further he explaines himselfe thus Inter gratiam praedestinationem c. Betweene grace and predestination this is the onely difference that predestination is the preparation of grace and grace is the gift or donation of predestination Or as a little after Grace is the effect of predestination But will the Pontifician say Mans free-will is not for all this excluded from being an ingredient at least in preparation Augustine in the same place snuts free-will quite out of doores yea from setting one foot vpon the threshold or entry to iustification Ideo ex fide vâ— secundum gratiam firma sit promissio omni semini non de nostrae voluntatis potestate sed de sua praedestinatione promisit Promisit enim quod ipse facturus erat non quod homines quia et si faciant homines bona quae pertinent ad colendum Deum ipse facit vt illi faciant quae praecipit non illi faciunt vt ipse faciat quod promisit Alioquin vt Dei promissa compleantur non in Dei sed in hominum est potestate quod à Domino promissum est ab ipsis redditur Abrahae Non autem sic credidit Abraham sed credidit danc gloriam Deo quoniam quae promisit potens etiam facere non ait praedicere non ait praescire nam aliena facta potest praedicere atque praescire sed ait potens etiam facere ac per hoc facta non aliena sed sua That is It is therefore of faith that according to grace the promise might be sure to all the seede he promised not out of any respect to the power of our will but of his predestination For he promised not that which men but which himselfe was about to doe because though men doe those good things which belong to Gods worship hee causeth them to doe those things which hee hath commanded they doe not causâ— him to doe that which hee promised Else that the promises of God should bee performed it is not in the power of God but of men and that which the Lord hath promised is by them performed to Abraham But Abraham did not so beleeue God but hee beleeued giuing glory to God because what he had promised he was able also to doe he saith not to fore-tell he saith not to fore-know for hee is able to fore-tell and fore-know other mens workes but hee saith hee is able to doe meaning hereby not others workes but his owne So this holy man For otherwise saith he a little after Per hoc vt promissa sua Deus possit implere non etiam in Dei sed in hominis potestate hereby it should come to passe that it rested not in Gods power to bee able to fulfill his promises but in mans power St. Augustine therefore admits of no mixture of mans free-will concurring with Gods grace in preparing him to receiue the promise of God touching iustification as being built vpon the eternall decreâ— of Gods predestation as an effect springing from the cause And Epist. 107. Vital The will is prepared of the Lord saith he How Quia praeuenit hominis voluntatem bonam nec cam cuiusquam inuenit in corde sed facit For God preuents the good will of man nor doth hee finde thie good will in anie mans heart but makes it se. And the same Father in his exposition of the Epistle to the Galathians vpon these words Induerunt Christum They haue put on Christ saith thus Filii fiunt participatione sapientiae id praeparante atque praestante Mediatoris fide quam fidei gratiam nunc indumentum vocat Vt Christum induti sint qui in eum crediderunt They are made sonnes by the participation of wisedome which is prepared and performed by faith in the Mediator which grace of faith he now calleth a putting on So that they haue Christ put on them which haue beleeued in him Faith then so prepares as it also performes the worke of iustification whereas Popish faith may as they say prepare and yet faile to performe And writing to Simplicianus he comes directly to the point Quaeritur vtrum vel fides mereatur hominis iustificationem an verò nec fidei merita praecedant misericordiam Dei sed sides ipsa inter dona gratiae numeretur Misericors Deus vocat nullis hoc vel fidei meritis largiens quia merita fidei sequuntur vocationem potius quam praecedunt It is demanded whether faith doe merit mans iustification or else neither the merits of faith do go before the mercie of God but euen faith it selfe is reckoned among the gifts of grace The mercifull God calleth bestowing this grace no not vpon any merits of faith because the merits of faith rather follow vocation than goe before it And againe in another place Ante fidem non debentur homini nisi mala pro malis retribuit autem Deus indebitam gratiam bona pro malis Before faith nothing is due to a man but euill for euill but God doth reward a man with vndeserued grace to wit good for euill Where hee speakes of sauing faith iustifying not of common faith preparing And in his one hundred and fifth Epistle to Sixtus his fellow Priest Restat vt gratuitum Dei donum esse fateamur si gratiam veram idest sine meritis cogitamus Wee are to confesse that to bee a free gift of God if we consider the true grace that is without merits Now the true grace is that whereby a man is iustified and saued but this grace is a free gift without merits therefore no merits goe before the grace of iustification And Bernard sweetely Non est quò gratia intret vbi iam meritum occupauit Et deest gratia quicquid meritis deputas Grace hath not where to enter where merit hath already taken up the roome And you detract from grace whatsoâ—uer you attribute to merits And againe Ergo iam plena confessio gratiae ipsius gratiae plenitudinem signat in anima confitentis Now then a plenary acknowledgement of grace is a signe of the fulnesse of grace it selfe in the soule of him that thus confesseth it And thus consequently out of the Fathers wee conclude as the Catholicke doctrine of the Church in those primitiue times That there is in man no worke of preparation whereby to merit by congruitie the grace of iustification which is the freegift of God without our merits And St. Augustine plainely discouers vnto vs the puddle whence this doctrine of merit of congruitie first issued namely from Pelagius Qui cos remunerandos dicit qui bene vtuntur libero arbitrio ideo mereri Domini grattam debitum cius reddi fatetur who saith they are to bee rewarded which vse well their free will and thereby merit the grace of God which he confesseth to be renared as due to their free will This accordeth with Romish Schoole diuinitie teaching That homini operanti
promises made Hee saith not and to seeds as of many but as of one And to thy seed which is Christ. And this was that promise of God which Abraham beleeuing his faith was counted to him for righteousnesse as it is there in the sixt verse euen as Abraham beleeued God and it was accounted to him for righteousnesse Therefore Vega's diuinitie hath very much failed him in propounding these two examples of Noah and Abraham to proue the iustification of his generall Faith whereas we plainely see both these Patriarches faith had speciall and principall reference and respect to Christ Iesus And therefore their faith was reckoned to them for righteousnesse For the other examples which Vega there addeth in generall out of the eleuenth to the Hebrewes they are all of the same nature and all confirme this infallible and vndeniable truth That the promises of God in Christ and Christ alone with all his righteousnesse is the obiect of that Faith which is reckoned to Abraham to Noah and to euery beleeuer for righteousnesse Here then comes in the true formall cause of our iustification namely Christ himselfe with all his righteousnesse which being apprehended by faith it is imputed vnto vs for righteousnesse This is it that giues a true being to iustification Iustification therefore consists in the imputation of Christ and his righteousnesse comprehending also all the promises of God in him apprehended by faith Now concerning this Catholicke doctrine of imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith the Scriptures are very pregnant in the proofe of it This Gospell hath testimonie before the Law in the Law and in the Prophets and is confirmed by Christ and his Apostles Before the Law to omit other examples wee haue two famous ones that of Noah and Abraham of whom wee spake euen now who are layd downe for exemplary patterns yea and liuely types to all beleeuers Noah before the floud and Abraham after the floud and before the Law which St. Paul doth especially note to put a difference betweene faith and the workes of the Law in the point of iustification In the Law also we haue two principall types liuely shadowing this doctrine of imputation The first we finde in Leuiticus 1. 4. And hee shall put his hand vpon the head of his burnt-offering and it shall bee accepted for him to make attonement for him The burnt offering was a figure of Christ sacrificed for vs vpon the crosse the man that brings this burnt-offering is a type of euery true beleeuer and the hand which hee putteth on the head of the sacrifice is faith laying hold on Christ and as it were owning him for our proper sacrifice which God accepteth to bee an attonement for vs a sacrifice of a sweet sauour vnto the Lord. The Apostle applies this sacrifice with the fruits of it to Christ Rom. 5. 11. Wee reioyce in God through our Lord Iesus Christ by whom we haue receiued the attonement Also Ephes. 5. 2. Walke in loue as Christ also hath loued vs and giuen himselfe for vs an offering and a sacrifice to God of a sweete smelling sauour Christ is then this burnt-offering our attonement with God and an offering of a sweete sauour vnto the Lord. Now the instrument or hand whereby Christ is apprehended and applyed to euery true Beleeuer is Faith It was the hand of Faith which the diseased woman in the Gospell touched Christ her Sauiour with and fetched vertue out of him To whom the Lord said Daughter be of good comfort thy faith hath made thee whole goe in peace This the Apostle doth also liuely set out Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to wit Iesus Christ to be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousnesse for the Remission of sinnes that are past through the forbearance of God to declare at this time his righteousnesse that hee might be iust and a iustifier of him that beleeueth in Iesus How fully doth the Apostle parallel and compare this truth with that type A second type of our righteousnesse or iustification by imputation of Christ vnto the beleeuer in the time of the Law is set downe Num. 21. 8. 9. The Lord said vnto Moses make thee a fiery serpent and set it vpon a pole and it shall come to passe that euery one that is bitten when he looketh vpon it shall liue and Moses did so and the serpent-bitten-man looked and liued The brazen Serpent was a type of Christ the serpent-bitten-man is euery sinner whom that old serpent hath already stung with sinne as he did our first Parents The looking on the brazen serpent so lifted vp vpon a pole is the faith of the beleeuer beholding Christ lifted vp vpon his Crosse. This Christ Iesus himselfe applyeth Ioh. 3. 14. 15. As Moses lifted vp the Serpent in the wildernesse euen so must the sonne of man be lifted vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish but haue eternall life A most sweet collation of the truth with the type shewing that as faith is the hand of the soule laying hold vpon the bloudy sacrifice of Christ for our atonement with God so faith is also the eye of the soule so to looke vpon Christ crucified as to bee thereby cured of all the deadly wounds of sin and so to liue eternally The Prophets also are full of testimonies to confirme this doctrine of iustification by imputation Esa 53. 4. Surely hee hath borne our griefes and carried our sorrowes yet we did esteeme him stricken smitten of God and afflicted as if hee had beene a malefactor But he was wounded for our transgressions hee was bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are wee healed All wee like sheepe haue gone astray we haue turned euery one to his owne way and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of vs all And vers 8. he was cut off out of the land of the liuing for the transgression of my people was he stricken Though he had done no violence neither was any deceipt in his mouth yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him he hath put him to griefe when thou shalt make his soule an offering for sinnes he shall see his seede c. Here wee see most liuely set downe a mutuall imputation of our iniquities vnto Christ and of his merits vnto vs. And then the Prophet vers 11. sheweth by what meane or instrument this righteousnesse of Christs obedience is imputed to vs By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie many for hee shall beare their iniquities By his knowledge or by the knowledge of himselfe that is by faith in him knowing and acknowledging seeing and beholding him with the eye of faith to bee that Lambe of God before the shearer taking away our sinnes for hee hath borne our iniquities The Prophet Ieremy also doth set this downe most sweetly by a reciprocall or mutuall relation betweene Christ and his Church calling Christ
of a sinner For saith hee Penance is the immediate cause or immediate disposition and as it seemeth sufficient with Gods grace to our iustification yea it perfecteth and consummateth our iustification But Faith is not such a neer disposition to iustification and it remaineth in sinners and our iustification is but as it were initiated by it It is euident therefore that the most potent cause of our iustification is penance and therefore that we are iustified it is to be imputed to it and not to faith So he Nay such is the Pontifician hatred against Faith that Vega Trents Interpreter denyes euen Faith that is formed by grace and charity as they say to bee sufficient to iustification As he saith Quamuis eo ipso quod aliquis per fidem iustificetur fiat fides illius formata tamen non sequitur quod per eam vt formatam acquiratur iustitia Et ideo neque debent loca quae tribuunt iustitiam fidei restringi ad fidem formaetam Although a mans iustification by Faith implyeth that his Faith is formed to wit a true Faith yet it followeth not that by it as it is formed righteousnesse is obtained And therefore neyther those places which attribute righteousnesse to Faith ought to bee restrained to true Faith or Faith that is formed Such a hard conceit haue the Pontificians of Faith formed or vnformed But now forasmuch as the Scriptures doe euery where ascribe so much to faith in the point of iustification how doe they answer the Scriptures in this point Surely Vega according to his rare dexteritite vndertakes that taske too produceth fiue reasons why the Apostle hath done most prudently oftner to attribute iustification to faith than to any other vertue The first is Because faith is the foundation and fountaine the prime cause and roote of our saluation which saith he St. Augustine hath shewed in his Booke of the Predestination of Saints alledging Cornelius for an example whose Prayer and Ames-deeds were done in faith that by them saith Vega he might be brought to the Faith of Christ. Now note here I pray you a notable tricke of legier-demain in this Tridentine Champion who was of one spirit with that Councell For doth he giue these titles to faith calling it with the Councell the fountaine and foundation the roote and originall of our saluation for any good will hee beares faith or that herein he preferres it before other graces Nothing lesse For a little before hee had giuen faith such a blow and that with Aristotles philosophicall fist as that hee hath made this very foundation to stagger againe Plus enim quam omnia c. For saith he this is of more weight than all that are brought for the commendation of faith towards God that we are more straitly vnited to him by our louing of him and by sorrow for offending of him and a purpose to our vtmost endeauour to please him for the time to come then we are vnited by faith Which being the formost in our iustification it comes hindmost and furthest off from perfection according to that axiome in Philosophy Priora generatione posteriora perfectione The first in generation the last in perfection But passe wee to his second reason which is much like the former Because saith he all our workes which concurre to iustification haue their meritorious force from faith and faith from none else besides Thirdly Therefore is our saluation fitly attributed to faith because there is no stronger cause to moue a sinner to those things which on his part are requisite to his iustification Fourthly It was conuenient that the Apostles in their Epistles and Sermons should commonly impute and attribute our iustification vnto faith Indeede Vega's copie hath sanctification haply mis-printed sauing that they confound iustification and sanctification together But why so commonly impute iustification to Faith namely because forsooth the Apostles had to doe with sundry sects and therefore were so to attemper their exhortations as to draw them from their sect to the Christian Faith Nor is it lawfull saith Vega hence to inferre that there are no other things better than those which are more often commended So by this reason we are to vnderstand that the doctrine of iustification by Faith so often commended and preached by the Apostles in their Epistles was not therefore so much and so often pressed and preached as if it were the best doctrine but that other doctrines according to Vega's estimate might be better but as if the Apostles only temporized with those times and persons with whom they had to doe As if it appertained not to all Abrahams seede by promise to whose Faith righteousnesse was imputed nor was it written saith the Apostle for him onely that it was imputed to him but for vs also to whom it shall be imputed if we beleeue on him that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead Therefore it is by Faith that it might bee by grace to the end the promise might bee sure to all the seede both Iewes and Gentiles which walke in the steps of that Faith of our Father Abraham O Vega be not so impiously iniurious yea sacrilegious to rob vs of the inheritance of our Faith vnder a colour as if iustification by Faith had beene a temporary purchase and merchandize for those Apostolicall times and as if now the intaile were quite cut off from Abrahams race Or if yee Pontificians will bee such malignant enemies to iustifying Faith whereby Abraham and all his seede are and shall bee iustified to the worlds end then confesse your selues to bee quite cut off from being Abrahams seede His fift reason why iustification is most commonly ascribed to faith is because Faith is that only disposition to which among all our workes it might principally bee attributed without perill of our pride and the iniurie and derogation of Gods grace For seeing faith is the gift of God and a kinde of testimony of Gods grace towards vs in as much as it is attributed to our faith it is attributed to the grace and mercy of God and not to our strength that no flesh shall glory in his presence But why then Vega do you teach the doctrine of iustification another way and the onely way to puffe men vp with pride and so to empty them of all grace As Bernard saith Non est quâ— gratia intret vbi iam meritum occupauit Grace findes no way to enter where merit hath already taken vp the roome And againe Deest gratiae quicquid meritis deputas That is detracted from grace whatsoeuer is imputed to merits Dost thou commend the admirable wisedome of God in teaching man to ascribe the iustification of Faith to the mercy and glory of God and yet dost thou adde iustification of thine owne workes to robbe God of his glorie and thy selfe of all grace puffing vp thy selfe with pride in steade thereof But leaue we these puddles of errour and come
the summe of all wee put on Christ hee becomes wholly ours being made vnto vs of God wisedome and righteousnesse and sanctification and redemption and all in all Now true it is that this vnion is not only internall inuisible reall and peculiar to Gods elect but also externall visible nominall and common to all Christians So that although all Christians in Common as well Hypocrites and false Professors as the sincere and faithfull may claime a share in this vnion so farre forth as it is externall and visible as beeing wrought by externall and visible instruments the Word and Sacraments wherof all Christians are in common partakers yet onely the Elect and Faithfull are partakers of the internall and true reall vnion with Christ as being wrought by a most powerfull Agent the Spirit of Christ and by a most actiue instrument the Faith of Christ. So that Faith in the hand of Gods spirit is the principall yea and sole immediate instrument and meane to vnite vs vnto Christ euen as the spirit in man is the meane to vnite the body and soule together CHAP. IX Of the other Romane Catholicke euasions to elude and frustrate the euidence of Scriptures concerning sole Faith in Iustification FOrasmuch as the holy Scriptures doe abound with cleare euidences to proue our Iustification by Faith alone in the only imputation of Christs righteousnesse apprehended and applyed by Faith altogether excluding workes from hauing any thing to doe in this worke it stood therefore the Church of Rome vpon to vse all art and wit of men and Angels I meane bad Angels to blunder these Chrystall fountaines by their distinctions and to sophisticate the pure simplicitie of truth with their faire false glosses and farre-fetcht interpretations To beginne with the Epistle to the Romanes where the Apostle in setting down the doctrine of Iustification doth so often attribute Iustification to faith without workes or without the works of the Law opposing faith against works grace against merit the Law of Faith against the Law of workes as being incompatible meanes or instruments to iustification The Pontificians can easily reconcile all by vnderstanding the opposition to bee betweene Faith and eyther those workes of the Law which are ceremoniall or those which are done before a man haue Faith but not of those workes which are done in the state of grace after a man haue receiued faith as is intimated in the eight Chapter of the Sixt Session of the Councell of Trent Wherupon* Vega reckoning vp sundry opnions as of some that take those workes excluded by Paul not only for legall and ceremoniall but morall and naturall of others that say St. Paul spake of workes going before Faith and St. Iames of workes comming after Faith c. At length addes his owne opinion spun like a copweb out of the subtiltie of his owne braine and all vpon the preposition Ex diuersly taken of Paul and Iames as this quaint Franciscan hath obserued For this preposition Ex saith he in Paul signifieth merit and debt but in Iames only co-operation and co-efficiency as where Paul saith that no man is iustified ex operibus by workes hee should meane none is iustified by the merits and due deserts of his owne workes And where Iames saith That a man is iustified ex operibus by workes and not ex fide tantum by faith only he should meane that workes do concurre vnto iustification and not faith alone But wee shall not want a broome to sweep downe this subtile webb But let vs adde first another of his webs which hee also fasteneth vpon his Trent-Fathers namely That Paul speakes of the first iustification from which precedent workes are excluded And Iames of the second Iustification in which subsequent workes are included Now for Vega's first reason and note vpon the preposition Ex it is no lesse really absurd than seemingly subtile For if Paul by saying Neminem ex operibus iustificari None is iustified by workes should meane by the merit or due desert of his workes then consequently by saying hominem ex fide iustificari that a man is iustified by Faith he should meane that man is iustified by the merit and due desert of his Faith which Vega himselfe in the selfe same place denyeth Thus the nimble Spider is wrapped and intangled in his owne webbe And as for the Trent-Fathers conceipt of Pauls first and Iames second Iustification wee shall by and by see the vanitie of it For indeede the iustification which Paul ascribeth to Faith without workes and that which Iames attributeth ioyntly to workes with Faith are so different as they differ not in degrees of first and second but in a most opposite respect as much as Iustification in the sight of God differeth from Iustification in the sight of man As wee shall more plainely shew anon Now for Pauls iustification by faith without workes it is cleare that all workes are excluded without exception not onely legall and ceremoniall and morall done before the state of grace but those also done in the state of grace none are excepted of what nature soeuer Paul shuts all out from iustification for if any be iustified by workes yea by workes of grace then Abraham for Abraham is propounded not onely as a particular beleeuer but as the father and figure of all the faithfull But Abraham was not iustified by workes not by any workes not by his best workes done in the state of grace This the Apostle proues manifestly Rom. 4. 5. To him that worketh not instancing of Abraham but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his Faith is counted for righteousnesse So that Abraham is iustified not by working but by beleeuing To this purpose Gregory surnamed the Great Bishop of Rome vpon the seuen penitentiall Psalmes in the fourth of them to wit Psalme 51. vpon these words Et exultabit lingua mea iustitiam tuam you must pardon the vulgar barbarisme of the Latine the true English is And my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousnesse saith Iustitia Dei fides est the righteousnesse of God is faith And hee instanceth Abraham Abraham beleeued God saith he and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Quia iustus ex fide viuit Because the iust doth liue by faith Si ergo iusti vita fides est consequens est eandem fidem esse iustitiam sine qua quisque esse iustus non potest If therefore the iust mans life be faith it followeth that the same faith is that righteousnesse without which no man can be iust Or saith hee the righteousnesse of God is that he will not the death of a sinner For it seems iust with man to reuenge his wrong but it is the righteousnesse of God to pardon the penitent So he As therefore Abraham is iustified so euery sonne of Abraham to wit euery beleeuer is iustified namely by faith and not by workes Now was not beleeuing Abraham a regenerate person Did he not bring forth
