of justice to God where by righteousnesse saith hee is understood something that is inherent c. and that hee goeth about to prove which no man doubteth of when indeed hee should prove not that there is a righteousnesse inherent in the faithfull for that wee freely confesse but that the righteousnesse which is inherent is that by which wee are justified But it is evident that the Apostle speaketh not heere of the righteousnesse of justification but of the righteousnesse of sanctification whereunto in this Chapter hee doth exhort as to a necessary and unseparable consequent of justification Neither doth the Apostle heere or elsewhere as before I observed in setting downe the differences betweene justification and sanctification exhort us to the righteousnesse of justification or the parts thereof which bee not our duties but Gods gracious favours for that were to exhort us to remission of sinne and acceptation to life But to the righteousnesse of sanctification and the parts mortification and renovation and to the particular duties thereof hee doth both here and in many other places exhort as namely in his sixth testimony cited oâ—…t of Eph. 4. 23 24. from which hee would prove which no man doth deny that our renovaâ—…ion according to the image of God standeth in righteousnesse and holinesse inherent § VII His fourth allegation had need to be a good one for this is the third time that hee hath cited and recited and as it were recocted it out of Rom. 8. 10. The Spirit liveth because of justification or as it is in the Greeke the Spirit is life because of justice For justification or justice which maketh us to live and thereby to worke cannot be onely remission of sin but something inward inherent Answ. In this place vers 10. 11. as I shewed before the Apostle setteth down a double priviledge of those in whom Christ dwelleth by his Spirit freeing them from the Law of death The one in respect of the soule vers 10. that howsoever the body bee dead that is as Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth mortall or appointed to death by reason of sin which the first Adam brought in and by it death his sinne being imputed to all yet the soule for so the word Spirit is taken when it is opposed to the body is life that is as the Antithesis requireth designed unto life by reason of that righteousnes of the second Adam by imputation whereof all the faithfull are entituled unto everlasting life For as in the former part of the Antithesis is not meant the spirituall death of men dead in sinne for that is the death of the soule and not of the body and the Apostle speaketh of those in whom Christ dwelleth but the corporall death unto which they also in whom Christ dwelleth are subject so in the latter is meant not the life of grace or of righteousnesse but the life of glory The other priviledge respecteth the body vers 11. that after it hath beene dead and turned into dust the Spirit of him that raised up Christ from death dwelling in us shall raise unto life eternall our mortall bodies § VIII His fifth testimony Gal. 3. 21. where when the Apostle saith If there had been a Law given which could give life or justifie as the Rhemists translate the word vivificare then in very deed justice should be of Law hee doth plainely saith he demonstrate that justice from whence justification is named is something which giveth life to the soule and hee doth place the same in motion and action Answ. If from this proposition propounded by the Apostle Bellarmine could have assumed the antecedent that so hee might conclude the consequent then might hee strongly have concluded against us that wee are justified by inherent righteousnesse But seeing the Apostle doth tollere antecedenâ—… that is intendeth to contradict that antecedent what reason hath Bellarmine to argue as hee doth It is very true that if the Law could have given us life that is as Chrysostome and Oâ—…umenius expound could have saved us according to that legall promise Hocfac vives doe this and thou shalt live or as the Rhemists translate could have justified us then undoubtedly wee might have beene justified by inherent righteousnesse But forasmuch as it was impossible for the Law to justifie and save us because it neither was noâ—… is possible for us by reason of the flesh to performe the condition and forasmuch as God therefore sent his Sonne to performe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that the Law requireth unto justification that wee who could not bee justified nor saved by any inherent righteousnesse of our owne prescribed in the Law and therefore not by a justice consisting in our actions or motions might bee justified and saved by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us what can Bellarmine gather from hence with any shew or colour of reason to prove justification by such a righteousnesse as is inherent and consisteth in motion and action § IX The sixth I have already answered with the third As for his testimonies collected out of Augustine a briefe anâ—…were may serve that hee not considering the force of the Hebrew and Greeke words which never in all the Scriptures are used in the signification of making righteous by inherent or infused righteousnesse but resting as it seemeth upon the notation and composition of the Latine word justificare as not differing in respect thereof from the Verbe sanctificare doth sometimes more largely extend the signification of the word justification than the Scriptures use it as including the benefit of sanctification But it is a most certaine truth that the word justificare being used in the Scriptures translated into Latine as the translation of the Hebrew Hitsdiq and of the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be understood to signifie no other thing if it bee a true translation than what is meant by the Hebrew and the Greeke which as I have shewed before doe never in all the Scriptures signifie to make just by infusion of righteousnesse And therefore it cannot be denied but that it is and was an oversight in them who using the word as mentioned in the Scriptures and from thence borrowing it extend it to another signification than that of the originall wherof it is a translation I say againe as I have said before that the fotce of the Latine word in this controversie is no further to be respected than as it is a translation of the Hebrew and the Greek and as it is a true translation it must bee understood no otherwise than according to the meaning of the originall if it be understood otherwise then is it not a true translation neither is the sence of the word divine but humane Howbeit Augustine differeth from Bellarmine as touching the use of this word in two things first that hee doth not alwaies so use the word as for example when hee teacheth as hee and the rest of the Fathers often doe
transient or the sinfull blemish remaining in the soule which is a vicious disposition and pronenesse to sinne left as the remainder of originall sinne and increased by our owne actuall transgressions as it is a fault and the offence of God bringging with it reatum culpae to a beleever and is not imputed to whom Christs obedience is imputed but covered with the robe of Chrisâ—…s righteousnesse by imputation wherof he is not only freed from the guilt both of the punishment and of the fault but also accepted as righteous in Christ but as the maculâ—… is an habituall sinne or sinfull disposition polluting the soule as a remainder of originall sinne increased by our actuall transgressions it is not wholly abolish'd in this life and much lesse at once but it is mortified by degrees in those that repent of their sinnes who day by day are renewed in the innerman As for those places which Bellarmine alleageth to prove remission of sinne to be the totall abolition of sinne I have fully answered heretofore in the second question of the first controversie shewing that divers of them are to be understood in respect of the guilt which in remission is totally abolished The other which are to bee expounded of the corruption are understood of the cleansing and purging of our soules from them either begunne in this life or finished at the end of this life For the death of the body bringeth with it in the children of God the death and utter extinction of sinne And therefore death which was brought in as a punishment of sinne becommeth a remedy to extinguish sinne For whiles we live in the mortall body sinne liveth in us but when the body dyeth sinne is extinguished CAP. III. Containing our two last Arguments § I. OVR foureteenth Argument If redemption reconciliation and adoption be imputative then justification also is by imputation For I have shewed heretofore that these three in substance differ not from justification for as all these three benefits are comprised under justification so in them the whole nature of justification doth consist For what is it to be redeemed and reconciled but to have our sins remitted or not imputed by the imputation of Christs sufferings which is the first part of justification and what is it to be adopted but to bee accepted in the beloved as righteous and as an heire of eternall life by imputation of Christs obedience which is the second part of justification But those three benefits are imputative all of them wrought by the not imputing of sinne which had made us the bond-slaves of sinne and Satan enemies to God and children of the devill and by the imputation of Christs merits whereby of the slaves of sinne and Satan wee are made Gods servants of enemies his favourites of the children of the devill the sonnes of God § II. Our fifteenth Argument out of Psalm 32. and Rom. 4. If the Holy Ghost describe justification to bee the forgiving of iniquities the covering of sinne the not imputing of sinne to the sinner the imputing of righteousnesse not to him that worketh but to him that beleeveth in Christ or imputing of righteousnesse without workes then justification standeth not in deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse but in imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which the sinner is both freed from his sinne and also accepted as righteous But the Holy Ghost doth so describe justification Rom. 4. 6 7 8. â—…x Psalm 32. 1 2. To both parts Bellarmine doth answere The assumption hee first denieth and then cavills with it For first whereas Calvin as he saith demandeth whether this bee a full definition of justification or but halfe he likewise demandeth when either the 〈◊〉 saith Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord and Blessed are they who f are upright in the way or when our Saviour saith Blessed are the poore in Spirit blessed are the meeke c. whether each of these bee a perfect definition For if it be where is then remission of sinne Secondly he saith that Paul alleageth this testimâ—…ny out of the Psalme not that hee might thereby define fully justification but onely to prove that true justification is the gift of God and not gotten by our owne strength And that hee fitly proveth from thence that David calleth him blessed whose sinnes God remitteth that is whâ—… by the gift aâ—…d grace of God is justified § III. To the former I reply that there is not the like reason betweene these places cited by us and those alleaged by him For those containe but certaine notes and markes of Blessednesse though the Papists absurdly make eight beatitudes of the eight notes of one and the same blessednesse Matth. 5. But here the Apostle out of Psalm 32. sheweth that blessednesse it selfe whereby as appeareth by the former verse he meaneth justification which is the onely 〈◊〉 viae because by it we are intitled to the eternall happinesse which is beatitudo patriae all other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being but notes and signes of this is so defined or described For somuch those words import David doth describe the blessednesse as our translation fitly rendreth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place The second is a meere depravation of the Apostles meaning and intenâ—…ion which was not to prove that justification is the gift of God which he had already taught to be a gracious action of God freely justifying by his grace those that beleeve in Christ but by a new supply of Arguments to prove the same question which in the former Chapters hee had disputed concluding that a man is justified by faith and not by workes which question here hee proveth by the example of Abraham and by the testimony of David The Argument drawne from Abrahâ—…ms example is an excellent proofe which Chrysostome well observed as Cardinall Tâ—…let doth acknowledge For Abraham had both faith and workes and yet he was justified not by his workes but by his faith If Abraham had had no workes or not such notable workes it might have beene said that he was justified by faith without workes because he wanted workes But seeing he abounded with store of excellent works and yet was not justified by them but onely by faith this is an invincible argument to prove that a man is justified by faith and not by workes For Abraham though hee had works yet was justified by faith without workes Likewise David describeth or if you will declareth the blessednesse of the man that is that a man is blessed that is to say justified to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes § IV. This was his denyall of the assumption But now he cavilleth that it may bee that in these words is contained the full definition of justification implicitè For there cannot be remission of sinne in Bellarmines sense that is deletion of sinne unlesse righteousnesse be infâ—…sed as darkenesse is not driven
him our Saviour fitteth his answere and first to confute his errour and to let him understand that no man living who is but a meere man can be justified by inherent righteousnesse he telleth him that no man is good that is purely and perfectly just and therefore reproveth him for that hee thinking our Saviour to bee but a meere man as others were did call him good But in the second place to answere his question hee telleth him that if by his owne workes hee did hope to bee saved hee must doe those workes which God himselfe had commanded and so referreth him to the Coâ—…mandements of the Law of which God himselfe had said doe this and thou shall live which is the legall promise Levit. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Thus our Saviour fiâ—…teth according to the Law his answere to the disposition of the party who was a justitiary But otâ—…erwise when our Saviour and his Apostles were a ked the like qâ—…estion they made answere according to he doctrine of the Goâ—…pell For our â—…aviour being asked Ioh. 6. 28. what shall wee doe that we may doe the workes of God answered vers 29. This is the worke of God that which he esteemeth in stead of all workes that ye beleeâ—…e in him whom hee hath sent for he that beleeveth hath fulfilled the Law Christ being the â—…nd of the Law to every one that beleeveth Rom. 10. 4. And the Apostle Paul being demanded of the Iaylour what must I doe to bee saved answereth beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt bee saved Act. 16. 30 31. § XVI In the third place he alleageth testimonies out of the doctrine of the Apostles viz. Rom. 8. 13 17. 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. Iam. 2. 8. 2 Pet. 1. 11. 1 Ioh. 1. 9. Apoc. 3 21. Answ. The place cited out of S. Iames is no promise but a commendation if you fulfill the royall law ye doe well Of Rom. 8. 13 17 and 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. I spake before But concerning them and all others that are or may be alleaged there is a distinction of conditions to be held that either they import the cause of the thing promised which is salâ—…ation or happinesse or the proper markes and cognizances of such as shall be saved or are happy which doe not shew propter quid 〈◊〉 sunt vel servandi sed qualâ—…s beats sunt quales servandi Christ our alone Saviour is the onely cause of salvation and the onely foundation of our happinesse He is eternall life and whosoever hath him hath life eternall Faith is the only instrument whereby we receive Christ and therfore to it also is salvation ascribed in respect of the object which it doth receive As when it is said thy faith hath saved thee it is to be understood as if it were said Christ received by faith hath saved thee A condition therfore of receiving Christ by faith or of Christ received by faith betokeneth the cause but all other coâ—…ditions either of graces or of works doe not signifie the cause of salvation but the proper markes and cognizances of those which shall be saved And therfore prove that the markes aâ—…e or may be necessary by the necessity of presâ—…nce but not by necessity of efficiencie § XVII And this also may seâ—…ve to answere his fouâ—…th and fifth arguments His fourth is fetched from the Doctrine of the Prophets Ezek. â—…8 21 If the wicked shall turne from all his sins that he hath committed and shall keepe all my statutes and doe that which is lawfull and right he shall surely live That is if he shall turne from the wrong way into the right and goe on therein as sinne is an aberration and the errour of his way hee shall come to the end of his way which is salvation So that this condition is not the cause but the way Yea but saith Bellarmine in the same place to turne from righteousnesse and to breake the Commandements of God is a condition upon which dependeth the commination of death for if a righteous man turne from his righteousnesse and commit iniquity he shall surely die Therefore as the turning from righteousnesse unto sinne is the cause of death â—…o the turning from sinne to righteousnesse is the cause of life I answere that there is not par ratio there is no equality be tweene the sinne of the wicked and the righteousnesse of the godly Death is the due wages of sinne and sinne is the meritorious cause of death But eternall life is the free gift of God and not merited by our righteousnesse Sinne is of infinite demerit and so deserveth death eternall But not the obedience of any man but onely of Christ if it did merit at all â—…s or can be of infinite merit to deserve eternall life The sinnes of â—…he wicked are purely and perfectly evill but the righteousnesse of the reâ—…enerate is not purely and perfectly good The sinnes of the wicked are their owne workes wholly proceeding from themselves and to themselves the wages thereof is wholly and properly to be ascribed and imputed the good workes of the regenerate proceed from Gods free grace and therefore when they are rewarded God crowneth his owne graces in them and not their merits That which he babbleth concerning promises absolute and conditionall as if we held all the promises of the Gospell to bee absolute is a shamlesse and senselesse cavill Wee are so farre from saying that they be all aâ—…solute as if indifferently and without condition they promised salvation to all that we rather say they are all conditionall But we distinguish of conditions that some are from the cause as where the condition of faith is interposed and such conditions wee doe hold to bee necessary necessitate efficientiae some from other arguments and such are necessary onely necessitate presentiae § XVIII His fifth argument is taken from the condition of faith which we doe not deny to bee contained in the Evangelicall promise Now saith he by what words the Scripture requireth the condition of faith by the same or more cleare it teacheth the condition of fulfilling the Law to be required Answ. The condition of fulfilling the Law is required no where but in legall promises and is a condition by reason of the flesh impossible But in all these promises which hee citeth excepting that Matth. 19. 17. not the condition of fulfilling the whole Law is required but of some speciall duties betweene which and the condition of faith is great odds For faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith saveth alone it alone entituleth us and giveth us right to salvation Aske of any particular duty to which salvation is promised will invocâ—…tion Rom. 10. 13 will suffering Rom. 8. 17 will any other duty or grace save a man or entitle him to salvation No one part of righteousnesse though it may be a proper marke of them that shall be saved can save a man
