impertinent because the Moone hath no light but what shee borrowes from the sun Yet if the question were absolutely proposed why the Moone were ecclipsed as no other answere would serue so this alone were sufficient because the body of the earth which is not transpenetrable by any light is directly interposed betweene the sunne and the Moone Or if it be questioned how the Israelites being stung with serpents were saued the reply is good and formall by the signe of saluation which God had erected But some we may suppose died after it was erected what was the reason they did not stedfastly looke vpon it shall we then absolutely say the Israelites were saued not onely by this signe of saluation which God hath giuen them but by their eyesight as it was a faculty or quality inherent This was a qualification indeed so requisite in the subiect to be healed that such as were without it were depriued of ordinary meanes of preseruation yet none to speake properly and absolutely were saued by their eyesight but onely by the obiect of their sight or rather by both as they had relation to him whose victory ouer the great serpent and graund enemy of mankind the manner of the brasen serpents erection represented This last instance will apply it selfe vnto the point in hâ—nd Workes or righteousnesse inherent include no other causalâ—â—â— of iustification or saluation then the Israelites eiesight dido 〈…〉 ety their presence notwithstanding and precedence is in the same rancke or order necessary Christ onely is the true and immediate cause of healing vs from the sting of death as the brasen serpent was of the Israelites temporall recouery from the sting of deadly serpents Thus much of the agreement betweene Saint Paul and Saint Iames now of the agreements and difference betwixt the Romish Church and ours CHAP. VII Of the differences betwixt vs and the Romish Church concerning iustification or the right vse or measure of grace or righteousnesse inherent 1. BOth grant Gods decree or purpose to iustifie sinfull man to be an act of meere mercy Finall absolution or approbation they make no act of mercy but rather of iustice in God because it presupposeth absolute righteousnesse in vs. Both grant Christ to be the sole meritorious and proper efficient cause of that grace which is first infused whose reparation or increase is by their doctrine partly of grace because the foundation of it was meere grace precedent partly of debt because they merit these additions by right vse of their free wil. Whence they cannot without contradiction hold Christ to be the sole meritorious efficient cause of their second iustification or that grace whereby they become more in 〈◊〉 better approoued in the sight of God But about the vse or inâ—â—â—tance of this tearme iustification in Saint Pauls writings we â—â—â—â—ent They contend it it implies as much as to be inherently iust or righteous Many learned Protestants haue copiously shewed it to be a Law phrase equiualent to absolution from the sentence of iustice acquitall or the like To their allegations notwithstanding a wayward Papist will not yeeld because it is sometimes taken in that sence their writers alleadge as may appeare by our late instances or albeit we could by euidence of circumstance or otherwise conuince their vnderstandings that it hath the same valew with Saint Paul as with moderne Protestants yet subtile wits whereof the Romish Church hath plenty would redeeme the disaduantage and recouer their former footing by producing more instances of men absolued through the vprightnesse of their cause then we bring plâ—ces wherein the word iustification is taken for absolution or free pardon of men otherwise obnoxious to condemnation Phinehas resolute and zealous fact was imputed to him for righteousnesse and did iustifie or absolue both himselfe and the host of Israell from the abhomination committed by one of his brethren with the Midianitish woman not by non-imputation but by positiue depulsion of the crime or guilt whose infection would otherwise haue seised on him through conniuence or neutrality Let the Romanist therefore be as way ward as he list or take iustification in what sence he pleaseth that euery sonne of Adam is by nature the sonne of wrath destitute of the glory of God and liable to the sentence of condemnation he neither doth nor can denie that euery sonne of wrath must by his Almighty Iudge be absolued from the sentence of death before he can be admitted vnto life eternall he must vpon the same necessity grant The point then in which will he nill he we must ioine issue is What should be the true immediate and next cause of this finall absolution ought within vs or somewhat without vs By the immediate and next cause wee vnderstand such a cause as is necessarily accompanied by this effect and without whose participation this effect neither doth nor can befall any such a cause as whosoeuer is partaker of is by participation of it foorthwith absolued such a cause as who so can probably hope to be partaker of may vpon the same degrees of probability hope for finall absolution Such a cause as who so doubts or feares least he shall neuer be partaker of in this life must vpon the same tearmes doubt or dispaire of his absolution or saluation We denie he affirmes righteousnesse inherent to be such an absolute cause as hath beene notified of absolution or remission of sinnes of iustification howsoeuer taken Here it will not be amisse to aduise the Reader of a schoole-tricke which one that comes fresh from the arts would easily â—e use though put vpon some graue Diuines by the Romanist The question saith Bellarmine should be proposed not as Chenitius doth of the cause for which seeing that implies the efficient but of the cause by which we are iustified or absolued that is of the formall cause of iustification or absolution CHRISTS righteousnes they grant to be the efficient or meritorious cause for which not the formall by which our sinne are remitted or we iust fied They are indeed bound to assigne a formall cause by which we are truely iust because they hold vs formally iust in the sight of God and seeing they teach remission of sinnes to consist in the extirpation or expulsion of them they may in congruitie affirme that sinne is formally at least immediately remitted by habituall grace or righteousnesse inherent and remitted by CHRIST onely as the efficient cause which meriteth this measure of grace in the same forme of speech that the schooles tell vs that cold is expelled out of the water by the fire as by the efficient but formally or immediatly by the heat which the fire produceth in the water Although perhaps it may be a question whether the expulsion of cold out of the water or of sinne out of our bodies consonantly to their doctrine can haue any proper formall cause or onely an efficient by resultance but to demaund of vs what is the formall
cause of iustification by which our sinnes are formally remitted is as if we should aske one of their young pupils what were Latine for manus Iustification taken as we doe it for remission of sinnes not by inherent righteousnesse or ought within vs immediatly incompetible with them but by the externall merits of Christ is a forme or entity as simple as any formall cause can be and simple or vncompounded entities can neither haue formall causes or ought in proportion answearing to them Wherefore as I said it is either the follie or knauery of our aduersaries to demaund a formall cause of their iustification that deny themselues to beformallie iust in the sight of God For so to be iust and to bee iust onely by acceptance or non-imputation of vniustice are tearmes as opposite as can bee imagined Hee alone is formallie iust which hath that forme inherent in himselfe by which he is denominated iust and so accepted with God as Philosophers deny the same to be formally hot because it hath no forme of heate inherent in it but onely produceth heat in other bodies To be formally iust we for these reasons attribute onely vnto Christ who alone hath such righteousnesse inherent in himselfe as by the interposition of it betweene Gods iustice and sinfull flesh doth stop the proceeding of his iudgements as Phinehas zeale did stay the plague otherwise ready to deuoure the host of Israell Our aduersaries in that they acknowledge inherent righteousnesse to be the sole formall cause of iustification doe by the same assertion necessarily graunt it to be the sole true immediate cause of remission of sinnes of absolution from death and admisâ—ion to life This is the onely point from which they cannot start at which neuerthelesse whiles they stand they may acknowledge Christ come in the flesh crucified dead and buried or perhaps ascended into heauen but denie they doe the power of his sitting at the right hand of God the vertue of his mediation or intercession and more then halfe euacuate the eternity of his Priesthood as shall be shewed after this briefe explication of our assertion 2. When we teach iustification by faith and not by workes our meaning is by the doctrine of faith wee are bound to acknowledge and confesse that CHRIST IESVS by his eternall Priesthood whose offices in their seuerall places shall bee expressed is not onelie the sole meritorious cause of all graces or righteousnesse inherent requisite to finall absolution but these supposed in the party to bee absolued hee is