of iustification as a little before we premonished Now concerning the imputation of Christs righteousness what do they understand by it The Councell it selfe tels vs chap 7. where speaking of the formall cause of iustification they call it the righteousnesse of God but how the righteousnesse of God imputed to vs nothing lesse but that which is infused into vs. The words of the Councell are these Vnica formalis causa puta iustificationis est iustitia Dei non qua ipse iustus est sed qua nos iustos facit qua videlicet ab eo donati renoâ—amur spiritu mentis nostrae non modo reputamur fed verè iustinominamur sumus iustitiam in nobis recipientes vnusquisque suam secundum mensuram quam Spiritus sanctus partitur singulis prout vult secundum propriam cuiusque dispositionem cooperationem Quanquam enim nemo posset esse iustus nisi cui merita passionis Domini nostri Iesu Christi communicantur id támen in hac impiâ— iustificatione fit dum eiusdem sanctissimae passionis merito per Spiritum sanctum charitas Dei diffunditur in cordibus eorum qui iustificantur atque ipsis inhaeret c. The onely formall cause to wit of iustification is the righteousnesse of God not that whereby himselfe is iust but that whereby he makes vs iust namely wherewith he hauing endowed vs wee are renewed in the spirit of our minde and are not onely reputed but nominated and are really iust receiuing righteousnesse in our selues each according to his measure which the holy Ghost diuideth to euery one euen as he will and according to euery mans disposition and cooperation For although no man can be iust but hee to whom the merits of the passion of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ are communicated yet that is wrought in this iustification of a sinner while by the merit of the same holy passion the loue of God is by the holy Ghost shed abroad in the hearts of those who are iustified and is inherent in them c. Thus a man may see by the Councels expresse words that though they name imputation which they call the communication of Christs righteousnesse as the formall cause of our iustification yet they meane nothing else but that Christ hath merited that charity should be infused into our hearts whereby we should be iustified which in summe is as much to say as Christ became a Sauiour by whose merit euery man might bee made his owne Sauiour and that by another kinde of righteousnesse than that of Christ imputed That this is the sense of the Councell witnesse her chiefe Interpreters For if they had not finely found out this witty sense of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse it is much to be feared they had Anathematized the very name of it and throwne it into the fire of their Index expurgatorius wheresoeuer they had found it But this and other cleare truths in Scripture they can so dextrously handle as they can easily euacuate them by turning them to a most sinister sense and so are the lesse affraid to name them and to seeme to auouch them Otherwise as the history of this Councell tels vâ— the very name of imputation found very harsh intertainment among the most of their Schoole-doctors and Soto himselfe confesseth Quod verbum mihi semper suspectum in suspicionem detuli coram sancta Synodo which word saith he to wit Imputation I alwaies hauing suspected brought it into suspicion before the holy Synod And a little after although he commend the Canons of Colen accounting them as the buckler and bulwarke of faith yet saith he they as happely more secure of the aduersaries than safe haue vsed that word of Imputation where they say That the chiefe head of iustification is the remission and ablution of sinnes by the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ. But yet the Councell of Trent and Church of Rome are not so barren of inuention as not to bee able easily to reconcile this Catholicke word Imputation to the Church of Rome and to make it a Roman-Catholicke For by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse they haue learned to vnderstand that Christ hath merited an infusion of grace into vs whereby we are iustified For confessing the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to be the formall cause of our iustification they would teach vs out of Philosophy that Formalis causa est res illa vel qualitas quae inest subiecto that the formall cause as Soto saith is that thing or quality which is inherent in the subiect for the forme saith he is said in relation to the matter to which it giues a being by inherency Pari ergo modo c. As therefore the aire is not luminous or lightsome formally by the light that is in the Sun but by the light it receiueth in it selfe from the Sunne Constantissimum est c. it is a most constant truth That neither are wee formally iust and accepted by the righteousnesse which is in Christ but by that which himselfe hath conueyed into vs. Wee are saith hee made iust by Christs righteousnesse as by the efficient cause but not as by the formall cause But Vega peremptorily in his 7. book and 22. chapt intituled Of the impossibility of Christs righteousnesse to be the formall cause of our iustification concludeth thus in his first argument Superâ—â—uum est ab omni philosophia alienum ad hoc ipsum ponere aliant aliquam iustitiam videlicet iustitiam imputatiuam Christi It is superfluous and abhorring from all philosophy to put any other righteousnesse for a formall cause of our righteousnesse as the imputatiue righteousnesse of Christ. Therefore according to Romane-Catholicke diuinity which is most humane philosophy the formall cause of a mans righteousnesse must be inherent in him and his owne and not the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs. But yet the same author afterwards seemeth to shake imputation by the hand and to be good friends with it where he saith Non est adeo inuisum nobis hoc vocabulum vt credam nunquam nos posse hoc in proposito benè illo vti This word Imputation is not so odious vnto vs as that I thinke wee may neuer vse it well to this purpose Verè namque sanè ac latinè possumus dicere ad satisfactionem meritum imputatam esse generi humanâ— iustitiam Christi in passione sua iugiter imputari omnibus qui iustificantur satisfaciunt pro peccatis suis vitam aeternam suis bonis operibus merentur For wee may truely and soothly and in plaine termes say that vnto satisfaction and merit the righteousnesse of Christ in his passion is imputed to mankinde and is continually imputed to all men that are iustified and doe satisfie for their sins and by their good works do merit eternall life And much more to this purpose And a little after hee saith Non transiâ— iustitia Christi realiter
ab illo in iustificatos Christs righteousnesse doth not really passe from him into those that are iustified nor by it are we formally iustified But imputation is of God which ioynes the merits of Christ vnto vs and makes them ours after a sort in as much as for his merits sake hee giueth vs righteousnesse whereby wee are righteous Cum enim per iustitiam Christi c. For seeing by the righteousnesse of Christ mankinde hath satisfied for their sinnes and by it is reconciled to God and the gates of Paradise are thereby vnlocked and all that are iustified or satisfie or merit at Gods hand seeing by his merits they are iustified and reconciled to God and satisfie for themselues and merit increase of grace and blessednesse surely it cannot be denied but that to mankinde and all so iustified Christs righteousnesse is or may be imputed to satisfaction and merit So Vega I neede passe no other censure vpon this Romane-Catholicke doctrine than that of Gregory Deo maledicunt cum se ab illo accepisse vires intelligunt sed tamen de eius muneribus propriam laudem quaerunt They blaspheme God when they acknowledge they haue receiued strength from him and yet from his gifts seeke their owne praise And St. Augustine in his Soliloquies saith sweetly Vnde gloriabitur omnis caro Nunquid de malo Haec non est gloria sed miseria sed nunquid gloriabitur de bono nunquid de alieno Tuum Domine est bonum tua est gloria Qui enim de bono tuo gloriam sibi quaerit non tibi quaerit hic fur est latro similis est diabolo qui voluit furari gloriam tuam Qui enim laudari vult de tuo dono non quaerit in illo gloriam tuam sed suam hic licet propter tuum donum laudatur ab hominibus à te tamen vituperatur quia de dono tuo non tuam sed suam gloriam quaesiuit Qui autem ab hominibus laudatur vituperante te non defendetur ab hominibus indicante te nec liberabitur condemnante te Whereof shall all flesh reioyce Of euill This is not glory but misery But shall hee glory of good What of anothers good Thine O Lord is the good thine is the glory For he who of thy good seekes glory to himselfe and not to thee hee is a theefe and a robber and like the deuill who would haue robbed thee of thy glory For he that would be praised for thy gift and doth not therein seeke thy glory but his owne this man though for thy gift hee be praised of men yet hee is dispraised of thee because of thy gift he sought not thine but his owne glory But hee that is praised of men being disallowed of thee shall not be defended of men when hee shall be iudged of thee nor absolued when condemned of thee I haue been the more copious in citing these two authors Vega and Soto because both they were grand-Sticklers in the Councell and vndertooke to write these things as Commentaries vpon this sixt Session of Iustification as we haue sufficiently noted before So that what the Councell hath couched in the Text in fewer words these haue amplified and expressed more at large to the end that no man might mistake the Councels minde and meaning no not in the middest of her mistiâ— and cloudy equiuocations Thus they haue learned to doe with imputation the very name whereof had so startled the Councell for the time as men doe with the Serpent The Serpent with her very aspect at first affrights the beholder but being taken and her teeth pulled out men are then not affraide to carry her in their bosomes So the imputation of Christs righteousnesse was at the first sight terrible to the Church of Rome assembled in the Councell of Trent no lesse than the gastly Owle was to the Pope and his Cardinalls in the Councell of Lateran which appeared to them in steede of their holy Ghost but finding meanes to take Christ the Antitype of that health-giuing brasen Serpent and to pull out his teeth to wit the truth of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse whereby sinne and death are bitten and stung to death lest it should bite and sting all their merits to death they dare now freely and familiarly carry the Serpent in the bosome of their bookes handling imputation at their pleasure without any perill at all to Papall satisfaction Bellarmine hath also learned to play with the word imputation Homo tustificatus non egit imputatione alienae iustitiae qua iniustitiâ— propria inhaerens tegatur A man iustified needeth not the imputation of anothers righteousnesse whereby his owne inherent vnrighteousnesse may be couered And in the tenth Chapter of the same booke Christus nostra iustitia non quòd iusti simus ea iustitia quae est in Christo nobis imputata Christ is our righteousnesse not that we are iust by the righteousnesse which is in Christ imputed vnto vs Sic igitur nobis imputatur iustitia eius quoad satisfactionem quam pro nobis praestitit sed non propterea nos iusti id est mundi immaculati haberi possumus si verè in nobis peccatorum maculae sordes inhaereant So therefore is Christs righteousnesse imputed to vs in regard of satisfaction which he performed for vs but for all that we cannot bee holden for iust to wit cleane and immaculate if the spots and staines of sinne be yet truely inherent in vs. So this is the generall voyce of the Councell of Trent and the Church of Rome to allow of no other imputation of Christs righteousnesse but such as by his merits wee haue aâ—â—â—usion of grace whereby we merit and satisfie God in our iustification And so they admit of no other formall cause of iustification but an inherent righteousnesse in themselues and out of Christ. Thus we haue seene what the Romane-Catholike faith is touching Iustification and the formall cause of it CHAP. V. The Catholike Faith concerning iustification and of the termâ— and forme of Iustification NOw to know the true nature of Iustification it much imports vs to consider in what sense this word Iustification is to be vsed and taken in the iustification of a sinner The Pontificians or Papists would restraine the sense of it to the etymologie of the Latine word Iustificare as much say they as Iustum facere from whence they would conclude their inherencie of selfe-iustification wherein they doe as some Lawyers that by the mistaking or misapplying of a word can ouerthrow the whole right of a mans cause Indeede St. Augustine saith Quid est aliud iustificati quam iusti facti ab illo scilicet qui iustificat impium vt ex impio fiat iustus Aut certè ita dictum est iustificabuntur ac si diceretur Iusti habebuntur iusti deputabuntur What else is it to be iustified but to be made
iust namely of him who iustifieth the vngodly that of impious he may be made righteous Or surely it is so said They shall be iustified as if it were said They shall bee accounted iust they shall be reputed iust So he Thus we see though St. Augustine following the etymologie of the word take iustificare to iustifie or make iust yet hee meaneth nothing else but the accounting or reputing iust and not the infusing of grace whereby to be made iust And Bernard also saith Adde huc vt credas quod per ipsum tibi peccata donantur Hoc est testimonium quod perhibet in corde nostro Spiritus sanctus dicens Dimissa sunt tibi peccata Sic enim arbitratur Apostolus Gratis iustificari hominem per fidem Adde to this that thou beleeue that by him thy sinnes are forgiuen thee This is the testimonie which the holy Ghost beareth in our heart saying Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee For so the Apostle concludeth That a man is iustified freely by faith But let vs heare from the holy Ghosts own mouth in the Scriptures he will leade vs into all truth To iustifie in Scripture is vsually taken in a iudiciall sense as beeing properly a iudiciall word iustification beeing opposed to condemnation The Hebrewes haue one word which signifies to iustifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and it is still applyed to such a iustification as a man stands vpon in a iudiciall tryall As Genesis 44. 16. Mah nits tadhac how shall wee iustifie our selues said Iudah to his brother Ioseph in regard of the cup found in Beniamins sacke which seemed now to be brought to aiudiciall Tryall So 2. Sam. 15. 4. Absolon wisheth hee were Iudge of the Land that hee might doe euery man iustice or iustifie him Reade also for this purpose Deut. 25. 1. Psal. 51. 4. 1 Kings 8. 32. Pro. 17. 15. Esay 5. 23. 43. 26. Matth. 12. 37. 1. Cor. 4. 4. and many other places in Scripture to this purpose doe plainely shew how this word Iustifie is properly taken namely to acquit or cleere to pronounce or declare one iust by the sentence of the Iudge This sense of iustification the Church of Rome cannot endure they smother or at least smooth it ouer by slight of hand as a matter of no moment Whereas indeede there is nothing that will more directly leade vs to the true vnderstanding of the nature of iustification than the consideration of this word taken in a iudiciall sense wherein the holy Ghost doth vse it namely to acquit and absolue a man and pronounce him iust by sentence of iudgement This sheweth that the point of iustification of a sinner is not so light a matter as Papists and profane persons would make it No it is a Case to be tried at the barre of Gods iudgement-seate in whose sight shall no man liuing bee iustified Holy Iob while hee pleaded with his opposite friends hee wanted not matter for his iustification but when once the Lord God summons â—im out of the whirle-winde before his throne and bids him girde vp his loynes like a man Iob stands not now vpon his vprightnesse but confesseth I am vile what shall I answer thee I will lay my hand vpon my mouth c. Iob 40. 