servant doing or rather but endeavouring to doe his duety is rewarded In these two the arguments are not the same A servant that doth not his duety deserveth punishment and his disobedience is the meritorious cause of his punishment But by doing his duety especially if it bee done unperfectly which is alwayes our case he doth not deserve reward and therefore if hee bee rewarded it is to be ascribed to his masters bounty and not to his desert Such an Antithesis the Apostle maketh betweene the reward of sinne and of godlinesse Rom. 6. 23. Death is the due wages of sinne but eternall life which is the reward of godlinesse is the free gift of God And further as I said before when I formerly answered this allegation In this and many other such conditionall speeches the antecedent is not the cause but a signe token or presage of the consequent If God have given you grace to mortifie the deeds of the flesh it is an evident token that you shall live If God hath adorned you with his grace it is to be presumed that he will crowne his owne grace with glory § IX And such is his seventh testimony p as before I have shewed Rom. 8. 17 18. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires with Christ if we suffer with him that wee may also bee glorified with him where is no relation at all of efficiency betwixt our sufferings and glory But Bellarmine will prove it first by the conditionall particle of which I spake in answere to the last argument which doth not as hee saith point out the cause but the evidence by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that wee are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him namely if we suffer with him Secondly from the reason which is added concerning the excesse of glory to our sufferings which to my understanding doth plainly confute it For if the sufferings of this life be not condigne as the Vulgar readeth it to the glory that is to come how should they merit it ex condigno as they arrogantly speake But the scope of the Apostle in this place is to encourage the faithfull to suffer for Christ which he doth by two arguments the one from the happy event which is assurance of glorification testified by the holy Spirit who testifieth unto us that if we have grace from God to suffer with Christ that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires of Christ who shall bee glorified with him Not that ouâ—… sufferings doe make us the sonnes and heires of God c. but that they are the signes and evidences by which the holy Ghost doth assure us that we are so The other from the disproportion betweene our sufferings from him and the glory which we shall have with him For the Aposâ—…le having weighed both resolveth for so hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that all the sufferings of this life are not comparable to that glory but of this place more hereafter § X. His eighth testimony Rom. 10. 10. with the heart wee beleeve unto righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation We see here saith he that faith sufficeth not to salvation because it is not true and entire in the heart unlesse thereto be added externall confession And it seemeth that the Apostle alludeth to that speech of our Saviour Matth. 12. 32 33. Him that confesseth me before men will I confesse before my Father and him that denyeth me before men will I deny before my Father that is in heaven Answ. All this we confesse that besides faith confession and many other graces and duties are necessary to salvation not as causes but as causae sine quibus non as I have often said which are no causes § XI His ninth testimony Matth. 25. 34 35. Come yee blessed of my Father possesse the kingdom prepared for you before the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee to eate c. Surely saith hee the reason which is rendred doth plainely shew that good workes are aliquo modo some way causes of salvation and that for them the kingdome of heaven is given Answ. Of this place I have spoken before when I shewed that the causes of salvation were noted vers 34. Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world And the reason which is rendred is taken from good workes not as the cause for which salvation is given but as the evidence according to which our Saviour judgeth § XII His tenth testimony is out of the Epistle of Saint Iames and it is twofold the former Iam. 1. 25. He that is not a forgetfull hearer but a doer of the worke this man shall bee blessed in his deed the latter Iam. 2. 14. what will it profit my brethren if a man say that he hath faith and have not workes will faith save him But how saith hee out of the former is a man blessed in his deed if his deeds have no relation to happinâ—…sse but affoâ—…diheir idle presence Answ. Wee confesse that good works have relation to happinesse as they are necessary unto it as the way as the causa sine qua non Neither doe I conceive how good works can be idle where they are present though they doe not merit that which infinitely exceedeth their worth And as touching the other place Iam. 2. We confesse also that that faith which is in profession onely and is void of good workes doth not save a man because it is an idle and dead faith This therefore proveth good workes to be necessary necessitate praesentiae but for necessity efficioncie there is no shew nor colour § XIII After those severall testimonies he appealeth to the whole Epistles of Peter Iohn Iames and Iude whose chiefe intention was to prove that to justified men good workes are necessary to salvation and that faith alone doth not suffice as some in these times out of the Epistles of Paul not well understood began to preach I answere that as the Apostles whom he nameth urge the necessity of good workes so doe all true preachers of the Gospell at this day yea Paul himselfe did urge it as much as any of them if not more But the necessity of efficiencie he may as soone prove out of our sermons as out of the writings of the Apostles § XIV To the Scriptures hee addeth the testimonies of the Fathers who as they censured for heretickes those which denyed workes to bee necessary unto salvation so themselves taught that they bee necessary To which both censure and doctrine of the Fathers wee doe most willingly subscribe And wee should greatly wonder how this great Master of Controversies could bee so idle so impertinent so frivolous a disputant but that as I said before these his discourses proving
conversion he was touching the righteousnes which is in the Law blamelesse Phil. 3. 6. They were blamelesse before men but not faultles before God For Zacharias did use to sacrifice for his owne sinnes as well as for others as Augustine saith in his answere to this argument alleaged by the Pelagians And who knoweth not that for the sinne of incredulity hee was both deafe and dumbe for a time As touching the Apostles before the resurrection of Christ though our Saviour call them his friends and giveth them this testimony that they had kept his word yet who can bee ignorant how farre they were at that time from perfection and with how great imperfections they kept his word But it is strange that he should alleage the example of S. Paul Rom. 7. as one that had kept the Commandement forbidding concupiscence when in that chapter hee doth not onely confesse that by that Commandement hee was convicted to bee a sinner in that hee had concupiscence but also that that habituall concupiscence might appeare exceedingly sinnefull it did take occasion by the Law to worke in him all manner of actuall concupiscence § XIV But Bellarmines conceit is that concupiscence in the Apostle was no sinne because he did not consent to it Whereto I answere first that as he was carnall he did consent unto it but not as he was spirituall for so hee saith I delight in the Law of God after the inward man but I see another Law in my members warring against the Law of my mind and bringing me into captivity to the Law of sin which is in my members Whereupon he cryeth out v. 24. O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death meaning therby the flesh or the body of sin Secondly though the Apostle had not consented to concupiscence yet both the habituall concupiscence it self remainning in him after his regeneration and the actual concupiscences going before coâ—…sent arising from thence were sins The habituall is often called by the Apostle a sin and is noted to be the sinning sin which taking occasion by the Law to send forth evill concupiscences namely which the Law forbiddeth was exceedingly sinfull As for those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first motions of sinne in the thought or affections going before consent and arising from our owne concupiscence they are those very sinnes which are directly forbidden in the tenth Commandement for those which are joyned with consent are forbidden in the former Commandements Neither could Paul who had beene trayned up in the Law bee ignorant of that which the very heathen knew by the light of nature that evill concupiscence accompanyed with consent was a sinne But that which is forbidden in the tenth commandement the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne except the Law had said thou shalt not lust or thou shalt not have any evill concupiscence Hence Bellarmine concludeth that because the Law hath beene kept by many it is possible Neither doe we deny it to bee kept by the faithfull in respect of their upright walking in all the Commandements of God but wee deny it to be perfectly fulfilled by them Their new obedience which they performe with upright hearts and willing mindes hath the title of perfection given unto it and is a perfection begunne in respect of the parts for even an infant that is formed in the wombe is perfect in respect of his parts and is accepted of God in Christ the Lord not imputing to the faithfull their imperfections And it is a good saying of Augustine Oâ—…nia ergo mandata facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur All the Commandements are esteemed as done when that whâ—…ch is not done is pardoned § XV. But this answere concerning perfection of obedience begunne and the imperfections remitted will not serve the turne saith Yeaâ—…zechias â—…zechias professâ—…th that he had walked before the Lord in truth and with a perfect heart And if Ezechias walked before God with a perfâ—…ct heart who will deny it to Abraham to whom it was said walke before me and be perfect Answ. Wee doe read that the faithfull did keepe the Law but wee never read that they did abâ—…olutely fulfill it but that all of them had their imperfections and their sinnes And although many oâ—… them abounded with good workes yet their justification consisted in the remission of their sinnes and Gods acceptation of them in Christ imputing righteousnesse unto them without workes And where as it is said that they obeyed God with their whole heart and with a perfect heart this is to be understood of an entire or upright heart The hebrew words Tham Thom Tâ—…min and Shalem which signifâ—…e perfect or perfection are synonyma or words of the same sence with â—…ashar Iosher and Emeth that is upright uprightnesse and truth or sincerity and are signified by the phrase of walking with God or be fore God and aâ—…e the same with the Greek words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all of them opposed not to imperfection but to hypocrisie For Thom Tham and Thamin consider these places Psal. 35. 21. where Thom and Iosher are used as synonima the latter being the exposition of the former Let perfection and 〈◊〉 preserve mee Iosh. 24. 14. Where Thamin and Emâ—…th are used promiscuously serve the Lord in perfection and in truth Psal. 37. 37. where Tham and Iashar are put for the same observe the perfect man and behold the upright for the end of that man is peace So Iob is commended to have been Ish Thâ—… Vejashar a perfect and upright man The word Shalem which in the same speech of Ezechias 2 King 20. 3. is by the 72. translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perfect is by them reâ—…dred Esay 38. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a true heart as an upright heart is called Heb. 10. 22. § XVI The phrase of performing dueties with the whole heart Deut. 26. 16 as to seeke God with all the heart Deut. 4. 29. Psal. 119. â—… 10. to keepe his Commandements with all the heart and with all â—…he soule 2 King 23. 3. Psal. 119. 34 69. to turne unto the Lord with all the heart Ioâ—…l 2. 12. importeth nothing else where it is not legally understood but an entyre or upright heart that is not an heart and an heart as hypocrites use to speake Psal. 12. 2. 1 Chron. 12. 33. the phrase not with an heart and an heart is expounded vers 38. to be a perfect or upright heart Thus to serve the Lord in truth is to serve him with the whole heart 1 Sam. 12. 24. and to praise God with the whole heart Psal. 9. 1. 111. 1. is to praiâ—…e him with uprightnesse of heart Psal. 119. 7. Thus to walke with God or before God is to bee perfect or upright Gen. 17. 1. and to bee perfect or upright is to walke with God or before him for to
like they say they are but schoole points which not being yet determined by the Church may freely bee disputed of pro con Yea but thus much your Church hath determined that the faithfull who are the members of Christ doe by their workes truely merit or deserve eternall life and denounceth a curse against those who shall deny that a justified man doth by his good workes truely merit eternall life But there is nothing which can truly and properly be called merit but that which is of condignity and doth for it selfe and for its owne worth absolutely deserve the reward That which is said to merit by way of congruity is not truely and properly meritorious nor that which is said meerely to merit ex pacto as where is no proportion betweene the merit and the wages For neither of these doth truely deserve that which it is said to merit Wherefore the most and the most learned of the Papists hold that there is a due proportion betweene the workes of the faithfull proceeding from charity and the heavenly reward and that they condignely merit eternall life not only in respect of Gods promise but also for the worthinesse of the workes which are so dignified they say by the merit of Christ that they become truely meritorious and doe in Iustice according to their worth deserve the heavenly reward even as justly as the sinnes of the wicked deserve the punishment of hell In so much that our Rhemists say good workes be meritorious and the very cause of salvation so farre that God should be unjust if he rendred not heaven for the same unjust they meane for not rendring a just and equall reward Where fore howsoever some like snailes when they are touched doe pull in their hornes yet this undoubtedly is the Tenet of the learned Papists at this day Opera bona justorum meritoria esse ex condigno non solum ratione pacti sed etiam ratione operum that the good workes of the righteous are condignely meritorious not onely in regard of the covenant but also in respect of the workes themselves As for those who heretofore have denyed the absolute merit of condignity and have held either merits of congruity onely or onely ex pacto they are censured by some of the learned among them to have differed from us in words but in deed to have agreed with us But as for us we acknowledge no merits of eternall life but the merits of Christ onely and wee doe constantly hold and confidently professe that no meere man can merit that is deserve at the hands of God the reward of eternall life by any thing or by all the things which hee can doe or suffer in this world § IV. For the handling of this controversie I will observe this order first I will propound our arguments and maintaine them and then I will answere the objections of the Papists And first I will speake of the name and then of the thing neither of which hath any ground in the Scriptures and therefore both the name and the thing of all true Christians who desire not in matters of such moment as concerne our eternall inheritance to bee wisâ—… above that which is written are to be rejected The word mereri properly signifieth to deserve and meritum desert or that which deserveth a reward and that which doth not deserve is not properly and truely called merit Now there is neither in the canonicall Scriptures nor in the Greeke Fathers any word or phrase truely and properly translated which being ascribed to good workes doth signifie or import the deserving of eternall life at the hands of God There are words and phrases importing the reward of workes both good and bad but with this difference that the eternall reward of good workes as it was according to the purpose of grace given unto us in Christ before all secular times and freely intended and preordained and according to the Covenant of grace to them for whom Christ hath merited the same freely promised so it is freely bestowed as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift of God But the eternall reward of sinne as it is justly deserved so it is in justice rendred as the iust stipend or wages of sinne Rom. 6. 23. The wages of sinne is death but eternall life is the free gifâ—… of God § V. The Latine Fathers indeed doe often use the words mereri and meritum both in the better sence and in the worse but with this difference that in the worse sense they use it properly for deserving and desert For sinnes duely and in justice deserve punishment But in the better sense they doe not use the word properly for deserving and desert which every man knoweth to be the proper signification but in other significations and therefore unproperly if not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The verbe is used by them sometimes and indeed very often in the generall sense either of obtayning joyned commonly with the accusative case or of finding favour to have or to get any thing joyned with the infinitive without respect of merit and worth or relation to wages Vocabulum merendi saith Cassander the word meriting among the ancient Ecclesiastical writers for the most part signifieth to obtaine or to be made fit to obtaine The which among others appearâ—…th by that one place of Cyprian For where Paul saith 1 Tim. 1. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but I obtained mercie as the vulgar Latine and Erasmus Cyprian readeth misericordiam merui And so doth Augustine also Thus you see how joyned with an a accusative it signifieth to obtaine First So Ambrose Minus autem mirari debeâ—…us quòd tantam Ioannes gratiam in nascendo meruerit Secondly Ipsa etiam post usum vota fastidio sunt quae mereri optavimus postquam meruimus abdiâ—…amus Thirdly Iniqueus Cain longaevam dâ—…xit aetatem duxit uxorem â—…c meruit promissione divina Fourthly â—…ratiam â—…um ordinareris Episcopus non suscepisti quia gratuitò â—…am non meruisti Hierome Quanto magis egâ—… mereri debeo veniam 1. Aug. confugerunt ad fidem qua misericordiam indulgentia mererentur 2. Talem se Apost confitetur fuisse peccatorem ut omnis peccator propterea dese non desperet quia Paulus peccatorum scil primus meruit indulgentiam Primasius Magna beatitudo est sine labore legis vel poenitentia fidem per solam gratiam promereri But oyned with an infinitive it signifieth for the most part to finde favour Ambrose O aquâ—… quae Sacramentum esse Christi meruisti quâ—… lavas omnâ—…a 〈◊〉 lavaris 1. Augâ—…stine 〈◊〉 â—…vix in illo populo qui de servitute decem miraculis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. And in the samâ—… booke spâ—…aking of Saint Paul prâ—… persecutionibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meruit appâ—…llari 3. Of Dâ—…vid 〈◊〉 saith Qui Râ—… Prophetâ—…
quia debetur quia dignè retribuitur quia meritâ—… redditur Deinde ne justitiâ—… de humanose extolleret 〈◊〉 sicut humanum meritum malum non dubitatur esse peccatum non à contraâ—… retulit dicens â—…ipendium justitiae vita â—…terna haec ne praeter Mediatorem aliqua alia via quaereretur adjecit in Christo Iesu Domino nostro tanquam diceret Auditâ—… quod stipâ—…ndium peccaâ—…i sit mors quid te disponis extollere O humana non justitia sed nomine justitiae planè superbiâ—… quid te disponis extollere ac contrariam morti vitam aeternam tanquam dâ—…bitum stipendium flagitare Quaprâ—…pter O homo si accepturus es vitam aeternam justitiae quidem stipendium est sed tibi gratia est cui gratia ipsa justitia Tibi enim tanquam dâ—…bita reddereâ—…ur si ex tetibi esset justitiâ—… cui debetâ—…r Nunc igitur de plenitudine ejus accepimus non sâ—…lum gratiam qua nunc justè in laboribus usque in finem vivimus sed etiam gratiam pro hac gratia ut in requie postea sine fine vivamus Intelligendum est igitur etiam ipsa hominis bâ—…na merita esse Dei munera quibus cum vita aeternae redditur Quid â—…isi gratia pro gratia redditur Vita bona nostra nihil aliud est quam Dei gratia sine dubiâ—… vita eteÅ•na quae bonae vitae reà ditur Dei gratia est Et ipsa enim gratis datur quia gratis data est illa câ—…i datur Sed illa cui datur tantummodâ—… gratia est haec autem quae illi datur quâ—…niam praemium ejus est grâ—…tia est prâ—…gratia tanquam merces pro justiâ—…ia That which Augustine speaketh of the grace of justification is true of all grace Quomodâ—… est gratia si ex debito redditur How is it grace if it be rendred of duety § XI The Papists when thâ—…y are pressed with the authority of Saint Augustine would seeme to differ much from the Pelagians but it is more in shew than in trueth For they doe hold the merit of congruity and that grace is given to men according to their owne preparations and dispositions and that the efficacy of grace when it is offered is so to bee ascribed to our owne free will as that it is in our owne power either to accept or reject it For this Alphonsus a Castro setteh downe as a Catholike Assertion that when God hath stirred up our will to that which is good it is in the power of mans will either to assent to Gods monition or to dissent Ex hâ—…c autem quâ—…d nos monitioni illius consentimus qui tamen dissentire pâ—…teramus debetur nobis merces precium inde meritum nostrum And so our Rhemists that those whom God pardoneth worke by their owne free will and thereby deserve their owne salvation If therefore the grace of righteousnesse or the grace of glory be deserved by us both which the Papists teach the former by merit of congruity the latter by merit of condignity then contrary to Augustines Assertion neither the one nor the other is to bee called grace For that hee denieth to bee truely called grace which is not omni â—…odo gratuita So much concerning Augustines exposition now let us search the judgements of some others of the Fathers § XVII Tertullian interpreteth this Text thus Stipendiâ—… delinquentiae mâ—…rs Donativum autem Dei vita aeterna in Christâ—… Iesu Domino nostro Origen Benè autem Metaphâ—…ram i. Figuram militiae ex initio propositam servat ut militantibus sub peccati rege Stipendia debita mortem dicat exolvi Deum verò non erat dignum militibus suis stipendia tanquam aliquod debitum dare sed donum gratiam quae est vita aeterna in Christo Iesu Domino nostro The same hath Sedulius Hierome Stipendia peccati mors qui peccato militat remunerationem accipit mortem Gratia autem Dei vita aeterna non dixit similiter stipendia justitiae Nâ—…n enim nostro labore quaesita est sed Dei munere condonata Chrysostome the Apostle having spoken of the wages of sinne concerning the good he doth not observe the same order for hee did not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wages of your good deeds but the free gift of God shewing that they were not delivered of themselves nor received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a due debt nor retribution or remuneration of their labours but that all things came to them by grace Theodoret worthily he called death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a military stipend but here saith hee upon those words Gratia autem Dei he doth not say wages but grace for eternall life is the gift of God For although a man should performe very great and absolute righteousnesse yet temporall labours are not equivalent to eternall blessings Phoâ—…ius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He said not the wages of your good workes but the free gift of God Theophylact Sinne to its servants for a reward of their service rendreth death but that which is to come from God hee calleth grace and not reward as if hee should say for you receive not the wages of your labours but by grace all these things happen to you in Christ who worketh these things Haymo What is it that speaking of the reward of sinne â—…e calleth it stipend but of the remuneration of the Elect he calleth it the grace of God For they that goe to warfare receive their owne wages but whatsoever the Elect have they receive it wholly from the grace of God whether they have faith or charity or any good worke and moreover for this grace of faith and good workes gratis accipiunt they freely receive eternall life c. And the same hath Rhemigius And to these you may adde two famous Cardinals the one Cajetan hee doth not say that the stipend of righteousnesse is eternall life but the gift of God is eternall life that we may understand that not by our merits but by the free gift of God we attaine to eternall life for the end The other Contarenus it is here to bee noted saith hee that the Apostle signifieth that death is due to sinne in justice for so much the name Stipend doth import but that eternall life is of the free gift of God § XIII Our fifth Testimony is Rom. 8. 18. which our Rhemists according to the vulgar Latine read thus For I thinke that the passions of this time are not condigne to the glory to come that shall be revealed in us which words so translated non condignae or as Ambrose and Augustine in many places read indignâ—… are a direct contradiction to the merit of condignity Neither ought they to cavill at our former translations which reade they are not worthy For what is their non
