inferreth a proportion betwixt eating and beleeuing that as he that eateth receiueth and taketh to himselfe the meat that he eateth and digesteth the same to the nourishment of euery part euen so he that beleeueth doth by his faith as the hand and mouth and stomach of the soule receiue and take vnto him Iesus Christ with all his benefits to become particularly his strength and comfort and nourishment vnto euerlasting life Now all this speech of eating and beleeuing and applying vnto vs the benefits of Christ M. Bishop saith he omitteth as an vnsauorie discourse but the reason is because pearles are vnsauorie to swine and grosse Capernaites know no eating of Christ but by the mouth nor receiuing of him but into the belly But most ridiculous is that which he addeth He might be ashamed to make this discourse vnto vs that admit no part of it to be true For so might I briefly reiect his whole booke with the same words that he might be ashamed to write the same to vs that admit no part of it to be true He should vnderstand that M. Perkins had in hand to write that that is the truth and not that that they would admit to be true who are sworne to Antichrist to maintaine his vntruthes And seeing he hath so pregnantly shewed thereby the nature of true and liuely faith not by any inuention of his owne but out of the verie words of Christ M. Bishop might himselfe be iustly ashamed to answer it so childishly and simply as he hath done I confesse sayth he that faith hath his part therein But Saint Austine attributeth to faith not onely a part therein but to be the thing it selfe euen the eating and drinking of the bodie and bloud of Christ q August in Ioan. tract 26. Credere in Christum hoc est maÌ„ducare panem viuum To beleeue in Christ saith he is to eate the bread of life he that beleeueth eateth Why doth he refuse to speake as Saint Austine speaketh but that like a carnall Anthropophagus he referreth it to the mouth and to the bellie to eate the flesh of Christ and to drinke his bloud not listening to that that M. Perkins had alledged vnto him out of the same Austine r Ibid. tract 25. Why preparest thou thy teeth and thy belly beleeue and thou hast eaten But faith he saith hath his part therein if it be ioyned with charitie and frequentation of the Sacraments Which if of his is verie idle to vs who hold no true faith but that Å¿ Gal. 5.6 which worketh by charity and seeketh after the Sacraments as being t Rom. 4.11 the seales of the righteousnesse of faith the verie proper vse thereof is to giue particular assurance to the faithfull of the mercie of God towardes them in Iesus Christ For as in humane contracts and gifts somewhat commonly is deliuered by earnest or seale for confirming and sure-making of the maine so hath God thought good in his couenants and promises of grace to appoint his Sacraments particularly to be vsed and applied to euerie man that euerie beleeuer knowing Christ by the same Sacraments to be figured and offered vnto vs may take knowledge by the deliuerie thereof that Christ is his to eternall life by faith in his name it being in effect sayd vnto him thereby Thou belâ—euest the promises of God in Christ concerning grace and forgiuenesse of sinnes vnto euerlasting life take this for seale and assurance that by thy faith in Christ the whole benefit thereof appertaineth vnto thee Therefore Christ saith very effectually Take eate this is my body Drinke ye this is my bloud as by the Sacrament deliuering himselfe vnto vs and in himselfe the whole fruit and benefit of that that he hath done for vs. Why doth he deliuer these seales of the righteousnesse of of faith particularly vnto me but that he would haue me know that the promises of righteousnesse are thereby through my faith sealed particularly vnto me Thus therefore saith ioyned with frequentation of the Sacraments doth so much the more effectually minister vnto vs this comfort of particular assurance towards God All this is vnsauorie to M. Bishop but let vs leaue him to his acornes and draffe and let him leaue this feeding to them who therein haue learned to u 1. Pet. 2 3. tast how gracious the Lord is Now to shew that the vse of faith is to receiue M. Perkins alledgeth the words of S. Paul that x Gal. 3.14 through faith we receiue the promise of the spirit importing thereby that faith is as it were the hand into which being holden forth vnto God he giueth the spirit which he hath promised that faith apprehendeth and imbraceth the promise of God concerning this gift of his spirit and that thereby we become partakers thereof To this also M. Bishop answereth nothing onely he will seeme to alledge the words and wholy peruerteth them For whereas the Apostle maketh the spirit the thing promised he citeth the place as if the spirit were named as the promiser And whereas the Apostle speaketh as of a thing y Ibid. ver 2. alreadie performed to them to whom he wrote he citeth it as of a thing futurely to be performed and that with a condition if we obserue those things which Christ hath commanded whereas the spirit is promised not if we obserue but z Ezech. 