man would much more will God performe his Word and Couenant although the seale be not set thereunto But if it may bee had there is Necessitas praecepti a necessity laid by Gods commandement vpon all those that are Filij praecepti the Sonnes of the commandement Those Sonnes all men are when they are grown to be Adulti and therefore if then they neglect to be baptized they deserue for their contempt to bee cut off and to bee eternally condemned But Infants while such are none of these Sonnes as being both vncapable of the precept and vnable to offer themselues vnto the Sacrament whence followeth that the commandement taketh hold onely of the Parents and those that haue the care of them So that although the Child dying vnbaptized may bee free from danger yet those that neglect to present him vnto Baptisme shall bee damned for breach of Gods commandement Leâ— Parents therefore by all meanes bee carefull to performe this duty and if by reason of weakenesse or some other impediment it cannot bee done publickely rather then left vndone let it bee done priuatly Wise men and amongst the rest M. Caluin would haue it so yea the Church of England requireth it prescribing a forme of Priuate Baptisme in case of necessity and commanding that what is priuatly done be by the Minister publickely made knowne in the Congregation An order heretofore too much neglected God grant henceforward it may be better obserued Finally and lastly seeing euery one that is Adultus must of necessity haue a Faith of his owne first it is the duty of Parents by all meanes to worke Faith in their Children when they are capable thereof that as they haue beene instruments to traduce Originall sinne vnto them to their perdition so they may againe repaire in them the image of God to their eternall saluation Secondly let euery one looke to himselfe and see that hee haue Faith for it is in vaine to trust to the Faith of another The righteousnesse of Christ indeed is a cloke large enough to couer the sinnes of all men but the Faith of another man is little enough for himselfe I cannot couer my nakednesse with it They were but foolish virgins that said Giue vs of your oile for our lamps are out and fitly were they answered by the wise virgins Wee feare there will not bee enough for vs and you but goe yee rather to them that sell and buy for your selues Let Papists blaspheme and say they can supererogate and more then satisfy for their sinnes and that one man may for a price buy out of the Popes treasury the Surplus of another mans merits yet am I sure the oile of another mans lampe will not serue my turne nor procure mee fauour to enter with the bridegroome God grant me therefore wisdome euen while it is called to day to get mee oile in my owne lampe NOT CONSENT OF FATHERS BVT SCRIPTVRE THE GROVND OF FAITH Written by the occasion of a conference had with Mr. Bayly by the late Reuerend and Learned Diuine Master Iohn Downe Bachelour of Diuinity and sometimes Fellow of Emanuell Colledge in Cambridge OXFORD Printed by IOHN LICHFIELD for EDWARD FORREST Anno Domini M.DC.XXXV NOT CONSENT OF FATHERS BVT SCRIPTVRE THE GROVND OF FAITH LOVING and Reuerend M. Bayly I acknowledge my selfe much endebted vnto you both for my kind entertainment and the peaceable Conference I had with you Would you but vouchsafe to visit my poore Cottage I should readily endeauour to satisfy some part of the debt if not with like entertainment yet with equall welcome The residue I know not how better to discharge then by pursuing my first intention that is by labouring to reduce you backe into the bosome of that Church out of which with such danger to your soule scandall to the brethren and vnkindnesse to her you haue withdrawne your selfe And to this end might I haue obtained from you in writing as at our parting I entreated what those speciall Motiues were which had wrought in you this sudden change I would haue strained my selfe by writing also to haue giuen them the best satisfaction But seeing for reasons best knowne to your selfe and into which I list not further to inquire you held it not fit as then to yeeld so farre vnto mee I haue thought good for the present to reflect vpon some passages of our Conference specially that ground whereon you then stood so much and vpon which you plainely professed that you would aduenture your Faith It may please you therefore to remember that being demaunded a reason of your departure you pretended that in reading the ancient Fathers you had met with sundry Bugbeares which so scared and affrighted you that vnlesse you would resist the light of Conscience and hazard your eternall saluation you could not chuse but bee swayed by them Whereunto it being replied that happily those Bugbeares were but Scarcrowes and that you should haue taken a safer and surer course if you had resolued your Faith into Scriptures nothing being sufficient to beare vp so weighty a peece but onely diuine testimony your answer was that vpon Scripture you relyed howbeit because it is obscure and subiect to manifold constructions vpon Scripture vnderstood according to the interpretation and doctrine of the Fathers nothing doubting but that as long as you held the Faith of them whom wee verily belieue to bee saued your selfe could neuer perish through misbeliefe In which answer howsoeuer in word you seeme to attribute some force and vertue to the Scriptures yet in truth you doe but cancell them and make them of none effect For if the Scriptures lie rather in the Sense then in the Letter and the Sense by reason of the darknesse and ambiguity of them bee not to bee found in themselues but elsewhere out of them in the writings of the Fathers it followeth clearely that in your account Paul and Peter and Iames and Iohn and the other Pen-men of holy writ are no better then Cyphers vnlesse Cyrill and Ambrose and Hierome and Augustin and the rest of that ranke as digit numbers vouchsafe to adde some value and signification vnto them So that now by your fauor this must bee my taske briefly and plainely to demonstrate that hauing remoued your Faith from the authority of Scripture vpon the exposition of the Fathers you haue built quite beside the rocke and layd your foundation vpon the sand But take this protestation first that wee neither disesteeme nor despise the Fathers as by Priests and Iesuites wee are ordinarily slandered but contrarywise with all duty wee rise vp to their gray haires and reuerence their venerable antiquity Withall wee acknowledge that they were in their times excellent ornaments and lights of the Church endued not onely with singular knowledge in the mystery of Faith but also with admirable sanctity and vprightnesse of life Whereby in all their combats and bickerins with Hereticks they maintained the truth of God so wisely and couragiously
as that of the body sees the Sunne Of that therefore by Caluins iudgement Saint Iames speaketh not Beza in eundem locum of this hee doth And Beza who vpon this place treadeth in Caluins steps and well knew his meaning affirmeth that Saint Iames vnderstandeth not the same Faith whereby Saint Paul saith wee are iustified but onely that whereby wee doe belieue there is a God and that Christ is the Sonne of God and that all things prescribed in both the testaments are true which is in effect the very definition of Historicall Faith But for all your praysing of Caluin you cannot bee contented with his exposition but you must needs haue a tricke beyond him For whereas hee by Saint Iames his Faith vnderstand a vulgar knowledge you will rather haue it to be a peculiar shew by miracles which is the most senselesse deuice that euer was imagined For who euer dreamed that the Question which there the Apostle disputeth should bee this Whether a peculiar shew by miracles without works doe iustifie And when hee saith Thou beleeuest there is one God thou doest well the Diuels belieue also and tremble what brute of Cuma or Arcadia would expound it thus Thou hast a peculiar shew by miracle it is well the Diuels haue a peculiar shew by miracles also and tremble Learne therefore and know that the Faith which Diuels haue cannot bee Faith of miracles for miracles the Diuels can worke none being limited within the compasse of their nature which cannot produce supernaturall effects and neuer being ordained to bee the confirmers of Faith to which end miracles were appointed Now then to end this point whereas you pray this may serue for an answer vnto my first distinction of Historicall Faith I must tell you plainly that what you cannot win by force you are not like to get by begging neither can I at any hand bee intreated to accept of friuolous and desperate speeches for sound and substantiall answers Whereas againe you make the ground of my error as you pretend to bee confounding of Historicall Faith with a vulgar knowledge You shall by your patience giue mee leaue still to erre that error vntill by some new-found nicetie you can distinguish them whereof I pray you let vs heare by the next Lastly where you wish mee to know that whosoeuer finally contemneth Historicall Faith cannot haue the other two kinds of Faith nor bee saued I doe you to weet that I know it right well but what you intend or would inferre thereon nor I nor I thinke your selfe know Some thing was to be said to make a shew and to fill vp paper but what and how pertinent it is Hippoclides cares not Treatise The second is Faith of Promise and is a Perswasion or Assurance that the Promises of God made in Christ to wit iustification remission of sinnes adoption regeneration finally Election it selfe and eternall saluation doe particularly pertaine vnto mee and are mine Yet this iustifies not N. B. And I confidently hold that a firme and finall perswasion application and assurance that the promises of God made in Christ to wit Iustification Remission of Sinnes Adoption Regeneration and Election it selfe and eternall Saluation doe particularly belong vnto mee and are mine is that which iustifies a man before God You deny it and thus you oppose I. D. Vnto my assertion you oppose only your simple contradiction preparing your selfe immediately to answer my arguments But because in my Treatise certaine words are promised before my reasons whereat you cauill after your confused manner in a very importune and vnfit place I will by your leaue rectifie what you haue disturbed and maintaine them there where my owne method first ordered them Treatise This Faith of Promise although I deny not but in Scripture it is called Faith and that euery Saint of God both may and ought to haue particular perswasion and Assurance Yet I confidently deny that this Perswasion and Assurance is that which iustifies a Man before God N. B. A man may bee saued by this Faith yet this Faith is not a iustifying Faith therefore a man may bee saued without a iustifying Faith Whosoeuer may bee saued by this Faith and by your third kind of Faith may bee saued by two kind of Faiths the one iustifying the other not iustifying which is absurd Yet by your confession M. Downe a Christian ought to haue this Faith as of necessitie Then if hee ought to haue it hee cannot bee without it and yet may ordinarily be saued without it as you say and so saued without that which hee ought of necessity to haue to saluation and also ought to haue that to saluation which will doe him no good to saluation because hee may bee saued without it What absurdities and contrarieties be these I. D. Now alas were I as cunning as Theseus himselfe how could I winde my selfe out of these perplexities and labyrinths wherein you haue intangled mee or were I as strong as Samson how could I breake in sunder these cords of absurdities and contrarieties wherewith you haue so fast bound mee And yet when I looke more neerely vnto the matter mee thinks the knots are not so intricate that there needs some God from the engine as it is in the Prouerb to vntie them For as Augustin saith Doe but restore my words and your calumniation will presently vanish All I say is no more but this that euery Saint of God both may and ought to haue particular assurance and perswasion you report mee to say A man may bee saued by this assurance and that he ought to haue it as of necessity to saluation Betwixt which sayings there are as the Poet speaketh many high hils and deep seas and therefore what iars or discords soeuer you haue here found is in the song of your owne setting and not of my deuising For what mad Syllogismes are these if insteed of your imaginary proposition you restore my true assertion and then adde vnto it your Assumption and Conclusions thus A man may and ought to bee assured But Assurance is not iustifying Faith Ergo a man may bee saued without a Iustifying Faith Ergo a man may bee saued by two kinds of Faith Ergo hee may bee saued without that which hee ought of necessity to haue to saluation Ergo hee ought to haue that to saluation which will doe him no good to saluation Doe you not see that against the canons of Logick first you haue one tearme in the conclusion namely may bee saued which is not found in either of the premisses Againe that neither tearme of the Conclusion is in the Maior proposition And lastly that the Conclusion is affirmatiue notwithstanding that the Assumption is negatiue Fie fie that a Logicke-wright should so much ouershoot himselfe and so shamefully transgresse his owne precepts This infamy to retort vpon you your owne words had you not incurred if you could haue abstained from peruerting my speeches and adding vnto them such
source of all Rebellion and Disobedience N. B. Your Genus is that Faith iustifying is a Rest which is false when you speake more learnedly I will deigne you farther answer I. D. That Rest is not the Genus of Iustifying Faith I easily grant you for as appeares manifestly in my Treatise I make Affiance or which is all one Rest to bee the Act or Forme of Faith and not the Genus thereof If I had thought it fitting to haue troubled the Definition therewith I was not so ignorant but I could haue called it either an infused grace or a gratious habit or a Theologicall vertue but because the Philosopher taught me that Habits are sufficiently defined by their Acts in reference vnto their proper Obiects I held it needlesse to expresse it But suppose I had made it to be the right Genus how doe you disproue it Forsooth it is sufficient for such a Pythagoras as you are to say it is false an inexpiable wrong would it be to demand a reason of your sayings Onely you adde Plut. in vitâ Alex. that when I shall speake more learnedly you will deigne me farther answer Brauely againe spoken and Alexander-like for neither would hee being a King contend with any but Kings neither may you being so transcendent for your learning and surmounting the most of men as farre as the Sun doth the lesser lights without impeachment of honour vouchsafe disputation with any but your Peers much lesse with such a one as is scarce to bee found in any Predicament Yet seeing the Sunne so surpassing in glory is no way enuious of his light but imparteth bountifully of his beames to the enlightning of the rest of the starres it may please you also with whom wisdome must liue and dye Ioh. 12.2 out of your benignity to send forth some influence of your learning vpon mee that I may more cleerely discerne at least in this question betweene truth and that which is onely seeming so N. B. Shew mee for your warrant one place of Scripture that so tearmeth it any one Father of the Church old or new for these 1600. yeeres Greeks or Latins that will auouch it and I will yeeld to your Genus The Hebrew word for Faith and the Greek word whereof you haue heard before doe vtterly condemne you they both signifying a perswasion and an Assurance and neuer a Rest I maruell you will teach the Holy Ghost to speake and the Church now to vnderstand what Faith is and that by such a woodden Definition which may rather moue to choller then consent I. D. If by denying vnto mee the warrant of Scriptures of Fathers old and new Greeke and Latin for 1600. yeeres and of the Greeke and Hebrew words for Faith you intend to proue that Affiance or Rest is not the Genus of Faith it shall without more a-doo bee yeelded vnto you for as appeares in the former section I make it to bee not the Genus but the Act or Forme thereof But if you would thereby perswade that Rest or Affiance is not the Act of Faith I must tell you that these reasons are cleane out of date and that you doe too much abuse your Readers patience setting againe before him these Coleworts now more then twice sodden For both in the beginning of this disputation and in the last section saue two before this I haue throughly scanned cleered this businesse shewing that I am so farre from teaching the Holy Ghost to speake and the Church to vnderstand what Faith is as you vnchristianly lay vnto my charge that I vse no other tearme but that which the Spirit of God hath in Scripture sanctified to this purpose and the Holy Church hath euer spoken and vsed But because I am loth to pester my paper with so many Tautologies and needles repetitions as you vse to doe thither must I entreate the courteous Reader to repaire for satisfaction In the meane season seeing both by expresse testimony of Scripture and cleere euidence of reason I haue warranted euery part of my definition and yet you without disprouing the weakest of my proofes tauntingly call it a woodden Definition you must pardon mee if I tell you plainely that this wood-kinde of answering deserues to bee reformed with a little woodden correction But where you say my Definition may rather moue to choler then consent a man would thinke reading this your answer that either your principles were so incurably hurt or your braine dam'd and ram'd vp with such a deale of dull and tough flegme that it were as easy almost to remoue a mountaine as to moue you either to the one or the other And yet indeed I find you of a cleene contrary complexion euen the most pettish and waspish gentleman that euer I met withall euery small petty occasion stirs your choler and works you presently out of temper But because I see it is your impotency disease I beare with you the more praying you notwithstanding to haue as much patience as you may if at times for the purging of this humor I play the Physician and minister some small quantity of rheubarb vnto you N. B. For alas Master Downe what Rest can a man haue vpon Christ without Assurance to bee saued by his death and Passion and knowledge of his Lord and Sauiour A full assurance therefore as a cause worketh Rest vpon Christ as an effect and is therefore the Generall word in the Definition of Iustifying Faith I. D. Your argument if I mistake not standeth thus That which is an Effect of Assurance cannot be the Act of Faith But Resting vpon Christ is an Effect of Assurance Ergo it cannot bee the Act of Faith I distinguish of Assurance for it is either of the generall proposition or of the Speciall and indiuiduall of the Generall when wee are assured that Whosoeuer Belieueth on Christ shall bee iustified and saued of the Speciall when wee are certainly perswaded that We are iustified and shall bee saued If you meane the former then I deny the Maior for such Historicall Assurance is a necessary pre-requisite vnto Iustifying Faith and is the cause without which wee cannot belieue on Christ and therefore that which is such an effect of Assurance may bee the Act of Faith If you vnderstand the latter then doe I grant the Maior for if such Assurance be as I haue demonstratiuely proued it selfe the Effect of Faith it is more then manifest that That which is an effect of such Assurance cannot bee the Act of Faith But then I deny the Minor that Resting vpon Christ is an effect of such assurance affirming that contrarily Resting vpon Christ is the cause of such Assurance and Assurance is the Effect of that Resting But what rest say you can a man haue vpon Christ without Assurance to be saued by his Death Passion Surely vnlesse wee know his Death and Passion to bee the onely meanes of saluation wee cannot rest vpon him for it but to
haue better exprest it For my part I cannot guesse what it should bee nor will I trouble my braine in seeking it Happily your selfe know not what you would And thus haue I though breefly yet fully answered all your reasons It now remaineth that either you produce sounder arguments then yet you haue giuen vs or adde more vigor and strength vnto these or because I feare you can do neither that considering the weaknes of those reeds whereon you haue hitherto leaned hence forward you trust them no more It can bee no disgrace vnto you to bee ouercome of Truth neither is it leuity or inconstancy vpon sight of your errour to change both your opinion and practice Take therefore vnto you Christian seuerity and ingenuously reuoke what you haue held or done amisse so shall you giue glorie vnto God and God shall honour you in the sight of all his Saints But if notwithstanding all that hath beene said you meane still to persist in your error and will not bee persuaded although you be perswaded I feare lest after straining at these gnats you fall to swallowing downe of Camels and proceed from dislike of a few indifferent ceremonies vnto flat schisme and separation which God forbid for his mercies sake Amen See T de ora HOW S. PAVL AND S. IAMES ARE TO BEE reconciled in the matter of IVSTIFICATION YOV demand how Saint Paul teaching Iustification by Faith onely without the Works of the Law Ro. 5.20.28 Gal. 2.16 Iam. 2.24 and Saint Iames affirming that of Works a man is iustified and not of Faith only may bee reconciled I will endeuour to giue you the best satisfaction I can in a few Propositions 1 Scripture being the Word of God who is truth and whose promises are not yea and nay 2. Cor. 1.17.18.19.20 but yea and Amen although sometime there may seeme contrariety in it yet reall difference and repugnancy there can bee none truth euer agreeing and neuer contradicting it selfe 2 Paul therefore and Iames being inspired by the same spirit must needs conspire in the same truth although the one exclude Works from Faith in the matter of Iustification the other include Works together with Faith 3 The readiest way to reconcile this seeming contradiction is to obserue carefully the Occasions whereupon they were moued to deliuer these doctrines and to distinguish the Equiuocation and diuers vse of these two words Iustification and Faith For if there bee the same meaning in both and no ambiguity in either of these tearmes it cannot bee auoided but they must of necessity crosse one the other 4 Saint Pauls occasion was this Hee saw with what eagernesse contention certaine Iewes maintained Act. 15.1 that vnlesse the law of Moses were kept and obserued together with the Gospell there could bee no Iustification and that thereby mans Works were either substituted in the roome of or yoked together with Faith to the great preiudice of Gods free Grace Ro. 2.24 And therefore against these he proues by the testimony of the Law the Prophets that we are Iustified by Faith in Christ freely without the works of the Law 5 Hereupon some there were who like spiders sucking venome out of the wholsomest flowers so interpreted this comfortable doctrine as if it skilled not whether they practized good works and led a godly vertuous life so as they did belieue And against this sort of men the Apostle Saint Iames thought it necessary to oppose himselfe 6 So that Saint Iames doth not dispute against Saint Paul but for the right meaning of S. Paul against those that depraued and wrested his doctrine to a wrong sence Paul so defending Iustification by Faith without Works as hee denies not the necessary practice of them but only denies the power of Iustification vnto them Iames so establishing good Works not as giuing them force to make a man acceptable and iust in the sight of Gods iustice but onely disabling that Faith from hauing any power to Iustify vs which is not accompanied with them 7 And thus Saint Augustin vnderstandeth it When De fide oper l. 1. c. 14. saith he the Apostle saith that a man is iustified by Faith without the Works of the Law hee meaneth not that Faith being receiued and professed the works of Iustice should bee contemned but that euery one should know that he may be iustified by Faith although the works of the law goe not before For they follow him that is iustified but goe not before him that is to bee iustified And againe 83. quaest q. 16. When as Paul speakes of the good works of Abraham which accompanied his Faith it is manifest that by the example of Abraham he doth not so teach that a man is iustified by Faith without works that if hee doe belieue it concernes him not to worke well but to to this end rather that no man should thinke that by the merit of his former good Works he hath attained the gift of iustification which is by Faith 8 As the consideration of the different occasions which moued these two Apostles to speake so differently doth in part cleere this question so will it yet bee more euident if wee know the seuerall acceptions and vses of these words Iustification and Faith and in what sence either Apostle vnderstands them 9 Iustification vsually in the Scripture phrase signifieth not to make iust by infusing the quality of Iustice into the soule 2. King 15.4 Deut. 25.1 Psal 81.3 Prov. 17.15 Mat. 12.37 Ro. 8.33.34 but to pronounce and declare to be iust being indeed a Law-terme and drawne from ciuill Courts of iudicature and is opposed to Condemnation And this is so cleere that Tolet a Iesuite confesseth it most frequently so to signify in Scripture Pineda Vega and Salmeron three great Papists acknowledge it in this sence to be vsed by S. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans where hee disputeth purposely of Iustification 10 Now there is a double tribunall where wee are to bee iudged one is Gods the other Mans and therefore God is sayd to Iustify and Man also God when he acquits a sinner from his sinnes for the merit of his Son Christ Man when seeing our good works which are the fruites and testimonies of our grace with God out of the iudgement of Charity hee accounts vs the Sonnes of God Of the former Saint Paul speakes of the latter S. Iames. S. Paul enquireth how wee are made lust before God namely by Faith S. James how it may appeare vnto men that wee are Iust namely by Works Faith is the principle of Existence by which we are Iust Works of Knowledge by which we are knowne to be Iust Iac. 2.10 In id cap. 11 That Saint Iames vnderstandeth such a Declaratiue Iustification is plaine by that he saith Shew mee thy Faith by thy Works And Thomas of Aquin affirmeth that Workes following Faith are not said to Iustify as Iustification is an infusion of
