of Gods spirit but of mans spirit so that if such proue all abortiues and dead borne it is no maruaile But the sons of God we cannot be till we be in Christ which is till we beleeue in Christ as Gal. 3. 26. Ye are all the children of God by faith in Iesus Christ therefore before this faith in Iesus Christ we are not the children of God no not so much as the Embrio in the first conception But the new creature must bee in Christ Iesus as the Apostle saith Gal. 6. 15. So when Christ himselfe speakes of regeneration to Nicodemus Ioh. 3. instructing him therein how it is begun in a man hee tels him in the continuation of his speech that this appertaines to those that beleeue in the son of man vers 15. and vers 16. For a man to be regenerate or made the son of God by adoption he must be in the son of God by beleeuing in him Where Christ also opposing faith to vnbeliefe saith those are condemned already that beleeue not hauing no part in the regeneration therefore before faith in Christ no regeneration at all no cleansing no sanctification but all condemnation Againe Christ is made vnto vs sanctification 1. Cor. 1. 30. vnto vs in him Of him are ye in Christ Iesus therefore while out of Christ no sanctification So the adoption of children is by Iesus Christ Ioh. 1. 5. therefore no sons no regeneration but in Iesus Christ. Likewise Ioh. 15. 2. Euery branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away So vers 4. As the branch cannot beare fruit of it selfe except it abide in the vine no more can ye except ye abide in mee â—or without me yee can doe nothing Therefore while a man is out of Christ vntill by faith he be ingrafted into Christ the true Vine from whom hee receiueth the liuely sappe of a new life hee can doe nothing nothing that is good nothing that is acceptable to God no worke of new obedience or sanctification But some may say Regeneration is wrought by the Spirit of God in vs and so may be before faith in Christ and consequently before we come to be actually in Christ. To which I answer True it is that the Holy Ghost is the immediate efficient cause of our regeneration But how doth he worke regeneration in vs namely by working in vs faith in Christ which faith is the very immediate instrument whereby the Holy Ghost doth regenerate sanctifie and cleanse vs sith the Holy Ghost by this faith ingrafteth and vniteth vs into Christ in whom we are regenerate and made the sonnes of God Now that faith is the instrument of our regeneration and sanctification it is euident Acts 15. 9. 26. 18. So that the very first and prime act of Gods sanctifying spirit in vs is to worke faith in vs by which faith in Christ as by a noble instrument the Holy Ghost vniting vsto Christ as members to the head doth regenerate vs and so makes vs the adopted sons of God And before faith in Christ we cannot say wee haue Gods sanctifying spirit in vs I say in regard of prioritie of time For this sanctifying spirit in the same moment that he sanctifies vs he workes faith in Christ in vs by which he regenerates and sanctifies vs. But they re-ioyne by a distinction and say that this repentance which prepares the way to faith and layes the foundation of regeneration is not acceptable to saluation but only to fit prepare vs thereunto and to make vs the more capable of it In this distinction they do much please themselues but they confound themselues in their distinction For they affirme againe that this precedent repentance of theirs is regeneration and sanctification and newnesse of life inchoatiue begun at least in part A bold assertion Is it regeneration begun and in part and being acceptable is it not acceptable to saluation Is not regeneration a worke of our saluation And though regeneration should be begun in this repentance in neuer so small a degree a worke it is of our saluation if it bee true regeneration Logicians know that Magis minus non variant speciem A man in the first conception is a man though imperfect and inchoatiue But they reply again That they do not say this preuious repentance is acceptable to saluation of it self but as it hath relation to faith coÌ„ming after whereby it becomes acceptable A pretty shift And yet they say again That repentance goeth before faith not in the precedency of time but in nature only in the order of causes Now if this repeÌ„tance go before faith in the order of causes then repentance must cause saith so this absurdity wil follow That the effect must giue a form being at least a well being vnto the cause if so be faith the effect consequent of repeÌ„tance as they say make the same acceptable But how doe they proue that this their repentance goes before faith in Christ in nature and in the order of causes They proue it out of Matth. 21. 32. where Christ taxing the infidelity of the Pharisees wherein they came behinde the very Publicans faith Iohn came to you in the way of righteousnesse and ye beleeued him not but the Publicans and the Harlots beleeued him and ye when ye had seen it repented not afterward that ye might beleeue him Hence they conclude That repentance must goe before faith as the cause of it alledging Christs words thus Ye repented not that ye might beleeue But leauing out him That ye might beleeue Him to wit Iohn Baptist as it is in the text which implieth what kinde of faith Christ there meaneth to wit an assent to the truth of Iohns doctrine The place thereby comes to bee preuerted For Credere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ei is the faith of assent but Credere in cum that is in Christum is the iustifying faith So that by that place alledged if repentance goeth before faith in the order of causes then certainly that repentance is the cause of no other faith but the faith of assent there spoken of which is not all one faith with the iustifying faith But they which affirme thus yet confess that repentance doth not go before the faith of assent which they terme also the Euangelical faith but that its an effect consequent therof And here by the way I might take iust occasion to shew the absurdity of those that distinguish betweene Euangelicall faith and the faith of Christ as if Euangelicall faith were onely a generall assent to the truth of the Gospell whereas a generall assent and Euangelicall faith are as different as this and the faith of Christ are all one for Euangelicall faith looketh vpon the Gospell not onely as a true history but as the mysterie of God in Christ it embraceth it as the Gospell preaching Christ the Sauiour yea preaching Christ to euery beleeuer of this Gospell in particular As
which ioynes the merits of Christ vnto vs and makes them ours after a sort in as much as for his merits sake hee giueth vs righteousnesse whereby wee are righteous Cum enim per iustitiam Christi c. For seeing by the righteousnesse of Christ mankinde hath satisfied for their sinnes and by it is reconciled to God and the gates of Paradise are thereby vnlocked and all that are iustified or satisfie or merit at Gods hand seeing by his merits they are iustified and reconciled to God and satisfie for themselues and merit increase of grace and blessednesse surely it cannot be denied but that to mankinde and all so iustified Christs righteousnesse is or may be imputed to satisfaction and merit So Vega. I neede passe no other censure vpon this Romane-Catholicke doctrine than that of Gregory Deo maledicunt cum se ab illo accepisse vires intelligunt sed tamen de eius muneribus propriam laudem quaerunt They blaspheme God when they acknowledge they haue receiued strength from him and yet from his gifts seeke their owne praise And St. Augustine in his Soliloquies saith sweetly Vnde gloriabitur omnis caro Nunquid de malo Haec non est gloria sed miseria sed nunquid gloriabitur de bono nunquid de alieno Tuum Domine est bonum tua est gloria Qui enim de bono tuo gloriam sibi quaerit non tibi quaerit hic fur est latro similis est diabolo qui voluit furari gloriam tuam Qui enim laudari vult de tuo dono non quaerit in illo gloriam tuam sed suam hic licet propter tuum donum laudatur ab hominibus ◠te tamen vituperatur quia de dono tuo non tuam sed suam gloriam quaesiuit Qui autem ab hominibus laudatur vituperante te non defendetur ab hominibus iudicante te ne◠liberabitur condemnante te Whereof shall all flesh reioyce Of euill This is not glory but misery But shall hee glory of good What of anothers good Thine O Lord is the good thine is the glory For he who of thy good seekes glory to himselfe and not to thee hee is a theefe and a robber and like the deuill who would haue robbed thee of thy glory For he that would be praised for thy gift and doth not therein seeke thy glory but his owne this man though for thy gift hee be praised of men yet hee is dispraised of thee because of thy gift he sought not thine but his owne glory But hee that is praised of men being disallowed of thee shall not be defended of men when hee shall be iudged of thee nor absolued when condemned of thee I haue been the more copious in citing these two authors Vega and Soto because