by those against whom S. Iohn S. Iames S. Peter and S. Iude writeth as Augustine testifieth and then by Simon Magus and Eunomius and lastly by Luther and Caluin But heerein hee resembleth the Iewes Luke 11. that attribute the miracles of Christ to the power of Belzebub For this Doctrine of iustification by faith without workes is the Doctrine not of Satan as this Satanicall Masse-priest affirmeth but of the holy Ghost We conclude saith the Apostle Rom. 3. that a man is justified by fayth without the works of the Law Neither doth he vnderstand the works of the ceremoniall Law or works done by force of free-will For then he would not haue excluded all the workes of the Law nor denyed that Abraham was iustified by workes Furthermore he would only haue concluded that man is not iustified by the ceremoniall Law or by workes done by the force of free-will without grace S. Augustine also lib. de fid et oper c. 14. teacheth vs that man is first iustified and then doth good workes His wordes speaking of good works are these sequuntur iustificatum non praecedunt iustificandum They follow him that is justified and goe not before in him that is to be iustified As for those Christians that turned the grace of God into wantonnesse as Saint Iude sayth and the rest against whome the Apostles wrote they did altogether contemne good workes a matter much condemne and farre from vs. Simon Magus likewise Eunomius gaue themselues ouer to a dissolute life and Eunomius promising saluation to his followers beleeuing only speaketh not of the true fayth of Christ but of his owne wicked and Hereticall fayth But Luther and Caluin neither speake against good workes nor conteÌ„ne them nor allow of their opinions that contemne good workes but only exclude them from being the cause of iustification or concurring in the act of iustification before Gods tribunall seate Otherwise they exhorte all Christians to good works and highly prayse them as the fruites of our iustification and very acceptable in Gods sight And this Doctrine they deuised not of their owne brayne but receiued it from the Apostles and the ancient Fathers of the Church Cum dicit apostolus saith Saint Augustine de fid et operib C. 14. arbitrari se iustificari hominem per â—â—dem sine operibus legis non hoc agit vt praecepta contemnaÌ„tur sed vt sciat se quisque per fidem iustificari etiam si legis opera non praecesserint When the Apostle sayth that hee beleeueth man to be justified by fayth without the works of the Law he entendeth not that the commaundements should be despised but would that euery man should knowe that hee is justified by fayth albeit the workes of the Lawe goe not before Against vs therefore neither the words of Iude nor of other apostles make any thing But against our aduersaries if S. Augustine bee Iudge they ayme directly arbitrantur saith he Lib. de fid et operib c. 15. per quasdam poenas ignis eos posse purgari ad salutem percipiendam merito fundamenti Hee saith the certaine in his time errooniously beleeued that such as liue lewdly may be saued through fire holding the foundation And against such hee disputeth and applyeth the Apostles wordes Secondly our aduersarie telleth vs that Luther and Caluin teach that good-works are mortall sinnes and that faith according to Caluins opinion is sinne But that is rather a lewd sinfull tricke to impute that to any which hee neuer wrote nor thought Nay it appeareth manifestlie that they teach contrarie Thirdly hee asketh a question where we reade in Scriptures that only faith justifieth But this question we haue alredy answeared And now we say further that this is found in all places where either the Law and works are excluded from causing iustification or else we are said to be iustified freely and by grace or else are taught that the iust doth liue by fayth The Apostle Gal. 2. sayth if justice be by the Law that Chirst dyed in vaine And Gal. 5. volentes iustificari per legem à gratia exciderunt While they sought for justice by the Law they fell from Christ Neither is our aduersaries exception of any moment where hee sayth that the workes of the ceremoniall Law and of the Gentiles are only excluded by the words of the Apostle For he doth not onely speake of the Gentiles but of Abraham that was the Father of the faithfull denyeth that he was iustified by works The prophet Dauid also Psal 32. pronouÌ„ceth him blessed to whome God imputeth no sin Which sheweth that it is not the ceremoniall Law but the whole Lawe whose transgressions are imputed to vs. And the Apostle generally excludeth all workes for which a reward is due from iustification Ei qui operatur merces non imputatur secundum gratiam He addeth also how fayth may be sayd to justifie But he might haue remembred that here he is no teacher but an aduersary We do therfore rather expect arguments then documents from him His exposition of faith iustifying as a disposition or as a worke is farre from truth and from the meaning of the Apostle who excluding our workes placeth our true iustification before God in Gods mercy and Christs iustice made