judged of him Bellarmine saith It is not intelligible how a man should be judged for an idle word and therefore it must be taken for such a picro such a little sin as cannot come into Judgement An excellent Doctor sure to correct his master as if he had wanted Truth and to corrupt his Scholars as if they did not want Repentance 14. For this Text if rightly urged will rather ptove no sin venial in its own nature but only by Gods mercy For if not an idle word is venial then much less a greater sin but not an idle word is venial for that shall be accounted for at the last day if not repented of before at least virtually in the contrition if not actually in the confession Thus he first makes bold with Gods Justice proving some sins to be venial that he may find or make matter for Purgatory and afterwards he teacheth others to make as bold with Gods Mercy that he may the better follow his proof for he telleth us that a man may die a true penitent for no other hath hopes of Purgatory and yet die with a resolution of abiding in sin Potest quis dùm moritur habere voluntatem per gendi in peccato veniali igitur tale peccatum deleri in morte non potest A man when he dies may have the purpose of continuing in a venial sin therefore such a sin is not to be abolished by death He means a man in the state of grace for no other is capable of the benefit of his purging flames So he cares not to pull down repentance that he may set up Purgatory whereas sure it more suits with conscientious and sound Divinity to pull down venial sins to set up repentance For it is not possible that man should die in the state of true repentance who dyeth with a purpose of retaining any sin in his soul that displeaseth God for by that very purpose he prefers his own will and pleasure above Gods and therefore loves not God with all his heart and consequently is not a true believer because not a true lover and not a true penitent because not a true believer Surely this cannot be a doctrine of Piety which teacheth Impenitency since no man now hath hopes of being righteous by his innocency but only by his repentance Nor had Saint Augustine such a light esteem of venial sins if we may believe Gratian Par. 1. dist 25. cap. 3. For this was his doctrine Nullum peccatum est adeò veniale quod non fiat criminale dum placet No sin is so venial but it may be made mortal if it please the sinner and this it must do if he hath a will and purpose to continue in it And Consequently if he die having such a will and purpose his venial sin is become mortal and by that means is made fewel for Hell not for Purgatory And so venial sin is also in danger of falling which is the other supporter of this your new building Isto enim fundamento posito quod tollitur satisfactio descrimen peccati mortalis à veniali necessario sequitur nullum esse Purgatorium Bell. lib. 1. c. 2. This foundation being laid that there is not satisfaction for sin sc. of our own and that there is no venial sin sc. in it self it must follow there can be no Purgatory And this foundation may very safely be laid by us because it is without if not against the Text that you have laid the other foundation 15. I know your Cardinal alledgeth many more places of the Bible besides those three formerly mentioned to prove this new Article of Faith But there is so much straining of the Scripture in his allegations I will not say wresting because I hope it was not to his destruction that he comes under that condemnation of the wise man There is an exquisite subtiltâ—… and the same is unjust Eccles. 19. 25. Men may by their wit and exquisite subtilty make Gods Word seem to say any thing but it is unjust for them so to do and they must be unrighteous in so doing and had need be very penitent for that unrighteousness For if we shall give an accounâ—… for every idle word of our own much more for endeavouring to make Gods Word partake of our idleness And indeed Gods Word being to be interpreted according to the analogie of Faith Rom. 12. 6. it is fitter for Infidels then for Christians to seek after such interpretations thereof as are not agreeable with that analogie But herein your writers are partly excusable for being over-ruled by the determination of your Church to set up a new Article of Faith which is not reducible to any of those in the Apostles Creed they have been after a sort constrained to interpret the Scriptures according to that new Article lately made by your Church and not according to the Analogie of that Faith which was at first left by the Apostles For sure it will pose an ordinary understanding to shew how your Purgatory is consistent with the Communion of Saints and with the forgiveness of sins which are both in that Creed since they cannot be of the Communion of Saints who are in a separation from God and perchance under the power of the Devil nor have they obtained remission of sins who are still under torments for them Nor can I see how this doctrine doth agree with that which is the very marrow and substance of the whole Gospel to wit That we are reconciled to God by the death of his Son Rom. 5. 10. and That God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself not imputing their trespasses unto them 2 Cor. 5. 19. For if there be a punishment reserved the trespass is imputed But 〈◊〉 there be an actual reconciliation aâ—… doubtless there is for true Penitents anâ—… true Believers then surely no punishment is reserved and no future satisfaction is necessary and so we may fully believe the remission of sins according to ouâ—… Creed And no present separation is possible and so we may as fully believe thâ—… Communion of Saints The woman thaâ—… came behinde our blessed Saviour anâ—… touched but the border of his garment was healed immediately Luke 8. 43. Dâ—… not you say A soul shall come not behiâ—… but before him look him in the face naâ—… go into his bosom to dwell in him and he again dwell in that soul and yet it shaâ—… not be healed unless you will recall thâ—… of the Psalmist Bless the Lord O my soul who forgiveth all thine iniquities who heaâ—…eth all thy diseases Psalm 103. 3. For whâ—… is the disease of the soul but sin or hoâ—… is that healed but by forgiveness Hoâ—… is sin forgiven if it must be satisfied oâ—… how is the soul healed if it must be tormented for sure not healing but wounding cometh from torment He that took upon him our flesh that he might save us did thereby shew He more willed our salvation then our flesh and how
shall we say He more willeth our punishment then our salvation 16. But if any will hereafter thus abuse the Word of God let him know he must likewise abuse the Prayers of his Church that so the sight of the one may bring him to the greater detestation of the other Wherefore let him say Domine non secundum peccata nostra facias nobis 1. non secundum mortalia sed facias nobis secundum venialia peccata O Lord deal not with us after our sins that is deal not with us after our mortal sins but deal with us after our venial sins Neque secundum iniquitates nostras retribuas nobis 1. non in inferno sed in Purgatorio Neither reward us after our iniquites That is reward us not after our iniquities in Hell by eternal torments but reward as after our iniquities in Purgatory by temporal punishment And if he think these too direful deprecations for his Hope let him think those other too direful interpretations for his Faith which would make repentance so take away his mortal as to leave behind his venial sins or would so take out Hell as to leâ—… in Purgatory for his bounden satisfaction For our parts we will do Gods Woâ—… and Gods Church more right then to fiâ—… such Doctrines upon his Word or such Prayers upon his Church And since thâ—… thoughts of our hearts are reputeâ—… among our venial sins we will say Thaâ—… both God and his Church have taught uâ—… how to get those thoughts purged froâ—… our souls whiles we live and not expectâ—… their purgation after our death even by heartily praying in this manner Cleansâ—… the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiratioâ—… of thy holy Spirit not by the operation of an imaginary or unholy fire which if it come not from Hell is but imaginary if it come from Hell is but unholy that wâ—… may perfectly love thee and worthily magnâ—…fie thy holy name This we can pray in faith for our heavenly Father will give his holy Spirit to them that ask him Luk. 11. 13. And that holy Spirit will purifie our heart by faith Acts 15. 8 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fide purgans corda eorum Purging their hearts by Faith This is aâ—… the Purging of sin mentioned in the Scriptures even a Purgatory by Faith not by Fire And this is all the soul needs for if we may by vertue of this Purging Spirit or Purifying Faith either in our life or at our death perfectly love God we may doubtless after our death presently enjoy him since then as our faith is to be turned into Vision and our hope into Comprehension so our Charity is to be turned into Fruition our love of Christ into the enjoyment of him we cannot enjoy him where he is not but where he is that is not in a place far from Heaven if at least it be a place at all but in Heaven sitting at the right hand of God making intercession for us 17. And we had rather trust to his intercession to keep us from Purgatory then to others intercessions to deliver us from it For we are sure their intercessions are nothing worth but by vertue of his intercession and we are not sure that he doth intercede for souls in Purgatory for we cannot believe that he doth pray to God that a fire we know not whence should purge those souls which himself that came down from heaven could not purge For whatsoever fond Christians may fancy yet sure Christ himself will not so undervalue his own most precious blood and his own most holy Spirit as to pray that fire may cleanse those souls which his Spirit and blood have not cleansed And were it possible that such prayers could be made for souls in Purgatory as Christ would please to intercede withal yet since it cannot be known how long it is fit for souls to be in Purgatory no living man can use such prayers in faith of Christs intercession to go along with him to the throne of Grace But as he may pray for them without Christs intercession if they be there so he must pray for them without it when they shall be gone from thence For God hath not let us men on earth know the time of their deliverance no more then he hath taught us the belief of their captivity And now by this time I hope you understand what is my aim in making this answer though you say you did not in making that objection and will not perswade men hereafter to go to Purgatory that you may pray for them when it is so undenyable a Truth that if they be there they can have no benefit by your Prayers CAP. IV. Of the second Commandment and against Images 1. PApists not to be called Catholicks but false Catholicks saith their own Cassander 2. Confession and Absolution in the Church of Rome both faulty 3. The Church of England not defective in the practice of Penance neither for Confession nor for Contrition 4. The Church of Rome defective in her Confessional Interrogatories and consequently in her Penance for the sins against the second Commandement 5. No Catholick Divinity either in making the second no Commandment or in making no sin of Ignorance against it for All the Decalogue is as necessary to salvation as all the Creed 6. An errour in fact against a Commandement in the Decalogue infers an errour in faith against its corresponding Article in the Creed 7. Saint Augustine made bold with the place and order but not with the power or substance of the second Commandement He writ much against Images especially those of the blessed Trinity which you now maintain and worship to the great danger of making the scoffers of this age Antitrinitarians as by denying or concealing the second Commandement you have made them Antinomians 8. All Catholick Divines after Saint Augustine have not reckoned the first and second Commandements but as One indeed very few or none at all till Peter Lombard and might not so reckon them because it is against essential and accidential Catholicism 9. Good Church-men did neither joyn the first and second Commandements together as did the School nor divide the Tenth into two Commandements the absurdities of that division 10. T is easie for Christians well instructed in the first to sin out of ignorance against the second Commandement 11. Christ is not to be worshipped by A Picture because he is the true God 12. The Religious worshipping of Saints and Angels gross Idolatry For all the elicite Acts of Religion belong only to God who alone is the object of the first as Neighbour is the object of the second Table And t is against the order of Justice to confound the offices of God and Neighbour and consequentlâ—… the greatest breach of Christian Communion which is founded upon Justice 13. The Honour of Religion due by the first Table is unproportionable to any creature and cannot be given to any but against true Faith Hope and Charity
