Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highlie rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Then that our Sauiour was Christ Math. 16 the Sonne of the liuing God And briefly let S. Iohn that great secretarie of the Holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell Ioh 20. These thinges saith he are written that you may beleeue that IESVS is CHRIST the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth very well saying Rom. 10. This is the word of faith which we preach for if thou cōfesse with thy mouth our Lord IESVS CHRIST and shalt beleeue in thy hart that God raised him from death thou shalt be saued And in an other place ◠Cor. 15. I make knowne vnto you the Gospell which I haue preached and by which you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vayne What was that Gospell I haue deliuered vnto you that which I haue receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures was buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the creede is that justifying faith by which you must be saued And neither in S. Paul nor any other place of Holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we applie Christs righteousnes to our selues assure our selues of our saluation is either a justifying or any Christian mans faith but the very naturall act of that ougly Monster presumption Which being layd as the very corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humility and deuotion can they build vpon it The second difference in the manner of justification is about the formall act of faith which M. PERKINS handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as shorte as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many actes of faith feare hope and charity doe goe before our justification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. PERKINS Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the hart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification This joylie description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authority that deliuered it and so let it passe as already sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of this owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hartes be the only sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needes no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would fayne know by the way how litle infants that can not for want of judgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his justice are justified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrary to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before the come to any vnderstanding But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M. PER. findes two faults with it one that we teach faith to goe before justification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both justified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Marry this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and bloud of Christ and is already passed from death to life Io. 6.54 I answere that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his body in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthely obtayneth thereby life euerlasting as Christ saith expressely in that place And so this proofe is vayne Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before justification first by that of S. Paul Whosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord Rom. 10. shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in whome they doe not beleeue how shall they beleeue without a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto justification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterwardes to call vpon God for mercy and finally mercy is graunted giuen in justification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and justification This S. Augustine obserued when he said Faith is giuen first De prede◠sanct ca. 7 De spirit lit cap. 30 by which we obteyne the rest And againe By the lawe is knowledge of sinne by faith we obtayne grace and by grace our soule is cured If we list to see the practise of this recorded in holy write read the second of the actes and there you shall finde how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were stroken to the hartes and beleeued yet were they not straight way justified but asked of the Apostles what they must doe who willed them to doe penance and to be baptized in the name of IESVS in remission of their sinnes then loe they were justified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their justification In like manner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philippe announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that IESVS CHRIST was the Sonne of God no talke in those dayes of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnes yet was he not justified before descending out of his chariot he was baptized Act. 8. And three dayes passed betweene S. Paules conuersion and his justification as doth euidently appeare by the historie of his conuersion Act. 9. The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the minde stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the hart many good spirituall motions But this sayes M. PERKINS is as much to say that dead men only helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned by Gods spirit may haue many good motions for as our spirit giueth life vnto our bodies so the spirit of God by his grace animateth and giueth life vnto our soules But of this it hath beene once before spoken at large in the question of free will Pag. 84. THE THIRD DIFFERENCE CONCERNING FAITH IS this The Papists say that man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as the feare of God hope loue c. The reasons which are brought to maintayne their opinion are of no moment well let vs heare some of them that the indifferent Reader may iudge whether they be of any moment or no. M. PERKINS first Reason
be set to worke and if it doe not act that which it is set too then there wanted some thing requisite And consequently that was not the whole cause of that worke Now to the second proposition But their imagined faith can not apply to themselues Christs righteousnes without the presence of hope and charity For else he might be justified without any hope of heauen and without any loue towardes God and estimation of his honour which are thinges most absurd in themselues but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification which is nothing else but the playne vice of presumption as hath beene before declared Yet to auoid this inconuenience which is so great M. PE. graunteth that both hope and charity must needes be present at the justification but doe nothing in it but faith doth all as the head is present to the eie whē it seeth yet it is the eie alone that seeth Here is a worthy peece of Philosophy that the eie alone doth see whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seing the soule being the principall cause of sight as it is of all other actions of life sence and reason and it is not to purpose here where we require the presence of the whole cause not only of the instrumentall cause And to returne your similitude vpon your selfe as the eie cannot see without the head because it receiueth influence from it before it cā see so cannot faith justifie without charity because it necessarily receiueth spirit of life from it before it can doe any thing acceptable in Gods sight The fourth reason if faith alone doe justifie then faith alone will saue but it will not saue ergo M. PERKINS first denyeth the proposition and saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an Innocent babe dye shortly after his baptisme wherein he was justified shall he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is justified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therefore this first shift was very friuoulous Which M. PERKINS perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shall also be saued that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement Then must those wordes of the holy Ghost so often repeted in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time will render vnto euery man according to his workes But of this more amply in the question of merits 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which justification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare Ecclesias 1. Rom. 8. Luc. 13. 