quod est etiam poena peccati Nam quando tale est vt idem sit poena peccati quantum est quod valet voluntas sub dominante cupiditate nisi fortè si piae est vt oret auxilium c. which is onely sinne and is not also the punishment of sinne For in that sinne which is also the punishment of sinne how little is it that the will can do against concupiscence or lust hauing dominion ouer it and therfore by reason hereof a man cannot do that that he should do neither can he but do that that he should not do which yet ceaseth not to be a sinne and subiect to punishment because he hath purchased this condition to himselfe by the merit of a former sinne For Adam had it in his power not to sinne and yet did sinne by doing that which he ought not to do and was in his power and libertie not to do and for this cause was giuen ouer as a prisoner to sinne that thenceforth he could not do what he ought to do nor could chuse but do what he should not do Therefore the same Austin asking if that rule that he hath set downe be true how f Ibid. Cur paruuli tenentur rei Respondetur quia ex eius origine tenentur qui non fecit quod facere potuit diuinum scilicet seruare mandatum infants become guiltie and are so holden answereth that it is by being borne of him who did not that that was in his power to do In a word man is not worthie of punishment for not doing that which he cannot do except he haue disabled himselfe for the doing of it but if he haue disabled himselfe as indeed he hath by the first sinne then is he iustly punished both for not doing that which he once could but now cannot do and for doing that which he once could but now cannot chuse but do Which being a case very euident and sundrie times deliuered by S. Austin in retracting the like places against the Manichees may we not wonder at the absurd folly of this man who for conclusion braueth in his termes as if he had caried the matter very cleere when indeed like an ignorant cauiller he himselfe vnderstandeth not what he saith We respect not what natural sence doth teach to shepheards but we cannot but thinke him an ill shepheard ouer the flocke of Christ who taking vpon him to be a doctor of Diuinitie is so ignorant in a principle of religion which by the word of God euery shepheard should know God make him wise to see his owne folly and then he will submit himselfe in obedience to that truth which now in his ignorance seemeth vnto him a strange light of a new Gospell CHAPTER 2. OF ORIGINALL SINNE 1. W. BISHOP M. PERKINS FIRST CONCLVSION Pag 28. THey say naturall corruption after Baptisme is abolished and so say we but let vs see how farre forth it is abolished In Originall sinne are three things First the punishment which is the first and second death second guiltinesse which is the binding vp of the creature vnto punishment third the fault or the offending of God vnder which I comprehend our guiltinesse in Adams first offence as also the corruption of the heart which is a naturall inclination and pronenesse to any thing that is euill or against the law of God For first we say that after Baptisme in the regenerate the punishment of Originall sinne is taken away Rom. 8.1 For there is no condemnation saith the Apostle to them that are in Christ Iesus For the second that is guiltinesse we further condescend and say that it is also taken away in them that are borne anew For considering there is no condemnation to them there is nothing to bind them to punishment Yet this caueat must be remembred namely that the guiltinesse is remoued from the person regenerate but not from the sinne in the person But of this more hereafter Thirdly the guilt in Adams first offence is pardoned And touching the corruption of the heart I auouch two things First that the verie power and strength whereby it raigneth in man is taken away in the regenerate Secondly that this corruption is abolished as also the fault of euerie actuall sinne past So far forth as it is the fault and sin of the man in whom it is Indeed it remaines till death and it is sinne considered in it selfe so long as it remaines but it is not imputed to the person And in that respect is as though it were not it being pardoned Hitherto M. Perkins Annotations vpon our Consents First vve say not that the punishment of Originall sinne is in it or any part of it but rather a due correction and as it were an expulsion of it this is but a peccadilio but there lurketh a serpent in that caueat that the guiltinesse of Originall sinne is remoued from the person regenerate but not from the sinne in the person The like he saith afterward of the fault that it is a sinne still in it selfe remaining in the man till death but it is not imputed to him as being pardoned Here be quillets of very strange Doctrine the sinne is pardoned and yet the guiltinesse of it is not taken away Doth not a pardon take away from the fault pardoned all bond of punishment due vnto it and consequently all guiltinesse belonging to it Who can denie this vnlesse he know not or care not what he say If then Originall sinne be pardoned the guiltinesse of it is also remoued frō it selfe Againe what Philosophie or reason alloweth vs to say that the offendor being pardoned for his offence the offence in it selfe remaineth guiltie as though the offence separated from the person were a substance subiect to law and capable of punishment can Originall sinne in it selfe die the first and second death or be bound vp to them What senslesse imaginations be these Againe how can the fault of Originall sinne remaine in the man renewed by Gods grace although not imputed Can there be two contraries in one part of the subiect at once Can there be light and darknesse in the vnderstanding vertue and vice in the will at the same instant Can the soule be both truly conuerted to God and as truly auerted from him at one time Is Christ now agreed to dwell with Belial and the holy Ghost content to inhabite a bodie subiect to sinne All which must be granted contrarie to both Scripture and naturall sence if we admit the fault and deformitie of sinne to remaine in a man renewed and indued with Gods grace vnlesse we would very absurdly imagine that the fault guilt of sinne were not inherent and placed in their proper subiects but were drawne thence and penned vp in some other odde corner Remember also gentle Reader that here M. Perkins affirmeth the power whereby the corruption of the heart raigneth in man is taken away in the regenerate which is cleane contrarie vnto
the first proposition of his first reason following as shall be there proued R. ABBOT It was not M. Perkins intent here to set downe any exact or formall description of Originall sinne but onely so to touch it as might serue to leade him to the point that was to be disputed of But out of that which he saith it ariseth that originall sinne is a common guilt of the first sinne of man inferring as a iust punishment an vniuersall distortion and corruption of mans nature and euerlasting destruction both of bodie and soule Concerning the matter therfore he propoundeth three things in Originall sinne to be considered the sinne the guilt and the punishment Where M. Bishop being like a man of glasse afraid of being crackt where he is not touched would for more assurance giue vs a note and I warrant you it is a wise one We say not saith he that the punishment of Originall sinne is in it or any part of it but rather a due correction and as it were an expulsion of it Where he putteth me in mind of a speech that I haue heard concerning an outlandish Mathematicke Reader whose tongue hauing out-runne his wits and making a discourse of he knew not what asketh his hearers at length Intelligitisne Do ye vnderstād me they answered him No. Profectò nihil miror saith he neque enim ego intelligo meipsum Marrie I do not maruel for neither do I vnderstand my selfe Such a lecture doth M. Bishop here reade which no man else vnderstandeth nor he himselfe If he had vnderstood what Originall sinne is and that concupiscence being a part of Originall sinne is also a punishment thereof corruption of nature which is one part arising from the guilt of the first sinne which is the other part he would not so vnaduisedly haue denied that the punishment of Originall sinne is also a part thereof especially finding S. Austin in so infinite places affirming that concupiscence is in such sort a sinne as that it is also a punishment of sinne and of what sinne but that which Adam in person committed by action and is ours originally by propagation But that either this punishment of Original sinne which is the corruption of nature or the following punishment thereof which is the first and second death should be called expulsion of Originall sinne we lacke some Oedipus to resolue vs sure I am that M. Bishop vnderstood not what he said nor can giue vs anie answer to make it good Such learned men haue we to do with which are so deepe in their points that they know not what they say Now he that vttereth such riddles himselfe might easily pardon another man in a speech though distasting to him yet in it selfe verie easie to be vnderstood What a stirre doth he make at that that M. Perkins saith that in the regenerate the guiltinesse is remoued from the person but not from the sinne in the person The meaning is plaine that the sinne is pardoned to the man regenerate and therfore cannot make him guiltie but yet in it self and in it owne nature it continueth such as that setting aside the pardon it were sufficient still to make him guiltie and to condemne him as shall be afterwards auouched out of Austin to euerlasting death The pardon acquitteth the man but yet it cannot alter the nature of the sinne it setteth a barre against the effect but take away the barre the cause is as strong as it was before His idle and wast words and fighting with a shadow I let passe if he were not a senslesse man that that M. Perkins saith in the plaine meaning thereof would neuer seeme to him any senslesse imagination But he goeth further How can the fault of Originall sinne remaine in the man renewed by Gods grace although not imputed Why M. Bishop what hindereth I pray you Can there be two contraries saith he in one part of the subiect at once And why not What hath not his Philosophie taught him that contraries are incompatible onely in their extremes Did he neuer reade that contraries when they striue to expell one another do it not in a moment but by degrees and though one be stronger then then the other yet the weaker stil hath that latitude which the strōger hath not gained Thus are there in the regenerate man a Rom. 7.23 the law of sinne and the law of the mind the former rebelling against the latter b Gal. 5.17 the flesh and the spirit the one contrary to the other as the Apostle speaketh and that in one part of the subiect as shal appeare Can there be light and darknesse in the vnderstanding saith he Why did M. Bishop neuer reade of c Zephan 1.15 a darke day or will he reason therof if it be day it cannot be darke or if it be darke it cannot be day And if he can see that light and darknesse may meete together in a day can he not see that light and darknesse may also be together in the vnderstanding One where our Sauiour Christ commēdeth the light of his Disciples d Matth. 13.16 Blessed are your eyes for they see another where he condemneth their darknesse e Mark 8 18. Haue ye eyes and see not By light of vnderstanding Peter saith f Matth. 16.16 Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Blessed art thou Simon saith Christ for flesh and bloud hath not reuealed this vnto thee but my Father which is in heauen The same Peter by and by also bewrayeth darknesse of vnderstanding giuing Christ occasion to say vnto him g Ibid. vers 23 Get thee behind me Satan for thou vnderstandest not the things that are of God but the things that are of men h Orig. in Mat. tract 3. Contraria sibi adhu erant in Petro veritas mendaecium De veritate dicebat Tu es Christus c. Ex mendacio dixit Propitius tibi esto c. Contraria erant adhuc in Petro There were contraries as yet in Peter saith Origen truth and falshood he spake by truth one way he spake by falshood another way In a word the Apostle telleth vs that i 1. Cor. 13.9.12 we know but in part we prophecie but in part we see through a glasse darkly or as the maisters of Rhemes translate it in a darke sort How can that be but that there is still some darknesse in the vnderstanding which yet in part hath receiued light He goeth further Can there be vertue and vice in the will at the same instant Yes M. Bishop for whatsoeuer is wanting of perfect vertue k August epist 29. Id quod minus est quà m debet ex vitro est ex vitio est saith S. Austin it is by reason of vice So long therefore as there is not perfect vertue there is vice remaining together with vertue The inner man wherein is the will of man is renewed as the Apostle telleth vs from day to day S.