36.27 to cause vs to keepe his statutes and obserue his iudgemens and do them Yet hereupon he demaundeth What is this to the Certaintie of Saluation I answer that it is so strong to proue the Certaintie of Saluation as that against it he could find nothing more safe for himselfe then to say nothing to it For if to beleeue in Christ be to receiue Christ and so to receiue him as that thereby we eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his bloud the beleeuer hath this for a certaintie deliuered vnto him by Christ himselfe that he hath eternall life and that Christ will raise him vp at the last day For a Iohn 6.54 whosoever eateth my flesh satih Christ and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day The beleeuer therefore by his faith conceiueth a particular certaintie and assurance of his owne Saluation and is thereby b 1. Iohn 5.13 to know that he hath eternall life Now to shew the effect of faith M. Perkins bringeth sundrie places of Austin Ambrose Chrysostome Tertullian Bernard that by faith we touch Christ we lay hold of him we find him we see him we eate him we digest him Whereto M. Bishop answereth full wisely we find Christ we hold Christ we see Christ by faith beleeuing him to be the sonne of God and redeemer of the world and iudge of quicke and dead thereby making this finding and seeing and holding and digesting of Christ by faith to be no other thing but what is incident to the diuell because all these things the
iustice or Righteousnesse for vs hath not made his Righteousnesse ours which is the thing that S. Austin affimeth but hath giuen vs a Righteousnesse of our owne The exposition of the iustice of God which he citeth out of Austin is wholy impertinent because the Righteousnesse of Christ of which he saith that Christ made his Righteousnesse our Righteousnesse is the Righteousnesse which Christ wrought for vs in his owne person not that which God worketh in vs for his sake The sinne was wrought by vs the Righteousnesse by him he tooke to him our sinne and imparted his Righteousnesse vnto vs. And this Righteousnesse imputed vnto vs is truly sayd to be that which God giueth to man that man may be iust through God so that therein S. Austin howsoeuer sayth nothing that is contrarie to our defence 9. W. BISHOP Now let vs come to the reasons of Catholikes which M. Perkins calling the obiections proposeth for them to proue that the iustice which God bestoweth vpon vs is Inherent and not imputed OF INHERENT IVSTICE FIrst obiect As one man cannot be made wise valiant or continent by the wisedome valour or continencie of another so one man cannot be made iust by the iustice of another M. Perkins answereth That one mans iustice cannot be made anothers no more then life or health but Christs iustice may who by couenant of grace is made euerie mans owne with all his gifts Reply This answer solueth not the difficultie any whit at all for Christs wisedome power and other gifts are not imputed vnto vs as it is euident Why then is his iustice more then the rest we confesse that in a good sence all Christs gifts are ours that is they were all employed to purchase our redemption and we do daily offer them to God that he will for his Sonnes sake more and more wash vs from our sinnes and bestow his graces more plentifull vpon vs thus are all Christs riches ours so long as we keepe our selues members of his mysticall bodie but this is nothing to the point which the argument touched how one man may formally be made iust by the iustice of another rather then wise by the wisedome of another R. ABBOT We haue a Sect. 6. before heard it confessed by Bellarmine that the sinne of Adam is imputed to all his posteritie as if euerie man had committed the same himselfe neither can they truly describe the state of Originall sinne out of the doctrine of their owne schooles but they must confesse so much Now let them resolue vs how one man may be reputed to haue sinned in the sinne of another and we will resolue them how we may be reputed to haue wrought all Righteousnesse in the Righteousnesse of Christ Surely as Adam did beate the person of all mankind and b August de peccat mer remiss lib. 3. cap. 7 Adhuc omnes ille vnus fuerūt we all were that one man as S. Austin saith and therefore what he did was as done by all and euerie one so did Christ beare the person of all the elect and faithfull and was accounted as them all in one c Bernard epist 190 Non alter qui forefecit alter qui satisfecit quia caput corpus vnus est Christus not one that made the forfeiture and another that made the satisfaction because one Christ is both the head and the bodie and therefore what he did likewise was as done by all and euerie one M. Perkins therfore rightly said that Christ being made ours by the couenant of grace we one with him and he with vs albeit the Righteousnesse Inherent in him cannot be inherent in vs that we thereby should be inherently iust yet by imputation the same is deriued vnto vs and we thereby and for his sake are accepted as if we were inherently iust in most perfect and high degree But saith M. Bishop the wisedome and power of Christ and his other gifts are not imputed vnto vs why then his iustice more then the rest I answer him that that onely is imputed vnto vs which by the couenant of grace is to be imputed which onely hath reason of imputation Although Christ be wholy ours that is for vs and for our vse vnto Saluation yet by imputation he is ours onely in that which by way of humiliation and obedience he hath vndertaken and performed for vs. That I say is imputed vnto vs of Christ which Christ is meerly and