likewise the sole immediate cause of finall absolution or iustification The latter part of this assertion may admit this ilustration Suppose a man not destitute of other senses yet ready euery moment to droupe or fall into some deadly fit vnlesse his spirits were refreshed by pleasant musicke we might truely say one in this case did liue by the sense of hearing for deafe hee should quickly die yet were musicke the sole immediate cause of his preseruation without actuall application of whose sound euen this sense it selfe by whose meanes his spirits refreshed better enable his other senses to their proper functions would foorthwith faile him In this sort doe sinfull men drawe life from CHRIST by faith alone by which likewise and not by workes wee are sayd to abide in him as being vnited in spirit to him albeit by abiding so vnited our other faculties are strengthened and viuificated to bring forth the fruits of righteousnesse The former instance notwithstanding doth not exemplifie the first part of our Assertion for musicke only continues life naturall which is supposed to haue another originall But if we speake of life spirituall maintained by saith and of which faith it selfe is a part it was originally and wholly deriued from CHRIST on whom faith and all other graces whatsoeuer tam in fieri quam infacto as well in the first production as during the time of their continuance and preseruation depend as essentially and perpetually as the light of the moone or other participated or reflected splendor doth on the brightnesse of the Sunne Nor may wee imagine that this borrowed and variable righteousnesse in vs though thus depending on the Sonne of righteousnesse is or can be euen whiles it remaines without eclipse or in such fulnesse as in this life the best men at any time are capable of sufficient for the time being to acquit or absolue vs if God should enter into iudgement with vs. This strict dependence of such righteousnesse as we haue on CHRISTS righteousnesse presupposed faith is said to iustifie vs not by any effects in vs deriued from him but by its transeunt acts reciprocally lifting vp our hearts to the fountaine whence grace and spirituall life doth flow and reflecting the beames or raies of our mindes thus illuminated vnto our mysticall head still deâ—iuing vertue from his crucified body to stint the deadly issues of sinne not vtterly to expell all reliques of vnrighteousnesse For when we take the eyes of faith of him albeit the habite of faith and other graces remaine as intire in vs as euer they were the very memory of transgressions past or the sight of sinnes inherent whilest we look on them deiect vs. According to this disferent aspect euen the best men liuing whilest this brittle glasse of mortality and mutability is in running may bee subiect to the like subalternation of hopes and feare the exiled Poâ—t hath expressed Spes mihi magna subest dum te mitissime Caesar Spes mihi respicio dum mea facta cadit Strength to my hopes doth still accrewe whil'st Caesars mildnesse I do vie we But mine owne facts whilest I beholde my heart doth faile my hopes growe colde But though sinne may often sting vs by fits and bring vs almost to deaths dore by vicissitude of despaire or dismaâ— yet we recouer as presently by faithfull looking on the glorious author as the Israelites did by beholding the visible signe of saluation 3. The controuersie hitherto proposed and declared in as scholasticke forme as our English tongue well can beare may be reduced in fewest tearmes and fittest for popular instruction vnto the right vse and immediate end of faith and other sanctifying graces We of reformed Churches with vnanimous consent of heart and minde belieue and teach and thou O CHRIST our Lord our life and strength giue iudgement out of thy throne of Maiestie whether not more agreeable to thy minde then shee which sits as Queene of heauen and brags as if she were thy best beloued Spouse or her children do That our Faith our Hope and Charitie or whatsoeuer pledges of thy fathers loue and fauour towards vs we through thy merits haue obtained were giuen vs not to alter but to better that plea we made before we had them Being by nature the sonnes of wrath and groning vnder the heauie burden of our sinnes with teares and sighes by thy precious blood by thy death and passion wee daily besought Him for
them and shall his goodnesse in giuing them flake the feruency of our wonted desires or supplications when as we seeke grace onely to the end we may finde and truly taste his mercie Thou hast taught vs Not euery one that sayth Lord Lord shall enter into the kingdome of heauen but such as doe the will of thy Father which is in heauen and his wil as the Apostle witnesseth they only do which obey it in all things omitting no commaundement when occasion is giuen taking no occasion to breake or violate any Shall we then enter into the kingdome of heauen because we thus farre do thy fathers will and in some measure obserue his Commaundements Rather without such obseruance we shall not we cannot enter therein yet when we haue done all this wee are still vnprofitable seruants To what vse then doth our inherent righteousnesse or obseruance of Gods Commaundements serue vs If sincere that haue been and vnfaigned though imperfect yet the faith which brought it forth will make a sincere and faithfull plea for mercy in the day of triall in which he that hath been an hearer only and no doer of the lawe or hath done in part what God would haue done but not sincerely nor faithfully because it was his will and pleasure but out of humour naturall affection or hipocrisie shall cry Lord Lord and shewe many tokens of Gods loue and fauour towards him in hope to better this present sute for mercie yet shall not be heard Why Either because he neuer had any true pledge of Gods fauour or did not vse such as hee had aright because as his workes haue been such now are his prayers presumptuous vnfaithfull or hypocriticall such as cannot obtaine any other answere of God then that depart from mee I neuer knew thee It shall not boote him to make proofe that hee hath giuen his goods to the poore or his body to the fire that he hath healed the sicke cast out diuels and wrought other wonders in CHRISTS name vnsesse his faith haue quelled all trust all pride or glory in these gracings wholly set on Gods mercies in CHRIST from whose apprehension vnlesse these other acts or exercises though of mercie sprung they are not truely done in faith but springing thence we cannot be so ready to doe them as hauing done them to renounce all trust or confidence in them For whiles we compare these slender yet sincere effects of our loue and thankfulnesse to him with his infinite loue and mercie towards vs wheron true faith alwaies lookes whiles it conceiues them the sight of them causeth greater humilitie for the present more hearty sorrow for sinnes past then we could haue conceiued if wee had not done them as the sight of Zorobabels temple finished did make the auntients of Israell weepe because the perfection and glorie of the former was more liuely represented to their senses by this visible and semblable model then by the ruines meere absence or imperfect reparations of it To be able to sound the depth of many conclusions better then others can giues stayed and setled iudgements a more distinct and compleat measure of the knowledge they wanted then fantasticke or shallow wits can haue For this cause solid learning alwaies contracts verball knowledge and superficiall skill in any facultie dilates mens estimates of theÌ„selues puffes them vp with preiudiciall conceits of their owne worth And seeing all our knowledge in this life though of matters naturall and neere at and is euery way imperfect the increase of it is alwaies vnnaturall and monstrous vnlesse the more we know the better we know our imperfectious and be humbled with a more sensible feeling of our wants Now in as much as the fruits of life do neuer take so kindely as the fruites of knowledge in any sonne of Adam since he made that impious and crroneous choice and euery mans owne experience can teach him that his practique faculties or performances come still short of his speculatiue notions or apprehensions of what is good and fit to be done we are by this twofold reason enforced to take the vnfained acknowledgement of our imperfection in working and serious distrust both to our works and our selues as no way iustifiable or approueable in the sight of God but for the perfect and compleate righteousnesse of CHRIST IESVS for an essentiall branch of that vniformity before required in true and sauing faith The growth of these particulars is like the growth of twins the more firme and liuely faith we haue the better and more sincerely we worke the bettter and more sincerely we worke the more vnfaignedly and faithfully wee renounce all confidence in our workes and our selues the more faithfully we renounce all confidence in these the more caâ—tiestly we seeke after saluation only by CHRIST of whose allsufficient sacrifice and righteousuesse fully satisfactory of Gods law and meritorious of mercy our righteousnes inherent though imperfect giues vs a truer tast then vnbelieuers can haue Thus the weaker we are in our selues the stronger we are in Him 4. The former question about the vse of grace depends vpon another betwixt the Romanist and vs about the