woord of the Gospell pertayneth too euery seuerall persone Wherfore as touching those that wee speake of there is found in them no stubbornnesse against the Gospell but onely originall corruption whiche notwithstanding is euen of it self alone sufficient to damne the reprobates Besides this although the condition of beléeuing bee annexed yet doth not the ordinance hang vpon that but rather that hangeth vppon the ordinaunce as which goeth in order before all other inferior causes Else see howe false and vnreasonable thinges insew For it will folowe that God in deuising with himselfe did firste set before him his whole woork as already finished and that accordinge as he saw his woorke should bée disposed of itselfe and not by him that made it he should therupon take occasion too determine that is too say too appoynt eyther too saluation or damnation Or if yee like better that god himselfe was vncerteine how the performing or not performinge of the condition woulde fall out Then must it bée concluded that Gods ordinance hangeth in suspence and that the determination of the case as Austin trimly sayeth is not in the power of the potter but of the clay And herevpon wil be grounded another false opinioÌ„ namely that faith hath not his beginnyng of God but of the will of man if it bee so that Gods foresight gaue him cause too determin vpon his choise Neither is it too the purpose to obiect that faith is not foresene forasmuch as it is a gift of god that commeth in by the waye but that corruption and vnbeleefe are foresene which are naturall in man after his fall For the reason of the contraries requireth in any case that loke in what degrée faith is placed in the ordinance of Election euen in the same degree must faithlesnesse or vnbeeleefe bee placed in the ordinance of reprobation Therefore if ye make faith foreknowen too bee the cause of the ordinance of election which is vtterlye a poynte of a Pelagian and therefore repealed by Austin you must needes deeme the same also of vnbeleefe in the contrarye ordynance of reprobation And on the othersyde if yee submit faith vnto the sayd ordinance as you needes must for wee be chosen to the intent to beleue and not bicause wee wold or should beleue you must nedes also in the contrary member submit vnbeleefe to the ordinance of reprobation Quest VVill you then make the ordinance of reprobation to be the cause of vnbeleeue as wel as you make the ordinance of election too bee the cause of faith Answer No. For the ordinance of election is in déede the efficient cause of faith But corruption or vnbeleefe with the fruites therof are in such wise put vnder the ordinance of reprobation as that the will of man is the first efficient cause of them and yet notwithstanding they be subiect too the ordinance bycause that although it bee not throughe the ordynance yet is it not besydes the ordynance nor without the ordynance that those thinges happen whereof the fayling cause and not the efficient cause is grrounded in God as I sayde afore For like as they onely beléeue in whom God createth fayth euen so through Gods forsaking of mannes wil sinne is krepte into mankynde and there abydeth yelding ill fruit in as manye as God listeth too leaue vp too their owne lustes that they may bee the cause of theyr own damnation whervntoo they are also inregestred and appoyncted from euerlastinge Furthermore that I may retyre vntoo the other question whatsoeuer is sayde of the forenamed condition whiche is annexed too the ordinaunce as who should saye that the ordinance depended vppon the condition it is vnfitly spoken .. For the ordinance of sauinge the elect sort is another thinge than the verye glorifiynge of the elect and the ordinance of dampning the Reprobates is another thinge than the verye damninge of them in somuche as the ordinaunce it selfe must needes bee distinguished from the execution of it The execution than of the ordinaunce of election that is too wyt the saluation of the chosen dependeth vppon faythe that taketh holde of Christe and the execution of the ordinaunce of Reprobation that is too wyt the