of George Cassander vpon the word Mereri or Merit in his second Scholia vpon his Ecclesiasticke hymnes printed at Paris 1616 for in other later impressions haply you shall finde this Scholia is quite purged out by the Index Expurgatorius composed by the commandement of the Catholike King Philip the second and by the aduice also of the Duke of Albany the copy whereof was printed at Strasburgh The words of the Index are these Scholium incipiens Vocabulum merendi apud veteres c. deleatur totum The Scholium of George Cassander beginning thus c. Let it be wholly cancelled But being notwithstanding preserued from this Purgatory fire let vs note it Vocabulum merendi apud veteres Ecclesiasticos Scriptores ferè idem valet quod consequi seu aptum idoneumque fieri ad consequendum Id quodinter caetera vel ex vno Cypriani loco apparet Nam quod Paultu inquit 1. Tim. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod vulgò dicitur Misericordiam consecutus sum vel vt Erasmus veriit Misericordiam adeptus sum id Cyprianus ad Iubaianum legit Misericordiam merui Et multa loca sunt in Ecclesiasticis officijs precibus vbi hoc vocabulum hoc intellectu accipi debeat Quae vocis notio si retineatur multa quae duriùs dici videntur mitiora commodiora apparebunt The word Merit saith Cassander among ancient Ecclesiasticall Writers doth commonly import as much as to attaine or to be made apt and fit to attaine or obtaine That which among others doth appeare out of one place of Cyprian For that which Paul saith 1. Tim. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the vulgar latine rendreth But I obtained mercie or as Erasmus rendreth it I got or receiued mercie The same doth Cyprian to Iubaianus reade I merited mercie And many other places saith hee there are in the Ecclesiasticall offices and prayers where this word Merit ought to bee taken in this sense Which sense of the word if it bee retained many things which seeme to be spoken harshly will appear more gentle and accommodate Thus Cassander But this among sundry other sayings of Cassander being condemned by the Index to bee purged out of his workes doth plainly shew what opinion the Pontificians haue of Merit aduancing it to a sense of a higher straine than the ancient Fathers of the Church were euer acquainted withall Or let the Pontificians themselues interpret vnto vs the meaning of this word Merit vsed by St. Augustine speaking of the sinne of our first Parents Foelix culpa quae tale◠meruit Redemptorem Will they say that Adams sinne merited either by Congruity or by Condignity Christ the Redeemer And againe where hee saith Nemo de sui peccati dimissione desperet quando illi veniam meruerunt qui occiderunt Christum Let none despaire of the pardon of his sinne when as they merited pardon which killed Christ. Will they therefore say that they which murthered Christ merited pardon either Congruously or Condignly Or what meant Gregory firnamed the Great Bishop of Rome when he vsed the word Merit to Sauls persecuting the Church of Christ saying Illi dictum est Quid me persequeris Iste verò audire meruit Dimissum est tibi peccatum tuum To him it was said Why do est thou persecute me But he merited to heare Thy sinne is forgiuen thee What merit was this trow we And the same Gregory speaking of the theefe vpon the Crosse saith Latro cruentis manibus audire meruit c. The theefe with his bloudy hands merited to heare This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise What merit was in his bloudy hands But thus we see the meaning of the word Merit in these purer and ancient times vsed for to obtaine or such like But to returne whence we digressed we see Vega and Soto two grand Captaines in the Trent Councell one directly opposite to the other in the matter of merit of Congruity But the Councell through the dexterity of Sancti Crucij hath so composed the decrees and namely this of preparation as that by profound equiuocations euen flat contradictions are reconciled But the conclusion is that merit of Congruitie is ratified by the Councell in the necessity of preparatorie workes to iustification but inuolued in such generall termes that Soto and his side holding the contrary may not take offence at it but be made to beleeue that the Councell is for them In so much as Soto in his three bookes de Natura Gratia which he writes as a Commentary of this Session of the Councell sets downe all the Decrees and Canons of the same as the ground and text of his Commentary Take one notable instance of their egregious equiuocation in the first Canon of this Session before alleadged If any man shall say that a man may bee iustified before God by his owne workes which are done either by the power of mans nature or by the doctrine of the law without diuine grace by Iesus Christ let him be accursed Note here what variety of senses this Canon is full charged withall Would Vega and his side haue their merit of Congruity decreed Here is a Canon leueld against all those that shall say that a man by his own works may be iustified before God without the grace of God implying that by and with the grace of God assisting a man he may be iustified before God by his owne works done by the power of nature as his free-will or by the doctrine of the law Yea but thus Soto may feare that the Anathema the deadly bullet of this Canon will hit himselfe for denying all merit of Congruity done by the power of nature assisted by grace going before iustification Then let Soto but view ouer the Canon againe hee shall see it turned and leuelled against the Pelagians who taught that a man by his owne workes done by the power of nature may be iustified before God without diuine grace by Iesus Christ. Or against the vnbeleeuing Iewes who thought to be iustified before God by the obseruation of Moses law sauing onely that the Councell hath cautelously and correctedly expressed this vnder the name of the letter of Moses law Chapt. 