negligence or of ignorance corrupt the innocencie of the law of Nature which we all receiue in the Protoplast Adam S. Ambrose in another place iumpeth with Bede in these words Non discreuit concupiscentiam hanc à peccato sed miscuit hoc significans quia cum nec suspicio quidem esset istud non licerè apud deum cognoui inquit esse peccatum Sub sua persona quasi generalem agit causam Lexitaque concupiscentiam prohibet quae propterea quod oblectamento est non putabatur esse peccatum He hath not discerned this concupiscence from sinne but hath coupled it with sinne signifying thereby that when there was not so much as any suspition that this thing was not lawfull before God I knew saith he that it is sinne Vnder his own person he pleadeth as it were the generall cause The law therefore forbiddeth concupiscence which because it delighteth seemeth not to be sinne Thus writeth S. Ambrose whose words cannot possibly be vnderstood of any other concupiscence than of that which is inuoluntarie and originall Thirdly that their owne vulgar Latine text which the late councell of Trent preferreth before both the Hebrew and the Greeke and commandeth all papists to vse it as authenticall and none other hath the word iniquitas in both places and doth call as well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ininiquitie these are the expresse words omnis iniquitas peccatum est All iniquitie is sinne Loe their owne translation to which all papists are tied as a Beare to a stake doth flatlie confound them all and saith plainelie and expressely That euerie iniquitie is a sinne And yet the papists of Rhemes bluntishly and impudently defend the contrarie crying out with open mouthes That some iniquitie is not sinne The truth is this that they are driuen to a non plus and cannot tell in the world what to say against this doctrine of concupiscence in the regenerate For both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is truly and fitly tearmed iniquitas or iniquitie VVhich but that I studie to be briefe I could shew by a thousand testimonies out of S. Austen S. Ambrose and S. Bede Answere therefore ô papist if ye can or if ye dare not because ye cannot then reclaime your selues and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you and adiure you if your hearts faile you not and if your owne consciences condemne you not to send me an answere to this short challenge which I haue compiled very briefely so once to prouoke you to the open combat which I haue now many years expected at your hands and could neuer yet find so much courage in any of you all VVherefore to seale vp the veritie of this article as an vndoubted truth I will here adde for the complement as amost delicat post-past to satisfie the longing appetites of the Iesuit Parsons the arch priest Blackwell and all the traiterous crew of that Iesuited brotherhood the flat testimonie of their saint Thomas Aquinas whose doctrine they are bound to defend beleeue and approue and may not in any case refuse or denie the same these are his expresse words Dicendū quod illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationisnon perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potest esse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum ingenere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem perueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati VVe must answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefest in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some vnperfect thing in this kind VVhereupon it commeth that such a motion of sensualitie preuenting reason is a veniall sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne Thus writeth Aquinas out of whose words I note these important obseruations First that this Aquinas is a popish canonized saint Secondly that for his great learning he was surnamed Doctor Angelicus The Angelicall Doctor Thirdly that Pope Vrbanus the fourth and Pope Innocentius the fift did so admire and reuerence the excellent learning of this famous schoole-doctor who was a learned clarke indeed that they confirmed his doctrine for authenticall and gaue it the first place after the canonicall Scripture Fourthly that this great doctor so highly renowned in the Romish church that no papist may denie or gainesay that which he hath written graunteeth freely teacheth plainely and auoucheth constantly that the inordinate motion of sensualitie which goeth before reason is properly a sinne though but a veniall sinne as he tearmeth it For it is one thing to be a sinne perfectly another thing to be a sinne properly A veniall and little sinne is as well and as truly a sinne as a mortall and great sinne as the papists tearme them For he is as truly and properly a theefe that stealeth a lambe or a goose as he that stealeth an oxe or a horse though not a theefe in so high degree For mortall and veniall sinnes as the papists tearm them doe onely differ Secundum magis minus according to more and lesse But in truth euery sinne is mortall as I haue alreadie proued in my booke of Motiues Answer ô papists if ye can if not repent for shame The fift Article Of the condigne so supposed merite of workes THe papists either of ignorance or of malice doe most vnchristianlie slander the professors of Christs Gospell as though they were enemies to good workes when in deed they both thinke preach and write more Christianly more religiously and more sincerely