measure of inherent righteousnesse They make the encrease and growth of grace not to perfect but vtterly to abolish the nature of it by conuerting it into righteousnes inherent as well for quantity as quality acceptable of it selfe to God without his fauour or indulgence We as the name imports make it alwaies subordinate vnto gratious acceptance and seeing we take it onely as a pledge of diuine fauour whereof wee stand perpetually in need as it is first giuen so we desire it may be increased onely to the end we may more constantly and faithfully sue for mercie and seeke diuine approbation aright Of our edification in CHRIST faith is not the foundation onely but the roofe vnto which all other graces haue the same reference that Hur and Aaron had vnto Moses The best seruice euen charitie it selfe can performe is to vnderprop the hands of faith lifted vp vnto the throne of grace from which the sentence of absolution must proceed Directly contradictory to this declaration saith the Romanist faith iustifies onely as it disposeth vs to the attainment of charity which is the formall cause of iustification the complete forme of such perfect righteousnesse inherent as is the onely immediate cause of saluation Charitie though giuen for CHRIST is to him the Crowne of faith reaching heauen by it owne perfection to vs not charity onely but faith it selfe as it is part of our imperfect righteousnesse inherent is footstoole to it selfe in the act of iustification or whiles it pleads for mercy Nor vas any sonne of Adam for the least moment of time euer so righteous but the actuall mediation of Christ or interposition of his sacrifice secluded from his triall at the tribunail of Gods iustice he might besides all his other sinnes iustly haue beene condemned for not stirring vp
for the nature physicall properties or the quantitie of the mettall but for the princes estimate whose image and superscription it beares One corallarie of this conclusion gathered by these authors themselues was that the entitie or qualitie of grace might increase without any necessarie increase of the value or estimate of it with God as the kings maiesty if it should please him might make the same portion of siluer which now goes for a shilling to be currant but for nine pence or rather make that peece as large as the shilling though retaining the same value inscription it now beares We shall perchance no way crosse these professours tenent but onely better illustrate our owne if we say As it is not the legall instrument though bearing the sâ—ale or inscription royall but the princes will and pleasure thereby authentiquely testified which frees the malefactor from sentence of condemnation so neither is it grace or righteousnesse inherent though these be the image and character of our righteous Iudge but the mercy and free pardon of our God proclaimed indefinitely to all the penitent but sealed to euery faithfull soule in particular by those pledges of the spirit which finally absolues vs from the curse laide vpon vs by the Law and enstates vs in the promises of the Gospel In both pleas the sanctified soule vseth saith all other graces or parts of righteousnes inherent no otherwise then a penitent malefactor would doe the instrument wherein the princes pleasure is contained if he were to plead his cause before the prince himselfe in whose presence though with ordinary Iudges they will sometimes be too bold I presume no malefactor would stand vpon tearmes of integrity or present innocency because he had his pardon vnder seale seeing that was giuen him to plead for mercy not for iustice Not altogether different from these exemplifications of our assertion some schoolemen though seeking to come as neer the Romish Church present tenents as they could thought it no inconuenience to hold that the grace wherby men become truely and inherently iust was not of it owne nature absolutely incompatible with all degrees or reliques of sin in respect of which we might stand in need of Gods fauour and mercy after communication of grace But this and the like opinions are vtterly destroyed root and branch by the thunderbolt of the former decree and their authors and followers censured by Vasquez for holding it but as possible to the absolute power of the Almightie to replenish our soules vvith grace and not take away all staine of sinne for that any reliques of the one should lodge in the same brest with the other implies a contradiction in his diuinity which vaine surmise shall be refuted when we come to handle the nature of sin and the necessity of grace How friuolously he alleageth that of Saint Iohn whosoeuer is borne of God sinneth not to this purpose the Reader may perceiue by the true interpretation of that place in the Chapter following 6. For the time I would request as many as feare the shipwracke of faith and conscience to rest contented with this short discouery of two rocks against which all that follow the Trent Councels direction ineuitably dash The first an cuacuation of Christs priesthood for by their doctrine after grace is infused and remaines inherent a man may bee iustified saued and glorified without any more reference to Him then Adam in the state of integrity had Christ say they hath restored vnto vs what we lost in Adam What was that Inherent righteousnesse so we grant with the Antient. But in what measure In as full and perfect as Adam had it before his fall or without admixture of corruption drawne from his loynes So farre the Romanists seeks to extend the authoritie of some Fathers The best vse and end then of grace in his construction is to passe ocuer the euerlasting Couenant of grace in Christ that wee may recoue the state which our first Parents forfeited This is the most immediate and necessarie consequence of the Trent Fathers determination for if habituall grace be as they decree the sole formall cause of iustification that once gotten will exclude all necessity or vse of any other cause or meanes of reconciliation or acceptance with God Agreeable hereto as Vasquez disputes at large they admit no application of Christs merits but onely in the collation of gifts inherent or infusion of Charity Admitting then one of their Church should remaine in the state of habituall grace a weeke or two before his death let vs suppose as for disputation sake or sure tryall of a true formall cause it is lawfull by their rules giuen to this purpose to suppose any impossibility that Christ had neuer beene incarnate crucified raised from the dead or set at the right hand of God the former party notwithstanding should be as certainly saued as hee can be by beliefe of all these Articles and become heire infallible of as great glory and felicity as wee hope for by incorporation into Christs body Nor doth Christ if their opinion may stand sit at the right hand of his Father to make intercession for vs after grace is infused or whiles wee retaine it but that it may be infused and recouered if it should chance to be lost Now what heresie was there broached more blasphemous against Christ than this which abolisheth the principall part of his mediation what could more directlie cuacuate that great mysterie of the true and reall vnion betwixt the head of the Church and the members By this doctrine neither are our persons in this life reconciled to God nor our nature exalted to dignity in the life to come by being vnited to Christ but immediately by our inherent righteousnesse without any intermediation of his person his sacrifice merites or other benefit of his passion as any cause at all or bond of our vnion or acceptance with God after the infusion of grace which is the onely formall linke betwixt the diuine nature and ours whence it necessarily followes that our humane nature must though by another kinde of vnion and lesse measure of an inferiour grace bee as immediately vnited to God as immediately approued for iust as immediately meritorious of glory as immediately capable of Gods presence as Christ was Might not that great Schooleman for such I haue euer accompted Vasquez with lesse danger to his soule or repugnancie to this great mysterie â—hole truth directly to deny he durst not or other tenents maintained by him haue granted that as Christ is truely reputed holy not onely from the Holinesse formally inherent in his humane nature but from the vnction of the deitie or vncreated holinesse whereto hee is hypostatically vnited so might all partakers of such faith as Saint Paul ascribes righteousnesse vnto bee truely and properly called and reputed righteous in the sight of God from the absolute righteousnesse of Christ as man to whom they are by the
