Christiani fonteâ iustitiae ha erirâ tenentuâ inâeniunt la âc m toxicatum How can water both sweet and salt flow out of one fountaine Where Christians are bound to draw at the fountaine of iustice there they find a poysoned brooke It made me call to mind the good vsage and behauiour of the Spaniards in the west Indies where by their extreme villanies and cruelties they haue made the name of Christian religion to stinke amongst those poore and vnbeleeuing soules It made me consider the humilitie and deuotion and great vertue that the Iesuits and Seculars bewrayed the one of the other in the late contentions that were amongst them It put me in mind of the morall and modest conuersation of Weston the Iesuite and his fellows in hunting the diuell in Sara Williams and many pretie trickes about that matter Surely M. Bishop if the faith and religion which we professe did bring forth such vgly monsters as your Popes haue bene or did nourish such execrable villanies and filtheries as are practised amongst you we might iustly grow suspicious of it But thankes be to God that though our fruits be not such as they ought to be yet the face and state of our Church and common wealth is such as that we may boldly tell you that it is not for a harlot to compare with an honest matrone nor for you to make comparison betwixt vs and you 19. W. BISHOP The second difference in the manner of iustification is about the formall act of faith which M. Perkins handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as short as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many acts of faith feare hope and charity do go before our iustification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. Perkins Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the heart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnesse for his iustification This ioyly description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authoritie that deliuered it and so let it passe as alreadie sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of his owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hearts be the onely sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needs no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would faine know by the way how little infants that cannot for want of iudgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his iustice are iustified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrarie to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before they come to any vnderstanding R. ABBOT By those acts of faith feare hope charitie going before iustification the Councell of Trent doth expresly consort it selfe with Pelagius the heretike This faith feare hope charitie we must know not to be the effects or workes of any infused grace which before iustification is none but they are the proper actes of mans free will onely assisted by some externall or outward grace as they by collusion call it which as I haue shewed before in the question of a Sect. 5. Free will Pelagius the heretike affirmed and graunted as well as they But hereby they directly crosse the rule of S. Austine that b August de fide oper cap. 14. Sequuntâr iustificatum âon praecedunt iustificandum good workes follow in a man being iustified but they go not before iustification He saith they do not go before they say they do go before onely they are not properly meritorious Meritorious they are also c Bellarm de iustific lib. 1. ca 17. Fides suo quodaÌ modo meretur remissioneÌ peccatorum in some sort but not properly meritorious ex condigno as the new faith hope and charitie are in the iustified man Let the Reader well obserue it that there is one faith hope and charitie before iustification another faith hope and charitie infused when a man is iustified But of that we shall heare more anone Here the speciall matter is as touching M. Perkins his description of faith to be an instrument supernaturall created by God in the heart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnesse for his iustification This M. Bishop saith is set downe without anie proofe and is alreadie sufficiently confuted but where Surely we haue seene much for proofe on M. Perkins side but M. Bishops confutation yet we haue not seene Yea where M. Perkins did notably demonstrate this act of faith out of the Gospell M. Bishop passed it ouer without anie further answer but onely to say d Chap. 3. sect 16 He might be ashamed to vse this discourse to vs who admit no part of it to be true in which sort he might easily answer any thing that he list not to admit for truth But what is it that he would haue to be proued For that faith is an instrument to apprehend and receiue it is plaine because it is e Aug. in Ioan. tract 50. Quomodo tenebo absentem quomodo in coelum manuÌ mittam vt ibi sedentem teneam fidem mitte tenuisti the hand which we stretch to heauen to take hold of Christ and to hold him sitting there it is the mouth whereby we eate and drinke Christ because f Ibid. tract 26. Qui credit manducat to beleeue is to eate it is the stomach wherby we digest him for g Tertul. de resur carn fide digerendus he is to be digested by faith it is h Bernard in Cant. ser 32. In bonis Domini quatenus fiduciae pedem pârrexeris eatenus possidebis the foot wherby we enter possession of the benefites of Christ and possesse so farre as we stretch the same it is i Idem in Annunc ser 3. Dominus oleum misericordâae nisi in vase fiduciae non ponit the vessell whereinto God putteth the oyle of his mercy k Aug. de verb. Dom. ser 33. Fide illum accipimus By faith saith Austin we receiue Christ it is l Ambros in Psâl 43. Fidei tactus est quo tangitur Christus by faith saith Ambrose that we touch Christ and m Cyprian lib. 2. epist 2. Quatum fidei capacâ afferimus tantum gratiae inundanin haurimus looke how much faith we bring to receiue saith Cyprian so much we draw of the abundant grace of God This being plaine the question then must be of the thing that is to be receiued Now the thing to be receiued is the thing wherby we are to be iustified The thing whereby
of her head And as she had true repentance of her former life so no doubt but she had also a firme purpose to leade a new life So that in her conuersion all those vertues met together which we hold to concurre to iustification and among the rest the preheminence worthily is giuen to loue as to the principall disposition She loued our Sauiour as the fountaine of all mercies and goodnesse and therefore accounted her precious ointments best bestowed on him yea and the humblest seruice and most affectionate she could offer him to be all too little and nothing answerable to the inward burning charity which she bare him Which noble affection of hers towards her diuine Redeemer no question was most acceptable vnto him as by his owne word is most manifest for he said That many sinnes were forgiuen her because she loued much But M. Perkins saith that her loue was no cause that moued Christ to pardon her but onely a signe of pardon giuen before which is so contrary to the text that a man not past all shame would blush once to affirme it First Christ saith expresly that it was the cause of the pardon Because she had loued much Secondly that her loue went before is as plainly declared both by mention of the time past Because she hath loued and by the euidence of her fact of washing wiping and anointing his feete for the which saith our Sauiour then already performed Many sinnes are forgiuen her So that here can be no impediment of beleeuing the Catholike Doctrine so clearlie deliuered by the holy Ghost vnlesse one will be so blindly led by our new Maisters that he will beleeue no words of Christ be they neuer so plaine otherwise then it please the Ministers to expound them And this much of the first of those reasons which M. Perkins said were of no moment R. ABBOT I wished thee gentle Reader before to obserue that which here plainly thou seest that by the Romish doctrine there is one faith hope charity before iustification which must prepare a man in iustification to receiue and is the cause for which in iustification he doth receiue another a faith which is the cause why God endueth him with faith a hope which is the cause for which God endueth him with hope a charity which is the cause for which God bestoweth vpon him the gift of charity A strange doctrine and the same for which Pelagius was of old condemned a August epist 46. that vpon our merits the grace of God is bestowed vpon vs. M. Bishop will say that they make no merits of these yet he himselfe knoweth that their schooles do make them merits ex congruo though not ex condigno merits which are of force to moue God and which it is conuenient that God should respect though they do not fully deserue grace And this merit b Bellarm. de iustif lib. 1. cap. 17. Fides suo quodaÌ modo meretur remissionem peccatorum iustificat per moduÌ dispositionis ac meriti Bellarmine himselfe affirmeth as before was said But let vs know why they account them not properly merits The reason indeede is because they say they are not the effects of any infused grace for they make them intrinsecally the acts onely of mans free will though adioyning the shew of a counterfeit grace which doth as it were put a hand vnder the arme to helpe lift it vp for the acting thereof Yet M. Bishop at randon not knowing what he saith calleth them diuine qualities contrary to the doctrine of his owne schooles For if faith hope and charity before iustification be diuine qualities and essentially the works of grace there can nothing hinder but that they should be as properly meritorious as those infused graces wherein they affirme iustification to consist But now he must vnderstand that the Fathers did not take merit so strictly as that they giue him way to shift off from himselfe the assertion of Pelagius They vnderstood it so largely as that c August epist 105. Si excusatio iusta est quisquis ea vtitur non gratia sed merito liberatur if a man can but plead a iust excuse for his deliuerance he that vseth it is not deliuered by grace but by merit if there be but d Cont. 2. epist Pelag. lib 1. cap. 19. Pro meritis videlicet voluntatis bonae ac sic gratia nö sit gratia sed sit illud c. gratiam Dei secundum merita nostra dari a good will before grace then grace is not grace but is giuen vpon merit And if he will say that they affirme not any good will before grace let him remember that Pelagius affirmed such a preuenting grace as they do but S. Austine professeth to know no grace but iustifying grace as hath bene shewed e Cha. 1. sect 5. before so that if before iustifying grace there be any good will or good worke then the grace of God is not freely giuen but by merit according to the doctrine of Pelagius Yea Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that the f Bellarm. de grat li. arbit lib. 6. cap. 5. Gratiam secundum merita nostra dari intelligum patres cùm aliquid sit proprijs viribus etiamsi nân sit meritum de condigno ratione cuius datur gratia Fathers do vnderstand the grace of God to be giuen by merits when any thing is done by our owne strength in respect whereof grace is giuen though the same be not any merit de condigno of condignity or worth Such are the faith hope and charity that they teach before iustification which therefore as I haue said are denied to be merits de condigno because they proceede from our owne strength Yea say they but not without the helpe of God But so Pelagius also said as we haue shewed in the place before quoted in the question of Free wil and therefore in that they say nothing to free themselues from saying that which the Fathers condemned in Pelagius that according to our merits the grace of God is bestowed vpon vs. And this M. Bishop will proue by the example of the woman who in the Pharisees house washed the feete of Christ of whom our Sauiour saith g Luk. 7.47 Manie sinnes are forgiuen her because she hath loued much She was iustified therefore saith he because of her loue M. Perkins answereth that that because importeth not any impulsiue cause of the forgiuenesse of her sinnes but onely a signe thereof as if Christ had said It is a token that much hath bene forgiuen her because she loueth much But M. Bishop like to bad disposed persons who face the matter most boldly where their cause is woorst saith that this is so contrary to the text that a man not past all shame would blush once to affirme it The text of it owne accord yeeldeth this construction and no other The creditour forgiueth to one fiue hundred talents to the other fifty whether of
as it were the soule of faith Now no man is ignorant but it is the soule that vseth the body as an instrument euen so then it is charity that vseth faith as her instrument and inferiour and not contrariwise which S. Paul confirmeth at large in a whole chapter prouing charity to be a more excellent gift then faith or any other concluding with these words 1. Cor. 13. Now there remaineth faith hope and charity these three but the greater of these is charity Whereupon S. Augustine resolueth thus Nothing but charity maketh faith it selfe auailable Li. de Trinit cap. 18. for faith saith he may be without charity but it cannot be auailable without it So that first you see that charity is the mouer and commaunder and faith as her instrument and handmayd Now that in the worke of iustification it hath the chiefe place may be thus proued I demaund whether that worke of iustification by faith be done for the loue of God and to his honour or no If not as it is void of charity so it is a wicked and sinfull act no iustification but infection our owne interest being the principall end of it now if it comprehend and conclude Gods glory and seruice in it that is if they apply Christs righteousnesse to them to glorifie God thereby then hath charity the principall part therein for the directing of all to the honour and glory of God is the proper office and action of charity All this reason that charity both concurreth to iustification and that as principall S. Augustine confirmeth in these words The house of God that is a righteous and godly soule Serm. 22. de vârbis Apostol hath for his foundation faith hope is the walles of it but charity is the roofe and perfection of it R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop was loth to trouble himselfe too much with M. Perkins answer who truly obserueth the difference betwixt faith charity that the proper act of faith is to take receiue to vs the proper act of loue to giue our selues forth to others Seeing theÌ that iustificatioÌ is a thing to be receiued the same must needs be performed properly by faith but not by charity because charity is no instrumeÌt to receiue But yet faith receiuing all of God vseth charity as the meanes to make returne of it selfe to God againe and by charity as a working hand performeth all the duties commaunded of God to the honour and glory of God This therefore the Apostle intendeth in the place alledged that faith hauing alone iustified vs by receiuing the gift of righteousnesse which is by the merit of Iesus Christ doth not stay there but goeth forth by charity to serue God to serue one another and to shew our selues thankfull vnto God And wonder it were that the Apostle hauing before professedly disputed the matter of iustification and referring the same wholy to faith should here crosse all that he hath before said and tell vs that not onely faith but loue also must concurre to make vp our iustification before God Marke it well gentle Reader that where the Apostle purposely speaketh of the meanes of iustification M. Bishop can finde nothing to proue that we are iustified by loue nothing pleaded but onely faith but here where the Apostle describeth only the condition of the faith by which we are iustified here he will finde somewhat whereby to plead against the Apostles former doctrine yea and will proue that loue hath not onely a part but the chiefest part in our iustification and that faith is rather the instrument or handmaid of charity How much is he beholding to his Maister Bellarmine that hath taught him such a trick and furnished him with a deuice which neuer any Father Greeke or Latine neuer any translatour could light vpon till his admirable wit had found it out We may well thinke that such a head could not but deserue a Cardinals hat Forsooth the text proueth that life and motion is giuen to faith by charity But how so a Bellarm. de iustific lib. 2. cap. 4. Marry the Greeke word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã being passiue doth plainly shew that faith is moued led and guided by charity But what must we M. Bishop vpon Bellarmines word and yours take this without any further authority or warrant so to do Indeede it is true that the Greeke word sometimes is taken passiuely but by the Apostle is more often vsed in the actiue signification and in this place was neuer before by any Father Greeke or Latine taken otherwise Yea the spite is that the vulgar Latine interpreter to whom they are tied by the Councell of Trent crosseth this deuice for he readeth as we do Fides quae per charitatem operatur faith which worketh by loue But there is a tricke to salue that to for saith Bellarmine b Jllud operatur passiuè accipiendum est non aââiuè the word operatur must be taken passiuely not actiuely Now what blockheads were the Diuines of Rhemes that could not see so much or would omit so materiall a proofe against the heretikes for they haue translated as we do faith which worketh by loue But they were bashfull they thought Bellarmine could carie out the matter with his name and countenance but it would be condemned for a great fault in them Better it is for some man to steale a horse then for another to looke ouer the hedge They knew well that euerie child would crie out vpon them for lewd men if they had translated operatur passiuely in as much as neither their owne interpreter in any other place nor any other Latine author hath euer vsed it in that sort Againe they saw that a very grosse and palpable absurdity would thereupon haue ensued which on their owne part cannot be denied For if they had translated faith which is wrought by loue then it would haue followed that loue by which faith is wrought must needes be before faith whereas they all acknowledge that faith hath the first being according to that which M. Bishop a little c Sect. 20. Ex August de praedest sanct ca. 7. before alledged out of Austine faith is giuen first by which we obtaine the rest Which being a principle in diuinitie and accorded on both sides they could not tell how to make good if they should haue said that faith is wrought by loue Now M. Bishop though for the rest he would aduenture vpon his Maisters credit yet durst not follow him so farre as to translate operatur passiuely but onely beateth about the bush and telleth vs that the Greeke sheweth that faith is moued led and guided by charity Wherein he doth wrong to the Rhemists his country-men to whom for countries sake he should haue done that honour to stand to their translation Yea and he abuseth his Reader in that he doth not directly translate the place which if he had done he durst not translate it to giue that meaning that
a more excellent gift then faith therefore it should be the forme and life of faith or faith the instrument of charitie It followeth not that because the eie is more excellent then the eare therefore for the vse of hearing it should be more excellent then the eare No more doth it follow that because charitie is more excellent then faith therefore for the vse of iustification it must excell faith Faith and charitie respectiuely haue the preferment each of other If we respect latitude of vse charitie is more excellent then faith as which is extended euery way to God to Angels to men and by which all the gifts of God which he bestoweth vpon vs are made profitable to other men so as that k Aug. de verb. DoÌ ser 18. Vniuersa inutilitèr habet qui vnum illud quâ vniuersis vtatur non habet vnprofitably he hath all saith Austine who wanteth that one whereby he should vse all l Chrysost hom de fide spe charit Nullum charismae sine charitate perfectam est nullum donuÌ sine charitate aptuÌ Quicquid enim charismatis aut doni quisque meruerit desertuÌ charitate non stabit Omnia enim quae Sp. sanctus deuotis aut impertit aut donat aut charitate perficiuâtur aut sine charitate effectuÌ nulluÌ sortiuntur No gift saith Chrysostome is perfect or conuenient without charitie Whatsoeuer grace or gift a man hath obtained being destitute of charitie it will not stand because whatsoeuer God imparteth or giueth either is perfected by charity or without charity it commeth to no effect or vse But if we consider a man priuately in himselfe and for his owne vse faith is more excellent then charity as wherin originally standeth our communion and fellowship with God m Ephe. 3.17 by which Christ dwelleth in our hearts into which as a hand God putteth all the riches of his grace for our saluation and by which whatsoeuer else is in vs is commended vnto God We haue nothing in vs pure nothing cleane nothing but what is corrupted defiled but faith salueth all healeth all setteth Christ betwixt God and vs that for his sake he may be mercifull vnto vs. Againe if we respect latitude of time coÌtinuance charity is to be preferred before faith For faith is but for a time and when the promise of God which is the matter or subiect of it shall be fully accomplished the vse of it shall cease But charity and loue abideth for euer and shall continue betwixt God and vs an euerlasting bond Therfore Origen saith n Origen in Numer hom 14. Sola charitas nunquaÌ excidit ideò super prophetiaÌ super fideÌ super scientiam super ipsum etiaÌ martyrium charitas habenda est Onely loue it is that neuer faileth therefore it is more excellent then prophecie then faith then knowledge then martyrdome o Chrysost hom de fide spe charit Sola charitas aeterna est quia cum Deo in sanctiâ est ideo maior est Only charity is eternall saith Chrysostome because with God it is in the Saints for that cause it is the greater The same reason S. Austine also giueth p August de doct Christ lib. 1. cap. 39. Quia cùm quisque ad aeterna peruenerit duobus istis decedentibus charitas auctior certior permanebit because saith he when a man is come to things eternall those two faith and hope failing charity shall remaine more increased and better assured In few words to resolue M. Bishop in this behalfe we say that q Aristot Topic. the end is more excellent then those things which pertaine to the end The end of our faith iustification is charity that is the full restoring of vs to the image of God the very summe and effect whereof is loue Absolutely therefore to speake it is true that loue is greater and more excellent then faith But when we speake of the meanes of iustification and attainment of that saluation whereto perfect charity and righteousnesse doth belong then faith must be preferred as the greater and more excellent faith onely beareth sway therein and this slender weake charity which here we haue is of no effect or moment thereunto To saue a man I say faith is the greater in man being saued charity is the greater Till faith haue finished our saluation loue must yeeld to faith When faith hath fully saued vs it shall haue an end but loue which simply is the greater shall abide for euer Now as touching the place of Austine he speaketh there of faith according to vulgar vnderstanding in like sort as S. Iames doth He speaketh of a faith that may be without charity which true faith cannot be r August epist 85. Pia fides sine spe charitate esse non vult Godly faith saith the same Austine will not be without hope and charity For Å¿ Idem de verb. Dom. ser 61. Si fidem habet sine spe delectione Christum esse credit non in Christum credit if a man haue faith without hope and loue saith he he beleeueth Christ to be but he beleeueth not in Christ But that onely is the true iustifying faith whereby a man beleeueth in Christ which taketh not his life and force of loue but incorporating vs into Christ receiueth of him t 2. Tim. 1.7 the spirit of loue and by Christ giueth life and force to all the fruites and workes thereof Faith then as it is professed to men may be without charity but being without charity it profiteth nothing nor can stand vs in any steed with God but true faith is neuer diuided from charitie nor can be and therefore of it Saint Austine speaketh not That which he would seeme to inferre is without any premisses and apparantly false by the very words here questioned For if faith worketh by loue then faith is the worker that is the mouer and commaunder and loue the instrument by which it worketh and as absurd it must needes be to say that charity or loue is the commaunder and faith the instrument as to say the axe is the commaunder of the Carpenter that heweth with it or the Carpenter the instrument of the axe For conclusion of this section Maister Bishop wil giue vs a reason to proue that in the worke of iustification charitie hath the chiefest place First he asketh full wisely whether that worke of iustification by faith be done for the loue of God and to his owne honour or no Iustification is the worke of God who is u Rom. 3.26 the iustifier of him that is of the faith of Iesus His question is this whether God do iustifie vs for the loue of God But I answer him that the finall end of our iustification is the honour and glory of God who hath x Ephe. 1.5.6 predestinated vs to be adopted through Iesus Christ vnto himselfe to the praise of the
plaine to the words which he alledgeth for God shall render to the faithfull h Math. 16.27 according to their workes because good workes are the proper markes whereby God will take knowledge of them that are iustified and saued onely by faith in Christ For whom God hath iustified and saued vpon them he setteth the seale and marke of his Spirit working in them another nature and i Ephes 2.10 creating them in Christ Iesus vnto good works whereby he will thenceforth know them to belong to him and thereby at that day will put difference betwixt them and other men So that to speake of saluation in that sort as we commonly vnderstand it for the finall blisse and saluation that we expect in heauen faith alone in it selfe is not sufficient to saluation because though we be interested to it onely by faith yet somewhat else is required to prepare vs and fit vs to be partakers thereof And to speake of saluation in grosse faith alone excludeth not sanctification and good workes but includeth them as a part of that saluation whereof we are made partakers by faith alone so that rightly are we said to be saued by faith alone because nothing else doth giue vs anie title and it selfe alone doth giue vnto vs all other things that are necessarie to saluation 25. W. BISHOP 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which iustification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not Ecclesiast 1. Rom. 8. Luk. 13. 1. Ioh. 3. The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you do penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is iustified because we loue the brethren Againe of Baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. so we may also walke in newnesse of life To all these many such like places of holy Scripture it pleased M. Perkins to make answer in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is onely that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wait patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he saith neither yea nor nay and leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him and so neither to exclude hope or charitie or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of iustification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it R. ABBOT Iustification before God is no where in all the Scripture ascribed to any other vertue saue onely faith the promise of saluation is sometimes adioyned to other vertues as fruits and marks of them whom God hath saued but neuer as causes thereof as in the question of merits shall appeare We may well thinke that M. Bishop was here shrewdly put to his shifts that in all the Scripture could find no plainer proofes to serue his turne M. Perkins propounded but one place for them he thought himselfe to lay on loade and yet cannot bring vs any thing whereby it is said that we are iustified but onely faith His first place is taken out of an Apocryphall Scripture and yet such as it is it saith nothing for him First his translation is false for the words as their owne Arias Montanus translateth them are these a Eccles 1.27 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Non poterit âracundus vir iustificari A man giuen to much anger cannot be iustified that is cannot be acquitted of doing amisse cannot be cleared of committing offence because as S. Iames saith b Iam. 1 20. the wrath of man doth not accomplish the righteousnesse of God euen in like sort as the same Ecclesiasticus after saith c Eccles 23.11 he that sweareth vainely shall not be iustified and againe d Cap. 26.30 a victualler shall not be iustified of sinne For so is the Scripture wont continually to vse the word of iustifying for acquitting clearing discharging holding or pronouncing guiltlesse and innocent approuing allowing acknowledging for iust and such like as where it is said e Esa 5.23 which iustifie the wicked for reward f Mich. 6.11 shall I iustifie the false ballance g Luk. 10.29 he willing to iustifie himselfe c. Secondly therefore if the words be taken as he translateth them he that is without feare cannot be iustified he is as farre off from his purpose For the words import to the same effect that he that is without feare shall not be found innocent he shall not be found free from great sinne because the want of feare maketh a man bold to runne into all sinne but a verie senslesse man is he that would go about hereby to proue that a man is iustified by feare Againe he bringeth the words of Christ h Luk. 13.3 Vnlesse ye repent do penance saith he according to their foolerie ye shall all likewise perish And what of this Ergo forsooth a man must bee iustified by doing of penance Yea and is doing of penance a matter of iustification now But Ambrose sayeth that the Apostle calleth them l the blessed of whom God hath decreed i Ambros in Ro cap. 4. Beatos dicit de quibus hoc sanxit Deus vt sine labore aliqua obseruatione sola fide iustificentur apud Deum Et paulò post Nulla ab his requisita poenitentiae opera nisi tantum vt credant that without labour or any obseruâtion they are iustified with God onely by faith there being required of them no labour of penance but onely to beleeue Why then doth Maister Bishop tell vs that we are iustified by doing of penance Our Sauiour spake nothing there in their behalfe and verie absurdly doe they applie that that was meant of inward conuersion and repentance to outward and ceremoniall obseruation of doing penance As for repentance it setteth foorth the subiect capable of iustification by faith but is it selfe onely an acknowledgement of sinne no healing of our wound The feeling of paine and sicknesse causeth a man to seeke for remedie but it is no remedie it selfe Hunger and thirst make a man to desire and seeke for foode but a man is not fed by being hungrie By repentance we know our selues we feele our sicknesse we hunger and thirst after grace but the hand which we stretch foorth to receiue it is faith onely without which repentance is nothing but
leaues the reader to thinke as it seemeth best vnto himselfe whether hope be any cause of saluation and yet M. Perkins words are plainely these We are not saued by hope because it is any cause of our saluation The meaning of S. Paul as he declareth is this We are saued by hope that is we haue our saluation in hope but not yet in act we enioy it in expectation but not yet in possession In which sort he saith in another place that y Tit. 3.7 being iustified by the grace of God we are made heires as touching hope of eternall life We haue not yet the fruition of eternal life but yet in hope we are inheritors therof And hence did S. Austin take the ground of that exception which many times he vseth by distinction of that that we are in hope and that that we are indeed or in reall being Whereof he speaketh directly to declare the meaning of these words of the Apostle z Aug. de pec mer. remis l. 2 c. 8. Primittat sp nunc habemus vnde iaÌ filij Dei reipsa facta sumas in cateris verò spe sicut salui sicut innouati ita filij Dei re autem ipsa quia nândum salus ideò nonâum plenè innouati nondum etiam filij Dei sed filij seculi We haue now the first fruits of the spirit whence we are reipsa indeed the sonnes of God but for the rest as spe in hope we are saued as in hope we are renewed so are we also the sonnes of God but because reipsa indeed we are not yet saued therefore we are not yet fully renewed we are not yet the sonnes of God but the children of this world Againe he saith a Ibid cap. 10. Homo totus in spe iam et iam in re ex parte in regeneratione spirituali renouatus A man wholly in hope and partly also in act or in deed is renewed in spirituall regeneration Of the Church being without spot or wrinkle b Epist 57. Tunc perficietur in re quò nunc proficiendo ambulatur in spe Then shall that be performed indeed to which now by profiting we walke in hope Thus of Gods raising vs vp together with Christ and setting vs together with him in heauenly places c De bapt cont Donat. lib. 1. c 4. Nondum in re sed in spe He hath not yet done it really but in hope d In Psal 37. Re sumus adhuc filij irae spe non sumus Really we are yet the children of wrath saith he but in hope we are not so e Jbid. Gaude te redemptum corpore sed nondum re spe securus esto Reioyce that in body thou art redeemed not yet in deed or in reall effect but in hope we are out of doubt By all which it is plaine that the Apostle named not hope as a cause of the saluation that we hope for but onely to signifie the not hauing as yet really of the thing whereof the hope we haue embraced And it hath no sence that hope should be made a cause of the thing hoped for because the verie name of hope importeth some former ground or cause from whence we conceiue our hope and by vertue whereof we expect that which we hope for and do not therefore hope to obtaine it because we hope Thus M. Bishop hath neither S. Paule nor anie other testimonie of Scripture whereby to giue warrant that either hope or any other vertue hath any part in the worke of iustification but onely faith As touching the nature of hope f before hath bene spoken and it hath bene shewed a Cap. 3. secâ 20. that as the Scripture vnderstandeth it it is nothing else but a patient and constant expectation of that which we by faith in the promise of God do assuredly beleeue shall come vnto vs. 26. W. BISHOP To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scripture let vs ioyne here some testimonies out of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein Maister Perkins citeth some for him the most auncient and most valiant Martyr Saint Ignatius of our iustification writeth thus The beginning of life is faith Epist ad Philip. but the end of it is charitie but both vnited and ioyned together do make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Lib. 2. Strom. but feare doth build and charitie bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these words Hom. 70. in Mat. Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well S. Augustine crieth out as it were to our Protestants saith Lib. 3. Hypognos Heare ô foolish heretike and enemy to the true faith Good works which that they may be done are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue bene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified And De side oper cap. 14. Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the hearts of the faithfull Least by euill securitie they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtaine it Now the doctrine which M. Perkins teacheth is cleane contrarie For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can do by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kinde of cause but faith alone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnesse for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by theÌ magnified and called the onely and whole cause of our iustification is in the end become no true cause at all Cenditio sine qua non but a bare condition without which we cannot be iustified If it be an instrumentall cause let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and chuse whether he had leifer to haue charitie or the soule of man without any helpe of grace R. ABBOT Of his fiue proofes there is but onely one that maketh any mention of iustification by works The two first were surely put in but onely to fil vp a roome for there is not so much as any shew of any thing against vs. For although we defend that a man is iustified by faith onely yet do we not make faith onely the full perfection of a iustified man In the naturall bodie the heart onely is the seate and fountaine of life and yet a man consisteth not onely of a heart nor is a perfect man by hauing a heart but many other members and parts are required some for substance some for ornament which make vp the