both they were grand-Sticklers in the Councell and vndertooke to write these things as Commentaries vpon this sixt Session of Iustification as we haue sufficiently noted before So that what the Councell hath couched in the Text in fewer words these haue amplified and expressed more at large to the end that no man might mistake the Councels minde and meaning no not in the middest of her mistie and cloudy equiuocations Thus they haue learned to doe with imputation the very name whereof had so startled the Councell for the time as men doe with the Serpent The Serpent with her very aspect at first affrights the beholder but being taken and her teeth pulled out men are then not affraide to carry her in their bosomes So the imputation of Christs righteousnesse was at the first sight terrible to the Church of Rome assembled in the Councell of Trent no lesse than the gastly Owle was to the Pope and his Cardinalls in the Councell of Lateran which appeared to them in steede of their holy Ghost but finding meanes to take Christ the Antitype of that health-giuing brasen Serpent and to pull out his teeth to wit the truth of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse whereby sinne and death are bitten and stung to death lest it should bite and sting all their merits to death they dare now freely and familiarly carry the Serpent in the bosome of their bookes handling imputation at their pleasure without any perill at all to Papall satisfaction Bellarmine hath also learned to play with the word imputation Homo iustificatus non egit imputatione alienae iustitiae qua iniustitia propria inhaerens tegatur A man iustified needeth not the imputation of anothers righteousnesse whereby his owne inherent vnrighteousnesse may be couered And in the tenth Chapter of the same booke Christus nostra iustitia non quòd iusti simus ea iustitia quae est in Christo nobis imputata Christ is our righteousnesse not that we are iust by the righteousnesse which is in Christ imputed vnto vs Sic igitur nobis imputatur iustitia eius quoad satisfactionem quam pro nobis praestitit sed non propterea nos iusti id est mundi immaculati haberi possumus si verè in nobis peccatorum macula sordes inhaereant So therefore is Christs righteousnesse imputed to vs in regard of satisfaction which he performed for vs but for all that we cannot bee holden for iust to wit cleane and immaculate if the spots and staines of sinne by yet truely inherent in vs. So this is the generall voyce of the Councell of Trent and the Church of Rome to allow of no other imputation of Christs righteousnesse but such as by his merits wee haue an infusion of grace whereby we merit and satisfie God in our iustification And so they admit of no other formall cause of iustification but an inherent righteousnesse in themselues and out of Christ. Thus we haue seene what the Romane-Catholike faith is touching Iustification and the formall cause of it CHAP. V. The Catholike Faith concerning iustification and of the terme and forme of Iustification NOw to know the true nature of Iustification it much imports vs to consider in what sense this word Iustification is to be vsed and taken in the iustification of a sinner The Pontificians or Papists would restraine the sense of it to the etymologie of the Latine word Iustificare as much say they as Iustum facere from whence they would conclude their inherencie of selfe-iustification wherein they doe as some Lawyers that by the mistaking or misapplying of a word can ouerthrow the whole right of a mans cause Indeede St. Augustine saith Quid est aliud iustificati quà m iusti facti ab illo scilicet qui iustificat impium vt ex impio fiat iustus Aut certè it a dictum est iustificabuntur ac si diceretur Iusti habebuntur iusti deputabuntur What else is it to be iustified but to be made iust namely of him who iustifieth the vngodly that of impious he may be made righteous Or surely it is so said They shall be iustified as if it were said
face to him that stands on the one side another forme and to him on the other side a third Or like a plaine picture which hanging on the wall although the posture of the face be set one way yet it seemes to cast equall aspect vpon euery one in the roome Thus is verified that of Guido Clemens Priest and Cardinall of St. Potentiana who saith that in the Church of Rome there is quaedam radix duplicitatis simplicitati columbae contraria a certaine roote of doublenesse which is contrary to the doues simpliciti◠To conclude this point of Popish preparation it is so farre from fitting and disposing a man to receiue the grace of iustification grace of iustification being rightly vnderstood as it is a maine impediment and stumbling blocke in the way vnto it For whereas this preparation of theirs aduanceth mans free-will and other naturall powers to the attainment of grace what doth this else but puffe a man vp with a conceit of himselfe that he is in a better state than indeed he is as hauing something left in him which being helped by some motion of common or I wot not what grace is able to leade him to the full possession of grace and so of glory Gregory saith well Hee that knowes not his disease how doth he seek to the Physitian for the greater the fault is being the sooner acknowledged it is the more speedily amended but the lesser sinne while it is deemed to be as it were none at all is so much the worse and more securely kept in vre If Saint Paul speaking in the person of a regenerate man as exercised with the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit complaines that in him that is in his flesh dwels no good thing then what good thing can there be in any vnregenerate man to dispose him to any grace whose imaginations of his heart are onely euill continually They are euill and onely euill and that continually onely euill If corrupt Nature haue yet any thing left to brag off if any free-will to this grace whereof we speake where is that conuicting power of the Law that makes sinne out of measure sinfull That casts a man downe in the sense of his misery causing him to cry out Wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me from this bodie of death How shall a man come to Christ wearie and laden that he may be refreshed How comes the vngodly to be iustified if hee bring any merit to dispose him thereunto How shall the Law then be our Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ who came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance Wee need none other testimony to conuince this Pontifician puffe-doctrine of preparatory workes to bee at the least Cousin-germaine to that of the Pelagians than the Councell of Trent it selfe The Pelagians held that some men vsing the reason of their owne will haue or doe liue in this world without any sinne To this agreeth that Canon of Trent If any shall say that all workes done before iustification howsoeuer they bee done are truely sinnes and deserue the hatred of God let him be accursed Compare now the Pelagian and Pontifician doctrine together and one egge is not liker another All workes done before iustification are not truely sinnes say the Trent-Fathers therefore the workes of the Pelagian heretickes done before or without iustification whatsoeuer or howsoeuer done are no sinnes as they taught Shall St. Austine be vmpire in this case Pelagianorum sententia est sine vllo peccato aliquos homines tam ratione propriae voluntatis vtentes in hoc saeculo vixisse vel viuere Optandum est vt fiat conandum est vt fiat supplicandum est vt fiat non tamen quasi factum fuerit confidendum est Qui seipsum talem putat ipse se decipit veritas in eo non est non ob aliud nisi quia falsum putat It is the opinion of the Pelagians that some men by vsing the reason of their owne will haue and doe liue in this world without sinne It were to be wished so it were to be laboured for it is to be prayed for yet not to be beleeued as if it were so He that thinkes himselfe such a one deceiueth himselfe and the truth is not in him for no other cause but because he deemeth falsely And in another place hee saith Si Gentilis inquis nudum operuit nunquid quia non est ex fide peccatum est Prorsus in quantum non est ex fide peccatum est non quia per scipsum factum quod est nudum operire peccatum est sod in tali opere non in Domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatum Nam quamuis bona malè tamen facit ideo negare non potes eum peccare qui malè quodlibet facit Fructus bonos non facit arbor mala An dicis hominem infidelem arborem bonam If a Heathen saist thou shall couer the naked is it therefore a sin because it is not of faith Certainly in as much as it is not of faith it is sinne not in regard of the worke it selfe which is to clothe the naked is it a sin but in such a worke not to glory in the Lord only the wicked man denieth this to be a sin For although he doth good yet he doth it ill therefore thou canst not deny that he sinneth that doth any thing ill An euill tree doth not beare good fruit Do est thou callan vnfaithfull man a good tree Note here St. Augustine condemnes all workes for sinnes that are not done in the state of grace but in the state of nature and infidelity Therefore St. Augustine is anathematized of the Church of Rome for saying that all workes done before iustification are indeede sinns But whereas the Pontificians may obiect that St. Augustine condemnes onely such workes as are done without faith and not those Pontifician workes of preparation wherof faith as they affirme is the roote I answer St. Augustine speaketh honestly without equiuocation for hauing to do with the Pelagians those enemies of the grace of God hee opposeth the state of grace against the state of nature shewing that whatsoeuer a man doth in the state of nature before he be in the state of grace it is sin stiling euen the best workes of these heathen moralists but splendida peccata glittering sinnes Now whatsoeuer is done before iustification is done in the state of nature consequently it is sinne in St. Augustines sense because it is the bad fruit of a bad tree As for that first grace whereby the Papists teach a man is stirred vp to prepare himselfe for iustification it doth not set a man ipso facto in the state of grace hee is for all that faith of his a meere naturall man still And therefore that faith which they speake of going before iustification is not freed from the