ours by fayth To conclude this point seeing none are saued but such as are iustifyed and none are iustifyed by workes of the law but such as performe the whole law it is manifest that before God which is so iust and holy and leaueth no sin vnpunished no sinner is iustified by the workes of the law If it were otherwise then would it folow that Mary Magdalen and other great sinners transgressing the law were iustified by the law Fourthly he saith It is an absurd heresie to say that faith caÌ„not be without workes But if he speake of a true liuely and iustifiing faith he is rather an absurd heretike if he say that the same may be without good works The apostle saith that faith worketh by charity and that the iust doth liue by faith But liuely faith is actiue S. Augustine also lib. de fid et oper c. 16. dooth testifie that true faith cannot bee voide of workes fides Christi saith he fides gratiae Christianae id est ea fides quae per dilectionem operatur posita in fundamento nâ—minem perire permittit So it appereth it deserueth not the name of Christian faith that worketh not by charitie In this place also this K. accuseth the Lutherans Caluinistes as he calleth them for their euill life But this is onely an ordinarie phrase of his rayling stile For not those that exclude workes from causing our iustification before God but such as albeit they pretend faith and works yet neither haue true faith nor good workes are guiltie of this accusation If we please to parralell those whome hee calleth Lutherans and Caluinistes with the Popes Cardinals Masse-priestes and their adherentes I doubt not but they will
be saued redeemed But if Christ be not our formal justice thē his iustice was not made our iustice which contradicteth the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. If he did not formally satisfie for vs then he dyed almost in vaine and we are to satisfie for our selues If he be only the meritorious cause of our redemption and saluation then hath not Christ saued or redeemed vs but we are to saue and redeeme our selues as well as we can If by grace together with our cooperation we are saued and redeemed as this K. saith then we are formally saued and redeemed without Christ which only commeth in as a meritorious cause Beside that if grace here be nothing but charity or a habit not distinct from Charity as Schoole-men teach then our owne workes properly saue vs and not Christes Passion Finally if Christes redemption of vs from sinne be nothing else but a deseruing of grace by which we dispose our selues to justification if he hath freed vs from the tyrāny of the Diuill and captiuity of Hell because he hath procured vs grace by which we may resist maugre all the force of Hell and hath satisfied for our sinnes to obtaine vs grace that we may satisfie for all our sinnes as this wicked blasphemer teacheth pag. 262. Then is man the principall cause of his owne iustification and good workes should goe before iustification and Christ should not deserue to be called our redeemer or sauiour but a grace giuer that men might free and redeeme them selues And lastly not Christ should satisfie for vs but wee should satisfie for our selues All which poyntes are not only contrarie to Scriptures and absurd but vtterly ouerthrow the worke of Christes satisfaction and ransome payd for vs. In the third Chapter of his third Booke hee goeth on rayling against vs cryeth out with open mouth that we make Christ no redeemer at all and his reason is for that we teach that euen righteous men are sinners and that our sinnes are couered by the imputation of Christ his satisfaction and righteousnesse But his Collection is so foolish that if there were a whole couent of Fooles in place he might well prooue Abbot For Saint Iohn sayth that if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs. And the Apostle Rom. 4. out of the Prophet sayth blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered And yet Kellison will not say but that these holy Apostles acknowledged Christ to bee their redeemer Our Sauiour also taught the Apostles to pray for the forgiuenesse of their trespasses Finally to say that a Christian can liue without sin is playne Pelagianisme Hierome dialog 1. aduers Pelagianos setteth downe these two propositiōs for the ground of Pelagianisme that a man may be without sinne if he will and that Gods commaundements are easie Saint Augustine likewise Lib. de haeres c. 88. reckoneth this assertion among the heades of Pelagius his heresie that the life of just-men in this world hath no sinne at all Neither is Kellisons exception of any moment For it followeth not if Christ make not men cleare without sinne that Adam is more potent then Christ because all his posteritie were made sinners For by the same reason it may be sayd that as all men were made sinners by Adam so all should be made righteous by Christ Furthermore the power of Christs grace exceedeth Adams transgression in this that Christ deliuered man of his meere grace But Adams posteritie by his transgression incurred the penalty therof deseruedly