the error of your interpretation which you haue sucked from your corrupt maisters Cursed is euery one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to do them The law promiseth life to them which obey the Law in all things they that offend in any thing to them it threatneth death and damnation p DVR Yet Christ Math. 11.30 saith My youke is easie and my burden light And S. Iohn 1. Epist 2.4 Ho that saith I know him and keepeth not his Commandements is alayr WHIT. pag. 705. S. Ioh. 1. Epist. 5.3.4 expoundeth the speech of Christ His Commandements are not grieuous For all that is borne of God ouercommeth the world and this is the victorie that ouercommeth the world euen our faith This yoke then to those who haue faith seameth not grieuous because they are inflamed with the loue of Gods Law neither feare they the curse of it because they are ingrafted by faith into Christans for the place of S. Iohn I answere they are said to keepe the Commandementâ— who do their best enendeuour to keepe them If any do thinke that he so keepeth them that hee is without all sinne that is that he perfectly keepeth them S. Iohn calleth him a lyar 1. Ioh. 1.8 An hard condition and which no man can euer satisfie Christ doth propose to vs another condition much easier Mar. 16.16 Beleeue and thou shalt bee saued By this new Couenant the old q DVR If it be abrogated how are we not freed from the obedience of it If God require only that you beleeue then by beleeuing you fulfill the Lavv and so haue not only an imputed but an inherent righteousnes WHIT. pag. 614. I say not that the Law is simplie abolished but in some respect Therefore it vvill not follovv that vve are freed from the obedience of it Againe vvee say not that faith fulfilleth the Law as if it did performe perfect obedieÌ„ce to it but because it layeth hold on Christ vvho is the end and perfection of the Lavv and on his righteousnes Therefore is it not an inherent but an imputatiue iustice is abrogated so as whosoeuer beleeueth the Gospell is freed from the condition of the Law Gal. 5.18 Rom. 6.14 For they that r DVR Christ saith not as you write but Hee that beleeueth and is baptised shall be saued Now they who are baptised haue receiued from God a good will to keepe the whole Law which they determine afterwards by the grace of Christ to obserue WHIT. pag. 715. The words of Christ confirme as â—â—ch as I brought them for For Baptisme is not a worke of the Law but a wale of faith And Christ sheweth that our saluation consisteth only in faith And though the baptised frame theirliues according to the rule of the Law and are endued with new wills and new strength yet they do it not with that mind to iustifie themselues by their obedience before the Lord. Then should they lose the righteousnes of faith which doth not consist in our merits and good vvorkes but is such as the Apostle describeth Rom. 4.5 beleeue are not vnder the Law but vnder grace What needs many words Å¿ DVR This is your new Diuinitie that vvee should be freed from the cursse of the Lavv vvhich vvee cannot fully obey vvhen as Christ at the last shall pronounce the cursse against those vvho haue not obered And Christ as S. Paul saith hath freed vs from the cursse because by his death be â—ath deserued grace for vs vvhereby we may keepe the Lavv. WHIT. pag. 713. This is your ignorance in Diuinity For who is ignorant of that which the Apostle affirmeth plainely Gal. 3.13 that Christ hath freed vs from the cursse of the Law Though then we cannot fully keepe the Law yet being ingrafted into Christ and he communicating his righteousnes vnto vs wee escape the cursse of the Lavv. At the last day it is no maruell if Christ pronounce the cursse of the Law against the reprobates vvho neuer vvere freed from the cursle And if Christ by his death brought vs grace to keepe the Law why might not the Galathians haue kept the Lavv and obtained righteousnes by it But the Apostle shevveth them that Christ tooke the cursle because he tooke both the sinne and the punishment vpon him not that therby he procured theÌ„ grace to fulfill the Law Christians are deliuered from the curse of the law but not from the obedience of it As for our works surely God regardeth them and if they be good he rewardeth them if contrarie he iudgeth them worthy of punishment t DVR Jn those vvho are iustified God much respecteth their vvorkes as in Abraham Iam 2.21 and 1. Ioh. 3.7 And in Phinehas Psal 106.31 his vvorke imputed for righteousnes WHIT. pag. 716. To the places of Saint Iames and Saint Iohn you haue been ansvvered before The fact of Phinâ—haâ— proceeded from faith and so the praise of it to bee giuen to faith not to the worke If you accounted of Thâ—mas as you make shew of your iudgment vvould bee sounder in these things For thus he vvriteth on Galat. 3. VVorkes are not the cause that any one is iust before God but they are affâ—ctes and manifestations of righteousnes Neither Luther not any of vs say any more but in iustifying of vs God hath no respect to our works u DVR The Prophet saith not that a man is iust because be beleeneth but that be vvho is iust doth liue by his faith that is doth vphold himselfe by his faith and sainteth not It is as absurd to be iust by another mans iustice as to liue by another mans life WHIT. pag. 716. I could admit of your exposition but that I am persvvaded the Apostle vnderstood the Prophers mind beuer then you For the Apostle hath vsed it to proue that we are iustified by faith and not by the workes of the Law no not by those which are wrought after faith for thus he reasoneth Gal. 3.11 That 〈◊〉 man is iustified by the Law in the sight of God it is euident for the iust shall liue by faith And the Law is not of faith What hath he concluded but that you demy that is that the Prophet hath said that a man is iustified because hee beleeueth So Chrysast in Gal. 3. sheweth that saith iustifieth by the testiâ—â—â—nie of the Prophet Abakuk Which if it were not what concerneth it the Galathians who vvere endued vvith faith and ioyned their vvorkes vvith their faith If it be absurd to be iust by another mans righteousnes I pray you tel me hovv the Scripture calleth Christ both the cursse and sinne As for vs we had rather be absurd vvith the holy Ghost then vvise vvith you for the iust shall liue not by his works but by his faith Now goe on * DVR Then where is your faith which assureth you of the remission of your sinnes and quiteth all your
made man absolute perfect wisdome and other gifts of the spirit were heaped vpon him certainly he had it not alone nor am I moued with the authority of the schoolmen who lest they might seeme to thinke lesse honorablie of Christ doe attribute to him presently all perfections And Damascens argument taken from the personall vnion doth not conclude it Damasc lib. 3. de Orthodox side vnlesse we will thinke that the Deity did infuse all the quality of it selfe into the humanity of Christ That which the Euangelist writeth of this progresse of wisdome pertaineth only to the human nature of Christ And seeing that Christ would assume the whole nature of man Heb. 4.15 sauing in sinne and lay off that person of God and emptie himselfe and take the forme of a seruant Phil. 2. will it be vnbeseeming the person of Christ that wee say hee was made both wiser and fuller of grace by little and little He was indeed most full of grace â—nd whatsoeuer grace any bodie hath al that he drew out of this euer remaining fouÌ„taine of most abundant grace Ioh. 1.16 but yet this hindreth not but that Christ as the Euangelist writeth might grow in grace which thing also Ambrose confesseth For so he saith Ambros in Luc. lib. 2. cap. 2. k DVR But he saith lib. 5. de fide cap. 8. I say that the Sonne was ignorant of nothing but he tooke vpon him our affection that hee might say hee was ignorant by our ignorance WHIT pag. 553. If Christ as a child was ignorant of nothing because of the personall vnion with the Deity yet it is a very childish argument to reason from the person to the humane nature that because the man Christ is ignorant of nothing therefore the humaniâ—y of Christ is not ignorant of any thing If Ambrose sometime vpon occasion diffeâ— from