by Canon bound to follow the Fathers that Protestantism waxeth weary of it self that Calvinism is accounted * For proof read Dr. Heylins Cypr. Anglicus and its Introduction Cypr. Angl. l. 4. p. 414 415 416. there you 'l see the agreement made betwixt the Pope or his agents and some of our Clergy men and that which â—â—ey call the ancient Catholick Religion is nothing but Popery only abatement in some things at least for a time 〈◊〉 Cyprianus Anglicus was setled in his pontificalibus heresie at the least and little less than treasoâ— I say much of this Heylin saith was truth and he himself in his Introduction to that History and other books makes very manifest What Chillingworth answereth to this bold charge of the Jesuit you may see in Dr. Cheynells rise and growth of Socinianisâ— c. 6. The â—anterburian Religion not the true Protestant Religion p. 70 But to return to my business Bellarmine is answered by learned Dr. Ames a Nonconformist in his Bellarminus Enarvatus T. 4. l. 2. de peccato originali c. 3. p. 34. ad p. 46. which I have read and Bishop Jeremy â—â— I hear is answered very learnedly and fully by Mr. Henry Jeanes â—â—other Nonconformist which I have not read how conformable â—â—e Bishops Doctrine is to the false Pelagian condemned Doctrine of â—â—e Church of Rome and Nonconformable to the true and approved â—â—octrine of the Church of England let the indifferent and judiciâ—â—s Reader judg Vide Maccovium Rediv. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arminiaâ—â—ruâ— c. 9. p. 118. That Original sin inherent in us is properly sin I prove thus 1. That which hath the name and nature of sin properly so called â—â—s sin properly so called but original sin inherent in us hath the â—â—e and nature of sin properly so called ergo it is sin properly so â—â—lled 1. It hath the name of sin properly so called given unto it in saâ—â—red Scripture The Reverend * Sum of Christian Religion p. 144. A. B. â—â—sâ—er tells us That all other sins have â—â—eir special names but original sin is â—â—operly called sin and †Amand. Polan Syntag. l. 6. c. 3. p. 336. Polanus beâ—â—re him saith that 't is called absoâ—â—tely sin Rom. 7. 8. because it is the â—â—ring and fountain of other sins pecâ—atum peccans sinning sin Rom. 7. 13. â—â—eccatum inhabitans indwelling sin Rom. 7. 17 20. and Mr. Hilderâ—â—am upon Psal 51. p. 283. tells us that the Spirit of God expresly â—â—lls it sin Psal 51. 5. Behold I was shapen in iniquity â—â—d in sin did my Mother conceive me and so Dr. Mer. â—asaubon * In locum Musculus and Dr. Ames expound the place â—hich place Bishop Prideaux * Fasciculus controversiarum c. 3. q. 5. p. 112. saith â—â—nnot be understood but of original sin â—â—d its propagation as both ancient and â—â—ter Divines expound the place and in â—â—ree Chapters of the Epistle to the Romans viz. 6. 7 8. 14 times at â—â—ast and Heb. 12. 1. Rom. 6. 6 12 13 14. Rom. 7. 7. I had not known sin â—â—t by the law for I had not known lust that is to be sin except the â—â—w had said Thou shalt not coveâ— Where 't is clear that lust by which 〈◊〉 meant the first unlawful desires or motions which have not the â—â—nsent of the will lust in the habit or disposition inclination imagiâ—â—tion as well as lust in the act is forbidden in the Tenth commandâ—â—nt as not only Beza Parâ—us Calvin and Peter Martyr but also Dr. Willet and Wilson and Dr. 〈◊〉 and Diodate upon the place 〈◊〉 B. Prideaux Fasc controvers c. 3. q 5. p. 112. Sharpius Symphon â—a Novis Epoc. p. 397. Andrews and Dr. Mayor upon the 〈◊〉 Commandment and Bishop 〈◊〉 and Sharpius elsewhere assure 〈◊〉 verse the 8. For sin taking occâ—â— the Commandment the more 〈◊〉 â—â— the more it bursteth forth †A. B. Vsher Sum of Christian Religion p. 144. 〈◊〉 streams do that cannot be stopped till God by his holy Spirit 〈◊〉 it wrought in me all manner of concupiscence for without the 〈◊〉 was dead that is it seemed so to him because he knew it 〈◊〉 felt it not but when he knew the law he knew sin and 〈◊〉 activity and found 't was alive so verse the 14. But I 〈◊〉 sold under sin Man is said to be carnal two ways 1. Quâ—â— carni because he serves the flesh so unregenerated men 〈◊〉 nal 2. Quia proclivis est carni because he is inclined to 〈◊〉 the flesh that is original corruption which is called flesh 〈◊〉 1. Gal. 5. â—7 so Paul was carnal though he had mortified 〈◊〉 he had some relicts or remainders of it an inclination to thâ—â— of the flesh he was carnal in opposition to the law that 〈◊〉 ritual that is he was not so spiritual as the law required 〈◊〉 der sin slaves to â—in are of two sorts 1. Some sell themsâ—â— sin original sin and its lusts they willingly obey the lusts 〈◊〉 flesh so did Ahab and such are wicked men 2. Some arâ—â— another and such a slave was Paul even after his actual conâ—â— for he was a slave against his will he desired to escape from 〈◊〉 ster he served him unwillingly as may be seen verses the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is no more I that do it but sin that is original 〈◊〉 tion that dwelleth in me So verses 23 24. so Rom. 8. 2. he 〈◊〉 have added Rom. 5. 12. As by one man sin entred into the 〈◊〉 death by sin so verse the 13th For until the law sin that is 〈◊〉 ginal sin was in the world which the Apostle proves 〈◊〉 death was in the world till Moses v. 14. 2. Original sin hath the nature of sin properly so called 〈◊〉 I prove thus 1. Because it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of 〈◊〉 which is the definition that the Spirit of God gives of 〈◊〉 perly so called 1 John 3. 4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin is the 〈◊〉 gression of the law as we translate the words but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is dâ—â— from Alpha a Privitive Particle and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lex the law and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a want of conformity to the Law of God Now that Original 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I prove thus 1. Because it is a want of that righâ—ousness which all men ought to â—â—ave * Vide Dr. Barlow Exercitat 2. Scholastical Divines define â—â— to be oarentia rectitudinis debitae a â—â— of rectitude which ought to be in â—â— reasonable creature And this I Homily of the coming down of the Holy Ghost p. 209. Mâ—n of his own nature is fleshly and carnal corrupt and naught sinful and disobedient to God without any spark of goodness in him without any vertuous or godly motion only given to evil thoughts and wicked deeds â—â—ight prove out of Aquinas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 82. a. 3. con Cum originale peccaâ—â—um justitiae originali opponatur nihâ—â—â—â—iud
of Godfry Goodman Bishop of Gloucester was accused of it in Court and Convocation and declared and professed it by his last Will and Testament as Dr. Heylin shews in his Cypr. Angl. l. 4. p. 416. 'T is said of Dr. Theodore Price Bishop of that though he lived like an Atheist yet he died like a Papist Prin ' s Epistle to K. Châ—r I before his Quench-coal p. 42. England be so absolutely directly and cordially Papists that it is all that 1500 l. per Ann can do to keep them from confessing it This and much more may be seen in Dr. Heylin's Cypr. Angl. l. 4. p 392 408. Doth not A. B. Laud p. 36. of his commended Relation of his Conference with Fisher say thus The Church of Rome and Protestants set not up a different Religion And doth not Dean Potter iâ— Charity mistaken p 62 say thus That the most necessary and fundamental Truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned by fundamental points of faith we understand these prime and capital Doctrines of Religion which * But what are those a Bishop and a people or a Pope and the multitude of Professors of Christianity as Bishop Sparrow intimates in his Rationale upon the Common-prayer Book p. 89. Bishops Curates and people committed to their charge make up a Church make up the holy Catholick Church But did not the Church of England before A. B. Laud altered the Prayer for the Fifth of November say That Papists Religion is Rebellion and A. B. Laud held that Bishops are essential to the being of a Church as Heylin shews in his Cypr. Anglic. l. 1. p. 54. l. 4. p. 400 401. their faith is faction Which cannot be said of Protestants Religion or Faith truly without great slander though Dr. Heylin as they say most wickedly standers all the first restorers of the Reformed Religion with it Doth not the Church of Rome hold such points of faith as do destroy the foundation and those not only questioned but denied by real Protestants Doth not the Church of Rome hold this Doctrine as a point of faith for denying or not believing of which they have put many thousands of Protestants to death viz. That the body and blood together with the soul of the Lord Jesus Christ is truly really and substantially in the Sacrament of the Eucharist and that there is made a turning of the whole substance of the bread into his body and of the whole substance of the wine into his blood which turning the Catholick Church as they falsly call themselves doth call Transubstantiation If this be denied see the 18th Article of their Religion set down in the 14th Article of this Book And doth not our Vide Bull Pii 4 bound up with the Council of Trent super forma juramenti professionis sidei Church of England hold the truth in this point against the Church of Rome that this their Doctrine is false and doth destroy the humane Nature of Christ and consequently destroy all the Articles of our Creed which concern Jesus Christs humane nature and consequently our Salvation And is not this a fundamental point of faith that true believers persons are justified before God by the righteousness of Christ imputed to them and applied by faith alone Is it not the main drift of the Apostle to prove and settle the Romans and Galatians in this truth That believers persons are not justified before God by their own good works even of that Law of which câ—meth the knowledge of sin Rom. 3. