later members wipe away our Protestants exposition interpreting this place of the meere knowledge not of the obseruation of the law because God speaketh there of fullfilling and doing it in worke Rom. 10. v. 6. August de na gra c. 69. q. 54 in Deuteron Theod. q. 38. in Deuteron Rom. 8. v. Yet if by reason of S. Paul who allegorically only not literally applyeth that sentence to Christ they gloze it at least to be vnderstood of the Euangelicall doctrine of Fayth then we also insist that if the precept of fayth in substance supernaturall may be obserued how much more the naturall commandments of the Decalogue of which S. Augustine and Theodoret expound that of Deuteronomy 2. Secondly the Apostle sayth That which was impossible to the law in that it was weakned by the flesh God sending his Sonne in the similititude of the flesh of sinne euen of sinne damned sinne in the flesh that the iustification of the law might be fullfilled in vs who waike not according to the flesh but according to the spirit Therefore they that are regenerated in Christ in whome the spirit of God dwelleth who walke in newnes of life do truly satisfy and fullfill the law of God They Fulk in 8. ad Rom. sect 1. Abbot c. 4. sect 38. 43. do it quoth Fulke and Abbot by the supply or imputation of Christs righteousnes imputed vnto them and made theirs not by ability giuen them to keepe it But this guilefull commentary hath beene heertofore discarded in the Controuersy of Inherent Iustice And heere S. Paul flatly auerreth the comming of Christ to haue beene that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs in vs whose earthly shape and similitude he tooke in vs in whose flesh he damned and abolished sinne for in his owne he neuer extinguished any because it was neuer touched with the least aspersion Therefore he cannot be expounded of the obedience performed by Christ in his own person but of that which we atcheiue in ours whome he cleanseth from vice and adorneth with grace that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs quickened by his spirit which in flesh weakened infeebled by sinne was otherwise without grace impossible to be kept Likewise Christs righteousnes according to Protestants is communicated vnto them by fayth only but the Apostle heere writeth of a iustification obtayned by working and going forward in newnes of life by walking not according to the flesh but according to the spivit then the causall preposition for which ensueth the comparison betweene them that pursue their fleshly appetits and such as are swayed with the desires of the spirit the correspondence and agreement with this other Text Not the heares of the law are iust with God but the doers of the law Rom. 2. v. 13. shal be iustifyed inuincibly proue that the Apostle speaketh of the iustification purchased by the doing and keeping of the law in our owne persons and not of that which by Augu. de spir lit c. 26. your almighty-vaine beleefe is imputed vnto you And so S. Augustine When it is sayd quoth he the doers of the law shall he iustified what other things is sayd then the iust shal be iustified For the doers of the law verily are iust Agayne Fullfill Aug. in psal 32. the law which thy Lord thy God came not to breake but to fulfill for thou shalt fulfill that by loue 〈…〉 are thou couldst not And a litle after Our Lord will affoard his sweetnes and our earth August ep 144. ad Anast. Idem de spir lit c. 30. will yield ber fruit that by charity yee may fulfill which by feare was hard to accomplish In another place The law teaching commanding that which without grace could not be performed discouered vnto man his infimity that infirmity discouered might seeke out a Sauiour from whome the will healed might be able to do which infirme it could not do The law therefore leadeth vnto fayth fayth impetrateth a more copious spirit the spirit diffuseth Charity Charity fullfilleth the law 3. Thirdly Christ pronounceth May yoake is sweet and Matt. 11. v. 30. 1. Ioan. 5. v. 3. my burthen light S. Ioan This is the law of God that we keep his commandments and his commandments are not heauy To whom are they not heauy To them to whome our Redeemer spake Take vp my yoake vpon you and learne of me Matt. c. 11. v. 29. because I am meeke and humble you shall find rest to your soules To them whome S. Iohn taught how to ouercome the world but these men were inuironed with humane infirmityes therfore men compassed with the frailty of our flesh which M. Abbot gaine-sayth may by the succour of Abbot c. 4. sect 43. Christ and assistance of his grace take vp the yoke of Gods commandments easily beare them and sweetly obserue them Fourthly our Sauiour sayd to him who desired to learne the way of saluatioÌ„ If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments Is it possible then to enter into euerlasting Matth. 19. v. 17. life Yes And not by this meanes which Christ proposed No. No Conceaue you so hardly of the blessed Redeemer and louer of our soules as to auouch that he who came to teach the way of truth who neuer counsailled the captious Pharisyes his deadly foes to run any vncouth false or straying path did now perswade this Religious Marc. 10. v. 21. Basil hom cont dinites auaros Chrys Euthim. in eum locuÌ„ Calu. in Harm in c. 19. Matt. Marc. 10. Luc. 18. Psal 118. v. 31. v. 55. 51. 168. young man whome he loued who vnfeignedly sought as S. Basil S. Chrisostome and Euthymius thinke his eternall weale to an erroneous and impossible course of of atteyning blisse Did he say vnto him hoc fac viues do this and thou shalt liue which although he would he could not do or if he did might not purchase life therby For such is the impious answere which Caluin and his followers returne to this heauenly admonition or precept of Christ forcing his meaning quite contrary to his words Fifthly Kinge Dauid auoucheth of himselfe I haue ran the way of thy commandments I haue kept thy law I haue not declined from thy testimonyes I haue kept thy commandments and testimonyes And that you might be assured he sayd true the holy Ghost addeth his seale subscription thereunto Dauid did that which was right in the sight of God turned from nothing that he commanded him all the dayes of his life except only the matter of Vrias the 3. Reg. 15. v. 5. 3. Reg. 14. v. 8. 4. Reg. 18. Luc. 1. v. â— Hethiâ—e Agayne He was not like my seruant Dauid who kept my Commandments Of Ezechias he witnesseth the same Of Zacharias and Elizabeth Saint Luke recordeth They were both iust before God walking in all the commandments and iustifications of our
Christ by water and the holy Ghost in the regenerate it is wholy cleansed and washed away against our Protestants who stifly contend Originall sinne to be an inheritable peruersnes an vniuersall corruption spread ouer the whole man and defiling him in all parts powers both of body and soule Whereby from the head to the foote he is so ouerwhelmed as with an ouerflowing of water that no part of him is free from sinne Neither doth this prauity in their opinion euer cease but like as a burning fornace bloweth out flame and sparkles or as a spring doth without ceasing cast out water So that peruersnes neuer ceaseth in vs but continually bringeth forth the works of the flesh In so much as whatsoeuer we thinke speake or labour to effect is stayned with the floud of this infectious streame and which is worst of al they affirme this cankred corruption to cleaue so fast vnto vs as it can neuer be scoured forth not by the oyle of grace not by the strength of fayth not by the pretious bath of Christs sacred bloud not by any help of vertue or fauour from aboue as long as coÌ„cupiscence the law of the flesh which perseuereth vntill death according to them is formally sinne inordinatly resisteth or stubbornely rebelleth against Greg. de valent 12. disp 6. q. 12. tom 1. Field in his 3. booke of the Church c. 26. f. 131. Feild ibid. Abbot in his defence cap. 2. VVhitaker l. de pecca origin the law of the mind 3. Whose grosse absurdityes concerning this point chiefly spring from these three heades of falshood first that Originall sinne doth nor formally consist in the losse or depriuation of any iustice grace or perfection euer restored by the merits of Christ in this earthly warfare as we maintaine but in the defect and want of the whole righteousnes which Adam enioyed before his fall The property whereof according to M. Field is to subiect all vnto God and leaue nothing voyd of him Not any inordinate appetite not any contrariety betweene the flesh and the spirit which still abyding Originall sinne also remayneth Secondly that this Originall righteousnes was essentially required to the integrity of Nature Thirdly that all declinings and swaruings from that perfect subiection vnto God and entyre coniunctioÌ„ with him which grace worketh are sinnes and decayes of natures integrity and consequently that concupiscence being a declyning from that entier subiection c. is truely and properly sinne Thus they We againe otherwise teach that the former disorders be defects woundes and decayes of Nature but not properly sinnes which that I may more clearely demonstrate I will briefly declare from whence our concupiscence or rebellion naturally ariseth what Originall sin is and what was the originall Iustice of our first Parents before they fell or felt in themselues those dangerous coÌ„flicts 4. Great was the felicity and thrice happy was See S. Iohn Damas l. 2. de fide ortho cap. 11. S. Greg. in prol 3 psal Poenit. Pererius l. 5. in Genes the state and condition of Adam at his first creation when being framed in the terrestriall Paradise by the immediate hand of God he had his soule beautifyed with grace or inherent iustice his vnderstanding endued with the perfect knowledge of all naturall and supernaturall misteryes his will rectifyed by the loue of God and strong bias of his owne inclination directly carryed to the mark of vertue he had the inferiour powers of his soule the motions of his flesh subiect vnto reason the sterne of reason pliable to the spirit the spirit alwayes obedient vnto God he had no ignorance no errour no perturbation of passions in his mind no inordinate concupiscence no Aug. l. 14. de ciuit Dei c. 26. rebellion in his flesh no propension to euill no difficulty to good No corruption sayth S. Augustine in his body no trouble or distemper by his body bred or ingendred in his senses no Read Pererius in Genes l. 5. de statu innocentiae and Gab. Vas quez in 2. 2. q. 8. dis 131. c. 7. intrinsecall disease could breake from within no extrinsecall hurt was feared from abroad perfect health in his flesh and all peace tranquility raigned in his soule There were the admirable effects this the sweet harmony which Original iustice caused betweene the flesh and the spirit Now whether these extraordinary priuiledges flowed from iustifying grace which was formally all one as the best Deuines accord with Originall Iustice or whether they were caused by the seuerall habits of sundry vertues infused to this purpose or whether some of them proceeded from the sweetnes of diuine contemplation or from the speciall care and prouidence of God I will not heere dispute only I say they could not be any naturall propertyes springing from the roots of nature because in some thinges they eleuated and perfected nature far aboue her naturall course in others they stooped bridled and restrained the maine current of her naturall desires and sensuall appetites as God supernaturally suspended the heat Originall iustice no naturall property but a gift supernaturall of fire in the furnace of Babylon or as he tempered and asswaged the naturall and irreconciliable fiercenes of the wild and sauage beastes in the Arke of Noë neither of which could proceed from nature the one being as I say aboue the other repugnant thereunto for who can think that the dowry of grace is the right of nature or that the gift of immortality is essentially due to a morall body or that contrary qualityes should not naturally resist and oppositely fight the one against the other Who can think that Adam and Eue our first progenitours were essentially iust a prerogatiue only due vnto God or dismantled of that iustice were impayred yea changed in their essence And so not the same after as before their fall in parts essentiall The righteousnes therefore which they lost especially the chiefe and formal part was a diuine accident or heauenly quality not essentially required Feild in his 3. booke of the Church chap. 26. which M. Field misdeemeth to the integrity of nature for that implyeth if nature be taken as it ought to be distinct from that which surmounteth nature but supernaturally added to the perfection thereof and with this couenant imparted to Adam that if he had not trespassed it should haue beene perpetually propagated and transfused Augu. de peccat merit remis l. 2. c. 22. l. 13 de ciuit Dei cap. 13. to his posterity But he transgressing and disobeying the Commandment of his Lord and Maister was iustly plagued with the disobedience of his flesh his hand-mayd vnto him a reciprocall punishment so S. Augustine tearmeth it of his disobedience vnto God Hence proceedeth the rage of concupiscence the commotions of the inferiour and baser parts rebelling against the superiour the auersion from good the proâ—esse to euill hence the disorder of passions the infirmityes of the mind
Creatour there is in it disobedience from the dominion of the mind as Feild presseth out of S. Augustine It is a transgression from the rule of reason a defection sayth Abobt from rightetousnes a swaruing from the law of God but whatsoeuer swarueth or declineth from the prescript of his law is sinne Therefore concupiscence is not only a languor wound or fayntnes but the true sin of Nature Our answere is ready It is a sinne either materially or formally formally if it be a free and voluntary transgression materially if it want deliberation or consent of will as in fooles children and mad men it doth But as in them the actuall lusts or desires of concupiscence are materiall disorders or swaruings from the will of the highest but not properly sinnes so neither in the regenerate if as S. Augustine often auoweth they yield not vnto them For which cause we deny that whatsoeuer declyneth from the law of God is sinne euery vniust law euery hereticall interpretation euery booke which Protestants set forth in defence of their errours is a declyning and swaruing from his law and albeit they damnably sinne in disgorging such poyson yet the books themselues are not properly sinnes but so far forth sin is committed as they are any way diuulged imbraced or allowed no more are the sinnefull motions of concupiscence vnles by voluntary consent they be yielded vnto especially such as are seated in the flesh which is not capable of sinne 8. Secondly they presse the authority of the Apostle and testimony of the Fathers as that S. Paul tearmeth Rom. 6. v. â— ad Rom. 7. v. 24. concupiscence sin the body of sinne the body of death S. Augustine iniquity vice a great euill Methodius death and destruction it selfe S. Ambrose the defilement of nature the seed root or seminary of sinne S. Cyprian a domesticall euill Origen sinne which is the cause of death I answere it is named sinne death destruction c. for many reasons which S. Augustine himselfe assigneth First for that it is the effect Aug la. de â—uptijs concup c. 23. of sin as our speach is called our tongue or hand writing our hand because our tongue or hand frameth it The second for which it is so intitled he noteth to be because it inclineth prouoketh and if it ouercome is the cause of sin death defilement c. So cold is sayd to be sluggish and heauy for that it maketh men heauy wyne merry by reason it stirreth vp to mirth And so concupiscence for as much as it continually suggesteth allureth often induceth to all kind of wickednes S. Cyprian besides the S. Cypr. de ratio circumcis S. Bernard de sex triâ—ul precedent names calleth it a raging beast of stincking breath S. Bernard A contagion a pestilent poyson a manifold pestilence the cherishment of all naughtinesse a furnace strongly burning with the affections of ambition auarice enuy willfullnes lewdnes and all vices 9. Thirdly it is tearmed a great euill because it is indeed an vntoward and euill propension a hindrance from good a want of due subiection in the inferiour powers therefore truly called a sicknes or euill quality though not a sinne for harken what the same S. Augustine writeth to Iulian the Pelagian Thou think est that if concupiscence Aug. l. 6. cont Iul. c. 5. prope finem Rom. 7. v. 15. 19. were euill the baptized should want it thou art much deceaued for he wanteth all euil In this sort S. Paul calleth it the euill which he hateth and the euill which I will not that I doe Fourthly it doth beare the name of sinne because it was the materiall part of sinne or that which the formall guilt of our capitall infection materially included after which maÌ„ner it may be improperly sayd to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iniquity the name for which Iohn Caluin and his Ghospellers so eagerly striue yet if you take the word iniquity in August tract 41. in Ioan. his proper signification it is wholy cancelled in S. Augustines iudgment saying because all iniquity is blotted out hath no infirmity remayned 10. Lastly it doth sometyme truly vndergo that name because in the irregenerate the auersion from God Aug. l. 5. contra Iul. c. 3. which is the forme and essence of Originall sinne is annexed vnto it This is the meaning of S. Augustine when in his fift booke against Iulian he first calleth it sinne then the cause also and punishment of sinne for so it is properly sinne not in it selfe alone but as it is combined with the aforesayd auersion to make one complete and vitious habite So there is in it disobedience against the dominioÌ„ of the mind because it is in them vnbridled and vntamed VVhitak l. 8. aduers Duraeum fol. 576. lust so it is that sinnefull concupiscence against which the good spirit according to S. Augustine doth striue and couet Howbeit by these words Whitaker taketh occasion to cauill that he speaketh of concupiscence in the regenerate because in them only is the good spirit which warreth against it But he is much deceaued for S. Augustine meaneth not by the good spirit the spirit of righteousnes but the naturall propension to good the right Synderesis or light of Gods countenance which he hath stamped in the hartes of the wicked this often fighteth and biddeth war to that concupiscence which is true sinne by reason of the formall guilt conioyned vnto it notwithstanding if that formall guilt be once forgiuen the materiall part that is concupiscence of it selfe inhabiting in vs against which we wrastle is no more sinne then a dead carcasse bereft of life is a true and proper man 11. One scruple yet may trouble my Reader why Vlpid tit de edilitio edict lege prima Tul. ep Papirio Paeto ep â— in fine S. Augustine should call this concupiscence vicious or a vice for heereon we may vndoubtedly argue that it is likewise sinnefull or a sinne I answere that the word Vitium vice if we sift the natiue signification and property thereof may be taken for any thing that is diseased or defectiue either in nature or art as Vlpianus in the ciuill law vseth the word and Pliny stileth the falling sicknes by the name of Vice Tully likewise giueth the name of vice to whatsoeuer is broken or out of reparation in the roote or walles of a house Thus S. Augustine taketh the word vice for that which is maymed and diseased and not for that which is sinnefull when he speaketh of the woundes of sinne abyding in the regenerate wherein I appeale to no other sentence then his owne which I heere insert as a seale and obligation of his beliefe concerning this matter Iam Aug. l. 2. contra Iul. prope init ne discernis iam ne perspicis c. Dost thou now discerne dost thou now perceane dost thou now behould the remission of all sins to be made in Baptisme and as
