for the absolute possibility of fulfilling the Law but rather against it For those who are not at all times so willing as they ought to be to fulfill the Law they cannot allwaies fulfill it But no man is at all times so willing as he ought to be to fullfill the Law Augustine averreth Nâ—…minem esse qui tantum velit 〈◊〉 res exigit therfore no man is able allwaies to fulfill it For although perhaps he could if hee would which as even now I said is not generally true of the regenerate themselves yet whiles hee will not hee cannot For the will of obeying is the chiefe part of obedience The meaning therfore of those Fathers is that the impossibility of the Law is not to be ascribed to the Law as if it were not possible but to the will of man who will not obey it § XXII Now that the Fathers who deny the Law to be impossible doe not meane that it is absolutely possible to be perfectly fulfilled appeareth by these reasons First because they yeelded so farre to the objection of the Pelagians as not to deny it to be possible to the unregenerate as I noted before Secondly because they held that all men are sinners and that no man in this mortall life can live without sinne and consequently without transgressing the Law Now it is manifest that hee who transgresseth thâ—… Law doth not fulfill it But when we thus argue Bellarmine saith we confound two questions which ought not to be confounded whether the Commandements may be kept and whether a man may live without sinne which questions are so different that to the former â—…gustine allwayes answered affirmatively to which purpose â—…ee citeth Dâ—… peccat merit remiss lib. 2. cap. 3. 6. De Nâ—…tur gratia c. 69. De gratia lib. arbitr c. 16. in Psal. 56. And to the latter negatively to which purpose hee quoteth Lib. de Natur. gratia cap. 34. De spiritu litera cap. ult contr 2. Epistolas Pelag. c. 14. Epist. 89. 95. and the whole booke de perfectione justitiâ—… Aâ—…sw This say I is a plaine evidence that Augustine when hee saith which wee also say that a man may keepe the Commandements meaneth not the perfect fulfilling of the Law For if the question be propounded concerning the perfect fulfilling of the Law it is the same in effect with the other For hee that perfectly fulfilleth the Law doth undoubtedly live without â—…nne and hee that doth not live without sinne doth not perfectly fulfill the Law Wherefore the affirmation of the one question understood of perfect fulfilling and the Negation of the other doth imply a contradiction Thirdly Because the fathers explane their meaning when they say that the Law is possible and that a man may keepe the commandements not in respect of the perfect fulfilling but partly in respect of the sinceâ—…e study and upright endevour to performe and partly in respect of Gods mercie in Christ pardoning what is wanting in their obedience So saith Augustine hîc studium pracepta servandi gratia Dei tribuit quâ—… si quid etiam in eis prâ—…ceptis minus servâ—…tur ignoscit Here the grace of God bestoweth the study of keeping the precepts which also if any thing in those precepts be not kept it pardoneth which I cited before all the commandements are reputed to be done when whatsoever is not done is pardoned And elsewhere hee saith that our righteousâ—…esse in this life doth consist rather in remission of sins than in perfection of virtues For as touching perfection he saith Vâ—…rtutem quae nuâ—… est in homine justo perfectam hactenus nominare ut ad ejus perfectionem pertineat etiam ipsius imperfectionis in veritate agnitio in humilitate confessio that the virtue which now is in a just man is â—…o farre forth called perfect that to the perfection thereof appertaineth both the acknowledgment of the imperfection there of in truth and the confâ—…ssion of it in humilily § XXIII But heâ—…e Bellarmine holdeth a strange paraâ—…oxe That although a man cannot live without sin yet he may perfectly fulfill the Law of God The absurdity whereof hee hopeth to salve with the distinction of sinnes into veniall and mortall because veniall sinnes without which none are in this life doe not hinder the fulfilling of the Law But this distinction will not serve his turne unlesse hee can prove that veniall sinnes are no sinnes For if they be sinnes they are transgressions of the Law And if they be transgâ—…essions of the Law as undoubtedly thâ—…y are or else they be no sinnes then hee that cannot live witâ—…out them cannot live without transgression of the Law and hee thâ—…t cannot live without transgression of the Law cannot perfectly fulfill it I will not enter into the full discussing of this question at this time because it is another controversy onely for the clearing of the point in hand I doe avouch according to the Sâ—…riptures that the wages of sinne or stipend Rom. 6. 23. the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the just recompence of reward Heb. 2. 2. is death and that the least sinne according to the sentence of the Law if it be a sinne maketh a man subjâ—…ct to the curse of God Gal. 3. 10. And that as every sinne deserveth death and therefore in it self is mortall so every sinne is punishâ—…d with death either with the death of the party who hath no part in Christ to whom all sinnes are mortall or with the death of Christ as the sinnes of those who are his members to whom their sinnes which in their owne nature are mortall become veniall as being allready punished in Christ and the justice of God satisfied for them by the satisfaction given by Christ whose bloud doth cleanse us from all our sinnes both great and small none being so small but that it is of sufficient weight to presse down the sinner to hell being of infinit guilt committed against infinite justice deserving infinite punishment for which the justice of God cannot be satisfyed but by a propitiation of infinite value Thus therefore I reason That sinnâ—… which is punished with the death of Christ is in it selfe mortall all and every even â—…he least sinne of the faithfull is punished with the death of Christ therfore all and every even the least sinne of the faithfull is in it selfe mortall But Bellarmine hath a conceipt that veniall sinnes are not simply siâ—…nes nor against the Law but besides it I answere First that which is besides the Law is an aberration from it and a declination from it â—…ither to the right hand or to the left and that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is absolutely forbidden Secondly to doe that which is besides the Law is not to doe that which is commanded but hee that doth not the thing commanded that doth not all that doth not continue in doing all is subject to the
confesse our selves to be sinners But the pharisaicall Papist if he be once justified as by their doctrine all are for a time at the least who either are baptized or absolved hee must thinke that in him there is no sinne nothing that God can justly hate And therefore farre bee it from him to make such a confession as this or to cry out with the Apostle Wretched man that I am who shal deliver me from this body of death Rom. 7. 24. § IX His second reason to prove this allegation to bee imperitnent is this Because although Esay should speake of all that is of that whole people yet hee doth not speake of all at all times but onely of the people of the Iewes at that time who for their extreme wickednesse were delivered into captivity as appeareth by the words following verse 10. Zion is a wildernesse Ierusalem a desolation the Temple burnt c. Answ. These words doe prove that the Prophet in this place doth not speake in the person of the wicked Iewes that lived in his time before the desolation of Ierusalem but of the remnant of the faithfull and penitent Iewes who being in captivity bewaile their sinnes and lament the desolation of the Temple and City And therefore what is said of them may be extended to the faithfull in all times being as these were humbled before God for their sinnes as penitent suppliants § X. His third reason because the Prophet speaking onely of the wicked of that time meaneth not all their workes as though all were sinnes for then Bellarmine must confesse that the best workes of the unregenerate are but splendida peccata but such as they accounted to bee their righteousnesse as their sacrifice and new-moones and other ceremoniall observatious wherein they placed their righteousnesse which because they were not 〈◊〉 with a good intention nor as they ought are worthily compared but not by them to a menstruous cloth and are rejected by God Esa. 1. 11. Answ. Here Bellarmine taketh for granted that the Prophet speaketh of the workes of the wicked onely of that time which I have disproved Or if hee had spoken of the wicked it were more probable either that they should place their righteousnesse in morall workes if they had any rather than in ceremoniall or if they placed the top of their righteousnesse as hypocrites many times doe in ceremoniall observations that they would compare those things which they so highly esteemed to menstruous clouts But hee speaketh of all the persons All wee and therefore including the righteous if there were any at all among them as some there were both before the captivity and in it and of all their righteousnesses and therefore not of their ceremonials onely but also of their morals Neither might they performe the chiefe of their ceremonials during their captivity being in a forraine land § XI Secondly that the good workes of the faithfull in this life are not purely and perfectly good I prove because in all our best actions there is a mixture of evill either by the absence or defect of some good thing which ought to bee therein or by the presence of some fault or corruption which ought not to be in them And this I prove first out of Exod. 28. 36. 38. where the high Priest who was the figure of Christ is appointed to weare on his forehead a plate of pure gold which is also called an holy coronet Exod. 29. 6. Levit. 8. 9. engraven with this inscription Holinesse of the Lord and so the 72. translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Lord that is of Christ who is the Lord our righteousnesse The end wherefore he was to weare it was that Aaron might beare the iniquity of the holy things which the children of Israel should hallow in all their holy gifts And it was alwaies to be on his forehead that they the holy gifts might be accepted before the Lord where we are plainly taught that in all our best actions and holy services which wee performe to God there is iniquity which must bee taken away by the holinesse and righteousnesse of Christ imputed unto us otherwise they cannot in themselves be accepted of God § XII Secondly out of Eccl. 7. 