of God whereby he accounteth and esteemeth that righteousnes which is in Christ as the righteousnes of that sinner which beleeueth in him By Christs righteousnes we are to vnderstand two thinges first his sufferings specially in his death and passion secondly his obedience in fulfilling the lawe both which goe together for Christ in suffering obeyed and obeying suffered And the very shedding of his bloud to which our saluation is ascribed must not onely be considered as it is passiue that is a suffering but also as it is actiue that is an obedience in which he shewed his exceeding loue both to his father and vs and thus fulfilled the lawe for vs. 3. Rule That iustification is from Gods mercies and grace procured onely by the merite of Christ 4. Rule That man is iustified by faith alone because faith is that alone instrument created in the hart by the Holy Ghost whereby a sinner laieth holde of Christs righteousnes and applies the same to him selfe There is neither hope nor loue nor any other grace of God within man that can doe this but faith alone now of the Doctrine of the Roman Church Because M. PERKINS settes not downe well the Catholikes opinion I will helpe him out both with the preparation and justification it selfe and that taken out of the Councel of Trent Where the very wordes concerning preparation are these Sess 6. c. 6. Men are prepared and disposed to this iustice when being stirred vp and helped by Gods grace they conceiuing faith by hearing are freely moued towardes God beleeuing those thinges to be true which God doth reueale and promise â—â—â—â—ely that he of his grace doth iustifie a sinner through the redemption that is in CHRIST IESVS And when knowledging them selues to be sinners through the feare of Gods iudgementes they turne them selues to consider the mercie of God are lifted vp into hope trusting that God will be mercifull vnto them for Christs sake and beginning to loue him as the fountayne of all iustice are there by moued with hatred and detestation of all sinnes Finally they determine to receiue baptisme to beginne a new life and to keepe all Christs commaundements After this disposition or preparation followeth Iustification and for that euery thing is best knowne by the causes of it all the causes of Iustification are deliuered by the Councell in the next Chapter which briefly are these The finall cause of the Iustification of a sinner is the glorie of God the glory of Christ and mans owne iustification the efficient is God the meritorious CHRIST IESVS Passions the instrumentall is the Sacrament of Baptisme the onlie formall cause is inherent iustice that is Faith Hope and Charity with the other giftes of the Holy Ghost powred into a mans soule at that instant of iustification Of the iustification by faith and the second iustification shall be spoken in their places So that we agree in this point that iustification commeth of the free grace of God through his infinite mercies and the merits of our Sauiours Passion and that all sinnes when a man is justified be pardoned him The point of difference is this that the Protestants hold that Christs Passion and obedience imputed vnto vs becommeth our righteousnes for the wordes of justice and justification they seldome vse and not any righteousnes which is in our selues The Catholikes affirme that those vertues powred into our soules speaking of the formall cause of iustification is our iustice and that through that a man is iustified in Gods sight and accepted to life euerlasting Although as you haue seene before we hold that God of his meere mercie through the merits of CHRIST IESVS our Sauiour hath freely bestowed that iustice on vs. Note that M. PERKINS comes to short in his second rule when he attributeth the merits of Christs suffringes to obedience whereas obedience if it had beene without charity would haue merited nothing at Gods handes And whereas M. PERKINS doth say that therein we raze the foundation that is as he interpreteth it in his preface we make Christ a Pseudochrist we auerre that herein we doe much more magnifie Christ then they doe for they take Christs merits to be so meane that they doe but euen serue the turne to deface sinne and make men worthie of the joyes of heauen Nay it doth not serue the turne but only that God doth not impute sinne vnto vs. We contrarywise doe so highly esteeme of our Sauiours inestimable merits that we hold them wel able to purchase at Gods handes a farre inferiour justice and such merits as mortall men are capable of and to them doe giue such force and value that they make a man just before God and worthy of the Kingdome of heauen as shall be proued Againe they doe great iniury to Gods goodnes wisedome and justice in their justification for they teach that inward justice or sanctification is not necessary to justification Yea their Ring-leader Luther saith That the iustified can by no sinnes whatsoeuer except he refuse to beleeue lose their saluation Wherein first they make their righteous man Like as our Sauiour speaketh to sepulchers whited on the out side with an imputed justice but within full of iniquity and disorder Then the wisdome of GOD must either not discouer this masse of iniquity or his goodnesse abide it or his justice either wipe it away or punish it But say they he seeth it well enough but couereth it with the mantle of Christs righteousnesse Why can any thing be hid from his sight it is madnesse to thinke it And why doth he not for Christes sake deface it and wipe it cleane away and adorne with his grace that soule whome he for his sonnes sake loueth and make it worthy of his loue and kingdome What is it because Christ hath not