The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errors of Papists, Arminians,…The true doctrine of justification asserted and vindicated, from the errours of Papists, Arminians,…

First, The case of Infants is of a peculiar consideration, and therefore not to be attended unto in most Questions: yea the Scripture pressing the things requisite to salvation, as repentance, obedience, &c. cannot be understood of Infants. And Suarez argueth against Justification by faith in the general, upon this ground, Because Infants are justified without it, so that the Argument (if it proveth any thing) would prove a Justification without faith, rather then before faith. Suppose a man should argue about glorification, as the adversary doth about Justification. Infants are glorified without fruits meet for repentance, Therefore men grown up also may be, How absurd would that be? Therefore if the conclusion of the Argument were granted, viz. Some that do not believe are justified, restraining it to Infants, the main Question would have no detriment. The opponent layeth down this conclusion (Reconc. of man with God, p. 5.) That mans actual reconciliation to God, requireth previous conditions to be wrought in him by Gods Spirit, before he can be reconciled actually to God; among which he reckoneth believing as the chief. Now I may retort on him thus, Infants are actually reconciled to God, but Infants do not believe, Therefore some are actually reconciled to God that do not believe.

First, The case of Infants is of a peculiar consideration, and therefore not to be attended unto in most Questions: yea the Scripture pressing the things requisite to salvation, as repentance, obedience, &c. cannot be understood of Infants. And Suarez argueth against Justification by faith in the general, upon this ground, Because Infants are justified without it, so that the Argument (if it proveth any thing) would prove a Justification without faith, rather then before faith. Suppose a man should argue about glorification, as the adversary doth about Justification. Infants are glorified without fruits meet for repentance, Therefore men grown up also may be, How absurd would that be? Therefore if the conclusion of the Argument were granted, viz. Some that do not believe are justified, restraining it to Infants, the main Question would have no detriment. The opponent laieth down this conclusion (Reconc. of man with God, p. 5.) That mans actual reconciliation to God, requireth previous conditions to be wrought in him by Gods Spirit, before he can be reconciled actually to God; among which he reckoneth believing as the chief. Now I may retort on him thus, Infants are actually reconciled to God, but Infants do not believe, Therefore some are actually reconciled to God that do not believe.