than the papists doe of and concerning godlie actions and good workes In regard hereof before I come to the maine point of that which I purpose to oppugne in this article I graunt first of all that though good workes neither doe nor can goe before iustification yet they euer follow as the fruits follow the tree the persons that are freely iustified by Gods mercie in Christ Iesus for his merits and condigne deserts I graunt secondly that though good workes goe not before iustification yet doe they so necessarilie goe before saluation that no man without them can attaine eternall life when possibilitie is graunted to doe them I graunt thirdly that good workes are the true effects of predestination by which the children of God make their saluation sure vnto themselues and manifest vnto the world Yet this notwithstanding I hold constantlie beleeue stedfastly and affirme Christianlie that albeit good workes are the effects of predestination and necessarie fruits of faith and iustification yet neither are they the cause of predestination nor of iustification neither
may not onely truly but also iustly require reward at Gods hands in regard of his promise freely made vnto vs. But I euer denie withall that any reward is due to our best workes for any condigne merit or desert of or in our workes Gods free acceptation mercie and promise set apart For as Saint Austen grauely saith Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam Woe euen to the best liuer vpon earth if thou examine his life thy mercy set apart Answere ô papists if ye can and if ye cannot then repent and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you I prouoke you to the combat I adiure you all ioyntlie and euery one of you seuerally for the credite of your cause for the honour of your Pope and the life of popish doctrine which now lieth bleeding and wil shortly yeeld vp the Ghost if some soueraigne remedie bee not speedily prouided for the same The sixt Article Of the Popish distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes ALthough it be true that all sinnes are not equall but one greater than another and although it be also true that in a good and godly sence some sinne may be tearmed mortall and some veniall which yet may more fitly be called sinnes regnant and not regnant neuerthelesse most true it is to the euerlasting confusion of all impenitent papists that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature and onely veniall by way of Gods free acceptation and mercie for his owne name sake and merits of his deare sonne our Lord Iesus I prooue it first both briefely and euidently For Christ himselfe telleth vs in his holy Gospell that we must giue a straight account of euery idle word in the generall day of iudgement And for no other end doubtlesse must this account be made but onely because euery idle word is flatly against the law of God This the papists can neuer denie it is euident to euery child And yet must they likewise confesse that idle words be those sinnes which they call venials And consequently they must confesse against their wils and against their professed Romish doctrine that all sinnes are mortall that is to say against the law of God This doctrine of our Sauiour Christ Iesus is confirmed by the testimonie of S. Iohn his beloued Apostle where he telleth vs that euery sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the transgression of Gods law as is alreadie prooued at large in the fourth article of concupiscence And the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a declining from the right way doth plainely confirme the same Secondly because our popish Rhemists confesse in plaine tearms that euery sinne is a swaruing from the law of God For doubtlesse that which swarueth from the law is truly said to be against the law but not agreeable to the law Thirdly because the famous popish Frier and Romish bishop Iosephus Angles teacheth the same doctrine in his booke dedicated to the Pope himselfe These are his own expresse words Omne peccatum veniale est alicuius legis transgressio Patet quia omne veniale est contra rectam rationem agere contra rectam rationeÌ„ est agere contra legem naturalem precipientem non esse à regula rectae rationis deuiandum Euery sinne veniall is the transgression of some law This is cleere because euery veniall sinne is against right reason and to doe against right reason is to doe against the law of nature which commaundeth vs not to depart or swarue from the rule of right reason Loe euery veniall sinne is against right reason and against the law of nature which is giuen to euery one in his creation in his birth or natiuitie Fourthly because Durandus another famous papist confuteth the late receiued popish opinion of Thomas Aquinas which the Pope and his Iesuits hold to wit that veniall sinnes are preter legem non contra Besides the law but not against the law These are Duâ—ands owne words Ad argumentum dicendum quod omne peccatum est contra legem dei naturalem vel inspiratam vel ab eis deriuatam To the argument answere must be made that euery sinne is against the law of God either naturall or inspired or deriued from them And this opinion of M. Durand is this day commonly defended in the popish vniuersities and schooles So saith Frier Ioseph these are his words D. Thomas eius sectatores tenent peccatum veniale non tam esse contra legem quam preter legem Sequitur Durandus tamen alij permulti hanc