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight for by the Law is the knowledg of sin Yea doth not the Apostle say that if he shall teach justification of our persons before God by our own good works he should frustrate the grace of God that is overthrow the Gosâ—el of Jesus Christ for if righteousness come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 21. And could these great Grandees who imposed and took subscription to the Book of Homilies upon and from others be ignorant of what the Church of England holds therein especially this Whosoever denieth this Doctrine THAT FAITH ALONE JUSTIFIETH is not to be accounted a Christian man nor a setter forth of Gods glory but for an adversary to Christ and his Gospel and for a setter forth of mans vain glory that 't were the greatest arrogance and presumption of man that Antichrist could set up against God to affirm that a man might by his own works take away and purge his own sin and justifie himself Homily of Salvation of Mankind p. 16 17. Now because some of our English conforming Divines have by their Preachings and Writings said that most of these ensuing false Doctrines I Heylin in his Introduction to his Cypr. Angl. p. 36. S. 36. have renounced all which the Church of Rome holdeth and maintaineth are the Doctrines of the Church of England and thereby induced many persons to believe and allow them I have to prevent the growing mischief of this grand deceit and to vindicate the Church of England from these calumnies and to inform the ignorant and inconsiderate that have subscribed assented and consented to the Articles of Religion and Homilies of the Church of England but never throughly read and considered them spent as much of my time with my pen as could be spared from my fork and rake this Harvest whiles many great Conformists to the Ceremonies and Government enjoy their Plurality of Benefices besides their great dignities but labour not in the Word and Doctrine much less preach or write against these gross Popish Doctrines but rather preach or print them to the great dishonour of God especially of Jesus Christ the increase of Popery and Atheism and the great grief of those godly Christians that are Protestants indeed and in truth as well as in profession Antichrist professeth the Creed as well as these men yet by his superinduced Doctrines and practices he overtbrows it So these men of long Name may profess subscribe and assent to the Doctrine of the Church of England and yet by superinduced Doctrines contradict and destroy it for they give not an internal assent to it as was observed before out of Mr. Fowler ' s Free Discourse p. 305. And whether those men do not play the Hypocrites lâ—t the world judg The Pope of Rome in divâ—ding Rome unto 25 Priests the fatal squarâ—-root of the number of the Beast 666 laid the foundation of his Iâ—olatrous and tyrannous Kingdom long before his Supremacy was perfected yea claimed He arose out of the earth as grass by little and little insensibly so possibly may a Pontifex Maximus with such a number of such Priests in time â—o elsewhere especially if rulers and ruled are willing to be ridden by them Of all Beasts tâ—e two horned Beast is the most dangerous to be ridden by next that which is most like him as
it theâ— he did more sensibly and firmly rest upon God for the performance of his promise to him 2. If mens persons are justified before God by their own personal good works then they are so justified either by those good works they do before their faith or by those that follow after their faith but they are not justified before God by their own personal good works which they do before their Faith nor by those which they do after their Faith or after they believe in Christ therefore they are not justified before God by their own personal works 1. Their persons are not justified before God by their works which they do before they believe in Christ because they are not formally good they are not pleasing unto God for as much as they spring not from faith in Jesus Christ neither do they make men meet to receive grace and so do not dispositivè justifie as Papists hold or as the School-Authors say deserve grace of congruity yea rather for that they are not done as God hath commanded them to be done we doubt not but that they have the nature of sin So saith the Church of England in her 13th Article of Religion Works done before faith in Christ though they may be materially good yet they are not formally good but are perfectly evil yea are * Virtutes Eâ—hnicorum sunt splendida peccata Rom. 1. 17. sins for whatsoever is not of faith is sin saith St. Paul and the Church of England Rom. 14. 23. Homily of good Works T. 1. p. 30. 2. Their persons are not justified before God by those good works which they do after they believe in Christ and which proceed from Faith in Christ which I prove thus 1. By the twelfth Article of Religion of the Church of England Albeit that good works which are the fruits of faith and follow after justification cannot put away our sins and endure the severity of Gods judgment 2. Because they are imperfectly good and so stand in need of the perfect righteousness of Christ to cover their infirmities as may be proved by our Homily for Good-Friday T. 2. p. 177. Our acts and deeds be full of imperfectness and infirmity and therefore nothing worthy of themselves to stir God to any favour much less to challenge that glory that is due to Christ acts and merits 3. Because they follow the justified and are done after their justification and this argument the Church of England teacheth out of Saint Augustine in her Homily of good works T. 2. p. 82. Good * Bona opera non praecedunt justificandum sed sequntur justificatum S. August de fide operibus c. 4. 14. And this Doctrine John Lambert Martyr sealed with his blood Fox Book of Martyrs p. 1091. works go not before in him which shall afterward be justified but good works do follow after when a man is justified 4. Because it was confessed on all hands that no mens persons were ever justified before God by doing of evil works and therefore the Apostle had no need to prove that men were not justified by them but the works of unbelievers are †If an Heathen may cloath the naked feed the hungry and do such other like works yet because he doth them not in faith for the honour and love of God they be but dead vain and fruitless works to him Hom. of Faith p. 31. See there also p 30. all the life of them that lack true faith is sin Ibi. p. 31. evil works for an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit Mat 7. 17. And whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14. 23. And without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11. 6. Therefore it follows that the Apostle Paul did intend to prove that the good works of men which proceed from faith do not justifie menspersons in Gods sight 5. And lastly Papists themselves distinguishing of a twofold Justification first and second confess that all works are excluded from the first Justification which only is properly Justification their second is Sanctification properly Bellarmine himself Lib. 4 c. 15. de Justificatione confesseth that the Apostle Paul doth in the Epistle to the Romans dispute of the first Justification therefore he excludes all our works from the Justification of our persons before God 4. It is contrary to the Confession of Faith of the Reformed Churches of Christ as may clearly be seen in the Harmony of Confessions Sect. 9. To give you a sight of some things they declare at large the latter Confession of Helvetia c. 15. saith thus To justifie in the Apostles disputation touching Justification doth signifie to remit sins to absolve from the fault and the punishment thereof to receive into favour to pronounce a man just for the Apostle saith to the Romans God is he that justifieth who is he that can condemn where to justifie and condemn are opposed and in the Acts of the Apostles Act. 13. the Apostle saith Through Christ is preached unto you forgiveness of sins and from all things from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses by him every one that believeth is justified For in the law also and in the Prophets we real Deut. 25. 