worke it Lastly the same Apostle teacheth that sinne hath no dominion ouer them that are vnder grace which were false if concupiscence were properly sinne for that hath such dominion ouer euery good body that they cannot auoid the motion and sting of it No not S. Paul could be clearely deliuered 2. Cor. 12. vers 8. from that pricke of the flesh though he praied most earnestly for it wherefore by the testimony of S. Paul himselfe concupiscence is not properly sinne no more is it to lust if lust be taken for the first motions of concupiscence But concupiscence when it hath conceiued Iacob 1. vers 15. as S. Iames speaketh that is by our liking beginneth to take hold on vs bringeth forth sinne yet but veniall marry when it is consummate by our consent or long lingring in it then it engendreth death that is mortall sinne R. ABBOT EVen so might the adulterer pleade for himselfe that as Christ is said to haue been made sinne and yet is not properly sinne so adultery though it be called sinne yet is not so called because it is indeede and properly sinne but only because it is an effect of sinne and draweth on to many sinnes Surely in what manner the Apostle saith that adultery is sinne in the same manner doth he say that concupiscence is sinne and very vntowardly and shamefully doth M. Bishop bring that as a speech of the like kinde whereby it is said that a 2. Cor. 5. 2â— Christ for vs was made sinne As for that which he citeth out of St. Austin I haue b Of Original sinne after Baptisme sect 9. elsewhere before examined the places and haue shewed at large how falsly and wickedly they abuse him St. Austin neuer denying concupiscence in the regenerate to be sinne but only as sinne implieth a guilt of punishment which to the faithfull is remitted and therefore the condition of sinne in that respect abolished If we consider the nature of sinne in the corruption and vncleannesse of it St. Austin acknowledgeth concupiscence to be such an euill quality as maketh vs euill which nothing can doe but sinne yea he saith that it is c August coÌ„t Iulian. l. 6. c. 5. Tale ac tammagnum malum tantum quia inest quomodo non tenerâ—t in morte c. so great an euill as that only for that it is in vs it should hold vs in death and bring vs to euerlasting death but that the bond that is the guilt thereof is loosed in baptisme by the remission of all our sinnes I note these things but briefly because I choose rather to referre the Reader to the treaty hereof at large And thereby he shall perceiue how vntruly M. Bishop here saith as by the doctrine of St. Austin that if by the helpe of Gods grace we represse concupiscence we are deliuered from the infection and guilt of it Indeede St. Austin saith so much of the guilt but neuer did he say or thinke that we are or shal be deliuerâ—â—â— from the infection and vncleannesse of it d Aug. Epist 54. Malos diâ—it propter vitia infirmitatis humanae donec totum quo constamus ab omni vitiositate sanatum transeat in eam vitam vbi nihil omninò peccabitur vntill all whereof we consist healed from all corruption shall passe into that life where there shall be no sinne But if St. Austin will not take his part he will proue that which he saith by St. Paul himselfe in the same Chapter He demandeth saith he Who shall deliuer me from this body of death and answereth presently The grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord. Where we see how according to his vsuall manner he setteth downe the wordes as to haue his Reader thinke that he tendereth him a proofe of that which he saith but neuer goeth about to shew how that which he saith is to be deduced therfrom And here his falshood is the greater for that hee alleageth the Apostles wordes for that which he saith whereas that which he saith is vtterly ouerthrowen by the wordes which he alleageth For let me aske him doth the Apostle by deliuerance from this body of death meane a deliuerance from the infection of originall sinne He will say yes because for proofe thereof he citeth the Apostles wordes Well but tell vs then doe you not beleeue that St. Paul was a partaker of the grace of God and did thereby represse and resist the motions of concupiscence Neither will he here dare to say nay and if he should what Christian man would not spit at him But then we will aske him againe if the Apostle by the grace of Christ did resist concupiscence and euery one that so doth be deliuered from the infection thereof how standeth it that the Apostle did yet remaine in case to be deliuered from this infection Marke I pray thee gentle Reader the Apostle saith who shall deliuer me giuing thereby to vnderstand that he was not as yet deliuered He saith the grace of God shall deliuer me but he doth not say it hath deliuered me from the infection of concupiscence Here M Bishop is mute he hath taken a fall in his owne trippe and knoweth not which way to recouer himselfe The Apostle St. Paul though by the grace of God he resisted the motions of concupiscence yet was not as yet deliuered from the infection of it It is false therefore which M. Bishop saith that if by the helpe of the grace of God we represse it we are deliuered from the infection of it I haue e Of Original sinne sect 4. before shewed that the Apostle in naming this body of death hath reference to this infection meaning thereby f Rom. 6. 