Palaestine I think it good to rehearse them first in Latine after in Englishe as they are gathered togither by Augustine And theÌ„ to shewe according to your request what parte of their doctrine which they teache vnder the name of Predestination my selfe and other doe mislyke To the ende that you and other may the better iudge who are in deede worthy to be called Pelagians and whether some parte of their doctrine be not for iust cause misliked Crowley Here Cerberus vseth all his Retorique at once to persuade his dearely beloued friend whose letter he sayth he aunswereth that he and other of his minde be falsely and wrongfully accused to be enimies of Gods holy predestinatioÌ„ c. And to this ende he will in as fewe words as possibly he can set forth what shamefull doctrine is now taught c. But first he will set forth both in Latine and in Englishe those errours which the olde Heritike Pelagius with other did holde and also reuoke c. That men may the better iudge who are in deede worthy the name of Pelagians for he thinketh that he hath proued that we against whom he writeth are those that should be called Pelagians and whether some parte of oure doctrine be not for iuste cause misliked Now let vs sée how he noteth Pelagius errours out of Augustine first in Latine and then in Englishe Which when we haue weighed we shall sée who are moste lyke Pelagius he his or I and mine For this is his purpose I am sure for that he toucheth me first by name and setteth himself and such as he is against al such as I am affirming that whereas we accuse them as enimies of Gods Predestination they are in déede y e most intire louers and we the enimies therof My chief labor therfore in this Apologie shall be to make the truth hereof to appeare playnely to all the indifferent hearers Cerberus The wordes of Austen are these Episto 106. tomo 2. Obiectum est enim eum dicere Quia Adam siue peccaret siue non peccaret moriturus esset 2. Et quod peccatum eius ipsum solum laeserit non genus humanum 3. Et quod infantes in illo statu sunt quo Adam suit ante praeuaricationem 4. Et quod neque per mortem vel praeuaricationem â—de omne genus humanum moriatur neque per resurrectionem Christi omne genus humanum resurgat 5. Et diuites baptizatos nisi omnibus abrenuntient si quid boni visi fuerint facere non reputari illis nec eos habere posse regnum Dei 6. Et gratiam Dei atque adiutorium non ad singulos actus dari sed in libero arbitrio esse vel in lege atque in doctrina 7. Et dei gratiam secundum merit a nostra dari 8. Et silios Dei non posse vocari nisi omnino absque peccato fuerint effecti 9. Et non esse liberum arbitrium si Dei indiget auxilio quoniam in propria voluntate habet vnusquisque facere aliquid vel non facere 10. Et victoriam nostram non ex Dei adiutorio esse sed ex libero arbitrio 11. Et quod poenitentibus veni a noÌ„ detur secuÌ„dum gratiam misericordiam Dei sed secundum moritum laborem eorum qui per poenitentiam digni suerint misericordia Haec omnia Pelagius anathematizauit The first of Pelagius errours which Augustine here citeth is that Adam shoulde haue died whether he had sinned or not sinned This is as you heare one of Pelagius wicked errours that sinne is not the cause of Reprobation or casting away death sprong out of Gods ordinance or some other way came not of mans sinne saith he whether man had sinned or not sinned yet should he haue dyed contrary to the manifest Scripture which sayeth that by one man sinne entred into the worlde death by the meanes of sinne Roma 5. b. And the wyse man sayth that God created maÌ„ to be vndestroyed And againe he saith God hath not made death neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the liuing he created al things that they might haue their being yea all the people of the earth hath he made that they shoulde haue health that there should be no destruction in them and that the Kingdome of Hell should not be vpon earth for righteousnesse is euerlasting and immortall but vnrighteousenesse bringeth death Wicked and abhominable therfore was this errour of Pelagius which affirmeth that whether man had sinned or not sinned he shoulde haue dyed And here in the very beginning of Pelagius errours I reporte me to themselues euen to themselues I saye that blowe the trumpet of defamation against other with the termes of pestilent Pelagians whether those whome they so accuse nowe to be Pelagians holde this errour or whether they themselues which woulde take some mote of errour out of other mens eyes haue not this Pelagius beame sticking fast in their owne let they themselues be iudges or let their owne doctrine iudge both in print and preaching whereof some parte shall be hereafter rehearsed Yea let all the worlde iudge which haue hearde the doctrine of both parties who they are that in this point ought worthily to be called Pelagians Crowley After Cerberus hath set downe