man is conuerted this worke of God is not done by compulsion but he is conuerted willingly and at the very time when he is conuerted by Gods grace he wils his coÌ„uersion To this ende saide Augustine He vvhich made thee without thee will not saue thee without thee Again that is certen that our wil is required in this that we may do any goodthing wel but we haue it not from our owne povver but God workes to will in vs. For looke at what time God giues grace at the same time he giueth a will to desire will the same grace as for exaÌ„ple when God works faith at the same time he workes also vpon the will causing it to desire faith willingly to receiue the gift of beleeuing God makes of the vnwilling will a willing will because no man can receiue grace vtterly against his will considering will constrained is no will But here we must remember that howsoeuer in respect of time the working of grace by Gods spirit and the willing of it in man goe togither yet in regard of order grace is first wrought and mans will must first of all be acted and mooued by grace then it also acteth willeth and mooueth it selfe And this is the last point of consent betweene vs and the Romane church touching freewill neither may we proceede further with them II. The dissent or difference The point of difference standeth in the cause of the freedome of mans will in spirituall matters which concerne the kingdome of God The Papists say mans will concurreth worketh with gods grace in the first conuersion of a sinner by it selfe and by it owne naturall power and is onely helped by the holy Ghost We say that mans will worketh with grace in the first conuersion yet not of it self but by grace Or thus They say will hath a naturall cooperation we denie it say it hath cooperation onely by grace beeing in it selfe not actiue but passiue willing well onely as it is mooued by grace whereby it must first be acted and mooued before it can act or will And that we may the better conceiue the difference I will vse this comparison The Church of Rome sets forth the estate of a sinner by the condition of a prisoner and so do we marke then the difference It supposeth the said prisoner to lie bound hand and foote with chaines fetters and withall to be sicke and weake yet not wholly dead but liuing in part it supposeth also that being in this case he stirreth not himselfe for any helpe yet hath abilitie and power to stirre Herevpon if the keeper come and take away his bolts and fetters and hold him by the hand and helpe him vp he can and will of himselfe stand and walke and goe out of prison euen so say they is a sinner bound hand and foote with the chaine of his sinnes and yet he is not dead but sicke like to the wounded man in the way betweene Ierico and Ierusalem And therefore doeth he not will and affect that which is good but if the holy Ghost come and doe but vntie his bands and reach him his hand of grace then can he stand of himselfe and will his owne saluation or any thing els that is good We in like manner graunt that a prisoner fitly resembleth a naturall man but yet such a prisoner must he be as is not onely sicke and weake but euen starke dead which cannot stirre though the keeper vntie his boltes and chaines nor heare though he sound a trumpet in his eare and if the said keeper would haue him to mooue stirre he must giue him not onely his hand to help him but euen soule and life also and such a one is euery man by nature not onely chained and fettered in his sinnes but starke dead therein as one that lieth rotting in the graue not hauing any ability or power to mooue or stirre and therefore he cannot so much as desire or doe any thing that is truly good of himselfe but God must first come and put a newe soule into him euen the spirit of grace to quicken and reuiue him and then beeing thus reuiued the will beginneth to will good things at the very same time wheÌ„ god by his spirit first infuseth grace And this is the true difference betweene vs and the Church of Rome in this point of free will III. Our Reasons Now for the confirmation of the doctrine we hold namely that a man willeth not his owne conuersion of him selfe by nature either in whole or in part but by grace wholly and alone these reasons may be vsed The first is taken from the nature and measure of mans corruption which may be distinguished into two parts The first is the want of that originall righteousnes which was in man by creation the secoÌ„d is a prones and inclination to that which is euill and to nothing that is truely good This appeareth Gen. 8. 21. The frame of mans heart saith the Lord is euill euen from his childhood that is the disposition of the vnderstanding will affections with all that the heart of man deuiseth fâ—rmeth or imagineth is wholly euil And Paul saith Rom. 8. 