deliuered from the body of death For i De nat et grat ca. 55. De corpore mors corporis separat sed contracta exillo vitia cohaeâ—ent quibus iusta poena debetur the death of the body separateth the wicked from the body when yet the vices and sins thereby gathered do sticke fast to which iust punishment remaineth due Therfore when he praieth to be deliuered from this body of death k Ibid. De vitijs corporis dicit he meaneth it of the vitious affections of the body l De Temp. ser 45. Per concupiscentiam dictuÌ„ est hoc nostrum mortis corpus By concupiscence is it that this our body of death is so called So Oecumenius saith that the Apostle desireth to be deliuered from m Oecumen in Ro. ca. 7. Ex corporalibus actio nibus spiritualem mortem inducentibus à concupiscentijs quae in corpore sunt quaeque mors nobis sunt the concupiscences which are in the body and which are death vnto vs and do cause a spirituall death n Origen ibid. Corpus mortis appellatur in quo habitat peccatuÌ„ quod mortis est causa It is a body of death saith Origen wherein sinne dwelleth which is the cause of death Ambrose saith that the Apostle calleth his body a body of death o Ambros apud Aug. cont IuliaÌ„ lib. 2. Omnes homines sub peccato nascimur quorum ipse ortus in vitio est c. Ideò Pauli caero corpus mortis erat c. because we all are borne vnder sinne and our very beginning is in trespasse acknowledging as touching the corruption of sin that what it was in the beginning the same in part it continueth still Epiphanius or rather Methodius saith that the Apostle here meaneth p Method apud Epiphan haer 64. Non corpus hoc mortem sed peccatum inhabitans per concupiscentiam in corpore dicit c. sinne dwelling by concupiscence in the body from the bad imaginations thoughts whereof he wished to be deliuered accounting the same death and destruction it selfe Bernard saith that it was q Bernard in Cant. ser 56. Jpsa est carnis concupiscentia c. Hoc sanè vnointeriecto pariete non longè peregrinabatur à Domino Vnde optabas clamans Quis me liberabit c. the law of sinne euen concupiscence standing as a wall betwixt God and him that made him crie out who shall deliuer me from the body of this death In concupiscence then standeth this body of death and because by this body of death it is that the Apostle calleth himselfe miserable it is concupiscence that maketh him miserable which therfore S. Austin calleth r August de Tempore ser 45. miseram legem the miserable law of sin not as being it self capable of misery but per metonymiam because it maketh vs miserable or because we are miserable by it Thus therfore the Apostle acknowledgeth himselfe miserable in himself not as holding himselfe to be in disgrace with God but as finding in himself that for which he deserueth so to be and should be but that God in Christ is mercifull vnto him not to impute the same And what is it but a miserie to haue as it were a filthy carion tied fast to him still breathing out noysome stinke to be continually troubled with an importunat enemy giuing him no rest wearying his soule from day to day nay to cary about with him Å¿ Idem cont Iulian Pelag. lib. 2. Exercitum queÌ„dam variarum cupiditatum intra semetipsum debellabat euen an army of diuerse and sundry lusts drawing one this way and another that way fighting against him on the right hand and on the left bereauing him of his ioy whilest in most earnest meditations they cary him away whether he will or not from that wherin his delight is If outward crosses do make a man miserable much more this inward destraction affliction which galleth the strings of the hart vexeth the very spirit and soule more then the bitternesse of death it selfe If M. Bishop knew this affliction he would thinke there were cause enough therein to make him crie out Miserable man that I am c. But his benummed heart feeleth it not and therefore he speaketh of these matters but as a Philosopher in the schooles without any conscience or sence of that he saith and to a formall argument as he calleth it giueth these mis-shapen and deformed answers 5. W. BISHOP Now to the second Infants Baptized die the bodily death before they come to the yeares of discretion but there is not in them any other cause of death besides Originall sinne for they haue no actuall sinne and death is the wages of sinne as the Apostle saith Rom 5. Rom. 5. death entred into the world by sinne Ans The cause of the death of such Innocents 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 happie exchange of life euerlasting True it is that if our first parents had not sinned no man should haue died but haue bene 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 sayd most truly of S. Paul Rom. 5. Rom. 6. Death entred into the world by sinne But the other place 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 wages whereof if they had not repented them had bene hell fire now to inferre that Innocents are punished with corporall death for Original sinne remaining in them because that eternall death is the due hire of actuall sinne is either to shew great want of iudgement or else very strangely to peruert the words 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 how then doth he here say that he doth die the death for it R. ABBOT The example of infants dying after Baptisme before they come to yeares of discretion is rightly alledged to proue that sinne remaineth after Baptisme because where there is no sin there can be no death To this M. Bishop sendeth vs a most pitifull and miserable answer that the cause of the death of infants is not sin but either the distemperature of their bodies or externall violence Thus he would maintain a priuiledge to infants against the words of S. Iohn a 1. Ioh. 1.8 If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues that they may say we say we haue
no sinne and we do not therein deceiue our selues and though we die yet it is not by reason of sin that we die but either by the disteÌ„perature of our bodies or externall violence But if M. Perkins had sayd as he might haue sayd Infants after Baptisme are subiect to distemperature of body and externall violence and death following all which are the proper effects of sinne therefore they are not without sinne in what a wofull case had M. Bishop bene and how had he bene put to his shifts to deuise an answer Surely S. Austin saith that b Auâ—ust in Psal 37. Non aliquid patimur in ista vita n si ex illa morte quaÌ„ mâ—ruimus primo peccato we suffer not any thing in this life but by reason of that death which we deserued by the first sinne And so saith Origen verie rightly that c Origen in Leuit hom 3. Nobis hominiâ—us vel mors velreliqua omnis fragilitas in carne ex piccati conditione superducta est death and all other frailtie in the flesh was brought vpon vs by the condition or state of sin Therfore distemperature and weaknesse and sicknes and suffering of externall violence are no lesse arguments of sinne then death it selfe and how then doth he make these the causes of death without sinne when they are no otherwise the causes of death but by reason of sinne But he addeth further that God who freely bestowed their liues on them may when it pleaseth him as freely take their liues from them But yet if there be no sin and if it be as the Trent Councell saith that there is nothing in them that God hateth nothing that hindereth them from entring into heauen why then doth God without cause take away their life and not rather without death receiue them vnto himselfe why doth he not immediatly d 2. Cor. 5 4. cloth them vpon that mortality may be swallowed vp of life This is a mysterie to M. Bishop he cannot tel what to say therof But the dying of baptized infants sheweth that there is still in theÌ„ a corruption of flesh and bloud by which the sentence of the Apostle taketh hold of them e 1. Cor. 15.50 flesh and bloud cannot inherite the kingdome of God neither shall corruption inherite incorruption The cause of their death is the putting off of this corruptioÌ„ the dissolution full mortification of the body of sin that this slough being cast off and mortalitie changed into immortalitie corruption into incorruption they may be fit for the inheritance of the kingdome of God Thus Epiphanius bringeth in Methodius disputing against Proclus the Origenist that f Epiphan haer 64. ex Methodiâ— In auxiliaris medicamenti moduÌ„ ab auxiliatore nostro verè medico Deo ad eradicationem peccati ac deletionem assumptae est mors c. Instar medicamentariae purgationis mortem Deus benè inuenit quo sic omnino inculpabiles innoxij inueniamur c. videtur velut siquis summus opifex statuam pulchram ex auro aut alia materia à se constructam rursus conflet mutilatam repentè conspicatus à