formall cause of iustification they call it the righteousnesse of God but how the righteousnesse of God imputed to vs nothing lesse but that which is infused into vs. The words of the Councell are these Vnica formalis causa put a iustificationis est iustitia Dei non qua ipse iustus est sed qua nos iustos facit qua videlicet ab eo donati renouamur spiritu mentis nostrae non modo reputamur sed verè iusti nominamur sumus iustitiam in nobis recipientes vnusquisque suam secundum mensuram quam Spiritus sanctus partitur singulis prout vult secundum propriam cuiusque dispositionem cooperationem Quanquam enim nemo posset esse iustus nisi oui merita passionis Domini nostri Iesu Christi communicantur id tamen in hac impi◠iustificatione fit dum eiusdem sanctissimae passionis merito per Spiritum sanctum charitas Dei diffunditur in cordibus eorum qui iustificantur atque ipsis inhaeret c. The onely formall cause to wit of iustification is the righteousnesse of God not that whereby himselfe is iust but that whereby he makes vs iust namely wherewith he hauing endowed vs wee are renewed in the spirit of our minde and are not onely reputed but nominated and are really iust receiuing righteousnesse in our selues each according to his measure which the holy Ghost diuideth to euery one euen as he will and according to euery mans disposition and cooperation For although no man can be iust but hee to whom the merits of the passion of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ are communicated yet that is wrought in this iustification of a sinner while by the merit of the same holy passion the loue of God is by the holy Ghost shed abroad in the hearts of those who are iustified and is inherent in them c. Thus a man may see by the Councels expresse words that though they name imputation which they call the communication of Christs righteousnesse as the formall cause of our iustification yet they meane nothing else but that Christ hath merited that charity should be infused into our hearts whereby we should be iustified which in summe is as much to say as Christ became a Sauiour by whose merit euery man might bee made his owne Sauiour and that by another kinde of righteousnesse than that of Christ imputed That this is the sense of the Councell witnesse her chiefe Interpreters For if they had not finely found out this witty sense of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse it is much to be feared they had Anathemarized the very name of it and throwne it into the fire of their Index expurgatorius wheresoeuer they had found it But this and other cleare truths in Scripture they can so dextrously handle as they can easily euacuate them by turning them to a most sinister sense and so are the lesse affraid to name them and to seeme to auouch them Otherwise as the history of this Councell tels vs the very name of imputation found very harsh intertainment among the most of their Schoole-doctors and Soto himselfe confesseth Quod verbum mihi semper suspectum in suspicionem detuli coram sancta Synodo which word saith he to wit Imputation I alwaies hauing suspected brought it into suspicion before the holy Synod And a little after although he commend the Canons of Colen accounting them as the buckler and bulwarke of faith yet saith he they as happely more secure of the aduersaries than safe haue vsed that word of Imputation where they say That the chiefe head of iustification is the remission and ablution of sinnes by the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ. But yet the Councell of Trent and Church of Rome are not so barren of inuention as not to bee able easily to reconcile this Catholicke word Imputation to the Church of Rome and to make it a Roman-Catholicke For by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse they haue learned to vnderstand that Christ hath merited an infusion of grace into vs whereby we are iustified For confessing the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to be the formall cause of our iustification they would teach vs out of Philosophy that Formalis causa est res illa vel qualitas quae in est subiecto that the formall cause as Soto saith is that thing or quality which is inherent in the subiect for the forme saith he is said in relation to the matter to which it giues a being by inherency Pari ergo modo c. As therefore the aire is not luminous or lightsome formally by the light that is in the Sun but by the light it receiueth in it selfe from the Sunne Constantissimum est c. it is a most constant truth That neither are wee formally iust and accepted by the righteousnesse which is in Christ but by that which himselfe hath conueyed into vs. Wee are saith hee made iust by Christs righteousnesse as by the efficient cause but not as by the formall cause But Vega peremptorily in his 7. book and 22. chapt intituled Of the impossibility of Christs righteousnesse to be the formall cause of our iustification concludeth thus in his first argument Superfluum est ab omni philosophia alienum ad hoc ipsum ponere aliam aliquam iustitiam videlicet iustitiam imputatiuam Christi It is superfluous and abhorring from all philosophy to put any other righteousnesse for a formall cause of our righteousnesse as the imputatiue righteousnesse of Christ. Therefore according to Romane-Catholicke diuinity which is most humane philosophy the formall cause of a mans righteousnesse must be inherent in him and his owne and not the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs. But yet the same author afterwards seemeth to shake imputation by the hand and to be good friends with it where he saith Non est adeo inuisum nobis hoc vocabulum vt credam nunquam nos posse hoc in proposito benè illo vti This word Imputation is not so odious vnto vs as that I thinke wee may neuer vse it well to this purpose Verè namque sanè ac latinè possumus dicere ad satisfactionem meritum imputatam esse generi humano iustitiam Christi in passione sua iugiter imputari omnibus qui iustificantur satisfaciunt pro peccatis suis vitam aeternam suis bonis operibus merentur For wee may truely and soothly and in plaine termes say that vnto satisfaction and merit the righteousnesse of Christ in his passion is imputed to mankinde and is continually imputed to all men that are iustified and doe satisfie for their sins and by their good works do merit eternall life And much more to this purpose And a little after hee saith Non transit iustitia Christi realiter ab illo in iustificatos Christs righteousnesse doth not really passe from him into those that are iustified nor by it are we formally iustified But imputation is of God