1. That if a controversie were risen amongst any and they came to judgment the judg shaâ—l judg them that is justifie the righteous and condemn the wicked And in the fifth Chapter of Isaiah Wo to them that justifie the wicked for rewards Now it is most certain that we are all by nature sinners and before the judgment-seat of God convicted of ungodliness and guilty of death but we are justified that is acquitted from sin and death by God the Judg through the grace of Christ alone and not by any respect or merit of ours For what is more plain than that which Paul saith All have sinned and are destitute of the glory of God and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus for Christ took upon himself and bare the sins of the world and did satisfie the justice of God God therefore is merciful unto our sins for Christ alone that suffered and rose again and doth not impute them to us but he imputeth the justice of Christ unto us for our own so that now we are not only cleansed from sin and purged and holy but also endued with the righteousness of Christ yea and acquitted from sin death and condemnation finally we are righteous and heirs of eternal life To speak properly then it is God alone that justifieth us and that only for Christ by not imputing to us our sins but imputing Christs righteousness unto us But because we do receive this Justification not by any works but by faith in the mercy of God and in Christ therefore we teach and believe with the Apostle that sinful man is justified only by faith in Christ not by the Law or by any works For the Apostle saith Rom. 3. We
seek for another righteousness or justification to be received at Gods own hands that is to say the forgiveness of his sins and this justification or righteousness which we so receive of Gods mercy and Christs merits embraced by faith is taken accepted and allowed by God for our perfect and full justification We are justified freely by faith without the works of the Law Homily of Salvation of Mankind pag. 13. there 't is further said That on our part we are justified by faith in the merits of Christ which is not ours but by Gods working it in us There 't is said also That the justice of man is shut out of Justification and yet that faith shutteth not out repentance hope love fear of God to be joined with faith in every man that is justified but it shutteth them out from the office of justifying so it shutteth not out good works which are necessary to be done afterwards of duty to God but it excludeth them so that we may not do them to this intent to be made just by doing of them Whosoever denieth this Doctrine that faith alone justifieth is not to be accounted a Christian man nor for a setter forth of Gods glory but for an adversary 〈◊〉 Christ and his Gospel and for a setter forth of mans vain glory Mans righteousness cannot make himself righteous by his owâ— works neither in part nor in wholâ— That we are justified only by faith 〈◊〉 * We are not justified by our own good works either in part or in whole Christ So speak all the Fathers botâ— Greek and Latin Hilary Basil Aâ—brose Hilary saith these words plaiâ—ly Faith only justifieth Canon 9th upon Matthew Ambrâ— saith thus This is the ordinance of God that they which belieâ—â— in Christ should be saved without works by faith only freely receiving remission of their sins Consider diligently these wordâ— without works by faith only freely we receive remission of oâ— sins Ibi. p 14 15 16 17. The true meaning of this Doctrinâ— we be freely justified by faith without works or that we be justâ—fied by faith in Christ only is not that this is our own act to bâ—lieve in Christ or this faith in Christ doth justifie us and deserâ— our justification unto us for that were to count our selves to 〈◊〉 justified by some act or vertue that is within our selves but tâ—â— true understanding and meaning thereof is that although we heâ— Gods word and believe it although we have Faith Hope Chariâ—â— Repentance and fear of God within us and do add never so maâ— works thereunto yet we must renounce the merit of all our saâ—â— vertues of Faith Hope Charity and all other vertues and gooâ— deeds which we either have done shall do or can do as thing that be far too weak insufficient and imperfect to deserve remissioâ— of our sins and our justification and therefore we must trust oâ—ly in Gods mercy and that Sacrifice which our high * Which shews that faith justifieth as it receives Christ as an high Priest or Saviour not as a King as Mr. Fowler would have in the first place in his free Discourse p. 161. I receive Christ as my Prophet but he doth not justifie mâ— as he is my Prophet or my King Priest anâ— Saviour Jesus Christ the Son of Goâ— once offered thereby Gods grace Iâ—â— p. 17. Faith as great a vertue as it is yet it putteth us from it self and remitteth or appointeth us unto Chrisâ— for to have only by him remission oâ— our sins or justification so thâ— our faith doth as it were say to uâ— it is not I that take away your sins BUT IT IS CHRIST ONLY to him only I send you for thaâ— purpose forsaking therein all your good vertues words thoughts and works and only putting your trust in Christ Ibid. pag. 18. 2. 'T is not only contrary to her Homilies but also to her Articles of Religion Article 11th We are counted righteous before God only for the merits of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith and not for our own good works That we are justified by faith alone is a must wholesome Doctrine as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification To which for further proof I refer you And Article the twelfth 't is said thus Albeit that good works which are the fruits of faith and follow after justification cannot put away our sins Now Mr Fowler or any of his party cannot put off the Doctrine of the Church of England to which he hath subscribed as he doth our learned mens arguments against the Papists by saying as they do that the Apostle meant when he said That we are not justified by works works of the Ceremonial * Mr. Fowler 's Free Discourse p. 186. Law but not the works of the Moral Law or if them Those only which are done by the strength of nature but not those which proceed from faith For the Church of England excludes all our works even those that proceed from Faith And they intended in their Homilies and Articles of Religion Dr. Field of the Church 2d part p 861. We teach that he excludeth all these that is that St. Paul excluded from Justification all the works of Moses Law Ceremonial and Moral to overthrow the false Doctrine of the Church of Rome and to establish the Doctrine of Justification according to the Doctrine of the Gospel in opposition to Popery For it saith expresly That whosoever denieth this Doctrine that Faith alone justifieth is not to be accounted a CHRISTIAN MAN nor for a setter forth of Gods glory but for an ADVERSARY to Christ and his Gospel and for a setter forth of mans vain glory Homily for Salvation of Mankind p. 16 17. And again That were the greatest arrogancy and presumption of man that Antichrist could set up against God to affirm that a man might by his own works take away and purge his own sins and so justifie himself Ibid. pag. 17. By which you may see that to deny this Doctrine That we are justified by faith alone and to affirm that we are justified by our own good works is not a Christian but a proud presumptuoâ—â— antichristian Doctrine And to affirm or insinuate that our persons are justified before God partly by our faith and partly by our own good works is also cleaâ—ly against the express Doctrine of the Church of England for 〈◊〉 saith that faith shuteth out good works yea it self as 't is an act habiâ— or work from our justification and remitteth and directeth us to Chrisâ— merits for our justification as may be seen above 3. 'T is contrary also to Canonical Scripture Gal. 2. 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith 〈◊〉 Jesus Christ even we have believed in Jesus Christ that we might be jâ—stified by the faith of Jesus Christ and not by the works of the Law 〈◊〉 by the works of the Law shall no flesh be