The Apostle sheweth that Christes grace exceeded Adams transgression For Christ pardoned many offences but death came by one mans offence He doth also charge vs that we affirme that notwith-standing Christes grace we cānot resist any temptation of the flesh or the Deuill that we cannot fulfill the Law in any sort that we cannot doe any good worke but must needs sinne in all our actions But if hee cannot prooue that we doe so teach then I thinke he cannot deny but that he hath sinned in this action Let him therfore name them that so teach and prooue it out of their wordes if he canne Or else it will appeare that we teach nothing but that which standeth with truth and with the honor of Christ in atcheuing our redemption But our aduersaries will not so easily acquit themselues of teaching lewdly concerning the article of our redemptiō through Christ For first Kellison teacheth pag. 261. as before is noted that Christ is only the meritorious cause of our redemption which is as much as if hee should ascribe the principall and formall cause to our selues Secondly he sayth that Christ gaue vs grace by which together with our cooperation we may bee saued and redeemed Which being graunted it followeth that Christ redeemed vs not but only procured vs grace wherby wee might redeeme our selues Thirdly both hee and his consortes teach that euerye man ought to satisfye for his sinnes cōmitted after Baptisme But if a man do satisfye for his sinnes then is hee his owne redeemer Fourthly the Papistes hope by the merits of Saintes to be saued and redeemed But as he that serueth many Gods serueth no God truelye so hee that hath many redeemers hath no true redeemer Fiftlye they beleeue that the Pope by his indulgences can redeeme soules out of purgatorie Which sheweth that Christes redemption is vnsufficient Finallye in the canon of the Masse they professe that they offer pro redemptione animarum suarum as if the Priest with the sacrifice of the Masse could redeeme soules By the verie same argument also Lib. 3. c. 4. he endeuoureth to prooue that wee make Christ no spirituall Phisition As if Christ did not cure our diseases when he couereth them and imputeth his iustice vnto vs and sanctifieth vs by the holy Ghost But if his argument were concludent then must hee himselfe also affirme that Christ is no spirituall Phisition For he will not denie I trow that Christ dooth couer our sinnes and that no man in this life is so perfectly cured but that hee committeth diuers sinnes To say otherwise is flat pelagianisme Furthermore he is a good Phisition that taketh away the paine of the disease albeit hée cannot for the weakenesse of the patient cure the reliques thereof altogether And Isay c. 53. saith we are healed by the woundes of Christ Yet no man will say that in this frailty wee are so cured that we sinne not Finally there is a great disproportion and dissimilitude betwixt the diseases of the bodye and the soule The paines of the soule diseases follow after this life the paines of bodilye sicknesses come together with the disease For the soule diseases God punisheth for bodilye diseases the Phisition pitieth the patient The soule diseases consist in disobedience and actions which being once done cannot bée vndoone But diseases of the bodie consist in distemper or other euill qualitie which may be remooued Although then the
accompt it a matter very heynous Fiftly next to Lucifer the Pope excelleth in pride He treadeth on Princes neckes he giueth his feete to bee kissed hee rideth on mens shoulders he is called a God on the earth and vsurpeth his honor Such also are the Prelates and the rest of the popish Clergie Auentinus lib. 6. annal in praef sheweth they excell in pride and with goods giuen to the poore keepe Dogges Horses Harlots Pauperum alimentis canes equos scorta alunt Sixtly neuer was idlenesse more in price then since Monkes and Fryars came into the world They deuoure the fruites of the painefull labour of others and intend nothing but to eate drinke sleepe and to inioy carnall pleasures Of such we may say with the Apostle 2. Thess 3. Hee that laboureth not let him not eate Seauenthly albeit the Masse-priestes Monkes Nonnes and Fryars forsweare marriage yet not sect of Religion or state of men or women is more impure Honorius Augustodunensis speaking of Nunnes saith they are more common then Harlots Omnibus fornicarijs peius prosternuntur In England most horrible abhominations were found in the visitation of Abbyes Petrus de Alliaco lib. de reformat Eccles and Theodoric à Niem in nemore vnion diuers others shew that albeit Priestes were not marryed yet commonly they kept Harlots and that now is euident in our times by common experience Sacerdotes moderni saith Holcot in lib. sap lect 182. sunt similes sacerdotibus Baal sunt angeli apostatici sunt similes sacerdotibus Dagon sunt sacerdotes priapi sunt angeli abyssi The Priestes of his time he resembleth to heathen Priestes and sheweth how much they were subiect to lechery and heathenish impieties Finally the Doctrine of Popery is a doctrine full of