in Latine certaine of Pelagius errors to y e number of .xi. he repeteth y e first in Englishe that is that Adam should haue dyed though he had not sinned And bycause his purpose is to proue that we are those that holde this Pelagian heresie he vnderstandeth Pelagius meaning to be that sinne was not the cause of Reprobation or casting away but that heath sprong out of Gods ordinaunce And so at the last he concludeth that Pelagius and we are all one in thys point for we teache the same doctrine What moued Pelagius to teache that doctrine I knowe not neyther did I at any time so much as once thinke to holde or desende it And I thinke I may be bolde to say in the name of all that haue written or preached the doctrine that Cerberus misliketh that not one eyther hath or will teache it Although Cerberus doe boast that hereafter some parte of our doctrine shall be shewed whereby all men may be able to iudge that we are al one with Pelagius in this point For mine owne parte I will put all men out of doubt that I beleue and haue doe and will if God permit wache that if Adam had not sinned he had neuer dyed And that God did create man to be vndestroyed And that God made not death as the wise man writeth But by one man sinne entred into the the worlde and by sinne death And I can not sée that any of my breathren haue or doe teache any otherwise either in writing or preaching Wherefore Cerberus doth vs open wrong to ioyne vs with Pelagius in thys errour As for the doctrine that I haue written and
Cerberus wresteth top his purpose against me and my brethren shall by Gods helpe be defended in the place where it is produced against vs. Cerberus The seconde errour which Austen rehearseth is that Adams sinne did onely hurt himselfe and not the whole generation of man This is an other vile and detestable errour which Pelagius helde that the sinne of Adam brought not miserie and death vpon all his posteritie contrarye to the open Scripture which sayth that by the sinne of one condemnation came vpon all men And the holy man Esdras sayth O Adam what hast thou done for though it was thou that sinned yet thou arte not fallen alone but all we that come of thee The thirde depending also vpon the seconde is this That Infantes being newe borne are in that state that Adam was in before his transgression which errour semeth onely or chiefly to extende to the innocencie of children For if his minde were that in all pointes infantes were in Adames estate then shoulde it be ouer brutishe For who seeth not that babes newe borne suffer of tentimes payne and griefe which Adam did not before his transgression But to affirme that Infants are not borne and conceiued in sinne is to denie Originall sinne which is an olde and a diuelish errour and vtterly against the Scripture which sayth plainely Beholde I was borne in wickednesse and in sinne hath my mother conceyued mee Crowley In these two Articles can Cerberus finde nothing to burden vs withall For we teache that by their first byrth all Infants are enheritours of that possession that our common father Adam purchased by his first transgression or sinne That is of bodily trauaile and miserie in this lyfe and euerlasting death after this lyfe And that euen as the children of bonde slaues can enioy none other thing by birth than that bondage which their parents are in so the children of Adam can by nature enioy none other thing but that which belonged to their first father who by his first transgression made bath himselfe and all his posteritie bonde slaues to death hell the diuell and damnation Well therefore we shall not be Pelagians in this point But if I woulde deale as straightly with Cerberus as he doth with Samuell I coulde charge him with breaking of Priscians heade in the seconde Article where he writeth leseret for leserit Which though it be but a small fault yet is it as great a fault as that which Cerberus maketh so much of in Samuels rymes And the printers were to blame for both I am sure And therfore I woulde not y ◠eyther Samuell or Cerberus should beare any blame with them Who so Iusteth to conferre the copie of this aunswere which was first cast about in the streates of Londō with this y ◠is written in this Apologie shall easely sée that I haue amended many such faultes without noting of them to any mans reproche Cerberus The fourth errour is that neither by the death transgressiō of Adā all the generation of mā dyeth nor that by the Resurrection of Christ all the generation of man doth rise againe I doe not vnderstande that Pelagius did here speake of the last Refurrection at the day of iudgement as though he had after the maner of the Saduceis denied the Resurrection of our soules and bodies in the last daye for then were all them disputation in vaine of the maner how we shoulde be saued whether by the grace of God or by the deseruing of man if saluation or Rosurrection