5. The wisdome of the flesh is ENMITIE against God Which wordes are very significant for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated vvisdome signifieth that the best thoughts the best desires affections and indeauours that be in any naturall man euen those that come most neare to true holines are not onely contrary to God but euen enmitie it selfe And hence I gather that the very heart it selfe that is the will and minde from whence these desires and thoughts doe come are also enmitie vnto God For such as the action is such is the facultie whence it proceedeth such as the fruite is such is the tree such as the branches are such are the rootes By both these places it is euident that in man there is not onely a want absence or deprivation of originall righteousnes but a prones also by nature vnto that which is euill which prones includes in it an inclination not to some fewe but to all and euery sinne the very sinne against the holy Ghost not excepted Hence therefore I reason thus If euery man by nature doe both want originall iustice and be also prone vnto all euill then wanteth he natural free-will to will that which is truly good But euery man by nature wants originall iustice and is also prone vnto all euil Ergo Euery man naturally wants free-will to will that which is good Reason II. 1. Cor. 2. 14. The naturall man PERCEIVETH NOT the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnes vnto him neither CAN HE KNOVVE them because they are spiritually discerned In these wordes Saint Paul sets downe these points I that a naturall man doeth not so much as thinke of the things reuealed in the Gospell II. that a man hearing and in minde conceiuing them
thing which maketh vs of sinners to become righteous or iust before God And this is the first point of our disagreement in the matter of iustificatiō which must be marked because if there were no more points of difference betweene vs this one alone were sufficient to keepe vs from vniting of our religiōs for hereby the church of Rome doth race the very foundation Now let vs see by what reasons we iustifie our doctrine and secondly answere the contrary obiections Our Reasons Reason I. That very thing which must be our righteousnes before God must satisfie the iustice of the lawe which saith doe these things and thou shalt liue Now there is nothing can satisfie the iustice of the lawe but the righteousnes or obedience of Christ for vs. If any alleadge civill iustice it is nothing for Christ saith Except your righteousnesse exceede the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharises you cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen What shall we say that workes doe make vs iust that can not be for all mens workes are defectiue in respect of the iustice of the lawe Shall we say our sanctification whereby we are renewed to the image of God in righteousnes and true holinesse that also is imperfect and cannot satisfie Gods iustice required in the law as Isai hath saide of himselfe and the people all our righteousnes is as a menstruous cloath To haue a cleare conscience before God is a principall part of inward righteousnes and of it Paul in his owne person saith thus I am priuie to nothing by my selfe yet am I not iustified thereby 2. Cor. 4. 4. Therfore nothing can procure vnto vs an absolution and acceptance to life euerlasting but Christs imputed righteousnes And this will appeare if we doe consider how we must come one day before Gods iudgement seate there to be iudged in the rigour of iustice for whē we must bring some thing that may countervaile the iustice of God not hauing onely acceptation in mercy but also approbation in iustice God beeing not onely mercifull but also a iust iudge II. Reason 2. Cor. 5. 21. He which knew no sinne was made sinne for vs that we might be made the righteousnes of God which is in him Whence I reason thus As Christ was made sinne for vs so are we made the righteousnesse of God in him but Christ was made sinne or a sinner by imputation of our sinnes he being in himselfe most holy therefore a sinner is made righteous before God in that Christs righteonsnes is imputed and applyed vnto him Now if any shall say that man is iustified by righteousnes infused then by like reason I say Christ was made sinne for vs by infusion of sinne which to say is blasphemie And the exposition of this place by S. Hierome is not to be despised Christ saith he beeing offered for our sinnes tooke the name of sinne that we might be made the righteousnes of God in him NOT OVRS NOR IN VS If this righteousnesse of God be neither ours nor in vs thē it can be no inherent righteousnes but must needes be righteousnes imputed And Chrys. on this place saith It is called Gods righteousnes because it is not of works because it must be VVITHOVT ALL STAINE or want that cannot be inherent righteousnes Anselme saith he is made sinne as we are made iustice not ours but gods not in vs but in him as he is made sinne not his owne but ours not in him selfe but in vs. Reason III. Rom. 5. 