4. and 42. 5. I haue heard of thee by the hearing of the eare but now mine eye seeth thee Wherefore I abhorre my selfe and repent in dust and ashes Yea hee had said before Chap. 9. 15. Whom though I were righteous yet would I not answer but I would make supplication to my Iudge for God is a righteous and seuere iudge and who may stand in his sight when he is angry when hee sits to iudge For the heauens are not cleane in his sight how much more abominable and filthie is man which drinketh iniquitie like water Iob 15. 16. If therefore our iustification be such as must proceede from Gods iudgement seate and must be sentenced by Gods owne mouth it neerely concernes euery Mothers Sonne to bee well aduised vpon what ground we stand what euidence wee can bring to cleare our selues to satisfie our vnpartiall Consciences to stop the mouth of the accusing Diuell and to abide the fierie triall of that Iudge who is euen a consuming fire and will condemne euen the least sinne to the pit of hell But that wee may not mistake the true acception of iustification we are to consider iustification in a two-fold relation or respect either as it hath relation to God or to man before whom also we are said to be iustified but in a different yea opposite respect whereof we shall haue occasion to speake hereafter Here wee speake of Iustification in the first relation Now this iustification of a sinner in the sight of God whereof wee speake proceedeth from a iudiciall tryall In this sense it is vsed by the holy Ghost Rom. 8. 33 34. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that iustifieth who is he that condemneth It is Christ that dyed yea rather that is risen againe c. This iustification the Lord Iesus doth oppose to condemnation Iohn 5. 24. where speaking of iudgement vers 22. he inferreth Verily Verily I say vnto you Hee that heareth my word and beleeueth on him that sent me hath euerlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but is passed from death vnto life And like as Iesus Christ was condemned by a iudiciall proceeding Pilate giuing sentence though according to such euidence as was most vntrue in it selfe so all those for whom Christ was thus iudicially condemned shall be iudicially iustified and acquitted But this wil appear more clearly in setting down the formall cause of our iustification To speake to the capacity of the simple By formall cause is meant that which giues a being to iustification as forma dat esse the forme of a thing giues being vnto it That therefore which makes a man perfectly iust is called the formall cause of his iustification Now the Pontificians would hence conclude That inherent qualities must be the formall cause of iustification alledging the authority of Philosophers who say That the formall cause is the thing or quality which is in the subiect as the soule of man is in the body And therefore they exclude the righteousnesse of Christ whereby he is formally iust from being the formall cause of our iustification because say they Christs righteousnesse is in himselfe not in vs. But no maruaile if these Pontificians doe wrest the Maximes of Philosophers from their natiue sense when they dare so familiarly force the Scriptures themselues The Philosophers speake of a physicall formality but the holy Scriptures speake of the iustification of a sinner in the sight of God the forme whereof is relatiue and not physically inherent in vs. But be it so that the formall cause must alwayes be in the subiect to which it giues a being the formall cause then of iustification must be inherent Wherein
must it bee inherent In vs No but in iustification which is the subiect of this inherent formall cause For if inherent grace bee the formall cause of iustification then by way of relation iustification is the subiect of inherent grace For wee speake here of the formall cause of iustification not of the formall cause of man as if hee were the subiect wherein iustification is a quality inherent But to answer their mis-applyed philosophicall diuinity The forme of a thing is not alwayes a quality inherent as in the subiect where it is but sometimes it is onely inherent and extrinsicall by way of relation As that I am the sonne of such a man the formall cause hereof is not inherent in me but it is originally and relatiuely from my father that begate mee giuing a being to my sonship respectiuely to him So a man set at liberty by the fauour and meanes of another the very forme of his freedome was the others act in freeing of him not inhering in him that is freed but rather adhering vnto him Yea the Pontificians themselues confesse and Vega for one that the formall cause of mans redemption is a thing extrinsicall to wit the oblation of Christ on the Crosse and that the free fauour of God for the merit of Christ is the formall cause of remission of sinnes If therefore the forme of our redemption and remission of sinnes is not within vs but without vs why not as well the forme of our iustification the cause whereof is Christs redemption and the effect of it remission of sinnes In a word it is not with a forme as with an accident the being of an accident is the in-being of it Not so of a forme where being or modus essendi consists not necessarily in the inhering in the subiect whose formall cause it is but it may as well be extrinsicall by conferring a vertue and power whereby the Causatum receiueth the formality of its being But to leaue Philosophy and return to Diuinity it is yet in question whether the matter of this iustification be within vs or rather without vs. The Romane-Catholicke faith teacheth that it is within vs but the Catholicke faith concludeth that the formall cause of our iustification is without vs not within vs. This is that Catholicke doctrine which the Scriptures teach when they ascribe our iustification to faith apprehending that which is without vs where by apprehending is not meant a bare vnderstanding or knowing as Soto in the name of his Romane-Catholickes would haue it but it is also a laying hold vpon and applying of the thing beleeued We haue shewed afore how the Pontificians take the word Imputation namely for a participation of Christs righteousnesse so farre forth as thereby some other righteousnesse being merited is infused into vs and inherent in vs. But the true Catholickes hold otherwise that imputation is of a thing without vs being apprehended and applied by faith So that the thing imputed is that which is by faith apprehended As it is said of Abraham that hee beleeued God and his faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse Rom. 4. 3. Now the obiect of Abrahams faith was God yea God promising in regard of which obiect Abrahams faith is imputed to him for righteousnesse Not the act of Abrahams faith being but an instrument but the obiect of it is imputed As we may say we are iustified by the act of faith relatiuely to the obiect Christ not for the act of it Abraham beleeued God and his faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse But how is this sufficient to iustifie a man to beleeue God or the promise of God that it should be said to be imputed to man for righteousnesse I answer To beleeue Gods promise is to haue an eye of faith vpon Christ who is the substance of all Gods promises and in whom all the promises of God are Yea and Amen 2. Cor. â— 20. So that God in Christ is the obiect of faith imputed to the beleeuer for righteousnesse But here an obiection crosseth my way cast in by the aduersary of the truth Vega who saith Dixi c. I said that this faith of the Mediator is that to which for the most part and chiefely the Scriptures doe attribute our iustification yet we beleeue also saith he that faith taken generally as it relieth vpon diuine truth may also iustifie a man Nor are wee in that errour wherein some are to thinke that the onely faith of iustification promised or of saluation in Christ doth iustifie vs or is imputed vnto vs for righteousnesse For saith he Noahs faith of the future deluge as Paul witnesseth was imputed to him for righteousnesse and he was appointed the heire of righteousnesse which is by faith in that he beleeued God fore-telling the floud and a hundred yeares before it came began to build the Arke for the safety of his house And to Abraham also as the history of Genesis plainely teacheth it was imputed for righteousnesse because hee beleeued that his posterity should bee multiplied as the starres of heauen So that hence hee concludes that not onely to faith in Gods promisâ—â— in Christ is righteousnesse imputed but to faith in generall beleeuing Gods truth such as is not in the compasse of Gods promises in Christ but either speculatiue precepts or morall doctrines or other Propheticall predictions or historicall relations So that by the Pontifician doctrine other faith besides that in Gods promises in Christ may be imputed to a man for righteousnesse As Noahs faith in building the Arke against the floud and Abrahams faith in beleeuing Gods promise concerning the multiplication of his seed I answer that no faith is or can bee imputed to a man for righteousnesse but that which hath respect vnto Christ and the promises of God in him But Noahs faith in preparing the Arke to saue himselfe and his family from the floud was imputed to him for righteousnesse True this confirmeth the Catholicke doctrine of the imputation of faith as it lookes vpon Christ for what was the Arke but a Sacramentall type of Christ as Augustine saith Christus figuratus est in Noe in illa Arca orbis terrarum Quare enim in Arca inclusa sunt omnia animalia nisi vt significarentur omnes gentes Christ is figured in Noe and in that Arke of the whole world for why in that Arke were included all creatures but that all Nations should be signified by them And there hee applies that promise to Abraham Gen. 22. 18. In thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed And for Abrahams faith in Gods promise what seed of Abraham was this in whom all the Nations of the earth should be blessed Was it not Christ Yes Christ so saith Augustine in the forenamed place Christus in â—a prophetia occultus erat in quo benedicuntur omnes gentes Christ saith he was hid in that prophesie in whom all the Nations are
on earth he might exalt vs thither whither else not euen Adams best obedience could euer haue brought him much lesse ours Which may answer to a question that here may be fitly moued Quest. Whether the obedience of the whole Law of God wrought by Christ for vs is auaileable as to redeeme vs from the punishment of sinne so to purchase vnto vs eternall life in heauen The reason of the question is because not the Law if it had beene for euer perfectly fulfilled by Adam had any promise of that eternall life and immediate vision in heauen but only of this life Heauen is not within the Couenant of workes Answ. True it is that the fulfilling of the Law in it selfe simply considered hath no proportion with that endlesse life aboue For the first Adam was of the earth earthly and all his happinesse promised vpon the condition of keeping the Law for ought is reuealed or can be demonstrated was terrestriall But now forasmuch as the Law is fulfilled by Christ this obedience reacheth to a higher reward because there is a higher promise made than that of the first Adam Because Christ the second Adam is the Lord from heauen the Eternal whose Kingdom is not of this world but of a better a heauenly whose house is not made with hands So that his obedience to the Law in regard of his person becomes a rich and inestimable purchase of that better Kingdome for vs. For as is the heauenly such are they that are heauenly to wit the generation of God in and by Iesus Christ 1 Cor. 15. 48. 49. 50. vide Iohn 3. 13. No man ascendeth vp to heauen but he c. Thus haue we proued out of the holy Scriptures how the formall cause of iustification or that which giues a perfect being to our iustification making vs perfectly iust in the sight of God is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs and that euen of his whole righteousnesse actiue in his life and passiue in his death And that the formall cause of our iustification is not within vs but without vs not inherent but by imputation may easily appeare from the maine difference betweene the first Couenant and the second The first Couenant was that which was made with Adam in Paradise Doe this and liue the second that made with man after his fal Beleeue and liue So the first Couenant was of workes the second of faith the first of an inherent righteousnesse of our owne the second of a righteousnesse without vs not our owne simply but by relation namely made ours to wit Christs righteousnesse who of God is made vnto vs righteousnesse called in Scriptures the righteousnesse which is of faith Not to obserue and know this difference well is the ready way to leade men into all errour of this mysterie of God The Apostle doth notably set downe this difference between the first and second Couenant as termes infinitely opposite and admitting of no reconciliation Rom. 10. 3. when hee saith that the Iewes being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and going about to establish their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the vnrighteousnesse of God For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to euery one that beleeueth For Moses describeth the righteousnesse which is of the Law that the man which doth those things shall liue by them But the righteousnesse which is of Faith is to confesse with thy mouth the Lord Iesus and to beleeue in thy heart that God raised him from the dead and thou shalt be saued Also Rom. 11. 6. If it be by grace it is no more of workes otherwise grace is no more grace but if it bee of workes then it is no more grace otherwise worke is no more worke Also Rom. 4. the Apostle setting downe this same opposition betweene the Couenant of workes and of faith saith on this wise v. 2. c. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God For what saith the Scripture Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Euen as Dauid also describeth the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne What clearer Testimonies Yea this did God himselfe teach vs not obscurely by his own act Gen. 3. For when Adam had forfeited the first Couenant which was of workes made with him in Paradise before his fall and after his fall had made with him another Couenant to wit of faith in Christ the promised seede of the woman What doth God thereupon Hee shuts man out of Paradise and from the Tree of life lest putting forth his hand hee should take of it and liue for euer What is meant hereby Paradise was not only the place but also did signifie the happy condition of Adams blessednesse which he was to enioy in his innocencie the Tree of life was a sacrament and symbol of life appointed as a speciall meanes to preserue man from dying or decaying in his naturall strength so long as he continued in his obedience But by disobedience hee forfeited the Couenant brake the condition lost his former happinesse and was depriued of the meanes of that life wherein hee should haue liued for euer vpon earth Now God shutting him out from the earthly Paradise the place of earthly blisse and from the Tree of life the sacrament and symbol of immortalitie and hauing shewed vnto him another Tree of life in the middest of the Paradise of God to wit Iesus Christ who is very God and eternall life which whosoeuer by reaching out the hand of Faith eateth of shall liue for euer God I say doth hereby plainely teach vs that in attaining to the heauenly Paradise by the Tree of life Iesus Christ wee must not haue any more to doe with the things pertaining to the first Couenant now altogether forfeited and from which Adam and his posteritie is for euer banished neuer to returne or intermeddle there any more Gen. 3 22. 23. 24. Therefore to teach and beleeue the doctrine of an inherent righteousnesse whereby to attaine eternall life is euen as it were in despite of God and of his holy Angels the Cherubims keeping the way of the Tree of life to reuiue the old Couenant of workes againe and with the hand of the body to wit good workes reach out to take of the tree of life This is a Babylonish confounding of the two Couenants which stand vpon such irreconcileable termes of difference Is there no more difference betweene Do this and liue and Beleeue and liue betweene mans owne righteousnesse and Gods righteousnesse the establishing of the one being the abolishing
