eased of the same burden The voice of Christ to the sicke of the palsie b Mat. 9.2 Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee doth it not giue him present release from the bond thereof Dauid saith c Psal 32.3 Whilest I held my tongue from acknowledging and confessing my sinnes my bones were consumed in my mourning all day for thy hand was heauie vpon me day and night and my moisture was turned into the drouth of Summer I acknowledged my sinne vnto thee and did not hide mine iniquitie I thought I will confesse against my selfe my wickednesse vnto the Lord and thou forgauest the punishment of my sinne By which wordes he giueth vs to vnderstand that the forgiuenesse of his sinnes vpon his repentance and confession thereof was the taking away of the grieuous malady wherwith he was so sore afflicted and vpon experience hereof vttereth those words in the beginning of the Psalme d Ver. 1. Blessed is the man whose vnrighteousnesse is forgiuen and whose sinne is couered Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne as to note that one part of that blessing is to be released from the temporall punishments that are due to sinne Yea and to that purpose he addeth also after e Ver. 6. Aug. Pro hac Pro qua hac pro ipsa venia peccatoruÌ„ For this that is saith S. Austin for forgiuenesse of sinnes shall euery one that is godly make his prayer vnto thee in a time when thou maist be found surely in the ouerflowing of many waters they shall not come neere him Where by many waters he vnderstandeth the manifold crosses and afflictions of this life wherwith we are tossed to and fro by reason of our sinnes and signifieth that the godly man by obtaining forgiuenesse of sinnes obtaineth deliuerance and freedome from the punishment thereof Forgiuenesse of sinnes then is not vnderstood with reseruation of temporal satisfaction neither doth any thing remaine in the nature of punishment to him that by repentance and faith becometh partaker of that mercie As for his distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes applyed to the petition of forgiuenesse of sinnes we know no such neither is any such to be approued as f Of Iustification Sect. 41. before hath bene shewed By Gods hearkening to our prayer all sinnes become veniall if God heare not our prayer for forgiuenesse of sinnes all sinnes continue mortall Our Sauiour Christ knew no such difference as M. Bishop maketh that God when he heareth vs crying vnto him Forgiue vs our trespasses doth forgiue vs some sinnes wholy and othersome but in part or that our prayer should be a speciall meane in some sinnes to obtaine pardon of the fault and release of punishment and in othersome not so No neither did S. Austine euer dreame that God did forgiue sinnes with a reseruation of the punishment thereof he knew well that forgiuenesse altereth the case and nature of afflictions as hath bene before shewed Master Bishop citeth him saying that g Aug. Enchir. cap. 71. De quotidianis breuibus leuibusque peccatis sine quibus haec vita non ducitur quotidiana oratio fidelium satisfacit c. Delet omnino haec oratio minima quotidiana peccata Delet illa à quibus vita fidelium sceleratè etiam gesta sed poeniten â—â—in melius mutata discedit si quemadmodum veraciter dicitur Dimitte nobis c. ita veracitèr dicatur sicut nos c. id est si siat quod dicitur For the daily short and light offences without which this life is not led the daily prayer of the faithfull satisfieth But as he saith so of these daily and light offences so he saith of other also in the next words It blotteth out also those from which the life of the faithfull wickedly led but by repentance changed to better is departed if as it is truly said Forgiue vs our trespasses so it be truly said As we forgiue them that trespasse against vs that is if it be done which is said So then as it satisfieth for the one so it satisfieth for the other also as for the lesser so for the greater and for both obtaineth pardon at Gods hands But Master Bishop here doth meerely abuse his Reader by an equiuocation of the name of satisfaction For Satisfaction with Saint Austine as with all the auncient Ecclesiasticall Writers importeth the meanes whereby we are to intreate and obtaine of God pardon and forgiuenesse of our sinnes but with Master Bishop and his fellowes it importeth a punishment still remaining for sinnes past and already pardoned to be endured either in this life or after death in Purgatorie as he hath before expressed in the beginning of this Chapter Saint Austines meaning then is that the daily prayer of the faithfull sufficeth to obtaine pardon at Gods hands for our daily and common trespasses yea and for greater offences also when by repentance and amendement of life we forsake them but no meaning hath he either that the saying of the Lords prayer should be a recompence to God for our trespasse or that our trespasse being pardoned there should still remaine a satisfaction to be performed for it Now here Master Bishop further denyeth that in the Lords prayer we vse onely plea of pardon for saith he we are taught also to pardon others euen as we will looke to be pardoned And what then what because we are taught freely to pardon others shall we hereupon conceiue that God is hired by our pardoning others to giue pardon vnto vs Our Sauior Christ noteth therby the affection of them to whom it belongeth to vse the plea of pardon he saith not any thing to be construed to the impeachment and derogation of the freenesse of the pardon Meekenesse and readinesse to forgiue is h Gal. 5.22.23 a fruite of the spirit i Rom. 8.15 of adoption by which we cry Abba Father in the voyce of which spirit onely it is that God hearkeneth vnto vs. k Aug. Enchir. cap. 71. EoruÌ„ est dicere Pater noster c. qui iam tali patri regene rati sunt exaqua Spiritu sancto It is for them to say Our Father which art in heauen saith Saint Austine who now are regenerate and borne againe to such a Father of water and of the holy Ghost If we speake not by this spirit our voice is as the voice of strangers and God giueth no regard vnto it Therefore our forgiuenesse of others is not alledged as the cause for which God is moued to forgiue vs but we present it to him as the mark of his spirit which he hath set vpon vs as the token that we are his childreÌ„ to whoÌ„ he hath assigned it for a portioÌ„ to be made partakers of the forgiuenes of sins to whoÌ„ Christ hath ministred coÌ„fort boldnes so to pray His 2. exception is very vaine also for although the Lords prayer contain not all things necessary to saluatioÌ„
addeth that S. Austin in the same passage signifieth plainely that in baptisme all sinne and iniquitie is taken away and that there is left in the regenerate onely an infirmitie and weaknesse But it is his singular impudencie to alledge S. Austin so directly contrarie to his whole drift and purpose in that place which is as before was said to shew that sinne is in vs whilest we liue onely that it may not hurt vs we must haue care that we make not our selues the seruants of it Whereas he saith that iniquitie is taken away he meaneth it of the guilt thereof which ceasseth in the regenerate by the forgiuenesse of their sinnes but otherwise he himselfe affirmeth and approueth Ambrose affirming the same that g Contra Julian lib. 2 lib. 9. cap. 8. Neque enim nulla est tui quitas cùm 〈◊〉 vno homine vel inferiora superioribus contumacitès reluctantur etiamsi vincere non sinantur it is an iniquitie in vs that the flesh lusteth against the spirit albeit it be not suffered to ouercome He saith that the iniquitie being taken away there remaineth an infirmitie but not taking infirmitie in that sence as M. Bishop doth for a meere weaknesse but for that that he himselfe elsewhere expoundeth it when he saith that h De peccatâ—â—eris remis li. 2. cap. 17. Ignorantia infirmitas vitia sunt quae impediunt voluntatem nemoueatur ad faciendum opus bonum vel abopere malo abstinendum ignorance and infirmitie are the vices which do hinder the will that it moueth not to do good or to abstaine from euill which he calleth elsewhere i De nat grae cap. 67. Omni peccati animae duo ista poenaliae ignorantia difficuâ—tas the penalties of euery soule of man Whereby it appeareth that by infirmitie he meaneth that vitiousnesse and corruption of mans nature which ensued of the first sinne whereby it is disabled to the doing of good and forbearing of euill which in part is cured in regeneration but yet in part he saith is remaining still Thus M. Bishop we see maketh the best shift he can with words because in matter he can light vpon nothing to serue his turne 8. W. BISHOP Aug. Epist 29. M. Perkins 4. reason is taken from the record of the ancient Church Charitie in some is more in some lesse in some none the highest degree of all which cannot be increased is in none as long as a man liues vpon earth as long as it may be increased that which is lesse then it should be is in fault by which fault it is that there is no iust man vpon earth that doth good and sinneth not c. For which also though we profit neuer so much it is necessarie for vs to say Forgiue vs our debts though all our worst deeds thoughts be alreadie forgiuen in Baptisme Answer That here is neuer a word touching concupiscence or to proue Originall sinne to remaine after Baptisme which is in question but onely that the best men for want of perfect Charitie do often sinne venially which we graunt R. ABBOT S. Austin saith that a August Epist 29. Plenissima charitas quae iam non possit augeri quamdiu hic homo vttâ—â— est in nemâ—neâ— quamdiu autem augeri potest quod minus est quà m debet ex vitio est perfect charitie which can now no further be increased is in no man so long as he liueth here And so long as it may be increased saith he surely that that it is lesse then it shold be EX VITIO EST is by reason of some vice corruption default M. Bishop answereth that here is neuer a word of concupiscence or to proue Originall sinne to remaine after Baptisme But if he had meant honestly he should haue told vs what is meant by that vitium call it vice or blemish or staine or corruption or default or all these If it be not vnderstood of concupiscence and the continuing blot and staine of Originall sinne he should haue told vs what we are otherwise to vnderstand by it But he could deuise nothing else whereof to vnderstand it and therefore is content with a very homely and beggarly shift to passe it ouer that forsooth there is nothing said of concupiscence when yet that that is said cannot be meant of any thing else And that it is so meant S. Austin himselfe plainely confirmeth vnto vs by the like sentence in another place b De na gra cap. 38. Si in Abeltusio charitas Dei adhuc erat quo posset deberet augeri quicquid minus erat ex vitioerat If in Abel saith he there were wherein the loue of God might and ought to be increased that that was too little ex vitio erat was by reason of some vice or corruption And this he sheweth to be the same that the Apostle speaketh of when he saith Let not sinne raigne in your mortall bodies c. This sinne he tearmeth vitium and saith c Ex hoc vitio mittitur oculus quonon oportet By this vice or corruption the eye is cast whither it ought not to be and if it go forward and preuaile adulterie is committed Againe he addeth Hoc peccatum id est hunc vitiosae affectionis appetitum qui magna ex parte frenarunt c. This sinne that is to say this lust of vitious affection they who haue for the most part bridled haue deserued to be called iust And thus very often he calleth concupiscence a vice and the motions thereof vices as before was said Now in the place cited S. Austin addeth as touching the effect of this vice d Epist 29. Ex quo vitio non est nisius super terram c. Ex quo vitio non iustificabitur c. By reason of which vice there is not a iust man vpon earth that doth good and sinneth not By reason of which vice no man liuing shall be iustified or found iust in the sight of God By reason of which vice if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues c. Which two latter clauses M. Bishop very trecherously and falsly hath left out because he saw them wholy contrarie to all that he saith For if by reason of this vice of concupiscence we cannot say that we haue no sinne then it must needes follow that concupiscence is truly sin If by reason of this vice no man liuing shall be found iust in the sight of God then this vice that is to say concupiscence is sin because nothing hindreth a man from being iust in the sight of God but onely sinne And this taketh away the other part of his answer that S. Austine onely saith that the best men for want of perfect charitie do often sinne venially For by their doctrine veniall sinnes hinder not a man from being iust in the sight of God whereas the vice of which S. Austin speaketh is
concupiscence to be restrained and bridled Therefore he saith f De Temp. Ser. 45. Plenitudo est virtutis quòd lex dixit Ne concupiscas Hoc modo impleri non potest The perfection of vertue is that which the law saith Thou shalt not lust this now in this life cannot be fulfilled And againe g Ibid. Ser. 49. Hoc dicit legem implere hoc est non concupiscere Quis ergo hoc qui viuit potest To fulfill the law is not to iust and who is there liuing that can so do It is manifest then by S. Austin that that commandement requireth a perfection which in this world we neuer are able to attaine vnto because it doth not onely forbid consent but euen the very hauing of any euill motions or affections contrarie to the law And by those motions we do not onely breake the commandement Thou shalt not lust but we faile of yeelding loue to God with all our heart with all our soule c. because euil motions and lusts do occupie some part of the heart and soule and withhold the same from God Therefore S. Austin saith againe h Aug. de perf iust Cùm est aliquid concupisceÌ„tiae carnalis quod vel continendo fraenetur non omnimodò ex tota anima diligitur Deus Neque enim caro sine anima concupiscit quamuis caro concupiscere dicatur quia carnaliter anima concupiscit so long as there is any part of carnall concupiscence by continencie to be bridled God is not perfectly loued with all the soule for the flesh lusteth not without the soule although the flesh be said to lust because the soule lusteth according to the flesh Now therefore albeit it be true that a man may resist such euill motions and deny consent vnto them yet is he not therby freed froÌ„ transgression of the law But yet M. Bishop falsely alledgeth S. Austin to that purpose who in the place i August Confess lib. 10 cap. 30. Saepe etiam in somnis resistimus c. Potens est manus tua abundantiore gratia tua lasciuos motus etiam mei sopotu extinguere c Lugens in eo quod incomsummatus sum sperans perfecturum te in me misericordias tuas vsque ad pacem plenariam quam habebunt tecum interiora exteriora meacùm absorpta fuerit mors in victoriam cited not the seuenth as he quoteth but the thirtieth Chapter affirmeth indeed that somtimes men resist those concupiscences euen in their sleepe that it is in Gods power to make him alwaies so to do He signifieth his longing desire after that puritie and perfection but his expectation of it onely then when death shall be swallowed into victorie howsoeuer God be able if so it were his pleasure to giue it euen now also in the meane time And indeed there is no man liuing to whom can be attributed that perfection to be altogether and wholy free from consent of sinfull lust There is no man that fighteth so warily but that sometimes yea many times he receiueth grieuous wounds and findeth cause to cry mournfully vnto God for the cure thereof A man resisteth in one thing and is ouertaken in another at one time he checketh those corrupt desires with which as nets he is strongly intangled at another This is the state of all flesh and of this we haue cause to complaine so long as we liue here 41 W. BISHOP Iac. 3.2 1. Ioan. 1. We do offend in many things and if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues But if we could obserue all the law we should offend in nothing nor haue any sinne ergo Answer I graunt that we offend in many things not because it is not possible to keepe them but for that we are fraile and easily led by the craft of the diuell into many offences which we might auoyde if we were so warie and watchfull as we ought to be againe although we cannot keepe our selues from veniall offences yet may we fulfill the law which is not transgressed and broken vnlesse we commit some mortall sinnes For veniall sinnes either for the smalnesse of the matter or want of consideration are not so opposite to the law as that they violate the reason and purport of it although they be somewhat disagreeing with it But of this matter more fully in some other place R. ABBOT There is no doubt but if all impediments were taken away whereby we are hindered from keeping the commandements of God it should be possible enough perfectly to fulfill the same It is true which S. Austine saith that a August de spâ— lit cap. 19. Non vitio suo non implebatur lex sed vitio prudentiae carnis it is not by any default of the lawe that we fulfill it not but by default of the wisedome of the flesh which as the Apostle saith is b Rom. 8.7 enmitie against God and is not subiect vnto the law of God nor indeed can be We are by our frailtie led into many offences saith M. Bishop and we might auoyde the same if we were so warie and watchfull as we ought to be But so long as this frailtie hangeth vpon vs and by the weaknesse and corruption of flesh we are not so warie and watchfull as we ought to be why doth he attribute vnto vs a power and ablenesse to fulfill the lawe And what is that that he saith but euen the deuice of the Pelagian Heretickes who affirming c Hieron Epist ad Ctesiphont Hominem posse esse sine peccato si velit c. Cùm ab eis quaerimus qui sint quos absque peâ—cato putent noua stropha eludere cupiunt veritatem se non eos dicere qui sint vel fuerint sed qui esse possint that a man may be without sinne if he will and being demaunded who they were whom they tooke to be without sinne by a wily shift answered that they said not what men are or what they haue bene but what they may be Euen thus M. Bishop being vrged by the confession of the Apostles themselues that in many things we all offend and sinne that is do trespasse and breake the commandements of God confesseth it to be true but yet notwithstanding saith that it is vnpossible to keepe them But as Hierome answered the Pelagiaâ—s so we answer him d Jbid. Qua est argumentatio ista posse esse quod nunquam fuerit Posse fieri quod nullum fecisse testeris dare nescio cui quod in Patriarchis Prophetis Apostolis fuisse nequeas approbare What a reason is this that that is possible to be which neuer was and may be done which thou bearest witnesse that neuer any man did and to giue to euery man that which in the Patriarkes and Prophets and Apostles thou art not able to make good To be short as it is not possible for a man being feeble and weake and sicke to beare a