himselfe let him looke to it According to the flesh certainly hee was filled with wisdome and grace Nor doe some of your men Campian differ from this iudgement lest you should perhaps imagine it to be so horrible as that it cannot fall vpon a Catholike for I anseniiâ—â— Bishop of Gandaua Comment in concord cap. 12. Erasm annot in Luc. cap. 2. who was present at the CoÌ„uenticle of Trent professeth that he doth willingly incline to this iudgement and Erasmus albeit I name him not among writers on your side doth giue his note that it is the truer opinion But say you they affirme also that Christ was ignorant of some things And why may they not affirme it This say you is as much as if they affirmed that he was defiled with originall sinne Now at length you begin to argue very wittely that our Vniuersitie men may vnderstand your wonderfull subtiltie in disputing Would you deale on this manner with vs Campian if that dispute which you so often wish might bee permitted you For what could be spoken more absurdly Christ was ignorant of something therfore Christ was defiled with originall sinne As if he that is ignorant of something which may be knowne or he which is not endued with the perfect knowledge of all things it must needs be that he is defiled with sinne Thus then I will returne you a like argument l DVR Though they were ignorant of many things yet they had not that ignorance which commeth frâ— originall corruption vvhich if you say Christ had you must affirme that he was defiled vvith originall sinne WHIT. pag. 555. All ignorance commeth not from originall sinne as appeareth by the ignorance of Adam and the Angels therefore Christ might be ignorant without sinne And though we affirme all ignorance is now the punishment of sinne yet will it not follow that no ignorance was in Christ nay rather that there was for hee was to take vpon him the punishment of all our sinnes Therefore hee vnderwent not only this punishment but also death being the punishment of sinne Rom. 6 2â— yet for all this was he not defiled with originall sinne DVR The Fathers say he knevv not the day of iudgement because hee hath not reuealed it and would that others should be ignorant of it WHIT. pag. 556. This interpretation is easilie refelled For from this will follow that the Father also was ignorant of it seeing the Father did no more tell it and manifest it to others then the Sonne did The Angels are now ignorant of many things for they know not that day and houre and Adam Mar. 14.36 before he sinned was ignorant of many things for he did not vnderstand that Satan lay in waite for him therefore both the Angels are now defiled with sin and Adam in his greatest innocencie was a sinner You shall neuer pricke vs with these goades so as that wee may feare any deadly wound If you know not that there is an ignorance void of all fault learne it of Thomas who wil teach you that negatiue ignorance which he termes nescience 12. q. 76. art 2. is not sinne but the priuatiue If you can conclude that consequent out of our iudgement that Christ was ignorant of somewhat which hee then ought to haue knowne when he was ignorant of it then you put vs downe from this our standing For it is not a fault not to know those things which yet may bee knowne vnlesse it concerne vs to haue them knowne For who will blame a Porter for that he is ignorant of the Mathematikes But concerning Christ I answere now that vnto you which toucheth this cause neerer Although he were most pure from all spot of sinne so as nothing could be more vncorrupt yet hee tooke vpon himselfe the punishment due to sinne that he might deliuer vs from it Therefore also hee would die albeit death issued from sinne He then that suffered death for vs which sinne brought in can any thing which is ours be vnbeseeming him so as it be not infected with sin And you can neuer proue that ignorance in Christ was any whit more faultie than death Christ as he was a true man albeit a pure man so hee did neuer thinke imagine or vnderstand all things at once and he did sleepe sometimes Do you thinke that Christ while hee was sleeping did comprehend all things in his memorie which though you should affirme yet I see no reason to beleeue you That which Christ spake of that day and houre no man knoweth it Marc. 13.32 nor the Sonne himselfe Cyrill writeth that Christ spake it of himself and that he knew not the day of iudgement Cyril Thesaur lib. 9. cap. 4. as he was man because it is proper to the humane nature to bee ignorant of things to come But now say you wee shall take knowledge of worse things and here you recite many things concerning Christs sweaâ—e horror and sudden outcrie I acknowledge that which you alleage but I see no paradoxe therein I am not ignorant what is wont to be giuen out by you
the Euangelists and Apostles I wonder you are not ashamed of Hippolytus of whom Harding himselfe was almost ashamed Hippolyt Thinke not that we are ought moued with e DVR VVhy do you reiect this booke of Hippolyte as counterfeite Hierome affirmeth that he was a Bishop and hath written many Commentaries vpon the Scriptures WHIT. pag. 367. Will it therefore follow that this booke is not counterfeit nay it is the rather forged because Hierom doth not number it amongst his bookes Hyppolitus was a very worthy man of whom Eusebius Hierom Theodoret Nicephorus haue made verie honorable mention But this booke is childish in the beginning and in the whole altogether vnanswerable to his eloquence and iudgement authors of so small credit so lately drawne but of darknes as they scarse yet haue learned to looke vpon the light For what was this Hippolytus He writ you say of Antichrist But how worthily that foolish booke of Hippolytus which a certaine man I know not who of late daies published gesseth that the Diuell is Antichrist and faineth many other things which neither can be true nor were euer esteemed for true And yet you marueile we set him so light whom no man regards or reads or almost knowes I can giue you good leaue to recken him for your owne and if you will let him haue a better note in your armie The accusation concerning Cyprian Cyprian is more haynous whom all men reuerence for his singular faith and excellent learning But Caussaeus tearmeth him senselesse and without God They of Magdenburge call him a corrupter of penance Shall I be tied to take vpon me and defend euery speech which any man hath at any time vttered This Caussaeus I neuer saw nor before this euer heard of him But in as much as you so odiously accuse him I suppose him to bee some learned and godly man Vnto that he saith of Cyprian I answere that which I remember I haue read in f DVR That Cyprian which Nazianzene speaketh of was not our Cyprian the Father of the Church WHIT. pag. 367. Nazianzene certainely speaketh of the same Cyprian for see how hee describes him He did not only gouerne the Church of Carthage and all Affricke but the vvhole VVest and almost the East the Southerne and Northerne parts how thinke you is it not the same Cyprian Nazianzene viz. that he was in his youth dissolute and giuen to much vice and worshipped Diuels and vsed the helpe of Diuels He was saith Nazianzene a worshipper of Diuels and after a disciple of Christ. Nazian de Cypri Your vnreasonablenes forceth me to mention those things which I had rather haue concealed For in the Fathers imperfections you sticke fast like a burre and cease not to rub vp the remembrance of those things which you should doe better not once to touch If these things which Nazianzene reporteth of Cyprian be true then Caussaeus might say that Cyprian at that time was foolish and godlesse For I cannot thinke that Caussaeus would write so of him but in regard of those times or that any man would conceiue so iniuriously of that godly Martyr whereas they of Magdenburge complaine that hee corrupted the doctrine of repentance therein they forge against him no new accusation but rather disclose that which all men know to haue been too true Cyprian wrote some thing of Repentance very vnseasonably and vndiscreetly and not he g DVR O singular impudencie O intollerable arrogancie what haue all the Fathers in that age erred so sousely