20. There is not a just man upon the earth that doth good and sinneth not that is who in doing good sinneth not For if the meaning were onely thus as Bellarmine would have it that none are so just but that sometimes they sinne according to that 1 King 8. 46. those words that doth good were superfluous for there is no just man that doth not good But his meaning is that there is no just man upon earth who doing good sinneth not that is which doth good so purely and perfectly as that hee doth not sinne therein For to the perfecting of a good worke many things must concur the want of any whereof is a sinne The truth of this doth best appeare in the particulars Prayer is a good worke and so is the hearing of the word c. but there is no man doth so pray or so heare the word but that when hee hath done he hath just cause to pray unto God to forgive his defects and defaults both in the one and the other And in this sense Luther did truly hold that justus in omni opere bono peccat that a just man sinneth in every good worke Not that the worke in respect of its kind or per se is a sinne as if wee said that prayer c. is a sinne but per accidens because in that good worke there happeneth a defect which defect is a sinne not mortall to them who are in Christ but veniall And thus Augustine also seemeth to understand this place For speaking of the imperfection of charity in this life hee saith that so long as it may be increased profectò illud quod minus est quà m debet ex vitio est ex quo vitio non est justus in terra qui faciat bonum non peccet assuredly that which is lesse than it ought to be is out of vice by reason of which vice there is not a just man upon earth who doth good and sinneth not by reason of which vice no living man shall bee justified before God and in another place more plainely hee saith peccatum est cum charitas minor est quà m esse debet it is a sinne when charity is lesse than it ought to bee § XIII Thirdly such as is the tree such is the fruit The tree is corrupt in part For even in the best there is the Old man and the New the flesh and the Spirit betwixt which there is a perpetuall conflict so that wee cannot doe the things wee would and much lesse as we would but all even our best actions are stained with the flesh which is such a law in us that when wee would doe good evill is present with us
Flesh and the Flesh lusting against the Spirit So that though Will be present with us that wee cannot doe what we would and much lesse after what manner wee would that is with our whole soules with our whole mind heart and affections For what good wee minde or will as wee are Spirit the same wee will as wee are Flesh. This concupiscence the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne had not the Law said non concupisces that is thou shalt have none evill concupiscence neither habituall nor actuall Neither is it onely a sinne as the Apostle oftentimes doth cal it but also it is the mother-sinne Iam. 1. 13 Rom. 7. 17. which taking occasion by the Law to produce ill concupiscences therein forbidden is convinced not onely to bee a sinne but exceedingly sinnefull Rom. 7. 13. But of this I have spoken before and proved by the testimony of Augustine that concupiscence against which the good Spirit lusteth viz. in the regenerate for in the unregenerate the Spirit is not is both a sinne and the cause of sin and a punishment sinne § XIII And as touching the second the summe of the Law is that we should love God with all our heart and with all our soule c. but where is any defect of love there God is not loved with all the heart c. it being legally understood and therefore every defect is an aberration from the Law and consequently a sinne I have also proved out of Augustine that it is a fault where love is lesse than it ought to bee from which fault it is that there is not a righteous man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not For which also though wee bee never so good proficients wee must of necessity say forgive us our debts Therefore every defect is a debt that is a sinne whereunto wee may adde that of the same Augustine It is a sinne either when there is not charity where it ought to bee or is lesse than it ought to bee whether this may or may not bee avoided by the Will § XIV And as to the third If those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee not contrary to the Law then they are not forbidden in the Law and without doubt they are not commanded therein Now if neither they bee commanded nor forbidden then they are things indifferent but that is absurd yea but saith hee veniall sinnes hinder not justice And the Scripture absolutely calleth some men just and perfect notwithstanding their veniall sinnes I answere they hinder not imputative justice nor evangelicall perfection which is uprightenesse for to them that beleeve and repent they are not imputed Neither can it be denied but that the most upright men have their imperfections infirmities and slippes which though in themselves and according to the Law are mortall sinnes for if they should not bee forgiven they would as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth exclude men from heaven yet to them that are in Christ Iesus thâ—…y become veniall by the mercie of God through the merits and intercession of Christ. § XV. His second reason is taken from divers absurdities which hee conceiveth doe follow upon our assertion when as indeed they follow not upon our doctrine but upon his malicious misconceiving and misreport thereof as if wee held that all even the best workes of the righteous are mortall sinnes But wee acknowledge that the good workes of men regenerate are truly good and so to bee called notwithstanding the imperfection thereof Onely wee deny them to be purely good wherin we have the consent of holy Scriptures and of the ancient Fathers some whereof I before alleaged to whom I added Gregory and Bernard Gregory in the conclâ—…sion of his Moralls saith thus Mala nostra pura mala sunt bona quae nos habere credimus pura bona esse uequaquaÌ„ possunt Our evill things are purely evill and the good things which we suppose our selves to have can by no meanes bee purely good Bernard t Our lowly justice if we have any is perhaps true but not pure Vnlesse peradventure wee beleeve our selves to bee better than our fore-fathers who said no lesse truely than humbly all our righteousnesses are as it were the cloth of a menstruous woman wee doe not say that the good workes of the faithfull are sins and much lesse mortall sins For we hold that the sins of the faithful become to them venial But this we say with Salomon that there is not a righteous man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not which in effect is the same with that assertion of Luther Iustus in omni opere bono peccat § XVI Now let us examine the absurdities which hee absurdly upon his owne malitious misconceit objecteth against us In all which it is supposed that wee call the good workes of the righteous sinnes yea mortall sinnes The first if all the workes of the faithfull bee sinnes then the worke of faith whereby we are justified and that prayer whereby we begge remission of sinne should be sinnes Answ. The worke of faith and the act of prayer are good but not purely and perfectly good Neither are we justified by the worthinesse or by the worke of our faith but by the Object which it doth receive nor obtaine our desires by the merit of our prayer but by the mediation and intercession of Christ our Saviour Our faith is such that wee have need alwayes to pray Lord increase our faith Lord I beleeve help mine unbeleefe and our prayer such that when wee have performed it in the best manner we can wee have neede to pray that the wants and imperfections of our prayer may bee forgiven us § XVII The second If all the works of the righteous be sinnes with what face could the Apostle say that hâ—… knew nothing by himselfe And what boldnesse was that for his good workes that is for his mortall sinnes to expect a Crowne of righteousnesse Answ. Though the Apostle had no doubt sometimes offended after his conversion yet he was not conscious to himselfe in particular of any actuall sinne or crime committed by him for as the Psalmist saith who can understand his errors No man saith Basil is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free from sinne but God for of those many things wherein we offend the most wee understand not for which cause the Apostle saith I know nothing by my selfe but in that I am not justified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in many things I offend and doc not perceive whence also the Prophet saith who understandeth his trespasses But though hee was not conscious to himselfe of his slippes and oversights yet hee was not ignorent of his owne corruptious and infirmities against which when hee had prayed to God hee received this answere My grace is sufficient for thee and in weakenesse my power is made perfect Neither did the Apostle expect the reward for the
imputed as a full satisfaction for sinne the other by imputation of Christs perfect obedience as a sufficient merit of eternall life by the former we are freed from hell by the latter we are entituled to the kingdome of heaven Of them both the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5. that we are justified that is absolved from our sinne by the bloud of Christ. v. 9. and that wee are justified that is constituted just by his obedience vers 19. To this argument they answere by denying the antecedent saying that there are no parts of justification but that it wholly consisteth in remission of sinnes Indeed if it were the onely matter of justification as some of them teach and the entire formall cause of justification as others avouch of whom we shall speake in the next Chapter I say if both these opinions were true then I would confesse that the whole nature of justification doth consist in forgivenesse of sinne but whiles it is either but the matter as some say or but the forme as others or neither of both as I avouch it is a manifest errour to say that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes Againe in every mutation though it be but relative we must of necessity acknowledge two termes tâ—…rminum à quo terminum ad quem the denomination being taken commonly from the terminus ad quem As in justification there is a motion or mutation from sinne to justice from which terme justification hath its name from a state of death and damnation to a state of life and Salvation But if justification be nothing else but bare remission of sinne then is there in it onely a not imputing of sinne but no acceptation as righteous a freedome from hell but no title to heaven To this they answere that to whom sinne is not imputed righteousnesse is imputed and they who are freed from hell are admitted to heaven I doe grant that these things