erant ad vtendum venerati sunt ad colendum They are become inexcusable who of Gods gifts haue made Gods to themselues and those things which were created to bee vsed they adore them as an Idoll Onely Christ is that sacred and mysticall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that fish in whom is found our tribute-money to satisfie the Maiesty of God This money must bee stamped no where but in Gods owne Mint as the pure siluer Oare of it is no where found but in Gods owne Mynes the holy Scriptures no other Image or Superscription must be vpon it but that of Iesus Christ and none may tender or offer it vp to God but onely Christ. 1. Tim. 2. 6. There is one God and one Mediator betweene God and man the man Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe a ransome for all This pure ransome more pure more precious than gold will endure no mixture no allay of any other mettals much lesse of any drosse But inherent righteousnesse in vs though dipped in Christs bloud as hauing receiued a tincture from it as they say if wee offer it to God for currant payment hee will easily perceiue it counterfeit coine of our owne mynting of our owne inuenting no better than Alcumy little siluer but much drosse in it euen the drosse of humane inuention and corruption which if it bee brought to Gods touch turnes colour if put in the Skale of the Sanctuary is found too light if cast into the Test of Gods fiery iustice it is blown all away in smoke As Esay saith Thy siluer is become drosse thy wine mixt with water And as Ieremy saith Reprobate siluer shall men call them because the Lord hath reiected them Our inherent righteousnesse call it Christs merits or what you will is at the best but as Piscis in arido The fish while it is in the sea liueth moueth is full of strength and agility but vpon the dry land it straight loseth all his vigour motion and life it selfe and quickly putrefieth euen so the merits and righteousnesse of Christ being in him as in their proper element are most liuely and vigorous strong and auaileable to satisfie Gods iustice and to plunge all our sinnes into the deepe bottome of the bottomlesse deepe of his mercies by that sweete smelling sacrifice of himselfe once offered but take any part of these merits of Christ out of him and put them into our dry and parched sandy soules and they become of no life of no validity to make the least satisfaction for the least sinnes yea in this respect they stinke in the nostrils of God Our soules are but broken Cisternes to contain this pure water of life God could neuer yet finde any thing in vs in vs I say but onely faith whereby to iustifie vs and this faith not as a worke of ours iustifying vs but as an instrument applying Christ by whom in whom and for whom wee are iustified If God iustifie vs for righteousnesse inherent or dwelling in vs then God should bee said to iustifie the godly but the Scripture saith otherwise That God iustifieth the vngodly Rom. 4. 5. Now to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse where faith being opposed to working cannot be said to iustifie as it is a work A notable testimony to proue that our iustification is not from within vs but from without vs not in vs but on vs not of him that worketh but of him that beleeueth in him that iustifieth Whom the godly Nay but the vngodly As Augustine saith Tu Domine benedicis iustum sed eum prius iustificas impium Thou Lord doest blesse the iust but first he being vngodly thou iustifiest him As if hee had said Being first vngodly thou diddest iustifie him and then being iust thou Lord doest blesse him How then comes this forraine righteousnesse vpon an vngodly man The Apostle sheweth His faith is counted for righteousnesse How His faith layes hold on Christ who is the Lord our righteousnesse being made vnto vs of God wisedome and righteousnesse and sanctification and redemption that according as it is written He that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. But will the Pontifician say Doe you call the graces of Christ in vs counterfeit coyne drosse reprobate siluer c. Yes if ye reckon it for pay to satisfie Gods iustice withall in this sense in vs it is meere counterfeit drosse reprobate siluer coyned in the Mint of Satans forgeries It is but as the Sunne-beame vpon a dung-hill raysing vp a stinking vapour in stead of a sweete odour in Gods nostrils But the graces of God in vs flowing from our head Christ Iesus in whom wee are first iustified by faith are the matter of our sanctification and the consequent fruits and effects of our iustification Thus they are a Well of liuing waters springing vp in vs vnto eternall life Thus they are a garden of spices yea of costly Spicknard yeelding a fragrant smell while the Sunne of righteousnesse shines vpon them Thus are they more pure and precious than gold yea than much fine gold Thus are they so many precious stones to paue our way that leades to the Kingdome of Heauen Yea thus so many peerelesse Pearles which adorne our Crowne of grace here and shall much more gloriously imbellish and beautifie our Crowne of glory hereafter Thus all our good works and words and thoughts are precious euen in Gods sight through Christ. They will stand before his mercy seate but they dare not stand before the Tribunall of his strict and seuere iustice They dare come before God as a proofe of our faith and obedience but not as a price of our sinne and disobedience And at the best cause we haue to pray Gods mercy for them but in no case to pay his iustice with them Now there be many reasons why inherent righteousnesse is no formall cause of our iustification in the sight of God First because it is a meere humane inuention It hath no warrant in Gods Word and consequently no warrant at all Will the Pontificians herein as they are willing in other things stand to the iudgement of their father Aristotle Hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are better determined according to the Law than according to mans will for it is no sure rule Tertullian said of an errour of Hermogenes about the creation of the world of a pre-existent matter Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Si non est scriptum timeat Let the shop of Hermogenes shew this to be written If it be not written let him feare Now iustification is a fundamentall doctrine that cannot stand but vpon the Scriptures Iustification is by faith and faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God The word is neare thee euen in thy mouth and in thy heart that is the word of faith which we preach for with the heart man beleeueth to
blessed But the Apostle or rather the holy Ghost by the Apostle is the best interpreter of that prophecie Gal. 3. 16. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made Hee saith not and to seeds as of many but as of one And to thy seed which is Christ. And this was that promise of God which Abraham beleeuing his faith was counted to him for righteousnesse as it is there in the sixt verse euen as Abraham beleeued God and it was accounted to him for righteousnesse Therefore Vega's diuinitie hath very much failed him in propounding these two examples of Noah and Abraham to proue the iustification of his generall Faith whereas we plainely see both these Patriarches faith had speciall and principall reference and respect to Christ Iesus And therefore their faith was reckoned to them for righteousnesse For the other examples which Vega there addeth in generall out of the eleuenth to the Hebrewes they are all of the same nature and all confirme this infallible and vndeniable truth That the promises of God in Christ and Christ alone with all his righteousnesse is the obiect of that Faith which is reckoned to Abraham to Noah and to euery beleeuer for righteousnesse Here then comes in the true formall cause of our iustification namely Christ himselfe with all his righteousnesse which being apprehended by faith it is imputed vnto vs for righteousnesse This is it that giues a true being to iustification Iustification therefore consists in the imputation of Christ and his righteousnesse comprehending also all the promises of God in him apprehended by faith Now concerning this Catholicke doctrine of imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith the Scriptures are very pregnant in the proofe of it This Gospell hath testimonie before the Law in the Law and in the Prophets and is confirmed by Christ and his Apostles Before the Law to omit other examples wee haue two famous ones that of Noah and Abraham of whom wee spake euen now who are layd downe for exemplary patterns yea and liuely types to all beleeuers Noah before the floud and Abraham after the floud and before the Law which St. Paul doth especially note to put a difference betweene faith and the workes of the Law in the point of iustification In the Law also we haue two principall types liuely shadowing this doctrine of imputation The first we finde in Leuiticus 1. 4. And hee shall put his hand vpon the head of his burnt-offering and it shall bee accepted for him to make attonement for him The burnt offering waâ— a figure of Christ sacrificed for vs vpon the crosse the man that brings this burnt-offering is a type of euery true beleeuer and the hand which hee putteth on the head of the sacrifice is faith laying hold on Christ and as it were owning him for our proper sacrifice which God accepteth to bee an attonement for vs a sacrifice of a sweet sauour vnto the Lord. The Apostle applies this sacrifice with the fruits of it to Christ Rom. 5. 11. Wee reioycein God through our Lord Iesus Christ by whom we haue receiued the attonement Also Ephes. 5. 2. Walke in loue as Christ also hath loued vs and giuen himselfe for vs an offering and a sacrifice to God of a sweete smelling sauour Christ is then this burnt-offering our attonement with God and an offering of a sweete sauour vnto the Lord. Now the instrument or hand whereby Christ is apprehended and applyed to euery true Beleeuer is Faith It was the hand of Faith which the diseased woman in the Gospell touched Christ her Sauour with and fetched vertue out of him To whom the Lord said Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole goe in peace This the Apostle doth also liuely setout Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to wit Iesus Christ to be apropitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousnesse for the Remission of sinnes that are past through the forbearance of God to declare at this time his righteousnesse that hee might be iust and a iustifier of him that beleeueth in Iesus How fully doth the Apostle parallel and compare this truth with that type A second type of our righteousnesse or iustification by imputation of Christ vnto the beleeuer in the time of the Law is set downe Num. 21. 8. 9. The Lord said vnto Moses make thee a fiery serpent and set it vpon a pole and it shall come to passe that euery one that is bitten when he looketh vpon it shall liue and Moses did so and the serpent-bitten-man looked and liued The brazen Serpent was a type of Christ the serpent-bitten-man is euery sinner whom that old serpent hath already stung with sinne as he did our first Parents The looking on the brazen serpent so lifted vp vpon a pole is the faith of the beleeuer beholding Christ lifted vp vpon his Crosse. This Christ Iesus himselfe applyeth Ioh. 3. 14. 15. As Moses lifted vp the Serpent in the wildernesse euen so must the sonne of man be lifted vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish but haue eternall life A most sweet collation of the truth with the type shewing that as faith is the hand of the soule laying hold vpon the bloudy sacrifice of Christ for our atonement with God so faith is also the eye of the soule so to looke vpon Christ crucified as to bee thereby cured of all the deadly wounds of sin and so to liue eternally The Prophets also are full of testimonies to confirme this doctrine of iustification by imputation Esa. 53. 4. Surely hee hath borne our grieses and carried our sorrowes yet we did esteeme him stricken smitten of God and afflicted as if hee had beene a malefactor But hee was wounded for our transgressions hee was bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are wee healed All wee like sheepe haue gone astray we haue turned euery one to his owne way and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of vs all And vers 8. he was cut off out of the land of the liuing for the transgression of my people was he stricken Though he had done no violence neither was any deceipt in his mouth yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him he hath put him to griefe when thou shalt make his soule an offering for sinnes he shall see his seede c. Here wee see most liuely set downe a mutuall imputation of our iniquities vnto Christ and of his merits vnto vs. And then the Prophet vers 11. sheweth by what meane or instrument this righteousnesse of Christs obedience is imputed to vs By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie many for hee shall beare their iniquities By his knowledge or by the knowledge of himselfe that is by faith in him knowing and acknowledging seeing and beholding him with the eye of faith to bee that Lambe of God before the shearer taking away our sinnes for hee
