Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	faith_n	grace_n	work_n	6,088	5	6.2038	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00294	A booke intituled, The English Protestants recantation, in mattersof religion wherein is demonstratiuely proued, by the writings of the principall, and best learned English Protestant bishops, and doctors, and rules of their religion, published allowed, or subscribed vnto, bythem, since the comminge of our King Iames into England, that not onely all generall grownds of diuinitie, are against the[m], but in euery particular cheife question, betweene Catholicks & them, they are in errour, by their owne iudgments : diuided accordingly, into two parts, whereof the first entreateth of those generall grounds, the other of such particular controuersies, whereby will also manifestely appeare the vanitie of D. Morton Protest. Bishop of Chester his boke called Appeale, or, Ansuueare to the Catholicke authour of thebooke entituled, The Protestants apologie.	Broughton, Richard.	1617 (1617)	STC 10414; ESTC S2109	209,404	418

Iustice inherent and subiected as these men tell vs in the soules of men must needs make them both truely named and truely and really to be iust And this is euident through all the theologicall vertues faith hope and charitie or loue of God all one as in other vertues For as by prudence or wisedome a man is named and truely is prudent and wise by temperance temperate and so of the rest So by theologicall vertues resideing and inherent in vs wee are named and truely be as their denomination acts and effects are Of faith and beleife wee are onely named and are faithfull and beleeinge by hope hopefull or hopeinge by charitie or loue of God loueing of him and keeping his commaundements which is mans iustification as M. Wotton shall be wittnes in Wotton def of Perk. pag. 175. these his words Righteousnes saith Austin is nothinge els but not to syn not to syn is to keepe the commaundements of the lawe that is as himself presently expownds it To doe none of those things that are forbidden and to doe all those things that are commaunded Therefore faith though it be necessaryly required is not as Cambridg saith the whole cause of iustification Yet there is more hereafter of this matter CHAPTER IIII. WHEREIN THE CATHOLICK doctrine of the efficacie and validitie of good workes done in grace their meritt and reward is proued by these English Protestants CONCERNINGE the validitie and efficacie of good workes done in grace sufficient to iustifie the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to be holy and syncere in this matter hath beene sufficiently proued by our contry Protestants in the former chapters But to take away all pretence of exception I will a little more particularly speake of this Question Wherein the Councell of Trent hath thus defined Eternall life is to be proposed to those that worke well Concil Trid. sess 6. to the end and trusting in God both as a grace mercifully promised to the children of God by Iesus Christ and as a Reward by the promise of the same God faithfully to be rendered to their good deeds and meritts And a little after yeelding a reason for the dignitie and worthines of such good workes addeth thus Christ Iesus himself as the heade to the members and vine to the braunches doth continually inflowe vertue anticipateth accompanieth and followeth allwayes their good workes and without which they could by no meanes be gratefull and meritorious to God Hitherto the words of the Councell for Catholicks Now to proue how Protestants doe accommodate themselues to this doctrine first I argue in this maner Good workes should haue iustified in the state of Innocencie if Adam had not fallen Therefore they can iustifie being done in the state of grace by Christ The paritie and consequence is proued by the dignitie and value of Christs passion and meritts restoring for this purpose that which wee loste in Adam The Antecedent is iustified by D. Couell who comparing the good workes of Christians by grace in Christ repayring the fall of Adam with workes in the state of Innocencie writeth thus Had Adam continued in his first estate mans absolute Righteousnes and integritie in all his actions Couell def of Hooker pag. 40. had beene the way of life to him and to all his posteritie And seeing this integritie in mans Actions had tended but either to the keepeing of the precepts or doeing works of perfection both which by Protestants here after be possible this reason concludeth Secondly I argue thus whatsoeuer procureth pardon for sins doth iustifie But good workes done in grace procure pardon for sins Therefore they iustifie The first proposition is euidently true for as nothing but syn maketh man vniust so that which taketh it away must needs leaue him iuste The second proposition is thus proued first by D. Couell writing in these words Couell def of Hooker pag. 42. Feild pag. 116. Good workes Humiliation Fasteinge and Weepeing are meanes to blott out syn And by D. Feild also in this maner Good workes done in grace procure pardon for synne Againe thus I argue That which is able to iustifie perfectly in the sight of God and did iustifie Abraham the Father of the true beleeuers and iustified doth also iustifye vs But good workes are of that efficacie and did iustifie Abraham our Father Therefore they iustifie vs his children The Maior is manifestly true For first both that power and abilitie is in vayne which neuer is acted as that common grownde in learninge teacheth and the Protestants make the maner of the iustifyeing of Abraham a forme of our iustification The second proposition is proued by M. Wotton who Wotton def of Perk. pag. 241. see Wotton pag. 174. 