Of Bellarmine therefore we demaund why Saint Paul should instance in Abraham his purpose being as he and all his fellowes agree onely to shew that the first iustification is not attained by workes but by faith For inferring this conclusion the iustification of Rahab had beene more sit for in Saint Pauls dialect shee receiued the messengers by faith being as Bellarmine graunts destitute of all grace before But thus he answeres As Paul when he spake of the first iustification brought the example of Abraham which belonged to the second to prooue a maiori that no vniust man is iustified by workes without faith seeing iust Abraham was not made more iust by works without faith so Saint Iames when he spake of the second iustification where by a iust man becomes more iust brought in the example of Rahab which was per tinent to the first iustification where by an impious or vnregenerate man becomes iust to shew a maiori that a iust man is made more iust by workes and not of faith onely seeing Rahab of an harlot was made iust by workes not by faith onely For it is very probable shee was not onely an harlot but an infidell before such time as shee receiued the messengers but from that time to haue beleeued in God as being prepared to iustification by that worke of mercy yet so as that good worke done by faith was not simply meritorious of iustification but imperfectly and by way of congruity 5. Surely this Authors ill will vnto vs was greater then either the loue or reuerence he bare vnto Saint Paul vpon whose words least they should seeme to fauour our cause too much he labours to foster a meaning as ridieulous as thwart and contradictory to his purpose as the Diuell himselfe could haue deuised howbeit to acquit himselfe from suspition of partialitie or particular spleene against Saint Paul he spares not to father a sence and meaning altogether as foolish vpon Saint Iames as if the like palpable abuse offered to him had beene a satisfaction sufficient for the wrong done to his fellow Apostle The reader in the meane time cannot but hence take notice vnto what miserable plunges our aduersaries in this point are put when the sonnes are thus enforced violently to sumble against their mother fallen by dashing against the stone of offence to men Iewishly minded but the onely sure foundation of life to such as seek saluation aright as also how one absurditie suffered to passe by publicke authority imboldens inferiors to forge licences for a thousand The Trent Councell ignorant of any better hath giuen faire hints vnto her children for reconciling the former seeming contradiction betwixt S. Paul and Saint Iames as they expresly doe That S. Paul when hee affirmes we are iustified freely by faith without workes must be vnderstood of the first iustification whereby wee receiue grace without any worth or merit precedent S. Iames when he affirmes we are iustified by workes and not by faith alone implies the increment of grace or righteousnesse in the godly But what had Saint Iames to doe with this second iustification when as the parties whom he proposed to refute had altogether erred from the first Did hee intend they should accumulate iustifications as we doe degrees in schooles and be twise iustifyed at once Suppose hee did yet must the second iustifycation go in order before the first Or admitting hee spake ambiguously or indeterminately of both and authorized the Church when any controuersie should arise to dispose of his voice for either as shee pleased yet what instance could worse be fit the second iustifycation whereto the Romish Church applies his meaning then Rahab who til that time as Bellarmine grants was not onely an infidell but an harlot and therefore an impious person destitute of grace and if she were iustifyed or obtained the grace of iustifycation by this work done in faith without grace as the same writer glosses vppon this text how shal we reconcile him to the Romish church which hath peremptorily determined that the grace of iustifycation is not obtained by workes and to this purpose cites that of Paul If it bee grace then is it not of workes otherwise grace should be no grace Vnto this difficulty which thus diuides the tongs of Babell our answere is casie and consonant to the perpetuall voice of Gods spirit Rahab was iustified according to Saint Iames his minde this is presumed as iust or iustifiable as well by workes as by faith because her workes were a necessarie part of that inhere â—t righteousnesse which must be in euerie one that liues by faith for though wee liue by faith onely yet onely the Iust so liue This no way contradicts Saint Paul because she did not seeke saluation by workes but did therefore worke that shee might lay sure hold on Gods promises onely by faith which is alwaies as vnable or vnapt to iustifie to sue for grace or apprehend Gods mercies aright as it is to work when occasion is offered More repugnant is this distinction of iustification first and second to Saint Pauls minde or purpose or suppose though he did not entend or acknowledge it his discourse notwithstanding might admit of it there is lesse reason why his words should be retracted as Bellarmine doth to the first iustification then why those words of S. Iames of works a man is iustified and not of faith onely should be extended to the second or if Pauls might in part be appliable to it Dauid and Abraham which he makes the maine ground of his dispute are the most vnfit instances that could haue been chosen in all the Scriptures Abraham our aduersaries grant was iust before his beliefe of that promise which was imputed to his for righteousnes yet then reiustified not by workes though not without faith as Bellarmine minceth but by faith without workes as the Apostle strongly and peremptorily inferres For to belieue Gods promises concerning the birth of Isaac was the sole act of Faith yet by this act was Abraham iustified not the first time as