queÌ„ fallit spes qui dicit quod sperabant non inueni He is ashamed saith Austine that faileth of his hope Who is put to shame but he that saith I haue not found that that I hoped for h Theodo in Rom cap. 5. They that hope saith Theodoret and are deceiued of their hope doe blush and are ashamed thereof Therefore saith Saint Austine i August in Psal 37. Certi samus de spe non est enim inceria spes nostra vt de illa dubitâ—mus We are certaine of our hope for our hope is not vncertaine that we should doubt thereof Yea so are we certaine thereof as that Saint Paul saith k Rom. 5.2 We reioyce vnder the hope of the glory of God as being no lesse assured thereof then if we were alreadie in possession of it as l Sect. 15. ex Chrysâ—st in Rom hom 9. before I shewed that Chrysostome expoundeth that place farre otherwise then here Maister Bishop doth Which m Heb. 3.6 confidence and reioycing of hope groweth from that which the holy Ghost termeth n Cap. 10.22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 full assurance of faith whereby setting aside the respect of our owne impeachments of our selues we beleeue with Abraham o Rom. 4.18 vnder hope euen against hope resting vpon his promise who hath taken vpon him to be p 1. Pet. 2.25 the shepheard and Bishop of our soules and q Ephe. 3.20 is able to do exceeding abundantly aboue all that we aske or thinke according to the power that worketh in vs. Whereby as he hath alreadie wrought in vs the like great worke as r Cap. 1.20 he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead in that he hath Å¿ Cap. 2.5 raised vs vp being dead in trespasses and sinnes vnto the life of God so we rest t Phil. 1.6 perswaded that hauing begun this good worke in vs he will performe it good vntill the day of Iesus Christ u Bernard in Cant. ser 68. NoÌ„ est quòd iam quaeras quibus meritis speremus bona praesertiâ—â— cùm audias apud prophetam Non propter vos c. Neither is it for any man to aske saith Bernard vpon what merits we hope for this good seeing we heare by the Prophet x Ezech. 36.22 Not for your sakes but for mine owne sake will I do it saith the Lord. Now Maister Bishop admitting after his fashion an vncertaine Certaintie of hope demandeth What is this to the Certaintie of faith which the Protestants will haue euery man to be endued with at his first entrance into the seruice of God Where againe we see how pretily Maister Bishop can busie himselfe with a fether These termes of first entrance into the seruice of God are but the playing of his braine he would faine seeme to say something thereby when indeed he saith nothing For not onely at first entrance but in the whole continuance of the seruice of God he leaueth a man as a ship in a storme and hanging betwixt heauen and hell howsoeuer not doubting but that God for his part holdeth him fast to draw him to heauen yet still affrighted least himselfe should loose his hold and fall into hell nay not knowing whether he haue any hold of God or God of him because he cannot certainly know whether he haue any hope or charitie or repentance or praier which being seated in the darke corners of the will cannot otherwise then probably be discerned But as touching his question what is Certaintie of hope to Certaintie of faith I answer him that being truly vnderstood it maketh much to the prouing of it For hope goeth not beyond faith because as I haue said hope is but the patient waiting for that which faith beleeueth we shall haue What faith doth not assure vs we shall haue we cannot by hope expect and looke for There can therefore be no Certaintie of hope but it must presuppose a Certaintie of faith assuring vs of obtaining what we must hope for But saith Maister Bishop Saint Paul insinuateth that godly men partakers of the holie Ghost and hauing tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come yet after all this haue fallen awâ—y from God But I answer him that he saith more of them then Saint Paul did for he calleth them not godly men though haply for the time they seemed to be so Men may be partakers of the temporarie gifts of the holie Ghost and may tast of the good word of God and of the powers of the world to come as Iudas did while he was yet an Apostle of whom notwithstanding in the middest of these gifts our Sauiour said that y Iohn 6.70 he was a diuell The like is to be said of them who shall say at that day z Math. 7.22 Lord haue not we prophesied in thy name and in thy name cast out diuels and done many miracles who yet in the meane while as our Sauiour signifieth haue bene workers of iniquitie And what lesse can we say of Balaam who in the spirit saw so much concerning the state and hope of the people of God as made him enamoured thereon and to cry out a Numb 23.10 Let my soule die the death of the righteous and let my last end be like vnto his b Ver. 21. he seeth no iniquitie in Iacob neither doth he see any transgression in Israel c Cap. 24.5 how goodly are thy tents O Iacob and thy habitations O Israel who notwithstanding bewraied himselfe to haue a wicked heart bewitched with couetousnesse willing for mony to haue cursed the people whom the Lord directed him to blesse Men may haue great gifts and much reuelation and knowledge of the way of truth and be touched farre with the conceipt of that they know who yet are void of true faith and regeneration of the heart and therefore in the end because d Mat. 13.21 they haue no roote doe certainly fall and slide away Whose fall because they neuer truly stood though they seemed so to doe is not to impeach or weaken the assurance of them to whom God hath giuen by true faith to stand indeede As for that which Maister Bishop saith of such that they haue receiued faith and great fauours of the spirit c. it is but his owne commentarie and we accordingly regard it He affirmeth of their faith that which the Apostle affirmeth not and though they receiued some fauours of the spirit yet they neuer found the fauour to receiue him as e Ephes 1.14 an earnest vnto them of the heauenly inheritance or by him to be f Cap. 4 30. sealed vnto the day of redemption which if they had they should neuer being once sealed haue bene vnsealed againe because in this respect g Rom. 11.29 the gifts and calling of God are without repentance and neuer subiect to any change CHAPTER 4. OF IVSTIFICATION 1. W. BISHOP
necessarie as faith Be it so yet he doth not say that we are iustified by charity We say as he there saith that Å¿ Basil ser de fide Character insigne Christianorum loue is the badge and cognizance of Christian men much commended vnto vs by our Sauior as a marke whereby he will haue vs to be knowne to be his disciples We say further that it is as necessarie as faith to the full perfection of a Christian man and yet we say it hath nothing to do in the act of iustification To his question as touching the words alledged If a man know himselfe iustified by faith in Christ how can he acknowledge that he wants true iustice I answer him that a man acknowledgeth himselfe to want in himselfe true inherent iustice confessing himselfe to be sinfull and corrupt when yet he wanteth not that iustice or righteousnesse of which S. Paule saith t Rom. 4.5 To him that worketh not that is u Oecumen in Rom. 4. Ei qui ab operibus fiduciaÌ„ non habet who hath no confidence by workes but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is reputed for righteousnesse and so as Basil saith he is iustified by faith alone x Bern. in Cant. ser 23. Charitas patris ipsoruÌ„ cooperit multitudinem peccatorum Et ser 61. Iustitia tua in me operit multitudinem peccatorum the loue of the Father and the righteousnesse of Christ the Sonne couering the multitude of his sinnes so that they are as if they had neuer bin and he as if he had offended nothing as before hath bene declared Origens testimonie which is the last of all declareth plainly the same that Basils doth that y Orig. in Rom. cap. 3. Dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem ita vt credeÌ„s tan tummodo quis iustificetur etiaÌ„si nihil ab eo operis fueriâ— expletum the iustification of faith alone is sufficient so that a man onely beleeuing is iustified though there haue bene no good worke performed by him For example hereof he alledgeth the Thiefe on the crosse z Pro sola fide aâ— ei Iesus AmeÌ„ dâ—cot tâ—bi c. to whom for faith alone Christ said This day shalt thou be with me in paradise M. Bishop answereth againe that Origen excludes no good disposition in vs to iustification A strange matter that these Fathers should haue so little discretion still to be vrging faith alone faith alone and yet should meane to leaue a place to M. Bishops good dispositions whereby faith alone is ouerthrowne But he addeth out of his maister Bellarmine that faith is opposed to outward workes so that Origens meaning is that a man may be saued without doing outwardly any good workes if he want time and place And what are those outward workes Forsooth Bellarmine nameth to fast and to giue almes Absurd Friar as if there were no outward good workes to be done but onely fasting and giuing of almes M. Bishop here vnder the name of dispositions setteth forth vnto vs many good works of the theefe in that short time of his being vpon the crosse the feare of God hope faith repentance confession of sinnes loue towards God and his neighbor in reprehending his fellowes blasphemie and defending Christs innocencie and yet of him Origen affirmeth the same that Chrysostome did before of Abraham that not for any workes but he was iustified by faith alone a Super hoc non requisiuit Dominus quid priùs oporatus esset nec expectauit quid operis cùm credidisset explesset sed sola confessione iustificatum comitem sibi Paradisum in gressurus assumpsit Christ did not enquire concerning him saith he what he had wrought before nor did looke what worke he performed when he had beleeued but being to go into Paradice tooke him to accompany him being iustified onely by his confession that is by his faith which he vttered and shewed by his confession of Christ The other example there alledged by Origen maketh the matter as plaine which is of the woman in the Gospell that washed Christs feet with her teares and wiped them with the haires of her head whose good workes M. Bishop hath noted also b Sect. 21. before to whome notwithstanding c Origen ibid. Ex nullo legis opere sed pro sola fide not for any worke of the law but for faith only saith Origen Iesus said Thy sinnes are forgiuen thee and againe Thy faith hath saued thee Yea but Origen faith d Idem in ca. 4. that faith cannot be imputed to iustice to such as beleeue in Christ vnlesse they do withall put off the old man And we say no lesse that iustification cannot be separated from sanctification but where the one is there is the other also and yet it is distinctly to be considered what belongeth to the one and what belongeth to the other He correcteth the opinion of them who thinke profession of faith to be faith and thereupon saith as we do that to such their faith because indeed it is no true faith cannot be reputed for righteousnesse Therefore of faith he said before e Jbid Ne putes quòd si quis habeat talem fidem ex qua iustificatus habeat gloriaÌ„ apud Deum possit simul cum ea habere iniustitiam si enim quâ— credit quòd Iesus est Christus ex Deo natus est qui natus est ex Deo non peccat manifestuÌ„ est quia qui credit Jesu Christo non peccat quòd si peccat certum est quia non creditet c Certum est eum qui verè credit opus fidei iustitiae operari totius bonitatis Do not thinke that he that hath such a faith as whereby being iustified he hath to reioyce with God can together therewith haue vnrighteousnesse For if he that beleeueth that Iesus is Christ be borne of God and he that is borne of God sinneth not it is manifest that he that beleeueth in Iesus Christ sinneth not and if he do sinne that is giue himselfe to sinne it is certaine that he beleeueth not Certaine it is that he that truly beleeueth doth worke the worke of faith and righteousnesse and of all goodnesse Thus he saith as we do that true faith cannot be separated from godly life so that a man cannot haue fellowship with Christ by iustification who by sanctification also hath not fellowship with him But the roote of all is faith by which alone we are iustified and so the barre of sinne is taken away that diuided before betwixt God and vs that so the sanctifying spirit of God may haue accesse vnto vs to worke in vs the good worke of God and so to prepare vs to that inheritance to the hope wherof he hath called vs. As for the other place that he citeth it is the same in effect with that of Ignatius f Sect. 26. before alledged and containeth nothing
Abraham he noteth to be this i Fidem eius bonae opera consecuta esse demonstrat to shew that good works ensued or followed his faith The drift of his speech is against them who k Qui sic acceperunt dictum per fidem sine operibus vt putarent cùm semel in Christum credi dissent etiamsi malè operarentur flagitiosè ac facinorosè viuerent saluos se esse posse per fidem so tooke it to be said by faith without workes as that they thought that when once they had beleeued in Christ albeit they wrought euill and liued wickedly and leudly yet they might be saued by faith The error of these men he reformeth thus l Non ita intelligendum est vt accepta fide si vixerit dicamus eum iustum etiamsi walè vixerit It is not so to be vnderstood that a man is iustified by faith without workes as that hauing receiued the faith if he liue we should call him iust although he liue amisse By which phrase of receiuing the faith it appeareth that there is onely that faith here meant which consisteth in outward profession and receiuing of baptisme which is farre from that faith to which the holy Scripture attributeth iustification and saluation In all which speech S. Austin saith nothing against vs nothing which we auouch not as well as he but onely that vnder the name of iustification he containeth not onely forgiuenesse of sinnes wherin iustification properly consisteth but that also which we distinctly call sanctification consisting in the inward renewing of vs to holines and righteousnesse which the Scripture plainly distinguisheth as we do In the other place alledged he notably oppugneth that which M. Bishop would faine maintaine He toucheth three things appertaining to our saluatioÌ„ which towards it we haue alreadie attained Predestination vocation iustification Of this last he saith m Aug. de ver Apost Ser 16. Quid est iustificari Audemus dicere â—am hoc tertium habere nos Et erit quisquaem nostrúm qui audeat dicere Iustus sum Puto enim hoc esse Justus sum quod est Peccator non sum si audes hoc dicere occurrit tibi Ioannes si dixerimus c. Quid ergo Nihil habemus de iustitia an habemus sed non totum habemus Hoc ergo quaramus c. What is meant by being iustified Dare we say that we haue this third thing alreadie And is there any man that dares say I am iust for I thinke it to be all one to say I am iust as to say I am no sinner If thou be bold so to say S. Iohn meeteth with thee saying If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues c. What then haue we nothing of righteousnesse or haue we But yet we haue not all Let vs then seeke after this for if we haue some part and some part we haue not let that increase which we haue and that shall be supplied which we haue not He plainely confesseth that by that iustification which he speaketh of we haue but somewhat of inherent righteousnes and that we haue still somewhat of sinne and therefore that we are not as yet so iust by that iustification as that thereby we may stand for iust in the sight of God because we cannot stand for iust in his sight before whom perforce we must confesse our selues to be sinners But M. Bishop teacheth farre otherwise as we haue seene before that a man by baptisme is made as void of sinne as Adam was in the state of innocencie and therefore hath no need greatly to feare the rigorous sentence of a iust iudge Now of that righteousnesse that we haue S. Austin saith that it is to grow and increase that we n Ibid. Grati simus ex eo quod habemus vt addatur quod non habemus are to be thankefull for that we haue that that may be added which we haue not c. We teach in the like sort but yet withall we teach as he doth that it neuer so farre increaseth in this life but that it leaueth vs still to confesse our selues sinners and therefore that it neuer bringeth vs to that as that we can thereby be iustified in the sight of God This is the point Increase of inward and inherent righteousnesse we say there ought to be and is no man doubteth no man maketh question of it but we deny that we merit any iustification by our workes or grow by our owne righteousnesse to be reputed iust before the iudgement seate of God neither doth Saint Austine euer affirme the same 37 W. BISHOP Nothing then is more certaine and cleare then that our iustification may daily be augmented and it seemeth to me that this also be granted in their opinion For they holding faith to be the onely instrument of iustification cannot deny but that there are many degrees of faith it is so plainely taught in the word O ye of litle faith Mat. 8. Luc. 19. And then a litle after I haue not found so great faith in Israel and O Lord increase our faith and many such like where many different degrees of faith are mentioned How then can the iustification which depends vpon that faith not be correspondent vnto that diuersitie of faith but all one Againe Master Perkins deliuereth plainely Pag. 54. That men at the first are not so well assured of their saluation as they are afterward if then in the certaintie of their saluation which is the prime effect of their iustification they put degrees they must perforce allow them in the iustification it selfe And thus much of this question The obiections which Master Perkins makes for vs in this Article Pag. 201. do belong either to the question of merits or of the possibilitie of fulfilling the law or to the perfection of our iustice and therefore I remit them to those places and will handle the two latter points before I come to that of merits R. ABBOT That inherent righteousnesse may be increased we confesse but we deny that our iustification before God consisteth therein but onely in the merit and obedience of Christ which needeth no increase because it is fully absolute and perfect in euery respect in it selfe But Master Bishop according to his opinion muffled in the mists of ignorance telleth vs that there must needes be diuers degrees of iustification in our meaning because there are diuers degrees of faith and diuers degrees of assurance of saluation But we answer him that that necessarily followeth not because although the instrument whereby we receiue is in some stronger and in some weaker yet the thing receiued is one and the same to both The price of redemption in the shedding of the bloud of Christ is one and alike to all and euery faithfull man but yet it is not alike apprehended by euery one There is perfect righteousnes required of vs and the same is yeelded vnto vs in Christ There
by he saith very vntruly and absurdly for S. Iames bringeth the example of the true and liuely and workfull faith of Abraham as opposite to that idle and dead faith concerning which he propounded that question of faith and workes Yea of Abrahams faith he sheweth that it was said e Ver. 23. Abraham beleeued God and it was counted vnto him for righteousnesse which was neuer said of any man for saying that he had faith for beleeuing that there is one God for that faith that consisteth onely in profession before men Now the faith of Abraham which f Ver. 22. wrought with his workes and was made perfect by his workes g Beda in Epist Iac. cap. 2. that is saith Beda was proued by the performance of workes to be perfect in his heart this faith of Abraham I say is it whereby the Protestants hope to be iustified in the sight of God as Abraham was because h Rom 4.23 it was not written for him onely that it was imputed to him for righteousnesse but also for vs to whom it shall be imputed beleeuing in him that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead We alledge further that the faith whereof S. Iames speaketh is likened to the faith of diuels and therefore that it cannot be the same with that which the Scripture nameth for a iustifying faith M. Bishop answereth that that followeth not and for auouching thereof maketh Abrahams faith not onely the same with the faith of hypocrites and false Christians but also with the faith of diuels He would qualifie the matter in shew but in truth maketh no difference An excellent good thing may be like vnto a bad in some things saith he True but yet the bad cannot be like the good in that wherin standeth the goodnesse and excellencie of the good Now he maketh the Hypocrites faith if we consider the very act of faith the same that Abrahams faith was which was reputed vnto him for righteousnesse and for which the Scripture setteth him foorth as an excellent patterne of faith to be followed of all beleeuers But to auoyde the odiousnesse hereof he sophisticateth the matter and so much as in him lyeth blindeth his reader They are like saith he in two points where in the first point he comprehendeth the fulnes and perfection of that which he calleth Catholike and Christian faith consisting as here absurdly he saith in the perfect knowledge of all things reuealed as if euery one that hath their Catholike faith haue the perfect knowledge of all things reuealed but as more plainly he hath deliuered his mind before i Sect. 18. in beleeuing all to be true that God hath reuealed No more is there in Abrahams faith if we keepe within the compasse of the nature of faith no lesse in the diuell the same in euery Catholike Christian and so the diuel is become a Catholike whether he wil or not Come on M. Bishop rid vs of this doubt for we cannot find by you but that the diuell by Catholike faith is become a Catholike He goeth on Secondly this knowledge shal not steed them any whit But that is nothing to the very nature of faith whether is steede or not steed The essence act of faith whether it steed or not steed is no more but this to beleeue generally all to be true which God hath reuealed and therefore whether with good works or without the faith of the Catholike Christian in the act of faith is no other but the diuels faith Now albeit he say that these faiths differ in many points yet of those many he nameth but onely one and that nothing to the purpose For if he will shew a difference of faith betwixt Christians and diuels he must take it from faith it selfe and not from those things which to the nature of faith are meerely accidentall Christians saith he out of a godly and deuout affection do willingly submit their vnderstanding to the rules of faith But this is not to make a difference but to adde charity vnto faith This godly and deuout affection and willing submission is an act of charity and not of faith an act of the wil and affection wherein charity is seated not of the vnderstanding wherin he saith is the seat of faith And in this affection and submission faith it selfe still is no more then it was before to beleeue all to be true that God hath reuealed The diuel then still pleadeth for himselfe that if the Catholike faith which M. Bishop hath described do make a Catholike there is no reason to except against him for being a Catholike because he beleeueth all to be true which God hath reuealed Or if he wil say that true Christian faith doth alwaies actually necessarily imply this godly deuout affection and willing submission of the vnderstanding to the rules of faith then because this cannot be without charity let him grant the question let vs trauell no further about this point but let him say as we say that the true Christiā faith wherby it is said we are iustified cā neuer be separate frō charity good works Thus he casteth himself into he knoweth not what Labyrinths mazes cannot tell how to get out How much better were it for to acknowledge the simple and plaine truth of God then to intricate himselfe in these perplexities wherin he can find no place to stand secure But yet out of the words of S. Iames As the body without the spirit is dead so faith without works is dead he will further prooue that faith may be without charitie and yet perfect in the kind of faith Now this is it that hath bene said that in the kind of faith considering faith intirely in it selfe he maketh Abrahams faith and the diuels faith to be all one As touching the words of S. Iames sufficient hath bene said before If faith be considered as outwardly professed to men as he intendeth it good workes are the life of faith If it be considered as it is inward in the heart to God good workes cannot be the life thereof because that which is without cannot giue life to that that is within Whereas he turneth workes into charitie he playeth the Sophister for it is one thing to talke of charitie another thing to talke of workes the one being in habite the other in act the one inward the other outward the one the tree the other the fruite the one the spring the other the streame But letting this passe as handled before let vs see how he argueth from the place of Iames Albeit the body be dead without the soule yet is it a true naturall body in it selfe But that is not true for a true naturall body is that onely which hath the true members and parts of a naturall bodie which a dead bodie hath not k Arist Polit. lib. 1. cap. 1 When the body is dead saith Aristotle there shall be neither foote nor hand but onely by