sententiam impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata Et haec opinio modo in scbolis videtur communior S. Thomas and his followers hold that a veniall sinne is not so much against the law as besides the law But Durand and many others impugne this opinion auouching veniall sinnes to be against the commaundements And this opinion seemeth now adaies to be more common in the schooles Here I wish the reader to note by the way out of the word modo now adaies the mutabilitie of Romish religion For in that he saith modo now adaies he giueth vs to vnderstand that their doctrine is now otherwise than it was of old and in former ages A note worthie to be remembred For the old Romane religion was catholicke pure and sound and with it doe not I contend but I impugne late Romish faith and doctrine which the Pope and his Romish Schoole-men haue brought into the Church Fiftly because their canonized martyr Iohn Fisher the late bishop of Rochester teacheth the same doctrine so plainely as euery child must needs perceiue the truth in that behalfe These are his expresse words Quod peccatum veniale solum ex dei misericordia veniale sit in hoc tecum sentio That a veniall sinne is onely veniall through the mercie of God and not of it owne nature therein doe I agree vnto you Thus saith our bishop And as he telleth me that he agreeth with Luther therein so doe I tell our Iesuites that I agree with him with Durand Almaine and the other papists that teach the same doctrine Sixtly because Gerson another famous popish writer holdeth the same opinion These are his expresse words Nulla offensa dei est venialis de se nisi tantum modo per respectum ad diuinam misericordiam qui non vult de facto quamlibet offensam imputare ad mortem cum illud posset iustissimè Et ita concluditur quod peccatum mortale veniale in esse tali non distinguuntur intrinsecè essentialiter sed solum per respectum ad diuinam gratiam quae peccatum istud imputat ad poenam mortis aliud non No offence of God is veniall of it owne nature but onely in respect of Gods mercie who will not de facto imputa euery offence to death though he might doe it most iustly And
so I conclude that mortall and veniall sinnes as they be such are not distinguished intrinse cally and essentially but onely in respect of Gods grace which assigneth one sinne to the paine or torture of death and not another Thus writeth this famous popish bishop who was a man of high esteeme in the counsell of Constance Whose onely testimonie if his words be well marked is able to confound the papists and to strike them dead For first he telleth them plainely that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature Secondly that no sinne is veniall saue only in respect of Gods mercie Thirdly that God may most iustly iustissimè condeme vs for the least sinne we do Note seriously gentle reader the word iustissimè Fourthly that mortall and veniall sinnes are the same intrinse cally and essentially and differ but accidentally that is to say they differ in accident but not in nature in quantitie but not in qualitie in mercy but not in deformitie in the subiect but not in the obiect in imputation but not in enormitie saue onely that the one is a greater mortall sinne than is the other For as Gerson auoucheth we may iustly be damned for the least sinne of all howsoeuer other papists doe flatter themselues in their cursed deformed venials Seuenthly because sinne in generall is the transgression of Gods law as S. Ambrose defineth it yea euery word deed or desire against Gods law as S. Austen describeth it Their words are set downe in the fourth article of this discourse Eightly because the Iesuit Bellarmine vnawares confesseth the same against himselfe These are his owne words Respondeo omne peccatum esse contra legem dei non positiuam sed aternam vt Aug. rectè docet Omnis enim iusta lex siue à deo siue ab bomine detur ab aterna dei lege deriuatur Est enim aterna lex vt malum sit viol are regulam I answere that euery sinne is against the law of God not positiue but eternall as Austen teacheth rightly For euery iust law whether it be given of God or of man is deriued from the eternal law of God For the eternall law is that it is euill to offend against the rule These are our Iesuits owne words which as euery child can easily discerne doe euidently confute himselfe and his Romish doctrine For first vnder euery sinne must needs be contained their veniall sinnes or els some sinnes shall be no sinnes which implieth flat contradiction Secondly he telâ—eth vs that euery sinne and consequently veniall sinnes are against the eternall law of God Thirdly he graunteth that they are not onely besides the law sed contra legem but euen against the law Fourthly hence it is cleere and euident that the law eternall is the chiefe and principall law of all other laws seeing from it all other lawes are deriued Ninthly because the papists cannot possibly yeeld any sound reason why in the sinnes of theft one shall be mortall and another veniall For example sake let vs suppose one at one time to steale so many egs as will make a mortall sinne by Romish doctrine another at another time to steale so many as will make a venial sinne by the same doctrine then I demaund of our papists Why God cannot iustly condemne the theefe to hell that stealeth but so many egs and for all that can iustly condemne him to eternall torment that stealeth but one only egge aboue