iustice but as it is an exercise or declaration or perfection of Faith 12 Concerning the word Faith sometimes it signifieth that sanctifying grace of Gods spirit whereby wee beleeue in or on God that is put all our affiance vpon God in Christ for Iustification and Saluation sometimes a naked assent or agreeing to all the truths contained in the Scripture specially such as are Euangelicall That is only of the Elect this the Diuels haue That either hath works following it as in Abraham or is great in child of works ready to trauell and bring forth if God giue time as in the theefe on the crosse This many times is without works and therefore dead and spiritles Of that S. Paul speaketh of this S. Iames. That sole but not solitary iustifies this being solitary iustifies not 13 In a word S. Paul speaks of the cause of Iustification S. Iames of the Effect S. Paul descends from the Cause to the Effect S. Iames ascends from the Effects to the Cause S. Paul resolues how wee may bee iustified S. Iames how wee may bee knowne to bee iustified S. Paul excludes works as being no Cause of Iustification S. Iames requires works as fruites of Iustification S. Paul denies works to go before them that are to bee iustified S. Iames affirmeth that they follow him that is iustified 14 Others distinguish and reconcile them thus Iustification is sometime vnderstood without implying Sanctification sometime as it implyeth also Sanctification with it In the former sence S. Paul taketh it when hee proueth that a man is iustified by Faith without works S. Iames in the latter when he concludeth that a man is iustified by works and not by Faith only And this I suppose to be a very sound interpretation 15 Howsoeuer that Faith alone without the works of the Law in the sence aboue deliuered doth iustifie these ancient Fathers auouch together with us Origen Cyprian Eusebius Caesariensis Hilarie Basil Chrysostome Ambrose Augustin Cyril Primasius Hesychius Gennadius Oecumenius whose direct and expresse words I can at any time produce Nay these late Papists also least it should be thought that none but Protestants hold it the Canons of Collein the authors of the booke offered by Caesar vnto the Protestant Collocutors in the assemblie of Ratisbon Pighius Cassander Stapulensis Peraldus Ferus and others who count themselues as good Catholiks as they that hold otherwise 16 And this only Faith is so sure an anchor of our soules and suchâ— fountaine of true comfort both in life and death that Charles the fift Steuen Gardiner Sir Christopher Blunt and sundrie others durst not at their death trust vnto their works but vnto Faith in Christ only And Cardinal Bellarmin after a long disputation touching the merit of works is faine to conclude that because of the vncertenty of our owne iustice and the danger of vaineglory the Safest course is to repose all our affiance in the only mercy and goodnes of God So that in his iudgement wee Protestants haue chosen the Safest course I for my part will neuer trust my soule vnto them who leauing so safe a course meane to hazard it through a more dangerous way OF THE AVTHORS AND AVTHORITY OF THE CREED AND WHY IT IS CALLED a Symbole THE inscription of the Creed seemes to father it on the holy Apostles calling it the Symbole of the Apostles So doe almost all the Fathers of the fourth age after Christ and downeward affirming that the Apostles hauing receiued the Holy Ghost at Ierusalem and being now ready to disperse themselues into all parts of the world to preach the Gospell thought it good before their parting to compile this Symbole that it might serue as a pledge of their vnity in the Faith and a canon for their doctrine and teaching Yea some of them proceed so farre as particularly to set downe what article was made by what Apostle whereof see Augustin in his hundred and fifteenth Sermon de tempore Now although it bee very hard for mee to sway against the streame of so maine authority yet can I not but doubt thereof Paraphr in Mat. Praef. and confesse with Erasmus I know not who made the Creed especially hauing so great probabilities for demonstrations I dare not call them that it should not bee done by the twelue Apostles For first were it compiled by them is it likely that Saint Luke writing the history of their Acts would haue omitted so principall a matter Sundry other things of farre lesse consequence hee hath carefully recorded but of this so important and weighty a businesse hee makes not so much as one word mention which certainly hee would neuer haue failed to doe had they done so Adde hereunto that not one of the ancient Fathers who liued within the three first Centuries of Christ speake of any such thing in any of their writings and yet they should best know it whose times were neerest vnto the Apostles This deep silence both of Saint Luke and all those ancient Doctors make it vnto mee more then probable that the Apostles neuer composed it Secondly as the silence of these worthies so the very language of the Creed conuinceth it to bee yonger then the Apostles For the word Catholike vsed in the Creed was not knowne in their time Can any man thinke that the Church should then bee called Catholike when it was not Catholike For when they say this Creed was compiled the Church was scarce begunne among the Iewes and the Apostles had no where as yet preached the Gospell among the Gentils But heare the expresse words of Pacianus Bishop of Barcilona Sed sub Apostolis Ad Sympronian Epist 1. inquies nemo Catholicus vocabatur Esto sic fuerit Vel illud indulge cum post Apostolos haereses extitissent diuersisque nominibus columbam Dei atque Reginam lacerare per partes scindere niterentur nonne cognomen suum plebs Apostolica postulabat quo incorrupti populi distingueret vnitatem neintemeratam Dei virginem error aliquorum per membra laceraret In the Apostles times you will say no man was called Catholicke Bee it so Yet by your leaue when after the Apostles heresies were risen vp and by diuersity of names they laboured to rent and teare in peeces the done and queene of God was it not requisite that those which were Apostolike should haue a sirname of their owne whereby the vnity of those that are vncorrupt might bee distinguished and the error of none might rent in peeces the immaculate virgin of God Thus hee Against which if it bee obiected that the Epistles of Iames Peter Iohn and Iude are called Catholicke I answer the Inscriptions and Subscriptions of the Epistles are not Apostolicall but added to them by some other and sometime vntruly Neither is there any reason they should bee so stiled aboue the rest For neither is the doctrine contained in them more Catholicke then of all the other Epistles neither were they written to all the
Iewes more then the Epistle to the Hebrewes neither were they all written to all Catholicks for the second and third of Iohn were sent vnto priuate persons onely and all the rest as vniuersally concerne all Catholicks as these few tearmed Catholicke doe I conclude therefore the word Catholicke being latter then the Apostles so must the Creed bee also which vses it Thirdly the different relation of the story bewrayes the vncertainty of it for they giue not all the same article vnto the same Apostle Some marshall them iust as S. Luke doth in the first of the Acts others thus Peter Andrew Iohn Iames the elder Thomas Iames the younger Bartlemew Mathew Simon Iude Mathias Againe some of them attribute vnto Peter part onely of the first article I belieue in God the Father almighty and vnto Iohn the other part Maker of Heauen and Earth But others attribute the whole article vnto Peter and giue another vnto Iohn The like may bee obserued in other articles If then they bee certaine of the tradition why doe they differ thus in their reports If they differ thus one from another who can bee certaine of the tradition Fourthly if the Creed both for matter forme were from the Apostles and they deliuered it precisely in those words in which we now haue it why is it not placed in the Canon of Scripture Certainly in the Church although it euer haue been much esteemed yet was it neuer counted Canonicall Neither hath it been preserued so safe from addition detraction mutation as the rest of the Scriptures always haue been For euen in the ancientest times we find great variety in it Ruffin writing a iust comment on it omits that clause Maker of Heauen and Earth And who knowes not how many there are who relating this Creed leaue out the article of Christ descending into hell De Christi anima c. 6 Euen Bellarmin himselfe confesseth that it was not found anciently in all Creeds and hee voucheth for it Irenaeus Origen Tertullian and Augustin though fiue times he expoūd it and finally the Creed of the Roman Church also as Ruffin witnesseth vnto whom if hee had been so pleased he might haue added a whole armie of others whom for breuities sake I omit Finally the ancient Doctors were so farre from equalling it with Scripture that they appealed from it thereunto as to an higher authority Catech. 4. Cyril plainely affirmeth that wee may not beleeue the Creed without Scripture Biblioth sanc Patr. tom 9. And Paschasius against Macedonius shrowding himselfe vnder some words of the Creed appealeth vnto the Canonicall Scripture for that of it saith hee the text of the Creed dependeth Which had they thought it had been from the Apostles in such forme and as now we haue it without question they neuer would haue done Fiftly the reason which they assigne why they composed this Creed discouers the vanity thereof What was that That it might be forsooth vnto the Apostles a canon rule according to which they should square and conforme their preaching What vnto the Apostles to whom Christ promised his blessed Spirit that should lead them into all truth And that himselfe would put into their mouths a ready answer vpon all occasions so that they should not need to bethinke themselues what to say Could they possibly doubt lest any difference or discord should grow among them in matter of Faith who were so guided by the Spirit of truth and vnity that they could not in any point either erre themselues or lead any other into error Surely so to thinke derogateth much from the truth of Christ and imputeth much weaknesse vnto the Spirit of God and detracteth from the certainty of our Faith which dependeth on their preaching So that for this cause it is vnlikely they made this Creed at leastwise to this end De Symb. ad Cat. l. 1. c. 1. Lastly Saint Augustin saith thus not that false Augustin vpon whom those Sermons de tempore are fathered and whose authority is vsually alledged to warrant this legend but the true S. Augustin saith Illa verba Symboli qua audiuistis per Scripturas sparsa sunt inde collecta ad vnum redacta those words of the Creed which you haue heard are dispersed through the Scriptures and being gathered from thence are reduced into one With him agreeth Paschasius De Spirit Sanct. c. 1. De sacris omninò voluminibus quae sunt credenda sumamus de quorum fonte symboli ipsius series deriuata consistit Let vs take out of the sacred volumes what things wee are to belieue out of which fountaine the order of the Creed is deriued Centur. 1. l. 2. c. 4. And Marcellus a Bishop in a letter to Iulius Bishop of Rome professeth hauing rehearsed the words of the Creed Se hanc fidem ex Scripturis accepisse a maioribus secundum Deum accepisse candem in Ecclesiâ Dei praedicare that he receiued this Faith out of the Scriptures and next after God from his ancestors and that hee preached it in the Church of God If then as these Fathers affirme the Creed bee gathered out of the Scriptures how can the Apostles bee authors thereof For out of the old Testament they could not gather that Christ was borne of the Virgin Mary or that hee suffered vnder Pontius Pilate And as for the new many of the Apostles were dead before all was written and Iames before any was written besides that no part of it was written when the Creed was compiled if it bee true which the legend saith And these are the reasons for which it seemeth vnto me more then probable that the Apostles were neuer Authors of this Creed If it be so will some say why doth it then beare the Apostles name I answere because as out of S. Augustin and others we haue shewed the matter therein contayned is perfectly agreeable with the Apostles writings and was collected out of them Moreouer Apostolicall is a terme extended by writers vnto the first three hundred years after Christ Haet sola fides saith Damasus Ep. 5. quae Nicaeae Apostolorum authoritate fundata est perpetua est firmitate seruanda this only Faith which was established at Nice by the authority of the Apostles is firmely and perpetually to be held So Scythianus and Terebinthus are said to haue liued temporibus Apostolorum in the time of the Apostles Epiph. Haer. 66. who yet liued in Aurelians time towards three hundred years after Christ And Isidor distinguishing betweene Apostles and the First Apostles saith that Apostles continued downe vntill Pope Syluester and that the times before the great Councell of Nice were Apostolicall Although therefore the first Apostles were not the founders of this Creed yet those succeeding Apostles were of whom it may be called the Apostles Creed These things being so let it bee obserued thereupon first how friuolously Papists cauill and quarell with vs affirming that wee hold
the many excellent and heauenly graces wherewith the spirit of God beautifieth and enricheth the hearts of his Elect there is no one of more either necessity vnto saluation or importance for comfort and consolation then that of Iustifying Faith For as by the first Act of this faith our Iustification before God our peace with God our incorporation into the mysticall body of Christ Iesus our conuersion vnto God are first wrought and effected so by the consequent continued Acts of the same Fayth are wee being fallen dayly renewed and from both totall and finall falling away safely preserued and maintained This cōsidered me-thinkes no time can be better employed nor no paines more profitably taken then in the quest and enquiry of the true nature and definition of Iustifying Fayth And although I cannot deny but hee may haue fayth who cannot like a Logician define it and may haue the benefit of Iustification by it who cannot distinguinsh the nature of it yet this withall I boldly auerre that the ignorance hereof or a confused and indistinct apprehension of it disableth vs both from giuing and taking direct and euident comfort from it whereas a cleare and distinct knowledge thereof is able to satisfie and replenish with comfort any distressed or afflicted conscience For this cause haue I vndertaken so briefly and perspicuously as I can to set downe my opinion of the definition of Fayth perswading my selfe I doe not endeauouring at leastwise not to swarue from the wholesome doctrine of Christ and Gods word From the writings and doctrine of most learned and worthy Diuines peraduenture it doth and indeed it doth vary to whom although as farre farre inferior I owe all respect reuerence yet being Gods freeman I cannot endure to bee mans bond-man and sweare to all they say One Paphnutius sometime in the matter of Priests marriage preuailed against a whole Counsell of most learned and godly Bishops Socrat. l. 1. c. 8. and young Elihu may speake more oportunely pertinently then they that are much his Ancients Therefore as Nisus sayth in Virgill Neque hac nostris spectentur ab annis Aeneid l. 9. looke not how greene or how gray his head be that speaketh but let the touch of truth try all and what by it shall appeare to be base and counterfait refuse and reiect that which shall be found true and sound approue and embrace And that preiudice too strongly possesse thee not take my protestation that I neuer haue entertained this opinion rashly and inconsiderately but vpon mature aduise and deliberation nor broach it vpon a preposterous humour of nouelty or ambition to build vp mine owne credit existimation by the ruine and disparagement of so great Diuines for this were Subulâ leonem excipere to encounter a Lion with a bodkin as it is in the Prouerbe but vpon a sincere affection and desire to minister solid and found consolation to despayring and perplexed minds which as after shall appeare vpon this foundation may most firmely be raised And now trusting what I say shall be weighed in the ballance not of preiudice but vpright iudgement I leaue to preface any farther and come directly to the purprose Because I purpose not to raise my building very high I meane not to lay my foundation very deepe therefore neither will I play the Phylologer in shewing the diuers vses and acceptations of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Fides id est Faith or quote Ciceros Fiat quod dictum est or St. Augustines Fac quod dicis Offic. l. 1. to doe as a man sayes for the notation of Faith neither will I play the Phylosopher in discoursing of Physicall or Morall or Ciuill Faith wherein it were easie to wast much oile and paper nor lastly will I speake of that Theologicall Faith called Miraculous either in Agent or Patient which I take to bee none other then a diuine instinct for the working of a Miracle For albeit they who at the last day shall say Lord in thy name haue we not cast out Diuels may seeme to haue trusted in Miraculous Faith for Iustification Mat. 7.22.23 and acknowledgement of Christ yet notwithstanding neuer any controuersie about it hath exercised the Church of God To deferre your expectations therefore no farther three Faiths there seeme to be which lay claime and title to the priuiledge of justification giue me leaue to distinguish and denominate them according to their Obiects neither be offended if I handle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and giue new termes to old matters The first is Fides Historiae Historicall Faith which is an Assent of the mind vnto the truth of Gods word and specially the Gospell And this Faith whether it be according to the distinction of the Scoolemen Acquisite gotten by much hearing and experience without illumination or infused and reuealed by the spirit of illumination it hath no interest in the matter of Iustification For besides that it is absurd that so generall a Knowledge should iustify Acquisit Faith the Diuels haue according to that of St Iames Iam. 2. 19. The Diuels beleeue tremble Infused faith the Reprobates may haue as Balaam Iudas Magus Now the Scripture is plaine that justifying faith is propper and peculiar vnto the Elect and therefore Historicall faith cannot justifie The second is Fides Promissionum Faith of promises which is a Perswasion or Assurance that the promises of God made in Christ to wit Iustification Remission of sinnes Adoption Regeneration and finally Election it selfe and eternall Saluation doe particularly pertaine to me and are mine Now this although I deny not but in Scripture it is called faith and that euery Saint of God both may and ought to haue this particular perswasion and Assurance yet this I confidently deny that this perswasion is that which justifies a man before God and my reasons are these 1. If this were justifying Faith then whosoeuer liues and dyes without this particular Assurance he cannot be saued Heb. 11.6 Without faith it is impossible to please God But a man may be saued without it I instance in those our Brethren of Germanie who hold that faith may finally and totally fall away and consequently that there can be no certainty of Saluation whom yet the Church of God calleth and counteth brethren and it were vncharitable to censure of them otherwise Therefore or at leastwise probably Faith is not an Assurance 2. That which is in time after Iustifying Faith cannot be that faith This is vndeniable But this particular knowledge is in time after faith This I proue out of 1. Ioh. 5.13 These things haue I written vnto you that beleeue in the name of the Sonne of God that ye may know that ye haue eternall life Behold Beleeuing goes before and Knowledge comes after as for that which followeth in the same verse and that yee may beleeue I interpret it of Perseuerance growth in Faith Howsoeuer beleeuing Knowing are distinguished and
therefore are not one 3. That which in nature comes after Iustification cannot be Iustifying faith This appeares because Faith is the Efficient instrumentall cause of Iustification and euery Efficient by the rule of Logick is in nature before the Effect But this knowledge or Assurance is in nature after iustificatiō This I proue thus the truth of a proposition is alwayes in nature before the knowledge of the truth for Propositions are not therefore true because knowne so but they are first true and then knowne so Therefore this Proposition I know I am iustified spoken by on that is iustified must needs presuppose the partie before to be iustified Therefore this knowledge of Iustification in nature following Iustification it cannot be Iustifying faith 4. In conditionall promises there can be no Assurance of the thing promised before the performance of the condition V. G. This is a conditionall promise in the couenant of workes doe this and thou shalt liue life is promised but on condition of doing and therefore vntill we haue performed the condition we cannot nor may not looke that God should be reciprocall and giue vs life So in the couenant of grace iustification is promised but vpon condition of faith so sayth the Scripture beleeue and thy sinnes shall be forgiuen thee And therefore the condition of beleeuing must first be performed before we can assure our selues our sins are forgiuen If so then faith going before and Assurance following after Assurance cannot be justifying faith 5 That from whence followeth a blasphemous absurdity cannot be a truth for from truth nought but truth can be concluded But from this that faith is an Assurance such an absurdity doth follow What is that That God commands a man to know an vntruth to assure himselfe of that which neuer shall be For God being truth cannot command falshood to be taken for truth Nether tell me here for who art thou that disputest with God for this is a ruled case in diuinity God cānot doe things which imply contradiction and therefore not make vntruth to be truth or knowledge error Now that this absurdity followes from hence thus I demonstrate it God commands the Reprobate to beleeue For Ioh. 18.8.9 for vnbeleefe the world shall bee condemned but no condemnation but for breach of a commandement 1 Ioh. 3.4 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sinne is the transgression of the law and therefore they are commanded to beleeue I aske you then what it is to beleeue you will say to know to assure Therefore God commands the Reprobates to know and bee assured But this is a blasphemous absurdity therefore is your opinion absurd which infers it 6. That which the wicked may haue cannot be iustifying faith for it is Fides Electorum the faith of the Elect. But the wicked may haue this perswasion yea and many haue beene most confidently perswaded that they are in the fauour of God You will say it is no true perswasion but I say if forme make truth they are as formally and therefore as truly perswaded of it as the godly And therefore if the godly are therefore and for this cause iustified because cause they are strongly perswaded that they are iustified then why should not the wicked likewise be iustified by his strong perswasion But in truth these kind of speeches are vnreasonable and senselesse and so the opinion cannot be reasonable These sixe reasons shall suffice for the present although many more might be added only from hence I gather this Corollary that if iustifying Faith be not a Knowledge or Assurance much lesse is it a full knowledge or full Assurance Nay though we should graunt it to be a knowledge yet is it against Logick to define it by the perfection of knowledg For as there is a strong tree so there is a brused reed as there is a burning lamp so there is smoking flaxe as there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Faith come to full age and maturity so there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Faith in the nonage and minority So therefore to define it were to exclude the weake Faith and to make the Definition narrower and of lesse latitude then the definite Besides it is a most discomfortable doctrine vnto a troubled mind and leads the directest way to desperation for so the palsie hand of Faith should not receiue Christ And were not this to quench fire with oile and to adde Aloes to wormwood and might not hee that thus comforteth be counted one of Iobs miserable comforters Ob. The godly are said to know and to be perswaded yea the Prophet saith Io. 3.14 Ioh. 17.3 Esa 53.11 Heb. 11.1 By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie many and Faith is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Subsistence and Euidence Ans First I graunt the godly may and ought to know but the question is not of their duty but what it is which iustifies them 2 Secondly to know and so likewise the Verbs of Sence in the Hebrew tongue vsually signifieth not onely an act of the Minde or outward Sence but of the Will and affection also So in the Psalme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 1.6 Mat. 7.13 The Lord knoweth the way of the Righteous and in the Gospell Depart I know you not and elsewhere I will not heare see c. that is God will not so know heare see c. as in fauour to loue or approue And so doe I interprete that of the Prophet Christ being so knowne as to bee embraced and rested vpon by the Will shall iustify many 3 Thirdly that Definition in the eleuenth to the Hebrewes I deny with Peter Martyr and the rest of our Diuines to bee perfect but rather by the Effects to describe it And as for that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistence whereon you seeme to stand take this first that the writers of the new Testament vse words in the same sence that the Seuentie Translators doe Secondly that that which in Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expectation that the Septuagint turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Ruth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ruth 1.12 so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Hebrewes shall not be Subsistence but expectation or desire of things that are hoped for But of this umpliandum censeo I pronounce nothing only I conclude his second Faith not to be Iustifying Faith And because you shall not count me singular or alone in this point read M. Foxe in his booke de Christo gratis iustificante and you shall find him earnest against this opinion The third faith is Fides Persone or Personalis meriti Faith of Person or of Personall merit and of this I make the Obiect to be Christ the Mediator meriting the Act of it Fiducia a Rest or Deuolution the Subiect of it the facultie of the Will and not the Vnderstanding the next End of it Iustification the remote End eternall Saluation And thus I