onely for vs what he is absolutely of himselfe it is not imputed vnto vs albeit his infinite wisedome and power and prudence and whatsoeuer he is of himselfe haue concurred to the doing of that that should be imputed vnto vs and do concurre to the effecting and maintaining of those benefits which of that imputation are to arise vnto vs. But the wisedome and power of Christ as they are in his humane nature a part of the image of God and of that Righteousnesse whereby man should be wise to know and able to do what concerneth him towards God are imputed vnto vs as a part of his Righteousnesse thereby he acquitteth our ignorances and errors our weaknesses frailties that the same stand not against vs in the sight of God And thus one may be reputed wise by the wisedom of another iust by the iustice of another because where any thing is in nature of dutie and debt it is at the discretion of him to whom it is due to accept one mans performance thereof for discharge of the other Yea but saith M. Bishop this is nothing to the argument how one man may be formally iust by the iustice of another And I answer him that their obiection is a formall foolerie grounded vpon a witlesse supposall of that which no man is so witlesse as to imagine We say that a man may be formally iust two manner of wayes A man is one way formally iust in qualitie another way formally iust in law Formally iust in qualitie is he in whom is found the perfect inward forme and qualitie of iustce and Righteousnesse without spot or staine and thus it were absurd indeed to say that a man may be formall iust by the iustice of another because the inherent qualitie of one subiect cannot become the inherent qualitie of another But in course of law and iudgement the forme of iustice is not to be subiect to crime or accusation and he is formally iust against whom no action or accusation is liable by law Now it is true indeed that euerie one that is formally iust in qualitie is also formally iust in law but yet a man may be formally iust in law who by inherent forme and qualitie is not iust For in this sort a man becommeth iust by pardon and forgiuenesse because pardon being obtained the law proceedeth no further and all imputation of the offence in law is taken away as if it had neuer bene committed And this is the state of our iustice and
Christiani fonteâ— iustitiae ha erirâ— tenentuâ— inâ—eniunt la â—c m toxicatum How can water both sweet and salt flow out of one fountaine Where Christians are bound to draw at the fountaine of iustice there they find a poysoned brooke It made me call to mind the good vsage and behauiour of the Spaniards in the west Indies where by their extreme villanies and cruelties they haue made the name of Christian religion to stinke amongst those poore and vnbeleeuing soules It made me consider the humilitie and deuotion and great vertue that the Iesuits and Seculars bewrayed the one of the other in the late contentions that were amongst them It put me in mind of the morall and modest conuersation of Weston the Iesuite and his fellows in hunting the diuell in Sara Williams and many pretie trickes about that matter Surely M. Bishop if the faith and religion which we professe did bring forth such vgly monsters as your Popes haue bene or did nourish such execrable villanies and filtheries as are practised amongst you we might iustly grow suspicious of it But thankes be to God that though our fruits be not such as they ought to be yet the face and state of our Church and common wealth is such as that we may boldly tell you that it is not for a harlot to compare with an honest matrone nor for you to make comparison betwixt vs and you 19. W. BISHOP The second difference in the manner of iustification is about the formall act of faith which M. Perkins handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as short as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many acts of faith feare hope and charity do go before our iustification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. Perkins Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the heart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnesse for his iustification This ioyly description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authoritie that deliuered it and so let it passe as alreadie sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of his owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hearts be the onely sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needs no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would faine know by the way how little infants that cannot for want of iudgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his iustice are iustified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrarie to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before they come to any vnderstanding R. ABBOT By those acts of faith feare hope charitie going before iustification the Councell of Trent doth expresly consort it selfe with Pelagius the heretike This faith feare hope charitie we must know not to be the effects or workes of any infused grace which before iustification is none but they are the proper actes of mans free will onely assisted by some externall or outward grace as they by collusion call it which as I haue shewed before in the question of a Sect. 5. Free