1. Ioan. 3. cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you doe penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is justified because we loue the brethren Againe of baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. So we may also walke in newes of life To all these and many such like places of Holy Scripture it pleased M. PERKINS to make answere in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is only that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wayte patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he sayeth neither yea nor nay leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him so neither to exclude hope or charity or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of justification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scriptures let vs joyne here some testimonies of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein M. PER. citeth some for him The most auncient and most valiant Martir S. Ignatius of our justification writeth thus Epist ad Philip. The beginning of life is faith but the end of it is charity but both vnited and ioyned together doe make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Libr. 2. strom but feare doth build and charity bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these wordes Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued Hom. 70. in Mat. he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well Lib. 3. hypognost S. Augustine cryeth out as it were to our Protestants and saith Heare O foolish Heretike and enemy to the true faith Good workes which that they may be donne are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue beene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified De side oper c. 14. And Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the harts of the faithfull Least by euill security they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtayne it Now the doctrine which M. PERKINS teacheth is cleane contrary For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can doe by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kind of cause but faith a lone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnes for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by them magnified and called the only and whole cause of our justification is in the end become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be justified If it be an instrumentall cause Conditio sine qua non let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and choose whether he had leifer to haue charity or the soule of man without any helpe of grace But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these wordes As Moyses lift vp the serpent in the desart Ioh. 3. so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth
inherent in the soule of Man any such grace of God as doth cleanse it from sinne and make the man just in his sight is with them to raze the foundation of Religion and to make Christ a Pseudochrist wherein I knowe not whether they be more enuious against the good of Man then they are injurious eyther to the inestimable value of Christes bloud as though it coulde not deserue any better estate for his fauourites or vnto the vertue and efficacie of the holy Ghost as not being able by likeliehood to purge mens soules from sinne and endue them with such Heauenlie qualities I omitte the disgrace thereby donne to the Blessed God-head it selfe making the Holie of Holies rather willing to couer and cloake our iniquitie then to cure it And contrarie to his infinite goodnes to loue them whom he seeth defiled with all maner of abhominations Vnto these paradoxes impious against God and slaunderous to Man If it will please your Majestie to adde the prophane carnallity of some other points of the Protestant Doctrine you will doubtles in short time loath it As for example That it is as good godlie by eating to feede the body as to chastize it by fasting That it is as holy to fulfill the fleshly desires of it by Mariage as by Continencie to mortifie them yea that it is flatte against the word of GOD to vowe Virginitie And also contrarie to his blessed will to bestowe our goodes on the poore and to giue our selues wholy to prayer and fasting All which this Aduocate of the English Congregation teacheth expreslie Pag. 132. 162. 166. Is this the purity of the Gospell Or is it not rather the high way to Epicurisme and to all worldly vanity and iniquitie I need not joyne hereunto that they teach it to be impossible to keepe Gods Commaundements and therefore in vaine to goe about it And farther that the best worke of the righteous man is defiled with sinne Wherefore as good for him to leaue all vndone as to doe any Nay if this position of others were true it would followe necessarily that all men were bound vnder payne of damnation neuer to doe any good deede so long as they liue for that their good deede being stayned with sinne cannot but deserue the hyre of sinne which according to the Apostle is Death euerlasting If your Majesties important affaires Rom. 6. would once permitte you to consider maturely of these impieties and many other like absurdities wherewith the Protestant Doctrine is stuffed I dare be bold to say that you would speedely either commaund them to reforme themselues and amend their errors or fairly giue them their Congie I will close vp this my second reason with this Epiphoneme That it is impossible for a Protestant firmely cleauing to the groundes of his owne Religion to hope for anie saluation For they doe and needes must graunt that no man can be saued without a liuely faith and also that a liuely faith cannot be without charity for otherwise it were dead Now then to the purpose No Protestant can haue charity for as witnesseth S. Iohn 1. Epis cap. 5. 3. This is the charitie of God that we keepe his commaundements But it is impossible according to the Protestants to keepe the commaundements therefore also impossible to haue charity Which is the fulnes of the lawe Rom. 13. consequently impossible to haue a liuely faith which cannot be without charity And so finally through want of that liuely feeling faith whereby they should lay hold on Christs righteousnes to hale and apply that vnto themselues they can haue no hope at all of any fauour and grace at Gods handes Without which they must needes assure themselues of eternal damnation in steede of their pretended certayntie of saluation To these two argumēts gathered out of the treatise following I adde a third collected from these your owne memorable wordes related in the aboue named conference viz. Are we nowe come to that passe Pag. 69. that we must appeache Constantine of Poperie and superstition Which argueth that your Majestie judgeth them to haue litle regard of either piety or ciuility that would admit such a thought into their mind as that the first Christian Emperour our most renowmed countriman should be nousled brought vp in superstitiō wherein your Majestie hath great reason for he was most carefully instructed taught the Christian Religion by such holy Confessors whose sincerity in faith had bin tried in the hotte furnace of many strange persecutions And he farther had the good happe to see and heare together in the first generall Councell of Nice many of the holiest and best learned Bishops of Christendome Therefore is it most vnlikely that so Royall a Person deuoted to Religion and hauing so good meanes to attayne to the perfect knowledge thereof as no man could haue better should neuerthelesse in the purest