sanctus every godly man shall pray unto thee Our Saviour taught his owne Apostles and all other Christians to pray daily for remission of sinne Every one saith Cyprian is taught peccare se quotidie dum quotidie per peccatis jubetur orare that he sinneth daily seeing he is commanded to pray daily for his sinnes Therefore all even the best of us are sinners Fifthly whosoever doth that evill which he would not and doth not that good which hee would is a sinner both in respect of commission and omission but such is the condition of the best even of the Apostlâ—… himselfe Rom. 7. 15. 19. for so he saith vers 25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I my selfe Sixthly whosoever hath sinne is a sinner All men have sinne and that I prove thus Whosoever is a lyar himselfe and maketh God a lyar that saith he hath no sinne he undoubtedly is a sinner But every man though he were as holy as the beloved Apostle and Evangelist Saint Iohn is a lyar himselfe and maketh God a lyar that saith he hath no sinne for if wee saith he including himselfe say we have no sinne wee deceive our selves and the truth is not in us 1 Iohn 1. 8. if we say that we have not sinned we make him a lyar and his word is not in us vers 10. Therefore every man though hee be as holy as Saint Iohn himselfe is a sinner Seventhly whosoever is free from sinne is also free from death No mortall man is free from death Therefore no mortall man is free from sinne CHAP. III. The question concerning the imperfection of inherent righteousnesse further discussed § I. TO contradict this argument that we are not justified by righteousnesse inherent because it is unperfect Bellarmine indeavoureth to prove that it is perfect both in respect of habituall and actuall righteousnesse But in both hee useth to dispute Sophistically in the first because some men have beene indued with perfect righteousnesse in the second because some good works of the just are purely and perfectly good For though both these assertions were true as they are not yet would they not conclude justification by inherent righteousnesse For first as touching the persons the question is not whether some choice men in some part of their life after they have beene good and long proficients doe attaine to some perfection but whether they and all others when they are first justified are endued with perfect justice for if they be not then endued with perfect inherent righteousnesse they are not justified by it Now justification by habituall righteousnesse which they call their first justification is incipientium of incipients and themselves distinguish Christians into three rankes that some are incipients some proficients some perfect But incipients are such as be infants and babes either in respect of age when being baptized in their infancie are as they teach justified or in respect of religion being new converts But to imagine that either infants which have not so much as the use of reason nor are as yet capable of the habits of Faith Hope and Charity and much lesse are able to produce the Acts to Beleeve to Hope to Love or new converts who are like Babes to bee fed with Milke are indued with perfect righteousnesse is a great absurdity § II. Yea but saith Bellarmine the workes of God are perfect Deut. 32. 4. habituall righteousnesse is the worke of God therefore it is perfect Answ. The workes of God are either immediate and such as hee worketh at once or else mediate which hee worketh by degrees The former are perfect at the first according to their kinde as were the workes of creation The latter are not perfect at the first but by degrees are brought to perfection as the worke of procreation or carnall generation and of Spirituall Re-creation or Regeneration Adam was the immediate Worke of GOD created at once and therefore perfect in his kinde at the first Seth also was the Worke of GOD not immediate by creation but mediate by Procreation being first begotten by his parents and conceived then formed in the wombe then borne then growing from age to age untill hee came to bee a perfect man So it is in the Spirituall Re-creation For wee are the workemanship of God created unto good workes but we are not perfect Christians at the first For we are first begotten by the incorruptible seed of Gods Word receiving as it were the seeds of Gods graces at the first being but as Embryons in the wombe untill Christ bee formed in us And when wee are borne a new wee are at the first but as new borne Babes who are to desire the sincere milke of the worke that we may grow thereby and afterwards stronger meats that wee may grow more and more and then not contenting our selves with that measure of growth which wee have attained unto must still strive towards perfection being from day to day renewed in the inner man untill we come to be adult growne men or as the Apostle speaketh perfecti and when we are such because alwayes in this life we are in our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or growing age receiving onely the first fruits of the Spirit wee must imitate the Apostle Paul who though he farre excelled the most perfect among us acknowledged that he had not attained to perfection but did strive towards it exhorting all others who are perfect that is adulti or growne men to be of his minde that is that they should acknowledging their imperfection still more and more strive towards perfection § III. As touching actuall righteousnesse hee dealeth also Sophistically for first where hee should prove that the works of the faithfull are perfect or purely and absolutely good he proveth that they are truely good and not sinnes but especially when he should prove that all the workes of the faithfull or righteous are purely and perfectly good he proveth that some are As though a man who is not onely guilty of many sinnes and infected with manifold corruptions and infirmities but also in respect of his former sinnes obnoxious to damnation could bee justified by some good workes among many not good But this is a most erroneous conceit of the Papists who hold that every good worke proceeding from charity doth absolutely deserve heaven even as well as any evill worke committed against charity deserveth hell As though by one act of charity the whole Law were fulfilled as well as by one act committed against charity the whole Law is broken Hee that transgresseth one Commandement though it bee but once is guilty of all But hee doth not fulfill the Law and much lesse can bee justified by his obedience whose obedience is not totall perfect and perpetuall It is true that a faithfull man may bee justified that is declared and approved to be just by some one or more good workes as Abraham
man could performe justitiam legis considered in the abstract as it is described in the doctrine of the Law and as Bellarmine himselfe De justif lib. 1. cap. 1. doth consider it would justifie him because it is perfect yet considered in the concrete for that righteousnesse which men attaine unto in or by the Law doth not justifie because it is unperfect And therefore that righteousnesse which men have in or by the Law doth not fulfill the righteousnes of the Law which the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These two distinctions Bellarmine hath devised to shift off onely two of the places cited viz. Rom. 3. 27. and Phil. 3. 8 9. both which distinctions being rightly understood make against himselfe as I have shewed § IX Now he commeth to the third thing viz. what is meant by workes For saith he our adversaries by workes which the Apostle excludeth from justification understand all works whether done before or after faith yea faith it selfe considered as a work which opinion to be most absurd and proceeding from the ignorance of the Scriptures Augustine saith hee teacheth Men not understanding what the Apostle saith we make account that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law have thought that hee had said that faith is sufficient to a man though he live wickedly and have no good workes which be it farre from that Vessell of Election to thinke And farre bee it also from us so to thinke But although faith alone doth not suffice unto the perfection of a Christian who is to bee saved yet it alone sufficeth unto justification wherein wee have had the consent of many of the Fathers And although to the act of justifying nothing in us concurreth with faith but it alone sufficeth yet in the party justified there must concur with faith both inward graces and also outward works But here the Papists are divided among themselves Some of them thinke that by the workes of the Law are excluded not the workes of the morall but of the ceremoniall Law others that the workes of the morall Law are also excluded not all but such as goe before faith such as are done by the strength of nature without grace and without faith I answere first to both joyntly that not onely the workes of the Law are expressely excluded but all workes whatsoever indefinitely Rom. 4. 2 6. 11. 6. Eph. 2. 9. and more specially the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse Tit. 3. 5. the workes which God hath prepared for the regenerate that they should walke in them Ephes. 2. 9 10. Againe in him that is said not to worke workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded but hee that is justified by faiâ—…h is said not to worke Rom. 4. 4 5. and to have righteousnesse imputed to him without workes verse 6. Therefore his workes are not to bee distinguished but all are understood to be excluded § X. To the former severally I answere first that when the holy Ghost nameth the Law indefinitely he meaneth either the whole Law which is called Mishmereth the observation of the Lord or his charge containing three branches the morall the ceremoniall and the judicial Law or the chiefe part which is the morall Law And that the Apostle meaneth it especially because he speaketh of that Law by which commeth the knowledge of sinne and which was common both to Iewes and Gentiles unto which the whole world was subject Rom. 3. 19 20. whatsoever the Law saith it saith to them who are under the Law that every mouth may bee stopped and all the world may become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obnoxious to the judgement of God Therefore by the deedes of the Law there shall no flesh that is neither Iew nor Gentile be justified in his sight for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne Moreover it is evident that the Apostle in that place speaketh of that Law which forbiddeth morall offences mentioned from the tenth verse to the ninteenth and by which all both Iewes and Gentiles are convicted to be under sin ver 9. 