downe He shewes saith Lyra the insufficiencie of the Scripture in respect of Christs excellencie in worke and doctrine speaker D. B. P. Secondly S. Iohn saith not that for faith vve shall be saued but beleeuing vve should haue saluation in his name vvhich he clipped off speaker A. W. What saith Master Perkins more than your glosse doth acknowledge That faith may be anowed by which life may be had And another glosse expounds that beleeuing of faith formed by charitie which you grant iustifies It helpes vs nothing at all to leaue out those words in his name and therefore there was no clipping in it speaker D. B. P. Thirdly remember to vvhat faith S. John ascribes the meanes of our saluation not to that vvhereby vve applie vnto our selues Christs righteousnes but by vvhich vve beleeue Jesus to be Christ the Messias of the Ievves and the Sonne of God vvhich M. Perkins also concealed speaker A. W. The faith spoken of in this text is not properly iustifying faith but that is signified in the latter part of the verse where it is said that we haue life in his name that is by resting vpon his power to saue vs. The concealing of those words doth more hurt than helpe vs. speaker W. P. If it bee said that this place must bee vnderstood of Christs miracles onely I answere that miracles without the doctrine of Christ and knowledge of his sufferings can bring no man to life euerlasting and therefore the place must bee vnderstood of the doctrine of Christ and not of his miracles alone as Paul teacheth Gal. 8. 1. If we or an Angell from heauen preach vnto you any thing beside that which wee haue preached let him bee accursed And to this effect hee blames them that taught but a diuers doctrine to that which he had taught 1. Tim. 1. 3. speaker D. B. P. Novv to the present matter S. Iohn saith that these miracles recorded in his Gospell vvere vvritten that vve might beleeue Iesus to be the Son of God and beleeuing haue saluation in his name c. Therefore the vvritten vvord containes all doctrine necessary to saluation Ans. S. Iohn speaks not a word of doctrine but of miracles and therfore to conclude sufficiencie of Doctrine out of him is not to care vvhat one saith But M. Perkins foreseeing this saith it cannot be vnderstood of miracles only for miracles vvithout the doctrine of Christ can bring no man to life euerlasting True and therefore that text speaking only of miracles proueth nothing for the sufficiency of the vvritten Word Christs miracles vvere sufficient to proue him to be the Sonne of God and their Messias But that proueth not S. Iohns Gospell to containe all Doctrine needfull to saluation For many other points of faith must be beleeued also speaker A. W. Master Perkins prooues that the Euangelist speakes not only of miracles because he speakes of such a faith as will bring a man to euerlasting life which the faith that comes by miracles only will not doe You offer not to answere his reason which stands still in force against you but denie the conclusion that he speakes not onely of miracles This reason wee haue confirmed as also the interpretation by that place of Austin Iohn the Euangelist saith â—ustin witnesseth that our Lord Christ both said and did many things that are not written But those things were chosen out to be written which seemed sufficient for the saluation of the beleeuers And whereas you would restraine the text only to the proofe of Christs being the Messiah Lyra may teach you that in this conclusion the profit also of the doctrine is declared And Hugo Cardinalis saith that in these words specially the intent of the booke but generally the end of all the Scripture is declared Now the end of the Scripture is our saluation To the same purpose writes Cyrill All things that our Lord did are not written but those that the writers thought to be sufficient for manners and doctrine that we glistering with true faith good workes and vertue might come to the kingdome of heauen speaker D. B. P. And if it alone be sufficient vvhat neede vve the other three Gospels the Actes of the Apostles or any of their Epistles or the same S. Johns Reuelations speaker A. W. There are some that thinke and the opinion is not vnlikely that the Euangelist speakes of all the bookes of the new Testament which hee saw before his writing of this Gospell vnlesse perhaps the reuelation were penned by him afterward But the obiection shewes it selfe to be vaine by my former answer to the like about the fiue bookes of Moses speaker D. B. P. Finally admit that S. Johns Gospell vvere all-sufficient yet should not Traditions be excluded for Christ saith in it in plaine tearmes that he had much more to say vnto his Apostles but they as then being not able to beare it he reserueth that to be deliuered vnto them aftervvard of vvhich high mysteries S. John recordeth not much in his Gospell after Christs resurrection and so many of them must needs be deliuered by Tradition vnvvritten speaker A. W. First if it be granted that our Sauiour had at that time some new matter to deliuer which they had not heard of what get you by it It will not follow thereupon either that all things necessarie to saluation are not contained in the scriptures or that your traditions are the things that our Sauiour meant for as Austin truly affirmeth since Christ hath not signified any where in scripture what they were it is rashnes for any man to presume to say they were such or such things No man saith your Glosse may determine what they were Secondly there is no shew of consequence in your reasoning Christ had many things to say not long before his death Therefore though the Gospell be all sufficient yet there are many things not written which were needfull to be beleeued Because they were afterward to be spoken therefore were they not written at all by the Apostles and Euangelists sure Christ forbad not the writing of them in those words Thirdly this is the place which heretikes abuse to the countenancing of their traditions as you do of yours All foolish heretikes saith Austin that will haue themselues counted Christians indeuour to colour their bold fantasticall inuentions with that sentence of the Gospell I haue yet many things to say to you Lastly I answere that those many things of which Christ speakes were the same that before he had taught them which they partly vnderstood not and partly remembred not I prooue it thus Our Sauiour said before that he had taught them all things which he had heard of his father and promised to send them the holie ghost that should teach them and cause them to remember whatsoeuer he had said to them whereof we haue a worthie example in that speech
with S. Bernard who liued 1000. yeares after Christ He in I know not what place the quotation is so doubtfull saith Those things vvhich vve call merits are the vvay to the Kingdome but not the cause of raigning speaker A. W. You that twight vs so much with ignorance and brag so much of your owne knowledge especially in the old writers should haue all these places at your fingers ends but this answere if it were true must needs be more by gesse then by cunning Bernard sayes merits are the way not the cause if he had meant as you would haue him he should and would haue said that they were not the whole cause but the party or ioint cause but he denyes them altogether the nature of causes by giuing them another place to be the way to heauen speaker A. W. I answere that merits be not the whole cause but the promise of God through Christ and the grace of God freely bestowed on vs out of which our merits proceed Which is Bernards owne doctrine What is Bernards owne doctrine your whole answer or only the later part of it let the reader iudge These are Bernards words As it is inough to merit not to presume of merit so to want merits is inough to condemnation If he speake of merits properly taken what presumption is it for a man to demand his right But because our good works which he as other auncient writers calls merits are imperfit therefore our greatest merit is to know we merit not for the later part of his sentence we graunt that it is inough to damnation for a man to be without good works It followes in Bernard No infants regenerate want merits but haue Christs whereof notwithstanding they make themselues vnworthie if they had opportunitie to add their owne and neglected it which is the danger of riper yeares Infants sayes Bernard haue Christs merits but if they come to yeares they must also haue some of their owne What merits to deserue heauen then were Christs insufficient but they must haue good works without which they make themselues vnworthie of any benefit by Christ. Is not this whollie our doctrine let vs heare his conclusion Haue a care sayes Bernard to haue merits hauing them know they were giuen thee hope for the fruite of them by the mercy of God and thou hast auoided all danger of pouertie vnthankefulnes and presumption We must haue good workes else wee are poore we must know they are not of our selues else we are vnthankfull we must looke for reward of mercie not of debt else we are presumptuous So that Bernard requires good workes not as the cause but as the way betwixt Gods promise and performance of giuing euerlasting life to them that are iustified and sanctified speaker W. P. August Manual cap. 22. All my hope is in the death of my Lord. His death is my merit my merit is the passion of the Lord. I shall not be voide of merits so long as Gods mercies are not wanting speaker D. B. P. Secondly he citeth Saint Augustine All my hope is in the death of my Lord his death is my merit True in a good sense that is by the vertue of his death and passion my sinnes are pardoned and grace is bestowed on me to doe good workes and so to merit speaker A. W. You leaue out the better halfe of that which was alleaged out of Austin which indeede ouerthrowes your answere That Christ hath procured pardon and grace for you to merit by but Austin saith that the death and passion of the Lord are his merit that is by your interpretation his merit of grace not of glorie For that he must merit by well vsing the grace which Christ hath deserued for him to cut off this Austin addes I shall not be voide of merits so long as Gods mercies are not wanting Haue those works the true and whole nature of merit which receiue their worth from Gods mercie If you will answere that by Gods mercie he meanes not his accepting of the worke but his supplying vs with grace to worke I replie that he may for all that mercie want merits because it depends vpon his own free will when God hath done his vttermost whether hee will worke or no. But that which followes in Austin shewes that all is in Gods mercie If saith he the mercies of the Lord be many I am much in merit the mightier he is to saue the more am I secure So that Austin takes all from himselfe and giues it to God speaker W. P. Basil. on Psal. 114. Eternall rest is reserued for them which haue striuen lawfully in this life not for the merits of their doings but vpon the grace of the most bountifull God in which they trusted speaker D. B. P. These words are vntruly translated for first he maketh with the Apostle eternall life to be the prize of that combate and then addeth that it is not giuen according vnto the debt and iust rate of the works but in a fuller measure according vnto the bounty of so liberall a Lord Where hence is gathered that common and most true sentence That God punisheth men vnder their deserts but rewardeth them aboue their merits speaker A. W. Wherein lies the error of the translation You take too much vpon you as if all the world were bound to allow your word without any further proofe But let vs examine the translation Eternall rest saith Basil is reserued for them who in this life haue striuen lawfully not as a debt paid them for their worke but giuen them vpon the most bountifull grace of God in whom they haue hoped He is desirous to picke quarrels that findes fault with such translations What one word hath Master Perkins left out or misinterpreted that might be any thing to your aduantage But the testimonie was too plaine to admit any cauill else the translation had been good enough But your proofe is at least as bad as your accusation To prooue the words are vntruly translated you tell vs that Basil makes eternall life the prize of the combat what is this to the purpose where is the fault of the translation But let vs take your interpretation of his meaning If the reward be not giuen according to debt but in a fuller measure and yet no greater thing giuen than euerlasting life doubtlesse our workes deserue not truly and wholy the reward of euerlasting life that God bestowes on them of bountie speaker W. P. August on Psal. 120. He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne gifts not thy merits speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine was to wise to let any such foolish sentence passe his penne What congruity is in this He crowneth thee because he crowneth his ovvne gifts not thy merits It had been better said He crowneth thee not c. speaker A. W. It may be apparant to all men who consider this mans course in answering the testimonies of the Fathers that
which against the commandement of God I painted my body is to be afflicted that hath taken so great pleasure my often laughter is to be recompenced vvith continuall vveeping my silkes and soft cloathing it to be chaunged into rough haire speaker A. W. The like may be said to that of Ierome and this beside that Paula had now resolued as it followeth in that place to giue hir selfe to please Christ and not the world which she could not well doe if she continued in the vanities thereof speaker D. B. P. Read another Epistle of his to the same Eustochium about the preseruing of her virginity and see what penance himselfe did being a most vertuous young man speaker A. W. As for the penance as you call it that Ierome himselfe did it was not to satisfie Gods wrath for his sinnes but to subdue his owne corrupt affections which makes me the rather so expound the former of Paula I subdued saith he in that place the rebelling flesh by fasting diuers weekes And afterward if they suffer this that is as the place shewes if they be so tempted who their body being consumed are assaulted by thoughts only what temptations is a virgin subiect to who liues in the abundance of delights Yea Ieromes whole epistle to hir perswades to the auoyding of courtly temptations by the forsaking of the place of danger not to satisfaction by penance speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine saith He that is truly penitent lookes to nothing else then that he leaues not vnpunished the sinne vvhich he committed For by that meanes not sparing our selues he vvhose high and iust iudgment no contemtuous person can escape doth spare vs. speaker A. W. The argument of the epistle to Macedonius is the anowing of the priests praying for them who hauing sinned promise ecclesiasticall penance The clause you alleage out of it makes nothing against vs who confesse that our looking into our owne faults and condemning our selues for them and if you will afflicting our minds and bodies to became we haue offended is many times an occasion that God withholds his hand from shiking For his end being our reformation by the sight of our sinne and his iudgement due vnto it in the nature of the thing when this effect is alreadie wrought in vs to what purpose should God draw his sword to chastice speaker A. W. And he sheweth how that a penitent sinner doth come to the Priest and receiue of him the measure of his satisfaction The very beginning of the homily sheweth that it is true repentance Austin there intreates of because he proues the necessitie and profit of that which he there requires by those places of scripture which vrge humiliation and amplifies the parable of the Publican who was iustified in his humilitie rather then the Pharisie though he fasted twice a weeke and gaue tithes of all that he possessed The end of comming to the priest Austin makes this that he may iudge whether the sinne require any publike satisfaction to be made to the Church or no that if his sinne saith Austin be not only to his great hurt but also to the offence of other and it seeme expedient to the priest for the benefit of the Church he may not refuse to do penance before many or euen before the whole multitude and not by shamefastnes adde pride to the deadly sore speaker D. B. P. And he saith directly against our Protestants position That it is not sufficient to amend our manners and to depart from the euill vvhich vve haue committed vnlesse we do also satisfie God for those things which vve had done speaker A. W. How is this testimonie of Austin against our position do we say it is inough to leaue sinne though we sorrow not for it nay do we not teach that no man can leaue that sin for which he is not truly and hartily grieued vnlesse perchance he change one sinne into another The satisfaction that God requires is that which Austin there describes out of the Psalme The sacrifice to God is a troubled spirit an humble and contrite heart God will not despise This is all that the Prophet whom he alleageth requires in that place Austin addes almes which we willingly acknowledge as a sacrifice greatly pleasing God and fit to testifie true repentance that hauing found mercy at Gods hands we may also shew mercy to other speaker A. W. S. Gregorie saith That sinnes are not only to be confessed but to be blotted out with the austerity of penance speaker D. B. P. What saith Gregory more then I haue oft acknowledged that we may not thinke it sufficient to confesse we haue sinned but must also bewaile our sinnes committed I will close vp these testimonies with this sentence of our learned country-man venerable Bede Delight saith he or desire to sinne vvhen we doe satisfaction is lightly purged by almesdeeds and such like but consent is not rubbed out vvithout great penance novv custome of sinning is not taken avvay but by a iust and heauie satisfaction speaker A. W. You were ashamed to set downe Beades proofe of these three points least the weakenes of his reasons might lighten the waight of his authoritie Delight in sinne saith Bede is likened to Iairus daughter who was raised to life by the touching of her hand he forgot that Christ bad her rise so is that purged by almes and such like light satisfaction Consent is signified by the yong man that was carying out to be buried and is not wiped out but by heauie penance Will you heare his proofe for our Lord doth not reach out his hand to him but saith to him as it were with a certaine mouing of him and grauitie yong man I say vnto thee arise By Lazarus hauing lien foure dayes in the graue and stincking both the simple act and the custome of sinning is signified which is not taken away and pardoned but by a right and heauie satisfaction which is vnderstood by the lowdnes of our Lords voyce and his groning in spirit at the raising of him As weake as this groundworke is to beare so waightie a building we will not offer to push at it if you will giue vs leaue to make that reasonable interpretation which I haue prooued to be intended by diuers of Beades auncients that he meanes only to teach vs that as sinnes differ in heinousnes so must our ret entance in waight and measure if this like you not whatsoeuer damage this worke of Beade shall haue the fault shall be yours wholie and not ours at all speaker D. B. P. And if you please in few words to heare the Protestants works of penance and satisfaction Insteed of our fasting and other corporall correction they fall to eating and that of the best flesh they can get and take in the Lord all such bodely pleasure as the company of a woman will afford In lieu of giuing almes
