of Salvation In the second Homily there I have read thus Iustification is not the office of man but the office of GOD. and againe Iustification is the office of GOD onely and is not a thing which we render unto him but which we receive of him not which we give to him but which we take of him by his free mercy and by the onely merits of his most deerly beloved Sonne our Lord our only Redeemer Saviour and Iustifier IESUS CHRIST And yet it is Popery in M. MOUNTAGU to have said and written Properly to speake GOD only justifieth who alone imputeth not but pardoneth sinne En quo vaecordia caecos For yet moreover is it not your owne Beleefe and Profession for which if he should say otherwise M. MOUNTAGU should be cryed downe Papist that Iustification consisteth in Remission of sinnes or not imputing of them unto the man justified Ne posthac dubites saith CALVIN Instit III. XI XXII and you subscribe it quo modo nos DEUS justificet cum audis Reconciliare illum nos sibi non imputando delicta and againe Nos justificationem simpliciter interpretamur acceptationem illam quâ nos DOMINUS in gratiam receptos pro justis habet Eamque in Peccatorum remissione ac justitiae CHRISTI imputatione positam esse dicimus Sect. 2. to whom per omnia agreeth M. PERKINS in mo places than ten defining Iustification to be an Act of GOD absolving c. And yet with you M. MOUNTAGU is a Papist for affirming GOD only justifieth properly when your selves confesse that Iustification at least properly consisteth in Remission of sinnes and that none can forgive sinnes properly but GOD. How this should hang together I professe my ignorance I cannot tell For eyther Iustification in your opinions must not consist in forgivenesse of sinnes or else others beside GOD must have power of imputing or of not imputing sinnes And heere it is worth the while to observe how these detracters doe crosse their owne shinnes It will not be long before that M. MOUNTAGU with them be accounted a Papist for saying A Priest GOD'S Minister in GOD'S place can forgive sinnes and heer he is a Papist for saying GOD only justifieth properly when themselves will have Iustification to bee meerly forgivenesse of Sinnes and yet hold that none doth or can forgive Sinnes but GOD. May I not say well ô vertiginem In sober and not in madde Puritanicall sadnesse dare you say that some other beside GOD some creature over and above GOD can forgive Sinnes This is contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England in that Homily which you remember indeed but can produce no testimonie thence Because all men bee sinners saith that Homily and offenders against GOD and breakers of his Lawes and Commandements therefore can no man by his owne acts workes or else deedes seeme they never so good be justified and made righteous before GOD but everie man of necessity is constrained to seek for another righteousnesse or justification But where shall he find it where is it to bee had It is expressed according unto truth To be received at GOD'S hand It is GOD then that justifieth in this opinion of the Homily And againe in the second Homily of that argument as is already remembred Iustification is the office of GOD only it is not the office of man Credimus SPIRITUM SANCTUM in cordibus nostris habitantem voram nobis fidem impertiri ut hujus tanti mysterij cognitionem adipiscamur saith the Belgick Confession which is the POPERY of M. MOUNTAGU as pleaseth these Great Masters in Israel Lyars against their owne knowledge in saying it contradicteth the Doctrine of the English Church Or if this be not the thing they meane what is it That GOD imputeth not sinnes unto the justified or that Iustification is not in pardoning and not imputing sinnes whereas the Papists doe clamour against us for maintayning that Iustification to be received at GODS hands is forgivenes of sins and trespasses in such things as hee hath beene offended in I confesse I am a Papist if this be Popery or else that which followeth after Remission of sins against which they informe in the next place CHAP. IX Holinesse of life added unto Iustification and Remission of sins GOD justifieth originally and Faith instrumentally INFORMERS AGaine WHO only can and doth translate from death unto life reneweth a right spirit and createth a new hart within us MOUNTAGU WHo can doe this but only GOD most high It is a work of Omnipotencie to create they say it is a greater work to recreate Where sinne is pardoned by GOD and a man is become regenerate borne anew and in state of Grace with GOD there GOD by his HOLY SPIRIT worketh inward renovation Where sinne is graciously and freely pardoned there holy life and conversation doth est soones ensue This is the divinitie that I have learned in our Protestant Schooles touching this point And to my understanding it is observed and tendred by DAVID in Psal L. X. Hide thy face from my sinnes and put away all mine iniquities which is Remission of sinnes Then followeth to make up a complete worke Create in mee a clean