excluded all other meanes that either Iew or Gentile required but not charitie Vaine man what had S. Bernard here to do either with Iewes or Gentiles He spake to Christian and faithfull brethren to whom he had no occasion to giue any caueat either against Iewes or Gentiles but instructeth them what to do being pricked and grieued with sinne euen to hunger and thirst after righteousnesse not meaning by righteousnesse inherent righteousnesse as M. Bishop doth but that righteousnesse which consisteth as he had before expounded it in the forgiuenesse of sinnes Therfore he teacheth to beleeue in Christ who is our righteousnesse l Justitia donaÌ„s delecta sub fineÌ„ a righteousnesse as he speaketh againe that forgiueth sinnes the forme of which righteousnesse he expresseth thus m Delicta iuueÌ„tutu meae ignorantias meas ne memineris â—â—stus sum Remember not the offences of my youth and my ignorances and I am righteous or iust Thus S. Bernard saith that a man is iustified by faith alone and shall we be so mad as to thinke that in saying a man is iustified by faith alone his meaning was as M. Bishop affirmeth that a man is iustified by faith and charitie that is to say not iustified by faith alone And did S. Bernard thinke that a man hath charitie before he haue charitie For seeing as M. Bishop telleth vs the gift of charitie is infused and powred into vs in iustification surely to say that by charitie a man is iustified is to say that by charitie the gift of charitie is powred into him Which if it be absurd then let him be content that S. Bernards meaning be as indeed it is that a man is iustified by faith alone let him take charitie for a gift of the iustified not for any fore-running cause of iustification Now that the righteousnes there spokeÌ„ of is not meant of inherent righteousnesse it is very plaine in that S. Bernard in the words following treateth seuerally therof vnder the name of sanctificatioÌ„ His counter-places are impertinent What S. Bernard therein saith we say n In Cant. ser 24 Non facit hominem rectum fides etiam rectae quae noÌ„â—peratur ex dilectione A mans beleeuing aright except it worke by loue doth not set him right or straight and againe o Nec fides fine operibus nec opera sine fide sufficiunt ad animi rectitudinem Neither faith without workes nor workes without faith do suffice to the rectitude or straightnesse of the mind True it is as I haue often said that to the full rectifying and perfecting of a man belongeth not onely iustification by the forgiuenesse of sinnes but also sanctification to charitie and good workes but what doth this hinder but that notwithstanding both the worke of iustification and the obtaining also of sanctification may be performed by faith alone Chrysostomes words are p Chrysost ad Gal. ca. 3. Illi dicebant qui sola fide nititur execrabilis est hic contra demonstrat qui sola fide nititur eum benedictum esse They sayd he who rested on faith alone is accursed but Paul saith that he is blessed that resteth vpon faith alone M. Bishops answer that faith alone there excludeth onely the ceromonies of Moses law is alreadie shewed to be vaine But here it further appeareth in that Chrysostome noteth that the Apostle maketh speciall choice of Abraham who was so long before the Law for an example of being iustified without workes and that q Ibid. AbrahaÌ„ producit in medium declarans hunc quoque sic fuisse iustificatioÌ„ Quod si is ante gratiam ex fide iustificatus est idque quum operibus bonis floreret multo magis vos Et in Ep. ad Rom. hom 8. supra sect 26. when as he abounded in good workes For if he in that case were not iustified by his workes but by his faith then it is manifest that not onely the ceremoniall workes of Moses law but all other workes are excepted from that iustification that is described to be by faith alone We are to be iustified as Abraham was Abraham though he abounded in good workes yet was not iustified thereby Therefore we also though we haue good workes yet are not iustified thereby but by faith alone The sentence of Basil he saith is pitifully mangled by M. Perkins when as by himselfe it is altogether marred His words saith he truly repeated are these Let no man acknowledge c. putting in a sentence of his owne making vnder the name of Basils wordes truly repeated What a shamelesse man is he thus to mocke his Reader thus grosly and palpably to forge a matter and yet to pretend truth Basil hauing mentioned the wordes of S. Paul that r 1. Cor. 1.30 Christ is made vnto vs of God wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption saith hereupon thus Å¿ Basil ser de humilit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Latinè apud Bellarm. de Iustif. lib. 1. c. 25 Haec est perfecta integra gloriatio in Deo quando neque ob iustitiam suam quis se iactat sed nouit quidem seipsum verae iustitiae indigum sola autem fide in Christum iustifâ—catum for that is perfect and full of reioycing in God when a man is not lifted vp because of his owne righteousnes but knoweth that he himselfe is destitute of true righteousnes and is iustified by faith onely which is in Christ Thus he spake to a Christian auditorie and instructed them to acknowledge themselues to be void wanting destitute of true righteousnes to be iustified only by faith in Christ M. Bishop saith that he excludes all merits of our owne but no necessary good disposition but he should remeÌ„ber I say that Basil spake to them that were past dispositions and preparations it being a Sermon not ad Catechumenos such as were yet to be baptized but ad fideles to the faithfull as they were tearmed after Baptisme and them doth he teach to acknowledge themselues to be iustified by faith alone But whosoeuer they had bene how crossely doth M. Bishops bad disposition carry him to Basils words Basil saith Let a man acknowledge himselfe destitute of true righteousnesse and to be iustified onely by faith in Christ M. Bishop saith a man is not destitute of true righteousnesse but hath vertuous good dispositions and preparations by which he is to be iustified and not by faith alone But no maruell that they crosse others who are so tangled with the truth as that they know not how to speake but to crosse themselues still blowing both hot and cold freely and yet for workes for nothing and yet for something no merit and yet in some sort merit of meere mercie and yet somewhat to moue God beside his mercie But to giue some colour to that that he saith he telleth vs that Basil in his Sermon de Fide proueth by many texts of Scripture that charitie is as
but what we also teach as hath bene declared there 31. W. BISHOP The third Difference of Iustification is howe farre foorth good workes are required thereto Pag. 91. Master Perkins saith That after the doctrine of the Church of Rome there be two kinds of Iustification the first when of a sinner one is made iust the which is of the meere mercie of God through Christ without any merit of man onely some certaine good deuotions of the soule as the acts of Faith Feare Hope Charitie Repentance go before to prepare as it were the way and to make it more fit to receiue that high grace of Iustification The second Iustification is when a iust man by the exercise of vertues is made more iust as a child new borne doth by nouriture grow day by day bigger of this increase of grace Catholikes hold good workes to be the meritorious cause M. Perkins first granteth that good workes do please God and haue a temporall reward 2. That they are necessarie to saluation not as the cause therof but either as markes in a way to direct vs towards saluation or as fruites and signes of righteousnes to declare one to be iust before men all which he shuffleth in rather to delude our arguments then for that they esteem much of good workes which they hold to be no better then deadly sinnes The maine difference then betweene vs consisteth in this whether good workes be the true cause indeed of the increase of our righteousnes which we call the second iustification or whether they be onely fruites signes or markes of it R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop it seemeth did not well like that M. Perkins should do the Church of Rome that wrong to make her better then indeed she is for whereas he had said that they exclude all workes from the first iustification and confesse it to be wholly of grace M. Bishop reformeth his error by adding that certaine good deuotions of the soule as the acts of faith feare hope charitie repentance go before to prepare the way to iustification all which it hath bene his drift hitherto to proue to be properly and truly the causes thereof Now as touching the point in hand M. Perkins obserueth three things accorded vnto by vs in the recitall whereof M. Bishop vseth his wonted guise of deceit and fraud First we graunt that good workes do please God and are approued of him and therefore haue reward which we intend both temporall and eternall but he mentioneth it as if we affirmed no other but only temporall reward Secondly we say that they are necessarie to saluation not as causes either conseruant adiuuant or procreant but either as consequent fruites of that faith which is necessarie to saluation or as markes in a way or rather the way it selfe leading to saluation Thirdly we say that the righteous man is in some sort iustified by workes as S. Iames saith that Abraham was iustified by workes that is declared and made manifest to be iust And this he acknowledgeth to be in some sort also before God for that it pleaseth God by our workes to take the sight and knowledge of our faith albeit we forbeare so to speake both for auoiding confusion in this disputation of iustification properly vnderstood in the sight of God and also for that the same phrase in the Apostles writing of that point sounds another way This last M. Bishop here cōcealeth fearing lest it should preuent him of some of his cauils but that which he doth alledge he saith is shuffled in rather to delude their arguments then that we esteeme much of good workes which he saith we hold to be no better then deadly sinnes Thus the glozing sycophant still playeth his part still peruerting sometimes our saying sometimes our meaning Where he cannot oppugne that which we teach he will make his Reader beleeue that we meane not as we say We see no such difference betwixt them and vs betwixt their liues and ours but that we may well be thought to esteeme good workes as much as they do We would be ashamed to be such as their stories haue described their Popes and Cardinals and Bishops nay as M. Bishop and his fellowes haue described the Iesuites to be Whereas he saith that we account good workes no better then deadly sinnes he very impudently falsifieth that which we say We affirme the good workes of the faithfull to be glorious and acceptable in Gods sight for Christs sake being done in his name and offered vpon the altar of faith in him The imperfection thereof is accidentall and taketh not away the nature of a good worke but onely maketh it an vnperfect good worke which imperfection notwithstanding were sufficient to cause the worke to be reiected if in rigor and extremity God should weigh the same which he doth not but mercifully pardoneth it for Christs sake Seeing then the blemish set aside we acknowledge it to remaine intirely a good worke being the worke of the grace of God to be accepted and rewarded of God with what conscience doth this brabler say that of good workes we make no better then deadly sinnes As touching the question propounded by him it consisteth of two parts the one of the increase of righteousnesse the other of the cause of that increase We say that the righteousnesse whereby we are to be iustified before God admitteth no increase because it must be perfect righteousnesse for perfect righteousnesse consisteth in indiuisibili if any thing be taken from it it is not perfect and if it be not perfect it cannot iustifie before God Now by M. Bishop it appeareth that the inherent righteousnesse which they say is infused into a man in his first iustification is vnperfect because it remaineth afterwards to be increased Of the same inherent iustice we also make no question but that there is an increase thereof to be expected and laboured for and that we are therein to thriue and grow from day to day but hence we argue that it is not that that can make a man iust in the sight of God for the defect that is thereof is not by a meere priuation but by admixtion of the contrarie a August Epist 29. ex vitio est it is by reason of some corruption as S. Austin saith Yea b Idem de perf iustit Peccatum est cùm non est charitas quae esse debet vel minor est quà m debet there is sinne as he againe saith when charitie that is inhernt iustice is lesse then it ought to be But where sinne is a man cannot be said to be iust in the sight of God Therefore by the Popish imagined first iustification a man cannot be iustified in the sight of God no nor by their second iustification because it neuer groweth to that but that it is still capable of increase It remaineth therefore that we are iust in the sight of God onely by the righteousnes of Christ which is without increase being
iustification yet the very habite of iustice is with them a thing meerely infused of God and not the act of man himselfe Therfore as touching the very habite of iustice a man must be onely passiue not actiue in the same sence as M. Perkins speaketh onely a receiuer and not at all a worker thereof But now he telleth vs that the iustification which they so teach wrought and procured by hope feare loue c. excludeth all boasting as well as ours But that cannot be for the Apostle telleth vs that l Rom. 3.27 boasting or reioycing is not excluded by the law of workes but by the law of faith So long as any thing is attributed to our workes in this behalfe we haue somewhat to glorie in as that by our workes and for our workes sake we haue obtained that which we haue The Apostle saith that m Rom. 4.2 if Abraham were iustified by workes he had whereof to glorie or reioyce and therefore it is not true that iustification being attributed to workes we haue nothing whereof to reioyce or boast our selues Neither doth M. Bishops explanation helpe the matter at all that we cannot boast of those preparations as though they came of our selues because we see the Pharisee in the Gospell to glorie of that which notwithstanding he confesseth to be the gift of God n Luc. 18.11 August in Psal 31. Cùm dicebat gratias tibi fatebatur ab illo se â—â—cepisse quod habebat Hieron aduer Pelag li. 3 Jlle gratias agit Deo quia ipsius misericordia non sit sicut caeteri homines c. O God I thanke thee saith he that I am not as other men are But by his words of these good inspirations descending froÌ„ the Father of lights he doth but abuse his Reader dealing onely colourably as Pelagius the hereticke was wont to do For they make God the occasion only and not the true cause of them They make him externally an assistant to them but the internall producing and proper originall of them is of the Free will of man which is the cause why they affirme these works that go before iustificatioÌ„ not to be meritorious as they say those are that follow after For if they made them essentially the workes of grace they could haue no colour to attribute merit to the one and to deny it to the other Yea M. Bishop himselfe apparantly excludeth them from being the works of grace in that presently after he calleth the grace of iustification the first grace as being ignorant of the language of their owne schools wheras these workes are said to go before to prepare vs for the receiuing of iustifying grace In these works of preparation therfore there is apparantly somwhat attributed to man wherof he hath to glorie in himselfe for that howsoeuer being helped of God yet he doth somewhat himselfe for which God bestoweth vpon him the gift of iustification Yea M. Bishop plainly ascribeth to him somewhat wherof to reioyce in that he ascribeth it to him to consent to the grace of God Yea but a man saith he can no more vaunt of consent to these workes then of consent to faith true and therefore if either way he haue any thing of himselfe he hath somewhat whereof to boast M. Bishop therefore buildeth vp his owne glorie in both so acknowledging the grace of God both in faith and workes as that all is nothing but by the free wil of man Now we on the other side together with the auncient Church o Fulgen. ad Monim lib. 1. Nullatenus sinimus immo salâ—briter prohibemus tam in nostra fide quà m in nostrâ— opere tanquam nostrum nobis aliquid vindicare suffer not nay we vtterly forbid that either in our faith or in our worke we challenge to our selues any thing as our owne But in the iustification of faith boasting or reioycing is excluded not onely for that faith and all consent of faith is wholly the gift of God but also for that to faith nothing at all is ascribed for it selfe but onely to Christ who is receiued thereby and is it selfe a meere acknowledgement that we haue all that we haue of the soueraigne bountie and mercy of God only for his owne sake not for any thing that is in vs. Now therfore we hence argue against M. Bishops iustification that that is the onely true doctrine of iustification by which mans boasting or reioycing is excluded By the doctrine of iustification by workes mans boasting is not excluded Therfore the doctrine of iustification by works is not the true doctrine of iustification As for his comparison of a man mired in a lake and content that another should helpe him out it sauoureth very strongly of the stinke of the Pelagians leauing in a man both will and power for the helping of himselfe whereas the Scripture affirming vs to be p Ephe. 2.1 dead in trespasses and sinnes bereaueth vs altogether of all either will or power whereby we should yeeld any furtherance to the sauing of our selues But the same is also otherwise vnfit because the conuersion of a man is an acceptance of a seruice and an entrance into it wherein he is to bestow his labour and paines to deserue well as M. Bishop saith at his hands whose seruant he is and by couenant to merit heauen Hereto he worketh partly by grace as he saith and partly by free will and therefore hauing merited and deserued he hath somewhat in respect of himselfe wherein to glorie and reioyce whereas the course that God taketh is q Bernard Cant. Ser. 50. Vt sâ—iamâ—â— in dâ—e illa quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae feâ—imus nos sed pro misericordia sua saluos nos fecit that we may know at that day as S. Bernard saith that not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercie he hath saued vs. For this cause albeit he could haue perfected vs at once and euen at the first haue reformed vs to full and vnspotted righteousnesse to serue him accordingly yet hath he thought good to leaue vs groning vnder a burden of sinne and vnder many infirmities and imperfections in the seruice that we do vnto him that the sight of our foule feet may still pull downe our Peacockes tayle and we may alwaies fully know that we are to giue all the honour and glorie of our saluation to God alone But M. Bishop telleth vs that all glorying and boasting is not forbidden and we acknowledge the same for else the Apostle wold not haue said r 1. Cor. 1.31 He that glorieth let him glorie in the Lord. Our glorying or reioycing must be with the acknowledgement of his goodnesse and to the magnifying of him and not of our selues He that exalteth himselfe as the Pharisee did in that which he confesseth to be the gift of God reioyceth against God But M. Bishop offendeth both wayes he attributeth not all vnto God