19. Secondly it is unreasonable to be thought that any man who was a transgressour of the morall Law should looke to bee justified by the observation of the ceremoniall Law which was but a by-law being but an appendice of the first table of the morall Law as the judiciall was an appendice of the second table And further the Apostle professeth that whosoever would be circumcised was bound to the performance of the whole Law Therefore the observer of the ceremoniall law could not be justified without the observation of the morall law Thirdly this answer which is given by some of the Pontificians is rejected by Bellarmine and the greater part of learned Papists who with us following the interpretation of Augustine and other of the ancient Fathers doe confesse that by the workes of the law which the Apostle excludeth from justification are meant the workes of the morall law as well as of the rest § XI But then say I all good workes whatsoever are excluded For in the Law which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse all good workes are prescribed and therefore those which proceed from faith For if charity which is the fulfilling of the law proceedeth from faith unfained 1 Tim. 1. 5. then doe those good workes which the law prescribeth proceed from faith also or else they are not such as the law requireth And therefore frivolous is the distinction of Bellarmine and other Papists who by the workes of the law excluded from justification underâ—…tand workes done before or without faith by the strength of nature not workes proceeding from faith or workes of grace The absurdity of whâ—…ch distinction being applyed to the question in hand may further appeare 1. If workes going before justification bee excluded from being any cause thereof then much more those workes which follow justification for causes doe not use to follow after but to goe before their effects at least in order of nature 2. The question concerning justification by workes must of necessity be understood of good workes for of those which are not good no question ought to be made But workes done before or without faith are not good For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne and without faith it is impossible to please God Neither can the fruit be good whiles the Tree is bad Neither can it be imagined that a man should bee justified by the workes of the law going before faith unlesse it bee presupposed that a man without faith and before grace is able to fulfill the law For hee that doth not fulfill the law transgresseth it and hee that transgresseth it is cursed not justified by it 3. When the Apostle termeth those workes which hee excludeth from the act of justification the workes of the Law the word Law is added not by way of extenuation as
those words of the Apostle Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction First that the word gratis may bee understood as opposed to merits of condignity going before justification and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine are but merits of congruity But it is evident that not onely merits of condignity but all merit whatsoever yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us or any desert of ours or worthines in our selves And thus the councill of Trent it selfe expoundeth this word We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely because none of those things which goe before justification whether faith for workes deserve the grace of justification for if it be grace then is it not of workes for iâ—… it were of workes then grace were not grace as the same Apostle saith Secondly saith he it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace for those that proceed from grace are not opposed to grace and therfore not excluded Whereunto I reply we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God and what good thing we have from God that is called ours as our faith our Charity our Hope our good â—…orkes Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace when as if we should doe all that is commanded which cannot be done without grace we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks because we have done but what was our duty to doe Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritoriâ—…us cause of justification in our selves though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace is added through the redemption whiâ—…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth thaâ—… in us there is no materiall cause no merit of justification but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace I say it may as in that opposition which is of relatives as of the cause and the effect For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof The other argument is from the word grace For if our justification be of grace then not of workes as the Apostle teacheth Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace So Ephes. 2. 8 9. you are saved by grace not of workes For to him that worketh the reward that is justification or salvation is not imputed of grace but it is rendred as of debt but to him that worketh not but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is imputed namely of grace to righteousnesse Rom. 4. 4 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes verse 6. CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes and first from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell Secondly from the Doctrine of Christian liberty § I. NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works which when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof hee proveth them to be consequents thereof rather than causes And having little to say to the question it selfe he intermingleth many impertinent discourses Impertinent I say to the question though not to his purpose which was to calumniate us as though we held all those assertions which he laboureth to confute In his fourth booke therefore which is de justitia operum he propoundeth two maine questions to be disputed unto which divers others are coincident The former concerning the necessity of good workes the other concerning the truth of them As if we either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good To the former hee referreth three questions the first whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God as though wee taught they were not the second concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell as if we taught that the difference standeth in this that by the Law good workes are necessary by the Gospell not The third concerning Christian liberty as though we taught that the faithfull in their conscience and before God are subject to no Law Concerning the truth of the righâ—…eousnesse of good works after hee hath disputed the question whether the Law be possible whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe whether good workes doe justifie or not Concerning the former questions it shall suffice to shew what our tenet is in every of them and to defend our assertions against his cavils â—…o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes passing by the rest as impertinent As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered that we hold good workes necessary in many respects and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford we confesse that they are necessary necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres that are already justified and are to bee saved as necessary consequents of justification and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae as causes either of justification or Salvation § II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation which we deny not Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove but that they are necessary to justification as causes thereof which is the question betweene us for ought that I can discerne he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes wherein he spendeth nine Chapters For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary because as hee propoundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke we are bound to keepe the Law of God And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gospell and concerning Christian liberty But by these arguments Bellarmine neither proveth his owne assertion nor disproveth ours His assertion is that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof which we deny He argueth they be causes why because they are necessary As if every thing that is necessary were a cause But whereto are they necessary to salvation saith Bellarmine Why
the necessity of good workes though they bee impertinent to the maine Question because they prove not that which is in controversie betwixt us yet are not impertinent to his purpose which was to calumniate us and to beare the world in hand that wee are such as deny the necessity of good workes But if the question were tryed by voices of the Fathers innumerable testimonies might bee produced out of their writings wherein they teach that wee are justified by faith and not by workes yea in direct termes affirming that which is the question betweene us that we are justified by faith alone But that workes are necessary as causes either to salvation or which is the question to justification not any one pregnant testimony out of the ancient Fathers is or as I suppose can bee produced But to prove the necessity of good workes by way of presence I shall not need to recite the severall testimonies seeing I have my selfe delivered more to prove and to urge the necessity of good workes than can be gathered out of all these testimonies put together § XV. In the third and last place he bringeth a reason like to that which he framed l. 1. cap. 14. that faith alone doth not justifie But doth he not dispute the same question here did he not propound five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone the fifth and last wherof was from the necessity of good works the handling whereof hee put off to this place Should he not then from the necessity of good workes prove that faith doth not justifie alone But in stead of proving that hee endevoureth to prove that faith doth not save alone Thus craftily hee glydeth from one question to another for his owne advantage because hee knew that more is required to salvation than was required to justification For sanctification commeth betwixt justification and salvation And although we are justified without works going before justification yet we are not saved without workes going before salvation they being the way which God hath prepared for them that are justified to walke in towards their glorification I might therefore according to the Lawes of disputation hold him to the question or refuse to give him answere But he is so farre from proving that