doe alwayes concurre but yet they are not to bee confounded for they differ in themselves and in their causes and in their effects in themselves for it is one thing to bee acquitted from the guilt of sinne another thing to be made righteous as wee see daily in the pardons of malefactors in their causes for remission of sinne is to be attributed to Christs satisfactory sufferings the acceptation as righteous unto life to Christs meritorious obedience In their effects for by remission of sinne wee are freed from hell and by imputation of Christs obedience we have right unto heaven § XVII If unto justification there be required besides remission of sinne Imputation of righteousnesse then there are two formall causes of justification Answ. It followeth not for although there bee two tâ—…rmini in this mutation yet there is but one action and this one action is the onely forme of justification viz. imputation of Christs righteousnesse of which are two effects which also be the two parts of justification remission of sinne and acceptation as righteous as I said in the definition that justification is an action of God wherein hee imputing the righteousnesse of Christ to a beleeving sinner doth not onely absolve him from his sinnes but also accepteth of him as righteous and as an heire of eternall life § XVIII Notwithstanding this so evident truth some of the Divines of whom we spake when they would prove justification by the passive righteousnesse of Christ onely take this position for granted that justification is nothing but remission of sinne and hereupon inferre that seeing wee have remission of sinne onely by the bloud of Christ we are justified by his bloud onely And to this purpose they alleage many testimonies of Scriptures affirming that by the bloud of Christ and by his death and passion wee have remission of sinne to all which we readily subscribe But if there be any other places that seeme to ascribe unto the sufferings of Christ more than remission of sinnes as entrance into heaven and salvation c. such places are to be understood by a Synecdoche putting the chieâ—…e and most eminent part of his obedience for the whole Others labour to prove this assertion that justification is nothing but remission of sinne by testimonies and by reasons and to this purpose collect a multitude of testimonies of Protestant Divines who against the Papists have maintained that justification confisteth in remission of sinnes onely But this assertion as hereafter I shall shew is to be understood as spoken in opposition to the Papists who unto justification besides remission of sinnes require inward renovation or sanctification and therefore their meaning was to exclude from justification not imputation of righteousnesse which alwayes concurreth in the same act with remission of sinne and without which there can be no remission for by the same act of imputation of Christs whole and entire righteousnesse we have both remission of sinnes and acceptation unto life but to exclude renovation à ratione justificationis from the proper nature of justification as if they had said wee are not justified both by remission and renovation as the Papists teach but by remission without renovation that is in their meaning by remission onely and this is acknowledged by Bellarmine himselfe as hereafter shall bee shewed And forasmuch as by remission of sinne wee have an imputative righteousnesse for to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne to him he imputeth righteousnesse without workes as the Apostle proveth Rom. 4. 6 7. therefore when it is said that we are justified by remission onely and not by renovation it is all one as if wee said that wee are justified by imputation onely and not by infusion of righteousnesse § XIX Their chiefe argument to prove their assertion is this Remission is as well of the sinnes of omission as of commission As therefore he whose sinnes of commission are remitted is reputed as if hee had done nothing forbidden so whose sinnes of omission are remitted is reputed as if hee had left undone nothing that is commanded Now hee that is reputed as if hee had neither done any thing forbidden nor left undone any thing that is commanded hee is reputed as if hee had fulfilled the whole Law I answer by distinction if they consider remission of sinnes barely without imputation of righteousnesse as they must if they will make good their assertion then hee that hath onely remission of the sins both of commission and omission is freed from the guilt of both but not from the fault For notwithstanding such remission of his sinnes he is a sinner as having both committed what is forbidden and also omitted what is commanded Yet by remission or not imputation of sinne hee is freed from the punishment and a râ—…atu poenae from the guilt binding over to punishment as if hee had neither committed any thing forbidden nor omitted any thing commanded Hee therefore that hâ—…th remission is reputed as having neither committed any evill nor omitted any good not simply
have fulfilled the Law Such is not ours for being sinners in our selves wee cannot stand before God as righteous by justice inherent neither can wee oppose it to Gods judgement or interpose it betwixt Gods justice and our sinnes or plead it as a full satis faction But the best of us must pray with David Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord for no flesh shall bee righteous in thy sight namely if thou enter into judgement with him and againe if thou Lord shalt marke iniquity O Lord who shall stand but there is forgivenesse with thee that thou mayst be feared Augustine on those words Quis sustinebit Non dixit ego non sustinebo sed quis sustinebit vidit n. propè totam vitam humanam circumlatrari peccatis suis accusari omnes conscientias cogitationibus sâ—…is non inveniri cor castum praesumens de sua justitia Si ergo cor castum non potest inveniri quod praesumat de sua justitia praesumat omnium cor de misericordia Dei dicat Deo Si iniquitates observaveris Domine Domine quis fustinebit quae a. spes est quoniam apud te propitiatio est quae est ista propitiatio nisi sacrificium quod est sacrificium nifi quod pro nobis oblatum est Sanguis innocens fusus delevit omnia peccata nocentium Ergo est apud te propitiatio Nam si non esset apud te propitiatio si judex solum esse velles misericors esse nolles observares omnes iniquitates nostras quaeâ—…eres eas quis sustineret quis staret in judicio tuo Spes ergo una est quoniam est apud te propitiatio Againe Augustine and some others doe use to joyne in coherence the 8. and 9. verses of the 20. Chapter of the Proverbs when the righteous King shall sit on his throne who can say my heart is cleane wee deny not that there is a righteousnesse inherent in the faithfull that it is accepted of God in Christ that it is graciously rewarded but we deny that we are justified thereby This is not it in which wee can stand in judgement before the righteous King sitting on his throne § VIII Our third argument By that righteousnesse of man which onely is perfect wee are justified and not by that which is unperfect The righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him is the onely righteousnesse of man which is perfect and all our inherent righteousnesse in this life is unperfect Therefore wee are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him and not by any righteousnesse inherent in our selves The proposition needeth no proofe for that justice which is not perfect cannot stand in judgement before God and is so farre from justifying that it selfe is sinfull every imperfection and defect being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of the Law and consequently a sinne So long saith Augustine as charity may be increased assuredly that which is lesse than it ought to bee is vicious and againe more plainely peccatum est cum charitas minor est quà m debet it a sinne when charity is lesse than it ought to-be I doe not say that the habit of grace as faith or charity or a worke of grace as prayer or almes giving is a sinne and much lesse a mortall sinne as our adversaries charge us but I say that the imperfection or defect of the habit or the worke is a sinne and in respect thereof neither the habit nor the worke though good is purely and perfectly good but sinfull and stained with the flesh which staine to them who are in Christ Iesus is veniall and it notwithstanding both the habit and the worke of grace are cum venia with favour and indulgence through the merits and intercession of our Saviour in him accepted the want and imperfection being by his perfect righteousnesse and obedience covered That the righteousnesse of Christ is perfect is also manifest And that it is the onely righteousnesse of man which in this life is perfect is evidently proved because all the righteousnesse of all meere and mortall men is unperfect And that I prove by these reasons § IX First no sinners have perfect righteousnesse inherent in them All mortall men are sinners Therefore no mortall man hath perfect righteousnesse inherent in him The proposition is manifest for whiles men bee sinners they cannot be perfectly righteous The assumption viz. that all men are sinners it is proved by the common experience of all men in all ages Secondly it is grounded upon most plaine and undeniable testimonies of holy Scriptures which have concluded all men whatsoever under sinne Gal. 3. 22. Rom. 3. 23. 1 King 8. 46. Eccl. 7. 20. Thirdly it is a confessed and received truth which therefore the Apostle in his Enthymeme Gal. 3. 10. taketh for granted For thus the Apostle argueth Every one that is a transgressour of the Law is accursed therefore All men whatsoever even those who seeke by their obedience of the Law to be justified are accursed If any man should deny the consequence of this Enthymeme it is to bee made good by adding the assumption which the Apostle left out as a thing presupposed and taken for granted thus Whosoever is a transgressour of the Law is by the Law accursed which the Apostle expresseth in these termes Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them But all men without exception even those which seeke to be justified by the Law are transgressours of the Law Never any man continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them that is never any meere and morall man hath so abstained from all evill forbidden as that he hath also done the things commanded that he hath done all that hee hath ever continued in doing all Thus Chrysostome understandeth the Apostle to argue No man is justified by the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all have sinned and are under the curse and saith that the Apostle by testimony proveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that no man hath fulfilled the Law and Oecumenius likewise in Gal. 3. that the Apostle proveth that even those who seeke to be justified by the Law are under the Curse why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because no man saith he fulfilleth the Law Therefore all men without exception even those which seeke to bee justified by the Law are by the Law accursed which conclusion is of no force if it bee not granted that all men are transgressours of the Law Fourthly all they who are to pray to God for the forgivenesse of their sinnes are sinners But all even the best of men are to pray to God for the forgivenesse of their sinnes Pro hac that is for remission of sinnes or abit ad te omnis