indeed two principall arguments which he bringeth to prove the merit of good workes which it shall suffice to answere in their due place For I doe not thinke them worthy of double paines Only for the present I answer to the first that where is speech of our dignity it is to bee ascribed to Gods dignation as Bernard well saith Digni nos sumus sedipsius dignatione non dignitate nostra wee are worthy but by his dignation or deigning to accept of us as worthy not by our own worthines secondly the words dignus and dignè sometimes do signifie not the equality of worth but that which is convenient meet or becomming as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. 1. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess. 2. 12. 3 Ioh. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 4. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. 1. 27. To the second thatthere are rewards free liberal and undeserved as wel as those which be mercenary and deserved and therfore the name of reward doth not alwaies presuppose merit or desert To which purpose let the reader compare these paralell places Mat. 5. 46. Luk. 6. 32. where the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are used in the selfe same sense For if you love those that love you what reward have you quam mercedem habetis saith Matthew quae vobis est gratia saith Luke what thankes have you in the one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus much of the name § IV. For the thing Bellarmine bringeth three sorts of proofes Authority of Scripture Testimonies of Fathers and reason The authorityes of Scripture he reduceth to seven heads The first is of those places whâ—…re eternall life is called merces reward His reason is thus framed If eternall life be the reward of good workes then good workes doe merit it but the former is true viz. that eternall life is the reward good workes therefore the latter viz. that good workes doe merit eternall life Answ. The proposition he taketh for granted all his proofe in this place being that sine dubitatione without doubt it is true But in his second Chapter he proved it by this which goeth for a maxiâ—…e among them that merces and meritum are relatives But I answere by distinction That merces reward is of two sorts It is either debita due as justly deserved or gratâ—…ita as freely bestowed and without desert as Ambrose also distinguisheth Alia est merces saith hee liberalitatis gratia aliud virtutis stipendium laboris remâ—…neratio which distinction is insiunated by the Apostle Rom. 4. 4. for reward is either imputed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to grace as the inheritance of an adopted sonne or rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to debt or duty as the hire or wages of an hired servant or labourer who is worthy of his hire And is acknowledged by Bellarmine For when the Apostle saith to him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt satis aperitè indicat esse quandam mercedem qua imputari possit secundum gratiam non secundum debitum he doth plainely enough shew that there is a certaine reward which may bee imputed according to grace not according to debt Merces noftra saith Augustine gratia vocatur Si gratia est gratis datur Our reward is called gratia so the Latine translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if it be grace it is freely given And againe God hath sent a Physitian hee hath sent a Saviour hee hath sent him who should heale freely that is but little that hee should heale freely who should also give reward to them that are healed Nothing can be added to this benevolence Who is he that will say let me heale thee and I give thee a reward Of this free reward wee have examples and Testimonies in the holy Scriptures as first that which Bellarmine in the first place citeth very impertinently to prove the name merit Gen 15. 1. where the Lord saith to Abraham I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward Psalm 127. 3. heritage and reward used promiscuously Children are an heritage from the Lord and the fruit of the wombe is his reward And so merces and gratia as was noted before out of Matth. 5. 46. and Luk. 6. 30. Such a reward is our inheritance in heaven which is therefore called the reward of inheritance Col. 3. 24. And this most plainely appeareth in the antithesis which the Apostle maketh betweene the reward of sinne and the reward of piety The wages of sinne is death but eternall life is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift of GOD in IESVS CHRIST our LORD Rom. 6. 23. But of this place we have spoken in our fourth Testimonie whereby it appeareth that howsoever merces debita that is wages and meriâ—…um are relatives yet merit and the reward of eternall life or any other free reward are not relatives Among men wages hath place because the labourer deserveth it and he that hireth him is benefited by the labour and there is ordinarily a due proportion betweene the labour and the wages But with God it is otherwise we can deserve nothing of him neither is hee benefited by our labours neither is there any proportion betweene our workes and the reward of eternall life The proposition therefore though by him taken for granted is by us to be denyed § V. The assumption that eternall life is the reward of good workes wee freely confesse so it bee understood of a free reward which as it was graciously promised so it is freely and undeservedly given Bellarmine therefore should have proved that eternall life is a mercenary and on our part a deserved reward But of all the places which he quoteth both in the second and third Chapters where the word merâ—…es is used not one doth prove eternall life to bee a deserved reward or imply the merit of condignity As Genes 15. 1. I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward 2 Chron. 15. 7. Your worke shall be rewarded Prov. 11. 18. To him that soweâ—…h righteousnesse there shall bee a sure reward For as Hos. 10. 12. Hee that soweth in righteousnesse shall reape in mercie Wisd. 5. 16. The righteous shall live for ever and their reward is with the Lord Eccl. 18. 22. The reward of the Lord abideth for ever Esai 40. 10. Behold the Lord will come and his reward with him so Apoâ—… 22. 12. Matth. 5. 12. great is your reward in heaven 1 Cor. 3. 8. Every one shall recive his owne reward according to his owne labour § VI. Onely there may bee question of that place Matth. 20. 8. Call the labourers and give them their wages which Bellarminâ—… citeth in the third Chapter and afterwards urgeth both in the same Chapter and in the seventeenth and also nineteenth And for as
according to charity sanctified from the corruption of sinne and justified from the guilt of the same therefore they should take heed lest they should againe bee polluted with those sinnes from which they were sanctified or made guilty of those crimes from which they were justified § V. His second testimony is Rom. 8. 30. Whom he hath called them hee hath justified Answ. The Context doth shew that the word in the 30. verse is used in the same sense as verse 33. For having shewed that whom the Lord calleth hee doth justifie and whom he doth justifie them also hee doth glorifie from thence hee inferreth this consolation who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that justifieth as was said verse 30. who shall condemne c. Where justifying most plainely is used as a judiciall word signifying by sentence to justifie as Chrysostome and Oâ—…cumenius on this place doe note as opposed to accusing and condemning and cannot with any shew of reason be drawne to signifie contrary to the perpetuall use of the word infusion of righteousnesse But heere it may bee objected that in this place where the Apostle setteth downe the degrees of salvation sanctification is either included in justification or left our Answ. It is left out for the Apostle setting downe the chaine of the causes of salvation in the degrees whereof every former being the cause of the latter left out sanctification as being no cause of salvation but the way unto it and the cognizance of them that are saved And these degrees are so set downe Act. 26. 18. where the end of the ministery is expressed first Vocation that men should bee called and thereby brought to beleeve secondly Iustification that by faith they may receive remission of sinnes thirdly Glorification that by faith they may receive the inheritance among them that are sanctified where sanctification is mentioned onely as the cognizance of them that are saved Againe sanctification is left out because it is included in respect of the beginning thereof which is our conversion or regeneration in vocation and in respect of the consummation in glorification for as sanctification is gloria inchoata so glorification is gratia consummata § VI. His third testimony is Rom. 4. 5. to him that beleeveth in him who justifieth the ungodly Ans. he should have done well to have made up the sentence his faith is imputed for righteousnesse which place is so farre srom favouring the Popish conceit that it plainely confutes it first it is called the justification of the ungodly that is of one who is a sinner in himselfe for he that is a sinner in himselfe by inherent sinne and so remaineth cannot be justified by righteousnesse inherent secondly because to him that beleeveth in Christ faith relatively understood that is the righteousnesse of Christ apprehended by faith is imputed for righteousnesse thirdly because in this place justification is expressed by these termes not imputing sinne remitting or covering of sinne imputing righteousnesse without workes imputing faith for righteousnesse to him that worketh not that is that seeketh not to bee justified by his owne righteousnesse but beleeveth in him that justifieth a sinner CAP. IIII. The third and fourth signification of the word justification assigned by Bellarmine § I. THirdly saith Bellarmine justification is taken for increase of justice for even as he is said to be heated not only who of cold is mà de hot but also who of hot is made hotter even so he is said to be justified who not onely of a sinner is made just but also of just is made more just Ans. In this comparison of like there is a great unlikenesse for calefaction implyeth a reall mutation and a positive change in the subject from cold to hot but in justification the change is not reall but relative as before hath beene shewed Bellarmine therefore must prove that to justifie doth signifie to make righteous formally by righteousnesse inherent before he can prove that it signifieth the increase of inherent justice But if the former cannot be proved much lesse the latter But yet he bringeth three proofes such as they be § II. The first Ecclus. 18. 21. Ne verearis usque ad mortem justificari quâ—…niam merces Domini manet in aeternum feare not to be justified untill death for the reward of the Lord adideth for ever Answ. To omit that the booke is Apocryphall which ought not to bee alleaged in controversies of faith the testimonie it selfe is vilely depraved The words in the Originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is stay not untill death to be justified or as their own interlinear translation readeth it ne expectes usque ad mortem justificari wait not untill death to be justified where it is evident that he speaketh of justification in our first conversion which he would not have differred untill the time of death and not of the continuance or increase of it for then the sentence would beare a contrary and indeed an ungodly sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abide not or continue not to be justified or to be just untill thy death And the words untill death are not to be joyned with the last word justified but with the first stay not untill death And their translation of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether as Bellarmine here readeth ne verearis or as some editions have ne vetéris hath no affinity with the Originall But our interpretation as it agreeth with the words of the Text so it is confirmed by the context Vse Physike before thou bee sicke before judgement prepare thy selfe humble thy selfe before thou bee sicke and in the time of sinnes that is whiles thou mai'st yet sinne shew thy conversion let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vowes in due season and deferre not untill death to be justified or to become just § III. But this testimony Bellarmine urgeth againe in another place shewing that the place is to bee understood of continuing and proceeding in justice and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are as much as cease not And this he would prove by that which goeth before be not hindred to pray alwayes where the wise man admonisheth us to increase our justice by continuall prayer and also by that which immediately followeth because the reward of the Lord endureth for ever for reward agreeth not to the first justification of the wicked but indulgence Answ. This interpretation of Bellarmine may then be admitted when it shal be proved first that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to cease secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pray thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwaies fourthly that those words but the reward of the Lord endureth for ever are found in the Originall Text. But if Bellarmine knew that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth stay not or waite not and not cease not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render the vow and not to pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
justification by inherent righteousnesse he affirmeth that to be justified by Christ in that place doth signifie to bee made just by obtaining righteousnesse 〈◊〉 And this hee would prove by two reasons first out of those words jâ—…sti constistuentur multi many shall be constituted or made just From whence he argueth thus To bee constituted just is to bee made just by inherent righteousnesse To bee justified is to bee constituted just Rom. 5. 19. Therefore to bee constituted just is to bee made just by righteousnesse inherent Answ. Wee confesse that whosoever is justified is constituted yea is made just but the question is concerning the manner whether by infusion of righteousnesse or by imputation The assumption therefore is granted by us But the proposition is false and hath no ground in the Scriptures Yea the contrary may bee proved out of the place alleaged where justification or making righteous is opposed not to the corruption of sinne but to guilt and condemnation vers 16. and 18. And therefore he is said in this place to be justified or constituted righteous who being absolved and acquitted from the guilt of sinne and from condemnation is accepted as righteous unto life for as in the former part of the 19. verse many are said to be constituted sinners that is as the Greeke interpreters doe expound it and as appeareth by the former verses guilty of sin and obnoxious to condemnation by the disobedience of Adaâ—… meaning that one offence of his which we cal his fal which cannot be otherwise understood but by imputation so in the latter part many are said to be constituted just by the obedience of the second Adam that is absolved from the guilt of sinne and condemnation and accepted as righteous in Christ his obedience being communicated to them which cannot be by any other meanes but by imputation Neither can any reason be given why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bee constituted just should not be a judiciall word as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be justified In all other places this verbe whether it bee used in the good sense or in the bad signifieth no such thing as Bellarmine inferreth upon it For as in the bad it signifieth to convince or condemne as Gal. 2. 18. Iam. 4. 4. so in the good to approve or commend as Rom. 5. 8. 2 Cor. 4. 2. 6. 4. 7. 11. And accordingly the meaning of this place may be this as by the disobedience of the first Adam many were convicted and condemned as sinners that is guilty of sinne and damnation so by the obedience of the second Adam many shall bee approved and accepted as righteous His reason is from the antithesis of Adam to Christ which as I shall hereafter in his due place prove maketh wholly against him for if by the actuall disobedience of Adam imputed unto us wee were made sinners then by the obedience of Christ imputed unto us we are made righteous but the former is true therefore the latter Of this antithesis I am hereafter to speake more at large in the meane time this may suffice to maintaine and justifie our exposition of the word against Bellarmines cavils § II. But here Bellarmine frameth to himselfe a fourefold Objection of Calvin and Chemnitius proving that to justifie is a judiciall word signifying to absolve and to pronounce just Their first reason is because the Apostle opposeth justifying to condemning as Rom. 5. 16. 18. 8. 33. Therefore as God is said to condemne when he doth not acquit a man but pronouncing him guilty deputeth him unto punishment so on the contrary he is said to justifie when hee acquitteth and absolveth a man from guilt and pronouncing him just accepteth of him in Christ as righteous unto eternall life To this Bellarmine shapeth two answeres first That justification is rightly opposed to condemnation but is not therefore alwayes a judiciall word for even condemnation it selfe sometimes is the act of a Iudge appointing him to punishment who in judgement was found guilty and sometimes it is the effect of a fault which hath deserved punishment And so Adam hath condemned us and God condemneth but Adam hath not condemned us by judging us after a judiciall manner but by imprinting in us Originall sinne After the same manner saith hee justification sometimes is the act of a Iudge sometimes the effect of grace And both wayes doth Christ justifie us first as the second Adam by deletion of sinne and infusion of grace secondly in the day of judgment by declaring them just whom before he had made just Reply Iustification in this question and in the places alleaged is considered as an action of God and being referred to God it signifieth not to make just by infusion of righteousnesse but by sentence after the manner of a Iudge to absolve from sinne and to pronounce and accept as righteous as being opposed to condemning which being referred to God signifieth not to make sinfull but by sentence after the manner of a Iudge to pronounce the offendour guilty and to award him punishment But what either justifying or condemning may signifie being referred to other either persons or things it is not materiall so that it be confessed which cannot be denied that justifying being ascribed to God signifieth not to make righteous by infusion no more than condemning being attributed to God signifieth to make wicked by infusion but both are to bee understood as the actions of a judge who either pronouncing a man just absolveth him from guilt or pronouncing him guilty appointeth him to punishment This therefore was an impertinent shift of a subtle sophister having nothing to say to the purpose for whereas he applyeth his distinction of condemning and justifying to the first and second Adam as pertinent to the places alleaged I answer first that neither is considered as the act of the first or second Adam but as Bellarmine confesseth in his second answer as the actions of God the Iudge secondly that although in some sense the first Adam may bee said to have condemned us as the second Adam is truely said Esai 53. 11. to justifie us yet both is to bee understood of the guilt of sinne brought upon us by the one and taken away by the other For as the first Adam by his transgression may be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have condemned us because hee hath inwrapped us in the guilt of his sinne and so made us guilty of death and obnoxious to the â—…entence of condemnation that transgression of his being imputed us being in him as the root so the second Adam may truely be said to justifie us who are in him both as a surety in taking upon him our guilt and paying our debt for us Esai 53. 11. and also as our intercessour and advocate pleading for us that by imputation of his righteousnesse we may be absolved from our sinnes and accepted as righteous in him § III. His second answer is that although
