IVSTIFIcation onely by fayth The Papists error 94 FAyth is not the only cause of our iustificatiō but there are other also as hope charitie almes deedes and other vertues Rhemist Roman 8. sect 6. Yea workes are more principall then fayth in the matter of iustification Iam. 2. sect 7. Whosoeuer therefore sayth that a man is iustified onely by fayth and that nothing els is required to iustification we pronounce him accursed Trident. Concil sess 6. can 9. Argum. 1. Rom. 8.24 We are saued by hope Ergo not onely by fayth Rhemist Answ. 1. We are sayd to be saued by hope not because wee are thereby iustified but because by hope we do expect and waite for our saluation which is not yet accomplished as it followeth vers 25. If wee hope for that wee see not then doe we with patience abide for it Argum. 2. Galath 5.6 Fayth that worketh by charitie Fayth then hath her whole actiuitie and operation toward saluation of charitie It doth not therefore iustifie vs alone but fayth and charitie together of the which charitie is the more principall Rhemist ibid. Answ. We graunt that it is a working fayth that doth iustifie as the Apostle here sayth but not as it worketh but as it apprehendeth and beleeueth Charitie is a principall effect of fayth and followeth it how then can fayth receiue actiuitie from charitie the effect doth not giue life to the cause You know Augustine often sayth Opera non praecedunt iustificandum sed sequuntur iustificatum Workes goe not before vnto iustification but followe in him that is already iustified But if charitie should beget fayth then workes proceeding of charitie should goe before fayth by the which wee are iustified The Apostle sayth Without fayth it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 Ergo neither doth charitie please God without fayth Fayth giueth actiuitie to charitie how then can it receiue that which it giueth Argum. 3. Iam. 2.24 We see how that of deedes a man is iustified and not of fayth onely Ergo we are not iustified by fayth onely Rhemist Answ. Saint Iames is not contrary to his fellow Apostle Saint Paul who concludeth Rom. 3.28 that We are iustified by fayth without workes that is as much to say as by fayth onely And he excludeth not onely workes of nature or of the law but euen workes of grace which God hath ordayned Ephes 2.10 Therefore S. Iames in saying we are not iustified by faith onely meaneth not that iustification whereby we are made iust before God for then he should impugne Saint Pauls principles But by iustifiyng or being iustified he vnderstandeth nothing els but to be declared iust as well before men as in the sight of God which declaration is testified and shewed forth by our workes proceeding of faith Thus the word iustified is taken Rom. 3.4 That thou maist be iustified in thy words that is knowne or declared to be iust Augustine also sayth Iustificabuntur id est iusti habebuntur They shall be iustified that is counted iust as we also say Sanctificetur nomen id est sanctum habeatur Let thy name bee sanctified that is reputed and acknowledged to be holy amongst men The Protestants WE are not enemies to good workes as our aduersaries falsely charge vs nay we preach good workes we exhort to good workes we establish good workes teaching the right vse of them out of the word of God which is not to concurre or be ioyned with faith in our iustification but to follow necessarily and issue out of faith as liuely testimonies thereof to the glorie of God the example of others and our comfort but faith it is onely which as a liuely instrument ordained of God doth assure vs of our iustification by grace in Christ. Argum. 1. Saluation is ascribed onely to beleefe Mark 16.16 Act. 16.31 But it is the propertie of faith onely to beleeue not of hope or charitie the effect of hope is by patience to abide Rom. 8.25 The operations also of loue are set forth 1. Corinth 13. Where amongst other Loue is sayd to beleeue all things that is mutuall loue amongst men is not mistrustfull but taketh all things in good part but to beleeue the things of God it is the propertie onely of faith as Augustine vpon those words of the Apostle How shall they call vpon him on whom they haue not beleeued In his duobus tria illa intuere fides credit spes charitas orant In these two behold those three faith beleeueth hope and charitie pray Faith therefore onely beleeueth and so consequently onely iustifieth Enchirid. cap. 7. Argum. 2. Our iustification and saluation is of the meere grace and mercie of God not at al of any merite or desert in vs Ergo we are iustified only through faith for it is of grace that we are saued through faith Ephes. 2.8 That all is to bee ascribed onely to the mercie and grace of God the Apostle euery where sheweth Rom. 9.12 It is not in him that willeth or runneth but in God that sheweth mercie We are iustified freely by grace Rom. 3.24 What hast thou that thou hast not receiued Augustine saith Intelligenda est gratia Dei per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum qua sola liberamur à malo We must vnderstand the grace of God by Iesus Christ by the which we are onely deliuered from euill Si quid boni est magni vel parui donum tuum est nostrum non est nisi malum si quid boni vnquam habui à te recepi If there bee any good in vs much or little it is thy gift nothing is ours but the euill in vs Ergo all good things are of God and onely of his grace and therefore our iustification Argum. 3. There are many euident places which doe attribute our iustification to faith without workes Rom. 3.28.11.8 Ephes. 2.8.9 In all these places in plaine termes We are sayd to bee iustified by faith without workes As for those friuolous euasions that the Apostle speaketh of the first iustification not of the second or of the workes of nature or of the lawe not of grace we haue answered before Quaest. 2. part 3. artic 3. If they will oppose that saying of S. Iames. 2.24 we answere with Augustine Nec Apostoli sunt inter se aduersi ille dicit Abrahae opus omnibus notum in filij immolatione magnum opus sed ex fide laudo fructum boni operis sed in fide agnosco radicem The Apostles are not contrarie one to the other he sayth Abrahams worke was knowne to all in offering vp his sonne a great worke but of faith I praise the fruite but it was rooted in faith His meaning then is this that Abraham was iustified that is declared to men to be iust by this worke HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES AS doe arise betweene the Protestants and Papists about the natures of Christ. WE haue now through Gods gracious assistance entreated of all those
how all men are iustified before God and what is the vse of the sacraments in all men and therefore it is no extraordinary or exempt case but the common case of all the faithfull that righteousnes saith the Apostle might be imputed to them also Rom. 4. 11. Secondly although Isaac with many other were first circumcised and after iustified yet this is perpetuall they were no more iustified by circumcision then Abraham who was iustified before he was circumcised but by faith onely and therefore the Sacraments are seales of the iustice of faith whether the iustice of faith goe before or follow after Argum. 2. Augustine saith In Isaac qui octauo die circumcisus fuit praecessit signaculū iustitiae fidei et quoniam patris fidem imitatus est secuta est in crescente ipsa iustitia cuius signaculum in infante praecesserat In Isaac who was circumcised the eight day the seale of the righteousnes of faith went before and because he did follow his fathers faith as he grew iustice it selfe followed the seale whereof went before in his infancy Ergo circumcision was a seale as well to Isaac as to Abraham and so consequently to all THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments THis question also hath diuerse partes First whether the Sacraments do giue or conferre grace by the worke wrought Secondly of the difference of the Sacraments of the olde and new testament Thirdly whether the Sacraments of the new law doe imprint a signe or character in the soule that can neuer be put out Fourthly of the necessity of the Sacraments THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE SACRAMENTS of them selues doe giue or conferre grace The Papistes error 92 THe Sacraments giue grace ex opere operato by the worke wrought that is by force and vertue of the worke and word done and said in the sacrament Rhemist Act. 22. sect 1. So that not faith onely iustifieth but the Sacraments also and other workes of religion Rhemist Rom. 6. sect 5. The Sacraments then are immediate instruments and efficient causes of our iustification not mediately as they nourish and encrease our faith but properly and in themselues Faith in the receiuer giueth no efficacie to the Sacrament but onely taketh away the lets and impediments which might hinder the efficacie of the Sacrament as the drynes of the wood maketh it to burne the better yet is it no efficient cause of the burning which is the fire onely but onely a helpe Thus they compare the Sacrament working of it selfe to fire that burneth and faith is as the drying of the wood but a disposing and preparing of the hart Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram cap. 1. Argum. 1. Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Act. 22. ver 16. The Sacrament of Baptisme doth of it selfe wash away sinnes Rhemist And we see in S. Iames that remission of sinnes is annexed to the vnction with oyle Rhemist 1. Timoth. 4.14 Ergo the Sacraments giue and conferre grace Ans. 1. To the first we answer that the text ioyneth with the Sacrament the inuocation of the name of God to the which saluation is promised Rom. 10.13 to wash away sinnes wherefore that place maketh nothing for your purpose Secondly in the other place health of body is promised by the gift of miracles but remission of sinnes is said to be obtained by the praier of the Elders The praier of faith shall saue the sick Iam. 5.15 Argum. 2. S. Paul saith He hath cleansed his Church by the lauer of water in the word Ephes. 5.26 Ergo baptisme is an instrumental cause of our iustification Bellarm. Ans. 1. It is not vnusuall in the Scripture to call the signe or Sacrament by the thing signified as Exod. 12.11 the Paschall Lambe is called the Passeouer whereas it was but a signe and memoriall thereof So Baptisme is called The lauer of regeneration Tit. 3.5 because it is a sure signe of our regeneration by the holy Ghost Secondly the Apostle in this place expoundeth himselfe for he saith that We are washed by water in the word that is the outward element doth send and referre vs to the word and promise of God whereof it is a seale The Protestants THe sacraments haue no power to giue or conferre grace to the receiuer neither are they immediate instruments of our iustification instrumentall meanes they are to encrease and confirme our faith in the promises of God of themselues they haue no operation but as the spirit of God worketh by them our internall senses being moued and quickened by those externall obiects Neither doe we say that the sacraments are bare and naked signes of spirituall graces but they doe verily exhibite and represent Christ to as many as by faith are able and meete to apprehend him So to conclude looke how the word of God worketh being preached so doe the sacraments but the word doth no otherwise iustifie vs but by working faith at the hearing thereof So sacraments doe serue for the encrease of our faith faith is not a seruant and handmaide to the sacraments as the Iesuite declared by the homely similitude of the fire and drie wood but faith is the more principall and the sacraments haue no other vse or end then as they are helpes for the strengthening of our faith Grace of themselues they can giue or conferre none Argum. 