dampnation of the castawaies dependeth vppon synne â—nd there fruites thereof accordinge tâ—o this saying of the Prophet thy destruction O Israell commeth of thy selfe And of this ordinance of choosinge some men too bee saued by grace and of refusing othersome too bee dampned through their owne sinnes we know none other cause but this one namely that the Lord who is both incomparablye mercyfull and incomparablye rightfull will bee glorifyed in that wise He that holdes not himselfe contented with this for asmuche as hee seeketh some hygher thynge and some rightfuller thinge than Goddes will hee is worthely reprooued by the Apostle for a â—rabler Quest Ergo God hateth some not for their sinnes sake but because he listeth so too doo An. This is a slaunderous obiectioÌ„ For it is certeine that God hateth no maÌ„ but for sinne for otherwise he had hated hys owne work But it is one thing to hate and another thing to ordeine one to iuste hatred For the cause of the hatred is manifest namely euen sinne but why God appoynteth whoÌ„ he listeth vntoo iust hatred thoughe the cause bee hid from vs sauinge too the ende hee may bee glorified yet cannot it not be vnrightuous toÌ„sideringe that the will of God is the only rule of rightfulnes For if wee speake of this soueraigne will of God which ordereth disposeth the causes of all thinges wée must not say that a thinge ought too be rightful before God should wil it but contrarywise that God must firste wyll the thynge beefore it can bee ryghtfull whiche who so considereth not shall reason but confusedly of this matter Quest But yet for all this God seemeth too bee a regarder of persons if he yelde not alike vnto all that haue done alyke For in this poincte all men are like that they bee corrupted by nature spred into them from Adam An. Nay trulye it foloweth not of necessitye that whosoeuer yeeldeth not alyke vnto like shoulde bee an accepter of persons but he onlye whiche yeldeth not alyke vnto lyke because hee is parciallye mooued by some circumstaunces that accompany the person it self as if two men were offenders alike the iudge shoulde acquit the one of them bicause he is rich or his kinsman or his countrieman For these be the persons that may not bee regarded of him that will iudge vncorruptlye But I pray you let vs put the case y two men bee indetted vnto you both in like somme and both vppon like conditions Nowe if of your liberalitie you forgiue the one his dette and exact the other mans dette accordinge too extremity of law shall there bee any excepting of persons in this behalfe What if some souereigne hauing a cupple that offend alike doo of his meere grace parden
setteth foorth the proporcionable resemblance of woorkes and glory and not y cause of glory For in all places he stedfastlye defendeth that rightuousnesse is the mere gyfte of God without the woorkes of the lawe and is not payde as a dew det but bestowed vppon the beléeuers as a grace Que. He meaneth but the works of the Ceremoniall lawe Ans A fond answer For hys matchinge of duty grace one againste another caÌ„not stand onles all the workes of the lawe bee excluded without exception and yet I wil ouerpasse other argumeÌ„ts of paules which are bent directlye against the very law of the tenne hests bent I say not toâ— deface the law which is the madnes of the Manichees but too take away from it the power of iustifiyng Again I besech you if works may be thanked for any maner of rightuousnes why should yee exclude the ceremonies y bée rightlye vsed For truly they be compreheÌ„ded in y sowerth commaundement of the ten hestes as longe as they were rightlye vsed they were most excellent workes Quest But ceremonies be abolished by the comming of Christ An. I confesse they be abolished because they bée fulfilled in Christ But the matter it self declareth that where Paule disputeth of the causes of Iustification his reasons tend not to proue that the Ceremonies bee abolished but too shew that saluatioÌ„ rested alwaies in the only rightuousnes ef christ imputed to theÌ„ that beleue for confirmation therof among other things he