Gospell the covenant of workes and the covenant of grace as if the Gospell did unto justification require inherent and that a more perfect righteousnesse than the Law requireth And consequently with the false Apostles and teachers of the Galatians doe teach another Gospell than that which the Apostle taught which whosoever doth hee is accursed Whrefore the samethings which the Apostle objecteth against the Galatians who were seduced by their false Teachers are verified of the Papists who seekng to be justified by the workes of the Law are under the curse they are fallen from grace to them the promise is of no effect to them Christ dyed in vaine then Christ profiteth nothing as hereafter I shall shew For whosoever seeketh to bee justified by the workes of the Law hee is a debtour to the whole Law and to him who is a debtour to the whole Law that is to bee subject to the curse if he transgresse it and to be excluded from justification and salvation if he doe not perfectly fulfill it Christ profiteth nothing For whereas they distinguish the workes which they make the condition of both the Covenants that the one are the workes of Nature the other of grace it is evident that all good workes and all inherent righteousnesse is prescribed in the Law which is the most perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse Secondly that inherent righteousnesse is not the condition of the covenant of grace but is the thing promised to all that truely beleeve For the better understanding whereof wee are to know that the covenant of workes was made with all mankinde in Adam the Covenant of Grace with the heires of promise in Christ. The former promiseth justification to these who in their owne persons performe perfect obedience that perfect obedience being the condition of the Covenant The latter that to us the sonnes of Abraham being redeemed and justified by faith the Lord will give grace to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him in which our new obedience consisteth which as I said is not the condition of the promise but the thing promised § XXI Secondly by confounding justification and sanctification they teach men to place the matter of justification and merit of salvation in themselves For the matter of sanctification is inherent and that which is the matter of justification is the merit of salvation Againe that which is inherent is both prescribed in the Law and is also our owne though received from God which the Pharisie himselfe confessed when he thanked God for it But the holy Ghost doth teach us that wee are neither justified by the obedience or righteousnesse which is taught in the Law nor by that which is ours And in regard of this very difference betwixt the Papists and us wee are not unworthily called Evangelici the professors of the Gospell and they the enemies thereof who seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse doe with scorne reject the righteousnesse of Christ imputed which is that righteousnesse of God revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith This being the maine doctrine of the Gospell that we are justified not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves or performed by our selves but by the righteousnesse of Christ alone apprehended by faith § XXII By confounding justification and sanctification and so of two benefits making but one they doe abolish and take away that maine benefit of the Messias by which we are not onely freed from hell but also intituled unto the kingdome of heaven which the Scriptures distinctly call our justification without which there can bee no salvation For whom God doth justifie all them and onely them he doth glorifie And that they doe wholly take away the benefit of justification it shall further appeare in handling the second question of this first controverfie whereof I am now to speake CAP. VII That the Papists exclude remission of sinne from Iustification and in stead thereof have put expulsion and extinction of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse and that they fouly erre therein § I. BVT heare it will be objected that so long as the Papists acknowledge remission of sinne to concurre unto justification they cannot be said wholly to take away the benefit of justification but rather to follow the judgement of some of the Latine fathers who sometimes comprehending the benefit of sanctification under the name of justification seemed to make justification to consist in remission of sinne and sanctification Whereunto I answere that indeed the Papists pretend so much For the Councell of Trent in expresse termes saith that justification is not remission of sins alone but also sanctification and renovation of the inner man and to the like purpose Bellarmine disputeth that justification doth not consist in the remission of sinnes alone but also in inward renovation And yet all this is but a meere colourable pretence For as they exclude from justification the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by which onely wee have remission of sinne so they doe indeed and in truth exclude remission it selfe And as in stead of imputation of righteousnesse they have brought in infusion of justice so in stead of remission of sinne by imputation of Christs righteousnesse they have brought in the utter expulsion extinction deletion of sinne by infusion of righteousnesse And for this they have some shew of reason For if they should hold that justification consisteth partly in remission that is in the forgivenesse or not imputation of sinne and partly in renovation or sanctification then they must confesse that there are two formall causes of justification which Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent and may truly bee objected against such of the Fathers as held justification to consist partly in remission and partly in renovation and consequently should bee forced to acknowledge two wayes of making men just by one and the same act of justification the one by imputation of that righteousnesse by which being without us we have remission of sinne the other by infusion of righteousnesse inherent by which sinne is expelled But the Councell of Trent doth stedfastly hold that there is but one formall cause of justification and that is infusion of justice whereby sinne is expelled What then becometh of remission of sinne which according both to Scriptures and Fathers concurreth to justification I say of it as of justification the name is retained but the thing is taken away § II. Heere therefore I am to shew two things first that the Papists from justification exclude remission of sinne by putting into the roome thereof the expulsion and extinction of sinne which belongeth not to justification but to sanctification and consequently doe wholly abolish by their doctrine the benefit of justification Secondly that remission of sinne is not the utter extinction or deletion thereof As touching the former when Calvin objected against the Councell of Trent that it made two
formall causes of justification Bellarmine answereth thus the Councell of Trent in expresse termes said that there is but one onely formall cause of justification Yea but say wee the Councell seemeth to make two viz. remission of sinnes and renovation But saith he when the Councell maketh mention severally of remission of sin and of infusion of grace it did it not to signifie that there is a twofold formall cause of justification but to declare that there are two termes of that motion which is called justification or two effects of the same cause For there cannot bee that mutation or translation which the Councell noteth to bee in justification unlesse by remission of sinne a man cease to bee wicked and by infusion of justice begin to be godly But saith hee as the aire when it is enlightened of the Sunne by the same light which it receiveth ceaseth to bee darke and beginneth to be lightsome So a man by the same justice given and infused by the Sunne of righteousnesse ceaseth to bee unjust the light of grace expelling the darknesse of sinne and beginneth to bee just the light of grace succeeding the darkenesse of sinne And as in calefaction which similitude hee useth elsewhere the accesse of heat expelleth cold so in justification the infusion of justice expelleth sinne This then is the doctrine of the new Church of Rome that in this mutation called justification which they define to bee a passage from sinne to righteousnesse though there be as in all other motions duo termini viz. sinne which is terminus à quo and righteousnesse which is terminus ad quem yet there are not two distinct actions concurring viz. remission or expulsion of sinne and infusion of righteousnesse but one and the same action which is the infusion of justice expelling sinne even as in calefaction though there bee two termes cold and hot yet there are not two actions for the same action of fire which bringeth in heat expelleth cold and so in illumination there are two termes darkenesse and light but not two actions for one and the same act of the Sunne which bringeth light driveth away darkenesse Whereby it is evident that by remission of sinne the Papists doe not understand as all men from the beginning of the world have understood pardoning forgiving not imputing sinne but the utter deletion expulsion abolition of it which Bellarmine calleth veram remissionem true remission as if the pardoning of the offence and taking away the guilt were not true remission but this true remission they hold to bee such that in a man who is justified and hath remission of sinne there is no sinne remaining and hee onely is to bee held a just man in whom there is no sinne Thus then remission of sinne is by the Papists excluded from justification and that brought in the roome of it which belongeth to that perfection of sanctification whereunto none attaine in this life § III. Now that the Papists grossely erre in making remission of sinne to bee the utter abolition or expulsion of it by infusion of righteousnesse may appeare by these arguments First whereas in sinne there are two things to bee considered the guilt and the corruption or Anomy thereof it is evident that the guilt of sinnes past is taken away by remission wholly and at once the corruption is taken away by mortification thereof not wholly in this life and at once but by degrees we being day by day renewed in the inner man The latter is the worke of Gods Spirit within us The former is an action of God without us such as is that of the Creditor in remitting or forgiving a debt And so the Scriptures conceive of remission For our sinnes are debts in respect of the guilt binding us over to punishment which wee owe for them When as God therefore remitteth the debt releaseth this obligation forgiveth the punishment hee is said to remit our sinnes This our Saviour taught by the parables of the creditors and debtors Matth. 18. 23. Luk. 7. 41. And thus he hath taught us to pray Matth. 6. 12. Forgive us our debts as wee forgive our debtors How doe wee forgive By not revenging the offence but laying aside all desire and purpose of revenge by passing by it and as it were forgetting it by covering it with charity by not imputing it by being reconciled unto the party who hath offended us not by a reall taking away of the sinne from the offender but a wiping of it out of our remembrance not by expelling the offence out of the offender but out of our thoughts § IV. Thus in the Scriptures to remit sinne is not to abolish and extinguish the sinne it selfe but to absolve from the guilt of sinne to pardon and to forgive the debt and to remit the punishment to cover a mans sinne and not to impute it And this plainely appeareth by these manifold phrases which are used in the Scriptures to signifie remission of sinne all which import the taking away of the guilt but none the utter abolishing of the corruption As first the Hebrew Salach Exod. 34. 9. Numb 14. 19 20. 30. 6. Deut. 29. 19. Psal. 103. 3. Esay 55. 7. Ier. 31. 34. Dan. 9. 20. signifieth parcere remittere ignoscere condonare propitium esse Kasah to hide to spare to forgive Nehem. 4. 5. Psal. 32. 1. 85. 2. Ioel 2. 17. Deut. 13. 8. Kaphar also is to cover to pardon to be propitious Deut. 21. 8. Psal. 65. 4. 78. 38. 79. 9. Esay 22. 14. Nasa to spare to forgive to take away the guilt Gen. 18. 24 26. 50. 17. Exod. 32. 32. Numb 14. 19. Psalm 32. 1. cum Rom. 4. 7. Esay 33. 24. Psalm 25. 18. Habar to passe by an offence Mic. 7. 18. and Hehebir to cause it to passe 2 Sam. 12. 13. 24. 10. Zech. 3. 4. Machah to wipe or to blot out of remembrance the sinnes of men as it were out of a booke to blot them out from before his face Nehem. 4. 5. Psalm 51. 9. Ier. 18. 23. Hesir to remove Esay 27. 9. Lo chashab not to impute Psal. 32. 2. In like manner the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to remit or forgive Mat. 6. 12 14 15. 18. 27 32. whence is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remission that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgivenesse as Hesychiiâ—…s expoundeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condonare to forgive Luk. 7. 42. 2 Cor. 2. 10. Ephes. 4. 33. Col. 2. 13. 3. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to impute Rom. 4. 8. 2 Cor. 5. 19. So the Latine remittere dimittere ignoscere condonare donare veniam dare parcere propitium esse and the English to remit to pardon to forgive § V. For the farther clearing of this point let us consider these three things first what that is which is remitted Secondly where it remaineth untill it bee remitted Thirdly by what act of God it is remitted The thing remitted is our
a prayer for the justification or sanctification of the wicked that his sinne may bee no more as Bellarmine absurdly expoundeth it dicet peccatum fuisse non esse but is a propheticall imprecation against the wicked that God would break their arme that is their power and strength and that when he as a judge should inquire into their wickednesse they should not be found according to that Prov. 10. 25. he shall be no more that is as Augustine expoundeth it that the wicked when he is judged shall perish for his sinne And so Vatabius make inquiry into his sinne thou shalt not finde him neither doth the Psalmist say non invenietur ipsum scil peccatum sed non invenietur ipse scilicet peccator not it but he shall not be found § VI. For the perfection of righteousnesse hee alleageth three places two out of Ephes. 5. vers 8. Yee were sometimes darkenesse but now light in the Lord where the abstract Light is put for the concrete Lightsome as being inlightned as the Children of Light not that they are that light in which there is no darkenesse Neither is it said that we are in our selves Light but notwithstanding that darkenesse which remaineth in us wee are Light in the Lord. The second place is Ephes. 5. 26 27. where it is said that Christ did give himselfe for his Church that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word that hee might present it to himselfe a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle or any such thing but that it should be Holy and without blemish In which words there is no mention of justification but of sanctification which in this life is begun and increased by the worke of the Spirit in the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments that at the Marriage of the Lambe it may bee presented unto him a glorious Church not having spot or wrinckle c. Wherefore Augustine That which I said saith he that God hath chosen unto himselfe a glorious Church I did not therefore speake it because now it is altogether such though no doubt she was chosen that she might be such when Christ who is her life shall appeare for â—…en she also with him shall appeare in glory for which glory she is called a glorious Church And againe wheresoever I mentioned the Church not having spot or wrinckle it is not so to bee taken as though now it were but because it is prepared to be such when she also shall appeare glorious And the same answer will serve for the third place cited out of the Canticles 4. 7. Tota pulchraes macula non est in te thou are all faire there is no spot in thee unlesse perhaps he speake of the beauty of the Spouse adorned in her justification with the perfect righteousnesse of Christ for of her Sanctification which is but begun in this life it is not true But the Papists are without shame who apply such texts of Scripture to the now Church of Rome § VII Besides these places of Scripture Bellarmine saith many other very weighty arguments might bee brought but hee hath already produced them in his first booke De Baptismo cap. 13. which when they shall call come to bee weighed will be found light enough For those places which speake of the efficacie of Baptisme in washing cleansing and taking away our sinnes prove not that in justification sinnes are utterly abolished For in Baptisme is sealed to them that are Baptized yea and conferred to the faithfull the benefits not onely of justification but also of sanctification And therefore as it is the Sacrament of remission of sinne and the seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith so it is called the Laver of regeneration wherein we are Baptized into the similitude of Christ his death and resurrection And therefore though in Baptisme sinne were wholly taken away as well in respect of the corruption as of the guilt yet it would not follow that in justification there is a Totall deletion of sinne But neither in Baptisme is there a totall abolition of sin seeing it is manifest that originall sinne which is called the flesh the old man and evill concupiscence remaineth in all the faithfull though in some measure mortified yet never fully and altogether extinguished in this life And although the Papists for maintenance of their severall errors viz. of justification by inherent righteousnesse of the perfect fulfilling of the Law of merit of works of supererogation doe maintaine that concupiscence remaining in the faithfull after Baptisme is not a sinne and the Councell of Trent hath denounced Anathemà against them that shall say it is a sinne yet it is manifest not onely by the testimony of antiquity and evident reasons which I could produce if I would runne into another controversie but also by the doctrine of the Apostle who doth not onely in many places expressely call it a sinne and describeth it as a sinne but also setteth it forth as the mother of sinne the sinning sinne which because it taketh occasion by the Commandement forbidding lust to worke in men all manner of evill concupiscence is not only convinced to be a sinne but also to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exceedingly sinnefull § VIII And not only habituall concupiscence in generall which is the body of sinne and the body of death in respect of which sinne the body of the faithfull is said to be dead Rom. 8. 10. is sinne but also the severall members and branches thereof which remaine even in the best are so many habituall sinnes as a spice at the least of pride selfe-love carnall security infidelity hypocrisie envy worldly and carnall love of pleasure profit preferment and glory in this world c. Which though they bee not imputed to the faithfull yet in themselves are sins as being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 swervings from the Law of God not onely as defects of righteousnesse which were enough to make them sinnes but as positive vices Neither is it to be doubted but that as the acts of pride and other habituall vices remaining even in the best are sinnes so much more the vices themselves from which they proceed are sinnes and are by the same Commandement of the Law forbidden Now whatsoever is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sinne For as every sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so every 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a sin that being a perfect definition of sinne as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Non potuit rectius brevius definiri peccatum quà m ut à S. Ioanne fuit definitum illis verbis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But all evill concupiscence both habituall and actuall both in generall the body of sinne and in particular the severall branches being so many habituall sinnes in whomsoever they are found even in the most regenerate are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aberrations from the
