that kind whereof his Aduersaries accused him His heart was vpright his life was innocent neither his Aduersares could make proofe neither did his conscience accuse him or God condemne him of these faults that he was charged withall Thus farre Dauid durst stand to Gods Iudgement that hee was innocent in those particular euils whereof man had accused him but it followes not therefore hee durst enter into iudgement with God and plead that God himselfe could find no fault at all with him Hee might haue many secret faults and imperfections euen in this most innocent passage of his life which neither himselfe knew nor his enemies could come to the knowledge of and therefore though he dare pleade his righteousnesse before God so farre as man can accuse him of vnrighteousnesse yet he dare not goe further to cleare himselfe against all that God may obiect against him Heare what himselfe saith in this case Psal. 139. 23. 24. Search me O God and know my heart try me and know my thoughts Speakes the Prophet this out of confidence that God vpon search and tryall shall finde no euill in his heart and thoughts No but out of holy desire that whatsoeuer euill is found in him may bee amended Hee knowes well that many things may be found faulty in him and therefore he stands not to iustifie himselfe but only sues for grace to redresse them adding in the next words And see if there be any wicked way in mee and lead mee in the way euerlasting 2 They proue that the workes of Men regenerate are not Sinnefull by the Scriptures which call them good workes and say that they are pleasing vnto God 1. That they are good Let your light so shine before Men that they may see your good worke Matth 5. 16. Charge the rich that they doe good and bee rich in good workes 1 Tim. 6. 18. wee are his workemanshippe created in Christ vnto good workes Eph. 2. 10. why trouble yee the woman for shee hath wrought a good worke vpon mee Mat 26. 10. 2. That they are also pleasing vnto God is apparant by these places Ye are made an holy â—riesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God by Iesus Christ 1 Peter 2. 5. In the Epistle to the Philippians the Apostle calleth their almes seat vnto him An odor of a sweet smell a sacrifice acceptable well pleasing vnto God Philip 4. 18. Againe To doe good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is well pleased Heb. 13. 16. Hence thâ—y argue If the workes of Men regenerate bee good and acceptable vnto God then certainely the Protestants erre in their Doctrine teaching that the best workes of Men are sinnefull for as much as Sinne is neither good in it selfe nor any way pleasing vnto God Who is infinitely offended at all iniquity Hereunto we answere That this Argument is nothing but a forward and wilfull mistake of our doctrine Wee teach that the best workes of the best men are in part sinnefull They thereupon cry out that wee take away all goodnesse from the workes of the godly and that wee account them to be in se. i. e. Ex natura sua damnable and mortall sinnes This is a foolish calumny of Men that cannot distinguish betweene the disease and the diseased Body but straightway conclude that the whole body it selfe is nothing else but a meere rotten vlcer because it hath swellings and sores in some parts of it Wherefore to vnfold their eyes in his point they are to vnderstand that wee make a necessary true distinction between That which is sinne and that which is sinnefull teaching that the good workes of the Regenerate be not sinnes though they be sinfull Wee explaine it thus That is to be called Sinne in its owne Nature which is the transgression of the Law in doing any act forbidden or in leauing vndone any act commanded by the Law The omitting or committing of any such act is properly in se ex Naturâ suâ a sinne Because it is directly and totally in the very substance of it against the Law As to pray to a false God or neglect prayer to the true God are both of them sinnes in their very proper Natures because both are forbidden by the morall law That wee call sinnefull which is for the maine substance of the worke conformable to the Law but it failes and offends against the Law in some circumstances required in the doing of it when the thing is done which the Law commands but noâ— perfectly in euery point as the Law commands it such a worke we say is not a sinne though it be sinnefull there is sinne in it but it is not all sinne This distinction our Aduersaries cannot but admit of as in the workes of the Heathen and Christians vnregerate so in the good workes of the Regenerate themseâ—ues Wee and they confesse that the morall Vertues of the Heathen were good and commendable in the substance thereof nor doe we thinke there is any men so deuoide of reason as to affirme that the Iustice Temperance Chastity Liberality of a Heathen are meere vices sinnes We all grant they were vertues but yet our Aduersaries themselues cannot affirme that they were euery way vertuous free from all spots and staines of Vice seeing they had neither faith sanctity from whence they sprung nor the glory of God at which they aimed Now as the vertues of the naturall man are in part vitious so the good workes of the Regenerate are in part sinnefull To fast to pray to giue almes with the like workes of Piety or Mercy we affirme and teach that they are good workes good in their nature and vse being such actions as the Law commands We know none of our side so farre gone with passion as to maintaine that a godly man sinnes because hee fasts prayes and giues almes as if those very acts were nothing but damnable sinne We detest such franticke opinions and if any of our Writers haue let slip such words as may giue occasion to our Aduersaries so to thinke of vs we doe not nor are we bound to iustifie euery hot and cholericke speech breathed out in eagernesse of disputation Good workes they be truly and verily good but they are not perfectly good When a godly man prayes he doth well but he neuer doth so well but he may doe better Nor dare any man in the world auouch that either the roote whence good actions come is purged by perfect Holinesse or the manner of doing them is so exactly kept in a precise obseruation of euery circumstance or the end in doing them Gods glory and Mans good so syncerely and truely aimed at that the seuerity of Gods Iustice cannot finde any the least failing in any of those things This is all we teach touching the sinfulnesse of good workes and thus we stand too as a most certaine truth And we say That this sinnefulnesse accompanying our good workes is
for the transgression of the Law A briefe summe of Popish doctrine concerning humane satisfactions for sinne THus we haue the resolution of the dispute of S. Iames together with such Cauils as our Adversaries make vpon the seuerall passages thereof By the whole order whereof it appeares sufficiently that Saint Iames disputing against Faith meanes thereby that false and bastard Faith which hypocrites pleased themselues withall insteed of a true Faith and that disputing for workes he meanes nothing but a working Faith And it appeares also that the drift of the Apostle is not in this place to dispute directly of Man's Iustification but only to bring that in as an argument to proue his principall Conclusion That Faith without workes is dead because it will not iustifie In summe it 's euident that neither these Apostles doe disagree between themselues nor yeâ— either of them doe agree with our Adversaries in teaching Iustification by the the Workes of the Morall Law Of the impossibility of Man's Iustification by which meanes Hitherto Theâ—r exâ— Proposition is that None can be iustified by their owne safisfaction for the transgression of the Law For this is this is the only way 〈◊〉 for an Offender to obtaine Iustification and Absolution viâ— to alleage that he hath satisfied for his offence committed by doing or suffering so much as the party offended could in justice exact of him Which satisfaction being made he is no longer debter vnto him but deserues his absolution and his fauour as if he had not offended at all Now then the Question is Whether a Sinner may by any thing done or endured by himselfe satisfie the Iustice of God so obtaine absolution at the Barre of God's Iudgment We defend the Negatiue That it is impossible for a Sinner by any Action or Passion of his own to doe so much as shall be aequivalent vnto the wrong which he hath done vnto the glorious Iustice of God that there with he may rest satisfied and exact no further paenalty Which point is so euident vnto the Conscience of euery one that knowes himselfe to be either a Creature or a Man or a Sinner that it needes not any confirmation If we be considered as Creatures there 's nothing that a finite strength in a finite time can performe which can hold proportion with the offence of an infinite goodnes and Iustice and the eternal punishment thereby deserued Consider vs as Men so we are bound to fulfill the Law of God in all perfection nor is there any thing so true so honest so just so pure so worthy loue and good report but the Law one way or other obliges vs vnto the thought and practise of it So that besides our due debt of Obedience we haue nothing to spare ouer and aboue whereby to satisfie God for those Trespasses that we haue committed vpon his honour and Iustice. Lastly consider vs as Sinners so we are tyed in a double Obligation 1. of punishment to be suffered for Sinne committed 2. Another of Obedience to be perpetually performed Both these debts of punishment and Obedience are equally exacted of sinfull Men and ergo 'tis as absurd in Diuinity to say the Obedience of the Law or good workes will satisfie for the Transgression of the Law as 't is in ciuill dealing to account the payment of one Band the discharge also of another Wherefore euery one that is not blinde and proud in heart will here be soone perswaded to relinquish all claime of Heauen by his own satisfaction running vnto him onely who alone without the helpe of Man or Angell hath troden the Winepresse of the fiercenesse of God's wrath bearing our Sinnes in his Body on the Tree suffering the vtmost whatsoeuer was due to the punishment of them Our Adversaries in this busines are at a stand mistrusting their owne yet not daring wholly to trust to Christ's satisfactions They will giue him leaue to haue his part but by his leaue they will haue one share too in satisfying for Sinnes For they are a generation of Men that are resolued to be as litle beholding to God as may be for grace or for glory And if there be any article of Religion wherein Scripture and Reason would giue the honour of all vnto God they looke at it with an Euill Eye and cast about which way to thrust in themselues for copartners 'T is strange to see to what passe Pride and Couetousnesse haue brought the doctrine of Satisfaction as it is now taught and practised in the Romish Church With you patience I shall take a short survey of it that you may see whether of vâ—twaine rest our Consciences vpon the surer and more stedfast anchor we that trust onely to Christ's satisfactions or they that joine their owne together with his The summe of their doctrine as it is deliuered vnto vs by the Councell of Trent Sess. 6. cap. 14 16. Sess 14 cap. 8. 9. with the Romish Catechisme part 2. cap. 5. quaest 52. seq and explained at large by Bellarmine in his two bookes De Purgatorio in his 4th Booke De Poenitentia and his Bookes De Indulgentijs is this Sinnes are of two sorts 1. Sinne committed before Baptisme as Originall Sinne in all that are baptized Infants and actuall sinnes in those that are baptized at yeares of discretion 2. Sinne committed after Baptisme when after the Grace of the holy Ghost receiued in Baptisme men fall into Sin polluting the Temple of God and grieuing his Spirit Touching the former sort of Sinnes they are agreed that Men are freed from them both the fault and punishment by the Merits and satisfaction of Christ only without any satisfaction on our part But now for Sinnes after Baptisme in obtaining of Remission of them Christ and we part stakes Which copartnership is declared vnto vs in this manner In 〈◊〉 Sinnes we must know there are three things considerable 1. The fault in the offence of God's Maiesty and violation of our friendship with him Here they grant also That Man can not satisfie for the fault doing any thing that may appease God's displeasure and procure his loue Christ onely hath done this for vs for whose onely satisfaction God of his mercy freely returnes into fauour and friendship with vs. But this must be vnderstood in a catholique sense viz for fault of Mortall Sinnes as for Veniall Sinnes God is but slightly angry with them and so we may satisfie him for the fault thereof both in this life and in Purgatory 2. The staine or corruption of Sinne called the Reliques of Sinne abiding in the Soule For the purging out of which there is great force in such satisfactions as are made by Prayers Fastings Almesdeedâ—s and other laborious workes although the Heretiques say otherwise That the abolishing of inhaerent corruption is by the gift of grace freely bestowed on vs by degrees in the vse of all godly meanes 3. The punishment of Sinne which after the fault is pardoned
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere dico imputari in iustitiam idque sensu proprio non metonymice The same is the opinion of his fellowes the Remonstrants of Vorstius of Peter Bertius of Episcopius and the rest With whom Bellarmine agrees pat Liber â— de Iust. cap. 17. When vpon that Rom 4. His faith is imputed for righteousnesse he saith thus Vbiipsa fides censetur esse Iustitia ac per hoc non apprehendit fides iustitiam Christi sed ipsa fides in Christum est iustitia In summe their opinion runnes thus God in the Legall Couenant required the exact obedience of his Commandement but now in the Couenant of grace he requires faith which in his gracious estimation stands in stead of that obedience to the Morall Law which wee ought to performe Which comes to passe by the Merit of Christ for whose sake God accounts our imperfect saith to be perfect obedience This Assertion we reiect as erronious and in place thereof we defend this Proposition God doth not iustifie a man by Faith properly impuring vnto him faith in Christ for his perfect obedience to the Law and therefore accounting him iust and innocent in his sight Which we proue by these Reasons 1 We are not Iustified by any worke of our owne But beleeving is an Act of our owne Therefore by the Act of beleeving we are not Iustified The Maior is most manifest by the Scriptures which teach that we are saued by grace Ephes. 2. 5. and therefore not by the workes of Righteousnesse which we had wrought Tit. 3. 6. For if it be of Works then were grace no more grace Ro. 11. 6. The Minor is likewise evident That Faith is a worke of ours For though Iohn 6. 