justified So Gal. 2. 21 For righteousness come by the Law then christ is dead vain Dr. Fearley gives this Note Although the * Notes in loc be many uses and benefits of Christs death besidâ— our justification yet the Apostles argument is very strong that the would have been no necessity for 〈◊〉 Salvation that Christ should have diâ—â— Luther upon the place saith That to seek to be justified by the works of the Law is to reject the Grace of God which he saith is blasphemy more horrible than can be expressed it is to deny Christ to spit in his face to tread him under foot We despise Grace when we observe the Law that we may be justified through it We constantly affirm that either Christ died in vain or else the Law justifieth not but Christ died not it vain Ergo the Law justifieth not and by his blood expiated our sins 〈◊〉 men might have been justified by 〈◊〉 works of the Law either Ceremonial 〈◊〉 Moral Rom. 3. 28 Therefore we coâ—clude that a man is justified by faith with out the deeds of the Law And v. 3â— seeing it is one God which shall justifâ— the circumcision by faith and the uncâ—â—cumcision through faith That is Jeâ— called the Circumcision and Gentilâ— called the Uncircumcision are justifie by one God by and through Faith 〈◊〉 Jesus Christ Read further Rom. 4. 2. 〈◊〉 4 5 10 11. but Rom. 3. 20. which I haâ— almost forgotten is very considerablâ— as to this point Therefore by the deâ—d of the Law there shall no flesh be justifie in his sight for by the Law is the know ledg of sin Where observe 1. That he speaks of a Justification of mens persons before God in his sight and not of saith and before men as Saiâ— James Chap. 2. 17 18 20 21 22 24 26. is to be understood 2. He saith That a man is not justified by the works of the Law 〈◊〉 which is the knowledg of sin which is the Moral Law for by thâ— Moral Law all men are convinced of sin and that there is sin in their best works even in those that proceed from Faith Papists and their followers amongst us say that mens persons are not justified in the sight of God by doing the works of the Ceremonial Law but they say they are * Mr. Fowler 's free Discourse p. 186. justified by the works of the Moral Law which proceed from faith which is directly contrary to the Doctrine delivered by St. Paul which is That by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight For by the Law is the knowledg of sin by the Moral not by the Ceremonial Law is the knowledg of sin And so the word Law is taken in Rom. 2. 12 13 14 15 18 21 22 25 26. as not only Protestants but also Papists themselves expound Dr. Feaâ—ley Dr. Willet Mr. Calvin Pareus and Cornelius a Lapide in Loc. the word And that mens persons are not justified by their own good works of the Moral Law which spring from Faith as Papists affirm Mr. Fowler 's free Discourse pag. 187. they are I prove thus 1. If any meer man since the Fall was ever justified by the works of the Moral Law which proceeded from Faith then certainly Abraham the Father of the Faithful was so justified but Abraham was not so justified therefore no meer mans person since the Fall was so justified The sequel of the Major is evident 1. Because Abraham's Personal works which proceeded from his Faith were as good as any meer mans works For by faith Abraham left his own Country and went when he was called of God into a strange Country which he should after receive in his posterity and be went out not knowing whither he went and there sojourned Heb 11. 9. And by faith Abraham when he was tried offered up Isaac and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten Son of whom it was said that in Isaac shall thy seed be called Hebr. 11. 17 18. 2. Because he being the Father of the Faithful there is the same reason and way of all faithful mens Justification that was of his as the Apostle shews Rom. 4. 12 13 24 25. Now the Minor viz. That Abraham was not justified before God by his own personal good works which proceeded from his faith I prove by the Apostles own arguments 1. If Abraham was justified before God by his own personal good works which proceeded from his Faith then he had some matter to glory or boast of before God but Abraham had no matter to glory or boast of before God therefore he was not justified before God by his own Personal good works which proceeded from his faith Both the Promises are in Rom. 4. 2. for if Abraham were justified by works of his own he had whereof to glory there is the Major but not before God there is the Minor That is he had no matter to glory of before God Rom. 3. 27. in the point of his Justification he brought nothing of his own to justifie his person before God for God wrough his Faith and his works in him True he might have somewhat 〈◊〉 glory or boast of before men but not before God for the reasoâ— alledged and also because what he had was imperfect and due 2. To him that is justified before God by his works there is a reward due of debt not of grace but to Abraham there was a rewarâ— due not of debt but of grace therefore he was not justified beforâ— God by his works The Major is in Rom. 4. 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward reckoned not of grace but of debt The Minor 〈◊〉 proved thus 1. Because he was justified by faith Rom. 4. 3. For what saith thâ— Scripture Abraham believed and it was counted to him for righteousnesâ— Gen. 15. 6. 2. Because he was not justified by his works Rom. 4. 5. For to hâ—â— that worketh not that is seeketh not righteousness or justification 〈◊〉 his works but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith 〈◊〉 counted for righteousness 3. Abraham believed and was justified before God before he performed those eminent acts of faith mentioned Rom. 4. 18. as may be seen Geâ— Pererius Pareus in Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 3. Dâ—b 2. 12. 3 4 7. Gen. 13. 16 18. Gen. 14. 14 18 19. and which is urged by Papists and yielded by Protestants But the Apostle as Moses before him puts his justification upon that eminent act of faith because then he mosâ— manifested his faith even when he was or had been under a great affliction and not upon any eminent act of Faitâ— before or after this that no man might * Willet in Rom. 4. 3. impute 〈◊〉 justification to his works and then he did more firmâ— believe the promise than he did before and then he had more sense and feeling of it than he had at the first making of
as it was operatiâ—â— by good moral works that is in St. Paul'â— sense that his person was justifieâ— before God by it as so operative else he speaks not to the purpose as Bellarmine commonly doth for 't is yielded That Abrahams faith was justified by works and declared before men yea and his person too before men that 't was a true and living faith and not a dead faith or a meer profession of faith and that he was a justified person is very false and his endeavour to prove it is like it He saith The Apostles design in the fourth Chapter is to prove that the observance of Mosaical rites whereof Circumcision was the chief is not necessary to mens Justification or acceptance with God and this he would prove by the instance of Abraham who was accepted and also very high in Gods favour even while he was in uncircumcision p. 134. But to this I say that 't is clear the Apostles design in that Chapter is to prove that no mens persons are justified by works but that all that are justified are justified only by Faith in Jesus Christ and lest any should think that only the Jews were thus justified by Faith in Christ without the works of the Law he proves that even the Gentiles and the Jews are justified the same way even by faith in Christ because Abraham was so justified before he was circumcised v. 9. Cometh the blessedness upon the circumcision only or upon the uncircumcision also No but it comes upon both Jews and Gentiles alike for Abraham was justified by faith in Christ before he was circumcised that he might be the father of all them that believe though they be not circumcised that righteousness that is that Christs righteousness might be imputed to them also And p. 136. he saith That St. James his design was to prove against Gnosticks who were ranting * Sir we are no more Antinomians than St. Paul was nor Gnosticks Antinomians the absolute necessity of new obedience in order to mens being received †This is most false into Gods favour that is justified or accepted as righteous By which 't is clear that he makes as Dr. Patrick doth new obedience to go before Justification In p. 137. he expounds Phil. 3. 9. of inherent righteousness and to that end saith that Paul chiefly desired to be found in Christ Whereas 't is clear that there is no such expression nor meaning but that he desires only to be found in Christ not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith that is clothed with the righteousness of Christ imputed to him as all our Orthodox Divines expound the place as Calvin Piscator Dr. Featly Diodate Beza in Locum And Dr. Willet in his Synopsis Willet Synopsis Papismi pag. 580 986 1000. Bp. Prideaux Fascic Controversiarum c. 5. q. 5. p. â—66 Bp. Downham of Justificaâ— l 7. c. 3. 