in true holinesse and righteousnesse Of this grace of sanctification there is more frequent mention in the Fathers who wrote against the Pelagians than of the other Because the Pelagians acknowledging the grace of God in forgiving sinnes which is indeed the justifying and saving grace they had not the like occasion to insist upon the declaration and proofe thereof as they had of the other which the Pelagians denyed § II. Of whose errors in this point there were foure degrees For first they acknowledge no other inward grace of God but bonum naturae the possibility of nature and the power of free-will which because it is freely given of God without any precedent merits of ours they acknowledged to bee Gods grace In the second place they acknowledged the grace that is the gracious favour of God in forgiving sinnes but the inward vertue avoid sinnes and to walke in obedience they ascribed to the power of nature Thirdly for our direction and instruction how and what sinnes to avoid and how and what duties to performe they acknowledged Gods grace in teaching and instructing us by his word and by his law Fourthly they acknowledged after a sort the helpe of grace for the more easie performance of their duties but they denied the necessity thereof because without grace they being directed by the word were able of themselves though not so easily to fulfill the Law § III. These three latter degrees are condemned by so many decrees of the Councell of Milevis among which this is one denouncing Anathema against such as shall say that the grace of God whereby wee are justified through our Lord Iesus Christ doth availe onely to remission of sinnes which are already committed and not for a helpe that we may not commit them unto which rightly understood we doe subscribe acknowledging that by the same grace of God by which we were elected redeemed called reconciled adopted justified wee are also sanctified For wee professe that our blessed Saviour was given unto us of God not onely to bee our justification and redemption but also to be our Sanctification And we doe acknowledge that in the Covenant of grace the Lord hath not onely promised remission of sinnes to those that beleeve in Christ but hee hath also sworne that he will give us being redeemed and having remission of sinne to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the daies of our life And therefore we do also willingly subscribe to those sentences of Augustine which Gratian hath transcribed into the third part of his decree No man taketh away sinnes but Christ alone who is the Lambe of God taking away the sinnes of the world Now he taketh them away both by forgiving those that are already committed among which originall sinne is contained and also by helping that they bee not committed and by bringing us unto life where they cannot bee committed at all And againe the grace which by our Lord Iesus Christ is given is neither the knowledge of the divine Law neither nature nor remission of sinnes alone but it felfe also causeth that the Law be fulfilled that nature be freed that sinne raigne not And this I presume is as much as can truely bee alleaged out of the Fathers For seeing they doe hold as wee shall hereafter shew justification by faith onely it cannot bee imagined that they held justification properly understood by inherent graces unlesse wee can imagine that they thought there is no inherent grace but faith onely § IV. But howsoever the Fathers may be excused who opposing the errors of the Pelagians which oppugned the sanctifying grace did much insist upon the declaration the proofe and the amplification thereof oftner speaking of this gift of grace which was oppugned than of the gracious favour of God in forgiving of sinnes which the Pelagians did confesse yet the backsliding posterity cannot bee excused and that in three respects For first they leave out altogether the proper signification of grace which is most frequent in the holy Scriptures as if there were no other grace to bee acknowledged but that which is inherent Secondly they take away that grace of remission which the Pelagians did confesse and in the roome thereof they have brought in an utter deletion or abolition of sinne caused by the infusion of grace Thirdly that grace which they would seeme so much to magnifie is not much better acknowledged by them than it was by the Pelagians For first they doe not acknowledge it to be a quickning and reviving grace to them that are dead but an healing grace to the sicke and a helping grace to the weake And by how much they extoll the power of nature and lessen the foulenesse of originall sinne so much they extenuat the benefit of grace and are as well as the Pelagians worthily termed the enemies of Gods grace Secondly there seemeth to be little or no difference betweene the Pelagians bonum Naturae which they acknowledged to bee Gods grace and that sufficient grace which the Papists hold to be common to all Thirdly neither is there any great difference betweene them in respect of that grace whereby men are called For the Pelagians acknowledged the great grace of God in revealing his will unto us and in directing us what to doe and what to beleeve and withall confessed that God doth worke in us to will by revealing his will to us And what doe the Papists acknowldge more but that God having called us by his word and moved us to turne unto him it is in the power of our free-will either to accept Gods effectuall grace or to refuse it But this belongeth to another controversie A TREATISE OF IV STIFICATION THE FOVRTH BOOKE Of the Matter of Justification CAP. I. The state of the question concerning the matter of justification it being the principall point in controversie § I. THE third Capitall errour of the Papists in the question of justification is concerning that righteousnesse whereby we are justified where for prevention of Popish calumniations I must desire the Reader to remember three things First that the controversie is not concerning our Sanctification but concerning our Iustification For wee confesse that our habituall sanctification consisteth in our righteousnesse inherent and actuall in our new obedience Secondly that the question is not of our justification before men but before God For we acknowledge that we are justified that is declared and knowne to be just not onely by profession of the faith but also by good workes as Saint Iames teacheth Thirdly that wee doe not deny that there is a righteousnesse in the faithfull as Bellarmine falsly chargeth us For we professe that there is no faithfull or justified man in whom there is not inherent righteousnesse more or lesse according to the measure of grace received And further we professe that this righteousnesse which we have from God and is inherent in us is graciously both
est si divinitùs districtè 〈◊〉 and in the conclusion of his worke lib. 35. cap. 26. wherein as hee professeth that hee sought chiefly to please God so hee confesseth that this intention was accompanied with other worse intentions and sinister respects as seeking to please men and affecting their praise whereupon hee inferreth Si autem de his divinitùs districtè discutimur quis inter ista remanet salutis locus quando mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos 〈◊〉 crediâ—…s pura bona esse nequaquam possunt the evill things saith he which we have are purely and meerely evill but the good things which we suppose our selves to have are not nor can in any wise be purely good and so said Bernard Nostra siquâ—… est humilis justitia recta forsan sed non pura whence it followeth necessarily that none of the workes of the faithfull are pure and consequently that their very best workes are impure This which hath been said may suffice to a conscience not cauterized neither shall I need to say any more in this needlesse argument For though it should bee granted that some of the works of the faithfull were purely good as they are not yet so long as any of their works are sinfull as in many things we faile all insomuch that the righteous as Bellarmine himselfe doth cite the place doth fall seven times a day they cannot be justified by their workes but are by the sentence of the Law in themselves accursed because they doe not continue in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them and because the breach of any one commandement maketh them guilty of all I conclude against the Papists as Epiphâ—…ius did censure the Catharists these men professing themselves pure by this supposition make themselves unpure for whosoever pronounceth himselfe to be pure therein he doth utterly condemne himselfe to be impure CAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments answered § I. THis was our third argument taken from the imperfection of our obedience and righteousnesse which I have defended against Bellarmines cavils before I proceed to the fourth I hold it needfull to answere his arguments in propounding whereof hee falleth short of his projects as I noted before for hee that would prove that men are justified by their workes had need to prove that all the workes of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good which is impossible to bee proved but hee neither concludeth of all works nor of all the faithfull And yet it is most certaine that if the faithfull be justified by their works then all the works of all the faithfull are purely and perfectly good His proofes are of three sorts authority of Scriptures Testimonies of Fathers and other reasons Out of the Scripture he citeth eight testimonies The first out of Iob 1. 22. In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips And that we may not answere with some of the Rabbins that though he sinned not with his lips yet hee might sinne in his heart hee telleth us that in the next Chapter God giveth him this testimonie that still he retained his innocency and therefore sinned neither in his tongue nor in his heart Againe whereas Satan sought by so many temptations to bring Iob to sinne and God on the other side permitted all those temptations that the patience and vertue of that holy man should bee manifested if Iob should have sinned God should after a sort have beene over come by the devill wherfore it is certaine that that worke of Iobs patience was not stained with any sinne and that the Lutherans which say the contrary take part with the devill against God § II. Answ. Those temptations were permitted by God as tyrals of Iob not perfection but integrity For that is Gods end that they who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sound and upright may be knowne 1 Cor. 11. 19. and this end was atchieved Cap. 2. vers 3. for still Iob retained his integrity But Satans intention was to prove him to be an hypocrite and to move him not onely to fall but to fall away from God and to blaspheme him to his face and so much hee undertooke both Cap. 1. 11. and Cap. 2. 5. howbeit hee failed in his enterprize And so much is signified in both the places alleaged by Bellarmine that Iob was so farre either from blaspheming God to his face which Satan undertooke he should that he offended not with his lippes nor charged God foolishly or from being discovered to be an hypocrite that by Gods owne testimony he retained his integrity as that word signifieth which Bellarmine according to the vulgar Latine calleth innocencie But Iob though hee were upright and sincere yet he was not perfect nor without sinne as appeareth by his manifold imperfections which afterwards he discovered Cap. 3. c. and also by his free confession of his sinfulnesse Cap. 9. 20. 33. and lastly by his feare and jelousie which hee had over his best actions lest he had sinned in them for as Gregory writing on those words of Iob Verebar omnia opera mea understandeth it to be an humble confession as if he had said quae apertè egerim video sed quid in his latenter pertulerim ignoro what overtly I performed I see but what covertly I suffered therein I know not But here may be objected which Bellarmine in the next Chapter alleageth out of the said Gregory Bonarum mentium est ibi etiam aliquo modo culpam agnoscere ubi culpa non est it is the property of good minds even there to acknowledge a fault where nofault is wherto I answere that Gregory speaketh in regard of humane infirmities which were laid upon man after his fall and namely of the monthly infirmity of women which though they bee not inflicted upon a man for his personall offences yet it is the property of good minds to esteeme them as laid upon them for their sinnes Thus Iob though his afflictions were not inflicted upon him as corrections for his sinnes but as tryals of his vertue yet he imputeth them to his sinnes Iob 13. 26. § III. In the second place he allegeth diverse testimonies out of the Psalmes wherein David pleadeth his owne innocencie and appealeth unto God to be judged according to his owne righteousnesse Psalm 7. 4. 9. 16. 1 2 3. 18. 2. 1. 26. 1. 119. 121. Answ. In some of these places David pleadeth the justice of his particular cause against his adversaries not the absolute innocencie of his person The rest are to be understood of his uprighttnesse and integrity For otherwise no man was more forward to confesse and to deplore his manifold sinnes than David was none more ready to implore Gods mercy none more fearefull that God should enter into strict judgement with him § IV. His third testimony is Matth. 6. 22. If thine eye be single the
fiction of the hereticks of our time Nay we say more that by the preaching of the Word faith is not onely excited where it was before but that it is first wrought ordinarily and begotten by the ministry of the Gospell The Papists ascribe the begetting of faith to the Sacraments and the stirring of it up to the Word As if faith infused in Baptisme did ly a sleep untill it be excited and awakned by the word But the Scripture teacheth us that faith commeth by hearing the Word that Preachers are Ministers by whom you do beleeve that without a preacher men cannot ordinarily beleeve Rom. 10. 14. that men are begotten to God by the preaching of the Word 1 Cor. 4. 15. that therefore preachers are their Fathers in the faith that they justifie men Dan. 12. 3. because they are the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in them whereby they are justified Why then doth Peter require them to whom he had preached to repent and to be baptized I answer that the holy Ghost by Peters sermon had wrought the grace of faith in the hearers before they were baptized Act. 2. 41. as by Pauls preaching Act. 13. 48. in so many of the hearers as were ordained unto life in Lydia Act. 16. 14 15. By Philips preaching in the Eunuch Act. 8. 38. by Peters preaching in Cornelius and his company Act. 10. 43. 44. and by this faith they were justified before God before they were baptized even as Abraham was before he was circumcised Rom. 4. 11. But that they might be justified also in the Court of their owne Conscience and much more that they might be saved many other things as repentance and a godly life with the use of the Sacraments and of all other good meanes are required besides that faith whereby alone they are justified before God And to this end did Peter require them to repent and to bee baptized not that Baptisme properly doth justifie and much lesse that it begetteth â—…aith for in all these faith was wrought before they were baptized but because it is a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith to them that are baptized not onely at the time of Baptisme but whensoever or how long soever they beleeve And whereas he saith that remission of sinnes is preached to those that beleeve as they ought I confesse it is true that remission is not promised to an idle dead or counterfeit faith but to the true lively and effectuall faith which in some measure purifieth the heart and worketh by love causing a man though not to fulfill all things that are commanded as Bellarmine speaketh yet to will to desire and to endevour that hee may performe all things commanded according to the measure of grace received But though obedience bee a necessary consequent of faith yet it is very absurd to confound it with faith as Bellarmine here seemeth to doe § V. As for his similitude of the Physitian I answer the onely meanes to bee cured of the wounds of our soules which are our sinnes by our spirituall Physitian which is Christ is to beleeve in him and the onely plaisters to bee applied are his sufferings and merits for by his stripes we are healed Esa. 53. 5. and the onely meanes on our part to apply them is faith For even as Moses lifted up the brazen Serpent in the Wildernesse that those who were bitten by the fiery serpents might by looking upon that which was but a figure of Christ be healed even so our Saviour Christ was lifted up upon the Crosse that whosoever being stung as we all are by the old Serpent and made subject to eâ—…all death shall looke upon him with the eye of a true faith shall bee saved To which remedie alone all true physicians of mens soules do use to direct the wounded Conscience when the Iaylour Act. 16. 30 31. in great consternation of mind came trembling and falling downe before Paul and Silas demanded of them what he might doe that he might bee saved they said beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ and thou shalt be saved And this remedy â—…in curing miraculously corporall discases was used sometimes with good successe Mat. 9. 21. 22. 14. 36. and was by our Saviour himself prescribed as the onely receipt Mar. 5. 36. Luk. 8. 50. § VI. Thirdly where the Apostle in this place nameth onely remission of sinnes hee saith it hindreth not but that justâ—…fication may bee understood to consist in remission of sinnes and infusion of righteousnesse For as we have not once shewed saith hee remission of sinnes is not onely the pardâ—…ning of the punishment but also the washing away and cleansing of the fault which is not done but by the cleannesse of grace and comelinesse of justice comming in the place which the name of justification pretendeth being named from justice Reply Not once but very oft hath hee said that remission of sinne is the utter deletion and extinction of sinne and that it is not a distinct act from infusion of righteousnesse because by infusion of justice sinne is expelled as by the accession of heat and light cold and darkenesse is expelled But as for condonation and pardon of the guilt and punishment that he hath utterly excluded from justification For the pardoning of the guilt and punishment is not done by infusion of righteousnesse which as hee teacheth is the onely act of justification whereof there is but one formall cause which is righteousnesse insuâ—…ed as the Councel of Trent hath defined but by imputation of the satisfaction of Christ. For righteousnesse infused as Bellarmine hath confessed doth not or cannot satisfie for our sinnes Now if there bee but one formall cause of justification as indeed there is but one and that one be not the imputation but the infusion of justice or as they rather use to speake the justice infused which expelleth sinne which expulsion or deletion they call the remission yea the true remission of sinne then the forgivenesse of the guilt and punishment belongeth not to justification But if the forgiving of the guilt and punishment be the not imputing of sinne which necessarily bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse as Bellarmine confesseth and the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. viz. that the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without workes when hee imputeth not sinne then it will necessarily follow that imputation of Christs satisfaction or righteousnesse is the onely formall cause of justification whereby we being absolved from sinne are accepted as just yea constituted righteous in Christ. And that infusion of righteousnesse expelling sinne is another thing which the Scriptures call Sanctification And this I take to be a manifest truth which being granted we have obtained the whole cause § VII Fourthly againe saith he although there were mention made in this place of justification only from sinnes yet in many other places there is mention made of Sanctification of cleansing of washing and renewing which shew