Iustification as M. Perkins saith we make but one but yet we make degrees of sanctification not euill worse and worst as this cauiller fondly dreameth but good and better and best according to the measure of Gods spirit bestowed vpon vs but yet so as that to the good better and best that is in this life there cleaueth a blemish and staine which would cause the worke to be condemned but that it is graciously accepted and the imperfection thereof mercifully pardoned for Christes sake as shall appeare in the handling of that matter He calleth the affirming of one iustification perfect at first and not after to be lost an absurd position but it is not absurd but to absurd men to whom the truth it selfe is absurd There is in the sight of God but one iustification onely by faith in Christ vnder the couerture whereof we stand thenceforth acceptable vnto God both in our persons and in our workes of obedience vnto euerlasting life In that sence as to present vs iust before God there is no other iustification That that is further is but declaratiua a iustification so called whereby we are iustified and declared to be iustified men The true iustification properly so called cannot be lost because a Rom. 8.30 whom God iustifieth he also glorifieth nor increased because the righteousnesse of Christ is alwaies vniforme and alike By this righteousnesse being the same to all all are equally righteous but by the different grace of sanctification in inherent righteousnesse some are more righteous some lesse and if Iouinian maintained the contrary he erred and therefore those Fathers whom M. Bishop citeth do not course vs at all but say the same that we do and we that they neither is it any other but his grosse ignorance so absurdly to mistake one thing for another We say that there is equality of righteousnesse in one respect and he bringeth the Fathers affirming against Iouinian what we cōfesse that there is difference of righteousnesse in another respect According to that former righteousnesse by imputation of the merit and obedience of Christ a man is as righteous the first day of his conuersion as he is in the end of his life howsoeuer as touching sanctification and inherent righteousnesse he grow much and therin be renewed from day to day 36. W. BISHOP First that of the Reuelations Let him that is iust be yet iustified or as your text hath it He that is righteous Cap. 22. let him be more righteous and that of feare not to be iustified euen vntill death Eccles 18. do conuince that there are more iustifications then one and that a man may increase in iustification and righteousnesse vntill death Which is confirmed where it is said That the path of a iust man proceedeth Prou. 4. as the light doth vntill it be perfect day which is degrees more and more And S. Paule teacheth the same where he saith to men that giue almes plentifully That God will multiply their seed 2. Cor. 9. and augment the increases of the fruites of their iustice Further S. Iames doth most effectually proue this increase of righteousnesse and the second iustification in these words Abraham our father was he not iustified by workes Cap. 2. offering Isaac his sonne vpon the altar That he speaketh of the second iustification is euident for Abraham was iustified before Isaac was borne as it is most manifest by the Scripture it selfe and by that heroicall act of not sparing his onely and intirely beloued Sonne his iustice was much augmented Gen. 15. Rom. 4. And the Apostle himselfe seemeth to haue foreseene all our aduersaries cauillation and to haue so long before preuented them First that common shift of theirs that this worke was a signe or the fruite onely of his faith and no companion of it in the matter of iustification is formally confuted for the holy Ghost speaking distinctly of both his faith and worke and ioyning them both in this act of iustification attributeth the better part of it vnto his worke thus Seest thou that faith did worke with his workes and by the workes the faith was consummate and made perfect Which he doth after fitly declare by a similitude comparing faith to the body and good works to the soule which giue life and lustre to faith otherwise faith is of litle value and estimation with God Which S. Paule also teacheth at large among other speeches including this That if he should haue all faith 1. Cor. 13. and wanted charitie he were nothing And comparing faith and charitie together defineth expresly that charitie is the greater vertue which charitie is the fountaine of all good workes And so by this preferring these works of charity before faith he doth stop the other starting hole of the Protestants that Abraham forsooth was iustified before God by onely faith but was declared iust before men by his works For if God esteeme more of charity then of our faith a man is more iustified before God by charity then by faith Againe in the very place where this noble fact is recorded to shew how acceptable it was to God himselfe it is said in the person of God Gen. 22. Now I know that thou louest me and to conuince all obstinate cauilling is it not said that his faith did in this very fact cooperate with his workes and that the worke made his faith perfect which coniunction of both of them together doth demonstrate that he speaketh of his iustification before God adding also That he was therefore called the friend of God which could not haue bene if thereby he had bene onely declared iust before men and thus doth S. Augustine reconcile the two places of the Apostles S. Paul and S. Iames which seeme contrary S. Paul saying that a man is iustified by faith without workes and S. Iames that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely That S. Paul speaketh of works which go before faith such as we of our owne forces without the helpe of grace are able to do and such he saith not to deserue our first iustification But S. Iames disputeth of workes which follow faith and issue out of our soules now garnished will grace and such he holdeth vs to be iustified by Lib. 83. Quest q. 76. Ser. 16. de verb. Apost that is made more and more iust See the place He saith directly that we are iustified and that this iustice doth increase whiles it doth proceede and profit R. ABBOT The exhortation of S. Iohn is that he that hath walked in righteousnesse and innocencie and thereby approoued his profession of the faith of Christ should still continue his course and go forward to iustifie and approoue himselfe to the consciences of all men by the same vertuous and godly life The words haue their reference to outward conuersation iustification is to be vnderstood of the same that S. Iames speaketh of and that is before men and in
example of outward life To inward holinesse and purity the other part of the sentence is to be referred He that is holy let him be sanctified still that is let him adde to his sanctification let him be more and more renewed let him still be a Ephe. 4.22.24 putting off the old man and putting on the new let him still b 2. Cor. 7.1 clense himselfe from all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit and finish or perfect his sanctification in the feare of God S. Iohn would not by both those speeches import one thing therfore seeing the latter without doubt importeth inward righteousnesse the other must needs be applied to outward workes As for that of Ecclesiasticus it is nothing to vs who admit no canonicall authority of that booke yet it prooueth nothing for M. Bishop nor against vs the words truly translated being these c Eccles 18.21 deferre not till death to be iustified that is put not off till death to repent to seeke forgiuenesse of thy sinnes according to that which in the former verse he hath said d Ver. 20. Humble thy self before thou be sicke whilest thou maiest yet sinne shew thy conuersion Here is nothing at all to prooue two iustifications in that sence that we here speake of as whereby a man being first iust becoÌ„meth more iust before the iudgement seat of God Increase growth of inherent righteousnesse we ackowledge and require in all faithfull Christians and his paines is idlely bestowed in the proofe thereof We know what our Sauiour saith e Iohn 15.2 Euery one that beareth fruit in me the Father purgeth that he may bring forth more fruit what S. Peter exhorteth f 2. Per. 3.18 to grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ We teach men to say with S. Paul g Phil. 3.12 Not as though I had already attained or were already perfect but one thing I do I forget that which is behind endeauour my selfe to that which is before and follow hard towards the mark c. We teach with S. Bernard h Bernard in Purif ser 3. In viae vitae non progredi est regredi In the way of life not to go forward is to go backward and againe i Epist 123. Nolle proficere est deficere not to increase is to decrease k Epist 91. Vbi incipis noâ—e fieri melior 〈◊〉 etiâ—m dâ—sinis esse iâ—â—us where a man beginneth not to care to be better there he giueth ouer being good at all He need not therefore to prooue this matter vnto vs who teach it much more faithfully carefully then they do The place of Iames prooueth no other iustification but what we confesse that is an approouing declaring of his faith and iustification His works are a testimony that the Scripture hath truly rightly said of him l Iam. 2.23 Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnes Now M. Bishop should haue told vs in what other meaning it can be taken that S. Iames saith that in his workes the Scripture was fulfilled that saith Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse For if his workes were but the fulfilling of that Scripture how absurdly doth Maister Bishop go about to prooue in his workes an augmentation of that which by that Scripture is imported formerly to be done If his workes were but the fulfilling of that that was said of his iustification before how doth he thereby seeke to proue a second iustification Now the former testimonie of his iustification is to be considered which was long after Gods first calling of him m Gen. 12. seq when he had shewed his singular faith and obedience vnto God in going out of his owne country at the word of God when he had long called vpon the name of the Lord built many altars vnto him done him much seruice when he had long trauelled from place to place vnder his protection For after all this yet was he not iustified by his workes but onely of his n Gen. 15.6 beleeuing the Lord it is testified that it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse We would haue M. Bishop to tell vs whether Abraham before the time that this testimonie was giuen him were a iustified man or not he cannot deny it because Abraham had done many good works and he hath before said that there can be no good workes before the first iustification If he were iustified before then it appeareth that to a man already iustified not his workes but his faith is counted for righteousnes and because it cannot be thought that by one meanes he was iustified before and by another now it must needes be that as before to be iustified so now still being iustified his faith is counted to him for righteousnesse according as it is written o Hab. 2.4 The iust shall liue by faith Now if after he were iustified he did continue stil to be iustified by faith then to speake properly as we do of iustification in the sight of God there is one onely iustification whereby a mans p Rom. 4 5. faith is imputed to him for righteousnesse as the Apostle speaketh It must needes therefore follow that S. Iames speaketh of iustification in some other meaning then the Apostle S. Paule doth what that meaning is let him learne not of vs but of the auncient Church q Phot. apud Oecum in Rom. cap. 4. Non habuit Abrahâ—m opera absit Opera siquidem habuit vt si cum hominibus qui simul cum eo versabantur fuisset in iudicio constitutus facilè iustificatus fuisset illisque antepositus verum vt coram Deo ex suis operibus iustificaretur tanquam dignus aequalis sese praebens dignitatis cum ea quae inde praebebatur beneficentia dono nequaquam fuisset illam assecutus Vnde ergo bâ— dignus est habituâ— ex sola fide c. Solutio patet ex bu quomodo hiâ— quidem Paulus ex fide ait iustificatum fuisse Abraham diuus autem Iaâ—obus ex operibus Had Abraham no workes saith Photius God forbid Verily he had workes so as that if he had bene brought in iudgement with the men with whom he liued he had easily bene iustified and preferred before them but that by his workes he should be iustified before God as worthie of the dignitie kindnesse and gift that was yeelded vnto him he would neuer haue attained to it but he had it by faith onely Hereby saith he the resolution is manifest how Saint Paule saith that Abraham was iustified by faith and Saint Iames that he was iustified by workes Here is a plaine distinction and difference deliuered that Saint Paule saith that by faith only a man is iustified before God but that it is before men with men that S. Iames meaneth a man is iustified by workes And this
But this is nothing to his purpose howsoeuer It pleaseth God who knoweth the heart and whatsoeuer is within vs yet to take vpon him the knowledge of our loue faith feare c. by the fruites thereof Hereby he will try vs he will approoue vs and giue testimony witnesse vnto vs and so shall he do at the last day But what will Bishop inferre hereof If that that he would prooue be that that he saith that it was acceptable vnto God we will easily graunt him so much and so send him backe againe as wise as he came If he would prooue hereby that Abraham was iustified before God by his works let him consider his argument well God tooke knowledge of Abrahams fearing him by his works therefore Abraham was iustified by works in the sight of God But if we follow the construction that S. Austin often maketh of those words this collection will appeare much more absurd b August coâ—â— Maximin lib. 3. cap. 19. God as he saith knoweth all things before they come to passe It was not now that God first knew that Abraham feared him Therefore as c Gemere dicitur spiritus quâ— nos gemere facit sicut dixit Deus Nunc cognoui quando cognoscere hominem fecit the spirit is said to pray and groane because he maketh vs to pray and groane so he saith that God is said to know when as he maketh vs to know d Jbid. lib. 1. Nunc cognovi id est nunc cognoscere te feci de Genes ad lit lib 4. cap. 9. feci vt cognosceretur Now I know then is as much as if he had said Now I haue made thee to know or I haue made it to be knowne that thou fearest me M. Bishops argument then is come to this God made Abraham to know by his worke in offering his sonne Isaac that he was one indeed that feared God therfore Abraham was iustified by his works in the sight of God But he will now conuince all obstinate cauilling and to that end saith that it is said that Abrahams faith in this fact did cooperate with his workes and that the worke made his faith perfect And what of that This coniunction of them both together doth demonstrate that he speaketh of his iustification before God This is as he said before iust as Germaines lips nine mile asunder He ioineth faith and workes together therefore he speaketh of iustification before God The argument much better serueth vs If he had spoken of iustification before God as S. Paul doth he would haue spoken of faith onely as he doth but because he ioineth faith and works together it plainly appeareth that he speaketh not of the same iustification whereof S. Paul speaketh and therefore must be vnderstood of iustification before men Well his friends are beholding to him for his good will but he is able to stand them in little steede Yet to helpe the matter it is added saith he and he was called the friend of God But why did he not alledge the whole text Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse and he was called the friend of God and so conclude thereof therefore he was iustified by his workes in the sight of God He might as well inferre it of the one as of the other and if the one part of the sentence be against his purpose what sence was there in him to seeke for it in the other The meaning is euident plain that it appeared by Abrahams obedience and workes that it was not without cause said of him Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse and that he was called the friend of God e Mat. 12.33 The tree is knowne by his fruites and Abraham by his fruites is iustified and prooued to be a good tree Now it is not hereby onely declared that he was iust before men as this wrangler cauilleth but it is hereby declared vnto men that he truly beleeued and by his faith was iustified before God To be short in the text there is not so much as one word or peece of word whereby Maister Bishop can make it good that Saint Iames speaketh of iustification in the sight of God But because the text will not Saint Austine is brought to prooue it who speaketh neuer a word to that effect M. Bishop very lewdly falsifieth his words and maketh him to say that which he doth not say nor euer meant to say He speaketh the idle dreames of his owne head and propoundeth them to his Reader vnder Saint Austines name The very words of Austin are these f August lib. 83. quaest 76. Non sunt sibi contrariae duorum Apostolorum sententiae Pauli Iacobi cùm dicit vnus iustificari hominem per fidem absque operibus alius dicit manem esse fidem sine operibus quia ille dicit de operibus quae fidem praecedunt hic de ijs quae fideÌ„ sequuntur The sentences of the two Apostles Paule and Iames are not contrarie one to the other when the one saith that a man is iustified by faith without workes and the other saith that faith without workes is vaine because the one speaketh of workes that go before faith the other of workes which follow faith Here is no mention of first or second iustification not so much as the name of iustification by workes much lesse any expounding of the meaning of it not a syllable in all that Chapter whence he should deriue that meaning of iustification which he setteth downe for Austins to be made more and more iust Nay I remember not in my reading that Austin any where in any meaning affirmeth iustification by works but onely in his Hypognosticon the wordes whereof are before handled which worke though we commonly cite vnder Austins name yet there is no man much conuersant in Austin but will easily conceiue by the phrase and style that it is none of his to say nothing that in his Retractations he maketh no mention of it The wordes that here he speaketh out of S. Iames are that faith is vaine without workes hereby willing it to be vnderstood that though faith do iustifie without any workes going before yet where it iustifieth it hath alwaies good workes thencefoorh accompanying it and that that faith which is not thus accompanied with good workes is not g August de fide oper cap. 14. Salubris illa plancque Euangelica that healthfull or sauing health which the Gospell commendeth nor doth iustifie him in whom it is h Lib. 83. quaest vt suprà Nam iustificatus per fidem non potest nisi iustè deinceps operari quamuis nihil anteà operatus iustè ad iustificationem peruenerit For he that is iustified by faith saith he cannot but thencefoorth worke righteously though he attaine to iustification without hauing wrought any thing righteously before The intent that S. Iames had alledging the example
euer they were endued with true faith The next of his arguments is taken from the man that came to the wedding n Math. 22.11 not hauing on a wedding garment This argument he handleth very learnedly First he saith that this man had faith which because he knew we would denie therefore for proofe thereof he addeth that else he had not bene admitted to the table which signifieth the sacraments But this needeth as much proofe as all the rest nay it cannot be prooued at all For men are admitted to the sacraments by men and they are admitted for profession of faith when they that admit them cannot tell whether they haue faith or not For as Hilary saith o Hilar. in Mat. ca. 22. In fallendis hominibus plurimum artis solet habere simulatio Et paulò post Humana simplicitas difficilè fraudulentiam simulatae mentis intelligit hypocrisie is wont to vse much art to deceiue men and humane simplicity hardly perceiueth the fraud of a dissembling mind Many pretend that which is not in them and make profession of faith with the mouth when in the heart they haue no faith at all p Aug. in Psal 7. Postquam in tanto culmine nomen coepit esse ChristianuÌ„ creuit hypocrisis id est simulatio eorum qui nomine Christiano malunt hominibus placere quà m Deo Since the name of Christianity hath begun to be in so high regard the hypocrisie of men hath increased that is the dissembling of them who by bearing the name of Christians regard more to please men then God Now sith all these are admitted to the sacraments and yet q 2. Thess 3.2 Tho. Aqui. ibid. Licet videantur habere eam non tamen habent veram all haue not faith it followeth not that because men are admitted to the sacraments therefore they haue faith nay it is a very ridiculous and childish proofe Wherefore as it is said that this man wanted charity so we say that he wanted also faith and so M. Bishop is become as wise a man as he was before Let him then expound the wedding garment to be charity it shall hurt vs nothing For we will answer him that he wanted the wedding garment of charity because he wanted faith for had he had true faith he should also haue had loue because r Gal. 5.6 faith worketh by loue But the wedding garment is as well faith as loue It is indeed Iesus Christ himselfe of whom the Apostle saith Å¿ Rom. 13.14 Put ye on the Lord Iesus Christ and againe t Gal. 3.27 so many as are baptized into Christ haue put on Christ Him we put on first by faith thereby making him ours and applying to our selues the benefit of his redemption that appearing before God in the scarlet garment of his obedience to bloudshed death we may by forgiuenes of sinnes be accepted for his sake thenceforth the residue of our spirituall attire may be put vpon vs whilest in putting on Christ we put on u Ephe. 4.24 the new man which according to God is created in righteousnes holinesse of truth whilest we x Col. 3.12 put on the bowels of mercie kindnesse humblenesse of mind meekenesse long suffering whilest by growing and increasing we are still y 1. Thess 5.8 putting on the brestplate of faith and loue and the hope of saluation for an helmet Thus Chrysostome truly and rightly saith that z Chrysost Op. imperf hom 44. Nuptiale vestimentum est fides veraquae est per Iesum Christum iustitia eiuâ— c. the wedding garment is true faith which is by Iesus Christ and the righteousnesse thereof or his righteousnesse And thus Ferus one of M. Bishops owne Doctors hath taught vs that the wedding garment which is Christ is put on two manner of waies a Perus in Mat. cap. 22. Primo internè per fideÌ„ cum peccatu tuis superinduu Christi iustitiaÌ„ c. Deinâ—e cùm externè charitatem eius aemulaeris first inwardly by faith when vpon our sinnes we put on his righteousnesse then outwardly when we imitate his loue The place which he alledgeth out of the Reuelation containeth nothing to the contrary b Apoc. 19.8 The fine linnen wherewith the bride and spouse of Christ is araied is * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the righteousnesses of Saints for so is the word in the plurall number Here is then first c Rom. 4.5.11 the righteousnesse of faith fully perfect in the bloud of Christ by the imputation of his obedience and merits and secondly the righteousnesse of good works and inward conformity vnto God begun in this life and fully to be perfected at the resurrection of the dead when Christ shall make his Church d Ephe. 5.27 a glorious Church not hauing spot or wrinkle or any such thing but to be holy and without blame But the exception which he maketh why faith can be no part of this wedding garment is worthy to be noted He hath before told vs that the wedding supper importeth the Sacraments the vse whereof is onely in this life and here saith that faith cannot be the wedding garment because faith remaineth not after this life How many mile to London a poke full of plummes But howsoeuer that be his wisedome might conceiue that since the last iudgement dependeth respectiuely vpon that that hath bene precedent in this life therefore as with him the righteousnesse and good workes of the Saints which they haue wrought here are their wedding garment for the last day so we may also truly say that the faith whereby in this life we beleeue in Christ shall be our wedding garment then when as Saint Peter saith e 1. Pet 1â— we shall receiue the end of our faith which is the saluation of our soules He alledgeth Hierome for his purpose very falsly or at leastwise very vainely The words of Hierome are these f Hieron in Math. cap. 22 Vestis nuptialis praecepta sunt Domini opera quae complentur ex lege EuaÌ„gelio nouique hominis efficiunt vestimentum The wedding garment are the commandements of the Lord and the workes which are made vp of the law and the Gospell and do make the garment of the new man Why doth he alledge these words to exclude faith froÌ„ being a part of the wedding garment when as one of the commandements of the Lord as S. Iohn telleth vs is this g 1. Iohn 3.23 that we beleeue in the name of his sonne Iesus Christ when as h Iohn 6.29 this is the worke of God as our Sauiour saith that is a worke that God hath commaunded and wherein he is pleased that we beleeue in him whom he hath sent when as the workes that are made vp of the law and the Gospell consist not onely in charitie but in faith also I stand not vpon the rest of the testimonies which he bringeth for