had on either parte bene denied altogither Neither doth the Scripture attribute the last Resurrection vnto Christ as though the soules and bodies of men shoulde haue died lyke beastes and not haue risen againe vnto iudgement if Christ had not come Yea no doubt all men shoulde haue risen againe and that to the iudgement of euerlasting damnation if Christ had not come But I vnderstande that Pelagius in this Article denied the generalitie of Redemption by the death of Christ by which we doe as it were arise from death bycause of the state of lyfe and saluation wherevnto we are bought in Christ by Redemption lyke as we were in the state of death and damnation in Adam by sinne Not that any man is purged from the corruption of sinne vnto the innocencie of Adam but bycause the sinne is couered in Christ and pardoned for his sake And further here is to be noted that the first parte of this errour is manifestly the very same which is in the seconde and thirde errour before rehersed and by the same Scriptures plainly condemned But to make the latter part of this errour more aparant it was necessarie and thought good of Augustine to rehearse the first againe that by the comparison of condemnation in Adam and Redemptiō in Christ it might the more plainely be perceiued that Christ was not inferiour to Adam nor grace inferiour to sinne And that as all the generation of man is condemned in Adam euen so is all the generation of man Redemed in Christ And as generall a Sauiour is Christ by redemption as Adam is a condemner by transgression Which comparison is taken out of S. Paule his Epistle to the Romanes where he saith Likewise then as by the sinne of one condemnation came vpon all men euen so by the iustifying of one commeth the righteousnesse that bringeth lyfe vpon all men Yet shall not all men be cōdemned by Adam eternally for there is ordained of God againe away vnto lyfe which way is Christ Neyther shall all be eternallye saued by Christ for there is of God declared a waye againe vnto death which waye is sinne and the wilfull contempt of Gods mercy in Christ But this appeareth to be one of Pelagius damnable errours That Christ was not a generall Sauiour that Christ offered not vp the sacrifice of redemtiō for al the whole world contrarye to the manifest Scripture which sayeth He it is that obtayned grace for our sinnes and not for our sinnes onely but also for the sinnes of the whole world The same is also manifestly declared in these Scriptures folowing and many other Iohn 1. a. 6. f. 12. g. Ro. 5. d. 14. c. 1. Cor. 8. d. 2. Cor. 5. c. Hebr. 2. c. 2. d. 2. Pet. 2. a. And here it is worthy to be noted againe how iustly this errour of Pelagius reboundeth into the bosome of those which so falsely accuse other to be giltie in the Pelagians errours Be indifferent dearely beloued in the Lorde I beseche thee and way the matter as it is I desire no more Crowley When Cerberus hath framed this fourth Article of Pelagius to his purpose and persuaded himselfe that it reboundeth into the bosomes of those that accuse him his sort to be giltie of Pelagius errours he concludeth that he desireth no more but that his dearely beloued whose letter he aunswereth woulde be indifferent and woulde waighe the matter as it is Surely
Austens name But bycause I promised before to proue mine affirmation as well by the iudgement of Auncient writers as by Scripture I will adde the iudgement of one or two moe whose autoritie and antiquitie is not to be dispised Of the which Ambrose shall be one Writing vpon the Epistle to the Romans he sayth Sicut per vnius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem sic per vnius iustitiam in omnes homines in iustificationem vitae Hoc est sicut per vnius delictum omnes condemnationem meruerunt similiter peccantes ita in iustitia vnius omnes iustificabuntur credentes Si qui autem condemnationem hanc generalem esse putant simili modo iustificationem generalem accipient Sed non est verum quia non omnes credunt Sicut enim per inobedientiam vnius hominis peccatores constituti sunt plurimi ita et per vnius obedientiam iusti constituentur multi Quos supra omnes dixit hic plures multos significat Plures enim delictum Adae secuti sunt praeuaricando non omnes multi iusti constituentur non omnes Non ergo in eos regnauit mors qui non peccauerunt in similitudine preuaricationis Adae That is to say Euen as by one mans sinne giltinesse came vpon all men to condemnation so did iustification of lyfe come vpon all mē through the righteousenesse of one man That is euen as by the sinne of one man all men that doe sinne as he dyd haue deserued condemnation euen so all that do beleue shall be iustified in the righteousenesse of one man And if any doe think that this condemnation is general let them in lyke maner take the iustification to be generall But that is not true bycause all men doe not beleue