alledgeth y examples of Abraham and Dauid Quest Then may wee say that paule excludeth but onely the good works that go before the grace of Iustification An. No lesse fond is this answere also For besides that the Apostle alledgeth manifeestly the examples testimenies of them that were iustified namely of Abraham and Dauid to the intent I may â—et passe his other reason grounded vppon the very nature of the lawe what a madnesse were it to busie a mannes self aboute the excludinge of those thinges whiche are not at all for why to déeme that they wiche are not iustified can dâ—o anye good woorkes it is no lesse folie than if a man should say that a tree can bringe forth good fruite before it be gâ—od â—t selfe Quest But although the hyre of eternal life be not dew for the worthines of the very workes yet is it dew at leastwise by couenant An. What couenant meene you I beseeche you Quest The couenant of the lawe which is Do this and thou shalt liue And if thou wilt enter into life kepe the commundementes An. How this couenant is to be vnderstoode it is to bée sene by the threatning which is set against the promyse And that is this by the witnes of the apostle cursed is euery one that abydeth not in all the thinges that are written in the booke of the lawe that he may kepe theÌ„ But the law requireth perfect loue And no man but onely Christ hath euer performed the law to the full therefore life is dew to none by the couenant but only vnto Christ As for vs we haue it giuen vs by mere grace from out of him who also is himselfe giuen vnto vs by mere grace Quest VVherfore call you them good woorkes then if they deserue not eternall lyfe An. Surely the Latin diuines yea euen the auÌ„cient sort of them haue vnproperly vsed the word Merit or Deserue in sted of Obtein and the woord Desirt or deseruing or Merit for a good worke whiche thinge ye shall neuer finde in the holye scriptures Now although the works of y regenerate are not so good as thei shold deserue eternall life yet are they good so farforth as they proceede from the good spirit of God from a hart y is clensed by faith And agein they be good bicause y by theÌ„ the lorde is glorified our neighbor helped and we our selues also reape this excellent fruite of theÌ„ that they bee witnesses vnto vs of our faith and consequently of our election Quest Let thus far then suffice concerning both the partes of Sanctification Now remayneth that which the Apostle saith also namely that Christ is become our redemption Ans By the woorde redemption the Apostle meeneth in that place not the verye act of redeeming but the effect of it that is too say the end whervnto the sayde Iustification and Sanctification lead vs the which is this that being redeemed from synne and death by Christ we should also be made partakers of eternal life in him whose pledge and earnest penny wee haue euen in this lyfe that is to wit the holy Ghost by whom we bee sealed vp Que. But Dauid grouÌ„deth this redemption and blesing in the release of sins VVhy then adde you also the imputation of the sanctificatioÌ„ that sticketh in Christ and his fulfilling of the law An. What if I shold incounter thee with these textes Blessed are the cleane in hart blessed are the blameles in y way and suche other like woldest thou gather here vpon y the releasing of sinnes is excluded I think not So now then sanctification is ment by the terme of iustification bycause these twoo go neuer a sunder And why maye I not make answer thus also that somtimes there is mention made but onely of y releasing of sinnes not to the ende to exclude all other pates that make men blessed but by cause the rest are couerfly comprehended vnder it And if thou wilt vrge mee yet further I may also fitly answer that aâ— the other are ment by y releasing of sins For who can denye but that euen originall sin hath néede of clensinge Ergo it is compreheÌ„ded in the releasinge of sins Also who can saye that he only is too bee taken for an offender y doth some thinge which he is forbiddeÌ„ not he also which performeth not that which is inioyned him Ergo not to haue fulfilled