many fruits of faith many good workes of charity piety mercy hospitality obedience humility and the like yet none of these come within the account of his iustification in the sight of God For to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Therefore though the Pontificians would neuer so faine foist and croud in by head and shoulders their workes comming after faith whereby they may be iustified yet they are all thrust out by the Apostle as those workers were shut out of Heauen by Christ Mat. 7. 22. 23. except they could either bring the Text within the compasse of their Index expurgatorius as they haue done the glosse and sentences of Fathers in the like kind or proue Abraham an vnregenerate person or force the Apostle to say that though Abraham were not iustified by workes but by faith yet Abraham was iustified first by faith and then by workes Yea but say they although Paul make no mention of Abrahams iustification by workes yet Iames another Apostle saith plainly Was not Abraham our father iustified by works when he had offered Isaac his sonne vpon the Altar Therefore Abraham was iustified not onely by faith but by works also Therefore to loose this Gordian knot wherein the Pontificians so much triumph wee will vse no other sword not Alexanders but the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God to cut it asunder At the first sight Paul and Iames seeme to be at great oddes the one ascribing iustification to faith without workes the other to faith and workes In both the Pontificians vnderstand one and the same iustification in kinde but to differ only in degree or order as Pauls iustification to be the first and that of Iames the second but both iustifying in the sight of God But we shall finde it far otherwise namely that these two Apostles doe speak of two different iustifications differing not in degree or order but in kinde and quality So that Paul speakes of that iustification whereby a man stands iust in the presence of God which is attributed to faith and not to workes at all and Iames of another iustification namely of a testification of a mans saith declaring a man to be a true beleeuer by good workes which are the proper fruits and effects of sauing and iustifying faith For if Iames should vnderstand by being iustified by faith and workes together such a iustification as makes a man iust in the sight of God then he should directly crosse his fellow-Apostle who shuts out all workes from hauing any thing to doe in our iustification in Gods sight For Paul saith Rom 4. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God But Iames saith Abraham was iustified by workes therefore this iustification of Abraham by workes was not that iustification which makes a man to reioyce before God to wit the iustification by faith which Paul directly opposeth to iustification by workes Rom. 4. Now that Iames speaketh of iustification by â—orkes and not by faith onely as vnderstanding a testification and demonstration of sound and sauing faith is euident by the whole passage of his second Chapter where the Apostle exhorting to workes of mercy and charity and meeting with false professors that turned the grace of God into wantonnesse professing they had faith but made no conscience of a Christian conuersation to testifie the truth and life of their faith by good workes hereupon he inferreth ver 14. What doth it profit my brethren though a man say hee hath faith and haue no workes can the faith saue him No that faith which is without workes is dead and cannot saue a man Yea such a faith is no better than that of Diuels Well yet thou saist thou hast faith But there is as well a dead faith as a liuing faith a faith common with Diuels as a faith proper to beleeuers a sauing faith as a deceiuing faith Shew mee therefore whether thou hast that liuing sauing faith of true beleeuers or no. It is not enough to say thou hast this faith vnlesse thou canst proue it It is one thing to say it another to haue it Now the proofe of it is by the fruits of it to wit good workes as the tree is knowne by the fruits For the liuing sauing Faith is not an idle but an operatiue working Faith it is a Faith euer working by loue Therefore as the man saith to his Neighbour vers 18. Thou hast Faith and I haue workes shew me thy Faith without thy workes and I will shew thee my faith by my workes In which words the Apostle puts a plaine difference betweene a dead and a liuing faith which yet we are not able to iudge of or to discerne one from another but by good workes and so speakes here of no other iustification by workes but only such as is declaratiue or demonstratiue in the sight of men as it is said here Shew me thy Faith by thy workes So that wee see here how it is the Apostles drift to discouer the true sauing liuing Faith from a false counterfeit and dead faith which notwithstanding vaine professors so much glory of Hereupon the Apostle instanceth the Faith of Abraham and Rahab which was proued to bee a liuing and sauing Faith by the fruits and effects of it Note the Apostles Context seriously and with iudgement In the 20. vers Wilt thou know O vaine man that Faith without workes is dead Was not Abraham our father iustified by workes when hee had offered Isaac his sonne vpon the Altar Seest thou how Faith wrought with his workes and by workes was Faith made perfect And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse and he was called the friend of God Ye see then how that by workes a man is iustified and not by Faith onely First Faith without workes is dead But Abraham was iustified by Faith But by what Faith Was it a liuing and sauing Faith that Abraham had Yes How doth that appeare By his workes euen by the workes of Faith which gaue testimony to his Faith that it was a liuing sauing and iustifying Faith for by workes his Faith was made perfect not that his workes added any being of perfection to his Faith but by way of demonstration and testimony onely As we haue the like phrase in Matth. 21. 16. Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfited praise not that Gods praise and glory receiued any addition of perfection by the mouth of those babes but onely in respect of the promulgation and declaration of his praise So here As also the Apostle inferreth in the next words vers 23. Thus the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse Note here how Iames varieth not one iot from the truth of the Scripture which ascribeth iustification
to Abrahams Faith without workes for hee vseth the very same Scripture which Paul vseth to shew iustification by Faith without workes Yea but he addeth in the next verse Ye see then how that by workes a man is iustified and not by Faith only This conclusion seems to smile vpon the Papists but in truth it derides their folly for we see the Apostle doth no other here but conclude the former premises shewing what is that Faith which is imputed to a man for righteousnesse to wit not a dead and idle Faith but a liuing and working Faith testified by the proper fruits and effects of it good workes So that Abraham being said to be iustified by workes and not by Faith onely it is but to proue his Faith by his workes and that hee was declared to be iustified by Faith through the euidence of his workes whereby hee was declared iust in the sight of men to whom Faith comes to be testified only by good workes The like is to bee vnderstood of Rahabs iustification by workes for it is another instance seruing to the same purpose of the Apostle to distinguish a liuing and sauing Faith from a dead and vnprofitable Faith And this the Apostle concludeth together with the Chapter with a reason drawne from a similitude For saith hee as the body without the Spirit is dead euen so Faith without workes is dead also Note here how the Apostle most aptly concludeth the constant and vniforme current of this Chapter concerning the difference betweene a dead and a lining Faith which are as it were the two hinges of the Chapter As the body without the spirit is dead euen so Faith without workes is dead also The Pontificians vpon this place doe ground their informing of Faith by charity as if Faith were altogether without forme and life vntill charity be infused into it but their collection is most improper and swarueth not onely from the property of the comparison but also from the maine purpose of the Apostle For the Apostle saith As the body without the Spirit is dead he saith not As the body without the soule is dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without spirit or breath for so the word signifieth Now if they would herein as they doe vpon other occasions altogether impertinent consult with Philosophy it would tell them that there are three things concurring to the composition of a liuing man the soule the body and the spirit The soule is that which informeth and giueth life to the body but the spirit by which they say the soule body are vnited is that whereby also the man doth breathe and whereby he is knowne to liue For so long as there is breath in a man wee know him to be aliue when a man lyes in a swoune or trance without any motion to know whether he be dead or no we take a Chrystall glasse or such like to discerne whether hee breathe or no if he breathe not we giue him for dead but if he breathe neuer so little we know hee is yet a liuing man To this purpose doth our Apostle apply this comparison that as we cannot know a man from a dead carkasse but by his spirit or breathing so no more can wee know a liuing Faith from a dead Faith but by good workes which are as it were breathed from it Obiect But will some say The word vsed by St. Iames for spirit may be as well taken for the soule which giues life to the body for so it is often taken in Scripture for the soule as Luke 23. 46. and elsewhere Besides doe not most Interpreters take it generally for the soule Why should wee not then rather take it for the soule and spirit of a man that is within him than only for the breath which proceedeth from him Answ. I answer First as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken sometimes for the soule as well as for the spirit so also it is vsed sometime for breath or winde as our Sauiour alludeth Ioh 3. 8. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for the praecordia or lungs whence the breath is deriued But the question is how it is to be taken in this place of St Iames. For the true meaning of this word in that place wee must as in the true interpretation of other Scriptures obserue the tenure of the text and context Now the tenure of that whole Chapter of St. Iames is chiefly to discerne true Faith from counterfeit To demonstrate this he instanceth the body of a man Now by what speciall signe is the body of a man known to liue By the spirit saith S. Iames. What spirit the soule or the spirit within a man or his spirit to wit his breath for Spirit may signifie all these By that spirit which doth most liuely plainly shew a man to be aliue that is the breath For when all other signs do faile as speech and motion of any limbe or member in so much as a man is senselesse lyes for dead yet if he breathe it is an euident token that he yet liueth But when he comes once to be as the same Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without this spirit or breath then he is certainly dead Euen so Faith without the breathing of good workes is dead And this agreeth with that he saith there Shew mee thy Faith by thy workes The soule indeede giues the body to liue but it is the breath that shewes the body to liue when the soule cannot Therefore it seemeth to my reason an vndeniable conclusion that Saint Iames speakes there of the breath of the body the most demonstratiue signe of life And deuout Bernard also excellently to this purpose and place of Iames Vt corporis huius vitam ex motu suo dignoscimus ita fidei vitam ex operibus bonis As we discerne the life of this body of ours by the motion of it so also the life of faith by good workes Nor are we ignorant that St Augustine Lib. 83. quaestionum quaest 76. to reconcile these two Apostles saith that Paul speakes of workes done before faith and Iames of workes after faith which opinion and conceit of his although it not onely want but crosse the euidence of Scripture sith Abrahams offering vp his Sonne was a worke of and so after faith and yet did not iustifie him before God as Paul plainely teacheth and where Augustine doth neuer so little swarue from the Scripure we must craue leaue there to leaue him being else followers of him as he is of the Scriptures according to his owne law yet St. Augustine going about to reconcile Iames with Paul saith not there nor any where else in all his writings that good works done after Faith doe iustifie vs in the sight of God but only that they are necessary duties of euery true beleeuer Wee know also that Body in Scripture is often taken for the whole Compositum or the whole man or person consisting of soule and
body as Heb 10. 5. A body hast thou prepared me meaning the whole humanity of Christ. So Rom. 12. 1. I beseech you Brethren by the mercy of God that ye present your bodies a liuing sacrifice c. meaning the whole man the soule as well as the body for the body without the soule is not a liuing but a dead sacrifice So the Apostle here telleth vs that as the body to wit a man without the Spirit or without breathing is dead that is is knowne to be dead Euen so faith without workes is knowne to be a dead faith And so our Apostles conclusion here is a pregnant confirmation of what he had formerly said concerning the proofe and euidence of a sauing and liuing faith which is knowne and distinguished from an idle and dead faith onely by good workes by the working whereof faith is knowne to liue as a man by breathing So then it is cleare that Pauls iustification by faith excluding workes is that whereby wee are iustified truly and really in the sight and account of God and that other iustification which Iames speakes of wherein hee ioyneth workes with faith is onely a declaratiue iustification in the fight and account of men to whom wee manifect the truth of that faith whereby we are iustified in the sight of God by our good workes whereby men take notice that wee are true no counterfeit beleeuers Wee will conclude this place of St. Iames with the interpretation of Aquinas In Epist. Iacobi Cap. 2. Iacobus loquitur de operibus sequentibus fidem quae dicuntur iustificare non secundum quod iustificare dicitur infusio sed secundum quod dicitur iustitiae exercitatio vel ostensio vel consummatio res enim fieri dicitur quando perficitur innotescit Iames saith he speaketh of workes following faith which are said to iustifie not in that sense that iustification is called infusion but in that it is called the exercise or manifestation or perfection of righteousnesse for a thing is said to be done when it is perfected and made manifest In the last place the Pontificians alledge Paul to the Galathians where say they speaking of iustification by faith without the workes of the Law hee meaneth yea and mentioneth the ceremonials of the Law as Circumcision therfore hee doth not thereby exclude from Iustification the workes of grace done in vs and by vs. I answer first their allegation is false for the Apostle thereby the Law or the workes of the Law meaneth not only the ceremonials but the very morals of the Law as Gal. 3. 10. for it is written Cursed is euery one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them All things exclude nothing Secondly he speaketh of the workes of the Law both ceremoniall and morall as they are done euen by the faithfull and regenerate also and not onely by others that euen in that respect they iustifie not in the sight of God To this end the Apostle saith Gal. 3. 11. But that no man is iustified by the Law in the sight of God it is euident for the iust shall liue by faith No man is iustified by the Law therefore not the regenerate not Abraham though hee did workes of the Law for he had the Law already written in the tables of his heart before it came to be written in stone But say they Abraham was iustified through workes True But how iustified In the sight of God No saith our Apostle No man is iustified by the Law in the sight of God In the sight of man he may as St. Iames meaneth but not in the sight of God as St. Paul plainely expresseth both here in the forenamed place to the Romanes Rom 4. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes hee hath whereof to glory but not before God So that the Scripture in two most euident and pregnant testimonies excludes all iustification by workes yea by any workes in the sight of God and before God that by two witnesses of holy Scripture this word of grace of iustification by Faith excluding all workes whatsoeuer ceremoniall or morall yea euen in the regenerate themselues as was faithfull Abraham the type of all the faithfull might be established against all Popish Sophistrie and doctrines of Diuels Thirdly admit the Apostle meant only legall Ceremonies not morall Duties though the contrary is manifest yet of those Ceremonies Circumcision is nominated by the Apostle for one speciall one Of which he saith Gal. 5. 2. Behold I Paul say vnto you that if ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing Circumcision then is vtterly excluded from Iustification and to depend vpon it makes a man a debtor to the whole Law Gal. 5. 3. But will some say for a Christian as these Galathians were to hold the necessity of Circumcision still together with Baptisme makes Christ vnprofitable and himselfe a debtor to the whole Law But did not Circumcision iustifie the Iewes before the vse of Baptisme as Baptisme doth now iustifie comming in the stead of Circumcision Surely much alike For if Baptisme now iustifieth as Pontificians teach ex opere operato then Circumcision once iustified which the same Pontificians deny But if Circumcision did not iustifie the Iewes as the Apostle affirmeth and Papists themselues confesse then Baptisme doth no more iustifie Christians Seeing that Baptisme is the same and no other to vs than Circumcision was to the Iewes though Papists put a great difference betweene them saying that the Sacraments of the New Testament do conferre grace ex opere operato but the Sacraments of the Old not so Wherein as in other doctrines of the mysterie of godlinesse they bewray their grosse ignorance But this by the way But now if circumcision and other ceremonials of the Law of God be excluded from hauing any thing to doe in our iustification in the sight of God by the obseruation of them then what part can Popish Ceremonies beeing not the ordinances of God but the inuentions of men yea most of them the doctrines of Diuels what part I say can these challenge in the worke of Iustification How shall the going a Pilgrimage to such a Shrine or to Rome in their yeare of Iubilee or the obseruation of Canonicall houres for reciting prayers not vnderstood or saying ouer by the Bead row so many Pater-nosters and Aue-Maries before such or such an Image or buriall in a Friars Cowle and a thousand such trumperies and meere mockeries yet all of them very meritorious with that notorious Meretrix of Rome how shall these things come-in for a share in Iustification Lastly wee may obserue how the Apostle as to the Romanes so to the Galathians doth oppose the Law and Faith as Gal. 3. 12. The Law is not of Faith But in what respect doth he oppose them first in respect of their natures the one consisting in working the other in beleeuing as Rom. 4. 5. To him that worketh not
remains for me no hope of saluation but in the sole mercy of Iesus Christ. So that the very Arch-Pontificians themselues in their death when their conscience is made their iudge renounce their own Doctrine seeme to desire to dye good Protestants like Balaam who wished he might dye the death of the righteous But I cānot see by what way such dubbling Wanderers can come to heauen because as in their life they denyed the doctrine of Faith so in their death they are for ought wee may deeme deuoyd of the duety of charity Dye they not in a most preposterous malice and enuy They would goe to Heauen but would pull the Ladder after them lest the simple people should follow them So the Hypocriticall Pharisees who shut vp the Kingdome of Heauen against men neither going in themselues nor suffering those that would to enter in Thus the Testimony of Romane Catholickes themselues may bee sufficient to conuince the vanitie and falshood of their iustification by their inherent righteousnesse But yet for more confirmation of the truth and confutation of this damnable doctrine of Popery let vs take a briefe view of the faith and opinion which the Saints of God from time to time haue had concerning their owne inherent righteousnesse Abraham the father and figure of the faithfull for all his workes yet was not iustified by them in the sight of God as the Apostle testifieth of him Rom. 4. 2. for if Abraham were iustified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God This onely testimony might stand for all to proue wherein the righteousnesse of all the faithfull consisteth whereby they stand iust in the sight of God to wit not in their inherent righteousnesse but in the onely righteousnesse of Christ imputed and by faith applied Thus Iob confessed he stood iustified Iob 9 2. How should man be iust with God if he will contend with him hee cannot answer him one of a thousand And ver 20. If I iustifie my selfe mine owne mouth shall condemne me if I say I am perfect it shall also proue me peruerse And Chapt. 25. 4. How can man bee iustified with God yea Chapt. 9. 15. whom saith he though I were righteous yet would I not answer but I would make supplication to my Iudge Indeede towards his friends he stands stoutly in the iustification of himselfe namely of his integrity and sincerity and that hee was no hypocrite as they no lesse vncharitably than vntruely charged him but towards God he beares himself farre otherwise before him he humbles himselfe he makes supplication to his Iudge saith Chap. 9. 30. If I wash my self with snow-water and make my hands neuer so cleane yet shalt thou plunge me in the ditch and mine owne clothes shall abhorre me for he is not a man as I am that I should answer him and we should come together in iudgement And Chapt. 10. 14. If I sinne then thou markest mee and thou wilt not acquite me from mine iniquity If I bee wicked woe vnto me and if I be righteous yet will I not lift vp my head I am full of confusion c. But had Iob no good workes Yes looke vpon his life described in his 29. 30 31. Chapters Hee was an eye to the blinde and a foote to the lame a deliuerer of the poore fatherlesse and friendlesse from the oppressor breaking the iawes of the wicked and plucking the spoile out of his teeth He wept for him that was in trouble and his soule was grieued for the poore And though hee were a great man a wise man a Prince yet hee ate not his morcels alone but the poore and fatherlesse fed with him The naked limmes blessed him being warmed with the fleece of his sheepe What sinne was Iob addicted to and what actions of piety and mercy did he not abound in Insomuch as in respect of his sincerity and integrity of heart hee durst say If I haue walked with vanity or if my foote hath hasted to deceit let me be weighed in an euen ballance that God may know mine integrity And God knew his integrity giuing testimony vnto it that he was a man perfect and vpright and one that feared God and eschued euill Yet all this righteousnesse Iob renounceth when he comes to the strict tryall of Gods Tribunall For comming to stand in Gods presence he saith Chapt 42. 5. I haue heard of thee by the hearing of the eare but now mine eye seeth thee wherefore I abhorre my selfe and repent in dust and ashes An admirable type of a faithfull man not trusting in his owne inherent righteousnesse but in the onely mercy of God through Christs merits whereby onely he stands iustified in the sight of God Was not Dauid also a holy man an honest hearted man after Gods owne heart yet he professeth Psal. 71. 15. c. My mouth shall shew forth thy righteousnesse and thy saluation all the day for I know not the numbers that is the perfections thereof I will goe in the strength of the Lord God and will make mention of thy righteousnesse euen of thine onely And in the beginning of the same Psalme In thee O Lord haue I put my trust let me neuer bee put to confusion deliuer me in thy righteousnesse And Psalme 89. 16. speaking in the name of all the faithfull he saith In thy name shall they reioyce all the day and in thy righteousnesse shall they make their boast And vpon the 32. Psalme Paul hath these words as a Commentary of Dauids words Rom. 4. 6. Euen as Dauid also describeth the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne But Dauid disclaimeth the iustification of all inherent righteousnesse in the sight of God Psal. 143. Heare my prayer O Lord giue eare to my supplication in thy faithfulnesse answer me and in thy righteousnesse And enter not into iudgement with thy seruant for in thy sight shall no man liuing be iustified And Psalme 30. If thou Lord shouldst marke iniquities O Lord who shall stand But there is forgiuenesse with thee that thou mayst be feared So Esay that Euangelicall Prophet aduanceth Gods righteousnesse and disauoweth mans righteousnesse Esay 54. 17. This is the heritage of the seruants of the Lord and their righteousnesse is of me saith the Lord. Yea say the Pontificians our inherent righteousnesse is of the Lord. Nay saith Esay chapt 64. 6. We are all as an vncleane thing and all our righteousnesse are as filthy rags Yea say the Pontificians before we be regenerate and be in Christ. But Esay speaketh of the Church of the Iewes of the circumcised to whom circumcision was a signe of regeneration and of Gods Couenant of grace and a seale of faith and Esay puts himselfe in the number Was Esay now vnregenerate And in the name of
haue alike liberty with my Antagonists I say no more for the present but commend you to God and to the word of his grace which is able to build you vp and to giue you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified Thine in Christ H. B. TRVTHS TRIVMPH Ouer TRENT CHAP. I. Of mans workes done before grace or of preparation in man vnto Iustification commonly called the merit of Congruitie The Romish Faith THE title of the fift Chapter of the sixt Session of the Councell of Trent is Of the necessitie of preparation to Iustification in men of ripe age where they say That by their free-will stirred vp and helped by grace they are disposed to conuert themselues to their Iustification by free assenting and cooperating with the same grace The ground of which disposition to Iustification is freewill which cooperating with grace produceth fixe seuerall workes of preparation laid downe by the Councell here and reckoned vp by Vega one of the Councels chiefe champions First an Historicall faith conceiued by hearing beleeuing the truth of Gods promises to a sinner in generall Secondly a feare of Gods iustice arising from the apprehension of their sinnes whence they arise thirdly to a hope by conuerting themselues to the consideration of Gods mercy trusting that God for Christs sake will be fauourable vnto them whom they then begin fourthly to loue as the fountaine of all righteousnesse and therefore are moued by a hatred and detestation against sinne that is fiftly by that Penance which they are to doe before Baptisme while sixtly they resolue to receiue Baptisme to begin a new life and to keepe the Commandements of God And Can. 1. If any man shall say that a man may be iustified before God by his owne workes which are done either by the power of mans nature or by the doctrine of the Law without diuine grace by Iesus Christ let him be accursed CHAP. II. Wherein the doctrine of Romish preparation is examined IT being the maine drift of this Councell to establish a righteousnesse inherent in a mans selfe and not finding how to dimme the bright sun-shine of truth against this doctrine but by an artificiall shadow of the second beames of grace medled and mingled with blinde or at the best bleare-eyed nature therefore the iudicious Reader may obserue how while this Councell would seeme in part to ascribe the worke of Iustification to Gods grace it doth in deed and in the maine attribute it to mans nature as may appeare in laying the first stone of this Babylonish building Of the necessitie of preparation to Iustification The whole frame of which preparation composed according to the modell of their Schoole-diuinitie as Cabriel Biel one of their chiefe Sententiaries who liued about fifty yeares before this Councell hath laid it downe as That the Act of the will presupposeth the Act of the vnderstanding and the Act of faith goes formost to apprehend the abomination of sinne and the wages of it hence a feare of Gods wrath and of hell fire hence a dislike and detestation of sinne And this saith he is a disposition of Congruity neither immediate nor sufficient but very remote Then faith turnes it selfe to the consideration of Gods mercy and resolueth that God is ready to remit sinne through the infusion of charity to those that are sufficiently prepared and disposed Vpon that consideration followeth the act of hope whereby a man begins to couet after God as the soueraigne good and from this act of hope he riseth to loue God aboue all things euen out of pure naturals From this loue issueth another dislike and detestation of sinne not for feare of damnation but for God finally aboue all things beloued And all these acts are followed with a purpose of amendment And so at length this comes to be a sufficient merit of Congruity being the immediate and finall disposition to the infusion of grace And this is such a preparation as doth necessarily as by a chaine of so many infolded linkes draw after it the infusion of grace whereby a man is iustified Thus wee see by what perplexed pathes they would leade men towards their iustification But note here what a power they giue to this preparation as euen to necessitate and inforce the infusion of grace because saith Biel to a man that doth as much as lyes in him God hath determined infallibly to giue grace And Aquinas saith it is a merit of Congruity that when a man doth wellvse his vertue God according to his super-excellent vertue should worke more excellently in him Videtur Congruum saith he It seemes Congruous and agreeable to reason that a man operating according to his vertue God should recompence him according to the excellencie of his vertue Yea such is the force of this merit of Congruity that according to Thomas it will merit not onely grace for a mans selfe but also for another man for because saith he a man in the state of grace doth fulfill the will of God it is Congruous or fitting that according to the proportion of friendship God should fulfill mans will in the saluation of another man Such is the nature of their doctrine of Congruitie of which sort are their workes of preparation disposing and fitting a man for grace And this is the sense and summe of the Trent doctrine touching preparation Now to cut off this Goliahs head we neede no other than his owne sword First concerning the title it selfe of the necessity of preparation in the Adulti or men growne as we call them note here the vanity of this doctrine how therein they confound themselues For I would aske them whom they meane by their Adulti or men of yeares Those within their owne Church such as are baptized or Heathens and Pagans without the pale of the Church such as are not yet baptized as Turkes Iewes or Indians Surely they mention those Adulti that are not yet baptized But it must needs be that they include their owne Adulti for else what vse is there in their Church of this doctrine of preparation which they so highly aduance commend vnlesse it be among the barbarous Indians But their Adulti haue already according to their doctrine receiued the grace of Iustification in their Baptisme conferring grace as they say ex opere operato which grace being once by any mortall sin afterwards lost there can be no more merit of Congruitie to merit a reparation of grace as it is in the preparation vnto grace as Thomas teacheth But leaue we the title and let vs come to the thing Popish preparation vnto grace hangs vpon two speciall hinges First free-will secondly that this free-will is moued by grace which their Schoole-men call the first grace implyed in this Councell A free-will they must haue though they confesse it to be weake and feeble And such a free-will wee easily grant them as loth to incurre their Anathema for
