povver dares vvarraunt vs to goe harmeles And this the heathen Philosophers could see yea could not but see in so much that Cicero sayeth Orat. prâ— Milonâ— magna vis est conscientiae in vtraÌ„que partem vt neque timeant qui nihil commiserunt panam semper ante oculos versari putent qui peccauerunt great force hath conscience in both partes that is in good and euil life in so much that they feare not vvho haue committed no fault and they vvho haue offended haue allvvayes the punishemeÌ„t before their eyes l. 2. de legâ—â— And in an other place he proueth by experience hovve necessarie coÌ„science is to restraine vs from sinne For sayeth he take avvay conscience and vvhat vvill he do in the darke that feareth nothing but the vvitnesse or Iudge Vvhat vvill he do in the desert vvhen he meeteth vvith a maÌ„ loden vvith gold and vveaker then him selfe Truly if coÌ„science bee taken avvay vve vvill neuer make scruple of secret sinnes no nor of publike transgressions if ether by povver or bribe vve can escape the penalties of the lavve If conscience bee once banished the vvorld bargaines vvill seeldom holde and promises vvill as seeldom bee kepte chastitie vvil allvvaies bee in dauÌ„ger ritch and treasurs vvill not bee secure Princes liues vvill bee subâ—et to hazard false dealing vvilbe rife in buying and selling thâ—eues cooseners cutpurses and conicatches haue good leaue and libertie to exercise their artes and the gappe vvill ly open vnto all vice Hovve perniciouse then vnto vertue and hovv fauourable vnto vice is our Reformers doctrine vvhich as I shall euideÌ„tlye proue and therfore breefly bicause euidently despoilethe the vvorlde of conscience more necessarye to mans life then the sonne it selfe They say as is allready related that to a faithfull man and true Christian God imputeth no sinne vvhy then should a Christian make conscience of sinne vvhich if it bee not imputed ether is no sinne at all or else not to bee caâ—ed for They auouch that since Adams fall man neuer had free vvill and libertie and seing that vvher noe libertie is no sinne can bee for no man deserueth euil for that vvhich he could not auoid it follovvethe that vvhosoeuer is persuaded as all must be by theyr opinion that hee hath no free-vvill must make nether conscience nor scruple of any sinne They affirme also that by Christe vvee are freed from all obligation of lavves in so much that noe lavve can bynde or touch our conscience vvee need not then make scrouple of anye transgression or sinne vvhich in that it is sinne is against the obligatioÌ„ of one lavve or other bicause vvhere no lavve byndeth there is no obligatioÌ„ vvhere noe obligation is noe breach or transgression can bee founde and vvhere no transgressioÌ„ there is no sinne vvhere noe sinne is no conscience of sinne is to be made It is an article also of fay the amongest them or at least a thing necessary to bee beleeued that the commaundementes are ampossible vvho then vvilbee so madde as to make conscience for not full filling the lavve vvhich is impossible to bee full-filled as vvell truly maye the prisonner make a conscience that hee goeth not to the Church or sernson on an holy daye vvhen he is faste chained to a blocke in prison and the dores are faste locked bolted Bicause it is as impossible if Caluin lye not to keepe the commaundements as for that prisonner to go to the Churche They are of opinion that God is the autour of all our sinnes as vvell yea more then vvee or selues bicause hee is the principall cause vvee are only his instrumeÌ„ts vvhich if it bee true noe man needeth to bee soe scrupulous as to make bones of that of vvhich God him selfe maketh no conscience And if conscience bee takeÌ„ a vvaye the lavve vvitnesse Iudge and Executioner is taken a vvaye so good leaue is giuen to playe vvhat euill parts vvee vvill if ether vvee can by secrecie auoid the magistrats eye or by violence and force resiste his povver for then conscience being taken a vvaye nothing is remaining to keep vs in avve The tvvelueth Chapter shevveth hovv they open the gapp to pride I Haue allready declared hovv the Reformers by many pointes of their doctrine opeÌ„ the gapp to all vice in generall novv it shall not be amiss to shevv hovv they fauourize some vices especially and in particuler And first I vvill beginne vvith pride bicause that vvas the first sinne and the first cause of all sinnes â—â—â—li 10. bicause the deuil sinned before man and his first sinne vvas svvelling pride by vvhich hee coueted to bee as great and as highe in perfection as the highest Yea many are of opinion that Adams first sinne also vvas pride vvhich moued him to eate of the forbidden frute maugre the commaundement of God imagining that soe for so the deuill had promised hee should become like vnto God in knovving good and euil And this is the cause vvhy proud men especially are called the children of the deuil bicause by pride they especially ressemble him Vvherfore that doctrine vvhich stirreth vp a proude coÌ„ceipte in vs caÌ„ not bee of God bicause it moueth to pride vvhich is of the deuil and therfore if I shall proue that our reformers doctrine puffeth vp vvith pride all those vvhich follovve it I shall proue it not to bee of God but of the deuil For althoughe pride be a common disease of all heretikes for vvhoe so preferreth his ovvne iudgement before the vvholle Church as all heretikes doe in that they are heretikes must needes condemne him selfe of an extraordinarie pride yet some heretikes by some pointes of their doctrine haue giuen more especiall cause of this sinne of pride The Gnostikes vvere of opinion that as gold thoughe cast into the mire neuer looseth his natiue colour and perfectioÌ„ so a iust man such as they counted them selues Ex Iren. l. 10 c. 1. can neuer bee soyled neuer loose his perfection in vvhat actions soeuer hee intermedleth him selfe thoughe in adulteries and fornications Vvhich doctrine moued them to suche a conceit of theÌ„ selues that they thought them selues to knovve al thinges and to be so perfecte that noe sinne could contaminate them Ex Anth l. c. de poenit c. â— The like vvas the pride of the NouatiaÌ„s vvho therfore called them selues pure and cleane And to omit the pride of Arius Nestorius chap. 5. Luther and Caluin vvhich in the first booke I haue set dovvne let vs see hovv their doctrine puffeth meÌ„ vp vvith pride They are of opinion as is allready related that vvee are iust by no other iustice then Christes ovvn iustice vvhich doctrine vvhoe soever embraceth he must needs be persvvaded that he is as iuste as Christe him selfe bicause in his opinion they haue bothe one and the same iustice vvhich persuasioÌ„ is enough to stirre vs vp to LuciferiaÌ„ pride as is allready in another place