175. and infrac 5. speaketh thus in the name of Protestants Wee teache that those that are in deede adiudged good workes are able to iustifie a man perfectly in the presence of God and to deserue euerlastinge life Whereby hee doth not onely teach iustification by workes of grace but that they deserue euerlasteing life but of this their worthines and meritt I will dispute hereafter And the same M. Wotton in the same Wotton sup pag. 240. Wotton sup pag. 203. his defence of M. Perkins writeth thus M. Perkins professeth that Abraham was iustified by workes euen before God not onely before men This a little before the same place And for himself concerninge the iustifieing of Abraham his words be these Abraham was iustified longe before God made him the promise and before hee came out of the land of Chanaan Which was before his faith so much vrged by Protestants in this question was so commended Further I argue thus Nothing that is error is true doctrine But the deniall of iustification by good workes is error Therefore not true doctrine The Maior is euidently true for truthe and error are opposites The Minor is thus proued by D. Couell whose words be these To say wee clayme nothing by any dutie wee doe or any vertue wee finde Couell def of Hooker pag. 42. in our selues in the best construction maketh but an harshe sownde and discouereth the error which they of the Church of Rome haue thought vs to holde Where hee directly calleth that error which the Romane Church hath charged Protestants with in this question and expresseth it to be in extenuating good workes so farre that they and vertue in vs were not sufficient Title to clayme reward for them of God which could not be except they were of a iustifieing and deseruing nature and power Moreouer thus I reason That which is the obseruation of the lawe is righteousnes and Iustice But good workes done in grace at the obseruation of the lawe Therefore they are righteousnes and Iustice The Maior is euident The Minor is proued by the Couell def of Hooker pag. 42. same Protestant Doctor in the same place and in these wordes Amongst creatures in this worlde onely mans obseruation of the lawe

impressed in the soule that is a certaine spirituall and indeleble signe that they may not bee iterated For proofe of which doctrine by English Protestants I argue in this Maner That doctrine which is taught by the Greeke Church neither hereticall nor Scismatical but orthodoxe by these Protestants ot by a generall Councell whose decree and sentence bindeth all is to bee allowed by them much more if both those their Rules so confirme it But the doctrine of this Indeleble character in the Sacraments of Baptisme Confirmation and Orders is taught and approued both by the Greeke Church and a generall Councell that of Florence for such allowed by them before Therefore it ought to bee embraced by them The Maior is euidently true by their graunt before And the Minor thus proued First the Greeke Church by Hieremias their Patriarke in their Censure Hierem. in censur cap. 11. vppon Protestants in the eleuenth chapter hath so censured And the generall Councel of Florence with the assert of the same Greeke Church Armenians Iacobines and all Christendome hath defined it in these words Inter haec Sacramenta tria sunt Baptismus Cōcil Flor. in vnion Arm. Confirmatio Ordo quae Characterem i. spirituale quoddam signum à caeteris distinctum imprimunt in anima indelebile c. Among these Sacraments there are three Baptisme Confirmation and Order which impresse in the soule a Character that is a certaine spirituall signe distinct from others indeleble wherevppon they are not Iterated in the same parson but the other fowre do not Impresse a Character and admitt Iteration To bee breife I argue thus once for all That doctrine which is generally maintained not onely by all professors of it but also acknowledged and defended by them that bee esteemed learned among the enemies thereof and professe the same Religion with them is true But this doctrine of a Character is such Therefore it is true The Maior is euidently apparēt for no more then frends and Aduersaries learned can consent to any truth The Minor is thus proued by these Protestant Doctors following Ioyning in Religion with them that impugne and persecute the Church of Rome First D. Feild Feild l. 1. cap. 15. acknowledgeth a Character in Baptisme and to remayne euen in the excommunicate And so indeleble D. Couell affirmeth the same of Baptisme and Orders and seemeth to insinuate it of Confirmation Hee writeth of it in these words It is not amisse both termed a kind of Marke Couell def of Hook pa. 87. 88. 