Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	law_n	sin_n	transgression_n	2,676	5	10.9658	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11015	A treatise of Gods effectual calling: written first in the Latine tongue, by the reuerend and faithfull seruant of Christ, Maister Robert Rollock, preacher of Gods word in Edenburgh. And now faithfully translated for the benefite of the vnlearned, into the English tongue, by Henry Holland, preacher in London; Tractatus de vocatione efficaci, quae inter locos theologiæ communissimos recensetur, deque locis specialioribus, qui sub vocatione comprehenduntur. English	Rollock, Robert, 1555?-1599.; Holland, Henry, 1555 or 6-1603.; Bèze, Théodore de, 1519-1605.	1603 (1603)	STC 21286; ESTC S116145	189,138	276

quality or action belongs not to euery creature but only to the reasonable creature Angell or Man for God gaue his law vnto these only Of this being which we say is the matter of sinne God himselfe is the author and principall efficient for it is he alone that calleth those things which are not as if they were and that createth all things both substances and accidents But the creature neither is nor is called the principall efficient of any being Therefore that being which is the matter of sinne seeing God is the principall efficient thereof necessarily in and by it selfe is good for that whatsoeuer God createth or maketh hath an ingrafted forme of goodnesse in it Gen. 1. 31. When God saith he saw whatsoeuer he had made behold it was very good This forme of goodnesse is so naturall and essentiall to Being whether quality or action which God made that there from it can neuer be separated But now I graunt that this same Being hath put on another forme to wit * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cause of sin Lawlesnesse the cause whereof is an euill instrument as we shall shew hereafter for this Lawlesnes is from another cause neither doth it destroy that essentiall forme of the goodnesse of being it selfe which proceedeth from God the creator and maker thereof For as for the being which God maketh nothing can be put to it or taken from it that in it selfe it may be better or worser So much concerning the matter of sin Now as touching the forme The forme of sinne is called Lawlesnes that is the want of conformitie with the will and law of God 1. Ioh. 3. Sinne by his forme is thus The forme of sin defined Sinne is the transgression of the law This Lawlesnesse or transgression which wee call the forme and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manner of sinne is not a beeing or a thing positiue but a thing meerely priuatiue to wit a priuation and want of conformitie with the law of God This trangression happeneth through the cause and fault of an euil instrument which God vseth in that being or in doing his owne worke and this instrument is either the Deuill or an euill man and vnbeleeuer For when the Diuell or an euill man concurreth with God to bring forth his work he is not the principall efficient of the being it selfe or of the worke done but only an instrumentall or ministeriall cause but the Deuill or man is the principall efficient cause of the transgression or of the deformity or sin of that action And this transgression the efficient whereof is an euill instrument is euill either for that the action it selfe or Causes of sinne worke is contrarie to the law of God as when a man committeth murther the action of murther is expresly Causes of sinne condemned by the lawe Thou shalt not murther or for that the fountaine and beginning of the action or worke is against the law of God although the action in it selfe be conformable to the law for as the law of God commandeth the action or worke it selfe so hath it regard of the fountaine and beginning of the action commanding that the whole worke which is commanded by the law proceed from a pure holy and beleeuing heart of that instrument which God vseth in doing his worke An example of this kind of transgression may be this When any man giueth almes which worke indeed is commanded of God and yet not done of charitie it is reiected see 1. Cor. 13. Or lastly it falleth out to be a sinne for that the end which the euill instrument in doing or working together with God proposeth to it selfe is against the lawe of God For as the law of God commandeth the worke it self and the fountaine and beginning of the worke euen so it commandeth the end as the chiefe and principall to wit the glorie of God himselfe Whether yee eate or drinke or whatsoeuer ye do do all to the glorie of God 1. Cor. 10. And in this respect a man sinneth when he doth ought not for God nor for his glory but for himselfe his owne profit and only for his owne glorie Here it is to be noted that whosoeuer sinneth as touching the fountaine and originall of the action the same man alwaies sinneth touching the end and so contrarily Wherefore these two last wayes of transgression are alwayes ioyned together Againe it is to be noted that he who sinneth touching the original and the end doth not alwayes sin in the action it self For the action or work of any instrument how euil soeuer in it self may be good The person must please God otherwise the worke shall displease conformable to the law Wherfore the first way of transgression the two last are not alwaies conioined Now then this transgression which we cal the maner forme of sinne comming or put to that Being the author wherof is God and which in it selfe is good whether it be a qualitie or an action maketh vp that which we call sinne and which is so called of the forme thereof and not of the matter seeing