the lawe is also sin whiche also hath néede too be released Now remaine the sinnes that is to say the déedes that are don ageynst the law wherof there is no question but they haue néede too bee satisfied for All these are released by Christes satisfaction whiche is imputed too vs all Nowe let vs come too the name of Release That man is properly saide to release a dette whiche fréely yea and vtterly dischargeth his detter so as hee reserueth no action too himselfe ageinst him Now then wee bee all of vs the children of wrath not onely bycause we be corrupted or bycause wee fulfill not the lawe or bycause wee doo the thynges that are forbidden vs but also bycause wee ought too appeare pure béefore God such as he made vs and not only not too be transgressors of the law but also to be performers of the law Therfore too she ende that we who else must perish may haue full perfecte release of all sinnes this foresaide release muste of necessitye matche with the other release
tuousnes is ours by imputacion Abrahams rightuous nesse Rom. 4. 3. Rom. 5. 1. 9 Obiection a gainst this that faith is the free gyft of God by Christ Eph. 1. 4. Rom. 3. 24. 2. Tim. 1. 9 1. Ioh. 4. 19 Phil. 3. 12 Rom. 5. 6 8. 10. The thinges that wee attaine in Christ 1. Cor. 1. 30 what wisedome is Luke 1. 77 Coll. 2. 3. Mat. 17. 5 IustificatioÌ„ or rightuousnes Ephe. 1. 4. Iames. 2 8 c. Math. 1. 20 Luke 1. 35 Math. 3. 15 Iohn 17. 4. Ioh. 19. 30 Phi. 3. 9. 10 1. Pet. 2. 22. Obiection against rightuousnesse by Imputation Phil. 28 Obiection against the sufficieÌ„cy of christs rightuousnes for any but himselfe Gall. 4. 45 The partes of rightuousnes SaÌ„ctificatioÌ„ or holinesse â— Iohn 3. 9 Mat. 1. 18 20. Luke 1. 35 Rom. 8. 3. Col. 2. 9 2. cor 5. 19. Christe the second Adam Rom. 5. 18 19. 1. co 15. 45 Of our dubble birth Iohn 3. 4. 5. Rom. 5. 18 Our sanctification in Christ layde forth more plainely Rom. 8. 3. 4 An obiectioÌ„ against sanctification by imputatios Rom. 7. 25. Gal. 5. 17 Rom. 12. 1 vvhy vve be not fully holy in this life 1. Cor. 1. 1â— The proportionable resemblance betvveen hâ— linesse and rightuousenesse Luke 6. 44 1. Cor. 13. 12 Spirite Fleshe 1. Iohn 3. 6 Of sinninge and not sinninge 1. Ioh. 1. 8 Rom. 7. 15 Of naturall reason the poure therof Rom. 1. 20 Rom. 3. 11 12. He meaneth Reason Reason is vt terly blind in matters concerninge god maimed in matters concerninge maâ— Iohn 5. 23 Iohn 17. 8 what the knowledge of the olde philosopher was as touching God how litle too be regarded Rom. 1. 12 That is too say Reason Obiection of misagreing of the christen di uines Rightuousnes by comparison Math. 7. 17. 1. cor 4. 4 Rom. 4. 2 Tit. 3. 5. Obiection in excuse of mans vnablenes by nature Rom. 5. 15 16. c. A suttle shift to chalenge some peice of rightuousnes vn to man. Psal. 5. 5 Rom. 2. 10 Rom. 1. 17 6. 23. Heb. 12. 2 A pursewing of the former obiection Hire wages reward and recompence Rom. 4. 4 Luk. 17. 10 Of geuing to the worker 2. Cor. 5. 10 woorkes make not men rightuouse Math. 7. 17 18. Ro. 15. 16 good works bee needfull to saluation Rom. 8. 14. 1. Iohn 3. 7 Iam. 2. 21 22. Of faith that worketh not till it be very late Luk. 23. 40 c. Damninge for euill woorkes Rom. 6. 32. Rom. 3. 20. Oddes or difference in punishemeÌ„t Mat. 10. 15. Oddes in glorie 2. Cor. 9. 6 Obiection to proue that workes deserue A popish Epicurish obiection Rom. 4. 4 Rom. 7. 7 Ceremonies abolished by christe workes of preparation Ro. 4. 6. 15 Obiection of reward dew by couenant Gal. 3. 10 why works bee called good wheras they merit not what is meÌ„t by redemption The conclusion of the things afore saide Acts. 16. 14 Ephe. 2. 8 Phil. 1. 29 To whom faith is giueÌ„ What prouidence is The prero gatiue of Prouidence Obiection against gods Prouidence Note this Another obiection against the same Gods prouidence resembled by a clocke Ezechiel 1 5. c. Examples of Gods prouidence Ioseph GeÌ„n 45. 7 50. 20 Sathan an instrument of Gods prouidence Madianitâ—â— Iudg. 7. 22. 2. Kings 12 22. Achitophell 2. Kings 15 34 17 14 23. Absolon 2. kinges 17. 23. 2. Kinges 18. 9. c. 1. Pet. 3. 17 1. thes 3. 3. 