perfection of a man whereof if anie be wanting it is an imperfection so that a Aug. de ciuit Dei lib. 11. ca. 22 Si vnum radatur supercilium quà m propemo duâ nihil corpori quà m multuÌ detrahitur pulchritudini if but one ey-brow be shauen as S. Austine saith though in a maner nothing be taken from the bodie yet it causeth a great blemish vnto it Euen so is it in the iustified man faith onely is the seat and fountaine of spirituall life because as the quickening facultie power of the liuing soule dwelleth in the heart so Christ who is our life dwelleth in our faith or in our hearts by faith but yet we consist not spiritually of faith onely but many other vertues and graces are required to make vp the perfection of a Christian man to which as to the other members from the heart so from faith life is imparted and communicated that in them we may be aliue to God Thus then Ignatius saith not purposely of iustification but by occasion of commending faith and loue that b Ignat. epist ad Ephes for which M. Bishop following his maister Bellarmine misquoteth Ep. ad Philippânses faith is the beginning of life c. Which maketh for vs altogether against him For if faith be the beginning of life then by faith we first liue By faith therfore we are iustified for to be iustified as M. Bishop confessed in the former section is to be translated from death Now as naturall birth draweth not only guilt but also corruption as hath bene before shewed so faith wherein is our new birth giueth not onely forgiuenesse of sinnes to iustification but also sanctification to holinesse and newnesse of life the summe whereof is charitie because charitie is the epitome and briefe of the whole law and herein further is accomplished our perfection towards God so as that faith and loue vnited and ioyned together do make perfect the man of God The place of Clemens Alexandrinus is the same and needeth no further answer With Chrysostome we say that faith alone sufficeth not absolutely though faith alone suffice to iustification Charitie and good workes are necessarie to the perfection of a iustified man but he is not by them made a iustified man Therfore the same Chrysostome saith of Abraham c Chrys ad Rom. hom 8. Fide saluarieum qui opera non habet nihil fortasse fue rit insolentiae eâ verò qui rectè factis se conspicuum secerit non ex ipsis sed ex fide iustum fieri hoc scilicet admirabile est quod maximè fidei potentiam manifestat That a man that is without workes should he saued by faith it should be no strange matter but that he that hath made himselfe renowmed by his good works should yet not be iustified thereby but by faith this is wonderfull and doth greatly set forth the power of faith S. Austin in the place by him alledged if it were S. Austin auoucheth good workes to iustifie theÌ that are iustified that is to approue them iust but condemneth the auouching of any workes whereby to obtaine iustification and purposely in that place disputeth against it d August Hypognost lib. 3. Ex operibus noÌ iustificabitur omnis caro coram illoc quia iustitia Dei praeuentu misericordiae per fidem Iesu apparuit super omnes qui crediderunt Ideò subiungens inquit Iustificatè gratu per gratiaÌ Dei. Noli âi praeponere opera propria neâ exâââeÌ gloriari quâ ex operibus non c. By workes no flesh shall be iustified in the sight of God because the righteousnesse of God by his preuenting mercy through the faith of Iesus Christ is apparent vpon all that do beleeue Therefore the Apostle saith we are iustified freely by the grace of God Put not thine owne workes before it nor glorie thereof because by workes no flesh shall be iustified before him If no workes go before iustification then M. Bishops cause as too weake must go to the wals because then we cannot be said to be iustified by workes for being iustified before we cannot be sayd properly to be iustified by workes that follow after and if neither by works before nor after then not at all It followeth therefore that when S. Austine saith in that place that men of God are iustified by good workes he must needes meane as Thomas Aquinas saith S. Iames doth e Thom. Aquin. in Gal. cap. 3. lect 4. quantum ad manifestationem iustitiae by way of manifesting and declaring that a man is iustified so as that contrarie to M. Bishops assertion they are only signes and tokens of a iustified man not any causes of iustification Therefore S. Austin saith againe anon after f Aug. vt supr Iustificatio per fideÌ Iesu Christi data est datur dabitur crâdentâbus Iustification hath bene giuen is giuen and shall be giuen to them that beleeue by the faith of Iesus Christ Now that which he saith in the words cited by M. Bishop he saith it not as to the Protestant but to the Pelagian heretike the brother of the Papist for affirming good works of mans free wil before the iustifying grace of God for which the iustifying grace of God is bestowed vpon him Which opinion S. Austin hauing confuted bringeth in the heretike obiecting thus g Ibid. Ergò inquies damnas opera liberi arbitrij bona quia dicis iustitiam ex operibus non deberi c. Thou wilt say Doest thou then condemne the good workes of free will in that thou sayest that righteousnesse is not due by workes If so why then doth the Apostle command vs to abound in good workes To which he answereth h Audi haeretice stulte inimice fidei veritatis Operae liberi arbitrij bona quae vt fiant praeparaÌtur per gratiae praeâentum nullo lib. arbitrij merito et ipso faciente gubernante perficiente vt abundent in libero arbitrio non damna mââ quia ex his homines Dei iustificati sunt iustificantur iustifiâabuntur in Christo Damnamus verò authoritate diuina opera liberi arbitrij quae gratiae praeponuntur ex his tanquâm meritis in Christo iustificari extolluntur Hearken thou foolish heretike and enemy of the true faith We condemne not the good works of free will which that they may be done are prepared by the preuenting of grace vpon no merite of free will and the same preuenting grace causing directing and effecting that they do abound in free wil because by such men of God haue bin are and shal be iustified in Christ But by diuine authoritie we condemne the workes of free will which are put before grace and are extolled for vs by these as it were merits to be iustified in Christ Where verie plainly by the name of the workes of free will he excludeth all workes before the grace of iustification from
cap. 3. Multo magis ad crucifixum respicientes credentes animae morteÌ effugituros He teacheth sayth Theophylact that sith the Iewes beholding the image of the brazen Serpent did escape death much more we looking vnto him crucified and beleeuing shall escape the death of the soule Thus they simply tooke the words of Christ and made the cure to consist as on the one side in looking so on the other side in beleeuing M. Bishop saith that the meaning is that men infected with sinne haue no other remedy then to imbrace the faith of Christ Iesus Well then if no other remedy then that is the onely remedy If that be the onely remedy then for remedy there is nothing necessary but onely that And if any thing else be necessary then the cure is not performed by that not to be ascribed vnto it for a cure cannot be said to be done by one thing when that doth not cure without another But as theâe to looking so here the cure is ascribed to beleeuing It is therefore to be ascribed to nothing but faith onely As for that which he further requireth by his corrections exceptions it is but a part of the cure which is performed by faith onely For whatsoeuer is necessary in vs to eternall life followeth of true and liuely faith and is ministred vnto vs in Christ Iesus when by faith we haue imbraced him e Acts. 15.9 Our hearts are purified by faith f Gal. 3.14 by faith we receiue the promise of the spirit and g Rom. 8.2 the law of the spirit of life which is in Christ Iesus deliuereth vs from the law of sinne and of death that it may neither preuaile against vs to condemnation nor any further reigne ouer vs in conuersation which being the gift of God is not to be alledged to impeach the free bestowing of the grace of God 28. W. BISHOP His 2. reason is collected of exclusiue speeches as he speaketh vsed in Scriptures As we are iustified freely not of the law not by the law Gal. 2.16 Luk. 8.50 not of works not of our selues not of the works of the law but by faith all boasting excluded onely beleeue These distinctions whereby works and the law are excluded in the worke of iustification include thus much that faith alone doth iustifie It doth not so for these exclusiue speeches do not exclude feare hope and charity more then they exclude faith it selfe Which may be called a worke of the law as well as any other vertue being as much required by the law as any other But S. Pauls meaning in those places is to exclude all such workes as either Iew or Gentile did or could bragge of as done of themselues and so thought that by them they deserued to be made Christians For he truly saith that all were concluded in sinne and needed the grace of God which they were to receiue of his free mercy through the merits of Christ and not of any desart of their owne And that to obtaine this grace through Christ it was not needfull nay rather hurtfull to obserue the ceremonies of Moyses law as Circumcision the obseruation of any of their feasts or fasts nor any such like worke of the law which the Iewes reputed so necessary Againe that all morall works of the Gentiles could not deserue this grace which workes not proceeding from charity were nothing worth in Gods sight And so all workes both of Iew and Gentile are excluded from being any meritorious cause of iustification and consequently all their boasting of their owne forces their first iustification being freely bestowed vpon them Yet all this notwithstanding a certaine vertuous disposition is required in the Iew and Gentile whereby his soule is prepared to receiue that great grace of iustification that say we is faith feare hope loue and repentance that say the Protestants is faith onely Wherefore say we as the excluding of works and boasting exclude not faith no more do they exclude the rest faith being as well our worke and a worke of the law as any of the rest and all the rest being of grace as well as faith and as farre from boasting of as faith it selfe Now that out of S. Luke beleeue onely is nothing to the purpose For he was bid beleeue the raising of his daughter to life and not that Christs righteousnesse was his and faith alone may be a sufficient disposition to obtaine a myracle but not to obtaine iustification of which the question onely is Consider now good Reader whether of our interpretations agree better with the circumstance of the text and the iudgement of the auncient Fathers The texts see thou in the Testament Take for a tast of the Fathers iudgement S. Augustines exposition of those places of S. Paul of one of the chiefest of which De gra lib. arb cap. 7. thus he speaketh Men not vnderstanding that which the Apostle saith We esteeme a man to be iustified without the law thought him to say that faith sufficed a man although he liued euill and had no good works which God forbid that the vessell of election should thinke And againe De praedest sanct cap. 7. Therefore the Apostle saith that a man is iustified by faith and not of works because faith is first giuen and by it the rest which are properly called workes and in which we liue iustly are by petition obtained By which it is manifest that S. Paul excluding the workes of the law and the workes done by our owne onely forces doth not meane to exclude good works which proceede from the helpe of Gods grace R. ABBOT If iustification be affirmed of faith denied to all other things it should seeme likely that the meaning of the Scripture is that by faith onely we are iustified M. Bishop answereth that those exclusiue speeches of the law and works of the law do no more exclude feare hope charity then they exclude faith it selfe because it is a worke of the law as well as any other vertue But yet the Apostle teacheth vs that the promise is a Rom. 4.16 therefore of faith that it may be of grace and b Cap. 11.6 if it be of grace it is not of works and therefore expresly seuereth faith from workes as elsewhere he maketh a distinction betwixt c Cap. 3.27 the law of workes and the law of faith so that M. Bishop in confounding faith with the works of the law speaketh flatly contrary to the Apostle For the faith of Christ though it be accidentally reduced to the law yet is not originally intended in the law because Christ who is the obiect of our faith is in order of nature consequent to the law For life is first propounded in the law which when it cannot be obtained there Christ is consequently giuen and offered vnto vs that we may haue life in him But we further tell him as before that we attribute not our iustification to faith
Yet we haue heard how Bellarmine maketh them u De iustificat lib. 2. cap. 17. quodam modo in some sort meritorious also and that their Schooles haue commonly receiued them so to be so that in this respect also they do but dally with the Apostle But tell vs M. Bishop are those vertuous dispositions of yours the workes of grace or onely of free will If they be of grace as you commonly foist in the name of grace in speaking of them what hindereth them from being meritorious seeing it is grace you say that addeth merit vnto workes If they be of free will then all workes of our owne forces be not excluded from iustification which before you say the Apostle intendeth If he say that free will is helped by grace let him tell vs what he meaneth therein by grace and we shall finde him a meere Pelagian heretike as before is said He goeth on further and saith that as the excluding of workes and boasting excludeth not faith no more doth it exclude the rest How so Marry faith is as well our worke and a worke of the law as any of the rest But that is false as we haue already seene and againe faith with vs doth not iustifie as a worke as both faith hope and charity do with them but onely as the instrument of our iustification to be apprehended and applied thereby All the rest saith he are of grace as well as faith But being before iustification how should they be of grace seeing before iustification there is no infused grace and why are they not meritorious as hath bene said Againe he saith that the rest are as farre from boasting of as faith But therein he flatly contradicteth the Apostle who affirmeth that x Rom. 3.27 boasting is not excluded by the law of workes but by the law of faith And the thing is plaine for he hath somewhat to boast of who doth any thing for which the grace of God is bestowed vpon him but in faith there is nothing to boast of because the act of faith is to beleeue that God doth all through Christ onely for his mercies sake it is it selfe wholy the gift of God and attributeth nothing to it selfe or to vs but all wholy vnto God But M. Bishop cannot be said to exclude boasting in as much as he must confesse as hath bene before said that his workes of preparation are intrinsecally the works onely of free will and doth make the free will of man in all the worke of iustification concurrent with the grace of God yea so farre as that man hath to glory that by his free will the grace of God taketh his due effect it being in his power either to accept or to refuse the same Whereas he excepteth against the place of S. Luke y Luk. 8.50 onely beleeue as nothing to the purpose he sheweth that he hath not learned rightly to conceiue thereof Let S. Austine teach him that z Aug. de verb. Dom. ser 18. Nouerimus omnia miracula quae corporalitèr fecit valere ad admonitionem nostram vt percipiamus ab eo quod noÌ est transituruÌ neque in fine abituruÌ post Per ista teÌporalia quae videbantur aedificauit fidem ad illa quae non videbantur all the miracles which Christ did corporally do serue for our instruction that we may receiue of him that that shall not passe away nor go from vs in the end that by these temporall things which were seene he edified and builded faith to the things which were not seene Christ therfore yeelding here to faith onely a miracle for the recouery of bodily life doth instruct vs that to faith onely he also yeeldeth the work of his power for the raising of vs vp to the spirituall life of grace The man indeede was bid as M. Bishop saith to beleeue the raising of his daughter to life but therein he was bid also to beleeue that it is Christ by whom we are spiritually raised vp from death to life in being reconciled vnto God by the not imputing of our sinnes through the righteousnesse and merit of the same Iesus Christ imputed vnto vs. He saith that faith might be sufficient to obtaine a miracle but I answer him that that miracle was a benefit importing a further benefit and all the benefits of Christ are obtained in like sort so that our Sauiour Christ still referring them that seeke vnto him to faith for the obtaining of bodily health doth also referre vs to faith for the obtaining of soules health Now how his interpretation here deliuered agreeth with the text of Scripture the Reader I hope can well consider by that that hath bene said As for the places of Austin if his sight had not failed him I suppose he would not haue alledged them the one of them being nothing at all against vs and the other directly against himselfe We say a August de grat lib. ââbit cap. 3. God forbid that the Apostle should thinke that faith sufficeth a man although he liue euill and haue no good workes Nay we say further God forbid that he should thinke that there is any true faith in them that liue euill and haue no good workes We haue often enough said that a true iustifying faith is neuer separated from godly life and that faith that is without good workes is onelie called faith with men but indeede and with God it is not so In the other place Saint Austine bringeth in the Apostle saying b De praedest sanct cap. 7. that a man is iustified by faith and not of workes But how accordeth this with that that Maister Bishop saith that a man is iustified by his workes as well as by his faith By faith and not by works saith Saint Austine out of the Apostle both by faith and works saith M. Bishop out of his owne braines S. Austine giueth the reason c Ibid. Quia ipsa prima datur ex qua impetreÌtur caetera qua propriè opera nuÌ cupantur in quibus iustè viuitur Because faith is first giuen by which the rest are obtained which are properly called works in which a man liueth righteously Wherby he importeth that faith is first giuen that thereby we may be iustified and thence follow good works in which we liue well according to his rules before deliuered d De fide et operib cap. 14. Sequntur iustificatum non praecâdunt iustificandum They follow a man being iustified they go not before to iustification e Epist 120. cap. 30. Ex hoc incipiunt bona opera ex quo iustifica mur noÌ quia praecesserunt iustificamur then they begin when we are iustified we are not iustified for them going before Then plainly it appeareth by S. Austines iudgement that iustification is the beginning of good works and if iustification be the beginning of good workes then by no meanes can it be said that good workes are any cause of
6. 11. plainly professeth that he cannot tell whether he loue God or God loue him who saith that hope and charity are seated in the darke corners of the will and a man hath but onely coniectures and a probable opinion of the being thereof in himselfe What shall he then make bold of in name of friendship with Christ who knoweth not whether he be a friend to Christ or Christ to him As for the saying of Austine why he alledgeth it I know not vnlesse it be that he were onely desirous to say somewhat out of Austine S. Austine noteth that inherent iustice consisteth in charity which is the summe of the law which is the rule of iustice According therefore to the measure of our charity greater or lesse so is the measure of our righteousnesse We say the same but what is this to shew that charity is the fittest instrument to apply vnto vs the merit of Christ But that he may not dreame of iustification before God by any perfection of charity here let him remember what Saint Austine hath said thereof that f August epist 29. Supra cap. 2. sect 8. perfect charity is in no man so long as he liueth here that the lesnesse thereof to that that it ought to be is by reason of a default or corruption in vs by reason whereof no man liuing shall be iustified in the sight of God 30 W. BISHOP M. Perkins fourth Reason is taken from the iudgement of the auncient Church They are blessed Ambros in Rom. 4. to whom without any labour or worke done iniquities are remitted So no workes or repentance is required of them but onely that they beleeue To these and such like words I answer First that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses Secondly that that Author excludeth not repentance but onely the workes of Moses law which the Iewes held to be necessary as circumcision and such like see the place and conferre with it that which he hath written in the same worke vpon the fourth to the Hebrewes where he hath these words Faith is a great thing and without it it is not possible to be saued but faith alone doth not suffice but it is necessary that faith worke by charity and conuerse worthy of God De verb. Ap. ser 40. M. Perkins next authority is gathered out of S. Augustine There is one propitiation for all sinners to beleeue in Christ True but where is it that we neede nothing else but to beleeue Leuit. li. 1. ca. 2. 3. Hesichius saith Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone and not of works that is we do not merit by our works done before grace any thing at Gods hand but of his mercy receiue both faith and iustification Sup. CaÌt. ser 22. 4. Bernard hath Whosoeuer thirsteth after righteousnesse let him beleeue in thee that being iustified by faith alone he may haue peace with God Answer By faith alone he excludeth all other meanes that either Iew or Gentile required but not charity which his very words include for how can we abhorre sinne and thirst after iustice without charity and in the same worke he declareth plainly Serm. 24. that he comprehendeth alwaies charity when he speakes of a iustifying faith saying A right faith doth not make a man righteous if it worke not by charity And againe Neither works without faith nor faith without works is sufficient to make the soule righteous Gal. 3. 5. Chrysostome they said he who rested on faith alone was accursed but Paul sheweth that he is blessed who rested on faith alone Answer He speakes of the Iewes who held Christians accursed because resting on the faith in Christ would not obserue withall Moses law Gal. 5. the Apostle contrariwise denounceth them accursed who would ioyne the ceremonies of Moses law with Christian religion and so faith alone there excludeth onely the old law not the workes of charity so he mangleth pittifully a sentence of S. Basils saying De Humil. Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified onlie by faith in Christ If a man know himselfe iustified by faith in Christ how can he acknowledge that he wants true iustice His words truly repeated are these Let man acknowledge that he is vnworthie of true iustice and that his iustification comes not of his desert but of the meere mercy of God through Christ So that by faith alone Saint Basil treating of humility excludes all merit of our owne but no necessarie good disposition as you may see in his Sermon de Fide where he proues by many texts of holy Scripture that charitie is as necessarie as faith M. Perkins last testimonie is out of Origen Rom. 3. Who proues as M. Perkins said that onely beleeuing without workes iustifieth by the example of the Theefe on the Crosse of whose good workes there is no mention Answer Origen excludeth no good disposition in vs to iustification but saith that a man may be saued without doing outwardly any good workes if he want time and place as the Theefe did who presently vpon his conuersion was put to death which is good Catholike doctrine but that you may perceiue how necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to iustification you shall finde if you consider well all circumstances not one of them to haue bene wanting in that good Theefes conuersion First that he stood in feare of Gods iust iudgement appeares by these his words to his fellow Doest thou not feare God c. He had hope to be saued by Christ out of which he said O Lord remember me when thou commest into thy Kingdome By both which speeches is shewed also his faith both in God that he is the gouernour and iust iudge of the world and in Christ that he was the Redeemer of mankind His repentance and confession of his fault is laid downe in this And we truly suffer worthily His charity towards God and his neigbour in reprehending his fellowes blasphemie in defending Christs innocencie and in the middest of his greatest disgraces and raging enemies to confesse him to be King of the world to come out of all which we may gather also that he had a full purpose to amend his life and to haue taken such order for his recouery as it should please Christ his Sauiour to appoint So that he lacked not any one of those dispositions which the Catholike Church requires to iustification Now that that great Doctor Origen meant not to exclude any of these good qualities out of the companie of faith is apparant by that which he hath written on the next Chapter where he saith That faith cannot be imputed to iustice Rom. 4. to such as beleeue in Christ vnlesse they do withall put off the old man and a little before more plainly saying I thinke that faith is the first beginning of saluation hope is proceeding in the building but the
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 donaÌs delecta sub fineÌ a righteousnesse as he speaketh againe that forgiueth sinnes the forme of which righteousnesse he expresseth thus m Delicta iuueÌtutu meae ignorantias meas ne memineris ââstus 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 noÌâperatur 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 iustifâcatum 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 remeÌber 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 coÌcealeth 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
to the same grace and therefore very fondly doth M. Perkins inferre that in that sentence S. Paule speaketh of workes of grace because in the text following he mentioned good workes Whereas the Apostle putteth an euident distinction betweene those two kind of workes signifying the first to be of our selues the second to proceede from vs as Gods workmanship created in Christ Iesus and the first he calleth Works simply the second Good workes prepared of God for vs to walke in after our first iustification What grosse ignorance then was it to take these two so distinct manner of workes for the same and to ground himselfe so boldly vpon it R. ABBOT The question intended by M. Perkins is expresly propounded how farre foorth good workes are required to iustification namely before God which he determineth thus that they are required not as causes for which we are iustified either in the beginning of grace or in the proceeding thereof but onely as effects and fruites of iustification Which although it be implyed in that that before hath bene said of being iustified by faith alone yet neither as touching first nor second iustification is directly handled by M. Perkins but only in this place Here therefore he disputeth wholy as touching iustification before God that good workes concurre not as any causes thereof and bringeth his arguments directly to that point First the Apostle saith a Rom. 3.28 We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the works of the law M. Bishop excepteth against this place as meant of the first iustification of a sinner not appertaining to the second iustification But we find but one iustification spoken of by S. Paule both beginning and continuing in faith for being still sinners so long as here we liue it must needes be that that which the Apostle saith of the iustification of a sinner must stil appertaine vnto vs and therfore that both firstly and lastly we are iustified by faith without the workes of the law And if there were any second iustification that which the Apostle saith must necessarily be taken to belong to it For he writeth these things to the Romaines to the Galathians which long before had beleeued and bene baptized and yet now still informeth them that their iustification is by faith without the works of the law still he saith b Gal. 2.21 If righteousnesse be by the law Christ dyed in vaine yea he proueth by the Prophets words not that the sinner onely but c Cap. 3.11 the iust shall liue by faith as Hierome mentioning out of the vulgar Latin translation of the Psalmes these words d Psal 55.7 vulg Lat. Pro nihilo saluos faciet eos He will saue them for nothing addeth e Hieron aduer Pelag. lib 2. Haud dubium quin iustos qui non proprio merito sed Dei salâaÌtur clementia No doubt but he meaneth the iust who are not saued by their owne merit but by the mercie of God But it is further to be noted that he bringeth in Abraham for an example of this iustification euen then when he had long bene the seruant of God and shewed singular deuotion and obedience vnto him He bringeth for another example the Prophet Dauid a man according to Gods owne hart who from his childhood had bene called of God yet now still acknowledging his blessednes to consist in the f Rom. 4.6 Lords imputing of righteousnesse without workes It is euident therefore that M. Bishops exception is vnsufficient and that not only at a mans first entraÌce into the state of grace which he calleth the first iustificatioÌ but afterwards also a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law and therfore works can be no meritorious cause of any second iustification His acknowledgement that a sinner is iustified freely of the meere grace of God through the merit of Christ only without any merit of the sinner himselfe is a meere collusion and mockerie For if a man be iustified by workes then it is not by meere grace He saith g Sect. 21. before of the woman that washed the feet of Christ that her loue and other vertuous dispositions were causes why she was iustified and determineth still that hope feare repentance charitie concurre as causes thereof Yea but saith he they are no meritorious causes there is the merit of Christ onely and no merit of the sinner himselfe So then iustification is by workes but not by merits But we see the Apostle resolueth against workes of merits he saith nothing he speaketh of that that is not of that that cannot be workes there may be but merit there can be none as is afterwards to be declared See then the madnesse of these men the Apostle saith h Gal. 2.16 Ephes 2.9 Not by workes yes say they it is by works but it is not by merits the Apostle saith i Rom. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of workes yes say they it is both by grace and by workes but it is not by merits Thus impudently they confront the Apostle and seek to tye vpon him a flat contradiction to that he saith They will seeme to vphold grace by excluding merit when as the Apostle testifieth they plainely ouerthrow it by affirming workes because as hath bene before alledged out of Austin grace is not grace in any respect except it be free in euery respect Yea neither do they wholly exclude merit but affirme the same k Bellar. de iust lib. 1. cap. 17. in some sort euen in their first iustificatioÌ as I haue before diuers times obserued out of Bellarmine Thus they play fast and loose and wold faine say but cannot well tell what to say With Pelagius they are ashamed to omit the grace of God and yet they so teach it as that they make it of no effect Now because our iustification is meerely by the gift of God therefore M. Perkins saith that the sinner in his iustification is meerely passiue meaning that we do nothing at all wherein consisteth any part of our righteousnesse with God M. Bishop saith that this is absurd because a man must beleeue and to beleeue is an action But it is absurd onely to an absurd and ignorant man who vnderstandeth not what he readeth To beleeue is an action but he hath had occasion enough to know and vnderstand if ignorance had not blinded him that we place no part of righteousnesse in the very act of faith but in the thing receiued thereby Christ onely is our righteousnesse and him we receiue by faith God iustifieth we are iustified God imputeth righteousnesse to vs it is imputed God then is the agent we the subiect whereon he worketh patients receiuers and no way workers of that which is our righteousnesse before God And to this his vnderstanding should leade him in that iustification which they maintaine For although they say that by faith hope charitie repentance which are actions they obtaine
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 coÌfesse 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
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 Å¿ 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. NoÌ frustrae addidit In conspectu tuo nisi quia potest esse iustificatus in coÌspectu hominuÌ 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