1. as here vnder the name of the doctrine of the law lest as the History of the Trent-Councell hath well obserued if it had passed as at the first draught in these words per legem Mosis by Moses law then exception might haue beene taken in the behalfe of Circumcision to which some ascribing remission of sinnes this Canon or that Decree might haue been a preiudice to their opinion Thus all parties euen the contrary factions of that Councell were well satisfied while one side conceiued the Decree made expresly for them and the other side that it made not against them The Decrees being not vnlike an artificiall indented picturetable which to him that lookes full vpon it presents one kinde of forme or
imputation of sin whereas that sauing faith whereof St. Augustine speaketh is that which doth actually not dispose vnto but possesse a man of the state of grace which is the verie state of iustification as we shall see in the due place hereafter Therefore Popish preparation vnto iustification is nothing else but meere Pelagianisme both Pelagians and Pontificians ioyntly holding that all workes done without or before iustification are no sins CHAP. III. The Catholicke faith touching preparation to iustification THe Romish faith concerning such preparatorie workes to iustification the Catholicke faith of Christs Church doth renounce and disclaime as hereticall and antichristian for these reasons First because the holy Scriptures teach no such thing but the cleane contrarie The Scriptures teach no merit of Congruitie they teach not that free will being stirred vp and helped by I wot not what first grace a man is thereby disposed to receiue iustification but the flat contrary Ioh. 1. 12. As many as receiue Christ and such are they as beleeue in him are made the Sonnes of God But doth not this grace come by some disposition in mans nature as by his free will assisted and so cooperating with the grace of God for the attaining of iustification No such thing For verse 13 Christ teacheth that those Sonnes of God are borne not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God Where note a direct opposition betweene Gods grace and mans will in the worke of Regeneration or Iustification mans will being by a negatiue vtterly excluded from any copartnership with God Not of the will of man but of God So Titus 3. 5. Not by workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but according to his mercie he saued vs c. Where all humane workes going before Iustification all merits of congruitie are excluded from disposing a man to receiue iustification for not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee haue done but according to his mercie bee saueth vs. And Rom. 4. 5. To him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his Faith is counted for righteousnesse Note God iustifieth the vngodly therefore not the righteous not the meritorious by Congruitie vnlesse vngodlinesse and sinne can merit iustification at Gods hand as St. Augustine said of Adams sinne Foelix culpa quae talem meruit Redemptorem It was a happie sinne that merited such a Redeemer Whereas besides some places of Scripture which they peruert to their purpose they obiect the examples of the Eunuch Acts 8. and of Cornelius Acts 10. by which they would proue their workes of Congruitie as Vega alledgeth them Vega may remember what he said in another place before where hee produceth St. Augustines authoritie to proue that these two were true beleeuers before the Apostles came and preached vnto them which also Vega himselfe subscribeth vnto confessing that these two had grace and faith before sauing onely the difference is in the acception of grace and faith wherein the Pontifician egregiously equiuocateth the true nature whereof wee shall hereafter discouer But say that neither the Eunuch nor Cornelius before they were instructed by the Apostles had the grace of iustification doth it therefore follow that those workes of theirs did by Congruity merit iustification at Gods hands or that they were thereby prepared to iustification Why did not then Esau's teares merit the blessing ex congruo or why did not Ahab's repentance merit by Congruity not onely a repriuall of punishment but an absolute pardon of his sinne for they did quantum in se fuit as much as in them lay Or else according to Romes doctrine God must be vniust or at least wanting in his natiue goodnesse For further cleering of this point come we to the ancient Fathers to whom also this doctrine of merit of Congruity and of Condignity was altogether vnknowne This Vega himselfe is forced to confesse where making this obiection Why did the Fathers saith hee no where vse this distinction of merit of Congruity and Condignity to which he answereth If all things which neuer were in vse among the Fathers are to be condemned we shall be forced to condemne many things which all Catholickes now receiue And the Philosopher should haue said in vaine Scientiaes fieri per additamenta that Sciences are brought to passe by addition But he addeth Neither are we to grant that this distinction of merit of Congruity and Condignity was altogether vnknowne to the Fathers They acknowledged the things although they vsed not the termes saith Vega seeing they diuersly vsed the word of Merit as either strictly or largely whereof we shall speake more largely hereafter In the meane time let vs see what workes of preparation the ancient Fathers taught or inioyned as necessarie to dispose a man to iustification by way of merit taken in the largest sense as Vega at least