can reach vnto I enuie it not But at the best when all is done is it euer the neerer to grace or iustification If nature haue any faculty at all this way surely it is to be found in those men that most excell in the gifts of nature as in the Philosophers the learned the disputers of the world Wherefore then doe not these receiue the Gospell with all readinesse and freedome of will Nay are they not rather the further off from Christ by how much nature seemes more excellent and perfect in them Saint Paul makes a challenge 1. Cor. 1. 20. Where is the wise Where is the Scribe Where is the disputer of this world Hath not God made the wisedome of this world foolishnesse and vers 21. he concludeth flatly that seeing the world by wisedome knew not God in the wisedome of God it pleased God by the foolishnesse of preaching to saue them that beleeue And vers 26. Not many wise men after the flesh are called c. And our Sauiour Mat. 11. 25. I thanke thee O Father Lord of heauen and earth that thou hast hid these things from the wise and men of vnderstanding and hast reuealed them vnto babes And therefore hence we may conclude That the more our nature presumeth of its owne perfection any way in disposing it selfe to grace the more blinde it is and further off from grace though the Councell of Trent accurseth those that shall condemne natures disposing of it selfe to grace Can. 7. Nay bring me an Angell in his pure naturals innocent as Adam in his first creation his will most free vntainted vncaptiued yet what relation is there betweene him and the word incarnate This is a high and hidden mysterie which neither Adam in his purest naturals no nor Angell but by speciall reuelation Ephes. 3. 10. could by their naturall knowledge attaine vnto As the Lord said to Peter Flesh and bloud hath not reuealed this vnto thee What free-will then can there be in vs by nature towards that thing which our naturall vnderstanding is altogether ignorant of The naturall man receiueth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishnesse vnto him neither can hee know them because they are spiritually discerned Now that which the vnderstanding apprehends not the will desires not Ignoti nulla cupido Thomas Aquinas saith well and truly Hoc est ex institutione diuinae prouidentiae vt nihil agat vltra suam virtutem Vita autem aeterna est quoddam bonum excedens proportionem naturae creatae quia etiam excedit cognitionem desiderium eius secundum illud 1. Cor. 2. 9. Oculus non vidit c. This is of the appointment of Gods prouidence that nothing should worke beyond its proper vertue But eternall life is a certaine good exceeding the proportion of created nature because it also exceedeth the knowledge and desire of it according to that 1. Cor. 2. 9. Eye hath not seene nor eare heard neither haue entred into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that loue him for God hath reuealed them vnto vs by his spirit c. And so Thomas concludeth that not euen Adam in his perfection could merit eternall life without a supernaturall grace And the same Aquinas Ea quae sunt fidei excedunt rationem humanam those things which are of faith exceede humane reason And a little after Homo assentiendo his quae sunt fidei eleuatur supra naturam suam c. A man by assenting to those things which are of faith is eleuated aboue his nature therefore it is necessary that faith be infused into him by a supernaturall gift of God Yea say the Pontificians We ascribe the first motion of free-will to the worke of a preuenting grace But by their owne confession this work of grace is no other but to moue stirre vp as it were to awaken the will Indeede if the Trent-Fathers would not hypocritically halt in this point but speake ingenuously and plainly and say That God by his spirit through the preaching of the word doth illuminate the blinde vnderstanding of the naturall man as he did the heart of Lydia to see the mysterie of Christ and so the will is inflamed to desire and long after saluation then wee and all Catholicke beleeuers would in this point giue them the right hand of fellowship This is indeede the right and true preparation vnto the grace of iustification if not rather the true grace it selfe already begun in our hearts For this is life eternall that they know thee to bee the onely true God and whom thou hast sent Christ Iesus And as the Prophet Esay speaketh By his knowledge shall my righteous seruant iustifie maâ—ie for he shall beare their iniquities which implyeth that holy knowledge and illumination is the first worke of grace and iustification knowledge there being taken for sauing faith faith being that to the soule which the eye is to the bodie as the Lord applyeth it Iohn 3. 14. 15. Or if these Romane-Catholicke Doctors would but vse the same language that the ancient Fathers of the Church haue vsed concerning free-will they should herein shew themselues honest men Saint Augustine confesseth plainly that man by abusing his free-will hath lost both himselfe and it And by this reckoning more is required than a bare mouing helping or stirring vp of the will as if it were onely lame when it is quite lost That therefore in the Prophet must here take place I will take from them their stonie heart and giue them a heart of flesh The heart in mans conuersion must be new made and moulded againe But they will obiect that free-will by mans fall is not altogether lost according to that of St. Augustine Peccate Adâ— liberum arbitrium de hominum natura perisse non dicimus Wee doe not say saith hee that by the sinne of Adam mans nature is depriued of free-will or that free-will is perished But note what St. Augustine there addeth Sed ad peccandum valere in hominibus subditis Diabolo ad bene autem pieque viuendum non valere nisi ipsa voluntas hominis Dei gratia fuerit liberata ad omne bonum actionis sermonis cogitationis adiuta But wee say saith he that free-will in men subiect to Satan preuaileth to the committing of sinne but to good and godly liuing it is of no force vnlesse mans will be freed by Gods grace and assisted vnto euery good worke and word and thought And in his book de gratia libero arbitrio ca. 17. he saith He worketh first that we may will who when we do wil doth perfect vs by cooperating that therfore we may wil he works without vs but whe we are willing seruile that we may perform he cooperates with vs. And c. 16. vpon Phil. 2. Deus est qui operatur in vobis c. Certum est nos facere cum
facimus sed ille facit vt faciamus praebendo vires efficacissimas voluntati And Epist. 107 to Vitalis Carthaginen vpon that of the Apostle Phil. 2. God worketh in vs euen to will he saith Vera Dei gratia praevenit hominis voluntatem bonam nec eam cuiusquaminuenit in corde sed facit The true grace of God preuenteth mans good will neither findes he it in any mans heart but makes it good Whereupon in his second booke against Iulian the Pelagian hee calleth it Seruum arbitrium saying Hic vultis hominem perfici atque vtiuam Dei dono non libero vel potius seruo propriae voluntatis arbitrio You would haue a man perfected and I would it were by the gift of God and not by the free or rather seruile arbitrement of his owne will Thus according to St. Augustine mans liberum arbitrium is by Adams fall turned into seruum arbitrium seruing onely to sinne and to turne it to good it must not onely bee moued stirred or helped but freed by Gods grace which is a worke of power in disarming the strong man And what this grace is hath beene shewed afore to wit Gods sauing grace The true grace of God saith Augustine not a common grace Deuout Bernard vnderstands by free-will a meere will in man without respect to the obiect good or euill Velle inest nobis ex libero arbitrio non etiam posse quod volumus Non dico velle bonum aut velle malum sed tantum velle To will is in vs proceeding from free-will but not to performe what we will I say not to will good or to will euill but onely to will And againe Corruit homo de posse non peccare in non posse non peccare amissa ex toto complaciti libertate Man fell from a possibility not to sinne to an impossibility of not sinning hauing altogether lost the liberty of delight Per propriam quippe voluntatem serâ—â—â— peccati factus meritò perdidit libertatem confilij for by his owne proper will being made the seruant of sinne hee hath deseruedly lost the liberty of his election or counsell Now how shall all this be repaired againe The same Bernard resolueth it Velle homini vt esset creans gratia fecit vt proficiat saluans gratia facit vt deficiat ipsum se deijcit That man should haue a will is from creating grace that this will should profit is from sauing grace that it should decay iâ— of its owne voluntary defection It is therefore a worke not of common grace as they vnderstand by the first grace whereby they say the will is moued but of effectuall sauing grace to restore the will of man and fit it for Christ. Habet igitur homo necessariam Dei virtutem Dei sapientiam Christum qui ex eo quod sapientia est verum ei sapere re-infundat in restaurationem liberi consilij ex eo quod virtus est plenum posse restituat in reparationem liberi complaciti Man therefore hath the necessarie vertue of God and wisedome of God which is Christ who as hee is wisedome doth re-infuse wisedome to know the truth to the restauration of the freedome of election and as he is vertue doth restore a full power to the reparation of the freedome of delight and happinesse which saith he is begun here in grace and consummate hereafter in glory And again concerning free-will he saith Nemo putet ideo dictum liberum arbitrium quod aequa inter bonum aut malum potestate aus facultate versetur cum cadere per se quidem potuerit non autem resurgere nisi per Domini spiritum Ergo si à Domini spiritu iam non à libero arbitrio Let no man thinke that free-will is therefore so called as hauing an equall and indifferent power or faculty betweene good and euill seeing it could fall by it selfe but not â—ise againe but by the spirit of the Lord. And if it bee by the spirit of the Lord it is not now of free-will And St. Augustine tells vs plainly what that grace is whereby the will is freed to wit Gratia Dei per Iesum Christum Dominâ—m nostrum in qua nos suâ— non nostra iustitia instos facit c. That grace whereby the will is freed is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord wherein hee maketh vs iust by his owne not by our righteousnesse c. But saith the carnall minde If man haue not free-will to accept grace offered what cause hath God to complaine or to condemne man for that which is not in his power to performe I might answer with the Apostle O vaine man who art thou that repliest against God But I answer againe Though man haue no will of himselfe to receiue grace offered yet he hath a will to reiect grace offered for which he is iustly condemned So that mans corrupt will is sufficient to conuict him though no way able to conuert him after that manner which Pontificians teach And thus God needeth not mans carnall wit to pleade for the equity of his iustice sith God doth not simply condemne men for that which by nature they are inuincibly vnable to performe as by the vertue of free-will to receiue grace offered but for that which is in their power and will to doe namely when they not only not willingly receiue but wilfully and contemptuously reiect and put from them the grace of God offered them in the Gospel And iustly doe all such obiecters come within the compasse of Iobs censure Iob 13. 7. Will yee speake wickedly for God and talke deceitfully for him c. As Saint Hierome Concede Deo potentiam sui nequaquam te indiget defensore Let God be Master of himselfe he needes not thee to pleade for him Now by the former testimonies as by a cloud of witnesses the Church of Rome is sufficiently conuicted of grosse absurditie and of grieuous impiety in her doctrine of preparation to iustification wherein her Gordian knot of manifold errours while the Romish Harlot would haue the liuing childe diuided betweene her and the true Mother Gods grace is cut asunder and dissolued by the sharpe sword of Salomons wisedome First because the worke of preparation is rather the worke of iustification it selfe and that so soone as the vnderstanding is inlightened and the will inflamed to apprehend Christ by faith Secondly because that grace of God whereby the will of man is prepared to iustification as they say is no common grace receiued as well by the reprobate as the elect but the sauing and iustifying grace of God which whosoeuer receiueth is more truly said to bee already actually iustified than disposed and prepared thereunto Thirdly because the work of Gods grace in mouing the vnderstanding and the will to embrace Christ is no weake and common worke but a worke of power in loosing the workes of the Diuell that strong man
Fourthly because mans will doth not cooperate with Gods grace as a co-agent and fellow-worker in the first act of mans conuersion but Gods grace is the Agent and mans will is the Patient that effectually calleth and wee effectuously come that strongly drawes vs and we by the vertue thereof sweetly not compulsarily freely not frowardly and not now passiuely but actiuely do runne after Christ as St. Augustine saith The will to beleeue God worketh in man and in all his mercie preuenteth vs. And againe If we be drawn to Christ then we beleeue vnwillingly But none can beleeue vnlesse he be wiiling for he is drawne to Christ to whom it is giuen to beleeue in Christ. He is the mightie Agent in conuerting vs and wee thereby become meeke Patients in being conuerted Turne thou me saith chastised Ephraim and I shall bee turned Thou art the Lord my God Surely after that I was turned I repented and after that I was instructed I smote vpon my thigh c. And it is a thing not vnworthy the obseruation that euen in their vulgar Latine Translation which they preferre before all others yea before the originals themselues wheresoeuer any is exhorted to conuersion to God the Verbe is alwaies put in the passiue signification as Conuertere or Conuertimini Be thou Conuerted or be ye Conuerted and neuer in the actiue Conuerte te or Conuertite vos Conuert thou or Conuert you your selues which might sufficiently conuince all Pontificians that the worke of our conuersion is not a matter of cooperation shared betweene mans will and Gods grace but passiue in vs and actiue in God Hee conuerteth by his grace and wee are thereby willingly conuerted Contrary to the Trent Doctrine saying That a man is disposed by grace to conuert himselfe Fiftly because the whole glorie of our conuersion to Christ is to bee ascribed to Gods grace alone not as the Trent Fathers professe in a few Hypocriticall words while they deny it in the maine dint of their doctrine but in sinceritie and truth without equiuocation of any merit of congruitie in vs preparing and disposing vs to be capable of iustification Finally because they ranke faith among those other workes of preparation as if it had no other hand in the worke of iustification but onely as a disposing cause So as a man may haue faith before he come to be iustified yea and such a faith also as a man may haue it and yet neuer attaine to iustification Contrary to St. Augustine Iustificatio ex fide incipit Iustification beginnes at faith as hereafter more fully For these causes the Catholicke faith abhorreth the Romane-Catholicke-doctrine touching their preparation to iustification But say some who may claime kindred either with Pelagians or Pontificians although the merit of congruitie bee not admitted as an inducement to iustification yet there are some workes required of vs as matter of preparation to faith in Christ which though it bee not meritorious yet it is acceptable to God For example Repentance is a worke necessarily proceeding and so preparing a man to faith in Christ which Repentance being in vs before faith in Christ it is notwithstanding acceptable to God Indeede I deny not but the Pontifician forge can affoord vs such scoria enough But what Repentance is this A true Repentance say they It had neede if it bee acceptable to God Wherein consists it It is say they a sorrow for sinne past and a purpose of amendment for the time to come But is this sufficient to true Repentance Yes say they Ahab and the Nineuites repented and was not their Repentance true sith God accepted it and thereupon reuoked or at least reiourned the sentence denounced Indeede Ahabs Repentance was a true hypocriticall Repentance so the Nineuites Repentance was a true carnall Repentance as the faith of diuels is said to be a true faith which the Pontificians challenge for their onely true faith Is this true faith therefore acceptable to God But was the Repentance of Ahab and of the Nineuites acceptable to God because God for the present forbore to punish them It followes not because God forbare them that therefore their Repentance was acceptable to him For how can the action bee acceptable when the person is not But their persons were not acceptable to God For Ahab was a damned Idolater and a most wretched wicked person who had sold himselfe to the diuell and the Nineuites were heathenish infidels out of Christ. But till wee be in Christ our persons are not accepted of God for in him only God is well pleased And before faith in Christ wee are not in Christ therefore before faith in Christ no action of ours is acceptable to God yea no way acceptable not onely as these would haue it not acceptable to saluation as such obiecters themselues confesse but not acceptable towards it as these affirm For while we are out of Christ all our actions are abominable before God much lesse acceptable to him And so much the more abominable they bee and so much the lesse acceptable by how much the more wee esteeme them acceptable or endeauour to please God by them As God himselfe saith Matth. 3 17. This is my beloued Sonne in whom I am well pleased With whom is God well pleased in his Beloued The Apostle applyeth it Ephes. 1. 6 To the praise of the glorie of his grace wherein hee hath made vs accepted in the Beloued Therefore no acceptation with God but of those that are actually in the Beloued to wit in his sonne Iesus Christ. Nor doe wee feare â—rents Canon here thundring out her Anathema to any that shall say that all workes done before grace are sinnes or that the more a man endeauoureth to please God before faith in Christ the more deepely he endangereth himselfe to Gods high displeasure for we affirme this again and againe That all workes done before faith in Christ the more wee thinke therein to please God the more damnable they be because herein we set vp an Idoll of our handy-work in stead of Christ whereby to please God Much lesse as some haue dared to vent that before sauing faith in Christ there may be and afore begun in a mans heart by the meanes of preparatory graces as repentance and the like the worke of sanctification of regeneration of cleansing of the heart c. Than which doctrine what can bee more derogatory to Christ And what more contrary to the Scriptures which say If any man be in Christ he is a new creature therefore out of Christ no new creature no not inchoatiue in the least degree For if regeneration or sanctification or newnesse of life or cleansing of the heart may be begun without Christ what hinders that it may not bee also perfected without Christ Nay if regeneration bee but begun then there is a childe of God at least newly conceiued if not newly borne and brought forth Such conception is a false conception of winde not
spem vitae aeternae After this disposition or preparation doth follow iustification it selfe which is not onely the remission of sinnes but also sanctification and renouation of the inner man by a voluntary receiuing of grace and of gifts Whence a man of vniust is made iust and of an enemy a friend that he may be an heire according to the hope of eternall life To which also agreeth the eleuenth Canon of this Session Si quis dixerit homines iustificari vel sola imputatione iustitiae Christi vel sola peccatorum remissione exclusa gratia charitate quae in cordibus eorum per Spiritum sanctum diffundatur atque illis inhaereat aut etiam gratiam qua iustificamur esse tantum fauorem Dei anathema sit If any man shall say that men are iustified either by the onely imputation of Christs righteousnesse or by the onely remission of sins excluding grace and charity which is shed abroad in their hearts by the holy Ghost and is inherent in them or else that the grace whereby we are iustified is onely the fauour of God Let him be Anathema In these words of the Councell is infolded the very mysterie of iniquity For their iustification is composed partly of remission of sins and partly yea principally of sanctification as they call it and renouation of the inner man and to this is added mans free-will And thus their vniust man is made iust Note also how in the Canon they name the imputation of Christs righteousnesse as one of the ingredients in this composition of iustification But the plaine truth is this imputation they quite shut out from hauing any thing to doe with their iustification as this very terme of imputation had no good entertainment in the Councell And note againe how they denie the grace of iustification to be the onely fauour of God reseruing a roome for mans merit contrary to that of the Apostle Rom. 3. 24. Being iustified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus Now by the way let vs see what the Pontificians meane by Imputation For this purpose I will insert here a saying of Pighius though otherwise a Pontifician writer which Soto answereth and laboureth to cleare from suspicion of heresie Pighius hauing considered sundry places of Scripture as in the Psalmes and Iob c. that the Saints of God dare not bring their own inherent righteousnesse to the strict triall of Gods iudgement Ex his confecit Pighius c. saith Soto Pighius thence concludes That our inherent righteousnesse if it be strictly examined by the diuine rule is not perfect but we are iustified rather by that righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs. Which he exemplifieth that as Iacob hid vnder the habit of his elder brother the true first-borne receiued his fathers blessing so wee receiue glory vnder anothers person to wit Christ. Now how doth Soto with all his subtilty acquit his Pighius from being an hereticke in so saying Haes omnia saith hee all these things by one word of equiuocation are detorted to a finister sense Who can euer doubt but that we the sons of Adam which by our owne nature and ability can bring no merits or worthinesse into Gods presence can pretend or couer our faults with the onely righteousnesse of Christ in whose right we are sonnes and heires of the Kingdome But when wee say Christs the genetiue case wee doe not meane the subiect of inherency that the sense should bee The righteousnesse which is in Christ as the heretickes grossely erre but it is a note of the efficient cause that the sense should bee The righteousnes which is that of Christ being accepted of God nos influit doth poure into vs so Soto Thus we see by what a pretty neate distinction he would assoile his brother Pighius from being an herericke although hee speake the same thing with vs. Only I pitie Soto his sottishnesse that while hee would haue Pighius to meane by our righteousnesse our naturall righteousnesse which may not abide Gods strict tryall he remembers not vpon what instances Pighius inferred this his true Catholicke conclusion For his instances by Soto his owne allegation were holy Iob and holy Dauid who disclaimed their owne righteousnesse But I hope Soto will not say these were now naturall men and vnregenerate Now for the clearer vnfolding of this mysterie let vs hear their great champions what they in their voluminous commentaries vpon this Session meane by Iustification Soto makes a threefold iustification Prima genuinaque notio huius nominis inquit est acquisitio iustitiae nempe ex iniusto iustum fieri The prime and proper notion of this word Iustification saith he is an acquisition of righteousnesse namely of vniust to be made iust As calefaction or heating of cold to be made hot according to the Text of the Councell which saith Thus the vniust man is made iust So they take Iustificare to be as much as iustum facere to make iust Secunda c. the second notion and next to this is saith he that it signifieth an augmentation of righteousnesse The first of these he compareth to that originall righteousnesse that Adam once had which importeth a rectitude or right ordering of the whole man which he proues diuinely out of Aristotle in the fift of his Ethicks And the second hee proueth Apoc. 22. 11. Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc He that is iust let him be iustified still But in this as in many more their Latin Translation will not abide the touch of the originall which saith He that is righteous let him be righteous still or let him doe righteousnesse still The like place he bringeth out of Ecclesiasticus but with the like felicitie and successe And he alledgeth that of St. Iames You see that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith only By which words saith hee hee had contradicted Paul where he saith Arbitramur hominem iustificari per fidem non ex operibus Wee iudge that a man is iustified by faith and not of workes vnlesse Paul had spoken of the former iustification and Iames of the latter Although saith he we will declare in his proper place how our workes also doe concurre in iustification Nisi quod Paulus loquitur de praecedentibus Vnlesse that Paul speaketh of precedent workes I suppose he meaneth workes going before iustification So hee Where you see he speakes very perplexedly yet so as hee cannot dissemble his meaning For the iudicious Reader may well perceiue that hee would faine force that speech of the Apostle Rom. 3. 28. Therefore we conclude that a man is iustified by Faith without the deeds of the Law to be meant of that faith going before iustification which they rancke among their preparatory workes for that is their fides informis their faith without charity as yet vnformed as they say sauing that herein he forgets himselfe for the Apostle speakes