despaire of saluation In that they make such grace the sole formal cause of iustificatioÌ„ without which as all grant there is no entrance into Gods rest a Romanists trust hope or beliefe of life eternall as possible to him must first be terminated in the same degrees vnto so full a measure of grace or righteousnesse as they require either as present or possibly future He that doubts as Bellarmine confesseth â—ll mâ—st haue iust cause to doubt whether hee bee perfectly righteous or no must of necessity conceiue equall doubt of his estate in grace He that knows as who throughly examining his own heart for any space together but may know he is not able to plead for his cause with God in iustice is bound to belieue his present want of sauing grace Hee that cannot raise his heart through consciousnesse of his often transgressions much deiected to these magnanimous hopes of euer being able to fulfill the Law of God is this distrust remaining by his blinde beliefe of the Churches infalibility in this decree bound finally to despaire of saluation or any good Gods mercies or his Redeemers blood can doe him VVee are content to take Bellarmines testimony as authentique against his fellowes that our arguments prooue his former conclusion It is safest to put our whole trust and confidence in Gods mercies the vndoubted consequence whereof is that the Trent Councell did erre perniciously in so resoluing this principall point of saluation as hath beene declared But it is a wonder to behold what miraculous reconciliations the imaginary vnity of the Romane Church can worke in Iesuiticall braines Bellarmine whether out of feare of sharper censure enforced to vse this miserable shelter or so dazled with the mysticall vnity of the inerrable Church that hee could discerne no difference betwixt the Trent Councells decree and his owne conclusion takes it as approued by the Romane Church because that Church allowes the same collect wee doe vpon Sexagessima Sunday As if because he now had captiuated his vnderstanding to thinke the Church is alwaies the same and cannot erre therefore the author of that collect must needs be of the same mind the Trent Councell was when as a greater part of their best Schollers about the time it was celebrated did in this point better accord with the Auspurge confession then with it Had the doctrine contained in that collect been exhibited to the Councell by reformed Churches it had bin as peremtorily condemned as any Article of Wikliffe or Luthers doctrine but now seeing it hath slept so long in their liturgy that the sufferance of it may seeme to argue a tacite consent or approbation of that Church into whose thoughts it neuer came the author of it though for ought they know a man as obnoxious to error as we are out of all question of our opinion in the point of iustification must be thought not to haue erred in coÌ„ceiuing that praier which the Church allowes his meaning rather shall bee quite contradictory to his words More then miraculous must the composition of that body haue beene which but one in it selfe should exactly haue symbolized with euery ingredient in olde chaos yet no lesse strange may the Iesuites temper seeme were hee not homo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which can infallibly belieue euery opinion held for this thousand yeares by that Church which in respect of faith and doctrine is but one after the same manner chaos was one huge masse of contrarieties and confusions in this respect better consorting with Iesuiticall faith which is but a prime matter or indeficient seminary of various treachery as the whole body of his religion is but a meere hogepoge of dictinctions CHAP. VIII How farre the Law must be fulfilled in this life of the regiment of grace of the permanencie of iustification what interruptions it may admit how these must be repaired or in what sense it may bee said to be reiterated That euery sin is against Gods Law though not incompatible with the state of grace 1. SEeing that iustification which is by faith in Christ so much pressed by S. Paul presupposeth that state of integrity or qualification for acceptance with God whereunto S. Iames requireth workes or to vse his words the fulfilling of the royall Law of libertie without respect of persons or reserued indulgence to our desire it will be necessary briefly to examine how far the Law may be fulfilled by vs in this life or which is all one with what measure of inherent righteousnes or sanctifying grace that faith which onely iustifies must bee accompanied Now seeing the Law is but the image of Gods will or of that internall Law of righteousnesse which was in Christ whereunto faith as hath beene saide includes a conformity such a fulfilling of the Law in this life as may witnesse our true imitation of diuine goodnesse noâ— in good will or minde onely but in good workes is in this life not onely possible but requisite We must be perfect as our heauenly father is perfect which speech of our Sauiour cannot be vnderstood according to the measure of perfection nor was he himselfe as man so holy and perfect as God his father but according to the truth of the proposition for vero nihil verius we must be as truely perfect and holy according to that imperfect measure which our polluted nature is capable of as God is according to the infinite or absolute perfection of holinesse yet are wee not holy after the same manner Christ was holy or Adam in the state of his integrity It is a very fit distinction vsed by diuines in this argument that there is a twofolde perfection one of parts another of degrees whereof the former is as necessary as the other impossible to all in this life The perfection of parts may in generall be illustrated by a childe or infant which though wanting the strength and agility hath the true life and right proportion of man in euery part and able in some sort to moue euery member it hath though not by perfect motion Strong sound men in Christ Iesus we canot be in this life yet altogether dead monstrous or mishapen wee may not bee Howbeit if wee apply this resemblance to the point in question it better fits that opinion of the Diuines of Colen which held mens righteousnes inherent to bee imperfect onely in respect of the quantity then the doctrine of reformed Churches which with our best righteousnes admit a mixture of sin inherent so as this perfectioÌ„ of parts according to their teneÌ„ts may more aptly bee compared vnto a childe indued with life and rightly proportioned yet subiect to some disâ—aâ—e or infirmity able to walke but depraued in all his motions alwayes pâ—one to stumble or fall The maner as wel of sins inherence in our nature after infusion of grace as of its concurrence in our actions shal be declared by Gods assistance in the seuenth
the gifts and graces of the spirit or not right vsing them to his glory that gaue them Thus much euery conscience that hath tasted of Gods mercy and goodnesse in Christ will be ready to confesse and this truth now deliuered by vs was in effect the doctrine of the learned and religious Bucer in his conference at Ratisbone with our aduersaries Although he that is iustified hath righteousnesse through Christ inherent the faithfull soule notwithstanding doth not rely on it but onely on the righteousnesse of Christ wherewith wee are endowed without which there neither is nor can be any righteousnesse A more full declaration of his opinion in this controuersie vasquez * out of the same conference hath ready gathered to our hands When certaine propositions which the Author of that conference cals ambiguous were brought vnto him amongst which this was the first faith is the beginning of iustification his answer was if this speech be meant of inchoated righteousnes renouation of the mind which consists in faith hope and charitie with other vertues we admit it for such righteousnesse wee grant to bee a gift yea a new creature in Christ of which we participate by faith yea faith is the first part of it seeing we can neither loue God nor conceiue true hope in Him vnlesse we first know him by faith This righteousnesse of renouation notwithstanding is not that by which we become so righteous in the sight of God as life eternall should be due vnto vs for it seeing it is imperfect and cannot satisfie the Law of God during the time of this mortall life another righteousnesse is required to wit the rightousnesse of God through which wee haue confidence in our Lord CHRIST and are established in the assurance of saluation The like resolution or state rather of this controuersie he gathers out of Chemnitius words as they are related by his aduersary Tiletan We teach not that beleeuers are iustified without righteousnesse for such iustification God himselfe hath pronounced to bee an abhomination in his sight Prou. â—â— ver 15. Isa 5. ver 23. but we thinke it necessary that in iustification righteousnesse should interceed or interpose and that not euery sort of righteousnesse but such as is sufficient in the iudgement of God such as is worthy of eternall life Now seeing that righteousnesse which consists in the internall renouation of our mindes by reason of carnall imperfection and vncleannesse adherent is not such necessary it is there should be another righteousnesse through whose interuention or intercession we are iustified in the sight of God 5. From this learned writer the Diuines of Colen and many Schoolemen acknowledged by the Romish Church for her children in other points did but a little dissent as the Iesuite grants and their words are so plaine that euery one may see might these men haue been chiefe delegates in this cause the controuersie had bin quickly ended The only difference can be picked by this curious inquisitor is but this Chemnitius and Bucer made our inherent righteousnesse as he wrongfully charges them a sin the diuines of Colen made it onely imperfect or no righteousnes without the merits of CHRIST to which it serued but as an instrument by their confession CHRIST righteousnesse was not only the efficient or meritorious cause for whose sake this righteousnesse innerent was bestowed vpon vs but the sorme