1. Rom. 1.17 The iust shall liue by faith Ergo he liueth not that is he is not iustified by any worke wrought as by the sacraments but onely by faith faith therefore giueth life and efficacie to the sacramentes it is not contained absolutely in themselues Againe Saint Paul saith That faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes before he was circumcised Rom. 4.10 Ergo he was not iustified by circumcision no more are we by the sacraments but both he and we are iustified onely by faith Argum. 2. Saint Peter sayth Baptisme saueth vs not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but in that a good conscience maketh request vnto God by the resurrection of Christ 1. Pet. 3.21 Ergo it is faith in the resurrection of Christ which worketh in vs peace of conscience and not the outward washing that saueth or iustifieth Kemnitij argum Augustine thus writeth Aliud est aqua sacramenti aliud aqua quae significat spiritum dei ista visibilis est abluit corpus significat quid fit in anima per illum spiritum anima mundatur saginatur The water of the Sacrament is one thing the water which signifieth the spirit is another the one is visible and washeth the flesh and signifieth what is done in the soule but by the spirit the soule is cleansed The Sacrament of Baptisme then by this fathers sentence and so all other sacraments doe not giue grace but signifie onely and represent grace THE SECOND PART OF THE difference of the olde and new Sacraments error 93 THe sacrifices and ceremonies of the olde law were so farre
life or quickening to bee made a true and right faith The words then are thus to be read and distinguished So faith without works is dead that is this kinde of faith which neither worketh nor euer shall Not thus Faith is dead without workes as though a true faith were quickened by works But euen as the bodie is dead hauing neither soule nor the operations thereof life motion sense so this vaine speculatiue kinde of faith is dead both wanting the spirite and soule that is hauing not one sparke of true faith neither the operations and fruites thereof which a liuely faith sheweth by loue as the soule worketh life and motion in the bodie for a liuely faith can neuer bee without workes And a dead faith will neuer haue workes but remaineth dead for euer Wee must not therefore thinke that it is one and the same faith which sometime is dead without workes and againe is made aliue and quickened when workes come But wee must vnderstand two kindes of faith one altogether voide of good workes which is onely a faith in name and a verie dead faith Another is a liuelie faith alwaies working and this can neuer become a dead faith so neither can the other bee euer made a liuelie faith Argum. That charitie is not the forme or any cause of faith but the effect rather and fruite thereof we doe learne out of the word of God Christ saith Iohn 3.18 Hee that beleeueth shall not bee condemned but is alreadie passed from death to life Iohn 5.24 Faith then is able to saue vs and alone iustifieth vs before God without loue which alwaies foloweth a true faith but is not ioyned or made a partner with it in the matter of iustification But faith could doe nothing without the forme thereof Ergo charitie is not the forme of faith Saint Paul also faith Faith which worketh by loue Galath 5.6 The being and substance of faith is one thing the working another Loue onely concurreth with faith in the working it is no part of the essence or being of faith August Ea sola bona opera dicenda sunt quae fiunt per dilectionem haec necesse est antecedat fides vt inde ista non ab istis incipiat illa Those onely are to bee counted good workes which are wrought by loue faith of necessitie must goe before for they must take their beginning from faith and not faith from them Faith then goeth before loue that worketh therefore loue is not the forme of faith for forma prior est re formata the forme should goe before the thing formed THE FOVRTH PART HOW MEN are iustified by faith The Papists WEe are saide to bee iustified by faith because faith is the beginning error 81 foundation and the roote of iustification Concil Triden sess 6. cap. 8. Faith then by their sentence doth not fully iustifie the beleeuer but is the beginning way and preparation onely to iustification Andrad ex Tilem de fide err 11. Rhemist Rom. 3. sect 3. The Protestants FAith is not the beginning onely of our iustification but the principall and onely worker thereof neither are wee iustified in part or in whole by any other meanes then by faith Argum. He that is at peace with God is fully and perfectly iustified his conscience cleared and his sinnes remitted But by faith wee haue peace of conscience Ergo by faith wee are fullie and perfectly iustified Rom. 5.1 The Scripture also faith The iust man shall liue by faith Rom. 1.17 But wee liue not by iustification begun onely but perfited and finished Ergo our full iustification is by faith Augustine vpon these words Iohn 6.29 This is the worke of God that yee beleeue c. Si iustitia est opus Dei quomodo erit opus Dei vt credatur in eum nisi ipsa sit iustitia vt credamus in eum If iustice or righteousnes bee the worke of God how is it the worke of God to beleeue in him vnlesse it be righteousnes it selfe to beleeue in him See then it is not initium iustitiae credere sed ipsa iustitia it is not the beginning of iustice to beleeue but iustice and righteousnes it selfe THE FIFT PART WHETHER faith bee meritorious The Papists BY faith we doe merite eternall life Catechis Roman p. 121. ex Tilemann de error 82 fide err 20. Rhemists also ascribe meriting to faith Rom. 3. sect 3. Argum. Faith is a worke Ergo if we be iustified by faith wee are iustified by workes and soe consequently by merite The Protestants Ans. FAith in deed is a worke but not any of our owne works it is called the worke of God Iohn 6.29 God doth wholly worke it in vs Ergo wee cannot merite by it Argum. Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.8 By grace are you saued through faith not of yourselues for it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Faith then is no meritorious cause of our iustification but onely an instrumentall meanes whereby we doe apprehend the grace of God offered in Christ God giueth both faith and the end of faith Vtrumque Dei est as Augustine saith quod iubet quod offertur Beleeue and thou shalt be saued both come of God the thing commanded that is faith and the thing offered namely saluation Ergo all is of grace THE SIXT PART WHETHER to beleeue bee in mans power The Papists RHemist Act. 13. sect 2. giue this note that the Gentiles beleeued by their error 83 owne free will though principallie by Gods grace therefore to beleeue partly consisteth in mans free will though not altogether this is their opinion The Protestants FAith is the meere gift of God Ephes. 2.8 and wholly commeth from God it is not either in part or whole of our selues Argum. Rom. 11.36 Of him through him and for him are all thinges Ergo fidei initium ex ipso neque hoc excepto ex ipso sunt caetera Therefore saith Augustine the beginning of our faith is of him vnlesse wee will say that all things else are of God this onely excepted And afterward hee sheweth that our faith is wholly of God not part of him part of our selues Sic enim homo quasi componet cum Deo vt partem fidei sibi vendicet partem Deo relinquat So man shall as it were compound with God to chalenge part of faith to himselfe and leaue part for God THE SEVENTH PART WHEther faith may be lost The Papists error 84 A Man may fall away from the faith which once truely he had as Saint Paul saith of some They had made shipwrack of faith 1. Timoth. 1.19 Rhemist ibid. Ergo true faith may be lost The Protestants Ans. THe Apostle saith Some hauing put away a good cōscience made shipwrack of faith Such a faith in deed that hath not a good cōscience may be lost for it is not a true liuely faith but a dead fruitelesse faith Argum. But hee that once
by good workes Rhemist Rom. 2.3 Ans. This is but a late and new deuice of the first and second iustification as afterward we wil shew in the proper place The scripture teacheth vs that not onely the beginning of our righteousnes but the finishing and perfiting of it is onely by grace in Christ Ephes. 2.5.6 When we were dead in our sinnes he hath quickned vs together in Christ by whose grace yee are saued and hath raysed vs vp and made vs sit together in heauenly places We see that this saluation by grace bringeth vs vp to heauen Ergo both the first second iustification are of grace for they can bring vs no further then to heauen Rhemist 2. Workes done of nature without or before fayth cannot merite but workes done by Gods grace may and are ioyned with it as causes of saluation Ans. Not onely the workes of nature but euen of grace also are excluded Wee are saued saith the Apostle by grace through fayth not of workes And then he sheweth what workes namely good workes such as the Lord hath ordayned for vs to walke in Ephes. 2.9.10 Ergo workes also of grace wrought in vs by the spirite of God are shut out from being any causes of our saluation I conclude with Augustine vpon those wordes of the Psalme Let the Lord alway be magnified Peccatores magnificetur vt vocet consiteris magnificetur vt ignoscat iam iustè viuis magnificetur vt regat perseueras vsque ad finem magnificetur vt te glorificet Art thou a sinner let God be magnified in calling thee doest thou confesse thy sinnes let him be magnified in forgiuing them doest thou liue well let him be magnified in directing thee doest thou continue to the end let him be magnified in glorifiing thee God is as much to be praysed for all things wrought after our calâ—ing and conuersion as for mercy shewed before All then is wholly to bee ascribed to Gods grace and mercie nothing is left for our merite or desert THE FOVRTH PART OF THE distinction of merites The Papists THey make two kindes of merite Meritum de coâ—gruo merite of congruitie error 91 such are the preparatiue workes before iustification as were the prayers almes deeds of Cornelius Act. 10. which though they be not simply meritorious ex debito iustitiae by the due debt of iustice yet they deserue at Gods handes of congruitie because hee doth graciously accept them Act. 10. sect 5. The other kinde they call meritum de condigno merite of condignitie when the reward is iustly due by debt such are the workes done in the second iustification which are truely meritorious and worthy of heauen Gabriel Biel. Rhemist Rom. 2. sect 3. The Protestants FIrst wee vtterly denie any such merite of condignitie For Saint Paul sayth that the afflictions of this life are not condigne of the glory to come Rom. 8.18 Condignitie then is wholly remoued and taken away Secondly a rewarde of congruitie in some sorte we graunt but neither for any thing done before fayth or iustification for it is impossible without fayth to please God or doe any thing acceptable vnto him Hebr. 6.6 Neither is it of congruitie for the merite of our workes but it is congruum it is agreeable to the mercie and iustice of God in respect of his promise graciously made in Christ to rewarde the