Oecumen in Iac. ca. 2. De simplici assensu fideÌ dicere solemus c. Rursum coÌsecutionem ex affectu procedeÌtem cum firmo assensu nomine fidei vocamus bare assent of the vnderstanding and there is a faith that implyeth the affection of the heart and will There is a faith whereby m Iohn 3.15 he which beleeueth shall neuer perish and there is a faith whereby some n ââk 8.13 beleeue for a time and in time of temptation go away There is a faith which the world o 2. Tim. 2.18 destroyeth and there is p 1. Iohn 5.4 a faith which is our victorie whereby we ouercome the world According to these differences there is q Iam. 2.14 a faith without workes and there is r Gal. 5.6 a faith which worketh by loue We affirme then of the faith of the elect whereby we beleeue in God to which the promise of iustification and eternall life is made that it is a faith which cannot be separated from charity and good workes but wheresoeuer it is there is infallibly ioined with it the loue of God bringing forth Å¿ Phil. 1.11 the fruites of righteousnesse which are by Iesus Christ to the glory and praise of God Now as touching this faith M. Bishops arguments must be vnderstood or else they are nothing against vs and being so vnderstood a man would wonder that a wise man should shew so much folly to bring arguments so impertinent and friuolous as he hath done The first is taken from the words of reprobate hypocrites who t Mat. 7.22 at that day shall say vnto Christ Lord Lord haue we not prophecied in thy name c. to whom he shall professe saying I neuer knew you depart from me ye workers of iniquity They shall say Lord Lord therefore they beleeued in Christ and were perswaded assuredly that they were of the elect the conclusion as well agreeing to the antecedent as a goose feather to a foxes taile It is to be noted that faith is grounded vpon the word of God and the thing which it beleeueth is that that God hath said Thus the Apostle telleth vs that u Rom. 10.17 faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God and therefore calleth the word of God x Ver. 8. the word of faith because that is the obiect and matter of faith Whatsoeuer we conceiue towards God beside the word of God it is opinion imagination presumption but faith it is not Now the word of God denounceth that x Psal 11.6 the soule of the Lord hateth them that loue iniquitie that y Psal 92 9. all the workers of iniquity shall be destroied that Christ shall say to them at the last day Depart from me ye workers of iniquitie If then there be no faith but by the word of God and the word of God denounce destruction to the workers of iniquity how can it be said that the workers of iniquitie haue faith to perswade themselues assuredly that they are of the elect S. Austine saith z Aug. de verb. Dom. ser Qui fidem hâbet sine spe dilectione ChristuÌ esse credit non in Christum credit He who hath faith without hope and charity beleeueth that Christ is but he beleeueth not in Christ For a Cyprian de simplic praelat Credere se in Christum quomodo dicit qui non facit quod Christus facere praecepit how doth he say that he beleeueth in Christ saith Cyprian who doth not what Christ hath commanded vs to do How then doth M. Bishop say that these beleeue in Christ in whom he confesseth there is no charity no loue to Christ to do those things which he commandeth They of whom Christ speaketh as the words very plainly import are heretikes schismatikes false Apostles false teachers yea and such also as though they preach the truth of Christ yet preach it not truly sincerely but b Phil. 1.15.18 of enuie and strife and vnder a pretence who vnder the name of Christ c Gap 2.21 seeke their owne and not that that is Christs making the word of God to serue them themselues not seruing it vsing the Gospell for their purpose when they haue no true purpose for the Gospel d Psal 50.16.17 taking the testament of Christ in their mouthes but hating to be reformed thereby e Tit. 1.16 professing to know God when by their deeds they deny him To the name of Christ euen in the mouthes of such wicked men God somtimes doth that honour as that miracles are done thereby diuels are cast out great effects are wrought wherin they much glory in respect thereof assume much vnto themselues These in the end not of faith but for feare wheÌ they shal see that which they beleeued not that f Phil. 3.19 damnation is their end shall in perplexity of mind cry vnto Christ whoÌ before they regarded not and therefore by him now shall be reiected Of such though professing to know God and prophecying in the name of Christ yet the Apostle saith as the vulgar Latine translateth and as the word well beareth that they are g Tit. 1 16. vnbeleeuers yea as Thomas Aquinas expoundeth it h Thom. Aquin. in Tit. 1. lect 4. Non apti ad credendum not fit to beleeue And if they be vnbeleeuers why doth M. Bishop say they haue faith or if they haue faith why doth the Apostle say that they are vnbeleeuers Surely they that beleeue destruction to be the end of the works of iniquity will be carefull to auoid the same Cyprian truly saith i Cyprian de simplic praelat Metueret conscientiae nostra si crederet quia non credit omnino nce metuât si autem crederet caueret Si caueret euaderet Our conscience would be afraid if it did beleeue because it beleeueth not therefore it feareth not If it did beleeue it would take heede and if it did take it should auoide or escape namely the punishments to come whereof he speaketh in that place The cause why men k Heb. 4.2 profit not by the word of God is because it is not mingled with faith in those that heare it Where there is faith men profit by it and it is the l 2. Cor. 2.16 sauour of life vnto life but where faith is wanting it commeth to passe which Ambrose saith m Ambros in 1. Thess ca. 4. TraÌseunt hinc in gehennam vt ediscant verum esse quod credere noluerunt They go from hence to hell that there they may learne that that is true which here they would not beleeue Thus it commeth to passe with them of whom M. Bishop here speaketh who either preach their owne deuices vnder the name of Christ or mingle not that with faith in themselues which they preach to be beleeued of other men There is not so much as one word in the text whence he should conclude that
though any do by occasion name charitie for the wedding garment as men by diuers occasions speake diuersly thereof yet no man was euer so absurd as expresly to exclude true faith from being one part of it as M. Bishop doth And if any do speake sometimes of a faith without charitie and fruites of good workes they speake thereof as we do as being onely a bastard faith a false and fained faith an idle outward receiuing and professing of the faith or doctrine of faith not that true faith which the Apostle speaketh of to which he assigneth our iustification in the sight of God The like foolish argument he maketh from the i Mat. 25.1 foolish virgins he may well call it the like because indeed they are all naught They had faith saith he true but they had not true faith they had not that faith which the Apostle speaketh of wherein our iustification is affirmed to consist For of that faith the Protestants say truly that it cannot be lost because God hath made vnto it the promise of eternall life and therefore Christ prayeth for it that it may neuer faile They had a forme or shew of faith as they had k 2. Tim. 3.5 a forme or shew of godlinesse but neuer knew the power thereof His tale of perfection is an idle dreame as we shall see hereafter if God will As for them that apply this text to the profession of virginitie they do apparent wrong therein the very text it selfe giuing to vnderstand that therby is described the kingdome of heauen by which in these parables euery where is vnderstood the whole state of the outward and militant Church professing to seeke the kingdome of heauen To take it otherwise is to offer violence to a very plaine and manifest text Vnder the name of Virgins all are comprehended who by profession and promise of faith and baptism haue vndertaken to be l 2. Cor. 11.2 virgins that is entire and faithfull vnto Christ By the lampe is imported that outward profession to men the oyle signifieth true faith and a good conscience inwardly to God Howsoeuer the lampes of foolish virgins of idle and emptie professors giue them credit with men so as that they are not barred from the companie and conuersation of the wise yet in the sleepe of death they shall go out and shall not serue to light them to go to God then shall they too late seeke and wish for that the oportunitie whereof before they carelesly omitted Then shall they cry Lord Lord as the other did before but it shall not boot them to cry when the doores shall be shut against them Thus doth Christ giue the same to vnderstand of hypocrites in generall which before he had done of hypocriticall and false teachers and what he saith here he expresseth more fully by the other Euangelist that when they shall cry m Luk. 13.25 Lord Lord open to vs and Christ shall answer vnto them I know you not whence you are then they shall begin to say We haue eaten and drunke in thy presence and thou hast taught in our streets Where we see them pleading that they haue heard Christ preach and they haue bene partakers of his Sacraments but they cannot plead for themselues that they haue beleeued in him therfore he shall answer theÌ again I tell you I know ye not whence ye are depart from me ye workers of iniquitie His fourth argument is of n Ioh. 12.42 many amongst the chiefe rulers of the Iewes who beleeued in Christ but yet confessed him not because of the Pharisees lest they should be cast out of the synagogue for they loued the praise of men more then the prayse of God Here we see faith indeed as he saith but we see no necessitie that faith should be vnderstood here to be without charitie Here is weake faith and weake loue too much yet entangled and tyed in the nets of carnall and earthly respects but he hath no ground to affirme that there is no loue Yes saith he for charity prefers the glory and seruice of God before al things in the world whereas these men were afraid to confesse Christ Indeed o 1. Ioh. 4 18. perfect charitie casteth out all feare and perfect faith breedeth perfect charity but there is a beginning of true faith and loue which being yet little and weake and hauing not yet ouermastered all worldly regards is for a time timorous and fearefull to confesse Christ yet groweth to strength by litle and little till it resolue to cleaue vnto him with losse of all other things Such was the faith of Nicodemus and Ioseph of Arimathea who were two of these chiefe rulers the one p Ioh. 3.2 coming to Iesus by night the other a disciple also q Cap. 19.38 but secretly for feare of the Iewes who yet afterwards being stirred vp with those things which they beheld saw in the death of Christ more boldly shewed themselues in his behalfe and in the end forsooke all for the following of his seruice In the meane time they shewed loue also to Christ though weakly r Cap. 7.50.51 the one in speaking in his behalfe Å¿ Luk. 23.51 the other in withholding his consent from the counsell and deed that was acted against Christ both in yeelding themselues to be his disciples and to be instructed by him Such was the faith and loue of the Apostles themselues who were euery while affrighted and in his greatest distresse t Mat. 26.56 all forsooke him and fled But he that u Cap. 12.20 breaketh not the brused reed nor quencheth the smoaking flaxe till he bring foorth iudgement into victorie wheresoeuer he seeth true faith and vnfained loue though yet weake and feeble watereth and cherisheth and vndersetteth the same that it may grow to strength x Aug. in Ioan. tract 53. Videte quemadmodum Euangelista notauerit improbauerit quâsdam ques tamen in eum credidisse dixit qui in hoc ingressu fidei si proficerent amorem quoque humanae gloriae proficiendo superarent The Euangelist saith S. Austin noteth and reproueth some of whom notwithstanding he saith that they did beleeue in Christ who if they did grow forward in this beginning of faith wold by growing forward ouercome the loue of humane glory which the Apostle had ouercome who saith God forbid that I should reioyce but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ This growth there is wheresoeuer there is true and vnfained faith and because it cannot grow without loue it groweth to the ouercoming of all contrarie loue til it cleaue wholy vnto God Thus the Gospel expresly teacheth concerning some of these chief rulers and we cannot doubt but that the like befell in the rest of them that did truly beleeue in Christ They beleeued but their faith was weake and their loue was according to their faith til increase of faith brought further strength of loue and they learned by faith
the light thereof Now albeit this be the true light i Ephes 5.13 which maketh all things manifest and the onely sure foundation whereupon we can rest our faith for what is it what the whole world saith if God say not the same yet against the importunitie of the aduersarie and for thy better satisfaction thou shalt see our assertions and expositions throughly munited and fenced with the acknowledgment of the auncient Church Wherein although we cannot but say that by the Fathers and Bishops of those times many things were conceiued and deliuered amisse and are not our aduersaries forced will they will they to confesse the same yet God hath so prouided that his truth ex abundanti is iustified by them and no antiquity or authoritie of humane error hath so defaced it but that still the track thereof euen by theÌ who somtimes haue deemed somewhat against it is plainly to be discerned Yea in sundry articles of our faith the whole streame of antiquitie runneth so oppositely directly against the doctrine and practise of the Romane church that now is as that we may woÌder at their extreme impudency and wilfulnes who against so cleare and euident testimony do still persist in the maintenance thereof Which in some part thou shalt see in the treatise here following and shalt vnderstand according to the occasioÌ here offered that howsoeuer they cry with wide mouthes The fathers the fathers yet their crie is greater then their strength and that the Fathers haue not left vs vnfurnished either of armour to defend our selues or of weapons to conquer them And the more to secure thee hereof I haue set downe the testimonies of the Fathers for the most part in their owne words either in Latine or translated into Latine or in the Greeke tongue sometimes where I had the copie at hand and saw the Latine translation not fitly to expresse the Greeke I haue had a sincere and faithfull care to deale vprightly herein and not to trouble thee with impertinent allegations but onely such as are pregnant and cleare to that purpose for which they are alledged That God by whose prouidence this seruice hath befallen vnto me make the same profitable both to thee and me and graunt vs by writing and reading to increase in the light and assurance of his truth that we may more and more see and discerne the frauds of these Mountebanks and iuggling Sophisters who by insolent ostentation of words and casting of false and deceitfull colours take vpon them to be able to charme the world and by their wits to iuggle all other men beside their wits treading vnder foote the word of God pretending the fathers names and betraying the faith of the fathers subiecting all religion to their owne fancie and saying after the manner of wicked men k Psal 12.4 With our tongues we will preuaile we are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs And thou O merciful Father who onely art the refuge and dwelling place of thy poore and maligned Church l Psal 68.18 stablish for thy names sake the thing that thou hast wrought in vs go forward with the worke which thou hast so graciously begun to dissolue the captiuity of BabyloÌ and to free the remnant of thy Church from the yoke of the slauerie and bondage of Antichrist that all stumbling blockes of Popish prophanations and idolatries being remoued there may be a way prepared for the returne of the forlorne seede of Abraham into the societie of thy people that thencefoorth we may expect and looke for the comming of thy Sonne Iesus Christ to make an end of these euill dayes and to gather vs euerlastingly to that hope which in him thou hast set before vs. m Apoc. 22.20 Amen Lord. Come Lord Iesus come quickly The speciall Contents of this Booke THat the Church of Rome maketh Christ in effect no Christ pag. 14. c. That Rome is Babylon and the Pope Antichrist pag. 39. Of Free-will Chap. 1. pag. 86. Of originall sinne after Baptisme Chap. 2. pag. 163. Of the certaintie of Saluation Chap. 3. pag. 255. Of Iustification Chap. 4. pa. 379. in which are handled these points 1. That righteousnesse before God is imputed not inherent pag 387. 2. What manner of faith it is whereby we are iustified p. 434. 3. That Faith onely doth iustifie pag. 468. 4. How we affirme it vnpossible to keepe Gods commaundements pag. 550. 5. That our good works are not free from staine of sin p. 573. 6. That true faith cannot be without charitie good works pag. 605. Of Merits Chap. 5. pag. 629. Of Satisfaction Chap. 6. pag. 729. Of Traditions Chap. 7. pag. 839. Of Vowes and namely of the Monkish vowes of chastitie pouertie and obedience Chap. 8. pag. 992. Of Images Chap. 9. pag. 1105. THE PREFACE TO THE READER BY DOCTOR BISHOP GEntle Reader I meane not here to entertaine thee with many words the principall cause that moued me to write was the honour and glorie of God in defence of his sacred veritie then the imploying of his talent bestowed vpon me as well to fortifie the weaker sort of Catholiks in their faith as to call backe and leade others who wander vp and downe like to lost sheepe after their owne fancies into the right way I tooke in hand particularly the confutation of this booke not only for that I was thereunto requested by a friend of good intelligence and iudgement who thought it very expedieÌt but also because perusing of it I found it penned more schollerlike then the Protestants vse to do ordinarily For first the points in controuersy are set down distinctly and for the most part truly Afterward in confirmation of their opinion the chiefe arguments are produced from both Scriptures Fathers and reason Which are not vulgar but culled out of their Rabbins Luther Peter Martyr Caluin Kemnitius and such like though he name them not Lastly he placeth some obiections made in fauour of the Catholike doctrine and answereth to them as well as he could And which I speake to his commendation doth performe all this very briefly and clearly So that to speake my opinion freely I haue not seene any booke of like quantitie published by a Protestant to contain either more matter or deliuered in better method And consequently more apt to deceiue the simple especially considering that he withal counterfeiteth to come as neare vnto the Romane Church as his tender conscience will permit him whereas indeed he walketh as wide from it as any other noueller of this age Wherefore I esteemed my spare time best imployed about the discouering of it being as it were an abridgement of the principall controuersies of these times and do endeuour after the same Scholasticall manner without all superfluitie of words no losse to maintaine and defend the Catholike partie then to confute all such reasons as are by M. Perkins alledged for the contrary Reade this short treatise good Christian diligently for
ineffabili dono gratiae caelestis illuminat God helpeth vs by his doctrine and reuelation whilest he openeth the eyes of our hearts whilest he sheweth vs things to come that we may not be holden with things present whilest he layeth open vnto vs the snares of the diuell whilest he enlighteneth vs with the manifold and vnspeakeable gift of his heauenly grace Thus hitherto they agree as touching this preuenting grace both calling that by the name of grace which the auncient Church disclaimed vnder that name because they vnderstood grace to be meant of that onely whereby God himselfe maketh vs to bee that that hee calleth vs to be and here is nothing but propounding perswading exhorting stirring enkindling enlightening moouing knocking but leauing it to vs either to accept or reiect that that is propounded and perswaded and * Jbid. cap. 4. Nostrum est quia haec omnia vertere etiam in malum possumus Conc. Trid. Sess 6. cap. 5. Neque homo ip c nihil omnino agit inspirationem illâ recipiens quâ pe qui illam abijcere potest both resting the act and effect of all vpon man himselfe yeelding to his motion when it is at his owne discretion to doe otherwise For M. Bishop here telleth vs out of their learning that there is in vs a naturall facultie of Free will to which this propounding perswading is vsed q Coster vt supr Relicta voluntati libertate quae fieri potest vt vel suscipiantur influxus diuini vel repulsam patiantur to which it is left to giue to these motions either admission or repulse r B llar de grat lib arbit lib. 5. cap. 29. In potestate voluntatis relinquitur consentire voâaÌti sua senti vel non consentire It is left in the power of the will saith Bellarmine either to consent to God calling and perswading or not to consent vnto him Now saith Costerus Å¿ Coster ib. Qui hanc gratiam admittit cadem aduitus progreditur vlterius vt credendo sperando poenitendo ad iustificationis gratiam se paret â Of Iustification Sect. 21. He that by Free will admitteth of this grace by the helpe of it not being yet any spirituall renewing grace but onely as the friend as before was said reaching his hand or giuing a coard to the man in the pit he prepareth himselfe by beleeuing hoping repenting and performing workes of pietie to receiue the grace of iustification So that before iustification and without any inward or inhabitant grace of regeneration euen by Free will receiuing onely a helpe which is without it a man hath faith hope repentance loue by which and for which as M. Bishop afterwards disputeth God is induced and moued to bestow vpon vs his iustifying grace All this matter M. Bishop in the thirteenth Section of this question setteth downe thus God by his grace knockes at the doore of our hearts he doth not breake it open or in any sort force it but attendeth that by our assenting to his call we open him the gates and then lo he with his heauenly gifts will enter in Whereby it appeareth that with theÌ the first intrinse call act of mans conuersion is of himselfe and an act of his owne Free will occasioned by God but acted by man himself because the act of grace on Gods part being complete there remaineth a distinct and seuerall act of the will of man for admitting of that grace of God vpon admitting whereof followeth the endowment of the gifts of God by which thence foorth Free will worketh according to the will of God All this Pelagius also taught as they do affirming a power of nature consisting in Free will t Pelag apud August contrae Pelag Ce est lib 1 cap. 4. JpsaÌ possiâilitatem gratiae suae ad âliat semper auxilio which power being not sufficient of it selfe God alwaies assisteth with the helpe of the foresaid grace u August Epist 107. Per legem per Scripturas suas Deus operatur vt velimus sed eu consentire vel no consentire ita nostrum est vt si velimus fiat si autem nolimus nihil in nobis operationem Dei valere faciamus By his law by his Scriptures which we reade or heare he worketh that we may be willing but to consent or not consent is so ours as that if we will we do so if not we cause that the worke of God auaileth nothing Now then x Contr. Pelag. vt supra cap. 32.33 Qui currit ad Deum ab eo seregi cupit ad est voluntatem suam ex eius voluntate suspendit qui ei adherendo nigiter vnus eum illo fit spiritus non hoc nisi de arbitrij efficit libertate Qua qui benè vtitur ita se totum trauit Deo omnemque suam mort ficat voluntatem vt cum Apostolo possit dicere Viuo autem c. pontique cor suum in manis Dei vt illud quo voluerit Deus ipse declinet he that vseth his Free will aright saith he he runneth vnto God and desireth to be guided and directed by him and hangeth his will vpon the will of God to whom being ioyned by cleaning still vnto him he becometh or is made one spirit with him he so committeth himselfe wholy to God and mortifieth all his owne will that with the Apostle he may be able to say Now I liue yet not I but Christ liueth in me he putteth his heart into Gods hand that God may incline it whither it shall please him Here is Free will yeelding assent to God and from thence by assistance of grace which he also as we haue heard acknowledgeth in his meaning which is the same with the Papists to be necessarie alwaies and in all things there follow the workes of preparation which he expresseth by termes of running vnto God desiring to be guided by him mortifying our owne will putting our heart into Gods hand hanging our wil vpon Gods will Now hereupon will he haue to ensue the iustifying grace and gift of God which he signifieth by becoming one spirit with God by hauing Christ to liue in vs by hauing God to incline our hearts whither it pleaseth him y August ibid. Magnum profecto diuinae gratiae adiutorium vt cor nostrum quo voluerit Deus ipse declinei sed hoc tam magnuÌ adiutorium sicut ipse desipit tunc mere mur cùm sine vllo adiutorio nonnesi de arbitrij libertate ad Dominum currimus c. vs his praecudentibus meritis sic eius consequamur gratiam vt cor nostrum quo voluerit ipse declinet A great helpe of grace indeed saith Austine that God incline our heart neither he will but this so great helpe as he Pelagius doteth we then merit or obtaine when without any helpe onely by Free will we runne to God desire to be guided by him c. That these merits going
haue profited by the words of Christ and haue taken occasion thereby to come to Christ for the obtaining of eternall life the true meanes whereof he directeth when he saith n Iohn 17.3 This is life eternall to know thee the onely true God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent Which knowledge of Christ seeing this man had not without which M. Bishop himselfe I hope will say there is no eternall life surely euen by his owne grounds it must be absurd to say that Christ by these words did simply intend to direct him a way for the obtaining of eternall life And if he will say that he was indeed first to beleeue and then by faith to keepe the commandements thereby to enter into life the Apostle taketh exception against that when citing the words of the Prophet The iust shall liue by faith he inferreth o Gal. 3.11 Now the law is not of faith but saith He that doth these things shall liue in them For if the law saying He that doth these things shall liue in them do not accord with the faith of Christ then it is not for them that professe the faith of Christ in the doing of these things that is in the keeping of the commandements to expect the obtaining of eternall life Yea p Tertull. de praescript Euaetuatur gratiae Euangelica si ad legem Christum redigit the grace of the Gospell is made void if it bring Christ to the law saith Tertullian which he learned of the Apostle saying q Gal. 5 4. Ye are voided of Christ ye are fallen from grace that will be iustified by the law Therefore he saith r Rom. 4.14 If they which be of the law be heires then faith is made void and the promise is made of none effect Å¿ Gal. 3.18 If the inheritance be by the law it is no longer by promise But God hath giuen it by promise and therefore faith beleeueth t 1. Ioh 5.10.11 that God hath giuen vnto vs eternall life and this life is not in our keeping the commandements but in his sonne and in him only we are to expect it that from the beginning to the end we may still confesse that u Rom. 6.23 eternall life is the gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. The commandements of God therefore are now laid before vs not as the condition for obtaining of eternall life but as the way to walke in vnto eternall life assured vnto vs by the free promise and gift of God And of this promise and gift of God the keeping of Gods commandements is a part who hath said x Ierem. 31.33 I will put my law in their hearts and in their minds will I write them y Ezech. 36.27 I will put my spirit into them and will cause them to walke in my statutes and to keepe my iudgements and do them Whereto agree the words of the Apostle z Ephe. 2.10 We are his workmanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good works which God hath prepared for vs to walke in Which workmanship when by the grace of God it is begun in vs albeit by reason of many imperfections it be not such as that by the vertue thereof we may expect eternall life yet our faith receiueth further confirmation and assurance thereby that he that hath wrought this beginning of life will go forward therewith to the end and hauing made vs partakers of one part of his promise will make vs also partakers of the other taking these first fruites of sanctification as an earnest and pledge from him of the performance of the whole Therefore albeit we well know that we do not keep the coÌmandements of God as we ought to do yet we do not for that cause stand in doubt of eternall life but finding our hearts truly affected towards God a Mat. 5.6 hungring and thirsting after righteousnesse vnfainedly hating sinne and groning vnder the burden of it b Heb. 12.1 hanging so fast on we comfort our selues that God hath made the light of his Saluation to shine vnto vs resoluing according to his promise that this Sunne-rising though it be not yet fully cleare and may haply sometimes be ouercast with clouds yet shall neuer haue any night but that accepting our godly indeauours pardoning our defects and wants forgiuing vs all our sinnes he will c Phil. 1.6 perfect the good worke which he hath so graciously begun in vs so that the true faithfull soule may alwaies boldly say d Psal 23.6 Thy louing kindnesse and mercy shall follow me all the daies of my life and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord for euer Now because M. Bishop laieth no other but a rotten foundation no maruell if he build no other but a tottering and shaking house because he looketh to haue life grow out of his keeping of the commandements which is as a reed continually shaken with the wind no maruell if he deny to himselfe any stedfast assurance and trust of attaining thereunto But yet it is a falshood of his to charge the Protestants with affirming that no man by any helpe of Gods grace can keepe Gods commandements The Protestants onely say that God giueth vs not that fulnesse of grace whilest here we liue as that we can fully and perfectly keepe the commandements of God so as to be iustified thereby but they deny not but that all the faithfull according to the degrees and measure of grace receiued do in a measure keepe Gods commandements and as grace is increased so they increase in the keeping of the commandements and that this grace shal yet further renew and sanctifie them in such sort as that in the end corruption sin being wholly abolished for euer they shall be fully conformed to that image of righteousnesse that God hath described in the law But of this hereafter In the meane time we see by that that M. Bishop hath told vs of faith that the Church of Rome indeed teacheth no other faith but the same that deuils haue Which being obiected by M. Perkins he laboureth to cleare but saith nothing to serue the turne but by ouerthrowing that which he buildeth otherwhere He saith that the deuils know all to be true which we beleeue but yet do want a necessary condition of faith which is a godly and deuout submission of their vnderstanding to the obedience of faith and so haue no faith to speake properly But if godly and deuout submission of the vnderstanding to the obedience of faith be a necessary condition of faith as he telleth vs here so as that that which is called faith without this is not properly so called how then standeth it which elsewhere he determineth that faith truly and properly so called may be without charity and good works For what godlinesse what deuotion what submission or obedience can there be where charity is not Godlinesse deuotion submission obedience what are they but good works If then
