Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highlie rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Then that our Sauiour was Christ Math. 16 the Sonne of the liuing God And briefly let S. Iohn that great secretarie of the Holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell Ioh 20. These thinges saith he are written that you may beleeue that IESVS is CHRIST the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth very well saying Rom. 10. This is the word of faith which we preach for if thou cōfesse with thy mouth our Lord IESVS CHRIST and shalt beleeue in thy hart that God raised him from death thou shalt be saued And in an other place ◠Cor. 15. I make knowne vnto you the Gospell which I haue preached and by which you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vayne What was that Gospell I haue deliuered vnto you that which I haue receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures was buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the creede is that justifying faith by which you must be saued And neither in S. Paul nor any other place of Holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we applie Christs righteousnes to our selues assure our selues of our saluation is either a justifying or any Christian mans faith but the very naturall act of that ougly Monster presumption Which being layd as the very corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humility and deuotion can they build vpon it The second difference in the manner of justification is about the formall act of faith which M. PERKINS handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as shorte as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many actes of faith feare hope and charity doe goe before our justification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. PERKINS Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the hart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification This joylie description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authority that deliuered it and so let it passe as already sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of this owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hartes be the only sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needes no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would fayne know by the way how litle infants that can not for want of judgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his justice are justified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrary to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before the come to any vnderstanding But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M. PER. findes two faults with it one that we teach faith to goe before justification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both justified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Marry this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and bloud of Christ and is already passed from death to life Io. 6.54 I answere that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his body in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthely obtayneth thereby life euerlasting as Christ saith expressely in that place And so this proofe is vayne Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before justification first by that of S. Paul Whosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord Rom. 10. shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in whome they doe not beleeue how shall they beleeue without a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto justification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterwardes to call vpon God for mercy and finally mercy is graunted giuen in justification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and justification This S. Augustine obserued when he said Faith is giuen first De prede◠sanct ca. 7 De spirit lit cap. 30 by which we obteyne the rest And againe By the lawe is knowledge of sinne by faith we obtayne grace and by grace our soule is cured If we list to see the practise of this recorded in holy write read the second of the actes and there you shall finde how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were stroken to the hartes and beleeued yet were they not straight way justified but asked of the Apostles what they must doe who willed them to doe penance and to be baptized in the name of IESVS in remission of their sinnes then loe they were justified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their justification In like manner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philippe announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that IESVS CHRIST was the Sonne of God no talke in those dayes of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnes yet was he not justified before descending out of his chariot he was baptized Act. 8. And three dayes passed betweene S. Paules conuersion and his justification as doth euidently appeare by the historie of his conuersion Act. 9. The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the minde stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the hart many good spirituall motions But this sayes M. PERKINS is as much to say that dead men only helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned by Gods spirit may haue many good motions for as our spirit giueth life vnto our bodies so the spirit of God by his grace animateth and giueth life vnto our soules But of this it hath beene once before spoken at large in the question of free will Pag. 84. THE THIRD DIFFERENCE CONCERNING FAITH IS this The Papists say that man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as the feare of God hope loue c. The reasons which are brought to maintayne their opinion are of no moment well let vs heare some of them that the indifferent Reader may iudge whether they be of any moment or no. M. PERKINS first Reason