faithfull obedience of his seruants so then the congruitie is on Gods behalfe not in respect of our workes We are iustified sayth the Apostle Gratis per gratiam freely by grace Rom. 3.24 Ergo there is no merite either of congruitie or condignitie seeing all is done freely Augustine sayth Quid ille latro attulerat de fauce ad iudicium de iudicio ad crucem de cruce in Paradisum I pray you what merite did the theefe bring with him from the prison to iudgemeÌ„t from the iudgement place to the crosse from the crosse to Paradise Here was neither merite of congruitie nor condignitie THE FIFT PART OF THE MANner of meriting The Papists OVr workes they say are pleasing and acceptable vnto God euen after error 92 the same manner that Christ and his workes were Tapper ex Tileman loc 11. Err. 14. Christes paynes of their owne nature compared to his glorie were not any whit comparable yet they were meritorious and worthy of heauen not for the greatnes of them but for the worthines of his person So our works not of their owne nature but as they are of grace are meritorious of the ioyes of heauen Rhemist Rom. 8.18 The Protestants FIrst it is a great blasphemie to say that Christs passions in themselues deserued not that glory which he hath purchased for vs neither that there was any comparison betweene them for then how could he haue fully satisfied the wrath of God Christ hath payed the ransome for our sinnes Wee are redeemed with his precious blood as of a lambe vnspotted 1. Pet. 1.19 His blood was the price of our redemption therefore of it selfe meritorious It was not in respect of Christ of grace but of merite in him Vnto vs his redemption is of grace Rom. 3.24 Wherefore his passion being the passion of the Sonne of God was a full satisfaction and worthy desert of that glory which hee hath purchased for vs. Secondly it is another great blasphemy to match and compare in the way and maner of meriting Christs workes and ours together For first there is no merite at all in vs vnto saluation we haue no merites but Christs and are saued onely by fayth in him not by workes Ephes. 2.8 Secondly by your own confession our works are not of their nature meritorious but of grace But Christs workes were of themselues full of merite without any externall helpe or accession of grace for in himselfe did all fulnes dwell Coloss. 1.19 Augustine very well sheweth the great difference in the way of meriting betweene Christ and vs thus writing Quantum interest cum duo sint in carcere interreum visitatorem eius illum causa premit illum humanitas adduxit sic in istu mortalitate nos reatu tenebamur Christus misericordia descendit Looke what difference there is when two are in prison together betweene the prisoner and his friend that commeth to visite him the one is there of necessitie the other commeth of good will Such difference is there betweene Christ vs for when we were deteined in the prison of this mortalitie for the guilt of our sinnes Christ came in mercy to visite vs. How can there now be any proportionable or like way of meriting in the guiltie prisoner and the innocent and friendly visiter THE FOVRTH QVESTION of Iustification THe partes of this question First of the preparatiue workes to iustification Secondly of the 2. kindes of iustification the first second Thirdly of inherent iustice Fourthly of Iustification only by fayth They folow now in order THE FIRST PART OF THE PREparatiue workes The Papists
Apostle but we are sure the Pope is none neither successor of any Apostle but very Antichrist Ergo we haue more iust cause to examine his decrees 4 Lastly let Augustine speake Nouit charitas vestra omnes nos vnum magistrum habere sub illo condiscipulos esse nec ideo magistri sumus quia de superiore loco loquimur vobis sed magister est omnium qui habitat in nobis omnib You know brethren saith he that we are all felow scholers vnder one maister and though we speake to you out of an higher place yet are we not your master he is the teacher and master of vs all that dwelleth in our harts Ergo the spirite of God speaking in the scriptures is the chief and best interpreter thereof THE THIRD PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion concerning the meanes or methode to be vsed in interpreting of Scripture The Papistes error 10 OVr aduersaries prescribe this methode and course to be takē in expounding of scripture which consisteth in foure rules the generall peactise of the Church the consonant interpretation of the fathers the decrees of generall Councels lastly the rule of faith consisting partly of the scriptures partly of traditions vnwrittē Stapleton Cōcerning the three first we haue already touched them in part they appeare to be insufficient First the Councels and fathers he made chief interpreters of Scripture before and now they are but meanes what other chief iudge then is there to vse these meanes surely none but the scriptures Secondly these meanes are most vncertaine the practise of the Church is often changed fathers agree not in their expositiōs and Councels can not alwayes be had Concerning the rule of faith consisting of vnwritten verities he groundeth it falsely vpon that place Rom. 12.6 let vs prophecie according to the rule of faith and Gal. 6.16 as many as walke according to this rule This rule was a certaine platforme of Religion geuen by the Apostles before the Scriptures were written according to the which say they the Scriptures were afterward compiled by the Apostles Rhemens in Rom. 12.6 Answere S. Paul meaneth no other rule but that which is set downe in his writings no other forme of doctrine but that conteined in his Epistles as in the 6. to the Galathians speaking of this rule he alludeth to the former verse where he saith he reioyced in nothing but in the Crosse of Christ his rule therfore is to receiue Christ onely without the ceremonies or workes of the law against the which heresie he disputeth in the whole Epistle But of all other it is a great blasphemie to say that the Apostles set downe the Scriptures by a rule as though the spirite of God by whom they spake had neede of any such direction The Protestantes WHen we say that the scriptures must expound them selues our meaning is that by certaine compendious and ready meanes we should labour to vnderstand the scriptures by them selues the meanes are especially these foure First to haue recourse to the originall toung as in the old Testament to the Hebrue in the new to the Greeke as 1. Tim. 2.15 through bearing of children they shal be saued if they continue in faith and loue In the English it is doubtfull whether this clause if they continue in faith be referred to children or to those that beare them but read the Greeke and the doubt is remoued for bearing of children is all one word in the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that it must needes be vnderstood of the women for this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bearing of children is in the singular number that which foloweth of the plurall and it is but an action not a person so that it should be improperly sayd if they continue that is in bearing of children Stapleton obiecteth against this meane that it is not now needefull seeing there is a perfect and absolute translatiō authorised by the Councell of Trent he meaneth the vulgare Latin We answere First it is no perfect but an erronious translation and verie corrupt Secondly if it were neuer so perfect yet for more certaintie it is profitable to search the originall euery man will trust his owne skill rather then another mans Thirdly the Councell did fondly in authorising an old blind translation before the authenticall copies of the Hebrue and Greeke 2 Secondly the scope of the place the circumstance of it with that which goeth before and commeth after must be wayghed which will bring great light to the place we haue in hand an example we haue 1. Pet. 4.8 loue couereth multitude of sinnes the Papistes gather out of these words that loue doth iustifie vs before God and taketh away our sinnes but by the circunstance of the place the Apostole saying immediatly before haue feruent loue among you it is euident he vnderstandeth brotherly loue amōgest our selues whereby faultes are buried forgeuen and forgotten Stapleton obiecteth that this is but an vncertaine way and many times fayleth for the scripture passeth many times from one matter and argument to another how then can it helpe to consider the circumstance of the place being of a diuerse matter We answere we say not that any of these meanes serueth for euery place but when one fayleth to vse another when the circumstance helpeth not to runne to the originall if there we find no succour to cōpare places together and when we may to vse them all or the most 3 Thirdly the conference of places is very profitable as Iames. 2.21 Abraham was iustified by workes compare it with that place Rom. 4.2 there S. Paule saith flatly that Abraham was not iustified by workes Wherfore seeing one Apostle is not contrary to the other we must needs gather that this word iustified is diuersly taken Paule saith that Abraham was not iustified that is made righteous before God by his workes Iames saith he was iustified that is declared to be iust before men and so Thom. Aquinas expoundeth it Stapleton obiecteth that this meanes in cōparing of places is of it selfe many times of smal force Answere as though we affirme that these meanes must be vsed asunder and not rather ioyntly together and where one fayleth another to helpe Secondly some things are found but once in the scriptures Aunswere they are then either very plaine or not greatly necessarie Thirdly heretikes haue erred in comparing of Scripture Answere they compared them not diligently nor with a syncere minde but corruptly and negligently 4 The fourth rule is the analogie and proportion of faith which is nothing els but the summe grounds of Religiō gathered out of scripture such as are conteined in the Creede the Lordes Prayer the ten Commaundements and in our whole Catechisme We must take heede that in the interpretation of Scripture we swarue not from this rule of faith nor impugne any principle of Religion Wherefore the Papistes interpretation of those wordes of Christ we do reiect Hoc est corpus meum this is my