and loue to preferre the seruice of Christ before all the glory of this world Albeit it is not to be omitted that S. Iohn somtime following the Hebrew phrase vseth the terme of beleeuing in Christ abusiuely applying it to them who by the miracles of Christ and his manifest declaration of the truth were conuicted in conscience to acknowledge him to be of God but yet did not at all in their hearts submit themselues vnto him Thus he saith in another place that y Ioh. 2.23 many beleeued in the name of Christ when they saw his miracles which he did to whom yet he did not commit himselfe because he knew what was in them Thus might it be said of some of those chiefe rulers that they beleeued in Christ that is were perswaded in their minds that he spake the truth but yet preferring their credit and reputatiō with men gaue no regard vnto it But that there is another manner of beleeuing in Christ which is that wherof we speake not incident to them who cōtinue wholy possessed with such respects Christ himself sheweth saying z Ioh. 5.44 How can ye beleeue which receiue honor one of another seek not the honor that cometh of God alone They might therfore in some meaning be said to beleeue in Christ when yet they had no true faith which as appeareth by these words cannot be separated from loue and seeking of the honour that cometh of God alone which wheresoeuer it is begun beginneth to looke vnto God and winding by degrees out of all other regards yeeldeth it selfe entirely to follow him Therfore the distinction of faith being obserued which the Scripture it selfe enforceth vpon vs M. Bishop hath yet alledged nothing to proue that true faith and charitie may be diuided or that any man may be said truly to beleeue in whom there is not also loue to righteousnesse and good works 51. W. BISHOP Cap. 2. 5 This place of S. Iames What shall it profit my brethren if any man say that he hath faith but hath not works what shall his faith be able to saue supposeth very plainly that a man may haue faith without good workes that is without charitie but that it shall auaile him nothing Caluin saith that the Apostle speakes of a shadow of faith which is a bare knowledge of the articles of our Creed but not a iustifying faith Without doubt he was litle acquainted with that kind of faith by which Protestants be iustified but he directly speakes of such a faith as Abraham was iustified by saying That that faith did worke with his works and was made perfect by the workes Was this but a shadow of faith But they reply that this faith is likened vnto the faith of the Diuell and therefore cannot be a iustifying faith that followeth not for an excellent good thing may be like vnto a bad in some things as Diuels in nature are not onely like but the very same as Angels be euen so a full Christian faith may be well likened vnto a Diuels faith when it is naked and voyd of good works in two points first in both there is a perfect knowledge of all things reuealed secondly this knowledge shall not stead them any whit but only serue vnto their greater condemnation because that knowing the will of their master they did it not And in this respect S. Iames compareth them together now there are many points wherein these faiths do differ but this one is principall that Christians out of a godly and deuout affection do willingly submit their vnderstanding vnto the rules of faith beleeuing things aboue humane reason yea such as seeme sometimes contrary to it But the diuell against his will beleeues all that God hath reuealed because by his naturall capacitie he knowes that God cannot teach nor testifie any vntruth Againe that faith may be without charitie is proued out of these words of the same 2. chapter Euen as the body without the spirit is dead so also faith without works is dead Hence thus I argue albeit the body be dead without the soule yet it is a true natural body in it selfe euen so faith is perfect in the kind of faith although without charity it auaile not to life euerlasting Lastly in true reason it is manifest that faith may be without charity for they haue seuerall seates in the soule one being in the will and the other in the vnderstanding they haue distinct obiects faith respecting the truth of God and charity the goodnesse of God Neither doth faith necessarily suppose charity as charity doth faith for we cannot loue him of whom we neuer heard Neither yet doth charity naturally flow out of faith but by due consideration of the goodnes of God and of his benefits and loue towards vs into which good and deuout considerations few men do enter in comparison of them who are led into the broad way of iniquity through their inordinate passions This according to the truth and yet more different in the Protestants opinion for faith layes hold on Christs righteousnes receiues that in but charity can receiue nothing in as M. Perkins witnesseth Pa. 85. but giues it selfe forth in all duties of the 1. and 2. Table Now sir if they could not apply vnto themselues Christs righteousnes without fulfilling all duties of the 1. and 2. Table they should neuer apply it to them for they hold it impossible to fulfill all those duties so that this necessary lincking of charity with faith maketh their saluation not only very euill assured but altogether impossible for charity is the fulnesse of the law which they hold impossible Rom. 12. and then if the assurance of their saluation must needs be ioyned with such an impossibility they may assure themselues that by that faith they can neuer come to saluation R. ABBOT That faith may be without charitie and good workes it is true and we doubt not thereof according to the meaning of faith of which S. Iames speaketh which Caluin very iustly and rightly saith is but a shadow of faith For it plainely appeareth by the text that he speaketh of faith as only professed before men as before hath bene alledged Therefore he compareth it a Iam. 2.16 to the good words of him that wisheth wel to the poore man but doth nothing at all for him To this tendeth his question b Ver. 14. What auaileth it though a man say that he hath faith and his other demand c Ver. 18. shew me thy faith The vttermost that he extendeth it to by instance is a meere historicall faith d Ver. 19. Thou beleeuest that there is one God His purpose is to shew that faith if it be truly professed hath a root within from whence spring by obedience the fruites of al good workes and if it giue not foorth it selfe by workes it is no true faith Whereas M. Bishop saith that S. Iames speaketh directly of such a faith as Abraham was iustified
faith concerning which it is said of Abraham f Gen. 15.6 He beleeued the Lord and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse there followeth alwayes charitie as a necessary and infallible consequent and companion thereof 53. W. BISHOP The Protestants bold asseuerations that they cannot be parted are great but their proofes very slender and scarce worth the disprouing The first He that hath not care of his owne hath denied his faith 1. Tim. 5. therefore faith includeth that good worke of prouiding for our owne Answer That faith there seemes to signifie not that faith whereby we beleeue all things reuealed or the Protestants the certaintie of their saluation but for fidelitie and faithfull performance of that which we haue promised in Baptisme which is to keepe all Gods commandements one of the which is to prouide for our children and for them that we haue charge of so that he who hath no such care ouer his owne charge hath denied his faith that is violated his promise in Baptisme There is also another ordinary answer supposing faith to be taken there for the Christian beliefe to wit that one may deny his faith two wayes either in flat denying any article of faith or by doing some thing that is contrarie to the doctrine of our faith Now he that hath no care of his owne doth not deny any article of his faith but committeth a fact contrary to the doctrine of his faith so that not faith but the doctrine of faith or our promise in Baptisme includeth good workes Ioh â— 2 There are among you that beleeue not for he knew who beleeued and who was to betray him Opposing treason to faith as if he had said faith containeth in it selfe fidelitie This argument is farre fetched and little worth For albeit faith hath not fidelity and loue alwaies necessarily ioyned with it yet falling from faith may well draw after it hatred and treason yea ordinarily wickednesse goeth before falling from the faith and is the cause of it which was Iudas case whom our Sauiour there taxed for he blinded with couetousnesse did not beleeue Christes doctrine of the blessed Sacrament and by incredulitie opened the diuell a high way to his heart to negotiate treason in it â— Ioh 2. 3. They obiect that Who saith he knowes God and doth not keepe his commandements is a lyer Answer He is then a lyer in graine who professing the onely true knowledge of God yet blusheth not to say that it is impossible to keepe his commandements but to the obiection knowing God in that place is taken for louing of God as I know ye not that is I loue you not Our Lord knowes the way of the iust Math 7. 25. Psal 1. Ioh. 14. that is approues it loues it so he that knowes God keepes his commaundements as Christ himselfe testifieth If anie loue me he will keepe my word And he that loueth me not will not keepe my words Lastly they say with S. Paul That the iust man liueth by faith But if faith giue life then it cannot be without charitie Answer That faith in a iust man is not without hope and charity by al which conioyned he liueth and not by faith alone But faith is in a sinful and vniust man without charity who holding fast his former beliefe doth in transgressing Gods commandements breake the bands of charity And so it remaineth most certaine that faith may be and too too often is without the sacred societie of charitie R. ABBOT The Protestants asseuerations are indeed very bold but not vpon slender proofes Their proofes are stronger then that any such silly disputers as M. Bishop is shall be able to disproue them As for his proofes to the contrarie thou hast seene gentle Reader how miserable and poore and beggerly they be See now what choise he maketh of our arguments culling out those that he was best able to deale with and what slender shifts he maketh to auoid them a 1. Tim. 5.8 He that prouideth not for his owne saith S. Paul and namely for them of his houshold he denieth the faith and is worse then an infidell It must follow therefore that there can be no faith where this worke of charitie is wilfully cast off M. Bishop telleth vs that by faith is here meant either fidelitie as touching the performance of that we haue promised in baptisme or else the doctrine of faith But let him expound it as he list of either of them it shall yeeld an illation consequence of that which we affirme For seeing the introduction of iustifying faith is b Mark 1.15 repentance from dead workes iustifying faith must alwayes imply a conscience and care of conforming a mans selfe to the doctrine of the Gospell and to the promise and vowe that he hath made in baptisme of obedience vnto God and therefore where dead workes still raigne it cannot be said that iustifying faith hath there taken anie place Therefore he that shaketh off the yoke of the doctrine of the Gospell and by his conuersation disclaimeth the promise that he made in baptisme plainely sheweth that howsoeuer he professe the faith yet that he hath no true faith abiding in him And this the Apostle teacheth of him who is so inhumane and barbarous as that the commandement of God cannot moue him to prouide for them the care of whom euen infidels by instinct of nature do know and conceiue to belong vnto them But we would gladly vnderstand how M. Bishop diuideth the articles of faith from the doctrine of faith For what do the articles of faith containe but onely the doctrine of faith That then contrary to the doctrine of faith must needs also be contrary to the articles of faith He therfore that by his deeds denieth the doctrine of faith denieth in effect also the articles of his faith howsoeuer with his tongue outwardly to men he make shew to confesse the same M. Bishops answer then taketh not away the strength of this argument but rather addeth further force and strength vnto it But it is plaine by the very words that the Apostle vnderstandeth faith as it is opposed to infidelitie affirming that such though they be c Hieron in 1. Tim. cap. 5. Fideles nomine beleeuers in name as Hierome speaketh yet in deed are not beleeuers Therefore Chrysostome expounding the words by that saying of the same Apostle d Tit. 1.16 They professe that they know God but by their deeds they denie him inferreth e Chrysost in 1. Tim. hom 14. Quomodo hutuâ—nodicredit qui Deum abâ—egauitâ— How doth he beleeue that hath denied God The argument therefore is firme and sure that howsoeuer there may be an outward profession of faith yet indeed there is no faith wheresoeuer there wanteth a correspondence of good workes In the second place it is strange to see how M. Bishop making choise of his aduersaries weapons yet is foyled in his owne choise The argument he saith
drinkes now defiled with rapine and couetousnesse yea all things should be cleane vnto them It is not for almes then that Christ saith Behold all things shall be cleane vnto you for almes it selfe may be defiled and vncleane but for n 1. Tim 1.5 loue out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith vnfained So that in effect the words of Christ are but the same with that which the Apostle saith o Tit. 1.15 All things are cleane to them that are cleane that is to them who in heart and conscience are purified and clensed And because p Acts. 15.9 by faith the heart is purified therefore he saith in effect to them that beleeue all things are cleane So then Maister Bishop reasoneth thus To them that giue almes in true faith and a good conscience all things are cleane therefore by almes-deedes we are redeemed and purged from our sinnes We denie the argument because it is not by almes it selfe that all things are cleane vnto vs but almes it selfe receiueth purity and cleanenesse from faith and a good conscience without which it is in Gods sight defiled and vncleane 13 W. BISHOP Math. 3. Luk. 3. Our sixt Bring forth the worthy fruites of penance That is do such workes as become them who are penitent Which as S. Chrysostome expoundeth are He that hath stolen away another mans goods Hom. 10. in Math. let him now giue of his owne he that hath committed fornication let him abstaine from the lawfull companie of his owne wife and so forth recompencing the workes of sinne with the contrarie workes of vertue The same exposition giueth Saint Gregorie Hom. 10. in Euang. In Psal 4. and to omit all others venerable Bede interpreteth them thus Mortifie your sinnes by doing the worthy fruites of penance to wit by afflicting your selues so much for euery offence as worthy penance doth require which will be a sacrifice of iustice that is a most iust sacrifice To this M. Perkins answereth that this text is absurd for the word repent signifieth onely change your minds from sinne to God and testifie it by good workes Reply His answer is most absurd for we argue out of these words Worthy fruites of penance and he answereth to the word going before repent which we vse not against them and for his glose or testifying our repentance is sufficiently confuted by the Fathers before alledged And Saint Iohn expresly maketh them the meanes to escape the wrath of God saying that the Axe was set to the roote of the Tree and vnlesse by worthy fruites of penance they appeased God they should be cut vp and cast into hell fire and seemeth to confute the laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith saying it will not helpe you to say that yee are the Sonnes of Abraham who was father of all true beleeuers as much as if he had said Trust not to your faith hand off yee generation of vipers For notwithstanding yee be the sonnes of the faithfull vnlesse ye amend your liues and for the euill workes which yee haue done heretofore make recompence and satisfie the iustice of God with good yee shall be cast into hell fire R. ABBOT This argument is like his fellowes that are gone before We must do such workes as become those that are penitent therefore the workes that we do are satisfactions for our sinnes A man would thinke that Maister Bishop should haue more discretion then to bring such light stuffe in so waighty a cause Though Maister Perkins had alledged it out of some of their bookes yet reason would haue required that he in the reuiew should haue better aduised of it But we see Trigge and Trugge will not part companie vvhat his fellowes haue said be it good or bad true or false he will say it to the death Onely his memory faileth him a little where he saith that they vse no argument against vs from the words going before Do penance as they say Repent as we translate it hauing forgotten that his maisters of a Rhem. Testam Annot. Math. 3.2 Rhemes made a stout argument from thence in behalfe of penance and satisfaction Very impudently they dealt therein because it is contrary to their owne doctrine to vrge penance and satisfaction vpon them that are to be baptized and Thomas Aquinas affirmeth it to be an iniurie to the bloud of Christ as I haue b Of Iustification Sect. 20. before shewed and therefore by their owne doctrine the words of Iohn Baptist cannot be vnderstood of any such matter But yet they were faine for a shift to take hold of that because they had nothing else so colourably to serue turne in that behalfe It was out of M. Bishops head what they had said or else without doubt he would haue said the like But M. Perkins hath rightly told him that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there vsed by S. Iohn signifieth the alteration and change of the mind from sinne to righteousnesse It importeth no acts of penance but inward reforming of our affections for the amendment of our liues And therfore doth Athanasius say that repentance hath it name from thence c Athanas quaest 162. Ideò poenitentia resipiscentia dicitur quod mentem à malo in bonum transferat for that it transferreth or remoueth the minde from euill to good M. Bishop will not stand vpon this he vrgeth the other words worthy fruites of penance Howsoeuer he translate them absurdly yet we approue his exposition of them do such workes as become them that are penitent but what followeth hereof for him Surely we teach men to do such workes as become them that professe repentance to recompence former workes of sinne with contrary workes of vertue former neglect and carelesnesse with due circumspection and watchfulnesse ouer their waies and conuersation We teach that in grieuous sinnes our griefe affliction of mind should be the more and that both inwardly it is so and outwardly appeareth so to be where true repentance is euen as greater wounds cause greater feeling and paine and make men more earnest to seeke remedie and cure But in all this we can finde no satisfaction in all this we cannot finde that our affliction and sorow is the thing it selfe that workes the cure It is the humbling of our selues to seeke mercie at Gods hands for the washing away of our sinnes in the bloud of Iesus Christ but wee know not how it selfe should be taken for a vvater to vvash vs from our sinnes But yet M. Bishop will proue it so to be because Iohn Baptist saith d Ver. 10. Now is the axe laid to the roote of the tree euery tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruite shall be hewen downe and cast into the fire Which is euen as much to the purpose as if he had said iust nothing We say also that euery tree that bringeth not forth good fruite shall be hewen downe and cast into
the fire but still we say what is this to satisfaction We still require his proofe that for the vertue and woorth of these fruites it is that God is appeased towards vs. But that cannot be for a man cannot bring forth good fruite except first of all he be made a good tree for e Chap. 7.17 an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruite And if he must first be a good tree that he may bring forth good fruite then God must first be appeased towards him which is by the faith of Iesus Christ f Rom. 3.25 whom God hath set forth to be our reconciliation or attonement through faith in his bloud Our good fruites then are not the causes but the effects of Gods being appeased towards vs. If we haue none we are sure that we are in state of iudgement and damnation and the sentence of Saint Iohn taketh hold of vs but if we haue them we are not to account them the redemption of our sinnes but testimonies of the remission and forgiuenesse thereof Yea but Saint Iohn saith M. Bishop seemeth to confute the laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith Where or in what words Marry because he saith Say not in your hearts we haue Abraham to our father We may imagine that he had a vizard on his face whē he wrote this that the paper might not see him blush Why what is there in these words against the laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith Forsooth he saith to them it will not helpe you to say that ye are the sonnes of Abraham who was father of all true beleeuers Well but what is this yet to laying hold on Christes satisfaction by faith It is as much saith he as if he had said trust not to your faith hand off ye generation of vipers This is a strange construction that say not in your hearts we haue Abraham to our father should be as much as to say Trust not to your faith But it grew at Rome and we know that things farre fetched are woont to be very strange As for vs we conceiue in our simplicity that Iohns meaning was to reprooue them for flattering themselues for that carnally they were the seede of Abraham as if that were sufficient security for them towards God when as in the meane time they neglected the repentance and faith and workes of Abraham The true children of Abraham are they g Rom. 4.12 who walke in the steps of the faith of Abraham and h Iohn 8.39 do the workes of Abraham which they not regarding could not be accounted the sonnes of Abraham whose of-spring was reckoned according to the spirit not according to the flesh Thus doth our Sauiour testifie of them that they beleeued not saying vnto them i Math. 21.31 Publicans and harlots shall go before you into the kingdome of God For Iohn came vnto you in the way of righteousnesse and ye beleeued him not but Publicans and harlots beleeued him and ye though ye saw it were not moued with repentance afterward that ye might beleeue him Now is it not a wonder that whereas it is apparent that they had no faith yet Iohn Baptist should say vnto them Trust not to your faith Well all this is nothing he cannot serue the Popes turne that will not notably cogge and lye The rest of his commentarie accordeth with this where he foisteth in the satisfying of Gods iustice there being nothing in the words of S. Iohn that foundeth to that effect 14. W. BISHOP Cor. 7.10 The 7. obiection with M. Perkins Paul setteth downe sundrie fruites of repentance whereof one is reuenge whereby repentant persons punish themselues to satisfie Gods iustice for the temporall punishment of their sinnes M. Perkins answereth A repentant sinner must take vengeance of himselfe and that is to vse all meanes to subdue the corruption of nature and to bridle carnall affections which kind of actions are restrainments properly but no punishments directed against the sinne but not against the person Reply I neuer saw any writer so contradict himselfe and so dull that he doth not vnderstand his owne words If this subduing of our corrupt nature be restrainments onely from sinne hereafter and not also punishments of sin past how then doth the repentant sinner take vengeance of himselfe which you affirme that he must do Reuenge as euery simple body knoweth is the requitall of euill past We graunt that all satisfaction is directed against sinne and not against the person but for the great good of the man albeit that for a season it may afflict both his bodie and mind too as Saint Paules former Epistle did the Corinthians but this sorow being according vnto God doth much benefit the person as the Apostle declareth For besides this reuenge taken on himselfe to appease Gods wrath it breedeth as it is in the text following in our corrupt nature that loueth not such chastisement A feare to returne to sinne least it be againe punished for where there is no feare of paines much pleasure thither our corruption will runne headlong It stirreth vp also in vs Indignation against sinne and all the wicked instruments of it A defence and clearing of our selues with the honester sort And an emulation and desire to flie as farre from sinne as other our equals and consequently A loue of vertue and honest life which freeth vs frō that sorow and all other troublesome passions all which are plainly gathered out of the same text of S. Paul R. ABBOT The Greeke fathers Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius and Hierome amongst the Latines do referre the reuenge there spoken of by the Apostle to the punishment of the incestuous man whereby they maintained the authority and due regard of the lawes of God But we further very willingly yeeld that by reuenge is also meant a wreaking of a mans anger as I may terme it vpon himselfe being offended and grieued at himselfe for the sinne that he hath done and therefore bending himselfe to crosse and thwart those desires by which he was led vnto it This the Scripture teacheth vs by the termes of a Math. 16.24 denying our selues b Col. 3.5 mortifying our earthly members c 1. Pet. 4.1 suffering in the flesh d Gal. 5.24 crucifying the flesh with the affections and lusts of it and e Rom. 6.6 destroying of the body of sinne Thus men occasion requiring giue themselues ouer to fasting and weeping and mourning and forbearing of accustomed delights yea and to open rebuke and shame with men hauing by publike offence made themselues a scandall to the Church This reuenge we denie not we say that hereby we testifie both to God and men the displeasure and offence that we haue taken against our selues we teach others to take heed and carefully to shun those occasions whereby we haue fallen we labour hereby that the tēptations of sin may no more in the like sort preuaile against vs but we are still