burthen which notwithstanding being recouered and fully cured he can beare with ease so it is not possible for vs so long as we are compassed about with corruption and frailtie to obserue and keep the law and righteousnesse thereof which yet being deliuered from all bondage of corruption and sinne we shall easily attaine vnto His second shift is as absurd as the former that though we cannot keepe our selues from veniall offences yet we may fulfill the law because it is not broken but by mortall sinnes But the law it selfe saith e Gal. 3.10 Cursed is euery one that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do them Therefore concerning all sinnes the sentence of the Apostle must stand good that f Rom. 6.23 the wages of sinne is death So our Sauiour Christ testifieth g Mat. 5.19 He that breaketh one of the least of these commandements and teacheth men so he shall be called the least in the kingdome of heauen that is saith S. Austin h August in Ioan. tract 122. Consequens est vt qui minimus est in regno coelâ—rum non intrâ—t in regnum coelâ—rum he shall not enter into the kingdome of heauen But we will demand of M. Bishop are those veniall sinnes forbidden by the law or not If they be not forbidden then they are no sinnes for i Rom. 4 15. where there is no law there is no trespasse and k Aug. de pece mer. rem lib. 2 cap. 16. Neque peccatum erit si quid erit si non diuiuitùs â—ubeatur vt non sit sinne shall be no sinne if God do not forbid the being of it But if they be forbidden how doth he say that to do them is no transgression of the law for what is it but a transgression of the law to do that which the law forbiddeth to be done The Apostle saith that l Rom. 3.20 by the law cometh the knowledge of sinne Veniall sinnes then by the law are knowne to be sinnes how are they knowne to be sinnes by the law but that they violate the reason and purport of the law But let S. Iohn here stop M. Bishops mouth m 1. Ioh. 3.4 Whosoeuer committeth sinne transgresseth also the law for sinne is the transgression of the law Veniall sinne as he tearmeth it is sinne therefore veniall sinne is the transgression of the law he therefore that committeth onely those which he calleth veniall sinnes cannot be said to fulfill the lawe 42. W. BISHOP Lastly it may be obiected that the way to heauen is streight and the gate narrow which is so true that it seemeth vnpossible to be kept by flesh and bloud but that which is impossible to men of themselues is made possible and easie too by the grace of God which made Saint Paule to say Phil. 4. Psal 118. I can do all things in him that strengtheneth and comforteth me and the Prophet Dauid After thou O Lord hadst dilated my heart and with thy grace set it at liberty I did runne the wayes of thy commandements that is I did readily and willingly performe them Of the louing of God with all our heart c. shall be treated in the question of the perfection of iustice R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop maketh the commandements of God not only possible but possible and easie too But I answer him againe as Hierome did the Pelagian hereticke a Hier. ad Ctefiphont Facilia dicis Dei esse mandata tamen nullum proferre potes qui vniuersa compleuerit Responde mihi facilia sunt an difficilia si facilia profer quis impleuerit cur Dominus in Euangelio Intrate inquit per angustam portam sin autem difficilia cur ausus es dicere facilia esse Dei mandata quae nullus impleuerit Thou sayest the commandements of God are easie but yet thou bringest foorth no man that hath fulfilled them all Tell me saith he are they easie or are they hard to be done If they be easie shew vs who hath fulfilled them and why our Sauiour saith in the Gospell Enter in at the straite gate But if they be hard why doest thou dare to say that the commaundements of God are easie which no man hath fulfilled Thus Hierome plainly excepteth against his answer to those words of Christ for they to whom Christ speaketh those words were and are men endued with the grace of God and yet he giueth them to vnderstand that the gate of life shall be strait and narrow vnto them Therefore S. Austine saith that b Aug. de praedest grat ca. 9 Arduum est virtutis iter quanquaÌ„ adiuuaÌ„te gratia Dei non sine labore gradiendum the way of vertue is hard and though the grace of God do helpe yet is not to be traueled without labour and paines Now if it be so hard a matter and so full of trauaile and paines to compasse that c Jdem cont 2. epist Pelag lib. 3. ca. 7. Ista parua iustitia Et epist 200. Iustitia nondum coÌ„summata small and vnperfect righteousnesse which here we haue is it an easie matter with M. Bishop to atchieue that absolute and perfect righteousnesse that is described in the law Some helpe he thinketh to haue in that the Apostle saith d Phil. 4.13 I am able to do all things in Christ or by the helpe of Christ that strengtheneth me But the Apostle himselfe excludeth him from that helpe in that he so plainly testifieth of himselfe that he could not finde how to performe the good that he would as we haue seene before yea telleth vs that though the spirit be in vs lusting against the flesh yet by reason of the e Gal. 5.17 flesh lusting against the spirit we cannot do the things that we would He that could do all things yet could not repell the f 2. Cor. 12.7 buffeting Angell of Satan by whom he was greeuously afflicted nor was thought able to withstand the temptations of pride and vaine glory vpon the abundance of his reuelations as appeareth in that this sting of Satan was occasioned to bridle him therefrom The place it selfe plainly sheweth the meaning of it selfe that he was enabled to all things that is to the enduring of all things that coÌ„cerned him in the seruice that he had in hand that neither abounding nor wanting neither fulnesse nor hunger should hinder him froÌ„ going on therein for the preaching testifying of the Gospel for enlarging coÌ„firming of the Church of Christ accordingly as elsewhere he saith g 2. Tim. 2.10 I suffer all things for the elects sake But the restraint that Bernard vseth is not to be omitted h Bernard de dilig Deo In illo omma potest quae tamen possâ— prosit He is able to do all things that is all which it is behoouefull that he be able to do Now what is behoouefull it is not for
illud esse consequens video vt quâ—lemlibes vel quantamlibet in hac vita potuerimus definire iustitiam nullus in ea sit hominum qui nullum habeat omninò peccatum Such iust men liuing by faith haue no need to say forgiue vs our trespasses do coÌ„uince it to be false which is writteÌ„ No maÌ„ liuing shall be iustified in the sight of God and that If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and that there is not a man that sinneth not and that There is not a man iust vpon the earth that doth good and sinneth not But because these sayings cannot be false it followeth that whatsoeuer or how great soeuer we can define righteousnesse in this life there is not a man therein that is without sinne Where very plainely he disclaimeth the assertion of any righteousnesse in this life in which that may be found that M. Bishop speaketh of namely not to sinne And surely had not this man a face of brasse and an iron conscience he would not in these dayes of light affirme a thing or seeme to affirme it so contrarie to the perpetuall doctrine and confession of the Church As for his distinction of veniall sinnes I haue before shewed it to be friuolous and vaine and the same God willing shall appeare further in the Section next saue one 46. W. BISHOP To these reasons taken partly out of the Scriptures and partly out of the record of Antiquitie let vs ioyne one or two drawne from the absurditie of our aduersaries doctrine which teacheth euery good worke of the righteous man to be infected with mortall sinne which being graunted it would follow necessarily that no good worke in the world were to be done vnder paine of damnation Rom. 7. thus No mortall sinne is to be done vnder paine of damnation for the wages of sinne is death but all good workes are stained with mortall sinne ergo no good worke is to be done vnder paine of damnation It followeth secondly that euery man is bound to sinne deadly for all men are bound to performe the duties of the first and second table but euery performance of any duty is necessarily linked with some mortall sinne therefore euery man is bound to commit many mortall sins and consequently to be damned These are holy and comfortable conclusions yet inseparable companions if not sworne brethren of the Protestants doctrine Now let vs heare what arguments they bring against this Catholike verity R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop hath learned from his fellow M. Wright to strike the matter dead at one blow Albeit it is more likely that these arguments going so currant amongst them were agreed vpon at Wisbich or some other like place in some solemne assembly and consultation where the graue and reuerend companie of the Seculars laid their wits together to giue the Protestants some ineuitable and deadly blow It is hard to thinke that one or two mens wits should serue to contriue such a matter as here is against vs. Now if some young Sophister of the Vniuersitie had stood by and smiling at them had said that it was pitty that they good old men should be troubled with making of Syllogisms who had forgotten of how many termes a Syllogisme doth consist would they not think you haue startled at the hearing of it and thought themselues exceedingly disgraced by a boy Surely the arguments here set downe are such as that if a boy in our Vniuersities should make the like in earnest he shold be thought iustly to deserue the rod and yet these are they who take vpon them as if we were to say vnto them a Iob. 12.2 Because you onely are men wisedome must dye with you He will proue by our doctrine that no good worke is to be done vnder paine of damnation And how forsooth no mortall sinne is to be done vnder paine of damnation but all good workes are stained with mortall sinne ergo c. Did not his head serue him to know that it is an error in arguing when a Syllogisme consisteth ex quatuor terminis We haue mortall sinne in the Maior proposition and in the Minor stained with mortall sinne If he would haue kept the course of argument he must haue said thus No mortall sinne is to be done vnder paine of damnation but all good workes are mortall sinnes ergo c. Which if he had said the absurditie of his minor proposition had easily appeared because euery man could haue discerned that good workes though they haue some aspersion or touch of our corruption yet do not thereby become sinnes no more then gold by his drosse becometh earth or iron no more then white linnen for some spot or staine is to be accounted blacke haire-cloth no more then the day is to be called night because it hath but ouercast and darksome light S. Hierome telleth vs that b Hier. aduers Pelag. lib. 2. Quando dicit nullas tenebras in Dei lumine reperiri ostendit omnia aliorum lumina sorde aliqua maculari Denique Apostoli appellantur lux mundi sed non est scriptum quod in Apostolorum luce nullae sint tenebrae When S. Iohn saith that there is no darkenesse found in the light of God he sheweth that all others lights are blotted with some vncleannesse The Apostles saith he are called the light of the world but it is not written that there was no darknesse in the Apostles light And what will M. Bishop conclude that because there was some darknes in the Apostles light therefore their light was darknesse and not light If he will not so conclude then let him say that it followeth not that good workes are sins albeit in our doing of them they receiue some blemish and staine of sinne But to shew vs somewhat more of the sweat and superfluitie of his learning he hath added another argument of the like feature to proue that by our doctrine euery man is bound to sinne deadly And why so because all men are bound to performe the duties of the first and second Table and euery performance thereof is necessarily linked with mortall sinne Which is as if a man should reason thus A lame man is bound by law to come to the Church but he cannot come to the Church but he must halt therefore he is bound by law to halt M. Bishop is bound to pay a man twenty pounds but he cannot tell the mony without soyling his fingers therefore he is bound to soile his fingers He can no way inferre his conclusion but by a sophisticall cauillation which the Logicians call fallaciam accidentis whereby in the conclusion he inferreth that of the accident which in the premisses is referred onely to the subiect his argument by that meanes wholly without forme and offending in the like sort as the other did Bring it into his due fashion and euery child then shal see that his proofe is most ridiculous and absurd For to bring in his conclusion
sundry places saith he of Scripture we are said to be redeemed iustified and saued freely but this word freely importeth that we are saued without doing any thing our selues in that matter of saluation Answer Not so good Sir for euen in your owne doctrine it is necessarie that ye beleeue and bring foorth the fruites of repentance and that now and then ye make some short prayers and receiue the Communion and do many other odde things in that matter of saluation wherefore the word freely doth not exclude all our working and suffering in that matter R. ABBOT Those odde things as this odde companion termeth them which we require as necessary in the matter of our saluation are no other but either occasions and affections of seeking and desiring or meanes of our apprehending and receiuing that saluation which is freely and onely by Iesus Christ We do not pray to be saued for our prayers sake nor beleeue to be saued for our faiths sake nor receiue the Communion to be saued or to haue our sinnes forgiuen by vertue of our receiuing but we pray and beleeue to haue our sinnes forgiuen vs and to be saued freely for Christes sake and do receiue the Communion for the strengthening of our faith in this beleefe Christ by the Sacrament offering himselfe vnto vs with the whole benefit of his passion to be receiued and made ours by faith As for repentance consisting in the true feeling and acknowledging of our sinnes whereby we see our selues in our selues to be lost and cast away it is the motiue and occasion of seeking this saluation in Christ and freely for his sake and the fruites of repentance which we require are but the way as hath bene before shewed to the full attainement and possession of saluation which we receiue by him And further we acknowledge that our repentance our faith our prayer and whatsoeuer else is in vs towards God is wholly and altogether of the gift of God purposing saluation vnto vs of his owne free mercie and therefore of the same mercie bestowing vpon vs those things which he hath appointed as preparations thereunto but to our selues as of our selues we can challenge no part nor parcell of any of these things Therefore on our part nothing hindreth but that we are said to be redeemed iustified and saued freely that is a Rhem. Testam explication of words in the end for nothing as Master Bishops Masters of Rhemes do giue the signification of the word gratis But if Master Bishop himselfe had meant to deale here truly and honestly with his Reader he should not haue dodged in this sort by talking of vs without answering for himselfe but should haue made it appeare how that which he affirmeth can stand with that which the Scripture teacheth If we be not saued but by interposing our merits for the purchase thereof how is it said that we are saued freely that is for nothing how can our sins be freely forgiuen that is for nothing when they are not forgiuen but vpon condition of satisfaction Satisfaction is the payment of a price as we haue seen before out of Thomas Aquinas Now to do a thing freely and to do it for price and paiment cannot possibly stand together Therefore M. Perkins argueth rightly If we satisfie in our own persons then are we not saued freely and if we be saued freely then we make no satisfaction at all M. Bishops leisure serued him not to answer this point We know he wanted no good wil but in hast he was must needs be gone because indeed he knew well that he could say nothing but that euery child would see his doubling and shifting and descry him to be a very vaine and wilfull man 6. W. BISHOP M. Perkins third reason We pray daily Forgiue vs our sins now to plead pardon and to satisfie