19. As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous marke here is a comparison betweene the first and second Adam And hence I reason thus As by the disobedience of the first Adam men were made sinners so by the obedience of the second Adam are we made righteous Now we are not onely made sinners by propagation of naturall corruption but by imputation For Adams first sinne was the eating of the forbidden fruit which very acte is no personall offence but is imputed to all his posteritie in whome we haue all sinned The Fathers call this very sinne Adams handwriting making vs debters vnto God And therefore in like manner the obedience of Christ is made the righteousnes of euery beleeuer not by infusion but by imputation IV. Reason A satisfaction made for the want of that iustice or obedience which the law requires at our hands is accepted of God as the iustice it selfe But Christs obedience is a satisfaction made for the want of that iustice or obedience which the law requires as the Papists themselues auouch Therefore this satisfaction is our iustice And me thinks the Papists vpon this consideration haue litle cause to dissent from vs. For if they make Christs obedience their satisfaction why should they not fully close hands with vs and make it their iustice also V. Reason The consent of the auncient Church Bernard saith epist. 190. The IVSTICE OF ANOTHER is assigned vnto man who wanted his owne man was indebted and man made paiment The SATISFACTION OF ONE IS IMPVTED to all And why may not iustice be from an other as vvell as guiltines is from an other And in Cant. serm 25. It sufficeth me for all righteousnes to haue him alone mercifull to me against vvhome I haue sinned And Not to sinne is Gods iustice MANS IVSTICE is the MERCIFVLNES OF GOD. And serm 61. Shall I sing mine owne righteousnes Lord I vvill remember thy righteousnes alone for IT IS MINE ALSO in that euen thou art made unto me righteousnes of God What shall I feare least that one be not sufficient for vs both it is not a short cloake that cannot couer two it will couer both thee and me largely beeing both a large and eternall iustice August on psal 22. He praieth for our faults and hath made our faults his faults that he might make HIS IVSTICE OVR IVSTICE Obiections of Papists Obiections of the Papists proouing inherent righteousnes to be the matter of our iustice before God are these I. Obiect It is absurd that one man should be made righteous by the righteousnes of an other for it is as much as if one man were made wise by the wisdome of another Ans. It is true that no man can be made righteous by the personall righteousnes of an other because it pertaines onely to one man And because the wisdome that is in one man is his altogether wholly it cannot be the wisdome of another no more then the health and life of one body can be the health of an other But it is otherwise with the righteousnesse of Christ it is his indeede because it is inherent in him as in a subiect it is not his alone but his and ours together by the tenour of the Couenant of grace Christ as he is a Mediatour is giuen to euery beleeuer as really and truly as land is giuen from man to man and with him are giuen all
some fewe but all and euery commaundement of the lawe of God as Dauid saith psal 119. 6. Then should I not be confounded when I haue respect to AL THY COMMANDEMENTS And this endeauour is a fruite of perfection in that it proceedes from a man regenerate For as all men through Adams fall haue in them by nature the seedes of all sinne none excepted no not the sinne against the holy Ghost so by grace of regeneration through Christ all the faithfull haue in them likewise the seedes of all vertues needefull to saluation and hereupon they both can and doe indeauour to yeelde perfect obedience vnto God according to the whole law And they may be tearmed perfect as a childe is called a perfect man though it want perfection of age and stature and reason yet hath it perfection of parts because it hath all and euery part and faculty both of body soule that is required to a perfect man Conclus II. There be certaine works of supererogation that is such works as are not onely answerable to the law and thereupon deserue life euerlasting but goe beyonde the lawe and merit more then the lawe by it selfe can make any man to merit But where may we finde these works not in the person of any meere man or angel nor in all men and angels but onely in the person of Christ God and man whose workes are not onely answerable to the perfection of the law but goe farre beyond the same For first the obedience of his life cōsidered alone by it selfe was answerable euen to the rigour of the lawe and therefore the sufferings of his death and passion were more then the lawe could require at his hand considering it requireth no punishment of him that is a doer of all things conteyned therein Secondly the very rigour of the lawe requireth obedience onely of them that are meere men but the obedience of Christ was the obedience of a person