and merit of our justification But neither his death nor obedience had beene effectuall to our justification if he had not risen from the dead As the Apostle sheweth 1 Cor. 15 17. If Christ bee not raised your faith is vaine yee are yet in your sinnes For if Christ had not risen againe it had beene an evidâ—…nce that he was not the Sonne of God and then could not his obedience or sufferings have beene meritorious for us But by his resurrection hee was mightily declared to be the Sonne of God in regard whereof it was said Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee and being God his obedience and sufferings are of infinite and all sufficient merit and value vertue and efficacie for the justification and salvation of all that beleeve in him And againe what benefits Christ merited for us by his obedience even untill death the same being risen he applyeth and giveth to those that beleeve God having raised him and exalted him with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance to Israel and remission of sinnes Christ therefore was given unto death that hee might by his sufferings satisfie for our sinnes the penalty thereunto belonging and he did rise againe that by application of his merits we might bee justified Righteousnesse therefore shall be imputed to those that beleeve in the resurrection of Christ or rather in Christ raised againe who as he gave himselfe to bee a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or price of ransome for our sinnes so he did arise againe that by effectuall application of his merits we might bee justified So that whom by his death and obedience he redeemed meritoriously then he doth effectually justifie and save by his life and the severall actions thereof viz. his resurrection ascension sitting at the right hand of his Father as our King and Priest his comming againe to judgement who therefore shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children it is God that justifieth who is hee that condemneth It is Christ that dyed yea rather that is risen againe who is even at the right hand of God who also maketh intorcession for us § IV. In the words following Bellarmine answeareth a secret objection if remission of sinnes be ascribed to Christs death and renovation to his resurrection then belike remission and renovation be two severall actions proceeding from divers causes contrary to that which hath beene delivered For prevention whereof he saith It is to be noted that the death of Christ which is the price of our redemption was not onely the cause of the remission of sinne but also of internall renovation And the like as he saith afterwards may bee said of the reâ—…urrection For according to the doctrine of the Catholike Church these two cannot bee severed fâ—…rasmuch as one and the same grace viz. charity being through the merit of Christ infused and inherent in us doth both blot out or extinguish our sinnes and also adorneth the soule with righteousnesse wherefore though the Apostle might have ascribed both remission and renovation either to Christs death or to his resurrection yet he chose rather distinctly to attribute remission to his death and renovation to his resurrection propter similitudinem because of the likenesse which the extinction of sinne hath with the death of the body and spirituall renovation with the resurrection of the body whereunto I answer briefly first that though the death and resurrection of Christ in respect of their efficacie though remission and renovation alwayes goission and renovation then in justification there are two actions proceeding from two causes secondly that these foure distinct benefits remission of sinne and acceptation of us as righteous in Christ which are the parts of justification wrought both of them by imputation of Christs righteousnesse which is the one and onely forme of justification likewise the dying unto sinne or mortification and the rising of the Sonle from the grave of sinne which is our first resurrection or vivification which are the two parts of sanctification those foure actions I say proceed from two causes and that in twofold respects For remission of sinne is procured by the merit of Christs death and dying unto sinne is ascribed to the vertue of his death the imputation of Christs merits whereby wee are both absolved from sinne and accepted as righteous is ascribed to his resurrection whereby his merits are applyed unto us for our justification and the grace of rising from the grave of sinne to the vertue of his resurrection for by the same power whereby Christ did rise againe are wee raised from sinne to newnesse of life § V. His second allegation is Rom. 5. 21. That as sinne reigned unto death so grace may reign by justice to life everlasting through Iesus Christ our Lord where by justice opposed to sin he saith is meant inward renovation Ans. 1. We deny not but that in all the faithful there is a two fold righteousnesse the one imputed which is the righteousnesse of justification the other infused and inherent which is the righteousnesse of sanctification which he calleth renovation If therfore the Apostle did speake here of righteousnesse inherent yet this place would make nothing against us For we confesse that as sin reigneth in the children of disobedience by producing the workes of iniquity so the grace of God or the Spirit of grace doth reigne in the faithful by bringing forth the fruits of righteousnes But this is not the righteousnesse of justification but that wherein our sanctification doth consist But indeed the Apostle here doth not speake either only or chiefly if at all of inherent righteousnesse Neither doth hee in this place make an opposition or antithesis betweene sinne and righteonsnesse to which supposition Bellarmines argument is grounded but betweene the kingdome of sinne reigning unto death and the kingdome of grace reigning by righteousnesse unto everlasting life through Iesns Christ our Lord. Now the righteousnesse wherein the kingdome of grace especially consisteth is the righteousnesse of justification by faith whereupon followeth peace of conscience and joy in the holy Ghost Rom. 14. 17. compared with Rom. 5. 1. 2. which being not our righteousnesse as all inherent justice is but the righteousnesse of God is chiefly yea in the cause of justification is onely to bee sought after Phil. 3. 8 9. Rom. 10. 3. Secondly as in all the chapter from the twelfth verse to the end the opposition which is made is of Adams sinne to Christs obedience so in this place as the sinne of Adam was the cause of death so Christs obedience of life the opposition is not of inherent righteousnesse to inherent sinne but of Christs righteousnesse to Adams sinne § VI. His third allegation is out of Rom. 6. 13. Doe not ye exhibit your members as instruments of iniquity unto sinne but exhibit your selves to God as of dead men alive and your members instruments
covered that is saith he quorum peccata in oblivioneÌ„ ducta sunt whose sins are brought into oblivion in the place quoted by Bellarmine he hath these words Blessed are they whose sins are covered he doth not say in whom no sins are found but whose sins are covered The sins are covered and hid they are abolished or blotted out by oblivion according to his owne former exposition even now alleaged If God covered sins he would not have an eye to them nor animadvert them if hee would not animadvert them neither would he punish them Noluit agnoscere maluit ignoscere he would not take notice of them he would rather pardon them Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered then follow the words cited by Bellarmine Ne sic intelligatis doe not sounderstand what he saith whose sins are covered as though they were there and lived unmortified and unrepented of For that they bee there still though mortified appeareth both by the words before that they may be found there though covered and by his next words tecta ergo peccata quare dixit ut non viderentur why then did he say that sins are covered not that they be not at all but that they may not be seene Quid enim erat Dei videre peccata nisi punire peccata for what is Gods seeing of sin but his punishing of sin and so on the other side what is his not seeing or covering of sin but his not punishing or pardoning it Afterwards making way for the exposition of verse 3. he saith that no man is without sin and that no man can boast that he is cleane from sins And that therefore men if they would have their sinnes cured they must not hide them like the Pharisee who be ing in the Temple as it were in statione medici did shew his sound parts and hid his wounds Deus ergo tegat vulnera noli tu let God therefore cover thy wounds do not thou For if thou being ashamed wilt cover thy wounds the Physician will not cure it then follow the words cited by Bellarmine in the second place Medicus tegat curet emplastro enim tegit Let the Physician cover and cure for with a plaister he covereth then followeth under the cover of the Physitian the wound is healed under the cover of him that is wounded the wound is concealed From whom doest thou conceale it from him that knoweth all things Therfore brethren see what he saith quum tacut c. because I held my peace my bones are waxen old c. where August doth not expound these words whose sins are covered but sheweth that if wee would have them healed wee should not cover them but confesse them to our Spirituall Physician that he covering them with an emplaister may cure them all which we confesse so that he needed not to quote the two Gregories to prove that God doth as it were with a plaister cover and cure our sinnes But withall we would know of Bellarmine what this plaister is Is it our inherent righteousnesse as the Papists teach or is it not the righteousnesse and satisfaction of Christ by whose stripes we are healed for as I shall shew presently out of Iustin Martyr whom here to no purpose Bellarmine did alleage in the first place nothing could cover our sinnes but onely the righteousnesse of Christ by whom the iniquity of many is hid or covered § XIV Diverse other arguments Bellarmine mentioneth as cited out of Calvins Institutions Lib. 3. c. 11. in answering wherof besides some of those which I have produced he spendeth six whole Chapters which notwithstanding for the most part are not there to be found but seeme at least some of them to have been devised of his own braine and by him framed and fitted to his owne strength that having overcome these counterfeit enemies hee might seeme to have refuted us But these arguments which I have produced are sufficient for the proofe of the point in question and them I have defended against his cavils If any man desire to see the defence of the rest that is to see Bellarmines objections devised for us maintained against himselfe he may have recourse to the answere of David Paraeus who hath in so many Chapters answered Bellarmines exceptions Lib. 2. de justif Cap. 9 10 11 12 13 14. Now I proceed to the testimonies of the Fathers and of other later Writers CAP. IV. Testimonies of Writers both Old and New proving justification by righteousnesse imputed § I. I Beginne as Bellarmine did with Iustin Martyr For what other thing saith he could hide or cover our sinnes but the righteousnesse of the Sonne of God In whom was it possible that wee sinners and ungodly should bee justified but in the onely Sonne of God O sweet commutation that the iniquity of many should be hid in one just person and that the righteousnesse of one should justifie many sinners 2. Athanasius affirmeth that the fulfilling of the Law wrought by the first fruits whereby he meaneth the flesh of Christ is imputed to the whole lumpe 3. Gregory Nyssene marvell not saith the Spouse that uprightnesse hath loved me but that being blacke by reason of my sinne and by my workes drawing neere to darkenesse hee hath made mee beautifull by his love making an exchange of his beauty with my blacknesse For having translated the filthinesse of my sinnes unto himselfe hee hath made me partaker of his purity communicating unto me his owne beauty 4. Chrysostome here the Apostle sheweth that there is but one righteousnesse and that that of the Law is recapitulated or reduced to this of faith And that he which hath gotten this which is by faith hath also fulfilled that but he that despiseth this he falleth from that together with this and a little after â—… if thou beleevest in Christ thou hast fulfilled the Law and hast performed much more than the Law commanded For thou hast received a farre greater righteousnesse For as he had said in the words going before that Christ hath justified us by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more amply than we would have been justified by the Law This greater this more ample righteousnesse must needs be understood of Christs righteousnesse imputed unto us 5. Ambrose he that confesseth his sinnes to God is justified that is obtaineth remission of sinne which is also testified by S Iohn 1 Ioh. 1. 9. and is verified in David Psalm 32. 5. and in the Publican Luk. 18. 14. But he that is justified by remission of sinne is also justified by imputation of righteousnesse for as Bellarmine confesseth the not imputing of sinne bringeth with it imputation of righteousnesse 6. Hierome to the like purpose then are wee just when wee confesse our selves to bee sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not in our owne merit but in Gods mercy 7. Augustine omnes qui per Christum
with which many come to baptisme and to shew that faith which justifieth is commanded by the will to note the difference of forced faith such as is in Devils and was in those men who beleeved in Christ compelled by the miracles but Christ did not concredit himselfe to them for such a faith doth not justifie For as science is begotten by virtue of demonstrative reason so faith is not demonstrated but is undertaken by the virtue or power of the will captivating the understanding unto the obedience of Christ who doth infuse it wherefore Augustine tract 26. in Ioan. other things saith hee a man may doe against his will but none can beleeve but he that is willing § VI. Thus have I proved against Bellarmine that to beleeve is an act of the will as well as of the understanding and that the seat of faith is neither the understanding alone nor the will alone but the mind which comprehendeth both Howbeit I cannot altogether subscribe to the judgement of the Schoole-men and other learned men whether Protestants or Papists who teach that the understanding is commanded by the will to assent unto divine truthes and that it doth credere ex imperio voluntatis For I doe not conceive how the will which is intellectus extensus and followeth the judgement of the practike understanding in so much that it willeth nothing but what the understanding approveth and judgeth to be willed how it I say should command the understanding Neither doth their reason satisfie which is this that the understanding of man in matters pertaining to Science is determined to one thing by the evidence of the thing or necessity of reason not by the Will but the understanding of man in matters belonging to faith which sometimes surpasse the capacity of humane reason cannot be determined to any particular either by the evidence of the thing or by necessity of reason both which are wanting in the objects of faith which are things hoped for and things not seene And therefore say they there can no assent bee given unlesse the understanding be commanded by the will to assent But I answere as the ground of knowing things by Science is the evidence of the thing or necessity of reason so the ground of beleeving things is the authority of God speaking in his word which is infallible and in certainty surpasseth the grounds of Science and by it the understanding is determined to such particulars as it conceiveth to be revealed of God As therefore in things of science which the understanding doth judge to bee evident and of necessary truth the will doth readily embrace them following therin the judgment of the understanding and so the mind which containeth both faculties doth willingly and yet necessarily assent therto moved therunto by the evidence of necessary truth so in matters of faith which the understanding though it comprehends them not yet doth judge infallibly true moved thereto by the authority of God revealing those truthes the Will as I conceive being captivated by the understanding and submitting it selfe to the judgement thereof the mind doth willingly and yet necessarily assent to such truthes revealed by God moved thereunto by the infallible authority of God speaking in his Word Which in certainty of truth doth farre surmount all grounds of science and doth captivate the understanding and it the Will Why therefore the assent to divine truthes which are grounded upon a most certaine and inâ—…allible soundation which perswadeth the understanding should more proceed from the Will than the assent to humane sciences I cannot conceive or why the Will should command the understanding in them more than in matters of science CAP. VI. Of the object of justifying faith § I. SO much of the subject now wee come to the object of justifying â—…aith where the question ought not to be made coneeming the object of faith at large but of that object which is proper to faith as it justifieth For we doe freely confesâ—…e that the object of faith is all and every truth revealed unto us by God and that the word of God is objectum fidei adaquatum the even object of â—…aith that is we are bound to beleeve whatsoever is contained in the word but what is not contained in the word of God we are not to beleeve it as a matter of â—…aith And that therefore by the â—…ame faith by which we are justified we beleeve whatsoever is contained in the written word of God whether expressely or by necessary consequence So that Bellarmine might have saved a great deale of labour idlely spent in proving that which we confesse that by faith we beleeve the creation and all other truths revealed in the word yea we professe him to have no true justifying faith who denieth credit to any thing which hee findeth revealed by God Howbeit the Papiâ—… extend this object not onely to the Canoâ—…icall Scriptures but also to those which we according to all almost antiquitieâ—… call Apocryphall and not onely to the written word but also to their unwritten verities as they call the traditions of the Church of Rome that is such doctrines and ordinances as that Church doth teach and observe having no ground nor warrant in the Scriptures The which notwithstanding whiles they doe not onely match but also preferre them before the written word doe evidently prove the Pope who by their doctrine is above the Church and the Church above the Scriptures to bee Antichrist But this is another controversie whereinto I may not now make an excuâ—…sion Onely I desire the Reader to take notice of this marke among others of the Catholike Apostaâ—…ie of the Romane Church which hath not onely departed from the ancient doctrine and rule of faith which is the Scriptures but also have set up a new rule the last resolution of their faith being into the infallible judgement and irrefragable authority of the Bishop of Rome and to this purpose let him consider these two testimonies of Saint Bâ—…sil it is a manifest falling away from the faith and conviction of pride either to reject any of those things that are written or to bring in any of those things that are not written The other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that is without the Scripture inspired of God being not of faith is sinne § II. But howsoever by that faith which justifieth wee beleeve all and every truth revealed by God yet the proper and formall Object of justifying faith quatâ—…nus justificat and by beleeving whereof it doth justifie is not every truth but that onely which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called the Truth that is Christ with all his merits Ioh. 14. 6. or the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ or the Promises of the Gospell concerning justification and salvation by Christ which often times in the Scripture is called the Truth as Ioh. 1. 17. 5. 33. 8. 31 32. and as some thinke Ioh. 8. 44. and by Christâ—… owne