for our sins are cleane contrarie Answer If our sins be mortall we craue pardon both of the sin and the eternall punishment annexed and do willingly withall satisfie for the temporall paine as the man who is conuicted of high treason and hauing both his life honor lands and goods pardoned and restored vnto him doth very ioyfully indure-three moneths imprisonment and any reasonable fine set on his head If our sinnes be veniall then that prayer is a speciall meane both to obtaine pardon of the fault and release of all the paine In Enchir c. 71 as witnesseth S. Augustine saying That for the daily short and light offences without which this life is not led the daily prayer of the faithfull doth satisfie And that is not true which M. Perkins adds that we are taught in that prayer wholy and only to vse the plea of Pardon For in the same petition we are taught also to pardon others euen as we will looke to be pardoned Againe if there were only a plea of pardon it wold not serue M. Perkins purpose For who would say that within the compasse of the Pater noster all things necessary to saluation be contained besides prayer is one part of satisfaction as shall be proued hereafter and so by oft praying for pardon we may well satisfie for much temporall punishment R. ABBOT I pray thee gentle Reader that with M. Perkins argument here propounded and M. Bishops answer to it thou wilt compare that which M. Bishop himselfe before hath said a Of originall sinne Sect. 1. Doth not a Pardon saith he take away from the fault pardoned all bond of punishment due vnto it and consequently all guiltinesse belonging to it Who can deny this vnlesse he know not or cure not what he say Hereby then vnderstand that M. Bishop here either knoweth not or careth not what he saith for that as a man hauing forgotten himselfe he wold make vs beleeue that the pardoning of a fault doth not take away all bond of punishment due vnto it That which he said before is sensible and cleare to euery mans sight but that which he saith here is senslesse and absurd euen in that very instance whereby he seeketh to make it good The man who for high treason is but adiudged to short imprisonment and fine is neuer said to be pardoned The prince dealeth graciously with him in not calling him further into question but to giue him a pardon should be to cut off both imprisonment and fine And who was there euer in the world before the time of these ranck witted Sophisters that made that construction that M. Bishop doth of our prayer which we make to God Forgiue vs our trespasses as that our meaning therein should be to say to him Forgiue vs the sinne and the eternall punishment but as touching the temporall punishment we are willing and readie to make thee satisfaction for it When we lye groning vnder the burden of temporall calamities and afflictions do we not say vnto God Forgiue vs our trespasses and begge of him remission of sinnes to the intent that by forgiuenesse of sinnes we may be
commandement auaileth nothing from the mouth of God himselfe where he himselfe worketh not within that which he commandeth To this agreeth in effect the exposition of Ambrose though taking the words by way of accusation which Austin construeth by way of precept or exhortation k Amâ—r de Cain Abel li 2. ca. 7. In te reuertitur crimen quod ae te câ—pit Non habes in quo necessit item magis quam menteÌ„ tâ—aÌ„ arguas In te retâ—rque tur improbitas tut â—u princeps illâ—us es Ben aâ—t Tit princeps es illius Et enim impretas mater quaedaÌ„ est delictoram c. The sinne saith God returneth vpon thee which began of thee Thou hast not wherein to blame necessitie more then thine owne mind Thy wickednesse is turned backe vpon thee thou art the beginner of it Rightly doth he say thou art the beginner of it for impietie is a mother of sinnes c. Thus he maketh God in those words to accuse Cain of sinne not to attribute to Cain Free will for conuerting vnto God The other exposition of Austin is in reading the place l Aug. vt supra Cum commota fuerit pars ipsa carnalis ad aliquid perperam committendum si acquiescatur Apostolo dicenti Ne exhibeatu membra c. ad mentem domita victa conuertitur vt subditae ratio dominetur Ad te conuersio eius erit c. The conuerting or turning thereof shall be to thee and thou shalt rule ouer it vnderstanding sinne to be meant of carnall concupiscence or lust and making the construction thus that when carnal concupiscence is moued or stirred to commit any wicked thing if a man rest and harken to the Apostle saying Let not sin reigne in your mortall bodies giue not your members weapons of vnrighteousnesse vnto sinne then it being tamed and ouercome is conuerted and turned to be in subiection to the mind that reason may haue the rule and dominion ouer it Therefore he taketh it as if God had willed Cain to giue ouer that which by his owne wicked desire and lust he had intended and if he did resist it it should turne and yeeld to him and whilest it was not suffered to worke without it might be the better accustomed not to stirre within Prosper bringeth these latter expositions all into one as if God had sayd to Cain m Prosper de vocat gent lib. 2. ca. 4. Tuus hic error est enumque peccatum quiâ—sce noli in insontem fratrem movert ad te potius tua culpa reuoâ—itur Noli peccato regnum in te dareâ—sed tu potius in ipsum sume dominatuÌ„ Paenitendo enim nec in manus facinus progredieres ab eo in quo te doles displicuisse mundaberis This is thy error and thy sinne be quiet and be not mooued against thy harmelesse brother rather let thy sinne be charged vpon thy selfe yeeld not to it that it shold reigne in thee but do thou take on thee the dominion rule ouer it By repenting thou shalt not go to any further wickednesse thou shalt be reformed in that wherein thou shalt grieue that thou hast offended me Thus here is counsell and commandement to Cain but no assertion of Free will and by Cains going forward in his wicked course we see that Free will auaileth nothing to true obedience and keeping of Gods commandement Now then that M. Bishop can find nothing in Austin let vs see what Hierome hath to iustifie Cains example to be the maintenance of Free will Hierome hath indeed the words and exposition which he alledgeth n Hieron tradit Hebrat in Genes Quia liberi arbitrises monto vt non tibi peccatum sed tu peccato domineris Because thou hast Free will I admonish and warne thee that sinne do not ouer-rule thee but that thou ouer-rule sinne But that this neither helpeth him nor hurteth vs it will easily and plainly appeare if we consider what was accorded before betwixt him and vs. For we deny not Free will in morall and ciuill outward actions as hath bene before acknowledged by him For in vaine were education and lawes and exhortations and all precepts and directions of life if there were not left in man a power to conforme himselfe outwardly to the prescriptions thereof God hath left in nature o August desp lit cap. 28. Non vsqueadeo in anima humana imago Dei detrita est vt nullae in ea velut lineamenta extrema remanserint Origen cont Celsum lib. 4. Impossibile vt eius imaginis lineamenta in totum delcantur c. some outward most lineaments some vnperfect shadowes and portraiture of his image for the preseruing of publike order and societie amongst men which could not stand if men for feare or shame or other respects could not containe and bridle themselues from those mischiefes and villanies whereto corruption of nature doth incline them To this the words of Hierome are to be referred For Cain was p Chrysost in Gen. hom 18. Sciebat ab initio quòd fratrem hic adoriturus esset ideo antea verbu reprâ—mit now contriuing and plotting the murder of his brother There was now no law to terrifie him from the accomplishing of that which he had intended but God himselfe taketh vppon him to set before him the horrour of his fact and to reclaime him from proceeding any further If therfore we do with Hierome referre the words here questioned to sinne God speaketh to Cain to this effect Why art thou so much offended that thy brother is better accepted then thy selfe why art thou thus moued with enuie towards him and intendest mischiefe against him If thou doest well as he doth assure thy selfe thou shalt be accepted as well as he But if thou do wickedly if thou go forward with that horrible villanie that thou hast conceiued know for a suretie that thy sinne shall lie waiting for thee at the doore and shall neuer cease to attend and follow thee till it haue brought vpon thee iust reuenge Wherefore I aduise thee to giue ouer bridle thy passion be maister thus farre of thine owne affections let not enuie carrie thee forward to commit so monstrous and vnnaturall a fact it is yet in thine owne power and therefore stay thy selfe and giue no further way to this bloudie designement to be sorie when it is too late Thus much and no more do Hieromes words expresse vnto vs and we doubt not but Cain had Free will as touching committing of this cruell act For if some man had stood in his way with a sword drawne to slay him if he should attempt the killing of his brother who doubteth but that it would haue made him hold his hands which he could not if he had not had in him power and libertie to forbeare And if M. Bishop meant no more when he speaketh of Cains power not to sinne if he had listed we would
the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes the pride of life is not of the Father but of the world He speaketh of the things of the world which are of the Father because they are his creatures S. Iohn speaketh of the things of the world which are not of the Father He speaketh of the world which is the creature and frame of heauen and earth all things therein S. Iohn speaketh h August cont Iulian. lib. 4. cap. 13. Nouimus Ioannem non mundum istum id est coelum terram omnia quae in eo substātialiter sunt reprehendisse cum diceret Omnia quae in mundo sunt c. not of the world in that meaning but of the world of mākind corrupted defiled with sinne according to which the vnregenerate are called i Luk. 16.8 the children of this world and as our Sauiour Christ saith that k Iohn 7.7 the world hated him because he testified of it that the workes thereof are euill And doth he not then thinke you bring vs a good proofe that euery thing in the world tempteth vs to sinne The meaning of S. Iohn is plaine that in the world that is to say in the men of this world there is nothing but corruption the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes the pride of life and the following of all these all which are not of the Father nor haue accord with him but are of men themselues perish together with themselues What is this then but profanely and lewdly to abuse the word of God thus to cite it to proue a falshood when it hath not so much as any shew of that for which it is cited If it be grosse to say that whatsoeuer allureth to sinne is sinne I am sure it is much more grosse that he hath sayd for the disprouing of it He addeth further that it is as wide from all morall wisedome to affirme that the first motions of our passions be sins But we iudge not of these things by morall wisedome which is the wisedome of this world because l 1. Cor. 1.21 the world by it owne wisdome knoweth not God in the wisdome of God we esteeme hereof as God by the foolishnesse of the Apostles preaching hath taught vs to beleeue And out of their preaching we haue learned to say as S. Austin did that m August cont Iulian. lib. 4. cap. 2 Ipsa per se ipsā libido rectissimè omnino suis ipsis motibus accusatur quibus ne excedat obsistitur lust it selfe by it selfe is very iustly accused or blamed in the very motions of it wherein it is resisted that it exceed not and that n Ibid. li 5. ca. 5. Quantumlibet in isto conflictu superiores simus c. tamen ipsis certè nostrae cogitationis motibus affectibus si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus c. howsoeuer in this conflict of the spirit against the flesh we get the better yet if in the very motions and affections of our thought we say that we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. But saith he heathen Philosophers could distinguish betweene sudden passions of the mind and vices But what is it to vs what heathen Philosophers haue distinguished seeing Christian Philosophers haue taught vs to cal these passions o See after Sect. 9. vices inward vices vitiousnesse vitious affections vitious concupiscences or lusts Let M. Bishop follow Philosophers if he please as for vs we say in these questions of Diuinitie as Tertullian sayd that p Tertul de praescript adu haeret philosophia temeraria interpret diuinae naturae dispositionis philosophie is but a sawcie interpreter of Gods nature and disposition that Philosophers are q Idem cont Hermogen Haereticorum patriarchae philosophi the patriarches of heretikes We take our instructions out of Solomons porch not out of the porch of Zeno from Hierusalem not from Athens and there we haue learned to call it sinne whatsoeuer swarueth from the law of God as before hath bene declared Yea but M. Bishop will proue out of that very text which M. Perkins alledgeth that concupiscence is not sinne r Iam. 1.14 Euery man saith S. Iames is tempted when he is drawne away by his owne concupiscence and is allured afterward concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth forth sinne Marke well the words saith he First concupiscence tempteth and allureth by some euill motion but that is no sinne vntill afterward it do conceiue But how doth he proue that by any argument out of S. Iames his words What is it not sin because S. Iames doth not expresly call it sin Why then neither shall the consent be sin because S. Iames expresseth the consent first and afterwards inferreth the bringing forth of sinne But though S. Iames do not call it expresly sinne yet S. Paul doth For what S. Iames speaketh of concupiscence stirring vp euill motions and thereby tempting and entising the very same S. Paul expresseth in these words ſ Rom. 7.8 Sinne wrought in me all manner of concupiscence Which is the same as if he should haue said that concupiscence which is the habite of sin did stir vp in him all maner of euill motions and affections to tempt him thereby The same Apostle saith t Cap. 6.12 Let not sinne raigne in your mortall bodies that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof calling it by the name of sin where it raigneth not nor is obeyed in the lusts of it He distinctly noteth sinne and the lusts of it and the obeying that is consenting to those lusts and so plainely sheweth that in the roote and from the beginning it is sinne Thus the faithfull elsewhere are warned to take heed not to be hardened u Heb. 2.13 by the seducing or deceitfulnesse of sinne where it is also plaine that it is sinne which seduceth and enticeth euen as the Apostle saith x Rom 7.11 Sinne seduced me or deceiued me and thereby slue me giuing to vnderstand that these seducings and enticings that is the first motions of concupiscence are so farre sin as that thereby he felt himselfe in himselfe to be but a dead man Thus the Apostle S. Paule thwarteth all that M. Bishop gathereth out of S. Iames his words but yet the most deepe Doctor S. Austin sifteth out the matter very profoundly for him And indeed he sifteth well but leaueth to M. Bishop nothing but the very branne y Aug. contra Iulian. lib. 6. cap. 5. Profectò in his verbis partus à pariente distinguitur Pariens est cōcupiscentia partus peccatum Sed concupiscentia non parit nisi conceperit Nec concipit nisi illexerit hoc est ad malum perpetrādum obtinuerit volētis assensum In these words saith he the birth is distinguished from that that bringeth foorth That that bringeth foorth is concupiscence the birth is sinne But concupiscence bringeth