pessimo quodam homine c. God as the true Physition hath appointed death for a medicinable purgation for the vtter rooting out and putting away of sinne that we may be made faultlesse and innocent and that as a goodly golden image sightly and seemely in all parts if it be broken and defaced by any meanes must be new cast and framed againe for the taking away of the blemishes and disgraces of it euen so man the image of God being maimed and disgraced by sinne for the putting away of those disgraces and the repairing of his ruines and decayes must by death be dissolued into the earth thence to be raised vp againe perfect and without default Now if M. Bishop will not learne it of vs yet let him learne it of these ancient Fathers that sin is the cause of death euen in them to whom notwithstanding it is forgiuen pardoned for Christs sake But he goeth further True it is that if our first parents had not sinned no man should haue died but both haue bene long preserued in Paradise by the fruit of the wood of life and finally translated without death into the kingdome of heauen But since they haue sinned what Marry it is most truly said by S. Paul Death entred into the world by sinne Well then if it entred by sin into the world doth it continue in the world by any other thing then by which it first entred Nay as it entred by sinne so sinne is the onely cause of the continuing of it and without sinne there is no death in the failing of the cause must needs be a surceasing of the effect Now to shew that death is the proper effect of sin M. Perkins alledgeth the words of the Apostle The wages of sinne is death But M. Bishop saith that this place is foully abused by him And why so Forsooth the Apostle here by death meaneth eternall damnation And what then Doth he therfore not meane bodily death also Surely the Apostle alludeth to that that God sayd to our father Adam in the beginning g Gen. 2.17 In the day that thou shalt eate of that forbidden tree thou shalt die the death thereby threatning vnto him both the first and second death And in that meaning hath the Apostle spoken of death in the chapter going before that by sinne came death c. Therefore M. Bishops great maister Thomas Aquinas telleth him that when the Apostle immediatly before saith the end of those things is death he meaneth by death h Tho Aquin. in Rom. cap 6. Peccata â—e se nata sunt inâ—iucere mâ—â—tem teÌ„poralem eternaâ—â— Et â—o â—arg finis peccati mori tam temporalis quà m aeterna both temporall and eternall death Another exception is that sinne is here taken onely for Actuall sinne which is a fiction meerly absurd and vaine For it is a proposition vniuersall concerning all sinne and so vsed vniuersally by all writers and if it be true of Actuall sinne that the wages of sinne is death much more is it true of Originall sinne which is the filthie and corrupt fountaine whence all actuall sins do spring And that we may know that M. Bishop himselfe is of no other mind he himselfe hath vsed it in the section next saue one before this concerning Originall sinne arguing that if Originall sinne were properly sinne in the regenerate then it should cause death vnto them because the wages of sinne is death Whereby it appeareth that he speaketh but at all aduenture and to serue the present turne without any conscience or regard of that he speaketh whether it be true or false He hath bene brought vp in Bellarmines schoole and of him hath learned to care no further but onely to say somewhat though it be starke naught Now for conclusion of this
point he saith Let not this be forgotten that he himselfe aknowledged in our Consent that the punishment of Originall sinne is taken away in Baptisme from the regenerate True and what then How then saith he doth he say here that he doth die the death for it But he saith not so neither is it so for if he should die the death for Originall sinne he should die also the eternall death which notwithstanding by Christ is taken away This death therefore to the regenerate is not in the nature of a punishment but rather of a medicine as hath bene alreadie sayd for the vtter dissoluing and mortifying and destroying of the body of sinne that onely righteousnesse may liue in them It followeth as a wages of sinne according to the words of the Apostle in it owne nature due vnto it though now payed for other end then it was before 6. W. BISHOP M. Perkins third reason 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 is such Ergo Answ 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 bene by nature sinne and euerie thing in this world one way or another tempteth vs to sinne according vnto that of S. Iohn 1. Epi. 2. All that is in the world 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 sudden passions of the mind 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 Iacob 1. but euery man is tempted when he is drawne away by his owne concupiscence and is allured after when concupiscence hath conceiued it bringeth forth sinne Marke the words well First Concupiscence tempteth and allureth by some euill motion but that is no sinne vntill afterward it do conceiue that is obtaine some liking of our will in giuing eare to it and not expelling it so speedily as we ought to do the suggestion of such an enemie the which that most deepe Doctor S. Augustine sifteth out very profoundly in these words When the Apostle S. Iames saith Lib. 6. in Jul. cap. 5. euery man is tempted being drawne away and allured by his Concupiscence and afterward Concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth forth sin Truly in these words the thing brought forth is distinguished from that which bringeth it forth The dam is concupiscence the fole is sinne But concupiscence doth not bring sin forth vnlesse it conceiue so then it is not sinne of it selfe and it conceiueth not vnlesse it draw vs that is vnlesse it obtaine 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 sin which followeth after Lib. 4. in Iohan. cap. 15. vnlesse we resist manfully may be seene in S. Ciril so that by the iudgement of the most learned ancient Fathers that text of S. Iames cited by M. Perkins to proue concupiscence to be sin disputeth it very soundly to that reason of his Such as the fruit is such is the Tree I answer that not concupiscence but the will of man is the Tree which bringeth forth either good or bad fruit according vnto the disposition of it concupiscence is only an intiser vnto bad R. ABBOT Against M. Perkins first proposition M. Bishop saith that not euery thing that entiseth vs to sinne is sinne But therein he saith vntruly if he meane as he should do of that that is in man himselfe It is generally true that there is nothing that tempteth or entiseth to sinne which hath not it selfe the nature of sinne either as the subiect or as the thing it selfe so that concupiscence because it cannot be said to be the subiect must necessarily be holden to be sin it selfe His exceptions to the contrarie are very fond First that then the apple that allured Eue to sinne had bene by nature sinne and secondly that euery thing in the world one way or another tempteth vs to sinne But where hath he euer read that the apple if it were an apple tempted or intised Eue Did the apple any thing more then it did before or was it any other then it was before Surely there was no change in the apple but the change was in her selfe and therfore as it did not tempt her before so neither could it be sayd to tempt her in that temptation And what is this but to make God the tempter who was the maker of the apple contrary to the words of S. Iames that a Iam. 1.13 God tempteth no man to euill Which we must likewise say of all other things in the world if it be true that M. Bishop saith that they tempt vs to sinne For though God himselfe immediatly do not tempt vs yet if the creatures of the world do tempt vs the accusation redoundeth to him because in the creatures there is nothing but his worke They are faire beautifull they are pleasant to sight and vse but do they therfore tempt to sinne Did the Sun tempt the heathen idolaters to worship it Did b 2. Sam. 13.2 Thamar tempt Ammon to filthines or c Dan. 13.8 Susanna the wicked elders Nay as S. Iames telleth vs it is our own sinful lust that tempteth vs to abuse the good creatures of God which thēselues tēpt vs not but rather as S. Paul teacheth vs d Rom. 8.22 they grone and trauaile in pain because e Vers 20. they are subiect to our vanity and therfore f Vers 19.21 wait when the sons of God shal be reuealed that they may be deliuered from the bondage of our corruption into the glorious liberty of the sonnes of God But he alledgeth to his purpose the words of S. Iohn All that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh and the concupiscence of the eyes and pride of life Where if we consider the Apostles words as they lie we shall see how iustly it may be returned to himselfe which a little before he said of M. Perkins that either he sheweth great want of iudgement or else very strangely peruerteth the words of holy Scripture The thing that he hath to proue is that euery thing in this world tempteth vs to sin The words of S. Iohn are g Iohn 2.16 All that is in the world