91. or character And confesseth it to bee Indeleble And for Orders hee addeth thus For ministeriall power is a worke of seperation because it seuereth them that haue it from other men maketh them a speciall order consecrated vnto the seruice of the moste highe in things wherewith others may not meddle I call it indeleble because they which haue once receiued this power may not thinke to putt it of and on like a cloake as the wether serueth And againe in this maner Where there is a chaunge of estate with an Sup. pag. 91 Impossibilitie to returne there wee haue reason to account an Indeleble Character to bee imprinted This saith the Church of Rome is in Baptisme Confirmation and Order This forme figure or Character is called Indeleble because that is not to bee reiterated as Protestants confesse of Baptisme Confirmation and Orders from whence it cometh The Character of Order is an actiue power as the schoolemen speake which giueth an Abilitie publickly to administer the Sacraments vnto those whome the Church hath esteemed fitt The Character of Baptisme is a passiue power which maketh men fitt to receaue the rest And from hence not onely is proued in as playne words as any schooleman or other Catholicke can speake the Catholicke opinion of a Character but also that Orders and others besides them allowed for Sacraments are to bee so esteemed as his last wordes the rest insinuate And this sufficeth of this Question CHAPTER XXI PROVING BY THESE PROTEstants that the Sacraments of the Ghospell giue grace and as the schooles speake ex opere operato by the vvorke vvrought CONCERNING the validitie and grace of Sacraments The Councell of Trent defineth thus If any Cōcil Trid. Sess 7. man shall say that the Sacraments of the new lawe do not giue grace by the worke wrought opere operato but that onely faith of the promise of God sufficeth to obtaine grace lett him bee Anathema And to demonstrate that the present Protestants of England are or by their owne writings ought to bee of the same opinion thus I argue Whatsoeuer Catholicke doctrine of the Romane Church is confirmed both by the publicke proceedings and priuate writings of the Protestants of England ought to bee allowed and embraced by them But the doctrine of the Romane Church concerning the efficacie of Sacraments that they cause grace in the worthie and duely disposed Receauers of them and that ex opere operato as the Councell before and our schooles speake is such Therefore it ought to bee allowed and embraced by them for true The Maior is euidently true and cannot bee denied for no man may or can hold against his owne opinion or that publicke Rule and Authoritie to which hee hath subscribed and submitted himself in Religion The second proposition is thus proued and first by that cheefe Rule their booke of Articles Booke of Articl of Relig. art 25. to which they haue all subscribed where it is thus defined in their Religion Sacraments ordeyned of Christ are effectuall signes of grace and Gods good will towards vs by the which hee doth worke inuisibly in vs. And againe in their newly reformed communion booke in these words By this words Sacrament I meane an Comm. Booke refor titul Catechis outward and visible signe of an inward and spirituall grace giuen vnto vs ordeyned by Christ himself as a meanes whereby wee receaue the same Therefore beeing graunted by the greatest Rules of Religion which English Protestants haue that Sacraments bee effectuall of grace and Gods fauour giuing grace and meanes whereby wee receaue grace And all English Protestants Ministers haue subscribed to these doctrines in those bookes They must needs graunt that Sacraments bee causes of grace for among causes the efficient and effectuall is not onely a cause but of extrinsecall causes by many degrees the cheifest And beeing allowed for such Instruments and meanes by which God worketh inuisibly in vs and giueth grace and wee so receaue grace as their words bee They must needs bee true instrumental causes of grace and such worke in vs. And their same practicall Rule of their Religion the Communion booke hath the same doctrine concerning Baptisme and consequently of all others proued by them to bee Sacraments one and the same reason beeing of all for in the Treatise of Baptisme thus it prescribeth the Minister to speake vnto God By the Baptisme of Comm. Booke Titul publick

Whitsontide was generally receaued as a Tradition deliuered by the Apostles then the times themselues not being either commaunded or directly exemplified in scripture must also be allowed by tradition And yet the Sabboth day in the old lawe which was abrogated by this tradition of the Sonday the Lords day as hee nameth it was so expressely commaunded by scripture that in order it is the third of the ten cheife commaundements and one of the first table belongeing to the worshipp of God Therefore a Tradition so powerable as to giue a ceaseinge to the expresse writtē worde lawe and commaundement of God must needs be of equall power And the Christians feaste of Easter likewise crosseing with and euacuateing the Pascha of the lawe written and without scripture onely by the prerogatiue of Tradition cannot be inferior especially seeing as before the Quartadec●mans denyers thereof were condemned as Hereticks by the primatiue Church for that cause And the like reason is of the feast of Whitesontide in the Church of Christ receaued by the same Rule of Easter onely by vnwritten tradition yet clearely abolisheinge and takeinge away the written lawe and word of God in that behalf Further I argue thus whatsoeuer is not a perfect and compleate Rule and Square in matters and questions of Religion without the help and dyrection of vnwritten traditions cannot be termed an absolute Rule in this kinde But the scripture and written worde of God by these Protestants is such Therefore by them no absolute and perfect Rule in matters of faithe The Maior is euidently true in the