A09473:13
Two treatises· I. Of the nature and practise of repentance. II. Of the combat…Tvvo treatises· I. Of the nature and practise of repentance. II. Of the combat…
Two treatises· I. Of the nature and practise of repentance. II. Of the combat of the flesh and spirit.Tvvo treatises· I. Of the nature and practise of repentance. II. Of the combat of the flesh and spirit.
Cambridge: printed by John Legate printer to the University of Cambridge. 1593., 1593Cambridge: printed by Iohn Legate printer to the Vniversitie of Cambridge. 1593., 1593
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
And whereas there have bin published here to fore in English two sermons of Repentance, one by M. Bradford Martyr, the other by M. Arthur Dent: sermons indeed which have done much good: my meaning is not to add thereunto, or to teach any other doctrine, but only to renew & revive the memory of that which they have taught.
And whereas there have bin published here to fore in English two sermons of Repentance, one by M. Bradford Martyr, the other by M. Arthur Dent: sermons indeed which haue done much good: my meaning is not to adde thereunto, or to teach any other doctrine, but only to renew & revive the memory of that which they have taught.
Neither let it trouble thee that the principal divines of this age, whom in this treatise I follow, may seem to be at difference in treating of repentance. For some make it a fruit of faith containing two parts, mortification, & vivification: some make faith a part of it, by dividing it into contrition, faith, new obedience. The difference is not in the substance of doctrine, but in the logical manner of handling it. And the difference of handling ariseth of the divers acception of repentance. It is taken two ways generally & particularly. Generally for the whole conversion of a sinner, ⟨image 4⟩and so it may contain contrition, faith, and new obedience under it. It is taken particularly for the renovation of the life and behaviour: and so it is a fruit of faith. And this only sense do I follow in this treatise.
Neither let it trouble thee that the principall divines of this age, whom in this treatise I follow, may seeme to be at difference in treating of repentance. For some make it a fruite of faith containing two parts, mortification, & vivification: some make faith a part of it, by deviding it into contrition, faith, new obedience. The difference is not in the substance of doctrine, but in the logicall maner of handling it. And the difference of handling ariseth of the divers acception of repentance. It is taken two wayes generally & particularly. Generally for the whole conversion of a sinner,