that was both God man Thirdly the lawe requires personall obedience that is that euery man fulfill the lawe for himselfe and it speaks of no more Now the obedience which Christ performed was not for himselfe alone but it serueth also for all the elect and considering it was the obedience of God as Paul signified whē he said feede the Church of God which HE purchased VVITH HIS BLOOD it was sufficient for many thousand worlds and by reason the law requireth no obedience of him that is God this obedience therefore may truely be tearmed a worke of supererrogation This one we acknowledge and beside this we dare acknowledge none And thus farre we agree with the Church of Rome in the doctrine of the estate of perfection and further we dare not goe The difference The Papists hold as the writings of the learned among them teach that a man being in the state of grace may not onely keepe all the commandements of the law and thereby deserue his owne saluation but also goe beyond the law and doe workes of supererrogation which the lawe requireth not as to performe the vow of single life and the vow of regular obedience c. And by this means they say men deserue a greater degree of glorie then the law can afoard Of perfection they make two kinds one they cal necessarie perfection which is the fulfilling of the law in euery commandement whereby eternall life is deserued The second is profitable perfection when men do not onely such things as the lawe requires but ouer and besides they make certen vowes and performe certaine other duties which the lawe inioynes not for the doing whereof they shall be rewarded with a greater measure of glorie then the lawe designeth This they make plaine by comparison Two soldiers fight in the field vnder one and the same captaine the one onely keepes his standing and thereby deserues his pay the other in keeping of his place doth also winne the enemies standard or doe some other notable exploit now this man besides his pay deserues some greater reward And thus say they it is with all true Catholickes in the state of grace they that keepe the lawe shal haue life eternal but they that doe more then the law as workes of supererrogation shall be crowned with greater glorie This is their doctrine But we on the cōtrarie teach that albeit we are to striue to a perfection as much as we can yet no man can fulfill the lawe of God in this life much lesse do works of supererrogation for the confirmatiō wherof these reasons may be vsed I. In the moral law two things are commanded First the loue of God and man Secondly the manner of this loue now the manner of louing God is to loue him with all our heart and strength Luc. 10. 27. Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soule with all thy strength AND VVITH ALL THY THOVGHT c. As Bernard saide the measure of louing God is to loue him vvithout measure and that is to loue him with the greatest perfectiō of loue that can befall a creature Hence it followes that in louing God no man can possibly doe more then the lawe requireth and therefore the performance of all vowes whatsoeuer and all like duties comes short of the intention or scope of the law II. Reason The compasse of the law is large and comprehendeth in it more then the minde of man can at the first conceiue for euery commaundement hath two parts the negatiue and the affirmatiue In the negatiue is forbidden not onely the capitall sinne named as murther theft adulterie c. but all sinnes of the same kinde with all occasions and prouocations thereto And in the affirmatiue is commanded not onely the contrarie vertues as the loue of God and the loue of our neighbours honour life chastitie goods good name but the vse of all helps and meanes wherby he said the vertues may be preserued furthered and practised Thus hath our Sauiour Christ himselfe expounded the lawe Math. chap. 5. and 6. vpon this plaine ground I conclude that all duties pertaining to life and manners come within the list of some morall commaundement And that the Papists making their workes of supererogation meanes to further the loue of God and man must needs bring them vnder the cōpasse of the lawe Vnder which if they be they can not possibly goe beyond the same Reason III. Luc. 17. 20. When ye haue done all those things that are commanded vs we are vnprofitable seruantes we haue done that which was our duty to doe The Papists answere that we are vnprofitable to God but not to our selues but this shift of theirs is beside the very intent of the place For a seruant in doing his dutie is vnprofitable euen to himselfe and doth not so much as deserue thankes at his masters hand as Christ saith v. 9. Doth he thanke that seruant Secondly they answer that we are vnprofitable seruants in doing things cōmaunded yet