goodnesse f Idem de verb. Apâ—st se◠〈◊〉 lloâ— peccati nomine appelat vnde oriuntur cuncta peccata id est ex carnali concupiscentia from which root of concupiscence he saith againe that all sinnes do spring and grow Thus S. Austine confesseth that albeit there be remission of sinnes in baptisme and nothing remaining of any actuall sinnes yet the root of Originall sinne continueth still which being the same that it was before must needs be sinne as it was before albeit in respect that the guilt thereof is released he forbeareth to call it by the name of sinne But of this root M. Perkins further saith and that rightly that though it be in substance the same that it was before yet in extent and power and strength it is not the same It holdeth not the whole man captiue as before the yoke thereof is broken the kingdome of it is dissolued it is as an enemie conquered and disarmed not hauing the g Rom. 6.13 members at commandement to be the weapons of vnrighteousnesse vnto sinne as before it had In the first instant of the conuersion of a sinner saith he sinne receiueth his deadly wound in the root neuer afterward to be recouered Now here M. Bishop though he knew not well what to say yet to shew both his wit and his honesty would not forbeare to say somewhat He wisheth the Reader to conferre this last answer of M. Perkins with his former doctrine bearing him in hand that he shall find him no more constant then the wind And why so Forsooth he saith here that sinne is deadly wounded is the root and had 〈◊〉 before that sinne remaineth still with all the guiltinesse of it 〈◊〉 â—mouted But what contradiction it there betwixt these 〈…〉 deadly wounded and yet remaineth stiâ— What hinâ—◠〈…〉 his deadly wounded 〈…〉 may truly be said to 〈…〉 to had 〈◊〉 the guiltâ— wherewith it held vs and vntill it be healed by perfect buriall it still rebelleth being dead Yea but M. Perkins saith it remaineth sâ—ill with all the guiltinesse of it although not imputed But I answer him that he abuseth M. Perkins who for this matter stopped this wranglers mouth in the answer last before and he dissembleth it as though he saw it not The guilt of sin he saith remaineth potentially not actually that is it remaineth such as that in it owne nature it is sufficient to make a man guilty but yet it doth not so became the guilt thereof is remitted and pardoned which S. Austine manifestly proueth as I haue said before He doth not say then that it remaineth with all the guiltinesse of it though not imputed because it cannot be said to remaine with all the guiltinesse of it but it must also be said to be imputed Therefore in this whole disputation he confesseth with S. Austine as touching actuall guilt that Originall sinne is wholly and fully dead to the regenerate but yet remaineth still to rebell though it be dead And yet as touching rebellion it hath also receiued a deadly wound because it hath not now the same power to rebell as it had before to raigne and if sometimes it do gather power againe yet doth it neuer totally or finally recouer the kingdome that it had or preuaile vtterly to separate the faithfull from the loue of Christ as naturally it doth but by the first stroke and wound that it receiued by the grace of Christ becommeth in the end euery way and altogether dead and is vtterly abolished neuer to be againe He further alledgeth that M. Perkins first saith that concupiscence maketh a man to sinne intangleth him in the punishment of sinne and maketh him miserable and yet here blusheth not to conclude that he holdeth it at the first neither clipped nor pared but pulled vp by the roots But where doth he find this conclusion in M. Perkins words Surely the paper whereon he wrote this would haue blushed if it had had a forehead for very shame to carie the report of so manifest a lie But let the paper do what it will M. Bishop blusheth not for if he had bene a man of a blushing face he had wanted the name of being the writer of this booke What M. Bishop is it all one to be deadly wounded in the root and to be pulled vp by the roots M. Perkins saith not any where that concupiscence or sinne is pulled vp by the roots but as a man hauing receiued a deadly wound yet liueth afterwards for the time and stirreth and moueth euen so concupiscence though it receiue a deadly wound whereof in the end it dieth yet liueth and strugleth and rebelleth for the time stirring vp many noisome and euill motions and lusts from the consent whereof no man can say that he is altogether free and therein maketh a man to sinne and entangleth him in the punishment of sinne and maketh him miserable in such sort as before hath bene declared I may here turne M. Bishops words vpon himselfe Learne here gentle Reader what credit is to be giuen to such maisters as he is to such Maisters did I say nay to such remorselesse beasts who make no scruple or conscience to lie to falsifie to depraue those things against which otherwise they can haue nothing to except As for that which he glaunceth at in the end that concupiscence defileth all the works of the regenerate so that though they be in themselues good works yet they are stained with that which though it be not imputed yet is in it selfe mortall and deadly sinne it hath bene in part already declared and proued in the i Sect. 19. answer to his epistle dedicatorie and shall be more fully handled in his due place in the question of iustification where he professedly disputeth of that matter CHAPTER 3. OF THE CERTAINTIE OF SALVATION 1. W. BISHOP M. PERKINS FIRST CONCLVSION VVE hold and beleeue that a man in this life Pag. 37. may be certaine of saluation and the same doth the Church of Rome teach M. P. 2. Conclu We hold that a man is to put certaine affiance in Gods mercy in Christ for the saluation of his soule and the same holdeth the aforesaid Romane Church M. P. 3. Conclu We hold that with assurance of saluation in our hearts is ioyned doubting and there is no man so assured of his saluation but he at sometime doubteth thereof especially in the time of temptation and in this the Papists agree with vs. Not so Sir M. P. 4. Conclu They goe further and say that a man may be Certaine of the Saluation of men and of the Church by Catholike faith and so say we M. P. 5. Conclu They hold that a man by faith may be assured of his owne saluation through extraordinarie reuelation In this sence onely the first conclusion is true M. P. 6. Conclu The sixt and second be all one that we may be assured of our Saluation in regard of God that promiseth it
vnto thee put case he had said If a Papist shall say vnto thee How is all the world saued it being onely Christ that hath done righteously thou maiest answer him How was the whole world condemned when it was onely Adam that obeied not The matter of our condemnation then is in the one and the matter of our saluation in the other corruption of nature being consequently drawne by generation from the one as a part of our condemnation and sanctification to holinesse consequently deriued by faith and regeneration from the other as a part of our saluation And now he may well see that our arguments be not poore nor make against our selues as he pretendeth but his answers are such penurious and poore shifts as that now they are once discouered we expect from him no further maintaining of them 7. W. BISHOP His fourth reason The Papists make Christs obedience their satisfaction but satisfaction is equall to iustice therefore they must make it as well their iustice as satisfaction For the Maior he citeth Bellarmin Lib. 2. de Iustif cap. 7. I haue read the Chapter and finde no such words further I say there is a great difference betweene satisfaction for mortall sinnes and iustification for satisfaction cannot be done vs for the guilt of mortall sinne is infinite being against an infinite Maiestie and so no creature can make full satisfaction for it wherefore the infinite valour of Christs satisfaction is necessarily required who hauing taken away the guilt of eternall punishment due to sinnes leaueth vs his grace to satisfie for the temporall paine of it as shall be in his due place declared more at large Againe a man must needes haue his sinnes pardoned and grace giuen him before he can make any kinde of due satisfaction for he must be in the state of grace before he can satisfie wherefore he must needs flie to the benefit of Christ satisfaction There is nothing like in iustification for first to make a man iust in Gods sight requires no infinite perfection but such as a meere man is very well capable of as all must needes confesse of Adam in the state of Innocencie and of all the blessed Soules in heauen who be iust in Gods sight Neither is it necessarie to be infinite for to be worthy of the ioyes of heauen which be not infinite as they are enioyed of men or Angels either of whom haue all things there in number weight and measure Briefly it is a most easie thing for one man to pay the debts of another but one man cannot bestow his wisedome or iustice on another and not credible that God whose iudgement is according to truth will repute a man for iust who is full of iniquitie no more then a simple man will take a Black-moore for white although he see him cloathed in a white sute of apparell R. ABBOT In true and right vnderstanding satisfaction is fully equiualent to iustification and that that is our satisfaction is also our iustification before God For declaration whereof it is to be obserued that sinne consisteth partly in commission partly in omission partly in doing that that we ought not to do partly in not doing that that we ought to do Satisfaction then for sinne must serue to acquit both the one and the other it must take away what we haue done and supply what we haue not done or else it cannot be called a satisfaction Therefore as on the one side in the euill that we haue done we are reputed as if it neuer had bene done so on the other side in the good that we haue not done we are reputed as if all had bene done Accordingly S. Austine saith that a August Retract l. 1. cap 19. Omnia mandata facta deputaÌ„tur quando quicquid non sit ignoscitur all the commandements of God are reputed to be done when that is pardoned that is not done Our satisfaction therefore is our iustification with God because thereby we are reputed as if we had performed all the righteousnesse of God And so doth Bernard make them both one when saying b Bernard ep 190. Assignata est ei aliena iustitia qui caruit sua There is the righteousnesse of another assigned to him who wanted of his owne he addeth to expresse the same c Satisfactio vnius omnibus imputatur c. the satisfaction of one is imputed vnto all euen as he alone hath borne the sinnes of all But more clearely is it euicted by the words of the Apostle who where Dauid pronounceth the man d Psal 32.1 blessed to whom the Lord forgiueth his sinnes saith that he e Rom. 4.6 describeth there the blessednesse of that man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works giuing thereby to vnderstand that forgiuenesse of sinnes is the imputation of righteousnesse without works If therefore in satisfaction there be forgiuenesse of sinnes then is there also iustification that is the imputation of righteousnesse without workes Now then sith Bellarmine confesseth that the merit and obedience of Christ is our satisfaction f Bellarm. de Iustif lib. 2. ca. 7. Si solùm vellent nobis imputari Christi merita quia nobis donata sunt possumus ea Deo patrè offerre pro peccatis nostris quoniam Christus suscepit super sâ— onus satisfaciendi pro peccatis nostris nosque Deo pâ—tri recoÌ„ciliaÌ„di recta esset eorum sententia he must acknowledge it also to be our iustification that is the thing whereby and for which we are reputed iust in the sight of God because thereby we are reputed as hauing perfectly fulfilled all the commandements of God I haue read the chapter in Bellarmine saith M. Bishop and finde no such words But he was drowsie belike when he read it let him reade it better when he is well awake and then he shall finde that Bellarmine saith that in true meaning it may be said that the merits of Christ are imputed vnto vs for that they are giuen vnto vs of God and we may offer the same to God the Father for our sinnes in respect that Christ hath taken vpon him the burden of satisfying for our sinnes Where what doth he but acknowledge that Christ according to the burden taken vpon him hath in his merits made satisfaction for our sinnes but in his folly like M. Bishop because he vnderstandeth not himselfe will not haue them imputed for our righteousnesse before God His differences betwixt saluation and iustification are impertinent because that iustification which he speaketh of is not our iustification before God as shall appeare Briefly therefore to touch what he saith the guilt saith he of mortall sinne is infinite being against an infinite maiestie But therefore the guilt of all sinne is infinite neither is there any sinne but what is mortall because all sinne is against an infinite maiestie Therefore to all sinne the infinite valour of Christes satisfaction is required which because it is infinite
his argument must be this Whosoeuer is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table is bound to sinne But euery man is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table therefore euery man is bound to sinne His Prosyllogisme for the proofe of his maior proposition out of his owne words must arise thus Whosoeuer necessarily sinneth in doing the duties of the first and second Table is bound to sinne but whosoeuer is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table necessarily sinneth in the doing therof therefore whosoeuer is bound to do the duties of the first and second Table is bound to sinne Here his maior proposition is apparently absurd for though a man by reason of infirmity cannot but sinne in doing his duty yet it is the duty onely that he is bound to and not to the sinne because the sinne is not implyed in the dutie but ariseth by casuall and accidentall necessitie from the condition of the man Now therefore a man may doubt whether is greater in this man his malice or his ignorance In respect of his malice we may vse to him the words of the Prophet Dauid c Psal 52.3.5 Thy tongue imagineth wickednes and with lies thou cuttest like a sharpe razor Thou hast loued to speake all words that may do hurt O thou false tongue In respect of his ignorance we may iustly scorne him as a presumptuous and sawcie companion who being of so base qualitie and not knowing how to frame an argument aright would take vpon him to encounter a whole armie of learned men and so insolently dedicate his vnlearned fooleries to the King 47. W. BISHOP First they alledge these words Enter not O Lord Psal 141. into iudgment with thy seruant because no liuing creature shall be iustified in thy sight If none can be iustified before God it seemes that none of their workes are iust in his sight Answer There are two common expositions of this place among the ancient Fathers both true but farre from the Protestants purpose The former is S. Augustines S. Ieromes De perf iustic Epist ad Ctâ—s S. Gregories in his Commentaries vpon that place who say that no creature ordinarily liueth without many veniall sinnes for the which in iustice they may be punished sharpely either in this life or else afterward in Purgatory Wherefore the best men do very prouidently pray vnto God not to deale with them according vnto their deserts for if he should so do they cannot be iustified and cleared from many veniall faults And therefore they must all craue pardon for these faults or else indure Gods iudgements for them before they can attaine vnto the reward of their good deedes The second exposition is more ordinarie with all the best Writers vpon the Psalmes as S. Hilarie S. Hierome S. Arnobius S. Euthimius and others which is also S. Augustins S. Gregories All these say Lib. ad Croâ—ia cap. 10. lib. 9. moral cap. 1. that mans iustice in comparison of the iustice of God will seeme to be no iustice at all and so take these words No creature neither man nor Angell shall be iustified in thy sight that is if his iustice appeare before thine and be compared to it For as the stars be bright in themselues shine also goodly in a cleare night yet in the presence of the glittering Sun beams they appeare not at all euen so mans iustice although considered by it selfe it be great perfect in his kind yet set in the sight presence of Gods iustice it vanisheth away and is not to be seene This exposition is taken out of Iob where he saith I know truly it is euen so that no man compared to God Iob 9. shal be iustified Take the words of the Psalme in whether sence you list that either we haue many veniall faults for which we cannot be iustified in Gods sight or else that in the sight of Gods most bright iustice ours will not appeare at all and it cannot be thereof iustly concluded that euery worke of the righteous man is stained with sinne and consequently the place is not to purpose R. ABBOT I would wish thee gentle Reader well to obserue M. Bishops twofold answer to this place The more cleare these words of Scripture are against the inherent righteousnesse of man the more notably his singular impudencie appeareth in seeking to shift them off Dauid saith it a Prophet saith it a man after Gods owne heart saith it a Psal 143.2 Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord for no man liuing shall be iustified or found iust in thy sight Now M. Bishop answâ—reth that this is spoken in respect of veniall sinnes without which no creature liueth and for which a man may in iustice be punished sharpely either in this life or in Purgatorie Where it is to be obserued that he hath told vs in the Section last saue one that veniall sinne is no formall transgression of Gods law by reason whereof they hold that b Rhem. Testim 1. Ioh. 1.8 veniall sinnes consist with true iustice and hinder it not So saith Andradius c Andrad Orth. explicat lib. 5. Iustitiam euertere nullo pacto possunt neque perfectam ab solutam legis obedientiam quoquo modo impedire They can no way ouerthrow iustice nor in any sort hinder the perfect and absolute obedience of the law So then Dauids prayer must be this Enter not into iudgement with me for veniall sinnes for by reason of veniall sinnes which hinder not but that a man is iust no man liuing shall be iustified in thy sight Which exposition being apparently lewd and shamelesse yet he hath learned of his maister Bellarmine to countenance it with the names of them who neuer thought any such thing He alledgeth Austin who in the place by him cited hath not a word to tâ—at effect which maketh him to set none downe because indeed there are none But in the place mentioned the same Austin rightly saith d Aug. de perfe iustit Superexalâ—at misericordia iudiâ—io Quod si noÌ„ esset quae spes esseâ— Quando quidem cùm rex iustâ—s federit in throâ—o quis glo ritbitur se castuÌ„ habere cor aut quis gloriabitur se esse immuâ—em à peccato Were it not that mercy reioyceth ouer iudgement what hope should there be For when the iust King shall sit vpon his throne who shall glorie that he hath a cleane heart or reioyce that he is free from sinne If no man shall be able then to challenge to himselfe a cleane heart where is that perfect iustice of workes which Master Bishop dreameth of which cannot come but from a cleane heart He citeth in the second place the reuerend Father Saint Hierome who beside that he saith nothing for him speaketh expresly and directly against him e Hieron ad Câ—esiphont Quando â—icit In coÌ„spectu tuo hoc intelligi