justum fuerat ut quomodo Abraham credens ex Gentib per solam fidem justificatus est ita caeteri fidem ejus imitantes salvarentur 2. In Rom. 4. 5. Convertentem impium per solam fidem justificat Deus And on those words of the Latine Edition secundum propositam gratiam that is saith he as Hierome had said before quo gratis proposuit per solam fidem dimittere peccata 3. In Rom. 4. 6. the blessednesse of man he calleth remission of sins by faith It is a great blessednesse without the labour of the Law and penitence to obtaine the Grace of God by faith alone Which words are in part taken out of S. Ierome on the same place 4. In Rom. 8. 28. On those words secundum propositum secundum quod proposuit salvare sola fide according to which he purposed to save by faith alone those whom he foreknew should beleeve whom also he freely called to salvation Which word for word are taken out of Ierome 5. In Rom. 10. 5. Moses put a difference betweene either justice to wit of faith and of workes because the one by workes the other sola credulitate justificet accedentem by faith alone justifieth him that commeth and so Ierome on the same place out of whom also hee reciteth word for word that which before I cited out of him in Rom. 10. 16. Ergo si fides sufficit adjustitiam c. 7. In Gal. 2. 20. In fide vero filii Dei i. in sola fide quia nihil debeo legi so Ierome 8. In Gal. 3. 14. ex fide i. ut sola fide salvarentur credentes c. XVII Theodoret in Rom. 3. 24. sola enim fide allata peccatorum remissionem accepimus We have received remission of sinnes having brought faith onely 2. In Rom. 3. 25. Our Lord Christ is both God and the propitiatory and the high Priest and the Lambe and by his bloud he procured our salvation Solam à nobis fidem exigens requiring of us faith alone 3. In Eph. 2. 8. By grace c. for we brought onely faith Neither did we of our owne accord beleeve but being called we came and when we were come hee did not exact of us the purity and innocencie of life sed sola fide suscepta condona vit peccata but hee forgave our sinnes accepting of our faith alone 4. And in the seventh of his Therapeutickes after he had cited that of Esai 45. 23. I blot out your iniquities c. he addeth for not by any praise-worthy workes of ours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by faith alone wee have obtained the mysticall or spirituall good things XVIII Prosper Aquitanicus in his Epigrammes Inde i. ex doctrina Apostolica capit quisque vitam quam parit una fides From the Doctrine of the Apostles a man receiveth life which faith alone doth beget or procure XIX Claudius Marius Victor s At ille Abraham Credidit nuda fidei confessio sola Plenam adjustitiae et meriti reputata coronam est XX. Petrus Chrysologus Christus mulieris haemarrhoissae docuit exemplo quà m fides sola totam proficiat ad salutem The Testimonies which Bellarmine in the second place out of his owne store produceth for us out of Leo are impertinent for they speak of the work of faith not in justifying but in sanctifying of us XXI Primasius in Rom. 4. 3. Tam magna fuit donâ—… Dei fides Abrahâ—… ut pristina ei peccata donarentur sola ei pro omni justitia duceretur accepto The same had Ierome saving that here is a divers reading for that which we reade in Ierome prae omni justitia doceretur accepta reputatum est illi ad justitiam compensatum sola fides 2. In Rom. 4. 5. Impâ—…um per solam fidem justificat non per opera quae non habuit si enim secundum opera puniendâ—…s est non liberandus 3. In Rom. 4. 12. ut omnes qui ex Gentib credunt secundum fidem filii sint Abrahae dum illis sola fides adjustitiam repetatur the very same had Ierome 4. In Rom. 5. 1. Fides facit filios Abrahae qui ante circumâ—…isionem exsola credulitate justificatâ—… est 5. In Rom. 8. 28. Propositum Dei est ut sine â—…peribus Legis vel quibuscunque aliis meritis per fidem solam justificaret impios 6. In â—… Cor. 5. 19. Non reputans illis delicta ipsorum h. e. indulgens per solam fidem quae gratis donata est 7. In Gal. 1. 3. Sola fide salvati est is per gratiam Dei 8. In Gal. 2. 14. Non ex operib sed sola fide per gratiam vitam habere te nosti Hierome 9. In Gal. 2. 17. Si enim gentes fides sola non salvavit nec nos quia ex operibus nemo justificabitur Hierome 10. In Gal. 2. 20. In fide verò Filii Dei in sola fide Hier. 11. In Gal. 3. 6. Abraham credidit Deo c. ita vobis fides sola sufficit adjustitiam Hier. 12. In Gal. 3. 14. Vt in Geâ—…tib benedictio Abrahae fieret in Christo Iesu ut sola fide Gentes benedicerentur in Christo sicut promissum fuerat Abrahae Hierome ut pollicitationem Spiritus accipiamus per fidem solam 13. In Gal. 3. 22. Vt necesse esset sola fide per gratiam salvari credentes 14. In Gal. 3. 26. Omnes enim Filii Dei estis per fidem in Christo Iesu â—…nes enim â—…qualiter Iudai Gentes per fidem solam quae 〈◊〉 Dei creditis Christo. Hierome XXII Theodulus Caelo-Syriae presbyter in Rom. 4. 13. Lex ob quam gloriaris nihil profuit adpromissiones ipsi Abraham factas sed sola fides 2. In Rom. 5. 2. ad iâ—…narrabilia dona beneficia Dei in nos collata nos 〈◊〉 prâ—…er fidem attulimus XXIII Genâ—…dius apud Oecumen in Rom. 3. 24. freely that is without any good workes of thine thou art saved And againe as having brought with thee nothing but faith Wherefore all that beleeve in Christ are justified freely bringing with them onely to beleeve XXIV Venantius Fortunatus in expos-symboli in artic de remissione peccatorum Nobis in hoc sermone sola credâ—…litas sufficit XXV Venerabilis Beda in Psa. 77. 7. per justitiam factorum nullus salvabitur sed per solam justitiam fidei XXVI Haymo in Gal. 3. 12. Lex non complebatur fide sed opere Evangelium â—…utem completur fide magis quà m operibus quia sola fides salvat 2. In Rom. 1. Pluribus modis ostendit Paulus justitiam salutem non esse per legem sed per fidem in Christum ut a lege abducat in sola fide Christi eos constituat 3. In Evâ—…ngel de circumcisione Christi sola tantummodo fide salvabuntur gentâ—…s siout scriptum est justus exfide vivet XXVII
which are a few testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers impertinentâ—…y alleaged His first testimony is Prov. 28. 25. qui sperat in Domino sanabitur The second Psal. 37. 40. Salvabit eos quia speraverunt in eo The third Psal. 91. 14. quoniam in me speravit liberabo eum Answ. None of these three places doe speake either of justification or preparation thereunto nor of hope otherwise than as it is included in affiance which as it hath reference to the future time is all one with hope nor of hope or affiance as it goeth before but as it followeth justifying faith what therefore could be more impertinently alleaged The first place according to the originall is but he that trusteth in the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be made fat The Latine in the next verse translateth the same words thus qui confidit and the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The second Psalm 37. 40. the word chasah is translated sometimes confidere to trust sometimes and as I take it in that place onely sperare to hope in the same sense of affiance those that thus trust or hope in God he delivereth them from the wicked and saveth them But before they can either be saved or trust in God they must be justified by faith And therefore this hope or affâ—…ance is no forerunner of justification but a follower thereof The third Psalm 91. 14. the Hebrew chashak which by some is translated sperare by others valde or vehementer amare amore in aliquem propendere and might better have beene alleaged for love than for hope both which are consequents of justifying faith The words then are because he hath set his love upon me therefore I will deliver him he doth not say I will justifie him But let us heare Bellarmines commenting upon this place the Hebrew word saith he doth signifie to adhere to love to please therefore not every hope but that affiance which proceedeth out of a good conscience and out of Love and filiall adhering to God doth deliver a man c. § VIII His fourth testimony Matth. 9. 2. confide fili have a good heart sonne so the Rhemists translate thy sinnes are forgiven thee For our Lord faith Bellarmine did not as some falsely teach justifie the man who had the palsey before he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be of good courage my sonne but contrariwise as the Councell of Trent very learnedly signifieth first he saith be confident my sonne and when he saw him raised up in hope of health hee added thy sinnes remittuntur tibi are forgiven thee Whereby Bellarmine would signifie that by this hope or affiance the man was prepared for justification Answ. First the party and those that brought him had faith as all the three Evangelists note Matth. 9. 2. Mark 2. 5. Luk. 5. 20. and therefore was justified before God for if they who brought him had faith much more he who no doubt desired them to bring him and had already his sins forgiven Secondly the Verbe is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the time past and ought to be translated not as Bellarm. readeth remittuntur are now forgiven or in forgiving but remissasunt they are already forgiven And by that argument our Saviour putteth him in comfort that hee should be cured because his sinnes which were the meritorious cause of his sicknesse were forgiven By which glad tydings hee would have him to be assured by speciall saith of the remission of his sinnes and in that assurance to be confident So that although the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be confident were uttered first yet the words following containe the cause of that confidence And therefore not onely remission of sinnes but assurance thereof by speciall revelation went before his confidence which therefore could be no preparative disposition thereunto And this is usuall in such consolations first to bid the party to be confident or not to feare and then to set downe the cause thereof as Genes 15. 1. Feare not Abraham I am thy shield and thy exceeding great reward Esai 43. 1. Feare not Israel for I have redeemed thee In the same ninth of Matthew verse 22. Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole Luk. 1. 30. Feare not Mary for thou hast found grace or favour with God Luk. 2. 10. Feare not for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy and so in other places And these were his testimonies of Scriptures in which he hath found no releefe § IX Let us see what helpe the Fathers will afford him No man saith Ambrose can well repent him of his sinnes who doth not hope for pardon Answ. Hope of pardon is a motive to repentance and to the use of other good meanes whereby wee may through Gods grace attaine both to justification and to sanctification Howbeit repentance belongeth to sanctification and not to justification Augustine whatsoever thou declarest so declare it that hee to whom thou speakest by hearing may beleeve by beleeving may hope by hoping may love From whence nothing can be gathered but that as faith by which we are justified commeth by the hearing of the word as the Apostle also teacheth so from faith proceedeth hope and from both faith and hope love So that here hope which is a fruit of justifying faith and a consequent of justification is made a disposition not to justification but to love Cyprian to those who had fallen in time of persecution giveth this advice that they should acknowledge their grievous crime neither despairing of the Lords mercy nor as yet challenging pardon viz. untill they had truely repented thereof which was indeed wholesome counsell For no man can be assured of the pardon of any crime untill he have truly repented of it Vpon which words of Cyprian Bel. larmine though he can gather nothing out of them for his purpose but that those who desire pardon must not despaire of Gods mercy yet as a notable bragger he insulteth over us as if he had us at some advantage when God knoweth hee hath scarce brought any thing worth the answering By which words saith he our adversaries are plainely refuted who begin not to repent before they are fully assured that they are highly in Gods favour and are confident that they are to be ranked with the Cherubin and Seraphin which is an impudent and yet a witlesse slander as though wee were either so arrogant as the Papists who assume to themselves perfection which we doe not or so senselesse that we should teach that men are tyed to begin their repentance when they have attained to perfection and not till then If it be said that wee make repentance to be the fruit of faith which we define to be a full assurance of Gods favour c. I answere that that definition agreeth onely to speciall faith Not that all speciall faith is a full assurance but that every virtue is to be defined
freely professe that by how much wee have received the greater favours from God in redeeming us and bringing us into the liberty of his children in freeing us from sinne and from the yoake of the Law by so much the more are we bound to obedience not to be justified or saved by it but to testifie our thankefulnesse and to glorifie God who hath beene so gracious unto us c. Much more might be said concerning Christian liberty but this is as much as is pertinent to the question in hand If any desire to bee better informed in this point I referre them to my treatise of Christian liberty which I published many yeaâ—…es agoe CAP. V. That good Workes are not necessary by necessity of Efficacie § I. ALL this while Bellarmine as we have seene hath wandred from the question but now he saith he will come neerer unto it For now hee will prove the necessity of good workes not onely by way of presence but by wâ—…y of efficacie But to what will he prove them necéssary to justification no such matter But yet that is the question which hee ought to prove if hee will disprove justification by faith alone that good workes doe concurre to justification as causes thereof For though they were as they are not causes of Salvation yet it is manifest that they are consequents and therefore no causes of justification So that Bellarmine though hee be come neerer the question yet he is not come home to it But perhaps it will be said that Bellarmine prevented this objection when he first propounded this as his fifth principall argument to prove that faith doth not justifie alone because good workes are necessary to Salvation His argument may thus be frarned If faith did justifie alone then it would save alone but faith doth not save alone without good workes which are necessary to Salvation in those that are come to yeares Therefore faith doth not justifie alone without good workes which are so necessary to Salvation etiam hominibus justificatis even to them that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save Answ. The proposition is denied first by Bellarmine himselfe who teacheth though falsely that not all who are justified shall bee saved when notwithstanding the Apostle saith â—…hom the Lord hath justified he also hath glorified And further he holdeth that they who are justified may utterly and finally lose their justification though they lose not their faith and farther that they may also lose their faith which as he absurdly teacheth is lost by any act of infidelity and consequently both their justification and Salvation Yea but saith Bellarmine their justice cannot be lost nor their Salvation whiles they have faith if they be justified by faith onely But Bellarmine himselfe saith though falsely that the faith of them who are justified may be lost and with it their Salvation and therefore by his doctrine a man bee justified by faith and yet not be saved by it Secondly it is denied by some of the Fathers who though they teach that faith alone sufficeth to justification as you have heard yet deny that it alone sufficeth to Salvation because some other things as namely good workes are thereunto required To the assumption that saith alone doth not save If such a faith be meant as is alone severed from Charity and void of workes I doe confesse that it neither saveth nor yet justifieth I doe not say alone but not at all But if he speake of a true lively faith in Christ which purifieth the heart and worketh by love of which onely we speake and understand it relatively as we doe then I constantly affirme that faith in Christ alone that is Christ alone received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our Salvation and that neither workes nor any other graces are causes of salvation unlesse hee meane caussas sine quibus non which are no causes § II. But for the further proofe of his consequences Bellarmine saith that we cannot deny them because Luther teacheth that a Christian man cannot lose his salvation unlesse he will not beleeve and that the Lâ—…therans affirme that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone Answ. Wee can deny what either Luther or those that are called Lutherans doe affirme without warrant of Gods word therefore this was but a slender proofe Howbeit we doe not deny that assertion of Luther nor the like which though full of true comfort yet are most maliciously calumniated by the Papists as if hee taught men not to care what sinnes they commit so that they can say they have faith Whereas Luther delivereth speeches of that kinde to comfort the distressed consciences labouring under the burden of sinne assuring them that although their sinnes bee many and great yet they ought not to despaire if they can finde in their heart to beleeve in Christ. Which is most true For though our sinnes be many the mercies of God are more though great yet the merrits of Christ are greater And though the Lutherans doe say that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone yet that is no proofe of Bellarmines consequence but a flat deniall of his assumption which it behoveth him to prove Upon these things thus premised Bellarmine inferreth that all the testimonies which afterwards namely in his fourth Booke he was to alleage out of Scriptures and Fathers to prove that good workes are so necessary to salvation even to men that are justified that without them faith alone doth not save them doe also prove that faith alone doth not justifie which is the thing saith hee which wee have undertaken to prove which notwithstanding wee doe constantly deny protesting against this inference of Bellâ—…mine and affirming that although good workes be so necessary to salvation as that that faith which is without them doth not save a man yet that doth not hinder our assertion that faith doth justifie alone because they doe not concurre to the act of justification at all and much lesse as the causes thereof for they follow justification though ordinarily they goe before salvation and howsoever that faith which is alone severed from charity and destitute of good workes doth neither justifie as I have shewed heretofore nor save yet notwithstanding faith relatively understood that is Christ received by faith doth save alone § III. But to returne to his fourth Booke though Bellarmine still doe wander yet I must be content to follow him To prove therefore that good workes are necessary to salvation by necessity of efficiency as causes thereof hee useth three kindes of proofes testimonies of Scriptures sentences of Fathers and reason Out of the Scriptures hoe produceth tenne testimonies besides some whole Epistles The first testimony Heb. 10. 30. For patience is necessary for you that doing the will of God ye may receive the promise Here first saith he wee have the terme necessary and
state of perfection or supererogation as that it is for the most part a sinnefull state and that in three respects First in respect of making the vow For it is sinne to vow that which a man doth not know to be lawfull or not in his owne power then doth hee sinne with an high hand not onely resolving but also vowing to sinne and to continue therein Secondly in respect of the performing the vow when the thing vowed viz. continencie in single life doth appeare not to be in their power and yet to performe their vow of single life live in incontinency and uncleanenesse Many times it falleth out that a man at the first doth not know the thing vowed to be either not lawfull or not in his power yet because he doth not know it to be lawfull and in his power he sinneth by rash vowing but when afterwards it doth appeare to be either unlawfull or not in his power he is not bound to keepe that vow which rashly he made but hee is bound to breake it for by performing it he addeth sinne to sinne and many times a greater sinne to a lesse that is to the rashnesse of his vow the incontinencie of his life And this is perpetuall among the Popish votaries who never dissolve their vow though the performance of it bee never so wicked Thirdly because the vowed single life among the Papists being for the most part so filthy and abominable that all the world cryeth shame upon them for their filthinesse yet by them is obtruded unto God as a matter not onely of religion and satisfaction but also of merit of perfection and supererogation And the like might be said of their vow of blinde obedience For simple and absolute obedience is onely to bee vowed and performed to God But to vow the like towards any sinfull man who either doth or at least may command that which is unlawfull as sometimes they doe to murther Princes or to attempt other traiterous practises c. and to thinke that in so doing he doth merit and supererogate it is to forsake God § VII His second reason If the Commandements were impossible they would binde no man And so the precepts should bee no precepts for it cannot bee imagined how any man should sinne in that which hee cannot avoid c. His reason is thus to be framed To that which is impossible no man is tyed To the Commandements all men are tyed Therefore the Commandements are not impossible The assumption which no man denyeth he proveth because if they did not binde they were no precepts neither were the transgression of them a sinne The proposition he proveth because it cannot bee imagined how a man should sinne in that which he cannot avoid I answere as heretofore by distinction That the Commandements are said to be impossible either simply or by accident If therefore the meaning of his conclusion be that the Commandements bee not simply and absolutely impossible then I grant all for wee never held that the Commandements are simply impossible for to man both before his fall and after his resurrection they were and shall be absolutely possible But since the fall they are impossible in respect of the perfect performance in and by our selves not simply but by reason of the flesh that is to say through our owne default For if wee would not have sinned in Adam the Law had beene possible unto us but by our voluntary sinne we lost both 〈◊〉 possibilitatis and also possibilitatem non peccandâ—… Now it were absurd to imagine that our fault should free us from obedience Howbeit even after the fall there is a distinction to be held betweene men unregenerate in the corrupt state of nature and the regenerate in the state of grace To the unregenerate the Law is impossible through their owne default which doth not lessen their sinne for they sinne voluntarily and many times of malice as the devils also doe who though they have brought upon themselâ—…es a necessity of sinning so that they can doe no other but sinne yet this doth not as I said extenuate their sinne for they commit sinne with greedinesse but rather aggravate their finfulnesse Those that are habituated in sinne in whom custome is become as it were another nature they can no more of themselves ceasse from sinning than a Black-moore can wash away his blackenesse Ier. 13. 23. § VIII Yea but saith Bellarmine It cannot bee imagined how a man should sinne in that which hee cannot avoid Answ. That seemeth to be true in respect of the liberty of contradiction but not in respect of the liberty of contrariety In respect of a sinfull action a man hath liberty to doe it or not to doe it which wee call the liberty of contradiction But he hath not liberty to doe that which is good his naturall will enabling him onely to sinne So that although a naturall man may abstaine from this or that sinfull act yet he sinneth in whatsoever he doth neither can he doe any other but sinne If therefore they doe not sin who are not able to fulfill the Law then all Infidels yea all naturall men who câ—…n doe nothing but sinne should be exempted from sinning which is absurd To the regenerate man as I said before the Law is possible both in respect of his faith For he that truely beleeveth in Christ hath fulfilled the Law in Christ. Secondly in regard of his new obedience and that in three respects For first his new obedience though it be not compleat yet it is obedientia inchoata and though it be not a fulfilling of the Law yet it is an acceptable keeping thereof Secondly though it be unperfect and stayned with the flesh yet being â—…ntyre that is sincere and upright it is in Christ accepted as perfect Thirdly because the imperfection thereof being covered with Christs perfect obedience and cured by his intercession is remitted Now all is esteemed done when that which is not done is remitted § IX His third reason If God should command things impossible he should be more cruell horresco referens and more foolish than any tyrant in exacting atribute from his owne friends which none were able to pay and making such Lawes which he knew none were able to performe But the Consequent is blasphemous therefore the antecedent To the proposition I answere as before by distinction That if God should command things simply impossible there would besome colour for his blasphemous consequence But the Lord commandeth nothing but what to man in his first creation was absolutely possible neither doth he exact any tribute which he did not make us able to pay nor make any law which we were not able to observe And although now wee cannot in our selves fulfill it yet God was not tyed to accommodate his Law like a Lesbian rule to our weakenesse contracted by our owne default but it became him to propound such Lawes as were answerable to our first integrity describing