Apostle elegantly saith were while in the state of sinne free from righteousnesse Christ therfore was so made sinne for vs as that he was reputed yea and iudged as a sinner as Esay saith He was numbred with the transgressours and hee bare the sinne of many Now that Christ is said to bee made sin in the abstract and we to be made righteousnesse in the abstract not righteous in the concrete as Logicians speake Lyra saith Ideo in abstracto dicitur iustitia Dei vt efficeremur perfecte iusti We are said to be made the righteousnesse of God in the abstract that is perfectly iust And that is wee are made iust but relatiuely in respect to Christ as he was made sinne but relatiuely in respect of vs we are made the righteousnesse of God in him as hee was made sinne for vs and in vs to wit in our person as wee haue said so he is called The Lord our righteousnesse Yet true it is that Christ might be said to be made sinne to wit the sacrifice for sinne though not so properly in this place But if Papists will wrangle and wring out this sense from this place because the Glosse saith so let them remember that as Lyra's Glosse saith As we are made perfectly iust by Christ so was he made a perfect sacrifice for vs to free vs both à culpa poena from the fault and the penaltie and not a lame sacrifice or imperfect to free vs onely à culpae but not à poena as Papists say reseruing the punishment for their purgatorie But of this hereafter Howsoeuer if they will needes take sinne there for the sacrifice for sinne yet Christ was so the sacrifice for sinne as must necessarily imply the imputation of our sinnes vpon his person But enough of this place which one place is enough to proue the formall cause of our iustification to be the righteousnesse of Christimputed vnto vs. It followeth therefore that the formall cause of our iustification that which makes vs truely iust in the sight of God yea before Gods iudgement seate is the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs and that no otherwise than our sinnes were imputed to him whereby hee was made a malefactor not by hauing our sinnes in him but vpon him He bore our sinnes vpon him saith Peter So Esay Hee bare the sinnes of many and was numbred with the transgressors Hee is the truth of the type of those two goates Leuit. 16. the one slaine the other let goe figuring the humanity the slaine Goate and the diuinity of Christ the scape Goate or the slaine Goate the death of Christ and the scape Goate his resurrection For he dyed for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification which his rising againe from the dead is liuely shadowed in the scape Goat on which Aaron put both his hands confessed ouer him all the iniquities of the children of Israel putting them vpon the head of the Goate sending him away by the hand of a fit man into the wildernesse where those sinnes should neuer be seene more vers 21. Hee was that Ioshua the high Priest our Iesus or Iehoshua and high Priest who offering himselfe vpon the Crosse was clothed in filthy garments euen with the menstruous cloth of our sinnes imputed vnto him or imposed vpon him As Chrysostome applies that place to Christ that we might be clad in the glorious robes of his righteousnesse put vpon vs As the ordinary Glosse vpon this place saith excellently Iesus est indutus sordidis vestibus quiae qui peccatum non fecit pro nobis peccatum factus est Sed haec sordida vestis est ei ablata cum nostra deleuit peccata vt quia ille sordidis indutus est vestibus nos resurgentes in eo semper candida habeamus vestimenta Iesus hath filthie rayment put vpon him because he that did no sinne was made sinne for vs. But this filthy rayment was taken from him when he had cancelled our sinnes that because he was attired in filthy rayment we rising againe in him may alwayes haue white garments vpon vs. That we as Iacob being cladde in the sweete smelling robes of our elder brother Christ might bee accounted as a field which the Lord hath blessed and so receiue the blessing of the birth-right in our elder brothers name As the type is very pregnant to this purpose whereupon Ambrose saith thus Iacob primogeniturae benedictionem obtinuit veste fratris maioris natu indutus â—ic vestis Christi optimum odorem spirat c. Iacob clothed in the garment of his elder brother obtained the blessing of the birth-right so the garment of Christ doth yeeld a fragrant smell c. And againe Quod Isaac odorem vestium â—lfecit fortasse illud est quia non operibus iustificamur sed fide quoniam carnalis infirmit as operibus impedimento est sed fidei clarit aâ— factorum obumbrat errorem quae meretur venianâ— delâ—ctorum That Isaac smelled the odour of the garments haply it is to signifie that we are not iustified by workes but by faith because carnall infirmity is an impediment to workes but the glory of faith doth shadow the errour of our workes and procureth pardon of our sinnes The conuert Prodigall had the fatte Calfe slaine for him and the best robe put vpon him Euery sinner is this Prodigall yea that beleeuing repenting theefe hanging vpon the Crosse as Saint Augustine compares them together Iesus Christ is the fatte Calfe killed for vs his righteousnesse is that best robe put vpon vs. So St. Augustine applyeth it Proferat hic pater stolam illam primam induat filium immortalitate quem secum videt in cruce pendentem mactet vitulum saginatum hominem illum susceptum etiam pro latronibus crucifixum Let the father bring forth that best robe let him clothe his sonne with immortality whom he seeth crucified with Christ let him kill the fatte Calfe that man taken and crucified euen for theeues And the ordinary Glosse saith Adduâ—ite vitulam id est pradicate Christum mortem eius insinuate Bring forthe the fat Calfe that is preach Christ and put men in minde of his death Nor is that an obscure type of Christ clothing vs with his righteousnesse which wee finde Gen. 3. 21. where the Lord God doth make coates of akinnes and therewith clotheth the man and the woman No doubt of skinnes of beasts sacrificed types of Christ. The Scripture it selfe leades vs to this construction so often mentioning the putting on of Christ as Gal. 3. 26. 27. Being by faith in Iesus Christ made the children of God and such saith the Apostle haue put on Christ. Now what is it to put on Christ but to make him wholly ours As the king of Babel is said to put on Egypt as a garment in token that it was become wholly his Ier. 43. 12. Christ standing before Pilate to be iudged as he
Spirit of zeale and piety vpon all the Ministers of thy Word and Sacraments especially vpon the reuerend Arch-Bishops Bishops that standing in the place of Pillars in thy Temple of the salt of the earth of the light of the world they may strongly support thy true Religion season and lighten those places which are dark and vnsauory and all for want of faithfull Ministers thus shall they highly magnifie their office and discharge their stewardship by prouiding and sending painfull labourers into euery corner of thy field Inspire and inflame them Lord with that zeale of thine own wherewith thou didst purge thy Temple from profane merchandize that so they may with the whip-cords of sound Doctrine and wholesome Discipline chase out of thy Church all Herefie and Idolatry Why should the world O Lord complaine and cry Where is the spirit of those aâ—cient Bishops and Martyrs and 〈…〉 Champions of thy truth as of Cranmer â—â—â—mer Hooper Bucer Peter Martyr Iewel and other faithfull witnesses whose eyther bloud hath beene the seed or preaching and writing the watering of this thy noble Vineyard O keepe farre from vs the spirit of cowardise and lukewarmnesse of ambition and loue of the world lest these infeebling and infatuating our soules wee should proue a generation of peruerse and foolish children pulling downe what our religious fore-fathers with such care and paines mature iudgement and sound knowledge in the truth haue built Stirre vp O Lord the noble hearts of the two honourable Chancellors of our Vniuersities that with the ayde of soueraigne authority they may zealously set themselues to preserue those Fountaines and Nurceries from the mudde of Heresie and the bitter root of Impiety Infuse the spirit of courage zeale vprightnesse and hatred of couetousnesse in aboundance vpon all the reuerend Iudges and Iustices of the Land that they may duely execute the Lawes by freeing the poor innocent from the potent oppressor by cutting downe sinne and cutting off the traiterous ring-leaders to Idolatry Thus thy Church being purged Iustice executed Religion maintained sinne reformed our Couenant with thee renewed our vowes of better obedience and thankfulnesse performed and we through thy merits reconciled to thy Father of mercies thou the great Captaine and Lord of Hosts mayst againe take thy peoples part turne the edge of thy Sword against thine enemies and fill our mouthes with a new song of praise thankâ—giuing to thee which sittest vpon the Throne with the Father and the Holy Ghost God blessed for euer Amen The Preface to the Reader CHristian Reader loe here the two great mysteries laid open the one of Godlinesse the summe where of is Christ beleeued on in the World the other of Iniquity the head whereof is Antichrist beleeued on of the World Two Mysteries incompatible as light and darknesse They are the two bounders disterminating Ierusalem from Babylon This Mysterie of iniquity I meane the Romish doctrine of Iustification is the head-doctrine or source whence all their meritorious satisfactions doe flow And Bellarmine with other Pontificians confesseth Iustification to bee the maine Cardo or hinge whereon hangeth the whole body of controuersies betweene them and the Pretestants Nor was it for nothing that the Councell of Trent so improued all their skill and strength to oppose and oppresse the true Catholicke doctrine of Iustification as whereby the Papall magnificence and the gaine of the Romish Craftsmen for their Diana was endangered So that this their Abortiue was a hatching for seuen moneths so long was this Babylonish Raâ—â—â—â— wherewith they would force heauen gates a hammering in the Trent-forge so as the History noteth that the most expert in the Church affirmed That if all the 〈…〉 assembled from the Apostles times to that were summed vp together they could not make vp so many Articles as the Trent-Fathers had amassed together in this one sixt Session of that Synod the best part whereof also they were beholden to Aristotle for And no maruaile they were so puzzled for they were to encounter sundry difficulties as first the euidence of Scriptures secondly the concent of ancient Fathers thirdly the powerfull preaching and writings of Luther fourthly the dissent of their Schoolemen and fiftly the diuision of the Councell it selfe some being Thomists some Scotists some Dominicans some Franciscans To satisfie and reconcile all which was more than an Herculean labour But what could be difficult to the Papall Omnipotencie who could send his holy Ghost post from Rome to Trent in a Cloake-bagge which loosed all knots and decided all doubts Nor had the Pope wanting in that Councell the most pregnant wits in the Pontifician world beâ—â—aes a numerous multitude of new titular Bishops as titular for learning as liuing to lay on load of down right voyces to conclude and ratifie whatsoeuer the Pope with his Cardinals in their Conclaue at Rome and his dextrous instruments in the Councell had with no lesse sweat than artifice contriued For the first maine obstacle the euidence of Scripture they are faine to collegue and speake it faire and borrow from it certaine broad Phylacteries wouen with Scripture phrases wherewith the Babylonish where partly decks her shamelesse forehead and partly adornes the cobwebbe Robe of her counterfeit selfe-Iustification as Coelestis Pater Iesus Christ the Sun of righteousnesse the author and finisher of our faith The Father of mercies and God of all consolation sent his sonne to redeeme Iewes and Gentiles and that all might receiue adoption of sonnes Him hath God sent forth to be apropitiation for our sinnes in his bloud for this Redemption we ought to giue thanks And ch 7. The Meâ—itorious cause of our Iustification is our Lord Iesus Christ c. O holy Councell Will any suspect the Serpent to lurke vnder such flowers of Paradise Or that they goe about to betray Christ with Hâ—yle Master But in this their profound hypocrisie lyeth the whole Mysterie of Iniquity Sitamen hypocrisis dici debet quae iam latere prae abundantia non valet prae impudentiâ non quaerit as Bernard saith of Romes Clergy in his time If that may be called hypocrisie which neither for the abundancy of it can nor for the impudencie of it cares to conceale it selfe Thus by egregious hypocrisie Arrius deluded the Councell of Nice confessing Christ to be God of God yet denyed his consubstâ—ntiality with the Father Thus the second Councell of Nice summoned to decree the erection and veneration of Images makes a goodly Preface giuing thankes to God that they were deliuered from Idols Thus Augustine confesseth how he was seduced by the Manichaean hypocrisie Thus dealeth the Trent Councell And besides her hypocrisie her impudencie displayes it selfe while in this Councell Rome alters the Rule of Faith addes her Traditions Decretals and Canons as a party and equall rule with Scripture guelds the Scriptures of their masâ—uline authoritie and genuine sense closing vp all in the Cabinet of the Popes breast where
in mouing the vnderstanding and the will to â—mbrace Christ is no weake and common worke but a worke of power in loosing the workes of the Diuell that strong man Fourthly because mans will doth not cooperate with Gods grace as a co-agent and fellow-worker in the first act of mans conuersion but Gods grace is the Agent and mans will is the Patient that effectually calleth and wee effectuously come that strongly drawes vs and we by the vertue thereof sweetly not compulsarily freely not frowardly and not now passiuely but actiuely do runne after Christ as St. Augustine saith The will to beleeue God worketh in man and in all his mercie preuenteth vs. And againe If we be drawn to Christ then we beleeue vnwillingly But none can beleeue vnlesse he be willing for he is drawne to Christ to whom it is giuen to beleeue in Christ. He is the mightie Agent in conuerting vs and wee thereby become meeke Patients in being conuerted Turne thou me saith chastised Ephraim and I shall bee turned Thou art the Lord my God Surely after that I was turned I repented and after that I was instructed I smote vpon my thigh c. And it is a thing not vnworthy the obseruation that euen in their vulgar Latine Translation which they preferre before all others yea before the originals themselues wheresoeuer any is exhorted to conuersion to God the Verbe is alwaies put in the passiue signification as Conuertere or Conuertimini Be thou Conuerted or be ye Conuerted and neuer in the actiue Conuerte te or Conuertite vos Conuert thou or Conuert you your selues which might sufficiently conuince all Pontificians that the worke of our conuersion is not a matter of cooperation shared betweene mans will and Gods grace but passiue in vs and actiue in God Hee conuerteth by his grace and wee are thereby willingly conuerted Contrary to the Trent Doctrine saying That a man is disposed by grace to conuert himselfe Fiftly because the whole glorie of our conuersion to Christ is to bee ascribed to Gods grace alone not as the Trent Fathers professe in a few Hypocriticall words while they deny it in the maine dint of their doctrine but in sinceritie and truth without equiuocation of any merit of congruitie in vs preparing and disposing vs to be capable of iustification Finally because they ranke faith among those other workes of preparation as if it had no other hand in the worke of iustification but onely as a disposing cause So as a man may haue faith before he come to be iustified yea and such a faith also as a man may haue it and yet neuer attaine to iustification Contrary to St. Augustine Iustificatio ex fide incipit Iustification beginnes at faith as hereafter more fully For these causes the Catholicke faith abhorreth the Romane-Catholicke-doctrine touching their preparation to iustification But say some who may claime kindred either with Pelagians or Pontificians although the merit of congruitie bee not admitted as an inducement to iustification yet there are some workes required of vs as matter of preparation to faith in Christ which though it bee not meritorious yet it is acceptable to God For example Repentance is a worke necessarily proceeding and so preparing a man to faith in Christ which Repentance being in vs before faith in Christ it is notwithstanding acceptable to God Indeede I deny not but the Pontifician forge can affoord vs such scoria enough But what Repentance is this A true Repentance say they It had neede if it bee acceptable to God Wherein consists it It is say they a sorrow for sinne past and a purpose of amendment for the time to come But is this sufficient to true Repentance Yes say they Ahab and the Nineuites repented and was not their Repentance true sith God accepted it and thereupon reuoked or at least reiourned the sentence denounced Indeede Ahabs Repentance was a true hypocriticall Repentance so the Nineuites Repentance was a true carnall Repentance as the faith of diuels is said to be a true faith which the Pontificians challenge for their onely true faith Is this true faith therefore acceptable to God But was the Repentance of Ahab and of the Nineuites acceptable to God because God for the present forbore to punish them It followes not because God forbare them that therefore their Repentance was acceptable to him For how can the action bee acceptable when the person is not But their persons were not acceptable to God For Ahab was a damned Idolater and a most wretched wicked person who had sold himselfe to the diuell and the Nineuites were heathenish infidels out of Christ. But till wee be in Christ our persons are not accepted of God for in him only God is well pleased And before faith in Christ wee are not in Christ therefore before faith in Christ no action of ours is acceptable to God yea no way acceptable not onely as these would haue it not acceptable to saluation as such obiecters themselues confesse but not acceptable towards it as these affirm For while we are out of Christ all our actions are abominable before God much lesse acceptable to him And so much the more abominable they bee and so much the lesse acceptable by how much the more wee esteeme them acceptable or endeauour to please God by them As God himselfe saith Matth. 