falsly supposed ground For it is as vnuoluntarie in the one as it is in the other neither can it bee any more auoided in the one than in the other This is the gordian knot which the papists are neuer able to loose or vntie Bellarmine himselfe is enforced to confesse that Saint Austen acknowledgeth all the motions of concupiscence euen those which be inuoluntarie to be properly sinne and flatly condemned by the tenth commaundement These are his expresse wordes Haec dicta sunt ad mentem S. Augustini qui precepto non concupisces intelligit prohiberi aliquo modo motus omnes concupiscentiae etiam inuoluntarios assensum vero his motibus prohibere docet illo alio precepto post concupiscentias tuas non eas These things are spoken after Saint Austens mind who by this precept Thou shalt not lust vnderstandeth all the motions of concupiscence euen the inuoluntarie to be prohibited in some sort and that the consent to these motions is forbidden by that other precept Follow not thy concupiscence Thus writeth the Iesuiticall Cardinall by whose doctrine it is euident that Saint Austen affirmeth the first motions of concupiscence which preuent reason cannot be auoyded to bee condemned by Saint Paul as sinfull and against the law of God Which doctrine of Saint Austen doth so sting and confound all papists that Bellarmine knoweth not in the world what he shall answere to the same And therefore deceitfully he addeth in his exposition of Saint Austens words the word quodammodo after a sort which word neither is in Saint Austen nor yet agreeable to his meaning For Saint Austen saith plainely simply and absolutely without all ands or ifs or other qualifications that such motions are forbidden by this commandement non concupisces And for the consummation of this doctrine which ouerthroweth the best part of poperie I will here adde to Saint Pauls doctrine and the exposition of Saint Austen the flat testimonie of Saint Iohn an other Apostle who singeth the same song with Saint Paul Saint Iohn in his first epistle hath these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euery one that sinneth transgresseth the law And sinne is the transgression of the law These are S. Iohns words truly translated out of the originall Greeke But before we proceed any further in the discourse hereof let vs take a view of that doctrine which our papists of Rhemes haue sent vs. These are their words Iniquitie is not taken here for wickednesse as it is commonly vsed both in Latin and in our language as is plaine by the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying nothing else but swaruing or declining from the straight line of the law of God or nature So that the Apostle meaneth that euery sinne is an obliquitie or defect from the rule of the law but not contrarie that euery such swaruing from the law should be properly a sinne as the heretikes doe vntruly gather to proue that concupiscence remaining after baptisme is a very sinne though we neuer giue our consent vnto it Thus they write Out of whose words I gather two notable documēts the one that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a defect and swaruing from the law but not properly a sinne the other that if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be proued to be sinne properly then wil it also follow of necessity by S. Iohns doctrine that concupiscence in the regenerate is properly sinne Let this doctrine be wel marked as which is no lesse apparant then important Now it only remaineth for the victorie truth of this article That I proue against our papists the Rhemists that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie sinne properly behold the proofe A very famous papist and great linguist Ben. Arias Montanus saith plainely in expresse teames that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is transgressio legis the transgression of the law Now that the transgression of Gods law is properly sinne none is so sottish that he doth not vnderstand it none so impious that he will denie it none so peeuish that he will not acknowledge it But I proue the same S. Ambrose hath these words Quid est enim peccatum nisi preuaricatio legis diuine coelestium inobedientia preceptorum For what is sinne but the transgression of Gods law and disobedience to his heauenly precepts Loe sinne saith S. Ambrose is nothing els but the transgression of Gods law that is to say nothing els but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Iohn tearmeth it and as Arias Montanus doth interprete it S. Austen hath these words Peccatum est transgressio legis Sinne is a transgression of the law Loe S. Austen concludeth with S. Ambrose and they both agree with S. Iohn The same S. Austen in another place defineth sinne in this manner Peccatum est dictum vel factum vel concupitum aliquid contra legem aternam Sinne is a word deed thought or desire against the eternall law of God And what the eternall law is he sheweth in these words next following in the same place Lex aeterna est ratio diuina vel voluntas Dei ordinem naturalem conseruari iubens perturbari vetans The eternall law is the reason or will of God which commaundeth the naturall order to be obserued and forbiddeth the same to be perturbed Thus writeth this auntient graue and learned father by whose iudgement it is properly sinne whatsoeuer is against the will of God So then Gods will is that law and rule by which euery sinne must be measured and tried And consequently whatsoeuer deflecteth declineth or swarueth from the will of God the same is most properlie sinne The reason hereof is euident because not to be correspondent and agreeable to Gods will is the very intrinsecall reason essence and nature of sinne But so it is that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disorder and concupiscence in the regenerate is repugnant and disagreeable to the will of God and consequently it must be sinne indeed S. Bede who for his learning and vertue was renowned throughout the whole Christian world and thereupon surnamed venerabilis hath these expresse words Virtus huius sententiae facilius in lingua Graecorum qua edita est epistola comprehenditur Si quidem apud eos iniquitas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocatur quod significat quasi contra legem vel sine lege factum Si quidem lex Graece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellatur sequitur sed latinum nomen eidem rationi congruit quod iniquitas quasi aequitati aduersa nuncupatur Quia quicunque peccat contarius nimirum aequitati diuinae legis peccando existit The force and efficacie of this sentence is more easily perceiued in the Greeke tongue in which the epistle was written For iniquitie with them is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth As done against law or without law For the law is called in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The
Latine word also agreeth to the same reason because it is called iniquitie as being against equitie for euery one that sinneth is by reason of sinne contrarie to the equitie of Gods law See more to this effect in the eight article following Dionysius Carthusianus a famous papist hath these words Lex autem diuina est aequitas ipsa sicque mortale peccatum est iniquitas id est non aequitas vtpote violatio aequitatis The law of God is equitie it selfe and consequently iniquitie that is not equitie to wit the transgression of equitie is a mortall sinne Nicolaus de Lyra another famous popish writer hath these words Peccatum est transgressio legis diuinae Lex autem diuina est ipsa aequitas ideo in omni peccato mortali est equitatis corruptio per consequens iniquitas Sinne is the transgression of the law diuine and therefore in euery mortall sinne there is corruption of equitie and consequently there is also iniquitie The Corollarie Now gentle reader thou hast heard the expresse words and plaine testimonies as well of the auntient fathers S. Ambrose S. Austen and S. Bede as also of the two famous popish writers Carthusianus and Lyranus concerning this great question and most important point of doctrine in which the very life of poperie doth consist I haue proued first euen by the testimonie of S. Paule and of S. Austen expounding his words as also of the Iesuit