faith properly so called cannot be without these then it is true which we say that true faith can neuer be without charity and good works But that he denieth in the other place and with common consent they all deny it Therefore he must denie that which here he himselfe saith that godly and deuout submission of the vnderstanding to the obedience of faith is a necessary condition of faith properly so called and so as yet there is no exception but that their faith is the same with the deuils faith But taking this which he saith which indeed is true though he by no meanes must stand to it that godly and deuout submission c. is a necessary condition of true faith yet because it is but a condition adioined and not the very nature of faith it selfe surely vnlesse he describe faith in other sort then he doth he answereth yet nothing as touching the very act of faith but that the faith of deuils is all one with their faith His other exception is that the deuils trust not in God for Saluation nor indeauour any manner of way to obtaine it as Christians do Which is euen as vaine as the former was because he answereth nothing to put difference as touching faith it selfe he himselfe still denying that trust in God for a mans owne Saluation is any part of faith But he should haue answered directly to the point what there is in the very nature of faith it selfe whereby their faith is to be distinguished from the faith of deuils whereof he is not able to giue vs any certaine answer And to be short all that he hath here said is but framed for a shew to serue for present shift because he dareth not deny but that there haue bene and are many desperate rakchels yea of their Popes and Cardinals there haue not wanted such in whom there is no godly or deuout submission of vnderstanding to the obedience of faith no trust in God for Saluation no indeauour to obtaine it who yet haue had their Catholike faith to beleeue that Christ hath died and risen againe and that by his bloud there is forgiuenesse of sinnes though not for them yet for them that repent so that in that which he saith hitherto there is nothing at all whereby to put difference betwixt their faith the deuils faith and hereafter we shall see that he is able to say no more then here he hath said 4. W. BISHOP M. Perkins in his first exception graunts Pag. 54. That commonly men do not beleeue their Saluation as infallibly as they do the articles of the faith yet saith he some speciall men do Whereof I inferre by his owne confession that our particular Saluation is not to be beleeued by faith for whatsoeuer we beleeue by faith is as infallible as the word of God which assureth vs of it Then if the common sort of the faithfull do not beleeue their Saluation to be as infallible as the articles of our Creed yea as Gods owne word they are not by faith assured of it Now that some speciall good men either by reuelation from God or by long exercise of a vertuous life haue a great Certaintie of their Saluation we willingly confesse but that Certaintie doth rather belong to a well grounded hope then to an ordinarie faith R. ABBOT M. Perkins rightly saith that the Scriptures in this matter of faith assurance do direct vs the duty of faith what it ought to do and what we are to pray and labour for though we do not all and alwaies attaine vnto it Secondly that though commonly men do not with the like assurance beleeue their owne Saluation as they do the doctrine of faith expressed in the articles of the Creed yet that some speciall men do so as did Abraham and the Prophets and Apostles and martyrs of God in all ages who without doubting laied downe their liues for the testimony of God and for the name of Christ assuring themselues to receiue a better resurrection And so we make no question but that by the same spirit that certified them many faithfull also now do receiue the like certificate of eternall blisse and are thereby ready if occasion serue to do the same that they haue done Now because he saith that commonly men do not so infallibly beleeue their owne Saluation though some speciall men do hereof saith M. Bishop I inferre by his owne confession that our particular Saluation is not to be beleeued by faith But of his confession followeth no such illation For he cannot conclude that therfore our own Saluation is not infallibly to be beleeued by faith because men do not coÌmonly so beleeue it but rather that it is so to be beleeued by faith because some special men do beleeue it so for that in those speciall men is example to the rest what they ought to striue vnto But saith M. Bishop Whatsoeuer we beleeue by faith is as infallible as the word of God that assureth vs of it And we graunt that it is as infallible in it selfe but not alwaies so in our apprehension feeling And if he will say that it is alwaies as infallible to vs and our vnderstanding and conscience he speaketh very falsly and absurdlie for there are diuers degrees of faith a Mat. 8.26 little faith b Cap. 15.28 great faith c Rom. 4.21 full assurance of faith euen as a weake eie and a strong eie And as a weake eie seeth but weakly and vnperfectly and a strong eie seeth strongly and more fully discerneth the thing seene so a little faith beleeueth faintly though truly greater faith beleeueth more stedfastly full assurance of faith d Ibid. ver 18. beleeueth vnder hope euen against hope The disciples of Christ said vnto him e Iohn 6.69 We beleeue know that thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God Which in it selfe was infallibly true and yet they did not so infallibly apprehend it but that this faith was soone shaken and because they did not yet infallibly beleeue it our Sauiour telleth them that therefore he forewarned them of his death resurrection that f Ibid. ca. 14.29 when it was come to passe they might beleeue namely as S. Austine saith g August in Ioan. tract 79. Quo vtso illud fuerant creditu ri quòd ipse esset Christus filius Dei viui c. Creditur autem hoc no fide noua sed aucta aut certè cuÌ mortuus esset defecta cùm resurrexisset refacta Neque enim eum Dei filium non ante credebant sed cùm in illo factuÌ est quod ante praedixit fides illa quae tunc quaÌdo illit loquebatur fuit parua cùm moreretur penè taÌ nucta reuixit creuit that he was Christ the Son of the liuing God Which as he addeth they should beleeue not with a new faith but with a faith increased which was quailed in his death but
signifieth that much conflict remaineth for the attainment of that which notwithstanding certainly vndoubtedly he hopeth for He denieth him so to reioice as if there were no further dangers to be feared no further opposition to be expected no further temptations to be endured no further enemies to be resisted and importeth that there is much fighting and wrastling much care and sorow many perplexities and troubles yet to be forecast and looked for We may not then be secure as if there were nothing any more to trouble vs but we may be secure and without doubt of an happy issue and deliuerance from all troubles and this is the hope that we reioice in Therefore S. Austine saith as before was cited r August in Psal 37. Spe securus est Ioy that thou art redeemed but yet not in reall effect as touching hope be secure be without feare So againe s Idem in epist Ioan tract 3. supra sect 14. If a man haue in his heart loue towards the brethren let him be secure let him be without doubt that he is passed from death to life And thus doth Cyprian describe the condition of faithfull Christians t Cyprian cont Demetr Viget apud nos spes robur firmitas fidei inter ipsa seculi libentis ruinas erecta mens immobilis virtus nunquaÌ nisi laesa patientia de Deo suo semper anima secura There is with vs strength of hope and stedfastnesse of faith and amidst the ruines of the decaying world a couragious mind and constant vertue and patience alwaies ioyfull and a soule alwaies secure or without doubt of God to be our God To be short how farre Saint Bernard was from denying the securitie of particular faith and hope appeareth by that that before hath bene said in the twelfth section whereby it is plaine that it was not his purpose here to require that necessity that M. Bishop doth of doubt feare 16. W. BISHOP This passage of testimonies being dispatched let vs now come vnto the fiue other reasons which M. Perkins produceth in defence of their opinion The first reason is That in faith there are two things the one is an infallible assurance of those things which we beleeue This we graunt and therehence proue as you heard before that there can be no faith of our particular Saluation because we be not so fully assured of that Apoc. 3. but that we must stand in feare of losing of it according to that Hold that which thou hast lest perhaps another receiue thy crown But the second point of faith puts all out of question For saith M. Perkins it doth assure vs of remission of our sinnes and of life euerlasting in particular Proue that Sir and we need no more It is proued out of S. Iohn As many as receiued him Iohn 1. he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God namely to them that beleeue in his name This text commeth much too short he gaue them power to be the sonnes that is gaue them such grace that they were able and might if they would be sonnes of God but did not assure them of that neither much lesse that they should so continue vnto their liues end I omit his vnsauorie discourse of eating and beleeuing Christ and applying vnto vs his benefits which he might be ashamed to make vnto vs that admit no part of it to be true I confesse that therein faith hath his part if it be ioyned with charitie and frequentation of the Sacraments This is it which S. Paul teacheth That not by the works of Moses law Gal. 3. but by faith in Christ Iesus we receiue the promises of the spirit shall haue hereafter the performance if we obserue those things which Christ hath commanded vs. But what is this to Certaintie of Saluation But saith he it is the property of faith to apply Christ vnto vs and proues it out of S. Augustine Beleeue and thou hast eaten Againe Send vp thy faith Tract 25. in Ioh. and thou maist hold Christ in heauen c. To which and such like authothorities I answer that we find Christ we hold Christ we see Christ by faith beleeuing him to be the sonne of God and redeemer of the world and Iudge of the quick and the dead and we vnderstand and disgest all the mysteries of this holy word But where is it once said in any of these sentences that we are assured of our Saluation we beleeue all these points and many more but we shal be neuer the nearer our Saluation vnlesse we obserue Gods commandements The seruant which knowes his Maisters will and doth it not shall be beaten with many stripes Luke 12. Ioh. 15. Then you are my friends saith our Sauiour when you shall do the things which I command you which we being vncertaine to performe assure not our selues of his friendship but when to our knowledge we go as neare it as we can and demand pardon of our wants we liue in good hope of it R. ABBOT M. Perkins affirmeth that the nature of true faith standeth not only in an vnfallible but also in a particular assurance of remission of sins life euerlasting Vnfallible assurance M. Bishop acknowledgeth but thence wil conclude against particular assurance of our owne Saluation because saith he we be not so fully assured of that but that we must stand in feare of loosing it This he saith he hath proued before but his proofe thereof is already disproued onely here for supply he bringeth the words of Christ to the Church of Philadelphia a Reuel 3 11. Hold that which thou hast least another receiue thy crowne Which supply of his is euen according to the manner or his former proofe he nameth a place and so leaueth it be it right or wrong what is that to him If ye aske him how he inferreth that that he would proue thereby you must pardon him he cannot tel It is very doubtfull what may here be imported by the crowne whether the Angel that is the Bishop of the Church of Philadelphia be particularly warned to take heed of forgoing or loosing any of them whom he should account as S. Paul speaketh b Phil. 4.1 1. Thess 2.19 his ioy and crowne of reioycing at the comming of Iesus Christ or whether the same Church be generally admonished to take heed of loosing the crowne of the publike calling and grace of God For so God to signifie the establishing of his kingdome of grace amongst the Iewes amongst other words saith c Ezech. 16.12 I set a beautifull crowne vpon thy head To which honour done vnto them when they yeelded not correspondence of dutifull obedience and thankfulnesse to God our Sauiour Christ foretold them that d Mat. 22.43 the kingdome of God which was their crowne should be taken from them and giuen to a nation that should bring forth the fruit thereof The like we take
a conuiction of guilt of death incurred thereby and yet could yeeld no remedie against death being afterwards b Heb. 7.18 disanulled because of the weaknesse and vnprofitablenesse thereof so farre should we be from thinking that of the ceremoniall law it should be sayd Do this and thou shalt liue The yong man demandeth of Christ c Mat. 19.16 What good thing shall I do that I may haue eternall life Now looke of what law our Sauior answereth him as M. Bishop hath cited before d Vers 17. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements of the selfe same law doth he answer another to the same question vpon recitall of a briefe of the commandements e Luc. 10.28 This do and thou shalt liue namely of the morall law to which it hath reference f Leuit. 18.5 where it is first spoken as appeareth by that that followeth for declaration of it Of which also it is rehearsed by g Ezech. 18.11.13 c. Ezechiel the Prophet and is by the Apostle Saint Paul further alledged to shew the difference betwixt h Rom. 10.5 the Righteousnesse of the law and the Righteousnesse of faith Moses saith he this describeth the Righteousnesse of the lavv that the man vvhich doth these things shall liue thereby i Gal. 3.12 The lavv is not of faith but he that doth these things shall liue in them Of which law he saith k Rom. 3.20 By the lavv commeth the knowledge of sinne that it saith l Cap. 7. ver 7.16.22 Thou shalt not lust that he consenteth to it that it is good that he delighteth in it as touching the inner man that the m Cap. 13. v. 9. Gal. 5.14 summe thereof is Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe all which doe vndeniably point out vnto vs the morall law as both n August de spir lit ca. 14. Saint Austine and o Hieron epist ad Ctesiphont Saint Hierome out of the same and such like places haue expresly affirmed Of the same law therefore he saith p Gal. 3.10 So manie as are of the workes of the law are vnder the curse for it is written Cursed is euerie one that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do them And because no man continueth in all he concludeth hereof q Ver. 11. cap. 2.16 that by the law no man is iustified in the sight of God that by the workes of the law no flesh shall be iustified Now of the selfe same law doth he say that which M. Bishop hath cited for the cutting of his owne throat r Cap. 5.4 Ye are abolished from Christ whosoeuer are iustified by the law thereby teaching vs to resolue that Iustification by Christ and Iustification by the worke of the law cannot possibly concurre in one Now whereas the Apostle for auouching Iustification onely by faith in Christ taketh it for a ground that no man fulfilleth the Righteousnesse of the law M. Bishop that he may be wholy thwart and crosse vnto him affirmeth that by the helpe of Gods grace men are made able to fulfill the law to be iustified thereby Against which assertion to proue that the Righteousnesse of the regenerate and faithfull is not such as that it can answer the iustice and Righteousnesse required in the law M. Perkins alledgeth the common confession of all endited by the Prophet Esay Å¿ Esa 64.6 All our Righteousnesse is as a menstruous or defiled cloth For if the Righteousnesse commaunded by the law be most exact and perfect and no righteousnesse is performed by vs but what by our weaknesse and corruption is blemished and stained then can no righteousnesse of ours satisfie the commandement of the law But M. Bishop answereth that the Prophet speaketh these words in the person of the wicked of that nation and that time and therefore that they are madly applied vnto the righteous Where a man would wonder that he should be so mad as to imagine that prayer to be vttered in the person of wicked men or that wicked men should make mention or any their Righteousnesse vnto God And as for the time it fitteth not the age wherein the Prophet himselfe liued but was prophetically written in respect of a time long after succeeding He foresaw in the spirit the desolation of Ierusalem and the temple and that whole land and thereupon putteth himselfe into the person of the faithfull and maketh himselfe as one of them that should liue at that time This is verie apparent by the Prophets words t Vers 10. Thine holy cities lye wast Sion is a wildernesse and Ierusalem a desert The house of our sanctuarie and of our glorie where our fathers praised thee is burnt vp with fire and all our pleasant things are vvasted This prayer then was to serue for a direction to the faithfull that then should be to make their mone vnto God and to intreat mercie at his hands And very answerable to this propheticall prayer is the prayer of the Prophet Daniel made presently at that time For whereas M. Bishop to proue that the Prophet speaketh in the person of the wicked alledgeth those words u Esa 64 5. Lo thou hast bene angrie for we haue offended and haue euer bene in sinne the Prophet Daniel likewise saith x Dan 9.5 We haue sinned and haue committed iniquitie and done wickedly y Vers 7. O Lord Righteousnesse belongeth vnto thee and vnto vs open shame z Vers 10. We haue not obeyed the voyce of the Lord our God to walke in his wayes c. And whereas he alledgeth the other words a Esa 64.7 There is no man that calleth vpon thy name and standeth vp to take hold of thee the Prophet Daniel in like sort saith b Dan. 9.13 We haue not made our prayer before the Lord our God Both of them say We haue offended We haue sinned We haue not prayed as shewing plainely that they so spake of other men as that they implied themselues also Nay saith M. Bishop that is but the manner of Preachers and specially of such as become Intercessours for others who vse to speake in the persons of them for whom they sue Where he maketh the holy Prophets and seruants of God as verie hypocrites to God as he himselfe is as if they tooke vpon them to accuse themselues to God when they intended nothing lesse But to driue him out of this hole the Prophet Daniel saith of himselfe that in that prayer c Dan. 9.20 he confessed his owne sinnes and the sinnes of his people and why should Daniel the Prophet be sayd to confesse his owne sinnes and not the Prophet Esay or those iust and faithfull in whose person Esay spake Nay both the one and the other spake out of the true affection of the faithfull at all times who alwayes find in themselues defects and defaults whereby they find iust
now he maketh of it Which meaning of his cannot in any sort be true because it is faith which first heareth and beleeueth and receiueth the words of God thereby prescribeth vnto charity the way that it is to go and the duty that it is to performe without which what is charity but a wild a wandering affection easely swaruing and caried away from the due respect and loue of God so that by faith it is that charity pleaseth God and d Heb. 11.6 without faith it is vnpossible to please God Now seeing with God we cannot thinke that the greater is accepted for the lesse but rather the lesse for the greater not the mistresse so to speake for the handmaides sake but rather the handmaid for the mistresse sake we must needes make faith not the handmaide as M. Bishop doth but the mistresse because by faith it is that charity is acceptable vnto God But he telleth vs that S. Iames doth demonstrate charity to be the life and as it were the soule of faith when he saith Euen as the body is dead without the soule so is faith without charitie But he wrongeth his Reader in citing thus falsly the words of S. Iames. For S. Iames saith not so is faith without charity but so is faith without workes Now charity cannot be without works but if there might not be workes without charity S. Paul would not haue said e 1. Cor. 13.3 Though I feede the poore with all my goods and though I giue my body to be burned and haue not loue it profiteth me nothing Charity is inwardly the affection of the heart seene onely to God but workes are outwardly visible and apparant to men and therefore there is a difference to be made betwixt charity and workes which wholy ouerthroweth all that M. Bishop here goeth about to prooue For the faith whereof we here dispute is inward in the heart because with f Rom. 10.10 the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnesse But that which is without cannot be the life or soule of that which is within nay it selfe hath from within all the life that it hath and if it receiue not life from within it is altogether dead Workes therefore being outward and issuing from within if they be true can by no meanes be said to be the life of faith that is within But that which S. Iames saith he saith it of workes He saith nothing therefore to prooue that charity is the life and soule of faith But how then will he say doth Saint Iames make workes as it were the life and soule of faith Very well according to that meaning of faith which he there intendeth For he speaketh of faith as it is outwardly professed to men g Iam. 2.14.18 Thâu saiest thou hast faith shew me thy faith I will shew thee my faith Now in this respect workes are rightly said to be the lifâ of faith not charitie but workes because charity cannot be discerned by the eies of men but workes of behauiour and conuersation are discerned Yea there may be a profession of the faith and works thereunto correspondent outwardly when yet there is neither faith nor charity within Yet where it is so men outwardly to men and to the Church go for no other but liuing mâmâââs of the Church vntill such time as the winde of temptation bloweth them away and discouereth them to haue bene but chaffe when in semblance they seemed to be good corne But where there is outward profession of faith and there is not conuersation thereunto agreeing a man is accounted but a dead branch fit to be cut off his profession wanteth that that should giue it life and grace he is euery mans by word and reproch his hypocrisie is detested of all men and therefore is much more lothsome vnto God In a word S. Paul speaketh of faith in one meaning as it is inward in the heart to God S. Iames speaketh of faith in another meaning as it is outward in the face to men If we vnderstand it according to Saint Paul it is faith that giueth life to all the rest as afterwards shall further appeare If we vnderstand it according to Saint Iames workes are the life of faith and giue it name and being because a man is not accounted faithfull for his words vnlesse there be also workes agreeable to his words Now therefore Maister Bishops comparison whereby he would make charitie as the life and soule and faith as the body cannot be made good out of this place nay indeede it cannot be made good at all For that which must be as the life and soule must be the internall and essentiall forme of the thing But h Bellarm. de iustificat lib. 2. cap. 4. Forma fidei extrinseca noÌ intrinseca quae dei illi non vt sit sed vt moueaturâ sit res actuosa operans charitie is to faith a forme onely extrinsecall and outward not an inward forme saith Bellarmine not giuing it his being but onely his mouing actiuitie and working Charity therefore cannot be called the life and soule of faith Now because it is but an outward and accidentall forme the mouing and working that it giueth vnto faith is but outward and accidentall For the proper and naturall act and motion of a thing cannot proceed from an accidentall forme Faith therefore hath it owne inward essentiall forme whereby it hath life being within it selfe whence proceedeth a motion working that is proper to it selfe And thus doth the Apostle set it down distinctly as a vertue absolute in it self wheÌ he saith i 1. Cor. 13.13 Now abide these three faith hope and loue Where to say that faith is as the body and loue as the soule is to make the Apostle to speake absurdly as if a man for two should reckoÌ a body a soule According to this distinction doth the scripture still set forth faith in the nature of faith to be the instrument of our iustification before God eueÌ according to that life soule that is that proper essentiall forme whereby it hath the being of faith which yet in iustifying vs receiueth charity as an accidentall forme to be vnto it an instrument for mouing and stirring abroad in the performance of all duties recommended vnto vs both to God and men Thus Bellarmine perforce wresteth from M. Bishop yea and from himselfe also this assertion of faith being likened to the body and charity to the soule Yet M. Bishop once againe will assay to proue it by S. Paul making charity a more excellent gift then faith reckoning faith hope and charity and concluding the greatest of these is charity But this testimony auaileth him nothing at all for it followeth not that because the eie is a more excellent member then the eare therefore the eie is as the life and soule to the eare or the eare the instrument of the eie No more doth it follow that because charity is
f Aug. in Psa 83 Fides nidus est pullorum tuoruÌ in hoc nido operare opera tua the nest wherein we are to lay our workes that we may hatch them vnto God Faith is g Prosp de voc gen l. 1 c. 8. Fides bonae voluntatis iustae actionis est genitrix the mother of a good will and iust and righteous conuersation Our faith in Christ is h Aug. in Ps 120 Christus in corde vestro fides est Christ in vs and i Ambr. in Luc. l. 1. c. 21. Mihi sol ille caelestis mea fide vel minuttur vel augetur that heauenly Sunne is either impaired or increased vnto me saith Ambrose according to my faith In a word S. Austin telleth vs that k Aug. in Joan. tract 49. Vnde mors in anima Quia fides noÌ est Ergo animae tuae anima fides est faith is the soule of our soule what is that to say but the life of all our life It is faith then and not charitie that giueth influence to all the rest euen to charitie it selfe as faith increaseth so other graces are increased as faith decreaseth so other graces decrease the life of faith is our life the strength of faith is our l Cyprian ad Quirinum lib. 3. cap. 43. Tantum possumus quantum credimus strength if our faith be weake there is nothing else wherby we can be strong Therfore M. Bishop goeth much awry yet no otherwise then he is wont to do in assigning to charitie to giue the spirit of life and influence to faith when as it is by faith that we m Galath 3.14 receiue the spirit which is the author of all spiritual life and grace on which all our state dependeth towards God 24. W. BISHOP The fourth reason if faith alone do iustifie then faith alone will saue but it wil not saue ergo M. Perkins first denieth the proposition saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an innocent babe die shortly after his baptisme wherein he was iustified shal he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is iustified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therfore this first shift was very friuolous Which M. Perkins perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shal also be saued and that good works shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement Then must those words of the holy Ghost so often repeated in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time wil reÌder vnto euery man according to his works But of this more amply in the question of merits R. ABBOT Tertullian rightly saith a Tertul. de poenit Horum bonorum vnus est âitulus salâs hominis criminum pristinorum abolitione praemissa the saluation of man is the one title of all the benefites of God forgiuenesse of sinnes being put in the first place If saluation be the whole and iustification but a part then more is required to saluation then to iustification because more is required to the whole then to a part Vnder saluation we comprehend both iustification and sanctification in this world life and blisse eternall in the world to come The first act of our saluation is our iustification but God hauing by iustification reconciled vs vnto him goeth forward by sanctification b Col. 1 12. to make vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light To iustification belongeth only faith to sanctification all other vertues and graces wherein consisteth that c Heb. 12.14 holinesse without which no man shall see the Lord. His exception as touching infants dying after baptisme is very idle They are not onely iustified by forgiuenesse of sinnes but also sanctified by the spirit of grace neither is there any man iustified to the title of eternall life but the same is together also sanctified to the possession thereof and therfore hath more to saluation then onely iustification But as touching the verie point his minor proposition is false We say that we are saued also by faith onely according to that that before I alledged out of Origen that d Origen in Ro. cap. 3 sup sect 21 for faith only Christ said to the woman Thy faith hath saued thee Hath saued thee saith he as a thing alreadie done according to the vsuall phrase of the Scripture in that behalfe For so it is said of Zacheus e Luk. 19.9 This day saluation is come to this house So saith the Apostle f 2. Tim. 1.9 He hath saued vs and called vs with a holy calling g Tit. 3.5 of his owne mercy he hath saued vs. The reason whereof is because in iustification as I haue sayd our saluation is begun and in that we are iustified we are saued Christ therein being giuen vs and in him the interest and title of eternall life thenceforth by that right onely to be continued and performed vnto vs. Being then iustified by faith alone we are saued by faith alone the gift of sanctification to holinesse and good works being necessarily coÌsequent not as by vertue wherof we are to be saued whom the Scripture pronounceth to be already saued but as the processe of Gods worke for accomplishment of that saluation whereto in iustification we are begotten and in way of inheritaÌce intitled by faith alone We are saued by faith alone saith M. Perkins because faith alone is the instrument whereby we apprehend Christ who onely is our saluation Where obserue gentle Reader what M. Bishop maketh of that speech that for faith alone we are saued and that good works shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement Os impudens Where doth M. Perkins say that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement What a Doctor of diuinitie to lye wilfully to lye What is this but meere varletrie to abuse his Reader not being carefull haply to looke into M. Perkins booke but taking it vpon his word But if thou haue M. Perkins booke I pray thee to looke to the obiections and answers set down in the end of this question of Iustification which M. Bishop hath vnhonestly left out and there in the answer to the sixt Obiection thou shalt find these words In equitie the last iudgement is to proceed by workes because they are the fittest meanes to make triall of euery mans cause and serue fitly to declare whom God hath iustified in this life By which words thou mayest esteeme how little faith or credite is to be yeelded to this wretched man who doubteth not here with manifest falshood to affime that M. Perkins saith that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our iudgement And by the same words the solution is
being any causes thereof and onely in men of God who are first iustified that they may be meÌ of God affirmeth a iustification by works in that sence as S. Iames speaketh thereof which as I haue said is nothing else but a declaration and testimonie of their being formerly iustified by the faith of Iesus Christ In what sence he speaketh of free will it hath bene shewed before in the question of that matter and that he acknowledgeth no free will to righteousnesse but onely that that we do which is made free by the grace of God To the last place of S. Austin we willingly subscribe condemning them i De fide oper cap. 14. Si ad eam salutem obtinen dam sufficere solam fidem putanerint benè auteÌ viuere bonis operibus vâaÌ Dei tenere neglexerint who thinke that onely faith is sufficient to obtaine saluation and do neglect to liue well and by good workes to keepe the way of God which last words seruing plainely to open S. Austins meaning M. Bishop verie honestly hath left out We teach no such faith as S. Austin there speaketh of We teach onely such a faith as iustifieth it selfe alone but is neuer found alone in the iustified man neuer but accompanied with holinesse and care of godly life and therefore condemne those as spirits of Satan which teach a faith sufficient to obtaine saluation without any regard of liuing well The summe of our doctrine S. Austin himselfe setteth downe in the very same Chapter that good workes k Ibid. Sequâtur iustificatum non praecedunt iustâfâcandum follow a man being iustified but are not precedent to iustification Now therfore in all these speeches there is hitherto nothing to crosse that which M. Perkins hath affirmed that nothing that man can do either by nature or grace concurreth to the act of iustification as any cause but faith alone Of works of nature there is lesse question but of works of grace of workes of beleeuers the Apostle specially determineth the questioÌ that we are not iustified therby as shal appeare M. Perkins further saith that faith is but the instrumentall cause of iustification as whereby we apprehend Christ to be our righteousnesse and neuer doth any of vs make faith the onely and whole cause of iustification in anie other sence We make not the verie act of faith any part of our righteousnesse but onely the merit and obedience of Christ apprehended and receiued by faith But by this meanes M. Bishop saith that faith is become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be iustified But that is but his shallow and idle conceipt for the necessarie instrument especially the liuely instrument is amongst the number of true causes not being causa sine qua non a cause without which the thing is not done but a cause whereby it is done Causa sine qua non is termed causa stolida otiosa a foolish and idle cause because it is onely present in the action and doth nothing therein It is not so with faith but as the eye is an actiue instrument for seeing and the eare for hearing c. so is faith also for iustifying and M. Bishops head was scant wise to make a principall instrument a foolish and idle cause But he asketh then whose instrument faith is and maketh his diuision that either it must be charitie or the soule of man without any helpe of grace We answer him that it is the instrument of the soule wrought therein by grace being l Ephes 2.8 the gift of God and m August de praedest sanct cap. 7. the first gift as before we haue heard out of Austin whereby we obtaine the rest and therefore whereby we obtaine charitie also so that his diuision goeth lame and neither is faith the instrument of charitie nor yet of the soule without grace but of the soule therein and therby endued with the grace of God R. ABBOT But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these words As Moses lift vp the serpent in the desart so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth him but what is this to iustification by onely faith Marrie M. Perkins drawes it in after this fashion As nothing was required of them who were stong by serpents but that they should looke vpon the brazen serpent so nothing is required of a sinner to deliuer him from sinne but that he cast his eyes of faith vpon Christs righteousnesse and apply that to himselfe in particular But this application of the similitude is onely mans foolish inuention without any ground in the text Similitudes be not in all points alike neither must be stretched beyond the verie poynt wherein the similitude lieth which in this matter is that like as the Israelites in the wildernesse stong with serpents were cured by looking vpon the brazen serpent so men infected with sin haue no other remedy then to embrace the faith of Christ Iesus All this we confesse but to say that nothing else is necessary that is quite besides the text as easily reiected by vs as it is by him obtruded without any authoritie or probabilitie R. ABBOT Similitudes M. Bishop saith must not be stretched beyond the verie point wherein the similitude lieth but Christ himselfe here directeth vs to conceiue wherein the similitude lyeth Christ himselfe expresseth that in their looking vpon the Serpent was figured our beleeuing in him What shall we then conceiue but as they onely by looking were cured of the sting so we onely by beleeuing are cured of sinne So S. Austin saith a Aug. in Joan. tract 12. Quomodo qui intuebantur serpeÌtem illum sanabantur à moâsibus serpeÌtum siâ qui intueÌtur fide morteÌ Christi sanatur à morsibus peccato rum Attenditur serpeâs vt nihil vâleat serpens attenditur mors vt nihil valcat mors As they that beheld that Serpent were healed of the stinging of the Serpents so they who by faith behold the death of Christ are healed of the sting of sinne And againe A Serpent is looked vnto that a Serpent may not preuaile and a death is looked vnto that death may not preuaile In like sort doth Chrysostome expresse the similitude b Chrys in Ioan. hom 26. Illiâ corporeis oculis suscipientes corporis sâlutem hic incorporeis peccatorum omnium remissionem consecuti sunt There by bodily eyes men receiued the health of the body here by spirituall eyes they obtaine forgiuenesse of all their sinnes So saith Cyril c Cyril id Ioan. lib. 2. cap. 20. Respicientibus in euÌ fide sincera aeternae salutis largitor ostenditur He is shewed hereby to be the giuer of eternall saluation to them that by true faith do looke vnto him d Theophyl in Joan.