29. it bee said This is the worke of God that ye beleeue in him whom hee hath sent yet will not our adversaries conclude thence that Faith is Gods worke within vs and not our worke by his helpe For so should they runne into that absurdity which they would fasten vpon vs. viz. That when a Man beleeues t is not man beleeues but God beleeues in him To beleeue though it be done by Gods aide yet 't is we that doe it and the Act is properly ours And being so we conclude that by it we are not iustified in Gods sight Here two Exceptions may be made 1 First that we are not iustified by any worke of our owne viz which we our selues doe by our owne strength without the help of grace But yet we may be iustified by some worke which we doe viz by the aide of Grace and such a worke is Faith Wee answere This Distinction of workes done without Grace and workes done by Grace was devised by one that had neither Wit nor Grace being a Tâ—icke to elude the force of such Scriptures as exclude indefinitely all workes from our Iustification without distinguishing either of Time when they are done before or after or of the ayde helpe whereby they are done whether by Nature or by Grace Wherefore it is without all ground in Scripture thus to interpret these Propositions A man is not iustified by workes that is by workes done by worth of Nature before and without Grace A Man is iustified by Grace that is by workes done by aide of Grace These Interpretations are meere forged inventions of froward Minds affirmed but not proved as we shall more hereafter declare 2 That we are not Iustified by any workes of our own that is by any works of the Law but by a worke of the Gospell such as faith is we may be iustified Male res agitur vbi opus est tot Remedijs saith Erasmus in another case T is a certaine signe of an vntrue opinion when it must be bolstered vp with so many distinctions Nor yet hath this distinction any ground in Scripture or in Reason for both tell vs that the workes commamded in the Law and workes commanded in the Gospell are one and the same for the substance of theÌ„ What worke can be named that is enioyned vs in the New Testament which is not also coÌ„manded vs in that summary precept of the Morall Law Thou shalt loue the Lâ—rd thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soule and with all they strength and with all thy mind and thy neighbour as thy selfe Luc. 5. 27. Deut. 6. 5 What sinne is there against the Gospell that is not a transgression of the Law If the Gospel coÌ„mand Charity is it any other then that which the Law commands If the Gospell coÌ„mand Faith doth not the Law enioine the same you will say No. It doth not command Faith in Christ. I answere yea it doth For that which commands vs in generall to Beleeue what euer God shall propose vnto vs commands vs also to beleeue in Christ assoone as God shall make knowne that t is his will we should beleeue in him The Gospell discouers vnto vs the Obiect the Law commands vs the obedience of beleeuing it Wherefore Faith for the Substance of the Grace and works done by vs is a worke of the Law and so to be Iustified by the Action of beleeuing is to be Iustified by workes and by our owne Righteousnesse contrary to the Scriptures and that Phil 5. 9. That I may be found not c. This of the first Reason 2 God accounts that only for perfect Righteousnâ—sse of the Law which is so in deed and truth But Faith is not the perfect fulfilling of the Law Therefore God doth not account it â—or such The Minor is granted by our adversaries That Faith is not the exact Iustice of the Law such as can stand before the severity of Gods Iudgments The Maior must be proued That God accounts not that for perfâ—ct Iustice which is not perfect indeed This appeares by that Rom. 2. 2. The iudgement of God is according to trueth Where therefore any thing is not truly good and perfect there God esteemes it not so Here also twil be excepted That God some time Iudgeth Iudicio iustitiae according to exact Iustice and then he â—udgeth nothing perfectly iust but that whiâ—h hath true perfection of Iustice in it Sometimes he iudgeth iudicio misericordâ—ae according to mercy and so he may esteeme a Man perfectly righteous for that which is not perfect righteousnesse in it selfe namely for his Faith Surely this is a trimme distinction thus applyed that sets Gods Mercy and Truth together by the Eares As who would say When God iudgeth out of Mercy hee then doth not iudge according to truth The Scriptures doe not acquaint vs with any such mercifull iudgement of God This they doe acquaint vs with That God iudgeth according to mercy not when he doth pronounce and cleare a Sinner to be perfectly righteous for that righteousnesse which is truely imperfect but when he iudgeth a Sinner to be righteous for that righteousnesse which is perfect but is not his owne In this Iudgement there is both Truth
coinquinatum intrare potest Now sure this is admirable that such acts as these should defile a man deserue hell offend God in a word be sinnes and yet for all this neither commanded nor forbidden in any Law of God Was there euer such a toy heard of as this as Sinnes beside the Law T is a most ridiculous contradiction Peccatum praeter Legem He that doth any thing beside the Law not mentioned nor include â— therein by way of prohibition or command t is most apparent he sinnes not nor offends not at all For whom doth he offend or who can challenge him of Sinne Doth God the Law-giuer No for t was not his intention to command or forbid such an act and ergo be it done or not done it crosseth not his will nor hath he any reason to finde fault or be displeased at it Satan or Man cannot accuse him For let them then shew the Law that prooues him an offender If they cannot alleadge a Law against which he hath transgressed they wrongfully accuse him of a fault Were it not absurd accusation against a prisoner at the Barre to say that he hath indeed done nothing against the Lawes of the Land but many things besides the Law not forbidden nor commanded in the Law those hee hath done and deserues to be punished for it as an offender But now if those veniall sinnes bee mentioned in Gods Law then are such actions either commanded or forbidden If commanded then the not doing of such a thing is plainely contrary to the Law As for example To steale a penny or some other small matter to please an idle word to tell an officious lie these be veniall sinnes say our Aduersaries But how hnow they they be sinnes who told them so The Scriptures they will say Where In the 8 and 9 Commandement Aske them now Did God intend in those Commandements to forbid those actions of stealing and lying Yea or No If he intended it not then t is no sinne at all to doe them seeing it croâ—seth not Gods will nor offends him If he did intend to forbid vs those things then to doe them is a sinne manifestly contrary to the holy will of God the Lawgiuer Wherfore let vs here remeÌ„ber that excellent rule of Bernard Non iussa quïdem licitè vtrumlibet vel admittuntur vel omittuntur iussa vero sine culpa non negleguntur sine crimine non â—ontemnuntur For things not commanded we may either lawfully doe them or leaue them but for things commanded to neglect them is a sinne to contemne them is a haynous crime Wherefore this distinction of sins against and sinnes beside the Law falleth to dust and our Minor Proposition stands firme That he who committeth veniall Sinne transgresseth the Law of God and therefore is vnrighteous for his so doing Becanus here forsakes the Cardinall in this distinction and helpes him by an other deuisâ— He grants that Veniall Sinnes be against the Law and proues it because euery Veniall Sinne is moraliter malum and Ergo contra rectam rationemet Legem aeternam But here 's now the distinction It is one thing to be contra Legem another contra finem Legis All Veniall sinnes be against the Law but no veniall sinne is properly against the end of the Law that is against Charity the Loue of God or our Neighbour Is not this a superfine Inuention As if a Subiect that hath in many things broken the Law should say True my faults be against the Law of the Land but yet they are not against the end of those Lawes viz. obedience to my Prince and Loue to the good of him and my Country Though I break the Lawes yet I would not haue you thinke but I loue and honour my Prince and Country well enough Iust so the Iesuits A man may commit many sinnes against Gods Law and yet obserue the end of the Law in louing God with all his heart and his Neighbour as himselfe Then which nothing can be more senselesse that a man should offend God in breaking of his Law and yet not withstanding loue God with his whole heart That a man should wrong his Neighbour doing that to him which he would not haue done to himselfe and yet for all that loue his Neighbour as himselfe If ye loue mee keepe my Commandemâ—nts saith Christ. Iohn 14. 15. Nay say the Romanists we loue him and yet breake his Commandements Loue doth none euâ—l to his Neighbour saith the Apostle Romans 13. 10 Nay say the Iesuits Loue may doe euill to his Neâ—ghbour and yet keepe the name of loue A man may be angry with another without cause reuile him and call him Racha hee may defraude him in small matters for these they make veniall sinnes and yet in the meane time all this without breath of Charity Himselfe would not willingly be so vsed but hee will vse another in this sort and yet looke to bee thanked for his loue too Such grosse absurdities doe our Aduersaries runne in to by coyning such senselesse distinctions of Sinnes not against but besides the Law of sinnes not against the end of the Law though against the Law it selfe Our Consciences cannot be satisfied with such silly shiftes and therefore we leaue them vnto those that can content themselues and choake vp their Consciences with a little sophistry Men who make a pastime of sinne and take liberty to qualifie and dispence with Gods Law as they thinke agreeable to their Conscience hoping by tricks of wit and dodging Distinctions to a void the accusations of Conscience and to elude the seuerity of Gods Iudgement SECT 4. CHAP I Iustification by workes makes void the couenant of grace of the difference between the law the Gospel of the vse of the Law of the erroneous conceit of our Aduersaries in this point THus much of these three Exceptions of our â—econd Argâ—ment prouing the impossibiliâ—y of our Iustification by the workes of the Law because we cannot perfectly fulfill the â—aw We goe now forward vnto two Arguments more taken the one from the difference of the two Couenants God hath made with man First of works the other of grace and the other from the Nature of true Christian Libâ—rty obtained for vs by Christs death Argument That which makes voide the Couenant of Grace is a false and haereticall doctrine But Iustification of workes of the Law makes void the Couenant of Grace Ergo T is false and haeriticall so to teach For confirmation of the minor in this Argument wee must briefly shew 1 What the Couenant of Grace what the Couenant of workes is 2 What opposition their is betweene these two By the Couenant of Grace we vnderstand in one word the Gospell i. e. the gratious appointment of God to bring man to Saluation by Iesus Christ. In the administration of this gratious purpose of God we must obserue foure periods of time where in God hath diuersly ordered this meanes
God in a word in the Renovation of his Facâ—lties Which what is it else but Sanctification or Regeneration or Conuersion Only stiled by that tearme of Vocation in regard of the meanes whereby it is ordinarily effected that is the preaching of the word He must needs coyne vs some new Mystery in Divinity who will perswade vs that some other worke of Grace is meant by Vocation and not that of Sanctification Therefore wee haue neither one Linke snapt out nor two shuffled together in this chaine of our Saluation But foure as distinct as vndivideable Election Sanctification whereto we are called by the Gospell preached 2 Thess. 2. 14. Iustification by Faith which is a fruit of Sanctification and Glorification The fourth place is that in the Epistle to the Hebrewes Chap. 13. 14. For if the blood of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling them that are vncleane sanctifieth as touching the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternall Spirit offered himselfe without fault to God purge our consciences from dead workes to serue the liuing God Hence they argue That as Leuiticall Sacrifices and Washings did sanctifie the flesh from outward Legall impurity so the Sacrifice of Christ doth purge the Conscience from inward spirituall vncleanenesse of dead Workes or Sinnes This purging of the conscience is nothing but iustification of a sinner Wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be all of one meaning To which I answere That the Apostle in that Chapter and the next disputing of the vertue and efficacy of Christs death far exceeding the force of all Leuiticall Sacrifices the shadowes of it ascribes vnto it what could not be effected by those viz. eternall Redemption verse 12. purging of the conscience from dead workes verse 12. the putting away of sinne verse 26. The Sanctification of the Elect Chap. 10. 7. 10. made Heires according to the hope of eternall life In neither then of those places is our sanctification confounded with our Iustification but both distinctly declared as two seuerall partes of graces and meanes of the Accomplishment of our eternall Happinesse 'T is scarce worth the labour to examine those other Scriptures produced by our Aduersaries whereof some part doe directly crosse and the rest doe but onely in apparance confirme their assertion In generall therefore for them thus much wee confidently affirme that let the Concordance be studied and all those places examined wherein either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed in the Old or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New Testament there will not one be found no not one in which those wordes carry any other meaning then that which we stand for viz. the clearing of a parties innocence questioned as faulty and blame-worthy Take a taste of some places 1 Iustification is sometimes applyed to 1. God when Man iustifies God As Psal. 51. 4. Rom. 3. 4. That thou mightest be iustified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in thy saying and mightest ouercome when thou art iudged Matth. 11. 19. And wisedome is iustified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of her children Luke 7. 35. Luke 7. 29. And the Publicans iustified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God being baptized with the baptisme of Iohn Can there be any other meaning of Iustification hereâ— but this onely That God is then iustified when his workes his wisedome his sacred ordinances being accused by prophane men as vntrue vnequall vnâ—ust and foolish are by the Godly acknowledged or any other meanes evidently cleared vnto all men to be full of all Truth Equity Wisedome and Holinesse 2 Man and that 1 Before Man in things betweene Man and Man When Man iustifies Man Deut. 25. 1. If there be a controversie betweene Men and they come vnto iudgement that the Iudge may iudge them then they shall iustifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the righteous and condemne the wicked Isaiah 5. 23. Woe to them whâ—ch iustifie the wicked for a reward and take away the righteousnesse of the righteous from him Prouerb 17. 15. He that iustifieth thâ— wicked and condemneth the iust euen they both are an abomination to the Lord. 2 Sam. 15. 4. Oh that I were made Iudge in the Land that euery man that hath any suit or cause might come to me and I would doe him Iustiâ—e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In these many the like places to Iustifie is in iudâ— ciall proceeding to absolue a party from fault blame whether it be rightfully or wrongfully done Ezek. 16. 52. Be thou confounded and beare thy shame in that thou hast iustified thy sisters speakes God vnto Ierusalem in comparison of whose abhomination the sinnes of Sodome and Samaria were scarce to be accounted any faults They were Saints to her Of the Pharises Christ speakes Luke 16. 15. Yee are they that iustifie your selues before men but God knoweth your hearts That is You stand vpon the defence and ostentation of outward Holinesse and deeming it sufficient to make it appeare before Men you are holy without regard of acquitting the sincerity of your hearts before God 2 Before God where God iustifies Man Exod. 23. 7. The innocent and the righteous slay thou not for I will not iustifie the wicked by esteeming him as innocent and letting him goe from punishment Isaiah 50. 8. Hee is neere that iustifieth me who will contend with me saith the Prophet in the person of Christ signifying God would make it appeare that he was blamelesse for the rejection of his people the Iewes who perished for their owne and not his fault Rom. 5. 18. As by the offence of one iudgement came on all Men to condemnation So by the righteousnesse of one the free gift came vpon all men to the Iustification of life Rom 8. 33. 34. Who shall lay thing to the charge of Gods Elect It is God that iustifies who shall condemne 1 Cor. 4. 4. I know nothing by my selfe yet in this am I not iustified Hee that iudgeth me is God q. d. I haue kept a good conscience in my Ministery but God is my iudge though my conscience pronounce me innocent yet God is my sole Iudge that iudgeth me and my conscience Acts 13. 38. 39. Through this Man is preached vnto you the forgiuenesse of sinnes and from all things from which yee could not be iustified by the Law of Moses by him euery one that beleeueth is iustifyed By which places not to name more it appeares plâ—inly that Iustification is opposed to Accusation and Condemnation and therefore can signifie nothing else but the defence absolution of a persoÌ„ accused for an offender Which thing is so cleare and euident that it cannot be gaynsayed except by those alone who are wilfully blind and obstinately resolued to coÌ„tradict any truth that makes against their inveterate errors For our selues we may not nor dare not shut our eyes against so cleare Light nor ought we to be so bold wheÌ„ God hath