Bellarmine graunting the same that concupiscence remaining after baptisme in the regenerate is both called sinne and is properly sinne indeed Secondly that the first motions of concupiscence which are connaturall to the corrupt man and can no way be auoided are flatly forbidden by this commaundement Thou shalt not couet Thirdly that though the said rebellious motions be inuoluntarie in the worke yet are they voluntarie in the originall which is sufficient saith S. Austen Fourthly that Cardinall Bellarmine not able truly to answere S. Austens words hath in his explication added deceitfully this word quodammodo after a sort VVhich word cannot be found in S. Austen neither is it agreeable to his meaning But such beggerly shifts and sillie euasions are the props and staies of late Romish religion Fiftly that by S. Iohns doctrine euery deflection from the eternall law is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently it is properly sinne Sixtly that S. Ambrose S. Austen and S. Bede doe all three affirme constantly and with vniforme assent that sinne is nothing els but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a transgression of the law of God Seuenthly that by the flat doctrine not only of Saint Bede but also of two famous popish writers whose authoritie is euer most forcible against papists Dionysius Carthus and Nicholaus Lyranus iniquitie is a mortall sinne because it is against the eternall law which is equitie it selfe and the will of God Eightly that our papists of Rhemes do confute themselues vnawares while they tell vs that euery sinne is a declining and swaruing from Gods law but withal denie that euery such swaruing from Gods law is properly sinne For seeing Gods law is nothing els but his will as is alreadie proued the papists must either confesse that to swarue and decline from Gods will is properly sinne or els that to decline and swarue from Gods will is consonant and agreeable to his will which to hold is not onely most absurd but withall implieth flat contradiction Against this discourse of originall concupiscence in the regenerate nothing in truth can be alledged for the papists Yet to take away all wrangling I will truly put downe the vpshot of our Rhemists and frame my answer to the same Thus doe they write Though in the 5. chapter verse 17. the Apostle turne the speech affirming euery iniquitie to be sinne yet there the Greeke word is not the same as before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By which it is plaine that there he meaneth by iniquitie mans actuall and proper transgression which must needs be a sinne These are their words to which I answere in this wise First that though the Greeke word be different yet is it equiualent and so the sence all one This to be so S. Austen will testifie with me in these words Nemo dicat aliud est peccatum atque aliud iniquitas Nemo dicat ego peccator homo sum sed iniquus non sum Omnis qui facit peccatum iniquitatem facit Let no man say sinne is one thing and iniquitie another thing Let no man say I am a sinfull man but not vnrighteous For euery one that committeth sinne committeth also iniquitie Thus writeth S. Austen and what he saith the same say Beda and Oecumenius VVho as we see here doth plainely and expressely affirme sinne and iniquitie to be all one So that whatsoeuer is sinne must also be iniquitie and whatsoeuer is iniquitie the same likewise must be sinne Neither is it to the purpose to iterate their vsuall song because as is alreadie prooued Saint Ambrose telleth them in another place that this sinne is committed against the will of man These are his words Numquid quia inuitum hominem dicit peccare immunis debet videri à crimine quia hoc agit quod non vult pressus vi potestatis Non vtique Ipsius enim vitio desidia haec caepta sunt Quia enim mancipauit se per assensum peccato iure illius dominatur Is therefore a man cleere and free from sinne because he saith man sinneth against his will because he doth that which he would not doe being pressed with the violence of power No truly for these things began through his fault and negligence For seeing he consented to be a slaue vnto sinne sinne by right hath dominion ouer him Loe a man is guiltie of sinne yea euen of that sinne which he doth against his will and cannot auoid the same that is of originall concupiscence And S. Ambrose yeeldeth a reason hereof because this impossibilitie came of mans default And this is the very case of infants as is alreadie said Let the reader here obserue seriously with me that S. Ambrose calleth this inuoluntarie concupiscence crimen a crime or mortall sinne Secondly that S. Bede affirmeth not only all to be sinne which is iniquitie but also reputeth the very corruption of innocencie which commeth of infirmitie to be sinne in Gods sight These are his expresse words Omnes qui peccant praeuaricationis rei sunt hoc est non solum illi qui data sibi scriptae legis scita contemnunt sed illi qui innocentiam legis naturalis quam in protoplasto omnes accepimus siue infirmitate siue negligentia siue etiam ignorantia corrumpunt All that sinne are guiltie of preuarication or transgression of the law that is not only they which contemne the precepts of the written law giuen them but they also which either of infirmitie or of
may not onely truly but also iustly require reward at Gods hands in regard of his promise freely made vnto vs. But I euer denie withall that any reward is due to our best workes for any condigne merit or desert of or in our workes Gods free acceptation mercie and promise set apart For as Saint Austen grauely saith Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam Woe euen to the best liuer vpon earth if thou examine his life thy mercy set apart Answere ô papists if ye can and if ye cannot then repent and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you I prouoke you to the combat I adiure you all ioyntlie and euery one of you seuerally for the credite of your cause for the honour of your Pope and the life of popish doctrine which now lieth bleeding and wil shortly yeeld vp the Ghost if some soueraigne remedie bee not speedily prouided for the same The sixt Article Of the Popish distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes ALthough it be true that all sinnes are not equall but one greater than another and although it be also true that in a good and godly sence some sinne may be tearmed mortall and some veniall which yet may more fitly be called sinnes regnant and not regnant neuerthelesse most true it is to the euerlasting confusion of all impenitent papists that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature and onely veniall by way of Gods free acceptation and mercie for his owne name sake and merits of his deare sonne our Lord Iesus I prooue it first both briefely and euidently For Christ himselfe telleth vs in his holy Gospell that we must giue a straight account of euery idle word in the generall day of iudgement And for no other end doubtlesse must this account be made but onely because euery idle word is flatly against the law of God This the papists can neuer denie it is euident to euery child And yet must they likewise confesse that idle words be those sinnes which they call venials And consequently they must confesse against their wils and against their professed Romish doctrine that all sinnes are mortall that is to say against the law of God This doctrine of our Sauiour Christ Iesus is confirmed by the testimonie of S. Iohn his beloued Apostle where he telleth vs that euery sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the transgression of Gods law as is alreadie prooued at large in the fourth article of concupiscence And the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a declining from the right way doth plainely confirme the same Secondly because our popish Rhemists confesse in plaine tearms that euery sinne is a swaruing from the law of God For doubtlesse that which swarueth from the law is truly said to be against the law but not agreeable to the law Thirdly because the famous popish Frier and Romish bishop Iosephus Angles teacheth the same doctrine in his booke dedicated to the Pope himselfe These are his own expresse words Omne peccatum