ought not too much to discourage us knowing that his grace is sufficient for us and that his strength is made perfect in our weakenesse § VIII His seventh testimony is taken from those places which teach that the workes of the righteous doe please God Mat. 3. 4. Sap. 9. 1. 2 Act. 10. 35. 1 Pet. 2. 5. Phil. 4. 18. But nothing can please God but that which is truly good and pure from all vice as Calvin himselfe confesseth Iust. l. 3. c. 12. § 1. Answ. As God hath made two covenants with men the one of works the other of grace so himselfe may bee considered either as a severe judge judging according to the Law which is the covenant of workes beholding men as they are in themselves or as a mercifull father in Christ dealing with us according to the covenant of Grace â—…eholding us in his beloved As he is a Iudge judging according to the Law no obedience can satisfie or please him but that which is pure and perfect as Calvin truely saith As hee is the father of the faithfull in Christ judging according to the covenant of Grace he dealeth with us as a loving father with his children Malach. 3. 17. Psalm 103. 13. accepting the upright though weake and unperfect endevours of his children in lieu of perfect performance Hence in the Scriptures to be upright or to walke with God is to please God Gen. 5. 24 cum Heb. 11. 5. and they who are upright are his delight Pro. 11. 20. Not that either they or their actions are perfect or accepted of God in and for themselves as being pure from sinne but that being covered with the righteousnesse of Christ they are accepted in him and not onely accepted but also graciously rewarded Then belike saith Bellarmine the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed not onely to the sinners themselves but to their sinnes also making them an acceptable sacrifice to God Answ. Wee speake not of the sinnes of the faithfull as hee maliciously cavilleth as if we made no difference betwixt their good workes and their sinnes but of their good workes which though unperfect and stained with the flesh the Lord accepteth in Christ as truly good not imputing to the faithfull their wants but covering them with the perfect obedience of Christ. § IX His eighth testimony is from those places which absolutely call the workes of the righteous good workes as Mat. 5. 16. 1 Tim 6. 17. Tit. 3. 8. Eph. 2. 10. Answ. where he saith that the workes of the faithfull are called absolutely good workes there is an ambiguity to bee cleared For though the Scriptures absolutely call the works of the righteous good workes yet they doe not say that they are absolutely good All good workes and vertues being considered in the abstract as they are in themselves according to their kinde and as they are prescribed in the word of God are absolutely good but considered as it were in the concrete as they bee in us or performed by us mixed with imperfections and stained with the flesh they are not absolutely purely and perfectly good Prayer in it selfe and â—…s it is prescribed in the word of God is a worke absolutely good but as it is performed by us it may bee truely good if performed in truth and with an upright heart but it is not absolutely and purely good by reason of those imperfections which concurre there with So faith and love and all other graces considered in the abstract are absolutely good but considered as they bee in us they are truly but not purely and absolutely good by reason of the impersections and defects which alwayes accompany them But saith Bellarmine out of Dionysiâ—…s Areopagita that worke is to be called evill in which there is any defect but it is not to be called good unlesse it be entirely and wholly good which is true according to the rigour of the Law from which our Saviour Christ hath freed the faithfull and in that sence all the good workes of the Papists themselves even their prayers in which they so much trust are sins Or if they deny any defect to be in their prayers or other their supposed good works they speake lyes in hypocâ—…isie having cauterized consciences But here againe let the Reader observe the desperate doctrine of the Papists who as they account no man justified in whom there is any sinne so they teach all workes to bee absolutely sinnes in which is any defect whereupon the accusation which they falsly lay to our charge will bee verified of them viz. that all the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes For wee deny them to bee sinnes though they have some defects but they affirme them absolutely to bee sinnes if there be any defect in them as undoubtedly there alwayes is as I have alrâ—…ady proved § X. These were his testimonies of holy Scriptures in the next place hee produceth other witnesses viz. Ambrose Hierome Augâ—…stine Gregory and Bernard who testifie nothing against our assertion but against the malicious misconceit of the Papists who conceive or at least report of us that wee put no difference betwixt good workes and sins From which wee are so farre that wee willingly subscribe to that conclusion which hee would prove out of the fathers and is the title of his chapter Opera bona non esse peccata sed verè bona that good workes are not sinnes but truly good § XI Now follow his reasons which if they served to prove no more than the same question which againe is propounded to bee proved wee would not gaine say But his first reason is brought to prove that the good workes of the righteous are no way vitiated corrupted or defiled and consequently that they are not onely truely but also purely good For if they were contaminated saith hee that would arise either from our inbred concupiscence or from the defect of love towards God or from the mixture of veniall sinnes concurring with them But from none of these For neither is that concupiscence a sinne in the regeneratâ—… nor is the want of the love of God a sinne in them nor veniall sinnes such sinnes as are contrary to the Law of God or unto charity Thus for the confirmation of one error Bellarminâ—… broacheth three more But if concupiscence bee a sinne if the want of Gods love bee a sinne if those which the Papists call veniall sinnes bee sinnes indeede then must it bee confessed that the good workes which are stayned with the flesh which proceed from a defective love of God and our brethren that are mixed with divers imperfections and corruptions are notpurely good § XII As for concupiscence of the flesh which remaineth in the regenerate it hath possessed and defiled all the parts and faculties of the soule which as they are in the regenerate partly spirit so they are also partly flesh And these two are opposite one to the other the Spirit lusting against the
Adams disobedience or transgâ—…ession Therefore wee are justified that is not onely absolved from the guilt of sinne but also accepted as righteous by imputation of Christs obedience As touching the proposition that the word sinners doth in this place signifie guilty of sinne and obnoxious to condemnation it is testified by Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what then is the word sinners in this place it seemeth to mee that it is to be subject or obnoxious to punishment and condemned to death by Oecumenius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by Theophylact likewise sinners that is obnoxious to punishments and guilty of death which exposition is plainely confirmed by the verses going before where the same opposition betweene the first and second Adam being made the â—…ormer part is expressed in these words that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or guilt of Adams transgression came upon his posterity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto condemnation especially vers 16. and 18. § II. The assumption though gaine-said by Bellarmine in this place yet is taught not only by other Papists who fully contradict Bellarmines Assumption but elsewhere also by Bellarmine himselfe For Durandus Pighius Catharinus doe hold originall sinne to be nothing else but the guilt of Adams fall or the disobedience of Adam imputed unto us which opinion also Occam professeth that he would hold if he were not hindered by the authority of the Fathers Yea saith Bellarmine it seemeth to have beene the opinion of some of the ancient as Peter Lombard reporteth Iâ—… refuting this opinion Bellarmine justly findeth fault with them that they held originall sinne to be nothing else but the guilt of Adams disobedience imputed it being also the depravation of our nature following thereupon But in that they say originall sinne is the disobedience of Adam imputed unto us that he doth approve For Adam alone did indâ—…ed commit that sinne by actuall will but to us it is communicated by generation eo modo quo communicari potest id quod transiit nimirum per imputationem after that manner whereby that may be communicated which is transcient and gone to wit by imputation Omnibus enim imputatur c. for it is imputed to all who are borne of Adam because wee all being then in the loynes of Adam when hee sinned in him and by him wee sinned Yea and farther hee rightly disputeth that if Adams sinne were not ours by imputation neither the guilt of it nor the corruption following upon it had belonged to us This assertion of Bellarmine confirmeth our assumption and contradicteth his own alleaging that wee are made sinners through the disobedience of Adam by injustice inherent and not imputed which also he contradicteth in other places For he granteth the sinne of Adam so to be imputed to all his posterity as if they all had committed that sinne and to the same purpose citeth Bernard Ours is Adams fault because though in another yet we sinned and to us it was imputed by the just though secret judgement of God And againe taking upon him to prove that the propagation of sinne may bee defended without maintaining the propagation or traduction of the soule he saith that nothing else is required to the traduction of sinne but that a man be descended from Adam by true and ordinary generation For generation not being of a part but of the person or whole man for homo generat hominem therefore