can please God or be accepted of him Hee is not iust that is in this state In that of Grace a man is iust when hee is changed which must haue concurrence of two things Priuation of being to that which was the Body of sinne A new constitution vnto God in another state In which hee that is altered in state changed in condition transformed in minde renewed in soule regenerate and borne a new to God by Grace is iust in the state of iustification ceasing to be what hee was becomming what he was not before Thus to be changed is to be a new Creature The act is saide by Dauid Psalm 51. To create Which being a worke of Omnipotent power exceedeth the indowment of any Creature It is not therefore of our selues from or by our selues But this change is the worke of the right hand of the most high operating powerfully as hee can and actiuely as hee will Wrought it is by God by God alone Man or Mans free-will is not author hereof Therefore no merit interveneth therefore not to be ascribed to our selues None here but Christ preuenting vs the Author of our integritie crowne of our felicitie and consummator of our glorie Secondly to iustifie is to giue increase and augmentation vnto that first Article as to be more iust in processe and profectu by increase of Grace and the fruit of that Spirit by which they are renewed in the inner man In naturall action and passion it plainely appeareth Cold water is made warme vpon the fire heere is an alteration of the propertie Warme water is made hotter by continuing on the fire with an augmentation and accesse of that heate So I vnderstand it Apoc. 22. Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc Hee that is iust let him become more iust by accesse of Gods Grace euer day by day Thirdly to iustifie is to declare and pronounce one iust as Prou. 8. He that iustifieth the wicked and condemneth the righteous is alike abominable before the Lord. So againe in the 50. Psalme That thou mayest be iustified in thy sayings and cleare when thou art iudged God is not otherwise iustified but by being knowne acknowledged and confessed iust in all his wayes As he is said to be magnified when his noble acts are made knowne and men doe praise him for his mercy goodnesse and saluation Iustification properly is in the first acceptance A Sinner is then iustified when hee is made iust that is translated from state of Nature to state of Grace as Colos 1. 13. Who hath deliuered vs from the power of darkenesse and hath translated vs into the Kingdome of his deere Sonne Which is motion as they say betwixt two termes and consisteth in forgiuenesse of sinnes primarily and Grace infused secondarily Both the act of Gods Spirit in man but applyed or rather obtained through Faith which representeth first God willing and ready to forgiue and renew Draweth neere vnto him closeth in fast with him Adhereth vnto him inseparabâ—y with I will not let thee goe except thou blesse And God doth returne I will blesse thee pardon thy sinnes for my names sake and accept thee as mineowne in Christ my sonne whose Bloud hath made attonement for Man So that properly to speake God onely iustifieth who alone imputeth not but pardoneth sinne Who onely can and doth translate vs from death vnto life renueth a right Spirit and createth a new heart within vs. Causally and actiuely God doth it But because God was drawne thereto by our Faith which laying hands vpon his mercy in Christ obtayneth this Freedome and newnesse and renewing from him Faith is saide to iustifie instrumentally And Faith alone to doe it without copartners in the act which is in instanti as Gods immediate workes are all done and not long adoing as wee know The Soule of man is the subiect of this act In which vnto which are necessarily required certaine preparations and preuious dâ—spositions to the purpose As knowledge of God our selues his Law his iustice iealousie iudgement c. Feare Hope Contrition Loue desire of purpose for a new life and such like But these are all with and from Faith which in the very act of iustification are not actiue though habitually there then before and after at least some of them perhaps not all Iustification is not but in the Church Faith is the life and originall of the Church as appeareth by the Scriptures by the Subiect and performance of Faith So that worthily may the principall indowment of Grace be ascribed vnto the roote and originall of Christian Piety Faith Fides prima datur saith Saint Augustine ex qua caetera impetrantur In the first signification then of iustification the which properly is iustification wee acknowledge instrumentally Faith alone and Causally God alone In the second and third beside God and Faith wee yeeld to Hope and Holinesse and Sanctification and the fruits of the Spirit in good workes But both these are not Iustification rather Fruits and Consequents and effects appendants of Iustification then Iustification which is a solitary act So that well and truly and according to the tenet of Antiquity is it resolued by our Church Artic. 11. We are accounted righteous before God onely for the merit of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ by faith and not for our owne workes or deseruing Our Iustification in the act thereof is onely the worke of God for Christs sake whose death and Passion apprehended by Faith which is the sole peculiar worke of Faith to doe as it hath made an attonement betwixt God and vs so hath it procured remission of our Sinnes at his hands and thereupon a new state of Grace not for any merit or deseruing of our own which is vtterly excluded in this Act. Thus Thomas 1. 