〈◊〉 15. p. 460. Assembly of Divines in their larger Catechism of justifying Faith Papismi 12th Gen. Controversie of the Sacrament of Baptism in answer to Bellarmine who denieth that we are justified formally by the righteousness of Christ but that we are justified by our own righteousness inherent in us answers thus This is a great * Vid. King James his saying to this purpose before p 〈◊〉 in the Margent blasphemy and contrary to the Apostle who saith That I might be found not having mine own righteousness which is by the Law but the righteousness of God through faith Phil. 3. 9. The righteousness 〈◊〉 God by faith is not our own righteousness but we are justified by the righteousness of God that is by the righteousness of Christ by God imputed to 〈◊〉 And so Bishop Downham expounds the place and answereth Bellarmine's shifts and Mr. Fowler 's improvement of them which learned answer of his is too large here to be inserted where he proves ouâ— of Chrysostom and Châ—mnitius that the Apostle did in the point of Justification of his person before God account all his works not only those before his conversion but even those since yea his works both past and present as loss and dung Though these men declare themselves by their works to be Factors for Rome preach and print most Antichristian Popish Doctrine and such as some of the honester and sounder sort of Papists have disclaimed and written against with approbation of the learned and Regent Papists themselves as Dr. Ame's shews out of Contarenus whose works were approved by the Regent Doctors of Divinity at Paris An. 1572. Contarenus words are these Dr. Ames Bellar. Enervat T. 4. lib. 6. de Justif c. 1. Thes 1. compared with his 13th Protestants argument pag. 151. Quoniam inquit ad duplicem justitiâ—â— pervenimâ—â—â— per sidem justitiam inhaereâ—tem nobis charitatem ac gratiam qua efficimur consortes divinae naturae justitiam Christi nobis donatam imputatam quoniam insâ—â—rti sumus induimus Christum restat inquirere utranam debeamus niti existimari nos justificari coram Deo idest sanctos justos haberi ego prorsus existimo piè Christianè dici quod debeamus niti niti inquam tanquam restabili quae certò nos sustentâ—t justitia Christi nobis donata non auteâ—â— sanctitate gratia nobis inherente haec etenim nostra justitia est inchoata imperfecta quâ— tueri nos non potest quin in multis offendamus quin assiduè peccemus Id circo in conspeclu Dei non possumus ob hanc justitiam nostram haberi justi boni quemadmodum deceret filios Dei esse bonos sanctos Sed justitia Christi nobis donata est vera perfecta justitia quae omnino placet oculis Dei in qua nihil est quod Deum offendat quod Deâ—â— noâ— summopeâ—â— placcat â—ac ergo sola re certa stabili nobis â—â—tendum est ob eam solam credere nos justificari coram Deo id est justos â—aberi dici justos Now I suppose Mr. Fowler will have no just cause to blame me for discovering so plainly his erroneous opinions seeing I have dealt canâ—idâ—y with him in repeating his own words and he will thereby in reâ—se that preferment which he hath gotten already by his printing these his erroneous Doctrines I have confuted Though I confess I have taken this pains to convince and convert him and prevent others To preach against Calvin's Doctrine was the way to Preferment as Heylin shews in Cyp. Angl. p. 68. imbracing of his Errors To all which I shall add Bishop Sanderson's judgment Justification of sinners by the imputed righteousness of Christ apprehended and applied unto them by a lively Faith without the works of the Law is a sound true comfortable profitable and necessary Doctrine Serm. upon Rom. 3. 8. p. 49. in 4 to ART VI. That mens foreseen
Ceremonies Protestants answer As if the inspiration of God did not make God the author of the fact as well as the command expressed in his word Otherwise it were lawful for the Papists to conclude by the same reason that they have authority to institute new Sacrifices and Sacraments Bellarmine replies and saith That the Congregation made a new Feast Esth 9. 1. Mac. 4. Protestants answer That the first was political the second was to be disallowed Bellarmine saith the Apostles instituted a new Ceremony Act. 15. Protestants answer That there was no new ceremony instituted but a respect to scandal in tollerating an old ceremony Bellarmine saith the Church may institute some things and ceremonies are not repugnant to the Gospel neither hath the Lord forbidden that we should add no ceremonies for the more commodious and profitable administration of the Sacraments Protestants answer 1. The Church cannot appoint any new thing by her own authority 2 Carnal ceremonies void of the Spirit as all humane ceremonies are are repugnant Hildersham proves from Job 4. 23. that humane Ceremonies are forbidden in the Gospel in loc Bishop Andrews in Command 2. p. 263 or 255. Dr. Reynolds Conference with Hart c. 8. d. 4. p. 565. John Launder Thomas Iveson John Denly Martyrs professed that they believed that the Ceremonies used here in Q. Maries days were naught vain superfluous superstitious which they sealed with their blood Fox his Book of Martyrs p. 1593 1594 1595 1598. to the perfection of the New Testament 3. Humane ceremonies can make â—o more to the commodious and profitable administration of Christs Sacraments as they were administred by Christ and his Apostles than the decrees of faith made by men do make more commodiously to illustrate the faith revealed by Christ What shall we think that certain new men have a better insight and know better what ceremonies are to be used in Baptism than the holy Apostles and Christ himself So of the Supper too Bellarmine saith That ceremonies iustituted by the Church cannot be omitted without sin yea not without scandal Protestants answer There cannot be instituted Religious ceremonies by the Church without sin and therefore they may be omitted without sin and ought to be omitted 4. That we cannot fully and perfectly perform all that the Law of God requireth for Christ saith plainly That when we have done all we can do we are unprofitable servants Which shews that we cannot perfectly keep the Law for if we could we should be profitable servants getting thereby much glory to God and everlasting life to our selves Do this and thou shalt live And the Homily of the Death of Christ T. 2. part 2. p â—82 saith Our acts and deeds be full of imperfectness and infirmity and therefore nothing worthy of themselves to stir God to any favour much less to challenge that glory that is due to Christs acts and merits And again in the same Page it saith thus of Adam after his fall He could not keep the Law neither if Adam and his posterity had been able to satisfie and fulfill the Law perfectly in loving God above all things and their neighbours as themselves then should they have easily quenched the Lords wrath and escaped the horrible sentence of eternal death For 't is written Do this and thou shalt live that is fulfil my Commandments keep thy self upright and perfect in them according to my will then thou shalt live and not die But such was the frailty of mankind after his fall such was his weakness that he could not walk uprightly in Gods Commandments though he would never so fain but daily and hourly fell from his bounden duty offending the Lord his God divers ways to the great increase of his condemnation all are gone astray Our frailty is such that we can never of our selves fulfil the Law according to that the Law requireth And our 15th Article of Doctrine saith thus That all we the rest that is besides Christ although baptized and born again in Christ yet offend in many things and if we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us Yea the Popes Doctrine viz. That meer men since Adams fall can in this life perfectly fulfil Gods whole Moral Law is not only contrary to Sacred Scripture the Doctrine of the Church of England in her Homilieâ— and Articles but also her Book of Common Prayers As to the Lords-Prayer wherein Christ taught his holy Apostles and all Gods children to say every day Forgive us our trespasses To our commoâ— general Confession We have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts We have offended against thy holy Laws We have left undone those things we ought to have done and we have done those things we ought not to have done And 't is contrary to the prayer after every Commandment for pardon of sin committed against it Lord have mercy upon us Yea the Litany might be brought against Papists in this point And Prov. 7. 20. Rom. 7. 15. 17 18 20 23 24 1 Joh. 1. 8 9 10. and contrary also to the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches to be seen in the Harmony of Confession Sect. 4. and the 43 Article of Religion of the Church of Ireland and the fourth Article of the 16th Chapter of the Confession of Faith of Scotland Yea the gates of Hell I believe will never be able to overthrow that Faith in that Confession made by that Assembly Heâ—â— what Shelford Serm. p. 121 127 136 139 147. and White Bishop of Eli on the Sabbath p. 157. say for mans ability to fulfil the Law against the Doctrine of the Church of England and what Shelford saith for works of Supererogation Serm. p. 184. may be seen in Laudensium Autocatacrisis p 70 71. And what Bishop Forbes saith in his Book de Justificatione may be seen in the Supplement thereunto p. 300. And what Dr. Patrick saith may be seen in his Parable of the Pilgrim p. 324. who there saith thus 'T is true we are not tyed to that which we cannot do but yet the flesh will sometimes juggle and complain of impotence when there is nothing hinders it but sloth This is Bellarmines argument de observatione Legis c. 7. si praecepta c. if the precepts are impossible then they oblige none To this argument Dr. Ames gives this answer Dr. Ames his Bellar. Enervatus T. 3. c. 7. p. 191. 1. That this argument doth not prove that the Law is more possible to be kepâ— by believers than by unbelievers by the just than by the unjust 2. That the obligation to keep the Law is not taken away by the impossibility that flows from our fault To which I shall say but thus that the words imply as they may well be taken one or both of these errors 1. That men now are not bound to keep the Moral Law of God Or 2. That 't