6. the body of sinne as he hath termed it in the former Chapter g August de Temp. â—er 45. Per concupiscentiam dâ—ctum est hoc nostrummortis corpus which is to be destroyed and to which by and for concupiscence belongeth death It is true then which M. Bishop saith that the Apostle in desiring to be deliuered from this body of death did thereby intend a release from the infection of concupiscence but where was his vnderstanding that could not see that this maketh directly against himselfe and plainly sheweth that this release and deliuerance is yet to come and befalleth not vnto vs so long as we continue clothed with mortality and corruption But he telleth vs yet further that St. Austin out of the same sentence where concupiscence is called sinne Now not I worke it any more but sinne that dwelleth in me argueth very soundly that the Apostle could not meane sinne properly which cannot saith he be committed without consent of the minde He quoteth for this Lib. 6. cont Iulian. cap. 23. whereas in that sixt booke there are but thirteene Chapters But the place which he meaneth I take to be in the eleuenth Chapter of the same booke where St. Austin hauing mentioned those words of the Apostle goeth
grace the substance and truth being reueiled they ought to cease This was the very reason why the Apostles taught the Church x Col. 2. 17. 20. to be disburdened of those rites because they were shadowes of things to come the body whereof is in Christ. But M. Bishop telleth vs by another spirit that therefore the Church of Rome reteineth them because they were shadowes of things to come because they were types and figures of the law of grace and reproueth them of vndiscreet zeale that are minded otherwise Sith then he can obserue vndiscreet zeale in the Apostles I may not maruell that he deemeth my sore eyes darkened with strange defluxion and distillation of corrupt humours but such indeede is the case of mine eyes that in the law of Moses and in the Prophets I cannot see that religion which we call Popery which standeth in those points of faith whereof the question is betwixt them and vs. The rest of his wordes I passe ouer as idle talke What hee hath declared wee see and we see so much folly in it and so little weight as that we cannot but aduise him to take longer time and goe ouer the same againe W. BISHOP §. 5. ANd much more reprâ—chfull is it to hold as he doth That we worship God after the same manner as they did for then should we sacrifice to him Beefs Muttons Calues and Lambs and our sacrificers should be of Aarons issue and order and we all circumcised I omit all their ceremonies because M. Abbot excepteth them And if the Protestants doe altogether pray as they did and in the same termes as M. Abbot affirmeth them to doe they sometimes then doe pray vnto God to remember Exod. 32. v. 13. Abraham Isaac and Iacob and for their sakes to make mercy on them for to that effect and in those termes prayed the Prophet Moyses and that according vnto those Patriarkes expresse order and commandement Genes 48. v. 16. Whereunto if it please the Protestants to ioyne that other prayer of the Psalmist Remember O Lord Dauid Psal 131. and all his mildnesse let them tell mee whether this small prayer with which they finde so great fault Tu per Thomae sanguinem c. Thou O Lord for that blouds sake which thy seruant shed in defence of thy holy Church take compassion vpon vs be not warranted for good by example of the like recorded in the old Testament For if they then did desire God to remember the excellent vertues of his seruants and for their sakes to shew mercy to others why may not we doe the same now why may we not as well beseech God to remember the constant fortitude of S. Thomas as they did the mildnesse of Dauid I will not dwell vpon these impertinent and loose follies which all that be not babes may of themselues easily discry but doe out of the premises inferre first that no religion was to be called Catholike before the Gospell of Christ was preached or to be preached to all nations and therefore the law of Moyses being peculiar to one people and countrey could not be called Catholike secondly that the Roman faith and religion is very conformable to that of the Patriarks and Prophets as the verity is to the figure whence it followeth that the Protestants new deuices hold no due correspondence with them I haue already confuted this his assertion