of iustitification by faith not of faith disposing or preparing a man to iustification But of this more hereafter In the third place saith he the name of iustification is further vsed to signifie the absoluing of a guiltie person in iudgement and pronouncing of him to bee quit For which he alleageth Prou. 17. 15. and Deut. 25. 1. But this saith he is not much different from the first acception of the word but rather altogether of neere affinity to it Yet this third signification saith Soto is no where in Paul nor in the Scripture where any mention is made of our iustification by Christ. See this crafty shuffler how hee can packe this close to the first kinde of acception of this word iustification as if it were all one with it or neere a-kinne vnto it and yet he can say of this last that it is not to be found in Paul although he could finde the first to be in Paul at least in his owne strained sense But is not the word Iustifie as it is taken in the last sense to wit to absolue or acquit as it were in iudgement vsed by Paul yea and that also where mention is made of our iustification by Christ What meaneth then that which the Apostle saith Rom. 8. 33. 34. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect It is God that iustifieth who is he that condemneth It is Christ that dyed or rather that is risen againe who is euen at the right hand of God who also maketh intercession for vs. Note the Apostle vseth here the termes of a iudiciall triall Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect who shall accuse them who shall bring in euidence against them It is God that iustifieth And if God the Iudge do iustifie who shall condemne Yea but how shall God iustifie a sinner It is Christ that dyed He dyed for our sinnes Rom 4. 25. or rather which is risen againe And He rose againe for our iustification Rom. 4. 25. c. So you see here is iustifying taken for absoluing in iudgement and it is in Paul and that where mention is made of our iustification by Christ. Therefore Soto bewrayes eyther grosse ignorance in denying or egregious malice in dissembling such a cleare truth And no maruell if he cannot or will not finde iustification vsed for absolution iudiciall in Paul or in the Scripture where mention is made of our iustification by Christ. For indeed iustification in this sense is the condemnation and confusion of Popish iustification as we shall see in the due place Vega also another Champion in this Councell he speakes the same language of Babylon and saith there is a twofold iustification as Doctors meaning the Schoole-men say The first and second The first iustification when a man of vniust is made iust The second when of iust a man becomes more iust The first he defineth thus The first iustification is a certaine supernaturall change whereby a man of vniust is made iust The second thus It is a supernaturall change whereby a man of iust is made more iust And these also are either actiue or passiue actiue in regard of God working this iustification first and second in vs and passiue in regard of man himselfe who is changed from bad to good and from good to better But for the actiue iustification as it is wrought by God and so proues derogatory from mans excellency Vega sleights it as rather obscuring than clearing his definitions But as for the third kinde of iustification which is iudiciall to be pronounced and accounted iust before the Tribunall seate of iustice Vega giues it no better entertainment than his brother Soto saying That the Doctors intermit and let passe this kinde of iustification as impertinent to the purpose And so it is indeede very impertinent to their Pontifician purpose and very incommodious as the wicked complaine that the righteous man is not for their profit sith contrary to their waies Wisd. 2. 12. But for other distinctions of iustification Vega is very liberall in summing them vp together as Iustitia Christiana Mosaica politica oeconomica legalis moralis particularis actualis habitualis acquisita insusa inharens imputata externa interna fidei operum practica theologica pharisaica sincera philosophica supernaturalis and so in infinitum But enough of such blundring distinctions So then the iustification of the Church of Rome is properly to make one iust that was vniust and to make one of iust more iust Yet here it will be worth our noting to obserue the legierdemaine of the Councell of Trent and the Pontificians in their distinction of first and second righteousnesse or iustification For the Scriptures speaking of a twofold iustification one by faith another by workes vpon which ground the ancient Fathers also do distinguish a two-fold righteousnesse one in the sight of God the other in the sight of men the Pontificians also that they may seeme to speake the same language they haue their distinction too of a first and second righteousnesse yet so as destroying the nature of the first iustification by faith whereby we stand iust in Gods sight they so qualifie the matter as either they make nothing at all of their first righteousnesse or they doe altogether confound it with their second righteousnesse inherent and so by their distinguishing they make iustification and sanctification all one But the learned Cardinall Contarenus writing a little before the Councell of Trent and was afterwards one of the Councell in his tract of iustification speaking of these two iustifications saith That by the one to wit the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith we are iustified before God by the other which is inherent we are iustified before men But Babylon confounds all together iustification and sanctification In the next place let vs consider how they vnderstand this making iust This iustification saith the Councell consists partly of remission of sinnes partly of the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and partly of sanctification and renouation of the inner man and so of inherent righteousnesse Now here lies the knot of the mysterie to be resolued first it were well if the Chuch of Rome did meane truely and sincerely in naming remission of sins and imputation of Christs righteousnesse in the point of iustification Secondly if at the best they did vnderstand them aright yet to ioyne vnto them inherent righteousnesse of our owne will be found no iust dealing But to allow of no iustification at all saue that which is inherent in vs bewrayes deepe deceit and double hypocrisie in once naming remission of sins and the imputation of Christs righteousnesse which they vtterly shut out from hauing any society with inherent righteousnesse in the worke of iustification as a little before we premonished Now concerning the imputation of Christs righteousness what do they understand by it The Councell it selfe tels vs chap 7. where speaking of the
here may be fitly moued Quest. Whether the obedience of the whole Law of God wrought by Christ for vs is auaileable as to redeeme vs from the punishment of sinne so to purchase vnto vs eternall life in heauen The reason of the question is because not the Law if it had beene for euer perfectly fulfilled by Adam had any promise of that eternall life and immediate vision in heauen but only of this life Heauen is not within the Couenant of workes Answ. True it is that the fulfilling of the Law in it selfe simply considered hath no proportion with that endlesse life aboue For the first Adam was of the earth earthly and all his happinesse promised vpon the condition of keeping the Law for ought is reuealed or can be demonstrated was terrestriall But now forasmuch as the Law is fulfilled by Christ this obedience reacheth to a higher reward because there is a higher promise made than that of the first Adam Because Christ the second Adam is the Lord from heauen the Eternal whose Kingdom is not of this world but of a better a heauenly whose house is not made with hands So that his obedience to the Law in regard of his person becomes a rich and inestimable purchase of that better Kingdome for vs. For as is the heauenly such are they that are heauenly to wit the generation of God in and by Iesus Christ 1 Cor. 15. 48. 49. 50. vide Iohn 3. 13. No man ascendeth vp to heauen but he c. Thus haue we proued out of the holy Scriptures how the formall cause of iustification or that which giues a perfect being to our iustification making vs perfectly iust in the sight of God is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs and that euen of his whole righteousnesse actiue in his life and passiue in his death And that the formall cause of our iustification is not within vs but without vs not inherent but by imputation may easily appeare from the maine difference betweene the first Couenant and the second The first Couenant was that which was made with Adam in Paradise Doe this and liue the second that made with man after his fal Beleeue and liue So the first Couenant was of workes the second of faith the first of an inherent righteousnesse of our owne the second of a righteousnesse without vs not our owne simply but by relation namely made ours to wit Christs righteousnesse who of God is made vnto vs righteousnesse called in Scriptures the righteousnesse which is of faith Not to obserue and know this difference well is the ready way to leade men into all errour of this mysterie of God The Apostle doth notably set downe this difference between the first and second Couenant as termes infinitely opposite and admitting of no reconciliation Rom. 10. 3. when hee saith that the Iewes being ignorant of Gods righteousnesse and going about to establish their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the vnrighteousnesse of God For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to euery one that beleeueth For Moses describeth the righteousnesse which is of the Law that the man which doth those things shall liue by them But the righteousnesse which is of Faith is to confesse with thy mouth the Lord Iesus and to beleeue in thy heart that God raised him from the dead and thou shalt be saued Also Rom. 11. 6. If it be by grace it is no more of workes otherwise grace is no more grace but if it bee of workes then it is no more grace otherwise worke is no more worke Also Rom. 4. the Apostle setting downe this same opposition betweene the Couenant of workes and of faith saith on this wise v. 2. c. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath whereof to glory but not before God For what saith the Scripture Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Euen as Dauid also describeth the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sinne What clearer Testimonies Yea this did God himselfe teach vs not obscurely by his own act Gen. 3. For when Adam had forfeited the first Couenant which was of workes made with him in Paradise before his fall and after his fall had made with him another Couenant to wit of faith in Christ the promised seede of the woman What doth God thereupon Hee shuts man out of Paradise and from the Tree of life lest putting forth his hand hee should take of it and liue for euer What is meant hereby Paradise was not only the place but also did signifie the happy condition of Adams blessednesse which he was to enioy in his innocencie the Tree of life was a sacrament and symbol of life appointed as a speciall meanes to preserue man from dying or decaying in his naturall strength so long as he continued in his obedience But by disobedience hee forfeited the Couenant brake the condition lost his former happinesse and was depriued of the meanes of that life wherein hee should haue liued for euer vpon earth Now God shutting him out from the earthly Paradise the place of earthly blisse and from the Tree of life the sacrament and symbol of immortalitie and hauing shewed vnto him another Tree of life in the middest of the Paradise of God to wit Iesus Christ who is very God and eternall life which whosoeuer by reaching out the hand of Faith eateth of shall liue for euer God I say doth hereby plainely teach vs that in attaining to the heauenly Paradise by the Tree of life Iesus Christ wee must not haue any more to doe with the things pertaining to the first Couenant now altogether forfeited and from which Adam and his posteritie is for euer banished neuer to returne or intermeddle there any more Gen. 3 22. 23. 24. Therefore to teach and beleeue the doctrine of an inherent righteousnesse whereby to attaine eternall life is euen as it were in despite of God and of his holy Angels the Cherubims keeping the way of the Tree of life to reuiue the old Couenant of workes againe and with the hand of the body to wit good workes reach out to take of the tree of life This is a Babylonish confounding of the two Couenants which stand vpon such irreconcileable termes of difference Is there no more difference betweene Do this and liue and Beleeue and liue betweene mans owne righteousnesse and Gods righteousnesse the establishing of the one being the abolishing of the other Nor is it to purpose that these Babylonians alledge that they ascribe their inherent righteousnesse to God as the author of it and by whom
imputation of Christs righteousnesse or in the remission of sinnes without our inherent righteousnesse as appeareth in the former Chapter What needes more testimony in such a cloud of witnesses Among all which not a word of any inherent righteousnesse not a word of infusion of grace not a word of hope and charity ioyned with faith as equally concurring much lesse precurring and out-stripping faith in the worke of iustification not a word of imputation so to bee vnderstood as if Christ did therefore merit that we might haue grace inherent or of our owne whereby to bee iustified in Gods sight Although true it is that the same ancient Fathers doe often call our inherent righteousnesse which is our sanctification by the name of iustification but they neuer say that hereby we are iustified in the sight of God In a word the consideration of the true difference betweene the first couenant and the second doth easily conclude the truth of this doctrine The first couenant made with Adam in Paradise was the couenant of workes Doe this and liue but the second couenant opposite to that is of grace Beleeue and liue as the Apostle doth notably oppose faith against workes in our iustification Therefore vnlesse wee would bring man againe into the estate of Adam in his earthly Paradise before his fall and so shut out Christ the second Adam to pleade iustification by workes is a monstrous dreaâ—â—e Therefore it was not for nothing that our first Parents were banished out of that earthly Paradise typically to teach them that now they had no more to do with that first condition of their creation the happinesse whereof depended vpon the couenant of workes but now they must seek a new Paradise that is a heauenly and that by a new and liuing way to wit by faith in Christ which is that couenant of grace opposite to the couenant of workes So opposite that as the Apostle saith If it be of grace then it is no more of workes otherwise grace is no more grace But if it bee of workes then is it no more grace otherwise worke is no more worke Rom. 11. 6. CHAP. VI. Of the instrumentall cause of iustification and first of the Romane Catholicke doctrine herein THE Councell of Trentputs no other instrumentall cause of iustification but the Sacrament of Baptisme which saith she is the instrument of faith without which faith no man could euer obtaine iustification Where notwithstanding shee would seeme not altogether to exclude faith as a party-instrument But because Baptisme is so vnderstood as an instrumentall cause as will require rather a particular discourse by it selfe wee will shew here what allowance they giue to faith in iustification That which the Pontificians ascribe to faith in the worke of iustification is either that it is a worke of grace preparing and disposing a man to receiue the grace of iustification as being the beginning of other graces and going before iustification as appeareth out of the Trent Councell Ses. 6. cap. 8. or else that it is a grace concurring with other graces infused and inherent as hope and charity and such like by which ioyntly a man comes to be iustified otherwise they allow faith no hand at all in iustification As may appeare in the Councell of Trent the sixth Session the ninth and eleuenth Canons Si quis dixerit sola fide impium iustificari c. If any man shall say that a sinner is iustified by faith alone c. And if any man shall say that men are iustified either by the onely imputation of Christs righteousnesse or by the onely remission of sinnes excluding grace and charity which is shed abroad in their hearts by the holy Ghost and is inherent in them or also that the grace whereby we are iustified is onely the fauour of God let him bee Anathema or accursed Whereupon Vega in his glosse vpon this place sets this downe for his prime conclusion Certissima fide est tenendum fidem solam absque operibus alijs neque satis esse ad iustificationem acquirendam neque ad tenendam acquifitam Wee are to hold by a most certaine beliefe that faith alone without other workes is neither sufficient to procure iustification nor being procured to preserue it And what those other workes bee hee telleth vs to wit first Baptisme secondly the Eucharist or the Masse thirdly Penance fourthly Confession and Absolution fiftly the keeping of the Commandements c. And againe Multipliciter posse hominem iustificari prima quidem ac communior magisque protrita via est per poenitentiam secunda dilectio Dei super omnia c. Wee say that a man may be iustified many waies The first and more common beaten way is by penance the second by the loue of God aboue all the third by martyrdome the fourth by prayer no doubt so many Pater-nosters and Aue-maries vpon beades and obseruing Cannâ—nicall houres the fift by the Sacraments of the Church and especially by Baptisme Penance and the Eucharist Penance you must note is in great request in the worke of iustification being here againe repeated and rancked in the middest betweene Baptisme and the Eucharist because in Penance there is not onely Confession to know what is in the conscience but satisfaction to tell what is in a mans purse if hee will deale by commutation And in the last place Probabilis est etiam sexta vt videtur via nempe per fidem It seemeth also probable that there is a fixt way namely by Faith But this way of faith comes lag in the reare and it is but probable neyther nay it doth but seeme probable The other wayes therefore are their common high-wayes of iustification this of Faith is onely a way of sufferance and that in some case of Necessitie yet with speciall restriction too as iustifying a man onely from originall sinne as Vega there addeth Videtur enim probabile c. For it seemeth probable that if a man be infected only with originall sinne and so soone as he should come to the vse of reason hauing heard the preaching of faith and seene miracles to confirme it should be willing to receiue it for the sauing of his soule by this onely that he giues credit vnto it hee should be iustified and haue his originall sinne pardoned But here mee thinkes Vega forgets himselfe in two things first that he puts faith in the last place which elsewhere he puts in the first Secondly that he attributes that to faith to wit the taking away of original sinne which eyther was taken away before in the baptized or if the party were not yet baptized Faith is not sufficient to iustifie him from originall sinne without Baptisme eyther in facto or in voto in deed or in desire Yea in the conclusion he saith peremptorily Non fides sed poenitentia primas partes tenet in reconciliatione peccatoris Not faith but penance hath the chiefe place in the reconciliation
we to the Chrystall fountaines of Christs truth CHAP. VII The Catholike Faith of the Doctrine of Faith as the sole immediate Instrument to apprehend and apply the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs to our Iustification as beeing the effectuall meane of our vnion with him HAuing seene what credit Faith carryeth among the Pontificians in the work of Iustification which at the best is allowed no more but eyther to dispose and make a man the more apt that also with the helpe of other disposing graces to receiue Iustification which notwithstanding for all his Faith he may faile and come short of or else to come in for a share but must be content with the least share or none at all among other graces as Charity Penance Martyrdome and such like all which take place of Faith in Iustification Let vs now come to take an estimate of Faith according to the standard of Catholike Doctrine weighing it in the most vnpartiall ballance of the Sanctuary Nor doe we purpose in this place to speake particularly and punctually of the propertie and kinde of Faith whereby a man is said to be iustified as referring that to the more proper place but wee will content our selues so to speake of faith here in generall as the only immediate instrumentall cause in vs whereby we come to bee made righteous in the sight of God For as our Iustification is by the Imputation of Christ and his righteousnesse vnto vs so the only instrumentall meane comming betweene to apply and effectually to worke this imputation of Christ to vs is the act of beleeuing which is the property of Faith As Augustine saith Fidelis est à fide fides à credendo A beleeuer hath his name of Faith and Faith of beleeuing As the Apostle saith With the heart man beleeueth to righteousnesse Faith is the hand of the soule which applyes the sacrifice of Christ for sinne It is the hand that puts on the Robe of the righteousnesse of Christ our elder brother vpon vs by the sweete smell whereof God being well pleased bestoweth the blessing of heauen and earth vpon vs of grace and glorie and all Yea faith hath another singular propertie that it is as it were the ligament or sinew which fasteneth and vniteth euery faithfull member to the head Christ Iesus from the influence of whose fulnesse we receiue and grace for grace And the Councell of Trent seemeth to professe as much though with limitation and restriction to her owne reserued sense saying Nam â—ides nisi adeam spes accedat charitas neque vnit perfectè eum Christo neque corporis eius viâ—um membrum efficit For Faith say they vnlesse hope and charitie bee added vnto it doth neither perfectly vnite with Christ nor make a liuing member of his body The Councell neede not here equiuocate for the matter as if she did admit of our spirituall vnion with Christ by Faith indeed but such a Faith as hath hope and charitie ioyned with it whereas in truth her meaning is that not Faith so much as Hope and Charitie doe vnite vs to Christ sith Hope and Charitie make the vnion perfect which faith doth not Yea Charity and Penance as her intimous Vega saith doe more closely vnite vs to Christ than Faith doth But we shall discusse and discouer this mystâ—rie more cleerely when we come to speak of the kinde of Faith required in Iustification In the mean time suffice it vs that we haue the Councels confession That Faith at least with the helpe of Hope and Charitie doth vnite vs to Christ. And though Vega preferre Charitie and Penance before Faith in this worke of vniting with Christ yet thereby hee doth not altogether exclude Faith Faith therefore according to the Pontificians conâ—ession hath at least a share though the least according to their allowance in working our vnion with Christ. But the Catholicke beliefe ascribeth this worke of vnion with Christ primarily yea and solely to Faith namely as the immediate and onely instrument of Gods spirit in vs. Now our iustification by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse stands in our vnion with Christ. This is confeâ—led of all That whatsoeuer we receiue from Christ it is by vertue of our mysticall vnion with him And saith it is that worketh this vnion not Faith as Pontificians teach before it bee formed by Charity To which Faith only Vega ascribeth a certaine vnion with Christ Comparamus enim nobis Spiritum sanctum iustitiam facimusque vt Christus inhabitet in nobis per Eidem informem aut saltem per â—idem vt prius est natura quà m formetur For saith he wee get vnto our selues the holy Ghost and righteousnesse and doe cause Christ to dwell in vs by Faith vnformed or at least by Faith as it is by nature before it bee formed So that by this doctrine a dead Faith or that which differeth not from the Faith of Diuels doth cause our vnion with Christ or Christ to dwell in vs. But let vs see how Vega cleereth this doctrine from this imputation A little after in his second question of faith and workes taking vpon him as he is very venterous to answer an argument brought to proue that Paul excludes no beleeuer from saluation where he saith The righteousnesse of God by the Faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all that beleeue To this place saith Vega many commonly say that Paul said not Vnto all and vpon all that beleeue him but in him which is onely proper to those that haue charitie and by loue tend vnto him Aliud enim inquiunt est credere Deo quod est ei â—idem adhibere aliud credere Deum quod est credere Deum esse aliud credere in Deum quod est credendo amare credendo diligere credendo in eum ire eius membris incorporari For it is one thing say they to beleeue God that is to giue credit vnto him another thing to beleeue God that is to beleeue that God is and another to beleeue in God that is by beleeuing to loue him by beleeuing to affect him by beleeuing to goe into him and to bee incorporate into his members They are the words of St. Augustine vsed by him very frequently throughout his workes and by name in his nine and twentieth Tract vpon Iohn which Vega quoteth Well how doth Vega auoyde this Argument concerning Faith in Christ bringing saluation vpon all that beleeue Nihil valet hoc refugium commune Non enim habetur graece â—i neque in eum sed absolute dicitur In omnes super omnes qui credunt This common refuge saith hee is nothing worth For it is said absolutely Vnto all and vpon all thatbeleeue the Greeke hath not him or in him Note here good Reader that these Pontificians howsoeuer they would magnifie and preferre their vulgar Latine translation before the originall Hebrew and Greeke yet where it makes not for them they can
