this light of the spirit, specifically distinct from the light of Reason in the Natural man, as the light of reason is from the light of Sense in the bruit beast, v. 11. And this spirit the world hath not (therefore not the Natural man) v. 12. Formerly he made such an observation, as this, his refuge, that the Evangelist said, not Darkness could not, but did not comprehend the light, which, how slender a refuge it was for him we there saw: here the Apostle is express, Cannot, yet he attempts an evasion. There is no end of this man's sophistry, nor can be upon his principles, that the Grammar and Logic of the Scripture must veil to his Reason.  
2 Your Doctrine here (as all along) is purely Pelagian: for you acknowledge no such incapacity in the Natural man, of discovering all Gospel-truths leading to salvation, but what by the diligent use of means he may overgrow, etc. therefore of himself, not only may he make use of the means, but so make use of them, as that thence, he shall certainly be savingly enlightened: Which must be one of these ways.  
1 Either the seeds of natural light shall hereby grow up into a saving light, so Nature improves itself into Grace, and this is according to your Doctrine, that there is nothing supernatural in the efficacy of Grace; and this is highly Pelagian, for it makes Nature Grace, (Sub laude Naturae, latent inimici Gratiae) and Nature before this improvement must be Grace, in the seed, as by it, it becomes grace in the fruit, Or,  
2 By this use of means, he shall procure the giving of saving light and grace from the hand of God, which is still the Pelagian doctrine, that the grace of God is given according to man's merits; but still it is a Riddle to me, how you can allow thus much, and make good your doctrine, against the supernatural efficacy of grace.  
As for your gloss upon 1 Cor. 3. 1. It is evident the Apostle calls them carnal, opposed to spiritual; not absolutely, as formerly he had opposed the natural man, but in part, therefore he adds by way of limitation, babes in Christ; but when he expostulates with them v. 3. are ye not carnal, and walk according to max? he there implies, that the mere man is wholly carnal, for as much as the weak Christian, so far as he is carnal, he is according to man, and wherein he walks carnally he walks according to man.  Goodwin. 
4 (And last to the Objection) concerning Heathen Philosophers, and others of great parts, and natural endowments of reason, wit, understanding, etc. who either rejected the Gospel, as a Fable, as the Philosophers, or else perverted and wrested the truth thereof in many things to their own destruction, and possibly to the destruction of others, as Heretics; I answer, when I affirm and teach, that Reason, or the intellectual part of a man is competent to apprehend, discern, subscribe unto the things of God, and of the Gospel, my meaning is not to affirm withal, that therefore men of these endowments, though never so excellently enriched with them, must of necessity apprehend, discern, or subscribe unto these things; Reason, and understanding even of the greatest advance in man, will serve men for other ends and purposes, besides the apprehension and discerning the things of God in the Gospel, and may accordingly be improved and employed by them; yea, they may be employed against the Gospel, and made to war and fight against the truth of it: it is a saying of known truth concerning all things that have not an essential connexion with a man's sovereign good:  
Nil prodest quod non laedere possit idem. i e. 
Nothing there is so profitable,  
But to do mischief is as able.   
Because some men suffer themselves to be bewitched with a corrupt desire of drawing away Disciples after them, and for the fulfilling of such a Lust speak perverse things (as the Apostle speaketh) it doth not fellow from hence, that therefore they were in no capacity, or in no possibility of speaking the truth, and refraining from the teaching of perverse things.  
Aristotle speaking of riches, saith, That it is impossible that he should have them, who takes no care to have them; So are we to conceive of the knowledge and true discerning of the things of God in the Gospel, in what capacity soever men are, either for ability, or means otherwise for attaining them, it is impossible that ever they should actually attain to them, unless they be careful, and shall bend the strength of their minds and understandings in order to the attainment of them. Now the Heathen Philosophers (more generally) became vain in their imaginations, as the Apostle speaketh, i. e. they spent themselves,, the strength of their parts, time, and opportunities upon matters of a low, or secondary concernment, and which they apprehended to have a more ready and certain connexion with their own honour, and esteem amongst men, and did not charge themselves, their gifts, or parts, with that worthy and blessed design, which the Apostle calls the having of God in acknowledgement; upon this their unnatural unthankfulness towards God, uttering itself in their addition of themselves, to studies, speculations, and inquiries of a self concernment with the neglect of him, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their foolish heart was darkened. Concerning Heretics, it is a common Notion amongst us, that these from time to t●me were turned aside from the way of truth, by some unclean Spirit or other; as Pride, Ambition, Envy, Voluptuousness, or the like; if these Spirits once enter into a man, they will soon call in, and take unto themselves other spirits worse than themselves; I mean spirits of error and delusion, to advocate for them, and plead their cause: as for the mistakes and miscarriages in judgement of good men, upright (in the main) with God, and the Gospel, about some particular points they are to be resolved into several causes, of which we shall not now speak particularly, only this I shall say, whatsoever any man's error, or mistake in judgement, is about the things of the Gospel, it is not to be imputed to any deficiency on God's part, in the vouchsafement of means unto him, competent, and sufficient, as well for the guiding into, as for the keeping of his judgement in the way of truth, but into some deficiency, neglect, or incogitancy of his own, which he might very possibly have prevented, or overcome. But—  Resbury. 
For the sum of this Paragraph concerning the Philosophers, and Heretics, you say in the first place, That though they were able to apprehend the things of the Gospel, yet doth it not follow that they must; but 1. We have seen that no Natural man is able. 2. Find one that ever did advance his reason to apprehend the Gospell-Mystery without the Spirit of illumination, revealing it by the Word, if not one, than none could, for from the Universal denial of the Act, to the denial of the Power, the consequence is undeniable. 3. Whether might those Philosophers (according to your apprehension) without the word of the Gospel, have found out in the Book of the Creature the Gospell-Mystery, or might they so improve their reason about inquiry after God? That thereupon he must send his Word unto them, thereby enlightening them? whether soever of these you take, you fall into the Relagian Heresy, as we often formerly evinced against your Discourse of the same batch with this.  
As for your instance of men bewitched with a corrupt desire of drawing Disciples after them, and speaking perverse things; pardon me, if I be apt to believe that you speak feelingly, and from selfe-experience.  
2 You teach that men must bend their minds and intentions to Gospel-enquiries, that they may have the knowledge thereof; 'tis true, so doth the Spiritual man: But the Natural man wants Principles for bending his mind thereto, as discerning nothing worthy in them, and his heart's set against them.  
3 You say, That God punishing the Philosophers for their unthankfulness, addicting themselves to other things, etc. their foolish heart was darkened: this is true too, but the conclusion you aim at here, scil, that therefore they were able to have addicted themselves to Gospel-enquiries is both false, and Pelagian, as hath been proved before; as supposing that man is able to perform all his duty.  
As for Heretics, it is true, you say, They are led aside by some unclean Spirit, therefore must I always suspect an Heretic, though his conversation be never so specious, to be but a whited Sepulchre; whereas in the close of this Section you say, That whatsoever any man's error, etc. be, it is not to be imputed to deficiency on God's part, in the vouchsafement of means; I answer, deficiency sounds culpably, and therefore not to be imputed to God; but evident it is, that God doth not) yet without deficiency vouchsafe the necessary means of Gospel-knowledge, to many denying his Word, to more his Spirit, who have no more, nor otherwise deserved this denial, than those to whom he affords both, who is sought of those that asked not for him, and found of those that sought him not, of whom it is, as of him that shows mercy, not of him that wills, nor of him that runs.  Goodwin. 
Secondly, concerning the Spirit of God, by which alone, and in opposition to reason many affirm and teach, That the things of God, and matters of Religion are to be apprehended, discerned, and known; I answer, that such an Opinion as this, is a conceit as uncouth, as culpably weak, and ill-coherent with itself, as lightly can be; for if only the Spirit of God within me apprehends the things of God, and I myself apprehend them not (and apprehend them I cannot, but by my reason or understanding, having no other faculty, where with to apprehend or conceive them) such an apprehension of them relateth not at all unto me, nor can I any whit be said the more to apprehend them, because the Spirit of God apprehends them in me; then I may, or might, in case the same Spirit should apprehend them in another man; That which another man meditates, or indicts in my house without imparting it unto me, no whit more concerns me, then in case be should have meditated or indicted the same in the house of another man. Besides, the Spirit of God being but one and the same infinite, and invisible Spirit in all men, he cannot with any tolerable propriety of speech, nor with truth, be said to apprehend, discern, and conserve that in one man, which he doth not after the same manner apprehend, discern, and conceive in another, yea, in every man; therefore if there be any thing more apprehended, or discerned of the things of God, in one man then in another, the difference ariseth not from the different apprehensions of the Spirit in these men, but from the different apprehensions of these men themselves, and this by their own reasons and understandings, they having (as hath been said) no other faculties, principles, or abilities wherewith to apprehend, but these.  Resbury. 
You affirm here, That many teach that by the Spirit of God alone, in opposition to reason in man the things of God are apprehended: who those many are, or one of those many, I know not; the Doctrine of your known Adversaries is, That by man's reason are the things of God apprehended, but that they may be savingly so, reason must be Spiritually enlightened, and the whole soul sanctified, and that by preventing and differencing Grace, so that all you say further in this Section are waste words; you may make great webs, if you spin thus plentifully, yet when all is done they will be but Cobwebs.   

CHAP. XV.  Goodwin. 
IF it be demanded, But is any man able without the presence and assistance of the spirit of God, to discern the things of God, or to judge aright the matters of Religion? I answer,  
1 Plainly, and directly to the heart (I suppose) of these, who make this demand, No: The spirit of God hath such a great interest in, and glorious super-intendency over the Minds, and Spirits, Reasons and Understandings of men, that they cannot act or move regularly, or perform any of these operations or functions that are most natural and proper to them, upon any worthy or comely terms, especially in matters of a spiritual concernment, but by the gracious and loving interposure and help of the spirit; for (questionless) the intellectual frame of the heart and soul of man, was by the sin and fall of Adam wholly dissolved, shattered, brought to an absolute Chaos, & confusion of ignorance, and darkness, to a condition of as great impotency to do him the least service, in order to his comfort or peace in any kind, as can be imagined. So that if the Reasons and Understandings of men quit themselves in their actings or workings with honour, or with any due proportion to their benefit, comfort, or peace; it must needs be by means of that gracious conjunction of the spirit of God with them, which is a veuchsafement unto the children of men, procured by him, who raised up the Tabernacle of Adam, when it was fallen, jesus Christ blessed for ever, in respect of which vouchsafement purchased by him, and given unto men for his sake, he is said to in lighten every man, coming into the world: so that what light soever of truth, what clear and sound principle, or impressions of Reason or Understanding soever is since the fall, to be found in any man, is an express f●utt of the Grace, that is given unto the world, upon the account of jesus Christ, and is reinvested in the soul, by the appropriated interposure of the spirit of God, the gift whereof upon this account, is so frequently and highly magnified in the Scriptures. Yea, not only the habitual residency of all principles of light and truth in the soul, is to be attributed unto the Spirit of God, as supporting and preserving them from defacement, but also all the actings and move of the rational powers of the soul, according to the exigency, ducture, and import of them, as in all right apprehensions of things, in all legitimate and sound reasonings, and debates, whether for confirmation of any truth, or the confutation of any error or the like, But—  Resbury. 
Here we have a Question and an Answer, for the Answer we have much to observe, and contend against it.  
1 You say that you Answer to the heart of those, etc. then, as is your perpetual manner, upon this Argument, you Cant in high words, and general expressions: Briefly, that you may answer to the heart of those, that hold the truth against you; You must Answer two things, first that the soul must be renewed by habitual grace. Secondly, That so renewed, it must be acted by effectual grace.  
2 You grant the utter dissolution of the intellectual frame by Adam's fall, hereby no doubt you think to find out an evasion from the charge of Pelagianisme: We shall see how well you will acquit yourself of this charge in the examination of your doctrine: in the mean time, here is deep silence about the will of man, and about the sensual appetite: do you grant the Will, as to supernaturals, wholly despoiled, as to naturals deeply wounded? do you deny the lustings of the sensual appetite in the state of innocency against right reason? Or do you with the jesuitical School hold such lustings natural to that state?  
3 You lay down your main doctrine that there is such a light vouch safed to all men, by the procurement of jesus Christ, as that according to your former doctrine, every man in the world may improve it to faith and repentance. Here,  
1 We must take notice of an unsound dropping of your pen by the way, and upon the by: Christ you say, raised up the Tabernacle of Adam; this, no doubt to insinuate, that all men without exception, are redeemed by him; But by your leave Sir, it is the Tabernacle of David, that he raiseth up, as he took upon him the seed of Abraham: but men of unsound doctrines, have no mind to hold fast the form of sound words.  
2 For the doctrine itself, which you ground upon joh. 1. 9 It is such, as that Scripture will not at all countenance. 1. They give a very fair interpretation of the place, and as to me it seems genuine, who understand by this light, natural Understanding, and Reason bestowed upon man by Christ, as God, and man's Creator, which natural light still remains, though much obscured by the fall in man, without which he was not man; and of this light Christ, as the Son of God and Author of nature, is the Author unto every one borne into the World; Thus Calvin (and with him others) resolving the place thus, The Evangelist setting forth the divinity of Christ, shows him to have been the Creator of all things, v. 3. And because man is the choicest piece of the creatures here below, and we are most affected with truths concerning ourselves, he set forth Christ not only as the Author of being to all creatures in general, v. 3. but particularly instanceth in man, whose being i● of the best beings; a life, and this life, of the best of lives; a rational. and intellectual. In him was life, he is life of himself; and he is the spring or author of life, to all living creatures: more particularly, of that life of light, which the rational creature, Man, lives, v. 4. the same light with that, v. 9 The Author of which light, the Creator of man, john testifies him to be giving witness to his Godhead, He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was before me, v. 15.  
Of this light Austin speaks, Tract. 2. in cap. 1. joan. This life was the light of men, did he say the light of beasts?— There is a certain light of men, whereby they differ from beasts. Let us now see, and understand what is this light of men. Thou differest not from a beast, but by thy Understanding; whence art thou better than the beast? from the image of God; where is the image of God? in the mind, in the understanding. If therefore thou be'st better than a beast, because thou hast a mind, by which thou understandest what the beast cannot understand, and thence thou art a man, that thou art better than the beast; The light of men, is the light of minds; the light of minds, is above minds, and excels all minds. This was that life by which all things were made, here then the Creator of man is set forth his restorer.  
2 If we must suppose it supernatural Light, then must we limit the Subject enlightened thus; He enlightens every man that comes into this world, who is enlightened; that is, there is no other fountain of Light but he, to all that are enlightened; here we may fitly bring in that illustration of that eminent light, Austin upon that text, They shall all be taught of God; who when he had according to truth interpreted it only of the Sons of the Promise, and the Vessels of Mercy, according to Election— he adds for further clearing. But as we speak rightly, when we say of any Schoolmaster who is alone in the City, this man teacheth all, not because all learn, but because none learn but of him, whosoever do there learn; so we rightly say, God teacheth all men to come to Christ, not because all come, but because no man comes otherwise, Lib. de praedest. Sanct. chap. 8. so here, Christ enlightens every man that comes into this world, not that every man coming into the world is enlightened, but of all comers into the world, whosoever is enlightened, he alone is the enlightner; though as I said the former interpretation seems most genuine; but whether the former, or this, or whatsoever other interpretation may be the truth, it is evident, that Mr. goodwin's, who will have such a gift of illumination vouchsafed by Christ unto all, as that every man may improve to faith and repentance, cannot be the truth.  
1 From the context here, for notwithstanding this light, and enlightening, such is the darkness both of the world, and of his own, the jews, as, comprehended not this light, or rather laid no hold upon it, as knew him not, 〈◊〉 received him not, these only excepted, who 〈◊〉 distinction from, and opposition to the rest, were not borne of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, ●or of the will of man, but of God; therefore well saith Austin, speaking of that light shining upon this darkness; As when a blind man is placed in the Sunshine, the Sun is present to him, but he is absent from the Sun; so every fool, every unrighteous, every wicked person is blind in his heart, wisdom is present to him, but being present to a blind man, it is absent from his eyes, not because it is absent from him, but because he is absent from it, Tract. 1. in c. 1. joan. here was a beaming forth of this light upon such, and about them, in his works and word, but they neither discern it, nor have any power so to do, because they are blind though in the midst of Sunshine.  
