in praier we must beleeue it shall be giuen vs as we aske it but in praier we are to aske the pardon of our owne sinnes and the merit of Christs righteousnes for our selues therefore we must beleeue the same particularly The proposition is a rule of Gods word requiring that in euery petition we bring a particular faith whereby we beleeue that the thing lawfully asked shall be giuen accordingly Mark 11. 24. The minor is also euident neither can it be denyed for we are taught by Christ himselfe to pray on this manner Forgiue vs our debts and to it we say Amen that is that our petitions shall without all doubt be graunted vnto vs. Aug. serm de Temp. 182. And here note that the Church of Rome in the doctrine of iustification by faith cuts off the principall part and propertie thereof For in iustifying faith two things are required first Knowledge reuealed in the word touching the meanes of saluation secondly an Applying of things knowne vnto our selues which some call affiance Nowe the first they acknowledge but the second which is the very substance and principall part thereof they denie III. Reason The iudgement of the auncient Church August I demand now doest thou beleeue in Christ O sinner Thou saist I beleeue What beleevest thou that all THY SINNES may freely be pardoned by him THOV HAST THAT VVHICH THOV HAST BEELEEVED Bern. The Apostle thinketh that a man is iustified freely by faith If thou beleeuest that thy sinnes cannot be remitted but by him alone against whome they were committed but goe further and beleeue this too that by him THY SINNES ARE FORGIVEN THEâ— This is the testimonie which the holy Ghost giueth in the heart saying thy sinnes are forgiueÌ„ thee Cyprian God promiseth thee immortalitie vvhen thou goest out of this vvorld and DOEST THOV DOVBT This is indeede not to knowe God and this is for a member of the church in the house of faith not to haue faith If we beleeue in Christ let vs beleeue his wordes promises and we shall neuer die and shall come to Christ with IOYFVL SECVRITIE with him to raigne for euer The II. difference touching faith in the act of iustification is this The Papist saith we are iustified by faith because it disposeth a sinner to his iustification after this maner By faith saith he the minde of man is inlightened in the knowledge of the law and gospell knowledge stirres vp a feare of hel with a consideration of the promise of happines as also the loue and feare of God and hope of life eternall Now when the heart is thus prepared God infuseth the habite of charitie and other vertues whereby a sinner is iustified before God We say otherwise that faith iustifieth because it is a supernaturall Instrument created by God in the heart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification In this their doctrine is a twofold error I. that they make faith which iustifieth to goe before iustification it selfe both for order of nature as also for time whereas by the word of God at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then iustified and sanctified For he that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and blood of Christ and is alreadie passed from death to life Iohn 6. 54. The second is that faith beeing nothing else with them but an illumination of the minde stirreth vp the will which beeing mooued and helped causeth in the heart many spirituall motions and thereby disposeth man to his future iustification But this indeed is as much as if we should say that dead men onely helped can prepare themselues to their future resurrection For we are all by nature dead in sinne and therefore must not onely be inlightened in minde but also renewed in will before we can so much as will or desire that which is good Now we as I haue said teach otherwise that faith iustifieth as it is an instrument to apprehend apply Christ with his obedience which is the matter of our iustification This is the truth I prooue it thus In the Couenant of grace two things must be considered the substance thereof the condition The substance of the couenant is that righteousnes and life euerlasting is giuen to Gods Church and people by Christ. The condition is that we for our parts are by faith to receiue the foresaid benefits and this conditioÌ„ is by grace as well as the substance Now theÌ„ that we may attaine to saluation by Christ he must be giuen vnto vs really as he is propounded in the tenour of the foresaid couenant And for the giuing of Christ God hath appointed speciall ordinances as the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments The word preached is the power of God to saluatioÌ„ to euery one that beleeues and the end of the sacraments is to communicate Christ with all his benefites to them that come to be partakers thereof as is most plainely to be seene in the supper of the Lord in which the giuing of bread and wine to the seuerall communicantes is a pledge and signe of Gods particular giuing of Christs bodie and blood with all his merits vnto them And this giuing on Gods part cannot be effectuall without receiuing on our parts and therefore faith must needes be an instrument or hand to receiue that which God giueth that we may finde comfort by this giuing The III. difference concerning faith is this the Papist saith that a man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as hope loue the feare of God c. The reasons which are brought to maintaine their opinion are of no moment I. Reason Luk. 7. 