but beleeueth c. Secondly in respect of their opposite conditions The condition of the Law is Doe this and liue but the law of Faith is Beleeue and liue as the Apostle declares at large Rom. 10. 4. c. Now all this opposition between the Law and Faith is mainely in the point of Iustification There is a Iustification by the Law a Iustification by Faith but so opposite and incompatible as they can in no wise bee reconciled together the one doth necessarily exclude the other Oyle and vineger cannot bee mingled together but the one will euer floate aboue the other and admit of no mixture so the oyle of grace and of faith can abide no mixture with the sharpe vineger of that killing letter the Law in the worke of iustification in Gods sight vnlesse where the Law is entirely and exactly kept in all points But otherwise the Law and Faith the Law and the Gospell doe sweetly conspire together For as for the Ceremonies of the Law in as much as they were types all answering to the patterne of heauenly things shewed to Moses in the Mount which patterne was Christ as the Apostle to the Hebrewes most diuinely sheweth those Ceremonies those Types are now all swallowed vp and for euer fulfilled in the substance and truth which is Christ And as for the morall Law it is made subordinate to the Faith of the Gospell so that in euery beleeuer it is the rule of Christian obedience and holy conuersation And therefore when the Law was giuen in Mount Sinai Iesus Christ stands at the top saying I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Egypt out of the house of bondage Thou shalt haue no other Gods but me c. Now what deliuerance was this A temporall deliuerance only No it was a liuely type of our spirituall freedome from the Egyptian seruitude of sinne and Sathan witnesse the Pascall Lambe which slaine the blood sprinkled saued the Israelites which was a type of the Lambe of God that taketh away the sins of the world And the Sea diuided a type of Baptisme sauing the soule and drowning sinne together with the power of darkenesse Pharaoh and his Hoast So that howsoeuer the giuing of the Law was with much terrour in regard of the manner yet in regard of the matter being well vnderstood it must needes bee most comfortable to all the faithfull who beleeue in Iesus Christ the Deliuerer from Egypt who hath freed vs from the curse of the Law and will worke in vs both to will and to doe the duties of the Law as fruits of faith euen of his good pleasure Indeed that notable and excellent Preface to the Morall law I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Egypt c. to the common carnall and vnbeleeuing Iewes was a Riddle but to the Eagle-ey'd Beleeuer Iew or Gentile it is a most cleere Gospell setting forth what Iesus Christ hath done for vs and consequently what wee should doe for him that as wee beleeue in him who hath saued and redeemed vs out of the house of bondage and from the seruitude of the spirituall Pharaoh so wee should testifie this our faith in louing fearing seruing and obeying him in keeping those commandements of Loue written not with pen and inke but with the finger of Gods spirit not in tables of stone but in the fleshie tables of our hearts As it is in the Song of Zachary That wee being deliuered from the hands of our enemies should serue him without feare in holinesse and righteousnesse all the dayes of our life Therefore seruants were called à seruando as being saued by those to whom therefore they did owe their seruice In this respect the Law and Faith the Law and the Gospell are not opposite but sweetely subordinate the one vnto the other that as Christ hath saued vs from the curse of the Law so he propounds himselfe to be serued of vs by conformity to the Law in a Christian conuersation So that the Tree of life sweetning these waters of Marah Iesus Christ sweetning and sanctifying the Law vnto vs wee drinke thereof with comfort to strengthen vs in our way to Canaan through this wearisome Wildernesse As Dauid saith I will runne the way of thy Commandements when thou hast enlarged my heart So that Faith and the Law to wit the obedience of Gods will are sweete yea inseparable companions and goe hand in hand together throughout the whole Pilgrimage of this life but in the worke of our Iustification in the sight of God they are meere strangers one vnto the other yea sworne opposites that can neuer be reconciled though the Pontificians would neuer so faine ioyne together Faith Gods Arke and their owne worke Dagon in their Temple to stand as copartners in their iustification But Dagon fals downe where the Arke standeth yea hee loseth his head all deuices to pleade for himselfe and his hands too that hee cannot doe one good deede towards his Iustification but remaines a meere trunck and senslesse blocke And as the Philistims while they boasted they had gotten the Arke of God to their Dagon were not free but the more followed with diuine vengeance So the Pontificians while they bragge of faith and good workes as concurring in iustification they are so farre from being saued from Gods wrath as that they doe the more incense him against themselues Nor shall they euer bee free from feeling and fearing Gods plagues till with the Philistims they send home the Lords Arke with a sinne-offring that is vntil they repent of this their profanation of the Faith of Christ which is that onely wherein Israel must be saued renouncing their own workes as hauing no more hands than Dagon left them for to worke their iustification in the sight of God CHAP. X. A plausible obiection of the Pontificians for the confirmation of their Iustification by inherent righteousnesse answered and diuers reasons added to shew the absurdities of Iustification by inherencie BVt the Pontificians in the behalfe of their iustification by inherent righteousnesse obiect What difference is there say they betweene Gods pardoning our debts and giuing vs money to pay them A pretty deuice indeede For so long as they can colour and varnish ouer their hypocrisie by seeming to ascribe the glory of their inherent iustification to God they thinke all is well enough and if probability might stand for proofe our penny of inherent righteousnesse might proue as good siluer to satisfie for our debts to God as the price of Christs bloud payde for vs and imputed to vs. But let Baal pleade for himselfe seeing he is a God And for the deciding of this doubt we haue a leading case in the Gospell that will easily stint the strife The case is betweene the Pharisee and the Publican both went vp to the Temple to pray The Pharisee prayed thus Lord I thanke thee I am not as other
diminish the glory but euen abolish the merit of Christ in all his sufferings His glory it is to bee our whole and sole Sauiour this glory hee will not impart to any creature for hee saith I euen I am the Lord and besides me there is no Sauiour Stella obserueth well saying Redemptor redemptus inuicem se excludunt To be a Redeemer and to be redeemed are two incompatible things and cannot consist together But the faithfull are called The redeemed of the Lord Esa. 62. 12. and the Lord the Redeemer therefore in no sort can they be their owne Redeemers vnlesse Christ bee denyed to bee their Redeemer and they his redeemed Againe the merit of Christs sufferings was to intitle vs to the intire obedience and righteousnesse of Christ to make it as firmely and wholly ours by imputation as our sinne was his by imputation But inherent iustification robs Christ of his glory seeing thereby euery man becomes his owne Sauiour atleast in part and so Christ is denied to bee a perfect and alone Sauiour And seeing inherent righteousnesse challengeth only a part of Christs merits and consequently alloweth him to be but a party-Sauiour and so also that he bore our sinnes but in part to the end we might fill vp what is wanting eyther by our owne workes or by the surplusage of some fained Church-treasure and workes of supererogation or satisfaction Hence it is that Christ being diuided and our righteousnesse parted betweene him and vs that his death comes vtterly to be abolished and of none effect For as the Galathians ioyning circumcision with Christ and their workes with faith in their iustification came to be abolished from Christ and Christ profited them nothing So all Popish inherency of righteousnesse ioyning Christs merits and mans workes together doth vtterly annihilate and frustrate the death of Christ. For faith and workes are opposite and exclude each other in the point of iustification As the Apostle saith If by grace then it is no more of workes otherwise grace is no more grace But if it bee of workes then is it no more grace otherwise worke is no more worke So that grace and workes are vnreconcileable and incompatible in the worke of iustification Although the Trent Councell doth according to her manner most impiously abuse that former place to the Romanes applying it onely to exclude merit of condignity from those workes which goe before iustification though not merit of congruity according to her equiuocall scope destroying in one little Chapter the true nature and property of faith and grace in our iustification A third reason condemning Popish iustification by inherent righteousnesse is because it peruerteth the whole tenure of the Gospell and those clouds of testimonies therein all euidently prouing our iustification by Christ through faith as hath been formerly declared A fourth reason because it fils the heart with pride as we haue seene in the example of that Pharisee who though he acknowledged God to bee the Author of his many vertues yet because he rested in them and placed therein his righteousnesse and perfection he failed of Gods approbation And we see the Apostle doth often strike vpon this string shewing how pride doth necessarily follow this iustification by workes at any hand for by faith boasting is excluded Rom. 3. 27. 4. 2. 1. Cor. 1. 29. Ephes. 2. 9. Not of workes least any man should boast Implying that works in iustification is as the Leauen of the Pharisees it sowers and swels the whole lumpe And there must needes bee an intolerable height of pride in that mans heart that dare with Lucifer ascend into the seate of God and aspire to be like the most High by ioyning his workes and Christs merits together whereby hee will be iustified in the sight of God and become a fellow-Sauiour with Iesus Christ. A fift reason followeth hereupon That consequently this doctrine of inherent iustification leades a man headlong to hell For as it teacheth a man to aspire to a partnership with Christ in his glory in the worke of iustification so it maketh him to haue fellowship with the Diuell and his Angels in their eternall condemnation It is not possible this doctrine should euer bring a man to Heauen it being as it were a Ladder the one side whereof is of Timber and the other side of a Reed ioyned together by rotten steps For mans workes are that side of Reede and Christs merits are the other side of Timber of the Tree of life both ioyned together by the steps of vnsound doctrine of inherent righteousnesse Like those feete part of yron and part of clay no way cohering together In a word this doctrine of inherent righteousnesse is a false and deceitfull doctrine which as it can neuer truly iustifie a man in Gods sight so it can neuer satisfie the conscience with solid comfort For that which iustifies a man in the sight of God giues a man boldnesse and confidence in his presence Therefore the Apostle saith Beeing iustified by Faith we haue peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ by whom also we haue accesse by Faith into this grace wherein wee stand and reioyce in hope of the glorie of God c. And chap. 8. 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods chosen It is God that iustifieth And Heb. 10. 19. where hauing shewed that our iustification stands in remission of sinnes he inferreth thereupon That we haue boldnesse to enter into the Holyest that is into heauen by the bloud of Iesus This is it that giues vs true peace of conscience in our selues and confidence towards God But inherent righteousnesse can neuer giue vs this peace of conscience this confidence towards God being at the best mingled with infinite imperfections and corruptions Euen Bellarmine himselfe confesseth That it is the safest and securest course to relye vpon the only merits of Christ. And we reade that Stephen Gardiner that bloudy persecuter of Gods Saints lying vpon his death bed and being demanded by some that stood by a reason of his faith how hee looked to be saued His answer was That for his part hee beleeued he could not be saued but by the only merits of Iesus Christ but saith hee this is a secret and must be kept from the peoples knowledge for if this gap bee once set open then farewell all good workes Yea Pope Gregory the Seuenth that notorious Hildebrand recounting his many pontificall prerogatiues and among them that one That if the Bishop of Rome haue any personall defaults yet vndoubtedly he is sanctified by the merits of blessed Peter but at length hauing drunk-in such store of iniquitie like water as an old leaking ship now ready to sinke in the very hauens mouth being put to a pinch vpon the apprehension of Gods approaching arrest haling him vnto iudgement then he could learn to say I find my selfe so surcharged with the huge weight of my sinns that there
procure vs the possession of heauen yet hee meanes not a solitary and dead faith but such a faith as is a liuing and sauing faith working by loue which hath as well a worke of sanctification in a holy life amongst men as of iustification by a holy beliefe in the sight of God For there is frequent mention of a twofold righteousnesse in the workes of ancient Fathers The one of iustification before God which is the righteousnesse of faith the other of iustification before men which is the righteousnesse of workes This second is via regni the way to the kingdome that other of faith is causâ—â—egnandi the cause of our reigning in this kingdome Saint Paul also disclaimeth all his former Phâ—risaicall life which as touching the Law was vnreprouable calling and accounting it but drosse and dung Nay now after his conuersion hauing walked holily and faithfully in his Apostolicall vocation and Ministery so that he knew nothing by himselfe yet what saith he Although I know nothing by my selfe yet am I not therby iustified but he that iudgeth me is the Lord. And renouncing all his inherent righteousnesse all his desire was to bee found in Christ not hauing his owne righteousnesse which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith To omit the multitude of testimonies of holy men of God the fathers of the Church from time to time who in their writings doe renounce their own inherent righteousnesse as iustifying them in the sight of God Let vs for conclusion of this point adde a few memorable sayings vttered by dying men such as were of a holy life conuersation now agoing to appear before the dreadfull Tribunall of Gods most strict and vnpartiall iudgment now sealing vp their faith with their last breath Possidonius in his 27. Chapter of the life of Augustine tels a memorable story Augustine saith he told vs that hee heard a most wise and pious answer of Ambrose of blessed memory drawing neare his end which he much praised and commended for when that venerable Father lay vpon his death-bed and was desired of the faithfull standing about his bed with teares that hee would aske of the Lord a longer time of his Pilgrimage here he answered them I haue not so liued as that I am ashamed to continue amongst you nor yet am I affraid to dye because we haue a good Master And herein saith Possidonius our Augustine now aged did admire and praise his words as refined in the fire and weighed in the ballance For therefore is hee to be vnderstood to say Nor doe I feare to dye because wee haue a good Master lest he might be thought to trust and presume too much vpon his most sanctified life But I haue not so liued that I am ashamed to liue among you this he said in regard of that which one man might know of another for knowing the tryall of diuine iustice he said he relyed more vpon the goodnesse of his Lord than vpon his owne merits to whom also he prayed daily in the Lords Prayer Forgiue vs our debts c. Bernard when hee seemed to drawe his last breath being in a trance he thought he was presented before the Tribunall of his Lord And Sathan also stood opposite against him charging him with many wicked accusations And when hee had prosecuted all to the full then the man of God was to pleade for himselfe And being no whit terrified or troubled he said I confesse I am vnworthy nor can I obtaine the Kingdome of Heauen by mine owne merits But my Lord obtaining it by a double right to wit by the inheritance of his Father and by the merit of his passion contenting himselfe with the one hee bestoweth the other vpon mee by whose gift claiming it as mine owne right I am not confounded At this word the enemy went away confounded There is extant an exhortation of Anselme to a dying brother set downe in most sweet words When any brother seemeth to be extremely oppressed it stands both with piety and prudence that he be exercised by a Prelate or some other Priest with these questions and exhortations vnder written And first let him be demanded Brother doest thou reioyce that thou shalt dye in the faith and let him answer I do Confesse that thou hast not liued so wel as thou shouldest I confesse it Doest thou repent of it I doe repent Hast thou a will and purpose to amend if thou shouldst haue time to liue longer Yes Doest thou beleeue that the Lord Iesus Christ the Sonne of God dyed for thee I beleeue it Doest thou beleeue thou canst not bee saued but by his death Yea. Doest thou from thy heart thank him for this I doe Giue therefore while there is life in thee alwayes thankes vnto him and put thy whole trust in this his onely death Commit thy selfe wholly to his death Couer thy whole selfe with this death and wrap thy selfe wholly in it And if the Lord goe about to iudge thee say Lord I put the death of our Lord Iesus Christ betweene me and thy iudgment otherwise I will not contend with thee If he shall say that thou hast deserued damnation say thou I set the death of our Lord Iesus Christ betweene mee and my illdeseruings and assigne me the merit of his most precious passion for my merit which I my selfe should haue had but alas haue not Let him say againe I put the death of our Lord Iesus Christ betweene mee and thy wrath Let him also say three times O Lord into thy hands I commend my spirit And let those that stand about him answer Into thy hands O Lord we commend his spirit And he shall dye secure and shall neuer see death The same Anselme in his meditations as it were setting himselfe before the Tribunall of Gods iudgement whereby he declareth that neither the life of the regenerate nor good workes can stand against diuine iustice but onely Christ the Mediator saith My life doth terrifie mee for my whole life being exactly discussed and sifted doth appeare to me either to be sinne or meere barrennesse And if any fruit appeare therein it is either so counterfeit or imperfect or one way or other corrupt as it cannot but displease God for all of it is either sinnefull and damnable or vnfruitfull and contemptible But why doe I separate or distinguish vnfruitfull from damnable For if it be vnfruitfull it is damnable For euery tree which bringeth not forth good fruit shall be cast into the fire O therefore drie and vnprofitable tree worthy of eternall fire what wilt thou answer in that day when it shall be required of thee euen to a moment how thou hast spent all that time limitted and bestowed on thee to spend thy life in O extremity On the one side sinnes accusing on the other iustice affrighting vnderneath Hels horrible Chaos gaping aboue the
mouth do affirm That there is no kinde of Faith but one as Soto saith Eadem vniner sorum fides est The Faith of all men is one and the same Indeede in the sixt Chapter of the same Booke he sets down a two-fold acception of Faith the first of that Faith which he cals a morall vertue which is in the will the other an intellectuall vertue in the vnderstanding The first he takes for fidelity in keeping ones word The second for the credit giuen to it In this latter sense Soto takes that Faith which is in man towards God and what this Faith is he further sheweth in the seuenth Chapter where he propounds two things concerning faith first Quod nullatenus duae sed vna penitus Fides est qua credimus vniuersa reuelata siue historiae sint siue promissiones siue praeceptiones aut consilia first that there bee not two but altogether one Faith whereby we beleeue all things reuealed whether they be histories or promises or precepts or counsels The second is Quod promissionum assensus ad fidem Catholicam pertinens non est specialis ille quo quisque de se credit seu recipere modo seu habere iam gratiam sed ille in genere quo firmiter credimus Iesum Christum vniuersalem esse Redemptorem c. That the assent of the promises appertaining to the Catholicke faith is not that speciall assent of faith whereby euery man beleeueth of himselfe that hee eyther now receiueth or hath grace already but that generall assent whereby we firmly beleeue that Iesus Christ is an vniuersal Redeemer c. Therefore that wee may trace these Pontificians to their fourmes or holes we will insist in their owne foot-steps and first shew what species or kinde of faith they hold and secondly what qualities they appropriate vnto it in particular First therefore what kinde of faith they meane wee haue had the testimony of the Councell of Trent ioyntly and generally and then more particularly the Commentary of Soto vpon it namely that it is a meere Historicall faith common both to good and wicked men To whom also wee will adde Vega's iudgement and Commentary who also excludeth all kindes of faith but this one Historicall faith as any way requisite to iustification Nor doth any of them allow vnto faith any other worke in iustification but onely as it disposeth a man thereunto Let vs heare Vega's owne words who not fearing to blaspheme the doctrine of faith deliuered by Christ and his Apostles by peruerting it to serue his Antichristian doctrine saith Et Paulus caeteri Apostoli imo ipse Christus cum fidei tribuebunt nostram salutem iustificationem cum eam exigebant ab eis quibus praedicabant agebant de fide per quam acquirere possumuâ— verè acquirimus iustitiam docebantque nos dispositionem qua nos ex parte nostra disponimus ad gratiam sed ista fides non est fides formata aut saltem non in quaâ—tum formata habet ista efficere both Paul and the other Apostles yea euen Christ himselfe when they attributed to faith our saluation and iustification and required it of those to whom they preached they handled that faith by which we may acquire and doe truely acquire righteousnesse and they taught vs that disposition whereby on our part we dispose our selues to grace but this faith is not a faith formed or at least not as it is formed doth it effect these things And by and by he explaines this more clearely saying Fides formata non est via neque dispositio ad institiam nostram siquidem illa iam habet secum praesentem iustitiam Faith which is formed is not the way nor the disposition to our righteousnesse for this already hath righteousnesse present with it It remaines therefore that Vega alloweth no faith in iustification but that which is vnformed or voide of charity and that this serues onely to dispose a man to iustification which iustification charity possesseth when once it hath giuen forme and life to faith Now Vega in the former question among other sundry acceptions of this word Faith doth most willingly imbrace and pitch vpon that which signifieth credulity or aptnesse to beleeue or a perswasion or a firme and certaine assent sed inâ—uidens tamen but yet vneuident And omitting others this hee most diuinely proueth out of a prophane Author and Historian Titus Liuius As also out of the Poet Virgil Credo equidem neque vana fides genus esse Deorum I verily beleeue there is a generation Of Gods nor is my faith a vaine imagination This example Vega worthily puts among others to demonstrate and exemplifie that faith which the Pontificians haue and hold concerning God and their owne saluation by way at least of disposition as we haue said Now this faith taken for credulity or perswasion or assent but vneuident hee diuides into sundry branches as either it is humane or diuine humane when we beleeue mans sayings diuine when we beleeue Gods sayings This diuine Faith hee sub-diuideth into actuall and habituall The actuall Faith hee cals a firme and certaine but vneuident assent of those things which are reuealed of God That it is a firme and certaine assent it exceeds opinion that it is vneuident it is inferiour to the intellect or vnderstanding science and sapience which are intellectuall vertues hauing clearnesse and euidence Habituall Faith is a certaine intellectuall habit whereby the vnderstanding is made apt and disposed to the actuall Faith This habituall Faith he further diuides into fidem acquisitam infusam into faith acquired and infused Faith acquired is a habit fitting vs the more easily to beleeue being acquired by the frequency of the acts of Faith Faith infused is a certain supernaturall habit and altogether of a diuine condition infused by God into our vnderstandings that by it wee may easily and certainly and vndoubtedly assent vnto diuine reuelations Verùm hic habitus c. but this habit saith hee may be both in righteous men and in sinners as all Catholicke Doctors for certaine hold and experience it selfe declareth Lastly he diuideth Faith in fidem informem formatam into faith vnformed and formed Faith vnformed he cals a habit of Faith separated from charity Faith formed is a habit of Faith conioyned vnto charity and hauing it present with it Although these in habit are both one for as charity ioyned to Faith makes it to be formed so being remoued from Faith againe leaues it as it found it vnformed This is the perplexed doctrine of the Pontificians or Church of Rome concerning Faith who though they be so barren of distinctions as not to finde out the true kindes of Faith grounded on the holy Scriptures but Babylonishly confound them all in one yet againe they shew their pregnant and fruitfull veine in distinguishing when as they diuide and subdiuide this poore Faith of theirs into so many parts
quae fides Quae per dilectionem operatur Hanc daemones non habent fidem quae per dilectionem operatur sed soli serui Dei soli Sancti Dei soli fide filij Abrahae soli filij dilectionis filij promissionis ideo est charitas dicta Tell me what faith had Peter That which worketh by loue This faith which worketh by loue the Deuils haue not but only Gods seruants only Gods saints onely the sonnes of Abraham by faith onely the sonnes of loue the sonnes of the promise therefore it is called also charity Note here how St. Augustine puts a distinct difference between that kinde of Faith of Gods saints which is neuer separated from charity but alwayes working by loue and that in the Deuils and damned which is not capable of charity no more than the Salamander of heat Discernenda est ergo fides Daemonum à fide Sanctorum Plane discernenda vigilanter diligenter Therfore saith he the faith of the Diuels is to be discerned from the faith of the Saints Yea it is to be heedfully and carefully discerned Yea the whole current of ancient Fathers tunne mainly to proue that sauing and iustifying Faith is a Faith proper to the Elect and Saints of God and meerely distinct in kind and nature from that faith which is common with reprobates and deuils Hence it is that they giue sauing and iustifying Faith such Epithets and Attributes as doe distinguish it from the faith which is in the reprobate and damned As they call it Sancta integra vera viua non reproba fides c. A holy intire true liuing not a reprobate faith Origen saith Certum est quod remissionem peccatorum nullus accipiat nisi detulerit integram probam sanctam fidem per quam mercari possit Arietam cuius natura haec est vt peccata credentis abstergat It is certaine that none can receiue remission of sins vnlesse he bring an entire godly and holy faith where with he may buy the Ramme the nature whereof is this to take away the sins of the beleeuer And againe Si fidem obtuleris tanquam precium hoc est Siclum sanctum Christo velut Ariete immaculato in hostiam dato remissionem accipies peccatorum If thou shalt offer thy faith as a price that is the holy Sicle hauing Christ as an immaculate Ramme offered vp in sacrifice thou shalt receiue remission of sinnes This ancient Doctor of the Church cals faith a price as Peter cals it a precious faith Chrysostome vpon the third Chapter to the Romanes saith What is the Law of Faith To be saued by grace Hee declareth the power of God that not only he saueth but also iustifieth and glorifieth without the helpe of any workes but requiring only faith If therefore God do saue and iustifie and glorifie vs by faith without the helpe of any workes concurring in our iustification then surely wicked and godlesse men so remaining whatsoeuer other faith they may haue they haue nothing to doe with this iustifying Faith by which most properly we are called Fideles Theophylact saith Qui credit in Filium non iudicatur Nunquid si immundam egerit vitam non iudicatur Maximè quidem Non enim verè fideles sunt eiusmodi Hee that beleeueth in the Son is not condemned But if a man leade an impure life is he not condemned Yes doubtlesse For such men are no true beleeuers St. Basil saith What is the property of a Christian Faith working by loue The Faith then of a Christian is not separate from loue for it is alwayes operans working by loue And the same Father addeth What is the property of Faith A ful perswasion without reasoning c. where the same Father sheweth other common properties of faith as it apprehends the truth of Gods Oracles and is true it selfe without adding or detracting Our Sauiours words in the third of Iohn v. 16. are very powerfull God so loued the world that he gaue his onely begotten Sonne that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish but haue euerlasting life Whence issueth this conclusion Whosoeuer beleeueth in Iesus Christ shall neuer perish But wicked men by the confession of Pontificians although they beleeue do perish Therefore that faith or beleefe which wicked men haue is not that faith or beleefe in Christ which will not suffer any man to perish St. Augustine to this purpose vpon these words Credo in Deum c. saith Non dicit Credo Deum vel credo Deo quamuis haec necessaria saluti sint Aliud est enim credere illi aliud credere illum aliud credere in illum Credere illi est credere vera esse quae loquitur credere illum credere quia ipse est Deus credere in illum diligere illum Credere vera esse quae loquitur multi malipossunt credere autem ipsum esse Deum Daemones possunt credere vero in Deum soli nouerunt qui diligunt illum qui non solum nomine Christiani sunt sed factis vita quia sine dilectione fides inanis est cum dilectione fides Christiani sine dilectione fides Daemonis I beleeue in God c. He saith not I beleeue that God is or I beleeue God although also these are necessarie to saluation For it is one thing to beleeu him another to beleeue that he is and another to beleeue in him To beleeue him is to beleeue those things are true which he speaketh to beleeue that he is is to beleeue that he is God or that God is to be beleeue in him or into him as the Scottish Dialect or Phrase doth more liuely expresse it is to loue him To beleeue those things to bee true which he speaketh euen many wicked men may doe it and to beleeue that God is euen the Diuels can also doe it but to beleeue in God they only can skill which doe loue him which are Christians not onely in name but also in their deeds and life because faith without loue is vaine with loue the faith of a Christian without loue the faith of Diuels So this holy Father As elsewhere throughout his workes he teacheth this as the Catholike doctrin constantly maintained in the Church of Christ That sauing and iustifying faith is a faith meerely distinct and different in kinde and nature from that faith which is in wicked men and in Diuels cleane contrary to the Romane Catholicke doctrine as the like place we alledged before in the sixt Chapter out of his 29. Tract vpon St. Iohn And it is also vsed by the Glosse vpon Rom. 4. Vega citeth the place by way of obiection but leaues it vnanswered as we haue formerly shewed For indeede it is vnanswerable And therefore but only in that one place and that by way of obiection Vega in all that voluminous Booke of Iustification neuer meddleth with Credere in Christum keeping him close to his Text to wit the Councell of