4 Gal. 6. 14. 2. cor 12. 9 Act. 2. 23 4. 28 Rom. 8. 22 Eph. 5. 25 The Instruments of christs death Luke 22 3. 4. Iohn 12. 6 Mat. 27. 18 Iohn 19. 8 Obiection against the foresaide examples Difference betweene â—â— and By Rom. 8. 14. 1. cor 12. 11 Eph. 1. 11 Ioh. 14. 17 Rom. 1. 26 28. 2. tim 2. 2â— Permission or sufferaÌ„ce willingnes How euill persons performe Gods will. Rom. 9. 19. Psal. 5. 5 Mark. 3. 35 Obiection against prouidence bycause God created all things good Why the blissed Angelles neuer fell nor neuer shall An obiectioÌ„ that God should be the author of euill The necessitie inforceth not mannes will. Math. 26. 54. 56 Iohn 13. 11 18. Ioh. 19. 36 Actes 17. 3 Necessitie of sinning excuseth not sinne Rom. 7. 14 Iohn 8. 36 Rom. 8. 7. The conclusion of the discourse coÌ„cerning prouidence Of fatherige euill vppon god god willeth none iniquitie Psal. 5. 4 â–ª How God willeth or not willeth euill Rom. 5. 15 1. Pet. 3. 17 Of sufferaÌ„ce willingnesse Obiection against the foresaide allegations Gen. 45. 8 Psa 1 c 5. â— Iere. 25. â— Ezechi 21 21. c. Exod. 7. 18 Prou. 16. 33 Difference betweene the good in strumentes the bad in executing Gods vvill vvhat predestinacion is A worldly ouer scrupulous dout Rom. 8. 19. Actes 2. 23. Augustin de Ciuit. Dei lib. 19. ca 1. Twoo sorts of predestination The answer to the doure or obiectioÌ„ last afore named Rom. 9. 22 23. Another obiection vpoÌ„ a distinctioÌ„ of termes Acts. 13. 48 Iude. 4 1. Thes 5. â— 1. tim 2. 4 The right vnderstanding of all generall or indefinite propositions concerning prouidence and predestination Math. 4. 23. Iohn 6. 40 Eph. 28 2. Thes 2. 3 Rom. 9. 1â— Acts. 13. 48 Acts. 16. 14 Election must needes bee particular vvithouâ— anâ— peremptory or precise excepting of any persons Rom. 1. 19. Stubbornnes is the let of the effectual workiÌ„g of gods promises Mat. 20. 16 ConditioÌ„ of beleeuinge Absurdities folowiÌ„g vppon the fore said questioÌ„ The nature of contraries in reasoning The causes of vnbeleefe and of faith are subiect to gods ordinaunce Difference betweene Gods ordinance the execution of his ordinance Iocl 13. 9. A right popishe and worldly obiection Differnce betwene hating and ordeining too iust hatred Whither there be any accepting of persons with God. Rom. 9. 21. How God shapeth both the choseÌ„ the reprobates out of one lump The wilfull vnreasonable obiection of the worldlinges Ro. 8. 14 Nedes must the reprobates perish the cause therof The middle causes betweene the ordinance of predestination and the end of it Rom. 8. 28 c. Rom. 11. 35 Rom. 9. 22. Remedies ageinst the temptation of particuler predestination Phil. 2. 13. 1. Ioh. 3. 10. Ro. 8. 15. 16 Psal. 42. 11 Other â—o comfortable remedies PerseueraÌ„ce or holding out to the ende Howtrewe faith the effectes of it ar interrupted Marke too know an elect from a worldling vnelected â–ª or from a reprobâ—te Rom. 7. 13 Rom. 7. 15 19 Rom. 7. 25. No man must bee hastely deemed for a â—eprobate
the nurrishment of bodely foode â— suchwise as maye be to the sustenance â— his lyfe it behoueth hym to haue it â— farfoorth his owne as he may euen â—te it So also to the intent wee may â—cke the iewce of the spirituall and â—dles lyfe out of Christ it behoueth vs â— take holde of him with the mouth of â—â—th and spiritually as it were to diâ—st him into vs As for Paules place â—â—â—erning Christs taking of mans naâ—e vnto him it cannot be fitly applied â— this matter for according to that all â—â— wythout exceptioÌ„ might say they be Christes members which thinge the Apostle setteth downe as peculiar to the Churche alone and so also dooth the reâ—semblaunce of bodily wedlocke importe For euery man and euery woman are not one flesh but eche man is one flesh with that woman whose husband he is and eche woman is one fleshe with that man whose wife shee is And therfore this cupplinge into one fleshe is not of nature but of couenaunt and so also is our coâ—iunction with Christe into one spirit â–ª Too conclude If the Apostle had ment so as you say namely that Christe hath knit himselfe vntoo vs buâ— by his Incarnation and