and not be in the state of sin by marrying For then by your own allowance the Rule will hold and truly if the rule will not hold till then I believe the inference will hold ever after For if a mans being tempted to fornication will not yet sure his actual fornicating will put him under this indulgence of marrying because if he once fornicate he then may lawfully marry since the Apostle in saying It is better to marry then to fornicate hath allowed if not commande him to chose the better and to leave the worse And whereas you appeal to the precedent words If they cannot contain let them marry the same absurdity still follows your new gloss which is this That the Priviledge of marriage depends upon the bestiality of fornication for If they cannot contain is no more then if they burn and if they burn in your gloss is no less then if they fornicate whence it follows that according to your new gloss Saint Paul hath said If they fornicate let them marry And this is yet more palpable as the same Rule is set down in the second verse not by way of supposition but by way of Position in these words To avoid fornication let every man have his wife for if to avoid fornication do there signifie not to avoid the danger but only the guilt of fornication this concession To avoid fornication let every man have his wife will in effect be turned into this Prohibition Let no man have his wife till he hath actually fornicated and so the Laity must plunge themselves in vitiousness as well as the Clergy if they will have wives For Saint Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every man comprizeth Clergy and Laity both alike neither of them more nor less then the other Wherefore since there is no man in Christendom but is either a Clergy-man or a Lay-man it will follow that no man in Christendom hath a Licence much less a Command to take a wife until he hath actually fornicated and so the ready way to avoid fornication by this remedy of marriage according to your gloss is to commit fornication To joyn all three together you in effect say That to burn is to fornicate and if they cannot contain is If they be actually guilty of Incontinency and to avoid fornication is to avoid the sin of fornication not the temptation to that sin And I say that this being supposed though it be not granted you will scarce be able to prove That any man hath the Apostles concession and much less his approbation to marry but only such a man as hath first actually fornicated which is a strange kind of Doctrine and may well make any sober man exclaim with the Canonist Nota mirabile quod plus habet hic luxuria quam castitas Gloss. in Decretal Greg. lib. 1. Tit. 21. cap. 6. See here a wonderfull case That Luxury hath a greater priviledge then chastity Therefore I conceive it fitter for a Divine to say That Saint Paul intended the remedy before the disease not after it and consequently did allow men to marry that they might avoid not only the guilt but also the danger of fornication for else he had not allowed marriage to avoid fornication till it was impossible to be avoided And consequently it is a greater sin in any Christian Church to allow one Priest to fornicate then to allow all her Priests to marry for by the one she thwarts Gods command by the other she follows his example by the one she approves and encourages a damnable sin by the other she approves and encourages a most glorious Vertue For allowing Priests to marry doth not make their marrying the more necessary but only their abstaining from marriage the more voluntary that is to say It doth only make Viâ—…ginity in Priests a Free will offering which cannot be acceptable unless it be free and the more it is free the more it is acceptable 13. You say further That Saint Paul himself had great temptations of the flesh but did neither marry nor fornicate to avoid them I answer If I had fully transcribed my Instance concerning Abraham as it is in Ignatius his Epistle to the Philadelphians I might have added not only Saint Peter but also Saint Paul to the number of married men and so perchance have prevented this part of your Objection But to let go conjectures Saint Paul himself tells us what were his Temptations Acts 20. 19. even temptations which befell him by the laying in wait of the Jews Temptations from other mens flesh not his own from other mens fleshly minds not from his own fleshly body And I wonder upon what probability of Truth you say Saint Paul was under the sinfull motions of the body when himself saith he could not tell whether he were in the body or out of the body at the time he had that revelation after which was given him a Thorn in the flesh lest he should be exalted above measure v. 3. 7. The Text saith Saint Paul had a Thorn in the flesh not Temptations of the flesh that is he had penall afflictions not sinfull motions These if they went up with him into Paradise yet surely came not with him down from thence For going to Paradise doth by your favour much more purge sin then going to Purgatory Besides datus est mihi stimulus was not so properly said of these motions as natus est in me stimulus carnis meae nor can you say That was given him at that time which you know was born in him so long before and was properly to be called a Relick not a Gift Or that God gave that concupiscence to his chiefest Apostle which by his Spirit he doth subdue in his meanest servants Nor is it probable Saint Paul did call that a Messenger of Satan which was inbred in him from his own natural corruption or ascribe that to the Devil which was rather to be ascribed to the flesh Summe all these inconveniencies together and I believe you will hereafter joyn with Saint Chrysostom Saint Pauls most faithfull interpreter in the judgement of your own Divines who gives us this interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c By the Angel of Satan he meaneth Alexander the Coppersmith those about Hymaeneus and Philetas all that opposed the word and contended or contested against him those who did cast him into prison scourge and drive him away because those did the works of Satan Therefore even as he calleth the Jews the sons of the Devil for following his example so he calleth the Messenger of Satan every man that fell foully upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this saith he was the thorne in the flesh given to buffet me And truly the world is still very full of such Messengers of Satan for no Orthodox Divine now adaies can teach men either how to live or how to die according to his duty trust and conscience but legions of factious spirits will be pecking at
die judicii non ista purgatio quam Doctores ponunt ante diem judicii Mark his words He saith the Doctors not the Apostles had been the Teachers of Purgatory Yet this is the Text your Cardinal most magnifies lib. 1. cap. 5. as fittest to prove both this fire and its fewel both Purgatory and Venial sins though a very learned interpreter of his own Church Erasmus had avowed before that it was not sufficient to prove it either and in truth in that himself hath confessed it to be one of the hardest Texts of all the Scripture unum ex difficillimis he hath in effect discredited his own proof For no Divine may laudably take that Text to prove an Article of Faith whose obscurity is fitter to shew men their ignorance then to remedy it For God doth not oblige any man to an impossibility to believe that which he cannot know or to know that which he cannot understand and therefore to say the place is very obscure and yet to ground an Article of Faith upon it is in effect to say There ought to be a belief where there is not an understanding or there ought to be an understanding where the thing is not to be understood For sure God is not defective in necessaries and therefore if this doctrine had been necessary to salvation he would not have delivered it so obscurely as to leave the unlearned under a most irremediable ignorance which is inconsistent with the knowledge of Faith nor the learned under most inextricable doubts and perplexities which are incompetible with the assent of Faith So that this text makes no more for the belief of Purgatory then the former The third and last Text then alledged to prove Purgatory was that of Mat. 12. to which the forenamed Author answers Non sequitur non remittitur hic neque in futuro ergo utrobique est remissio Quia ex negativis nihil sequitur sed tantum dicitur ad majorem gravitatem peccati blasphemiae It followâ—… not because it is said It shall not be forgiven him neither in this world nor in the world to come that forgiveness may be had both here and there for nothing can follow from meer negatives But this is only spoken by way of aggravation against the sin of blasphemy Thus that judicious man answers this Text and I think you can scarce shew any of your writers that have exceqted against his answers But the very same answers in Peter Martyrs mouth much displease your Cardinal lib. 1. cap. 4. For first he excepts against that part of it That the words were spoken by way of aggravation and tells us That by the same reason we may deny Hell it self and say those other words Go ye cursed into everlasting fire were spoken only by way of aggravation Pray let another add after him that we may as well deny heaven too and say that those words in the Creed I believe the life everlasting were spoken only by way of aggravation that so if we will not have a Purgatory we may not have an Heaven as well as not have an Hell in our Creed But if you think this in forme too irreligious pray think the other so too which caused it and you will not approve your Cardinal as the only Master of Gods Israel who is so ready to teach men to turn Atheists if they will not turn Papists For all the Christian Churches many years before us and most Christian Churches at this day with us have no belief of your Purgatory and yet firmly believe both Heaven and Hell For both are alike contained in the same Article to wit the life everlasting which teacheth us to believe this Truth They that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil shall go into everlasting fire But we have no third state of those who have neither done good nor evil but partly good and partly evil Good by avoiding mortal sins or repenting of them but evil by committing venial sins and not repenting of them Or good by repenting but evil by not satisfying And we have no third place for this third state of men to go into a place in which is neither everlasting life by it self nor everlasting fire by it self but a strange kind of medly which is made up partly of life and partly of fire only the life of it is everlasting but the fire of it is temporary not everlasting so yon see we may very well deny Purgatory and yet not so much as doubt of Hell because that very Article which teacheth us to believe everlasting fire teacheth us not to believe temporary fire But your Cardinal hath another exception against this exposition Exaggeratio non debet esse inepta qualis est quum fit partitio uni membro nihil respondet An exaggeration ought not to be improper and unfit as that is which makes a Partition and leaves nothing to answer one member of it Pray Sir who can imagine That Negatives are capable of a Partition any more then meer non entities and therefore an exaggeration grounded upon negatives may not be supposed to make a partition because a non entity cannot be supposed to have any parts or members As if I should say of a confirmed Christian He is not to be made a Papist or a Turk what partition is here of Christians into Papists and Turks 8. Secondly he excepts against that answer Nothing can follow from meer Negatives As Philip King of Spain is not King of Venice therefore some other man is King of Venice it follows not saith Peter Martyr by good Logick because it is grounded upon a negative So here It shall not be forgiven him neither in this world nor in the world to come it follows not There shall be forgiveness in the world to come The Cardinal excepts saying It follows not according to the rules of Logick but it follows according to the Rules of Prudence because otherwise we should suppose our Saviour had spoken most unfitly or improperly nay in plain terms most foelishly Respondeo non sequi secundum regulas Dialecticorum id quod inferimus ex verbis Domini sed tamen sequi secundum regulam Prudentiae quia alioqui faceremus Dominum ineptissimè loquutum An horrid blasphemy to say the eternal Word spake impertinently or Wisdom it self spake foolishly unless we may set up a false consequence to make his words good Is not this contrary to the wise mans advice Ne dixeris quia ipse me implanavit Say not thou He hath caused me err for he hath no need of the sinfull man Eccl. 15. 12. Let an insolent Dogmatist say what he pleaseth but a conscientious Divine must say God needs not my Lye to maintain his Truth no more then he needs mâ—… sin to maintain his righteousness For a consequence without the Rules of Logick is a Lye since it is a conclusion without premises an effect without a cause or a Consequent without