deserued it So to say were to derogate from the infinite value of his merits Or is it for that God cannot make such justice in a pure man as may be worthy of his loue and his kingdome And this were to deny Gods power in a matter that can be donne as we confesse that such vertue was in our first father Adam in state of innocencie And M. PERKINS seemes to graunt Pag. 77. That man in this life at his last gaspe may haue such righteousnesse If then we had no other reason for vs but that our justification doth more exalt the power and goodnes of God more magnifie the value of Christs merits and bringeth greater dignity vnto men our doctrine were much better to be liked then our aduersaries who cannot alleage one expresse sentence either out of holy Scriptures or auncient Fathers teaching the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs to be our justification as shall be seene in the reasons following and doe much abase both Christs merits and Gods power wisdome and goodnesse Now to their reasons M. PERKINS first reason is this That which must be our righteousnesse before God must satisfie the iustice of
Baptisme commonly called Concupiscence was neuer a sinne properly but onely the materiall part of sinne the formall and principall part of it consisting in the depriuation of Originall iustice and a voluntary auersion from the lawe of GOD the which is cured by the Grace of GOD giuen to the baptised and so that which was principall in Originall sinne doth not remayne in the regenerate neither doth that which remayneth make the person to sinne which was the second point vnlesse he willingly consent vnto it as hath beene proued heretofore it allureth intiseth him to sinne but hath not power to constrayne him to it as M. PERKINS also himselfe before confessed Nowe to the third and intangleth him in the punishment of sinne howe doth Originall sinne intangle the regenerate in the punishment of sinne If all the guiltines of it be remoued from his person as you taught before in our Consent Mendacem memorem esse oportet Either confesse that the guilt of Originall sinne is not taken away from the regenerate or else you must vnsay this that it intangleth him in the punishment of sinne nowe to the last clause that the reliques of Originall sinne make a man miserable a man may be called wreatched and miserable in that he is in disgrace with God and so subject to his heauy displeasure and that which maketh him miserable in this sence is sinne but S. Paul taketh not the word so here but for an vnhappy man exposed to the danger of sinne and to all the miseries of this world from which we should haue beene exempted had it not beene for Originall sinne after which sort he vseth the same word 1. Cor. 15. If in this life onely we were hoping in Christ we were more miserable then all men not that the good Christians were farthest out of Gods fauour and more sinnefull then other men but that they had fewest worldly comforts and the greatest crosses and thus much in confutation of that formall argument Now to the second Infantes Baptised die the bodely death before they come to the yeares of discretion but there is not in them anie other cause of death besides Originall sinne for they haue no actuall sinne Rom. 5. Rom. 5. and death is the wages of sinne as the Apostle saith death entred into the world by sinne Answere The cause of the death of such Innocentes is either the distemperature of their bodies or externall violence and God who freely bestowed their liues vpon them may when it pleaseth him as freely take their liues from them especially when he meanes to recompence them with the happy exchaunge of life euerlasting True it is that if our first parentes had not sinned no man should haue died but haue beene both long preserued in Paradise by the fruit of the wood of life and finally translated without death into the Kingdome of heauen and therefore is it said most truely of S. Paul death entred into the world by sinne Rom. 5. But the other place Rom. 6. the wages of sinne is death is fouly abused for the Apostle there by death vnderstandeth eternall damnation as appeareth by the opposition of it to life euerlasting and by sinne there meaneth not Originall but Actuall sinne such as the Romans committed in their infidely the wagis where of if they had not repented them had bin hell fire now to inferre that Innocents are punished with corporall death for Originall sinne remayning in them because that eternall death is the due hire of Actuall sinne is either to shewe great wante of judgement or else very strangelie to preuert the wordes of Holy scripture Let this also not be forgotten that he himselfe acknowledged in our Consent that the punishment of Originall sinne was taken away in Baptisme from the regenerate howe then doth he here say that he doth die the death for it M. PERKINS third reason That which lusteth against the spirite and by lusting tempteth and in tempting intiseth and draweth the hart to sinne is for nature sinne it selfe but concupiscence in the regenerate is such ergo Answere The first proposition is not true for not euery thing that intiseth vs to sinne is sinne or else the Apple that allured Eue to sinne had beene by nature sinne and euery thing in this world one way or an other tempteth vs to sinne according vnto that of S. Iohn All that is in the world 1. Epl. 2. is the Concupiscence of the flesh and the Concupiscence of the eyes and Pride of life So that it is very grosse to say that euery thing which allureth to sinne is sinne it selfe and as wide is it from all morall wisedome to affirme that the first motions of our passions be sins For euen the very heathen