That Christ at his comming confirmed the faith and religion of the Iewes without any additions of his owne and commended it simply and nakedly only stripping it of types and shadowes to be preached to all nations And here I adde that then Christians may yet haue many wiues together as the Iewes had or giue their wiues vppon any displeasure a libell of diuorse for these were no shadowes nor ceremonies And briefly it should follow thereof that all that part of their law that doth belong to iustice and iudgement stands still in full force and vertue among vs Christians which is most opposite to the determination of the Apostles in the first Councel holden at Hierusalem where it was plainly decided that we Christians Act. 15. vers 28. were not bound to keepe the old law Againe if the Apostles were simply and nakedly to preach vnto the Gentiles the law of Moyses stript of types and shadowes why were they commanded to preach vnto them the Sacrament of baptisme or of our Lords Supper which are no where commanded in the law of Moyses Well let this then passe as a most notorious and grosse ouersight But the Apostles saith he added nothing of their owne which is very false for many things were left by our Sauiour to their disposition whereupon Saint Paul saith Caetera cum venero disponam I will dispose 1. Cor. 11. v. 3â— of the rest when I come and was further bold to say Haec dico ego non Dominus For the rest I say 1. Cor. 7. v. 12. not our Lord. M. Abbot goes on belying the Apostle and saying And they preached only the Gospell Rom. 1. promised before by the Prophets where he corrupteth the Text by adding the word only and weaueth into that Text to the Romans these wordes out of the Acts of the Apostles saying none other things then those Act. 26. v. 22. which the Prophets and Moyses did say should come where he both mangleth the Text and also breaks off in the middest of a sentence that it might seeme applyable to all points of the Apostles preachings which the Apostle applyeth only to Christs death and resurrection and the preaching and carrying of light vnto the Gentiles It is a peece of strange alchymie to distill out of these wordes of the Apostle that they preached nothing but the same faith and religion which the Iewes embraced S. Paul saith that he had preached nothing of Christs death and resurrection and that he was the light of the Gentiles but that which the Prophets did speake should come to passe M. Abbot of his owne head enlargeth this his speech to all other points of our faith Againe all is besides the purpose for the Apostle saith not that hee taught any one article which the common sort of the Iewes did beleeue but such things as the Prophets said should come to passe Who knowes not that they foresaw and fore-told many things that were no articles of faith in their dayes and touching these very particulars how many of the Iewes did beleeue that their Messias should die so shamefull a death or that Moyses law should be abrogated by their Messias and that the Gospell of Christ should be preached vnto all nations all these were great nouels and exceeding scandalous to the body of the Iewes wherefore though some better learned among them and more religiously affected might vnderstand the Prophets speaking of those points yet were they farre from the common reach and perswasion of that people of the Iewes from these points that the Iewes beleeued
will teach you when I come some new doctrine and points of faith which Christ hath not taught or commanded me to teach but I haue added of mine owne If he thinke so let him tell vs that we may wonder at him If he doe not thinke so to what end is it that he alleageth those wordes Surely he who a little before so religiously telleth them that o Vos 23. he receiued of the Lord that which he deliuered to them should not seeme likely presently after to say that he would hereafter teach them other matters of his owne which he had not receiued of the Lord. M. Bishop therefore should haue vsed his discretion to put a difference betwixt matter of order and matter of faith so to vnderstand that though the Apostles might as the Church alwaies may prescribe orders for decency and conueniency in the publike assemblies and gouernement of the Church yet that in doctrine and faith neither they then nor the Church now may adde any thing to that which Christ our Lord commanded and deliuered both to them and vs. Of the same kinde is his other proofe out of that which the Apostle faith for aduice to the vnmarried so still to abide concerning which he professeth to haue receiued p 1. Cor. 7. 12. 