47. Many sinnes are forgiueÌ„her BECASE shee loued much WheÌ„ce they gather that the woman here spoken of was iustified and had the pardon of sinnes by loue Ans. In this text loue is not made an impulsiue cause to mooue God to pardon her sinnes but onely a signe to shew and manifest that God had already pardoned them Like to this is the place of Iohn who saith 1. Ioh. 3. 14. We are translated from death to life BECAVSE we loue the brethren where loue is no cause of the change but a signe and consequent thereof II. Reason Gal. 5. 6. Neither circumcision nor vncircumcision auaileth any thing but FAITH THAT VVOEKâ—TH BY LOVE Hence they gather that faith doth instifie together with loue Ans. The propertie of true faith is to apprehend and receiue something vnto it selfe and loue that goes alwaies with faith as a fruite and an vnseperable companion thereof is of another nature For it doth not receiue in but as it were giue out it selfe in all the duties of the first and second table towards God and man and this thing faith by it selfe cannot doe therefore Paul saith that faith worketh by loue The hand hath a propertie to reach out it selfe to
veniall and not against the lawe but beside the lawe But this which they say is against the petition for a debt that comes by forfiture is against the bond or obligation Nowe euery sinne is a debt causing the forfiture of punishment and therefore is not beside but directly against the lawe 4. In this clause as we forgiue our debters it is taken for granted that we may certenly knowe that we are in loue and charitie with meâ— when wâ— make reconciliation why then may not we knowe certenly that we repent and beleeue and are reconciled to God which all Romane Catholikes denie 5. In the last wordes and lead vs not into temptation we pray not that God should free vs from temptation for it is other whiles good to be tempted Psal. 26. 1. But that we be not left to the malice of Sathan and held captiue of the temptation for here to be bed into temptation and to be deliuered are opposed Now heÌ„ce I gather that he which is the child of God truely iustified and sanctied shall neuer fal wholly and finally from the grace of God and I conclude on this manner That which we aske according to the will of God shall be graunted 1. Ioh. 5. but this the child of God asketh that he might neuer be wholly forsaken of his father and left captiue in temptation This therefore shal be graunted 6 This clause Amen signifies a speciall faith touching all the former petitions that they shall be graunted and therefore a special faith concerning remission of sinnes which the Romane Church denieth To come to the last place to the Institution of the sacrament of the Lords Supper 1. Cor. 11. v 23. In which first of all the Reall presence is by many circumstances ouerthrowne Out of the wordes he tooke and brake it is plain that that which Christ took was not his body because he cannot be said with his owne handes to haue taken held and broken himselfe but the very bread Againe Christ said not vnder the forme of bread or in bread but This that is bread is my body 3. Bread was not giuen for vs but onely the body Christ and in the first institution the body of Christ was not theÌ„ really giuen to death 4. The cup is the newe testament by a figure why may not the bread be the body of Christ by a figure also 5. Christ did eate the supper but not himselfe 6. We are bidden to doe it till he come Christ then is not bodily present 7. Christ bids the bread to be eaten in a remembrance of him but signes of remembrance are of things absent 8. If the Popish reall presence be granted then the body blood of Christ are either seuered or ioyned together If seuered then Christ is still crucified If ioyned together then the bread is both the body blood of Christ whereas the institution saith the bread is the body and the wine is the blood 2 Againe here is condemned the administration of the sacrament vnder one onely kind For the commandement of Christ is drinke ye all of this Math 26. 27. And this commandement is rehearsed to the Church of Corinth in these wordes do this as oft as ye drinke it in remembrance of me v. 25. And no power can rehearse this commandement because it was established by the soueraigne head of the Church These fewe lines as also the former treatise I offer to the vewe and reeding of them that fauour the Romane religion willing them with patience to consider this one thing that their religion if it were Catholike and Apostolike as they pretend it could not be contrarie so much as in one point to the groundes of all Catechismes that haue beene vsed in all Churches confessing the name of Christ euer since the Apostles daies And whereas it crosseth the said grounds in sundrie points of doctrine as I haue prooued it is a plaine argument that the present Romane religion is degenerate I write not this dispising or hating their persoÌ„s for their religion but wishing vnfainedly their