licenciousnesse the Popes of Rome take vpon them to dispense with all sins and wickednes Their indulgences as the Germans Grauam 3. complaine are causes of many mischiefes hinc stupra say they incestus adulteria periuria homicidia furta rapinae foenora ac tota malorum lerna They take vppon them to absolue moste wicked sinners à poena culpa Nay euerie Masse-priest challengeth to himselfe power to giue absolution to such as come to confession The Iesuites of late absolued them before hand which by gun-powder went about to blow vp the Parliament house HaÌ„mond the Iesuite absolued Pearcy Catesby and their fellowes taking armes against their King and Countrie While men hope to satisfie for their sinnes in purgatorie they deferre repentance to the last breath Their enemies they tye with yron bondes Alexander the 3. would not release the Emperor vntill he had trod on his necke with his feete and vsed him with greate indignities Contrarywise they promise heauen to their friends though laden with greeuous siâ—s They hold euerie transgression of the Popes decretales to bee sinne This is therefore a Religion that both promiseth reward to cutthroates greeuous sinners and by their indulgences absolutions and fancies of purgatory hold a sinner so fast bound in sinne that there can bee no hope for him to bee loosed as long as he followeth their wicked Doctrines As for Luther and Caluin they are farre from such wicked courses They teach christian liberty But they extend it not so that they exempt Christians eyther from the obedience of Gods lawes or mans lawes but onely from the cursse of the law and from humane traditions that they binde not mens consciences They distinguish Christ Moyses And so would Kellison too but that hee talketh hee knoweth not what Of Moyses his law they make diuers vses and onelye detract from it the effect of iustification and saluation by reason it accuseth man of sinne and is not fulfilled The Apostle also teacheth if iustice were of the law that Christ had dyed in vaine Of the author and original of sinne and of conscience they teach most Christianlye following therein the Doctrine of the Apostles and holy Fathers of the church The pride of the Pope his adherents they detested and refused both by wordes and examples and so farre were they from idlenesse and allowing of idlenesse that they thought him vnworthy to liue or eate that laboured not in some honest and lawfull vocation Concerning chastitie they taught as truely as the Papists wickedly They shewed that it consisted not in forswearing marriage but in abstinence from all filthie thoughtes actes and speeches That which some impute to Luther of taking the Mayde when the wife refuseth is a meere calumniation He sheweth onely what some doe or at the least threaten to doe and not what they ought to doe Of the degrees of consanguinitie they teach better then the Pope They neuer taught that a man might marrie his brothers wife or his Neece or his Sister as the Popes haue doone Finally they hold no sinners fast bound in sinnes but shew the right way how to rise from sinne by faith in Christ and true repentance clearing those doubts which before had entangled many Christian soules and brought them to vtter destruction If then this K. had not had his conscience seared his eyes seeled and his vnderstanding darkned in these points he would haue seene and acknowledged the deformities of his owne fellowes Doctrine and abstained from accusing others Chap. 11. A reiection of Kellisons slaunderous accusations imputing in his 8. Booke Atheisme and contempt of Religion to the professors of true and Christian Religion in the Church of England COnsorte not thy selfe with detractors saith Salomon Prouerb 24. For their destruction shall come vppon them suddenly But Kellison was not so wise as to borrowe light from so wise and prudent a King He hath chosen rather to imitate fooles who as if all their treasure were in their tongues count it gaine to speake lewdely of their betters Istic est thesaurus stultis in lingua situs saith plautus in paenulo vt quaestui habeant malè loqui melioribus Forgetting his friendes in Italy Spaine and other countries groaning vnder the captiuity of Antichrist in his preface he chargeth his natiue couÌ„try of England as vnfortunate for ingendring a certaine Monster called Atheistes But if our Countrie men had lesse frequented Italy there had béene farre lesse Atheisme then in England now there is It is well knowne that Machiauelisme came from Italy and rose not in England and how Englishmen Italienated are said to be like Diuels incarnated Furthermore if the Masse-priestes as they haue brought with them the dregges of Popish heresies had not also brought with them the sinnes of Sodome and mixed diuine Religion with temporall policies and state practises seeking with fire and Gun-powder to reestablish in this kingdome the Popes tyranny then had he had no colour of this imputation Neither dooth this any way concerne vs that professe Religion heere in England beeing the proper crime of the Italianated and Hispaniolized Masse-priestes and their consortes that beeing inspired with the malicious spirit of Antichrist liue like Atheistes