Bellarmine grants Wherefore Faith without workes did iustifie him the second time vnlesse hee take iustification otherwise then S. Paul there doth And if this verie same Scripture which sayth Abraham belieued God concerning Isaacs birth and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse were as Saint Iames auoucheth againe fulfilled in the offering of Isaac he was iustified the third time onely by belieuing God not by his worke neuer accomplished if wee take beliefe and iustification in the same sence the holy spirit by the mouth of Paul doth in the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Romans Though to offer vp Isaac in sacrifice were a work yet did Abraham offer him onely by faith because faith onely impelled him to this worke yea by the very same act of Faith which had beene imputed to him for righteousnesse Hee considered sayth S. Paul that God was able to raise him vp euen from
should make loue to our meate the soule or forme of a perfect taste For meate wholsome and pleasant we cannot perfectly relish but we must loue it howbeit we liue not by louing it but by tasting eating and digesting it No more can we rightly belieue Christs death and passion but we must loue him and his members yet liue wee not by louing them but by tasting Gods loue and fauour to vs or as I need not be afraid to speake by eating Christs flesh and drinking his blood For though by faith one and the same wee Assent vnto euery article in our creed yet this faith doth not iustifie but as it respects Christs bodie giuen for our sinnes or as it cleaues vnto Gods mercies manifested in that eternall sacrifice alwaies breathing out life to men renot neing all trust and confidence euen in such graces as wee haue receiued from him All this notwithstanding if we compare loue and faith together as parts of that righteousnesse which is in vs not considering the necessary dependance Loue hath of Faith in nature to loue is more then to belieue because it necessarily includes beliefe so is it more to loue our meate then to taste it because loue supposeth taste howbeit in respect of life to taste our meate is of more vse then to loue it So is it more to moue then to liue for all vicall motion includes in it acts of life yet is not motion simply better then life or the sensitiue sacultie whence it proceeds because it wholly depends on them not they on it 9. The second principall place of Scripture they vsually alleage doth vtterly discredit themselues but breeds no difficulty to vs in this present argument for that the faith whereof Saint Iames speakes doth differ as much from that whereto S. Paul ascribeth righteousnesse as a liue man doth from a dead or a body endued with life and motion from a statue or painted image no heathen artist that could but vnderstand the very tearmes of their seeming contradictory propositions would deny albeit some Romish writers of no meane ranke haue been giuen ouer vnto such Iewish blindnesse as to abuse Saint Iames authority not onely to hold iustification by workes as well as faith wherto his words incline as the thing it self in his sence though not in that construction they make of it is most true but to perswade the ignorant that such faith as S. Paul commends may be without works or christian loue But their folly herein will worke shame in such of their successors as shall comment vpon these two Apostles writings as in some of their predecessors it hath done if they consider that those very workes without which faith in Saint Iames construction sufficeth not vnto saluation are expresly comprehended in that faith wherby S. Paul tels vs the Iust do liue Was not Abraham our father iustified through vvorks when he offered his son Isaac vpon the altar he meant no more nor was more pertinentto his intended conclusion then if he had thus spoken If Abraham had sayd as they did whose empty faith he disapproues I haue faith but had not proued his sayings true by his deedes or readinesse to offer vp his onely Sonne vvhen God commaunded him for actually hee did not offer him he had not been iustified before God Why because he had not belieued in such sort as Saint Paul meant when he sayth by faith Abraham offered vp Isaac when he was tried But it may bee this faith was informed perfected or instigated to this act by loue of whom not of Isaac for that was the maine obstacle to worke distrust the chiefe antagonist of his faith Not of Sarah or any other friends or neighbours all which doubtlesse had disswaded him had he acquainted them with his purpose Was it then the loue of God Him indeed he loued aboue all because he firmely belieued his mercy and louing kindnesse towards him but this loue supposed it vvas his Assent vnto Gods omnipotent power which as the Apostle expresly tels vs moued him to this act For hee considered that God was able to raise him from the dead from whence also hee receiued him in a figure This consideration or inducement was a worke yet a proper act of faith no way of loue But loue perhappes did make it meritorious The loue indeede wherewith God loued him made his working faith acceptable in his sight but that it was strength of faith not the quality of loue which God imputed vnto him for righteousnesse the same Apostle for doubtlesse the same hand it was which penned the eleuenth to the Hebrâ—es and the fowrth vnto the Romans puts it out of doubt beeing not weake in faith he considered not his body now dead vvhen he was now a hundred yeere old neither yet the deadnesse of Sarahs wombe He staggered not at the promise of God through vnbeliefe but vvas strong in faith giuing glory to God And being fully perswaded that what he had promised he vvas also able to performe And therefore it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse One and the same faith it was and standing at the same bent vnlesse by continuance of like triall increased in strength which wrought in him a readinesâ—â— of minde to