define it a Rest of the Will vpon Christ and his merits for Iustification and consequently Saluation In which Definition 1 That the Obiect of it is the Person or Personall merit of Christ the whole tenor of Scripture proues which runs thus Hee that beleeueth in mee shall not perish Ioh. 3.16 Ioh. 14.1 Ioh. 1.12 and Yee belieue also in me and As many as receiued him to them hee gaue power to bee the Sonnes of God that is to them that belieued in his Name and in six hundred places besides But if thou wilt be further informed see M. Foxe in the booke before quoted 2 That the Act of it is Fiducia Affiance I report me to all the words vsed in the originall of the old Testament as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to retire vnto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deuolue or Roll vpon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to trust or put confidence in and all the rest and to the forme of words vsed in the new as Credere in Sperare in to beleeue and hope in or vpon 3 That it is Subiectiuely in the Will appeares by the Act for Fiducia Affiance without controuersie is in the Will as also by the Obiect Christ which implies not a Knowledge but Fiducia or Rest Ob. Fiducia Affiance is Spes roborata a confirmed Hope therefore if you make Faith to be Fiducia Affiance you make it likewise to be hope and vnskilfully confound two distinct vertues Ans I denie Fiducia Affiance to bee Hope although the Prince of Schoolemen Thomas of Watering and his followers haue heretofore taught it For 1 Hope looks to the End which is Saluation Affiance to the meanes which is Christs personall merit 2 The Act of Hope is expectare to looke out for the Act of Affiance is tuniti to leane on or rest vpon 3 Hope is of things that are future but Affiance of that which is present So yet Faith is Fiducia Affiance which I further confirme by S. Augustins authority Credere est amare In Ioh. 7. tract 29. amando in Deum tendere To belieue is to loue and by louing to moue vnto God expounding Amare by Confidere Loue by Affiance according to that Fathers vsuall phrase in his Tractates vpon Iohn Ob. Faith may be both Notitia Fiducia Knowledge and Affiance and so both in the Will and in the Understanding Ans It cannot bee because it is impossible for one and the same Habit to bee Subiectiuely in two seuerall Faculties of so different natures Indeed Bonauenture saith Hope is in both being Certi expectatio In 3. Scut citante Kemnit loco de iustif a certaine expectation Expectation being in the will certitude in the Vnderstanding But I answer that Certainty is the ground of diuine Hope but no part of the nature thereof as knowledge of a thing to be loue-worthy is the ground of loue for Ignoti nulla cupido no desire of that which is vnknowne but not of the nature of it and therefore as you cannot place Loue both in the Mind and Will no more may you Hope or Faith Ob. If Faith bee Fiducia Affiance then the wicked may haue it for Balaam desired the death of the righteous Num. 23.10 Mat. 13.20.21 and some receiue the Word with ioy belieuing but for a time Ans There is a double Affiance the one is sleight and superficiall and grounded on no other foundation then a generall apprehension that it is good to bee saued by Christ but leaue not their former course and embrace a new the other is setled and grounded hauing these precedents 1 A particular knowledge of our sinfull estate examined by the rule of Gods Word 2 An apprehension of Gods wrath and eternall death deserued by sinne 3 Vnfained sorrow for sinne with resolution of new life 4 A knowledge of Christ and here 1 Of his sufficiencie 2 His louing inuitation of all to rest on him for Iustification and Saluation These foure things going before if by the operation of Gods spirit shall afterward follow a rest vpon Iesus Christ for Iustification Saluation I pronounce this Rest to bee that Act which doth iustify before God So that these three Faiths shall bee as the three Propositions of a Categoricke Syllogisme Faith of Story being the Maior Faith of Person or Personall merit being the Assumption and Faith of Promises being the Conclusion on this wise De Whosoeuer shall as formerly is declared rest vpon the merits of Christ for his Iustification and Saluation he shall be iustified and saued This the Scripture affirmeth and to acknowledge the truth thereof is Historicall Faith ri But I doe so rest vpon Christ This the Conscience priuy to the sincerity of the heart assumeth which act of Resting I tearme Iustifying Faith j. Therefore I am iustified shall be saued And this is the Faith of Promise concluded of the former premisses and is the Assurance before mentioned To draw to a Conclusion concerning these three Faiths I adde farther that to the Faith of Story many doe not aspire namely such Paynims and Gentiles to whom God hath not vouchsafed the Ministery of the Word and meanes of knowledge yet many Reprobates doe liuing within the compasse and territory of the Church and remaine for all that vniustified Vnto the Faith of Person and that Affiance which I call sleight and superficiall many likewise of the vessels of wrath doe attaine but cannot goe one step farther whereas all and euery of the Elect rest on Christ in the second manner and vpon the precedents before specified and are thereby iustified Vnto the Faith of promise though the children of God may come and most do come yet some doubtlesse partly through the strength of flesh and mixture of infidelity with their Faith partly through the force and violence of temptation doe not nor dare not inferre the Conclusion and yet may be iustified Lastly and finally whereas Faith is distinguished into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 full Faith and little Faith I take it that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to bee restrained to Faith of Promise onely but that both are common to all three so that a weake assent vnto the story is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong assent is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a strong Affiance is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a weake Affiance is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a bold and confident inference of the Conclusion is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fearefull and timerous inference is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But yet neither of them in the first doth iustifie although one of them of necessity must goe before Iustification nor yet in the third although 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may and ought to follow but in the second the least dramme of Affiance though it bee but as a graine of mustard-seed doth iustifie as perfectly as the greatest quantity because it receiues all Christ who is not capable of magis and minus more and
things Hence the ancient Fathers inuented the word Trinity to signify the plurality of persons in one substance Homousios to expresse the consubstantiality of the Sonne with the Father Theotokos to maintaine the personall vnion of both natures in Christ and six hundred such like words vtterly vnknown vnto former ages Ibid. old matters as the same Athanasius saith Cap. 18. receiuing new names those new names couching vnder them no new meaning According whereunto Vincentius Lirinensis though he would not haue his Timothie to broach new things yet giueth him leaue to teach the same things he hath learned after a new manner Being therfore warrāted both by the precept practice of the Primitiue Church I see no cause but that euen in this point also I may be permitted to vse new tearmes Perhaps you will say that not only the tearme wherewith it is inuested but the matter hereof is also new for so much your questions out of Hierome and Tertullian and the floud of words following with not a drop of reason in them seeme to import Whereunto though I haue already sufficiently answered yet now I adde by way of surplus that many Truths lye a long time hidden in their principles and vnheeded of the wisest which being at length disclosed and brought to light are not therefore new in themselues but onely vnto vs comming newly vnto our knowledge euen as the countrey of America is called the new world not because it is of a latter creation then Europe Asia or Africa but only because it is of a later discouery These Conclusions vntill their dependency and coherence with the principles doe manifestly appeare vnto vs it sufficeth to beleeue them implicitly and in the preparation of the Minde but when they shall bee vnfolded out of their principles and clearly demonstrated vnto vs by necessary deduction from them we are bound to yeeld distinct and expresse assent vnto them And then as it would haue been great folly in the Spaniard to haue refused the gold and treasures of the new world because it was found out not by the old Argonauts but by Christopher Columbus a late sailer so would it bee great sinne in vs to disclaime and renounce the benefit of a truth because it is made known vnto vs not by an ancient Father but by a man of yesterday or to day Iam. 2.1 For this were to haue the faith of God in respect of persons as S. Iames saith and to restraine the gift of the Spirit of Wisdome and reuelation vnto the times of our predecessors as if they only had eyes giuen them to spie out truths and it were impossible for vs to see what they saw not although wee caried the Sunne in our hands as Lactantius speaketh Now then to apply this vnto the matter in hand if the point you quarell at bee not onely new vnto the present custome De Ciuit. Dei lib. 22. c. 7. as S. Augustin speaketh but also contrary vnto reason and the grounds of Faith I confesse it is erronious and iustly may you come vpon mee with your demaunds out of Hierome and Tertullian Ep. 23. ad Paulin. De veland virg cap. 1. who are you whence when that after 400. yeeres you should goe about to teach vs what wee knew not before But if it bee new only vnto vs and not in it selfe then doe I answer your Hierome with Hierome Weigh not truth by time and Tertullian with Tertullian Nor space of times nor patronage of persons nor priuiledge of places may prescribe against truth For that which is no otherwise new is true and as the truth of God is with all reuerence and submission to bee embraced Howbeit this I say not as if I would be thought to bee the first discouerer hereof or that it had laine hid as it were in the pit of Democritus vntill this time For that there is a Faith whose obiect is the Person of the Mediator was neuer yet vnknowne in the Church but hath euer beene manifest euen from the beginning Search the Scriptures and you shall find therein nothing more cleere then this For as in the treatise sent you I haue shewed the whole tenor of them runs thus Hee that beleeueth in mee shall not perish Ioh. 3.16 Ioh. 14.1 Ioh. 1.12 yee beleeue in God beleeue also in mee As many as receiued him to them hee gaue power to bee the Sonnes of God that is to them that beleeue in him c. Rom. 3.22.26 Gal. 2.16.3.22 Phil. 3.9 Iam. 2.1 Reu. 2.13.14.12 Whereunto I adde that in sundry places it is expresly called the Faith of Iesus Christ not because it inhereth in Christ as in a Subiect but for that it hath relation and respect vnto Christ as vnto the right Obiect And that at length it appeareth both that the matter is euery way old though the tearme bee new and that new tearmes may bee giuen to old matters euen of this kind so as they bee proper determined and adequated thereunto It remaineth onely to shew that such is the tearme which here I vse For proofe whereof I say no more but this that if our best Diuines haue conueniently distinguished other Faiths according to their obiects calling one Faith of story because Scripture story another Faith of Promise because the Euangelicall promise a third Faith of Miracles because miracles are the proper obiect of them I see no reason why I may not as freely and as fitly call that Faith of Person which hath for its Obiect the Person of Iesus Christ Neither can I conceiue if this bee an inkhorne tearme as it pleaseth your elegancy to tearme it why Faith of Story Faith of Promise Faith of Miracles should not bee inkhorne-tearmes also But you are a very nice and dainty man you can tast no wine how old or generous soeuer vnlesse the cup out of which you drinke it bee grauen by Myron or Polycletus N. B. But this hath beene the course of all fanaticall spirits in all ages moued with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil 1.14 selfe-loue contention hypocrisie and couetousnesse De Haeresibus ad Quodvult Deum to condemne all others to set vp and stablish their owne fantasies Read Augustine yea see the Ecclesiasticall histories Eusebius Sozomen Euagrius Dorotheus Vincentius c. there shall you see whereupon these Schismes in the Church began Let mee therefore intreate you if you will needs deale in these graue causes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet that you will deale also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well as becommeth a wise man For otherwise you shall bewray your mind desirous of nouelties hazard your credit offend the Church yea as hee saith take vpon you to glew an egge Diogenianus loosing your labour and making your selfe ridiculous to the best I. D. What hath beene the course of fanaticall spirits in all ages and whereupon they haue been moued to beginne their Schismes in the Church I am not now to learne
Saints with your niceties and falsities any longer for thus you reason No historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of Iustification But firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell is historicall Faith Therefore firmely to belieue the truth of Gods Word and specially the Gospell hath no interest in the matter of Iustification Good Sir I deny your Maior which you thus endeuour to proue ab absurdo enumeratione partium No generall knowledge shall haue any stroke in the matter of Iustification All historicall Faith is a generall knowledge Therefore no historicall Faith hath any interest in the matter of iustification Proue your Minor which I denie telling you moreouer that firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word in genere and the Gospell in Specie is not a Generall knowledge but a Speciall knowledge and therefore I argue Such a speciall knowledge of the Gospell is the beginning of Faith Iustifying Mat. 13.11 Ioh. 17.3 Mat. 16.17 But firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and the Gospell is such a speciall knowledge ex confesso Therfore firmely to consent to the truth of Gods Word and especially the Gospell is the beginning of Iustifying Faith I. D. If you were as farre from hood-winking your owne eyes as I am from blearing the eies of others you might easily perceiue that now I deale against our common aduersaries the Papists and ouerthrow the iustification of their Historicall Faith by the chiefest arguments which Protestants vse But you after the manner of those Gladiators called Andabatae nor see nor care whom or what you strike and so mildly affected are you towards mee that so you may make some probable shew of endammaging or disaduantaging mee you reck not though through my sides you reach and wound the best Diuines of our Church yea and the common truth which wee all maintaine Neither doe I vse such circumguagues nor wiredraw my arguments into such a length as you beare vs in hand but hauing nakedly and plainely defined what Historicall Faith is I proue by two reasons that Faith so defined doth not iustifie the first whereof is this because it is absurd that so generall a Knowledge should iustifie So that your Ferio Syllogisme deserues a Ferula and vtterly to bee cashed as being no creature of mine but an idle figment of your owne and the next in Celarent for so you forme it although indeed it bee also in Ferio the Minor proposition and Conclusion notwithstanding your generall notes being but particular enuntiations is the onely Syllogisme intended by mee and including my first argument The Maior whereof it seemes you grant saying nothing vnto it and the Minor only you deny which I cannot but wonder at seeing both the Minor and Conclusion are vniuersally vouched by all the Diuines of our side The Conclusion is that Historicall Faith iustifies not So saith Hyperius De fide Hom. iustificandi There is a certaine Historicall Faith whereby those things which are propounded in holy writ are simply beleeued but yet is not applyed vnto Christ and the matter of our Saluation Loco de Fide The Minor is that Historicall Faith is a generall Knowledge So sayth Kemnitius There is a certaine generall Faith which vsually is tearmed Historicall and againe Historicall Faith is a generall assent holding in generall that the promise of the Gospell is true And M. Perkins Ser. caus c. 36. A generall Faith whereby they giue assent vnto the Gospell Neither doe I know any one of our Diuines that either in the Conclusion or the Minor doth gainsay them So that by the iudgement of these men both consenting to Gods Word in generall and to the Gospell in speciall is not a Speciall but Generall Knowledge and if the Speciality of the Gospell being but a part of the whole Scripture did specify Faith it would follow thereupon that there are as many Speciall Faiths as there are seuerall Articles of the Creed which were vnreasonable to imagine For that Faith which assenteth vnto the Gospell is no other then that which assenteth vnto the rest of holy Scripture and although it may principally respect that part of diuine truth yet doth it not only respect it nor is limited thereunto as vnto the proper adequate obiect thereof but vniuersally extendeth it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities whatsoeuer As for that Faith which our Diuines call Speciall is to be vnderstood of Faith of Promises wherby the Saints apply and appropriate them vnto themselues particularly and indiuidually assuring themselues of their present iustification and future saluation And the ignorance hereof as I ween is the cause why you turne generall into speciall and write of this matter so wildly and confusedly This notwithstanding very peremptorily you pronounce that Historiall Faith is a speciall Knowledge and thereupon Syllogistically inferre that it is the Beginning of Iustifying Faith to what end I wot not well vnlesse it bee to proue that it doth iustify because as you conclude it is the beginning of that Faith But whatsoeuer your intent bee your argument I answer by distinguishing of the word Beginning For if you vnderstand thereby a Pre-requisite or Preparatiue vnto iustifying Faith you doe but fight with a shadow for in that sence I grant the Conclusion neither doth such a beginning of Iustifying Faith iustify If you meane thereby that it is Iustifying Faith inchoat and in a remisser degree then I deny your Maior and say that such a knowledge call it as you please generall or speciall is not the beginning of iustifying Faith If it were then Diuels and Reprobates hauing it should haue iustifying Faith which Gods Word attributes vnto the Elect onely Tit. 1.1 And if it bee true that Faith of person is the consummation of Iustifying Faith as in the former section you say it cannot bee that such a knowledge should bee the Beginning thereof vnlesse you will say that Accidents may passe from one Subiect to another which is against all Philosophy For Historicall Faith is in the Vnderstanding and Faith of Person is in the Will and therefore Faith of Story beginning in the Mind can haue no subsistence elsewhere and iustifying Faith being perfected in the Will cannot bee begunne in any other Subiect The passages quoted in the margent though you should rack them till they rent asunder yet will they not confesse what you alledge them for For how I pray you hang these things together To you it is giuen to know the mysteries of the Kingdome of heauen This is life euerlasting to know thee Flesh and Bloud hath not reuealed this vnto thee but my Father Ergo Such a knowledge is iustifying Faith begun This is too violent astraining of Scripture and as Volusian speaketh is not a sucking of milke but drawing of bloud from the dugs of the Church Ep. 1. ad Nic. 1. As for the Minor I haue already sufficiently demonstrated the falshood thereof only
vs see what you reioyne hereunto First you say I beg the matter in Question What matter that Historicall Faith is a generall knowledge but neither is that the matter now in Question neither doe I any way beg it For in this Syllogisme the Question is whether Historicall Faith doe iustify of your Question there appeares nor palme nor footstep which yet in the former section against your negatiue I haue proued to bee most true That which you adde if it bee not senselesse is contrary both to your selfe and vnto reason For saying that Historicall Faith is proper and speciall vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith you plainely distinguish it from iustifying Faith which is contrary to what you haue elsewhere said If you still confound them and make Historicall Faith the beginning of Iustifying Faith it is as if you should say the beginning of iustifying Faith is speciall and peculiar vnto the Elect in the beginning of their iustifying Faith which is altogether witlesse and senselesse Lastly to say that Historicall Faith which before was Generall and common as soone as it is conioyned with application and Resting on Christ becomes speciall and peculiar is vtterly void of reason For as Grace superadded vnto Nature in the Elect makes not Nature speciall and peculiar vnto them but that still it remaines common vnto all men so also Historicall Faith by accession of Iustifying Faith or Affiance changeth not its nature and becomes Speciall but as it was euermore continues Generall Generall I say both Obiectiuely as stretching it selfe vnto all supernaturall reuealed verities and Subiectiuely not being appropriated vnto the Elect onely but commonly incident vnto others also Secondly you deny the Minor telling mee plainely that it is ridiculous yea blasphemous to say that Diuels haue Faith or that euer Balaam Iudas or Magus had Faith If I should now temper my inke with some sharper ingredient and in the zeale of my affection say vnto you as the Angell sometime said vnto Satan Iude 9. The Lord rebuke thee it were no more then here you iustly deserue For it is not holy and learned men alone which yet were too impudent but euen the spirit of Wisdome and truth himselfe whom I tremble to speake it you charge with ridiculousnes and blasphemie For doth not the Holy Ghost by Saint Iames in expresse tearmes say The Diuels belieue and tremble and by Saint Luke Then Simon himselfe also belieued Iam. 2.19 Act. 8.13 and did not Balaam prophecying of Christ and Iudas preaching Christ assent vnto those truths wherewith they were illuminated And what Orthodoxe Diuine is there ancient or moderne who falling vpon this question doth not acknowledge that Diuels and Reprobates doe Historically belieue De vnico Bapt. cont Petil. c. 10. Saint Augustine is bold and compareth the Faith of Diuels confessing Christ Wee know thee who thou art euen the Sonne of God with that memorable confession of Peter Thou art the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God This confession saith hee was fruitfull vnto Peter but pernicious vnto the Diuels yet in both not false but true not to bee denied but acknowledged not to bee detested but approued And a little after hauing vouched that of Saint Iames the Diuels belieue and tremble and compared therewith the Faith of those who belieue the truth of God but liue wickedly Behold saith hee Wee haue found out of the Church not onely certaine men but Diuels also confessing the same Faith of one God yet both confirmed by the Apostles rather then denied Of the same iudgement are our latter writers That Faith is attributed to Simon Magus Inst lib. 3. ca. 2. §. 10. saith Caluin We vnderstand not with some that hee fained in words a Faith which was not in his heart but thinke rather that being ouercome by the Maiesty of the Gospell hee did in a sort belieue and acknowledge Christ to be the Author of Life and Saluation Simon saith Beza In Act. 8.13 On the Creed Ans to Rhem. T. in Iam. 2.6 belieued with Historicall Faith Historicall Faith saith Perkins is in the Diuell and his Angels Such a Faith saith Fulke as is in Diuels namely an acknowledging that there is one God and so likewise of all the rest of the Articles of Faith to bee true without trust or confidence in God Finally the whole Church of Auspurg Whereas Saint Iames saith Harm Confess the Diuels belieue and tremble hee speaketh of an Historicall Faith Now this Faith doth not iustifie for the Diuels and the wicked are cunning in the History Which last words I would wish you to note and obserue For if Historicall Faith bee no other then an assent of the Mind vnto the truth of Gods Word then Diuels and Reprobates so assenting yea being cunning in the Story must needs haue Historicall Faith Adde hereunto that if they doe not so much as Historically belieue then the sinnes which they commit against the Gospell are onely sinnes of ignorance and not against knowledge neither can they offend of malice or fall into that vnpardonable sinne which is against the Holy Ghost Mat. 12.32 Neither lastly can any bee said to haue made shipwracke of Faith which yet the Scripture saith some haue done 1 Tim. 1.19 vnlesse perhaps you will say a man may make shipwracke of that which hee neuer had So that now if I haue spoken ridiculously and blasphemously as you say you see what Schoolemasters haue deceiued me and vpon what reasons I haue been drawne into this folly and impiety or rather the world sees what folly it is in you thus against all reason to impute blasphemy and ridiculousnesse vnto the truth of God and the most glorious preachers and defenders thereof Yet Caluin you say telleth mee it is ridiculous to say that Diuels haue Faith and it is plaine that this whole disputation Iam. 2. is not about Faith But is it possible that Caluin should striue against the torrent of so maine authority or like the Philosopher of whom Aristotle speaketh forget his owne voice and vnsay that which he had formerly said Certainly if you wil giue him leaue to bee the interpreter of his owne meaning you shall find hee doth not For when hee denieth that Diuels haue Faith and that Saint Iames there disputeth of Faith hee vnderstandeth not Faith indefinitely but particularly iustifying Faith This is euident by his annotation on the twentieth verse In Iam. 2.20 Here saith hee is no disputation of the cause of Iustification whereby what other can hee meane then Iustifying Faith And when hee saith the dispute is not about Faith hee addeth forthwith but of a vulgar knowledge which conioyneth a man to God no more then the sight of the Sunne lifts him to Heauen Now what is that Faith which vnites vs vnto God but onely Iustifying Faith and what is this vulgar knowledge other then Historicall Faith by which the eye of the mind sees diuine truth