Philosophers could distinguish betweene sodaine passions of the minde and vices teaching that passions may be bridled by the vnderstanding and brought by due ordering of them into the ring of reason and so made vertues rather then vices And that same text which M. PERKINS bringeth to perswade these temptations to be sinnes proues the quite contrary God tempteth no man but euerie man is tempted Iacob 1. when he is drawen away by his owne concupiscence and is allured afterward when concupiscence hath conceaued it bringeth forth sinne Marke the wordes well First Concupiscence tempteth and allureth by some euill motion but that is no sinne vntill afterward it doe conceiue that is obtayne some liking of our will in giuing eare to it and not expelling it so speedely as we ought to doe the suggestion of such an enemie the which that most deepe Doctor Saint Augustine sifteth out very profoundly in these wordes Lib. 6. in Iul. cap. 5. When the Apostle Saint Iames saith euery man is tempted being drawne away and allured by his Concupiscence and afterward Concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth forth sinne Trulie in these wordes the thing brought forth is distinguished from that which bringeth it forth The damme is concupiscence the fole is sinne But concupiscence doth not bring sinne forth vnlesse it conceiue so then it is not sinne of it selfe and it conceiueth not vnlesse it drawe vs that is vnlesse it obtayne the consent of our will to commit euill The like exposition of the same place and the difference betweene the pleasure tempting that runneth before and the sinne which followeth after Vnlesse we resist manfully may be seene in S. Cirill Lib. 4. in Iohan. ca. â—1 so that by the iudgement of the most learned auncient Fathers that text of S. Iames cited by M. PERKINS to proue concupiscence to be sinne disputeth it very soundly to that reason of his Such as the fruit is such is the Tree I answere that not concupiscence but the will of man is the Tree which bringeth forth either good or badde fruit according vnto the disposition of it concupiscence is onely an intiser vnto badde Lib. 5 con Iulianum cap. 3. But S. Augustine saith That concupiscence
Luke 7.47 MANY sinnes are forgiuen her because she hath loued much whence they gather that the woman there spoken of had pardon of her sinnes and was iustified by loue Answere In this text loue is not made an impulsiue cause to moue God to pardon her sinnes but only a signe to shew that God had already pardoned them Reply Obserue first that Catholikes doe not teach that she was pardoned for loue alone for they vse not as Protestants doe when they finde one cause of justification to exclude all or any of the rest But considering that in sundry places of holy write justification is ascribed vnto many seuerall vertues affirme that not faith alone but diuers other diuine qualities concurre vnto justification and as mention here made of loue excludeth not faith hope repentance and such like so in other places where faith is only spoken of there hope charity and the rest must not also be excluded This sinner had assured beleefe in Christes power to remitte sinnes and great hope in his mercy that he would forgiue them great sorrowe and detestation of her sinne also she had that in such an assembly did so humbly prostrate her selfe at Christes feete to wash them with her teares and to wipe them with the haires of her head And as shee had true repentance of her former life so no doubt but shee had also a firme purpose to leade a newe life So that in her conuersion all those vertues mette together which we holde to concurre to justification and among the rest the preheminence worthely is giuen to loue as to the principall disposition She loued our Sauiour as the fountayne of all mercies and goodnes and therefore accounted her pretious oyntements best bestowed on him yea and the humblest seruice and most affectionate she could offer him to be all too little and nothing answerable to the inward burning charity which she bare him Which noble affection of hers towardes her diuine Redeemer no question was most acceptable vnto him as by his owne word is most manifest for he said That many sinnes were forgiuen her because she loued much But M. PERKINS saith that her loue was no cause that moued Christ to pardon her but only a signe of pardon giuen before which is so contrary to the text that a man not past all shame would blush once to affirme it First Christ saith expreslie that it was the cause of the pardon Because shee had loued much Secondly that her loue went before is as playnlie declared both by mention of the time past Because she hath loued and by the euidence of her fact of washing wiping and anoynting his feete for the which saith our Sauiour then already performed Manie sinnes are forgiuen her So that here can be no impediment of beleeuing the Catholike Doctrine so clearly deliuered by the holy Ghost vnlesse one will be so blindly ledde by our new Masters that he will beleeue no wordes of Christ be they neuer so playne otherwise then it please the Ministers to expound them And this much of the first of those reasons which M. PERKINS said were of no moment 2. Reason Neither Circumcision nor prepuce auayleth any thing Gal. 5.6 but faith that worketh by charity Hence Catholikes gather that when the Apostle attributeth iustification to saith he meanes not faith alone but as it is ioyned with charity and other like vertues as are requisite to prepare the soule of man to receiue that complete grace of iustification M. PERKINS answereth that they are joyned together But it is faith alone that apprehendeth Christs righteousnes