containe in them all doctrine needfull to saluation whether it concerne faith or maners and acknowledge no Traditions for such as hee who beleeueth them not cannot be saued Before wee come to the Protestants reasons against Traditions obserue that we deuide Traditions into three sorts The first we tearmed Diuine because they were deliuered by our blessed Sauiour who is God The second Apostolicall as deliuered by the holy Apostles The third Ecclesiasticall instituted and deliuered by the Gouernours of the Church after the Apostles daies And of these three kindes of Traditions we make the same account as of the writings of the same Authors to wit we esteeme no lesse of our Sauiours Traditions than of the soure Gospels or any thing immediatly dictated from the holy Ghost Likewise asmuch honor credit do we giue vnto the Apostles doctrine vnwritten as writtē For incke paper brought no new holines nor gaue any force and vertue vnto either Gods on the Apostles words but they were of the same value and credit vttered by word of mouth as if they had bene written Here the question is principally of diuine Traditions which we hold to be necessarie to saluation to resolue determine many matters of greater difficultie For we deny not but that some such principall poynts of our Faith which the simple are bounde to beleeue vnder paine of damnation may bee gathered out of the holie Scriptures as for example that God is the Creator of the world Christ the Redeemer of the world the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier and other such like Articles of the Creede M. P. goeth about to prooue by these reasons following that the Scriptures containes all matter of beleefe necessary to saluation Testimonie * Deut. 4.2 Thou shalt not adde to the words that I command thee nor take any thing there from Therefore the written worde is sufficient for all doctrine pertaining to saluation If it be saide that this is spoken as well of the vn-written as written worde for there is no mention in the texte of the written worde then M. P. addeth that it must bee vnderstood of the written worde onely because these wordes are as a certaine preface set before a long Comentarie made vpon the written Law ANSWERE Let the words be set where you will they must not bee wrested beyond their proper signifycation The words cited signifie no more then that wee must not either by addition or subtraction change or peruert Gods commandements whether they be written or vnwritten Now to infer that because they areas a preface vnto MOSES Law that therfore nothing must be added vnto the same Law is extreame dotage Why then were the bookes of the Old Testament written afterward if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught besides that one booke of Deuteronomy Shall we thinke that none of the Prophets that liued and wrote many volumes after this had not read these words or that they either vnderstood them not or that vnderstanding them well did wilfullie transgresse against them one of these the Protestants must needes defend or else for very shame surcease the alleadging of this text for the all-sufficiencie of the written word M. P. His testimonie * Esa 8.2 ◠To the Law and testimonie if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth saith M. P. What is to be done in cases of difficultly men must not runne to the Wizardes and Soothsayers but to the Lawe and to the Testimonie commending the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer ANSWERE By the Lawe and testimonie in that place the fiue bookes of MOSES are to bee vnderstood if that written Worde bee sufficient to resolue all doubts what-so-euer What neede wee then the Prophets what neede wee the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles What Wizarde would haue reasoned in such sorte The Prophet willeth there that the Israelites who wanted wit to discerne whether it be better to flie vnto God for councell than vnto Wizardes and Sooth-sayers to see what is written in the Lawe of MOSES concerning that poynt of consulting-Wizards which is there plainely forbidden in diuerse places Now out of one particular case whereof there is expresse mention in the written worde to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoeuer are thereby to be decided is a most vnskilfull parte arguing as great want of light in him as was in those blinde Israelites 3. Testimonie * Iohn 20.31 These things were written that ye might beleue that IESVS is the CHRIST and in beleeuing might haue life euerlasting Here is set down the full end of the Gospell that is to bring men to faith and consequently to saluation to which the whole scripture alone is sufficient without Traditions ANSWERE Here are more faults than lines First the text is craftily mangled Things being put insteede of Miracles For S. IOHN sayeth Many other Miracles CHRIST did c. but these were written c. Secondly S. IOHN sayth not that for faith we shall be saued but beleeuing we should haue saluation in his name which hee clipped off thirdly remember to what faith S. IOHN ascribes the meanes of our saluation not to that whereby we applie vnto our selues Christs righteousnes but by which we beleeue IESVS to be CHRIST the MESSIAS of the Iewes and the Sonne of God which M. P. also concealed Now to the present matter S. IOHN saith that these miracles recorded in his Gospell were written that wee might beleeue IESVS to bee the Sonne of God and beleeuing haue saluation in his name c. Therefore the written word containes all doctrine necessarie to saluation ANSWERE S. IOHN speakes not a word of doctrine but of myracles and therefore to conclude sufficiencie of doctrine out of him is not to care what one sayeth But M. P. sore-seeing this sayeth it cannot be vnderstood of miracles onely for miracles without the doctrine of CHRIST can bring no man to life euerlasting True and therefore that texte speaking onely of myracles prooueth nothing for the sufficiencie of the written Worde CHRISTS miracles were sufficient to prooue him to bee the Sonne of GOD and their MESSIAS But that prooueth not Saincte IOHNS Gospel to containe al Doctrine needful to saluation For many other poynts of faith must be beleeued also And if it alone be sufficient what neede we the other three Gospelles the Actes of the Apostles or any of their Epistles or the same S. IOHNS Reuelations Finallie admit that S. IOHNS Gospell were all-sufficient yet should not Traditions be excluded for Christ sayeth in it in plaine tearmes * Ioh. 16. that he had much more to saye vnto his Apostles but they as then being not able to be are it he reserued that to be deliuered vnto them afterward of which high mysteries S. IOHN recordeth not much in his Gospell after Christs resurrection and so many of them must needes be deliuered by
this wee must beleeue that there is nothing else which wee may beleeue ANSWERE By the Gospell there is vnderstood all our Christian doctrine written and vnwritten and not onelie the written worde of the foure Euangelists else wee should not beleeue the Actes of the Apostles or their Epistles no more than Traditions which Christian doctrine written and vnwritten we onely beleeue by diuine faith to all other Authors we giue such credit as their writings do deserue If anie man desire to see TERTVLLIANS judgement of Traditions let him read his booke of prescriptions against Heretikes where he auerreth that Traditions serue better than the Scriptures themselues to confute all Heresies Heretikes alwaies either not allowing all the bookes of Scripture or else peruerting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures And in his booke De Corona militis he formallie proposeth this question Whether Traditions vnwritten are to be admitted or no and answereth by manie instances that they must be receiued concluding thus For these and the like poynts if thou require law out of the Scriptures thou shalt finde none but Tradition is alleadged to be the Author of them Custome the confirmer and Faith the obseruer So that nothing is more certaine than that TERTVLLIAN thought vnwritten Traditions necessarie to be beleeued Come we now vnto his second testimonie out of S. IEROM * In cap. 23 Mat. who writing as he saith of an opinion that S. IOHN Baptist was killed because he foretold the comming of Christ the good-man would saye ZACHARIE S. IOHNS Father for the Scripture sheweth plainely why S. IOHN lost his head * Mat. 14 But S. IEROM there sayeth this Because it hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easelie be contemned as approoued But of which particular M. P. shewing himselfe a doughtie Logician would inforce an vniuersall that sorsooth all may be contemned that is not proued by Scripture As if you would prooue no Protestant to bee skilfull in the art of true reasoning because M. P. behaues himselfe in it so vnskilfully But S. IEROM in the same place declareth why that might be as easely reprooued as allowed not hauing anie ground in the Scripture because saith he It is taken out of the dreames of some Apocryphall writings opposing Scripture to other improoued writings and not to approoued Traditions to which hee saith in his Dialogues against the Luciferians before the middle That the Church of God doth attribute the like authoritie as it doth vnto the written Law M. P. His third Author is S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 2. de doct Chri. cap. 9. