as flat blasphemy And yet Calvin esteem's so much this blasphemous fancy that he makes it the price of our Redemption For thus he writes Nothing had been done Cal lib. 2 instit vt sup if Christ had onely dyed a Corporal death but it was also requisite that he should feele the severity of the wrath of God And when this was obiected as a blasphemy by F. Campian Whitaker did second sustaine it Vvitak lib. ◠cont Dureum sect 18. saying that Calvin wrote most truly that nothing had been done if Iesus Christ had onely suffered a corporal death Yea he calls this a doctrin most full of comfort These doctrines are so fals against the Scriptures which shew nothing more frequently and clearly then that we are redeemed by the blood and death of Christ and they are in themselues so absurd and blasphemous that we neede spend no more time in refutation of them for they are of the same kind with those of which S. Hierome speaks when he saith that to discover them is to vanquish them Yea some Ptotestants have written against them as Doctor Bilson B. of Winchester in his booke Bilson in Apol. Prot. tract 3. sect 3. num 40. which he intitles The full redemptein of mankind by the death and blood of Christ And in the defence of the article that Christ descended into hell c. But notwithstanding all the grosse absurdities of this sense invented by Calvin yet it was generally followed by the Presbyterians and by many other Protestants who denyed the local descent of Christs soule to hell For although it sounded very ill yet it behooved to be kep't by the Presbyterians for want of a better vntill a new one more commodious was found out which now lately hath been performed by the new Reformers of these times who see further and more clearly then M. Calvin who although he was famous in his owne generation and was reputed to be an Apostle sent extraordinarly by God to reforme the Church yet did not so much as know his Catechisme nor the true sense of the articles of his Creed but invented such a sense as some of his disciples haue abandonned it as false and others as blasphemous As Beza in his version of the Scripture turned Hell into Grave so he vnderstood this article of the Creed he descended into Hell that is He descended into the grave Which errour together with the former coruption invented by M. Calvin a learned Minister in Edinburgh did publickly refute in divers Sermons a little before the troubles for which he was much persecuted by the Puritans He shew that Bezas corruption made a grosse Tautology in the Apostles Creed or it made an explication more obscure then the thing it explained The Tautology would be very grosse to say Crucifyed dead and buryed he descended into the grave that would be twice buryed Or if you make descending into hell the explication of burial that is a rare Commentary to explicate a matter which is cleare and needs no Cōmentary by that which is more obscure and cannot yet be rightly vnderstood by Protestants as appeares by their dissensions The same Minister shew that both these vices were against the end of the Creed and the wisdome of the holy Apostles who made it short and plaine that it might serve the capacity of all men and therefore it was to be free of idle Tautologies and obscure Commentaries But at that time this Minister did not know that the Presbyterians were to deny the Creed to haue been composed by the Apostles by which his arguments are answered although by falling into grosser absurdities The third sense devised by the Presbyterians at Westminster is subiect to the like inconveniences that is both of Tautologies and obscure glosses For they say by that article He descended into Hell is vnderstood that he continued in the state of the dead and vnder the power of death till the third day For first it would be a Tautology to say dead and buryed and then repeate againe he remained dead or in the power of death that is sufficiently knowen by the words that follow to witt The third day he arose from the dead For he behoved to remaine dead so long as he was dead and he was dead till the third day that he arose from the dead So that the addition of he descended into hell vnderstood in the Ministers new coyned sense would not be onely superfluous but also ridiculous Then if they will make Christs descent to hell an explication of Christs remaining dead the Commentary would be more obscure then the text which is clear of it self How would the Presbyterians be pleased if one would say of Iohn Calvin or Knox or of their late Apostle M. Henderson that they are dead buryed descended into hell And if this man being accused before the Presbytery would bring in his owne defence the Ministers new Commentary that he meaned only by these words that they remained in the power state of death because they are not as yet risen from the dead I am morally perswaded what ever Commentary could be brought either their owne or any other the Presbyterians would be ill pleased with such a Text and would thinke it was sufficient to haue said that they were dead and buryed without this addition They descended into Hell But of all the expositions that ever I found on this article that of the late Protestant Bishop Vsher is the rarest which D. Vane speaking of the Ministers iuglings describes thus D. Vane Lost sheep pag. 243 1. Edit O what Serpentine wriglings and windings to escape the assaulters do they make O what perverse ridiculous and contradicting answers and evasions do some of them make In which they shew at once both much wit and much folly For fooles could not speake as they do and wise men would not In so much that B. Vsher Primat of Armagh a very learned man to avoid the Confession of Christs descent into Hell according to the article of the Creed in the plaine sense thereof doth so turne it and wind it that he makes the sense of the words He descended into hell to be He ascended into Heaven To such pitifull refuges doth the weaknesse of a bad cause drive them c. Thus he And so by this Bishops Commentary for descend we haue ascend and for Hell Heaven But all these senses being nowayes satisfactory the Presbyterians tooke the cleanliest easiest way to deny the Creed it self to be Apostolique that so men might not care much or take great notice of the sense when all authority is taken from the text That shift might in some manner serve their turne if this truth were not as expresly in the Scripture as it is in the Creed Now I would inquire at any man of conscience or ordinary discretion who will consider impartially these things what I should do in this case should I believe the Presbyterians who haue
quite taken away For S. Iohn saith of Christ Behold the Lamb of God Iohn 1.29 Acts. 3.19 Mich. 7.19 Heb. 9.28 that taketh away the sins of the world And the spots of our Soules are said to be washed cleanged and our sins to be throwen into the bottome of the sea and to be blotted out and exhausted Therefore in iustification sins do not remaine but they are really taken away As the soule in Iustification is purged and cleanged from the filthinesse of sins which are so forgiven that they are really taken away so it is also beautifyed with inward grace and inherent iustice by which he who was before a sinner is renewed in the Spirit of his mind and hath the love of God powred forth in his heart by the holy Ghost This the Apostle sheweth 1. Cor. 6.11 when writing to the Corinthians he saith These things you were to witt fornicators adulterers c. but you are washed but you are sanctified but you are iustifyed in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God Ephes 4.24 And elswhere be renewed in the Spirit of your mind and put on the new man which according to God is created in iustice and holynesse of truth And writing to the Romans he saith Rom 5.5 The Charity of God is powred forth in our hearts by the holy Ghost which is given vs. I forbear to cite more testimonies Aug. de gâ—â—â—ia S. Augustin sheweth that this inherent iustice is the love of God The grace whereby we are iustifyed that is Christ cap. 30. Idem de nat gra c. 70. saith he the love of God poured into our hearts And elswhere Charity begun is iustice begun Charity encreased is iustice encreased great charity is great iustice and most perfect charity is most perfect iustice If therefore charity or the love of God which is powred into our Soules and consequently is inherent intrinsecal in them be the iustice by which we are made formally iust then our iustice is also inherent intrinsecal And hereby all the causes of our Iustification according to the doctrin of the Catholique Church may be clearly vnderstood Concil Trid. sess 6. c. 7. For the efficient cause is our mercyfull God the meritorious our Lord Iesus Christ the final cause the glory of God of Christ and life everlasting and the formal cause is the Iustice of God not that by which he himself is iust but that by which he makes vs iust and with which we being endowed are renewed in the Spirit of our mind and are not only reputed but truly are iust But said the Catholique to me that you may vnderstand more fully how we are made formally iust not by that iustice which is in God but by that iustice which proceeding from God is in vs I will illustrate the matter a litle more vnto yow As sin is the death of the soule so grace and iustice is the life of it Wherefore as the natural life of man is the formal cause of his living naturally so his spiritual life which is grace iustice is the formal cause of his living spiritually As then the natural life or soule of man by which he lives naturally albeit it be from God yet it is not that life by which God lives but it is that life communicated by God to man by which man lives and therefore cannot be any thing external but must be internal in man So the Spiritual life of the soule which is grace iustice by which man lives Spiritually is not the iustice which is in God or by which God is iust but that iuftice which is communicated by God to man whereby man is rendred iust and lives Spiritually and therefore must be internal in him since nothing can live either naturally or Spiritually by any thing which is external vnto it The example of the raising Lazarus from the the dead will yet more cleare this matter For if Christ calling Lazarus from the grave had not given him inward life Lazarus could not haue risen again and lived by the life of Christ which was without him But it was necessary for the resurection of Lazarus that his own life should be inwardly restored to him by Christ It is so in our case for a man who is raised by Christ from the death of sin vnto the life of righteousnesse must have grace or iustice which is the Spiritual life of the soule inwardly communicated to