25. no commandement from the Lord for what is this to shew that the Apostle hereby added a new point of faith when as whether the married or the vnmarried whether they that follow his aduise or they that follow it not all are saued by the same faith Aduise is of things arbitrary to be done faith is of things necessary to be beleeued The Apostle therfore might giue wholsome aduise without coÌ„mandement of the Lord and yet cannot hereupon be said to teach a new article of faith I said further in my answere that the Apostles preached only q Rom. 1. 2. the Gospell promised before by the Prophets in the holy Scriptures M. Bishop telleth me that I belye the Apostle and corrupt the text by adding the word only But I set downe the word only in a letter distinct from the wordes of the text as appeareth in my booke though he would not obserue it but hudleth all together and therefore there was no cause for him to charge me with corrupting the text And what will he say notwithstanding that it was not meant that they preached only the Gospell promised in the Scriptures Surely the Apostle noteth his calling and seruice to haue bin to preach the Gospell of God This Gospell of God he saith God had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures Now if M. Bishop will say that though the Gospell were there promised yet the whole Gospell was not promised he wrongeth the Apostle by making his wordes partly true and partly false true in one part of the Gospell because one part was promised false in another part because that other part was not promised Which to auoide he must confesse that the whole Gospell was promised in the Scriptures of the Prophets and because the Apostles preached only the Gospel of God therefore they preached only the Gospell promised in the Scriptures And thus in the end of the same Epistle the Apostle speaketh againe to the same effect that r Rom. 16. 26. the myslerie of the Gospell was published amongst all nations by the Scriptures of the Prophets We doe not thinke he dallied in so saying as to meane the Gospell is published that is to say a part thereof but not the whole but the Gospell entirely and perfectly is preached by the Scriptures of the Prophets Therefore elsewhere he professeth that in preaching the Gospell f he said no other things but what the Prophets and Moses did Acts 26. 22. say should come But here M. Bishop saith I mangle the text and breake off in the midst of a sentence that it might seeme appliable to all points of the Apostles preachings which the Apostle applieth only to Christs death and resurrection and the preaching and carrying of light to the Gentiles But he himselfe rather doth wrong in so abridging the wordes of the Apostle contrary to the practise of the Apostle who though here he name only a briefe of some principall points as accuslomably is done yet vnder these as the chiefe comprehendeth the whole doctrine which he taught He vsed the wordes to take away the offence which was generally conceiued against his preaching and seeing he did not preach these only particulars which are here set downe neither were they offended only at these therefore he must be so vnderstood as that the wordes must be applyed to all the rest and that taken as put in steede of all whereat they were offended most of all And if we doe not so take them we make him subiect to calumniation because he could not affirme that he said no other things then the Prophets and Moses did say should come if in any other points he taught any thing that had not the testimony of Moses and the Prophets Yea when the same Apostle saith generally of t Rom. 3. 21. 22 the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ that it hath the witnesse of the law and the Prophets how can M. Bishop perswade vs that in the preaching of the righteousnesse of God by the faith of Iesus Christ he should teach any thing but whereof hee had witnesse and warrant of the law and Prophets especially when wee see him as in other of his Epistles so specially in the Epistle to the Romans instifying all points of faith accordingly And that this is a truth not to be contradicted we will take witnesse of Gregory Bishop of Rome who saith that u Gregor in Cant c. 5. Apo 〈…〉 a Pro 〈…〉 â—ruâ—n dâ—ctis vt 〈◊〉 persisterent fidem integram 〈…〉 the Aposiles receiued the whole faith from those things that were spoken by the Prophets And againe x Idem in Ezech hom 6. Qued praedicat lâ—x hoc â—iani Prophete quod dâ—nuilciant Prophatae â—o◠〈…〉 bâ—t 〈◊〉 quod exâ—â—ourt Euangelium hoc praediâ—aâ—erunt Apostoâ—â— per mundum Looke what the law preacheth the same also doe the Prophets and what the Prophets teach the same the Gospell hath exhibited and what the Gospell exhibited the Apostles preached through the world Thus the law and the Prophets and the Gospell and the preaching of the Apostles haue all deliuered only one and the same thing Therefore he saith that y Ibid. Vâ—raque Testamenta in nullo a se dâ—screpant c. Inâ—st testamento veteri testamentum noâ—um c. Prophetia testamenti noâ—i testamentum vetus est expositio testamenti veteris testamentum nouum the two Testaments differ not in any thing one from the other that the new Testament is contained in the old that the old Testament is a prophecio of the now and the new Testament the exposition of the old The same had St. Austin said before that