giue him occasion by his motion of his body to declare his desire to follovve yet if hee commaūde him in deed to folovve hee is very vnreasonable Or if Caluin vvill saye that God vvill seeme only to cōmaund vs bicause hee vvould make vs to see our imbecillitie and to doe vvhat vve can at least to shevve our desire then follovveth it that there are noe cōmaundementes bicause God dothe not verilie commaund them but seemeth only to commaund to make vs see our ovvne infirmitie and to shevve our desire Or if Caluin vvill not bee so bold as to deny all commaundementes then must hee graūt that God is vnreasonable in commaunding vs more then vvee are able to performe As for example if the master vvould commaund his seruaunt not onlye to ronne but also to flye on his arraund and for a shorter cutte to leape ouer a riuer ouer vvhich he cā scarsely see vvould you not thinke him vnreasonable and quite beside him selfe The like dothe almightie God if vve beleeue Caluin for he commaundeth vs to loue him aboue all and our neighbour as our selues he biddes vs not to steale not to kill yea not to couet our neighbours vvife or goods vvhich is as if hee should commaund vs to flye or to moue mountaines or to leape ouer the sea bicause these thinges in Caluins opinion are noe more impossible then are the commaundamentes and therfore in these commaundementes God shevveth him selfe as vnreasōable as hee should doe in the other Yea if once vvee graunte that god maye cōmaund impossibilities then is ther noe reason vvhy brute bealles maye not bee commaunded not to kill one another not to liue of spoile to faste somes tymes and to honour yea loue their Creatour bicause God commaundeth mā to doe these thinges vvho yet is noe more able to do thē then beastes are And if beastes could speake vvould tell allmightie God that hee hathe noe reason to commaund them to do these thinges bicause they are not in their povver then maye men make the same exception and accuse their Creatour as a Prince most vnreasonable vvhoe commaundeth them to excute those lavves vvhich they noe more can fullfill then oxen and asses can doe And if god vvill condemne them as guiltie of offence for not obeying his commaundment they maye ansvvere vvith saincte Christostome Hom 16 in ep Heb. Si impotentes nos fecit deinde imperat culpa eius est If he hath made vs impotent as Caluin sayeth he hathe bicause by his decree and ordinaunce he hindreth vs or at least if vvee be allready by Adams sinne made impotent Supra l. 2. Instis c. 7. sect 5. And yet he commaundeth vs the faulte is his and not ours if vvee transgresse his commaundement The fourth Chapter shevveth hovv the former doctrine maketh God a most cruel tyraunt CErdon that infamous heretike Ex Ter. l. prasc c. 51. and diuers of his folovvers reading in the old testament vvhat seueritie in that lavve God had sometymes vsed and not considering that the enormitie of sinne is such that it deserueth not only temporall but also aeternal deathe and imagining that such seueritie could not proceed frō the good God vvhoe is goodnes it selfe as thoughe God vvere mercifull and not iuste also they affirmed that there vvere tvvoe gods the one good the other cruel the one the autour of the olde testamēt the other of the nevv the one Creatour only of superiour substaunces the other of this inferiour vvorlde Against these men saint Austine vvrote a booke entitled Against the aduersarie of the lavve and Prophetes in vv ch hee proueth that in the nevve lavve God hath shevved as great seueritie to vvit in the death of Ananias Act. 3. Mat. 2◠5. Saphita in and threatening aeternal danation vv ch passeth all temporall punishment against those that shall not giue almes and not only against those that shall kill but also against them that shal be angrie and shall call contumeliously their brother foole Vvhence it follovveth that one and the selfe same god is seuere and svveete iuste and mercifull And good reason for as the king must not only be gētle but iuste also and therfore the Aegiptians Hierogliffe of a kinge vvas a bee vvhose hony signifieth the svveetnesse vvhich ought to be in a Prince and his stinge importeth that hee must bee vvith all seuere and iuste also vvhere mercie and faire meanes vvill not serue so God the king of kinges offereth his grace moste frankelye bestovveth benefites on vs bountifully and many tymes vvinketh at our defaultes expecteth patiently amendement and repentaunce but if vvee contemne his benefittes and abuse his patiēce then dothe hee lay it on seuerely vppon vs bicause as hee is good so is hee iust must bee iust else vvere hee not God And althoughe some respecting only the shortenesse of the pleasure vvhich they haue takē in sinne thinke it harde to be punished eternally for a momētaire pleasure yet if they consider vvhat it is to offende so great a Maiestie and hovve vvhen vve sinne vve doe in affection desire eternally to perseuer in that sinne and pleasure or cōmoditie l. 4. dial c. 44. vve vvill thinke vvith sainct Gregoire that it is good reasō that the sinner vvhoe hath sinned in his eternitie should bee punished in gods aeternitie Yea if Princes for a momentarie transgression may iustly punishe their subiectes vvith perpetuall exile and death it selfe vvhich of it selfe is perpetuall bicause a resurrectiō is not naturall vvhy maye not God iustelie punishe vs vvith eternall paines for our tēporall faultes especially seing that they vv ch dye in mortall sinne neuer thinke of repētaunce but remaine perpetually obstinate in their mallice and so may iustely bee perpetually punished bicause sinne as longe as it remaines is vvorthy paine and therfore if it remaine for euer it may iustly bee punished for euer and euer But althoughe it be so that there are not tvvoe gods as Cerdon sayed the one meeke and mylde the other cruel and Churlishe and althoughe the selfe same God and the good and the onlygod bee must bee bicause hee is God mercifull and iust and consequently gentle seuere vvithout all crueltie bicause iustice is noe crueltie yet if vve vvill auouch Luthers and Caluins doctrine for currant vve must of necessitie confesse that God is the cruellest tyraunte that euer vvas or can bee For they affirme as vve haue related in the former Chapter that God commaundethe vs thinges altogetherimpossible and they can not deny but that for transgressing these commaundemēts the vvicked are tormēted in hell perpetually for Christe bidds thē goe accursed in to euerlasting fyer Mat. 2◠vvhoe clothed him not in his mēbers vvhen hee vvas in them naked vvho fed him not vvhen in them hee vvas houngrie vvhich if it bee so then is God moste cruel and barbarouse Luther once vvell perceued that this consequence to vvit that God is cruel
God by his Prophete Hieremie c. 15. If thou vvilt be conuerted I vvill conuerte thee And hovve often doth scripture exhorte and commaund vs to conuerte our selues to God Ezech. 18.33 Vvhich vvere ridiculously spoken if it vvere not in our freevvill by the assistaunce of Gods grace to tourne vnto God Mat. 19. And in the nevv Testament sayeth Christ if thou vvilte enter into life Keepe the cōmaundementes And again hee complaineth vvith teares of Hierusalems ingratitude saying Mat. 23. Hierusalem Hierusalem hovv often vvould I haue gathered thee as a hen gathereth her chickins vnder her vvinges and thou vvouldst not Vvhat man in his vvittes vvould speake thus vnless he thought that Hierusalem had free vvill else might Hierusalem haue ansvvered Christe in this manner Vvhy complainest thou so pitifullie of my slouthe and ingratitude Knovvest not thou that I can not vvhy sayest thou to mee and thou vvouldst not knovving that I haue noe vvill that thine only is the vvill myne is seruile necessitie So that it is manifest by experience reason and scripture that man hathe free vvill And seing that ther is no page of scripture but it conteinethe ether commaundement or counsaile or exhortation or some one or other of the signes of free vvill vvhich are before alleaged I may be bold to say that there is noe page in holy Scripture out of vvhich may not euidently be deduced a pregnaunte proofe and argument for free vvill Vvherfore althoughe some fevv places are in Scripture vvhich till they be vvel vnderstood may seeme to disproue free vvill yet rather should the heretike confesse his vvāt of skill