the Epistles in generall if any thing in Paules Epistles sound to him as contrary to the doctrine of the Catholike Church it is vnknowne what Church they meane he faileth of the right sense Thus howsoeuer clearely the scripture soundeth yet it meaneth not that which it saith if it be contrarie to that which they affirme To this impudent deuise they are driuen because they see that the scripture condemneth them vnlesse they themselues haue the managing of the scripture that if the scripture be admitted for iudge it peremptorily pronounceth sentence against them so that they haue no meanes to colour their abhominations but by challenging to themselues to be iudges of the scripture As for vs we hang the doctrine of faith not vpon our expositions but vpon the very words of God himselfe we make the holy scripture the iudge not in ambiguous and doubtfull speeches but in cleare and euident sentences where the very words declare what the meaning is It is a question betwixt vs and them whether Saints images be to be worshipped or not they say they are we say they are not Let the Iudge speake x Exod. 20.4 Deut. 5.8 Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any likenesse of any thing in heauen aboue or in the earth beneath or in the waters vnder the earth thou shalt not now down to them nor worship them It is a question whether there be now any sacrifice to be offered for the forgiuenesse of sins They say there is so in their Masse we say there is none Let the Iudge speake y Mat. 26.28 This is my bloud of the new Testament which is shed for you for many for remission of sins z Heb. 10.18 Now where remission of sins is there is no more offering for sin It is a question betwixt vs whether the Saints be our Mediators vnto God or not They say they are we say they are not Let the Iudge determine it a 1 Tim. 2.5 There is one God saith he and one Mediatour betwixt God and man euen the man Iesus Christ It is a question whether a man be iustified before God by workes or not They say it must be so we say it cannot be Let the Iudge answer it b Rom. 3.20 By the workes of the lawe shall no flesh be iustified in his sight c Gal. 3.11.12 That no man is iustified by the law in the sight of God it is euident for the iust shall liue by faith and the law is not of faith but the man that shall do those things shall liue in them They alledge that the Iudge saith that d Iam. 2.24 a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely we say that that is onely in the sight of men or with men they say that it is in the sight of God Let the iudge end it e Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were iustified by workes he had to reioyce but not with God It is a question whether the crosses and sufferings of the Saints do yeeld vs any helpe with God or any part of satisfaction for our sinnes They say they do we say they do not let the iudge tell vs whether they do or not f 1. Cor. 1.13 Was Paul crucified for you g Gal 6.14 God forbid that I should reioyce but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ It is a question whether the people ought to be partakers of the Lords cup they say no we say yea Let the iudge decide it h Mat. 26.27 Drinke ye all of this Thus in all matters betwixt them and vs the iudge speaketh clearely on our side his words are so plaine as nothing can be more plaine Yet notwithstanding they tell vs that all these things haue another meaning which we must take vpon the Popes word The commādement forsooth is meant of the idols of the Gentiles not of the images of Saints As if a whore-monger should say that the lawe forbiddeth whoredome of Christians with heathens not one with another The Scripture they say intendeth there is no other Mediator of redemption but one but Mediators of intercession there are many As if an adulterous woman should say that she may haue but one husband of this or that sort but of another sort she may haue many And yet they make them mediators of redemption also because they make them mediators of satisfaction and redemption is nothing else but the paiment of a price of satisfaction Thus they dally in the rest and shew themselues impudent and shameles men let them for their meanings reade to vs as plaine words of the iudge as those are that we reade to them and we will admit of them If not they must giue vs leaue to stand to the sentence of the iudge of heauen and earth and to account the Pope as he is a corrupt and wicked iudge although were he what he should be yet void of all title of being iudge to vs. 22. W. BISHOP Giue me leaue gentle Reader to stay somewhat longer in this matter because there is nothing of more importance and it is not handled any where else in all this Booke Consider then with your selfe that our coelestiall Law-maker gaue his law not written in Inke and Paper but in the hearts of his most faithfull subiects * Ierem. 31. 2. Cor. 3. endowing them with the blessed spirit of truth * Iohn 16. and with a most diligent care of instrusting others that all their posteritie might learne of them all the points of Christian doctrine and giue credit to them aswell for the written as vnwritten word and more for the true meaning of the word then for the word it selfe These and their true successors be liuely Oracles of the true and liuing God them must we consult in all doubtfull questions of Religion and submit our selues wholy to their decree S. Paule that vessell of election may serue vs for a singular modell and patterne of the whole who hauing receiued the true knowledge of the Gospell from God yet went vp to Hierusalem with Barnaby to conferre with the chiefe Apostles the Gospell which he preached lest perhaps he might runne in vaine and had runne as in expresse words he witnesseth himselfe * Gal. 2. Vpon which fact and words of S. Paule the auncient Fathers do gather that the faithful would not haue giuen any credit vnto the Apostles doctrine vnlesse by S. Peter and the other Apostles it had bene first examined and approued * Tertul lib. 4. in Marc. Hier. Ep. 89 quae est 11. inter Ep. Augustini August lib. 28. contra Faustū cap. 4. Againe when there arose a most dangerous question of abrogating Moses lawe was it left to euery Christian to decide by the written word or would many of the faithfull beleeue S. Paule that worthy Apostle in the matter Not so but vp they went to Hierusalem to heare what the pillars of the Church would say where by the decree of the Apostles
workes that we are our owne sauiours but that we apply vnto our selues by good workes that whereby we are made our owne sauiors But if he meane as the Protestants do when they auouch that by faith onely we apply vnto our selues the saluation which is in Christ Iesus that is that this saluation is entirely in the merits of Christ deseruing and purchasing the same for vs and that meerely and immediatly for Christs sake God bestoweth the same vpon vs that we do but onely stretch foorth the hand and that by his gift also to receiue that which freely and of his meere mercy he giueth vnto vs then his meritorious workes are come to nought and he bestoweth a great deale of labour in vaine for the proofe thereof We would gladly see which way he will shift Surely if our good workes do but apply vnto vs the saluation which is in Christ then they cannot be said to merit saluation theÌ„selues For that that applyeth doth not worke the effect of that which it doth apply The hand that applieth the medicine cannot be said it self to worke the cure for if it performe the effect it selfe to what end doth it apply another thing for the same purpose But if our workes do merit saluation themselues then they do more then apply vnto vs the saluation which is in Christ Iesus and we must be said according to the absurditie before mentioned to be thereby our owne sauiours Let the Reader well obserue how he stealeth away in a cloud of ambiguous words which notwithstanding howsoeuer he expound do worke inconuenience to himselfe But by his owne words he giueth answer to the place which he obiecteth of Paule saying to Timothie that c 1. Tim. 4.10 so doing he should both saue himselfe and them that heard him that he did not meane that Timothie should do that for himselfe by vertue whereof he should be saued but onely that he should apply vnto himselfe the saluation which is in Christ Iesus He was to saue them that heard him not by meriting their saluation for them but by preaching vnto them d 1. Cor. 15.2 the Gospell by which they were saued So was he also to saue himselfe by continuing in the same faith and doctrine of the Gospell whereby the way of saluation is set foorth vnto vs. In the same manner S. Peter exhorteth the Iewes who were pricked in their hearts at the hearing of his preaching e Act. 2.10 Saue your selues from this wicked generation namely by receiuing and accepting the message of saluation by Iesus Christ We are said to saue our selues as we are said to feed our selues and to cure our selues We feed our selues not by being food and nourishment to our selues but by receiuing that which is our food We cure our selues not by being a medicine to our selues but by taking and applying to vs that whereby we are cured So we saue our selues onely by embracing Iesus Christ by whom onely we are saued And this we intend when we say that we are saued by faith onely namely that faith only is the instrument whereby we lay hold of Iesus Christ in whose onely merits our saluation wholy and immediatly doth consist Which doctrine of faith wholy aduanceth the glorie of Christ because it referreth all entirely to him not onely for that we confesse that faith is the gift of Christ but also because we teach that it is not by any vertue of faith it selfe by which we are saued but onely by the merit and power of Christ whom we receiue by faith How then doth M. Bishop say that their assertion of our merits doth no more diminish the glory of the merits of Christ then it doth that we say that we are saued by faith onely when as they leaue so much for man to glorie of in himselfe his assenting to grace and working therewith by his owne free will and his well vsing thereof to merit and deserue saluation for himselfe when as we say that we are saued meerely by the merits of Christ and haue nothing in any sort to attribute to our selues and they say that we are not saued meerely by the merits of Christ but the merits of Christ do onely make vs able by free will to deserue our owne saluation But of this as he saith we shall haue further occasion to speake in the question of merits Now here M. Perkins noteth it for a further absurditie of their doctrine of merits that they do not onely make men their owne sauiours but make one man also the sauiour of another whilest that in the want of our owne merits we may be partakers in the merits of the Saints M. Bishop being a man of a wide throate to swallow and of a strong stomacke to digest without any trouble all the filth of the Romish Church sticketh not at the matter but plainely affirmeth that other good mens merits may steed them that want some of their owne and saith that it may be deduced out of an hundred places of Scripture whereas of that hundred there is not so much as one that will yeeld him ground of any such deduction For as for that which he alledgeth out of the first Commaundement that God sheweth mercy vnto thousands in them that loue him and keepe his commandements how he should draw mans merit from thence where God professeth onely his mercie both to the fathers and the children no wise man can easily conceiue It is true that God sometimes in the Scriptures is said for one mans sake to shew mercy to another it is neuer said that it is for one mans merits that he shewes mercy to another but only for his own loue and promise sake Thus do the people of God somtimes make mention of f Deut. 9. â—7 Abraham Isaac Iacob g Psal 132 10. Dauid not as to begge of God for their merits sake but as to vrge God with his couenant and promise that he made vnto these who shewed all that mercy and loue vnto their seed h Deut. 7.8 9.5 because he would keepe the oath which he had sworne vnto their fathers And surely seeing it was onely for his mercies sake that he respected the fathers themselues it is vnlikely that for the fathers merits he shold respect the children i Oecumen in Rom cap. 4. Siquis illum demostrare nitaâ—urper opera dignum fuisse c. Vides quod nihil omninò hâ—beat ne vestigâ—um quâ—dem operum adhuiusmodi beneficia quae ipse à Deo accepit Vnde ergo his dignus habitus est Ex sola side Abraham saith Oecumenius was not by his workes worthy of the benefites of God he had nothing at all not any shew of workes to the benefites that he receiued of God but was accounted worthy thereof by faith onely The cause of all was that which Moses said k Deut. 4.37 He loued thy fathers therefore he chose their seed And what was it for their merits that he
another whereas to that purpose it was vsed and to that purpose most fitly is applyed and therein nothing contained but what is agreable to the truth For whereas he taketh vpon him to correct that terme of necessitie and will haue it to be called infallibilitie and certaintie he malapertly taketh vpon him to teach them that are more learned then himselfe It is a word which S. Austin often vseth vpon the like occasion both against the Pelagians and Manichees b August de perfect iustit Rat. 9 Quia peccauit voluntas secula est peccantem peccatuÌ„ habendi dura necessitas Man sinned by his will saith he and thereupon followed a cruell necessitie of hauing sinne c Retract lib. 1. cap. 1 Naturae nostrae dura necessitas merito praecedentis iniquitatis exortae est A cruell necessitie of sinne grew vpon our nature by the desert of the first sinne d De nat gra cap. 66 Ex vitijs naturae non ex coÌ„ditione naturae est quaedam peccandi necessitas Not by creation but by corruption of nature there is a certaine necessitie of committing sinne e Cont Fortunat. disput â— Post quaÌ„ libera ipse voluntate peccauit nos in necessitatem praecâ—pitati sumus After that Adam sinned by free will we were throwne headlong into a necessitie of sinne all that haue descended of his race And that this necessitie doth well stand with libertie S. Bernard sheweth in calling it f Bernard in Cantic Ser. 81. Ipsa sua voluÌ„tas necessitateÌ„ facit vt nec necessitas cùm voluntaria sit excludere valeat voluntatem nec voluntas cùm sit illecta excludere necessitatem Et postâ— Anima sub voluntaria quadam malè libera voluntate tenetur Et iterum post Voluntas inexcusabilem incorrigibileÌ„ necessitas facis a voluntarie and mis-free necessitie wherein neither can necessitie excuse the will because it is voluntarie nor the will exclude necessitie because it is entangled with delight therein wherein will taketh froÌ„ him all matter of defence and necessitie bereaueth him of possibilitie of amendment and in a word the will it selfe in strange wise causeth this necessitie to it selfe Now then because the state of sinne is such as that there is one way necessitie by the habit of corruption and another way libertie by the free motion of the will very rightly did M. Perkins to expresse the same vse the example of a prison that puts necessitie in one thing and libertie in another And thus in righteousnesse also necessitie and libertie agree and do not one exclude the other For the Angels being by the grace and power of God confirmed in goodnesse are thereby necessarily good g Jdem de grat lib. arist sup so and in such sort good as that they cannot become euill and yet they are freely and voluntarily good because it is the will it selfe that is established in goodnesse The same shall be the state of eternall life to the elect and faithfull h August de perfect iustitia Bene viuendi nunquam peccandi voluntaria foelixque necessitas A voluntarie and happy necessitie of liuing wel and neuer sinning any more Let M. Bishop take knowledge now of this manner of speech and learne not to find fault when he hath no cause But he noteth that we must not vnderstand that a man is at any time compelled to sinne where I may answer him with his owne words before Who knowes not this And againe that this is none of M. Bishops caueat but taken out of M. Perkins M. Perkins had told him so much before hand and therfore what needed this note For this necessitie groweth not of any outward force but from inward nature not by condition of the substance but by accidentall corruption which being supposed there is a necessitie of sinne as in the palsey a necessitie of shaking in the hot feauer a necessitie of burning in the broken legge a necessitie of halting so continuing till the maladie and distemper be cured and done away And whereas M. Bishop referreth this necessitie of sinne to the weaknesse of man and to the craft of the diuell he speaketh too short in the one and impertinently in the other For we are not to conceiue weaknesse onely which may be onely a priuation but a positiue euill habite and contagion of sinne whereby a man sinneth euen without any furtherance of the diuels temptations by the onely euill disposition of himselfe Which euill disposition because it is also in the will it selfe therefore in the midst of that necessitie a man sinneth no otherwise but as M. Bishop requireth to haue it said with free consent of his owne will W. BISHOP M. P. 5. Conclusion The second kind of spirituall actions be good as Repentance Faith Obedience c. In which we likewise in part ioyne with the Church of Rome and say that in the first conuersion of a sinner mans Free will concurreth with Gods grace as a fellow or co-worker in some sort for in the conuersion of a sinner three things are required the word Gods spirit and Mans will for Mans will is not passiue in all and euery respect but hath an action in the first conuersion and change of the soule when any man is conuerted this worke of God is not done by compulsion but he is conuerted willingly and at the very time when he is conuerted by Gods grace he willeth his conuersion To this end saith S. Augustine He which made thee without thee Seâ— 15 de verb. Apost will not saue thee without thee Againe that it is certaine that our will is required in this that we may do any thing well it is not onely then required in our first conuersion if it be required to all good things which we do but we haue it not from our owne power but God workes to will in vs. For looke at what time God giues grace at the same time he giues a will to desire and will the same as for example when God worke faith at the same time he workes also vpon the will causing it to desire faith and willingly to receiue the gift of beleeuing God makes of the vnwilling wil a willing will because no man can receiue grace vtterly against his will considering will constrained is no will But here we must remember that howsoeuer in respect of time the working of grace by Gods spirit and the willing of it in man go together yet in regard of order grace is first wrought and mans will must first of all be acted and moued by grace and then it also acteth willeth and moueth it selfe And this is the last point of consent betweene vs and the Romane Church touching Free-will neither may we proceed farther with them Hitherto M. Perkins Now before I come to the supposed difference I gather first that he yeeldeth vnto the principall point in controuersie that is freedome of will in ciuill and morall
In this respect was it that Luther said that Free will is Res de solo titulo a matter of name only and a bare title because of man himselfe it is nothing and by it or in it there can nothing be attributed vnto him For a August de bono perseu cap. 13. cont 2. ep Pelag lib. 4. ca. 6. we will indeed it is true but God worketh in vs to will we worke but it is God that worketh in vs to worke we walke but he causeth vs to walke we keepe his commaundements but he worketh in vs to keepe his commandements so that nothing is ours of our selues but all is his onely And this M. Bishop in some shew of words here seemeth to affirme but indeed he wholy ouerthroweth it He saith that mans will then onely concurreth with Gods grace when it is first stirred and holpen by grace and therefore that M. Perkins either doth not vnderstand them or else doth wrongfully accuse them in that he chargeth them to say that mans will concurreth with Gods grace by it selfe and by it owne naturall power But M. Perkins vnderstood them well enough and doth no whit wrongfully accuse them For Andradius the expounder of the riddles of the councell of Trent doth plainely tell vs b Andrad orthodoxar explicat lib. 4. Libere nostri arbitrij motto atque ad institiam apâ—licatio non magis a gratia Deipendet quam à diuina virtute stipitis exultio c. Cum diuina gratia iacentem libertatem erigat confirmet viresque illi addat quibus oblata iustitiae ornamentae complecti possit non secus quidem sui ad iustitiam applicationis causa efficiens dicenda est ac ea quae natura constant earum omnium operationum ad quas naturae impulsione feruntur that the motion of Free will and applying of it felfe to righteousnesse doth no more depend vpon the grace of God then the fires burning of the wood doth depend vpon the power of God that grace lifteth it vp being fallen downe and addeth strength vnto it but that it is no lesse the efficient cause of applying it selfe to grace then other naturall things are of all those operations whereto by force of nature they are caried Therefore he compareth c Ibid. Non secus ac ligneis soleâ— deuincti qui incedendiquidem facultatem habent etsi ingredi nullo modo possit ni vincula rumpantur priùs quae motum reprimunt ac retardam Free will to a man made fast in the stockes who hath a power and ablenesse in himselfe to go if he be let go out of the stockes and the bonds be broken that held him before that he could not stirre Whereby he giueth vs to vnderstand their mind that as the fire and other naturall things being by the power of God vpholden in that which naturally they are do of themselues worke their proper and naturall effects and as a man vnbound and let go out of the stockes walketh and goeth not by any new worke that is wrought in him but by his owne former naturall power so Free will though entangled in the delights of sinne and bound with the bonds thereof yet hath a naturall power whereby it can apply it selfe to righteousnesse if grace by breaking the bonds and abating the strength of sinne do but make way for it to vse and exercise it selfe so that grace hauing wrought what concerneth it they leaue it to the will by it selfe and by it owne naturall power to adioyne it selfe to worke therewith And this Bellarmine plainely testifieth when he affirmeth d Bellarm de grat lib. arb lib 6 cap 15. Sicut auxilium generale ita concurrit cum omnibus rebus in actionibus naturalibus vt tameÌ„ non impediat libertatem contiâ—geÌ„tiam ita speciale auxil um adâ—â—uans ita concurrit ad omnes actiones supernaturales vt non impediat hominis libertatem quoniam eodeÌ„ prorsus modo auxilia ista concurrunt that grace doth no otherwise concurre to supernaturall actions then vniuersall causes do to naturall so that it doth no more in the worke of righteousnesse then the Sunne and heauenly powers do in the act of generation or the producing of other naturall effects yeelding an influence and inclination but leauing the very act to the will and worke of man All which in effect M. Bishop himselfe afterwards expresseth teaching that man after the fall of Adam hath still a naturall facultie of Free will which being first outwardly moued and inwardly fortified by the vertue of grace is able to effect and do any worke appertaining to saluation therby giuing to vnderstand that there is still an abilitie left in nature howsoeuer for the present ouerwhelmed and oppressed which being excited and stirred vp though in it selfe it be not sufficient to produce the effects of spirituall actions yet hath a sufficiencie to apply it selfe to grace for the producing thereof Which Costerus the Iesuite declareth by the similitude of e Coster Enchirid ca. 5. Sit quispiam lapsus in foueam tenebricosam ex qua neque cogitete gredinec exire solus possit sed in ea securus obdormiat accedat ad eum amicus qui hominis miserius de somno exertatum ad egressum moneat multisque rationibus vt assintiatur inducat tum ei manum vel funem potrigat simul coâ—antem educat in lumen a man fallen into a darke and deepe pit whence he cannot get out by himselfe nor hath care to get out but sleepeth securely therein till his friend come who awaketh him out of his sleepe and wisheth him to get out and by reasons perswadeth him to be willing thereto and so giueth him his hand or reacheth to him a cord which he taketh and layeth fast hold on it and yeeldeth his owne vttermost strength that he may be pulled out To which purpose also he vseth another example of a man f Ibid. Homo languidus qui ab igne vel à lumine solis facie auersus se ipse solus non potest coÌ„uertere sed si accedat amicus qui iuuet languidus ipse conatum aliquens adhibeat sit tandem vt conuersus calore solis aut ignis fruatur extremely faint and weake lying with his face turned away from the fire or the Sunne who is not able to turne himselfe to the fire or the Sunne but if he haue one to helpe him vseth his owne strength also for the turning of himselfe about to enioy the warmth thereof Which comparisons do plainely shew that they attribute vnto Free will a proper and seuerall worke beside that that is done by the grace of God Whereby we see how guilefully M. Bishop speaketh when he saith that the wil is made able by grace to bring forth spiritual fruit being of it self vtterly vnable therto because he meaneth not hereby that grace doth worke in the wil that whole ability that it hath but that to