heart O LORD and renew a right spirit within mee which to me seemeth an Infusion of Grace And S. PAUL doth everie where after vocation unto and acceptation of us with GOD urge walking according unto vocation in newnesse and in holinesse of life But because GOD was moved thereunto by a true and a lively faith in him and his mercies in CHRIST Faith is by mee said to iustifie instrumentally That GOD justifieth causally hath beene suspected of Popery and challenged therefore Now that Faith justifieth instrumentally cannot avoide the same imputation And yet the maine exception of all Papists against the doctrine of our Church is that we hold a man is iustified by Faith which must be originally or instrumentally THAT wee exclude with the forenamed Homilies That we be iustified by Faith in CHRIST only is not That this our owne act to beleeve in CHRIST or this our faith in CHRIST which is within us doth iustifie us for that were to account our selves to be iustified by some act or vertue within our selves For saith S. PAUL Rom. VIII XXXIII It is GOD that iustifieth THIS we embrace as also in the same Homily Faith doth directly send us to CHRIST for remission of our sins And by Faith given unto us of GOD wee embrace the Promise of GOD'S mercie and of Remission of sinnes which accordeth with the traduced passage of M. MOUNTAGU because GOD was drawne unto it by our Faith which laying hold upon his mercy in CHRIST obtayneth this freedome and newnesse and renewing from Him Faith is therefore said to justifie that is instrumentally or applicatorily And so I am content to passe for a Papist with the CHURCH of England CHAP. X. An Accesse declaratory made to the act of Iustification by the works of a lively Faith S.
acts thereof The memorable Saying of SCOTUS The power of the Will in things divine CHAP. XI The fourth and last point of ARMINIANISME touching the Synod of DORT The Synod of Dort not our Rule Private opinions no Rule The Informers imputations nothing at all THE SECOND PART touching POPERY CHAP. I. THe Author uncharitably traduced His profession for the doctrine discipline received and commanded in the Church of England Conformable Puritans Furious zeale The Church of Rome not a sound yet a true Church Private opinions disclaimed The Church of England asserted to her owne publick and proper Tenents The cause of all these Imputations CHAP. II. The Church Representative and Points Fundamentall what they are All that Papists say is not Poperie Particular Churches have and may erre The Catholick Vniversall Church hath not cannot erre Of Generall Councels The Author farre from the Iesuites fancy The XXI Article of the Church of England explaned CHAP. III. Strange accusations Antiquity reverenced not deified Fathers accused of some error by Iesuites The occasion of their enlarged speeches concerning Free-will The Author acquitted of Popery CHAP. IV. Private and publick doctrine differenced In what sense the Church is said to be alwaies visible The Author acquitted from Popery againe by others learned Divines Of the Church of Rome CHAP. V. Touching ANTICHRIST The Pope and Prelacie of Rome Antichristian That he is Magnus ille Antichristus is neither determined by the publick doctrine of the Church nor proved by any good argument of private men Difference among Divines who The Man of sinne should bee The markes of the great Antichrist fit the Turkish Tyrannie every way as well as the Papacy The peace of the Church not to bee disquieted through variety of opinions No finall resolution to be yet had in this point CHAP. VI. Touching IUSTIFICATION The state of a meere naturall man who to please GOD must become a new creature That newnes cannot bee wrought without a reall change of a sinner in his qualities In what sence it may be said that there is an Accesse of Iustification both by daily receiving remission of new sins and by increase of grace injoyning vertuous and good deeds unto faith CHAP. VII A change made in a justified man The Author agreeth in part with the Councell of Trent and therefore maintaineth Popery no necessarie illation The doctrine of the Church of England and of other reformed Churches in this point of Iustification CHAP. VIII Strange Popery GOD onely and properly justifieth CHAP. IX Holinesse of life added unto Iustification and Remission of sinnes GOD justifieth originally and Faith instrumentally CHAP. X. An Accesse declaratory made to the act of Iustification by the works of a lively faith S. PAUL and S. IAMES reconciled The old Prophets and ancient Fathers made new Papists by the Informers CHAP. XI The doctrine of MERIT ex condigno rejected as false and presumptuous Difference between the old and the new signification of Mereri CHAP. XII The quality and conditions of a good work required by the Roman Writers to make it rewardable as farre as they are positive no Protestant disalloweth of To those conditions may others be added CHAP. XIII GOD surely rewardeth good works according to his promise of his free