places The same S. Paul writing to the Corinthians sayth As we haue 1. Cor. 15. v. 49. borne the image of the earthly let vs also beare the image of the heauenly but the Image of earthly Adam we haue truly borne by the deadly impression of internall and hatefull sinne Cent. 3. c. 4. Column 48. therefore we must truly beare the figure of Christ by the beautifull stampe of internall and acceptable grace as Origen cyted by the Centurists doth plainely insinuate and the Apostle likewise confirmeth in his Epistle to the Ephesians Be renewed in the spirit of your mind and put on the new man which according to God is created in Iustice and holynes of Ephes 4. v. 24. truth behold we haue not the new man imputed vnto vs but we put him on vs formed and created not in signe and sanctification but in iustice and holynes of truth and that according to God Besides it is sayd We are buryed with him by ad Rom. 6. Baptisme to the end that as Christ did rise from death so we may walke in newnes of life Vpon which wordes S. Augustine auerreth Aug. in Enchir. cap. 52. That as in Christ there was a true resurrection so in vs there is a true iustification Whosoeuer then detracteth from the truth of our infused iustice detracteth from the verity of Christs resurrection and whosoeuer impayreth the perfection of this darkneth also the glory of that S. Chrysostome commenting vpon that passage of S. Paul aboue cyted You are washed you are sanctifyed you are â— ad Cor. 6. v. 11. iustifyed sayth He sheweth that you are not only made cleane but holy and iust Illuminated and made perfect sayth S. Clement of Alexandria Of old made new of humane diuine sayth S. Gregory Nazianzen Which are most euident testimonyes Clem. l. 1. Pedago cap. 6. Nazian ora in san bap for my purpose yet to leaue no place of tergiuersation to wrangling Sophisters I will further corroborate this chiefe and fundamentall article with other most cleare and irrefragable arguments 8. That grace and renouation is perfect entire and not the effect but the true cause of our iustification by the VVhitak l. 8. aduers Dutaeum very consent of our Aduersaryes which absolueth vs from sinne endueth vs with purity and holynes in the eyes of our Creatour engrafteth vs into Christ vniteth vs vnto God and giueth vs life in him maketh vs his adopted children entitleth vs to the right and purchaseth the inheritance of our eternall kingdome All this is wrought not by any other precedent cause but by that inherent Rom. â— v. 4. iustice or infused charity which God deriueth into our soules therefore that maketh vs truly righteous and iust before the Tribunall of his highnes First it cleanseth vs Ibid. v. 7. from our sins as S. Paul to the Romans defineth saying We are buryed togeather with Christ by Baptisme into death Rom. 8. v. 2. Tertul. l. de resur carn c. 46. Basil de spir san c. 15. Aug. l. 1. de nupt concup c. 22. Lib. de lib. arbit c. 14. 15. 16. de sprit liter 8. 17. What death but the death of sinne of which it immediatly followeth he that is dead is iustifyed from sinne to wit is released and absolued from sinne by the newnes of life wherin he resembleth the resurrection of Christ Againe The law of the spirit of life in Christ Iesus hath deliuered me from the law of sinne where Tertullian insteed of deliuered vseth the word manu misit hath set free like a bound man enfranchized and set at liberty by the benignity of his Maister S. Basil explicating the former place sayth The spirit infuseth liuely and reuiuing force recouering our soules from the death of sinne into a new life And S. Augustine the later writeth thus The law of the spirit of life in Christ hath dissolued the guilt of concupiscence procuring remission of all sinnes who doth also often testify that the law of the spirit of life is the grace of the new Testament written in our harts Secondly it doth not only expell the mists of sinne but garnisheth also our soules with the lustre of vertue as I haue already conuinced in my first encounter against M. Abbot which cannot be interpreted Ephes 1. v. 4. of signes of beauty grateful to men who pierce not into the closet of our soule nor behould the light and brightnes therof mentioned aboue Therefore it must Ioan. 15. 1. Cor. c. 12. v 26. needs be expounded of the purity splendour and holynes it displayeth before the face of God according to that of S. Paul He chosevs that we should be holy and immaculate in his sight in charity that is by meanes of his habituall charity harboured in our brests 9. Thirdly this inward renouation doth truely incorporate vs in the mysticall body of our Lord Sauiour Coloss 3. v. 13. Gal. 3. v. 17 Rom. 8. v. 11. Aug. de spir lit c. 29. Rom. 13. v. 13. 14. it engrafteth vs like liuely branches into him our true vine it maketh vs the body of Christ and members of member Doinge on sayth S. Paul to the Collossians the new man him that is renewed vnto knowledge according to the image of him that created him To the Galathians as many of you as are baptized in Christ haue put on Christ. And how haue yee put him on but as the same Apostle testifyeth By his spirit dwelling in you Wherof S. Augustine sayth By the spirit of Christ incorporated made a member of Christ euery one may inwardly affoarding increase accoÌ„plish works of iustice Besids that very word to put on Christ often vsed in holy Write doe on the armour of light doe yee on our Lord Iesus Christ according to the Hebrew * Indui haebraicâ— laâ—aâ— Isa 61. Chrys in 1. c. ad Gal. in c. 3. ad Rom. Cyril l. 9. in Genes Hieron ad Pamach Rom. 6. v. 10. 1. Cor. 6. v. 17. Ioan. 14. v. 23. 1 Cor. 3. v. 16. 17. 1. ep Ioan. c. 3 v. 24. 1. Ioan. 4. v. 16. 1. Ioan. 4. v. 17. Rom. 6. v. 11. Augu. de verbis Apostol ser 18. 28. l. de ciuit Dei c. 24. phrase and allusion to the long gownes of the Iewes signifyeth great plenty and aboundance of grace sanctity and iustice with which they that put on Christ are inwardly clad as it were with a rich and gorgeous robe which doth not only couer the nakednes but wholy adorneth the temple of our soules with heauenly rayes of incomparable vertues Therefore Isay calleth it The vestment of saluation the garment of iustice or coate of ioy as the 70. Interpreters or vestment Iesus as other translate it wherof read S. Chrysostome S. Cyrill S. Hierome 10. Fourthly by this inhabiting grace a true vnion is made a league is contracted betweene God and vs We liue to him Are one spirit with him
speaking to their harts By which All Heretikes according to S. Augustine who receaue the authority of the Scriptures perswade themselues they follow them whereas they rather follow their owne errours 27. Hence it also proceedeth that if no other ground or foundation be assigned no heretike could be noted or condemned of heresy nay as Suarez that great Suarez l. 1. defens fid cap. 11. Deuine heereupon inferreth No heretike should be or heresy at all no man ought to be compelled to the vnity of sayth and fellowship of one Religion to which the Scripture so often exhorteth and God requireth as necessary to saluation For if it be inough for euery one to appeale to the tribunall of his owne as he deemeth inspired conscience who can decline from the rule of Fayth Who can swarue from his owne particuler iudgment forsake that guide foundation of beliefe which himselfe broacheth and boldly vaunteth to come from God Who then can be an heretike or what heresy be vented If that be the square of fayth who ought to be compelled by forsaking that rule to conforme himselfe to another profession Euery one may safely remaine in his owne religion as long as they verily thinke which all men easily do that they haue receaued the riches of the spirit in as great measure as any other For this reason D. Whitguift alleadged why the Church of England need VVhitg in his defens against Cartâ—r not submit it selfe to the Church of Geneua The same reason may the Brownist alleadge why he should not yield to the Puritan the Puritan for not conforming himselfe to the Protestant and one Protestant why he should not subscribe to the iudgment of another Therefore besides the inward inspiration there must be some other outward vndeceauable and ouer-ruling Iudge or els God hath not sufficiently prouided for the necessityes of his Church not for her peace concord and stability not for her vnity in fayth certainty of beliefe not for the obedience and submission of her children not for the ending of quarrells decision of doubts and rooting out of errours But of this againe in the next chapter where my Aduersary might haue read this very obiection answered if he had not heere importunly vrged it out of due order time and place 28. The shew of reason which this Respondent Obiections The first bringeth to proue the iudgment of the secret spirit is to this effect First sayth he the Church receaueth from God inspiring her the right sense of Scripture he must first decide the coÌ„trouersy in her mind before she can exteriourly decide what they are bound to belieue therefore the spirit of God speaking in her hart is the supreme Iudge of Controuersyes euen in the opinion of vs Catholikes Secondly he proueth that the same spirit speaking The second in the diuine word to euery particuler man was likewise iudge in the law of Nature because at that tyme there were no other ordinations then such as did necessarily follow out of the eleuating of mankind to a supernaturall end but out of that it no way followes that al the faythfull were to obey one supreme Pastour Thirdly The third in the law written there was not one Gouernour the faythfull among the Iewes being without any subordination to any one among the Gentills And the Gentils had no subordination to the high Priest of the Iewes The fourth Fourthly it must be acknowledged sayth he by the aduerse part that the spirit of God as speaking in particular to euery man decideth which company of the professors of Christianity is the true Church and by consequence Answers To the first the same spirit determineth in the same manner all other controuersies Thus he To the first I answere that the motions inwardly inspired to the pastours of the church are no iudiciall sentences nor finall decisions of matters controuerted they are not any infallible rules neither to others to whom they are vnknowen nor to themselues to whome they are vncertaine vntill they be outwardly decreed and iointly subscribed vnto by the suffrages of all both head and members For vntill then they be not made one common voice one publik law one generall consent or definitiue sentence pronounced by them all they are not the last and highest Tribunal of the Church to which euery one is bound to submit himselfe without further appeale To the second I reply with D. Sanders other learned Deuines It is false that To the second Sander de visib Monar l. 4. c. 3. 4. there was no other ordinary Iudge in the law of Nature then Gods priuate instruction for Adam during his life was the chiefe head supreme directour of Gods people in points of fayth Then Seth after Enos c. And so in succeeding ages the first borne or eldest among the faithfull by the prerogatiue of his primogeniture or some other by Gods speciall election discharged that office which did also necessarily follow out of the eleuation of mankind to a supernaturall end supposing the sweetnes of diuine prouidence after mans fall and want of fayth To the third I answere that God himmselfe in the written To the third Deut. 17. vers 12. law appointed one high Priest and supreme Iudge among the Iewes He that shall be proude refusing to obey the Commandment of the Priest which at that tyme ministreth to our Lord thy God and the decree of the Iudge that man shall dye To whome notwithstanding the faithfull amongst the Gentils were not subiect because they had no such positiue precept imposed vpon them they were then separated and diuided from that chosen company by which the lineall and visible succession of the Church was propagated and continued Yet if they liued according to the prescript of reason and light of nature the necessary mysteryes of fayth were reuealed vnto them either by God himselfe or by an Angell or by some other inuiolable tradition Which being an extraordinary course can neither be a warrant for particular men to challeng the like nor preiudice the ordinary way which the diuine wisdome vseth in instructing his seruants especially now in the law of grace in which he hath subiected both Iew and Gentile to the obedience of one head supreme pastour according to that which our sauiour said Other sheepe I haue which are not of this fold them also must I bring and they shall heare my voice and there Ioan. 10. 16. shall be made one fold and one pastour Which cannot be vnderstood of Christ as he inuisibly feedeth and gouerneth his flocke for so there was alwayes one fold Cyprian l. 1. ep 6. ad Magnum and one pastour but of his visible headship and of his secondary also and visible pastour who now succeedeth him of whome S. Cyprian interpreteth those words 27. To the fourth I deny the Antecedent for that which first decideth what society of Christians is the To the Fourth true
vtter Haeb. 5. 22. Ioan. 16. v. 12. And heerein they traced the footsteps of their Lord and Maister Iesus Christ who sayd to his Disciples Many thinges I haue to say to you but you cannot beare them now Whereupon S. Gregory Nazianzen affirmeth the Diuinity of the holy Ghost to be one of the misteryes Christ reuealed Greg. de theol orat â— not to his Disciples at that tyme. Which moued the Eunomians to tearme him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The vnwritten God Yea S. Paul himselfe referreth exhorteth recommendeth vnto vs besides his written word many vnwritten 1. ad Tim. c. vltimo 1. Cor. 11. 2. 2 Thes c. 2. 14. Bâ—sil de Spir. Sancto c. 29. Basil ibid. cap. 27. verityes To Timothy O Timothy keep the Depositum To the Corinthians I praise you brethren that in all thinges you be mindfull of me and as I haue deliuered vnto you keep my precepts or Traditions according to the Greeke To the Tessalonians Hold the Traditions which you haue learned whether it be by word or epistle Vpon which wordes S. Basil accounteth it Apostolike to perseuere firmely euen in vnwritten Traditions And a little before Of such articles of Religion as are kept and preached in the Church some were taught by the written word other some we haue receaued by the tradition of the Apostles deliuered vnto vs as it were from hand to hand in misteryes both which be of one force to godlines and these things no man wil deny S. Epiphanius cyting the forenamed place of S. Epiphan har 61. Chrysost in 2. ad Thess â—om 4. Hieron aduers Lucifer Orig. in proem l. â— de Prin. Aug ep 86. ad Casulan Paul sayth We must vse traditions for the Scripture conteyneth not all thinges and therefore the Apostles deliuered certaine things by writing certaine by Tradition S. Chrysostome vpon the same text The Apostles did not deliuer all thinges by writing but many thinges without and these be as worthy of credit as the other S. Hierome Although there were no authority oâ— proofe out of Scripture the consent of the whole world in this behalfe should stand in lieu of a precept For many other thinges also which by tradition are obserued in the Church haue gotten the force and strength of a written law Origen That truth is only to be belieued which in nothing swarueth from Ecclesiasticall tradition S. Augustine Concerning those thinges of which the Scripture maketh no mention the custome of Gods people or the constitutions of our Ancestours are to be held in place of a law 6. Some of these Fathers M. Reynoldes faythfully Reyn. conclus 1. p. 689. Reyn. ibid. pag. 620. cyteth yet for that they vtterly exclude his fond and fayned glosse of the Apostles wordes aboue mentioned he one while answereth I tooke not vpon me to controle them but let the Church iudge if they considered with aduice inough c. And some few leaues before of S. Basil and S. Epiphanins he malepartly protesteth They were deceaued But if they were deceaued S. Cyprian Tertullian S. Chrysostome S. Fulke against purgatory p. 362. 303. c. Vvhâ—tak de sacra Scriptura p. 678. 68â— 683. 685. Tertul. l. de cor mil. Chrys ho. 1. in Acta Hier l. coÌ„â— Lucif c. 4. ep 28. ad Licâ— Aug. de Ge ad lit l 20. cap. 23 â— Cor. 3. 20 lere 31. 33. Euseb l. r. de demâ—n cap. 8. Tull. l. de lâ—g Isocra ep ad Philip. Maced Hierome S. Augustine S. Leo whome M. Fulke and Whitaker reproue for affirming the like were likewise deceaued S. Paul himselfe was deceaued who for this cause tearmeth the Corinthians the Epistleof Christ written not with inke but with the Spirit of the liuing God not in tables of stone but in the tables carnall of the hart The holy Ghost also was deceaued who prophesing of the new Testament by the mouth of Ieremy sayth I will put my law into their bowels and in their harts will I write it The reasons are manifest because our harts are farre surer Registers of Gods word farre lesse subiect to destruction then leaues of paper Because it is not meet that the perfect documents of the new law of the law of spirit life and truth should be wholy figured in dead and senseles Characters Because the infinite knowledge of the holy Ghost daily teaching instructing his Church was not to be restrained to any limited volumes Because as new doubtes new cloudes of diffiâ—â—ltyes arise amongst vs so new beames of light new instructions or explications are needfull to cleare those mists Because precepts of manners as Tully obserueth are more sweetly sowed and engrafted in a Commonwealth by obseruation and custome then by restraint of Iawes Because as Isocrates teacheth the liuely voice oracles of the mind are more forcible to perswade of greater account and estimation then the records of writing 7. And therfore as the Romans locked vp in the Capitoll the Oracles of the Sybils and permitted them not Fenestella l. 1. cap 13. de magist Clemens Alex. strom 5. Dion Bas Eus vs infra 1. Cor. cap. 2. 6. Bils 2. part pag. 265. Reyn. conclus 1. Dyon Eccles hier cap. 1. Basil locis citatis Leo. ep 8. ad Flauia Euseb l. 1. de demonst euang c. 8. 1. Cor. 11. v. 2. 2. Thess 2. 14. 1. Tim. vlt. v. 20. 1. Cor. 2. 6. 1. Cor. 11. v. 34. Ad Tit. 1. v. 5. Haeb. 5. v. 11. Aug. l. â—onâ— epist Fund c. 4 5. to the view of any but only their Priests as the Aegyptians according to Clemens Alexandrinus report did not publish the knowledge of their diuine secretes but only to them as were to be aduanced either to Royall or Priestly dignity so S. Dionyse S. Basil and Eusebius witnesse that the Apostles thought meete to couer some hidden misteryes of our fayth from the contempt of the vulgar and by secret Tradition to deliuer them onely to such as were more fit and capable Of whome S. Paul sayd We speake wisedome among the perfect Notwithstanding M. Bilson cauelleth That albeit the Church had some Rites and Ceremonyes yet no matter of fayth sayth he Nothing necessary to saluation sayth M. Reynolds vnwritten Meere cauils For S. Dionyse calleth the concealed misteryes Chiefe and supersubstantiall S. Basil Principall parts of our Faith S. Leo Constitutions which appertaine to the pith and substance of fayth Eusebius All the precepts which Christ gaue as it were to the wiser and most spirituall sort of men which the testimonyes themselues seeme to pronounce For can we thinke the Traditions which S. Paul equally ballanced with his own Epistle the Depositum he so earnestly recommended to Timothy the wisedome he vttered among the perfect only and among such as were fit to teach others can we thinke the thinges he had to prescribe concerning the vse and administration of the Blessed Sacrament the forme he appointed about the ordering of Priests the speach