the end resolueth that eternall life is most truly rendred vnto good workes as the due reward of them but because those good workes could not haue bene done 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 answer doth he giue where he hath these words Epist 106. Eternall life is called grace not because it is not rendred vnto merits but for that those merits to which it is rendred were giuen in which place he crosseth M. Perkins proportion most directly affirming that S. Paule might haue said truly eternall life is the pay or wages of good workes but to hold vs in humilitie partly and partly to put a difference betweene our saluation and damnation chose rather to say that the gift of God was life eternall because of our damnation we are the whole and onely cause but not of our saluation but principally the grace of God the onely fountaine of merit and all good workes R. ABBOT M. Perkins alledged the whole words of the Apostle not to argue onely from the assertion expressed in the latter part that a Rom. 6.23 eternall life is the gift of God but also from the connexion of the whole sentence that whereas it being said that the wages of sinne is death the sequele of the speech if there were any merit in our workes should haue bene The wages of righteousnesse is eternall life he saith not so but the gift of God is eternall life and so both by that which he doth not say and also by that which he doth say sheweth that there is no place to be giuen to the merit and desert of man Now Maister Bishop taketh the first part of the sentence by it selfe The wages of sinne is death as if Master Perkins had thence argued against merit and asketh Where were the mans wits Surely his owne wits were not so farre from home but that he well knew wherein the proofe stood but we see he is disposed sometimes to shew his apish trickes that we may see how he can skippe and leape about the chaine howsoeuer he aduantage himselfe nothing at all thereby But at his pleasure he produceth the words which M. Perkins properly intended Eternall life is the gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. He telleth vs that the place is answered 1200. yeares past by S. Austine in diuers places of his works Now indeed it is true that S. Austine in diuers places of his works hath handled those words but the spite is that in none of all those places he hath said any thing to serue M. Bishop for an answer This may appeare by that that he saith in the very same booke and very next Chapter to that that M. Bishop citeth b August de grâ—◠〈◊〉 arbit cap. 9. Câ—â—â— posseâ— dicere rectè dicere Stiâ—â—endâ—m iustitiae vita etâ—rnâ— maluâ—â—â—â—eÌ„ dicere Gratia Dei c. vt intelligantus non pro meritâ— nostru Deum nos ad vitam aeternaÌ„ seâ— pro miseratione sua perducere de quo c. Whereas the Apostle might say and rightly say The wages of righteousnesse is eternall life yet he chose rather to say The grace of God is eternall life that we may vnderstand that not for our merits but for his owne mercies sake he bringeth vs to eternall life whereof it is said in the Psalme He crowneth thee in mercie and compassion Hereby it may seeme that S. Austine meant to yeeld M. Bishop small helpe by his expounding of this place to the maintenance of their merits But in the Chapter cited by M. Bishop she propoundeth the question c Ibid. cap. 8. Si vita aeterna bonus operibus redditur sicut apertissiâ—â—è dicit Scriptura Quoniam Deus redâ—es c quomodo gratia est vita aeterna cum gratia non operibus reddatur sed gratis detur c. how eternal life should be called the grace of God seeing that it is elsewhere said that God will render vnto euery man according to his workes The difficultie he sheweth to arise of this that that is called grace which is not rendred vnto workes but is freely giuen Whereof he citeth the words of the Apostle If it be of grace it is not of workes otherwise grace is no grace Then he solueth the question thus that d Intelligamus ipsa bona opera nostra quibus aeterna redditur vita ad Dei gratiam pertinere we must vnderstand that our good workes to which eternall life is rendred do belong also to the grace of God signifying that God of his mercie intending to giue vs eternall life doth by the same mercie giue vs those good workes to which he will giue it For conclusion of that Chapter he saith consequently that e Vita nostra bona nihil aliud est quâ—m Dei gratia sine dubio vita aeterna quae bonae vitae redditur Dei gratia est ipsa enim gratis â—ata est quia gratis data est illa cui datur sed illa cui datur tantum modo gratia est haec autem quae illi datur quomaÌ„ praemiuÌ„ eius est gratia est pro gratia tanquam merces pro iustitia vt verum sit c. because our good life is nothing else but the grace of God therefore vndoubtedly eternall life which is rendred vnto good life is the grace of God for that is freely giuen because that is freely giuen to which it is giuen But good life to which eternall life is giuen is onely grace eternall life which is giuen to good life because it is the reward thereof is grace for grace as it were a reward for righteousnesse that it may be true as it is true that God will render to euery man according to his workes In all which discourse plainely he sheweth that good life is the grace and gift of God and when God rendreth thereto eternall life he doth but adde one grace to another grace which although it be as it were a reward for righteousnesse yet is indeed but grace for grace Which fully accordeth with that that was cited out of him before that f Supra Sect. 2. August in Psal 109. Whatsoeuer God promised he promised to men vnworthy that it might not be promised as a reward to works but being grace might according to the name be freely giuen because to liue iustly so farre as a man can liue iustly is not a matter of mans merit but of the gift of God So that although eternall life be as it were a reward of righteousnesse in consequence and order yet absolutely to speake it is not so because both the one and the other are only the grace and gift of God Now if God by his free gift intending to vs eternall life do giue vs his grace to leade a iust and holy life that thereto
performed vnto God the transgressing whereof to be a sinne against God not onely mediatly by not yeelding subiection to the Law-giuer but immediatly in the very thing it selfe which it hath done or left vndone It is the prerogatiue of God onely to tie the conscience in this sort and whosoeuer else taketh vpon him thus to do he is an vsurper against God And thus doth the Pope bind mens consciences he maketh his lawes matters of religion and of the worship of God and will haue men beleeue that in the very doing of the things which he commandeth they immediatly please God merit at the hands of God make satisfaction to him for their sinnes and purchase eternall life On the other side that in the trespasse thereof not onely in respect of disobedience to the higher powers but for the very not doing of the things themselues there is sinne against God a breach and wound of conscience and the guilt of euerlasting death This is one speciall matter for which we iustly detest that Romish idol and do chalenge him not onely for sitting in the Temple of God by vsurping an outward superioritie in the visible state of the Church but also for y 2. Thes 2.4 sitting as God in the temple of God by chalenging to himselfe and possessing in such sort as hath beene sayd the consciences of men in which God onely ought to raigne As for Princes and temporall gouernours if they keepe them within their bounds they make no lawes in that kind for causes seeming good vnto them they require outward conformity and obedience to their lawes for conscience sake of the authority committed vnto them of God but they leaue the conscience free from any inward opinion or perswasion of the things themselues wherein they require to be obeyed Here therefore a man is outwardly bound and seruant to the law but inwardly he still continueth free to God being perswaded that the doing or not doing of such or such a thing in and for it selfe maketh him to God neither the better nor the worse and therefore the thing in it selfe being either way indifferent to God he yeeldeth himselfe in the