2 From the whole Doctrine of Natural corruption, and the grace of Conversion throughout the Scriptures; even all those Scriptures, whence you gather, That the intellectual frame of man was so shattered by Adam's fall, are bend against all unregenerate persons, showing not what they had been by Adam's fall, if Christ had not been, but what they are, this notwithstanding, before regeneration; therefore.  
1 For the Doctrine of Natural corruption, all men are thereby before regeneration flesh, in which dwells no good thing, wherein it is impossible to please God; which, enmity against the Law of God, contrary in its lustings to the Spirit, all dead in sin, all darkness, all children of wrath, all in subjection to Satan, all under the Law, all borne as wild Ass●● Colts, all such as cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God, as savour only the things of the flesh, etc. whereas if your Doctrine was true, the Scripture must have affirmed the contrary to all these, either that by Nature we are not flesh, or not so wholly in opposition to the Spirit; but that in the flesh some good thing dwells, that we may by Nature please God, that we are in amity with the Law of God, compliant to the motions of the Spirit, alive from sin, light, children of peace, free from Satan's bondage, borne under Grace, borne the Children of wisdom, such as can receive the things of the Spirit of God, as savour, or have those Principles, whereby we may savour the things of the Spirit, etc.  
2. For the Doctrine of the Grace of conversion, the Scripture saith;  
1 That it is supernatural, quickening Grace, Grace by which we are borne anew, Grace raising from the dead, Grace anew creating; but according to your Doctrine, there should be no such thing, as the Grace of conversion, or Regeneration, but only a progress of Natural virtues, faith and repentance, but the fruits of the seeds of light in Nature; for this light you make a common vouchsafement to all, and the word Natural you will not allow to difference the unregenerate man from the regenerate: so that in the building of your Babel, here is nothing but confusion of speech, from confusion of things, Grace is Nature, and Nature is Grace; Natural is Spiritual, and Spiritual is Natural; and which is yet admirable, Spiritual is with you too supernatural.  
2 It is altogether free, and preventing; as there is a supernatural Grace of Conversion, so this grace, as altogether independent upon any thing in man, therefore is of God. 1. As of him that shows mercy, merely because he will show mercy, and will have compassion, on whom he will have compassion; in opposition to man willing, or to man running. 2 As of him that is sound of those that sought him not. 3. As of him that by this grace of his makes the difference betwixt the converted and unconverted, so as the glorified Saints shall owe unto God, not only what they received in common with the damned, but that wherein they excel the damned; who hath made thee to differ? 4. As of him that calls, not only of the foolishest, and weakest, and basest, and most despised in the world; but even of the worst of men, 1 Cor. 6. 9 And Mr. Goodwin himself tells us how desperately encumbered the unregenerate state of the Ephesians was. Now according to your doctrine, all must be contrary; man must begin, and God must follow; man must first give, and God must recompense again; whatsoever it is, that you shall please to call the grace, or the work of conversion on God's part, it must be vouchsafed unto those, who by the improvement of that common, original, natural grace you tell us of; that light vouchsafed to all in their natural birth, have sought the Lord, have willed, have runned, and so they having received that common Posse (Pelagius his own grace) shall make themselves by the good use of it, to differ from those, who for not using it, are not converted. 3. It is effectual and peculiar the saving grace of God in Jesus Christ, is not potential but effectual, wherever it gives the power, giving the deed likewise, not common but peculiar, given only to those, who are indeed saved by it, No man can come to me, except the father draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day; without this drawing, here is no power of coming; whosoever is drawn, surely comes, and is surely saved; All are not saved, All come not, neither then could all come, or any, but those that do come; this grace than is at once, preventing, effectual, and peculiar. And indeed the peculiarity of it, is evident from the former heads, He hath mercy, on whom he will have mercy, there is a distinction of the heirs of mercy from the rest, Who hath made thee to differ? differencing therefore peculiar grace, you hath he quickened, you, not all, etc. Thus we have seen the vanity of your Interpretation, and if we add the Heresy too, we shall do you no wrong; For, whether you confound Grace and Nature; or which way soever you make Grace to arise from Nature, or to depend upon any thing in the natural man, you cannot possibly quit yourself of palpable Pelagianism. The least charge that can be against you is, that grace is given according to merits, in that sense wherein Pelagius was refuted and condemned: The very Doctrine of Pelagius you teach, for a common power of repentance in all men, against the supernatural efficacy of converting grace, against the preveniency, and peculiarity of it, against the natural man's darkness and impotency; and you offer fair against original sin, whilst you tell us, that ●e are all borne so vested with light and pow●●. And you think to carry all, as if you were no consort of his: only because you have a new fetch for it, which, how slender ●n o●●e it is, I hope by this time appears.  
What you add towards the end of this Section, about the actings and move of the ●ationall Powers, by the spirit of God; you do so hover in generals, and only put off with a parcel of fine words, as all that I shall yet say, is to pray you to speak plainly, and particularly; you use the same Artifice, and Cant most extremely; Afterwards in the first Chapter of your book, when you should lay down your express doctrine about the divine influx and concourse; we must try if we can hunt you out of your holes there.   

CHAP. XVI.  Goodwin. 
1. THough the spirit of God contributes by his assistance after that high manner, which bath been declared, toward the right apprehending, understanding, discerning the things of God by men; yet this no ways proveth, but that they are the Reasons and Understandings of men themselves, that must apprehend, discern, and understand these things; and consequently, must be provoked, raised, engaged, employed, and improved by men, that they may thus apprehend, and discern, notwithstanding all that assistance which is administered by the spirit: otherwise, nothing will be apprehended or discerned by them. Nor will the assistance of the spirit, we speak of, turn to any account of benefit, or comfort, but of loss, and condemcondemnation unto men, in case their Reason's 〈◊〉 Understandings shall not advance, and quit themselves according to their interest thereupon.  Resbury. 
This may pass as impertinent. It is the Reason of man that must apprehend, etc. But it is Reason sanctified, that apprehends savingly, man must stir up his own soul, but it is by the work of the sanctifying spirit, that so he doth effectually. These things have been proved abundantly already.  Goodwin. 
3 In case the Spirit of God shall at any time reveal (I mean, offer, and propose) any of the things of God, or any spiritual Truth unto men; these must be apprehended, discerned, judged of; yea, and concluded to be the things of God, by the Reasons and Understandings of men; before they can, or aught to receive or believe them to be the things of God; Yea, before such a revelation can any ways accommodate, benefit, and bless their soul. When our Savi●●● speaking of that spirit to his Disciples, saith, And he will show you things to come: And again, he shall receive of mine, and shall show them unto you (Joh. 16. 13, 14.) he supposeth that they (viz.) with their own Reasons and Understandings, were to apprehend and judge of the things that should be thus showed unto them, to have been showed unto them by the spirit of God, and not to have proceeded from any other Author. Yea, in case men shall receive the things of God themselves, for the things of God, or of the spirit of God, before their Reason and Understanding have upon rational grounds, and principles judged them to be the things of God: yet can they not receive them upon these terms, as the things of God, I mean, as the tnings of God ought in duty, and by command from himself to be received by men; or so as to benefit, or i●●ich the soul by their being received. For as God requires of men to be praised with understanding, (i. e.) out of a rational apprehension, and due consideration of his infinite worth and excellency; so doth be require to be believed also, and they that believe him otherwise, believe they know not what, nor whom, and so are brethren in vanity, with those that worship they know not what, and build Altars to an unknown God; to trust or believe in God upon such terms, as these, is, being interpreted, but as the devotion of a man to an Idol; yea, the Apostle himself arraigns the Athenians of that high Crime, and misdemeanour of Idolatry upon the account of their sacrificing to an unknown God.  Resbury. 
This is of the same Spirit, Error, and impertinency with the last;  
1 The Spirit's revelation, he interprets his Proposal; This is just Pelagius his revelation, proposal by his word and doctrine.  
2 The things by the Spirit proposed must be discerned the things of God, by our own reasons, etc. Who doubts this? but (which he means not) by our own reasons enlightened, by renewing and peculiar Grace; he saith, They must be received upon rational grounds, true reason being by Scripture enlightened.  Goodwin. 
4 And lastly, The interposure and actings of reason and understanding in men, are of that sovereign, and most transcendent use, yea, necessity, in and about matters of Religion, that all the agency of the Spirit, notwithstanding a man can perform 〈◊〉 thing, no manner of service unto God with accep●… nothing in a way of true edification to himself, with●… their engagement and service. First, I stand charg●… by God, not to believe every Spirit, but to try th● Spirits, whether they be of God; I demand, b● what rule or touchstone shall I try any Spirit? wh●… or upon what account shall I reject one, as a Spirit 〈◊〉 error, falsehood, and delusion; and do homage 〈◊〉 my judgement and conscience to another, as the Spirit of God? If it be said, I ought to try the Spirits by the Scriptures, or Word of God; I demand again, But how shall I try my touchstone, or be sure that that Principle, notion, or ground, which I call th● Word of God, and by which I go about to try the Spirits, is indeed the Word of God? There is scarce any error that is abroad in the Christian world, but freely offers itself to be tried by the Word of God, as well as the true Spirit of God himself; i e. by such meanings, senses, or conclusions, as itself confidently asserts to be the Word of God; i. e. the mind of God in the Scriptures; so that I am in no capacity to try such a Spirit, which upon such an account, as this, pretends his coming forth from God, unless I be able to prove, that those senses, meanings, and conclusions, by which be offers to be tried, are not indeed the Word of God.  
Now it is impossible that I should prove this merely, and only by the Scriptures themselves; because unto what place or places soever I shall have recourse for my proof, or trial in this case, this Spirit will reject my sense and interpretation, in case it maketh against him, and will substitute another, that shall not oppose him. Nor can I reasonably or regularly reject his sense in this case, at least as an untruth, unless I apprehend some relish or taste therein, which is irrational, or some ●…on which jarreth with, or grateth upon some 〈◊〉 principle 〈◊〉 other of reason within me; for as 〈◊〉 ●…e one hand, what Doctrine or Notion soever clearly accords, and is commensurable with any solid and 〈◊〉 ●…ted Principle, or ground of reason within me, 〈◊〉 ●…by demonstrably evinced to be a truth, and from God; so on the other hand, what Doctrine, or saying s●…r bears hard, or falls foul upon any such Principle, must of necessity be an error, and somewhat that proceeds from Satan, or from ●…n, and not from God.  Resbury. 
1 The same things most impertinently still over and over, an endless waster of words.  
2 By what rule or touchstone shall he●ry any Spirit, or Doctrine? he answers, If it be said by the Scripture, but how shall I try this touchstone? I answer, By itself, as the rule, by reason, as the eye, enlightened and guided by this rule, according to the Grammar, and the Logic of it; He objects, That it is impossible to prove the truth, or disprove an error merely by the Scriptures, because still the question will be about the sense of the Scripture; I answer, By the Scripture alone, as the rule, by reason, as making use of this rule, but so, as in making use thereof it be guided by this rule, and resolves all conclusions into the authority of this rule, is the truth to be proved, or errors disproved, and the sense of whatsoever controverted text discussed, and cleared.  
As for that which you add about irrational last, and grating upon reason, etc. for as much as you do not object reason to the Word, but oppose it thereunto, and advance it there-above, and will have reason the touchstone of the Word, beside and above the Word; you show yourself, as formerly, a most impure and profane Socinian, by all good men to be abhorred; and whilst you plead so much for reason, you are a man mad with reason, no way solving those difficulties, which you pretend upon supposition, that the Scripture shall be the touchstone; for let us suppose reason the touchstone, must you not be at the same loss, your adversary denying that to be according to the principles and grounds of reason, which you affirm to be according to them? But here is no such difficulty, as you pretend; for allowing the Scripture the Touchstone, you shall by some Scripture-truthes, wherein both yourself and adversary agree, clear the controverted text, and resute his errors about it, that he must either yield to the truth therein, or deny what he affirmed, and overthrow his own foundations.  Goodwin. 
The reason hereof is clearly asserted by the Apostle in these words, For God is not the Author of confusion, but of peace; from whence it appears, that God is not divided in himself, or contradictious to himself, so as to write or assert that in one Book, as in that of the Scriptures, which he denieth or opposeth in another; as viz. That of Nature, or of the fleshly tables of the heart of man; but whatsoever he writeth, or speaketh in the one, he writeth or speaketh nothing in the other, but what is fairly, and fully consistent with it.  Resbury. 
A doughty reason, God is not the Author of confusion; true, but man is, who hath so corrupted his reason, as he hath night for a vision, and gropes in the dark like a blind man. It is one thing, what God wrote upon the nature of Man in his Creation, who made man upright; another thing, what man hath written upon his own nature by the Fall, who hath found out to himself many inventions; what the Devil likewise hath written upon his mind, by deluding suggestions. You may remember formerly a piece of discourse much like this of yours, by your elder Brother the Collator, with whom Prosper hath to do, confounding the state of Man by Creation, with his condition since the Fall; and Prospers answer to him. It is admirable to see, how the same spirit, that possessed Pelagius, and his Disciples of old, speaks the same things, and useth the same Arguments in Mr. Goodwin, One borne out of due time, so many Ages after.  
In the praise of five things did they craftily couch their sacrilegious Doctrine, at so great enmity with the Grace of God, as Aug. observes, Lib. 3. contra duas Epist. Pelagian. viz. In the praise of the Creature, of Marriage, of the Law, of freewill, and of the Saints. How oft do we hear Mr. Goodwin extolling man, and the noble faculties of reason, understanding, etc. in man? and here, from the Law of Nature, and from the Wisdom of God, he thinks to extol the reason of blind, corrupt, wretched, self-confounded man, against the Grace of God; I hinted to you before what a fair offer you made against Original sin, I believe your Doctrine about it is; That it is wholly taken off from man, by that glorious vouchsafement of light, you told us of, by jesus Christ, to every one that comes into this world, but your darkness about that light, and the darkness of Mankind about things of the Spirit of God, that light notwithstanding we have lately seen.  
As for the fleshly tables of the heart, we know no such, but in the regenerate, when the Lord shall have taken away the heart of stone, and given an heart of flesh, Ezek. 36. You may remember how Austin concludes hence, as formerly we alleged him, that the will of man is wholly adverse, and inflexible unto good, before the effectual and peculiar work of regeneration; and where then shall be that provoking, and stirring up of reason, understanding, etc. you tell us of so often, in the Natural man? We told you before, how ill-pleasing it was to you, to hold fast the for me of found words; I do not wonder at it, it is not for your advantage; I perceive if we might have a new Scripture see forth by your superlative reason, we should have the text much altered, for the Tabernacle of David, the Tabernacle of Adam, for the heart of stone, the fleshly tables of the heart:  Goodwin. 
Upon this account it is a grave and worthy advertisement of Master Perkins, in his Epistle before his Treatise of Predestination; It is (saith he) also requisite, that this Doctrine (he speaks of Predestination, Election, and Reprobation) agree with the 〈…〉 of co●●on reason, and of that knowledge of God, which may be obtained by the light of Nature; In 〈◊〉 ●…ing of his ●e ●●●arly supposeth, That what●… should be taught by any in the mysterious and high p●…ts of Predistination, otherwise then according to the Scriptures, and the truth, may be clearly disproved by this, viz. The disagreement of it with the c●…on grounds of reason, and of that knowledge of God, which the light of Nature shineth into the hearts of men: if himself had kept close to this Principle of his own, in drawing up his judgement in the point of Predostination, the world had received a f●rre differing, and better account from his ●en of this subject, then now it hath; But if his sense were, That the heights, and depths of Religion, (for so we may call the Doctrines of Election, and Reprobation, etc.) 〈◊〉 nothing in them but what agrees with the grounds and principles of common reason, and with the Dictates of Nature in men, and consequently may be measured, discerned, and judged of by these, he did not conceive, that matters of a more facile and ordinary consideration were above the capacity and apprehension of reason.  Resbury. 
For Master Perkins his. Testimony, and your Descant upon it, you do but wander, 1. He builds the doctrine of Predestination upon the Word of God, in opposition to the judgements of men, his words are these; The Doctrine of Predestination, and of the Grace of God, is to be built up out of the Word of God, and not out of the judgements of men. Then he adds out of Hilary, God cannot be known but by God, of God must we learn whatsoever we are to understand concerning him, because no otherwise is it known then by him as the Author. After this he adds further; It is requisite likewise, that this Doctrine agree with the natural knowledge of God, and the Principles of common understanding, such as these, and then lays down divers.  