improperly but properly called Sacerdotes sacrifycing Priests And S. Paul teacheth That euery Priest or Bishop is ordained to offer Gifts and Sacrifices To conclude then wheras M. Reynoldes himselfe is faine to yeild That these thinges are linked by nature in relation and mutuall dependance as I may say one of the other the Altar the Sacrifice and the Sacrifycers seeing I haue already proued that we haue true and reall Altars true and proper Priests he cannot deny vs without open shame and contradiction a true reall and proper Sacrifice 12. If we looke into the old Law we shall find that King Dauid in the feruour of his Propheticall spirit speaketh of Christ Thou art a Priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech which S. Paul often repeateth But what was the order of Melchisedechs Priest-hood Wherein was he a figure and type of Christ M. Bilson recounteth certaine prerogatiues S. Paul mentioneth yet no priuiledge no act of Priest-hood no signe or shew of Sacrifice properly belonging to any Priest But S. Cyprian and Primasius wisely tell vs That the singularity of his order consisted in offering not the bloud of brute beasts but Bread Wine As the holy Ghost also in Genesis witnesseth Melchisedech King of Salem brought forth bread and wine for he was the Priest of the most high Or and he was the Priest of the most high agreeable to the Greeke and Hebrew copyes where both the causall coniunction for as Copulatiue and of necessity inforce that he brought forth bread and wine as a Priest to offer them vnto God And therein the Fathers affirme against M. Bilson That he figured and resembled our Sauiours oblation of the holy Eucharist S. Clemens of Alexandria S. Ambrose S. Cyprian S. Augustine Isidorus S. Hierome cyting to the same purpose many others S. Cyprians words are these Our Lord Iesus Christ offered a sacrifice to God the Father Chrys hom 60. ad pop Nos ministrorum tenemus locum qui verò sanctificat ea immutat ipse est Arno. in Psal 109. Lact. l. 4. Inst ca. 14. Prima in com cap. 5. ep ad Heb. Epiph. haer 55. Aug. in Psal 109. ep 95. ad Inno. l. â— con ad le prophe c. 20. Oecum in cap. 5. ad Hebr. and offered the same that Melchisedech did that is Bread Wine to wit his Body and bloud 13. Moreouer Christ is not only called a Priest according to the peculiar ranke of Melchisedech and therfore must offer a peculiar Sacrifice proper to his order and different from others but he is tearmed also in this kind a Priest for euer So that heerein he continueth both the dignity and function of his eternall Priest-hood because heere by his commandment by his authority by his speciall concurrence with the Priests Prelats of his Church he incessantly offereth vnto his Father his owne body bloud vnder the forms of Melchisedechs Sacrifice For as in the administration of other Sacraments he is the chiefe and principall Agent when we baptize Ipse est qui bapâ—zat He is he that bapâ—izeth sayth S. Iohn when we ordaine or consecrate Priests he is he who consecrateth them In like manner when we celebrate Masse he is he who inuisibly celebrateth he is the chiefe high-priest and we his Ministers he the true and supreme Bishop and we the Suffragans or Substitutes who supply his roome We may then vndoubtedly inferre with Arnobius Lactantius Primasius Epiphanius S. Augustine That the eternity of Christs Priest-hood according to the singuler order of Melchisedech still perseuereth in the true Oblation of his body and bloud made at the Altar and offered now in al parts of the world And if we examine the learned Protestant what els can he assigne in which Christ doth exercise at this tyme the proper act of his neuer ending Priest-hood The Sacrifice of the Crosse That remayneth not and in respect of that Oblation and Host once offered as Oecumenius noteth he cannot be called a Priest for euer The prayer and intercession he maketh for vs aboue But this is not any peculiar and proper act of Priest-hood much lesse of any determinate and particuler order The vertue and efficacy of his bloudy Sacrifice which he still offereth and representeth to his Father But if this euerlasting effect disappoint the new Law of all proper Sacrifices it should by the same reason haue frustrated Act. 4. v. 12. the old For there is no other name vnder heauen giuen to men in which we ought to be saued No other vertue by which our forefathers were sanctifyed then the death of Christ Againe this representation which our Sauiour maketh of his Passion in the sight of his Father is no such Sacrifice whereby he may either chalenge the name or reserue the office of an euerlasting Priest Or if it be any such besides that you applaud the Reall Sacrifice in heauen which in earth you detest seeing this is only exercised among Angels aboue and no act of Priesthood perseuereth amongst men no kingdome of Christs Church no CoÌ„mon-wealth of his people no law of Christianity now flourisheth vpon earth but is vtterly disanulled extinguished and altogeather translated to the Court of heauen according to that of S. Paul Priesthood being translated Heb 7. v. 12. it is necessary also a translation of the Law be made 14. Now if Christian harts can neuer subscribe to these impietyes if we must of necessity graunt that God hath euer some Church some inheritance some chosen Isa 19. v. 21. Prou. 9. 1. Dan. 11. v. 31. Psalm 17. 16. Hier. in Psalm 71. people vpon earth we must needs allow some visible outward proper law by which as his peculiar flock they appertaine vnto him and are combined in mutuall fellowship and society togeather If a Law a Priesthood if a Priesthood a Sacrifice if a Sacrifice what other then this which Isay foresaw The Aegyptians shall know their Lord in that day and worship him in Hosts and guifts c. And there shal be the Altar of our Lord in the midst of Aegypt SalomoÌ„ shaddowed Wisedome hath built an house imolated rictimes mingled wine c. Daniel mentioned calling it the Dayly Sacrifice which Antichrist shall deface and abrogate at least in publike King Dauid specifyed There shal be a sirmament in the earth vpon the tops of Mountaines Where S. Hierome expoundeth Firmament Memorable wheat The Caldaicall translation Supersubstantiall bread The learned Hebricians commonly interprete Placentam tritici A * The Hebrew word Pissathbar signifyeth a Cake of wheat as Reuelinus sayth Cake of wheate substantiall Bread or a sacrifice of Bread So Rabbi Salomon There shall be a Cake of wheat in the earth in the Rab. Saloin â—sa 72. Rab. Achilas in â—undeÌ„ locum Rab. Iona. l. col in Psal 72. Read Gal. l. 10. de area cap. 4. 5. 6. 7. Mal. 1. v. 11. Reyn. c. 8. diuis 4. Bils 4. par pag. 695. Alan de
crucifyed his bloud shed And therefore if vve exactly scan the povverfull and effectuall vvordes of Consecration vvhich immediatly produce no more then they signify vve may truly auerre that Christ in this svveet and admirable manner is heere dayly killed and crucifyed againe For if he vvere sayd to be killed in the Apoc. 5. 9. 138. imperfect thaddovves and darke resemblances of the old Lavv and tearmed by S. Iohn The Lambe slaine from the beginning of the world because the Goates Lambes and other victimes were slaine which obscurely shadowed and resembled him how much more truely may he be said to be daily crucified in our dreadfull mystery of the Masse which is not onely a bare and naked figure but so liuely an Image so neere a Character such a perfect representation of that on the Crosse as it is the same body the same bloud the same Host Oblation which there was made And no difference at all but that that was sacrificed vpon the ignominious wood of the Crosse and this vpon the hallowed Altar of the Church That was all imbrued with bloud this cleane from the effusiō of bloud That offered by the treacherous hands of the Iewes this by the annoynted hands of the Priests That in his true proper and natiue shape this in a couert hidden and Sacramentall manner Heereupon S. Cyprian Cyp. ep 63. Pascha de cons◠dist ◠c. Iteratur Greg. do Conse dist 2. c. Quid sie hom 37. in euan Aug. de fide ad Petrum c. 19. The Sacrifice which we offer is the Passion of Christ. Paschasius Daily Christ is mystically immolated for vs and the Passion of Christ in mystery is deliuered S. Gregory Christ in himselfe immortally liuing dieth againe in this mystery S. Augustine speaking of the carnal Sacrifices of the Leuiticall Law and this Commemoratiue of the new In them he saith Christ was foreshewed as to be killed in this he is shewed as killed The reason heereof is manifest because the seuerall substances of bread and wine as I touched aboue are not directly changed and transubstantiated into the whole person of our Sauiour Christ as here he liued vpon earth or as he now raigneth in heauen but the bread into his body apart from the bloud and the wine into his bloud apart from the body In so much that if nothing else ensued but that which the words precisely signifie and effectuate the body should be there truly dead deuoid of bloud and the bloud truly shed seuered from the body 28. Notwithstanding al this we constantly beeleue that per concomitantiam as the Deuines tearme it or by sequell of all parts each to other the body of our Sauiour is in the Sacrament as it is in it selfe that is glorious immortall and fully replenished with his pretious bloud His bloud is likewise vnder the other kind as it now existeth conteyned in his veynes his veynes in his body his body conioyned to his soule his soule and body Hypostatically vnited to the Sonne of God so that Christ by this sequell or Concomitance is here wholy vnder both kinds his whole body his whole bloud his whole soule his whole Godhead his whole man-hood Yea by essentiall connexion of one with the other all the persons of the holy Trinity the Father Sonne and holy Ghost 29. O most rare and vnspeakable mysterie which M. Bell M. Reynolds and their vnhappy Consorts either blinded with ignorance or transported with malice can Heb. 5. ver 11. not conceaue O great and inexplicable speach which S. Paul thought vnfit to vnfold to the Hebrewes feeble in faith and weake in vnderstanding And indeed it is too deepe a point to explaine to the itching eares of our captious Heretikes if the calamity of our times importunity of our Aduersaries did not presse vs thereunto 30. Besides these cauils gathered out of Scripture M. Bils 4. p. pag. 692. 693. 752. Rey. p. 536. Bilson and M. Reynolds huddle vp certaine obiections out of the Fathers writings as that S. Gregory Nazianzen calleth our daily Sacrifice An Image of that on the Crosse S Chrysostome A signe a remembrance of Christs death Others say That Christ is ossered in a Sacrament in mysterie in memory Some tearme it A spirituall Sacrifice A Sacrifice of praier S. Augustine A Sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing But how do these sayings infringe our doctrine We allow it an Image yet the truth it self A signe yet the thing signed An image in respect of the outward forms the truth in respect of the inward substance A signe in shew the thing it selfe indeed We agree with the Fathers That Christ is offered in a Sacrament in mysterie c. in regard of the visible elements and outward representation as I haue already declared we call the Masse A spirituall Sacrifice A Sacrifice A Sacrifice of Praier for that it is made with blessing and praier mysticall for that the manner of consecrating this victime is not grosse carnall and sensibly bloudy as the Iewish victimes were but cleane spirituall and vnbloudy Vnbloudy in Sacrification in substance bloudy Aug. con lit Petil. l. 2. ca. 86 ◠Tertul. ad Mar. li. 4. Iren. l. 4 ca. 33. 34. the manner spirituall the thing corporall We subscribe to S. Augustine Tertullian Irenaeus and the rest That it is a Sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing because hereby God is highly praised aboundant thankes are surrendred vnto him And whatsoeuer the old Law with many Hosts and burnt offerings nakedly resembled by our sole and singuler Sacrifice is wholy honorably fully accomplished In which respect we are the true worshippers of God Who neither in the Temple of Ierusalem nor in the mount Garizim but in euery Coast and Climate of the earth adore the Father of Heauen according of our Sauiours prophesie in spirit and truth He saith in spirit by reason of the life and spirit of God which our Host containeth Ioan. 4. 23. In truth because it is indeed the truth it selfe the true body of Christ which the figures of the old Law shadowed and resembled Or he addeth in spirit not to debar vs from all externall Sacrifices or outward ceremonies as Caluin misconstrueth the word but to exclude the grosse corporall victimes of the Iewes as S. Chrysostome Caluin in his Com. vpon this place Chrys and Euthy vpon this place Amb. de Spi. l. 3. ca. 11. Cyr. in Io. l. 2. ca. 93. and Euthymius expound this place In truth to oppose it against the false and vnlawfull worship of the Samaritans which is the interpretation of S. Ambrose S. Cyril and Theophilact 31. And this is sufficient to cleare the Fathers sufficient if not to stop the mouth of clamous Aduersaries yet to quiet the minds of indifferent Readers sufficient to acquit our Sacrifice from calumny our selues from Idolatrie our Priests from iniury and incroachment vpon Christs incommunicable right in their immaculate and daily immolation of his body
sin Aug. ibidem And a little after Thou pardonest him that confesseâ—h Thou pardonest him but punishing himselfe So mercy and truth accord Mercy because man is deliuered truth because sinne is punished THE EIGHT CONTROVERSY APPROVETH The doctrine and practise of Indulgences against D. Fulke and other Sectaryes CHAP. I. IF the vse or rather abuse of Pardons were such as the Hussits heertofore the Waldenses the Thaborits and the Protestants now of late haue buzzed Ioan. Cocaeus l. de hist Hussitarum Synodus Constant â—es 2. Greg. de Valentia tom 4. disp 7. q. 20. puncto â— into the eares of their wretched followers accursed were the Pen vnhappy the Man who would vndertake their defence But sith all their reports are pernicious calumnyes which issue from mindes corrupted with malice I will briefly propose what Pardons or Indulgences are then what grounds to authorize them we haue out of Scripture 2. Indulgence therfore is a mercifull relaxation or absolutioÌ„ of temporall punishment due to sin by applying out of the Sacrament the superabundant satisfactions of Christ and his Saints by him that hath lawfull authority To manifest the truth of this definition two principal pointes generally denyed by Fulke and his Consorts I am now to demonstrate First that there What Indulgences are is a certaine surplussage or common treasure of publike Satisfaction in the Church Secondly that this treasure may be communicated to such as need proportionably to the punishment their sinnes require Concerning the former In one and the same action achieued in the fauour of God a double valew may be considered the one of merit the other of satisfaction The merit is drawne froÌ„ the worthinesse of the worke as it floweth from the fountaine of supernaturall grace the satisfaction ariseth from the painfulnesse difficulty or annoyance which is takeÌ„ in performing the same And because euery good and pious act of necessity beareth this heauenly stampe of grace and is commoÌ„ly attended with some paine difficulty euery such action is both meritorious of heauen and satisfactory for the delight taken in sinning both which it hath pleased God to set downe by the Scribes and Secretaries of his holy will 3. S. Marke speaking of a charitable Almes-deed affirmeth it meritorious Whosoeuer shall giue you to drinke a Mar. 9. vers 40. Matth. 25. vers 35. cup of water in my name c. he shall not loose his reward And S. Matthew testifieth that heauen is giuen as merited herby For I was hungry and you gaue me to eat c. And that the same worke is also satisfactory Toby anoucheth Almesdeeds deliuer vs from sinne and death Salomon confirmeth As water quencheth fire so Alsmesdeeds extinguish sinne Which Toâ— 4. v. 11. Eccles v. 35. cannot be meant of blotting out the guilt of any mortall crime wholy remitted by repentance therefore it is vnderstood of satisfiyng for the punishment to which a sinner is liable Neither is there any reason why the same worke of prayer for example may be meritorious to him that prayeth and propitiatory in the sight of God to obtaine some benefit vnto others if it may not be also satisfactory for their sinnes because the excellency of the worke from which merit proceedeth is nothing lessened but rather augmeÌ„ted by reason of the painfulnes the painfulnes froÌ„ which SatisfactioÌ„ is made more precious in regard of the dignity So that merit may well comply in the same action with Satisfaction and Satisfaction agree with merit Yet there is a great difference betweene them for no man can merit for others but satisfie he may Christ only hath merited both grace and glory for vs all and throughly satisfied for our sinnes The vertue of his merits communicated vnto vs by our meritorious deeds we can deriue to none but our selues the fruit of his satisfaction we may apply by our satisfactory workes both to our selues and to our fellow members 4. Besides no man can merit so much but he may daily increase merit more and it is impossible to arriue to such height of perfection in the way of merit but the crowne of reward shall infinitly surpasse the worthinesse of our deserts For the sufferances of this tyme are not condigne Rom. 8. 18. Bernar. de conuers ad Clericos serm 30. to the glory to come They are not answerable sayth S. Bernard to the precedent fault which is remitted nor to the present grace which is infused nor to the future glory which is promised vnto vs. But they may be notwithstanding in the way of Satisfaction more theÌ„ inough to discharge the debt of punishment for that being rated according to the proportion of the faultâ— As the measure of sinne such shall be the nuÌ„ber Deut. 25. of stripes Many zealous Penitents and perfect followers of Christ haue indured more penall afflictions then the satisfaction of their sinne required Now the surplussage or supererogation of these spirituall satisfactions which auance Nazian orat 4â— quae est orat 2. in Pascha In extraâ— Vnigeniâ— de poenis remis 1. Pet. 1. Psalm â—â—â— Basil exponens verbâ— Psal 48. Chrys hom 10. in ep ad Ronaâ—oâ— to some are not vayne or superfluous but make vp one complete masse of passions which abound in the Church chiefly through the sufferings of Christ and our B. Lady For first if euery drop of Christs precious bloud as S. Gregory Nazianzen doth insinuate and Clement the sixt define if euery prayer he made and worke he achieued might haue beene sufficient to haue satisfied for the sinnes of all mankind what a great price what a copâ—ous redemption what an inestimable ransome did he offer for vs A price saith S. Basil surpassing all valew A ransome which as much exceedeth saith S. Chrysostome the summe of our iniquities as the maine Ocean surmounteth a little sparke of fire cast into it 5. Likewise our Blessed Lady who neuer spotted with the staine of sinne who replenished with the fountaine of grace went daily forward increasing in many charitable and painefull workes had a rich heap of satisfactions to augment the summe before mentioned Fulke in c. 1. ad Colos sect 4. Matth. 1. Which because M. Fulke is ashamed to confesse he villanously denyeth by the instigation no doubt of some infernall spirit this immaculate purity of the Virgin Mary and belcheth forth out of his impure breast If she * He speaketh absolutly and accuseth our B. Lady aswell of actuall as of originall sin as appeareth out of his aâ—not in c. 3. Mar. sect Scotus in 3. sent dist 3. quaest 1. Zuarez Tomo 2. in 3. part distinct 3. sect 5. Bonauâ—n 3. dist 3. q. 2. Aug. Ep. 57. neuer sinned how can she reioyce in God her Sauiour How can she be one of Christs people who was called Iesus because he should saue his people from their sinnes Blasphemous Catiffe who would not vnderstand that Christ might redeeme his Mother as Scotus and