faith doth not justifie alone that hee is not able to prove that it doth not save alone disputing in that sence according to which we doe hold that faith doth justifie alone Now for the understanding of our sence and meaning certaine distinctions heretofore propounded must for avoiding of calumniations bee here repeated First that wee doe not meane that faith is the onely grace which doth sanctifie as the Papists will needes misunderstand us but that to sanctification not only other graces doe concurre with faith but good workes also And consequently that besides faith the said graces and good workes be forerunners of our salvation Secondly when wee say faith alone wee doe not meane that faith which is alone being a solitary an idle a counterfeit and dead faith severed from charity and other graces and destitute of goodworks but we meane a true and lively â—…aith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love which cannot be severed from charity and other graces as I have heretofore proved And therefore wee hold that although in respect of the act of justifying or saving it alone yet in respect of the being thereof it never is nor if it be a true justifying and savingfaith can be alone Thirdly when we doe say that faith alone justifieth and saveth wee speake with relation to the object or relatively meaning that the object which faith alone receiveth doth justifie and save us when wee say therefore that we are justified or saved by faith alone our meaning is that we are justified only by the righteousnesse of Christ which is apprehended by faith alone and not by our owne righteousnesse and that wee are saved by the merits of Christ alone received by faith and not by our owne workes or merits and consequently that Christ received by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our salvation § XVI Now let us heare Bellarmines dispute Iffaith alone did save and that workes were not otherwise â—…ecessary than in respect of presence as the fruits and signes of faith then it would follow that faith could save though it wanted all maner of good workes and were joyned with all maner of vices and sinnes but the consequent is false therfore saith hee faith alone doth not save and good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence but also of some efficiencie To the proposition I answere first that it is senselesse and implyeth a contradiction For if good workes must necessarily be present with saving faith which hee confesseth wee doe hold how can it be supposed without implying a contradiction that it can save being not onely destitute of all good workes but also accompanied with all maner of sinne this is sufficient to overthrowe his whole dispute Secondly I deny the consequence of his proposition For justifieing and saving faith though it justifie and save alone yet it never is nor can be alone Even as the eye in respect of his being cannot if it be a true living eye be alone severed from other parts of the body yet in respect of the act of seeing unto which no other part doth concurre it seeth alone Even so faith which is the spirituall eye of the soule in respect of its being cannot if it be a true lively faith be alone severed from the other graces which are with it fellow members of sanctification but yet in respect of the Act of justifying and saving unto which no other graces concurre with it as any causes therof it justifyeth and saveth alone because it alone and no other grace doth receive Christ unto justification and salvation Thirdly we do not say that the presence of good workes is necessary to salvation onely as they are the fruits and signes of faith but also as necessary forerunners as causa sine qua non as the way to salvation and as the evidence according to which the sentence shall be pronounced Which consideration disproveth the proofe of his consequence which is that according to our doctrine good workes are required to the act of saving onely by accident whose presence addeth nothing to the virtue of faith in justifying and saving and so their absence detracteth nothing from it and therefore being taken away faith never the lesse saveth Answ. Things whose presence is necessary cannot be said to bee present by accident For such may be present or absent but that which is necessary cannot be otherwise the thing being safe But we hold the presence of workes not to be contingent but necessary both in respect of salvation as the way to it and as Causa sine qua non and of faith as the unseparable fruits of it without which it is said to be dead
For what will it profit a man saith St. Iames if hee shall say that hee hath faith and hath not workes will that faith save him For as the body without the Spirit is dead so that faith which is in profession onely and is without workes is dead § XVII But this reason of his hee doth illustrate by two unlike similitudes For saith hee even as fire because by its heat alone it heateth if from the fire were taken away all other qualityes which are by accident joyned with heat it would still without doubt heat And as a father because by the onely relation of paternity hee hath reference to his sonne if from him who is a father all other attributes were removed as knowledgen â—…bility power health beauty and in stead os them there should succeed ignorance basenesse weaknes sicknes deformity and among all these attributes paternity should remaine yet still that father should have relation to his sonne Even so because a Christian apprehendeth salvation by faith alone and unto it is referred by our adversaryes surely it followeth that faith remayning hee may be saved although hee have no good workes and have many ill Answ. In the former similitude hee compareth a Christian man to fire faith to heat and other graces and good workes to such other qualityes as in fire by accident concurre with heat In which similitude nothing is like For neither doth a Christian man justifie or save others by faith as fire by his heat doth heat other things neither is hee justified or saved by his faith as it is a quality inherent but as it is the hand to receive Christâ—… neither are other graces or duetyes of sanctification which wee call good workes to be compared with I know not what accidentall qualityes concurring with heat but to those unseparable qualityes of fire viz light and drynes For even in the fire that is inflamed there doe concurre necessarily with heat drynesse and light neither were it a true fire without them and yet the act of heating is to be ascribed to the heat of the fire properly and not to the light or drynesse of the element so in a true Christian that is justified there doth concurre necessarily with faith both other sanctifying graces answerable to the drynesse of the fire and also the light of a Christian conversation without which hee is not to be held a true Christian or truely justified and yet the act of justifying or saving is not to be ascribed either to other graces or to good workes but onely to faith receiving Christ or rather to Christ onely received by faith In the other similitude he compareth the reference which faith hath to salvation unto that relation with is betweene father and sonne But faith and salvation are no such relatives Neither are the graces of the sanctification or good workes to be compared to those accidentall adjuncts attributed to a father which may come and goe as being not necessary to the being of a father but rather to those properties of the humane nature as reason will understanding wit c. For although a man cannot become a father without these yet his being a father is not not to be ascribed to these § XVIII And whereas hee would seeme to take away the answeare of his adversaties who alleage that his supposition is impossible both because in his first booke he had proved that saith may truely and indeed be severed from charity and good workes and also because at least in conceit it may be severed from them which he saith is sufficient for the confirmation of an hypotheticall prâ—…position neither can his adversaries deny it who teach thah faith and workes have that relation which is betweene the cause and the effect Hereunto I reply First that I have formerly not onely answered his arguments which hee produced to this purpose but also proved by unanswereable arguments that true justifying faith cannot be severed from charity and good workes Secondly as I said even nowe his supposition implyeth a contradiction and therefore is impossible Impossible I say that workes being supposed to bee present necessitate presentiae should in the same speech be truely supposed to be absent Thirdly If Bellarmine can conceive that true justifying and saving faith may be without charity and good workes then hee may also conceive that that faith may save which is severed from charity and destitute of good workes His assumption I grant for wee teach according to the Scriptures that that faith which is alone severed from charity and good works doth justify or save neither alone nor at all and doe ascribe lesse to such a faith than the Papists themselves doe But his conclusion is faulty as contayning more than can be inferred upon the premisses that good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence but also of some Efficiencie which was not so much as mentioned in the antecedent of the proposition which the conclusion should gainsay and say no more Thus much of the necessity of good workes CHAP. VI. Of the verity of the justice of works and of the possibilitie of fulfilling the Law § I. NOw Bellarmine will discourse of the truth of the justice of workes or of actuall righteousnesse And in this dispute he spendeth eigth Chapters But to what end for I feare hee wandreth still Hee had in the first booke propounded five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone The Fifth and last was that good workes also doe justifie and therefore not faith alone This assertion hee laboureth to prove by divers arguments The first from the necessity of good workes which I have answeared The second from the verity of the justice of workes namely that the good workes of the faithfull and regenerate are truely good which wee doe not deny wee say indeed that the seeming good workes of men unregenerate are not truely good because an evill tree cannot bring forth good fruit But the good workes of the regenerate being the workes of grace and the fruits of the Spirit wee acknowledge to be truely good But will it hereupon followe that therfore they are or may be justified by workes Nothing lesse Hee must prove that the workes of the regenerate are not onely truely good but also purely and perfectly good and not onely that but that they are also perpetually and universally good For if they faile in any one particular as in many things we saith Iames the just offend all they cannot be justified by their obedience For hee that offendeâ—…h in one is guilty of the breach of the whole Law and is so farre from being justified by his obedience that by the sentence of the Law hee is accursed because he hath not continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them unlesse therfore he can prove that not onely some but all the workes of the faithfull are not onely truely but