veniale est alicuius legis transgressio Patet quia omne veniale est contra rectam rationem agere contra rectam rationeÌ„ est agere contra legem naturalem precipientem non esse à regula rectae rationis deuiandum Euery sinne veniall is the transgression of some law This is cleere because euery veniall sinne is against right reason and to doe against right reason is to doe against the law of nature which commaundeth vs not to depart or swarue from the rule of right reason Loe euery veniall sinne is against right reason and against the law of nature which is giuen to euery one in his creation in his birth or natiuitie Fourthly because Durandus another famous papist confuteth the late receiued popish opinion of Thomas Aquinas which the Pope and his Iesuits hold to wit that veniall sinnes are preter legem non contra Besides the law but not against the law These are Duâ—ands owne words Ad argumentum dicendum quod omne peccatum est contra legem dei naturalem vel inspiratam vel ab eis deriuatam To the argument answere must be made that euery sinne is against the law of God either naturall or inspired or deriued from them And this opinion of M. Durand is this day commonly defended in the popish vniuersities and schooles So saith Frier Ioseph these are his words D. Thomas eius sectatores tenent peccatum veniale non tam esse contra legem quam preter legem Sequitur Durandus tamen alij permulti hanc sententiam impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata Et haec opinio modo in scbolis videtur communior S. Thomas and his followers hold that a veniall sinne is not so much against the law as besides the law But Durand and many others impugne this opinion auouching veniall sinnes to be against the commaundements And this opinion seemeth now adaies to be more common in the schooles Here I wish the reader to note by the way out of the word modo now adaies the mutabilitie of Romish religion For in that he saith modo now adaies he giueth vs to vnderstand that their doctrine is now otherwise than it was of old and in former ages A note worthie to be remembred For the old Romane religion was catholicke pure and sound and with it doe not I contend but I impugne late Romish faith and doctrine which the Pope and his Romish Schoole-men haue brought into the Church Fiftly because their canonized martyr Iohn Fisher the late bishop of Rochester teacheth the same doctrine so plainely as euery child must needs perceiue the truth in that behalfe These are his expresse words Quod peccatum veniale solum ex dei misericordia veniale sit in hoc tecum sentio That a veniall sinne is onely veniall through the mercie of God and not of it owne nature therein doe I agree vnto you Thus saith our bishop And as he telleth me that he agreeth with Luther therein so doe I tell our Iesuites that I agree with him with Durand Almaine and the other papists that teach the same doctrine Sixtly because Gerson another famous popish writer holdeth the same opinion These are his expresse words Nulla offensa dei est venialis de se nisi tantum modo per respectum ad diuinam misericordiam qui non vult de facto quamlibet offensam imputare ad mortem cum illud posset iustissimè Et ita concluditur quod peccatum mortale veniale in esse tali non distinguuntur intrinsecè essentialiter sed solum per respectum ad diuinam gratiam quae peccatum istud imputat ad poenam mortis aliud non No offence of God is veniall of it owne nature but onely in respect of Gods mercie who will not de facto imputa euery offence to death though he might doe it most iustly And
God knew right wel that it is not in our power to keepe his lawes Thirdly that God commanded to vs impossible things that we might therby acknowledge our owne insufficiency wholy rely vpon his fauor help mercy Fourthly that we might hereby know that our saluation proceedeth of mercie and not of the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done and wherein the papists seeke merit and iustification So then the doctrine which I now teach is not my doctrine onely but the flat doctrnie of Saint Austen yea and the selfe same doctrine which the best learned papists haue taught before me That it is not possible for man to keepe Gods commaundements perfectly in this life no other proofe is needfull saue onely the Lords Prayer For in it the best liuer vpon earth is taught to aske forgiuenesse and pardon for his sinnes and doubtles where pardon must be demaunded there the law is not exactly obserued The vsuall practise of all papists is consectarie hereunto For in their ordinarie and daiely masses as also in their quotidian auricular confessions they confesse three seuerall times their most grieuous sinnes in these wordes Mea culpa mea culpa me a maxima culpa In which publique daily confession they must eitheir confesse that they deale hypocritically dissemble damnably and mocke God most irreligiously or els doubtles that they cannot keepe Gods commaundements as they beare the world in hand they do Now it remaineth that I answere to some popish obiections which the papists deeme and repute insoluble The first Obiection The young man told Christ that he had kept all the commaundements from his youth vp VVhom Christ reprooued not as though he had not kept them indeed but exhorted him to perfection in selling all his possessions The Answere I Answere both with Saint Austen and Saint Hierome That the young man answered vntrulie when hee said hee had kept all the commaundements Saint Austen hath these words Ille quidem tristis abscessit qui viderit quemadmodum illa legis mandata seruauerat Puto enim quod se arrogantius quam verius seruasse responderat He went away sorrowfull who knew how hee had kept the commaundements of the low For I thinke he answered more arrogantlie then trulie that he had kept them Sant Hierome saith plainlie and roundlie Mentitur He lieth And the circumstance of the texts going afore and following doe purport no lesse vnto vs. The second Obiection Saint Paul saith For note the hearers of the law are iust with God but the doers of the law shall be iustified The Answere Saint Paul meaneth nothing lesse in these words than that a man in Gods sight can be iustified his workes But he goeth about to conclude all vnder sinne and so to haue neede of the glorie of God because none is able to performe and keepe the law For his whole scope and intent is this to proue that the Iewes did in vaine boast against the Gentiles that they had the law seeing they did not keepe the same As if he had said if ye will be iustified by the law ye must performe and keepe the law which ye doe not for not the hearers of the law but the doers are iust in Gods sight I willinglie graunt and will it not denie that if any of you papists can perfectly obserue and keepe the law the same papist shall be iustified by the merit of his workes but if any such papist could be found which I am sure is impossible yet should that papist heare what Saint Paul saith of holy Abraham For saith he if Abraham were iustified by works he hath glorie or whererein to boast but not before God The third Obiection If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements The answere Our Sauiour Christ doth not shew in this place how men doe attaine vnto eternall life but hee sheweth what perfect obseruation of Gods law is required of them who looke to bee iustified by the workes of the law This my answere is cleered by the question proposed vnto Christ which was this VVhat good thing shall I doe that I may haue eternall life Christ answered If thou wilt haue eternall life by doing good workes then must thou keepe Gods commaundements But this is impossible as is alreadie prooued The fourth Obiection Christ saith My yoke is easie and my burden is light And Saint Iohn saith his commaundements are not heauie The Answere The law of God is impossible to be kept in such perfection as the same requireth at our hands as I haue alreadie proued Neuerthelesse the yoke of Christ is sweete and his burden light to all them which beleeue in him For as Saint Peter saith The yoke of the law is such a burden as neither we nor our fathers were able to beare but we belleeue to be saued by the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ hath taken away