3. 17. This is my beloued Sonne in whom I am well pleased With whom is God well pleased in his Beloued The Apostle applyeth it Ephes. 1. 6 To the praise of the glorie of his grace wherein hee hath made vs accepted in the Beloued Therefore no acceptation with God but of those that are actually in the Beloued to wit in his sonne Iesus Christ. Nor doe wee feare Trents Canon here thundring out her Anathema to any that shall say that all workes done before grace are sinnes or that the more a man endeauoureth to please God before faith in Christ the more deepely he endangereth himselfe to Gods high displeasure for we affirme this again and againe That all workes done before faith in Christ the more wee thinke therein to please God the more damnable they be because herein we set vp an Idoll of our handy-work in stead of Christ whereby to please God Much lesse as some haue dared to vent that before sauing faith in Christ there may be and afore begun in a mans heart by the meanes of preparatory graces as repentance and the like the worke of sanctification of regeneration of cleansing of the heart c. Than which doctrine what can bee more derogatory to Christ And what more contrary to the Scriptures which say If any man be in Christ he is a new creature therefore out of Christ no new creature no not inchoatiue in the least degree For if regeneration or sanctification or newnesse of life or cleansing of the heart may be begun without Christ what hinders that it may not bee also perfected without Christ Nay
they rancke among their preparatory workes for that is their fides informis their faith without charity as yet vnformed as they say sauing that herein he forgets himselfe for the Apostle speakes of iustitification by faith not of faith disposing or preparing a man to iustification But of this more hereafter In the third place saith he the name of iustification is further vsed to signifie the absoluing of a guiltie person in iudgement and pronouncing of him to bee quit For which he alleageth Prou. 17. 15. and Deut. 25 1. But this saith he is not much different from the first acception of the word but rather altogether of neere affinity to it Yet this third signification saith Soto is no where in Paul nor in the Scripture where any mention is made of our iustification by Christ. See this crafty shuffler how hee can packe this close to the first kinde of acception of this word iustification as if it were all one with it or neere a-kinne vnto it and yet he can say of this last that it is not to be found in Paul although he could finde the first to be in Paul at least in his owne strained sense But is not the word Iustifie as it is taken in the last sense to wit to absolue or acquit as it were in iudgement vsed by Paul yea and that also where mention is made of our iustification by Christ What meaneth then that which the Apostle saith Rom. 8. 33. 34. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect It is God that iustifieth who is he that condemneth It is Christ that dyed or rather that is risen againe who is euen at the right hand of God who also maketh intercession for vs. Note the Apostle vseth here the termes of a iudiciall triall Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect who shall accuse them who shall bring in euidence against them It is God that iustifieth And if God the Iudge do iustifie who shall condemne Yea but how shall God iustifie a sinner It is Christ that dyed He dyed for our sinnes Rom. 4. 25. or rather which is risen againe And He rose againe for our iustification Rom. 4. 25. c. So you see here is iustifying taken for absoluing in iudgement and it is in Paul and that where mention is made of our iustification by Christ. Therefore Soto bewrayes eyther grosse ignorance in denying or egregious malice in dissembling such a cleare truth And no maruell if he cannot or will not finde iustification vsed for absolution iudiciall in Paul or in the Scripture where mention is made of our iustification by Christ. For indeed iustification in this sense is the condemnation and confusion of Popish iustification as we shall see in the due place Vega also another Champion in this Councell he speakes the same language of Babylon and saith there is a twofold iustification as Doctors meaning the Schoole-men say The first and second The first iustification when a man of vniust is made iust The second when of iust a man becomes more iust The first he defineth thus The first iustification is a certaine supernaturall change whereby a man of vniust is made iust The second thus It is a supernaturall change whereby a man of iust is made more iust And these also are either actiue or passiue actiue in regard of God working this iustification first and second in vs and passiue in regard of man himselfe who is changed from bad to good and from good to better But for the actiue iustification as it is wrought by God and so proues derogatory from mans excellency Vega sleights it as rather obscuring than clearing his definitions But as for the third kinde of iustification which is iudiciall to be pronounced and accounted iust before the Tribunall seate of iustice Vega gìues it no better entertainment than his brother Soto saying That the Doctors intermit and let passe this kinde of iustification as impertinent to the purpose And so it is indeede very impertinent to their Pontifician purpose and very incommodious as the wicked complaine that the righteous man is not for their profit sith contrary to their waies Wisd. 2. 12. But for other distinctions of iustification Vega is very liberall in summing them vp together as Iustitia Christiana Mosaica politica oeconomica legalis moralis particularis actualis habitualiâ— acquisita insusa inhaerens imputata externa interna fidei operum practica theologica pharisaica sincera philosophica supernaturalis and so in infinitum But enough of such blundring distinctions So then the iustification of the Church of Rome is properly to make one iust that was vniust and to make one of iust more iust Yet here it will be worth our noting to obserue the legierdemaine of the Councell of Trent and the Pontificians in their distinction of first and second righteousnesse or iustification For the Scriptures speaking of a twofold iustification one by faith another by workes vpon which ground the ancient Fathers also do distinguish a two-fold righteousnesse one in the sight of God the other in the sight of men the Pontificians also that they may seeme to speake the same language they haue their distinction too of a first and second righteousnesse yet so as destroying the nature of the first iustification by faith whereby we stand iust in Gods sight they so qualifie the matter as either they make nothing at all of their first righteousnesse or they doe altogether confound it with their second righteousnesse inherent and so by their distinguishing they make iustification and sanctification all â—he But the learned Cardinall Contarenus writing a little before the Councell of Trent and was afterwards one of the Councell in his tract of iustification speaking of these two iustifications saith That by the one to wit the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith we are iustified before God by the other which is inherent we are iustified before men But Babylon confounds all together iustification and sanctification In the next place let vs consider how they vnderstand this making iust This iustification saith the Councell consists partly of remission of sinnes partly of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and partly of sanctification and renouation of the inner man and so of inherent righteousnesse Now here lies the knot of the mysterie to be resolued first it were well if the Church of Rome did meane truely and sincerely in naming remission of sins and imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the point of iustification Secondly if at the best they did vnderstand them aright yet to ioyne vnto them inherent righteousnesse of our owne will be found no iust dealing But to allow of no iustification at all saue that which is inherent in vs bewrayes deepe deceit and double hypocrisie in once naming remission of sins and the imputation of Christs righteousnesse which they vtterly shut out from hauing any society with inherent righteousnesse in the worke
haue done by the word Communication whom Vega hath quoted to shew how thereby the righteousnesse of Christ is made wholly ours his sufferings our sufferings as if we our selues had suffered But yet let vs see a little further into the language of the Fathers concerning this point Onely by the way seeing Vega cannot finde the word Imputation once mentioned among the ancient Fathers let him looke but St. Augustines Epist. 106. to Bonifacius or as some copies haue it to Paulinus and there hee shall finde these words Cur meritis praeueniri gratia perhibetur quae gratia non esset si secundum meritum imputaretur Why is grace said to be preuented by merits which should not be grace if it were imputed according to merit Yea how often doth Augustine mention the Apostles words where he saith Fides imputaretur ad iustitiam Faith is imputed vnto righteousnesse But let vs contend not so much for the word as for the thing it selfe which wee shall finde the Fathers to abound in St. Ambrose writing vpon the 39 Psalme saith Totus ex persona Christi iste Psalmus est Iustitiam meam dicit licet non arroganter homo dicere possit Iustitiam suam qui Deo credit fidem suam sibi reputari ad iustitiam confitetur This whole Psalme is of the person of Christ therefore hee saith My righteousnesse though also a man that beleeues in God and confesseth that his faith is reputed to him for righteousnesse may without arrogancy say his righteousnesse Now although Ambrose say speaking of Christ Iustitiam meam in stead of Iustitiam tuam as it is in the originall and also in the vulgar Latine he following some other copy yet hereby wee may see his vnderstanding in the mysterie of Christ namely how Christs righteousnesse comes to bee our righteousnesse our faith being imputed to vs for righteousnesse as the Scripture saith Sauing that Ambrose vseth the word Reputing for Imputing differing very little in the sound but nothing at all in the sense The same Ambrose writing vpon the Epistle to the Galatians where hee opposeth the righteousnesse of the Law and that of Christ one against the other vpon these words for if there had beene a Law giuen which could haue giuen life verily righteousnesse had beene by the Law saith Iustitiam hauâ— dicit quae apud Deum imputatur iustitia id est fidei quia lex habuit iustitiam sed ad praesens quia non iustificaret apud Deum remittere enim peccata non potuit vt de peccatoribus faceret iustos he saith that righteousnesse which of God is imputed to wit the righteousnesse of faith sith the Law also had a kinde of righteousnesse but temporary that could not iustifie with God for it could not forgiue sinnes and so of sinners make men to bee iust So that here is another ancient Father vsing the very word Imputation And a little after vpon these words As many as haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ haue put on Christ saith Hoc dicit quia credentes dum immutantur Christum induunt quando hoc appellantur quod credunt This he saith because beleeuers while they are changed doe put on Christ when they are called that which they beleeue So that by St. Ambrose his doctrine our iustification is by imputation of grace by faith in the putting on of Christ. And St. Austine besides the former alledged place where he defineth iustification to be a making of one iust by accounting him so or by deputing reckoning him iust saith in Psa. 32. Nolâ— vos interrogare de iustitia vestra â—ortassis autem nemo vestrum audeat mihi respondere iustus sum sed interrogo vos de fide vestra Sicut nemo vestrum audet dicere Iustus sum sic nemo non audet dicere Fidelissum Nondum quaero quid viuas sed quaero quid credas responsurus es credere te in Christum Non audisti Apostolum Iustus exfide viuit fides tua iustitia tua I will not aske you of your righteousnesse for haply none of you dare answer me I am righteous but I aske you of your faith As none of you dare say I am iust so you dare not but say I am a beleeuer I demand not yet how thou liuest but how thou beleeuest thou wilt answer me thou beleeuest in Christ. Hast thou not heard the Apostle The iust shall liue by faith Thy saith is thy righteousnesse And vpon the 30. Psalme the same Father doth further cleare his minde touching imputatiue righteousnesse vpon these words of the Psalme Rid mee and deliuer mee in thy righteousnesse Nam si attendas ad iustitiam meam damnas me In tua iustitia erue me est enim iustitia Dei quae nostra fit cum donatur nobis Ideo autem Dei iustitia dicitur ne homo se putet à seipso habere iustitiam For if thou lookest vpon my righteousnesse thou condemnest mee In thy righteousnesse deliuer me for it is the righteousnesse of God which is made also oure when it is giuen vnto vs. And therefore is it called Gods righteousnesse lest man should thinke that he hath righteousnesse of himselfe Now what righteousnesse doth this holy man meane here The righteousnesse of God made ours by infusion of grace into vs So I know the Pontificians would be ready to interpret this place But let St. Augustine be his owne interpreter who addeth in the very next words Sic enim dicit Apostolus Paulus Credenti in eum qui iustificat impium So saith the Apostle Paul To him that beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly Quid est Qui iustificat impium Qui ex impio facit iustum deputatur fides eius ad iustitiam What is that Which iustifieth the vngodly Who of vngodly and wicked makes iust his faith is deputed for righteousnesse Yea this holy man is so farre from ascribing the least part of iustification to any inherent righteousnesse in vs as that he excludes euen faith it selfe as it is a worke from being any meritorious cause of our iustification For elsewhere speaking of Gods election and vocation of grace and not of workes alledging the examples of Iacob and Esau the one loued the other hated euen in the wombe before either of them had done good or euill c. that the election of God might stand not of workes c. Si autem verum est quod non ex operibus inde hoc probat quia de nondum natis nondumque aliquid operatis dictum est vnde nec ex fide quae in nondum natis similiter nondum erat And if it be true that it is not of works and from thence he proues it because it was said of them before they were borne and before they had done any thing whereupon neither was it in respect of faith which likewise as a worke was not as yet in them being yet vnborne And againe Iustificati gratis