to do say We are unprofitâ—ble servants and therefore our good works cannot merit any thing of God by their own worth and oblige him to give us a reward for their profit done him Cond 5. That there be a proportion between the thing meriting and the thing merited but between our imperfect good works and eternal life there is no proportion merit of condignity must be equal to the reward or thing merited that is truly and properly meritorious that doth properly and absolutely for it self deserve a reward or which doth in its formal reason include equality or condignity tâ— that reward of which 't is said to be meritorious but now that there is no proportion between our works and eternal life is proved Rom. 8. 18. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us Where 't is clear thaâ— the Apostle who was a regenerated man and had done as many good works as any regenerated man after his conversion as appears by his works yet those he sligâ—ts in comparison of the knowledge of Christ by faith and who suffered many great and cruel afflictions and 〈◊〉 last Martyrdom for Christs sake yet he reckoned them all not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us in heaven they hold no true proportion or equality with the reward neither in respect of dignity or worth nor in respect of duration or time these affâ—â—ctions are not worth that glory which we shall have in heaven aâ—â— these afflictions which are but for a moment are not worthy to be equalled with that eternal weight of glory which they work for us if righâ—â— born This place saith Pareus and our Dr. Fulk and Willet in locum tollit omne meritum condigni Pareus in loc Dr. Fulk taketh away all merit of condignity for if the sufferings of the Saints neither for quality nor quantity are proportionable to the glory that is to come then it followeth necessarily that they are not worthy if the sufferings of Martyrs come short of the value and worth of the glorious happiness of Saints triumphant in heaven then sure much more do their best actions come short thereof There is a reward ratione pacti when a man promiseth such a reward to a person if he do such a work for him Now this reward is called wages not properly merit because it may be meerly of promise and not of desert e. g. A man may promise another man an 100 l. of good gold to fetch him a bottle of straw which when he hath done he is bound to give or pay it to him because he promised so much but this is not properly merit of condignity for the work done was not worth the money supposing as is to be supposed the straw easie to be had and near at hand for there was no proportion between the fetching of the bottle of straw and the 100 l. Now where there is merit of condignity there must be proportion between the merit and the reward because the reward of the merit is an act of justice as Aquinas shews and justice is a certain equality as he there proves out of the Philosopher 12. 〈◊〉 q. 114. a. 1. c. 2. There is a rewardâ— ratione operis when a man doth such a work that doth of its self and its own nature carry such a dignity and worthiness in it as that it deserves such a reward to be given to him in justice Now this is that the Papists are to prove that our good works do that there is such excellency dignity and worthiness in them as that they do of their own nature deserve eternal salvation at Gods hands and that God is bound in justice with it to reward us for the dignity of our good works which we Protestants utterly deny and we say that if we should yield that our good works do thus merit eternal life at Gods hands these absurdities would easily follow 1. That we had something whereof to glory or to boast of that we had merited our salvation contrary to Ephes 2. 8 9. 2. That eternal life were not freely given to us but of due and just debt paid to us contrary to Rom. 6. 21. 3. That Christ dyed in vain contrary to Gal. 2. 21. This is one of the Church of Romes Antichristian Doctrines which doth in effect deny Christ to be come in the flesh It 's but a vanity in our men the great friends to Rome to say that Papists profess with us the Apostles Creed when as indeed and in truth by their doctrines and practises they deny and overthrow what they profess for if men can by their own strength turn themselves to God when they will and fulfil the whole moral Law do works of superogation and by the right use of their natural reason and will merit ex congruo the first grace and then ex condigno merit eternal life What need was there for Christ so have come into the world and taken our nature upon him become our surety to have fulfilled the law and dyed for us And therefore our Homily before alledged saith very well That this Doctrine of Merits speaks blasphemy against Gods mercy and great derogation to Christs blood-shedding and another Homily before alledged That whosoever denieth this Doctrine that faith alone justifieth is not to be accounted a Christian man nor for a setter forth of Gods glory but for a setter forth of mans vain glory and for an adversary to Christ and his Gospel and that it were the greatest arrogance and presumption of man thâ—â— Antichrist could set up against God to affirm that a man might by his oâ—â— works take away and purge his own sin and justifie himself Homily of salvation of mankind p. 16 17. Obj. But they say That Christ 〈◊〉 merited that our good works that are his Nova haec est Theologia Prophetis Apostolis ignota Christus meruit ut nos mereamur nobisipsis vitam aeternam Dr. Ames Bel Enerv. t. 4. c. 2. p. 214. gifts wrought in us and performed by us should merit eternal life Ans 1. This I have often heard said but could never as yet see it proved and therefore till it be proved I deny it because there is neither sacred Scripture nor good reason for it I know that true believers in Christ are made worthy 2 Thes 1. 5. Apoc. 3. 4. by the perfect righteousness of Christ imputed to them and apprehended and applied by a lively faith but this makes not their imperfect works which as good he works in them and which they owe unto him meritorious at Gods hands again God doth reward his people with eternal life secundum opera * Rom. 2. 6. according to their works but not propter opera for their works and the reward is of free gift not of due debt for 't is ex pâ—â—misso of Gods own free promise but not
appointed him a dâ—y to hear him of it to whom he expounded and testified the Kingdom of God perswading them concerning Jesus Christ both out of the Law and out of the Prophets from morning till night Act. 28. 21 22 23. Now had Peter who was the Apostle of the Circumcision been there at Rome then or before no doubt but he would have taught his own country-men the Kingdom of God and manifested out of the Law of Moses and the prophets that Jesus Christ was the Messias before Paul came there But they were ignorant of the very foundation of Christianity and talked of it as of a strange thing a new Sect and much talked against and if he had been there then this had been a fit time for him to have joined with St. Paul in preaching Jesus Christ but we read of none of all this in Sacred Scripture 8. There is no mention of Peter ' s joining with Paul in any of his Epistles written from Rome though he mentioneth Timothy to Philemon to the Colossians to the Philippians if Peter had been then at Rome and Bishop there 't is probable that Paul would have gotten his hand or name or commendations to some one or other of these Epistles that were thence written Now put all these things together and it will manifestly appear that Peter did not sit Bishop so long as Papists say he did it will most probably appear that he was never at Rome Object But they say That Peter came to Rome again the twelfth year of Nero and that then also Cornel. a Lapid Chron. Act. Apostol p. 7. Paul returned thither also and that they both restored the Church there that was falling away by reason of Nero ' s persecution Answ To this I answer thus 1. That this is only said but not proved 〈◊〉 That this is a very improbable story For 1. It 's improbable that Peter who forsook Rome as soon as ever Claudius his Decree for Banishment of the Jews was published for fear of losing his life should after Nero's bloody Persecution was begun adventure to return to Rome 2. 