would haue it But before we come to set downe the ancient doctrine of the Church concerning this point I must premonish the Reader seriously to note this one thing in the Fathers That when they speake of grace and faith whereby a man is iustified they meane nothing else but sauing grace and iustifying faith not now preparing a man vnto but actually placing and possessing him in the state of iustification and saluation They meane nothing lesse than any such first grace preparatory and euen common to wicked men which neuer come to partake of the second grace as the Romanists doe teach The Fathers admit of no such meane betweene sauing grace and faith and betweene sauing faith and iustification betweene any first second grace as differing in kinde but vnderstand one sauing effectuall grace Indeede St. Augustine speaketh of a first and second grace but by the first he meaneth that of iustification by the second that of sanctification differing no more but as the roote and the branch the tree and the fruit Or St. Augustine acknowledgeth no other first grace but that which is giuen to the elect in this life saying Coronat in nobis Deus dona misericordiae suae sed si in ea gratia quam primam accepimus perseueranter ambulemus God crowneth the gifts of his mercie in vs but if in that first grace which we haue receiued we walke with perseuerance Ambrose saith He that dare preach that the grace of God is giuen according to mens merits preacheth against the Catholike faith Therefore this doctrine of merit of congruity was no Catholicke doctrine in Saint Ambrose his dayes nor doth he meane any other grace but that of iustification All the preparation this holy man alloweth is where he saith Duce Deo venitur ad Deum by God leading vs we come vnto God And St. Chrysostome So soone as a man beleeues hee is iustified And St. Augustine Praedestinatio est praeparatio gratiae Predestination is the preparation to grace to wit of iustification And
facimus sed ille facit vt faciamus praebendo vires efficacissimas voluntati And Epist. 107 to Vitalis Carthaginen vpon that of the Apostle Phil. 2. God worketh in vs euen to will he saith Vera Dei gratia praevenit hominis voluntatem bonam nec eam cuiusquaminuenit in corde sed facit The true grace of God preuenteth mans good will neither findes he it in any mans heart but makes it good Whereupon in his second booke against Iulian the Pelagian hee calleth it Seruum arbitrium saying Hic vultis hominem perfici atque vtiuam Dei dono non libero vel potius seruo propriae voluntatis arbitrio You would haue a man perfected and I would it were by the gift of God and not by the free or rather seruile arbitrement of his owne will Thus according to St. Augustine mans liberum arbitrium is by Adams fall turned into seruum arbitrium seruing onely to sinne and to turne it to good it must not onely bee moued stirred or helped but freed by Gods grace which is a worke of power in disarming the strong man And what this grace is hath beene shewed afore to wit Gods sauing grace The true grace of God saith Augustine not a common grace Deuout Bernard vnderstands by free-will a meere will in man without respect to the obiect good or euill Velle inest nobis ex libero arbitrio non etiam posse quod volumus Non dico velle bonum aut velle malum sed tantum velle To will is in vs proceeding from free-will but not to performe what we will I say not to will good or to will euill but onely to will And againe Corruit homo de posse non peccare in non posse non peccare amissa ex toto complaciti libertate Man fell from a possibility not to sinne to an impossibility of not sinning hauing altogether lost the liberty of delight Per propriam quippe voluntatem serâ—â—â— peccati factus meritò perdidit libertatem confilij for by his owne proper will being made the seruant of sinne hee hath deseruedly lost the liberty of his election or counsell Now how shall all this be repaired againe The same Bernard resolueth it Velle homini vt esset creans gratia fecit vt proficiat saluans gratia facit vt deficiat ipsum se deijcit That man should haue a will is from creating grace that this will should profit is from sauing grace that it should decay iâ— of its owne voluntary defection It is therefore a worke not of common grace as they vnderstand by the first grace whereby they say the will is moued but of effectuall sauing grace to restore the will of man and fit it for Christ. Habet igitur homo necessariam Dei virtutem Dei sapientiam Christum qui ex eo quod sapientia est verum ei sapere re-infundat in restaurationem liberi consilij ex eo quod virtus est plenum posse restituat in reparationem liberi complaciti Man therefore hath the necessarie vertue of God and wisedome of God which is Christ who as hee is wisedome doth re-infuse wisedome to know the truth to the restauration of the freedome of election and as he is vertue doth restore a full power to the reparation of the freedome of delight and happinesse which saith he is begun here in grace and consummate hereafter in glory And again concerning free-will he saith Nemo putet ideo dictum liberum arbitrium quod aequa inter bonum aut malum potestate aus facultate versetur cum cadere per se quidem potuerit non autem resurgere nisi per Domini spiritum Ergo si à Domini spiritu iam non à libero arbitrio Let no man thinke that free-will is therefore so called as hauing an equall and indifferent power or faculty betweene good and euill seeing it could fall by it selfe but not â—ise againe but by the spirit of the Lord. And if it bee by the spirit of the Lord it is not now of free-will And St. Augustine tells vs plainly what that grace is whereby the will is freed to wit Gratia Dei per Iesum Christum Dominâ—m nostrum in qua nos suâ— non