that such a good worke be done so and so what then we dispute now touching particulars in euery Mans reall practice The enquiry is not for the generall What euill is there in such and such a good worke done thus and thus according as the Circumstances are framed in an Imagined Case As to aske what Sinne is their in an Almes-deede done out of Faith and Charity to Gods glory This is a fond question thus framed vpon generall termes we say their is no Sinne in it But the enquiry is in particular what Euill their is in such a worke done by this or that Man according to all Circumstances that were at that time incident to the worke as What sinne was there in Zacheus or Cornelius almes-deeds This question we admit and answere to it That some Sinne there was for which those holy Men as wel as others would not haue beene willing that God should enter into iudgement with them strictly to iudge them Yea but will the Iesuits reply name what Sinne this was or else you wrong them Now this is meere impudency For who is judge of their actions Are we or is it God and their owne Consciences we can be no judges who at furthest can judge but accordrng to outward appearance We know not their Hearts nor are we priuy vnto euery particular Circumstance that did accompany those actions of theirs Circumstances in euery particular action differ infinitely one Man may offend in this point another in that nor haue we a generall Rule whereby to judge alike of all And therefore it is a childish quaere to aske on Man whether another Man offendes who may doe euill a 1000 times not only secret from others but vnwitting to himselfe If then the Iesuite will haue an answere to his question he must resort to particular mens Consciences and to God for only the spirit of Man and the spirit of God know the things of Man Let him aske a Cornelius when he giues almes whether he doe thinke this worke so well done that no fault can bee found with it Doubtlesse he will answere that he cannot excuse himselfe from all faultinesse though he knew nothing by himselfe yet he dares not stand to Gods judgment His confession and prayer would in this case be the same with Nehemiahs Nehem. 13. 22. Remember me O my God concerning this also and spare mee according to the greatnesse of thy mercy at once begging fauorable acceptance of his obedience and gratious pardon of his infirmities If this suffice not in the next place the Iesuite is to repaire to God almighty and question him where the Sinnes in such and such a good workes who no doubt can shape him an answere that will sore confound his pride and folly and make it quickly appeare vnto him that sinnefull Man when he pleades with God is not able to answere him one obiection of a 100 that God shall make against him This of the third Argument That Man hath sufficient meanes to doe well and not Sinne. The last followes drawne from such absurdities as they say doe follow vpon our Doctrine Thus. 4 If say they our Doctrine be true that the best workes of Men be Sinfull then these absurdities be likewise true doctrine That to be iustified by faith is to be iustified by Sin That no man ought to beleeue because the worke Beleeuing is Sinne. That all good works are forbidden because all Sinne is forbidden That God should command vs to commit Sinne because he commands vs to doe good workes That God bidding vs be zelous of goâ—d workes should in effect bid vs be zealous of mortall Sinne. That to pray for the pardon of Sinne were a damnable Sinne. These and such other absurd Positions would be true if the protestants doctrine concerning the sinfulnesse of good workes may stand for good Hereunto we answere That these absurdities issue not out of our Doctrine but out of our Aduersaries malitious Imaginations Who like the ragine Sea casting vp mire and Dirt from its owne Bottome would faine throw all this filth in the face of the Reformed Churches to make them odious and hatefull to the world The best is Truth cannot bee disgraced though it may be belyed These foule Absurdities touch vs not but follow vpon that Doctrine which is none of ours Namely That the good works of the Regenerate are in their very Nature altogether sins and nothing else but sordes inquinamenta merae iniquitates Such an absurd assertion would indeed yeeld such an absurd consequence But we defended it not they abuse vs grosly wheÌ„ in their writings they report of vs the contrary that we doe mainetaine This onely we teach That mens good workes are in part sinfull Much good they haue in them but with all some euill mingled therewith Amongst the gold some drosse also will be sound that will not be able to abide the fire of Gods seuere Tryall Imperfections will appeare in our best workes so long as humane infirmity and mortality hangs vpon vs. This we teach and from this Doctrine all that haue reason may see that no such vnreasonable conclusions can be collected And let thus much suffice for the clearing of this third Proposition touching the imperfection of our obedience to the Morrall Law of God euen in the good workes which we performe From whence euery godly heart should leâ—rne both Christian Humilitie and also Industry First Humility not to boast in the flesh and glory in its owne Righteousnesse thinking that God must highly account off and reward largely that which is very little worth Secondly Industry in a faithfull indeauour after perfection That what cannot be done well as it ought wee may yet euery day be done better then before it was CHAP. IIII. Three generall exceptions against the truthes deliuered in this third Section THus we haue stood long in the confirmation of our second Argument touching the impossibility of Mans fulfilling of the Law in this Life and so consequently of iustification by the Law Against all that haue bin sayed for the profit of this point our Aduersaries haue three Common and generall Exceptions Which are these 1 That Concupiscence or Naturall Corruption in the first and second act of it is no sinne 2 That imperfection in our Charity and Obedience is no sinne 3 That smaller faults or as they tell them Veniaâ—â— sinnes doe not hinder the Iustice and goodnesse of any good worke To these three Positions they haue continually recourse For whereas they cannot deny but that their is in the Regenerate both a pronesse of Nature vnto Euill and also many inordinate Sinnefuâ—l motions arising thence they first deny that either these Naturall Corruptions or disordered Motions of the Heart be any sinnes Againe they confesse that no man hath such perfect loue of God and Man but that he may increase in charity nor be his good workes so perfectly good but that they ought still to striue to doe them