of Esay cals his new Couenant or Testament and doth anathematize and curse to the pit of hell all those that haue or shall place our iustification in the onely imputation of Christs righteousnesse or in the remission of sinnes without our inherent righteousnesse as appeareth in the former Chapter What needes more testimony in such a cloud of witnesses Among all which not a word of any inherent righteousnesse not a word of infusion of grace not a word of hope and charity ioyned with faith as equally concurring much lesse precurring and out-stripping faith in the worke of iustification not a word of imputation so to bee vnderstood as if Christ did therefore merit that we might haue grace inherent or of our owne whereby to bee iustified in Gods sight Although true it is that the same ancient Fathers doe often call our inherent righteousnesse which is our sanctification by the name of iustification but they neuer say that hereby we are iustified in the sight of God In a word the consideration of the true difference betweene the first couenant and the second doth easily conclude the truth of this doctrine The first couenant made with Adam in Paradise was the couenant of workes Doe this and liue but the second couenant opposite to that is of grace Beleeue and liue as the Apostle doth notably oppose faith against workes in our iustification Therefore vnlesse wee would bring man againe into the estate of Adam in his earthly Paradise before his fall and so shut out Christ the second Adam to pleade iustification by workes is a monstrous dreame Therefore it was not for nothing that our first Parents were banished out of that earthly Paradise typically to teach them that now they had no more to do with that first condition of their creation the happinesse whereof depended vpon the couenant of workes but now they must seek a new Paradise that is a heauenly and that by a new and liuing way to wit by faith in Christ which is that couenant of grace opposite to the couenant of workes So opposite that as the Apostle saith If it be of grace then it is no more of workes otherwise grace is no more grace But if it bee of workes then is it no more grace otherwise worke is no more worke Rom. 11. 6. CHAP. VI. Of the instrumentall cause of iustification and first of the Romane Catholicke doctrine herein THE Councell of Trent puts no other instrumentall cause of iustification but the Sacrament of Baptisme which saith she is the instrument of faith without which faith no man could euer obtaine iustification Where notwithstanding shee would seeme not altogether to exclude faith as a party-instrument But because Baptisme is so vnderstood as an instrumentall cause as will require rather a particular discourse by it selfe wee will shew here what allowance they giue to faith in iustification That which the Pontificians ascribe to faith in the worke of iustification is either that it is a worke of grace preparing and disposing a man to receiue the grace of iustification as being the beginning of other graces and going before iustification as appeareth out of the Treâ—â— Councell Ses. 6. cap. 8. or else that it is a grace concurring with other graces infused and inherent as hope and charity and such like by which ioyntly a man comes to be iustified otherwise they allow faith no hand at all in iustification As may appeare in the Councell of Trent the sixth Session the ninth and eleuenth Canons Si quis dixerit sola fide impium iustificari c. If any man shall say that a sinner is iustified by faith alone c. And if any man shall say that men are iustified either by the onely imputation of Christs righteousnesse or by the onely remission of sinnes excluding grace and charity which is shed abroad in their hearts by the holy Ghost and is inherent in them or also that the grace whereby we are iustified is onely the fauour of God let him bee Anathema or accursed Whereupon Vega in his glosse vpon this place sets this downe for his prime conclusion Certissima fide est tenendum fidem solam absque operibus alijs neque satis esse ad iustificationem acquirendam neque ad tenendam acquisitam Wee are to hold by a most certaine beliefe that faith alone without other workes is neither sufficient to procure iustification nor being procured to preserue it And what those other workes bee hee telleth vs to wit first Baptisme secondly the Eucharist or the Masse thirdly Penance fourthly Confession and Absolution fiftly the keeping of the Commandements c. And againe Multipliciter posse hominem iustificari prima quidem ac communior magisque protrita via est per poenitentiam secunda dilectio Dei super omnia c. Wee say that a man may be iustified many waies The first and more common beaten way is by penance the second by the loue of God aboue all the third by martyrdome the fourth by prayer no doubt so many Pater-nosters and Aue-maries vpon beades and obseruing Cannonicall houres the fift by the Sacraments of the Church and especially by Baptisme Penance and the Eucharist Penance you must note is in great request in the worke of iustification being here againe repeated and rancked in the middest betweene Baptisme and the Eucharist because in Penance there is not onely Confession to know what is in the conscience but satisfaction to tell what is in a mans purse if hee will deale by commutation And in the last place Probabilis est etiam sexta vt videtur via nempe per fidem It seemeth also probable that there is a sixt way namely by Faith But this way of faith comes lag in the reare and it is but probable neyther nay it doth but seeme probable The other wayes therefore are their common high-wayes of iustification this of Faith is onely a way of sufferance and that in some case of Necessitie yet with speciall restriction too as iustifying a man onely from originall sinne as Vega there addeth Videtur enim probabile c. For it seemeth probable that if a man be infected only with originall sinne and so soone as he should come to the vse of reason hauing heard the preaching of faith and seene miracles to confirme it should be willing to receiue it for the sauing of his soule by this onely that he giues credit vnto it hee should be iustified and haue his originall sinne pardoned But here mee thinkes Vega forgets himselfe in two things first that he puts faith in the last place which elsewhere he puts in the first Secondly that he attributes that to faith to wit the taking away of original sinne which eyther was taken away before in the baptized or if the party were not yet baptized Faith is not sufficient to iustifie him from originall sinne without Baptisme eyther infacto or in voto in deed or in desire Yea in the
conclusion he saith peremptorily Non fides sed poenitentiâ— primas partes tenet in reconciliatione peccatoris Not faith but penance hath the chiefe place in the reconciliation of a sinner For saith hee Penance is the immediate cause or immediate disposition and as it seemeth sufficient with Gods grace to our iustification yea it perfecteth and consummateth our iustification But Faith is not such a neer disposition to iustification and it remaineth in sinners and our iustification is but as it were initiated by it It is euident therefore that the most potent cause of our iustification is penance and therefore that we are iustified it is to be imputed to it and not to faith So he Nay such is the Pontifician hatred against Faith that Vega Trents Interpreter denyes euen Faith that is formed by grace and charity as they say to bee sufficient to iustification As he saith Quamuis eo ipso quod aliquis per fidem iustificetur fiat fides illius formata tamen non sequitur quod per eam vt formatam acquiratur iustitia Et ideo neque debent loca quae â—ribuunt iustitiam fidei restringi ad fidem formatam Although a mans iustification by Faith implyeth that his Faith is formed to wit a true Faith yet it followeth not that by it as it is formed righteousnesse is obtained And therefore neyther those places which attribute righteousnesse to Faith ought to bee restrained to true Faith or Faith that is formed Such a hard conceit haue the Pontificians of Faith formed or vnformed But now forasmuch as the Scriptures doe euery where ascribe so much to faith in the point of iustification how doe they answer the Scriptures in this point Surely Vega according to his rare dexteritie vndertakes that taske too c produceth fiue reasons why the Apostle hath done most prudently oftner to attribute iustification to faith than to any other vertue The first is Because faith is the foundation and fountaine the prime cause and roote of our saluation which saith he St. Augustine hath shewed in his Booke of the Predestination of Saints alledging Cornelius for an example whose Prayer and Ames-deeds were done in faith that by them saith Vega he might be brought to the Faith of Christ. Now note here I pray you a notable tricke of legier-demain in this Tridentine Champion who was of one spirit with that Councell For doth he giue these titles to faith calling it with the Councell the fountaine and foundation the roote and originall of our saluation for any good will hee beares faith or that herein he preferres it before other graces Nothing lesse For a little before hee had giuen faith such a blow and that with Aristotles philosophicall fist as that hee hath made this very foundation to stagger againe Plus enim quam omniâ— c. For saith he this is of more weight than all that are brought for the commendation of faith towards God that we are more straitly vnited to him by our louing of him and by sorrow for offending of him and a purpose to our vtmost endeauour to please him for the time to come then we are vnited by faith Which being the formost in our iustification it comes hindmost and furthest off from perfection according to that axiome in Philosophy Priora generatione posteriora perfectione The first in generation the last in perfection But passe wee to his second reason which is much like the former Because saith he all our workes which concurre to iustification haue their meritorious force from faith and faith from none else besides Thirdly Therefore is our saluation fitly attributed to faith because there is no stronger cause to moue a sinner to those things which on his part are requisite to his iustification Fourthly It was conuenient that the Apostles in their Epistles and Sermons should commonly impute and attribute our iustification vnto faith Indeede Vega's copie hath sanctification haply mis-printed sauing that they confound iustification and sanctification together But why so commonly impute iustification to Faith namely because forsooth the Apostles had to doe with sundry sects and therefore were so to attemper their exhortations as to draw them from their sect to the Christian Faith Nor is it lawfull saith Vega hence to inferre that there are no other things better than those which are more often commended So by this reason we are to vnderstand that the doctrine of iustification by Faith so often commended and preached by the Apostles in their Epistles was not therefore so much and so often pressed and preached as if it were the best doctrine but that other doctrines according to Vega's estimate might be better but as if the Apostles only temporized with those times and persons with whom they had to doe As if it appertained not to all Abrahams seede by promise to whose Faith righteousnesse was imputed nor was it written saith the Apostle for him onely that it was imputed to him but for vs also to whom it shall be imputed if we beleeue on him that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead Therefore it is by Faith that it might bee by grace to the end the promise might bee sure to all the seede both Iewes and Gentiles which walke in the steps of that Faith of our Father Abraham O Vega be not so impiously iniurious yea sacrilegious to rob vs of the inheritance of our Faith vnder a colour as if iustification by Faith had beene a temporary purchase and merchandize for those Apostolicall times and as if now the intaile were quite cut off from Abrahams race Or if yee Pontificians will bee such malignant enemies to iustifying Faith whereby Abraham and all his seede are and shall bee iustified to the worlds end then confesse your selues to bee quite cut off from being Abrahams seede His fift reason why iustification is most commonly ascribed to faith is because Faith is that only disposition to which among all our workes it might principally bee attributed without perill of our pride and the iniurie and derogation of Gods grace For seeing faith is the gift of God and a kinde of testimony of Gods grace towards vs in as much as it is attributed to our faith it is attributed to the grace and mercy of God and not to our strength that no flesh shall glory in his presence But why then Vega do you teach the doctrine of iustification another way and the onely way to puffe men vp with pride and so to empty them of all grace As Bernard saith Non est quo gratia intret vbi iam meritum occupauit Grace findes no way to enter where merit hath already taken vp the roome And againe Deest gratiae quicquid meritis deputas That is detracted from grace whatsoeuer is imputed to merits Dost thou commend the admirable wisedome of God in teaching man to ascribe the iustification of Faith to the mercy and glory of God and yet dost thou adde iustification of