the person descending from Adam though his soule be from God was in the loynes of Adam and being in him originally as in the roote in him and with him hee sinned the actuall sinne of Adam being communicated unto him by imputatioâ—… For as Augustine saith definita est seutentia c. it is a resolved case by the Apostle that in Adam we all sinned § III. But what shall wee say to the inherent corruption which Adam by his transgression contracted By this assertion it seemeth not to be traducted otherwise than as the fruit and consequent of the actuall disobedience which was the opinion of Pighius and Catharinus For as Adam by his first transgression which was the sinne of mankind contracted not onely the guilt of death but also the corruption of his nature being both a privation of originall righteousnesse and also an evill disposition and pronenesse to all manner of sinne which is that macula peccati remaining in the sinner after the act is gone so wee having sinned in Adam are not onely made guilty of death and void of originall righteousnesse but also are defiled with that habituall disposition and pronenesse to all manner of sinne So that according to this assertion it may be defended that nothing in our generation is communicated unto us with the humane nature but the disobedience of Adam which is communicated by imputation As for the guilt of death and the inherent coruption they are not derived from Adam but contracted by our sinning in him And hereunto we may apply Bellarmines distinction of sinne so properly called that it is either a voluntary transgression or that blemish which remaineth in the soule caused and contracted by the transgression being of the same nature with it diffeâ—…ing no otherwise from it than as heat from the act of heating For in the former sense originall sinne is the voluntary trangression of Adam imputed unto us and is one and the same in all men in Adam actuall and personall in us originall For onely he by actuall will committed it but to us it is communicated after that manner by which that which is past and gone may bee communicated to wit by imputation In the latter sense it is the corruption inherent contracted and caused as in Adam by his personall sinne so in us by our sinning originally in him which though it bee alike and equall in all yet it is every mans owne § IV. But supposing originall sinne according to the received opinion to be wholly communicated unto us from Adam in our generation yet we must distinguish betwixt Adams first transgression or actuall disobedience which we call his â—…all and the corruption or depravation of his nature which thereupon followed For though we be partakers of both yet not after the same manner Of the transgression we can be no otherwise partakers than by imputation For Adams transgression being an action and actions continuing or having a being no longer than they are in doing cannot bee traducted or transmitted from Adam to his posterity But the corruption being habituall is derivable by propagation Now the Apostle Rom. 5. speaketh of Adams actuall disobedience once committed by him by which he saith we are made sinners that sinne of his being communicated unto us by imputation and not of the corruption thereupon following So by the like reason we are made just by the obedience of Christ which hee performed for us in the daies of his flesh which can
other sorts of contraries that is to say relata which Aristotle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privantia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as privation and habit contradicentia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as affirmation and negation which Tully calleth velde contraria Thus if Bellarmines Logick be good there are no opposits but contraries nor any contraries but adversa when it is acknowledged by better Logicians than himselfe that of all opposites the most contrary are those which are opposed as affirmation and negation which are called contradicentia as imputare non imputare which are so immediately opposed as the one of them is alwayes true quidlibet affirmare negare verum but cannot both bee true together for that implyeth a contradiction And therefore Chemnitius objection standeth still in force § IX Againe if the holy Ghost in this place had meant by remission of sinne the deletion or abolition of it hee would not have called it remitting covering or hiding or not imputing of it For nothing is either remitted covered or not imputed but that which is And things are hid not that they should not bee but that they should not bee seene Tecta ergo peccata quare dixit saith Augustine ut non viderentur As a prudent man hideth his knowledge Prov. 12. 23. and an hypocrite his sinne we know this saith Bellarmine but withall we know that somethings are covered that they may bee preserved and some things that they may be abolished As wounds are covered with a plaister the most ordinary end and perpetuall consequent of hiding any thing hee leaveth out which is that it may not be seene and so God hideth our sinnes when hee hideth his face from them § X. But for our learning Bellarmine will shew us the expositions of the Fathers that wee may know how farre we swarve from the meaning of the ancient and Orthodox Church And first hee citeth Iustin Martyr who alleadging Psal. 32. 2. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord doth not impute sinne that is saith he that a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repenting of his sinnes receiveth from God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the forgivenesse of his sinne where hee expounderh the not imputing of sinnes to bee the forgivenesse thereof But saith he not as you deceive your selves and others like you in this point who say that although they be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not those which have sinne but such as the Scripture calleth sinners that is to say impenitent sinners so that they know God the Lord will not impute sinne unto them though they doe not repent wherein we wholly agree with Iustin though the Papists doe not who deceive themselves and others whom they perswade though they live in sinne if they observe the outward formality of doing penance which all of them do once a yeare though they neither have faith nor repentance which very few if any of them have they have absolution from their sinne § XI In the next place he citeth Origen and Hierome both which doe make three degrees of the three phrases wherein as they conceive David ascendeth from the lesse to the greater when as notwithstanding it is apparant that if those phrases did signifie divers things the first were the greatest and the middle the least according to the variety of the words whereby sinne in this place is signified Origen setteth them downe not as the gifts of God as Bellarmine beareth us in hand but as a mans owne merits for because saith hee the beginning of the conversion of the soule is to forsake evill from this hee deserveth which the Papists themselves deny to receive remission of sinne But when hee shall beginne to doe good as it were covering over his former evils with new good things he is said to cover sinnes But when he shall come to a perfect man insomuch that from the soule the very roote of all wickednesse is cut off in so much that no footstep of wickednesse can bee found therein which never happeneth in this life for concupiscence which remayneth in all is both a footstep of sinne at the least and the very roote of all iniquity Iam. 1. 14. where now the summe of perfect blessednesse is promised then God cannot impute any sinne which was a private and unsound conceit as there are many more of Origen from which though we dissent wee cannot justly bee said to swarve from the doctrine of the Primitive Orthodox Church § XII Hierome if yet it be Hierome mentioneth three degrees but all of remission of sinne for so hee saith quibus modis remittuntur peccata tribus by what wayes are sinnes remitted by three They are remitted by Baptisme they are covered by Charity they are not imputed by Martyrdome which assertion also is unsound both because according to this conceipt to no man is sinne not imputed but onely to Martyrs and also because by Charity hee seemeth to understand not Gods love but ours when notwithstanding it is euident though our charity cover other mens sinnes Prov. 12. 10. yet our sinnes are to bee covered by the love and mercie of God in Christ. Howbeit in that which followeth he is moresound and agreeth with us quod tegitur non videtur quod non videtur non imputatur quod non imputatur nec punietur what is covered is not seene what is not seene is not imputed what is not imputed shall not be punished where he plainely sheweth that the covering and not imputing of sinne is the not punishing of it But this distinction of the words into three degrees is rejected by Saint Ambrose who saith that to remit cover and not impute are all of one sense and meaning Indeed hee saith that divers names of sinnes are here mentioned whereby wee may gather the variety of sinnes but the Verbes bee of one signification quia cum tegit remittit cum remittit non imputat because when hee covereth he remitteth and when hee remitteth hee doth not impute And this exposition is most agreeable â—…to that of Saint Paul who by all these three understandeth one and the same thing which is the imputation of righteousnesse without workes For it is the manner of the men of God in their Psalmes and Hymnes recorded in the Word of God for their greater comfort as it were by way of exultation to dwell upon those things wherein they rejoyce by expressing the same in divers and sundry â—…ermes whereby the selse same thing is repeated which Rhetoricians call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 § XIII In the last place hee citeth two testimonies against us which he calleth out of Augustines exposition of these words which being intirely cited agreeth wholly with us For to omit his exposition of these words a little before set downe quorum tecta sunt peccata whose sins are