sactifice his onely sonne in hope of a ioyfull resurrection and to expect his birth from the dead wombe of Sarah The obiect likewise whereto his Assent did adhere was one and the same his fidelitie which had promised on which faithfully still relying it was impossible his other faculties or affections should not subscribe to whatsoeuer his Assent of faith should enioine them and that remaining in wonted strength it could not but bring forth perfect loue and good works which may be sayd in such a sense to perfect it as we are sayd to blesse God that is to declare his blessednesse For as Gods loue to vs was most apparent in offering his onely Sonne So Abrahams loue to God was best manifested by sacrificing his sonne Isaac vvhom he loued yet he sacrificed him by faith wherefore his loue did result from firme Assent to Gods couenant and mercie made to mankinde in him in the faithfull acceptance whereof and full acquiescence therein his righteousnesse as in due place shall be shewed did consist 10. This comment vpon the Apostles words concerning Abrahams workes giues vs the true meaning of the like concerning Rahab Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot iustified by vvorkes vvhen she receiâ—ed the messengers and had sent them out another way If she had said vnto these messengers only thus I belieue the God of heauen earth hath giuen you this whole land for a possession yet I dare not shew you any kindnesse in this city her belief had bin as dead as a body without breath or motion But what man or woman liuing is there of common sense which once firmly perswaded that God in iustice had giuen his natiue country vnto forreine people whom he loued
reiteration but we are not to denie that of all which is incompatible onely with some Wee are therefore to consider there is a threefold iustification one radicall or fundamentall which is the infusion of habituall grace or faith and this is neuer but one another actuall which I accompt actuall supplications made in faith for the remission of sinnes committed either before the infusion of faith or after What it is to pray in faith is partly intimated before partly in the end of this Chapter else-where more fully and purposely handled The third is iustification vertuall which consists in the performance of that and the like precepts watch and pray continually which cannot be meant of actuall prayers for hee that so praies continually shall continually vse much babling In this perpetuity of vertuall prayer consists the permanent duration of iustification which yet hath many interruptions A man may haue the habite of faith and yet not alwaies pray in faith either actually or vertually as he may be out of charity with his brother or vnlawfully deteine goods wrongfully gotten without present forfeiture of his estate in grace though to pray in faith it is impossible in the one case vntill hee be reconciled to his brother or haue freely forgiuen him in the other vntil he hath made restitution of those things his conscience condemned him for keeping The perpetuitie of this vertuall prayer or iustification therein consisting depends vpon the continuance of some former resolution or intention made in faith which is not alwaies preiudiced by minding other matters but only by doing things forbidden by the law of God or as S. Paul speakes not of Faith A man intending to go a iourney vertually continues his former intent so he keepe on his way without digression albeit he actually minde not the businesse hee goes about but entertaine such other thoughts or discourse as way or company shall affoord But if through too much minding cōpany or other matters he should chance to wander or for slow opportunities of dispatching his intended businesses his vertuall intention is interrupted and time lost must bee redeemed with double diligence So must such ruptures as actuall sinnes or omission of necessarie duties make in the perpetuity of vertuall praying or permanency of iustification thence depending be repaired with actuall praiers made in faith But here wee may descry the idle curiosity of some wits more acute then subtile at least then sound and rather apt through multiplying entities without necessity to obscure matters in themselues distinct and cleere then to cleere difficulties or obscurities For some there bee which speake of Faith and Repentance as of two spirituall habits or graces really or at least essentially distinct It is one thing indeed to rise another to walke yet both immediate and proper acts of one and the same motiue faculty so is it one thing to belieue and another to repent yet both formall acts of one and the same habite only the later includes a peculiar reference to a slip or fall whence it receiueth a distinct name from the former which specially imports a direct progresse in the way of godlinesse without interruption Better we cannot notifie the nature of true repentance then by restauration of faith to it wonted throne out of which it had for a time bin iustled by sinfull affections though not deposed from it soueraigntie as Dauid was preiudiced by his sonnes rebellion and for a time enforced to forsake the Hill of Sion though not depriued of his kingdome Euen such repentance as vsually goes before regeneration hath a correspondent faith annexed the difference betwixt them onely such as is betweene heate and calefaction which as some good Philosophers resolue vs is heate not acquired or consistent but onely in the motion or acquisition Or briefly to speake more fully Faith alwaies moues vnto repentance which generally taken may in few words not vnfitly be defined to be a sorrow for sin conceiued and moderated by faith and as the faith is such is the sorrow either meerly morall or truely spirituall 4. The summe of all we haue deliuered in these two chapters is briefly but most diuinely set downe by Saint Iohn who though hee vse not the formall tearmes of iustification yet