him by Christ the fountain and meritorious cause of all iustice and the source of all Spirituall life or else man could not be raised from the death of sin and live spiritually S. Augustin proves by the holy Scriptures that Christ came into the world Aug. â—ib de peccat mer. remis cap. 26. seq to give vs that Spiritual life I shall heep together saith he many testimonies which shall suffice by which it may appear that for no other cause Christ came into the flesh but that by the disposition of grace he might quicken save and illuminate all those to whom as members appoynted in his body he is head who before were placed in the death sicknesse darknesse of sin I shall only bring two or three of the many testimonies of Scripture which the holy Father heapeth vp there S. Paul saith Ephes 2.4 God who is rich in mercy for his exceeding charity wherwith he loved vs even when we were dead by sins quickned vs together in Christ by whose grace you are saved and raised vs vp with him c. Ibid. c. 4 v. 24. And again be renewed in the Spirit of your mind and put on the new man which according to God is created in Iustice and holynesse of the truth The same Apostle writing to the Colossians saith And you Coloss 2.13 when you were dead in the offenses and vncircumcision of the flesh did he quicken together with him pardoning you all offenses And to Titus he saith Titus 3. v. 5. that we are iustifyed by his grace Whence it is evident that these who haue been sinners and become iust are said to rise again to be quickneed by Christ to be renewed inwardly to be iustifyed by his grace But they could not rise from the death of sin nor be quickned renewed inwardly and be iustifyed by his grace vnlesse they had spiritual life which is grace or iustice inwardly coÌ„municated vnto theÌ„ Therefore these who rise froÌ„ the death of sin are iustifyed quickned inwardly renewed have the spiritual life of iustice flowing from the merits iustice of Christ inwardly remaining in them And hence doth appear clearly the truth of that which the Catholique Church teacheth to witt that we are made iust by the iustice of God not by that wherby he himself is iust but by which he makes vs iust For as nothing can make an man iust but iustice So it is not the external
As a man who was rich and had mispent his estate cannot be iustly commanded by any new law to pay as much tribute as when he had his estate nor be punished for not paying it thereafter for such a law would be both vniust ridiculous commanding impossibilities and so would be no law and the makers of it would be both vnreasonable cruel So man after the fall of Adam could not by any new law be iustly commanded by God to do that which was impossible vnto him vnlesse we would make that new law vniust and ridiculous God him self vnreasonable Tyrannous Therefore since God made and promulgated his law long after the fall of man vsed exhortations propounded rewards and threatned punishments to induce men to keep it and all his actions are iust and wise they presuppose necessarly the possibility of keeping that law with the assistance of his grace or else such things would not be only against Gods goodnesse iustice but also against ordinary prudence Moreover the same Catholique shew me that the Presbyterians who accuse the Catholiques falsy for taking away the second commandment as they call it of which matter we shall haue occasion to speak more fitly hereafter may be iustly accused for taking away in reality not one but alle the commandments For their errour of the impossibility of them destroyes the end for which they and all iust lawes are made to wi t that they may be kept and so they destroy the Whole divine commandments and make them of no effect yea this errour destroies also the end of Christs Incarnation Passion if we will believe S. Augustin For having brougt many passages of Scripture to this purpose he subioyns Quibus appaparet D. Iesum Christum nullam aliam ob causam in carnem venisse c. Aug. lib 1 de pecc mer rem c. 26. where he sheweth very largely that Christ for no other cause came vnto the world and became obedient vnto the death of the Crosse but that he might reconcile sinners to God destroy the power of sin obtaine grace from God to make vs walk in newnesse of life and in obedience of his holy commandments Whereby it may be seen what a dangerous fundamental errour this is which is against such principal fundamental points of the Christian religion Therefore the Presbyteriās would de well to make vse of the same holy Fathers sound advice when he saith Let him to whom the commandments are heavie know Aug. lib. de perfect institue c. 10. that he hath not got the gift to witt of the love of God by which they are made not heavie but yet though he find them heavie let him not be broke with despaire but let him be enforced and stirred vp to seek to beg and to knock But the Presbyterians who hereby may know that they want the love of God cannot make immediat vse of this wholsome counsel to seek and beg that love of God by which his commandments are made easy till they first correct or rather quite their erroneous faith whereof they make this a chiefe article that it 's impossible to love God or keep his commandments Therefore they must first beg true faith that they may believe Gods commandments to be possible with help of his grace and then they may beg and obtaine the second to witt the love of God by which they may find grace to fulfill them This article of the Presbyterians faith gave occasion to a Catholique Gentleman of my acquentance to say to the Presbyterians who were much pressing him to subscrib the Covenant that he would never be of their religion who professed they did not love God yea and made it an article of their faith that they could not love him Thus he Having therefore diligently considered all these grounds I could no longer believe the impossibility of keeping Gods commandments even with the help of his grace as an article of my faith reveald in Scripture which I found to be against Scripture and against the goodnesse iustice and wisdome of God Which the holy Fathers some Protestants do call extream blasphemy which destroyes the vertue and power of Gods grace which puts the blame of our negligence sluggishnesse from our selves and layes all vpon God which is against the end of Christs Incarnation merit of his Passsion which hinders the growth of piety and opens a gate to all wickednesse and makes all the divine commandments of no effect But vpon the contrary I resolved by Gods grace to embrace and believe the ancient Catholique doctrin concerning the possibility of keeping the commandments with the help of Gods grace Which I found to be so clearly expressed in Scriptures so strongly maintaind by the holy Fathers so consonant to right reason iustice piety and which did make so much for the glory of Gods grace the merits of Christs death and passion CHAP. XV. Of Iustification by Faith onely maintain'd by the Presbyterians and their first Reformers as the principal article of their Religion AFTER the triall of our doctrine concerning the Commandments I considered in the next place our doctrine of Iustification not only because this hath connexion with the former but also for the importāce of the matter For I haue read and heard this article of Iustification by faith onely called by many Protestants the soule and life of their religion and of all articles the principal and greatest on the contrary they call Iustification by works the life of Popery so that M. Fox saith that Luther Fox Acts. Man p. 402. by opening a certaine veine which lay long hid to witt our Iustification by faith only did overturne the foundation of Popery Moreover I haue heard it affirmed that Iustification by faith only was so certaine a truth and so evidently contain'd in the Scriptures that some of the learned Papists after they had much oppposed it were at lenth overcome by the strenth of it and made to acknowledge it and there was no point of Popery esteem'd to be more absurd nor more against the Scriptures then Iustification by works in so much that M Knox in his first sermon at S. Andrewes did make instance principally in it Knox Chron. pag. 76. 77. for thus speaks his history of him He plainly proved the Papists doctrine lawes to repugne directly to the lawes of God the Father and of Christ Iesus his Son This he proved by conferring the doctrine of Iustification expressed in the Scriptures which teach that man is iustifyed by faith only c. and the doctrine of the Papists which attributes iustification to the works of the law And vpon severall occasions I haue heard the Ministers pretend great advantage in this point which they ordinarly vrge very much Having then no small expectation to find such expresse and convincing Scripture for this point of Iustification by faith only that any impudent front cowld hardly deny it I begun
his meer mercy by his preveening and helping grace doth excite and call a sinner without any of his preceeding merits as it were out of the sleep of sin that he may convert himself vnto God 2. A sinner being thus awakned and assisted by the Divine grace conceiving faith by hearing doth believe all things to be true which are revealed promised by God particularly that a sinner is iustifyed by the free mercy of God through the redemption which is in Christ Iesus 3. This faith representing God to be a severe punisher of sins there ariseth in a sinner thus disposed by faith a fear of Gods iudgments with which the Soule is profitably shaken terrifyed Prou. â— 7 For as Salomon saith the feare of our Lord is the beginning of wisdome 4. The soule of a sinner being thus terrifyed it is raised vp againe to hope by the same faith which represents God to be most bountifull mercyfull in forgiveing sins For which cause he sent his son into the world to deliver vs from sin by his death 5. Vpon this hope confidence in the divine mercy there ariseth the love of God who is so bountifull and mercyfull and likwise a hatred and detestation of sin which God hateth a sorrow and grief for what is past and a firm resolution of a better life in time to come a purpose of observing the divine Commandments of receiving the holy Sacraments Now all these dispositions of fa th fear love hope and the rest being placed in the soule of man by Gods preveening grace Iustification or the infusion of iustifying grace doth follow as we shall see shortly That these preparations difpositions are necessary before iustification the Scripture shewes Our Saviour shew the necessity of preveening grace when he said Iohn 6.44 Heb. 11.6 Eccles 1.28 ibid v. 17. No man can come vnto me vnlesse my Father draw him Of faith S. Paul saith that without