For euen as by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so by the obedience of one man many shall be made righteous The Apostle doth here call those same many that he did before call all For many haue in sinning folowed the sinne of Adam but not all and many shall be made righteous but not all Death therefore hath not raigned ouer them which haue not sinned in lyke sort as Adam did These be the wordes of Ambrose Which though at the first sight they séeme to incline to the errour of Pelagius yet when they be well weighed they giue a good and sounde meaning That is that sinne neuer raigned in any of Gods elect For although the elect of God in as much as they be the childrē of Adam be partakers of Adams sinne and in Adam condemned yet are they by Christe deliuered from that condemnation so that sinne hath in them no dominion at all Which thing appeareth in them by the fayth in Christ which when they come to knowledge they doe both by wordes and workes declare That this is the meaning of Ambros doth very plainely appeare by that he sayth that all the beleuers shall be iustified For what nedeth iustification where no condemnatiō was Thus much I thought good to write concerning y ◠simple meaning of this auncient Father least any mā of simplicity mistaking his meaning might think y t he should denie y e Elect to be conceyued and borne in originall sinne from which neuer any that was borne Christ only excepted coulde be frée But this is his meaning that in the Elect and chosen Children of God this sinne hath no dominion as it doth appeare by their obedience that they shewe in beleuing the Gospell but in the Reprobates it beareth rule still For Christ hath not killed it in them And to make an ende of this matter Saint Paule sayth thus in his eyght chapter to the Romans Who shall laye any thing to the charge of Gods Elect It is God that doth iustifie who is it that shall condemne If all mankinde then be elected in Christ as Cerberus sayth then shall no sinne be layde to any mans charge For who dare accuse Gods chosen children And so shall Cerberus doctrine be the destruction of all vertue as he hath afore affirmed of the doctrine we teache of Predestination As for that which Cerberus citeth out of the seconde chapter of S. Iohns first Epistle the other places that he sendeth the Reader vnto I doe nowe passe ouer as sufficiently aunswered by that I haue written concerning S. Paules meaning in the fift to the Romans Cerberus The fift of Pelagius errours was that riche men being baptized except they did vtterly renounce and forsake their riches though they seeme to doe some good yet is it not accepted neither can they haue the Kingdome of God A filthy and an abhominable errour directly repugnant both to the state of the common wealth and also to the worde of God which sayth Charge them that be riche in this world that they be not exceding wyse c. And that they doe good and be riche in good workes c. The sixt errour is that the grace of God and the helpe of God is not giuē to euery one of our works but that it is in free choyse in the lawe and in doctrine This errour is exceding wicked and execrable that mā by the law by doctrine and by free choise is able to doe any maner of good worke whatsoeuer it be without the grace and helpe of God For as S. Paule sayeth we are not sufficient of our selues to think any thing as of our selues but our ablenesse cōmeth of God And againe It is God that worketh in vs both the will and the dede euen of good will The seuenth errour is that the grace of God is giuen according to our deseruing Vile and abhominable is this errour also and contrary to the manifest minde and words of the Apostle which sayth If it be of workes then is it no more grace for then were deseruing no more deseruing The eyght errour is that none can be called the children of God except they be all together made without sinne This errour is lyke wicked with the rest directly repugnant to the open Scripture where it is written If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs. For as S. Iames saith of himselfe and of all other In many things we sinne all Crowley In these foure errours Cerberus can finde nothing to charge vs with all and therfore he goeth about to get himselfe credite among the simple Christians by calling these errours filthy and abhominable exceding wicked and execrable vile and abhominable and lyke wycked with the reste But if a man might come to reason with Cerberus I thinke it woulde fall out in the ende that he is not so cleare of the sixt errour as he would séeme to be when he calleth it exceeding wicked and execrable For if he were asked why feared he to translate Saint Paules words according to his meaning when he saide to the Philippians Deus est qui operatur