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scriptures are found all those poynts which containe faith and maners of liuing well ANSWERE All things necessarie to be beleeued of euerie simple Christian vnder paine of damnation that is the Articles of our Beleefe are contayned in the Scriptures but not the resolution of harder matters much lesse of all difficulties which the more learned must expressely beleeue if they will be saued which distinction S. AVGVSTINE else-where doth signifie * De peccatorū meritis cap. vlt. And is gathered out of manie other places of his workes as in that matter of rebaptizing them who became Catholikes after they had bene baptized by Heretikes He saith * Lib. 5. de bapt contra Donat. cap. 23. The Apostles truely haue commanded nothing hereof in their writings but that custome which was layed against S. CYPRIAN is to bee beleeued to haue flowed from an Apostolicall tradition as there be many things which the vniuersall Church holdeth and therefore are to be beleeued The same saith he of the custome of the Church in Baptizing infants * De genes ad litra lib. 10. cap. 23. And in his Epist 174. of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not in the holy Scripture and yet neuerthelesse is defended to be vsed in the assertion of faith As also saieth he we neuer read in those bookes that the Father is vnbegotten and yet wee hold that he is so to be called * Lib. 3. cap 3. cont max Arianum And S. AVGVSTINE holdes that the holie Ghost is to be adored though it be not written in the word The like of the perpetuall Virginitie of our B. Ladie * Haeresi 4. out of which and many more such like we gather most manifestlie that S. AVGVSTINE thought many matters of faith not to be contayned in the written worde but to be taken out of the Churches treasurie of Traditions M. P. His last testimonie is taken out of Vincentius Lirinensis who sayth as he reporteth that the Canon of the Scripture is perfecte and fullie sufficient for all things ANSWERE I thinke that there is no such sentence to be found in him he saies by way of objection What neede we make recourse vnto the authoritie of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect Hee affirmeth not that they be fullie sufficient to determine all controuersies in religion but throughout all his booke he prooues the cleane contrarie that no heresie can be certainelie confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholike Church Thus M. P. hauing ended with the Law Testimonie addeth in a postscript two other slender reasons vnto his former The first that Christ and his Apostles vsed alwaies to confirme their doctrine with the testimonies of Scriptures and not with Tradition ANSWERE Fist for our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS he out of his diuine wisdome deliuered his doctrine most commonly in his owne name But I saye vnto you And verie seldome confirmeth it with any testimonie out of the Law The Euangelists do often note how CHRIST fulfilled the old prophecies but neuer or very seldome seeke to confirme his doctrine by testimonies their owne they doe sometimes but to saye they neuer wrote any thinge out of Tradition proceedes of most grosse ignorance Where had Saint MATHEVV the adoring of the Sages S. IOHN Baptists preaching briefelie that was done before his owne conuersion but by Tradition S. MARK wrote the most part of his Gospell out of Tradition receiued from S. PETER as witnesseth EVSEBIVS * Lib. 2. hist cap. 14. S. LVLE testifyeth of himselfe that he wrote his whole Gospell * Cap. 1. as he had receiued it by Tradition from them who were eye-witnesses What desperate carelesnesse was it then to affirme that the Apostles neuer vsed Tradition to confirme any doctrine when some of them built not onely parcels but their whole Gospels vpon Traditions His other reason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessarie to saluation then we must aswell beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not else-where to be sound but in their bookes but that were absurde for they might erre ANSWERE That doth not follow for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswel kept in
bookes of holy Scripture put together do contayne all necessary instruction Now then the argument followeth but some of those bookes of holy Scripture haue bene lost therefore some poynts of necessarie doctrine contayned in them are not extant in the written worde and consequently to be learned by Tradition M. P. answereth First supposing some of the bookes to be lost that all needfull doctrine which was in them is in some of the others preserued But why did he not solue the Argument proposed were then those bookes supersluous Doth the Holie Ghost set men to pen needelesse discourses which this answere supposeth Therefore he giues a second more shamefull that none be perished which is most contrary vnto the plaine Scriptures * 1. Paral. vlt. 2. Paral 9. as S. IOHN CHRYSOSTOM prooueth * Hom. 9. in Mat. E◠Hom. 7. in priorem ad Corinth where he hath these expresse words That many of the Propheticall bookes are lost may be prooued out of the historie of Paralipomeneon which they translate Cronicles Now as for M. P. gesses that some of them are yet extant but otherwise called some were but little rolles of Paper some profane and of Philosophie I holde them not worth the discussing beeing not much pertinent and avowed one in word onely without either any reason or authoritie M. P. His fourth objection of the Jewish Cabala is a meere dreame of his owne our Argument is this MOSES who was the Pen-man of the Olde Law committed not all to writing but deliuered certaine poynts needefull to saluation by Tradition nor any Law-maker that euer was in any Countrey comprehended al in letters but established many things by customes therefore not likelie that our Christian law should be all written That MOSES did not pen all thus we prooue It was as necessarie for women to be deliuered from Originall sinne as men Circumcision the remedie for men could not possible be applyed to women as euery one who knoweth what circumcision is can tell neither is there any other remedie prouided in the written law to deliuer women from that sinne Therefore some other remedie for them was deliuered by Tradition Item if the Childe were likely to die before the eight daie there was remedie for them as the most learned doe hold yet no where written in the Law Also many Gentils during that state of the Old Testament were saued as IOB and many such like according to the opinion of all the auncient Fathers yet in the Law or any other part of the Old Testament it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they should liue wherefore many things needefull to saluation were then deliuered by Tradition To that reason of his that God in his prouidence should not permit such a losse of any parte of the Scripture I answere that God permitteth much euill Againe no great losse in that according to our opinion who hold that Tradition might preserue what was then lost Now insteede of M. P. his fift reason for vs of milke and stronge meate wishing him a Messe of Pappe for his childish proposing of it I will set downe some authorities out of the written word in proofe of Traditions Our Sauiour said being at the point of his passiō * Ioh. 16.12 that he had many things to say vnto his Apostles but they could not as then beare them * Act. 10. Our Sauiour after his resurrection appeared often vnto his Disciples speaking with them of the kingdome of God of which little is written in any of the Euangelists * 1. Cor. 11 I commende you brethren that you remember me in all things and keepe the Traditions euen as I haue deliuered them to you * 1 Tim. 6. O TIMOTHY keepe the dispositum that is true which I deliuered thee to keepe * 2. Tim. 1 Hold fast by the holy ghost the good things committed vnto thee to keepe which was as S. CHRISOSTOM and THEOPHILACT expounde the true doctrine of CHRIST the true sence of holy Scriptures the right administration of the Sacramentes and gouernment of the Church To which alludeth that auncient holy Martir S. IRENEVS * Lib. 3. c. 4 saying that the Apostles layd vp in the Catholike Church as in a rich treasurie all things that belong to the trueth S. IOHN who was the last of the Apostles left aliue said * Epi. 3.13 that hee had many other things to write not idle or superfluous but would not commit them to inke and pen but referred them to be deliuered by word of mouth And to specifie for example sake some two or three poynts of greatest importance where is it written that our Sauiour the Sonne of God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of the same substance with his father Where is it written that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne aswell as from the Father Where is it written that there is a Trinitie that is three persons reallie distincte in one and the very same substance And that there is in our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS no person of man but the substance of God man subsisting in the second person of the Trinitie Be not all and euerie of these principall articles of the Christian faith and most necessarie to be beleeued of the learned and yet not one of them in expresse tearmes written in any parte of the holie Bible Wherefore wee must either admit Traditions or leaue the highest mysteries of our Christian faith vnto the discretion and courtesie of euerie wrangler as shal be more declared in the argument following The sixt and last reason for Traditions Sundrie places of holy Scriptures be hard to be vnderstood others doubtfull whether they must be taken liberally or figuratiuely If then it be put to euery Christian to take his owne exposition euery seueral sect will coyne interpretations in fauour of their own opinions so shal the word of God ordayned only to teach vs the trueth be abused and made an Instrument to confirme all errors To auoide which inconuenience considerate men haue recourse vnto the Traditions and auncient Records of the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and deliuered to the posteritie as the true copies of Gods word see the true Exposition and sense of it and thereby confute and reject all priuate and new glosses which agree not with those auncient and holy Comentaries So that for the vnderstanding of both difficult and doubtfull texts of Scripture Traditions are most necessarie M. P. His answere is that there is no such neede of them but in doubtfull places the Scripture it selfe is the best glosse If there be obserued first the analogie of faith which is the summe of religion gathered out of the cleerest places Secondly the circumstance of the place and the nature and signifycation of the wordes Thirdly the conference of place with place and concludeth that the Scripture is falsely tearmed the matter of strife it being not so of it selfe but by the