will Pelagius the heretike affirmed and graunted as well as they But hereby they directly crosse the rule of S. Austine that b August de fide oper cap. 14. Sequuntâ—r iustificatum â—on praecedunt iustificandum good workes follow in a man being iustified but they go not before iustification He saith they do not go before they say they do go before onely they are not properly meritorious Meritorious they are also c Bellarm de iustific lib. 1. ca 17. Fides suo quodaÌ„ modo meretur remissioneÌ„ peccatorum in some sort but not properly meritorious ex condigno as the new faith hope and charitie are in the iustified man Let the Reader well obserue it that there is one faith hope and charitie before iustification another faith hope and charitie infused when a man is iustified But of that we shall heare more anone Here the speciall matter is as touching M. Perkins his description of faith to be an instrument supernaturall created by God in the heart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnesse for his iustification This M. Bishop saith is set downe without anie proofe and is alreadie sufficiently confuted but where Surely we haue seene much for proofe on M. Perkins side but M. Bishops confutation yet we haue not seene Yea where M. Perkins did notably demonstrate this act of faith out of the Gospell M. Bishop passed it ouer without anie further answer but onely to say d Chap. 3. sect 16 He might be ashamed to vse this discourse to vs who admit no part of it to be true in which sort he might easily answer any thing that he list not to admit for truth But what is it that he would haue to be proued For that faith is an instrument to apprehend and receiue it is plaine because it is e Aug. in Ioan. tract 50. Quomodo tenebo absentem quomodo in coelum manuÌ„ mittam vt ibi sedentem teneam fidem mitte tenuisti the hand which we stretch to heauen to take hold of Christ and to hold him sitting there it is the mouth whereby we eate and drinke Christ because f Ibid. tract 26. Qui credit manducat to beleeue is to eate it is the stomach wherby we digest him for g Tertul. de resur carn fide digerendus he is to be digested by faith it is h Bernard in Cant. ser 32. In bonis Domini quatenus fiduciae pedem pâ—rrexeris eatenus possidebis the foot wherby we enter possession of the benefites of Christ and possesse so farre as we stretch the same it is i Idem in Annunc ser 3. Dominus oleum misericordâ—ae nisi in vase fiduciae non ponit the vessell whereinto God putteth the oyle of his mercy k Aug. de verb. Dom. ser 33. Fide illum accipimus By faith saith Austin we receiue Christ it is l Ambros in Psâ—l 43. Fidei tactus est quo tangitur Christus by faith saith Ambrose that we touch Christ and m Cyprian lib. 2. epist 2. Quatum fidei capacâ— afferimus tantum gratiae inundanin haurimus looke how much faith we bring to receiue saith Cyprian so much we draw of the abundant grace of God This being plaine the question then must be of the thing that is to be receiued Now the thing to be receiued is the thing wherby we are to be iustified The thing whereby
we are to be iustified is the obedience of Christ for n Rom. 5.15 by the obedience of one saith the Apostle shall many be made righteous and what is the obedience of Christ but the righteousnesse of Christ The righteousnes of Christ then is the thing to be apprehended and receiued for our iustification And how should we be o 2. Cor. 5.21 made the righteousnesse of God in him but by apprehending and receiuing a righteousnesse which is in him He is called the p Ierem. 23.6 Lord our righteousnes not who maketh vs righteous only but who himselfe is our righteousnes and how should he be our righteousnes but by his righteousnesse Therefore in apprehending and receiuing Christ by faith we apprehend receiue the righteousnes of Christ to be our iustification before God But I need not stand vpon this for seeing through this whole Chapter we shall proue that we receiue no gift of inherent righteousnesse whereby we can be iustified in the sight of God it followeth as is also proued that the righteousnesse which we receiue by faith for iustification is the merite and obedience of Christ imputed vnto vs. Now M. Bishop telleth vs that he can gather a disproofe of all this out of M. Perkins owne explication For saith he if faith created in our hearts be the onely sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend the couenant of grace then there needes no Sacraments for that purpose But such disproofes will make men thinke that he is runne not out of his learning onely but also out of his wits If he will apply that answer to M. Perkins it must be thus If faith be the onely instrument whereby we apprehend Christ what neede we anie Sacraments to offer him vnto vs And why did he not as well say what neede there anie word of God to that purpose for his disproofe standeth as good in the one as in the other But M. Perkins setteth both downe as meanes on Gods part to offer Christ vnto vs not as instruments or meanes on our part to apprehend and lay hold of Christ and notably obserueth how the giuing of bread and wine to the seuerall communicants in the Lords Supper is a pledge and signe of Gods particular giuing of Christs bodie and bloud with all his merites to euery of them by faith in him Yea saith M. Bishop but how then are infants iustified who cannot