nostra iustitia instos facit c. That grace whereby the will is freed is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord wherein hee maketh vs iust by his owne not by our righteousnesse c. But saith the carnall minde If man haue not free-will to accept grace offered what cause hath God to complaine or to condemne man for that which is not in his power to performe I might answer with the Apostle O vaine man who art thou that repliest against God But I answer againe Though man haue no will of himselfe to receiue grace offered yet he hath a will to reiect grace offered for which he is iustly condemned So that mans corrupt will is sufficient to conuict him though no way able to conuert him after that manner which Pontificians teach And thus God needeth not mans carnall wit to pleade for the equity of his iustice sith God doth not simply condemne men for that which by nature they are inuincibly vnable to performe as by the vertue of free-will to receiue grace offered but for that which is in their power and will to doe namely when they not only not willingly receiue but wilfully and contemptuously reiect and put from them the grace of God offered them in the Gospel And iustly doe all such obiecters come within the compasse of Iobs censure Iob 13. 7. Will yee speake wickedly for God and talke deceitfully for him c. As Saint Hierome Concede Deo potentiam sui nequaquam te indiget defensore Let God be Master of himselfe he needes not thee to pleade for him Now by the former testimonies as by a cloud of witnesses the Church of Rome is sufficiently conuicted of grosse absurditie and of grieuous impiety in her doctrine of preparation to iustification wherein her Gordian knot of manifold errours while the Romish Harlot would haue the liuing childe diuided betweene her and the true Mother Gods grace is cut asunder and dissolued by the sharpe sword of Salomons wisedome First because the worke of preparation is rather the worke of iustification it selfe and that so soone as the vnderstanding is inlightened and the will inflamed to apprehend Christ by faith Secondly because that grace of God whereby the will of man is prepared to iustification as they say is no common grace receiued as well by the reprobate as the elect but the sauing and iustifying grace of God which whosoeuer receiueth is more truly said to bee already actually iustified than disposed and prepared thereunto Thirdly because the work of Gods grace in mouing the vnderstanding and the will to embrace Christ is no weake and common worke but a worke of power in loosing the workes of the Diuell that strong man
here may be fitly moued Quest. Whether the obedience of the whole Law of God wrought by Christ for vs is auaileable as to redeeme vs from the punishment of sinne so to purchase vnto vs eternall life in heauen The reason of the question is because not the Law if it had beene for euer perfectly fulfilled by Adam had any promise of that eternall life and immediate vision in heauen but only of this life Heauen is not within the Couenant of workes Answ. True it is that the fulfilling of the Law in it selfe simply considered hath no proportion with that endlesse life aboue For the first Adam was of the earth earthly and all his happinesse promised vpon the condition of keeping the Law for ought is reuealed or can be demonstrated was terrestriall But now forasmuch as the Law is fulfilled by Christ this obedience reacheth to a higher reward because there is a higher promise made than that of the first Adam Because Christ the second Adam is the Lord from heauen the Eternal whose Kingdom is not of this world but of a better a heauenly whose house is not made with hands So that his obedience to the Law in regard of his person becomes a rich and inestimable purchase of that better Kingdome for vs. For as is the heauenly such are they that are heauenly to wit the generation of God in and by Iesus Christ 1 Cor. 15. 48. 49. 50. vide Iohn 3. 13. No man ascendeth vp to heauen but he c. Thus haue we proued out of the holy Scriptures how the formall cause of iustification or that which giues a perfect being to our iustification making vs perfectly iust in the sight of God is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs and that euen of his whole righteousnesse actiue in his life and passiue in his death And that the formall cause of our iustification is not within vs but without vs not inherent but by imputation may easily appeare from the maine difference betweene the first Couenant and the second The first Couenant was that which was made with Adam in Paradise Doe this and liue the second that made with man after his fal Beleeue and liue So the first Couenant was of workes the second of faith the first of an inherent righteousnesse of our owne the second of a righteousnesse without vs not our owne simply but by relation namely made ours to wit Christs righteousnesse who of God is made vnto vs righteousnesse called in Scriptures the righteousnesse which is of faith Not to obserue and know this difference well is the ready way to leade men into all errour of this mysterie of God The Apostle doth notably set downe this difference between the first and second Couenant as termes infinitely opposite and admitting of no reconciliation Rom. 10. 3. when hee saith that the Iewes being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and going about to establish their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the vnrighteousnesse of God For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to euery one that beleeueth For Moses describeth the righteousnesse which is of the Law that the man which doth those things shall liue by them But the righteousnesse which is of Faith is to confesse with thy mouth the Lord Iesus and to beleeue in thy heart that God raised him from the dead and thou shalt be saued Also Rom. 11. 