of virtue yet to life I am enabled not by merits but by pardon To this Bellarmine giveth the same answere which he did to Aâ—…gustine and Prosper which is that one and the same bush whereby he seâ—…keth to stoppe all gapps that he speaketh of such merits as wee have from our selves which neither are nor can be any But to this place this answere cannot be applyed seeing Gregory speaketh those words in the person of Iob whose workes proceeded from grace he being the most gracious man that was then upon the earth The same Gregory writing on the seventh Penitentiall Psalme speaketh to this effect If that felicitie of Saints be mercie and is not acquired by merits which hee had noted before out of the Psalme what then shall become of that which is written and thou rendrest to every man according to his workes if it be rendred according to works how shall it be esteemed mercie But it is one thing saith he to render according to workes another to render for the workes themselves For in that it is said according to workes the quality of works is meant that whose workes shall appeare to bee good his reward may be glorious For to that blessed life wherein we live with God and by God no labour may be matched no workes compared especially seeing the Apostle saith The passions of this time are not condigne to the future glory Where he teacheth these three things First that eternall life is not gotten by merits no not of Saints Secondly That it is not given for our workes as the meritorious cause though according to our workes Thirdly that our workes are not worthy of it and therefore cannot condigneâ—…y merit it § VI. The sixt and last is Bernard out of whom he citeth as objected by us foure Testimonies The first de annunciat serm 1. where is an excellent passage against merits out of which Bellarmine citeth for us one onely sentence But I will recite the whole place Now as touching life eternall we know that the passions of this time are not condigne to the future glory though one man should sustaine them all Neither are the merits of men such that eternall life should bee due to them by right or that God should doe some injury if hee did not give it For to omit that all our merits are Gods gifts and so for them man is more a debtour to God than God to man what are all merits to so great glory Finally who is better than the Prophet who held it necessary to say unto God Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord and a little after when hee had commended speciall faith whiâ—…h the Papists cannot abide he â—…aith ipse peccata condonat ipse donat merita pramia nihilominus ispe redonat hee forgiveth our sinnes he giveth us merits or good workes and he neverthelesse giveth us the rewards In which words are contayned six good arguments against merit of condignity The first If the passions of this life even martyrdome it selfe are not condigne or worthy to the future glory though one did beare them all then much lesse are our actions or good workes But the passions of this time though one man should sustayne them all are not condigne or worthy to the future glory therefore much lesse are our good workes worthy of that glory Secondly Condigne merits are such that eternall life is due unto them by right insomuch as God should seeme to doe wrong if he did not bestow it as the Papists most presumptuously teach But our good workes are not such as Bernard here plainely testifieth therefore our good workes are not condigne merits of eternall life Thirdly Those things which bee the gifts of God doe not merit of God yea they are so farre from meriting at the hands of God that they make men who have them debtours to God and not God to them But our good workes which some call merits are all of them the gifts of God Fourthly Betweene merits of condignity and the reward there is an equall proportion But what are all our good workes which they call merits to so great glory Fifthly They who have condigne merits may boldly appeare before the judgement of God and challenge their due reward but the holiest man that liveth ought to say with David enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord for no man living shall be justified in thy sight if thou enter into judgement with him Sixthly If God doth give unto us both our good works or merits and also the reward then our good workes doe not condignely merit everlasting life but the antecedent is true therefore the consequent Of these six Bellarmine citeth onely the second and that onely he answereth viz. that Bernard teacheth that eternall life is not due to merits by right absolutely because they presuppose both the grace and the promise of God but grace and promise being presupposed eternall life is due by right which he would prove out of 2 Tim. 4. 7. and Heb. 6. Reply Bernard speaketh with presupposall both of Gods grace and promise and teacheth that good workes though proceeding from grace though having the promise of reward yet to them eternall life is not due by right neither doe they merit it condignely as is proved by the six reasons whereof Bellarmine answeareth never a one For in thâ—… first reason he speaketh of the sufferings according to the Apostles meaning of the sonnes and heires of God which they suffer for or with Christ having this promise that if they suffer with Christ they shall be glorified with him yet these though one man should sustaine them all are not condigne to the future glory As for the second which he would seeme to answere instead of explaining it he plainely contradicteth it saying that our merits are such as eternall life is due to them by right In the third argument Bernard doth not onely presuppose that the good works or merits where of he speaketh doe proceed from grace but from thence proveth that because they are Gods gifts they cannot merit of God but the more a man hath of them the more he is indebted to God In the fourth he sheweth that betweene all our workes though never so much proceeding from grace and the future glory which is promised to them there is no proportion In the fifth he speaketh of them that are most godly who have both grace and promise of glory that they are so farre from condigne merit that if God should enter into judgement with them none of them could be justified in his sight In the sixth he setteth downe the degrees of grace freely bestowed upon us that hee doth condonare peccata donare merita redonare praemia Of his grace hee forgiveth our sinnes of his grace he giveth us good workes which hee calleth merits of his grace redoubled upon us he graciously giveth the reward which hee hath freely promised as for his proofes out of
reward of their labours who are Gods workemen vers 9. labouring for him and not for themselves is the blessing of increase which God giveth thereunto Even as the harvest is the reward of the earing not to be asscribed to the merit of earing but to the blessing of God And so it is here plainely said though the Planter and the Waterer shall have their owne rewards yet their reward is not to bee asscribed to the merit of their labour but to the blessing of God I have planted saith Paul and Apollâ—… hath watered but God gave the increase So then neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the increase Or if the place should generally be understood oâ—… all workes both good and bad the meaning would be that the reward would be answerable either good or bad That of the Psalmist Psal. 62. 12. To thee Lord mercie for thou rendrest to every man according to his worke is not generally to be understood of the workes of all men both good and bad for the bad works of the wicked hee doth not reward in mercie but judgement without mercie shall bee executed upon them but of the good workes of the godly onely which though they bee good and acceptable to God in Christ yet he rewardeth them not according to merit but according to his mercie The place Apâ—…c 22. 12. may be an exposition of the rest For whereas in the rest it is said that God will judge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to their dâ—…eds here Christ saith he will render to every one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his worke shall be viz. good or bad But here the Papists would seeme to bring a reason à pari that as the wicked are damned prâ—…pter peccata for their evill workes so the godly are saved propter opera bona for their good workes And as â—…vill workes merit hell so good workes pari ratione merit heaven Answ. it is impar ratio there is no equality in the comparison For first the Scripture plainely teacheth that by and for their evill works men are condemned and as plainely denieth that by or for good workes men are saved Ephes. 2. 8 9. Tit. 3. 5. Secondly any one sinne meriteth death because it is a breach of the Law yea of the whole law Iam. 2. 10. but not any one good worke can merit heaven because it is not the fulfilling of the whole law for there must be a concurrence of all duties In so much that if a man should performe all the Commandements and faile in one the breach of that one maketh him guilty of all Thirdly evill workes are purely and perfectly evill and therefore absolutely deserve death but the good workes are not purely and perfectly good as I have heretofore prooved therefore death is the due stipend of sinne but eternall life is the free gift of God Fourthly sinne is absolutely meritorious of damnation but so is not our obedience of Salvation For though we could performe all the commandements by a totall perpetuall and perfect obedience yet wee must acknowledge our selves unprofitable servants and much lesse could we merit thereby because we have done but our duety and where is no more but duety there can bee no merit Debitum non est meritum § XIIII His third argument is taken from those places which do so testifie eternall life to be rendred to good workes that they place the very reason why eternall life is given in good workes The places bee these Matth. 25. 34 35. Come ye blessed of my Father possesse the kingdome prepared fâ—…r you from the beginning of the world For I was hungry and you gave mee meat c. and in the same chapter vers 21. because thou hast beene faithfull in few things c. Apoc. 7. 