faith it is impossible to please God for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a Rewarder of those who seek him Of fear beside the former testimony of Salomon it is said that who is without fear cannot be iustifyed And again the fear of our Lord chaseth away sin S. Paul saith of hope that we are saved by it Rom. 8.24 Luke 7.47 Of love our Saviour saith Many sins are forgiven her for she loved much And that repentance is also necessary there is nothing more clear in the Scriptures By all which testimonies it remaines evident that although faith be the first disposition of the soule to iustification yet the others above-mentioned are also requisite Neither can there be any difficulty in this matter since it is as clear as the Sun that no man of a sinner can become the friend of God vnlesse he haue not only faith but also the fear love of God with hope in his mercy and repentance for sins To this purpose S. Augustin saith Aug de predest sanct cap. 7 Idem serm 22. de Verb. Dom fides prima datur ex qua caetera impetrantur That is faith is first given by which the rest are obtain'd And again the house of God is founded by Faith raised vp hy hope and perfected by Charity And as in this sense it is truly said that faith doth iustify to wit as a fundamentall radicall disposition to Iustification so it is no lesse true that fear hope love repentance do also iustify to witt as secondary dispositions proceeding from faith because these likwise dispose the soule fitly to receive the forme of iustice and to become the friend of God and the Scripture ascribes forgivenesse of sins Salvation or Iustification to them as it doth vnto faith For as our Saviour told S. Mary Magdalen that her faith had saved her Luke 7. Rom. 8. Iam. 2. so he said that many sins were forgiven her because she loved much and S. Paul saith we are saved by hope and S. Iames expresly that we are iustifyed by works not by faith only By which consideration it may be easily vnderstood what works S. Paul excludes from Iustification when he saith that a man is iustifyed by faith without the works of the law For he doth not exclude the works of grace but only the works of the law which are done by the strength of nature without the grace of God and do not proceed from faith but go before it Now it is certaine that such works as not proceeding from faith do not properly dispose and prepare the soule vnto Salvation Concil T r d sess 6. câ—p 8. For as the Councel of Trent teacheth faith is the foundation roote and beginning of all Salvation Iustification and is the first effect of Gods free grace in the Soule of man But the Apostle doth not exclude from iustification the works of grace which follow faith for they do iustify that is dispose the Soule vnto Iustification as faith it self doth and they proce d also from grace as faith proceeds from it and therefore are not the works of the law but the works of grace After this manner doth that great Doctour S. Augustin clearly reconcile these two places of S. Paul S. Iames. Aug. lib. 83. quaest 76. The sentences saith he of S. Paul S. Iames be not contrary one to another whâ—n one affirmeth that a man is iustifyed by faith without works the other saith that faith is vaine without works for S. Paul speaketh of works that go before faith and S. Iames of works that do follow faith These preparations disposiâ—ions being placed in the soule Iustification it self doth follow which is not only remission of sins but also sanctification and renovation of the inward man by the voluntary reception of the divine grace gifts But albeit Iustification followeth these dispositions of faith love repentance the rest yet it is altogether free proceeding from the mercy bounty of God without the desert of man For the Catholique Church professeth openly notwitstanding the Ministers strong calumnies to the contrary that no man by any faith or works can merit the grace of Iustification Concil Trid. sess 6. cap. 8. as the Councel of Trent teacheth in these words We are said to be freely iustifyed because none of those things which preceed Iustification whether faith or works doth merit the grace of Iustification Now this grace consisteth in two thing s to witt in Remission of sins and inward sanctification by the first the soule is changed purged from sin which is the filthinesse of the Soule and by the second it is adorned and beautifyed with grace which is the beauty of it and made to die vnto sin live vnto iustice But it must be diligently observed that the Catholiques do teach according to the Scriptures that in Iustification our sins are not so forgiven that they remaine in the Soule but they are
iustice of Christ but it must be internal iustice flowing from his merits and iustice that can quicken vs. This raising of one from the death of sin to the life of Iustice is called by the Catholiliques the first Iustification by which one of a sinner is made the friend of God And it is altogether free proceeding meerly from the grace favour of God without all works and merits of man Of this S. Paul speaks to the Romans Aug. de Spir. lit c 4 when he saith We conclude that man is iustifyed by faith without the works of the law Where S. Augustin vnderstands by the works of the law not only the works of the Ceremonial and Iudicial law but also of the Moral law which are done by the force of nature or by the insight of the law without the help of grace in Christ which help is not given except one haue first faith in Christ which is the roote of salvatioÌ„ first effect of the divin grace in our soules Therefore if man could not be iustifyed by these works of the law albeit he did them much lesse can he be iustifyed by these works when he breaketh the law as S. Paul proveth in the same epistle that both Iewes and Gentiles haue sinned and therefore stand in need of the mercy of God and consequently must be iustifyed by the faith grace of Christ Besids this first Iustification there is another which the Catholiques call the second Iustification by which one is not of impious made iust but of iust he is made more iust and of a friend made yet more intimate with God according to that in the Apocalypse Apocal. 22.1 Eccles 18.22 He that is iust let him be iustifyed even vnto death Of this Iustification are vnderstood the words of S. Iames when he saith That a man is iustifyed by works and not by faith only That is by works following after faith flowing from it for such works are not the works of the law that is they are not works done meerly by the force of nature or by the only knowledge of the law but they are the works of grace as faith it self is and by these works we are iustifyed and not by faith only This second Iustification is acquired by doing all works of iustice and piety by which a man being in the state of grace purchaseth a further augmentation of it S. Augustin brings S. Paul Aug lib. de gra lib. aeâ—b c 6. as an example of both these Iustifications For before his conversion he was found with no good merits but rather with many evil merits who was persecuting the Church and yet he obtain'd mercy Therefore he was not iustifyed by his works or by the deeds of the law but by the faith or grace of Christ But after his conversion first Iustification the same Apostle reckons out the good works he had done 2. Timoth 4.6 by which he had advanced in piety iustice I am even now saith he to be sacrificed and the time of my resolution is at hand I have fought a good fight I have consummate my course I have kept the faith Concerning the rest there is laid vp for me a crown of iustice which our Lord will render to me in that day a iust iudge Vpon which S. Augustin saith He reckons out now his good merites that after his good merits he might obtaine the crown who after evil merits did obtaine grace Take heed what followes There remaines to me a crown of iustice c. To whom could the iust iudge render the crown if he had not first as a merciful father given him grace And how had that been a crown of iustice if grace had not gone before which iustifyes the impious How could that haue been rendered as due Aug. ibid vt supra if the first had not been freely bestowed Thus S. Augustin By these reasons many other testimonies which were showen vnto me I was brought to vnderstand the Catholique doctrin concerning the nature of Iustification and therby I was made more sensible of the errous which are against it CHAP. XVII Of the Presbyterians three principall Errours concerning Iustification HAVING thus seen the truth of the ancient and Catholique doctrin I was moved to take special notice of three principall and most grosse errours maintain'd by the Presbyterians against it The first is that they do not only place the whole nature of Iustification in remission of sins but they likwise teach that although our sins be forgiven in Iustification yet they are not taken away but that they really remaine in the person iystified and are only covered and not imputed The second errour is that a man iustified hath no internal nor inherent iustice in him as being altogether defiled inwardly with sin but that he is only iust by the external iustice of Christ with which he is covered and which is imputed vnto him The third and last errour consists in this that they teach this external iustice of Christ is applyed vnto man by faith only and that not by a Christian or Catholique faith wherby one believes the articles of the Creed or such things as God hath revealed in Scripture but by a special faith as they call it wherby every one believes for certaine that his sins are forgiven him and that he is one of the predestinate The first errour to witt that sins remaine and are not taken away from the person iustified maintain'd by Calvin and the Presbyterians I found to be against cripture the vertue of Christs passion the efficacy of Baptisme S. Iohn Baptist calleth Christ the lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world Iohn 1.29 Heb. 9.28 1 Iohn 1. ch 1. v 7. Acts 22.16 S. Paul saith that Christ was offered vp once to exhaust the sins of many And S. Iohn affirmeth that the blood of Christ cleanseth vs from all sins Ananias said to S. Paul Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins If our sins be taken away as S. Iohn affirmeth how do they remaine as the Presbyterians believe If our sins be washed away and cleansed by the blood of Christ and by baptisme how can the filthinesse and blots of them remaine David saith to God Psalm 31.1 Wash me and I shall be whiter then snow But according to the Presbyterians he behoved to remaine as black as pitch and as filthie as the puddle even with all the washing that God would bestow vpon him Therefore this Presbyterian doctrin is against the Scriptures the vertue of Christs passion and the efficacy of baptisme and it is also clearly against the holy Fathers as we shall see shortly in the Triall of the Sacraments Against these clear authorities the Calvinists bring principally one place of Scripture whereon they found their errour and that is in the 31. Psalme where David saith Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven whose sins are covered I admired