good deuotions of the soule as the actes of Faith Feare Hope Charity Repentance goe before to prepare as it were the way and to make it more sit to receiue that high grace of iustification The second iustification is when a iust man by the exercise of vertues is made more iust as a Childe newe borne doth by nuriture growe day by day bigger of this increase of grace Catholikes hold good workes to be the meritorious cause M. PERKINS first graunteth that good workes doe please God and haue a temporall reward 2. That they are necessary to saluation not as the cause thereof but either as markes in away to direct vs towardes saluation or as fruites and signes of righteousnes to declare one to be just before men all which he shuffleth in rather to delude our arguments then for that they esteeme much of good workes which they hold to be no better then deadly sins The maine difference then betweene vs consisteth in this whether good workes be the true cause indeede of the increase of our righteousnes which we call the second justification or whether they be only fruits signes or markes of it M. PERKINS pretendes to proue that they are no cause of the increase of our justice and yet frames not one argument directly to that purpose but repeates those objections and proposeth them now at large which he made before against the first justification the which although impertinent to this place yet I will solue them first and then set downe our owne We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe 2 Rom. 3. Answere The Apostle there speaketh of the justification of a sinner for he saith before that he hath proued both Iewe and Greeke to be vnder sinne and that all haue sinned and neede the glory of God Wherefore this place appertaynes not vnto the second justification and excludes only either workes of the law as not necessary vnto the first justification of a sinner against the Iewes who thought and taught them to be necessary or else against the Gentils any worke of ours from being any meritorious cause of that first justification for we acknowledge very willingly as you haue heard often before that euery sinner is justified freely of the meere grace of God through the merit of Christ onely and without any merit of the sinner himselfe and yet is not a sinner being of yeares of discretion meerely passiue in that his justification as M. PERKINS very absurdly saith for in their owne opinion he must beleeue which is an action and in ours not onely beleeue but also Hope Loue Repente And this kinde of justification excludeth all boasting in our soules as wel as theirs For as they must graunt that they may not bragge of their faith although it be an act of theirs so necessarily required at their justification that without it they could not be justified euen so let them thinke of the rest of those good preparations which we hold to be necessary that we cannot truly boast of them as though they came of our selues but we confesse all these good inspirations as all other good to descend from the bounteous liberality of the father of lightes and for the yeelding of our consent to them we can no more vaunt then of consenting vnto faith all which is no more then if a man be mired in a lake and vnable of himselfe to get out would be content that an other of his goodnesse should helpe him out of it Yet obserue by the way that Saint Paul forbiddeth not all glorying or boasting Rom. 5. For he gloryeth in the hope of glory of the Sonne of GOD 2. Cor. 10. and in his tribulations Againe He defineth that we may glory in measure and that he might glory in his power And that he was constayned to glory in his visions and reuelations 2. Cor. 12. So that a good Christian may glory in our Lord and in his heauenly giftes so it be in measure and due season Acknowledging them from whence they come But to boast and say that eyther GOD needed vs or that our good partes were cause that GOD called vs first to his seruice is both false and vtterly vnlawefull Ephes 2. So that by grace yea are saued through faith and that not of your selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Is nothing against our Doctrine of justification but too too ignorantly or maliciously cited against it and note also with Saint Augustine that faith is there mentioned Lib. 83. q. 76. to exclude all merites of our workes which went before and might seeme to the simple to haue beene some cause why God bestowed his first grace vpon vs but no vertuous dispositions requisite for the better preparation to the same grace and therefore very fondly doth M. PERKINS inferre that in that sentence Saint Paul speaketh of workes of grace because in the text following hee mentioned good workes Whereas the Apostle putteth an euident distinction betweene those two kinde of workes signifying the first To be of ourselues The second To proceede from vs as Gods workemanshippe created in CHRIST IESVS and the first he calleth Workes simply the second Good workes prepared of God for vs to walke in after our first iustification What grosse ignorance then was it to take these two so distinct manner of workes for the same and to ground himselfe so boldly vpon it Now to his second reason If you be circumcised Gal. 9. you are bound to the whole lawe Hence thus he argueth If a man will be iustified by workes he is bound to fulfill the whole lawe according to the rigour of it That is Paules ground But no man can fulfill the lawe according vnto the rigour of it ergo No man can be iustified by workes He can apply the text prefixed vnto any part of the argument Erit mihi magnus Appollo Saint Paul only saith in these wordes That if you bee circumcised yea are bound to keepe the whole lawe of Moyses M. PERKINS That if a man will be iustified by workes he must fulfill the rigour of the lawe Which are as just as Germains lippes as they say But M. PERKINS sayes that it is Saint Paules ground but he is much deceiued for the Apostles ground is this That circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme and therefore he that would be circumcided did make himselfe subject vnto the whole lawe of the Iewes Of the possibilities of fulfilling the lawe because M. PERKINS toucheth so often that string shall be treated in a distinct question as soone as I haue dispatched this M. PERKINS third Argument Election to saluation is of grace without workes wherefore the iustification of a sinner is of grace alone without workes because election is the cause of iustification Answere That election is of grace without workes done of our owne simple forces or without the workes of