reasons for Other writers saith hee I so read that how much soeuer they excell in holinesse and learning Ep. 19. ad Hieron I doe not therfore thinke any thing to be true because they iudge so but because they perswade me either by those Canonicall Authors or by probable reason not abhorring from truth Bellarmine vpbraiding Illyricus for his Coniectures is thus answered by learned Iunius Contrà Bell. de transl impl 1. c. 11. Bee not so hot I pray you against humane coniectures In a word whether wee would modestly shew our owne opinion or refell anothers wee deale humanely saying it is a coniecture but to vpbraid humane coniectures is meere inhumanity Dan. Cham. de oecum Pont. Nay Daniel Chamier a very learned late writer in his booke de oecumenico Pontifice doth professedly distinguish his arguments into Scripture Coniecture and Testimony and will you therefore say of him as you doe vnto mee that hee doubted of the truth of his cause determined to ensnare poore silly Readers and walked not recto pectore with an vpright conscience Reioinder to Brist reply But so it is I vse the very words of D. Fulk being almost in the same tearmes cauilled withall by blundering Bristow When you can say nothing against my assertion your selfe you would make mee vncertaine of it and say that it is but a light suspicion of mine because in one place before I come to the sound proofe of it I say it is a probable coniecture And doth it follow therefore that I doubt of it because I offer a probable coniecture vnto other mens vnderstanding before by order of discourse I am brought to the manifest probation of it Well yet if Probable like you not those that follow are Necessary and I feare mee you will bee able to say little to them that leaue this without answer and the weaker the argument the more disgrace to bee graueld by it But my purpose in vsing both was for the more strength and perswasion for as Pindar saith It is the surest and safest way in a tempestuous night to cast out of the ship two ankers Olymp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6. Treatise 2. Arg. That which is in time after iustifying Faith cannot bee that Faith This is vndeniable But this Particular knowledge is in time after that Faith This I proue out of 1 Ioh. 5.13 These things haue I written vnto you that belieue in the name of the Sonne of God that yee may know that yee haue Eternall life Behold Belieuing goes before and Knowledge comes after As for that which followeth in the same verse and that yee may belieue I interprete it of Perseuerance and growth in Faith Howsoeuer Belieuing and Knowing are here distinguished and therefore are not all one N. B. I deny your Minor neither doth that place of S. Iohn helpe you ought as wee shall see anon I tell you that iustifying Faith is a Particular Knowledge though in other tearmes by vs vsed and by the Scripture set downe So that where you say a man first belieueth and then knoweth wee say hee beleeueth that is hee particularly knoweth apprehendeth and applieth Christ to himselfe perpetually and liuely to his saluation So that Belieuing and particular knowing himselfe to bee elected are one and that it is this knowledge thus I argue I. D. Before you come to bestow a word or two vpon the Minor which you deny you thinke it good like a cunning and subtle disputer flatly to deny the Conclusion and peremptorily to auouch the Contradictory vnto it then very prodigally to wast a multitude of words in the proofe thereof A maruelous policy I promise you vtterly disabling me from farther replying for as much as Logicke it selfe giues no precept how a man may reply vpon him who denies the Conclusion and taking the Contradictory thereof as granted goes about thereby to disproue the Premises For so doe you when you say Faith is a knowledge and therefore goes not afore knowledge my reason being contrarily framed thus Faith goes before knowledge therefore is not knowledge Doubtles had you not had the heart of Zenodotus Martial and the liuer of Crates as the Poet saith you could neuer haue stumbled vpon so politicke a deuise But let vs heare your reasons N. B. What soeuer iustifieth a man is Faith Darij Esa 53.11 But particular knowledge iustifieth a man Therfore particular knowledge is Faith I proue the Minor out of the Scripture By the knowledge of himselfe saith the Lord shall my righteous seruant justify many Lo M. Downe here the knowledge of Christ iustifieth a man and is the same in effect and working that Faith is and therefore are they both one which you make to bee twaine by distinction and originall Your speech helpeth Bellarmine that saith Faith may bee rather in ignorantiá implicitâ in an ignorance couched then in explicitâ cognitione a discouered knowledge Tom. 3. de iustif l. 5. c. 7. I. D. Iud. 14.18 Seeing here you plow with my heifer as Samson sometime said vnto the Philistines how is it that you read not my riddle also I meane hauing borrowed this Obiection from my Treatise why take you not from thence the answer also Surely that you vrge the one so eagerly and so diligently suppresse the other I know no cause but this you knew not how to reply vnto it and therefore I will by your fauor repeate the same againe vntil you find out some forcible reason to driue me from it The verbs of vnder standing and sence in the Hebrew tongue signifie not onely the acts of them but of the will and affections also So Psal 1.6 the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous And Depart I know you not And I will not heare see c. that is God will not so know heare see as to loue and approue And so may I interpret that of the Prophet Christ being so knowne as to bee embraced and rested on by the will shall iustifie many Adde now that it is neither necessary nor likely your Particular knowledge should bee here ment for the Obiect of the Prophets knowledge is no other then Christ but the Obiect of your knowledge is your owne selfe or your present state in grace and future Saluation And what a senselesse speech doe you put into the mouth of the Prophet for by your glosse it is as if hee should say My righteous seruant by making many to know that they are already iustified shall bring many vnto that which already they haue namely iustification But Esay had in him both the Spirit of Wisdome and the Tongue of Eloquence and therefore pardon me if I cannot thinke he vsed to speake non-sense like you Where you say my speech helpeth Bellarmine who saith Faith may bee rather in ignorantiâ implicitâ in an ignorance couched then in explicitâ cognitione a discouered knowledge First Bellarmine hath no such words neither I thinke did hee euer dreame
which they are iustified and so come to eternall life But what say I vnto the Minor deliuered in other tearmes thus Knowledge of Christ apprehendeth eternall life I say first it is not the same Proposition because the tearmes are changed neither are they equipollent Secondly I grant it to bee true whether you meane by knowledge Dogmaticall Faith or Particular assurance for by the one doe we apprehend that there is an eternall life by the other that wee haue speciall interest in it Well then if it apprehendeth eternall life doth it not follow that therefore also it apprehendeth iustification No by no meanes for as wee haue aboue demonstrated it is not necessary that that which apprehendeth the latter should apprehend the former also And yet though I disallow the consequence the consequent I readily yeeld you that Particular knowledge apprehendeth iustification for so haue wee defined Faith of promise to be a perswasion or assurance that the promise of God made in Christ to wit iustification remission of sinnes adoption regeneration finally election it selfe and eternall saluation doe particularly pertaine vnto mee and are mine What gather you now of this Ergo say you it is iustifying Faith How so Because whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification is iustifying Faith Nay contrarily whatsoeuer apprehendeth iustification it not iustifying Faith for apprehension followeth iustification no man apprehending himselfe to bee iustified vntill hee be iustified but Iustifying Faith is in nature before iustification that being the cause and this the effect And therefore vnlesse you will say that that which followeth is that which goeth before you cannot say that that which apprehendeth iustification is that which iustifieth To conclude therefore neither is Faith knowledge nor knowledge Faith but particular knowledge for ought you haue yet said or can say commeth in time after Faith But whereas finally you inferre that Faith is knowledge in the beginning knowledge in proceeding knowledge in the end besides that the foundation vpon which it is grounded is vntrue it is cleane contrary also to that which erewhile you affirmed that Faith is but one compounded of my three nice distinctions the first being the beginning the second the progresse the third the end For the third is Faith of Person and in the Will and is by your confession there the end of Faith yet here you say faith is knowledge in the end which things how they can stand together I see not vnlesse you will say that knowledge is in the Will and so confound the faculties and operations of the soule N. B. In Ioh. 1. Ep. c. 5. to 13. The place of Saint Iohn by you cited to proue your Minor in your argument maketh nothing for you because the Apostle speaketh of their increase of knowledge and not of the originall begetting of knowledge and so saith M. Caluin I. D. The text in the clearest tearmes that may bee distinguisheth betweene Belieuing and knowing and vnto that giueth the priority before this but your glosse confoundeth their natures and saith that the Apostle here speaketh onely of increase of knowledge Wo to the glosse that corrupteth the text for if this bee S. Iohns meaning it is as if hee should say I write vnto you that know that yee are iustified haue eternall life that yee may increase in knowing that yee haue eternall life and that yee may know yee are iustified and haue eternall life which how vnworthy it is the pen of an Apostle euery one easily seeth But Caluin you say interpreteth the place as you doe Bee it so yet is it not the name of Caluin how venerable soeuer that may sway this matter For seeing I professe to differ from him in the definition of Iustifying Faith hee defining it by knowledge I by Affiance you may not thinke it vnreasonable if in this point and the explication of such scriptures as may seeme to concerne it I desire rather to bee pressed with his reasons then borne downe with his authority But what saith Caluin Because there ought to bee dayly proceedings in Faith therefore he writes to them that belieue already that they may more firmely and certainly belieue Whereunto I willingly assent if you apply it as Beza in his annotations doth vnto the last clause of the verse and that yee may belieue for then the meaning without forcing or constraining the words will bee as if hee should say I write vnto you that belieue that belieuing yee may know yee haue eternall life knowing the same may constantly perseuere and proceed on in Belieuing For as the clouds poure downe raine to moisten the earth and the earth moistned sendeth vp vapours againe to make clouds so likewise Faith begets Assurance and Assurance being gotten doth againe confirme and strengthen faith And thus doe the Century-writers expound this place Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. p. 276. gathering from it that Cetainty of Saluation is an Effect of Faith and so euidently distinguishing knowledge from Faith Treatise 3. Arg. That which in nature comes after iustification cannot bee iustifying Faith This appeares because Faith is the Efficient Instrumentall cause of Iustification and euery Efficient by the rule of Logicke is in nature before the Effect But this knowledge or assurance is in nature after Iustification Ergo it is not Faith N. B. Your Minor is very false and so proued by my former arguments For particular knowledge and assurance of our saluation is not in nature after Faith but is Faith and wholy infused by the Spirit of God and begotten by hearing of the Word preached and commeth to act by degrees according to the measure of grace giuen of God For it is in Habitu sometime not in actu Faith habituall in power actuall in the deed of belieuing as when one sleepeth his beliefe is not in actu and yet hee liueth vnto God by his faith which liueth powerfully in him though not actually I. D. The Maior of my Syllogisme is vndeniable because as I haue said Faith is the cause of iustification For as D. Fulke saith vnto Bristow excluding it from Efficient causes Reioinder to Bristow p. 172. Seeing Scripture often affirmeth that God worketh in vs by Faith faith must needs be an instrumentall efficient when you haue said all that you can except you will teach vs new Grammar and Logicke The Minor therefore you say is very false and so proued by your former arguments But those arguments are already answered and thus I proue the Minor For as for the rest of your idle and wilde talke touching the infusion begetting degrees habit act of Faith I willingly passe ouer lest pursuing you in this course I seeme to run riot and play the wanton with you Treatise The truth of a Proposition is alwayes in nature before the knowledge of the truth for Propositions are not therefore true because they are knowne so but they are first true and knowne so Therefore this Proposition I know I am iustified spoken
by one that is iustified must needs presuppose the partie before to be iustified N. B. O. O. O. O. O. I. D. What mum Master Baxtar Hath Sigalion now instantly sealed vp your lips that you cannot or are you suddenly become a professed Pythagorean that you may not speake For me thinkes you that haue beene so vocall and wastfull of your breath in so many impertinent and friuolous excursions should not now bee so sparing and niggardly of a word or twaine vpon so necessary a point But the truth is the argument is vnanswerable and inuincible and therefore you held it better to say nothing and slily to passe it ouer then to marre all by saying nothing to the purpose Which course if you had also vsed in the rest of this disputation you should haue saued this scribling labor and I had receiued virgin paper from you And so as Galba in the iudgement of all might haue beene thought worthy of the empire if hee had not beene Emperor Tacit. 1. Hist you also in the opinion of some might haue beene counted able to write if you had not written But now that after so much loudnesse and clamourousnesse you are become so dumbe and silent it argues that though ability faile yet will should not haue beene wanting vnlesse the euidence of truth had perforce made vp your mouth And so construeing your silence to bee in this point no lesse then plaine yeelding I passe on to the next argument Treatise 4. Arg. In conditionall Promises there can bee no Assurance of the thing promised before the performance of the condition v. g. This is a conditionall Promise in the couenant of works Doe this and thou shalt liue Life is promised but on condition of Doing and therefore vntill wee haue performed the condition wee may not looke that God should bee reciprocall and giue vs Life Now in the Couenant of Grace Iustification is promised but vpon condition of Faith so saith the Scripture Belieue and thy sins shall be forgiuen thee Therefore the condition of Belieuing must first bee performed before wee can assure our selues our sins are forgiuen If so then Faith going before and Assurance following after Assurance connot bee Iustifying Faith N. B. I deny your Minor and say there may bee an Assurance of Saluation in some measure before there can bee the performance of Faith actuall in the highest measure Therefore your Minor is vtterly false For Faith in his true defined state is a firme Assurance and Perswasion and a firme Assurance and Perswasion is Faith and both the Greeke and Hebrew words signifieth Faith before cited doe declare Yea this Assurance is giuen vnto vs together with the hearing of the Word of God Habitualiter and will shew it selfe Actualiter in due time and therefore sometime is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sometime is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first in the beginning the next in the Lords due time and this can neuer be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but secundùm magis or minùs shall externas vel internas exerere vires shew forth his forces either within man or without I. D. To make all plaine my argument reduced into the right forme standeth thus That which goeth before iustification is not that which followes after iustification But Faith goeth before iustification and Assurance followes after Ergo Faith is not Assurance The Minor of this Syllogisme is that which you deny affirming it to be vtterly false and you confirme it to bee so by this reason There may bee Assurance of Saluation in some measure before there can be Performance of Faith Actuall in the highest measure Ergo Faith goeth not before Assurance nor doth Assurance follow after Faith The Antecedent of which Enthymeme I grant for as much as there may bee Assurance in this life but not the performance of Faith actuall in the highest measure wee here Belieuing only in part as the Apostle saith But if hereupon it follow Therefore Faith goeth not before Assurance it will also follow Faith goeth not before Charity or good works because Charity and good works may be in some measure before Faith actuall bee in the highest measure or thus The elder Sonne is not borne before the yonger because the yonger may waxe as tall as a Pygmee before the elder bee growne to the stature of a Giant Which Consequences if they be absurd and ridiculous as absurd and ridiculous is it to inferre that Faith cannot bee before Assurance because Assurance may bee in some measure before Faith bee in the highest measure Nay farre better doth it follow from hence against your selfe that Faith is not Assurance nor Assurance Faith For if as you expresly say Assurance may bee in a lower measure when Faith is in a higher how can they possibly differing so in degrees but bee differing things For although it be true that more and lesse doe not diuersify the kind yet is it as true that the same indiuiduall quality cannot at the same time bee both intended and remitted no more then the same string in a Lute can at once bee strained vp and let downe and yeeld at the same time both a base and treble sound In the residue of this Section you shew your selfe to bee one of those idle Oratours of whom Quintilian speaketh Inst Orat. l. 11. who neuer regard where the point or issue of the Question lieth so they may besides the cause either from the persons or out of some common place find occasion of declaiming Lib. 6. Epig. 19. Such as was Postumus the Aduocate in Martiall who being entertained to plead the cause of one who had three Goats stolen from him by his neighbour left the proofe of this and fell a discoursing of the battell of Cannae of the Mithridatike and Carthaginian wars and other such impertinent matters But neuer was there any offended more notoriously in this kind then you all those speeches are nothing els but extrauagances and by-matters For I pray you how doth it concerne my argument to talke of the origination of Faith in Greeke and Hebrew how Assurance is giuen how it shewes it selfe of Oligopistie Plerophorie and Apostasie of the intention and remission of it and finally of the inward and outward forces thereof Surely De arte Poët as much as a Cypres-tree concernes a table of shipwrack as Horace speaketh And therefore giue mee leaue to plucke you by the eare and to say vnto you as did the poore Client vnto his Lawyer aboue named Now I pray thee Postume say some thing at length touching my three Goats N. B. Where it pleaseth you to make remission of sinnes a Promise vpon a Condition I tell you with all the Church of God in all ages it is rather an encouragement to belieue assuredly in Christ as if hee should say Thy sinnes bee forgiuen thee therefore bee of good comfort that both the former and latter to wit forgiuenesse of sinnes and Beliefe might bee ascribed to