for no other but a madde and frantike dreame and yet perforce must vse it because hee knew no better shift therefore he thought good to colour it the best he could by curtolling the wordes alleaged naming only imputation of righteousnesse whereas the Apostle nameth imputation of righteousnesse without workes But let him take the wordes as the Apostle setteth them downe and then giue vs his answere and we shall apparantly see him to be a most impudent man making no conscience of that he saith but studying only to blinde the Reader from seeing that truth which he himselfe knoweth not how with any probable shew to contradict Yet he telleth vs for conclusion that there is only a bare sound of wordes for the Protestants the true substance of the text making wholly for the Papists So then the sound of the wordes by his confession is for vs but inasmuch as the wordes are very plaine and cleare how may we be informed that the true substance and meaning of them is wholly for the Papists when as they containe in shew a flat contradiction to the doctrine of the Papists Wee see here the vse of that caueat which the Rhemists haue giuen to their Reader aduertising him o Rhem. Testam ArgumeÌ„t of the Epistles in generall to assure himselfe that if any thing in Pauls Epistles sound to him contrary to the doctrine of their Catholike Church he faileth of the right sense By this meanes if Saint Paul say it is white yet we must not thinke that he meaneth it to be white if it please their Church to call it blacke And therefore though here he speake of imputation of righteousnesse without works and bring testimony of ancient Scripture for confirmation thereof yet he must not be taken to meane that there is any such or any other but the imputation of the righteousnesse of workes because there is no other approued by the Roman Church Well may we thinke the iudgement of God to be fearefull vpon them who are so blinde as to be led with such fopperies and grosse deceipts CHAP. X. That eternall life is meerely and wholly the gift of God and cannot be purchased by merit or desert ANSWERE TO THE EPISTLE PAul teacheth that eternall life is the gift of God through Iesus Christ c. to Hee telleth vs againe and againe c. W. BISHOP IN the same place you had a large solution of this obiection but he that hath made a couenant with hell will not looke vpon that which might helpe him to heauen We teach with the Apostle and with his faithfull interpreter Saint Augustine That eternall life is the gift of God both originally because we must receiue grace by the free gift of God before we can doe any thing that doth deserue the ioyes of heauen and also principally the whole vertue and value of our merits doe proceede of the dignity of Gods grace in vs which doth eleuate and giue such worth to our workes that they thereby deserue life euerlasting Notwithstanding if we take not hold on Gods grace when it is freely offered vs and doe not concurre with it to the effecting of good workes we shall neuer be saued and this our working with the grace of God deserues heauen both which are prouedly this sentence of the same Apostle God will render to euery man according to Rom. 2. vers 6. 7. 8. his workes to them truly that according to patience in good workes seeke glory and honour and incorruption life eternall to them that are of contention and that obey not the truth but giue credit to iniquity wrath and indignation where you may see in expresse termes eternall life to be rendered and repaid for good workes to such men as diligently seeke to doe them and to others who refuse to obey the truth and rather choose to beleeue lies and to liue wickedly eternall death and damnation R. ABBOT WHether M. Bishop or I may bee thought more likely to flatter himselfe in an opinion of hauing made a couenant with hell I leaue it to be esteemed by the whole processe of this worke and the God of heauen shall make it one day more fully to appeare Against his solution of the obiection here propounded he knoweth well that I a Of Merits sect 8. haue returned a replication which sheweth the same to be infirme and vaine and seeing he can fortifie it no further the bare repeating of it is no other but womanish and idle talking The Apostle telleth vs that b Rom. 6. 