the curse of the law Christ hath satisfied for our transgressions of the law Christ sent by God in the similitude of sinfull flesh blotted out the hand writing that was against vs and nailed it vpon the crosse There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus Christ is our iustification our sanctification and our redemption By faith in Christ wee doe ouercome the world Christ is so mercifull that hee refresheth all those which come vnto him This being so wee may trulie say that in Christ wee fulfill the law because he is our righteousnesse our sanctification and our redemption because hee hath ouercome death because hee hath clothed vs with his righteousnesse because hee hath couered our nakednesse with his garments because in him wee haue gotten the victorie ouer hell death and damnation This is it that Saint Austen saith in these golden wordes Omnia ergo mandata tunc facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoseitur All the commaundements are then reputed as done when whatsoeuer is not done is of mercie forgiuen The first Obiection Saint Hierome saith He is to be detested as a blasphemer that affirmeth God to haue commaunded any impossible thing And Saint Austen saith God can neither commaund things impossible because he is iust neither condemne a man for that which he could not auoyd because he is mercifull The Answere I answere first that hee is to bee detested as a blasphemer that affirmeth God to haue commaunded any thing vnto man which was either impossible in it selfe to be done or to be done of man as man I say impossible in it selfe because otherwise Christ himselfe could not haue fulfilled the law which to hold is flat blasphemie against the Sonne of God I say impossible to bee done of man as man because otherwise the Protoplast Adam could not haue kept the law which to hold is most absurd and against all learning and learned men Secondly that he is to be detested as a blasphemer
giue licence to marrie a mans owne naturall sister Answere papists if ye can or els yeeld vnto the truth for shame The fourth Article Of originall concupiscence in the regenerat SAint Paule throughout the whole seuenth chapter to the Romans proueth originall concupiscence in the regenerate to be sinne But the papists cannot abide to heare this doctrine they stop their eares against the charmer though he charme neuer so wisely And why I pray you because forsooth it ouerthroweth their holy so supposed iustifications their inherent purities their mutuall satisfactions their condigne merites their pharisaicall supererogations And yet Petrus Lombardus their famous master of sentences whose book to this day is publickely read in their schooles of diuinitie vtterly condemneth their damnable doctrine in this point These are his expresse words Secundum animas vero iam redemptisumus ex parte non ex toto à culpa non à poena nec omnino à eulpa non enim ab ea sic redempti sumus vt non sit sed vt non dominetur But touching our soules we are redeemed in part not wholly from the sinne not from the paine neither wholly from the sinne or fault For we are not so redeemed from it that it be not in vs but that it rule not ouer vs. Thus writeth the worshipfull popish master our reuerend father Lombard out of whose words we may gather with facilitie so much as will serue our turne against the papists For first he saith we are redeemed in part but not in the whole Secondly that we are not wholly redeemed from sinne Thirdly he telleth vs how we are redeemed from sinne viz. that albeit sinne still remaine in vs yet hath it not such dominion ouer vs that it can enforce vs to consent thereunto Loe this doctrine is not mine but the flat doctrine of the papists which I learned of that great papist who for his learning was surnamed the master of sentences and to this day is publickly read in their diuinitie schooles Touching S. Paule he saith first in this manner I my selfe with the mind serue the law of God but with the flesh the law of sinne Out of these words I note first that the Apostle speaketh of the regenerate throughout this whole chapter because he nameth himselfe who was Gods chosen and elect vessell For which respect and the like expressed in the seuenth chapter to the Romanes S. Austen changed his opinion and graunted S. Paule to speake here of the regenerate I note secondly that the elect and regenerate doe serue the law of sinne I note thirdly that the best liuers are so farre from meriting ex condigno grace and glorie that they deserue in rigour of iustice eternall death because death is the reward of sin VVhich for that S. Austen could not well digest at the first he thought that S. Paules words were to be vnderstood of the reprobate and not of the elect and godly sort but when he had pondered the Apostles discourse and words more seriously he changed his opinion This is confirmed in the selfesame chapter in these words But I see another law in my members rebelling against the law of my mind and subduing me vnto the law of sinne which is in my members By these words it is euident that albeit S. Paule were the child of God yet could he not merite any thing in Gods sight but rather in rigour of iustice prouoke Gods heauie displeasure against him For where or what could be his merite who was prisoner to the law of sinne Againe the same is confirmed in these words For I do not the good which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. Thus saith S. Paule And doubtlesse since he did the euill which he would not he sinned though he were regenerate and in that he sinned he was guiltie of damnation because death is the stipend of sinne For this cause grauely saith S. Austen Cum deus coronat merita nostra nihil aliud coronat quam munera sua VVhen God crowneth our merites he crowneth nothing els but his owne gifts Againe the same is confirmed in these words For the law is spirituall but I am carnall sold vnder sinne Thus saith S. Paule of himselfe And yet it is most true that one vnder the buthen of sinne can merite nothing saue hell fire and eternall paine Againe the same is confirmed in these words If I do that I would not then it is not I that doth it but sinne that dwelleth in me Loe S. Paule graunteth that to be sinne in himselfe which yet himself consenteth not vnto And that he speaketh of originall concupiscence which remaineth in the regenerate after baptisme it cannot be denied And it will not serue the turne to say as Bellarmine doth viz. that originall concupiscence remaineth after baptisme but is no sinne at all and that it is called sinne onely in this respect because it prouoketh a man to sinne as a mans writing is called his hand because it is written with his hand For first their owne master Petrus Lombardus graunteth it to be sinne euen as S. Paule doth Secondly it causeth man to serue the law of sinne which seruice can neuer be but sinne Thirdly S. Paule saith he doth that ill which he would not and that which he doth hate All which must needs be meant of sinne That concupiscence remaining after baptisme is truly called sinne the papists themselues confesse vnawares in a maine point of doctrine and setled ground of their religion Marke well gentle reader what I shall deliuer in this behalfe God chose all in Christ that shall be saued before the foundation of the world and likewise reprobated al both negatiuely and positiuely that I may vse their schoole-tearmes but positiuely for the foresight of original sinne For the proofe hereof it will suffice to alledge the words of our papists at Rhemes in their notes vpon the new testament Thus doe they write So likewise God seeing all mankind and euery one of the same in a generall condemnation and masse of sinne in and by Adam deliuereth some and not othersome These are their own words and that which they teach is the common doctrine of the Romish church Againe the same Rhemists in the chapter afore quoted haue these words by the same example of those twins it is euident also that neither nations nor particular persons be elected eternally or called temporally or preferred to Gods fauour before others by their owne merits because God when he made choise and first loued Iacob and refused Esau respected them both as ill and the one no lesse than the other guiltie of damnation for originall sinne which was alike in them both And therefore where iustly he might haue reprobated both he saued of mercie one This is that strong foundation whereon the papists thinke predestination to be built the which I willingly doe admit as which will make