a sure obligation vnto punishment binding ouer the transgressor vnto the paines of God's aeternall wrath by a stroÌ„ger chaine then of Steele or Adamant Christ by his meritorious satisfaction hath broken these bonds and ransomed vs from this fearefull Bondage vnto Hell and destruction He being made a Curse for vs hath redeemed vs from the Curse of the Law Gal. 3. 13. That is By taking on himselfe the punishment of our Sinnes in his owne person suffering and satisfying the wrath and Iustice of God he hath once for euer set vs free from the dreadfull vengeance of God which we deserue should fall vpon vs for our Iniquities 2 In our deliuerance from the Power of Sinne which though it abide in vs in the Reliques of our corrupted Nature yet by the power of the Holy Ghost dwelling in the Hearts of the Regenerate it is subdued and kept vnder that it doth not reigne nor exercise it's commanding authority without Controle So that whereas the Vnregenerate be the Seruants of Sinne wholly at the command of Satan and wicked affections the Regenerate are freed from this slauery being ruled and guided by the Spirit of the Lord which wheresoeuer it is there is liberty as the Apostle speakes 2 Cor. 3. 17. Liberty from that blindnes wherein we are holden by Nature not knowing what the will of God is Liberty from that rebellion and infirmity of our Nature whereby we are nor willing nor able to doe the will of God From which we are freed in part by the Spirit of Christ inlightning our Mindes and changing our Hearts This Liberty from Sinnes dominion and damnation S. Paul joynes together Rom. 8. 2. The Law of the Spirit of Life which is in Christ Iesus hath freed me from the Law of Sinne and of Death And againe Rom. 6. 14. Sinne shall not haue Dominion ouer you for ye are not vnder the Law but vnder Grace 2 Our freedome from the Law is eithr from the Ceremoniall or Moral law The Ceremoniall Law contained in it diuerse Carnall Ordinances 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to endure vntill the time of reformation From all which Christ hath freed the Church of the New Testament as namely 1. From the whole burthen of Legall ceremonies whatsoeuer vsed in the worship of God Those resemblances are of no vse now when the substance it selfe is come in place nor may such beggarly and impotent rudiments be sought after when greater perfection is to be had Gal. 4. 9. 2. From that restraint in things indifferent whereunto the Iewes were tied but we are not bound Such are the obseruations of dayes of Meates and Drinkes of Garments with the like Wherein the Iewes were restâ—ayned but our consciences are left free being taught that euery Creature of God is good being sanctified by Prayer and thankesgiuing 1. Tim. 4. 4. 5. And that to the pure all things are pure Onely this being obserued that we abuse not this our Liberty but that as we are informed by Faith that all things are lawfull for vs so we should be taught by charity to see what are expedient in regard of others That a due regard be had of others infirmity that nothing be done whereby the truly weake may be scandalized as the Apostle commands Rom 14. 21. By which â—eanes Knowledge on the one side still preserues vs that our consciences be not iâ—snared with superstition and charity on the other side shall keepe our Liberty from degenerating into Licentiousnesse and vnchristian contempt of our weake Brethren 2 Our freedome from the Morall law stands in this that whereas the Law requires of euery Man vpon strictest termes of Necessity full and compleate Obedience to all things whatsoeuer contained in it if he will auoide the punishment of Hell fire Christ hath freed all that belieue in him from this heavy and rigorous exaction of the Law taking away from our Consciences this obligation vnto a necessary fulfilling thereof vpon paine that we shall forfeit Heauen if we doe it not As we shall see more anon 3 In the last place our Freedome is from Men namely from all power and authority they may claime ouer our consciences they may hold our persons in subjection but they cannot command ouer our consciences We acknowledge no Iurisdiction of Man or Angel ouer our Consciences but only that of God that created vs and of Christ that hath redeemed vs. Whosoeuer ergo shall impose vpon Man any humane Traditions Opinions or Ordinations whatsoeuer to tye his conscience vnto obedience by vertue of his own authority such a one trenches vpon Gods high Praerogatiue vsurpes tyrannically ouer the soules of Men according as at this day that Man of Sinne doth But here we must obserue that Humane Constitutions be either Ecclesiasticall or Politicall Ecclesiasticall concerne either the matter and substance of God's worship when any thing is invented by Man commanded wherein and whereby to worship God 2 The Manner and externall order of God's worship in the determination of indifferent circumstances tending to decencie and comelinesse For the former we renounce and reiect all humane authority whatsoeuer that shall without warrant from the Scriptures prescribe vnto the Church any doctrine to be receiued as a diuine Trueth or Custome Ceremony or Practise whatsoeuer to be obserued as a proper part of God's most holy worship According as our reformed Churches haue happily recouered their Liberty by breaking asunder those cordes casting away that Yoake of false doctrine of Superstitions â—â—râ—moniall will-worships wherewith not Christ but Anti-Christ had insnared and oppressed the Church And they haue God's owne warrant for so doing Isay. 29. 