A BRIEF ANSWER TO CERTAIN Objections against the Treatise of Faith, made by EZ. CULVERWELL. Clearing him from the errors of Arminius, unjustly laid to his charge.  
LONDON, Printed by I. D. for William Sheffard, and are to be sold at his Shop at the entrance in out of Lombard street into Popes-head Alley. 1626.   

Christian Reader,  
Although my great care in setting forth A Treatise of Faith, was to deliver that truth which I gathered out of the holy Scriptures, and, keeping in mine eye, the mark I aimed at, To strengthen the weak in faith, I purposely avoided all controversies which might entangle weak judgements: Yet now of late I perceive, that, as my Labours have had good approbation of the Learned, and have been profitable unto weak Christians, so some few have by speech and writing manifested their differing judgements from me, and an hard censure of me; which I had purposed to pass by in silence: but meeting of late with a brief confutation in print, of some chief points in my Book, which might stumble many weak ones, I hold myself bound in Conscience to maintain the truth by me delivered, and to clear myself from many unjust imputations. Wherein passing by the Author, and all his intentions, I will touch the principal points gainsayed. This formerly I had done, and sent to the Author before he published his Confutation. Therefore he had no just cause to make my defect of answer a cause of putting his Confutation to the press, as he allegeth in his Epistle to the Reader.  
HIS 
a pag. 4.  first exception is against these words, Many of God's children do not enjoy that sweet life and blessed estate in this world, which God their Father hath provided for them. Any indifferent Reader may see his gross mistaking herein. For what I speak of God's bounty in providing means, whereby his children might live more comfortably, if the fault were not in themselues, he understands of God's Decree, which is unchangeable, and cannot be frustrated. So that all his Discourse hereof, as many others, might well have been spared.  
The 
b pag. 7. 8. etc.  second, and indeed the only point in question is, Whether Salvation in Christ, be in the Gospel's proclaimed and offered in general to all that hear it, or only to the Elect. The former I hold & prove by most evident Scriptures, as, I doubt not, the Learned will approve.  
Herein I have, beside many other Orthodox defenders of the truth, both ancient and modern, the consent of that famous Synod at Dort, wherein were assembled a great number of leared Divines, out of the Reformed Churches. Their own words I will set down, that all may see how I agree with them.  

Chap. 2. Art. 5.  It is the promise of the Gospel, that whosoever believeth in Christ crucified, should not perish, but have life everlasting: which promise, together with the injunction of Repentance and faith, ought promiscuously and without distinction to be declared and published to all men, and people, to whom God in his good pleasure sends the Gospel.  
But for as much as many being called by the Gospel, 
Art. 6.  do not repent nor believe in Christ, but perish in their Infidelity, this comes not to pass for want of, or by any insufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ offered upon the Cross, but by their own default.  
This shall suffice for my defence in this point. As for further Confutation of his arguments to the contrary, it is not my purpose to charge the Press with more Controversies among ourselves. Only this I will say (which may be a sufficient answer to all his Allegations) that all the Scriptures which restrain the merits of Christ to some only, are to be understood of those that shall enjoy them: but those Scriptures which enlarge Christ's Merits to all, are to be meant of the Offer only, or proclaiming them to all, though many of them never partake of Christ. So then the General offer doth not make all partakers of Christ: nor the Special Partaking of Christ, hinder the general offer.  
By Offer I mean only the outward Calling by the Gospel, 
Math. 22.14.  which none can deny to belong to many that are not chosen. This I affirm to be the only ordinary seed to beget saving Faith. My Adversary taketh this Offer for a Promise to have Christ (which I confess that none shall have but the Elect) and so he spends much labour in vain.  
Whereas 
c pag. 16. etc.  he challengeth all the Scriptures by me alleged, to prove the general Offer, to be misapplied, for that he would have them to be understood of the Elect only, I must refer this also to the judgement of the Learned: with submission to their censure, I profess, I cannot find any one clear place where the WORLD must of necessity be taken for the ELECT only. For the wicked in the world it is oft used; and more generally, for all Mankind, as Mr Calvin, with sundry other great Divines understand it, even 
d Io. 3.16.  in the place where he misalledgeth him to the contrary. In this Scripture (God so loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life) I desire may be considered, if the World be not divided into believers, who shall be saved, and unbelievers who shall not be saved: which cannot be understood of the Elect only. As for 
e Mar. 16.15.  this most manifest scripture preach the Gospel to every creature) to understand the Elect, is unreasonable. Therefore I profess that his Accusation is unjust.  
He cometh 
f pag. 20. etc.  in the next place to my main argument, wherein he foully mistaketh my meaning, not well considering my words. For what I speak of the knowledge of a pardon proclaimed, he understands of the knowledge of a pardon embraced, which belongs only to a believer: but the proclamation of a pardon, must be known to an unbeliever before he can believe; which is that that I maintain.  
After this 
g pag. 26.  he objecteth, that there be many other strange passage; wherein he doth much mis●ake my plain meaning. One of the supposed strange passages is, that I say, By diverse considerations in a man void of faith, faith may be gotten, as if I meant that this might be effected without the help of the Spirit: whereas to show myself an enemy to universal grace, and so to clear me from Arminius his errors, I plainly say, that None can attain unto faith without the special grace of God's Spirit (pag. 42.82.) to which purpose I cite sundry Scriptures proving the same.  