walke with God is for a man to behave himselfe as in his pâ—…esence and to walke before God is to behave a mans selfe in his sight that is uprightly Thus Henâ—…ch Gen. 5. 22. 24. Noâ—…h Gen. 6. 9. Abraham and Isâ—…ack Gen. 48. 15. David and others are said to have walked before God Of David it is said that hee walked before God in truth and righteousnesse and uprightnesse of heart 1 Kin. 3. 6 of Ezekias 2 King 20. 3. that hee walked before God in truth with a perfect that is an upright heart For you are not so to understand it as if Ezekias had no imperfections For when the Lord left him a little unto himselfe that he might try him and know that is make knowne unto him what was in his heart he rendred not againe according to the benefits done to him but hâ—…s heart was lifted up with pride 2 Chron. 32. 24 25 31. From this example of Ezechias as it were from the lesse Bellarmine inferreth If Ezechias walked before God with a perfect heart who will deny it to Abraham to whom it was said walke before me and be perfâ—…ct Answ. I doubt not but Abraham did walke before God that is to say was perfect or upright For so much the Scriptures testifie of him Gen. 24. 40. 26. 5. 48. 15. and that hee was the friend of God 2 Chrâ—… 20. 7. Esai 41. 8. Iam. 2. 23. But Bellarmines proofe is very slender that Abraham was such because hee was required so to be For so the whole people of Israel which for the uprightnesse required in them was called Ieshâ—…run Deut. 32. 15. 33. 5 26. are exhorted Deut. 18. 13. thou shalt be perfect that is upright with the Lord thy God Ios. 24. 14. serve him in perfection and in truth 1 Sam. 12. 24. In truth with all your heart And thus it appeareth that the termes of perfect heart and whole heart in the places before mentioned doe not import any legall perfection but uprightnesse and integrity of hearâ—… which though it be but a perfection inchoated or begun being only a perfection in respect of the parâ—…s and not of the degrees towards which notwithstanding it aspireth yet neverthelesse it is the Evangelicall the Christian and the best perfâ—…ction which we can attaine unto this life § XVII These were his proofes out of the Scriptures Now he will prâ—…ve out of the Fathers that the Law of God is not impossible he shoâ—…ld say for so he propounded the state of the question absolutely posâ—…ble But â—…he Fathers may be distinguished into two rankes For either they weâ—… such as wrote before Pelagius spred his errour or after Those whâ—…h wrote before did as Augustine saith write more carelesly of thee things insomuch that 〈◊〉 would seeme to father his errours upâ—… them Those who wrote after hee had broached his heresies as naâ—…ely Hierome in his latter dayes and Augustine had the like controvere though not altogether the same with Pelagius that we have with the â—…apists For both doe hold the same assertion that the Law is possiblâ—… both doe use the like arguments and both doe abuse the same Testâ—…onies of Scripture to confirme their errour § XVIII There are I confesse two seeming differences betweene the Pâ—…agians and the Papists The one that the Pâ—…lagians held that a man â—…y strength of nature might fulfill the Commandements of God which â—…e Papists deny The other that a man might so fulfill the Law of God as that he might live without siâ—… which the Papists also deny But if it 〈◊〉 considered that the Pelagiaâ—…s did call the power of nature Gods gracâ—… and did acknowledge that the direction and instruction which men haâ—…e by the Word and Law of God was to bee ascribed to Gods grace aâ—…d that the grâ—…ce of God doth helpe men more easily to obey the Law oâ—… God iâ—… will appeare that there is no such great differencâ—… in the foâ—…er respect as is pretendâ—…d Againe the 〈◊〉 betweene the Pelagians and Papists is not in respect of 〈◊〉 or impossibility but in respect of greater or lesse difficulty For the Papists doâ—… not aâ—…knowledge that men by natâ—…re are dead in sinne â—…d utterly deprived of the Spirituall life but that they are sicke and weake and â—…yed with the bands of sinne so that they cannot fulfill the Law of God unlesse they 〈◊〉 â—…olpen and loosed by grace but being holpen by grace then the fulfilling of the Commandements is easie to them The Pelagians likewise confesse that by the grace of God which they call bonum naturae or the power or possibility of nature they were enabled by the grace of God vouchsafed in his Word and Law guided and directed by the justifying grace of God freed from the bond of their sinnes and by the Sanctifying grace of God holpen with more ease to fulfill the Commandements of God So that the Papists although they doe not with the Pelagians deny originall sinne or the necessity of saving grace yet they doe extenuate the originall corruption and so magnifie the strength of nature that they differ not much from them For whereas originall corruption is both a privation of the habit of originall righteousnesse and also an evill and wicked disposition and pronenesse to all manner oâ—… sinne infecting all the parts and faculties of the soule they make the â—…rivation to be of the act onely and not of the habit or power as if it were not a meere impotencie to that which is spiritually good but a dfficulty the evill disposition either they altogether deny saying that â—…iginall sinne is onely carentia justitiae debit ae in esse the want of originall â—…ighteousnesse or else they so extenuate it that they make it to be lese than any veniall sinne and in the regenerate no sinne at all But Auâ—…ustine doth truly teach against both Pelagians and Papists that man by â—…nne lost both bonum possibilitatis and also possibilitatem non peccandi as I vill hereafter shew And as touching the other differenceâ—… though the Papists hold â—…at a man cannot bee altogether without sinne for any long time thoâ—…h for some short time in which short time if he shall say he hath no sine he shall make Saint Ioâ—…n and not himselfe a lyar 1 Ioh. 1. 8. yet â—…ey say they may be without all siâ—…nes excepting those which they do â—…all veniall which they doe so extenuate that indeed they make theâ—… no sinnes as being no anomies or transgressions of the Law comâ—…tted against the Law or repugnant to Charity but onely besides the â—…aw such as may well stand together with perfect inherent righteoâ—…esse For they say he onely is a righteous man in whom there is no siâ—…e and yet that there is no man so righteous as that he liveth without â—…ese veniall sinnes But if they be 〈◊〉 and not contrary to the Lw then they are neither commanded nor forbidden and so no sinnes â—…t
curse Thirdly Whatsoever is not agreeable or conformable to the Law is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a sinne But that which is besides the Law is not conformable unto it therefore it is a sinne and a transgression of the Law which whosoever committeth hee doth not fulfill the Law Fourthly Things forbidden in the Law are against the Law Those which they call veniall sinnes are forbidden in the Law For either they are forbidden or commanded or neither forbidden nor commanded If they be commanded then are they duetyes and not sinners if neither commanded nor forbidden then are they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things indifferent it remayneth therefore that they are forbidden § XXIV Now because the proofe of this point that the fulfilling of the Law is not possible unto us is a matter of great consequence for thereby the popish doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse in generall and by workes in particular is evidently confuted I will to those arguments heretofore used adde the testimonies of antiquity in requitall of Bellarmines allegations out of the Fathers First Therefore Iustin Martyr saith that never any man did accurately performe all the things that are commanded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly Eusebius Caesariensis demonstrates that things required in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to all men impossible Thirdly Ambrose Tanta mandata sunt ut impossibile sit servari ea so great things are commanded that it is impossible they should be kept whence Peter in the Acts of the Apostles saith why doe you impose a yoke upon the brethren which neither our fathers nor we were able to beare Fourthly Chrysostome what did the Law intend to make a man just but it was not able 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for no man did fulfill it 2. No man could be justified by the Law unlesse hee fulfilled all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this was not possible to any man therfore that righteousnesse it self is quashit 3. That the Apostle by Testimony cited out of Deut. proveth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that no man hath fulfilled the Law Hierome and Augustine in this point deliver the same things against the Pelagians which wee doe against the Papists Fifthly Quoniam a. saith Hierome nemo potest implere legem that no man can fulfill the Law and doe all things that are commanded the Apostle testifieth also elsewhere For that which was impossible of the Law in that it was weake through the flesh Rom. 8. 3. c. 2. This is the onely perfection of men if they know themselves to be unperfect And you saith hee when you have done all say wee are unprofitable servants wee have done what was our duety to doe If hee be unprofitable who hath done all what is to be said of him who was not able to fulfill 3. And againe thou saist the Commandements of God are easie tamen nullum proferre potes qui universa compleverit and yet canst bring forth none that hath fulfilled them all 4. God saith the Pelagian hath given possible Commandements and who denyeth this but how this sentence is to bee understood the vessell of election most plainely teacheth that which was impossible of the Law in that it was weak through the flesh c that is that the Law is not simply impossible but by reason of the flesh that which was possible before the fall is since the fall impossible by reason of mans coruption 5. When the Pelagians said that although no man bee without sinne yet he might be without sinne what kinde of arguing saith he is this posse esse quod nunquam fuerit that that may be which never was posse fieri quod nullum fecisse testeris that that may be done which your selfe testifie never any man did and to attribute that I know not to whom which you can never prove to have beene in the Patriarches or Prophets or Apostles 6. That which our Saviour Christ saith if thou wilt be perfect is said to him who could not yea would not and therefore could not 7. Then are we just when we confesse our selves to be sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not of our owne merit but of Gods mercie 8. If wee doe not that which we would but worke that which wee would not how say ye that a man may be without sinne if he will Behold the Apostle and all beleevers are not able to accomplish what they would 9. Having cited many testimonies to prove that no man is justified by the workes of the Law all these saith he I runne through ut ostendam a nullo legem esse imâ—…letam that I might shew that the Law is fulfilled of none meaning by the Law all the Commandements which are contained in the Law 10. If you can shew the man who hath fulfilled all then may you shew a man who needeth not Gods mercie 11. The Law is made weake quoniam nemo potest iâ—…plere eam nisi Dominus because none but