in so great a matter As if they were ignorant that the works of repentance had any vertue any where else but from the merits and blood of Christ. WHIT. pag. 369. What neede all this heate It had been your part to haue shewed that the Fathers who then liued haue spoken nothing vnfitly of repentance so had you confuted that I charge them with which your heare will not cure And what if the Fathers haue thought that mens works haue all their vertue and power from the merit of Christ will it thence follow they haue spoken nothing vnfitly of repentance and works As if Christ by his death had onely merited that we might by our works and merits deserue eternall life or that they who hold the foundation may not build timber or haie vpon it alone but all the holy Fathers of that time were tainted with that error For being desirous by seuere lawes to limit and restraine the euill manners of men they made the greatest part of Repentance to consist in certaine outward disciplines which they appointed which seuere censuring of sinne sharpe punishing of wickednes might happely be borne withall but when they thought the punishment of sinne to be discharged Gods iustice satisfied freedome from sinne and certeine forgiuenes with righteousnes hereby to be procured herein they diminished the power of Christs death they attributed too much to their owne inuentions and in a word depraued the doctrine of repentance because our sinnes are clensed and remoued by no offices or workes of ours but only by the blood and passion of Christ And so your obiection of Repentance is answered We doe not for all this deny the workes of Cyprian nor reiect the bookes of any Father of that age as you falsely affirme seeing both he and they agree with vs in the greatest questions but this is the priuiledge of you and your fellowes that you euen greedily hunt after and pursue whatsoeuer is faulty in any author as if all the Fathers errors serued to make vp the body and faith of your religion Something you say Cyprian wrote to Cornelius which if we giue credit vnto then Peter Martyr and his cōfederats must be held for worse thē adulterous sacrilegious but what that is I cannot so much as couiecture I know that Cyprian sent many letters to Cornelius but none of them accuse vs either of adultery or sacriledge neither can you out of those letters alleadge any thing to our preiudice or your aduantage but this is euer your manner to proue nothing clearely and distinctly but only to name the Fathers and from their names to raise certaine rouing vncertaine suspitions That which you write of Chambers and pillowes I passe ouer as nothing else but scoffing and reproachfull taunts such as is common in euery varlets mouth Now you come to the next age and heere you mention Chrysostome Nazianzene Ambrose and Hierome But to what purpose I pray you Chrysostom for what if Luther do censure Chrysostome sharply because by too much aduauncing our works and merits he obscureth the righteousnes of faith what though Caussaeus find some thing fabulous in Nazianzene Nazian h DVR You freely graunt that Chrysostome Nazianzene Ambrose and Hierome are on Campians side and yet you pleasantly demaund are these Fathers wholy yours we who are then true sonnes doe not challenge them as halfe Fathers but wholy our Fathers WHIT. pag.
did he not teach that grace was inbred in nature and your Popish crevv defendeth the same who seeth not then Pelagius sitting in your triumphant chariot Romish Church seek for the auncient Church of Rome you shall neuer find it for shee hath now lost not the life only but the very colour and appearance of the true Church Seeing therefore all other things faile you and also Histories themselues on which you seemed much to relie helpe you nothing what remaineth but one of these two either must you yeeld before the battaile or die in the battaile I wish you would once at length take knowledge of that which Nazianzen writeth We haue learned it to bee commendable aswell to yeeld vnto reason as with reason to ouercome EDMVND CAMPIAN The eighth Reason which is the Paradoxes of our aduersaries WHen that most excellent men I reuolue in my mind amongst many heresies wherewith I haue to doe certaine moÌ„strous opinions of such as are fantasticallie giuen I could not but condemne my self of slouthfulnes and cowardlines if making triall thereof I should bee afraid of any mans actiuitie and strength let him be as eloquent as yee would wish let him be as much exercised as you would desire yea let him be one that hath throughly studied all sorts of books yet must he needs be to seeke both for matter and words also when he shall vndertake to maintaine those his vnpossible propositions as follow for if he perhaps will giue his consent we will dispute of God of Christ of Man of sinne of Iustice of Sacraments and of Manners I will trie whether they dare maintaine their opinions such sayings as they lingring after their owne lure haue bruted abroad by their writings God graunt they will acknowledge these their owne a De Deo Cal. Inst lib. 1. cap. 18. lib 2. cap. 4. lib. 3. cap. 23. 24. Pet. Mart. in 1. Sam. 2. Methanct in cap. Rom. 8. VVittem 1524. Sic docet Luther in asser 36. in resol asser 36. in lib. de ser arbit Praesat in anno Phil. In Apol. Eccl. Ang. Vide Ench. pre an 1543 axiomes * This is most false not any one of our men haue affirmed that God is the author of sinne God is the author and cause of sinne willing prompting making commaunding and working it and their gouerning the wicked counsels of naughty men * This is false we do not so compare togither The adultery of Dauid and the treason of the Traitor Iudas was as properly the worke of God as the calling of S. Paul was This monstrous doctrine whereof Philip Melancthon was once ashamed yet Martin Luther from whose brest Philip suckt the same as highly extolleth as though it had been some heauenly oracle and therefore matcheth his said scholler in a manner with the Apostle S. Paul I will demaund also what mind Luther was of whom the English Caluinists affirme to haue been a man sent from God to lighten the Word when hee razed out of the Letany vsed in the Church this verse O blessed Trinitie and one God haue mercy vpon vs then in order I will proceed to the person of o De Christ Inst lib. 1. c. 13. nu 23. 24. Beza in Hess Beza contra Schmidel lib. de vnit Hypost dua in Christ. nat Christ demaund of them what these Paradoxes meane whereas the Catholike Church holdeth that Christ is the Son of God and God of God * Christ is Son of the Father but God of himselfe Caluin saith that Christ is God of himselfe and Beza affirmeth that he was not begotten of the substance of the Father also be it agreed saith he that there are in Christ two vnions consisting in one substance the one of the soule with the flesh and the other of the Diuinity with the humanity That place of S. c Caluin in Ioh. 10. v. 30 Iohn I and the Father are one doth not proue that Christ is God of one substance with God the Father yea and my soule * This is false reade the answere saith d Luther cont Laton Luther cannot brooke this word Homouotin Proceed yee forward e Bucer in Lu. 2. Calu. in â—ar Eu. Christ from his infancie was not full of grace but daily encreased in gifts of the mind as other men vsually doe and waxed wiser through experience euery daie more then other so that in his childhood he was subiect to f Luth. Loss Hem. Mela. in Euang. de 1. post Epist Marl. in Matt. 26. Cal. in Har. Euan Brentius in Luc. par 2. Hom. 65. in Catech. an 1551. in Ioh. Hom. 54. ignorance which is all one as if they should say that Christ was corrupted with the spot and staine of * This is false for all ignorance riseth not from originall corruption originall sinne But listen and you shall know more pernitious doctrine then this Christ when he praied in the garden and plentifully sweat both water and blood trembled through feare and sensiblie feeling of eternall damnation vttered certaine speeches without reason and without consent of the inward spirit yea speeches without consideration through the vehemencie of his griefe the which speeches as vnaduisedly spoken he quickly corrected Is there any more such stuff giue diligeÌ„t eare Christ wheÌ„ he cried out with a loud voice hanging on the Crosse My God my God why hast thou forsaken me was tormented with the flames of hell fire he let ouer-slip * This is false neither Birutius nor any of our men euer said so him g Caluin in Har. Euang. in eand sent Loss in Matth. 