soule for how can God haue all the soule so long as concupiscence hath any part therfore in the remainder of any matter of concupiscence there is sinne because c Ibid. Rat. 15. it is sinne when either there is not loue at all or it is lesse then it should be and it is lesse then it should be when it is not with all the soule Therefore doth S. Austin define sinne to be d Ad Simplâ—â— quaest 2. Est piccatuâ—a hominis mordinatio atque peruâ—rsita â—â—d est à prae â—amiore conditore auersio ad cond iâ—â—ife â—â—ra conuersio hominis inordinatio atque peruersitas a disordered and peruerted condition of man Of man he saith not only of the will of man and therefore if in man there be any disordered or mis-conditioned affection the same is sinne But concupiscence which is a rebellion of the law that is in the members against the law of the mind is a disorder in man and therefore necessarily must be holden to be truly sinne A second errour he committeth in that making concupiscence onely the materiall part of sinne he appropriateth it to the inferiour sensuall and brutish parts and faculties of the nature of man and to the resistance thereof against the superiour and more excellent powers of the will and reason and vnderstanding whereas concupiscence truly vnderstood importeth the vniuersall habite of auersion from God and a corruption spred ouer the whole man and defiling him in all parts and powers both of body and soule And therefore doth the Apostle expound the conuersation in or according to the lusts or concupiscences of the flesh to be e Ephes 2.3 the fulfilling of the will of the flesh and of the minde which he could not do but that concupiscence signifieth also the prauitie and corruption of the mind euen as the Apostle S. Peter also maketh it the fountaine of all f 2. Pet. 1.4 the corruption that reigneth in the world And thus amongst the workes of the flesh which are the fruits and effects and as it were the streame of that fountaine of corruption are reckoned those things which haue their proper seate and being in the highest parts of the soule as are g Gal 5 20.21 idolatrie heresie witchcraft enuie hatred pride which being acts of concupiscence and sinfull lust yet are so farre h August de cui Dei lib. 14. cap. 2 3. from being tied to the inferior parts of the soule which haue their occupation properly in the flesh as that some of them and that specially pride and enuie are noted to be the sinnes of the diuell who hath no communion or societie with the flesh and therefore in the name and nature of concupiscences are meerely the vices and corruptions of the mind Yea S. Austin acknowledgeth that i Idem Retract lib. 1. cap. 15. Ipsae cupiditas nihil aliud est quam voluntas sed vitiosa peccatoque seruiens concupiscence is nothing else but the will of man corrupted and seruing sinne and that the temptation of concupiscence is nothing else but k De bono perseuer ca. 6. Qui in tentationem suae mala voluntatis non insertur in nullam prorsus infertur Vnusquisque enim tentatur à concupiscentia sua c. the temptation of a mans owne euill will So saith S. Bernard l Bernard in Canâ— ser 81. Voluntate persisto agere contra legem Nam mea voluntas ipsa est lex in membris meis legi diuinae recalâ—itrans Mihi ipsi mea ipsius voluntas contraria inuenitur It is in my will that I continue to do against the law of God for mine owne will is the law in my members rebelling against the law of God mine owne will is found contrarie to my selfe Whereby it appeareth that concupiscence which is that rebelling law of sinne is a deprauation of the will also and not to be restrained to the brutish and sensuall affections of the inferiour part Nay Hierome noteth that it signifieth m Hieron ad Alagas quaest 8. Nos per concupiscentiam omnes perturbationes animae significatas putamus quibus maeremus gaudemus timemus concupiscimus all the passions or perturbations of the soule whereby we ioy or sorow feare or desire which are holden to be n August de ciuit Dei lib. 14. cap. 3. Origines omnium peccatorum atque vitiorum the originals and beginnings of all sinnes and vices which although Poets and Philosophers haue taken to arise of the flesh yet o Ibid. Non omnia vitae iniquae vitia tribuenda sunt carni ne ab his omnibus purgemus diabolum qui noâ— habet carnem Christian faith saith Austin teacheth otherwise that we are not to attribute these vices of euill life altogether to the flesh that is to the sensuall part least that of all the sinnes thereof we acquit the diuell because he is without flesh Another errour of his is that he maketh the priuation of Originall iustice and auersion of the will to be the principall matter of Originall sinne For the principall matter in Originall sinne is the p 1. Retract lib. 1. cap. 15. Peccatum eos dicimus ex Adam originalitèr trahere id est eius reatu implicatos ob hoc poenae obnoxios deteneri guilt of Adams sinne q Bernard in aduent dom ser 1. Jn Adam omnes peccauimus in illo sententiam damnationis accepimus omnes in whom we all haue sinned and in him haue all receiued the sentence of damnation For that must be accounted the principall which is the cause of all the rest and it is the guilt of the first sinne that is the cause of whatsoeuer further sinne originally cleaueth to vs which together with death it selfe is the punishment of that first sinne His fourth error is as touching the cure of Originall sinne which he maketh to be such as if Originall iustice were wholy restored and all auersion of the will from God wholy taken away Which is so palpably false as that we may wonder that he had so little feeling of conscience as that for shame he would write it to the world For if there be that cure that he speaketh of in the Baptized how is it that there is so little effect or token thereof How is it that after Baptisme there remaineth so great crookednesse peruersenesse of nature which we find commonly to be no lesse then from the beginning men haue complained of How is it that it is r Cyprian de Cardinal Christi operib in Prologo Ommno rarum est difficile fieri bonum facile pronum est esse malum haec sine magi stro sine exemplo doctrina statim à pubescentâ—bus annu imbuimur docemur so rare and hard a matter to be trained to goodnes so easie and ready a matter to become naught that to the one we attaine with much difficulty albeit
cap. 3. Multo magis ad crucifixum respicientes credentes animae morteÌ„ effugituros He teacheth sayth Theophylact that sith the Iewes beholding the image of the brazen Serpent did escape death much more we looking vnto him crucified and beleeuing shall escape the death of the soule Thus they simply tooke the words of Christ and made the cure to consist as on the one side in looking so on the other side in beleeuing M. Bishop saith that the meaning is that men infected with sinne haue no other remedy then to imbrace the faith of Christ Iesus Well then if no other remedy then that is the onely remedy If that be the onely remedy then for remedy there is nothing necessary but onely that And if any thing else be necessary then the cure is not performed by that not to be ascribed vnto it for a cure cannot be said to be done by one thing when that doth not cure without another But as theâ—e to looking so here the cure is ascribed to beleeuing It is therefore to be ascribed to nothing but faith onely As for that which he further requireth by his corrections exceptions it is but a part of the cure which is performed by faith onely For whatsoeuer is necessary in vs to eternall life followeth of true and liuely faith and is ministred vnto vs in Christ Iesus when by faith we haue imbraced him e Acts. 15.9 Our hearts are purified by faith f Gal. 3.14 by faith we receiue the promise of the spirit and g Rom. 8.2 the law of the spirit of life which is in Christ Iesus deliuereth vs from the law of sinne and of death that it may neither preuaile against vs to condemnation nor any further reigne ouer vs in conuersation which being the gift of God is not to be alledged to impeach the free bestowing of the grace of God 28. W. BISHOP His 2. reason is collected of exclusiue speeches as he speaketh vsed in Scriptures As we are iustified freely not of the law not by the law Gal. 2.16 Luk. 8.50 not of works not of our selues not of the works of the law but by faith all boasting excluded onely beleeue These distinctions whereby works and the law are excluded in the worke of iustification include thus much that faith alone doth iustifie 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 law as well as any other vertue being as much required by the law as any other But S. Pauls meaning in those places is to exclude all such workes as either Iew or Gentile did or could bragge of as done 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 obtaine this grace through Christ it was not needfull nay rather hurtfull to obserue the ceremonies of Moyses law as Circumcision the obseruation of any of their feasts or fasts nor any such like worke of the law which the Iewes reputed so necessary Againe that all morall works 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 Iew and Gentile are excluded from being any meritorious cause of iustification and consequently all their boasting of their owne forces their first iustification being freely bestowed vpon them Yet all this notwithstanding a certaine vertuous disposition is required in the Iew and Gentile whereby his soule is prepared to receiue that great grace of iustification that say we is faith feare hope loue and repentance that say the Protestants is faith onely Wherefore say