sanctifying them abolished their naturall corruptions by degrees That so the body of sinne might be destroyed that is not presently annihilated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made of no force and strength made vnable to worke strongly in vs. That henceforth we might not serue sinne Though alwayes we should haue sinne in vs. So are we dead to sinne not as if sinne were vtterly dead in vs or had no more working in vs then it hath in a dead carcase but because the guilt of sinne is fully taken away and the power of sinne hatâ— receiued a deadly wound doth bleed out some of its life now and shall infallâ—bly bleed out the last drop of its life hereafter Vnto the third Argument we answere thus That the Hornes of those Dilemma's be made of wood and may be easily battered We say then that God sees and knowes the sinfull corruption which is in the regenerate for wee cannot assent vnto that wilde and franticke imagination of some who haue troubled the quiet of some places in this Land by preaching that God doth not nay cannot see any iniquity or matter of blame in those that be in Christ Iesus We beleeue that nothing is hid from his eyes nor be our sins lesse visible to him then our graces God knowes what sinnes his children commit he iudgeth them to be faults and such as deserue his infinite wrath Yea to goe further as hee sees the sinne of the regenerate so he hates it with a perfect hatred it being impossible that his pure eyes should behold impurity and loue it But now what followes hence If he see it and hate it then he cannot but punish it True that consequence is certaine But what 's next If God punish that sinne which is in the Regenerate how then is their sinne couered and their iniquities forgiuen How doth hee account them Iust whom he knoweth and punisheth for vniust Here 's a Sophisme He sees sinne and hates sinne and punisheth sinne of the Regenerate Therefore he punisheth it in and vpon their owne persons That 's a non sequitur Hee punisheth it but t is in the person of Christ who hath troden the Winepresse of the fierce wrath of God conceiued against all sinfulnesse whatsoeuer in his Elect by which meanes his hatred towards the sinne of the Regenerate is fully satisfied and also his loue towards their persons procured He graciously passeth by their iniquity pardoning vnto them what he hates and hath punished in Christ in which respect he may be truly said not to see that sinne in them which he will neuer punish in them and to couer that sinne which shall neuer bee layed open in iudgement against them CHAP. II. No man can perfectly fulfill the Law in performing all such workes both inward and outward as each commandement requires against which truth Popish Obiections are answered ANd thus much touching the first Proposition and the first point wherein Man fals short of his obedience to the Morall Law viz. in the imperfection of habituall inherent holinesse We goe on vnto the next Proposition touching Mans actuall Obedience vnto the whole Law Where we teach That no man can perfectly obey the Law in performing all such workes both inward and outward as each commandement requires A man would thinke this point needed no other proofe but onely experience In all the Catalogue of the Saints can you pricke out one that after regeneration neuer committed sinne against the Law We shall kisse the ground he treads on if we know where that man haunts who can assure vs that since his conuersion he neuer brake the Law Shall we finde this perfection in a Monkes Cell or in a Hermits Lodge an Anachorites Mue vnder a Cardinals Hat or in the Popes Chaire All these are Cages of vncleannesse not Temples wherein dwells vndefiled Sanctity Neuer to sinne that 's a happinesse of Saints and Angels with whom we shall hereafter enioy it but whilst wâ—e are mortall we can but wish for it Thy Law saith Dauid is exceeding large It compriseth in it not a few but many and manifold duties Good workes are by a kind of Popish Soloecisme brought to a short summe Prayer Fasting and Almes-deedes These are eminent among the rest but not the hundreth part of the whole number There is besides a world of duties enioyned and as many sinnes forbâ—dden each Commandement hath it seuerall Rankes euery duty its manifold Circumstances to reckon vp all were a businesse which the wit of the subtilest Iesuite or the profoundest Diuâ—ne could hardly master To performe them is a taske which is beyond the strength of the holiest Man who in finding it a great difficulty to doe any one well would forthwith iudge the performance of so many an impossibility But if this suffice not we haue expresse Scriptures to proue that no man doth actually obey the Law in all points Such places are these 1 1 Kings 8. 46. There is no man that sinneth not 2 Eccles. 7. 20. For there is not a iust man vpon eaâ—th that doeth good and sinneth not 3 Iames 3. 2. In many things we offend all 4 1 Iohn 1. 8. If we say that we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs. Whence we conclude that de facto neuer any man did keepe the Law but brake it in some yea in many things And therefore we say that the dispute of our Aduersaries touching the possibility of keeping the Law vanishes to nothing For seeing no man hath or will euer actually keep it as the Scriptures witnesse to what end serues all the quarrelling aâ—d dispute about the possibility of keeping it No man shall be iustified by the Law because he hath a power to keepe it if he list but because he hath actually kept it Whence it is manifest that the reply of our Aduersaries is ridiculous No man indeed doth keepe it but yet they may if they will For 1. what is that to Iustification Can a man that 's regenerate be iustified by his obedience of the Law when yet after his regeneration hee doth not keepe it 2. And againe How know these men that there was or is such a power in the Saints to keepe the Law when yet the world neuer saw it brought into Act Is it not more probable that what neuer was nor will be done neuer could nor can be done Were they all idle and did not doe their best endeauour T is true none doth so much good as hee should and might but yet t is a sharpe censure to say that none would put themselues forward to the vtmost of their might What shall be said of Saint Paul Phil. 3. 12. He confesseth that himselfe was not yet perfect but that he sought after it How negligently No with great diligence and intention He followed after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 12. and that eagerly Reaching forth to catch the things that were bâ—fore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 13. And pressing towards
the obedience of the Law which yet they cannot in all things perfectly obey CHAP. III. No man in this life can performe any particular good worke so exactly that in euery point it shall answere the rigour of the Law proued by conscience Scriptures reason and Popish obiections answered I Proceed vnto the last Proposition which concerneth Mans actuall Obedience to any one particular precept of the Law Wherein will appeare the third Imperfection of mans Obedience in fulfilling of the Morall Law We haue seene That no man hath perfect inherent sanctity free from Natures corruption Againe That no man can performe perfect actuall obedience to all and euery duty of the Law without failing in any one point And this much our Aduersaries will not much sticke to yeeld vnto vs and confesse That there is no man but sinneth at some time or other and that t is scarce possible to avoide veniall sinnes as they stile them But then they deny vtterly That a man sinnes in euery particular good worke though he cannot doe all perfectly yet in some he may exactly fulfill the Righteousnesse of the Law not missing in any one circumstance And therfore at least by that obedience he may be iustified This opinion of theirs hath neither truth in it selfe nor yet brings any benefit at all to their maine purpose in prouing Iustification by workes For to what end serueth it them to stand quarrelling for the perfectioÌ„ of our obedience in some one or two good works when yet we faile in many things besides One thing well done will not iustifie him that doth many things ill For that of Saint Iames must be a Truth Hee that keepeth the whole Law and yet faileth in one point is guilty of all Iames 2. 10. Much more guilty is he that keepeth it in a few and breakes it in many But yet further we reiect this opinion also as an Errour and we teach on the contrary That No man in this life can performe any one particular good worke so exactly that in euery point it shall answere the rigour of the Law and the seuere tryall of Gods Iudgement About this Assertion our Aduersaries raise much stirre and many soule slaunders against vs proclaiming vs to all the world open enemies to all good workes that wee bee Factors for the Kingdome of darknes promoting as much as in vs lyeth all licentiousnesse in evill courses and taking of the courage and endeauour of Men after pious duties For who will set himselfe say they to doe any good worke if the Protestants doctrine be true that in doing of it he shall commit a mortall Sinne who wil pray fast and giues almes if when he doth these things he cannot but sinne As good then it were to doe euill as to doe good a man can but sin and so he shall let him doe his best These slanderous incongruities fastened on vs spring not out of our Doctrine rightly vnderstood but out of froward and peruerse hearts that will not see the truth Such aspersions will easily bee wiped of when after the confirmation of the Trueth wee shall make answere to such obiections as seeme to infringe it We say then That no man can performe any good worke required in the Law with such exact observation of every circumstance that were it examined by the rigour of the Law and Gods Iustice no fault at all can bee found in it This we proue by Conscience by Scriptures by Reason First we here apeale vnto the Conscience of Man the Iudgment whereof is to be regarded and whereunto we dare stand in this matter Thou that boastest that in such and such good workes that thou hastnot committed any Sinne at all Darest thou indeed stand to it and vpon these Tearmes appeare in Gods Iudgment Darest thou abide the strictnesse of this examination standing ready to Iustifie thy selfe against euery thing that hee can obiect Wilt thou venter thy selfe vpon this Tryall euen in the best works thou dost That God cannot with his most piercing eye of Iustice spy a fault in theÌ„ if he number theÌ„ he shal find nothing short if he weigh them not one graine too light Againe let conscience speake when thou hast prayed fasted giuen almes done any other excellent worke of Piety and Charity in the deuoutest and most vnblameable manner thou thinkest possible Thinkest thou verily that in this case thou doest not at all stand in need of Gods fauour to passe by thine infirmities and that thou needest not euen in this behalfe pray Lord forgiue me my trespasses What man durst say or thinke in any good worke Lord in this particular I doe not desire thou shouldest be mercifull vnto me Without doubt there is no man liuing vpon earth that shall in serious consideration of the seuerity of Gods iudgement and the great infirmity of his owne Nature compare his own obedience with the seuerity of Gods Iustice but his heart will presently shrinke within him and his conscience shunne this tryall as much as euer Adam did Gods presence The thought of such a strict proceeding in Iudgement would make the proudest heart to stoope and tremble the boldest face to gather blacknesse filling the soule with an horrible feare in the expectation of that day should the most innocent life the most holy actions of men be there scanned according to the rigour of Iustice not graciously pittied pardoned and accepted according to that mercifull loue of God which couereth and passeth by multitudes of sinnes T were arrogant pride in any man to vtter that speach in a sober temper Whereunto Iob breakes out in a passion chased by the sense of his miserable tortures and the froward disputes of his friends Oh saith he that a man might pleade with God as a man pleadeth with his neighbour And againe Lay downe now put me in a surety with thee who is he that will strike hands with me And againe Oh that I knew where I might find him that I might come euen to his face I would order my cause before him and fill my mouth with arguments I would know the words which he would answere mee and vnderstand what he would say vnto me Speakes the man reason or is he beside himselfe what challenge God to dispute with him and hope to make his party good in the quarrell This was Iobs infirmity It s our Aduersaries arrogancy who dare set their foot against Gods and bid him pry as narrowly as hee list into their good workes they will maintaine the righteousnesse thereof against all that he can obiect to proue the least sinâ—ulnesse Iob saw his folly God grant that these may theirs In a calmer temper when conscience was not ouerclouded with griefe and anger he reades vs a quite contrary lesson In the 9 Chapter of his booke How should man be iust with God if he contend with him he cannot answer him one of a thousand v. 2. 3. And againe hauing reasoned questioned of Gods