Catholikes which M. PERKINS through his confused order toucheth here and there To which I will adde one taken out of the wordes of S. Paul But thou by faith dost stand be not to highly wise Rom. 11.20 Phil. 2.12 but feare if God hath not spared the naturall boughes lest perhaps he will not spare thee neither And againe Worke your saluation with feare and trembling There be aboue an hundred such textes in holy write wherein the Holy Ghost exhorteth vs to stand in feare of our saluation out of which I thus frame my argument No man must stand in feare of that of which he is by faith assured But the faithfull must stand in feare of their saluation Ergo they be not assured of it by faith The Minor or second proposition is playnlie proued by these places cited before the Maior is manifest there is no feare in faith he that feareth whether the thing be assured or no can not giue a certayne assent thereunto Dubius in fide infidelis est Put the case in an other article to make it more euident He that feareth whether there be a God or no doe we esteeme that he beleeueth in God So he that feareth whither IESVS CHRIST be God is he a Christian hath he a true faith You must needes answere no. So he that feareth whether he shall be saued or no can haue no faith of his saluation To these inuincible reasons grounded vpon Gods word let vs joyne some playne testimonies taken aswell out of the holy Scripture as out of the auncient Fathers First what can be more manifest to warrant vs that the faithfull haue not assurance infallible of their saluation then these wordes of the Holy Ghost Eccles 9. There be iust and therefore faithfull and wise men and their workes be in the hand of God and neuerthelesse a man doth not knowe whether he be worthy of hatred or loue but all thinges are kept vncertayne for the time to come Where is then the Protestants certayntie And because one heretike cauilleth against the Latine translation saying that a word or two of it may be otherwise torned heare how S. Ierome who was most cunning in the Hebrewe text Coment in â—unc loâ—um doth vnderstand it The sence is saith he I haue found the workes of iust men to be in the hand of God and yet themselues not to knowe whether they be loued of God or no. An other playne testimonie is taken out of S. Paul where he sheweth that it is not in vs to judge of our owne justice but we must leaue to God the judgement of it â— Cor. 4. these be the wordes I am not guiltie in conscience of any thing but I am not iustified herein but he that iudgeth me is our Lord therefore iudge not before the time vntill our Lord doe come who also will lighten the hidden thinges of darknes and will manifest the councell of the hart and then the prayse shall be to euery man of God So that before Gods judgement by Saint Paules testimonie men may not assure themselues of their owne justice much lesse of their saluation how innocent soeuer they finde themselues in their owne consciences Serm. 5 in Psal 118. De constitut monas c. 2. See vpon this place S. Ambrose S. Basill Theodoret on this place who al agree that men may haue secret faults which God onely seeth therefore they must liue in feare and alwayes pray to be deliuered from them For the rest let Saint Augustines testimonie whome our aduersaries acknowledge to be the most diligent and faithfull register of all antiquity be sufficient This most iudicious and holy Father thus defineth this matter De verb. Domini ser 35. De ciuit Dei lib. 11. c. 12. As long as we liue here we our selues can not iudge of our selues I doe not say what we shall be to morrowe but what we are to day And yet more directly Albeit holy men are certayne of the rewarde of their perseuerance yet of their owne perseuerance they are found vncertayne For what man can knowe that he shall perseuer and hold on in the action and encrease of iustice vntill the end vnlesse by some reuelation he be assured of it from him who of his iust but secret iudgement doth not enforme all men of this matter but deceiueth none So no iust man is assured of his saluation by his ordinarie faith by extraordinarie reuelation some man may be assured the rest are not Which is just the Catholike sentence And because S. Bernard is by our aduersaries cited for them in this point take his testimonie in as precise tearmes as any Catholike at this time speaketh Thus he writeth Serm. 1. de Septuag Who can say I am one of the elect I am one of the predestinat to life I am one of the number of the children Who I say can thus say the scripture crying out against him Eccles 9. A man knoweth not whether he be worthy of loue or hatred Therefore we haue no certayntie but the confidence of hope doth comfort vs that we be not vexed at all with the perplexitie of this doubt The word of GOD according to Saint Bernard cryeth out against all them that certaynlie assure them selues of their saluation whereon then doe they build their faith that beleeue it If it may be permitted to joyne moderne opinions with auncient badde men with good I could proue by the testimonie of euery principall sect of this time that all other sectaries were deceiued in this their perswasion of their saluation For both Lutherans Caluinists and Anabaptists to omitte the rest doe hold euerie one of themselues assured of their saluation and yet each sect holdeth euery one not of his owne band assured of damnation so that by the sentence of the Lutherans all Caluinists and Anabaptists are miserably deceiued when they assure themselues of their saluation In like manner if the Anabaptists be true censurers both Lutherans and Caluinists and all other not of their heresie erre fouly when they beare themselues in hand that they shall be saued Certayne it is therefore by the consent of all the world that very manie who assure themselues of saluation are in deede assured of damnation With the testimonies of the auncient Doctors for vs I pray thee gentle Reader Pag. 57. conferre those which M. PERKINS in his sixt reason alleadgeth against vs. First Saint Augustine in these wordes Of an euill seruant De verb. Domini serm 28. thou art made a good child therefore presume not of thine owne doing but of the grace of Christ It is not arrogancy but faith to acknowledge what thou hast receiued it is not pride but deuotion What word is here of certayntie of saluauation but that it belongeth to a faithfull man to confesse himselfe much bound to God for calling of him to be his Which euery Christian must doe hoping himselfe so to be and being most certayne that
be set to worke and if it doe not act that which it is set too then there wanted some thing requisite And consequently that was not the whole cause of that worke Now to the second proposition But their imagined faith can not apply to themselues Christs righteousnes without the presence of hope and charity For else he might be justified without any hope of heauen and without any loue towardes God and estimation of his honour which are thinges most absurd in themselues but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification which is nothing else but the playne vice of presumption as hath beene before declared Yet to auoid this inconuenience which is so great M. PE. graunteth that both hope and charity must needes be present at the justification but doe nothing in it but faith doth all as the head is present to the eie whē it seeth yet it is the eie alone that seeth Here is a worthy peece of Philosophy that the eie alone doth see whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seing the soule being the principall cause of sight as it is of all other actions of life sence and reason and it is not to purpose here where we require the presence of the whole cause not only of the instrumentall cause And to returne your similitude vpon your selfe as the eie cannot see without the head because it receiueth influence from it before it cā see so cannot faith justifie without charity because it necessarily receiueth spirit of life from it before it can doe any thing acceptable in Gods sight The fourth reason if faith alone doe justifie then faith alone will saue but it will not saue ergo M. PERKINS first denyeth the proposition and saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an Innocent babe dye shortly after his baptisme wherein he was justified shall he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is justified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therefore this first shift was very friuoulous Which M. PERKINS perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shall also be saued that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement Then must those wordes of the holy Ghost so often repeted in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time will render vnto euery man according to his workes But of this more amply in the question of merits 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which justification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare Ecclesias 1. Rom. 8. Luc. 13. 1. Ioan. 3. cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you doe penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is justified because we loue the brethren Againe of baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. So we may also walke in newes of life To all these and many such like places of Holy Scripture it pleased M. PERKINS to make answere in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is only that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wayte patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he sayeth neither yea nor nay leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him so neither to exclude hope or charity or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of justification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scriptures let vs joyne here some testimonies of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein M. PER. citeth some for him The most auncient and most valiant Martir S. Ignatius of our justification writeth thus Epist ad Philip. The beginning of life is faith but the end of it is charity but both vnited and ioyned together doe make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Libr. 2. strom but feare doth build and charity bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these wordes Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued Hom. 70. in Mat. he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well Lib. 3. hypognost S. Augustine cryeth out as it were to our Protestants and saith Heare O foolish Heretike and enemy to the true faith Good workes which that they may be donne are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue beene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified De side oper c. 14. And Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the harts of the faithfull Least by euill security they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtayne it Now the doctrine which M. PERKINS teacheth is cleane contrary For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can doe by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kind of cause but faith a lone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnes for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by them magnified and called the only and whole cause of our justification is in the end become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be justified If it be an instrumentall cause Conditio sine qua non let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and choose whether he had leifer to haue charity or the soule of man without any helpe of grace But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these wordes As Moyses lift vp the serpent in the desart Ioh. 3. so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth
Tradition vnwritten This place of S. IOHN M. P. patcheth vp with an other of S. PAVL * Gal. 1. ◠If we or an Angell from heauen preache vnto you any thing besides that which wee haue preached let him be accursed And to this effect he blames them that taught but a diuers doctrine to that which he had taught * 1. Tim. 1.3 ANSWERE Now wee must looke vnto this Gentle-mans singers There were three corruptions in the text of S. IOHN here is one but it is a soule one In steed of Preaching vnto them an other Gospell he puts preach vnto them any other thing when there is great difference betweene an other Gospell any other thing The Gospel comprehendeth the principal poynts of faith the whole worke of Gods building in vs which S. PAVL like a wise Architect * 1. Cor. 3 12. had layd in the Galathians others his fellow-work-men might build vpon it gold siluer and pretious stones with great merit to themselues and thankes from S. PAVL Mary if any should digge vp that blessed and onely foundation and would laye a new one him S. PAVL holdeth for accursed So that that falcification of the text is intollerable and yet when all is done nothing can be wringed out of it to prooue the written word to comprehend all doctrine needefull to saluation for S. PAVL speaketh there onely of his Gospell that is of his preaching vnto the Galathians and not one worde of any written Gospel No more doth he in that place to TIMOTHY And so it is nothing to purpose The fourth Testimonie * 2. Tim. 3.16 The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and to instruct to righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect vnto euery good worke In these words are contayned saith M. P. two arguments to prooue the sufficiencie of Scripture The first that which is profitable to these foure vses to teach al necessarie truth is not in the text to confute errors to correct faults in maners to instruct all men in all dutie is M. P. his addition to the text that is sufficient to saluation But the Scriptures serue for all these vses c. ANSWERE This text of holy Scripture is so farre from yeelding our aduersaries two Arguments that it affoordeth not so much as any probable colour of halfe one good argument In searching out the true sence of holy Scriptures wee must obserue diligently the nature proper signifycation of the words as M. P. also noteth out of S. AVGVSTINE in his sixt objection of this question which if the Protestants did here performe they would make no such account of this text for S. PAVL saith only that all Scripture is profitable not sufficient to teach to reproue c. How are they then carried away with their owne partiall affections that cannot discerne betweene profitable and sufficient Good Timber is profitable to the buylding of an house but it is not sufficient without stones morter a Carpenter Seede serues well yea is also necessarie to bring forth corne but will it suffice of it selfe without manuring of the ground and seasonable weather And to fit our purpose more properlie good lawes are verie profitable yea most expedient for the good gouernment of the common-wealth But are they sufficient without good customes good gouernours and judges to see the same Laws customs rightly vnderstood and duely executed Euen so the holy Scripturs S. PAVL affirmeth are very profitable as contayning very good necessary matter both to teach reproue correct but he saith not they are sufficient or that they do containe all doctrine needfull for these foure ends And therefore to argue out of S. PAVL that they are sufficient for all those purposes when he saieth onely that they are profitable to them is plainely not to know or not to care what a man saith And to presse such an impertinent cauil so often and so vehemently as the Protestants do is nothing els but to bewray vnto the indifferent reader either their extreame ignorance or most audacious impudencie that thinke they can face out any matter be it neuer so impertinent The same answere I make vnto M. P. his second argument out of the same place that the holy Scriptures bee profitable to make the man of God absolute but not sufficient I say more-ouer that M. P. doth falsely English these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the whole Scriptures when it signifyeth all Scripture that is euerie booke of Scripture and is there put to verifie that the Old Testament only serues to instruct to saluation For in the words next before S. PAVL sheweth how that TIMOTHY from his infancie had bene trayned vp in the knowledge of the holy Scriptures which saith he can instruct thee to saluation And annexeth as the confirmation thereof the Text cited All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach c. Now in TIMOTHYS infancie no parte of the New Testament was written and therefore all Scripture which is here put to prooue that Scripture which TIMOTHY in his Infancie knew cannot but by vnreasonable wresting signifie more than all the bookes of the Olde Testament So that there are three soule faultes in this the Protestants Achilles The first in falsification of the text that it might seeme to bee spoken of the whole which is spoken of euerie part The second in applying that which is spoken of the Olde Testament vnto both the Olde and New The third in making that to be all-sufficient which S. PAVL affirmeth onely to be profitable And this is all they can saye out of the Scripture to prooue that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation Where-upon I make this invincible argument against them out of this their owne position Nothing is necessarie to be beleeued but that which is written in holy Scripture But in no place of Scripture is it written that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation as hath bene prooued Therefore it is not necessarie to saluation to beleeue the written worde to containe all doctrine needefull to saluation And by the same principle I might reject all testimonie of Antiquitie as needelesse if the Scriptures be so al-sufficient as they hold Yet let vs here what testimonie M. P. brings out of antiquitie in fauour of his cause TERTVLLIAN * De resur carnis saith Take from Heretikes the opinions which they defend with the Heathens that they may desende their questions by Scripture alone and they cannot stand ANSWERE Here Scripture alone is opposed as euerie one may see vnto the writings of Heathen Authors and not to the Traditions of the Apostles and therefore maketh nothing against them Againe saieth M. P. out of the same Author We neede no curiositie after IESVS CHRIST nor inquisition after the Gospel when we beleeue it we desire to beleeue nothing besides it for
foundation maketh not Christ a Pseudochrist as you say here or else you teach your disciples very pernitiously to hold the same necessary heades of Religion with it But to leaue to you the reconciliation of these places let vs examine briefly how you confirme your paradox that the Church of Rome maketh Christ a false Christ which you goe about to proue by foure instances The first is because the seruant of his seruants may chaunge and adde to his commaundements hauing so great power that he may open and shut heauen to whome he will and binde the very conscience with his owne lawes and consequently be partaker of the spiritual kingdome of Christ Here are diuerse reasons hudled vp in one but all of litle moment for all these seuerall faculties which the Pope enioyeth being receiued by the free gift of Christ and to be employed in his seruice onlie and to his honour and glorie are so farre off from making Christ a Pseudochrist that they doe highly recommēd his most singuler bounty towardes his followers without any derogation to his owne diuine prerogatiues The particulars shal be more particularly answered in their places hereafter Now I say in a word that Christs Vicar cannot change any one of Gods cōmaundements nor adde any contrarie vnto them but may well enact establish some other conformable vnto them which doe bind in cōscience for that power is granted of God to euery soueraigne gouernour Rom. 13. as witnesseth S. Paul saying Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers And that as it is in the 5. verse following of necessity not only for wrath but also for conscience sake So that to attribute power vnto one that is vnder CHRIST to binde our consciences is not to make CHRIST a Pseudochrist but to glorifie him much acknowledging the power which it hath pleased him to giue vnto men In like manner what an absurde illation is that from the power to open and shut heauen gates which all both Catholikes and Protestants confesse to haue beene giuen to Saint Peter and the rest of the Apostles to inferre that CHRIST is made a Pseudochrist as who should say the master spoyled himselfe of his supreame authority by appoynting a stewarde ouer his housholde or a porter at this gates he must be both Master and Man to belike And thus much of the first instance Come we now to the second It is that we make Christ an Idoll for albeit we call him a Sauiour yet in vs in that he giues his grace to vs that by our merits we may be our owne sauiours c. I meruaile in whome he should be a sauiour if not in vs What is he the Sauiour of Angels or of anie other creatures I hope not but the mischief is that he giues grace to vs that there by we may merite and so become our owne Sauiours This is a phrase vnheard of among Catholiks that anie man is his owne Sauiour neither doth it folowe of that position that good works are meritorious but well that we applie vnto vs the saluation which is in CHRIST IESVS by good works as the Protestants auouch they doe by faith onlie In which sence the Apostle S. Paul sayeth to his deare Disciple Timothe Tim. 4. For this doing thow shalt saue both thy selfe and them that heare thee And this doth no more diminish the glorie of our Soueraigne Sauiours infinit merits then to say that we are saued by faith onlie good works no lesse depending if not more aduancing Christs merits then only faith as shall be prooued hereafter more at large in