we as the excluding of works and boasting exclude not faith no more do they exclude the rest faith being as well our worke and a worke of the law 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 onely is nothing to the purpose For he was bid beleeue the raising of his daughter to life and not that Christs righteousnesse was his and faith alone may be a sufficient disposition to obtaine a myracle but not to obtaine iustification of which the question onely is Consider now good Reader whether of our interpretations agree better with the circumstance of the text and the iudgement of the auncient Fathers The texts see thou in the Testament Take for a tast of the Fathers iudgement S. Augustines exposition of those places of S. Paul of one of the chiefest of which De gra lib. arb cap. 7. thus he speaketh Men not vnderstanding that which the Apostle saith We esteeme a man to be iustified without the law thought him to say that faith sufficed a man although he liued euill and had no good works which God forbid that the vessell of election should thinke And againe De praedest sanct cap. 7. Therefore the Apostle saith that a man is iustified by faith and not of works because faith is first giuen and by it the rest which are properly called workes and in which we liue iustly are by petition obtained By which it is manifest that S. Paul excluding the workes of the law and the workes done by our owne onely forces doth not meane to exclude good works which proceede from the helpe of Gods grace R. ABBOT If iustification be affirmed of faith denied to all other things it should seeme likely that the meaning of the Scripture is that by faith onely we are iustified M. Bishop answereth that those exclusiue speeches of the law and works of the law do no more exclude feare hope charity then they exclude faith it selfe because it is a worke of the law as well as any other vertue But yet the Apostle teacheth vs that the promise is a Rom. 4.16 therefore of faith that it may be of grace and b Cap. 11.6 if it be of grace it is not of works and therefore expresly seuereth faith from workes as elsewhere he maketh a distinction betwixt c Cap. 3.27 the law of workes and the law of faith so that M. Bishop in confounding faith with the works of the law speaketh flatly contrary to the Apostle For the faith of Christ though it be accidentally reduced to the law yet is not originally intended in the law because Christ who is the obiect of our faith is in order of nature consequent to the law For life is first propounded in the law which when it cannot be obtained there Christ is consequently giuen and offered vnto vs that we may haue life in him But we further tell him as before that we attribute not our iustification to faith
exact of euery man a temporall satisfaction answerable to the fault committed But this cannot be i Hieron in Esa cap. 53 lib. 14. Ne exparte veritas ex parte mendaciū◠eredatur in Christo least as S. Hierome saith in another case it be partly a truth and partly a lye which we beleeue in Christ For then as touching eternall punishment it shall be a truth that Christ is the propitiation for our sinnes but as touching temporall satisfactions it shall be a lye and we shall be said to be the propitiation and attonement for our owne sinnes Which because it is blasphemous and wicked to affirme neither hath the Scripture taught vs any such diuision betwixt Christ and vs therfore we must confesse that in name of satisfaction for reconcilement vnto God we do nothing for our selues but Christ only both temporally and eternally is the satisfaction for our sinnes Christ did not onely beare the infinite wrath of God to acquit vs of eternall punishment but according to the words of the Prophet cited by the Euangelist k Esa 53.4 Math. 8.17 He tooke vpō him our infirmities and beare our sicknesses that is our temporall punishments which what doth it import but that in respect of temporall punishments also Christ is our Redeemer Christ is our satisfaction vnto God And if not so why do we then pray to God to be deliuered from temporall calamities and afflictions for Christes sake Nay see how wickedly this deuice is framed The bloud of Christ serueth not to acquit vs from temporall punishments but the bloud of S. Peter doth and the bloud of Paul and the bloud of the Martyrs these all are helpfull to free vs from temporall satisfactions They pray by one Saint against the toothach by another against the falling sicknesse by another against the plague c. their merits are auaileable in this behalfe but the merit of Christ auaileth nothing And yet they tell vs that the conclusion of all their praiers is Per Christum Dominum nostrum through Christ our Lord. But why do they thus bring in the mediation of Christ if Christ in this respect haue done nothing for vs If Christ haue left the burden of temporall satisfactions to lie wholy vpon vs why do they pray by him and through him to be disburdened thereof This the Church of the faithfull hath alwaies done and in all times The Church of Rome therefore dealeth vnfaithfully to retaine the words of the faithfull and to giue checke to the meaning of them by denying Christ to be our Redeemer from that wrath of God whereby temporall afflictions and punishments are laid vpon vs. As for vs we resolue that as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punishments but also temporall so the obedience and merit of the second Adam to answer that in sauing which the other had done in destroying hath made satisfaction to God for both so that the faithfull penitent soule beleeuing receiuing in Christ forgiuenesse of sinnes beleeueth it selfe to be perfectly reconciled vnto God reckoneth not of any further satisfaction to be made vnto him Now M. Bishop acknowledgeth that Christes satisfaction is of infinite value therfore that our satisfactiō is not to supply his But if it be of infinite value why doth he restraine abridge the effect thereof in respect of them to whom the infinite value of it doth belong why doth he make the value therof in respect of the temporall punishments of sin altogether idle of no vse and if it might haue freed vs from doing satisfaction for our selues why doth it not He giueth vs reasons that by the smart therof we may be feared and made carefull to auoid sin that by suffering we may be cōformed as mēbers to Christ our head You say wel M. Bishop but yet we heare nothing here concerning satisfaction We require a reason of the assertion of our satisfactions for that Christ we say hath yeelded a full satisfaction for vs you tell vs of being frighted from sin made cōformable vnto Christ which are things that stand very well without any matter of satisfaction The Scripture teacheth vs these vses of the sufferings of the faithfull but it saith nothing to vs concerning satisfaction But for the better vnderstanding of this whole matter it is to be obserued that the temporal calamities euils of this life are of thēselues and in their own nature the punishments of sin the effects of Gods curse the beames of his euerlasting fury wrath the forerunners of his dreadful iudgment preparations to death death it self the vpshot of all the rest as it were a gulfe swallowing vs vp into feareful darknesse and vtter destruction both of body soule Now Christ being l Iohn 1.29 the lambe of God that taketh away the sinne of the world in taking away our sins taketh away consequently the effects of sin because the cause being remoued the effects cannot remaine But in sin as hath bene before declared we are to consider both the corruption and the guilt of which the guilt being taken away the corruption may stil remaine and the effects of sinne haue reference to both these Being then reconciled vnto God through Iesus Christ by the not imputing of our sins we see that the temporal afflictions and grieuances of this life are stil continuing lying vpon vs. Hereupon the question is our sins being forgiuen in what nature they continue We say not as satisfactions to the wrath of God in respect of the guilt of sin but as cautions and prouisions of his loue for the destroying of the corruption of it The guilt of sinne is the foundation of satisfaction and where no guilt is there is no satisfaction to be demaunded When therefore forgiuenes hath taken away the guilt there can be no requiring of satisfaction the afflictions thenceforth lying vpon vs are of another nature and to other ends vses then that either we should be said thereby to satisfie God or that God should be said thereby to satisfie himselfe of vs. The vses thereof the Scripture noteth m Rom. 6.6 the destroying of the body of sin n Heb. 12.10 the making of vs partakers of his holinesse o 2. Cor. 4.16 the renewing of the inner man from day to day p Col. 1.12 the making of vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light q 1. Cor. 11.32 We are chastened of the Lord when we are iudged that we should not be cōdemned with the world r Aug. de Trin. lib. 13. cap. 15. Prosunt ista mala quae fideles piè perferunt vel ad emendanda peccata velad exercendam probandamque iustitiam vel ad demōstrandā vitae huius miseriā vt illa vbi erit beatitudo vera atque perpetua desideretur ardenriùs instantiùs inquiratur Vide in Ioan. tract 124. They serue saith Austine