the said number For this must they doe and a good reason here of must they yeeld which I am well assured they can neuer do or els confesse euery sinne to be mortall and so against their wils to subscribe to mine opinion Answere ô papists if ye can if ye cannot then repent for shame and yeeld vnto the truth The seuenth Article Of popish vnwritten traditions THe papists beare the world in hand that many things necessarie for mans saluation are not conteined in the holy scriptures of the old and new testament and consequently that none can be saued but such as beleeue their vnwritten traditions and what their Pope telleth them For the exact knowledge whereof I put downe these propositions The first Proposition with the first reason THe written word or holy scripture containeth in it selfe euery doctrine necessarie for mans saluation I prooue it by the manifold texts both of the old and new testament by the authoritie of the holy fathers and by the the testimonie of renowned and best approoued popish writers Ex testamente veteri Locus primus Ye shall not add to the word which I speak vnto you neither shall ye take any thing away from it Againe thus That which I command that only doe thou to the Lord. Neither add any thing nor take any thing away Againe thus Only be thou strong and of a valiant courage that thou mayest obserue and doe according to all the law which Moses my seruant hath coÌ„manded thee Thou shalt not turne away from it neither to the right hand nor to the left Bee carefull that ye keepe all things which are written in the booke of the law of Moses that ye decline not from them neither to the right hand nor to the left By these manifold texts we may see euidently that the holy scriptures are most perfect and that nothing may bee taken from them neither any thing added to them But doubtlesse if all doctrine necessarie for mans saluation were not sufficiently conteined in them then of necessitie many things should be added to them Bellarmine the mouth of all papists answereth to these and the like places that they are not spoken of the written word precisely but of Gods word generally which is partly written and partly vnwritten Non ait inquit ille ad verbum quod scripsi sed quod ego precipio He saith not quoth our Iesuite to the word which I haue written but which I command But doublesse this is a miserable shift and a very childish answere For first God himselfe wrote his owne wordes in two tables of stone and then deliuered them to Moses Yea after Moses had broken the said tables in his vehement zeale against Idolatrie God commanded Moses to hew two other tables of stone like to the first in which he writ againe the wordes that were in the first tables and commanded Moses to put them vp in an arke of wood Secondly Moses expounded the law of God to the Israelites at large VVhich large explication of the law God himselfe commanded him to write and to giue the same to the Israelites that they might put it in the side of the arke of the couenant and there keepe it for a witnesse against them Thirdly God commanded Iosue to keepe and obserue all things which were written in the booke of the law which Moses had deliuered to the Leuites charging him to meditate therein day and night that he might doe according to the same Fourthly Moses telleth
Athanasius that albeit the words be not expressed in the scriptures yet haue they that meaning which holy writ approoueth Answere ô papists if ye can if not repent for shame and yeeld vnto the truth The eight Article Of the impossibilitie of keeping Gods commandements in popish sense TOuching this article the reader must seriously obserue with me this adiunct in popish sense because it is both emphaticall and of great moment For I will not affirme simply and absolutely that Gods children can not keepe his commandements in a godlie sense and Christian meaning but this I constantly denie and at this presēt intend in God to proue the same effectually against all Iesuits and Iesuited papists That none haue kept do keepe or can keepe Gods commaundements in popish sense and meaning viz. that none are so pure holy and free from sinne that they can stand with God in iudgment and challenge eternall life as of debt due vnto them for their holy life Marke well gentle reader my discourse for I hope in God to hit the naile on the head and to set downe that which will be as heauie to the papists heart as a piece of lead The Apostle telleth vs in plaine and very expresse words That the best liuers vpon earth are sinners In multis enim offendimus omnes For we all offend in manie things But certes if it be true as it is most true indeed for S. Iames being inspired with the holy Ghost cannot lie That the holy Apostles committed many sinnes then doubtlesse it is not in euerie ones power to keepe Gods commandements neither will it helpe the papists to distinguish after their wonted manner of mortall and veniall sinnes For besides that I haue proued alreadie in the sixt Article that euery sinne is mortall in it owne proper nature both the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the transgression of the law and also the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a declining from the right way doe euidentlie conuince the same For it can neuer be trulie said that hee performeth and keepeth the law which transgresseth the law or swarueth from the same It is the truth which S. Paul alledgeth out of the