14. These are they who came out of great tribulation c. therefore they are before the Throne of God In which places the particles enim quia ideo for because therfore are all causall His reason standeth thus To what things the causall particles are applied they are causes of that to which they have relation as namely of Salvation To workes of charity the causall particles are applied Therefore workes of charity are causes of Salvation To the proposition I answere that causall particles doe not alwaies nor for the most part signifie causes so properly called For that is a grosse erâ—…our of the Papists as I noted before The word cause sometimes is used properly to signifie that argument which hath relation onely to its effect by virtue whereof the effect hath its being either as from the efficient or as of the matter or as by the forme or as for the end Sometimes it is used generally to signifie any argument or reason whatsoever which is not the cause of the thing or of the being of that whereof it is said to bee a cause but of the consequence or conclusion and thus the rendring of any reason is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a rendring of the cause though perhaps it bee from the effect or any other argument And forasmuch as persons are discerned and knowne by their effects for as our Saviour saith By their fruits you shall know them therefore it is usuall in the Scriptures from the effect to argue and declare the cause As thus God is mercifull for hee rewardeth the godly according to their workes God is just for hee rewardeth the wicked according to their sinnes This man is elect because he truely beleeveth and repenteth this man truely beleeveth because hee is fruitfull of good workes This is a good tree for it bringeth forth good fruite To the woman that was a sinner much was forgiven for shee loved much In those and infinite more examples the cause or reason which is rendred is from the effect Therefore the proposition is false § XV. Now let us consider the places of Scriptnre which hee alleageth and first Matth. 25. 35. for when I was hungry c. This reason which is alleaged is not from the cause as if good workes were the meritorious cause of our inheriting the kingdome of heaven but from the effect to prove the cause which is expressed Verse 34. as I have shewed before For for what cause are men to be saved First because they are blessed of the Father that is justified and therefore entituled to this kingdome Secondly because they are elected and therefore this kingdome was prepared for them from the beginning Thirdly because they arâ—… the heires of God for whom our Saviour purchased this inheritance noted in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iâ—…rit But how shall it appeare who they are that are blessed and justified for whom this kingdome is prepared for whom this inheritance is purchased By the fruits of justification election redemption and namely by the workes of mercy and chariâ—…y towards the poore members of Christ according to which as the evidence our Saviour
the Lord who freelygiveth what he had freely promised Thirdly when a superaboundant reward is promised to a small worke and the party to whom it is promised is no way able either to doe or so much as to will the performance of it but receiveth wholly his will and ability to performe it from his Lord the thing promised cannot be ascribed to his merit but to the gracious bounty of his Lord. § V. The seventh and last condition is that a meritorious work must proceed from charity which we acknowledg to be required in every good worke But in the proofe hereof he falleth into a nice dispute proving against Guihielmus 〈◊〉 that the vertue of meriting is to be ascribed more principally to Charity than to faith And although this bee but an idle dispute seeing neither faith nor charity doth truely and properly merit yet I durst be bold to affirme that if to either merit were to be ascribed that it were rather to bee attributed to faith For by faith the merits of Christ are applyed unto us and not by charity By faith we are entitled to Gods Kingdome by 〈◊〉 wee are not By faith wee obtaine the inheritance which by charity we doe not By faith we are saved and not by charity Faith is the condition of the covenant of grace upon which and no other grace salvaâ—…ion is promised Those that truly love are also saved it being the proper cognizance and as Basiâ—… speaketh the character of the faithfull and none are saved without it but yet they are not saved by it nor for it but onely by the merits of Christ which are apprehended by faith alone Salvation which is purchased by the merits of Christ is promised to faith as that whereby we are made partakers of Christs merits and are therefore said to be justified and saved by faith alone but charity and the fruits thereof are the evidence according to which God will save us Christ is the foundation of our happinesse yea he is eternall life Faith is the onely instrument wherby wee are made partakers of Christ all other graces are but notes and signes of our union which we have with Christ and of happinesse by him By faith we have this inheritance but it is had among those that are sanctified When it is said happy is shee that beleeved there the cause of happinesse is noted but when it is said happy is he that loved orfeared not the cause of happinesse is signified but a note or signe of it Both faith and charity must concurre to every good act for as a worke without charity is not good so without faith it is sin But if you compare the graces together it is certaine that charity proceedeth from faith 1 Tim. 1. 5. and according to the measure of our faith such is the measure of our love for faith is the Mother-grace from which charity and all other graces as from the root and fountaine doe spring and flow It may seeme indeed that sanctification and inherent righteousnesse doth more principally consist in love because charity is the fulfilling of the Law yet sanctification it selfe doth flow from faith which purifieth the heart and worketh by love But as for the grace of justification whereunto merit if wee had any ought to bee referred for justification is the entitling of us to the kingdome of heaven neither charity nor any other grace in us doth concurre unto it but faith is all in all I will not follow him in his idle dispute I confesse the point that to every rewardable or as he calleth it meritorious worke charity is required § VI. Now let us recapitulate his seven conditions And because he shall not finde me refractary I doe confesse that all and every of these conditions are required to every rewardable worke For first it must be good Secondly it must be done in obeysance to God Thirdly it must be done by men in this world Fourthly it must bee voluntary and not forced Fifthly it must bee performed by a man who is in the state of grace Sixthly the expectation of the reward is to bee grounded on Gods promise And lastly it must proceed from charity But now say I that not any one of these conditions nor all of them put together can make a worke meritorious of eternall life before God They are common notes and markes of all good workes whatsoever but the proper notes of merits are such as I set downe in the beginning of this discourse concerning merits For workes are not therefore meritorious because they are materially good nor because they are in obeysance to God for that is our duty and debt which wee owe to God nor for that they are performed by such as are viatores and pilgrims in this world nor because they are wrought by men in state of grace nor because the expectation of the reward is grounded on Gods promise which is of a free reward and not of wages merited by us nor lastly because they proceed from charity For our charity by reason of the imperfection thereof cannot stand in judgement to satisfie the justice of God and much lesse to merit And whatsoever or how great soever it is it is not only a duety which we owe to God but the onely debt which wee owe or ought to owe to our brethren and that for Gods sake to omit that we receive it as a free gift from God and therefore by it we cannot merit of him CHAP. IX Bellarmines dispute that good workes are meritorious ex condigno not onely ratione pacti but also ratione operis examined § I. IN the fourth place Bellarmine discourfeth how farre forth good workes are either meritorious or are rewarded Meritorious whether ex condigno and if so whether ratione pacti solum or ratione operis also That good workes are meritorious ex condigno which is the matter that hitherto hee hath proved hee now maintaineth against Durandus affirming that his Assertion as it is refuted by the common consent of all almost Divines so also by all the arguments which formerly hee hath used against us to prove that the workes of the godly are truely and properly meritorious which I desire the Reader to take notice of because some draw-backs who notwithstanding would seeme stiffe defenders of merits doe beare the simple in hand that it is but a Schoole-point to say that workes are meritorious either ex condigno or ex congruo When as in very trueth it is the received Doctrine of that Church that the good workes of the godly are truely and properly meritorious of everlasting life Now it is evident that meritum ex congruo is not truely and properly meritorious § II. In the next place Bellarmiâ—…e now taking it for granted that good workes are meritorious ex condigno hee disputeth whether they bee so ratione pacti tantum or ratione operis tantum or ratione utriusque whereunto I answere