wisdome power not to be questioned or resisted by any How much lesse shall I answere him saith he chuse out my words to reason with him whom though I were righteous yet would I not answer but I would make supplication to my iudge v. 14. 15. Further If I would iustifie my selfe mine own mouth will condemne me If I say I am perfect it shall proue me peruerse Though I were perfect yet would I not know my soule I would despise my life v. 20. 21. And once more If I wash my self with snow water make my hands neuer so clean yet that thou plunge me in the ditch mine own cloathes shall abhorre me For he is not a man as I am that I should answere him and we should come together in iudgement vers 30. 31. 32 See this holy Saint who elsewhere stands peremptorily to the defence of his Innocency and vprightnesse against that wrongfull imputation of hypocrisie which his friends charged him withall telling them that till he die he wil not take away his innocency from himselfe nor his heart shall not reproue him of his dayes yet when he sets himselfe before the Tribunall of Gods Iustice he dares not stand out in his own Iustification but submits himselfe to the mercy of his Iudge with humble supplication for his fauour These confessions of Iob be not complements out of a fained and needlesse modesty but the fruits of a conscience rightly informed and apprehensiue of its owne sinfulnesse and the seuere rigour of Gods iudgment The serious meditatioÌ„ of which two particulars we commend vnto our Aduersaries and all other of their humour that are apt to entertaine fauourable and gentle opinions touching their sinnes and withall to nourish high conceits of their owne goodnesse Whence they grow by degrees to thinke that Gods iudgement is like their owne foolish imaginations and where they out of blindnesse or selfe-loue cannot see a fault that there God himselfe can finde none We hardly see beames in our own eyes are we then so skilfull to spie the smallest moate who can vnderstand his faults saith Dauid wilt thou answere him Yes I doe A secret fault may soone sâ—â—p it a deceitfull heart may in one circumstance go beyond thy wit watchfulnesse Here then humility would doe well and prayer for thy ignorances for thy secret sinnes vnknowne to thy selfe as much as others Here true modesty would haue her place that thou preferre Gods wisedome and iudgement aboue thine owne remembring that he iudgeth not as man iudgeth but sometimes otherwise then thou doest accounting that abhomination which in thine eyes is much set by and alwayes more exactly then thou caust seeing much euill in that where thou seest little and some euill where thou think'st there is none And therefore alwayes speake vnto thy selfe in those excellent words of Saint Iohn If my heart condemne as in many things it doth God is greater then my heart and knoweth all things 1 Iohn 3. 20. God forbid then that in any thing I should presume to pleade with him in my Iustification He is wise in heart and mighty in strength who hath hardened himselfe against him and hath prospered Iob. 9. 2. Thus much touching our first Argument for the inward witnesse of the conscience Which in the most innocent life often in the most holy worke drawes backe from Gods Iudgement seat and is afraid to put it selfe vpon the tryall of his seuere Iustice. Wee haue the Scriptures to witnesse vnto vs the same Truth Psa. 143. â— 2. Heare my prayer O Lord giue earâ— vnto my supplication in thy faithfulnesse answere mee and in thy righteousnesse Here the prophet seemes to appeale to the Iustice of God requiring his helpe vpon such tearmes as if God out of pure Iustice could not haue denyed him But t is nothing so T is the mercy of God the holy Prophet sues vnto Answere me in thy faithfulnesse and Righteousnes that is in those gratious promises wherin thou hast made mee to trust where vpon I doe rely Thou art iust and faithfull in keeping promise be so to me in my distresse who according to thy promise seeke vnto thee for succour Vnto this Righteousnesse of God Dauid presents himselfe and his supplications but before that strict severe Iustice of God he dares not stand but in all submissiuenesse prayes in the next words And enter not into Iudgement with thy seruant He craues mercifull audience of his prayers but deprecates the strict examination of his Life and doings He knew well that if God should deale with him vpon so hard Termes his owne Innocency could neuer haue made his prayers exceptable For saith he in this shall no Man liuing be Iustified The force of this place Bell. seekes to decline by three poore miserable shifts That Dauid would not haue God enter into Iudgement with him to iudge him seiliâ—et according to such things as he had of himselfe but according to such things as God had giuen him that is Iudge mee not according to that righteousnesse which I haue by Nature but according to that righteousnesse which thou hast giuen by thy Grace Which interpretation how ridiculous a phantasy it is and quite besides the meaning of the Prophet t is easy for any one to Iudge by reading of that Psalme Bell. therefore hath another string to his Bow but as rotten as the Former 2 That the place is meant of veniall Sinnes without which a Man cannot liue and though they be small faults yet would it be no Iustice in God to punish them So that the meaning is Lord enter not into Iudgement that is Lord I will not contend with thee I confesse my selfe a sinner and craue pardon Diuers small faults I haue committed not against the Law but besides the Law and thou mayest easily pardon them My case is not singular I doe therein but as other Men doe amongst whome there is none so iust but some time failes and offends And therefore doe not lay such faults to my charge Men of corrupt conscience that thus sport with Sinne and play with the Scriptures The Iesuite must bring vs better proofes then he doth else wee shall neuer beleeue that Dauid was a Man of Bellarmine his mind touching Veniall Sins That doctrine is part of the dregs of corrupted Nature maynatined by Popish Moabites who are setled on thier Lees infatuated by the Loue of Sin and flattering themselues in that wickednesse as little light which God accounteth worthy to be haâ—ed wee acknowledge no Veniall Sinnes but such as deserue eternall death which hereafter we shall make good And therefore if Dauid would not that God should enter into iudgement with him because of veniall sinnes that accompany his holiest practises t is in effect that which we say the difference is onely in an Epithete We say Dauid prayed not to come into iudgement because his best workes were sinfull and Bellarmine addes Because venially or pardonably sinnefull
This must be restrained to the righteousnesse which consistes in Obedience to the Ceremoniall Law All our Righteousnesse that is all our Ceremoniall workes in Sacrifices Obseruations of Sabboaths New-moones Fasts and such like are as filthy clouts being done in that manner as wee doe them viz without Faith and Obedience To these we say That there would neuer be an end were a Man bound punctually to refute euery Cauill which an Aduersary may frame out of his fancy-full imagination and froward heart We owe the Romanists no such credit as to assent to any point of Religion vpon their bare affirmation We can as confidently deny such Exceptions as these without yeelding them a refutation as they doe boldly make them without bringing any proofe And certainely most vaine and vngodly is that course which our Aduersaries or any that tread in there steps doe hold in their Disputations about serious points of Christian Doctrine when being vrged with conuincing Scriptures they thinke they haue done the part of Schollers and satisfied the Consciences of others desirous of Truth if they can amuse and stonny you a little with two or three Interpretations and prety exceptions and so leaue you to chuse which you list They will not tell you which they will stand to but euen when there answers crosse one another yet all shall downe that if one helpe not another may and altogether may vexe you when they cannot satisfie you This quarrelsome humour of men who seeke not the truth in loue but write to maintaine to dispute is not the least vexation of the spirit and wearinesse to the flesh of man as all those will witnesse whose much reading hath led them along into the perplexed mazes of Schoole-learning whether Diuine or humane The third place of Scripture is Psal 130. 3. If thou Lord shouldest marke iniquities O Lord who shall stand This place is parallell to the former wherein the holy Prophet desires God to be attentiue to the voice of his supplications craues this audience meerely of Gods fauour not vpon any righteousnes or worth of his own As for that he confesseth That if God should be strict to obserue wherein hee and all men doe amisse neither himselfe nor any other could be able to stand in his presence Whence he flies from his Iustice vnto his mercy But there is forgiuenesse with thee that thou mayest be feared verse 4. Presumption then it is and arrogant pride for any Romanist to say Lord if thou doe obserue Iniquities yet I shall be able to stand In such and such good workes be extreame to marke what is done amisse I feare not the tryall nor will sue to thy mercy From Scriptures we come to Reason Which is thus Wheresoeuer there is concupiscence and inordinate motions of the heart wheresoeuer there 's a defect of Charity towards God and Man Wheresoeuer veniall sinnes as our Aduersaries cals them are mingled with good works there the best workes of men are not free from some corruptions and sinfulnesse But in a man Regenerate there is concupiscence and euill motions of the heart present with him when hee would doe good there is a want of that measure of loue to God and Charity to Man which he might and ought to haue there also are besides many veniall faults that accompany his best workes Ergo the works of a Man Regenerate are not euery way good but in part sinfull The Minor is cleere and confessed by our Aduersaries especially for the two former circumstances of concupisâ—â—â—ce and imperfection of Charity and for veniall sinnes they also acknowledge it a very hard matter to 〈…〉 in any good worke Wherefore they are driuen in a desperate manner to deny the Maior and to auouch That neither concupiscence nor imperfection of Charity to God or our Neighbour nor yet veniall sinnes mingled with good workes doe at all impaire the goodnesse and perfect righteousnesse oâ— our obedience to the Law but that they are as good with those infirmities as without them Bad causes must be helpt out by bold and desperate attempts and so it â—ares with our Aduersaries in this point They will vtterly deny that there is any thing euill in a man Regenerate rather then be forced to confesse there is any thing euill in the workes that he performes The impudent vnreasonablenesse of this their Assertion we shall shortly speake of In the meane we goe on vnto the consideration of such Arguments which are brought by our Aduersaries to proue That the good workes of men Regenerate are truely and perfectly good without all faultinesse in them They proue it then 1 From the examples of Iob and Dauid Of Iob is said Iob 1. 22. In all this Iob sinned not nor charged God foolishly and chap. 2. verse 10. In all this did not Iob sinne with his lippes Againe for Dauid he is conscious to himselfe of his owne innocency and that no fault can be found in his doings wherefore he prayes Psal 7. 8. Iudge me O Lord according to my righteousnesse and according to mine integrity that is in me And after all this Psal. 18. 23. 24. He professeth openly his innocency and reward for it I was saith he also vpright before him and I kept my selfe from mine iniquity Therefore hath the Lord recompensed mee according to my righteousnesse according to the cleannesse of my hands in his sight And Psal. 17. vers 3. Hee declares how GOD had throughly tryed him and yet found him faultlesse Thou hast proued mine heart thou hast visited me in the night thou hast tryed me and yet shalt find nothing I am purposed my mouth shall not transgresse How then can any man say that Iob and Dauid sinned mortally in their sayings and doings when God himselfe witnesseth for them that they dâ—e not sinne Hereto we answere That we doe not lay sinne vnto the charge of those holy men nor doe we say they did ill where the Scriptures witnesse they did well Iob in that first Act of his tryall quitted himselfe well and ouercame the Temptation He sinned not as afterwards he did breaking forth into impatiency and that is all the Scripture meant by that speech In all this Iob sinned not But whether Iobs patience were in this first conflict euery way so vnreproueable that not the least fault could be spied in it in Gods seuere Iudgement is more then we dare affirme or our Aduersaries will euer be able to proue For Dauid his innocent demeanor of himselfe in the time of Sauls raigne was such that no Imputation of vnfaithfulnesse or ambition could iustly bee layed to his charge Wherefore when Sauls followers accuse him of treason against their Master Dauid appeales vnto God desiring him to deale with him according to his Innocency in that behalfe His owne conscience and God with his conscience after tryall made acquit him from plotting and practising against Saul as his Aduersaries said hee did Thence it followes that Dauid did not offend in
sufficient to barre vs from Iustification by them For we deserue not reward for what is well done except all were well done But neuerthelesse it shall not hinder Gods gracious acceptation of our good workes who is well pleased with the obedience of his children so farre as it is good and holy and when it failes for Christs sake he mercifully pardoneth their Trespasses Thus much of the second Argument The third is from reason grounded on Scriptures 3 Where there are sufficientia principia rectae operationis sufficient causes and meanes of well-doing there a good worke may be done without all fault But in a man Regenerate there are causes and meanes sufficient for well-doing Ergo He may doe well and not offend They proue the Minor thus To the performance of any good worke there is required nothing but these things Knowledge of what is to be done will and power to do it But now a Regenerate man hath all these For first his vnderstanding is enlightned so that hee can easily know what is good to be done Secondly his will and affections are sanctified and aided by grace to desire and endeauour the performance of it And thirdly and lastly hee hath power to put in practise what he knowes and desires there being no impediment inward or outward that should hinder him Ergo he may doe well and sinne not Here we desire them to shew vs. How a man Regenerate is enduded with such perfect abilities as may helpe him and quite rid him of all such impediments as might hinder hiâ— in well doing This they say is done by the grace of Sanctification giuen vnto a Regenerate man whereby hee is freed from all contagion of sinne and such incombrances as hinder him in well-doing For by this grace giuen to him hee is made a good tree now A good tree cannot bring foorth â—ad fruit Matth 7. 18. And ergo a good man cannot doe bad workes 〈…〉 made a fruitfull Branch of Christ the true Vine as it is Iohn 15. 5. I am the Vine yea are the branches he that abideth in me and I in him the 〈◊〉 beareth much fruit And Ergo That fruit onely which is good Which Similitude of a Branch much illustrates the matter in their Imagination For as in a Vine-Branch If first it haue sufficient moisture from the Body of the Vine Secondly if it haue sufficient heat of the Sunne to digest that moysture And thirdly if it be not hurt nor hindred by Frosts Wette Windes Wormes or other such discommodities of the Ayre and Soile then certainely it will be are very much and very good fruit so is it in a man regenerate From Christ he receiues sufficient moisture of Diuine Grace which is in him as a well of water springing vp vnto euerlasting life Iohn 4. 14. He hath heat sufficient of spirituall affection to cause him to bud forth into good workes For Christ saith I am come to send fire on the earth and what will I if it be already kindled Luke 12. 49. And Did not our hearts burne within vs said the two Disciples that went to Emaus Luk. 24. 32. Ergo they haue heat enough Finally they haue no impediment Neither inward For why It is written Rom. 8. 1. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus Ergo no inward impediment to well-doing Nor outward For it written nothing shall separate vs from the Loue of God that is in Christ Iesus our Lord Rom. 8. 