light of nature otherwise one and the same thinge in the same respect might be absolute and not absolute perfect and not perfect and two Contradictories might be true which is vnpossible The Minor proposition is thus proued by D. Feilde who speakeing of traditions Feild l. 4. cap. 20. pag. 239. vnwritten and yet allowed by him hath these wordes The third kinde of tradition is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall partes thereof which the first Christians receauing of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities This may rightly be named a tradition for that wee neede a playne and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obscurely conteyned in the scripture Which is sufficient proofe that tradition vnwritten is the cause why many things are beleeued by faith grownded vppon tradition not written which the scriptures could neuer warrant vs to beleeue For things obscurely handled and not playnely and distinctly explicated which as hee saith is by tradition cannot be the formall obiect of faith by any possibilitie for seeing true certayne and vndoubted Reuelation from God euen by Protestants is the formall cause of beleeueinge things obscurely conteyned or taught cannot haue this priuiledge And yet by D. Feilds wordes many thinges be in this state without the assistance of tradition and yet firmely to be beleeued Therefore not the obscuritie in scripture but to vse his wordes a playne and distinet explication of many thinges by tradition receaued by the first Christians from the Apostles commended to posterities is the formall cause and reason of beleeueinge such verities Now to drawe to an end in this question of traditions D. Feild to his fowre before acknowledged kindes of traditions The holy scriptures the Creede of the Apostles the forme Feild pag. 238. l. 4. of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall parts thereof which the first Christians receaueinge of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the scriptures commended to posterities and the continued Feild pag. 239. practise of such thinges as neither are conteyned in the scripture expressely nor the example of such practise expressely there deliuered thoughe the growndes reasons and causes of the necessitie of such practise be there conteyned and the benefitt or good that followeth of it hee addeth the fift kinde in these wordes The fift kinde of traditions comprehendeth Feild supr pag. 239. such obseruations as in particulare are not commaunded in scripture nor the necessitie of them from thence concluded though in generall without limitation of times and other circumstances such things be there commaunded Of this sorte many thinke the obseruation of the lent faste to be the faste of the fourthe and the sixt dayes of the weeke and some other This supposed as also the Feild pag. 242. same Protestant Doctors Rules before to know true traditions the consent and doctrine of the Churche the moste renowned for learninge the constant Testimonie of the pastors of an Apostolicke Church amonge which next to generall Feild pag. 202. Councells bynding and commaunding all the Church of Rome is especially to be obeyed reuerenced and respected as moste priuiledged from error yt must needs be euident by these Protestants that Traditions whether deliuered in scripture to be deduced from them or to be receaued without scripture are to be adiudged for the Romane Churche for that before is proued by them to be the true Church of Christ the Pope of Rome to be the supreame commaunding Ruler in it that the scriptures receaued by it are Canonicall and the vndowbted worde of God and all true and Iuridicall expositions and deductions from them are onely for the doctrine of the same Churche of Rome And so their other grounted Rules of generall Councells and Learned Fathers to be handled in the next chapters doe also teach vnto vs the same doctrines by these Protestants for by their Iudgment they may not nor can proceede in such b●sines but by the holy scriptures and true expositions and deductions from them allreadie proued by these Protestants for the present Roman Church Therefore I conclude this question with this Arguments following Whatsoeuer doctrines in Religion generall Councells the highest binding and commaunding Rule and authoritie ouer all Christians in the Iudgment of Protestants haue defined by the Bishops and Fathers assembled in them in matters of Religion by traditions written or vnwritten are to be receaued and embraced of all But all or the cheefest Articles in question betweene Catholicks and Protestants are directly concluded by the grounte of these Protestants by the Councells and Bishops in them assembled at Nyce the seconde the greate Laterane Florence and Constance Basile cited and allowed for generall Councells by the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson D. Willet D. Couell M. Bils Middlet papist ●9 119. 120. 124. 125. Willet synop cont 1. q. 7. Liniban ap Parkes and others in such maner as the present Church of Rome now teacheth Therefore they ought so to be receaued and embraced of all Christians bothe propositions are graunted before by these Protestants or in these citations Therefore nothinge remayneth to be proued in this Argument And because these Protestants Parkes pag. 137. 180. Couell def of Hook pag. 21. Parkes ag lymb pag. 176. Willet Antil pag. 178. c. Abbot ag Hill pag 38. 48. 49. 51.