13. ratified and explained by Christ Mat. 15 9. In vaine they worship me teaching for doctrine Mens precepts which was a thing contrary to God's expresse commandement Ezech. 20. 18. â—â— Walke yee not in the ordinances of your Fathers neither obserue their manners nor defile your selues with their Idoles I am the Lord your God walke in my Statutes and keepe my Iudgements and doe them For the later namely humane Constitutions concerning indifferent Circumstances in God's worship tending to orderly decency agreeable to the simplicity and purity of the Gospell herein wee must acknowledge the authority of the Church though not ouer our Consciences to binde them yet ouer our practises to order limit them Accordingly as also we doe in the other branch of humane Obediences viz. Politicall or ciuill comprising all Law touching lawfull things made for the gouernance of Kingdomes or inferior states by the supreame Magistrate that hath authority so to doe Wherevnto we must be subject not because of wrath onely but also for conscience sake For Conscience sake not because the highest Monarch on Earth hath power ouer the Conscience of his meanest subject to binde it by vertue of his owne authority but because God hath established the Magistrates authority and commanded subjects Obedience in lawfull things and therefore we cannot disobey
acquainted vs with his meaning as to follow another of our owne making And there fore according to the Scriptures we acknowledge and maintaine that as in other places where mention is made of the Iustification of a sinner before God so in the 2 and 4 Chapters of the Ep. to the Rom. and third Chapter of the Gal. where the Doctrine there of is directly handled by Iustification nothing else is meant but the gracious Act of Almighty God whereby hee absolues a beleiuing sinner accused at the Tribunall of his Iustice pronouncing him iust and acquitting him of all punishment for Christs sake CHAP III The Confutation of our Aduersaries cauils against our acception of the word Iustification OVR Adversaries haue little to reply against these so plaine places Somthing they answere namely 1 That it cannot be denied but that Iustification doth many times beare that sense we stand for But with all they would haue vs obseru this rule that Quotiescunque in Scripturis Deus dicitur iustificare impium semper intelligendum est ex impio facere iustum God cannot declare a man to be iust but of vniust he must make him iust And they giue the Reason Because the Iudgment of God is according to Trueth Rom. 2. 2. We embrace this Rule and the Reason of it acknowledging that where euer there is Iustification there must be Iustice some way or other in the party Iustified But the Question stands still in what manner God makes a sinner iust whom hee in Iudgemenr pronounceth so to be They say by bestowing on him the grace of Sanctification perfect Righteousnesse inherent in his own Person We affirme that it is by imputing vnto him the perfect Righteousnesse of Christ accepting Christs obedience for his In which diuersity let vs come as neere them as Trueth will giue leaue Thus â—arre we goe along with them 1 That there is inherent Righteousnesse bestowed vpon a Sinner whereby of vnholy impure vniust he is made holy cleane and iust We all confessed this worke of the Holy Ghost renewing Man in the spirit of his mind restoring in him the Image of God in Knowledge Righteousnesse and Holinesse That the Holy Ghost dwelles in the Elect as in Temples dedicated to his service which he adornes by communicating vnto them his Heauenly graces That hee makes them Liuing Members of Christs Body and fruitfull Braunches of that true Vine That this grace infused is a fountaine of Living water springing vp to eternall Life These things we beleeue and teach Wherfore whereas the Popish Doctors fall foule on our reformed writers charging Calvin others for denying all Inherent Righteousnesse in Beleeuers maintaining only an Imputed Righteousnesse without them We tell them 't is a grosse Calumny forged by perverse Minds that list not to vnderstand Mens playnest writings Nor Calvin nor any that euer maintained the trueth with him euer denied the Righteousnes oâ— Sanctification But this he denies we also with the Scriptures that the Righteousnesse which iustifies vs in Gods Iudgment is not in our selues but all in Christ. That inherent Righteousnesse or sanctification allway keepe company with Iustification in the same Person Severed they are never in their common Subiect viz a True Beleeuer as appeares Rom. 8. 