and maketh it ours It vseth charity as an instrument to performe the duties of the first and second table but it hath no part with faith in the matter of our iustification Reply That it hath the chiefest part and that faith is rather the instrument and hand mayd of charity My proofe shall be out of the very text alleadged where life and motion is giuen to faith by charity as the greeke word Energoumene being passiue doth playnlie shewe that faith is moued led and guided by charity Which S. Iames doth demonstrat most manifest saying that Euen as the body is dead without the soule so is faith without charity Making charity to be the life and as it were the soule of faith Now no man is ignorant but it is the soule that vseth the body as an instrument euen so then it is charity that vseth faith as her instrument and inferiour and not contrarywise which S. Paul confirmeth at large in a whole chapter prouing charity to be a more excellent gift then faith or any other concluding with these wordes Now there remayneth faith hope and charity 1. Cor. 13. these three but the greater of these is charity Whereupon S. Augustine resolueth thus Nothing but charity maketh faith it selfe auaylable Li. de Trinit cap. 18. for faith saith he may be without charity but it can not be auaylable without it So that first you see that charity is the mouer and commaunder and faith as her instrument and hand mayde Now that in the worke of justification it hath the chiefe place may be thus proued I demaund whether that worke of justification by faith be done for the loue of God and to his honour or no If not as it is voyd of charity so it is a wicked and sinnefull act no justification but infection our owne interest being the principall end of it now if it comprehend conclude Gods glory and seruice in it that is if they apply Christs righteousnes to them to glorifie God thereby then hath charity the principall part therein for the directing of all to the honour and glory of God is the proper office and action of charity All this reason that charity both concurreth to justification and that as principall S. Augustine confirmeth in these wordes Serm. 22. de verbis Apostol The house of God that is a righteous and Godly soule hath for his foundation faith hope is the walles of it but charity is the roofe and perfection of it The third of these trifling reasons is peruersly propounded by M. PER. thus Faith is neuer alone therefore it doth not iustifie alone That this argument is fondly framed appeereth playnlie in that that Catholikes doe not deny but affirme that faith may be without charity as it is in all sinnefull Catholikes we then forme the reason thus If faith alone be the whole cause of justification then if both hope and charity were remoued from faith at least by thought and in conceipt faith would neuerthelesse justifie But faith considered without hope charity will not justifie ergo it is not the whole cause of justification The first proposition can not be denyed of them who knowe the nature and proprietie of causes for the entire and total cause of any thing being as the Philosophers say in act the effect must needes followe and very sence teacheth the simple that if any thing
be set to worke and if it doe not act that which it is set too then there wanted some thing requisite And consequently that was not the whole cause of that worke Now to the second proposition But their imagined faith can not apply to themselues Christs righteousnes without the presence of hope and charity For else he might be justified without any hope of heauen and without any loue towardes God and estimation of his honour which are thinges most absurd in themselues but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification which is nothing else but the playne vice of presumption as hath beene before declared Yet to auoid this inconuenience which is so great M. PE. graunteth that both hope and charity must needes be present at the justification but doe nothing in it but faith doth all as the head is present to the eie whē it seeth yet it is the eie alone that seeth Here is a worthy peece of Philosophy that the eie alone doth see whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seing the soule being the principall cause of sight as it is of all other actions of life sence and reason and it is not to purpose here where we require the presence of the whole cause not only of the instrumentall cause And to returne your similitude vpon your selfe as the eie cannot see without the head because it receiueth influence from it before it cā see so cannot faith justifie without charity because it necessarily receiueth spirit of life from it before it can doe any thing acceptable in Gods sight The fourth reason if faith alone doe justifie then faith alone will saue but it will not saue ergo M. PERKINS first denyeth the proposition and saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an Innocent babe dye shortly after his baptisme wherein he was justified shall he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is justified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therefore this first shift was very friuoulous Which M. PERKINS perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shall also be saued that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement Then must those wordes of the holy Ghost so often repeted in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time will render vnto euery man according to his workes But of this more amply in the question of merits 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which justification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare Ecclesias 1. Rom. 8. Luc. 13. 