time of it be mis-ledde into errour and superstition If then it may be proued that this most Christian Emperor the glittering ornament of our noble Iland did beleeue such articles of the present Roman Church as the Protestants teach not to be beleeued Will not your Majestie rather joyne in faith with so peerles a Prince who by the consent of all antiquity was for certayne right well enformed then with these whome doubtles most men deeme to be pittifully deceiued Nowe that Constantine was of the same opinion in matter of Religion with the present Church of Rome may euidently be gathered out of this that followeth First he was so affectionate vnto the signe of the Crosse that he would haue it gloriously appeare both abroade in his banners and at home in his Pallace Euseb de vita Constan lib. 3. cap. 2. Lib 2. c. r 4. Lib. 4. c. 26. and in the middest of the Citie of Rome with this Poesie In this signe of saluation I haue deliuered the Cittie With it also he blessed his visage With fasting and other corporall affliction he chastized his body that he might please God He with incredible admiration honoured professed Virgins and made lawes in their fauour Ibidem lib. 3. cap. 47. alibi Chry. hom 66. ad pop Antioch He builded many Churches in honour of the Apostles and Martirs And as S. Chrysostome recordeth He that was reuested in purple went to embrace the Sepulchres of S. Peter and S. Paul and all Princely state laide aside stood humbly praying vnto the Saints that they would be intercessors for him vnto God He farther tooke order for the burying of his owne body in the middest of the Tombes of the twelue Apostles that after his death he might be partaker of the prayers Euseb in vita Const lib. 4. ca. 60. Ibid cap. 71. which should be there offered in the honour of the Apostles Neither was he frustrated of his holy desire for as it followeth in the 71. Chapter of the same booke at his funerals the people joyning with the
so wicked a man should rule ouer so good Ouer what then but he shall rule ouer sinne See how manifestly that worthie Doctor hath preuented their cauill And if it were neede I might joyne with him that most skilfull Father in the Hebrue text S. Ierome In quest Hebraice who in the person of God expoundeth it thus Because thou hast free will I admonish and warne thee that thou suffer not sinne to ouercome thee but doe thou ouercome sinne The second is taken out of this text of Deut. Cap. 30.19 I call this day sayeth Moyses heauen and earth to witnes that I haue set before you life and death benediction malediction therefore choose life that thou maist liue and thy seede Which words were spoken in vayne if it had not beene in their power by the grace of God to haue made choise of life or if that grace would haue made them doe it infallibly without their consent Vnto these two places of the old Testament one vnder the law of Nature and the other vnder Moyses law let vs couple two more out of the newe Testament The first may be those kinde wordes of our Sauiour vnto the Iewes Math. 23. Ierusalem Ierusalem c. how often would I haue gathered together thy children as the hen doth her chickens vnder her winges thou wouldest not Which doe playnlie demonstrate that there was no want either of Gods help inwardly or of Christs perswasion outwardly for their conuersion and that the whole fault lay in their owne refusing and withstanding Gods grace as these wordes of Christ doe playnlie witnes and thou wouldest not The last testimony is in the Reuelat. where it is said in the person of God I stande at the dore and knocke Cap. 3. if any man shall heare my voyce and open the gates I will enter in to him and will suppe with him and he with me Marke well the wordes God by his grace knockes at the dore of our hartes he doth not breake it open or in any sort force it but attendeth that by our assenting to his call we open him the gates and then lo he with his heauenly giftes will enter in otherwise he leaues vs. What can be more euident in confirmation of the freedome of mans will in working with Gods grace To these expresse places taken out of Gods word let vs joyne the testimonie of those most auncient Fathers against whose workes the Protestants can take no exception The first shall be that excellent learned Martir Iustinus in his Apologie who vnto the Emperour Antonine speaketh thus Vnlesse man by free will could flie from foule dishonest deedes and follow those that be faire and good he were without fault as not being cause of such thinges as were done But we Christians teach that mainkinde by free choise and free will doth both doe well and sinne To him we will joyne that holy Bishoppe and valiant Martir Ireneus who of free will writeth thus not only in workes but in faith also Lib. 4. c. 72. our Lord reserued liberty and freedome of will vnto man saying be it done vnto thee according to thy faith I will adde to that worthy companie S. Cyprian who vpon those words of our Sauiour will you also depart discourseth thus Ioan. 6. Lib. 1. Ep. 3 Our Lord did not bitterly inueigh against them which forsooke him but rather vsed these gentle speeches to his Apostles will you also goe your way and why so Marry obseruing and keeping as this holy Father declareth that decree by which man left vnto his liberty and put vnto his free choise might deserue vnto himselfe either damnation or saluation These three most auncient and most skilfull in Christian Religion and so zealous of Christian truth that they spent their bloud in confirmation of it may suffice to certifie any indifferent reader what was the iudgement of the auncient and most pure Church concerning this article of free will specially when the learnedst of our Aduersaries confesse al Antiquity excepting only S. Augustine to haue beleeued taught free wil. Heare the wordes of one for all Mathias Illyricus in his large long lying historie hauing rehearsed touching free will the testimonies of Iustine Ireneus and others Cent. 2. c. 4. col 59. saith In like manner Clement Patriarch of Alexandria doth euery where teach free will that it may appeare say these Lutherans not only the Doctors of that age to haue beene in such darknes but also that it did much encrease in the ages following See the wilfull blindnes of heresie Illyricus confessing the best learned in the purest times of the Church to haue taught free will yet had rather beleeue them to haue beene blindly ledde by the Apostles and their best Schollers who were their Masters then to espy amend his owne error These principall pillers of Christs Church were in darknes belike as Protestants must needes say that proude Persian most wicked heretike Manes of whome the Manichees are named who first denyed free will beganne to broach the true light of the newe Gospell Here I would make an end of citing Authorities were it not that Caluin sayeth 2. Iust. ca. 2. q. 4. that albeit al other auncient writers be against him yet S. Augustine as he vaunteth is clearly for him in this point but the poore man is fouly deceiued aswell in this as in most other matters I will briefly proue and that out of those workes which S. Augustine wrote after the Pelagian heresie was a foote for in his others Caluin acknowledgeth him to haue taught free will Of our freedome in consenting to Gods grace he thus defineth De spirit lit 34. De gra Chri. 14. Ad simpli q. 2. Tract 72. in Ioan Ep 47. to consent to Gods calling or not to consent lyeth in a mans owne will Againe Who doth not see euery man to come or not to come by free will but this free will may be alone if he doe not come but it cannot be but holpen if he doe come In an other place that we will doe well God will haue it to be his and ours his in calling vs ours in following him Yea more To Christ working in him a man doth cooperate that is worketh with him both his owne iustification and life euerlasting will you here him speake yet more formally for vs. We haue dealt with your brethren and ours as much as we could that they would hold out and continue in the sound Catholike faith the which neither denieth free will to euill or good life nor doth attribute so much to it that it is worth any thing without grace So according to this most worthy Fathers iudgement the sound Catholike faith doth not deny free will as the old Manichees and our newe Gospellers doe nor esteeme it without grace able to doe any thing toward saluation as the Pelagians did And to conclude heare S. Augustines answere vnto them who say