expresseth by nature of it howsoeuer taken by words equiualent or rather more theologicall or significant as by fellowship with God the Father his Sonne CHRIST and his members and by the fruits of it fulnesse of ioy For being iustified by saith as Saint Paul sayth we haue peace with God through our Lord IESVS CHRIST and reioice in hope of his glorie This then is the message sayth Saint Iohn which we haue heard of him and declare vnto you that God is light and in him is no darknesse at all If vvee say we haue fellowship with him and walke in darknesse we lie and do not the truth But if we walke in the light as he is in the light we haue fellowship one with another This walking in the light as God is in the light is that iustification or qualification whereof S Iames speakes whereby wee become immediatly capable of Christs righteousnesse or actuall participants of his propitiation which is the sole immediate cause of our iustification taken as S. Paul doth it for remission of sins or actuall approbation with God The truth of which doctrine Saint Iohn likewise ratifies in tearmes equiualent in the words immediately following And the blood of CHRIST clenseth vs walking in the light as God is in the light from all sin not from such onely as were committed before the infusion of that grace which is the ground of our fellowship with God and amongst our selues the very lamp by whose light wee walke but from all subsequent transgressions of what kinde soeuer Now if we say that we such as S. Iohn then was regenerate and in the state of grace haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs. Euen such then as walke in the light are sinners and not iust in themselues but onely as they are besprinkled with CHRISTS righteous bloud Neuerthelesse if we confesse our sinnes faithfully he is faithfull and iust to forgiue vs our sinnes and to cleanse vs from all vnrighteousnesse not from sinnes veniall onely And is there any circumstance either in the matter or manner of his discourse which may occasion vs to suspect the same word sinne should not be of equall importance in both these places last cited and that third following These things write I vnto you that you sinne not What venially only No questionlesse he was more desirous that they should not sinne mortally nor do the authors of this distinction deny that men regenerate may sinne so grieuously as to fall both totally and finally from grace yet sayth S. Iohn If any man sin as there is no man that sinneth not both mortally and venially by our aduersaries grant vvee haue an Aduocate with the Father
but would seeke to merit their fauour by gratefull offices It was extraordinary in this woman firmly to belieue as shee told the messengers but resting so perswaded a worke of no perfection to make her peace with the Israelites â—ad shee doubted whether their title vnto the land of Canaan had been iust or suspected Gods donation of it vnto Abraham to haue been forged by his successors as Constantines is by the baser Roman cleargy shee might without any iust imputation for want of loue or other good works haue aduentured her life amongst her neighbours in defence of her country Or had she vpon the Israelites misdemeanours distrusted their successe she might at last in worldly policy haue rather hazarded their future displeasure then incurred present danger of death or torture of her Citizens for harbouring spies But whiles she firmly belieues both that the Israelites donation was from God that they would certainly preuaile against her people though her entertainment and concealement of them were acts of kindnesse prudence and humanity yet their omission had been properly not of faith because impulsiuely they were from faith nor could they haue been omitted but through vnbeliefe or distrust vnto Gods promises Worldlings would haue condemned her not for vvant of charitie but for excesse folly rather had shee not done as shee was perswaded By faith then those workes become righteous which without it had been traiterous And if we respect not the cause of our knowledge but the thing knowne faith did perfect the workes the workes only made the perfection of faith knowne to men In this sense it is most true of faith what some misapply to iustification of mens persons workes iustifie and perfect faith not in the nature of the thing but in the sight of man to whom they witnesse the liuelihood and perfection of faith noâ— as causes but effects and signes of our iustifiattion they are not onely signes but conditions concomitant or precedent In the same sense are these other words of the Apostle to be vnderstood As the body without the spirit is dead so faith vvithout vvorkes is dead also For if a humane bodie want spirit breath or motion we rightly gather it wants life yet are breath and motion rather effects then causes of life But the schoole-men dreaming the holy Ghost had been scholler to Aquinas or some chiefe masters of their profession take the sprit in this place for actus primus as the soule by which wee liue and breath and hence they conceiued that grosse error which the Romanist now makes an article of his beliefe to wit that works animate or at least casually perfect faith as the soule of man doth his bodie And wheras Caluin most acutely and orthodoxally infers that if faith without works or charity bedead it is not properly but equiuocally called faith They reply workes or charitie do not informe faith intrinsecally as the reasonable soule doth man for so it would follow that as he is not a man but a dead trunk which hath no soule so it should not bee true faith but an image or dead picture of faith which wants vvorkes or charitie How then do they perfect faith Extrinsecally as the soule doth the body or other halfe of man which remaines a true body though no true man after the soules departure For application of this distinction they adioine when Saint Iames affirmes faith to be dead without