by way of relation iustification is the subiect of inherent grace For wee speake here of the formall cause of iustification not of the formall cause of man as if hee were the subiect wherein iustification is a quality inherent But to answer their mis-applyed philosophicall diuinity The forme of a thing is not alwayes a quality inherent as in the subiect where it is but sometimes it is onely adherent and extrinsicall by way of relation As that I am the sonne of such a man the formall cause hereof is not inherent in me but it is originally and relatiuely from my father that begate mee giuing a being to my sonship respectiuely to him So a man set at liberty by the fauour and meanes of another the very forme of his freedome was the others act in freeing of him not inhering in him that is freed but rather adhering vnto him Yea the Pontificians themselues confesse and Vega for one that the formall cause of mans redemption is a thing extrinsicall to wit the oblation of Christ on the Crosse and that the free fauour of God for the merit of Christ is the formall cause of remission of sinnes If therefore the forme of our redemption and remission of sinnes is not within vs but without vs why not as well the forme of our iustification the cause whereof is Christs redemption and the effect of it remission of sinnes In a word it is not with a forme as with an accident the being of an accident is the in-being of it Not so of a forme where being or modus essendi consists not necessarily in the inhering in the subiect whose formall cause it is but it may as well be extrinsicall by conferring a vertue and power whereby the Causatum receiueth the formality of its being But to leaue Philosophy and return to Diuinity it is yet in question whether the matter of this iustification be within vs or rather without vs. The Romane-Catholicke faith teacheth that it is within vs but the Catholicke faith concludeth that the formall cause of our iustification is without vs not within vs. This is that Catholicke doctrine which the Scriptures teach when they ascribe our iustification to faith apprehending that which is without vs where by apprehending is not meant a bare vnderstanding or knowing as Soto in the name of his Romane-Catholickes would haue it but it is also a laying hold vpon and applying of the thing beleeued We haue shewed afore how the Pontificians take the word Imputation namely for a participation of Christs righteousnesse so farre forth as thereby some other righteousnesse being merited is infused into vs and inherent in vs. But the true Catholickes hold otherwise that imputation is of a thing without vs being apprehended and applied by faith So that the thing imputed is that which is by faith apprehended As it is said of Abraham that hee beleeued God and his faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 3. Now the obiect of Abrahams faith was God yea God promising in regard of which obiect Abrahams faith is imputed to him for righteousnesse Not the act of Abrahams faith being but an instrument but the obiect of it is imputed As we may say we are iustified by the act of faith relatiuely to the obiect Christ not for the act of it Abraham beleeued God and his faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse But how is this sufficient to iustifie a man to beleeue God or the promise of God that it should be said to be imputed to man for righteousnesse I answer To beleeue Gods promise is to haue an eye of faith vpon Christ who is the substance of all Gods promises and in whom all the promises of God are Yea and Amen 2. Cor. 1. 20. So that God in Christ is the obiect of faith imputed to the beleeuer for righteousnesse But here an obiection crosseth my way cast in by the aduersary of the truth Vega who saith Dixi c. I said that this faith of the Mediator is that to which for the most part and chiefely the Scriptures doe attribute our iustification yet we beleeue also saith he that faith taken generally as it relieth vpon diuine truth may also iustifie a man Nor are wee in that errour wherein some are to thinke that the onely faith of iustification promised or of saluation in Christ doth iustifie vs or is imputed vnto vs for righteousnesse For saith he Noahs faith of the future deluge as Paul witnesseth was imputed to him for righteousnesse and he was appointed the heire of righteousnesse which is by faith in that he beleeued God fore-telling the floud and a hundred yeares before it came began to build the Arke for the safety of his house And to Abraham also as the history of Genâ—sis plainely teacheth it was imputed for righteousnesse because hee beleeued that his posterity should bee multiplied as the starres of heauen So that hence hee concludes that not onely to faith in Gods promises in Christ is righteousnesse imputed but to faith in generall beleeuing Gods truth such as is not in the compasse of Gods promises in Christ but either speculatiue precepts or morall doctrines or other Propheticall predictions or historicall relations So that by the Pontifician doctrine other faith besides that in Gods promises in Christ may be imputed to a man for righteousnesse As Noahs faith in building the Arke against the floud and Abrahams faith in beleeuing Gods promise concerning the multiplication of his seed I answer that no faith is or can bee imputed to a man for righteousnesse but that which hath respect vnto Christ and the promises of God in him But Noahs faith in preparing the Arke to saue himselfe and his family from the floud was imputed to him for righteousnesse True this confirmeth the Catholicke doctrine of the imputation of faith as it lookes vpon Christ for what was the Arke but a Sacramentall type of Christ as Augustine saith Christus figuratus est in Noe in illa Arca orbis terrarum Quare enim in Arca inclusa sunt omnia animaliae nisi vt significarentur omnes gentes Christ is figured in Noe and in that Arke of the whole world for why in that Arke were included all creatures but that all Nations should be signified by them And there hee applies that promise to Abraham Gen. 22. 18. In thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed And for Abrahams faith in Gods promise what seed of Abraham was this in whom all the Nations of the earth should be blessed Was it not Christ Yes Christ so saith Augustine in the forenamed place Christus in ea prophetia occultus erat in quo benedicuntur omnes gentes Christ saith he was hid in that prophesie in whom all the Nations are blessed But the Apostle or rather the holy Ghost by the Apostle is the best interpreter of that prophecie Gal. 3. 16. Now to Abraham and his seed were the
them as an Idoll Onely Christ is that sacred and mysticall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that fish in whom is found our tribute-money to satisfie the Maiesty of God This money must bee stamped no where but in Gods owne Mint as the pure siluer Oare of it is no where found but in Gods owne Mynes the holy Scriptures no other Image or Superscription must be vpon it but that of Iesus Christ and none may tender or offer it vp to God but onely Christ. 1. Tim. 2. 6. There is one God and one Mediator betweene God and man the man Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe a ransome for all This pure ransome more pure more precious than gold will endure no mixture no allay of any other mettals much lesse of any drosse But inherent righteousnesse in vs though dipped in Christs bloud as hauing receiued a tincture from it as they say if wee offer it to God for currant payment hee will easily perceiue it counterfeit coine of our owne mynting of our owne inuenting no better than Alcumy little siluer but much drosse in it euen the drosse of humane inuention and corruption which if it bee brought to Gods touch turnes colour if put in the Skale of the Sanctuary is found too light if cast into the Test of Gods fiery iustice it is blown all away in smoke As Esay saith Thy siluer is become drosse thy wine mixt with water And as Ieremy saith Reprobate siluer shall men call them because the Lord hath reiected them Our inherent righteousnesse call it Christs merits or what you will is at the best but as Piscis in arido The fish while it is in the sea liueth moueth is full of strength and agility but vpon the dry land it straight loseth all his vigour motion and life it selfe and quickly putrefieth euen so the merits and righteousnesse of Christ being in him as in their proper element are most liuely and vigorous strong and auaileable to satisfie Gods iustice and to plunge all our sinnes into the deepe bottome of the bottomlesse deepe of his mercies by that sweete smelling sacrifice of himselfe once offered but take any part of these merits of Christ out of him and put them into our dry and parched sandy soules and they become of no life of no validity to make the least satisfaction for the least sinnes yea in this respect they stinke in the nostrils of God Our soules are but broken Cisternes to contain this pure water of life God could neuer yet finde any thing in vs in vs I say but onely faith whereby to iustifie vs and this faith not as a worke of ours iustifying vs but as an instrument applying Christ by whom in whom and for whom wee are iustified If God iustifie vs for righteousnesse inherent or dwelling in vs then God should bee said to iustifie the godly but the Scripture saith otherwise That God iustifieth the vngodly Rom. 4. 