outward man vpon conscience of giuing obedience to the power seruiceable and comformable to the law And this is that Christian libertie which the Scripture teacheth which is not as some men would haue it a licentious immunity in outward things to do euery man what we list but a freedome of the heart from any seruile opinion of any thing that we do The doctrine whereof Luther very excellently propounded in two paradoxes as they seemed to them that vnderstood them not as touching conuersation in outward things that z Luther de libert Christiana a Christian man is free from all men a Lord and subiect to no man And again that a Christian man is a diligent seruant and vassall to all men and subiect to all Inwardly in conscience he is free and bound to nothing but saith a 1. Cor 10.23 All things are lawfull for me Outwardly in conuersation he is bound to that that is expedient and serueth for edification whereby he may yeeld obedience to gouernours loue to neighbours instruction to the ignorant strengthening to the weake comfort to the strong good example to them that are without auoiding all scandall whereby he should cause the libertie whereof he is inwardly perswaded to be blasphemed and slandered Now therefore Princes in their lawes are to be obeyed vpon conscience of their authoritie being from God but this hindereth not but that the Pope is iustly accused for thrusting Christ out of his place by requiring obedience vpon conscience of the things themselues which he commandeth As for the opening and shutting of heauen we doubt not but that the Pope if he be the minister of Christ may chalenge the office and function thereof according to the tenor of the commission wherewith Christ hath left it to his Church But he not contented with that authoritie which Christ hath left indifferently to the ministery of the Church immediatly from Christ himselfe deriued in common to the whole body of the Church vsurpeth vnto himselfe a singularity in this behalfe making himselfe in Christs steed the head from whence the power of binding and loosing is deriued to all the rest and in that respect at his owne pleasure reseruing to himselfe a prerogatiue of speciall cases and causes which are most for his aduantage wherein no man may meddle but himselfe It is true that the master by appointing afterward ouer his houshold or a porter at his gates doth not diuest himselfe of his supreme authoritie but sith it is the peculiar honour of the Lord to giue that power and to determine the offices and places of his seruants surely he who being left but afterward of a house will lift vp himselfe to be a Lieutenant generall of a Realme and of a porter will make himselfe a Potentate and take vpon him to be euen as the Lord himself he is to be taken for no other but a traytor to his Lord and therefore is by his fellow seruants to be resisted in his course This is the Popes case He had the keyes of heauen committed vnto him in common with his fellow seruants to euery man for his part and portion of the Lords house and to the great disturbance and disorder of the house he hath chalenged vnto himselfe the soueraigntie and Lordship of the whole He hath made himselfe master of the Church and all the rest seruants vnto him By this extrauagant and exorbitant power he handleth all things as he list and abuseth the keyes to shut them out of heauen so farre as he can who in the behalfe of their maister do seeke to hinder his wicked and vngodly proceedings What then shall we adiudge him but a traytor to his Lord and maister Iesus Christ vsurping that which is proper to Christ alone In a word M. Bishop must vnderstand that though the Popedome were drowned in Tiber and Babylon were cast as a milstone into the sea yet Christ needeth not to be maister and man to but without the Pope hath seruants enough to attend him in his seruice W. BISHOP Come we now to the second It is that we make Christ an Idoll for albeit we call him a Sauiour yet in vs in that he giues his grace to vs that by our merits we may be our owne sauiours c. I maruell in whom he should be a sauiour if not in vs What is he the Sauiour of Angels or of any other creatures I hope not but the mischiefe is that he giues grace to vs that thereby we may merit and so become our owne sauiors This is a phrase vnheard off among Catholikes that any man is his owne sauiour neither doth it follow of that position that good workes are meritorious but well that we apply vnto vs the saluation which is in Christ Iesus by good wo kes as the Protestants auouch they do
effecta ex eo quòd corporis passionibus se subdit c. caro dicitur effecta inde nomen trahit in quo plut studij vel propositi gerit the soule being become of more grosse disposition by yeelding it selfe to the passions of the bodie is said to be become flesh and taketh the name of that on which it bestoweth it most desire And againe f Jdem in Psal 38. hom 2. Animas nostras incarnauimus We haue turned our soules into flesh So saith Austine that g August de ciuit Dei lib. 14. cap. 2. Saepe ipsum hominem id est naturam hominis carnem nuncupat Et post In operibus carnis inuenimus illa quibus animi vitia significantur à voluptate carnis aliena the Scripture calleth man himselfe that is the nature of man by the name of flesh and calleth those the workes of the flesh which yet are the proper vices of the mind and belong not to that which we properly call the flesh And so doth God himselfe say of man wholy that h Genes 6.3 he is flesh and our Sauiour in the Gospell opposing flesh to the spirit i Ioh. 3.6 That which is borne of the flesh is flesh and that that is borne of the spirit is spirit giueth to vnderstand that all goeth vnder the name of flesh that is not borne againe and renewed by the spirit Now therefore as touching concupiscence Saint Austine telleth vs that k Aug. de perf Iustit Rat. 17 contr Julian lib. 5. cap. 5. Quia carnaliter anima concupiscit it is said that the flesh lusteth because that the soule lusteth according to the flesh Yea Cyprian doubted not to say l Cyprian in Prolog de cardinal Christi operibus Quód caro aduers spiritum spiritus aduersus carnem contendere dicitur repugnare impropriè dictum arbitror quia solius animae lis ista est qua secum rixatur c Et paulo prius Corpore sic vtitur anima sicut Faber malleo vel incude in qua format omnium turpitudinum idola fabricatur quaelibet quarumcunque voluptatum simulachra Non est caro dictatrix peccati nec inuentrix malitiae nec cogitatus format nec disponit agenda sed officina est spiritus qui mea per eam quaecunque affectauerit peragit consummat that he held it to be vnproperly said that the flesh lusteth against the spirit because it is the soule onely that is at strife with it selfe For the flesh is no directer of sinne no deuiser of wickednesse it frameth not the thought nor disposeth what shal be done but is as the shop or workhouse of the soule which in it and by it performeth whatsoeuer it desireth vsing the body as the Smith doth his hammer or anuile framing therupon the idols of vncleanesse and pleasure Seeing therefore as here it is plaine concupiscence is seated in the soule which for the corruption thereof is called by the name of flesh so that the Apostle by flesh in himself meaneth nothing but the soule according to the remainder of original infection which still did sticke fast vnto him M. Bishop by his second circumstance proueth nothing but that concupiscence is truly properly affirmed to be sin Which had bene very readily to haue bene perceiued by any man if he had framed his argument as he shold haue done Sinne properly taken is seated in the soule but concupiscence is not seated in the soule for this euery man would haue presently seene to be absurd But he to blind his Reader chose rather to say Concupiscence is seated in the flesh wheras notwithstanding the flesh as it is the seate of concupiscence cannot haue any reasonable vnderstanding but of the soule But now the third circuÌ„stance I trow will do the deed That he taketh out of the first verse of the eight Chapter Now there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus that walke not after the flesh Whence saith he I argue thus There is no condeÌ„nation to them that haue sinne dwelling in them if they walk not according to the fleshly desires of it therefore it is no sinne properly for the wages of sinne is death that is eternall damnation As if he should say God for Christs sake doth not impute this sinne therefore it is no sinne God to them that are in Christ doth pardon this sinne ergo it is not properly sinne And so he might likewise argue of Dauids adulterie Peters denying abiuring of his maister Pauls persecuting of the Church that none of these were properly