38. Ergo no outward impediment of good workes Hereunto we make answer That this Argument is a sophisticall cauillation which proues that which we do not deny They say that a Man Regenerate hath sufficientia principia rectae honestae operationis We say so too confessing that hee is made a good tree a fruitfull Branch that hee is enlightened sanctified and strengthened by the spirit of God vnto the performance of good workes We grant that now he is enabled to doe well who before his Regeneration could doe nothing saueâ—ll but the question still remaines whether now he doe so well as that he doth nothing ill when he doth best We grant that the Vine which in former time yeelded nothing but wild grapes now being transplanted and grafted into the best Vine beares good grapes but we deny that they are so weet and kindly in euâ—â— respect as not to haue a little relish still of their former wildnesse and sowrenesse Wherefore our Aduersaries doe but trifle with vs to tell vs that Men Regenerate haue meanes sufficient to doe those workes that be good this we deny not but we question whether they haue helpe sufficient to performe any worke so absolutely and perfectly good that God himselfe cannot charge it with any Sinne at all This we constantly deny And to their discourse That a regenerate Man hath sufficient Knowledge Power and will to doe good perfectly in this they affirme more then will euer bee proued Our imperfections in euery one of these three particulars witnessed to our Conscience by Scripture and experience doth disable vs euer froÌ„ doing any worke entirely and totally good Knowledge we haue but much darkned by ignorance We haue a will to doe good but that also corrupted with much forward RebellioÌ„ A power we haue to do good but alwayes crossed and much restrained by manyfold Lusts within and Temptations without vs. How is it possible for vs being compassed about with so many infirmities but wee should offend in one thing or other Becanus here brings vs an instant of a good worke and bids vs shew what sinne there is in it If sayth he A Man regenerate read or heare those words of Christ. Mat 6. giue almes hee being enlightned knowes that this is a worthy and honest worke Wherupon he is toucâ—ed in heart and stirred vp to do it He consents to this motion and resols vpon the execution which supposing that he be rich nothing now can hinder because he is both able and willing to giue Now then this almes being thus giuen out of knowledge and a pious motion of the Heart tending to Gods honour and our Neighbours good the Iesuit desires to knew of vs where their is any Sinne in it Wee say there is some euill in euery good worke and therefore hee would haue vs tell him what euill there is in this Almesdeed Vnto this we say that this enquiry of the Iesuite is the most ridiculous and absurd thing that can be He asketh vs where is the Sinne what if we answere him we doe not know Is hee now euer the wiser what hath he gained hereby Are other Mens worke without all faults because we know not what they be Nay are they without fault because themselues know not whether there be any in them or no what silinesse were it to argue in this sort Therefore when wee come to this point strictly to examine the workes of Men. First we tell the Iesuite that he must not put Cases touching generalities suppose
that such a good worke be done so and so what then we dispute now touching particulars in euery Mans reall practice The enquiry is not for the generall What euill is there in such and such a good worke done thus and thus according as the Circumstances are framed in an Imagined Case As to aske what Sinne is their in an Almes-deede done out of Faith and Charity to Gods glory This is a fond question thus framed vpon generall termes we say their is no Sinne in it But the enquiry is in particular what Euill their is in such a worke done by this or that Man according to all Circumstances that were at that time incident to the worke as What sinne was there in Zacheus or Cornelius almes-deeds This question we admit and answere to it That some Sinne there was for which those holy Men as wel as others would not haue beene willing that God should enter into iudgement with them strictly to iudge them Yea but will the Iesuits reply name what Sinne this was or else you wrong them Now this is meere impudency For who is judge of their actions Are we or is it God and their owne Consciences we can be no judges who at furthest can judge but accordrng to outward appearance We know not their Hearts nor are we priuy vnto euery particular Circumstance that did accompany those actions of theirs Circumstances in euery particular action differ infinitely one Man may offend in this point another in that nor haue we a generall Rule whereby to judge alike of all And therefore it is a childish quaere to aske on Man whether another Man offendes who may doe euill a 1000 times not only secret from others but vnwitting to himselfe If then the Iesuite will haue an answere to his question he must resort to particular mens Consciences and to God for only the spirit of Man and the spirit of God know the things of Man Let him aske a Cornelius when he giues almes whether he doe thinke this worke so well done that no fault can bee found with it Doubtlesse he will answere that he cannot excuse himselfe from all faultinesse though he knew nothing by himselfe yet he dares not stand to Gods judgment His confession and prayer would in this case be the same with Nehemiahs Nehem. 13. 22. Remember me O my God concerning this also and spare mee according to the greatnesse of thy mercy at once begging fauorable acceptance of his obedience and gratious pardon of his infirmities If this suffice not in the next place the Iesuite is to repaire to God almighty and question him where the Sinnes in such and such a good workes who no doubt can shape him an answere that will sore confound his pride and folly and make it quickly appeare vnto him that sinnefull Man when he pleades with God is not able to answere him one obiection of a 100 that God shall make against him This of the third Argument That Man hath sufficient meanes to doe well and not Sinne. The last followes drawne from such absurdities as they say doe follow vpon our Doctrine Thus. 4 If say they our Doctrine be true that the best workes of Men be Sinfull then these absurdities be likewise true doctrine That to be iustified by faith is to be iustified by Sin That no man ought to beleeue because the worke Beleeuing is Sinne. That all good works are forbidden because all Sinne is forbidden That God should command vs to commit Sinne because he commands vs to doe good workes That God bidding vs be zelous of goâ—d workes should in effect bid vs be zealous of mortall Sinne. That to pray for the pardon of Sinne were a damnable Sinne. These and such other absurd Positions would be true if the protestants doctrine concerning the sinfulnesse of good workes may stand for good Hereunto we answere That these absurdities issue not out of our Doctrine but out of our Aduersaries malitious Imaginations Who like the ragine Sea casting vp mire and Dirt from its owne Bottome would faine throw all this filth in the face of the Reformed Churches to make them odious and hatefull to the world The best is Truth cannot bee disgraced though it may be belyed These foule Absurdities touch vs not but follow vpon that Doctrine which is none of ours Namely That the good works of the Regenerate are in their very Nature altogether sins and nothing else but sordes inquinamenta merae iniquitates Such an absurd assertion would indeed yeeld such an absurd consequence But we defended it not they abuse vs grosly wheÌ„ in their writings they report of vs the contrary that we doe mainetaine This onely we teach That mens good workes are in part sinfull Much good they haue in them but with all some euill mingled therewith Amongst the gold some drosse also will be sound that will not be able to abide the fire of Gods seuere Tryall Imperfections will appeare in our best workes so long as humane infirmity and mortality hangs vpon vs. This we teach and from this Doctrine all that haue reason may see that no such vnreasonable conclusions can be collected And let thus much suffice for the clearing of this third Proposition touching the imperfection of our obedience to the Morrall Law of God euen in the good workes which we performe From whence euery godly heart should leâ—rne both Christian Humilitie and also Industry First Humility not to boast in the flesh and glory in its owne Righteousnesse thinking that God must highly account off and reward largely that which is very little worth Secondly Industry in a faithfull indeauour after perfection That what cannot be done well as it ought wee may yet euery day be done better then before it was CHAP. IIII. Three generall exceptions against the truthes deliuered in this third Section THus we haue stood long in the confirmation of our second Argument touching the impossibility of Mans fulfilling of the Law in this Life and so consequently of iustification by the Law Against all that haue bin sayed for the profit of this point our Aduersaries haue three Common and generall Exceptions Which are these 1 That Concupiscence or Naturall Corruption in the first and second act of it is no sinne 2 That imperfection in our Charity and Obedience is no sinne 3 That smaller faults or as they tell them Veniaâ—â— sinnes doe not hinder the Iustice and goodnesse of any good worke To these three Positions they haue continually recourse For whereas they cannot deny but that their is in the Regenerate both a pronesse of Nature vnto Euill and also many inordinate Sinnefuâ—l motions arising thence they first deny that either these Naturall Corruptions or disordered Motions of the Heart be any sinnes Againe they confesse that no man hath such perfect loue of God and Man but that he may increase in charity nor be his good workes so perfectly good but that they ought still to striue to doe them
better but then here also they deny that this imperfection of our charity and good works is any sinne Lastly they grant that no man can auoide veniall sinnes scarse in the best workes he doth but then they deny that veniall sinnes be contrary to the Law so that albeit a man commit them yet he may perfectly fulfill the Law of God I cannot stand largely in the refutation of these foule errors The confutation whereof belongs properly to the Article of remission of sinnes where the nature and kindes of sinnes are to be handled For this present I shall but touch on them briefly and proceed to the matter 1 For the first we defend this conclusion The vitious inclination and pronnesse of Nature vnto euill as also the inordinate motiâ—ns of concupiscence which goe before consent they are sinnes euen in a man regenerate That the inclination and pronnesse of Nature to sinne is a sinne we proue thus It is expresly so called by the Apostle Rom. 7. not once nor twice but almost in euery verse of the Chapter I am carnall sold vnder sinne The sinne that dwelleth in me ver 17. 20. The Law of sinne verse 23. 25. In it selfe it is sinne and deserues the wages of sinne eternall death For which cause the Apostle there cals it The body of this death verse 24. Because this inward Corruption which is like a Body that hath many members consisting of diuerse euill affections spreading themselues throughout his whole Nature made him lyable to eternall death from which onely Gods mercy in Christ could deliuer him 2 To rebell against the Law is Sinne. Ergo To haue a rebellious inclination is sinne likewise For if the act bee euill the habite must needes be naught if the Law forbid one it must needs forbid the other If it be euill to breake any Commandement in act is it not euill to haue a pronenesse and readinesse of minde to breake it The habit denominated a man sinfull and not the act Nor doth God lesse abhorre the pronnesse of man to offend him then wee doe abhorre the rauenous disposition of a Wolfe though it be a Cubb not yet vsed to the prey or one tyed vp in a chaine and kept from rauening That the euill motions of the heart without consent be sins 1 They are forbidden in the Morrall Law In the tenth Commandement Thou shalt not couet For motions with consent are forbidden in the other Commandments As appeares manifestly in Christs exposition of the Commandements Mat. 5. 22. were not only the outward act of Adultery but the inward desire is also forbidden if wee beleeue Christ the best interpreter of the Law When Ergo the tenth Commandement forbids coueting of our Neighbours Wife it either meanes the same kind of lusting with a needelesse Tautology or a different viz. that which is not consented vnto Nor can our Aduersaries shift this off though Becanus most impudently denies it with out any reason of his so doing 2 We proue it thus Whatsoeuer is inordinate and repugnant to right Reason that is Sinne. But these Motions without confent be inordinate Ergo They be Sinne The Minor is confessed That these Motions be inordinati recta Rationi repugnantes The Maior is apparant For what is Ordo recta Ratio in Moralibus but that course of doing any thing which is conformable to Gods Law and his will God is the God of order His Law is the rule of order in all humane actions Recta Ratio what is it but the conformity of mans vnderstanding and will vnto Gods will which only is the rule of righteousnesse We neuer purpose and will matters aright but when wee will them agreeably to Gods will Wherefore it is a grosse absurdity to deny the Sinnefulnesse of these disorderly motions seeing no man can breake those orders which God hath made and yet be faultlesse Nor is it possible a Man should doe that which is contrary to Gods will And yet be without Sinne in doing of it These motions then without consent be confusions in Nature opposites to the righteousnesse of the will of God and vnto that euen and streight order expressed in his Law We conclude then that Concupiscence and inordinate motions of the Soule not consented vnto are Sinnes contrary to our Aduersaries assertion They bring some Reasons to proue they are not 1 Originall sinne is taken away in Baptisme But concupiscence is not taken away in Baptisme as appeares by experience in the regenerate in whom it remaines Ergo concupiscence and pronnesse to Sinne is no sinne This Argument is friuolous In Originall sinne there are two things First the guilt Secondly the inherent corruptions We say in Baptisme the guilt is altogether washed away from the Baptized Elect by the blood of Christ. And for the corruption thereof it is part done away by the sanctifying Spirit of Christ powred out vpon the Regenerate which by degrees purgeth out the inherent sinfulnesse of Nature by replanting the graces of Sanctification in all parts Concupiscence then notwithstanding Baptisme remaines in the Regenerate and is a sinne in them the guiltinesse whereof God mercifully pardons in Christ. 2 What is not in our power to auoide that God doth not forbid vs by his Law But t is not in our power to auoide the Motions of the heart that preuent Reason and consent Ergo they be no sinnes forbidden vs. To this we answere The Maior is true in things meerely Naturall that fall out by the Necessity of Nature well disposed So we say Gods Law were vncouth should he command a man neuer to be an hungry or thirst which things he cannot auoide but they come vpon him will he nill he by the meere necessity of Nature But concerning inordinate motions there 's no such matter God hath layed no such necessity on Nature in her creation but we by our sinne haue brought it upon our selues Now such a necessity excuses vs not In this case it helpes a man no more to say I cannot auoid euill thoughts and desires then it doth a desperate sinner that by countenance hath hardened himselfe in euill courses or then it helpes the Diuels and the damned if they should say Wee cannot chuse but doe euill 3 They argue thus That which would haue beene naturall and without fault in man if he had beene created in puris Naturalibus that is no sinne nor fault in vs. But motions preuenting consent would be naturall and without fault in men so made Ergo In vs they be no faults of themselues Heere our Aduersaries haue made a Man of white Paper or the like to Materia prima that hath not any quality in him morally good or bad That is A Man that hath neither the Image of God in knowledge righteousnes and holines engrauen on his vnderstanding will affections and whole person nor yet though it haue it not hath in him any contrary euill quality that comes vpon him by