implet quod scriptum est non concupisces The apostle therefore saith not that he hath not power to doe good but that he cannot perfect that which is good For he doth great good who doth that which is written Follow not thy lustes but he doth not perfect his well doing because he doth not fulfil that which is written Thou shalt not lust Out of these wordes of Saint Austen I note many memorable documents First that Saint Austen speaketh these wordes of the regenerate for they onely can doe this good whereof the apostle speaketh Secondly that though the regenerate can doe good and striue against lust yet can they not doe that good so perfectly but it is alwayes annexed to sinne and chayned with it as with an heauie yokefellow Thirdly that the tenth commandement marke well my wordes prohibiteth not onely actuall lust done with consent but also originall lust committed without consent and consequently that concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is sinne properlie and formallie I prooue it because Saint Paul could not performe this precept as Saint Austen truely and learnedly obserued who for all that touching actuall sinne was most free and innocent For he fought mightily against his raging concupiscence and did in no wise yeeld thereunto He was therefore guiltie by reason of originall concupiscence which abode in him against his will Therefore most absurd is the exposition of the Rhemists who beare the reader in hand that Saint Paul speaketh not of the habituall concupiscence or sensuall desire and inclination to euill when he forbiddeth to lust For if onely the consent of our reason and mind to obey and to follow the lusts thereof were sinne indeede then should Saint Austens exposition be very childish and too too absurd who telleth vs plainely in expresse tearmes That S. Paul could not fulfill that precept although he did not yeeld his consent vnto it neither did obey or follow the desires thereof No no Saint Paul had no such meaning he named it sinne as it is indeed He saith hee had not knowne lust to be sinne except the law had said Thou shalt not lust But he could neuer be ignorant that concupiscence with consent was sinne seeing the verie heathen men did know and confesse the same Againe that actuall concupiscence which our Rhemists speake of is forbidden in the sixt seuenth and eight commaundements as Christ himselfe expondeth them And consequently the tenth commandement forbiddeth the very habituall and sensuall desire or inclination to sinne and the euill fruits thereof that is wicked vicious and iniurious thoughts though wee resist and striue against them This is the expresse doctrine of Saint Austen in another place which he deliuereth in these words Agitenim aliquid concupiscentia carnis quando non exhibetur ei vel cordis assensus vbi regnet vel membra velut arma quibus impleatur quod iubet agit autem quid nisi ipsa desideria mala turpia Non enim si bona licita essent eis obedire prohiberet apostolus For concupiscence of the flesh worketh something euen when there is not giuen vnto it either the consent of the heart where it may reigne or the members as weapons which may accomplish what it appointeth And what doth it but the very wicked and filthy desires For if they were good and lawfull the apostle would not forbid to obey them Marke these wordes gentle reader for they fortifie that which is already said and giue a deadly blow to the papists two things are cleered by this testimony of Saint Austen the one that concupiscence to which consent is not giuen bringeth foorth ill desires the other that the said desires are vnlawfull and prohibited by the law of God And so we haue it euidently prooued by many inuinsible reasons that concupiscence habitued to which the regenerate yeeld no consent but stoutly resist the same is so farre from being meritorious as the papist teach that it is sinne formally and properly so called Neither will it serue their turne to obiect that which is euer in their mouthes that it is inuoluntarie and can no way be auoided and so no sinne at all This obiection I grant carrieth a maiestie with it and it seemeth to many men to be insoluble But God willing I shall make it so cleere and euident as euery child may behold with facilitie the weakenesse falshood and absurditie thereof Saint Austen prooueth at large in sundrie places of his workes that inuoluntarie motions of concupiscence are sinne in deed and truely so called In his first booke of retractations he hath these wordes Illud quod in paruulis dicitur originale peccatum cum adhuc non vtantur libero arbitrio voluntatis non absurdè vocatur etiam voluntarium quid ex primi hominis mala voluntate contractum factum est quodammodo haereditarium Non itaque falsum est quod dixi vsque adeo peccatum voluntarium malum est vt nullo modo sit peccatum si non sit voluntarium That which in infants is called originall sinne when as yet they vse not free arbitrement of will is not absurdly called voluntarie because being contracted of the euill will of the first man it is become in a sort hereditarie It is not therefore false which I said sinne is an euill so voluntarie that it is no way sinne if it be not voluntarie Againe in an other place S. Austen hath these words Quod si quisquam dicit etiam ipsam cupiditatē nihil esse aliud quam voluntatē sed vitiosam peccatoque seruientem non resistendum est nec de verbis cum res constat controuersia facienda est Sic enim ostenditur sine voluntate nullū esse peccatū siue in opere siue in origine But if any man say that concupiscence is nothing else than a wil that is vitious seruing sinne there is no resistance to be made neither must controuersie be in words when the thing is cleere euident For so we proue euery sinne to be voluntarie either in the act or else in the originall Againe he hath these wordes Propterea non perturbat de paruulis questio quia ex illius origine rei tenentur qui voluntate peccauit quando libero ad faciendū ad non faciendū motu animi non carebat eique ab opere malo abstinendi sūma potestas erat Therfore let no man be troubled with the question about infants because they are guiltie by reason of his originall that sinned voluntarily hauing free motion of mind both to do not to do as also full power to absteine from euil Thus we see most euidently that the vnuoluntary motions of concupiscence so tearmed of the papists are both sinfull and voluntarie sinfull in their nature and voluntarie in the originall And the papists may as well denie concupiscence to bee sinne in the infants vnbaptised as in them that are baptised vpon this their
negligence or of ignorance corrupt the innocencie of the law of Nature which we all receiue in the Protoplast Adam S. Ambrose in another place iumpeth with Bede in these words Non discreuit concupiscentiam hanc à peccato sed miscuit hoc significans quia cum nec suspicio quidem esset istud non licerè apud deum cognoui inquit esse peccatum Sub sua persona quasi generalem agit causam Lexitaque concupiscentiam prohibet quae propterea quod oblectamento est non putabatur esse peccatum He hath not discerned this concupiscence from sinne but hath coupled it with sinne signifying thereby that when there was not so much as any suspition that this thing was not lawfull before God I knew saith he that it is sinne Vnder his own person he pleadeth as it were the generall cause The law therefore forbiddeth concupiscence which because it delighteth seemeth not to be sinne Thus writeth S. Ambrose whose words cannot possibly be vnderstood of any other concupiscence than of that which is inuoluntarie and originall Thirdly that their owne vulgar Latine text which the late councell of Trent preferreth before both the Hebrew and the Greeke and commandeth all papists to vse it as authenticall and none other hath the word iniquitas in both places and doth call as well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ininiquitie these are the