all men would be cleansed from sin and so all would be saved which is false If they say It is not death simply but death ioyn'd with faith that hath this power Why shall not also faith and life have the same power How can the Presbyterians without any ground in Scripture assigne that power to faith and death which they deny against Scripture to faith and the holy Sacraments and to the blood of Christ Death indeed may put an end to sin that one sin no more but it cannot take away sins already done or else death would be more powerfull according to that tenet then the blood of Christ the holy Sacraments which is not only a groundlesse fancy but also a great absurdity Out of which it followeth that either the Presbyterians must grant that they do not go to heaven which is very much against the assurance of their election or that they are purged from their sins after this life since they are not purged in it which is against their negative confession And so these who deny a a Purgatory for venial sins must grant a new and most dangerous Purgatory for mortal sins For my part I could never find a solid answer to this reason and therefore I leave it to the Presbyteries consideration But because this Catholique did trouble vs with this difficulty I thought to have entangled him as much with the words of Bellarmin whereof I had heard some Ministera often boast Did not Bellarmin said I after he had much laboured to prove Iustification by works in end conclude That it was most safe to put all our confidence in the only mercy of God What will become then of all your works and merits which such a great Champion of your Church doth renounce To which he answered that Bellarmins words fully related do clear the whole matter Bellar. lib. 5. de Iustif cap. 7. prop. 3. and shew the vanity of the Ministers pretences For thus he speaks By reason of the vncertainty of our proper Iustice and of the danger of our vaine glory it is most safe to put all our confidence in the only mercy favour of God Where he doth not deny neither good works nor merits but only affirmeth that for two reasons which he there toucheth that it is most safe not to rely vpon them but vpon the alone mercy of God Out of which the Ministers would make this false collection therefore we are not iustifyed by works Which is as ridiculous as if you would say The Protestants teach that it is most safe to rely vpon the mercy of God Therefore they are not iustifyed by faith If then the Protestants relying vpon the mercy of God taketh not away Iustification by faith why should not also the Catholiques relying on the same mercy not take away Iustification by works Bellarmin speaks so clearly in this matter that his meaning cannot be wrested without malice For he sheweth in the same place that David and other Saints had some confidence in their iustice and good works according to that in the 17. Psalme The Lord will render to me according to my iustice because I have kept his wayes The like he sheweth of Nehemias Ezechias and Ester And this they did with great humility But because such cōfidēce is dangerous to many by reason of pride vaine glory that may arise beside there are few who haue such merits or are sure to have them Therefore Bellarmin saith it is most safe to rely on the mercy of God whereof he gives this reason Either a man hath good works or he hath none but evil works If he hath no good but evil works then he is perniciously deceived who trusts in evil works for these are deceitfull riches as S. Bernard calls them If he hath good works he looseth nothing by not looking on them by putting his trust in the mercy of God alone for God lookes on them knowes them well and will not suffer them to passe without their due reward Thus Bellarmin Yea Concil Trid. sess 6. cap. 16. the Councel of Trent makes the like profession when it saith Although much be given to good works in the holy Scriptures c. Yet God forbid that a Christian should trust or glory in himself not in our Lord whose goodnesse is so great that he willeth these things to be our merits which are his own gifts The Ministers may collect out of these words by their Logique that the Councel of Trent yea and that all Papists are Protestants But they will not distinguish between the necessity of good works and confiding in them which are very different At least all moderat Protestants may know by this open profession the falshood of that calumny which is often beaten into their eares to witt that all Papists presume in their merits S. Augustin sheweth that there are two gulfs in this matter one vpon either hand and that the truth is a direct way in the middle Presumption of iustice or good works is the gulf vpon the one hand and negligence of good works is the precipice on the other But the earnest care of good works and piety accompanyed with humility is the safe way in the middle Thus ended the Catholique to the good satisfaction of some Protestants who were present To conclude this matter wherein I have stayed longer by reason of the Ministers specious pretences of great advantage in it I can not believe any more Iustification by faith only as the principal article of my religion because it is not in Sctipture because it is expresly against Scripture against the holy Fathers because it is an ancient heresy condemned in Simon Magus Eunomius because the Presbyteriās iustifying faith is not a true Catholique faith having the divin reveal'd truth for its obiect as these he retiques required but is a private fancy a false faith Shelf aboue as it is acknowledged by some Protestāts having for its obiect humane presumption Because it makes Christ a most imperfect Physician and either debarreth man from the kingdome of heaven into which he cannot enter with the filthinesse of his sins or exposeth him after this life to a most dangerous purgation Because it breeds neglect of all piety and good works and opens a wide gate to all sort of vice In a word albeit the Ministers bragged much of this article yet I found they had never lesse reason if we will stand to the iudgment of the Scriptures Fathers which God willing I ever intend to prefer to their fancies and to their Philosophical distinctions or rather confusions to which they are forced to run that they may lurk in their obscurities when they are beaten out of the Scriptures in which at first they pretended to be impregnably setled It is sufficient for me that the Scripture expresly saith that a man is iustifyed by works and not by faith only Which is the contradiction of the Presbyterians faith and
instruments doth not depend either vpon the the holynes of the Minister or vpon worthinesse of the receiver but vpon the work wrought that is on the Sacramental action which is instituted by Christ for that end As for example the Sacrament of baptisme confers the grace of Sanctification to infants washing away their original sin and making them the children of God and this effect it vndoubtedly produceth in infants in whom no dispositions are required so that if they die before they commit any actual sin all of them would infallibly go to heaven Here it is evident that baptisme confers grace by the work wrought or by the Sacramental action and institution of Christ and not for any worthinesse of the infants Again although the dispositions of faith love repentance and the rest be required in these persons who being come to age are to be baptized yet baptisme doth produce their Sanctification not by vertue or for the merit of these dispositions although without them iustifying grace would not be produced but for the institution of Christ to whom and not to the merit of the receaver all the grace is attributed Thus he shew me how the Catholique Doctours did explaine the matter and that it never entered into any of their heads that the Sacraments would produce grace in those who were ill disposed or received thē without due preparation since the Scripture sheweth that these 1. Cor. 11. v. 9. who receeive the Eucharist vnworthily receive vnto themselves damnation Vpon these considerations I thought it no wonder that the Presbyterians who esteem their Sacraments to be of so little value haue also made them to be of so little vse For they haue abrogated and condemned all private baptisme and Communion so that these two Sacraments which are all they have cannot be any more vsed in private although vpon never so great necessity And for their Communion as they never give it in private for the comfort of the sick so they give it very seldom in publick for the devotion of the whole for in some remarkable Townes and other parts of the Countrey it hath not been once administrated these 8. or 9. yeares By all which I saw clearly enough that the doctrines and practises of the Presbyterians were not only against the excellency but also against the necessity of the Christian Sacraments which were thereby rendred altogether gracelesse and almost vselesse Therefore I intended Godwilling to follow no longer such wicked opinions and practises which destroy the nature end and vse of the Christian Sacraments CHAP. XIX That Baptisme taketh away Original sin which is denyed by the Presbyterians VPON the determination of the former question this other was soone decyded For if Baptisme conferres grace as hath been proved generally of all the Christian Sacraments in the former chapter then it also taketh away sin which cannot stay with grace in the same place And so accordingly the Catholiques teach Concil Trid. sess 5 can 5. that Original sin is taken away by Baptisme as the Councel of Trent hath defined in these words If any man shall deny that by grace conserred in the Sacrament of Baptisme the guilt of original sin is taken away or saith also that all that is properly sin is not taken away but only razed and not imputed be he accursed The chieff Protestants Presbyterians hold the contrary as an article of their faith Luther saith to deny sin to be remaining in a child after baptisme Luth. art 1. damnat à Leone X. Cal. lib. 4. Instit cap. 15. sect 10. Confess Vvestmin ch 6. is to tread both Paul and Christ vnder foote Calvin accordeth to him It is false saith he that by baptisme we are loosed and exempted from original sin The Presbyterian confession of Westminster saith that by original