is the cause of Gods hate or eternal death and put the same into the one side of the ballaunce then take and put into the other side this saying of S. Paul to the Romanes was that then that was good made death vnto me God forbid but sinne was made death vnto me Then wey both these sayings together with the hand of good aduisemēt in the indifferent ballāce of vpright iudgement and put not in aboue three graynes of wilful partialitie thus shalt thou plainly see that the Apostle agreeth farre better with the Maiestie of God and hath a much more reuerent opinion of hys iudgements than these men haue yea thou shalt easily perceyue whatsoeuer they say that neyther Gods pleasure nor Gods ordinance or predestinatiō nor none other thing that is good is made death or the cause of Gods hatred agaynst any man but sinne is the very grounded cause why God hateth taketh vengeaunce and punisheth man by death and destruction according to that which the same Apostle sayth Death is the reward of sinne And the wordes of O see are also manifest plaine where he saith O Israell thou doest destroy thy selfe but in me onely is thy helpe In which words of the holie ghost thou seest how manifestly God doth as it were purge him selfe from being the cause or worker of mans destruction so that the perdition and destruction of man is altogether to be attributed vnto hym selfe And God being cleare neyther accessarie nor partaker thereof as the chiefe and hygh Iudge of heauen and earth vnspotted and wythout blame gyueth the sentence of euerlasting death vpon man for his own wicked deseruing and offence But on the other side sayth God vnto man in me only is thy helpe In God onely onely in God is our helpe and saluation in him onely and of him altogether and not of our selues commeth our saluation and all whatsoeuer belongeth therevnto The same is also set forth by all those Scriptures whych are before rehearsed to proue that sinne and euill commeth not of Gods predestination for vpon that conclusion dependeth also thys proposition that sinne is not the cause of Reprobation or of Gods hatred towards man Crowley Yet once againe hath Cerberus a snatch at Knoxe Whether he do report his words truly or not I knowe not for I haue not seene that booke of his neither haue I cause to thinke y t al is Gospel that Cerberus saith Much more adoe than néedeth doth Cerberus make to proue that an Argument à contrarijs simile and dissimile doth not alwayes conclude necessarilie For as he sayth who séeth not that they do not holde in all pointes This therfore that Cerberus hath here written is but dalliaunce and as it were dauncing about the bushe The questiō is whether the sequele be good in the matter that Knoxe doth vse it in or not We must therfore consider the matter and how Knoxe doth applie this maner of reasoning to this matter The matter therfore is a question moued concerning the cause why Esau shoulde be hated of God and Iacob beloued before any of them had done eyther good or euill yea and before they were borne and therfore before there could be in them any deseruing at all Now Knoxe sayth that if Esau were hated for his euill deseruing then must it néedes follow by an Argument following of the nature of contraries that Iacob was beloued for his well deseruing Nowe I must thinke well of Knoxe for I knowe hym to be not only learned but also godlie and therefore not like to ouershoote himselfe so farre that he woulde stretch an Argument taken out of the place of contraries further than the nature thereof will suffer I must thinke therfore that he meant that if God do in choosing and refusing in louing and hating respect nothing but the well deseruing of one sort and the euill deseruing of y e other as the common opinion of the Papistes is then it must néedes follow by an Argument of the nature of contraries that if he hated Esau for his euill deseruing he must needes loue Iacob for his well deseruing If Cerberus be not satisfied with this let him looke for furder aunswere at Knoxes owne hand for he is yet liuing and able to aunswere for himselfe As for the similitude of a King or Prince that Cerberus vseth to deface Knoxes Argument withall may serue him among such as know not that God is frée frō al mens affections and that he can not be moued to loue vs the better for the giftes that we bestow vpon him nor the worsse for that we take from him and spoyle him of any treasure that he ought to haue The nature of God is not to hate but to loue For S. Iohn sayth God is loue And as the wise man sayth he loueth all things that be and he hateth none of the thinges that he hath made Neyther hath he ordeined or made any thing hating the same that he ordeyned or made For in that he made or ordeyned them they are all excéeding good Wherefore when we say or when it is sayd in the Scriptures that God doth hate any of his creatures as it is said that he hated Esau it is meāt that he loued not Esau or those other creatures whome he is sayde to hate so