the abilitie which the wil naturally hath grace offereth and being accepted yeeldeth only an assistance and helpe for the accomplishment of the work Which he implieth in that he saith that the worke proceedeth principally of grace not wholy but principally onely because grace first occasioneth and beginneth the same whereas otherwise they make Free will parallel-wise and as it were side by side concurre with grace to the effecting of that whereto it tendeth Yet he will not haue vs thinke that they require some outward helpe onely to the will to ioyne with grace or that grace doth but as it were vntie the chaines of sinne wherein our will is fettered and then will can of it selfe turne to God when indeede he cannot well tell what he would haue vs thinke We heare him and his fellowes talke of inward mouing and inward fortifying but in truth they make all this inward but onely outward because they still deny that grace worketh that intrinsecall act of the will whereby it first applieth it selfe to God and do leaue g Andrad vt supra Homini semper liberum relinquitur diuinae operationi praebere impedimentum eamque vel amplecti vel repudiare the will of man to make vp the worke of grace by that that meerely and naturally is his owne In respect whereof Costerus compareth grace h Coster vt supra Est haec gratia in arbitrio voluntatis vt ea vti possit non vti retinere abijcere quemadmodum baculus in manu conualescentis cuius auxilio si velit vtetur sin minus poterit eum remouere to a staffe in a mans hand which at his owne will he either vseth for his helpe or throweth away still excluding that worke of God whereby it is wrought in the will to will and receiue the grace of God and not to reiect the same The necessitie of which worke herein plainly appeareth for that man as touching spirituall life i Ephes 4.18 the life of God is wholy dead and therefore as the dead man hath no facultie or power left whereby to do any thing for himselfe for recouerie of life againe but his life and the life of all his parts must wholy and newly be put into him so man hath nothing left in nature whereof with any helpe whatsoeuer he can make any vse to returne to God againe but this life must wholy and newly be wrought in him by the grace and power of God Now in this point M. Bishop stutteth and stammereth and knoweth not how or what to say Man he saith is but halfe dead not starke dead and by and by after he is halfe dead in his naturall powers of vnderstanding and will but touching supernaturall workes he may in a good sence be likened to a dead man and yet presently saith againe that in this state there is a naturall facultie of Free will which is able being outwardly moued and inwardly fortified to effect and do any worke appertaining to saluation Whereby he wholy ouerthroweth the comparison of a dead man because where there is remaining an actiue power that needeth onely to be stirred vp and strengthened there cannot be affirmed the state of death But the Scripture pronounceth man absolutely dead The k Iohn 5 25. dead shall heare the voyce of the Sonne of God and they that heare it shall liue l Epes 2 1.5 Col. 2.13 Ye were dead in trespasses and sinnes not m Luk. 10.30 halfe dead like the man that descended from Ierusalem to Iericho to whom S. Ambrose more fitly resembleth man falling after Baptisme m Ambros de poeâ—tit lib. 1. cap. 10. and in the state of grace but plainely o Mat. 8.22 dead like p Iohn 11.39 Lazarus foure dayes dead and now stinking in his graue in whose raising vp was q Aug in Ioan. trail 49 Surrexes protessit Jn vâ—roquâ— potentia Domin erat non vires mortut the power of Christ not any strength of the dead man so as that the recouering of a man to faith and spirituall life is by r Eâ—nes 1.19 the same working of the mightie power of God which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead Which if M. Bishop did acknowledge according to the plaine euidence of holy Scripture he would not thus halt betwixt grace and Free will but would confesse that whatsoeuer the will doth in the worke of saluation the same is fully and wholy wrought therein by grace But now he doth but dally with the name of Grace as Pelagius the heretike did onely to hide the venime and poyson of his false doctrine Å¿ August cont Pelag. Celest lib. 1. cap. 37. Gratiae vocabulo frangens inuidiam effensionemque decliâ—ians to abate the hatred and auoid the offence that should otherwise arise against him And no otherwise doth the councell of Trent which he alledgeth for his warrant the doctrine whereof is the very same with the Pelagian heresie being taken with those corrections and limitations wherewith Pelagius and his followers did abridge and explaine themselues For they denied not a necessitie of the grace of God Pelagius himselfe plainely saying t Pelag. apud Aug. ibid lib. 1. cap. 31. Liberum arbitrium habere nos dicimus quod in omnibus bonu operibus diuino semper adiuuarur auxilio We say that we haue a Free will which in all good workes is alwayes assisted with the helpe of God u Cap. 33. Lâ—berum sic confitemur arbitrium vt dicamus nos indigere Dei semper auxilio We so confesse Free will as that we say that vve alwayes stand in need of the helpe of God x Cap. 35 Epistota nostra consitetur nos omnino nihil boni facere â—asse sine Deo We can do no good at all without God y Cap. 37. Inuemeni nos ita hominis laudare naturam vt Dei semper gratiae addamus auxilium We so prayse nature as that we alwayes adde the helpe of the grace of God And that we may see that he first trod the path for the councell of Trent to follow he sticketh not to pronounce z Cap. 1. A thema qui sentit vel docet gratiam Dei qua Christus vinit in hunc munâ—um peccatores siluâ—s facere non solum per singulas horas aut per singula momenta sed etiam per singulos actus nostros non esse necessariam qui hanc conantur auferâ—e paenas sortiuntur aeternas Anathema to euery one that thinketh or saith that the grace of God whereby Christ came into this world to saue sinners is not necessarie not onely euery houre and euery moment but to euery act of ours and they that go about to deny it shall be punished for euer So doth the Pelagian heretike affirme to Hierome a Hieron adis Pelag. lib. 3. Suâ—t plerique nostrorum qui omina quae agimus dicant fieri praesilio Dei There
therefore presume not of thine owne doing but of the grace of Christ It is no arrogancie but faith to acknowledge what thou hast receiued it is not pride but deuotion What word is here of Certaintie of Saluation but that it belongeth to a faithfull man to confesse himselfe much bound to God for calling of him to be his Which euery Christian must do hoping himselfe so to be and being most certaine that if he be not in state of grace it is long of himselfe and no want on Gods part The second place hath not so much as any shew of words for him thus he speaketh Let no man aske another man Tract 5. in Epis Ioan. but returne to his owne heart and if he find Charity there he hath securitie for his passage from like to death What need was there to seeke charity in his heart for securitie of his Saluation if his faith assured him thereof therefore this text maketh flat against him R. ABBOT The words of Austine or rather of Ambrose for he indeed is the author of them are these a August de verb. Dom. ser 28. ex Ambros de sacram lib 5. cap. 4. O homo nō audebas oculos tuos ad coelum attollere oculos tuos ad terram dirigebas subitò accepisti gratiam Christi Omnia tibi peccata dimissa sūt Ex malo seruo factus es bonus filius Ideo praesume non de operatione tua sed de Christi gratià Gratia enim saluati estis Apostolus ait Non ergo hìc arrogantia est sed fides praedicare quod acceperis non est superbia sed deuotio O man thou didst not dare to lift thine eies to heauen thou didst cast them to the earth and vpon the sodaine thou receiuedst the grace of Christ all thy sinnes are forgiuen thee Of an euill seruant thou art made a good sonne Presume therefore not of thine owne working but of the grace of Christ For by grace ye are saued saith the Apostle Here therefore is no arrogancie but faith to speake of that which thou hast receiued is not pride but deuotion To which words Maister Bishop answereth What word is here of Certaintie of Saluation when as expresly against his assertion it is affirmed that the faithfull regenerate in Christ doth presume that his sinnes are forgiuen him that he hath receiued the grace of Christ that he is made the child of God and that this is no arrogancie no pride no vnlawfull presumption but a matter of faith a matter of deuotion and a good presumption as he calleth it afterwards Now all these things he comprehendeth vnder the name of Saluation citing to that purpose the words of the Apostle By grace ye are saued For how doth the Apostle say By grace ye are saued as of a thing done already but for that we are made partakers of the forgiuenesse of sinnes haue receiued the grace of Christ and are become the children of God Therefore in presuming of these things as Ambrose willeth the faithfull to do we consequently presume and stand assured of our owne Saluation because in these things our Saluation is begun as appeareth by the words of Christ concerning Zacheus b Luk. 19.9 This day Saluation is come to this house because this man is become the sonne of Abraham And whereas M. Bishop saith we may not presume hereof because we know not our owne works or righteousnesse S. Ambrose telleth vs that this is not to be presumed of our owne works but of the grace of Christ the true calling whereof is such as maketh vs that whereunto we are called because we are thereby called not at the eare onely but inwardly and in the heart Therefore them that are thus truly called S. Ambrose willeth not coldly to hope according to the manner of M. Bishops hope where feare is as strong as hope but faithfully and deuoutly to presume that they are in the state of grace not with doubting to thinke that if they be not so it is long of themselues but to resolue that without themselues they are so indeed onely by the grace of God We may well thinke that it was a frostie morning that made M. Bishop to make so cold construction of so effectuall and plaine words But in the next place cited out of Austine he goeth beyond himselfe Let vs take the whole words as he hath them vpon these words of S. Iohn c 1. Iohn 3.14 By this we know that we are translated from death to life because we loue the brethren Hereupon saith he d August in Ioan. tract 5. Quid nos scimus Quia transiuimus de morte ad vitam Vnde scimus Quia diligimus fratres Nemo interroget hominem redeat vnus quisque ad cor suum Si ibi inuenerit charitatem fraternam se uros sit quia transcit de morte ad vitam Iam in dextera est Non attendat quia mo lo gloria eius occulia est cum venerit Dominus tunc apparebit gloria eius Viget enim sed adhuc in hyeme viget radix sed qu est aridi sunt raini Intus est medulli quae vigis tintus sunt solit arborum 〈◊〉 fructus sed aestatem expectant Ergo nos 〈◊〉 c. What do we know That we are translated from death to life Whereby do we know it Because we loue the brethren Let no man aske of another man let him returne to his owne heart if he find there loue to the brethren let him be without doubt that he is passed from death to life He is now on the right hand Let him not regard that his glory is now hid when the Lord shall come then his glory shall appeare For he is aliue but yet as in the winter the root is aliue but the branches are in a manner dry Within is the pith that liueth within are the leaues within are the fruits but they looke for a sommer Therefore we know that we are translated from death to life because we loue the brethren Where we see both by the text it selfe and by the exposition of this auncient Father that by loue towards them that are our brethren in the faith of Iesus Christ we are to take knowledge and assurance of our being translated from death to life that is of our owne Saluation and that so as to be without doubt thereof and yet this wrangler doubteth not to say This place hath not so much as any shew of words for him The point in question is affirmed not in ambiguous and doubtfull words but euidently and apparantly and yet he goeth away with This place hath not so much as any shew of words for him nay this text maketh flat against him But why so I pray you What need was there saith he to seeke charitie in his heart for securitie of his Saluation if his faith assured him thereof But why doth he not answer to the point Doth not S. Austine teach the
vnderstanding or vsing of the name of grace as meaning thereby the grace of sanctification as the Scripture by grace meaneth the free mercy of God accepting vs freely in Christ by the forgiuenesse of our sinnes and this M. Bishop citeth as if Caluin had affirmed that Austines opinioÌ„ had ben wholy against him as touching iustification by the righteousnesse of Christ In like sort he abuseth Chemnicius whose words in the former place are these b Chemn Exam. Coâ—cil Triden de iustific Patribus lâ—cet verbum iustificare accipiaÌ„t pro renouatione qua efficiuntur in nobis per spirituÌ„ opera iustitiae non mouemus litem vbi iuxta scripturam rectè commodè tradunt doctrinam quemodo et quare persona Deo reconcilietur c We contend not against the Fathers albeit they commonly take the word iustifying for that renewâ—â—g whereby the works of righteousnesse are wrought in vs whereas according to the Scripture they rightly and conueniently deliuer the doctrine how and for what a man is reconciled vnto God receiueth remission of sinnes and adoption and is accepted vnto euerlasting life In the other place he saith c Patres quidem verbuÌ„ iustificare in hac significatione saepe vsurpare non ignoro sed de proprietate linguarum quaestio est I am not ignorant that the Fathers do often vse the word iustifie in this signification namely to make inherently iust but the question is of the propriety of tongues He confesseth that the Fathers sometimes do somewhat differ from vs as touching the signification of the word but rightly truly affirmeth that as touching the matter point of doctrine they teach the same that we do Surely if betwixt the Papists and vs there were no greater difference then onely about the meaning of a word we would not loose our time nor spend our labour friuolously and idlely to contend against them But they abuse the Fathers mistaking of a word to the ouerthrowing of the doctrine approoued by the Fathers And yet the Fathers when they place iustification in the forgiuenesse of sinnes as many times they doe and teach that by the righteousnesse that is in vs being defectiue and vnperfect e August de Trin. lib. 13. cap. 14. Vtique iustuÌ„ est vt debitores quos tenebat liberi dimittaÌ„tur credentes in eum quem sine vllo debito occidit hoc est quòd iustificari dicimur in sanguine Christi d Psal 143.2 no man liuing shall be iustified in the sight of God as they alledge out of the Psalme they doe neither in matter of doctrine nor meaning of the word depart from that that is maintained by vs. S. Austine saith Iust it is that the debters or trespassers whom the diuell held should be let goe free beleeuing in him whom he slew without debt or trespasse This is it that we are said to be iustified in the bloud of Christ f Jbid. cap. 16. Iustificati planè in eo quòd à peccatis omnibus liberati liberati autem à peccatis omnibus quoniam pro nobis est Dei filius qui nullum habebat occisus We are iustified in his bloud in that we are freed from all sinnes and freed from all sinnes for that the Son of God who had no sinne was slaine for vs. So Theodoret giuing the meaning of the words of the Apostle we are iustified freely c. maketh it to be this g Theodoret. in Rom. cap. 3. Sola fidâ— allata remissionem peccatorum consequimur Bringing faith onely we obtaine the forgiuenesse of our sins Origen maketh these words Thy sins are forgiuen thee h Origen ad Rom. cap. 3. the pronouncing of the iustification of the woman who with her teares washed the feet of Christ S. Bernard saith that i Bernard in Anâ—unciat ser 1. Crede quia per ipsâ—m tibi peccata doâ—antur Sic enim arbitratur Apostolus gâ—atis iustificari hâ—minem per fidem our being iustified freely by faith which the Apostle speaketh of consisteth in beleeuing that our sinnes are forgiuen vs. But most fitly to the purpose he saith in another place k Idem epist 190 Vbi re oÌ„â—iliatio ibi remâ—ssio pec catorum quid ipsa nisi iustificatio Where there is reconciliation there is forgiuenesse of sinnes and what is that but iustification Now according to this construction of iustification they are wont to deliuer that l August in Psa 33. Iste est modus humanae iustitiae vt vita mortalis quantumlibet proficiat quia sine delicto esse non potest in hoc non delinquat dum speratin cum in quo est remissio delictorum JdeÌ„ de ciu Dei lib. 19. cap. 27. vt supra Sect. 5. mans iustice or righteousnesse is to hope or put trust in himâ—â—â—â— whom is forgiuenesse of sinnes that our righteousnesse in this life is rather forgiuenesse of sinnes then perfection of vertues that m Idem cont 2. epist Pelag. lib 3. cap. 5. Omnium piorum c. Spes vnâ— est quòd aduocatum habemus c. the onely hope of all the godly groning vnder this burden of corruptible flesh in the infirmitie of this life is this that we haue an aduocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust and he is the propitiation for our sinnes as S. Austine speaketh that n Hieron adu Pelag. lib. 1 Tunc iusti sumus quaÌ„do nos peccatores fatemur iustitia nostra non ex proprio merito sed ex Dei consistit misericordia then we are iust when we confesse our selues sinners and our righteousnesse consisteth not of our merit but of the mercie of God as Hierome saith that o Ambros de Jacob. c. Non gloriabor quia iustus sum sed gloriabor quia redemptus sum Gloriabor non quia vacuus peccati sum sed quia mihi remissa sunt peccata Non gloriabor quia profui aut quia profuit mihi quisquam sed quia pro me aduocatus apud patrem Christus est sed quia pro me Christi sanguis effusus est we are not to reioyce that we are iust but that we are redeemed not that we are without sinne but that our sinnes are forgiuen vs not in the good that we haue done or that any other man hath done for vs but that Christ is our aduocate with the Father that the bloud of Christ was shed for vs as Ambrose saith that p Bernard in Cant. ser 22. Iustitia in absolutione peccatorum Christ is our righteousnesse in the forgiuenesse of our sinnes and that q Ibid. ser 23. Hominis iustitia indulgentiae Dei Gods forgiuenesse or pardon is mans righteousnesse as S. Bernard saith Now what do we teach otherwise then all these haue taught when we say that we are reputed iust by the forgiuenesse of our sinnes and that this is our iustification in the sight of God For what are we but iust in the