sin we are wholly defiled in all the faculties parts of soule body And that this corruption of nature during this life doth remain in those that are regenerated and that it self and all the motions of it are truly properly sin I found the Catholique doctrin to be firmly founded in the Scriptures to have been zealously defended by the holy fathers who account them infidels who deny it and to be agreable to the very instinct of almost all Christians And consequently the Presbyterian belief which is iust opposite must be against all these as also I found it to have been an ancient heresy and that it is so false and absurd that diverse Protestants have been scandalized at it and abandonned it and some have condemned it as blasphemy All which I shall briefly touch That baptisme taketh away original yea and all sin the Scripture sufficiently sheweth Ananias said to S. Paul Acts 22.17 Acts 2.38 Ephes 5.26 Titus 1. v. 5.1 Pet. 3.21 Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins S. Peter gave this advice to the Iewes be every one of you baptized for the remission of your sins S. Paul saith that Christ hath loved his Church and delivered himself for it that he might sanctifie it cleansing it by the lauer of water in the word Again He hath saved vs by the lauer of regeneration S. Peter saith Baptisme saveth you also If then Baptisme washeth away our sins how are they not taken away if we be cleansed from sin how can the filthinesse of sin remain If we be borne of new again in the lauer of regeneration how can the old man or death of sin abide in vs Christ is called in the Scripture the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world But how could he be said to take away the sins of the world if he did not take away Original sin which is the sin of the whole world And how is that sin taken away but by Baptisme These places of Scripture appeare so clear for this truth that without great violence they cannot be wrested to an other sense But now let vs heare the iudgment of the holy Fathers of the primitive Church S. Augustin sheweth the doctrin of the ancient Church against the Pelagians who falsely alleadged that the Catholiques maintaind Baptisme did not take away all sins but did only shave them for which supposed doctrin they branded the Catholiques with the name of Manichees He puts down their calumny in these words Aug. lib. 1. cont duas epist Pelag. c. 13. These Manichees do teach that baptism doth not give remission of sins nor takes away crimes but only shaves them To which calumny S. Augustin answer's thus Who affirmes this against the Pelagians vnlesse he be some infidel For we teach that baptism gives remission of all sins and takes away crimes and not shaveth them Where may be observed not only what was the doctrin of the auncient Church but also that the contrary is a point of the Manichean heresy and that these who maintain it are infidels in S. Augustins iudgment Again the same holy Father sheweth the great vertue of
baptism when he saith Aug. lib 1. de peccat mer. rcmis c. 5. by the begetting flesh original sin is only contracted but by the regenerating Spirit remission is made not only of original but also the of voluntary sins S. Chrysostom doth more largely illustrate this matter shewing that baptism doth not only take away sin but also bringeth many graces privileges to the persons baptized They are Chrys in homil ad Neophitos saith he not only made free but holy not only holy but iust not only iust but children not only children but heires not only heires but brethren of Christ not only brethren of Christ but coheires not only coheires but memhers not only the temple but the members of the Spirit Yow see how many are the privileges of baptism Many indeed think that the heavenly grace consists only in the remissien of sins but we have reckoned ten privileges For this cause we baptize infants c. Idem in homil ad baptizandos Thus S. Chrysostom Again the same holy Father sheweth that albeit a sinner were defiled with all sorte of iniquity and tyed with the bands of all wickednesse yet when he comes vnto this Bath he riseth more pure then the beames of the Sun And as a little spark of fire cast into the deep sea is not leasurely but instantly extinguished by the aboundance of waters forthwith it is shewed to be nothing so all humane malice when it comes to the waters of these heavenly fountaines is more easily put out then the heate of that little spark And least this should be thought to be said out of ambition or exaggeration he proves all from these words of S. Paul 1. Cor. 9.10.11 Do not erre Neither fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers c. shall possesse the kingdome of God And these things indeed you were but you are washed but you are sanctifyed but you are iustifyed Then after an excellent discours on the vertue of baptism he sheweth why it is not called the lauer of remission of sins nor the lauer of purification but the lauer of regenerion because saith he it doth not only forgive our ssns nor simply purify vs who were wrapped vp in wickednesse but it makes vs as if we were borne from heaven More testimonies need not to be added since the Centurists do confesse that the most auncient Fathers as S. Clement Cent. 2. cap. 4. cent 3. c. 4. S. Iustin Cyprian and many others maintain'd the same doctrine Yea they maintain'd this so eagerly that some of them do brand those who believe the contrary with the note of infidelity as we have seen lately out of S. Augustin Greg. lib. 9. regist ep 39. To whom also accordeth S. Gregory the great who saith that nothing can be more vnfaithfull then to teach that sins are only superficially or not fully taken away in baptism Moreover this truth is so engrafted in the hearts of Christians that the most part of Protestants believes it albeit it be against the faith of their Church and albeit it be also true that few of them know so much Hence it came to passe that diverse Presbyterians were scandalized at some words which a great Apostle of the Covenant spake lately against this truth For when one striving to cleare himself before the Presbytery of some imputation wherewith he was charged had said that he was as innocent of that whereof he was accused as he was free of original sin by baptisme the said Apostle presently took him vp sharply told him that he was speaking flat Popery and that neither he nor any man whosoever would be freed from original sin so long as they lived Wherevpon many to whose eares this discourse came took great offence as if this had been the private opinion of that Minister not knowing that it was also the belief of the Presbyterian Church and of their first Reformers Hence it may appeare that this article of the Presbyterian faith is not only against the Scriptures holy Fathers but also against the very instinct of almost all Christians And besids all these absurdities I found it to have been a most auncient heresy defended by the Origenists who thought as S. Epiphanius witnesseth Epiph. haer 64. that sins were not taken away by baptism but only covered and were at length purged by death So that we have for the most part auncient and condemned heresies for the articles of the Presbyterian faith Yea a famous Protestant of Germany condemnes this opinion in the name of his Lutheran brethren as a blasphemie against the holy Scriptures This blasphemie Shlusselburg lib. 1. Theol. art 18 saith he of the Calvinists that baptism doth not purge sins the holy Ghost in in many places refuteth All which besides many other considerations were more then sufficient to hinder me from making such a pernicious errour which indeed makes baptism of no effect an article of my faith I will conclude this matter with the testimonies of two most renowned Fathers who found by experience the wonderfull effects of baptisme Aug. lib 4. Confess cap. 4. S. Augustin doth relate how a dear Camerâ—d of his whom he had infected with the errours and heresies which himself followed before his conversion falling extreamly sick being without vnderstanding or sense was in that condition baptized And how thereafter he coming to his senses S. Augustin began to iest him with the baptism which he had received without vnderstanding But saith the father he found that he had received it and abhorred me as an enemy admonishing me with a wonderfull libertie that I would leave off to speak such things if I would remain a friend Whereat S. Augustin professeth that he much admired to see such a change wrought in the mind by that which was done in the body of him who at that time knew not what they did Cypr. epist 2. ad Donat S. Cyprian also ingenuously confesseth what a vitious man himself was before baptism and how suddenly he was changed and became an other man by the grace which he received in that Sacrament and acknowledging thankfully the many benefites which Christianity conferred vpon him he calleth it truly The death of sins and the life of vertues The like admirable change was also wrought by baptism in the soule of S. Augustin By all which may be knowen that baptism not only purgeth the soule from sin and adorneth it with grace but also it changeth admirably the mind of man The false supposition of the Presbyterians that original sin is nothing else but concupiscence shall be hereafter refuted in the triall of the Covenant CHAP. XX. That Baptism is necessary for the Salvation of Infants which is denyed by the Presbyterians I took notice of aÌ„ other daÌ„gerous errour which was taught by our first Reformers and is yet maintain'd by the Presbyterians against the necessity of baptism For as they teach that baptism taketh not a way original