workes he tearmes it dead in such a sense as we say a body is dead by the soules absence and yet remains a true bodie Whence sayth Valentian the sectaries haue furnished vs with an argument against themselues Rather this answere is contrary to Valentians and his fellowes assertions for were his illustration true and pertinent workes or faith should constitute one grace and qualitie as the body and soule make one man which no Papist dare affirme of the habite of faith and charitie being graces in their iudgements specifically distinct And Valentian who stands most vpon the former illustration expresly denies that charity much lesse workes can be any proper forme of faith either intrinsecall as the reasonable soule is of man or extrinsecall as whitenesse is of the body Some perfection notwithstanding Charitie giues to Faith in which respect it may by analogie to true and proper formes bee metaphorically said to informe saith The perfection it giues hee so expresseth that the Latine Reader by his words cited at full in the margine for I will not trouble the text with them may plainly perceiue hee was desirous to say somewhat but he knew not what Arias Montanus who better vnderstood Saint Iames his phrase by the analogie of faith and forme of wholsome doctrine then Valentian did himselfe or this fictitious analogie betwixt Charitie naturall formes interprets the former place in part to our purpose To liue as Philosophers say is to operate and vitall operation proceedeth not from the bodie but from the spirit nor doth â—â—e Apostle say workes are the spirit of faith where he speakes only of the appellation or name of life His meaning is that faith without workes is as truely reputed dead as the body without the spirit is rightly sayd as it truely is dead But if wee will not wrest the letter against the Apostles meaning but rather gently apply his words to his intent the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies onely breath or motion enspired from the soule for workes in their nature are operations and are more fitly compared to breathings or motions then to the substantiall spirit or soule or the faculty whence these flow which last in proportion best answeres to faith Now as the readiest waie to â—et breath in one fallen in a swound or raise one vp out of a dead â—it is to reuiue the spirits by which vitall motions are inspired and managed so the onely way to bring forth liuing workes or fruites of righteousnes is to quicken or strengthen faith which liuely in it selfe and able to performe it proper acts as firmly to apprehend Gods power iustice and mercie will vndoubtedly giue life to all other powers and affections and impell them to their proper functions The Romanist as ignorant as the Iew of this righteousnesse which is by faith preposterously seekes to make vs new men in Christ not by reuiuing faith which is as the animall spirit by whose influence works become vitall but as if one from this principle in nature man is dead vvithout breath and motion should seeke to bring men out of swounds or dead fits by blowing breath into them with a quill or making them moue by deuises so he grosely mistaking that saying of S. Iames as the body without the spirit so faith without workes is dead also hence seekes to raise vp such as die in Adam after the same manner we haue seene them raised which fall downe dead in an anticke first by wagging one arme then another vntill the whole body moue The anticke
all that he held faith without workes to be altogether vaine and vnable to iustifie in the sight of God if with them it were in his iudgement not sufficient he had denied all iustification in Gods sight either by faith alone or by workes and faith so as no meanes of saluation could be left vs. More arguments I need not vse for euery obseruant Reader may furnish himselfe with plenty all demonstratiue that workes taken as Saint Iames meant not for the act or operation onely but either for the act or promptitude to it are necessary to iustification not before men but before God and in order of nature precedent 2. But the Readers minde as for a while mine was may be held in suspense that albeit we must be operatrue ere we can be iustified yet the first operation of that faith which iustifies is alwaies seen in the busines of iustification as that of Saint Austen may necessarily seeme to imply Bona opera sequuntur iustificatum non praecedunt iustificandum If we be not iustified as all agreed without some operation or worke of faith and all other good workes as this Father affirmes are not precedent but subsequent to iustification those operations of faith which belong to the worke of iustification must of necessity in order of nature if not of time be of all others the first This golden sentence notwithstanding will not abide ihe touch vnlesse we take iustification as Saint Austen doth for the first infusion of that grace wherby we are iustified and enabled to bring forth works truely good That the habite of grace whereof faith is the principall part or foundation should in order of nature be precedent to workes done in faith for vnlesse so done they are not truely good is a case excluded by it clearenesse from all controuersie But the workes by which as Saint Iames affirmes we are iustified must needs goe before the iustification which he speaks of yet not before the first infusion of faith vnlesse we affirme which no protestant must or any intelligent Papist doth that wee may bring foorh good workes ere faith bee planted in our soules The infallable consequence of these deductions is that betweene Saint Pauls faith and Saint Iames his iustification there must be workes intermediate of what kind it skils noâ— so they be done in faith Of workes so done to question which are in time and nature first were as if you should demaund what meates such as after a long sickenesse haue well recouered their tast and appetite vse first to feed vpon