which did so consummate it that is our iustification was accomplished by addition of his righteousnesse vnto ours Vnto this opinion amongst the rest euen Pighius himselfe who made so light accompt of originall sinne did subscribe not induced thereto as is pretended with the sweet discourses of his aduersaries but with the euidence of the truth they taught Indeed Pighius consequently to his error concerning the nature of originall sinne did hold our righteousnesse inherent imperfectionly for the quantity whereas Chemnitius and Bucer did hold it vnsufficient besides for the quality not that it was a sin but that it had sin so adherent as it could not make vs cleane and pure though but in imperfect measure in Gods sight We wil be content to take these Diuines mentioned with that troupe of most famous schoolemen as well antient as moderne expresly yeelded vs by Vasquez as more then fully sufficient either for worth or number to ouersway the authoritie of such later Pontificians as in the conference at Ratisbone or Auspurge or in that booke exhibited vnto Charles the fift before the Trent Councell maintained the contrarie opinion now established Vnto the Trent Councels authoritie because it hath determined for these later and obscurer against the former Schoolemen and vs we will oppose the authority of Scripture and principles of faith directly acknowledged by all but indirectly ouerthrowne by the Councels decree In examining of which it may excuse our boldnesse that so many of their writers should without censure before and some I take it sinte the promulgation of it teach the contrarie The sole formall cause of iustification is the righteousnesse of God not by which he is righteous but wherby hee makes vs righteous to wit that wherewith once endued we are renewed in the spirit of our minde and are not onely reputed iust but truely denominated iust as indeed we are by receiuing righteousnesse euery one according to that measure which the holy Spirit imparts vnto vs as he pleaseth and according to our seuerall proper dispositions or cooperations The formall cause or if that be not enough the sole formall cause of our iustification is righteousnes inherent which as the Romane Catechisme set out by the authoritie of the same Councell in plaine tearmes auoucheth must be so perfect as to leaue no staine or blot of sinne inherent in vs able to present our soules if I mistake not the meaning of it truely glorious at least splendent and beautifull in the sight of God Whatsoeuer else I haue charged their doctrine with they willingly grant to be necessarie consequences of the Councels determination and condemne vs as Heretickes for contradicting them And least we should suspect it might be a matter not altogether vnpossible for the Trent fathers to erre in that peremptory decree late Iesuties would perswade vs it were a matter altogether impossible for God almighty although he should vse his absolute power to iustifie vs by any other meanes then the Councell hath defined Some in their Chuch of no meaner note then the famous victoria and Melchior Canus with other of Aquinas followers publique professors too were not ashamed or afraid to teach that grace inherent did not make vs iust or acceptable in the sight of God by it meere entity or quallity that the value or estimate of it did depend vpon the will and pleasure of him that gaue it content to accept or pronounce vs once partakers of it as iust and holy though not such in our selues or though the inherent vertue of it as money is valuable not
but would seeke to merit their fauour by gratefull offices It was extraordinary in this woman firmly to belieue as shee told the messengers but resting so perswaded a worke of no perfection to make her peace with the Israelites â—ad shee doubted whether their title vnto the land of Canaan had been iust or suspected Gods donation of it vnto Abraham to haue been forged by his successors as Constantines is by the baser Roman cleargy shee might without any iust imputation for want of loue or other good works haue aduentured her life amongst her neighbours in defence of her country Or had she vpon the Israelites misdemeanours distrusted their successe she might at last in worldly policy haue rather hazarded their future displeasure then incurred present danger of death or torture of her Citizens for harbouring spies But whiles she firmly belieues both that the Israelites donation was from God that they would certainly preuaile against her people though her entertainment and concealement of them were acts of kindnesse prudence and humanity yet their omission had been properly not of faith because impulsiuely they were from faith nor could they haue been omitted but through vnbeliefe or distrust vnto Gods promises Worldlings would haue condemned her not for vvant of charitie but for excesse folly rather had shee not done as shee was perswaded By faith then those workes become righteous which without it had been traiterous And if we respect not the cause of our knowledge but the thing knowne faith did perfect the workes the workes only made the perfection of faith knowne to men In this sense it is most true of faith what some misapply to iustification of mens persons workes iustifie and perfect faith not in the nature of the thing but in the sight of man to whom they witnesse the liuelihood and perfection of faith noâ— as causes but effects and signes of our iustifiattion they are not onely signes but conditions concomitant or precedent In the same sense are these other words of the Apostle to be vnderstood As the body without the spirit is dead so faith vvithout vvorkes is dead also For if a humane bodie want spirit breath or motion we rightly gather it wants life yet are breath and motion rather effects then causes of life But the schoole-men dreaming the holy Ghost had been scholler to Aquinas or some chiefe masters of their profession take the sprit in this place for actus primus as the soule by which wee liue and breath and hence they conceiued that grosse error which the Romanist now makes an article of his beliefe to wit that works animate or at least casually perfect faith as the soule of man doth his bodie And wheras Caluin most acutely and orthodoxally infers that if faith without works or charity bedead it is not properly but equiuocally called faith They reply workes or charitie do not informe faith intrinsecally as the reasonable soule doth man for so it would follow that as he is not a man but a dead trunk which hath no soule so it should not bee true faith but an image or dead picture of faith which wants vvorkes or charitie How then do they perfect faith Extrinsecally as the soule doth the body or other halfe of man which remaines a true body though no true man after the soules departure For application of this distinction they adioine when Saint Iames affirmes faith to be dead without workes he tearmes it dead in such a sense as we say a body is dead by the soules absence and yet remains a true bodie Whence sayth Valentian the sectaries haue furnished vs with an argument against themselues Rather this answere is contrary to Valentians and his fellowes assertions for were his illustration true and pertinent workes or faith should constitute one grace and qualitie as the body and soule make one man which no Papist dare affirme of the habite of faith and charitie being graces in their iudgements specifically distinct And Valentian who stands most vpon the former illustration expresly denies that charity much lesse workes can be any proper forme of faith either intrinsecall as the reasonable soule is of man or extrinsecall as whitenesse is of the body Some perfection notwithstanding Charitie giues to Faith in which respect it may by analogie to true and proper formes bee metaphorically said to informe saith The perfection it giues hee so expresseth that the Latine Reader by his words cited at full in the margine for I will not trouble the text with them may plainly perceiue hee was desirous to say somewhat but he knew not what Arias Montanus who better vnderstood Saint Iames his phrase by the analogie of faith and forme of wholsome doctrine then Valentian did himselfe or this fictitious analogie betwixt Charitie naturall formes interprets the former place in part to our purpose To liue as Philosophers say is to operate and vitall operation proceedeth not from the bodie but from the spirit nor doth â—â—e Apostle say workes are the spirit of faith where he speakes only of the appellation or name of life His meaning is that faith without workes is as truely reputed dead as the body without the spirit is rightly sayd as it truely is dead But if wee will not wrest the letter against the Apostles meaning but rather gently apply his words to his intent the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies onely breath or motion enspired from the soule for workes in their nature are operations and are more fitly compared to breathings or motions then to the substantiall spirit or soule or the faculty whence these flow which last in proportion best answeres to faith Now as the readiest waie to â—et breath in one fallen in a swound or raise one vp out of a dead â—it is to reuiue the spirits by which vitall motions are inspired and managed so the onely way to bring forth liuing workes or fruites of righteousnes is to quicken or strengthen faith which liuely in it selfe and able to performe it proper acts as firmly to apprehend Gods power iustice and mercie will vndoubtedly giue life to all other powers and affections and impell them to their proper functions The Romanist as ignorant as the Iew of this righteousnesse which is by faith preposterously seekes to make vs new men in Christ not by reuiuing faith which is as the animall spirit by whose influence works become vitall but as if one from this principle in nature man is dead vvithout breath and motion should seeke to bring men out of swounds or dead fits by blowing breath into them with a quill or making them moue by deuises so he grosely mistaking that saying of S. Iames as the body without the spirit so faith without workes is dead also hence seekes to raise vp such as die in Adam after the same manner we haue seene them raised which fall downe dead in an anticke first by wagging one arme then another vntill the whole body moue The anticke