to interpret those places then to deny free vvill vv ch all scripture allmost so euidētly auoucheth l. Cor. 12. Let thē not therfore obiecte that God vvorketh all in vs that mans vvay is not in man Ier. 10. that it is not of the vviller nor of the ronner but of God that taketh mercie on vs Rom 9. that God calleth and knocketh at the dore of our soule Ephes 5. that God the father dravveth vs For I can easilie ansvvere and haue al the sfathers and diuines to backe me in it Io. 6. that God only operateth in vs by his antecedēt grace but vvee also by vertue of it cooperate vnto his motion that mans vvay that is the vvay of Saluation is not in mans povver in respect of the beginning bicause God only puttes vs in the vvay by his vocation and praecedent grace but yet by vertue of this grace it is in our povver to vvalke in this vvay that it is God only that begīneth all good vvills and courses but supposing his precedent grace vve also vvill and ronne but not vve only but his grace vvith vs vve vvith it That God only calleth and knocketh by his praeuenient grace but vve also by cōsent do open the dore vnto him that God the father dravveth by his motions but svveetly vvithout violence by persuasion and allurement not by cōpulsion But to labour no farther in so euident and plaine a matter by a great absurditie vvhich follovveth this doctrine I vvill demonstrate it to bee absurd bicause one absurditie follovveth another If man haue no freevvill all vice and vvickednesse must goe for currant and no man must endeuour to auoid sinne bicause he hathe no povver to auoid it Be it then that Maister Minister dehorte me from vice vvith all the Rhetorick vvhich he hathe let him lay before myne eyes the filthines of sinne the dishonestie vvhich it implyeth the offēce of God the scandale of my neighbour vvhich follovveth it therby to dissuade me from it yet if I haue no freevvil nor povver to auoid sinne I may ansvvere him that his persuasions are but lippe-labour vvhich he might as vvel vse to a beast as to a man For vvhat I shall do that of neceffitie I shall doe and as hee disuadeth me from vice so the pleasure or temporall profit vvhich vice bringeth doth so allure me and the deuil so vrgeth me that I can not resiste bicause I haue no free vvill but must behaue my selfe passiuely permitting concupiscence and the deuil to vvorke in me vvhat they vvill bicause I haue no povver to resiste them For as a man that is persuaded that he hathe noe force to resiste his enemie or the Ministers of iustice layeth dovvne his armes and vveapons and permitteth them to do their pleasure knovving that resistaunce is vaine vvhen vvill he nill he their pleasure must be doone so vvhen a man is persuaded that he hathe no freevvill nor povver to auoide sinne he must yeeld him selfe as a slaue to all vice and vvhen he feeleth the temptation he must yeeld presently and acknovvledge his ovvn impotencie And if any man rebuke him for his sinnes or if God herafter at the day of Iudgement accuse him or condemne him he hathe an excuse ready for such an accusation and a tricke in store to auoid such a condemnation to vvit that he could do no othervvise bicause he had no free vvill And so he may commit vvhat sinnes he vvill and no man yea not God him selfe can iustly finde fault vvith him vnless they first finde a fault in Luthers and Caluins doctrine vvhich teacheth him that hee can not do othervvise The seuenth Chapter proueth that the reformers in auouching the lavves and commaundementes of God to bee impossible giue occasion also of all impiety I Shall not need to dvvell longe on this pointe nor to vse any longe discourse to come vnto my intended conclusion bicause I haue already in the fifte booke sette dovvne Luthers and Caluins vvordes in vvhich they affirme the commaundementes to be impossible vvher also I haue disproued this doctrine and proued the contrarie to vvit that man hathe povver vvith the grace of God to fullfill his commaundementes only novve out of those premises as in that booke I inferred God to bee vnreasonable by Luthers and Caluins doctrine so novve out of the same I vvill conclude that the gappe is opened to all vice and vvickednes For if a man bee once persuaded that hee can not fullfill the commaundement of keeping the Sabboth-daye if desire of gaine or lacre moue him to seruile vvorkes labours hee vvill easilie bee persvvaded to labour vvho is allready persvvaded that hee can not keepe the Sabothe as hee should doe And if hee once giue credit to Caluin that hee can not obserue the lavve vvhich forbiddeth him to couet his neighbours vvife or goods if hee bee tempted or moued vvith suche obiectes hee vvill neuer vrge him selfe to vvithstand such temptations bicause hee is persuaded that he can not fullfill this lavve but must needes transgresse it and not only couet and desire but also inordinatelye vse his neighbours vvife and vsurpe his goodes also vvhen soeuer they crosse the vvaye of his desire Breefely seing that there is noe sinne but it is a transgression of one lavve or other hee that is persuaded that hee
can not fullfill any lavve of God as all Lutheranes and Caluinistes are is persuaded also that hee can auoid noe sinne and consequently if any sinne moue or allure him ether by profit or pleasure vvhich it implyeth hee can not being so persuaded endeuour to vvithstande the temptation bicause that vvere to shevve him selfe able to resiste sinne and to fullfill the commaunde mentes and consequently to condemne Ihon Caluins doctrine And althoughe in so doing hee openeth the gappe to all manner of iniquitie yet therin hee shevveth him selfe a true Caluiniste vvhoe being persuaded by religion and conscience that hee hathe nether force nor vvill to resiste any sinne or to fullfill any commaundemeÌ„t must not yea can not vvithout offence of conscience and hazard of faithe go about to fullfill any lavve for so thoughe not in vvordes yet in facte and deed hee should deny his religion The eight Chapter shevveth hovve in affirming that Christ hathe freed vs from all lavves they loose the bridle to all vice THe reformers as is recounted partely in the third booke and second chapter partely in the fifte chapter of the same booke are of opinion that Christe vvas noe lavvgiuer but rather that he came to free vs from all lavves vvhich doctrine althoughe I haue in the former places alleaged yet to ease the reader it shall not bee amisse here also to set dovvne the samedoctrine in other their ovvn vvords in cap. 4. Gal. Luther in a comment of his on holy scriptur often tymes inculcateth that by Christ vvee are so freed from all lavves that none of them can bynd vs or touch vs in conscience These are his vvords Discat igitur pius legem Christum duo contraria esse prorsus incompatibilia praesente Christo lex mullo modo dominari debet sed cedere debet è conscientia relinquere cubilâ— quòd angustius est quam vt duos capere possit soli Christo Let therfore the godly man learn to knovv that Christ and the lavv are tvvoe contraries altogether incompatible Christe being present the lavv must in no vvise rule but must depart from conscience and leaue the bedd vvhich is to narrovv for tvvoe to Christe alone Vvhere you see that hee makes Christe and all lavves euen his ovvn lavves so contrarie that if Christ stand noe lavv can stande nor haue any force ouer conscience in c. 2. Gal. And in another place of the same comment thus hee defineth quatenus est Christianus est supra omnem legem as hee is a Christian or in that hee is a Christian he is aboue all