well as he loued the others of whome it is sayd that he loued them It can not be denied but must néedes be confessed that God loued al his creatures in that he would make them some thing where as before they were nothing and in that he would giue them some part of that which is proper to himselfe For to be is proper to God And whatsoeuer hath any being it hath the same of God When God giueth a being to his creatures he sheweth that he loueth them but when he giueth them an euerlasting and blessed being then he loueth them so that the other loue in comparison of that seemeth but an hatred And therfore it is sayd that he hateth them whom he appointeth not to that euerlasting blessed being but leaueth thē to themselues that in them he may haue occasion to exercise his iustice and by them to gyue occasion to hys dearlie beloued to sée and consider the excéeding greatnesse of his loue and mercie towardes them But Cerberus séemeth to haue the whole Scripture on his side For he sayth that all the Scripture teacheth vs that God neuer hateth and punisheth vs without our owne deseruing Which saying I graunt to be true but not in that sense that Cerberus would haue vs to vnderstande it For Cerberus woulde haue vs to thinke that God could not be compted iust if he shoulde refuse any man in whome there were not sinne that might moue God to refuse him and to that ende he citeth the wordes of the wise man For this is his opinion as it appeareth before that in Christ all mankinde is elected and so consequently that Esau was elected in Christ But
by sinne he made himself a reprobate and was not refused before he sinned But let vs sée how this place of the wise man maketh for his purpose The words are these as Cerberus citeth them Et cum qui nullam poenam commeritus sit condemnasse a tua potentia iudicas alienum And thou Lorde estemest it a thing contrarie to thy power to haue condemned him that hath not deserued punishment All the Scripture is nowe by Cerberus brought into a short summe For it is knit vp in lesse than two lines written in the .xij. Chapter of the booke of wisdome Of what authoritie that booke hath awayes bene thought to be I thinke Cerberus is not ignorant And how diuers readings there be of that place which he cyteth I suppose he knoweth The Tygurine Bible is it that Cerberus followeth Other translations there be that differ from that and from the olde also The olde translation hath it thus Cum ergo sis iustus iustè omnia disponis ipsum quoque qui nòn debet puniri condemnas exterum aestimas à tua virtute That is Forasmuch as thou thy selfe art iust thou doest dispose all things iustly him also that ought not to be punished thou doest condemne and doest esteeme him as one exiled from thy power or dominion Bylike when Cerberus cited this place he supposed that no mā should sée his booke but such as were not able to discerne Chalk from Chéese What place can make more manifestly against him and for vs than this place doeth For by these wordes it is plaine that though God do condemne him that hath not by any déedes deserued to be condemned yet is God neuer the latter iust and doth dispose all things iustly Yea and the circumstance of the Text doth shew that this translation is more nigh the meaning of the writer thā is that which Cerberus followeth For the sentence going immediatly before is thus Neque Rex neque tyrannus in conspectu tuo inquirent de hijs quos perdidisti That is Neyther King nor tyrant will in thy presence make inquisition for them that thou hast destroyed And the sētence that doth immediatly follow is thus Virtus enim tua iustitiae initium est ab hoc quod omnium Dominus es omnibus te parcere facis That is For thy power is the beginning of iustice and bycause thou art Lord of all thou doest make thy selfe to spare all But bicause there is such diuersitie of translations in the Latine and peraduenture Cerberus wyll saye he hath loked in the Gréeke and findeth that the Tygurine translation which he followeth is most agréeable to the Gréeke Text out of which all our Latine translations are taken It shall not be amisse therfore to set downe the Gréeke Text that suche as haue any skill therein may iudge betwixt vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is to say so far as I am able to vnderstād it Thou being iust doest dispose all things iustly cōmaunding to condemne straunge from the land of thy power him y t is not to be iudged ignominious If any cā sée any other meaning in this Gréeke text I wil not contende for I sée that many men of great learning haue varied in opinion about the translation therof But graunt that Cerberus haue cited that translation that is according to the true meaning of the Text what hath he wonne thereby Shall all the Scripture be on his side bicause it is written in y e booke of wisdom that God estemeth it a thing contrarie to hys power or more