26. desperate speeches being no otherwise affectioned then if he should haue died an eternall death if they haue any worse stuffe then this let them emptie their gorge Christ they saie descended into hell that is Christ after he was dead tasted of the paines of hell nowhit h Schmidel conci de Pass câ—â—ua Dom. Aepinus Com. in Psal 16. lesse then the damned soules doe sauing that he was to be restored againe for as much as by his corporall death he could haue profited vs nothing it was therefore requisit that his i Caluin Instit lib. 2. cap. 16. Bren. in Catechis 1551. soule also should striue with eternall death and in this manner to tolerate the paine and paye the ransome of our sins And lest peraduenture any man should suspect that this escaped Caluin by ouersight the said k Instit lib. 2 cap. 16. nu 12. Caluin calleth you all forlorne knaues if any of you haue debated vpon this * They who deny this doctrine to be full of comfort may worthily be accounted desperate men comfortable doctrine oh cursed times oh cursed daies what miserable doctrine haue you bred vp Hath that precious and princely blood which gushed out of the torne pierced side of that most innocent Lambe Christ Iesus euery little drop of which blood for the worthines
of the sacrifice was sufficient to haue redeemed a thousand worlds reliened mankind nothing at all 1. Tim. 2. Apoc. 2.6 except the man Christ Iesus the mediator betweene God and man had suffred also the * Which of vs spake after that manner second death the death of the soule the want of grace which is due only for sinne and detestable blasphemie In comparison of this madnes Bucer in Matt. 26. Bucer shall seeme modest though absolutely he is indeed very impudent in that he taketh this word Infernus in the Creed only to signifie Sepulchrum that is a graue by a very ouer thou art figure Epexegesis which is a latter recitall or rather by a foolish and fond figure which is commonly called Tautologia that is an idle and superfluous telling of oneâ—tale often Of the English sectaries some are accustomed to hang vpon Caluin whom they make their God and some to take part with Bucer their great master Some also mutter in their slieues against this article dewising with themselues how without causing of an vproare it may be quite cut out of the Creed that it molest them no more That that also was * This is most false this was neuer assayed in our Church attempted in a certaine assemblie at London I remember one Richard Chenie a miserable old man that was amongst them told mee who though hee was euilly intreated of theeues abroad yet did hee not repaire home into his fathers house And thus farre as concerning Christ his owne person now what say they of man marry that the l De Homine Illyri in par lib. de â—â—t Pec. col Inst lib. 2. ca. 3 Sacer. de cons ve Eccl. Aepin de â—â—b Pecc Sanct. Rem contra Cens Col. De peccato Image * This is false we deny this directly of God is cleane blotted out of a maÌ„ so that there is not so much as one spark of goodnes remaining in him His whole nature as touching all the whole faculties of the soule is so quite altered that no man not euen he that is lately christened nor any holy vertuous man is any thing else inwardly but meere corruption and contagion but whereto tendeth this forsooth to no other purpose but that they who will snatch at heauen by their onlie faith leading their liues in loosest sort may accuse nature may despaire to attaine to vertue and cast off the burden of the holy Commandements from their backes To this hath m Jllyri in vari lib. de peccat orig vide Heshis in Epist ad Illyr An peccatuÌ„ sit substaÌ„tia Cal. in Antid Conc. Trid. idem docuerat VViclef apud VVald lib. 2. de Sacra c. 154. De gratia Illyricus the staÌ„dard bearer to the Magdeburgeans annexed that his diuellish decree of originall sinne which he holdeth to bee the most inward substance of mens soules because saith he after the fall of Adam the very Diuel himselfe doth shape them anew transforme them into his owne substance This is also an vsuall saying amongst these abiects that * This is most false our men euer abhorred this doctrine all sinnes are equall but with this condition lest peradueÌ„ture the Stoickes do quicken againe that they be weighed in the ballance of Gods iust iudgement as though God which is as a most gentle iudge would rather aggrauate then ease our burden and notwithstanding that he is most righteous he would yet exaggerate the offence make it more then it is in very deed By this ballaÌ„ce a silly poore Tauernour that killeth a cock wheÌ„ there is no need offeÌ„deth God no lee if he giue iudgment in his furie then did that vile butcherly fellow being great with child of Beza his doctrine that secretly with arpistolet most treacherously murdred that great noblemaÌ„ of FraÌ„ce the Duk of Guise a Prince of rare vertue which was the most horrible lameÌ„table deed that euer was doue in any time within the compasse of the wide world But peraduenture those men that are set so eagerly in handling of the nature of sinne De Gratia will shew themselues great Philosophers in disputing of Gods grace which wil helpe to heale and cure this maladie n Luth. in resp contra Louan Bucer in Ioh. 1 VVel in nat Christi Brent hom 12. in Ioh. Cent. lib. 1. cap. 4. De Iustitia Good offices it seemeth that they appoint for this grace the which they impudently crie out to be powred into our harts or to haue sufficient ability to withstand all sorts of sinnes and place it altogeter out of our reach in the only fauour of God which fauour they say * This is false the grace of God begeteth iustification and sanctification followeth iustification alwaies and necessarily doth neither amend the wicked nor purifie the corrupted nor lighten those that bee in darknes nor inrich them that want good workes but only doth hide that old heape of sinnes still remaining and sticking within vs by Gods wincking thereat to the intent that it be not imputed as deformed and odious in his sight with which their vaine imaginations they are so well pleased that euen * This is false we confesse Christ is euery way full of grace Christ himselfe for no other cause in their iudgements may be said to be full of grace and truth but because that God the Father did wonderfully fauour him What manner of thing then is Iustice a certaine respectiue relation not composed of the three Theologicall vertues Faith Hope and Charitie which do close the soule with their beautie but only a cloaking of sinne the which whosoeuer can apprehend by his bare faith that man is as sure of his saluation as if hee were already in present possession of the endlesse ioyes of heauen but go to let him dreame of this yet how can hee assure himself of future perseuerance vntill his death which o Matth. 12 Luc. 11. gift of perseuerance whosoeuer wanteth he commeth to most miserable end though for a season hee embraced iustice both sincerely and zealously Nay verily except this thy faith saith p Inst. lib. 3. c. 2. nu 40. Caluin doth foreshew thee thy perseuerance so infalliblie that thou canst not be deceiued therin thou oughtest to account it as a weake and feeble faith By this point I know him to be Luthers owne scholler for a q Lib. de capt â—ab Christian man saith he though he would cannot * Luther speaketh of the grace of Baptisme which is not lost by sin damne himselfe but only by incredulitie I will make hast to the sacraments De Sacramentis they haue lest O blessed Christ no Sacrament I say none not two not one for their bread r Caluin Instit lib. 4. cap. 15. Cent. 1. lib. 1 cap. 16. Luth. lib. de cap. Babyl Cent 2. 5. cap. 4. Luth. aduer Gochl item Epist ad Melanct. 10.2 in Epist ad