Curiosity of methode or nice prescriptions would in this case be offensiue to good stomaches which should not doe much amisse in falling to such wholsome food as first comes to hand Thus much in generall is not vnfitting to our present purpose That the internall eliâ—itiue or formall acts are in order of nature and time precedent to the impulsiue acts of faith to wit such operations or exercises of other vertues faculties or affections as are inspired by it as wee most firmely assent to Gods mercy wisdome truth and iustice before we can be faithfully mercifull iust or true or doe the workes of righteousnesse mercy or truth in faith Of the internall or proper acts or exercises of faith such as flow directly from it are before such as are conceiued by way of reflexion Such as flow immediately from the essence are at least in order of nature before such as proceed from the properties of it In both rankes these are before others of the same kinde which are of more generall or abstract points as we actually assent vnto diuine reuelations first as true then as good lastly as good to vs and yet we must so assent vnto them ere we can firmely or confidently relie vpon them nor can our reliance or trust whether on Gods prouidence in generall or vpon his mercies in CHRIST be more firme and faithfull then is our precedent deniall of our selues and renunciation of all trust in worldly meanes which property as was before obserued immediately results from our direct assent vnto Gods wisdome power and mercy and vnto our owne misery ignorance and imbecillitie From assent to both these and vnfaigned deniall of our selues thence resulting as from ioint rootes springs true confidence in Gods prouidence alwaies in order of nature precedent to stedfast and inseperable adherence vnto CHRIST which is the end of all our working and as it must for this reason be first intended so can it hardly be accomplished without some intermediate acts or exercises of Gods graces in vs vnto all which faith necessarily is concurrent If we shall then compare the acts or operations of faith amongst themselues according to the same strength or equall degrees of fidelity in doing Gods will the effectuall application of CHRISTS merits is but a branch of the former vniformity in working required by Saint Iames neither necessarily nor ordinarily the first either in order of nature or time whether we speake of application actuall and expresse or of implicit and potentiall that faith which is of strength sufficient for firme and faithfull application of Christs righteousnes or conceiuing sure trust in Gods mercie offred in him is as immediatly operatiue of other workes as powerfull to bring forth deedes of mercy alwaies vniformely prompt to doe any part of Gods will that first whereunto it is first called It was an act of that faith by which Abraham liued an act commendable in the sight of God to forsake his Countrey when God called him yet an act in time long precedent to that which was imputed vnto him for righteousnes and in his legend the holy Ghost would instruct vs that the safest way to get full assurance of our heauenly inheritance is to execute Gods will without delay first to renounce the world father and mother natiue Countrey c. that we may be ready when he shall call and on these foundations surely laid to raise our confidence in CHRIST Know saith the Apohle they which are of faith the same are the children of Abraham but euery one is not the sonne of faith that saies or thinkes he belieues as his father Abraham did vnlesse he haue such an operatiue faith as Abraham had well trained to euery point of seruice that shall be enioined This speech of Saint Paul is but equiualent to that of our Sauiours If ye were Abrahams children ye would doe the workes of Abraham what were these faithfully to assent vnto the truth reuealed by God and louingly to entertaine his messengers but now saith our Sauiour You goe about to kill me a man that hath told you the truth which I haue heard of God this did not Abraham The nature and vniformity of faith supposed such as hath been often inculcated Saint Gyprians collections in this point are as strong and sound as the point it selfe is orthodoxall Christ cals them Abrahams children whom he sees operatiue in
them and shall his goodnesse in giuing them flake the feruency of our wonted desires or supplications when as we seeke grace onely to the end we may finde and truly taste his mercie Thou hast taught vs Not euery one that sayth Lord Lord shall enter into the kingdome of heauen but such as doe the will of thy Father which is in heauen and his wil as the Apostle witnesseth they only do which obey it in all things omitting no commaundement when occasion is giuen taking no occasion to breake or violate any Shall we then enter into the kingdome of heauen because we thus farre do thy fathers will and in some measure obserue his Commaundements Rather without such obseruance we shall not we cannot enter therein yet when we haue done all this wee are still vnprofitable seruants To what vse then doth our inherent righteousnesse or obseruance of Gods Commaundements serue vs If sincere that haue been and vnfaigned though imperfect yet the faith which brought it forth will make a sincere and faithfull plea for mercy in the day of triall in which he that hath been an hearer only and no doer of the lawe or hath done in part what God would haue done but not sincerely nor faithfully because it was his will and pleasure but out of humour naturall affection or hipocrisie shall cry Lord Lord and shewe many tokens of Gods loue and fauour towards him in hope to better this present sute for mercie yet shall not be heard Why Either because he neuer had any true pledge of Gods fauour or did not vse such as hee had aright because as his workes haue been such now are his prayers presumptuous vnfaithfull or hypocriticall such as cannot obtaine any other answere