Minus dicit plus significat vult enim quod non solum in futuro sed etiam hic punitur tale peccatum He speaks little but he signifies much for his meaning is That such a sin is punished not only in the next world but also in this 10. Your late Jesuites tell us of a remission of the sin with a reservation of the punishment but your old Divines take remitting for not punishing without which in truth it cannot be remission For God doth not afford us a less forgiveness then he doth require us to afford one another and that is so to forgive the sin as not once to think of punishing or of revenging it For indeed to forgive sin is nothing else in its own nature but not to reserve it to be punished and because God punished our Saviour for our sins it is said He made him sin for us 2 Cor. 5. 21. For so Christ took our sin upon him that is to say not our Guilt but our Punishment and he took it upon himself that he might not leave it upon us For he was wounded for our transgressions Isa. 53. 5. He was bruised for our iniquities that is He was punished that we might be acquitted The chastisement of our peace was upon him that is His chastisement was our Peace and with his stripes we are healed And blessed be God we are so for sure it is we could never be healed with our own stripes it is his wounds work our cure and not our own yet I will not follow Scotus who to confute them that denyed contingency did say It is pitty but such men should be under torments till they should confess it were possible for them not to be tormented I will not say in like manner It is pitty but they who deny our souls to be healed with our Saviours stripes should themselves be beaten with many stripes till they should confess that their own stripes could not heal them for then I know they would be under the lash for ever But I must say That it were just with God to put them under such a confutation For they are under a gross denyal not of a Metaphysical but of a Theological Truth and that of such a Truth as hath joyned Gods Mercy and Justice both together in mans salvation and therefore such a Truth as may not be denyed without great uncharitableness to man and greater unthankfulness to God I think few of those men who now most stand upon this new Divinity of remission in the next world to be obtained by our own stripes and others suffrages because it brings them so good a market would be willing at their deaths to venture their souls upon it for fear it should bring them as bad a remedy And I cannot but wonder at your Cardinal who hath said concerning this Text Hinc colligunt Sancti Patres quaedam peccata remitti in futuro seculo per orationes suffragia Ecclesiae Bellar. lib. 1. de Purg. cap. 4. Hence the holy Fathers do gather that some sins are forgiven in the next world by the prayers and the suff ages of the Church for he could not say this if Saint Thomas said true without putting Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostom out of the Catalogue of the Fathers 11. I know our Country-man Backet was swayed by Saint Augustine to conclude for Purgatory but I fear either he mis-applyed or mis-understood Saint Augustine or Saint Augustine mis-understood himself For Saint Augustine hath most dogmatically determined against it lib. 13. de Civit. Dei cap. 8. In requie sunt animae piorum à corpore separatae Impiorum autem poenas luunt donec istarum ad aeternam vitam illarum vero ad aeternam mortem corpora reviviscant The souls of the righteous are in rest of the unrighteous in torment after they are separated from the flesh till the bodies of the one shall be raised again to eternal life the bodies of the other to eternal death 12. But he that will not teach Fancy instead of Faith must take God for the Author and Gods Church for the Pillar and ground of that Truth which he teacheth else he may chance rove in uncertainties to the worlds end especially if he shall take Metaphorical allusions for dogmatical conclusions and florid declâ—…mations for solid determinations as Divines now usually are on all sides in their citations out of â—…he Fathers upon any argument making some of them speak against their own doctrine to speak for new devices and in effect to write contradictions rather then not write for the great Diana of these clamorous Ephesians Therefore I will not here examine the citations of the Fathers for surely A Christian Divine is bound to teach no other Faith for Christian then such as hath been manifestly declared in the Word of Christ and generally and constantly professed by the Catholick Church of Christ And your Cardinal finds not so muth as the word Purgatory in all the Scriptures nor in any one general Council till the fourth of Laterane under nnocent the third above twelve hundred years after Christ which was as far from being Oecumenical as Rome is from being all the Christian world and if it had been so yet hath only furnished us with Consultations not with Canons or Constitutions your own Platina being my witness who saith thus in the life of Innocent the third Venere multa in consultationem nec decerni tamen quicquam apertè potuit Many things were debated but nothing was openly decreed in this Council and I hope you will not say that they passed their decrees in private or by any underhand dealing An observation that may weaken some of your other Tenents no less then Purgatory which you obtrude upon the consciences of men as established by the Canons of this Council which in truth made no Canons at all if your own Platina be worth belief 13. Next I meet with your Cardinals Reasons whereof some do rather put then prove this new Article of Faith contrary to Aquinas who allows not of Ratio ponens but only of Ratio probans radicem fidei par 1. qu. 32. art 1. ad 2. arguing not so much from the authority of Gods Word as against it As particularly that reason lib. 1. cap. 11. Intelligibile non est quomodo verbum ociosum ex naturâ suâ dignum sit perpetuo odio Dei maneat igitur quaedam esse peccata venialia solâ temporaâ—…i poenâ digna No man can understand how an idle word is in its own nature worthy of Gods eternal hatred therefore let it stand for a Truth that some sins are venial and only worthy of temporal punishment A strange way of arguing for a Divine who should not exercise his Readers curiosity but establish his conscience Christ saith That for every idle word men shall give account in the day of Judgement to make men repent before hand even of their least sins that judging themselves they may not be
that believes the torments of Purgatory can stick to do any Villany if he may be thus absolved for doing it And it is to be seared that some of your party still heighten their absolutions according to their designs which is little less then to make the power of God subservient to the malice of the Devil and to fill the hearts of men with impiety that they may commit sin and with impenitency when they have committed it 3. This and much more might have been said by way of condemning your Church but I desired only to acquit our own and to shew that if we would our selves we might all be sincere and true Penitents because our Church was not really but only seemingly defective in the practice of Pennance For though she wracked no mans conscience yet she so far instructed all that not the meanest of her Communicants who were not Hypocrites could be under the danger and much less under the guilt of Impenitency And I had reason to satisfie my self and others in this point for it is evident by Saint John Baptists first Sermon Mat. 3. 8 9. Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance and think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father That it is in vain for any man to boast he hath Abraham for his Father or as we Christians use to speak He hath the Church of Christ for his Mother who is not a true Penitent Nay it is in vain for any Church to boast of her being the daughter of Abraham or the Spouse of Christ if she follow not his example who first Preached Christ calling upon all that are of her Baptism and are associated in her Communion To bring forth fruits meet for Repentance And upon this ground did Lactantius determine so positively That the true Church of Christ was to be known only by the practice of Pennance Lib. 4. de vera sap cap. 30. Sed tamen quia singuli quique caetus Haereticorum se potissimum Christianos suam esse Catholicam Ecclesiam putant sciendum est illam esse veram in quâ est Confessio Poenitentia quae peccata vulnera quibus subjecta est imbecillitas carnis salubriter curat But because the several Congregations of Hereticks think themselves the best Christians and each his own Church to be the Catholick Church we must know That is the true Catholick Church in which there is Confession and Penance to take care for the healing of those sins and wounds which the infirmities of the flesh bring upon us He saith the Catholick Church is to be known by an Healing Confession and an Healing Penance the same in effect which Saint John Baptist had said before him I knowing that those words Confession and Penance made more noise in your Church then in ours was willing to examine whether we had not the same vertue of them amongst us to heal us as was amongst you to heal you because we had not the same noise of them And I found we had For besides the greater censure of Excommunication in the power of the Bishops and the lesser censure of abstention in the power of all Parochial Priests enabling and requiring them to deny the Communion to scandalous sinners till they had testified their repentance for their sins I fòund that every one of us was put under a necessity of censuring and condemning himself which was the readiest way to bring us all to an ingenuous confession of our sins and to a serious contrition for them For being bound in our daily publick prayers to hear the Ten Commandements from the mouth of the Priest as from the mouth of God kneeling upon our knees and to say at the end of every Commandement Lord have mercy upon us We could not justly be charged for want of an Healing Confession to let pass that at the beginning of our prayers because no sin but was against some one of Gods Commandements and we asking mercy for our transgression of every one did in effect confess our transgressing it And being also bound to say Encline our hearts to keep this Law we could not justly be charged for want of an healing Penance because that wholly consisted in the contrition and conversion of the Heart That Penance most healing the soul which had most broken the heart A broken and a contrite heart O God shalt thou not despise For this Contrition as it is true Penance so it is sufficient for wiping away of all sin from the soul your own Cardinal not only asserting but also assuring this for true doctrine Bellar. li. 2. de de Poenit. cap. 15. Utrum omnia peccata per veram contritionem sive Poenitentiam deleantur Resp. Illud autem affirmamus non ut probabile sed planè ut certum apud Catholicos exploratum nullam esse peccatorum multitudinem vel gravitatem quae per veram poenitentiam non expietur nam Ezech. 18. 33. Deus saepius clamat Nolo mortem Peccatoris sine ullâ exceptione veniam pollicetur omnium iniquitatum si impium serio paenituerit vitae praeteritae cum emendationis proposito Whether all sins are blotted out by true Contrition or Penance I answer we affirm this not only as probable but also as certain and unquestionable amongst Catholicks That there is no multitude or magnitud of sins which is not expiated by true Penance For God himself Ezech. 18. 33. often saies nay swears I will not the â—…eath of a sinner and promises forgiveness without exception of áll iniquities whatsoever if the wicked earnestly repent of his sinful life past and truly purpose amendment for the time to come Here you see he takes true Contrition and Penance for one and the same and saies That is true Contrition when the wicked earnestly repents of what is past and really purposeth amendment for what is to come We have this earnest Repentance professed and practised in our Church for we say Lord have mercy upon us and encline our hearts to keep this Law And we have also this real purpose of amendment for after our repenting we say And write all these thy Laws in our hearts we beseech thee So that having this true Contrition it cannot be denyed but we have also true Penance amongst us that is such a Penance as doth expiate our sins though never so many and great heal our wounds and save our soul If such an Healing Penance as this may not be had without an Healing Confession it is plain we have also an Healing Confession amongst us because we have this Healing Penance If it may t is as plain we need no other Confession then that we have I desire not to implead your Church concerning the exercise of Penance for I see our own wishes it might be restored But I crave leave to say That our Church which requireth us to lay open our consciences daily before the searcher of hearts doth not permit us to conceal any one