iudgement for he writeth directly and flatly contrarie to that Inslit lib. 1. cap. 15. sect 4. that you bring him in speaking q DVR But Caluin saith that the Saints haue nothing within but contagion and corruption For if there be in the Saints no true iustice but all their vvorkes are sinnes vvhat can be in them besides corruption and contagion WHIT. pag. 572. Doe you neither feare God nor reuerence man Shew vâ— any such words of Caluin if you can if you cannot why doe you repeate that which Campian most falsely obiected at the first There are in the Saints and the regenerate many excellent vertues and graces of the holy Ghost as faith loue hope patience c. who euer said that these vvere nothing but corruption and contagion fie away vvith you and your slander As for your argument it is marue lous slender for though the Saints haue no iustice of their ovvne vvhich doth perfectly satisfie the Lavv of God yet they are indued vvith many excellent vertues and ornaments of the holy Ghost If I should reason because there is no sound learning in you at all therefore there is nothing but meere ignorance in you I should conclude the one as truly as you the other As for your last slander that all the vvorkes of the Saints are sinnes vve say no that they are sinnes but that by reason of the inherent corruption they are tainted vvith some spot of sin and haue not that perfection vvhich the law and iustice of God requireth Wil you say that he vvho is lightly touched vvith some disease is nothing else but the disease you should certainly stand in need of Physitions and much Physicke if you should thus speake That the image of God was not quite blotted out in man But this is your fashion that when you cannot reprooue those things which we doe say then you faine those things to be said by vs which may easily be reprooued We teach that man was created and formed so in the beginning that hee was answerable to the image of God in all things Now that image was a most perfect entirenes of all parts heaped vp with all good graces and vertues which could bee incident to the pure nature of man Whatsoeuer he did imagine desire will thinke or vnderstand was holie and right and agreeable to Gods will yea euen to the rule of that law Thou shalt loue God with all thy heart with all thy soule with all thy strength and thy neighbour as thy selfe But after that Adam had slid backe from God we say that this image was pitifully corrupted and deformed that neither the vnderstanding did retaine that ancient light nor the will did loue God nay the whole will was turned from him neither did there remaine entire any facultie either of bodie or soule Although therefore we denie not that some reliques of that most noble image do remaine still yet we hold that all that which may reconcile and make vs acceptable vnto God and bee sufficient for vs to saluation is blotted out and extinguished All reason and iudgement and vnderstanding which was some little peece of that image is not vtterly lost there is not no will at all left in vs but yet the fall of Adam did inflict such a blow vpon all these faculties which yet remaine in vs that neither can our will of it selfe will any thing which God may like of nor our minde thinke vnderstand or iudge right and true things without error Therefore Iohn saith that the light shineth in the darkenes Joh. 1.5 but yet the darkenes comprehendeth it not But now those greater things faith righteousnesse holinesse and perfect vertue which may leade vs vnto euerlasting felicitie these did not onely receiue a wound to become weaker but they did quite perish and became none vntill that they bee renewed in vs by the holy Ghost and the grace of regeneration Wherefore thus doth the Lord speake touching man whom hee had fashioned after his owne image whom also he knew throughly Gen. 6.5 The wickednes of man was great in the earth and all the imagination of the thoughes of his hart was onely euill continually And that we might vnderstand that these things were pronounced of mankind as it is in it selfe and not onely of those wicked men who liued before the flood the Lord doth againe repeate these things after the flood what time Noah onely with his familie were left aliue vpon the earth Gen. 8.21 Hereafter saith he I will not curse the earth any more for mans sake for the frame of mans heart is euill from his youth Can you Campian iudge better and righter of the image of man than the Lord himselfe could If all the thoughts of mans heart bee both alwaies and onely euill and the very frame and beginning fountaine as it were of al his thoughts most corrupt what now is left of that image which was sometime so excellent which may helpe any whit to attaine happines Hitherto belongeth that which Christ saith That which is borne of the flesh Ioh. 3.6 is flesh and that which is borne of the spirit is spirit If the whole man be flesh certainly the whole is vncleane And Paul saith we were the children of wrath Eph. 2 3â— But the Lord doth not hate his owne image nay wheresoeuer he beholds it hee loueth it entirely And Paul pronounceth that the whole man euery whit is the child of wrath wherefore that image which may make vs acceptable to God can neuer now be found in vs. For he saith not onely that wee are so hurt and wounded as that yet some hope of life remaineth but that we wholy such as wee are in our selues are obnoxious and subiect to euerlasting death as if nature had framed vs thereunto What should I heape vp more testimonies of the Scriptures which are so plentiful through the whole Scripture that nothing is oftner repeated than the losse of this image wherfore we iudge so of man after sin before restitution euen as Augustine writeth whom the very Schoole-men themselues durst not reprooue Naturall gifts were corrupted in man by sinne and the supernaturall extinguished But of man regenerate wee doe not say those things which you affirme that nothing is found in him but meere corruption and contagion For he is indued with the spirit of Christ he possesseth Christ dwelling in him he is indued with faith hope and charitie But he who hath nothing in him but corruption it is certaine that he is no whit regenerate For the new man which is created according to God Eph. 4.14 must bee reformed after righteousnes and true holines Indeed that which the regenerate man hath of his owne and proper to himselfe is vitious For so the Apostle saw another law in his members rebelling against the law of his minde Rom. 7.23 but those things which he receiued from God are contrarie to this corruption and contagion which if
into the minds of our Vniuersitie men by these meanes by lying so openly so shamefully and so boldly O Rome what a Campian hast thou returned to vs how much chaunged from him that he was when thou receiuedst him Art thou wont so to instruct adorne and polish thy pensioners as that they retaine nothing of their auncient shamefastnes What may I complaine of or to whom should I appeale surely euen to the very same our Vniuersitie men to whom you your selfe write they may conuince you by their testimonies For within these two yeares our Cambridge men haue heard this very matter twise propounded and defended in the diuinity Schooles That sinnes are not equall If neither our owne confession nor the testimonie of all mortall men can make enough for the defending of our innocencie be it that we are Stoikes and heretikes and euery thing else But these are * DVR Herein Caluin made sinnes equall for that hee thought all sins to be deadly and vvorthy of euerlasting punishment WHIT. pag. 578. Therefore doth Caluin make all sinnes equall because hee proueth that all sinner are in their owne nature deadly but the Scripture hath taught this most plainly For if euery sinne be the transgression of Gods law and an auersion defection from God which is the chiefest good it must needs in it selfe deserue eternal death Rom. 6.21.23 Iam. 2.10 though euery sinne in Gods iustice is odiudged to eternall death yet it doth not equally deserue it Caluins words saith Campian howsoeuer with an exception if they be pondered by God the Iudge What are these the words of Caluin that he saith sinnes are equall but so if they be weighed by God the Iudge nothing lesse for Gods iudgements could not be right if so be he did iudge sinnes to be equall But marke yee a singular