all things haue their denominations from their formes These things thus declared it shall bee easie to gather some definition of sinne That sinne is a quality or action of a reasonable creature lawlesse or contrarie to the law of God The generall proprietie of sinne or the consequent thereof is guiltinesse and guiltinesse is that which meriteth or deserueth punishment as therefore guiltinesse followeth after sin so after guilt followeth punishment both temporall and eternall Let this suffice concerning sinne in generall which being knowne it is easie to answer those questions which are wont to be made touching sin and namely to this Three questions concerning the causes of sin which they aske If Sinne be of God or if God be the author of sin Answ In sin there are two things a Being and a transgression God is the Author and principall efficient of that Being but of that transgression God is not the author but the euill instrument is Againe it is asked whether this transgression be any way from God Answ It is from God not effecting but permitting it for he suffers it to be done by an euill imstrument Thirdly it is demanded if God permit sin in as much as it is transgression of his law Answ Not so which euen by this one reason may be shewed He permitteth it vnto his glory and all the meanes of Gods glory so farre as they haue such respect are good and darknes it selfe as it is permitted of God vnto the glory of his name becōmeth light Againe if here it be asked If therfore the transgression of Gods lawe in so farre as a transgression bee not permitted of God doth it not of necessity follow that sin in respect or as it is a transgression is done against * Deo inuito whether he will or no. Gods will Ans It followeth not for that

CHAP. XXIX Of iustifying Faith OVr effectual calling is effected first by y e Law then by the Gospell The whole doctrine of the Law may be reduced to this * or forme of reason syllogisme Cursed is he that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of this law to do them But I haue not continued in them Therefore I am accursed The proposition of this reason is the voice of the Law and that commination which is added to the couenant of works which is thus conceiued Do this and thou shalt liue but if thou do it not thou shalt die THe assumption of this reason is the act of euerie ones conscience that applieth to it selfe the transgression of the law The conclusion likewise is the act of each ones conscience applying to it selfe the iust punishment and curse of God for sinne This forme of reasoning belongs not so much to the calling it selfe as to our preparation to that Our preparation to our effectuall calling effectuall calling which is properly effected by the doctrine of the Gospell For by the doctrine of the Law which is comprehended in this argument wee are amazed and affected with the feeling of our miserie which feeling is the first degree vnto saluation Now the doctrine of the Gospell may be comprehended in this forme Whosoeuer beleeueth shall be iustified and liue But I beleeue therefore I shall be iustified An Euangelicall syllogisme and liue The proposition is the voice of the Gospell or of God himselfe calling For therein is contained the first part of an effectuall calling which is nothing els but a proclaiming of the free couenant the forme whereof is contained in this proposition The Assumption is not indeed the act of the naturall conscience but of euerie ones supernaturall saith applying to himselfe Christ Iesus the Mediator of the couenant and him first crucified and next glorified The Conclusion also is the act of faith applying to euerie one the benefits of Christ his righteousnesse and saluation by him This reason doth properly belong to Calling and the Proposition of it is the first part of calling and the Assumption and conclusion is the second part And seeing the assumption and conclusion are the acts of our faith whereby we doe as it were make answer vnto God that calleth surely we shall not without cause say that the second part of effectuall calling is nothing els but faith Wherefore the common place of Faith must be comprised vnder this of our effectuall calling It followeth therefore that we speake of Faith yea of that faith which is properly simply so called that is of faith which they call iustifying faith For as touching the other kinds of faith which are commonly numbred as a Iustifying faith dead faith c. they are so termed not simply but in some respect and with an addition dead faith temporary faith c. Now in the declaration of faith the first thing that offereth it selfe to be considered is the obiect thereof The The obiect of faith obiect is generally whatsoeuer is contained in the word of God that is the whole truth of God But specially and properly the obiect of it is Iesus Christ with all his benefits There is a twofold consideration of Christ and his benefits for first Christ with his benefits is considered as he is offered in the word and Sacraments that is as he is offered vnto vs as in a looking glasse and yet not so much Christ himselfe as a certaine image or picture of him Of this looking glasse of the word and Sacraments ye reade 1. Cor. 13. 12. We see now as it were in a glasse and by a darke speaking And 2. Cor. 3. 18. But we with open face beholding the glorie of the Lord as in a glasse are transformed into the same image from glorie to glorie Now Christ so considered The glasse wherein we may finde and see the face of Christ is nothing els but Christ preached in the word and represented in the Sacraments We saith he preach Christ crucified 1. Cor. 1. 