expresse words omnis iniquitas peccatum est All iniquitie is sinne Loe their owne translation to which all papists are tied as a Beare to a stake doth flatlie confound them all and saith plainelie and expressely That euerie iniquitie is a sinne And yet the papists of Rhemes bluntishly and impudently defend the contrarie crying out with open mouthes That some iniquitie is not sinne The truth is this that they are driuen to a non plus and cannot tell in the world what to say against this doctrine of concupiscence in the regenerate For both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is truly and fitly tearmed iniquitas or iniquitie VVhich but that I studie to be briefe I could shew by a thousand testimonies out of S. Austen S. Ambrose and S. Bede Answere therefore ô papist if ye can or if ye dare not because ye cannot then reclaime your selues and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you and adiure you if your hearts faile you not and if your owne consciences condemne you not to send me an answere to this short challenge which I haue compiled very briefely so once to prouoke you to the open combat which I haue now many years expected at your hands and could neuer yet find so much courage in any of you all VVherefore to seale vp the veritie of this article as an vndoubted truth I will here adde for the complement as amost delicat post-past to satisfie the longing appetites of the Iesuit Parsons the arch priest Blackwell and all the traiterous crew of that Iesuited brotherhood the flat testimonie of their saint Thomas Aquinas whose doctrine they are bound to defend beleeue and approue and may not in any case refuse or denie the same these are his expresse words Dicendū quod illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationisnon perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potest esse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum ingenere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem perueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati VVe must answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefest in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some vnperfect thing in this kind VVhereupon it commeth that such a motion of sensualitie preuenting reason is a veniall sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne Thus writeth Aquinas out of whose words I note these important obseruations First that this Aquinas is a popish canonized saint Secondly that for his great learning he was surnamed Doctor Angelicus The Angelicall Doctor Thirdly that Pope Vrbanus the fourth and Pope Innocentius the fift did so admire and reuerence the excellent learning of this famous schoole-doctor who was a learned clarke indeed that they confirmed his doctrine for authenticall and gaue it the first place after the canonicall Scripture Fourthly that this great doctor so highly renowned in the Romish church that no papist may denie or gainesay that which he hath written graunteeth freely teacheth plainely and auoucheth constantly that the inordinate motion of sensualitie which goeth before reason is properly a sinne though but a veniall sinne as he tearmeth it For it is one thing to be a sinne perfectly another thing to be a sinne properly A veniall and little sinne is as well and as truly a sinne as a mortall and great sinne as the papists tearme them For he is as truly and properly a theefe that stealeth a lambe or a goose as he that stealeth an oxe or a horse though not a theefe in so high degree For mortall and veniall sinnes as the papists tearm them doe onely differ Secundum magis minus according to more and lesse But in truth euery sinne is mortall as I haue alreadie proued in my booke of Motiues Answer ô papists if ye can if not repent for shame The fift Article Of the condigne so supposed merite of workes THe papists either of ignorance or of malice doe most vnchristianlie slander the professors of Christs Gospell as though they were enemies to good workes when in deed they both thinke preach and write more Christianly more religiously and more sincerely than the papists doe of and concerning godlie actions and good workes In regard hereof before I come to the maine point of that which I purpose to oppugne in this article I graunt first of all that though good workes neither doe nor can goe before iustification yet they euer follow as the fruits follow the tree the persons that are freely iustified by Gods mercie in Christ Iesus for his merits and condigne deserts I graunt secondly that though good workes goe not before iustification yet doe they so necessarilie goe before saluation that no man without them can attaine eternall life when possibilitie is graunted to doe them I graunt thirdly that good workes are the true effects of predestination by which the children of God make their saluation sure vnto themselues and manifest vnto the world Yet this notwithstanding I hold constantlie beleeue stedfastly and affirme Christianlie that albeit good workes are the effects of predestination and necessarie fruits of faith and iustification yet neither are they the cause of predestination nor of iustification neither
so I conclude that mortall and veniall sinnes as they be such are not distinguished intrinse cally and essentially but onely in respect of Gods grace which assigneth one sinne to the paine or torture of death and not another Thus writeth this famous popish bishop who was a man of high esteeme in the counsell of Constance Whose onely testimonie if his words be well marked is able to confound the papists and to strike them dead For first he telleth them plainely that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature Secondly that no sinne is veniall saue only in respect of Gods mercie Thirdly that God may most iustly iustissimè condeme vs for the least sinne we do Note seriously gentle reader the word iustissimè Fourthly that mortall and veniall sinnes are the same intrinse cally and essentially and differ but accidentally that is to say they differ in accident but not in nature in quantitie but not in qualitie in mercy but not in deformitie in the subiect but not in the obiect in imputation but not in enormitie saue onely that the one is a greater mortall sinne than is the other For as Gerson auoucheth we may iustly be damned for the least sinne of all howsoeuer other papists doe flatter themselues in their cursed deformed venials Seuenthly because sinne in generall is the transgression of Gods law as S. Ambrose defineth it yea euery word deed or desire against Gods law as S. Austen describeth it Their words are set downe in the fourth article of this discourse Eightly because the Iesuit Bellarmine vnawares confesseth the same against himselfe These are his owne words Respondeo omne peccatum esse contra legem dei non positiuam sed aternam vt Aug. rectè docet Omnis enim iusta lex siue à deo siue ab bomine detur ab aterna dei lege deriuatur Est enim aterna lex vt malum sit viol are regulam I answere that euery sinne is against the law of God not positiue but eternall as Austen teacheth rightly For euery iust law whether it be given of God or of man is deriued from the eternal law of God For the eternall law is that it is euill to offend against the rule These are our Iesuits owne words which as euery child can easily discerne doe euidently confute himselfe and his Romish doctrine For first vnder euery sinne must needs be contained their veniall sinnes or els some sinnes shall be no sinnes which implieth flat contradiction Secondly he telâ—eth vs that euery sinne and consequently veniall sinnes are against the eternall law of God Thirdly he graunteth that they are not onely besides the law sed contra legem but euen against the law Fourthly hence it is cleere and euident that the law eternall is the chiefe and principall law of all other laws seeing from it all other lawes are deriued Ninthly because the papists cannot possibly yeeld any sound reason why in the sinnes of theft one shall be mortall and another veniall For example sake let vs suppose one at one time to steale so many egs as will make a mortall sinne by Romish doctrine another at another time to steale so many as will make a venial sinne by the same