the aduersaries that wil haue Christ as God to act nothing but ascribe the whole office of Christes Preest-hood to the humane nature doe deuide the person and not onelye the two natures approching neerer to Nestorius then our teachers to error Finally hee alleadgeth the testimony of Egidius Hunnius against Caluin as if in expositiō of scriptures he did Iudaizare or fauour the Iewes But neither is the testimony of a sworne enemie to be much regarded nor hath any man that felicitie in expounding Scriptures that he fayleth in nothing In the second chap. he chargeth vs that we make Christ an absurd redeemer these are the words of this absurd surueyor And why so I pray you forsooth because we hope onelye to be iustified by Christes iustice But this doth not touch vs onely but the holy prophets apostles also God by his prpophet Isay c. 53. saith that his iust seruant shall iustifie many by his knowledge shal beare their sins The Apostle 1. Cor. 1. teacheth vs that he is made vnto vs wisdome righteousnesse sanctification redēption To make his matter good page 257. hee maketh vs to say that there is no justice but Christes justice nor good workes but Christes workes nor merit but his merit nor satisfaction but his satisfaction But these are his owne sottish ideotismes and not our wordes For wee doe not denye that there is a certaine imperfect iustice in man sanctified by Gods holy spirit and that such doe good workes pleasing vnto God We confesse also that man by sinne doth merit death albeit his workes be not so perfect that they can deserue eternall life Finally we know that the Fathers sometime accompt the obedience of the law to bee a satisfaction and so cal the performance of penalties enioyned by the Church But did we attribute all the honor of our iustification and saluation vnto Christ our Sauiour yet this is neither absurditie nor dishonour to him But this absurd and kettle Diuine dooth dishonour and blaspheme Christ ioyning the wordes absurd and redeemer together He doth also contradict the Scriptures where hee saith that Christ with one word or teare or drop of blood might haue redeemed vs. And therein he passeth the impudency of his holy Father Clement the sixt in the chap. vnigenit extr de poenit remiss for he saith one drop of blood would haue sufficed But this dropping dreary dunse addeth a teare or a word How cōtrarie they are to scriptures these testimonies declare Isay 53. therfore shal he deuide the spoiles of the strong because he hath giuen his soule to death Mat. 20. We reade that he came to giue his life a ransome for many and Luc. 24. that so Christ must suffer and 1. cor 15. that Christ dyed for vs according to the Scriptures Gal. 3 We learne that to deliuer vs from the curse of the law he was made accursed and Hebr. 2. that it was fitting that the author of our saluation should by suffering be cōsummated Heb. 9. that his testamēt could not bee fulfilled without the death of the testator Absurdly also he talketh of a storme raysed in heauen for the Sonne of God when Lucifer wold be like the highest For it is ridiculous to thinke of any stirre or storme raysed in Heauen where there is and alwaies was such quiet and content or to suppose that Lucifer contended with the Sonne of God Hee might doe well to tell vs what Deuill tolde him this For in holy Scriptures no such thing is found Finally describing the blessed state of man in Paradice and of his miserie being throwne out of Paradice vnawares he ouerthroweth with his boysterous eloquence two bulwarks of Popery to wit Freewill and Purgatory For if euery sinner bee a slaue to his flesh and a captiue to the Diuell and a slaue to sinne and the Diuell as hee saith then hath hee not freewill For to bee free and bound at one time implyeth contradiction Againe if the deuill hold sinners in hell perpetuallye as page 254. hee confesseth then there is no redemption out of Purgatory which as Papists teach is in hell Pag. 258. he chargeth vs farther that we teach that good workes are not necessary and thence inferre that no Lawes eyther humane or diuine can bind vs in conscience And lastly he sayth that we hold that no sinnes nor euill workes can hurt vs because Christes justice being ours no sinne can make vs sinners And so he runneth on in a course of wild eloquence like a Colte that hath broken his halter But as Hierome sayth in his Booke against Vigilātius stultum est fingere materiam cui rhetorica declamatione respondeatur It is a foolish and dizardly thing to feine matters thē in a rhetorical surueying declamatiō to answer In his fictions certes this man seemeth neither to haue reason nor conscience For first albeit we say that we are not iustified by workes yet we teach that as many as are iustified by faith in Christ are also sanctified by his grace and that workes are necessary effects of our iustification Secondly we directly affirme that Gods Lawes doe bind in conscience and mans Lawes as farre as they commaund for