lavve And yet again in another vvorke of his l. de libertaâ—â— Christiana hee speaketh more boldly and plainly nullo opere nulla lege homini Christiano opus est cum per fidem sit liber ab omnilege for a Christian no lavv nor vvorke is needfull seing that by faith he is free from all lavve Supra l. 2. Inst c. 2. §. â— 14 The same opinion holdeth Ihon Caluin as in the former and many other places is plainely to be seen By vvhich doctrine althoughe they vvill seem to make Christe a more perfect redeemer as before is noted yet in deed they make him a fauourer and patrone of all vice and vvickednes For if vve be freed from all obligation of lavves then do they noe more bynde vs then lavves abrogated if they bynde not in conscience then noe man is bound in conscience to obserue them If he be not bound in coÌ„science to obserue them then he sinneth not in transgressing them no more then in doing contrarie to a lavv vvhich is abrogated bicause euery sinne is against the obligation of one lavve or other yea then he transgresseth not bicause vvhere is noe obligation ther can be no transgression If it be no sinne to transgresse lavves as Luther and Caluin say that to a Christian such transgressions are not imputed as sinnes then need not any Christian make any scrouple of any action by vvhat lavv soeuer it be forbidden and so hee may as freely steale as giue almes and as boldly hee may follovv his lust and sensualitie as liue chastly and moderate his appetites for vvhere noe lavv byndethe in conscience all is lavvfull that liketh and so the gappe is open to all manner of vice The ninth Chapter proueth that in affirming God to be the autour of sinne the Reformers open the gappe to all vice I Haue already related the blasphemies of our nevv Christians against the goodnes of God and I haue demonstrated that they are senseles absurd and impious in making God the autour of our sinnes vvhose mercie pardoneth and vvhose iustice punishethe sinnes but can not vvorke or commit the least sinne vvithout preiudice of his goodnesse and deitie also vvhich is goodnes it selfe So that novve I vvill suppose for my premises that they are of that opinion and I vvill deducefor my intended conclusion that this doctrine looseth the bridle vnto all iniquitie For if a man be once persuaded as all Caluinistes are that God is the autour and vvorker of his sinnes vvhat is ther remaining to restrayne and vvith-hold him from sinne he may and vvill easily discourse thus vvith him selfe vvhen soeuer the deuil vrgeth or the flesh allurethe or the vvorld intiseth him to sinne This acte to vvhich I ame tempted and vvhich commonly is called a sinne is the vvorke of God as vvell as myne and more his then myne bicause as my oracle that is Ihon Caluin telleth me he vvorketh it in me and vrgeth me vnto it Vvhy then should I ether be a frayed or ashamed to do that vvhich God not only dothe vvith me but also so forcibly moueth mee vnto it that as M. Caluin telleth me I can not possibly resiste him Ame I better then he or can any sinne be so vglye as not to beseeme me vvhich beseemeth him vvho is goodnes it selfe But peraduenture God dispenseth vvith him selfe but not vvith me and therfore vvill not haue me to sinne Vvill he not Vvhy then dothe he vrge and egge me to sinne vvhere I ame vrged certes I ame vvilled and vvilled by him by vvhom I ame vrged Yea if sinne be the vvorke of God as it is vnless Caluin lye then is it the effect of his vvill for as Dauid sayeth hee dothe all by his vvill and as diuines say his povver is his vvill and so I in sining shall do his pleasure and conforme my selfe to his vvill Let vs sinne then freely vvee do but Gods vvill and let vs not make scruple of that of vvhich hee is the vviller and vvorker let vs not blushe at the turpitude of sinne of vvhich God him selfe is not ashamed nether lette vs feare offence vvhere vve doe our masters vvill and pleasure rather let vs persuade our selues that all sinnes are lavvfull and pleasing to God bicause they are the vvorkes of his vvill and consequently according to his vvill But fye rather vppon this impious and licentious
doctrine God forbiddeth sinne by his lavve and therfore vvould not haue it done and hee punisheth sinne most seuerily and therfore is no autour of it and hee is goodnesse it selfe and deuoide of aâ—â— mallice and therfore caÌ„ not vvorke sinne vvhich is deuoid of all goodnes and nothing but mallice The tenthe Chapter by many pointes of their doctrine proueth that they take avvay all vice and vertue from mens actioÌ„s and so giue them leaue to sinne and to do vvhat they vvill IT is a thinge so manifest that vertue and vice honestie dishonestie is to be found in the actions of man that there vvas neuer any people so barbarous or vitiouse vvhich hath not commended many of mens actions and hathe not dispraised many others and blushed at them euen in them selues as not beseeming mans nature vvhich as it is reasonable so it should be ruled by reason Vvherfore to certaine actioÌ„s honours and revvardes haue beene proposed and to others seuere punishmentes and chastisments The vvisest of the GeÌ„tils vvhose reason by sinne superstitioÌ„ vvas least obscured vvere of opinioÌ„ that some actions vvere sinnes and offences of God that others vvere gratefull and pleasing vnto him For they knevv that God the autour of nature as hee had ordained all thinges to their end and giuen them faculties to exercise those actioÌ„s vvhich should bring them to their end so hee hathe ordained man vnto his end vvhich is to liue vertuously and by vertuous life so to serue God here that he maye enioye him herafter and therfore hee hathe endevved him vvith reason by vvhich hee may knovv vertue from vice and good from euill and a vvill also to execute that vvhich reason shal coÌ„maund so that vvhen hee liueth according to reason hee follovvethe his nature and Gods ordinaunce and exercise the those actions vvhich beseem his reasonable nature and are pleasing vnto God and vvhen he sollovveth sensualitie and leaueth reason theÌ„ dothe hee that vvhich is not beseeming his nature then dothe hee breake Gods ordinaunce and svverue from the end to vvhich he is ordained and consequentlye sinneth offendeth God l. 1. Eth. c. 8. Vvherfore Aristotle sayeth that vvise and vertuouse men vvhich liue according to reason are most deare vnto God Ex Clement Alex orat hortator ad gentes in Phaedone Plato affirmeth that God is the reuenger of sinne and dishonestie and in another place he distinguisheth three kindes states of men The first of those that liue vertuously and they sayeth he are sent to the happy Ilancls vvhich vvee vvould calle heauen the second state is of them vvho commit lesser faultes vvhich vvee vvould calle veniall sinnes such sayeth hee are purged for a tyme the same doe Catholikes saye of theÌ„ that dy out of mortall sinne yet are defiled so vvith veniall sinnes that they need some purging in Purgatorie and then vvith the first sorte are admitted to the happy IlaÌ„ds The last are they vvhich commit enormous and hainous crimes and such sayeth Plato are tormented perpetually bicause their paines do them noe good vvhich is as much to saye as Catholikes say of theÌ„ vvhoe for greater offences of vvhich they repent not before deathe are condemned to a praemunire and perpetuall imprisonment in hell By vvhich it may appeare that not only Christianes but also paganes and those that vvante the light of fayeth haue yet by light of reason espyed vice in some of our actions and vertue in other some and haue deemed those vvorthy punishment these vvorthy some revvard And yet if vvee giue credit to our nevve Christianes vvee must acknovvledge noe more vertue or vice in the actioÌ„s of men theÌ„ in the operations of brutish and vnreasonable creaturs For first if it be true vvhich Luther and Caluin teache vs that noe lavves caÌ„ bynde a Christian then doth it follovve that a Christiane can not sinne and consequently that ther can bee noe vice in any of his actioÌ„s For vvher noe lavve byndeth there is noe lavve vvhere no lavve is there is noe transgression of lavve vvhere is no transgression noe sinne can bee bicause euery sinne is a transgression of one lavve or other Rom. 7. Vvherfore S. Paule sayeth that vvithout lavve sinne is dead and of noemallice 8. 