Now, the controversy that was between Austin and the Pelagians and semi- Pelagians about perseverance, Hilary thus expresseth in his e])istle to him : " Deinde moleste ferunt," speaking of the semi-Pelagians, " ita dividi gratiam, qufe vel tunc primo homini data est, vel nunc omnibus datui-, ut ille acceperit perseverantiam, non qua fieret ut perseveraret, sed sine qua per liberum arbitrium perseverare non posset ; nunc vero Sanctis in regnum per gratiam prsedestinatis, non tale adjutorium perseverantise detur, sed tale, ut eis perseverantia ipsa donetur, non solum ut sine illo dono perseverantes esse non possint, verum etiam ut per hoc donum non nisi perseverantes sint. Cjeterum quicquid libet donatum sit predestinatis, id posse et amittere et retinere propria voluntate contendunt." The very state of the controversy as now under contest is most clearly expressed in this report of the difierenee between the semi-Pelagians and the church of God in those days. And because the whole sum of Mr Goodwin's book is briefly comprised in the 9th and 10th chapters of Prosper, De Ingrat., I shall transcribe the 10th chapter, to present to the reader the substance and pith of that treatise, as also the state of the controversy in those days: —
" Quam Sana fides sit vestra patescat,
Gratia qua Christi populus sumus, hoc cohibetur
Limite vobiscum, et formam hauc adscribitis illi :
Ut cunctos vocet ilia quidem, invitetque ; nee uUum
Praeteriens, studeat communem afferre salutem
Omnibus, et totum peccato absolvere mundum ;
Sed proprio quenique arbitrio parere vocantl,
Judicioque suo ; mota se extendere meute
Ad lucem oblatam, qua} se non subtraliat ulli,
Sed cupidos recti juvet, illustretque yolentes.
Hinc adj uteris Domini bonitate magistra
Crescere virtutum studia, ut quod quisque petendum
Mandatis didicit, jugi sectetur amore.
Esse autem edoctis istam coinmuniter asquam
Libertatem animis, ut cuvsuni explore beatum
Persistendo queant, finem effectumque petitum
Dante Deo, ingeniis qui nunquam desit iionestis.
Sed quia non idem est cunctis vigor, et variarum
Illecebris rerum trahitur dispersa voluntas,
Sponte aliquos vitiis succumbere, qui potuissent
A lapsu revocare pedem, stabilesque mauei-e."
As I said, we have the sum of Mr Goodwin's book in this declaration of the judgment of the semi-Pelagians, so also, in particular, the state of the controversy about the perseverance of the saints, as then it was debated ; and I doubt not but the learned reader will easily perceive it to be no other than that which is now agitated between me and Mr Goodwin. The controversy, indeed, in the matter between Austin and the Pelagians was reduced to three heads : — As to the foundation of it, which Austin con- cluded to be the decree of predestination: which thoy denied. The impul- sive cause of it he proved to be the free grace of God; and tlie measure or quality of that grace to be such as that whoever received it did persevci-e,
62 A PREFACE TO THE READER.
it being perseverance which was given : both which they denied. About tlie kind of faith which temporary professors might have, and fall from it, which were never elected, there was between them no contest at all. Of his judgment, then, there were these two main heads, which he laboured to confirm : —
1. That perseverance is a gift of God, and that no man either did or could persevere in faith and obedience upon the strength of any grace received (much less of his own ability, stirred up and promoted by such considerations as Mr Goodwin makes the ground and bottom of the perseverance of all that so do), hut that the whole icas from his grace. Subservient to this, he main- tained that no one temptation whatsoever could be overcome but by some act of grace ; and that therefore perseverance must needs bo a work there- of, it being an abiding in foith and obedience notwithstanding and against temptation. To this is that of his on John, Homil. 53 : " Quosdam nimia voluntatis sure fiducia extulit in superbiam, ot quosdam nimia voluntatis sua) diffidcntia dejecit in negligentiam : illi dicunt quid rogamus Deum ne vincamur tentatione quod in nostra est potestate ? Isti dicunt, at quid conamur bene vivere, quod in Dei est potestate ? O Domine, O Pater, qui cs in coelis, ne nos inferas in quamlibet istarum tentationum, sed libera nos a malo. Audiamus Dominum dicentem, ' Rogavi pro te, Petre, ne fides deficiat tua:' ne sic existimemus fidem nostram esse in libero arbitrio ut divino non egeat adjutorio," etc. That, with both of these sorts of men, the way and work of the grace of God is at this day perverted and ob- scured, is so known to all that it needs no exemplification : some requiring no more to the conquest of temptations but men's own rational considera- tion of their eternal state and condition, with the tendency of that whereto they are tempted ; others turning the grace of God into wantonness, and supinely casting away all heedful regard of walking with God, being en- slaved to their lusts and corruptions, under a pretence of God's working all in all ; — the latter denying themselves to be men, the former to be men corrupted. And in ]tlain terms the Milevitan council tells us: " Si quis finx- erit ideo gratiam esse necessariam ad vitanda peccata, quia facit hominem cognoscere peccata, ct discernere inter peccata et non peccata, qua discre- tione per gratiam habita, per liberum arbitrium potest vitare ; is procul," etc. The light of grace to discern the state of things, the nature of sin, and to consider these aright, the Pelagians allowed, — which is all the bot- tom of that perseverance of saints which we have ofiered by Mr Goodwin; but upon that supply of these means, to abide and persevere in faith, to flee and avoid sin, is a thing of our own performance.