for it selfe or as it is an act or worke as if it were any part of our iustice or righteousnesse but as the heart giueth life to the body not by the substance of it selfe which is but flesh as the rest of the body is but by the vitall and quickning power of the soule that is seated therein and as the hand feedeth the body not as being it selfe the foode of the body but by receiuing and ministring vnto it the meat wherewith it is sustained euen so faith iustifieth and giueth life by receiuing Christ to be our righteousnesse and life in him d Act. 26.18 receiuing forgiuenesse of sinnes and inheritance amongst them that are sanctified vnto eternall life But M. Bishop telleth vs that the Apostles meaning in those places is to exclude all such works as either Iew or Gentile did or could bragge of as done of theÌselues so thought that by theÌ they had deserued to be made Christians A goodly toy Forsooth after they had bene Christians a long time they began to dispute reason the matter whether it were for the works that before they had don that they were made ChristiaÌs whether they had deserued by their works to be made Christians wheÌ e Ephe. 2.3 they had their coÌuersation in the lusts of the flesh in fulfilling the wil of the flesh of the mind walking according to the course of this world and after the Prince that ruleth in the aire the spirit that worketh in the children of disobedience as the Apostle describeth the condition both of Iewes and Gentiles before they were partakers of the grace of Christ Were the Christians then of so slender vnderstanding as that they should make question of their deserts in that estate Was that the thing so much laboured by the false Apostles to perswade men that for their former deserts they were become Christians and had the Apostle so much businesse to weane them and withhold them from the conceipt and opinion of such deserts What should a man spend time and labour to refute so ridiculous so senslesse and absurd deuices Who would thinke that M. Bishop a Doctor of Diuinitie by title should be so simple a man as that his Maister Bellarmine could gull him and gudgeon him with so vaine a tale The matter is plaine After that men had accepted the faith of Christ and were become f Act. 15.1.10 brethren and disciples there came vnto them the false Apostles and preached vnto them g Ver. 2. Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses ye cannot be saued They sought to perswade men that to the faith of Christ they must adde the obseruation of Moses law Here was no question whether by any deserts they were become Christians but being now Christians what it was wherein they should repose themselues for iustification and saluation The Galathians were amongst others intangled by those false Apostles and hauing before h Gal 1.9 receiued the Gospell i Cap. 4.27 hauing bene baptized into Christ k Cap. 3.2 hauing receiued the spirit yea and l Ibid. Ver. 4. hauing suffered many things for the Gospell yet were brought to the adioining of circumcision and the law to the faith of Iesus Christ to be iustified thereby This the Apostle inueyeth against and reducing the state of the question from the ceremonies of the law to the whole law determineth not concerning the Popish first iustification but concerning iustification wholy concerning men beleeuing alreadie and in the state of grace that they must be m Ro. 3.20.28 Gal. 3.11 iustified by faith and not by the works of the law yea without the workes of the law yea and saith n Gal. 2.16 we haue beleeued in Christ that we might be iustified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the law The Papist saith we beleeue in Christ that we may be iustified by the works of the law but the Apostle saith we beleeued in Christ that we might be iustified by the faith of Iesus Christ and not by the works of the law giueth a reason why we that beleeue in Christ cannot be iustified by the works of the law o Jbid. because by the works of the law no flesh shall be iustified And whereas the Papist againe saith that by Christ and by his grace we are enabled to fulfill the law to be iustified thereby the Apostle peremptorily denounceth p Cap. 5.4 Ye are abolished from Christ ye are fallen from grace whosoeuer are iustified by the law And that we may vnderstand what law he meaneth S. Hierome hauing mentioned those words that by the workes of the law no flesh shall be iustified saith thereof q Hieron ad Ctesiphont Quod ne de lege Moysâ tantum dictum puâes non de omnibus mandatis quae vno legis nomine ontinentur ideÌ Apostolus scribit dicens coÌsentio legi c. Which that thou maiest not thinke to be spoken onely of the law of Moses that is the ceremoniall law but of all the commaundements which are contained vnder the one name of the law the same Apostle writeth saying I consent to the law or delight in the law of God as touching the inner man But of that before in the third section Hereby then it appeareth that being members of Christ and baptized into him our iustification still consisteth not in workes but onely in the faith of Iesus Christ But M. Bishop by a new qualification telleth vs that all works both of Iew and Gentile are excluded from being any meritorious cause of iustification Not then from being any cause but onely from being any meritorious cause For he hath r Sect. 21. before told vs that that vertuous disposition of which he here speaketh is the cause of iustification But if they be causes how then is it true that he saith here that the first iustification is freely bestowed For Å¿ Rhem. Testam explication of words in the end Gratis freely as the Rhemists tell vs is as much to say as for nothing and if it be bestowed for this vertuous dispositions sake then it is not bestowed for nothing but for hope for charity c. Thus they turne and winde this way and that way and can finde nothing whereupon to stand Saint Austine giueth it for a rule that t August cont Pelag. Celest li. 2. ca. 24. Non enim gratia Dei gratia erit vllo modo nisi fueriâ gratuita omnimodo the grace of God shall not be grace in any sort except it be free in euery respect And how is it free in euery respect if our workes of preparation or disposition be properly the causes for which it is bestowed vpon vs And what is it but a mockery to say that the Apostle so often absolutely determining against iustification by workes should meane notwithstanding that workes are the very causes of iustification onely that they are not meritorious causes
iustification He excludeth not then good workes which proceede from Gods grace as M. Bishop saith but he denieth that there are any good workes before iustification because he knoweth no grace but iustifying grace and therefore directly crosseth Maister Bishops assertion of good workes before iustification which are the causes for which we are iustified 29. W. BISHOP Maister Perkins third argument Very reason may teach vs thus much that no gift in man is apt as a spirituall hand to receiue and apply Christ and his righteousnesse vnto a sinner sauing faith loue hope feare repentance haue their seuerall vses but none of them serue for this end of apprehending but faith onely Answer Mans reason is but a blinde mistris in matters of faith and he that hath no better an instructor in such high mysteries must needes know little But what if that also faile you in this point then euery man cannot but see how naked you are of all kinde of probability I say then that reason rather teacheth the contrary For in common sence no man apprehendeth and entreth into the possession of any thing by beleeuing that he hath it For if a man should beleeue that he is rich of honour wise or vertuous doth he thereby become presently such a one nothing lesse His faith and perswasion is no fit instrument to apply and draw these things to himselfe as all the world sees How then doth reason teach me that by beleeuing Christes righteousnesse to be mine owne I lay hand on it and make it mine Againe Christs righteousnesse according to their owne opinion is not receiued into vs at all but is ours onely by Gods imputation what neede we then faith as a spirituall hand to receiue it If they say as M. Perkins doth that faith is as it were a condition required in vs which when God seeth in vs he presently imputeth Christs righteousnesse to vs and maketh it ours then will I be bold to say that any other vertue is as proper as faith to haue Christ applied vnto vs there being no other aptnesse requisite in the condition it selfe but onely the will and ordinance of God then euery thing that it shall please him to appoint is alike apt and so M. Perkins had small reason to say that faith was the onely apt instrument to apply to vs Christs righteousnesse Moreouer true diuine reason teacheth me that both hope and charitie do much more apply vnto Christians all Christes merits and make them ours theÌ faith For what faith assureth me of in generall that hope applieth vnto me in particular by faith I beleeue Christ to be the Sauiour of all mankind by hope I trust to be made partaker of that saluation in him But charity doth yet giue me a greater confidence of saluation for by the rule of true charity as I dedicate and imploy my life labours and all that I haue to the seruice of God so all that God hath is made mine so farre forth as it can be made mine according vnto that sacred law of friendship A micorum omnia sunt communia And therefore in true reason neither by faith nor any other vertues we take such hold on Christes merits nor haue such interest in his inestimable treasures as by charity which S. Augustine vnderstood well when he made it the modell and measure of iustification saying De nat gra cap. vlt. That Charity beginning was Iustice beginning Charitie encreased was Iustice encreased great Charitie was great Iustice and perfect Charity was perfect Iustice R. ABBOT M. Perkins alledgeth that very reason may teach vs that faith onely iustifieth because there is no gift in man that hath the property of apprehending and receiuing but faith onely To this M. Bishop answereth that mans reason is a blind mistresse in matters of faith Wherein he saith truly and indeede is the cause why he himselfe writeth so blindly as he doth and measureth high mysteries by carnall and base conceipts And surely it seemeth that his reason was very blinde who gaue so blinde a reason against that which Maister Perkins saith being spoken not out of the reason of man but as the reason of a faithfull man may esteeme by direction of the word of God No man entreth into the possession of any thing saith he by beleeuing that he hath it for if a man beleeue that he is rich doth he thereby become rich I answer him no but though a man by beleeuing himselfe to be rich do not become rich yet if to a poore begger a great man say If thou wilt take my word and referre thy selfe to me and depend vpon my fauour and good will I will make thee rich doth he not by giuing credit to his word commit himselfe to him entertaine his fauour accept his offer and become owner of that that is promised vnto him What is it whereby we accept of promise but onely beliefe Now all that our question is of consisteth of promise in all the benefits of God we are a Gal. 4.28 the children of promise b Cap. 3 29. heires by promise c Heb. 6.17 heires of promise expecting all things by the gracious promise of God d 2. Pet. 1.4 by promise to be partakers of the diuine nature e Gal. 3.14.16 the blessing by promise f Ephe 1 13. the spirit by promise g Gal. 3.18 the inheritance by promise h Tit. 1.2 life eternall by promise i 2. Pet. 3.13 by promise a new heauen and a new earth wherein righteousnesse dwelleth all which k 2. Cor. 1.20 promises in Christ are yea and in him Amen for his sake first made and for his sake to be performed also Now seeing God hath taught vs that l Heb. 11.33 by faith we obtaine the promises that m Gal. 3.14 we receiue the promise of the spirit through faith that n Ibid. ver 22. the promise of blessing is giuen by the faith of Iesus Christ to them that beleeue that o Mat. 8.13 as we beleeue so it shall be vnto vs that p Mat. 11.24 whatsoeuer we desire when we pray if we beleeue that we shall haue it it shall be accordingly vnto vs why is it strange to M. Bishop that in beleeuing according to the word and promise of God to be partakers of those things which he hath promised we should be said to become partakers thereof In those mad presumptions fondly alledged by him there is no beleeuing because there is no ground whereupon to beleeue but when God promiseth and tieth the effect of his promise to the beleeuing of it not to beleeue that in the beleeuing of it we are partakers of that which we beleeue is to make God a liar and to frustrate that which he hath promised Sith then God hath promised Christ vnto vs to be q Ierem. 23.6 our righteousnesse and that r Rom. 3.22 by the faith of Iesus Christ that is by beleeuing
top and perfection of the whole worke is charity R. ABBOT To set downe the places alledged out of Ambrose is sufficient to discouer the bad and euill conscience of M. Bishop in the answering of them and to shew what a one he is indeede in all the rest of his answers First a Ambros in Rom. ca. 3. Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operaÌtes neque vicem reddentes sola fide iustificati sunt dono Dei they are iustified freely saith he because working nothing nor making any requitall they are iustified by faith alone through the gift of God The second is this b Jbid cap. 4 Manifestè beati sunt quibus sine labore vel opere aliquo remittuntur iniquitates peccata teguâtur nulla ab hâ requisita poenitentiae opera nisi tantùm vt credant They are blessed to whom without any labour or worke their iniquities are forgiuen and sinnes couered no worke of penitencie being required of them but onely to beleeue Thirdly he saith c Idem in 1. Cor. cap. 1. Hoc constitutuÌ est à Deo vt qui credit in Christum saluus sit sine opere sola fide gratu accipiens remissioneÌ peccatorum This is appointed of God that he that beleeueth in Christ shall be saued without works freely by faith alone receiuing forgiuenesse of sinnes I pray thee now gentle Reader to marke well his answer to these allegations First he saith that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Ambroses It is true indeede that some make question of the Prefaces that are inserted to the seuerall Epistles but of the Commentaries themselues saue onely vpon the epistle to the Hebrewes I know no man that doubteth Their d Sixt. Senens biblioth sanct lib 4. Sixtus Senensis reckoneth them for the workes of Ambrose for their part and our e Centâr Magdeburg lib. 4. cap. 10. Centuristes for our part and on both sides they are alwaies cited in his name There is no doubt but they are the workes of a very auncient writer if they were not his and therefore that can make little to acquit Maister Bishop of crossing the auncient Church vnlesse he can giue vs a better answer But that we shall haue namely that that Author excludeth not repentance but onely the workes of Moses law which the Iewes held to be necessarie as circumcision and such like Short and sweete this he hath told vs and if we will fare better we must take the paines to go further But let him remember that the point in question is of being iustified by faith alone which Saint Ambrose there directly and fully affirmeth by faith onely by faith onely it is required onely to beleeue Now though the ceremoniall workes of Moses law be excluded from iustification yet if we be iustified by any other workes we are not iustified by faith onely or alone He excludeth not repentance saith he but let vs request him to turne vs these words into English Nulla ab his requisita paenitentiae opera nisi tantùm vt credant We take it to be this there being required of theÌ no labour or worke of penitency or repentance but onely to beleeue He meaneth indeed by penitencie that which publikely was don for which men were called poenitentes penitents as afterward appeareth but by excluding such works of penitencie it appeareth that it was not his meaning to exclude only circumcision and such other ceremonies of Moses law and therefore that M. Bishops answer is a verie absurd and broken shift Marke the words gentle Reader Working nothing not making any requitall without any labour or worke no worke of penitencie required without workes and freely and by faith alone all sounding that f Ambros in Psal 43. Non facta sua vnumquenque iustificant sed fides prompta a mans works do not iustifie him but his prompt faith as the same S. Ambrose speaketh in another place As for the words which he bringeth to crosse the other they are no way contrarie to vs. We say as he saith that faith alone sufficeth not and yet we say as he also saith that faith sufficeth to iustification For it is one thing to say what sufficeth to iustification another thing to say what sufficeth to the perfection of a Christian and iustified man The place alledged out of Austin inferreth our assertion though it expresse it not If it be our propitiation that is our iustification to beleeue in Christ then onely to beleeue in Christ doth iustifie If not then it cannot be said to be our iustification to beleeue in Christ For where the effect belongeth to many causes alike there it cannot be singularly attributed to anie one His answer to the words of Hesychius is impertinent for Hesychius beside that he saith that grace is not merited because it is of mercie telleth vs also what it is whereby the same is apprehended and that he saith is faith alone g Hesych in Leuit lib. 4 cap. 14. Gratia ex misericordia compassione probatur fide comprehendiur sola non ex operibus Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone and not of workes If grace be not apprehended by works as Hesychius saith why doth M. Bishop tel vs that it is apprehended by workes If it be apprehended by faith alone why doth he tell vs that it is not apprehended by faith alone Be it that our workes before grace doe not merit our iustification yet if by workes we be iustified as well as by faith then it is not true which this Father saith that the grace of iustification is apprehended by faith and not by workes The words of Saint Bernard are plainely spoken of the imputed righteousnes of Iesus Christ by occasion of the Apostles words that Christ is h 1. Cor. 1 30. made vnto vs of God wisedome righteousnesse sanctification and redemption i Bernard in Cant. ser 22. Iustitia in absolutione peccatoruÌ Righteousnes saith he by forgiuenesse of sinnes for prosecuting therof saith of Christ k Iustitiae tuae tanta vbique fragraÌtia spargitur vt non solum iustus sed ipsa dicaris iustitia et iustitia iustificans TaÌ validus denique es ad iustificandum quaÌ multus ad ignosâenduÌ Quamobrem quisquis pro peccatis compunctus esurit et sitit iustitiaÌ credat in te qui iustificas impium solam iustificatus per fidem pacem habebit ad Deum so sweete a sauour of thy righteousnes is euery where spred abroad as that thou art not only called righteous but also righteousnesse it selfe and a iustifying righteousnesse As strong thou art to iustifie as thou art readie to forgiue Whosoeuer therefore being pricked with his sinnes hungreth and thirsteth after righteousnesse let him beleeue in thee who iustifiest the vngodly and being iustified by faith onely he shall haue peace with God M. Bishop telleth vs that S. Bernard by faith alone
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 credeÌs tan tummodo quis iustificetur etiaÌsi 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 dâcot tâbi 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
fully absolute and perfect according to the prescript forme of the law the same being vndertaken for our sakes and performed in our name But whereas we acknowledge the increase of inherent righteousnesse there groweth a question of the cause of this increase The Romish doctrine is that the grace of God is c Coster Enchir. cap. 5. Est haec gratia in arbitrio voluntatis quemadmodum baculus in manu conualescentis cuius auxilio si velit vtetur siâ minùs poterit eam remouere like vnto a staffe put into a mans hand to stay him and that it is left to his free will either to vse this staffe to keepe him vp or to leaue it and so to fall Free will then say they vsing well the grace that it hath receiued deserueth thereby an increase of iustice and righteousnesse Thus they still hang all vpon the merit and free will of man they thinke scorne to haue any thing of gift but one way or other will deserue all But the doctrine of truth teacheth vs to conceiue all to be of grace both the first gift of sanctification and all the succeeding increase thereof For although it be true that God to the thankfull receiuing and vsing of his gifts doth adde greater measure thereof according to that of our Sauior e Mat. 25.29 To him that hath shall be giuen that is saith S. Austin f Aug. de doct Christ lib. 1. ca. 1. Dabitur habentibus id est cum benignitate vtentibus eo quod acceperââit To them that vse well that which they haue receiued yet that which is added is but g Joh. 1.16 grace for grace and h Fulgent ad Monim lib. 1. Dona sua donis suis reddit the rendring of one gift to another gift God himselfe giuing himselfe occasion by one gift of the bestowing of another As he giueth faith and to faith giueth that for which we beleeue as he giueth vs to pray and to our prayer giueth that for which we pray so in all the rest he giueth grace and giueth to vse well the grace that he hath giuen and to the well vsing thereof giueth also further measure and increase of grace that both in the gift and in the increase all prayse and glorie may redound to him The means in vs whereby this increase is wrought vnto vs is our faith which as it first receiueth the spirit so receiueth also the increase of it whilest by the growth thereof we grow more into Christ and thereby are more and more partakers of his life i Ambros in Luc. ca 11 li. 10. Mihi fide mea Sol ille coelestis vel minuttur vel âugetur That heauenly Sunne saith Ambrose is increased or diminished vnto me according to my faith Now theÌ to determine the point wherupon we are here to insist it is not whether inherent righteousnesse may be increased for that we denie not nor whether good workes be meritorious causes of the increase of it for that beoÌgeth properly to the question of merits but the question is whether in the increase of righteousnes which they tearme second iustification we grow to any such perfection as that thereby we may be found perfectly iust in the sight of God by vertue and force thereof to be accepted vnto euerlasting life 32. W. BISHOP M. Perkins pretends to proue that they are no cause of the increase of our iustice and yet frames not one argument directly to that purpose but repeates those obiections and proposeth them now at large which we made before against the first iustification the which although impertinent to this place yet I will solue them first and then set downe our owne We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the works of the law Answer The Apostle there speaketh of the iustification of a sinner for he saith before that he hath proued both Iew and Greeke to be vnder sinne and that all haue sinned and need the glorie of God wherefore this place appertaines not vnto the second iustification and excludes only either works of the law as not necessary vnto the first iustification of a sinner against the Iewes who thought and taught them to be necessarie or else against the Gentils any worke of ours from being any meritorious cause of that first iustification for we acknowledge very willingly as you haue heard often before that euery sinner is iustified freely of the meere grace of God through the merit of Christ onely and without any merit of the sinner himselfe and yet is not a sinner being of years of discretion meerly passiue in that his iustificatioÌ as M. Perkins very absurdly saith for in their owne opinion he must beleeue which is an action and in ours not only beleeue but also Hope Loue and Repent and this kind of iustification excludeth all boasting in our soules as well as theirs For as they must graunt that they may not bragge of their faith although it be an act of theirs so necessarily required at their iustification that without it they could not be iustified euen so let them thinke of the rest of those good preparations which we hold to be necessarie that we cannot truly boast of them as though they came of our selues but we confesse all these good inspirations as all other good to descend from the bounteous liberalitie of the Father of lights and for the yeelding of our consent to them we can no more vaunt then of consenting vnto faith all which is no more then if a man be mired in a lake and vnable of himselfe to get out would be content that another of his goodnesse should helpe him out of it Yet obserue by the way that S. Paule forbiddeth not all glorying or boasting Rom. 5. For he glorieth in the hope of glory of the Sonne of God 2. Cor. 10. and in his tribulations Againe He defineth that we may glorie in measure and that he might glory in his power 2. Cor. 12. and that he was constrained to glory in his visions and reuelations So that a good Christian may glory in our Lord and in his heauenly gifts so it be in measure due season acknowledging them from whence they come But to boast and say that either God needed vs or that our good parts were cause that God called vs first to his seruice is both false and vtterly vnlawfull Ephes 2. So that by grace ye are saued through faith and that not of our selues it is the gift of God not of workes lest any man should boast himselfe is nothing against our doctrine of iustification Lib. 83 q. 76. but too too ignorantly or malitiously cited against it and not also with S. Augustin that faith is there mentioned to exclude all merits of our works which went before and might seeme to the simple to haue bene some cause why God bestowed his first grace vpon vs but no vertuous dispositions requisite for the better preparation
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 ââcepisse 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 salâbriter 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 sâiamââ in dâe illa quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae feâimus 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
to bestow his grace vpon vs as I haue shewed a Sect. 21. before Therefore he doth not direct the words of S. Paul onely against merits but simply against works that he affirmeth b August li. 83. quaest 76. Vt nemo meritu priorum bonoruÌ operuÌ arbitrotur se ad donum iustificationis peruenisse Dicit posse homineÌ sine operibus praecedentibus iustificari per fideÌ Dicit de operibus quae fidem praecedunt a man to be iustified without workes precedent or going before that he teacheth that not for any good worke past a man attaineth to the iustification of faith that a man is not iustified by workes that go before faith meaning by faith not a faith which is before iustification but the faith in which our iustification is begun as appeareth very plainly by that that he saith in another place c Jdem de verb. Apost ser 16. Si iustitiae nihil habemus nec fidem habemus Si fideÌ habemus iam aliquid habemus iustitiae If we haue no righteousnesse we haue no faith but if we haue faith we haue also some part of righteousnesse alreadie And thus perpetually he excludeth all workes going before iustification from being any causes thereof and still maketh iustification the beginning of all good workes so as that d Idem epist 46. Sine illa cogitare aliquid vel agere secunduÌ Deum vlla ratione omninò noÌ possumus without the grace of God which with him is no other but the grace e Epist 105. Istam gratiam commendat Apostolus qua iustificati sumus vt homines iusti essemus whereby we are iustified we can in no sort thinke or do any thing according vnto God Of M. Bishops vertuous dispositions before iustification he neuer speaketh word nor euer giueth intimation of any such nay he condemneth the Pelagians for affirming the same as we haue seene in the question of f Sect. 5. Free will 33. W. BISHOP Now to his second reason If you be circumcised Gal. 5. you are bound to the whole law Hence thus he argueth If a mân will be iustified by workes he is bound to fulfill the whole law according to the rigour of it That is Paules ground But no man can fulfill the law according vnto the rigour of it ergo No man can be iustified by workes He that can apply the text prefixed vnto any part of the argument Erit mihi magnus Apollo Saint Paul onely saith in these words That if you be circumcised yee are bound to keepe the whole law of Moses Maister Perkins That if a man will be iustified by workes he must fulfill the rigour of the law Which are as iust as Germains lips as they say But M. Perkins sayes that it is Saint Paules ground but he is much deceiued for the Apostles ground is this That circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme and therefore he that would be circumcized did make himselfe subiect vnto the whole law of the Iewes Of the possibilities of fulfilling the law because M. Perkins toucheth so often that string shall be treated in a distinct question as soone as I haue dispatched this R. ABBOT The force of the sentence alledged that a Gal. 5.3 he that is circumcised is bound to keepe the whole law dependeth vpon the verse going before and that that followeth after He saith before b Ver. 2. If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing by one particular giuing to vnderstand what was to be conceiued of the rest that c August cont Faust Man lib. 19. cap. 17. Certa pernicies si in huiusmodi legis operibus putareÌt suam spem salutemque continerâ it was certaine destruction for them to thinke that their hope and saluation was contained in such workes of the law because thereby they were secluded from hauing any benefit in Christ Which as he hath namely spoken of circumcision as being a speciall matter then spoken of so he saith it in the verse after of the whole law d Ver. 4. Ye are abolished from Christ whosoeuer are iustified by the law ye are fallen from grace If then in any part of the law a man seeke to be iustified he is thereby voided of the grace of Christ Being abandoned from Christ and his grace he hath no meanes of iustification and saluation but by the law He cannot be iustified by the law but by perfect obseruing of it because it is said e Cap. 3.10 Cursed is euery man that continueth not in all things that are written in the booke of the law to do them What then is said of circumcision belongeth to all the workes of the law He that seeketh to be iustified by the workes of the law he is bound fully and perfectly to obserue the same and if he be any where a trespasser he cannot be iustified by the law And rightly doth M. Perkins say that this is the ground of that which the Apostle saith of circumcision as he shall well perceiue that obserueth how through the whole Epistle he disputeth generally against iustificatioÌ by the law to disprooue the doctrine of the false Apostles vrging for iustification circumcision and other ceremonies of the law Therefore in the words alledged this argument is implied He that wil be iustified by the law is bound to fulfill the whole law He that seeketh to be iustified by circumcision seeketh to be iustified by the law he is therefore bound to the perfect obseruation of the whole law As for that which M. Bishop saith that circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme it is a very idle and sleeuelesse answer For what is Iudaisme but a profession of iustification by the law the Iewes f Rom. 932. seeking righteousnesse not by faith but as it were by the workes of the lâw Circumcision therefore is a profession of iustification by the law against which the Apostles ground is as hath bene said that he that professeth to be iustified by the law doth tie himselfe to obserue it without any breach being by the law guilty of death if he be found to transgresse in any sort Now that there is no ablenesse in vs to fulfill the law so as to be iustified thereby it shall appeare God willing in the place where Maister Bishop promiseth to treate thereof 34. W. BISHOP M. Perkins third argument Election to saluation is of grace without workes wherefore the iustification of a sinner is of grace alone without workes because election is the cause of iustification Answer That election is of grace without workes done of our owne simple forces or without the workes of Moses law but not without prouision of good works issuing out of faith and the helpe of Gods grace as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop to answer the argument auoucheth a plaine point of Pelagianisme that Gods election is vpon foresight of