be the immediate instrument of Gods holy spirit to sanctifie the whole soule and body as the Scripture ascribes the worke of sanctification to faith as the immediate Instrument Acts 26. 18. Sanctified by Faith in me said Christ to his new conuert Apostle The Councell of Trent it selfe confesseth that faith is the roote of other graces Faith say they is the roote of all Iustification placing their iustification in hope and loue c. How then is Faith the roote If it be the roote the roote is not a bare disposition to a tree as they would haue Faith to bee to their iustification A dead roote cannot beare a liuing tree but like roote like tree But a roote naturally produceth and shooteth forth the tree for the life and substance of the tree is originally in the roote and comes from the roote Take away the roote and the tree witherereth for it liues in the roote And the roote giueth life to the tree not the tree to the roote As the Apostle said to the ingraffed Gentile once the Wilde Oliffe Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee With what reason then can the Pontificians say That charity which is the branch not the roote giues life to the root which is Faith Herein how far themselues differ from senslesse stockes or come short of the vegetable trees I define not Now as the whole tree drawes hislife and nourishment from the roote so all the fruits of holinesse haue their life and nourishment from faith for faith is the roote of them all And as the Apostle saith If the roote be holy so are the branches But Faith the roote of other graces is holy yea most holy as Iude speaketh therfore hope loue and all other graces growing in and from Faith are sanctified by and from Faith for as much as Faith is rooted in Christ from whom it receiues the life as of iustification so of sanctification Hence it is that deuout Bernard saith excellently to this purpose Primum syncera radix sancta fidei in terra humani cordis plantatur cumque fides plenè adulta fuerit velut quaedam magna est Arbor diuersa in se habens poma exquibus reficitur anima plena Deo First the sincere roote of holy Faith is planted in the ground of mans heart and when faith is fully growne vp it becomes as a great Tree hauing in it sundry sorts of Apples wherewith the soule being full of God is refreshed Without Faith saith the Apostle it is impossible to please God But whatsoeuer action proceedeth from Faith therein it pleaseth God By Faith was Abels sacrifice made acceptable to God By Faith Enoch walking with God pleased God And are not all those actions of the Patriarches and Saints of God related in that eleuenth Chapter to the Hebrewes all referred to Faith as the roote from whence they sprang and receiued their life and louelinesse It is Faith that graceth euery action of the iust man for the iust man shall liue by his Faith Whatsoeuer fruite growes not from this roote it is sinne Whatsoeuer is not of Faith is sinne is as true in generall of sauing Faith as it is in particular of the Conscience called Faith by the Apostle Rom 14 23. Now the reason of all this that Faith giues life and beeing to euery grace for as much as euery grace is radically in faith is because where faith is Christ is Now Faith is in the heart and consequently Christ dwelleth in the heart by Faith And if in the heart then in euery part and faculty of the soule and body So that as the soule quickneth euery part of the body so Faith quickneth and sanctifieth euery faculty of the soule As St Augustine saith Fides quae credit in Deum vita animae existit per hanc iustus viuit Faith which beleeueth in God is the life of the soule and by this faith the iust man liueth And elsewhere he saith Vnde mors in anima quia non est fides Vnde in corpore quia non est ibi anima Ergo animae tuae anima fides est Whence is death in the soule because faith is not there Whence in the body because the soule is not there Therefore the soule of thy soule is Faith And as the soule is in the body Tota in toto tota in qualibet parte The whole soule is in the whole body and whole in euery part So Fides tota est in toto tota in qualibet parte Whole faith is in the whole heart and whole in euery faculty of the soule Hence the Apostle making himselfe the instance of the life of faith saith I am crucified with Christ. Neuerthelesse I liue yet not I but Christ liueth in me and the life which I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith of the Son of God who loued me and gaue himselfe for me Christ therefore is not to be found in that part or faculty of the soule where faith is not If Faith bee not in the will Christ is not there and so in the rest And where Christ is not there is no life no sanctification Our wils therefore our memories our affections our motions and cogitations are dead prophane all out of order if Christ be not and liue not in euery one of them And Christ is not in any of them if Faith be not there Hence it is that Faith is all because as the roote it containes all graces In the vnderstanding it knoweth God in the will it hopeth and loueth God in the memory it thinketh of God with thankefulnesse for his mercies in the affections it feareth God it sorroweth for sinne it patiently suffereth it reioyceth in God in all it serueth God How so From Faith it is that the vnderstanding knoweth God in his Sonne Iesus Christ the knowledge of whom is eternall life And therefore Diuines by knowledge in that place vnderstand Faith And St. Augustine saith Intellectus merces est fidei Ergo noli quaerere intelligere vt credas sed crede vt intelligas Vnderstanding is the reward of Faith Doe not therefore seeke to know that thou mayst beleeue but beleeue that thou mayst vnderstand From Faith it is that the will hopes in God loues God and cleaueth vnto him and so in the rest And therefore St. Augustine placeth Faith in the will saying A Domino praeparatur voluntas hominis vt sit fidei receptaculum The will is prepared of the Lord to be the receptacle of faith And againe Omne quod non est ex fide peccatum est Ac per hoc bona voluntas quae se abstrabit à peccato fidelis est quia iustus ex fide viuit Whatsoeuer is not of Faith is sinne And therefore the good will which withdrawes it selfe from sinne is faithfull because the iust man liueth by Faith Hence it is that Bernard saith Credere in Deum est in eum
Tower of Babell as we touched before It is the troubled Sea where Romes Peter-men finde the best fishing As the Iewes said of Christ â—f we let him thus alone all the world will goe after him and the Romanes will come and take away our kingdome so the Romane Pontificians may say If we should allow of certainty of Faith all the people would forsake vs and wee should lose our Kingdome What would become then of the merchandise of soules of Purgatory-Masses and Dirges and Trentals so rich a trade in Romes Court if the People might purchase saluation by faith yea and rest assured of it without any dependance of humane inuentions But let vs examine the former limitations of Pontifician certainty apart First they admit only of a generall certainty but no particular And reason good for as wee said their Faith is onely generall And this their certainty they place in the vnderstanding as they do also their faith The obiect of this certainty is the generall truth of Gods Word So that this is such a certainty as the very Diuels and damned may haue for they beleeue and tremble Why but because they are certainly perswaded of the truth of Gods Word And as the Pontifician faith is common with the wicked so also their certainty which is the fruite of such faith Secondly in that they say that certainty may bee true or false according to the disposition of him in whom it is this is absurd For how can a thing be certaine yet false vnlesse it be certainly false or a false certainety Certainety and falshood are incompatible and meerely opposite Indeede it is one thing to bee certaine another to seeme certaine which seeming certainty is nothing else but opinion Thirdly that they deny certainty of faith in iustification but by speciall reuelation this agreeth with their maine doctrine of faith which indeed hath no other certainty in it than such as is in the reprobate and whereas they restraine their speciall reuelation to some few this shewes the iniquity of Pontificians in making a Monopoly of Gods grace and indeede a meere nullity of sauing Faith Fourthly their probable coniectures of their iustification are altogether abhorrent from the nature of Faith in Christ and meere illusions Such probabilities are impossibilities of saluation But it is a good reason for the Pontificians why they should deny certainty of Faith if the best certainty be onely coniecturall probability Fiftly say they only spirituall men liuing in the state of perfection as deuout St. Anthony may haue a certainety of saluation built vpon his good life This is another strong reason why Pontificians exclude certainty of Faith of saluation seeing it is rather grounded vpon good workes To these they adde two other reasons why no man can be certaine of his iustification because say they no man by the euidence of faith can bee certaine of his predestination For indeede if a man cannot by faith be certaine of his predestination he cannot bee certaine of his iustification The reason is good Lastly say they a man cannot be certaine of his iustification that is not certaine of his perseuerance in grace to the end But no man say they can be sure of perseuerance Therefore no man can bee sure of his saluation These two last reasons are inferred vpon the fifteenth and sixteenth Canons of the Councell of Trent Thus haue we in generall as it were in a light velitation or skirmish spent a small volley vpon the Pontifician forces which march against certainety of faith Come wee now to ioyne the maine battaile wherein wee will obserue this order of sight first wee will shew the weakenesse of those arguments they bring for their vncertainety secondly we will make good and fortifie those arguments authorities and reasons wherewith the Catholike truth of the certainty of faith is maintained and confirmed First for the Pontifician reasons and allegations for their vncertainty of faith wee finde sundry of them set downe in the history of the Councell of Trent together with the answers vnto them forced from the Canuase of the opposite parties some holding that the opinion of certainety of grace was an intolerable arrogancy others that that certainty in its kinde was meritorious The first of these were for the most part Dominicans grounding their opinion of vncertainty vpon the authority of Thomas Aquinas Bonauenture and the Schoole-men Also vpon reason saying That God would not make man certain of grace lest swelling with pride and opinion of himselfe he should dispise others as knowing himselfe to bee righteous and others notorious sinners Also that Christians would grow sleepy sloathfull and carelesse of good workes In which respect incertitude of grace was profitable yea meritorious For perturbation or trouble of minde is that which at first afflicts men but to those that haue learned to beare it it becomes at length meritorious Besides they cite places of holy Scripture as out of Salomon That man knowes not whether hee be worthy of hatred or loue out of the Booke of Wisedome That a man must neuer be free from feare of sinne that it is pardoned out of the Apostle That wee must worke out our saluation with feare and trembling and that St. Paul professeth of himselfe that though his conscience did not accuse him yet he was not therfore iustified These reasons and testimonies besides many others saith the History did chiefly Seripandus Vega and Soto alledge and amplifie out of the Fathers On the other side saith the History Catarinus with Marinarus did out of the same Fathers alledge places to the contrary that it might appeare that the Fathers as they saw occasion did attemper their Sermons to the present occasions sometimes to animate the doubtfull and deiected sometimes to represse the presumptuous still submitting themselues to the authority of the Word of God They said to wit Catarinus and Marinarus that as often as Christ is obserued in the Gospell to forgiue sins so often he said Be of good comfort thy sinnes are forgiuen thee And that it seemed absurd that Christ would minister to any man occasion of presumption or pride or to depriue all of that which might be matter of profit or merit Also that the Scripture bound vs to giue thankes to God for our iustification which vnlesse we be sure we haue receiued with what face yea with what affection shall we giue thankes Sith it is folly to acknowledge a benefit which thou knowest not whether it bee giuen thee or no. Surely St. Paul doth clearely enough affirme this certainety when he would haue the Corinthians sensible that Christ is in them vnlesse they be reprobates and when he saith that therefore wee haue receiued the spirit of God that by him wee might vnderstand what is giuen vs of God And againe more plainely That the holy spirit doth beare witnesse to our spirit that wee are the Sonnes of God And that it is also a part of great impudency
saying that free-will is altogether lost and extinguished by Adams fall The praise which Vega their Interpreter giues to Richardus learned saying as he cals it of free-will wee also with its proper limitation admit of When thou hearest saith he that free-will is a captiue vnderstand nothing else but that it is weake and depriued of the vertue of its natiue power Being thus weake then how should it dispose it selfe to receiue grace No saith the Councell as also their Schoole-men Free-will being weake it must be stirred vp moued and helped by grace and then it disposeth it selfe freely to receiue the grace of iustification So free-will as the God Baal being asleepe must bee awakened and stirred vp by Gods grace Well but what grace of God is this I pray you that thus moueth mans free-will as the waight that sets the wheele a going Surely I can learne no more from the Councels own mouth who knowes full well how to temper her words but that this mouing grace of God is some sound in the eare whereby Popish faith is conceiued Or else when God toucheth mans heart by the illumination of the Holy Ghost according to that of Gabriel Biel who saith that the will in the acts of it doth presuppose the acts of the vnderstanding and the vnderstanding wee know must be informed by hearing or by speciall illumination But in generall this grace they call the first grace or a grace that is freely giuen differing from the second grace which they call a grace that makes a man gracious and acceptable They say this first grace is freely giuen because no merit goes before it neither is this any sauing grace because as they confesse all men are alike capable of it and many receiue it that neuer come to saluation This is that grace which Arminius cals his sufficient grace But Aquinas saith plainly that this first grace is not the grace of the Holy Ghost for to the grace of the Holy Ghost hee attributeth the merit of Condignity but to that grace whereby the will disposeth it selfe the merit only of Congruitie But this first grace being once receiued and entertained by free-wil cooperating with it a man disposeth prepareth himselfe to merit the second grace by way of Congruity And yet Aquinas speaking of this grace saith Deus non dat gratiam nisi dignis c. God giues not grace but to the worthy yet saith hee not so as being first worthy but because hee by grace makes them worthy O miserable perplexity If God giue grace to none but to the worthy then they were worthy before hee gaue them grace but if they were not worthy before he gaue them grace how doth he giue grace to none but to the worthie But whatsoeuer this first grace is wherby the will is first moued Aquinas tels vs what it is not namely that it is not the grace of the Holy Ghost for the merit that proceedeth of the grace of the Holy Ghost is of Condignity but the merit that proceedeth from free-will moued by the first grace is onely the merit of Congruity farre inferiour to that of Condignitie But that we may not lose our selues in this Maze let Vega and Soto tell vs the Counsels minde in this point as being themselues most prinie to it Onely the worst is wee finde them two of opposite opinions in this point of merit by Congruitie Vega admitteth merit of Congruity after the first grace disposing a man to the grace of iustification But it is pretty to note the vafrous and subtile elusion and euasion that he findeth against the streame of Fathers and especially of St. Augustine in this point For whereas they as himselfe confesseth shut out all kind of merit from iustification teaching that it is freely giuen to all Vega turnes the Cat in the pan and saith Loquuntur de gratia iustificationis c. They speake saith he of the grace of iustification as it comprehends all the gifts of God belonging to our iustification whereof in that proposition a little before hee makes the first grace to be one And so take iustification as it comprehends the first grace in it it excludes all merit because no merit goes before the first grace as the most of them teach but taking the grace of iustification alone by it selfe which is the gratia gratum faciens the grace that makes a man accepted it may bee questioned saith he whether that may not fall vnder the merit at least of Congruitie Whereupon hee inferreth his fourth proposition which is That faith and other good workes whereby wee are disposed vnto the second grace by which wee are formally iustified and made acceptable to God doe by Congruitie merit such grace and our iustification Yea Vega ibid. saith Alia sunt merita ex congruo quae in peccatoribus reperiuntur quae nullo praemiâ— digna sunt quia fiunt ab hominibus Deo ingratis exoâ—is sed tamen eiusmodi ex se sunt vt Congruum sit diuinam bonitatem condeceat ea ex liberalitate benignitate sua acceptare vt trahat peccatores ad suam gratiam Of another sort are those merits of Congruitie found in sinners which are worthy of no reward as being done by men not liked nor beloued of God but yet of themselues they are such that it is Congruous and meete and beseeming the diuine goodnesse out of his liberalitie and bountie to accept them that hee may draw sinners to his grace But Soto on the other side shutteth out all manner of merit of Congruity going before iustification Pergimus pro ingenio nostro constituere c. Wee proceede saith Soto according to our capacitie to define that before iustification which is wrought by that grace that makes a man accepted there is in mans workes no merit either of Condignitie or of Congruitie But a little after hee makes a full amends for it saying Cum autem quis c. When a man begins once to be in the state of grace to wit of iustification then may hee merit both for himselfe by Condignitie and for others by Congruitie Other merit of Congruity going before the grace of iustification Soto confesseth he findes no foundation of any vnlesse that of St. Augustine alleadged by Thomas Fides meretur iustificationem that faith meriteth iustification But Soto would haue this put among St. Augustines retractations whereas by Merit in that place is meant not either any Congruity or Condignity termes vnknowne to the ancient Fathers in any such sense but onely the meanes or instrument to procure or acquire grace And as Soto himselfe a little after acknowledgeth St. Augustines meaning expressed by himselfe by the word Impetrare iustificationem That whereas he saith Faith doth merit iustification his meaning is faith obtaineth iustification sine aliqua ratione meriti without any respect of merit Here let mee insert by the way a worthy annotation
of George Cassander vpon the word Mereri or Merit in his second Scholia vpon his Ecclesiasticke hymnes printed at Paris 1616 for in other later impressions haply you shall finde this Scholia is quite purged out by the Index Expurgatorius composed by the commandement of the Catholike King Philip the second and by the aduice also of the Duke of Albany the copy whereof was printed at Strasburgh The words of the Index are these Scholium incipiens Vocabulum merendi apud veteres c. deleatur totum The Scholium of George Cassander beginning thus c. Let it be wholly cancelled But being notwithstanding preserued from this Purgatory fire let vs note it Vocabulum merendi apud veteres Ecclesiasticos Scriptores ferè idem valet quod consequi seu aptum idoneumque fieri ad consequendum Id quodinter caetera vel ex vno Cypriani loco apparet Nam quod Paultu inquit 1. Tim. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod vulgò dicitur Misericordiam consecutus sum vel vt Erasmus veriit Misericordiam adeptus sum id Cyprianus ad Iubaianum legit Misericordiam merui Et multa loca sunt in Ecclesiasticis officijs precibus vbi hoc vocabulum hoc intellectu accipi debeat Quae vocis notio si retineatur multa quae duriùs dici videntur mitiora commodiora apparebunt The word Merit saith Cassander among ancient Ecclesiasticall Writers doth commonly import as much as to attaine or to be made apt and fit to attaine or obtaine That which among others doth appeare out of one place of Cyprian For that which Paul saith 1. Tim. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the vulgar latine rendreth But I obtained mercie or as Erasmus rendreth it I got or receiued mercie The same doth Cyprian to Iubaianus reade I merited mercie And many other places saith hee there are in the Ecclesiasticall offices and prayers where this word Merit ought to bee taken in this sense Which sense of the word if it bee retained many things which seeme to be spoken harshly will appear more gentle and accommodate Thus Cassander But this among sundry other sayings of Cassander being condemned by the Index to bee purged out of his workes doth plainly shew what opinion the Pontificians haue of Merit aduancing it to a sense of a higher straine than the ancient Fathers of the Church were euer acquainted withall Or let the Pontificians themselues interpret vnto vs the meaning of this word Merit vsed by St. Augustine speaking of the sinne of our first Parents Foelix culpa quae tale◠meruit Redemptorem Will they say that Adams sinne merited either by Congruity or by Condignity Christ the Redeemer And againe where hee saith Nemo de sui peccati dimissione desperet quando illi veniam meruerunt qui occiderunt Christum Let none despaire of the pardon of his sinne when as they merited pardon which killed Christ. Will they therefore say that they which murthered Christ merited pardon either Congruously or Condignly Or what meant Gregory firnamed the Great Bishop of Rome when he vsed the word Merit to Sauls persecuting the Church of Christ saying Illi dictum est Quid me persequeris Iste verò audire meruit Dimissum est tibi peccatum tuum To him it was said Why do est thou persecute me But he merited to heare Thy sinne is forgiuen thee What merit was this trow we And the same Gregory speaking of the theefe vpon the Crosse saith Latro cruentis manibus audire meruit c. The theefe with his bloudy hands merited to heare This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise What merit was in his bloudy hands But thus we see the meaning of the word Merit in these purer and ancient times vsed for to obtaine or such like But to returne whence we digressed we see Vega and Soto two grand Captaines in the Trent Councell one directly opposite to the other in the matter of merit of Congruity But the Councell through the dexterity of Sancti Crucij hath so composed the decrees and namely this of preparation as that by profound equiuocations euen flat contradictions are reconciled But the conclusion is that merit of Congruitie is ratified by the Councell in the necessity of preparatorie workes to iustification but inuolued in such generall termes that Soto and his side holding the contrary may not take offence at it but be made to beleeue that the Councell is for them In so much as Soto in his three bookes de Natura Gratia which he writes as a Commentary of this Session of the Councell sets downe all the Decrees and Canons of the same as the ground and text of his Commentary Take one notable instance of their egregious equiuocation in the first Canon of this Session before alleadged If any man shall say that a man may bee iustified before God by his owne workes which are done either by the power of mans nature or by the doctrine of the law without diuine grace by Iesus Christ let him be accursed Note here what variety of senses this Canon is full charged withall Would Vega and his side haue their merit of Congruity decreed Here is a Canon leueld against all those that shall say that a man by his own works may be iustified before God without the grace of God implying that by and with the grace of God assisting a man he may be iustified before God by his owne works done by the power of nature as his free-will or by the doctrine of the law Yea but thus Soto may feare that the Anathema the deadly bullet of this Canon will hit himselfe for denying all merit of Congruity done by the power of nature assisted by grace going before iustification Then let Soto but view ouer the Canon againe hee shall see it turned and leuelled against the Pelagians who taught that a man by his owne workes done by the power of nature may be iustified before God without diuine grace by Iesus Christ. Or against the vnbeleeuing Iewes who thought to be iustified before God by the obseruation of Moses law sauing onely that the Councell hath cautelously and correctedly expressed this vnder the name of the letter of Moses law Chapt. 1. as here vnder the name of the doctrine of the law lest as the History of the Trent-Councell hath well obserued if it had passed as at the first draught in these words per legem Mosis by Moses law then exception might haue beene taken in the behalfe of Circumcision to which some ascribing remission of sinnes this Canon or that Decree might haue been a preiudice to their opinion Thus all parties euen the contrary factions of that Councell were well satisfied while one side conceiued the Decree made expresly for them and the other side that it made not against them The Decrees being not vnlike an artificiall indented picturetable which to him that lookes full vpon it presents one kinde of forme or