23. For the Gospell preached doth set Christ in a manner before our eyes Gal. 3. 1. To whom Iesus Christ was before pictured before your eyes and among you crucified Next we be to consider Christ without this glasse of the word and Sacraments as he is in himselfe Of Christ so considered the Apostle speaketh 1. Cor. 13. 12. But then we shall see him face to face And 1. Ioh. 3. 2. But we know that it shall come to passe that when he shall appeare we shall be like him because we shall see him as he is As there is a twofold consideratiō of Christ so the knowledge and apprehension of him is twofold The first is called Faith the A twofold know ledge or apprehension of faith latter Sight Of both these ye reade 2. Cor. 5. 7. For wee walke by faith not by sight These two wayes of knowing apprehending do agree one with another in nature and essence for both of them are the knowledge and apprehension of Christ but they differ in quantity and as they vse to speake more or lesse for the knowledge of faith is the lesser as also is the apprehension whereupon 1. Cor. 13. 9. it is said that we know in part But the knowledge apprehension by Sight is the greater so perfect knowledge and apprehension and this shall haue place in the next world Of this perfect knowledge is spoken in the same chap. vers 10. But after that which is perfect is come And vers 12. Then shall I know euen as I shall be taught These things thus laid downe and knowne it is easily perceiued what the speciall and first obiect of faith is namely Iesus Christ with all his benefits and euen so as he offereth himselfe in the word and Sacraments Or the obiect of faith is the word it selfe or the promises which are made of Christ which is all one Hence it followeth The necessitie of the word preached that whensoeuer the preaching of the word and admistration of the Sacraments shalcease this faith also wherby we now walke must also cease See 1. Cor. 13. Then shall that which is in part be done away To conclude it is to bee noted of this obiect of faith that it is speciall that is offered to me to thee and to euerie man specially and distinctly For albeit the words bee generally conceiued yet they are specially to be taken as spoken to me to thee or of me and of thee Thus much touching the obiect of faith Now we are to speake of the subiect thereof namely wherein it is and from which it proceedeth The subiect of faith is the soule of man and in the soule of man the The subiect of faith reasonable and principall faculties those I terme first the mind then the wil. For as touching the other inferior faculties and affections of the soule faith is not so much

for it is deriued either by the soule or by the body of the parents or through their default It cannot bee said that the propagation of this sin is by the soule for the soule of the Father or Mother is not deriued by propagation to the children in whole or in part as is very euident wherfore this sin coms not by the soule of the parents But it may not vnfitly be said that there is some deriuation How sin is deriued from parents to their children of this sin by the body of the parents to the body and soule of the child begotten by them This propagation of sinne by the body of him which begetteth into the bodie of him which is begotten is easily discerned for the seede of the parents being in the child is corrupted infected with sin whence it followeth necessarily that the bodie which is begotten of such corrupt vncleane seede must also be corrupt and vncleane in like manner The propagation of sinne by the body of him which begetteth into the soule of him which is begotten is more hardly expressed yet I deliuer what seemes most How sin infefecteth the verie soule probable vnto me on this manner After that by the bodie of him which begetteth sinne is deriued into the bodie of him which is begotten now the body begotten being corrupt infected with sin this bodie I say infecteth and poisoneth the soule created euen then of God before and infused into it that very moment of time wherein it was created Here you demaund whether the soule were pure and cleane the time it was created and so Quest infused into the bodie and then afterwards so defiled by the contagion of the bodie I answer it is not like to bee so for that the soule is created infused and corrupted in Ans the very selfe same moment of time This corruption of the soule is partly by reason of the desertiō of God partly by reason of the contagion of the body whereinto it is infused for God the very same moment of time wherein he createth infuseth the soule in his iust iudgment forsakes it and giues it ouer to the body to bee so defiled with sinne wherefore this I auouch that the soule is created infused forsaken of God and defiled by the bodie the very same moment of time The manner of the propagation of this sinne which is said to be through the default of the parents followeth and this I expresse on this wise Adam by that his first offence did deriue as by a certaine conduit whatsoeuer corruption was in him to his posteritie for this cause the Apostle Rom. 5. 