the Scribes and Pharisees yee shall in no case enter into the kingdome of heauen What righteousnesse doth he here meane Inherent questionlesse for he presseth such an vniforme obseruation of all the Commaundements as Saint Iames doth The Scribes and Pharises did as it euen seems then calumniate him as they afterwards did Saint Paul and the Pontificians do vs stil as a destroier of the Law because he reprooued their confidence in workes and sought to establish the doctrine of faith which we now reach Needfull in this respect was that eaueat Thinke not that I am come to destroy the Lawe or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfill them Whosoeuer therefore shall breake one of these least commaundements and shall teach men so he shall bee called the least in the Kingdome of Heauen but whosoeuer shall doe and teach them the same shall be called the greatest If by the kingdome of heauen he meant the kingdome of grace the argument is more strong then otherwise it would be howsoeuer strong it is and not impeached by this reply That such obseruance of the Commaundements as is here required is necessarie to sanctification or saluation not to iustification That it should be more necessary to one of these then to another implies a contradiction in the termes well expressed and equally compared as it doth vnto our Sauiours purpose to say that workes are lesse necessarie before iustification then after it A man in that he is iustified is the immediaâ—e heire of saluation at the least acquitted from the sentence of death now if we affirme such righteousnesse more necessarie after he is iustified then before we should in congruitie grant that workes win heauen and faith only deliuers from hell or granting iustification to be the passage from death to life eternall the addition of such workes subsequent as were not precedent could be auaileable onely to supererogate some excesse of glory for though wee stood still at the same point where iustification found vs wee should be infallible heires of glorie Or if faith without workes obtaine iustification hauing iustified vs shall it not much more without them lay sure hold on saluation and all the degrees of ioy that do accompanie it Suppose a man should die in the very instant wherein he is iustified none would doubt either of absolution or saluation Is he then saued with workes or without them If without them our Sauiours rule doth faile vs for this man enters into the kingdome of heauen without more strict obseruance of the Commandements then the Scribes and Pharisees vsed without any part of that righteousnesse whereof they in some measure were partakers If with them their presence is necessarie to iustification and in order of nature before it because necessary ere he can be capable of entrance into the kingdome of heauen as performance of euery condition is in nature precedent to the accomplishment of what is not promised without it Againe no man denies but faith inherent in order of nature goes defore iustification in that sence we take it yet iustifying faith necessarily includes such workes in it as Saint Iames requires at the least a preparation or immediate promptnesse of minde to do them and more then so was not in the worke of Abraham which he commends seeing Isaac vvas not actually facrificed but offered vp by faith vnfaigned to bee sacrificed and this worke or rather thus much of it did goe before iustification either as the cause doth before the effect or as the meanes before the end for as Saint Iames sayth he was iustified by it But that perhaps in his language and intent was no more then to bee declared iust So would I answere were I Aquinas his scholler and held iustification to consist in habituall righteousnesse or grace infused Thus Bellarmine very well expounds the like speech of Saint Iohn Hee that doth righteousnesse is righteous Because of his deeds or his workes No but by them he is knowne to be righteous For he is said to be righteous that doth righteousnesse as he that moues is sayd to be liuing or the tree good that beares good fruit yet is not the tree therfore good because it beares good fruit nor doth a man liue because he moues but contrariwise the one moues because he liues the other brings forth good fruite because good so in like manner he that doth righteousnesse is righteous yet not righteous because he doth righteousnes but he doth righteousnesse because he is righteous This answere shaped by him for Saint Iohn would haue better be fitted Saint Iames as the gloze which they put vpon S. Iames would not altogether so il beseeme Saint Iohn That he had meant the second iustification whereby a man receiues increase of grace and is more iust had been harder for vs to disprooue though most improbable for them to affirme But that S. Iames should meane this second iustification as the Trent Councell without any shew of probability boldly auoucheth is manifestly disprooued by his instance in Rahab for the first righteousnesse shee euer wrought was the receiuing of the messengers and sending them out another way and yet by this worke was shee iustified in that sence Saint Iames meant not in the sight of men but of God For the drift of his dispute is to shew that without workes no man can be approoued in Gods sight howsoeuer he may perswade himselfe and others Abrahams and Rahabs workes are but branches of that religion whose practices he had commended to those his disciples as pure and vndefiled before whom Man onely No before God euen the Father The religion it selfe he exemplifies by obseruance of the affirmatiue and negatiue precepts as in visiting the fatherlesse and widowes in their distresse and by keeping themselues vnspotted of the world Bellarmines instance in Abrahams workes euidently refutes their opinion that thinke workes onely declare vs iust his allegation of Rahabs kindnesse or hospitality more forcibly ouerthrowes the Trent Counsell and his owne imagination that Saint Iames should meane the second iustification whereby a man of iust becomes more iust then which nothing can be imagined more contradictory to the Apostles meaning For who can thinke he reputed them for iust whom hee called vaine men in that they had faith without workes the same faith notwithstanding seconded with workes had as our aduersaries contend made them iust not more iust then before for now they were first to become iust being before vniust and transgressors of the Lawe as the Apostle prooues in that they had respect vnto persons The iustification therefore he sought by Rahabs example to bring them vnto vvas if so vve distinguish the first iustification whereby of transgressors they were to become new men in CHRIST and inwardly righteous not in the sight of man but of God for whatsoeuer this Apostle denies of faith without workes he attributes to faith with workes Now it is graunted by
can the faith saue him The conclusion intended in both places as in that whole discourse was no more but thus No man may presume hee is already in the state of iustification or saluation vnlesse hee finde himselfe vnpartially deuoted vnto good workes of euery kinde Or albeit his faith haue once or twice shewed it selfe by his workes or readinesse to doe ods will he must not here let vp his rest or rely on what is past Abraham had obeyed Gods will once in leauing his fathers house and againe in cancelling his owne resolution for making his seruant his heire vpon Gods promise to make his seed like the starres of heauen his beliefe hereof was accounted to him for righteousnesse But did he thus iustified by faith cease to work No his faith by working became more perfect and improued his former approbation of being reputed righteous so farre as to be thenceforth called the friend of God And this was written for our instruction vt qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc that euery one which hath attained to morall hope of saluation should make his election sure by practise of such workes as perfect faith and enapt it for sure reliance on Gods promises Did Saint Paul then euer affirme that a man could be saued or iustified without such workes No he alwaies supposed them as a qualification most necessary in the party which expected finall absolution or benefit of Gods generall pardon In what sence then doth he say we are iustified by faith not by workes Not by workes ceremoniall Not by such as were the best that Abraham or Dauid euer did The forme of