venerable Imadges commaunding the making and vse of them In the last Canon they giue diligent and longe directions Can. 102. vnto preists how to behaue themselues in aduising and absoluing penitents in the Sacramen● of penance Therefore I may conclude that Protestants Religion is vtterly condemned by generall Councells both of the primatiue Church and latter ages And consequently by all other Iudgments in the Church of Christ Because these men haue told vs that all Bishops Doctors and Professors of Religion are bownde to followe the definitions of generall Councells CHAPTER IX WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants That the authoritie of the primatiue Fathers is to be receaued and followed in matters of Religion And how it wholly proueth the present doctrine of the Church of Rome vtterly condemninge all Protestant Religion THE authoritie and value of the Testimonie of the auncient Fathers and that they taught and approued the doctrine of the present Churche of Rome euen by the graunt of these Protestants is euident in the laste Chapter for being of that opinion in generall Councells and publicke assemblies and sentences to which by their owne consent and subscription they submitted and bownde themselues as to their lawfull and commaunding Rule they could not and might not teache and write otherwise in priuate then in publicke themselues and others had authoritatiuely concluded Yet for a full satisfaction to Protestants in all things I will breefely entreate of these also as they wer● priuate writers And first of their authoritie I argue thus Whoso euer allowe in shewe and wordes amonge the Ignorant Readers or hearers of their writings and sermons the authoritie of the auncient and primatiue Fathers to procure people to beleeue that their Religion and doctrine agreeth with them as men teaching and writing the truthe and to that purpose doe yeeld vnto them greate respect and reuerence ought truely and syncerely to beleeue and embrace their Religion But these English Protestant writers be such Therefore they ought and are bownde to followe and embrace their doctrine The Maior proposition is euidently true for as dissimulation craftie and double dealeinges to delude and deceaue others in all thinges is a vile and abominable synne against truthe charitie and Iustice so in matters of Religion wherein not the least equiuocation of to saue a mans life may be vsed it must needs be an offence moste damnable and deuelishe The Minor proposition is thus proued by these Protestants Their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson writeth thus The Bilson suru pag. 85. auncient consent of godly Fathers is with greate care to be searched and fallowed of vs cheifely in the Rule of faith And agayne Wee rest vppon the Pag. 82. sup scriptures of God vppon the authoritie of the auncient Doctors and Councells And maketh the same reason with Vincentius Lirinensis in these Pag. 83. sup words Leaste euery man should wrest the scriptures to his fansye and sucke thence not the truthe but the patronage of his error And hee addeth that S. Augustine gaue this respect not onely to generall Councells but to the testimonies of particular Fathers Irenaeus Ciprian Hilarius Ambrose Gregory c. Chrisestome Basil and others D. Sutcliffe writeth thus Wee Sutcl subuers pag. 87. acknowledge the faith of the Fathers of the fourth fift and sixt ages and adioyne our selues to that Church And to credite his cause and make his readers beleeue hee consenteth with those Fathers hee speaketh in this maner The Fathers in all points of faith are for vs Protestants Sutel ag D. Kell pag. 17. and not for the Pope D. Willer knowing of what little credit his bare worde is euen by his Protestants as appeareth hereafter would procure creditt to his protestancye by damnable periury in these wordes I take God to wittnesse before Willet Antilog pag. 263. whome I must render accompt c. That the same faithe and Religion which I defend is taught and confirmed in the more substantiall points by these Historians Councells Fathers that liued within syne or sixe hundred yeares after Christ And further Pag. 264. sup thus It is moste notoriously euident that for the grossest points of Popery as Transsabstantiation sacrifice of Masse worshipping of Imadges Iustification by workes the supreamacie of the Pope prohibition of Mariage and such other they of the Romane Churche haue no shewe at all of any euidence from the Fathers within syue hundred yeares of Christ In all which questions amonge others I am to proue the contrary be these Protestants themselues hereafter in their place And in an other page of the same treatise hee writeth thus The auntient Fathers that liued within sixe hundred yeares of Christ are Willet Antil pag. 271. K. speache in parl An. 1603 conference at Hampt pag. 73. against them His Maiesties speach in parlament it this I will euer yeeld all reuerence to antiquitie And in their conference For my parte I knowe not howe to answeare the obiection of papists when they charge vs with nouelties but to tell them their abuses are new And hee approueth the dayes of Constantine for a Rule in Religion saying Constantine is not to be appeached of superstition but thinges