bountie and grace CHAP. XIV The Church of England holdeth no such absolute certainty of salvation in just persons as they have of other objects of Faith expressly and directly revealed by GOD. CHAP. XV. Touching Evangelicall Counsailes Evangelicall Counsailes admitted according to the doctrine of the old Fathers and many learned Divines of our Church Popish doctrine concerning workes of Supererogation rejected CHAP. XVI S. GREG. NAZIANZ defended from the touch of uncircumcised lips CHAP. XVII The exposition of the saying of our SAVIOUR If thou wilt be perfect c. S. CHRYSOST S. AUG S. HIER S. AMBR. make it no imperious precept If it be the Informers are the least observers of it and sinne against their owne consciences CHAP. XVIII Touching LIMBUS PATRUM The dreames of Papists about Limbus Patrum related and rejected The state of mens soules after death The place proportioned to their state The soules of the blessed Fathers before CHRIST'S ascension in heavenly Palaces yet not in the third and highest heavens nor in that fulnesse of ioy which they have now and more of which they shall have heerafter The opinion of old and new Writers Our Canons not to be transgressed The doctrine and faith of the Church of England concerning the Article of CHRIST'S descent into Hell The disadvantage wee are at with our Adversaries Every Novellers Fancie printed and thrust upon us for the generall Tenet of our Church The plain and easie Articles of our CREED disturbed and obscured by the wild dreames of little lesse than blasphemous men by new Models of Divinity by Dry-fatts of severall Catechismes The Beleefe of Antiquity The Author and It far from POPERY CHAP. XIX The seventh point of Popery touching IMAGES The Historicall use of Images maketh nothing for the adoring of them Popish extravagancies CHAP. XX. S. GREG. doctrine concerning Images far from Popery CHAP. XXI No religious honour or worship to bee given unto Images They may affect the mindes of religious men by representing unto them the actions of CHRIST and his Saints In which regard all reverence simply cannot be abstracted from them CHAP. XXII Popish doctrine and practice both about adoration of Images rejected CHAP. XXIII The Church of England condemneth not the historicall use of Images The Booke of Homilies containes a general godly doctrine yet is it not in every point the publick dogmaticall resolved doctrine of the Church The Homily that seemeth to condemne all making of Images is to be understood with a restriction of making them to an unlawfull end Many passages therein were fitted to the present times and to the conditions of the people that then were The finall resolution of this controversie CHAP. XXIV Touching signing with the Signe of the CROSSE To signe with the signe of the Crosse out of Baptisme or upon the breast c. no more superstition than to signe in Baptisme or upon the forehead The practice of the ancient Church The reasons that moved them that might move us to use often signing They lived with Pagans and wee with Puritans both deriders of the signe of CHRIST'S Crosse CHAP. XXV The practice of the primitive Church approved Unadvised Informers Novellers rejected CHAP. XXVI The testimony of S. ATHANASIUS vilified by the Informers The testimonies of other Fathers concerning the efficacie and power of the signe of the Crosse CHAP. XXVII Popery is not the signing with but the adoring of the Crosse Strange effects which GOD hath wrought of old adhibito signo CRUCIS and may doe still by vertue of CHRISTS Death and Passion which that Signe doth represent CHAP. XXVIII The Informers presumption against the current of Antiquity CHAP. XXIX Touching the SACRAMENT of the ALTAR The Informers drawn low
can bee touched with this aspersion by these men that have set themselves to calumniate where they are ignorant of the point they undertake against I have in consequence these words And consisteth in forgivenesse of sinnes primarily and in grace infused secondarily Which words if the Informers could have understood or would have construed according to my meaning they might have observed out of my discourse that I made a great difference betwixt these two parts and by Secondly intended only Concomitanter my purpose beeing to wipe off that odious Popish imputation of which I shall speake anon in their calumniating our doctrine of Iustification which because these Informers either could not or would not understand I shall endevour to speak somewhat more plainly and fully out unto their eares IUSTIFICATION as I said is deduced of Iustifico which hath or may have a threefold signification To make just and righteous to declare just and righteous and to make more just and righteous for the encrease and augmentation of Iustification Apoc. XXII XI Qui justus est justificetur by new accesse of GOD'S grace and progresse in course of righteousnesse every day more and more Remissio peecati facit ut Sanctit as incheate vires acquirat râ—â—oretur for the declaration of the Act of Iustification