soever wee doe is profitable to our selves but not to God Reply Beda giveth two reasons though Bellarmine conceale the better why we doing that which is commanded are notwithstanding called unprofitable servants The former quia Dominus bonorum nostrorum non indiget because the Lord hath no need of our good things Which though true yet doth neither so well fit the comparison wherein the servant though usefull to his master both abroad and at home could not by all his endevour deserve to himselfe so much as thankes neither agreeable to the reason which our Saviour rendreth because we have â—…one what is our duty to doe The latter we are unprofitable servants because saith he Non sunt condignae c. The sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glory that shall be reavealed that is because we cannot deserve the reward of eternall life by our service But as it is elswhere said saith he who crowneth thee in mercie and loving kindenesse hee doth not say in thy merits and workes because by whose mercie wee are prevented that we may in humility serve God by his gift we are crowned that in sublimity we may reigne with him So Bede § XI The third exposition he saith is Augustines viz. That we may be called unprofitable servants when we have kept all Gods Commandements because we doe no more than our duty which indeed is the reason which Christ himselfe doth render neither can wee from thence demand any just reward unlesse God had made a liberall Covenant with us For by our condition we are the bond-servants of God and if he will he may bind us to performe all manner of workes as it pleaseth him without reward This our condition Christ for the preservation of humility would have us to acknowledge Howbeit by his gracious covenant we may expect reward 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. Matth. 20. 13. Which God in his great bounty hath promised to this end that thereby he might draw us to performance of our duety as Augustine teacheth Replpy This answere of Bellaamine is worthy to be observed or rather admired first for the impudencie of it in that he fathereth this exposition upon Augustine who in the place by him quoted doth not once mention this Text of Luk. 17. 10. nor hath one word to that purpose for which this exposition is alleaged excepting the clause of Gods bounty which as it proveth this to bee that very testimony of Augustine which he quoteth so doth it evidently exclude merit Secondly for the force of truth which forceth him to contradict his owne assertions both here and in other places For first hee confesseth that hee which doth no more but his duty doth not merit and that wee doe no more but our duty Whereupon it followeth that we doe not merit Secondly where hee confesseth that wee can doe no more than our duty he renounceth all workes of supererrogation And thirdly in that he confesseth that for the same cause wee are unprofitable servants he taketh away all merit of condignity Fourthly he confesseth that without Gods gracious promise we could expect no reward Which proveth that the reward is due onely ratione pacti and not ratione ipsius operis which afterward he denyeth Fifthly he confesseth that such is the bounty and goodnesse of God that to allure us to the performance of our duty hee doth freely promise a reward Now what God doth freely promise to give he giveth freely and without desert For eternall life which in his word hee hath promised as a reward in his eternall counsell hee purposed freely without any respect of our worthynesse to bestow upon us and what in mercy hee either purposed or promised Christ by his merit hath purchased for us So that we attaine to heaven by a threefold right By Gods free donation electing us in Christ as his free gift Secondly by Christs merit as our inheritance Thirdly by Gods free promise as his gracious reward whereby he crowneth not our merits but his owne gifts and graces in us God indeed hath promised freely to reward our workes but that our workes should merit the reward he hath no where promised or taught § XII His fourth exposition is of Chrysostome that the Lord doth not say ye are unprofitable servants but biddeth them say so which is true But what will Bellarmine inferre therefrom that therefore they were not so God forbid For then our Saviour should have taught his Disciples to lye Neither doth God allow of counterfeit humility But the meaning of our Saviour was to teach his Disciples in humility to confesse the truth that because they had but done their duty if they had done all that is commanded they should not bee lifted up with a proud conceite that thereby they had merited but should no lesse truly than humbly confesse that they were unprofitable servants who by doing no more than their duty could not merit of God And this objection is also answered by Bernard Sed hoc inquies propter humilitatem monuit omne dicendum Planè propter humilitatem numquid contra veritatem But you will say that for humility sake hee admonisheth them thus to say No doubt for humilitie But did hee bid them speake against verity And the same is taught by Chrysostome elsewhere No man saith hee doth shew foorth such a conversation as to be worthy of the kingdome but it is wholly of his gift therefore hee saith when you shall doe all that is commanded say we are unprofitable servants we have done what is our duty to doe And againe in another place where he sheweth that what the Sonne of God did for us hee did not of duty but what good we doe wee doe it of duty Wherefore himselfe said when you shall have done all say ye are unprofitable servants for wee have done what was our duty to doe If therefore wee shew foorth love if we give our goods to the poore we performe our duty c. Object Yea but the servants which imployed their Talents well were commended as profitable servants Answ. They were commended as good servants and faithfull to their master And of him because they profitably imployed their Talents were graciouslie rewarded But of their merit nothing is said If they had not imployed their Talents well they should have beene punished And in that they did imploy them well they did but their duty and that also by assistance of Gods grace who both gave them the Talents and grace to imploy them well and therefore though they had reward yet they did not merit it § XIII Our fourth Testimonie is Rom. 6. 23. For the stipend of sinne is death but the free gift of God is eternall life through IESVS CHRIST our LORD where is an antitheâ—…is or opposition betweene death meaning eternall death the reward of sinne and eternall life the reward of righteousnesse that death is the stipend of sinne justly merited by it but
eternall life is not a stipend or wages merited by us but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift of God which is a most pregnant place for if the Apostle had supposed eternall life to be a stipend or wages or merited reward he would have said that as death is the stipend of sinne so eternall life is the stipend of righteousnesse But the Apostle making an opposition between the reward of sinne and the reward of righteousnesse saith that the one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a military stipend due to those who serve under Satans colours the other is not a stipend or wages deserved but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a military stipend or wages due to souldiers As when Iohn Baptist biddeth the souldiers to bee content 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with their stipend Luke 3. 14. So 1 Cor. 9. 7. For as Augustine saith Quod est merces operanti hoc militanti stipendium and worthily saith hee is death called a Stipendium Quia militiae diabolicae mors aeterna tanquam debitum redditur The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the vulgar Latine translateth Gratia signifieth a free gift not rendred as due to the merit of the receiver but vouchsafed freely out of the free bounty and undeserved favour of the giver For as Primasius saith Non est gratia si non gratis datur si debita merentibus redditur quod absit And Augustine Non erit Dei gratia ullo modo nisi gratuita fuerit omni modo wherefore it is called Gratia that we may understand it is of grace and not not of merits The Verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence it is derived signifieth freely to bestow to gratifie or graciously to give And therefore is eternall life called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth freely bestow it The Argument standeth thus A free gift which is opposed to stipend or wages is not merited by us Eternall life is the free gift of God and is opposed to stipend or wages therefore it is not merited by us § XIV Bellarmine answereth that Augustine hath diligently answered this argument Epist. 105. Enchirid. â—…ap 107. But chiefly In libro de gratia lib. arb cap. 8. 9. From whence hee gathereth two Assertions First That the Apostle might well have said eternall life is the stipend of righteousnesse even as he said The stipend of sinne is death which confession of Augustine cutteth the thrâ—…at hee saith of our Assertion Sâ—…condly That the Apostle did not say Eternall life is the stipend of righteousnesse as he said Death is the stipend of sinne least any man should thinke that we so have righteousnesse of ourselves as we have sinne of our selves therefore eternall life is called grace not because it is not the reward of merit but that we have the merits themselves from grace To the former I reply that when Augustine saith that eternall life might well be called a stipend which hee maketh to bee all one with merces hee meaneth a stipend or reward freely given as if there were stipendium gratâ—…itum as well as merces gratuita And that this was his meaning I demonstrate out of the same places which Bellarmine doth quote and first out of Epist. 105. Debita redditur pâ—…na demnato indebita gratia liberato â—…t nec ille se indignum queratur nâ—…c dignum se iste glorietur Si antem gratia atque null is meritis reddits sed gratuita bâ—…nitate donata ipsa aterna vita gratia nuncupatur nâ—…n ob aliâ—…d nisi quia gratis datur Secondly Enchirid. cap. 107. Ipsam vitam aeternam quae certa merces est operum bonorum gratiam Dei appellat Apostolus stipendium enim inquit pâ—…ccatimors gratia autem Dei vita aeterna in Christo Iesu Dominâ—… nâ—…stro stipendium pro opere militiae debitum redditur non donatur Idâ—…ò dixit stipendium peccatimors ut mortem peccato non immeritò illatam sed debitam demonstraret Gratia verò nisi gratis sit gratia non est Thirdly Praefat. in Psal. 31. Merces nostra gratia vocatur figratiâ—… est gratis datur quid est gratis datur Gratis câ—…nstat Si reddatur tibi quod debetur puniendus es quid ergò fit Non tibi Deus râ—…ddit debitam poenam sed donat indebitam gratiam Fourthly Degratia lib. arbitr cap. 9. Cum Apostolus prius dixisset stipendium peccatimâ—…rs meritâ—… inquit stipendium quia militiae diabolicae mors aeterna tanquam debitum redditur Vbi cum posset dicere rectè dicere stipendium autem justitiae vita aeterna maluit dicere Gratia autem Dei vita aeternâ—… ut hinc intelligamus non meritis nostris Deum nos ad aeternam vitam sed pro sua miseratione perducere Whereby it appeareth that although hee saith that eternall life may bee called a stipend yet hee meaneth not a stipend or wages deserved or merited by us but a reward freely given us of God § XV. And as the former Assertion maketh not against us so the later maketh wholly for us against both the Pelagians and the Papists The Pelagians held that their good workes were done not by the helpe of grace but by the strength of their owne free will and so in that respect a reward was due unto them whereas they who bring forth good workes ex donâ—… gratiae had neither commendation nor merit Against them Augustine in many places disputeth proving that eternall life which is the reward of our good workes is called by the Apostle Gratia not onely because it selfe is freely given but also because the good workes whereof it is the reward are to be ascribed to Gods grace And that therefore the Lord when he rewardeth the godly life of the faithfull with eternall life hee giveth them gratiam progratia and that when he rewardeth our merits thereby meaning our good workes hee doth crowne not our merits but his owne graces Thus hee writeth Epist. 105. Omne meritum nostrum non in nobis facit nisi gratia cum Deus câ—…ronat meritâ—… nâ—…stra nihil aliud 〈◊〉 quà m munerâ—… suâ—… Sicâ—…t enim ab initio fidei misericordiam consecuti sumus non quia fideles eramus sed ut esseâ—…us sic in finâ—… quod erit in vita aeterna câ—…ronabit nos sicut scriptum est in miseratione misericordia Vndè ipsa vita aeterna quâ—… utique in fine sine fine habebitur ideò merit is praecedentibus redditur tamen quiâ—… eadem merita quibus redditur non à nobis parata sunt per nâ—…stram sufficientiam sed in nobis facta per gratiâ—…m etiam ipsa grâ—…tia nuncupatur Non ob aliud niâ—…i quia gratis datur nec ideò quiâ—… meritis non datur sed quia data sunt ipsa merita quibus datur Stipendium peccati mors rectè stipendium
harsh speech that God should bee said to bee a debtour to any crâ—…ature yet as Augustine saith hee may bee said to be a debtour as hee is a promiser and because it is a just thing to keepe promise hee may be said to owe the performance of that which hee hath promised But as his promise was not de debito but de gratuitâ—… so what hee freely promised he freely giveth 7. Out of Augustine he citeth three testimonies two out of his Epistle to Sixtus out of which Epistle I have before produced divers pregnant testimonies against merits so properlycalled His first allegation is this nullane sunt merita justorâ—…m sunt planè quia â—…usti sunt sed ut justi fierent merita non fuerunt In which testimony there is nothing for the merit of condignity but onely the name of merit which notwithstanding â—…ignifieth nothing but the good workes of the just which God will reward As if hee had said have the just no good workes which God will reward They have no doubt because they are just For as Saint Iohn saith he thâ—…t worketh righteousnesse is righteous 1 Iâ—…h 3. 7. But as the former words doe not prove the merit of condignity so the later words plainely disprove merits of congruity that they might become righteous saith hee they had no merits for as in the same Epistle Augustine teacheth against bothsorts of merits Sicut ab initio fidei misericordiam consequuti sumus non quia fideles eramus sed ut essemus sic in fine quod eâ—…it in vita aeterna coronabit nos sicut scriptum est in miseratione misericâ—…rdia Secondly as touching the other Augustine indeed saith that as the Apostle calleth death the stipend of sinne so he might truly have called eternall life the stipend of righteousnesse But yet hee could not say that it was debitum stipendium Because the Apostle by way of opposition saith that death is the stipend meaning the due and deserved stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Nay he saith the contrary that it is not to be demanded tanquam debitum stipendium And elsewhere as we heard before though the Apostle might have said that eternall life is the stipend of righteousnesse yet he would rather say that it is the grace of God that hereby we might understand that God doth not bring us to eternall life by our merits but by his mercie And in the same hundred and fifth Epistle The stipend of sinne is death and worthily it is called a stipend because it is due c. Deinde ne justitia de humano se extolleret bono sicut humanum meritum malum non dubitatur esse peccatum non à contrario retulit dicens stipendium justitiâ—… vita aeterna sed gratia inquit Dei vita aeterna tanquam diceret audito quòd stipendium peccati est mors quid te disponis extollere contrariam mâ—…rti vitam aeternam tanquam debitum stipendium flagitare But of this point I have spoken more than sufficiently when I urged our fourth testimony out of Rom. 6. 23. But the third testimony Bellarmine chiefly urgeth Vita aeterna est tâ—…tum praemium cujus promissione gaudemus Eternall life is the whole reward in the promise whereof we doe rejoyce nor can this reward come before merits be had neither may it be given to a man before he be worthy For what more unjust than this and what more just than God We must not therefore demand the reward before wee merit to receive it Answ. Augustine as himselfe testifieth wrote this booke when he was newly baptised and as yet not accustomed or well versed in the Scriptures and therefore if he should have written any thing therein contrary to that which I have heretofore proved out of him it ought not to prejudge those manifold pregnant Testimonies by mee cited before which he wrought when he was of more mature judgement and of riper yeares Notwithstanding out of this testimony such as it is Bellarminâ—… collecteth five conclusions against us First that a man he meaneth â—…o doubt a righteous man hath the merits of eternall life that is as Bellarmine acknowledgeth Augustine to use the terme that he hath good workes which God will reward with eternall life and that we confesse Secondly that eternall life is one and all our reward But Augustine doth not say unâ—…m neither is it true For temporall Blessings are also rewards though but petty rewards in comparison of eternall life neither doth he say simply totum but tâ—…tum cujus promissione gaudemus For temporall benefits we are to use but not to set our hearts upon them but spirituall blessings are those wherein we are to rejoyce them we use these we are to enjoy for those are utenda but these are sruenda Thirdly that the reward of eternall life is given in justice that we should not say that it is given of meere liberality But Augustine every where else teacheth that it is given of grace and that it is called grace non ob aliud nisi quia gratis datur for no other cause but because it is freâ—…ly given and that it is not grace si non sit omni modo gratuita Neither doth it hinder it to be of Gods free grace that it is given in justice For these two in the workes of God especially in the worke of justification and salvation doe meet together Grace and mercie in respect of us in that he doth justifie and save us gratis by his grace justice not in respect of our merits which in justice can merit nothing at the hands of God but punishment but partly in reâ—…pect of Christs merits unto which eternall life is due and partly in respect of his promise made in Christ to all that truely beleeve which promise he is faithfull and just to performe Fourthly that the reward is not given before they be found worthy of it that shall have it lest wee should fay there is no dignity in workes I answere that our dignity standeth in Gods dignation or acceptation in Christ which dignity he vouchsafeth to all that truely beleeve in Christ. For to them Christ is the end and complement of the Law insomuch that whosoever beleeve in Christ they are esteemed to have fulfilled the Law Wee acknowledge the dignitie of good workes as being the fruits of the Spirit and as being good profitable and necessary but no dignity of merit doe we ascribe to them And yet the faithfull are not therefore unworthy nor destitute of merits so long as they are accepted in Christ and made partakers of his merits by faith Unto which faith Augustine useth to ascribe merit For indeed faith is that worke of God which hee requireth instead of all our merits because by it wee are partakers of the merits of Christ which whosoever hath is not without merits nor unworthy of the Kingdome