then vsed may still be continued Confer pag. 69. But now it shall appeare that these Protestant Doctors and Ministers are so far from iustifying these their oathes protestations and assertions they be enforced to acknowledge those primatiue Fathers doe allowe teache and approue the doctrine of the present Romane Churche which these men impugne and persecute and for that cause doe not onely deny the authorities of those primatiue learned and holy Fathers but call and censure them with vnciuill barbarous contemptuous and Irreligeous names and phrases For proofe whereof I argue thus Whatsoeuer Sect Religion or People being vrged by such testimonies as Protestants haue giuen for allowance of the Fathers authorities before to followe them accept of their doctrine and stand to their Iudgment in these controuersies of Religion doe vtterly refuse and disallowe it though his Maiestie should approue it but say they are vnfit Iudges in controuersies of diuinitie that their Iudgment is little to be respected their testimonie is not worthe answearing there is no probabilitie in their opiniōs they are not to be beleeued deserue not credit are not credible to be admitted are not fitt Iudges were to partiall are to bee forsaken contemned and dispised such men cannot with any apparance of truthe affirme those primatiue Fathers and Doctors to allowe their Religion and proceedings or defend their cause by their Authorities But these Protestants Doctors and Ministers of England be such Therefore those Fathers are not for their Religion The Maior proposition is to manifestly true and the Minor is proued also by these Protestants themselues in this maner M. Wotton expressely controlleth the Kings sentence before concerninge Wotton def of Perk. pag. 15. 16. the time of Constantine and antiquitie his wordes be these the

their owne writings and authorities published allowed or receaued amonge them since the beginning of the Raigne of our Soueraigne Kinge Iames in England That in all the cheefest Controuersies of this time in particular The doctrine of the present Church of Rome is onely orthodoxe Catholicke and true And the Contrary of these Protestants erroneous Hereticall and damnable Here endeth the first part of the generall grownds in Religion and ensueth the second of the particular Questions betweene Catholicks and Protestant of England THE SECOND PART OF ENGLISH PROTESTANTS RECANTATION IN MATTERS OF RELIGION CHAPTER I. WHEREIN BY THE PRESENT English Protestant writers is proued against Protestants and their doctrine That the predestination of particular men cannot without particular Reuelation be certaynely knowne much lesse as a matter of faith AS amonge all Questions of Religion the eternall predestination of men to be saued being from eternitie in God can haue none before it in duration So in order lett vs first entreate and begin from thence how fare and certainely it may be knowne of particular mens preordination to glorie in this worlde The holy Councell of Trent aduertising all men with S. Paule to worke their saluation with feare and trembling hath thus defined of Philipp 2. v. 12. Conc. Trid. sess 6. can 12. this secrett So longe as wee lyue in this mortalitie no man ought so much to presume of the hidden misterie of Gods Predestination that he certainely determine himself to be in the number of the predestinate as though it were true that hee which is iustified could either syn no more or if hee shall syn ought to promise to himself a certaine Amendement for except by speciall reuelation it cannot be knowne whom God hath chosen The like doctrine it concludeth against the predestinaries of Can. 15. 16. sup this time in the 15. and 16. canons of the same session The contradictorie of which Catholicke position hath beene so fare and generally defended by Protestants That it is as the See cap. 2. infra principall and cheefest grownde of their Religion That as a man is iustified by faith so this faith is that which assureth him that hee is iust in grace and fauour with God that hee cannot at the leaste finally or totally fall from grace And so consequently that hee knoweth as a matter of faith that hee is both iust and predestinate as will sufficiently appeare in the next chapter by English Protestants synce his maiesties entrance into England the short time which I haue limited to dispute against them by themselues what inconueniences abuses and iniquities this inuention hath brought into the world will in some sort appeare in this chapter by their owne writeings and is so much knowne to all men by lamentable experience that I neede not to repeate it in this place Wherefore I will onely confute this Protestant opinion by the present English Protestant writers and thereby demonstrate the Catholicke doctrine of the cited sacred Councell to be moste true and religious in this point euen by their sentence Then first concerning this proposition I argue thus No doctrine or opinion which is a desperate doctrine contrarie to diuinitie and to the true doctrine of predestination is or can be the true doctrine in this question But the predestinarie Protestant doctrine with assurednes of faith without particular reuelation that a man shall be saued is thus desperate