the diseases of the body famine sicknes and death it selfe 5. And although Original sinne be now the cause of all these euils yet it doth not properly consist in them all but in the priuation of that prime grace by which the soule of Adam was enriched adorned and conuerted vnto God For as Originall righteousnes included these three prerogatiues or triple rectitude to speake in S. Thomas language first the vnion of the mind with soueraigne goodnes secondly the subiection of the inferiour powers of the soule to reason thirdly the like subordination of all the members of the body to the soule yet it did truely and principally reside in the former and contayned S. Thom. 1. p. q 95. â—â—t 1. the later two as accessaryes or dependants thereof So Originall sinne which is only knowne by his contrary habit is truly formally nothing els then the voluntary priuation of the same Originall iustice which ought to be in vs as it maketh the soule deformed blemished Feild in his 3. booke c. 26. and auerted from God Wherefore seing this want and priuation is taken away by Baptisme and the whole grace as it cloathed beautifyed and adorned the soule entierly restored the whole guilt of sinne is forgiuen the formall cause or true essence of Originall iustice recouered againe by the passion of Christ and the other deordinations the remaynder of concupiscence are only the effects or punishments of the precedent fault and not any true and proper fault For if man had beene created in the state of pure nature as the Philosophers thought he was and many Deuines against M. Feild teach he might be because it inuolueth no contradiction neither in respect of the creature nor Creatour Then I say he should haue beene pestered with the same inordinate concupiscence and rebellion of the inferiour parts as now he is but then it had been a meere infirmity langour or fayntnes of nature growing out of the matter whereof man is compounded and not any wound or punishment also of sinne as in our case it is The reason appeareth for as man in the state of pure nature must haue been coÌ„pacted of two diuers and repugnant natures of soule body flesh and spirit and consequently of a corporall and reasonable of asensuall and spirituall appetite which could not chuse but maintaine a perpetuall warre of contrary and repugnant desires it being naturall to euery thing according to Philosophy to couet that which is conuenient and sutable to it selfe so the sense euen then would hunt after sensible pleasant delight-some obiects and the spirit would seeke for spirituall the spirit would often checke restrayne and bridle the pursuit of Aug. de pec merit remis l. 2. cap 4 de nuptijs concup l. 1. c. 27. l. 13. de Triâ— c. 10. contra Iul. Pelag. l. â— 1. retract c. 15. sense and sense would likewise hinder weaken and repine at the heroicall workes and endeauours of the spirit Thus the winds of diuers opposite passions the fluds of contrary inclinations would naturally striue and resist one the other yet as in that case this contrariety had beene no sinne but a sequele a disease a feeblenes of nature so now the same abiding in the regenerate from whome the dregs of all impurity are cleansed it is only according to S. Augustine left as an exercise of vertue to wrastle against or as a punishment of sinne and not as any true or proper sinne Which by two irrefragable arguments I conuince in this manner Ezech. 36. v. 25. Mich. 7. v. 19. â—01 lasâ— v. 12. Ioan. 1. v. 29. Psal 50 v. 6. Whatsoeuer filth or vncleanes our soules contracted by the sinne of Adam is wholy washed away in Baptisme by the grace of Christ But the filth or guilt of concupiscence descended from Adam therefore it is clean abolished by the vertue of Christ The Maior or first proposition is euery where testifyed in holy Writ by the Prophets and Apostles who often witnes that there shal be left no sinne in vs after we are once new borne in Christ for he shall cleanse vs from all our iniquityes he shall drowne our sinnes in the bottome of the sea he shall discoast them from vs as far as he East is distant from the West he taketh away sinnes blotteth them out wipeth them away dissolueth them like a clowd he shall forgiue the iniquity to the house of Iacob and this is all the fruit that the sinne thereof be taken away But none Isa 44. v. 22. Isa 27. v. 9. Ad Rom. 8. v. 1. Hier. in Com. in hunc locuÌ„ Ad Rom. 5. v. 19. of these Prophesyes not one of these assertions were true if the guilt of concupiscence still lurked in the soule of the regenerate It were not true which S. Paul teacheth There is no damnation to them that are in Christ Iesus to wit Nihil damnatione dignum nothing worthy damnation as S. Hierome commenteth vpon that place if any damnable sinne remayned in them Not true which the same Apostle auoucheth As by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so also by the obedience of one many shall be made iust if we be not as truely iustifyed and purged from the drosse of sinne Psal 50. v. 9. Ad Ephes 1. v. 4. ad Collos 1. v. 22. ad Ephes 4. v. 22. 24. ad Colos 3. v. 9. ad Rom. 6. ad Ephes 5. 2. ad Corinth 6. Chrys ho. 40. in 15. 1. Cor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the merits of Christ as by the fall of Adam we were infected therewith 7. Secondly King Dauid speaking of the purity of the soule cleansed by grace sayd Thou shalt wash me and I shall be made more white then snow S. Paul writeth that the iustifyed are holy and immaculate that they cast off the old man and put on the new that they liue in Christ are light in our Lord temples of the liuing God Therefore free from the darknes free from the impurity death and idolatry of sinne for what participation hath iustice with iniquity what society is there betweene light and darknes what part hath Christ with Beliall what agreement hath the temple of God with Idolls Only God sayth S. Chrysostome can deliuer from sinne which in this lauer of regeneration he effecteth he toucheth the soule it selfe with grace and plucketh from thence the rooted sinne he who by the fauour of the King is pardoned his cryme hath his soule still defiled whome Baptisme washeth not so but he hath his mind more pure then the beames of the Sunne and such as it was when it was first created Which testimony of his so euidently discouereth the spot of Originall guilt to be quite abolished as the Magdeburgian Protestants censuring this place doubt not to say Chrysostome speaketh of the efficacy of Baptisme very dangerously And yet he speaketh no otherwise then the word of God and generall voyce of
it were the ciuill or domesticall war of inward vices to remayne with the baptized For they are not such vices which are now to be called sinnes if concupiscence draw not the spirit to vnlawful workes conceaue and bring forth sinne By which wordes I may resolue and end this mayne coÌ„trouersy that the repugnance betweene the flesh the spirit the vntowardnes to good the forwardnes to euill other defects of nature are vices indeed but no sinne in the faythfull I may note also by the way the extrauagaÌ„t examples which Protestants bring of a woman in trauaile of a womaÌ„ child of one Viper ingendring another to proue thereby that coÌ„cupiscence a sinne may coÌ„ceaue and bring forth sinne For that we willingly confesse we graunt that voluntary concupiscence which is a sinne Abbot c. 2 sect 6. fol. 211. may cause and beget another sinne But we say that the suddaine motions of concupiscence which inuade our mind against our will and that concupiscence of it owne nature is not sinnefull vnles by winning our consent it conceaue and consumate sinne as S. Iames and S. Augustine heere expresly auow Yet who was euer so mad as to teach a womaÌ„ not to be a womam vnles she conceaue or a viper no viper except it breed and ingender vipers Their examples therefore are impertinent and all the oiections they make against vs either friuolous or fully VVillet contr 17. q. 1. p. 558. answered 12. Neuerthelesse before I finish this questioÌ„ some may expect I should more largly vnfold what Originall sinne is and how it stayneth our soules against the Anabaptists the Albigensians and Zuinglian Protestants Likewise how all the whole progeny of Adam is infected there with against the Caluiuists Puritans of our tyme Calu. l. 4. instit c. 16. §. 24. 25 Fulk in c. 3. Ioan. sect 2. in cap. 7. 1. ad Cor. sect 11. VVhitak controu â— q. 6 c. 3. who imagine the children of the faythfull to be receaued of God into the inheritance of the couenant from their mothers wombe be regenerated by the Holy Ghost and may be saued without Baptisme Vpon which wicked ground M. Dod a silenced Minister once Preacher at Banbury resused to christen the Lady Popes child vntill their meeting day before which tyme the poore infant dyed without domage or hurt to his soule as that wretched fellow deliuered Against these and many such errours some I say may looke I should reason a little but because they are only mayntained by old condemned Heretikes or new Schismaticall Precisians and not generally imbraced by the Synagogue of England whose common heresyes I heere impugne it shal be sufficient to descry the rockes and dangerous shallowes you ought to â—huâ— least you suffer shipwracke sayling in this difficulty without the card of direction First then beware of the Pelagians who say we incurre the corporall death and punishment but not the guiltines of our forefathers fault vnles byimitation we follow his transgressions Whome S. Paul refuteth teaching That we all trespassed in Adam Are by nature Rom 5. Ephis 2. v 3. the children of wrath Borne and conceaued as King Dauid sayth in sinne On the other side take heed of Matthias Illyricus his drunken phrensy who fayneth our birth-sinne not to be any relation or accident but the defiled substance Psal 50. Matth. Illiric in l. de essentia iustit iniustit original it selfe of man Making thereby either God the author and abettour of sinne who createth propagateth preserueth our humane nature or some other Creatour of thinges then God with the Manichean Heretikes From whome wicked Caluin whose steps our Sectaryes precisely follow departeth not much affirming The whole nature of man is a certaine seed of sinne whereby not the flesh or sensuall parts alone but the very soule is so corrupted that it Calu. l. 2. c. 1. §. 9. needeth not only to he healed but in a manner to put on a new nature Detest and flye these dotages and that of Origen who dreamed our sinne of nature to be the dayly crimes Ibid. §. 9. oursoule committed before it was vnited to the body Which dreame he tooke from the Platonists and it is condemned Concil Brach. c. 6. in the first Bracharan Councell and by S. Leo Epiphanius and others The dotage likewise of Tertullian and Apollinaris who imagining that oursoules descended S. Leo ep ad Turb c. 10. Epipha ep ad Ioan. Ierosol S. Aug. l. de â—aeres c. 86. S. Thom. 2. 2. q. 8â— artic â— Genes 2. Vasq in 1. 2. disp 232. c. 4. sup q. 83. by propagation from nature as the soules of plantes and beasts accordingly thought Originall sinne to be the naturall contagion which one polluted soule deriueth from another Which the whole Schoole not only of Deuines but also of Philosophers constantly abhorre and truely teach the soule of man to be immediatly created by the hand of God and at the same tyme infused to the body as Moyses intimated in the second of Genesis Our Lord formed man of the slyme of the earth and breathed into his face the breath of life and man became a liuing soule O ther 's more neer then these yet not conformable to truth affirme our radicall crime to be a positiue accident and vitious quality But vvho I pray doth produce this accident Not God he cannot be the cause of finne nor Adam nor the Diuel nor any earthly creature they haue no power to effectuate any such positiue and hereditary quality or if they Vâ—sq ib iâ— disp c. 2. could it being corporall as themselues graunt how can it infect the spirituall soule Neither yet is Originall sinne the meere fault which Adam committed imputed vnto vs as Pighius and Catharinus teach for that maketh vs by extrinsecall Rom. 5. Concil Trident. sess 5. denomination only not truely and properly sinners as S. Paul and the Councell of Trent define we are 13. Nor is it the only binding ouer or desert of punishment because these be sequels both which follow of Vasq ibid. cap. 3. sinne for no man is iustly designed or obnoxious to punishment but he that hath deserued it no man deserueth it but he that hath trespassed offended Sinne therfore goeth before the lyablenes or desert of punishment What then shall we say What is the natiue and home-bred crime of which we speake I answere as before that it is the want and priuation of Original iustice as it is voluntarily caused in vs by the disloyalty and transgression we committed in our first fathers reuolt whereupon we gather out of S. Anselme this pithy definition of it It is the S. Ansel l. de coÌ„ep virg c. 26. Dionys l. de Eccles Hierar Concil Trid. sâ—ss 5. Can. 2. Aug. l. 1. de nâ—â—pt concup c. 28. nakednes or want of iustice due to the children caused by the disobedience of Adam Which S. Dionysius meaneth
Aug. l 2. de peccat merit remis c. 27. not with the issue of consecrated children Which a little before he doth thus corroborate with the strength of reason because renouati parentes c. renewed parents do carnally ingender not of the first fruits of newnes but of the reliques of oldenes They communicate vnto their posterity not the personall blessings of new restored life but the common Aug. l. de peccat merit remis c. 12. 1. ad Cor. 7. vers 14. maledictions of old depraued nature so enthrall their of spring in the bondage of Adam cannot indue them with the inheritance of Christ In his next booke handling that obiection the Caluinists now as the Pelagians then vrged out of S. Paul How the vnbelieuing party is sanctifyed by the faythfull and the children of their marriage are cleane and holy He solueth it in this manner that the Christian is often the occasion of gayning the other vnto God procureth also the baptizing of their children And concludeth a little after what other sanctification soeuer is meant by the Apostle neither the incredulous Aug. loc citato can be saued or purged from their sins without the sacrament of the Church Nec paruuli de quibuslibet sanctis iustisque procreati c. Nor children begotten of what soeuer holy iust parents are assoyled of the guilt of Originall sinne vnles they be baptized in Christ for whome we ought to speake so much the more earnestly by how much they are lesse able to speake for themelues In fine what followeth of the contrary doctrine but that all descendents from regenerate parents take from them their right to heauen that to know my election is sufficient to know that any of my carnall progenitours was a belieuing Christian in the dayes of Christ or at any tyme since that no children or childrens children in any succeeding generation can be damned whose parent when they were borne was a faythfull belieuer These heresyes and the like hatefull to repeate necessarily attend on the fornamed absurdity vvhich I leaue as bones for Puritans to gnavv on and vvill aduance my pen to more profitable discourses THE SEAVENTEENTH CONTROVERSY DEMONSTRATETH That our Iustice is inherent in vs and not imputed only against Doctour Whitaker Doctor Fulke and Maister Abbot CHAP. I. MAISTER Whitaker M. Abbot and the rest of their crew who deny the perfect remission of sins in the beautifull flocke of Christs chosen sheep which come vp from the lauatory of sacred Baptisme Cantiâ— 6. v. 5. do much more disauow the inward iustice and splendour of their soules which cannot reside with those abyding spots therfore as they hold their christned children faythfull belieuers only rid of their offences by the meere exemptioÌ„ from paine or not imputation of fault so they affirme theÌ„ no otherwise iustifyed beloued of God then by the sole imputation of Christs extrinsecal fauour or outward righteousnes ascribed vnto them But we that haue proued the true forgiuenes and destruction of sinne do likewise maintaine the internall renouation and iustification of man whereby he is not only outwardly accompted iust but inwardly endowed beautifyed and enriched with a heauenly guift or supernaturall quality pleasing vnto God which we tearme with S. Paul our spirit of adoption Rom. 8. v. 15. idem v. 23. Ioan. 3. v. 5. Coloss c. 1. v. 12. 13. Ephes 5. v. 8. 1. Pet. 2 v. 9. the first fruits of the spirit or our new birth our inherent iustice because it doth inherently dwell and inhabite in our soules We teach moreouer that the purgatioÌ„ and remission of our sinnes is formally nothing els then the infusion of that celestiall guift For as this materiall Sunne with the same beames expelleth darcknes and enlightneth the regions of the aire so the true Sunne of Iustice dissolueth the cloudes of iniquity and garnisheth our soules with the selfe same rayes of grace which the Apostle testifyeth Willing vs to giue thankes to God and the â—ulg l â— de remis peâ— c. 4. Concil Trid. sess 6. c. 3. Luc. 15. v. 24. Ephes 2. v. 5. Gal. â— v. 15. Aug. ep 54. Colos 3. v. 9. Basil de spirit sant Chrys in Psal 118. Aug. ep 1â—0 de spir lit c. 27. Father who hath made vs worthy vnto the part of the lot of Saints in the light who hath deliuered vs from the power of darknesse hath translated vs into the kingdome of the Sonne of his loue Again to the Ephesians You were once darknes but now light in our Lord. S. Peter From darcknes he hath called you into his mâ—rueilous light Where he compareth the state of infidelity or vicious life to darckenes the state of iustification to light because it expelleth the mists of sinne adorneth with inward and inherent brightnes the tabernacles of our soules as S. Fulgentiuâ— and the Councell of Trent expound the former place to the Colossians The same is confirmed by many other Texts where we are sayd to receaue life by the benefite of Iustification My sonne was dead and is reuiued When we were dead by sinne God quickned vs togeather in Christ In respect of which we are called A new oreature we are borne againe by a spirituall generation we spoyle our selues of the old man doe on the new c. Which newnes of ours S. Basil calleth The participation of the holy Ghost S. Chrysostome Infused bountifulnes S. Augustine The grace of the new Testament written in the tables of our harts S. Iohn The seed of God which remaineth in vs. S. Paul The excellent grace of God in you the holy spirit of God in which you Ioan. 1. ep c. 3. v. 9. 2. Cor. 9. v. 14. Ephes 4. v. 30. 2. Cor. 4. v. 7. Rom 15. v. 5. are signed a treasure which we haue in earthly vessels Charity diffused into our hartes by the holy Ghost which is giuen vnto vs. 2. A thing so cleare that our Aduersaryes haue not the face to gaine-say it But confesse an inward sanctification of the Holy Ghost and alteration of man yet togeather with this sanctification there is still quoth M. Abbot a remaynder of originall corruption by the touch and staine whereof the holynes and newnes that is wrought in vs is defiled Likewise inherent righteousnes although it be the worke of God yet it is soyled in the puddles of our corruption What say you Is sanctification stayned Holynes defiled The worke of God soyled in the puddles of sinne All the fornamed sentences of holy Scripture define the contrary they teach That we cast off the old man and put on the new that we are translated from the power of darknes to the kingdome of light that we were once darknes but now light in our Lord once dead but now aliue to God Likewise the Scripture often recordeth That the Abbot in his defence c. 4. fol. 403. 430. puddles of sinne are cleansed destroyed blotted