haue any such act of faith I answer him that infants dying are iustified and saued meerely by vertue of the couenant and promise of God to which they are entitled by the calling and faith of their parents and in right whereof they are baptized and entred into the bodie of the Church God hauing sayd q Gen. 17.7 I will be thy God and the God of thy seed For where the offer of the couenant hath no place there the meanes of acceptance cannot be required but by meere and absolute gift righteousnesse and life are giuen and in the Sacrament sealed vnto them who according to the purpose of the grace of God are by inward regeneration made the seed of the faithfull according to the intendment and meaning of the couenant Yet nothing hindereth but that we may conceiue that God calling infants frō hence doth in their passage by the power of his Spirit giue them light of vnderstanding and knowledge and faith of Christ as an entrance to that light and life which after by Christ and with him they enioy for euer Who when he will maketh babes and sucklings to praise him and euen in young children sometimes in our sight sheweth the admirable fruit of his grace in their death far beyond that their yeares are capable of As for infants baptized and continuing to elder yeares they are not alwayes iustified in being baptized but God calleth them some sooner some later some at one houre some at another according to his good will and pleasure and then the medicine long before applied beginneth to worke the effect that doth appertaine vnto it 20. W. BISHOP But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M. Perkins finds fault with it one that we teach faith to go before iustification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both iustified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Ioh. 6.54 Marrie this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the bodie and bloud of Christ and is alreadie passed from death to life I answer that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his bodie in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthily obtaineth thereby life euerlasting as Christ saith expresly in that place And so this proofe is vaine Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before iustification Rom. 10. first by that of S. Paul Whosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in whom they do not beleeue how shall they beleeue without a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto iustification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterward to call vpon God for mercie and finally mercie is graunted and giuen in iustification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and iustification This Saint Augustine obserued De praedest sanc cap. 7. De spirit lit cap. 30. when he said Faith is giuen first by which we obtaine the rest And againe By the Law is knowledge of sinne by faith we obtaine grace and by grace our soule is cured If we list to see the practise of this recorded in holy writ reade the second of the Acts and there you shall find how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were striken to the hearts and beleeued yet were they not straight way iustified but asked of the Apostles what they must do who willed them to do penance and to be baptized in the name of Iesus in remission of their sinnes and then lo they were iustified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their iustification In like maner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philip announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that IESVS CHRIST was the Sonne of God no talke in those dayes of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnesse yet was he not iustified Act. 8. before descending out of his chariot he was baptized And three dayes passed betwene S. Pauls conuersion and his iustification Act. 9. as doth euidently appeare by the historie of his conuersion The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the mind stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the heart many good spirituall motions But this saies M. Perkins is as much to say that dead men onely helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned
iustification yet the very habite of iustice is with them a thing meerely infused of God and not the act of man himselfe Therfore as touching the very habite of iustice a man must be onely passiue not actiue in the same sence as M. Perkins speaketh onely a receiuer and not at all a worker thereof But now he telleth vs that the iustification which they so teach wrought and procured by hope feare loue c. excludeth all boasting as well as ours But that cannot be for the Apostle telleth vs that l Rom. 3.27 boasting or reioycing is not excluded by the law of workes but by the law of faith So long as any thing is attributed to our workes in this behalfe we haue somewhat to glorie in as that by our workes and for our workes sake we haue obtained that which we haue The Apostle saith that m Rom. 4.2 if Abraham were iustified by workes he had whereof to glorie or reioyce and therefore it is not true that iustification being attributed to workes we haue nothing whereof to reioyce or boast our selues Neither doth M. Bishops explanation helpe the matter at all that we cannot boast of those preparations as though they came of our selues because