contrarie to diuinitie and to the true doctrine of predestination Therefore it neither is nor can be the true doctrine To deny the Maior or first proposition is blasphemie because God infinite and immutable wisedome cannot possibly commaunde or reueale for truth any such error Therefore the first proposition being euidently true The Minor or second proposition is authoritatyuely with English Protestants concluded against this predestinarie opinion in the publicke Protestant Conference at Hampton Court before his Conference at Hampton court pag. 29. Maiestie and with his allowance in these words Verie manie in these dayes neglecting holines of life presume too much of persisting in grace layeing all their Religion vppon predestination If I shall be saued I shall be saued which is a d●sperate doctrine contrarie to good diuinitie and the true doctrine of predestination wherein wee should reason rather ascēdendo then discēdendo thus I liue in obedience to God in loue my neighbour I followe my vocation c. Therefore I trust that God hath elected and predestinated mee to saluation Hitherto the consent of this English Protestant Conference from whence it is manifest that no certanitie much lesse by faith but onely a morall trust or hope according to the good life of man can be had without reuelation that wee are predestinate Secondely supposing which with the scriptures all Protestants graunt that without grace by Christ and persisting in it no man can be saued I Argue thus No man that is vncertaine whether hee sall fall from grace can be certaine with certanitie of faith that hee is predestinate or shall be saued But without particular Reuelation all men Protestants and others be vncertaine whether they shall fall from grace Therefore no man without particular reuelation is or can be certaine hee is predestinate The Maior proposition is certainely true And his Maiestie in the same cited Protestant Assembly citeing the place of S. Paule before related against the certainerie of predestination concludeth the Minor or second proposition thus Wee may full from grace Conference at Hampton sup pag. 30. and addeth the doctrine of predestination should be handled with greate discretion which hee insinuateth the Protestants haue not done and speaketh plainely of them in these words The Inferring of the necessitie of standing and persisting in grace is a desperate presumption The like is taught more at lardge in other places of that conference where it is also Confer sup pag. 41. 42. 43. acknowledged that present Iustification or iustice is loste by any mortall or greuous syn which to be frequently committed by Protestants will appeare hereafter by their owne testimonies My third Argument is this No doctrine that is pestilent and scandalous to all Churches is or can be true doctrine But this predestinarie doctrine is such Therefore neither is nor can be true The Maior Relation of Religion cap. 45. is euident The Minor is proued by the Protestant Relator of Religion whoe telleth vs that Protestāts in Germanie will rather returne to the Church of Rome then admitt this Protestant point of doctrine which they call predestinarie pestilence and addeth that this with some others Cap. 48. of their opinions hath exceedeingly scandalized all other Churches My fourth Argument is this Nothing that is not reuealed of God can be beleeued with certaintie of faith or with faith But particular mens predestination is not reuealed of God Therefore it cannot be by faith beleeued The first proposition is euidently true because Gods reuelation or to be reuealed of him is the formall

obiect or cause of beleefe and true faith The second proposition is thus proued by D. Couell whoe entreating Couell def of Hooker pag 59. of this greate question hath these words A curious searcheing into that will which is not reuealed serueth but to breede a contempt of that which is reuealed vnto vs. Man desireth rather to knowe then to doe nay to knowe euen those things which doe not concerne him rather then to doe that for the neglect whereof hee must giue an accompt From hence cometh it to passe that what the schooles haue curiously sought out concerning the nature of Gods will the pulpitts nay the stalls of Artificers haue vndertaken to decide them all And Pag. 62. sup prosecuteing this question hauing cited and approued the Catholicke distinctions of the will of God into antecedent consequent of Gods good pleasure and the signe of it into a will absolute conditionall c. hee concludeth thus God willeth all men to be saued Whoe therefore that they are not it is not his decree but their owne fault Certainely saithe S. Ambrose hee willeth all men to be saued if they will themselues for hee that hath giuen a lawe to all doubtles hath excluded none Yf any Protestant will answere as Wottō def of Perkins pag. 467. c. many of them vnlearnedly holde That deduction from scripture as they suppose maketh a matter of faith I tell him with all learned dyuines and in true diuinitie that nothinge vncertayne doubtfull or fallible can possibly make a matter of faith which must of all assents in this world be moste certaine But euery deduction from such supposed scripture especially where neither the matter man