Fiducia a Rest or Deuolution the Subiect of it the facultie of the Will not the Vnderstanding the next end of it Iustification the remore end eternall saluation and I thus define it A rest of the will vpon Christ and his merits for iustification and consequently saluation I. D. Because you complaine anon that the word Rest which I haue made to bee the iustifying act of Faith is ambiguous and thereupon it pleaseth you in your Answers following to take aduantage and make you mery with the Equiuocation thereof you shall giue me leaue before I step a foot further in a few words and a little more plainely to open my meaning touching that Act. And to this end seeing to proue that Faith is an Affiance or Rest I reported mee in my Treatise vnto the words vsed in the originall of the old Testament as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the forme of words vsed in the new as to belieue in to hope in or as in some translations it is read to belieue on to hope on I will first shew that these tearmes applied vnto Christ the right Obiect of Faith import that very Act whereby wee stand iustified before God and secondly I will diligently inquire and search out what may bee the true proper and naturall meaning of these tearmes both which being cleerely demonstrated it will manifestly appeare both what that Rest is which I make to be the iustifying Act of Faith and how fondly and vainely you cauill and dally with the ambiguity thereof That Belieuing in or vpon importeth that Act is in it selfe so apparant that I thinke no sober man will deny it but because to you a man must proue that the Sunne shines thus I demonstrate it That which is imputed for righteousnesse and by which wee are iustified is the true Act of Iustifying Faith This you cannot deny vnlesse you will turne Papist for our Religion will not permit you to ioyne any other companion with Faith in the matter of Iustification But such belieuing is imputed for righteousnesse and is that by which we are iustified so saith the Apostle Rom. 4.5 To him that belieueth in him that iustifieth the wicked his Faith is counted for righteousnesse and againe Wee haue belieued in Iesus Christ that wee might bee iustified by the Faith of Christ Adde hereunto that whereas the same Apostle saith With the heart man belieueth vnto righteousnesse Rom. 10.10 forthwith in the next verse hee interpreteth that Belieuing by Belieuing in For saith hee the Scripture saith V. 11. whosoeuer belieueth in him shall not bee ashamed Wherefore I conclude that so to Belieue is the Iustifying Act of Faith So also is Hoping in or vpon being in effect the same with Belieuing in For although Hope and Faith bee in nature two distinct Graâ—es and so reckoned by Saint Paul yet seeing by reason of the neere affinity betweene them Hope is sometime put for Faith it may not seeme strange that to hope in is also vsed for to belieue in Now that Hope is sometime put for Faith appeareth by that of Saint Peter 1 Pet. 3.15 Bee ready alwayes to giue an answer to euery man that asketh you a reason of the Hope that is in you where Hope as Caluin saith In eum loc is by a Synechdoche taken for Faith And as manifest is it by Saint Paul that to Hope in is no other then to Belieue in for hauing said That wee should bee vnto the praise of his glory who first hoped in Christ Eph. 1.12.13 In whom also yee hoped hauing heard the Word of Truth the Gospell of your Saluation by and by hee ads by way of interpretation In whom also Belieuing yeee were sealed with the holy Spirit of Promise In a word the Act of Hope properly taken is expectation or looking out for the performance or comming of a thing but Hoping in imports Affiance or trusting on something for the performance thereof As touching the words of the old Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first I find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confounded with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as words of the same signification they being after the manner of Scripture ioyned together in the same verse as equipollent the one to explane and expound the other for example Psal 118.8 Psal 37.5 It is better saith Dauid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to trust in the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then to put confidence in man and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Roll thy way vpon the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and trust vpon him But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it selfe is in the same manner confounded with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which construed with the Proposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to Belieue in and is by your owne confession the very Act of iustifying Faith for example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they belieued not in God Psal 78.22 Mic. 7.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and trusted not in his saluation and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Belieue not in a friend 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 trust not in a Prince Againe that which in the old Testament is vttered by one of these words the same in the new is expressed by Belieuing in for example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We trust in the Name of his Holinesse saith the old Testament Psal 33.21 Ioh. 1.12 1 Ioh. 3.23.5.13 Prou. 3.5 Act. 8.37 Psal 25.2 Psal 31.1 Rom. 10.11 Hee that belieueth in his Name saith the new 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 trust in the Lord with thy whole heart saith the old If thou Belieue with thy whole heart saith the new finally In thee O Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haue I trusted let mee not be confounded saith the old Hee that Belieueth in him shall not bee ashamed saith the new If you except against this last parallell that the Apostle hath reference vnto that of Esay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hee that Belieueth maketh not haste rather vnto those passages of the Psalmes aboue quoted I answer with Beza that it is not likely In ad Ro. 10.11 partly because the vniuersall particle and the word in him is not to bee found in the Prophet partly because the Apostle saith not as the Phophet Esay doth maketh not haste but precisely accordeth with the words of the Prophet Dauid saying shall not bee confounded nor ashamed Howsoeuer seeing in all these places the same thing is intended and meant it is cleere that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Belieuing in are Synonyma differing in name but not in definition and so I conclude what aboue I vndertooke to demonstrate that all these tearmes properly import the Iustifying act of Faith In the next place are wee to inquire the right acception and signification of these words that wee may more perfectly conceiue what that Fiducia or Rest is which wee haue made to bee that Act. And first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as R. Kimchi obserueth properly and primitiuely signifieth to retire into
say that a man cannot rest vpon him for saluation vnlesse hee know that hee is already translated from death to life is a most vnreasonable and senselesse speech as if a man might not trust vnto his friend to doe something for him vntill he were sure it is already done If you be so sandblind in this present case that you cannot see how Rest may goe before Assurance yet I hope your sight is not so much decayed but you may perceiue it through a paire of spectacles Put case then that a skilfull and welknowne Physician should offer freely to cure the diseases of such as are sicke vpon condition they receiue Physicke of no other but put themselues wholly absolutely into his hands doe you thinke it absurd to become his patient or that you cannot repose your selfe vpon his skill to bee cured by him vnlesse you be first assured that the cure is already done Nay rather if you know well that your health is perfectly recouered you cannot rely vpon him for that whereof you are fully possessed Iesus Christ the Arch-physician of our soules as hee is knowne to bee all-sufficient and euery way able to heale our maladies so doth hee louingly inuite all those that are heauy loden to come vnto him promising to refresh them all vpon condition that renouncing themselues and all others they set their whole Affiance on him for the remission of their sinnes And dare you now make question how a man may betake himselfe into the hands of Christ vntill he know that his sinnes bee already pardoned Nay rather when wee know the debt is paid and that according to the old rule sinnes once remitted neuer returne againe we remaine thankefull for that which is past and continue our Affiance on him for discharge of that which is to come For to obserue this by the way wee may not thinke that in the first act of our conuersion and iustification we receiue actuall pardon of all our sinnes past present and to come as some and those of no meane marke haue rashly and vnaduisedly taught for sinnes past only are then actually forgiuen and sinnes to come onely in the destination and purpose of God But neither doth God actually pardon the iustified man nor the iustified man actually receiue pardon for his sinnes vntill hee haue actually committed them and renewed his Faith and Repentance for them Neither let any man thinke that I speake this out of mine owne head and without ground for I am strongly backed herein by the warrant of Scripture the euidence of reason and the testimony of worthy men By the warrant of Scripture for that teacheth onely remission of sinnes past so saith Saint Paul in expresse tearmes Rom. 3.25 God hath set forth Iesus Christ to bee a reconciliation through faith in his bloud to declare his righteousnesse by the forgiuenesse of the sinnes that are passed By the euidence of reason for if future sinnes as well as sinnes past bee actually remitted in our conuersion and first acceptation into grace what need of Repentance what need of Prayer that God would forgiue vs our trespasses To repent and craue pâ—â—â—on of that whereof wee are not guilty and which wee neuer committed is palpable folly and as great folly is it by Repentance and prayer to demand that of God which wee say wee are sure hee hath long agoe bestowed vpon vs Finally by the testimony of worthy men for Pardon saith Origen is of sinnes past not future Repentance In ad Rom. 3. De acerbè Iudicantib Miscell lib. 3. pa. 97. saith Gregory Nyssen is the dissolution and destruction of sinnes past It is confessed by all truly godly and learned saith Hierome Zanchie that the Saints to obtaine new remission for a new sinne haue need of a new act of Faith and Repentance according to that saying so rise in Scripture that by Faith men are iustified and haue their sinnes remitted which when it is spoken of them that are come to yeeres of discretion is alwayes to be vnderstood of Actuall Faith that is of the Act of Faith De praedest grat Lastly Master Perkins when a Faithfull man grieuously sinneth the sinne is indeed remitted in the destination of God yet no remission is actually either giuen by God or receiued by man vntill hee repent Nay if hee should neuer repent which yet is impossible hee should as guilty of eternall death euen for this one sin be damned for there is no new remission of any new sinne without a new act of Faith and Repentance But inough of this point in this place though it bee of great importance because it is but by the way only hence I gather that seeing Faith goeth before and Assurance necessarily commeth after remission that Faith is not Assurance N. B. I had rather say Faith were a labour then a Rest for it seeketh continually by sanctification and holy loue to bring both body and soule vnto eternall rest and then Faith ceaseth when eternall pacification and rest is wrought in man I. D. Thus you reason Faith is a labour Rest is not a labour Ergo Faith is not a Rest The Maior you proue thus That which worketh rest is a labour But Faith worketh rest and ceaseth when rest is wrought Ergo Faith is a labour The Minor you leaue naked and without proofe supposing I thinke that no man vnlesse bereft of his fiue wits would deny it and hold that Rest is a labour Let vs therefore briefly examine them both The Maior of your second Syllogisme precisely and literally vnderstood is not true for that which worketh is the Agent or Labourer and the Labourer cannot bee the Action or Labour Whereupon it followeth If that which worketh bee not a labour And Faith as you assume worke that therefore Faith is not a labor which is contradictory vnto the Maior of your first Syllogysme And yet as I grant not vnto you that Faith is a labour so neither dare I peremptorily deny it only I blame you for speaking so confusedly where it was necessary to vse distinction Know therefore that Faith as all other qualities whether acquired or infused may bee considered two wayes either in the first act as Schooles vse to speake or in the second The first act is the very habit of Faith inhering and sticking in the soule the second is the immediate and proper operation and action thereof If then you vnderstand Faith in the first Act and as it is an Habit it is not a labour but is imprinted in vs by the Holy Ghost to the end that when oportunity is offered and duty requireth wee may by vertue thereof more sweetly readily and easily worke and labour And so far is it from being a labor it selfe that oftentimes it lieth as it were idle asleep doing nothing at all vntill it please the Spirit of God to stirre vp our wils and to quicken the sparke hee hath put in vs inabling vs thereby to cooperate
worketh eternall rest and peace But how doth this follow Faith is the cause of eternall quiet and resting from our labours in the Kingdome of Heauen Ergo it is the cause of Affiance and Resting vpon Christ here in this life for it is not necessary that that which causeth the one should also cause the other But if in your Conclusion when you say Faith is not a Rest you meane it is not that eternall rest what is that to mee who define not Faith by such a Rest So then your therefore either concluding beside the Question or being inferred vpon no Premisses deserueth of mee no answer at all Yet to take away all scruple let vs see what may be said for it Bellarmine to proue that Affiance is an Effect of Faith De iustif lib. 1. cap. 6. and consequently not Faith alledgeth and vrgeth three passages of Scripture but withall I must tell you that if hee dispute to the purpose hee must meane by Affiance no other then confident Perswasion or Assurance For his aduersaries as himselfe there saith defining Faith by Affiance vnderstand thereby that Speciall Faith whereby euery one applying to himselfe the diuine Promise belieueth or rather confidently trusteth that all his sins are forgiuen him by Christ So that if as he ought hee argue vnto the meaning of his aduersaries hee concludeth not against my Affiance but onely against your Perswasion or Assurance Neuerthelesse let vs examine those places seuerally and particularly The first is that of the Apostle to the Ephesians Eph. 3.12 In whom wee haue boldnesse and entrance with confidence by the Faith of him whence it followeth saith hee if confidence or Affiance be by Faith that Faith is not Affiance but the cause thereof for otherwise the sense would bee we haue entrance with confidence by confidence which is absurd To this I answer first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Confidence oftentimes signifieth Perswasion or Assurance being deriued of a verbe that signifieth firmely to be Perswaded as where the Apostle saith Rom. 2.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou strongly perswadest thy selfe that thou art a guide of the blind Phil. 1.25 and againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this am I well assured of and therefore it is not necessary here to vnderstand it of my Affiance Secondly grant that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Affiance is meant yet doth it not follow that it is an effect of Iustifying Faith seeing by faith not Iustifying but Historicall Faith may bee vnderstood which is the meanes by which wee grow vnto Affiance Lastly let it be farther yeelded that both by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Affiance and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifying Faith are meant yet may Affiance this notwithstanding bee that Faith neither will any such absurdity ensue thereon For as when you say wee are assured by Faith you would thinke your selfe wronged if I should inferre thereupon that Faith is not Assurance but the cause thereof or that otherwise the sense would bee wee are assured by assurance so when the Apostle saith in Affiance by Faith why should he not also count himselfe as much abused if you gather from hence that Faith is not Affiance but the cause thereof or that else the speech would be absurd as if hee should say in Affiance by Affiance The reason of all in a word is because this forme of words may import that Affiance is the next and immediate Act of Iustifying Faith The second place is that saying of our Sauiour vnto the woman diseased with an issue of blood Mat. 9.22 Bee confident daughter thy Faith hath saued thee where saith hee Faith is againe in like sort distinguished from Affiance for the woman is moued to conceiue and entertaine Affiance who was already healed by Faith To this I answer that the word which our Sauiour vseth to the woman is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to be bold or couragious whence commeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Boldnes courage Exerc. 317.4 which as Iulius Scaliger saith is the motion of Fortitude vnto some worke and is opposed vnto Timerousnesse or Fearefulnesse Neither was it without speciall reason that our Sauiour chose that word rather then any other for finding that vertue proceeded from him and demanding who had touched him Luc. 8.47 the woman seeing that shee could conceale it came vnto him trembling and fell at his feet and declared what shee had done whereupon hee said vnto her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tremble not Daughter nor be dismay'd but cheere vp and bee of good courage for I assure thee thy Faith hath saued thee goe thy way in Peace Now this Boldnesse or courage I confesse is an effect of Faith nay oftentimes an effect of the effect of Faith namely Hope for as Despaire of victory causeth Fearefulnesse and deiection of Spirit so contrariwise Hope of victory maketh a man to bee bold and confident But vnlesse you can proue that this Boldnesse is the same with my Affiance which with all your skill you can neuer doe they being of so different natures you can neuer conclude from hence that Affiance is an effect of Faith The third and last place is that of the same Apostle vnto Timothy They which minister well shall get vnto themselues a good degree and much affiance in the Faith which is in Christ where saith hee 1 Tim. 3.13 Affiance is said to be acquired and gotten by Faith because Faith may bee without such Affiance Whereunto I answer that the word vsed in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which no way signifieth Affiance but libertie and freedome of speech whether wee vtter our mind vnto God by prayer as where the Apostle saith Heb. 4.16 Let vs come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with boldnesse and freedome of Speech vnto the Throne of grace or make profession of our Faith before men as where the same Apostle saith Cast not away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your free profession Heb. 10.35 as Beza translateth it And because this libertie and freedome proceedeth from the testimony of a good conscience and assurance of the loue and fauour of God Heb. 3.6 therefore is it sometimes vsed for Assurance as where the Apostle saith Whose house wee are if wee hold fast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that confidence and reioycing of Hope vnto the end meaning by Confidence saith Beza that most worthy effect of Faith whereby wee crye Abba Father Prou. 28.1 and sometimes for that Lion-like boldnesse which Salomon saith alwayes attendeth a good conscience and so doth the same Beza in this present place of Timothy vnderstand it Heb. 3.6 vide annot Tremel ad Heb. 4.16 And hence it is that the Syriacke oftentimes rendreth this word by Retection or Reuelation of the face because a good conscience lifteth vp the head and boldly sheweth the face whereas a guiltie minde hangeth downe the head and as one confounded and ashamed dares
the inward holynesse or hollownesse of the heart but onely the heart it selfe and God which made it May therefore bee erronious and though proceeding from Charity yet in the meane season swaruing from verity If then when Men iustify vs our owne Consciences tell vs that they pronounce a wrong sentence and absolue the guilty the comfort that growes vnto vs thereby is no better then a cup of cold water is vnto a man sicke of a burning feuer or then the Sardonian laughter which makes the face seeme to grin while the deadly poison is searching through euery veine and seazing vpon the very heart But if wee bee well assured that the sentence is iust and true and that they are not deceiued therein although it bee not the end wee aymed at nor the Crowne wee looked for yet is it a sweet and amiable companion of holy life publickely testifying vnto our great comfort that God hath been glorified by vs our profession honoured and others inuited if not gained vnto Christ And thus much haue I thought good in regard of your silence to speake I hope not impertinently at least wise not vnprofitably of Iustification the summe whereof is that Affiance iustifies before God Assurance before Consience works before Men. So that I doe not simply deny either that Assurance is Faith for in my Treatise I acknowledge that the Scripture sometime calleth it Faith or that it iustifieth for I confesse it iustifieth at the barre of Conscience onely I deny it to bee that Faith which iustifies before God affirming that Faith to bee no other then Affiance N. B. Thus Master Downe you haue what you haue so much so earnestly so bitterly and contumeliously wrested from mee in writing sith that you haue refused to defend your Doctrine preached here by Disputation I. D. Indeed Master Baxter when I vnderstood by the aduertisements of sundry my good friends in Bristoll that you had not onely drawne vp an Answer against me full of reprochfull and disgracefull speeches but had also dispersed it abroad into the hands of diuers Burgesses of that City thereby to discredit both mee and the Doctrine which I preached among them without vouchsafing after a whole twelue months space to send mee a copie thereof according vnto promise true it is that as soone as the next oportunity was affoarded mee I could not forbeare to chalenge you for this vnchristian and vnschollerly dealing and to let you know the iust indignation and disdaine I conceiued thereat Besides that once did I neuer either by word or writing sollicit you in this matter and then earnest perhaps and vehement I might bee in expostulating with you but Bitter and Contumelious I am sure I was not and for proofe thereof I referre mee vnto the testimonie of those who were then present with vs. But whether earnest and vehement or Bitter and Contumelious Answer from you by no meanes could I wrest any And that now I haue obtained a Copie thereof thanks vnto those my good friends who neuer left following vpon the sent of the Foxe vntill they surprized him for me and not vnto you who desired and laboured nothing more then to keep it from mee Of all men you liked not it should light into my hands and yet of all men me it most concerned and vnto mee was onely promised And so after the Parthian manner you fight flying and as Caesar said of the Scythians make it more difficult to finde you then to foile you Well yet I refused you say to defend the Doctrine I preached by disputation First the course which formerly we had agreed and resolued vpon was Writing and therefore I saw no reason why I should yeeld to haue the cause remoued from a higher vnto an inferiour Court from Writing vnto Disputation For as a late learned writer saith Writings are more solid peaceable Dan. Chamier Ep. ad Egnat Armand and certaine then is present speech for more solid must those things needs bee which are meditated then which are suddenly spoken more peaceable then those things which are done in the tumult and while the minds of the Disputants are with present vehemence inflamed more certaine for writings remaine and words are winged and fly away and writings easily conuince the impudence of them that would corrupt them which speaking cannot so well doe And although in quicke writing there bee without question more aduisednesse then in present speaking yet doth Saint Hierome excuse his hasty commentary vpon Saint Mathews Gospell Proaem comment in Math. promising a more absolute worke that you may know saith hee What ods there is betweene the boldnesse of sudden enditing and the diligence of well-studied writing Secondly as the Apostle Saint Paul answered the Serieants that were sent vnto him from the gouernours of Philippi Act. 16.37 After that they haue beaten vs openly vncondemned which are Romans they haue cast vs into Prison and now would they put vs out priuily Nay verily but let them come and bring vs out so say I vnto you after you haue in a more publicke manner traduced and wronged mee scattering through the whole City a most slanderous inuectiue and libell against mee doe you thinke now by a priuate and chamber-disputation to content mee Nay verily this plaister is too narrow for the wound and open wrong requires open satisfaction Lastly howsoeuer you pretend that you set not pen to paper vntill I had refused your chalenge of disputation the Reader may bee pleased to vnderstand that it is cleane contrary And therefore as I cannot but impute your deniall to impart vnto mee what in writing you had opposed against mee to the distrust you had either in your cause or in your owne sufficiency so now hauing scribled away so much precious time and sacrificed so much paper to Cloacina that suddenly you apprehend a disputation I assure my selfe it was but a sleight deuised vpon the present to shift mee off and to rid your selfe from me whose residence you knew to bee elsewhere and who at that time was to take vp a nights lodging with you Or if you meant sincerely and vnfainedly doublesse it was confidence you had either in the boldnesse of your forehead vncapable of the purple tincture of modesty or in the vnskilfulnes of those who were like to be our Auditors Moderators who as I take it haue more skill in Marchandize and trafficking then in Demonstration or Dialecticall Syllogismes For otherwise wee had beene vpon equall ground in either of the Vniuersities I suppose you would haue beene better aduised ere you had made that challenge vnto mee N. B. I pray God it may worke in you a willing mind to embrace Peace and Brotherly loue without the which wee can neuer see God Bristol Iuly 27. 1602. I. D. It is impossible that vnto a man of vnderstanding any benefit or profit should accrew by reprehension vnlesse it may appeare vnto him by some euident remonstrance that that which is
