Klētoi tetērēmēnoi, or, The Saints perseverance asserted in its positive grounds and vindicated from all material exceptions against it occasioned by a late immodest account of two conferences upon that point, between Tho. Danson and Mr. Jer. Ives, published by the said Mr. Ives, which account is also herein rectified, and its falshood detected to the just shame of the publisher / by Tho. Danson.

To Mr. Ives's Appendix.

UPon review of what I have already done, I find a few words will suffice. They that would be satisfied as to the Judgment of the Fathers, about the Saints perseverance, may find Passages enough for that end, collected to their hands, in Dr. Kendal's Sancti Sanciti in English, and in Latin in Hier. Zanch. de Pers. Sanct. in Miscell. V. 3. Oper. And as for Au∣gustin, 'tis well known that he wrote a whole Book de Persever. Sanct. and distinguishes

often between common and special Grace, as Mr. Fowler told Mr. Ives. And as for that worthy person Mr. Richard Baxter, he does not determine against the Point, as we hold it, but says, From Matth. 13.6, 21. it may well be inferred, that those shall not fall away in time of temptation, in whom the Word of God hath taken deep rooting. In the 11th of his 32 Directions, pag. 107.

As for the Charge of Antinomianism, and the Passages he quotes out of Mr. Cottons Cov∣of Grace, Mr. Bridges, Dr. Owen, however in some Particulars they may sound, I think the Reverend Mr. Caryl (whom Mr. Ives reflects upon for writing a Commendatory Epistle to Mr. Cotton's Tract abovementioned) speaks the sense of them all, in his excellent Com∣ment upon Job. 10.15. They put dangerous Suppositions opposite to these, who say, Let a godly man be never so wicked let him sin as much as he will, yet it shall be well with him: [which is the language of such as Dr. Crisp, whom Mr. Ives quotes, and we disown.] Though there be a truth in it, that how much soever a godly man sinneth, he shall be pardoned; yet the Scripture useth no such language: and the Form of Wholesom Words teacheth every man rather to speak thus, If I be wicked, then woe unto me. Thus far Mr. Caryl, to whom I sub∣scribe.

And as smoothly as Mr. Ives thinks to carry it, he forgets, or understands not, that Dr. Crisp speaks of the Elect, but the other Divines of Believers, which are not convertible terms; for though all Believers are Elect, yet the Elect are not ipso facto Believers as soon as they exist in the World. Now we who hold, that the Elect are Children of Wrath as well as others, during their state of unbelief, do yet hold also, that to those Elect, being once Believers, there is no condemnation, Rom. 8.1.

As for the denial of Conditions in the New Covenant by the other Divines abovementi∣oned, I will not contest about Terms, if they will but grant, That the New Covenant is not absolute, in opposition to any Means or Order which God hath appointed for obtaining the Benefits of it; though I see no harm in the term Condition, as applied to the New Cove∣nant. As for Mr. Jer. Burroughs asserting of remission of all sins, past, present, and to come; I suppose he means with Ames, that sins past are remitted formally; future sins but vertu∣ally. Med. Theol. lib. 1. cap. 27. n. 24. Because he that hath been forgiven one sin, shall not be condemned for another. See Col. 2.13. I find not any thing else worth the taking no∣tice of, but his Answers to two of our Ar∣guments against their Doctrine of Saints

Apostacy. 1. That it is destructive of Christian Comfort. To which he answers out of Mr. Baxter, That a comfortable life may be led without Assurance. To which I reply, That the experience of Adams frailty gives us, who have remains of sin in us, more cause to fear our standing, if left (as he) to our selves. And 'tis the strongest consolation we are capable of, or can desire in this life, that we shall be preserved from every evil work to Gods heavenly Kingdom, 2 Tim. 4.17. The second Argu∣ment which Mr. Ives pretends to answer, is, That the Saints Apostacy makes Gods love changeable. To which he answers, That Gods love is upon condition. I reply, Gods love is taken in Scripture two ways, which the Schools call Amor ordinativus & collativus, that is, for Gods purpose of doing men good, which is one and the same whilst Unbelie∣vers, or Believers; and of this Love there nei∣ther is nor can be any Condition (as under the sixth Argument of Election I have proved.) And for the performance of this purpose, or actual collation of the benefits purposed; and thus Faith is a qualification of the Subject, necessary by the tenor of the Gospel, to the participation of the benefits tender'd therein. And 'tis Gods Love in the former sense, which we say were changeable; should he damn any

true Believer. As for his story out of Dr. Pierce, That woman that believed not that Adul∣tery had done her any hurt, nor was damnable in her, nor lessen'd the favour of God, understood not our Doctrine, for the stain of Sin surely is an hurt; and the state of Grace takes not away the demerit of Damnation, though it prevents that event; and though the sins of Believers lessen not the favour or love of God, in the first acception above-mentioned, i. e. makes not his purpose of no effect: Yet it does in the second acception, for it procures God's with-draw∣ing, &c. To conclude, I heartily wish and pray, That God would remove from Mr. Ives the way of Lying, and cloath him with Hu∣mility, and give him Repentance, to the ac∣knowledging of the Truth, that he may not be more ashamed to have his Ignorance known, then desirous to have it cur'd.