Gods Lawe albeit through Christ Iesus we are deliuered from the curse of the law being iustified by fayth and walking no more after the flesh but after the spirit Thirdly we beleeue that all sinnes and euill workes do hurt those that doe them Although we also beleeue that he who is borne of God and iustified by fayth sinneth not vnto death Finally most falsely he maketh vs to teach first that Christ hath redeemed vs because no sinne can hurt vs and next that we are deliuered from the Law because no Law can binde vs and thirdly that we are deliuered from the Diuel and Hel because howsoeuer we liue they cannot hurt vs. Nay we pronounce him anathema that shall hold that eyther sinne cannot hurt or that the Law bindeth not or that howsoeuer Christians liue they cannot be damned to Hell And thus much may serue to cleare vs from this barking curres slaunders But Popish Doctrine concerning our redemption is not so easily defended For Papistes beleeue that the Pope by his indulgences can redeeme soules from Hell They teach also that euery man is to satisfie for his sinnes committed after Baptisme But then Christ is but halfe a redeemer Neither do they sticke to say that the sonne of God assuming the nature of Thomas Aquinas or some other might haue redeemed the world which is contrary to all the promises made to the Fathers concerning the Messias to come of the seede of Abraham Kellison pag. 261. sayth that Christes Passion was not our formall justification nor satisfaction he should haue said Christes Passion obedience and iustice if he would formally haue crossed our Doctrine but only the meritorious cause of our redemption and saluation which deserueth for vs at Gods hands grace by which together with our cooperatiō we may
diseases of the body may be remooued yet the diseases of the soule cannot bee perfectly cured so long as we liue in this world Nay albeit this K. take Christ for his Phisition yet he will not say that hee is cured of all ignorance malice defectes and infirmities Most ridiculous therefore is his discourse of the diseases of the soule and of his resine and emplasters of 7. Sacraments and of his burning in purgatorye and other his Schoole-trickes and foolerye and more like to make his reader sicke with the surfet of his suruey then otherwise The fift Chapter of his third Booke containeth a fragment of some Schoole-lecture concerning the honor due to Law-giuers But while he would seeme to honour Christ with the title of a Lawgiuer he doth much dishonour him comparing him to Moyses nay to Lycurgus Solon Romulus Plato Trismegistus and I know not who Against vs all his bablement maketh nothing For albeit we doe not confound the law and the gospell nor make Christ a lawgiuer like to Moyses or an exactor of the penalties of lawes as doe the Papists yet we doe not denye that hee may be tearmed and is after a sort a Lawgiuer Neither doth eyther Luther or Caluin deny this absolutelye as this K. affirmeth Hardly therefore will hee bee able to charge vs with any fault in this behalfe vnlesse he will falsifye our wordes as hee doth Caluins lib. 3. Instit c. 19. 10. making him to conclude that Christians are exempted from all lawes where he hath no such words and onely speaketh of ceremonies that may bee obserued and omitted But the Papists albeit they make Christ a Law-giuer and make that a part of his honour yet they giue the same power to the Pope c. translato de constitutionibus shewing themselues to be subiects of an other Kingdome then that of Christ Iesus In the sixt Chapter he rayleth not onely at man but at God calling him absolutely an angry God and supposing that his wrath is no way to be appeased but by the masse-priests sacrifices Further he saith that Christ offered two sacrifices the one at his last supper the other vpon the Crosse and that he hath many vicegerentes But that is contrary to the wordes of the Apostle Heb. 9. who saith that Christ was once offered to take away the sinnes of many This is derogatorie to the honor of Christ that is a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech and cannot well stand with the Popes generall vicarship or the office of Masse-priestes his supposed vicegerents Against vs his vaine brablementes effecte nothing seeing Christ is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech in regard that he succeedeth none nor hath any successors or vicegerents in this sacrifice that he offered once vpon the Crosse Furthermore this preesthood of Christ after the order of Melchisedech we maintaine the Papistes ouerthrowe as at full I haue declared in my third booke de missa against Bellarmine where also the absurdities and contradictions of the Masse-priestes are particularly disciphred In the seauenth Chapter of his third booke moste wickedly hée would make the world beleeue that we deny Christ to be iudge of quicke and dead And his reason is for that Caluin saith that Christ shall not condemne a faithfull man As if it were not the part of a iudge as wel to acquite as to condemne Further if this argument were concludent then should Kellison