upon man as where S. IAMES saith ABRAHAM was justified by workes that is declared to be a righteous man by the lively fruits of a true faith and for absolution which is the Act of the Iudge to speake according unto secular proceedings from the use and practice where of the word is taken and applied unto the proportionable Acts of GOD upon man by whom wee are justified alone If this bee Popery M. PERKINS is a Papist 1 who hath in effect the very same Now I professed at first to take Iustification only in this acceptation and inferred there upon against the Gagger no more than was enough to confute him and his that we teach and beleeve that when sinnes are pardoned by GOD GOD doth not change the minde of the sinner ney that yet destroyeth in him the blot and body of sinne but that the same remaining in the soule of man in like maner as it did before condonation is only taken away by a not imputation of the guilt For so BECANUS Manet ergo homo in se peccator impius immundus solùm habetur pro justopio mundo omnia ejus opera sunt immunda 〈◊〉 inquinâ—ta But wee saith that most learned and judictions D. WHITE truely are Forre from this absund opinion how farre how so for we teach saith he that together with the Action of GOD remitting sinne concurreth another Action of divine grace enabling man to forsake and mortifie every greater sinne which GOD hath pardoned And M. PERKINS observeth that many among us doe not hold CHRIST or beleeve in him aright for their Iustification because they hold him without change of heart and life for by S. PAULS conclusion whom CHRIST quickneth them hee justifieth and whom he doth not quicken he doth not justifie And this is directly the doctrine of the Scripture 1. Cor. VI. XI Heb. IX XIV Rev. I. V. VI. 1. Pet. II. IX Ezech. XXXVI XXVI Esay LIII V. Psal CIII III. Fathers also are cyted to that purpose BERNARD saith Sinnes are not onely pardoned but the gift of sanctity is conferred and CHRYSOSTOME saith Delivering us from sin he engrafteth righteousnesse yea he extinguisheth sinne and doth not suffer it to be Sinne in the soule is as a leprosie in the bodie Now as when NAAMAN was restored by washing in Iordan his leprosie was removed and his flesh restored to that naturall health vigour and beautie it had so when GOD pardoneth sinne he removeth away the guilt thereof by free pardon and conferreth grace to the destroying of sinne and healing of the foule Mich. VI. XIX and this is the meaning of S. AUGUST in Psal VII Cum Iustificaâ—uâ— impius ex impio fit justus ex possessione Diaboli migrat in templum DEI. and Ser. XVI de verbis Apostoli summing up whatsoever I have said in effect and by these Ignorántes is traduced as Popery Nos sumus de iustitia nihil habemus Habemus omnino Grati simus ex co quod habemus ut addatur quod non habemus ne perdamus quod habemus Iustificati sumus ipsa iustitia cùm proficimus crescit quomodo crescit dicam vobiscum quodammodo conferam ut unusquisque vestrum iam in ipsa iustificatione constitutus acceptâ scilicet remissione peccatorum per lavacrum regenerationis accepto spiritu sancto proficiens de die in diem videat ubi sit accedat proficiat crescat donec consummetur incipit homo à fide Quid pertinet ad fidem Credere sed adhuc ista fides discernatur ab immundis spiritibus alluding to that IAMES 2. Si tantum credis sine spe vivis vel dilectionem non habes Daemones credunt contremiscunt A new life needs then must be conjoyned with Iustification And this is the expresse doctrine of D. WHITAKERS Remissio peccatorum facit ut Sanctitas in nobis inchoetur and of CALVIN himselfe who will have men to be taught this doctrine Doceantur homines fieri non passe ut justi censecutur CHRISTI merito quin renoventur eius spiritu in sanctam vitam frustraque grataitâ DEI adoptione gloriari omnes in quibus spiritus regenerationis non habitat Denique nullos à DEO ricipi in gratiam qui non iusti quoque verè fiunt Now if a man at all times when he is truely iustified be also sanctified what offence can there be to allow one common word to containe and expresse both these parts But men that understand not the true state of things but scumme upon the surface and take things up in grosse without due proportions and come with prejudicate malice to lay hold upon any thing for their owne advantage no marvell if they make strange Popery and in indiscreet zeale cast forth they cannot tell what CALVIN is not afraid loco quo supra to use the very terme of INHERENT righteousnesse Nunquam reconciliamur DEO quin simul donemur IUSTITIA INHERENTE which speech if that M. MOUNTAGU had used no excuse would have put by imputation of Popery To conclude and give them satisfaction if they will take any if not jacta alea est eatur IUSTIFICATION is taken two waies in Scripture Strictè magis and extensivè Precisely for remission of sinnes by the onely merits and satisfaction of CHRIST accepted for us and imputed to us and enlargedly for that Act of GOD and the necessary and immediate concomitants unto and consequents upon that the whole and entire state and quality and condition of man regenerate changed by which a sinner guilty of death is acquitted cleansed made just in himselfe reconciled unto GOD appointed to walke and beginning to