face to him that stands on the one side another forme and to him on the other side a third Or like a plaine picture which hanging on the wall although the posture of the face be set one way yet it seemes to cast equall aspect vpon euery one in the roome Thus is verified that of Guido Clemens Priest and Cardinall of St. Potentiana who saith that in the Church of Rome there is quaedam radix duplicitatis simplicitati columbae contraria a certaine roote of doublenesse which is contrary to the doues simpliciti◠To conclude this point of Popish preparation it is so farre from fitting and disposing a man to receiue the grace of iustification grace of iustification being rightly vnderstood as it is a maine impediment and stumbling blocke in the way vnto it For whereas this preparation of theirs aduanceth mans free-will and other naturall powers to the attainment of grace what doth this else but puffe a man vp with a conceit of himselfe that he is in a better state than indeed he is as hauing something left in him which being helped by some motion of common or I wot not what grace is able to leade him to the full possession of grace and so of glory Gregory saith well Hee that knowes not his disease how doth he seek to the Physitian for the greater the fault is being the sooner acknowledged it is the more speedily amended but the lesser sinne while it is deemed to be as it were none at all is so much the worse and more securely kept in vre If Saint Paul speaking in the person of a regenerate man as exercised with the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit complaines that in him that is in his flesh dwels no good thing then what good thing can there be in any vnregenerate man to dispose him to any grace whose imaginations of his heart are onely euill continually They are euill and onely euill and that continually onely euill If corrupt Nature haue yet any thing left to brag off if any free-will to this grace whereof we speake where is that conuicting power of the Law that makes sinne out of measure sinfull That casts a man downe in the sense of his misery causing him to cry out Wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me from this bodie of death How shall a man come to Christ wearie and laden that he may be refreshed How comes the vngodly to be iustified if hee bring any merit to dispose him thereunto How shall the Law then be our Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ who came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance Wee need none other testimony to conuince this Pontifician puffe-doctrine of preparatory workes to bee at the least Cousin-germaine to that of the Pelagians than the Councell of Trent it selfe The Pelagians held that some men vsing the reason of their owne will haue or doe liue in this world without any sinne To this agreeth that Canon of Trent If any shall say that all workes done before iustification howsoeuer they bee done are truely sinnes and deserue the hatred of God let him be accursed Compare now the Pelagian and Pontifician doctrine together and one egge is not liker another All workes done before iustification are not truely sinnes say the Trent-Fathers therefore the workes of the Pelagian heretickes done before or without iustification whatsoeuer or howsoeuer done are no sinnes as they taught Shall St. Austine be vmpire in this case Pelagianorum sententia est sine vllo peccato aliquos homines tam ratione propriae voluntatis vtentes in hoc saeculo vixisse vel viuere Optandum est vt fiat conandum est vt fiat supplicandum est vt fiat non tamen quasi factum fuerit confidendum est Qui seipsum talem putat ipse se decipit veritas in eo non est non ob aliud nisi quia falsum putat It is the opinion of the Pelagians that some men by vsing the reason of their owne will haue and doe liue in this world without sinne It were to be wished so it were to be laboured for it is to be prayed for yet not to be beleeued as if it were so He that thinkes himselfe such a one deceiueth himselfe and the truth is not in him for no other cause but because he deemeth falsely And in another place hee saith Si Gentilis inquis nudum operuit nunquid quia non est ex fide peccatum est Prorsus in quantum non est ex fide peccatum est non quia per scipsum factum quod est nudum operire peccatum est sod in tali opere non in Domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatum Nam quamuis bona malè tamen facit ideo negare non potes eum peccare qui malè quodlibet facit Fructus bonos non facit arbor mala An dicis hominem infidelem arborem bonam If a Heathen saist thou shall couer the naked is it therefore a sin because it is not of faith Certainly in as much as it is not of faith it is sinne not in regard of the worke it selfe which is to clothe the naked is it a sin but in such a worke not to glory in the Lord only the wicked man denieth this to be a sin For although he doth good yet he doth it ill therefore thou canst not deny that he sinneth that doth any thing ill An euill tree doth not beare good fruit Do est thou callan vnfaithfull man a good tree Note here St. Augustine condemnes all workes for sinnes that are not done in the state of grace but in the state of nature and infidelity Therefore St. Augustine is anathematized of the Church of Rome for saying that all workes done before iustification are indeede sinns But whereas the Pontificians may obiect that St. Augustine condemnes onely such workes as are done without faith and not those Pontifician workes of preparation wherof faith as they affirme is the roote I answer St. Augustine speaketh honestly without equiuocation for hauing to do with the Pelagians those enemies of the grace of God hee opposeth the state of grace against the state of nature shewing that whatsoeuer a man doth in the state of nature before he be in the state of grace it is sin stiling euen the best workes of these heathen moralists but splendida peccata glittering sinnes Now whatsoeuer is done before iustification is done in the state of nature consequently it is sinne in St. Augustines sense because it is the bad fruit of a bad tree As for that first grace whereby the Papists teach a man is stirred vp to prepare himselfe for iustification it doth not set a man ipso facto in the state of grace hee is for all that faith of his a meere naturall man still And therefore that faith which they speake of going before iustification is not freed from the
imputation of sin whereas that sauing faith whereof St. Augustine speaketh is that which doth actually not dispose vnto but possesse a man of the state of grace which is the verie state of iustification as we shall see in the due place hereafter Therefore Popish preparation vnto iustification is nothing else but meere Pelagianisme both Pelagians and Pontificians ioyntly holding that all workes done without or before iustification are no sins CHAP. III. The Catholicke faith touching preparation to iustification THe Romish faith concerning such preparatorie workes to iustification the Catholicke faith of Christs Church doth renounce and disclaime as hereticall and antichristian for these reasons First because the holy Scriptures teach no such thing but the cleane contrarie The Scriptures teach no merit of Congruitie they teach not that free will being stirred vp and helped by I wot not what first grace a man is thereby disposed to receiue iustification but the flat contrary Ioh. 1. 12. As many as receiue Christ and such are they as beleeue in him are made the Sonnes of God But doth not this grace come by some disposition in mans nature as by his free will assisted and so cooperating with the grace of God for the attaining of iustification No such thing For verse 13 Christ teacheth that those Sonnes of God are borne not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God Where note a direct opposition betweene Gods grace and mans will in the worke of Regeneration or Iustification mans will being by a negatiue vtterly excluded from any copartnership with God Not of the will of man but of God So Titus 3. 5. Not by workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but according to his mercie he saued vs c. Where all humane workes going before Iustification all merits of congruitie are excluded from disposing a man to receiue iustification for not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee haue done but according to his mercie bee saueth vs. And Rom. 4. 5. To him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his Faith is counted for righteousnesse Note God iustifieth the vngodly therefore not the righteous not the meritorious by Congruitie vnlesse vngodlinesse and sinne can merit iustification at Gods hand as St. Augustine said of Adams sinne Foelix culpa quae talem meruit Redemptorem It was a happie sinne that merited such a Redeemer Whereas besides some places of Scripture which they peruert to their purpose they obiect the examples of the Eunuch Acts 8. and of Cornelius Acts 10. by which they would proue their workes of Congruitie as Vega alledgeth them Vega may remember what he said in another place before where hee produceth St. Augustines authoritie to proue that these two were true beleeuers before the Apostles came and preached vnto them which also Vega himselfe subscribeth vnto confessing that these two had grace and faith before sauing onely the difference is in the acception of grace and faith wherein the Pontifician egregiously equiuocateth the true nature whereof wee shall hereafter discouer But say that neither the Eunuch nor Cornelius before they were instructed by the Apostles had the grace of iustification doth it therefore follow that those workes of theirs did by Congruity merit iustification at Gods hands or that they were thereby prepared to iustification Why did not then Esau's teares merit the blessing ex congruo or why did not Ahab's repentance merit by Congruity not onely a repriuall of punishment but an absolute pardon of his sinne for they did quantum in se fuit as much as in them lay Or else according to Romes doctrine God must be vniust or at least wanting in his natiue goodnesse For further cleering of this point come we to the ancient Fathers to whom also this doctrine of merit of Congruity and of Condignity was altogether vnknowne This Vega himselfe is forced to confesse where making this obiection Why did the Fathers saith hee no where vse this distinction of merit of Congruity and Condignity to which he answereth If all things which neuer were in vse among the Fathers are to be condemned we shall be forced to condemne many things which all Catholickes now receiue And the Philosopher should haue said in vaine Scientiaes fieri per additamenta that Sciences are brought to passe by addition But he addeth Neither are we to grant that this distinction of merit of Congruity and Condignity was altogether vnknowne to the Fathers They acknowledged the things although they vsed not the termes saith Vega seeing they diuersly vsed the word of Merit as either strictly or largely whereof we shall speake more largely hereafter In the meane time let vs see what workes of preparation the ancient Fathers taught or inioyned as necessarie to dispose a man to iustification by way of merit taken in the largest sense as Vega at least would haue it But before we come to set downe the ancient doctrine of the Church concerning this point I must premonish the Reader seriously to note this one thing in the Fathers That when they speake of grace and faith whereby a man is iustified they meane nothing else but sauing grace and iustifying faith not now preparing a man vnto but actually placing and possessing him in the state of iustification and saluation They meane nothing lesse than any such first grace preparatory and euen common to wicked men which neuer come to partake of the second grace as the Romanists doe teach The Fathers admit of no such meane betweene sauing grace and faith and betweene sauing faith and iustification betweene any first second grace as differing in kinde but vnderstand one sauing effectuall grace Indeede St. Augustine speaketh of a first and second grace but by the first he meaneth that of iustification by the second that of sanctification differing no more but as the roote and the branch the tree and the fruit Or St. Augustine acknowledgeth no other first grace but that which is giuen to the elect in this life saying Coronat in nobis Deus dona misericordiae suae sed si in ea gratia quam primam accepimus perseueranter ambulemus God crowneth the gifts of his mercie in vs but if in that first grace which we haue receiued we walke with perseuerance Ambrose saith He that dare preach that the grace of God is giuen according to mens merits preacheth against the Catholike faith Therefore this doctrine of merit of congruity was no Catholicke doctrine in Saint Ambrose his dayes nor doth he meane any other grace but that of iustification All the preparation this holy man alloweth is where he saith Duce Deo venitur ad Deum by God leading vs we come vnto God And St. Chrysostome So soone as a man beleeues hee is iustified And St. Augustine Praedestinatio est praeparatio gratiae Predestination is the preparation to grace to wit of iustification And
secundum suam virtutem videtur congruum vt Deus recompenset secundum excellentiam suae virtutis To a man working according to his naturall power and vertue it seemeth meet that God render a recompence according to the excellencie of his vertue Therefore the Catholicke Church of Christ where of the Church of England is a member reiecteth this Pontifician preparation to iustification as a doctrine repugnant to the holy Scriptures and to the Writings of the Catholicke Doctors and Fathers in the Primitiue Church This doctrine of Rome tending also howsoeuer they would dissemblingly disclaime it in words to a flat derogation from the glorie of Gods grace while it would make man an equall sharer with God in the atchieuement of so great a worke for though they seeme to ascribe the glory to God because say they he stirreth vp the will whereby it beginneth to prepare and dispose it selfe to grace yet this is nothing else but a mocking of God As deuout Bernard speaking of this diuine stirring vp of free will saith Nefas est Deo quod minus nobis quod excellentius sit attribuere It is iniquitie to attribute to God that which is lesse and to our selues that which is the more excellent Now to stirre vp what is it else but as it were to awaken one from sleepe The will is asleepe and God must awaken it before it can do any thing that is good and being thus awakened it sets itselfe a working As Sampson awakened by Dalilah shewed his great strength the glorie of which action is it to be ascribed to Dalilah for awakening and stirring him vp or to Sampson who being asleep wanted nothing but stirring vp to giue him occasion to exercise his strength Mans will therefore beeing but stirred vp of God and Sampson-like doing workes of wonder euen aboue humane strength and naturall force as to prepare and dispose it selfe for that great worke of iustification how shall it not bee honoured much aboue God by how much mans worke herein is greater than Gods worke The Church of Rome is very nice and strait laced in setting out the manner of Gods mouing of mans will in the first grace as they call it as fearing lest more glorie might bee giuen to God than to man for they ascribe no more to God but a certaine stirring vp and helping of the will whereby it should freely dispose it selfe to iustification Whereas Bernard speakes home and like a downe-right honest man in this point Facit Deus voluntarios quatenus dum de mala mutat voluntatem in bonam God makes men willing while of euill he changeth the will into good So it is one thing to stirre vp and helpe another to change the nature of a thing from euill to good St. Ambrose Voluntas nihil habet in suis viribus nisi periculi facilitatem The will hath no power at all but a propension to perill And St. Chrysostome Omnes homines antequam peccemus liberum quidem habemus arbitrium si volumus sequi voluntatem Diaboli an non Quod si semel peccantes obligauerimus nos operibus eius iam nostra virtute euadere non possumus Sed ficut Nauis fracto gubernaculo illuc ducitur vbi tempestas voluerit sic homo diuinae gratiae auxilio perdito per peccatum agit quod non vult ipse sed quod Diabolus vult nisi Deus valida manu misericordiâ— soluerit eum vsque ad mortem in peccatorum suorum vinculis permanâ—bit All men saith he before sinne haue free will to follow the Diuels will or not When once by sinne wee haue capituated our selues to his workes wee cannot now by our owne power free our selues But as a Ship the Rudder being broken is carried whither the tempest will so man hauing by sinne lost the helpe of diuine grace doth not that which himselfe willeth but which the Diuell willeth and vnlesse God with a strong hand of mercie loose him hee shall abide in the bonds of his sinnes euen vnto death So then this strong hand is more than a bare stirring vp St. Augustine here seemeth to allude to that in the Gospell where our Sauiour resembleth the state of sinfull man to a house kept and possessed by a strong man when the will is wholly captiuated by Sathan and cannot be freed but by the power of Christ a stronger than that strong man But the Councell of Trent wants the ingenuitie to acknowledge the mightie power of God in freeing mans captiue-wil from the tyrannie of the strong Diuell Also St. Chrysostome in the prosecution of that his former Treatise compareth mans will before sinne to wit in the state of innocencie to a free-people or state in whose power and election it is to chuse what King they wil but hauing once elected such a one for their King it is not now in their power vpon any dislike to depose him againe although he tyrannize ouer them neuer so much none can free them from this grieuous bondage but only God So it being once in the power of mans will in the free state of innocencie to choose a King God or the Diuell hauing once by the consent of sinne made choyce of the Prince of darkenesse who tyrant-like ruleth in the children of disobedience taking them captiue at his will it appertaines only to the mightie power and infinite goodnesse of God to set free these miserable Captiues out of that Tyrants more than Egyptian bondage A worke no lesse if not infinitely more miraculous than the deliuerance of those Israelites through the middest of that Red Sea Howsoeuer the Trent Fathers mince the matter and obscure the power of Gods mighty worke in mans conuersion parting the glorie of it betweene mans nature and Gods grace as wee haue heard Like the Whoore that would haue the child diuided between her selfe and the true Mother But that the glorie of Gods powerfull grace in mans conuersion may not lye thus smoothered vnder the dampe of earthy and deepe hypocrisie let vs see a little what this free-will of man is in the state of corruption Vega highly commends that saying of Richardus as we noted before Doctè Richardus inquit Cum audis liberum arbitrium esse captiuum nihil aliud intellige quam infirmum natiua virtutis potestate priuatum Learnedly said Richardus saith he When thou hearest that free-will is a captiue vnderstand it no otherwise than that it is weak depriued of the vertue of its natiue power I wote well these Pontifician spirits would gladly bring mans free-will into credit by filing and smoothing that rougher language which the Fathers haue left vpon it And I dare be bold herein to gratifie the Trent-Councell Let free-will in mans corrupt heart be not captiue but only weake not dead but depriued onely of its primitiue and natiue vertue nay let it be aduanced to as high a pitch of perfection as possible a sinnefull man
we our selues had suffered But yet let vs see a little further into the language of the Fathers concerning this point Onely by the way seeing Vega cannot finde the word Imputation once mentioned among the ancient Fathers let him looke but St. Augustines Epist. 106. to Bonifacius or as some copies haue it to Paulinus and there hee shall finde these words Cur meritis praeueniri gratia perhibetur quae gratia non esset si secundum meritum imputaretur Why is grace said to be preuented by merits which should not be grace if it were imputed according to merit Yea how often doth Augustine mention the Apostles words where he saith Fides imputaretur ad iustitiam Faith is imputed vnto righteousnesse But let vs contend not so much for the word as for the thing it selfe which wee shall finde the Fathers to abound in St. Ambrose writing vpon the 39. Psalme saith Totus ex persona Christi iste Psalmus est Iustitiam meam dicit licet non arroganter homo dicere possit Iustitiam suam qui Deo credit fidem suam sibi reputarâ— ad iustitiam confitetur This whole Psalme is of the person of Christ therefore hee saith My righteousnesse though also a man that beleeues in God and confesseth that his faith is reputed to him for righteousnesse may without arrogancy say his righteousnesse Now although Ambrose say speaking of Christ Iustitiam meam in stead of Iustitiam tuam as it is in the originall and also in the vulgar Latine he following some other copy yet hereby wee may see his vnderstanding in the mysterie of Christ namely how Christs righteousnesse comes to bee our righteousnesse our faith being imputed to vs for righteousnesse as the Scripture saith Sauing that Ambrose vseth the word Reputing for Imputing differing very little in the sound but nothing at all in the sense The same Ambrose writing vpon the Epistle to the Galatians where hee opposeth the righteousnesse of the Law and that of Christ one against the other vpon these words for if there had beene a Law giuen which could haue giuen life verily righteousnesse had beene by the Law saith Iustitiam hanc dicit quae apud Deum imputatur iustitia id est fidei quia lex habuit iustitiam sed ad praesens quia non iustificaret apud Deum remittere enim peccata non potuit vt de peccatoribus faceret iustos he saith that righteousnesse which of God is imputed to wit the righteousnesse of faith sith the Law also had a kinde of righteousnesse but temporary that could not iustifie with God for it could not forgiue sinnes and so of sinners make men to bee iust So that here is another ancient Father vsing the very word Imputation And a little after vpon these words As many as haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ haue put on Christ saith Hoc dicit quia credentes dum immutantur Christum induunt quando hoc appellantur quod credunt This he saith because beleeuers while they are changed doe put on Christ when they are called that which they beleeue So that by St. Ambrose his doctrine our iustification is by imputation of grace by faith in the putting on of Christ. And St. Austine besides the former alledged place where he defineth iustification to be a making of one iust by accounting him so or by deputing reckoning him iust saith in Psa. 32. Nolo vos interrogare de iustitia vestra sortassis autem nemo vestrum audeat mihi respondere iustus sum sed interrogo vos de fide vestra Sicut nemo vestrum audet dicere Iustus sum sic nemo non audet dicere Fidelis sum Nondum quaero quid viuas sed quaero quid credas responsuruses credere te in Christum Non audisti Apostolum Iustus ex fide viuit fides tua iustitia tua I will not aske you of your righteousnesse for haply none of you dare answer me I am righteous but I aske you of your faith As none of you dare say I am iust so you dare not but say I am a beleeuer I demand not yet how thou liuest but how thou beleeuest thou wilt answer me thou beleeuest in Christ. Hast thou not heard the Apostle The iust shall liue by faith Thy faith is thy righteousnesse And vpon the 30. Psalme the same Father doth further cleare his minde touching imputatiue righteousnesse vpon these words of the Psalme Rid mee and deliuer mee in thy righteousnesse Nam si attendas ad iustitiam meam damnas me In tua iustitia â—rue me est enim iustitia Dei quae nostra fit cum donatur nobis Ideo autem Dei iustitia dicitur ne homo se putet à seipso habere iustitiam For if thou lookest vpon my righteousnesse thou condemnest mee In thy righteousnesse deliuer me for it is the righteousnesse of God which is made also ours when it is giuen vnto vs. And therefore is it called Gods righteousnesse lest man should thinke that he hath righteousnesse of himselfe Now what righteousnesse doth this holy man meane here The righteousnesse of God made ours by infusion of grace into vs So I know the Pontificians would be ready to interpret this place But let St. Augustine be his owne interpreter who addeth in the very next words Sic enim dicit Apostolus Paulus Credenti in eum qui iustificat impium So saith the Apostle Paul To him that beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly Quid est Qui iustificat impium Qui ex impio facit iustum deputatur sides eius ad iustitiam What is that Which iustifieth the vngodly Who of vngodly and wicked makes iust his faith is deputed for righteousnesse Yea this holy man is so farre from ascribing the least part of iustification to any inherent righteousnesse in vs as that he excludes euen faith it selfe as it is a worke from being any meritorious cause of our iustification For elsewhere speaking of Gods election and vocation of grace and not of workes alledging the examples of lacob and Esau the one loued the other hated euen in the wombe before either of them had done good or euill c. that the election of God might stand not of workes c. Si autem verum est quod non ex operibus inde hoc probat quia de nondum natis nondumque aliquid operatis dictum est vnde nec ex side quae in nondum natis similiter nondum erat And if it be true that it is not of works and from thence he proues it because it was said of them before they were borne and before they had done any thing whereupon neither was it in respect of faith which likewise as a worke was not as yet in them being yet vnborne And againe Iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius ne fides ipsa superba sit Nec dicat sibi quis si ex fide quomodo gratis quod enim fides meretur cur
non potius redditur quà m donatur Non dicat ista homo fidelis quia cum dixerit vt merear iustificationem habeo fidem respondetur ei Quid enim habes quod non accepisti Being iustified freely by his grace lest faith it selfe should be proud Nor let any man say to himselfe if it be of faith how is it freely for that which faith meriteth why is it not rather rendred as due than freely giuen Let no beleeuer speake thus for when he shall say I haue faith that I may merit iustification it is answered him For what hast thou that thou hast not receiued Thus this holy man disclaimes all merit of workes in vs yea euen of faith it selfe though it bee the instrument to apply the righteousnesse of God in Christ vnto vs whereby we are truely iustified And it stands with good reason For faith iustifieth not by vertue of the act of beleeuing but as the instrument in applying the obiect which is Christ. As the hand is said to heale onely by applying the medicine or to inrich by receiuing a treasure or to feed by putting meat into the mouth as we say a childe is fed with a spoone when the milke onely feedeth So faith by applying Christ the true balme healeth by receiuing Christ the true treasure inricheth by conuaying Christ the true bread and water of life feedeth the soule St. Augustine also in his first Sermon vpon the 70. Psalme saith In eum credo qui iustificat impium vt deputetur sides mea ad iustitiam I beleeue in him that iustifieth the vngodly that my faith may be deputed hee comes very neare Imputed for righteousnesse It would fill a large volume to set downe the Tracts and sayings of this holy Father to this purpose seeing all his workes are euery where perfumed with this most sweet and Catholicke doctrine of iustification through the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs not for any grace inherent in vs though it be the gift of God bestowed on vs for Christs sake I will onely adde one or two sayings more of this holy man Per fidem induendo Christum omnes fiunt filij non natura sicut vnicus Filius sed filij fiunt participatione sapientiae id praeparante atque praestante Mediatoris fide quam fidei gratiam nunc indumentum vocat vt Christum induti sint qui in eum crediderunt ideo filij Dei fratresque eius Mediatoris effecti sunt In putting on Christ by faith all are made sonnes not sonnes by nature as is the onely begotten Sonne but they are made sonnes by the participation of wisedome being prepared and performed by the faith of the Mediator which grace of faith hee now calleth a clothing or putting on so that they haue put on Christ that haue beleeued in him and therefore they are made the sonnes of God and brethren of the Mediator What plainer words could this holy Father haue vsed to expresse the nature of iustification in the imputatiue righteousnesse of Christ than by calling imputation a participation of Christ by the meanes of faith in which respect hee calleth faith a putting on because thereby Christ with all his righteousnesse is put vpon vs and so wee are made the sonnes of God Iustin Martyr saith Quid aliud peccata nostra potuisset tegere quà m Christi iustitia O beneficia expectationem omnem exuperantia vt iniquitas quidem multorum in vno iusto abscondatur iustitia autem vnius faciat vt multi iniusti pro iustis habeantur What else could haue couered our sinnes but Christs righteousnesse O blessings exceeding all expectation that the iniquity of many should bee couered in one righteous person and that the righteousnesse of one should cause that many vniust should be accounted iust And of later times deuout Bernard Mor◠in Christi morte fugatur Christi nobis iustitia imputatur Death is vanquished in Christs death and Christs righteousnesse is imputed to vs. And againe Qui nostram induit carnem subijt mortem putas suam nobis negabit iustitiam voluntariè incarnatus voluntariè passus voluntariè crucifixus solam à nobis retinebit iustitiam Christus peccati meritum tulit suam nobis donando iustitiam Hee that both tooke vpon him our flesh and vndertooke death will hee trow you denie vs his righteousnesse voluntarily incarnate voluntarily suffering voluntarily crucified will hee keepe from vs his onely righteousnesse And writing to Innocentius he saith Homo qui debuit homo qui soluit Nam si vnus pro omnibus mortuus est ergo omnes mortui sunt vt videlicet satisfactio vnius omnibus imputetur sicut omnium peccata vnus ille portauit It was man that was indebted and man that paid it For if one died for all then were all dead to the end that the satisfaction of one should be imputed to all euen as he alone bore the sinnes of all Ambrose also vpon these words of the Apostle Christ was made a curse for vs as it is written Cursed is euery one that hangeth on tree saith Non ille maledictus sed in te maledictus Christ was not accursed but in thee was hee accursed lust so are we in him blessed Saint Cyril also vpon these words of Esay The Deliuerer shall come forth of Sion and shal turn away iniquities from Iacob c. concludes thus from Rom. 10 10. For with the heart c. With the heart saith he man beleeueth to righteousness with the mouth confession is made to saluation We haue therefore receiued of God the word of faith and confession Which word bringeth saluation and procureth righteousnesse For Christ doth so iustifie the vngodly that hee proclaimeth Behold I haue remoued thine iniquities as a cloud and thy sinnes as a mist. For this word of faith shall be for euer in vs and shall neuer cease from our mouth but wee shall transmit and conuay it euen vnto posterity For thus also shall posterity be iustified For if Christ bee for euer both God and Lord the confession of this his faith shall neuer faile with those who haue acknowledged his appearing So Cyril This therefore was among the ancient Fathers of the Church and they haue sent it downe to vs their posterity as the Catholicke faith to bee confessed of all Gods children vntill the appearing of Iesus Christ that our iustification stands in the merits of Christ and the mercies of God in the remission of our sinnes and the not imputing them vnto vs. But the Trent-Fathers and the Church of Rome as being not the legitimate posterity but the bastard brood falsly pretending from those holy Fathers disclaime this Catholick faith concerning iustification in the remission of sinnes which God in the forenamed place of Esay cals his new Couenant or Testament and doth anathematize and curse to the pit of hell all those that haue or shall place our iustification in the onely