1. Ioan. 3. cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you doe penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is justified because we loue the brethren Againe of baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. So we may also walke in newes of life To all these and many such like places of Holy Scripture it pleased M. PERKINS to make answere in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is only that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wayte patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he sayeth neither yea nor nay leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him so neither to exclude hope or charity or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of justification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scriptures let vs joyne here some testimonies of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein M. PER. citeth some for him The most auncient and most valiant Martir S. Ignatius of our justification writeth thus Epist ad Philip. The beginning of life is faith but the end of it is charity but both vnited and ioyned together doe make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Libr. 2. strom but feare doth build and charity bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these wordes Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued Hom. 70. in Mat. he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well Lib. 3. hypognost S. Augustine cryeth out as it were to our Protestants and saith Heare O foolish Heretike and enemy to the true faith Good workes which that they may be donne are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue beene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified De side oper c. 14. And Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the harts of the faithfull Least by euill security they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtayne it Now the doctrine which M. PERKINS teacheth is cleane contrary For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can doe by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kind of cause but faith a lone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnes for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by them magnified and called the only and whole cause of our justification is in the end become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be justified If it be an instrumentall cause Conditio sine qua non let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and choose whether he had leifer to haue charity or the soule of man without any helpe of grace But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these wordes As Moyses lift vp the serpent in the desart Ioh. 3. so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth
him but what is this to justification by only faith Marry M. PERKINS drawes it in after this fashion As nothing was required of them who were strong by serpents but that they should looke vpon the brasen serpent So nothing is required of a sinner to deliuer him from sinne but that he cast his eye of faith vpon Christs righteousnes and apply that to himselfe in particular But this application of the similitude is only mans foolish inuention without any ground in the text Similttudes be not in all poynts alike neither must be streatched beyond the very poynt wherein the similitude lyeth which in this matter is that like as the Israelites in the Wildernes stoung with serpents were cured by looking vpon the brasen serpent so men infected with sin haue no other remedy then to embrace the faith of Christ Iesus All this we confesse but to say that nothing else is necessary that is quite besides the text and as easely rejected by vs as it is by him obtruded without any authority or probability His 2. reason is collected of exclusiue speeches as he speaketh vsed in Scriptures Gal 2.16 As we are iustified freely not of the lawe not by the lawe not of workes not of our selues not of the workes of the lawe but by faith all boasting excluded Luke 8.50 only beleeue These distinctions whereby works the law are excluded in the worke of justification include thus much that faith alone doth justifie It doth not so for these exclusiue speeches do not exclude feare hope and charity more then they exclude faith it selfe Which may be called a worke of the lawe aswell as any other vertue being as much required by the lawe as any other But S. Paules meaning in those places is to exclude all such workes as either Iewe or Gentile did or could bragge of as donne of themselues and so thought that by them they deserued to be made Christians For he truly saith that all were concluded in sinne and needed the grace of God which they were to receiue of his free mercy through the merits of Christ and not of any desart of their owne And that to obtayne this grace through Christ it was not needefull nay rather hurtfull to obserue the ceremonies of Moyses lawe as Circumcision the obseruation of any of their feastes or fastes nor any such like worke of the lawe which the Iewes reputed so necessary Againe that all morall workes of the Gentiles could not deserue this grace which workes not proceeding from charity were nothing worth in Gods sight And so all workes both of Iewe and Gentile are excluded from being any meritorious cause of justification and consequently all their boasting of their owne forces their first justification being freely bestowed vpon them Yet all this notwithstanding a certaine vertuous disposition is required in the Iewe and Gentile whereby his soule is prepared to receiue that great grace of