'T is most probable that Paul this year or rather after it wrote his second Epistle to Timothy in which he tells him thus I 〈◊〉 now ready to be offered and the time of my departure is at hand I have fought a good fight henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness c. Do thy diligence to come shortly to me do thy diligence to come before winter 2 Tim. 4. 6 7 8 9 21. Yet in this Epistle is no mention of Peter though as was observed before Eâ—bulus Pudens Linus Claudia and all the Brethren saluted him And he makes mention of only Luke that was with him and how others were disposed of as there is to be seen and if Peter had been there he would not have sent for Mark also and given that reason he doth For he is profitable to me for the Ministry would not Peter have done more that way than Mark if he had been there Obj. But Peter was at Babylon and there wrote his first Epistle to the dispersed Jews 1 Pet. 5. 13. The Church that is at Babylon salâ—teth you Now by Babylon he meaneth Rome as Cornelius a Lapiâ—â— Hart and other Papists expound the place And that because Rome is by the Fathers and our Protestant writers called Babylon in the Revelations of John Rev. 17 18. chap. Answ To this learned Dr. Reynolds gives a full large and learned Answer But I answer Conference with Hart c. 6. d. 3. p. 262 263 c. briefly thus that in Sacred Scripure we read of Babylon 1. Literal 2. Mystical Babylon litâ—ral is Babylon in Caldea where the Israelites were in ancient time carried captive And this Babylon most of oâ—â— Learned men do here understand by Peters Babylon the Church thâ—â— is at Babylon in Caldea Here Peter they say was when he wroâ—â— his first Epistle but others say he was in Babylon in Egypt which is called Cairo and that there he wrote his first Epistle and thâ—â— thence he sent Mark to Alexandria in Egypt and that he was the first Bishop that is Congregational or Parochial Pastor there for there were no Diocesan Bishops then One of these two without doubt he was at but that he was at Rome Babylon Mystical is improbable as I have proved before And that Peter should call Rome Babylon there is no reason given And there was no need for him to disguise the name of Rome with the Mystical nnme of Babylon as there was afterward for St. John If he had been at Rome he might without any danger and he would without doubt have said plainly if he had been Bishop there as they say he then was The Church that is at Rome saluteth you Here by the way take notice that Papists to prove Peter at Rome do confess that Rome is that wicked Babylon the Mother of Harlots and all abominations designed to destruction which is a good argument against themselves But I deny this consequence Peter was at Babylon therefore he was at Rome Obj. But by Babylon Papias the Apostles Scholar doth say was meant Rome as Eusebius saith Hist l. 2. c. 25. and Jerom de viris illustribus Answ To which I answer 1. That Eusebius was an Arrian hath been proved false in this matter before and may again 2. That whether this Papias should be yielded to be one of the Apostle John's own Scholars is not certain yet he was a man of a very small judgment as saith judicious Dr. Reynolds who mistaking the meaning of the Apostles speeches in a matter of greater weight deceived many Fathers that followed for his antiquity as both * Euseb Hist l. 3. 36. Eusebius and †Jer. de Scriptor Eccles in verba Papias Jerom do report of him The less strange if they believed him and others them in this point of no such importance then and that Mark was Peter ' s Scholar at Rome came from him by one as good as himself Clemens Alexandrinus as Dr. * Conference with Hart c. 6. d. 3. p 265. Reynolds speaks The Centurists speak of him as of a weak man for judgment whose obscure writings and his writing of two 〈◊〉 John's Disciples Johannes Discipulus Johannes Senior bred great disturbance in the Church by his unskilful making a difference Quid Jacobus aut Johannes sive Matthaeus vel alius quisquam ex discipulis Domini quidque Aristion Senior Johannes Discipuli dixerint Cent. 2. l. 10. p. 133. between John the Disciple and John the Elder about the authority of John ' s Epistles and the Revelations And they say of him that he brought forth many strange parables and doctrines of Christ in his Books and that he was a man of a mean judgment and that he did not rightly understand the Apostles disputations and examples And being such an one he might and did misunderstand
acteth against and contrary to them By which saith he they do declare themselves to be none of the Church of Christ but rather of the Synagogue of Satan Yea he there tells his Wife That he called them with good conscience as Christ called their forefathers the children of the Devil and that as their father the Devil is a lyar and murtherer so their Kingdom and Church as they call it standeth by lying and murdering therefore my dear Wife have no fellowship with them Ibid. Bishop Ridley in his Letter in Captivity calls the Church of Rome the Strumpet of Babylon and the Pope of Rome Antichrist Fox his Book of Martyrs p. 1626. col 1. And in his Answer at his Examination to Bishop White he saith He cannot but confess with St. Gregory a Bishop of Rome also that the Bishop of that place is the very true Antichrist whereof St. John speaketh by the name of the Whore of Babylon And I say saith he with the said St. Gregory that he that maketh himself a Bishop of all the world is worse than Antichrist Ibid. p. 1650. col 2. And in his Communication with Dr. Brooks Bishop of Gloucester when he degraded him exhorting him to recant and submit to the Church of Rome he saith thus You know my mind concerning the usurped authority of the Romish Antichrist Ibid. p. 1659. col 2. And a little after when he would Bishop Ridley though when he was in his Pontificalibus he contended too much for the Surplice c. yet when he came to die he refused it and abominated it put on him the Surplice c. he inveighed against the Romish Bishop and all that foolish apparel calling him Antichrist and the apparel foolish and abominable Ibid. In his Farewell Letter to all his Friends he calls the Bishop of Rome the Babylonical Beast and the then Bishops of England thieves of Samaria Sabei Caldei These robbers have rushed out of their dens and have robbed the Church of England of all the aforesaid holy treasure of God they have carried it away they have overthrown it and instead of Gods holy word the true and right administration of Christs holy Sacraments as of Baptism and the other they mix their Ministry with mens fantasies and many wicked and â—â—godly traditions Ibid. p. 1674. And these Bishops he calls the Soldiers of Antichrist Ibid. p. 1675. col 1. And in his Letter to the Lords Temporal he saith thus I wonder my Lords what hath bewitched you that ye are so suddenly fallen from Christ unto Antichrist from Christs Gospel unto mens traditions from the Lord that bought you to the Bishop now of Rome I warn you of your peril be not deceived except ye will be found willingly consenters unto your own death For if ye think thus we are Lay-men this is a matter of Religion we follow as we are taught and led if our teachers and governours teach us and lead us amiss the fault is in them they shall bear the blame My Lords 't is true I grant you that both the false teacher and the corrupt governour shall be punished for the death of their subjects whom they have falsely taught and corruptly lead yea and their blood shall be required at their hands But yet neverthelss shall that subject die the death himself also that is he shall also be damned for his own sin For if the blind lead the blind Christ saith not the leader only but both shall fall into the ditch Shall the Synagogue and the Senate of the Jews trow ye which forsook Christ and consented to his death therefore be excused because Annas and Caiphas with the Scribes and Pharisees and their Clergy did teach them amiss yea and also Pilate their Consenters and doers are both guilty saith Bishop Ridley Ibid. p. 1675. governour and the Emperours Lieutenant by his tyranny did without cause put to death Forsooth no my Lords no. For notwithstanding that corrupt Doctrine or Pilates washing of his hands neither of both shall excuse either that Synagogue and Seigniory or Pilate but at the Lords hand for the effusion of that innocent blood on the latter day shall drink of the deadly whip * Bishop Gardners six Articles called the Whip with six strings I â—elieve he alluded to Ye are witty and understand what I mean Therefore I will pass