2. q. 114. ar 7. Nullo modo aliquis potest sibi mereri reparationem post lapsum Restauration after fall that is Iustification of a sinner no man can procure or deserue vnto himselfe To whom agreeth the Councell of Trent Sess vi can viij and your owne men confesse it is gratuita And therefore as our Article saith not for our owne workes or deseruings Further our Church proceedeth not to the augmentation or declaration of iustification there But inferreth Wherefore that we are iustified by faith alone is a most wholesome Doctrine and very full of comfort as it is indeede and your long disputes may intangle the simple but not infringe the truth nor indeede discent from it Fides non absoluit iustificationem saith Casalius and wee admit it but sola iustificat and hee admitteth that For so haue antiquitie auouched generally as himselfe and Cassander doe confesse Origen Hilary and many others to haue resolued so But this is contrary vnto our Bible 1 Corinth 13. 2. Though I haue all faith so that I could remoue mountaines and haue no charitie I am nothing Therefore only faith doth not iustifie Why because Faith without Charity doth not iustifie for
the greatest Faith that can be without it is nothing As if it were not in euery Protestants mouth and confessed by these opposers that howbeit Faith alone doth iustifie yet not that Faith which is alone doth iustifie Fides sola but not solitaria Faith that is without Charitie doth not iustifie but Faith may yet iustifie without Charitie They haue their seuerall distinct acts and the act of Faith is to iustifie though both are vertues incident to a iust man As if the Protestants that affirme onely Faith doth iustifie did withall maintaine that all Faith did iustifie or as if hee that proposeth a thing conditionally must needes imply the condition to be reall and true It is a supposition if I had all Faith c. but a supposition of impossibility For it is impossible that all Faith should be without Charitie though some may be and is without it Beside I can answere that the Faith which iustified when it did iustifie to admit the Supposition of possibilitie was not then without Charitie though afterwards it was For in your opinion iustifying Faith may diminish and abolish and be lost Now iustification being in an instant may eftsoones be lost againe Why not and so a seperation of Faith and Loue. Secondly it is contrary to Iam. 2. 24. You see then how that by workes a man is iustified and not by Faith only In this poynt of Iustification as mine and thine are the common barretters of the World so Faith and good Workes haue broken the peace It is the errour of the Protestants say the Papists that Faith onely iustifieth It is the errour of the Papists say the Protestants that Workes doe iustifie Flat ad oppositum at least in tormes And whether should a man belieue Nay more this difference seemeth very ancient and in being when those names of opposition Protestants and Papists were not heard of in the world For Saint Paul saith By Faith without the workes of the Law And Saint Iames saith as positiuely by Workes and not alone by Faith Scripture against Scripture Apostle against Apostle Paul against Iames Iames against Paul Is Christ diuided or the Spirit irresolued or at oddes God forbid At oddes they were then as wee are now I would that wee were at no more oddes now than they then were Controuersies soone might be at an end and Christs Coate diuided soone made vp againe which is dismantled with new rentts daily Saint Paul had great contentions all dayes of his life in the whole course of his ministery with halfe-Christians false-Christians those of Concision as hee termeth them That neged as necessary vnto Saluation workes and obseruing of the Law As if Christ without them did not profit any thing against these hee aduaunceth the excellency and worth of Faith and depresseth the condition of any or all those works of the Law whereupon they insisted on which they relied whereof they gloried Saint Iames on the other side opposeth as much Simon Magus Menander their adherents and that damnable Sect of the Gnosticks that liuing in all brothelry and horrid impieties cast off all care and opinion and account of good workes as being for imperfect ones for simple ones and beginners in Christianity not to be regarded or insued of by themselues who would be counted perfect men in their Generations and through Faith alone as they pretended of neete acquaintance and alliance with God Against these Saint Iames opposeth the necessitie of workes But neither doth Saint Paul deny workes to the Regenerate nor Saint Iames deny the act of Faith Secondly I answere here that Saint Paul speaketh of Iustification in attaining it which in respect of man is confessed to be the act of Faith Saint Iames of Iustification now obtayned which necessarily is not seperate from workes Iustus factus through the Grace of Christ is Iustus declaratus by his holy life and conuersation And so Saint Iames is expounded by your selues or else hath accesse of Iustification as it is also taught by your owne men Iames 2. 