6. If it be by grace it is no more of workes otherwise grace is no more grace but if it bee of workes then it is no more grace otherwise worke is no more worke Also Rom. 4. the Apostle setting downe this same opposition betweene the Couenant of workes and of faith saith on this wise v. 2. c. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God For what saith the Scripture Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Euen as Dauid also describeth the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne What clearer Testimonies Yea this did God himselfe teach vs not obscurely by his own act Gen. 3. For when Adam had forfeited the first Couenant which was of workes made with him in Paradise before his fall and after his fall had made with him another Couenant to wit of faith in Christ the promised seede of the woman What doth God thereupon Hee shuts man out of Paradise and from the Tree of life lest putting forth his hand hee should take of it and liue for euer What is meant hereby Paradise was not only the place but also did signifie the happy condition of Adams blessednesse which he was to enioy in his innocencie the Tree of life was a sacrament and symbol of life appointed as a speciall meanes to preserue man from dying or decaying in his naturall strength so long as he continued in his obedience But by disobedience hee forfeited the Couenant brake the condition lost his former happinesse and was depriued of the meanes of that life wherein hee should haue liued for euer vpon earth Now God shutting him out from the earthly Paradise the place of earthly blisse and from the Tree of life the sacrament and symbol of immortalitie and hauing shewed vnto him another Tree of life in the middest of the Paradise of God to wit Iesus Christ who is very God and eternall life which whosoeuer by reaching out the hand of Faith eateth of shall liue for euer God I say doth hereby plainely teach vs that in attaining to the heauenly Paradise by the Tree of life Iesus Christ wee must not haue any more to doe with the things pertaining to the first Couenant now altogether forfeited and from which Adam and his posteritie is for euer banished neuer to returne or intermeddle there any more Gen. 3 22. 23. 24. Therefore to teach and beleeue the doctrine of an inherent righteousnesse whereby to attaine eternall life is euen as it were in despite of God and of his holy Angels the Cherubims keeping the way of the Tree of life to reuiue the old Couenant of workes againe and with the hand of the body to wit good workes reach out to take of the tree of life This is a Babylonish confounding of the two Couenants which stand vpon such irreconcileable termes of difference Is there no more difference betweene Do this and liue and Beleeue and liue betweene mans owne righteousnesse and Gods righteousnesse the establishing of the one being the abolishing of the other Nor is it to purpose that these Babylonians alledge that they ascribe their inherent righteousnesse to God as the author of it and by whom
this thou canst not number vp so many good dueties which thou hast done as this all-seeing Iudge can number and set before thee greater and weightier duties which thou hast altogether omitted And more than that too this Iudge can muster vp vnto thee whole Legions of sins which thou hast committed the least whereof all the men in the world with all their merits their arrogant works of supererogation the fained treasure of the Church with Masses and Dirges and whatsoeuer else man or Angel can deuise cannot possibly appease the wrath and satisfie the iustice of this Iudge for For if all the Creatures in the world could satisfie Gods iustice for one sinne wherefore dyed the innocent Lambe and the only Sonne of God Well then in this case what wilt thou doe whither wilt thou flye where wilt thou seeke reliefe for thy perplexed spirit where comfort for thine appalled conscience where a sanctuary for thy soule now pursued with the hue and cry of diuiue iustice and reuenge of hell and Satan of the guilt of thy tormenting conscience for sinne Thy good workes and merits They cry guilty before Gods throne of many imperfections defects corruptions If thy actuall transgressions which are many if thy totall omissions of dueties which thou oughtest to haue done should bee silent yet euen thy best actions which thou bringest to pleade for thee would and must tell the truth and become a full grand Iurie to bring-in the verdict of thy condemnation And then thou shalt be found such as the Gospell hath doomed who pleading their great workes before the Iudge receiued this sentence I know you not depart from mee yee workers of iniquitie Dost thou not thinke it safest now to bee of thy Brother or thy Father Bellarmines minde who howsoeuer as a member of the Papall State he writ mainely against the truth of iustification yet one time speaking his conscience and vttering his priuate iudgement said Propter incertitudinem propriae iustitiae periculum inanis gloriae tutissimum est fiduciam in sola Dei misericordia benignitate reponere Because of the vncertainty of our owne righteousnesse and the perill of vaine glory it is most safe to repose our confidence in the only mercy and fauour of God Only herein be vnlike this Brother or Father of thine For this sentence of his standing in his workes shall rise vp in iudgement against him at the latter day for all his lyes spoken through hypocrisie but let it teach thee so to renounce all thy supposed merits as reposing thy selfe in the only mercies of God and merits of Christ thou mayst flying from Babylon finde mercy and