are not able to bridle these vnrulie motions wherefore when Bell. saieth That the Law is giuen to the reasonable will not to the sensiue appetite it is vtterly false Because in Man it is probable of gouernment and so subject to the Law Our Reason hath euen in this our corrupted estate a ciuill command ouer our appetite and affections so that it can moderate them by faire persuasions now and then That which it can doe sometimes it ought to doe alwaies and if any affections can obey Reason at sometimes were they not infected with Sinne they would doe it at all times And if they doe well when they obey certainly they doe euill when they disobey And ergo such motions of them as are repugnant to right reason are nothing but rebellion against God's Law As to the place in the 7. Rom. we answere That that Interpretation of it which Bell. brings is most peruerse and against all Sense The Apostle complaines that he did the Euill which he would not no doubt in so doeing he did sinne But what is it now which committed this guilt or sinne It is not I that doe it saieth the Apostle but that sinne that dwelleth in me That is according to Bell not I in my mind or superior faculties of Reason and Will but my inferior Appetite and affections which doe this euill against my consent So the meaning shal be Concupiscence in that duell in the Apostle committed Sinne but the Apostle himselfe committed it not Which is very absurd As if a cholericke-Man hauing done a mischiefe in his anger should saâ—e It were not he did it but his raging passion or an adulterer that 't was not he committed the Sinne but his sinfull Affection that carried him further then reason would So that if God will punish such a sinne he must not punish him but onely his sensitiue appetite which was in fault This is ridiculous for besides that it crosseth the Romanists Doctrine manifestly in teaching that such disorderly motions of the sensitiue appetite be no sinnes which heere the Apostle contradicts saying plainly that the Sinne which dwelt in him did doe the euill he would not viz Sinne it draweth after it this grosse Error That some faecultie in man may sin and yet the man not sinne himselfe Wherefore the Apostle in that speach 'T is not I doe it but sinne in me doth not oppose one facultie against the other the reasonable will against the sensitiue appetite seeking for a shift to excuse his sinne by putting it off from himselfe to that which was not capable of Sinne but he opposeth grace in euery facultie to Corruption in the same facultie as two contrarie Principles and causes of his actions one mouing to good the other enclining to bad Thence the Apostle saieth that when he doth euill 't is not I that doe it i. e I regenerate according to the Grace that dwelleth in me for that inclines me to doe good but 't is the Sinne dwelling in me which when I would doe well inclines me to doe euill He heere shewes the Roote whence this Euill comes but yet he doth not put off the fault from himselfe As 't is himselfe doth well so 't is himselfâ— doth ill too according as he concludes vers 25. Then I my selfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe both well and ill well according to Grace in my mind that is regenerate part both of inferior and superior facultie I serue the Law of God but ill according to corruption remaining in me but in my flesh vnregenerate part the Law of Sinne. Much more might be added but 't is not my purpose heere to enter vpon the common place at large I proceed to the second quaestion of our Aduersaries who teach that albeit our Loue of God be imperfect yet this imperfection is not sinne in vs. They grant That no man hath any grace of the spirit but he may encrease in it daily that the Loue of God and our Neighbours may still grow on to farther degrees of affection That no grace nor good worke hath that full perfection which it might haue in this Life or which we shall attaine vnto in Heauen But they deny this defect to be any fault or sinne 2. Defectus Charitatis quod viz non faciamus opera nostra tanto feruore dilectionis quanto faciemus in patriâ defectus quidemest sed culpa peccatum non est saieth Bell. and againe Charitas nostra quamuis comparata ad Charitatem beatorum sit imperfecta tamen absolute perfecta dici potest This is an Error against which we defend this Conclusion in generall touching both Charity and all man Righteousnes The defects or want of Perfection in Mans Righteousnes is Sinne. For the proofe of this point we are to obserue that the Imperfection or Perfection of any thing is to be considered of two waies 1 Comparatiuely When any thing set by another is more or lesse perfect then that other 2 Absolutely When considered in it selfe it hath or wantes that Perfection which it should haue by its proper Nature Betweene these there is great difference For Comparatiue imperfection is not euill absolute imperfection is Euill We may see it in an example The Senses that are in Man being compared with their like in other creatures 't is manifest they are much excelled by them as by an Eagle for sight a spider for touch c. Heere we say that the eie of a man is not perfect as the eie of an Eagle but yet we doe not account this imperfection any Naturall euill of the eie of a man God might haue giuen a stronger and a clearer sight to men but we blame not his workes nor count our sight imperfect because it hath not that singular Temper which is in other Creatures but because it wants at any time that temper which is agreeable to our nature Such a defect only is properly an Euill in Nature when something is wanting to the perfection of any part which by the Course of nature should be there Thus 't is also in Grace Compare we the Righteousnes of man or Angels with the Righteousnes of God we saie that God's is infinitely more perfect then the Creatures But now is this imperfection in Humane or Angelicall righteousnes any Euill and Sinne in them We saie No. Neither are the Angels sinfull because lesse righteous then God nor Adam sinfull because lesse righteous then either God made them both lesse good then himselfe yet very good and without all Sinne. There be degrees of Righteousnes and though the Creature be infinitely below the heighest pitch of goodnes which is God yet he may bee still aboue that lowest descent vnto Sinne and vnrighteousnes In Phylosophie we dispute whether the slackening of any degree in one Quality be the mingling of another that is contrary As heat in eight degrees if it decrease vnto seuen whether there is any degree of cold mingled with it 'T is heard to
say that there is But concerning Grace and Righteousnes 't is certaine there is that remissio graduum without any admixtion of Sinne and iniquity As the Holines of Saints is lesse then that of Angels that of Angels lesse then the Holines of Christs glorified Humanity this lesse then his Diety And yet in the least of these Righteousnesses there is no Vnrighteousnes at all to be found no not in the seuere judgement of God Except we say there is vnrighteousnes in Heauen where no vncleane thing can enter Well then What Imperpection of mans Righteousnes is it which is Sinne We say That Imperfection when man in any Grace or good Worke wantes that degree of goodnes which he ought to haue As in nature If the Eye want that cleernes of sight which should be in it 't is a naturall Euill In Morality if a man want that Temperance or degree of Temperance he ought to haue it s a vitious and morall euill so in Grace the want of that righteousnes or degree of righteonsnes which God requires to be in man is a Sinne and spirituall Euill All such priuations of what should be present are Euill in what kind soeuer If they be in nature they be malamiseranda deserue pity and cure if in Vertue and Grace they be mala culpanda worth of blame and punishment Such defects as these in Grace when man fals short not onely of that which is in others but that which should be in himselfe doe alwaies arise from the mixture of Corruption and Sinne. Hee that loues nâ—t God or his neighbour so much as he ought to doe 't is because his heart be wicked at the least in part and that he loues others things more then he should doe These things are certaine and vndeniable according to those words of St. Augustin that are authenticall Profecto illud quod minus est quam debet ex vitio est And againe Pecâ—atum est vel cum non est charitas quae esse debet vel minor est quam debet 'T is a Sinne not to loue God at all or to loue him lesse then we should Wherefore heere we aske the Iesuite whether Charity and other Graces in a man regenerate be so perfect in this Life as they ought to be If he say they be not so perfect as they ought to be how can he affirme that this defect is no fault nor Sinne Can a man possibly doe worse or be worse then he should and yet be iâ— no fault therefore If he say they be as perfect as they should be his owne Conscience and the Conscience of all the men in the World will gain-say him for a liar No man can say that he loues God and his Neighbour asmuch as he ought to doe and that he is not bound in euery grace and good worke to ariue at greater perfection then hee hath for the present He that thinkes himselfe come nearest vnto the marke will yet be driuen to confesse that he fals many bowes short of those patternes which we ought to imitate Adam in his Innocency Christs Humanity and the Saints in Heauen Wee here bid them Depinge ubi sistam make a point where we shall stoppe that when we are come so farre we need seeke no further perfection If they cannot do this then they must confesse as the truth is that euery man is bound by Gods command to be more holy to be more perfect in all Graeces and good workes and so farre as he wants any degree or dramme of goodnesse that should be in him and his works so farre he is sinfull and guilty of a fault 3 I goe on to the last Assertion of our Aduersaries which is toâ—ching veniall sinnes viz. That these doe not hinder the righteousnesse of mens good workes A man may be a perfect iust man though he commit many veniall sinnes The reason whereof they make to be because veniall sinnes are not contrary to charity the loue of God and our neighbour and so may stand well enough with the fulfilling of the Law Against this errour tending to the obduration of mans hart in impenitency loue of sin we maintain this conclusioÌ„ Those sinnes which the Church of Rome cals veniall doe truly make a man regenerate and his workes vnrighteousnesse in the sight of God This we proue by this one Argument Whosoeuer transgresseth the Law he is vnrighteous in so doing But he that commits veniall sinnes transgresseth the Law Ergo He that commits veniall sinnes is an vnrighteous man The Maior is vndeniable For the Minor our Aduersarie is at a stand They are loath to grant it yet cannot tell how to deny it with any honesty Bellarmine after one or two shuffling distinctioÌ„s of simpliciter secundum quid perfectè and imperfectè at last plainly denies that veniall sinnes be contrary to the Law For answering vnto those places in Iames. In many things we offend all and that in Iohn If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues Hee saith they cannot hansomly shift themselues of those places who hold that veniall sinnes be propriè contra Legem Such as bee of that opinion Let them looke to it saith he what they will answere to that of Saint Iames. He that keepes the Law in one point c. He therefore will be more wise and wary Solâ—da igitur respensio est saith he Peccata venialia sine quibus non viuitur non esse peccata simpliciter sed imperfectè secundum quid neque esse contra Legem sed praerer Legem And thus saith he Omnia cohaerent like a Pebble in a Withe Nam qui ostendit in vno praeuaricans scilicet vnum praeceptum reus est omnium simpliciter iniustus constituitur tamen in multis offendimus omnes quia tametsi nihil facimus contra Legem tamen multa facimus praeter Legem Et qui â—atus est ex Deo non peccatat transgrediendo Legem tamen si dicamus qâ—ia peccatum non habemus viz. nihil praeter Legem faciendo noâ— ipsos seducimus veritas non est in Nobis This is an vnbound Besome as will appeare by vndoing that distinction which seemes to hold it together Veniall sinnes are not against the Law but besides the Law Well we must now know what is against the Law what besides That is against the Law when any thing is done which the Law forbids or left vndone which it commands That is besides the Law when the thing done is neither coÌ„manded nor forbidden in the Law He then that commits a veniall sinne doth some such act as the Law neither forbids nor commands Here then we aske Be veniall sinnes sinnes Yea they be Is God offended with them Yea and he may iustly punish them on vs with the losse of Heauen For so Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Peccata venialia nisi misericorditer remittantur impediunt ab ingressu illius Regni in quod nihil