10. s. And S. Ihon sayeth that vvhosoeuer sinneth committeth iniquitie and that sinne is iniquitie that is transgression for so the Greeke vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvhich hee vseth importeth therfore the Grecianes commonly calle sinne by the selfe same name And althoughe some actions vvhich are of them selues cuill are not sinnes bicause the lavveforbiddeth them but therfore are by the lavve forbidden bicause of them selues they are sinnes yet certaine it is that there is noe sinne but it is forbidden ether by the lavv of God or of nature or of man and therfore vvell might sainct Austine saye l. 2. de pee mer. c. 16. that noe sinne should be if noe lavve did forbid it Rom. 2. And althoughe sainct Paule sayeth that the gentils sinned vvithout a lavve and therfore shal be punished vvithout a lavve yet hee excludeth only a vvritten lavve such as the Ievves had and vvithout that sayethe hee the geÌ„tils doe sinne but yet not vvithout all lavve for at least they transgressed the lavve of nature othervvise they could not haue sinned bicause euery sinne is against one lavve or other and so if noe lavv bynd vs in conscience noe sinne at all can bee found in our actions be they neuer so crossing and contratie to reason Secondly they denye free-vvill and consequently they take avvay all vice and vertue For if vvhen I do that action vvhich is counted a sinne I haue noe free-vvill then I can do no othervvise if I can do noe othervvise I ame not to bee blamed for that vvhich I could not auoyed but rather to bee pityed that I ame so constrained And if vvhen I pray to God or giue almes to the poore I can do no othervvise as I can not if I haue noe free-vvill I ame not pravse vvorthe bicause noe God a mercie to him that dothe vvell vnavvares or vvether hee vvill or noe Vvherfore vvee commend those moste vvhich doe vvell freely and of their ovvne choise vvhere vvee see men by feare or coÌ„pulsion are driueÌ„ to vvell doing vvee coÌ„mend them the lesse by hovv much greater vvas the constrainte vvhich is a signe that free choise more or lesse is necessary to the making of a vertuouse action Thirdly they say that God imputeth no sinne vnto a faithfull man vvhence it follovveth that there is noe sinne in their actions or that God is deceiued or is noe right esteemer of thinges but this they vvill not saye and therfore must auouch that there is noe sinne in Christians actions Fourthly although herin they speake not vvith that consequence vvhich might haue beene expected of men of reason they affirme that all our actions euen those that go for best are of them selues
sonne of God But thou vvillt say that in many places Caluin others graunt that Christe is true God the sonne of God I vvill graunt it also l. 1. Inst c. 13. for Caluin in the first booke of his Institutions and thirteenth chapter indeuoureth to proue Christes diuinitie but yet thou seest also hovve they eate their vvords deny in one place vvhich in another they affirmed And so to conclude ether they speake thus vvittingly of Christe and so they are noe Christians but renouncers of Christ or of ignoraunce so thy are not men to be fellovved in so great mattets as faythe is vvho haue need thē selues to learne their Catechisme vvhich teacheth hovv to speake and to beleeue of Christ and God The second chapter shevveth hovv by their doctrine they make Christe an absurd redeemer MAN once vvas free of condition as being created lord ouer all and subiect to none but God vvhose seruice is no seruilitie he vvas noble of birthe as being framed by God his ovvn hands of virgin earth Mannes felicitie in paradise vvhich yet vvas not stained by sinne he vvas happie in state as being indevved vvith a body immortall freed from diseases deaths and distemperaturs nether benummed vvith cold nor parched vvith heat nor pined vvith honger nor molested vvith thirst enriched vvith a soule filled vvith grace and spiritual treasures vvhich vvas prone to vertue not inclined to vice nether molested vvith concupiscence nor overruled by passion but ruled reason vvhich vvas ruled by grace His superiour parte vvas obedient to God his inferiour parte to the superiour sensualitie to reason the flesh to the spirit and all creaturs to him vvere buxome and obedient Besides this invvard foelicitie of soule and body he vvas placed in Paradise vvhere he vvas enuironed and compassed about vvith all delightes and pleasures and farre from all displeasurs Mannes seruitude after sinne But vvhen by sinne man vvould not be subiecte to God hee became a slaue to his ovvne flesh passions and sensualitie a bond man to sinne captiue to the deuill subiect to death and mortalitie hell and damnation And of all this seruile subiection sinne vvas the cause for vvhen Adā sinned and vvee in Adame transgressed vve vvere by by guiltie of death vvhich is the revvard of sinne Rom. ◠and by sinne vve became slaues to sinne and concupiscence For as Christe sayeth vvhosoeuer sinneth is a slaue to sinne Io 8. l Io 5. 2 Pet 2. Rom. 6. and being slaues to sinne vve vvere slaues to the deuill vvhoe hathe noe authoritie nor povver ouer vs but by sinne and being slaues to the deuill vvee vvere captiues of hell vvhich is the prison vvhere the deuill holds sinners perpetually And behold here breefly in vvhat bondage by sinne the deuill had gotten vs. After that by sinne vve vvere despoiled of grace if he had tempted vs vve could not haue resisted and if vve had fallen by sinne Th. ◠2. q. 109. a. 7. vve could not haue risen again by force of nature and force of grace vve had none bicause sinne had depriued vs of it and so vve vvere slaues to sinne and the deuill also and captiues also and prisoners of hell vvhich is devv to sinne vvherfore sainct Paule sayeth that Vve vvere deteyned captiues at the deuils vvill and pleasure 1. Tim. ◠To ransome this prisoner and to redeme this bondslaue by vvay of aequitie and iustice it vvas necessarie that a diuine person should become man Mannes Redeemer for God only could not satisfie bicause he vvas the partie offended and in that he vvas God could be indebted to none Man only vvas not able to paye so great a ransome as sinne required only God and man vvas a fitte pay-master For as S. Leo sayeth if he had not been true god he could not haue giuen vs a remedie Ser. 1. Nat. Domini and if he had not been true man he could not haue giuen example yea he could not haue suffered and so could not haue satisfied And amongest the three diuine persons the second vvas the fittest For vvho fitter to be a mediatour then the midle person Vvho fitter to be the sonne of mā by incarnatiō then he vvho from all aeternitie vvas the sōne of god Vvho fitter to repaire the image of god in mā thē hevvhoe vvas the image of his father Vvho fitter to make an amendes for Adames inordinate