Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…

R. B. You have been far from satisfying me in asserting the instrumentality of faith in Justification. You here come more short of satisfying me, against the sufficiency of the Gospel-grant as Gods instrument. You say, This indeed is Gods, not mans. I say, There is none but Gods: for non datur instrumentum, ⟨p. 29⟩quod non est causae principalis instrumentum. You say, It is of it self unable to raise man up to Justification. I answer, 1. It is not of it self able to do all other works antecedent to Justification, as to humble, to give faith, to Regenerate, &c. But that's nothing to our business. 2. But as to the act of Justification, or conveying right to Christ, pardon, and righteousness, I say, It is able of it self as the signum voluntatis divinae to do it. And you will never be able to make good your accusation of its disability. 3. If you should mean that [of it self] i. e. without the concomitancy of faith as a condition, it is not able: I answer, that's not fitly called disability: Or if you will so call it; the reason of that disability, is not because there is a necessity of faiths instrumental co•fficiency; but of its presence as the performed condition: It being the will of the donor that his grant should not efficere actualiter, till the condition were performed.

R. B. YOu have been farre from satisfying me in asserting the instrumentality of faith in Justification. You here come more short of satisfying me, against the sufficiency of the Gospel-grant as Gods instrument. You say, This indeed is Gods, not mans. I say, There is none but Gods: for non datur instrumentum,