one to the other that which is given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not given 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. 4. for debitum non est gratuitum If eternall life bee gratia gratis data si gratis datur then is not due by desert And if the good worke also be grace how can it deserve a reward and so great a reward from him that gave it For Bellarmine hath taught us in the beginning of this seventeenth Chapter that if the worke bee much lesse than the promised reward it should not be a merit of condignity in respect of the worke If saith hee the Master of the vineyard should promise to a labourer for his dayes worke not the day-peny but an hundred crownes and yet the heavenly reward given to a good worke doth incomparably surpasse the unequall proportion that is betweene an hundred crownes and a daies worke § VI. In his second argument he trifleth egregiously He saith there is a proportion betweene the fountaine and the river running from it Grace is the fountaine Ioh. 4. 14. and eternall life is the river which maketh glad the City of God Psal. 46. 5. where according to the Latine it is thus read Fluminis impetus laetificat Civitateâ—… Dei which Bellarmine himselfe expoundeth thus Fluminis impetus laetificat Civiâ—…taem Dei i. Non timebit populus Dei quando turbabitur terra ergo c. Literally the place is understood of the Brooke Kidron and of the city of Ierusalem But if it must bee allegorized then as by the fountaine grace is to be understood according to that of Ioh. 4. 14. so by the river should be understood perseverance and increase of grace running to eternall life as the sea wherein the course of all rivers endeth And therefore such as is the proportion of the fountaine to the sea such is of grace or of a gracious worke to eternall life This was his first analogy the second is no lesse ridiculous Moreover saith he there is a proportion betweene the ascent and descent of water for it doth ascend as high as it doth descend and therefore the grace of the Spirit which descended from heaven will ascend as high No doubt if it be conveyed in a close conduit pipe § VII His third Reason Eternall life is the day-peny of those that labour in the vineyard Matth. 20. But the day-peny is the just hire of the dayes labour So is eternall life The day-peny which was given to those that wrought but one houre doth signifie eternall life which is thereby proved not to bee an hire rendred as due to equall labour but as a free reward bestowed by the bounty of the Lord who â—… may doe with his owne what he pleaseth For if it were the just wages for the whole dayes labour then he that wrought but one houre should have had but one twelfe part of the wages His fourth Reason Seed in vertue physicall is equall to that thing wherof it is the seed and containeth it Grace is the seed and eternall life that whereof it is the seed therefore iâ—… vertue morall Grace is equall to glory Answ. This argument is grounded upon a similitude of grace and seed which are not like in those things for which this comparison is brought For neither is seede the meritorious cause of that whereof it is the seed as hee supposeth grace to bee nor grace the seminall cause of eternall life for seed is the materiale principium But grace meaning grace inherent is neither the materiale principium nor the meritorious cause nor any other cause of salvation unles it be 〈◊〉 sine qua non which is no cause Yea but gracâ—… saith he is called the seed of GOD 1 Ioh. 3. 9. Answ. The seede of God properly is Gods word sowne in our hearts as the seede of our new and spiriâ—…uall life in this world This seede conceived by the power of the Spirit is the grace of regeneration as the materiale principium of our spirituall life meant in that place of S. Iohn which alwaies abideth in the childe of God who being once borne of God is never unborne againe The fruits in respect whereof it is called seed are the fruits of a godly life For the seed of Gods Word being sowne in our hearts and there conceived and taking root fructifieth and bringeth forth increase in some thirty in some sixty in some aâ—… hundred fold The grace of regeneration therefore is called seed in respect of the fruit of good works which it bringeth forth in this life And further the doing of good workes is compared to sowing of seede which hath relation to the great harvest as also the committing of the dead bodies of the faithfull to the earth For even as he that casteth his seed into the ground doth it in hope of increase at the next harvest or as hee that committeth the dead body to the earth as seede doth it in hope of increase at the great harvest so hee which soweth in righteousnesse to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reape everlasting life And as the seed cast into the ground is not cast away but is recompenced with increase at the harvest And as the body though sowne in corruption doth not perish but riseth in incorruption at the great harvest so he that soweth the seed of good workes though hee may seeme to cast them upon the waters as Salomon speaketh hee shall not lose thereby but hee shall bee rewarded an hundred-fold and at the great harvest hee shall inherit everlasting life But as the increase in harvest is not to bee asscribed to the merit of the sower but to the blessing of God and as the raising of the dead body to incorruption at the last day is not to bee attributed to the merit of committing it as seed to the earth but to the merit and power of CHRIST in whom wee are made alive againe so the reaping of everlasting life at the great harvest is not to bee asscribed to our merit but to the merit of Christ who hath purchased it for us and to the undeserved mercie of God who crowneth his owne graces in us So if wee sowe to our selves in righteousnesse wee shall reape in mercie as the Prophet speaketh § IX His fifth argument concludeth nothing to the purpose Eternall life saith hee is a certaine supernaturall action in respect of the Object and of the principles bâ—…th efficient and formall But merit which consisteth in love is also a supernaturall action in respect of the Object and of the principles both efficient and formall therefore they have aproportion betweene themselves and the one leadeth to the other as the right way to the end Answ. I grant that the grace of sanctification is the right way to glorification but no meritorious cause thereof That there is a proportion of likenesse in the respects mentioned but no proportion of equality And
have said before Christ justifieth not onely as hee is our Iudge but also as our Surety paying our debt and as our Advocate pleading for us The holy Ghost justifieth both as he is the Spirit of regeneration working in us the grace of faith and as the Spirit of adoption by applying unto us the merits of Christ assuring us of our justification and adoption The Ministers of the Gospell justifie as they are also said to forgive sinnes to beget men unto God and to save them ministerially as the Embassadours of Christ whose office it is to reconcile men unto God to preach and to pronounce remission of sinnes to them that beleeve and also instrumentally as the instruments of the holy Ghost to worke in them the grace of faith by which they are justified for faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10. 14 17. and Preachers are said to bee Ministers by whom you beleeve 1 Cor. 3. 5. Sacraments doe justifie as seales of that righteousnesse which is by faith Rom. 4. 11. And as the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments doe justifie ut manus dantis as the hand of God giving and applying Christ and his righteousnesse to the faithfull receiver so faith is manus accipieâ—…tis the hand of the beleever receiving Christ and his righteousnesse unto justification § VII But the second place is in his conceit more cleare viz. Esai 53. 11. where the Lord speaking by his Prophet concerning Christ saith My righteous servant shall by his knowledge justifie many and he shâ—…ll beare their sinnes where the verbe is in Hiphil Iatsdiq which signifieth shall make just Chemnitius indeed saith he goeth about to wrest this place also to the judiciall signification But in vaine for there are foure words which are manifestly repugnant to his interpretation But before wee speake of those foure words let us heare what Chemnitius saith Whereas Andradius saith he wresteth that sentence of Esay to prove that to justifie is to endue the minde with the quality of inherent justice it is great impudencie for there is presently added an exposition how that justification is to be understood because he shall saith Esay beare their iniquities where Chemnitius doth not so much as mention the judiciall signification of the word justifying after the manner of a Iudge but rather signifieth that Christ at his first comming did not justifie the Elect after the manner of a Iudge but as a surety in taking upon himselfe our debt and bearing our iniquities and as a Redeemer paying our ransome and so di charging us from our debt and from our bondage Neither doth it follow that it is not a judiciall word because in that place it signifieth not to justifie as a Iudge for besides the Iudge there are other parties also who doe justifie in a judiciall sense as namely sureties and advocates § VIII Now let us examine those foure words all which serve to prove that Christ in that place is not said to justifie after the manner of a Iudge which no man affirmeth and therefore Bellarmine fighteth with his owne shadow For we doubt not but that Christ may be said to justifie divers wayes first by his doctrine as our Prophet and Teacher in which sense Teachers are said to justifie Dan. 12. 3. secondly as our Priest both by his satisfaction and sacrifice propitiatory as Esai 53. 11. for so he saith and he shall beare their iniquities so Heb. 9. 26 28. and also by his intercession as our Advocate 1 Ioh. 2. 2. Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 9. 24. thirdly by his sentence as our king and judge at the last day Matth. 25. 34. The first word is by his knowledge that is as he expoundeth it out of Hierome by his doctrine Answ. Wee deny not but that Christ by his doctrine did justifie many working in them the grace of faith for even other Teachers who are but his Ministers doe also justifie others as Daniel speaketh not by infusion of righteousnesse but as the instruments of the holy Ghost to beget faith in the hearers or being as Saint Paul speaketh Ministers by whom they doe beleeve and beleeving are justified in the judiciall sense But Esay speaketh not of his doctrine but of his knowledge and that passively understood not for that knowledge whereby he knoweth all things but whereby hee is acknowledged to bee the Messias that is to say faith and so Pagnine Vatablus and Tremellius read scientia sui or agnitione sui that is by faith in him for so is faith often termed as 2 Pet. 1. 2 3. and 1 Tim. 2. 4. c. by which as it is said in this place of Esay hee doth justifie La rabbim that is as Paul speaketh Rom. 5. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the multitude of the Elect who beleeve in him how by bearing their iniquitiâ—…s that is the punishment due for their sinnes his sufferings being imputed to them if therefore justifying by faith doe prove justification by works or by inherent righteousnesse then this word proveth it § IX The second word is ipse justus by which word saith he is signified that Christ doth justifie not onely by teaching but also by just working and by imparting his righteousnesse unto us Answ. Christ his obedience or just working is proper to his person and inherent in him and therefore that righteousnesse which he performed in his owne person being both active and therefore transient and proper to his person and therefore without us cannot be imparted to us otherwise than by imputation To what purpose then doth he urge this word seeing Christ is just in justifying us as well by imputation as by infusion Forsooth to shew that Christ by his obedience and sufferings doth not justifie after the manner of a Iudge which no man affirmeth But what is his reason because it is not required to justifying after a judiciall manner that he who justifieth others should himselfe be just as if he should say it is not required that a Iudge should bee just contrary to that Gen. 18. 25. But God doth justifie us after the judiciall manner as a Iudge through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and by forgivenesse of sinnes and that to this end to shew forth his justice that hee might bee just and the justifier of him who beleeveth in Iesus Rom. 3. 25 26. But this might better have beene objected against his owne exposition of the former word seeing he who is not just himselfe may by his doctrine justifie others Notwithstanding that which Bellarmine here áffirmeth concerning Christ is most true that it was necessary that he who should justifie others by his obedience should bee just himselfe howbeit he impertinently alleageth Rom. 3. 26. which speaketh of God justifying us not as a Mediator by his obedience but as a Iudge by his sentence But the true reason why the Prophet useth this word is in respect of the words following to signifie that Iesus Christ the righteous was made