Now whereas you make a double inference hence; I Concerning the Doctrine of Predestination itself; 2 Concerning all other Doctrines not so high and mysterious, I will return for answer to you, your own Arminius' words to this Proposition of Mr. Perkins, viz. Against this I contend not, only let this be added, where we cannot agree about these (common notions) by reason of darkness overspreading our minds, and the weakness and diversity of humane judgements, (which thou rejectest, saith he to Perkins) there let us have recourse to the first (the Word of God) for the definitive and peremptory suffrage, as that which is above all other.  
You see here, 1. Arminius himself utterly turning his back of that Doctrine, which your inference pleads for; you will have the Doctrine of Predestination tried ultimately at the bar of Reason, he at the Scripture bar. 2 His reason for it; whereas we hear from you of nothing but light, shining from God upon the hearts of men, and the great capacity of that noble faculty of reason in man, so frequently boasted of; He acknowledgeth such darkness overspreading the minds of men, as common notions, and men's judgement ac-according thereto, are not to be rested in, but from them to the Word of God must the appeal be made for final determination.  Goodwin. 
It was the saying of Augustine, That God hath bowed down the Scriptures to the capacity of Babes, and Sucklings; Tertullian hath much upon this account to excellent purpose; in one place (speaking of the Soul being yet simple, rude, and unfurnished with any acquired knowledge, either from the Scripture, or other Institution) he demands why it should be strange, that being given by God it should speak out (or sing) the same things, the knowledge whereof God giveth to his Children; not long after he admonisheth the Gentiles, that neither God, nor Nature lie; and thereupon that they may believe both God, and Nature; wisheth them to believe their own Souls; A little after he saith, that the Soul he speaks of, hath the words (and therefore the inward senses and impressions) of christian's, whom notwithstanding it wisheth that it might never bear, or see; Elsewhere having mentioned some expressions of affinity with the Scriptures, as oft coming out of the mouths of Heathen, he triumphs over them, as it were, with this acclamation; O the testimony of a soul naturally Christian! nor doth Calvin himself say any thing less than all this, when he saith; That God hath implanted (or inwardly put) the seed of Religion in the minds of men, doubtless the seed sympathizeth richly with that body, which springs and grows from it: But these things by the way. All impressions, all principles of Light and Truth, which are found written in the hearts and consciences of men, are here written by the finger of God himself; therefore what Spirit, or Doctrine soever symbolizeth in notion, and import, with these or any of them, must of necessity be of the same parentage and descent with them, there being no original parent or father of light, and truth, but God only. And on the contrary, what doctrine or spirit soever, putteth any of these principles to sorrow or shame, and doth not lovingly comport with them, hereby declare themselves to be of a spurious and ignoble race: As Christ reasoned with the Jews, If God were your Father, ye would love me, For I proceed forth, and come from God, but because they bated him, he concluded them to be the children of the devil.  Resbury. 
As for your testimonies out of Austin, Tertullian, and Calvin, you do but make use of your old fallacy, from the part to the whole; the Scripture is in some things bowed down to the capacity of babes; is it in all things so? all milk, no strong meat? Did Austin think the Reason of man, competent to search out, and give a reason of all Scripture truths? this by name, about Predestination, and the execution thereof? let us hear himself upon this Argument, De verbis Apostol. Serm. 11. The Potter hath power over the clay to make of the same lump one vessel to honour, another to dishonour: wilt thou dispute with me? nay, wonder with me; cry out with me, O the depth of the riches, let us both agree in fear, that we perish not in error; Oh the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God, how incomprehensible are his judgements, and his ways past finding out! Search things unsearchable, do things impossible, corrupt things incorruptible, see things invisible, his judgements are unsearchable, let it suffice thee, and his ways past finding out. So 〈◊〉 Teri●…ians testimonies, the soul hath the ●…owledge of some things, impressions of some ●hings belonging to Christians; but you may 〈◊〉 soon get oil out of a flint, as out of these testimonies wring your Conclusion: That all Divine Truths may be known by the natural man, by reason of their agreement with the dictates of the natural understanding, as it is now in the state of mankind, since the fall. For Calvi●… his seed of religion, you would fain discourse into fruit, but your Discourse is neither the shining of the Sun, nor rain from heaven upon it.  
1 The seeds of some truths are writ upon the heart of man, as knowledge, but these of the Law, not of the Gospel;— the Wisdom of God hid in a mystery, etc. flesh and blood hath not revealed, etc. No man can say jesus is the Lord, but by the spirit: the natural man receives not the things of the spirit of God, neither can do, etc. What man knows the things of man? etc.— the spirit of God, not of the World, etc. The Natural man darkness, through corruption, by Satan further darkened.  
2 The knowledge he hath by nature of those things of the law is very obscure, evanid, and clouded with many errors, and those invincible otherwise, then as by the discovery of the word diligently consulted.  
3 The highest knowledge the Natural man can attain to, with whatsoever help of the Word of God (without the renewing and peculiar work of the spirit, vouchsafed only to the Saints, whereby they become such) is but historical, not intuitive, of logical apprehension, not of spiritual vision, and therefore such a knowledge, as is a great stranger to faith and repentance.  
4 All saving fruit of this knowledge is utterly prevented, and the tendency of it to eternal life stifled, choked, and perverted in every natural or unregenerate soul; and therefore how richly soever the seed sympathizeth with the body which springs from it, yet no such body shall spring from those seeds in the soil of an unregenerate soul, partly through darkness, & error, and partly through pravity and perverseness; therefore your conclusion here is most impertinent, wherein you so insist upon the goodness of these seeds in their own Nature, and in reference to their Author, God, as you overlook the badness of man, the subject of them through the corruption of his Nature, so full of darkness, falsehood, and enmity against the truth of God, as thence these seeds must needs rot under the clods, except the soil be supernaturally changed.   

CHAP. XVII.  Goodwin. 
COncerning the mystery of the Trinity, the incarnation of God, or the Son of God, the conception of a Virgin, with some other points of like consideration, commonly pretended to be against, or at least above, and out of the reach and apprehension of Reason; I clearly Answer.  
1 That they are every whit as much; yea, upon the same terms, out of the reach of faith, as of Reason, For how can I believe (at least upon good grounds, ●…d as it becometh a Christian to believe) that which I have no reason, nor am capable of apprehending any reason; nay, for which there is no reason, why I should believe it? If it be said, I am bound to believe the doctrines specified, because they are revealed by God: I answer, That this is a rational ground, whereof my Reason and Understanding are throughly capable, why I should believe them; the light of Nature clearly informeth me, that what God revealeth or speaketh must needs be true; and consequently worthy and meet to be believed. If it be further said, But Reason is not able to apprehend or conceive how three should be really and essentially one, and the same; how a virgin should conceive and bring forth a Son, etc. I Answer, That no faith or belief in such things as these, is required of me, nor would be accepted with God, i● case it were in me, above what I am able by Reason to apprehend and understand. As I am not able by my Reason to apprehend the particular and distinct manner how the three persons subsist in one and the same divine Nature and Essence: So neither am I bound to believe it; that which I am bound to believe in this point is only this, That there are three who do thus subsist, (I mean in the same divine essence) and for this, my Reason is apprehensive enough why I should believe, viz. Because God himself hath revealed it (as hath been said) If I should confidently believe any thing more or further concerning the Trinity of persons (commonly so called, and there is the same reason of the other points mentioned) than what I know upon the clear account of my Reason and Understanding, it would be presumption in me, and not faith; and I should contract the guilt of those whom the Apostle chargeth with in truding (or advancing themselves) into the things which they have not seen [i. e. rationally apprehended and understood.] But  Resbury. 
1 Whereas you say, these mysteries here mentioned of the Trinity, Incarnation, and the virgin's conception, are pretended to be against, at least above Reason, it seems you deny even these to be above the reach of Reason in fallen man, which yet in your discourse immediately ensuing, you grant in deed though not in terms: but contradictions are no rare things in your discourse.  
2 Whereas you say they are every whit as much; yea, upon the same terms out of the reach of Faith, as of Reason:  
1 It is false, for Faith hath the proper, and immediate ground of believing them, the authority of the Word revealing them; But Reason hath not an immediate ground of discerning them, viz. such a light, as whereby they of themselves are visible to the natural understanding, therefore when they are within the reach of Faith, yet are they not within the reach of Reason upon the same terms.  
2 You equivocate, for seeming to carry on your former doctrine, you relinquish it. Formerly you made Reason the touchstone of the Scriptures; and whatsoever text of Scripture should not be found to agree with Reason, and to be relished by it, must be rejected: here you make the Scripture to be above the trial of Reason, as appears by that which follows: For how can I believe? &c: If it be said I am bound, etc. This is a rational ground, etc. the light of Nature, etc. Here you grant that Reason is to believe what the word affirms, merely for the authority of the word. But 1. This is contrary to your former doctrine, requiring that Reason find a rational taste and savour in the thing itself to be believed. 2. Here Reason believes, rather than discerns the thing believed; it discerns the ground of believing, but not the nature or manner of the thing believed: therefore as before, the thing believed is not upon the same terms, out of the reach of Faith, as of Reason.  
3 Whereas you object, That Reason is not able to apprehend or conceive how three should be really and essentially one and the same, etc. and then answer, no faith or belief in such things as these, is required, etc. Let me ask you this one thing; Is it not a fruit of natural corruption, by the fall, that we apprehend no more towards the distinct knowledge of these things? If so, then are you bound to know, and knowing to believe more of them; and your discourse about believing more than you apprehend, how unacceptable it would be, falls to the ground. But here again you discover that Popish & Pelagian leaven; that God hath no right to require of man any more, than man hath power to perform; as formerly you argued from the command of God to the faculty of man. As for your Interpretation of Colos. 2. 18. I cannot receive it, intruding into the things which they have not seen, is in true interpretation, which they have not seen in the doctrine of the Scriptures.  Goodwin. 
2 If it be yet demanded, but is it not contrary to the grounds of Nature, and so to Principles of Reason, that a virgin should conceive a child; and if so, how can such a doctrine, according to what you have asserted, be received as from God, or as a truth? I Answer; It is no ways contrary to Reason, nor to any principle thereof, that God should be able to make a virgin to conceive, but very consonant thereunto; 〈◊〉 the Apostle Paul supposed it credible enough (as we lately heard) even in the eye of Reason, that God should make the earth bring forth her dead alive: indeed that a virgin should conceive in a natural way, or according to the course of ordinary providence, is contrary unto Reason, but this Religion requireth not of any man to believe; nor doth it bear hard at all upon any Principle of Reason; that God should be willing to do every whit as great and strange a thing as tha●, (I mean as to cause a virgin to conceive) for the accomplishment of so great and glorious a design, as the saving of a lost world. Nor is it contrary to Reason or any Principle thereof, that God or the first Being, being infinite, should have a manner of sulsisting or being, far different from the manner of subsistence, which is appropriate to all created and finite beings, or that this manner of subsisting which is proper unto him, should be unto men incomprehensible. But most consonant it is to Principles of Reason, when God himself hath pleased so far to reveal that appropriate and incomprehensible manner of his subsisting, as to declare and say that he subsisteth in three, that men should accordingly believe it so to be.  
So that most certain it is, there is nothing in Christian Religion, which so far as it concerneth men to know and believe, but what fairly and friendly comports with that Reason and Understanding which God hath given unto man, and what by a diligent and conscientious use of these noble faculties be may come to know and believe, at least so far as to salve his great interest of salvation.  Resbury. 
This Section is of the same stamp with the former; the sum of it is this, That it is agreeable to Reason, to conceive of God, that he is, and that he can do above the course of Nature, and comprehension of Reason, and that when God shall declare that such is his being, and his doings such, it is likewise agreeable to Reason to believe him upon his word. But  
1 Who denies this, but Mr. Goodwin and his associates in error? This is the very Doctrine of your adversaries, against which you dispute.  
2 This no way agrees with your former Doctrines. 1. That which affirms, that all men have that light of Reason and Understanding, which according to God's dispensation towards all men, they may improve to saving Faith and Repentance; For saving Faith requires the knowledge of these mysteries, which you grant here come only so far within the reach of Reason, as that when God hath revealed them, it is rational to believe his Word; without which, Reason could never find them out: But the greatest part of the men of the world have not the Scriptures. 2. That which affirms Reason to be the touchstone of the Scriptures; you said but lately of Predestination, that whatsoever should be taught about it, otherwise then according to the Scriptures, and the truth, might be clearly disproved by the grounds of common Reason. You affirm page 16. That whatsoever doctrine or saying bears hard, or falls foul upon any undoubted Principle or ground of Reason within you, must of necessity be an error: Now this principle and ground of Reason must be such, as in the account of men generally passeth for such a principle or ground. Now doubtless, that three should be essentially one, bears hard upon whatsoever grounds of Reason in you, or any man since the fall: That a Virgin should conceive, bears hard likewise upon Reason; I am sure it did so in the blessed virgin herself, Luk. 1. 34. therefore according to your doctrine formerly laid down, these mysteries should be rejected, and indeed the whole doctrine of godliness, which the Apostle tells us is a great mystery, and therefore bears hard upon Reason.  
Neither do you salve your former discourse when you say, it doth not bear hard upon any principle of Reason, that God should be willing to do as strange a thing, as to cause a virgin to conceive: For because the thing itself bears so hard upon Reason, and is so strange; therefore according to your former doctrine, the word affirming it, should be rejected. So for the manner of his subsistence, three in one, because it bears so hard upon Reason, as you here grant, that it is incomprehensible, according to your former doctrine, it ought not to be believed, as you know upon that very account, your good friends, the Socinians, believe it not; But when you meet with such instances as you dare not deny; as these now in hand, and yet they cannot be made to close with your doctrine, than you wind out of your own doctrine itself, yet so, as you would seem still to hold it. In other instances, as about Election, and Reprobation, Redemption, Renovation, the perseverance of the Saints, you will hold stiffly to your grand doctrine of the pre-eminence of Reason, because the doctrine of personal election, and reprobation, and the dominion of God therein, relisheth not with your Reason; because the dependence of redemption upon election, and the doctrine of the Saints perseverance, and of the efficacy, and peculiarity of grace relish not with your Reason, therefore they must be rejected, though the Scriptures be as evident for them, as for the Trinity and Incarnation. And he that should argue with you, as you do here; that it is not contrary to Reason, neither doth it bear hard upon any principle of Reason, that God should have a dominion, to man incomprehensible, would be rejected by you upon this account, that such a Doctrine itself was not according to Reason. Look over your conclusion, concerning the unchangeable love of God to the Saints; and your questioning of the Scriptures, in case they either in terms, or by just consequence, avouch the same, pag. 335. of your book formerly alleged, and tell me if it be not as I say.  
As for the close of your Section. 1. That there is nothing in Christian Religion, etc. but what fairly comports, etc. To this, I oppose this assertion, formerly made good, That in Christian Religion, there are many things above, many things cross to man's corrupt Reason. 2. That by a diligent and conscientious use, etc. I have formerly showed at large, what putid Pelagianisme is here obtruded.  Goodwin. 
2 Look how many precepts, exhortations, adm●nitions, I stand charged by God to submit unto, and practise, I am under so many charges and engagements from him likewise, to exercise my Reason, and understanding. 1. To apprehend aright the mind of God in every of these respectively, left when he enjoineth me one thing, I through mistake should do another. 2. To consider how, when, and in what cases I am commanded by him to do this or that. 3. (And last to pass by other particulars.) To gather together, and call up upon my soul all such motives and considerations, which I am able, whereby to provoke, stir up, and strengthen myself to the execution, and performance of all things accordingly. When God commandeth me to strive to enter in at the straight gate, to seek his kingdom, and the righteousness thereof, in the first place; To labour for the meat which endureth to everlasting life; To be a man in understanding: (To omit other precepts of like nature without number) he commandeth me consequentially, and with a direct, clear, and necessary implication, to rise up in the might of my reason & understanding, in order to the performance of these things, nor am I capable of performing the least of these great, and most important commands, in any due manner, but by interressing my Reason, judgement, and Understanding, and this throughly, and effectually, in and about the performance: The truth is, I stand bound in duty and conscience towards God, and in faithfulness to mine own soul, neither to believe any thing at all, as coming from God, which I have not, or may have, a very substantial ground in Reason to believe, cometh indeed from him; nor yet to do any thing at all, as commanded by him, unless there be a like ground in Reason to persuade me that it is indeed his command.  Resbury. 