powred into our harts men are iust whosoeuer are iust Moreouer conferring the law written in tables of stone with the law of Grace engrauen in our harts he auoucheth That was written out of man that it might terrify him this in man himselfe that it might intrinsecally iustify him Further This iustice of ours is the grace of Christ regenerating vs De spirit lit c. 17. by the holy Ghost In fine explicating these wordes of the the Apostle The iustice of God by faith of Iesus Christ which the Caluinists glose to be that which is resident in Christ De peccat reâ—is c. 25. S. Augustine expoundeth thus The Iustice of God by fayth of Iesus Christ that is by fayth wherewith we belieue in Christ for as that fayth is called Christs not by which Christ belieues so that Rom. 3. v. 22. Aug. de spirit lit c. 9. cap. 11. iâ— psal 30. Conc. 1. tract 26. in Ioan. Iustice is called Gods not whereby God is iust both of them fayth and iustice be ours but therefore they are tearmed Gods Christs because through their liberalâ—â—y they are giuen to vs. 6. The third and chiefest point whereby the former two are more strongly confirmed that our inherent iustice doth truly iustify vs in the sight of God the Apostle himselfe manifestly teacheth saying As by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so also by the obedience of one many shall be made iust For the fall of Adam made vs truly sinners by inward infection before the face of God Rom. 5. v. 19. therefore the merits of christ did make vs truly iust by internal iustice in the sight of God This place so vexeth all Sectaryes as they know not how to rid themselues of Calu. l. 3. instit c. 11. sect 2. it Caluin answereth that we are iust because we are declared and pronounced iust by the iudgment of God but to be constituted or made iust as the Apostle writeth importeth more then to be declared such Againe this authenticall true iudgment of God presupposeth iustice in vs before it can be Caâ—â— ibid. rightly pronounced as not to depart from Caluins owne example If an Innocent be brought to be arraigned before the Fulk in c 5. ad Rom. sect 3. Abbot in his defence of the reformed Cathol c. 4. sect 6. 8. Abbot loc citato Fulke vbi supra VVhitak l. 8. aduer Dureum fol. 602. Aug. l. 1. de peccat merit remis cap. 9. 15. Chrys ho. 10. in c. 15. ad Rom. Theoph. in hunc loc seate of a righteous iudge when iudgment is giuen according to his innocency he is sayd to be iustifyed quoth he before the Iudge Well I say so too but as innocency there so iustice heere precedeth iudgment in the party adiudged or declared iust euen in the sight of the Almighty who pronounceth his sentence according to truth Doctour Fulke and Doctour Abbot help out their Maister and graunt that imputatiue Iustice by which he is constituted and made iust indeed goeth before the sentence yet not inherent Iustice But S. Paul teacheth that as we are made sinners by the offence of Adam so iust by the grace of Christ therfore as besids the imputation of Adams default there is a true and proper sin of nature which infecteth vs all and maketh vs truly properly sinners in the eyes of God as both they and all English ProtestaÌ„ts hold with vs against the Pelagians so besides the imputation of Christs iustice which cannot make vs formally iust there ought to be a true and inhabitant iustice which beautifyeth our soules before the throne of heauen or els we could not be truly made iust by Christ as we are made sinners by Adam and therein consisteth the force of the Antithesis S. Paul vseth betweene them which M. Abbot and Fulke like cunning Pylots who warily shunne the most perilous rocks silently passe ouer but M. Whitaker perceiueth it well rather ventureth to dash himselfe against it by denying the comparison then not to take notice therof Though sayth he we be iust in Christ as we are sinners in Adam yet not after the same manner No I appeale againe to the sacred Text to S. Augustine S. Chrysostome Origen Theophilact and all Interpreters Heretikes only excepted whether the opposition doth not wholy accord in this that as true sinne hatefull to God was distilled from Adam so true iustice acceptable in his sight is communicated vnto vs by Christ for S. Paul doth not only teach That as Adam was the authour of sinne so Christ of righteousnes wherein VVhitak loco citato Origen l. 5. in c. 5. ad Rom M. Whitaker only placeth the summe of his discourse he addeth moreouer That as by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so also by the obedience of one man many shal be made iust where he maketh sayth Origen a comparison of sin and death diffused into all men from Adam of iustification and Theoph. in hunc loc life from Christ. A little before he explaineth how they are both alike in the diffusion or communication from one to many and differ in the thing they communicate because from the one sin from the other iustification is imparted Rom. 3. v. 15. Ibid. v. 17. And Theophilact As by the default of one sinne crept in vnto condeÌ„nation of death so by the iustice of one saluatioÌ„ entred to iustification of life Besides the Apostle in the same place amplifyeth this point and affirmeth that the grace instilled by Christ hath more power to iustify then sinne to destroy saying If by the offence of one many dyed much more the grace of God and the guift in the grace of one man Iesus Christ hath abounded vpon many Likewise If in the offence of one death raigned by one much more they that receaue the aboundance of grace and of donation and of iustice shall raigne in life by one Iesus Christ. Out of which wordes we collect fiue infallible verityes against the erroneous doctrine of Protestants First that grace communicated by Christ is not weake and imperfect but copious and abundant Secondly it is not only imputed vnto vs but receaued of vs. Thirdly it is not the meerâ— grace of sanctification but of Iustice Fourthly it raigneth and preuaileth in vs to produce workes of iustification to life as sinne raigned to bring forth workes of iniquity to death Fifthly it is much more powerfull to iustify and make vs acceptable to God then sinne was to condemne and make vs odious vnto him Therfore he concludeth Where sinne abounded grace did more abound that as sinne raygned to death so also grace may raigne by iustice to life euerlasting through Iesus Christ our Lord. Ibid. v. 10. 22. 7. Let vs match these Texts of holy Writ with others and make all modest men ashamed to spurne against a truth warranted by the collation of sundry
the first encounter beaten to the ground 14. For the scope and tenour of the Apostles Analogy doth not consist in the manner but in the cause of Christs being made sinne to the end he might make vs iust albeit in a different sort he made sinne by a meere imputation because it was impossible for him to be truly a sinner we properly and truly iust because it is more Tit. 2. v. 24. Leuit 4. v. 11. 24. Ezec. 44. v. 29. Osee 4. v. 8 honourable and glorious vnto Christ to cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable to enrich and endow vs with the treasures of his inherent iustice then to leaue our filth and ordure ouershaddowed with the mantle of his externall righteousnes Secondly Christ is sayd to be made sinne that is an hoast and sacrifice for the extirpation of sinne So the Hebrew word Chattat peccatum Sinne often signifyeth a victime for sinne as in Leuiticus Ezechiel and Osee peccatum * Hebraicé Chattat Peccatum in the latin it is Pecca ta populi mei comedent they shall eate the sinne of my people that is the hoast or victime for their sinne Therfore as Christ was not by the meanes of another but in his owne person truly and really made a sacrifice for sin so we not only by imputation but truely and really in our selues ought to be the iustice of God in him And the Apostle elegantly sayth that we must be not iust but the iustice of God in Christ to oppose it to sinne signifying withall that it is the effect and likenes of Gods increated iustice by infused and created charity communicated vnto vs as S. Cyril expoundeth it or for that it is giuen vs Cyril l. 22. the saur c 3. August l. de spirit lit c. 18. Chrys Theoph. in bunc loc through the merits of Christ from God according to S. Augustin or lastly to betoken the excellency of the Iustice which leaueth no spot or blemish of sinne but maketh vs as it were wholy Grace wholy Iustice it selfe as S. Chrysostome and Theophilict do insinuate 15. Another argument they take out of the first to the Ephesians He hath gratifyed vs in his beloued Sonne or as they to boulster their heresy corruptly translate he hath made vs Ephes 1. v. 6. 3. acceptable in the beloued As though we were only outwardly accepted by the fauour of his Sonne not in wardly endowed with the participation of his Iustice how beit the In the Bible set forth by his Maiesty Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not only import to accept as gracious but to make gracious and acceptable indeed by communicating vnto vs inherent iustice in ward ornaments by which God maketh our soule as S. Chrysostome sayth pulchram desiderabilem ac dilectam beautifull Chrys in â—um loc desired and beloued of him 16. Thirdly Whitaker and Fulke obiect out of S. Paul to the Corinthians Christ is made vnto vs from God wisedom VVhitaker in his answere to 3. reason of â—â— Campian Fulk in c. 2. ad Cor. sect 2. 3. Cor. 1. v. 30. righteousnes sanctification and redemption Therefore say they our righteousnes is placed in Christ not heaped vp with our vertues But the contrary is gathered out of the same wordes for Christ is there affirmed to be our righteousnes as he is our sanctification and wisedome now he is our sanctification as they themselues agree by inherent sanctity our wisedome likewise by the habit or guift of wisedome infused into vs Therefore our righteousnes or iustice rather by created iustice imparted to our soules I answere againe that Christ is called our iustice diuers and sundry wayes 1. In the way of Communication because the perfectioÌ„s of the head are communicated to the body 2. In way of Richardus Tap. in explica ar de iustif Stapl l. 7. de iustit imputat c. 9. Rom. 8. v. 29. Bernard ep 190. assimilation for that God the Father hath predestinated vs to be made conformable to the Image of his Sonne 3. In way of satisfaction because he hath fully satisfyed for the debt of our sinnes which satisfaction of his is applyed vnto vs and made ours indeed by imputation as S. Bernard testifyeth yet not without true and inherent iustice also in our selues 4. In the way of merit for that he hath merited and purchased for vs true iustice from the handes of God 5. In the way of causality for that he is also togeather with God the efficient cause of our sanctification and iustice These and other causes which Protestants ignorantly Concil Trid sess 6 c. 7. Aug. l. de spirit â—it c. 9. in psal 30. Hier. dial aduers Pâ—lag mingle and confound the holy Councell of Trent doth wisely distinguish and set downe in this manner The sinall cause of our iustification is the glory of God of Christ eternall life the efficient God the ineritorious his beloued Sonne our Lord Iesus Christ c. the instrument all baptisme c. the only formall cause is the iustice of God not that by which he is iust but by which he maketh vs iust by which he cloatheth man as S. Augustine speaketh when he iustifyeth the wicked or as he saith in another place which God imparteth that man may be iust which S. Hierome S. Bernard and sundry reasons manifestly Bernard epist 290. approue as I shall more plentifully discouer in the Chapter ensuing THE SECOND CHAPTER IN WHICH The former doctrine is confirmed by more reasoÌ„s authorityes and other obiections of our Aduersaryes refuted AS the in-bred naughtynes of Originall infection neuer cleanly rinsed or scoured out is the sluse of filthines in Protestants iudgment and roote of al their impious opinions which I named aboue so the heauenly beame of inhabitant grace which garnisheth the soules of Christs faythfull seruants is the head well-spring according to vs of all the good that proceedeth from vs. This iustifyeth vs before the Tribunal of his highnesse this maketh our works pleasing to his Maiesty this aduanceth them to the dignity of merit this purchaseth the crowne of reward this ministreth power and ability to fullfill his Commandments and whatsoeuer els we do acceptable to him and worthy of his kingdome al floweth from the veines of this celestiall fountaine Therfore I labour to fense and strengthen it further with some other impregnable reasons 2. The first prosecuted by Andreas Vega is to this purpose The iustice which Adam had before his fall was not imputatiue but inherent and true Iustice which made him amyable and gratefull in the sight of God as all the Vega l. 7. in Concil Trid. c. 22. Fathers and our aduersaryes with them generally confesse but the same Iustice is restored vnto vs by the merits of Christ which we lost in Adam therefore true Iustice before God is heere communicated to our soules by the benefit Rom. 5. of his passion The minor
proposition is taught by the Apostle that we receaue by Christ more then we lost by Adam Aug. tom 3. de Gen. l. 6. c. 21. Aug. l. dâ— spir lit cap. 21. Iraen l. 3. c. 20 Cyril l. 1â— in Ioan. â— 25. and subscribed vnto by S. Augustine saying We receaue not the immortality of a spirituall body which man had not but we receaue Iustice from which by sinne man was fallen And in another place he affirmeth in the inward man renewed by the grace of Christ that iustice to be written which fault had cancelled By S. Irenaeus who teacheth that the SoÌ„ne of God was to this end incarnate that that which we had last lost in Adam of the Image and likeness of God we might recouer in Christ Iesus By S. Cyrill Patriarch of Alexandria the nature of man to be sanctifyed is to be reformed and renewed by participation of the spirit according to the first image that inuested with that first grace we may ouercome the raigning sinne adhering to diuine charity and wholy giuen to the study of vertue and so the law of the flesh being vanquished we may preserue inuiolable the beauty of the image imprinted in vs. 3. Doctour Abbot ouer-borne with the weight of this reason and poise of some of the former auctorityes Abbot â— 4. sect 13. fol. 431. plainely affirmeth that Christ came to restore the inherent Iustice we lost in Adam yet so as he beginneth but doth not perfect it as long as we continue in this life and therfore inherent Iustice is not such in any men heere as that therby he can be found iust in the sight of God Yes you cannot deny but that Adams iustice before his fall was such as it made him iust in the sight of God but these Fathers contest that we partake by the merits of Christ that iustice from which by sinne man was fallen that which fault had cancelled yea sayth M. Abbot we receaue the same not really but in hope Neither Abbot lol citato will this serue your turne for in hope we possesse the immortality of our bodyes of which notwithstanding S. Augustine affirmeth we receaue not the immortality of a spirituall body c. but receaue Iustice therfore we receaue this really and not only in hope as we do immortality Besides he testifyeth this iustice to be giuen when man is renewed by grace which not only the holy Scriptures but your selues also confesse to be really performed euen in this life S. Cyrill auoucheth the like with whome Irenaeus agreeth in such perspicuous tearmes as no shift can be deuised to expound them otherwise Andreas Vega vbi supra 4. The second reason insinuated by the fornamed Vega is that one and the same thing can neuer be both the efficient and formall cause of the same effect The Sunne for example cannot be the cause of heate and be the heat itselfe which is produced but the Iustice of Christ is the cause of our iustification and that by producing iustice in vs for of his fullnes we al partake more or lesse according to the measure of his donation Which cannot be meant of imputatiue iustice which without limitation or proportion of measure is equally referred to euery one therefore of inherent wherof Christs iustice being the efficient cannot be also the formall cause or if it be how is it also the free fauour and mercy of God as Protestants VVhitak in his answere to 8. reason of M. Campian fol. 228. likewise vnaduisedly teach How doth Whitaker auouch We acknowledge no other iustifying grace then the great and free mercy of God whereby he did elect and predestinate vs in Christ before all eternity vnto life euerlasting And yet he sayth a little after This obedience of Christ imputed vnto vs and apprehended by fayth is that righteousnes of ours which you enquire after Ibid. fol. 229. What Is the obededience of Christ all one with the mercy goodnes of God the humility of him that obeyeth with the greatnes of him who is obeyed Or do such diuers causes both worke the same formall effect I need not wonder at your ignorance in points of diuinity who are so little seene in the principles of Philosophy 5. The third reason is the diuine grace with which we are heere iustifyed vpon earth is the same which shal be heereafter crowned in heauen for the reward of glory is there proportioned to the small pittance of iustice or 2. Cor. 9. v. 6. great measure of grace which heere we obtaine He that soweth sparingly sparingly also shall reap and he that soweth in blessings of blessings also shall reape Now the haruest of celestiall iustice which we shall heereafter enioy is not imputatiue but such as shall inhere and beautify our soules therefore that which is heere either infused by God or which we purchase by our good workes is likewise in herent and dwelling in vs. 6. The fourth reason if by the iustice of Christapprehended and applyed vnto vs by fayth we be formally iust we should all equally participate the perfection of iustice one could not be more holy righteous and iust Ioan. 14. v. 2. Hiero. l. 2. aduers Iouin 1. Cor. 15. v. 41. 42. â—eild in his 3. booke of the Church c. 30. fol. 140. then another and consequently because according to the proportion of iustice the crown of glory is assigned there should be no distinction of glory no difference of reward in heauen contrary to that of Christ In the house of my Father there be many mansions of the Apostle One glory of the Sunne another glory of the stars for starre differeth from starre in glory so also the resurrection of the dead And wheras M. Feild auoucheth That from imputed righteousnes which is equall in all men no imparity of ioy can flow c. but from the imparity of inherent righteousnes it is that there are so different degrees of ioy glory found among the Saints of God that are in heauen he auoucheth two thinges which countenance our doctrine the one directly that our iustice is inherent the other coÌ„sequently that this inherent iustice is perfect entiere cleane from al impurity and wholy pleasing to God otherwise it could not deserue any reward at his handes it could not be renowned honoured nor yet admitted into that pure and immaculate kingdome into which no defiled thing can enter 7. Fiftly the Iustice with which baptized infants are endowed by the water of regeneration is not the extrinsecal Iustice of Christ apprehended by an act of fayth which sucklings depriued of reason cannot haue but they are iustifyed as M. Feild with vs auerreth and striueth to wrest the meaning of Luther with the habits or potentiall habilityes of Fayth Hope and Charity but according to S. Augustine Feild in his 3. booke of the Church c. 44. Aug. l. 1. de peccat merit c. 9. God giueth to the faythfull the most secret grace of