saluation in the great day of the Lord Iesus Let me hereunto adde a passage or two one out of Augustine his Manual which Booke though it bee fathered vpon some other Author yet the chiefe matter of it is confessed to bee collected out of Augustines Workes In omnibus aduersitatibus non inuenio tam efficax remedium quà m vulnera Christi in illis dormio securus requiesco intrepidus Christus mortuus est prâ—nobis Nihil tam ad mortem amarum quod morte Christi non sanâ—tur Tota spes mea est in morte Domini mei Mors eius meritum meum refugium meum salus vita resurrectio mea merituâ— meum miseratio Domini Non sum meriti inops quamdiu ille miserationum Dominus non defuerit Et misericordiae Domini multae multus ego sum in meritis Quanto ille potentior est ad saluandum tanto ego securior Peccaut peccatum grande multorum sum mihi conscius delictorum nec sic despero quia vbi abundauerunt delicta superabundauit gratia In all aduersities saith hee I find not a more effectuall remedy than the wounds of Christ in them I sleepe securely in them I rest without feare Christ dyed for vs. There is nothing in death so bitter which cannot be cured with the death of Christ. All my hope is in the death of my Lord. His death is my demerit my refuge my saluation life and resurrection my merit is the Lords mercy I want no merit so long as the Lord of mercies is not wanting And while the Lord is rich in mercies I am rich in merits The more able he is to saue the more am I secure I haue committed some haynous sin and am guilty of many trespasses yet I despaire not because where sins haue abounded there grace hath also super abounded And in the 23. Chapter Inter bâ—achia Saluatoris mei viuere volo mori cupio Betweene the armes of my Sauiour it is both my will to liue and my wish to dye Another passage to this purpose I finde in Gregory in the conclusion of that singular worke of his Morals where speaking of mans good workes and good intentions concludeth thus St de his diuinitus districtè discutimur quis inter ista remanet salutis locus quando mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos habere credimus pura bona esse nequaquam possunt If saith he we be strictly sifted by God concerning these things what place would bee left for saluation in them seeing that both our euill actions are simply euill and the good things which we beleeue we haue cannot be simply good Which place of Gregory beeing alledged by Luther to proue none can bee certaine that hee doth not alwaies mortally sinne although Iohn Bishop of Rochester would haue Gregory to meane not all workes but only such as we vainely boast of as Sixtus Senensis relateth Yet Gregories meaning is easily discouered by the title or contents prefixed to the said Chapter in these words Quod Sanctus Gregorius in his quae iam recta intentione protulit vanae gloriae vel laudis hâ—manae fauorem subrepsisse sibi formidat pro recompensatione operis postulat orationem lectoris that is That St. Gregory in those things which he did with a right intention feareth lest some affectation of vaine glory or humane applause might haue crept in vpon him and for a recompence of his worke desireth the Readers prayers And it is plaine also by the whole tenure of that Chapter that Gregory durst not trust his best workes vpon the tryall of Gods strict iudgement seeing that a mans best intentions are subiect to bee tainted with secret pride and vaine glory And the said Bishop of Rochester may seeme too sharpe in his censure the sequell whereof tends to a flat condemnation of Gregories best intentions as if he had beene directly conscious of pride in them whereas Gregory onely feareth least some such corruption might haue secretly stollen in vpon him And to confirme this and put it out of all question Gregory in another place speaketh excellently to this purpose Omnis humana iustitia iniustitia esse conuincitur si districtè iudicetur Prece ergo post iustitiam indiget vt quae succumbere
not onely of the Diuines but also of all the Bishops who were perswaded that their opinion was right that they had hit vpon the truth So that the Cardinall of St. Crosse saw that many had more neede of a bridle than of spurres and by frequent digressions from the purpose and passages to other questions he often would expresse his desire of putting an end to this controuersie It was twice propounded in the Synod of the Prelates to relinquish altogether this question as being ambiguous long and tedious yet affection bearing sway they fell backe vpon it againe Thus farre the History which though somewhat long yet I hope the Reader will not thinke it more tedious in the reading of it than I haue done in the inserting of it which I haue the rather done that it might the more appear how this point of certainty hauing on the one side euidence of truth to confirme it and on the other humane wit and affection to oppugne it did puzzle and perplexe the whole Synod and fill them full of vncertainties Wee see those reasons and authorities alledged by the aduerse faction who were for vncertainty very acutely and pregnantly answered by Catarinus and those with him Also whereas they catched here and there at some passages of the Fathers seeming to fauour their doctrine of vncertainty it is well noted by the History that the Fathers might sometimes by accommodating their exhortations to the people as the occasion required represse the insolency of such as were presumptuous and vainly confident in the assurance of their saluation howsoeuer they continued in sinne whereas the Fathers in their maine discourses of faith speake most clearely in the confirmation of the certainty of iustification as we shall see hereafter Come wee now to Vega's incounters with the certainty of faith he takes great paines to beate the ayre what with answering what with vrging arguments for his Pontifician Goddesse Vncertainty now an Article of Romes faith Hee vndertakes according to his rare dexterity to answer all opposites and to expound or moderate the meaning of such authorities as are alledged out of the Scriptures or Fathers making them by some pretty quaint distinction to speake iust as him listeth The first place he bringeth for his vncertainty is out of Iob 9. 