Many waste words still, according to your manner. One passage or two we must call to account.  
1. God commands you, you say, in such and such precepts, to rise up in the might of your Reason, etc. We hear in Scripture of the weakness of Reason, as to the things of God, not sufficient of ourselves to think a good thought, etc. We hear of the might of the Word Preached, to cast down the strong holds and reasonings in man against the things of God: But where this mighty Reason dwells, I would willingly ask Mr. Goodwin, but that I fear he will send me Racovia.  
2. Nothign may you believe as coming from God, which you have not very substantial ground in Reason to believe cometh from him; the like for obedience to his Commands: If you meant Reason enlightened, and sanctified by the Word and Spirit, thence believing upon the authority of the Word, your meaning was the same with theirs whom you oppose; but your meaning is, Reason, by its own light, receiving or rejecting the Word itself according as such and such Doctrines, are above or not above, contrary, or agreeable to the apprehensions of the Natural man, as we have clearly found you out formerly, and to this you have been answered over and over, according as your tautology hath given occasion.  Goodwin. 
I confess (good Reader) I have presumed at somewhat an unreasonable rate upon thy patience, in detaining thee so long with the Argument yet in hand; But the sense of that unconceivable mischief and misery, which I most certainly know have been brought upon the World Christian, (at least in our Quarters of it) and which lies sore upon it at this day, by means of the reigning of this Notion, and Doctrine amongst us, That men ought not to use, but lay aside their Reason in matters of Religion; lieth so intolerable sad and heavy upon my spirit, that I could not relieve myself to any competent degree, with saying less than what hath been said, to relieve the world, by hewing in sunder such a snare of death cast upon it, most assuredly all the ataxies, disorders, confusions, seditions, insurrections, all the errors, blasphemous opinions, apostasies from the truth and ways of holiness, all trouble of mind, and sad workings of conscience in me; all unrighteousness, and injustice, all bribery and oppression, all un-man-like self-seeking and prevaricating with public interests and trusts; all covetousness and deceit, and whatsoever can be named in this world, obstructive, destructive, to the present comfort and peace, to the future blessedness and glory of the sons and daughters of men, proceed and spring from this one root of bitterness and of death: they neglect to advance and engage home their Reasons, judgements, Understandings in matters of Religion, to employ and improve them according to their proper interests and capacities in these most important affairs.  Resbury. 
Your tongue is your own, in way of apology for your wand'ring discourse: hitherto you tell us of the deep apprehensions you had of that unconceivable mischief, etc. brought upon the world by that doctrine, That men must lay aside their Reason in matters of Religion; a mere Hobgoblin of your own making, that you may have something to pelt at. How Reason is to be laid aside, and how not, we have showed distinctly formerly; not as you represent; as if men should look at it as their duties to be Idiots and mad men in seeking into the things of God.  
As for those Ataxies, etc. hence they are, That men have been so bold to oppose their own corrupt reasonings against the word of God, instead of following the light and guidance of it, and captivating their fleshly reason to the Doctrines of Faith.  Goodwin. 
O Reader, my mouth is open unto thee, my heart is enlarged (now for a recompense in the same, I speak unto thee, as a dear Brother in Christ) be thou also enlarged, say unto the world round about thee, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light; doubtless the world should soon find itself in another manner of posture then now it is, and see the whole Hemisphere of it filled with the glorious light of the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ, if the inhabitants thereof, every man from his quarters, would be persuaded to rise up in the might of his abilities, those heavenly endowments of reason, judgement, understanding, wherewith God, by Jesus Christ hath re-invested them to seek after him, by enquiring diligently into, by weighing narrowly all those things, as works of Creation, works of Providence, inscriptions upon the Soul, and especially the sacred word of extraordinary revelation, wherein, and whereby God hath drawn near unto men, and (as it were prepared) postured, and fitted himself on purpose to be found and known, and this as well in the excellency of his Grace, as of his Glory, by all those who upon these terms seek after him. The time was when the Spirit was not given, because Christ was not glorified in Heaven; the time now is wherein the Spirit is not given unto the world, according to the preparations, and royal bounties, and magnificence of Heaven, because he is not glorified on earth by the worthy employment of the means, abilities, opportunities vouchsafed unto men; the Word of God makes it one argument of the wickedness, and sensual ways of men, that they have not the Spirit; yea, the Apostle Paul by charging the Ephesians to be filled with the Spirit, clearly supposeth it to be a sensual strain of a voluntary unworthiness in men, if they have not a very rich and plentiful anointing of the Spirit.  Resbury. 
A word or two to this wordy Paragraph.  
1 Say unto the world awake, etc. Say you to your Reader. But for as much as this sleep is the sleep of death, as is here evident, in that the waking from it, is standing up from the dead; where is now that mighty Reason, Understanding, Judgement, you have so often told us of, (as here again you do) in the natural man?  
2 The time now is (you say) wherein the spirit is not given unto the world, according to the preparations of the royal bounty, and magnificence of heaven, because, etc. this is (as formerly we have seen at large) the Pelagian doctrine so famously branded; that grace is given according to our merits, the Popish doctrine of the merit of congruity: the jesuitical doctrine, That he that doth what in him lies by the strength of Nature, shall thereby obtain Grace.  
3 The Word of God (you say) makes it one argument of the wicked and sensual ways of men, that they have not the spirit, judg. 5. 18, 19 what then? you add; yea, the Apostle Paul by charging the Ephesians to be filled with the spirit, clearly supposeth it to be a voluntary strain of sinful unworthiness in men, if they have not a very rich and plentiful anointing of the spirit.  
Answ. 1. These Ephesians were regenerate, and spoken to as regenerate; therefore this concludes nothing for the natural man.  
2. 'tis true, what you say concerning the Natural man, but false that you would conclude, that therefore the Natural man hath power to obtain this anointing of the spirit; from man's duty, to his ability, is a mere non sequitur. It is the duty of the natural man, to fulfil the law of God (otherwise the transgression of the Law is not sin) yet it is impossible for him. The flesh is not subject to the Law of God, neither can be. It is the duty of the natural man when the Gospel is preached to him, to come to Christ, and a sinful strain of voluntary unworthiness, that he comes not; Ye will not come to me that ye might have life, saith Christ to the Jews, rebuking them: Yet none can come to him except the Father draw him; and this drawing of the Father is not according to any preparation of man drawn; He will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, and compassion on whom he will have compassion; It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. It is the duty of the natural man, to receive the things of the spirit of God revealed in the Gospel, which yet he cannot do, without the renewing work of the spirit, whereby he becomes a spiritual man, because they are spiritually discerned But to obtain this renewing work of the spirit, is not in his power, hath no dependence upon any thing by him done in order thereunto. The wind bloweth where it listeth, thou bearest the sound thereof, but knowest not whence it comes nor whither it goes; so is every one that is born of the spirit.   

CHAP. XVIII.  Goodwin. 
HE that lives up to those principles of light, which God hath vested in him, is underthe beatifical influence of that most rich promise of Christ; To him that hath, shall be given, and he shall have abundantly; By him that hath (in this promise) is meant (as clearly appears from the tenor of the Parable immediately preceding) such a person, who useth, employeth, improveth that which he hath, hereby declaring that he hath what he hath; nor is that which he is here said to have, any thing of a Spiritual or supernatural import, this likewise is evident from the said Parable, for here one of the three, who all had received talents, one, or more, all which talents must needs by the course of the Parable be supposed to be of one and the same kind; nor is the least intimation of any difference, especially of any specifical difference between them, is said to be an evil and slothful Servant, notwithstanding his talon, and because of his slothfulness, to be cast into utter darkness; these are no Characters (especially in the judgement of those, with whom we are to conflict in the ensuing Discourse) of persons that had received any thing saving, or supernatural. But by that which is here promised to be given, and that in abundance, to him that hath, must of necessity be meant somewhat, that is of a spiritual and saving nature; this also is evident from the carriage of the same Parable, where the Servants who had received the talents, and employed them faithfully (by whom are typified our Saviour's, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that have, as was lately said) are graciously invited by their Master into this joy, Enter thou into thy Master's joy: So to the other, enter thou into thy Master's joy.  
Now if either God or Christ, be signified or meant by the Master of these Servants (as I suppose no man questions, but that either the one or the other are typified hereby) by entering into their joy, cannot be meant a receiving of greater measure of natural gifts or endowments, nor of receiving any reward, which belongs to persons qualified only with such endowments; as these, but salvation or eternal blessedness and glory; if so, it roundly follows, that by what Christ promiseth shall be given to him that hath (in the sense declared) is meant somewhat of a saving consequence, as regenerating Grace, the sanctifying Spirit of God, Faith, and the like. And promising not only, or simply, that to him that hath shall be given, but further, that he shall have abundantly, he clearly signifieth, that in case men will stir up, provoke, and lay out themselves accordingly in the improvement of such abilities, and gifts, which shall from time to time be vouchsafed unto them; they may be virtue of the bounty and gracious decree of God in that behalf, attain and receive from God what proportion or measure of the Spirit of Grace, and of God they can desire, therefore they that teach men to be merely passive in matters of Religion, and forbid them the use of their Reasons and Understandings, as unlawful, and dangerous, in these affairs; how prudently soever they may consult their own carnal ease, honour, and worldly accommodations by such a doctrine, yet herein they say to men (in effect) be not excellent, let it never be said that the God of heaven hath made you rich or great.  Resbury. 
Mr. Goodwin hath here led us to that famous Scripture, the Parable of the Talents, a Scripture so much abused by the whole nation of the Jesuits, in whose steps the Arminians tread, and amongst them this Author.  
1 Let us see his Interpretation hereof. 2. The true Interpretation.  
1 For his; It labours with two very great diseases. 1. Self-contradiction. 2. Pelagianisme. 1. For selfe-contradiction, spiritual and supernatural, are here one and the same with him; as appears in these words. Nor is that which he is said to have, any thing of a spiritual or supernatural import. A little after saving and supernatural are one and the same with him, ●n these words. These are no characters of persons that had received any thing saving or supernatural. Presently after spiritual and of saving nature are one and the same in these words. By that which is here promised to be given, must of necessity be meant some thing of a spiritual, and saving nature,: and this in opposition: to natural, in these words; by entering into the Master's joy cannot be meant a receiving of a greater measure of natural gifts or endowments, nor of receiving any reward which belongs to persons qualified only with such endowments as these. But salvation, or eternal blessedness and glory: If so, it roundly follows, that by what Christ promiseth shall be given, etc. is meant somewhat of a saving consequence, as regenerateing grace; the sanctifying Spirit, faith and the like, thus he; Whence it is evident, that grace is not here natural, that what is natural is not saving, that regenerating grace is spiritual and supernatural given upon the improvement of natural endowments: but how doth this accord with his former Doctrine, about which he laboured so much that in the argument of the efficacy of grace, the word supernatural was no where in Scripture so much as virtually found, that the word natural distinguisheth not the unregenerate from the regenerate, etc.  
We observed formerly that what he speaks here presently after concerning men's attaining what proportion and measure of the Spirit o●… grace they can desire upon the improvement o●… such gifts and abilities as they shall from time to time receive, doth involve him in a contradiction to what he there had taught; if he here mean the work of the Spirit, to be any other than such an influx as is attemperd and proportioned to man's natural acting, and therefore natural, but if that be his meaning, then doth he contradict himself here, making all that is saving to be supernatural as we have now observed, but he hath drunk deep of an intoxicating cup, wonder not if he Stagger like a drunken man.  
2. For Pelagianisme, as plain and palpable as may be; that regenerating grace, the sanctifying spirit, faith and the like is given to men upon the use, employment and improvement of natural endowments, which is that Stigmatised doctrine of Pelagius so notoriously refuted and condemned, as formerly hath been cleared; where we had this very doctrine in the hands of the Massilians related by Prosper charging them therein with high Pelagianism, only Master Goodwin hath another fetch for it, that new vouchsafements by jesus Christ unto all in their natural birth, he tells us of, which how miserable a shift it is, hath formerly been discovered.  
But that we may have the whole mystery of Master goodwin's doctrine about this point, and see his vain, and selfe-subverting Sophistry. I shall add and examine a notorious passage, Page 329. and 330. of his Book, the sum whereof is as followeth.  
1. Regeneration (saith he) imports a reiteration of some generation or other. I answer, regeneration is a generation over andabove a former generation. 2. It cannot import a repetition of natural generation: true, therefore it must import a repetition of spiritual generati●…n. False it is, (as will appear by and by) a spi●…tuall generation over and above the natural generation, a repetition, if he will needs have ●hat word of generation, but not of natural nor spiritual generation, but only of the genus common to both, one opposite species succeeding another. He goes on, ' Natural and spiritual generation are contra-distinguished the one to ●he other, 1 Pet. 2. 23. and john 3. 6. True, and ●hence your discourse will come to nought as will appear by these Scriptures mentioned when we ●ave heard your conclusion, for which you are ●aking way in these words, viz. Now I suppose there can hardly be any instance given where the introduction of one contrary form or quality into the subjectis termed a repetition of the other; as for example, calefaction is never termed a repetition of Frigefaction. Pitiful Sophistry: No such thing is here pretended; the spiritual birth is a repetition, not of the opposite species or contrary form, as you phrase ●t, to wit, the natural birth, but only of the genus birth. As Calefaction succeeding Frigefaction, is a repetition, not of Frigefaction, the opposite species, but of alteration, the genus.  
Now comes your conclusion, but it is an evil egg of an evil bird, a false conclusion; from a false discourse; you conceive that regeneration relates not to the natural generation, as natural; but unto the spiritual state and condition of men in respect of their natural condition an● birth. But the Scriptures newly mentione● prove two things utterly destructive of this conclusion of yours. 1. That men by natural generation have nothing spiritually good in them▪ but the contrary, and that to the utmost▪ 2. That regeneration relates to the natural generation, as miserably corrupt and sinful, th●… our Saviour shows the necessity of regeneratio●… or the second birth, because by natural generation or the first birth we are so sinful; it bein●… the birth of the flesh in opposition to the birth of 〈◊〉 Spirit, 3 John 6. with the Context; thus Pe●… opposeth regeneration as that generation which 〈◊〉 of incorruptable Seed, to natural generation 〈◊〉 that generation which is of corruptable Seed; evident●… that both he & our Saviour opposeth the latter i●… its excellency to the former in its wretchedness and therefore in no wise relates to the forme●… according to any excellency in it to be repeated●… In laying down this conclusion, you tell u●… that men generally in the days of their youth●… degenerate from the innocency of their childe●… hood and younger years, and corrupt themselve●… with the principles and ways of the world whence you give us to understand, that regeneration appropriable only to persons living t●… years of discretion, is a repetition of that spiris tuall purity, which in their natural birth they had; but,  
1. Natural birth, and that as it relates, to regeneration hath no more innocency or spiritual purity in it, than what the flesh imports in utmost opposition to the Spirit.  
2. This degeneration you speak of from the spiritual excellency of their natural birth, 〈◊〉 it such as whereby spiritual life received in ●…e natural generation is extinct or not? if not; ●…en a man yet living may be borne again to ●…e same life, which you grant most absurd, al●…wing Nicodemus discourse for good in this ●…oint, and it is most manifestly absurd to every ●…e. If it be extinct; then 1. What is the advan●…ge of it, and so to what end was it vouchsafed 〈◊〉 men? 2. Regenerating grace prevents all ●…bilities in man, finding him wholly dead, as 〈◊〉 spiritual life; where then is that mighty ●…eason, understanding, etc. you are wont to tell 〈◊〉 of, and those endowments, and ability for ●…he improvement of them which here in your explication of.  
This Parable you mention, in order to regenerating grace, you further tell us that in and upon their spiritual state, in respect of their natural generation, they are if not simply, you do not say (though) but (if) not simply, and absolutely, yet comparatively innocent, etc. whereby it appears that you have a good mind, simply, and absolutely to deny original sin in them. And in respect of these qualifications, in grace and favour with God, upon the account of the death and sufferings of Christ; formerly we heard from you of a saving light vested in the natures of all upon this same account; the vanity of which doctrine we have discovered.  