Salomons interrogation who can say I haue made mine heart cleane I am cleane from my sinne upposeth his father could neuer haue truely auouched thus much yea Dauid himselfe euen in his best daies and purest thoughts vnfainedly disclaimes all such purity or perfection as this briefe demaund to reserue others and the full handling of this to their proper place is for the present proofe sufficient k Who can vnderstand his faults cleanseme from my secret sinnes This assures vs there is another acception of iustification yet behind most frequent with Saint Paul to wit the actuall sentence of the iudge acquitting or absoluing or for finall absolution or actuall acquittance of the parties so qualified as Saint Iames requires And as we are not capable of Gods promises of eternall life or happinesse without workes and yet we apprehend them not by workes but by faith so this finall sentence of ioy and comfort is apprehended by faith alone although so truely apprehended it cannot be by parties destitute of workes nor doe we onely by faith alone apprehend the truth or deriue the benefit of diuine promises to our selues but by it alone though accompanied with all other sanctifying graces and attended with the whole traine of workes morall or ceremoniall we expect and pray the promises may be fulfilled not for our sakes or for any righteousnesse we haue in vs or can hope for in this life but only for the merits of CHRIST by his sole mediation and intercession 4. The seeming contradiction betweene these two great Apostles is hence easily and cleerely thus dissolued Saint Iames affirming we are iustified by workes and not by faith alone speakes of the passiue qualification in the subiect or party to be iustified or made capable of absolute approbation or finall absolution this qualification supposed Saint Paul speakes of the application of the sentence or of the ground of our plea for absolution the one by his doctrine must be conceiued and the other sought for onely by saith the immediate and onelie cause of both he still contends not to be in vs but without vs and for this reason when hee affirmes that wee are iustified by faith alone he considers not faith as it is part of our qualification inherent or the foundation of other graces but as it includes the correlatiue tearme or immediate cause of iustification wherunto it alone hath peculiar reference or continuall aspect This is that which in other tearmes some haue deliuered fides iustificat relatiue non effectiue aut formaliter faith iustifies relatiuely not formally or by way of merit or efficiency To this purpose he alleageth the Prophets testimony the iust shall liue by his faith Faith then makes him iust and iustifies him in that sence Saint Iames meant as it is operatiue but he liues by it as it vnites him to the Lord of life yea by it alone in as much as by it alone not by it and other parts of grace as ioint supporters he trusts in Gods mercies offered in CHRIST wholly relying on them not partly on them and partly on righteousnesse inherent That the Prophet in faith included this confidence and reliance vpon Gods mercies in CHRIST was a point vnto the iudicious Sasbout so cleere that if the Apostle in the first to the Romanes had otherwise taken it he knew not how they could be reconciled That so much imports in the tenth and eleuenth to the Hebrewes is euident and will so appeare from the very proposall of his speeches Cast not away therefore your confidence which hath great recompence of reward For ye haue need of patience that after ye haue done the will of God ye might receiue the promise For yet a little while and he that shall come will come and will not tarry Now the iust shall liue by faith but if any man draw backe my soule shall haue no pleasure in him But we are not of them who draw backe vnto perdition but of them that beleeue to the sauing of the soule That Paul wheresoeuer he attributes iustificaion to faith alone alwaies includes the principall obiect of true faith as the sole immediate cause whereby of men iustifiable because actually partakers of Gods graces we become actually iustified or absolued his coment vpon these words of Moses Abraham beleeued God and it was counted vnto him for righteousnesse doth put it out of controuersie Was it therefore such righteousnesse as deserued absolution or reward Rather rewarded as such by gracious acceptance as is there implied Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not to the loiterer or idle person No to him that faithfully workes as Abraham did and yet seekes saluation onely by firme beleefe in him which iustifies the vngodly his faith or rather his faith thus set vpon it proper obiects is imputed to him for righteousnesses But the Iesuite demaunds when is it thus imputed After grace infused or whiles it remaines inherent or at the first infusion only Not after grace infused by which in his diuinitie he ceaseth to be impious Was Abraham then destitute of inherent grace before he belieued the promise concerning Isaac Sosome Romanists consequently to their Churches erroneous interpretation of scripture haue auouched whom Bellarmine dares not follow
reiteration but we are not to denie that of all which is incompatible onely with some Wee are therefore to consider there is a threefold iustification one radicall or fundamentall which is the infusion of habituall grace or faith and this is neuer but one another actuall which I accompt actuall supplications made in faith for the remission of sinnes committed either before the infusion of faith or after What it is to pray in faith is partly intimated before partly in the end of this Chapter else-where more fully and purposely handled The third is iustification vertuall which consists in the performance of that and the like precepts watch and pray continually which cannot be meant of actuall prayers for hee that so praies continually shall continually vse much babling In this perpetuity of vertuall prayer consists the permanent duration of iustification which yet hath many interruptions A man may haue the habite of faith and yet not alwaies pray in faith either actually or vertually as he may be out of charity with his brother or vnlawfully deteine goods wrongfully gotten without present forfeiture of his estate in grace though to pray in faith it is impossible in the one case vntill hee be reconciled to his brother or haue freely forgiuen him in the other vntil he hath made restitution of those things his conscience condemned him for keeping The perpetuitie of this vertuall prayer or iustification therein consisting depends vpon the continuance of some former resolution or intention made in faith which is not alwaies preiudiced by minding other matters but only by doing things forbidden by the law of God or as S. Paul speakes not of Faith A man intending to go a iourney vertually continues his former intent so he keepe on his way without digression albeit he actually minde not the businesse hee goes about but entertaine such other thoughts or discourse as way or company shall affoord But if through too much minding cōpany or other matters he should chance to wander or for slow opportunities of dispatching his intended businesses his vertuall intention is interrupted and time lost must bee redeemed with double diligence So must such ruptures as actuall sinnes or omission of necessarie duties make in the perpetuity of vertuall praying or permanency of iustification thence depending be repaired with actuall praiers made in faith But here wee may descry the idle curiosity of some wits more acute then subtile at least then sound and rather apt through multiplying entities without necessity to obscure matters in themselues distinct and cleere then to cleere difficulties or obscurities For some there bee which speake of Faith and Repentance as of two spirituall habits or graces really or at least essentially distinct It is one thing indeed to rise another to walke yet both immediate and proper acts of one and the same motiue faculty so is it one thing to belieue and another to repent yet both formall acts of one and the same habite only the later includes a peculiar reference to a slip or fall whence it receiueth a distinct name from the former which specially imports a direct progresse in the way of godlinesse without interruption Better we cannot notifie the nature of true repentance then by restauration of faith to it wonted throne out of which it had for a time bin iustled by sinfull affections though not deposed from it soueraigntie as Dauid was preiudiced by his sonnes rebellion and for a time enforced to forsake the Hill of Sion though not depriued of his kingdome Euen such repentance as vsually goes before regeneration hath a correspondent faith annexed the difference betwixt them onely such as is betweene heate and calefaction which as some good Philosophers resolue vs is heate not acquired or consistent but onely in the motion or acquisition Or briefly to speake more fully Faith alwaies moues vnto repentance which generally taken may in few words not vnfitly be defined to be a sorrow for sin conceiued and moderated by faith and as the faith is such is the sorrow either meerly morall or truely spirituall 4. The summe of all we haue deliuered in these two chapters is briefly but most diuinely set downe by Saint Iohn who though hee vse not the formall tearmes of iustification