PAUL and S. IAMES reconciled The old Prophets and ancient Fathers made new Papists by the Informers INFORMERS HEe speaketh of an Accesse of Iustification or of a second Iustification His words are these S. IAMES Cap. 2. 24. meaneth that a man is justus declaratus by his holy life and conversation or that a man hath Accesse of Iustification as it is also taught by your owne men CHAP. XVIII pag. 148. MOUNTAGU HEe nameth indeed an Accesse unto Iustification but it is as out of the mouth of Popish Writers and not out of his owne opinion Is there no difference in your understanding betwixt these two Affirming positively and relating reservedly Many Protestants give answer unto Popish objections satisfactorie out of Popish Tenents who yet I think subscribe not unto those their Tenents B. MORTON is most frequent in this course and yet I hope you hold him no Papist But I farther adde Though I said not so in that place by you recyted I may and I doe also avow an accesse of Iustification made unto it by workes of an Holy and a Lively Faith Not as essentiall thereto or ingredient intrinsically for Iustification is properly the work of GOD and eatenus without magis or minus but as accessory and circumsistant for destruction of the Body of sinne by contrary actions of new Righteousnesse to speake properly is a worke of Sanctification not of Iustification according unto S. PAUL But in what place do I speake by name of a second Iustification Goe save your honest credits and name mee the place quote the very words I distinguish indeed betwixt the phrase of S. PAUL and S. IAMES that HEE speaketh of Iustification in attaining it S. IAMES of Iustification attained which cannot be separated from good works as anon is declared and cited out of the twelfth Article of our Confession In briefe the Information is rather an inference upon the passage than the passage expressed as it should be It is known unto all that the Romane Professors have ever in their mouths the Text of S. IAMES What doth it profite though a man saith he hath Faith and hath no Works can his Faith save him Unto this allegation amongst other things this is answered S. PAUL speaketh of Iustification in the attayning it That onely Faith doth justifie and that it is the Act of Faith in regard of man For properly and causally and originally GOD doth onely Iustifie But S. IAMES meaneth of Iustification had and obtained the which necessarily is accompanied with good workes and can bee no more separate from good workes than light from the Sunne So that justus factus through Faith by the grace of God is also justus declaratus by his holy life and conversation that is the tree is knowne by the fruit it bringeth forth Well may we beare the name of Christian men say the Homilies but we lacke that true faith which belongeth thereto for true faith doth evermore bring forth good workes as Saint IAMES speaketh Shew mee thy Faith by thy Workes Thy deeds and workes must bee an open testimonie of thy faith otherwise thy faith being without good workes is but the Divels faith the faith of the wicked a phantasie of faith and not a true Christian faith This is the very declaration of the Homilies for which and no more my Informers have promoted me for a Papist For that Accesse unto Iustification is not by me made essentiall unto Iustification but onely declaratory as I have plainly expressed in direct words It nor is in it selfe nor is delivered by mee nor conceived of by mee to bee any part of or ingredient into the entire Act of proper Iustification I say proper for as your owne Divines acknowledge the word being as most words are extensive ambiguous and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth sometime extend it selfe unto all the naturall consequents unto and proper Acts of Iustification and so it may be said there is a twofold Iustification When S. PAUL saith they are M. PERKINS his words No man is justified by the Law in the sight of GOD he maketh a double Iustification One before GOD the other before men Iustification before GOD is when GOD reputeth a man just and that onely for the merit and obedience of CHRIST Iustification before men is when such as professe faith in CHRIST are reputed just by men The first is peculiarly the act of GOD. Not long before Iustification is a certaine action in GOD applied unto us which is wrought in instanti Good Popery also yet to be found in the same man For if Faith justifieth by disposing the heart thus hee disputeth against the Papists then there must be a space of time between Iustification and justifying Faith But there is no space of time betwixt them for so soone as a man beleeveth he is presently justified Doe you heare M. PERKINS speak of Iustification in instanti according to that old Rule Nescit tarda