be beleeued as profitable and necessarie to saluation And these they say are two fold Apostolicall namely such as were deliuered by the Apostles and not written and Ecclesiasticall which the Church decreeth as occasion is offered We holde that the Scriptures are most perfect containing in them all doctrines needfull to saluation whether they concerne faith or manners and therefore we acknowledge no such traditions beside the written word which shall be necessarie to saluation so as he which beleeueth them not cannot be saued Our reasons Testimonie I. Deutr. 4. 2. Thou shalt not adde to the wordes that I command thee nor take any thing there from therefore the written word is sufficient for all doctrines pertaining to saluation If it be said that this commandement is spoken as well of the vnwritten as of the written word I answere that Moses speaketh of the written word onely for these very words are a certen preface which he set before a long cōmentatie made of the written lawe for this ende to make the people more attentiue obediēt Testimonie II. Isai 8. 20. To the lawe and to the testimonie If they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth what must be done in cases of difficultie Men must not runne to the wizard or southsaier but to the lawe and testimony and here he commends the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubtes and scruples in conscience whatsoeuer Testimonie III. Iohn 20. 31. These things were written that ye might beleeue that Iesus is the Christ and in beleeuing might haue euerlasting life Here is set downe the full ende of the Gospell and of the whole written word which is to bring men to faith and consequently to saluation and therefore the whole scripture alone is suffient to this ende without traditions If it be said that this place must be vnderstood of Christs miracles onely I answere that miracles without the doctrine of Christ and knowledge of his sufferings can bring no man to life euerlasting therefore the place must be vnderstood of the doctrine of Christ and not of his miracles alone as Paul teacheth Gal. ◠1 8. If we or an Angel from heauen preach vnto you any thing BESIDE THAT which we haue preached let him be accursed And to this effect he blames them that taught but a diuers doctrine to that which he had taught 1. Tim. 1. 3. Testimonie IIII. 2. Tim. 3. 16 17. The vvhole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may be absolute beeing made perfect vnto euery good vvorke In these words be cōtained two arguments to proue the sufficiencie of Scripture without vnwritten verities The first that which is profitable to these foure vses namely to teach all necessarie truth to confute all errours to correct faults in manners and to instruct in righteousnes that is to informe all men in all good duties that is sufficient to saluation But Scripture serueth for all these vses and therefore it is sufficient and vnwritten traditions are superfluous The secōd that which can make the man of God that is Prophets and Apostles and the ministers of the word perfect in all the duties of their callings that same word is sufficient to make all other men perfect in all good workes But Gods word is able to make the man of God perfect Therefore it is sufficient to prescribe the true and perfect way to eternall life without the helpe of vnwritten traditions V. The iudgement of the Church Tertull saith Take from heretickes the opinions vvhich they maintaine vvith the heathen that they may defende their questions by SCRIPTVRE ALONE and they cannot stande Againe We neede no curiositie after Christ Iesus nor inquisition after the Gospell When we beleeue it we desire to BELEEVE NOTHING BESIDE for this we first beleeue that there is NOTHING MORE which we may beleeue Hierome on Matth. 23. writing of an opinion that Iohn Baptist was killed because hee foretold the comming of Christ saith thus This because it hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easily be contemned as approoued In which wordes there is a conclusion with a minor and the maior is to be supplied by the rules of logick thus That which hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easily be contemned as approoued but this opinion is so therefore Beholde a notable argument against all vnwritten traditions Augustine booke 2. c. 9. de doct Christ. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scripture are found ALL THOSE POINTES VVHICH CONTAINE FAITH AND MANNERS of liuing well Vicentius Lirinen saith the Canon of the Scripture is perfect and fully sufficient to it selfe FOR AL THINGS Beside these testimonies other reasons there be that serue to prooue this point I. The practise of Christ his Apostles who for the confirmation of the doctrine which they taught vsed alwaies the testimony of Scripture neither can it be prooued that they euer confirmed any doctrine by tradition Act. 26. 