12. saith By one man to wit sinning sin entred into the world Here it may be demaunded whence proceedes this efficacie or power of that first sin to ingender as it were and to deriue sinne into all and euerie one of Adams progenie I answer this efficacie of that sinne is by reason of that word and couenant which God made with Adam in his creation as it were in these words If man wil stand and persist in that his innocencie which he had by creation he shall stand for his owne good and for his progenie but if he do not stand but fall away his fall shall turn The Couenant of God in the creation as to his owne dammage so to the hurt of his posteritie and whatsoeuer euill shall be tide him the same shall ensue to all his off-spring after him And this last way of the propagation of originall sinne pleaseth me best and ought to content all sober wits for that this is grounded on the authority and words of the Apostle And thus far our iudgement concerning originall sinne Now let vs briefly see what the old hereticks and late aduersaries of Gods truth say concerning this sinne First The opinion of the heretikes cōcerning originall sinne heere wee be to meete with the heresie of Pelagius the Monke and Caelestius his Disciple which said there was no originall sinne that Adam by his fall did hurt himselfe only and not his posteritie excepting onely by his example They said his posteritie sinned not by propagation of his sinne but by imitation of their father Adams preuarication When it was obiected against them that young infants died which could not be but that they are infected with originall sinne They answered that Adam himselfe also had died by the law of nature albeit he had not sinned And this was the Pelagians principall argument against The Pelagians argument against originall sinne originall sinne If sinne be by propagation then it must needs be deriued to the posteritie by the soule or by the body but not by the soule for that it is not by traduction and it is not by the bodie because it is void of reason neither can sinne be said to bee first and properly seated in it and not by both vnited because it is not by the parts therefore there is no originall sinne at all The answere is easie of that which hath beene before set downe in this chap touching the forme or manner of the propagation of this sinne First their proposition Answer doth not number all the formes meanes of the propation of this sinne for there is besides those meanes a deriuation of sinne which is through the default of the parents Next the Assumption is false for albeit there be no propagation of sinne by the soule yet it may well bee by the bodie as is afore shewed And thus farre of Pelagius and Caelestius heresie Next the Schoole-men had diuers opinions of originall Schoolemens opinion of original sinne sinne for some said that originall sinne consisted only in the guilt of Adams apostasy others said it was but the want of original iustice But Peter Lombard reiecting these opinions auoucheth it to be also a positiue euill qualitie contrarie to that first originall iustice Albertus Pigghius Ambrosius Catharinus said that it was nothing els but that first transgression of Adam And out of this conclusion they drew forth three other opinions the first was this Originall sinne is one and the selfe same onely Three grosse opinions of papists concerning originall sin in all men 2. This sin in Adam was reall and actually his but it is ours only by imputation the third that infants in verity haue nothing in them that hath any appearance of sinne for they said that guiltinesse want of iustice and the spots of nature and such like things seeme rather to be punishments then faults if ye speake not happily improperly as when ye apply the name of the cause to the effect Bellarmine following all these first blames Lombards conclusion concerning his positiue qualitie and next Bellarm. obiect against Lumbard Answer condemnes Pigghius assertion as hereticall One of his principall arguments against Lombard is this God is either the cause of that positiue quality or not the cause if the cause then is he the cause of

without Christ and therefore doth beget feare and horror within vs. The instrument wherby the spirit doth worke this sorrow in our hearts is the preaching of the law The sum whereof is in that syllogisme concerning the which we haue spoken in the doctrine of faith the proposition of which syllogisme is this Cursed is euery one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of this law to do thē The assumption is by euery mans conscience thus annexed But I haue not continued in them the conclusion therefore is this I am accursed From hence dooth that sorrow or rather that horror of the heart arise or spring not somuch for sin which is in the assumption as for the punishment and feare of the curse which is in the conclusion And this is that which is called the pricke of conscience which by meanes of the conclusion before shewed doth not only prick a wounded mind but also pierce euen through the heart And this legall sorrow if the grace of the Gospell did not put an helping hand betweene it and vs would driue a man into vtter desperation And thus much concerning that first sorrow The very same spirit of God is likewise a principal efficient cause of the latter sorrow but not proceeding as before for now he becommeth the spirit of adoption Wherby we crie Abba Father Rom. 8. that is testifying of our adoption in Christ and therefore doth inlarge both our heart and mouth to call vpon God familiarly as vpon our Father The instrument whereby the holy spirit doth worke this faith in our hearts it is the preaching of the Gospell the summe whereof is contained in that syllogisme concerning which we haue spoken in the doctrine of faith The proposition of this syllogisme is He that beleeueth shal be iustified and shall liue whereupon faith doth assume saying But I do beleeue and concludeth saying Therefore righteousnesse and life pertaineth vnto me In this conclusion there is I confesse matter of ioy of vnspeakable gladnesse but it is as true that there is in it matter of sorrow also which is conceiued after we haue