30. But that therefore they must be confounded for one and the same Grace and worke of God may be affirmed with as good Reason as that in the Sunne Light and Heate are all one because alwaies ioyned to geather That by this grace of Inherent Righteousnesse a Man is in some sort iustified before God That is so farre as a Man by the grace of God is become truly holy and good so farre God esteemes him holy good God taketh notice of his owne graces in his Children he approues of them and giues Testimony of them in case it be needfull as appeares by the Righteousnesse of Iob Dauid Zachary and other holy Men who were good and did good in Gods sight Yea in the Life to come when all corruptions being vtterly done away the Saints shall be invested with perfection of Inherent Holinesse by the Righteousnesse of their owne and not by any other shall they then appeare iust in Gods fight Thus farre we agree with them But herein now wee differ that although by the grace of Sanctification infused God doe make him righteous and holy in some measure that was before altogether vnholy and wicked neuerthelesse we affirme that by and for this Holynesse the best of Saints living never were nor shall be Iustified in Gods sight that is pronounced iust and innocent before the Tribunall of his Iustice. For we here take vp the forenamed Rule layed downe by our adversaries Whomsoeuer God pronounceth to be perfectly iust he must needs be made perfectly iust For Gods Iudgment is according to trueth Now that no man in this life is made perfectly iust by any such inherent Holinesse in him as is able to outstand the severe and exact triall of Gods Iudgment is a Trueth witnessed by the Scripture and confessed alwaies by the most holy Saints of God Our Aduersaries indeed stiffly pleade the contrary teaching that sinne and Corruption in the Iustified is vtterly abolished The error and pride of which Imagination we shall shortly haue occasion more at Large to Discouer vnto you Meane while let that much stand for good that Man being not made perfectly iust in himselfe cannot thereby be declared perfectly iust before God and therefore some other Righteousnesse not that of Sanctification is to be sought for whereby a sinner may be Iustified in Gods sight To that argument of ours from the Opposition of iustification to Accusation and Condemnation confirmed by so many places of Scripture They answere That this hinders nothing at all Both may agree to God who of his mercy iustifies some that is makes them inherently Iust of his Iustice condemns other that is punisheth them To which slight Answeres wee make this short reply That where words are opposite as they acknowledg these to be there according to the Lawes of opposition they must carry opposite Meaning But vnto Accusation Comdemnation and punishment nothing is opposite but defence Absolution and Pardon Where therefore Iustificare is coupled with these words it must needes beare this and no other meaning of a bad man to make a good is not opposite to Accusation Condemnation or punishment of him Accused he may be Condemned and punished iustly and after made good I should but trouble you to alleadge more of their Cavills Let thus much suffice for the clearing of this point That Iustification and Sanctification are to be Distinguished and not confounded The Righteousnesse of the one is in vs in its Nature true and good but for its degree and measure Imperfect and alwaies yoaked with the remaynder of naturall Corruption And therefore if a sinner should plead this before the Iudgment seate of God offering himself to be
my selfe in my minde serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of sinne Euen Paul serues God in the better halfe of him doe what he can sinne will haue a place in his heart a part of his seruice though he be vnwilling to yeeld it If any will compare and preferre himselfe to this holy man he may prooue himselfe prouder but better then him he cannot T is arrogance for a simple Fryer to claime perfection when so great an Apostle disauowes it He that will not acknowledge that corruption in himselfe which Paul in the name of all confesseth in his owne person t is not because such a one is more holy then the Apostle but because he is ignorant and sees it not or high-minded and scornes to be knowne of it Furthermore Reason confirmes what Scriptures and experience doe witnesse viz. that sinfull corruption will hang fast vpon vs vnto our dying day for if we suppose an vtter abolishment of sinne and corruption in our Nature it must needes follow there will neuer be any sinfulnesse at all in our workes and liues Where the Habit is perfect the Action is so too and a sweet Fountaine cannot send forth bitter waters Wherefore seeing not the best of men can liue without manifold actuall sinnes It it apparent that this ill fruit comes from a bad humour in the tree and this defect of actuall obedience comes from the imperfection of habituall holinesse This is sufficient for Iustification of the truth of our first Preposition That inherent holinesse in this life is not perfect Because t is alwayes coupled with some sinfull corruption But here our Adversaries cry out with open mouth that we maintaine moastrous propositions Namely That there is nâ— inherent holinesse in a man that 's iustified that after Iustification a man still remaines a sianer and vniust That in Iustification sinne is not abolished but onely couered with Christs mantle Thence they fall to their Rhetoricke That all Calvinists are but painted Sepulchers faire without full of rottennesse within Like foolish Virgins that haue no oyle of their owne But thinke to be supplyed by that of other folkes Like Wolues in a Lambes skinne which hides but takes not away their rauening and fierce nature Like a leprous person in fine cloathes that lookes to be fauoured and imbraced by his King because his is well apparelled For this is say they to teach That a Man iustified is yet a sinner in himselfe That corruption filthinesse and vncleannesse remain in him when yet in Gods sight he is accounted pure and cleane because hee hath hid himselfe vâ—der the cloake of Christs righteousnesse Whence also they tell vs it well follow Wee make Christs body monstrous a holy beautifull head ioyned to filthy leprous members Christs marriage polluted A most holy and faire Bridegroome coupled to a foule deformed Spouse To this we say Truth is modest yet shee will not bee out-faced with bigge words Their eloquence hath slandered partly vs partly the truth Vs in