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 becoÌmeth 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 noâe fieri melior ãâã etiâm dâsinis esse iââus 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 Abrahâm 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 Iaâobus 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 coââ 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
and frailty it becommeth defectiue and faulty if God call it to precise and strict examination iudgement Euen as elsewhere he saith againe y Ibid cap. 11. Omnis humana iustitia iniustitia esse cânuincitur si districtè iudicetur Prece ergò post iustitiaÌ indâget vt quae succumbere discussa poterat ipsa iudicis pietate conualescat All the righteousnesse of man is conuicted to be vnrighteousnesse if it be strictly iudged it needeth therefore praier after righteousnesse that that which being sifted might quaile by the meere piety of the Iudge may go for good Where I hope that M. Bishop though he will say much yet will not say that Gregory meant that we should pray that the righteousnesse which we do of our owne strength by the piety and clemencie of the Iudge may stand for good And if he dare not so say then it followeth that of that righteousnesse which in this life we attaine to by the gift of God Gregory saith that it is found to be defectiue and to come short of perfect righteousnesse and thereby to be vnrighteousnesse if seuere and strict account be taken of it which more peremptorily he affirmeth elsewhere saying z Ibid. ca. 18. Si remota pietate discutimur opus nostrum paena dignuÌ est quod remunerari praemijs praestolamur c. Restat vt postquaÌ bonuÌ opus agitur lachrymae expiationis exquâraÌtur quatenus ad aeterna praemia meritum recti operis subuebat humilitas postulationis If we be iudged without mercy our worke is worthy to be punished which we expect to haue rewarded Therefore the teares of expiation as he speaketh are required that humble praier may lift vp the merit of our good worke to the obtaining of eternall reward So that howsoeuer he commend Iob as well he might sure I am that both Iob and he condemne M. Bishop as a proud Pharisee maintaining the righteousnesse of man against the righteousnesse of God to the impeaching of the glory of God Which he doth also by his quillet of attributing good workes principally to the grace of God not wholy but principally that so he may reserue some place at least to the free will of man because he cannot endure that no part of glory should redound to man To be short it appeareth both by that that is said here and that that hath bene a Sect. 4.44 45. before alledged that Gregory doth not bereaue man only of that perfection that shall be in heauen but also of that that is required by duty ought to be in him here vpon the earth 50. W. BISHOP Now before I depart from this large question of iustification I will handle yet one other question which commonly ariseth about it it is Whether Faith may be without Charity I prooue that it may so be first out of these words of our Sauiour Manie shall say vnto me in that day Lord Lord Math. 7. haue we not prophecied in thy name haue we not cast out diuels haue we not done many miracles to whom I wil confesse that I neuer knew you depart from me all yee that worke iniquity That these men beleeued in Christ and perswaded themselues assuredly to be of the elect appeareth by their confident calling of him Lord Lord and the rest that followeth yet Christ declareth manifestly that they wanted charity in saying that they were workers of iniquity 2. When the King went to see his guests Math. 22. He found there a man not attired in his wedding garment and therfore commanded him to be cast into vtter darknesse This man had faith or else he had not bene admitted vnto that table which signifieth the Sacraments yet wanted charity which to be the wedding garment besides the euidence of the text is also proued where in expresse termes Apoc. 1â The garments of Christs Spouse is declared to be the righteousnesse and good works of the Saints And that with great reason for as S. Paul teacheth 1. Cor. 13 Faith shall not remaine after this life With what instrument then trow you will the Protestants lay hold on Christs righteousnesse That charity is that wedding garment S. Hierome vpon the same place doth witnesse saying That it is the fulfilling of our Lords commandements And S. Gregory doth in expresse words define it Hâm â8 in Euang. Can. â2 in Mat. Tract ââm Maââ Math. 25. What saith he must we vnderstand by the wedding garment but charity So do S. Hilary and Origen and S. Chrysostome vpon that place 3. The like argument is made of the foolish Virgins who were part of the Kingdome of God and therefore had faith which is the gate and entrance into the seruice of God Yea in the house of God they aspired vnto more then ordinarie perfection hauing professed Virginitie yet either caried away with vaine glorie as S. Gregory takes it or not giuing themselues to the workes of mercy spirituall and corporall as S. Chrysostome expounds it briefly not continuing in their former charitie for faith once had cannot after the Protestants doctrine be lost were shut out of the kingdome of heauen albeit they presumed strongly on the assurance of their saluation as is apparent by their confident demaunding to be let in for they said Lord Lord open vnto vs. Iohn 12. 4. Many of the Princes beleeued in Christ but did not confesse him for they loued more the glory of men then the glory of God What can be more euident then that these men had faith when the holy Ghost saith expresly that they beleeued in Christ which is the onely act of faith and yet were destitute of charitie which preferreth the glorie and seruice of God before all things in this world R. ABBOT That there may be faith without charitie we make no question but the question is of that faith whereby we are iustified or wherin standeth our iustification before God It is to be knowne that faith is of diuers sorts there is a faith which is called a Tit. 1.1 the faith of the elect as being peculiar vnto them and for which men are called b Ephe. 1.1 faithfull and there is a faith by which the c Iam. 2.19 diuels also are said to beleeue and yet are not to be called faithfull There is a faith whereby we d Ibid. beleeue that there is one God and there is another faith whereby e Iohn 14.1 we beleeue in God There is a faith whereby Simon Magus f Act 8.13.21 beleeued whose heart was not right in the sight of God and there is a g Act. 15.9 faith whereby God purifieth the heart There is a h Iam 2 20. dead faith and there is a i Gal. 2.20 faith whereby we liue and Christ liueth in vs. There is a k 1 Tim. 1.5 faith vnfained and thereby we vnderstand that there is also a fained faith There is a faith that consisteâh in l
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 reputatioÌ 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 coÌtinue 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
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 ChristiaÌ faith wherby it is said we are iustified caÌ neuer be separate froÌ 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
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 hutuânodicredit qui Deum abâegauitâ 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
turne Because he had no great skill to answer he thought it wisedom to take heed what he did obiect But yet out of that sentence truly alledged we may take somewhat to this point The words are p Gal. 3.11 The iust shall liue by faith According to these words true faith is said alwayes to imply and containe eternall life Our Sauior Christ speaketh as of a thing presently had q Ioh. 3.36 He that beleeueth hath eternall life r Cap. 5.24 he is passed from death to life But without charitie there can be no state of eternall life because Å¿ 1. Ioh. 3 14. he that loueth not abideth in death If then wheresoeuer there be true faith there be eternall life and without charitie there can be no eternall life it must necessarily follow that wheresoeuer there is true faith there is also charitie and loue bringing forth the fruites of good workes and seeking to winne others by example of iust and holy life M. Bishops answer we see giueth checke to the holy Ghost The holy Ghost saith The iust shall liue by faith Not so saith M. Bishop he liueth by faith hope and charitie and not by faith alone Further I trouble not my selfe with his idle words which containe nothing but a begging of the matter in question and are applied onely to an argument of his owne deuice CHAPTER 5. OF MERITS 1. W. BISHOP OBserue that three things are necessary to make a worke meritorious First that the worker be the adopted sonne of God and in the state of grace Secondly that the work proceed from grace and be referred to the honour of God The third is the promise of God through Christ to reward the work And because our aduersaries either ignorantly or of malice do slaunder this our doctrine in saying vntruly that we trust not in Christs merits nor need not Gods mercy for our saluation but wil purchase it by our owne works I wil here set downe what the Councell of Trent doth teach concerning Merits Sess 6. cap. vlt. Life euerlasting is to be proposed to them that work wel and hope wel to the end both as grace of mercie promised to the sonnes of God through Christ Iesus and as a reward by the promise of the same God to be faithfully rendred vnto their workes and merits So that we hold eternall life to be both a grace as well in respect of Gods free promise through Christ as also for that the first grace out of which they issue was freely bestowed vpon vs. And that also it is a reward in iustice due partly by the promise of God and in part for the dignitie of good workes vnto the worker if he perseruere and hold on vnto the end of his life or by true repentance rise to the same estate againe In infants baptized there is a kind of merit or rather dignitie of the adopted sonnes of God by his grace powred into their soules in baptisme wherby they are made heires of the kingdom of heauen but all that arriue to the yeares of discretion must by the good vse of the same grace either merit life or for want of such fruite of it fall into the miserable state of death R. ABBOT M. Bishop setteth downe three things which he saith are necessary to make a work meritorious but giueth vs no ground at all whereby we may rest perswaded that where those three things do concurre a man may be said to merit or deserue at Gods hands He leaueth vs still to wonder that a sinfull wretch offending and prouoking God from day to day should dare to talke of merite and desert with God but that we know that heresie and ignorance make men bold to frame the maiestie of God to their owne brainsicke and senslesse conceits The conditions and circumstances by him mentioned we alwayes teach and require in our doctrine of good workes but farre are we from finding merit in any of them For first the adopted sonne of God standeth bound by dutie to do all things to the honor of his Father and there can be no merit in doing that which a man by dutie is bound to do Secondly if the worke proceed from the grace of God the work is Gods and not mans and therfore man can therby merit nothing Thirdly if the reward depend vpon promise then it ariseth not of the merit or worth of workes especially there being by the frailtie of the worker and the bountie of the promiser that disproportion betwixt the worke and the reward as that it is meerly absurd to imagine that the one should be merited and deserued by the other These things God willing shall further appeare in the processe of this question In the meane time M. Bishop here challengeth vs for slaundering their doctrine with some matters of truth as that they trust not in Christs merits that they need not Gods mercy for their saluation but will purchase it by their owne workes Now we wote well that they vse speech of Christes merits and Gods mercie and of trusting therein because they know that if they abandoned the mention hereof they would soone grow odious and hatefull to all men For the cuppe of poison of the whore of Babylon they must vse a couer of such good words least they make men loth to drinke thereof But let it be examined how they teach these things and their falshood will soone appeare By trust in Christs merits men conceiue the placing of the confidence of saluation immediatly therein as the proper cause for which God accepteth vs to eternall life who our selues are miserable sinners and altogether vnworthy thereof But their trust in Christs merits is that he hath purchased for vs grace if we list by free will to merite heauen for ourselues thereby to be iust before God in our selues and worthy of the kingdome of heauen as M. Bishop in the former question of a Sect. 2. Iustification hath declared So then the effect of Christs merits is tied onely to this life and thenceforth we are to depend vpon that which here we do for our selues by wel vsing that grace which the merits of Christ first purchased for vs. Therefore one Richard Hopkins translating into English a booke of Granatensis as touching prayer and meditation giueth it one where for a marginall note that our Sauiour Christ is our Aduocate for the time of this life but after our departure out of this life he is no more our Aduocate but our Iudge for the time is past saith he of dealing with God by an Aduocate c. and we shall haue our definitiue sentence according to our workes Whereby it appeareth what reckoning they make of the mercie of God which they also pen vp within the compasse of this life and denie it that place which the Apostle giueth it b 2. Tim. 1.18 at that day Yea so little vse is there with them of Gods mercie as that M. Bishop doubteth not to demaund
benefits go vnder the name of rewards yet in all our righteousnesse there is nothing to counteruaile in any sort the bountie of his goodnesse and therefore was farre from that Pharisaicall and proud opinion of merit which M. Bishop desireth to fasten vpon him Which is easie to be seene in that also which I cited out of him before that t Basil in Psal 114. supra sect 13. eternall rest is layd vp for them who lawfully fight the combat of this life not to be rendered by way of debt to workes but prouided by the grace of the bountiful God for them that trust in him u Cypr de eleem Si expeditos si celeres si in hoc operis agone currentes dies nos vel reditiones vel persecutionis inuenerit nusquam Dominus meritis mostris ad proemium decrit In pace coronam vincentibus candidam pro operibus dabit in persecutione purpuream propassione geminabit Cyprian hath nothing for M. Bishops turne but onely the name of merits and it is already shewed that that can auaile him nothing In steed of merits put in good workes which is all that it importeth and Cyprian saith nothing but what we say No more doth Hilary whose words are x Hilar in Mat. can 5. Haec rectè perfectèque viuentium merces est vt in nouam âoelestemque substantiam ex hac corruptibilu corporis materie transferantur This is the reward of them that liue well and perfectly that from this matter of a corruptible bodie they are translated to a new and heauenly substance M. Bishop somewhat forceth the place to serue his turne but it is plaine by that that hath bene said before that the names of hire and reward are farre enough off from prouing merit and desert And whatsoeuer they import with men yet that they import not so with God let Hilary himself be witnes who speaking of the wages of them that were hired into the vineyard saith y Idem ibid. can 20. Merces quideÌ ex dono nulla est quia debetur ex opere sed gratuitaÌ Deus omnibus ex fidei iustificatione donauit Wages indeed there is none of gift because it is due by worke but God hath giuen the same freely to all by the iustification of faith There is no merit then in the reward that Hilarie speaketh of because though it be termed reward yet it is freely giuen by the iustification of faith In the place of Ambrose it is plaine that the name of merits is taken indifferently for workes either good or euill He saith that z Ambros Offic. lib. 1. cap 15. Nonnè euidens est meritorum aut proemia aut supplicia post mortem manere it is euident that for merits there remaineth after this life either reward or punishment and M. Bishop will not say that punishment remaineth for the merits that he pleadeth for Yet he calleth good workes by the name of merits but to how little purpose for Popish merit hath bin already shewed And how farre Ambrose was from opinion thereof his owne words shall witnesse where he saith a Ambr. in Psal 118. ser 20. Quis nostrum sine diuina potest miseratione subsistere Quid possumus dignum proemijs facere coelestibus c. Quo tandâm hominum merito defertur vt haec corruptibilis caro induat incorruptioneÌ mortale hoc induat immortalitatem Quibus laboribus quibusue iniurijs possumus nostra leuare peccata Indignae sunt passiones huius teÌporis ad superuenturam gloriaÌ Non ergo secundum merita nostra sed secundum misericordiam Dei coelestium decretorum homines forma praecedit Which of vs can stand without the mercie of God What can we do worthy of the reward of heauen By what merit of man is it yeelded that this corruptible should put on incorruption or this mortall should put on immortality By what labours by what suffering of wrongs can we abate our sinnes The sufferings of this time are vnworthy for the glory that is to come Therefore the forme of heauenly decrees goeth before men not according to our merits but according to Gods mercie This being so by the iudgement of Ambrose why doth M. Bishop seeke to perswade vs by the name of Ambrose that God frameth his heauenly decrees concerning vs according to our merits and that the works that we do are worthy of the reward of heauen He vseth commonly the name of merit as the rest do but neuer had in his heart that matter of merit that M. Bishop dreameth of Hierome also is cited but for shew and onely to fill vp a place b Hieron adueâ Jouinian lib. 2. Nostri laboris est pro diuersitate virtutuÌ diuersa nobis proemia praeparare It belongeth to our labour according to diuersitie of vertues to prepare for our selues diuersity of rewards The rewards by the promises of God are tied to the workes and therefore in doing the workes to which the rewards belong we may well be said to prepare for our selues the same rewards As we are said to worke out our saluation because though it be Gods meere grace by which we are saued yet he vseth our will and our worke for the effecting thereof so are we said also to prepare rewards for our selues because God vseth vs as instruments to do for our selues the workes that belong to those rewards which he hath prepared for vs. And these rewards we doubt not as before was said but that they are diuers according to the diuersity of our works greater rewards to greater works lesse reward to lesser works but what is all this to proue that the rewards are iustly merited and deserued by our workes That Hierome thought not so it is plaine by that we haue seene out of him c Supra sect 17. before that there can no worke be found worthy of the iustice of God as also for that he sayth in the name of the people of God d Hieron in Esa lib. 17. cap. 64. Si consideremus merita desperanduÌ est If we consider our owne merits we must despaire and resolueth euen concerning e IdeÌ adu Pelag. lib. 2. Pro nihilo saluos faciet eos haud dubiuÌ quin iustos qui non proprio merito sed Dei saluantur clementia the iust that they are not saued by their owne merite but by the mercie of God There followeth Saint Bernard whom M. Bishop would not haue cited if he had meant so faithfully as he should haue done In what sort S. Bernard taketh the name of merits hath bene declared a little before so as they may well blush to cite any thing out of him for maintaning their doctrine of merits But M. Bishops dealing is so much the more vnhonest for that in the very same sermon Bernard ouerthroweth that that he would proue by him f Bernar. in Can. ser 68. Quid de meritis solicita sit Ecclesia cui
be very many of ours vvho say that all things that vve do are done by the helpe of God By this acknowledgement of grace Pelagius deluded the Bishops of the Easterne Churches before whom he was conuented and by that meanes was acquitted and dismissed as hauing taught nothing against the truth For as Augustin noteth b August epist 95. His audius verâis thommem Dei gratia adiunari Catholici antistitââ nullam aliam Dei gratiam intelligere potuerunt nisi quam in libris Dei legere populis Dei praedicare consueuerunt When they heard him confesse the grace of God they could imagine no other grace but what they were wont to reade in the booke of God and preach to the people of God Which grace by this occasion the same S. Austin in diuerse and sundrie places defineth to be that c Ibid. Gratiae qua Christiani filij Dei sumus Et postea Qua praedesiinati vocamur iustificamur glorificamur whereby we are Christians and the children of God and being predestinate are called iustified and glorified d Epist 105. Qua iustificati sumus vt homines iusti essemus whereby we are iustified to be iust men e Epi. 107. Agnoscamus gratiam quae facit proasse doctrinam which maketh the doctrine of God profitable vnto vs f Cont. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 13. Vt non âstendat tantummodo veritatem verumetiam impertiae charitatem whereby he doth not onely shew vs the truth but also inspireth loue g Ibid. cap. 30. Qua iustificamur id est qua charitas Dei diffunditur in cordibus nostris c. whereby we are iustified that is whereby the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giuen vnto vs h Cont. 2. Epist Pelag lib. 4. cap. 6. Haec est gratia Dei bonos faciens nos whereby we are made good i Cont Pelag c. vt supra cap. 10. Istam aliquando fateatur qua futurae gloriae magnitudo non solum promittitur verumetiam creditur speratur nec reuelatur solum sapientia verumetiam amatur nec suadetur solum omne quod bonum est verumetiam persââad tur wherby the excellencie of heauenly glorie is not onely promised but also beleeued and hoped for nor wisedome onely reuealed but loued and euerie thing that is good is not onely aduised but fruitfully and effectually perswaded This onely grace and no other did they vnderstand to be the grace of Christ whereby as touching the worke of our saluation God is all in all whilest of him and by him meerely by his gift we are whatsoeuer we are towards him so that although k De grat lib. arbât cap. 16. Certum est nos velle cum volumus sed ille facit vt velimus c. Certum est nos facere cùm facimus sedille facit vt faciamus c we will and we worke and we walke and we runne yet it is God that worketh in vs to will and to worke and to walke and to runne and in all these things we haue nothing but what we haue of him that there may be no exception to the Apostles question l 1. Cor. 4.7 What hast thou that thou hast not receiued and if thou haue receiued it why doest thou boast as if thou hadst not receiued it But this grace Pelagius could by no meanes endure he thought it absurd that all should be ascribed to God and therefore would needes deuise a course of grace that might giue way to the Free will of man The contriuing of which course if we duly consider from point to point we shall see that it most fully correspondeth and accordeth to that doctrine of grace and Free will which is now taught in the Church of Rome onely the specialties thereof their schoole diuines haue directed them to expresse somewhat more distinctly then he hath done And first they tell vs of grace preuenting exciting and stirring vp whereby saith the councell without any desert of ours we are called that by his grace raising vs vp and helping vs we may be prepared to returne to our iustification Where we are to note M. Bishops errour in his owne principles who sundry times calleth the grace of first iustification * Of Iustification sect 32. Of Merits sect 1 c. the first grace forgetting that there is a former grace to which he himselfe referreth their workes of preparation and here bringeth the councell describing it as precedent to iustification But of this preuenting grace Costerus the Iesuite saith that m Coster de lib. arbit Haec gratia praeuenitas non est illa quae in anima nomina inhabitans usstuÌâonstituât filium Dei efficit sed impulsus tantùm motio sp sancti adhuc foris degentis qui stat ad ostrum eordis pulsans nondum admissus ad eius domicilium it is not that that dwelleth in the soule to make a man iust but it is onely the impulsion and motion of the holy Ghost being yet without and standing knocking at the doore of the heart not being as yet let in This he expresseth by the comparison of a friend finding a man in a deepe pit as before was sayd and perswading him by diuerse reasons to be willing to be pulled out Therefore Bellarmine saith that n Bellarm. de grat li arbit lib 6. cap. 15. Nihil est aeliud nâsi suâsio quae non deterât nat voluntatem sed inâlinat per moduÌ proponentis obiecti it is but onely a perswading which doth not determine the will but inclineth it in manner of a propounding obiect This grace Pelagius describeth in this sort o Pelag apud a August cont Pelag. Celest lib. 1. cap. 10. Operatur in nobis velle quod bonum est velle quod sanctum est dum nos serrenis cupidit itibus deditor mutorum more animalium taentummede presentia diligeÌtes futurae gloriae magnitudine praeââorum pollicitatione succendit dum reuelatione sapientiae in desiderium dei stupentem suscitat voluntatem dum nobis suadet omne quod bonum est He worketh in vs to will that that is good to will that that is holy whilest finding vs giuen to earthly lusts and like bruit beasts louing onely present things note that he excludeth all former merits as the councell doth he enkindleth our minds with the greatnesse of the glorie to come and with promise of reward whilest by reuealing his wisedome he raiseth vp our astonished will to the desire and longing after God whilest he perswadeth and exhorteth vs to all good things And againe to the same purpose he saith p Ibid ca 7 Adiuuat nos Deus per doctrinam reuelationem suam dum cordis nostri oculos aperit dum nobis ne praesentibus occupemur futura demonstrat dum diaboli pandit insidiat dum nos multiformi
euill not without the euill it selfe And thus much in infinite places he giueth to vnderstand So farre therefore as sinne implieth guilt he denieth concupiscence in the regenerate to whom it is forgiuen to be any longer sinne because they are not thereby holden guilty and in this we gainsay him not because it is but as if he should say that though in it selfe it be sinne yet to the faithfull it is as if it were no sinne because it is not imputed for sinne whereto willingly we accord But the question is whether in it owne nature it be not such as that it should make guiltie saue onely that it is pardoned and that did S. Austine neuer deny as before hath bene proued he confesseth it to be c Ibid. vt suprae such an euill as should draw vs vnto euerlasting death onely for being in vs but that the guilt thereof is remitted Now this cannot be affirmed of any thing but that that is properly and truly sinne and therefore it cannot be doubted but that S. Austine did take concupiscence to be sinne according to the true and proper vnderstanding of the name of sinne This true and proper nature of sinne is before shewed to consist in a defect obliquity or swaruing from the law of God For the law of God is the true image and description and perfect rule of righteousnes and euery declining from the rule of righteousnesse is vnrighteousnesse and d 1. Iohn 5.17 all vnrighteousnesse is sinne therefore euery declining from the law of God is sinne And this is so true as that e Pigh de peccat origin cont 1. PropriaÌ veramque peccati rationem Ioannes explicat peccatum est iniquitas c. id est obliquatio à rectitudine quae nobis lege praescribitur aut legu transgressio Pighius in his time a maine pillar of the church of Rome doth fully approoue it and maintaineth it with all his might that it is a true and perfect definition of sinne which S. Iohn hath set downe that sinne is the transgression of the law Now because the law requireth not onely outward actions but also the inward fixed disposition and quality of righteousnesse not onely workes of charity but also the inward habite of charity whence all such workes are to proceed it followeth that if there be a contrary quality or habite the same is sinne because it is a declining from the law Seeing therefore concupiscence not onely in the first acts motions of it but euen habitually is f August cont Julian lib. 2. defectus à iustitia a defecting or declining froÌ righteousnesse as S. Austine calleth it seeing it is a very habituall g Rom. 7.23 et 8.7 enmity and rebellion against the law of God all M. Bishops learning cannot auoid it but that it must necessarily be concluded to be sinne But yet to giue some shew of auoiding it he sendeth vs to Thomas Aquinas to learne of him now in the end of the world another forme and definition of sinne which is the deordination of the will so that howsoeuer other faculties and powers be distorted and corrupted yet we must thinke there is no sinne so long as there is an integrity and right disposition of the wil. Which position is absurdly false because the loue of God requireth h Deut. 6.5 Luc 10.27 all the heart all the mind all the soule all the thought and strength i August de doct Christ lib. 1. ca. 22. Nullum ase riuulum duci extra patitur cuius deriuatione minuatur It endureth not that any streame should be drawen from it by the deriuing whereof it should any way be diminished But the will of man is not the whole man and therefore albeit there be supposed a rectitude and integrity of the will yet is not sinne hereby excluded if there be a defect or failing in any other part Yet that being graunted to M. Bishop he is no whit the neerer to his purpose hereby For if the deordination of the will be sinne then concupiscence is sinne because concupiscence is the deordination of the will For it hath bene before declared that k Retract lib. 1. cap. 15. Jpsa capiditas nihil est aliud quam voluÌtas vitiosa peccatoque seruiens concupiscence is nothing else but the will of man corrupted and seruing sinne and therefore the remainder of concupiscence in the regenerate is nothing else but a remainder of the corruption of the will and according to that remainder a seruing of the law of sinne Whereas then he affirmeth that in baptisme the deordination of the will is taken quite away it appeareth hereby that he is wholly deceiued because so long as concupiscence remaineth so long still there remaineth in part a deordination of the will And indeed that rectifying of the will which he affirmeth is but an Idea a meere fantasticall speculation contrary to the common sight and experience of all men The defendour thereof sheweth a will naughtily resolued against conscience and truth All men find all men see and feele in themselues and others a great distortion a crosnesse a crookednesse and vntowardlinesse of will And if there be that cure and healing of the will of which he speaketh what hindereth that there is not perfect righteousnesse For l De spir eâ lit cap. 35. Fieret perfecta iustitia si tanta adâib retur voluntas quanta sufficii ââaerâ there should be perfect righteousnesse saith S. Austine if there were so great will as sufficeth for so great a matter And that the will is lesse hereto then it ought to be m Epist 29. ex vitio est it is by reason of n De lib arbit lib. 3 ca. 14. Vitij nomen maximè solet esse corruptio Quod perfectioni naturae deesse perspexeris id vocas vitium a corruption an imperfection whereby there is somewhat wanting to the perfection of it And if there be still a corruption and a want of perfection in the will then the will is not yet fully rectified and because the will is not yet fullie rectified sinne remaineth still for sinne saith M. Bishop is the deordination of the will But it is further to be obserued that to the perfect rectifying of the will belong cleare light of vnderstanding and perfect delight of loue For o De peccat mer. et remiss lib. 2. cap 17. Nolunt homines facere quod iustum est siue quia latetan iustum sit siue quia no delectat TaÌto enim quodque vehementius volumus quantò certuis quà m bonum sit nouimus eoque delectamur ardentius Ignorantia igitur infirmitas vitia sunt quae impediunt vsluntatemne moueatur ad faciendum opus bonum vel ab opere malo abstinendum therefore haue men no will to that that is iust either because they know it not to be iust or because they delight not in it For so much the more earnestly do