sin in our confession nor retain and keep back any one sin from our Penance but biddeth us follow the example of David saying Try me O God and seek the ground of my heart prove me and examine my thoughts look well if there be any way of wickedness in me and lead me in the way everlasting Psalm 139. You cannot say He concealed any one sin in his Confession though he had not the Priests Interrogatories for he desires God to examine and to interrogate him Interoga me saith your Latine Nor can you say he retained or kept back any one sin from his Penance though he had not the Priest for his Penitentiary for he had God instead of him Mark well if there be any way of wickedness in me and lead me from that perishing way into the way everlasting 4. I heartily wish I could say the same of your Church which requireth the people to say open their consciences before the Priest That she did not permit the people to conceal any one sin in their Confession nor retain and keep back any one sin from their Penance For I am so far from envying for your sakes who alone would be thought to sit in Moses his Chair that as he wished all the Lords people were Prophets so I heartily wish all the Lords people among you were Penitents for then we should have less perplexity and more piety and peace on both sides then now we have either within us or without us But as there is great reason to fear that a late faction among us by putting down the Ten Commandements as they were repeated with our Confession and Penance hath not only suppressed the practice but also banished the very thought of Repentance from some men no less then the desire of Innocency from themselves so there is great reason to believe that a late faction among you by putting no interrogatory upon the second Commandement and putting all other sins into interrogatories hath not only suppressed the practice but also banished the very thought of repentance both in themselves and others as to all the sins that are generally committed amongst you against the rule of that Commandement And surely there may be sins not only of Ignorance but also of Infirmity and of Presumption committed against the second Commandement as well as against any of the other of which sins there should be a Confession and for which sins there should be a Penance as well as of and for the sins against any of the other Commandements For the second Commandement being as moral as the rest is as capable of being transgressed as the rest and why then should your Interrogatories upon the seventh Commandement in true account though the sixt in yours be so many and gross as almost to lead even your very Priests into Temptation and yet so few or none at all upon the second as not to lead your people out of it Si cognovit faeminam in vase naturali vel extra vas is such a question as may justly come under an interdict for God plainly forbids all such ribauldry which leads men into sin Ephes. 5. 3. Let it not once be naemed among you as becometh Saints And Colos. 3. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 filthy communication is to be put out of the mouth not taken into it for fear it should pass from the mouth into the heart But si adoravit imaginem if he hath falen down and worshipped an image is such a question as ought not to be omitted in your Penitential Interrogatories because God hath forbidden such a worship and hath commanded such a worshipper to repent and the goodness of God leading him to repentance Rom. 2. 4. it is the wickedness of man to keep him from it And truly the practice of your Church doth not lead such a sinner to repentance but rather doth confirm him in his impenitency For seeing so many interrogatories upon all the other Commandements not only for Commissions in thought word and deed but also for Omissions and seeing none at all upon the second Commandement he is thereby confirmed that there can be no sin against that Commandement and so no repentance needful concerning it By which means he is in danger not to repent truly of any sin This general Axiome He that offends in one point is guilty of all being as undenyably true concerning each point of repentance as concerning each point of obedience for by the witting and willing neglect of repentance no less then of obedience in any one particular Gods authority is equally contemned and Christian Charity is equally violated And though I doubt not but God graciously accepts of your Peoples unfeigned repentance because being cordial for the sins they know it is effectual for the sins they know not yet sure your Priests do not discharge their duties so conscionably as they ought who keep the people from knowing their sins against the second Commandement for by that means they do keep some from being true Penitents do not take a right course to make any one a true Penitent Do you think God will forget this his own Commandement in his last sentence because you are now willing to forget it in your examinations If not why should you thus betray the souls committed to your charge not teaching them to judge themselves that they may not be condemneded of the Lord For even your method of Confession Printed at Paris 1556. which pretends fully to shew all sins and their remedies in qua peccata eorum remedia plenissimè continentur yet quite leaves out the second Commandement for thus it summs up the Precepts of the Decalogue Unum crede Deum Believe in one God for the first Ne jures vana per ipsum Take not his name in vain for the second Commandement and more at large so sets them down in the Titles of the two ensuing Chapters that we cannot think the omission of the second Commandement the fault of your Poetry but of your Divinity So you see it was not out of any humour of quarrelsomness but meerly out of zeal to godliness that I hinted the defect of your Confessional Interrogatories 5. But it seems by you It is not only the practice but also the Doctrine of your Church That there needs no repentance for any sin against the second Commandement and you think to justifie this doctrine first by making no second Commandement and then by making no sin against it First by making no second Commandement For you say Saint Augustine and all Catholick Divines after reckon these two but as one Secondly by making no sin against the second Commandement for you say It is impossible for Christians well instructed in the first to offend through ignorance against the second I answer first in general That there is no Catholick Divinity either in the one or in the other either in making the second no Commandement or in making no sin through ignorance against it For the Ten Commandements
needs follow an errour in Faith And so Bellarmine himself professeth lib. 4. de Pont. c. 5. Si Papa erraret praecipiendo vitia prohibendo virtutes teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona virtutes esse malas proinde teneretur errare If the Pope should err so grosly as to command us to do evil and to eschew that which is good the Church would be bound to believe that Vices were lawful and Vertues unlawful and so consequently would be bound to be in errour We may yet further improve this tenent and say That no man can maintain what is false in matter of fact but he must also maintain what is false in matter of faith according to the very same particular in the Creed which corresponds to that of the Decalogue wherein he is erroneous whether the falsity concern his God or his neighbour or himself For as all practicks so all speculatives are reducible to these three heads Our God our neighbour and our selves As for example He that explicitly in fact maintains that fornication is lawful or any sin that is against his own body doth implicitly in faith deny his own resurrection and as in fact so also in faith doth sin against himself He that maintains any point of faction and disobedience against the fifth Commandement or any thing of injustice against the rest doth not only in fact explicitly sin against the Decalogue but also in faith implicitly sin against the Creed in that part of it which concerns his neighbour that is The Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints Lastly He that maintains any false external worship being rather willing to expunge or confound the second Commandement then to obey it sins not only in fact but also in faith against his God and doth in effect expunge that Article out of his Creed which immediately concerneth the Deity I believe in God So you see there is no Catholick Divinity in this doctrine which either makes the second no Commandement or makes no sin against it as it is no Catholick Divinity which supposeth our belief in God to be no Article of Faith or that there may be in Christians no errour or heresie against that Article For your seeming qualification in these words through ignorance alters not the case because the second Commandement hath as great an obligation and as distinct a morality as the first and therefore may be transgressed as many waies as the first that is to say as well by ignorance as by negligence infirmity or presumption and I suppose you cannot think it for the credit of your Confessional Interrogatories so to keep men from ignorances as to let them continue in presumptions Therefore either say there may be no sin at all against the second Commandement or do not say What Interrâ—…gatories are needful concerning it For if your Interrogatories do not discover the greater sins they must discover their own weakness if not your deceitfulness that 's my answer in general 7. Secondly I answer in particular That Saint Augustine did in the division of the Commandements reckon the first and second but as One not that he thought the second comprized in the first as you seem to intimate but that from a Trinity of precepts concerning our duty towards God we might readily acknowledge a Trinity of persons in the Unity of the Godhead For he neither expunged the second Commandement out of the practical principles of his Religion nor confounded it with the first but allowed it to prohibit an external Idolatry in worshipping the Godhead by any Image or representation For so saith he lib. de fide Symb. cap. 7. Simulachrum Dei nefas est Christiano in templo collocare It is a great sin for a Christian to set up any Image of God in the Church which is the very second Commandement changed from a legal prohibition into a doctrinal conclusion Again Epist. 119. In primo praecepto prohibetur coli aliqua in figmentis hominum Dei similitudo non quia non habet imaginem Deus sed quia nulla imago ejus coli debet nisi illa quae hoâ—… est quod ipse nec ipsa pro illo sed cum illo In the first Commandement sc. the second being joyned with it according to his new method we are forbidden to worship any Image of God according to the false inventions of men not that God hath not an Image but because no Image of his ought to be worshipped but only that one substantial Image of him his begotten Son who is the same with himself and to be worshipped as himself And in his 222. Epistle Si Trinitas sic est invisibilis ut nec mente videatur multò minus de illa hujusmodi opinionem habere debemus ut eam rebus corporalibus vel corporalium rerum imaginibus similem esse credamus If the Trinity be so invisible as that it is also incomprehensible we ought not to have so slight an opinion concerning it as if it were like any corporeal thing or to think it may be represented by any corporeal images What could Saint Augustine say more for the second Commandement and against you who are now come to represent and worship God the Father under the image of an Old man God the Son under the image of a Lamb and God the holy Ghost under the image of a Dove If I wrong you in this you may thank your own Cajetane who saith expresly Ecclesiae Romanae usus admittit hasce Trinitatis imagines eaque pinguntur non solum ut ostendantur sed ut adorentur Cajet in 3. Aqu. qu. 25. art 3. The custom of the Roman Church admitteth these images of the Trinity and they are painted not only that they may be shewed but also that they may be worshipped See the vast difference between Saint Augustines and your doctrine concerning the second Commandement He alloweth it to prohibit both the making and the worshipping any Image of God either in Trinity or in Unity you notwithstanding that prohibition say it is lawful not only to make but also to worship the images of the Trinity Doubtless were Saint Augustine now alive he would again part the second Commandement and divide it from the first meerly out of hatred to this your most abominable idolatry For rather then suffer the holy and undivided Trinity to be thus sinfully either represented or worshipped expresly against this second Commandement He would certainly restore it to its own place that it might no longer lie hid under the first but recover its own power as being much more zealous of Gods glory then of his own and therefore such a Divine as had much rather lose his argument of proving the Trinity from the number of three Commandements in the first Table then let you lose your Religion by an idolatrous representation and worship of that Trinity expresly against the letter and the end of the second Commandement Or if you think Saint Augustine a