justification that say we is faith feare hope loue and repentance that say the Protestants is faith only Wherefore say we as the excluding of workes and boasting exclude not faith no more doe they exclude the rest faith being as well our worke and a worke of the lawe as any of the rest and all the rest being of grace as well as faith and as farre from boasting of as faith it selfe Now that out of S Luke beleeue only is nothing to the purpose For he was bid beleeue the raysing of his daughter to life and not that Christs righteousnes was his and faith alone may be a sufficient disposition to obtayne a myracle but not to obtayne justification of which the question only is Consider now good Reader whether of our interpretations agree better with the circumstances of the text and the judgement of the auncient Fathers The texts see thou in the Testament Take for a taste of the Fathers judgement S. Augustines exposition of those places of S. Paul of one of the chiefest of which thus he speaketh Men not vnderstanding that which the Apostle saith We esteeme a man to be iustified without the lawe De gra lib. aâ—b c 7. thought him to say that faith sufficed a man althoug he liued euill and had no good workes which God forbid that the vessell of election should thinke And againe De predest sanct c 7. Therefore the Apostle saith that a man is iustified by faith and not of workes because saith is first giuen and by it the rest which are properly called workes and in which we liue justlie are by petition obtayned By which it is manifest that S. Paul excluding the workes of the lawe and the workes donne by our owne only forces doth not meane to exclude good workes which proceede from the helpe of Gods grace THAT FAITH ONLY DOTH NOT IVSTIFIE MASTER PERKINS third Argument Very reason may teach vs thus much that no gift in man is apt as a spirituall hand to receiue and apply Christ and his righteousnesse vnto a sinner sauing faith loue hope feare repentance haue their seuerall vses but none of them serue for this ende of apprehending but faith only Amswere Mans reason is but a blinde mistris in matters of faith and he that hath no better an instructor in such high misteries must needs know little But what if that also faile you in this poynt then euery man cannot but see how naked you are of all kinde of probability I say then that reason rather teacheth the contrary For in common sence no man apprehendeth and entreth into the possession of any thing by beleeuing that he hath it For if a man shoulde beleeue that he is rich of honour wise or vertuous Doth he thereby become presently such a one nothing lesse His faith and perswasion is no fitte instrument to apply and drawe these thinges to himselfe as all the worlde sees How then doth reason teach me that by beleeuing Christes righteousnesse to bee mine owne I lay hand on it and make it mine Againe Christs righteousnes according to their owne opinion is not receiued into vs at all but is ours only by Gods imputation what neede we then faith as a spirituall hand to receiue it If they say as M. PERKINS doth that faith is as it were a condition required in vs which when God seeth in vs he presently imputeth Christs righteousnesse to vs and maketh it ours Then will I be bolde to say that any other vertue is as proper as faith to haue Christ applyed vnto vs there being no other aptnesse requisite in the condition it selfe but only the will and ordinance of God then euery thing that it shal please him to appoynt is alike apt and so M. PERKINS had small reason to say that faith was the only apt instrument to apply to vs Christs righteousnesse Moreouer true diuine reason teacheth me that both hope and charity doe much more apply vnto Christians all Christes merits and make them doe then faith For what faith assureth me of in
good deuotions of the soule as the actes of Faith Feare Hope Charity Repentance goe before to prepare as it were the way and to make it more sit to receiue that high grace of iustification The second iustification is when a iust man by the exercise of vertues is made more iust as a Childe newe borne doth by nuriture growe day by day bigger of this increase of grace Catholikes hold good workes to be the meritorious cause M. PERKINS first graunteth that good workes doe please God and haue a temporall reward 2. That they are necessary to saluation not as the cause thereof but either as markes in away to direct vs towardes saluation or as fruites and signes of righteousnes to declare one to be just before men all which he shuffleth in rather to delude our arguments then for that they esteeme much of good workes which they hold to be no better then deadly sins The maine difference then betweene vs consisteth in this whether good workes be the true cause indeede of the increase of our righteousnes which we call the second justification or whether they be only fruits signes or markes of it M. PERKINS pretendes to proue that they are no cause of the increase of our justice and yet frames not one argument directly to that purpose but repeates those objections and proposeth them now at large which he made before against the first justification the which although impertinent to this place yet I will solue them first and then set downe our owne We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe 2 Rom. 3. Answere The Apostle there speaketh of the justification of a sinner for he saith before that he hath proued both Iewe and Greeke to be vnder sinne and that all haue sinned and neede the glory of God Wherefore this place appertaynes not vnto the second justification and excludes only either workes of the law as not necessary vnto the first