BEcause M. Perkins sets not downe well the Catholikes opinion I will helpe him out both with the preparation and Iustification it selfe and that taken out of the Councell of Trent Where the very words concerning preparation are these Sess 6. c. 6. Men are prepared and disposed to this iustice when being stirred vp helped by Gods grace they conceiuing faith by hearing are freely moued towards God beleeuing those things to be true which God doth reueale and promise namely that he of his grace doth iustifie a sinner through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus And when knowledging themselues to be sinners through the feare of Gods iudgements they turne themselues to consider the mercie of God are lifted vp into hope trusting that God wil be mercifull vnto them for Christs sake and beginning to loue him as the fountaine of all iustice are thereby moued with hatred and detestation of all sins Finally they determine to receiue baptisme to begin a new life and to keepe all Christs commandements After this disposition or preparation followeth Iustification and for that euery thing is best knowne by the causes of it all the causes of Iustification are deliuered by the Councell in the next Chapter which briefly are these The finall cause of the Iustification of a sinner is the glory of God the glory of Christ and mans owne Iustification the efficient is God the meritorious Christ Iesus Passions the instrumental is the Sacrament of Baptisme the onely formall cause is inherent iustice that is Faith Hope and Charity with the other gifts of the Holy Ghost powred into a mans soule at that instant of Iustification Of the Iustification by faith and the second Iustification shall be spoken in their places So that we agree in this point that Iustification commeth of the free grace of God through his infinite mercies and the merits of our Sauiours Passion and that all sinnes when a man is iustified be pardoned him The point of difference is this that the Protestants hold that Christs Passion and obedience imputed vnto vs becommeth our righteousnesse for the words of iustice and iustification they seldome vse and not any righteousnesse which is in our selues The Catholikes affirme that those vertues powred into our soules speaking of the formal cause of Iustification is our iustice that through that a man is iustified in Gods sight accepted to life euerlasting Although as you haue seene before we hold that God of his meere mercy through the merits of Christ Iesus our Sauiour hath freely bestowed that iustice on vs. Note that M. Perkins comes too short in his second rule when he attributeth the merits of Christs sufferings to obedience whereas obedience if it had bene without charity would haue merited nothing at Gods hands R. ABBOT The doctrine of the Councell of Trent concerning preparation to Iustification is the very heresie of the Pelagians as may appeare by that that before hath bene said thereof in the question of a Sect. 5. Free will Out of the free will of man only stirred vp and helped by grace b Coster Enchirid cap 5. Haec gratia impulsus tantum motio spiritus s adhuc foris degentis liberum arbitrium auxilio Dei necdum inhabitantis sed mâuânus adiunantis se praeparat ad iustificationem not any intrinsecall or infused but only outwardly assisting grace which is no more but what Pelagius himselfe acknowledged they deriue faith hope loue repentance the feare of God the hatred of sinne and purpose of new life whereby he prepareth and disposeth himselfe to receiue in his Iustification another faith hope charity and other gifts of the holy Ghost then to be powred into his soule Whereby though they will not seeme so to do yet indeed they runne into the affirming of that which if Pelagius had not denied condemned he had bene condemned himselfe c August epist 206 gratiam Dei secundum merita nostra dari that the grace of God is bestowed vpon vs according to our merits In which sort Bellarmine saith that d Bellarm. de Iustificat lib. 1. cap. 1â Fides âustificat per moduÌ dispositioâis merin meretur remissionem peccateruÌ suo quodam modo faith iustifieth by way of merit that faith in it manner doth merit forgiuenesse of sinnes applying thereto some speâches of Austine which to that purpose were neuer meant In seââing downe the causes of Iustification out of the Councell he committeth an absurd errour in saying that the finall cause of the iustification of a sinner is mans owne Iustification as if it selfe could be the final cause of ââeâfe whereas the Councel nameth in steed thereof eternall life Whereââ he saith that they agree with vs in this point that Iustification ãâã of the free grace of God through his inâ ãâ¦ã our Sauiours Passion he doth but sopâ ãâ¦ã For if Iustification be of the free grace of God then it is not of works according to that of the Apostle e Rom. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of works otherwise grace is no grace But he afterwards professedly disputeth that his works of preparation are the very cause of Iustification It were odious to refuse the name of the free grace of God and therefore formally he nameth it but by the processe of this discourse it will appeare that he meaneth nothing lesse then to make it free That our Iustification and righteousnesse before God standeth not in any inward vertues and graces powred into our soules but in the imputation of Christes obedience and righteousnesse made ours by faith shall be proued vnto him God willing by better arguments then he shall be able to disprooue But that we are not to expect much of him for disproouing he himselfe here sheweth vs by a silly note in which he telleth vs that M. Perkins comes too short in his second rule when he attributeth the merits of Christes sufferings to obedience whereas obedience saith he if it had bene without charity would haue merited nothing at Gods hand Wherein what doth he but giue check to the Apostle in that he saith f Rom. 5.19 By the obedience of one shall many be made righteous For to him he might likewise say that he comes too short in attributing to Christes obedience that many by it are made righteous whereas by his obedience if it had bene without charity many could not haue bene made righteous But the mans simple ignorance appeareth in this diuiding of obedience from charitie whereas charity is the very mother of obedience neither is there any true obedience but what issueth therefrom And therefore M. Perkins well noted though Maister Bishops narrow eyes beheld it not that Christ in his obedience shewed his exceeding loue both to his Father vs. But we must be content to beare with many such idle and bootelesse notes 2. W. BISHOP And whereas M. Perkins doth say that therein we raze the foundation that is
in the not imputing thereof but also in h Cap. 6.6 destroying the body of sinne and restoring in vs the image of God i Ephe. 4.24 in righteousnesse and holinesse of truth he hauing giuen himselfe k Tit. 2.14 to purge vs to be a peculiar people vnto himselfe and l Ephe. 5.27 to make vnto himselfe a glorious Church not hauing spot or wrinkle or any such thing And all this Christ will effect vnto vs but he will do it according to his owne will not according to Popish fancie All this is now in fieri non in facto esse it is begun and in doing but it is not yet finished and done it shall be fully perfected at the resurrection of the dead In the meane time he bringeth vs not to perfect righteousnesse in our selues nor giueth vnto vs a full immunitie from sinne that he may take away from vs all occasion of reioycing in our selues that as Saint Austine noteth m August de peccat merit remiss lib. 3. cap. 13. Vt dum non iustificatur in coÌspectu erâs viuens actionem gratiarum semper in dulgentiâe ipsius debeamus siâ ab illa primâ caâsa omniuÌ vâticrum id est ae tumore superbâe sancta humilitate scruemur whilest no man liuing is found iust in the sight of God we may alwaies owe thankesgiuing vnto his mercie and by humilitie may be healed from swelling pride and n Bernard in Cant. ser 50. Vt scâamus in die illa quia non ex operibus iustitiae quae fecimus nos sed pro misiricerdiae sua saluos nos fecit that we may know as Saint Bernard saith at that day that not for the works of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercie he hath saued vs. Now therefore we doe no wrong to Gods goodnesse wisedome iustice in our iustification as Maister Bishop fondly chargeth vs because we teach iustification in the same sort as God himselfe hath taught it vs inferring sanctification as an immediate and necessarie effect but not conteining it as an essentiall part We hold sanctification to be necessarie to iustification in this sence that the one cannot be without the other and that no man is iustified by the righteousnesse of Christ who is not also sanctified by the spirit of Christ but we denie sanctification to be necessarie to iustification in Maister Bishops meaning as to be any cause or matter of it As for the place of Luther wretchedly falsified by him the true purpose of it onely is to shew the worke of Gods grace to be irreuocable in them vpon whom he hath set the marke of his election and hath iustified them by faith in Christ to whom as Saint Austine saith o August Soli. loq cap. 28. Quibus omnia cooperantur in bonuÌ etiam peccata ipsa euen their very sinnes doe worke for good and thereof is made as it were a triacle and preseruatiue against sinne so that as Bernard saith p Bernard de triplici cohaer clauor vincul glutin Of Certaintie of Saluation Sect. 9. though Dauid be branded with the blot of horrible sinnes and Peter be drowned in a depth of denying his Maister yet there is none that can take them out of the hand of God who because he will preserue them therefore preserueth their faith and continueth in them his spirit of sanctification and though by occasion they fall yet they neuer so fall but that q 1. Iohn 3.9 his seede remaineth in them and r Psal 37.24 his hand is vnder to lift them vp againe Now because we affirme the inward sanctifying of the heart to be alwaies an infallible consequent of iustification there is no place for that obiection of his that we make the righteous man like to sepulchers whited without with an imputed Iustice but within full of iniquitie and disorder The imputation of righteousnesse both outwardly and inwardly is our iustification before God and by sanctification the iustified man both outwardly and inwardly becommeth other in quality then he was before so that although sinne in part be still remaining to lust and rebell yet it is brought into subiection that it raigneth not and being checked and resisted that it may not bring forth fruit a man is not by it reputed full of iniquitie and disorder But of this sufficient hath bene said Å¿ Sect. 17. before by occasion of the same cauill in his epistle to the Ring Here as he giueth further occasion we tell him that that remainder of sinne in the regenerate is couered with the mantle of the righteousnesse of Christ and so S. Austine as we haue seene before calleth it t August de nupt concup lib. 2. ca. 34. peccatum tectum sinne couered or hidden But saith he it is madnesse to thinke that any thing can be hid from the sight of God We answer him that God seeth it well enough with the eye of his knowledge but by reason of that couerture u August in Ps â1 Noluit aduertire Tecta quare vt non videââtur Quid erat Dei videre peccata aâsi puâire peccata will not see it with the eye of his iudgement he seeth it with a discerning but seeth it not with a reuenging eye euen as it is said x Numb 23.21 He seeth no iniquitie in Iacob nor beholdeth transgression in Israel But he demaundeth Why doth he not deface it and wipe it away and adorne the soule with grace c. He hath his answer before I will here quit him onely with Saint Austins words y Augus âânat Cââgrat cap. 27. riot agit Deus vt âaâct onââa sed agit tuâlicio suo nec ordinem sanaâdi accipit ab aegreto God is in hand to heale all but he doth it at his owne discretion and receiueth not of the sicke man an order for his cure Againe he asketh Hath not Christ deserued it We tell him ye Christ hath deserued it and for his merits sake it shall be done but we must expect the time that God hath appointed for the doing of it Christ hath deserued for vs to be wholly freed from mortalitie corruption and death as before was sayd but mortalitie corruption and death yet continue still When mortalitie corruption and death shall be abolished then shall sinne also wholly and for euer be taken away Last of all he demaundeth Is it because God cannot make such iustice in a pure man I answer him out of Tertullian z Tertul. aduers Praxeâin Si tam abruptè in praesumptionibus nostris hac senteÌtia vtamuâ quiduis de Deo confingere poterimus quasi fecerit quia facere potuerit Potuit Deus pennis hominem ad volanduÌ instruxâsse non tamen quia potuit statim fecit c. Probare apertè debebis ex Scripturâs If we will so abruptly in our presumptions conceiue opinion we may faine what we list of God as if he had
forgiuenesse of sinnes then in perfection of vertues Which being so albeit his exposition conteine nothing materiall against vs yet we hold the same not so properly applied to the thing which he there expoundeth For we doe not thinke that the iustice or righteousnesse of God is so called onely for that it is the gift of God but because thereby we are iustified thereby we are iust and righteous in the sight of God Which because we are not by inherent iustice as S. Austine euery where confesseth it followeth that the righteousnesse of God must be vnderstood of another kind of righteousnesse which is that whereof the Apostle instructeth vs whereby Å¿ Rom. 4.6 the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works according to the words of Dauid t Psal 32.1 Blessed is the man whose vnrighteosnesse is forgiuen and whose sinne is couered Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne Therefore the Greeke Scholiast expounding the righteousnesse of God to be that that is giuen of God further sheweth what that gift is u Oecumen in Rom cap. 3. Iustitia Dei est iustificatio absolutio seu liberatio à peccatis à quibus non potuââ lex liâerare The iustice or righteousnesse of God is iustification and release or deliuerance from sinnes from which the law could not deliuer vs. And so Chrysostome though he say as M. Bishop citeth that iustification is of grace that is of Gods free gift yet withall saith that x Chrysost in 2. Cor. hom 11. Deâ est ista iustitia quando non ex operibus quando necessarium est etiam nullam maculam inuenââ the righteousnesse of God is so called because it is not of works inasmuch as it is necessarie that there be no spot sound Where he presupposeth that there cannot be found any righteousnesse of works but such as is spotted and defiled and therefore importeth that the righteousnesse of God which must be without spot can by no meanes be vnderstood of the righteousnesse of works Neither doth it helpe M. Bishop any whit that inherent righteousnesse is pure of it selfe as it is the gift of God because though it be pure of it selfe and in the worke of God yet it is soiled in the puddles of our corruption and receiueth a blemish by our crooked and vntoward vsing of it and is neither giuen to that end nor is sufficient to yeeld vs iustification in the sight of God Hitherto therefore the argument standeth good As Christ was made sinne so we are made righteousnesse Christ was made sinne by imputation of our sinne We are therefore made righteous by the imputation of his righteousnesse 6. W. BISHOP Rom. 5. M. Perkins third reason As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous mark here a comparison betweene the first and second Adam hence I reason thus As by the obedience of Adam men were made sinners so by the obedience of Christ are they made righteous but men are made sinners by imputation of Adams sinne vnto them and not onely by propagation of naturall corruption ergo by imputation of Christs iustice we are made righteous Answer The comparison I allow because it is the Apostles and denie that men are made sinners by imputation of Adams fault and say that euery one descended of Adam by naturall propagation hath his own personall iniquity sticking in them which is commonly called Originall sinne and an high point of Pelagianisme is it to denie it For albeit we did not tast of the forbidden fruit in proper person yet receiue we the nature of man polluted with that infection really and not by imputation And so the comparison serues not at all M. Perkins turne but beareth very strongly against him it being thus framed As by Adams disobedience many were made sinners euen so by Christs obedience many shall be iustified This is his Maior Now to the Minor But by Adams disobedience they were made sinners by drawing from him euery one his owne proper inherent iniquity in like manner we are iustified by Christ not by imputation of his iustice but by our inherent iustice which is powred into our soules when we are in Baptisme borne a new in him See what penurie of poore arguments they haue that to make some shew of store are forced to propound such as make manifestly against them R. ABBOT This argument Maister Bishop could no way auoid but by shewing himselfe either impudently wilfull or absurdly ignorant and surely if his knowledge be no better then be here expresseth he hath ill bestowed those thrice seuen yeeres that he hath before spoken of in the studie of Diuinitie and were best to set himselfe to schoole againe The case is very cleare that if we be sinners by the imputation of Adams sinne then are we also righteous by the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ Therefore he denieth that we are made sinners by the imputation of Adams sinne Yea but M. Bishop you should then haue told vs how it is true that the Apostle saith that a Rom. 5.19 by Adams disobedience we are made sinners For how should we be sinners by his disobedience but for that his disobedience is imputed vnto vs Bellarmine saith and he therein saith truly that b Bellarm. de Amiss grat statu peccati lib. 4. ca. 10. Peccatâ Adami ita posteris omnibus imputatur acsi omnes idem peccatuÌ patrauissânt Adams sinne is imputed to all his posteritie as if all had committed the same He alledgeth to that purpose Saint Bernard saying that c Bernard Domin prima post Epiphan ser 1. Nostra est culpa nobis iusto Dei iudicio imputabatur licet occulto Adams sinne is our sinne and by the iust though secret iudgement of God is imputed vnto vs. He saith againe in another place that d Bellar. ibid. lib. 5. ca. 17. Communicatur per imputationem Omnibus enim imputatur qui ex Adamo nascuntur Adams sinne is communicated vnto vs by imputation that it is imputed to all that are borne of Adam and calleth it the imputation of Adams disobedience If Adam then by disobedience were holden a sinner and his disobedience is imputed vnto vs as if we our selues had disobeied it must needes follow that by the imputation of the same disobedience we also are sinners as well as he Therefore doth the Apostle say that e Rom. 5.12 in him that is in Adam all haue sinned If in Adam all haue sinned then in Adam all are sinners in Adam all are guiltie of sinne To which purpose Saint Bernard saith f Bernard de aduent Dom. ser 1. In Adam omnes peccauimus in eo sententiam damnationis accepimus omnes In Adam we haue all sinned and in him we haue all receiued the sentence of damnation So Saint Austine also saith that g August de Trint lib. 13. ca. 12. Parentum
vnto thee put case he had said If a Papist shall say vnto thee How is all the world saued it being onely Christ that hath done righteously thou maiest answer him How was the whole world condemned when it was onely Adam that obeied not The matter of our condemnation then is in the one and the matter of our saluation in the other corruption of nature being consequently drawne by generation from the one as a part of our condemnation and sanctification to holinesse consequently deriued by faith and regeneration from the other as a part of our saluation And now he may well see that our arguments be not poore nor make against our selues as he pretendeth but his answers are such penurious and poore shifts as that now they are once discouered we expect from him no further maintaining of them 7. W. BISHOP His fourth reason The Papists make Christs obedience their satisfaction but satisfaction is equall to iustice therefore they must make it as well their iustice as satisfaction For the Maior he citeth Bellarmin Lib. 2. de Iustif cap. 7. I haue read the Chapter and finde no such words further I say there is a great difference betweene satisfaction for mortall sinnes and iustification for satisfaction cannot be done vs for the guilt of mortall sinne is infinite being against an infinite Maiestie and so no creature can make full satisfaction for it wherefore the infinite valour of Christs satisfaction is necessarily required who hauing taken away the guilt of eternall punishment due to sinnes leaueth vs his grace to satisfie for the temporall paine of it as shall be in his due place declared more at large Againe a man must needes haue his sinnes pardoned and grace giuen him before he can make any kinde of due satisfaction for he must be in the state of grace before he can satisfie wherefore he must needs flie to the benefit of Christ satisfaction There is nothing like in iustification for first to make a man iust in Gods sight requires no infinite perfection but such as a meere man is very well capable of as all must needes confesse of Adam in the state of Innocencie and of all the blessed Soules in heauen who be iust in Gods sight Neither is it necessarie to be infinite for to be worthy of the ioyes of heauen which be not infinite as they are enioyed of men or Angels either of whom haue all things there in number weight and measure Briefly it is a most easie thing for one man to pay the debts of another but one man cannot bestow his wisedome or iustice on another and not credible that God whose iudgement is according to truth will repute a man for iust who is full of iniquitie no more then a simple man will take a Black-moore for white although he see him cloathed in a white sute of apparell R. ABBOT In true and right vnderstanding satisfaction is fully equiualent to iustification and that that is our satisfaction is also our iustification before God For declaration whereof it is to be obserued that sinne consisteth partly in commission partly in omission partly in doing that that we ought not to do partly in not doing that that we ought to do Satisfaction then for sinne must serue to acquit both the one and the other it must take away what we haue done and supply what we haue not done or else it cannot be called a satisfaction Therefore as on the one side in the euill that we haue done we are reputed as if it neuer had bene done so on the other side in the good that we haue not done we are reputed as if all had bene done Accordingly S. Austine saith that a August Retract l. 1. cap 19. Omnia mandata facta deputaÌtur quando quicquid non sit ignoscitur all the commandements of God are reputed to be done when that is pardoned that is not done Our satisfaction therefore is our iustification with God because thereby we are reputed as if we had performed all the righteousnesse of God And so doth Bernard make them both one when saying b Bernard ep 190. Assignata est ei aliena iustitia qui caruit sua There is the righteousnesse of another assigned to him who wanted of his owne he addeth to expresse the same c Satisfactio vnius omnibus imputatur c. the satisfaction of one is imputed vnto all euen as he alone hath borne the sinnes of all But more clearely is it euicted by the words of the Apostle who where Dauid pronounceth the man d Psal 32.1 blessed to whom the Lord forgiueth his sinnes saith that he e Rom. 4.6 describeth there the blessednesse of that man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works giuing thereby to vnderstand that forgiuenesse of sinnes is the imputation of righteousnesse without works If therefore in satisfaction there be forgiuenesse of sinnes then is there also iustification that is the imputation of righteousnesse without workes Now then sith Bellarmine confesseth that the merit and obedience of Christ is our satisfaction f Bellarm. de Iustif lib. 2. ca. 7. Si solùm vellent nobis imputari Christi merita quia nobis donata sunt possumus ea Deo patrè offerre pro peccatis nostris quoniam Christus suscepit super sâ onus satisfaciendi pro peccatis nostris nosque Deo pâtri recoÌciliaÌdi recta esset eorum sententia he must acknowledge it also to be our iustification that is the thing whereby and for which we are reputed iust in the sight of God because thereby we are reputed as hauing perfectly fulfilled all the commandements of God I haue read the chapter in Bellarmine saith M. Bishop and finde no such words But he was drowsie belike when he read it let him reade it better when he is well awake and then he shall finde that Bellarmine saith that in true meaning it may be said that the merits of Christ are imputed vnto vs for that they are giuen vnto vs of God and we may offer the same to God the Father for our sinnes in respect that Christ hath taken vpon him the burden of satisfying for our sinnes Where what doth he but acknowledge that Christ according to the burden taken vpon him hath in his merits made satisfaction for our sinnes but in his folly like M. Bishop because he vnderstandeth not himselfe will not haue them imputed for our righteousnesse before God His differences betwixt saluation and iustification are impertinent because that iustification which he speaketh of is not our iustification before God as shall appeare Briefly therefore to touch what he saith the guilt saith he of mortall sinne is infinite being against an infinite maiestie But therefore the guilt of all sinne is infinite neither is there any sinne but what is mortall because all sinne is against an infinite maiestie Therefore to all sinne the infinite valour of Christes satisfaction is required which because it is infinite
Iesus Tit. 3. The like description of our Iustification is in S. Paul Of his mercie he hath saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost whom he hath powred into vs abundantly through Iesus Christ our Sauiour that being iustified by his grace we may be heires in hope and not in certaintie of faith of life euerlasting Where the Apostle inferring that being iustified by his grace declareth that in the words before he had described the same Iustification to consist in our new birth of Baptisme and the renewing of our soules by the infusion of his heauenly gifts which God of his mercie did bestow vpon vs for his Sonne Christs sake Many other places I omit for breuitie sake and will be content to cite few Fathers because the best learned of our aduersaries do confesse that they be all against them as I haue shewed before De peccat merit remis cap. 15. Epist 85. lib. 12. de Trinit cap. 7. Lib. 6. de Trinit First Saint Augustine saith That this iustice of ours vvhich they call Righteousnesse is the grace of Christ regenerating vs by the holy Ghost and is a beautie of our inward man It is the renewing of the reasonable part of our soule And twentie other such like whereby he manifestly declareth our iustice to be inherent and not the imputed iustice of Christ Let him suffice for the Latine Fathers And Saint Cyril for the Greekes who of our Iustification writeth thus The Spirit is a heate who as soone as he hath powred charitie into vs and hath with the fire of it inflamed our minds we haue euen then obtained iustice R. ABBOT a Eccles 19.24 There is a subtiltie that is fine saith Ecclesiasticus but it is vnrighteous and there is that wresteth the open and manifest law M. Bishop is none of those that deale finely that will cogge by art and will lie and yet not seeme to lie what he doth he will do outright and will lie so as that euerie man may see him to be a liar that he may not be taken for other then indeed he is Tell vs M. Bishop where is it that M. Perkins saith that in heauen we shall haue no other but imputed iustice or Righteousnesse where doth he make any shew or semblance of saying so Fie M. Bishop fie for shame leaue this lying and belying of men a good cause needeth no such meanes for the vpholding of it they that in apparent vntruth see you thus wilfull and shamelesse cannot but take you for a cosiner in all the rest M. Perkins saith that imputed Righteousnesse continueth for euer but doth he say that in heauen there shall be no other who plainely saith that sanctification shall be perfect in the world to come We shall for euer enioy eternall life by vertue of that whereby we are first admitted vnto it because thereby we are admitted to it to enioy it thereby for euer But he who by his merit purchased for vs eternall life purchased for vs also to be made meete for the enioying of it and therefore shall then make vs vnto himselfe b Ephe 5.27 a glorious Church not hauing spot or wrinckle or any such thing but c 1. Cor. 15.28 God shall be all in all Whereas he maketh M. Perkins to say that perhaps inward Righteousnesse shall be perfect in the end of this life he againe abuseth him for he asketh the question onely as a supposition what if it be so but maketh no perhaps that it is so denying that if it were so we could be iustified thereby The rest of this Section as touching the maine drift of it is altogether impertinent tending to proue Inherent iustice which we denie not but onely the perfection thereof in this life But whereas he seeketh to make good that our iustification consisteth therein he commeth much too short and one of his proofes directly proueth the contrarie For when the Apostle saith d 1. Cor. 6.11 You are washed you are sanctified you are iustified vndoubtedly he meant not by iustification and sanctification to import one and the same thing But there is no question but that by sanctification is meant inherent iustice Therefore inherent iustice cannot be vnderstood in iustification And this is apparent by those very authors whom he himselfe citeth for exposition of the place as namely Chrysostome saying e Chrysan 1. Cor. cap. 6. hom 16. Abluit nosmunquid igitur hoc solùm Minimè sed sanctificauit neque hoc etiam sed iustificauit Atqui liberari à peccatu magnuÌ munus est nunc autem te etiam innumeris impleuit bonis He washed vs and what did he so onely Nay but he also sanctified vs and not this onely but also he iustified vs very plainely putting difference betwixt iustification and sanctification and expounding iustification in the next words to be this liberari à peccatis to be deliuered from sinnes So doth Theophylact also expresly referre iustification to forgiuenesse of sinnes f Theoph. in 1. Cor. ca. 6. Vos ille sanctificat Quo pacto Iustificando inquit Cum enim prius vos abluisset iustitia condonasset mox sanctimoniam contulit When he had first washed you and by iustification had pardoned you forthwith also he bestowed sanctification Oecumenius likewise seuereth theÌ as Chrysostome doth g Oecumen ibid. Nec id solum verum etiam sanctificauit neque hoc tantum sed iustificauiâ He hath not onely washed you but also sanctified you and not that only but also iustified you He citeth Ambrose also but Ambrose saith not one word to import that Iustification should be construed of inherent iustice h Amâros ibid. Illic omnibus peccatis aââuitur credens iustificatur Dei nomine per spiritum Dei nostri Deâ filius adâptatur In baptisme all sinnes being done away the beleeuer is washed is iustified in the name of the Lord and by the spirit of our God is adopted to be a sonne of God Now we may see what credit is to be giuen to this gamester who shewing his cardes in packe telleth vs he hath wonne the game when he hath nothing at all to helpe for the winning of it As for the other place to Titus That being iustified by his grace c. There is no argument to proue the contrarie but that the Apostle may comprehend the whole worke of sauing vs which he before mentioneth vnder the name of Iustification as the maine point whereupon dependeth all the rest But more properly we may take it in the third place as in the former text to the Corinthians distinguished from the sanctification and renewing of the holy Ghost and expressing the other speciall effect of the washing of the new birth consisting in the forgiuenesse of our sinnes The places of Austin and Cyrill being spoken of inherent iustice begunne in this life not denied by vs say nothing against vs. How