Moyses lawe but not without prouision of good workes issuing out of faith and the helpe of Gods grace as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits OF THE SECOND IVSTIFICATION THE fourth argument A man iust be fully iustified before he can doe a good worke and therefore good workes can not goe before iustification True not before the first justification of a sinner But good Sir you hauing made in the beginning of this last Article a distinction betweene the first and second justification And hauing before discussed the first and the second now remayning and expecting you why did you not say one word of it the matter being ample and well worthy the handling albeit you will not willingly confesse any second justification as you say Yet had it beene your part at least to haue disproued such arguments as we bring to proue a second justification Yee acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification But these degrees must be made downeward of euill worser and worst for if all our sanctification and best workes be like vnto defiled cloutes and no better then deadly sinnes as you hold and else where Pag. 76. let any wise man judge what degrees of goodnes can be lodged in it Againe how absurd is that position that there is but one justification whereby they take fast hold on Christs righteousnes which can neuer after be either loosed or increased Why then doe you with your brother Iouinian maintayne that all men are equally righteous If it so be Lib. 2. con Iouin Epist 81. Epist 57. Hom. 15. in Ezech. let him that desireth to see you well coursed read S. Hier. S. Amb. S. August S. Greg. At least we must needes vphold that a man is as just and righteous at his first conuersion as at his death how Godly a life soeuer he lead against which I will put downe these reasons following First that of the reuelations Let him that is iust be yet iustified or as your text hath it Cap. 22. He that is righteous let him be more righteous and that of feare not to be iustified euen vntill death Eccles 18. doe conuince that there are more justifications then one and that a man may increase in justification and righteousnes vntill death Which is confirmed where it is said That the path of a iust man proceedeth Prob. 4. as the light doth vntill it be perfect day Which is degrees more more And S. Paul teacheth the same where he saith to men that giue almes plentifully 2. Cor. 9. That God will multiply their seede and augment the increases of the fruits of their iustice Further S. Iames doth most effectually proue this increase of righteousnes and the second iustification in these wordes Abraham our father was he not iustified by workes offering Isaac his Sonne vpon the Aultar Cap. 2. That he speaketh of the second iustification is euident for Abraham was iustified before Isaac was borne as it is most manifest by the Scripture it selfe and by that heroicall act of not sparing his onely entirely beloued Sonne Genes 15. Rom. 4. his iustice was much augmented And the Apostle himselfe seemeth to haue forseene all our aduersaries cauillation and to haue so longe before preuented them First that common shift of theirs that this worke was a signe or the fruit onely of his faith and no companion of it in the matter of iustification is formally confuted for the holy Ghost speaking distinctly of both his faith and worke and joyning them both in this act of justification attributeth the better part of it vnto his worke thus Seest thou that faith did worke with his workes and by the workes the faith was consummate and made perfect Which he doth after fitly declare by a similitude comparing faith to the body and good workes to the soule which giue life and lustre to faith otherwise faith is of litle value estimation with God Which S. Paul also teacheth at large among other speeches including this That if he should haue all faith and wanted charity 1. Cor. 13 he were nothing And comparing faith charity together defineth expresly that charity is the greater vertue Which charity is the fountayne of all good workes And so by this preferring these workes of charity before faith he doth stop the other starting hole of the Protestants that Abraham forsooth was justified before God by onely faith but was declared just before men by his workes For if God esteeme more of charity then of our faith a man is more justified before God by charity then by faith Againe in the very place where this noble fact is recorded to shew how acceptable it was to God himselfe it is said in the person of God Gen. 22. Nowe I knowe that thou louest me and to conuince all obstinate cauilling is it not said that his faith did in this very fact cooperate with his workes and that the worke made his faith perfect which conjunction of both of them together doth demonstrate that he speaketh of his justification before God adding also That he was therefore called the friend of God Which could not haue beene if thereby he had beene only declared just before men thus doth S. Augustine reconcile the two places of the Apostles S. Paul S. Iames which seeme contrarie S. Paul saying that a man is iustified by faith without workes and S. Iames that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely That S. Paul speaketh of workes which goe before faith such as we of our owne forces without the helpe of grace are able to doe and such he saith not to deserue our first iustification But S. Iames disputeth of workes which followe faith and issue out of our soules nowe garnished with grace and such he holdeth vs to be iustified by that is made more and more iust See the place He saith directly L. 83. quest q. 76. Serm. 16. de verb. Apos that we are iustified and that this justice doth increase whiles it doth proceede and profit Nothing then is more certaine and cleare then that there our justification may daylie be augmented and it seemeth to me that this also bee graunted in their opinion For they holding faith to be the only instrument of justification cannot deny but that there are many degrees of faith it is so plainely taught in the worde O yee of little faith Math. 8. Luc. 19. And then a little after I haue not founde so great faith in Israell And O Lord increase our faith and many such like where many different degrees of faith are mentioned How then can the justification which dependes vpon that faith not be correspondent vnto that diuersity of faith but all one Pag. 54. Againe M. PERK deliuereth plainly That men at the first are not so well assured of their saluation as they are afterward If then in the certainty of their saluation which is the prime effect of their