molimina Spiritus sancti grantia which was learned I thinke from S. AUGUSTINE which place I will presently report who learned it of S. CYPRIAN who Epist 1. speaketh thus Accipe quod sentitur antequam discitur nec per mor as temporum longâ agnitione colligitur sed compendio gratiae maturantis hauritur This he saith seemed to him at the first impossible but in conclusion being called and justified he found it true Vt repentè ac perniciter exuatur quod vel genuinum situ materiae naturalis obduruit vel vsurpatum diu senio vetustatis inolevit I know Renovation Sanctification or the second Iustification for why contend wee about words that agree upon the point is distinct from Remission of our sins by GOD and imputation of CHRISTS righteousnesse unto us wherein is our Acceptance and Iustification and for them both I conclude with S. AUGUSTINE Sanè ista renovatio non momento uno fit sicut momento fit uno illa renovatio in Baptismo remissione omnium peccatorum Neque enim vel unum quantulumcunque remanet quod non remittatur Sed quemadmodum aliud est carere febribus aliud ab infirmitate quae febribus facta est revalescere itemque aliud est infixum telum de corpore demere aliud vulnus quod eo factum est secundâ curatione sanare ita prima curatio est causam removere languoris quod per omnium peccatorum indulgentiam fit Secunda ipsum sanare languorem quod fit paulatim proficiendo in renovatione hujus imaginis Quae duo monstrantur in Psalmo ubi legitur Qui propitius fit omnibus iniquitatibus tuis quod fit in Baptismo Deinde sequitur Qui sanat omnes infirmitates tuas quod fit quotidianis accessibus cùm haec imago renovetur De quae re Apostolus apertissimè loquutus est dicens Et si exterior homo noster corrumpitur sed interior renovatur de die in diem Renovatur autem in agnitione DEI hoc est justitiâ sanctitate
walke in holinesse and in newnesse of life Remission of sinnes and imputation of CHRIST'S Righteousnesse saith M. PERKINS is Iustification a free pardoning and cancelling of all Bands and Obligations of transgression for CHRIST'S sake through the only merit of his Death Passion and shedding of his bloud Which Act Psal XXXII II. is called Not imputing sin When and where GOD doth so pardon and not impute sinne he addeth unto it out of his love a seconding Act of divine mercy and grace enabling man to abandon everie mortall sinne those sinnes that doe hang so fast on that are more eminent notorious enormious whose property is vastare conscientiam to the amolishing of the whole body of sinne that it raigne not in our mortall bodies although that those delicta ordinariae incursionis as TERTULLIAN nameth them cannot so easily bee put away Have I unto you seemed to confound Iustification with Sanctification if yet you knowe the difference between them or have I ascribed in your seeming anie act of Sanctification unto Iustification You may bee pleased to remember that I went not most punctually to work but è re natâ to confute the Gagger described Iustification at large never suspecting that any professed enemies of Popery as you would seem to bee would so captiously have perverted my true sense and meaning my words at least my passage beeing warranted by YOUR owne Dictators CALVIN PERKINS BEZA For Iustificationis nomen largè accipio saith BEZA and imagine them to bee my words ut complectitur quicquid à CHRISTO consequimur tam per Imputationem quà m per Spiritus in nobis Sanctificationem Annotat in Tit. 111. ver VII and in Opusc To. 11. pa. DCLXXVII Otherwise be it known unto your Masterships that I beleeve Iustification in strictnes of tearms is neither Regeneration nor Renovation nor Sanctification but a certaine Action in GOD applied unto us or a certaine respect or relation whereby we are pardoned and acquitted of our sinnes esteemed righteous before GOD and accepted by him in CHRIST unto life everlasting which wiser men than you have so expressed whom haply for my sake you will hold to be Papists heereafter CHAP. VII A change made in a justified man The Author agreeth in part with the Councell of Trent and therfore maintaineth Popery no necessary illation The doctrine of the Church of England and of other reformed Churches in this point of Iustification INFORMERS ANda little after In the state of grace a man is iust when hee is changed Which change must have concurrence of two things Privation of Beeing to that which was The body of sinne and secondly a new constitution unto GOD in another estate In which he that is altred in state changed in condition transformed in mind renew'd in soule regenerate borne anew unto GOD by grace is iust in the state of Iustification ceasing to bee what he was becoming what he was not before In this maine point he accordeth fully with the Councell of TRENT Sess VI. cap. XXXVII contradicteth the Doctrine of the Church of England in the book of Homilies serm of salvation and all other Reformed Churches MOUNTAGU HEER now at length wee have some though very poore shew of a just and formall accusation