Archbishops got their places by Simonie and abused them to luxurie and all excesse He complaineth that d Iutâ—stiâ—a insinabilu est plaga ecclesia c. A turpi vita à turpi questu à turpi commercio à negatio denique perambulante in tenebris the plague of the Church was inward and incurable and that by filthie life by filthie lucre by filthie companie and by the matter that walketh in the darke that is by Simonie He concludeth thus e Superest vt tam de medio siat daemonium meridianum ad seducendos siqui in Christo residus sunt adhuc permanentes in simplicitate sua Ipse est Antichristus qui se non solùm diem sed etiam meridiem mentiâ—tur It remaineth that the noone-walking diuell be brought forth to seduce if there be any in Christ yet continuing in their simplicitie The same is Antichrist who shal counterfeit himselfe to benot onely day but noone day and shall be exalted aboue all that is called God c. Againe hauing vpon another occasion afterwards entred into the like discourse of the strange declination of the state of the Church he endeth in like sort f In Psal Qui habitat ser 6. superest vt reueletur homo peccati c. It remaineth that the man of sinne be reuealed the son of perdition c. He saw not that the Pope was Antichrist yet he saw that the Church was then by the gouernment of the Pope as a horse sadled and bridled and fully furnished for Antichrist to get vp and ride vpon Yea and it appeareth by that that M. Perkins secondly citeth that he did not thinke S. Peters chaire to be vncapable of Antichrist in that he saith g Idem epist 125. Bestia illa de Apocalypsi cui datum est os loquutus blasphemias bellum gererecum sinctu Petri sedem occupat tanquam leo paratus ad praedam The beast spoken of in the Reuelation to which is giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warre with the Saints possesseth the chaire of Peter as a Lion readie to the prey He spake this indeed of the Antipope but yet it appeareth that he saw the time then fitting for the kingdome of Antichrist and that Antichrist might be likely to sit in Peters chaire and therfore was not farre from seeing and deeming that the Pope was Antichrist But what he saw not others had seene before that time when h Auent Annal. lib 5. Plerique tum Hildebrandum pro contione Antichristum esse praedicant titulo Christi inquibat Antichristi negotium agitat In Babylonia in templo dei sedeâ— Super omne id quod col tur extollitur quasi deus sit se errare noÌ„ posse gloriatur c. Quicquid dixerit legem Dei putat c. many in their Sermons as Auentinus saith did publikely deliuer that Hildebrand was Antichrist that vnder the title of Christ he did the businesse of Antichrist He sitteth in Babylon said they in the temple of God he is exalted aboue all that is worshipped as if he were very God he boasteth that he cannot erre whatsoeuer he saith he taketh it to be the law of God The same Auentinus mentioneth that i Ibid. Plerique omnes boni aperti iusti ingenui simplices tum imperium Antichristi coepisse quòd ea quae Christus seruator noster tot annos antè nobis cantauit euenisse eo tempore cernebant memoriae literarum prodidere almost all good and plaine men that dealt iustly ingenuously and simply did then deliuer in writing that the kingdome of Antichrist was then begun for that they saw that those things were then come to passe which Christ our Sauiour had spoken of so many yeares before Long after that he bringeth in Eberhard the Archbishop of Iunauia of whom I spake before saying k Idem lib. 7. Sub Pont. maximi titulo pastoris pelle lupum saeuissimum nisi caeci sumus sentimus HildebraÌ„dus ante annos centum et septuaginta primus specie religionis Antichristi imperij jundamenta iecit c. Flamines illi Babyloniae soli regnare cupiunt ferreparem non possunt c. Qui seruus seruorum est dominus dominoruÌ„ perinde acsi deus foret esse cupit c. Ingentia loquitur quasi vera Deus esset c. Vnder the title of the highest bishop the garment of a shepheard we perceiue if we be not blind a most cruell wolfe Hildebrand saith he a hundred and seuenty yeares ago did first vnder shew of religion lay the foundation of the Empire of Antichrist c. Those Priests of Babylon desire to raigne alone they can indure no equall He that is the seruant of seruants coueteth to be Lord of Lords euen as though he were God He speaketh great words as though he were God euen that wicked man whom they are wont to call Antichrist in whose forehead a name of blasphemie is written I am God I cannot erre Thus l Matthew of Paris sheweth how Robert Grosthead bishop of Lincolne in the time of king Henry the third being extremely afflicted and grieued to see the desolation and confusion of the Church by the practises of the Bishop of Rome a little before his death called some of his Cleargie to him and by argument and reason informed them that the Pope was Antichrist for that he was m a destroyer of soules for that he by his n Non obstante violated and ouerturned all the constitutions of the holy Fathers for that he multiplied o mischiefes and inconueniences in the Church c. I omit many other that might be brought particularly acknowledging and testifying this point but by these it may appeare that both before the time of S. Bernard and after it was a thing amongst good men coÌ„monly beleeued and spoken that the Pope was Antichrist Yea M. Perkins well obserueth that the reason whereby S. Bernard proued Anacletus the Antipope to be Antichrist proueth all the Popes since to haue bene Antichrists because they haue not bene elected according to that forme whereby he then iustified Innocentius to be the true bishop of Rome that is with consent of the Emperor the Princes of Christendome and the whole Cleargie being since chosen by the Cardinals onely And this he further confirmeth by a decree of Pope Nicholas the second for the election of the Pope that it shall be with the liking of the p Dist 33. In nomine saluo seÌ„per honore reuerentia Imperae toris ista siant Emperour and performed by q Electio Romani Pontificis in potestate Cardinalium Episcoporum sit ita vt siquis Apostolicae sedi sinc praemissae concordi canonica electione eorum ac deinde sequentium ordinum religioseruÌ„ Clericorum Laicorum consensu inthroni zatur non Papa vel Apostolicus sed Apostataeus habeatur the Cardinall Bishops but with the consent of the rest of the Cleargie and Laitie and
no sinne and we do not therein deceiue our selues and though we die yet it is not by reason of sin that we die but either by the disteÌ„perature of our bodies or externall violence But if M. Perkins had sayd as he might haue sayd Infants after Baptisme are subiect to distemperature of body and externall violence and death following all which are the proper effects of sinne therefore they are not without sinne in what a wofull case had M. Bishop bene and how had he bene put to his shifts to deuise an answer Surely S. Austin saith that b Auâ—ust in Psal 37. Non aliquid patimur in ista vita n si ex illa morte quaÌ„ mâ—ruimus primo peccato we suffer not any thing in this life but by reason of that death which we deserued by the first sinne And so saith Origen verie rightly that c Origen in Leuit hom 3. Nobis hominiâ—us vel mors velreliqua omnis fragilitas in carne ex piccati conditione superducta est death and all other frailtie in the flesh was brought vpon vs by the condition or state of sin Therfore distemperature and weaknesse and sicknes and suffering of externall violence are no lesse arguments of sinne then death it selfe and how then doth he make these the causes of death without sinne when they are no otherwise the causes of death but by reason of sinne But he addeth further that God who freely bestowed their liues on them may when it pleaseth him as freely take their liues from them But yet if there be no sin and if it be as the Trent Councell saith that there is nothing in them that God hateth nothing that hindereth them from entring into heauen why then doth God without cause take away their life and not rather without death receiue them vnto himselfe why doth he not immediatly d 2. Cor. 5 4. cloth them vpon that mortality may be swallowed vp of life This is a mysterie to M. Bishop he cannot tel what to say therof But the dying of baptized infants sheweth that there is still in theÌ„ a corruption of flesh and bloud by which the sentence of the Apostle taketh hold of them e 1. Cor. 15.50 flesh and bloud cannot inherite the kingdome of God neither shall corruption inherite incorruption The cause of their death is the putting off of this corruptioÌ„ the dissolution full mortification of the body of sin that this slough being cast off and mortalitie changed into immortalitie corruption into incorruption they may be fit for the inheritance of the kingdome of God Thus Epiphanius bringeth in Methodius disputing against Proclus the Origenist that f Epiphan haer 64. ex Methodiâ— In auxiliaris medicamenti moduÌ„ ab auxiliatore nostro verè medico Deo ad eradicationem peccati ac deletionem assumptae est mors c. Instar medicamentariae purgationis mortem Deus benè inuenit quo sic omnino inculpabiles innoxij inueniamur c. videtur velut siquis summus opifex statuam pulchram ex auro aut alia materia à se constructam rursus conflet mutilatam repentè conspicatus à pessimo quodam homine c. God as the true Physition hath appointed death for a medicinable purgation for the vtter rooting out and putting away of sinne that we may be made faultlesse and innocent and that as a goodly golden image sightly and seemely in all parts if it be broken and defaced by any meanes must be new cast and framed againe for the taking away of the blemishes and disgraces of it euen so man the image of God being maimed and disgraced by sinne for the putting away of those disgraces and the repairing of his ruines and decayes must by death be dissolued into the earth thence to be raised vp againe perfect and without default Now