conuersion in this world and their saluation in the world to come FINIS To the Reader Pag. 235. l. 20. I say that Christ obaied the law for him selfe not because he did by his obedience merit his own glorie but because he was to be a perfect and pure high priest not onely in nature but also in life and as he was a creature he was to be conformable to the law Faults to be amended thus Pag. 1. l. 1. for 3. read 4. p. 9. l. 2. read Apostolicke p. 19. l. 17. read formeth and l. 23. read indeauour p. 39. l. last read too p. 48. l. 18. read or p. 55. l. 2. read holy p. 126. l. 2. read be p. 138. l. 13. read pertaining p. 142. l. 23. read matters p. 161. l. 5. read containe and l. last read chastitie p. 168. l. 5. read persecution p. 187. l. 7. read men p. 192. l. last read cannot p. 222. l. 5. read right p. 260. l. 9. read particular p. 265. l. 14. read I thinke p. 284. l. 2. read deputies Faults escaped in the places of Scripture Pag. 1. v. 3. pro 4. p. 4. c. 18. pro 17. p. 6. c. 18. pro 17. p. 7. v. 18. pro 8. p. 19. v. 5. pro 7. p. 22. v 2. pro 1. p. 43. v. 20. pro 28 29. p. 50. v. 21. pro 22. p. 52. v. 36. pro 63. p 75. v. 13. pro 12. p. 127. v. 12. pro 21. p. 135. v. 20. pro 8. p. 139. c. 8. v. 1. pro c. 1. v. 8. p. 164. v. 38. pro 37. p. 227. v. 18. pro 29. o Epist. 17. Eâ—stâ— Paula ad Marcellam Serm. in CaÌ„t. 33. Epist. 125. C. in nomine dist 23. referente Iuello 2 Thess. 2. d ExameÌ„ pacâ—â—qâ—â— imprimè de nou vâ—â—u a Caen 1590. d Hypogn 3. Ser. 15. de verb. Apost de grat â— arbitr 1. c Posse velle actu velle recipere c August de correp grat c. 12. d Epist. 105. e Fulgent lib. Prad f Bernard l. de libâ—ro arbitrio e Aug. contra Iul. l. 5. cap. 3. c ad Valer. lib. 1. c. 24. d Lib. 2. contra Iul. e Tract 42. in Ioh. c quoadimputationem d quoad exâ—â—tiam b contra Iuâ— l. 6. c. 6. e Bellar. l. 3. pag. 1129. cl Gal. 3. 14. Mark 11. 24. 1. Ioh. 5. 14. Ioh. 6. â—6 c de verbis Dei serm 28. d Tract 5. epist. Ioh. Bellar. dâ— Iustif. lib. 2. cap. 7. d Iren. lib. 5. cap. 17. Chrysostom homil ad Neoph. e namely for himself f as any one starre partakes in the whole light of the Sunne with the rest of the starres so farforth as the said light makes it to shine e we haue posse velle he had no more but posse si vellet he wanted velle quod posset August de corrept grat cap. 11. b de verbis Dei serm 7. c
is concerning Originall sinne after baptisme that is how farforth it remaineth after baptisme A point to be well considered because hereupon depend many points of poperie I. Our consent I. Conclus They say naturall corruption after baptisme is abolished and so say we but let vs see how farre it is abolished In originall sinne are three things I. the punishment which is the first and second death II. Guiltines which is the binding vp of the creature vnto punishment III. the fault or the offending of God vnder which I comprehend our Guiltines in Adams first offence as also the Corruption of the heart which is a naturall inclination pronesse to any thing that is euill or against the law of God For the first we say that after baptisme in the regenerate the punishment of originall sinne is taken away There is no condemnation saith the Apostle to them that be in Christ Iesus Rom. 8. 1. For the second that is the guiltines we further condescende and say that is also taken away in them that are borne anew for considering there is no condemnation to them there is nothing to binde them to punishment Yet this caueat must be remembred namely that the guiltines is remooued from the person regenerate not from the sinne in the person but of this more afterward Thirdly the guilt in AdaÌ„s first offence is pardoned And touching the corruption of the heart I auouch two things I. That that very power or strength wherby it raigneth in man is taken away in the regenerate II. That this corruption is abolished as also the fault of euery actuall sinne past so farre forth as it is the fault and sinne of the man in whome it is Indeede it remaines till death and it is sinne considered in it selfe so long as it remaines but it is not imputed vnto the person and in that respect is as though it were not it beeing pardoned II. The dissent or difference Thus farre we consent with the Church of Rome now the difference betweene vs stands not in the abolishment but in the manner and the measure of the abolishment of this sinne Papists teach that Original sinne is so farre forth taken away after baptisme that it ceaseth to be a sinne properly and is nothing els but a want defect and weaknes making the heart fit and readie to conceiue sinne much like tinder which though it be no fire of it selfe yet is it very apt and fit to conceiue fire And they of the church of Rome denie it to be sinne properly that they might vpholde some grosse opinions of theirs namely That a man in this life may fulfill the law of God and doe good workes voide of sinne that he may stande righteous at the barre of Gods iudgement by them But we teach otherwise that though originall sinne be taken away in the regenerate and that in sundrie respects yet doth it remaine in them after baptisme not onely as a want and weaknesse but as a sinne and that properly as may by these reasons be prooued Reason I. Rom. 7. 