example a crab-tree â—…ocke hath no ability of it selfe to bring forth apples and therefore may be tearmed dead in that kind of good fruit Yet let a sianâ—e of apples be gaâ—ted into it and it wil be are apples euen so albeit our sower corrupt naure of it selfe be vnable to fructifie to life euerlasting yet hauing reâ—iued into it the heauenlie graft of Gods grace it is inabled to produce he sweete fruit of good workes to which alludeth Saint Iames. Receâ—e the ingrafted vvord vvhich can saue our soules againe what more dâ—d then the earth and yet it being tilled and sowed doth bring forth aâ—… beare goodly corne now the word and grace of God is compared by â—ur Sauiour himselfe vnto seede and our harts vnto the earth that receiâ—ed it what meruaile then if we otherwise dead yet reuiued by this liuelyeed do yeeld plentie of pleasing fruit speaker A. W. The question is not whether God can maâ—e a man able to doe good workes or no for of that no mandoubts but what a man can doe by nature to his owne coâ—…ersion Master Perkins saith he is spiritually dead and thereâ—…re can do nothing You answere that he can doe something when God hath quickened him But what can hee doâ— to the quickening of himselfe giue his free consent you say Then it must needes follow that he hath power by naâ—…e to will his owne conuersion for as yet hee hath receiued no grace but onely hath had a good motion made to him or inspired into him by God of which by his owne free wilâ— he takes a liking and so attaines to iustifying grace speaker D. B. P. Hauing hitherto explicated the state of the question and solued such obiections as may be gathered out of Master Perkins against it before I come to his solution of our arguments I will set downe some principall places both out of the Scriptures and auncient Fathers in defence of our Doctrine because he proposeth but few for vs and misapplieth them too God hath appointed to bring them to chuse and like of saluation 〈…〉 Christ. speaker D. B. P. Vnto these 〈…〉 of the old Testament one vnder the law of Nature and the â—…er vnder Moyses law let vs couple two more out of the new Testament The first may be those kind words of our Sauiour vnto the Iewes Jerusalem Jerusalem c. how often vvould I haue gathered together thy children as the hen doth her chickâ—â—s vnder her vvings and thou vvouldest not Which doth plainely demonstrate that there was no want either of Gods helpe inwardly or of Christs perswasion outwardly for their conuersion and that the whole fault lay in their owne refusing and withstanding Gods grace as these words of Christ doe plainely witnes and thou vvouldest not The last testimony is in the Reuelat where it is said in the person of God I stand at the doore and knocke if any man shall heare my voice and open the gates I vvill enter in to him and vvill suppe vvith him and he vvith me Marke well the words God by his grace knocks at the dore of our harts he doth not breake it open or in any sort force it but attendeth that by our assenting to his call we open him the gates and then lo he with his heauenly gifts will enter in otherwise he leaues vs. What can be more euident in confirmation of the freedome of mans will in working with Gods grace speaker A. W. We acknowledge that the fault is wholy in euery man that is not saued but wee denie that therefore he hath power by nature to chuse life when it is offered he failes indeede in doing of that which hee might doe and ought to doe for his owne furtherance to this choise as the Iewes did in refusing to heare to meditate to yeeld to the miracles wrought by our Sauiour Christ and to beleeue the doctrine which they could in no reasonable sort gainsay It was voluntas signi not beneplaciti God offered them the outward meanes of his word not the inward meanes of his spirit for their conuersion which Lydia had To breake open the doore were to vse compulsion to knock is to vse the outward meanes of conuerting a man or if you will to inspire a good purpose vpon which if any man open out of doubt Christ will enter But this doth no prooue that a man vpon this motion can yeeld by the strength of his owne free will which is the point in question speaker D. B. P. To these expresse places taken out of Gods word let vs ioyne the testimony of those most auncient Fathers against whose workes the Protestants can take no exception The fiâ—â—â— shall be that excellent learned Martyr Iustinus in his Apologie who vnto the Emperour Aatonine speaketh thus Vnlesse man by free vvill could she from soule dishonest deeds and follovv those that be faire and good he vvere vvithout fault as not being cause of such things as vvere done But vve Christians teach that mankind by free choise and free vvill doth both doe vvell and sinne To him we will ioyne that hâ—ly Bishop and valiant Martyr Jreneus who of free will writeth thus not only in vvorkes but in faith also our Lord reserued liberty and freedome of vvill vnto man saying be it done vnto thee according to thy faith speaker A. W. I will adde to that worthie company Saint Cyprian who vpon those words of our Sauiour vvill you also depart discourseth thus Our Lord did not bitterly inâ—â—igh against them vvhich forsooke him but rather vsed these gentle speeches to his Apostles vvill you also goe your vvay and vvhy so Marry obseruing and keeping as this holy Father declareth that decree by vvhich man left vnto his liberty and put vnto his free choise might deserue vnto himselfe either damnation or saluation These three most auncient and most skilfull in Christian Religion and so zealous of Christian truth that they spent their blood in confirmation of it may suffice to certifie any indifferent reader what was the iudgement of the auncient and most pure Church concerning this article of free wl specially when the learnedst of our Aduersaries confesse all Anâ—â—quitie excepting only S. Augustine to haue beleeued and taught free will Heare the words of one for all Mathias Illyricus in his large long lying historie hauing rehearsed touching free will the testimonies of Iustine Ireneus and others saith mannerâ—lement â—lement Patriarch of Alexandria doth euery vvhere teach free vvill that it may appeare say these Lutherans not only the Doctors of that age to haue been in such darknes but also that it did much encrease in the ages follovving See the wilfull blindnes of heresie Illyricus confessing the best learned in the purest times of the Church to haue taught free will yet had rather beleeue them to haue bin blindly led by the Apostles and then best Schollers who were their Masters then to
can recouer though it liue and bring forth fruites of sinne for the time of our continuance in this mortall carcasse The third poynt Certeintie of saluation I. Our consent speaker W. P. I. Conclus We hold and beleeue that a man in this life may be certeine of saluation and the same thing doth the Church of Rome teach and hold II. Conclus We hold and beleeue that a man is to put a certeine affiance in Gods mercy in Christ for the saluation of his soule and the same thing by common consent holdeth the foresaid Church this point maketh not the difference betweene vs. III. Conclus We hold that with assurance of saluation in our harts is ioyned doubting and there is no man so assured of his saluation but he at sometime doubteth thereof especially in the time of temptation and in this the Papists agree with vs and we with them speaker A. W. To this conclusion the Papist ansvvers Not so Sir But he shevves not vvhat it is he mislikes in it IV. Conclus They goe further and say that a man may be certeine of the saluation of men or of the Church by Catholike faith and so say we V. Concl. Yea they hold that a maÌ„ by faith may be assured of his own saluation through extraordinary reuelation as Abraham others were and so do we speaker A. W. Here he ads that In this sense only the first conclusion is true viz that there is no assurance but by reuelation We ansvvere that this reuelation is common to all true beleeuers in their seuerall proportions VI. Conclus They teach that we are to be certeine of our saluation by speciall faith in regard of God that promiseth though in regard of our selues and our indisposition wee cannot and in the former point they consent with vs. II. The dissent or difference The very maine point of difference lies in the manner of assurance I. Conclus We hold that a man may be certeine of his saluation in his owne conscience euen in this life and that by an ordinary and speciall faith They hold that a man is certeine of his saluation onely by hope both of vs hold a certeinty we by faith they by hope II. Conclus Further we hold and auouch that our certeinty by true faith is vnfallible they say their certeinty is only probable III. Conclus And further though both of vs say that we haue confidence in Gods mercy in Christ for our saluation yet we doe it with some difference For our confidence commeth from certeine and ordinary faith theirs from hope ministring as they say but a coniecturall certeinty Thus much of the difference now let vs see the reasons to and fro III. Obiections of Papists Obiect I. Where there is no word there is no faith for these two are relatiues but there is no word of God saying Cornelius beleeue thou Peter beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued And therefore there is no such ordinary faith to beleeue a mans owne particular saluation Ans. The proposition is false vnlesse it be supplied with a clause on this manner Where there is no word of promise nor any thing that doth counteruaile a particular promise there is no faith But say they there is no such particular word It is true God doth not speake to men particularly Beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued But yet doth he that which is answerable hereunto in that he giueth a generall promise with a commandement to apply the same and hath ordained the holy ministerie of the word to applie the same to the persons of the hearers in his owne name and that is as much as if the Lord himselfe should speake to men particularly To speake more plainely in the Scripture the promises of saluation be indefinitely propounded it saith not any where if Iâ—hn will beleeue he shall be saued or if Peter will beleeue he shall be saued but whosoeuer beleeueth shall be saued Now then comes the minister of the word who standing in the roome of God and in the stead of Christ himselfe takes the indefinite promises of the Gospel and laies them to the harts of euery particular man and this in effect is as much as if Christ himselfe should say Cornelius beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued Peter beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued speaker D. B. P. Here M. Perkins contrary to his custome giueth the first place to our reasons which he calleth obiections and endeuoureth to supplant them and afterward planteth his owne About the order I will not contend seeing he acknowledgeth in the beginning that he obserueth none but sets downe things as they came into his head Otherwise he would haue handled Iustification before Saluation But following his method let vs come to the matter Reply Good Sir seeing euery man is a lyar and may both deceiue and be deceiued and the Minister telling may erre how doth either the Minister know that the man to whom he speaketh is of the number of the elect or the man be certaine that the Minister mistaketh not when he assureth him of his saluation To affirme as you doe that the Minister is to be beleeued aswell as if it were Christ himselfe is plaine blasphemie Equalling a blinde and lying creature vnto the wisedome and truth of God If you could shew out of Gods word that euery Minister hath such a commission from Christ then had you answered the argument directly which required but one warrant of Gods vvord but to say that the assurance of an ordinary Ministers vvord counteruailes Gods vvord I cannot see vvhat it vvanteth of making a pelting Minister Gods mate On the otherside to auerre that the Minister knowes who is predestinate as it must be graunted he doth if you will not haue him to lie when he saith to Peter thou art one of the elect iâ— to make him of Gods priuie Councell without any warrant for it in Gods word Yea S. Paul not obscurely signifying the contrary in these words The sure foundation of God standeth hauing this seale our Lord knoweth vvho be his And none else except he reueile it vnto them speaker A. W. You vtterly mistake Master Perkins who doth not say that the Minister is to assure any man of his saluation but to applie the generall promises of Scripture to euery man particularly vpon condition of beleeuing The generall is Whosoeuer beleeues shall be saued the Ministers particular application Cornelius beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued This is so plainly set downe by Master Perkins that I wonder how you could mistake him and so certainly grounded vpon the generall that there can no question be made of it Neither doth this equall the Minister to Christ but as Master Perkins truly saith is as much in effect as if Christ himselfe should say Cornelius beleeue thou and thou shalt be saued For if it be true that whosoeuer beleeues shall be saued it is as true that Cornelius shall be saued if he
beleeue So that your discourse of the Ministers knowledge and the mans election is nothing to Master Perkins answere speaker W. P. It is answered that this applying of the Gospell is vpon condition of mens faith and repentance and that men are deceiued touching their owne faith and repentance and therefore faile in applying the word vnto themselues Answ. Indeed this manner of applying is false in all hypocrites heretikes and vnrepentant persons for they applie vpon carnall presumption and not by faith Neuerthelesse it is true in all the elect hauing the spirit of grace and prayer for when God in the ministerie of the word being his owne ordinance saith Seeke ye my face the heart of Gods children truly answereth O Lord I will seeke thy face And when God shall say Thou art my people they shall say againe The Lord is my God speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins then flieth from the assurance of the Minister and leaues him to speake at â—andon as the blind man casts his clubbe and attributeth all this assurance vnto the partie himselfe who hearing in Gods word Seeke yee my face in his hart answereth Lord I vvill seeke thy face And then hearing God say Thou art my people saith againe The Lord is my God And then loe without all doubt he hath assurance of his saluation Would ye not thinke that this were rather some seely old Womans dreame then a discourse of a learned Man How know you honest man that those words of God spoken by the Prophet 2000. yeares past to the people of Israell are directed to you Mine owne hart good Sir tells me so How dare you build vpon the perswasion of your owne hart any such assurance When as in holy writ it is recorded VVicked is the hart of man and who shall know it Are you ignorant how Saul before he was S. Paul being an Israelite to whom those words appertained perswading himselfe to be very assured of his faith was notwithstanding fouly deceiued and why may not you farre more vnskilfull then he be in like manner abused Moreouer suppose that this motion commeth of the holy Ghost and that he truly saith The Lord is God how long knoweth he that he shall be able to say so truly When our Sauiour Christ Iesus assureth vs that many be called but few of them are chosen to life euerlasting How knoweth he then assuredly that he being once called is of the predestinate speaker A. W. Your question in skorne to the honest man is nothing to Master Perkins answere he doth not say that those places of the Prophet belong to euery man but that all the elect yeeld obedience to God in the ministerie of the word beleeuing as he commands them and so vpon the knowledge of their beleefe come to the assurance of their saluation As for the doubt that a man may be called and be none of the predestinate he that truly beleeues the Scripture casts it quite away hauing learned of God that whosoeuer beleeues shall be saued which could not bee true if it were possible that a man should beleeue and not be predestinate And it is a truth of God that he which beleeueth knoweth that he beleeueth and he that truly repenteth knoweth that he repenteth vnlesse it be in the beginning of our conuersion and in the time of distresse and temptation Otherwise what thankfulnes can there be for grace receiued speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins saith that he who beleeueth knoweth that he beleeueth Be it so if he beleeue aright and meddle no further then with those things which be comprehended within the bounds of faith But that the certainty of saluation is to be beleeued is not to be begged but proued being the maine question he saith further that he who truly repenteth knoweth that he repenteth he knoweth indeed by many probable coniectures but not by certainly of faith as witâ—â—lâ—â—h that holy person If God come to me as he dot◠〈◊〉 all repentant sinneâ—â— I shall not see him and if he depart away from me I shall not vnderstand it Which is sufficient to make him thankefull yea iâ— he receiued no grace at all yet were he much beholding vnto God who offered him his grace and would haue freely bestowed it vpon him if it had not been through his owne default And thus our first Argument stands in his full strength and vertue that no man can assure himselfe by faith of his saluation because there is no word of God that warranteth him so to doe speaker A. W. If he that beleeues aright know he beleeues and withall is sure that no man doth beleeue but he that is predestinate because that whosoeuer beleeues shall be saued and none shall be saued but they that are predestinate it is out of doubt that assurance of saluation by faith may and must be had Now why or how should it be more impossible to know we repent truly then that wee beleeue truly especially since that and this necessarily and certainly goe together Euery man that hath true faith and no man but he that hath true faith doth repent truly That of Iob is not spoken of mans repentance but of his inabilitie to comprehend the workes of God as the whole discourse shewes neither are the words If ye come to me but as also Arias Montanus and Pagnine expound them Behold he passeth by Vatablus vnderstands the place of not knowing God by his workes Master Perkins asks what thankfulnes there can be for grace receiued if a man cannot know that he hath receiued any As for the coniecture you speake of it is likelier to breed feare than thankfulnes being so vncertaine or at the least thankfulnes by halues because wee can be but halfe perswaded that we haue receiued grace speaker W. P. Obiect II. It is no article of the Creede that a man must beleeue his owne saluation and therfore no man is bound thereto Ans. By this argument it appeares plainly that the very pillars of the Church of Rome doe not vnderstand the Creed for in that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed euery article implieth in it this particular faith And in the first article I beleeue in God are three things contained the first to beleeue that there is a God the second to beleeue the same God is my God the third to put my confidence in him for my saluation and so much containe the other articles which are concerning God When Thomas said Ioh. 20. 20. My God Christ answered Thou hast beleeued Thomas Where we see that to beleeue in God is to beleeue God to be our God And Psal. 78. 22. to beleeue in God and to put trust in him are al one They beleeued not in God and trusted not in his helpe speaker A. W. I aâ—mit all this and adde more that M. Perkins be no loÌ„ger ignorant 〈◊〉 Catholike knowledge of the creede that we must also loue him wiâ—â— a 〈◊〉