the rest are but meer calumniations For heer is a charge of delivering Popery and maintaining it and withall an advancing of that charge by pretending some seeming proofe in a threefold branch 1. of According fully with the Councell of TRENT 11. Contradicting the Doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND 111. Dissenting from all other reformed Churches which is done by this one Assertion A change is made in a justified man the substance in briefe of all the former suggestion such an one as maketh mee beleeve that these informations were not gathered by any Scholars or Divines but subscribed unto unadvisedly and collected by some other at odds with his owne little or frantick wits for who can conceive that a just and uniust a carnall and spirituall man should be the same that one regenerate and reformed in the spirit of his mind should be the same that hee was before that a live man should bee dead I confesse I cannot conceive LAZARUS in his grave and sitting at table with our SAVIOUR to have undergone no change nor alteration SAUL a Persecuter and Saint PAUL an Apostle without change the Thiefe upon the Crosse no other man than when hee robbed and killed upon the high-way Was he called justified saved then sure he was changed Had hee not been changed from what hee formerly was hee had not entred into Paradise with our SAVIOUR Hee whose Disciples YOUR Divines are assigned to be never taught you this Learning Fatemur saith he dum nos intercedente CHRISTI justitiâ sibi reconciliat DEUS ac gratuitâ peccatorum remissione donatos pro justis habet cum ejusmodi misericordiâ conjunctam simul esse hanc ejus beneficentiam quòd per Spiritum suum sanctum in nobis habitet cujus virtute concupiscentiae carnis nostrae magis ac magis indies mortificantur Instit III. XIV IX You heare him to speak of righteousnes inhabiting in our hearts by grace diffused from the HOLY GHOST of a progresse in a new course of life from grace to grace from perfection unto perfection which is not a phantasie but reall Nos enim so he addeth sanctifitamur hoc est consecramur DOMINO in veram vitae puritatem cordibus nostris in legis obsequium formatis And somewhat before as hath been remembred already he calleth it a resurrection from death to life and no resurrection but supposeth change when this mortall shall have put on immortality and this corruptible shall have put on incorruption which is indeed the work of the right hand of the Most High and cannot be but betwixt terms that à quo and this ad quem which is the strangest Popery that ever yet I was acquainted withall But why go I about to proove that there is Motion unto those that agree not upon common Principles or bring proofs to ANAXAGORAS for The snowe is white who would not suffer himself to be perswaded so nay because he was otherwise by preconceit perswaded he said it did not so much as seem white unto him YOUR opinions are your owne you will opine what formerly you have thought So doe for mee and there an end If yet you would there make an end and be content to enjoy your conceits unto your selves and make much of them at home but we must come over and conforme our Faith unto your thoughts or wee shall heare of it on both our eares For instance at present Odiously and maliciously you advance this accusation to procure hate and envie unto the part and parties ad oppositum unto you It is the Doctrine you say of the Councell of Trent and M. MOUNTAGU agreeth fully with that Councell But you mistake on each hand and knowe not what you say I do not
agree fully but onely in part with the Councell of Trent And is it not possible to accord in something with the Councell of Trent and to bee no Papist nor maintaine Popery What say you to M. PERKINS in his Reformed Catholick who professeth conformity in many and different points with them and even in this point of Iustification is HEE a Papist Even in your owne understandings though not much there are some Decisions and Conclusions in that Councell which you will imbrace as well as Papists doe What say you to this Si quis ADAE praevaricationem sibi soli non ejus propagini nocuisse asserit acceptam à DEO sanctitatem justitiam quam perdidit sibi soli non nobis eum perdidisse aut in quantum illum per inobedientiae peccatum mortem poenas corporis tantùm in omne genus hominum transfudisse non autem peccatum quod mors est animae Anathema sit and your selves will say Amen will you not unto it It is not therefore a necessary illation M. MOUNTAGU holdeth somewhat determined in the Councell of Trent he is therefore a Papist That Councell were it worse than it was and yet for my part I hold it in some respect pestem Reipublicae Christianae yet resolving upon such a Truth as is warranted in Reason in Divinity with generall consent of all Ages is not in that to be condemned Now such is the point there concluded for which M. MOUNTAGU is called Papist A man justified is changed from that state wherein hee was borne the childe of the first ADAM unto the