ought to doe and consequently doth not so well but that nowe and then he sinneth at the least venially and that therefore the said holy Doctor had just cause to say Li. 9. confess c. 13. Woe be to the laudable life of a man if it be examined without mercy Al which notwithstanding just men may out of that charity which they haue in this life doe many good workes which are pure from all sinne as hath beene proued They alleadge yet another place out of S. Augustine That belongeth vnto the perfection of a iustman Lib. 3. conduas Epist Pelag. c. 7. to knowe in truth his imperfection and in humility to confesse is True that is as he teacheth else where First that the perfection of this life is imperfection being compared with the perfection of the life to come Againe that the most perfect in this life hath many imperfections both of witte and will and thereby many light faultes Now come we vnto S. Gregory our blessed Apostle out of whose sweet wordes ill vnderstood they seeme to haue sucked this their poison Lib. 9. morall cap. 1. He saith The holy man Iob because he did see all the merit of our vertue to be vice if it be straightly examined of the inward iudge doth rightly adde if I will contend with him I cannot answere him one for a thowsand I answere that by our vertue in that place is to be vnderstood that vertue which we haue of our owne strength without the aide of Gods grace which we acknowledge to be commonly infected with some vice that S. Gregory so tooke it appeares by the wordes both going before and following before he writeth thus A man not compared to God receiued iustice but compared vnto him he leeseth it For whosoeuer compareth himselfe vnto the author of all good leeseth that good which he had receiued for he that doth attribute the good vnto himselfe doth sight against God with his owne giftes And after thus To contend with God is not to giue to God the glory of his vertue but to take it to himselfe And so all the merit of this our vertue which commeth not of God but is attributed vnto our selfe as proceeding onely from our selues is the very vice of pride and cannot be prejudiciall vnto true good workes al which we acknowledge to proceede principally from the grace of God dwelling in vs. He saith further with S. Augustine that in this life we cannot attayne vnto perfect purity such as shall be in heauen read the beginning of his first and second booke of Morales and there you shall finde him commending Iob to the skyes as a good and holy man by his temptations not foyled but much aduanced in vertue Now before I depart from this large question of justification I will handle yet one other question which commonly ariseth about it it is WHETHER FAITH MAY BE WITHOVT CHARITY I PROVE that it may so be first out of these wordes of our Sauiour Many shall say vnto me in that day Lord Lord Math. 7. haue we not prophecied in thy name haue we not cast out Diuels haue we not done many miracles to whome I will confesse that I neuer knewe you depart from me all yee that worke iniquitie That these men beleeued in Christ and perswaded themselues assuredly to be of the elect appeareth by their confident calling of him Lord Lord and the rest that followeth Yet Christ declareth manifestly that they wanted charity in saying that they were workers of iniquity Math. 22. 2. When the King went to see his guestes He found there a man not attired in his wedding garment and therefore commaunded him to be cast into vtter darknes This man had faith or else he had not beene admitted vnto that table which signifieth the Sacraments yet wanted charity which to be the wedding garment besides the euidence of the text is also proued where in expresse tearmes Apoc. 19. The garments of Christs Spouse is declared to be the righteousnes and good workes of the Saintes And that with great reason for as S. Paul teacheth 1. Cor. 13. Faith shall not remayne after this life With what instrument then trow you will the Protestants lay hold on Christs righteousnes That charity is that wedding garment S. Hierome vpon the same place doth witnesse saying That it is the fulfilling of our Lordes commaundements And S. Gregory doth in expresse wordes define it Hom. 38. in Euang. What saith he must we vnderstand by the wedding garment but charity So doe S. Hilary and Origen and S. Chrysostome vpon that place Can. 22. in Math. Tract 20. in Math. Math. 25. 3. The like argument is made of the foolish Virgins Who were part of the Kingdome of God and therefore had faith which is the gate entrance into the seruice of God Yea in the house of God they aspired vnto more then ordinary perfection Hauing professed Virginity yet either caried away with vayne glory as S. Gregory takes it Or not giuing themselues to the workes of mercy spirituall and corporall as S. Chrysostome expoundes it briefly not continuing in their former charity for faith once had cannot after the Protestants doctrine be lost were shut out of the Kingdome of heauen albeit they presumed strongly on the assurance of their saluation as is apparant By their confident demaunding to be let in for they said Lord Lord open vnto vs. Ioh. 12. 4. Many of the princes beleeued in Christ but did not confesse him for they loued more the glory of men then the glory of God What can be more euident then that these men had faith whē the H. ghost saith expresly that they beleeued in christ which is the onely act of faith And yet were destitute of charity which preferreth the glorie and seruice of God before al things in this world Cap. 2. 5. This place of S. Iames. What shall it profit my bretheren if any man say that he hath faith but hath not workes what shall his faith be able to saue Supposeth very playnlie that a man may haue faith without good workes that is without charity but that it shall auayle him nothing Caluin saith that the Apostle speakes of a shadowe of faith which is a bare knowledge of the articles of our creede but not of a justifying faith Without doubt he was litle acquainted with that kinde of faith by which Protestants be justified but he directly speakes of such a faith as Abraham was justified by saying That that faith did worke with his workes and was made perfect by the workes Was this but a shadowe of faith but they reply that this faith is likened vnto the faith of the Diuell and therefore cannot be a justifying faith that followeth not an excellent good thing may be like vnto a badde in some thinges as Diuels in nature are not only like that the very same as Angels be euen so a full Christian faith may be well likened