that they affirme we deny all inherent righteousnesse in a person iustified which is an impudent calumny The truth in condemning that for an error which is sacred verity taught vs by God in the Scriptures viz. That a person iustified is yet after that in himselfe in part sinfull This we still teach and maintaine for a truth firme as the foundation of the earth that cannot bee shaken namely That although a Iustified person is by the grace of the Holy Ghost dwelling in him made inherently holy yet this sanctity is not that perfect purity of the heart which the Law requires because some degrees of impurity and corruption doe dwell in him till death And therefore the most iustified person liuing is yet in himselfe partly sinfull and vniust but the sinfulnesse is pardoned vnto him in CHRIST Against this the Râ—manists contend labouring to proue that in him that is iustified Sinne doth not remaine at all but is vtâ—erly abolâ—shed They proue it by such Arguments as these 1 The Scriptures testifie That Christ is the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world That Hee was offered to take away the sinnes of many That in Repentance our sinnes are blotted out That God will subdue our iniquities and cast our sinnes into the bottome of the Sea in allusion to the drowning of the Aegyptians in the red Sea Wherefore if sinne be taken away blotted out drowned in the Sea like the Aegyptians then sure it is abolished and remaines no longer 2 They prooue it from the Properties which are ascribed to Sinne as namely these 1 Sinne is compared to spotts staines and filthynesse but from thence we are washed by the powring on of cleane water vpon vs and by the Blood of Christ. 2 Sinne is compared to Bonds Fetters the Prison whereby we are holden captiue vnder the power of Satan Now Christ hath broken these Chaines and opened these prison doores hauing deliuered us from the power of darknesse and redeemed us from all iniquity made us free from Sinne to be come the seruants of Righteousnesse 3 Sinne is compared to sicknesses diseases wounds Now God is the best Phisition the most skilfull Chirurgian and where he vndertakes the Cure he doth his worke throughly he cures all diseases and each on perfectly He doth not spread on a sick Man a faire Couerlid or couer a festred wound with a faire cloth as Caluin imagines but by a purgatiue potion he expelles the disease by a healing plaister he cures the wound So that there is not left nor corrupt matter nor dangerous sore that can proue deadly according to that Rom. 8. 1. There is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Iesus that is There is no matter at all for which they deserue Condemnation as those expound 4 Sinne is likned to death nay it is the spirituall Death of the Soule Now he that is iustified is restored to Spirituall Life and where Life is there death is quite taken away seing a Man cannot be aliue and dead both together Wherefore the Apostle saith Rom. 6. 6. Our old Man is crucified with him that the Body of Sinne might be destroyed that hence forth We might not serue Sinne and v. 11. We are dead vnto Sinne. Hence they conclude If the filthinesse of sinne be washed away the Chaines of sinne broken the Diseases and hurts of Sinne healed the Death of Sinne abolished then it followes that Sinne is quite exstinguished and remaines no more in those that are iustified 3 They argue thus If Sinne remaine in those that are iustified and be onely couered then God either knowes of the sinne or knowes it not To say he were ignorant of it were blasphemy all things being naked and bare before his eyes If he know it then either he hates it or he hats it not If he doth not hate it how doth the Scriptures say true
If the hardest precepts of the Law may be kept then much more all the rest which are easier But the hardest precepts may be obserued Ergo the rest also They proue the minor thus Three precepts there are which are most hard as all confesse 1 Thou shalt loue the Lord with all thy heart 2 Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe 3 Thou shalt not couet The tenth Commandement But now all these three commandements may be kept by the Regenerate Ergo the rest and so the whole Law Wee deny the minor of the Prosyllogisme and say that those three precepts are not to be kept perfectly by any man in this life They proue it in each particular 1 That a man in this life may loue God with all his heart This they prooue ◠By Scripture Deut. 30. 6. The Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart and the heart of thy seed to loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soule that thou mayest liue This is a praediction or promise of that which was heretofore and is still accomplished in the regenerate who being sanctified and purified from sinne a worke of Gods Spirit in the heart figured by externall circumcision of the flesh should loue God with all their hearts 2 By example of Dauid who saith of himselfe Psal. 1 9. 10. With my whole heart haue I sought thee and God also testifies of him That he kept his commandements and followed him with all his heart to doe that onely which was righteous in his eyes 1 Kings 14. 8. The like is recorded of Iosiah 2 Kings 23. 25. And like vnto him was there no King before him that turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soule and with all his might according to all the Law of Moses neither after him arose any like him These men then loued God with all their hearts 3 By reason For to loue God with all the heart carries one of these three senses First to loue him onely and nothing else and so wee are not commanded to loue God with all our heart because we must loue our neighbour too 2 To loue him tanto conatu quanto fieri potest that is as much as may be Nor is this commanded saith Becanus and yet if it were who would say t were impossible to loue God as much as one can 3 To loue God aboue all that is to preferre him before all creatures before father and mother as Christ did Mat. 10. 