truly after the Latine Text that Cerberus citeth a thing straunge from his power to condemne him that hath not deserued punishment I thinke not For the booke of wisedome is of that sort of bookes that must be made to agrée with y e Canonical bookes the Canonicall bookes must not be enforced to agree with it For it is Apokryphe that is a booke permitted to be read priuatly but not of such authoritie that we may builde our fayth vpon euerie sentence in it But graunt that this booke were of as great authoritie as any other booke of Scripture is should we thinke that God might not iustly refuse such of his creatures as it pleaseth him not to choose vnlesse the same creatures had first by sinne made them selues vnworthie to be chosen We must not restraine God of his libertie to doe wyth his creatures what he himselfe will Neyther must we say or thinke that any thing that he doth is or can be other than iust albeit that we can not vnderstand howe the same shoulde be iust We must therefore wyth reuerend seare seeke another meaning of thys place than Cerberus doth teach vs let vs thinke therefore that God speaketh here of therecution of his iudgement and not of election And it shalbe good for vs to say always wyth S. Austen that the cause of Gods doings may be secrete so that we can not know them but vniust they can not be But Cerberus séemeth to himselfe to haue gotten a great aduauntage by the example of the Cananites and Israelites The Cananites were driuen out for theyr sinnes and this was iustice but the Israelites were put in their place without deseruing and that was mercie Wherefore in refusing God worketh by iustice and in choosing he worketh by mercie As though there were no difference betwene choosing and refusing of creatures and the vsing of them when they be chosen or refused God chooseth and refuseth without respect of good or euill deseruings but he maketh not his refusal knowen vnto men till the refused haue by theyr sinnes shewed them selues worthie to be refused And though the chosen sort neyther do nor can shewe themselues worthie for theyr good workes to be chosen yet before they receyue the great blessing promised they shewe themselues by theyr workes lesse worthie to be refused than the other And to this do the Scriptures that Cerberus hath cited out of Moses Paule O sée and the rest full well agrée But it followeth not hereof that therefore God had not refused the wicked sort before they sinned It is true that death is the rewarde of sinne but it is not true that euerie one that sinneth receyueth that reward for Christ came to saue sinners and the frée gift of euerlasting life is bestowed vpon such sinners as were elected in Christ before the beginning of the world It is true also that man destroyeth himselfe by the frée consent of his will to do contrarie to the commaundement of God that his helpe and succour commeth of God alone yet doth it not therfore follow that no man is refused of God before he haue cōmitted sinne whereby he destroyeth himself For when the elect were chosen in Christ then were the rest refused For otherwise it could not be an election but a generall acceptation As for the saying that Cerberus sayth is ours and would haue his friend to lay it in the one side of
sheading righteousnesse euerlasting lyfe by his resurrectiō According to y e saying of Paul Traditus est propter delicta nostra resurrexit propter iustificationē nostrā He was deliuered vnto death for our sinnes and he rose againe for our iustification But Cerberus and his fellowes do vrge the vniuersall signe Omnes All. Sicut per vnius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem sic per vnius iustitiam in omnes homines in iustificationem vitae That is Euen as by one mans fault sinne entred into all men to condemnation so by the righteousenesse of one man is righteousenesse entred into all men to the iustification of lyfe This vniuersall signe muste néedes streatche it selfe to all Adams posteritie and therfore all muste be made righteouse by Christ These men will not see how suche vniuersall signes are vsed in the Scriptures They can not perceiue how this vniuersall signe shoulde in the first sentence streatche it selfe to all the generation of the firste Adam that sinned and in the seconde sentence to all the generation of the seconde Adam which is Christ The generation of y e first are all that haue or shall be borne of fleshe and bloud and the generation of the seconde are al they that be borne of God If we shoulde in all places of Scripture streatche this vniuersall signe all so farre as Cerberus doth streatche it here we should make as good a piece of worke as y e Nonne did which reade in s Paule Omnia probate proue all things And therefore hauing a minde to sir Iohn the Chaplen of the house she proued what it was to lye with a man And being with childe the matter came to the knowledge