containe in them all doctrine needfull to saluation whether it concerne faith or maners and acknowledge no Traditions for such as hee who beleeueth them not cannot be saued Before wee come to the Protestants reasons against Traditions obserue that we deuide Traditions into three sorts The first we tearmed Diuine because they were deliuered by our blessed Sauiour who is God The second Apostolicall as deliuered by the holy Apostles The third Ecclesiasticall instituted and deliuered by the Gouernours of the Church after the Apostles daies And of these three kindes of Traditions we make the same account as of the writings of the same Authors to wit we esteeme no lesse of our Sauiours Traditions than of the soure Gospels or any thing immediatly dictated from the holy Ghost Likewise asmuch honor credit do we giue vnto the Apostles doctrine vnwritten as writtē For incke paper brought no new holines nor gaue any force and vertue vnto either Gods on the Apostles words but they were of the same value and credit vttered by word of mouth as if they had bene written Here the question is principally of diuine Traditions which we hold to be necessarie to saluation to resolue determine many matters of greater difficultie For we deny not but that some such principall poynts of our Faith which the simple are bounde to beleeue vnder paine of damnation may bee gathered out of the holie Scriptures as for example that God is the Creator of the world Christ the Redeemer of the world the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier and other such like Articles of the Creede M. P. goeth about to prooue by these reasons following that the Scriptures containes all matter of beleefe necessary to saluation Testimonie * Deut. 4.2 Thou shalt not adde to the words that I command thee nor take any thing there from Therefore the written worde is sufficient for all doctrine pertaining to saluation If it be saide that this is spoken as well of the vn-written as written worde for there is no mention in the texte of the written worde then M. P. addeth that it must bee vnderstood of the written worde onely because these wordes are as a certaine preface set before a long Comentarie made vpon the written Law ANSWERE Let the words be set where you will they must not bee wrested beyond their proper signifycation The words cited signifie no more then that wee must not either by addition or subtraction change or peruert Gods commandements whether they be written or vnwritten Now to infer that because they areas a preface vnto MOSES Law that therfore nothing must be added vnto the same Law is extreame dotage Why then were the bookes of the Old Testament written afterward if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught besides that one booke of Deuteronomy Shall we thinke that none of the Prophets that liued and wrote many volumes after this had not read these words or that they either vnderstood them not or that vnderstanding them well did wilfullie transgresse against them one of these the Protestants must needes defend or else for very shame surcease the alleadging of this text for the all-sufficiencie of the written word M. P. His testimonie * Esa 8.2 ◠To the Law and testimonie if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth saith M. P. What is to be done in cases of difficultly men must not runne to the Wizardes and Soothsayers but to the Lawe and to the Testimonie commending the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer ANSWERE By the Lawe and testimonie in that place the fiue bookes of MOSES are to bee vnderstood if that written Worde bee sufficient to resolue all doubts what-so-euer What neede wee then the Prophets what neede wee the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles What Wizarde would haue reasoned in such sorte The Prophet willeth there that the Israelites who wanted wit to discerne whether it be better to flie vnto God for councell than vnto Wizardes and Sooth-sayers to see what is written in the Lawe of MOSES concerning that poynt of consulting-Wizards which is there plainely forbidden in diuerse places Now out of one particular case whereof there is expresse mention in the written worde to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoeuer are thereby to be decided is a most vnskilfull parte arguing as great want of light in him as was in those blinde Israelites 3. Testimonie * Iohn 20.31 These things were written that ye might beleue that IESVS is the CHRIST and in beleeuing might haue life euerlasting Here is set down the full end of the Gospell that is to bring men to faith and consequently to saluation to which the whole scripture alone is sufficient without Traditions ANSWERE Here are more faults than lines First the text is craftily mangled Things being put insteede of Miracles For S. IOHN sayeth Many other Miracles CHRIST did c. but these were written c. Secondly S. IOHN sayth not that for faith we shall be saued but beleeuing we should haue saluation in his name which hee clipped off thirdly remember to what faith S. IOHN ascribes the meanes of our saluation not to that whereby we applie vnto our selues Christs righteousnes but by which we beleeue IESVS to be CHRIST the MESSIAS of the Iewes and the Sonne of God which M. P. also concealed Now to the present matter S. IOHN saith that these miracles recorded in his Gospell were written that wee might beleeue IESVS to bee the Sonne of God and beleeuing haue saluation in his name c. Therefore the written word containes all doctrine necessarie to saluation ANSWERE S. IOHN speakes not a word of doctrine but of myracles and therefore to conclude sufficiencie of doctrine out of him is not to care what one sayeth But M. P. sore-seeing this sayeth it cannot be vnderstood of miracles onely for miracles without the doctrine of CHRIST can bring no man to life euerlasting True and therefore that texte speaking onely of myracles prooueth nothing for the sufficiencie of the written Worde CHRISTS miracles were sufficient to prooue him to bee the Sonne of GOD and their MESSIAS But that prooueth not Saincte IOHNS Gospel to containe al Doctrine needful to saluation For many other poynts of faith must be beleeued also And if it alone be sufficient what neede we the other three Gospelles the Actes of the Apostles or any of their Epistles or the same S. IOHNS Reuelations Finallie admit that S. IOHNS Gospell were all-sufficient yet should not Traditions be excluded for Christ sayeth in it in plaine tearmes * Ioh. 16. that he had much more to saye vnto his Apostles but they as then being not able to be are it he reserued that to be deliuered vnto them afterward of which high mysteries S. IOHN recordeth not much in his Gospell after Christs resurrection and so many of them must needes be deliuered by