14. What doth it profit though a man saith hee hath faith and hath no workes Can faith saue him Nothing at all Not at all For a better saith then that which Saint Iames meant the Faith of the Gnostiques the Deuils had Beside it is a faith onely supposed presumed and in opinion If a man say he hath faith A manifest insinuation it was not reall A Faith boasted of but not had So that this Faith and that other of the Protestants Caelo solo disparantur Nor can they be compared as they are For the Faith of the Protestants generall or speciall I dispute not now is a Faith wrought and infused by God through the Grace of Christ Liuing liuely actiue fruitfull declaring the roote by the good fruit they neuer seperate them in their Doctrine And your men doe blame them because they neuer seperate the Spring and water-course Faith and good workes but they professe it must and doth worke by Loue. And therefore it is a lying imputation that good workes are not necessary to Saluation All Writers old and new as Cassander saith in generall doe with ioynt consent teach that Faith must bring forth the fruit of good workes Otherwise It is a dead faith without workes And hee produceth the Confession of the Protestants thus Fatendum est haec opera quae à iustificatis fiunt ad salutem id est regnum Dei vitam aeternam consequendam esse necessaria iuxta illud si vis ad vitam ingredi serua mandata It must be confessed that the workes which are done of iustified men are necessary to obtaine Saluation that is to purchase the Kingdome of God aâ—deternall life according vnto that If thou wilt enter into life keepe the Commandements And the Church of England expressely teacheth Artic. 12. Albeit that good workes which are the fruits of faith and follow after Iustification cannot put away sinnes and indure the seueritie of Gods iudgement yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ and doe necessarily spring out from a true and liuely Faith Insomuch as that by them a true and liuely faith may as euidently be knowne as a Tree is discerned by the fruit I adde as this mans Spirit is discerned by his lying That of Matth. 7. 22. is so farre from being expresse in the point that it is farre from being to purpose It is not for iustifying of a sinner by workes but rather for relapsing of one iustified by Grace See Fathers that affirme the same Namely that which wee doe teach that Faith alone iustifieth For so all these three named doe Origen Hilary and Ambrose Origen saith Cassander clearely declareth in his Commentaries vpon the Epistle to the Romans Solâ fide absque operibus aliquos fuisse iustificatos That some haue beene iustified by Faith alone without any workes at all The Theefe vpon the Crosse was not saued by workes which hee had not Faith alone saued him
in the mercies of Christ but this being speciall and therefore extraordinary may admit an exception for common vse Therefore in Rom. 3. he speaketh plaine in generall not with that limitation of some Iustification of Faith alone sufficeth albeit a man hath not done any workes As direct a Protestant as euer wrote Caluin or Chemnitius could say no more But in Rom. 5. he is otherwise minded If so what why vrge you the witnesse of him that saith and vnsaith the same thing But it is not so Origen is wronged by you His words are Faith cannot be reputed vnto Iustice to such as beleeue Christ and yet put not off the old man with his Acts. Doe Protestants say it can be We distinguish Historicall and Iustifying Faith You doe difference Faith in Degree if in nothing else Beliefe may be before without Iustification a generall assent without application or adhesion Origen is in this also a perfect Protestant It is their Doctrine That there is a Faith which iustifieth not It is Origens Doctrine absolutely Origen saith Which beleeueth Christ He doth not say Which beleeueth in Christ Thus per omnia in all points he sideth with the Protestants in their Faith concerning Faith as you propose it Secondly see Hilary vpon Math. 7. And doe See him Protestant to thy confirmation See him Papist to thy confusion The saluation of Nations are his words is through faith and in the Precepts of the Lord the life of all men Doth this man speake against the Iustification of a man by Faith that ascribeth saluation vnto Faith And Can. 8. in Math. vnto onely Faith And else-where as he is cited by Cassander A Christo per fidem remissio est quod lex laxare non poterat Fides enim sola Iustificat Remission of sinnes is from Christ which could not be released by the Law For onely Faith iustifieth Saint Ambrose runneth the same way with Origen and Hilary in Comment vpon the Epistle to the Romans Hoc etiam constitutum est à Deo vt qui credit in Christum saluus sit sine opere solâ fide gratis accipiens remissionem peccatorum It is so ordained by God that whosoeuer beleeueth in Christ is made partaker of saluation by faith alone without workes receiuing forgiuenesse of sinnes In conclusion it is confessed vpon all hands by the most lerned in the Church of Rome that many of the ancient Fathers ascribe Iustification vnto Faith alone Casalius in his second Booke and 16. Chapter allayeth their saying and we approue it but implyedly he giueth to vnderstand that Doctores Sancti doe affirme that sola fides iustificat Faith alone is that which iustifieth No new Gospell therefore as this Goose gagleth XIX That no good workes are meritorious IN