witnesse The Fathers of the Councell of Trent pronounce a curse on them who affirme that a iust man doth sin either mortally or venially in euery good worke To this Caluin answereth that which Salomon saith Antidot 6. Sess in Can. 25. that man thinketh his owne waies right but God pondereth the hearts But in the iudgement of God nothing is sincere and honest but that which floweth from the perfect loue of him Caluin speaketh not one word of the equalitie of sins nor was there any cause why he should Only this he intendeth if the Lord would weigh in his ballance the excellentest works of godly men that he would easily find what to coÌ„demne what is this to the purpose As for that that Thomas Walsingham did obiect against Wicliffe it is not much materiall he wrote many things against Wicliffe being dead and let passe no slander which witty malice could deuise While Wicliffe was aliue no aduersaries could hurt him but being dead they condemned him they plucked him out of his graue burned his body when they might without danger deuise any thing against that most holy man Neither can I euer be induced to beleeue that Wicliffe taught these things if this imputation depend vpon no greater credit than of an aduersarie As touching that that you report of the Duke of Guise I defend not the fact he that committed it suffered punishmeÌ„t greater I wis than Tauerners are wont that kill pullen when there is no need I confesse that the Guise was a man of admirable fortitude I would he had been of more clemencie He was flaine euen as you say by a wicked man whom if perhaps either hope of impunity or feare of punishment did induce that being examined hee did accuse verie noble and innocent men it is neither marueilous nor new Him that he did appeach as the Ringleader of his plot the King himselfe did pronounce an innocent but as for Beza all good men haue acquitted him in their iudgements long ago From Sinne you passe your speech to Grace Of Grace I would rather you your selfe did make passage and you hope that we who are so strict in the matter of sin will play the Philosophers so gloriously about Gods Grace Surely we shall thinke we play the Philosophers very well if we referre all our Philosophie for the amplifying of the Crosse of Christ Gal. 6.14 You also do treate of Grace but as still you are wont in few words But what do you reproue in our Philosophie because we place Grace out of vs only in the fauouer of God For you Campian would haue your men to be perswaded that we take all Grace from man and doe place it only in the mind of God like Platoes Idea But either you know not what you talke of in this place and that you are ignorant of this Philosophie or els you suffer not our opinion being infolded in your slanders to bee manifest For wee make grace to bee twofold that I may omit many distinctions wherein wee doe not disallow the Philosophie of your Schoole men For either Grace declareth the free goodwill and clemencie of God toward vs or else it signifieth those gifts which flow out of that mercy of God to vs. That they commonly call Grace making acceptable and this Grace freely giuen Now for that x DVR I know vvell your doctrine of imputatiue iustice than vvhich I know not whether any man can deuise one thing more against the Scriptures WHIT. pag. 582. Thus you speake like a Iesuite but vvhat is there that the Scripture doth more celebrate than imputatiue iustice Rom. 4.3.4.5.6 is a most cleere text for it But what know you not that our sins were imputed to Christ and why then may not Christs righteousnes be imputed to vs in lâ—ke manner Thinke you that Christ had our sinnes really infused into him I suppose you will neuer say so seeing then in the one part you are compelled against your will to confesse an imputation why do you not also grant it in the other specially seeing the Apostle himselfe propoundeth vs this Antithesis 2. Cor. 5.21 Christ vvas made sinne for vs that we might be made the righteousnes of God in him Therefore we are so made righteousnes in Christ as he was made sinne for vs which must necessarily bee vnderstood of imputation And veâ—â—ly whereas our iniustice or iniquitie is a debt and Christ hath payed it then must it of necessity follow that that payment is ours no otherwise then only by imputation Againe I pray you what can bee imagined more absurde then that the meritâ— of Saints should be imputed vnto vs and Christ his righteousnes cannot bee for they who buy indulgences with money doe not doubt but to reape much fruit from the merits of others It then the merits of Saints as you thinke can make them more iust in whom they are not inherent what an impious and absurd thing were it to giue lesse power of imputation to the merits and righteousnes of Christ DVR Charity iâ— the end of the Law Rom. 13. For he that loueth his brother hath fulfilled the Lavv. So that
if charity be truly in vs vve haue true iustice and vvell said Augustine Charitie begun is iustice begun charitie encreased is iustice encreased great charity is great iustice perfect charitie is perfect iustice WHIT. pag. 583. All is true you say touching charitie Loue your neighbour as the law requireth and you haue fulfilled the second Fable but this you cannot doe therefore be not brag in the opinion of your charitie which if it were as great as euer any man had yet it should be farre short of that the Law requireth neither can it make you iust As for Augustine wee confesse as much as hee saith but this is not the iustice which freâ—th vs from the wrath of God for that neuer increaseth or groweth but is euer most absolute and perfect that is Christ his obedience imputed vnto vs by faith Of charitie August Epist 29. writeth thus As long as charity may be encreased that verily vvhich is lesse is faulty by that vvhich is faulty there is none iust vpon earth goodwill and fauour whereby the Lord embraceth vs in Christ and forgiueth vs our sinnes and receiueth vs into fauour we place it in God but the effects of this Grace are in vs which effects are these that we do by the holy Ghost perceiue that wee are loued of God that we beleeue in God and repose al hope of saluation in that mercy of God We do not therefore take away all grace from man and place it only in Gods fauour but that first grace wherby he hath reconciled vs to himselfe in Christ and wherin our saluation is contained that alone wee place in God which being felt by vs faith hope and charity and other vertues do follow it which are ours and resident in vs. But we deny that position of yours of infused grace whereby you defend that the grace whereby we are iustified is a certaine habite situate in our minds within and we acknowledge no other iustifying y DVR Why do you not then freely confesse that you doe place all grace only in the fauour of God vvithout vs vvhich fauour doth neither amend the wicked nor purge nor illuminate nor enrich them but only dissemble their old remaining stinking chanell God winking at it WHIT. pag. 584. You cease not to trouble vs with your ignorance for doth it follow that wee remoue all grace from vs because wee place iustifying grace which is the mercy of God in Christ not in vs but in God only for beside this grace there is another grace communicated to all the Saints wherby their soules â—re purged and renewed This consisteth in faith and in the fruits of faith which they coÌ„monly cal Grace infused therfore that chanell of sin doth remaine not within them that haue attained true righteousnes as you slander vs to teach but by the power of the holy Ghost it is daily purged out yet so that as loÌ„g as we liue there remaine some reliques of sin old Adam For if that chanel were so purged that no blots of sinne did remaine in vs neither would S. Paul complaine of the law of his members and the body of death Rom. 7.23.24 Neither should wee neede the renuing of the spirit 2. Cor. 4.16 grace but the great and free mercy of God whereby hee did elect and predestinate vs in Christ before all eternitie vnto life euerlasting and hath called vs in time and iustified vs. z DVR But vvhat place of Scripture doth distinguish iustification from sanctification S. Paul doth not 1. Cor. 6.11 Rom. 6.13 