Luke 7.47 MANY sinnes are forgiuen her because she hath loued much whence they gather that the woman there spoken of had pardon of her sinnes and was iustified by loue Answere In this text loue is not made an impulsiue cause to moue God to pardon her sinnes but only a signe to shew that God had already pardoned them Reply Obserue first that Catholikes doe not teach that she was pardoned for loue alone for they vse not as Protestants doe when they finde one cause of justification to exclude all or any of the rest But considering that in sundry places of holy write justification is ascribed vnto many seuerall vertues affirme that not faith alone but diuers other diuine qualities concurre vnto justification and as mention here made of loue excludeth not faith hope repentance and such like so in other places where faith is only spoken of there hope charity and the rest must not also be excluded This sinner had assured beleefe in Christes power to remitte sinnes and great hope in his mercy that he would forgiue them great sorrowe and detestation of her sinne also she had that in such an assembly did so humbly prostrate her selfe at Christes feete to wash them with her teares and to wipe them with the haires of her head And as shee had true repentance of her former life so no doubt but shee had also a firme purpose to leade a newe life So that in her conuersion all those vertues mette together which we holde to concurre to justification and among the rest the preheminence worthely is giuen to loue as to the principall disposition She loued our Sauiour as the fountayne of all mercies and goodnes and therefore accounted her pretious oyntements best bestowed on him yea and the humblest seruice and most affectionate she could offer him to be all too little and nothing answerable to the inward burning charity which she bare him Which noble affection of hers towardes her diuine Redeemer no question was most acceptable vnto him as by his owne word is most manifest for he said That many sinnes were forgiuen her because she loued much But M. PERKINS saith that her loue was no cause that moued Christ to pardon her but only a signe of pardon giuen before which is so contrary to the text that a man not past all shame would blush once to affirme it First Christ saith expreslie that it was the cause of the pardon Because shee had loued much Secondly that her loue went before is as playnlie declared both by mention of the time past Because she hath loued and by the euidence of her fact of washing wiping and anoynting his feete for the which saith our Sauiour then already performed Manie sinnes are forgiuen her So that here can be no impediment of beleeuing the Catholike Doctrine so clearly deliuered by the holy Ghost vnlesse one will be so blindly ledde by our new Masters that he will beleeue no wordes of Christ be they neuer so playne otherwise then it please the Ministers to expound them And this much of the first of those reasons which M. PERKINS said were of no moment 2. Reason Neither Circumcision nor prepuce auayleth any thing Gal. 5.6 but faith that worketh by charity Hence Catholikes gather that when the Apostle attributeth iustification to saith he meanes not faith alone but as it is ioyned with charity and other like vertues as are requisite to prepare the soule of man to receiue that complete grace of iustification M. PERKINS answereth that they are joyned together But it is faith alone that apprehendeth Christs righteousnes and maketh it ours It vseth charity as an instrument to performe the duties of the first and second table but it hath no part with faith in the matter of our iustification Reply That it hath the chiefest part and that faith is rather the instrument and hand mayd of charity My proofe shall be out of the very text alleadged where life and motion is giuen to faith by charity as the greeke word Energoumene being passiue doth playnlie shewe that faith is moued led and guided by charity Which S. Iames doth demonstrat most manifest saying that Euen as the body is dead without the soule so is faith without charity Making charity to be the life and as it were the soule of faith Now no man is ignorant but it is the soule that vseth the body as an instrument euen so then it is charity that vseth faith as her instrument and inferiour and not contrarywise which S. Paul confirmeth at large in a whole chapter prouing charity to be a more excellent gift then faith or any other concluding with these wordes Now there remayneth faith hope and charity 1. Cor. 13. these three but the greater of these is charity Whereupon S. Augustine resolueth thus Nothing but charity maketh faith it selfe auaylable Li. de Trinit cap. 18. for faith saith he may be without charity but it can not be auaylable without it So that first you see that charity is the mouer and commaunder and faith as her instrument and hand mayde Now that in the worke of justification it hath the chiefe place may be thus proued I demaund whether that worke of justification by faith be done for the loue of God and to his honour or no If not as it is voyd of charity so it is a wicked and sinnefull act no justification but infection our owne interest being the principall end of it now if it comprehend conclude Gods glory and seruice in it that is if they apply Christs righteousnes to them to glorifie God thereby then hath charity the principall part therein for the directing of all to the honour and glory of God is the proper office and action of charity All this reason that charity both concurreth to justification and that as principall S. Augustine confirmeth in these wordes Serm. 22. de verbis Apostol The house of God that is a righteous and Godly soule hath for his foundation faith hope is the walles of it but charity is the roofe and perfection of it The third of these trifling reasons is peruersly propounded by M. PER. thus Faith is neuer alone therefore it doth not iustifie alone That this argument is fondly framed appeereth playnlie in that that Catholikes doe not deny but affirme that faith may be without charity as it is in all sinnefull Catholikes we then forme the reason thus If faith alone be the whole cause of justification then if both hope and charity were remoued from faith at least by thought and in conceipt faith would neuerthelesse justifie But faith considered without hope charity will not justifie ergo it is not the whole cause of justification The first proposition can not be denyed of them who knowe the nature and proprietie of causes for the entire and total cause of any thing being as the Philosophers say in act the effect must needes followe and very sence teacheth the simple that if any thing