legatis missis à Tharasio facultas data fuit eosdem conveniendi cum regnaret Aaron princeps Saracenicus in Christianos infensissimus Cùm autem duo qui Constantinopoli missi fuerant ad eos Legati in Palaestinam pervenissent audientes Theodorum Patriarcham Hierosolymorum exulem jam desunctum diverterunt ad Monachos quosdam à quibus acerbissimam quam paterentur Christiani orientales servitutem intellexerunt quodque periculosissimum esset adire sive Antiochenum sive Alexandrinum Patriarcham nimirum si detecti essent fore ut non ipsi tantum Legati extremum subirent periculum sed in illud ipsum omnes Orientis fideles conjicerent quamobrem eos à proposito revocârunt illuc proficiscendi There was at that time no convenience for those three Patriarchs of the East to write back again to Tharasius nor indeed for his Legates to deliver Letters to those Patriarcks because Aaron a Prince of the Saracens and a great persecutor of the Christians had the sole power of those Contries Therefore the two Legates who had been sent from Constantinople with Tharasius his Letters as soon as they came to Palaestine and there heard that Theodorus Patriarck of Hierusalem was dead in exile they turned aside to some Monks there who informed them of the great bondage of the Oriental Christians and that it was very dangerous for them to go to either of the two Patriarcks of Antioch or Alexandria for if they were discovered they would not only endanger themselves but also all those Eastern Christians By which means they dehorted them from their purpose of going further thus saith Baâ—…onius Therefore pray expunge that Synodical Epistle out of the third action of this Council which hath this title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We the high Priests and Priests of the East framed in answer to that from Tharasius with this inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the high Priests and Priests of Antioch Alexandria and of the holy City For it is evident by your own Baronius that neither was Tharasius his Epistle delivered to any of these Patriarcks not was this answer sent from any of them Nay indeed it is evident from the answer it self That it was sent from some Hermites of Palestine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We your humble servants and the meanest of those who desire to live in the desart which cannot be made good of any that lived in Antioch Alexandria and Hierusalem their great and populous Cities Nay in the sequele of the Epistle the Monks or Hermits themselves discover this forgerie saying They would not let the Legates or Messengers sent from the Council go any further 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We therefore knowing the deadly hatred of those cursed Nations against us resolved with one consent to detain your Messengers and not let them go to those to whom you had sent them that is To the forenamed Patriarcks And again a little after We knowing two of our own Brethren John and Thomas adorned with the zeal of the Orthodox Faith said unto them Go ye along with these men and make their Apologie and signifie by word of mouth what we dare not signifie by letter and when they excused themselves as private and ignorant men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we replyed That he who opened the mouth of his Apostles enabling them to instruct all the world is able to open your mouths and make you speak the sense of those Patriarchs who neither can now receive the Councils Letters nor dare answer them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Potens est dare vobis sermonem in apertione oris vestri ad supplendum intentionem sensus eorum qui neque literas quivêrunt suscipere neque ausi sunt scribere vel super talibus quolibet modo mutire See here what Patriarchs they were who sent these two Presbyters John and Thomas for their Legates to the second Council of Nice even a few Monks of Palestine and seeing this you cannot but abominate that damnable â—…orgerie and falsification of that Council which reckons these two Presbyters as the Legates of the three Patriarcks of the East and so takes their Subscriptions Thus it is said in the beginning of the fourth fifth sixth and seventh actions That this John and Thomas supplyed the places of the Apostolical Thrones of the Eastern Churches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a title often afterwards given to that John with this variation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he supplyed the place of the Eastern high Priests and at last at the end of the fourth Action they both subscribe after this manner I John supplying the place of the three Apostolical Thrones of Alexandria Antioch and Hierusalem do agree to all things contained in this Action The like is also the Subscription of Thomas and yet one of those Patriarchs was dead and neither of the other two had sent or could send to this Council The words of the subscription are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joannes misericordiâ Dei Presbyter Patriarchicus Syncellus locum retinens trium Apostolicarum sedium Alexandriae Antiochiae Hierosolymorum omnibus quae praeferuntur in hoc textu consentio conveniens subscripsi manu meâ This subscription doubtless was intended for the greater confirmation of this Council that it might be thought to have the consent of all the five Patriarchs but it is the greatest confâ—…tation of iâ—… for it appears by the very letter which they brought with them that they came not from any one of those Patriarchs as his Substitutes but only from some private Monks of Palestineâ—… Thus the wisdom of this world is foolisâ—…ness with God and much more against God for it is written He taketh the wise in their own craftiness 1 Cor. 3. 19. And I think you can scarce shew me in all your Legend any one Table which so grosly contradicts it self and so openly bespeaks the Readers dis-belief 18. What should I say more to disprove a false worship then which were enough to discountenance a true even that it was at first set up by falsities and â—…alsifications and is still upheld by them Look to your Council that first set it up look to your Champions that still uphold it and tell me if they do not proceed in such a course as is fitter for Juglers then â—…or Divines as if God had given them the Key of knowledge not to open but to lock up his Commandements and the power of jurisdiction not to guide his people in the right way of salvation but to drive and force them out of it yet thus far notwithstanding so great sins and so little Repentance I will gratifie you in leaving the second Commandement out of your Confessional Interrogatories as to say you may the more securely leave it out at the Peoples if you put it in at your Priests Confession For to the one this Image-worship is a sin of Ignorance to the other a sin of Presumption In
with what Head Heart and Hand I can answer it for all will be little enough to vindicate Gods glory which you have taken from him to give unto his servants so little cause have you to be troubled that we will not joyn with you in the same theft and agree altogether to rob God For you say Against praying to Saints I alledge Job 4. 18. It seems I might have alledged twenty texts more impertinently for praying to Saints and no exception would have been taken at my allegations For so your late Dogmatist hath done most unconscionably because to the abuse of Christian Religion most uncharitably because to the breach of Christian Communion and yet neither you nor any of your party have sought to reclaim his errour or to repair Gods truth But you have laid a task upon me That I must â—…rit vindicate mine own before I may oppose his Allegations Mine own allegation was this Behold he put no trust in his servants and his Angels he charged with â—…olly This 〈◊〉 used as an argument to confute that strange I might have said that blasphemous Invocation which you are pleased to teach poor mis-believing souls though its rythm being above its reason shews in what unhappy age it stole into your prayers O Thoma Didyme succurre nobis miseris ne damnemur cum impiâ—…s in adventu Judicis Help us O good Saint Thomas that we be not condemned with the wiâ—…ked in the last Iudgement For said I those mighty helpers the blessed Saints will not in that day be able to help themselves much less will they be able to help others Therefore all of us had reed rely upon that helper which alone is able to stand himself and to support us in the Judgement and he is no other but only the eternal Son of God For saying this two great sins are laid to my châ—…ge by the consâ—…quence of your exception which concerns Divines though not by the words of it which concern Grammarians The first is That I look upon the day of Judgement with too fearful an eye and seek to get my self an helper or a supporter against that day The second is That I look upon my Saviour with too faithful an eye and seek to get him for my helper and supporter Come Sir let us not triste away our souls though we do our words but acknowledge the terrour and the scrutinie of that day will be both alike unsupportable That the Justice of God will shew it self indispensable That our conviction will be made indisputable and why not our condemnation undenyable That all flesh must then keep silence and no flesh will be able to keep station before him but such as have the eternal Iustice to satisfie for their sins and the eternal Word to plead on their behalf that satisfaction Therefore in this unimaginable unexpreâ—… inextricable exigency and diâ—…tress of â—…ouls there can be but one common Sanctuary for all mankind to she unâ—…o and consequently in vain do any of us â—…lie to other Sanctuaries before it For if we must chang our other Sanctuaries then why should we choose them now If the Saints then cannot be our Helpers why should we now pray unto them for help since all our Prayers tend to this That we may be acquitted in the last Judgement and not so gain the world as to lose our own souls My help cometh from the Lord saith holy David which made heaven and earth Psalm 121. 2. not saying what help because he meant all help not saying ae what time because he meant at all times not saying in what exigencies because he meant in all exigencies so then this is his meaning All my help at all times and in all exgencies cometh from the Lord which made heaven and earth As no Saint helped him to make them so no Saint can help me when he will destroy them Therefore if I would not be helpless in that day when I shall most want help even in the day of Destruction I must beseech him to be my Helper which made heaven and earth For only he that made them out of nothing is able to keep me from being worâ—…e then nothing â—…or though the Heavens shall then pass away with a great noise and the earth shall be burned up 2 Pet. 3. 10. yet his help shall not pass away but shall preserve me and all those that heartily Pray unto him from the everlasting Burnings which is more then he hath promised to do for those who pray to Saints and t is to be feared that such prayers will make him do less Therefore give me such an Helper as will not leave me nor forsake me till he hath saved me and sure that can be no other but the God of my salvation so saith the same holy Supplicant Thou hast been my help leave me not neither forsake me O God of my salvation Psal. 27. 9. May I say to any Saint in the Day of thanks giving when I shall be in heaven Thou hast been my help 2. And how then shall I say to any Saint in the day of supplication whiles I am on earth Make speed to save me make haste to help me since what is Prayer on earth will be Prayer in Heaven for we shall not there learn unthankfulness How can I leave out O Lord and say O Mother of God save me and help me For in this case your learned Cardinal supplies me with a reason to the contrary Nam ea quibus indigenâ—…us superant vires creaturae ac proinde etiam Sanctorum Bell de â—…anct Beat. lib. 1. c. 17. Those things which we 〈◊〉 are above the power of the Saints to give us And if our wants be above their Power how are our Prayers for the supply of those wants not above their Glory for we are taught to say at the end of our Prayers For thine is the Kingdom the power and the glory nor can we pray in faith to any to whom we cannot say so at the end of our Prayers therefore not to any but to God the Father Son and holy Ghost And it is the great scandal and greater sin of your Prayers to the blessed Virgin and other Saints That you ask those blessings and that protection from them which he alone can give whose is the Kingdom the Power and the Glory But to return to your Cardinals Reason which alone is enough to keep me from turning to his Religion If those things which we want be not in the power of the Saints to give us why should they be in our Prayers to the Saints as if they could give them â—…or be that hath said Ask and it shall be given you Mat. 7. 7. hath in effect said Ask not of those who cannot give For that is either to ask in vain or to ask in sin t is to ask vain if without the Gift t is to ask in sin if against the Precept So then I asking not that help of the Saints which they cannot