23. eternall life is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free grace or gift of God through Iâ—su Christ our Lord. We teach saith M. Bishop that eternall life is the gift of God originally and principally Thus by his shifting termes of originally and principally he limiteth the Apostles wordes and deludeth a maine Theoreme and Canon of Christian faith leauing it to be vnderstood that though eternall life be originally and principally the gift of God yet totally and absolutely it is not so Which iâ— it be true it must necessarily follow that as the Apostle saith truly that eternall life is the gift of God because in part it iâ— so so a man may truly say against the Apostle that eternall life is not the free gift of God because in part and in some sort it is not so And if no man may dare in this wise to gainsay the Apostle then wee must acknowledge that which Origen saith that c Origen in Rom. 4. Stipendia inquit peccati mors Et non addidâ—â— similitèr vt dicâ— et stâ—pendia aâ—â—â— iustitiae vita aterna sed ait Gratia autem Deâ— vâ—â—a aetâ—rna vt stâ—pend â—m quod vtique debiâ—o mercedi similé est retributionem poenâ— esse docâ—â—â—t mortis vâ—tam verâ— aternam soli gratiae consignareâ— the Apostle hauing said that the stipend of sinne is death did not adde in the like sort that the stipend of righteousnesse is eternall life but eternall life is the grace of God that he might teach that the retribution of punishment and death is a stipend which is like to a debt or wages but might assigne life eternall to grace only And thus the Apostle himselfe teacheth vs to conceiue when he saith d Rom. 11. 6. If it be of grace then it is not of workes otherwise grace is no grace For e August coÌ„t Pelag. Celest lib. 2. c 24. Gratia Dei non eriâ— gratâ—â— vllâ— modo nisigratâ—ita fuerâ—t omni modo grace saith Austin shall not be grace in any respect except it be free in euery respect f Idem Epist 120. c. 19. Haec est gratia quae gratis datur non meritâ—s operantis sed miseratione donantis That is grace saith he which is freely giuen not for the merits of the worker but by the mercy of the giuer Thus Hierome saith g Hieron Epist ad Demâ—trâ—ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non opâ—ruâ— retributio sed donamis est
Clerklike he shall thereby saue his life and shall not a iust Iudge frame his sentence accordingly Will M. Bishop say that he is no iust Iudge in such a case that dismisseth him with life that hath iustly deserued death If he will not say so then let him be so wise here as to vnderstand that iust iudgment proceedeth not alwaies by deserts but it is the part of a iust Iudge to iudge by lawes Now we know that as with men so with God there are lawes of rigour and extremity and there are lawes also of fauour and mercy The law of workes is a law of rigour k Rom. 4 15. a law which causeth wrath because l Gal. 3. 22. it concludeth all vnder sinne by reason whereof m Vers 10. so many as are of the workes of the law are vnder the curse for it is written n Deut. 27. 26. Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to doe them and there is no man that continueth to doe all because o Iam. 3. 2. in many things we offend all Therefore the ministery of this law is called p 2. Cor. 3. 7. 9. the ministery of death the ministery of condemnation and the iudgement which proceedeth according to this law is called by St. Austin q August in Ioan. tract 22. Judicium damnationis the iudgement of damnation because no man escapeth damnation that vndergoeth this iudgement Against this iudgement Dauid prayeth when he saith r Psal 143. 2. Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord c. that is as St. Austin expoundeth it Å¿ August de Temp. ser 49. Ne stâ—â— mecum in iudicio eâ—â—gendo à me omnia quae praecepisti omnia quae iussistâ— Nam me inuenies reum si in iudicium intraueâ—is mecum Opus est ergò mihi miâ—â—râ—câ—rdia tua potiùs quà m liquidissimo iâ—diciâ— tuo Stand not with me in iudgement to require of me all that thou hast willed and commanded for thou wilt finde me guilty if thou enter into iudgment with me I haue need therefore of thy mercy rather then of thy meere iudgment The Apostle St. Paul bearing the same minde and dreading the same iudgement desireth at that day t Phil. 3. 9. to be found in Christ not hauing saith he mine owne righteousnesse which is by the law but the righteousnesse which is by the faith of Christ euen the righteousnesse which is of God through faith And hereby he leadeth vs to the consideration of another law which hee calleth elsewhere u Rom. 3. 27. the law of faith the tenour whereof is expressed by the wordes of our Sauiour x Iohn 6. 40. This is the will of him that sent me that euery one which seeth the sonne and beleeueth in him should haue euerlasting life and I will raise him vp at the last day This is a law of mitigation and mercy whereby is administred grace and righteousnesse and life which could not be obtayned by the former law To this law are annexed and thereupon depend many fauours and gracious promises which God hath made vnto the faithfull grounded vpon Iesus Christ the Mediatour of the new Testament in y 2. Cor. 1. 