confute himselfe Now in the sixt verse the Apostle sheweth what manner of faith that is which justifieth viz. not a dead or a counterfeit but a lively and effectuall faith a faith which is effectuall or effectually worketh by love a faith which as Saint Iames saith is not without workes but is demonstrable by good workes § III. But these words Bellarmine doth wilfully deprave For in other places hee readeth and understandeth the wordes as wee doe following the vulgar Latine translation unto which hee is tyed by the decree of the Councell of Trent reading fides quae per charitatem operatur faith that worketh by charity as our English Rhemists also translate the words And to seeke no further in the very beginning of the next chapter where hee confuteth the erroneous opinion of Osiander who held that the righteousnesse of Christ whereby wee are justified is the essentiall righteousnesse of the Deity dwelling in us saith that this errour is manifestly refuted by the Apostle Rom. 4. proving the righteousnesse by which wee are justified to bee faith vivam viz. per dilectionem operantem to wit a lively faith and working by love and likewise Gal. 5. 5 6. we by faith expect the hope of righteousnesse for in Christ Iesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith which worketh by love Whereupon hee inferreth quòd si fides per dilectionem operans c. but if faith working by charity be that righteousnesse c. But here for a poore shift and to serve his present turne hee interpreteth the Greeke Participle of the middle voice as if it were passive fides quae agitur faith which is acted moved formed and as it were animated by love And therupon inferreth that charity isthe forme of faith and that faith justifieth formally as it is formed by charity and not otherwise and consequently that charity justifieth much more and hereupon also he buildeth afterwards that distinction of faith that it is either formata when it is acted by charity or informis when it is severed from it where also to helpe out the matter hee saith that the Latine word operatur is passively understood whereof as I suppose no example can bee given thereby making the translation barbarous and understanding it as never any before him understood iâ—… § IV. But to begin with the last it were a strange speech if a man signifie that the matter is acted by the form or that the body is acted by the soule should say corpus per animam operatur And no doubt if the old interpreter had meant so he would have said agitur and not operatur As for the Gâ—…eeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifieth effectuall or effectually working and so both the Verbe and the Participle which are used nine times at the least in the new Testament are or ought to be effectuall namely in it selfe or effectuall to worke according to the twofold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or act whereof the Philosophers and Schoolemen use to speake to wit the first and the second c. which distinction may be applied to habits of grace or gracious habits The first act which is the forme of faith or of any other grace is that Tushijah that essence or entity whereof Salomon speaketh wherby any grace is that which it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed and in truth which is the integrity of it and so saith Thomas actus primus est forma integritas rei in respect whereof faith and so every other grace is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unfained This is that principium agendi that inward act or efficacie whereby faith or any other grace is effectuall in it selfe lively active operative apt to produce operations according to their severall kinds without which faith or any other grace is dead and counterfeit and not that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeede and in truth whereof it beareth the name but aequivocè even as the counterfeit of any man is called by his name The second act of faith or of any other grace is the actuall working thereof actus secundus saith Thomas est operatio And these acts are either immediate and eliciti as the Schoolemen speak or mediate and imperati As for example the immediate or elicite acts of justifying faith are first to beleeve truly and effectually and by a lively assent that Iesus the Sonne of the blessed Virgin is the eternall Sonne of God the Messias and the Saviour of all that beleeve in him Secondly because I so beleeve in Christ to beleeve that hee is my Saviour Thirdly by these acts faith receiving Christ who is our righteousnesse doth justifie The mediate acts which are called imperati are these acts which the immediate acts doe produce mediantibus aliis virtutibus by the mediation of other vertues For if I beleeve that Iesus is the Sonne of God and the Saviour of all that beleeve in him and consequently that hee is my Saviour hereupon I shall be moved to trust in him as my Saviour which is the act of affiance but commanded by faith and to expect salvation from him which is the act of hope but commanded by faith and likewise to love him and by love to obey him which are the acts of charity but commanded by faith as here it is said faith working by love § V. Now those graces by which faith worketh as namely charity have not the respect of the formall cause unto faith but rather of the instrumentall Neither doth faith worke by them as its forme but as its instruments as the soule by the body and the members thereof But that charity is not indeed the forme of faith whereby it is acted and formed it may appeare evidently by these reasons First because those which hold it to be the forme of faith deny it to bee the inward and intrinsecall forme whereby faith is that which it is which onely is the formall cause and as it were the soule of faith but extrinsecall whereby as they imagine the acts of faith are informed and so they make it by a strange kinde of Logicke the forme of all vertues as well as of faith Secondly because one habit disparated from another as the three Theologicall vertues faith hope and charity being also as themselves say seated in diverse subjects as the seat of faith is the mind of love the heart cannot possibly be the forme of the other Thirdly that habit which proceedeth from another as the fruit and effect thereof cannot bee the forme of that other But charity which is the fulfilling of the Law proceedeth from faith unfained 1 Tim. 1. 5. For therefore doe wee love God and our neighbour for his sake because by faith wee are peâ—…swaded of his love towards us and therefore doe wee love him because hee loved us first 1 Ioh. 4. 19 Fourthly if charity be the forme of faith then faith is the
those who have not Charity have not faith who as the same Apostle saith professe themselves to know God but in deeds deny him which also is against himselfe for how saith Chrysostome can such a man be said to beleeve that denieth God Therefore saith he the wicked deny the faith not in heart or mouth but indeed and of them saith he writeth Saint Gregory whose testimony he alleageth directly against himselfe Eos non veraciter credere non habere veram fidem quinon bene operantur that they doe not truely beleeve nor have a true faith who doe not worke well And therefore those that worke ill as those doe who are without Charity and namely those who provide not for their domesticks shew that they have no true faith But this he salveth with another testimony of the same Gregory that many enter into the Church because they have faith and yet want the wedding garment because they have not Charity Where by faith we are to understand the profession of faith which many make who have not Charity But by the wedding garment we are according to the Scriptures to understand rather Christ and his righteousnesse as I have shewed heretofore put on by a true and lively faith for he that was without the wedding garment wanted faith as well as charity The Authour of the unfinished Worke in Chrysostome faith Nuptiale vestimentum est fides vera quae est per Iesum Christum justitiam ejus the wedding garment is the true faith which is by Iesus Christ and his righteousnesse But will you heare one of their owne Writers upon Matth. 22. what is saith he that wedding garment to wit that whereof Paul speaketh when he saith put on the Lord Iesus Christ. This garment is inwardly put on by faith when thou puttest on Christs righteousnesse to cover thy sinnes c. § VII The second out of Ioh. 6. 64. Iudas though he professed the faith is yet said not to have beleeved because he wanted Charity and therefore they who want Charity want faith Bellarmine answereth that he is said not to beleeve because at that time he had lost his faith I reply Iudas though he professed the faith yet he never had true faith and therefore never lost it For from the beginning Iesus knew who they were that beleeved not and who should betray him for this cause saith he in the next verse I said unto you that no man can come to me that is beleeve in me vers 35. and 64. unlesse it be given unto him of my Father which hee insinuateth had not been given to Iudas whom from the beginning he knew to be no beleever § VIII Hee that saith hee knoweth God namely by faith and keepeth not his commandements is a lyar Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh of the knowledge of familiarity and friendship of which the Lord speaketh to the wicked Matth. 