state of grace and adoption of the Sonnes of GOD by the second ADAM IESUS CHRIST our Saviour and of an unjust person is made righteous of an enemy is made the friend of GOD that so he may become heire of eternall life Which is good Catholick Doctrine non Romano sed antiquo more Christian and justifiable if S. PAUL taught Catholick and Christian Doctrine Rom. V. X. when we were enemies wee were reconciled unto GOD by the death of his Sonne and being reconciled wee shall bee saved by his life And againe Heb. IX XIV For if the bloud of Buls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling them that are unclean sanctifieth as touching the purification of the flesh how much rather shall the bloud of CHRIST who through the eternall Spirit offred himself without spot unto GOD purge your consciences from dead works to serve the living God! Can this bee conceived without a change GOD pardoneth sinne in man for the death and passion of CHRIST his Sonne in that very act and instant imputing unto him the righteousnesse of CHRIST that all-sufficient and well-pleasing sacrifice for his justification and doth he leave him there his sinnes belike remaining still in being as they were himselfe indeed the very man he was before or rather as perfect are the workes of the mightie GOD not done by halves and to no purpose doth hee not also wash and clense his soule and conscience from dead workes doth he not wipe out his iniquities when he cancelleth the band and maketh him become another man doth hee not conferre upon him of his grace for the abolishing of the bodie of sinne and enabling the soule against the assaults of sinne TERTULLIAN compareth man in the state of Nature depraved unto that Leprosie described Levit. XIII where as there is a change in the body made cleane and whole from the leprosie so violent and infectious so doth he and that justly acknowledge the like in the clensing and purifying of the soule Conversum enim hominem de pristino carnis habitu in candorem fidei quae vitium macula aestimatur in saeculo totum novatum mundum voluit intelligi qui jam non sit varius non sit de pristino novo aspersus Si verò post abolitionem in vetustatem aliquid ex ea re vixerit rursum in Carne ejus quòd emortuum delicto habebatur immundum judicari I would TERTULLIAN had never written worse than so The rest of the Fathers run the same way CLEMENS ALEXANDRINUS in his Paedagog pag. 96. and VII Strom. pa. 319. commenting as it were upon that of the APOSTLE But you are washed but you are sauctified DOMINUS qui in mentes nostras indulgentiae coelestis allapsu clementer influxit in animi obtestantis hospitio justa operatione tenetur saith S. CYPRIAN and appealeth unto DONATUS for witnesse Scis c. quid detraxerit nobis quidve contulerit mors ista criminum vita virtutum which generally he had a little before expressed thus Sed postquam undae genitalis auxilio superioris avi labe detersâ in expiatum pectus ac purum desuper se lumen infudit postquà m coelitus spiritu hausto in novum me hominem sensinativitate secundâ reparatum mirum in modum protinus confirmare se dubia patere clausa lucere tenebrosa facultatem dare quod prius difficile videbatur geri posse quod prius impossible videbatur ut esset agnoscere terrenum fuisse quod prius carnaliter natum obnoxium delictis viveret DEI esse coepisse quod jam spiritus animaret Nor doth the Church of England differ heerfrom which never did so much as dreame of denying an alteration in state condition life manners unto a man that is justified How could our Church doe it and make answer unto S. PAUL Ephes 2. 11. 12 13. Wherefore remember that you being in time past Gentiles in the flesh and called uncircumcision of them which are called circumcision in the flesh made with hands that you were I say at that time without CHRIST and were aliens from the common-wealth of Israel and were strangers from the covenants of promise and had no hope but were without GOD in the world But now in IESUS CHRIST you which were farre off are made neere by the bloud of CHRIST So heer is variation of place and station and an alteration also in state ver 19. Now you are no more strangers and forreyners but citizens with Saints and of the houshold of GOD. Not that only but Two made one As if saith CHRYSOSTOM two statues were the one of brasse the other of gold and both being cast into the furnace should from thence come out gold Such is the changed estate of men justified that they are also regenerate and borne anew that are justified I will not justifie the Councell of Trent farther than needs they have not deserved it at the hands of any Protestants but Truth is truth even from the Divels mouth And if they meant no otherwise than thus as I conceive they did not I see no reason to quarrell them or dissent from them But yet one peg higher is this imputation strained namely that I not onely agree with the Councell of Trent but disagree from the Church of England I deny this absolutely prove it and take all If I disagree from the