if M. Bishop will not learne it of vs yet let him learne it of these ancient Fathers that sin is the cause of death euen in them to whom notwithstanding it is forgiuen pardoned for Christs sake But he goeth further True it is that if our first parents had not sinned no man should haue died but both haue bene long preserued in Paradise by the fruit of the wood of life and finally translated without death into the kingdome of heauen But since they haue sinned what Marry it is most truly said by S. Paul Death entred into the world by sinne Well then if it entred by sin into the world doth it continue in the world by any other thing then by which it first entred Nay as it entred by sinne so sinne is the onely cause of the continuing of it and without sinne there is no death in the failing of the cause must needs be a surceasing of the effect Now to shew that death is the proper effect of sin M. Perkins alledgeth the words of the Apostle The wages of sinne is death But M. Bishop saith that this place is foully abused by him And why so Forsooth the Apostle here by death meaneth eternall damnation And what then Doth he therfore not meane bodily death also Surely the Apostle alludeth to that that God sayd to our father Adam in the beginning g Gen. 2.17 In the day that thou shalt eate of that forbidden tree thou shalt die the death thereby threatning vnto him both the first and second death And in that meaning hath the Apostle spoken of death in the chapter going before that by sinne came death c. Therefore M. Bishops great maister Thomas Aquinas telleth him that when the Apostle immediatly before saith the end of those things is death he meaneth by death h Tho Aquin. in Rom. cap 6. Peccata â—e se nata sunt inâ—iucere mâ—â—tem teÌ„poralem eternaâ—â— Et â—o â—arg finis peccati mori tam temporalis quà m aeterna both temporall and eternall death Another exception is that sinne is here taken onely for Actuall sinne which is a fiction meerly absurd and vaine For it is a proposition vniuersall concerning all sinne and so vsed vniuersally by all writers and if it be true of Actuall sinne that the wages of sinne is death much more is it true of Originall sinne which is the filthie and corrupt fountaine whence all actuall sins do spring And that we may know that M. Bishop himselfe is of no other mind he himselfe hath vsed it in the section next saue one before this concerning Originall sinne arguing that if Originall sinne were properly sinne in the regenerate then it should cause death vnto them because the wages of sinne is death Whereby it appeareth that he speaketh but at all aduenture and to serue the present turne without any conscience or regard of that he speaketh whether it be true or false He hath bene brought vp in Bellarmines schoole and of him hath learned to care no further but onely to say somewhat though it be starke naught Now for conclusion of this
of God yea the vntruth hereof is so palpable and grosse and contrarie to the common experience of all beleeuers as that we may iustly maruell at the wilfull absurditie of this man in the assertion of it The third reason of our praying continually for forgiuenesse of sinnes is for the obtaining of the fruit effect thereof For so long as we o 2. Cor. 5.7 walke by faith and not by sight we stil pray for the sight of that as touching which we haue now but the comfort of faith and hope We beleeue that we are redeemed both in body and soule yet still we p Rom. 8.23 sigh in our selues waiting for the adoption euen the redemption of our bodies q August in Psal 37. Gaude te redemptum sed non duÌ„ re spe securu esto Ece nim si no gemueris in spe noÌ„peruentes adrem Ioy that thou art redeemed saith Austine but not yet in reall effect in hope or as touching hope be without all doubt If thou shalt not now grone in hope thou shalt not attaine to the reall effect Thus then by praier we sigh and grone for our redemption who yet by faith beleeue that already we are redeemed So therefore albeit we beleeue that God hath forgiuen vs our sinnes yet still we pray for forgiuenesse of sinnes that that may appeare to vs which we now beleeue The Prophet Dauid giueth vs to vnderstand that r Psal 32.1 forgiuenesse of sinnes is blisse and happinesse and therefore a freedome from all misery and sorow We still liue in misery and sorow and seeme wholly strangers to all title of blisfull state Therefore being still in case as if our sinnes were not forgiuen vs we still pray for forgiuenesse of sinnes that as we haue heard so we may see and by effects may discerne and enioy the same forgiuenesse But here M. Bishop telleth vs that to pray to God to giue vs those things we are assured of by faith is as fond and friuolous as to pray him to make Christ our Lord to be his sonne or that there may be life euerlasting to his Saints in heauen of which they are in full and assured possession Which is so fond and friuolous a speech as that well we may perswade our selues that it neuer came from any wise man For matters of faith are of diuers sorts Some are already fully acted and done and those we onely beleeue we do not pray for them as the creation of the world the birth and death and resurrection of Christ and other such like Other some are beleeued as designed and pronounced by God but not yet fully acted and effected to vs which we so beleeue as that still we pray for them till they be effected praier being nothing else but Å¿ August de verb. Dom. ser 36. Ostendit fideÌ„ fontem â—sse orationuâ—â—eâ— posse â—re ruâ—uÌ„ vb caput aquae siccatur the streame or riuer of faith an issue of the desire of that which ioyfully we beleeue A notable example whereof we see in Dauid who when God had sent Nathan to him to certifie him that he would stablish the kingdome for euer in his house posterity albeit he beleeued ioyfully accepted the tidings hereof yet forbeareth not therfore to pray that it might be so t 2. Sam. 7.25 Now therefore saith he confirme for euer the word that thou hast spoken concerning thy seruant and his house and do as thou hast sayd For thou O Lord of hosts hast reuealed vnto thy seruant saying I will build thee an house therefore hath thy seruant bene bold to pray this prayer vnto thee Therefore now let it please thee to blesse the house of thy seruant that it may continue for euer before thee for thou O Lord God hast spoken it Where we plainely see him praying vnto God that that might be whereof he was assured by faith vpon the promise of God that so it should be and not onely so but did therefore pray because God had reuealed vnto him that it should be so And do we not thinke that Dauid beleeued the word spoken to him from God by the same Prophet when he had admonished him of his grieuous trespasse and he repented u 2. Sam. 12.13 The Lord hath taken away thy sinne and yet afterwards he prayeth x Psal 51.1 Haue mercy vpon me O God after thy great goodnesse according to the multitude of thy mercies do away mine offences Our Sauiour Christ beleeued that his y Ioh. 10 28. sheepe shall neuer perish and therefore that the Father would keepe them and none should take them out of his hands and yet he prayeth z Cap. 17.11 Holy Father keepe them in thy name euen them whom thou hast giuen me He was assured by faith that God would deliuer him from death a Psal 16.10 that he would not leaue his soule in hell nor suffer his holy one to see corruption yet b Heb. 5 7. in the dayes of his flesh did offer vp supplications with strong crying and teares to him that was able to saue him from death and was also heard in that which he feared He was assured by faith that God would glorifie him yet he prayeth c Ioh. 17.5 Now glorifie me O Father with thine owne selfe The Apostle S. Paul was assured by faith that d 2. Tim. 4.18 the Lord would deliuer him from euery euill worke and preserue him vnto his heauenly kingdome yet he ceased not to pray Leade vs not into temptation but deliuer vs from euill We beleeue by faith and are assured that Christs kingdome shall come yet we daily pray Let thy kingdome come Thus therefore albeit by faith in the promise of God we now rest assured of the remission of sinnes yet because it is not yet reuealed we still pray Forgiue vs our trespasses that we may enioy by realitie and possession what we beleeue we alreadie haue in Gods affection Now albeit these three arguments hitherto be idle and vaine conceits yet for conclusion he commendeth them for substantiall and sufficient to assure euerie good Christian that he well may hope for Saluation doing his duty but may not without great presumption assure him of it by faith But it hath bene alreadie shewed that doing of dutie can yeeld vs neither faith nor hope truely so called because we come so short of the doing of it Therefore Hierome rightly saith that e Hieron in Esa lib. 17. cap. 64. Si consideremuâ— merita nostra desperanduÌ„ est if we consider our owne merites we must needs desfaire But God would haue f August in Psal 88. Non secundum merita nostra sed secunduÌ„ illâ—us mi sericordiam firma est promissio the promise to be sure not according to our merites but according to his mercie He would haue it to depend vpon his promise and his oath g Heb. 6.18 that by two immutable things wherein it