desire of knovvledg Gen. ◠then he vvhoe vvas the vvisdome of his father Vvho fitter to abate Adams pride vvho vvould haue been like to God then he vvho vvas in deed the likeness of god his father and yet by incarnation of purpose became in outvvard shovve as vnlike him as man is to God Breefly vvho fitter to appease the storme then Ionas for vvhom the storme vvas ray sed for it vvas no other then the sonne of God for vvhō the storme in heauen vvas raised vvhen Lucifer vvould be like the highest It vvas no other then the same sonne of God for vvhō in paradise that storme arose vvhen Adam puffed vp vvith pride vvould be like to god in Knovvledg of good and euil for to him is proper the likenesse and image of God vvhich they inordinately affected The anciēt then of yeares became a child the vvord vvas mute God became man the second and middle person played the mediatour the sonne of God became the sonne of man and in mans nature vvhich hee had takē vppon him repayred vvhat man had ruined and destroying sinne by fleshe vvhich by flesh vvas committed ouercame the deuill by fleshe by vvhich he had ouercome and vvher as vvith one teare yea one vvorde he might haue redeemed vs he vvould shed his blood for vs and vvheras one dropp had been sufficient he povvred out all to shevv the greatnesse of his charitie and the greatnesse of our ingratitude vvhich still commit sinnes vvhich cost Christ so dearly to shevv the mallice of sinne vvhose staine could not be takē out vvithout the blood of this lamb and to shevve the greatnesse of the ransom and the price of our redemptiō So great vvas this price vvhich vvas payed for vs 1. Pet. 1. that sainct Peter sayeth Vvee vvere redeemed not by gold and siluer but by the pretiouse blood of Christe 1. Cor. 6. And sainct Paule sayeth that vvee vvere bought by a great price so great Psal 13◠that Dauid calles it copiosa redemptio a copiouse redemption Prorsus copiosa sayeth sainct Bernard quia non gutta sed vnda sanguinis per quinque partes corporis manauit Copiouse in deed bicause not a dropp Ser 22. in Cant. but a streame of bloud issued out at fiue partes of his body so ritch a price vvas this blood sayeth he Ep. 190. That it vvas sufficient to haue satisfied for the sinne vvhich shed it So that Christ is our redemer Vvho hathe deliuerd vs out of the povver of darkenesse Col. 1. freed vs from the slauerie
paenaunce fasting almesdeeds prayer and vvorkes of paenaunce vve may satisfye for all our sinnes and all the paynes devv vnto our sinnes So that Christ hathe redeemed vs from the seruitude and heauy yoke of the lavve and yet vve must keepe the lavve and novv especially bicause the heauinesse therof is taken avvay by Christ his grace Christ hathe freed vs from the seruitude of sinne and yet vve must auoide sinne and novv especially bicause Christes grace hath giuen force to arise by paenaunce from our former sinfull life Psal 〈◊〉 and to vvalke in the vvaye of his commaundementes and nevvnes of life Christ also hathe deliuered vs from the tyrannie of the deuill bicause he hathe giuen vs grace to resist him vvherfore vvee must not yeeld vnto him but novv especially vve must stand against him Christ also hathe satisfied for vs and yet vve must satisfie and novv especially bicause he hathe giuen vs grace by vvhich vve may do paenaunce for sinne and satisfie for the payne For although that Christe hathe payed the price of our redemption yet vvould he haue vs to applye it by our cooperation not only in faithe for so hee should open the gapp to all vice but in poenaunce in obseruatioÌ„ of the commaundementes and receiuing of the Sacramentes Vvherfore our redeemer him selfe vvho freed vs from the yoke of the lavve yet commaunds vs 〈◊〉 Keep the lavve if vve mean to enter into life Mat. 19. and although he hath satisfied for or sinnes Lue. vle yet he commaunds his Apostles to preach penaunce vnto vs as necessarie for remission and satisfaction of our sinnes And if hee had redeemed vs in that manner vv ch the Ghospellers imagin and had set vs at that libertie that noe lavve can bynde vs nor noe sinne hurte vs and that noe good vvorkes nor satisfaction nor any other cooperation besides faith can be required on our parte then had hee beene a most absurd redeemer as I haue all ready proued and had rather tumbled vs dovvne into the depthe of sinne and damnation then redeemed vs. The third Chapter shevveth hovv by their doctrine they make Christe no Redemer at all VVell did our blessed sauiour compare heretiks vnto Vvolues vvrapped and invested in sheepe-skinnes Mat. 7. vvhose manner hath all vvayes been vnder praetence of religion to vtter blasphemie and then to mean intend the vvorst vvhen they speake fairest Vvhat I pray you is so common in our ghospellers mouthes as that Christ only is our Redeemer and sole mediatour vnder vvhich pretence they â—ondeÌ„ne all honour giuen vnto sainâ—â—es and abandon all prayer and intercessi in valhich is made vnto them as iniuriouse to Christ and his title of a Redeemer In vvhich truly they seeme not vnlik to Iudas vvho vvould needs Kisse Christe vvhen he meant to betray him and me thinkes and vvhat I thinke I shall proue anone in this point they resemble the Ievves vvhich invested Christe like a King called him King and adored him as King yet in deed derided him as a foole For so these men calle Christ the Redeemer and rather then they vvill not seem to mean so they take from the Saincts the mother and freends of Christ all secondarie mediation and intercession and vvill seem to be so zealous of Christes honour that they vvill haue none honoured but him and yet in deed vnder this faire shovve they cary false hartes and euen then vvhem they calle him and adore him as a Redeemer they robbe him and despoile him of that honourable title Lut. in com Gal. fol. 298. Luther in his commentaries vppon the second Chapter to the Galathians sayeth plainly that Christe apprehended by faith is Christian iustice for vvhom God reputeth vs iuste l. 3 Inst c. 3. §. 2. Caluin also subscribeth that our iustice consisteth in the imputation of Christes iustice vnto vs. And bicause this iustice is extrinsecall and is not inhaerent in vs they saye that thoughe for Christes sake vve be reputed iuste yet the holyest that is is a greevouse sinner and all his vvorkes are vvorthy nothing else but damnation vvhich doctrine herafter diuerse tymes especially in the seuenth booke shal be related hence it is also that they saye that our sinnes are only couered vvith christes iustice vv ch is imputed vnto vs but are not taken avvaye nor extinquished This they explicate by a similitude for say they as if a man looke thorovghe redd glasse all seemeth redd bee it blacke or vvhite so God beholding vs throughe Christes iustice reputeth vs iuste thoughe in deed vvee bee sinners Abouâ— in the first chap. And this Caluin in his preface of his Institutions to the King of Fraunce avoucheth not to derogate from christe but to make much for his honour for vvhat sayeth he is to Christe more honorable theÌ„ to acknovvledge our selues despoiled of all vertue that of 〈◊〉 vvee maye bee clothed that is reputed 〈◊〉 for his iustice vvhich is imputed vnto vs. But let vs see hovve honourable this is to Christe I vvill not deny but that it is honourable to Christ and expedient for 〈◊〉 to acknovvledge that of our selues vvith out Christes grace vvee are sinners and cá do litle else but sinne Th. 1 2.q.109 but to saye that notvvithstanding Christes grace vvhâ—â—â— he hath bestovved on his iuste is ready to bestovve on all repeÌ„taunt