5. Now to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse where faith being opposed to working cannot be said to iustifie as it is a work A notable testimony to proue that our iustification is not from within vs but from without vs not in vs but on vs not of him that worketh but of him that beleeueth in him that iustifieth Whom the godly Nay but the vngodly As Augustine saith Tu Domine benedicis iustum sed eum prius iustificaa impium Thou Lord doest blesse the iust but first he being vngodly thou iustifiest him As if hee had said Being first vngodly thou diddest iustifie him and then being iust thou Lord doest blesse him How then comes this forraine righteousnesse vpon an vngodly man The Apostle sheweth His faith is counted for righteousnesse How His faith layes hold on Christ who is the Lord our righteousnesse being made vnto vs of God wisedome and righteousnesse and sanctification and redemption that according as it is written He that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. But will the Pontifician say Doe you call the graces of Christ in vs counterfeit coyne drosse reprobate siluer c. Yes if ye reckon it for pay to satisfie Gods iustice withall in this sense in vs it is meere counterfeit drosse reprobate siluer coyned in the Mint of Satans forgeries It is but as the Sunne-beame vpon a dung-hill raysing vp a stinking vapour in stead of a sweete odour in Gods nostrils But the graces of God in vs flowing from our head Christ Iesus in whom wee are first iustified by faith are the matter of our sanctification and the consequent fruits and effects of our iustification Thus they are a Well of liuing waters springing vp in vs vnto eternall life Thus they are a garden of spices yea of costly Spicknard yeelding a fragrant smell while the Sunne of righteousnesse shines vpon them Thus are they more pure and precious than gold yea than much fine gold Thus are they so many precious stones to paue our way that leades to the Kingdome of Heauen Yea thus so many peerelesse Pearles which adorne our Crowne of grace here and shall much more gloriously imbellish and beautifie our Crowne of glory hereafter Thus all our good works and words and thoughts are precious euen in Gods sight through Christ. They will stand before his mercy seate but they dare not stand before the Tribunall of his strict and seuere iustice They dare come before God as a proofe of our faith and obedience but not as a price of our sinne and disobedience And at the best cause we haue to pray Gods mercy for them but in no case to pay his iustice with them Now there be many reasons why inherent righteousnesse is no formall cause of our iustification in the sight of God First because it is a meere humane inuention It hath no warrant in Gods Word and consequently no warrant at all Will the Pontificians herein as they are willing in other things stand to the iudgement of their father Aristotle Hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are better determined according to the Law than according to mans will for it is no sure rule Tertullian said of an errour of Hermogenes about the creation of the world of a pre-existent matter Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Si non est scriptum timeat Let the shop of Hermogenes shew this to be written If it be not written let him feare Now iustification is a fundamentall doctrine that cannot stand but vpon the Sciptures Iustification is by faith and faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God The word is neare thee euen in thy mouth and in thy heart that is the word of faith which we preach for with the heart man beleeueth to righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made to saluation Let Pontificians feare to frame such a iustification as they finde not in the Scriptures Secondly because inherent righteousnesse doth not only
wisedome Whereupon Augustine saith Quae incerta Quae occulta Quia Deus ignoscit talibus peccatoribus confitentibus punientibus sua peccata What vncertainty What hidden things Because God doth pardon such to wit sinners confessing and punishing or repenting of their sinnes And Augustine addes as Vega also alledgeth Nihil tam occultum nihil tam incertum Nothing so secret nothing so vncertaine And Vega here leaping ouer Augustines amplification and exposition of his meaning he onely addes Augustines conclusion Hoc incertum patefecerit Deus seruo suo Dauid c. This vncertaine thing God reuealed to his seruant Dauid For when standing and accusing himselfe hee said Peccaui I haue sinned forthwith hee heard of the Prophet that is of the Spirit of God which was in the Prophet The Lord hath put away thy sinne Well now let vs a little insist vpon these words of Augustine which Vega ingeniously confesseth doe most clearely fauour their cause of Pontifician vncertainty of all other that hee hath read in all Augustines workes First whereas Augustine taking the vulgar Latine for the onely Text which hee followeth vseth the word incerta I answer there is no such word in the Originall for incertum The words in the Originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is word for word And in the secret or in the hidden part as our last translation well renders it thou shalt make me to know wisedome Not a word of vncertainty Therefore Vega takes a very vncertaine ground yea rather a meere Boh◠or emptinesse whereon to build his vncertainty Besides sith Augustine going vpon an vnwarrantable ground taking that for Text which Gods Word knoweth not are we therefore bound presently to take his exposition for Gospell And whereas hee applies those vncertaine and hidden things to the remission of sinnes wee know Augustine oftentimes abounds with rare conceits but else how this application or exposition should result from the Text vnlesse raised vp by the strength of conceit the Text it selfe giues vs no euidence to see But that wee may not seeme too strait-laced in limiting the ouer-lauish liberty of the vulgar Latine if wee take downe both the Text and Augustines Glosse at one bit together it will not choake vs nor cause vs to surfeit especially if we take all the ingredients of it For it is with Scriptures and Fathers as with Physicke if the Dosis haue eyther moe or fewer ingredients than the wise Physitian prescribeth it may alter the whole nature of the Physicke and in stead of health procure more hurt to the body And here I must tell you that Vega deales with St. Augustine as eyther a negligent or rather malicious Apothecary who for some sinister respects leaues out some speciall ingredient out of the composition Or else to goe no further than the Scripture hee treades in the very steppes of the Tempter who craftily left out the most materiall word in all the Text which was In all thy wayes without which we haue no warrant of Gods protection and so Sathan by his false fingering would haue made the promise of God of none effect So playeth Vega. For as we noted euen now Vega in relating Augustines exposition leaues out the most materiall thing which Augustine noteth in his explaning and applying those Incerta or vncertaine things to remission of sinnes And that is the instance he giueth of the Niniuites That we may recollect all to one intire head which Vega hath so torne asunder wee will set downe Augustines words whole together Incerta occulta sapientiae tuae manifestasti mihi they be the words of his vulgar Text. Whereupon he inferreth Quae occulta Quae incerta Quia Deu◠ignoscit talibus id est poenitentibus Nihil tam occultum nihil tam incertum Ad hoc incertum Niniuitae poenitentiam egerunt dixerunt enim c. What hidden what vncertaine things Because God pardoneth euen such that is penitent persons Nothing so hidden nothing so vncertaine Vpon this certainty the Niniuites repented for they said though after the Prophet had threatned though after that voice Three dayes and Niniuie shall be destroyed they said among themselues that the mercy of God was to be intreated They said thus reasoning with themselues Who knoweth if God will returne and shew mercy It was vncertaine when they said Quis nouit Who knoweth But hauing once repented they reaped certaine mercy c. So Augustine Do we not see here a manifest difference between Augustines owne application of vncertainty Vega's strained application Vega would apply this vncertainty of the remission of sins to the time past vnderstanding it of sins already pardoned as if a man were altogether vncertaine that his sins are pardoned when they are already pardoned But Augustine tels vs plainly that he vnderstands this vncertainty of remission of sins in the future tense that is concerning the vncertainty of sins to be pardoned for which God denounceth expresse iudgments as in the example of the Niniuites God hath threatned peremptorily that within forty dayes Niniuie should be destroyed What should the Niniuites now doe in this case They beleeue God that hee was true in his word Yet they resolue to repent speedily But to what purpose when now the sentence was already pronounced of him that cannot lye Yes as knowing that such like threatnings are conditionall they would at least put it to an aduenture Who knoweth if God will returne and pardon It may be God will shew mercy No maruell if the Niniuites were doubtfull of the pardon of those sins which they knew they had committed but had not yet repented of But whence proceeded this their vncertainty From their faith No but Augustine tels vs the reason Quia peccata magna erant Niniuitarum dixerunt Quis nouit Because the Niniuites sins were great they said Who knoweth So that their vncertainty proceeded not from the defect of faith but from the excesse of their sins But as they were vncertaine before they repented after they had repented they found certam misericordiam certaine mercy saith Augustine witnesse the preseruation of themselues and their Citie As therefore the Niniuites were vncertaine in regard of the grieuousnesse of their sinnes and the greatnesse of Gods iudgement already peremptorily threatned whether they should finde God fauourable or no in reuersing his sentence and preseruing their Citie but afterwards vpon their repentance found the certainty of Gods mercy in sparing them whereof the sparing of their City was a certaine and infallible argument So sinnefull men burthened with the guilt and horrour of sinnes and borne downe with the terrour of Gods wrath threatned in his Word may well bee doubtfull and vncertaine how God may deale with them although they resolue with themselues to repent and humble themselues but after vpon their true repentance God being mercifull in pardoning their sins they finde now certam misericordiam certaine mercy the certainty whereof is the