person The like he saith afterward of the fault that it is a sinne still in it selfe remayning in the man till death but it is not imputed to him as being pardoned Here be quillets of very strange Doctrine the sinne is pardoned and yet the guiltines of it is not taken away Doth not a pardon take away from the fault pardoned all bond of punishment due vnto it and consequently all guiltines belonging to it Who can denie this vnlesse he knowe not or care not what he say If then Originall sinne be pardoned the guiltines of it is also remoued from it selfe Againe what Philosophy or reason alloweth vs to say that the offendour being pardoned for his offence the offence in it selfe remayneth guilty as though the offence seperated from the person were a substance subject to lawe and capable of punishment can Originall sinne in it selfe die the first and second death or be bound vp to them What sencelesse imaginations be these Againe how can the fault of Originall sinne remayne in the man renewed by Gods grace although not imputed can there be two contraries in one part of the subject at once can there be light and darknes in the vnderstanding vertue and vice in the will at the same instant can the soule be both truely conuerted to God and as truely auerted from him at one time is Christ now agreed to dwell with Belial and the holy Ghost content to inhabite a body subject to sinne all which must be graunted contrary to both Scripture and natural sence if we admitte the fault and deformity of sinne to remayne in a man renewed and indued with Gods grace vnlesse we would very absurdly imagine that the fault and guilt of sinne were not inherent and placed in their proper subjects but were drawne thence and penned vp in some other odde corner Remember also gentle Reader that here Master PERKINS affirmeth the power vvhereby the corruption of the hart raigneth in man is taken away in the regenerate which is cleane contrarie vnto the first proposition of his first reason following as shall bee there proued OVR DISSENT LET vs nowe come vnto the difference which is betweene vs. The Catholikes teach that Originall sinne is so farreforth taken away by Baptisme that it ceaseth to bee a sinne properly the effectes of it remayning are an inperfection and weakenesse both in our vnderstanding and will and a want of that perfect subordination of our inferiour appetite vnto reason as was and would haue beene in Originall iustice which make the soule apt and ready to fall into sinne like vnto tinder which although it bee not fire of it selfe yet is fit to take fire yet say they that these reliques of Originall sinne be not sinnes properly vnlesse a man doe yeelde his consent vnto those euill motions Master PERKINS teacheth otherwise That albeit Originall sinne bee taken away in the regenerate in sundry respectes yet doth it remayne in them after Baptisme not onely as a want and weakenesse but as a sinne and that properly as may be proued by these reasons Saint Paul saith directly 1. Rom. 7. It is no more I that doe this but sinne that dwelleth in me that is Originall sinne The Papists answere That it is called there sinne improperly because it commeth of sinne and is an occasion of sinne I approue this interpretation of Saint Paul as taken out of that auncient and famous Papist Saint Augustine Li. 1. cont duas Epist Pelag. cap. 10. Lib. 1. de nuptiis Concup cap. 23. who saith expresly Concupiscence whereof the Apostle speaketh although it be called sinne yet is it not so called because it is sinne but for that it is made by sinne as writing is called the hand because it is made by the hand And in an other place repeating the same addeth That it may also be called sinne for that it is the cause of sinne as cold is called sloathfull because it makes a man sloathfull so that the most profound Doctor Saint Augustine is stiled a formall Papist by M. PERKINS and shall be as well coursed for it by the playne circumstances of the place For saith he that Saint Paul there takes sinne properly appeares by the wordes following That this sinne dwelling in him made him to doe the euill which he hated Howe proues this that sinne there must be taken properly it rather proues that it must be taken improperly for if it made him doe the euill which he hated then could it not bee sinne properly for sinne is not committed but by the consent and liking of the will But Saint Paul did not like that euill but hated it and thereby was so farre off from sinning that he did a most vertuous deede in resisting and ouercomming that euill As witnesseth Saint Augustine saying Reason sometimes resisteth manfully Lib. 2 de Gen. cont Manich. cap. 14. and ruleth raging concupiscence which being done wee sinne not but for that conflict are to bee crowned This first circumstance then alleaged by M. PERKINS doth rather make against him then for him Now to the second O wreatched man that I am who shall deliuer me from this body of death Here is no mention of sinne howe this may be drawne to his purpose shall be examined in his argument where he repeateth it so that there is not one poore circumstance of the text which he can finde to proue Saint Paul to take sinne there properly Nowe I will proue by diuers that he speakes of sinne improperly First by the former part of the same sentence It is not I that doe it All sinnes is done and committed properly by the person in whome it is but this was not done by Saint Paul ergo Second out of those wordes I knowe there is not in me that is in my flesh anie good And after I see an other lawe in my members resisting the lawe of my minde Thus sinne properly taken is seated in the soule but that was seated in the flesh ergo it was no sinne properly The third and last is taken out of the first wordes of the next Chapter There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in CHRIST IESVS that walke not according to the flesh c. Whence I thus argue there is no condemnation to them that haue that sinne dwelling in them if thy walke not according vnto the fleshly desires of it therefore it is no sinne properly For the wages of sinne is death this is eternall damnation Rom. 6. Nowe to M. PERKINS Argument in forme as he proposeth it That which was once sinne properly and still remayning 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 The Maior which as the learned knowe should consist of three wordes contaynes foure seuerall pointes and which is worst of all not one of them true To the first that which remayneth in man after