Now you tell us of a state of Favour wherein upon the same account all children are, and the proof we must expect in your second part, in the mean time the same arguments which refuted your former opinion, refute this too with the same breath, and we must hear the Apost●… telling us that we are by nature the children of wrat●… But you will here say something to confirm i●… Mat. 18. 1, 2, 3. Whence you infer a wreste●… conclusion, that unless we shall say that children are in such a state of favour with God; w●… shall make our Saviour (in effect) to say, tha●… unless his disciples be like unto those who ar●… in a state of condemnation, they cannot be saved: But this according to your usual wring rather than concluding. For answer, 1. O●… Saviour compares them in their qualification▪ not in their state or condition. 2. This comparison will not conclude infants in a saving state 〈◊〉 for first, though in humility negative, rather than positive, they must be like children, yet that is not all: they must not only be free from pride, ambition, etc. as children through the incapacity of their tender age are, but further, they must have a humble and remorseful sense of sin, with contrition and selfe-loathing, an high esteem and true impression of free grace pardoning, withal, faith, repentance, etc. which children have not, secondly, they grown to years of discretion, cannot in this humility wherein they are compared be like children, but from a principle of regeneration, whereas in children it is only through incapacity of their age; therefore such qualifications in persons of years, conclude higher for them, then in Infants. As children are radically rational, though in their infancy reason cannot express itself in many fruits: so are they radically sinful, and that unto death in sin, though sin in that age cannot express itself as to many fruits of it.  
In the next place you anticipate an objection which you could not but so that your doctrine is liable to; not any thing you say that hath ●●e● said upon this last account, supposeth children to be begotten or borne without original sin, than you add, only that indeed hath been said, which supposeth that, that sin which is in children, is taken away by the death of Christ: So that they are generally whilst children, in the favour of God through Christ, notwithstanding that sin which is in them, which is as much as to say, they are borne without the guilt of original sin. Death (according to your doctrine here) reigns not over those that have not sinned after the Similitude of Adam's transgression; again, that state of corruption by natural birth which you allow is far different from that which the Scripture teacheth; yours is but such a state as is found in the regenerate, as is notwithstanding that corruption, a saving state; the Scripture teacheth it such a state of flesh, as without regeneration changing that state there can be no salvation. One passage I had almost forgot, whereas you say regeneration is appropriable only to persons grown to years of discretion, allowing what hath over & over been proved, that without regeneration there is no person in a saving state, it will hence follow, that so many children as are saved are regenerate.  
Hitherto Master goodwin's interpretation (with the examination of it,) which we had good reason to set down in contradistinction to the true interpretation which now follows. And it is such as will evidence itself clearly to suit with the Parable, and is withal the sense of the Fathers generally who have spoken to it; as likewise, (at least the prime sense) of divers Modern Divines of the best note: See the text, Mat. 25. 14. to the 31. to which is Parallel, Luke 19 to the 28.  
The main parts of this Parable are three: the  
First, Of a man, (a noble man Luke 19 12.) travelling into a far Country (to receive a Kingdom Luke, ibid.) and committing to his servants his goods, and these goods (talents, Mat. 25. 15. pounds, Luke 19 13.) by them to be employed for increase to their Lord. vers. 14. 15.  
This noble man is Christ, this far Country heaven, his journey thither, his ascension; the Kingdom he is gone to receive, the Kingdom of glory at the resurrection; these servants, the Ministers of the Gospel, these talents or pounds the doctrine of the Gospel, committed to their Ministry; their employment for increase, the faithful discharge of their Ministry, with deligent labour against manifold hazards, whereby the Gospell-Kingdome of Christ takes place in the world and is enlarged, as in the Parrable Luke 12. 41. to the 49. the servant there is not the Christian in general, but the Minister of the Gospel, viz. the Steward of his Lord's house, whom upon his faithful discharge of his trust in the household, his Lord will make him Ruler over all that he hath, verse 42. with 44. So here the servants are the same; si Ministers of the Gospel, to whose trust the Lord hath committed the managing & improvement of his estate, si his Kingdom here upon Earth, till his next ●…g, whom upon their faithful discharge of this their trust, he will in like manner advance to further Rule, as in the third part of the Parrable is expressed, vers. 21. and 23.  
Quere. But what may the inaeqality of the talents here signify?  
Answ. In Parables there are some essential parts, some amplifications for ornament; the essential parts are of special signification, in close connexion with the scope, the amplifications of more general signification, which if they should be too presiesly restrained, would many times pervert the true interpretation; as to give one instance. In the parable of the rich man in Hell, he is represented as taking care for his friends upon earth, that they may not come into those torments; we may not hence conclude that the damned in hell, have a loving affection towards, and a tender care of their friends yet living in the world, such an amplification no essential part I conceive the inaequality of the talents here to be of this general signification, that the Lord doth in much wisdom, and with due circumspection commit the Gospel's ministry to the Ministers thereof, good & bad; of the like consideration is that which immediately follows viz. to every one according to his several ability; that is ingeneral, the Lord requires a faithful discharge of their Ministry, from every one of them; even the meanest, but he that should give such a special interpretation as this; that even those Ministers who prove unfaithful, and inbane condemnation in the end, had the least charge committed to them, and the least opportunities of Gospell-ministration, should swerve from the truth; therefore to show that this is no special part of the Parable, in Luke there is no inaequality of the pounds, nor different ability of the Servants mentioned.  
The second part of the parable vers. 16. 17, 18. the carriage of those servants in the absence of their Lord; two of them trade with their talents and make increase; these are the fruitful Ministers, who give diligent heed to the work of the Ministry which they have received of the Lord, their increase is the fruits of their labours in the conversion and edification of souls, in planting and propogating the Churches of Christ; By the faithful discharge of the Gospel's ministry, the Kingdom of Christ in the world increaseth, as when leaven is put into dough, the Mass increaseth, or as when a grain of Mustardseed grows into a spreading tree. The third digs into the earth and hides his Lord's money; this is the unfaithful Minister, who neglects the charge committed to him, the doctrine of the Gospel, by Christ committed to his hand, as a lighted candle, which he puts under a bushel, or under a bed, so that it gives no light to the house; the unfruitful Steward that gives not the family their meat in due season; too slothful to endure the labours of the Ministry, too fearful to abide the hazards, and undergo the sufferings, too worldly and sensual, to mind the spiritual concernments thereof, with the necessary neglect of the things of this life. Now ensues the third part of the Parable, the return of this Noble man, his call these servants to account, and rendering to them according to their carriage in his absence, v. 19, to the 31.  
The return of this Noble man, is the coming of Christ to judgement; his reckoning with his servants: his calling the Ministers of the gospel to account; A word of weighty caution here to them: with them shall Christ begin, in the day of judgement: The accounts of the first and second here, are the accounts of the faithful ministers, the ministry in their hands hath been fruitful, the recompense rendered them by their Lord, making them rulers over many things, and receiving them into his joy, is the State of glory conferred upon them; a state of highest honour and fullest joy, agreeable hereunto is that of the Apostle. 1 Thessal. 2. 19, 20.  
The account of the third servant, is the account of the evil and unfruitful Minister who to colour his own sloth and wickedness, chargeth the Lord with austerity and unrighteousness; the manner of hypocrites, and wicked ones, to cast their faults upon the Lord, guilty at once of disobedience and insolence. The labours and hazards which are indeed required of the faithful Minister, he looks at as intolerable, and therefore takes and easier course, but to the destruction of himself and his hearers, repining in his spirit against the Lord, who hath made the ministerial charge so laborious and hazardous, vers. 24, 25.  
The answer of his Lord unto him. vers. 26, 27. is such, as makes way for his condemnation out of his own mouth Lu. 19 22. Because he had such hard thoughts of Christ, to whom he must give account, he should therefore have used his utmost diligence to have fulfilled his ministry; Christ shall need no other testimonies against the wicked then their own at the day of judgement, nay their own mistakes & evil apprehensions of him, shall yet be testimony sufficient against them to condemn them, and justify him in their condemnation. But who are these exchangers here? the hearers of the gospel preached, by the faithful preaching of the gospel, many hearers are gained unto the Lord, others are left more inexcusable, both making for the glory of Christ at the great day, and therefore the faithful Ministers, a sweet savour of Christ unto God, in them that are saved, and in them that perish, 2 Cor. 2. 15.  
The sentence of judgement is begun, ver. 28. That trust and honour which was conferred upon him, shall be taken from him, and conferred upon the faithful minister, what is that? the glory of the faithful minister in the fight of men and angels, shall receive increase from the condemnation of the unfaithful; Stripped of all that honour which sometime was vested in him, the confirmation of this sentence, vers. 29. He that hath; not only what the Lord committed to him, but what he required of him, the increase of his talents, to him shall be given glory, as a a recompense of his faithfulness, and he that hath this recompense of glory, shall receive increase, and it shall be abundant to him, from the condemnation of the wicked, and unfaithful servant, as by the destruction of the vessels of wrath is made known so much the more, the riches of glory on the vessels of mercy. Rom. 9 22, 23. On the contrary from him that hath not, viz. that which the Lord required; the increase of his talon; shall be taken away even that which he hath, viz. that honour which he received from Christ, committing to his trust the Gospel's Ministry, and which in the eyes of men by virtue thereof he bore in this world, which now shall end for ever in utmost shame and torments, v. 30. and so as from the Glory of the faithful Minister his misery shall increase; as hence weeping and gnashing of teeth to the wicked jews that they see Abraham, Isaac and jacob and all the Prophets in the Kingdom of God, and themselves thrust out. Luke. 13. 28. so that every way, to him that hath, shall be given, and from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And now I appeal to the Judicious reader, if this be not a natural interpretation of this Parable, and what is there now in it, for the improvement of natural indowements to the obtaining of regenerating Grace.  
This Section he closeth with a false charge, as if his adversaries taught men so to lay aside reason and understanding as to be merely passive in matters of Religion, with avile slander, as though they consulted their own worldly concernments in holding the truth against him and his fellows, with Laodicean pride assigning unto man his excellency upon these terms, that upon the improvement of his natural abiilites, preventing regenerating grace he is made great by God. If I should now show what by regenerating grace the men of his Confederacy understand, his error would yet further appear, but the digression would be● too long: Only this passeth as an Article of Faith amongst them. That all the operations of God being performed, which he useth for working Conversion in us, yet so doth Conversion remain in our power as that we may not be converted. So that all the efficiency they acknowledge in converting grace, is to give us a power of Conversion, not Conversion itself: which how contrary it is to the truth, and with how much clearness the efficacy of grace certainly and infallibly working Conversion itself is by the Fathers in the Pelagian controversy demonstrated, I shall not need here to say, if the Reader bear in mind what hath been said above.   

CHAP. XIX.  
We have done with his Motives to read his Book: Now follows the third part of his Preface, viz. A prevention of Objections against the reading thereof; In this and the next which is likewise the last part, we shall not need to spend much time, there being little but impertenencies, beside what hath been answered before, we shall therefore touch upon such things as are observable, and as the Case shall require, insist sometimes more largely.  
Object. 1. That he teacheth the possibility of the Saints final Apostasy, he teacheth more than the possibility thereof, so that it many times comes to pass; for answer hereto he refers to the ninth Chapter of his Book; but the judicious Reader will find there as every where else nothing but Errors.  
Object. 2. That he exalts nature to the prejudice of free grace, he answers hereto as followeth, which we shall set down in his own words, as formerly we have done (because this is a passage that requires distinct Examination,) and then accordingly examine it.  Goodwin. 
Concerning the Grace of God and the freeness thereof, I hold and teach nothing but what fairly and fully accords with these positions.  
1. That the original or first spring of the salvation of the world, and so of every particular person, that comes to be saved, was in and from the Grace, the free Grace and good pleasure of God.  
2. That the whole method or systeme of the Counsels by which and according to which God effecteth and bringeth to pass the salvation of all that are saved, did proceed wholly and entirely from the same grace and good pleasure.  
3. And more particularly, That the gift of Jesus Christ for a Mediator and Saviour unto the world, and so the Grant or Promise of justification and salvation unto men, by or upon believing, issued solely and wholly from the same grace.  
4. That men by nature and of themselves, i. e. Considered in and under such a condition, as they were brought into by Adam, and wherein they should have subsisted (in Case they had ever been borne, and lived in the world.) Had not the free grace of God in Christ interposed to relieve them and better their Condition, have no strength or power, not the least inclination or propension of will, to do any thing, little or much acceptable unto God or of a saving import.  
5. That notwithstanding this restauration or healing of the natural condition of man by the free grace of God, yet there is not one of a thousand, possibly not one throughout the whole world but so far corrupts himself with the lusts of the flesh and ways of the world, that without a second relief from the free grace of God, as, viz. in his patience and long suffering towards him, ever comes to repent or believe, or to persevere believing and so to be saved.  
6. That it is from the free and undeserved grace of God, that any person of mankind, is so much as put into a Capacity of believing or hath power and means vouchsafed unto him sufficient to enable him to believe.  
7. That a man is put into this capacity of believing by an irresistible acting or working of the free grace of God.  
8. That when any man by virtue of the power and means vouchsafed unto him by the free grace of God comes actually to believe, the exercise and acting of this power proceeds also from the free grace and good pleasure of God, so that no man ever believeth without a present and actual assistance from the free grace of God, in order to this his believing, over and above his ability or power to believe.  
9 (And last) That the Act of believing whensoever it is performed by any man, is so inconsiderably and at so low a rate of efficiency from a man's self, that (to help apprehension a little in the case) suppose the Act of believing, could be divided into a thousand parts or degrees, nine hundred ninety and nine of them are to be ascribed unto the free grace of God, and only the one remaining unto man; yea this one degree of the Action is no otherwise neither to be ascribed unto man then as graciously supported, strengthened and assisted by the free grace of God.  
The Reader will find none of these Positions contradicted by any thing affirmed or denied in the di course: I attribute as much as possible can be attributed to the free grace of God, in and about the Act of believing, salving the attributablenesse of the action unto man himself, in the lowest and most diminutive sense that can well be conceived. It is man that believes, not God; therefore so much efficiency about it must be left to man, as may give it denomination of being his.  Resbury. 
Reader, one word in general; doth not he seem to speak fairly for grace here? but never did any man play more fast and loose with sound and sense of his doctrine, than this Author doth; how Orthodox soever any of these positions may be in their sound, not any one of them is so in the sense by him intended.  
Read over his-first Position and his second, which are very general, & the third where thou hast some explication of the former; then add the sixth, and thou hast a further explication; they all together come to this. That God of his mere good pleasure appointed that all believers should be saved by Jesus Christ; that of the same good pleasure or grace, he gave Jesus Christ for the world; that by him all men are in their natural generation put into a Capacity of believing, and have means sufficient afforded them for salvation: that in all this God hath an equal respect of grace to all men. By this time than thou mayst discern, how different this grace which he teacheth, is from that Grace which the Scriptures teach, viz.  
1. That God chose from all eternity by a special Decree of peculiar grace, the persons of those unto salvation, who in the end are saved▪ this Decree (wherein the grace of it appears) not founded upon Faith or Works, or any thing in Man foreseen, but merely upon his own good will and pleasure, that according to this Decree, he gave them to Christ, and Christ for them, by his Redemption to bring them certainly to salvation; that of the same mere grace he doth in his own time effectually call them, thereby discriminating them in their actual state and condition, as formerly he had in his Council, from the rest of men; in their Call uniting them to Christ, blessing them with all spiritual blessings in him to the effectual obtainment of salvation.  
2. It is such grace as which notwithstanding the greatest number of persons by far to whom it belongs, perish everlastingly; for he makes it equally belong to all the world, the greatest part whereof by far (I think he will not deny) perisheth.  
For the fourth Position; The sin and misery of Man's condition in Adam, is merely notional: He doth not allow, that one man living is in that condition by his natural conception and birth; whereas the Scriptures teach and with them the Fathers against the Pelagian heresy, that all men are borne in that condition, and remain therein till they be regenerate by the peculiar grace of God, as we have formerly seen at large.  
For the fifth: 1. He teacheth the Pelagian power of the natural and unregenerate man, casting a false gloss over it of restauration and healing, as we discoursed above.  
2. He teacheth the Pelagian method of Regeneration, that Grace is given according to Man's merit. This second relief from the free grace of God, being nothing but his patience and long-suffering, through which man being spared, mak● such use of his natural endowments and common principles, as thereupon the Grace of Regeneration (whatsoever it is to which he vouchsafes that name) is given, as we saw lately in his explication of the Parable of the Talents.  
For the sixth and seventh: What is here affirmed, we must understand of all Men at their birth or conception rather, according to his explication of 1 john 9 formerly. And so Original sin, at least that which he himself granted by Adam in his fourth Position here is prevented to all men, never takes hold of any; the very thing by Pelagius maintained, and in him condemned; only a new fetch for it.  