sinners 〈◊〉 still sinners and only reputed 〈◊〉 for Christes iustice vvhich is by fayth apprehended and by God imputed vnto vs is most dishonorable to Christe For if vve haue no other iustice then Christs iustice vvhich is imputed vnto vs then haue vve no internall sanctitie in vs then are vve not truly sanctified then are vve still sinners be vve neuer so iuste Caluin and Luther and all the Lutheranes Caluinists haue no other ansvver to this then concedo totum I graunte all Are vvee then still truly sinners and not truly iuste then vvas the first Adame more potent in mallice then the second in grace and sanctitie for he made vs truly sinners Christ could not make vs truly iuste Then vvas Sainct Paule deceiued vvho sayeth that Christs grace exceeded Adams sime Rom. 5. Are vve still sinners and not truly sanctified then hathe not Christ verily redeemed vs from the seruitude of sinne Io. 8. for vvhosoeuer is in sinne is a slaue to sinne If vvee be not redeemed from sinne then are vve not freed froÌ„ the tyrannie of Satan vvhose only title is sinne by vvhich he domineereth ouer vs. And seing that hell follovveth sinne as a iust punishment for such a fault then are vve still captiues prisoners of Hell and Christ is noe Redemer vvho hathe nether redeemed vs from sinne nor hell nor daÌ„nation The same ghospellers affirm that by sinne our nature is so vveakened that not vvithstanding Christes grace vve can not resist any temptation of the flesh or deuill that vve can not possibly fullfill the lavve and coÌ„maundementes that vve
calle the Supper for though some of them allovve vs also Order and some Penaunce yet in these Sacramentes as is before declared they do not aggree But yet if vve consider the estimation vvhich they make of these tvvoe Sacramentes vvhich all of them allovve vs vve shall see that herin vve are not much beholding vnto them And as concerning baptisme in Synop. Col. c. 17. Luther is of opinion that no forme of vvords is necessary yea he thinketh it sufficient if you baptize the child in the name of the lorde And being demaunded once vvhether it vvas lavvfull to baptise in milke or beare he ansvvered that any liquour that is apte to bathe or vvashe is sufficient And so you see hovv hee taketh a vvay the matter and forme of baptisme or at least bringeth them bothe in doubte And as touchiÌ„g the vsual forme of vvords Caluin iumpeth vvith him in the same opinion l. 4. Inst c. 17. and addeth that such formes of vvords are meare magicall charmes and enchauntementes Brentius sayeth that if the minister after that the Creed is read saye only In this fayth I vvas he thee departe in peace it vvill serue vvel enough in c. 26. Mat. And Bucere denyeth that vvords are necessarie in the Eucharistie and vvould say no doubte the same in baptisme The same Luther as is before related is of opinion that actuall faythe euen in children is necessarie and that Sacramentes haue no other effecte then to stirre vp this faithe vvherfore seing that Baptisme ca not stirre vp childrens faithe bicause they haue no knovvledge of the signification of such mysteries it must needs follovv that to Baptise children is but laterem lauare to vvash a tile and to loose labour Caluin also is nether a frayed nor a shamed to saye l. 4. Inst c. 17. § 17. that sainct Ihon Baptistes vvashing vvas as good as Christes baptisme Act. 19. And yet sainct Paule rebaptized them vvith Christes baptisme vvhom saincte Ihon before had baptized vvhich argued his baptisme of insufficiencie and proueth Christes baptisme to be of more perfection vvhich suplyed that vvhich vvas vvanting in sainct Ihons baptisme The same Caluin sayeth that in necessitie vvomeÌ„ may not baptise § 22. and that if the childe dy vvithout baptisme he may be saued if ether he be predestinated or be the childe of faithfull parentes yea he sayeth that fevv do mark hovv much harme that doctrine hathe doone vvhich teacheth that Baptisme is necessary vnto saluation And if you vrge him vvith those vvordes of our Sauiour vnless a maÌ„ be borne agame of vvater and the holy ghoste c. Io 3. he vvill father glosse the texte moste grossely then yeeld vnto you that baptisme is necessary to saluation l. â— Inst c. 16 § 17.18 The meaning is not sayeth he that materiall vvater is necessary but this is the sense vnless a man be borne againe of the holy ghoste vvhich like vvater vvasheth he can not enter into heauen And so by this exposition vvater is not necessary only the regeneration and vvashing of the spirit is necessary and this Baptisme according to Caluins opinioÌ„ children may haue vvithout vvater euen in their mothers vvoÌ„be if they be predestinate or childreÌ„ of faithfull parentes This is Caluins doctrine I saye Caluins for it is his singuler opinion contrarie to the opinion of the Churche and all the ancient fathers and councells yea contrarie to scripture it selfe For scripture telles vs plainly that vvee are all borne children of vvrathe Ephes 2. Rom. 5. and that vvee all sinned in Adam and consequently are conceued and borne in orignall sinne Iob. 3. vvherfore Iob vvho vvas predestinate curseth the day of his natiuitie and night of his conception Psal â—â— and Dauid not only prede stinate but borne also of saithfull parentes confessethe that hee is conceiued in sinnes that is in original sinne for the he brevve vvorde signifieth sinne in the singuler number vvhich not vvith standing the Translatour translated sinnes bicause originall sinne is the roote of all sinnes Gen. 13. And vvher as Caluin alleageth the blessing of God to Abrahame and all his seed and posteritie that serueth only to bevvraye his ignoraunce For first after that God had made that promise yet hee commaunded Circumcision and threatened that those that had it not should peris he And so althoughe Caluin vvere of Abrahams seed and his parentes also yet do the it not follovve that hee shal be partaker of that benediction vvithout baptisme secoÌ„dly that promise and benediction is novv to bee vnderstoode carnally or spiritually if carnally theÌ„ are none but levves capable of the benediction bicause they enly are the carnall children of Abrahame and so Caluin hathe noe parte in it at all If spiritually then they only are partakers of the benediction vvho as sainct Paule sayetâ—e Rem â— do imitate the faithe vvorkes of Abrahame Gal â—â— vvherfore seing that children euen of faithfull parentes doe in no vvise imitate ether Abrahames faithe or vvorkes they can not bee pertakers of his benediction vntill they bee baptised and so by receuing the Sacrament of fay the do in some sorte imitate Abrahames faithe And if Caluin say that at least by predestination children may bee saued vvithout baptisme hee shall but discouer herin hovv blockishe a diuine he is For none are predestinare but by the passion and merites of Christe Io. â— vvhich first are applyed by baptisme and not vvithout baptisme at leaste in desire therfore Christe threateneth damnation to all that are not baptised Vvherfore althoughe all children that are predestinate shal be saued yet not vvithout baptisme and they vvhich dye vvithout baptisme as by Christes ovvne sentence they are excluded from heauen so are they not predestinate But let vs see more of Caluins doctrine not tofollow it but to bevvare of it not to imbrace Suprae 16. it but to detest it The same man affirmethe that the reprobate or the children of infidels not predestinate are not to bee baptized least baptisme bee contaminated and bee made a false seale bicause sayeth he baptisme is a seale of former iustice and therfore if defiled infidels bee baptised the vvater is contaminated Ibid. and the seale is falsified He addeth that the children of the faithfull or the predestinate need not baptisme as a necessarie meanes vnto saluation and therfore if they dye vvithout it they may bee saued Yet sayeth hee baptisme is not to be contemned bicause it is commaunded as a ceremonie to incorporate vs meÌ„bers of the Church Novve put all this together to vvit that Baptisme is noe better then sainct Ihons vvashing that it is not necessarie for the predestinate oâ— children of faithfull parentes bicause they may be saued vvithout it and that it can not bee ministred vnto the children of infidelles least it bee contaminated it follovveth euidently that Baptisme is not necessarie yea that it is superfluouse bicause