7. 25. I know you not whereunto I reply that if he speake of such knowledge it is the knowledge of faith and cannot be had but by faith and so the argument standeth in force Howbeit unfitly doth he alleage the Lords not knowing of the wicked to prove the meaning of our knowing of him If he speake not of the knowledge of faith the argument is the stronger for if he be a lyar that only saith that he knoweth God and keepeth not his commandements then much more is hee a lyar that saith hee knoweth God by faith and keepeth not his commandements Beda indeed expoundeth this knowledge of God of the love of God which is a fruit and consequent of our faith hocest Deum nosse quod amare but others of faith as Gregory speaking of this place notitia quippâ—… Dei ad fideâ—… pertinet Oecumenius maketh this verse to bee of the same signification with the sixth verse of the first Chapter If we say that we have fellowship with him and walke in darkenesse we are lyars and that which Saint Iohn there calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Communion here hee calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commixtion or conjunction Thus therefore hee saith Saint Iohn having said before that those which beleeve in the Lord have communion or fellowship with him here hee setteth downe evidences of our communion with him In this wee know that wee know him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that which hee had said before that wee have conjunction or communion with him if wee keepe his Commandements And this saith hee hee more fully sheweth by the contrary but hee that saith I know him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or I have communion with him and keepeth not his Commandements he is a lyar This then is â—…is meaning he that saith I know God that is I have Communion with him by faith and doth not keepe his Commandements hee is a lyar But whether wee understand the words of communion by faith or of faith according to the usuall pâ—…rase of the Scriptures puting knowledge for faith as I noted before or of knowledge it selfe the argument is unanswerable For if wee cannot truely bee said to know Christ that is to beleeve in him unlesse wee keepe his Commandements then it is evident that true faith cannot be severed from Charity For this is love if we keep his Commandements 1 Ioh. 5. 3. againe if hee that saith hee knoweth God and keepeth not his Commandemenes bee a lyar much more he that saith hee beleeveth in God and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar as I said before To this adde Tit. 1. â—…6 which Bellarmine cited against himselfe those that professe themselves to know God but in workes deny him they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unbeleevers Ioh. 3. 36. or as the vulgar Latine incredibiles or as Thomas Aquinas non apti ad credendum § IX Fourthly 1 Ioh. 5. 1. Every one that bâ—…leeveth that Iesus is the Christ is borne of God and therefore undoubtedly hath charity Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh de fide formata as Saint Augustine expoundeth and so doe wee for whosoever truely beleeveth hath fidem formatam For the Apostle no doubt speaketh of a true lively saith and such there is none but that which the Papists call formatam which worketh by love And therefore the argument holdeth that whosoever hath a true lively iustifying faith is borne of God or regenerated by the Spirit of sanctification and therefore is undoubtedly endued with charity § Fifthly Iam. 2. That faith which iâ—… without workes is dead A true lively justifying faith is not dead Therefore â—… true livâ—…ly â—…ustifying faith is not without works Bellarmine saith he hath explaned this in his third argument that faith is said to be dead not as a mâ—… is said to bee dead who after death is not but as a body is said to bee dead which after death is but liveth not For saith he Life is not of the
alleadged Wee saith the Apostle speaking of himselfe and Saint Peter knowing that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law but onely by the faith of Iesus Christ even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the workes of the Law For by the workes of the Law shall no flesh be justified For if the faithfull such as Peter and Paul bee justified by faith and not by workes then are they justified without workes Neither doe the workes of the faithfull concurre unto their justification § IX But for all this Bellarmine will prove that in the Epistle to the Galathians the workes only done without faith are excluded from justification by certaine consequences which the Apostle inferreth which saith he are most strong against workes done without faith but most weake against workes wrought by faith That they are strong against the workes of nature I doe confesse but that they be weake against justification by workes of grace they being equally strong against all I doe deny For the Apostle when in the question of justification hee excludeth workes doth not distinguish of workes whether proceeding from nature or from grace as if by the one wee were justified and not by the other but generally excludeth all even those which are commanded in the Law of God thereby meaning all inherent righteousnesse whatsoever even charity it selfe which is the end of the Law and proceedeth from faith unfained For the Law is a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse whencesoever it proceedeth Neither are the Papists able to produce any one place of Scripture wherein the Apostle either affirmeth that wee are justified by workes proceeding from grace or propoundeth this question to bee disputed whether workes doe justifie without faith but even whether faith doth justifie without workes alwaies concluding the affirmative that wee are justified by faith without workes thereby teaching that workes doe justifie before God neither without faith nor yet with it § X. For the better understanding of this needfull point worthy to be insisted upon and for the satisfying of Bellarmines objections wherein hee pleaseth himselfe wee are to take notice that there are two wayes to life eternall which God hath propounded to man the one in the state of innocencie the other after his fall The former was the covenant of workes or of inherent righteousnesse to be performed by himselfe the Sacrament whereof was the Tree of life But when man had broken this covenant and was fallen from the state of integrity into the state of disobedience and corruption it being now not possible that he should be justified or saved by inherent righteousnesse according to the covenant of workes the Lord therefore in his infinite mercie and love of mankind made with man being now a sinner the covenant of grace in the promised seed that whosoever truly beleeveth in him though in himselfe a sinner as since the fall all are should bee justified and saved by his righteousnesse The faith in this covenant concerning the justification of sinners and salvation by Christ was professed from the beginning after the promise was once made by all the Patriarches and ancient beleevers who had testimony that they pleased God and by faith in the Messias wrought those things which were pleasing to God which without faith in Christ they could not have done And it was represented and figured in the sacrifices which were types and figures of Christs sacrifice even from the beginning And the same was afterwards confirmed by Sacraments viz. Circumcision which was ordained to bee a seale of that righteousnesse which is by faith and the passeover which was a type of Christ our passeover who is immolated for us and prefigured by the propitiatory which covered the Arke in which were the two tables of the Law by the Scape-goate which did beare away the sinnes of the people by the high Priest who was a type of Christ in many respects but most plainely by the brasen Serpent c. But lest men should either through ignorance or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias and consequently their owne salvation which is the common corruption of all naturall men it pleased the Lord to renew the covenant of workes by publishing the Morall Law not with purpose that any should by the obedience thereof be justified or saved which Bellarmine himselfe confesseth but partly that to naturall and unregenerate men it should bee a Schoolemaster unto Christ discovering unto them their owne damnable estate in themselves both in respect of their sinnes and of the curse belonging unto them for the same that so they might be forced to seeke for salvation out of themselves in Christ and partly that to men regenerated and justified it should bee a rule whereby to frame their lives and as it were a councellour and a guide to direct them in the way which God hath appointed them to walke in towards our country in heaven § XI Those therefore which looked to be justified by the observation of the Law as the Galatians were taught by their false teachers were in a pernicious errour both because none can bee justified by the obedience of the Law all men without exception being sinners and subject to the curse and also because there is such an opposition betweene these two covenants in the matter of justification that to bee justified according to the Covenant of workes by inherent righteousnesse is a disanulling of the covenant of grace which cannot bee disanulled in it selfe though to him that seeketh to be justified by works it is made void as the Apostle proveth Gal. 3. and therefore with him I say that if justification be by the works of the Law whatsoever then the covenant of grace is disanulled and made void then is the promise made of none effect then Christ died in vaine Gal. 2. 21. then is the inherent no more of promise Gal. 3. 18. but faith is made void and the promise made of none effect Rom. 4. 14. then men are made debtours to the whole Law and consequently Christ is become of none effect to them And finally they that seeke to be justified by the Law are fallen from grace Gal. 5. 2 3 4. according to all the consequences alleaged by Bellarmine From when I argue thus To them that are debtours to the whole Law Christ is become of none effect to them the covenant of grace is disanulled and the promise made of none effect c. They that seeke to be justified by the workes of the Law that is by righteousnesse inherent whatsoever whether before or after grace are debtours to the whole Law Therefore to them that seeke to bee justified by righteousnesse inherent Christ is become of none effect c. The proposition is thus proved Those that are debtors to the whole Law are subject to a double yoake of most miserable bondage opposite