doctrine then I demaund of our papists Why God cannot iustly condemne the theefe to hell that stealeth but so many egs and for all that can iustly condemne him to eternall torment that stealeth but one only egge aboue the said number For this must they doe and a good reason here of must they yeeld which I am well assured they can neuer do or els confesse euery sinne to be mortall and so against their wils to subscribe to mine opinion Answere ô papists if ye can if ye cannot then repent for shame and yeeld vnto the truth The seuenth Article Of popish vnwritten traditions THe papists beare the world in hand that many things necessarie for mans saluation are not conteined in the holy scriptures of the old and new testament and consequently that none can be saued but such as beleeue their vnwritten traditions and what their Pope telleth them For the exact knowledge whereof I put downe these propositions The first Proposition with the first reason THe written word or holy scripture containeth in it selfe euery doctrine necessarie for mans saluation I prooue it by the manifold texts both of the old and new testament by the authoritie of the holy fathers and by the the testimonie of renowned and best approoued popish writers Ex testamente veteri Locus primus Ye shall not add to the word which I speak vnto you neither shall ye take any thing away from it Againe thus That which I command that only doe thou to the Lord. Neither add any thing nor take any thing away Againe thus Only be thou strong and of a valiant courage that thou mayest obserue and doe according to all the law which Moses my seruant hath coÌ„manded thee Thou shalt not turne away from it neither to the right hand nor to the left Bee carefull that ye keepe all things which are written in the booke of the law of Moses that ye decline not from them neither to the right hand nor to the left By these manifold texts we may see euidently that the holy scriptures are most perfect and that nothing may bee taken from them neither any thing added to them But doubtlesse if all doctrine necessarie for mans saluation were not sufficiently conteined in them then of necessitie many things should be added to them Bellarmine the mouth of all papists answereth to these and the like places that they are not spoken of the written word precisely but of Gods word generally which is partly written and partly vnwritten Non ait inquit ille ad verbum quod scripsi sed quod ego precipio He saith not quoth our Iesuite to the word which I haue written but which I command But doublesse this is a miserable shift and a very childish answere For first God himselfe wrote his owne wordes in two tables of stone and then deliuered them to Moses Yea after Moses had broken the said tables in his vehement zeale against Idolatrie God commanded Moses to hew two other tables of stone like to the first in which he writ againe the wordes that were in the first tables and commanded Moses to put them vp in an arke of wood Secondly Moses expounded the law of God to the Israelites at large VVhich large explication of the law God himselfe commanded him to write and to giue the same to the Israelites that they might put it in the side of the arke of the couenant and there keepe it for a witnesse against them Thirdly God commanded Iosue to keepe and obserue all things which were written in the booke of the law which Moses had deliuered to the Leuites charging him to meditate therein day and night that he might doe according to the same Fourthly Moses telleth
Athanasius that albeit the words be not expressed in the scriptures yet haue they that meaning which holy writ approoueth Answere ô papists if ye can if not repent for shame and yeeld vnto the truth The eight Article Of the impossibilitie of keeping Gods commandements in popish sense TOuching this article the reader must seriously obserue with me this adiunct in popish sense because it is both emphaticall and of great moment For I will not affirme simply and absolutely that Gods children can not keepe his commandements in a godlie sense and Christian meaning but this I constantly denie and at this presēt intend in God to proue the same effectually against all Iesuits and Iesuited papists That none haue kept do keepe or can keepe Gods commaundements in popish sense and meaning viz. that none are so pure holy and free from sinne that they can stand with God in iudgment and challenge eternall life as of debt due vnto them for their holy life Marke well gentle reader my discourse for I hope in God to hit the naile on the head and to set downe that which will be as heauie to the papists heart as a piece of lead The Apostle telleth vs in plaine and very expresse words That the best liuers vpon earth are sinners In multis enim offendimus omnes For we all offend in manie things But certes if it be true as it is most true indeed for S. Iames being inspired with the holy Ghost cannot lie That the holy Apostles committed many sinnes then doubtlesse it is not in euerie ones power to keepe Gods commandements neither will it helpe the papists to distinguish after their wonted manner of mortall and veniall sinnes For besides that I haue proued alreadie in the sixt Article that euery sinne is mortall in it owne proper nature both the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the transgression of the law and also the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a declining from the right way doe euidentlie conuince the same For it can neuer be trulie said that hee performeth and keepeth the law which transgresseth the law or swarueth from the same It is the truth which S. Paul alledgeth out of the law Cursed is euerie one that abideth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to doe them It is also the truth which S. Iames saith That whosoeuer keepeth the whole law and yet faileth in one point is become guiltie of all To which may be added innumerable texts both of the old and new testament that the best liuers vpon earth doe sinne and transgresse Gods commaundements Holy Moses telleth vs in the first booke of his Pentatench That when God saw that the wickednes of man was great on the earth that all the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart were only euill continually then it repented God that he had made mā on the earth Iob telleth vs That God found no stedfastnes in his Saints yea he saith farther That the heauens are not cleane in his sight And he addeth these wordes How much more is man abhominable and filthie which drinketh iniquitie like water The kingly Prophet saith that in Gods sight none that liueth can be iustified VVise Salomon saith that no man living is able truely to say he is cleane from sinne The same wise man saith in like maner that the iust man sinneth many times Esay saith that all our righteousnes is as filthie clouts Esdras saith he was ashamed for his own sinnes and for the sinnes of the people because their trespasse was growne vp vnto heauen Saint Paul sheweth at large that all men are sinners and that no man is able to be iustified by his workes All saith hee both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne There is none righteous no not one they haue all gone out of the way they haue all beene made altogether vnprofitable there is none that doth good no not one Now we know that whatsoeuer the law saith it saith to them which are vnder the law that euery mouth may be stopped and all the world be subiect to the iudgement of God There is no difference for all hane sinned and are depriued of the glory of God and are iustified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus Againe in another place he hath these words For they being ignorant of the righteousnesse of God going about to stablish their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the rightenesse of God the case is cleere and euident For as the Prophet saith If God should marke our iniquities and reward vs after our deeds none of vs were able to endure it Now let vs heare S. Austens graue sentence concerning this controuersie Diliges inquit proximum tuum sicut teipsum Deum vero ex toto corde ex tota anima ex tota mente vt omnes cogitationes tuas omnem vitam omnem intellectū in illū conferas à quo habes