had purposed in himselfe And vers 11. In whom also wee haue obtained an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsell of his owne will Whereupon Augustine hauing to this very purpose recited the same Scripture at large saith Quis haec audiat diligenter intelligenter audeat de hac quam defendimus tam clara veritate dubitare Who can heare these things diligently and intelligently and dare doubt of this so cleare a truth which we defend Now Gods will is the prime absolute and independent cause of his decree and act of predestinating vs to saluation Yea voluntas Dei saith Augustine est prima summa causa omnium corporalium spiritualâ—umque motionum Nihil enim fit visibiliter sensibiliter quod non de inuisibili intelligibili summi Imperatoris Aula aut iubeatur aut permittatur secundum ineffabilem iustitiam praemiorum atque poenarum gratiarum retributionum in ista totius creaturae amplissima quadam vniuersaque republica The will of God is the prime and supreme cause of all both corporall and spirituall motions For nothing is done visibly and sensibly which is not from the inuisible and intelligible Court of the supreme Emperour eyther commanded or permitted according to the vnutterable iustice of rewards and punishments of fauours and retributions in this kinde of spacious and vniuersall republique of the whole creature And Ludouicus Viues noteth vpon St. Augustines words Qui voluntatem Dei spectant certissimam originem è qua vniuersa profiscuntur spectant Idque quoniam aliud non sit in mando quam quodea vult They which looke vpon Gods will doe looke vpon a most certaine cause or fountaine from whence all things do flow And that because there is no other thing in the world than what his wil willeth This is according to that of the Apostle saying That God worketh all things after the counsell of his own will The will of God then is the prime supreme cause of all And this will is in himselfe and of himselfe alone it depends nor vpon any thing out of himselfe as vpon the creature or the actions of men fore-seene but it is in himselfe and not without himselfe as Ephes. 1. 9. Hauing made knowne vnto vs the mysterie of his will according to his good pleasure which hee had purposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in himselfe Now this absolute independent will of God is as wee see set out by sundry attributes as The Purpose of his will the Counsell of his will the good Pleasure of his will vers 5. 9. 11. By the Purpose of his will is set out Gods immutable determination by the Counsell of his will Gods vnsearchable wisedome and by the good Pleasure of his will his vnspeakable goodnesse mercie and free grace in the worke of ordaining man vnto saluation So that the Counsell and Purpose and good Pleasure of Gods will in appointing vs vnto saluation was not suggested into the minde and disposition of God by the meanes of any eyther faith or workes in vs which God fore-saw we would haue but our faith and other good fruits of it are therefore in vs because God according to the Counsell Purpose and good Pleasure of his owne will did appoint vs vnto saluation As Augustine saith excellently to this purpose Fiunt electi non qui eliguntur quia crediderunt sed qui eliguntur vt credant Hanc enim vocationem Dominus ipse satis aperit vbi dicit Non vos me elegistis sed ego elegi vos Nam si propterea electi erant quoniam crediderant ipsi eum prius vtique elegerant credendo in eum vt eligimererentur Aufert autem hoc omnino qui dicit Non vos me elegistis sed ego vos elegi Et ipsi quidem procul dubio elegerunt eum quando crediderunt in eum vnde non ob aliud dicit Non vos me elegistis sed ego vos elegi nisi quia non elegerunt eum vt eligeret eos sed vt eligerent eum elegit eos quia misericordia eius praeuenit eos secundum gratiam non secundum debitum Elegit ergo eos de mundo cum hic ageret in carne sed iam electos in seipso ante mundi constitutionem Haec est immobilis veritas praedestinationis gratiae They are elect not who are elected because they beleeued but who are elected that they might beleeue For this calling the Lord himselfe also doth sufficiently declare where he saith You haue not chosen mee but I haue chosen you For if they had been therefore elected because they had beleeued then they had chosen him first by beleeuing in him that they might merit to be chosen but he doth altogether take away this who saith You haue not chosen me but I haue chosen you And indeed they certainly choose him when they beleeue in him whereupon for no other cause he saith You haue not chosen mee but I haue chosen you but because they chose not him that he might choose them but that they might choose him he chose them because his mercy preuented them according to grace not according to debt Therefore he chose them out of the world when hee liued here in the flesh but being already chosen in himselfe before the foundation of the world This is that vnmoueable verity of predestination and grace And a little after Elegit ergo Deus fideles sed vt sint non quia iam erant God therefore elected the faithfull but that they might be faithfull not because they were already faithfull And alledging that of St. Iames Iames 2. Hath not God chosen the poore in this world that they might be riâ—h in faith and heires of the Kingdome which he hath promised to them that loue him He thereupon concludes Eligendo ergo facit diuites in fide sicut haeredes regni Therefore by electing them he maketh them rich in faith as also heires of the Kingdome And before in the 10. Chapter Ad hanc vocationem electionis propositi Dei qui pertinent â—mnes sunt docibiles Dei nec potest eorum quisquam dicere credidi vt sic vocarer praeuenit eum quippe misericordia Dei quia sic vocatus est vt crederet Whosoeuer doe appertaine to this vocation namely of Gods election and purpose they are all taught of God nor can any of them say I beleeued that therfore I should be so called sith the mercy of God preuented him because he is so called that he might beleeue And lib. de Patientia Christus non iustos sed iustificandos elegit Christ did not chuse those that were already iust but those who were to be instified Thus wee see this holy man following the word of Christ concludes the Purpose Counsell and good Pleasure of Gods will to be the prime originall absolute independent cause of mans saluation As hee saith
riches of his grace in his kindnesse towards vs through Christ Iesus What greater loue what greater grace what richer mercy than for God to cast his eye of fauour vpon vs euen when we were dead in sinnes As the Apostle saith also Rom. 5. 8. God commendeth his loue towards vs in that while we were yet sinners when we were enemies Christ dyed for vs. And in the vulgar Latine set forth by the Diuines of Louain printed at Antwerpe 1584. in the fourth to the Romanes Verse 5. wee finde these words in the Text Ei verò qui non operatur credenti autem in eum qui iustificat impium reputatur fides eius ad iustitiam secundum propositum gratiae Dei Now to him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is reckoned for righteousness according to the purpose of the grace of God Now these last words are not in our vulgar translations nor in most Greeke Copies but the Louain Doctors haue noted in the margent that they are found in some Manuscripts and Greeke Copies And it were to be wished that they had added no worse than this into that their translation for it is but that which is the generall Doctrine of the Gospell of Christ. For the preaching of the Gospel what is it but a beame of this grace of God shining vpon sinners as Tit. 2. 11. The grace of God that bringeth saluation hath appeared vnto all men And the Gospel is the Gospel of the grace of God Act. 20. 24. And the Word of God is the word of his grace vers 32. And Acts 14. 3. Yea we finde the very same words in the Apostle 2. Tim. 1. 