22. I continue vnto this day witnessing both to small and great saying NONE OTHER THINGS THEN THOSE which the Prophets and Moses did say should come And by this we are giuen to vnderstand that we must alwaies haue recourse to the written word as being sufficient to instruct vs in mattes of saluation II. If the beleeuing of vnwritten traditions were necessarie to saluation then we must as well beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as well as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall traditions are not else where to be found but in their bookes And we may not beleeue their sayings as the word of God because they oftē erre being subiect to errour and for this cause their authoritie when they speake of traditions may be suspected and we may not alwaies beleeue them vpon their word Obiections for Traditions First they alleadge 2. Thess. 2. 15. where the Apostle biddes that Church keepe the ordinances which he taught them either by worde or letter Hence they gather that beside the written worde there be vnwritten traditions that are indeede necessarie to be kept and obeied Ans. It is very likely that this Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer Paul writ to any Church though in order it haue not the first place and therefore at the time when this Epistle was penned it might well fall out that some things needefull to saluation were deliuered by word of mouth not being as yet written by any Apostle Yet the same things were afterward set downe in writing either in the second epistle or in the epistles of Paul Obiect II. That Scripture is Scripture is a point to be beleeued but that is a tradition vnwritten and therefore one tradition there is not written that we are to beleeue Answ. That the bookes of the old and new Testament are Scripture it is to
temporall blessings In the first age he appointed vnto him for meate euery hearb of the earth bearing seed and euery tree wherein there is the fruite of a tree bearing seed Gen. 1. 18. And as for flesh whether God gaue vnto him libertie to eate or not to eate we hold it vncerten After the flood the Lord renewed his grant of the vse of the creatures and gaue his people libertie to eat the flesh of liuing creatures yet so as he made some things vncleane and forbad the eating of them among the rest the eating of blood But since the comming of Christ he hath inlarged his word and giuen libertie to all both Iewes Gentiles to eate of all kindes of flesh This word of his we rest vpon holding it a doctrine of deuills for men to commaund an abstinence from meates for conscience sake which the Lord himselfe hath created to be receiued with thanksgiuing Socrates a Christian historiographer saith that the Apostles left it free to euery one to vse what kinde of meate they would on fasting daies and other times Spiridion in lent dressed swines flesh and set it before a stranger eating himselfe and bidding the stranger also to eat who refusing professing him selfe to be a Christian therefore saith he the rather must thou doe it for to the pure all things are pure as the word of God teacheth vs. But they obiect Ier. 35. where Ionadab commanded the Rechabites to abstain from wine which commandement they obeyed and are commended for doing well in obeying of it therefore say they some kinde of meates may lawefully be forbidden Ans. Ionadab gaue this commandement not in way of religion or merit but for other wise and politicke regardes For he inioyned his posteritie not to drinke wine not to build houses not to sowe seede or plant vineyards or to haue any in possession but to liue in tents to the ende they might be prepared to beare the calamities that should be fall them in time to come But the Popish abstinence from certaine meates hath respect to conscience and religion and therefore is of another kind and can haue no warrant thence II. Obiect Dan. 10. 3. Daniel beeing in heauines for three weekes of daies abstained from flesh and his example is our warrant Ans. It was the manner of holy men in ancient times when they fasted many daies together of their owne accordes freely to abstaine from sundrie things and thus Daniel abstained from flesh But the Popish abstinence from flesh is not free but stands by cōmandement and the omitting of it is mortal sinne Againe if they will follow Daniell in abstaining from flesh why doe they not also abstaine from all pleasant bread and wine yea from ointments and why will they eate any thing in the time of their fast whereas they cannot shew that Daniel eate any thing at all till euening And Molanus hath noted that our ancetours abstained from wine and dainties and that some of them ate nothing for two or three daies together Thirdly they alleadge the diet of Iohn Baptist whose meate was Locusts and wild honie and of Timothy who abstained from wine Ans. Their kinde of diet and that abstinence which they vsed was only for temperance sake not for conscience or to merit any thing thereby let them prooue the contrarie if they can Thirdly and lastly we dissent from them touching certaine endes of fasting For they make abstinence it selfe in a person fitly prepared to be a part of the worship of God but we take it to be a thing