justification of a sinner against the Iewes who thought and taught them to be necessary or else against the Gentils any worke of ours from being any meritorious cause of that first justification for we acknowledge very willingly as you haue heard often before that euery sinner is justified freely of the meere grace of God through the merit of Christ onely and without any merit of the sinner himselfe and yet is not a sinner being of yeares of discretion meerely passiue in that his justification as M. PERKINS very absurdly saith for in their owne opinion he must beleeue which is an action and in ours not onely beleeue but also Hope Loue Repente And this kinde of justification excludeth all boasting in our soules as wel as theirs For as they must graunt that they may not bragge of their faith although it be an act of theirs so necessarily required at their justification that without it they could not be justified euen so let them thinke of the rest of those good preparations which we hold to be necessary that we cannot truly boast of them as though they came of our selues but we confesse all these good inspirations as all other good to descend from the bounteous liberality of the father of lightes and for the yeelding of our consent to them we can no more vaunt then of consenting vnto faith all which is no more then if a man be mired in a lake and vnable of himselfe to get out would be content that an other of his goodnesse should helpe him out of it Yet obserue by the way that Saint Paul forbiddeth not all glorying or boasting Rom. 5. For he gloryeth in the hope of glory of the Sonne of GOD 2. Cor. 10. and in his tribulations Againe He defineth that we may glory in measure and that he might glory in his power And that he was constayned to glory in his visions and reuelations 2. Cor. 12. So that a good Christian may glory in our Lord and in his heauenly giftes so it be in measure and due season Acknowledging them from whence they come But to boast and say that eyther GOD needed vs or that our good partes were cause that GOD called vs first to his seruice is both false and vtterly vnlawefull Ephes 2. So that by grace yea are saued through faith and that not of your selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Is nothing against our Doctrine of justification but too too ignorantly or maliciously cited against it and note also with Saint Augustine that faith is there mentioned Lib. 83. q. 76. to exclude all merites of our workes which went before and might seeme to the simple to haue beene some cause why God bestowed his first grace vpon vs but no vertuous dispositions requisite for the better preparation to the same grace and therefore very fondly doth M. PERKINS inferre that in that sentence Saint Paul speaketh of workes of grace because in the text following hee mentioned good workes Whereas the Apostle putteth an euident distinction betweene those two kinde of workes signifying the first To be of ourselues The second To proceede from vs as Gods workemanshippe created in CHRIST IESVS and the first he calleth Workes simply the second Good workes prepared of God for vs to walke in after our first iustification What grosse ignorance then was it to take these two so distinct manner of workes for the same and to ground himselfe so boldly vpon it Now to his second reason If you be circumcised Gal. 9. you are bound to the whole lawe Hence thus he argueth If a man will be iustified by workes he is bound to fulfill the whole lawe according to the rigour of it That is Paules ground But no man can fulfill the lawe according vnto the rigour of it ergo No man can be iustified by workes He can apply the text prefixed vnto any part of the argument Erit mihi magnus Appollo Saint Paul only saith in these wordes That if you bee circumcised yea are bound to keepe the whole lawe of Moyses M. PERKINS That if a man will be iustified by workes he must fulfill the rigour of the lawe Which are as just as Germains lippes as they say But M. PERKINS sayes that it is Saint Paules ground but he is much deceiued for the Apostles ground is this That circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme and therefore he that would be circumcided did make himselfe subject vnto the whole lawe of the Iewes Of the possibilities of fulfilling the lawe because M. PERKINS toucheth so often that string shall be treated in a distinct question as soone as I haue dispatched this M. PERKINS third Argument Election to saluation is of grace without workes wherefore the iustification of a sinner is of grace alone without workes because election is the cause of iustification Answere That election is of grace without workes done of our owne simple forces or without the workes of
for the mastery 2. Tim. 2. is not crowned vnlesse he striue lawfully It is also resembled vnto places of honour Math. 25. Ioh. 14. Mat. 13. 