law Cursed is euerie one that abideth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to doe them It is also the truth which S. Iames saith That whosoeuer keepeth the whole law and yet faileth in one point is become guiltie of all To which may be added innumerable texts both of the old and new testament that the best liuers vpon earth doe sinne and transgresse Gods commaundements Holy Moses telleth vs in the first booke of his Pentatench That when God saw that the wickednes of man was great on the earth that all the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart were only euill continually then it repented God that he had made mā on the earth Iob telleth vs That God found no stedfastnes in his Saints yea he saith farther That the heauens are not cleane in his sight And he addeth these wordes How much more is man abhominable and filthie which drinketh iniquitie like water The kingly Prophet saith that in Gods sight none that liueth can be iustified VVise Salomon saith that no man living is able truely to say he is cleane from sinne The same wise man saith in like maner that the iust man sinneth many times Esay saith that all our righteousnes is as filthie clouts Esdras saith he was ashamed for his own sinnes and for the sinnes of the people because their trespasse was growne vp vnto heauen Saint Paul sheweth at large that all men are sinners and that no man is able to be iustified by his workes All saith hee both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne There is none righteous no not one they haue all gone out of the way they haue all beene made altogether vnprofitable there is none that doth good no not one Now we know that whatsoeuer the law saith it saith to them which are vnder the law that euery mouth may be stopped and all the world be subiect to the iudgement of God There is no difference for all hane sinned and are depriued of the glory of God and are iustified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus Againe in another place he hath these words For they being ignorant of the righteousnesse of God going about to stablish their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the rightenesse of God the case is cleere and euident For as the Prophet saith If God should marke our iniquities and reward vs after our deeds none of vs were able to endure it Now let vs heare S. Austens graue sentence concerning this controuersie Diliges inquit proximum tuum sicut teipsum Deum vero ex toto corde ex tota anima ex tota mente vt omnes cogitationes tuas omnem vitam omnem intellectū in illū conferas à quo habes ea ipsa quae confers Cum autē ait toto corde tota anima tota mente nullam vitae nostrae partem reliquit quae vacare debeat quasi locum dare vt alia ve velit frui Thou shalt loue thy neighbour saith he as thy selfe but God with thy whole heart with thy whole soule and with thy whole mind that thou maist cōferre vpon him all thy thoughts and all thy life all thine vnderstanding of whom thou hast receiued the selfe same which thou doest conferre or giue But when he saith with all thy heart with all thy soule with all thy mind he hath left no part of our life which may be vacant and as it were giue place to haue fruition of any other thing The same Saint Austen saith againe in another place That this commaundement of louing God with all our heart cannot be perfecty fulfilled of any man in this life These are his wordes In quae plenitudinc charitatis praeceptum illud implebitur Diliges dominū Deum tuū ex toto corde tuo ex tota anima tua ex tota mente tua Nam cum est adhuc aliquid carnalis concupiscentiae quod vel continendo froenetur non omnimodo ex tota anima diligitur Deus Non enim caro sine anima concupiscit quamuis caro concupiscere dicatur quia carn aliter anima concupiscit Tunc erit iustus sine vllo omnino peccato quia nulla lex erit in mēbris eius repugnans legi mentis eius sed prorsus toto corde tota anima tota mente diligit Deum quod est primum summumque praeceptum Cur ergo non praeciperetur homini ista perfectio quamuis cam in hac vita nemo habeat Non enim rectè curritur si quo currendum est nesciatur In which fulnesse of charitie that commaundement shall bee fulfilled Thou shalt loue thy Lord thy
Latine word also agreeth to the same reason because it is called iniquitie as being against equitie for euery one that sinneth is by reason of sinne contrarie to the equitie of Gods law See more to this effect in the eight article following Dionysius Carthusianus a famous papist hath these words Lex autem diuina est aequitas ipsa sicque mortale peccatum est iniquitas id est non aequitas vtpote violatio aequitatis The law of God is equitie it selfe and consequently iniquitie that is not equitie to wit the transgression of equitie is a mortall sinne Nicolaus de Lyra another famous popish writer hath these words Peccatum est transgressio legis diuinae Lex autem diuina est ipsa aequitas ideo in omni peccato mortali est equitatis corruptio per consequens iniquitas Sinne is the transgression of the law diuine and therefore in euery mortall sinne there is corruption of equitie and consequently there is also iniquitie The Corollarie Now gentle reader thou hast heard the expresse words and plaine testimonies as well of the auntient fathers S. Ambrose S. Austen and S. Bede as also of the two famous popish writers Carthusianus and Lyranus concerning this great question and most important point of doctrine in which