20. whom they are all Yea and in him Amen first granted for his sake and for his sake faithfully performed Now these things being thus decreed and established by law God as a iust Iudge dispenseth these fauours and graces accordingly euen by iust iudgment consisting here not in examination of merits but in discerning the markes and qualities whereby God will haue them knowen to whom by law the couenant of this grace and mercy doth appertaine This iudgement St. Austin calleth z August in Ioan tract 22. Iudicium discriminationis a iudgement of distinction whereby God putteth a difference betwixt the good and the euill accordingly as the same St. Austin expoundeth those wordes of Dauid a Psal 43. Vulg. 42. 1. Iudge me O God c. b August in Psal 42. Distet intereum qui in te credâ—t eum qui non credit Par infirmitas sed dispar conscientia Par labor sed dispar desiderium Let there be difference betwixt him which beleeueth in thee and him which beleeueth not There is infirmity alike but the conscience is vnlike They are equall in trauell and labour but they differ in desire And by this iudgement God maintaineth the cause of the righteous against the wicked their cause being iust howsoeuer their merit be nothing and therefore yeeldeth that to the iustification of their cause which yet they cannot claime by desert of workes And thus the Apostle in respect of the faithfull calleth c 2. Thess 1. 5. it the iust iudgement of God whereby he vouchsafith them the Kingdome of God for it is iust with God saith he to recompence tribulation to them that trouble you and to you which are troubled rest with vs. It is iust with God and iust iudgement because it is so ordered and decreed in the law of faith that they shall be reckoned worthy of the Kingdome of God that doe suffer affliction for the testimony thereof And so the same Apostle being himselfe to receiue sentence of death as a malefactour at the hands of an vniust Iudge comforteth himselfe in the goodnesse of his cause and the testimony of his conscience that hauing fought a good fight and finished his course and kept the faith he should of a iust Iudge at that day receiue a crowne whereby against that vniust sentence his iustice and vprightnesse in that behalfe should be made apparant and manifest to the whole world This iudgement then proceeding by the law of faith is tempered and mingled with mercy as I haue d Of Merits sect 19. elsewhere shewed God accepting what wee haue done but not requiring what wee haue not done testifying our righteousnesse such as it is but neuer questioning our sinnes For e Aug. Epist 29. Cum Rex iustus sederit in thronâ— quis gloriabitur se castuÌ„ habere cor aut quis gloriabitur se esse immunem à peccato Quae igitur spes est nisi miserecordia superexultet iudicium when the iust King shall sit vpon his throne saith Austin who shall glory that he hath a cleane heart or that he is free from sinne and therefore what hope is there vnlesse mercy surmount iudgement And so in another place f Idem in psal 129. Apud te propitiatio est Nam si non esset apud te propitiatio si iudex soluÌ„ esse velles miserecors esse nolles obseruares omnes iniquitates nostâ—as quâ—reres â—as quis sustineret quis ante te staret dâ—ceret Innocens sum quis staret in iudicio tuo spes ergo vna est quoniam apud te propitiatio est There is mercy with thee for if there were not mercy with thee
the soule going from the body he shall hold it with him for euer without any change that neither being exalted it can come downe to punishment nor being drowned in eternall punishments can thence forth rise to any remedy of saluation If after death there be no deliuerance if there be no change but as the Angell either good or badde receiueth the soule out of the body so it continueth for euer either exalted to ioy or drowned in punishment then there can be no Purgatory then there can be nothing but either heauen or hell where they that come shall abide for euer Hee citeth for this the same wordes of Salomon that we doe and of which Olympiodorus a writer of the same time saith k Olympiodor in Ecclesi asâ— cap. 11. In quocunque loco seu illustri seu tene 〈◊〉 depreâ—edatur â—omo cum moritur mâ—ode gradu atque ordine poriâ—â—net in aeternum nam vel requieseâ—â— in lumine foelicitatis aeterae cum iustis Christo Domino vel in tenebris cruciatur cum iniquis huius mundi principâ— Diabolo In whatsoeuer place either lightsome or darke a man is taken when he dyeth in the same degree and order he abideth for euer for either he resteth in the light of eternall felicity with the iust and with Christ our Lord or else he is tormented in darkenesse with the wicked and with the Prince of this world the Diuell But Gregory againe writeth an Epistle to his friend Aregius a Bishop to comfort him concerning the death of some belonging to him wherin it is worthy to be obserued how consonantly he carrieth himselfe to the doctrine of the Scriptures Amongst other wordes