this wee must beleeue that there is nothing else which wee may beleeue ANSWERE By the Gospell there is vnderstood all our Christian doctrine written and vnwritten and not onelie the written worde of the foure Euangelists else wee should not beleeue the Actes of the Apostles or their Epistles no more than Traditions which Christian doctrine written and vnwritten we onely beleeue by diuine faith to all other Authors we giue such credit as their writings do deserue If anie man desire to see TERTVLLIANS judgement of Traditions let him read his booke of prescriptions against Heretikes where he auerreth that Traditions serue better than the Scriptures themselues to confute all Heresies Heretikes alwaies either not allowing all the bookes of Scripture or else peruerting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures And in his booke De Corona militis he formallie proposeth this question Whether Traditions vnwritten are to be admitted or no and answereth by manie instances that they must be receiued concluding thus For these and the like poynts if thou require law out of the Scriptures thou shalt finde none but Tradition is alleadged to be the Author of them Custome the confirmer and Faith the obseruer So that nothing is more certaine than that TERTVLLIAN thought vnwritten Traditions necessarie to be beleeued Come we now vnto his second testimonie out of S. IEROM * In cap. 23 Mat. who writing as he saith of an opinion that S. IOHN Baptist was killed because he foretold the comming of Christ the good-man would saye ZACHARIE S. IOHNS Father for the Scripture sheweth plainely why S. IOHN lost his head * Mat. 14 But S. IEROM there sayeth this Because it hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easelie be contemned as approoued But of which particular M. P. shewing himselfe a doughtie Logician would inforce an vniuersall that sorsooth all may be contemned that is not proued by Scripture As if you would prooue no Protestant to bee skilfull in the art of true reasoning because M. P. behaues himselfe in it so vnskilfully But S. IEROM in the same place declareth why that might be as easely reprooued as allowed not hauing anie ground in the Scripture because saith he It is taken out of the dreames of some Apocryphall writings opposing Scripture to other improoued writings and not to approoued Traditions to which hee saith in his Dialogues against the Luciferians before the middle That the Church of God doth attribute the like authoritie as it doth vnto the written Law M. P. His third Author is S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 2. de doct Chri. cap. 9. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scriptures are found all those poynts which containe faith and maners of liuing well ANSWERE All things necessarie to be beleeued of euerie simple Christian vnder paine of damnation that is the Articles of our Beleefe are contayned in the Scriptures but not the resolution of harder matters much lesse of all difficulties which the more learned must expressely beleeue if they will be saued which distinction S. AVGVSTINE else-where doth signifie * De peccatorū meritis cap. vlt. And is gathered out of manie other places of his workes as in that matter of rebaptizing them who became Catholikes after they had bene baptized by Heretikes He saith * Lib. 5. de bapt contra Donat. cap. 23. The Apostles truely haue commanded nothing hereof in their writings but that custome which was layed against S. CYPRIAN is to bee beleeued to haue flowed from an Apostolicall tradition as there be many things which the vniuersall Church holdeth and therefore are to be beleeued The same saith he of the custome of the Church in Baptizing infants * De genes ad litra lib. 10. cap. 23. And in his Epist 174. of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not in the holy Scripture and yet neuerthelesse is defended to be vsed in the assertion of faith As also saieth he we neuer read in those bookes that the Father is vnbegotten and yet wee hold that he is so to be called * Lib. 3. cap 3. cont max Arianum And S. AVGVSTINE holdes that the holie Ghost is to be adored though it be not written in the word The like of the perpetuall Virginitie of our B. Ladie * Haeresi 4. out of which and many more such like we gather most manifestlie that S. AVGVSTINE thought many matters of faith not to be contayned in the written worde but to be taken out of the Churches treasurie of Traditions M. P. His last testimonie is taken out of Vincentius Lirinensis who sayth as he reporteth that the Canon of the Scripture is perfecte and fullie sufficient for all things ANSWERE I thinke that there is no such sentence to be found in him he saies by way of objection What neede we make recourse vnto the authoritie of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect Hee affirmeth not that they be fullie sufficient to determine all controuersies in religion but throughout all his booke he prooues the cleane contrarie that no heresie can be certainelie confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholike Church Thus M. P. hauing ended with the Law Testimonie addeth in a postscript two other slender reasons vnto his former The first that Christ and his Apostles vsed alwaies to confirme their doctrine with the testimonies of Scriptures and not with Tradition ANSWERE Fist for our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS he out of his diuine wisdome deliuered his doctrine most commonly in his owne name But I saye vnto you And verie seldome confirmeth it with any testimonie out of the Law The Euangelists do often note how CHRIST fulfilled the old prophecies but neuer or very seldome seeke to confirme his doctrine by testimonies their owne they doe sometimes but to saye they neuer wrote any thinge out of Tradition proceedes of most grosse ignorance Where had Saint MATHEVV the adoring of the Sages S. IOHN Baptists preaching briefelie that was done before his owne conuersion but by Tradition S. MARK wrote the most part of his Gospell out of Tradition receiued from S. PETER as witnesseth EVSEBIVS * Lib. 2. hist cap. 14. S. LVLE testifyeth of himselfe that he wrote his whole Gospell * Cap. 1. as he had receiued it by Tradition from them who were eye-witnesses What desperate carelesnesse was it then to affirme that the Apostles neuer vsed Tradition to confirme any doctrine when some of them built not onely parcels but their whole Gospels vpon Traditions His other reason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessarie to saluation then we must aswell beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not else-where to be sound but in their bookes but that were absurde for they might erre ANSWERE That doth not follow for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswel kept in