20. If I iustifie my selfe mine owne mouth shall condemne mee if I say I am perfect it shall also proue me peruerse Vega makes much adoe about this place fending and prouing but the very sight of the Text is sufficient to confute his folly in applying it to his vncertainty of iustification when as this place doth giue such a deadly wound to their iustification it selfe by their inherent righteousnesse which holy Iob here vtterly disclaimeth But doth Iob here vtter one syllable of the vncertainty of his faith in God his Sauiour and Redeemer Nay doth he not protest the contrary Though he slay mee yet will I trust in him And vers 18. Behold now I haue ordered my cause I know that I shall be iustified Who is he that will pleade with mee What clearer testimony could this holy man giue of his strong confidence and assurance of his iustification by faith in God So that I maruaile Vega would at all meddle with the example of Iob who throughout his booke is such a cleare mirrour of a true beleeuer whose faith is fortified with all confidence and assurance sauing that hee can easily impute Iobs certainty to a speciall reuelation and not to the property of faith But let not Vega with his iugling by casting a false myst think so easily to eclipse the clear beames of truth With the like successe he is tampering with Dauid and Salomon He alledgeth that of Dauid Who can vnderstand his errors Hereupon he inferreth if a man doe not know his sins how can he be sure of his iustification To this allegation we neede vse no other answer but Bernards exposition which Vega himselfe both obiecteth and takes vpon him to answer that these words of Dauid are vnderstood onely of veniall sinnes not of mortall This Vega confessing to be verisimile very probable and likely to be true yet answereth that seeing mortall sinnes are more truely and properly sinnes and do more defile the soule than veniall sinnes why should these words bee restrained onely to veniall sinnes I will not now enter into a discussion of veniall and mortall sinnes a distinction most grosly and impiously abused by the Pontificians but this I say that according to the iudgement of Pontificians of veniall sinnes they must needes confesse that these words Dauid must bee meant onely of veniall sinnes that is such as the Pontificians call veniall The very word in the vulgar Latine will beare no other sense Delicta which signifieth slippes or errors or certaine defects and omissions such as the Pontificians ranke amongst their veniall sinnes But this place of Dauid makes nothing at all against certainty of faith For what if a man yea the holiest man if Dauid doe not know his sinnes his slippes and errors yet while he complaines hereof and confesseth them in generall vnto God praying O cleanse thou me from my secret faults what hindreth but that God cleansing him from all his faults should seale vnto him the certainty of the remission of all his sins apprehended by a liuely faith As Dauid saith in the 32. Psalme Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiuen and whose sinne is couered c. But how shall a man come to be certaine of this his blessednesse Dauid instanceth it in himselfe vers 5. I acknowledged my sinne vnto thee and mine iniquity haue I not hid I said I will confesse my transgressions vnto the Lord and thou forgauest the iniquity of my sinne How did Dauid know that God had forgiuen his sinnes seeing he saith peremptorily Thou forgauest the iniquity of my sinne Did not Dauid know this by the certainty of faith Vega I know hath his answer at his fingers ends and will say that Dauid came to know this eyther by speciall diuine reuelation or else by Nathans pronouncing Dauids absolution saying The Lord hath put away thy sinne Yea but Dauid tels vs in the next words that this was not his case alone but it was common to euery godly man in particular For this saith Dauid shall euery one that is godly pray vnto thee in a time when thou mayst be found that is Euery godly man should haue the like comfortable successe vpon his repentance as Dauid had and say with confidence as Dauid did Thou forgauest the transgression of my sinne But Vega suspecting the strength of the Father's authority he addes thereto the Sonnes to wit Salomons Pro. 20. 9. Who can say I haue made my heart cleane I am pure from my sin Quis Who That is few or none saith Vega sith interrogations in Scripture and in the Fathers are commonly taken for negations And he produceth Hieromes exposition vpon the second of Ioel