h pag. 27.  Another of the objected strange passages is, that I make sorrow for sin, and desire of remedy, causes of faith. But those words are none of mine, they are his collection from these words of mine, (pag. 44.) Under the causes I comprehend all that work of God, whereby he worketh faith in any. Under that work of God, among other things, I mention sound sorrow for man's misery, and fervent desire after Christ the remedy. Let any indifferent Reader now judge if I make not Gods work the cause of faith: and these, with other particulars, such gifts as God worketh in us before faith.  
In the next place 
i pag. 29.  charging me with Arminianism most unjustly; he taketh in hand to confute Universal Redemption by many Arguments. But seeing I have purposely avoided that question, and do from my heart deny, that every man is actually reconciled by Christ, and affirm, that none have any benefit by Christ, but Believers and their seed: I leave the scanning of his arguments to his adversary whosoever he be: and I do here testify under my hand, to all posterity, that I renounce all Arminius his errors: and give my full consent to the Synod of Dort.  
As for these phrases, (God hath made a deed of gift, and grant of Christ to mankind, yea to all sinners excepting none,) and other like to them, which he presseth against me, they are to be taken of God's dispensation of his mind in and by the Gospel: and so much is expressed by me (pag 36.) in these words; Making so free a grant thereof, in the Gospel, to all sinners excepting none.  
Any indifferent Reader may see, that my main scope is, to draw every one that heareth the Gospel, to believe, by this, that Christ and his benefits be proclaimed to him, and shall never be bestowed on him, unless he believe; which is far from Arminius his errors.  
Lastly, where he conceiveth some contradictions in my Book, it is clear they be his conceits, as will evidently appear by the particulars.  
Concerning the first pretended contradiction, his words are these, 
k pag. 39  You say, that all Gods promises made to the Elect, are absolute, (pag. 141.) And again, Most of the free promises of the Gospel be propounded with some condition. What contradiction is in these words? Are these terms (absolute & upon some condition contradictory)? Are not the conditions required in the Gospel, absolutely promised to the Elect? The distinction which I make of promises absolute and conditional, showeth, that there is no contradiction in those words. These well agree, that The Elect cannot fail of that which God promiseth to them, and all others to whom God offers salvation, shall not obtain it, because they believe not.  
Another pretended contradiction he thus expresseth, I take it that the manifestation of GOD'S counsel to the heirs of promise (pag. 209.) crosseth the general offer. Who would so take it but he? it being Gods eternal counsel to save none but the Elect, which he manifesteth to Abraham and his seed according to the Faith; this nothing hindereth the general offer, and proclamation of pardon to the Reprobate, to make them inexcusable for refusing mercy offered.  
A third pretended contradiction is, that I say, God out of his faithfulness freely bestows that which he offereth and sealeth (pag. 357.) and that Many do not receive that which is promised and sealed (pag. 358.) What contradiction is it to say, that Many for want of faith receive not that which is promised? God faithfully performeth what he offereth in the Word, and sealeth by the Sacraments, but only to such as by faith receive both.  
FINIS