That also is a strange thing that faith should iustifie vs and not sanctifie vs but more strange that Christ should impute his righteousnes to vs that vve may be iust and yet not holy and sanctified WHIT. pag 586. Who can reade the Scripture specially the Epistle to the Romanes and not find these two distinguished for in the first part of it he treateth of iustification in the latter of sanctification vvhat is more manifest then that he vvriteth Rom 8.30 vvhom he hath called those hee hath iustified vvhom hee hath iustisted those hee hath glorified Now this glorification signifieth the glorious renouation which is begun heere and perfected in another life as your Thomas vpon this place hath obserued Againe 1. Cor. 1.30 Is not heere iustification and sanctification distinguished iustification and sanctification are inseparable yet must they be distinguished which because you do not you place iustification in sanctification Your place out of the Epistle to the Corinthes doth plainly distinguish them Your second place sheweth that a kind of iustificatioÌ„ is in sanctification but it is not that perpect iustice by which we are iustified before God but only an imperfect one As for your wondeâ—s and strange things they come from your ignorance for we haue neuer sepaâ—ated these two but affirme that he who is by faith partaker of Christ his righteouâ—nes must needs haue the old man crucified and the body of sinne destroyed in him that he may no longer serue sinne For grace infused wherein regeneration and sanctification consisteth and which the Scriptures call the new man is not strong enough to iustifie vs a DVR Grace infused and our inherent righteousnes though it be not perfect yet it is true iustice and doth iustifie vs. WHIT. pag. 58â— By this you ouerthrow your doctrine of iustification for that iustice which doth reconcile vs to God ought to be most perfect that such as neither the law nor God himselfe can require a more perfect That which is not perfect is in it kind corrupt If then â—n imperfect iustice can please God then a corrupt thing will please him and so should he not be perfectly iust but being most iust that only pleaseth him which is according to the prescription of the law most perfect Luk. 10.27.28 Leuit. 18.5 because it neuer satisfieth the law of God in this life and ought euery day to be restored and aspire to greater perfection For so Paul saith 2. Cor. 4.16 Although our outward man perish yet our inward man is renewed daily which place Augustine hath very often vsed in this cause You see therfore both what grace we place in God and what we confesse to be infused into our hearts For as for that you say wee barke out that grace is not strong enough for the resisting of sinne therein you goe about thorough our sides to wound Paul himself vppon whoÌ„ this your reproch reboundeth Rom. 7.18.19.21.23 For though he were indued with infused grace as much as any other yet he denieth that he could attaine to perfect that which is good b DVR S. Paul saith only that hee vvas assayed and tempted by those motions but seeing it is not sinne vvhere the consent of the vvill is not bee saith it vvas not hee that did it but the flesh for hee doubted not but grace vvas sufficient for him vvhereby be might ouercome all these seeing he had the
vvord of Christ for it 2. Cor. 12.9 And he shevoeth that by this grace vvee may ouercome our corruptions Rom. 7.25 WHIT. pag. 594. But the Apostle sheweth that he was not only tempted by these but ouercome Rom. 7.15 he â—aith he did that vvhich he hated Why did he hate it vnlesse it were worthie hatred Now nothing is worthy hatred but sinne And vers 19. he addeth hee did the euill vvhich he vvould not Then he sinned for to be tempted with euill is not to do that a man would not but to be tempted and to ouercome them is to do that a man both should and would do And vers 23. he saith he was led captiue to the lavv of sinne How can he be a captiue and not be ouercome Beleeue the Apostle then and he could not resist sinne alwaies by all his grace But you say his will did not giue consent bee it so yet those motions are sinne against the tenth Commandement For Rom. 7.7 he sheweth that he speaketh of concupiscence without consent For lusts with consent subduing the will the Philosophers confessed to be sinne For the place you alleage 2. Cor. 12.9 the sufficiencie of Gods grace is but so much that hee should not bee swallowed vp of temptations The godly fall often but God lifteth them vp againe For the other place Rom. 7.25 you are deceiued by the corrupt Latin translation For in the Greeke it is I thanke God by Iesus Christ you reade it as if asking the question vvho should deliuer him from the body of death he had answered himselfe The grace of God by â—esus Christ when he giueth thankes to God as if hee had said Though this body of death be troublesome vnto me because it compelleth me to serue sin yet I rest in that hope which I haue placed in Christ for that he did not the good which he would but the euill that he would not and that when he desired to do good euill was present with him finally that the law of his members doth so rebell against the law of his mind that it maketh him captiue to the law of sin Hence you may know how great strength sinne hath which euen the Apostle himselfe albeit hee were indued with singular grace could not so fully resist but that sometimes he was both ouercome of it and bound vp in it as Augustine speaketh If you doubt Campians whether the Apostle spake this of himselfe I had rather you should take aduise of Augustine August de verb. Apost Serm. 5 â—libi Gal. 5.17 than of the Masters of Trent seeing they be very bad interpreters of the Apostle What should I remember to you Dauid and the rest of the Fathers who haue taught by their examples that it is not easie to resist sinne but herein you are like your selfe in that you say that Christ is no otherwise said by vs to bâ— full of grace and truth but thâ—â— that the Father did very much fauour him I pray you Campian whence could you gather this Do we not say that Christ was full of grace so that from his fulnes we all receiue grace who of vs did euer deny that there was very great and infinit grace in Christ For they that say that Christ was so full of grace that all men did declare that hee was worthy of the vnspeakeable fauour both of God and men they doe not only hold that Christ was no otherwise full of grace but herein that God did very much fauour him but also they doe set out Christs grace to haue bin more abundant For they doe confesse Ioh. 3.34 both that the grace of the spirit was plentiful in Christ without measure and also they hold that there did an outward grace so shine forth in Christ that all did loue him and did perceiue that he was beloued of God this doth Brentius and Bucer and all our Diuines acknowledge What thing therfore say you is Iustice Of Iustice. you make answere to your selfe a Relation If you commence an action against vs about Aristotles Predicaments certainly we feare not but we shall haue a Philosopher gentle enough in this cause For though Iustice be c DVR That vvhich is not at all cannot bee a reall Relation WHIT. pag. 600. But Christs righteousnesse is not not at all For Christ performed all things vvhich the Lavv required therefore vvas indued vvith the qualitie of perfect iustice but that reason which perswadeth vs to confesse that this righteousnesse of the Law in Christ was a quality the same compelleth vs to thinke that this righteousnesse is not a quality inherent in vs for that vvee neuer in our owne person obeyed the Lavv. Novv vvhat doth let that that righteousnesse in Christ cannot bee made ours by relation and imputation for common sense might haue taught you this if a man do pay money in your name this payment is yours by imputation If you aske how that is yours vvhich is not inherent in you I say againe which thing the Apostle doth so oft presse it is yours by imputation Now rub vp your Philosophie if you can to proue that nothing is made ours by imputation a Relation yet Philosophie will not be cashierd but that it is a quality you can neuer proue either out of the Predicaments