Christ had imposed vpon him Now M. Perkins to take away the opinion of our owne Righteousnesse and to shew that we haue no other but the Righteousnesse of Christ to rest safely vpon alledgeth as Gregorie doth the rigour and seueritie of Gods iudgement which admitteth of nothing but what is exact and perfect according to the rule of iustice prescribed vnto vs. Where M. Bishop sheweth himselfe a verie stupide and senslesse man not moued with the l 2. Cor. 5.11 terrours of the Lord and the dread of that iudgement which the very Angels tremble at We know it well saith he Yea do but what is then your refuge and defence Marrie seeing there is no condemnation to them that by Baptisme be purged from Originall sinne as saith he M. Perkins himselfe confesseth the Apostle to teach what then needeth any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge Wherein he notably abuseth M. Perkins for the hiding of his owne shame For neither the Apostle nor M. Perkins do teach that by Baptisme we are purged from Originall sinne but onely that in baptisme it is remitted and pardoned so that though it continue still in vs yet the faithfull are not thereby holden guiltie before God So then by forgiuenesse of sinnes through the imputation of Christs merits and obedience it is that there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ it is not for that there is nothing in them for which otherwise they might iustly be condemned Surely they that rightly know themselues do know that in themselues there is that still being for which God might iustly cast them away if he should iudge them in themselues but their comfort hope is that for Christs sake it is not imputed vnto them that they shall stand before Gods iudgement seate in the veile of his innocencie and most perfect Righteousnesse and in him shall haue eternall life adiudged vnto them But with M. Bishop the case is farre otherwise There is no condemnation because there is nothing worthie of condemnation all iustice all innocencie no impuritie or vncleannesse no more sinne then was in Adam in the state of innocencie as he hath m Sect. 10 before spoken in the question of Originall sinne May we not maruell that an hypocrite should thus securely flatter himselfe being occasioned to bethinke himselfe of that dreadfull and fearefull day We are purged from Originall sinne saith he vvhat needes then any iustified man greatly to feare the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge But farre otherwise thought Saint Austine when he sayd as we heard before n August epist 29. Cum rex iustus sederit in throne quis gloriabitur se castuÌ„ habere cor aut quis gloriabâ—tur se esse immunem à peccato Quae igitur spes est nisi superexultet miserecordia iudicium When the iust king shall sit vpon his throne vvho shall glorie that he hath a cleane heart or that he is free from sinne What hope then is there saith he vnlesse mercie be exalted aboue iudgement And what in the rest of his life hath the iustified man no cause greatly to feare the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge no sinne no trespasse for the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge to take any hold of We haue seene before that our best workes will not endure seueritie of iudgement how shall we then quaile by reason of our sinnes S. Austin saith very well o Aug. in Psal 42. Quiâ—unque hic viâ—it quantum libet iuste viuaâ— vae illi sicum illo in iudicium intrauerit Deus Who so liueth here howsoeuer iustly he liue wo vnto him if God enter into iudgement with him And fully answerable hereunto is that which Gregorie saith p Greg. Moral li 8. c. 21 Quantalibet iustitia polleant nequaquam sibi ad iustâ—tiam vel electi sufficieÌ„t si districtè in iudicio requirantur Not the very elect howsoeuer they excell in iustice shal be able to approue themselues innocent if they be narowly sifted in iudgement But most effectuall to the purpose is that of Hierome q Hieron in Esa l. 6. c. 13. Quum dies iudicij vel dormitionis aduenerit dissolueÌ„tur omnes manus quia nâ—llum opus dignum Dei iustitia reperietur c. Omne quoque corâ—siue anima hominis tabescet pauebit conscientia peccati sui When the day of iudgment or of death shall come all hands shal be dissolued because there shal no worke be found vvorthie of the iustice of God neither shall anie man liuing be iustified in his sight Whereupon the Prophet saith O Lord if thou markest iniquities who shall endure it euerie heart and soule of man shall faint and feare by reason of the conscience of his owne sinne And will M. Bishop notwithstanding say what needeth any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge The best is that he leaueth no man to make vse of that which he sayeth because he will giue no man leaue to assure himselfe that he is iustified Yet to make his matter good he alledgeth that Sainr Paul saith that he had runne a good race c. and therefore there vvas a crowne of iustice layed vp for him by that iust iudge c. Of which place we would gladly haue knowne how he maketh application to his purpose The Apostle maketh mention of a crowne of iustice layed vp for him and to be rendered vnto him by a iust iudge but he doth not say that he needeth not to feare the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge God is a iust iudge as well when he iudgeth by lawes of mercie as when he iudgeth by lawes of extremitie as well in the r Rom. 3.27 law of faith as in the law of workes but the rigorous sentence of this iust iudge is onely when he iudgeth by the law of workes By the law of faith God forgiueth and pardoneth he considereth with fauour and Å¿ 2. Cor. 8.12 if there be a vvilling mind it is accepted according to that a man hath not according to that that he hath not and all this he doth as a iust iudge because by law he doth whatsoeuer he doth But in the rigor of the law which is the law of workes he remitteth nothing but requireth all to t Mat. 5.26 the vttermost farthing nothing pleaseth but what is exact and perfect and fully answerable to the rule S. Paul then expected that God as a iust iudge would yeeld vnto him the crowne not by the law of workes but by the law of faith wherein God u Psal 103 4. crowneth in mercy and louing kindnesse because this crowne is a crowne of iustice x Bernard de grat lib. arbit sub finem Corona iustitiae sed iustitiae Dei non suae JustuÌ„ est quippe vt reddat quod debet debet autem quod pollicitus est Et haec est iustitia de quae praesumit Apostolus promissio
c Cap. 4. Sect. 4. What need any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a iust Iudge Hence are those most insolent speeches of theirs that good workes are d Rhem. Annot. 2. Tim. 4.8 truly and properly meritorious and fully worthy of euerlasting life that heauen is the due and iust stipend which God by his iustice oweth to the persons working by his grace that we haue a right to heauen and deserue it worthily that it is our owne right bargained for and wrought for and accordingly payed vnto vs as our hire e Ibid. Heb. 6.10 that good workes be so farre meritorious as that God should be vniust if he rendered not heauen for the same Thereupon Tapper sticketh not to say f Ruard Tapper in explic art Louan tom 2 art 9. Absit vt iusti vi tam aeternam expectent sicut pau per eleemosynam Multò namque gloriâ—sius est ipsoâ— quasi victores triumphatores eam possidere tanquam palmaÌ„ suit sudoribus debitam God forbid that the iust should expect eternall life as the poore man doth an almes for it is much more glorious that they should haue it as conquerers and triumphers as the prize due vnto their labours Thus you your selues haue written M. Bishop and do we slaunder you in reporting truly what you haue written No no your speeches are impudent and shamelesse in this behalfe and such as we wonder that your foreheads serue you to auouch Why doth it not suffice you to preach good workes simply as Christ and his Apostles did with commendation of Gods mercy in rewarding the same What need this vaine foolery of merite so improbable so absurd so impossible whereby you do not magnifie God but set vp the righteousnesse of man against the grace of God As for the definition of the Councell of Trent we esteeme it not knowing the same for the most part to haue bene but a conuenticle of base Italianate Machiauels who by equiuocations and sophistications haue deluded the world and by casting the chaffe of some phrases of the Fathers vpon the meeres and puddles of the schoolemen haue laboured to couer and hide the filth and mire thereof and indeed haue left them still to serue by false confidence and trust for gulfes and whirlpools to swallow vp and deuoure the soules of men Although the words of the Councell may beare some good construction according to the auncient fathers meaning of the name of merites yet by them they are deceitfully set downe to leaue open a gappe to the absurd and intollerable presumption of men in aduancing and lifting vp the desert of mens workes as if God were thereby greatly bound and beholding vnto them How farre their meaning extendeth will appeare by M. Bishop who will not haue vs thinke that he will speake any thing but by the authoritie of that Councell And first he telleth vs that they hold that eternall life is a grace which indeed they dare not denie because the Scripture expresly so affirmeth g Rom. 6.23 Eternall life is the grace or gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. But he addeth to grace a supply of workes quite contrary to the Scriptures for it is expresly sayd h Chap. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of works otherwise grace is no grace i August contra Pelag. Celest lib. 2. ca 24. Non enim gratia Dei gratia erit vllo modo nisi fuerit gratuita omni modo Grace saith Saint Austin is not grace in any sort if it be not free in euery sort It is of grace saith M. Bishop and yet it is of workes also But still to make a shew of vpholding grace he telleth vs that though eternall life be by workes yet the first grace out of which those workes do issue is freely bestowed vpon vs. Which he saith only as ashamed to deny grace altogether and not of any conscience that hee maketh faithfully to auouch the same For if the grace whence those workes do issue which is the grace of iustification be freely bestowed vpon vs why doth he before labour to approue that we are iustified by workes Or if we obtaine the grace of iustification by workes how doth he say that the same is freely bestowed vpon vs The plaine truth is that by their works of preparation they make a man at least in some sort as we haue heard before out of Bellarmine to merit and deserue euen the first grace if by the first grace we vnderstand the grace of their first iustification as M. Bishop vsually doth But beside grace it is also a reward due in iustice saith he And how so Marry partly by the promise of God Now if he rested here we would not contend with him For promise is indeed grace and iustice in respect of promise is nothing but truth in the performance thereof neither is here any impeachment of the free gift of God But not contented herewith he addeth that it is due in part also for the dignitie of good workes And thus he confoundeth those things which the Scripture still very precisely distinguisheth aduertising vs that k Rom. 4.14 if they which are of the law that is of workes be heires then is faith made voide and the promise is made of none effect and againe l Gal. 3.18 if the inheritance be of the law that is of workes it is no longer by promise To be inheritors by workes and to be inheritors by promise are things so opposite as that the one wholly excludeth the other neither can they possibly stand together As for that which he saith of infants merite and dignitie it is also the schoolemens fiction and deuice Remission of sinnes is their saluation as it is ours and in them it standeth good which the Apostle saith m Rom. 5 2â— As sinne hath raigned ouer them vnto death so grace also raigneth by righteousnesse that is by imputation of righteousnesse vnto eternall life not by any dignitie in them but through Iesus Christ our Lord. But as touching them that arriue to yeares of discretion he telleth vs that either they must by good vse of grace merite life or for want of such fruite fall into the miserable state of death A very hard sentence for himselfe for if he neuer haue life till he merite and deserue it we can well assure him that he shall go without it And I wonder that his heart did not tremble at the writing hereof but that he hath hardened the same against the truth and writeth but only for maintenance of that occupation and trade that must yeeld maintenance backe againe to him What will he say in the end when he shall lie wrastling with death and readie to resigne his soule into the hands of God Will he then craue for mercie who writeth now so earnestly for merite Let him take heede that God do not then answer him n Luk. 19.22 Out of thine
one of vs. Where my portion raigneth I beleeue that I also raigne where my bloud ruleth I beleeue that I also haue dominion where my flesh is glorified I know that I also am glorious Albeit I be a sinner yet I doubt not of this fellowship of grace Albeit my sinnes hold backe yet my substance namely being now of his flesh and his bones requireth it Albeit mine owne defaults doe exclude me yet fellowship of nature putteth mee not away I might despaire because of my exceeding great sinnes and corruptions my defaults and infinite negligences which I haue committed and dayly without ceasing doe commit in thought and word and worke and euery way that humane frailtie can sinne but that thy Word O my God became flesh and dwelt amongst vs. But now I dare not despaire because he being obedient vnto thee vnto death euen the death of the crosse hath taken away the hand-writing of our sinnes and fastening it to the crosse hath crucified sinne and death Now securely I take breath and heart againe in him who sitteth at thy right hand and maketh intercession for vs. By these words and many other that might be alledged out of that booke the Reader may iudge of the construction that M. Bishop maketh of the words cited by M. Perkins We see nothing here but confession of sinnes in himselfe no other hope but onely forgiuenes of sins in Christ Surely these are not the speeches of a man dreaming of an ablenesse giuen vnto him to deserue eternall life No no it was neuer heard of in the world that the meaning of these words My hope is wholly in the death and merite of Christ should be that we hope to be able by Christ to merite and deserue saluation vntill these brazen faced hypocrites were hired and set to worke by Antichrist for the confusion of soules by making them to leane vpon the broken staffe of their owne merites in steed of the onely sauing merite of the bloud of Christ The faithful haue alwayes in their end betaken themselues to this hold and many returning vnto God euen at the last gaspe hauing nothing in themselues to comfort themselues haue securely reposed their hope in the merit and death of Christ and with ioy and comfort haue gone to God who if they had vnderstood hope in Christ according to M. Bishops exposition thereof of being to be made able by Christ to merite heauen would haue bene rent and torne in peeces with perplexitie and feare neither could haue conceiued any comfort thereof at all But let him alone he shall one day vnderstand the vntruth of his answer when he shall be glad to make vse of those words which we haue spoken of or the like without that good sence as hee calleth it which now his senslesse and dead heart imagineth of them The place of Basil is as cleare as the light yet he laboureth to cast a mist before it also but cannot so doe it but that hee is forced in part to acknowledge the truth on our behalfe k Basil in Psal 114. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is layd vp eternall rest saith he for them that striue lawfully in this life not to be rendered according to debt for workes but prouided according to the grace of the bountifull God for them that trust in him Where apparently Basill alludeth to the words of the Apostle l Rom. 44. To him that worketh that is to him that hath the righteousnes of workes the reward is not imputed * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by fauour but by debt and therefore the phrases being borowed from the Apostle must with him haue the same meaning as with the Apostle they haue His meaning then is plaine that that eternall rest is not rendered by way of debt but by way of fauour and grace and neuer hath any ecclesiasticall writer vnderstood those phrases otherwise Onely M. Bishop telleth vs that Basils meaning is that it is not rendered according to the debt of workes that is according to the iust rate of workes but in a fuller measure and aboue our merites But his masters of Rhemes reiect this commentary of his and doe tell him that our workes are m Rhem. Testam Annot. 2. Tim. 4. fully worthy of euerlasting life God then doth not exceed the rate of our workes as they say but giueth onely what we are fully worthy of what we fully and iustly merite and deserue thereby Yea and they saw well that to teach otherwise as M. Bishop doth is to ouerthrow merite For if God do giue vs aboue our merits then we do not merite that which God giueth or if we do merite it then it cannot be sayd to be aboue our merites But it is aboue our merites sayth M. Bishop therefore it followeth necessarily that we doe not merite or deserue it Yea wee haue seene before out of Fulgentius and Bernard that Gods reward doth so incomparably exceede all the merite and worke of man as that eternall life is not due thereunto by right neither should God doe any wrong if hee did not giue it and therefore the sentence of Basill is true according to the Apostles intendment of those termes which he vseth that eternall life is not rendered by way of debt for workes but by grace that is freely bestowed to them that trust in him M. Bishop telleth vs that hee maketh eternall life to be the prize of the combat but what of that seeing hee giueth vs to vnderstand that this prize is with fauour and mercie proposed and with the same mercie and fauour rendered to them that fight the combat Therefore hee sayth in another place n Basil de humilit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is nothing left thee O man to glorie of whose glorying and hope consisteth in this that thou mortifie all that is thine and seeke in Christ the life to come whereof hauing the first fruites we are now therein liuing wholly by the grace and gift of God There is then with Basil no merit no debt in any sort because we liue wholy by the grace and gift of God so that M. Bishops exposition is but a meere falsification of Basils words M. Perkins further alledgeth a saying of Austin He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne gifts not thy merits M. Bishop answereth that S. Austin was too wise to let any such foolish sentence passe his pen. He questioneth the matter What congruitie is it to say thus He directeth a better forme of speech It had bene better sayd thus Now if the sentence be S. Austins what will men but take M. Bishop for a foole that wold so vnaduisedly befoole S. Austin and take vpon him to correct his words when he had no cause The place indeed is misquoted either by M. Perkins mistaking or by the ouersight of the Printer for in steed of Psal 102. he hath quoted Psal 120. by misplacing of the figure a very small and easie ouersight But S.