the translation let any man iudge that either vnderstands the Hebrew Chaldee and Greeke or will looke vpon other interpretations of your owne men For the sense our interpretation is confirmed by the course of the text that a man cannot know by the outward things that befall him here whether he be loued of God or hated because these happen alike both to the elect and to the reprobate Hee that will reade the expositions of learned men and weigh the likelihood of their reasons shall see that the place is not cleere enough to prooue a controuersie speaker D. B. P. An other plaine testimony is taken out of S. Paul where he sheweth that it is not in vs to iudge of our owne iustice but we must â—aue to God the iudgement of it these be the words I am not guiltie in conscience of any thing but I am not iustified herein but he that iudgeth me is our Lord therefore iudge not before the time vntill our Lord doe come vvho also vvill lighten the hidden things of darknes and vvill manifest the counsell of the hart and then the praise shall be to euery man of God So that before Gods iudgement by S. Pauls testimony men may not assure themselues of their owne iustice much lesse of their saluation how innocent soeuer they find themselues in their owne consciences See vpon this place S. Ambrose S. Basill Thâ—doret on this place who all agree that men may haue secret faults which God only seeth and therefore they must liue in feare and alwaies pray to be deliuered from them speaker A. W. If all you say be granted it is nothing to vs for wee doe not fetch our assurance from the perfection of our righteousnes but from the truth of our faith Neither denie wee that a man hath many secret slips knowne to God onely but we say he may be assured of his saluation for all these vpon which it doth not depend Wee acknowledge with those worthie men that we must call vpon God for pardon of our secret sinnes with feare and humblenes of minde speaker D. B. P. For the rest let S. Augustines testimony whom our aduersaries acknovvledge to be the most diligent and faithfull register of all antiquitie be sufficient This most iudicious and holy Father thus defineth this matter As long as vve liue here vve our selues cannot iudge of our selues I doe not say vvhat vve shall be to morrovv but vvhat vve are to day And yet more directly Albeit holy men are certaine of the revvard of their perseuerance yet of their ovvne perseuerance they are found vncertaine For vvhat man can knovv that he shall perseuere and hold on in the action and encrease of iustice vntill the end vnlesse by some reuelation he be assured of it from him vvho of his iust but secret iudgement doth not enforme all men of this matter but deceiueth none So no iust man is assured of his saluation by his ordinary faith by extraordinary reuelation some man may be assured the rest are not Which is iust the Catholike sentence speaker A. W. Austin speakes not there of the assurance of saluation but perswades men to giue no credit to flatterers because we our selues cannot iudge of our selues and indeede wee are oftentimes faultie in those things wherein wee suppose we haue done very well In the other place he denies that knowledge which is wholy without doubting and to which wee grant few or none attaine ordinarily speaker D. B. P. And because S. Bernard is by our aduersaries cited for them in this point take his testimony in as precise tearmes as any Catholike at this time speaketh Thus he vvriteth VVho can say I am one of the elect I am one of the predestinat to life I am one of the number of the children VVho I say can thus say the Scripture crying out against him A man knovveth not vvhether he be vvorthy of loue or hatred Therefore vve haue no certeinty but the confidence of hope doth comfort vs that vve be not vexed at all with the perplexitie of this doubt The vvord of God according to S. Bernard cryeth out against all them that certeinly assure themselues of their saluation vvhereon then doe they build their faith that beleeue it speaker A. W. Bernard was by profession a member of the Popish Church and therefore against vs his testimonie is nothing but against you it is of great weight For the point in question first he is of opinion in that place by you quoted that a man may know in what estate he is for the present at least in part because God hath giuen certaine manifest signes and tokens of saluation that it cannot be doubted but that he is in the number of the elect in whom those signes shall continue Secondly the reason why he denies the latter is because the signes he speaks of being in outward obedience principally may faile and so breede some cause of doubting The scripture he alleageth for the ground of his vncertaintie hath nothing in it to that purpose speaker D. B. P. If it may be permitted to ioyne moderne opinions vvith auncient bad men vvith good I could proue by the testimony of euery principall sect of this time that all other sectaries vvere deceiued in this their persvvasion of their saluation For both Lutherans Caluinists and Anabaptists to omit the rest doe hold euery one of themselues assured of their saluation and yet each sect holdeth euery one not of his ovvne band assured of damnation so that by the sentence of the Lutherans all Caluinists and Anabaptists are miserably deceiued vvhen they assure themselues of their saluation In like manner if the Anabaptists be true censurers both Lutherans and Caluinists and all other not of their heresie erre fouly vvhen they beare themselues in hand that they shall be saued Certaine it is therefore by the consent of all the vvorld that very many vvho assure themselues of saluation are indeed assured of damnation speaker A. W. How doth your conclusion belong to this question Very many who to assure themselues of saluation are assured of damnation who denies it But the course you take in comming to it is out of the way of truth Let all Anabaptists passe whom we not you haue from time to time confuted till of late you began to tread vpon them when we had beaten them downe Caluinists and Lutherans as you maliciously call them agree in this point for the most part and neither make any question but the other may be saued for all their differences in some opinions but both haue very iust cause to doubt of you who fight against the maine foundation as in the next article speaker D. B. P. With the testimonies of the auncient Doctors for vs I pray thee gentle Reader conferre those vvhich M. Perkins in his sixt reason alleadgeth against vs. First S. Augustine in these vvords Of an euill
seruant thou art made a good child therefore presume not of thine owne doing but of the grace of Christ. Jt is not arrogancy but faith to acknovvledge vvhat thou hast receiued it is not pride but dâ—uâ—tion What vvord is here of certeinty of saluation but that it belongeth to a faithfullman to confesse himselfe much bound to God for calling of him to be his Which euery Christian must doe hoping himselfe so to be and being most certeine that if he be not in state of grace it is long of himselfe and no vvant on Gods part The second place hath not so much as any shevv of vvords for him thus he speaketh Let no man aske another man but returne to his owne hart and if he find Charity there he hath security for his passage from life to death What need vvas there to seeke charity in his hart fer security of his saluation if his faith assured him thereof therefore this text maketh flat against him speaker A. W. There is this for certaintie of saluation that it is no presumption or a man to know he hath receiued the grace of Christ it is not arrogancie but faith not pride but deuotion whereas you say it is presumption arrogancie and pride Can any thing be more contrarie Not so much as a shew of words yet is there substance of matter for if charitie be a securitie for passage from life to death and if a man may know whether it be in his heart or no doubtlesse there is assurance of saluation to be had But you will say not by faith else what neede he seeke for charitie as if it were amisse to haue more proofes than one He that hath tried the diuels temptations knowes that all is little enough But this assurance by charitie is assurance by faith because it prooues wee haue such a faith as shall certainly bring vs to euerlasting life speaker D. B. P. The next Author he citeth is S. Hilarie in these words The Kingdome of heauen which our Lord professed to be in himselfe his vvill is that it be hoped for vvithout any doubtfulnes of vncertaine vvill at all is an addition othervvise there is no iustification by faith if faith it selfe be made doubtfull First he saith but as we say that the Kingdome of heauen is to be hoped for without any doubtfulnes for we professe certainty of hope and deny only certainty of faith as M. Perkins confesseth before And as for faith we say with him also it is not doubtfull but very certaine What maketh this to the purpose that a man must beleeue his owne saluation when S. Hilary speaketh there of faith of the resurrection of the dead Hilary requires such a hope as is grounded vpon faith and hath the same nature with faith but that it particularly respects the time to come whereas faith rests absolutely vpon God for the present also Neither speakes hee of the resurrection from the dead in particular but of euery mans trust concerning his own enioying of all heauenlie felicitie speaker D. B. P. His last Author is S. Bernard VVho is the iust man but he that beâ—â—g loued of God loues him againe vvhich comes not to passâ— but by the sâ—…t reuealing by faith the eternall promise of God of his saluation to come vvhich reuelation is nothing else but the infusion of spirituall grace by vvhich the deeds of the flesh are mortified the man is prepared to the Kingdome of heauen togither receiuing in one spirit that whereby he may presume that he is loued and loues againe Note that he saith the reuelation of the spirit to be nothing else but the infasion of spirituall graces and comfort whereby a man hath some feeling of Gods goodnesse towards him by which as he saith he may presume but not beleeue certainely that he is loued of God But let S. Bernard in the same place interpret himself there he speaketh thus as I cited once before It is giuen to men to tast before hand somewhat of the blisse to come c. Of the which knowledge of our selues novv in part perceiued a man doth in the meane season glorie in hope but not yet in security His opinion then is expressely that for all the reuelations of the spirit made by faith vnto vs we are not assured for certainty of our saluation but feele great ioy through the hope we haue hereafter to receiue it speaker A. W. Would Bernard haue a man presume that God loues him without warrant or would he haue him not beleeue the testimonie of the spirit which assures him of that loue by such a pledge Austin taught vs before that it is no arrogancie but faith to know what we haue receiued and Bernard teacheth vs now that the end of receiuing is that we may presume we are beloued of God that is that wee may know it by faith He addes further afterward that this is the holy and secret counsell of God which the Sonne hath receiued from the Father by the holy Ghost and communicates to those that be his so that they begin to know as they are knowne it being granted to them to feele before hand somwhat of their blessednes to come as it hath been hidden from all eternitie in him that did predestinate and shall appeare more fully in him when he shall make vs blessed We beleeue with Bernard that we haue here but a taste of the ioy to come and that our securitie is not ordinarily without doubting So that the certaintie he speakes of and that we say Christians haue is all one speaker D. B. P. This passage of testimonies being dispatched let vs now come vnto the fiue other reasons which M. Perkins produceth in defence of their opinion The first reason is this That in faith there are two things the one is an insallible assurance of those things which vve beleeue This we grant and there hence proue as you heard before that there can be no faith of our particular saluation because we be not so fully assured of that but that we must stand in feare of losing of it according to that Hold that which thou hast least perhaps another receiue thy crovvne speaker A. W. Faith in it selfe is a full assurance but hath not this full worke in euery one that truly beleeues and therefore your proofe is insufficient speaker D. B. P. But the second point of faith puts all out of question For saith M. Perkins it doth assure vs of remissission of our sinnes and of life euerlasting in particular Proue that Sir and we need no more It is proued out of S. Iohn As many as receiued him he gaue them poeer to be made the sonnes of God namely to them that beleeue in his name This text commeth much too short he gaue them power to be the sonnes that is gaue them such grace that they were able and might if they would be sonnes of God but did not assure
sanctification be perfect in the world to come yet shall it not iustifie for wee must conceiue it no otherwise after this life but as a fruit springing from the imputed righteousnes of Christ without which it could not be And a good childe will not cast away the first garment because his father giues a second And what if inward righteousnesse be perfect in the ende of this life shal we therefore make it the matter of our iustification God forbid For the righteousnesse whereby sinners are iustified must be had in the time of this life before the panges of death speaker D. B. P. The sixt and last reason for Catholikes is The iustice of the faithfull is eternall â—uieth after this life and is â—…ned in beaâ—en but Christs imputed iustice ceaseth in the end of this life eigo M. Perkins answereth First that imputed righteousnes continueth with vs for euer and that in heauen we all haue no other Secondly that perhaps in the end of this life in ward righteousnes shall be perfect and then without perhaps it shal be most perfect in heauen So that one part of this answere ouerthroweth the other Wherfore I need not stand vpon it but will proâ—eed to fortifie our partie with some authorities taken both forth of the holy Scriptures and auncient Fathers speaker A. W. There are many pitifull shifts in this answere First Master Perkins denies the assumption which you leaue so ouerthrowne and runne to fortifie your owne partie Secondly he giueth the reason of his deniall That acceptation of vs as righteous and forgiuenes of sinnes shall be continued in heauen Thirdly he saith not that wee shall haue no other righteousnes in heauen but the quite contrarie viz. sanctification which is inherent righteousnes here imperfect Fourthly he puts it not to perhaps but resolutly affirmes that sanctification shall be perfect in the end of this life Fiftly there is not in his speech so much as a shew of any contradiction which ariseth wholy from that clause foysted in by you we shall haue no other Lastly as any man may discerne you change Master Perkins conclusion and so his whole reason speaker D. B. P. The first place I take out of these words of S. Paul And these things certes vvere you Dronkers Couetous Fornicators c. But you are VVashed you are Sanctified you are Iustified in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ and in the spirit of our Lord Here iustification by the best interpreters iudgement is defined to consist in those actions of washing vs from our sins and of infusion of Gods holy gifts by the holy Ghost in the name and the sake of Christ Iesus speaker A. W. First I answere as before that the Fathers often take iustification for sanctification also Secondly I say Bellarmine out of whom you take this hath deceiued you Chrysostome doth not make iustification consist in those actions of washing c. his words are these God hath washed vs and not that onely but hath sanctified vs neither that onely but hath iustified vs. Now if washing and sanctifying be iustifying in Chrysostoms iudgement how doth he rise from one to another as diuers things Theophylact makes them diuers at least in nature God hath clensed you from them saith Theophylact yea and sanctified you How By iustifying you faith he for he hath washed you then afterward iustifying he hath sanctified you Theodoret expounds the place of forgiuenes of sins in baptisme Your ordinarie glosse applies washing to baptisme sanctifying to the holy Ghost giuen vs that wee may worke well and iustifying to our working well Ambrose saith that in baptisme he that beleeues is washed is iustified in the name of the Lord and is adopted a sonne to God by the spirit of our God But neuer a one of these saith that iustification consists in these actions of washing and infusion of Gods gifts speaker D. B. P. The like description of our iustification is in S. Paul Of his mercie he hath saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost vvhom he hath povvred into vs abundantly through Iesus Christ our Sauiour that being iustified by his grace vve may be heires in hope and not in certainety of faith of life euerlasting Where the Apostle inferring that being iustified by his grace declareth that in the words before he had described the same iustification to consist in our new birth of Baptisme and the â—enewing of oursoules by the infusion of his heauenly giftes vvhich God of his mercy did bestow vpon vs for his Sonne Chrsts sake This is but your glosse For the grace of God in that place signifies the fauour of God as otherwhere the same phrase doth or the loue of Christ who as Lyra there saith makes vs the adopted sons of God Caietan makes an opposition betwixt Gods grace and our workes as the Apostle doth If it be of grace it is no more of workes So doth Chrysostom and Theophylact vnderstand it of fauour not of debt For if he saued vs by fauour When we were desperate and cast away much more saith Theophylact shall he giue vs those good things to come now we are iustified as the Apostle saith If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne much more being reconciled wee shall be saued by his life speaker A. W. Many other places I omit for breuity sake and will be content to cite few Fathers because the best learned of our aduersaries do confesse that they be all against them as I haue shewed before First S. Augustine saith That this iustice of ours which they call righteousnes is the grace of Christ regenerating vs by the holy Ghost And is a beautie of our invvard man It is the renuing of the reasonable part of our soule And twenty other such like whereby he manifestly declareth our iustice to be inherent and not the imputed iustice of Christ. Let him suffice for the Latin Fathers And S. Cyrill for the Greekes who of our iustification writeth thus The spirit is a heate vvho as soone as he hath povvred charity into vs and hath vvith the fire of it inflamed our minds vve haue euen then obtained iustice In the first place alleaged by you there is no such matter onely Austin proues against the Pelagians that we are not sinners from Adam by imitation alone because then we should also be righteous from Christ by nothing but imitation In the Epistle to Consentius he speakes not of that righteousnes whereby wee are iustified but of that which is inherent What other thing saith he is iustice in vs or any other vertue by which we liue orderly and wisely than the beautie of the inward man This is true of those graces we receiue by sanctification He doth not say that the grace by which we are iustified is the renewing of the reasonable