that wée be ioyned vnto him but by faith he should rather haue sayd that Christ is of our fleâ—â— and of our bones Quest On forth I pray you and shewâ— me what we receiue by being spiritualâ— made one with Christe through faith 〈…〉 you haue sayd An. Again wee enter into a howge gâ—… whose widenesse length depth whâ—â— as otherwise it surmounteth our capaâ—â—tie according as the Apostle witnesseâ—â— we knowe so farforth as the holy ghâ—… wherwith wee bée endewed sercheth the â—epth of god He that hath not spared â—is owne Sonne saith the Apostle but â—ath geuen him for vs all how should he not also geue vs all thinges with him Wherefore I aunswere that all thinges needefull for saluation flow into vs out of Christe when wee take holde of him by faith Que. But if it may be I would haue you â—hew vnto mee particularli which those thinges bee An. I answere then that some thinges are Christes owne in such wise as they â—leaue alwayes to himself alone and become not oures but by imputation of whiche sorte bee the thinges that he hath performed for our sakes namely that by becomming subiect to the law he fulfilled all rightuâ—usnesse and suffered the punishments dewe for our sinnes both whiche thinges the Apostle compriseth vnder the name of obedience And some thinges doe so rest in christ as yet notwithstanding the force and operation of them is spread intoo vs of which sort is the singular puerenesse of the manhod in Christ garnished with all gifts without measure which purenesse not onely becometh ours by imputation but also is the headspring and originall of our new birth and of all the spirituall gyftes that accompany the same Quest VVhat callest thou imputacion Ans That benefyte of God the father wherby he vouchsafeth to account Christes obedience as ours in as ample wise as if we ourselues had fulfilled the lawe and made ful satisfaction for our sinnes Quest But standeth this with Gods nature that he shoulde accept any man as rightuous for another mans rightuousnesse Ans In deede it is an other mans rightuousnesse in asmuche as it is withoute vs and resteth in another subiecte or person that is to witte in Christe and yet is it not anothers in asmuche as the same subiecte that is to wit Christe is ours yea and also is spiritually beecome all one thinge with vs by faith Quest Naye truelye if he bee become all one thinge with vs nowe it seemeth that what so euer he hathe in him the same is ours in very deede and not only by imputation â—ns Certesse were it once graunted y â—e very substaunce of Christ were beeâ—me our substaunce by reall copulation â—…d vnitinge whiche thinge foloweth of â—…eir opinion that auouche Christs flesh â—â—d bloude to bee eaten with the verye â—outh and so to bée conueyed into vs â—en should your sayinge folow of conseâ—ence also Whereby it may be perceyâ—d howe greatlye the doctrine as well 〈…〉 transubstantiation as also of consubantiation fighteth against the doctrine rightuousnes by imputation besydes at it also taketh awaye the verinesse of â—hristes fleshe I sayde afore that christ â—â—d wee bee verelye made one in deede â—â—wbeit that the same is a meere spiriâ—all misterye the hande whereof is â—e holye Ghoste and that the marke â—hereat it ameth is not the growinge â—â—gether of the substaunces or of the perâ—â—ns into one for to what purpose were at But that the spirituall life shoulde 〈…〉 that meanes flowe from Christe the â—isticall heade into his misticall bodye â—derneath it Quest Let vs returne too Imputation An. Contented and I saye that lyâ—â— as whatsoeuer waÌ„t of rightuousnes anâ— whatsoeuer spottinesse of sinne is in 〈…〉 the same is without Christe and yet â—â— imputed to Christ So on the other sideâ— I say that Christes obedience is outâ— vs as stickinge in Christe the onely ground of it and yet notwithstanding is imputed vnto vs And the foundaciâ—â— of this imputacion is this that he is oâ—â— with vs and wée one with him after spirituall waye and manner as I saydâ— afore so as he was accounted a sinneâ—â— not in himselfe but in vs and wée be â—â— kened for rightuous not in our