sight of God when there is taken from vs the imputation of all sinne Surely r August de verb. Apost ser 16. Puto hoc esse dicere Iustus sum quod est Peccator non sum to be iust is the same as not to be a sinner and Å¿ Idem in Psal 118. conc 3. Jovia fidei pro non peccantibus habentur quibus peccata non imputantur in the way of faith they to whom their sinnes are not imputed are accounted not sinners Therefore it followeth that they are accounted iust Yea as was before alledged t Idem Retract lib. 1. cap. 19. vt supra sect 7. all the commandements of God are reputed to be done when that which is not done is pardoned But he who is reputed to haue done all the commandements of God is reputed iust He therefore to whom God pardoneth that which he hath not done is reputed iust u Idem in Psal 118. con 3. Siquid à deuiante coÌ„mittitur propter viam non imputatur tanquam non fuerit operatus accipitur In the way of faith if any thing be committed by stepping out of the way for the waies sake it is not imputed and a man is taken as if he had not done it Yea x Bernard in Cant. 23. Omne quod mihi ipse non imputare decreuerit sic est quasi non fuerit all that God hath determined not to impute is all one as if it had neuer bene Now he that is taken as if he had neuer done amisse is reputed iust Whosoeuer therefore is in the way of faith is reputed iust And thus much is included in the sayings of the Fathers â—heresoeuer they teach forgiuenesse of sinnes who thereby to expresse our iustification learned of the Apostle himselfe who saith that we are iustified y Rom. 3.24 through the redemption that is in Christ and expoundeth that redemption by z Ephe. 1.7 Col. 1.14 forgiuenesse of sinnes and in the not imputing of sinne vnderstandeth a Rom. 4.6.7.8 the imputing of righteousnesse without works as before was said Now forgiuenesse of sinnes is yeelded vnto vs by vertue of the merit righteousnesse which Christ hath wrought for vs who b Rom 8.32 was giuen for vs and c Tit. 2.14 gaue himselfe for vs who was d Gal. 4.5 made vnder the law to redeeme vs and therefore is e Bernard in Cant. ser 70. Iustus pro hominibus iust or righteous for vs who f Luk. 22.10 shed his bloud for vs g 1. Thess 5.10 died for vs h Act. 3.26 rose againe for vs and whatsoeuer he hath done hath done for vs. And if for vs the Sonne of God haue i Mat. 3.15 fulfilled all righteousnesse and obedience to his Father who had no neede to vndergoe any such seruice for himselfe should it not be strange that the same should not be reckoned and imputed vnto vs Very iustly it is accounted ours whatsoeuer he hath done for vs no lesse then if we our selues had performed the same for our selues And this is the imputation of Christes righteousnesse which we maintaine by which our sinnes are couered and hidden that is pardoned and forgiuen and we are consequently reputed iust euen by the iustice or righteousnesse of Christ because in the righteousnesse of Christ is the forgiuenesse of our sins But why do they reiect imputation of righteousnesse which as we haue seene before the spirit of God so expresly recommendeth vnto vs by the very phrase importeth that we are not righteous in our selues Surely it were k Origen in Rom ca. 4 Quid videbitur gratiae iusto reputari iustitiam ad iustitiam no matter of grace or fauour as Origen well noteth that to a iust or righteous man his righteousnesse should be reputed for righteousnesse But it is a matter of fauour and grace that God reputeth vs iust It must therefore of necessity be by other meanes then by the righteousnesse that is in vs which can be no other but the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ that it may be verified of him which is written l Ierem. 23.6 This is the name whereby they shall call him The Lord our righteousnesse Thus saith Ambrose m Ambros in Psa 118. ser 18. Ipse iustitia est nobis de suo dedit sui habere consortiâ—m Christ is righteousnesse and of that that is his he hath giuen vnto vs to haue fellowship with him n IdeÌ„ de Abrah lib. 2. cap 8. verè nos tegmine velleris sui vestiuit in demum introducit aeternae salutis he hath indeede clothed vs with the couer of his fleece and bringeth vs into the house of euerlasting saluation And hereof he intimateth a comparison which o Pigh controu De fide iustificatione Pighius himselfe could not but approoue that as Iacob receiued the blessing and inheritance in the garments and apparell of Esau his elder brother to whom the same did properly belong so we receiue the blessinâ— of God and are accepted to eternall life in the garment of the righteousnesse of Christ by faith in him whilest thereby we obtaine the forgiuenesse of our sinnes p Ambros de Iacob c. li. 2. cap 2. Odoratus est odorem vestimentorum Fortasse illud est quia non operibus iustâ—ficantur sed fiâ—e quoniam carnalis infirmitas operibus impedimento est fidei autem claritas factorum â—b umbrat errorem quae meretuâ— veniam delictoâ—uÌ„ Isaac smelled the sauour of Iacobs garments namely which Rebecca his mother had put vpon him of his brother Esaus Haply saith he it importeth this that we are not iustified by works but by faith because the infirmitie of flesh is a hinderance to works but the brightnesse of faith ouershadoweth the errour of our works as which obtaineth the forgiuenesse of our sinnes This ouershadowing is our safety this hiding and couering of our errours and imperfections which disgrace and blemish all our righteousnesse and works and what haue we to couer and hide the same but onely the fleece of the merit of Iesus Christ And this point Saint Bernard as he was most abundant in spirituall meditation so hath most clearely and diuinely set forth vnto vs and saue that we know with whom we haue to deale we should hold it almost incredible that there should be that impudencie in any man as with so wretched and beggerly answers to goe about to shift off so plaine and manifest proofes q Bernard epist â—90 vt supra Sect. 9. There is the righteousnesse of another saith Saint Bernard assigned vnto him that wanted of his owne The righteousnesse then that is assigned vnto vs is anothers and not our owne Yea but let his owne reason saith Maister Bishop serue for exposition of his former words Be it so and what is that reason Forsooth this saith he For why may not iustice be from another as
distinction is very plainly intimated by S. Paul when he saith r Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were iustified by workes he had to reioice but not with God He denieth not but Abraham was iustified by workes and that he had wherein to glory and to stand vpon his iustification but yet not with God He might do it in respect of men but with God he could not do it So saith Origen vpon those words hauing first put difference betwixt iustification by faith seene onely to God and iustification by works which may be approoued of men ſ Origen in Rom. ca. 4. Abraham si ex operibus iustificatus est habet quidem gloriam ex operibus venientem sed non illam quae apud Deum est If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath the glory which commeth by works but not that which is with God And this distinction is apparant also by S. Austine who speaking as touching inherent iustice and righteousnesse of workes saith t Aug. de Temp. ser 49. Quamdiu viuitur in hac vita nemo iustificatus est sed In conspectu Dei. Nō frustrae addidit In conspectu tuo nisi quia potest esse iustificatus in cōspectu hominū Referet in conspectu Dei Non iustificabitur in conspectu tuo omnis viuens So long as we liue in this life no man is iustified but in the sight of God Not without cause was it that Dauid added In thy sight For it may be that a man may be iustified in the sight of men but let him speake as touching Gods sight and no man liuing shall be iustified in thy sight Where sith S. Austine as touching iustification by workes denieth that any man in this life is iustified in the sight of God it must necessarily follow that that iustification which is by workes must not be vnderstood in the sight of God but onely in the sight of men Now then to speake of iustification before men as S. Iames doth it is true that both faith and workes do concurre and ioine in the act of iustification The faith that inwardly in the heart iustifieth to God and is outwardly professed with the mouth to men is not sufficient to approoue a man outwardly to men and to the Church of God to the sight and conscience whereof euery faithfull man is bound to acquit and cleare himselfe vnlesse it be accompanied and adorned with vertuous and vpright conuersation In this respect therefore it may be said that the better part in some sort is attributed to workes that faith is made perfect by workes that faith is as the body and good workes as the soule and that faith without workes is dead euen as the body is dead without the soule Men specially haue an eie to workes and thereto attribute more then to words He is taken for a halting and halfe Christian that maketh shew of faith and liueth not accordingly Men account him as a carion a dead carkasse lothsome detestable he is euery mans byword as I said before and his name continually carieth reproch with it Hereby it appeareth also that faith though haply it be in the heart yet is here respected onely as it is professed to men For it cannot be that the worke of the hand should giue life to the faith of the heart but rather receiueth life from it Yea M. Bishop himselfe telleth vs that charity within is the life of faith within and therefore workes which are without cannot be said to be the life of faith but as faith it selfe also is without There may be workes whereby a man outwardly may u Luk. 16.15 iustifie himselfe to men as the Pharisees did which yet are dead workes because there is neither faith nor charity to giue them life from the heart Now S. Iames must so be vnderstood as that not charity which is habitually and inuisibly within but works which are outward and apparent must be the life of faith He speaketh therefore of faith as it is outwardly professed which hath it life and grace and honour amongst men by the outward fruites of good workes correspondent to it selfe Very guilefully therefore doth M. Bishop turne his speech from workes whereof S. Iames speaketh to charity there being here so different a consideration to be had of the one and of the other yea he himselfe naming charity the fountaine of good workes and thereby importing that charity as the fountaine differeth from the good workes that issue therefrom The place that he alledgeth to the Corinthians x 1. Cor. 13.2 Though I haue all faith c. is nothing to this purpose because we speake here of a faith that is common to all the faithfull but the Apostle there speaketh of a faith that is peculiar onely to some whereof he hath said the chapter going before y Cap. 12.9.10 To one is giuen the word of wisedome to another the word of knowledge to another is giuen faith meaning the faith whereby miracles are wrought as he himselfe addeth Though I haue all faith so that I could remooue mountaines c. His purpose is to teach men not to be proud of speciall gifts of the spirit but to respect the end and vse thereof which is performed by loue without which they are onely idle shewes As touching the comparison of faith and charity there hath bene enough said z Sect. 22. before For our present state faith hath the preferment and all in all hangeth vpon our faith which is the heart and life of whatsoeuer else is in vs towards God It is faith that giueth God his glory that acknowledgeth him to be that that he is that so setteth him before vs as to draw all our affections vnto him our loue our feare our hope our delight our selues wholy both body and soule The promises of God in speciall manner are made to them that beleeue and trust in him Therefore that God esteemeth more of our charity then of our faith is not the Apostles assertion but M. Bishops fond collection and that which the whole course of Scripture doth gainsay But supposing it to be so the consequence that M. Bishop draweth therefrom is very ridiculous If God esteeme more of charity then of our faith a man is more iustified by charity then by faith As if he should say A man esteemeth more of his eies then of his eares therefore he heareth better with his eies then with his eares A thing may simply absolutely be preferred before another and yet the other in some respect vse may be preferred before it Thus may it very well be said as touching this comparison of faith with charity as before is said Further he alledgeth that God to shew how acceptable Abrahams fact was to him saith Now I know that thou louest me The true text is a Gen. 22.12 Now I know that thou fearest me but thus M. Bishop shufleth and shifteth the best he can to gaine somewhat to charity against faith
saluation in Christ which in the law being a transgressour thereof he could not finde But of these words enough hath bene said before in the question of l Cha. 3. Sect. 3. the Certaintie of Saluation For conclusion of this point to quit M. Bishop I will alledge the words of S. Bernard m Bernard in Cant. ser 50. Non latuit praeceptoreÌ„ praecepti ponduâ— humanas excedere viâ—es sed iudicauit vtile ex hoc ipso suae ipsos insufficientiae admoneri et vt scirent sanè ad queÌ„ iustitiae fineÌ„ niti pro viribâ—s oporteret Ergo mandando impossibilia non praeuaricatores fecit sed humiles vt omne os obstruatur subditus fiat to tus mundus Deo AccipieÌ„tes quippe mandâ—tum sentientes defectum clamabimus in coelum miserebitur nostri Deus sâ—temus in die illa quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nos sed secundum miserecordiam suam saluos nos fecit It was not vnknowne to the commaunder that the waight of the commaundement doth exceede the strength of man but he held it expedient that hereby men should be aduertized of their owne vnsufficiencie and that they should know to what end of righteousnesse they should labour to their vtteâ—most Therefore by commaunding things vnpossible to vs he hath not made vs trespassers but humbled vs that euery mouth may be stopped and all the world may be made subiect to God For receiuing the commaundement and feeling our owne defect and want we shall cry to heauen and God will haue mercy vpon vs and we shall know at that day that not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercy he hath saued vs. In which words he giueth vs to vnderstand that God had reason sufficient to giue the law though he knew it vnpossible for vs in this state of mortality and weakenesse perfectly to fulfill the law 44. W. BISHOP Now that iust mens workes be not sinnes which I prooue first That good works be not stained with sinne by some workes of that patterne of patience Iob Of whom it is written that notwithstanding all the diuels power and craft in tempting of him He continued still a single hearted and an vpright man Cap. 2. departing from euill and preseruing his innocencie If he continued an innocent he sinned not Againe if in all these instigations to impatience he remained patient these his workes were perfect For S. Iames saith Esteeme it my brethren all ioy Cap. 1. when you shal fall into diuers temptations knowing that the probation of your faith worketh patience And let patience haue a perfect worke that you may be perfect and entire failing in nothing 2. King Dauid thus by the inspiration of the holy Ghost speaketh of himselfe Thou hast O Lord prooued my heart Psal 16. thou hast visited me in the night thou hast tried me in fire and there was no iniquity found in me It must needes then be graunted that some of his workes at least were free from all sinne and iniquity And that the most of them were such if you heare the holy Ghost testifying it I hope you will beleeue it reade then where it is of record 3. Reg. 15. That Dauid did that which was right in the sight of our Lord and not onely in the sight of men and turned from nothing that hee commaunded him all the dayes of his life except onely the matter of Vrias the Hethite 3. The Apostle affirmeth 1. Cor. 3. That some men do build vpon the onely foundation Christ Iesus gold siluer and pretious stones that is being choise members of Christes Catholike Church doe manie perfect good workes such as being tried in the fornace of Gods iudgement will suffer no losse or detriment as he there saith expresly Wherefore they must needes be pure and free from all drosse of sinne otherwise hauing bene so prooued in fire it would haue beene found out 4. Many workes of righteous men please God Rom. 12. 1. Pet. 2. Make your bodies a quick sacrifice holy acceptable to God the same offering spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God Phil. 4. And S. Paul calleth almes bestowed on him in prison an acceptable sacrifice of sweet sauour and pleasing God But nothing infected with sinne all which he hateth deadly can please God and be acceptable in his sight God of his mercy through Christ doth pardon sin or as the Protestants speake not impute it to the person but to say that a sinfull worke is of sweet sauour before him and a gratefull sacrifice to him were blasphemie wherefore we must needs confesse that such workes which so well pleased him were not defiled with any kind of sinne Mat. 5. 1 Tim. 6. Ephes 2. Finally many workes in holy writ be called good as That they may see your good workes To be rich in good works We are created in Christ Iesus to good workes but they could not truly be called good workes if they were infected with sinne For according to the iudgment of all learned Diuines it can be no good worke that faileth either in substance or circumstance that hath any one fault in it for bonum ex integra causa malum ex quolibet defectu Wherefore we must either say that the holy Ghost calleth euill good which were blasphemie or else acknowledge that there be many good workes free from all infection of sinne R. ABBOT The wise man hauing prefixed this title That good workes be not stained with sinne which we say they be taketh vpon him in his text to proue that iust mens workes be no sinnes which no man saith they be We must beare with him because his vnderstanding doth not serue him to take that for gold wherein there is any drosse for if it did he would easily conceiue that the staine of mans sinne doth not destroy or take away the nature of the good worke which in man by man is wrought by the grace of God But leauing that peece of his folly let vs examine his proofes that good workes be stained with sinne And first he will proue it by the example of Iob because it is said of him that a Iob. 2.3 he continued still a single hearted and an vpright man departing from euill and preseruing his innocencie But it were very hard to say how M. Bishops purpose should be made good out of these words We find here a relation of Iobs goodnesse but we find nothing to proue that that goodnesse of his was no way touched or stained with sin Now the reader is to vnderstand that this coÌ„mendation of Iob set down in the 1. Chapter after repeated in the 2. chapter to shew his constancy therin was of old vrged by the Pelagian heretikes as now by M. Bishop to prooue the perfection of the righteousnesse of man But S. Austine well waighing the circumstance of the text how it is withall said There
giuing to vnderstand that that former was not the whole meaning of Christes words r Beda in Luc. cap. 17. We are vnprofitable seruants because the sufferings of this time are not worthy of the glory to come as in another place which crowneth thee in mercy and compassion He saith not in thy merits because by whose mercy we are preuented that we may humbly serue him by his gift we are crowned to reigne with him What M. Bishop no more faith no more trust in you do you alledge Authors when they condemne your doctrine euen in the places whence you cite them Leaue of leaue of Act. 26.14 it is hard for you to kicke against the prickes You fight against the Gospell of Christ against the truth of God and do not you doubt but it will preuaile against you and the conquest thereof shall be your vtter confusion if you hold on your course 5. W. BISHOP And thus we fall vpon the third property of M. Perkins meritorious worke which is That it be done to the profit of another and say that albeit God in himselfe receiue no profit by our workes yet doth he in the administration of his holy common-weale the Church wherein good mens seruices do much pleasure him And in this sence it is said of S. Paul That by cleansing our selues from wicked workes 2. Tim. 2. Math. 5. we shall become vessels sanctified and profitable vnto our Lord. Againe God is glorified by our good workes That seeing your good workes they may glorifie your Father which is in heauen Finally God doth reioyce at the recouerie of his lost children Ioh. 15. ver 8. Luk. 15. If then good men trauailing painfully in Gods Vineyard do yeeld him outwardly both honour ioy and commoditie that may suffice to make their worke meritorious R. ABBOT As touching this condition we contend not with Maister Bishop concerning his exposition thereof Merit must be done by the will and for the vse and behoofe of him at whose hands it must merit So Christes obedience by the will of the Father to the praise of the glory of his grace did merit and deserue at his Fathers hands in our behalfe Onely it is to be added that it must fully satisfie the vse and behoofe whereto it is intended and not faile in any point thereof Now because a Aug. Euâ—hirid cap. 64. Sic spiritu Dei extitantur vt etiam spiritu suo c. tanquaÌ„ filij hominuÌ„ quibusdaÌ„ motibus humanis deficiant ad seipses c. the children of God are so moued by the spirit of God as that by their owne spirit as the sonnes of men through humane motions and affections they sometimes faile and fall backe to themselues and therefore do not so entirely and perfectly serue the vses of the Lord to yeeld either glory to God or loue to their brethren as they ought to do therefore neither do they attaine to this condition of merit nor can in any sort bind God to repay them for that broken seruice that they haue done nay if he would call matters to strict reckoning and account he hath rather occasion of quarell against them for disgracing and defiling the works that he hath wrought in them 6. W. BISHOP M. Perkins fourth property is That the worke and reward be equall in proportion If he vnderstand Arithmeticall proportion that is that they be equall in quantity to wit the one to be as great or of as long continuance as the other then we denie this kinde of equality to be requisite to merit there is another sort of proportion called by the Philosopher 5. Ethic. Geometricall and the equality of that is taken by a reasonable correspondence of the one vnto the other as when a good office is giuen vnto a Citizen of desart it may be that the honour and commodity of the office is farre greater then was the merit of the man yet he being as well able to discharge it as another and hauing better deserued it is holden in true iustice worthie of it In like manner in a game where maisteries are tried the prize is giuen vnto him that doth best not because the value of the reward is iust as much woorth as that act of the man who winneth it but for that such actiuitie is esteemed woorthy of such a recompence Now the crowne of heauenly glory is likened by Saint Pule vnto a Garland in a game where he saith 1. Cor. 9. 2. Tim. 2. That we all runne but one carieth away the prize And he that striueth for the maisterie is not crowned vnlesse he striue lawfully It is also resembled vnto places of honour Math. 25. Ioh. 14. I will place thee ouer much And I go to prouide you places Grace is also in many places of Scripture compared to seede Math. 13. 1. Ioh. 3. For the seed of God tarieth in him But a little seed cast into good ground and well manured bringeth forth abundance of corne Briefly then such equality as there is betweene the well deseruing subiect and the office betweene him that striueth lawfully and the crowne betweene the seede and the corne is betweene the reward of heauen and the merit of a true seruant of God And thus much of M. Perkins first Argument more indeede to explicate the nature and condition of merit then that his reason nakedly proposed did require it R. ABBOT The proportion that maketh merit or desert must be Arithmeticall wherein the worke must fully equall the reward though not in greatnesse and continuance yet in value and woorth If the one in that sort do not counterpoise the other the one cannot be said to be deserued by the other But there is no proportion at all either Arithmeticall or Geometricall betwixt that that is finite and that that is infinite therefore none at all betwixt the worke of man and the reward of heauen the one being euery way finite the other in continuance infinite So then Maister Bishops Geometricall proportion and reasonable correspondence is excluded also because a Fulgent ad Monim lib. 1. TantuÌ„ ibi graetia diuinae retributionis exuberat vt inceparabiliter atque ineffabiliter omne merituÌ„ quamuis bonae ex Deo datae humanae voluntatis operationis excedat the grace or gift of Gods reward as Fulgentius saith doth so much there abound as that incomparably and vnspeakeably it exceedeth all the merit of the will and worke of man albeit it be good and giuen vnto him of God There is no reasonable correspondence where the one incomparably and vnspeakeably exceedeth all the merit and desert of the other The same is imported by Saint Bernard who hauing said that mens merits are not such as that life eternall is due vnto theÌ„ of right giueth reason therof beside that that I mentioned before b Ber. in Annunciat Ser. 1. Quid sunt omnia merita ad tantaÌ„ gloriam For what are all merits to so great