the question of merits Now that other good mens merits may steede them who want some of their owne may be deduced out of an hundred places of the Scriptures namely out of those where God sayeth that for the sake of one of his true seruants he will shewe mercie vnto thousands as is expressely said in the end of the first commandement In like manner I answere vnto your third instance that for Christ to haue taken away by his blessed Passion the eternall payne due vnto our sinnes to haue left a temporall to be satisfied by vs is not to make himselfe a false Christ but a most louing kinde and withall a most prudent Redeemer Wiping away that by himselfe which passed our forces and reseruing that to vs which by the helpe of his grace we wel may ought to doe not only because it were vnseemely that the parts of the body should be disproportionable to the head but also because it is reasonable as the Apostle holdeth Rom. 8. that we suffer here with Christ before wee raigne with him in his Kingdome In your last instance you say that we make Christ our mediator of intercession to GOD thinking out of your simplicity that therein we much magnifie him sing Osanna vnto him Whereas we hold it for no small disparagement vnto his diuine dignitie to make him our Intercessor that is to pray him to pray for vs who is of himselfe right able to helpe vs in all we can demaund being aswell God as Man And albeit one in thought singling out the humanity of Christ from his diuine nature and person might make it an intercessor for vs Yet that being but a Metaphisical cōceipt to separate the nature from the person since the Arrian heresie which held Christ to be inferior to his Father it hath not beene practised by Catholikes who alwayes pray our Sauiour Christ to haue mercy vpon vs neuer to pray for vs. And consequently make him no mediator of intercession but of redemption And to come to your grieuous complaint that withall his Mother must be Queene of heauen and by right of a mother commaund him there Who can sufficiently meruaile at their vnnaturall grosse pates who take it for a disgrace to the Sonne to aduaunce his owne good Mother or else who wel in his wits considering Christs bounty to strangers and his enemies will not be perswaded that on his best beloued mother he did bestowe his most speciall fauours For hauing taken flesh of her hauing suckt her breasts and receiued his nuriture and education of her in his tender yeares and being aswell followed of her as of any other Is it possible that he should not be as good to her as to others vnto whome he was not at all beholding Againe the verie place of a mother requiring preheminence before all seruants and subjects of what dignitie soeuer doth not the right rule of reason lead vs to thinke that Christ the fountayne of all wisdome replenished the B. Virgin Marie his deare Mother with such grace as should make her fit for that place it lying in his hands and free choise to doe it And therefore is she trulie tearmed of holy and learned Antiquity our Lady and Queene exalted aboue all quyers of Angels That which you impute vnto vs farther that she must in the right of a mother commaund her Sonne is no
Therefore saith he it is put ambiguous and left vncertayne that while men are doubtfull of their saluation they may doe penance more manfully and so may moue God to take compassion on them An other reason of this vncertayntie De cor gra cap 13. yeeldeth Saint Augustine in these wordes In this place of temptation such is our infirmity that assurednes might engender pride To this agreeth S. Gregory saying Lib. 9. moral cap. 17. If we knowe our selues to haue grace we are proude So that to strike downe the pride of our harts and to humble vs and to make vs trauaile more carefully in the workes of mortification God doth not ordinarily assure men at the first of their owne saluation but to cheere vp their hartes on the other side doth put them in great hope of it like to a discreet and good Lord who will not at the first entrance into his seruice infeafe his seruant in the fee simple of those lands which after vpon his good deserts he meaneth to bestowe on him This is an other kinde of Doctrine then that which M. PER. in his last supply deliuereth to witte That if we regard our owne indisposition we must despaire because we be not worthy of his mercie Not so good Sir Because we knowe that he bestoweth mercy vpon the vnworthie at the first justification of a sinner but will not admitte into the Kingdome of heauen any vnworthy but giues men grace while they liue to worke that they are made worthy of his heauenly Kingdome according to that They shall walke with me in whites Apoc. 3.4 because they are worthie but of this more fully in the chapter of merits The fift reason for our opinion is taken out of M. PER. second exception to witte howsoeuer a man may be assured for his present state yet no man is certaine of his perseuerance to the end And therefore although we might be assured of our Iustification yet can we not be certaine of our Saluation For he only that perseuereth to the end shall be saued M. PERK answere is that prayer doth assure vs to perseuer to the end for God biddes vs pray that we fall not into temptation and promiseth an issue forth 1. Cor. 10. So then the assurance dependes vpon prayer and not vpon our former faith What then if we doe not pray so as we should may not the enemy then not only wound but kill vs to it cannot be denyed and therein as in diuers other workes of pietie many haue bin too too slacke as the pitifull fall of thousands haue taught vs. Oh saith M. PERKINS it cannot be that he which was once a member of Christ can euer after be wholy cut off O shamelesse assertion and contrary to many playne textes and examples of holy Scriptures Doth not our Sauiour say in expresse words That euery branch in me not bearing fruit Ioh. 15. he will take it away And againe If any abide not in me he shall be cast forth as the branch and shall wither and be cast into the fire which doth demonstrate that some which were members of Christ be wholy cut off and that for euer Are we not by faith made members of Christ by our aduersaries owne confession and doth not our blessed Sauiour say Luke 8. expounding the parable of the sower That the seede which fell vpon the rocke doth signifie them who with ioy receiue the word and these saith he haue no roote but for a time they beleeue and in time of temptation reuolt 1. Tim. 1.19 1. Tim. 4. 2. Tim. 6. Doth not Saint Paul in expresse tearmes say That some hauing faith and good conscience expelling good conscience haue made shipwracke of their faith of whome were by name Hymenaeus and Alexander The like That in the the last dayes some shoulde reuolt from the faith Againe That some for couetuousnesse sake had erred from the faith And for example amongst other take Saul the first King of Israell who was at his election as the holy Ghost witnesseth so good a man 1. Reg. 19. that there was no better then he in Israell and yet became reprobate as is in the Scripture signified The like is probable of Salomon 2. Reg. 15. 16. and in the newe Testament of Iudas the traytor and Simon Magus whome S. Luke saith that he also himselfe beleeued and after became an Arch-heretike Act. 8. and so died the like almost may be verefied of all Arch-heretikes who before they fell were of the faithfull But what neede we further proofe of this matter seeing that this is cosen german if not the very same with one of that infamous heretike Iouinians erronious articles Heres 82. Li. 2. cont Iouin condemned and registred by S. Hierome and S. Augustine who held that just men after Baptisme could not sinne and if they did sinne they were indeede washed with water but neuer receiued the spirit of grace his ground was that he which had once receiued the spirit of grace could not sinne after which is just M. PERKINS proposition so that to vpholde an errour he falleth into an olde condemned heresie And which is yet more absurd in the next confirmation he letteth slippe at once a brace of other heresies these be his wordes And if by sinne one were wholy seuered from Christ for a time in his recouery he is to be baptised the second time Where you haue first rebaptizing which is the principall error of the Anabaptists and withall the heresie of the Nouatians who held that if any in persecution denied Christ after baptisme there was no remedie left in Gods Church for their recouerie but must be left to God so saith M. PERKINS for that of rebaptizing he seemes to bring in ex absurdo so that the common saying is verified in him one absurdity being graunted a thowsand followe after But doth he knowe no other meanes then Baptisme to recouer one cut off from Christ hath he forgotten that corrupted sentēce of the Prophet wherewith they beginne their common prayer What houre soeuer a sinner doth repent him of his sinne c. With them repentance and with vs the Sacrament of Penance serue a man at any time of his life to be reconciled to Christ But we must answere vnto that of S. Iohn They went out from vs 1. Ioan. 2. but they were not of vs for if they had beene of vs they would haue continued with vs. I answere If they went out from vs they were before with vs which confirmeth our assertion that men may departe from their faith and Christes profession but such men were not indeede of the number of the elect of which S. Iohn was for then either they would haue continued with them in the Christian faith or else by hartie repentance would haue returned vnto it backe againe which is S. Augustines owne exposition De bono perse c. 8. And these be the Arguments for the