sin so they belieue that it is not necessary for salvation that children dying without that Sacrament may be saved VpoÌ„ this dangerous doctrin followeth a most dangerous practise Fot they believing baptism not to be necessary suffer many children to die without it and they have also made a law abrogating all private baptism Our first Reformers shew their minde clearly The Scotiâ—h Confession c. of baptism Confess Vvestminst chap. 28. n. 5 Cal. in Antido to Concil ad sess 6. c. 5. lib. 4. instit c. 16. sect 24. 25. cont art Parisiens p. 307. F or Râ—yon de â—ortu progressu haeres lib. 8. c. 11. when they say in their first Confession That baptism isnoto of such necessity that the want of it can be hurtfull to the Salvation of children And they deny also the profitt of it when they subioyn that many have ben baptized and yet were never inwardly purged The same is almost repeated by our new Presbyterian Reformers in their late confession at Westminster where they say that grace and salvation are not so necessarly annexed vnto baptism that no person can be saved or regenerated without it or that all that are baptized are vndoubtedly regenerated These doctrines and practises are dâ—rived from Calvin the first Foundator of Presbytery who taught that the children of the faithfull are holy from their mothers womb are already sanctifyed and have remission of their sins and that they have need of baptism not as of a help necessary but as of seale ordain'd by God to seale in them the grace of adoption And if they die they may be saved without baptism And according to this doctrin he made a law in Geneva that the children to be baptized should expect sermon and he suffered a child to dye without baptisme because it was brought a little late to the Church as Florimond Reymond testifyeth Now I found the opposite doctrin to witt that baptism is necessary for the salvation of infants to be most firmly founded in Gods word to haue been strongly and zealously defended by the holy Fathers and the ancient Church and to be conforme to the general instinct of Christians Therefore the Presbyrian doctrin which is contrary must be against all those And besids I found it to be an auncient heresy and to be so dangerous and pernicious an errour that diverse famous Protestants have abandonned it All which points I shall briefly touch 1. Our Saviour saith clearly in the Scripture vnles a man be borne again of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God Iohn v. 5. Which place the holy Fathers and the ancient Church vnderstood of baptism Aug. lib. 1. de pecc mer. remiss c. 30. S. Augustin sheweth that this place was so expresse convincing that it confounded the Pelagians who denyed original sin and made them acknowledge the necessity of baptism although not for the remission of original sin which they denyed yet for the attayning of the kingdom of heaven But yet to maintain their errour they foolishly imagined that children might be saved without baptism although without it Vrb. Reg. 1. parte oper in Caetechismo minori fol. 104. 105. 107. they could not enter into heaven Vrbanus Regius a famous Protestant in Germany saith that the right beleeving Fathers and Christians vnderstood this place of baptism And to beleeve saith he that none either man or child can be saved without baptism both the Scripture and the authority of the auncient Church compelleth vs. For the Fathers we shall bring S. Augustin who writeth thus to S. Hierome Aug. epist. 20. ad Hier. Whosoever saith that such children shall have life in Christ who depart this life without participatien of the Sacrament of baptism that man questionlesse gainsayeth the preaching of the Apostles and condemneth the whole Church where such hast is made to runne with children because it is beleeved without doubt that otherwise they cannot at all be quickned in Christ And in another place he saith most earnestly Aug. lib. 3. de origine anâ—mae cap. Do not beleeve do not say do not tea h that children preveened by death before they receive baptism can attayn remission of their original sin if you desire to be a Catholique And that this was not only the belief of S. Augustin but also of the other holy Fathers as of S. Cyprian Nazianzen S. Hierom Câ—nt 3. c. 4. Cent. 4. c. 4 Aug. epist 90 92. S. Ambrose S. Hilarius c. the Centurists themselves do acknowledge yea the Carthaginian Milevitan Councels as S. Augustin testifieth professed the same and condemned their opinion who think that children can be saved without baptism And that the necessity of baptism is conforme to the generall instinct of Christians may appeare by the former testimony of S. Augustin where he sheweth that Christians make such haste and are so earnest to have their children baptised because they believe that otherwise they cannot be quickned in Christ Therefore the Presbyterian doctrin which denyeth the necessity of baptism gainsayeth the Scriptures Fathers and â—s against the common belief of Christians Moreover it was condemned Aug. lib de haeres c. 69. as an old heresy in the Pelagians For they denyed also that baptism was necessary for the remission of original sin There is indeed this difference between them the Presbyterians that they denying original sin thought it not necessary for the remission of it albeit they esteem'd it necessary for the attayning the kingdom of heaven But the Presbyterians graunting original sin believe that baptism is neither necessary for the remission of it nor for obtaining of heaven and so their errour in this point is greater then that of the Pelagians For they promise the kingdom of heaven to children dying without baptism which the Pelagians presumed not to do it being so clearly against the Scriptures That diverse famous Protestants have abandonned this errour and do hold that Salvation is not promised to the children of the faithfull dying without baptism Breirly sheweth in the Protestants Apology Prot Apol. trac 3. sect 4. n. 11. where he cites for this purpose the Confession of Auxburg Vrbanus Regius Hosmanus Bilson Bishop of Winchester and others King Iames also in the conference at Hampton-Court maintain'd that baptism was necessarie by the necessity of command albeit he did not think it necessarie by the necessitie of means All which considerations were more then sufficient motives to make me abandon the Presbyterian opinion and to embrace the Catholique belief concerning the necessity of haptism for the Salvation of infants But finding that the Presbyterians have principally two exceptions against the ancient Catholique doctrin I proposed them to a Catholique for my greater satisfaction First said I the Presbyterians do alleadge that the necessity of baptism is against the power of God by tying him to the ordinary means 2. They
by a true conversion to God when the baptism of water is not contemned but rather desired and yet through some necessity men die without it as S. Ambrose testifieth of Valentinian the yonger· I haue lost him Ambr. orat de obitâ—â— Val. ent iunioris Mark 1.4 Luke 3.3 saith he whom I was to regenerate but he hath not lost the grace which he hoped for This true conversion penance is also called baptism in the Scriptures for it is said that S. Iohn preached baptism of penance vnto remission of sins And according to this doctrin the ancients did handsomly distinguish three kinds of baptism which they called Sanguinis flaminis fluminis that is the baptism of blood of the Spirit of water Lastly he said that although baptism were not a necessarie mean ordained by God for Salvation of Infants yet it hath the necessitie of a command to Pastors Mat. 28.19 as is evident by our Saviours words to the Apostles Goe and teach all nations baptizeing them c. Therefore although it were supposed that no hurt come to the children dying without baptism yet they who by their office are obliged to baptize commit a great sin when they wilfully neglect to obey Christs command which the Presbyterian Pastors manifestly do suffering so many children notwithstanding the many teares and cries of their parents to die without baptism And according to this observation King Iames answered well a Minister in Scotland who enquired of him if he thought baptism so necessarie that if it were omitted the child would be damned No said the King but I verily believe if yow being called to baptise a child in danger of death would refuse to do it that you would be damned This answer may be seen in the first dayes conference at Hampton-Court Where it is also shewed that such a neglect of baptisme is not only a damnable sin in the Minister but likwise that it is very daÌ„gerous for the child For who saith the Bishop of London hath any carâ— of religion and would not by all meanes be carefull that his child receive baptism Who would not rather assure his action vpon the promises of Iesus Christ then the omission of it vpon the secret iudgment of God Then whereas the Ministers do alleadge that Christs command extends only to publique and not to private baptism this is a meer fancy without any ground in Scripture where no such distinctioÌ„ is made yea it is against Scripture For do we not read that S. Paul was baptized privatly by Ananias and the Eunuch by S. Philip. Acts. 9.18 Acts. 8.38 But they who teach that Gods commandments are impossible to be kept and make dayly profession to break them may let this passe with the rest These and diverse other inconsequentiall errours of the Presbyterians concerning baptim he did manifest vnto me which for brevities sake I omitt Therefore to conclude this point I cannot believe the Presbyterian doctrin against the necessity ob baptism because iâ— is against our Saviours expresse words against the holy Fathers whole ancient Church because it is an ancient heresy condemned in the Pelagians because it is against the common instinct of Christians and is condemned by diverse famous Protestants so that King Iames the head of a famous Protestant Church iudged it damnable in the Ministers and his Prelats esteem'd it most dangerous to the infants For which dangerous doctrin and the cruel practise flowing from it I can find no other ground but Ministerial tradition from Geneva and that against the Scriptures and all the former authorities Florimond above cited sheweth Flor. Reym de orta haeres lib. 8. c. 11. c. how this tradition descended from Calvin and that Musculus Superintendent of Berne deposed a Minister named Samuel Hueber for having baptized a child in the night when it was in danger of death and Beza did assist to that censure Moreover he sheweth how in a Protestant Synod at Figear it was ordain'd that the Ministers should comfort the parents of children dying without baptism But all in vaine so that the Ministers of Poictou in an aslembly at Chastelrauld in the yeare 1599. were enforced to give way to Ministers to baptize in private houses that they might avoid the cryes of tender hearted mothers I have heard of some pittiful accidents that have fallen forth in our Countrey vpon this same occasion so that some mothers have almost gone out of their witts when the Ministers suffered their children to die without baptism And I knew a Protestant father who for this same reason took great indignation at all Presbyterian Ministers Such a strong impression hath God made of this truth in the hearts of the simple people who in many other things have suffered themselves to be too simply misled to abandon the truth By all which it may be fâ—en how the Presbyterians make void and destroy the Sacrament of baptism CHAP. XXI Of the reall presence of Christs body in the holy Sacrament which is denyed by the Presbyterians AS the Presbyterians by denying both the effect and necâ—ssity of bapism do in effect quite take away that so holy