of this Truth taking this for their chiefest Topicks for Maxima locus Maximae Sirs ye know that by this craft we have our wealth Acts 19. 25. For no other reason but covetousness can easily be alledged why the same men should so mainly cry up the Imputation of their own and their Saints imaginary merits and righteousness to the maintaining and filling the supposed Treasure of the Church and yet so mainly cry down the imputation of our blessed Saviour's real and allsufficient merits and righteousness to the exhausting and emptying the Treasures of the people Thus it is clear that pleasure in unrighteousness hath hitherto opposed the Truth in its doctrine making Mammons Chaplains not over zealous to serve God in searching out his Truth that they may believe it or over zealous to serve themselves in not preaching a Truth which they do believe Again why should so many other formidable Truths and reasonings concerning righteousness temperance and judgment to come in and from the mouth of the same St. Paul make a Heathen tremble and not once move so many confident Christians but that this heavenly Truth of Justification by Faith hath been hitherto amongst them not rightly believed or poisoned in its belief and what venome can poison the operations of the soul but onely that of the Serpent the venome of sin turning the grace of our God into wâ—…n onness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into petulancy insolency and unsufferable contentiousness for so the Greek Orator hath joyned these together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isocr in Panath. contending against not for the Faith once delivered to the Saints or which is all one denying the onely Lord God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Jud. 4. Such men do falsely pretend Faith in Christ who do not deny ungodliness and worldly lusts who do not live soberly righteously and godly in this present world for they cannot look for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ The Grace of God which bringeth salvation to others will bring the great damnation upon them because they resist that grace betray that Saviour and belye their own Souls For most certainly the greatest miscreants that are would break off their sins by repentance and their iniquities by shewing mercy to the poor if they did with the eye of Faith see a watcher and an Holy one coming down from heaven and saying Hew the Tree down and destroy it Dan. 4. Or if they did hear with an honest and good heart and Faith cometh by no other hearing that word of Christs forerunner in his first coming to save us which is therefore the fittest to put us in mind of his second coming to judge us O generation of Vipers who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the Tree Therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire Matth. 3. For surely that Faith cannot justifie the sinner which cannot justifie it self a Faith that hath eyes and seeth not the watcher the Holy one coming down from heaven that hath ears and heareth not the crier the voice of one crying in the wilderness prepare ye the way of the Lord make his paths strait A Faith that lets men profess Christâ—…ans but live and act Infidels hardning their hearts stopping their ears closing their eyes lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their eares and understand with their hearts and should be converted and their Saviour the Physitian of Souls should heal them Thus it is also clear That pleasure in unrighteousness hath hitherto poisoned this Truth in its belief making men take phansie for Faith and think themselves in Heaven by their perswasion whiles they are even in Hâ—…ll by theit affections and by their actions not regarding that word which they cannot deny dare not gainsay If ye were Abraham's children who is the Father of the faithful ye would do the works of Abraham Joh. 8. 39. 5. For God gave us not the Articles of our Faith to be like Pharaohs lean kine to eat up the rules of his Commandments the fat-fleshed and well-favoured kine such as were fit for Sacrifices for himself much less such as were offered to himself for Sacrifices Therefore those can be no Gospel Instructions which teach men to devour widows houses nay to devour Gods own house and not onely his house but also his glory and worship under pretence of Faith for of these starveliug Documents we may justly say now and others will be able to say to the worlds end what is said of the starveling kine And when they had eaten them up even all the fat Kine that came up out of the river and fed in the medow This is all the fatness of Sea and Land which their Forefathers had consecrated to the Service and Honour of God it could not be known that they had eaten them but they were still ill-favoured as at the beginning Gen. 41. 21. He that hath commanded us to sanctifie publick Persons as Mininisters publick times as Sabbaths or Festivals publick places as Churches to his own worship will not cannot justifie those who sacrilegiously rob and persecute his Ministers mock and suppress his Sabbaths revile and profane his Churches For it were very strange if such men who are angerly reproved and openly branded for sacrilegious profane blasphemous persons by the Spirit of God should if they still persist in their Sacriledge profaneness and blasphemy be acquitted and absolved for righteous and innocent persons by the Son of God The Spirit of God calleth them enemies adversaries and such as hate him Psal. 14. Therefore surely the Son of God will not make them Saints accept them as friends reward them as servants Such a devouring Gospel as this was never of Gods teaching though it hath been of mens practising to the discountenanceing of Gods Truth and to their own shame and destruction that have practised it For God will never uphold those men in his Truth who discourage others from embracing it 6. Yet as long as Gods Truths are infinitely above all mens discouragements neither are your Priests excusable if they will not embrace them nor ours if they do forsake them notwithstanding both be as much discouraged as either open enemies or false friends and brethren can discourage them What shall the Sons of God come no more to present themselves before their Father because Satan will coâ—…e also among them to present himself before the Lord Shall the the Holy Angels be out of love with their own light because the Devil himself can and doth also appear an Angel of light no more may we be out of love with this heavenly Truth of being righteous by the righteousness of our blessed Redeemer because Hypocrites and Atheists have made it an occasion of or a pretence for their
teach it so humane reason cannot so well defend it and doth so much the worse oppose it nor do I see how these arguments can be answered unlesse they can be denyed nor how they can be denyed â—…ince they are so exactly agreeable with the Analogy of the text and therefore cannot disagree from the Analogy of Faith Many arguments have been used by excellent Divines drawn out of several places of the holy Scriptures which have been agreeable with the Analogy of Faith though not with the Analogy of the text and they have passed for good Theological arguments because they have been agreeable only with the Analogy of Faith how much rather should those arguments be taken for Theological which are agreeable not only with the Analogy of faith in the doctrine they prove but also with the Analogy of the Text in the manner of their proof And surely if all Divines did more use this way of arguing they would have much lesse of Contention and much more of Conscience in their arguments you have here shewed me this good way and I was very glad to see it and as willing to follow it for in all this Paragraph you have quoted nothing but Scripture all the fault is you have made unwarrantable inferences from your quotations 9. For first you say Here are works required to justifie as well as Faith because St. Paul saith we wait for righteousnesse by Faith which worketh by love Gal. 5. 5 6. He saith the Faith by which we are justified is a Faith working by love you thence inferre that we are justified by our works as well as by our Faith you may as well say because our eyes wherewith we see are in our heads we see with or by our heads as well as with or by our eyes or because our hands wherewith we handle are joyned to our armes we handle with our armes as well as with our hands for as the eye that is out of the head seeth not and as the hand that is parted from the arme handleth not so Faith that is without works justifieth not yet have works no more to do in justifying than the head hath in seeing or the arme hath in handling 10. Again you say Charity is greater than faith and must therefore needs have the greater influence in our justification I cannot see the reason of this consequence no more than of that a lyon is greater than a Hare therefore he must needs run faster If the Apostle had spoken of justification and had said Charity was greater than Faith your consequent would have been good but speaking not at all of justification your consequence cannot be good concerning that but must be made good concerning somewhat else viz. concerning those other things whereof he speaketh as particularly concerning those admirable acts of suffering not envying not vaunting bearing all things beleeving all things hoping all things enduring all things to which the soul is disposed by Faith but in which it is confirmed and perfected by charity or concerning the everlasting duration and continuance of Charity for that shall never fail but shall go with us into heaven and abide there with us for ever because that very motion of the soul in the fruition of God wherein consisteth eternal blessednesse is an act of Charity But Faith being of things not seen must needs vanish when we come to see God face to face by a clear vision and Hope being of things not enjoyed must needs vanish when we come to enjoy him by a full and immediate comprehension only Charity which in this life outpasseth Faith and Hope by more immediately uniting the soul to God shall in the next life out-passe it selfe when it shall taste the incomparable sweetnesse and enjoy the immortal comforts and feel the incomprehensible delights and joyes of that union In these respects which are named 't is most true that Charity is greater than Faith but not in respect of justification which is not named unlesse you will say the Apostle put more in the Conclusion than in the Premises nay though it should be granted that the Apostle doth not here speak comparatively but positively or else that Charity is greater than Faith yet will it not follow that Faith may not be greater than Charity in some one respect as particularly in this of justification for though Charity be the more noble in it selfe yet Faith is the more needful for us Charity may have the absolute preeminence in regard of its excellency and yet Faith may have a comparative preeminence in regard of its use Charitie may be the greater in regard of innocent men who can stedfastly and comfortably see God as he is in himselfe but Faith must be the greater in regard of sinful men who cannot see God as he is in himself either stedfastly because of their weaknesse or comfortably because of their sinfulnesse and therefore must look on him as he is in his Son who took upon him our weaknesse to give us his strength and our sin to give us his righteousnesse so far is it from a true consequence Charitie is greater than Faith must needs therefore have the greater influence in our justification 11. You have yet one more Quotation to prove justification by works and that is Rom. 2. 13. Not the hearers of the law there is Faith are just before God but the doers of the law there are good works shall be justified here I cannot question your inference which you do not make but I must question your interpretation which you have made For this place only sheweth that both Jewes and Gentiles might justly be condemned because both had sinned against the knowledge which God had given them of his law but it doth not shew how either might be justified yet you have interpreted it of Justification and by your interpretation have laid a kind of slurre and reproach upon Faith saying Not the hearers of the law there is Faith as if Faith were placed in the ear busied only in the hearing of the law not considering that Faith is the gift of God the most precious gift that ever he gave to sinful man excepting his Son in and for whom he gives it and that the gifts of God are to be received with our thankfulnesse unlesse we would have them recalled and reversed with his repentance for since we cannot deserve them if we will not highly prize them we shew our selves unworthy of what we have and make our selves uncapable of having more Come sir I will speak plainly that I may speak honourably of so great a gift If Faith be not in our hearts Christ is not there for he dwelleth in the heart by Faith Ephes. 3. 17. and if Christ be not in our hearts we can neither have good words in our mouths nor good works in our hands for out of the abundance of the heart as the tongue speaketh so also the hand acteth therefore pray le ts have no more of this Divinitie not
