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

But Affirmatively the proposition holds not universally. Nor Negatively, speaking de Actione qua est quid donandum. To your Minor, I could better answer if I could have found it. I expected it should have been this, But our Faith and Repentance are not Gods acts. But I know not whether I may be so bold as say, you will own that. Before you say, This rises not to make them formally▪ Gods acts, and not ours: where 1. you cautiously speak the two Propositions copulatively; and 2. you put in the word formally, which may do much to help you out. For the former, it is enough according to your own Rule to prove them Gods Conditions and ours, if they be Gods Actions and ours: for you say, Whose actions they are, his Conditions they are; that is evident. It is not therefore necessary that I prove them Gods and not ours. 2. It is hard to know whether your formally respect a natural or moral form. If the former action is the form it self, it is harder to find out its matter. Accidents have not properly matter and form; but the subject is called its matter; but Action hath scarce so proper a subject as other Accidents have, seeing it is rather Agentis, then in agent inhaesivè: Of transients, its beyond doubt; and I think so of Immanents, unless we may with Scotus, take them for Qualities; If you speak of Moral formality, were it sinful Action, I should deny God to be the Author; but of Faith and Repentance I dare not do so; I think God is the Author of them formally as well as materially. But in your following words you say, But they are our acts, &c. God believes not, &c. Reply; 1. To believe is our act; but to give us Faith, or to move us effectually to Believe, as a superior Cause, this is not our work, but Gods. 2. Let it be so; to believe is our work, and our condition; It follows not, that it is not Gods. 3. There are sufficient reasons why God is not said to Believe, though he cause us to believe. If you go on the Predeterminants grounds, I suppose you know their reasons, who take notice of the Armenians making this objection. If you enquire of the Jesuits and Arminians, that go the way of determined concourse, or of partial Causality, they think they have yet more to say, of which I suppose you not ignorant.

But Affirmatively the proposition holds not universally. Nor Negatively, speaking de Actione qua est quid donandum. To your Minor, I could better answer if I could have found it. I expected it should have been this, But our Faith and Repentance are not Gods acts. But I know not whether I may be so bold as say, you will own that. Before you say, This rises not to make them formally Gods acts, and not ours: where 1. you cautelously speak the two Propositions copulatively; and 2. you put in the word formally, which may do much to help you out. For the former, it is enough according to your own Rule to prove them Gods Conditions and ours, if they be Gods Actions and ours: for you say, Whose actions they are, his Conditions they are; that is evident. It is not therefore necessary that I prove them Gods and not ours. 2. It is hard to know whether your formally respect a natural or moral form. If the former action is the form it self, it is harder to finde out its matter. Accidents have not properly matter and form; but the subject is called its matter; but Action hath scarce so proper a subject as other Accidents have, seeing it is rather Agentis, then in agente inhaesivè: Of transients, its beyond doubt; and I think so of Immanents, unles we may with Scotus, take them for Qualities; If you speak of Moral formality, were it sinful Action, I should deny God to be the Author; but of Faith and Repentance I dare not do so; I think God is the Author of them formally as well as materially. But in your following words you say, But they are our acts, &c. God believes not, &c. Reply; 1. To believe is our act; but to give us Faith, or to move us effectually to Believe, as a superior Cause, this is not our work, but Gods. 2. Let it be so; to believe is our work, and our condition; It follows not, that it is not Gods. 3. There are sufficient reasons why God is not said to Believe, though he cause us to believe. If you go on the Predeterminants grounds, I suppose you know their reasons, who take notice of the Armenians making this objection. If you enquire of the Jesuits and Arminians, that go the way of determined concourse, or of partial Causality, they think they have yet more to say, of which I suppose you not ignorant.