and necessary a Sacrament so I conceived if it be true that Christs body be really present in the Eucharist as the Catholiques beleeve that the Presbyterians who deny the reall presence and do give vs nothing but signes and tokens of Christs body do also destroy this other most excellent Sacrament The Catholiques belief in this point Concil Triden sessio 13 c. 1. is clearly set down by the Councel of Trent where it is said The holy Synod doth openly and simply professe that in the holâ— Sacrament of the Eucharist after the consecration of bread wine our Lord Iesus Christ true od true man is truly really suhstantially contain'd c. Our first Scott sh Confession speaks not so clearly For after some ambiguity of words by which it would seem to graunt the reall presence it acknowledged that hrists body is only in the heavens For it saith that the holy Ghost by true faith 1. Scottish confes art 21. carrieth vs above all things that are visible c and maketh vs to feed vpon the body blood of Christ Iesus which is in the heavens And yet notwithstanding the far distance of place which is betwixt his body now grorifyed in the heavens and vs now mortall in this earth yet we assuredly beleeve c. The late Gonfession of Westminster albeit it vseth also some ambiguous expressions yet it affirmeth that Christs body is not corporally or carnally in with or vnder the bread wine Confess Vvest chap. 29. n. 7. And it s knowen also that the Presbyterians do zealously maintaine that Christs body is only in the heavens and that it is impossible even to the omnipotency of God to make a body to be present in two places at once And therefore according to them Christs body cannot be
else but the privation of some good and that can be of no other good but of Original Iustice And as Original Iustice albeit it comprehended many supernatural perfections both in the soule body consisted principally properly in that Iustifying grace by which the soule was adorned and Vnited vnto God the Soveraign good so original sin is the privation only of that Iustifying grace in the Superiour part of the soule the want of which makes the soule deformed and averted from God And seing this want is taken away by Baptisme and the whole grace as it beautifyed the soule is entirly restored the whole guilt of original sin is taken away and the whole essence of Original Iustice is recovered again by the merits of Christ Then for Concupiscence which is left after Baptisme it is not truly any sin but a weaknesse imperfection of Nature proceeding from the former Original sin as all sicknesses miseries and death it self are All which are left in vs even after the sin it self is taken away to put vs in mind from what happy Estate we had fallen and to stirre vs vp to labour more diligently and to call more earnestly for the help of Gods grace Neither is the grace which we receive from Christ the smaller or weaker that it doth not take away concupiscence and restore vs to the whole rectitude which Adam enieyed but it is rather more strong since many by it do stand even with all that weaknesse of nature which Adam did not with all the grace he had even in the strength rectitude of his nature All which things were confirmed to me by diverse authorities reasons which were too longsome here to insert It shall be sufficient to bring one testimony of S. Augustin against Calvins opinion and the fundament of it Concupiscence August lib. 1. de nuptijs concupis c. 23. saith he is called sin because it was made by sin whereas now in the regenerate it is not sin c. Yea he sheweth that concupiscence is so far from being sin when it is resisted that it becomes rather the matter of Victory and of a Crown vnto vs. Sometimes saith he Aug de Genesi cont Manich c. 4. Cal. lib. 3. Inst c. 3. par 10. reason doth stoutly resist bridle Concupiscence even when it is stirred vp which when it is performed we fall not into sin but after some wrestlings we are crowned Calvin ingenuously confesseth that his opinion in this matter is against S. Augustin all Antiquity which is sufficient to make it to be suspected if not also reiected As then the Catholique doctrine concerning Original sin is the same holy pure doctrine of the Primitive Church so your doctrine ô Covenanters is full of corruptions For besides that it corrupts the Catholique Faith it corrupts both your soules bodies This your selves do confesse for in your new Confession you say that man by Original sin became wholly defilled Conf. westminst ch 6. in all the faculties parts of Soule body and that this corruption of nature dureing this life doth remain in those who are regenerated and that both it self and the motions of it are truly properly sin Moreover it corrupts all your best thoughts words and actions For so you professe that by it you are vtterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all good and wholly inclined to all evil This also M. Calvin did teach Cal in Antid Con. Trid. sess 6. c. 16. Shels p. 146. saying The vitiousnesse of original sin which remaines in vs defiles before God what ever works proceed from vs. Of which doctrin M. Shelford a Protestant gives his opinion thus These who say so cannot in my Iudgment be excused from extream blasphemie Thirdly it corrupts Grace for it makes the Grace of Christ so weak and imperfect that it cannot free vs from the corruption of Original sin And lastly it is the source of many corrupt errors as of your Iustification by faith only the impossibility of keeping Gods commandments the denyall of all good works of inherent Iustice many more From which it is evident that your doctrine is very much corrupted which is the cause of so many corruptions Hence also may be easily seen that the Catholique doctrin concerning our natural inhability and rebellion to Gods Law is not corrupted because as it teacheth against the Pelagians that we are vnable by the power of nature to keep Gods Law so it affirmeth also against the Presbyterians what is impossible to be done by nature is possible by Gods grace and what we cannot do of our selves we can performe by the strength of him who comforts vs. Which might be easily shown to be S. Pauls doctrine Rom. 8.3.4 Philip. 4.13 and therefore to be free of corruption But your doctrine is very corrupt which so grants a natural inhability that it denys all supernatural ability even with the assistance of Gods grace to keep his Law You professe yourselves to be so naturally rebels to God that all his grace cannot make you good subiects which shewes that both your doctrin your selves are very much corrupted The same may be shewed of Sanctification For the Catholiques teach that no man is so perfectly holy here in this pilgrinage but he may every day advance in holynesse and be renewed dayly in the inward man and that no person even the holyest is free of venial sins imperfections and then only we shall be perfect when this corruption shall put on immortality In this sense they grant that sanctification in this life is imperfect whereas in an other sense they teach that there may be even in this life a certain perfection of holynesse in some degree svitable to the observation of the divine Commandments as has been shewed above chap. 14. p. 145. But your doctrin is very corrupt which maks your sanctification so imperfect that you cannot by it think so much as a good thought or do any thing but sin mortally And your obedience to the Law is so imperfect that you break it at every minut So that such sanctification may be rather called profanation and such imperfect obedience to Gods Law may be iustly tearmed Disobedience Lastly if the Catholique doctrin which affirmeth that man is not iustifyed by faith only be corrupted then the Scripture is corrupted which teacheth the same not only in substance but in expresse words proving it by diverse arguments examples and comparcing those who beleeve the contrary to Devils as we have seen above chap. 15. pag. 157. But your doctrin in this principal article of your faith is very much corrupted which corrupteth the pure fountain of Gods word By all which may be seen not only how falsly you accuse the Catholique doctrin of corruptions in all the former points but also how truly your own doctrin is full of corruptions SECTION VII Of the Holy Sacraments of Ceremonies Divorces and of Dispensations NEXT follow
it as the same Bellarmin affirmes against Calvins calumnies Secondly it is falsly called vncertain For albeit the Catholiques teach that no man without divine revelation can know the truth of his own repentance by the certainty of divine faith yet he mâ—y know it by a moral certainty ariseing from hope in the divine goodnesse according to that of S. Paul Rom. 8.14 we are saved by Hope which is sufficient to put mans mind in peace and tranquillity Then you as falsly detest the Catholique faith as generall and doubtsome For albeit the Catholiques bele ve not only all that God has reveal'd in geneâ—all but also every particular point yet you call their faith general and doubtsome because they will not beleeve that which God never reveal'd to witt your special faith or rather foolish fancie by which every one of you beleeves that your sins are forgiven and that you are of the number of the predestinate and by which you think to be iustifyed But the Catholiques have no reason to beleeve such a special faith because as it has been shewed above it is nothing but meer presumption and is condemned as a false faith a private fancie by a famous Protestant and it is so groundlesse doubtsome that it brings diverse among your selves who follow closely your principles into great perturbation of mind and some into desperation All which as also the truth and certainty of the Catholiques iustifying faith may be seen handled above in the matter of Iustification and particularly in the 17. Chapter page 183. and some few pages following After you have detested Confession and blamed the Catholiques for requireing so much Contrition now you detest Satisfaction and so you renounce all the three parts of the Sacrament of Penance but you do this with as little reason as you have done the rest For by Satisfactions the Catholiques vnderstand some laborious works such as Prayer A mesdeeds fasting which are offered vp to God in Satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to our sins after the guilt and eternal punishment are taken away by the Sacramental absolution which doctrine is most consonant to the Scripâ—ures holy Fathers That temporal punishment remaines due to sin after the eternal is remitted is most clear in the person of King David 2. Kings ch 12. v. 13. who after he had gote remission of his sins from God by the mouth of Nathan the Prophet was