sometime Iames sate and Iohn now sitteth In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem Neither is it true which our aduersaries say that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark likewise the See of Alexandria The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day nor the Church of Ephesus In India and Aethiopia there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles and is at this day Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession which is found in other places as well as at Rome THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome THis question hath diuers partes which must be handled in their order First whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacie he hath ouer other Churches how it began Sixtly of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops The Papists error 41 THey doubt not to say that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue to ordaine and constitute Bishops to depriue and depose them to restore them likewise to their former dignities and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church The Iesuites principall only argument is drawen from certain examples how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past constituted deposed and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch Ergo hee hath power ouer all Bishops We answere First It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops any such constitution or deposition though perhappes their consent and allowance were required as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Satis sit quod vestrae pietatis auxilio mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit It is sufficient that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick Whether was greater now the help and furtherance of the Emperor or the base assent of Leo Secondly wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes what by sufferance of others what by his owne intrusion hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops by this ought not to make a law that which is once or twise done by a false title cannot prooue the iustnes of the title Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie it appeareth by this that he doth not neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done paied full dearely for them being made slaues to the beast of Rome The Protestants THat the Pope neither hath nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops but that euery one in his owne precinct and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge It is thus proued 1. Peter was not chiefe neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue Ergo neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed The heauenly Hierusalem which is the Church of God is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles argument Tunstalli To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and vpon them all indifferently and equally is the strength of the Church grounded and established Fox p. 1066. 2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment afterward followed the Councel of Nice wherein was decreed that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set first the Bishop of Rome next the Bishop of Alexandria the third was the Bishop of Antioch the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces and one was not to deale within anothers charge Ergo the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church argument Nili plura Fox p. 9. 3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile which were all of the Popish sect what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they but only shadowes might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe what had they more then their Miters and their staffe when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects Verily in the primitiue Church the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie but now it was come to that poynt that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes What plainer testimonie can we haue then from the papists themselues Augustine also agreeth to their sentence habet omnis episcopus saith he pro licētia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium propriū tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops as he is not to iudge them but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church and sayth they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome The Papists SVch say they is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture nor any sound argumēt but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome which we denie not to haue been done but our answere more at large is this 1. One cause of these appeales was both for that they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches found greater liberty and fauour at Rome as Apiarius did who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome who
and determination of the parents 2. Let vs heare what authoritie Augustine yeeldeth to the father ouer his children Agite vicem nostram in domibus vestris Episcopus inde appellatus est quia superintendit vnusquisque ergo in domosua si caput est domui suae debet ad eum pertinere episcopatus officiū de Sanct. Ser. 51. You saith Augustine their Bishop must supplye our stead in your houses a Bishop or Superintendent is so called because he ouerseeth therefore euery housholder being the head of his house ought to playe the Bishop in his house The father then is a Bishop ouer his children shall any man then dare to take any out of his house that is his Bishoprike or any sheepe out of his folde without the Bishop and sheepheardes consent THE THIRD PART WHETHER Married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries The Papists WIth mutuall consent the man the wife may separate thē selues and vow error 92 and promise single life for euer so long as they both shall liue Bellarm. Cap. 37. Marie and Ioseph were perfitely man and wife yet by mutuall consent they liued continently all their daies Ergo it is lawfull for married couples to separate themselues for euer both agreeing therunto Bellarm. cap. 37. Answ. 1. It appeareth by the text that there was no such thing purposed by Ioseph before he was admonished by the Angell in a dreame but that as she was already betrothed so there was an intent on Iosephs parte that they should come together Math. 1.18 But that in the meane time Marie was found with childe by the holy ghost and so from that time Ioseph being a iust man neuer knew his wife there was no such purpose or vowe before 2. That this was an extraordinary exāple who seeth it not When any man shall be admonished by an Angell as Ioseph was and shall haue the like cause as Ioseph had to abstaine which shall neuer bee hee may be bould to doe as Ioseph did The Protestants THey that are once ioyned together in marriage and haue made a couenaunt each to other before God can not separate them selues though they both consent there being no other cause but a purpose of single life for more holines sake 1. It is flat contrary to S. Pauls rule 1. Corinth 7.5 Defraud not your selues except it be with cōsent for a time that you may giue your selues to fasting and prayer and againe come together lest Satan tempt you for your incontinencie First the Apostle saith directly they should but separate themselues for a time Secondly we doe thus reason out of his wordes there is no cause of separation but to be giuen to fasting and prayer but this may be done by a separation for a time neither is it necessary we should alwaies be giuen to fasting and prayer but vpon speciall occasion therefore perpetuall separation is not needfull 3. They that are long separated are subiect to fall into tentation the same cause therefore that moued them first to marrie for auoiding of incontinencie ought to moue them to come together againe Therefore it is not good nor lawful they should separat them selues for euer 2. That which God hath coupled no man ought to put asunder but they that are married haue made a couenant to God Pro. 2.17 as well as to themselues and are ioyned by Gods law together Ergo they can not dissolue their mariage by their owne power and will the Lord hauing an interest therein Augustine Thus writeth Non licet excepta causa fornicationis coniugem a coniuge dirimi nec sterilem coniugem fas est relinquere vt faecunda ducatur de nupt concupiscen Lib. 1. Cap. 10. It is not lawfull for married couples one to be separat frō another vnlesse it be for fornication nor to leaue a barren wyfe to marrie a frutefull Therefore if fornication onely be a iust cause of finall separation there can be no other If there were any other it is most like it should be for procreation of children But neither for that cause is a man to leaue his wife Ergo for no other Therefore not for any vow of continencie is marriage to be dissolued or any separation to be admitted Bellarm. saith that by their separation Marriage is not dissolued Auns It is asmuch dissolued as by your law in cases of diuorse 1. For these are your words for aduoutrie one may dismisse another but neither party can marry againe for any cause during life Rhemist Math. 19. Sect. 4. So ye allowe onely a kinde of dismission in the case of adultery and so you do in the vowing of continencie And thus you make this cause as forceable as the other to break off the Matrimonial duety which is contrary to the gospell THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER MARIage contracted not consummate may without consent be broken for the vow of continencie The Papists error 93 THeir opinion is that if the mariage be contracted onely and ratified but not yet consummate by the parties comming together it is lawful for either of them without the others consent to vowe chastitie cap. 38. Bellarm. His reason is because it is lawfull for a man to passe from a lesse perfect state of life to a more perfect if it may be done without detriment as this may be for yet they haue no children and the partie may as well bee maried to another Bellarm. Answ. First a single life is not alwayes the perfecter state nor to all as it is not to them that haue not the gift to containe as it is most like hee hath not that is contracted and hath made promise of mariage for then all this needed not Secondly though there be none of those impediments named yet there is a greater namely their fayth promise made each to other before God which they ought not to violate Thirdly Saint Paul saith If thou be bound to a wife seeke not to be loosed 1. Corinth 7.27 But they that are espoused one to the other are bound vnlesse you will say that the couenant made by them vnto God Prouer. 2.17 bindeth not The Protestants MAtrimonie whether ratified onely by lawfull contract or espousals or consummate ought not any way to be broken with consent or without for Monasticall profession 1 Our reason is because it is perfect mariage already in substance and before God which is ratified by contract onely and solemne vowe and couenant made each to other And being thus betrothed the one giueth power of their body to the other and now they are no more free That this mariage is perfect before God and in substance it appeareth by the law of Moses by the which a man defiling a mayd betrothed was to suffer death as well as if hee had committed vncleannes with a woman already maried Deuteron 22. verse 22.23 And Math. 1.18 Marie that was but betrothed to Ioseph is by the Angel called his wife vers 20. 2 August saith Coninges fidem sibi pariter