indifferent in it selfe and therefore no part of Gods worship and yet withall being well vsed we esteeme it as a proppe or furtherance of the worship in that we are made the fitter by it to worship God And herevpon some of the more learned sort of them say Not the worke of fasting done but the deuotion of the worker is to be reputed the seruice of God Againe they say that fasting in or with deuotion is a worke of satisfaction to Gods iustice for the temporall punishment of our sinnes Wherein we take they doe blasphemously derogat from Christ our Sauiour who is the whole and perfect satisfaction for sinne both in respect of fault and punishment Here they alleadge the example of the Ninevites and Achabs fasting wherby they turned away the iudgements of God denounced against them by his Prophets We answer that Gods wrath was appeased towards the Ninevites not by their fasting but by faith laying holde on Gods mercy in Christ and thereby staying his iudgement Their fasting was onely a signe of their repentance their repentance a fruite and signe of their faith whereby they beleeued the preaching of Ionas As for Ahabs humiliatiō it is nothing to the purpose for it was in hypocrisie if they get any thing thereby let thē take it to themselues To conclude we for our parts doe not condemne this exercise of fasting but the abuse of it and it were to be wished that fasting were more vsed of all Christians in all places considering the Lord doth daily giue vs new and special occasions of publike and priuate fasting The thirteenth point Of the state of perfection Our consent Our consent I will set downe in two conclusions I. All true beleeuers haue a state of true perfection in this life Math. 5. 48. Be you perfect as your father in heauen is perfect Gen. 6. 9. Noah was a iust and perfect man in his time and walked with God Gen. 17. 1. Walke before me and be perfect And sundrie kings of Iuda are said to walke vprightly before God with a perfect heart as Dauid Iosias Hezekias c. And Paul accounteth himselfe with the rest of the faithfull to be perfect saying Let vs all that are perfect be thus minded Phil. 3. 15. Now this perfection hath two partes The first is the imputation of Christs perfect obedience which is the ground and fountaine of all our perfectiō whatsoeuer Heb. 10. 14. By one offering that is by his obedience in his death and passion hath he consecrated or made perfect for euer them that beleeue The second part of Christian perfection is synceritie or vprightnes standing in two things The first is to acknowledge our imperfection and vnworthines in respect of our selues and hereupon though Paul had said he was perfect yet he addeth further that he did account of himselfe not as though he had attained to perfection but did forget the good things behinde and indeauoured himselfe to that which was before Here therefore it must be remembered that the perfection whereof I speake may stande with sundrie wants and imperfections It is saide of Asa that his heart vvas perfect vvith God all his daies and yet he pulled not dovvne the high places and beeing diseased in his feete he put his trust in the Physitians and not in the Lord. Secondly this vprightnes standes in a constant purpose endeauour and care to keepe not
difference We dissent not froÌ„ the Church of Rome in the doctrine of repentance it selfe but in the damnable abuses thereof which are of two sorts generall and speciall Generall are these which coÌ„cerne repentance wholly coÌ„sidered they are these The first is that they place the beginning of repentance partly in themselues and partly in the holy Ghost or in the power of their naturall freewill being helped by the holy ghost whereas Paul indeede ascribes this worke wholly vnto God 2. Tim. 2. 15. Proouing if God at any time will giue them repentance And men that are not weake but dead in trespasses and sinnes can not do any thing that may further their conuersion though they be helped neuer so no more then dead men in their graues can rise from thence The second abuse is that they take pennance or rather repentance for that publike discipline and order of correction that was vsed against notorious offenders in the open congregation For the scripture sets downe but one repentance and that common to all men without exception and to be practised in euery part of our liues for the necessaâ—ie mortification of sinne whereas open ecclesiasticall correction pertained not to all and euery man within the compasse of the Church but to them alone that gaue any open offence The third abuse is that they make repentance to be not onely a vertue but also a sacrament whereas for the space of a thousand yeares after Christ and vpward it was not reckned among the sacraments yea it seemes that Lumbard was one of the first that called it a sacrament and the schoole-men after him disputed of the matter and forme of this sacrament not able any of them certenly to define what should be the outward element The fourth abuse is touching the effect and efficacie of repeÌ„tance for they make it a meritorious cause of remission of sinnes and of life euerlasting flat against the word of God Paul saith notably Rom. 4. 