yet expresseth by nature of it howsoeuer taken by words equiualent or rather more theologicall or significant as by fellowship with God the Father his Sonne CHRIST and his members and by the fruits of it fulnesse of ioy For being iustified by saith as Saint Paul sayth we haue peace with God through our Lord IESVS CHRIST and reioice in hope of his glorie This then is the message sayth Saint Iohn which we haue heard of him and declare vnto you that God is light and in him is no darknesse at all If vvee say we haue fellowship with him and walke in darknesse we lie and do not the truth But if we walke in the light as he is in the light we haue fellowship one with another This walking in the light as God is in the light is that iustification or qualification whereof S Iames speakes whereby wee become immediatly capable of Christs righteousnesse or actuall participants of his propitiation which is the sole immediate cause of our iustification taken as S. Paul doth it for remission of sins or actuall approbation with God The truth of which doctrine Saint Iohn likewise ratifies in tearmes equiualent in the words immediately following And the blood of CHRIST clenseth vs walking in the light as God is in the light from all sin not from such onely as were committed before the infusion of that grace which is the ground of our fellowship with God and amongst our selues the very lamp by whose light wee walke but from all subsequent transgressions of what kinde soeuer Now if we say that we such as S. Iohn then was regenerate and in the state of grace haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs. Euen such then as walke in the light are sinners and not iust in themselues but onely as they are besprinkled with CHRISTS righteous bloud Neuerthelesse if we confesse our sinnes faithfully he is faithfull and iust to forgiue vs our sinnes and to cleanse vs from all vnrighteousnesse not from sinnes veniall onely And is there any circumstance either in the matter or manner of his discourse which may occasion vs to suspect the same word sinne should not be of equall importance in both these places last cited and that third following These things write I vnto you that you sinne not What venially only No questionlesse he was more desirous that they should not sinne mortally nor do the authors of this distinction deny that men regenerate may sinne so grieuously as to fall both totally and finally from grace yet sayth S. Iohn If any man sin as there is no man that sinneth not both mortally and venially by our aduersaries grant vvee haue an Aduocate with the Father
should be idle but so he is not saith Bellarmine First because he alwayes ministers strength and grace by which wee doe good works Secondly hee purgeth our daily and lighter sinnes and his blood cleanseth vs from all sinnes Or if through transgression of the law we fall away from our state of righteousnes he neuer thelesse is stil the propitiation for our sins and reconciles vs not only seuen times but seueÌ„ty times seuen times to his father if conuerted by his grace we addresse our selues to serious repentance Therfore we make not CHRIST an idle mediatour in saying the Law may be fulfilled but our aduersaries truly make his benefits vneffectuall when they teach that the excellency of his obedience could not effect that the iustification which is by the Law should bee fulfilled in vs. Whatsoeuer he thought it was safest for him to professe as hee hath written because the Trent Fathers for conclusion of that session accurse all that should say their resolutions in this point did rather disparage then set foorth the excellencie of CHRISTS sacrifice or the true woorth of his merits But the more mercifull Bellarmine makes his God the readier to forgiue our frequent trespasses the greater stil is their former mockery seeing euery time they repeat that petition they implicitely yet necessarily include the appurtenances Lord make vs such as wee shall not need of thy forgiuenesse The excesse of diuine Maiesty in respect of princely dignity presupposed their mockery of God in suing for restauration of grace after relapses into mortall sinne may for the quality be resembled by imagination of some great fauourite in the Court after many bountifull rewards for little or no seruice falling to rob or steale and lastly crauing pardon in these or like tearmes I haue grieuously offended against your Crowne and dignity but by your wonted grace I beseech you bestow as good preferment on me as before I had and amends shall quickly bee made for all the wrongs I haue done vnto my fellow subiects you shall not finde matter of death in me againe so long as your bounty towards me lasts that I shall not commit some petty sinnes of wantonnesse quarrelling drinking swearing I hope your highnesse will not expect for these are not against your Law but besides it The insolency of this imagination in a malefactour could an earthly Prince knowe the heart whence it issued would make his former offence in it self and course of common iustice meritorious of death altogether vncapable of mercy otherwise easie to haue beene obtained And is it either lesse exclusiue from Gods fauour or more prouocatiue of his seuerity to beg such grace at his hands as shall wipe out all former reckonings where with he could charge vs or hauing promised sincere obedience to the Law to elude the Lawgiuer with that distinction without which Bellarmine thinkes our Writers arguments to proue the fulfilling of the Law impossible can hardly be answered They saith he which grant as Vega doth veniall sinnes to be against the Law are enforced to hold that to keepe the Law is onely possible in as much as onely the greater part of it may bee kept whence the denomination is indefinitely attributed to the whole But what can they say to that of Iames. Hee that keepeth the whole Law and offendeth in one point is guilty of all The solide answere therefore in his iudgement is that veniall sinnes without which we doe not liue are not sinnes simply but imperfectly and in a sort neither are they against the Law but besides the Law Such as first did apply this distinction to that purpose for which the moderne Romanist now misuseth it might perhaps be in part excused by the barbarousnesse of the times wherein they liued and their ignorance in Scriptures But wee haue cause to feare that Bellarmines generall skill and knowledge in them vvas punished by GOD vvith particular grosse and palpable ignorance or blindnesse rather in thinking this quiâ—ke of wit should glue together such Oracles of the Apostles as without it would mightily iarre and start asunder As that of Iames late cited He that offends in one mortally is guilty of all and this other In many things we al offend 1. venially or these two of S. Iohn He that is borne of God sinneth not If we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues So doubtlesse they do and mightily mistake both these great Apostles meaning that thinke any in this should be so righteous as not to stand in neede of Gods fauour for absolution from sins committed against his Law but of their meaning in the Chapter following 9. These discussions may informe the Reader that Bellarmines conclusion of this controuersie wherein hee may seeme vnto the vnobseruant to attribute somewhat to Gods mercies in the businesse of iustification after grace infused was but like the first inuitation of an Italian onely for fashion sake For if his authority could haue moued any of his profession after fulnesse of grace to haue tasted the louing kindnesse of the Lord he could not be ignorant that the Trent Councell had shut the doore vpon them It is the safest way saith he * to put our whole trust in Gods mercies VVhy so because there is no trust or confidence to be put in our owne good workes or fruits of grace No rather because it is more easie to grow proud of our deeds then to be assured of our sincerity in doing them But if neither safe it be to trust in them nor by his doctrine to any purpose without them to trust in Gods mercies hee hath left his Romane Catholikes in a miserable case VVhat is it then they can hope or desire Gods mercies should doe for them To remit their sinnes How By not imputing them this is all they can condemne in vs. VVhat then to set heauen open vnto them without remission of sinnes or iustification This is more then can be laid to any heritickes charge none euer liued but granted iustification to bee a necessary gate through which all that haue sinned must enter into heauen It remaines then the onely ground of all hope or trust a Romanist can haue of any good from Gods mercies must be his precedent perswasion or beliefe of absolute and perfect righteousnesse either now inhabiting his soule or hereafter to be obtayned That is hee must trust God one time or other will be so mercifull to him as he shall not stand in neede of his mercie at the houre of death 10. He that wold clearly conuince the Romish church or her childreÌ„ of a capitall crime vsually obiected by our writers shold begin w th the vertual intentioÌ„ of the priest by rigid positions of their late writers most necessarily required to the effectual working of the Sacraments for that euidently breedeth doubt whervnto if we adioyne this absolute necessity of compleat habitual grace inherent for remission of sins it openly condemnes the Trent Councell it selfe for nursing