9. Who hath saued vs and called vs with an holy calling not according to our workes but marke according to his owne purpose and grace which was giuen vs in Christ Iesus before the world began but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Sauiour Iesus Christ c. So that the ground of our saluation by Iesus Christ is the meere grace of God by this grace we are saued by this grace we come to inherit eternall life for eternall life is of the grace of God it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift of his grace And wee are heires of the grace of life 1. Pet. 3. 7. The Apostle Paul was so in loue with this grace that all his Epistles are perfumed throughout as it were with this precious oyntment Hee nameth it not so little as a hundreth times The salutation of each Epistle hath grace in it yea the Apostle sets it as his marke at the end of euery Epistle and would haue all his Epistles knowne by that marke to bee his As hee saith 2. Thes. 3. 17. 18. The salutation of Paul with mine owne hand which is the token in euery Epistle so I write The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ bee with you all So that besides other probable arguments I finding this marke at the end of the Epistle to the Hebrewes I conclude it to bee Pauls Epistle No one Apostle ends his Epistle with the prayer and wishing of grace but onely Paul Indeede the Reuelation endeth so The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with you all Amen Thus Gods gracious eternall purpose in electing to saluation such as in his speciall fauour hee was pleased to foreknow being the prime and originall cause whereon depends the whole frame of our effectuall saluation it teacheth vs a maine difference between the first Couenant and the second The first Couenant was made with the first Adam in Paradise which indeed did meerly depend vpon mans will to keep it or to break it Doe this and thou shalt liue This was that first Couenant which Man failing to keep so forfeiting his estate God now makes a second Couenant in the second Adam which he will not as he did in the first hazzard vpon mans will or ability in the keeping of it Gods wisdome well weighing that if Adam in his perfection so easily and quickly brake the first Couenant though hee had both will and power to keepe it how much more man now corrupt and weake would neuer bee able to keepe the second Couenant And therefore to make sure worke God takes a contrary course in the second Couenant which that it may for euer stand firme and immutable hee hath established it vpon the sure foundation of his owne good pleasure and will wherein is no shadow of change Well the conclusion is Gods free grace and fauour is the ground of our election it is the foundation whereon depends our whole saluation wee are elected wee are saued all by grace according to his purpose and grace This grace of God the Pontifician Church cannot away withall as being an enemy to all their Doctrine And therfore the Councell of Trent hath excluded yea and condemned the grace of God as the sole efficient cause of saluation for Ses. 6. Can. 11. the words be Si quis dixerit c. gratiam qua iustificamur esse tantum fauorem Dei anathema sit that is If any shall say that the grace whereby we are iustified is onely the fauour of God let him be Anathema or accursed If Romes Curse were of force then wofull were the case of St. Paul that doth so often mightily magnifie the grace of God in our iustification yea the only grace and fauour of God excluding workes as not hauing the least share with Gods grace therein Nay the whole Word of God which is the Word of his grace and the Gospell of his grace must fall vnder Romes Curse Howsoeuer the equiuocating Romanists would foyst and shuffle in their workes by the name of grace by which indeed they destroy and ouerthrow the grace of God Obiect But say some It is sufficient that wee grant that Gods grace doth manifest it selfe in prouiding for vs and offering vnto vs meanes whereby we may be saued without which meanes because we cannot be saued therefore we are said to be saued by the grace of God Answ. Is that sufficient O enemies of the grace of God and of your owne saluation Will you so limit Gods grace Will ye so eclipse the glory of his grace as to confine it within such narrow bounds Indeede great and infinitely great was Gods loue in so louing the world that he gaue his only begotten Sonne that all that beleeue in him should not perish but haue life euerlasting But did his gift depend vpon mans acceptance that it might be effectuall if man would otherwise not Then as Esay saith Who hath beleeued our report Had not then this great loue of God beene vtterly lost Had not this gift beene such as no man would receiue it For what saith the Scripture All haue sinned and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 come short of the glory of God The naturall man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perceiueth not receiueth not this gift it is farre aboue out of his
the means of grace offered a sufficiency to saue and in men a liberty and ability to receiue them Hereupon the History setting downe the censure of these two opinions saith That the first contained a great hidden mysterie humbling mans conceit on the one side and aduancing Gods grace on the other The other more plausible popular specious and apt to puffe vp man with pride and herein agreeing with the Friars vaine professing rather artificiall curiosity in preaching than accurate and sound Diuinity and to the Courtiers it seemed more probable as more agreeable with politicke respects It had especially two stout maintainers that were Bishops And they which defended it building vpon humane reasons thereby shewed their pregnant wit aboue others but when they came to testimonies of the Scripture they easily failed in their cause So the Historie In the third place he reciteth the opinion of a third sort of whom Catarinus is specially named who to mitigate and moderate the matter confesseth that there is a certaine number of the predestinate vnto life but those very few whom God out of his speciall grace purposed effectually to call and saue As for the rest God would haue them also to bee saued affording them sufficient meanes but leauing it to their owne will to accept or refuse them And these latter were of two sorts some that receiuing the means were saued though they were none of Gods elect and of these there was a great number Others refusing to cooperate with God who would haue saued them are therefore damned That the cause of the predestination of those first few was the only absolute will and pleasure of God and of those other Gods preuision of their accepting and vsing of Gods helpe and their cooperating with it but the cause of the reprobation of the Iast Gods preuision of their peruerse will in refusing Gods helpe or in vsing it ill This diuision is much like that which wee finde in Plato's Phedo where all men are sorted into three rankes First of such as are very good but very few and those dying goe straight to Heauen to the Elizian fields The second of those that are starke naught whereof there are very many which dying goe immediatly to Hell whence there is no redemption and the third sort are of a middle condition neither very good nor very bad who dying are cast into a Riuer in Hell where continuing for a yeare or two till they be throughly purged they are after that remoued into Heauen But that Riuer in Hell is long ago with the extreme heate of Hell fire so dryed vp as it is now become a hot dry stoue called Purgatory where that middle sort of Pontificians who are neyther of the number of speciall predestinate nor of the worst and refuse of the rest but such as by the vertue of their free-will accept Pontifician grace offered them are for a time entertained in those hellish flames till eyther their vncleane soules or their Executors full sachels and powches bee throughly purged But this is by the way But from the heate of those altercations in the time that these things were a hammering in the Councels forge let vs come to see what their learned Commentator Vega hath in cold bloud set downe concerning this point of predestination according to the Councels definitiue sentence Duo sunt c. There are two things which the Fathers define concerning the mysterie of predestination First they decree That not euery one that is iustified is predestinate and that the grace of iustification may befall euen those that are not predestinate because he that is iustified may lose his iustification once had and neuer after recouer it And this saith he the Fathers deliuered in these words of the 12. Chapter Quasi verum esset c. As if it were true that he that is once iustified could eyther sinne no more or if hee did sinne ought to promise to himselfe certaine repentance Sed multò adhuc apertiùs c. But much more plainly in the 17. Canon in these words Si quis iustificationis gratiam c. If any shall say that the grace of iustification happeneth to none but such as are predestinate to life and all others who are called to be called indeede but not to receiue grace as being by Gods power predestinate to euill let him be accursed And saith Vega