For the eighth: As in his Preface hitherto and in his following Book, whensoever he hath occasion to speak to the influx of God for the operation of grace in man; he hovers in the Clouds and keeps in Generals (well acquainted with that rule Dolus in Universalibus.) So here he tells us of a present and actual assistance; but if the Reader here conceive that he grants an effiicacious impression upon the will of man, by the spirit of God, determining it to the Act of believing and working in man to believe, he deceives himself; for against such a doctrine he raiseth bitter Tragedies.  
For the ninth: He denies the whole act of believing to be from God, and he renders his reason, because than it could be Man's act. The falsehood of this position, and the vanity of the reason annexed may thus appear.  
1. For the position: God is the Author of all being, he being the only Creator; but every part or degree of the act of believing (supposing it divided into whatsoever parts) is something, a being Contradistinguisht to nothing: If Man be the Author of any part, whereof God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Man creates.  
2. God is the Author of all good, he being the one unchangeable and necessary Good. He good of himself, all other things by participation; but every part of the act of believing is good; therefore from God the only foundation of all good.  
3. The Act of believing is specially good; all parts of that act are uniform in nature; therefore if Man be the Author of any part, whereof God is not, Man apart from God is the Author of something specially good.  
4. If Man may be the Author of one part of being, of good, of special good; why not of more? Why not of the whole? and so Man shall be the Creator of the noblest operations; why should we then have inferior operations for God to be the Author of, and not deny him the Author of all or any?  
2. For the Reason: That God is the Author of the whole, doth no way deny Man's efficiency, or take the denomination of the act from him: Where causes are subordinate, the whole effect is produced by both; thus when in writing the teacher guides the learners hand, they both write the whole, every letter, and every part of every letter. In the motion of higher and lower wheels, the less within the greater, the whole motion is performed by both; In causes thus subordinate, but of different kinds, the denomination is from the dependent cause. Thus when the Plummet moves the wheel of the clock round, we say the wheel, not the Plummet turns round; but the Plummet is the first mover. Thus when the Earth springs forth her fruits, God is the Author of them, of all and every part of them; yet the Earth springs them, though he produce them; he springs them not, but makes her to spring them. The denomination of the action ever belonging to the inferior cause, because in it is the principle whence the action Emergeth: In the production of Faith then, God works, and man works, and Man not one part only, but the whole, but this in subordination to God who works the whole likewise; yet Man believes, not God, because in Man is the principle whence the act of believing issues: His will, but his will by grace renewed; His will the principle which believes: Grace renewing the will the principle by which he believes: He believes in whom is the act of believing produced; It is not produced by God in himself, but by influx from himself in Man.  
It is no immanent action in God, but in Man, in him produced by a transient action of God upon him. Therefore I say with Austin; It is certain that when we will, we will, but it is he that makes us to will that which is good, who works in us both to will and to do. So that it is certain that when we believe, we believe; but it is he that makes us to believe, and that not in part, but in whole. Appositely Bernard, ascribing all that is good in man to the grace of God; Not partly grace (saith he) and partly free will, but each of them by an undivided work, performs the whole. This, the whole; and that, the whole; but as the whole is in this, so the whole is from that: Excellently Austin, proving not only the whole of Faith to be from God, but the denial of it to be Pelagianism. Having first proved Faith to be of God, he adds (as formerly we have quoted him) Furthermore if God work our Faith, acting in our hearts in a wonderful manner, that we may believe, shall we fear lest he be not able to do the whole? Now follows the Pelagianism of the denial. And therefore Man challengeth to himself the first part of it, that he may deserve from him to receive the last. S e if any thing be done by this means, but that the grace of God, one way or other may be given according to our merits; and so grace shall not be grace.  
Then in the prosecution of this discourse, he blames the pride of Man, that he will (as it were) Compound with God, so as to challenge part of his Faith to himself, and leave part thereof to God; and which is yet more arrogant, he will take the first part to himself, (and pray say Mr. Goodwin if this be not your part) leave the following part to God: and in that which he saith belongs to them both, he makes himself to go before, and God to behind.  
Thus have we seen the vanity, fraud, and Error of your positions; as for the close of this Section, it may well pass for Smoke, and so may indeed all that follows, in the remaining objections and answers I shall therefore briefly touch upon them, for there is nothing material in them.  
3. Obj. That your doctrines are ro●ten Errors.  
You answer for the two doctrines more largely handled in the following book. 1. That you prove they were never cast out of the Church by any Council reputed Orthodox, till the Synod of Dort.  
An. 1. It seems you have so much modesty & conscience as to grant, some other of your doctrines, such as these here in your Preface that have been cast out by Counsels, reputed Orthodox, which indeed is true; to set aside that at Carthage, and that at jerusalem, where Pelagius was condemned, we have seen the Milevi●ane, and second Arausican formerly rejecting them.  
2. For those two doctrines you are forced t● confess that by the Synod of Dort they were rejected, which was the greatest Protestant Synod that hath been held since the time● of Reformation.  
3. What if they were not by any other, nor had been by that? Can you name no great Errors by yourself confessed so to be, but what have been by some or other Council reputed Orthodox by Orthodox men, cast out?  
2. For those two doctrines, you say they were taught by all Orthodox antiquity, and Calvin himself and who not? this is the true spirit of your fore Fathers; thus julian the Pelagian would have john of Constantinople a teacher of the same doctrine with himself; but do you not read the detection of his falsehood, by Austin, with all bringing upon him the whole stream of the Orthodox to refute him? and do you not sadly resent your own danger, lest in time you may hear; Haec verba tua quò proficiunt, nisi ut appareat, vel quomodo de hac causa scire neglexeris Catholicorum sententias, Sermonesque doctorum, vel si eos nosse curasti, qu● fraud coneris circumvenire nescientes? Si nesciens, hoc fecisti, cur non miseram re●●uis imperitiam? si sciens cur non sacrilegam deponis audaciam? Contr● Julian. Pelagi. lib. 1. Thus the Massylians or Semipelagians, alleged that what Austin taught about the call of the Elect according to the purpose of God, in his writings against Pelagius, was contrary to the doctrine of those most famous teachers in the Church which had been before him. Prosp. in Epist. ad Augustinum; but Augustine's answer thereto quoting Cyprian, Ambrose & Nazianzine teaching the same doctrine with him, and concluding the like of the rest generally, you are not ignorant of. lib de bono persev. C. 19  
4. Object. These discourses are full of niceties, etc.  
One of your Answers, is, that for yourself, you go no further than you feel the ground firm under you: but your firm ground we have sound bogs and quagmires more than once; when you come to a soft place (you say,) you tread lightly; indeed you have your Reserves sometimes when you come to a knot; I beeleeve this doctrine of divine influx, or concourse, is one of your ●oft places, you are wont to Skin it over so fairly.  
Another of your Answers, is, that your adversaries have occasioned these subtleties, forsaking the grounds of reason, etc. whereas the truth is, Men of corrupt judgements, your friends, have by opposing their reasonings to clear Scripture occasioned them.  
5. Object. Some plead a Nonnecessity of enquiring farther about this argument.  
You answer to this purpose; 1. That the treasure of divine wisdom is not exhausted, but that we may make further discourses. But I answer, the truths by you opposed are so fully cleared long since, that should an Angel from heaven teach your doctrines, those that are taught of God, would see ground enough to reject him. 2. You boast of something done by you above all that went before you; I know it not: pray point us to your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Then you proclaim the trophies of your party; whereas indeed, the church hath in divers ages triumphed in the ruin of your Errors, and so she will do to the end.  
6. Object. That these opinions have been held by a less religious generation of Men.  
You answer that in such and such Chapters you have disproved the Objections. Take the last word here for me, till those chapters be disproved.  
7. Object. Armianisme, Pelagianisme, Socinianism.  
In answer whereto, you are upon your old false string, and would make us believe, that Calvin himself, the Synod of Dort, and I know not who, had sore fits of Arminianism. I return you here to my answer to your third Objection.  
Now follows the fourth and last part of your Preface, which is your Apology, I had almost said for your Apostasy; but let it pass in your own words concerning your change of judgement; but forasmuch as your Arguments are only general, and upon a false supposition, that you have changed from Error to truth, and no other than what any Desertor of the faith might use, I spare the fruitless pains of answering any thing at all to them.   
FINIS.   

De Gratiae Convertentis Irresistibilitate.  
Thesis Exmii tum pietate, tum eruditione Theologi, D. D. joannis Praestoni, Collegii Immanuelis in Academia Cantabrig. quondam Praefecti.  
1. Gratiae convertens non est resistibilis.  
2. Decretum dei de permissione peccati, non tollit libertatem in peccando.  
MIHI in animo erat hanc secundam tractasse: Sed ea paululùm muta●â, mutato etiam consilio nonnullas ob causas, quas palam proferre non libet, institui istam de irresistibilitate gratiae explicare dicendo, & confirmare.  
Verum est quidem Arminium profiteri saepiuseulè, tantum se gratiae tribuere, quantum quisquam unquam fecit alius; nihil à quoquam unquam dici de gratiae efficaciâ, quod non ab ipso etiam dictum sit; immò quicquid fingi vel excogitari potest ad explicandas & illustrandas gratiae vires, id se agnoscere; falsò igitur de eo spargi, se in gratiam dei injurium esse, & libero arbitrio plus nimio tribuere: Idem apud Augustinum Pelagium de se pro●itentem reperietis. Interim tamen & illud verum, Totam hanc efficaciam gratiae quam verbis extollit & amplificat adeo, Stante Arminii sententiâ, pendere ab hominis voluntate; quippe quae pro innatâ suâ libertate potest hanc gratiam recipere vel rejicere, eâ uti vel non uti, eam denique vel efficacem reddere vel irritam facere: nec posse aliter fieri nisi abolere velimus libertatem Voluntatis, ejusque naturae inseparabiles proprietates destruere.  
Ne quis suspicetur, me falsam illi affingere sententiam; legantur ejus verba in tractatu qui inscribitur Declaratio sent. Arm. pa. 181. Quae haec sunt: Gratia (inquit Arm.) sic describitur in scriptura ut ei resisti possit; ut in vanum accipi possit: ut homo comittere possit quo minus ei assentiatur: ut homo possit ei non cooperari: ergo irresistibilis quaedam vis & operatio gratiae tribuenda non est. His verbis an non diruit Arminius id quod prioribus aedificarat? id aliorum sit judicium.  
Non ignoro quantum Arminiani cavillantur circa hoc vocabulum (irresistibilis) à Calvino aliisque nostris Theologis usurpatum, clamantes, secundum hanc nostram sententiam, homines stipites fieri; in actu conversionis nihil eos agere, sed tanquam lapides ab alio moveri & agi; imo non homines credere, sed deum in hominibus credere & re●●piscere. Sed quam falso haec nobis affingantur, & quam vere liceat dicere Arminium plus detrahere gratiae dei quam Jesuitae, facilè aspicieti● si dabitis mihi veniam eorum sententias fideliter recensere, easque paucissimis inter se conferre: nam his 4 praestitis, absolvam orationem. 1. Recitabo sententias adversariorum. 2. Explicabo quid nos sentiamus. 3. Rationes addam quibus nostra sententia stabiliatur. 4. Diluam objectiones, saltem unam vel alteram ex praecipuis, quibus ea oppugnari solet.  
Quod ad primum attinet; Jesuitae quidam affirmant, omnibus etiam reprobis dari vel mediatè sufficientem gratiam; electis vero & iis solis dari gratiam efficacem, quae certo & infallibiliter suum finem consequitur. S quaeratur autem, qua in re ponant hujus gratiae efficaciam? Resp. non in physicâ determinatione voluntatis, sed in morali suasione, non quâvis, sed congruâ ut appellant, i. e. secundum eas circumstantias loci, personae, temporis oblatâ, quibus deus, qui omnes voluntatis inclinationes ab aeterno perspectas habet, praevidet voluntatem certo & infallibiliter esse assensuram. Distingunt igitur inter gratiam sufficientem & efficacem. Jis quos deus elegit ad vitam, vi illius absoluti decreti intendit, non solum suggerere suasionem sufficientem, sed eam offerre tempore congruo, quando novit vocatum certô obsecutur●m deo vocanti: quos autem non elegit, iis etiam offert suasionem sufficientem, sed tempore non congruo, & quando certô praevidet, eos non obtemperaturos vocationi divinae.  
Unde colligitur hanc esse sententiam Jesuitarum;  
1 Vocationem efficacem sequi non praecedere decretum electionis, adeóque decretum esse absolutum & non conditionatum.  
2 Conversis & non conversis non dari eandem & aequalem gratiam; sed eam quae datur electis, sempe efficaciorem esse, etsi non ●espectu sui, tamen respectu congruitatis, quam habet ad voluntatem hominis convertendi.  
3 Omnes convertendos certò & infallibiliter converti, idque vi solummodo gratiae convertentis; alios vero certò & infallib●liter non converti, idque non solummodo, quod ipsi nolint, sed ob defectum congruitatis gratiae oblatae; quae grati a etsi quoad substantiam, ut aiunt, sit sufficiens, ita ut possint ejus adminiculo converti si velint; tamen quoad circumstantias non est sufficiens, quia tempore congruo non offertur. Sic enim Suarez: Moralis suasio e●st abundans, non sufficit: Physica determinatio nimia est; tollit enim libertatem: sed in congruitate quadam tota gratiae efficacia consistit. Haec Jesuitae.  
Arminiani autem, etsi videntur asserere, initium, progressum & perfectionem omnis boni operis, gratiae tribuendum esse; ita ut nemo, sine gratia praeveniente, concomitante & subsequente, boni quicquam cogitare, velle aut facere possit: tamen cum haec omnia modo resistibili fieri contendunt, ita ut in potestate voluntatis sit, gratiâ ist â u●i ad sui conversionem, vel non uti, palam est eos haec omnia de gratia, in speciem tantùm, non verè & ex animo, profiteri. Hoc facilè patebit, si opinionem Arminianorum sigillatim explicuero.  
1. Primò igitur codcedunt, intellectum illustrari a divina gratia irresistibiliter.  
2. Aff●ctus etiam, reformari et accendi eadem gratia, idque irresistibiliter.  
3. Voluntatem etiam ita excitari per gratiam assistenitiae, ut iam sit expedita, cum prius esset impedita; jam soluta, cum prius ligata; iam experrecta, cum prius essent sopita. Sed voluntatem renovari, eamque physicè inclinari à deo ad bonum, vel in voluntatem aliquam qualitatem vel habi●ū sanctitatis infundi, unde propendeat magis in opera bona quam mala, prosus negant Arminiani; quippe quod si aliquid ex his concederetur, destru eretur naturalis libertas voluntatis, de cujus libertatis essentia est, ut positis omnibus requisitis, possit agere vel non agere: Videantur ipsissima eorum verba, Coll. Hag. pag. 298. In mentem (inquiunt) infusus est habitus scientiae, in affectus infusa est sanctitas, ut spes, metus, etc. At in voluntatem non potest talis infusio fieri, quippe quae ex se libera est ad volendum bonum vel malum. Hinc (inquiunt) prius exci●atur moralis suasio in intellectu, sed vi gratiae p●aevenientis. 2. huic sansioni voluntas assentire potest, sed vi gratiae concomitantis 3. Et in actum producit hunc assensum, sed vi gratiae subsequentis. His tamen omnibus istam cautionem diligenter subjungunt; etsi voluntas nihil horum sine gratiae auxilio praestare potest; tamen est in potestate voluntatis huic gratiae obniti, eam avertere, impedire, reijcere si velit; nec fieri posse aliter, servatis na●uralibus proprietatibus voluntatis. Sic status questionis explicatur à joh. Arnoldo adversus Bogermannum pag. 263. Positis omnibus operationibus, quibus ad conversionem in nobis efficiendam Deus uti●ur, manet tamen ipsa conversio ita in nost●a potestate, ut possimus non converti.  
Hac sententia pofita, coguntur Arminiani haec dogmata defendere, à veritate magis aliena, quam ipsa jesuitarum.  
1. Defendunt decretum conditionatum fidei prae●cientiae innitens; nam cum voluntas, positis omnibus Dei actionibus, possit ●e convertere vel non, credere vel non, necesse est ut Deus prius praevideat, qui credituri sint & qui non, quam aliquo● eligat ad vitam, alios destinet ad interitum: Jesuitae autem ponunt decretum absolutum, & fidem esse fructum vel effectum illud consequens.  