of the Abbas she excused hir selfe by Saint Paule who biddeth vs proue all things If a théefe that taketh another mans goodes shoulde excuse himselfe with Omnia mihi licent I may doe all things or Omnia vestra sunt All things are yours It would not be founde that these vniuersall signes should either make it léeful for him to take another mans goods or to haue right to that that is not hys by some iust title I woulde wishe Cerberus and his fellowes therfore to weigh this matter better before they triumph ouer vs in such sort as he doth in this his aunswere And I woulde wishe him to consider well whether saint Austen in the Epistle where these Articles of Pelagius be written do not write cleane contrary to this iudgement of his For in the very place that he citeth to make for his purpose S. Austen sayth thus Infantes nuper nati non sunt in illo statu in quo Adam fuit ante praeuaricationem vt ad ipsos pertineat quod breuiter ait Apostolus Per vnum hominem mors per vnum hominem resurrectio mortuorum Sicut enim in Adam omnes moriuntur it a in Christo omnes viuisicabuntur Vnde sit quod Infantes nō baptizati non solum regnum coelorum verum etiam vitam aeternam habere non possint That is Infantes that be lately borne are not in that state that Adam was before he sinned that that thing which the Apostle doth in fewe wordes affirme might partaine vnto them By one man came death and by one man came the resurrection of the deade For euen as in Adam all dye so in Christ shall all be made alyne Wherby it commeth to passe that Insants which are not baptised are not onely vnable to enioye the Kingdome of Heauen but also lyfe euerlasting These wordes me think are very plaine against that which Cerberus would maintaine by Paule and Austen For if Infants vnbaptised can not haue the kingdome of God nor euerlasting lyfe how doth this saying In christo omnes viuificabuntur All shalbe quickned in Christ pertayne to all the posteritie of Adam vnlesse he will say that Infantes that dye before baptisme be not of Adams posteritie Better matter can I not wishe for against Cerberus than that which hangeth to the foundation that he himselfe buildeth vpon It were for my purpose to aduaūce the auctoritie of this Epistle bicause it helpeth me very much against this Hel Dogge Cerberus but bicause I woulde not haue the Reader to conceyue such an opinion of S. Austen as to thinke that he shoulde be of such minde as the Auctour of thys Epistle doth shewe himselfe to be in certaine pointes I will cite the iudgement of Erasmus concerning thys Epistle all other of this title That is Ad Bonifacium To Boniface Speaking of y e Booke of Epistles wher in this Epistle 106. is written he saith Nonnullae simplicitor confictae quod genus sunt illae Bonefacij ad Augustinum Augustini ad Bonifacium Some of those Epistles saith he are altogether fayned As are those of Bonifacius to Augustine and of Austen to Boniface Now iudge gentle Reader what this Cerberus meaneth that leauing the good and sounde workes of Austen where he writeth very well of this matter setteth his foundation vpon such rotten patches as some such as he is haue put forth in Austens name No maruell though Cerberus be ashamed to set his name to his booke This might suffise for our defence against Cerberus his assaulte in thys point But I will adde one Scripture or two and so the iudgement of some learned writers that he take not occasion of a new calumniatiō because I promised more than I haue yet performed Saint Paule writing to Timothe in his seconde Epistle and seconde chapter sayth thus Sed firmum fundamentum Dei stat habens signaculu hoc Cognouit Dominus qui sunt sui The foundation of God standeth firme and sure hauing this sure seale The Lorde knoweth who be his By which wordes it is manifest that S. Paule vnderstoode not that all mankinde were elected in Christ and so restored by Christ but a certaine number which though they be vnknowne vnto men yet doth the Lorde whose they be knowe them well and will not suffer them no nor any of them to perishe Wherfore he exhorteth all such as call vpon the name of the Lorde that is all Christians to depart from iniquitie For in a great house saith he there be not only vesselles of Golde and Siluer but also of Timber and Earth some to serue for honorable vses and some for vile vses I knowe how some doe wrest these latter wordes of S. Paule to proue that it is in mans power to depart from iniquitie bicause Saint Paule doth will Christians so to doe And especially those wordes which followe which are these Si quis ergo emund iuerit se ab istis erit vas in honorem sanctificatum vtile domino ad omne opus bonum paratum If any man therfore shall clense himselfe from these men he shall be a vessell sanctified vnto honour and profitable for the Lord being prepared and made readie for euery good worke These wordes do manifestly declare