denye Christ to be iudge of quicke and dead For I hope he will not say that Christ will at the last day condemne faithfull men He addeth also that we deny to Christ two offices of a judge to wit remuneration and discussion because we teach that man in this corruption of his nature cannot merit heauen by his workes and that no sinne is in his owne proper nature veniall But neither is this argument better then the former For although mens works deserue not the fauour and reward that shall be shewed them yet no man will deny that God almightie that iudgeth of their actions may reward them And albeit no sinne is veniall in his proper nature if wee respect the rigour of the lawe yet there is great difference betwixt sinne and sinne and the iudge is not onely to iudge of the qualitie of sinnes but also to examine and discusse whether the partie haue sinned or not Much idle talke also dooth hee spend about Christes two aduents as hee calleth them and about Iewish fancies concerning the Sonne of Ioseph that as they dreamed was to be slaine in the battell of Gog and Magog and of the dispatch of the iudgement in a trise and of the pronouncing of the sentence in an audible voice But because these Schoole-boyes fancies belong not to this argument I wil referre them to bee censured by his owne fantasticall disciples In the meane while I would pray this surueyor either to prooue them more demonstratiuely or to affirme them more modestly The 8. chapter containeth a packe of calumniations against vs for teaching that Christians are iustified by faith apprehending Christes iustice that is imputed vnto vs. And heereof hee concludeth that all men are not onely equally iust and perfect as the Beguardes said but also as iust as Christ himselfe But his inference is foolish absurde For although by Christes satisfaction and merits wee are all iustifyed and acquited yet there is an imperfect iustice in all the faithful in some more in some lesse and no way comparable to Christes iustice As for the perfection of Beguardes and Beguines it proceeded from the opinion of Monkish perfection and therefore much rather deserueth to bee imputed to Papists then to vs. Papists also say that a man may performe the law perfectly and that no man is saued but hee that obserueth the law But of the first we may conclude that their iustice is equall to the iustice of Christ who performed the lawe perfectlye and that all they that are saued by the lawe are equall in iustice matters somewhat strange and absurd yet following necessarily of our aduersaries Doctrine In the ninth chapter hee goeth about to prooue that we bring the new Testament and Christian religion into question But of all this greate slaunder hee hath no other ground then this small and simple collection that therefore we doe so because wee teach that Christ as man knew not the day of judgement and that hee increased in wisdome But therein wee teach nothing but that which both the Scriptures affirme and ancient Fathers beleeued Christ speaking of the last day Marc. 13. no man knoweth saith he no not the Sonne Nazianzen also Lib. 2. de filio nouit vt deus saith he vt homo se dicit ignorare The same is prooued by the testimonie of Cyril Luke chap. 2. saith that Iesus increased in wisdome stature in fauour with God men And heereupon Ambrose writeth that Christ according to the flesh was filled with wisdome and grace Maxentius also in
appeare Saintes in the eyes of indifferent iudges in comparison of them If any man else doubt let him reade the actes of the Conuenticle of Constance against Iohn the 23. the reportes of Iohn the 12. Sergius the 3. Landus Gregory the 6 and 7. Alexander the 6. Paul the 3. Leo the 10. other Popes set downe in Histories To speake generally there is great difference betwixt the men of Geneua and Rome of England and Italy Finally he concludeth if faith onely doe iustifie that if a man retaine faith all the vilanyes in the world cannot hurt him that hee may assure himselfe he is iust howsoeuer he liueth And this hee goeth about to confirme by Luthers wordes which he reporteth thus Sola fides Christi necessaria est ad salutem cetera omnia liberrimaneque praeceptaneque prohibita Onely faith is necessary to saluation all other thinges are free and neither commaunded nor forbidden But as his dealings are dishonest so his conclusion concerning vilanies is most vilanous For albeit we hold that a Christian man is to be iustified by faith alone in Christ Iesus yet wee teach also that he abuseth Gods grace and deceiueth himselfe which walking after the flesh and not after the Spirit and liuing loosely and vngodly supposeth notwithstanding that he retayneth true faith Furthermore none of vs euer taught that euerie one is presently iustified that beleeueth himselfe to bee iust as this K. boldly auoucheth but hee that indeede truely beleeueth in Christ Iesus Lastly this sycophant dooth most vniustly wrest and misreport Luthers words For in his commentaries in Gal. 2. hee hath not the words alleadged by Kellison albeit hee boldelye affirme it Nay hee seemeth to