notwithstanding punished temporally with the death of his Son Aug. tract 124. in Ioan. This truth S. Augustin doth testifie saying A man is forced to suffer even after his sins are forgiven c. puniâ—hment doth hold a man temporally whom sin holds not guilty vnto eternal damnation That this temporall paine remaining after the guilt of sin is remitted may be redeemed by good works which are therefore called Satisfactions is also evident For Daniel said to the King Let me Counsell thee Daniel 4. ô King redeem thy sins with almes and thy iniquities with the mercies of the poore S. Iohn Baptist saith Doe fruits worthy of Penance S. Augustin vpon these words of the Psalme Luke 3.8 Cleanse me from my sin desires sinners to say with David No my Lord Aug in psal 50. my sin shall not be vnpunished it shall not be vnpunished but therefore I will not that thou punish it because I punish my own sin I passe by more testimonies for brevities sake It is sufficient to note that the Centurists confesse this was the doctrine practice of the auncient Church as may be seen Centurie 3. col 127. Neither is it any wonder that you who deny all good works are so great Enemies to Satisfactions or works of austerity You detest next the Popes Iustification by works but you might as well with your first Apostle Luther renounce the Iustification of S. Iames who teacheth the same in expresse termes saying Do you see that by works Iames 2. ch v. 24. a man is iustifyed and not by faith only But enough of this matter has been said above Then for opus operatum which you abiure it has bred some of your Ministers endlesse work for being often enquired they could never tell truly what it was but brought diverse ridiculous oftentimes contrary glosses or rather gesses on it which would be too tedious here to insert Whereby it is evident Iude v. 10. that they have blasphemed things as S. Iude speaks whereof they are ignorant and have made many thowsands do the same What the Catholique Doctors intend by opus operatum has been above shewed pag. 202. to witt that the Sacraments of the new Law doe conferre grace by the work wrought that is by the power of the Sacramental action instituted by Christ to that effect and not by the merit of the Minister or Receiver of the Sacraments which is a most certain truth as may be seen above explain'd and confirmed at more length This is a better work wrought then the work of your Covenant which has wrought much mischief in great Britain You are not content to renounce all works of duty which are commanded by denying the possibility of keeping the commandments vnlesse you renounce also works of more perfection not commanded but Counselled which the Catholiques call works of Supererogation That there are such works most laudable commendable albeit you detest them is evident by the Scriptures Fathers For Virginity is not a command but a Counsel and is more perfect then Matrimony Of this S. Paul giveth testimony saying As concerning Virgins a commandment of our Lord I have not but Counsel I give as having obtaynd mercy of our Lord to be faithfull 1. Cor. 7.25 where he also sheweth that he who maries doth well but he who maries not doth better ver â—8 The same also our Saviour shewes saying that there are Eunuches who have gelded themselves for the Kingdome of Heaven Again our Saviour shewes another Counsel Math. 19.12 or work of perfection when he said to the yong man in the Gospell If thou wilt be perfect Goe sell the things thou hast and give to the poore thou shall have treasure in Heaven Math. 19.21 To these two works of perfection is adioyn'd voluntary obedience as Christ himself shew by his voluntary subiection to the blessed Virgin and S. Ioseph He himself being the absolute Lord of them all things S. Luke 2.51 The holy Fathers are most clear for this doctrine S. Chrysostom saith Chrys in 1. ad Cor. c. 9. Some things Christ commandeth somethings he leaveth to our own free-will For he said not sell that thou hast but if thou wilt be perfect sell that thou hast c. And in his 18. homily of Penance he saith Multi ipsa superant mandata Aug. de Virginitate c. 30. Many goe beyond the very commandments S. Augustin also sheweth the difference between Commands Evangelical Counsels affirming that for not doing the first men are
confesse with thy mouth our Lord Iesus Rom. 10.9 and in thy hart believe that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved S. Iohn saith also These things are written Iohn 20.31 that ye may believe Iesus Christ is the Son of God and believing ye may have everlasting life Here is not a word of Calvins special faith and yet we see how Abraham others were iustifyed without it by believing these things which God had revealed Rom. 11.33 4. S. Paul esteem'd Predestination one of the most deep secrets of God crying out O the depth of the riches of the wisdome knowledge of God c. And yet every Calvinist will know this secret in relation to himself as if he were one of Gods privy Counsellers or God had particularly reveald it to him S. Augustin saith to the same purpose Aug. lib. de corraept gr c. 13. who of all the campany of the faithfull so long as he lives in this mortality can presume that he is in the number of the predestinate What would S. Augustin have said of the Presbyterians who do not only so presume but make it also the principal article of their faith and the very ground of their Iustification 5. This belief of the assurance of election is against the Scripture which sheweth that man knoweth not whether he be worthy love or hatred Eccles 9.1 Phil p. 2.12 and exhorts vs to work out our Salvation in fear and trembling and advertiseth him who stands to take head least he fall Lastly as this presumptuous belief openeth a wide gate to all sort of vice and banisheth the exercise of vertue true piety which might be easily shewed so the seeking this faith hath made diverse loose all hope and it hath proved pernicious to them both in soule body For experience hath proved that it hath made diverse to be troubled in Spirit and loose their wits and some to fall into despaire by putting violent hands in themselves as it did not long ago to a famous Covenanter in Aberdeen M. T. Mercer who drowned himself when he was esteem'd by the Ministers there to haue been at the very point of getting assurance of his election So that I have heard some of the old Protestant Ministers condemne much this iustifying faith of the Puritans Shel p. 36.38 And M. Shelford doth not stand to call it a private Fancie and a false faith and an enemy to all true vertue piety Therefore by Gods grace I do not intend to believe it much lesse to found my Salvation vpon it All the assurance that we can have here without Gods particular revelation is by hope in the divine goodnesse and mercy which hope is not only fufficient to comfort vs in this life but also it will not confound vs in the next if we strive here to do our dutie and have the love of God powred forth in our hearts Therefore it belongs to the vertue of hope and not to faith to apply the divine promises as the same M. Shelford doth acknowledge Besids all these authorities reasons a Catholique shew me that this doctrin of Iustification by faith only destroyeth it self For if we cannot be iustifyed by any works then we could not be iustifyed by faith since faith it self is a work according to these words of our Saviour This is the work of God that you beleeve in him whom he hath sent Therefore said he since we are iustifyed by faith which is not against the divine grace nor our free iustification because faith it self is a work of grace so we may be also Iustifyed by love hope and other works of grace without any derogation from the diuine grace He did further vrge and said either the faith by which the Calvinists say that men are iustifyed is a mortal sin or not If it be a deadly sin then they are iustifyed by sin which is impious to say If it be not a mortal sin then all our actions are not sins as Luther Calvin falsly teach The same Catholique shew me that to shun these inconveniences to which the doctrin of the Calvinists drives them they affirm that faith albeit it be a work yet it doth not iustify as a work of vertue but only as an Instrument to apprehend the iustice of Christ Calvin saith that Faith Cal. ib. 3. Instit. cap. 11. sect 7. Mel. in locis tit de bon oper although it be of no dignity nor price iustifyes vs bringing Christ as a pot filled with money enricheth a man Melanchton saith that iustifying faith is like a poore mans hand which he stretcheth forth to receive almes from a rich man And so at length this iustifying faith which the Presbyterians so much cry vp by the confession of Calvin is of no price nor dignity so that by him it is compared to a pot and by another great light to a scabbed mans ' hand and by both ther principles it is a sinfull instrument by which they will have all men to be iustifyed Whereby said the Catholique it may appeare that these men are no lesse enemies to faith then to works and that they destroy the goodnesse vertue of both Whereas the Catholiques do esteem faith to be an excellent vertue and the very roote foundation of our Iustification There was an other difficulty arising clearly from the Presbyterian doctrin with which the same Catholique did much presse me and some other Protestants who were present Either said he the Presbyterians who pretend to be assured of their electiō are purged cleansed from the filthines of their sins befor they can enter into heauen or they are not purged at all from them If they be not purged from them Then they cannot enter into that heavenly citie For S. Iohn saith There shall not enter into it any polluted thing That citie is described to be of pure gold and the foundations of it to be adorned with every precious stone Therefore the Citizens of it must also be pure and without spot And consequently if the Presbyterians be not purged from the filthinesse and sores of their sins which must not be only covered but really taken away cured and cleansed they cannot enter into heaven If they say that they must be purged from their sins and all filthinesse and blots taken from them before they can enter into heaven then they are either purged from their sins in this life or in the life to come Not in this because they teach that their sins are not taken away in this life but are only covered and the filthinesse of them remaines and as they live so they di◠in sins Not after this life for then they behoved to acknowledge a Purgatory which is against a principal article of their negative faith If they say their sins are taken away by death in the very instant of it Then since death is common to all men if death had that power