of Noe that he was iustisied long before God made him that promise yea before hee came out of the land of Canaan For by faith he obeyed God when he was called to goe out into a place which he should afterwards receiue for inheritance And this faith of his was not a bare beleeuing that which God spake but a resting vpon him accordingly and so was that the Apostle speakes of whereby God was especially glorified for this reposing himselfe vpon God argued the account he made of the fauour of God to him Now the beleefe in that promise was not only for the maltiplying of his naturall seede but for saluation by Christ to his spirituall children that P should beleeue as he had done and therefore it is called the Gospel that he beleeued This faith was counted to him for righteousnes as euery act is whereby a man beleeuing in Christ rests vpon the promise of God But the particular thing that is accepted to his iustification is his beleeuing in God for iustification by Iesus Christ. I will vse no other proofe but the phrase it selfe To beleeue in God which necessarily implies a relying vpon God for that wee desire being promised speaker D. B. P. The Centurions faith was very pleasing vnto our Sauiour who said in commendation of it That he had not found so great faith in Israell What faith vvas that Mary that he could with a word cure his seruant absent Say the vvord only quoth he and my seruant shall be healed speaker A. W. The Centurions faith was not a iustifying faith but a meanes to it begotten in him by the consideration of our Sauiours power in working miracles though I doubt not but from this beleefe he was raised by God to a true faith for iustification by the Messias But this in it selfe was no more than the diuels haue acknowledging Christs power speaker D. B. P. S. Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highlie rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Then that our Sauiour was Christ the Sonne of the liuing God speaker A. W. S. Peters confession in that place was no more in words but of Christs office Thou art Christ and his nature The son of the liuing God But if he had not also by faith rested on him to iustification this confession would haue done him but little pleasure for Satan himselfe beleeues as much and is damned speaker D. B. P. And briefly let S. Iohn that great secretary of the Holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell These things saith he are vvriten that you may beleeue that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name speaker A. W. Doth the preaching of the Gospell aime at nothing else Then what shall become of holinesse of life and good workes made by you the matter of your second iustification This is not the last end of the Gospell but the first and by this the other is wrought we must beleeue that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God so that by beleeuing this we come to him that is beleeue in him or rest vpon him for saluation and thereby attaine to euerlasting life speaker D. B. P. With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth very well saying This is the vvord of faith vvhich vve preach for if thou confesse with thy mouth our Lord Iesus Christ and shalt beleeue in thy hart that God raysed him from death thou shall be saued And in another place I make knowne vnto you the Gospell vvhich I haue preached and by vvhich you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vaine What was that Gospell J haue deliuered vnto you that vvhich I haue receiued that Christ died for our 〈◊〉 according to the Scriptures vvas buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the creâ—d is that iustifying faith by which you must be saued speaker A. W. Such is the testimonie of Paul For it is more than apparant that a man may beleeue in his heart that God raised Christ from the death and yet denie many necessarie heads of religion and be wholy cast away But the Apostle in this implies the rest and namely that which followes beleeuing in God that is if I may so often repeate the same thing resting vpon him for iustification by our Sauiour Iesus Christ. The same answere I make to the other place the point of the resurrection is of necessitie to be beleeued of as many as looke to be saued but that is not all that is required For if it be neither your preparations to iustification nor your merits after iustification are to any purpose speaker D. B. P. And neither in S. Paul nor any other place of holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we apply Christs righteousnes to our selues and assure our selues of our saluation is either a iustifying or any Christian mans faith but the very naturall act of that ougly Monster presumption Which being laid as the very corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humility and deuotion can they build vpon it speaker A. W. All those places that require of vs faith in Christ teach vs also that a particular faith whereby we applie Christ to our selues by trusting to him for iustification is the only proper iustifying faith because to it nothing can be added for the matter of beleeuing A man may acknowledge that there is a God and giue credit as to a certaine truth to all that God reueales and yet not beleeue in God to iustification But he that performes this latter must needs also acknowledge the former This then being the height of faith is in the Scripture counted a iustifying faith speaker W. P. The II. difference touching faith in the act of iustification is this The Papist saith we are iustified by faith because it disposeth a sinner to his iustification after this manner By faith saith he the mind of man is inlightened in the knowledge of the law and Gospell knowledge stirres vp a feare of hell with a consideration of the promise of happinesse as also the loue and feare of God and hope of life eternall Now when the heart is thus prepared God infuseth the habite of charitie and other vertues whereby a sinner is iustified before God We say otherwise that faith iustifieth because it is a supernaturall Instrument created by God in the heart of man at his conuersion whereby hee apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnesse for his iustification speaker D. B. P. The second difference in the manner of iustification is about the formall act of faith which M. Perkins handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as short as he the matter not being great The Catholiks reach
this recorded in holy writ read the second of the Acts and there you shall find how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were stroken to the hearts and beleeued yet were they not straight way iustified but asked of the Apostles what they must doe who willed them to doe penance and to be baptized in the name of Iesus in remission of their sinnes and then loe they were iustified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their iustification speaker A. W. Those men S. Luke there speaks of were not yet come to a iustifying faith when they askt the Apostle what they should doe no nor to the knowledge of the Gospell but onely to a sight of their owne sinnes in consenting to the murthering of Christ. speaker A. W. In like manner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philip announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that Iesus Christ was the Sonne of God no talke in those daies of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnes yet was he not iustified before descending out of his chariot he was baptized And three daies passed betweene S. Paules conuersion and his iustification as doth euidently appeare by the history of his conuersion speaker D. B. P. The Eunuch had heard the Gospell expounded out of Esay and namely that men were to be iustified by the acknowledging of Christ his desire of baptisme was a proofe of his faith according to that he had learned and baptisme the seale of his pardon or iustification vpon that his beleefe of forgiuenes by Christs sufferings It appeares by the storie that there were three daies betwixt the vision and the baptisme of the Apostle but it is not any way shewed that hee had iustifying faith the first day and yet was not iustified till the third day it is but your conceit that tie iustification to baptisme speaker W. P. The second is that faith being nothing else with them but an illumination of the minde stirreth vp the will which being mooued and helped causeth in the heart many spirituall motions and thereby disposeth man to his future iustification But this indeede is as much as if wee should say that dead men onely helped can prepare themselues to their future resurrection For we are all by nature dead in sinne and therefore must not onely bee inlightened in minde but also renewed in will before wee can so much as will or desire that which is good Now we as I haue said teach otherwise that faith iustifieth as it is an instrument to apprehend and applie Christ with his obedience which is the matter of our iustification This is the truth I prooue it thus In the Couenant of grace two things must be considered the substance thereof and the condition The substance of the couenant is that righteousnesse and life euerlasting is giuen to Gods Church and people by Christ. The condition is that wee for our parts are by faith to receiue the foresaid benefits and this condition is by grace as well as the substance Now then that wee may attaine to saluation by Christ hee must bee giuen vnto vs really as hee is propounded in the tenour of the foresaid Couenant And for the giuing of Christ God hath appointed speciall ordinances as the preaching of the word and the administration of the sacraments The word preached is the power of God to saluation to euery one that beleeues and the end of the Sacraments is to communicate Christ with all his benefits to them that come to bee partakers thereof as is most plainely to bee seene in the supper of the Lord in which the giuing of bread and wine to the seuerall communicants is a pledge and signe of Gods particular giuing of Christs bodie and blood with all his merits vnto them And this giuing on Gods part cannot bee effectuall without receiuing on our parts and therfore faith must needs bee an instrument or hand to receiue that which God giueth that wee may finde comfort by this giuing speaker D. B. P. The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the mind stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the heart many good spirituall motions But this sayes M Perkins is as much to say that dead men only helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned by Gods spirit may haue many good motions for as our spirit giueth life vnto our bodies so the spirit of God by his grace animateth and giueth life vnto our soules But of this it hath been once before spoken at large in the question of free will speaker A. W. Is not the latter your doctrine also that a man vpon those good motions inspired disposeth himselfe to iustification by the good vse of his free will let the Councill of Trent be iudge as your selfe alleaged it before speaker W. P. The III. difference concerning faith is this the Papist saith that a man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as hope loue the feare of God c. The reasons which are brought to maintaine their opinion are of no moment Reason I. Luke 7. 47. Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she loued much Whence they gather that the woman here spoken of was iustified and had the pardon of sinnes by loue Ans. In this text loue is not made an impulsiue cause to mooue God to pardon her sinnes but onely a signe to shew and manifest that God had alreadie pardoned them Like to this is the place of Iohn who saith 1. Ioh. 3. 14. Wee are translated from death to life because we loue the brethren where loue is no cause of the change but a signe and consequent thereof speaker D. B. P. Obserue first that Catholikes do not teach that she was pardoned for loue alone for they vse not as Protestants do when they find one cause of iustification to exclude all or any of the rest But considering that in sundrie places of holy write iustification is ascribed vnto many seuerall vertues affirme that not faith alone but diuers other diuine qualities concurre vnto iustification and as mention here made of loue excludeth not faith hope repentance and such like so in other places where faith is only spoken of there hope charity and the rest must not also be excluded This sinner had assured beleefe in Christs power to remit sinnes and great hope in his mercie that hee would forgiue them great sorrow and detestation of her sinne also she had that in such an assemblie did so humblie prostrate her selfe at Christs feete to wash them with her teares and to wipe them with the haires of her head And as she had true repentance of her former life so no doubt but she had also a firme purpose to lead a new life So that in her conuersion all those vertues meete
speech maketh a distinction affirming of grace that it is giuen vs viz. on Gods behalfe of mercie and compassion and is receiued on our part by faith alone and not by workes Bernard Whoseeuer is pricked for his sinnes and thirsteth after righteousnesse let him beleeue in thee who iustifieth a sinner and beeing iustified by Faith alone hee shall haue peace with God speaker D. B. P. 4. Bernard hath VVhosoeuer thirsteth after righteousnes let him beleeue in thee that being iustified by faith alone he may haue peace with God Ans. By faith alone he excludeth all other meanes that either levv or gentile required but not charity Which his very words include for how can we abhorre sin and thirst after iustice vvithout charitie and in the same worke he declareth plainely that he comprehendeth alwaies charitie vvhen he speakes of a iustifying faith saying A right faith doth not make a man righteous if it vvorke not by Charitie And againe Neither workes vvithout faith nor faith without vvorkes is sufficient to make the soule righteous speaker A. W. The chiefe thing the Iewes stood vpon was charitie which they knew the law especially required and therefore to leaue that in was to aduance the righteousnes of the Iewes at the least in their opinion We may abhorre sinne for feare of punishment and thirst for righteoosnes for desire of glorie without any respect of loue but to our selues In those places you bring he sheweth what faith hee meaneth euen as we doe who say that no faith can iustifie but that which workes by loue not in the very act of iustifying but in the course of our conuersation Therfore in the former place when he hath said that being iustified by faith alone we shall haue peace with God he doth afterward distinguish iustification from sanctification They therefore that being iustified by faith desire and resolue to follow after holines c. And in the latter he saith that faith without workes is dead to seuer loue from faith is to kill it But none of these things prooue that Bernard gaue the habit or the act of loue any place of a cause in our iustification or any respect with God to our iustification For then how could hee haue said by faith onely speaker W. P. Chrysost. on Gal. 3. They said he which resteth on faith alone is cursed but Paul sheweth that hee is blessed which resteth on faith alone speaker D. B. P. He speakes of the Iewes who held Christians accursed because resting on the faith in Christ would not obserue withall â—oses law the Apostle contrariwise denounceth them accursed who would ioyne the ceremonies of Moses lavv vvith Christian religion and so faith alone there excludeth only the old lavv not the vvorkes of charity speaker A. W. That Chrysostome speaketh of the Morall law any man may see that markes how he vrgeth the Apostles reason to prooue them accursed who will ioyne the law with faith to iustification namely that they are accursed because they cannot fulfill euery part of the morall law for of it is that sentence vttered speaker W. P. Basil. de Humil. Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified onely by faith in Christ. speaker D. B. P. So he mangleth pittifully a sentence of S. Basils saying Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified only by faith in Christ If a man knovv himselfe iustified by faith in Christ hovv can he acknovvledge that he vvants true iustice His vvords truly repeated are these Let man acknovvledge that he is vnvvorthy of true iustice and that his iustification comes not of his desert but of the meere mercy of God through Christ. So that by saith alone S. Basill treating of humilitie excludes all merit of our ovvne but no necessary good disposition as you may see in his Sermon de fide vvhere he proues by many texts of holy Scripture that charity is as necessary as faith speaker A. W. That is saith Basil perfect and full reioycing in Gods sight when a man is not lifted vp no not for his owne righteousness but acknowledgeth himselfe indeed to be destitute of true righteousnes and to be iustified onely by faith in Christ. Basil in that place speaketh of faith as it is an assent to those things that are taught by the grace of God requiring workes not to iustification but in our cariage here to saluation speaker W. P. Origen on cap. 3. Rom. Wee thinke that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law and he saith that iustification by faith alone sufficeth so as a man onely beleeuing may be iustified And Therefore it lieth vpon vs to search who was iustified by faith without workes And for an example I thinke vpon the theefe who being crucified with Christ cried vnto him Lord remember me when thou commest into thy kingdome and there is no other good worke of his mentioned in the Gospell but for this alone faith Iesus saith vnto him This night thou shalt be with me in paradise speaker D. B. P. Origen excludeth no good disposition in vs to iustification but saith that a man may besaued vvithout doing ourvvardly any good vvorkes If he vvant time and place as the Theefe did vvho presently vpon his conuersion vvas put to death vvhich is good Catholike Doctrine but that you may perceiue hovv necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to iustification you shall find if you consider wel al circumstances not one of them to haue bin wanting in that good Theefes conuersion First that he stood in feare of Gods iust iudgment appeares by these his vvords to his fellovv Doest thou not feare God c. He had hope to be saued by Christ out of vvhich he said O Lord remember me vvhen thou commest into thy Kingdome By both vvhich speeches is shevved also his faith both in God that he is the gouernour and iust iudge of the vvorld and in Christ that he vvas the Redeemer of mankind His repentance and confession of his fault is laid dovvne in this And vve trulie suffer vvorthilie His charity tovvards God and his neighbour in reprehending his fellovves blasphemie in defending Christs innocency and in the middest of his greatest disgraces and raging enemies to confesse him to be King of the vvorld to come out of all vvhich vve may gather also that he had a full purpose to amend his life and to haue taken such order for his recouery as it should please Christ his Sauiour to appoint So that he lacked not any one of those dispositions vvhich the Catholike Church requires to iustification speaker A. W. Your discourse of the theeues vertues and good workes doth not refute the truth of Master Perkins allegation but if it doe any thing condemnes Origens iudgement of him As for the dispositions you often mention doubtlesse if Origen had thought that any such had been
issue out of our soules now garnished vvith grace and such he holdeth vs to be iustified by that is made more and more iust See the place He saith directhe that we are iustified and that this iusuce doth increase whiles it doth proceed and profit speaker A. W. This labour might haue bin saued For we grant that Abraham by this glorious fact was iustified euen before God that is was knowne to be iustified or to haue true faith as he was known to feare God by it not that God was ignorant before either of his faith or feare but because it pleased him by this deed to take as it were speciall notice of them both as men doe That righteousnes is increased by holie actions I shewed before and that therefore we are iustified by them that is more sanctified speaker D. B. P. Nothing then is more certaine and cleare then that our iustification may daily be augmented and it seemeth to me that this also be granted in their opinion for they holding faith to be the only instrument of iustification cannot deny but that there are many degrees of faith it is so plainely taught in the word O yee of little faith And then a little after I haue not found so great faith in Israell And O Lord increase our saith and many such like where many different degrees of faith are mentioned How then can the iustification which depends vpon that faith not be correspondent vnto that diuersity of faith but all one Againe M. Perkins deliuereth plainly That men at the first are not so vvell assured of their saluation as they are aftervvard If then in the certainety of their saluation which is the prime effect of their iustification they put degrees they must perforce allow them in the iustification it selfe speaker A. W. Degrees of faith we deny not but increase of iustification thereupon except it be in our feeling In which respect it receiueth continuall growth but in it selfe it cannot because God doth account faith to vs for righteousnes and forgiue our sinnes not by halues but fully vpon the least measure of true beleeuing Obiections of Papists speaker W. P. Psal. 7. 8. Iudge me according to my righteousnesse Hence they reason thus if Dauid bee iudged according to his righteousnesse then may hee be iustified thereby but Dauid desires to be iudged according to his righteousnesse and therefore he was iustified thereby Answ. There be two kinds of righteousnes one of the person the other of the cause or action The righteousnesse of a mans person is whereby it is accepted into the fauour of God into life eternall The righteousnes of the action or cause is when the action or cause is iudged of God to be good and iust Now Dauid in this Psalme speaketh onely of the righteousnesse of the action or innocencie of his cause in that hee was falslie charged to haue sought the kingdome In like manner it is said of Phineas Psalm 166. 31. that his fact in killing Zimri and Cosbie was imputed to him for righteousnesse not because it was a satisfaction to the lawe the rigour whereof could not be fulfilled in that one worke but because God accepted of it as a iust worke and as a token of his righteousnes and zeale for Gods glorie Obiect II. The Scripture saith in sundrie places that men are blessed which doe good workes Psal. 119. 1. Blessed is the man that is vpright in heart and walketh in the law of the Lord. Ans. The man is blessed that endeauoureth to keepe Gods commaundements Yet is he not blessed simply because he doth so but because he is in Christ by whom he doth so and his obedience to the lawe of God is a signe thereof Obiect III. When man confesseth his sinnes and humbleth himselfe by prayer and fasting Gods wrath is pacified and staied therefore prayer and fasting are causes of iustification before God Answ. Indeed men that truly humble themselues by prayer and fasting doe appease the wrath of God yet not properly by these actions but by their faith expressed and testified in them whereby they apprehend that which appeaseth Gods wrath euen the merites of Christ in whom the Father is well pleased and for whose sake alone he is well pleased with vs. Obiect IV. Sundrie persons in Scriptures are commended for perfection as Noe and Abraham Zacharie and Elizabeth and Christ biddeth vs all bee perfect and where there is any perfection of works there also workes may iustifie Answ. There bee two kinds of perfection perfection in parts and perfection in degrees Perfection in parts is when beeing regenerate and hauing the seedes of all necessarie vertues we endeauour accordingly to obey God not in some few but in all and euery part of the law as Iosias turned vnto God according to all the law of Moses Perfection in degree is when a man keepeth euery commandement of God and that according to the very rigor therof in the highest degree Now then whereas we are commaunded to be perfected and haue examples of the same perfection in Scripture both commaundements and examples must be vnderstood of perfection in partes and not of perfection in degrees which cannot bee attained vnto in this life though we for our parts must dailie striue to come as neare vnto it as possibly we can Obiect V. 2. Cor. 4. 17. Our momentarie afflictions worke vnto vs a greater measure of glorie now if afflictions worke our saluation then workes also doe the same Answ. Afflictions work saluation not as causes procuring it but as a meanes directing vs thereto And thus alwaies must we esteeme of workes in the matter of our saluation as of a certaine way or a marke therein directing vs to glorie not causing and procuring it as Bernard saith they are via regni non causa regnandi The way to the kingdome not the cause of raigning there Obiect VI. Wee are iustified by the same thing whereby we are iudged but we are iudged by our good workes therefore iustified also Answ. The proposition is false for iudgement is an act of God declaring a man to be iust that is alreadie iust and iustification is an other act of God whereby hee maketh him to bee iust that is by nature vniust And therefore in equitie the last iudgement is to proceed by workes because they are the fittest meanes to make triall of euery mans cause and serue fitly to declare whom God hath iustified in this life Obiect VII Wicked men are condemned for euill workes therefore righteous men are iustified by good workes Answ. The reason holdeth not for there is great difference betweene euill and good workes An euill worke is perfectly euill and so deserueth damnation but there is no good worke of any man that is perfectly good and therefore cannot iustifie Obiect VIII To beleeue in Christ is a worke and by it we are iustified and if one worke doe iustifie why may we not be iustified by all the workes of
Hitherto S. Augustine Note first that he defineth the iustice which we haue in this life to be true iustice which is pure from all iniustice and iniquitie Then that it is also perfect not fayling in any dutie which we be bound to performe Lastly that it bringeth forth good workes such as merit life euerlasting True it is also that this iustice although perfect in it self so farre as mans capacity in this life doth permit yet being compared vnto the state of iustice which is in heauen it may be called imperfect not that this is not sufficient to defend vs from all formall transgression of Gods law but because it keepeth not vs sometimes from veniall sinne and hath not such a high degree of perfection as that hath speaker A. W. You may wel think we make no small account of works that make them the way to heauen that require them as necessary of euery man that looketh to be saued that allow them no small reward in heauen that ground part of our assurance of saluation vpon them First giue me leaue to obserue by the way that the life Austin heare speaketh of is not iustification but holines of conuersation Then to your first note the righteousnesse we haue in this life is true righteousnes in regard of the author thereof the spirit of God who cannot deceiue nor be deceiued It is also called perfect in some men not as you say without Austins authoritie because it faileth not in any dutie which we are bound to performe but in comparison of the imperfection of it in other men and the vncapablenes that by our corruption is in euery one of vs. By merits he meaneth good workes as your selfe also expound them and as the manner of speech that the auncient Church vsed requireth the reason whereof is not because they deserue euerlasting life Augustine hath no such word but because they shall haue a reward though not vpon desert but fauour It cannot be called imperfect because it doth not keepe vs from sinning If it be true that it is sufficient to keepe vs from all formall transgression of Gods law else we must say that Adams righteousnes was imperfect yea it may well be held That the Angels now and we hereafter in heauen shall be kept from sinning not by any strength of inherent righteousnes but by the speciall grace of God continually vpholding vs. That it may be proper to God that possiblie he cannot sinne by reason of goodnesse resting in him that I may so speake which cannot be lesse then infinite And sure it is to me somewhat strange that this perfection of righteousnes should be able to keepe vs free from deadly sinnes as you call them and not much more easily preserue vs from veniall speaker D. B. P. Saint Augustine hath the like discourse vvhere he saith directly that it appertaines to the lesser iustice of this life not to sinne So that vve haue out of this oracle of Antiquitie that many works of a iust man are without sinne speaker A. W. The other place of Austin rather maketh against you For if it belong to this lesse righteousnes not to sin and for al that measure of it we haue we are not kept from sinning it may seeme that this righteousnes is not perfect So haue you nothing out of this register of Antiquity to proue that any workes of a iust man are without sinne speaker D. B. P. To these reasons taken partly out of the Scriptures and partly out of the record of Antiquitie let vs ioyne one or tvvo dravvne from the absurdity of our aduersaries doctrine vvhich teacheth euery good vvorke of the righteous man to be infected vvith mortall sinne Which being granted it vvould follovv necessarily that no good vvorke in the vvorld vvere to be done vnder paine of damnation thus No mortall sinne is to be done vnder paine of damnation for the vvages of sinne is death but all good vvorkes are stained vvith mortall sinne ergo no good vvorke is to be done vnder paine of damnation speaker A. W. Your Syllogisme is naught because it hath foure termes as they are called your assumption not being taken out of your proposition nor your conclusion sutable to the premisses it should be thus framed No mortall sin is to be done vnder paine of damnation But all good workes are mortall sinnes Therefore no good workes are to be dono vnder paine of damnation Now the syllogisme is true but the assumption euidently false You chose craftily rather no make a false syllogisme which you thought euery one could not spie then a false assumption manifest to the eyes of the simplest If you should alter the proposition that would be as apparantly false as the assumption is Nothing stained with mortall sin is to be done vnder paine of damnation speaker D. B. P. It follovveth secondly that euery man is bound to sinne deadly For al men are bound to performe the duties of the first second table but euery performance of any dutie is necessarily linked vvith some mortall sin therefore euery man is bound to commit many mortall sinnes and consequently to be damned These are holy and comfortable conclusions yet inseperable companions if not svvorne brethren of the Protestants doctrine Novv let vs heare vvhat Arguments they bring against this Catholike verity speaker A. W. Your other Reason is thus to be framed He that is bound to performe the duties of the first and second table is bound to commit many mortall sinnes But euery man is bound to performe all such duties Therefore euery man is bound to commit many mortall sinnes The proposition is thus proued according to your collection If the performance of such duties be neerely linked with mortall sinne then he that is bound to performe such duties is bound to commit many mortall sinnes But the performance of such duties as the Protestants say is neerely linckt with mortall sinne Therfore he that is bound to performe such duties is bound to commit many mortall sinnes I deny the consequence of your proposition This onely followeth vpon the antecedent that he which is bound to performe such duties is bound to performe that which is neerely linckt with some mortall sinne And this we grant to be true we are bound to the performance of those duties in the doing whereof by our corruption there will be some sinne annexed which in it owne nature is deadly speaker D. B. P. First they alleadge these vvords Enter not O Lord into iudgment with thy seruant because no liuing creature shall be iustified in thy sight If none can be iustified before God it seemes that none of their vvorkes are iust in his sight speaker A. W. Ans. There are tvvo common expositions of this place among the auncient Fathers both true but farre from the Protestants purpose The commonnesse of an exposition is a presumption but not a proofe of the truth thereof for all these two there may be a