galled himselfe in the riding of him We do imagine that by that time he hath better aduised of this whole matter he will thinke that some body did ride him when first he tooke this businesse in hand We may here see the blinde insolencie of a presumptuous vaine man who hauing said nothing but what is iustly to be derided and scorned yet taketh vpon him as if he had giuen vs some very admirable and learned answer Yea in this very place he bableth as if his wits were to seeke crossing and thwarting that in one line which he vttereth in another He telleth vs that the words of Esay were spoken in the person of the sinfull who had more sinnes then good workes and so their righteousnesse was like vnto a spotted and stained cloath and yet by and by he saith that their good workes though but few were free from all spots of iniquitie Againe as vncertaine where to stand he telleth vs that their euill works defiled their righteousnesse and made it like a stained cloath If their good works were free from all spots of iniquity how did their euil works defile them and make them like a stained cloath Or if their euill workes did defile their good and make them like a stained cloath how were they free from all spots of iniquitie Againe we would demaund of him how sinfull or as he hath called them before euill and wicked men should do good workes free from all spots of iniquitie seeing our Sauiour so plainly saith that a Mat. 7.18 Luk. 6.43 an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruite no more then we can gather grapes of thornes or figges of thistles S. Paul telleth vs that b Tit. 2.15 to them that are vncleane nothing is pure their mindes and consciences being defiled Which made S. Bernard to say that c Bern. in Cant. Ser. 71. Si fuerit nâ—â—us in conscientia nec quod ex ea prodieriâ— carebit naeuo if there be a blemish or blot in the conscience nothing that commeth from it shall be without a blot How then can it stand good which M. Bishop saith that sinfull and wicked men do good workes which are free from all spots of iniquitie But thus he turneth all vpside downe and according to the present occasion letteth goe whatsoeuer commeth next to hand without feare or wit But vpon the place I neede not to stand I referre the Reader to that that hath bene d Seâ—t 3. before said thereof where it hath bene shewed that the Prophet by way of prophecie endited the praier in the name of the faithfull that were to liue in the desolations of Ierusalem and the Temple that the praier of the Prophet Daniel at that time fully expresseth the effect of the same praier of Esay and therefore that it is the confession of the faithfull godly that their righteousnesse is as a stained cloth and that the auncient Fathers haue vsed the place for proofe thereof 49 W. BISHOP 3. There is not a man who doth not sinne And blessed is the man whose sinnes be not imputed to him and such like I answer that the best men sinne venially and are happy when those their sinnes be pardoned but all this is cleane besides this question where it is onely enquired whether the good workes that the iust do be free from sinne and not whether they at other times do sinne at the least venially This is all which M. Perkins here and there obiecteth against this matter but because some others do alledge also some darke places out of the Fathers I thinke it not amisse to solue them here together S. Cyprian saith That the besieged minde of man can hardly resist all assaults of the enemie for when couetousnesse is ouerthrowne vp starts lechery and so forth Answer All this is true that the life of man is a perpetuall warfare yet man assisted with the grace of God may performe it most valiantly and neuer take any mortall wound of the enemies although through his owne frailty he may be somtimes foiled Dial. 1. cap. Pelag S. Hierome affirmeth That then we are iust when we confesse our selues to be sinners Answer That all iust men confesse themselues to sinne venially but neither of these places come neare the point in question that not one good deede of the iust man is without some spot or staine of sinne Epict. 29. S. Austine hath these words Most perfect charity which cannot be encreased is to be found in no man in this life and as long as it may be increased that which is lesse then it ought to be is faulty of which fault it proceedeth that there is no man who doth good and doth not sinne All this we graunt to be true that no man hath so perfect charity in this life but that sometimes he doth lesse then he ought to do and consequently doth not so well but that now and then he sinneth at the least venially and that therefore the said holy Doctor had iust cause to say Woe be to the laudable life of a man Lib. 9. confess cap. 13. if it be examined without mercy All which notwithstanding iust men may out of that charity which they haue in this life do many good workes which are pure from all sinne as hath bene proued They alledge yet another place out of S. Austine Lib. 3. con duas Epist Pelag. cap. 7. That belongeth vnto the perfection of a iust man to know in truth his imperfection in humility to confesse it True that is as he teacheth else-where First that the perfection of this life is imperfection being compared with the perfection of the life to come Againe that the most perfect in this life hath many imperfections both of wit and will and thereby many light faults Now come we vnto S. Gregory our blessed Apostle out of whose sweet words ill vnderstood they seeme to haue sucked this their poison He saith The holy man Iob Lib. 9. moral cap. 1. because he did see all the merit of our vertue to be vice if it be straightly examined of the inward Iudge doth rightly adde if I will contend with him I cannot answer him one for a thousand I answer that by our vertue in that place is to be vnderstood that vertue which we haue of our owne strength without the aide of Gods grace which we acknowledge to be commonly infected with some vice that S. Gregory so tooke it appeares by the words both going before and following before he writeth thus A man not compared to God receiued iustice but compared vnto him he leeseth it For whosoeuer compareth himselfe vnto the author of all good leeseth that good which he had receiued for he that doth attribute the good vnto himselfe doth fight against God with his owne gifts And after thus To contend with God is not to giue to God the glory of his vertue but to take it to himselfe And so all the merit of
this our vertue which commeth not of God but is attributed vnto our selfe as proceeding onely from our selues is the very vice of pride and cannot be preiudiciall vnto true good workes all which we acknowledge to proceede principally from the grace of God dwelling in vs. He saith further with S. Augustine that in this life we cannot attaine vnto perfect purity such as shall be in heauen reade the beginning of his first and second booke of Morals and there you shall finde him commending Iob to the skies as a good and holy man by his temptations not foiled but much aduaunced in vertue R. ABBOT These arguments the most of them are foisted in of his owne head there being none of ours that alledgeth them to that purpose to which he produceth them But thus because he would be taken for a valiant warriour he maketh himselfe a man of straw to fight with and with all his might bestirreth himselfe against a shadow But the worth of his answers is first to be seene in that which he saith to the words of the Apostle a Psal 32.2 Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne The best men sinne venially saith he and are happy when those their sinnes be pardoned Now the Apostle expoundeth the forgiuenesse or not imputing of sinne there spoken of to be the imputation of righteousnesse But the forgiuenesse of their veniall sinnes is not the imputation of righteousnesse because without any forgiuenesse of veniall sinnes a man continueth righteous and iust as wherein there is no breach of iustice and righteousnesse and notwithstanding the same a man is iust in the sight of God as out of the Romish doctrine was shewed in the section last sauing one Therefore forgiuenesse of sinnes spoken of in that place cannot be vnderstood of veniall sinnes Againe he maintaineth in the question of Satisfaction that forgiuenesse of sinnes taketh not away the temporall punishment of sinne How then is a man happie when those veniall sinnes be pardoned if for want of satisfaction he remaine still to pay deare for them as he speaketh in his Epistle in Purgatory fire He bringeth in a place of Cyprian as idlely as he did the former texts To that which he saith we answer him that it is by the grace of Christ through the forgiuenesse of sins that the wounds which the faithfull man receiueth be not mortall His foiles and wounds of themselues are such as that he must say with Dauid b Psal 130.3 If thou O Lord be extreame to marke iniquities who can stand c Aug. in Psal 129. Vidit propè totaÌ„ vitaÌ„ humanaÌ„ circuÌ„latrari peccatis suit accusari omnes coÌ„scientias cogitationibus suis non inueniri castum cor praesumens de iustitia sua Si ergo cor castuÌ„ non potest inuenirs quod praesumat de sua iustitia prasumat omnium cor de miserecordia Dei dicat si c. He saw saith S. Austine the whole life of man in a manner to be barked at on euery side with his sinnes all consciences to be accused by their owne thoughts that there is not a cleane heart found that can presume of it owne righteousnesse If then therâ— cannot be found a cleane heart which may presume of it owne righteousnesse let the hearts of all presume vpon the mercy of God and say If thou markest iniquities O Lord who shall abide it Let Maister Bishop marke it well that in this warfare there is no heart cleane that can presume of it owne righteousnesse and that we haue nothing to rest vpon but onely Gods mercy To the place of Hierome he saith that all iust men confesse themselues to sinne venially But iust men confesse their sinnes in the same meaning as they say Forgiue vs our trespasses They say Forgiue vs our trespasses as S. Austin saith the Apostles did as we heard before for those sinnes for which they say also Enter not into iudgement with thy seruants for in thy sight no man liuing shall be iustified They confesse therefore such sinnes as hinder them from being iustified in the sight of God which M. Bishop saith his veniall sinnes do not The repeating of the whole sentence of Hierome is a sufficient answer to him the latter part whereof he concealeth because it taketh away his glose vpon the former d Hieron cont Pelag li. 1. Tunc iusti â—umus quaÌ„do nos peccatores fatemur et iustitia nostra non ex proprio merito sed ex Dei consistit miserecordia Then are we iust when we coÌ„fesse our selues to be sinners and our righteousnesse standeth not vpon our owne merit but vpon the mercy of God If our righteousnesse consist in the acknowledgement of our sinnes and in the mercy of God pardoning and forgiuing the same then is there in vs no such perfection as M. Bishop speaketh of neither can any worke come from vs that can haue the title of absolute and perfect righteousnesse before God And this will be yet more by that that in the next place is alledged out of Saint Austine who noting diuers degrees of charity saith that e Aug. epist 29. Plenissima charitas qua iaÌ„ augeri non potest quamdiu hìc homo vinit est in nemine QuaÌ„diâ— autem augeri potest profectò quicquid minus est quà m â—ebet ex vitio est the most perfect charity no further to be increased is in no man so long as he liueth here and so long as it may be increased that that is lesse then it ought to be is by reason of a corruption or default Now hereto Saint Austine addeth not onely that which Maister Bishop mentioneth though he mention it also by halfe f Ex quo vitio 〈◊〉 est iustuâ— c. By reason of which g Vitij nomen maximè solet esse corruptio Aug. de li. aâ—â—iâ— lib 3. cap. 14. corruption there is not a man iust vpon earth which doth good and sinneth not but also another sentence which he concealeth h Ex quo vitio non iustificaâ—â—tur c. By reason of which corruption no man liuing shall be iustified in the sight of God Now if by reason of a corruptioÌ„ remaining in vs there be such an imperfection of charity which is the substance of inherent iustice as that no man liuing shall be iustified in Gods sight then can no good worke proceede from vs which can be said to be perfectly and entierly goâ—d For from an vnperfect cause cannot come a perfect effect i Bern in Cant. ser 71. Si radix in vitio ramus If the roote be faulty the braunch also must be so A lame legge cannot yeeld an vpright and stedfast gate Therefore needes must there be a lamenesse and blemish in all the good workes that issue from vs. For charity is not such as it ought to be till we loue the Lord our God with all our soule But k Aug. de perfect iustit
Cum est aliquid concupiscentiae carnalis c. noÌ„ omnimodò ex tota anima diligitur Deus so long as there is any carnall concupiscence God is not loued with all the soule And so long as we liue here there is carnall concupiscence against the law of the minde Therefore so long as we liue here charity is neuer perfect in vs as it ought to be neither can any perfect good worke be effected by vs. M. Bishop minceth and qualifieth the matter that no man hath so perfect charity but that sometimes he doth lesse then he ought to do But the argument prooueth that charity is alwaies vnperfect in this life and therefore not sometimes onely but alwaies a man doth lesse then he ought to do There is alwaies a blot that staineth our charity l Hilar. apud August cont Julian lib. 2. Supra sect 44. by reason whereof we haue nothing in vs cleane nothing innocent as before was cited out of Hilary and therefore it can yeeld no workes that are free from blot and staine But the Reader is here to note the constancie of this man who affirmeth here that no man hath so perfect charity in this life but that sometimes he doth lesse then he ought to do whereas before he hath told vs of a righteousnesse so perfect in this life as that m Sect. 45. it faileth not in any duty which we are bound to performe Thus giddily he runneth to and fro being vncertaine what to say and neuer knowing where he may stand sure Now here he saith that the other saying of Austine Woe to the laudable life of man if it be examined without mercy is spoken in respect of veniall sinnes wheras Austine vseth the words in respect of hell fire which they say is not incident to their veniall sinnes For hauing professed that he he durst not say that after baptisme no word went out of his mothers mouth against Gods commaundement and that Christ saith that if a man say to his brother foole he is guilty of hell fire he addeth these words n Aug. Confess lib. 9. cap. 13. Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam And woe euen to the commendable life of man if thou set aside mercy in the examining or sifting of it To which purpose he saith also in another place o Idem In Psal 42. Quicunque hic viâ—â—â— quantumlibet iustè viuat vae illi si cuÌ„ illa in iudicium intrauerit Deus Whosoeuer liueth here howsoeuer iustly he liue woe vnto him if God enter into iudgement with him In which sort Arnobius also saith p Arno. in Psal 135. Vae nebis si quod debemus exegerit vae nobis si quod debet reddiderit Woe vnto vs if he require what we owe to him woe vnto vs if he pay what he oweth to vs. These woes are not vttered in respect of Purgatory or any temporall affliction but in respect of the issue of that finall dreadfull iudgement the sentence whereof shall stand for euer Now if they haue learned by the word of God to denounce this woe then woe to M. Bishop that to the contrary defendeth a righteousnesse so perfect in this life as that his righteous man q Sect. 4. needeth not greatly to feare the rigorous sentence of a iust Iudge as who faileth not in any duty that he is bound to performe who can keepe himselfe from all but veniall sinnes which are easily forgiuen r Rhem. Testam Annot. Mat. 10.12 Sext. Proaemaâ— glossa by the Bishops blessing by holy water by knocking the brest by saying a Pater noster by extreame vnction and some other such deuotions madly deuised to that end As touching the other place of Austine it hath bene already shewed that our righteousnesse in this life is vnperfect not onely by comparison but simply in it selfe and according to that that here is required of vs The imperfections of wit and will which M. Bishop speaketh of are so great and so many as that if he did but with a feeling heart and conscience consider the same he would finde that there is small cause in the most perfect of this life to pleade for that perfection that he maintaineth But being a man of a frosen and dead heart and neither knowing others nor himselfe by the name of many light faults he passeth ouer those things which make the most righteous and iust to groane vnder the burden of them and to say with Dauid Å¿ Psal 38.4 Mine iniquities are gone ouer my head and are like a sore burden too heauie for me to beare t Psal 40.12 My sinnes haue taken such hold vpon me that I am not able to looke vp they are moe in number then the haires of my head and my heart hath failed me Tush saith M. Bishop what neede all this adoe all these are but light and veniall faults but hereby we conceiue that neither his will nor his wit haue indeede that perfection that it were fit they should haue His answer to the words of Gregory is ridiculous and childish Gregorie forsooth by our vertue meaneth the vertue that we haue of our owne strength when as Gregorie teacheth that we haue no vertue of our owne strength but onely by the gift of God u Greg. Moral lib. 24. cap. 5. Iustitia nostra dicitur non quae ex nostro nostra est sed quae diuina largitate fit nostra It is called our righteousnesse saith he in another place not which is ours of our owne but which by the gift of God becommeth ours According to this meaning he saith that x Ibid. li. 9 ca. 1. Sanctus vir quia omne virtuâ—is nostrae meritum vitium esse câ—nspexit si ab interno arbitro districté iudicetur rectè subiungit si voluero c. the holy man Iob because he saw all the merit of our vertue to be vice if it be strictly iudged by the internall Iudge did rightly adde If I will contend with him I shall not be able to answer him one for a thousand He applieth his speech to Iobs righteousnesse which he had no cause to imagine that Iob alledged as attained vnto by his own strength And shall we be so mad as to thinke that if Iob had bene perfect by a righteousnesse receiued by the gift of God he would say he could not therefore answer God because he saw all the merit of the vertue that he had by his owne strength to be but vice It is strange to see that these men should be so blinde as not to see the grosse absurdity of these shifts Gregory spake to the instruction of his hearers whom surely he thought not to be worse then the Pharisee but knew that they attributed their vertue and righteousnesse to the gift of God and of that righteousnesse which they confessed to be Gods good gift teacheth them to acknowledge that through our weaknesse