workes and faith are two Coordinate causes by their ioynt-force-working our Iustification but the Apostle vtterly excludes Faith onely from Iustification and attributes it wholy vnto workes For by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faith onely he vnderstands faith alone that faith which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 17. alone solitary by itselfe without workes And such a dead faith whereof these hypocrites boasted S. Iames excludes wholly from justifying of a man I say then that he is not iustified by faith onely but that he is iustified by workes That is a working faith that is fruitfull in Obedience The Apostle goes forward from the Example of Abraham vnto that of Rahab verse 25. Likewise was not Rahab the Harlot iustified by workes That is in the same manner as Abraham so also Rahab was iustified by a working saith Which appeared to be so by that which shee did when she receaued the messengers entertained the two spies which were sent to search the land lodged them in her house without discouering them And when by accident they were made knowne hid them secretly vpon the roofe and afterwards sent them out another way conveied them away priuily not by the vsuall but by another way that is through the window letting them downe ouer the wall by a Cord as the story hath it Ios. 2. In this dangerous enterprise wherein this weake woman ventured her life in succouring the Enemies of her King and Country it appeares plainly that she had a strong and liuely Faith in the God of Israel and that the confession which she made with her mouth to the spies The Lord your God he is the God in Heauen aboue and in the Earth beneath Iosh. 2. 11. proceeded from a truely beleeuing heart insomuch as her words were made good by works that followed them Wherefore the Apostle iustly parallels these 2 examples of Abraham offering his sonne and Rahab in the kind vsage of the Spies because both those facts were singular trialls of a liuely faith which was able in that sorte to ouercome what was hardest to be conquered viz. Naturall affection In Abraham both fatherly affection to the life of a deere and only sonne and in Rahab the Naturall loue to ones Country and a mans owne Life did all stoope and giue way when once true Faith commands Obedience Here againe our adversaries trouble themselues and the Text with needlesse speculations telling vs that now the Apostle hath altered his cliffe and gone from the second Iustification in Abrahams example to the first Iustification in this of Rahab That Rahab was conuerted at this time of receauing the spies being made a beleeuer of an infidell a good woeman of a bad That she by this good worke did expiate her former sinnes and merited the grace and fauour of God notwithstanding that she committed a venial sinne in handling of the businesse telling a downe-right lie which though she should not haue done yet it hindred not the meritoriousnes of the worke with such other fond imaginations peruerting the simplicity of the Trueth But first they are not agreed among themselues whether the Apostle doe in that sort shift from one Iustification to another Bellarmine affirmes it and many moe But others deny it as may be seene in Lorinus his exposition of the. 21. v. of this Chapter And were they agreed vpon it sure I am they should disagree from the Apostle who makes this second instance of the same nature with the former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In like manner saieth he was Rahab iustified viz. as Abraham was Againe when they say Rahab became a true beleeuer at that time of receauing the spies not before 't is more then they can proue By the circumstances of the story it appeares plainely that she beleeued before they came by the relation of the great workes which God had done for his people and the promises that were made vnto them that they should possesse Rahabs countrey This bred feare in others but faith in her by the secret working of the holy Ghost See Ioshua 2. 9. c. And certainly had she not had Faith before the spies came who can thinke she would haue giuen entertainment to such dangerous persons But she knew them to be the Seruants of the God of Israel in whom shee beleeued and therefore by this Faith she receaued them peaceably though Enemies of her Countrey Lastly to that of the Meritâ—riousnes of the worke of Rahab to deserue Grace and Life aeternall we reiect it not only as a vaine but an impious conceit which neuer entred into the humble hearts of the Sâ— of old but hath bin set on foote in the last corrupt ages of the world by men drunken with selfe-Loue and admiration of their owne Righteousnes Thus we haue these 2 Examples whereby the Apostle hath proued sufficiently that the Faith which is separated from Obedience will not justifie a Man therefore that it is a dead Faith and not a true liuing Faith according as was proposed v. 20. Now for a close of this whole dispute he againe repeates that conclusion adding thereto anew similitude to illustrate it by in the last verse of the Chapter For as the Body without the Spirit is dead so faith without workes is dead that is As the Body without the Spirit i. e. the Souls or the Breath and other Motion is dead vnable to performe any liuing action whatsoeuer So Faith without workes is dead that is vtterly vnable to performe these liuing actions which belong vnto it What are those Two 1. To repose it stedfastly vpon the promise of life in Christ which is the proper immediate liuing Action of Faith 2. To justifie a Man in the sight of God which by a speciall priuiledge is the consequent of the former These liuing actions cannot be performed by that Faith which is dead being destitute of good workes That Faith which hath not power to bring forth Obedience is thereby declared to be a dead Faith deuoide of all power to embrace the promise with confidence and relyance as also to justifie A Man would thinke this were plaine enough and needed not to be troubled with any further Câ—villations But 't is strange what a coile our Adversaries make with this similitude writhing and straining it to such Conclusions as the Apostle neuer intendeâ— Hence they gather 1. That as the Soule giues life to the Body as the â—â—rme of the Body so Workes giue life to Faith as the forme of it 2 That as the Body is the same true Body without the Soule with it so Faith is one and the same true Faith without workes and with them which are nothing but sophisticall speculatiâ—â—â— besides the purpose of the Text. The Apostle intends nothing but to shew the Necessity of the Copulation of a liuing Faith and Obedience together by the similitude of the like Necessitie of the vnion of a liuing Body and the Soule But his purpose is not to shew that the
remaines yet to be suffered For although it be true that God in some causes doth pardon both fault and punishment wholy as in cause of Martyrdome which sweepes all cleane and makes aâ— l reckonings euen and although God might if it had so pleased him alwaies for Christ's sake haue pardoned the whole debt yet Holy Mother Church hath dâ—tâ—rmined that he doth not so vse to doe But after that in mercy he hath forgiuen the faulâ—â— yet there 's an after reckoning and we must come to Coram for the punishment by which his Iustice is to receaue satisfaction But ye must know the punishment of Sinne is two fold â— Eternall in the destruction of Soule and body in Hell-fire to endure for euer Heere now Christ's satisfaction comes in againe By whose merits alone they grant we are deliuered from the eternity of the punishment of Sinne. Which must be noted that Christ's satisfaction hath not eased vs of the substance of the punishment it selfe but only in the continuance of it 2. Temporall to endure onely for a time whereof there are also two degrees 1. One in this life as namely all calamities and afflictions vpon the Body Soule Name Goods c. together with death the last and greatest of euills All which are inflicted vpon mâ—n as punishments of â—inne Of these some come vpon vs inuiâ—â—bly as death vpon all men or as death in the wildernes on the Children of Israel with the like punishments certainly and irreuocably denounced Now here 's no remedy but patience and that 's an excellent remedy too For as the ghostly Fathers of Treâ—t informe vs If they be borne willingly with patience they be satisfactions for Sinnes but if vnwillingly they be God's just revenge vpon vs. Other some come Euitably And heere such a course may be taken that we need not suffer the punishment it selfe but we may buy it out and make satisfaction for it vnto God by other meanes Which meanes are principally foure 1. By the vehemency of Contrition or inward sorrow Which may be so intensiue as to satisfie for all punishments both in this life and also in Purgatory 2. By other outward laborious workes Whereby we may buy out the obligation to temporall punishments Such Workes are these 1. Praier with Confession Thankesgiuing c. For if we beleeue the Catholâ—que Doctors 't is a very good satisfaction to a Creditour if the debter pray vnto him for the forgiuenes of his dept According to that text Psal. 50. 15. Call vpon me in the day of trouble and I will dâ—liuer thee Ergo Praier is a satisfaction for the punishment of sinne 2. Fasting vnder which is comprehended the sprinkling of Ashes wearing of haire cloth whippings goeing bare-foote and such other paenall workes These also satisfie for sinnes as 't is written 2. Sam. 12. Dauid fasted lay vpon the ground and wept all night Therefore he satisfied for his Sinnes of Murther and Adultery And againe Paul saieth 1. Cor. 9. 27. I beat downe my body That is I whippe and cudgell my selfe to satisfie for my sinnes And againe Luk. 18. 13. The Publican smote vpon his breast Ergo. Corporall chastisement is a good satisfactions for sinnes 3. Almesdeedes comprehending all kind whatsoeuer workes of mercy These also buy out the punishments of sinne according to the text Dan. 4. 24. Breake off thy sin by Righteousnes and thine iniquity by mercy towards the poore that is By almesdeeds satisfie for the temporall punishmens of thy Sinnes And againe Luk. 11. 41. Giue almes of that which you haue and behold all things shall be cleane vnto you That is to say in the language of Babell The temporall punishment of sin shall be taken away Now all such workes as these are either 1. Voluntarily vndertaken of our owne accord as voluntary Pilgrimage Scourgings Fastes Sackloth Weepings and Praiers of such a number and measure with the like rough punishments which we take vpon our selues to pacifie God All which being done with an intent to satisfie for the punishment of our Sinnes must needs be accepted of God almighty for good payment because in so doeing we doe more then he hath required of our hands Now 't is very pleasing to God to doe what he bids vs not or what he bids vs to doe to another end of our devising He therefore that voluntarily vndertakes such needlesse paines giues God high satisfaction According to the Text. 1. Cor. 11. 31. If wee would iudge our selues we should not be iudged 2 Inioyned by the Priest Who by vertue of the Keies committed vnto him might iudicially absolue the paenitent from the whole debt were it not thought fit vpon speciall considerations to keepe backe a part Wherefore when he hath absolued him from the fault and aeternall punishment he binds him vnto satisfaction for the temporall punishment and therefore he enjoynes him what he shall doe to buy it out Let him goe visit the shrine of such and such a Saint say so many Aues Paternosters before such an Image whip himselfe so many times fast so many daies giue so much almes with such like paenalties And when he in humble obedience hath done these things commanded by the Preist then 't is certaine his sinnes be satisfied for For 't is to be noted that in enioyning this Canonicall satisfaction as 't is called the Priest and God almighty be just of the same mind Looke how much the Preist enioynes for satisfaction God must be content to take the same or else the paenitents conscience will not be quiet because it may be God expected more to be done for satisfaction then the party hath done by the Priests iniunction But it is to be supposed that as the Pope so euery Priest in his Chaire of confession hath an infallible spirit whereby he is able exactly to calculate the just propoâ—tion betweene the sinne and the punishment and the price of the punishment that so he may enjoyne just somuch penance as will buy it out neither more lest the paenitent be wronged nor lesse lest God be not satisfied All which is trimly founded vpon that text which saieth Whatsoeuer yee binde on Earth shall be bound in Heauen and whatsoeuer yee loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heauen Mat 16 19. 18. 18. That is Priests may forgiue the fault and retaine the punishment and what satisfaction they enioyne on Earth to expiate the punishment that will God accept in Heauen Or else they be deceaued This is the second meanes to satisfie for temporall punishments The 3. Meanes is by Pardons and Indulgences Wherin the superabundant merits of Christ and the Saints are out of the treasury of the Church granted by speciall grace of the Bâ— of Rome vnto such as are liable to suffer the temporall punishment of their Sinnes So that they hauing got by his grant a sufficient portion of satisfactory workes out of the common stocke they are freâ—d thereby from satisfying Gods Iustice by their owne workes Which
is a rare priviledge no doubt 4. The fourth meanes is by another liuing mans satisfaction for them For not onely the superabundant works of Christ and Saints departed but the good workes of iust men aliue will satisfie for another being done with that intent So great is God's clemency towards good Catholiques that though one man cannot confesse nor be contrite for another yet satisfie he may the Iustice of God for his sinnes Both these meanes are grounded vpon pregnant places of Scripture Gal. 6. 2. Beaâ—e yee one anothers burthen that is satisfie one for another Againe 2 Cor. 12. 15. I will most gladly bestow and be bestowed for your sakes that is to satisfie for your sinnes Againe 2 Tim. 2. 10. I suffer all things for the Elects sake that is that my sufferings may be their satisfactions So Col. 1. 24. I reioyce in my sufferings for you and fulfill the rest of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his bodies sake which is the Church That is My sufferings with Christ's sufferings make vp a Treasurie for the Church that such as want of their owne may make vse of his satisfaction and mine Againe Rom. 12. 15. We being many are one anothers Members Ergo We may impart satiâ—factory workes one to another as one member doth heate to another To conclude 'T is in our Creede I beleeue a communion of Saints Ergo There is a communion of satisfactions And so the point is very fitly proued Whereby it appeares that the Châ—lâ—ren of the Romish Church are reasonable well prouided of Meanes to recompense God's Iustice and redeeme the Temporall punishment of their sinnes in this life The other degree of the temporall punishment is in the life to come namely in â—urgatory whereinto all they drop who die in Veniall Sinnes the fault whereof was not forgiuen in this Life or in Mortall Sinnes the fault whereof was forgiuen in this Life but full satisfaction was not made for the punishment before death Such must fry awhile in Purgatory longer or shorter time according as their Sinnes are more or lesse haynous or as Mens hearts on Earth be more or lesse pitifull towards them But howeuer there they must be till the Temporall Punishment of their Sinnes be fully suffered or bought out by something else that may satisfie God's Iustice This Punishment of Sinne inflicted in Purgatory is twofold 1. Poena Damni of Losse viz. of the beautifull vision of God and ioyes of Heauen 2. Poena sensus of sense or smart viz. The bitter paines of God's wrath sensibly tormenting the Powers of the Soule inflicted vpon them either immediatly by God himselfe or by the ministery of the diuels as his Instruments For 't is a doubt not yet resolued among the Patrons of Purgatory whether the Diuels haue not to doe there also as well as in hell But whether their Tormentours be Diuels or not this is agreed vpon that the Torment and Punishment which the Soules do suffer in Purgatory is for the Substance of it the very same with the Torments of Hell differing only from it in continuance Those of Purgatory be temporall these of Hell aeternall Well now such as haue not bestirred themselues then well in this Life to make all euen by full satisfactions such must be arrested in the mid way to Heauen and cast into this Prison Out of which two Meanes there be to be deliuered 1. By suffering all this temporall punishment for so many yeares and dayes as 't is to continue How many that is you must inquire of St Michael the Church knowes not that But yet sure shee is that many Soules shall continue in Purgatory till the day of Iudgement so there shall be the same period of the World and of their Torments These haue a hard time of it 't is easier haply with others But be it as 't will be such as these pay the vtmost farthing where they endure in the flames of Purgatory so long till the time of their whole punishment be runne out Then God is satisfied and they deliuered 2. By buying out this punishment by some other satisfactory price For although God could so haue ordered it that euery Soule being once in Purgatory should suffer all the Temporall punishments due yet he is content to bee intreated to commute poenance and take some other valueable consideration by way of satisfaction for this punishment But this