Baptisme commonly called Concupiscence was neuer a sinne properly but onely the materiall part of sinne the formall and principall part of it consisting in the depriuation of Originall iustice and a voluntary auersion from the lawe of GOD the which is cured by the Grace of GOD giuen to the baptised and so that which was principall in Originall sinne doth not remayne in the regenerate neither doth that which remayneth make the person to sinne which was the second point vnlesse he willingly consent vnto it as hath beene proued heretofore it allureth intiseth him to sinne but hath not power to constrayne him to it as M. PERKINS also himselfe before confessed Nowe to the third and intangleth him in the punishment of sinne howe doth Originall sinne intangle the regenerate in the punishment of sinne If all the guiltines of it be remoued from his person as you taught before in our Consent Mendacem memorem esse oportet Either confesse that the guilt of Originall sinne is not taken away from the regenerate or else you must vnsay this that it intangleth him in the punishment of sinne nowe to the last clause that the reliques of Originall sinne make a man miserable a man may be called wreatched and miserable in that he is in disgrace with God and so subject to his heauy displeasure and that which maketh him miserable in this sence is sinne but S. Paul taketh not the word so here but for an vnhappy man exposed to the danger of sinne and to all the miseries of this world from which we should haue beene exempted had it not beene for Originall sinne after which sort he vseth the same word 1. Cor. 15. If in this life onely we were hoping in Christ we were more miserable then all men not that the good Christians were farthest out of Gods fauour and more sinnefull then other men but that they had fewest worldly comforts and the greatest crosses and thus much in confutation of that formall argument Now to the second Infantes Baptised die the bodely death before they come to the yeares of discretion but there is not in them anie other cause of death besides Originall sinne for they haue no actuall sinne Rom. 5. Rom. 5. and death is the wages of sinne as the Apostle saith death entred into the world by sinne Answere The cause of the death of such Innocentes is either the distemperature of their bodies or externall violence and God who freely bestowed their liues vpon them may when it pleaseth him as freely take their liues from them especially when he meanes to recompence them with the happy exchaunge of life euerlasting True it is that if our first parentes had not sinned no man should haue died but haue beene both long preserued in Paradise by the fruit of the wood of life and finally translated without death into the Kingdome of heauen and therefore is it said most truely of S. Paul death entred into the world by sinne Rom. 5. But the other place Rom. 6. the wages of sinne is death is fouly abused for the Apostle there by death vnderstandeth eternall damnation as appeareth by the opposition of it to life euerlasting and by sinne there meaneth not Originall but Actuall sinne such as the Romans committed in their infidely the wagis where of if they had not repented them had bin hell fire now to inferre that Innocents are punished with corporall death for Originall sinne remayning in them because that eternall death is the due hire of Actuall sinne is either to shewe great wante of judgement or else very strangelie to preuert the wordes of Holy scripture Let this also not be forgotten that he himselfe acknowledged in our Consent that the punishment of Originall sinne was taken away in Baptisme from the regenerate howe then doth he here say that he doth die the death for it M. PERKINS third reason That which lusteth against the spirite and by lusting tempteth and in tempting intiseth and draweth the hart to sinne is for nature sinne it selfe but concupiscence in the regenerate is such ergo Answere The first proposition is not true for not euery thing that intiseth vs to sinne is sinne or else the Apple that allured Eue to sinne had beene by nature sinne and euery thing in this world one way or an other tempteth vs to sinne according vnto that of S. Iohn All that is in the world 1. Epl. 2. is the Concupiscence of the flesh and the Concupiscence of the eyes and Pride of life So that it is very grosse to say that euery thing which allureth to sinne is sinne it selfe and as wide is it from all morall wisedome to affirme that the first motions of our passions be sins For euen the very heathen Philosophers could distinguish betweene sodaine passions of the minde and vices teaching that passions may be bridled by the vnderstanding and brought by due ordering of them into the ring of reason and so made vertues rather then vices And that same text which M. PERKINS bringeth to perswade these temptations to be sinnes proues the quite contrary God tempteth no man but euerie man is tempted Iacob 1. when he is drawen away by his owne concupiscence and is allured afterward when concupiscence hath conceaued it bringeth forth sinne Marke the wordes well First Concupiscence tempteth and allureth by some euill motion but that is no sinne vntill afterward it doe conceiue that is obtayne some liking of our will in giuing eare to it and not expelling it so speedely as we ought to doe the suggestion of such an enemie the which that most deepe Doctor Saint Augustine sifteth out very profoundly in these wordes Lib. 6. in Iul. cap. 5. When the Apostle Saint Iames saith euery man is tempted being drawne away and allured by his Concupiscence and afterward Concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth forth sinne Trulie in these wordes the thing brought forth is distinguished from that which bringeth it forth The damme is concupiscence the fole is sinne But concupiscence doth not bring sinne forth vnlesse it conceiue so then it is not sinne of it selfe and it conceiueth not vnlesse it drawe vs that is vnlesse it obtayne the consent of our will to commit euill The like exposition of the same place and the difference betweene the pleasure tempting that runneth before and the sinne which followeth after Vnlesse we resist manfully may be seene in S. Cirill Lib. 4. in Iohan. ca. â—1 so that by the iudgement of the most learned auncient Fathers that text of S. Iames cited by M. PERKINS to proue concupiscence to be sinne disputeth it very soundly to that reason of his Such as the fruit is such is the Tree I answere that not concupiscence but the will of man is the Tree which bringeth forth either good or badde fruit according vnto the disposition of it concupiscence is onely an intiser vnto badde Lib. 5 con Iulianum cap. 3. But S. Augustine saith That concupiscence
spirits that we are the sonnes of God and coheires of Christ with this condition If yet we suffer with him that we may be glorified with him So that the testimonie is not absolute but conditionall and then if we faile in performance of the condition God standes free of his promise and will take his earnest backe againe And so to haue receaued the earnest of it will nothing auaile vs much lesse assure vs of saluation This is the direct answere to that place although the other be very good that the testimonie of the spirit is but an inward comfort and joy which breedeth great hope of saluation but bringeth not assurance thereof This M. PERKINS would refute by the authority of S. Bernard in the place before cited Epist 107. see the place and my answere there The third reason is That which we must pray for by Gods commaūdement that we must beleeue but euery man must pray for saluation therefore we must beleeue that we shall haue saluation The proposition he confirmeth thus in euery petition must be two thinges one a desire of the thing we aske an other a particular faith to obtaine it which is proued by Christs wordes Whatsoeuer you shall request when you pray Marke 11. beleeue that you shall haue it and it shall be done This Argument is so proper for their purpose that we returne it vpon their owne heades We must pray for saluation therefore we are not yet assured of it For who in his wittes prayeth God to giue him that whereof he is assured already And a godly act of faith it is in that prayer to beleeue that God will giue that which he is assured of before hand such foolish petitions cannot please God and therefore after their doctrine it is to be denied that any faithfull man may pray for his saluatiō but rather thanke the Lord for it But to answere directly he who prayeth must beleeue he shall obtayne that which he prayeth for if he obserue all the due circumstances of prayer which be many but to this purpose two are required necessarily the one that he who prayeth be the true seruāt of God which first excludeth all those that erre in faith touched in these wordes What you of the faithfull shall desire when you pray shall be giuen you The other is when we request matters of such moment that we perseuer in prayer continue our suite day by day of these suites of eternall saluation