his name parson or any thinge of him in particular is reuealed must needs be vncertayne doubtfull and fallible Therefore it cannot make a matter and conclusion vnfallible and of faith For the conclusion in no syllogisme can be more certayne then the premises and fallible humane deduction from and by which it is concluded But according to the Rule of Logicke semper sequitur debilioreni partem allwayes followeth the weaker part And the Maior is euident in it self before The Minor is proued thus by Doctor Feild priuate Interpretation or Feild pag. 226. Couell def of Hooker pag. 8. deduction bindeth not But true faith bindeth all men And D. Couell expressely writeth the same which I haue answered and in these words Doctrines deryued are not the word of God But nothing but the word of God written or nor written as is euident maketh a matter of faith euen by Protestants The first Argument is framed thus whatsoeuer is onely knowne of God cannot be knowne muche lesse with certainetie of faith by particular men But particular mens predestination is onely knowne to God Therefore not to particular men much lesse with certanitie of faith The Maior proposition is euidently true the worde onely being exclusiue and denying all others The Minor proposition is thus testified by D. Couell in expresse words Couell def of Hooker pag. 63. and pag. 108. God onely knoweth who are predestinate And in an other place thus Mens predestination vnto life none can knowe but God onely The sixt Argument is No doctrine that draweth from consideration what concerneth mans saluation and bringeth contempt of good works is true But this predestinarie opinion is such Therefore not true The Maior is euidently true euen in the doctrine of English Protestants making in Artic. 12. their square it self of their Religion good workes to be necessarie to saluation and the consideration of it also The Minor is thus proued by D. Couell If all men rightly considered Couell def of Hooker pag. 107. 108. in those actions that concerne mans saluation how farre wee are tyed not onely in obedience but for vse to those things that are meanes to effect the s●me few would haue beene so carlessely resolute to contemne good workes through an opinion of eternall election By which sentence hee doth not onelie denie the Protestant certanitie and securitie of predestination but plainely teacheth that good workes are the meanes to effect saluation Then as the end cannot be obtayed without the meanes that bringeth vnto it so it cannot be predestinate without such meanes except God could or should predestinate things to be otherwise then they be or can be which is vnpossible The seuenth and last Argument in this question may bee this Noe man Ignorant of that whereuppon predestination or the certaine knowledg thereof dependeth can certainely know himself to bee predestinate But all Protestants are ignorant of that which is whether they shall lyue and dye in good workes Therefore noe Protestant is certaine of saluation The Maior is euident And the Minor proued Couell sup pag. 108 by the same Protestant Doctor in these wordes Eternall election includeth a subordination of means without which wee are not actually brought to enioy what God secretly did intend and therefore to builde vppon Gods election yf wee keepe not ourselues to the wayes which hee hath appointed for mee to walke in is but a false deceauing vanitie for all men notwitstanding their preordination vnto life which none can knowe but God onely are in the Apostl●s opinion till they haue embraced the truthe but the children of wrathe as well as others And to manifest that this was the doctrine of the primatiue church by which these Protestants say they will be Iudged D. Morton writeth Morton Apol part 2. pag. 223. in these wordes Veteres Patres fere omnes arbitratisunt praedestinationis causam fuisse praeuisa hominum opera All moste all the auncient fathers did thinke that the good deeds of men foreseene were the cause of predestination And Mr. Wotton writeth thus wee acknowledge that the fault is wholly Wottō def of Perkins pag. 86. in cuery man that is not saued Therefore I conclude this question that euen by English Protestant Doctors the doctrine of the Romane Church in this is true and that of the predestinarie Protestants is false erroneous and damnable CHAPTER II. PROVETH BY THE SAME Protestants of England That onely faith much lesse the assureing faith of Protestants neither doth nor can Iustifie NEXT vnto this Question of predestination lett vs entreate of that which hath moste and nearest connexion vnto it mans Iusification in this life whether it be by the supposed assureing faith of Protestants that a man is iustified and righteous as thy commonly call it or otherwise by these writers Of which matter the Councell of Trent first for Catholicks defineth thus It is necessarie Codcil trid ses 4. can 9. to beleeue syns neither are forgiuen neither were at any time forgiuen but freely by the mercie of God for Christ. And then addeth concerninge the presumptuous faith of Protestants which it had before confuted in this maner If any Can. 12. sup man shall say that iustifying faith is nothing els but a confidence of Gods mercie remitting sins for