2. Iesuitae concedunt majorem gratiam quoad modum iis omnibus praeberi qui convertuntur, quam iis qui non. Arminiani contra; majorem etiam (quoad modum) saepe communicari non conversis, quam conversis.  
3. Hinc etiam Arminiani ordinariè refundunt partiale principium conversionis in humanam voluntatem (quicquid verbis profitentur contra) cum Iesuitae illam totaliter tribuunt Dei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & beneplacito.  
4. Hinc etiam Arminiani statuunt gratiam convertentem & vivificantem non esse conversorum & electorum propriam, sed aliis etiam esse communem. Iesuitae vero, vocationem congruam, (in qua gratiae efficaciam statuunt,) esse electis peculiarem, fatentur.  
5. Censent Iesuitae, omnes eos infallibiliter & certò converti, quos Spiritus Sanctus convertere intenderat. Arminiani id pernegant. Vnde vulgo ausi sunt dicere, Spiritui sancto resisti posse, etiam tum, quando hac intentione operatur in homine ut convertat eum.  
His praemissis, jam nostra sententia quae sit, breviter exponam.  
Ut autem distinctè intelligatur quid nos sententiamus, sciamus oportet, conversionem hominis his quatuor gradibus absolvi.  
1. Deus infundit in totum animum, adeoque in ipsam voluntatem, habitum vel qualitatem sanctitatis eam regenerantem, eamque constituentem ex malâ bonam, ex nolente volentem; unde, quod ●…net ad naturam voluntatis, integrum manet; co●rigitur autem id quod corruptum est.  
2. Ab hac q valitate ita infusa, statim emergunt in voluntate inclinationes quaedam incompletae, omnem rationis advertentiam praevenientes, motibusque (qui à scholasticis pimo-primi appellantur) simillimae. His enim voluntas non vult completè & executiuè aliquod bonum, sed inchoatè & incompletè tantum inclinatur, & propendet in bona opera, quae Deo placent: unde non tam volitiones, quam velleitates dici debent.  
3. Inclinationes istae intellectui proponuntur objectiuè; unde intellectus eas expendit, de iis ratiocinatur & consilium capit, tandémque, cum eas ratas fecerit per dictamen suum ultimum & conclufivum, proponit voluntati ut eligendas.  
4. Postquam istae inchoatae inclinationes, ortae ab infusa gratia, subierunt censuram intellectus, & praevio ejus judicio fuer●nt comprobatae; tum demum voluntas elicit velle completum & executivum, ex quo immeditè sequitur conversio; vel potius Ipsum velle illud est conversio hominis ad Deum. His quatuor perficitur hominis conversio. Hic primum, scilicet receptio habitus gratiae infusae est irrestibilis quidem; sed nec est libera, nec voluntaria: voluntas enim merè passiuè se habet in ipsa receptione; ergo, non liberè.  
Secundò; Scilicet, inclinatio orta vel fluens à gratia, est irresistibilis; Physicè enim, & non moraliter, fluit à voluntate, gratia formata & imbuta. Est tamen voluntaria; actiuè enim producitur à voluntate: non tamen libera est, quia deest adhuo unum ex requisitis ad libertatem, scil. praevium judicium intellectus.  
Tertiò; Scilicet, judicium int●llectus de hac inchoata & incompleta inclinatione, est irresistibile; intellectus enim gratia divina illustratus, irresistibiliter & infallibiliter comprobat hanc inclinationem: est etiam eoúsque liberum, quoúsque intellectus est capax libertatis.  
Quarto: Cum intellectus edidit dictamen suum ultimum & conclusivum, tum voluntas, uti dixi, elicit completum velle & executivum, quod est ipsa actualis conversio ad Deum.  
Hoc autem velle est tum irresistibile tum liberum, adeoque ipsa conversio est & libera & irresistibilis.  
1. Irresistibile est; quia non solum necessitate consequentiae, sed etiam consequentis sequitur Physicam inclinationem voluntatis praeeuntem, & ultimum dictamen intellectus illud probans & confirmans. Liberum etiam est propriissimè, habet enim requisita ad libertatem; voluntas enim in hoc velle actiuè se habet, non passiuè.  
2. Non elicitur nisi a morali suasione, id est, non nisi praeeunte judicio intellectus aestimantis in utramque partem, quid fieri satius esset. Omne enim velle activum & completum, cui praecedanea fuit hujusmodi ratiocinatio & aestimatio intellectus de objecto oblato, verè & propriè liberum dici deb●t. Illa enim definitio, liberum esse quod, positis omnibus requisitis ad agendum, possit agere vel non agere, est dèfinitio in cerebro Jesuitarum solummmodo consita, quod fundamentum habet nec apud Patres, nec apud Veteres Philosophos, imo nec apud Antiquiores Scholasticos, quos tamen Suarez conatur quasi obtorto collo trahere in suam sententiam.  
Sic habetis nostram sententiam, secundum quam homo convertitur irresistibiliter, tamen liberè. Quam ut adhuc magis perspicuè intelligatis, hinc ●equuntur haec Theoremata, illis Arminianorum & Jesuitarum contraria.  
1 Non dicimus liberum arbitrium vel facultatem voluntatis quoad spirituale, esse semivivam & sem●mortuam, ut volunt Arm. Coll. Hag. pag. 300. vel se habere ut locomotiva in eo qui compedibus ligatur, vel visiva facultas in eo qui in locum aliquem tenebricosum compingitur, ut volunt Pontificij: sed asserimus facultatem voluntatis quoad bonum vere spirituale, penitus extinctam esse, sicut facultas vitalis in homine mortuo, locomotiva in occiso, visiva inexoculato  
2 Illi etiam defendunt, voluntatem tantum excitari a gratia morali vel assistenti eam pulsante & commonefaci●nte, non autem mutari a gratia habituali eam sanante & regenerante; ipsorum enim haec sunt verba, Ni●il obstat quo minus vel sola gratia moralis, id est moraliter suadens, homines animales spirituales reddat. Nos vero arbitramur, voluntatem etiam vivificari & regenerari ab infusione gratiae habitualis, id est, novae qualitatis voluntati impressae, quae se habet sicut intrinsecum principium voluntatem informans & mutans: unde fluunt omnes bonae & inclinationes & operationes.  
3 Illi statuunt, in actu conversionis voluntatem tantum actiuè, se habere. Nos sustinemus, voluntatem in primo actu conversionis, partim passiuè, partim actiuè, id est, prius passiuè, dein active se habere; ideoque cum Deo cooperari; non partim naturali facultate, qua pollet, partim supernaturali a gratia trans●unte accepta; sed potentia totaliter supernaturali; & infusa & vivificante gratia collata, juxta illud August. Uelle a nobis habemus; sed bene velle, & in parte, & in toto est a gratiâ.  
4 Arminiani existimant gratiam spiritus vivificam & quicquid aliud ex parte Dei requiritur ad hominis conversionem, tam reprobis communicari quam electis; idque hac intentione, ut serventur; alioquin Deum agere siumulatè & hypocriticè, cum iis verbum offert: legantur eorum verba Coll. Hag. pag. 308. Nos interim statuimus gratiam Dei vivificam, quae voluntati sanandae & regenerandae apta sit, electis esse peculiarem, iisque vi decreti electionis impertiri, in hunc finem, ut salvi fiant; aliis vero denegari, idque ideo quòd Deus eos non servare secum statuerit.  
5. Aiunt illi voluntatem a gratia vivifica excitatam, posse agere vel non agere; ad Deum se convertere vel non; quia alioqui non esset libera; libertatem enim esse, cum positis omnibus requisitis vel omnibus Dei actionibus, possit agere vel non: unde illud Corvini contra Tilen. pag. 337. Gratiam non ita instruere voluntatem viribus, quin semper maneat in potestate hominis iis uti vel non. Nos contro dicimus, voluntatem non posse tum physicae motioni a gratia profectae, tum divinae suasioni ab illuminato intellectu ei exhibitae, reniti vel refragari, sed necessitate consequentis ductum Dei sequi, juxta illud Augustini; Liberum arbitrium non potest Deo salvum facienti resistere.  
6. Illi dicunt, voluntatem a gratia excitatam, propriè cooperari cum Deo, esse causam coordinatam, concausam, causam partialem, causam concomitanten, etc. eamque ita influere in effectum, ut si non influat, effectus nullo modosit secuturus. Nos contra dicimus, voluntatem cooperari quid●m, sed ut causam omni modo subordinatam, & dominio Dei, ut principalioris agentis, penitus subjectam: adeo ut non propriè coagen● & cooperans dici debeat; sed potius prius acta agit se, & prius mota movet se, & prius Deo conversa convertit se ad Deum.  
7. Defendunt illi, non posse Deum nos modo irresistibili convertere, nisi etiam convertamur in truncos & stipites, ideoque quasi continua motione acti, non ipsi agamus quicquam, sed Deus omnia in nobis: contra, nos dicimus, truncos & stipites facultates, quibus acti ipsi simul agant, minimè habere: homines vero esse agentia libera; adeoque facultatem habere, ratione cujus acti à Deo ipsi simul agunt; unde verè & agere, & se convertere dici oportere: voluntas enim ex mala in bonam mutata, & ex nolente volens facta, habet in se intrinsecum principium bene volendi: unde dominium sui actus quo se convertit ad Deum, ei propriissimè tribui debet; etsi enim gratia Dei sit principium quo, tamen voluntas hominis est principium quod, omnia operatur; J●idem, etsi Deus sit causa efficiens conversionis prima & totalis, tamen voluntas est causa efficiens proxima, & totalis etiam, in genere causarum secundarum. Ergo, sicut effectus solent tribui causis seeundis & creatis, etsi agunt virtute causae primae: sic conversio propriissimè tribuenda est voluntati, etamsi totaliter agat virtute Dei & gratiae convertentis.  
8. Ultimò negant illi, irresistibilitatem gratiae divinae & libertatem voluntatis humanae posse simul consistere. Nos vero dicimus, conversionem esse irresistibilem, tamen Irresistibilit●● liberam. Sed distinguimus de irre- distinguitur. sistibilitate gratiae.  
1. Alia est, qua gratia regenerans a Deo infusa recipitur a voluntate; & ha●c irresistibilitatem (scil. receptionis) fatemur nos incompossibilem esse cum libertate.  
2. Alia est, qua inclinatio instigans ad bonum spirituale modo quodam physico promanat à voluntate gratia formata; & hanc etiam motionem dicimus irresistibiliter elici & voluntariè, sed non liberè.  
3. Alia est irresistibiltas, qua voluntas, tum motioni physicae a gratia profectae, tum suasioni intellectus eam comprobanti, necessario quidem, i. e. necessitate etiam consequentis, ●â quam certitudinem diximus, assentitur: & hanc irrestibilitatem dicimus, optimè posse cum libertate consistere; quip●è quod contineat in ea duo ista, in quibus libertas consistit.  
1. Quod voluntas, in eliciendo hoc ultimum velle, actiuè se habet, non passi●è.  
2. Quia praecesserit moralis suasio vel judicium intellectus aestimantis in potestate hominis esse conversionem propositam, id est, oblatum objectum accipere vel rejicere. Nam statuimus, quicquid fit in actu conversionis, vel per meram receptionem, vel per physicam determinationem, non esse liberum; sed omne velle quatenus & actiuè elicitur, & ex rationabili sausione promanat, eatenus solummodo liberum esse; idque hoc freti fundamento, quod ratio sit ad opposita, i. e. sola ratio est radix & fundamentum omnis libertatis; unde omnis actus voluntatis, in quem ratio influxerit, liberrimus est.  
Videtis jam quae sit nostra sententia, in qua explieanda diutius immorati sumus, quia hujus sententiae explicatio est praecipua ejus confirmatio, & contrariae refutatio: praeterea, omnium difficillimum est, quid statuun● illi qui Arminium sequuntur hac in causa, exprimere, quia verbis adeo speciosis & dubiis sententiam suam tegunt & involvunt.  
Restant argumenta quibus nostra sententia confirmari debet, quae breviter perstringam. Duo autem nobis sunt Probanda.  
1. Dari posse infusionem qualitatum vel habituum in voluntatem; quod illos pernegare, ante probatum est: quippe quod hujusmodi infusio destruat prorsus & tollat ejus libertatem & naturam.  
2. Habituali & vivi●ia gratia ita infusa, converti nos a Deo modo certo & nobis irresistibili.  
1. Dari infusionem hujusmodi gratiae renovantis & sanantis voluntatem, eamque inclinantis & determinantis ad alterum oppositorum in actu conversionis, vel hinc constat; quod omnes Theologi ponunt in voluntate habitualem aversionem a Deo, & habitualem conversionem ad sen●ibilia & carnalia: haec autem habitualis corruptio naturae, solo gratiae merae excitantis auxilio sanari non potest: Morbi enim, ut corporales, sic spirituales non curantur nisi contrariis; habitualis ergo corruptio, non nisi habituali qualitate voluntati impressa, mutari potest. Rectè igitur Prosper: Interior sensus non aperitur ad spiritualia praestanda, donec fundamentum fidei & fervor dilectionis in corde plantetur.  
2. Nisi concedatur▪, hujusmodi habitualem gratiam infundi in voluntatem, unde illa modo physico inclinetur ad bonum, nullum erit in homine formale principium, à quo actus boni possint elici: sicut enim in corporalibus, nemo videt nisi prius oculum habeat, nec audit nisi aures habeat: sic in spiritualibus, nemo videt nisi prius Deus oculos dedit ad videndum, nec audit nisi cui aures ad audiendum; eâdem ratione, nemo ad Deum se convertere potest, nisi habeat novum cor, i. e. novam voluntatem ad convertendum, Deúmque diligendum: unde enim illud in scripturis, Arbor mala malos fructus, bona bonos fructus profert? nisi ut inde intelligamus voluntatem bonam fieri oportere, priusquam opus aliquod spirituale praestare possit; Quod gratia sanante & regenerante, non autem gratia excitante & moraliter suadente fieri necesse est.  
3. Supponatur, voluntatem corruptione habituali deformatam, posse solo auxilio gratiae excitantis ad actus spirituales eliciendos elevari, esset tamen id contra illam suavitatem providentiae divinae, quae ab omnibus Theologis praedicatur. Deus enim voluntatem sic dispositam non suaviter promoveret, sed quasi obtorto collo raptaret ad opus, à qua adhuc abhorret ejus inclinatio. Ergo, Magis consentaneum est ut ponamus in voluntate habitualem quandam propensionem ad bonum spirituale, quod non à gratia excitante, sed ab infusionem habitualis gratiae praestare potest.  
4. Fatentur omnes, voluntatem non renatam nullam in se habere principium ve●è spirituale; tamen actum convertendi ad Deum non negabunt esse ordinis verè spiritualis & supernaturalis; quomodo autem voluntas solo pulsante gratia excitata, non autem gratia regenerante mutata, constituitur in ordine agentium supernaturalium, ego quidem non intelligo.  
5. Quaeram, quid illud sit, quod verum pium & sanctum constituit? non simpliciter actus pij & boni; actus enim non denominat subjectum tale, ut loquitur Philosophus; ergo, habitus sit oportet, unde homo sanctus & pius dicitur: Habitus autem iste situs non est in irrationali animi parte; ea enim non est culpae vel virtutis susceptiva propriè, sed participatiuè tantum, in quantum scil. rationalis animi pars in eam redundat. Si autem in rationali poni debet, non est in intellectu collocandus; nemo enim est vir bonus vel malus quòd bona vel mala tantum intelligat, ut optimè observat Aquinas; sed ideo dicitur unusque vir bonus vel malus, quod ea velit quae mala vel bona sunt. Relinquitur ergo habitum sanctitatis non posse nisi in voluntate collocari, utpote quae proprissiimè est subjectum susceptivum tum habitualis sanctitatis, tum habitualis corruptionis & rebellionis ei contrariae.  
6. Unde facilitas & promptitudo in operando, si voluntas per se indifferens sit & aequaliter inclinata in utramque partem? nam sicut ex malis actionibus contrahitur macula, unde habitualiter disponitur ad malum: sic ex bonis actionibus inficitur anima meliori tinctura, unde habitualiter inclinatur ad bonum, idque exclusa operatione gratiae pulsantis & excitantis.  
7. Amor●m Dei vel charitatem non esse merum actum, sed habitum permanentem, omnes melioris notae Theologi fatentur: habitus autem iste non in intellectu locum habet, quia affectus est; nec in sensuali appetitu qui ad amorem spiritualem elevari nequit: Reliquum est ergo, eam esse voluntati peculiarē, adeóque eam habituum vel gratiae habitualis propriissimè capacem esse.  