we must take these words of our Sauiour to be spoken Luke 18. We must alwayes pray and neuer be wearie And then no doubt but we shall in the end receiue it But because we are in doubt whether we shal obserue those necessarie circūstances of prayer or no therefore we can not be so wel assured to obtayne our suite although we be on Gods parte most assured that he is most bountifull and readier to giue them we are to aske 1. Ioan 5. But saith M. PERKINS S. Iohn noteth out this particular faith calling it Our assurance that God will giue vnto vs whatsoeuer we aske according to his will But where finde we that it is Gods will to assure euerie man at the first entrance into his seruice of eternall saluation is it not sufficient to make him an assured promise of it vpon his faithfull seruice and good behauiour towardes him The fourth reason is Whatsoeuer God commaundeth that a man must and can performe But God commaundeth vs to beleeue our saluation ergo we must beleeue it The proposition is true yet commonly denyed by all Protestants for God commaundes vs to keepe his commaundements and they hold that to be impossible but to the assumption That God commaundes vs to beleeue our saluation is proued saith M. PERKINS by these wordes Repent and beleeue the Gospell Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici Where is it written in that Gospel beleeue your owne particular saluation shew vs once but one cleare text for it and we will beleeue it I doe beleeue in Christ and hope to be saued through his mercy and merits but knowe well that vnlesse I keepe his wordes I am by him likened to a foole Math. 7. Math. 26. Math. 25. that built his house vpon the sandes He commaundes me to watch and pray least I fall into temptation and else where warneth me to prepare oyle to keepe my lampe burning against his comming or else I am most certayne to be shut out with the foolish Virgins An hundred such admonitions finde we in holy Scriptures to shake vs out of this security of our saluation and to make vs vigilant to preuent all temptations of the enemie and diligent to trayne our selues in godly exercises of all vertue The fift and last reason is this The Papists teach assurance of hope Rom. 5. euen hence it followeth that he may be infallibly assured for the property of a true and liuely hope is neuer to make a make a man ashamed Answere hope indeede of heauen makes a man most couragiouslie beare out all stormes of persecution and not to be ashamed of Christs Crosse but to professe his faith most boldly before the most bloudy tyrants of the world our harts being by charity fortified and made inuincible And this is that which the Apostle teacheth in that place and saith before Ver. 2. that the faithfull glory in the hope of the sonnes of God And doe not vaunt themselues of the certainty of their saluation This certainty of hope is great in those that haue long liued vertuously specially when they haue also endured manifolde losses much disgrace great wronges and injuries for Christs sake for he that cannot faile of his word hath promised to requite all such with an hundred folde But what is this to the certainty of faith which the Protestants will haue euery man to be endued with at his first entrance into the seruice of God When as S. Paul insinuateth that godly men partakers of the holy Ghost Heb. 6 yea after they haue tasted the good word of God and the power of the world to come that is haue receiued besides faith great fauours of Gods spirit and felt as it were the joyes of heauen haue after all this so fallen from God that there was small hope of their recouerie CHAPTER 4. OF IVSTIFICATION M. PERKINS Pag. 60. FIRST I will set downe the Doctrine on both partes that it may be seene how farreforth we agree Secondly The mayne differences wherein we are to stand against them euen to death Our Doctrine touching the iustification of a sinner I propound in foure rules The first Rule That iustification is an action of God whereby he absolueth a sinner and accepteth him to life euerlasting for the righteousnes and merits of Christ 2. Rule That iustification stands in two thinges First in the remission of sinnes by the merite of Christs death Secondly in the imputation of Christs righteousnes which is an other action
Moyses lawe but not without prouision of good workes issuing out of faith and the helpe of Gods grace as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits OF THE SECOND IVSTIFICATION THE fourth argument A man iust be fully iustified before he can doe a good worke and therefore good workes can not goe before iustification True not before the first justification of a sinner But good Sir you hauing made in the beginning of this last Article a distinction betweene the first and second justification And hauing before discussed the first and the second now remayning and expecting you why did you not say one word of it the matter being ample and well worthy the handling albeit you will not willingly confesse any second justification as you say Yet had it beene your part at least to haue disproued such arguments as we bring to proue a second justification Yee acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification But these degrees must be made downeward of euill worser and worst for if all our sanctification and best workes be like vnto defiled cloutes and no better then deadly sinnes as you hold and else where Pag. 76. let any wise man judge what degrees of goodnes can be lodged in it Againe how absurd is that position that there is but one justification whereby they take fast hold on Christs righteousnes which can neuer after be either loosed or increased Why then doe you with your brother Iouinian maintayne that all men are equally righteous If it so be Lib. 2. con Iouin Epist 81. Epist 57. Hom. 15. in Ezech. let him that desireth to see you well coursed read S. Hier. S. Amb. S. August S. Greg. At least we must needes vphold that a man is as just and righteous at his first conuersion as at his death how Godly a life soeuer he lead against which I will put downe these reasons following First that of the reuelations Let him that is iust be yet iustified or as your text hath it Cap. 22. He that is righteous let him be more righteous and that of feare not to be iustified euen vntill death Eccles 18. doe conuince that there are more justifications then one and that a man may increase in justification and righteousnes vntill death Which is confirmed where it is said That the path of a iust man proceedeth Prob. 4. as the light doth vntill it be perfect day Which is degrees more more And S. Paul teacheth the same where he saith to men that giue almes plentifully 2. Cor. 9. That God will multiply their seede and augment the increases of the fruits of their iustice Further S. Iames doth most effectually proue this increase of righteousnes and the second iustification in these wordes Abraham our father was he not iustified by workes offering Isaac his Sonne vpon the Aultar Cap. 2. That he speaketh of the second iustification is euident for Abraham was iustified before Isaac was borne as it is most manifest by the Scripture it selfe and by that heroicall act of not sparing his onely entirely beloued Sonne Genes 15. Rom. 4. his iustice was much augmented And the Apostle himselfe seemeth to haue forseene all our aduersaries cauillation and to haue so longe before preuented them First that common shift of theirs that this worke was a signe or the fruit onely of his faith and no companion of it in the matter of iustification is formally confuted for the holy Ghost speaking distinctly of both his faith and worke and joyning them both in this act of justification attributeth the better part of it vnto his worke thus Seest thou that faith did worke with his workes and by the workes the faith was consummate and made perfect Which he doth after fitly declare by a similitude comparing faith to the body and good workes to the soule which giue life and lustre to faith otherwise faith is of litle