from this to tell you that ye are fallen from Christ to his adversary the Bishop of Rome pag. 1667. And immediately after he tells them That he doth not in calling the Bishop of Rome Christs adversary or Antichrist rage or raile but speak the words of truth and sobriety And shews That that Church while it continued in the Apostles Doctrine was Apostolick and those that sate in that See might be called Apostolici but since that See hath degenerated from the trace of Truth and true Religion which it received of the Apostles at the beginning and hath preached another Gospel hath set up another Religion hath exercised another power and hath taken upon it to order and rule the Church of Christ by other strange Laws and Canons and rulers than ever it received of the Apostles the Apostles of Christ which thing it doth at this day and hath continued so doing alas alas of too too long a time since the time I say that the state and condition of that See hath thus been changed in truth it ought of duty and of right to have the names changed both of the See and of the Sitter therein As that See then for that true trade of Religion and Doctrine of Christs Apostles justly and truly was called Apostolick so as truly and justly for the contrariety of Religion and * Is this not directly contrary to A B. Laud's Doctrine in his Relation wherein pag. â—â—6 he saith That the Church of Rome and Protestants set not up a different Religion diversity of Doctrine from Christs and his Apostles that See and the Bishop thereof at this day both ought to be called and are indeed Antichristian The See is the seat of Satan and the Bishop of the same that maintaineth the abominations thereof is Antichrist himself indeed And for this cause this See at this day is the same which St. John calleth in his Revelation Babylon or the Whore of Babylon and spiritual Sodoma and Egyptus the mother of fornications and of the abomination upon the earth and with this Whore do spiritually meddle and lye with her and commit most stinking and abominable adultery before God all those Kings and Princes yea all Nations of the earth which do CONSENT TO HER ABOMINATIONS and use or practise the same Ibid. p. 1668. And in his Lamentation for the change of Religion in England he saith thus The head under Satan of all mischief is Antichrist and his brood and the same is he which is the Babylonical Beast Ibid. p. 1671. col 2. And in p. 1673 he calls King Edward the sixth that innocent that
conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law To which they add Rom. 4. 2 3. and Ephes 2. 8 9. and say further Therefore because faith doth apprehend Christ our righteousness and doth attribute all to the praise of God in Christ in this respect Justification is attributed to faith chiefly because of Christ whom it receiveth and not because it is a work of ours for it is the gift of God Now that we do receive Christ by faith the Lord sheweth at large Joh. 6. where he putteth eating for believing But it is most clear in Joh. 1. 12. and believing for eating for as by eating we receive meat so by believing we are made partakers of Christ therefore we do not part the benefit of justification giving part to the grace of God or to Christ and a part to our selves our charity works or merit but we do attribute it wholly to the praise of God in Christ and that through faith And moreover our charity and our works cannot please God if they be done of such as are not just wherefore we must first be just before we can love or do any just works We are made just as we said through faith in Christ by the meer grace of God who doth not impute unto us our sins but imputeth unto us the righteousness of Christ yea and our saith in Christ is imputed for righteousness unto us The Church of Basil saith thus We confess the remission of siâ—â— through faith in Christ crucified and though this faith doth without intermission exercise and shew forth it self in the works of charity and by this means is tried yet we do not attribute righteousness and satisfaction for our sins unto works which are fruits of faith but only to a true confidence and faith in the blood of the Lamb of God shed for us There may be seen the Confessions of Faith of the Churches of Bohemia France Belgia or Holland Ausburg Saxony Wirtemberg Scotland to which might be added the Confession of Faith of the Church of Ireland agreed upon Ann. 1615. in Articles 34 35 36 37. but they being almost the same verbatim with the Articles and Homilies of the Church of England for brevities sake I forbear But I pray take and consider the Confession of Faith of England and Scotland made by the late learned and orthodox Assembly of Divines Chapter the eleventh of Justification Those whom God effectually calleth he also freely justifieth not by infusing righteousness into them but by pardoning their sins and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous not for any thing wrought in them or done by them but for Christs sake alone nor by imputing faith it self the act of believing or any other Evangelical obedience to them as their righteousness but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith which faith they have not of themselves it is the gift of God Faith thus receiving and resting on Christ and his righteousness is the alone instrument of Justification yet it is not alone in the person justified but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces and is no dead faith but worketh by love Now let any indifferent and judicious and impartial man compare this with the ancient Doctrine of the Church of England set down in her Books of Articles of Christian Religion and Homilies and then judg whether it be not more consonant thereunto and also to Sacred Canonical Scripture than is 1. Dr. H. Hammond's * Practical Catechism p. 1649. p. 31. p 41. p. 33. p. 29. who saith That sincere obedience with faith justifies mens persons before God Or 2. Dr. Sim. Patricks †Parab of Pilgrim p. 511. 〈◊〉 who saith That new obedience must go before we can expect to be justified by the grace of God And thus * p. 32. Suffer not your faith to rest no not on Christ till it animate you to a free and cheerful obedience to all his commands Which destroys the faith of adherence and founds Faith upon his own works and not solely upon Christ if he means as he must do an actual animation to such an obedience as he speaks of Who saith also That good works are * Friendly Debate p. 13 14. necessary to justification He must mean a priori and antecedent to Justification else he speaks not ad rem but cuffs the man of clouts of his own making for all men even those he pleads against hold that they necessarily follow it And that faith justifies as 't is effectual by love to our Saviour he must mean so else he answers not his question How can this be seeing we are justified by faith only very well saith he for it is not an idle ineffectual faith which justifies but that which works by love to our Saviour and love is the keeping of his Commandments Which implys that Faith justifies our persons before God either as 't is a work or as 't is working by love and so he makes good works * Mans righteousness cannot make himself righteous either in part or in whole Homily of Salvation of Mankind p. 17. concauses at least with Faith of our Justification before God or that faith doth justifie our persons before God by good works of which Justification he would perhaps too have love the form as Papists would have it to be And this seems to be his meaning and of his Pilgrims guide to Jerusalem or rather to Rome because he faith It cannot be understood nor defined without works which implys that good works are of the constitutive essence of Faith Par. Pilgrim p. 139. and that all definitions of justifying faith that separate obedience from faith are but cheats and dangerous illusions And thence he derides the words recumbency adhesion rest acquiescence as lazie and slovenly expressions of Faith as justifying though our * Vrsin Catechism p. 27â— q. 21. p. 134. Bp. Davenants Determin 39. and of Justif c. 32 p. 411. Bp. Downham of Justif l. 6. c. 4. Dr. Ames Med. Theol. l. 1. c. 3 R. 4. Pareus in Act 15. 6. judicious learned and orthodox Divines have commonly used them in defining Faith as justifying Or 3. Mr. Fowler 's who saith That justifying faith is such a belief of the truth of the Gospel as includes a sincere resolution of obedience unto all its precepts or true holiness in the nature of it and that it justifies as it doth so Who saith also †Design of Christianity c. 19. p. 221 223. That this principle admitted viz. that faith justifies only as it apprehendeth the merits and righteousness of Christ gives advantage to Antinomianism Who saith That * Free Discourse part 1. p. 164. In the 160 page of his Free Discourse he saith that faith justifieth as it worketh by love And in p. 159. he saith it justifieth as it implieth obedience Justification is mostly