sins because to theÌ„ being in Christ there is no condematioÌ„ for any of these things Such drunken sophistrie are we troubled with and drawne by the importunity of ignorant buzzards to spend time in the refuting of such arguments as rather deserue to be chastened with a whip then to be graced with an answer The matter is plaine to theÌ„ that are willing to vnderstand There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus it is true and yet who is there of them that are in Christ Iesus but confesseth vnto God that there is that in him for which he might iustly be condemned To them that are in Christ for Christs sake it is forgiuen and pardoned it is not imputed vnto them but it is still such as if it were imputed it should be sufficient to condemne them to euerlasting death Therfore the Apostle saith of concupiscence not for his consenting to it which he disclaimeth but for the hauing of it dwelling in him that m Rom 7.11 it slue him that n Vers 13. by the commaundement it wrought death in him that by it he had o Vers 24. a body of death How so but that knowing that the wages of sinne is death he knew himselfe thereby in case of death if God should deale with him for it as in extremitie and yet in iustice he might do Therefore doth S. Austin say that euen in the regenerate p August cont Iulian. lib 6 cap. 5 Tale ac tam magnum malum tantum quia inest quomodo non teneret in morte pertraheret in vltimam morteÌ„ nisi vinculum eius in ea quae est in Baptismo peccatorum omnium remissione soluâ—retur concupiscence is such and so great an euill as that onely because it is in them it should hold them in death and draw them to euerlasting death but that the bond of the guilt thereof is loosed in Baptisme by the forgiuenesse of all our sinnes It is therefore such in it selfe to which death is due but yet to them that are in Christ it proueth not vnto death because it is forgiuen vnto them for Christs sake Thus we haue seene an end of M. Bishops circumstances and nothing yet to proue but that concupiscence by the Apostle is properly called sinne And to proue that it is so because he saith there is not
one of vs. Where my portion raigneth I beleeue that I also raigne where my bloud ruleth I beleeue that I also haue dominion where my flesh is glorified I know that I also am glorious Albeit I be a sinner yet I doubt not of this fellowship of grace Albeit my sinnes hold backe yet my substance namely being now of his flesh and his bones requireth it Albeit mine owne defaults doe exclude me yet fellowship of nature putteth mee not away I might despaire because of my exceeding great sinnes and corruptions my defaults and infinite negligences which I haue committed and dayly without ceasing doe commit in thought and word and worke and euery way that humane frailtie can sinne but that thy Word O my God became flesh and dwelt amongst vs. But now I dare not despaire because he being obedient vnto thee vnto death euen the death of the crosse hath taken away the hand-writing of our sinnes and fastening it to the crosse hath crucified sinne and death Now securely I take breath and heart againe in him who sitteth at thy right hand and maketh intercession for vs. By these words and many other that might be alledged out of that booke the Reader may iudge of the construction that M. Bishop maketh of the words cited by M. Perkins We see nothing here but confession of sinnes in himselfe no other hope but onely forgiuenes of sins in Christ Surely these are not the speeches of a man dreaming of an ablenesse giuen vnto him to deserue eternall life No no it was neuer heard of in the world that the meaning of these words My hope is wholly in the death and merite of Christ should be that we hope to be able by Christ to merite and deserue saluation vntill these brazen faced hypocrites were hired and set to worke by Antichrist for the confusion of soules by making them to leane vpon the broken staffe of their owne merites in steed of the onely sauing merite of the bloud of Christ The faithful haue alwayes in their end betaken themselues to this hold and many returning vnto God euen at the last gaspe hauing nothing in themselues to comfort themselues haue securely reposed their hope in the merit and death of Christ and with ioy and comfort haue gone to God who if they had vnderstood hope in Christ according to M. Bishops exposition thereof of being to be made able by Christ to merite heauen would haue bene rent and torne in peeces with perplexitie and feare neither could haue conceiued any comfort thereof at all But let him alone he shall one day vnderstand the vntruth of his answer when he shall be glad to make vse of those words which we haue spoken of or the like without that good sence as hee calleth it which now his senslesse and dead heart imagineth of them The place of Basil is as cleare as the light yet he laboureth to cast a mist before it also but cannot so doe it but that hee is forced in part to acknowledge the truth on our behalfe k Basil in Psal 114. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is layd vp eternall rest saith he for them that striue lawfully in this life not to be rendered according to debt for workes but prouided according to the grace of the bountifull God for them that trust in him Where apparently Basill alludeth to the words of the Apostle l Rom. 44. To him that worketh that is to him that hath the righteousnes of workes the reward is not imputed * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by fauour but by debt and therefore the phrases being borowed from the Apostle must with him haue the same meaning as with the Apostle they haue His meaning then is plaine that that eternall rest is not rendered by way of debt but by way of fauour and grace and neuer hath any ecclesiasticall writer vnderstood those phrases otherwise Onely M. Bishop telleth vs that Basils meaning is that it is not rendered according to the debt of workes that is according to the iust rate of workes but in a fuller measure and aboue our merites But his masters of Rhemes reiect this commentary of his and doe tell him that our workes are m Rhem. Testam Annot. 2. Tim. 4. fully worthy of euerlasting life God then doth not exceed the rate of our workes as they say but giueth onely what we are fully worthy of what we fully and iustly merite and deserue thereby Yea and they saw well that to teach otherwise as M. Bishop doth is to ouerthrow merite For if God do giue vs aboue our merits then we do not merite that which God giueth or if we do merite it then it cannot be sayd to be aboue our merites But it is aboue our merites sayth M. Bishop therefore it followeth necessarily that we doe not merite or deserue it Yea wee haue seene before out of Fulgentius and Bernard that Gods reward doth so incomparably exceede all the merite and worke of man as that eternall life is not due thereunto by right neither should God doe any wrong if hee did not giue it and therefore the sentence of Basill is true according to the Apostles intendment of those termes which he vseth that eternall life is not rendered by way of debt for workes but by grace that is freely bestowed to them that trust in him M. Bishop telleth vs that hee maketh eternall life to be the prize of the combat but what of that seeing hee giueth vs to vnderstand that this prize is with fauour and mercie proposed and with the same mercie and fauour rendered to them that fight the combat Therefore hee sayth in another place n Basil de humilit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is nothing left thee O man to glorie of whose glorying and hope consisteth in this that thou mortifie all that is thine and seeke in Christ the life to come whereof hauing the first fruites we are now therein liuing wholly by the grace and gift of God There is then with Basil no merit no debt in any sort because we liue wholy by the grace and gift of God so that M. Bishops exposition is but a meere falsification of Basils words M. Perkins further alledgeth a saying of Austin He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne gifts not thy merits M. Bishop answereth that S. Austin was too wise to let any such foolish sentence passe his pen. He questioneth the matter What congruitie is it to say thus He directeth a better forme of speech It had bene better sayd thus Now if the sentence be S. Austins what will men but take M. Bishop for a foole that wold so vnaduisedly befoole S. Austin and take vpon him to correct his words when he had no cause The place indeed is misquoted either by M. Perkins mistaking or by the ouersight of the Printer for in steed of Psal 102. he hath quoted Psal 120. by misplacing of the figure a very small and easie ouersight But S.