value estimation with God Which S. Paul also teacheth at large among other speeches including this That if he should haue all faith and wanted charity 1. Cor. 13 he were nothing And comparing faith charity together defineth expresly that charity is the greater vertue Which charity is the fountayne of all good workes And so by this preferring these workes of charity before faith he doth stop the other starting hole of the Protestants that Abraham forsooth was justified before God by onely faith but was declared just before men by his workes For if God esteeme more of charity then of our faith a man is more justified before God by charity then by faith Againe in the very place where this noble fact is recorded to shew how acceptable it was to God himselfe it is said in the person of God Gen. 22. Nowe I knowe that thou louest me and to conuince all obstinate cauilling is it not said that his faith did in this very fact cooperate with his workes and that the worke made his faith perfect which conjunction of both of them together doth demonstrate that he speaketh of his justification before God adding also That he was therefore called the friend of God Which could not haue beene if thereby he had beene only declared just before men thus doth S. Augustine reconcile the two places of the Apostles S. Paul S. Iames which seeme contrarie S. Paul saying that a man is iustified by faith without workes and S. Iames that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely That S. Paul speaketh of workes which goe before faith such as we of our owne forces without the helpe of grace are able to doe and such he saith not to deserue our first iustification But S. Iames disputeth of workes which followe faith and issue out of our soules nowe garnished with grace and such he holdeth vs to be iustified by that is made more and more iust See the place He saith directly L. 83. quest q. 76. Serm. 16. de verb. Apos that we are iustified and that this justice doth increase whiles it doth proceede and profit Nothing then is more certaine and cleare then that there our justification may daylie be augmented and it seemeth to me that this also bee graunted in their opinion For they holding faith to be the only instrument of justification cannot deny but that there are many degrees of faith it is so plainely taught in the worde O yee of little faith Math. 8. Luc. 19. And then a little after I haue not founde so great faith in Israell And O Lord increase our faith and many such like where many different degrees of faith are mentioned How then can the justification which dependes vpon that faith not be correspondent vnto that diuersity of faith but all one Pag. 54. Againe M. PERK deliuereth plainly That men at the first are not so well assured of their saluation as they are afterward If then in the certainty of their saluation which is the prime effect of their
for the mastery 2. Tim. 2. is not crowned vnlesse he striue lawfully It is also resembled vnto places of honour Math. 25. Ioh. 14. Mat. 13. 1. Ioh. 3. I will place thee ouer much And I goe to prouide you places Grace is also in many places of Scripture compared to seede For the seede of God tarrieth in him But a little seede cast into good ground and well manured bringeth forth abundance of corne Briefly then such equality as there is betweene the well deseruing subject and the office betweene him that striueth lawfully and the crowne betweene the seede and the corne is betweene the reward of heauen and the merit of a true seruant of God And thus much of M. PERKINS first Argument more indeede to explicate the nature and condition of merit then that his reason nakedly proposed did require it Exod 20. His second testimony is God will shewe mercy vpon thousandes in them that loue him and keepe his commaundements Hence he reasoneth thus Where reward is giuen vpon mercy there is no merit but reward is giuen vpon mercy as the text proueth ergo Answere That in that text is nothing touching the reward of heauen which is now in question God doth for his louing seruants sake shewe mercy vnto their children or friends either in temporall thinges or in calling them to repentance and such like but doth neuer for one mans sake bestowe the kingdome vpon another vnlesse the party himselfe be first made worthy of it That confirmation of his that Adam by his continuall and perfect obedience could not haue procured a further increase of Gods fauour is both besides the purpose and most false for as well he as euery good man sithence by good vse of Gods gifts might day by day encrease them And that no man thinke that in Paradise it should haue bin otherwise S. Augustine saith expresly That in the felicity of Paradise righteousnes preserued should haue ascended into better In Inchir cap. 25. And Adam finally and all his posterity if he had not fallen should haue bin from Paradise translated aliue into the Kingdome of heauen this by the way Nowe to the thirde Argument Rom. 6. Scripture condemneth merite of workes The wages of sinne is death True But we speake of good workes and not of badde which the Apostle calleth sinne where were the mans wittes but it followeth there That eternall life is the grace or gift of God This is to purpose but answered 1200. yeares past by that famous Father S. Augustine in diuers places of his most learned workes I will note one or two of them First thus here ariseth no small doubt De gra li. arb c. 8. which by Gods helpe I will now discusse For if eternall life be rendred vnto good workes as the holy Scripture doth most clearely teach note how then can it be called grace when grace is giuen freely and not repaide for vvorkes and so pursuing the pointes of difficulty at large in the end resolueth that eternall life is most trulie rendred vnto good workes as the due rewarde of them but because those good workes could not haue beene donne vnlesse God had before freely through Christ bestowed his grace vpon vs therefore the same eternall life is also truly called grace because the first roote of it was Gods free gift The very same answere doth he giue where he hath these wordes Epist 106. Eternall life is called grace not because it is not rendred vnto merittes but for that those merittes to which it is rendred were giuen in which place he crosseth M. PERKINS proportion most directly affirming that S. Paul might haue said truly eternall life is the pay or wages of good vvorkes but to holde vs in humility partly and partly to put a difference betweene our saluation and damnation choose rather to say that the gift of God was life eternall because of our damnation we are the whole and only cause but not of our saluation but principally the grace of God the only fountayne of merit and all good workes Now to those textes cited before about justification Ad Eph. 2. We are saued freely not of our selues or by the workes of righteousnesse which we haue donne Ad Tit. 3. I haue often answered that the Apostle speakes of workes donne by our owne forces without the helpe of Gods grace and therefore they cannot serue against workes donne in and by grace Now to that text which he hudleth vp together with the rest although it deserued a better place being one of their principall pillers in this controuersie It is The sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glory to come Rom. 8. The strength of this objection lyeth in a false translation of these words Axia pros tein doxan equal to that glory or in the misconstruction of them For we graunt as it hath beene already declared that our afflictions and sufferinges be not of equall in length or greatnes with the glory of heauen for our afflictions be but for the short space of this life and they cannot be so great as will be the pleasure in heauen notwithstanding wee teach that this shorter and lesser labour imployed by a righteous man in the seruice of GOD doth meritte the other greater and of longer continuance and that by the said Apostles playne wordes for saith he 2. Cor. 4. That tribulation