the former Proposition the Protestants were belyed in the Case of good workes as excluding their necessity vnto Saluation For though Faith alone acted in the act of Iustification yet there necessarily followed in ordinary course an haruest of good workes Now the valew of those workes is next to be questioned in the point concerning merit and desert wherein this Gagger as else-where lyeth out aloofe in ambiguities for he distinguisheth not of workes nor merit nor the termes how farre they are meritorious nor how they deserue what they haue Workes are considered before or after Iustification In the state of Nature or of Grace workes are not all of one kinde There are some good and so farre good as that they cannot be done to any euill end Such as are directed vnto God immediately to honour him to loue him and to feare him Others so euill that no intent or purpose can make them good to commit Adultery doe murther blaspheme God Others good in themselues and in a generality which may yet be done to an ill intent and purpose to giue Almes to be seene of men euill in a generall notion as to goe to the Stewes yet good in the designment to conuert a sinner Others indifferent euery way Now in the Proposition not any of these are meritorious according to the Doctrine of the Protestants saith the Gagger generally Not meritorious what is that Your Schooles assigne vs a two-fold merit of Congruity of Condignity that where Retribution or reward is not due yet conueniency requireth recompensation this where reward is rightly due and the denying thereof is iniustice and wrong vnto the party Here is no distinction of merit at all We are not giuen to vnderstand whether is intended Merit of Condignity or Congruity We know that in the Doctrine of the Romane Schooles and vnlesse wee did know it otherwise this fellow would not tell vs. Merit of Congruity is not commonly meant as scarce vouchsafed the name of Merit Good workes therefore said to be meritorious are so vnderstood to be ex condigno which that a worke may so be these Conditions are required That it bee morally good Freely wrought by man in this life In the state of Grace and friendship with God which hath annexed Gods Promise of Reward All which Conditions I cannot conceiue that any Protestant doth deny vnto good workes the fruits of Faith liuely and liuing For first euill workes are rewardable but with due desert that is Gods wrath and second death Worke s secondly of compulsion are not worth Gramercy 1 Cor. 9. 17. and thirdly after death working doth cease In the state of Grace to be wrought is the Protestants Tenent that precisely hold first Faith is necessary before good workes can be acceptable to God For God had first respect to Abel say they and afterward vnto his Sacrifice Deus non habet gratum offerentem propter munera sed munera propter offerentem saith Gregor hom 9. in Ezech. and then they maintaine that as God doth Crowne his owne workes in vs so he doth it hauing promised so to doe This is your owne Doctrine in the Romane Schooles And so farre the Protestants for these Conditions goe along with you Now if your Texts doe contrary this expresly or obliquely looke you to it it concerneth you as much as vs. First Math. 5. 12. Reioyce and be exceeding glad for great is your reward in Heauen Reward you say is due debt and debt is vpon desert But this desert whence came it and what is it Ex gratia ipsius saith Tertullian non proprietate nostrâ In the state of Grace men onely merit your selues teach then all their merit is of Grace As of Grace so ex compacto God hath promised therefore due to be required This is your fift and last Condition vnto merit Reward in Heauen no man denyeth Reward appointed for our good workes all confesse If this be your merit we contradict it not And this is your merit that you plead for All your Texts of Scripture Math. 10. 42. 2 Cor. 5. 10. 1 Cor. 9. 17. 18. 25. Heb. 11. 26. Psal 18. 20. and many moe in the same course and kinde speake directly this way and no other
so that the man fighteth with his shadow and taketh a ferne bush for a Foxe to hunt As idle in allegation of his Fathers as impertinent in his Texts of Scripture For these places of August Hierome and Ambrose produced by this iugler to be seene are meerely for another matter and so to that end recited by his instructor C. W. B. a man of more learning and better iudgement to proue that all the best workes of the righteous are not sinnes but truly good workes as proceeding out of a good roote That man had this fellow beene but a gagler would haue afforded him Fathers enough from Ignatius along for many ages to purpose as is specified in this point And yet Ignatius wrote in Greeke and could not vnderstand merit and those that wrote in Latine did vse the word but with no such intent as is supposed nor as is put vpon them by these later Tormentors of other mens meaning The Fathers who vse it tooke vp the word as they found it in ordinary vse and custome with men in those times not for to deserue which in our Language implyeth merit ex condigno but to incur to procure to purchase as Tacitus hath it in the life of Agricola Iijs virtutibus iram Caij Caesaris meritus est By these vertues he incurred the anger of Caius Caesar Which vse of the Tongue the inferior Ages mistaking haue built vp I know not what great Towers of Babel vnto themselues in contestation with and presumption against GOD which the ancient Fathers neuer dreamed of whose ioynt vnaminous and orthodoxall Doctrine is that which we will remember in Leoes words Non de qualitate nostrorum operum pendet coelestium mensura donorum In conclusion touching good workes the Church of England considereth them two wayes Artic. 