known the mercy of God in Christ to be so great and doth arise in this respect because we haue offended so merciful and so louing a Father It is then a ioy mixt with sorrow with the vnspeakable and glorious ioy of faith hauing ioined with it sighes that cannot be expressed And thus much also of the later sorrow Now let vs see how both these kinds of sorrow belong vnto sound repentance That first sorrow which is of the law and is conceiued by reason of the punishment which followeth sinne I confesse it is no part of this holy change and conuersion vnto God for of it own nature it doth rather estrange vs from God then conuert vs to The terror of the law a preparatiue for the Gospell God and in very deede it dooth altogether alienate the wicked from God as from a terrible iudge Notwithstanding in repentance it hath his vse for it prepareth the elect by giuing them sense of their misery to that grace and mercy which is propounded in the Gospell The latter sorrow which is according to God and is effected by the Gospel is properly a part of repentance and dooth effect that change of the mind and reason before specified And therefore the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 7. that the sorrow which is according to God causeth repentance And thus far of the first part of this benefit which is found to be in sorrow The other followeth which is called properly by the Apostle 2. Cor. vers 7. a Chaunge of the minde For there followeth after that godly sorrow a certaine wonderfull change of the minde of the will and of the heart As touching knowledge and that illumination Second part of repentance of the mind this goes before the sorrow we haue spoken of is an acknowledgment wrought in vs first of sinne and of our misery by the law next of mercy by the Gospell Therefore the chaunge of the mind which followeth this sorrow it pertaines to the faculty or iudgment of reason which also is called the counsell and purpose of the mind Act. 11. 23. He exhorteth them that with one purpose of heart they would cleaue vnto the Lord. And the iudgment or counsell of the mind is chaunged in this sort The mind disalloweth the euill which is committed and alloweth the good hereafter to be practised There are therefore two parts of the change of y e iudgement or counsell the first is the disallowing of the euill committed the second is the The change of the mind hath two branches approuing of the good to be done After the change of the iudgement or counsell of the mind there followeth a change of the wil in this manner The will reiecteth that euill which is committed or it declineth from it and alloweth the good to be done hereafter or inclineth thereunto There are there two parts of this change first a declination from the euil committed secondly an inclination to the good which is or ought to be done After the 2. Change of the will change of the wil followeth the change of the hart which is on this manner The heart hateth and detesteth that euill which it hath heretofore done and it loues and affects the good which hereafter it ought to doe There are therefore two parts of this change the first is the detestation 3. Change of the heart of euill done and committed the second is the loue of that good which ought to be done In general therfore there are two parts of that chang of the mind which is an effect of sorow the first is a change from euill and from sinne committed the second is a change to good hereafter to be practised and followed Commonly these parts are called mortification and viuification but I know not how rightly iustly for mortification and viuification are properly parts of regeneration which doth differ from repentance as shal be seene Regeneration and repentance differ hereafter By that which hath bin already said we vnderstand what be the especial points of repentance from whence it proceeds and wherunto it serueth The point from whence it proceedes is the euill or sinne committed the point to which it tendeth is the good heereafter to bee done Repentance therefore standeth betweene two actions past and future and it doth differ from regeneration for the points thereof are not deeds and actions but qualities to wit the corruption of nature or the old man and sanctitie or the new man but of this we shall entreate afterward when wee come to speake of the difference of repentance and of regeneration Ye see thē after that great sorow how there is a change in the whole mind of man Next ye see by that hath been saide of this benefit of repentance that repentance doth begin from the heart and doth proceede by the reasonable

of this sinne Heb. 6. 4. and 10. 26. 27. the Apostle calling it an apostasy or backslyding from God It is so also described 2. Pet. 2. 20. And 1. Io 5. 16. It is called a sinne vnto death As for the other kinds of this sin before specified some of them are consequently of this sin which we call a blasphemie and appertaine vnto it for desperation and final impenitency are the punishments of this sinne Obstinacie is in the very nature of this sinne for it caries with it an obstinate maliciousnesse And as for the other kinds I cannot see how they may be called sins against the holy Ghost for as for presumption what is it els but hypocrisie To Presumption repine at the graces of God in our brethren is a sinne against our neighbour and against the second table of the law Therefore let this rest that there is but one sin against the holy Ghost so called to wit the blasphemy against the holy Ghost or an apostasy from the grace of the spirit once receiued for these are one and the same to blaspheme against the holy Ghost