the question of Vowes 19. W. BISHOP The fift reason is taken out of those texts which teach that men are worthy of eternal life They shall walke with me in whites Apoc 3. Sap. 3. 2. Thess 1. Luk. 20.35 because they be worthy God proued them and found them worthy of himselfe That you may be esteemed worthy of the kingdome of God Now if men be worthy of eternall life it must needs be granted that they haue deserued it M. Perkins answereth that they were indeed worthy but not for their owne merits but for Christs imputed vnto them This is his onely refuge yet hath he not nor cannot shew any one text in Scripture that speaketh so But to refell him turne onely to the places and there you shal find that this worthinesse rose of good workes as Christ saith Apoc. 3. I know thy workes and find them not full yet there be some amongst you who haue not defiled their garments but haue their works full they shall walke with me in whites because they be worthy 2. Thess 1. and by sustaining persecutions they were made worthy of that kingdome And in the words following the Apostle signifieth that it is as iust for God to requite good workes with the ioyes of heauen as he doth punish wicked with the paines of hell R. ABBOT M. Perkins for obiection proposeth the place of the Reuelation a Apoc. 3 4. They shall walke with me in white for they are worthy as whereby they would proue merit because a man cannot be worthy but he must merit deserue M. Bishop out of his store addeth two other places of the new Testament but they are such as whereby is ministred vnto vs a very ready and pregnant answer to the first The place of Saint Luke is by their owne vulgar translation thus b Luk. 20.35 Qui digni habebuntur that is They who shall be accounted worthy The words of Saint Paule are c 2. Thess 2.5 Vt digni habeamini that ye may be esteemed worthie of the kingdome Whereby we conceiue and vnderstand what mans worthinesse is Gods dignation Gods acceptatioÌ„ Gods vouchsafing to take him as worthy for Christs sake though in respect of himselfe he be not worthy To this M. Bishop saith This is his onely refuge yet can he not shew any one text of Scripture that speaketh so But we answer him that all those texts of Scripture which do thus speake of God reputing or esteeming or accounting worthy do import so much vnto vs. For if our worthines stand in Gods esteeming and accounting of vs we may not of the title of worthinesse conclude that by perfection of reall qualitie we are that for which he is content in mercie and fauor to accept vs. We are accordingly worthie as we are iust We are iust to speake of perfect iustice not by righteousnesse of workes but onely by Gods imputation of righteousnesse without workes as we haue seene before In like sort therefore we are worthy d Bernard in Dedicat. Eccles ser 5 Nos sumus sed ipsius dignatione non dignitate nostrae by Gods vouchsafing acceptance not by our worthinesse as S. Bernard saith And hereto agree the confessions of the faithfull Iacob saith e Gen. 32.10 I am lesse then all thy mercies and all the truth which thou hast shewed vnto thy seruant that is as we reade it I am not worthy thereof according to that which Chrysostome saith f Chrysostom de compunct cordis Etsi millies moriamur etsi omnes animae virtutes expleamus nihil tamen dignum gerimus ad ea quae ipsi à Deo percepimus Though we dye a thousand deaths though we fulfill all the vertues of the soule yet do we nothing worthy in comparison of those things which we our selues haue receiued of God Iohn Baptist g Mat. 11.11 then whom there arose not a greater amongst womens children yet saith of himselfe in respect of Christ h Mat. 3.11 I am not worthie to beare his shoes i Mar. 1.7 I am not worthy to vntie the latchet of his shoe The Centurion of whose faith our Sauiour testifieth that k Mat. 8.10 he had not found so great faith no not in Israel yet saith of himselfe l Ver 8 I am not worthy that thou shouldest come vnder my roofe m Bernard in Dedicat. Eccles Ser. 5. Lege ô homo in corde tuo lege intra te ipsum de teipso testimonia veritatis hac communi luce iudicabis te indignuÌ„ Reade O man saith S. Bernard in thine owne heart reade within thy selfe concerning thy selfe the witnesse of truth and thou wilt iudge thy selfe vnworthy of this common light Thus holy men haue spoken thus they haue thought and if our vnworthinesse be such to these things shall we dreame of a worthinesse to the crowne of heauen n Psal 31.16 Saue me saith Dauid for thy mercies sake that is saith S. Austine o Aug. in Psal 30. Hoc est non in mea iustitia non in meis meritis sed in tuâ— misericordia non quia ego sum dignus sed quia tu misericors not in my righteousnes not in my merits but in thy mercie not because I am worthy but because thou art mercifull Againe the same S. Austine saith in another place p Idem in Psal 41. Nobis Deus omnia bona praestat quia bonus est non quia nos digni sumus quia ille misericors est non quiae in aliquo promeruimus God yeeldeth vnto vs all good things because he is good not because we are worthy because he is mercifull not because we haue meririted in any thing The Prophet acknowledgeth God giuing deliuerance q Psal 44.26 for his mercies sake or as the vulgar Latin readeth for his names sake Saint Austin againe expoundeth it r Aug in Psal 43. Hoc est gratis propter nomeÌ„ tuum non propter merituÌ„ meuÌ„ quia tu digna turus es facere non quia ego digâ—us sum cui facias That is freely for thy names sake not for my merit because thou shalt vouchsafe to do it not because I am worthy to whom thou shouldest do it Thus doth S. Austine oftentimes giue checke to M. Bishops conceipt of worthinesse by occasion of those phrases so often vsed for thy names sake for thy mercies sake for thy righteousnesse sake So Basil expoundeth the same phrase Å¿ Psal 143.12 For thy mercies sake t Basil in Psal 142. Non quòd ego dignus sim sed propter benignitatem tuam not because I am worthy but because of thine owne goodnesse Now if M. Bishop will haue no saluation but that he wil be worthy of it let him heare what S. Bernard saith u Bernard in Dedicat. Eccles Ser. 5 Quòd si nos puerili animositate gratis saluari nolumus merito non saluamur Excludit miseriae dissimulatio