12. 13. First as they are or may be done before Iustification had and obtained done by men meerely naturall and in the state of alienation from God and then as they are done after Regeneration by the inspiration and assistance of Gods Spirit Concerning the first Workes done before the grace of Christ saith Artic. 13. and the inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasing vnto God for as much as they spring not of Faith in Iesus Christ neither doe they make men meet to receiue Grace or as the Schoole Authors say deserue Grace of congruity Yea rather for that they are not done as God hath willed and commanded them to be done we doubt not but they haue the nature of sinne And so our Conclusion is Good workes thus and in this sort merit not at all vnlesse you meane Hell and Gods wrath For good workes done after Iustification which onely and alone are indeed good workes The Church of England in the 12 Artic. concludeth thus 1. They spring from a true and liuely Faith 2. They declare a true and liuely Faith 3. They are pleasing and acceptable to God 4. They cannot put away our sinnes nor endure the seuerity of Gods iudgement to wit not of themselues considered in themselues no not as issuing from their Fountaine Faith because Rem 〈…〉 ssion is in Christ gratuitum and pardon must preceede before that they can succeede Touching their merit and desert here is concluded nothing but the meaning of the Church in the Doctrine of her Schooles is directly this That the workes of Gods Saints in Faith and Charity are rewardable here and in the World to come both in generall as good workes and in particular as such good workes some more some lesse according to measure and proportion it being a rule in Nature and Grace both that whatsoeuer is receiued is receiued as the Donce can receiue it not as the Donor can conferre it Which procuring of reward at Gods hand both for things Temporall and Eternall the phrase of Antiquity hath called merit vpon the vse of the Tongue in those dayes and no otherwise though much mistaken afterward XX. That faith once had cannot be lost THere is no such Conclusion or Article tendred vnto the Church of England or resolued of vnto vs as of Faith Opinions haue varied and may keepe at large each one contenting himselfe with his owne priuate sobeit hee disturbe not the peace of the Church nor impose his priuate iudgement to be held of all It is held by some I grant that iustifying Faith that excellent gift of God is not conferred vnto any but to the Elect and predestinated vnto life The wicked that perish eternally from God as they neuer were in the state of Grace so neuer were they indued with true Faith Secondly as consequent hereunto that Faith once had cannot be lost or shaken out or off wholy from man but continueth inextinguible indefeisable And therfore thirdly those that once haue been indowed with that Transcendent guift are sure to be saued eternally nor cease to be and stand â—ustified before God These are opinions and defended but not of all Protestants not of the Church of England but opposed and refelled at home abroad as this fellow cannot but know if he know any thing in these points which for the maior part are fitter for Schooles then popular discourses and may be held or not held without heresie either way That Faith once had the propounded Conclusion cannot be lost may be interpreted and is moe wayes then one Whether not lost at all whether totally or finally lost Men are diuided in this Tenent Some suppose neither totally nor finally Some totally but not finally Some both totally and finally Which is indeed the assertion of Antiquity and your Schoole Some perceyuing the current of iudgements for the losse thereof totally and finally and considering also at least probability of Scripture consenting put in a new distinction of God and Man of the first and second causes of Faith and Iustification In regard of Man his weakenesse insufficiency and opposition against him in respect of second causes concurring in this action Faith once had may be lost they say But in regard of God considering his counsell and purpose vnchangeable reflecting on his absolute decree irreuersable faith once had cannot totally or finally be lost nor they perish eternally that were endowed therewith Now which of all these waies will you vnderstand the position Faith had may be lost For my part I know your meaning well enough but you should haue explayned it and not haue couertly rested in ambiguities You meane it may be lost totally and finally in regard of God who made no such absolute irreuersable decree as also in respect of second causes in man both without him and about him and against him I determine nothing in this Question positiuely which the Church of England leaueth at libertie vnto vs though the learnedst in the Church of England assent vnto Antiquity in their Tenent which the Protestants of Germany maintaine at this day hauing assented therein vnto the Church of Rome in the Diot at Ralisbone by Bucer and others vpon these