God so the manner of celebrating and keeping it holy is to be learned out of the word and neither custome nor authority ought to giue liberty for such workes vpon the Lords day as are not warranted by the word First we graunt that we are not so necessarily tied to the rest of the Sabboth as the Iewes were for those things are abolished which appertained to the Iewish Sabboth First the prescript of the day Secondly the ceremonious exercises of the Sabboth in the sacrifices and other rites of the Law Thirdly the typicall shadowes and significations of their Sabboth as first it betokened their rest in Canaan then the rest and peace of the Church by Christ Hebre. 4.3 5. Fourthly the strickt and precise rest wherein Christians haue more liberty then the Iewes had and againe they obserued their rest as being properly and simply and in it selfe a sabboth daies duty but we doe consider it as being referred to a more principall end as making of vs more fit for spirituall exercises Secondly we allow these workes to be done First opera religiosa or pietatis the religious workes and conferring to piety as the Priestes did slaye the sacrifices vpon the Sabboth and yet brake not the rest of the Sabboth Math. 12.5 so the people may walke to their parish Church though somewhat farre off the Pastor Minister may goe forth to preach yea and preaching is of it selfe a labour of the body to study also and meditate of his Sermon to ring the bels to call the people to the Church all these are lawfull as being helpes for the exercises of religion Secondly opera charitatis the workes of mercy are permitted as to visite the sicke the Phisitian to resorte to his patient yea to shew compassion to brute beastes as to helpe the sheepe out of a pit Math. 12.11 Thirdly opera necessitatis the workes of necessitie as the dressing of meat and such like Math. 12.1.3 Our Sauiour excuseth his Apostles for plucking the eares of Corne when they were hungry As for opera voluntaria workes of pleasure and recreation we haue no other permission to vse them then as they shal be no le ts or impediments vnto spirituall exercises as the hearing of the word and meditating therein and such other Otherwise they are not to be vsed Augustine saith speaking of the Iewes who did greatly prophane their Sabboth in sporting and dalliance Melius toto die foderent quà m toto die saltarēt It were better for them to digge all day then to daunce all day euen so verily it were better for many poore ignorant people that vpon the Sabboth giue themselues to drinking and quaffing gaming if they should goe to plough or cart all the day But as for other seruile workes as to keepe Faires and Markets vpon the Lords day to trauell themselues their seruants and beastes vpon the Sabboth it is flat contrary to the commaundement of God and the practise of the Church Nehemiah 13.16 where there is no extream and vrgent necessitie so that it is not to be doubted but that as the keeping of the Lords day is a moral commaundement so also the manner of the obseruing thereof in sanctifying it and resting therein is morall the ceremonies of the rest being abolished that is the Iewish strictnes thereof and the opinion which they had of their rest as being simply a part of the sanctifying of the Sabboth But we doe consider it as referred vnto more principall duties and obserue it not as of it selfe pleasing God but as making vs more fit for spirituall exercises Contrary to these rules we acknowledge neither power in Ordinaries nor priuiledge in custome to dispence with the sanctification of the Sabboth The Papists THey affirme that the Apostles altered the sabboth day from the seaueth day to the eight counting from the creation and they did it without scripture error 62 or any commaundement of Christ such power say they hath God left to his Church This then they holde that the sabboth was changed by the ordinarie power and authoritie of the Church not by any especiall direction from Christ thereupon it followeth that the Church which they say cannot erre may also change the sabboth to any other day in the weeke Rhemist Apoca. 1. sect 6. The Protestants 1. THe Apostles did not abrogate the Iewish sabboth but Christ himselfe by his death as he did also other ceremonies of the Law and this the Apostles knew both by the scriptures the word of Christ his holy spirite 2. They did not appoint a new sabboth of their owne authoritie for first they knew by the scripture that one day of seauen was to be obserued for euer for the seruice of God and exercise of religion although the prescript day according to the Law were abrogate for the Lord before the morall law was written euen immediatly after the creation sanctified the seauenth day shewing thereby that one of the seauen must be obserued so long as the world endured Secōdly they knew there was the same reason of sanctifiyng the day of Christs resurrection and the restitution of the worlde thereby as of sanctifiyng the day of the Lords rest after the creation of the world Thirdly they did it by the direction of the spirite of God whereby they were so directed and gouerned that although they were fraile men by nature and subiect to error yet they could not decline in their writings and ordinances of the Church from the truth which assurance of Gods spirite in the like measure the Church hath not but so farre forth is promised to be led into all truth as she followeth the rule of truth expressed in the Scriptures Wherefore the Church hath no authority to change the Lords day and to keepe it vpon Munday or Tuesday or any other day seeing it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered by the Apostles for the Lords day began in the Apostles time and no doubt by their Apostolike authority directed by the spirite of Christ was instituted Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1. ver 10. Neither can there come so long as the world continueth so great a cause of changing the Sabboth as the Apostles had by the resurrection of Christ. Wherfore the law of the Sabboth as it is now kept and obserued is perpetuall The Papists errour 63 4. THey affirme that the keeping of the Lords day in stead of the Iewish Sabboth is a tradition of the Apostles and not warranted by Scripture Rhemist Math. 15. sect 3. The Protestants THe obseruation of the Lords day is not deliuered by blinde tradition but hath testimony of holy Scriptures 1. Corinth 16.2 Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1.10 and the obseruation thereof is according to Gods commaundement not after the doctrine of men Fulk ibid. The Papists errour 64 5. THey teach that the Lords day is commaunded and likewise kept for some mysticall signification not onely for the remembraunce of benefites already
chapter of Iohn cannot be so vnderstoode as they expound it First Christ speaketh not onely of the sacramentall eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood but generally of the spirituall participation by fayth whether in the sacrament or without which is wrought in vs by the holy Ghost 1. If it be vnderstoode of the sacrament then it will follow that no man can be saued vnlesse he doe receiue the sacrament for Christ saith vers 53. Except you eate my flesh and drink my blood you cannot haue life in you This I am sure they will hardly grant that the Eucharist also should bee necessarie as they make Baptisme to saluation 2. If Christ hath relation to the sacrament then must it of necessitie bee ministred in both kindes for in euery place he ioyneth both these together the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood Augustine also thus writeth vpon these wordes Hoc est manducare illam escam illum bibere potum in Christo manere illum manentemin se habere This it is to eate that flesh and to drinke that drinke to abide in Christ and to haue him abiding in vs but this may be done without the sacrament Ergo it is not necessary to vnderstand it of the sacrament Secondly though we should graunt that this whole treatise Iohn 6. may fitlie be referred to the sacrament yet the wordes must be taken figuratiuelie for the spirituall eating and drinking of Christ in the sacrament and not otherwise 1 Vers. 35. Christ so expoundeth his owne words I am the bread of life he that commeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleeueth in me shall not thirst To eate then and to drinke Christ is to beleeue in him 2 Christ vnderstandeth another manner of eating of his flesh then the Capernaites did But they imagined that Christ would giue his very flesh and blood to bee eaten And therefore they went away offended and sayd This is an hard saying vers 60. Therefore Christ to correct their erronious conceit sayth vnto them that his words were spirite and life that is spiritually to be vnderstoode verse 63. So Augustine interpreteth those wordes of Christ as if he had sayd Spiritualiter intelligite quod locutus sum You must vnderstand spiritually that which I haue sayd You shall not eate this body which you see nor drinke that blood which shall be shed for you Sacramentum vobis aliquod commendaui spiritualiter intellectum viuisicabit vos I haue commended a certaine mystery and sacrament vnto you which being spiritually vnderstood shall quicken you The Papists ARgum. 3. Christ in the institution of this sacrament sayd vnto his Apostles after hee had giuen thanks and blessed Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodie that is that which is contayned in this bread or vnder the formes of this bread is my very body Bellarm. cap. 9. So that these wordes must needes be taken properly not to bee a trope or figure 1 It is not the manner of the scriptures to set down flatte precepts and commaundements and directorie rules in obscure termes or figuratiue speeches but plainely and euidently therefore it is not like that Christ being now to prescribe vnto his Apostles the perpetuall lawe and forme of this sacrament would speake obscurely 2 Though he spake by parables and signes to the Pharisies yet there was no cause why he should so doe none being present but his Apostles Bellarmin ibid. Ans. 1. It is very well that you will now though I thinke vnawares grant vnto vs that the precepts and rules in scripture are set downe simply and playnely wherefore the scriptures cannot bee so hard and obscure as you would beare vs in hand they are for if the precepts and rules of fayth be euidently in scripture expressed as you seeme to confesse what reason haue you to keepe back the people from the reading of scripture 2 It is false that the scriptures vse no figures nor tropes in the declaration of the lawes and sacraments of the Church for sayth not Saint Paul speaking of the sacraments of the Iewes Petra erat Christus the rock was Christ 1. Cor. 10.4 that is signified Christ Likewise in the 17. vers We that are many are one bread that is our spirituall vnitie and coniunction is represented in that we are partakers of one bread 3 Sometimes our Sauiour would speake darkely being alone with his Apostles thereby to stirre them vp more diligently to attend vnto his wordes as when he biddeth them beware of the leauen of the Pharisies Mark 8.15 Yet this speech of our Sauiour Christ vttered in the hearing of his Apostles This is my bodie was neither so darke nor obscure that the Apostles neede much bee troubled about the vnderstanding Nay many things being spoken in borrowed and metaphoricall wordes are vttered with greater grace and carrie a fuller sense When Christ sayd I am the doore Iohn 10.9 I am the vine Iohn 15.1 he spake by figure as he doth here for neither was he a vine or a doore as the bread was not his bodie Yet which of the Apostles was there that vnderstoode him not when he called himselfe a vine and a doore Neither could they doubt of our Sauiour Christs meaning here Contra. Now on the other side we will make it playne that these words of Christ are spoken tropically 1 Where Christ sayth according to Saint Luke This cuppe is the new Testament in my blood Luk. 22.23 we must needes admitte a double trope or figure for first the cuppe is taken for that which was contayned in the cuppe Secondly the wine in the cuppe was not the newe Testament but a signe of the new Testament If then in one parte of the sacrament hee spake by a figure why not also in the other when he sayth This is my bodie that is a liuely signe and seale thereof 2 It is no vnusuall phrase in the scripture to say this is that is signifieth as Genes 17.10 Circumcision is called the couenant it selfe where it was a signe onely of it And Exod. 12.11 the Lambe is called the Lords passeouer which it betokened onely In the same sense Christ sayth This is my bodie that is exhibiteth and representeth vnto you my bodie Augustine so expoundeth these wordes Non dubitauit Dominus dicere Hoc est corpus meum cum daret signum corpus sui Christ doubted not to say This is my bodie when hee gaue a signe and sacrament of his bodie The Protestants THat Christ is present with all his benefites in the sacrament wee doe willingly graunt neither doe we thinke that the elements of bread and wine are bare and naked signes of the bodie and blood of Christ but Christ is verily by them exhibited vnto vs and spiritually by fayth we are truely made partakers of his precious bodie blood not that Christ descendeth from heauen to vs but we ascend by faith and in spirit vnto him yea we confesse