37. and as Abraham did before his onely Sonne Now this onely is to loue God with all the heart and this men may doe as appeareth in the Martyres and others who left all for Gods loue Vnto these Arguments we answere That it is not so easie a matter to loue God with all the heart as these imagine Bellarmine indeed makes a But at it There is nothing required saith he of vs But to loue God with all the Heart As if it were as easily done as spoken But wee beleeue that in this But God hath set vp a white which all the men in the world may and must aime at but none will shoot so steadily as to hit it Vnto the place of Deuteronomy we say God therein tels vs what his gracious worke is in circumcising or sanctifying our hearts what our bounden duty is thereupon viz. to loue him with all our hearts the performance whereof wee must endeauour syncerely chough we cannot doe it perfectly For the examples of Dauid and Iosiah who are said to follow the Lord with all their heart there is nothing else meant thereby but a syncere intent and endeauour in the generall to establish and maintaine Gods pure Religion in their Kingdome free from corruption of Idolatry as also for their owne particular conversation to liue vnblameably For Dauid t is a cleare case that not perfection but syncerity is his commendations whose many sinnes recorded in the Scriptures witnesse sufficiently that hee had in his heart that corruption which many times turned the loue thereof from God to other things How did he loue God with all his heart when hee defiled Vriahs bed shed Vriahs blood intended to murder Nabal iudg'd away an honest mans Lands to a fawning Sycophant with such other faults The Prophet himselfe in that place in 119. Psal. witnesseth as the vprightnesse of his heart With my whole heart haue I sought thee so withall the weaknesse and corruption of it against which he humblie craues Gods assistance in the very next words Let me not wander from thy commandements For Iosiah t is plaine that this singular commendations is giuen him because of his through reformations of the most corrupt estate of Religion which was before his reigne Wherein many Godly Kings before him had done something in redressing some abuses but none went so farre in a zealous reformation of all according to Moses Law Wherefore the Text saith that there was no King before him like vnto him which cannot be meant absolutely of all for Dauid is said to follow Gods will with all his heart as well as Iosiah but since the time that Religion began to bee corrupted in the Iewish Church there was none of all the Kings of Iudah that was so faithfull as Iosiah to restore all things to their first purity Whence he hath the praise that he turned vnto God more entirely then any other King before or after him But now from Iosiahs zeale in reformation to conclude that in euery particular of his life he kept the Law perfectly louing God with all his heart is a consequence that wants strength of connexion Vnto the reason from the meaning of the Law we grant That the first is not the meaning of it But for the second viz. That to loue God with all the heart is to loue him as much as may be The Iesuite hath no reason either to deny that this is not commaunded or to affirme that if it were commanded t is yet possible to doe it Would any man say except he care not what he say that God doth not command vs to loue him as much as may be Or will it bee a truth from any mans tongue to say that he loues God with as great perfection as may be It cannot Which appeares thus Gods will is that we should loue him with all our hearts Now Christ hath taught vs to pray Thy will bee done in earth as it is in Heauen Thence t is euident Wee on Earth are bound to fulfill the Commandement of louing God as the Saints in Heauen doe fulfill it But now our Aduersaries themselues grant that whil'st wee bee in viâ wee cannot loue God so much as we shall d ee in Patriâ Whence it followes that no man can loue him so much as may be and as he ought to doe seeing no man hath his heart replenished with that measure of Diuine loue whereof his Nature is capable which either Adam had in his
the obedience of the Law which yet they cannot in all things perfectly obey CHAP. III. No man in this life can performe any particular good worke so exactly that in euery point it shall answere the rigour of the Law proued by conscience Scriptures reason and Popish obiections answered I Proceed vnto the last Proposition which concerneth Mans actuall Obedience to any one particular precept of the Law Wherein will appeare the third Imperfection of mans Obedience in fulfilling of the Morall Law We haue seene That no man hath perfect inherent sanctity free from Natures corruption Againe That no man can performe perfect actuall obedience to all and euery duty of the Law without failing in any one point And this much our Aduersaries will not much sticke to yeeld vnto vs and confesse That there is no man but sinneth at some time or other and that t is scarce possible to avoide veniall sinnes as they stile them But then they deny vtterly That a man sinnes in euery particular good worke though he cannot doe all perfectly yet in some he may exactly fulfill the Righteousnesse of the Law not missing in any one circumstance And therfore at least by that obedience he may be iustified This opinion of theirs hath neither truth in it selfe nor yet brings any benefit at all to their maine purpose in prouing Iustification by workes For to what end serueth it them to stand quarrelling for the perfectioÌ„ of our obedience in some one or two good works when yet we faile in many things besides One thing well done will not iustifie him that doth many things ill For that of Saint Iames must be a Truth Hee that keepeth the whole Law and yet faileth in one point is guilty of all Iames 2. 