the very life of poperie doth consist I haue proued first euen by the testimonie of S. Paule and of S. Austen expounding his words as also of the Iesuit Bellarmine graunting the same that concupiscence remaining after baptisme in the regenerate is both called sinne and is properly sinne indeed Secondly that the first motions of concupiscence which are connaturall to the corrupt man and can no way be auoided are flatly forbidden by this commaundement Thou shalt not couet Thirdly that though the said rebellious motions be inuoluntarie in the worke yet are they voluntarie in the originall which is sufficient saith S. Austen Fourthly that Cardinall Bellarmine not able truly to answere S. Austens words hath in his explication added deceitfully this word quodammodo after a sort VVhich word cannot be found in S. Austen neither is it agreeable to his meaning But such beggerly shifts and sillie euasions are the props and staies of late Romish religion Fiftly that by S. Iohns doctrine euery deflection from the eternall law is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently it is properly sinne Sixtly that S. Ambrose S. Austen and S. Bede doe all three affirme constantly and with vniforme assent that sinne is nothing els but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a transgression of the law of God Seuenthly that by the flat doctrine not only of Saint Bede but also of two famous popish writers whose authoritie is euer most forcible against papists Dionysius Carthus and Nicholaus Lyranus iniquitie is a mortall sinne because it is against the eternall law which is equitie it selfe and the will of God Eightly that our papists of Rhemes do confute themselues vnawares while they tell vs that euery sinne is a declining and swaruing from Gods law but withal denie that euery such swaruing from Gods law is properly sinne For seeing Gods law is nothing els but his will as is alreadie proued the papists must either confesse that to swarue and decline from Gods will is properly sinne or els that to decline and swarue from Gods will is consonant and agreeable to his will which to hold is not onely most absurd but withall implieth flat contradiction Against this discourse of originall concupiscence in the regenerate nothing in truth can be alledged for the papists Yet to take away all wrangling I will truly put downe the vpshot of our Rhemists and frame my answer to the same Thus doe they write Though in the 5. chapter verse 17. the Apostle turne the speech affirming euery iniquitie to be sinne yet there the Greeke word is not the same as before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By which it is plaine that there he meaneth by iniquitie mans actuall and proper transgression which must needs be a sinne These are their words to which I answere in this wise First that though the Greeke word be different yet is it equiualent and so the sence all one This to be so S. Austen will testifie with me in these words Nemo dicat aliud est peccatum atque aliud iniquitas Nemo dicat ego peccator homo sum sed iniquus non sum Omnis qui facit peccatum iniquitatem facit Let no man say sinne is one thing and iniquitie another thing Let no man say I am a sinfull man but not vnrighteous For euery one that committeth sinne committeth also iniquitie Thus writeth S. Austen and what he saith the same say Beda and Oecumenius VVho as we see here doth plainely and expressely affirme sinne and iniquitie to be all one So that whatsoeuer is sinne must also be iniquitie and whatsoeuer is iniquitie the same likewise must be sinne Neither is it to the purpose to iterate their vsuall song because as is alreadie prooued Saint Ambrose telleth them in another place that this sinne is committed against the will of man These are his words Numquid quia inuitum hominem dicit peccare immunis debet videri à crimine quia hoc agit quod non vult pressus vi potestatis Non vtique Ipsius enim vitio desidia haec caepta sunt Quia enim mancipauit se per assensum peccato iure illius dominatur Is therefore a man cleere and free from sinne because he saith man sinneth against his will because he doth that which he would not doe being pressed with the violence of power No truly for these things began through his fault and negligence For seeing he consented to be a slaue vnto sinne sinne by right hath dominion ouer him Loe a man is guiltie of sinne yea euen of that sinne which he doth against his will and cannot auoid the same that is of originall concupiscence And S. Ambrose yeeldeth a reason hereof because this impossibilitie came of mans default And this is the very case of infants as is alreadie said Let the reader here obserue seriously with me that S. Ambrose calleth this inuoluntarie concupiscence crimen a crime or mortall sinne Secondly that S. Bede affirmeth not only all to be sinne which is iniquitie but also reputeth the very corruption of innocencie which commeth of infirmitie to be sinne in Gods sight These are his expresse words Omnes qui peccant praeuaricationis rei sunt hoc est non solum illi qui data sibi scriptae legis scita contemnunt sed illi qui innocentiam legis naturalis quam in protoplasto omnes accepimus siue infirmitate siue negligentia siue etiam ignorantia corrumpunt All that sinne are guiltie of preuarication or transgression of the law that is not only they which contemne the precepts of the written law giuen them but they also which either of infirmitie or of