17. Paul saith directly It is no more I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in me that is originall sinne The Papists answer againe that it is so called improperly because it commeth of sinne and also is an occasion of sinne to be done But by the circumstances of the text it is sinne properly for in the words following Saint Paul saith that this sinne dwelling in him made him to doe the euill which he hated And v. 24. he crieth out O wretched man that I am vvho shall deliver me from this bodie of death whence I reason thus That which once was sinne properly and still remaining in man maketh him to sinne and intangleth him in the punishment of sinne and makes him miserable that is sinne properly But originall sinne doth all these Ergo. Reason II. Infants baptised and regenerate die the bodily death before they come to the yeares of discretion therefore originall sinne in them is sinne properly or else they should not die hauing no cause of death in them for death is the wages of sinne as the Apostle saith Rom. 6. 23. and Rom. 5. 12. Death entred into the world by sinne As for actuall sinne they haue none if they die presently after they are borne before they come to any vse either of reason or affection Reason III. That which lusteth against the spirit and by lusting tempteth and in tempting intiseth and draweth the heart to sinne is for nature sinne it selfe but concupiscence in the regenerate lusteth against the spirit Gal. 5. 17. and tempteth as I haue saide Iam. 1. 14. God tempteth no man but euery man is tempted when he is drawne avvay by his owne concupiscence and is intised then when lust conceiueth it bringeth forth sinne And therefore it is sinne properly such as the fruit is such is the tree August Concupiscence against vvhich the spirit lusteth IS SINNâ— because in it there is disobedience against the rule of the minde and it is the punishment of sinne because it befalls man for the merits of his disobedience and it is the cause of sinne Reason V. The iudgement of the auncient Church August epist. 29. Charitie in some is more in some lesse in some none the highest degree of all which cannot be increased is in none as long as man liues vpon earth And as long as it may be increased THAT VVHICH IS LESSE THEN IT SHOVLD BE IS IN FAVLT by which fault it is that there is no iust man vpon earth that doth good and sinneth not by which fault none liuing shalbe iustified in the sight of God for which fault if we say we haue no sinne there is no truth in vs for which also though vve profit neuer so much it is necessarie for vs to say forgiue vs our debts though al our words deedes and thoughts be alreadie forgiuen in baptisme Indeede August in sundrie places seemes to denie concupiscence to be sinne after baptisme but his meaning is that concupiscence in the regenerate is not the sinne of the person in whome it is For thus he expoundes himselfe This is not to haue sinne not to be guiltie of sinne And The lavv of sinne in baptisme is remitted and not ENDED And Let not sinne raigne he saith not let not sinne be but let it not raigne For as long as thou liâ—est of necessitie sinne will be in thy members at the least looke it raigne not in thee c. Obiections of Papists The arguments which the Church of Rome alleadgeth to the contrarie are these Obiect I. In baptisme men receiue perfect and absolute pardon of sinne and sinne being pardoned is taken quite away and therefore originall sinne after baptisme ceaseth to be sinne Ans. Sinne is abolished two waies first in regard of imputatioÌ„ to the person secoÌ„dly in regard of existing and beeing For this cause God vouchsafeth to maÌ„ two blessings in baptisme Remission of sinne
and Mortification of the same Remission or pardon abolisheth sinne wholly in respect of any imputation thereof vnto man but not simply in regard of the beeing thereof Mortification therfore goeth further abolisheth in all the powers of bodie and soule the very concupiscence or corruption it selfe in respect of the beeing thereof And because mortification is not accomplished till death therefore originall corruption remaineth till death though not imputed Obiect II. Euery sinne is voluntarie but original sinne in no man after baptisme is voluntarie and therefore no sinne Ans. The proposition is a politicke rule pertaining to the courts of men and must be vnderstoode of such actions as are done of one man to an other and it doth not belong to the court of conscience which God holdeth keepeth in mens hearts in which euery want of conformitie to the law is made a sinne Secondly I answer that originall sinne was voluntarie in our first parent Adam for he sinned and brought this miserie vpon vs willingly though in vs it be otherwise vpon iust cause Actuall sinne was first in him and then originall corruption but in vs originall corruption is first and then actuall sinne Obiect III. Where the forme of any thing is taken away there the thing it selfe ceaseth also but after baptisme in the regenerate the forme of originall sinne that is the guilt is quite remooued and therefore sinne ceaseth to be sinne Answ. The guilt or obligation to punishment is not the forme of