we offend in one commaundement we are guiltie of the whole Law but no man can fulfill the whole Law ergo Answer I denie the first proposition for one good worke done with his due circumstances doth bring forth merite as by all the properties of merite may be proued at large and by his owne definition of merite set downe in the beginning Now if a man afterward fall into deadly sin he leeseth his former merit but recouering grace he riseth to his former merit as the learned gather out of that saying of our Sauiour in the person of the good father Luc. â—5 Do on him that is on his prodigall sonne returning home his former garment His second proposition is also false as hath bene proued at large in a seuerall question To that of Saint Iames although it belong not to this matter I answer that he who offendeth in one is made guiltie of all that is hee shall be as surely condemned as if he had broken all See Saint Augustine Epist 29. ad Hieron R. ABBOT M. Perkins saith that he that will merite must fulfill the whole Law M. Bishop denieth that and saith that one good work done with his due circumstances doth bring forth merite Now happie men are they with whom one good worke is of so great worth But what doth a man merite by that one worke Surely if it be a merite of heauen I doubt not but M. Bishop for his part in that meriting facultie wherein he liueth hath in his opinion by many merits deuoured a number of the heauens of Democritus his innumerable worlds But I pray you tell vs M. Bishop if he be a Gal. 3.10 cursed that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the Law how should any man merite by performing onely one thing If life be tied onely to the doing of all why do you make so many merites of that which by the sentence of the Law can yeeld onely one Nay S. Iames plainely telleth vs as M. Perkins alledgeth that b Iam. 2.10 he that keepeth the whole Law and yet faileth in one point is guiltie of all that is he is in generall guiltie of breaking the Law and therefore lieth vnder the curse that is pronounced by the Law But this place M. Bishop saith belongeth not to this matter and why but because he knew not what to say vnto it for that that he doth say doth fully make against himselfe For how should one worke done with his due circumstances bring forth merite when notwithstanding the doing of many workes with their due circumstances a man for offending in any one is as surely to be condemned as if he had broken all Marry saith he a man may merite and after by falling into any mortall sinne he loseth his merite But that cannot be for the Law as hath bene said maketh no promise but to him that fulfilleth all and therefore till a man haue fulfilled all he can merite nothing and therefore hath merited nothing by any former act or acts if afterward he fall into any trespasse of the Law Now therefore there can be no rising againe to former merit where there is no merite at all and the place which he citeth in that sort as he citeth it may import a renewing to the former estate but as touching merit it importeth nothing at all But whether those words of S. Iames belong to this matter or not let S. Ierom tel him who thereupon infers thus c Hieron aduer Pelag. lib. 2. Quis nostruÌ„ aliquando non peccauit Si autem peccauit quod negari nou potest per vnum peccatum omnium est reui peccatorum non suis viribus sed Dei misericordia saluatur Which of vs hath not sometime sinned And if he haue sinned which cannot be denied and by one sinne be guiltie of all sinnes then is he not saued by his owne power but by Gods mercie The place then by his iudgement taketh away from man all power of being saued by any thing in himselfe and leaueth him to be saued onely by the mercie of God To the other proposition of M. Perkins argument he answereth also by deniall and saith that in a seuerall question he hath proued that a man may fulfill the whole law but by that he hath read the disproofe of his proofe it will appeare to him I hope that he hath proued nothing Now it is to be obserued how silly he omitteth the place of S. Iohn alledged by M. Perkins d 1. Ioh. 1.8 If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues c. which inuincibly proueth that no man fulfilleth the whole law because there is no man without sin and euery sinne is e Cap. 3.4 the transgression of the law 12. W. BISHOP His fift reason We are taught to pray on this manner Giue vs this day our dayly bread where we acknowledge euery morsell of bread to be the meere gift of God much more must we confesse heauen to be Answ M. Perkins taketh great delight to argue out of the Lords prayer but he handleth the matter so handsomly that a man may thinke him to be so profoundly learned that he doth not yet vnderstand the Pater noster for who taketh our dayly food to be so meerly the gift of God that we must not either make it ours with our penie or trauell we must not looke to be fed from heauen by miracle by the meere gift of God but according vnto S. Pauls rule either labour for our liuing in some approued sort or not eate Yet because our trauels are in vaine vnlesse God blesse them we pray to God dayly to giue vs our nouriture either by sending or preseruing the fruites of the earth or by prospering our labours with good successe or if they be men who liue of almes by stirring vp the charitable to relieue them So we pray and much more earnestly that God will giue vs eternall life yet by such meanes as it hath pleased God to ordaine one of which and the principall is by the exercise of good workes which God hath appointed vs to walke in to deserue it And it cannot but sauour of a Satanicall spirit to call it a Satanicall insolencie as M. Perkins doth to thinke that eternall life can be merited when Saint Augustine and the best spirit of men since Christs time so thought and taught in most expresse termes R. ABBOT It well appeareth that M. Perkins better vnderstood the Lords prayer then that he had any need to learne of any such slender master as M. Bishop is The argument which he vseth is very effectuall and strong If we cannot merit the food of this life but must craue it of gift much lesse can we merite euerlasting life But saith M. Bishop our dayly bread is not so meerly the gift of God but that we must either make it ours with our penie or trauell we must labour for our lining c.
Esuriuâ— c. Quid tam vile quid taÌ„ terrenum quà m frangere panem esueriente Tanti valet Regnum coelâ—ruÌ„ Si non habes facultateÌ„ frangendi paneÌ„ c. da calicem aquae frigidiae mitte duo miâ—uta in gazophylacium TaÌ„tuÌ„ emiâ— vidua duobâ—s minuus quantuÌ„â—mit Petrus relinquens reâ—â—a quantum emit Zachâ—us dando dimidium patrimonium Tanti valet quantum habueris for what thing He answereth I was hungry and ye gaue me to eate What is there so base saith he what so concerning the earth as to breake bread to the hungry At so much is the Kingdome of heauen valued vnto thee If thou haue no ability to breake bread to the hungry c. yet giue a cup of cold water cast two mites into the treasury The widow for two mites bought as much as Peter forsaking his nets as Zachee did in giuing halfe his goods It is valued vnto thee at so much as thou hast Thus the purpose of this iuditious Doctor is directly against Maister Bishops cause of receiuing the Kingdome of heauen shewing how base and of how little woorth the things are whereto God notwithstanding of his vouchsafing grace returneth the Kingdome of heauen that we may know that it is not for our merits sake that he bestoweth the same As for the imputation of Christes merits M. Bishop knoweth no vse of it because he yet knoweth not himselfe but he will then know the vse of the merits of Christ when he commeth to know how vainly and fondly he hath presumed of his own To the true Church of Christ it was neuer strange tidings that Christes merits should be imputed vnto them whose hope hath alwaies bene to finde fauour at Gods hands by vertue of that merit that he hath performed for them 16 W. BISHOP Here by the way M. Perkins redoubleth that common slaunder of theirs that we take away a part of Christes mediation For saith he if Christes merits were sufficient what neede ours It hath bene told them but they will neuer learne to vnderstand it I will yet once againe repeate it We hold our Sauiours merits to be of infinite value and to haue deserued of God all the graces and blessings which haue or shall be bestowed vpon all men from the beginning of the world vnto the end of it yet his diuine will and order is that all men of discretion hauing freely receiued grace from him do merit that crowne of glory which is prepared for them not to supply the want of his merits which are inestimable but being members of his mysticall body he would haue vs also like vnto himselfe in this point of meriting and further desirous to traine vs vp in all good works he best knew that there could be no better spur to pricke our dull nature forward then to ordaine and propose such heauenly rewards vnto all them that would diligently endeuour to deserue them The man seemes to be much ignorant in the matter of Christes mediation I will therefore helpe him a little It consisteth in reconciling man to God which he performed by paying the ransome of our sinnes in purchasing vs Gods fauour and in ordaining meanes how all mankinde might attaine to eternall life in the two first points we do for the most part agree to wit that our sinnes are freely pardoned through Christes passion and that we are as freely iustified and receiued first into Gods grace and fauour although we require other preparation then they do yet we as fully denie any merit of ours to be cause of either as they do Marry about the meanes of attaining to heauen we differ altogether for they say that God requires no iustice in vs nor merit at all on our parts but only the disposition of faith to lay hold on Christes righteousnesse and merits but we say that Christes righteousnesse and merit are incommunicable vnto any meere creature but that through his merits God doth powre into euery true Christian a particular iustice whereby he is sanctified and made able to do good workes and to merit eternall life Which ability we receiuing of Gods free gift through Christes merits doth much more magnifie both Gods grace and Christs merits for the greater that the gift is the greater is the glory of the giuer And to argue that to be a derogation vnto his mediation and merits which he hath appointed to be the very instrument of applying the vertue of them to vs is indeede vnder colour of magnifying Christes merits to vndermine and blow out all the vertue of them But saies Maister Perkins what should we talke of our merits who for one good worke we doe commit many bad which deface our merits if we had any True it is as it was once before said that euery mortall sinne blotteth out all former iustice and merit but by repentance both are recouered againe but must we not speake of any good because we may hap to do euil that is a faire perswasion and well worthy a wise man R. ABBOT To say that they take away a part of Christes mediation is no slaunder but truth as by M. Bishop himselfe appeareth in this very place To M. Perkins saying that if Christ did sufficiently merit eternall life for vs then he should do more then is needefull in making vs able to merit for our selues he answereth that though Christes merits be of infinite value and haue deserued of God all graces and blessings yet his diuine will and order is that we also merit that crowne of glory But to what end when he hath merited it already Marry not to supply the want of his merits but as being members of his mysticall body he would haue vs like vnto himselfe in this point of meriting Thus we must thinke that M. Bishop is like vnto Christ in this point of meriting or rather we must think him an impious wretched man thus in meriting to consort himselfe and his with the Sonne of God and to bring in these prophane nouelties into the Church which neither Scripture nor councell nor father nor any antiquitie was euer acquainted with Where hath he euer read that Christ would haue vs like vnto himselfe in this point of meriting What is this but to affirme him in a kinde of generality * Our conformity and likenesse to Christ wherin it standeth see of satisfaction Sect. 2. onely to be Iesus Christ but that otherwise he hath left it to euery man to be a Iesus Christ a Redeemer and Sauiour for himselfe because it is his will to haue vs like vnto himselfe in this point of meriting by which it is that he is become Iesus and a Sauiour vnto vs It is by meriting I say that Christ is vnto vs Iesus a Sauiour and therefore if we be like vnto him in meriting it cannot be auoided but that we also are Sauiours Yea and for this matter of meriting necessary it was that he that should be our Redeemer should be God because none
our merit and righteousnesse then it should be in giuing vs ablenesse to merit for our selues And by this the glory of the giuer is most of all set forth which then most clearely shineth when there is least shew or appearance of any thing to be attributed vnto vs. Which is not in their Popish doctrine where man by his merits is set on horsebacke and those merits are affirmed so to proceede from grace as that they proceede also in part from his owne free will Therefore to denie our merits is not to vndermine and blow out the vertue of Christes merits but to acknowledge the same to be in themselues entirely and perfectly sufficient without vs that whilest we yeeld nothing to our selues to reioyce in the glory of our saluation may redound wholy to him to whom wholy and onely it doth belong But to affirme merits on our part cannot be without singular derogation to the mediation and merits of Christ who hath taught vs to apply vnto vs the vertue of his merits not by meriting againe for ourselues but by beleeuing in him according to that which the Apostle hath taught vs that God hath m Rom. 3.25 set him forth to be an attonement for vs through faith in his bloud M. Perkins against this vaine presumption of merit alledgeth further that for one good worke that we do we haue many euill the offence whereof defaceth the merit of our best deedes and maketh them too light in the ballance of the law This M. Bishop lightly regardeth Tush his mortall sinnes are taken away by penance and his merits though they were gone yet returne againe and without doubt he will thereof make himselfe a ladder that shal serue him to climbe to heauen What saith he must we not speake of good because we may hap to do euill That is a faire perswasion and well worthy of a wise man It is but a hap we must think that he doth any euill and therefore he will not be barred from speaking of his good and is no foole I warrant you in the perswasion thereof Surely we thinke that Iob was somewhat wiser then M. Bishop and yet he thought that perswasion not to be vnworthy of him n Iob. 9.2 If I would contend with him I should not be able to answer him one for a thousand And when by the prouocation of his friends he had vsed that great iustification of himselfe being reprooued for it by the Lord he renounceth to speake of his good any more and saith o Iob. 39.37 I am vile what shall I answere thee I will lay my hand vpon my mouth Once haue I spoken but I will answer no more yea twise but I will proceede no further Dauid p Aug in Psal 129. Vidit propè totam vitam humanam circumlatrari peccatis suis seeing the whole life of man in a manner on euery side to be barked at by his sinnes thought his euils sufficient to stop his mouth from talking of his good and crieth out vnto God q Psal 130.2 O Lord if thou straitly marke iniquities who can stand S. Austine thought it worth the while to consider and tooke it to be a barre against all pleading of Merit that if God strictly examine our behauiour r August Plarae inueniâ—â— peccata quà m merita he shall finde more sinnes then merits or good workes and therefore he could cry out Å¿ Confess lib. 9. ca. 13. Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominuÌ„ siremotae miserecordia discutias eam Woe euen to the commendable life of man if thou O God examine it without mercy I wonder then what merit M. Bishop can finde in the commendable life of man The same S. Austine asketh againe t De verb. Dom. ser 15. Quis est qui noÌ„ sit debitor Dei nisi in quo nullum potest inueniri peccaâ—â—m Who is he that is not a debtor vnto God but he onely in whom can no sinne be found Now if we be all debtors vnto God by our sinnes can we by our good workes haue him a debtor vnto vs And what though God of his meere mercy and goodnesse do pardon our sinnes and putting out of sight and remembrance our euill deedes do still reserue the acknowledgement of our well-doings Shall we thereupon out of his mercy build a merit vnto our selues and thinke that we haue well deserued at Gods hands and bound him to vs by our good deedes when by our sinnes we haue a thousand times more prouoked him to destroy vs M. Bishop is no doubt a wise man and hath some great reason to settle himselfe in this perswasion but yet a foole may be so wise as to wish him to take heede that the golden house of merits that he buildeth now do not fall heauie in the end vpon his owne head 17 W. BISHOP Let vs to our third Argument God hath by couenant and promise bound himselfe to reward our workes with life euerlasting Therefore good workes do in iustice deserue it for faithfull promise maketh due debt Math. 20. The couenant is plainely set downe where God in the person of an housholder agreeth with his workmen for a penny a day that is to giue them life euerlasting for trauailing in his seruice during their life time as all auncient interpreters expound it Whereupon S. Paul inferreth that God should be vniust Heb. 6. if he should forget their workes who suffered persecution for him 2. Thess 1. and saith If it be iust with God to render tribulation to them that persecute you and to such as are persecuted rest with vs Li. 2. cont Iouin cap. 2. vpon the same ground S. Hierome saith Great truly were the iniustice of God if he did punish euill works and would not as well receiue good workes To all these and much more such like M. Perkins answereth that couenant for works was in the olde Testament but in the new the couenant is made with the workman not with the worke Reply All that I cited in this argument is out of the new Testament where expresse couenant is made for working and workes as you haue heard And as it was said in the old law Math. 19. Do these things thou shalt liue so is it said in the new If thou wilt enter into life keepe the coÌ„mandements and life eternall is the hire and wages for labouring in Gods vineyard and not of the imputed iustice or merits of Christ but looke about you and behold the goodly marke which M. Perkins sets vp Marke saith he that it is said God will render vnto euery man according to his workes not to the worke or for the worke O sharpe and ouer-fine wit doth he render according to the workes and doth he not render for the workes If the rate of the workes be the measure of the reward that for fewer or lesser workes there is a lesser reward and for many and worthier a greater surely in