loue of that righteousnes for which we fight in fighting against it So death of it selfe the wages of sin becometh to the faithful as a poison broken into a medicine and as a serpent that hath lost his sting a Bern. in Cant. Ser. 26. Iam non stimulus sed iubilus I am cantando moritur homo moriendo cantat Vsurparis ad laetitiam mater moeroris vsurparis ad gloriam gloriae inimica vsurparis ad introitum regni porta inferi fouea perditionis ad inuentionem salutis There is no sting but song saith S. Bernard man now dieth singing and singeth dying O thou mother of mourning saith he thou art turned to ioy thou enemy of glory doest now serue to giue glory thou gate of hell art vsed for an entry to the kingdome of heauen and thou pit of destruction for the finding of saluation S. Austin saith thereof that b Aug. de pec mer. remis li. 2. cap. 34. MorteÌ„ cerporis propter peccatum homini Deus inflixit post peccatorum remissionem propter exercendam iustitiam non ademit Et paulò priùs eam fidelibus euenire vt eius timore vinceÌ„do exerceretur fortitudo iustitiae God inflicted death for the punishment of sin and after forgiuenes of sins he still left it for the exercising of righteousnesse that saith he the fortitude of righteousnesse might be exercised in ouercoming the feare thereof The like hath bene noted out of him c Sect. 2. before concerning other iudgements laid vpon mankind in the beginning by reason of sinne Now as of these so of all other afflictions after forgiuenesse of sinnes we resolue that they forgo their former condition and propertie and cease to be reuengements and punishments for sinne but haue other respects and vses for which they are continued The examples so strongly vrged by Master Bishop make nothing against this First the Israelites murmure God to Moses threateneth wholly to destroy theÌ„ promising to make of him a mighty people Moses prayeth vnto God to withhold that wrath from his people to forgiue the trespasse God saith d Num. 14.20 I haue forgiueÌ„ it according to thy request but he addeth Notwithstanding as I liue all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord for all those men which haue seen my glory my miracles which I did in Egypt in the wildernes and haue tempted me these ten times and haue not obeyed my voice certainly they shall not see the land wherof I sware vnto their fathers Here is the forgiuenes of a sin saith M. Bishop and yet a punishment ensuing after But we answer him that this example altereth the question cometh not within the compasse of that wherof we speake For it is one thing to speake of the forgiuenesse of a sinne to the whole body of a people and another thing to speake of forgiuenesse to one particular man Forgiuenesse of a sinne to a whole people is not absolute but onely in a respect it is not simply the taking away of a sinne but the taking of it away in some sort and therefore though it be the excluding of one punishment yet nothing hindreth but that it may leaue place for another yea and though in common there be a forgiuenesse yet in particular there may stil remaine an imputation of the sinne euen as amongst this people were many reprobates and cast-awayes who though they were forgiuen and freed in respect of the destruction then threatened yet being void of repentance and true faith found otherwise spiritually no benefite at al of this forgiuenesse God saith not here simply I haue forgiuen it but I haue forgiuen it according to thy request Moses request was according to Gods threatening Gods threatening was wholly to destroy that nation In this respect God said I haue forgiuen it namely so as not at once to destroy this people according to my wrath and indignation conceiued against them And this Lyra very well obserued e Lyra in Num. ca. 14. Benè dicit iuxta quòd non totaliter dimisit sed quantum ad hoc quòd non deleret totum populum simul He saith well saith he according to thy request because he did not wholy pardon it but onely as touching the not destroying of the whole people at once Now albeit in this respect he did forgiue it because he did not wholy forgiue it therefore he voweth to glorifie himselfe throughout all the earth by making them an example of his iudgement vpon vnthankfull men with whom no sights nor sayings can preuaile to make them obedient to the voyce of God Therefore he would forbeare to destroy them in that sort and to their seed he wold make good the promise of the land of Canaan but as for them he would weare out the whole multitude of them that not one of them shold haue the enioying or sight thereof This he laid as a iudgement in common vpon that generation of men which had so infinitly from time to time prouoked him as that they made him f Psal 95.12 to sweare that they should not enter into his rest But yet in the bosome of that multitude we cannot doubt but many there were who truly repented and obtained forgiuenes both of this of all their other sins yet together with the rest were depriued of entrance into that holy land For God doth not except particular men from generall and common plagues and when he striketh a nation with famine sword pestilence or other calamity both one and other good and bad are subiect vnto it g Cyprian contra Demetr Intrae vnam domum boni mali interim coÌ„tinemur quicquid intrae domum euenerit pari sorte perpetimur donec c. We are shut vp together in one house saith Cyprian and whatsoeuer befalleth within the house we suffer it all alike Onely he so ordereth that what is to a nation in common for reuenge punishment becommeth in particular to the repentant and faithful a helpe and furtherance of saluation And so was it with the beleeuing Israelites who though by a common iudgement they were excluded corporally from the Sacrament and signe yet were thereby spiritually edified and learned with Abraham and Isaac and Iacob so much the more to meditate to desire long for the spirituall and euerlasting rest Albeit in respect of the faithfull also it is to be vnderstood that Gods chastisements oftentimes lye vpon them after forgiuenesse of sinnes though not for punishments to theÌ„selues yet for exemplary admonitions to others h Tho. Aquin. 12. q. 87. art 6. ad 3. Vt edificeÌ„tur in poena qui scaÌ„dâ—lizati sunt in culpa that as Thomas Aquinas speaketh they may be edified by the punishment that were scandalized by the sinne And thus S. Austin rightly saith that i Aug in Joan. tr 124. Productior est poenae quà m culpa ne parua putaretur culpa si cum
turne Because he had no great skill to answer he thought it wisedom to take heed what he did obiect But yet out of that sentence truly alledged we may take somewhat to this point The words are p Gal. 3.11 The iust shall liue by faith According to these words true faith is said alwayes to imply and containe eternall life Our Sauior Christ speaketh as of a thing presently had q Ioh. 3.36 He that beleeueth hath eternall life r Cap. 5.24 he is passed from death to life But without charitie there can be no state of eternall life because Å¿ 1. Ioh. 3 14. he that loueth not abideth in death If then wheresoeuer there be true faith there be eternall life and without charitie there can be no eternall life it must necessarily follow that wheresoeuer there is true faith there is also charitie and loue bringing forth the fruites of good workes and seeking to winne others by example of iust and holy life M. Bishops answer we see giueth checke to the holy Ghost The holy Ghost saith The iust shall liue by faith Not so saith M. Bishop he liueth by faith hope and charitie and not by faith alone Further I trouble not my selfe with his idle words which containe nothing but a begging of the matter in question and are applied onely to an argument of his owne deuice CHAPTER 5. OF MERITS 1. W. BISHOP OBserue that three things are necessary to make a worke meritorious First that the worker be the adopted sonne of God and in the state of grace Secondly that the work proceed from grace and be referred to the honour of God The third is the promise of God through Christ to reward the work And because our aduersaries either ignorantly or of malice do slaunder this our doctrine in saying vntruly that we trust not in Christs merits nor need not Gods mercy for our saluation but wil purchase it by our owne works I wil here set downe what the Councell of Trent doth teach concerning Merits Sess 6. cap. vlt. Life euerlasting is to be proposed to them that work wel and hope wel to the end both as grace of mercie promised to the sonnes of God through Christ Iesus and as a reward by the promise of the same God to be faithfully rendred vnto their workes and merits So that we hold eternall life to be both a grace as well in