10. Much more guilty is he that keepeth it in a few and breakes it in many But yet further we reiect this opinion also as an Errour and we teach on the contrary That No man in this life can performe any one particular good worke so exactly that in euery point it shall answere the rigour of the Law and the seuere tryall of Gods Iudgement About this Assertion our Aduersaries raise much stirre and many soule slaunders against vs proclaiming vs to all the world open enemies to all good workes that wee bee Factors for the Kingdome of darknes promoting as much as in vs lyeth all licentiousnesse in evill courses and taking of the courage and endeauour of Men after pious duties For who will set himselfe say they to doe any good worke if the Protestants doctrine be true that in doing of it he shall commit a mortall Sinne who wil pray fast and giues almes if when he doth these things he cannot but sinne As good then it were to doe euill as to doe good a man can but sin and so he shall let him doe his best These slanderous incongruities fastened on vs spring not out of our Doctrine rightly vnderstood but out of froward and peruerse hearts that will not see the truth Such aspersions will easily bee wiped of when after the confirmation of the Trueth wee shall make answere to such obiections as seeme to infringe it We say then That no man can performe any good worke required in the Law with such exact observation of every circumstance that were it examined by the rigour of the Law and Gods Iustice no fault at all can bee found in it This we proue by Conscience by Scriptures by Reason First we here apeale vnto the Conscience of Man the Iudgment whereof is to be regarded and whereunto we dare stand in this matter Thou that boastest that in such and such good workes that thou hastnot committed any Sinne at all Darest thou indeed stand to it and vpon these Tearmes appeare in Gods Iudgment Darest thou abide the strictnesse of this examination standing ready to Iustifie thy selfe against euery thing that hee can obiect Wilt thou venter thy selfe vpon this Tryall euen in the best works thou dost That God cannot with his most piercing eye of Iustice spy a fault in theÌ„ if he number theÌ„ he shal find nothing short if he weigh them not one graine too light Againe let conscience speake when thou hast prayed fasted giuen almes done any other excellent worke of Piety and Charity in the deuoutest and most vnblameable manner thou thinkest possible Thinkest thou verily that in this case thou doest not at all stand in need of Gods fauour to passe by thine infirmities and that thou needest not euen in this behalfe pray Lord forgiue me my trespasses What man durst say or thinke in any good worke Lord in this particular I doe not desire thou shouldest be mercifull vnto me Without doubt there is no man liuing vpon earth that shall in serious consideration of the seuerity of Gods iudgement and the great infirmity of his owne Nature compare his own obedience with the seuerity of Gods Iustice but his heart will presently shrinke within him and his conscience shunne this tryall as much as euer Adam did Gods presence The thought of such a strict proceeding in Iudgement would make the proudest heart to stoope and tremble the boldest face to gather blacknesse filling the soule with an horrible feare in the expectation of that day should the most innocent life the most holy actions of men be there scanned according to the rigour of Iustice not graciously pittied pardoned and accepted according to that mercifull loue of God which couereth and passeth by multitudes of sinnes T were arrogant pride in any man to vtter that speach in a sober temper Whereunto Iob breakes out in a passion chased by the sense of his miserable tortures and the froward disputes of his friends Oh saith he that a man might pleade with God as a man pleadeth with his neighbour And againe Lay downe now put me in a surety with thee who is he that will strike hands with me And againe Oh that I knew where I might find him that I might come euen to his face I would order my cause before him and fill my mouth with arguments I would know the words which he would answere mee and vnderstand what he would say vnto me Speakes the man reason or is he beside himselfe what challenge God to dispute with him and hope to make his party good in the quarrell This was Iobs infirmity It s our Aduersaries arrogancy who dare set their foot against Gods and bid him pry as narrowly as hee list into their good workes they will maintaine the righteousnesse thereof against all that he can obiect to proue the least sinâ—ulnesse Iob saw his folly God grant that these may theirs In a calmer temper when conscience was not ouerclouded with griefe and anger he reades vs a quite contrary lesson In the 9 Chapter of his booke How should man be iust with God if he contend with him he cannot answer him one of a thousand v. 2. 3. And againe hauing reasoned questioned of Gods