his spirit which secretly he powreth into Infants also as they then so likewise we are iustifyed not by actuall and imputatiue but by habituall and inhabtant Iustice inwardly cleansing and adorning our soules 8. Sixtly as no man can be truly accounted the obiect of Gods hatred and worthy of damnation by the meere imputation of fault vnles he be faulty indeed and guilty of crime so as Gabriel Vasquez solidly disputeth none can be reputed the obiect of his loue and worthy Gab. Vasquez in 1. 2. disp 206. cap. 3. of heauen by the extrinsecall will of God not imputing sinne or imputing Iustice vnles he be truely free from sin and endowed with Iustice Againe as no man can be made truly and formally wise by the wisdom which is in another or liue by the life which another enioyeth so neither formally iust by the iustice which is in another Abbot in his defence c. 4. fol. 423. 424. and so not by the Iustice which is in Christ M. Abbot in his defence answereth That a man may be formally iust two manner of wayes A man is one way formally iust in quality another way formally iust in law And then he graunteth That it were absurd indeed that a man should be formally iust in quality by the iustice of another But he may be sayth he formally iust in law For in the course of Law and iudgment the forme of Iustice is not to be subiect to crime or accusation he is formally iust against whome no action or accusation is lyable by law c. And this is the state of our Iustice and righteousnes in the sight of God Hath not he shaped a fine answere very sutable to Scriptures and much to the credit of Christ his Maister For did he giue Tit. 2. v. 24. himselfe for vs that he might redeeme vs from all antiquity and might cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable Did he shed his pretious bloud to take away our sinnes purging vs by the lauer of water in the word And hath he only performed it by immunity from punishment not by cancelling and purging Ioan. 1. v. 29. z. loan 3. v. 5. ad Ephes 5. v. 26. Ioan. 17. v. 19. Rom. 8. v. 15 2. Petr. 1. v. 3. ad Ephes 4. v. 14. Feild l. 3. c. 44. of the Church fol. 178. our faults The Scriptures manifestly teach That he sanctifyed himselfe that we might also be sanctifyed in truth giueth vs his spirit of adoption most great and pretious promises that by these we may be made partakers of the diuine nature created a new in iustice and holynes of truth And is all this done in the externall proceeding and course of law remaining in our selues still tainted with the inherence of sinne 9. All Philosophers accord that the denomination of a subiect is more truly and properly taken from the inherent quality which abydeth in it then from the outward forme which is referred vnto it as a Black Moore although he be apparelled in a white liuery is properly notwithstanding tearmed blacke of his innate blacknes not white of his outward habit Therefore if vve be truly sinners by invvard infection If the inherence of sin as Field confesseth be acknowledged in euery iustifyed person notwithstanding his iustification howsoeuer the iustice of Christ be Feild ibid. imputed vnto vs to free vs from the processe of the Law yet we cannot be truly tearmed iust holy innocent and imâ—aculate the children of God and heires of heauen as we are often called in holy Write Being as I say in very deed impure defiled channels of sinne by the inherence therof and consequently in our selues slaues to Sathan worthy hell worthy damnation Neither is it inough to say we may be accounted innocent because no inditement can be drawne no accusation heard no attachement take place against vs for as the guilt of sinne and heynousnes of treason goeth before the desert of punishment much more before the action or accusation which is layd to our charge so the exemption or immunity from the executioÌ„ of the law is no acquittance or freedome from the desert much lesse from the guiltynes or treachery of our harts Therefore the holy Ghost who iudgeth of vs as we are indeed should falsly tearme vs holy iust c. once darknes now light in our Lord if we be still darckned with the mists of sinne and are only freed from the punishment thereof 10. Moreouer what if M. Feild the polisher of the rough and crabbed speaches of other Protestants the refiner of their impure doctrine what if himselfe auow that sinne still lurketh in the faythfull not wholy exempted from all action in law but only from dominion and Feild 3. l. c. 44. f. 178. guilt of condemnation Read his wordes once againe and returne your verdict of him The inherence of sinne the iustifyed man acknowledgeth in himselfe notwithstanding his iustification which still subiecteth him to Gods displeasure and punishments Feild ibid accompanying the same Againe in the same page continuing his discourse of the iustifyed he sayth They are not already freed actually from the inherence of sinne and the displeasure of God disliking it But how can he be formally iust by course of law free from all crime action and accusation in whose spotted soule sinne still inhereth lyable to punishments and which is worse obnoxious to the disfauour of God hating and disliking it Shall I not thinke these iarring Ministers like the ancient Southsayers of whome Tully reporteth laugh the people to scorne and make merry among themselues in their secret meetinges when they remember with what contrary tales and lying fables they beguile their Readers For shall not I thinke this a cosening deuise a most exorbitant course that the Father of heauen should not absolutly extinguish but wincke at our faults cloake our iniquityes fauour whome he hateth wrong his Iustice and falsify his word in not punishing sinners according to the rate of their misdeserts for the loue of his Sonne vvho either vvould not or could not offer an equiualent ransome for Cal. 4. v. 6. the cleansing of our soules heere vpon earth 11. The seauenth is that we all participate of the same spirit with Christ our Sauiour Because you are sonnes Ioan. 1. v. 16. God hath sent the spirit of his Sonne into your harts We liue with his spiritual life of his fullnes we all haue receaued We receaue of the same fullnes life of grace in substance although not in perfection that in substance which the Angels enioyed in their state of merit for all the members of one mysticall body partake of one life the members enioy the same property of life with the head the branches are nourished with the sapp or iuyce which springeth from the vyne but the spirituall life and Iustice of Christ both is and was heere vpon earth inherent the Iustice of Angells inherent and pleasing to God therefore ours must of necessity
be also inherent and acceptable vnto him 12. Lastly why are the faythfull outwardly accepted only as iust not inwardly inuested with the garment of Iustice It is because God will not honour them so much whome he most dearly loueth for his Sonnes sake This cannot be It derogaterh from the riches of his infinite goodnes Or because Christ with his bitter Passion hath not made so great a purchase This were to debase the treasure of his incomparable merits Is it because God cannot endow a fraile creature with so rich a rayment But thus you blaspheme the Maiesty and power of God What then Doth it plant humility Doth it enkinkle in our harts the loue of God As though the smoak of pride the ordure of hatred the contagion of sinne abyding in our souls were apter fuell to nourish vertue then the seeds of grace the ofspring of Iustice the habits of Charity Meeknes Piety and the like Or lastly doth it tend to the greater glory of God and renowne of Christ Not so for it is far more honourable to God to haue all his seruants suited in the liuery of his beloued Sonne far more for the crowne and dignity of Christ that we be all clad in his Courtely robes all shine with the inward beames of his righteousnes then that apparelled in the raggs of our own miseryes we seeme to be cloathed with the couerture of his Iustice Is it not more stately and magnifical for a Prince to be rich welthy and valiant himselfe and without any impouerishing or diminution to his owne estate to endow his subiects with the like qualityes and store of riches receiued from him and still continued by the benefit of his fauour then he in all his pompe to be attended on by beggarly ignorant and cowardly vassals Is it not more credit for a Maister to be deeply learned to make his Schollers also florish with learning then for them deuoyd of all good literature meerly to vaunt of their Maisters skill So it is more glory to God more honour to Christ for him to abound with such an Ocean of grace or welspring of iustice as without any losse hinderance or diminution Dionys l. de diuinis nomin c. 4. S. Thom. 1. part q. â— he may deriue the riuers of true Iustice to others then if he alone should swimme in all aboundance and leaue his followers dry barraine and wholy destitute of that celestiall dew Chiefly sith it is the nature soueraigne property of goodnes according to S. Dionysius and all Deuines to diffuse and communicate it selfe to others and therefore as the bounty wisedome beauty and other Aug. l. 1. de peccat mer. c. 9. 10 Aug. in psal 98. Ipsam iustitiam ipse in nobis fecit qua illi plaâ—eamus Cyril l. 6. de Trinit Hieron l. 1. 3. aduers Pelag Basil l. 1. de Bapt. c. 2. Amb. l. 6. exam c. 8. Vener Beda in c. 11. Matth. attributes of God are made more glorious by imparting them to men in some inferiour degree why should not the Iustice of Christ become more illustrious by communicating it in some conuenient measure to the faithfull of his flocke Which according to my custome I will now corroborate with the authorityes of Fathers 13. S. Augustine They are iustifyed in Christ that belieue in him through the secret communication and inspiration of spiritualgrace whereby euery one leaneth to our Lord. Againe We are impious he the iustifyer when as he hath created in vs that iustice it selfe by which we may please him Behould we are not only sanctifyed but iustifyed also through the secret communication and inspiration of grace and that grace the iustice it selfe created in vs by which we please God S. Cyril The spirit is a heat who as soone as he hath infused charity into vs and hath with the fire of it inflamed our mindes we haue euen then obtayned Iustice. The like hath S. Hierome S. Basil S. Ambrose and Venerable Bede houldeth it to be a sinne against the Holy Ghost to deny his grace by which sins are remitted to be giuen in Baptisme Eucharist and the rest of the Sacraments I cyte not Origen because the Centurists reprehend him That he doth with open mouth declaime Cent. 3. â— 4. Column 78. Idem Column 82. Cent. 2. c. 4. Colum. 58. Cent. 4. c. 10. Col. â— 49. Luth. in commen S. Petri. Calu. l. 3. instit c. 1◠§. 15 Kemnitius in 1. part examinat Concil Trident. Patribus non mouemus litem Kemnitius ibid. paulâ— post of the Iustice of Iob nor S. Cyprian whome they also blame for saying The baptizing person imparteth the holy Ghost and inwardly sanctifyeth the baptized nor Clemens Alexandrinus of whom they report That in all his writings it appeareth he neuer knew the force of Originall sinne or the inherent malady thereof Likewise touching S. Hierome they approue that saying of Luther This point which in Christian doctrine is to be vndoubtely established that in Saints sinne abydeth was neuer by Hierome vnderstood And why did neither Hierome nor Clement vnderstand it but only because they teach with vs the infection of Originall sinne to be wholy extinguished by the inhabitant grace or Iustice of our soules Moreouer Caluin of S. Augustine touching this point sayth The very sentence of Augustine or at least his manner of speaking is not altogeather to be receaued And Kemnitius of many other Fathers writeth We sue not processe against the Fathers albeit they commonly take the word to iustify for the renewing therby the workes of righteousnes are wrought in vs. Againe I am not ignorant that the Fathers do often vse the word iustify in this signification namely to make inherently iust Thus you haue the sentence of S. Augustine the doctrine of S. Cyprian of Origen of S. Hierome of S. Clemens Alexandrinus and the common current of the Fathers speach running on our side by the partiall iudgment of no meane Protestants VVhitak in his answere to 8. reason of M. Campian fol. 231. Abbot in his defence c. 4. sect 5. 2. Cor. 5. v. 19. Psal 3â— v. 1. 14. Howbeit from these testimonyes of Fathers and deposition of their owne associates Whitaker and M. Abbot make their appeale once againe to the Tribunall of holy Scripture and to those places by name wherein our sinnes are sayd to be couered not imputed hidden c. As God was in Christ reconciling the world vnto himselfe not imputing to them their sinnes And blessed is the man whose iniquityes be forgiuen and whose sinnes are hidden or couered Likewise blessed is he to whome the Lord imputeth no sinne To which I haue answered in the former Controuersy now I add that three seuerall wayes a thing may be couered First we couer things to preserue them as sweet oyntments or perfumes least they loose their sent fragrant odour Secondly to hide and conceale them from our eyes by reasoÌ„ of their loathsomnes which we cannot otherwise
quite contrary also to the Apostle who acknowledgeth Charity only to be the fountaine nurse or mother of vertues saying Charity is patient is benigne c. Charity 1. Cor. 13. v. 4. v. â— suffereth all things beleeueth all thinges hopeth all thinges beareth all things But how is it patieÌ„t How benigne c. not formally for that were to make it a monstrous vertue compounded of diuers speciall formes Causally then because it is the Mother that begetteth the nurse that cherisheth the soule that giueth life of grace vigour of iustice preheminence of merit to the whole army of vertues 4. How inexcusable now are our seduced Protestants how wretchedly inchaunted with their Ministers charms who engrosse all to fayth which the Secretaryes of the Holy Ghost ascribe to Charity How entitle they fayth alone to the possession of life which S. Iames affirmeth to be dead without the workes of Charity How enthrone they fayth in the highest chaire of eminent dignity when S. Paul defineth Charity to be greater then it Marry a veile they haue to maske themselues vnder For Fulk in c. 13. 1. Cor. sect 3. Abbot cap. 4. sect 22. fol. 478. Ephes 3. v. 17. Charity sayth M. Fulke and M. Abbot with him is the greater in regard of continuance because fayth is but for a time Charity abydeth for euer Then it is the greatest also quoth M. Abbot if we respect latitude of vse for Charity is extended euery way to God to Angells to Men c. But if we consider man priuatly in himselfe and for his owne vse Fayth is more excellent then Charity as wherein our communion and fellowship with God by which Christ dwelleth in our harts into which as a hand God putteth all the riches of his grace for our saluation and by which whatsoeuer els Abbot fol. 479. in vs is commended vnto God Therefore he concludeth that to saue and iustify fayth is the greater So he It is true that Charity continueth when Fayth is euacuated but one truth ought not to impeach another that cannot derogat from the excellency of Charity in many other pointes wherein both Scriptures and Fathers giue her the preheminence But as for latitude of vse as you there take it Bern. serm â— in vigil nat Christ Fides veluti quoddaÌ„ aeternitatis exemplar praeterita simul praesentia ac futura â—iâ—u suo vastissimo coÌ„prehendit for the materiall obiects which they respect very false it is that Charity extendeth to more thinges then Fayth because fayth mounteth to God to Angells to men c. it descendeth to hell to the Diuels to their perpetuall torments it stretcheth it selfe to the fall of Adam to the deluge past to the future iudgment and many other obiects which Charity imbraceth not it reacheth besides to all tymes which either are haue beene or shall be heerafter Therefore S. Bernard calleth it The image or paterne of eternity which in her wide and vast bosome comprehendeth all thinges both past present and to come 5. Howbeit let this goe on the score of other the Authors rash and inconsiderate speaches The marke I shoot at is that Charity is preferred before fayth euen in the worke of iustificatioÌ„ and saluation of our soules in all these particulers in which M. Abbot giueth the first Abbot vbi supra 1. Cor. 13. Ioan. 1. c. 4. v. 12. Rom. 5. Ephes 3. 17. Aug. de spir lit cap. 17. Charitas lex est fidei spiritus viuificans dilectorem August tract 9. in ep Ioan. Chrys de incoÌ„p Dei nat hom 1. Leo ser 8. de Epipha Basil in proem de vera pia fide Prosp l. 3. de vita coÌ„temp c. 13. Ambr. in c. 13. Cor. Berna ser 24. super Cant. Idem serm 2. de resur chiefest place to fayth for when the Apostle defineth we are nothing without Charity he meaneth surely that we are nothing in the fauour of God nothing in the way of grace in the way of iustice and saluation S. Iames and S. Augustine meane the like whome I cyted aboue Moreouer haue I not already shewed that Charity adopteth vs to be the children of God that by Charity we are regenerated and new borne in Christ that by Charity the Holy Ghost by Charity God himselfe is harboured in our soules If we loue one another God abydeth in vs and his Charity in vs is perfected Also The Charity of God is powred forth into our harts by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs And if M. Abbot had not vsed his dexterity leauing out the wordes which maketh against him he might haue read in that very place which he quoteth for his purpose that not in Fayth but in Charity originally standeth our communion and fellowship with God for after these wordes By fayth Christ dwelleth in our hartes it immediatly followeth rooted and grounded in Charity Therefore Charity is the roote the origen or first beginning of Christs viuificall presence for as the tree draweth from the roote the sap of life so fayth from charity the liuely inhabitatioÌ„ of God in our harts For which cause S. Augustine sayth Charity it selfe diffused in the hart of the beleeuers is the law of Fayth and the spirit that giueth life to the loâ—er He calleth it otherwhere The health the beauty of the soule S. Chrysostome The chiefe good and head of all good thinges S. Leo The mother of all vertues S. Basil The proper budge or ensigne of a Christian man S. Prosper A Summary and abridgment of all good doings of the which euery good worke taketh his life S. Ambrose The head of Religion is Charity and he that had not the head hath not life c. Immediatly after Charity is the foundation of Religion S. Bernard sayth The separation of Charity is the death of fayth and he that deuideth them is tearmed by him Fideicida The murtherer of Fayth then he testifyeth with S. Augustine That Fayth taketh her life or soule from Charity Aug. l. de cognit verae vitae c. 37. 6. Further they affirme of Charity that it vniteth a Aug. de subst l. diâ—ect amoris and knitteth vs to God Marryeth b Bern. serm 83. in Cant. our soule to the word Marketh c Amb. l. 2. ep ep 7. man a friend to God Imparteth d Chrys in psal 132. heauen and vnspeakable good thinges to vs. He e Basil in institut Monach. that hath Charity hath God And f Idem in constit Monast c. 35. he that is depriued of Charity wanteth diuin grace By g Aug. l. de mor. Eccles cap. 13. Charity only it is wrought that we be not auerted from God and that we conforme our selues rather to him then to this world Moreouer say they Charity h Hilar. comment in Matth. ca. 4. couereth the multitude of sinnes By i Orig. hom 3. in c. 3. Leuit the aboundance of Charity remission of sinnes is made The