respect of Gods free promise through Christ as also for that the first grace out of which they issue was freely bestowed vpon vs. And that also it is a reward in iustice due partly by the promise of God and in part for the dignitie of good workes vnto the worker if he perseruere and hold on vnto the end of his life or by true repentance rise to the same estate againe In infants baptized there is a kind of merit or rather dignitie of the adopted sonnes of God by his grace powred into their soules in baptisme wherby they are made heires of the kingdom of heauen but all that arriue to the yeares of discretion must by the good vse of the same grace either merit life or for want of such fruite of it fall into the miserable state of death R. ABBOT M. Bishop setteth downe three things which he saith are necessary to make a work meritorious but giueth vs no ground at all whereby we may rest perswaded that where those three things do concurre a man may be said to merit or deserue at Gods hands He leaueth vs still to wonder that a sinfull wretch offending and prouoking God from day to day should dare to talke of merite and desert with God but that we know that heresie and ignorance make men bold to frame the maiestie of God to their owne brainsicke and senslesse conceits The conditions and circumstances by him mentioned we alwayes teach and require in our doctrine of good workes but farre are we from finding merit in any of them For first the adopted sonne of God standeth bound by dutie to do all things to the honor of his Father and there can be no merit in doing that which a man by dutie is bound to do Secondly if the worke proceed from the grace of God the work is Gods and not mans and therfore man can therby merit nothing Thirdly if the reward depend vpon promise then it ariseth not of the merit or worth of workes especially there being by the frailtie of the worker and the bountie of the promiser that disproportion betwixt the worke and the reward as that it is meerly absurd to imagine that the one should be merited and deserued by the other These things God willing shall further appeare in the processe of this question In the meane time M. Bishop here challengeth vs for slaundering their doctrine with some matters of truth as that they trust not in Christs merits that they need not Gods mercy for their saluation but will purchase it by their owne workes Now we wote well that they vse speech of Christes merits and Gods mercie and of trusting therein because they know that if they abandoned the mention hereof they would soone grow odious and hatefull to all men For the cuppe of poison of the whore of Babylon they must vse a couer of such good words least they make men loth to drinke thereof But let it be examined how they teach these things and their falshood will soone appeare By trust in Christs merits men conceiue the placing of the confidence of saluation immediatly therein as the proper cause for which God accepteth vs to eternall life who our selues are miserable sinners and altogether vnworthy thereof But their trust in Christs merits is that he hath purchased for vs grace if we list by free will to merite heauen for ourselues thereby to be iust before God in our selues and worthy of the kingdome of heauen as M. Bishop in the former question of a Sect. 2. Iustification hath declared So then the effect of Christs merits is tied onely to this life and thenceforth we are to depend vpon that which here we do for our selues by wel vsing that grace which the merits of Christ first purchased for vs. Therefore one Richard Hopkins translating into English a booke of Granatensis as touching prayer and meditation giueth it one where for a marginall note that our Sauiour Christ is our Aduocate for the time of this life but after our departure out of this life he is no more our Aduocate but our Iudge for the time is past saith he of dealing with God by an Aduocate c. and we shall haue our definitiue sentence according to our workes Whereby it appeareth what reckoning they make of the mercie of God which they also pen vp within the compasse of this life and denie it that place which the Apostle giueth it b 2. Tim. 1.18 at that day Yea so little vse is there with them of Gods mercie as that M. Bishop doubteth not to demaund
c Cap. 4. Sect. 4. What need any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a iust Iudge Hence are those most insolent speeches of theirs that good workes are d Rhem. Annot. 2. Tim. 4.8 truly and properly meritorious and fully worthy of euerlasting life that heauen is the due and iust stipend which God by his iustice oweth to the persons working by his grace that we haue a right to heauen and deserue it worthily that it is our owne right bargained for and wrought for and accordingly payed vnto vs as our hire e Ibid. Heb. 6.10 that good workes be so farre meritorious as that God should be vniust if he rendered not heauen for the same Thereupon Tapper sticketh not to say f Ruard Tapper in explic art Louan tom 2 art 9. Absit vt iusti vi tam aeternam expectent sicut pau per eleemosynam Multò namque gloriâ—sius est ipsoâ— quasi victores triumphatores eam possidere tanquam palmaÌ„ suit sudoribus debitam God forbid that the iust should expect eternall life as the poore man doth an almes for it is much more glorious that they should haue it as conquerers and triumphers as the prize due vnto their labours Thus you your selues haue written M. Bishop and do we slaunder you in reporting truly what you haue written No no your speeches are impudent and shamelesse in this behalfe and such as we wonder that your foreheads serue you to auouch Why doth it not suffice you to preach good workes simply as Christ and his Apostles did with commendation of Gods mercy in rewarding the same What need this vaine foolery of merite so improbable so absurd so impossible whereby you do not magnifie God but set vp the righteousnesse of man against the grace of God As for the definition of the Councell of Trent we esteeme it not knowing the same for the most part to haue bene but a conuenticle of base Italianate Machiauels who by equiuocations and sophistications haue deluded the world and by casting the chaffe of some phrases of the Fathers vpon the meeres and puddles of the schoolemen haue laboured to couer and hide the filth and mire thereof and indeed haue left them still to serue by false confidence and trust for gulfes and whirlpools to swallow vp and deuoure the soules of men Although the words of the Councell may beare some good construction according to the auncient fathers meaning of the name of merites yet by them they are deceitfully set downe to leaue open a gappe to the absurd and intollerable presumption of men in aduancing and lifting vp the desert of mens workes as if God were thereby greatly bound and beholding vnto them How farre their meaning extendeth will appeare by M. Bishop who will not haue vs thinke that he will speake any thing but by the authoritie of that Councell And first he telleth vs that they hold that eternall life is a grace which indeed they dare not denie because the Scripture expresly so affirmeth g Rom. 6.23 Eternall life is the grace or gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. But he addeth to grace a supply of workes quite contrary to the Scriptures for it is expresly sayd h Chap. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of works otherwise grace is no grace i August contra Pelag. Celest lib. 2. ca 24. Non enim gratia Dei gratia erit vllo modo nisi fuerit gratuita omni modo Grace saith Saint Austin is not grace in any sort if it be not free in euery sort It is of grace saith M. Bishop and yet it is of workes also But still to make a shew of vpholding grace he telleth vs that though eternall life be by workes yet the first grace out of which those workes do issue is freely bestowed vpon vs. Which he saith only as ashamed to deny grace altogether and not of any conscience that hee maketh faithfully to auouch the same For if the grace whence those workes do issue which is the grace of iustification be freely bestowed vpon vs why doth he before labour to approue that we are iustified by workes Or if we obtaine the grace of iustification by workes how doth he say that the same is freely bestowed vpon vs The plaine truth is that by their works of preparation they make a man at least in some sort as we haue heard before out of Bellarmine to merit and deserue euen the first grace if by the first grace we vnderstand the grace of their first iustification as M. Bishop vsually doth But beside grace it is also a reward due in iustice saith he And how so Marry partly by the promise of God Now if he rested here we would