1. Ioh. 3. I will place thee ouer much And I goe to prouide you places Grace is also in many places of Scripture compared to seede For the seede of God tarrieth in him But a little seede cast into good ground and well manured bringeth forth abundance of corne Briefly then such equality as there is betweene the well deseruing subject and the office betweene him that striueth lawfully and the crowne betweene the seede and the corne is betweene the reward of heauen and the merit of a true seruant of God And thus much of M. PERKINS first Argument more indeede to explicate the nature and condition of merit then that his reason nakedly proposed did require it Exod 20. His second testimony is God will shewe mercy vpon thousandes in them that loue him and keepe his commaundements Hence he reasoneth thus Where reward is giuen vpon mercy there is no merit but reward is giuen vpon mercy as the text proueth ergo Answere That in that text is nothing touching the reward of heauen which is now in question God doth for his louing seruants sake shewe mercy vnto their children or friends either in temporall thinges or in calling them to repentance and such like but doth neuer for one mans sake bestowe the kingdome vpon another vnlesse the party himselfe be first made worthy of it That confirmation of his that Adam by his continuall and perfect obedience could not haue procured a further increase of Gods fauour is both besides the purpose and most false for as well he as euery good man sithence by good vse of Gods gifts might day by day encrease them And that no man thinke that in Paradise it should haue bin otherwise S. Augustine saith expresly That in the felicity of Paradise righteousnes preserued should haue ascended into better In Inchir cap. 25. And Adam finally and all his posterity if he had not fallen should haue bin from Paradise translated aliue into the Kingdome of heauen this by the way Nowe to the thirde Argument Rom. 6. Scripture condemneth merite of workes The wages of sinne is death True But we speake of good workes and not of badde which the Apostle calleth sinne where were the mans wittes but it followeth there That eternall life is the grace or gift of God This is to purpose but answered 1200. yeares past by that famous Father S. Augustine in diuers places of his most learned workes I will note one or two of them First thus here ariseth no small doubt De gra li. arb c. 8. which by Gods helpe I will now discusse For if eternall life be rendred vnto good workes as the holy Scripture doth most clearely teach note how then can it be called grace when grace is giuen freely and not repaide for vvorkes and so pursuing the pointes of difficulty at large in the end resolueth that eternall life is most trulie rendred vnto good workes as the due rewarde of them but because those good workes could not haue beene donne vnlesse God had before freely through Christ bestowed his grace vpon vs therefore the same eternall life is also truly called grace because the first roote of it was Gods free gift The very same answere doth he giue where he hath these wordes Epist 106. Eternall life is called grace not because it is not rendred vnto merittes but for that those merittes to which it is rendred were giuen in which place he crosseth M. PERKINS proportion most directly affirming that S. Paul might haue said truly eternall life is the pay or wages of good vvorkes but to holde vs in humility partly and partly to put a difference betweene our saluation and damnation choose rather to say that the gift of God was life eternall because of our damnation we are the whole and only cause but not of our saluation but principally the grace of God the only fountayne of merit and all good workes Now to those textes cited before about justification Ad Eph. 2. We are saued freely not of our selues or by the workes of righteousnesse which we haue donne Ad Tit. 3. I haue often answered that the Apostle speakes of workes donne by our owne forces without the helpe of Gods grace and therefore they cannot serue against workes donne in and by grace Now to that text which he hudleth vp together with the rest although it deserued a better place being one of their principall pillers in this controuersie It is The sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glory to come Rom. 8. The strength of this objection lyeth in a false translation of these words Axia pros tein doxan equal to that glory or in the misconstruction of them For we graunt as it hath beene already declared that our afflictions and sufferinges be not of equall in length or greatnes with the glory of heauen for our afflictions be but for the short space of this life and they cannot be so great as will be the pleasure in heauen notwithstanding wee teach that this shorter and lesser labour imployed by a righteous man in the seruice of GOD doth meritte the other greater and of longer continuance and that by the said Apostles playne wordes for saith he 2. Cor. 4. That tribulation which in this present life is but for a moment and light doth worke aboue measure exceedingly an euerlasting weight of glory in vs. The reason is that just mens workes issue out of the fountayne of grace which giueth a heauenly value vnto his workes Againe it maketh him a quicke member of Christ and so receiuing influence from his head his workes are raised to an higher estimate it consecrateth him also a temple of the holy Ghost 2. Pet. 1. and so maketh him partaker of the heauenly nature as S. Peter speaketh Which addes a worth of heauen to his workes Neither is that glory in heauen which any pure creature attayneth vnto of infinite dignity as M. PERKINS fableth but hath his certayne boundes measure according vnto each mans merittes otherwise it would make a man equall to God in glory for there can be no greater then infinite as all learned men doe confesse M. PERKINS 4. reason Whosoeuer will meritte must fulfill the whole law for if we offend in one commandement we are guiltie of the whole lawe but no man can fulfill the whole lawe ergo Answere I denie the first proposition for one good worke done with his due circumstances doth bring forth merite as by all the properties of meritte may be proued at large and by his owne definition of meritte set downe in tne beginning Now if a man afterward fall into deadly sinne he leeseth his former meritte but recouering grace he riseth to his former meritte as the learned gather out of that saying of our Sauiour in the