manner of their Connection is the same that just in euery point as the Soule is to the Body or the Body to the Soule so Workes are vnto Faith and Faith vnto Works It sufficeth to his intent that as in the absence of the Soule the Body so in the absence of Obedience Faith is dead But thence it followes not that workes by their presence doe the same thing to Faith as the Soule to the Body by it's presence or that Faith in the absence of Workes remaines the same as the Body doth in the absence of the Soule If we must needs be tied to the strict termes of the Similitude let vs a little examine the comparison and we shall see our Aduersaries all flye off first from it Let the comparison be first thus Betweene the Body and the Soule Faith and Workes as the termes be in the Text. As the Body without the Soule is dead because the Soule giues life i. e sense breathing and all other Motion to the Body So Faith without Workes is dead because Workes giue life vnto Faith But now this Comparison will not runne on all foure For Workes are not vnto Faith as the Soule is to the Body but as sense and motion is to the Body Seeing Workes are externall acts not internall habits and so are proportionable not to the Soule but to the liuing actions thence issuing Wherefore 't is as absurd to say that Workes giue life vnto Faith as 't is ridiculous to affirme that Sense Motion giue life to the Body which are not Causes but Effects signes of Life Therefore when Faith without Workes is dead 't is not spoken in that sense because Workes giue life to Faith as the Soule doth to the Body Lâ—â— then the Comparison bee thus Between the Body and the Soule Faith and Charity As the Body without the Soule is dead because the Soule is the forme of the body and giues life to it So Faith without Charity is dead because Charity is the Forme of Faith and giues life to it But neither will the Comparison hold vpon these termes For 1. our Adversaries here put in Charity the habit for Workes the act which is more then themselues ought to doe seeing they will tye vs at short Bitts to the very letter of the Text. For though we can be content to admit that interpretation would they admit of the Apostle's plaine meaning not straine for querkes yet seeing they argue so precisely from the Words of the Comparison they must not now haue libertie from vs to goe from them but be content to take the Words as they lie in the Text and make their best of them Yet seeing 't is most senselesse to make Workes that is externall Actions the Forme of Faith an internall habit let them take Charity insteed of them an internall habit likewise Wil it be any better now belike so TheÌ„ 't is thus As the Soule is the Forme of the Body so Charity is the forme of Faith and as the Soule giues life and action to the Body so Charity vnto Faith Will they stand to this No. Here againe they fly off in both Comparisons Charity is one habit Faith another distinct betweene themselues and therefore they deny as there 's good reason that Charity is either the Essentiall forme of Faith as the Soule of the liuing Body or the accidentall Forme as whitenes of Paper They say 't is onely an externall Forme But this now is not to keepe close to the Apostle's comparison but to runne from it at their pleasure when they fall vpon an absurdity in pressing of it so strictly The Soule is no externall but an internall essentiall Forme therefore Charitie must be so if all runne round Againe doth Charitie giue life or liuing actions vnto Faith as the Soule doth vnto the Body Neither dare they hold close to this Comparison For the proper worke or action of Faith is to assent vnto the Trueth of diuine reuelations because of Gods authoritie as themselues teach Whence now comes this assent From the Habit of Faith or of Charity They grant that it comes immediatlie from the Habit of Faith which produceth this action euen when it s seuered from Charity Then 't is plain that it is not Charitie that giues life to Faith which can performe the proper action that belongs to it without it's helpe How then doth Charity giue life vnto Faith For this they haue a sillie conceit Charity giues Life that is Merite vnto Faith The beleefe or assent vnto diuine Trueth is meritorious if it be with Charity If without then 't is not meritorious This is a fine toy wherein againe they runne quite from the Comparison of the Apostle For the Soule giues liuing Actions to the Body not only the Qualifications of the Actions and so Charitie is not like the Soule because it giues only the qualification of Merit vnto the Action of Faith not the action it selfe Beside A most vaine interpretation it is without any ground from Scripture to say a liuing Faith that is a meritorious Faith when euen in common sense the life of any habit consists onelie in a power to produce those actions that naturallie and immediatlie depend vpon that Habit. And what Reason is there in the World why the Habit of Charity should make the actions of Faith meritorious or why Charity should make Faith meritorious rather then Faith make Charity meritorious seing in this life there is no such praeeminency of Charity aboue Faith Wherefore we despise these speculatiue Sophismes which with much faire glozing our Aduersaries draw from the Text but yet when all comes to the Triall themselues will not stand to the strict application of the similitude because it breeds absurdities which euen themselues abhorre Now if they take liberty to qualifie and interpret they must giue vs leaue to doe so too or if they will not we shall take it To shut vp all Their other Collection is as weake as the former namely A dead body is a true body ergo a dead Faith is true Faith This Argument forceth the Similitude and so is of a Force In materiall things which haue a diuerse being from different Causes it may hold But 't is not so in Vertues and Graces Trueth and Life are both essentiall to such qualities True Charity is a liuing Charity i. e. actiue as the Apostle himselfe proues v. 15. True Va Valour And so of euery vertuous quality if it be true 't is liuing and stirring in Action if it be otherwise 't is counterfeit some other thing that hath onely a shadow of it All these Trickes are pin vpon the Apostle to pervert his plaine meaning viz That as it is necessary to the being of a liuing body that it be coupled with the â—oule so 't is necessary to the being of a liuing true Christian Faith that it bring forth Workes of Obedience SECT 7. CHAP. I. None can be iustified by their owne satisfaction