to differ from the whole scope of the Law and of the Gospel since it is undeniable that Christ with his righteousnesse is the end of the Law and the subject of the Gospel This is St. Peters Divinitie Act. 10. 43. To Him give all the Prophets witnesse that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins i. e. in one word shall be justified And indeed what were all the propitiatory and expiatory sacrifices of the Law but so many types of Christs sacrifice upon the Crosse who is the Propitiation for our sins 1 John 2. 2. so that in truth this part of the Ceremonial Law was little other than a dark representation of the Gospel foreshewing in shadows what the Gospel was to declare in substance that the Lamb of God should tâ—…ke away the sinnes of the world whence St. Paul ascribeth the Justification of the Jew and of the Gentile to one and the same sacrifice Aâ—… Christ hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour Eph. 5. 2. Their sacrifices did expiate sin only by vertue of this sacrifice And this is that which the same Apostle proves to the Jews in his Epistle which he peculiarly sent to them the sum whereof is briefly this That Jesus Christ whom he did preach to them in that Epistle being the eternal Sonne of God coessential and coequal with his Father perfect God and perfect man in one and the same person was that Messiah which God from the beginning of time had promised and in the fulnesse of time had sent into the world as the only King to Govern as the only Priest to reconcile as the only Prophet to instruct his Church according to the Covenant made before the Law to the types and figures given under the Law and all the predictions explications additions and confirmations by the Prophets so that unlesse they would reject all the documents given to them in their own Law and by their own Prophets throughout all the Old Testament they must thankfully acknowledge heartily embrace and dutifully obey Jesus Christ as the sole Author of their redemption and salvation or to speak yet neerer to our debate though not to Gods Truth as the sole author of Justification to redeem them from the guilt and of sanctification to redeem them from the bondage of their sins This is the Doctrine of the whole Epistle to the Hebrews which is briefly delivered in the first words and confirmed and enlarged in the sequele of that Epistle God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the Fathers by the Prophets hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son There 's our blessed Saviour as Prophet to instruct the Church Whom he appointed heir of all things by whom also he made the worlds There he is as King to govern the Church which is his inheritance as man his workmanship as God When he had by himself purged our sins There he is as Priest to offer himself for a Sacrifice to reconcile the Church And all the Epistle after this in the doctrinal part of it is nothing else but an enlargement upon these Three Heads shewing the necessity of Christs three Offices and the excellency of his Person according to each Office viz. according to his Kingly Office in the first and second according to his Prophetical Office in the third and fourth Chapters and according to his Priestly Office in the rest till the nineteenth Verse of the tenth Chapter After which He treateth of those Offices and Duties which belong to Christians and that in the same method or manner as he had before of the Offices belonging unto Christ first briefly summing them up together and then fully and largely explaining them For so cap. 10. v. 22. He exhorts us to Faith and a good Conscience v. 23. To a firm hope and undaunted profession v. 24. To charity and to good works v. 25. To the publike exercise of all those duties of Piety which God had appointed for the nourishment and the increase of Faith Hope and Charity and the rest of the Epistle afterwards is but an enlargement upon these Will you say because he speaks so much for good works in the latter part of his Epistle He therefore requires them to Justification as well as Faith Look on the tenth Chapter you will soon recall that saying For there it is proved That the Law Sacrifices could not take away sin that is could not justifie those who offered them by two irresistible Topicks ab absurdo ab impossibili First From the command of the Law enjoyning those Sacrifices to be repeated every year which had been needless and therefore absurd if the worshippers could have been purged by them so as to have had no more Conscience of sin vers 23. Secondly From the nature of the Sacrifices that were offered which were not of so great an efficacy as to purge sin much less of so great an excellency as to expiate it For it is not possible that the blood of Bulls and of Goats should take away sins v. 4. And surely he that makes it his work to shew the weakness of the Law-Sacrifices to take away sin could not make it his intent to set up the Gospel-Sacrifices whether of the Heart by Meditation or the Lips by Prayer or of the Hand by Alms-deeds as expiations for our sins For the same Objections still hold against the one which were made against the other The necessity of their repetion is as great the proof of their imperfection is far greater I ask the soul of the most religious Votary that now lives whether he dare say that he ever prayed so devoutly but that either for want of firmness in his attention or of zeal in his affection he needed to ask forgiveness for his Prayers There was nothing of sin in the worst of Legal there is something of sin in the best of Evangelical Sacrifices and how then can it make an atonement for another sin 14. Therefore what ever be the excellency of good works as to Gods acceptance or the efficacy of them as to mans salvation yet they cannot be so excellent as to deserve nor so efficacious as to procure the Justification of a sinner no it cost more to redeem a soul so that He even the most righteous man that is must let that alone for ever Non dabit Deo placationem suam pretium redemptionis animae suae He can give to God what may please his goodness not what may appease his anger or satisfie his Justice He can offer up the homage he cannot offer up the price of his soul Accordingly we are bound to interpret all these and the like Texts concerning good works as declaring their indispensable necessity not as declaring their meritorious efficacy to our salvation as shewing them ot be consequents of the Faith that justifieth not Causes of Justification That honour must
or exactly proportionable to the Justice of the Creator for it self much less for another from its own worthinesse but only from Gods acceptance And that Christ himself as man could not have merited forgivenesse of our sins at the hands of God as having satisfied his offended Justice if God had not been mercifully pleased of his own free grace and goodnesse to accept of his satisfaction Nullius creaturae neque adeò Christi apud Deum esse meritum satisfactionem simpliciter condignam sed ex acceptatione ipsius Dei qui sponte suâ eâ satisfactione merito volâ—…it esse contentus Vasques in 3. Thom. Disp. 5. c. 1. So that if the eternal Son of God did by his most condigne and compleat righteousnesse purchase for us forgivenesse of sins and eternal life merito ex compacto non autem absoluto only by compact or covenant not by absolute Justice then what a vain imagination is it to think what an unwarrantable fiction is it to say that one mans righteousness can be meritorious to make another righteous which hath no condignity to challenge acceptance for it self and much less hath any compact or covenant to be accepted for another And if it be not meritorious to exempt him from guilt how can it be satisfactory to exempt him from punishment For satisfaction is an act of Justice but Justice will have the sin expiated before it will have the punishment remitted wherefore though your great Doctor spoke without book surely without Gods book when he said That the least drop of Christs blood was a sufficient satisfaction for the sins of the whole world and consequently that all the other passions of Christ were meerly superfluous as to our redemption from eternal death Bellar. de Jndulg l. 1. c. 4. For this assertion makes God delight in Unnecessaries which even nature abhorres meerly by instinct from him nay it makes him delight in some kind cruelty if not as injustice punishing our blessed Saviour more then was needful for the satisfaction of Justice yet if we should gratify him with the allowance though not the approbation of this unwarrantable asserion it would not do his work by laying a firm foundation of his surposed Treasury of thâ—… Church built upon the superfluous merits and passions of Christ the blessed Virgin and the other Saints 1. Because the Passions of Christ though they were all infinite in value from the dignity of the sufferer yet were none of them superfluous for the cause and ground of his suffering 2. Because there it is not the same reason of merit in the Saints as was in Christ For even those actions of Christ which proceeded from his humane nature had their merit from his Divine nature as the flesh of Christ is said to give life the obedience of Christ to give righteousness the blood of Christ to have redeemed the Church not in it self but as the flesh and the obedience and the blood of the Son of God The Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood Acts 20. 28. He shed his blood as man but he purchased the Church with it as God Those doings and sufferings of Christ which had their original from his Humanity had their excellency from his Divinity not so the doings and sufferings of the Saints for though they proceeded from the spirit of God yet were they the doings and sufferings only of men not of God because the Spirit of God dwelled in them not by a Personal Union but only by a powerful Communion 3. Because there is not the same reason of the acceptance of the Saints merits as of Christs For Gods promise of accepting the sufferings of his Son for the expiation of our sins is most evident not so of accepting the sufferings of his servants were they more then enough for themselves There is not in all the written word the least contract or Covenant of Gods making That he would accept superfluous merits or sufferings or satisfaction from some when for defects and demerits and dissatisfaction from others Besides what a strange insolency is it for a Divine to deny to Christian souls the Imputation of that part of Christs sufferings which is absolutely necessary both for Gods satisfaction and for their own salvation and at the same time to avow the imputation of that Part of Christs sufferings which he professeth to be superfluous For if necessary sufferings or doings may not how should unnecessary be imputed But above all it is a most abominable insolency to deny the imputation of Christs righteousnesse which is both substantial and satisfactory and to allow the imputation of the Saints righteousnesse which is not substantial as to its supposed superfluity and cannot be satisfactory if it could be superfluous t is not sufficient to justifie them that have it much less them that have it not The blessed Virgin her self did say My soul doth magnifie the Lord and my Spirit hath rejoyced in God my Saviour Ascribing to her God not to her self the honour of her salvation Therefore though she had a vast stock of oile in her Vessel for her own lamp yet I fear if any foolish Virgin which had not so should say unto her Give me of your oyl for my lamp is gone out she would turn the parable into a history and say not so lest there be not enough for me and for you Matth. 25. 9. This answer the Text in effect gives for her as for the wisest of all Virgins and therefore 't is most probable she would give it for her self and if so To let pass other absurdities T is certain you egregiously affront the mother of God in taking away her oile without her consent if you do not egregiously delude the sons of men in saying that her oyl will serve to feed their lamps you may as well say that her good works will serve to nourish and sustain their Faith or that her Faith will serve to purge and save their souls And as for the other Saints they cannot satisfie the Justice of God for themselves and much less for others because there are two impediments of their perfection in righteousnesse and an imperfect righteousness if it could be spared would in vain be communicated The first is the impediment of their Original the second is the impediment of their Actual sin They are both affirmed together by the Holy Ghost Prov. 20 9 Who can say I have made my heart clean sc. from my original corruption I am pure from my sin sc. from my actual transgression He that cleanseth the heart knoweth best how far he hath cleansed it we cannot cleanse our hearts but by his help and assistance if we can let us say no longer Make me a clean heart O God and he owneth no such cleansing in this world but which still leaveth some uncleannesse behind it He that hath made no use of his assistance is not at all concerned in this Interrogatory Who can say I