thine owne workes to robbe God of his glorie and thy selfe of all grace puffing vp thy selfe with pride in steade thereof But leaue we these puddles of errour and come we to the Chryst all fountaines of Christs truth CHAP. VII The Catholike Faith of the Doctrine of Faith as the sole immediate Instrument to apprehend and apply the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs to our Iustification as beeing the effectuall meane of our vnion with him HAuing seene what credit Faith carryeth among the Pontificians in the work of Iustification which at the best is allowed no more but eyther to dispose and make a man the more apt that also with the helpe of other disposing graces to receiue Iustification which notwithstanding for all his Faith he may faile and come short of or else to come in for a share but must be content with the least share or none at all among other graces as Charity Penance Martyrdome and such like all which take place of Faith in Iustification Let vs now come to take an estimate of Faith according to the standard of Catholike Doctrine weighing it in the most vnpartiall ballance of the Sanctuary Nor doe we purpose in this place to speake particularly and punctually of the propertie and kinde of Faith whereby a man is said to be iustified as referring that to the more proper place but wee will content our selues so to speake of faith here in generall as the only immediate instrumentall cause in vs whereby we come to bee made righteous in the sight of God For as our Iustification is by the Imputation of Christ and his righteousnesse vnto vs so the only instrumentall meane comming betweene to apply and effectually to worke this imputation of Christ to vs is the act of beleeuing which is the property of Faith As Augustine saith Fidelis est à fide fides à credendo A beleeuer hath his name of Faith and Faith of beleeuing As the Apostle saith With the heart man beleeueth to righteousnesse Faith is the hand of the soule which applyes the sacrifice of Christ for sinne It is the hand that puts on the Robe of the righteousnesse of Christ our elder brother vpon vs by the sweete smell whereof God being well pleased bestoweth the blessing of heauen and earth vpon vs of grace and glorie and all Yea faith hath another singular propertie that it is as it were the ligament or sinew which fasteneth and vniteth euery faithfull member to the head Christ Iesus from the influence of whose fulnesse we receiue and grace for grace And the Councell of Trent seemeth to professe as much though with limitation and restriction to her owne reserued sense saying Nam sides nisi ad eam spes accedat charitas neque vnit perfectè cum Christo neque corporis eius viuum membrum efficit For Faith say they vnlesse hope and charitie bee added vnto it doth neither perfectly vnite with Christ nor make a liuing member of his body The Councell neede not here equiuocate for the matter as if she did admit of our spirituall vnion with Christ by Faith indeed but such a Faith as hath hope and charitie ioyned with it whereas in truth her meaning is that not Faith so much as Hope and Charitie doe vnite vs to Christ sith Hope and Charitie make the vnion perfect which faith doth not Yea Charity and Penance as her intimous Vega saith doe more closely vnite vs to Christ than Faith doth But we shall discusse and discouer this mysterie more cleerely when we come to speak of the kinde of Faith required in Iustification In the mean time suffice it vs that we haue the Councels confession That Faith at least with the helpe of Hope and Charitie doth vnite vs to Christ. And though Vega preferre Charitie and Penance before Faith in this worke of vniting with Christ yet thereby hee doth not altogether exclude Faith Faith therefore according to the Pontificians confession hath at least a share though the least according to their allowance in working our vnion with Christ. But the Catholicke beliefe ascribeth this worke of vnion with Christ primarily yea and solely to Faith namely as the immediate and onely instrument of Gods spirit in vs. Now our iustification by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse stands in our vnion with Christ. This is confessed of all That whatsoeuer we receiue from Christ it is by vertue of our mysticall vnion with him And faith it is that worketh this vnion not Faith as Pontificians teach before it bee formed by Charity To which Faith only Vega ascribeth a certaine vnion with Christ Comparamus enim nobis Spiritum sanctum iustitiam facimusque vt Christus inhabitet in nobis per Fidem informem aut saltem per fidem vt prius est natura quà m formetur For saith he wee get vnto our selues the holy Ghost and righteousnesse and doe cause Christ to dwell in vs by Faith vnformed or at least by Faith as it is by nature before it bee formed So that by this doctrine a dead Faith or that which differeth not from the Faith of Diuels doth cause our vnion with Christ or Christ to dwell in vs. But let vs see how Vega cleereth this doctrine from this imputation A little after in his second question of faith and workes taking vpon him as he is very venterous to answer an argument brought to proue that Paul excludes no beleeuer from saluation where he saith The righteousnesse of God by the Faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all that beleeue To this place saith Vega many commonly say that Paul said not Vnto all and vpon all that beleeue him but in him which is onely proper to those that haue charitie and by loue tend vnto him Aliud enim inquiunt est credere Deo quod est ei fidem adhibere aliud credere Deum quod est credere Deum esse aliud credere in Deum quod est credendo amare credendo diligere credendo in eum ire eius membris incorporari For it is one thing say they to beleeue God that is to giue credit vnto him another thing to beleeue God that is to beleeue that God is and another to beleeue in God that is by beleeuing to loue him by beleeuing to affect him by beleeuing to goe into him and to bee incorporate into his members They are the words of St. Augustine vsed by him very frequently throughout his workes and by name in his nine and twentieth Tract vpon Iohn which Vega quoteth Well how doth Vega auoyde this Argument concerning Faith in Christ bringing saluation vpon all that beleeue Nihil valet hoc refugium commune Non enim habetur grace â—i neque in eum sed absolute dicitur In omnes super omnes qui credunt This common refuge saith hee is nothing worth For it is said absolutely Vnto all and vpon all that beleeue the Greeke hath not him or in him Note
he is both from the first originall of it so abstruse as also by reason of the continual contentions on both sides so inuolued and intricate that to cleare the truth we can scarce finde where to beginne And herein he saith perhaps too true But the Pontificians treading this endlesse maze may thank their owne Shoolemen who first drew this Labyrinth filling it full with the many meanders of their manifold distinctions whereby they haue so intoxicated euen their strongest brains with often turnings as it is no maruaile if subtile Soto himselfe and others of his society doe so much busie themselues in vaine to finde the right doore of faith as the blinde Sodomites were puzled in seeking the doore of the righteous Lot which they could not finde out So that for a man to go about to tread this Pontifician Maze may seeme an endlesse labour But if wee repaire to the Councell of Trent therein wee shall finde the whole spawne of the errours of faith compact in one lumpe together The Councell of Trent or the Church of Rome which you will acknowledgeth and admitteth only one kinde of faith namely an Historicall faith which say they is common to all men good and bad yea common to the very Diuels themselues The summe whereof is set down in the fifteenth Chapter of the sixt Session and in the twenty eight Canon Their words are these Aduerâ—us etiam hominum quorundam callidaingenia qui per dulces sermones benedictiones seducunt corda innocentium asserendum est non modè infidelitate per quam ipsa fides amittitur sed etiam quocunque alio mortali peccato quamuis non amittatur fides acceptam iustificationis gratiam amitti diuinae legis doctrinam defendendo quae à regno Dei non solum infideles excludit sed fideles quoque fornicarios adulteros molles masculorum concubitores fures auaros ebriosos maledicos rapaces caeterosque omnes qui laetalia committunt peccata à quibus cum diuinae gratiae adiumento abstinere possunt pro quibus à Christi gratia separantur That is Also against the cunning wits of certaine men which by sweet words and benedictions seduce the hearts of the innocent wee are to affirme that not onely by infidelity whereby euen faith it selfe is lost but also by any mortall sinne whatsoeuer although faith bee not lost yet the grace of iustification being receiued is lost maintaining the doctrine of Gods law which excludeth from the Kingdome of God not onely vnbeleeuers but also beleeuing or faithfull fornicators adulterers effeminate abusers of themselues with mankinde theeues couetous drunkards raylers extortioners and all other that commit deadly sinnes from which they might haue abstained by the helpe of Gods grace and for which they are separated from the grace of Christ. In which words we may obserue two remarkeable things concerning the Popish faith first that it hath no coherence with the grace of iustification seeing as they teach the grace of iustification may be lost and yet faith remaine stil in a man the second is that this faith of theirs is coÌ„mon to whoor-mongers to adulterers and all kind of lewd persons whom they cal beleeuing or faithfull though shut out from the kingdom of God To this they adde also the twenty eight Canon Si quis dixerit amissa perpeccatum gratia simul fidem semper amitti aut fidem quae remanet non esse veram fidem licet non sit viua aut eum qui fidem sine charitate habet non esse Christianum anathema sit If any man shall say that grace being lost by sinne faith together with it is alwaies lost or that which remaineth is not true faith though not a liuing faith or that he who hath faith without charitie is not a Christian let him be accursed So that according to Romes doctrine a man may haue faith and want grace and a dead faith with them is a true faith and faith without charity may serue to make a Christian. According to which doctrine the Diuell should haue a true faith and consequently not to bee denyed to bee a Christian Euen as the Turkes call their circumcised Mussel-men that is true Beleeuers such true Beleeuers may the Pontificians be allowed to be Vega giues the reason of this Quod sancta Synodus fidem peccatorum fidem veram appellauit c. That the holy Synod of Trent called the faith of sinners true faith surely she did it being compelled of you O ye Lutherans being desirous by a fit terme to make plaine to all men the Catholicke doctrine of the identity of faith vnformed and formed And lest any hereby should bee deceiued therefore shee hath put this qualification licet non sit viâ—a although it be not a liuing faith And yet the same Vega saith there Quod si Lutherus c. If Luther had only said that which he writ in his Commentary vpon the Galathians Si vera fides est c. If faith be true and if a man be truly a Sonne charitie shall not be wanting we had neuer opposed him Yea Vega but take Luthers meaning withall That wheresoeuer true faith is there is charity and then you will retract your words and hold on your opposition not against Luther but against the truth Soto also puts the matter out of doubt saying That fides mortua propriè est fides the dead faith is the proper faith And chapt 8. ibid. That this faith doth not only fictè fainedly or falsly as Lutherans say saith hee sed propriè legitimè verè but properly legitimately and truly make a man a Christian and the member of Christ according to the Text. But thus we come to discouer the Councels reasons why she cals a dead faith a true faith as also her meaning where she saith That the instrumental cause of iustification is the sacrament of Baptisme which is the sacrament of faith sine qua without which faith no man euer came to be iustified This might giue some colour to iustification by faith sauing that they say They may haue faith without iustification And againe in the same Chapter whereas they equiuocate egregiously saying That faith vnlesse hope and loue be added to it doth not perfectly vnite vs vnto Christ alledging that of Iames Faith without workes is dead and fruitlesse and that of Paul That in Christ Iesus neyther circumcision auaileth any thing nor vncircumcision but faith which worketh by loue yet they meane no other faith but that which is by nature voyde of loue and hope seeing it can subsist without them And so consequently the faith that they hold and maintaine is no liuing but a dead faith which may bee in the damned yea which is in the very Diuels And for the further opening and confirming of the Councels minde â—â—â—his maine point let vs heare further what her two Champions and Expositors Vega and Soto in their learned Commentaries vpon this Session
thousand such like being all but vntempered mortar to build their Castle of Vncertainty in the Ayre The conscience in this case being like the vncleane spirit in the Gospell which seeking rest and finding none in the wauering Vncertainty of Pontifician faith taketh vnto himselfe seuen other spirits worse than himselfe and so the conscience becomes more vncleane more vnsettled than it was before Now in the further laying open of this mysterie of Vncertainty if wee should follow the infinite perplexities and windings which we find in their most authenticke Commentaries vpon this point we should tread an endlesse Maze as tracing them in their vncertainties Vega writes a large Commentary vpon the forecited ninth Chapter of this Councell of Trent And Soto spends foure large Chapters vpon it No maruaile to see men wander wide in a wildernesse of vncertainty But wee will deale with them as the Prophet saith concerning the wilde Asse A wilde Asse vsed to the wildernesse that snuffeth vp the winde at her pleasure in her occasion who can turne her away All they that seeke her will not weary themselues in her moneth they shall finde her So these Pontificians wandring in the wilde disconsolate desert of doubtfulnesse and distrust snuffing vp the winde of vaine opinions at their pleasure cannot bee auerted from their aberrations and for a man to pursue them by the foote were to weary himselfe hee shall easily finde them out in their moneth when and where they disburthen themselues of the fruit they trauailed withall We will therefore onely touch those weighty reasons which they bring for the establishing of their vncertainty Soto hath reserued and marshalled this point of Vncertainty together with the arguments of it in the latter end of his third and last booke de natura gratia as being his Romane Triarij to helpe at a dead lift And indeede the maine doctrine of iustification hath such an inseparable relation to this point of Certainty as this being denied and remoued the whole doctrine of Faith falleth to ground And therefore comming to this point we may well apply the Prouerbe Ad Triarios iam res redijt The matter comes now to be tryed by the Triarij in whom resided the maine shocke dint and vpshot of the battaile As Soto saith Sentio ego pro mea exiguitate ingenij c. I am of opinion according to the slendernesse of my capacity that if there were no other argument that wee are not iustified by faith alone than that hence it would follow that a man is certaine he is in the state of grace wee should for this onely cause deny iustification by sole faith such is the euidence saith he that faith makes no man certaine of his saluation Et tamen aduersarij c. And yet the aduersaries saith hee by their peruerse argumentation doe euen hence especially reason and conclude that we are iustified by faith alone because otherwise no man were sure of his iustification for such a strong euidence do they take it that euery one ought to be certaine of his saluation Thus Soto And on the other side Luther saith Etiamsi nihil praeterea peccatum fuisset in doctrina Pontificia c. Although there had beene no other fault in the Pontifician doctrine than that they taught that we ought to stagger and wauer mis-deeming and doubting of the remission of sinnes of grace and our saluation yet we had iust cause to separate our selues from that Infidell and mis-beleeuing Church So he The case therefore standing thus betweene Certainty and Vncertainty in the matter of saluation that thereupon depends the winning and losing of the field it concernes both sides to bee no lesse sollicitous of the well managing of their forces if not much more than the ancient Romanes and their opposite enemies the Albanians when both sides resolued and concluded to pawne their perpetuall liberty and state to each other vpon the successe of one conflict betweene three twin-brethren called Horatij on the one side and other three twin-brethren called Curatij on the other First therefore let vs take a view of the state and strength of the Pontifician party To omit their many distributions of certitude as eyther in regard of the obiect or of the subiect or some diuine some morall c. wherein both Soto and Vega doe infinitely confound themselues take wee notice first in