third of more certainty speaker D. B. P. The former is S. Augustines S. Hieromes S. Gregories in his Commentaries vpon that place who say that no creature ordinarily liueth without many veniall sinnes for the which in iustice they may be punished sharpely either in this life or else afterward in Purgatory Wherfore the best men do very prouidently pray vnto God not to deale with them according vnto their deserts for if he should so doe they cannot be iustified and cleared from many veniall faults And therefore they must all craue pardon for these faults or else endure Gods iudgements for them before they can attaine vnto the reward of their good deeds speaker A. W. Austin hath not a word in that place of any veniall sinne but deliuereth the latter exposition of comparison with Gods righteousnes Iudge me not saith Austin according to thee who art without sinne and that which shall be in the world to come That which he saith shall not be iustified he referres to that perfection of righteousnes which is not in this life Neither saith Ierome any such thing but speaketh absolutely of all sinne as the other places alledged by him to the same purpose manifestly shew God hath shut vp all vnder sinne All haue sinned If they sin against thee for there is no man that sinneth not c. Neither doth Gregory make that interpretation vnlesse we shall say that there are no sinnes in the heart but veniall Many saith he though they sinne not in deed yet slip now and then by vaine and peruerse thoughts After he concludes thus Therefore he shall not be iustified in Gods sight that sinnes in heart vpon which God looketh Where he vseth not the word l slipping but sinning as before of the deed Therfore this first exposition hath not so much as any one authoritie truly alleaged to countenance it selfe withall speaker D. B. P. The second exposition is more ordinarie with all the best writers vpon the Psalmes as S. Hilary S. Hierome S. Arnobius S 〈◊〉 and others Which is also S. Augustine S. Gregorie All these say that mans iustice in comparison of the iustice of God will seeme to be no iustiâ—e at all and so take these words No creature neither man nor Angell shall be iustified in thy sight that is if his iustice appeare before thine and be compared to it for as the starres be bright in themselues and sâ—…ne also goodly in a cleare â—ight yet in the presence of the glittâ—… sunne beames they appeare not at all euen so mans iustice although considered by it selfe it be great and perfect in his kind yet set in the sight and presence of Gods iustice it vanisheth away and is not to be seene This exposition is taken out of Job where he saith I knoâ—… 〈◊〉 it is euen so that no man compared to God shall be iustified Take the words of the Psalme in whether sense you list that either we haue many veâ—â—all faults for which we cannot be iustified in Gods sight or else that in the sight of Gods most bright iustice ours will not appeare at all and it cannot be thereof iustly concluded that euery worke of the righteous man is stained with sin And consequently the place is not to purpose speaker A. W. Let vs see the other exposition and first what Hilarie saith for it who indeede applieth it to a comparison with Gods iustice but not onely in degree of righteousnes For he reciteth there diuers passions of anger griefe lust ignorance c. which are the cause why we cannot be iustified Erasmus hath brought good reasons to prooue that Commentarie on the Psalmes to be none of Hieromes I will adde one which I thinke may put the matter out of question that Hierome refuteth that interpretation which this Papist would confirme by that place They saith Hierome delude this testimonie none liuing shall be iustified in thy sight vnder a shew of godlinesse by a new kinde of reasoning For they say that none is perfect in comparison of God as if the scripture had said thus Here is your exposition denied to be the meaning of this scripture What is then the meaning When he saith in thy sight he will haue this vnderstood saith Hierome that euen those which to men seeme holy in Gods knowledge and approbation are not holy for man looks vpon the face but God lookes into the heart Now if no man be righteous when he lookes into and considers the heart whom the secrets of the heart doe not deceiue it is manifestly shewed that the heretikes doe not extoll men on high but derogate from the power of God Hierome then is so farre from bringing that interpretation for his owne that he reiects and refutes it and that which is worth the obseruing euen in that place which this Papist alleaged for his former exposition It is no marueile if these men can prooue any thing by the Fathers Arnobius indeed doth so interpret it But if wee rest vpon authoritie his bare exposition is not to ouerweigh Hieroms reason Besides he is farre from thinking a man righteous in such perfection as you dreame of as it is plaine by his former words Who dares say to God saith Arnobius heare me in thy truth and in thy righteousnes for it is true and iust that he which hath sinned should be most sharply punished Vpon the beginning of the second verse he hath these words It is thy righteousnes that being Lord thou shouldest think skorne to enter into iudgement with thy seruant Euthymius denieth that a man can be iustified if he be examined according to Gods perfect iustice But he addes further Or if we consider the benefits of God or his commandements So that the righteous breake euen the Commandements of God and are vnrighteous It is a needlesse matter to heape vp authorities for the proofe of that whereof there is no question Who doubts that both men and Angels in comparison of Gods infinite perfection are imperfectly righteous And this is all Austin saith But how can this prooue that the Psalme is to be vnderstood of mans righteousnes compared with Gods This is to deceiue your reader with bare names of men not to perswade him by the consent of the ancient Neither doe you remember that Austin where purposely he expounds that Psalme giues no such interpretation of it but makes in his sight to be as it is indeed in his iudgement Euery liuing man saith Austin may perhaps iustifie himselfe before himselfe but not before thee And afterward How vpright soeuer I seeme to my selfe thou bringest a rule out of thy treasurie thou laiest me to it and I am found euill So that Austin vnderstands this place wholy as we doe Gregory is as truly alleaged as Austin and as himselfe was before For he doth not
〈◊〉 ther vvith S. Augustine that in this life vve cannot attaine vnto 〈◊〉 puritie such as shall be in heauen read the begâ—…ing of his first and second booke oâ— Morals and there you shall find him commending Iob to the skyes as a good and holy man by his temptations not soyled but much â—…anced in vertue speaker A. W. These places for ought I know are of your owne deuising to be thus applied and there fore I will neuer striue about them though when occasion shal serue it will appeare that your answers to Austins and Gregories testimonies are but shifts speaker D. B. P. Novv before I depart from this large question of iustification I vvill handle yet one other question vvhich commonly ariseth about it it is WHETHER FAITH MAY BE without Charitie I Prooâ—e that it may so be first out of these vvordes of our Sauiour Many shall say vnto me in that day Lord Lord haue vve not propâ—â—cied in thy name haue vve not cast out Diuels haue vve not done many miracles to vvhom J will confesse that I neuer knevve you depart from mee all yee that vvorke iniquitie That these men beleeued in Christ and persvvaded themselues assuredly to be of the elect appeareth by their confident calling of him Lord Lord and the rest that follovveth Yet Christ Declareth manifestly that they vvanted charity in saying that they vvere vvorkers of iniquitie speaker A. W. Your proofe that they had a iustifying faith is too slender They called him Lord. What if they had called him Sauiour must they needs therefore haue had saith The rich man in hell calles vpon Abraham by the name of father shall I conclude as you doe speaker D. B. P. 2. When the King went to see his guestes He found there a man not attired in his wedding garment and therefore commanded him to be cast into vtter darknes This man had faith or else he had not been admitted vnto that table which signifieth the Sacraments yet wanted charitie which to be the wedding garment beside the euidence of the text is also prooued where in expresse tearmes The garments of Christs Spouse is declared to be the righteousnesse and good vvorkes of the Saintes And that with great reason for as S. Paul teacheth Faith shall not remaine after this life With what instrument then trow you will the Protestants lay hold on Christs righteousnesse speaker A. W. That charitie is that wedding garment S. Hierome vpon the same place doth witnesse saying That it is the fulfilling of our Lords commandements And S. Gregorâ—e doth in expresse wordes define it VVhat saith he must vve vnderstand by the vvedding garment but charitie So doe S. Hilarie and Origen and S. Chrysostome vpon that place Parables are no further any proofes than the meaning of them is certainly knowne but all your expositions of this are at least vncertaine The table signifieth the Sacraments What Baptisme too and your other fiue or how many and what Sacraments Besides your consequence is very feeble Was no man euer admitted to the Sacraments that made shew of faith when indeed he had none Your ordinarie glosse expounds it of being in the Church Chrysostome of the Scriptures which sit at the table of the Scriptures Gregory of the Church He commeth into the mariage saith Gregorie but without a wedding garment that hath faith in the Church but not charitie I might in like sort examine the rest of the parable and finde great diuersities of opinions as in such cases there must needs be But to the poynt First I say many hypocrites are in the Church that haue not so much as a perswasion of the truth of the Scripture and so absolutely want their mariage garment Secondly I adde that this man and many other might haue a generall beleefe and yet not rest vpon God for iustification by Christ without which faith there is no place for any man in heauen Thirdly let it be granted that charitie is the mariage garment what get you by it vnlesse you can prooue that the faith this man had was a true iustifying faith which you can neuer possibly doe The generall meaning of the parable seemes to be no more but this that many men thrust into the Church who when the day of trial comes will be found to haue no interest to the kingdome of heauen which our Sauiours conclusion shewes Many are called but few are chosen I denie not that sentence shall be giuen according to workes but that they which want workes haue faith This is the poynt in question and this can neuer be prooued by this parable speaker D. B. P. 3. The like argument is made of the foolish Virgins Who were part of the Kingdome of God and therefore had faith which is the gate and enterance into the seruice of God Yea in the house of God they aspired vnto more then ordinary perfection Hauing professed Virginitie yet either carried away with vaine glorie as S. Gregorie takes it Or not giuing themselues to the workes of mercy spirituall and corporall as S. Chrysostome expoundes it briefely not continuing in their former charitie for faith once had cannot after the Protestants doctrine bee lost were shut out of the Kingdome of heauen albeit they presumed strongly on the assurance of their saluation as is apparant By their confident demaunding to bee let in for they said Lord Lord open vnto vs. speaker A. W. The very like indeede and as vncertaine as the former These Virgins were part of Gods kingdome in profession but not in election and therefore neuer had iustifying faith The perfectioÌ„ you fancie might well be attained to without true faith especially the profession of such perfection which is all that they had for ought that can be proued by the text If you vnderstood the Protestants doctrine as well as you would seeme to doe you would know that we hold it as vnpossible to lose Charitie as to lose Faith affirming that he which hath not both to the end neuer had either Their confident demaunding to be let in shewes rather their desire than their hope and yet how many hope without true faith in Christ Is it not generally the case of all you Papists speaker D. B. P. 4. Many of the princes beleeued in Christ but did not confesse him for they loued more the glory of men then the glory of God What can bee more euident then that these men had faith when the holy Ghost saith expresly that they beleeued in Christ which is the onely acte of faith And yet were destitute of charitie which preferreth the glory and seruice of God before all things in this world speaker A. W. They might rest vpon him as the Messiah and yet not to iustification for who knowes not that the Iewes and especially the princes or chiefe men amongst them lookâ— for the Messiah as a temporall deliuerer not as a spirituall Sauiour Beside they
is othervvise due debt cannot be any meritorious vvorke speaker A. W. Is there not a contradiction in the meaning your selfe confesse it by and by where you expound it Disorder in words is when they are not set in such order as they should be here is no such fault If there bee any it is that he might haue spoken plainer But any man know his meaning by his words well enough speaker D. B. P. To vvhich S. Augustine doth ansvvere in these vvords O great goodnes of God to vvhom vvhen vve did ovve seruice by condition of our estate as bond men do to their Lord yet hath he promised againe and againe the reward of friends speaker A. W. S. Austin answers nothing against vs or for you It is free for God to promise a reward as wee gladly acknowledge he doth euen to those workes that are due But an action of dutie cannot be made to put on the true and whole nature of merit which is the question speaker D. B. P. In vvhich there is couched a comparison vvhich being laide in the light vvill much helpe to the vnderstanding of this matter He that hath a slaue or a bond-man may lavvfully exact of him all kind of seruice vvithout any vvages Bread and a vvhippe saith a Philosopher serue for a slaue Novv suppose the Master to be soueraigne gouernour of a state then if it please him to make his manfree and vvithall a member of his common vveale the same man by performing many good offices to the state may iustly deserue of his Prince as great revvard and promotion as any other of his subiects and yet may his Lord and old Master say truly to him all this that thou hast done or couldest do is but due debt vs to me considering that thou vvast my bond-man So fareth it vvith vs in respect of God all that vve can do is due debt vnto him because he hath made vs and endovved vs vvith all that vve either be or haue yet it hath pleased him as a most kind Lord to set vs at liberty through Christ and to make vs Citizens of the Saints and as capable of his heauenlie riches as the Angels if vve vvill do our endeuour to deserue them and vvhereas he might haue exacted all that euer vve could do vvithout any kind of recompence yet he of his inestimable goodnes tovvard vs doth neither bind vs to do all vve can do and yet for doing that little vvhich he commandeth hath by promise bound himselfe to repay vs a large recompence The cōparison you shew vs is fained by you not intended by Austin and if it be granted you makes nothing to the purpose No more indeede doth the conclusion of your whole discourse for it saith no more than wee yeeld that God wil recompence those seruices which are debt on our part and that exceeding bountifully but not vpon their desert speaker D. B. P. By which we may well vnderstand those words of our Sauiour VVhen you haue done all these things that are commanded you say that you are vnprofitable seruants vve haue done that vve ought to doo True By our natiue condition we were bound to performe not only all these things that be now commaunded but whatsoeuer else it should haue pleased God to command and this we must alwaies confesse to preserue true humility in vs yet God hath bettered our estate through Christ and so ◅ighly aduaunced vs that we not only be Citizens or Saints but his sonnes and heires and thereby in case to deserue of him a heauenlie crowne speaker A. W. It hath no shew of reason in it that our Sauiour should teach his Apostles whom hee had truly freed that they should say they are vnprofitable seruants because they doe that which they were once bound to doe but now are not as if a man that was once bound to pay double custome because he was a stranger should count himselfe vnprofitable to the King though being absolutely freed he pay the same custome still because once forsooth he was by dutie to pay so much I would faine know what dutie we were bound to doe in our naturall estate from which wee are freed in our spirituall for to my seeming our bond is doubled both in equitie because we haue receiued so vndeserued kindnes and in Gods intent who hath giuen vs his grace that wee might doe him better seruice speaker A. W. And this is S. Ambrose exposition vpon the place That Ambrose giueth no such exposition his own words shall testifie Therefore saith Ambrose as thou doest not onely not say to thy seruant sit downe but requirest further seruice of him so neither doth God content himselfe with one work or labour of thine because while we liue we must alwaies work Therefore acknowledge thy selfe to be a seruant bound to very many seruices doe not extoll thy selfe because thou art called the sonne of God his fauour is to be acknowledged but thy nature not to be vnknowne neither bragge if thou hast serued well which thou wert bound to doe These are his words out of which no man can wring any such interpretation We owe seruice though we be sonnes for it is plaine Ambrose speaks of our seruice after we are regenerate First because he saith we must worke alwaies Secondly because he mentions hauing serued well which befalles no man in his naturall estate before grace speaker D. B. P. Saint Chrysostome pondering these words let vs say taketh it for a holsome counsaile for vs to say that we be vnprofitable seruants least pride destroy our good workes and then God will say that we be good and faithfull seruants as it is recorded Againe we may truly say when we haue done all things commaunded that we are vnprofitable seruants as venerable Bede our most learned countriman interpreteth Because of all that vve doe no cammoditie riseth vnto God our Lord in himselfe vvho is such an infinite ocean of all goodnesses that he vvanteth nothing Whereupon Dauid saith That thou art my God because thou standest in need of no good that I can doe speaker A. W. You should haue quoted the place Chrysostome in his homily vpon that chapter saith no such thing But wheresoeuer he saith it if he say it at all it cannot prooue that we are not bound to doe good seruice in the state of grace nor that wee can merit at Gods hands nor that you interpret S. Luke aright wherefore then is it alleaged Theophylact who followes Chrysostome euery where expounds it of our seruice after grace and concludes vpon it that we may not for the doing of any worke necessarily require reward or honour For it shall be of the Lords bountie if he bestow any thing vpon vs for it and woe be to vs if we doe not our dutie And Cyrill is wholy of the same opinion who also denies that which before you affirmed that subiects can deserue any