himselfe saith For their sakes I sanctifie my selfe that they also might be sanctified through the truth Ioh. 17. 19. So that the actiue obedience of Christ in his life his holinesse as of a seruant is also imputed to vs For how was hee a seruant in our person but that hee might free vs from the condition of seruants That as the passiue obedience of Christ in his death remoued away from vs the ragges of our sins the badge and band of our seruitude So Christs actiue obedience in his life hath put vpon vs the most glorious libertie of our infranchisement and freedome his death hath cleansed vs his life hath clothed vs. These two therefore are in no sort to be diuided vnlesse we would bee content to haue our deliuerance from hel separated from our inheritance in heauen and still to bee subiect to the punishment of losse though free from the punishment of sense like those infants who dying vnbaptized the Pontificians haue deuised to put them in a certain Limbus or Hell wherein they must suffer though not the punishment of sense yet the punishment of losse as they say But as this is a meere fiction and fable so is that other it being as impossible for a man â—uer to come to possesse the Kingdome of Heauen without the imputation of Christs actiue obedience and righteousnesse as without his passion imputed euer to escape hell fire So that Christ cannot be diuided wee must haue him whole or none For it was necessary that the actiue righteousnesse of Christ should both goe before and accompany his passiue obedience seeing without the actiue the passiue should haue been altogether vnprofitable therefore they are ioyned together Phil. 2. 7 8. that so his passiue might seale vnto vs his actiue and his actiue sanctifie vnto vs his passiue Nay was not his passiue obedience also actiue by a voluntary offering vp of himselfe Was hee not obedient vnto the death Saith not Christ himselfe Ioh. 10. 15. I lay downe my life for my sheepe and vers 17. Therefore doth my father loue me because I lay downe my life that I might take it againe and vers 18. No man taketh it from me but I lay it downe of my selfe I haue power to lay it downe and I haue power to take it againe Christs passiue obedience therefore being it selfe also actiue how can these two possibly bee separated and diuorced one from the other That as the passiue obedience of Christ hath freed vs from sinne hell death and condemnation so the actiue obedience of his life might restore vs vnto possesse vs in the perfect state of righteousnesse life saluation and the Kingdome of heauen Yea these two are so vnseparable as that the confluence of all the sweet streames of Christs actiue obedience in his life haue a most sweete and comfortable influence into the bitter sea of his passiue obedience in his death making it to bee a most perfect and intire sacrifice the holinesse of Christs life sanctifying his death and shewing him to bee that Lambe of God without spot or blemish So that we cannot be partakers of Christs passiue obedience without his actiue lest hee proue vnto vs a lame and imperfect sacrifice And therefore the Apostle doth infold the affirmatiue imputation in the negatiue saying Euen as Dauid also described the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne Here is imputation of righteousnesse without workes concurring with the not imputing of sinnes For euen the passiue obedience of Christ whereby our sinnes come not to bee imputed had in it the holinesse and vertue of his actiue obedience throughout his whole life hauing beene obedient vnto his death that so the righteousnesse of his life also might be imputed vnto vs. Stella vpon Luke saith Omnes passiones Christi potius actionis nomine appellandae sunt quam passiones Christi martyrium crucis eius tormentum nihil redemptioni nostrae prodessent nisi actionem habuissent quod est velle flageâ—â—ari velle crucifigi All the passions or sufferings of Christ are rather to bee called actions than passions The martyrdome of Christ and the torment of his Crosse had auailed nothing to our redemption if they had not had action which is to be willing to be scourged and willing to be crucified He therefore that separates the actiue obedience of Christ in his life from his passiue in his death is like the man in the Gospell whom when the vncleane spirit had cleane left returned and finding him as an house swept with whited wals but voide of the garnish of grace he takes seuen other spirits worse than himselfe makes with them his re-entry and dwels there so the last state of that man is worse than the first Such is he that seemes to be cleansed from his sinnes and all his vncleannesse like a new swept house by acknowledging the righteousnesse of Christs passiue obedience in his death imputed to him but neglecting yea reiecting the righteousnesse of Christs actiue obedience in his life as nothing pertaining to him in the point of iustification but as though hee must haue a selfe-garnish as of a whited wall inherent in him whereby to claime the kingdome of heauen he becometh seuen times more vncleane than he was before O neuer let Christs life and death be diuided his actiue obedience his passiue let euer go together lest if we let go the one we lose both Therefore giue me whole Christ or none both his death that I may not dye for euer from him and his life that I may liue for euer with him The learned and godly Cardinall Contarenus who liued in Luthers time and writ soundly of iustification saith well to this purpose Omnis Christi iustitia attribuitur nobis quicunque Christum induimus The whole righteousnesse of Christ is attributed or imputed to vs as many as haue put on Christ. For to conclude this in a word the redemption by Christ procureth two things vnto vs deliuerance from death and the purchase of life By his passiue obedience hee wrought the first by his actiue the second For properly the death of Christ was to free vs from death but the life of Christ to infeoffe vs in life The condition of the first Adams life was Doe this and liue the second Adam hath done it that we might liue eternally eternally not as Adam had the promise here on earth but in heauen Hence it is that as Iesus Christ descended into the state of death to redeeme vs thence by his death So hee came downe from heauen that in the humility and obedience of his life on earth he might exalt vs thither whither else not euen Adams best obedience could euer haue brought him much lesse ours Which may answer to a question that