nomine armamini sed contra Ecclesiam dâ—micatis You are armed with the name of the Church and yet you fight against the Church This difficult matter being thus by me enterprised I haue exposed my selfe to the obloquie and euill speech of two sortes of men against whom in the defence of this work I must craue your Honors aid and protection The first sort is of our hollow harted Countrimen that haue English faces but Romish harts who will forge cauillations I know against these labours of mine and not cease to accuse me of lying and falshood as not hauing truly and indifferently set down the opinions of the popish Church To meete then with those slanderous accusations let such men know that I haue beene most carefull and circumspect in this behalf throughout this whole work not to charge them with any opinions which I haue not gathered out of their owne writings and alleadged their owne Authors for them so that with a good conscience I can protest before God that one day shall open the secrets of our harts that to my knowledge I haue not any where vsed any forgerie cauilling or deceit in setting downe their assertions and I would to God their writers were as free from this fault and as indifferent in alleadging the sentence of our Church as we doe deale plainely with them But as for them it is a shame to see how without all feare the Rhemists in their annotations vpon the new testament doe bely and slander our Church I will for example sake note a fewe places They charge vs to say that God is the author of sinne annot Math. 13. sect 2. which blasphemie is further off from vs then it is from them though we graunt that nothing is done in the world beside the will of God not by his permission onely That we affirme all things to be easie in Scripture annot Luk. 6. sect 1. whereas we say onely that the doctrine of faith is plainly declared in Scripture and deny not but that many things are therein hard to be vnderstood That we should say that the preaching of the Law and the iudgement to come maketh men hypocrites Act. 24. sect 2. whereas we holde the preaching of the Law to be necessary to bring men to repentance but iustification by keeping the Law which they teach we vtterly condemne That we condemne good workes as sinfull Pharisaicall hypocriticall annot Rom. 2. sect 3. whereas we acknowledge them to be the good gifts of God the fruits of iustification the way wherein all Christians must walke to saluation we onely exclude them from being any cause of our iustification before God That we allow no fasting but morall temperance and spiritual fasting from sinne Act. 13. sect 5. whereas we doe acknowledge a Christian vse of fasting and abstinence from all meates and drinkes for the taming of the flesh and making vs more fit to pray not an abstinence from flesh onely as they do superstitiously practise That we should say man hath no more free will then a peece of clay Rom. 9. sect 7. whereas we onely say that our free will hath no power or strength at all to will or doe the thing that good is without the grace of God That Caluine holdeth Christians children to be so holy that they neede no baptisme annot 1. Cor. 7. sect 11. Whereas Caluine clean contrary reasoneth thus against the Anabaptists That children ought therefore to be baptized because they are holy as S. Paul saith And such slanderous accusations they haue published against vs which would require a seuerall treatise to be set forth at large Let indifferent men now iudge comparing their writings with ours which of vs hath dealt most vntruly and vnfaithfully each with other and whether we haue not more iust occasion to complaine of them then they of vs. But to let accusations goe I would desire them rather to listen to the words of exhortation that they would but indifferently weigh with an equal balance of Christian iudgemeÌ„t what is set downe on both partes in this booke I trust if they be not wilfull and obstinate in their opinions that they may in time conceiue some better liking of the truth Augustine in a certaine place maketh mention of drunken Polio who one a time came from his pots and riotous company to Xenocrates schoole to laugh the graue Philosopher to scorne but it fell out to his good farre otherwise Ad extremum totum se illi ad quem deridendum venerat discipulum tradidit But Polemo being cleane changed by Xenocrates speech became his Scholler whom he went to scorne and whereas he came drunke he returned sober So I wish that our English recusants would but take vp this and such other bookes into their hands if it were but to scorne them God may so worke with them that their scorning shal be turned into a loue and lyking of the truth And I further say vnto them as Augustine to the Pelagians Quod dicimus orent vt aliquando intelligant non litigent vt nunquam intelligant quod dicimus intendant non contendant illuminentur non calumnientur An other sort of men there is beside these Right honorable against whom I must arme my selfe they are such as are giuen to extenuate disgrace and discommend the labours of others Me thinkes I heare them thus to giue out of me He hath taken a matter in hand aboue his strength some of his writings are extant already we know what he can doe he is like to perform no great matter and what doth he he doth but abridge other mens writings he bringeth nothing of his owne To these accusations I thus answere First I confesse my streÌ„gth to be small of it selfe yet God by weake meanes may worke great things Some Pamphlets of mine I coÌ„fesse are abroad vnworthy this learned age though perhaps befitting the person that wrote them his time age and the occasion considered But I say rather with August I count my self in the number of those qui scribendo proficiunt et proficiendo scribunt which profit in writing and by profiting write Secondly coÌ„cerning my labour paines taken in this work I boast not he that thinketh it light let him trie first himselfe before he giue his iudgement the waight of this burthen he onely knoweth that felt it and God that gaue strength to beare it but as for my part I hunt not for the praise of men I desire onely to profit the church of God I had rather men should holde their peace then flatter It is very well said of him Si inter quos viuis te recte viuentem non laudauerint illi in errore sint si autem laudauerint tu in periculo es I had rather other meÌ„ should be in a small error then I in great danger Epictetus wise saying is much commended 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sustine abstine sustaine and abstain I would we might part it betweene
that remission of sinnes followeth repentāce because baptisme was giuen after repentance for Baptisme doth not giue remission of sinnes but it is a seale onely and confirmation of our faith in the remission of sinnes 2. Neither is remission of sinnes obtained by our repentance but we are already being once called iustified before God by the remission of our sinnes and imputation of the righteousnes of Christ Rom. 4.7.8 By repentance and other workes that follow our calling is made sure 2. Peter 1.10 and our saluation finished vnto our selues Philip. 2.10 and our faith perfited Argum. Iustification goeth before sanctification for this is the fruite of the other but repentance is part of our sanctification renouation or regeneration being called by S. Paul A walking in newnes of life Rom. 6.4 Ergo it followeth and commeth after our iustification And seeing without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 how should our repentance be acceptable to God vnlesse it proceeded of faith faith then is initiate and begun in vs before repentance which we denie not by true repentance and other fruites of sanctification to be daily strengthened and encreased Augustine sayth No man is iustified but by the grace of Iesus Christ Non solum remissione peccatorum sed priùs ipsius inspiratione fidei timoris dei donec sanet omnes languores nostros Not onely by remission of sinnes but first by inspiring into vs faith and the feare of God til he haue cured all our maladies He saith as we heare that faith is inspired before we haue remission of sinnes and the feare of God without the which there is no true repentance THE FIFT QVESTION OF CONTRITION the first part of their penance THere are certaine poynts which we doe agree vpon 1. We grant that true contrition and sorrow of the heart is necessarie vnto repentance and that it standeth very well with the libertie of the Gospell and is profitable for Christians 2. Corinth 7.10 2. That true contrition is ioyned both with a full hatred and detestation of sinne committed 1. Corinth 11.31 We must iudge and condemne our selues as also with a full purpose to amend our liues Act. 11.23 Let vs then now see what difference of opinion there is betweene vs concerning contrition The Papists 1. THey hold that contrition is neither wholly of mans free wil nor yet wholly of God but that man by his free will holpen of God is able to repent error 7 so that he doth only Deo adiuuante poenitere He is brought to repentance God onely helping and assisting him Bellarm. de poenitent lib. 2. cap. 3. The Protestants TRue contrition of heart as all other good thoughts in vs as they are good come onely of God our cogitations indeed are our owne but all the goodnes of them is the meere gift of God Iam. 1.17 Argum. 1. Timoth. 2.25 If at any time God wil giue them repentance Repentance thē is the gift of God And Augustine writing vpon these very words saith Quantumlibet praebeat poenitentiam nisi ipse dederit quis agit poenitentiam Although he neuer so much giue occasion of repentance yet vnlesse he bestowe vpon vs the full gift of repentance no man is able to repent Thus he plainly distinguisheth betweene praebere poenitentiam to offer occasion to repent as he proueth out of S. Paul Rom. 2.4 The bountifulnes of God calleth thee to repentance and dare poenitentiam to giue or grant repentance But if God should onely helpe our free will and worke together with vs to repentance and not doe all alone himselfe he should rather praebere then dare poenitentiam offer occasion by stirring of vs vp to repentance then grant vs repentance it selfe which were contrary to the Apostle The Papists error 8 2. THey teach that contrition ought to be perfect because it must proceede from the loue of God which is the most perfect kind of loue Catechis Roman pag. 439 and that the greatnes of the griefe ought to be answerable to the quantitie of the sinne So they conclude that a man shall neuer knowe when he is sufficiently contrite Thom. Aquinas for he must be contrite for euery great sinne he hath committed Tileman Heshus loc 9. de poenitent err 25.27.28.32 The Protestants WHat is this els but a plaine doctrine of desperation for when is a man able so perfectly to be contrite as his loue toward God ought to be perfect or how can his sorrowe be equiualent to the waight of his sinnes or can a man remember all his sinnes that he should be sorie for Argum. 