or out of the chiefest Philosophie But your Theologicall vertues faith hope and charity had neuer any iniurie offred to them by vs indeed they be so handled by you that you seeme to take them not for Theologicall but for Philosophicall vertues But the cause that maketh vs not to hold that our righteousnes is compounded of these vertues as you would haue it is this because they are neuer so perfect in this life as throughlie to satisfie the law of God now the law must be satisfied or else we cannot be iust For the Lord doth allow no other righteousnes but the very same which is described in the law which whosoeuer cannot attaine are pronounced guilty of eternall death Therfore if we will be righteous and saued and free from that horrible curse such a righteousnesse must bee sought out than which the law cannot require a more absolute And where shall we find this Is it in our vertues in our faith in our charitie But these are weake many waies and want that integrity which the law requireth wherunto it propoundeth righteousnes For faith is but begun we are alwaies to pray that it may bee increased in vs. Now if faith be weak Rom 1.17 Luc. 17.5 other vertues which spring from faith cannot be perfect But righteousnesse must be of that kind as that nothing at all may be added thereunto From hence it followeth that righteousnesse is not compounded of our vertues as you vnfitly speake but it must be fetcht elsewhere Seeing therefore wee had no such vertue as might obtaine righteousnesse for vs with the Lord Christ was giuen vs by the Lord who performed perfect obedience to the law
without faith but to his perdition who receiueth the Sacrament that monster I doe abhorre and detest with mine whole hart You adde therfore they haue made no more reckoning of the Baptisme of Christ then of Iohns that is a meere ceremonie I am not ignorant what the Fathers thought of the Baptisme of Iohn But I heed what the Scriptures teacheth not what they imagined In them both there was the u DVR But Matth. 3.11 Iohn baptised with water only Christ with the Spirit WHIT. pag. 669. Here is no comparison betweene the Baptisme but the persons for not Iohn only but not Peter nor any Minister of the Gospel can giue the holy Ghost to those whom they doe baptise Men giue but the outward signe it is Christ who giueth the Spirit DVR VVhy vvere they Act. 19 4.5 baptised againe vvhom Iohn had baptised if it be the same Baptisme WHIT. pag. 671. They were not rebaptised as Ambrâ—se saith de Spirit Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 3. And the 5. vers being S. Pauleâ— words they are to be vnderstood not of those Ephesians but of the people whom John baptised As if S. Paul had said John taught those who came to his Baptisme to beleeue in Christ who was to come and they when they heard it were baptised in the name of the â—ord Iesus From this then can be gathered no differencâ— of thesâ— tvvo Baptismes same ceremonie the same doctrine and the same grace If there were any thing vnlike in these things I refuse not to confesse that the Baptisme of Iohn and Christ were diuers Now Iohn ioyned repentance Mat. 3 2.1â— Luk. 3.3 which is the fruit of true regeneration with his Baptisme and offâ—ed this Baptisme for the remission of sinnes If the Baptisme of Iohn wanted not repentance and remission of sinnes I see not why it should bee held so much different from the Baptisme of Christ And what is the cause * DVR Because that Baptisme did prepare men to regeneration of vvhich preparation Christ had no need WHIT. pag. 673. This is but your coyned distinction for the Fathers speake and answere otherwise Chrysâ—st in 3. Matth. not that he should receiue remission of sinne by â—aptisme but that be might leaue saâ—ctified waters for those who should after be baptised And August in cat â—ur in 3. Matth. Our Sauiour would therefore be baptised not that bee might bee sanctified but that he might sanctifie the waters for vs. why the Fathers demand wherfore Christ who needed no regeneration did come to the Baptisme of Iohn but because they iudged that his Baptisme had the power of regeneration Concerning that which you annexe If you haue it it is well if you want it there is no hurt beleeue and you shall be saued before you bee baptised wee doe not speake so loosely as you imagine For wee will not haue it to be in any ones choice to be baptised if hee will and to leaue it if hee will not Yet wee doe not thinke that Baptisme is so x DVR VVhat If without Baptisme infants may obtaine eternall life is it not your iudgements that it is no burt to them though they want Baptisme But Christ thought farre â—therwise Ioh. 3.5 WHIT. pag. 675. It is a wicked and batbarouâ— opinion to thinke that they who die before they can come to Baptisme are damned For who will say that the infants of the Iewes who died before the eight day did pâ—rish And when in former ages they deferred Baptisme till the houre of death did they think it so absolute necessary Will you say that an infant is not of the nuÌ„ber of the elect because God wil that he die before Baptisme if you will you shall be accounted bold rash and impious As for the place of Iohn Christ doth not thinke that none can come into heauen which wanteth the outward Baptisme The theefe was with Christ in Paradise and yet was vnbaptised with the outward Baptisme But the truth is by water Christ meaneth there the Spirit as appeareth by conference of places Matth. 3.11 As there fire so here water signifieth the power of the Spirit Ioh. 4.10 simplie necessarie to saluation that he that is not entred by Baptisme must needs perish euerlastingly For the saluation of a Christian man coÌ„sisteth in the mercie of God which is not so tyed bound to any Sacraments y DVR God hath shewed his vvill Ioh. 3.5 And â—hen S. Paul makes all by nature the Children of wrath Ephes 2.3 If there be no remedie against this euill in the Scripture but Baptisme what can be but that they vvho die vvithout Baptisme must needs die in the same condition WHIT. 677. God in no place hath shewed this to bee his will that they who die without Baptisme shall perish Of the words of Christ haue â—in spoken which if they be vnderstood of Baptisme they belong only to those who are of growne yeares That by no other meanes we can be freed from the miserable state of nature but by Baptisme is very false For the Spirit of God doth in and without the Sacrament doth communicate his graces as that he cannot saue those whom he will not haue perish without them Where the opportunity of Baptisme is not Gods promise alone is abundantly sufficient of it selfe But whosoeuer either neglecteth Baptisme through heedlesnes or boldly contemneth it him we condemne of very hainous sin For he doth both diminish the Maiestie of Christ and also refuseth his owne saluation But he that committeth neither shal not answere for the fault of another Therefore verie right was that iudgement of Bernard z DVR He speaketh not of infants but of those vvho indued with true faith were preuented by an vntimely death that they could not be baptised WHIT. pag. 680. How truly you speake we may iudge out of the same Epistle For he thus writeth VVho is ignorant that in former times they had other remedies against originall sinne besides Baptisme for to Abraham and his seed vt as the Sacrament of Circumcision giuen to this end But in other nations so many as vvere found faithfull vvee beleeue that they vvho vvere of yeares vvere sanctified by faith and sacrifices but the parents faith did profit their infants yea and vvas sufficient for them If this was so before Christ shall we thinke the condition of infants is now worse not the want but the contempt of Baptisme is damnable Bernard in Epist. ad Hugon In the rest that follow as being small matters you doe but trisle For neither doe you your selfe declare any thing of your owne opinions nor can you reproue any thing in ours But I long to know what you thinke of the faith of Infants I suppose you wil grant that they haue grace For say you Baptisme conferreth grace But will you not yeeld that they haue faith I wish therefore you would teach me to the end you may draw me wholy into your opinion how