ea ipsa quae confers Cum autē ait toto corde tota anima tota mente nullam vitae nostrae partem reliquit quae vacare debeat quasi locum dare vt alia ve velit frui Thou shalt loue thy neighbour saith he as thy selfe but God with thy whole heart with thy whole soule and with thy whole mind that thou maist cōferre vpon him all thy thoughts and all thy life all thine vnderstanding of whom thou hast receiued the selfe same which thou doest conferre or giue But when he saith with all thy heart with all thy soule with all thy mind he hath left no part of our life which may be vacant and as it were giue place to haue fruition of any other thing The same Saint Austen saith againe in another place That this commaundement of louing God with all our heart cannot be perfecty fulfilled of any man in this life These are his wordes In quae plenitudinc charitatis praeceptum illud implebitur Diliges dominū Deum tuū ex toto corde tuo ex tota anima tua ex tota mente tua Nam cum est adhuc aliquid carnalis concupiscentiae quod vel continendo froenetur non omnimodo ex tota anima diligitur Deus Non enim caro sine anima concupiscit quamuis caro concupiscere dicatur quia carn aliter anima concupiscit Tunc erit iustus sine vllo omnino peccato quia nulla lex erit in mēbris eius repugnans legi mentis eius sed prorsus toto corde tota anima tota mente diligit Deum quod est primum summumque praeceptum Cur ergo non praeciperetur homini ista perfectio quamuis cam in hac vita nemo habeat Non enim rectè curritur si quo currendum est nesciatur In which fulnesse of charitie that commaundement shall bee fulfilled Thou shalt loue thy Lord thy
God with all thy heart and with all thy soule and with all thy mind For whiles any part of carnall concupiscence is remayning which may be suppressed by containing God so long is not in euery respect loued with all the soule For the flesh coueteth not without the soule albeit the flesh be sayd to couet because the soule coueteth carnally Then shall the iust bee without any sinne at all because there shall be no law in his members rebelling against the law of his mind but he shall loue God wholy with all his heart with all his soule and with all his mind which is the first chiefest commandement VVhy therefore should not this perfection be cōmanded vnto man although no man can haue it in this life For they cannot run aright who know not whither they should run Out of these words of this holy father and great learned writer I gather these worthy lessons First that by Gods holy commaundement all men are bound to loue God with all their heart with all their soule and with all their mind Secondly that whosoeuer suffereth any part of his life to be vacant and to haue fruition of any other thing cannot fulfill this precept of louing God Thirdly that this precept of loue cannot be perfectly kept in this life Fourthly that originall concupiscence remaining in the regenerat is the hinderance and breach of this commaundement Fiftly that this perfection of loue is lawfully commaunded albeit none liuing doth or can attaine vnto it And consequently that it is not possible to any pure mortall man perfectly to keepe Gods commandements Aquinas the Popes great doctor and canonised saint graunteth freely and affirmeth constantly That the precept of louing God with the whole heart cannot be kept perfectly in this life These are his owne expresse words Respondeo quod praceptum aliquod dupliciter potest impleri Vno modo perfectè alio modo imperfectè Sequitur intendit Deus per hoc praeceptum vt homo Deo totaliter vniatur quod fiet in patria quando Deus erit omnia in omnibus vt dicitur 1. Cor. 15. ideo plenè perfectè in patria implebitur hoc praeceptum In via autem impletur sed imperfectè I answere that the precept may be fulfilled two wayes one way perfectly another many vnperfectly God intendeth by this precept to haue man wholy vnited to himselfe which shall be effected in heauen when God shall be all in all And therefore this precept shall be fulfilled perfectly and fully in the countrey but in the way it is fulfilled vnperfectly That is to say perfectly in heauen which is called our countrey and vnperfectly on earth which is tearmed the way Out of these golden wordes of the famous schoole-doctour Aquinas whose doctrine two Popes haue authorized for authenticall I obserue these points of great importance First that God by commaunding all men to loue him with their whole hearts did intend to vnite all men wholy vnto himselfe so as no part of their loue should be left vacant to be bestowed otherwise Secondly that this precept of louing God as wee are bound can be kept perfectly in heauen onely Thirdly that it is not impossible in this life to keepe Gods commaundements in a godly sense and meaning because we may keepe them in some sort and measure though not in that high and perfect degree which the law requireth at our handes For our great popish doctour marke well his wordes saith plainely and constantly In via impletur preceptum sed imperfectè The precept is fulfilled in the way or in this life but vnperfecty So that when the papists triumphing before the victorie cry out against vs with open mouths That we charge God with impietie affirming him to haue commaunded to man things imposible they may as well and with as much right and reason exclaime against their owne deere doctor Aquinas and consequently against their owne holy fathers the Popes Vrbanus the fourth and Innocentus the fift who haue commanded and strictly charged to receiue his doctrine as sent from heauen concerning both faith and maners For my selfe doe here teach the selfe some doctrine with Aquinas as his owne expresse wordes very flatly purport For my wonted manner is to confute poperie by the testimonies of best approoued popish writers Bernardus the Popes deere monke and reuerend Abbot iumpeth with Aquinas in these expresse wordes Quomodo ergo iubenda fuit quae implenda nullo modo erat Aut si placet tibi magis de affestuali datum fuisse mandatum non inde contendo dummodo aquiescas tu mihi quod minimè in vita ista ab aliquo hominum possit vel poterit ad impleri Quis enim sibi arrogare id audeat quod Paulus ipse fatetur non comprehendisse nec latuit preceptorem precepti pondus hominum excedere vires sed iudicauit vtile ex hoc ipso suae illos insufficientiae admoncri vt scirent sanè ad quem iustitiae finem niti pro viribus oporteret Ergo mandando impossibilia non preuaricatores homines fecit sed humiles vt omne os obstruatur subditus fiat omnis mundus Deo quia ex operibus legis non iustificabitur omnis caro coram illo Accipientes quippe mandatum sentientes defectum clamabimus in coelum miserebitur nostri Deus sciemus in illa die quiae non ex operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nos sed ecundum suam misericordiam saluos not fecit How then was it commanded which by no meanes could be performed or if thou rather thinke that the commaundement was giuen of affectuall charitie I will not contend with thee therein so thou also wilt yeeld vnto me herein That no man in this life is able to keepe and performe the same For who dareth to challenge that to himselfe which Paul confesseth hee could neuer attaine vnto neither for all that was the commander ignorant that the weight of the commandement did surpasse the power and reach of man but he deemed it a thing profitable for them that hereby they should be admonished of their insufficiencie and might know to what end of righteousnesse they ought with their best indeuours to applie themselues Therefore by commaunding things impossible he made not men preuaricatours but humble that euery mouth might bee stopped and all the world made subiect vnto God because by the workes of the law no flesh can be iustified in his sight But after that we haue receiued the commandement and thereby perceiue our owne want we must cry vp to heauen and God will haue mercie on vs and then shall we know that he hath saued vs not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but according to his owne free mercy Thus writeth their own deere Abbot Bernardus out of whose wordes I obserue many excellent documents First that God hath giuen vs those commaundements which we cannot possibly keepe and performe Secondly that