24. We are iustified freely by his grace through the redemptioÌ„ which is in Christ Iesus whome God hath sent to be a reconciliation by faith in his blood In these words these formes of speach redemption in Christ reconciliation in his blood by faith freely by grace must be obserued and considered for they shewe plainely that no part of satifaction or redemption is wrought in vs or by vs but out of vs only in the person of Christ. And therefore we esteeme of repentance only as a fruit of faith the effect or efficacie of it is to testifie remission of our sinnes and our reconciliation before God It will be said that remission of sinnes and life enerlasting are promised to repentance Ans. It is not to the worke of repentaÌ„ce but to the person which repenteth and that not for his owne merits or worke of repentance but for the merits of Christ which he applyeth to himselfe by faith And thus are we to vnderstand the promises of the gospel in which workes are mentioned presupposing alwaies in them the reconciliation of the person with God to whome the promise is made Thus we see wherefore we dissent from the Romane Church touching the doctrine of repentance Speciall abuses doe concerne Contrition Confession and Satisfaction The first abuse concerning contrition is that they teach it must be sufficient and perfect They vse now to helpe the matter by a distinction saying that the sorrowe in contrition must be in the highest degree in respect of value and estimation and not in respect of intention Yet the opinion of Adrian was otherwise that in true repentance a man should be grieued according to all his indeauour And the Romane Catechisme saith as much that the sorrowe conceiued of our sinnes must be so great that NONE CAN BE CONCEIVED TO BE GREATER that we must be contrite in the same manner we loue God and that is vvith all our heart and strength in a most VEHEMENT SORROVVE and that the hatred of sinne must be not onely the greatest but also MOST VEHEMENT and perfect so as it may exclude all sloth and slacknes Indeed afterward it followes that true contrition may be effectuall though it be imperfect but how can this stand if they will not onely commend but also prescribe and auouch that contrition must be most perfect and vehememt We therefore onely teach that God requires not so much the measure as the trueth of any grace and that it is a degree of vnfained contrition to be grieued because we cannot be grieued for our sinnes as we should The second abuse is that they ascribe to their contrition the merit of congruitie But this cannot stand with the all-sufficient merite of Christ. And an auncient Conncell saith God inspires into vs first of all the faith and loue of himselfe NO MERITS GOINâ— BFORE that we may faithfully require the sacrament of baptisme after baptisme doe the things that please him And we for our parts hold that God requires contrition at our haÌ„ds not to merit remission of sinnes but that we may acknowledge our owne vnworthines be huÌ„bled in the sight of God distrust all our owne merits further that we may make the more account of the benefits of Christ whereby we are receiued into the fauour of God lastly that we might more carefully auoide all sinnes in time to come whereby so many paines terrors of conscieÌ„ce are procured And we acknowledge no coÌ„trition at all to be meritorious saue that of Christ whereby he was broken for our iniquities The third abuse is that they make imperfect contrition or attrition arising of the feare of hell to be good and profitable and to it they applie the saying of the Prophet The feare of God is the beginning of vvisdome But seruile feare of it selfe is the fruite of the lawe which is the ministerie of death and condemnation and consequently it is the way to eternall destruction if God leue men to themselues and if it turne to the good of any it is onely by accident because God in mercie makes it to be an occasion going before of grace to be giueÌ„ otherwise remorse of conscience for sinne is no beginning of repentance or the restrainment of any sinne but rather is that properly the beginning of vnspeakable horrours of conscience and euerlasting death vnlesse God shew mercie And yet this feare of punishment if it be tempered and delaied with other graces gifts of God in holy men it is not vnprofitable in whoÌ„ there is not onely a sorrow for punishment but also and that much more for the offence And such a kinde of feare or sorrow is commanded Malac. 1. 6. If I be a father where is my feare if I be a Lord where is my feare And Chrysostome saith that the feare of hell in the heart of a iust man is a strong man armed against theeues and robbers to driue them from the house And Ambr. saith that Martyrs in the