and to vpbraid error in man is to reproch euen mortality in selfe Which if you had seriously and duly considered either you would not with such petulancy haue beene caried against the errors you imagine to be in mee or at least you would haue remembred your selfe also to be a man But seeing you count your selfe the only wise-man and others as the Poet speaketh Homer to fly about like shadowes you may not thinke it hard if being both ignorant and insolent you be admonished of the one and chastised for the other OF THE FAITH OF INFANTS AND HOW THEY ARE Iustified and Saued By the late Reuerend and Learned Diuine Master Iohn Downe Bachelour of Diuinity and sometimes Fellow of Emanuell Colledge in Cambridge OXFORD Prinred by IOHN LICHFIELD for EDWARD FORREST Anno Domini M.DC.XXXV OF THE FAITH OF INFANTS AND HOW THEY ARE Iustified and Saued THat Christian Infants haue a particular Faith of their owne is generally affirmed both by Papists and Lutherans yet with some difference De Bapt. l. 1. c. 10. as Bellarmine writeth For Papists hold that they haue onely Habituall Faith and that it together with Hope and Charity is infused into them in the Sacrament of Baptisme but the Lutherans saith he attribute vnto them Actuall Faith or something like thereunto Wherein it may be the Cardinall doth them some wrong Field Append. part 2. §. 1. For it is obserued by some Diuines that they constantly deny Children to haue any actuall apprehension of Gods mercies or that they feele in themselues any such motions of Faith Whereupon it must needs follow that their meaning is not to attribute vnto them Actuall Faith but a kind of Habituall Faith onely or that seed root and Habit whence Actuall motions in due time doe flow But bee their opinion herein whatsoeuer it will bee sure I am that both Lutheran and Papist agree in this that Infants haue a particular Faith of their owne The principall reasons that they alledge for proofe hereof are these Heb. 11.6 Infants please God but without Faith it is impossible to please him Mat. 19.14 The Kingdome of God belongs vnto them Which yet the Scriptures say cannot be attained without Faith The Word of God euery where maketh particular Faith a necessary meanes vnto Iustification and Saluation as where the Prophet saith The iust man shall liue by his Faith Hab. 2.4 but Infants are iustified before God and being iustified cannot but bee saued Matt 18.6 Mar. 9.36 Luc. 1.41 Nay Christ himselfe expresly saith that they doe belieue And Iohn the Baptist in the very wombe of his Mother was filled with the Holy Ghost and sprang at the salutation of the Blessed Virgin Other arguments they vse but they are all of the like nature and notwithstanding them all I cannot bee perswaded that Infants while they are such haue any Faith of their owne either Actuall or Habituall And these among sundry others are my chiefest reasons Deut. 1.39 First the Scripture in plaine tearmes affirmeth that they haue no knowledge at all either of good or euill and that they cannot so much as discerne betweene the right and the left hand If so Ion. 4.11 how can they who conceiue not of things naturall vnderstand those things that are heauenly and aboue the pitch of nature To this effect Saint Augustin Epist 57. Scire diuina paruulos qui nec humana adhuc norint si verbis velimus ostendere vereorne ipsis sensibus nostris facere videamur iniurià m quando iâ—â—loquendo fuadere studemus vbi omnes vires officiumque sermonis superet euidentia veritatis that is If wee should goe about to demonstrate with words that Children know the things of God who as yet know not the things of men I feare wee should offer wrong euen to our very senses endeuouring to perswade by speech that the euidence of the truth whereof far exceeds all power and office of speech Secondly when Infants are presented at the holy Font and either sprinkled with the water of Baptisme or dipped therein how chanceth it that they so much dislike thereof testifying their dislike by their crying and other motion of the body Certainly had they actuall Faith they would endure all with much patience and cheerefulnesse and neuer bewray so much aduersenesse and discontent But if in doing so they goe against their knowledge the Sacrament must needs bee so fâ—rre from auailing them to the washing away of Originall guilt that by their reluctation they rather contract a further guilt of Actuall sinne which I suppose none except he be too too vncharitable will imagine of them Thirdly if they haue Faith why are they not after their initiation by Baptisme forthwith admitted vnto holy Communion In the time of Saint Augustin and Innocent the first it was the practice of the Church so to doe and it continued as some write for the space of sixe hundred yeeres downe vnto the times of Ludouicus Pius and Lotharius But why is that custome now growne out of vse and why are Children barred from the Eucharist if they belieue as well as elder people Nay why are they not rather admitted then those of riper yeeres For Infants haue not so much as euill thoughts in them but these by reason of their longer life haue made themselues guilty of many euill deeds besides Fourthly Faith as Saint Paul witnesseth commeth by hearing and hearing by the Word of God preached But Infants heare not neither by the eare nor by any other way proportionable thereunto or if they doe yet they vnderstand not what they heare For did they vnderstand I presume they would harken more attentiuely vnto what is said then we see they doe Wherefore not hearing neither doe they belieue If you say they belieue by an inward Hearing then is that Faith wrought either by Ordinary or Extraordinary meanes Not by Extraordinary meanes for it is done euery day and houre By Ordinary therefore If so then haue wee a double manner of working Faith and both of them Ordinary the one by Inward Hearing in Infants only the other by Inward and Outward also in those that are Adulti which is a meere nouelty in the Church of God Fiftly how commeth it to passe if Children haue Faith that among so many millions of them as haue beene in the world not so much as one of them when they come to riper yeares giueth any testimony of his Faith vntill hee bee farther taught and informed If a child borne of Christian parents and entred into the visible Church by Baptisme shall afterwards while hee is yet in his tender yeeres fall into the hands of Infidels or Turks as the more the pitie many thousands of them haue done and the whole band of Ianizars they say consists of no other doth hee not readily receiue that religion which is first instilled into him without once dreaming of the Christian Faith Which yet how it should bee hauing from his
sinne of their owne Neither doth God thinke it agreeable with his iustice to exact of them a proper and particular Faith of their owne Infants then are holpen by anothers Faith Whose Faith will you say The Faith of the Parents as also of the Church who is the common mother of vs all and in whose wombe as it were they are conceiued borne This of old was Saint Augustins sentence and this all sound Diuines haue agreeably with the Scripture euer held Onely it may be demanded how and in what sort the Parents Faith auaileth them Whereunto I answer not by particular applying of Christs merits and obedience vnto them for this is done onely by a mans owne Faith vnto himselfe but by bringing them within the compasse of the Couenant of Grace Thus The Couenant was made not with Abraham onely Gen. 17.19 Act. 2.39 but with his seed also and the Promise saith Saint Peter was giuen both to the Parents and to the Children The Parents therefore by Faith apprehending this Promise and Couenant by their Faith interest their Children also thereunto For as it is in ciuill negotiations the bargaine that the Father maketh for himselfe his Children is firme and good although the Children bee not present at the bargaine-making nor vnderstand what is done euen so in this spirituall Couenant and contract with God the Parents Act is sufficient force to confederate their Children also and to giue them a right vnto all the benefits of the Couenant And as I conceiue this is imputed vnto them in lieu of all those Acts and Habits which otherwise are required in those that are Adulti How farther the Holy Ghost worketh in them is a deepe and inscrutable secret Et de occultis non iudicat Ecclesia the Church is no iudge of things that are hidden Onely I affirme that by the Faith of the Parents the Children are made a holy seed and members of Christs body But what if one of the Parents bee an Infidell What if either of them or both be notorious hypocrites or openly sinnefull hauing not in them true Iustifying Faith are the Children therefore without the compasse of the Couenant and vniustified before God I answer No For first if but one of the Parents belieue yet are the Children holy 1. Cor. 7.14 So saith Saint Paul The vnbelieuing husband is sanctified by the belieuing wife and the vnbelieuing wife is sanctified by the husband else were your Children vncleane but now are they holy Againe though neither of the Parents belieue with iustifying Faith yet being in the Church by the profession of Christian Religion their Children are within the Couenant For first the Soule that sinneth it shall die Ezech. 18.20 the sonne shall not beare the iniquity of the Father neither shall the Father beare the iniquity of the Sonne So that the impiety of the Parents preiudiceth not the Child that is borne in the Church Secondly by Parents are to bee vnderstood not those alone of whom Children are immediatly begotten and borne but their Progenitors and Ancestors also who feared God and liued in the Church though many generations before For God made not his Couenant with Abraham and his immediate seed onely but with all his seed after them in their generations Gen. 17.7 Ex. 20. and promiseth to shew mercy to the thousandth generation of them that loue him and keep his Commandments Whence it followeth that these are as it were a root vnto all their posterity borne in the Church and therefore Rom. 11.16 if the root be holy so are the branches also saith Saint Paul Lastly bee the next Parents whatsoeuer they will bee yet their Children being borne in the Church the Church is their Mother and the Faith and piety of the Church interesteth all such as are borne in her vnto the Couenant And thus you see how Children are iustified and Saued by anothers Faith If Children may not those that are Adulti so bee iustified and saued also No verily For as the Prophet saith The iust man shall liue suâ fide not by anothers Hab. 2.4 but by his owne Faith And hence is it that in the Lords prayer we are taught to say Our Father but in the Creed I belieue because Prayer is an Act of Charity extending it selfe vnto the good of others also but Belieuing is an Act of Faith onely benefiting a mans selfe Can the cloths that another weares warme mee or the meat another eates nourish mee or the potion another receiues cure mee or the soule that is in another man quicken mee Nor more can the Faith of another man iustify or saue mee As one man shall not beare anothers fault sed anima quae peccat ipsa morietur the soule that sinneth it shall die so shall not one man bee acquitted for anothers Faith sed anima quae credit ipsa saluabitur the soule that belieueth it shall bee saued Saluation euery where in Scripture is promised to him who himselfe belieueth and damnation is euery where threatned to him that belieueth not so And he belieueth not so who hath not a Faith of his owne Yea but if Adams sinne bee imputed vnto vs for Condemnation and the Obedience of Christ for Iustification why may not anothers Faith also bee imputed for Saluation The case is not alike for they were publicke persons and stood in our steed but so doe not others In the Couenant of works Adam was our Head and therefore his sinne is counted the common act of all those that were in his loines In the Couenant of Grace Christ is our Head and therefore his Obedience is esteemed the common Obedience of all those who are vnited vnto him by Faith Others are not our Heads nor represent our persons in regard whereof neither can their Act bee accounted ours It will further bee obiected that Christ forgaue the palsie-sicke man his sinnes for the Faith of them that brought him Luc. 5.20 and so as Thomas saith both Ambrose and one Iohn a Bishop vnderstand it Caten in cum loc But Saint Chrysostome otherwise and that more rightly vnderstanding it both of the sicke mans Faith and theirs who brought him For our Sauiour intending to bestow a double benefit vpon him namely the cure both of body and soule this could not bee effected but by the interuention of his owne Faith but the other might by the Faith of those that presented him So wee read that the Centurions seruant Mat. 8.13 15.28 and the woman of Canaans daughter were healed the one for his Masters the other for her Mothers Faith And who knowes not that vnbelieuers oftentimes temporally fare the better for the sake of the Faithfull Saint Ambrose therefore imputing the remission of sinnes vnto the Faith of others must bee vnderstood with a graine of Salt as they say that one mans Faith may obtaine Faith vnto another and so consequently by the interuention thereof Iustification also as did the
that they euer remained more then conquerors And now as they haue left behind them a pretious name among the Saints so wee doubt not but their soules are bound vp in the bundle of life and enioy the blessed making vision of God for euermore Such books of theirs as are come to our hands we esteeme as rich treasures and value them aboue gold Them doe wee search and peruse with all diligence bee it spoken without offence no Papists more Yet can wee not throughout them meet with those terrible Bugbears you so much complain of rather wee wonder how you could misse all those good Angels so frequently appearing in them to comfirme and settle you in your first Faith For I wil bee bold to say notwithstanding all the brags and crakes of that side that the Fathers are ours not yours or if they bee yours in any thing it is in the pettiest and smallest matters for in the maine and great questions controuerted between vs they are expresly for vs and against you as hereafter God willing shall in part appeare Vpon confidence whereof whensoeuer wee were summond and called vnto the Fathers by you wee neuer refused their triall but euer haue beene ready to aduenture all vpon their verdict The chalenge of that famous Prelate Ser. at Pauls Crosse Doctor Iewell Bishop of Salisbury is yet fresh in memory that if any learned man of our aduersaries or if all the learned men that bee aliue be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholicke Doctor or Father or out of any old generall Councell or out of the holy Scriptures of God or any one example of the Primitiue Church whereby it may clearly and plainly be proued that there was any priuate Masse in the whole world at that time for the space of sixe hundred yeares after Christ and so foorth in seuen and twenty seuerall articles hee would bee content to yeeld and to subscribe Reply to Hardings Ans This chalenge as that renowned Bishop in his life-time made good himselfe against his aduersary Master Harding so was it neuer yet retracted by any of vs but hath stoutly beene maintained by sundry succeeding champions Heare one for all That sayth worthy Whitaker Con. Camp tat 5. which Iewell most truly and constantly vttered that day when hee appealed to the antiquity of sixe hundred yeeres and offered vnto you that if you could bring foorth but one sentence cleere and euident out of any Father or Councell he would not refuse to yeeld the victory vnto you the same doe we all professe we all promise the same we will not shrinke from our word Thus you see how wee reiect not the Fathers as you would beare the world in hand but triumph rather in the testimony they giue vs and in our Apologies and Defences alledge them plentifully against you Howbeit neither doe wee nor dare wee make Gods of them or equall them with the holy Apostles as if they were infallible and could not erre Clouen tongues neuer sate vpon them as they did vpon these neither did the Spirit of God so guide and direct their pens but that sometimes they might faile and write amisse Had they had infallibility of iudgement safely might wee build our Faith vpon them but this they vtterly disclaime acknowledging it to bee the peculiar priuiledge of the Apostles And so far are they from making themselues Masters of our Faith that they require vs to iudge and censure of their writings by the Scripture which is the rule of Faith Neither would they haue vs to tie our selues vnto their authority more then they tyed themselues vnto the authority of others but freely to accept or refuse as wee see iust cause Hom. 13. in 2. Cor. I pray and beseech you all saith Chrysostome that leauing this and that mans opinion you will search all these things out of the Scripture In Euseb hist l. 7. c. 24. Let it bee commended saith Dionysius of Alexandria and without enuy assented vnto which is rightly spoken but if any thing bee vnsoundly written let that bee looked into and corrected Epist 62. I know I my selfe saith Hierome esteeme of the Apostles in one sort and of other Writers in another that the first alwayes speake truth and the latter as men doe in some things erre De Trinit l. 3. c. 1. In all my writings saith Saint Augustin I desire not only a godly Reader but also a free corrector yet as I would haue the Reader addicted vnto mee so neither would I haue a corrector addicted to himselfe De lib. arb l. 2. c. 32. And againe I am not bound to the authority of this man meaning Cyprian but I examine his saying by the authority of Scripture and what agreeth therewith I receiue with his commendation what agreeth not by his leaue I refuse And yet againe Epist 111. ad Fortunat. Neither are wee to esteeme the disputations of any men although Catholicke and praise worthy as the Canonicall Scriptures that wee may not sauing the honour which is due to those men dislike and reiect something in their writings if happily wee find them to haue thought otherwise then the truth either by others or our selues through Gods help vnderstood Such am I in the writings of others and such would I haue the vnderstanders of mine to bee Epist 19. ad Hieron Finally I saith the same Saint Augustin confesse vnto your charity that I haue learned to yeeld vnto those books of Scripture alone which now are called Canonicall this reuerence and honor that I most firmely belieue no Author of them to haue erred any thing in writing And if I find any thing in their writings which seemeth contrary to truth I will not sticke to say that either the copie is faulty or the translator apprehended not what is spoken or I vnderstand it not But others I so read that how much soeuer they excell in holynesse and learning I thinke it not therefore true because they thought so but because either by those Canonicall Authors or by probable reason not abhorring from truth they were able to perswade mee Thus the Fathers whose steps if wee tread in and whose counsell if wee follow and not taking vp euery thing vpon trust but examining them by the touchstone of truth I hope wee are rather to bee commended then blamed And reason for neither were the Fathers more then men neither are wee of this age lesse then men And I wonder why we may not iudge of the sayings of those who are but men as well as our selues What haue wee not reasonable soules as well as they are we not endued with the same faculty of vnderstanding and discoursing haue wee not still the same helps both of nature and art which they had Or when they died did the Holy Ghost also giue vp the ghost with them or doth hee deny to assist these latter times with his enlightning grace as hee
of all the heauenly hoste of the blessed Spirits therein whereas Saint Paul himselfe though hee had beene rauished vp into the third heauen euen into the Paradise of God 2 Cor. 12.3.4 yet returning backe neyther durst nor did vtter any such thing and lastly that hee talken so familiarly of Churches and Chancels and Monks and diuers other orders and ceremonies which are well knowne to be of a much latter date omitting I say these and the like obiections although perhaps not so easy to bee answered consider with mee I beseech you these few reasons following First if these were the books of that Denâ— which was Saint Pauls Scholler how commeth it to passe that neither Eusebius in his Ecclesiasticall history nor Ierome nor Gennadâ—ui purposely writing Catalogues of all the famous Writers before them nor Origen nor Chrysostom nor any ancient Father so farre as I can learne maketh any mention of them vntill Gregory the Great who liued about 600. Hom. 34. de 10. dragm yeares after Christ and speaketh very doubtfully of them too For as for Athanasius whom you affirmed to quote him I suppose you meant him in his Questions out of the old and new Testament wherein hee cites his Mystica Theologia But neither was this booke of Denis knowne in the time of Athanasius nor did Athanasius himselfe write that Biblioth l. 4. as your Sixtus Senensis thinketh For had hee written it would hee thinke you haue vouched his owne authority and that with such arrogance vnder the name of Great Athanasius or could hee haue mentioned Gregory Nazianzen who flourished so long after his decease I trow no yet hee doth both Quest 23. 117. 129. Act. 17. 34. Ib. 16.3 c. Secondly it is well knowne that S. Paul was the man that conuerted Denis and that before his comming to Athens Timothy had beene entertained by him and in his company had trauelled ouer many countreyes and grew so intimate and deere vnto him that he both counted and called him his Son 1 Tim. 1.2 2. c. 1.2 Which being so it cannot reasonably bee imagined that the true Denis would proue either so vngratefull or so presumptuous as this counterfait sheweth himselfe to bee vngratefull in that forgetting Saint Paul he euer speakes of one Hierotheus in obscure man in comparison as of his Master presumptuous for that as if hee were a Father to Timothy as well as Saint Paul hee calleth him his Sonne notwithstanding hee were farre more fit to bee his disciple Thirdly Diuin nom c. 5. Strom. l. 8. this Denis citeth Clemens the Philosopher not Clemens of Rome as some would haue it but of Alexandria for in him the very passage quoted by Denis is to bee found Deuin nom c. 4. And yet this Clemens liued two hundred yeeres after Christ Hee citeth also these words out of Ignatius My loue is crucified as if hee had beene present at his Martyrdome Memod and yet the true Dionysius suffered vnder Domitian whereas Ignatius both wrote his Epistle and was martyred some good while after him vnder Trajan Hee further citeth the Gospell and Reuelation of Saint Iohn as if they had a long time beene parcels of holy Scripture howbeit if wee may belieue history both those books were written but a little before Saint Iohns death and fourteen yeeres after the death of Dionysius And yet againe in an Epistle to Polycarpus hee speaketh vnto him as vnto a reuerend Bishop and Doctour Neuerthelesse Dionysius himselfe suffered in France in the yeere of our Lord ninety sixe as Writers testify but Polycarpus in the yeere one hundred sixty sixe and of his age eighty sixe so that at the death of Dionysius Polycarpus could be but a stripling and about sixteene yeeres old Fourthly according to the Prouerbe the Rat perisheth by bewraying himselfe for speaking of Infants and why they are baptized thus he saith Hier. Eccl. c. 7. Hereof wee say those things which our diuine Masters being instructed by the old tradition haue brought vnto vs. In which words ere hee was aware hee hath discouered that nor Paul nor any other of the Apostles could be his Masters for it is both vntrue and absurd to say that the holy Apostles were instructed in the point of Christian Baptisme by the old tradition Lastly this Denis writeth that himselfe together with Timothy and Hierotheus were present at the departure and funerall of the Blessed Virgin Mother Ep. ad Tim. Now story saith that shee liued threescore and three yeeres being fifteen yeeres of age when she bare Christ whereunto if yee adde thirty three yeeres of Christs life and fifteen more to make up her full age it will appeare that shee dyed eight and forty yeeres after her Sonnes birth and fifteen after his Ascension But on the other side it plainely appeareth that Denis Arcopagite was not conuerted vnto the Christian Faith till the eighteenth yeere after the ascension one and fifty yeeres after Christs birth Our Diuines gather it thus The Scripture witnesseth that Saint Paul was not called till Christ was ascended Reinold in Conc. 8. d. 2. Act. 9.5 Gal. 1.18 Act. 9.26 Gal. 1.21 Act. 13.4 Gal. 2.1 Act. 15.4 Act. 16.1 Being called hee stayed three yeeres in Damascus and Arabia before hee came to Ierusalem Thence he went into the coasts of Syria and Cilicia and the Countreyes thereabout And fourteen yeeres after hee came to Ierusalem againe with Barnabas to the Councell From the Councell hee went to Derbe and Lystra Where hee receiued Timothy And hauing trauelled through Phrygia Galatia Mysia Macedonia hee came at last to Athens Act. 17.34 where hee conuerted Denys So that it must needs bee about eighteen or at the least seuenteen yeeres after Christs Ascension before Saint Denys know Christ All which duely considered it is euident that the Blessed Virgin dyed if not three full yeeres yet more then two before the conuersion of Denys and consequently that he could not be one of those Brethren who were present at her death and funerall Whence also it followeth ineuitably that the Authour of that booke cannot possibly be this Denys This argument being pressed by that renowmed Reinolds vpon Iohn Hart Confer c. 8. d. 2. hee confessed ingenuously that hee knew not how to accord it And these or the like reasons haue so preuailed with sundry of your owne side that they haue beene forced some to doubt of him others vtterly to disclaime him from being the true Denys Praef. in Probl. Alex. Aphrod Theodorus Caza affirmeth those books of the Hierarchy to be none of Denys the Athenians In Act. 17. Ibid. Erasmus also professeth himselfe to be of the same mind And Laurentius Valla saith that the learnedest men of his time entitled one Apollinarius vnto them Cardinall Cajetan not onely saith it In Act. 17. but also sheweth how vnlikely it is that hee who wrote of the Names of God and of the Heauenly and