our Lord can fulfill it VI. Augustine saith that to that immortall life appertaineth that precept thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart with all thy soule and with all thy might but to this life let not sinne reigne in your mortall bodies to obey the lusts thereof to that life thou shalt not lust to this thou shalt not goe after thy lusts 2. God doth so worke righteousnesse in his Saints labouring under the temptation of this life that notwithstanding there remaineth both what he may largely adde to them when they aske and also what he may mercifully forgive when they confesse 3. In the same chapter hee had said that the two Commandements of loving God with all our heart and our neighbours as our selves wee shall fulfill when we shall see face to face But saith he the same is now commanded us ut admoneremur quid fide exposcere quò spem praemittere ut oblivisâ—…endo quaeretro sunt in quae anteriâ—…ra nos extendere debeamus that wee might be admonished what by faith to desire whether to send before our hope unto what things which are before we should preasse forward forgetting what is behind 4. That the virtue which now is in a just man is so farre to be called perfect that to the perfection thereof there belongeth the acknowledgment of its imperfection in verity and the confession thereof in humility for then this petite justice is according to its small measure infirmely perfect when it understandeth what is wanting to it selfe And therefore the Apostle saith both that he is unperfect and that hee is perfect unperfect considering how much he wanted unto justice the fulnesse whereof he did as yet hunger after and thirst perfect both because he is not ashaâ—…ed to confesse his imperfections and goeth forward well that he may attaine unto it 5. Surely hee that is renewed from day to day which is the cause
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
the same Whereunto I will adde that of Durandus both that which wâ—…e are and that also which we have whether they be good acts or good habits or uses all is in us from the liberality of God freely giving and conserving And because by a free gift none is bound to give more but the receiver rather is more bound to the giver wherefore by the good habits good acts and uses given unto â—…s of God God is not obliged to us out of any debt of justice to give more as if he did not give he should be unjust but we rather are obliged to God And it is a rash or blasphemous thing to thinke or speake the contrary If it be said that by the good use of Gods gifts wee may deserve greater I answere that as the good gift it selfe so the good use of it is also the free gift of God which if God reward hee doth not reward our merits but crowne his owne gifts as Aâ—…gustine often speaketh § XIII Secondly that which meriteth is free not onely from the necessity of coaction which condition the Papists acknowledge but also of duety for Quod est debitum non est meritum that which is duâ—…ty is not merit In rendring that which is due wee may satisfie perhaps our debt but not merit reward This is a certaine trueth if the worke bee due the reward is not due ratione operis for the workes sake Quid meriti apud Deum poterimus obtrudere qui debemus omnia How can wee plead merit before God who owe him all things Of that which we doe owe we are not owners the money which is owed is Aes alienum nihil propriè nostrum est nisi quod pro arbitrio possumus facere vel omittere saith Bellarmine Nothing is properly our owne but that which we can upon free choise doe or omit All the good things which wee can doe are due from us to God Luk. 17. 10. So that if we should doe all that is commanded we were but unprofitable servants because we have but done that which was our duety to doe But indeed wee doe not nor cannot performe all that is due so farre are we from merit Againe there is no good thing which wee can doe but it is commanded of God and therefore due Not to doe it is a sinne to doe it is not merit but duety Saint Bernard doth demonstrate for many causes that all our good workes are due unto God saith Bellarminâ—… so that he may exact them all though he would give no reward O if thou didst know saith Bernard how many things and to how many thou doest owe thou shouldst see how they are nothing which thou doest and how not to bee reckoned among the least in comparison of thy debts All that thou art thou owest to him from whom thou hast all And after who then will grumble any more saying Wee labour too much wee fast too much wee watch too much when hee is not able to answere the thousand yea not the least part of his debts Object But it will be said Doth not he well that payeth his debt Answ. In not paying it hee should sinne but in paying hee satisfieth onely his debt he doth not merit a new reward § XIV Thirdly that worke which meriteth must bee pure and perfect and not stained with any corruptions and imperfections for otherwise it will not so much as satisfie our debt but rather make us obnoxious unto punishment every defect and imperfection being a sinne and much lesse will it merit at the hands of God eternall life But all our best obedience is unperfect and stained with the flesh as I have heretofore proved at large all our righteousnesses being as polluted cloutes Gregory saith Omne virtutis nostrae meritum esse vitium Object 1. Yea but the imperfection is taken away by the bloud of Christ. Answ. Where is remission of sinne there can bee no merit of condignity Object 2. Veniall sinnes may stand with perfect righteousnesse Answ. True in respect of imputed righteousnesse by which sinnes are made veniall but in regard of inherent righteousnesse it is absurd Fourthly that which meriteth is more than is due for Debitum non est meritum for debt is not merit but all that we can performe is lesse than that which is due § XV. The thing that we are to merit that is to say the reward first it must bee proportionable to the merit For justice standeth in equality But betweene the best works or sufferings of this life yea martyrdome it selfe and eternall life there is no proportion For the one is finite the other infinite as being the everlasting fruition of God the infinite and chiefe good Wherefore Bernard Quid sunt saith he omnia merita ad tantam gloriam What are all merits to so great glory And Augustin How great labor is that rest worthy of which hath no end If you will make a true comparison and judge truely Eternall rest is rightly bought with eternall labour for eternall rest eternall labor should have been undertaken Thou who art to receive eternall happinesse thou oughtest to beare eternall sufferings Though our labour and tribulations were for a thousand yeares weigh a thousand yeares with eternity Why doest thou weigh that which is infinite with a thing that is finite be it never so great Non valent vitae praesentis obsequia aeternae vitâ—… gaudiis comparari Tantum ubi gratiae divinae retributionis exuberat ut incomparabiliter ineffabiliter â—…mne meritum qâ—…vis bonâ—… ex Deo datae humanae voluntatis operationis excedat Secondly it should bee due upon just desert and not bee given of grace Rom. 4. 4. The day-peny given to the worke of one houre is from bounty Matth. 20. 15. But eternall life is given freely by Gods grace Rom. 6. 23. Of the wicked Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these are justly punished but of the godly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they are crowned according to grace 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For although they should performe ten thousand workes it is the munificence of grace that for such small and vile workes such an heaven and kingdome and so great an honour should be given them Thirdly the rule by which rewardis rendred to condigne merits is not meere grace but justice and that either commutativè which standeth in equality or distributivè which respecteth dignity the former observing an arithmeticall the other a geometricall proportion But neither is their equality betweene â—…he merit and the reward neither are the things which wee doe or suffer condigne or any way comparable to the glory that shall bee revealed But the reward of eternall life is given of meere grace in respect of us Rom. 6. 23. According to the good pleasure of God Luke 12. 32. Who crowneâ—…h us with mercies Psal. 103. 4. For by grace
become of that which is written And thou shalt render to every one according to his workes If it be rendred according to works how shall it be accounted mercie Whereunto he giveth two answeres both of them making against merit The first Sed aliud est secundum opera reddere aliud propter ipsa operareddere It is one thing to render according to workes another to render for the workes themselves for in that which is said according to workes the quality of the workes is meant that whose workes shall appeare to be good his retribution may be glorious according to workes therefore is according to the quality of them whether good or evill For if good then he will reward them with blisse if evill then will he condemne them For to that blessed life saith he wherein we live with God and of God no labour can bee matched no works can be compared especially seeing the Apoâ—…tle saiâ—…h the sufferings of this life are not condigne to the future glory which shall be revealed in us His other answere howbeit in this respect also it may be called mercie because it is given for such workes as no man can attaine unto without mercie It is evident therefore saith hee that to whom God in mercie giveth grace to worke well in this life to them in greater mercie he granteth that in eternall blisse they shall be rewarded with an hundred fold this is that grace which for grace the Apostle saith shall bee given to the Saints of God that unto whom in this life the grace of sanctification is given of God to them the grace of eternall happinesse is given in the life to come which also maketh strongly against merits both because eternall life is a free gift and also because that righteousnesse to which it is given is a free gift and because greater mercie is shewed in giving glory than in giving gracc § III. The second exposition which he assigneth to Augustine is a fiction of his owne braine viz. that in the crowning of the Saints mercie is necessary for the remission of veniall sinnes Not that thâ—…s mercie saith hee is the Crowne of life but because it doth accompany it the Crowne of life being given to their merits and the remission granted to their venial offences which fiction as it is falsely fathered upon Aug. so it is not agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of Rome nor consonant to the truth it self For seeing in the faithful sin according to the truth both in respect of the guilt and also of the corruption is wholly taken away in the end of this life or according to the Church of Romes doctrine is purged and taken away by the fire of Purgatory it is a greaâ—… absurdity to imagine that the faithful whose soules before the resurrection enjoy as they also teach the beatifical vision should after the resurrection need remission of venial sins § IV. For our second argument Bellarmine propoundeth in our behalfe two object out of Esa. 55. 