in him Or if that work doth not hinder the free grace of iustification in Protestants conceit because it is the gift of God because it doth not iustify according to them as it is an actioÌ„ proceeding froÌ„ man but as it taketh hold and applyeth vnto them the iustice of Christ Why should our preparatiue workes any way preiudicate the freedome of that fauour as long as we acknowledg theÌ„ also the meer guift of the highest and not to dispose vs to the life of grace as they are achieued by our owne forces alone or flow from the drye and barren soyle of Nature but as they are made fertile by the water of the holy Ghost as they are eleuated and inspired by his viuificall motion For if the Beggar which is Cardinall Tolets example who of his owne accord Toleâ— in c. 3. ad Rom. stretcheth out his hand to receaue the offered almes doth not hinder the francke and liberall bestowing of the money much lesse should the cooperation of our freewill which not of our selues not of our owne endeauours but moued and strengthned by God yieldeth to his motions any way withstand his liberall donation and free guift of Iustice 17. In the last wing wherein the only hope of their victory remayneth such sentences of Scripture are ranged as flatly debarre the concurrence of workes from all kind of Iustice to wit By grace you are saued through fayth and that not of your selues for it is the guift of God not of workes that no man glory We account a man to be iustifyed by fayth without the Ephes 2. v. 8. Rom. 3. v. 28. Rom. 11. v. 6. Rom. 4. v. 2. workes of the law If by grace not now of workes otherwise grace now is not grace If Abraham were iustifyed by workes he hath glory but not with God with many others to the same purpose I answere that the Apostle excludeth indeed from the grace of iustification either first or second all workes which proceed from the vigour or strength of nature on which the Pelagians so much relyed Then he excludeth the good vse and exercise of freewil done without Christ to which the Semipelagians ascribed the dowry of grace Thirdly he excludeth the moral vertues performed by the Act. 15. v. 1. Aug. l 5. cont 2. ep Pelag. c. 7. in prâ—f ps 3â— ep 107. tract 50 de verb. Domini secundum Euang. Matth. Hier. l. â— com in c. 3. ad Gal. Prosper cont collat c. 22. Cent. 3. c. 4. Col. 80. ciâ—ant Orig. l. 8. in epist ad Rom. light of reason precepts of naturall Philosophy wherin the Gentils boasted and placed their happines Lastly he excludeth all works achieued by the sole notice of the Law both cerimoniall and morall in which the Iewes trusted so farre as they deemed themselues thereby only assured of Gods fauour and some of them vrged the necessity of circumcision the obseruation of their ceremonyes euen to Gentils conuerted vnto Christ of whome they auouched Vnles you be eireumcised you cannot be saued 18. Against these the Apostle so often inculcateth that neither circumcision prepuce nor any worke either of Iew or Gentill done by themselues or by the knowledge of the law without the grace of the Spirit inwardly mouing is able to saue them but he neuer excludeth the Sacraments of Baptisme or Pennance nor the works proceeding from the help of supernaturall grace to be dispositions to attaine the first true causes of increase in the second iustification whereof read S. Augustine S. Hierome and Prosper who interprete the Apostls meaning in the selfe same manner as I haue heere declared which interpretation the Century-writers haue also espyed and reproued in Origen engrossing these wordes in the Catalogue as they account them of his errours It is to be vnderstood that the workes which S. Paul reiecteth and so often reprehendeth are not the iustices which are commanded in the Law but those thinges in which they boast and glory who obserue the law according to the flesh or rites of sacrifices or obseruation of Sabaoths and new Monnes these and the like are the Concil Trid. sesl 6. Can. 1. Fulk in c. 2. Iacob sect 9. Fulk ibid. Vasq in 1. 2. disp 210. cap. 9. VVhitak l. 1. aduerf Duraeum VVhitak in his answere to M. CampiaÌ„ 8. reason â—ulke in c. 2. Iac. sect 9. Abbot in his defence c. 4. Ambr. in c. 3. 4. ad Rom. Chrys in c. 3. ad Gal. hom 7. in c. 3. ad Rom. Basil serm de humiâ—it Aug. l. 1. cont 2. ep Pelag. c. 21. l. 83. q. 76. Hesich in Leuit. l. 4. cap. 14. Hilar. cap. in Matth. August tract 49. in Ioan. workes by which he auoucheth no man may be saued Hitherto Origen quoted by the Magdeburgians To which purpose the Councell of Trent hath very diuinely decreed If any shall teach man may be iustifyed before God by his works which either by humane nature or by the doctrine of the Law are accomplished without the diuine grace of Iesus Christ let him be accursed According to this authentical exposition S. Paul and S. Iames are clearely discharged from that irreconciliable contradiction M. Fulke imagineth betweene them in our opinion for either S. Paul speaketh of the first iustification and S. Iames of the second which is not as he mistaketh another kind of iustification but the augmentation of the former or they both treate of the first and second also as Gabriel Vasquez thinketh most probable and the one excludeth workes wrought without the inward motion of grace from iustification the other acknowledgeth such workes to cooperate thereunto as proceed from grace which is no contradiction but the true and vndoubted position of our Catholike fayth 19. Although all the sentences of the Fathers which are stumbling blockes in our Reformers way be satisfyed in the same manner as these Texts of Scripture yet to ease the studious Reader from further trauaile I will particulerly set downe how the chiefest of them are to be vnderstood whome our Reformers oppose against vs concerning this point S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome S. Basil S. Augustine Hesichius and S. Hilary when they affirme vs iustifyed by fayth alone without any workes they mean without any workes eyther of our owne or of Moyses law done without grace Or they are to be interpreted of Fayth which is liuely indewed with Charity and accompanyed with other vertues So S. Augustine in his treatises vpon S. Iohn when he sayth Fayth is the soule of our soule Prosper S. Bernard and S. Augustine againe in the seauenth Chapter of his booke of predestination of Saints Prosp de voca gent. l. â— c. 8 9. Bernar ser 22 in cant Aug. de praedest Sanctor c. cap. 7. Leo serm de Epiphaâ— alibi Orig. in c. 3. ad Rom. Chrysost hom de fide lege nâ—turae Vasq in â— 2. disp 210. c. 9. are to be interpreted of fayth alone inchoatiuely S. Leo
vertues it nourisheth humility exciteth care procureth watchfullnes restrayneth vs within our bounds whetteth vs forward Hier. in c. 3. lonae Aug. l. de correp grat c. 13. Chrys ho. 8. in c. 2. ad Philip. Greg. ep 186. quae est l. 6. ad Greg. Cubiâ—ul Aug. lib. 9. mora c. 17. Andr. Vegal 9. cap. 17. in Concil Trident. Abbot c. 3. sect 7. Greg. epist 286. quae est ad Gre. Cubicul Aug. in our duety maketh vs more narrowly sift and examine our actions more deeply repent and do pennance for our sinnes more diligently worke to the attayning of vertue and more feruently cry and call vpon God to succor and assist vs in our dayly conflicts and combates against vice These fruits of our vncertainty and the former euills of Protestants security are set downe by S. Hierome S. Augustine S. Chrysostome S. Gregory the Great and diligently proposed by Andreas Vega in his defence of the holy Councell of Trent 7. Now when Protestants account these feares tentations when they compare them to sinne against which they fight and seeke wholy to abandone they bewray the Anuil on which their deuises are hammered quite opposite to the touch-stone of holy Scripture which commendeth timidity as behoofull Blessed is the man who is alwayes timerous worke your saluation with feare and trembling Are these counsailes suggestions Is this happynes to be abandoned Renounce you as dangerous assaults which the holy Ghost proposeth as wholesome remedyes and stayes of our soules And which S. Gregory writing to the Lady Gregoria notably pursueth telling her That she ought not to haue security but alwayes iealous alwayes fearefull dread her sinnes and wash them away with incessant teares A verity so often repeated in holy Write and celebrated by the rest of the Fathers as Caluin is coÌ„strained to coÌ„desceÌ„d vnto it at least in shew of words For Calu. in c. 6. ad Heb. v. 4. he affirmeth That God sprinckleth the reprobate with some tast or smacke of his grace shiâ—eth on their minds with some sparks of his light affoardeth them some feeling of his goodnes and engraueth in a sort his word in their souls Otherwise where is that fayth for a time of which S. Marke maketh mention There is therefore Mar. 4. v. 17. in the reprobate a certaine knowledge of God which after vanisheth away either because it tooke not so deep root as it ought or because being choaked it degenerateth Hitherto Caluin Which discourse Cal. ibid. of his because it driueth the silly Protestant into a thousand perplexityes still casting doubts and questioning with himselfe whether his fayth hath taken sufficient roote may not heereafter be choaked may not degenerate Whether the motions he feeleth be proper to the elect or the common sparkes of light tastes of grace feelings and impressions which are communicated to the reprobate Caluin quieteth his conscience with this finall Conclusion And by this bridle our Lord keepeth vs in feare and humility And truly we see how slippery and prone humane nature is otherwise to security foolish confidence Whose wordes be these The wordes of a Protestant or of a Catholike They are the wordes of a Protestant of the ring-leader of Protestants taking heerein the face of a Catholike and condemning the infallible certainty vayne security and foolish confidence of his Sectaryes 8. The obiections heere heaped togeather by our late Reformers are of diuers sorts some insinuate an assurance of saluation by reason of Gods spirit dwelling in vs others seeme to challenge it to the condition of faith others to Gods protection safeguard and preseruation Abbot c. 3. VVhitak l. 8. aduers Duraeum of such as he hath once called to the participation of his grace The principall of the first kind are these In this we know that we abyde in him and he in vs because he hath giuen vs of his spirit the spirit himselfe giueth testimony to our spirit that we are the sonnes of God and if sonnes heires also We haue receaued not the spirit of this world but the spirit which is in Fulk in c. 8. ad Rom. 2. 1. ad Cor. Kâ—mnitius in examin Con. Trid. Calu. l. 3. iustit c. 11. 1. Ioan. 4. v. â—3 Rom. 8. v. 1â— 1. Cor. 2. v. 12. 1. Ioan. 5. v. 19. â— Ioan. 3. v. 2. Rom. 8. v. 38. Hier. ep ad Algas quaest 9. Ambr. in eum loc Vatablus Beza and Erasmus in eum locuÌ„ â— Cor. 2. v. 12. God that we may know the thinges that are giuen vnto vs of God We know that we are of God and the whole is in wickednes We know that when he shall appeare we shall be like vnto him for we shall see him as he is I answere that this knowledg which the Apostles mention is not the certayne and infallible assurance of fayth but a probable knowledge a morall certainty such as begetteth a ioyful confidence and assured hope as S. Paul had when he sayd I am sure that neither death nor life nor Angells c. shal be able to separate vs from the Charity of God Where the Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifyeth only a propable perswasion and so S. Hierome S. Ambrose the Syrian interpreter Vatablus Bedae also and Erasmus read it or the Apostles may speake in some of those places of themselues in particuler by speciall reuelation if they had any such imparted vnto them concerning their perseuerance in grace as some thinke they had or they are to be vnderstood of the predestinate in generall and benefits of grace glory and euerlasting life reuealed for them in Scripture and by the instinct of fayth and spirit of God infallibly beleeued of which S. Paul namely writeth in the second Chapter of the first to the Corinthians But Protestants vrge against my former answere That the testimony of the spirit is the testimony of the Holy Ghost the testimony of the Holy Ghost is sure and infallible therfore the testimony of the spirit which witnesses to our spirit or with our spirit as the Greeke importeth is not only probable and coniecturall but infallibly certaine I answere it is so I confesse in it selfe as it is witnessed by the Holy Ghost but as it is intimated vnto vs by the inward loue of God zeale of soules hatred of sinne peace sweetnes ioy comfort dilatation of our hart such like which are the pledges testimonyes and certificates the holy Ghost affoardeth it is fallible and subiect to deceit For as the truth of holy Writ is of irrefâ—agable authority in it selfe yet proposed by men who may be deceaued is also deceaueable so that which the Holy Ghost witnesseth by himselfe immediatly or such expositors as cannot erre is infallible that which he testifyeth by probable and coniecturall signes is only probable vnto vs and obnoxious vnto errour Howbeit it passeth the boundes of truth and modesty That with a wonderfull tormenting of conscience we mistrust Reynolds
the gift of God It is not of him that runneth but of Fulke vbi supra Vvhitaker loco citato 1. Cor. 2. v. 14. ad Phil. 2. God who hath mercy on vs. He maketh vs willing to imbrace it he as M. Whitaker argueth out of S. Paul teacheth vs to vnderstand the things of God by him the will and deed is wrought in vs but not without the concurrence of our Free-will especially it being a vitall act which cannot be produced but by a liuely and vitall faculty Also I confesse that without God we can do nothing We can not speake we cannot moue we cannot liue yet with Act. 17. ver 28. his generall concourse we speake we moue and liue In ipso viuimus mouemur sumus So without the speciall helpe of Gods grace we can neither performe nor as much as thinke any worke of piety with it we can and doe atchieue many vertuous deeds His Grace destroyeth not but perfiteth awaketh cherisheth and reuiueth the liberty of our will For which cause S. Augustine saith Aug. tom 3. de spir litt c. 30. Aug. tom 7. de pecca mer remis l. 2. c. 18. Doe we euacuate Free-will by Grace God forbid But we rather establish it Likewise We ought not to so defend Grace that we may seeme to take away Free-will as the Manichies and our Protestants doe nor so maintaine Free-will that we be iudged through proud impiety vngratfull to Gods Grace as the Pelagians were but we ought to ioyne both togeather giue the preheminence in euery action to Gods Grace 28. After this sort we read the same actions which in way of our conuersion are ascribed vnto God to be attributed also vnto man To God King Dauid praied Psal 50. 12. Ezech. 18. 31. 1. Cor. 12. v. 6 Phil. 2. 12. Psal 84. 5. Eccies 17. 22. Psal 118. 59. Psal 118. 38. Psal 118. 112. White § 40. disgres 42. fol. 282. 1. Cor. 4. 7. Create a cleane hart in me ô God and renew a right spirit in my bowels To man Ezechiel said Make to your selnes a new hart and a new spirit Of God S. Paul writeth All in things he doth worke of Man with seare and trembling worke your saluation To God the Royall Prophet crieth out Conuert vs ô God our Sauiour To man King Salomon saith Returne vnto our Lord forsake thy sinnes And of himself King Dauid writeth I haue conuerted and turned my steppes to thy Commandements To God he prayeth Incline ô Lord my hart vnto thy lawes And of himselfe he witnesseth I haue inclined my hart to keepe thy Lawes 29. But if this be true saith M. White when the Apostle demandeth who hath seperated thee what hast thou which thou hast not receiued I may answere I haue seperated my selfe by doing that which was in my selfe to doe No Syr we can not make any such reply because we being fast asleepe in the lethargie of sin it is God only who first stirreth awaketh reuiueth vs it is he who after cooperateth and concurreth with vs it is he who supporteth and strengthneth vs he finally who accomplisheth and putteth in executional our blessed desyres Therefore from him we receiue and to him as the originall fountaine we ascribe whatsoeuer good there is in vs. In so much as there is no worke ordained to the attaining of euerlasting life to which we affirme not the grace of God many wayes necessary 30. First it is necessary for God to moue inspire and apply our thoughts to the good intended which the Deuines Psal 58. 11. Rom. 8. 16. Psal 69. v. 1. ad Rom. 8. 26. Ibid. 28 call his exciting or preuenting Grace whereof King Dauid spake Misericordia eius praeâ—eniet me His mercy shall goe before me And S. Paul It is not of the willer nor of the runner but of God that sheweth mercy Secondly it is necessary that God assist and helpe vs voluntarily imbracing his holy inspirations this is called his aiding or concomitant Grace whereby he accompanieth and cooperateth with vs when we yeald to his calling the free assent of our will This King Dauid implored saying Incline vnto my ayde ô God â— Lord make hast to helpe me Of this S. Paul speaketh The spirit helpeth our infirmity Agayne To them that loue God all thinges cooperate vnto good And this together with the former is souÌ„dly proued and fitly explained by S. Iohn in the Apocalips I stand at the doore and knocke If any man shall heare my voyce and open the gate I will enter into him c. To stand knocke at the doore of our harts is the office of Gods preuenting exciting or illuminating Grace to open the dore is both the worke of man worke of God Mans it is in giuing his free consent and concurring to the opening of his heart Gods in that he supporteth worketh and helpeth him also to open Apoca. 3. 20. the same by his cooperating Grace 31. To these many adde a third Grace distinct from the former which they call a Subsequent or following Grace mentioned by King Dauid His mercy also will follow me by S. Psal 22. 26. August in Enchi c. 32. Fulgâ—n l. 1. ad Monimâ—m c. 9. Conc. Trid. ses 6. 26. Augustine Fulgentius and by the generall Councell of Trent The diuine vertue or influence of grace deriued froÌ„ Christ our head goeth before accompanieth and followeth all our good workes The prerogatiue of this last Grace is to affoard oportunity of executing the good we intended before which is a greate benefit by reason that thereby our desyres are longer continued more inflamed perfitted and increased These three Graces are necessary for euery one be he iust be he sinner to the due accomplishment of pious vertuous and supernaturall workes The first God is said to worke In vs without vs that is without our free and deliberate consent The second In vs with vs because he cooperateth worketh with vs freely consenting to his heauenly motions The third In vs by vs to wit putting by vs as his free-working instruments our holy purposes in execution 32. Thus then I may conclude against M. Fulke and all our Protestants with the same words which S. Augustine vpon vide Aug. l. de gra l. arb c. 16. â— 17. Vasquiâ— in 1. 1. Disput 185. c. 6. Aug. l. de gra l. arb c. 9. Aug. de natu gra c. 33. the like occasions vsed against the Manichies Not because the Apostle saith It is God that worketh in you both to will and performe must we thinke he taketh away Free-will For if it were so then would not he a little before haue willed them to worke their owne saluation with feare and trembling For when they be commanded to worke their Free-will is called vpon but with trembling and feare is added least by attributing their well-doing to themselues they might be proud of their good deedes as