by the name of predestination they doe in this place vnderstand an eternall preordination of some to blessednesse or which is somewhat more plaine and familiar a certaine and firme purpose whereby God from eternity would bestow blessednesse vpon some men Now by all this it appeareth that the Trent-Fathers hold that others may be iustified besides those that are predestinate and preordained vnto life So that it seemeth the Councels definitiue sentence concerning predestination concluded vpon Catarinus his opinion afore cited that besides the certaine number of the predestinate vnto life who are but a few there are another sort left at large and at their owne liberty who receiuing grace offered by the cooperation of their free-will are also iustified as well as the other Secundum vero c. And the second thing which the holy Synod hath here taught her faithfull ones concerning iustification is that the mysterie of predestination is so hidden and secret as no man without diuine reuelation can know who those be whom God hath predestinate Verba c. The words of the Councell are in the 12. Chapter Nam nisi ex speciali reuelatione sciri non potest quos Deus sibielegerit For it cannot be knowne but by speciall reuelation whom God hath chosen to himselfe Quare in principio c. Wherefore in the beginning of this Chapter the Fathers doe wholesomly admonish all beleeuers that no man while he liueth in this mortality doe so farre presume as certainly to assure himselfe that hee is in the number of the predestinate Thus haue wee I hope without any equiuocation the full meaning of this holy Synod concerning predestination and the certainty of it As for the point of perseuerance which Vega coupleth with predestination as necessarily depending vpon it we shall need to adde no more but what the Councell it selfe saith expresly enough in Can. 16. cited by Vega Si quis magnum illud vsque in finem perseuer antiae donum se certò habiturum absoluta infallibili certitudine dixerit nisi hoc ex speciali reuelatione didicerit anathema sit that is If any shall say that hee shall certainly haue that great gift of perseuerance vnto the end by an absolute and infallible certainty vnlesse he shall learne this by speciall reuelation let him be accursed And this saith Vega confirmeth that which the Fathers said of predestination Now the cause saith he for which all righteous men ought to be affraid of their perseuerance and that none can arrogate to himselfe such a great certainty as this vnlesse it happen vnto him
by diuine reuelation the Fathers haue opened in those words of the 13. Chapter Veruntamen c. But let them that thinke they stand take heede lest they fall and so vnto the end of the Chapter Thus wee haue the state of Pontifician Doctrine touching the certainty of iustification in regard of predestination and perseuerance For the maine substance of these Trent-Fathers Decrees and Canons touching predestination and perseuerance wee shall trye what truth is in them when we come to set downe the opposite doctrine of the Catholicke Faith In the meane time let vs a little weigh the moment of Vega's arguments for the defence of the Councell In his second Chapter of his 12. Booke Of the vncertainty of predestination and perseuerance after a goodly flourish and triumphall tripudiation as if the field were already won before he had strucke stroke he saith Habemus certissima fortissima argumenta c. We haue most certaine and strong arguments whereby to confirme and defend the Doctrine deliuered here by the Fathers and to vanquish the contrary heresies And first to proue this definition of the Fathers saith he Non omnis c. Not euery one that is iustified is predestinate We haue many places of Scripture to serue our purpose prouing that there haue been many in the state of grace and afterwards haue fallen from it and at length damned For example Saul that was elect to be King of Israel is said 1. Sam. 9. 2. to be electus bonus an elect and good man so that there was not a better than he among all the children of Israel Now saith Vega being said to bee bonus electus elect and good as the vulgar Latine hath it it is manifest that he was then in the state of grace for the Scripture saith hee doth not adorne men with such prayses which are out of the state of Gods grace But saith he Saul afterwards fell and was reiected and damned I answer Saul is there called an elect man in that he was a choice and goodly tall young man proper of personage insomuch as none was found comparable to him for personage and stature for hee was taller by the head and shoulders than any of the people Doth this proue that hee was one of Gods eternall election Or doth God elect men to saluation for the goodlinesse of their person No wee see the contrary 1. Sam. 16. 7. That Saul dyed a reprobate and desperately we easily grant it But that Saul euer was in the state of grace Vega saith nothing yet to the purpose to proue it nor euer can he I rather maruaile why Vega omitted a more probable argument to proue Saul to haue once been in the state of grace to wit because the Spirit of the Lord comming vpon him he was turned into another man An argument which some other Pontificians vrge yet Vega alledgeth St. Augustines censure of Saul who concludes him to bee a reprobate saying The example of this Saul makes against some proud heretickes which deny that any of the good gifts of the holy Ghost may be giuen to those that doe not appertaine to the condition of Saints Which saying of that worthy Father doth plainly proue that Saul was neuer of the number of Gods Saints and that euen wicked and reprobate men may haue notwithstanding some speciall gifts of the holy Ghosts and yet be neuer a whit the nearer to the state of grace Saul was said to be changed into another man when Gods Spirit came vpon him not in regard of conuersion from sinne vnto God or from a wicked life to the state of grace but of a priuate man whose thoughts reached no higher than his fathers Asses hee was made a Prince and endowed with Princely qualities of wisedome and courage the gifts of Gods Spirit whereby hee was enabled for such a weighty gouernment Yea we are not affraid to put this case to the tryall euen of a Bishop of Rome Gregory the last good Bishop of Rome saith thus of Saul Saul electus dicitur non secundum gratiam sed secundum iudicium Bonus dicitur vt diuine aequitatis dispositio commendetur Bonum profectò est quicquid est iustum c. Saul is said to bee elect not according to grace but according to iudgement He is called good that the disposition of diuine equity might be commended That indeed is good whatsoeuer is iust c. And he illustrates this by the instance of Ecclesiasticall Pastors Per iustitiam quippe Dei Pastores reprobi c. For by the iustice of God reprobate Pastors are permitted to climbe to the regiment of holy Church but they which are euill by their iniquity are good by diuine dispensation and now by the secret ordination of God they are elected who at the last in the vniuersall iudgement shall be reprobated Therefore a reprobate shepheard because by diuine dignation he is appointed to that office may bee called elect and because he is iustly permitted hee may bee called good And because hee is thought fitter than others to execute Gods iudgements therfore none is said to be better than he among the children of Israel Seeing therefore it cannot be proued that Saul was euer in the state of grace but the contrary is manifest euen by the iudgment of him who was once Bishop of Rome no maruaile if he dyed a desperate Reprobate Hereunto Vega addeth Salomons example that being endued with extraordinary wisedome from God and so standing in the state of grace he afterwards fell away and Vega laboureth to proue that Salomon dyed a Reprobate For answer that God gaue such wisedome to Salomon this proues him no more to be in the state of grace than that which was giuen to Saul This wisedome giuen to Salomon was famous indeede but for ought we finde it was no other but a naturall and morall wisedome and knowledge whereby he might the better iudge that great people committed to his charge as Salomon himselfe saith 1. Kings 3. 9. and know the nature and property of all creatures as 1. Kings 4. 29. 30. 31. c. Not that I deny but that Salomon might now be in the state of grace and no doubt but he was but that hee was not therefore in the state of grace because of his extraordinary wisedome giuen vnto him For doe not wee know that for a naturall and morall wisedome euen Heathen men as many Pagan Philosophers haue farre excelled many of Gods Saints Againe as we deny not but that young Salomon was now in the state of grace so we deny that hee euer fell totally away from this estate It is true he fell fearfully but not totally for marke what the Scripture saith expresly 1. Kings 11. 4. It came to passe when Salomon was old that his wiues turned away his heart after other gods and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God as was the heart of Dauid his father And in the 6.