neuer be graunted But a word with you by the way Your righteous man must ouer-skippe that petition of the Pater noster forgiue vs our debts for he is well assured that his debts be already pardoned For at the very first instant that he had faith he had Christs righteousnes applyed to him and thereby assurance both of the pardon of sinnes and of life euerlasting Wherefore he can not without infidelity distrust of his former justification or pray for remission of his debts but following the famous example of that formall Pharise in liew of demaunding pardon may wel say Luc. 18. O God I giue thee thankes that I am not as the rest of men extortioners vniust aduouterers as also these Papists Fearing the remission of my sinnes or the certayntie of my saluation but am well assured thereof and of Christs owne righteousnes too and so forth But to goe on with M. PERKINS discourse Here we must note that the Church of Rome cutteth off one principall dutie of faith for in faith saith M. PERKINS are two thinges first knowledge reuealed in the word touching the meanes of saluation Secondly an applying of thinges knowne vnto our selues which some call affiance the first they acknowledge So then by M. PERKINS owne confession Catholikes haue true knowledge of the meanes of saluation then he and his fellowes erre miserable The second which is the substance and principall they denie Answere Catholikes teach men also to haue a firme hope and a great confidence of obtayning saluation through the mercy of God and merits of Christs Passion So they performe their dutie towardes God and their neighbour or else die with true repentance But for a man at his first conuersion to assure himselfe by faith of Christs righteousnes and life euerlasting without condition of doing those thinges he ought to doe that we Catholikes affirme to be not any gift of faith but the haynous crime of presumption which is a sinne against the Holy Ghost not pardonable See S. Tho 22. q. 21. â—rt 1. neither in this life nor in the world to come M. PERKINS third reason is drawne from the consent of the auncient Church of which for fashion sake to make some shewe he often speaketh but can seldome finde any one sentence in them that fits his purpose as you may see in this sentence of Saint Augustine cited by him Augustine saith De verbis Domini â—erm 7. I demaund nowe doest thou beleeue in Christ O sinner thou saiest I beleeue what beleeuest thou that all thy sinnes may freely be pardoned by him thou hast that which thou beleeuest See here is neither applying of Christs righteousnes vnto vs by faith nor so much as beleeuing our sinnes to be pardoned through him but that they may be pardoned by him So there is not one word for M. PERKINS But S. Bernard saith playnlie That we must beleeue that our sinnes are pardoned vs. But he addeth not by the imputed righteousnes of Christ Againe he addeth conditions on our party which M. PERK craftely concealeth For S. Bernard graunteth that we may beleeue our sins to be forgiuen if the truth of our conuersion meete with the mercy of God preuenting vs for in the same place he hath these wordes So therefore shall his mercy dwell in our earth that is the grace of God in our soules if mercy and truth meete together if iustice and peace embrace and kisse each other Which is as S. Bernard there expoundeth it if we stirred vp by the grace of God doe truly bewaile our sinnes and confesse them and afterward follow holines of life and peace All which M. PERKINS did wisely cut off because it dashed cleane the vayne glosse of the former wordes His last authority is out of S. Cyprian who exhorteth men passing out of this life not to doubt of God promises but to beleeue that we shall come to Christ with joyfull security Answere S. Cyprian encouradgeth good Christians dying to haue a full confidence in the promises of Christ and so doe all Catholikes and bidde them be secure too on that side that Christ will neuer faile of his word and promise but say that the cause of feare lyes on our owne infirmities And yet biddes them not to doubt as though they were as likely to be condemned as saued but animates them and puts them in the good way of hope by twenty kindes of reason M. PERKINS hauing thus confirmed his owne partie why doth he not after his manner confute those reasons which the Catholikes alleadge in fauour of their assertion Was it because they are not wont to produce any in this matter Nothing lesse It was then belike because he knew not how to answere them I will out of their stoare take that one principall one of the testimony of holy Scripture And by that alone sufficiently proue that the faith required to justification is that Catholike faith whereby we beleeue all that to be true which by God is reuealed and not any other particular beleeuing Christs righteousnes to be ours How can this be better knowne then if we see weigh and consider well what kinde of faith that was which all they had who are said in Scriptures to be iustified by their faith S. Paul saith of Noe That he was instituted heire of the iustice which is by faith Heb. 11.7 What faith had he That by Christs righteousnes he was assured of saluation No such matter but beleeued that God according to his word and justice would drowne the world and made an Arke to saue himselfe and his familie as God commaunded him Abraham the Father of beleeuers and the Paterne and example of justice by faith as the Apostle disputeth to the Romans Rom. ca. 4. What faith he was iustified by Let S. Paul declare who of him and his faith hath these wordes He contrary to hope beleeued in hope that he might be made the Father of manie Nations according to that which was said vnto him So shall thy seede be as the starres of heauen and the sands of the Sea and he was not weakned in faith neither did he consider his owne body now quite dead whereas hee was almost an hundred yeares old nor the dead Matrice of Sara in the promise of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthned in faith giuing glorie to God most fully knowing that whatsoeuer he promised he was able also to doe therefore was it reputed to him to iustice Loe because he glorified God in beleeuing that old and barren persons might haue children if God said the word and that whatsoeuer God promised he was able to performe he was justified The Centurions faith was very pleasing vnto our Sauiour who said in commendation of it That he had not found so great faith in Israell What faith was that Marry that he could with a word cure his seruant absent Math. 8. Say the word onely quoth he my seruant shall be healed S.
Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highlie rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Then that our Sauiour was Christ Math. 16 the Sonne of the liuing God And briefly let S. Iohn that great secretarie of the Holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell Ioh 20. These thinges saith he are written that you may beleeue that IESVS is CHRIST the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth very well saying Rom. 10. This is the word of faith which we preach for if thou cōfesse with thy mouth our Lord IESVS CHRIST and shalt beleeue in thy hart that God raised him from death thou shalt be saued And in an other place ◠Cor. 15. I make knowne vnto you the Gospell which I haue preached and by which you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vayne What was that Gospell I haue deliuered vnto you that which I haue receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures was buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the creede is that justifying faith by which you must be saued And neither in S. Paul nor any other place of Holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we applie Christs righteousnes to our selues assure our selues of our saluation is either a justifying or any Christian mans faith but the very naturall act of that ougly Monster presumption Which being layd as the very corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humility and deuotion can they build vpon it The second difference in the manner of justification is about the formall act of faith which M. PERKINS handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as shorte as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many actes of faith feare hope and charity doe goe before our justification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. PERKINS Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the hart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification This joylie description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authority that deliuered it and so let it passe as already sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of this owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hartes be the only sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needes no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would fayne know by the way how litle infants that can not for want of judgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his justice are justified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrary to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before the come to any vnderstanding But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M. PER. findes two faults with it one that we teach faith to goe before justification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both justified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Marry this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and bloud of Christ and is already passed from death to life Io. 6.54 I answere that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his body in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthely obtayneth thereby life euerlasting as Christ saith expressely in that place And so this proofe is vayne Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before justification first by that of S. Paul Whosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord Rom. 10. shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in whome they doe not beleeue how shall they beleeue without a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto justification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterwardes to call vpon God for mercy and finally mercy is graunted giuen in justification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and justification This S. Augustine obserued when he said Faith is giuen first De prede◠sanct ca. 7 De spirit lit cap. 30 by which we obteyne the rest And againe By the lawe is knowledge of sinne by faith we obtayne grace and by grace our soule is cured If we list to see the practise of this recorded in holy write read the second of the actes and there you shall finde how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were stroken to the hartes and beleeued yet were they not straight way justified but asked of the Apostles what they must doe who willed them to doe penance and to be baptized in the name of IESVS in remission of their sinnes then loe they were justified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their justification In like manner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philippe announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that IESVS CHRIST was the Sonne of God no talke in those dayes of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnes yet was he not justified before descending out of his chariot he was baptized Act. 8. And three dayes passed betweene S. Paules conuersion and his justification as doth euidently appeare by the historie of his conuersion Act. 9. The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the minde stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the hart many good spirituall motions But this sayes M. PERKINS is as much to say that dead men only helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned by Gods spirit may haue many good motions for as our spirit giueth life vnto our bodies so the spirit of God by his grace animateth and giueth life vnto our soules But of this it hath beene once before spoken at large in the question of free will Pag. 84. THE THIRD DIFFERENCE CONCERNING FAITH IS this The Papists say that man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as the feare of God hope loue c. The reasons which are brought to maintayne their opinion are of no moment well let vs heare some of them that the indifferent Reader may iudge whether they be of any moment or no. M. PERKINS first Reason