wee reade these l Gregor lib. 7. indict 2. Epist 111. Indecens est de illis taedio afflictionis addâ—ci quos credendum est ad veram vitam moriendo perue nisse HabeÌ„t for sitan illi iustam longi doloris excusationem qui vitam alteram nesciunt qui de hoc seculo ad mâ—lius transitiâ— esse non confidunt nos autem qui nouimus qui hoc credimus docemus coÌ„tristarinimium de obâ—â—ntibus no debemus ne quod apud alios tenet pietatis speciem hoc magis nobis in culpa sit Nam dissidetâ—c quodamodâ— genus est cotra hoc quod quisque pradicat torqueri moestitia dicente Apostolo Nolumus autem vos ignorare fratres c. Hac itaque ratione perspecta studendum nobis est vt sicut dixâ—mus de mortâ—â—â— non esslâ—gamur sed affectuÌ„ viuentibus impendamus quibus pictas ad 〈◊〉 sit ad sâ—uct◠〈◊〉 It is vndecent for vs to giue our selues to long affliction of sorrow for them whom wee are to beleeue to haue come by death vnto the true life They haue haply iust excuse of long sorrow who know not any other life who doe not beleeue the passage from this world to be to a better world but wee who know who beleeue and teach this are not to be too heauy for the dead least that which with others carryeth a shew of piety be to vs rather a matter of blame For it is in a manner a kinde of distrâ—st to be tormented with heauinesse contrary to that which he himselfe doth teach Hereof he citeth the wordes of Saint Paul to the Thestalonians which I haue before set downe and then addeth This therefore seeing we know wee are to haue care as I haue said not to be afflicted for the dead but to bestow our affection vpon the liuing to whom our piety or denotion may be profitable and our loue may yeeld fruit Surely he leaueth no place for Purgatory that teacheth to beleeue that the faithfull in death doe attaine vnto true life and that their passage from this world is to a better neither doth he acknowledge any vse of Prayers of Masses and Trentals and other Offices and Obsequies for the dead who saith that our deuotion and loue yeeldeth no fruit or profit to them He would not haue bidden Aregius not to be afflicted for the dead but to bestow his affection vpon the liuing if hee had thought the dead to be in a Purgatory where they should and might be releeued by the deuotions of the liuing Thus he beleeued and taught where he taught aduisedly according to the Scriptures and thus wee beleeue accordingly and what hee casually taught otherwise wee reckon it for wood and straw and stubble which hee built vpon the true foundation which now the day-light of the Gospell hath reueiled and the fire of Gods word consumeth though hee himselfe by the faith of the said foundation hath attained peace And this wee hold to be the only true application of the Apostles wordes and most fitting to the processe of the text the Apostle making himselfe a builder by his preaching laying Christ for the foundation of his doctrine and therefore consequently vnderstanding gold siluer pearles wood hay stubble to be the rest of the doctrine that is preached concerning Christ either true signified by gold and siluer and pearles or false signified by wood and hay and stubble So did Tertullian of old vnderstand it m Tertul. coÌ„t Marc. l. 5. Super quod prout quisque superstruxerit dignam scilicet vel indignam doctrinam opus â—ius per ignem probabitur merces â—iâ—s per ignem rependetur As euery man saith he buildeth vpon the foundation doctrine worthy or vnworthy his worke shall be tryed by fire his reward shall be repaied him by fire In the like sort doth Ambrose expound it n Ambros in 1. Cor. 3. Tria genera posuit praeclara in mundo in quibus bonam doctrinam significauit c. Tria alia genera posuit sedfriuola In his corrupta vana doctrina designata di nâ—scitur He setteth downe three kinds of things that are excellent in the world gold siluer pearles by which he signifieth good doctrine three other things he setteth downe which are but base wood hay stubble and by these corrupt and vaine doctrine is designed Now if by these things doctrine bee designed then the fire whereby triall must be made of these things must be vnderstood accordingly That cannot be of the Popish Purgatory fire for it cannot in this sense bee fitted to Purgatory fire which the Apostle saith Euery mans worke shall be made manifest for the day shall declareâ— because it shall bee reueiled by fire for it is not declared or manifested by Purgatory fire whether doctrine bee true or false sith it selfe is so obscure and darke as that no man knoweth where it is Is it made manifest to vs by Purgatory fire whether ours or the Popish doctrine bee the more true Nay but by the word of God this triall is made and thereby it appeareth what is truth and what is falshood what is right and what is wrong and the truth as the gold and siluer is approued and iustified thereby but errour and false doctrine as wood and