satisfactory payment cannot be made by the Soules themselues it must be made by some on Earth for them which is done 1. Either by laborious workes of any one iust and godly Catholique whether he be a friend of the deceased or other touched with a charitable pitty toward a poore soule Who by store of deuout prayers Almes Masses Pilgrimages founding of Coueâ—ts and Hospitals c. may procure a gaole-deliuery for that soule for which he intends those good workes 2. Or by the Pope who is purse-bearer to the Church and hath the Treasurie thereof vnder Lock and Key He now though he cannot directly absolue the Soules in Purgatory from their punishment as he can Men liuing on the Earth yet he may helpe them another way by bestowing on them so much of the superfluous sufferings of Christ and of the Saints that thereby God's Iustice may be satisfied for the whole punishment which otherwise they should haue endured Yea such is the power of his Indulgences to infuse a vertue into such and such Altâ—â— Shrines 〈◊〉 c. that whosoeuer shall frequent such places or vse such prayers all Complements duely obserued he may at his pleasure free one two three or more soules our of Purgatory Nay did not Couetousnes coole the heare of his Apostolical Charity he might so bountifully powre out the Treasures of the Church vpon these prisoners in Purgatory that they should all haue enough to weigh down the feales deserue a passe-port for Heauen Such efficacie there is in that spirituall Picke locke which the Pope hath in keeping All which is very properly proued by the former places of Scripture and others also were it needfull now to alleage them But thus we see the Catholiques are euery way furnished for satisfactions that what Christ hath not done for them they can doe for themselues either to suffer and ouercome the Temporall punishments of their Sinnes or else which is the easier course to buy out that punishment at a valuable price of other satisfactionary workes wherewith Gods Iustice shal be abundantly contented Now whereas those whom they terme Heretiques cry out aloud that such satisfactions to God's Iustice be indeed no Satisfactions at all because they are no wayes equall vnto the offence committed and so no full recompence of wrong offered vnto God for the assoiling of this doubt they giue vs this distinction very necessary to be obserued Satisfaction is double 1. Iustitiae ex rigore Iustitiae ad absolutam perfectam Aequalitatem Quantitatis That is There is a Satisfaction of Iustice consisting in
That the Apostle excludeth all the workes of Abraham from his Iustification both such as he performed when he had no grace and those he did when he had grace For those workes are excluded wherein Abraham might glory before Men. Now Abraham might glory before Men as well in those workes which he did by the helpe of Gods grace as those which he did without it Nay more in those then in these As in his obedient Departure from his owne Country at Gods command his patient expectation of the promises his ready willingnesse euen to offer his owne Sonne out of Loue and Duty to God his religious and Iust demeaning of himselfe in all places of his abode In those things Abraham had cause to glory before Men much more then in such works as he performed before his Conuertion when he serued other Gods beyond the Flood Therefore we conclude that Abraham was Iustified neither by such workes as went before Faith and grace in him nor yet by such as followed after This is most cleare by the v. 2. If Abraham where iustified by workes he had wherein to glory but not with God Admit here the Popish Interpretation and this speach of the Apostles will be false Thus If Abraham were iustified by workes that is by such workes as he performed without Gods gratious helpe he hath wherein to glory viz. before Men but not with God Nay that 's quite otherwise For its euident If a Man be Iustified by obeying the Law through his own strength he may boldly glory before God as well as before Men seing in that case he is not beholding to God for his helpe But according to our doctrine the Meaning of the Apostle is perspicuous Abraham might glory before Men in those excellent workes of piety which he performed after his vocation and in mens sight he might be iustified by them But he could not glory in them before God nor yet be iustified by them in his sight So then all workes whatsoeuer are excluded from Abrahams Iustification and nothing lest but Faith which is imputed vnto him for Righteousnâ—sse as it is v. 3. Whence it followes That as Abraham so all others are Iustified without all Merit by Gods free grace and fauour For so it followes verse 4. 5. Now vnto him that worketh the wages is not counted by fauour but by Debt but to him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for Righteousnesse These words runne cleare till a Iesuite put his Foote into the streame to raise vp the Mudde To him that worketh that is which fulfileth the Righteousnesse of the Morall Law the wages of Iustification and Life is not counted by fauour but by debt for by the perfect Righteousnesse of the Law a Man deserues to be iustified and saued But to him that worketh not that hath not fullfilled the righteousnesse of the Law in doing all things that are written therein But beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly That is relyeth vpon Christ who by his Righteousnesse obtained absolution for him that is Rightousnesse in himselfe His Faith is imputâ—d for Righteousnesse that is He by his Faith obâ—aynes Iâ—stification in Gods sight not by Merit of his owne but Gods gratious acceptation of Christs Righteousnesse for his But here our Aduersaries trouble the water by a false Inteâ—â—retation To him that worketh that is say they that fulfil the Law by his owne strength Wages is not counted by fauour but by debt but if he fulfill it by Gods grace his wages is paiâ—â— him by fauour not of debt Where vnto we reply That 1 This glose is a plaine corruption of the Text. For by workes in this fourth verse the Apostle vnderstands that kind of workes were of mention is made v 2 By which Abraham was not Iustified and these as we haue shewed where works done by the helpe of Grace not by the meere strength of Nature 2 And againe for the Assertion it selfe namely He that fulfils the mâ—rrall Law by the helpe of Gods grace is iustified by fauour not by debt we say t is ether a manifest falshood or at best an ambiguous speech For t is one thing to bestow Grace on a Man to fulfill the Law and t is another thing to Iustifie him when he hath fulfilled the Law If God should giue strength to a Man exactly to fulfill the Morralâ— Law that were indeed of his free fauour and grace but when this man that hath receaued this streâ—gth shall come before God with the perfect Righteousnesse of the Law pleading that in euery point he had done what was required God is bound in Iustice to pronounce him innocent and of due Debt to bestow on him the wages of eternall Life Adams case is not vnlike to such a Man For God gaue Adam what strength he had yet Adam fulfilling the Law by that strength should haue merited Iustification and Life Therefore when the Apostle speake 〈◊〉 all workes in the perfect fulfilling of the Law he saiâ—h that to him that worketh Wages is not counted by fauour but but by debt he speaketh exactly and the Iesuits in excluding workes done by Grace comment absurdly Thus much touching the third point concerning Mans Iustification by Faith alone as also of the first generall Head promised in the Beginning Namely the condition required of vs vnto Iustification viz. Faith SECT 3. CHAP. I Of the righteousnesse whereby a man is iustified before God that it is not his own inherent in himselfe that in this life no 〈◊〉 hath perfection of holinesse inherent in him I Proceede vnto the second Generall of the Matter of our Iustification where we are to enquire what Righteousnesse it is for which a Sinner is Iustified in Gods sight Iustificatâ—on and Iustice aâ—e still coupled together and some Righteousnesse there must be for which God pronounceth a Man Righteous and for the sake whereof he for Giâ—eth vnto him all his Sinnes Noâ— is a Sinner iust before God because Iustified buâ— hee is therfore Iustified because he is some way or other Iust. The Righteousnesse for which a Man can be Iustified before God is of necessity one of these two 1 Eyther inherent in his owne Person and done by himselfe 2 Or inherent in the Person of Christ but imputed vnto him A Man is Iustified either by something in him and performed by him or by some thing in another performed for him The wisedome of Angels and Men hath not bin able to shew vnto vs any third Meanes For whereas it is affirmed by some that God might haue reconciled Mankind vnto himselfe by a free and absolute parden of their Sins without the interuention of any such Righteousnesse eitheâ— in themselues or in Christ whereby to procure it to that we say That God hath seene it good in this matter rather to follow his owne most wise Counsailes then these Mens foolish Directions T is to no purpose now to dispute what God might
haue done whether God by his absolute omnipotency could not haue freed Men from Hell by some other Meanes without taking satisfaction for Sinne from Christ whether God ought not to haue the same priuiledge which we giue vnto any mortale King freely to pardon a Rebell and receaue him to fauour without consideration of any goodnesse in him or satisfaction made by him or anoâ— for him Or whether Sinne doe make such a deepe wound in Gods Iustice and Honour that he cannot with the safegard of either passe by it without amendes Such question as these are vaine and curious prosecuted by idle and vnthinkfull Men who not acknowledging the Riches of Gods 〈…〉 and grace in that course of their Redemption which god hath followed would accuse God of Indiscretion for making much adoe about nothing teach him to haue goâ—e a more compendious way to worke then by sending his owne sonne to 〈◊〉 for vs. 〈…〉 stand what God hath not tell him what he might or should haue done According to which course of his now reuealed will we know that God hath declared his euerlasting hatred against Sinne as that thing which most directly and immediately opposeth the Holynesse of his Nature and the Iustice of his Commandments We know that for this hatred which God beareth to Sin no sinfull creature can be able to stand in 〈…〉 And therefore before reconciliation it was needefull Satisfaction should be made where offence had bin giuen Which seeing man could not effect by himselfe God thought it good to prouide a Mediator who should in make peace betweene both So that what euer may be imagined of possibility of other meanes to bring man to Life yet now wee know that sicioportuit Thus Christ ought to suffer Luc. 24. 26. and that it Behoued him to be like vs that being a Faithfull high Priest he might make Reconciliation for our Sines Heb. 2. 17. Leauing then this new way to Heauen neuer frequented but by Imagination let vs follow the old wayes of Iustification that the Scriptures haue discouered vnto vs which are two and no more Either by our owne Righteousnesse and workes or by the Righteousnesse workes of another viz Christ. The former is that way whereby Man might haue obtayned Iustification and life had hee not bin a Sinner But now Man that is a Sinner cannot be Iustified and saued but onely in the later way viz. by the Righteousnesse of Christ the Mediator This Duine trueth is of most infallible certainty and soueraigne consolation vnto the conscience of a Sinner as shall appeare in the processe of our Discourse wherin we shall first remoue our owne Righteousnesse that so in the second place we may establish the Righteousnesse of Christ as the onely Matter of our Iustification in Gods sight By our owne Righteousnesse we vnderstand as the Apostle doth Rom. 10 The Righteousnesse of the Law or of workes which is twofold 1. The fulfilling of the Law whether by the Habituall Holynesse of the Heart or by the Actuall Iustice of good workes proceeding thence For the Law requires both That the Pâ—rson be Holy endued with all inward qualities of Purity and Iustice and that the workes be Holy being performed for Matter and all the Circumstances according to the Commandment 2 The satisfying for the Breach of the Law For he that makes full satisfaction to the Law which is broken is afterward no debter to the Law but to be accounted Iust and no Violater thereof We must now enquire touching these two whether a Man can be Iustified by his owne O-Obedience to the Morall Law Secondly Whether he can be iustified by his owne Satisfaction for Transgression of the Morrall Law Concerning which two Quaeres we lay downe these two Conclusions which are to be made good 1 No Man that is a Sinner is Iustified by his owne Obedience to the Morrall Law 2 No Man is Iustified by his owne satisfaction for his Transgression For the former It is the Conclusion of the Apostle Rom. 3. 20. Therefore by the workes of the Law shall no flesh be Iustified in his sight which we proue by these Arguments The first shall be that of the Apostle in the forenamed place which stands thus Whosoeuer is a Transgressor of the Morall Law he cannot be Iustifiâ—d by his Obedience thereto But euery Man is a Transgressor of the Morall Law ergo No Man can be Iustified by his obedience thereto The Maior is an vndeniable Principall in Reason It being a thing Impossible that a party accused as an offender should be absolued and pronounced innocent by pleading Obedience to that Law which he hath plainely disobeyed Wherefore the Apostle takes this Proposition for granted in these words of his For by the law commeth the Knowledge of Sinne v. 20. That which conuinceth vs to be sinners by that t is impossible we should be declared to be righteous that plea wilneuer quit vs which proues vs guilty Yea t were not onely folly but madnesse to alledge that for ones iust excuse which it selfe is his very fault whereof hee is accused The Maior then is certaine The minor is no lesse viz. That euery man is a transgressor of the Morall Law If any Sonne of Adam will deny this his owne conscience will giue his tongue the Lie and the Scriptures will double it vpon him Which hauing concluded all vnder Sinne averre That If we an Apostle not excepted say We haue no sinne we deceaue our selâ—es and the truth is not in vs. Yea If we say we haue not sinned we make God a her and his word is not in vs The conclusion then is vnfallable That by the Obedience of the Morall Law no Man shall be iustified that is quitted pronounced innocent before Gods iudgment seate This Aposticall argument vtterly ouerthrowes the pride of Man in seeking for Iustification by the Law and it is of so cleare euidence that the Aduersaries of this Doctrine cannot tell how to avoide it But for asmuch as many exceptions are taken and shifts sought out for the further manifestation of the force hereof against gainsayers of the truth it will be requisite to examine there euasions Which we shall doe in the next argument Which is this 2 Whosoeuer hauing once broken the Law can neuer after perfectly fullfill it he cannot be Iustified by his obedience thereto But Man hauing once broken Gods Law can 〈◊〉 after that perfectly fullfill it Ergo Man cannot be Iustified by Obedience of the Law The Maior of this Argument is framed vpon another ground then the former opposed vnto that erronious tenent of our Aduersaries That howsoeuer a man be a sinner against the Law yet neurthelesse afterward be may be iustified by his obedience of the Law Because God for the time following giues him grace perfectly to fulfill it Which opinion is directly contrary to the reason of the Apostle which is That once a sinner and alwayes