1. The sorrowe of Christians is not infinite or vncertaine but it is determined and limited Saint Paul sayth That he should not be swallowed vp of too much heauines 2. Corinth 2.7 And againe My Epistle made you sorie though for a season 2. Corinth 7.8 Augustine sayth Ista est vera poenitentia quando quis sic conuertitur vt non reuertatur This is true repentance when a man doth so turne vnto God that he returne not vnto sinne When a man therefore hath in this manner repented he may be sure that he hath mourned sufficiently It is therefore vntrue that a man is vncertaine when he hath sorrowed enough The Papists error 9 3. COntrition they say as it is not altogether without hope to obtaine mercie so can it not haue certitudinem remissionis peccatorum a certaintie or vndoubted assurance of remission of sinnes Concil Trident. sess 6. cap. 9. Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. The Protestants GOdly sorrowe and contrition bringeth ioy and comfort to the soule in the end with vndoubted assurance of the forgiuenes and remission of sinnes Argum. 1. Godly sorrowe worketh in the true penitent person a cleering of the mind 2. Corinth 7.11 but the soule and conscience cannot be cleered and set at rest vnlesse wee bee perswaded that our sinnes are forgiuen vs Ergo. Argum. 2. All hope is certaine and bringeth vndoubted assurance and therefore it is called the anchor of the soule Heb. 6.19 Wherefore either contrition is voyd of hope altogether which they will not grant or if it haue any hope it is sure and stable and worketh a full perswasion and assurance of the mercie of God Augustine sayth Petrus mox à Domino indulgentiam accepit qui amarissimè fleuit trinae negationis culpam Peter straight way receiued pardon and indulgence when he had most bitterly bewayled the sinne of his threefold deniall of Christ. How could Peter immediatly haue felt and receiued the remission of that great sinne if the Lord had not assured his conscience thereof The Papists 4. THey make contrition a part of satisfaction for our sinnes and to be a cause error 10 of iustification and remission of sinnes not onely in disposing and preparing of vs thereunto but in that thereby we verely obtaine remission of our sinnes Bellarm. lib. 2. de poenitent cap. 12. Arg. Luk. 7.47 Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she loued Not
to continue Wherefore it consisteth not in such laborious workes which if a man should long endure he should end his life sooner then repentance The Papists 3 THey measure their penance by number of yeares and dayes They haue error 28 their quadragenas fortie dayes penance septenas seuen yeares penance Ex Tileman Heshus loc 9. de poenitent Err. 83. And they lengthen or cut short the time of penance at their pleasure to continue three seuen or tenne yeares yea sometime more Bellarmin lib. 1. de poenitent 22. The Protestants THat true repentance is not to bee measured by the time but by the right sorrow and contrition of the offender Saynt Paul teacheth vs who writeth for the young man to be released because of his great and sufficient heauines for his fault 2. Corinth 2.7 Augustine also sayth Poenitentia vera non annorum numero sed amaritudine animicensetur poenitentia quamuis sit exigui temporis c. True repentance is not measured by number of yeares but by the bitternes of the soule though it be but for a short time yet it is not despised before that iudge which regardeth the heart THE FIFTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE OF MATRIMONIE THe seuerall questions belonging to this Controuersie are these First whether Matrimonie bee a sacrament properly so called 2 Of the causes of diuorce and whether it bee lawfull to marry after diuorce 3 Of the degrees in mariage First the maner of supputation or accounting of degrees Secondly whether the degrees forbidden Leuit. 18. may bee dispensed with Thirdly whether any other degrees may bee by humane law prohibited 4 Of the impediments of mariage of two sortes First of those that may hinder the contract of mariage onely Secondly of such impediments as may both dissolue the contract and the mariage also consummate 5 The comparison of mariage and virginitie whether either bee preferred before the other before God Of these now in their order 6 Of the times of mariage prohibited 7 Of the ceremonies and rites of mariage THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER Matrimonie be a sacrament The Papists error 28 THat it is properly and rightly a sacrament instituted of God and not deuised of men Concil Trid. sess 24. can 1. Argum. 1. Ephes. 5.32 This is a great sacrament Matrimonie is here a signe of an holy thing representing the coniunction of Christ and his Church Ergo a sacrament Answ. 1. The wordes are thus to be read rather This is a great mystery Or if we reade sacrament they haue no great aduantage seeing they are not ignorant that the originall word Mysterie which they translate sacrament is attributed to other things then sacraments as 1. Timoth. 3.16 Mysterie of godlinesse Apocal. 17.5 A mysterie great Babylon Neither doe they themselues much vrge this argument 2. The Apostle sayth not that Matrimonie is a mysterie but I speake of Christ and his Church vers 32.3 Matrimonie we confesse to be instituted of God and to be a signe of a holie thing yet no sacrament for so was the Sabboth ordayned of GOD and signified the rest in Christ Hebr. 4.8 yet was it no sacrament Wherfore al significatiue and mysticall signes are not sacraments Argum. 2. Matrimonie giueth grace of sanctification to the parties maried They shal be saued in bearing of children if they continue in faith and loue 1. Timoth. 2.15 These are the graces giuen by matrimonie Ergo a sacrament Answ. 1. We denie that any sacraments giue or conferre grace they are instruments only of grace 2. We also grant that by matrimonie God giueth to the faithfull this speciall grace to liue in holines purenes from the filthy pollution of the flesh but the sacraments are seales of spirituall graces and serue for the increase of fayth it is not sufficient to bee a meanes of any common gift but of the spirituall and iustifiyng grace to make a sacrament 3. Wherefore if by fayth and loue here they vnderstand only the fidelity and duety of wedlocke they are not those spirituall graces whereof sacraments are seales if wee take them for the true faith and loue which are the common graces of the faythfull as the very meaning is they are as well to be had out of wedlock as in it The Protestants THat matrimonie is no sacrament of the Gospell speaking now properly and vnderstanding a sacrament for the seale of the grace of God in the remission of our sinnes by Christ it is thus proued Argum. 1. Matrimony was instituted by GOD before sinne in Paradise therefore it can be no sacrament of the Gospell Argum. 2. Our aduersaries are contrary to themselues for they call matrimonie a prophanation of Orders Martin sect 15. cap. 11. And they say it is more tolerable for a Priest to keepe many concubines then to marrie Pighius ex Tileman Hesbus loc 21. Err. 2. Doe these fellowes meane in good sooth that matrimonie is a sacrament which they make so vile polluted and vncleane a thing 3 In euery sacrament there ought to be an external sensible element as the matter and a sanctifiyng word as the forme But in matrimony there is neither Ergo it is no sacrament Bellarm. The forme are the wordes pronounced by the parties themselues when they contract matrimonie I doe take thee c. They also themselues are the matter yea and the Ministers of the sacrament too For the Iesuite holdeth that it is a sacrament in the very contract and giuing of mutuall consent before it be solemnized in the Church De matrim cap. 6. Ans. 1. The sacrament is one thing and the receiuers another therefore the maried parties cannot be the sacramental matter being the receiuers 2. It is not euery word that sanctifieth but the word of God 1. Tim. 4.5 but these words I take thee are no parte of the word Ergo they want also the forme of a sacrament 3. The ministers of Christ preachers of the word are only the dispēsers of the mysteries and sacraments of the Church 1. Cor. 4.1 Wherefore the parties themselues could not be ministers of matrimonie if it were a sacrament Augustine thus writeth Ne quis istam magnitudinem sacramenti in singulis quibusque hominib vxores habētib intelligeret ego autē dico inquit c. Lest any man should think when the Apostle had said This is a great sacrament that this great Sacrament is to be vnderstood of all maried persons the Apostle addeth but I speake of Christ and his Church But if so be matrimony were a sacrament why is it not to be found in al maried folke THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE CAVSES of diuorse in mariage and whether it be lawfull to marrie after diuorse THE FIRST PART WHETHER THERE MAY BE more causes of diuorse then fornication onely The Papists DIuorse as Bellarm. defineth it is either from the dueties of mariage as from error 29 bed and boord as we say which is properly called diuortium or it is a dissoluing of the knot and
bond of mariage which is called repudium First then they affirme that the very bond and knot may bee dissolued in the mariage of Infidels if one of them after mariage become a Christian his reason is because mariage contracted in infidelitie is no sacrament and therefore may be dissolued Bellarmin cap. 12. Argum. Saint Paul sayth If the Infidell partie will departe let him depart a brother or sister is not in subiection in such a case 1. Corinth 7.15 Answ. Saint Paul giueth not liberty to the one partie at their pleasure vtterly to renounce the other as though they were no longer man and wife for Saint Paul had sayd before that if the Infidell partie bee content to dwell with the other he or she is not to be put away But his meaning is that if one partie wilfully depart the other is no longer bound nor in subiection for the performance of the mutuall dueties of mariage The Papists error 30 SEcondly separation from bed and boorde may be admitted they say for diuers causes Concil Trident. sess 24. can 8. Bellarmine nameth three Fornication according to Christs rule Math. 5. Heresie Tit. 3. An heretike must be auoyded Thirdly when one is a continuall offence to another a prouocation to sinne If thine eye offend thee pull it out Math. 5.29 Bellarmin cap. 14. Answ. Fornication we admit is a iust cause of separation and diuorce but not heresie for Saint Paul would not haue a woman to forsake an Infidell 1. Corinth 7.13 therefore not an heretike Wee must auoyd such that is take heede of their poysoned opinions and shun their company also where we are not otherwise bound Neither is the eye to be cut off where there is any hope but who knoweth whether the offensiue partie may returne to grace And this place proueth as well a finall â—utting off of mariage as a separation or disiunction The Protestants FIrst that there is no cause of vtter dissolution of mariage by way of diuorce but onely adulterie and fornication it is plaine by our Sauiour Christes wordes Math. 5.32 19.9 where neither infidelitie nor any cause beside is excepted but onely fornication