them as an Idoll Onely Christ is that sacred and mysticall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that fish in whom is found our tribute-money to satisfie the Maiesty of God This money must bee stamped no where but in Gods owne Mint as the pure siluer Oare of it is no where found but in Gods owne Mynes the holy Scriptures no other Image or Superscription must be vpon it but that of Iesus Christ and none may tender or offer it vp to God but onely Christ. 1. Tim. 2. 6. There is one God and one Mediator betweene God and man the man Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe a ransome for all This pure ransome more pure more precious than gold will endure no mixture no allay of any other mettals much lesse of any drosse But inherent righteousnesse in vs though dipped in Christs bloud as hauing receiued a tincture from it as they say if wee offer it to God for currant payment hee will easily perceiue it counterfeit coine of our owne mynting of our owne inuenting no better than Alcumy little siluer but much drosse in it euen the drosse of humane inuention and corruption which if it bee brought to Gods touch turnes colour if put in the Skale of the Sanctuary is found too light if cast into the Test of Gods fiery iustice it is blown all away in smoke As Esay saith Thy siluer is become drosse thy wine mixt with water And as Ieremy saith Reprobate siluer shall men call them because the Lord hath reiected them Our inherent righteousnesse call it Christs merits or what you will is at the best but as Piscis in arido The fish while it is in the sea liueth moueth is full of strength and agility but vpon the dry land it straight loseth all his vigour motion and life it selfe and quickly putrefieth euen so the merits and righteousnesse of Christ being in him as in their proper element are most liuely and vigorous strong and auaileable to satisfie Gods iustice and to plunge all our sinnes into the deepe bottome of the bottomlesse deepe of his mercies by that sweete smelling sacrifice of himselfe once offered but take any part of these merits of Christ out of him and put them into our dry and parched sandy soules and they become of no life of no validity to make the least satisfaction for the least sinnes yea in this respect they stinke in the nostrils of God Our soules are but broken Cisternes to contain this pure water of life God could neuer yet finde any thing in vs in vs I say but onely faith whereby to iustifie vs and this faith not as a worke of ours iustifying vs but as an instrument applying Christ by whom in whom and for whom wee are iustified If God iustifie vs for righteousnesse inherent or dwelling in vs then God should bee said to iustifie the godly but the Scripture saith otherwise That God iustifieth the vngodly Rom. 4. 5. Now to him that worketh not but beleeueth on him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse where faith being opposed to working cannot be said to iustifie as it is a work A notable testimony to proue that our iustification is not from within vs but from without vs not in vs but on vs not of him that worketh but of him that beleeueth in him that iustifieth Whom the godly Nay but the vngodly As Augustine saith Tu Domine benedicis iustum sed eum prius iustificaa impium Thou Lord doest blesse the iust but first he being vngodly thou iustifiest him As if hee had said Being first vngodly thou diddest iustifie him and then being iust thou Lord doest blesse him How then comes this forraine righteousnesse vpon an vngodly man The Apostle sheweth His faith is counted for righteousnesse How His faith layes hold on Christ who is the Lord our righteousnesse being made vnto vs of God wisedome and righteousnesse and sanctification and redemption that according as it is written He that glorieth let him glory in the Lord. But will the Pontifician say Doe you call the graces of Christ in vs counterfeit coyne drosse reprobate siluer c. Yes if ye reckon it for pay to satisfie Gods iustice withall in this sense in vs it is meere counterfeit drosse reprobate siluer coyned in the Mint of Satans forgeries It is but as the Sunne-beame vpon a dung-hill raysing vp a stinking vapour in stead of a sweete odour in Gods nostrils But the graces of God in vs flowing from our head Christ Iesus in whom wee are first iustified by faith are the matter of our sanctification and the consequent fruits and effects of our iustification Thus they are a Well of liuing waters springing vp in vs vnto eternall life Thus they are a garden of spices yea of costly Spicknard yeelding a fragrant smell while the Sunne of righteousnesse shines vpon them Thus are they more pure and precious than gold yea than much fine gold Thus are they so many precious stones to paue our way that leades to the Kingdome of Heauen Yea thus so many peerelesse Pearles which adorne our Crowne of grace here and shall much more gloriously imbellish and beautifie our Crowne of glory hereafter Thus all our good works and words and thoughts are precious euen in Gods sight through Christ. They will stand before his mercy seate but they dare not stand before the Tribunall of his strict and seuere iustice They dare come before God as a proofe of our faith and obedience but not as a price of our sinne and disobedience And at the best cause we haue to pray Gods mercy for them but in no case to pay his iustice with them Now there be many reasons why inherent righteousnesse is no formall cause of our iustification in the sight of God First because it is a meere humane inuention It hath no warrant in Gods Word and consequently no warrant at all Will the Pontificians herein as they are willing in other things stand to the iudgement of their father Aristotle Hee saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are better determined according to the Law than according to mans will for it is no sure rule Tertullian said of an errour of Hermogenes about the creation of the world of a pre-existent matter Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Si non est scriptum timeat Let the shop of Hermogenes shew this to be written If it be not written let him feare Now iustification is a fundamentall doctrine that cannot stand but vpon the Sciptures Iustification is by faith and faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God The word is neare thee euen in thy mouth and in thy heart that is the word of faith which we preach for with the heart man beleeueth to righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made to saluation Let Pontificians feare to frame such a iustification as they finde not in the Scriptures Secondly because inherent righteousnesse doth not only
himselfe and the whole Church of the Iewes hee renounceth all inherent righteousnesse as filthy rags in no sort to bee patched and pieced to that garment of saluation to that robe of righteousnesse namely Christs righteousnesse imputed and put vpon vs by the hand of faith wherein Esay and all the faithfull reioyce as hee saith Esa. 61. 10. I will greatly reioyce in the Lord my soule shall be ioyfull in my God for he hath clothed me with the garments of saluation he hath couered me with the robe of righteousnesse as a Bridegroome decketh himselfe with ornaments and as a Bride adorneth her selfe with her Iewels And in the 43. of Esay vers 25. 26. there is a flat opposition betweene Gods mercy and our workes in iustification I euen I am hee that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine owne sake and will not remember thy sins But may not our workes come in as sharers with Gods mercies What workes The Prophet addeth in Gods person Put me in remembrance let vs pleade together declare thou that thou mayst be iustified If God pleade with vs in iudgement we haue no euidence of any workes in vs whereby to be iustified in his sight But our workes and obedience to Gods lawes are called our righteousnesse As Matth. 5. 20. Except your righteousnesse exceede the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees yee cannot enter into the Kingdome of God I answer this place may well be vnderstood of Euangelicall righteousnesse opposite to that legall righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees and so Christ points vs to the righteousnesse of faith in him But admit our workes be called our righteousnesse what then doth it follow that this is our righteousnesse to iustifie vs in the sight of God Nothing lesse For Moses saith speaking of obedience to Gods commandements Deut. 9. Speake not thou in thy heart after that thou art come to possesse that good Land saying For my righteousnesse the Lord hath brought me in to possesse this Land No faith Moses vnderstand that the Lord thy God giueth thee not this good Land to possesse it for thy righteousnesse Now the Land of Canaan was a type of Gods Kingdome which wee cannot come to possesse by our own inherent righteousnesse Whereupon St Ambrose in his enarration vpon the 43. Psalme but according to our accompt 44. v. 3. They got not the Land in possession by their owne sword c. saith Patres nostri vtpote proximi haeredes Patriarcharum plantati in terra repromissionis non suis hoc meritis vindicabant Our fathers to wit the next successours and heires of the Patriarches beeing planted in the Land of promise did not claime this as due to their merits Ideo nec Moses cos induxit ne Legis hoc existimetur esse sed gratiae Lex enim merita examinat gratia fidem spectat Therefore saith he neither did Moses bring them in thither that it might not be reckoned as the worke of the Law but of Grace for the Law examineth workes or merits but Grace respecteth faith Therefore as not Moses but Iosua or Iesus forso was his Name was appointed to bring the children of Israel into the possession of Canaan the Land of promise which importeth also the Land of mercy or of grace So not the Law giuen by Moses but Iesus Christ by whom came grace and truth hee our true Ioshua bringeth his people into the possession of grace and glory Ergo qui non in brachio suo hoc est in sua operatione praesumit sed in Dei gratia credens quòd non facta sua vnumquemque iustificant sed fides prompta dicit Domino Tues ipse Rex meus Deus meus qui mandas salutes Iacob Therefore saith holy Ambrose he that presumeth not in his owne arme that is in his workes but in the grace of God beleeuing that not a mans workes but his prompt and cleare faith doth iustifie him this man saith vnto the Lord Thou art my King and my God that commandest saluation for Iacob True it is that the same Father in another place saith Sola fides non sufficit operari per dilectionem c. Sole faith is not sufficient it is necessary that faith worke by loue and conuerse worthy of God And a little after Festinemus c. Let vs hasten to enter into that rest because faith is not sufficient but a life beseeming faith must be added and great care vsed that faith bee not idle For it is necessary for euery one that would possesse Heauen to adorne his faith with good workes So he True a most pious and Christian speech but in all this he saith not that faith alone is not sufficient to iustifie vs in the sight of God and so to bring vs to the possession of Heauen for then hee should contradict himselfe elsewhere where hee saith Sublatis omnibus operibus legis sola fides posita est ad salutem All the workes of the law being remoued onely faith takes place in our saluation Marke he saith Sola fides onely faith And againe the same Father saith elsewhere Non operibus iustificamur sed fide quonâ—am carnalis infirmitas operibus impedimento est sed fidei claritas factorum obumbrat errorem quae meretur veniam delictorum We are not iustified saith he by workes but by faith because the infirmity of the flesh is an impediment to workes but the glory of faith doth couer the errour of our workes which faith obtaineth remission of sinnes And againe Infirmitas excludit à venia fides excusat à culpa Our infirmity excludeth vs from pardon and faith excuseth vs from blame And setting downe his peremptory iudgement grounded vpon Scripture he saith Arbitramur secundum Apostolum iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus legis Iustificetur ergo ex fide Dauid qui per legem peccatum agnouit sed peccati veniam ex fide credidit Wee definitiuely conclude saith hee according to the Apostle that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Therefore let Dauid be iustified by faith who by the law acknowledged his sinne and by faith beleeued the pardon of his sinne And againe elsewhere Deus clementia bonitatis suae semper homini procurans vt quod sine lege peccatum erat in lege posset deleri hoc decreuit vt solam fidem poneret per quam omnium peccata abolerentur That is God by the clemency of his goodnesse alwayes prouiding for man that both sinne committed without law and in the law might be blotted out hath made this decree to appoint sole faith whereby all mens sinnes might be abolished Now compare these iudicious sayings of this holy man with that hee said formerly that sole faith is not sufficient but a good life must be added and it will plainly appeare that he speakes of faith alone as sufficient to iustifie vs in the sight of God and to
dubium quin latinè possimus dicere apud Haereticos nostrae tempestatis non esse suae gratiae opinionem sed certitudinem Nor do we doubt but that we may say in plaine termes that the Heritiques of our time haue not an opinion of their grace or iustification but a certainety Note here iudicious Reader that the Pontificians doe allow of a certaine vncertaine particular certainety of Faith namely such as may bee eyther true or false They might better haue said iust nothing sauing that they cautelously put this clause by way of preuention that if a particular certainty of Faith bee neuer so manifestly proued yet it may proue at hap-hazzard eyther true or false And this Vega would demonstrate by a distinction saying There is a two-fold certainty Per se or Quoad nos Eyther a certainty in regard of the truth it selfe beleeued or in respect of our apprehension which may be deceiued according to the Councels own Text. In a word in his fift Chapter following hee sets downe foure limitations of certainety that are extra controuersiam without all controuersie allowed of the Pontificians First that euery man may haue a knowledge of his iustification by diuine reuelation and that this hath been truly reuealed to some holy men although but to few and them Gods greatest familiars as the blessed Virgin and the Apostles Secondly it is certaine that all righteous men may by some certaine signes and probable arguments or tokens and coniectures attaine to a probable notice and opinion or as they call it a coniecturall certitude of their iustification Thirdly saith he it is certaine that no mortall man without diuine reuelation can attaine in this life to the certainety of euidence of his iustification Fourthly it is also certaine that no man can without diuine reuelation certainely know anothers iustification vnlesse haply when he shall haue baptized a childe To these limitations wee may here adde the substance of that which Vega sets downe in the 46. Chapter of the same booke the title whereof is Possunt viri spirituales certitudinem assequi de sua gratia Spirituall men may attaine a certainty of their grace and iustification By spirituall men he vnderstandeth those that liue in a state of perfection as they terme it Yet this certainety is so rarely found among such as after much adoe and wauering this way and that way Vega being vncertaine what to thinke of this certainety at length hee is resolued vpon the point and giues vs a rare instance of Saint Anthony whose birth of faithull and religious Parents whose Christian and holy education whose firme faith in beleeuing all which the Church of Rome beleeueth whose care not to offend but to please God in all things whose voluntary pouerty whose inoffensiue and innocent life full of charity whose humility whose dayly comming to Masse and frequent Shrifts whose watchings and fastings and other infinit deuotions induced Vega to thinke that this certainty of saluation may haply bee found in some spirituall men But hee must bee a St. Anthony at the least who is possest with this certainety So few receiue this gift as Christ said of continency No not Martyrs themselues saith Vega Chapter 43. His words are Neque adduci possum vt credam aliquem Martyrem aut habuisse aut habere potuisse certitudinem de sua iustificatione c. Nor can I bee induced to beleeue saith hee that any Martyr eyther had or could haue the certainety of iustification vnlesse God reuealed it vnto him as also their perseuerance and crowne of blessednesse layd vp for them that so they might the more cheerefully and couragiously persist in their confession With these limitations doe the Pontificians confine their allowance of the certainty of Iustification First it is only generall not speciall or particular Secondly if particular there be any they say it may be true or false Thirdly this speciall certainty is giuen to none but by speciall reuelation and that to some speciall choyce persons as the blessed Virgin and the Apostles Fourthly iust men may haue some coniectural signes and probable opinions of their iustification Fifthly if any had this speciall certainty then certainly St. Anthony a priueledge which not euen the holy and faithfull Martyrs are capable off without speciall reuelation saith Vega. His reason is because euen Heretickes may be Martyrs and constantly dye for Christ. This is the state of Pontifician doctrine about certainety and vncertainety of faith in iustification Against which we oppose the truth of Catholick doctrine concerning the certainety of Faith First to their first limitation we oppose That the certainty of Faith is not generall but particular and speciall Secondly to the second that this certainty cannot be false but alwayes infallibly true and that not onely in regard of the truth of Gods word in generall which certainty may be in dogmaticall and historicall Faith but also of Gods speciall promises in Christ which it is the property of sauing faith certainely to apply and appropriate to the beleeuer that vndoubtedly they belong to him in particular Thirdly to the third that neyther this certainety is simply and only a speciall diuine reuelation nor peculiar onely to a few but it is the proper vertue of sauing and iustifying Faith and is in euery true beleeuer in whom true sauing faith is found Fourthly to the fourth that this certainety in euery man iustified is no coniecturall matter gathered by probable signes but a certaine cleare firme euidence of Faith Fiftly to the fift As for St. Anthony much might his priueledge be as hauing the Patronage of Pigs Cattel which the Priests do solemnly on St. Anthonies day blesse in his name and so they are free from all diseases and disasters all the yeare after and therefore the Pigges Masters or Dames are very Hogs if they requite not the Priests paines with the best Pigge But for all St. Anthonies workes of deuotion if they had beene of a far higher and holier nature they make but little for this euidence of certainety but rather the contrary For the more a man confides in his good workes the more vnsettled he is in the certainety of iustification And for Martyrs I meane Christs Martyrs if they haue not this certainty then none euer had it As for Heretickes they cannot dye for Christ while they dye in the quarrell of their Heresie Thus we haue the state of the question on both sides As for Veg's fourth allegation in his fifth Chapter forementioned That no man can certainely know but by speciall reuelation whether another man be iustified or no this is impertinent to the present purpose and so we leaue it extra controuersiam But display wee our forces now in the open field and try we our cause by the dint of truth First that the Pontificians should so stiffly stand for their vncertainty of Faith they haue great reason in regard it is the strongest supporter vncertaine as it is of the
super Cant. ser. 71. Ioh. 15. 5. Phil. 2. 13. Esa. 10. 15. Esa. 26. 1â— 2. Sam. 9. 2. Sam. 19. Hâ—â—ace Pro. 20. 6. Gal. 2. 20. 1. Cor. 12. 12. Psal. 133 Ephes. 5. 1 Cor. 6. 17. Psal. 104. Psal. 145. Ephes. 2. 20. 21. 22. Iohn 15. 4. 5. Rom 11. 24. Ephes. 5. 25. Ephes. 4. 15. 16. Reuel 1. 6. Vega l 10. de inaequal grat gloriae iustorune cap. 8. The title whereof is De pulcherrima via concilian di Paulum cum Iacobo quae nobis ex doctrine sancta Synodi illuxit Of the most beautiful way of reconciling Paul with Iames which was intimated vnto vs from the holy doctrine of the Synod Greg. in 7 Psal. poenit in Psa. 51 If it be not a misprinting See the Index printed at Madrid by publick authority Ann. 160â— See also Doctor Iames of Popish corruptions of the Fathers Iames 2. 21. See Deut. 6. 25 the Geneua translation amisse See the vulgar Latine pro Eritque iustitia nostra Erit nostri misericors si custod * In the Pontifician sense Conferre here the term Law opposed to Faith not the Ceremoniall Law to Moral Obiect Luke 1. 74. Exod. 15. 25. Psal. 149. Luke 18. Aug. de peccatorum merit is remissâ—l 2. c. 5 Aug. de verbis Domini ser. 36. Aug. de vtilit necess poenit hom 50. Ambros. in Psal. 118. serm 3. Colos. 2. 19. Matth. 18. â—sa 43. 11. Iob 9 â— Amâ—r de vocat Gent. lib. 1. ca. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Esa. 1. 22. Ier. 6. 30. Rom. 4. 5. Aug. â—onâ—es lib. 10. cap. 2. â— Cor. 1. 30. Arist. polit lib. 2 cap. 8. Tertul. aduers. Hermog lib. Rom. 10. 1. Esa. 43. 11. Stella in Luc. cap. 4. Rom. 11. 6. Concil Trid. Ses. 6. cap. 8. Dan. 2. 33. Rom 6. 1. 2. Baron an 1076 n. 33. Baron an 1074 n. 7. Mat 23. 13. Iob 31. 5. Ambros. in Psalme 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Canaan which is as much as to shew grace fauour or mercie Ambros. ibid. Ambros. in epist. ad Hebr. cap. 4. Ambr. in Rom. 9 Ambr. de Iacob vita beata lib. 2. cap. 2. Ambr. in Apol. Dauid Ambros. in Rom. cap. 11. Note 1. Cor. 14. 4. Phil. 3. 9. Possidonius in the beginning of St. Augustines workes See Chemmtius his Examen of iustification * The like speech did venerable Bede vtter at his death saying to his friends I haue so liued among you that I am not ashamed of my life neither feare I to dye because I haue almost gracious Redeemer Remaines Guil. Abbas in vita Bern. lib. 1. cap. 13. Elreidus Riuallensis Remaines Heb. 12. 29. Esay 33. 14. Iames 2. 10. Gal. 3. 10. Esay 29 13. Mat. 7. 22. Bellarm. de iustif l. 5. c. 7. 〈…〉 Greg. Moral l. 35. c. 26. Luther l. artic art 35. Sixtus Sene. bibl sact l. 5. annot 45. Greg. Moral lib. 9 cap. 24. Gasper Contarenus lib. de iustif 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 8. 32. Mat. 23. 13. Gen. 26. 15. Ier. 2. 13. Ioseph de Antiquit Iud. lib. 13. cap. 17. Iohn 4. 21. 23. Esa. 12. 3. Esa. 30. 14. Mat. 9. 22. Iohn 9. Dom. Soto de nat grat â— 2. c. 5. Concil Trid. Sess. 6. c. 15. can 28. * Note the sugar-tongued serpent prâ—faning Scripture by an hypocriticall mis-applying it to others when it directly taxeth seducing Pontificians themselues Vega de mortal verial peccat l. 1. c. 14. Soto de nat grat l. 2. c. 7. Concil Trid. Sess. 6. can 28. Soto de nat grat l. 2. c. 7. Soto ibid. Vega de iustif grat c. qu. 1. Ibid. qu. 2. rat 1. * His meaning is by grace inherent as hope loue c. â—erodot lib. 1. Ibid. quaest â— Acts 26. Esay 47. 10. Vega de iustif grat c. q. 1 propos 5. This beeing that faith which some nâ—uelists call Euangelicall faith which they distinguish in kinde from faith in Christ. Aqu 2. 2. qu. 4. 4. qu. 19. 5. 1. The vanity of the distinction of faith formed and vnformed Leo serm 14. in Natiuit Leo ibid. serm 10. Aug. de peccat merit remis lib. 2 cap. 29. Aug. de nat grat lib. contra Pelag cap 44. 2. Pet. 1. 1. Greg. Moral lib. 16. cap. 13. Greg. super Ezech lib. 2. hom 17. Aug. contr duas Epist. Pelag. ad Bonific l. 3. Obiects Greg. dialog l. 4. c. 2. Fulgent de incarnat grat Dom. nostri Iesis Christi c. 22. Aug. l. 50. homiliarum hom 17. Ibid. Origenin Leuit. c. 3. hom 3. 2 Pet. 1. 1. Chrys. in Rom cap. 3 serm 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. in Iohan cap. 3. S. Basil. dicit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Basil. regul contract definit 80. A comparison Aug. tract 29. in Iohan. Obiection Answ. Soto de nat grat l. 2. 6. 7. Concil Trid. Sess. 6. c. 6. Soto ibid. 1. Ioh. 3. 3. Rom. 4. 13. Marke 1. 15. Aug. Enchirid. cap. 5. a Chrysost. in Genes cap. 15. hom 36. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Rom. cap. 10. hom 17. Ambrose in Epist. ad Galat. cap. 3. Soto de nat grat l 2. c. 7. Designatur subiectum fidei esse intellectiuam potentiam c. Enchirid. Concil Colon. Prouincial de sacramento poenitentiae pag. 87. Printed at Paris 1554. Bellar. de iustif lib. 1. cap. 7. The subiect of sauing faith Recordari à Corde dicitur Rom. 11. 18. Rom. 11. 16. Bern. de ordine vitae lib. Heb. 11. 6. Aug. de cognit verae vitae c. 37. Aug. in Iohan. tract 45. ex cap. 11. Iohn 17. 3. Aug. in Iohan. tract 29. Aug. de verbis Apostoli ser. 33. Aug. contra duas Epist. Pelagio ad Bonifac l. 1. c. 3. Bern. flores de fide Hieror Osorius de iustitia l. 1. Ibid. lib. 2. Grat. de consecrat distinct 4. Gloss. * Cap. vlt. Aug. de verbis Apost serm 33. â—om 10. Aug. Enchir. c. 8 Aug. in Psa. 139 Praesatio Chrysost. de fide Abrabae serm Ambros. in Psal. 118. serm 22. Aug. in Psal. 32. Euang. Rom. 5. 1. c. Concil Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 15. 1. Sam. 19. Rom 1. 28. 29. Bern. serm ad Pastores Aug in Epist. Iohan. tract 10. Aug. in Psal. 56. Aug. Epist. 23. Bonifacio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrylost in Epist ad Colos. 1. Chrysost. ad populum Antioch homil 21. Iohn 3. 16. Greg. in Euang. homil 29. tom 2 Ambros. de incarnationis Domini sacramento lib. cap 1. Bellar de libero arbit l. 1. c. 6. Bellar in his fift generall controuersie lib. 2. cap. 31. Et maior Catech Nowell desinitur fides sic This the Church of Engl. doctrine Soto de nat grat l. 2. c. 7. Vega lib. 13. de lapsis eorum reparatione c. 31. Soto ibid. Concil Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 6. ibid. Can. 14 Vega lib. 6. de praepar