Tradition vnwritten This place of S. IOHN M. P. patcheth vp with an other of S. PAVL * Gal. 1. ◠If we or an Angell from heauen preache vnto you any thing besides that which wee haue preached let him be accursed And to this effect he blames them that taught but a diuers doctrine to that which he had taught * 1. Tim. 1.3 ANSWERE Now wee must looke vnto this Gentle-mans singers There were three corruptions in the text of S. IOHN here is one but it is a soule one In steed of Preaching vnto them an other Gospell he puts preach vnto them any other thing when there is great difference betweene an other Gospell any other thing The Gospel comprehendeth the principal poynts of faith the whole worke of Gods building in vs which S. PAVL like a wise Architect * 1. Cor. 3 12. had layd in the Galathians others his fellow-work-men might build vpon it gold siluer and pretious stones with great merit to themselues and thankes from S. PAVL Mary if any should digge vp that blessed and onely foundation and would laye a new one him S. PAVL holdeth for accursed So that that falcification of the text is intollerable and yet when all is done nothing can be wringed out of it to prooue the written word to comprehend all doctrine needefull to saluation for S. PAVL speaketh there onely of his Gospell that is of his preaching vnto the Galathians and not one worde of any written Gospel No more doth he in that place to TIMOTHY And so it is nothing to purpose The fourth Testimonie * 2. Tim. 3.16 The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and to instruct to righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect vnto euery good worke In these words are contayned saith M. P. two arguments to prooue the sufficiencie of Scripture The first that which is profitable to these foure vses to teach al necessarie truth is not in the text to confute errors to correct faults in maners to instruct all men in all dutie is M. P. his addition to the text that is sufficient to saluation But the Scriptures serue for all these vses c. ANSWERE This text of holy Scripture is so farre from yeelding our aduersaries two Arguments that it affoordeth not so much as any probable colour of halfe one good argument In searching out the true sence of holy Scriptures wee must obserue diligently the nature proper signifycation of the words as M. P. also noteth out of S. AVGVSTINE in his sixt objection of this question which if the Protestants did here performe they would make no such account of this text for S. PAVL saith only that all Scripture is profitable not sufficient to teach to reproue c. How are they then carried away with their owne partiall affections that cannot discerne betweene profitable and sufficient Good Timber is profitable to the buylding of an house but it is not sufficient without stones morter a Carpenter Seede serues well yea is also necessarie to bring forth corne but will it suffice of it selfe without manuring of the ground and seasonable weather And to fit our purpose more properlie good lawes are verie profitable yea most expedient for the good gouernment of the common-wealth But are they sufficient without good customes good gouernours and judges to see the same Laws customs rightly vnderstood and duely executed Euen so the holy Scripturs S. PAVL affirmeth are very profitable as contayning very good necessary matter both to teach reproue correct but he saith not they are sufficient or that they do containe all doctrine needfull for these foure ends And therefore to argue out of S. PAVL that they are sufficient for all those purposes when he saieth onely that they are profitable to them is plainely not to know or not to care what a man saith And to presse such an impertinent cauil so often and so vehemently as the Protestants do is nothing els but to bewray vnto the indifferent reader either their extreame ignorance or most audacious impudencie that thinke they can face out any matter be it neuer so impertinent The same answere I make vnto M. P. his second argument out of the same place that the holy Scriptures bee profitable to make the man of God absolute but not sufficient I say more-ouer that M. P. doth falsely English these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the whole Scriptures when it signifyeth all Scripture that is euerie booke of Scripture and is there put to verifie that the Old Testament only serues to instruct to saluation For in the words next before S. PAVL sheweth how that TIMOTHY from his infancie had bene trayned vp in the knowledge of the holy Scriptures which saith he can instruct thee to saluation And annexeth as the confirmation thereof the Text cited All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach c. Now in TIMOTHYS infancie no parte of the New Testament was written and therefore all Scripture which is here put to prooue that Scripture which TIMOTHY in his Infancie knew cannot but by vnreasonable wresting signifie more than all the bookes of the Olde Testament So that there are three soule faultes in this the Protestants Achilles The first in falsification of the text that it might seeme to bee spoken of the whole which is spoken of euerie part The second in applying that which is spoken of the Olde Testament vnto both the Olde and New The third in making that to be all-sufficient which S. PAVL affirmeth onely to be profitable And this is all they can saye out of the Scripture to prooue that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation Where-upon I make this invincible argument against them out of this their owne position Nothing is necessarie to be beleeued but that which is written in holy Scripture But in no place of Scripture is it written that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation as hath bene prooued Therefore it is not necessarie to saluation to beleeue the written worde to containe all doctrine needefull to saluation And by the same principle I might reject all testimonie of Antiquitie as needelesse if the Scriptures be so al-sufficient as they hold Yet let vs here what testimonie M. P. brings out of antiquitie in fauour of his cause TERTVLLIAN * De resur carnis saith Take from Heretikes the opinions which they defend with the Heathens that they may desende their questions by Scripture alone and they cannot stand ANSWERE Here Scripture alone is opposed as euerie one may see vnto the writings of Heathen Authors and not to the Traditions of the Apostles and therefore maketh nothing against them Againe saieth M. P. out of the same Author We neede no curiositie after IESVS CHRIST nor inquisition after the Gospel when we beleeue it we desire to beleeue nothing besides it for