write plaine contrarie Iustificato sic corde per fidem saith hee quae est in nomine eius dat eïs deus potestatem filios dei fieri diffuso mox spiritu sancto in cordibus eorum qui charitate dilatei eos ac pacatos hilaresque faciat omnium bonorum operatores omnium malorum victores etiam mortis contemptores inferni Hic mox cessant omnes leges omniū legum opera Omnia sunt iam libera licita lex per fidem Charitatē est impleta His meaning therefore is that those that are iustifyed by faith haue charitie and doe all good workes and auoide sinne not by constraint of lawes but mooued by Gods spirit working by faith and charitie and beeing stirred to doe well of their free choice And after the former wordes he addeth that a sinner looking for righteousnesse at Gods handes is not to looke vpon his owne workes but vpon God through Christ Are not these fellowes then strange collectors that conclude contrarie to a mans words and meaning and would make Luther a fauorer of licentiousnesse of life and an enemie of good workes who expressely condemneth al wickednes and commendeth good works detracting nothing from them but that they doe not iustifye before God but are rather fruites of iustification In the third Chapter hee affirmeth that Luther and Caluin in assuring men by an assured faith of electiō remission of sinnes justice and perseuerance in the same loose the bridle to all iniquitie But had not hee loosed the reines of his malicious tongue and suffered the same to range without restraint against such as defend the truth he would neuer haue vttered so much falsehood and villany against Luther and Caluin For they say not that whatsoeuer mens liues be they may boldly rely on Christ or else that men beeing clogged with al the sins of the world are to beleeue that they are iust as this surueying sycophant giueth out but rather that no mā is to presume of his faith or of Gods mercie or iustice without repentance and good life which are the fruites markes of a good faith And Luther albeit he say that life cannot be lost by any sinnes vnlesse a man will not beleeue yet hee doth not speake of sinnes to come but of sinnes past and doone away by the grace of Christ through baptisme and repentance Further out of Luthers wordes lib. de capt Babyl concerning the effect of faith he collecteth that howsoeuer a man liue though he bee neuer so incredulous in the Articles of his beleefe yet if he beleeue that hee shall be saued that it shall bee so But no such conclusion can bee drawne from his wordes or Doctrine Nay hée sheweth that good life cannot bee separated from true faith and neuer ment to disioyne the faith of the articles of the Creede from iustifying faith this beeing deriued from that faith Lastly albeit Christians being iustifyed by faith hope they shall bee saued yet no man euer beleeued that iustification is nothing else but an assurance that he shall bee saued as the Surueyor surmiseth Page 540. he calleth the faith of a mans owne saluation phantasticall as if the Apostle Saint Paul beleeuing that nothing should separate him from the loue of God were phantastical Furthermore how can a man professe himselfe a Christiā if he beleeue not remission of sinnes and eternall life and if he beleeue this how can hee chuse but beleeue his owne saluation againe how can we pray without doubting if we doubt of remission of sinnes which wee craue in the Lordes Prayer finally the Sacraments are seales of this assurance of saluation when they are applyed to euerie particular Christian His last reason or rather reasonlesse argument to prooue that assurance of faith bringeth foorth loosenesse of life is this because a man as hee thinketh may apprehend Christes justice to bee his eyther being mooued to sinne or being in the act of sinne But this is his owne weake surmise For hee that truelye apprehendeth Christ is clad with his iustice and guided by his grace and preserued from sinning And he that walloweth in sin and yet presumeth of Christes grace is not partaker eyther of his grace or iustice In his 7. Booke and 4. Chapter hee inueigheth against vs for teaching that sinne is not imputed to a faithfull man But all Christians are rather to exclaime against him that beleeueth that sinnes are neither doone away by repentance nor purged by faith in Christes blood but alwaies imputed vnto true beleeuers To helpe foorth with a bad matter hee saith that Caluin lib. 3. instit c. 14.17 and chap. 18.8 saith plainely that all iust and faithfull mens workes are sinnes But this is a plaine lye and sheweth that this surueyor dooth vse but little iust and plaine dealing For in those places no such thing is to be found Nay it implyeth contradiction to bee a good worke and a sinne both together After this hee concludeth because sinne is not imputed vnto them that beleeue that Christians are not to feare theftes or adulteryes or other sinne But his conclusion doth but lewdly follow vpon his premisses For albeit former sinnes are doone away by true faith and repentance yet all true Christians beeing once cured are to take heede they sinne