of God then that depart from mee I neuer knew thee It shall not boote him to make proofe that hee hath giuen his goods to the poore or his body to the fire that he hath healed the sicke cast out diuels and wrought other wonders in CHRISTS name vnsesse his faith haue quelled all trust all pride or glory in these gracings wholly set on Gods mercies in CHRIST from whose apprehension vnlesse these other acts or exercises though of mercie sprung they are not truely done in faith but springing thence we cannot be so ready to doe them as hauing done them to renounce all trust or confidence in them For whiles we compare these slender yet sincere effects of our loue and thankfulnesse to him with his infinite loue and mercie towards vs wheron true faith alwaies lookes whiles it conceiues them the sight of them causeth greater humilitie for the present more hearty sorrow for sinnes past then we could haue conceiued if wee had not done them as the sight of Zorobabels temple finished did make the auntients of Israell weepe because the perfection and glorie of the former was more liuely represented to their senses by this visible and semblable model then by the ruines meere absence or imperfect reparations of it To be able to sound the depth of many conclusions better then others can giues stayed and setled iudgements a more distinct and compleat measure of the knowledge they wanted then fantasticke or shallow wits can haue For this cause solid learning alwaies contracts verball knowledge and superficiall skill in any facultie dilates mens estimates of theÌ„selues puffes them vp with preiudiciall conceits of their owne worth And seeing all our knowledge in this life though of matters naturall and neere at and is euery way imperfect the increase of it is alwaies vnnaturall and monstrous vnlesse the more we know the better we know our imperfectious and be humbled with a more sensible feeling of our wants Now in as much as the fruits of life do neuer take so kindely as the fruites of knowledge in any sonne of Adam since he made that impious and crroneous choice and euery mans owne experience can teach him that his practique faculties or performances come still short of his speculatiue notions or apprehensions of what is good and fit to be done we are by this twofold reason enforced to take the vnfained acknowledgement of our imperfection in working and serious distrust both to our works and our selues as no way iustifiable or approueable in the sight of God but for the perfect and compleate righteousnesse of CHRIST IESVS for an essentiall branch of that vniformity before required in true and sauing faith The growth of these particulars is like the growth of twins the more firme and liuely faith we haue the better and more sincerely we worke the bettter and more sincerely we worke the more vnfaignedly and faithfully wee renounce all confidence in our workes and our selues the more faithfully we renounce all confidence in these the more caâ—tiestly we seeke after saluation only by CHRIST of whose allsufficient sacrifice and righteousuesse fully satisfactory of Gods law and meritorious of mercy our righteousnes inherent though imperfect giues vs a truer tast then vnbelieuers can haue Thus the weaker we are in our selues the stronger we are in Him 4. The former question about the vse of grace depends vpon another betwixt the Romanist and vs about the measure of inherent righteousnesse They make the encrease and growth of grace not to perfect but vtterly to abolish the nature of it by conuerting it into righteousnes inherent as well for quantity as quality acceptable of it selfe to God without his fauour or indulgence We as the name imports make it alwaies subordinate vnto gratious acceptance and seeing we take it onely as a pledge of diuine fauour whereof wee stand perpetually in need as it is first giuen so we desire it may be increased onely to the end we may more constantly and faithfully sue for mercie and seeke diuine approbation aright Of our edification in CHRIST faith is not the foundation onely but the roofe vnto which all other graces haue the same reference that Hur and Aaron had vnto Moses The best seruice euen charitie it selfe can performe is to vnderprop the hands of faith lifted vp vnto the throne of grace from which the sentence of absolution must proceed Directly contradictory to this declaration saith the Romanist faith iustifies onely as it disposeth vs to the attainment of charity which is the formall cause of iustification the complete forme of such perfect righteousnesse inherent as is the onely immediate cause of saluation Charitie though giuen for CHRIST is to him the Crowne of faith reaching heauen by it owne perfection to vs not charity onely but faith it selfe as it is part of our imperfect righteousnesse inherent is footstoole to it selfe in the act of iustification or whiles it pleads for mercy Nor vas any sonne of Adam for the least moment of time euer so righteous but the actuall mediation of Christ or interposition of his sacrifice secluded from his triall at the tribunail of Gods iustice he might besides all his other sinnes iustly haue beene condemned for not stirring vp