say it for he is cordially turning to him in all Thus was it with St. Peter look upon the course of his obedience you find him after his greatest undertakings grievously turning away from our blessed Saviour but look upon his repentance you find him earnestly turning to him Christ assured him his Faith should not fail and yet he should deny him thrice But we are sure his works failed and may be as sure our own works will fail so we must trust to our faith not to our works if we desire not to fail of our Justification 18. And I would gladly know how your doctrine of justification by works can agree with these three Scripture expressions justified by his free grace Rom. 3. 24. justified by Faith Rom. 5. 1. and justified by his blood Rom. 5. 9. For grace and works are set down as contraries mutually expelling one the other in the matter of Justification Rom. 11. 6. If by Grace then is it no more of works otherwise Grace is no more Grace But if it be of Works then is it no more Grace otherwise Work is no more Work So also Christ and Works Gal. 2. 21. If righteousnessâ—… come by the Law then Christ is dead in vaine So also Faith and Works Rom. 3. 28. A man is justified by Faith without the deeds of the Law so that to be justified by Works is to be justified without Grace without Christ without Faith unless we will make contraries not only abide but also agree one with another whereas in the doctrine of Justification by Faith all these expressions are as admirably reconciled among themselves as they are powerfully and plainly used to set forth our reconciliation with God For to be justified by Grace and by Christ and by Faith are so far from being contraries that they all speak one and the same truth namely this That we are justified through the free grace of Goâ—… for the mâ—…rit and bâ—…ood of Christ by a lively Faith applying that blood unto our souls and our souls unâ—… our God 〈◊〉 a lively Faith is not wiâ—…out works in the man 〈◊〉 justâ—…fieth though it be in the act of jusâ—…ification And therein it must be without â—…ks that it may be with Christ for if righteousnesse come by works it cannot come by Christ. 19. And what a madnesse is it for frail and weak flesh what a wickednesse is it for corrupt and sinful flesh to set up its own instead of its Saviours righteousnesse For though this doctrine may pretend to be most zealous for obedience yet is it in truth most averse from it nay most opposite against it so saith the Apostle Rom. 103. For they being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and going about to establish their own righteousnesse have not submitted themselves to the righteousnesse of God This was a great disobedience in the Jews but a greater in the Christians for they might be ignorant of the righteousnesse of God who knew not Christ not so we who know him Therefore if they in going about to establish their own righteousness did not submit unto the righteousness of God then we by going about to establish our righteousness must needs moreover wilfully resist and disobey Gods righteousness And in vaine do we talk of any other obedience whiles we are guilty of this resistance Yet I fear he came very near this guilt who said that justification by Faith alone was a most pestilent doctrine pestilentissimum dogma Stapâ—…eton qu. quodl 3. c. 9. cum itaque forgetting sure that St. Paul had fi st taught it And they who denounced Anathema against those who maintain this doctrine si quis dixerit solâ fide impium justificari Anathema sit Concil Trid. ses 6. can 9. forgetting sure that St. Paul still maintained it for their expurgatory Criticks durst not expunge this Position out of his Epistles though they durst out of the Index made upon them And this guilt must needs be very dangerous if not fully damnable because it labours to establish our own instead of our Saviours righteousness for so the same Council can 11. si quis dixerit justificari homines solâ imputatione justitiae Christi Anathema â—…it If any say that men are justified only by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse let him be accursed Jesu God didst thou give us thy righteousness to be imputed to us to bless us by taking away the guilt of our sins that in thee all the Nations of the earth might be blessed Gen. 22. 18. and shall any Ministers of thy Gospel dare to curse us for relying upon the imputation of thy righteousness was not our sin made thine that thy righteousness might be made ours and how can it be made ours but by imputation or why is it made ours by imputation but only for our Justification so saith the Text expressely 2 Cor. 5. 21. For he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousnesse of God in him As Christ was made sin for us so we are made righteousnesse in Christ neither the one nor the other by inherence therefore both alike by imputation for a third way is unimaginable Therefore St. Augustine thus glosses the forecited text Ipse peccatum nos justitia nec nostra sed Dei nec in nobis sed in ipso sicut ipse peccatum non suum sed nostrum nec in se sed in nobis He was made sin and we were made righteousnesse not our own but Gods righteousnesse nor in our selves but in our Saviour as he was made sin not his own but our sin nor in himself but in us That is in one word we are so made the righteousnesse of God in him as he was made sin for us to wit by imputation Therefore neither St. Paul nor St. Augustine neither Scripture nor Church were much regarded by him who made a meer scoffe of this imputation as if it were a phansied Chimera of mans invention and not a real mercy of Gods Donation And what else doth that argumentation import urged by your great Doctor si concupiscentia est verum peccatum tum Christus non verè sed imputativè redemit nos a peccatis Bellar. de am gr lib. 5. c. 9. If concupiscence be a sin then Christ hath not tâ—…uely buâ—… imputatively redeemed us from our sins why did he say imputativè for putativè imputatively for putatively but only to perswade the world that imputation is but a meer imagination This seems to be the drift of his argument to make good mans righteousnesse as that which is not at all infected by original and therefore may not be at all impaired by actual sin and this is little lesse in the business of Justification than to make void the righteousnesse of Christ. It was a wretchednesse to say Concupiscence is no sin in the regenerate which St. Paul called a sin in himself above ten times together Rom. 7. But it was moreover a wickednesse to say
that Redemption by Christ might upon any pretence be called imputative that is imaginary for so he is pleased to make the word signifie which is the whole scope of Gods most holy word and the only support and comfort of mens sinful souls By the first assertion he did overmuch exalt our own righteousnesse and took the ready course to bring us to presumption But by the second he did much more depresse the righteousnesse of Christ and so took the readie course to bring us to despair for if our redemption be imaginary our Salvation must be desperate And betwixt these two rocks of presumption and despair it is hard for any man to sail so warily as not to make shipwrack of his soul it being equally dangerous for him to rely upon his own and not to rely upon his Saviours righteousnesse Without doubt holy David though he had served God with all his might yet prayed to his dying day Enter not into Judgement with thy servant and hath accordingly bequeathed this Prayer as a legacy to all Gods servants ever since not excepting the most diligent and the most dutifull thus to pray for their Justification and then to pray most earnestly for it when they are drawing neerest Judgement That the Justification which they have now in title or sense of the Law they may also then have in the sentence of the Judge for that the one is not compleated without the other and upon what ground can any man pray to God not to enter into Judgement with him who knoweth himself still under the Accusation and Condemnation of the Law for the Judge must proceed according to the Law and how can he be exempted from the accusation and condemnation of the Law who hath broken it himself but by the satisfaction of his surety according to that of the Apostle Who is he that condemneth it is Christ that died Rom. 8. 34. No other satifaction but the death of Christ could consist with the Justice of God for that was indispenâ—…able and required it no other could consist with the Truth of God for that was infallible and had promised it no other could consist with the Office of Christ who took upon him the nature of man that he might expiate the sins of men no other could consist with our salvation who could not be saved unless our sins had been expâ—…ated This was a â—…urthen not to be taken from off our shoulders a yoke not to be taken from off our necks but only by the hand of the Messias in the Judgement of the Jews themselves for so the Chaldee Paraphrase interprets those words Isa. 10 27. The yoke shall be destroyed because of the Anoixting A facie Messiae vel propter Messiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The yoke shall be destroyed because of the Messias or by the power of Christ Our own hands which brought it cannot remove it our own hands which made it cannot destroy it we may struggle till we break our necks nay yet more our hearts but we cannot break our yoke The Spiritual Assyrian that so easily brought us down can more easily keep us under none can break his Army but He that hath bruised his Head none can rescue us from his captivity but he that hath led captivity captive even the Captain of our salvation This is the Justification God promiseth to Israel and I hope you will not say he fails in promise by giving another or rather by giving none for what is merited or purchased by us is not given us saying O â—…srael trust in the Lord for with the Lord there is mercy and with him is 〈◊〉 redemption And he shall redeem Israel from all his sins Psal. 130. 7 8. Say not you he shall redeem Israel from some sins when God saith from All Say not you From sins before regeneration by the first but not from sins after it by the second Justification For as to such sins the plenteous redemption is not with the Lord but with Israel and so you will quite contradict the Text. 1. In its exhortation O Israel trust in the Lord For Israel may trust in the Lord to be redeemed from his sins only till his regeneration but in himself after it 2. In its assertion For with the Lord there is mercy and with him is plenteous redemption whereas t is rather to be said according to this supposition For with your selves there is merit and with him is plenteous renumeration or with your selves is plenteous redemption to redeem you from your greatest sins those committed against the greater light and with the greater unthankfulness for such are the sins after Regeneration But with the Lord is onely a â—…cantie redempâ—…ion to redeem you from sins before your Regeneration when you neither had light to know them nor power to resist them By which means you do in effect bid Israel Trust in himself all his life long and in God only some sew daies or perchance hours sc. no longer then till he is Baptzed or cleansed by the laver of Regeneration since very few sober Christians and no one National Church doth now defer the Baptism of Infants longer then their very first Infancy and most Divines do think That Infants are regenerated when they are baptized 3. You will contradict the text in its promise And he shall redeem Israel from all his sins for you in effect say That Israel shall redeem himself from the greatest part of his own sins Therefore pray let this Redemption continue till the last minute of your lives till it be perfected by Glorification that it may redeem Israel from All his sins And since it is a Redemption from all sin pray let it be called Justification unless you can teach us what else it is that redeemeth us from the guilt of sin I will conclude this point with that prayer wherewith our blessed Saviour concludes his life and hath taught us to conclude Ours Into thy hands Lord I commend my Spirit This is certainly the best the last good work you can do To commend your soul to God Will you do this in your own righteousnesse then say not For thou hast redeemed me but For I have served thee O God thou God of Truth Will you do this in your Saviours righteousnesse then be ashamed of that doctrine which doth undervalue this Redemption But do what you will and say what you can These three Truths are irresistible and should be undeniable 1. He only can absolve guiltinesse whose Justice makes us Guilty 2. He only can pronounce us Just whose will is the rule of Justice 3. He only can acquit in Judgement who only is the supreme Judge And therefore since to be absolved from guiltiness to be pronounced Just and to be acquitted in the Jugement are all three comprised in this one word Justificari To be justified we may not rely upon our selves but upon our God not upon our own works and righteousnesse but upon our Saviours merits and mercies for