and to fall from grace receiued Notwithstanding I deny not but that this sin which is but one in substance may haue his increase or growth for then it is come to a height when as it fighteth against all the known truth which is according to godlinesse Next we say that this one sinne is impardonable not for that it is seldome and hardly pardoned but for that it is neuer pardoned because such a one can neuer repent him of his sinne that he hath committed For this mans heart groweth to such a hardnesse and that by Gods iust iudgment as can neuer after be mollified And that this sin is simply impardonable is manifest by y e very words of the lord in y e gospel before cited for where it is sayd in Matth. it shall not be forgiuen him neither in this world nor in the world to come and in Mark This sinne is neuer forgiuen but is culpable of eternall damnation Do not these words cut off all hope of pardon So as I cannot but wonder at the Rhemists so impudently to extenuate Rhemists impudency 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the force of the words of the lord To the Heb. 6. he saith it is impossible that he which so sinneth should be renued by repentance then he addeth a waighty cause and most necessarie for sayth he This man crucifieth againe to himselfe the Sonne of God that is as much as in him lyeth Which point the better to conceiue it we must know there is a difference betweene all other sinnes and this sin against the holy Ghost as touching the remission and expiation of them For to expiat all other sinnes the sacrifice of Christ once offered is sufficient for them all and the vertue thereof extendeth it selfe to purge all sinnes for euer But when a man hath once sinned against the holy Ghost and profaned that pretious bloud the vertue thereof will neuer after be effectual for the expiation of his sin Wherefore he stands in neede of some new sacrifice to purge his sinne which thing shal neuer be granted him For if this were graunted then must Christ be crucified againe or some other sacrifice must be offered but neither can Christ be crucifyed againe neither can any other sacrifice bee offered for him as it is written Heb. 10. 26. For there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinnes Therefore this sin can neuer be expiat because a new sacrifice can neuer be giuen for it And this is the cause of the impossibility of the pardon of this sinne The aduersaries namely the Rhemists in their obseruations on this place do thus interpret this impossibilitie they say there is a double repentance or renuing or purging of sinne They say the first is easie and light in and by Baptisme where say they all the sinnes before Baptisme are purged by that light washing of baptisme The second they call penance or the purging of sinnes Popish sacrament of penanc as they say by the sacrament of Penance and in this Sacrament as they speake such sinnes are purged which are committed after baptisme and this is hard and painfull as consisting of fastings prayers satisfactions and other corporall afflictions If you graunt them this distinction then they say this impossibilitie of being renewed is in respect of that repentance renewing and purging of sinne which is in baptisme For they say it is impossible that a sinne committed after Baptisme some baptisme being iterated should be purged for we may not be rebaptized As for the latter penance and renewing they say there is a possibility in it For the greatest sinne after baptisme may be expiat by it Therefore they affirme the Apostle speakes couertly to such as sinne after baptisme sending them to the Sacrament of Penance that by vertue of that Sacrament their sinne may be expiat and that they may be renewed But by this their interpretation 2. Pet. 3. 16 they peruert the holy Scripture to their owne destruction For this is certaine that the Apostle here takes away all possibilitie of being renewed as the reason annexed manifestly proueth Finally it is euident by that place of Iohn before cited that this sinne is impardonable and that this is proper to that sin that it can by no meanes be pardoned For Iohn saith we may not pray for that sinne If we may not pray for it there is no hope of repentance or pardon for it I know what the Rhemists heere would say to wit that by this sinne vnto death we must vnderstand finall impenitencie finall impenitencie is not remitted because here wants repentance and therfore we may not pray for such a one after his death for he died in impenitency contemning the Sacrament of Penance But they affirme it to be lawfull to pray for other sinnes after death This againe is to peruert Scripture for the Apostle speaketh not of prayer to be or not to be after his death which hath so sinned but that prayer must not bee conceiued for him whilest he liueth after that it hath manifestly appeared vnto the church by infallible arguments that such a one hath sinned vnto death As for Iulian the Apostata for whom the Church prayed not while he liued yea it prayed against him in his life time after it was clearely discerned that hee had sinned vnto death that is had blasphemed against the holy Ghost I passe ouer that place of Peter before cited where the Apostle speakes of no difficultie but of a meere impossibilitie of being renewed of repentance and of remission of sinnes where it is said Their latter state is worse then the first and as it followeth but it hath happened vnto him as it is in the true prouerbe the dog hath returned to his owne vomit and the sow to her wallowing in the mire And thus farre of this second controuersie and so much shal suffice concerning sinne