Ultimò. Quam absurdam est, concedere totum hominem mortuum esse in peccatis, ita ut ad bonum aliquod verè spirituale aspirare nullo modo possit: defeendere tamenvolunta●ē, quae est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsius animae, auriga omnium facultatum domina & regina humanorum actuum, illud denique principium quod ●onitatem & malitim spiritualem impertitur omnibus operibus ab homine praestitis; quam absurdum inquam est, statuere hanc facultatem, nec spiritualem fuisse ante lapsum, nec carnalem post lapsum, sed ●ū corruptionis per primum peccatum invectae, tum donorum spiritualium in hominis regeneratione infusorum, esse penitus expertem? Facile esset pluribus absurdis obruere hanc sententiam, sed haec sufficient. Ex his omnibus satis constat, infundi in voluntatem, vel in ea imprimi novam qualitatem vel habitum gratiae; quod ab Arminianis acerrimè negari, ex ipsorum verbis supra probatum est.  
Qui tamen adhuc dubitat, utrum haec sit eorū●ententia, legat Coll. Hag. p. 298. versione Bertii: ubi de industria & consultò defendunt, non in spirituali morte, separari dona spiritualia ab hominis voluntate; nec ante illam mortem, nimirum in statu innocentiae, eidem fuisse insita; quippe quod si hujusmodi donis inclinaretur voluntas in alter●tram partem, tolleretur ejus libertas, quae in eo consistit, quod aequaliter se flectere possit in utramvis partem, positis omnibus ad agendum requisitis.  
Restat nunc brevi probandum, Deum, sive immediatè, sive mediatè tum gratia infusa tum morali suasione, peccatores irresistibili quodam modo ad se convertere.  
Sed haec cautio praemittenda est: hoc 
Vox (Irresistibiliter) explicatur.  vocabulo (irresistibiliter) non intelligere nos, vim aliquam voluntati illatam, ejusque naturae repugnantem: sed inseparabilem tantum efficaciam gratiae divinae quae suaviter quidem & secundum modum ejus naturae inclinat voluntatem; ita tamen certò & necessariò (intelligimus eam necessit●tem, quam modo certitudinem diximus) ut à voluntate eludi nequeat.  
1. Veritas hujus sententiae vel hinc patet, quod passim in Scripturis, Deo soli ejusque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & beneplacito tribuitur peccatoris conversio vel regeneratio; homini ipsi autem, omnis vel minima cooperatio adimitur, Rom. 9 Non est volentis vel currentis, sed miserentis Dei; Ille cujus vult, miseretur; & quem vult indurat. Quod verè dici non posset, si homo possit pro libertate sui arbitrii, positis omnibus Dei actionibus ad conversionem requisitis, gratiam Dei vivificam in vanum accipere, (ut loquitur Arm.) eamque irritam facere. Observetur etiam his verbis, non solummodo Deo soli tribui, quod hic resipiscat, ille obduretur, sed hominis voluntatem & conatum prorsus excludi quo minus aliquas habeat partes in hoc negotio. Non est, inquit, volen●is vel currentis, sed miserentis Dei. Sicut rota non ideo bene currit, ut sit rotunda, sed quia prius est rotunda, ideo bene currit: sic homo non ideo vult vel currit, ut deus ejus miserescat eumque regeneret per gratiam spiritus vivificam, sed quia prius miseretur, ideo vult & ideo currit in via justitiae.  
2. Secunda ratlo sumitur ab infallibili connexione effectus cum causa, i. e. conversionis cum gratia convertente & vivificante: nam si gratia haec vivifica semper attingit suum effectum, nec cuiquam offertur, nisi in quo efficax sit, ad animam ejus sanandam & regenerandam; necesse est, ut praevalentem quandam & irresistibilem operationem ei tribuamus; gratiam autem istam, nunquam non finem suum assequi in omnibus quibus communicatur, patet ex multis scripturae locis. johan. 6. ver. 37. Quicquid dat mihi pater, ad me venit. jer. 31. v 33. Converte me, & ego convertar: unde colligitur, cuicunque infunditur gratia homini convertendo apta, eum certò & infallibiliter conversum iri; alioquin non posset sic Deum alloqui, Converte me, i. e. fac quicquid tu adminiculo spiritus & gratiae tuae infusione facere soles, et ego convertar; fortassis enim voluntas, cui integrum est gratiam accipere & rejicere, eam irritam faciat. Idem patet ex johan. 6. v. 45. Quicunque à patre audivit et didicit, is veniet ad me, i. e. quicunque ita audivit, & à Deo doctus est, simul gratiam spiritus vivificam imbiberit & acceperit, is certo veniet ad me; unde liquet, gratiam homini convertendo idoneam nunquam frustrari, sed modo quodam insuperabili effectum suum consequi, ita ut ab humana voluntate nunquam eludi possit. Quod porro confirmatur à natura gratiae, & à modo illo praepotenti quo Deus eam infundit in cor humanum; nam si gratia sit effectus infinitae potentiae, sicut est; & eâdem virtute homo regeneratur, quâ Christus suscitatus est a mortuis; tum Deus eam humanae voluntati ingenerando, exerit omnipotentem illam virtutem, cui nulla facultas creata obniti vel resistere potest.  
3. Accedit & hoc Argumentum. Gratia Dei ita est causa efficiens conversionis, ut nullam omnino causam sociam & coordinatam secum admittat, etiamsi causam sibi subordinatam (scil. humanam voluntatem) adjunctam habeat. At vero si voluntas quando excitatur à gratia assistentiae, ut appellant, possit ei resistere, potest etiam eidem assistere; si illi obniti, potest etiam cum eadem eniti ad eundem effectum producendum; denique si eam irritam facere, tum eam efficacem reddere: ideoqúe potest esse causa coordinata cum gratiâ Dei, in primo actu suae conversionis eliciendo. Deum autem suo solius & unius opere, exclusis omnibus causi● coordinatis, homines regenerare vel convertere, adeo liquidò constat, ut probatione non egeat: nam passim habetur in Scripturis, Deus convert●t, & Deus dat resipiscentiam, & Deus circumcidit, auferens cor lapideum, & substituens carneum in ejus locum. Denique Deus regenerat, & sua virtute resuscitat à morte peccati (omitto vim similitudinis, sicut nemo ad sui resurrectionem, & ad sui generationem conferre quicquam potest: sic neque ad regenerationem & resurrectionem spiritualem) Deus, inquam, haec omnia praestat; sed ei soli tribui non possent si haberet causam ita secum cooperantem, ut si illa nolit, nullus hujusmodi consecutus sit effectus. Ad haec verissimum est illud, quod dicitur a Scholasticis; Deus est causa totius entis i. e. etiamsi peccati (quod non est ens, sed defectus entitatis facultati, vel actui debitae inesse) causa non sit efficiens Deus, sed deficiens voluntas; tamen omnis boni operis, (in quo genere, prima conversio est praecipuum) si plenissimum sit entitatis; vel si totum sit ens, sicut est; hujusmodi (inquam) operis totius Deum esse causam, necesse est. Deus enim solus est causa totius entis, ubicunque reperitur; etiam ipsius peccati, in quantum ens est, Deum esse causam, omnes Theologi agnoscunt. Quamobrem e●si voluntas sit causa efficiens conversionis secundaria & subordinata, unde hortantur nos scripturae, nosmet convertere, corda nostra circumcidere, & sic deinc●ps; tanquam causa tamen coordinata vivificae gratiae Dei resistere, eamque in vanum accipere, (ut loquitur Arm.) nullo modo potest. Addo, etiamsi Deus socium admitteret in hoc opere, tamen voluntatem, quae est prorsus depravata & mortua in peccatis, non posse magis cum gratia excitante & pulsante cooperari, quam cadaver fricacionibus praeparatum & dispositum, potest se ipsum resuscitare, actú●que vitales ex se exerere. Sed ut hanc rationem finiam, supponatur, posse voluntatem una cum Dei gratia cooperari, vel non cooperari, pro innata libertate, quantum tamen, stante hac sententia, derogatum erit de Dei gloria, & homini arrogatum, plusquam par est? Meritò gloriari potest, suum velle tantum contulisse ad regenerationem, ut si noluisset, nunquam secutura fuisset. Sicut enim is, qui commonefactus ab alio, dat eleëmosynam, is illud opus bonum plus sibi refert acceptum, quam suadenti & excitanti: sic is, cujus voluntas tantum pulsata & commonefacta à gratia assistentae, se ad Deum convertit, is suam conversionem plus (vel aequaliter saltem) sibi tribuit, quam gratiae divinae, quae nunquam id effectum datura fuisset, nisi ipse ei consensisset, ejusque suasionem ratam fecisset; cum in ejus potestate esset, eam irritam reddidisse.  
4. Quarta ratio inde sumitur, qd decretum electionis (quo Deus secum statuerat, quosdam selectos ex massa communi servari) absolutum sit; suum ergo effectum necessariò & infallibiliter consequitur. Decretum electionis esse absolutum, ita ut Deo eligenti nihil obversetur in electis praevisum, sed omnes conditiones ad salutem requisitas, in eis ipse operari absolutè decreverit, adeo clarè patet ex multis scripturae locis, ut vix probatione egeat. Nam si Non nos Deum eligimus, sed ille nosmet, john 15. si ideo electi, u● essemus sancti, non ideo sancti ut eligeremur; si jacobum eligerit potius quam Esavum, cum utrique conditione omnin● essent pares & aequales, ad Rom. 9, si vocatio efficax & fides justificans sint fructus vel effectus praedestinationis, non conditiones praecedaneae, ad Rom. 8. denique si sola & unica ratio decreti sit merum Dei beneplacitum; (Quorum vult miseretur, & quos vult obdurat) tum necesse est, Deum absolute decrevisse quosdam servare, & in eum finem gratiam, sanctitatem & fidem iis impertire. Quod vero Deus ex his concessis, convertat omnes electos modo ab iis irresistibili, vel hinc liquet, quod si illi resistere possint gratiae iis convertendis aptae & idoneae, ad hunc finem communicatae ut converterentur: tum eludi possit a creatura absolutum hoc & peremptorium Dei decretum, qd existimare fas non est. Nec est, ut nunc obijciant pari ratione, & eos quos Deus reprobaverit, irresistibi●iter peccare. Negamus enim rationem utriusque eandem esse: nam etiamsi Fides sit effectus praedestinationis, tame● infidelita● non est effectus propriè dictus reprobationis; cum fides requirat causam efficientem per se, quae verè & propriè influit in suum effectum: ad infidelitatem autem non requiritur causa efficien●, sed deficiens (quippe quae sequitur ad merum defectum & absentiam causae illius a quâ fides efficeretur.) Sicut ad illumniandum aërem requiritur Sol vel alia causa efficiens, influens in illum effectum; sed ad obtenebrandum, absentia Solis sufficiat: pari ratione, etiamsi peccata reproborum sequuntur etiam infallibiliter, ex determinato Dei consilio qui eorum eventum decrevit, tamen conversio & fides sequuntur absolutum Dei decretum, modo multum dissimili: Peccata enim sequuntur infallibiliter quidem, necessitate tantùm consequentiae, id est, Deo non omnino causante vel efficiente, sed tantum permittente: fides verò & bona opera, eitam necessitate consequentis: ut pote quorum deus propriissimè author dici debet, secundum omnes Theologos. Nemo enim unquam dixerit homines credere, regenerari, ad Deum converti, bona opera praestare, deo tantùm permittente, sed etiam causante et operante. Si vero hoc nobis concessum fuerit (sicut necesse est ut concedatur) fidem & conversionem sequi absolutum Dei decretum necessitate consequentis, i. e. necessitate efficiente & cooperante, non video quomodo negari possit, cam modo quodam irresi●tibili in nobis fieri; cum enim aliquod agens ita agat in patiens, ut necessariò vincat, is propriè dicitur agere irresistibiliter: sic Deus, si ita convertat peccatorem ut is necessariò convertatur necessitate consequentis, tum eum convertit irresistibiliter, i. e. modo cui patiens cedere necesse est. Vnde miror, eos qui negant electionem ex fide praevisa pendentem, defendere tamen conversionem fieri modo resistibili, ut etiam frustrari possit.  
5. Quinta & ultima ratio haec sit. Si conversio fiat modo illo resistibili, sicut ab iis describitur qui Arm. sequuntur; tum electio divina non potest esse certa, secundum ipsorum principia; utpote quae pendeat a mutabili hominis arbitrio, quod (ut describitur ab Arminio) ausim dicere, a Deo ip●o praevideri non posse. Supponatur enim (quod illi substituunt fundamentum illius praevisionis) Deum perfectè praevidere omnes modos, quibus voluntas vel deordinari vel ad bonum inclinari possit. Supponatur etiam Deum praecognoscere omnia objecta vel circumstantias, quae possunt voluntati illo modo offeri vel exhiberi. Denique supponamus etiam, Deum exploratum habere, quomodo unumquodque objectum vel circumstantia apta sit movere voluntatem, eamque huc vel illuc suadendo impellere; tamen fi haec sit conditio voluntatis, ut positis quibuscunque objectis, etiam pofita quac●nque aptitudine in his objectis vel circumstantijs ad inclinandam voluntatem huc vel illuc; illa tamen pro intrinseca libertate possit agere vel non agere: Non video, quomodo Deus praevidere possit, quid voluntas certo & infallibiliter sit operatura, i. e. utrum se convertet ad Deum, necne: non quod Deus ex aliqua● impotentia non possit expiscari quid voluntas conatura sit, sed quia id non est simpliciter scibile; nam Non potest esse major certitud● in cognitione quam in objecto; unde sic argume●tor. Si certum sit voluntatem gratiae oblatae assensuram esse, tum ●alsu● est dictu, volunt●●m positis omnibus Dei actionibus, posse se convertere vel non convertere. Contra, si incertum sit, utrum voluntas huic gratiae r●sist●t, necne; tum ea, quam de illa habet Deus, praescientia certa esse nequit; nam scibile est mensura scienti●: ergo, scientiam ●sse veram, & tamen plus esse certitudinis in cognitione quam in re cognita, ●mplicat contradictionem; sicut implicatur contradictio, si quis dixerit, mensuratum esse majus vel minus mensura, tamen eidem aequale esse. Ad haec etiamsi verum sit, Deum cognoscere omnes modos, secundum quos voluntas bene vel male inclinari potest; tamen si voluntas sit omnimodo indeterminata, admittens nullum determinans, sive intrinsecum, sive extrinsecum, sive creatum, sive increatum, ut illi defendunt, implicat contradictionem, ut ab ipso Deo definiatur aliquis certus modus, quo illam deordinari vel rectè ordinari contigerit. Ex his omnibus colligitur, si gratia convertens moveat voluntatem modo ab illa resistibili, non posse Deum infallibiliter praesc●re qui credituri ●int, qui non; unde ex consequenti, omni● è medio tol●●retur electio. Ergo, reliquum est,  
Gratiam convertentem m●do irresistibili tum a Deo communicari, tum a nobi● accipi.  
Supersunt plures aliae rationes, sed & objectiones, quas recitare & refellere institui: sed satius mihi ●rit filum orationis imtempestiuè abrumpere, quam injurium esse tum in auditores, tum in doctissimos opponentes.  
FINIS●   

Reader, these following are the most material s●ips escaped the Press, which thou mayest do well to correct with thy pen before thou readest the book.  

In answer to Master Goodwin● Letter.  
Page 2. for discourage, read encourage. p. 7. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 25. 〈◊〉 declared r. decr●●d.   

In the Book.  
Page 14. line. 27. for i● read of. p. 17. l. 14. for, And why 〈◊〉. At lest why. p. 20. l. 21. for Hipol●mis● r. Hipolenuse. l. 21. r. Squares. p. 24. l. 7. for None r. Min●. p. 40. l. 20. for closely 〈◊〉. loo●●ly. p 47. l. last but on●, for Assertion r. A●●rtour. p. 50. l. 35 for President r. Present. p. 57 l 25. for lost r. last. p. 71. l. 2. for wills r. wits. l. ●0. for to r. so th●. p. ●3. for fuller, r. full. p. 96. l. 11. for many r. Man. 〈◊〉. 117. for addition r. addiction. p. 135. l. the last for Object r. Subject. p. 143. l 16. for as knowledge r. as to knowledge.