not contend with him For promise is indeed grace and iustice in respect of promise is nothing but truth in the performance thereof neither is here any impeachment of the free gift of God But not contented herewith he addeth that it is due in part also for the dignitie of good workes And thus he confoundeth those things which the Scripture still very precisely distinguisheth aduertising vs that k Rom. 4.14 if they which are of the law that is of workes be heires then is faith made voide and the promise is made of none effect and againe l Gal. 3.18 if the inheritance be of the law that is of workes it is no longer by promise To be inheritors by workes and to be inheritors by promise are things so opposite as that the one wholly excludeth the other neither can they possibly stand together As for that which he saith of infants merite and dignitie it is also the schoolemens fiction and deuice Remission of sinnes is their saluation as it is ours and in them it standeth good which the Apostle saith m Rom. 5 2â— As sinne hath raigned ouer them vnto death so grace also raigneth by righteousnesse that is by imputation of righteousnesse vnto eternall life not by any dignitie in them but through Iesus Christ our Lord. But as touching them that arriue to yeares of discretion he telleth vs that either they must by good vse of grace merite life or for want of such fruite fall into the miserable state of death A very hard sentence for himselfe for if he neuer haue life till he merite and deserue it we can well assure him that he shall go without it And I wonder that his heart did not tremble at the writing hereof but that he hath hardened the same against the truth and writeth but only for maintenance of that occupation and trade that must yeeld maintenance backe againe to him What will he say in the end when he shall lie wrastling with death and readie to resigne his soule into the hands of God Will he then craue for mercie who writeth now so earnestly for merite Let him take heede that God do not then answer him n Luk. 19.22 Out of thine
teacheth that those sacrifices did q Heb. 9.13 sanctifie as touching the purifying of the flesh that is outwardly to men but r Ver. 9.14 chap. 10.1.2 to sanctifie the conscience to acquit the conscience of sinnes it reserueth as a thing peculiar to the bloud of Christ But saith M. Bishop if satisfaction must be giuen to the congregation how much more reason is it that it be made to God True but what are we sinfull wretches that we should think that any thing that we can do should be a satisfaction to him for sinne But much more absurd are we to thinke that the offering of a bruite creature should be any part of the redemption thereof Our satisfacton therefore is not any thing that we do or can do but it is onely the pleading of a satisfaction payed for vs in the bloud of Christ Yet he still vrgeth that sacrifices were to satisfie God because it is said that vpon the sacrifice the sinne shall be forgiuen But I haue already answered him that it was forgiuen not for the sacrifice sake but for Christs sake whom the offerer was to vnderstand therein And we know that of Sacraments vsually those effects are spoken which properly belong to those things whereof they are sacraments It is rightly said by Tertullian that God in these sacrifices ſ Tertul contra Marc lib. 3. Non quae siebant exigens sed propter quod fiebant required not the things which were done but that for which they were done And therefore as Origen saith as touching the high Priests standing forth to appease the wrath of God when the Angell was gone foorth to be the executioner thereof t Origē in Num. hom 9. Neque enim indumenta Pōtificis purpura Lina bysso contexia erubuisset Angelus ille vastator sed ista quae futura erant indumēta magni Pontificis intellexit ijs cessic The destroying Angell would not haue bashed at the high Priests garments made of purple and wooll and silke but he vnderstood those garments that should be of the great high Priest Iesus Christ and to them he yeelded euen so we are to conceiue that the wrath of God was no whit nor in any sort pacified by those sacrifices for the things themselues that were done therein but hee respected in them the bloud and sacrifice of his onely begotten Sonne and thereto was content to yeeld himselfe satisfied and appeased towards them that offered with faith in him 9. W. BISHOP The reason for vs which indeed is the very groundwork of satisfaction may thus be framed many after pardon obtained of their sins haue had temporall punishment layed vpon them for the same sins and that by Gods owne order wherefore after the forgiuenesse of the sin and the eternall punishment of it through Christs satisfaction there remaineth some temporall paine to be endured by the partie himselfe for the same sin which is most properly that which we call satisfaction They denie that any man hath bene punished temporally for any sin which was once pardoned we proue it first by the example of the Israelites whose murmuration against God was at Moses intercession pardoned Numb 14. yet all the elder sort of them who had seene the miracles wrought in Aegypt for their deliuerance were by the sentence of God depriued of the sight of the land of promise and punished with death in the wildernesse for the very same their murmuration The like iudgement was giuen against Moses himselfe and Aaron Numb 20. Deut. 32. for not glorifying God at the waters of contradiction both of them had their sin pardoned yet were they both afterward for the same debarred from the entrance into the holy land To this M. Perkins answereth first that a man must be considered in a two fold estate as he is vnder the law and as he is vnder grace In the former estate all afflictions were curses of the Law in the latter they are turned vnto them that beleeue in Christ from curses into trials corrections preuentions admonitions instructions and into what you wil else sauing satisfaction Now to the purpose Whereas God saith he denied the beleuing Israelites with Moses and Aaron to enter into the land of Canaan it cannot be proued that it was a punishment or penaltie of the law laid vpon them the Scripture hath no more but that it was an admonition vnto all ages following to take heed of like offences as Paul writeth 1. Cor. 10. All these things came vnto them for examples and were written for our admonition Reply He that will not be ashamed of this audacious assertion needs not to care what he saith Hath the Scripture no more of their fact then that it was an admonition to others Turne to the originall places where the whole matter in particular is related First their murmuration then Moses intercession for them and the obtaining of their pardon and lastly after all the rest Gods sentence of depriuation of them from entring into the land of promise for that their murmuration Againe Aaron shal not enter into the land Numb 14. Num. 20. ve 24. Deut. 32.51 because he hath bin disobedient to my voyce and of Moses Because he hath trespassed against me at the waters of strife So that nothing is more cleare euen by the testimony of the holy Ghost then that their dayes were shortened and their hope of entrance into the land of promise cut off in punishment of those offences which were before forgiuen them And these things being recorded as S. Paul testifieth for our admonition and instruction we are to learne thereby that God so dealeth dayly with all those sinners that he calleth to repentance R. ABBOT M. Bishop here maketh a hot and a long haruest and all his corne will not yeeld him so much as one morsell of bread He telleth vs that the argument which he here handleth is the very groundworke of satisfaction now if the goundworke faile we may be well assured that the building cannot stand We deny indeed that any affliction or iudgement of God hath lien vpon any faithful man in the nature and condition of a punishment after the forgiuenesse of his sinne The things themselues which in their owne nature are punishments and at the first are inflicted in that nature yet the sinne being forgiuen lose that nature and become onely trials preuentions admonitions instructions neither do we therein conceiue Gods anger against vs but his fatherly goodnesse and prouidence care to keepe vs to himselfe that he may make vs partakers of eternall life Thus carnall concupiscence being of it selfe a punishment of sinne though according to the guilt it be taken away by remission of sins yet according to the thing it selfe remaineth in the faithfull not now for a punishment but for the humbling and exercising of vs to make vs to know our selues to draw vs to trust and confidence in God to sharpen our desire