generall what kinde of certitude they admit and allow of and what they reiect and disallow The certitudes or certainties which they allow of are these First a certitude of Catholicke Faith to wit a generall Faith concerning the truth of all things reuealed in the Word of God c. which certitude they call a firme and certaine assent though obscure to the generall truth of Gods Word And this they call the certitude in regard of the obiect the assent whereof cannot be deceiued So that they confesse a certaine generall certainty And this is suitable and proportionable to that kinde of Faith which they hold namely a generall Faith So that their generall certainty stands vpon very good reason for how can their certainty be any other but generall when their faith is no other but generall for as he said As the man is so is his strength So as the faith is such is the strength of it Certitude therefore being the property of faith as wee shall shew hereafter then faith being generall the certitude thereof can be no other than generall Secondly they doe also seeme to admit of a certaine particular certainty of faith but with such limitation as they make it to bee a most vncertaine certainty such as may be either true or false To this purpose Vega defining certainty to be a certain assent void of all doubting whose proper obiect is truth hereupon he thus inferreth Itaque licet certi nequeant propriè dici de suae gratia nisi qui se certò verè credunt esse in gratia tamen certò assentiri se esse in gratia omnes illos possumus debemus asserere qui absque vila cunctatione trepidatione id sibi de se persuadent siue vere hoc seâ—tiant siue falso Therefore saith hee though none can properly be said to be certaine of their grace but those that certainly and truly beleeue that they are in the state of grace yet we may and ought to affirme that all they doe certainely assent they are in the state of grace who without all doubt or feare doe perswade themselues hereof whether their opinion herein be true or false Et non nunquam c. And oft times saith hee Philosophers and Diuines doe so abuse these termes as that they affirme that all that haue a certaine assent of any thing are absolutely and simply perswaded thereof Quamobrem c. Wherefore the Fathers to wit of Trent in this ninth Chapter doubted not to say that Heretickes and Schismatickes doe boast of the certainty of the
which the authors themselues were carefull to commit to print vpon this argument would scarce beleeue how many things were discussed about this Article and with what ardency not onely of the Diuines but also of all the Bishops who were perswaded that their opinion was right that they had hit vpon the truth So that the Cardinall of St. Crosse saw that many had more neede of a bridle than of spurres and by frequent digressions from the purpose and passages to other questions he often would expresse his desire of putting an end to this controuersie It was twice propounded in the Synod of the Prelates to relinquish altogether this question as being ambiguous long and tedious yet affection bearing sway they fell backe vpon it againe Thus farre the History which though somewhat long yet I hope the Reader will not thinke it more tedious in the reading of it than I haue done in the inserting of it which I haue the rather done that it might the more appear how this point of certainty hauing on the one side euidence of truth to confirme it and on the other humane wit and affection to oppugne it did puzzle and perplexe the whole Synod and fill them full of vncertainties Wee see those reasons and authorities alledged by the aduerse faction who were for vncertainty very acutely and pregnantly answered by Catarinus and those with him Also whereas they catched here and there at some passages of the Fathers seeming to fauour their doctrine of vncertainty it is well noted by the History that the Fathers might sometimes by accommodating their exhortations to the people as the occasion required represse the insolency of such as were presumptuous and vainly confident in the assurance of their saluation howsoeuer they continued in sinne whereas the Fathers in their maine discourses of faith speake most clearely in the confirmation of the certainty of iustification as we shall see hereafter Come wee now to Vega's incounters with the certainty of faith he takes great paines to beate the ayre what with answering what with vrging arguments for his Pontifician Goddesse Vncertainty now an Article of Romes faith Hee vndertakes according to his rare dexterity to answer all opposites and to expound or moderate the meaning of such authorities as are alledged out of the Scriptures or Fathers making them by some pretty quaint distinction to speake iust as him listeth The first place he bringeth for his vncertainty is out of Iob 9. 20. If I iustifie my selfe mine owne mouth shall condemne mee if I say I am perfect it shall also proue me peruerse Vega makes much adoe about this place fending and prouing but the very sight of the Text is sufficient to confute his folly in applying it to his vncertainty of iustification when as this place doth giue such a deadly wound to their iustification it selfe by their inherent righteousnesse which holy Iob here vtterly disclaimeth But doth Iob here vtter one syllable of the vncertainty of his faith in God his Sauiour and Redeemer Nay doth he not protest the contrary Though he slay mee yet will I trust in him And vers 18. Behold now I haue ordered my cause I know that I shall be iustified Who is he that will pleade with mee What clearer testimony could this holy man giue of his strong confidence and assurance of his iustification by faith in God So that I maruaile Vega would at all meddle with the example of Iob who throughout his booke is such a cleare mirrour of a true beleeuer whose faith is fortified with all confidence and assurance sauing that hee can easily impute Iobs certainty to a speciall reuelation and not to the property of faith But let not Vega with his iugling by casting a false myst think so easily to eclipse the clear beames of truth With the like successe he is tampering with Dauid and Salomon He alledgeth that of Dauid Who can vnderstand his errors Hereupon he inferreth if a man doe not know his sins how can he be sure of his iustification To this allegation we neede vse no other answer but Bernards exposition which Vega himselfe both obiecteth and takes vpon him to answer that these words of Dauid are vnderstood onely of veniall sinnes not of mortall This Vega confessing to be verisimile very probable and likely to be true yet answereth that seeing mortall sinnes are more truely and properly sinnes and do more defile the soule than veniall sinnes why should these words bee restrained onely to veniall sinnes I will not now enter into a discussion of veniall and mortall sinnes a distinction most grosly and impiously abused by the Pontificians but this I say that according to the iudgement of Pontificians of veniall sinnes they must needes confesse that these words of Dauid must bee meant onely of veniall sinnes that is such as the Pontificians call veniall The very word in the vulgar Latine will beare no other sense Delicta which signifieth slippes or errors or certaine defects and omissions such as the Pontificians ranke amongst their veniall sinnes But this place of Dauid makes nothing at all against certainty of faith For what if a man yea the holiest man if Dauid doe not know his sinnes his slippes and errors yet while he complaines hereof and confesseth them in generall vnto God praying O cleanse thou me from my secret faults what hindreth but that God cleansing him from all his faults should seale vnto him the certainty of the remission of all his sins apprehended by a liuely faith As Dauid saith in the 32. Psalme Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiuen and whose sinne is couered c. But how shall a man come to be certaine of this his blessednesse Dauid instanceth it in himselfe vers 5. I acknowledged my sinne vnto thee and mine iniquity haue I not hid I said I will confesse my transgressions vnto the Lord and thou forgauest the iniquity of my sinne How did Dauid know that God had forgiuen his sinnes seeing he saith peremptorily Thou forgauest the iniquity of my sinne Did not Dauid know this by the certainty of faith Vega I know hath his answer at his fingers ends and will say that Dauid came to know this eyther by speciall diuine reuelation or else by Nathans pronouncing Dauids absolution saying The Lord hath put away thy sinne Yea but Dauid tels vs in the next words that this was not his case alone but it was common to euery godly man in particular For this saith Dauid shall euery one that is godly pray vnto thee in a time when thou mayst be found that is Euery godly man should haue the like comfortable successe vpon his repentance as Dauid had and say with confidence as Dauid did Thou forgauest the transgression of my sinne But Vega suspecting the strength of the Father's authority he addes thereto the Sonnes to wit Salomons Pro. 20. 9. Who can say I haue made my heart cleane I am pure from my sin Quis Who
peruersitate tantum istiremoti sunt propter quos hac agimus vt licet nondum velint fateri praedestinatos esse qui per Dei gratiam â—iant obedientes atque permaneant iam tamen fateantur quod eorum praeueniat voluntatem quibus datur hac gratia Now these men saith hee with whom wee haue to deale are so much remote from the Hereticall peruersnesse of the Pelagians that although they will not be brought to confesse that they which by the grace of God are made obedient and remaine so are predestinated yet notwithstanding they confesse that this grace preuents the will of those to whom it is giuen But how Augustine discouers their deceit Ideo vtique ne gratis dari credatur gratia sicut veritas loquitur sed potius secundum praecedentis merita voluntatis sicut contra veritatem Pelagianus error obloquitur This must be so forsooth lest grace should be thought to be giuen gratis as the truth speaketh but rather according to the merits of mans precedent will as the Pelagian errour gain-saieth the truth So that in the conclusion the Pelagians and Pontificians with their confederates conspire in the maine not onely to diminish but euen to demolish the glory of God The second precious thing which thou wouldest destroy is the saluation of the elect Thou to make a reprobate by thy carnall reason to become at the best a formall hypocrite puffed vp with the swelling pride of his selfe-righteousnesse wouldst destroy that gracious purpose of God in sauing impotent man which purpose of God is the onely cause of the effectuall sauing of men For take away this purpose of God and no man should be saued And not onely Gods purpose to saue some whom he will doth in time effectually bring them vnto the state of grace in Christ but also is so farre from making them carelesse as it makes them the more carefull to continue in the state of grace Yea not only so but God doth endowe all his with a care and minde and will and power to continue in his fauour and grace And to this end all things worke together cooperate for good to them that loue God to them that are called according to his purpose Hath God giuen me the grace of faith to beleeue in his Sonne Iesus Christ whereby I come now to know what I knew not before namely that I am of the number of Gods elect preordained to saluation before the foundation of the world Am I hereupon carelesse how I liue because I haue receiued the euidence of Gods fauour towards mee in Christ Nay now I begin to be more carefull than euer before that I may also attaine to the end of my saluation And I am so much the more encouraged hereunto not onely because I am ordained of God vnto it but because now the Spirit of Christ dwelleth in me strengthening incouraging comforting confirming mee more and more in the obedience of faith and sealing me vp vnto the day of Redemption I know that God hath appointed to saue me but not without meanes He hath made the meanes easie vnto me and he hath giuen mee both a minde power to obserue the conditions where I through carnall infirmity still dwelling in me faile yet still the means is in my way which is to be renewed by repentance humiliation and obedience I cannot now euer be resolued that because I know I am one of Gods elect therefore I will sinne and liue as I list but because I am one of Gods elect redeemed by Iesus Christ therefore my whole resolution is continually to set forth the prayses of him that hath called mee out of darknesse into his maruellous light St. Iohn was of another minde than these men where 1. Ioh. 3. speaking of our knowledge and assurance of our blessed estate in and through and with Christ he addeth vers 3. He that hath this hope purgeth himselfe euen as hee is pure So that the more certaine our faith and hope is of eternall life the more carefull it makes vs of fitting and preparing ourselues thereunto For he that hath this hope purgeth himselfe Tell me a Prince being borne heire apparant to a Kingdome because he is assured that none can preuent him of his right is he therefore carelesse of his course of life running riot and playing the young Prodigall and not rather disposeth himselfe or at least is carefully brought vp vnder Tutors and Gouernours for that end that by learning obedience in his youth and nonage he may know the better how to Command when he comes to weald the Scepter Now the Child of God by his new birth is borne heire apparant to the kingdome of glorie therefore while he is in his minoritie in the Principalitie of grace and because now he hath many infallible arguments to assure him of the Kingdome is he either himselfe so carelesse or is his heauenly Father so improuident as not euery way to furnish him with those graces beseeming such a Prince whereby he may in time be throughly furnished and accounted worthy to sit with Christ in his Throne Because old Symeon had a reuelation by the Holy Ghost that he should not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ Did he therefore as knowing God to be true in his promise neglect his ordinary meate and other meanes for the sustentation and preseruation of his life because he was to liue certainely vntill he should see the Lord 's Christ Because King Ezechias had a gracious promise from God that he should recouer of his pestilent disease and within three dayes be able to goe vp vnto the house of the Lord and moreouer that he had fifteene yeeres added of God vnto his dayes was Ezechias therefore carelesse of vsing the meanes for his recouery which the Lord had prescribed and so for the prolonging of his life which the Lord had promised Did he not according to Gods direction take and apply the lumpe of dry Figgs to the plague-sore and so recouered so that within three dayes he went vp vnto the house of the Lord to offer the Sacrifice of praise So the elect of God being now effectually called to the state of grace they haue a promise from God that they shall neuer see death that spirituall death which Christ speaks of till they see the Lord 's Christ face to face and know him by beatificall vision euen as they are knowne are they therefore carelesse of the spirirituall food of their soules the Word and Sacraments whereby they are preserued till they come to the fruition of this beatificall vision And being desperately sicke of the pestilence of sinne and hauing health promised and remedy prouided are they therefore so carelesse as not to put forth the hand of faith to apply Christ that lumpe of figgs that cluster of grapes that balme of Gilâ—ad to their pestilential sore that recouering perfect health thereby they may after three dayes be raised vp and be