originall corruption but as wee say in schooles an accident or necessarie companion thereof The true forme of originall sinne is a defect and depriuation of that which the law requireth at our hands in our minde will affections and in all the powers both of soule and bodie But they vrge this reason further saying where the guilt and punishment is taken away there is no fault remaining but after baptisme the guilt and punishment is remooued and therefore though originall corruption remaine it is not as a fault to make vs guiltie before God but onely as a weaknes Ans. Guilt is remooued and not remooued It is remooued frō the person regenerate which stands not guiltie for any sinne originall or actuall but guilt is not remooued from the sinne it selfe or as some answer there be two kindes of guilt actuall and potentiall The actuall guilt is whereby sinne maketh man stand guiltie before God and that is remooued in the regenerate But the potentiall guilt which is an aptnes in sinne to make a man stand guiltie if he sinne that is not remooued and therefore still sinne remaineth sinne To this or like effect saith Augustine We say that the guilt of concupiscence not whereby IT IS GVILTIE for that is not a person but that whereby it made man guiltie from the beginning is pardoned and that the thing it SELFE IS EVILL so as the regenerate desire to be healed of this plague Obiect III. Lastly for our disgrace they alledge that we in our doctrine teach that originall sinne after baptisme is onely clipped or pared like the haire of a mans head whose roots still remaine in the flesh growing and increasing after they are cut as before Ans. Our doctrine is abused for in the paring of any thing as in cutting of the haire or in lopping a tree the root remains vntouched and thereupon multiplieth as before But in the mortification of originall sinne after baptisme we hold no such paring but teach that in the very first instant of the conuersion of a sinner sinne receiueth his deadly wound in the roote neuer afterward to be recouered The third point Certentie of saluation I. Our consent I. Conclus We holde and beleeue that a man in this life may be certen of saluation and the same thing doth the Church of Rome teach and hold II. Conclus We holde and beleeue that a man is to put a certen affiance in Gods mercie in Christ for the saluation of his soule the same thing by common consent holdeth the foresaide Church this point maketh not the difference betweene vs. III. Conclus We hold that with assurance of saluation in our hearts is ioyned doubting and there is no man so assured of his saluation but he at some time doubteth thereof especially in the time of temptation and in this the Papists agree with vs and we with them IV. Conclus They goe further and say that a man may be certen of the saluation of men or of the Church by catholike faith and so say we V. Conclus Yea they hold that a man by faith may be assured of his owne saluation through extraordinarie reuelation as Abraham and others were and so doe we VI. They teach that we are to be certen of our saluation by speciall faith in regard of God that promiseth though in regard of our selues and our indisposition we can not in the former point they consent with vs. II. The dissent or difference The very maine point of difference lies in the manner of assurance I. Conclus We hold that a man may be certen of his saluation in his own conscience euen in this life and that by an ordinarie and speciall faith They hold that a man is certen of his saluation onely by hope both of vs hold a certentie we by faith they by hope II. Conclus Further we hold and auouch that our certentie by true faith is vnfallible they say their certentie is onely probable III. Conclus And further though both of vs say that we haue confidence in Gods mercie in Christ for our saluation yet we doe it with some difference For our confidence commeth from certen and ordinarie faith theirs from hope ministring as they say but a coniecturall certentie Thus much of the difference now let vs see the reasons two and fro III. Obiections of papists Obiect I. Where there is no worde there is no faith for these two are relatiues but there is no word of God saying Cornelius beleeue thou Peter beleeue thou or thou shalt be saued And therefore there is no such ordinarie faith to beleeue a mans owne particular saluation Ans. The proposition is false vnlesse it be supplied with a clause on this manner Where there is no vvord of promise nor any thing that doth countervaile a particular promise there is no faith But say they there is no such particular word It is true God doth not speake to men particularly Beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued But yet doth he that which is answerable hereunto in that he giueth a generall promise with a commaundement to applie the same and hath ordained the holy ministerie of the word to applie the same to the persons of the hearers in his own name and that is as much as if the Lord himselfe should speake to men particularly To speake more plainely in the Scripture the promises of saluation be indefinitely propounded it saith not any where if Iohn will beleeue he shall be saued or if