fo◠〈◊〉 second question I thinke you will confesse pardon â—ee if I thinke amisse that you haue not skill enough with vnderstanding to read the Greeke Fathers in their Original but are faine to trust vnto Translations But I beseech you doe not Translators many times what through ignorance or neglicence or wilfulnesse mistake and peruert the meaning of their Author L. 2. c. 1. Ruffinus translated the Ecclesiasticall history of Eusebius and in it this passage of Clemens that Peter Iames and Iohn although Christ preferred them almost before all yet they tooke not the honour of Primacy to themselues but ordained Iames who was surnamed Iust Bishop of the Apostles A shrewd testimony for the Primacy of Iames against that of Peter but the error is in the translation the Greeke Eusebius hauing not Bishop of the Apostles but Bishop of Hierusalem Yet Marianus Scotus citeth the same out of Methodius iust according to Ruffins translation from whence perhaps it was taken Hist l. 2. c. 23. Eusebius himselfe in expresse tearmes affirmeth the Epistle of S. Iames to be Spurious but your Chrystopherson renders it so as if he had meant that not himselfe but some others in the Church had so esteemed it in former times And lastly not to stand longer vpon this point that very translation of Cyrillus Alexandrinus which you haue made by Trapezuntius you haue little reason much to trust vnto For as Bonauentura Vulcanius sheweth Praef. Ann. it is a very disorderly one wherein many things are omitted much is added of his owne and much peruersly translated To conclude therefore seeing the writings of the Fathers haue so many wayes and so notoriously beene abused by addition by subtraction by alteration by misquotation by mistranslation it followeth that infallible certainty from them you can haue none and so consequently that you cannot safely build your Faith vpon them To proceed the Scriptures you say are obscure and ambiguous and therefore you may not rest vpon them saue onely as they are expounded of the Fathers If so then if the Fathers also bee obscure and ambiguous neither may you rest your Faith vpon them Now certainly the Fathers are as darke and doubtfull as the Scripture If you thinke otherwise doe but read the works of Tertullian and Arnobius and let me afterward know your minde For my part I see no reason why the Scripture should bee more subiect to diuersity of interpretations according to the difference of times as Cardinall Cusan impiously affirmeth Ep. 2. 7. Cont. Whit. l. 2. p. 45. and Duraeus the Iesuit impudently defendeth then the writings of the Fathers What doe wee not vouch the Fathers on both sides are we not as confident vpon them as you whence commeth this I beseech you if they bee so cleere that no doubt can bee made of them And why doe you professe in your Flemish Expurgatorie Index that in ancient Catholike Writers yee tolerate many errors yee extenuate and excuse them and often deny them by deuising some shift and faining a sence vnto them when they are opposed against you What need I say all these tricks and fetches if there bee no obscurity in them If literall and Grammaticall construction may cary it the Fathers are directly ours and wee suppose they ment as they wrote neither can you make any shew of answer vnlesse you fall to expound the meaning of them And so as you remoue your Faith from the letter of the Scripture vnto the exposition of the Fathers so must you of force remoue the same againe from the letter of the Fathers vnto some other tribunall to determine the sence and meaning thereof Giue mee leaue to declare this by some few examples That Faith only iustifies Origen Cyprian Eusebius Caesariensis Hilary Basil Chrysostome Ambrose Augustin Cyril Primasius Hesychius Gennadius Oecumenius in expresse tearmes affirme agreeing therein with vs whose words I will not fayle to produce whensoeuer you shall require Against hauing of Images in Churches and the Adoration of them wee haue the precise words not onely of Lactantius and Epiphanius and other Fathers seuerally Epist ad Ioh. Hicrosol but nineteene Bishops together in the Councell of Eliberis and of the whole Councell of Frankford vnder Charles the Great Against the Bishop of Romes supremacy wee haue the plaine resolution of Pope Gregory Lib. 6. ep 30. that he is the forerunner of Antichrist whosoeuer desires to bee called Vniuersall Bishop And of the Generall Councell of Chalcedon Act. 16. giuing to the Bishop of Constantinople equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome And of two hundred seuenteene Bishops in the sixt Councell of Carthage among whom were Saint Augustin Prosper Gresians and many other worthy Fathers all decreeing that the Pope of Rome thenceforward should haue no authority ouer the African Churches Finally against Transubstantiation thus writeth Gelasius himselfe a Bishop of Rome De dâ—ab nat con Euâ—ych The Sacraments of the Body and Bloud of CHRIST which we receiue is a diuine thing wherefore by them wee are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet the substance of bread and wine ceaseth not to bee Thus also Theodoret Dial. 1. Hee who hath called meat and drinke that which naturally is his body and after cals himselfe a Vine he himselfe hath honoured the visible signes with the name of his Body and Bloud hauing not changed their nature but hauing added grace vnto nature And againe Dial. 10. The signes mysticall change not their nature after consecration for they remaine in their first substance figure and forme Hom. 11. Chysostom likewise if hee bee the Authour of the imperfect worke on Math. In the sacred vessels there is not the true Body of CHRIST but the mystery of his Body And Saint Augustin The Lord doubted not to say This is my Body Con. Adimant c. 12. when he gaue the signe of his Body Thus the Fathers in these few points neither is it hard to shew the like consent in the rest What Will you now subscribe vnto their words yea being taken in the right sense But who shall iudge of the 〈◊〉 on vnderstand them one way we another Shall 〈◊〉 learned Rabbies of your side Fic that were too partiall and they so enterfere in their answers that they cut and hew one the other miserably Reuerend Bishop Morton hath demonstrated this at large Preambleâ—ng Mitigator Take one of his examples The Councell of Bâ—â—beris forbiddeth the hauing of Images in Churches Do Imagin l. 2. c. 9. and Adoration of them Of Images representing Gods nature faith Andradâ—â—s No saith Bellarmine for such were not then in vse For feare test Gentiles should thinke Christians warshipped them idolatrously saith Sanders But the reason of the Canon agreeth not much with this exposition saith Bellarmine Because Christians seemed to worship those Images as Gods Ibid. saith Alen Cope But this exposition is not agreeable to the Canon saith
Duraeus Con. Whitel◠p. 140. The Fathers are not counted Fathers when they either write or teach of their owne and what they haue not receiued from the Church p. 1. pa. 75. And Dominicus Bannes The more part of Doctors if some few bee against them make no infallible argument in matters of Faith De iurisd p. 4. Dr Marta also The common opinion of Doctors is not to bee regarded when another contrary opinion fauoureth the power of the keyes and the iurisdiction of the Church De vorb Dei l. 3. c. 10. Likewise Bellarmine The Fathers expound the Scriptures not as Iudges but as Doctors now not to this but that authority is required And De conc In expounding the Scripture the Catholike Church doth not alway and in all things follow the Fathers The writings of the Fathers are no rules and haue no authority to bind vs. In Rom. 14. Finally Tom teltroth Cornelius Mus To speake freely I would yeeld more credence to one chiefe Bishop in those things which concerne the mysteries of Faith then a thousand Augustins Hieromes or Gregories And thus as a right learned writer saith Reinol Conf. c. 2. d. 2. you vse the Fathers as Marchants are wont to vse their counters Sometime they stand with you for pence sometime for pounds as they bee next and readiest at hand to make vp your accounts So that I cannot but maruell how you dare to make that the ground of your Faith which the learnedst of your side so ordinarily reiect as an vnsure foundation to build vpon Shall I tell you M. Bayly you haue been fouly gulled and beguiled by your new Masters For notwithstanding all this faire pretence of Fathers yet in the end not Consent of Fathers but the authority of the present Church must bee your surest anchorhold So saith Gregory de Valentia a man well seene in the Romish mysteries Tom. in Thom. 3. d. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 3. De Sacram. l. 2. c. 25. Neither the holy Scripture nor yet tradition alone if yee separate from it the present authority in the Church is that infallible authority and mistresse of Faith So Bellarmine also The firmity of all ancient Councels and Doctrines depends vpon the authority of the present Church And this reason they render because without the authority of the present Church yee can neuer haue infallible certainty either of Scripture or Councels or Traditions which they bee or what is the true meaning of them So that now you must of force remoue your Faith from the ancient Fathers and rest it vpon the present Church But what are you now more safe then you were before Neuer a whit vnlesse you may further bee resolued what is the present Church For it is taken three seuerall wayes by you and is either the Church essentiall consisting of all Catholicks whatsoeuer Prier in Luth. tom 1. fund ◠or Representatiue of Bishops in a Coūcell or Virtuall the Pope who is head of the Church Now which of these three must you pitch vpon The first So say some But the most part of this Church is the Vulgar who are not comprehensiue of those matters which are controuerted neither is it possible for you to gather the voices of such a diuided and dispersed body Others therefore direct you to the second But what to a Councell with the Pope or without the Pope For here is such confusion of tongues and part taking of each side that I feare you will hardly find any rest for the sole of your foote this way Howbeit if the most voices of the new cut now adayes may sway it not a Councell without the Pope but the Pope whether with a Councell or without it it mattereth not much Tom. 3. p. 24. must bee the iudge and ground of Faith In this question saith Gregory de Valentia by the Church wee meant the Roman Bishops in whom resides the full authority of the Church when hee pleases to determine matters of Faith whether hee doe it with a Councell or without And Greiser Def. Bellarm. 10. 1. p. 1450. b. when wee affirme the Church to bee iudge of all controuersies of Faith by the Church wee vnderstand the B. of Rome who for the time being gouernes the ship of the militant Church And Albertin I say that besides the first verity there is an infallible rule liuing and endued with reason such as is the Church and this rule liuing and endued with reason is the chiefe B. of Rome So that Tom. 1. dis 44. Sect. 1. the Popes determination is the truth saith Suares and were it contrary to the sayings of all the Saints yet were it to bee preferred afore them nay if an Angell from Heauen were opposed against him the Popes determination were to bee preferred By all which you see that as you haue once already remoued your Faith from the ancient Fathers to your Mother the present Church so must you bee faine now againe to remoue it from your mother the present Church vnto your holy Father the present Pope But besides that it is altogether vnprobable that the Spirit of Truth should bee chained vnto the chaire of those men who many of them haue beene monsters rather then men and not only Heretiks but very Atheists and Infidels I would willingly learne why the Pope is so seldome in the humour to decide controuersies Why haue wee not from him an exact Commentary on the Bible that wee need no longer stand in doubt of the meaning thereof And why doth hee not stint the deadly fo-hood that now is on foot betweene the Iesuites and Dominicans But suppose hee bee both able and ready to resolue what must I trauell from England so farre as Rome for resolution and when I am arriued before him hath hee clouen tongues sitting vpon him to speake vnto mee in the language I vnderstand Or if I vnderstand him how am I assured that speaking to mee hee intendeth to teach the whole Church for otherwise hee may erre as Bellarmine shewes Innocent the eighth did De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 14. permitting the Norwegians to celebrate the sacrifice of the Masse without wine Shall I tell you a mystery Whatsoeuer your Priests and Iesuits prate either of Fathers or Church or Pope yet to an ordinary man who cannot of himselfe be resolued by them the authority of his Diocesan is sufficient yea and hee merits by belieuing it although what hee teach bee false This perhaps may seeme strange to you L. 3. d. 25. q. v. art 1. yet thus saith Gabriel Biel If a simple and vnlearned man heare his Prelate preach any thing contrary to the Faith thinking that what his Prelate hath so preached is belieued by the Church Instr Sacer. l. 4. c. 3. such a one not only not sinneth but by belieuing that which is false meriteth And Tolet Againe if a Countrey-man belieue his Bishop propounding some hereticall Doctrine about the
Articles he meriteth by belieuing although it be an error because hee is bound to belieue vntill it manifestly appeare that it is against the Church O immortall God if this bee true how easy a thing is it for a Papist to bee saued Onely belieue what your Prelate or Curate telleth you and you shall not need to trouble your selfe further for whether it be true or false sound doctrine or heresy you are out of danger nay it is meritorious to belieue it Alas alas that poore simple people should bee so miserably cheated and seduced God I hope will ere long open their eyes to see these impostures and by the light of his word guide their feet in a surer way In the meane season giue me leaue to summe vp all what I haue hitherto sayd and thereupon to inferre the Conclusion first intended Seeing therefore as wee haue now fully demonstrated the Fathers were but men as wee are neither hauing the Promise nor assuming vnto themselues the Priuiledge of Infallibility aboue vs seeing secondly many Counterfaits are set forth vnder the names of the Fathers which the best of your side cannot so readily discerne and which they ordinarily alledge in euery controuersie betwixt vs for authenticall Fathers seeing thirdly the writings of the Fathers are pitifully corrupted and adulterated by Hereticks and others and that sundry wayes by Addition Substraction Alteration Misquotation and False translation seeing fourthly the sayings of the Fathers are so ambiguous and obscure that not onely we and you one against another but your owne side also among themselues are distracted and diuided touching the sence and meaning of them seeing fiftly the more part of the Fathers sometime consent in errour yea and such errors as the present Church of Rome condemneth with Anathema seeing sixtly the most learned of your side make no scruple to reiect the Fathers whensoeuer they consent against them and warrant their so doing with diuerse reasons seeing lastly they make not Consent of Fathers but the authority of the present Church that is to say the Pope for the time being to bee the onely Infallible iudge of Controuersies seeing I say all these things are vndoubtedly so I will not bee afraid to conclude that the pretended Consent of Fathers is too weake and deceitfull a ground for a man with security to build his Faith vpon For whereas you say that beleeuing as the Fathers did if they bee saued as doubtlesse they are you cannot miscary take heed lest this proue but a broken reed and deceiue you in the end For first if for the reasons aboue set down you cannot be infallibly certaine which are the true Fathers and what is their right meaning how can you bee infallibly certaine that you belieue as they did Againe doe you thinke it safe to hold all their errors also and because they are not condemned for them that you shall escape condemnation in like manner beleeuing them Cont. Haer. c. 10. Heare then what Vincentius Lirinensis saith O wonderfull change of things saith hee the Authors of the same opinion are iudged Catholicks and the followers Heretiks the Masters are absolued and the Schollers condemned the Writers of the books shall bee the Sonnes of the Kingdome and Hell shall keep those that maintaine them For who doubts but blessed Cyprian the light of Bishops and holy Martyrs together with the rest of his Collegues shall raigne for euer with Christ Contrarily who is so impious as to deny that the Donatists and the rest of that pestilent crew who vnder the authority of that Councell presume to rebaptize shall burne for euermore with the Diuell Thus hee whereby you see how dangerous it is to beleeue euen as the best haue done before vs vnlesse wee haue better warrant then so for our doing Lastly suppose the Fathers consenting erred not yet are you neuer the safer For the strength of Faith exceeds not the strength of the testimony nor the strength of the testimony the Veracity of the Witnesse Now the Veracity of the Fathers is but the Veracity of men and the Veracity of men is imperfect and inconstant euer leauing roome for that word of truth All men are lyers Whence it followeth that your Faith being grounded only on the Veracity of men is no better then an Acquisite and Humane Faith Whereby though you belieue all that the Fathers did yet not belieuing as they did they may bee saued and you perish For they building vpon diuine testimony belieued with a Diuine Faith and therefore Sauing but you relying on humane authority belieue onely with an Acquisite and Humane Faith which saueth not no not although the things you belieue thereby are true For an Acquisite Faith the diuels themselues may haue and yet are damned Wherefore it being as you see so dangerous and vnsafe to trust in man and as the Prophet speaketh to make flesh your arme let mee entreat you euen in the bowels of Iesus Christ to take vnto you Christian seuerity and with all speed to returne your Faith backe againe vpon the rocke from which so rashly and vnaduisedly you remoued it Remember I beseech you how S. Augustin in a controuersy betwixt him and Hierome touching S. Peters dissimulation hauing eleuated the authority of foure of those seuen Fathers which were vrged against him and not being able to oppose three to the other three remaining Epist 19. quitteth himselfe thus When saith he I seeke a third that I also may oppose three to three verily I suppose I might easily find him if I had read much howbeit to mee the Apostle Paul shall bee insteed of all yea and aboue them all To him I flie to him I appeale of him I aske and demand c. In like manner doe you also and in Gods name let your finall appeale bee made vnto the holy Scriptures as vnto the supreme iudge in all questions of Faith Catech. 4. Theod. l. 1. c. 7. For as Cyril B. of Ierusalem saith The security of our Faith ariseth from the demonstration of the holy Scripture and the resolution of those things we seeke for must bee taken out of the diuine inspired Scripture saith Constantin in his oration to the Bishops of the Nicen Councell Con. Herm. De bon vid. c. 1. Orat. de ijs q. adeunt Hierosol Hom. 13. in 2. Cor. Epist 112. ad Paulin. And reason for the Scriptures are the rule of Faith as Tertullian and Augustin say A straight and inflexible rule as Gregory Nyssen saith A most exquisite rule and exact square and ballance to trie all things by saith Chrysostome In regard whereof saith Saint Augustin If a matter bee grounded on the euident authority of holy Scripture such I say as the Church calleth Canonicall it is without all doubt to bee belieued but as touching other witnesses and testimonies vpon whose credit a thing is vrged vpon vs to bee belieued thou majest lawfully either credit or not credit them as thou perceiuest them
to deserue or not to deserue credit Con. Parmen l. 5. And Optatus B. of Milenis you affirme wee deny betweene your yea and our nay the soules of the people wauer and stagger Let no man belieue either you or vs Wee are all contentious men Wee must seeke out iudges If Christians both sides cannot yeeld them and part taking would hinder truth Wee must seeke for a iudge without If a Pagan hee knowes not the mysteries of Christianity if a Iew hee is an enemie to Christian Baptisme Therefore vpon earth no iudgment touching this matter can bee found Wee must seeke a iudge from heauen But why knocke wee at heauen seeing herein the Gospell wee haue his will and testament With these Fathers your owne men accord The holy doctrine saith Thomas of Aquin Sum. p. 1. q. 1. a. 8. ad 2. vseth such authorities of profane writers as forraine and probable arguments but the authorities of Canonicall Scripture it vseth arguing properly and necessarily and the authorities of the Doctors of the Church as disputing indeed properly yet onely probably For our Faith relyeth on that reuelation which was made to the Apostles and Prophets who wrote the Canonicall books De verb. Dei l. 1. c. 2. but not on reuelation made to other Doctors if any such haue beene And Bellarmin The sacred Scripture is the rule of Faith most safe and certaine and God hath taught vs by corporall letters which wee may see and read what he would haue vs belieue concerning him And Stapleton Del. con Whit. l. 2. De rat Con. l. 2. c. 19. The diuine Scriptures alone yeeld infallible testimony and such as is meerely diuine And Persius also The authority of no Saint is of infallible truth for S. Augustin giues that honour onely to the sacred Scripture But why vouch I human authority hauing diuine God himselfe by the Prophet summons vs vnto the law and to the testimony Esa 8.20 affirming that if any speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Ioh. 5.39 Our Sauiour Christ commandeth to search the Scriptures as which testify of him and wherein eternall life is to bee had Luc. 16 3◠Abraham referred the rich gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets assuring himselfe that if they refused to heare them neither would they be perswaded though one rose from the dead The holy Apostle Paul chargeth vs not to presume aboue that which is written 1. Cor. 4.6 in as much as the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation through the Faith that is in Christ Iesus 2. Tim. 3.15.16.17 and are profitable for doctrine for reproofe for correction for instruction in righteousnesse that the man of God may bee perfect Luc. 1.3.4 throughly furnished vnto all good works To what end did Saint Luke write his Gospell was it not that we might know the certainty of those things wherein wee are instructed Phil. 3.1 This saith Saint Paul is a very safe course And hence was it that the Bereans searched the Scripture so carefully Act. 17.11 that they might bee fully assured of those things which were taught thē We haue a more sure word of Prophecy 2. Pet. 1.19 saith Saint Peter whereunto yee doe well that yee take heed as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place vntill the day dawne and the day starre arise in your hearts But S. Paul is yet more peremptory Though we saith hee Gal. 1.8 or an Angell from heauen preach any other Gospell vnto you then that which wee haue preached vnto you let him bee accursed Contra Haer. c. 12. What is it saith Vincentius Lirinensis that hee saith though wee Why not rather though I His meaning is though Peter though Andrew though Iohn yea though the whole Colledge of Apostles preach vnto you otherwise then wee haue preached let him bee anathema A fearefull straine for the maintenance of the first Faith neither to spare himselfe nor his fellow Apostles It is but a little Although saith hee an Angell from heauen preach otherwise then wee haue preached vnto you let him bee Anathema It sufficed not for the preseruation of the Faith once deliuered to mention the nature of humane condition vnlesse he comprehended Angelicall excellency also Though saith hee wee or an Angell from heauen Thus you see that the Faith which was first deliuered and is now contained in the Scripture is the soueraigne rule and iudge of all the doctrines both of men and Angels For whatsoeuer the Apostles preached the same is written as Irenaeus testifieth Lib. 3. c. 2. Whereupon Saint Augustin As touching Christ or his Church Cont. Petil. l. 3. c. 6. or any other thing pertaining to our Faith or life I will not say if wee who are no way to bee compared with him that said Though wee but as it is added if an Angell from heauen preach vnto you otherWise then what yee haue receiued in the Legall and Euangelicall Scriptures let him be accursed Happily you will say the Scripture is indeed the rule of Faith and the law of the Church but not the Iudge or if Iudge yet but a mute and dumbe Iudge and if there bee not some externall visible audible infallible vnerring Iudge to interpret Scriptures and to stint all controuersies there will neuer bee an end of quarels neither will there euer bee peace and vnity in the Church Indeed the name of vnity and peace is a goodly thing and a finall end of all controuersies might it bee had were much to bee wished for But I feare the Church will not bee so happy so long as it dwelleth in tabernacles and is militant here on earth 2. Cor. 11.18.19 Otherwise the holy Apostle would neuer haue written thus to the Corinthians I heare that there bee diuisions among you and I partly belieue it For there must bee also heresies among you that they which are approued may be made manifest among you And the generall experience of former ages confirmeth the same wherein God continually hath exercized his Church either with the fire of persecutions that it might appeare who they are that loue him more then the present world or with the tempests of contrary doctrines that it might bee knowne who are chaffe and who wheat who sound in the Faith and who not Besides this mee thinks the facilnesse and easinesse of the way which your new Masters prescribe vnto you should make you much to suspect the goodnesse of it For whereas it is the good pleasure of God that all men should carefully diligently studie the holy Scriptures Psal 1.2 119. reading them and meditating in them night and day to the end they may grow rich in all knowledge and vnderstanding you by your rule may spare all this paines and though you sit still take your ease and fold your hands yet if you belieue whatsoeuer your externall human iudge