benefits go vnder the name of rewards yet in all our righteousnesse there is nothing to counteruaile in any sort the bountie of his goodnesse and therefore was farre from that Pharisaicall and proud opinion of merit which M. Bishop desireth to fasten vpon him Which is easie to be seene in that also which I cited out of him before that t Basil in Psal 114. supra sect 13. eternall rest is layd vp for them who lawfully fight the combat of this life not to be rendered by way of debt to workes but prouided by the grace of the bountiful God for them that trust in him u Cypr de eleem Si expeditos si celeres si in hoc operis agone currentes dies nos vel reditiones vel persecutionis inuenerit nusquam Dominus meritis mostris ad proemium decrit In pace coronam vincentibus candidam pro operibus dabit in persecutione purpuream propassione geminabit Cyprian hath nothing for M. Bishops turne but onely the name of merits and it is already shewed that that can auaile him nothing In steed of merits put in good workes which is all that it importeth and Cyprian saith nothing but what we say No more doth Hilary whose words are x Hilar in Mat. can 5. Haec rectè perfectèque viuentium merces est vt in nouam â—oelestemque substantiam ex hac corruptibilu corporis materie transferantur This is the reward of them that liue well and perfectly that from this matter of a corruptible bodie they are translated to a new and heauenly substance M. Bishop somewhat forceth the place to serue his turne but it is plaine by that that hath bene said before that the names of hire and reward are farre enough off from prouing merit and desert And whatsoeuer they import with men yet that they import not so with God let Hilary himself be witnes who speaking of the wages of them that were hired into the vineyard saith y Idem ibid. can 20. Merces quideÌ„ ex dono nulla est quia debetur ex opere sed gratuitaÌ„ Deus omnibus ex fidei iustificatione donauit Wages indeed there is none of gift because it is due by worke but God hath giuen the same freely to all by the iustification of faith There is no merit then in the reward that Hilarie speaketh of because though it be termed reward yet it is freely giuen by the iustification of faith In the place of Ambrose it is plaine that the name of merits is taken indifferently for workes either good or euill He saith that z Ambros Offic. lib. 1. cap 15. Nonnè euidens est meritorum aut proemia aut supplicia post mortem manere it is euident that for merits there remaineth after this life either reward or punishment and M. Bishop will not say that punishment remaineth for the merits that he pleadeth for Yet he calleth good workes by the name of merits but to how little purpose for Popish merit hath bin already shewed And how farre Ambrose was from opinion thereof his owne words shall witnesse where he saith a Ambr. in Psal 118. ser 20. Quis nostrum sine diuina potest miseratione subsistere Quid possumus dignum proemijs facere coelestibus c. Quo tandâ—m hominum merito defertur vt haec corruptibilis caro induat incorruptioneÌ„ mortale hoc induat immortalitatem Quibus laboribus quibusue iniurijs possumus nostra leuare peccata Indignae sunt passiones huius teÌ„poris ad superuenturam gloriaÌ„ Non ergo secundum merita nostra sed secundum misericordiam Dei coelestium decretorum homines forma praecedit Which of vs can stand without the mercie of God What can we do worthy of the reward of heauen By what merit of man is it yeelded that this corruptible should put on incorruption or this mortall should put on immortality By what labours by what suffering of wrongs can we abate our sinnes The sufferings of this time are vnworthy for the glory that is to come Therefore the forme of heauenly decrees goeth before men not according to our merits but according to Gods mercie This being so by the iudgement of Ambrose why doth M. Bishop seeke to perswade vs by the name of Ambrose that God frameth his heauenly decrees concerning vs according to our merits and that the works that we do are worthy of the reward of heauen He vseth commonly the name of merit as the rest do but neuer had in his heart that matter of merit that M. Bishop dreameth of Hierome also is cited but for shew and onely to fill vp a place b Hieron adueâ— Jouinian lib. 2. Nostri laboris est pro diuersitate virtutuÌ„ diuersa nobis proemia praeparare It belongeth to our labour according to diuersitie of vertues to prepare for our selues diuersity of rewards The rewards by the promises of God are tied to the workes and therefore in doing the workes to which the rewards belong we may well be said to prepare for our selues the same rewards As we are said to worke out our saluation because though it be Gods meere grace by which we are saued yet he vseth our will and our worke for the effecting thereof so are we said also to prepare rewards for our selues because God vseth vs as instruments to do for our selues the workes that belong to those rewards which he hath prepared for vs. And these rewards we doubt not as before was said but that they are diuers according to the diuersity of our works greater rewards to greater works lesse reward to lesser works but what is all this to proue that the rewards are iustly merited and deserued by our workes That Hierome thought not so it is plaine by that we haue seene out of him c Supra sect 17. before that there can no worke be found worthy of the iustice of God as also for that he sayth in the name of the people of God d Hieron in Esa lib. 17. cap. 64. Si consideremus merita desperanduÌ„ est If we consider our owne merits we must despaire and resolueth euen concerning e IdeÌ„ adu Pelag. lib. 2. Pro nihilo saluos faciet eos haud dubiuÌ„ quin iustos qui non proprio merito sed Dei saluantur clementia the iust that they are not saued by their owne merite but by the mercie of God There followeth Saint Bernard whom M. Bishop would not haue cited if he had meant so faithfully as he should haue done In what sort S. Bernard taketh the name of merits hath bene declared a little before so as they may well blush to cite any thing out of him for maintaning their doctrine of merits But M. Bishops dealing is so much the more vnhonest for that in the very same sermon Bernard ouerthroweth that that he would proue by him f Bernar. in Can. ser 68. Quid de meritis solicita sit Ecclesia cui
by adoring and seruing of God we may be put out of feare of our sins and the punishment of them then doth it follow that prayers and such like seruice of Christ doth acquit vs of sinne and satisfie for the paine due to them In Psal 31. Hierome saith The sinne that is couered is not seene not being seene it is not imputed not being imputed it is not punished Answer To wit with hell fire which is the due punishment of such mortall sin whereof he speaketh or sin may be said to be couered when not onely the fault is pardoned but all punishment also due vnto it is fully payd Lib. 2. de punit cap. 5. So doth S. Ambrose take that word couered saying The Prophet calleth both them blessed as well him whose iniquities is forgiuen in Baptisme as him whose sinnes are couered with good workes For he that doth penance must not onely wash away his sins with teares but also with better workes couer his former sins that they be not imputed vnto him Now we must backe againe vnto Chrysostome belike he had forgotten this when he cited the other Hom. 44. sup Math. or else this was reserued to strike it dead He saith Some men endure punishment in this life and in the life to come others in this life alone others alone in the life to come other neither in this nor in the life to come there alone as Diues here alone as the incestuous Corinthian neither here nor there as the Apostles and Prophets as also Iob and the rest of this kind for they endured no sufferings for punishment but that they might be knowne to be conquerers of the fight Answer Such excellent holy personages sufferings as are mentioned in the Scriptures were not for their sins for they committed but ordinarie light offences for which their ordinarie deuotions satisfied abundantly The great persecutions which they endured were first to manifest the vertue and power of God that made such fraile creatures so inuincible then to daunt the aduersaries of his truth and withall to animate and encourage his followers Finally that they like conquerers triumphing ouer all the torments of this life might enter into possession of a greater reward in the kingdome of heauen All this is good doctrine but nothing against satisfaction that their surpassing sufferings were not for their owne sinnes And thus much in answer vnto M. Perkins arguments against satisfaction R. ABBOT Against his answer to the words of Tertullian I must vrge his owne words in the section before alledged Doth not a pardon take away from the fault pardoned all bond of punishment due vnto it and consequently all guiltinesse belonging to it Who can denie this vnlesse he know not or care not what he say Now then put these together Tertullian saith a Tertul. de haptismo Exempto reatu eximitur poena The guilt being taken away the punishment is also taken away But the pardoning of a sinne saith M. Bishop taketh away all guiltinesse belonging to it Therefore consequently it taketh away all the punishment for where there is no guilt no punishment can be Yes saith M. Bishop guiltinesse of temporall punishment doth remaine after the sinne and guilt of eternall be released But then a pardon doth not take away all the guiltinesse of sinne as before he saith it doth Oportet mendacem esse memorem A lyer must beare a braine Againe we would know some ground whereupon we may be assured that sinne hath two kinds of guilt for we conceiue but one onely guilt whereby the sinner is guiltie of all both temporall and eternal punishments Otherwise we may with as good warrant affirme guilt of infinite sorts one whereby a man is guilty of burning another whereby he is guilty of drowning another for the gowt another for the palsie and for euery seueral punishment a seueral guilt and that there may be a remitting of one of these guilts and yet a retaining of the other If M. Bishop take this to be absurd he must giue vs leaue to take him for an absurd man in thus seuering the guilt of temporall and eternal punishments Yea and this assertion of his is the denying of that that in the ground of this question is supposed and confessed For if the sinne be past and pardoned as he saith at first how remaineth there any guilt for what is the pardoning of a sinne but the remitting of the guilt The guilt is a bond whereby we stand bound to punishment the forgiuing of the sinne what is it but the releasing or loosing of this bond If the bond be released why doth he affirme that we are bound still or if we be still bound why doth he affirme the loosing of the bond If he will say that the bond is partly released and partly standeth still then let him say the sinne in part is pardoned but not wholly and then let him shew vs what warrant he hath that God in that sort forgiueth sins by patches and peeces which because he cannot do let him giue vs leaue to take him for that that he sheweth himselfe to be The words of Austine are meerly deluded with the same shift b Aug. de verb. Dom. ser 37 Suscipiendo poenam non suscipiendo culpam et culpam deleuit poenam Christ saith he by taking vpon him the punishment and not taking vpon him the fault hath done away both the fault and the punishment Iust saith M. Bishop the eternall punishment not the temporall But how doth he warrant this limitation in the one part of the sentence which cannot be iustified in the other Where it is said that Christ hath taken vpon him the punishment it is vnderstood of our punishment both temporall and eternall though that which should haue bene eternall to vs by the infinite power of his Godhead was ouercome and made temporall to him Was it S. Austins meaning then to say that Christ hauing taken vpon him our whole punishment hath deliuered vs onely from a part and left the rest to be satisfied by our selues Surely what Christ tooke vpon him for vs from the same he deliuered vs. He tooke vpon him our temporall punishments therefore hee hath taken away our temporall punishments so that they remaine not in the nature of punishments but of medicines to them that haue obtained forgiuenesse of sinnes by faith in him That the mediation of Christ extendeth to the remitting of temporall punishments I haue shewed c Sect. 2. 3. before and therfore need not stand here any longer to confute this improbable and vnlikely glose As for the place of Austine which he alledgeth for colouring hereof it hath his answer in the former section being the next words to those that are cited there d August Enchirid cap. 70. Nemini dedit laxamentū peocandi quamuis miserando deleat tā facta peccata si non satisfactio congrua negligatur God hath giuen to no man a freedome