he that satisfieth for halfe his debts or for any part of them makes some satisfaction vvhich satisfaction is vnperfect and yet cannot be called no satisfaction at all as euery child may see speaker A. W. Satisfaction is a full discharge of the debt so that the bond thereupon is voide but hee that paies halfe or three quarters of his debt if he pay not all in such sort as the bond requireth hath the bond still against him in ful strength and vertue so that though hee hath paid part of his principall debt he hath made no satisfaction at all speaker W. P. Learned Papists make answere that Christs satisfaction and mans may stand well together For say they Christs satisfaction is sufficient in it selfe to answere the iustice of God for all sin and punishment but it is not sufficient to this or that man till it be applied and it must bee applied by our satisfaction made to God for the temporall punishment of our sinnes But I say againe that mans satisfaction can bee no meanes to apply the satisfaction of Christ and I prooue it thus The meanes of applying Gods blessings and graces vnto man are twofold some respect God himselfe and some respect man Those which respect God are such whereby God on his part doth offer and conuey his mercies in Christ vnto man of this sort are the preaching of the worde baptisme and the Lords supper and these are as it were the hand of God whereby he reacheth downe and giueth vnto vs Christ with all his benefites The other meanes of applying on mans part are those whereby the saide benefits are receiued Of this sort there is onely one namely faith whereby we beleeue that Christ with all his benefits belong vnto vs. And this is the hand of man whereby he receiueth Christ as he is offered or exhibited by God in the word and sacraments As for other meanes beside these in Scripture we finde none Foolish therfore is the answere of the Papists that make mens satisfactions meanes to apply the satisfaction of Christ vnto vs for by humane satisfactions Christ is neither offered on Gods part nor yet receiued on mans part let them prooue it if they can speaker A. W. His second is as vntrue but mans satisfaction is not to supplie the vvant of Christs satisfaction but to applie it to vs as M. Perkins saith his faith doth to them and to fulfill his vvill and ordinance First the speech is beyond any ordinarie mans vnderstanding to make satisfaction is to applie another mans satisfaction to vs. Secondly to make satisfaction is to deserue that because of our satisfaction for the temporall punishment due to our sinnes Christs satisfaction for the eternall may be auailable to vs. Thirdly if mans satisfaction be not to supplie the want of Christs satisfaction either there is no temporall punishment belonging to sinne or Christ hath made satisfaction for that as well as for the eternall and then God cannot require any satisfaction of vs because he is alreadie satisfied both for the eternall and temporall punishment Fourthly if wee doe nothing by our satisfaction but applie Christs satisfaction to vs which is onely for the eternall punishment the temporall remaines wholy without satisfaction made for it speaker D. B. P. God doth in baptisme for Christs sake pardon both all sinnes and taketh fully avvay all paine due to sinne so that he vvho dieth in that state goeth presently to heauen But if vve doe aftervvard vngratefully forsake God and contrary to our promise transgresse against his commaundements then loe the order of his diuine iustice requires that we be not so easily receiued againe into his fauour But he vpon our repentance pardoning the sinne and the eternall punishment due vnto it through Christ doth exact of euerie man a temporall satisfaction ansvverable vnto the fault committed not to supplie Christs satisfaction which was of infinite value and might more easily haue taken away this temporall punishment then it doth the eternall But that by the smart and griefe of this punishment the man may be feared from sinning and be made more carefull to auoide sinne and also by this meanes be made members conformable to Christ our head that suffering with him we may raigne with him And therefore he hauing satisfied for the eternall punishment which we are not able to do doth lay the temporall paine vpon our shoulders that according vnto the Apostle Euery man do beare his ovvne burden speaker A. W. Here is a long discourse to little purpose neither answering any part of Master Perkins syllogisme nor defending any point of your owne answere but onely affirming that which before was said that God exacts a temporall satisfaction and affoording vs some reason to confute your opinion by in this sort If Christs satisfaction was sufficient more easily to take away the temporall punishment than the eternall how will you prooue it did not It stands you vpon to shew vs good euidence out of the record of Scripture that God agreed with Christ not to take the full desert of his sufferings and satisfaction but to leaue man still indebted to him though in truth the debt were paid If no such agreement can be shewed for my part I see not how God in iustice can aske the same debt twice being once fully satisfied That which you adde is wholy our doctrine viz. that God by smart and griefe would feare vs from sinning and make vs conformable to his Sonne our Sauiour But you teach that he punisheth vs and so takes satisfaction for sins past as if he were to be reuenged on vs at least by temporall punishment for our sinnes committed You repeate your conclusion but with no dependance vpon your former matter or proofe from that which followes where the Apostle tels the Galathians that they may not be alwaies finding fault with other men and so grow into a conceit of their owne goodnes but looke to themselues because euery man must giue an account to God for his owne sinnes and not for another mans If you will needs abuse the Apostle and applie his words to that he thought not on why doe you not by the same reason lay the eternall punishment vpon vs too for that was our burthen as well as the temporall speaker W. P. Others not content with this their former answer say that our satisfactions doe nothing derogate from the satisfaction of Christ because our workes haue their dignitie and merit from Christs satisfaction he meriting that our works should satisfie Gods iustice for temporal punishment But this is also absurd and false as the former was For if Christ did satisfie that man might satisfie then Christ doth make euery beleeuer to be a Christ a Iesus a Redeemer and a priest in the same order with his owne selfe But to make sinful man his own redeemer though it be but from temporall punishments is a doctrine of diuels For the holy Ghost teacheth that the
giuing make some satisfaction And what satisfaction can then be made when a man giues all of superfluitie as hauing need of nothing There must be some helpe thought on for this matter or all will be naught That which followes presumes there must be satisfaction made and shewes why you thinke those the fittest meanes for to satisfie by But where the foundation is ouerthrowne what shall wee neede to thrust at the building Onely I will adde here in the end of this discourse a few of many meanes for the procuring of pardon by satisfaction Pope Iohn the 22. granted seuen hundred yeeres of pardon to euery one that should kisse three times the measure of our Ladies foote as you call her and should say deuoutly three Auemaries to her blessed honour and worship The measure is to be had in Spayne printed together with the graunt of pardon I haue caused it to be printed and inserted in this place Monstra te esse Matrem sumat per te preces Qui 〈◊〉 nobis Nâ—… tus tulit 〈◊〉 se tuus Shew thy selfe to be a Mother let him by thy mediation receiue our prayers Who fâ—… our sakâ—… vouchsâ—… to be thâ—… Sonne El Papa Iuan 22. Concedio a quien besare esta medida tres vezos y rezare tres Aue Marias deuotamente a su bendito honor y reuerencia gana setecientos anÌ„os de perdon Y es libre de muchos peligros Teniendo la Bula de la santa Cruzada Impressa con licencia Dirigida a la deuocion del Cauallero de Gracia Pope Iohn the 22. granted to euery one that shal kisse this measure three times and shall say three Aue-Maries deuoutelie to her honour and worship to haue seuen hundred yeeres of pardon and to be free from many dangers alwaies prouided that he haue the Bull of the holy Cruzada Printed by authoritie directed to the deuotion of the Knight of Grace Sixtus the 4. granted to all them that deuoutly say a short prayer beginning Aue Maria mater Dei before the image of our Ladie the summe of eleuen hundred yeeres of pardon He that shall deuoutly say that prayer Obsecro te Domina c. before our Ladie of Pitie she will shew him her blessed visage and warne him the day and houre of his death and in his last end the Angels of God shall yeeld his soule to heauen and he shall obtaine fiue hundred yeeres and so many Lents of pardon granted by fiue Popes Enough for failing Sixtus the Pope to euery one being in the state of grace which must be obserued that shall say in the morning after three tellings of the Aue-bell three times the whole salutation of our Ladie granted for euery time so doing of the spirituall treasure of holy Church three hundred daies of pardon Toties quoties These be fistâ—â—ene Oos which S. Briget was wont to say c. who so say these a whele yeere shall deliuer fifteene soules out of Purgâ—… of his next kinred and conuert other fifteene sinners to goodlife and other fifteene righteous men of his kinde shall perseuere in good life To all them that before this Image of Pitie deuoutly say fiue Pater nosters and fiue Aues and a Credo pitiously beholding these armes of Christs passion are granted thirtie two thousand seuen hundred fiftie fiue yeeres of pardon Sixtus the 4. made the fourth and fifth prayers and hath done bulled his foresaid pardon Iohn the 22. hath granted to all that deuoutly say this prayer after the eleuation of our Lord Iesus Christ three thousand daies of pardon for deadly sinnes Boniface the 6. granted tenne thousand yeeres of pardon vpon the saying of another prayer betweene the eleuation and the three Agnus Deis Sixtus the 4. hath granted to all them that be in the state of grace saying this prayer following immediatly after the eleuation of the bodie of our Lord cleane remission of all their sinnes perpetually enduring And Iohn the 3. hath granted to all them that deuoutly say the same prayer before the Image of our Lord crucified as many daies of pardon as there were wounds in the bodie of our Lord in of the time of his bitter passion the which were 5465. Who that deuoutly say these prayers shall obtaine tenne hundred thousand yeeres of pardon for deadly sinnes granted by Iohn the 22. Who that deuoutly with a contrite heart daily say this Orison if he be that day in the state of eternall damnation then this eternall paine shall be changed him into temporall paine of Purgatorie then if he haue deserued the paine of Purgatorie it shall be forgotten and forgiuen thorough the infinite mercie of God But that I may not tire the reader and make him cast his gorge at such abominations which are Popish satisfactions for sinnes I will giue you a view of the number of yeeres for which pardon is graunted in this one booke viz. 1076832. speaker D. B. P. But now to knit vp this question Let vs heare briefly what the best learned and purest antiquity hath taught of this satisfaction done by man and because M. Perkins began with Tertullian omitting his auncients Let vs first heare what he saith of it in his booke of penance Hovv foolish is it saith he not to fulfill our penance and yet to expect pardon of our sinnes this is not to tender the price and yet to put out a hand for the revvard for God hath decreed to set the pardon at this price he proposeth impunity to be redeemed vvith this recompence of penance speaker A. W. This is but a tricke to make a shew as if Master Perkins had omitted some ancienter than Tertullian which else you could haue alleaged But who is so little acquainted with your courses that he knowes not we haue here the best you can bring Tertullian as the ancient writers generally speakes of repentance without which it is vnreasonable and vaine to looke for pardon Now whereas they mention and vrge oftentimes the outward workes it was because without them neither the Church could be satisfied and men would easily deceiue themselues with an opinion of repentance or at the most with some slight thinking vpon and grieuing for their sinnes This appeares in that very place immediatly after Therefore if they that sell first trie the coyne which they are to receiue that it be not clipt nor washt nor countenfeit we may well thinke that God will first make triall of the repentance especially since he is to grant vs so great a reward of eternall life But let vs deferre the truth of repentance a while By which words it is plaine that Tertullian speakes of testifying our repentance to be true by those outward signes of it which doe ordinarily accompanie it where it is true speaker D. B. P. His equall in standing and better in learning Origen thus discourseth See our good Lord tempering mercy vvith seuerity and vveighing the measure of the
man conclude the point out of them and we will yeeld if wee shew not a reasonable cause to the contrarie Secondly I adde fuâ—thâ—r that if it were granted that there were some such traditiâ—…s â—â—et as Austin saith of the first place who can say these or those be they For the most part of the traditions that are now thrust vpon the Church by you Papists are in comparison but new and very trifles or meere superstitious speaker D. B. P. Our Sauiour said being at the point of his passion That he had manie things to say vnto his Apostles but they could not as then beare them Our Sauiour after his resurrection appeared often vnto his Disciples speaking vvith them of the kingdome of God of vvhich little is vvritten in any of the Euangelists I commend you brethren that you remember me in all things and keepe the Traditions euen as I haue deliuered them to you speaker A. W. Now for the particulars the first is answered alreadie the second makes a bad consequence Christ spake often with his Disciples of the kingdome of God of which little is written in the Euangelists therfore there are some points necessarie to saluation not recorded in Scripture His talke with them might be for exhortation and consolation especially Who can say whatsoeuer it were that it is not written in the Epistles By traditions Ambrose vnderstands in the 2. Thessal nothing but the Gospell in that place to the Corinthians the Apostle seemes in all likelihood to speake of ceremonies or circumstances in their carriage about Gods seruice which neither is matter of saluation nor to be alwaies alike in all places and at al times So doth Ambrose vnderstand him speaker D. B. P. O Timothy keepe the depositum that is that vvhich I deliuered thee to keepe Hold fast by the holy Ghost the good things committed vnto thee to 〈◊〉 vvhich vvas as S. Chrysostom and Thesphilact expound the true doctrine of Christ the true sense of holy Scriptures the right admini words be not set downe in Scripture yet the matter is if not expresly which is not needfull yet by necessarie consequence as it may euidently appeare by the Councill and Fathers wherein and by whom the contrarie to those opinions is condemned and confuted The first point is implied necessarily in all those places by which our Sauiour is prooued to be true God that is the same God with his Father which you shall finde in Athanasius writings and the first Councill of Nice The second of the holy Ghosts proceedings from the Sonne as well as from the Father is prooued by Thomas out of the Scripture and by other against the Greeke Church The third beside that place of Iohn is necessarily concluded since there can be but one God out of the texts that prooue euery one of them seuerally to be God and by that of Matthew The fourth is prooued out of Scripture by the first Councill of Ephesus against Nestorius so that for these points we neede no traditions speaker W. P. Obiect VI. Sundrie places of Scripture be doubtfull and euery religion hath his seuerall exposition of them as the Papists haue theirs and the Protestants theirs Now then seeing there can be but one truth when question is of the interpretation of Scripture recourse must be had to the tradition of the Church that the true sense may be determined and the question ended Ans. It is not so but in doubtfull places Scripture it selfe is sufficient to declare his owne meaning first by the analogie of faith which is the summe of religion gathered out of the clearest places of Scripture secondly by the circumstances of the place and the nature and signification of the wordes thirdly by conference of place with place By these and like helps contained in Scripture wee may iudge which is the truest meaning of any place Scripture it selfe is the text and the best glosse And the Scripture is falsly tearmed the matter of strife it beeing not so of it selfe but by the abuse of man And thus much for our consent concerning Traditions wherein we must not be wauering but steadfast because notwithstanding our renouncing of Poperie yet Popish inclinations and dispositions bee rife among vs. Our common people maruelouslie affect humane traditions yea mans nature is inclined more to bee pleased with them then with the word of God The feast of the natiuitie of our Sauiour Christ is onely a custome and tradition of the Church and yet men are commonly more carefull to keepe it then the Lords day the keeping whereof stands by the morall law Positiue lawes are not sufficient to restraine vs from buying and selling on the Sabbath yet within the twelue daies no man keepes market Againe see the truth of this in our affection to the ministerie of the word let the Preacher alleage Peter and Paul the people count it but common stuffe such as any man can bring but let men come and alleadge Ambrose Austin and the rest of the fathers oh he is the man hee is alone for them Againe let any man bee in danger any way and straight hee sendeth to the wise man or wizzard Gods worde is not sufficient to comfort and direct him All this argues that Poperie denied with the mouth abides still in the heart and therefore wee must learne to reuerence the written word by ascribing vnto it all manner of perfection speaker D. B. P. The sixt and last reason for Traditions Sundry places of holy Scriptures be hard to be vnderstood others doubtfull whether they must be taken literally or figuratiuely If then it be put to euery Christian to take his owne exposition euery seuerall sect will coyne interpretations in fauour of their owne opinions and so shall the word of God ordained only to teach vs the truth be abused and made an Instrument to confirme all errors To auoid which inconuenience considerate men haue recourse vnto the Traditions and auncient Records of the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and deliuered to the posteritie as the true copies of Gods word see the true Exposition and sense of it and thereby consute and reiect all priuate and new glosses which agree not with those ancient and holy Commentaries So that for the vnderstanding of both difficult and doubtfull texts of Scripture Traditions are most necessary M. Perkins his answere is that there is no such need of them but in doubtfull places the Scripture it selfe is the best glosse If these be obserued first the analogie of faith which is the summe of religion gathered out of the cleerest places Secondly the circumstance of the place and the nature and signification of the words Thirdly the conference of place with place and concludeth that the Scripture is falsely tearmed the matter of strife it being not so of it selfe but by the abuse of man speaker A. W. First this reason can conclude nothing against our