generall that hope applyeth vnto me in particular by faith I beleeue CHRIST to be the Sauiour of all mankind by hope I trust to be made partaker of that saluation in him But charity doth yet giue me a greater confidence of saluation for by the rule of true charity as I dedicate and imploy my life labours and all that I haue to the seruice of God so all that God hath is made mine so farre forth as it can be made mine according vnto that sacred lawe of friendshippe Amicorum omnia sunt communia And therefore in true reason neither by faith nor any other vertue we take such holde on Christs merittes nor haue such interest in his inestimable treasures as by charity which S. Augustine vnderstoode well when he made it the modell and measure of justification saying That Charity beginning De nat gra c. vlt. was Iustice beginning Charity encreased was Iustice encreased great Charity was great Iustice and perfect Charity was perfect Iustice M. PERKINS fourth Reason is taken from the iudgement of the auncient Church They are blessed to whome without any labour or worke donne Ambros in Rom. 4. iniquities are remitted So no workes or repentance is required of them but only that they beleeue To these and such like wordes I answere First that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses Secondly that that Author excludeth not repentance but only the workes of Moyses lawe which the Iewes helde to be necessary as circumcision and such like see the place and conferre with it that which he hath written in the same worke vpon the fourth to the Hebrewes where hee hath these wordes Faith is a great thing and without it it is not possible to be saued but faith alone doth not suffice but it is necessary that faith vvorke by charity and conuerse worthy of God M. PERKINS next authority is gathered out of S. Augustine De verb. Ap. ser 40. There is one propitiation for all sinners to beleeue in Christ True but where is it that we neede nothing else but to beleeue Hesichius saith Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone Leuit. li. 1. cap. 2. and not of workes that is we doe not meritte by our workes done before grace anything at GODS hand but of his mercy receiue both faith and iustification 4. Bernard hath Whosoeuer thirsteth after righteousnes let him beleeue in thee Sup. cant serm 22. that being iustified by faith alone he way haue peace with God Answere By faith alone he excludeth all other meanes that either Iewe or Gentile required but not charity Which his very wordes include for howe can wee abhorre sinne and thirst after justice without charity and in the same worke Serm. 24. He declareth playnely that he comprehendeth alwayes charity when hee speakes of a justifying faith saying A right faith doth not make a man righteous if it worke not by Charity And againe Neither workes without faith nor faith without workes is sufficient to make the soule righteous Gal. 3. 5. Chrysostome they said he who rested on faith alone was accursed but Paul sheweth that he is blessed who rested on faith alone Answere He speakes of the Iewes who held Christians accursed because resting on the faith in Christ would not obserue withall Moyses law the Apostle contrary wise denounceth them accursed Gal. 5. who would joyne the ceremonies of Moyses lawe with Christian religion and so faith alone there excludeth onely the old lawe not the workes of charity so he mangleth pittifully a sentence of S. Basils saying De humil Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified onely by faith in Christ If a man knowe him selfe iustified by faith in Christ howe can he acknowledge that hee wants true justice His wordes truly repeted are these Let man acknowledge that hee is vnworthie of true iustice and that his iustification comes not of his desert but of the meere mercy of GOD through Christ. So that by faith alone S. Basill treating of humility excludes all merite of our owne but no necessary good disposition as you may see in his Sermon de fide where he proues by manie textes of Holy Scripture that charity is as necessary as faith Rom. 3. M. PERKINS last testimony is out of Origen Who proues as M. PER. said that onely beleeuing without workes iustifieth by the example of the Theefe on the Crosse of whose good workes there is no mention Answere Origen excludeth no good disposition in vs to justification but saith that a man may be saued without doing outwardly any good workes If he want time and place as the Theefe did who presently vpon his conuersion was put to death which is good Catholike Doctrine but that you may perceiue how necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to justification you shall finde if you consider well all circumstances not one of them to haue beene wanting in that good Theefes conuersion First that he stood in feare of Gods just judgement appeares by these his wordes to his fellowe Doest thou not feare God c. He had hope to be saued by Christ out of which he said O Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdome By both which speeches is shewed also his faith both in God that he is the gouuernour and just judge of the world and in Christ that he was the Redeemer of mankinde His repentance and confession of his fault is laid downe in this And we truly suffer worthely His charity towardes God and his neighbour in reprehending his fellowes blasphemie in defending Christs innocency and in the middest of his greatest disgraces and raging enemies to confesse him to be King of the world to come out of all which we may gather also that he had a full purpose to amend his life and to haue taken such order for his recouery as it should please Christ his Sauiour to appoint So that the lacked not any one of those dispositions which the Catholike Church requires to justification Now that that great Doctor Origen meant not to exclude any of these good qualities out of the companies of faith is apparant by that which he hath written on the next Chapter where he saith Rom. 4. That faith cannot be imputed to iustice to such as beleeue in Christ vnlesse they doe withall put of the old man and a little before more playnlie saying I thinke that faith is the first beginning of saluation hope is proceeding in the building but the toppe and perfection of the whole worke is charity THE THIRD DIFFERENCE ABOVT IVSTIFICATION howe farre forth good workes are required thereto MASTER PERKINS saith Pag. 91. That after the doctrine of the Church of Rome there be two kindes of iustification the first when of a sinner one is made iust the which is of the meere mercy of God through Christ without any merit of man onely some certayne
vnto a Diuels faith when it is naked and voyde of good workes in two points First in both there is a perfect knowledge of all thinges reuealed Secondly this knowledge shall not stead them any whit but only serue vnto their greater condemnation because that knowing the will of their master they did it not And in this respect S. Iames compareth them together Now there are many points wherein these faithes doe differ but this one is principall That Christians out of a goodly and deuoute affection doe willingly submitte their vnderstanding vnto the rules of faith beleeuing thinges aboue humane reason yea such as seeme sometimes contrary to it But the Diuell against his will beleeues all that God hath reuealed Because by his naturall capacity he knowes that God can teach nor testifie any vntruth Againe that faith may be without charity is proued out of these wordes of the same second Chapter Euer as the body without the spirit is dead so also faith without workes is dead Hence thus I argue albeit the body be dead without the soule yet is it a true naturall body in it selfe euen so faith is perfect in the kinde of faith although without charity it auayle not to life euerlasting Lastly in true reason it is manifest that faith may be without charity for they haue seuerall seates in the soule one being in the will and the other in the vnderstanding they haue distinct objectes faith respecting the truth of God and charity the goodnes of God Neither doth faith necessarily suppose charity as charity doth faith for we cannot loue him of whom we neuer heard Neither yet doth charity naturaly flow out of faith but by due consideration of the goodnes of God and of his benefits and loue towardes vs into which good deuout considerations few men doe enter in comparison of them who are led into the broad way of iniquity through their inordinate passiōs This according to the truth yet more different in the Protestants opinion for faith laies hold on Christs righteous receiues that in But charity can receiue nothing in Pag. 85. as M. P. witnesseth But giues it selfe forth in al duties of the first second table Now sir if they could not apply vnto themselues Christs righteousnes without fulfilling all duties of the first second table they should neuer apply it to them for they hold it impossible to fulfill all those duties so that this necessary lincking of charity with faith maketh their saluation not only very euill assured but altogither impossible for charity is the fulnes of the law which they hold impossible then if the assurance of their saluation Rom. 12. must needes be joyned with such an impossibility they may assure themselues that by that faith they can neuer come to saluation Let vs annex vnto these playne authorities of holy Scripture one euident testimony of Antiquity