storie saith f 2. Sam. 24.1 The wrath of the Lord was kindled against Israel and he moned Dauid against them in that he said Go number Israel and Iudah Here therefore necessarie it was and standing with the glorie of God by Dauids prayer that the sin of the people shold be forgiuen as well as Dauids sin Dauid prayed for them He offered a burnt offering as it were to tender vnto God the mediation of Iesus Christ that for his sake he might be mercifull vnto them Vpon this it is said g Ver. 25. The Lord was appeased towards the land the plague ceassed from Israel This maketh plainly against M. Bishop because it proueth directly that the forgiuing of the sinne was the staying of the plague not that the plague continued after the forgiuenesse of the sinne 11. W. BISHOP Our fourth reason The Prophets of God when the people were threatened with Famine the Sword the Plague or such like punishments for their sinnes did commonly exhort them to workes of penance as fasting prayer haire-cloth and the like to appease Gods wrath iustly kindled against them which being performed by them God was satisfied So for example sake the Niniuites at Ionas preaching doing penance in sack-cloath and ashes turned away the sentence of God against them M. Perkins answereth that famine the plague and such like scourges of God were not punishments of sinnes but corrections of a Father Reply This is most flat against a thousand expresse texts of the Scripture which declare that for the transgressions of Gods commaundements he hath sent those punishments vpon the people of Israel And what is the correction of a father but the punishing of a shrewd sonne for some fault committed yet in a mild sort Or doth the Schoole-master which is Caluins example whippe the scholer or strike him with the Ferula but to punish him for some fault So that great Rabbins seeme not to vnderstand what they say themselues when they admit those scourges of God to be the corrections of a Father but not the punishment for a fault As though fathers vsed to correct those sonnes who neuer offended them or masters to beate such scholers as commit no faults But saith M. Perkins these punishments be tending to correction not seruing for satisfaction what senslesse ryming is this by due correction of the fault the party is satisfied in iustice and when he that hath offended doth abide such punishment as the grieuousnesse of his offence did require there is both due correction of the offender and due satisfaction vnto the party offended M. Perkins finally flieth vnto his old shift of imputatiue satisfaction that forsooth our sufferings do not satisfie but the party punished by faith layeth hold on the satisfaction of the Messias and testifie the same by their humiliation and repentance Reply As we first graunt that all satisfaction hath his vertue from the grace of God dwelling in vs which is giuen vs for Christs sake so to say that Christs satisfaction taketh away all other satisfaction is iust to begge the principall point in question therfore an old triuants trick to giue that for a final answer which was set in the beginning to be debated looke vpon the forenamed example of the Niniuites of whō it is not certaine that they had any expresse knowledge of the Messias and therfore were farre enough off from laying hold on his satisfaction But most certaine euident it is in the text that God vpon the contemplation of their works of penance tooke compassion on them and was satisfied as by turning away the threatned subuersion is most manifest R. ABBOT It is an old saying a Tertul. adu Marc. lib. 4. Propter quod venimus hoc age Do that that we come for M. Bishop buildeth here beside his groundworke He propoundeth a Satisfaction to be made for sinnes past and pardoned that is after the forgiuenesse of the sins and bringeth vs arguments to proue a satisfaction for the obtaining of that forgiuenesse But we will take them as they come though by their owne grounds they be worth nothing there being no satisfaction to be made by a man as we shall see hereafter so long as he continueth in mortall sinne and still continuing in it vntill by forgiuenesse it be blotted out The Prophets denounce famine sword pestilence M. Perkins should not haue made any question but that they denounce them as the punishments of sinne as fruites and effects of Gods curse according to the law So did God accordingly execute them in fury and wrath for iust reuengement vpon a rebellious and vnthankfull people The point of question stood not in this neither needed M. Bishop to bestow so much paines for the prouing of it Yet it is to be obserued that although God in generall denounced and executed the same by way of reuenge and punishment yet in particular he had alwaies a respect to the calling and sauing of his elect turning those common iudgements to be vnto them occasions of repentance turning vnto God to obtaine of him remission of their sinnes and euerlasting life To them therefore vpon their repentance the nature of punishments was altered and they became meanes either to receiue them presently to endlesse blisse or to further them in the way wherein they were to walke for the attainement of it Of this enough hath bene said already but the matter here is this The Prophets denouncing such plagues do withall call the people to repentance to fasting to praying to putting on sackcloth and ashes This being performed saith M. Bishop God was satisfied Therefore he will haue vs to vnderstand that the doing of these things was a satisfaction that is the paiment of a iust price vnto God by which they merited the turning away of his fearefull and heauie wrath But this argument of his followeth not because we know that a man in fauour may hold himselfe satisfied towards another vpon his humbling of himselfe who yet receiueth not a satisfaction that is a iust and sufficient recompence for the debt that is owing him or the wrong that is done vnto him The seruant that ought his maister b Math. 18.24 ten thousand talents when he was called to paiment fell downe at his Maisters feete and besought him for patience His Maister herewith was appeased and satisfied and forgaue him all the debt and will any man hereupon say that he made his Maister satisfaction for the debt So is the case betwixt God and vs. We humble our selues before him we pray we intreat him to forgiue vs. He is herewith satisfied that is contented and appeased and remitteth the trespasse Shall we now hereupon say that our humbling of our selues our intreatie and praier to forgiue vs is the paiment of our debt This is a mad conclusion as we take it but such prety knots will serue at Rome to tye the Popes trinkets together and they hold fast enough there because no man must
meddle with the vntying of them But this matter as Maister Bishop handleth it would require somewhat further to be considered of We are therefore to vnderstand as in some part hath bene signified before that we are to put difference betwixt outward and temporall forgiuenesse respecting onely a temporall earthly benefit and that inward and spirituall forgiuenesse which serueth for the acquitting of the conscience to the obtaining of eternall life That outward and temporall forgiuenesse is not indeede to be called a forgiuenesse of the sinne but onely a forbearing of the punishment And this forbearance God yeeldeth not onely to true and faithfull repentance but also to the externall signes and tokens thereof proceeding onely from worldly sorow vpon feare of temporall plagues and punishments either imminent or incumbent For we must know that God ordereth the administration and gouernment of the world not onely for the bringing of his elect vnto eternall life but so also as serueth for maintenance of publike order and state and societie amongst men Such is the wickednesse of mans nature and pronenesse to mischiefe and violence to lasciuiousnesse and filthinesse and all kinde of iniquitie as that the state of men would grow intollerable if God did not take course both to restraine men from that enormitie and excesse of sinne whereto nature tendeth and to giue encouragement to those courses which serue for the common good and benefit of mankinde To which purpose Cyprian very rightly saith c Cypr. cont Demeir Si noÌ„ intercederet rebus humanis diuina censura quanta esset in hominibus audacia facinorum imprâ—nitate secura If Gods censure and iudgement did not interpose it selfe amidst the doings of men how great presumption would there be growing secure and carelesse by the impunitie of of sinne Now therefore when men grow to outrage extremity he sendeth amongst them his d Ezech. 14.21 sore iudgements the sword the famine the pestilence which are e Tertul. de anima cap. 14. Reuera lucs fames bella c proremediâ— deputanda tanquam consura insolescentis generis humani as it were the lopping pruning of mankind when they grow too proud and ranke and hereby he redresseth the insolencies and disorders that are found amongst them But when men vnderstanding the wrath and iudgement of God do shew their dread and feare thereof and yeeld themselues though but ciuilly to be reclaimed he sheweth himselfe outwardly appeased and satisfied and putteth vp the sword which he had drawne against them Thus though the Niniuites were heathens and infidels yet when vpon the preaching of Ionas they put on sackcloth and ashes and shewed tokens of repentance God did forbeare the destruction that he had proclaimed against them So when Ahab hearing by the message of Elias the fierce wrath of God conceiued against him did shew himselfe moued thereat by f 1. Kings 21.27.29 rending his clothes and fasting and lying in sackcloth though he were a most wicked man yet the Lord somwhat relented from the sentence that he had denounced and deferred the execution thereof from the father to the sonnes time In like sort the people of Israel when they euery while by idolatrie departed from God yet vpon humbling of themselues at the feeling of Gods heauy hand found mercy deliuerance from the tiranny of their oppressours though by the sequell it still appeared that they did it with a faithlesse and false heart Thus God yeeldeth temporall benefit to outward discipline and conformity to his lawes and sheweth his regard thereof for the course of this life euen in them towards whom he hath no purpose of euerlasting life Now although towards infidels and hypocrites vpon outward submission God shew himselfe outwardly satisfied and contented and do yeeld thereto the remitting of temporall punishments yet M. Bishop will not hereupon conclude that they haue made a satisfaction to God for their sinnes because they themselues teach that no man liuing in mortall sinne of impenitencie or infidelity can performe any worke of satisfaction vnto God So he himselfe here telleth vs that all satisfaction hath his vertue from the grace of God dwelling in vs which is giuen vs for Christes sake whereupon it followeth that where the grace of God dwelleth not by the faith of Christ there can be no vertue of satisfaction in any thing that is done The more vnshamefast man he within foure lines after to bring the Niniuites for a proofe of their satisfaction of whom he himselfe saith that it is not certaine that they had any expresse knowledge of the Messias he should haue said it is certaine that they had none and therefore were farre enough off from laying hold on his satisfaction and consequently were farre off from the participation of the grace of God But all is one with him it carieth a shew and that serueth his turne making no conscience at all of abusing the ignorance or vnaduisednesse of his Reader and onely regarding to vphold a side But now as touching spirituall forgiuenesse of sinnes for the acquitting of the conscience inwardly to God all that mourne and weepe that rend their clothes and lye in sackcloth and ashes that is that performe outward tokens of repentance are not partakers thereof The reason whereof is because these workes of themselues do spiritually yeeld no satisfaction or contentment vnto God Then do they obtaine true forgiuenesse and remission of sinnes when they are vsed only as affections wherewith we plead to the throne of the mercy of God the satisfaction of Iesus Christ that not for the things which we do but for his sake and g Math. 3.17 in him according to his promise he may be well pleased towards vs. In his name not in our owne we come vnto God for his merits not for owne we begge of him to be mercifull vnto vs testifying by our repentance the feeling and grieuance of our wounds but professing to expect in him onely the medicine for the cure Neither do we herein begge the point in question as M. Bishop alledgeth but we giue him plaine and currant answer We denie that which they affirme that workes of penance are true satisfactions to God for sinne They seeke to proue it for that God vpon the doing hereof is appeased and forgiueth sinnes We answer that where God vpon the doing hereof giueth forgiuenesse of sins it is not for the workes sake that is done but for that the doer by faith seeketh and findeth the washing away thereof in the bloud of Iesus Christ it being he onely of whom we are taught that h Col. 1.14 in him we haue redemption through his bloud euen the forgiuenesse of our sins There are that do those workes and yet haue no forgiuenesse and therefore that other in the doing thereof obtaine forgiuenesse it is not to be attributed to the workes themselues but to somwhat else that is respected therein And what is all our repentance but a
one that carieth any shew or semblance to that for which he citeth them Such is the notable imposturage and cosinage of these false harlots in laying together huge companies of the places of the Fathers to blind the eyes of simple men who are not able to discerne whether they be applied right or wrong I haue pointed at this matter before but it commeth here more fully to be declared M. Bishop in the beginning telleth vs thus We are not here to treate of that publike penance which for notorious crimes is done openly but of such priuate penance which is either enioyned by the Confessor or voluntarily vndertaken by the penitent or else sent by Gods visitation to purge vs from that temporall paine which for sins past and pardoned we are to endure either in this life or in Purgatory c. Mark that which he saith gentle Reader that satisfaction is not here meant of publike penance for notorious offences but only of priuat penance and that for sinnes past and already pardoned That thou mayst the better vnderstaÌ„d this secret of theirs thou art to obserue that in sin they affirme two things a Bellar. de paen lib. 4. cap. 1. Cum homines in DeuÌ„ peccant amicitiaÌ„ simul iustitiaÌ„ violant Ac pro amicitia reformanda noÌ„ potest homo Deo satisfaceremam satisfactio hominis erga Deum acceptatione ipsius Dei necessariâ— indiâ—â—get acceptatio autem amicitiaÌ„ praesupponit Et praeterea vt satisfactio sit aliquo modo ad aequaeâ—â—tatem oportet vt sicut offensio habuit infinitatem quandaÌ„ ex parte obiecti sic habeat satisfactio infinitateÌ„ aliquam ex parte principij satisfacientis Proinde requiritur vt opera satisfactoriae fiant à spiritu Dei homineÌ„ inhabitante siue ab ipso homine vt membro Christi ac filio Det iam per gratiam charitateÌ„ effecto c. the violation of amitie betwixt God and vs and the violation of iustice For the renewing of amitie they say that a man cannot satisfie because satisfaction must haue acceptance with God and acceptance presupposeth amitie and friendship Againe satisfaction must haue some kind of equalitie in respect of the offence for which the satisfaction is made That there may be such an equalitie it is necessary that as the offence hath a kind of infinitie in respect of the obiect which is God so the satisfaction haue a kind of infinitie in respect of the originall whence it hath beginning It must therefore proceed from the spirit of God dwelling in man or from man made by grace and charitie the member of Christ and child of God When therefore a man by mortall sinne hath expulsed from himselfe grace and charitie he must first vpon his contrition and confession be reconciled and haue his sinne forgiuen and afterwards must make satisfaction for the same sinne For they will haue vs thinke that though God be content to be friends with vs and in that respect to forgiue the sinne yet he will haue satisfaction made to his iustice for the wrong and trespasse that we haue done him Thou mayst not wonder that they be very earnest in the assertion of this matter because vpon this ground Purgatory standeth and consequently the whole reuenue of the Popes pardons and of all their obsequies and deuotions for the dead Now this being the point of their defence that God hauing forgiuen and pardoned the sinne there remaineth a satisfaction to be made by temporall punishment which of all the Fathers by him alledged speaketh any thing to that effect He hath taken them all out of Bellarmine but therin see the honesty and fidelity both of Bellarmine and him peruse them and consider of them again again and what doest thou find sounding to the proofe of their assertion The Fathers speake of a satisfaction for the obtaining of the forgiuenes of sins but of a satisfaction to be made when the sin is forgiuen they say neuer a word yea they neuer imagined any such thing The church of Rome denieth that to be properly a satisfactioÌ„ which the Fathers call by the name of satisfaction and knew no other but that yet that satisfaction they alledge for the proofe of their new deuised satisfaction Yea Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that b Bellar. de poen lib 4. ca. 1. Si veteres Patres interduÌ„ actionibus humanis tribuere id videntur vt DeuÌ„ ex inimico amicum reddant atque adeò pro expianda culpa satisfaciant interpretandi sunt dâ— satisfactione ex congruo non ex condigno where the Fathers do seeme to attribute to the actions of men to restore amitie with God and to satisfie for the remission of the sinne they must be expounded of satisfaction ex congruo not ex condigno So had he said before that with the Fathers in that case the words of c Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 12. Vbi poenitentia dicitur meritum pretium satiâ—factio redemptio pro peccato de merito c. ex congruo accipienda sunt merit price satisfaction redemption must be taken in that sort And yet whereas all these Fathers alledged speake of price satisfaction redemption for the remission of the sin he himselfe bringeth them to proue d Lib 4. cap. 9. satisfaction de condigno after the remission of the sinne To speake of them briefly in order as he reporteth them the first testimonie out of Tertullian concerneth publike penance the whole book being written thereof as e Beat. Rhen. in argum lib. Tert. de poenit Beatus Rhenanus sheweth in the argument of the same booke and as by the author himselfe appeareth in that he speaketh of such a repentance as is f Tertul de poen Quicquid mediocritas nostra ad poenitentiaÌ„ semel capessendam perpetuò continendaÌ„ suggerere conata est omnes deditos Domino spectat but once to be had after baptisme which was so ordered by the Church in publike penitencie but in priuate neuer neither wold M. Bishop pleade so hard for it if it were so Now publike penitency was a satisfaction to obtaine forgiuenes and so here Tertullian plainly expresseth calling it g Ibidem Quà m stultuÌ„ poenitentiam non adimplere veniam delictorum sustinere hoc est pretiuÌ„ non exhibere ad merceÌ„ manuÌ„ emittere Hoc enim pretio Dominus veniam addicere instituit c. a folly not to fulfill penance and yet to expect pardoÌ„ affirming the one to be the price for the other and that God hath set the pardon at this price This then being a price for the pardon cometh not within the compasse of our question which is of a satisfaction when the sin is pardoned Origens purpose in the same place alledged is by the example of the deliuerance of the Israelites when they called vpon the Lord to shew that the Lord deliuereth a man to aduersary powers h Origen in lib. Iudic. hom 3. Vt