shall dictate vnto you you are safe and cannot miscarry Now among simple and vnlettered Papists who is this Iudge but some Priest or Iesuite for other Iudge I am sure they meet with none A plausible course I confesse to many specially those that are idle and loth to take paines or weake and dare not trust their owne iudgement or superstitious and thinke they merit much by their blind obedience vnto their teachers But how plausible soeuer it may seeme to flesh and blood sure I am it is too broad to bee the narrow way that leadeth vnto life and the Kingdome of Heauen will neuer be attained vnlesse it suffer more violence then so I adde further it is too presumptuous to tie Diuine Prouidence vnto humane policy and for man first to deuise what in his wisdome seemeth fittest and then to resolue that therefore God hath ordered it so Yet this is the course your side ordinarily holdeth you loue rather to giue lawes vnto God then to take lawes from him and in this particular to prescribe what meanes God should appoint to settle vs in the knowledge of his truth rather then to vse the meanes which hee himselfe hath to that end appointed If you thinke this too hard a censure be it knowne vnto you that Bellarmine the Prince of Iesuits reasoneth so God saith hee De verb. Dei l. 3. c. 9. was not ignorant that many difficulties concerning the Faith would rise vp in the Church hee ought therefore to prouide some Iudge for the Church What Iudge Such a one doubtlesse as by his sole authority and sentence must bee able to resolue all difficulties Which for as much as neither Scripture noâ— any secular Prince can doe therefore it must needs bee the Prince of Ecclesiasticall that is the Pope See I beseech you how peruersly and preposterously they deale with you first they take vpon them to direct God whâ—â— what he should doe or else forsooth he shall not be prouident and discreet enough and then thrust their owne fancy vpon you as a point of Faith that God hath done it But to answer this yet a little more fully I affirme three things First that holy Scripture knowes not secondly that the ancient Fathers acknowledge not thirdly that as long as wee haue the Scripture there needs not any such standing humane Iudge in the Church as you dreame of As touching the first if you know any passage of Scripture wherein God hath authorized such a Iudge as you dreame of I require you to shew it for my part I know none Expresse Scripture I am sure you cannot shew deductions and consequences by your owne rule I haue no reason to admit For example if for proofe hereof you vrge that of our Sauiour to S. Peter I haue prayed for thee that thy Faith faile not Luc. 22.32 I would demand who shall bee iudge of the meaning of these words for I heare that Christ hath prayed for Saint Peter but I heare not that hee hath prayed for the Pope that his Faith fayle not and I know Saint Peter was firme and constant in the faith vnto his liues end but it seemes by Ecclesiasticall Hystory that sundry Popes haue made shipwracke of the Faith and become Hereticks If there be no Iudge to determine this doubt why doe you thrust such a Iudge vpon vs If there bee who is hee you will say the Pope Then thus you reason Christ prayed for S. Peter that his Faith might not faile by S. Peter the Pope also is vnderstood and this appeares because the Pope saith so therefore neither can the Popes Faith faile and consequently he is the ordinary infallible Iudge of the Church More briefly thus the Pope is that Iudge because the Pope will haue it so Nominate what other Iudge soeuer you list and what other Text besides you please and the argument is still the same too weake to persuade what you intend vnlesse by some new priuiledge out of any premisses you may conclude what you will In a word search the Scriptures throughout and you shall finde the Ministery and seruice of men established to bring vs to the Faith but an infallible humane magistery and Lordship to command Faith it knowes none That prerogatiue Royall it reserues onely vnto Christ himselfe Neither doe the ancient Fathers acknowledge any such Iudge which is the second point If they doe point I pray to the place for hitherto it hath beene vnknowne Many and sharp bickerings had those ancients with diuers and sundry Heretiks as Arius Macedonius Eutyches Nestorius and the like yet neuer did they either obiect vnto them that they wanted an infallible Iudge as you doe vnto vs or conuent them before the tribunall of such a Iudge which doubtlesse had beene a readier way then disputation to stop their mouths had there been such a soueraigne Officer in the Church Sundry and manifold are the writings of the ancient Fathers touching the Christian Faith of which some also were purposely written to instruct vs in all the doctrines of our religion and is it not strange that such men in such books remembring carefully all other points should forget so maine and principall a point as this is Nay more then this Tertullian long agoe wrote a booke of Prescriptions or Fore-pleadings against Hereticks Saint Augustin also wrote foure books of Christian Doctrine wherein his direct intent is to prescribe rules how to vnderstand and interpret Scripture And Vincentius Litinensis also hath written a short Commonitory for the Antiquity and Verity of the Catholike Faith against the profane nouelties of all Heresies If these Fathers had acknowledged this your imaginary Iudge how commeth it to passe that they no where mention him in these books For certainly here was the proper place and they could not without extreame supinity and negligence omit him had they knowne such a one such a one I say as vpon whom the security of Faith and vnity of the Church dependeth But this deep silence of theirs and that in so due a place and of matter so important euidently argues that they neuer were acquainted therewith and that it is but an Idole of these latter times Now if neither Scripture nor Fathers know such a Iudge I hope I may bee bold to inferre that the Church needs him not which is the third point For I trow this is both a safer and sounder kind of reasoning then that of yours Such a Iudge wee conceiue to bee necessary Therefore such a one hath God ordained But to cleere this point also I affirme that the Scriptures by themselues through Gods blessing vpon our endeauour is a sufficient outward meanes to bring vs to saluation and therefore there is no necessity of your externall Iudge The Consequence is plaine and euident the Antecedent thus I proue because all whatsoeuer is necessary to saluation is so cleerely and manifestly deliuered in them euen to the capacity of vulgar and ordinary men that if they
will either read or heare it read vnto them they cannot but know and vnderstand it This I could easily shew in euery particular and fundamentall point but that I should hold you too long Ps 19.8.9 Ps 119.105.130 Only if it bee not so tell me why doth the Holy Ghost say that they giue wisedome to the simple and light to the eyes that they are a lanterne to our feete and a light vnto our paths that the entrance into them sheweth light and giueth vnderstanding to the simple 2. Pet. 1.19 And why doth the holy Apostle S. Peter tearme them a light shining in a darke place Neither is it to bee neglected that all this is meant of the Scripturs of the old Testament Ioh. 20.31 which if they bee so lightsome how bright and cleere are they of the new These things are written saith Saint Iohn to the end yee might beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the Sonne of God Rom. 15.4 and that beleeuing yee might haue life through his Name And Saint Paul The things that are written are written for our instruction Now if the Scriptures in things necessary be so obscure and hard to vnderstand either it is because the Holy Ghost could not write more plainely or because he would not That hee could not no man will say that hee would not crosseth the end of his writing which was as is aboue said to instruct in the Faith and to bring vs vnto life But that God by writing obscurely and yet commanding vs to search should either intend to mocke vs or faile of his owne end cannot bee imagined without notable impiety Heare what the Fathers say Dial. cum Tryph. Iustin Martyr Harken to the things which I shall report from the holy Scriptures which Scriptures need not to bee expounded but onely heard Clemens of Alexandria Exhort ad Ethnic Heare yee that are farre off heare yee that are nigh the Word is hidden from none it is a common light it shineth vnto all men there is no Cimmerian darkenesse in it let vs hasten to saluation to regeneration Chrysostome In. 2. Thess hom 3. All things necessary are cleere and plaine in the Scriptures so that were it not through our owne negligence wee should not need Homilies and Sermons Augustin Doct. Christ l. 2. c. 9. In those things which are plainely set downe in the Scripture are found all those things which containe Faith and Manners of life to wit Hope and Charity And Bernard Ser. in illud Sap. Iustum deduxit The wayes of the Lord are straight faire full and plaine wayes Straight without error because they lead vnto life faire without filth because they teach cleannesse full for multitude because all the world is within Christs net plaine without difficulty because they yeeld sweetnesse Biblioth l. 6. ann 152. Hereunto your owne men agree Sixtus Senensis diuideth the Scripture into two parts granting that the one is cleere and euident containing the first and highest principles of things that are to be belieued and the chiefe precepts of good life and examples easy to bee knowne such as are some morall sentences and certaine holy Histories Anal. â—iâ— p. 100. profitable for the ordering of manners And Gregory of Valentia Such verities concerning our Faith as are absolutely and necessarily to bee knowne and belieued of all men are in a manner plainely taught in the Scriptures themselues Thus all things necessary to saluation are so plainely set downe in Scripture that at least wise for the determination of them your externall Humane Iudge needeth not Yea but neither are all satisfied with these plaine places neither are all places of Scripture plaine True Yet haue you no reason to doubt of that which is plaine because some through frowardnesse will not vnderstand no more then you haue of the snow whether it be white because Anaxagoras thought that it was blacke If nothing can be certaine but that which is vnquestioned we must all turne Scepticks and neuer beleeue any thing For as in Philosophy so in Diuinity there is nothing almost so absurd but one or other hath held and what dispute there is euen about this Iudge of yours and the last resolution of Faith you cannot bee ignorant As for those darker places if you vnderstand them not yet assenting vnto the plainer you are without danger seeing in those plainer as wee haue shewed all things necessary are comprehended Neither is their darkenesse so great but that without your torch-bearer they may bee enlightned In Esa 19. For as Hierome saith It is the order of the Scripture after hard things to set downe things that are plaine and what is first spoken in Parables afterward to deliuer in cleere tearmes Doct. Christ l. 2. c. 6. And Augustin There is nothing almost among those obscurities but in other places one may find it most plainely deliuered In. 2. Cor. hom 9. And Chrysostome The Scripture euery where when it speaketh any thing obscurely interpreteth it selfe againe in another place So the rest And hence they gather that Scripture is to bee interpreted by Scripture and the doubtfull places by those that are more certaine as appeareth in their writings but specially by Saint Augustin in his books of Christian Doctrine purposely by him written to demonstrate as much According to this precept was their continuall practice and what interpretation they found agreeing with plaine Scripture and the particular circumstances of the text that they admitted as true but what they iudged to swarue from it that they reiected as contrary to the Analogie of Faith and the Principles of our Religion Which course if wee also take and this course wee ought to take vnlesse wee thinke that God is not the best interpreter of his owne words we cannot at leastwise dangerously erre in our interpretations and we may boldly refuse those as false which we find contrary vnto this Analogie of Faith For example These words of Christ This is my Body wee vnderstand thus This Bread is Sacramentally my Body you thus This Bread is turned or transubstantiated into my Body The question now is whether is the truer interpretation yours or ours Let vs trie it by this rule Your owne Scotus and Cameracensis thinke that opinion which holdeth the substance of bread and wine to remaine 4 d. l. 11. q. 3. lit F. Quaest in 4. q. 6. a. 2. Lit. â— to bee the more probable and reasonable opinion yea and in all appearance more agreeable with the words of institution De Euchar. l. 3. c. 23. In regard whereof saith Bellarmine It may iustly be doubted whether the text bee cleere enough to inforce it transubstantiation seeing most learned and witty men such as Scotus was haue thought the contrary So that in these mens iudgement the likelyhood is on our side and you haue great reason to doubt of your exposition Besides this the Analogy of Faith teacheth vs that Christs Body is
a true Body like vnto ours but that Body which you fancy to be in the Eucharist is not like vnto our bodies For in this Body there is no distance of one part from another as of eye from eye and head from feet neither hath it any dimensiue quantity and is all both in Heauen and here on earth in the Sacrament at once yet not in the middle region betweene nor separated from himselfe but nothing of this can bee affirmed of our bodies or of any other organicall body And if you say that you conceiue of Christs Body in the Sacrament as of a glorified Body the plaine Scripture is against you that when Christ spake these words This is my Body his Body was yet vncrucified and vnglorified Your exposition therefore crossing the Analogy cannot possibly bee good As for ours thus we shew it The text plainely saith that our blessed Sauiour in his last supper tooke Bread blessed it brake it and gaue it vnto his disciples saying This is my Body What This bread But this Proposition This Bread is my Body literally and properly is not true therefore is it figuratiuely to be vnderstood How so Thus. I looke into plaine Scripture and there I find that as the Euangelists call it Bread before Consecration so Saint Paul cals it Bread after Consecration 1. Cor. 11.26 Ib. v. 27. Ib. v. 28. As often saith he as yee shall eat this Bread and Whosoeuer shall eat this Bread vnworthily and Let a man examine himselfe and so eat of this Bread Whence I conclude that the Bread is not changed but remaineth still Bread Then I consider further that our Sauiour now institutes a Sacrament and that in Sacramentall actions Sacramentall phrases are vsuall and the outward signe is called by the name of the thing signified as in the old Testament Gen. 7.10 Circumcision is called the Couenant and the Lambe the Passeouer and in the new Ex. 12.11 the Cup is called the new Testament or couenant Whereupon I inferre there being no reason to the contrary Luc. 22.20 that these words in like manner are to bee interpreted This is my Body that is This Bread is Sacramentally my Body or the Sacramentall signe of my Body And thus you see by clearing this one passage how other darker places also may receiue light from those that are plainer You will say this is to build vpon Consequences wherein it is possible to bee deceiued Whereunto I answer three things first that whatsoeuer may bee deduced out of the Word of God by euident Consequence is certaine euen by the certainty of Faith Bell. de Iust l. 3. c. 8. and this your owne greatest clarks doe grant Secondly to banish Consequences from Diuinity is to banish the vse of right reason and discourse also and that religion must needs bee driuen to narrow shifts which cannot subsist vnlesse men turne fooles or beasts Thirdly the necessity of a Consequence doth not any way depend vpon the person of him that inferreth it but onely vpon the mutuall relation and strait coniunction betweene the premisses and it so that by him who desires to bee satisfied in the truth not the person of him that deduceth it but the Consequence it selfe is to bee looked too whether it bee rightly deduced or no. But who shall iudge that will you say Indeed if you stand resolued vtterly to renounce all the helps and directions both of reason and art nor will yeeld to any Consequence of Scripture how cleere and euident soeuer but will only rely on the mouth and sentence of your humane externall Iudge I confesse I am at Dulkarnon to vse Chaucers phrase and you are past my skill infallibly to perswade you But if as wee haue shewed nor Scripture nor Fathers acknowledge such a Iudge if all whatsoeuer is necessary to saluation bee so plainely laid downe in Scripture as a man of meane capacity may vnderstand it if what is more obscurely deliuered in one place is more plainely expressed in another if God haue appointed that out of the plainer places wee should with study and industrie picke the meaning of those that are harder if hee haue promised that those that aske shall haue those that seeke shall find and to those that knocke it shall bee opened if finally though wee misse the true meaning of those harder places yet firmely adhering vnto the plainer wee are safe and out of danger then certainely the readiest and surest way to to interpret Scripture is by Scripture and there is no other way to determine controuersies and to satisfy the conscience but onely this If any notwithstanding this list still to bee contentious 1. Cor. 11. Wee saith S. Paul haue no such custome nor the Churches of God The rule it selfe is infallible and al-sufficient if wee either through ignorance cannot or through negligence doe not vse it as we ought the fault is not in God but in our selues neither doth hee faile in his prouidence but wee in our dutie Performe wee our duty obediently and hee will performe his promise faithfully In necessaries hee will neuer faile if in other things all be not of one mind yet let vs still proceed by the same rule and instruct one another in the spirit of meeknesse and God will reueale that also in due time And now M. Bayly you haue what I intended for the present it remaines that you peruse it attentiuely The summe is The Fathers may be Ministers by whom you belieue but their Consent is no ground of Faith Your externall humane Iudge is but a Chimera of mans braine and not an Officer of Gods making The onely al-sufficient infallible outward rule of Faith is Scripture in the plainer places which places also must interpret the difficulter Besides this albeit there may be a iurisdiction in the Church to order and controll the outer man yet to satisfy the Conscience and inner man there is no authority but this Which things being so let me entreat you and that in the bowels of Iesus Christ to remember from whence you are fallen and to cast about yet againe and by this rule to examine your new Faith It is not necessary for a man to be an Euclid or some cunning Mathematician to trie by a straight rule whether a line be straight or no. But you are a Scholler and a Minister and should bee able skilfully to apply the rule your selfe To trust anothers application of it for you and that in the point of saluation is not Christian modestie but meere childishnesse and foolish credulity Remember what Lactantius saith It behoueth a man Div. Instit l. 2. c. 8. specially in that thing wherein the state of our life consisteth to trust himselfe and to rely vpon his own iudgement and vnderstanding for finding out examining the truth rather then belieuing anothers errors to be deceiued as if himselfe were void of reason God hath giuen to all men some portion of wisedome whereby
holy Virgin to bee Genitricem Dei the Mother of God let him bee anathema The Councell of Chalcedon confirmed the same Act. 5. ratifying the Acts of the Ephesine Councell And the fift Councell of Constantinople thus defines If any say the glorious Virgin Mary is not truely but abusiuely Genitrix Dei that is the Mother of God let him bee Anathema or accursed Secondly by ancient Fathers both before and since Nestorius In ad Rom. who all stile her Deiparam the Mother of God Origen largely discourses and renders many reasons why shee should bee so called Eusebius Pamphili saith that the Empresse Helena honored Deiparae partum In vita Constantini the birth of the Mother of God Cyrill of Alexandria president in the foresaid Councell of Ephesus in his Anathematismes sent to Nestorius saith that Marie genuit In Conc. Eph. carnally begat him that was made flesh euen the Word of God and anathematizeth them that deny her to bee Genitricem Dei Epist 1. ad Chelid the Mother of God Gregory Nazianzen If any belieue not the Virgin Mary to be Genitricem Dei the Mother of God Ep. 97. ad Leon. Aug. let him bee separated from God Leo Accursed bee Nestorius who belieued not the Blessed Virgin to bee Dei Genitricem the Mother of God Iohn Cassian It is not lawfull to say Christ and not God is borne of Mary L. 2. de Incar Prosper of Aquitani The Virgin Mary bare Christ who is God of Heauen Hesychius L. 1. com in Lev. 2. Therefore to note the Natiuity of Christ the Sacrifice is said to bee baked in an ouen to wit in the Wombe Genitricis Dei of the Mother of God Augustin Mary therefore begat Cont. Faelic c. 12. and begat not the Sonne of God She begat him when Christ was borne of her according to the flesh Shee begat him not when the Sonne without beginning issued from the Father Vincentius Lirinensis Anathema to Nestorius denying God to bee borne of the Virgin Many more Fathers I could easily alledge Ca 21. but I presume one Decade of such witnesses is euidence sufficient Thirdly by latter writers of the reformed Churches Inst l. 2. c. 14. §. 4. who maintaine the same Faith of the Fathers Caluin We are to abhorre the Heresie of Nestorius that was that Mary is not the Mother of God Againe Hee that is the Sonne of God the same is the Sonne of Mary Beza Referr Scr. The Church hath rightly defined against Nestorius In Luc. 1.35 that Mary should be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God Peter Martyr Wee confesse that the Sonne of God is borne of the Blessed Virgin neither doubt wee to call Mary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. de Corp. Christ loc the Mother of God Sadeel Iustly was Nestorius condemned denying the holy Virgin to bee Deiparam the Mother of God seeing our ancestors haue constantly defended that Mary is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God De ver hum nat Christ though not the Mother of the Diuinity Danaeus In Aug. de haer c. 91. Part. l. 1. It is manifest that Mary may and ought to bee called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God Polanus It is rightly said of Christ that hee is God borne of the Virgin Loco de Christ Bucanus placeth among doctrines repugnant to diuine truth this of Nestorius that Mary is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God Tilenus The Blessed Virgin is truly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God Synt. de Nat. Christ n. 19. Ser. c. 18. On Creed Perkins Hence Mary is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God though shee be not the Mother of the Deity And Shee must bee held to bee the Mother of the whole Christ God and Man and therefore the ancient Church hath called her the Mother of God yet not the Mother of the Godhead Praemonit Finally the great Defendor of the ancient Catholicke and Apostolicke Faith King IAMES I acknowledge her to bee the Mother of God seeing in Iesus Christ the humane nature cannot bee separated from the Deity Fourthly by the Creed of the Apostles so vniuersally receiued of all Churches wherein all true Christians professe that they belieue in Iesus Christ the onely begotten Sonne of the Father and that he was conceiued of the Holy Ghost and borne of the Virgin Mary If the eternall sonne of God were borne of the blessed Virgin then must shee needs bee the Mother of God The Creed therefore of the Councell of Chalcedon thus expoundeth and openeth it Borne of the Blessed Virgin and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mother of God Neither may wee thinke that the holy Church of Christ hath vnaduisedly or rashly beléeued this doctrine but vpon firme and vnmoueable grounds both of Scripture and the analogie of Faith For first Scripture euidently teacheth it That holy thing which shall bee borne of thee shall bee called the Sonne of God saith the Angell Gabriel and Elizabeth whence commeth thus that the Mother of my Lord should come to me By which place saith Beza it is expresly manifest against Nestorius that Mary is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God Againe if Mary bee the Mother of Iesus Christ and Christ be God it followeth of necessity that she must be the Mother of God Nay doth not the Prophet directly say that the child borne vnto us is the mighty God In a word Esa 9.6 it will not I trust be denied but that Mary is the Mother of him that was Crucified that died that shed his bloud that was seene with the eye and felt with the hand 1. Cor. 2.8 Phil. 2.8 Act. 20. 1. Ioh. 1.2 But it was the Lord of glory that was Crucified that was obedient to the death that shed his bloud it was the Lord of life that was both seene and felt And therefore is Mary also the Mother of the Lord of glory the Mother of the Lord of life the Mother of him that is equall with God and consequently God seeing none is equall vnto God but God As Scripture so the Analogie of Faith also confirmeth it For no reason can be rendred why Mary should not be the Mother of God but eyther because Christ is not God or because the humanity was the subject of Conception and Birth before it was assumpted by the Word or lastly because the Humanity was neuer assumpted into the Vnity of the same Person but remayned a distinct person by it selfe all which were the damnable blasphemies and heresies of Arius Photinus and Nestorius the first of Arius the second of Photinus the third of Nestorius Therefore contrarywise I argue thus If Christ bee God and the Humanity were at the first creation thereof preuented from subsisting in it selfe and neuer had subsistence but in the Word so as both Natures constitute one onely Hypostasis or