that righteousnesse to which the stipend and wages of righteousnesse should be due But let vs here consider the reasons which M. Bishop setteth downe in S. Austines name why he did not say The wages of righteousnesse is eternall life partly saith he to hold vs in humility Well but yet it was not S. Austins meaning that the Apostle wold keep vs in humilitie by coÌ„cealing that that is true but by withholding vs from conceiuing proudly of our selues that that is not true n Ne iustitia de humano se extolleret bono merito lest saith S. Austin righteousnesse should aduance it selfe as of any merit that man should haue thereby Againe partly saith he to put difference betweene saluation and damnation This reason he maketh of his owne S. Austin hath it not but what is that difference Obserue it well gentle Reader for herein is the secret and thou shalt see the lewdnesse of there wretched men in abusing the name of S. Austin to the colouring of their falshood We are forsooth the whole and onely cause of our damnation but not of our saluation but principally the grace of God The grace of God he saith is principally the cause of our saluation but not the whole and onely cause for we must vnderstand that we our selues by our Free will are a part of the cause of our saluation Yea vpon Free will they hang the effect of the grace of God and from thence do they deriue vnto man that merit wherby he doth deserue eternall life For they know well that man cannot be said to merit any thing by that that is wholy the gift of God and therefore for the vpholding of merit and desert they are so eager and earnest for the maintenance of free will They walke in this behalfe in the very steppes of the Pelagian heretickes who as Prosper recordeth alledged for defence of Free will o Prosper de li. arbit Asserunt nec laudem ha bâ—re eos nec meritum qui ex dono gratiae sunt fideâ—es that men can haue no commendation nor merit who are faithfull by the gift of grace So S. Hierome bringeth in the Hereticke saying resolutely p Hâ—â—râ—n aduer Pelagâ—â— Mihi â—ullus â—nfâ—â—re peâ—erit arbitrij libertatem ne si in operibus mâ—s Deus adiutor extuâ—rit noÌ„ mihi debeatur merces sed ei qui in me operatus est No man shall take away from me free will lest if God be my helper in my workes the reward be not due to me but to him that worketh in me Euen so Popish merit standeth vpon free will for q Rhemish Annot in Rom. 9.14 men say the Rhemists worke by their owne Free will and thereby deserue their saluation So saith Alphonsus de Castro r Alphons de Castro adu haere lib. 7 in Gratia Ex hoc quòdnos monitioâ— illius consentimus qui tamen dissentire poteramus debetur nobis merces praemium inde meritum nostrum In that we by free will consent to Gods monition who yet had it in our power to dissent a reward and wages is due vnto vs and thence is our merit In like sort Andradius telleth vs that Å¿ Andrad Orth. explicat lib. 6. Nostra merita dicuntur quia liberè spontè illas actiones suscipimus quibus apud Deum promeremur they are called our merits because we freely and voluntarily vndertake those actions whereby we merit with God Now of this poisonfull doctrine whereby man is made partaker with God in the glorie of our saluation they would make S. Austine a partaker and patron with them who in condemning the Pelagian heresie condemned the same and challengeth our good workes which he calleth merits wholy and onely vnto God So he saith that t August Epist 105. Omne bonuÌ„ meritum nostruÌ„ non in nobis facis nisi gratia all our good worke or merit is wrought vnto vs by grace onely that u Jdem Hyâ—og lib. 3. Iustorum per totam seculi vitam meritum emâ—â— est grâ—tia all the merit of the iust through the whole life of this world is grace x De veâ— Dom. Sâ—rm 7. Totum reputa quòd iustus es pietati That thou art iust saith he repute it wholy to mercie y De verb. Apost Ser. 16. Totum quòd sumus quòd habemus boni ab illo habemus That that we are and haue in goodnesse we haue it wholy of him To that purpose he alledgeth against the Pelagians a speech of Cyprians requiring that z Idem de boâ—o perseu cap. 6 ex Cypriano de Orat. Dom. Nequis sibi superbè arroganterque aliquâ—d assumas nequis aut confessionis aut passionis gloriam suam dicat c. vt dum praecedit humilis submissa confessio datur totum Deo quâ—cquid suppliciter cum Dei timore petitur ipsius pretate praestetur no man proudly and arrogantly assume any thing to himselfe nor call the glorie of confessing or suffering his owne that whilest humble and lowly confession goeth before and all wholy is yeelded vnto God it may be granted vnto vs by his mercie whatsoeuer we humbly request in the feare of God Now according to those words of yeelding or attributing all wholy vnto God he saith in the same place a Jbid Tutiores viuimus si totum Deodâ—â—â—us non nos illi ex parte notis ex parte committimus We liue more safely if we attribute all wholy to God and do not commit our selues partly to God and partly to our selues For reason whereof he saith anone after that b Jbid cap. 7. Post casum hominis nonnifi ad gratiam suam Deus pertinere voltus vt homo accedat ad eum neque nisi ad gratiam suam pertinere volunt vt homo non recedat ab eo after the falâ— of man God would not haue it belong to any thing but to his grace that we come vnto him nor wold haue it to belong to any thing but his grace that we do not depart from him And to those words of Cyprian he alludeth in diuers and sundry places as namely where he saith that c Enchir. cap. 32 Proptereà dictuÌ„ NoÌ„ volentis c. vt detur totum Deo See of Free-will Sect 15. therefore the Apostle saith It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercie that all wholy may be attributed vnto God discoursing at large that our willing and our running is not to be diuided betwixt the will of man and the mercie of God because then as it is said on the one side It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercie because the will of man alone suffiseth not so on the other side it may be said It is not of God that sheweth mercie but of him that willeth and him that runneth
blindly proposed by M. Perkins I will confirme the first with such texts of holy Writ as specifie plainly our good workes to be the cause of eternall life Mat. 25. Come vnto me ye blessed of my Father possesse a kingdom prepared for you And why so For when I was hungry ye gaue me meat so forth the like is in the same chapter of the seruants who employed all their talents for their Lord said vnto them Because you haue bene faithfull in few things I will place you ouer many And many such like where good workes done by the parties themselues are expresly said to be the very cause why God rewarded them with the kingdome of heauen Therefore he must needes be holden for a very wrangler that doth seek to peruert such euident speeches and would make the simple beleeue that the cause there formally specified is not to be taken for the cause but doth onely signifie an order of things But if any desire besides the euidence of the text to see how the auncient Fathers take it let him reade S. Augustine In Psal 40. where he thus briefly handleth this text Come ye blessed of my Father receiue what shall we receiue a kingdome for what cause because I was hungrie you gaue me meate c. Of the reall imputation of Christs merits there was no tidings in those daies and that iudicious Doctor found that good works was the cause of receiuing the kingdom of heaueÌ„ R. ABBOT M. Bishop to helpe the former argument addeth some texts of holy writ which specifie plainely as he saith our good workes to be the cause of eternall life To this purpose he alledgeth the words of Christ as touching the last iudgement a Mat. 25.34 Come ye blessed of my Father possesse or rather b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inherite ye the kingdome prepared for you before the foundations of the world for I was hungry and ye gaue me meate c. Where the very place it selfe disproueth that that he intendeth to proue by it for by that that he saith Inherit ye the kingdome it is plainely gathered which S. Ambrose thence affirmeth c Ambros de abitis Theodosij Tanquam possessionem haereditariam recipimus ea quae promissa sunt â—â—bis We receiue as a possession of inheritance those things that are promised vnto vs. And if we receiue the kingdome by way of inheritance then it is not by merit as hath alreadie bene declared Againe when he saith prepared for you from the foundations of the world euen as S. Paule saith d Eph. 1.4 God hath chosen vs in Christ before the foundations of the world he sheweth that the kingdome was prepared for them that inherite it before they had any works and therfore to reason in the same maner as the Apostle doth e Rom. 9.11 not by workes but by the grace and mercie of him that calleth it is said Come ye blessed inherit the kingdome c. For to say that God f August contra Iulian. Pelag. li. 5 cap 3. Ne fortè ante constitutionem mundi ex operibus praecognitis putarentur electi seâ—utus est adiunxit si autem gratia c. vide Epist. 105. prepared the kingdome for them vpon foresight of their workes is the heresie of the Pelagians long agone condemned It must needes be therefore that it was prepared for them without respect of works and that their workes are alledged not as the proper cause fot which the kingdome is giuen vnto theÌ„ but as signes and tokens that they are they for whom it is prepared euen as before we heard out of S. Bernard that g Bernard de grat lib arb Occultae praedestinationis indicia futurae foelicitatis praesagia via regni noâ— causa regnandi they are tokens of our predestination foretokens of our future happinesse the way to the kingdome not the cause of our obtaining it No more can be argued out of the other place Reward we find there but Merit we find none neither can the one of these be euicted by the other It onely sheweth how God graceth his faithfull seruants by assigning vnto them vnder the name of reward that which indeed he otherwise freely bestoweth vpon them A most cleare example whereof we ha◠〈◊〉 our father Abraham to whome God made at first an absolute promise that he would h Gen. 12.2.3 make of him a great nation and would blesse him and in him all nations of the earth should be blessed and yet afterwards vpon the triall that he made of him for the offering of his sonne Isaac taketh occasion to renew the promise as if he would do it for his obedience therein i Cap. 22.16 Because thou hast done this thing and hast not spared thine onely sonne therefore will I surely blesse thee and I will multiply thy seede after thee c. and in thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed because thou hast obeied my voice The blessing was assured to Abraham infallibly by the former absolute promise of God k Prosper de vocat gent. lib. 1. cap. 3. Sine conditio ne promisit sine lege dâ—nauit without any caution or condition as Prosper well saith but he would haue Abraham to take knowledge by occasion of that that he had done that the promise before freely made should inuiolably without any impeachment stand good vnto him Euen so God from our works taketh occasion of the renewing of his promises thereto for our assurance tieth the performance therof vnder the name of reward when as the true cause of all is his mercy in Iesus Christ by whom onely it is that the worke is accepted in his sight Now if God vouchsafe to honour vs let not vs thereby take occasion to dishonour him or chalenge proudly to our merits that for which we should sing praise onely to his mercy Neither do we herein wrangle or peruert the Scripture but finding by the Scripture that God hath chosen and called vs l Ephe. 1.6 that we should be to the praise of the glory of his grace m Aug. cont Pelag Celest lib. 2. cap. 24. NoÌ„ enim Dei gratia gratia erit vllo modo nisi fuerit gratuita omni modo which is not grace in any sort except it be free in euery sort we endeuour that this glory may be yeelded entirely vnto God and that to this end it may alwaies be acknowledged that n Rom. 6.23 eternal life is the gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. Now whereas he alledgeth S. Austin to his purpose he abuseth S. Austin as he is wont to do who questioneth not any cause in the place by him cited but vsing the words Come ye blessed of my Father receiue ye a Kingdome goeth on hereupon to demaund not as Maister Bishop saith For what cause but o Aug. in Psal 49. Quid percipite Regnum Pro quare
sufficiently approoued vnto him in the z Supra Sect. 14. defence of the answer to the first obiection His whole errour standeth in this that he cannot conceiue how the reward should be giuen to our workes if it be giuen for Christes sake or how it should be giuen for Christes sake if it be promised to our workes whereas both these accord in one and for Christes sake it is that any such reward is assigned to our workes 18 W. BISHOP M. Perkins fourth obiection for vs is proposed vnskilfully yet could he not answer it but by relying vpon that which is most vntrue that forsooth no one action of the best man is without fault which hath bene already confuted and might be by instances of Abrahams oblation of his sonne Saint Iohn Baptists preaching and reprehending of Herod and Stephens martyrdome with infinite such like in which Maister Perkins nor any else will be able to shew in particular what fault there was Math. 6. Luk. 11. Againe our Sauiour saith That if the eye be simple the whole body is lightsome not hauing any part of darknesse in it and very reason teacheth vs that a mans action for substance and all due circumstances may be perfect It was then a very silly shift to say that neuer any man did any one action with all his due circumstances But in steede of that fourth Argument I will put this If a greater reward be due vnto them that do better workes then a reward is due vnto them that do good workes which is euident in reason But a greater reward is prouided for them that do better as S. Augustine grounded vpon Gods word Serm. 46. De verbâ—â— Dom. 1. Cor. 15. proueth in sundâ—y places namely vpon that For starre differeth from starre in glory so shall be the resurrection of the dead specifying that virginity shall shine after one sort chastitie in wedlocke after another and holy widowhood yet after another Serm. 95. Lib. de virg cap. 44. all saith he shall be there but they shine diuersly And of the same worke affirmeth That martyrdome shall be higher rewarded then any other work The like doth he vpon those words One ground shall yeeld thirty fold another threescore fold another an hundred fold Comparing chastity in wedlocke to the thirty in widowes to the sixty and in virgins to the hundred But most directly in his sixty seauen treatise vpon Saint Iohns Gospell vpon this verse In my fathers house are many mansions where he saith that albeit some be holier iuster and more valiant then others yet there shall be fit roomes for them all where euery one is to receiue his place according vnto his merit That penny spoken of by which saith he is signified eternall life shall be giuen to euery man equally Math. 20. because euery one shall liue for euer and not one longer then another but many mansions do signifie the different dignities of merits in the same euerlasting life And S. Gregory in most expresse termes doth teach the same doctrine saying Lib. 4. mor. cap. 42. Because in this life there is a difference of workes amongst vs there shall be in the other life without all doubt a distinction of dignities that as one here exceedeth another in merit so there one surpasseth another in reward Finally S. Augustine and S. Hierome De heres her 8â— Lib. 2. cont Iouiâ— condemne it as an heresie to hold that there is not diuersity of merits in this life and rewards in the next Whereon followeth most manifestly that there be merits and rewards R. ABBOT The fourth obiection he telleth vs is vnskilfully proposed but yet he doth not tell vs how he would haue it proposed because belike he had small opinion of it Yet I will do him the fauour to put it into forme for him to let it appeare whether he be likely of any aduantage by it It must be thus If good workes be perfect and without fault then they merit But they are perfect and without fault because they are the workes of the holy Ghost Therefore they must needes merit Now the first of these propositions is false For although it be graunted that good workes be perfect and without any defect yet can they not merit at Gods hands as may appeare by that that hath beene a Supra Sect. 3. 4. before said as touching the conditions of Merit Euen Adam himselfe in the state of Paradise could by desert haue chalenged nothing at Gods hands as neither can the elect Angels still continuing in that integritie wherein they were first created But Maister Perkins denieth the minor proposition affirming that no workes of ours are perfect and without blemish but do all carie the markes of our vncleannesse whereby being exacted in rigour they are subiect to reproofe For although in their originall which is the spirit of God they be pure and cleane yet as water though cleare in the fountaine yet gathereth vncleannesse from the channell wherein it runneth so the workes of grace wrought in vs do receiue some taint of the corruption of our nature through which they passe And as the hand of the most cunning Scribe write he neuer so excellently by himselfe loseth much of his perfection and grace in holding the hand of a child to teach him to write so the worke of the holy Ghost being most absolute in it selfe yet in vs through the crookednesse and corruption of our nature whilest it is framing vs to it selfe loseth much of the beauty and glory that it should haue vntill the same spirit haue fully consumed all our drosse that it alone may preuaile in vs. M. Bishop replieth that this is most vntrue and telleth vs that it hath bene already confuted but yet against his confutation it is iustified to him before and will stand good that there is no action of man so perfect but that there is a defect to be found in it The best of our actions is weakened by b Gal. 5.17 the flesh lusting against the spirit so as that we cannot do the things that we would In our best actions it hapneth which our Sauiour saith c Math. 26.41 The spirit indeede is willing but the flesh is weake And howsoeuer faith fighting against the weakenesse of the flesh do preuaile and ouercome yet euen of the resistance of the flesh there groweth a blemish and the neerenesse of the infection thereof doth breath out some distastfull quality vpon our workes for which we haue neede to aske pardon at Gods hands But M. Bishop bringeth instances of Abrahams oblation of his sonne of Iohn Baptists preaching and reprehending Herod of his and Steuens martyrdome with infinite other such like saith he in which no man can shew in particular what fault there was But why should we not conceiue the like of the martyrdome of Iohn and Steuen as we do of the martyrdome of Peter And of Peters martyrdome our Sauiour Christ beforehand saith d Iohn
him to make two Cherubins one at the one end of the mercy-seat and the other at the other end so as that with their wings stretched out they shold couer the mercy-seate Which done he saith d Exod. 25.22 There will I declare my selfe vnto thee and from aboue the mercy-seate betweene the two Cherubins which are vpon the Arke of the Testimonie I will tell thee all things which I will giue thee in commandement vnto the children of Israel According to this commaundement Moses did but what was done with those Cherubins which Moses set vp it is vncertaine whether by the enemies taking of the Arke as most likely it is they were taken away or whether they fitted not the place of the Temple where they should stand the Tabernacle and furniture thereof being before made portable to be remoued from place to place Howsoeuer that were this is certaine that Solomon by vertue of the same commandement and to obserue that which by Moses was prescribed made two Cherubins to stand in the same place as the other did and to the same vse The worke therefore being finished e 1. King 8.5.6 king Solomon and all Israel being assembled together the Priests brought the Arke of the couenant of the Lord into his place into the oracle of the house the most holy place euen vnder the wings of the Cherubins for the Cherubins stretched out their wings ouer the place of the Arke and the Cherubins couered the Arke Inasmuch then as God had by the law directed in what sort this should be done Solomon needed no further speciall cōmandement for the doing of it but had trespassed against God if being appointed to build a house vnto God he had not done it according to such rules as the law before had limited for the doing of it so idle a fancy is it which M. B. here deliuereth that out of his owne high wisedome onely he thought it lawful for him to imitate that which Moses had done before and consequently so vaine a cauill is it which he vseth that the obiection being mooued of the Cherubins made by Solomon M. Perkins answereth by the commandement giuen thereof to Moses when as there was the very same respect of both and Solomon renewed them by the same commandement by which Moses at first made thē Now these 2. Cherubins of which the questiō is specially moued were erected in the most holy place whether as the Christiā saith to the Iew before spokē of in the 2. Nicen coūcell f Nycen Synod 2. Act. 5. ex Leont Quo sanè nulli mortalium dabatur accessus praeterquam summo Sacerdoti idque semel in anno it was grāted to no mortal man to haue accesse but onely to the high priest that once only in the yeare yea and there was also g Exod. 26.33 2. Chron. 3.14 a veile drawne before to make a separation betwixt the holy place and the most holy so that no man had the sight of any thing therin Very falsly therfore vnhonestly doth M. B. deale to cōfound these Cherubins with the rest as touching their place and generally to say There they were placed not onely in the inward but also in the outward parts of the Temple vpon the walles and very doores that they might be seene of all the people it being euident that these were neuer to be seene of the people nor of any saue onely the high Priest and consequently were such as can giue no warrant at all to setting vp of Popish images As for the rest of the Cherubins which the text mentioneth they were of other sort wrought in the curtaines and feeling of the wals and vpon the dores and vessels onely for garnishing and beautifying the works but Cherubins that were standing images there were none but only those two The veile of the most holy place was h 2. Chro. 3.14 wrought with Cherubins i Kings 6.29 the wals were carued with grauen figures of Cherubins palme trees and other grauen flowers k Ver. 35. the doores also with the like l Cap. 7.29 the bases whereupon the caldrons were to stand were grauen in the borders with Lions Buls and Cherubins Here it is plaine then that the Cherubins were of no other respect or vse but as the figures of palme trees Pomgranats Flowers Lions Buls and other such like not in any sort for exercise of the deuotion of the people but onely for the adorning of the house Yea and to these also the people had no accesse within the house being prohibited to come any further thē to the doore neare to which stood the altar to which they were to tender their sacrifice the Priest receiuing the same to do with it according to the law but they themselues might not go in There was one part of the Temple which was called m Exod. 26.33 Heb 9.6.7 the holy place into which the Priests and Leuites ordinarily went to performe their ordinary seruice another part was called the most holy place into which only the high Priest went once a yeare these two parts are most properly called n Luk. 1.21 the Temple in which Solomon bestowed all that curiositie of worke But without these was the vast roome into which the people resorted where they waited o Ver. 10. in prayer whilest the Priests performed the seruice wherin they were accustomed to be taught and our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles preached vnto them going also in generall vnder the name of the temple yet not hauing in any sort that glorious beauty of workmanship that the other parts had neither can M. B. tell vs of any Cherubins therein Seeing then there were no standing Cherubins in Solomons temple but onely two which were wholy remooued out of sight and the rest had no other vse but onely the same as the figures of Lions and Bulles and Flowers and Palme trees and such like and of dead men there were no images at all not of Abraham Isaac Iacob or any other we should thinke that that temple yeeldeth so small grace to Romish Idols as that like Dagon they must fall to the ground and breake their necks vnlesse there be some better means and helpe found for the vpholding of them As for the vse whereto Solomon intended those workes of his who is there that maketh question of it Who doubteth but that by curiositie of Imagerie of caruing and grauing and painting men may beautifie either their houses or their Churches in the like sort as he did Yea M. Bishop well knoweth that we do not thrust Images wholly out of our Churches because we haue in Westminster in Paules and commonly in the rest of our Churches throughout the land many images of our deceased Kings and Queenes of our Nobles and States higher and lower which we preserue and adde more to them from day to day We determine nothing absolutely against Images but we determine against images in case of superstition and