hathe litle reason bicause in restoring hee auoydeth not sinne but chaungeth one sinne for another Yea if this doctrine may take place the Prince may as vvell vse oppression of his subiectes as bountie and magnificence subiectes may as vvell rebell as obeye souldiours need not to feare murder pillage Luxurie courtiours need not to make scrouple of vanitie flattery dissimulation ambition merchaunres need not to forbeare vsurie nor vnâ—uste selling and buying Iudges may take â—ribes and pronounce partial sentences and the Iurie may as vvell giue vvronge as right informations the ritche may as vvell bestovv blovves as almes on the poore and beggers maye as vvell steale as â—egge bicause as these are sinnes so are the contrarie vertues Supra vvhich are no more vertues as Caluin saieth then are those vice vv ch for their likenes and shovve of vertue dâ—gâ— for vertues And so no maÌ„ shall need to make bones of any sinne bicause some thinge hee must do vvhatsoeuer he do the is sinne and vvhen hee thinketh that he doeth best his doinges deserue no less then aeternal damnation But they vvill say that althoughe all actions be sinnes yet God imputes not all as sinnes and therfore vve must do almes-deedes and absteine from iniuries bicause God imputes these as sinnes but not the other Thus they saye but yet thus they take not a vvay the absurditie For yet it follovveth that an infidel may doe vvhat hee vvill and make no more scrouple of one action then of another bicause God imputes all his actions as they are that is sinnes and vices And if the faithfull and iust mans actions bee all sinnes ether God must impute all as sinnes or none at all bicause all are a like nether hathe God any reason to repute his almes deedes as good vvorkes rather then his theftes if those bee sinnes and deserue damnation as vvell as these vvhence it follovveth that vvee must put no difference betvvixte our actions but may aâ— freely and as boldly aduenture vppoâ— theftes and murders as any vvorkes oâ— charitie iustice mercie or any other vertue The Sixte Chapter shevveth hovv they deny free vvill and so also open the gappe to sinne SAint Austine sayeth that it is a thinge so commonly receiued that man hath free vvill Ep. 11. l. de duabus animabus c. 1. and that he is not to be blamed for that vvhich is not in his povver that the Shepheards sing it on the mouÌ„taines Poetes in theaters the vnlearned in Circles the learned in libraries maisters in Schooles Bishops in sacred places and mankinde throughout the vvorld Aug. l 〈◊〉 ciu c. 19. And Cicero thought it vvould bee counted such a paradox to deny free vvill that hee chose rather to deny Gods prescience vv ch seemed repugnaunte to it then to deny free vvill vvhich vvas so commonly receued And so sayeth sainct Austine he vvas iniurious to God least hee should bee iniurious to the common vvelthe vvhich could not stande vvithout free vvill And yet the Stoikes denyed free vvill as vvitnesseth sainct Austine l. 5. ciu 〈…〉 Aug ser â—â— and after them Simon Magus Manicheus and Vviclephe and last of all our late Reformers a badde broode of as bad breeders Luther therfore vvriting against Erasmus and against free vvill also vvhich Erasmus had proued both learnedly and eloquently entitleth his booke Lut. l de ser â—o arbitrio of Seruile Arbitrement in vvhich booke hee disputeth vvith all might and maine against free vvill and to set before our eyes more plainly our seruile condition hee calleth mans vvill a Hackney vppon vvhich if gods spirit chaunce to sit and settle it selfe it goeth necessarilie that vvay to vvhich the spirit spurreth it but if the deuill bestride this hackney it runneth vvhether Satan vrgeth it and hathe noe povver ether to resiste the one or the other And a litle after he sayeth that frevvill is a diuine name vvhich aggreeth only to God but not to man yea in another place hee sayeth that freevvill in maÌ„ is a title only and name vvithout the thing it selfe c. 8. Caluin in this point aggreeth vvith Luther For he in his first booke of institutioÌ„s c. 15. sect 8. grauntes that Adam had free vvill before his falle vvhich I see not hovv he can grauÌ„t l. 3. c. 34. bicause hee sayeth that Gods prouidence and predestinatioÌ„ taketh avvay frevvill yea that Adams first sinne vvas committed by the ineuitable decree of God but after his falle he in him selfe and vve in him Iost freevvill and therfore Caluin rebuketh the Philosophers vvho averre that man hathe free vvill and that else all difference betvvixte vice vertue is taken a vvaye for sayeth hee they say true if they take man before his fall c. 2. And in his second booke hauing giuen a sharpe ceÌ„sure and senteÌ„ce against bothe Philosophers and fathers bicause they absolutely affirme that man hathe freevvill these giue freevvill his parte together vvith the grace of God he vvisbeth that this name freevvill should no more bespoken of c. 2. sect 〈◊〉 and hee vvould vvish others if they vvould aske his counsaile to forbeare it also least that therby they take occasion of pride and of a proud conceit of their ovvn force And so if vvishers might be vvoulders vve should nether haue freevvill nor the name of freevvill By vvhich it is plaine that Caluin absolutely denyeth freevvill as Luther and melancthon once did althoughe after vvard they graunted it in externall and ciuill actions as buying and selling talking and vvalking and such like but in morall actions of vice and vertue yea in supernaturall actions to vvhich the grace of God is necessarie as the loue of God connersion and repentaunce of a sinner they graunt noe freevvill nor choise at all The vvhich opinion is so absurd that by this a man may see vvhat credit is to be giuen them in greater matters and higher mysteries vvho haue erred so grossely in a matter so euident that not only reason but also experience proueth it For first vve deliberate and consulte concerning some actions and not others as vvhether vve shall take Phisicke or noe and yet vvee coÌ„sulte not vvhether vvee shall dye or noe flye or noe and suck like vvhich is a signe that the former actions are in our povver else as vvell might vvee consulte vvhether vvee should flye or noe in the a yre vvhen by ronning or riding vve can not escape our enemie And vvhy haue Princes their counsailers to consulte deliberate if all thinges follovve the Svvay of necessitie Vve commaund also our seruauntes or subiectes to ronne or goe but not to flye or to staye the course of the sonne bicause those actions are in their povver not these Vvee exhorte meÌ„ also to leaue this vice to follovve that vertue vve counsaile the sicke to take this not that medicine bicause all these thinges are in his povver free choise yet vvee exhorte him not to put