1. and Dan. 9. 18. which he saith might be made The former wherof is availeable against the merit of grace not only the first which he confesseth but the second also and not onely against merit of grace but of glory for that also is promised without price the later against affiance reposed in our own merits For if we are not to trust in them for the obtaining of temporall benefits wherof Bellar understands the Prophet to speak then much lesse eternall between which and our supposed merits there is a farre gâ—…eater disproportion § V. Our third argument is â—…aken out of Luk. 17. 7 8. 9. 10. Which of you having a servant plowing or feeding cattell will say unto him by and by when he is come from the field Goe and sitdown to meat and wil not rather say unto him make ready wherwith I may sup and gird thy selfe and serve me till I have eaten and drunken and afterwards thou shalt eate and drink Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him I â—…row not So likewise you when you shal hâ—…ve done all these things which are commanded you which is spoken by supposition and is all one with this connexive If you shall doe all things which are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants wee have done that which was our duety to doe Which place affordeth three unanswerable arguments against the merit of condignity taken from three of those conditions required in merits which before were mentioned The first in respect of God who is our absolute Lord. The second in respect of us who are his bondservants the third in respect of our workes because all that we can doe though we should doe all that is commanded is but our duety § VI. For the first if earthly Masters who with their servants are fellow servants to one heavenly Master doe not owe so much as thanks to their servants for doeing that which they command then much lesse our heavenly Master who is our absolutâ—… Lord doth owe the heavenly reward to his servants when they doâ—… that which hee commandeth though they should doe all that is commanded which they are never able to doe For the second Iâ—… bondservants who are not their owne but their masters men for a servant as the Philosopher saith is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and altogether his man another mans man doe owe themselves and all that they can doe to their master and cannot deserve so much as thankes at his hands for doing what hee commandeth though they doe all that is commanded and although their service be profitable to their master and finally though they receive not from him either the will or power of yeelding obedience to him but all that they can desire or expect by their uttermost endevour is to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wâ—…ll pleasing to their master when if their service be any way defective are wel apayed if they escape the whip as Theophylact speaketh how much lesâ—…e wee who are the Lords mancipia and bondservants both by the right of creation and by the right of redemption being in regard thereof servi quia servati and consequently not our owne men but his who hath made and redeemed us and therefore doe owe our selves and all yea more than all we can doe doe wee or can we deserve at the hands of God the reward of eternall life by doing what he commandeth though we should doe all that is commanded which we never doe Especially seeing and also seeming that wee doe not all that is commanded and lastly seeing that our service bringâ—…th him no profit Iob. 22. 2 3. 35. 7. for that which we doe wee receive both the will and power from him Wherefore all that in reason we can desire or expect in regard of our obedience is that wee may bee well pleasing unto him Yea forasmuch as our service is alwayes defective and unperfect
God then are they fooles who repose affiance in their owne workes And no doubt but they are fooles who trust in their owne heart as Salomon saith Prov. 28. 26. For as Adrian saith who after was Pope Our merits are like astaffe of reed which not onely breaketh when it is leaned upon but also pierceth the hand of him that leaneth on it To trust in a mans owne righteousnessâ—… is the property of a proud Iustitiary and hypocrite Ezec. 33. 13. Luke 18. 9. and of one that is accursed because hee removeth his heart â—…rom God and putteth his trust in man that is to say hâ—…mselfe for as Bernard well faith for a man to trust in himselfe Non fidei sed per â—…dem est nec confidentiae sed diffidentiae magis in semetipso habere fiduciam But the true and upright Christian renouncing all confidence in his owne righteousnesse as being a beggar in spirit Matth. 5. 3. resteth wholly on the mercies of God and merits of Christ Psal. 130. 3 4. 143. 2. Dan. 9. 18. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Phil. 3. 8 9. according to the advice of our Saviour Luk. 17. 10. If it be objected that the godly in many places of Scripture doe alleage their owne innocency and integrity as seeming to put some affiance therein 2 King 20. 3. Nehem. 5. 19. Psal. 18. 21 24. 2 Tim. 4. 7 8. I answere first it is one thing to place affiance in our good works as causes of our salvation as merit-mongers use to doe another from our good workes as tokens and signes of our election vocation justification and as presages of our glorification to gather comfort assâ—…rance and hope to our selves of our justification and salvation which the faithfull use to doe and to that end are they commanded to practise good workes that they make their calling and election sure 2 Pâ—…t 1. 10. This distinction is acknowledged by Bellarmine Sciendum est saith hee aliud esse fidâ—…ciam nasci ex 〈◊〉 aliâ—…d fiduciam esse ponendam in meritis It is one thing out of our good workes to gather assurance and affiance in God which the faithfull doe as they are exhorted in the Scriptures 2 Pet. 1. 10. Iob 11. 15. Rom. 5. 4. Probation worketh hope 1 Ioh. 3. 21. If our heart condemne us not then have wee confidence towards God and it is another thing to place affiance in our merits which none but proud Iustitiaries and Pharisaicall Hypocrites use to doe Secondly we must distinguish betwixt the innocency and justice of a mans cause and the innocency and justice of his person For the same men in the Scripture who for the justification of their persons desire the Lord not to enter into judgement with them for the justification of their cause have not feared to appeale to Gods judgement § XIII Our sixth reason those who cannot fully discharge their duety much lesse can they merit For they that merit must doe more than their duety For they that doe but their duety though they doe all that is commanded must acknowledge themselves to be unprofitable servants But if they faile in their duety and come short of that which is commanded then can they merit nothing but punishment at the hands of God But no mortall man is able fully to satisfie his duety Our duety is to abstaine from all sinne yea to be 〈◊〉 from all sinne and to doe the things commanded to doe all and to continue in doing all and that in that manner and measure which the Law requireth But those things no mortall man is able to doe as hath beene proved heretofore So farre is every mortall man from meriting any thing but punishment at the hands of God Our seventh reason If good workes doe merit salvation then wee are saved by them but we are not saved by good workes Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. therefore they doe not merit salvation Eightly the last reason The heavenly Canaan is a land of promise as the earthly Canaan was which the Lord gave to the Israelites not because of their merits Deut. 9. 5. Nor for the merit of their forefathers Iosh. 24. 2. but because he loved them and that for no other cause but because hee loved them Deut. 7. 7 8. In which love as hee freely promised it so in the same undeâ—…erved love he did freely bestow it And yet hee was just in giving it because hee had promised it Nehem. 9. 8. The same wee are to conceive of the heavenly Canaan whereof the other was a Type that it is a land of promise and noâ—… of merit freely promised and freely bestowed on the heires of promise CAP. IIII. Testimonies of Fathers disproving merits and first those which Bellarmine hath sought to answere and then others § I. TO the former testimonies and proofes I will adjoyne the testimonies of Fathers and other writers And first those which Bellarmine hath endeavoured to answere of which Hilarie is the first Spes in misericordia Dei in sâ—…culum in seculum seculi est Non enim illa ipsa justitiae opera sufficient ad perfectâ—… beatitudinis meritum nisi misericordia Dei etiam in hac justiâ—…ae voluntate hâ—…manarum demutationum motuum vitia non reputet hinc illud Prophetae dictum est melior est misericordia tua super vitam In tantum misericordia Dei muneratur ut miserans justitia voluntatem aeternitatis quoque suae justum quemque tribuat esse participem His intendement is that the hope of salvation is to bee placed in Gods mercy which is better than our righteous life For the workes of righteousnesse without Gods mercy in forgiving of sinnes will not suffice to obtaine the reward of blessednesse which the mercy of God pitying our will of righteousnesse bestoweth on the just But Bellâ—…mine maketh him speake what pleaseth him for to omit that for sufficient hee readeth Sufficerent Hilary saith hee doth teach that with our goodworkes are mingled certaine sinnes which though they make not a man unjust as being light â—…nd veniâ—…ll yet they need pardon and mercy because nothing that is defiled can enter into the kingdome of heaven Bellarâ—…ines meaning is that at the day of judgement the faithfull shall need Gods mercy for the pardoning of veniall sinnes as heretofore â—…ee hath taught But there is no such matter in Hilary neither is it tâ—…ue as I have shewed beforâ—… that at the day of â—…udgement the faithfull shall need remission of veniall or any other sinnes neither doth Hilary say that the sinnes which are forgiven by the mercy of God are light and such as the Papists call veniall Neither is it true that there bee any sinnes which doe not make them sinners in whom they are seeing Bellarmine here confesseth that men are so defiled by them that they being not remitted exclude them from heaven neither doth hee say with good merits are mingled sinâ—…es neither doth he