which in this present life is but for a moment and light doth worke aboue measure exceedingly an euerlasting weight of glory in vs. The reason is that just mens workes issue out of the fountayne of grace which giueth a heauenly value vnto his workes Againe it maketh him a quicke member of Christ and so receiuing influence from his head his workes are raised to an higher estimate it consecrateth him also a temple of the holy Ghost 2. Pet. 1. and so maketh him partaker of the heauenly nature as S. Peter speaketh Which addes a worth of heauen to his workes Neither is that glory in heauen which any pure creature attayneth vnto of infinite dignity as M. PERKINS fableth but hath his certayne boundes measure according vnto each mans merittes otherwise it would make a man equall to God in glory for there can be no greater then infinite as all learned men doe confesse M. PERKINS 4. reason Whosoeuer will meritte must fulfill the whole law for if we offend in one commandement we are guiltie of the whole lawe but no man can fulfill the whole lawe ergo Answere I denie the first proposition for one good worke done with his due circumstances doth bring forth merite as by all the properties of meritte may be proued at large and by his owne definition of meritte set downe in tne beginning Now if a man afterward fall into deadly sinne he leeseth his former meritte but recouering grace he riseth to his former meritte as the learned gather out of that saying of our Sauiour in the
person of the good Father Luc. 15. Doe on him that is on his prodigall sonne returning whome his former garment His second proposition is also false as hath bin proued at large in a seueral question To that of S. Iames although it belong not to this matter I answere that he who offendeth in one is made guiltie of all that is he shall be as surely condemned as if he had broken all Epis 29. ad â—lieron See S. Augustine His 5. reason We are taught to pray on this manner Giue vs this day our dayly bread where we acknowledge euery morsell of bread to be the meere gift of God much more must we confesse heauen to be Answere M. PERKINS taketh great delight to argue out of the Lords prayer but he handleth the matter so handsomely that a man may thinke him to be so profouÌ„dly learned that he doth not yet vnderstand the Pater noster for who taketh our daylie foode to be so meerely the gift of God that we must not either make it ours with our peny or trauaile we must not looke to be fedde from heauen by miracle by the mere gift of God but according vnto S. Paules rule either labour for our liuing in some approued sort or not eate Yet because our trauailes are in vaine vnlesse God blesse them we pray to God daily to giue vs our nuriture either by sending or preseruing the fruits of the earth or by prospering our labours with good successe or if they be men who liue of almes by stirring vp the charitable to relieue them So we pray and much more earnestly that God will giue vs eternall life Yet by such meanes as it hath pleased God to ordayne one of which and the principall is by the exercise of good workes which God hath appointed vs to walke in to deserue it And it cannot but sauour of a Satannicall spirit to call it a Satannicall insolency as M. PERKINS doth to thinke that eternall life can be merited when S. Augustine and the best spirit of men since Christs time so thought and taught in most expresse tearmes But let vs heare his last argument which is as he speaketh the consent of the auncient Church and then beginneth with S. Bernard who liued 1000. yeares after Christ He in I knowe not what place the quotation is so doudtfull saith Those thinges which wee call merittes are the way to the Kingdome but not the cause of raigning I answere that merittes be not the whole cause but the promise of God through Christ and the grace of God freely bestowed on vs out of which our merittes proceede Which is Bernards owne doctrine Serm. 68 in Cantica Manuali c. 22. Secondly he citeth S. Augustine All my hope is in the death of my Lord his death is my meritte True in a good sence that is by the vertue of his death and passion my sinnes are pardoned and grace is bestowed on me to doe good workes and so to meritte 3. Basil Eternall life is reserued for them that haue striuen lawfully In Ps 114. not for the meritte of their doing but vpon the grace of the most bountifull God These wordes are vntruly translated for first he maketh with the Apostle eternall life to be the prize of that combate and then addeth that it is not giuen according vnto the debt and just rate of the workes but in a suller measure according vnto the bounty of so liberall a Lord Where hence is gathered that common and most true sentence That God punisheth men vnder their deserts but rewardeth them aboue their merittes 4. M. PERKINS turnes backe to Augustine vpon the Psal 120. Where he saith as M. PERKINS reporteth He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne giftes not thy merittes Answere S. Augustine was to wise to let any such foolish sentence passe his penne What congruity is in this He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne giftes not thy merittes It had beene better said He crowneth thee not c. But he mistooke belike this sentence of S. Augustines When God crowneth thee he crowneth his giftes not thy merittes Which is true being taken in that sence which he himselfe declareth To such a man so thinking that is De grat l b. arb c. 6. that he hath merittes of him selfe without the grace of God it may be most truly said God doth crowne his owne giftes not thy merittes If thy merittes be of thy selfe and not from him but if we acknowledge our merittes to proceede from grace working with vs then may we as truly say that eternall life is the crowne and reward of merittes Psal 142. His other place on the Psalme is not to this purpose but appertaynes to the first justification of a sinner as the first word quicken and reuiue mee sheweth playnelie nowe wee confesse that a sinner is called to repentance and reuiued not for any desert of his owne but of Gods meere mercy Hauing thus at length answered vnto all that M. PERKINS hath alleaged against merittes Let vs see what can be said for them following as neare as I can M. PERKINS order Obiections of Papists so he tearmeth our reasons First in sundry places of Scripture promise of reward is made vnto good workes Genes 4. Prouer 11. Eccles 18. Math. 5. If thou doe well shalt thou not receiue To him that doeth well there is a faithfull rewarde Feare not to be iustified vnto death because the rewarde of God remayneth for euer and. When you are reuiled and persecuted for my sake reioyce for great is your reward in heauen And a hundreth such like therefore such workes doe meritte heauen for a reward supposeth that there was a desart of it M. PERKINS answereth first that the reward is of meere mercy without any thing donne by men But this is most apparantly false for the Scripture expresseth the very workes whereof it is a reward Againe a reward in English supposeth some former pleasure which is rewarded otherwise it were to be called a gift and not a reward and much more the Latin and Greeke word Misos Merus which rather signifie a mans hier and wagis then a gift or rewarde Wherefore M. PERKINS skippes to a second shift that forsooth eternall life is an inheritance but not a reward Reply We knowe well that it is an inheritance because it is onely due vnto the adopted Sonnes of God but that hindreth not it to be a reward for that it is our heauenly fathers pleasure that all his Sonnes comming to the yeares of discretion shall by their good carriage either deserue it or else for their badde behauiour be disinherited M. PERKINS hauing so good reason to distrust his two former answeres flies to a third and graunteth that eternall life is a reward yet not of our workes but of Christs merits imputed vnto vs This is that Castle wherein he holdes himselfe safe from all Canon shotte but he is fouly abused for this