That most incorrupt judge S. Augustine saith flatly Lib. 15. de trin c. 17. Con crescen lib. 1. cap. 29. That faith may well he without Charity but it cannot profit vs without Charity And That one God is worshipped sometimes out of the Church but that vnskilfully yet is it he Also that one faith is had without charity and that also out of the Church neither therefore is not faith For there is one God one Faith one Baptisme one immaculate Catholike Church in which God is not serued only but in which only he is trulie serued neither in which alone faith is kept but in which only faith is kept with charity So that faith and that only true faith of which the Apostle speaketh Ephes 4. One God one faith may be and is in many without charity The Protestants bolde asseuerations that they cannot be parted are great but their proofes very slender and scarce worth the disproouing THAT FAITH MAY BE WITHOVT GOOD WORKES 1. Tim. 5. THE first He that hath not care of his owne hath denied his faith therefore faith includeth that good worke of prouiding for our owne Answ That faith there seemes to signifie not that faith whereby we beleeue all thinges reuealed or the Protestants the certainty of their saluation but for fidelity and faithfull performance of that which we haue promised in Baptisme which is to keepe all Gods commaundements one of the which is to prouide for our children and for them that wee haue charge of so that he who hath no such care ouer his owne charge hath denyed his faith that is violed his promise in Baptisme There is also another ordinary answere supposing faith to be taken there for the Christian beleefe to witte that one may deny his faith two wayes either in flatte denying any article of faith or by doing some thing that is contrary to the doctrine of our faith Now he that hath no care of his owne doth not deny any article of his faith but committeth a fact contrary to the doctrine of his faith so that not faith but the doctrine of faith or our promise in Baptisme includeth good workes Ioh. 6. 2 There are among you that beleeue not for he knewe who beleeued and who was to betray him Opposing treason to faith as if he had said faith conteyned in it selfe fidelity This Argument is farre fetched and little worth For albeit faith hath not fidelity and loue alwaies necessarily joyned with it yet falling from faith may well drawe after it hatred and treason yea ordinarely wickednes goeth before falling from faith and is the cause of it which was Iudas case whome our Sauiour there taxed for he blinded with couetuousnes did not beleeue Christs Doctrine of the blessed Sacrament and by incredulity opened the diuell a high way to his hart to negotiate treason in it 3. They object that Who saith he knowes God and doth not keepe his commaundements is a lyar 1. Ioh. 2. Answere He is then a lyar in graine who professing the only true knowledge of God yet blusheth not to say that it is impossible to keepe his commaundements but to the objection knowing God in that place is taken for louing of God as I knowe yee not that is I loue you not Math. 7. 25. Psal 1. Ioh. 14. Our Lord knowes the way of the just that is approues it loues it so he that knowes God kepes his commaundements as Christ himselfe testifieth If any loue me he will keepe my word And he that loueth me not will not keepe my wordes Lastly they say with S. Paul That the iust man liueth by faith But if faith giue life then it cannot be without charity Answere That faith in a just man is not without hope and charity by all which conjoyned he liueth and not by faith alone But faith is in a sinnefull and vnjust man without charity who holding fast his former beleefe doth in transgressing Gods commaundements breake the bandes of charity And so it remaynes most certayne that faith may be and too too
abuse of man REPLIE To begin with his latter words because I must stand vpon the former Is the Scripture falsely tearmed matter of strife because it is not so of his owne nature why then is CHRIST truely called the stone of offence or no to them that beleeue not S. PETER sayeth Yes * 1. Pet. 2. No sayeth M. P. because that commeth not of Christ but of themselues But good Sir Christ is truely tearmed a stone of offence and the Scripture matter of strife albeit there be no cause in them of those faults but because it so falleth out by the malice of men The question is not wherefore it is so called but whether it be so called or no truely That which truely is may bee so called truely But the Scripture truely is matter of great contention euery obstinate Heretike vnderstanding them according to his owne fantasie and therefore may truely be so tearmed although it bee not the cause of contention in it selfe but written to take away all contention But to the capitall matter these three rules gathered out of Saint AVGVSTINE be good directions whereby sober and sound wits may much profite in studie of diuinitie if they neglect not other ordinarie helpes of good instructiors and learned Comentaries But to affirme that euerie Christian may by these meanes be inabled to iudge which is the true sense of any doubtfull or hard text is extreame rashnesse and meere folly S. AVGVSTINE himselfe well conuersant in these rules indued with a most happie wit and yet much bettered with the excellent knowledge of all the liberall Sciences yet he hauing most diligently studied the Holie Scriptures for more than thirtie yeares with the helpe also of the best Comentaries he could get and counsell of the most excusit yet he ingeniouslie confesseth That there were more places of Scripture that after all his studie he vnderstood not then which he did vnderstand * Ep. 119. cap. 21. And shall euery simple man furnished only with M. P. his three rules of not twise three lynes be able to dissolue any difficultie in them whatsoeuer Why doe the Lutherans to omit all former Heretiks vnderstand them in one sort the Caluenists after an other The Anabaptists a third way and so of other sects And in our owne Countrey how commeth it to passe that the Protestants finde one thing in the holy Scriptures the Puritans almost the cleane contrarie Why I say is there so great bitter and endlesse contention among brothers of the same spirit about the sense and meaning of Gods word If euery one might by the aide of those triuiall notes readily disclose all difficulties and assuredly boult out the certaine trueth of them It cannot be but most euident to men of any iudgement that the Scripture it selfe can neuer end any doubtful controuersie without there be admitted some certaine Iudge to declare what is the true meaning of it And it cannot but redound to the dishonour of our blessed Sauiour to say that he hath left a matter of such importance at randome and hath not prouided for his seruants an assured meane to attaine to the true vnderstanding of it If in matters of Temporal justice it should be permitted to euery contentious smatterer in the Lawe to expound and conster the groundes of the Lawe and statutes as it should seeme fittest in his wisedome and not be bounde to stande to the sentence and declaration of the Iudge what iniquitie should not be Lawe or when should there be any ende of any hard matter one Lawyer defending one part an other the other One counseller assuring on his certaine knowledge one partie to haue the right an other as certainely auerring not that but the contrarie to be Law both alleadging for their warrant some texts of Law What end and pacification of the parties could be deuised vnlesse the decision of the controuersie be committed vnto the definitiue sentence of some who should declare whether counsellor had argued justly and according to the true meaning of the Lawe none at all but bloudy debate and perpetuall conflict each persuing to get or keepe by force of armes that which his learned counsell auouched to be his owne To auoyde then such garboyles and intestiue contention there was neuer yet any Law-maker so simple but appoynted some gouernour and Iudge who should see the due obseruation of his Lawes and determine all doubts that might arise about the letter and exposition of the Law who is therefore called the quicke and liuely lawe and shall we Christians thinke that our diuine Law-maker who in wisdome care and prouidence surmounted all others more than the heauens do the earth hath left his golden lawes at randome to be interpreted as it should seeme best vnto euerie one pretending some hidden knowledge from we know not what spirit no no It cannot be once imagined without too too great derogation vnto the soueraigne prudence of the Sonne of God In the Olde Testament which was but a state of bondage and as it were an introduction to the Newe yet was there one appoynted vnto whome they were commanded to repaire for the resolution of all doubtfull cases concerning the Lawe yea and bound were they vnder paine of death to stande to his determination and shall wee bee so simple as to suffer our selues to bee perswaded that in the glorious state of the Gospell plotted and framed by the wisdome of God himselfe worse order should bee taken for this high poynte of the true vnderstanding of the Holy Gospel it self being the life and soule of all the rest Giue mee leaue gentle Reader to stay some-what longer in this matter because there is nothing of more importance and it is not handled any where else in all this Booke Considder then with your selfe that our Coelestiall Law-maker gaue his Lawe not written in Inke and Paper but in the hearts of his moste faithfull subjectes endowīng them with the blessed spirite of trueth * Ierem. 31 2 Cor 3. and with a moste diligent care of instructing others * Ioh. 16. that all their posteritie might learne of them all the poynts of Christian doctrine and giue credit to them aswell for the written as vnwritten worde and more for the true meaning of the worde than for the word it selfe These and their true successors be liuely Oracles of the true and liuing God then must wee consult in all doubtfull questions of Religion and submit our selues wholy to their decree S. PAVL that vessell of election may serue vs for a singuler modell and patterne of the whole who hauing receiued the true knowledge of the Gospel frō God yet went vp to Ierusalem with BARNABY to conferre with the chiefe Apostles the Gospel which he preached least perhaps he might runne in vaine and had runne as in expresse wordes he witnesseth himselfe * Gal. 2 Vpon which fact and words of S. PAVL the auncient Fathers do gather that the faithful would not haue