2. The apostle doth not say what he was not habitually luilling to, but what he was habitually uniuilling to, — that is, what the bent of his will lay habitually against, having actual inclinations and elicit acts always to the contrary, though sometimes overcome. Neither in his discoursing of it doth he mention at all the surprisal into sin upon incogitancy and inadvertency, but the constant frame and temper of a regenerate man upon the powerful acting and striving
526
DOCTRINE OF THE SAINTS ' PERSEVERANCK [CHAP.
of the principle of lust and sin dwelling in him and remaining with him ; which, saith the apostle, doth often carry him out to do those things which are contrary to the principle of the inward man, which habitually condemns and actually not-wills, or rather nills, the things that are so done, even in their doing. And this doth mani- fest sufficiently, that when he did the evil he speaks of, he did it not with the full and entire consent of his will, as men do in whom there is no such principle opposite to sin and sinning as is in him that is regenerate, there being very much taken off by the habitual prin- ciple of grace that is in him, and its constant inclination to the contrary.
But he farther argues, " If we shall affirm that the contrary bent or motion of his will at other times is a sufficient proof that when he did the evil we speak of, he did it not with his whole will or ful- ness of consent, and so make this doing of evil or committing of sin without fulness of consent, in such a sense, a distinguishing character betwixt men regenerate and unregenerate, we shall bring Herod and Pilate, and probably Judas himself, into the list of men regenerate, with a thousand more whom the Scripture knows not under any such name or relation, — namely, all those whose judgments and con- sciences stand against the evil of the ways and practices wherein they walk/'
And this he proves at large to the end of the section, in the in- stance of Herod and Pilate proceeding, against their own judgments and consciences, in the killing of John and of our Saviour.
Ans. L We do not only assert a contrary bent and inclination in the wills of believers at other times, but also that, in and under the prevalency of indwelling sin, there is in them an "I'' that doth it not, and a not-willing it, from a principle, though, by reason of the present prevalency of the other, its actings and stirrings are not so sensibly perceived ; so that though they prevail not to the total pre- vention of the will from exerting the act of sin, yet they prevail to the impairing, weakening, and making remiss its consent there- unto.
2. The residue of this paragraph is intolerably sophistical, con- founding the renitency of the inward man, the principle of grace that is in the wills of believers, with the convictions of the judg- ments and consciences of unregenerate persons, and their striving against sin on that account. The judgments and consciences of wicked men tell them what they ought to do and what they ought not to do, without respect to the principle in their wills that is pre- dominant; but the apostle mentions the actings of the will itself from his own regenerate principle. We wholly deny that any unre- generate man hath any vital principle in his will not-consenting to sin, whatever the dictates of his judgment and conscience may be,
XV.] THE SINS OF BELIEVERS CONSIDERED, 527
or how effectual soever to prevail unto an abstinence from sin. To discover the differences that are betAveen the contest that is between the wills in unregenerate men, wholly set upon sin on the one hand, and their judgments and consciences, enlightened to an apprehension and approving of better things on the othex", and the contest that is between the flesh and Spirit lusting to contrary things in the same will, as it is in regenerate men, is a common-place that I shall not go forth unto. We grant, then, that in unregenerate men there may be, there is, and was in some degree perhaps in Herod and in Pilate, a conviction of conscience and judgment that the things they do are evil ; but we say withal, that all this being foreign to their wills, it hin- ders not but that they sin with the full, uncontrolled consent of their wills, which are at perfect liberty, or rather in perfect bondage, unto sin. That the " Spirit should lust against the flesh, and the flesh against the Spirit," both in the same will (as it appears they do. Gal. V. 19-23, for the fruits that they both bring forth are acts of the will), in any unregenerate man, we deny. And this is that, and not the former, which abates and takes off from the will's consent to sin.
He concludes the whole: "And to the passage of the apostle, mentioned Rom. vii., I answer farther, that when he saith, ' The evil which I would not, that do I,' he doth not speak of what he always and in all cases did, much less of wha.t was possible for him to do, but of what he did ordinarily and frequently, or of what was very incident unto him, through the infirmity of the flesh, namely, through inconsiderateness and anticipation by temptations to do such things which, when he was in a watchful and considerate pos- ture and from under the malignant influence of a temptation, he was altogether averse unto. Now, what a man doth ordinarily is one thing, and Avhat he doth sometimes and in some particular cases, especially what it is possible for him to do, is another. That true believers, whilst such, ordinarily sin not upon worse terms than those mentioned by the apostle concerning his sinning, I easily grant ; but it no ways followeth from hence, that therefore they never sin upon other terms, much less that it is impossible that they should sin upon others. And thus we see, all things thoroughly and im- partially argued, and debated to and fro, that even true believers themselves, as well as others, may do those works of the flesh which exclude from the kingdom of God, and that in respect thereof they are subject to this exclusion as well as other men."