we see the Pharisee in the Gospell to glorie of that which notwithstanding he confesseth to be the gift of God n Luc. 18.11 August in Psal 31. Cùm dicebat gratias tibi fatebatur ab illo se â—â—cepisse quod habebat Hieron aduer Pelag li. 3 Jlle gratias agit Deo quia ipsius misericordia non sit sicut caeteri homines c. O God I thanke thee saith he that I am not as other men are But by his words of these good inspirations descending froÌ„ the Father of lights he doth but abuse his Reader dealing onely colourably as Pelagius the hereticke was wont to do For they make God the occasion only and not the true cause of them They make him externally an assistant to them but the internall producing and proper originall of them is of the Free will of man which is the cause why they affirme these works that go before iustificatioÌ„ not to be meritorious as they say those are that follow after For if they made them essentially the workes of grace they could haue no colour to attribute merit to the one and to deny it to the other Yea M. Bishop himselfe apparantly excludeth them from being the works of grace in that presently after he calleth the grace of iustification the first grace as being ignorant of the language of their owne schools wheras these workes are said to go before to prepare vs for the receiuing of iustifying grace In these works of preparation therfore there is apparantly somwhat attributed to man wherof he hath to glorie in himselfe for that howsoeuer being helped of God yet he doth somewhat himselfe for which God bestoweth vpon him the gift of iustification Yea M. Bishop plainly ascribeth to him somewhat wherof to reioyce in that he ascribeth it to him to consent to the grace of God Yea but a man saith he can no more vaunt of consent to these workes then of consent to faith true and therefore if either way he haue any thing of himselfe he hath somewhat whereof to boast M. Bishop therefore buildeth vp his owne glorie in both so acknowledging the grace of God both in faith and workes as that all is nothing but by the free wil of man Now we on the other side together with the auncient Church o Fulgen. ad Monim lib. 1. Nullatenus sinimus immo salâ—briter prohibemus tam in nostra fide quà m in nostrâ— opere tanquam nostrum nobis aliquid vindicare suffer not nay we vtterly forbid that either in our faith or in our worke we challenge to our selues any thing as our owne But in the iustification of faith boasting or reioycing is excluded not onely for that faith and all consent of faith is wholly the gift of God but also for that to faith nothing at all is ascribed for it selfe but onely to Christ who is receiued thereby and is it selfe a meere acknowledgement that we haue all that we haue of the soueraigne bountie and mercy of God only for his owne sake not for any thing that is in vs. Now therfore we hence argue against M. Bishops iustification that that is the onely true doctrine of iustification by which mans boasting or reioycing is excluded By the doctrine of iustification by workes mans boasting is not excluded Therfore the doctrine of iustification by works is not the true doctrine of iustification As for his comparison of a man mired in a lake and content that another should helpe him out it sauoureth very strongly of the stinke of the Pelagians leauing in a man both will and power for the helping of himselfe whereas the Scripture affirming vs to be p Ephe. 2.1 dead in trespasses and sinnes bereaueth vs altogether of all either will or power whereby we should yeeld any furtherance to the sauing of our selues But the same is also otherwise vnfit because the conuersion of a man is an acceptance of a seruice and an entrance into it wherein he is to bestow his labour and paines to deserue well as M. Bishop saith at his hands whose seruant he is and by couenant to merit heauen Hereto he worketh partly by grace as he saith and partly by free will and therefore hauing merited and deserued he hath somewhat in respect of himselfe wherein to glorie and reioyce whereas the course that God taketh is q Bernard Cant. Ser. 50. Vt sâ—iamâ—â— in dâ—e illa quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae feâ—imus nos sed pro misericordia sua saluos nos fecit that we may know at that day as S. Bernard saith that not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercie he hath saued vs. For this cause albeit he could haue perfected vs at once and euen at the first haue reformed vs to full and vnspotted righteousnesse to serue him accordingly yet hath he thought good to leaue vs groning vnder a burden of sinne and vnder many infirmities and imperfections in the seruice that we do vnto him that the sight of our foule feet may still pull downe our Peacockes tayle and we may alwaies fully know that we are to giue all the honour and glorie of our saluation to God alone But M. Bishop telleth vs that all glorying and boasting is not forbidden and we acknowledge the same for else the Apostle wold not haue said r 1. Cor. 1.31 He that glorieth let him glorie in the Lord. Our glorying or reioycing must be with the acknowledgement of his goodnesse and to the magnifying of him and not of our selues He that exalteth himselfe as the Pharisee did in that which he confesseth to be the gift of God reioyceth against God But M. Bishop offendeth both wayes he attributeth not all vnto God