Churches is of great authoritie speaker A. W. Origen teacheth that the Church receiued from the Apostles by Tradition to baptize Infants Origen calles the tradition of the Apostles their practise of baptizing infants which hath sufficient ground of scripture though not in expresse words as your Church also holds and as Origen himselfe acknowledgeth by shewing the reason that moued the Apostles to baptise them as hee conceiues though indeede there is also other better warrant for it speaker A. W. Athanasius saith VVe haue proued this sentence to haue been deliuered from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers but yee O new Iewes and sonnes of Caiphas vvhat Auncestors can yee shevv of your opinion speaker A. W. Where reason failed the Arians on their side and could not moue them in behalfe of the Church Athanasius addes this as a further proofe for their confutation that the doctrine of Christ being one with his Father had been held from time to time in the Church whereas they had no consent of antiquitie for their opinion Yet had he himselfe prooued the point by many certaine reasons out of the Scripture and brought this argument from the authoritie of men for confutation of their false assertion that the former Diuines were not of that iudgement This Athanasius refuteth by the testimonies of Theognostus Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria whom he calles eloquent and one other Dionysius Bishop of Rome and Origen whom he termes painfull S. Basil hath these words VVe haue the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church partly vvritten and part vve haue receiued by Tradition of the Apostles in mysterie both vvhich be of the same force to godlines and no man opposeth against these vvho hath at the least but meane experience of the Lavves of the Church See Gregory Nazianzen Orat. 1. in Iulian If you will giue me leaue I will defend Basils speech by that which may be gathered out of him viz. that hee holds them things to be by tradition which are not exprest in the Scriptures My ground for this exposition are these words of his Out of what Scripture haue we saith Basil the very speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine some thousand two hundred yeares agoe recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now-a-daies in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first booke against him in the beginning Jf thou shalt saith this Heretike bring any thing out of the Scriptures vvhich is common to all vve must needs heare thee but these vvords vvhich are vvithout the Scriptures are in no sort to be receiued of vs when as the Lord himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine do they vvorship me teaching commaundements and precepts of men How S. Augustine opposed against them vnwritten Traditions hath been afore declared The like doth S. Bernard asfirme of certaine Heretikes of his time called Apostolici So that most truly it may be concluded that euen as we Catholikes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by word of mouth aswell as that which is written Euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their ignoble predecessors old condemned Heretikes to reiect all traditions and to she vnto the only Scriptures speaker A. W. The Heretike Maximinus asked nothing but reason of Austin if he stood vpon the matter and not vpon the termes neither doth Austin find fault with this condition nor could he in reason because as I answered before himselfe appeales to that kind of triall in that very disputation Neither must I saith Austin to Maximinus alleage the Councell of Nice in preiudice of the matter nor you the Councell of Ariminum neither am I tyed with the authoritie of this Councell nor you with the authoritie of that let matter striue with matter 〈◊〉 with cause reason with reason by the authoritie of the scriptures which are not proper to you or me but common to vs both But will you heare him speake more like Maximinus Reade me this saith Austin out of a Prophet reade it out of a Psalme recite it out of the Lawe recite it out of the Gospell recite it out of an Apostle Thence recite I the Church disperst ouer the whole world and our Lord saying my sheepe heare my voyce And a little after away with mens papers let the voyce of God sound And in another place away with our papers let Gods bookes come forth heare Christ heare the truth speaking If these speeches be hereticall we confesse our selues to be Heretikes but so that we haue Austin on our side for an Arch-Heretike Bernard speakes of the Hereticks called Apostolicks not in his 62. but in his 66. sermon vpon the Canticles where he saith neuer a word of their reiecting Traditions No more hath Austin nor Epiphanius where they write of them And if they did reiect traditions it was because they would establish their owne hereticall bookes viz. the Acts of Thomas and Andrew and the gospell of the Egyptians which to say the truth are to be counted traditions because they haue no warrant of the scripture nor are any part of the Canon It were easie for me to turne your owne sentence against you and as all men may see with good reason but it shall suffice me that I haue refuted your slaunders and shewes with sound proofe of arguments and authoritie I consider loosers must haue leaue to speake The eighth point Of Vowes Our consent speaker W. P. Touching vowes this must bee knowne that wee do not condemne them altogether but onely labour to restore the purity of doctrine touching this point which by the Church of Rome from time to time hath beene corrupted and defaced We hold therefore that a vow is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed vnto him and it is twofold generall or speciall The generall vow is that which concernes all beleeuers and it is made in the couenant both of the law and of the Gospell I will here onely speake of the vow which is made in the couenant of the Gospell in which there be two actions one of God the other of man God in mercy on his part promiseth to men the remission of sinnes and life euerlasting and man againe for his part promiseth to beleeue in Christ and to obey God in all his commaundements All men euer made this vow vnto God as the Iewes in circumcision which also they renewed so often as they receiued the Passeouer and in the newe Testament all that are baptized doe the like And in baptisme this vow is called the stipulation of a good conscience whereby wee purpose to renounce our selues to beleeue in Christ and to bring forth the fruites of true repentance and it ought to be renued so oft as wee are partakers of the supper of the Lord.
not haue any poore cottage of his own so much as to rest his head in but would wholy liue of almes and come vnto his heauenly doctrine He teacheth a yong man whom he loued in flat words That if he would be perfect he should go and sell all he had and giue it to the poore and come and follow him and then should haue a treasure in heauen These words are so expresse and euident that there can be but one way to shift from them which M. Perkins flâ—eth vnto pag 244. to wit that these words were only meant vnto that young man and not to be applied vnto any others no more than those words to Abraham of sacrificing his sonne Isaac But this seely shift of our poore Protestants is confuted manifestly in the same Chapter of S. Matthew where a little after S. Peter saith Lord behold we haue left all things and haue followed thee what reward shall we therefore haue We haue done as S. Ierome expoundeth it and the very sequele of the text doth plainly require that which thou commandest in the words before to that yong man What answere made our Sauiour That his commandement was only meant vnto that young man and that they had done foolishly in so doing nothing lesse but promiseth that they shall therefore sit with him in twelue seats iudging the twelue tribes of Israel And that whosoeuer would forsake Father Mother Lands Goods c. for his sake should receiue an hundreth fold and possesse life euerlasting Can any thing be more plaine out of the word of God it selfe than that not this or that man but whosoeuer shall forsake all for Christ doth verie blessedly speaker A. W. If this be the best supplie that can be made who can iustly blame Master Perkins for saying nothing in defence of your Popish partie For if all you offer to prooue were granted you all were nothing to the purpose Say it bee gratefull to God to sell all and giue it to the poore doth it follow hereupon that therefore it is lawfull to vow wilfull pouertie as a state of perfection I trow not But that is the question betwixt vs. You might haue done well to omit it indeede being so little to the matter For what kinde of conclusion call you this Our Sauiour would not haue any poore cottage of his owne Therefore pouertie may be vowed as a state of perfection or therefore it is greater perfection to haue no house than to haue one Our Sauiour being to trauell from place to place both for the preaching of the Gospell and his owne safetie thought it not conuenient to haue any certaine dwelling place yet your Monkes Friers and Nunnes haue and those the pleasantest and richest for the soile and ayre that can be found in the whole countries where they are But what did our Sauiour sell that he might thereby fall into wilfull pouertie His example helps you not let vs see his doctrine he teacheth a yong man you say whom he loued that if he would be perfect he should sell all he had and giue it to the poore and follow him and then he should haue treasure in heauen First for our Sauiours louing him which yet Matthew records not but Marke who leaues out that clause of being perfect it is more then plaine that this cannot be vnderstood of any speciall loue For neither did the man beleeue in him as the Messiah and he was falsely conceited of his owne righteousnes than which nothing is a greater hinderance to saluation and therefore nothing lesse beloued by our Sauiour Christ. This loue therefore signifies not an approbation of his vaine brag or a desire of making him perfit but either a pittying of his conceit or some kind gesture vsed towards him which later signification especially both the Greeke and Syriake words will well admit Secondly I answere that our Sauiour doth not intend to shew him how he may be perfect but by vrging him to sell that he had meanes to discouer his want of loue to God and his neighbour That he meant not to perswade him to any perfection it is euident First because no man without true faith which this Iusticiary wanted can come any thing neere to perfection Secondly for that a man may sell all that he hath c. and yet not be perfect For single life in your account is a matter of no small perfection But our Sauiour would make his vanitie in the opinion of his owne righteousnes apparant to him and other as it fell out indeed For refusing to obey him in that matter he bewrayed his couetousnes which he preferd before following our Sauiour whom he acknowledged to be a worthie teacher and before the loue of his brethren Lastly I say the chiefe point of perfection here mentioned is not selling of our goods but following of Christ which is a dutie belonging to all Christians so that without it no man is a Christian. In the following of Christ by the works of charity saith your glosse perfection consists principally in wilfull pouertie but as in the beginning by way of renouncing that which hinders and disposing of vs because by it the care of temporall things is taken away which hinders the soule from the loue of God and the soule is fitted to free contemplation of God To sell all and giue to the poore sufficeth not to perfection saith Ierome vnlesse after the despising of riches we follow Christ that is leauing euill do good And after Many leaue riches but not follow our Lord. He followes our Lord who doth imitate him and treads in his steps And againe afterward Because it sufficeth not to leaue he addes that which is perfect and haue followed me So that this is no state of perfection but rather a remedie against our being drawen away from following Christ which was as necessary to saluation both before and vnder the law as it is now in this light of the Gospell and if without wilfull pouerty it cannot be done doubtles neither those worthies of the former ages Abraham Moses Dauid c. could follow Christ in duties of charitie and we not only may but must sell all we haue that we may follow him It was spoken and intended only to that yong man neither doth Peter say that the Apostles had sold all and giuen it to the poore which is no where recorded of them in the scriptures but that they had forsaken all and followed him that is had left their ordinarie callings by which in likelyhood they might haue thriuen to attend vpoÌ„ our Sauiour and to be employed in his seruice And to the following of Christ either only or specially doth that of Ierome belong Peter speakes confidently saith Ierome we haue left all And because it is not sufficient only to leaue he addes that which is perfect And haue followed thee we haue done that thou commaundest that is we haue giuen ouer the hope of
The wordes are thus to bee read Bowe at his footestoole that is at the Arke and Mercie-seat for there hee hath made a promise of his presence the words therefore say not bow to the Arke but to God at the Arke The first reason by him proposed is this Psalme 98. Cast dovvne your selues before his sootesâ—oole vvhich vvas the Arke novv if the Arke vvere to be vvorshipped because it represented Gods foot-stoole much more may the Image be vvorshipped M. Perkins ansvvereth that the vvords must be englished thus Boâ— at or before the Arke notto the Arke but to God before the Arke Reply If it were so yet must they admit that wee must kneele at or before Images so we kneele to honour or pray to God against which some of their Preachers do crielike mad-men but the Hebreâ— phrase carryeth that wee must kneele to the arke as they who be skâ—lfull in the language do know and that the arke was worshipped of the Israelites is otherwise very euident for first none but the high Priest might come into the place where it was and it was carried before the campewith great solemnitie to search out a reasting place for the whole host And when they were to sight against the Philistins * they had great confidence in the presence of the arke and cap. 6,50000 of the Bethsamites were slaine for seeing the arke and Oza vvas by God smitten to death for touching the arke Doth not all this conuince in vvhat reuerence the arke vvas had euen by Gods owne testimonie speaker A. W. Your first reason to prooue the worshipping of Images is this If the Arke were to be worshipped because it represented Gods footstoole much more may the Image be worshipped But the Arke was therefore to be worshipped Therefore much more may the Image be worshipped I denie your whole Antecedent first the consequence of your proposition For it doth not follow that we may worship Images deuised by men to represent God because we may worship the Arke where God himselfe promised his presence and which he did appoint as an assurance of his presence If you can shew vs the like promise to your Images you say somewhat else nothing Your Assumption also is false The Arke was not to be worshipped To your proofe Master Perkins answers truly that the Psalme doth not commaund worshipping of the Arke but worship before the Arke You replie first that therefore it is lawfull to kneele before Images I answere your consequence is false because your Images are your owne wicked deuices and haue no promise of Gods presence therefore it is senselesnes to kneele before them not madnes to crie out against such follie Your second replie is that the Hebrew phrase carrieth it that we must kneele to the Arke as the skilfull in that language know First remember that these are Authors in the ayre as you answered about that place of Daniel Secondly know that they that are skilfull say otherwise What say you to the Chaldee Paraphrast who expounds it Worship in the house of his Sanctuarie and yet he keepes the proposition that is in the Hebrew So doth the Latin translation in the same Psalme where the same proposition is vsed worship in his holy mountaine the Chaldee hath in the mountaine of the house of his Sanctuarie the Greeke not much vnlike In or toward his holy hill The same seemes to haue been Theodorets iudgement of the place in question His footstoole was sometimes thought to be the Temple at Ierusalem but now the Churches which are ouer all the earth and Sea wherein wee worship the most holy God Of the same opinion is Vatablus Cast downe your selues before his footstoole that is as hee expounds himselfe in his note there In the Temple or before the Arke in which God exhibited his presence So doth Lyra interpret it who was a Iew borne and a Christian by profession worship his footstole that is before his footstoole The ordinarie and Interlinear glosses expound it out of the Fathers of Christs manhood to be worshipped by reason of the hypostatical vnion of it with the Godhead what is that to the worshipping of Images For the further auowing of that translation we haue also R. Dauid Kimchis authoritie Lastly you bring diuers proofes that the Arke was had in great reuerence all needlesse for who denies it Was there not great reason to esteeme highly of that whereby God was extraordinarily present with the Iewes as with no people nor in any place of the world beside What then was it therefore worshipped by the Priest when he went in once a yeere where it was Did the people worship it when it was carried before them As for that confidence the Iewes put in it they got little by it because they superstitiously abused it against Gods commandement putting trust in the presence of it abroad when it should haue been in the Tabernacle where God had promised his presence with it Was this worship to the Arke which the Lord deliuered into the hands of the Philistins Neither were those 50070. Bethsamites slaine for not worshipping it but for presuming to looke into it and Vzzah for touching it not because he did not worship it speaker D. B. P. To this may be added the authoritie of S. Ierom vvho doth teach that it vvas the more vvorshipped for the Cherubines and pictures of angels that vvere erected at the endes of it vvhereby he declareth that he thought Images vvorthie of religious vvorship speaker A. W. Of Ieroms 17. Epistle alleaged by Master Perkins to proue that Rome is Babylon you answere thus Good sir if S. Ierome had meant that that Epistle should haue had his authoritie he would haue set it out in his owne name which seeing he thought it not expedient set the authoritie of it aside and vrge his reasons if you thinke it worth your labour and you shall be answered These your owne words shall serne in steed of answere But for the satisfying of all men I will set downe Ieromes words that they may see with what care and truth you cite the testimonies of the ancient writers The Iewes saith Ierome in former times worshipped the Holy of Holies because there were the Cherubins and the Propitiatorie and the Arke of the Testament Manna Aarons Rod and the golden Altar Doth Ierome teach in these words that the Arke was the more worshipped for the Cherubins and pictures of Angels that were erected at the end of it First he makes no mention of any pictures of Angels but onely of the Cherubins Secondly he speakes not of worshipping the Arke but the Holy of Holies because of the things that were in it Thirdly he makes the Propitiatorie Manna Aarons Rod and the golden Altar causes of that worship as well as the Cherubins Lastly in the words following he counts the Sepulchre of our Lord more worthie of worship