Gods sight much lesse pleasing sacrifices to him as in the precedent discourse hath beene shewed if they be defyled with sinne 4. M. Abbot answereth Therefore good works being touched and infected with the contagion of sinne before they can please God must haue some meanes to take away the guilt imputation of the sinne c. which Christ doth perfuming them with the sweet Abbot c. 4 sect 44. fol. 578. 579 incense of his Obedience But how doth Christ take it away By abolishing or not imputing the contagion By not imputing sayth Abbot but thus he taketh away according to them the filth of adultery of murder of sacriledge and all heynous crymes from the beleeuing Protestant And are those sinnefull workes thereby made gratefull hostes and acceptable sacrifices pleasing vnto God No sayth he agayne Our good deedes are not sinnefull workes Are they not What is that guilt then of contagious sinne which must be taken away before they can please God If they be not sinnefull no contagion of sinne is to be pardoned by not imputing if they be sinfull then your sinneful acts inherently in themselues sinnefull by not imputing the guilt of contagion become gratefull pleasing and acceptable vnto God Neyther can M. Abbot any way cuade by his frequent and worm-eaten answere that the action we do is not sinnefull because it is in substance a good Ibid. â—7â— worke and the fruit of the good spirit of God and the default and imperfection is only an accident to the worke Nor Whitaker who to the same purpose replyeth in his answere to Duraeus VVhitk â— in his answere to Duraeus l. 8. pag. 698. We meane not that good workes are sinnes but that they haue some sinne mixed with them For it followeth not that siluer is drosse because it hath some drosse mingled with it Seeing our dispute is not heere of the physicall substance which in euery action euen of murder theft and the like is transcendentally good or in genere Entis to vse the Philosophers tearmes but of the morall bounty or deformity of a worke which if it be tainted with the mixture of any euill how accidenttally soeuer it cannot be good sith it is true which Dionysius teacheth Good ariseth from an entiere cause euill from euery defect So that Whitakers example which Abbot also alleadgeth Dionys de diuin nomin c. 4. par 4. Bonum ex vna tota causa malum ex multis particularibuâ— que proficiscitur defectibus of gold or siluer mingled with drosse is nothing to the purpose because there be two materiall substances really distinct heere we question of one morall act which admitteth no distinction there although one metall be mingled with the other yet by seuerall veynes in seuerall places they are so incorporated as the siluer is not drosse or drosse siluer heere the same act flowing from the same will aymed at the same end must be both good and bad pure and defiled siluer and drosse which is impossible For as it inuolueth contradiction that one and the same assent of vnderstanding should be at the same tyme both true and false in the agreement of all Philosophers and Deuines so likewise it implyeth that one and the same acte of the will should be ioyntly at the same moment good and euill laudable and vituperiall pleasing displeasing vnto God Wherefore if euery action of it owne nature be euil no worke of ours can be in substance good as M. Abbot would haue it none excellent as Whitaker pretendeth but the most excellent must needes in it selfe be wholy marred wholy odious vnto God wholy and substantially naught howsoeuer by outward acceptation it may seeme beautifull and fayre Not so say they for our good workes are not wholy euill not hatefull not sinnes but infected quoth M. Abbot with the contagion of sinne We say not quoth Whitaker to marry a wife is sinne Abbot VVhitak in the places cyted aboue but that they who marry wiues intermixe some sinne in that good action But you say that that intermixed sinne may wholy marre the action make it odious to God if that which is done be weighed in the ballance of diuine iustice Therefore you say that the action of it selfe is wholy euill wholy marred altogeather odious vnto God and hatefull of his owne nature vnles you beleeue that an action weighed in the ballance of diuine iustice becometh thereby worse more odious and abhominable then of it selfe it is and that our supreme highest Iudge who iustly condemneth the wickednes of man maketh it more wicked by the seuerity of his iudgement 5. Moreouer from whence creepeth this spot of sinne into that good and lawfull action of marriage Not from the will of taking a wife for that is laudable no sinne according to the Apostle not from the substance of the act for that M. Abbot also alloweth to be good not from any other accidentall circumstance of end tyme place or person for I suppose they be all guided by the rule of reason How then is sinne intermixed in the good action of marriage By the same act which inseparably draweth the stayne of corruption with it or by some other adioyned The desire of taking a wife for a good end in such as may lawfully marry is free from all sinne as by a wicked intention to which it is ordeyned if by the same one and the same action is both good and euill a sinne and no sinne agreable to reason and disagreable consonant and dissonant to the will of God the often refuted vnauoyded implicancy which you incurre If by some other act or vicious intent either this intention is principall and the cause of marriage as to marry the easier to contriue the murder of his wife or some other then the action of marriage is not good but impious wicked and detestable or it is a secondary intent and followeth the desire of marriage so it cannot vitiate the former good desire nor be termed a sinne intermixed therewith which albeit obstinate and ignorant aduersaryes can hardly be drawn to confesse yet will I make it so cleare as they shall not be able to deny Let vs take for example the act of louing God or dying for his sake what mixture hath it or slyme of euill any stayn that ariseth from the obiect beloued or will which loueth it Not from the obiect for that is infinite goodnes without all spot or blemish therefore no blemish can be intermixed with that act as it tendeth to so pure an obiect nor from the will of louing it for no feare of excesse no danger of impurity can possibly flow from desiring to loue the fountaine it selfe and mayne sea of purity not from the mudd of distraction not from the scumme of vaine glory not from the froath of pride which sometyme may accompany that heauenly loue for as it is impossible the act of loue should be an act of distraction vanity
much as it appertaineth vnto vs without sinne we might be alwayes vntill this euill of Concupiscence were healed if we should neuer consent vnto it to euill But in such things in which if not mortally yet venially we are ouercome of it rebelling in those we contract that for which we may dayly say forgiue vs our trespasses S. Chrysostome holdeth with him in most expresse and apparent termes 6. But our Sectaryes with one voyce oppose the wordes of the Law Non concupisces thou shall not couet Which forbiddeth nor the consent only say they but euery Rom 6. v. 12. Theod in eum loc Chrys in eum loc Aug. in psal 118. conc 3. de nuptijs concup l. 1. c. 17. in exp ep ad Gal. c. 5. Greg. 14. moral c. 9. Aug. in expos ep ad Gal. c. 5. l. con sul Pel. c. 3. 5. l 1 de nupt concup c. 23. Exod. 20. v 17. In bebrew for non concupisces it is lotachmod act euery motion of concupiscence I answere the Holy Ghost hath other where explayned the meaning of that precept in Ecclesiasticus Follow not thy strenght the concupiscence of thy hart go not after thy concupiscences By S. Paul Let not sinne raygne in your mortall body that you obey they concupiscences thereof He doth not say as Theodoret and S. Chrisostome obserue let it not exercise tyranny but let it not raigne because it cannot raygne and haue free dominion vnles we will accept voluntarily be thrall vnto it He doth not forbid it to be nor the hauing of those desyres as S. Augustine and S. Gregory note expounding if of the fomit for that is impossible as long as the flesh warreth against the spirit but he forbideth it to rule or ouercome by drawing vs into subiection he forbiddeth our following or obeying the desires thereof For he sinneth not in whome sinne doth not raygne according to the forenamed S. Augustine Likewise Concupiscence it selfe is now no sinne in the regenerate when consent is not yielded vnto it to vnlawfull workes And if any go about to cauill with S. Augustin the hebrew word vsed in Exodus cuteth off all occasion of cauillation For there insteed of concupisces it is tachmod deriued from chamadh which doth not signify to haue the disease of concupiscence but properly to desire or couet with the hart and because he doth not so who valiantly resisteth or wrastleth against it therefore S. Paul accounted the vnuoluntary appetite thereof no appetite or desyre of his saying But now not I worke it any more that is not I willingly not deliberatly not as an humane act in so much as it cannot be reckoned any coueting of mine But if he did not couet he obserued Rom. 7. v. 17. Ioseph l. 22. antiq c. â—1 Matth. 5. v. 23. 29. the law of not coueting albeit he felt the motions of concupiscence in his flesh against his will which were not forbidden by the word tachmod but the free and voluntary only yea some of the Iewes Iosephus being witnes were so farre of from imagining any surreptions or naturall passions to be forbidden as they tanght the meer internall thoghts although deliberate not to be comprehended in the prohibitions of nor stealing coueting c. whose erour our Sauiour corrected pronouncing the Chrys ho. 12. in Matt. Hieron ad Eustoch Cyril l. 3. contra Iul. Basil de coÌ„stit Mona c. 2. Greg. Niss l. de 8. beatic Aug. l. 1. cont 2. ep Pela c. 10. 13. 6. contra Iul. c. 11. l. 2. de pecca mer c. 4. 33. 34. Ambr. l. â— offic c. 2 Pros l. 2. de vit con templ 3. l. 3. c. 4. Cypr. l. de morta Aug. l. 2. cont Pela cap. 8. voluntary desires of concupiscence to be forbidden See S. Chrysostome S. Hierome Cyrill Basill Gregory Nissen Augustine Ambrose and Prosper thus interpreting that precept of the decalogue 7. Finally some obiect S. Cyprian The mind of man besieged and on euery side entrenched with the infestation or anoyance of the Diuell hardly withstandeth hardly resisteth euery one If couetousnes be cast downe lechery ryseth vp if lechery be kept backe ambition rusheth in if ambition be suppressed angerfreâ—tâ—th Pride swelleth drunknes allureth c. which I cannot ward off better then our renowned champion S. Augustine hath done saying God forbid we shouldiudge S. Cyprian eyther couetous because he wrastled with couetousnes or vnchast because he fought with vnchastity or subiect to anger because he stroue with wrath or ambitious because with ambition or fleshly because with fleshly sinnes or a louer of this world because he encountreth with wordly allurements or lecherous because with lechery or proud be-because with pride or drunken because with drunkenesse or enuious because he warred with enuy Nay the truth is he was none of theÌ„ al because he did manfully resist these euil motions partly comming from originall condition partly from vse and custome That which S. Augustine heere inferreth of the assault of S. Cyprian we may conclude of euery carnall suggestion or vicious inticement that it begetteth no sinne as long as we fight against it and haue not any lyking thereof THE XXVIII CONTROVERSY ESTABLIHSETH The possibility of keeping Gods Law against Doctour Whitaker Doctour Fulke and Doctour Abbot CHAP. I. WHEN we teach that the Commandments of God may by the help of his grace be obserued vpon earth we do not meane that they may be perfectly fullfilled according to the whole end and intent of the Law nor that our duety should be so entiere and complete as nothing can be added to the full perfection therof nor do we speake of the vniuersall obseruation of all precepts all the whole dayes of our life for that is rare graunted but to few nor yet of the perfect fullfilling of any of them any long tyme without some veniall sinnes or small imperfections for this is an extraordinary prerogatiue speciall fauour among al the children of Adam communicated only to our Blessed Lady But we defend it possible if not easy by Gods grace to fullfill the substance and satisfy the whole obligation of the Law as far forth as at any tyme it bindeth vs vnder the penalty of Fulke in c. 8. ad Rom. sect 1. Abbot c. 4. VVhitak cont 2. q. â— c. 3. fol. 580. Deutr. 30. v. 11. 12. sinne This D. Fulke this D. Whitaker this D. Abbot with other Protestants deny and Whitaker dubbeth as a point fundamentall and this is that which we vphould against them First by that of Deutronomy This commandment that I command thee this day is not aboue thee nor so far of nor situated in heauen that thou mayst say which of vs is able to ascend vnto heauen to bring it vnto vs that we may heare and fullfill it in worke c. but the word is very neere thee in thy mouth and in thy hart to do it These two
in their power by Gods helpe to Basil Orat in illud Attende tibi Chrys ho. 8 de poenio Aug. tom 7. denat grat c. 6â— Hier. ep ad Damas de expos Symboli keep them Therefore to quit the soueraigne goodnes from this merciles cruelty the Fathers vniformely define That it is a wicked thing to teach the Precepts of the spirit cannot be obserued S. Basil Accuse not God he hath not commanded things impossible S. Chrysostome We stedfastly beleeue God to be iust good not able to command things impossible hence we are admonished what we ought to do in things easy what to aske in things hard and difficile S. Augustine S. Hierome accurseth their blasphemy who teach any impossible things to be imposed by God vnto man Which argument hath beene handled heertofore in the CoÌ„trouersy of Free will where the Aduersaryes cauils theretunto are reiected The like impiety it were in God to cooperate with vs in such speciall manner to affoard his heauenly grace his supernaturall ayde to the keeping of his Commandments if we transgresse and sinne in keeping of them For as our August de pec mer. remis l. 2. c. 5. great Doctour S. Augustine teacheth To commit sin we are not ayded of God but to do good things or wholly fullfill the precept of iustice we cannot vnles we be ayded by God Marke heere that by the ayde of God we may not in part but wholy fullfill the precept and that in fullfilling it we do not sinne because thereunto we could not be holpen by God To which my aduersaries cannot shape their worne-out and thrid-bare reply That our obseruation our loue of God Abb cap. 4. sect 44. for example is no sinne but a good deed by acceptation For as I haue often answered God cannot accept that for good which is in it selfe naught and sinnefull but it is good in the Abbot ibid. sol 579. originall of grace from whence it proceedeth Explane your selfe a little better whether you meane it is perfectly or imperfectly good Graunt perfectly and you go on our side yield only imperfectly and you stand at the stay you were before perhaps you imagine that it springeth perfect from the fountaine of grace and after receaueth a blemish from the weaknes of flesh You imagine amisse for the same indiuiduall morall act which once is enriched with the dowry of perfection caÌ„not be after impouerished with any basenes of vice Or is it partly good as it is wrought by grace and partly euill as it runneth through the conduct of depraued nature No such matter the thing contradicteth it selfe as hath beene often signifyed neither is nature the conduct or pipe but true cause of the act in which there is not any part good assignable to grace distinct from that which is ascribed to man but the entiere action perfect or lesse perfect is wholy assigned to mans freewill wholy thereunto ayded by grace as the characters which the scholler frameth by the Maisters guiding of his hand are not seuerally drawne fayrely by one and rudely by the other but the same fayre or deformed rude or well fashioned are wholy from both Which forceth M. Abbot from that incongruous shift We Abbot cap. 4. sect 44. fol. 579. by our corruption do disgrace that which proceedeth holy and pure from God In like manner he is ferretted out of his other berry-hole That the action is good in the will and endeauour of Abbot ibid. the person by whom it is done For the will is weake the endeauour mean the person cloathed with human corruption who if he may will and endeauour that which is good then some good may proceed from a fleshly man perfect and entiere free from all spot and blemish or els the will and intendment is no better then the worke and VVhitak in his answere to the 8. reason of M. Camp VVhitah l. 8. aduers Duraum Abbot cap. 4. sect 44. fol. 578 this assignement of goodnes which you make to the will is a meere shew or treachery to cloake the badnes of your cause 2. Lastly you say although you place it not in order last that the duty we obserue is in substance good Well I am contented with this but see you recant not for heere I haue that the substance at least of louing God the substance of euery obseruation of the law which we achieue is perfect and entiere able to satisfy the will of God able to make vs acceptable vnto him Yes say they If he fauourably looke vpon it and impute not the fault but if he Abbot c. 4. sect 47. fol. 596. should strictly narrowly deale with vs he should haue iust cause of reiecting vs in the doing thereof Forbeare these ifs ands and come to the point Is the substance of the action done entierely good in it selfe or no abstracting from the fauour or dislike of God whose indulgence or seuerity VVhitak in his answere to the 8. reason of M. CampiaÌ„ being extrinsecall doth not make the substance of the worke better or worse It is not so good as it may endure the try all of the precise and perfect rule of righteousnes truth This is not the question but whether it may stand with satisfaction of his law It cannot stand with it in such full complete and absolute manner as that nothing at all may be added thereunto Neither is that the thing demanded who euer dealt with such slippery companions Must I still put you to the torture to draw out the truth My question is whether the substance of the act satisfyeth the obligation of the law Let vs heere what you say to this They answere as heertofore It is short of that which the law requireth it cannot be such VVhitak in his answere to the 8. reason of M. Câ—mplan and lib. 8. aduer DuraeuÌ„ Abbot cap. 4. fol. 60â— as it ought to be as long as the flesh lusteth against the spirit there can be no such entiere good in vs. Alwayes a man doth lesse then he ought to do I thought you would flinch from your word but I pursue you also flying The act then of louing God is substantially short of that the law requireth substantially lesse then it ought to be and not only lesse of that which ought to be by perswasion or counsaile but by precept binding to more vnder payne of morall sinne therefore the substance of this lesser act is not morally good but mortally defectuous substantially faulty a deadly sinne and true transgression of the law to which God cooperating must needs cooperate in particuler manner to the accomplishment of sinne Protestants are bound to surcease from louing praying or endeauouring to performe those mortall crimes and bound to performe them because God commandeth them as I further demonstrate by this dilemma Either God commandeth the complete perfect fullfilling of his law which Protestants teach no man in this