selueâ— but in him Quest But it is said that Abrahams faitâ— was imputed to him for rightuousenâ—â— and not this obedience of Christes An. You knowe this that the thingâ— which go in order one vnder another â—â— not contraries Fayth is sayde too 〈…〉 accounted vnto rightuousnes because is the instrument wherby the sayde obedience whereof the immutacion makâ—â— vs rightuous is taken hold vppon Aftâ—â— which manner also we be saide to be iustifyed by fayth namely in asmuche as â— â—eth holde of christes obedience by imâ—ation wherof we be made rightuous â—est There is yet one doubt behinde we your sayinge that Christe is taken â—â—de on by fayth agreeth with that â—…ich you said afore wheÌ„ you auouched at all gyftes doo flowe intoo vs from â—…riste taken holde vpon by fayth For â—eemeth to folow eyther that faythe â—ot of the fathers gyft in Christ or els â—t this your latter sayinge is vntrewe â—r needes must faith go before taking â—…ld if christ be taken hold on by fayth â—â—s The beginninge of our saluation â—â—meth of God who firste chose vs in â—hrist ere we were born yea and ere eâ—r the fouÌ„dacions of the world wer laid â—…d also firste loueth and knoweth vs in â—e time of our being borne when as yet â—e be not geuen vnto Christ and graffed â—o him in verye déede but are too â—e geuen and graffed Therefore if ye â—ue an eye to the verye instant of the â—e wée doo both beléeue and also take â—lde by beliefe
vpon christ offered vnto â— both at once For the cause of a thinge â—nnot bée woorkinge in verye déede vnâ—se the effecte of it come foorth together with it But if yee looke too the ordâ—â— of causes I graunt that the traynmeâ—â— of faith yea of trewe fayth goeth befoâ—â— the taking holde vppon Christe andâ— consequently is geueÌ„ not to them y aâ—â— already greffed but to them the are â—â— the poynt too bee greffed intoo him Yâ—â— foloweth it not therevpon that fayth 〈…〉 not geuen vntoo vs in Christe consiâ—â—ringe that the heauenly father settyâ— his determination in his onely Sonnâ— dooth not then first behold vs in Chrisâ— when wee be geuen vnto him but haâ—â— chosen vs knowen vs and loued vs 〈…〉 him yea euen before the foundations 〈…〉 the worlde were layde muche rathâ—â— when as yet wee hated him like 〈…〉 Christe himself also toke hold of vs first to the ende that wee might take holdâ— him afterward Again loke what is begon in vs by grace that we migh therbâ— bee greffed into Christ and therfore 〈…〉 in respecte of the order of causes is doâ—â— before our takinge holde vppon Christâ— the same is increased and strengthenâ—â— in vs afterwarde by the same grace iâ— Christ whom wee haue now taken hâ—â— on by faith Quest VVhat then are the things that wee atteine in Christ An. Paule concludeth this whole matter most plainly and also most briefelye when he sayeth that God the father hath made Christe our wysedome Iustificaâ—ion Sanctification and Redemption Que. What meene you by being made â—ur wisedome An. The selfesame thinge that zacharie â—â—eeneth when he sayeth that his owne â—â—â—nne Iohn Baptist is sent to shewe the â—nowledge of saluation that is too saye â—o shew Christe himselfe For the onlye â—rewe wisedome is this which Christe â—â—acheth vntoâ— men namelye when hee â—iscloseth himselfe vntoo them whiche â—â—inge the father also hath testified with lowde voice from heauen saying heere â—ee him Quest Recken you this among the gifts â—hat wee receiue by Christ Answere My méeninge is that Christe hymselfe 〈…〉 so géeuen vntoo vs to bée the onely teaâ—er of that trew and natiue wisedome â—â— that hee teacheth himselfe vntoo vs For he is both the teacher and the thinge that this is taught And therefore amonge Christes giftes the verye foremost and chiefest is that he géeueth himselfe vnto vs when he furnisheth vs with the knowledge of himselfe Quest VVhat doth Paule cal iustification in this place Ans That wherby we bée made rightuous that is to saye so farfoorth perfecte sounde faultlesse and vnblamable as not onelye there is quite wyped out of vs whatsoeuer vncleanenesse is in vs from top too to wherby God who is