Secondly Saint Augustine sometime was of opinion that the wife might be dismissed for infidelitie but he reuoketh and retracteth that opinion Lib. retract 1. cap. 19. For elsewhere he flatly concludeth thus A viro non fornicante non licere omnino discedere that it is not lawfull for a woman at all to leaue her husband if he committe not fornication De adulter coniug 1.7 And yet further to make this matter more playne we acknowledge no other cause of lawful diuorse in mariage but that only which is prescribed in the Gospell namely for adultery or fornication Math. 5.32 19.9 There is notwithstanding another cause whereby the mariage knot may bee dissolued though not for fornication as when one of the parties doth wilfullie renounce leaue and forsake the other vpon no iust cause but either of lightnes or for diuers religion as when an Infidel forsaketh a Christian a Papist a Protestant an heretick a true professor or vpon any other vnlawfull or vniust cause for the Apostle sayth playnely A brother or sister is not in subiection in such things 1. Corinth 7.15 that is is freed from the yoke or bond of mariage First it is plaine that the Apostle is so to be vnderstoode in this place for the word which he vseth is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no longer a seruant or in subiection which is to be taken in the same sense as if he should say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he or she is no longer bound or tyed which word the Apostle vseth vers 39. And agayne the Apostle hath relation here to the fourth verse where hee sayth the wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath no power of her own bodie the husband likewise But now saith he the infidel partie hauing wilfully separated himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the innocent partie is no longer in subiection that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath now power ouer his owne body and is now become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free exempt from the mariage knot or bond in which sense the Apostle vseth the word verse 39. Secondly we must know what kinde of desertion it is that causeth a dissolution of mariage and in what manner First it must be malitiosa desertio a malicious departure without any iust cause But when as the husband is absent by consent about necessary affayres as the Merchant beyond the seas or is employed in some waightie busines as in warfare in ambassage or such like or is violeÌ„tly deteined in prison or captiuity amongst the Turks or elswhere In these the like cases the wife is bound to waite expect the returne of her husband vnles she be otherwise aduertised of his death SecoÌ„dly the innoceÌ„t partie must vse all meanes to reconcile reclaime and bring home agayne the wilfull and obstinate partie so departing if it be possible Thirdly if he continue in his obstinacie and departe hauing no purpose to returne the matter must be brought before the iudge or Magistrate in such cases who after publike citation of the obstinate partie and certaine knowledge that he refuseth wilfully to appeare being cited and is not otherwise letted to come may with mature deliberation pronounce the innocent partie free and at libertie to marrie according to Saint Pauls rule A brother or sister is not bound in such things Thirdly neither is Saint Paul contrary to our Sauiour Christ who alloweth no diuorce but onely for fornication for that is a diuers case from this whereof Saint Paul treateth And there is great difference betweene lawfull diuorse and vnlawfull and wilfull desertion for there the innocent partie first claymeth the priuiledge of separation here the guiltie partie first separateth himselfe there diuorse is sued and required here the innocent partie seeketh no diuorse but seeketh all meanes of reconciliation So that properly the setting free the innocent partie in this case cannot be called a diuorse Christ therefore speaketh of lawfull diuorce not of euery dissolution of mariage for then mention should haue beene made in that place of naturall death and departure which is confessed by all to be a dissolution and breaking off of mariage Thus haue I shewed mine opinion with Beza and others concerning thiâ— poynt Herein further as in all the rest referring my selfe to the determination of our Church and the iudgement of our learned brethren Beza 1. Corinth 7. vers 15. Amand. Polan Hemingius Tâ—leman Heshus THE SECOND PART WHETHER IT BE LAWfull to marrie after diuorsement for adulterie The Papists FOr adulterie one may dismisse another but neither partie can marrie again error 31 for any cause during life Rhemist Math. 19. sect 4. no not the innocent partie may marrie againe for the mariage knotte is not dissolued because of adulterie Concil Trident. sess 24. can 7. Argum. 1. Rom. 7.2 The woman
WOrkes done before iustification though they suffice not to saluation error 93 yet be acceptable preparatiues to the grace of iustification and such as moue God to mercie As were the almes deedes and prayer in Cornelius Act. 10. sect 5. Rhemist The Protestants Ans. COrnelius prayers and almes were not without fayth as Augustine confesseth Non sine aliqua fide donabat orabat He did not giue almes pray without some fayth And he proueth it by that saying of the Apostle Rom. 10.14 How shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued Seeing then Cornelius had fayth his iustification also was begun for so soone as fayth commeth it iustifieth These were not then workes preparatiue to fayth and iustification but the fruites of his fayth and iustification begun Argum. Before fayth come there can be no workes of preparation acceptable to God because Without fayth it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 Augustine also sayth Ea ipsa opera ante fidem quae videntur hominibus laudabilia inania sunt those very workes which seeme to be commendable before fayth are altogether vaine and vnprofitable If they be vaine they are no preparations to fayth THE SECOND PART OF THE two kindes of iustification The Papists error 94 THere is a first iustification which is meerely of grace without workes as when an Infidel is made iust who had no acceptable workes before to be iustified by The second iustification is that wherein hee that is in Gods grace daylie proceedeth in by good workes Rhemist Rom. 2.3 This iustification and sanctification are all one Concil Trident. sess 6. cap. 7. And it is augmented and increased by the merite of worke sess 6. can 24. Argum. Of the first iustification S. Paul speaketh where he saith We are iustified by fayth without workes Rom 3.28 Of the second Saint Iames intreateth A man is iustified by workes and not of fayth onely 2.24 Rhemist Ans. This your deuice of first and second iustification is but a new deuice not yet 60. yeare olde your second iustification is nothing els but the effect fruits of iustification before God and a declaration that wee are iust before men Saint Paul and Saint Iames do speake of one and the same iustification by faith But they take the word diuersly for Saint Iames by iustifiyng meaneth nothing els but a testifiyng or declaration of our iustification before men And in this sense is the word taken Math. 11.19 Wisdome is iustified of her children that is declared to be iust The Protestants FIrst iustification and sanctification are two diuers things We are iustified by fayth onely by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ Roman 4.7 We are sanctified when by fayth working by loue we walke in newnes of life These two are perpetually distinguished in the scriptures I meane iustification and sanctification 1. Corinth 1.30 6.11 and Galath 5.25 If wee liue in the spirite let vs walke in the spirite Our iustification is the liuing in the spirit our sanctification the walking in the spirite Secondly our workes can be no cause of the increase of our iustification and the grace of God in vs But both our iustification and sanctification are the free gifts of God For what hast thou that thou hast not receiued 1. Corint 4.7 This was the olde Pelagian heresie that the grace of God is giuen according to our workes confuted by Augustine Epistol 106. Gratia iam non erit gratia quia secundum merita datur nam merces fidei auctae erit merces coeptae Thus grace shal be no grace for it is giuen according to merite for the increase of fayth or iustice is made the hyre or wages of fayth that is begun Thirdly the scripture speaketh but of one iustification which glorification followeth Rom. 8.30 Whom he iustified them also hee glorified vnles you will haue another iustification to come after our glorificatiō Likewise Rom. 4. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen ver 7. The iustification in remission of sinnes doth make a man blessed Ergo it is the onely sufficient iustification And Augustine accordingly sayth Donando delicta fecit se debitorem coronae by forgiuing our sinnes he hath made himselfe a debtor for the crowne or reward We see heauen is promised at the first remission of our sinnes what neede then any other iustification Wherefore it is a false and blasphemous decree in the Councel of Trent that wee are not iustified onely by remission of our sinnes sess 6. can 11. THE THIRD PART OF inherent iustice The Papists THey teach that men are not iustified by the onely imputation of the righteousnes error 95 of Christ Trid. Concil sess 6. can 11. Neither that wee are formally made iust by the righteousnes of Christ can 10. but by iustice inherent in vs whereby we are not onely reputed and accounted iust but are truely called iust and are so indeede sess 6. cap. 7. Rhemist Rom. cap. 2. sect 4. Argum. Rom. 2.13 Not the hearers of the law but the doers are iustified Ergo we are iustified by an inherent iustice Rhemist Ans. 1. Saint Paul speaketh of the iustification of the law and proueth by this argument that none could be iustified by the law because none were able to doe it And without performing of the law there was no iustification by the law what is this to the iustification of fayth 2. But if we will vnderstand it of the true iustification of Christians it must so be taken as August saith Non vt factorib iustificatio accedat sed factores legis iustificatio praecedat not that iustification doth come to the doers but that it goeth before the doers of the law The Protestants WE acknowledge an inherent iustice in all faithful men beleeuers but it is imperfect not able to iustifie them before God it is no other then sanctification which is a fruit of iustification But that iustice whereby we are iust before God not falsely accounted but made truly iust by God is by the righteousnes of Christ onely which we apprehend by fayth Argum. That iustice whereby we haue peace with God is the only iustice whereby we are iustified before God for vntil we are cleared and made iust before God it is impossible to haue peace with him But this is onely the iustice of faith Rom. 5.1 Ergo by this iustice onely are we iust before God August hath a good speech Si dixerimus quod nihil iustitiae habemus aduersum Dei dona mētimur si enim iustitiae nihil habemus nec fidem habemus si autem fidem habemus iam aliquid habemus iustitiae If we say we haue no iustice at all in vs we do belye the good gifts of God for if we haue no iustice we haue no faith But if we haue faith then haue we some iustice in vs. Here Augustine acknowledgeth no inherent iustice but onely the iustice of fayth THE FOVRTH PART OF