IESVS CHRIST the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sinnes In what manner onely as he is the meritorious cause or fountaine of grace whereby wee are immediately and throughly cleansed No rather as he is righteous and by interposition of his eternall sacrifice euen till this day as immediate a cause of our pardon from all sinnes whether past or present as it was of our generall reconcilement while it was offered Nor did he die to procure vs grace wherby we might become righteous and pure in his fathers sight but gaue vs grace that we might be purified by his death and passion yet if sinnes mortall as well as veniall to vse our aduersaries language bee comprehended in the saying last cited Bellarmines reconciliation of the former words if wee say that we haue no sinne with this other vvhosoeuer is borne of God sinneth not is palpably false 5. But if his be amisse it will be expected we reconcile them a right and so we may with as great ease as perspicuity In the latter then he speakes of habituall sin or such indulgence to transgressions as S. Iames makes liable to breach of the whole law for by sinne it is euident he includes as much as he had said in the beginning of that discourse whosoeuer committeth sinne transgresseth also the Lawe Why is there anie sinne which in the Protestants doctrine is not a transgression of the lawe or is it possible a man should goe against the commandement and not transgresse it But if some sinnes there be as Roman Catholiques teach onely besides the lawe in doing them we doe not transgresse the Lawe but rather pretergresse or goe besides it Yet seeing the Law-giuers will was that we should do the lawe not onely heare it much lesse goe besides it there is no pretergression of it but is directly against the Law giuers will otherwise a seruants negligence should not bee against his masters will but besides it For tell mee O yee fooles and blinde whether is more onely to omit the good deedes of the lawe or to commit such as your selues acknowledge to bee besides it Though the matter of omission may be â—arre greater yet for the forme of the action whence the denomination of opposition must be taken no sinne of omission can be so properly said to be against the Law as the least positiue sinne or transgression we can imagine Hee that commits any thing disagreeable to the Lawe doth omit what is commaunded by the lawe and somewhat more and therefore doth more properly goe against the lawe then hee which onely omits what is commaunded But it is vsually the nature of hypocrisie to place either sanctity or impietie rather in the matter or outward act than in the heart or affection Farre otherwise are we taught by the spirit of truth that it is the heart which God requireth No matter of sinne can be so light but is if the heart be set vpon it in the issue deadly and excludes from mercie scarce any obiect so bad as that the bare assent vnto it without delight or custome is vtterly incompatible with the habit of grace Nor doth Saint Iohn in the former places seeming contrarie suppose any difference in the act or matter of sinne but onely in the heart or habite of the sinner Euery one transgresseth the lawe in what sinne soeuer but euery transgression makes not a man a law-breaker or transgressour this denomination is not absolutely giuen but from a greater inclination or delight in doing euill then doing good And it is cleere that Saint Iohn when hee sayth he that is borne of God sinneth not vseth the selfe-same syllogisticall terme he had done before in that phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that committeth sinne Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Hebraisme which he followes imports not the act or operation onely but the habit or rather more then habit and the whole phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as the Latine operarius iniquitatis one that maketh a trade of sinne or professeth iniquitie whose seruice is altogether incompatible with the profession or hope of a Christian And this was the conclusion our Apostle was in both places to inferre as hauing taught immediatly before euery one that hath this hope of being the Sonne of God doth purge himselfe as he is pure and in habite becomes like vnto him as on the contrarie which is the Apostles inference likewise he that committes sinne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 resembles his father the diuell whose chiefe delight is in doing mischiefe It may be a Romane Catholicke will sooner belieue if we send him vnto Maldonat who commenting vpon the like speech 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus farre beares witnesse vnto the truth we teach that the hebrew phrase aimes rather at the habit then the act that to work or doe iniquity is as much as to be an artificer or craftesmaster of iniquity 2. But wee receiue not the record of man there is another that beareth witnesse of it euen our Sauiour from whose mouth Saint Iohn learned both the matter and phrase of that discourse Verily saith he to the Iewes whosoeuer committeth sinne is the seruant of sinne and the seruant abideth not in the house for euer but the son abideth for euer If the sonne therefore shall make you free ye shall be free indeed from the raigne of sinne not from all acts of sinne Hence did Saint Iohn take that lesson You know that he was manifested to take away our sinnes and in him is no sinne To be altogether without sinne then was his peculiar but Whosoeuer abideth in him sinneth not Not at all So he should not need any aduocation but he is no worker of iniquity nor doth he sin as Diuels doe for whose sinnes CHRIST was no propitiation That so the Apostle meant is apparent from the paralell vse of the same words immediately after reciprocally changed Hee that committeth sinne is of the diuell for the diuell sinneth from the beginning that is hath continued his apostacy or trade of sinne euer since his fall For this purpose tâ—e sonne of God was manifested that he might destroy the workes of the diuell What were these Delight in sinne wilfull indulgence to transgressions and such vnrelenting opposition to the truth proposed as did conuince the Iewes by our Sauiours verdict in the place last cited to be the sonnes of the diuell yee are of your father the diuell and the lusts of your father ye will doe he was a murtherer from the beginning and abode not in the truth because there is no truth in him When he speaketh a lie he speaketh of his owne for he is a lier and the father of lies And because I tell you the truth ye beleeue me not yet which of you can rebuke me of sinne His disciples they might because the sonnes of men but in that there