singulerly pure maye by anye meanes be offended but also there is moste plentuouslye founde in vs whatsoeuer may so muche delight him in this humaine nature as he of his good will maye voutchesaue to crowne wyth euerlastinge lyfe And of that rightuousnesse whereby a man iâ— accounted ryghtuous béefore God the certeine squéer and inuariable rule iâ— Gods owne law And the lawe not only forbiddeth the thinges that are not to be done threatning euerlasting death for a penaltie but also inioyneth the perfect louig of god and our neighbor Therfore that a man may be accounted rightuous afore god there be two things required of necessitye that is to say the vtter absence of all sinne and the fulfilling of all right according to the lawe Que. But this was neuer founde in any mortall wight An. Sauing Christ who not onely neuer sinned but also performed y who le lawe to the full Que. Tell me I pray you was not christ perfectly rightuous euen from the very moment of his conception Ans In respect of his Godhead he not onely was rightuous from euerlasting but also the very rightuousnes it self y is to say the souereine and most perfect purenesse And in respect of his manhod he was indewed with singular holines yea euen farre aboue the Angels euen from the very instant of the conception of his fleshe But now by the name of rightuousnesse wee meene that which foloweth vppon the perfect performing of gods law which rightuousnesse christ had not in effect vntill he had finished the whole woorke that was inioyned him For this is the rightuousnes by the imputation whereof wee bee iustified or made righteous and not the foresayd essentiall rightuousnes which is proper to the godhead nor yet the other naturall purenes of Christes fleshe wherof wee will intrete seuerally by it selfe for want of which distinction Osiander hath ouershot himselfe to fowly Question But I see not yet how this rightuousnesse may suffice For inasmuch as we not only performe not the lawe but also are ouercouered with innumerable sinnes howe shal wee bee accounted as though we had neuer sinned that is to say to be vndefiled of our sinnes if the spots of our sinnes be not first washed out and that caÌ„not be don without suffering of the punishments dew to them Answere Thou sayest righte Therefore whereas I sayde that Christ not onely brake not the lawe but also dyd most fully and perfectly performe the lawe thou must take his so dooing to comprehende in especially a satisfaction for al the sinnes of them that beleue for euery man is bounde by the lawe to loue god and his neyghbour perfectly not indefinitely but defynitelye that is to saye as hauinge regarde of hys owne peculiar callynge As for examples sake if a magistrate loue God but as some other priuate person dooth hée cannot bée saide too haue done his duetie because he is bound to loue god as a magistrate whiche maner of dealinge is too bée vnderstoode of all other kinde of callinges And Christ was sent to suffer for vs the punishmentes dew for our sinnes which thinge hee performed all his life longe but specially in that Sacrifice of his wherin he béecame obedient to hys father vnto death euen the death of the Crosse Therefore by woorkinge in sufferinge and by offeringe himselfe for vs he both fulfilled the lawe for vs and also made satisfaction for our sinnes Quest But in respecte that Christe is beecome man it seemeth he was bound by nature to performe the rightuousnesse of the lawe that is to saye too loue God and his neighbour perfectlye because the said law is laid vpon the very nature of maÌ„kind And therfore it semeth that his fulfilling of the lawe was not for vs but for himself that he might purchace himself life which thing cannot be said of the punishmentes that were to be indured by him for our sinnes An. Althoughe we should say that christ as touching his flesh purchased himselfe eternall life by fulfillinge the lawe whervnto hée was bounde yet were it no absurditie to saye also that the force of this desert is so great that it floweth also eueÌ„ vnto the beleuers But the former parte cannot well be iustified