but somewhat at least to the free will of man Againe it is not entirely the glorie of God that he respecteth but Å¿ Sest 2. the bringing of dignity vnto men as he hath before expressed Therfore albeit he will not haue a man boast and say that his good parts were the cause that God called him first to his seruice yet he maketh no exception but that a man may boast of the good workes that he hath performed in seruing him and may glory that his good parts therin are the cause why God adiudgeth heaueÌ vnto him as iustly deserued which is that against which the Scripture wholy driueth teaching vs to confesse that which Austin doth that t Aug Hypog lib 3. Intellâge in miseratione misericordiae non in factione meritorum animam coronari not for performance of merits but in mercy and louing kindnesse the soule of man is crowned and to say with Hilary u Hilar in Psal 135. Quòd sumus qui non fuimus quòd erimus quòd non sumus causam ââam non habet nisi misericordiae Dei That we are what we were not that we shall be what we are not it hath no other cause at all but onely the mercie of God Againe he will not haue vs boast and say that God needed vs for our selues but we must needes say with Tertullian x Tertul. aduer Hermog Nemo non eget eo de cuius vtitur There is none but needeth him of whose he vseth any thing Their doctrine of free will maketh God to stand in neede of vs because by it God bringeth not the worke of our saluation to passe but at our will It is in the power of our free will either to helpe it or hinder it either by admitting or reiecting the grace of God For the performance therefore of his purpose and promise God must stand in neede of our will to consent to his worke or else it succeedeth not For the auoiding of which absurdity we must confesse that God vseth nothing in vs for the effecting of our saluation but what he himselfe graciously worketh in vs. Our consenting our beleeuing our willing our working all is of God and nothing is there therein that we can call ours Now therefore it is plaine that M. Perkins did not ignorantly and maliciously as this ignorant wrangler speaketh but iudiciously and truly apply against them the place to the Ephesians y Ephe. 2.8 By grace ye are saued through faith not of your selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast Where the Apostle ascribing all to grace through faith in Christ taketh exception generally against works and giueth to vnderstand that they are effects not causes of saluation because God hauing first by faith put vs in the state of saluation doth consequently create vs anew in Christ Iesus vnto good workes M. Bishops exception is that the Apostle there excludeth onely the workes that be of our selues before we be iustified But that his exception is very vaine appeareth plainly by that the Apostle for reason of that that he saith Not of workes least any man should boast addeth in the next words For we are his workmanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes which God hath prepared for vs to walke in Where one way to vnderstand works in the one sentence which is to be proued and another way to vnderstand good workes in the other sentence which is the proofe is to make the Apostle to vtter as reasonlesse reasons as M. Bishops idle head is wont to do For what sence were it to say we are not saued by workes that are of our selues before we be iustified because we are Gods creation and workmanship in the good workes that we do after our iustification But the Apostles meaning is very euident we are not saued by any good workes that we do for our good workes are none of ours but they are his workmanship in vs by whom we are saued who hauing by his calling entitled vs to saluation hath prepared good workes as the way for vs to walke in to the same saluation It was not then M. Perkins ignorance to take two distinct manner of workes for the same but M. Bishops absurd shifting to make a distinction of workes there where the sequell of the text plainly conuinceth that there is no difference at all But we would gladly know of him to which manner of workes he referreth his vertuous dispositions To the latter he cannot because they proceede from vs as Gods workmanship created in Christ Iesus which we are not till we be iustified and they are for vs to walke in after our iustification If to the former then we see they are by the Apostle excluded from iustification So in neither place doth he say any thing of them and because he knew them not he hath wholy left them out He was vndoubtedly to blame to conceiue so little vertue in Maister Bishops vertuous dispositions as not to think them worth the speaking of But it is woorth the noting to what fashion he by this deuice hath hewed the words of the Apostle Not by workes least any man should boast that is not by workes that are of our selues but yet by vertuous good dispositions and workes of preparation which are partly of God and partly of our selues and yet as I haue before said they make the essentiall production of these workes of preparation to be onely of our selues because as yet there is z Coster Enchirid ca. 5. Hominis liberum arbitriuÌ auxilio Dei necdum inhabitantis sed moueÌtis adiuuantis se praparas ad iustificationem noÌ solum patiendo sed operando agendo no infused or inhabitant grace whence they should proceede and therefore out of their owne grounds it must follow that the same workes of preparation are here excluded by the Apostle But see the singular impudencie of this man who maketh S. Austin a witnesse of his vertuous dispositions who hath not in the place alledged by him so much as any seÌblance or shew for proofe thereof Note with S. Austin saith he that faith excludeth all merits of our works but no vertuous dispositions for preparatioÌ to grace Lewd Sophister where is that note found in S. Austine in what words is it set downe What still lye and nothing but lye S. Austine forsooth maketh the Apostle to exclude all merits of our workes which went before and might seeme to the simple to haue bene some cause why God bestowed his first grace vpon vs but not all workes for there are workes of preparation which Doctor Bishop no simple man I warrant you defendeth to be the cause why God bestoweth vpon vs his first grace Will he make S. Austine the author of so absurd and impious a glose S. Austine vnder the name of merits wholy excludeth workes vnderstanding by merits any thing going before iustification that should be vnto God a motiue or cause
our good workes directly contrary to that which the Apostle defineth in the example of Iacob a Rom. 9.11 Before the children were borne and when they had done neither good nor euill that the purpose of God according to election might stand not by works but by him that calleth it was said the elder shall serue the younger as it is written I haue loued Iacob and haue hated Esau b August Ench. cap. 98. Qua in re si futura opera vel bona huius vel mala illius quae Deus vtique praesciebat vellet intelligi nequaquam diceret non ex operibus sed diââret ex futuris operibus eoque modo istam solueret quastionem c. Where saith S. Austine if the Apostle would that either the good workes of the one or the euill workes of the other that were to come should be vnderstood he would not haue said Not of works but would haue said for the workes that were to come and so would haue put the matter out of question c IdeÌ epist 105. Ideo inquiunt Pelagiani nondum natorum alium oderat alium diligebat quia futura eorum opera praetudebat Quit istum aâutissimum sensum Apostolo defuisse non miretur The Pelagians said as he obserueth that of them being not yet borne God therefore hated the one and loued the other because he did foresee their workes to come Who would not wonder saith he that this wittie conceipt should be wanting to the Apostle But his resolution euery where is that Gods election is the cause of our good workes not the foresight of our good workes the cause why God elected vs. To that purpose he alledgeth the words of the Apostle d Ephe. 1.4 He hath chosen vs in him before the foundations of the world that we should be holy and without blame before him through loue e De praedest sanct ca. 8. Non quia futuri eramuâ sed vt essemus Et cap. 19. Non quia futures tales nos esse praesciuit sed vt essemus tales per ipsam electionem gratiae c. not saith he because we would be but that we should be not because he foreknew that we would be so but that we might be so by his election of grace The like he obserueth of the same Apostles words concerning himselfe f 1. Cor. 7.25 Aug. epist 105. I haue obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithfull not for that the Lord did foresee that he would be faithfull but by his mercy made him so to be It were too long to alledge all that might be alledged out of Austine as touching this point but Maister Bishop hauing very nicely touched it deferreth the rest to the question of merits where he saith nothing directly to it It seemeth he was ielous of the matter and therefore was loth to wade too farre least it should too plainly appeare that Pelagius and he are both fallen into one pit 35. W. BISHOP The fourth argument A man must be fully iustified before he can do a good worke and therefore good workes cannot go before iustification True not before the first iustification of a sinner But good Sir you hauing made in the beginning of this last Article a distinction betweene the first and second iustification and hauing before discussed the first and the second now remaining and expecting you why did you not say one word of it the matter being ample and well worthie the handling Albeit you will not willingly confesse any second iustification as you say yet had it bene your part at least to haue disprooued such arguments as we bring to proue a second iustification Yee acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification but these degrees must be made downward of euill worser and worst for if all our sanctification and best workes be like vnto defiled cloutes and no better then deadly sinnes as you hold Pag. 76. else-where let any wise man iudge what degrees of goodnesse can be lodged in it Againe how absurd is that position that there is but one iustification whereby they take fast hold on Christs righteousnesse which can neuer after be either loosed or increased Why then do you with your brother Iouinian maintaine that all men are equally righteous If it so be let him that desireth to see you well coursed read S. Hierome S. Ambrose S. Augustine S. Gregory Lib. 2. con Iouin Epist 81. Epist 57. Hom. 15. in Ezech. At least we must needes vphold that a man is as iust and righteous at his first conuersion as at his death how godly a life soeuer he lead against which I will put downe these reasons following R. ABBOT If there can be no good workes before the first iustification of a sinner what shall we thinke of M. Bishops vertuous dispositions and works of preparation What are they vertuous and yet are they not good Nay he hath called them a Sect. 30. 32. before good qualities good dispositions good preparations and what were they good then and now are they not good Tell vs M. Bishop your mind are your works of preparation good workes or are they not good If they be not good then you haue spoken vntruly before in calling them good If they be good then it is vntruth that you say here that no good workes go before the first iustification of a sinner Either in the one or in the other you must needes confesse that you haue said amisse Now here he quarelleth with Maister Perkins as if he had said nothing to the matter in hand which is as he saith of the second iustification whereas Maister Perkins though noting their distinction of first and second iustification yet hath in hand wholy to exclude workes from iustification whence it must follow that they haue no place in any second iustification And the argument here propounded directly ouerthroweth his second iustificatioÌ though he would not see so much For if a man can do no perfect good works till he be fully iustified theÌ can he do no perfect good works till the second iustification be fulfilled For a man is not fully and perfectly iustified till he haue attained to full and perfect iustice Iustice is not full and perfect so long as any thing remaineth to be added vnto it There is still something to be added in their second iustification till it come to his full terme Therefore till then a man is not fully iustified Now the iustice that is not perfect if it be respected in it selfe cannot be pleasing vnto God It can therefore bring forth no good workes to merit at Gods hands There can therefore be no good workes whereby a man should merit their second iustification M. Bishop after his manner briefly reciteth the argument and hauing so done very scholerlike answereth to the conclusion graunting it in one sort when the premisses inferre it in another and yet braueth and faceth as if the matter were wholly cleare for him
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 âam 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
galled himselfe in the riding of him We do imagine that by that time he hath better aduised of this whole matter he will thinke that some body did ride him when first he tooke this businesse in hand We may here see the blinde insolencie of a presumptuous vaine man who hauing said nothing but what is iustly to be derided and scorned yet taketh vpon him as if he had giuen vs some very admirable and learned answer Yea in this very place he bableth as if his wits were to seeke crossing and thwarting that in one line which he vttereth in another He telleth vs that the words of Esay were spoken in the person of the sinfull who had more sinnes then good workes and so their righteousnesse was like vnto a spotted and stained cloath and yet by and by he saith that their good workes though but few were free from all spots of iniquitie Againe as vncertaine where to stand he telleth vs that their euill works defiled their righteousnesse and made it like a stained cloath If their good works were free from all spots of iniquity how did their euil works defile them and make them like a stained cloath Or if their euill workes did defile their good and make them like a stained cloath how were they free from all spots of iniquitie Againe we would demaund of him how sinfull or as he hath called them before euill and wicked men should do good workes free from all spots of iniquitie seeing our Sauiour so plainly saith that a Mat. 7.18 Luk. 6.43 an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruite no more then we can gather grapes of thornes or figges of thistles S. Paul telleth vs that b Tit. 2.15 to them that are vncleane nothing is pure their mindes and consciences being defiled Which made S. Bernard to say that c Bern. in Cant. Ser. 71. Si fuerit nââus in conscientia nec quod ex ea prodieriâ carebit naeuo if there be a blemish or blot in the conscience nothing that commeth from it shall be without a blot How then can it stand good which M. Bishop saith that sinfull and wicked men do good workes which are free from all spots of iniquitie But thus he turneth all vpside downe and according to the present occasion letteth goe whatsoeuer commeth next to hand without feare or wit But vpon the place I neede not to stand I referre the Reader to that that hath bene d Seât 3. before said thereof where it hath bene shewed that the Prophet by way of prophecie endited the praier in the name of the faithfull that were to liue in the desolations of Ierusalem and the Temple that the praier of the Prophet Daniel at that time fully expresseth the effect of the same praier of Esay and therefore that it is the confession of the faithfull godly that their righteousnesse is as a stained cloth and that the auncient Fathers haue vsed the place for proofe thereof 49 W. BISHOP 3. There is not a man who doth not sinne And blessed is the man whose sinnes be not imputed to him and such like I answer that the best men sinne venially and are happy when those their sinnes be pardoned but all this is cleane besides this question where it is onely enquired whether the good workes that the iust do be free from sinne and not whether they at other times do sinne at the least venially This is all which M. Perkins here and there obiecteth against this matter but because some others do alledge also some darke places out of the Fathers I thinke it not amisse to solue them here together S. Cyprian saith That the besieged minde of man can hardly resist all assaults of the enemie for when couetousnesse is ouerthrowne vp starts lechery and so forth Answer All this is true that the life of man is a perpetuall warfare yet man assisted with the grace of God may performe it most valiantly and neuer take any mortall wound of the enemies although through his owne frailty he may be somtimes foiled Dial. 1. cap. Pelag S. Hierome affirmeth That then we are iust when we confesse our selues to be sinners Answer That all iust men confesse themselues to sinne venially but neither of these places come neare the point in question that not one good deede of the iust man is without some spot or staine of sinne Epict. 29. S. Austine hath these words Most perfect charity which cannot be encreased is to be found in no man in this life and as long as it may be increased that which is lesse then it ought to be is faulty of which fault it proceedeth that there is no man who doth good and doth not sinne All this we graunt to be true that no man hath so perfect charity in this life but that sometimes he doth lesse then he ought to do and consequently doth not so well but that now and then he sinneth at the least venially and that therefore the said holy Doctor had iust cause to say Woe be to the laudable life of a man Lib. 9. confess cap. 13. if it be examined without mercy All which notwithstanding iust men may out of that charity which they haue in this life do many good workes which are pure from all sinne as hath bene proued They alledge yet another place out of S. Austine Lib. 3. con duas Epist Pelag. cap. 7. That belongeth vnto the perfection of a iust man to know in truth his imperfection in humility to confesse it True that is as he teacheth else-where First that the perfection of this life is imperfection being compared with the perfection of the life to come Againe that the most perfect in this life hath many imperfections both of wit and will and thereby many light faults Now come we vnto S. Gregory our blessed Apostle out of whose sweet words ill vnderstood they seeme to haue sucked this their poison He saith The holy man Iob Lib. 9. moral cap. 1. because he did see all the merit of our vertue to be vice if it be straightly examined of the inward Iudge doth rightly adde if I will contend with him I cannot answer him one for a thousand I answer that by our vertue in that place is to be vnderstood that vertue which we haue of our owne strength without the aide of Gods grace which we acknowledge to be commonly infected with some vice that S. Gregory so tooke it appeares by the words both going before and following before he writeth thus A man not compared to God receiued iustice but compared vnto him he leeseth it For whosoeuer compareth himselfe vnto the author of all good leeseth that good which he had receiued for he that doth attribute the good vnto himselfe doth fight against God with his owne gifts And after thus To contend with God is not to giue to God the glory of his vertue but to take it to himselfe And so all the merit of
this our vertue which commeth not of God but is attributed vnto our selfe as proceeding onely from our selues is the very vice of pride and cannot be preiudiciall vnto true good workes all which we acknowledge to proceede principally from the grace of God dwelling in vs. He saith further with S. Augustine that in this life we cannot attaine vnto perfect purity such as shall be in heauen reade the beginning of his first and second booke of Morals and there you shall finde him commending Iob to the skies as a good and holy man by his temptations not foiled but much aduaunced in vertue R. ABBOT These arguments the most of them are foisted in of his owne head there being none of ours that alledgeth them to that purpose to which he produceth them But thus because he would be taken for a valiant warriour he maketh himselfe a man of straw to fight with and with all his might bestirreth himselfe against a shadow But the worth of his answers is first to be seene in that which he saith to the words of the Apostle a Psal 32.2 Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne The best men sinne venially saith he and are happy when those their sinnes be pardoned Now the Apostle expoundeth the forgiuenesse or not imputing of sinne there spoken of to be the imputation of righteousnesse But the forgiuenesse of their veniall sinnes is not the imputation of righteousnesse because without any forgiuenesse of veniall sinnes a man continueth righteous and iust as wherein there is no breach of iustice and righteousnesse and notwithstanding the same a man is iust in the sight of God as out of the Romish doctrine was shewed in the section last sauing one Therefore forgiuenesse of sinnes spoken of in that place cannot be vnderstood of veniall sinnes Againe he maintaineth in the question of Satisfaction that forgiuenesse of sinnes taketh not away the temporall punishment of sinne How then is a man happie when those veniall sinnes be pardoned if for want of satisfaction he remaine still to pay deare for them as he speaketh in his Epistle in Purgatory fire He bringeth in a place of Cyprian as idlely as he did the former texts To that which he saith we answer him that it is by the grace of Christ through the forgiuenesse of sins that the wounds which the faithfull man receiueth be not mortall His foiles and wounds of themselues are such as that he must say with Dauid b Psal 130.3 If thou O Lord be extreame to marke iniquities who can stand c Aug. in Psal 129. Vidit propè totaÌ vitaÌ humanaÌ circuÌlatrari peccatis suit accusari omnes coÌscientias cogitationibus suis non inueniri castum cor praesumens de iustitia sua Si ergo cor castuÌ non potest inuenirs quod praesumat de sua iustitia prasumat omnium cor de miserecordia Dei dicat si c. He saw saith S. Austine the whole life of man in a manner to be barked at on euery side with his sinnes all consciences to be accused by their owne thoughts that there is not a cleane heart found that can presume of it owne righteousnesse If then therâ cannot be found a cleane heart which may presume of it owne righteousnesse let the hearts of all presume vpon the mercy of God and say If thou markest iniquities O Lord who shall abide it Let Maister Bishop marke it well that in this warfare there is no heart cleane that can presume of it owne righteousnesse and that we haue nothing to rest vpon but onely Gods mercy To the place of Hierome he saith that all iust men confesse themselues to sinne venially But iust men confesse their sinnes in the same meaning as they say Forgiue vs our trespasses They say Forgiue vs our trespasses as S. Austin saith the Apostles did as we heard before for those sinnes for which they say also Enter not into iudgement with thy seruants for in thy sight no man liuing shall be iustified They confesse therefore such sinnes as hinder them from being iustified in the sight of God which M. Bishop saith his veniall sinnes do not The repeating of the whole sentence of Hierome is a sufficient answer to him the latter part whereof he concealeth because it taketh away his glose vpon the former d Hieron cont Pelag li. 1. Tunc iusti âumus quaÌdo nos peccatores fatemur et iustitia nostra non ex proprio merito sed ex Dei consistit miserecordia Then are we iust when we coÌfesse our selues to be sinners and our righteousnesse standeth not vpon our owne merit but vpon the mercy of God If our righteousnesse consist in the acknowledgement of our sinnes and in the mercy of God pardoning and forgiuing the same then is there in vs no such perfection as M. Bishop speaketh of neither can any worke come from vs that can haue the title of absolute and perfect righteousnesse before God And this will be yet more by that that in the next place is alledged out of Saint Austine who noting diuers degrees of charity saith that e Aug. epist 29. Plenissima charitas qua iaÌ augeri non potest quamdiu hìc homo vinit est in nemine QuaÌdiâ autem augeri potest profectò quicquid minus est quà m âebet ex vitio est the most perfect charity no further to be increased is in no man so long as he liueth here and so long as it may be increased that that is lesse then it ought to be is by reason of a corruption or default Now hereto Saint Austine addeth not onely that which Maister Bishop mentioneth though he mention it also by halfe f Ex quo vitio ãâã est iustuâ c. By reason of which g Vitij nomen maximè solet esse corruptio Aug. de li. aââiâ lib 3. cap. 14. corruption there is not a man iust vpon earth which doth good and sinneth not but also another sentence which he concealeth h Ex quo vitio non iustificaââtur c. By reason of which corruption no man liuing shall be iustified in the sight of God Now if by reason of a corruptioÌ remaining in vs there be such an imperfection of charity which is the substance of inherent iustice as that no man liuing shall be iustified in Gods sight then can no good worke proceede from vs which can be said to be perfectly and entierly goâd For from an vnperfect cause cannot come a perfect effect i Bern in Cant. ser 71. Si radix in vitio ramus If the roote be faulty the braunch also must be so A lame legge cannot yeeld an vpright and stedfast gate Therefore needes must there be a lamenesse and blemish in all the good workes that issue from vs. For charity is not such as it ought to be till we loue the Lord our God with all our soule But k Aug. de perfect iustit
Cum est aliquid concupiscentiae carnalis c. noÌ omnimodò ex tota anima diligitur Deus so long as there is any carnall concupiscence God is not loued with all the soule And so long as we liue here there is carnall concupiscence against the law of the minde Therefore so long as we liue here charity is neuer perfect in vs as it ought to be neither can any perfect good worke be effected by vs. M. Bishop minceth and qualifieth the matter that no man hath so perfect charity but that sometimes he doth lesse then he ought to do But the argument prooueth that charity is alwaies vnperfect in this life and therefore not sometimes onely but alwaies a man doth lesse then he ought to do There is alwaies a blot that staineth our charity l Hilar. apud August cont Julian lib. 2. Supra sect 44. by reason whereof we haue nothing in vs cleane nothing innocent as before was cited out of Hilary and therefore it can yeeld no workes that are free from blot and staine But the Reader is here to note the constancie of this man who affirmeth here that no man hath so perfect charity in this life but that sometimes he doth lesse then he ought to do whereas before he hath told vs of a righteousnesse so perfect in this life as that m Sect. 45. it faileth not in any duty which we are bound to performe Thus giddily he runneth to and fro being vncertaine what to say and neuer knowing where he may stand sure Now here he saith that the other saying of Austine Woe to the laudable life of man if it be examined without mercy is spoken in respect of veniall sinnes wheras Austine vseth the words in respect of hell fire which they say is not incident to their veniall sinnes For hauing professed that he he durst not say that after baptisme no word went out of his mothers mouth against Gods commaundement and that Christ saith that if a man say to his brother foole he is guilty of hell fire he addeth these words n Aug. Confess lib. 9. cap. 13. Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam And woe euen to the commendable life of man if thou set aside mercy in the examining or sifting of it To which purpose he saith also in another place o Idem In Psal 42. Quicunque hic viâââ quantumlibet iustè viuat vae illi si cuÌ illa in iudicium intrauerit Deus Whosoeuer liueth here howsoeuer iustly he liue woe vnto him if God enter into iudgement with him In which sort Arnobius also saith p Arno. in Psal 135. Vae nebis si quod debemus exegerit vae nobis si quod debet reddiderit Woe vnto vs if he require what we owe to him woe vnto vs if he pay what he oweth to vs. These woes are not vttered in respect of Purgatory or any temporall affliction but in respect of the issue of that finall dreadfull iudgement the sentence whereof shall stand for euer Now if they haue learned by the word of God to denounce this woe then woe to M. Bishop that to the contrary defendeth a righteousnesse so perfect in this life as that his righteous man q Sect. 4. needeth not greatly to feare the rigorous sentence of a iust Iudge as who faileth not in any duty that he is bound to performe who can keepe himselfe from all but veniall sinnes which are easily forgiuen r Rhem. Testam Annot. Mat. 10.12 Sext. Proaemaâ glossa by the Bishops blessing by holy water by knocking the brest by saying a Pater noster by extreame vnction and some other such deuotions madly deuised to that end As touching the other place of Austine it hath bene already shewed that our righteousnesse in this life is vnperfect not onely by comparison but simply in it selfe and according to that that here is required of vs The imperfections of wit and will which M. Bishop speaketh of are so great and so many as that if he did but with a feeling heart and conscience consider the same he would finde that there is small cause in the most perfect of this life to pleade for that perfection that he maintaineth But being a man of a frosen and dead heart and neither knowing others nor himselfe by the name of many light faults he passeth ouer those things which make the most righteous and iust to groane vnder the burden of them and to say with Dauid Å¿ Psal 38.4 Mine iniquities are gone ouer my head and are like a sore burden too heauie for me to beare t Psal 40.12 My sinnes haue taken such hold vpon me that I am not able to looke vp they are moe in number then the haires of my head and my heart hath failed me Tush saith M. Bishop what neede all this adoe all these are but light and veniall faults but hereby we conceiue that neither his will nor his wit haue indeede that perfection that it were fit they should haue His answer to the words of Gregory is ridiculous and childish Gregorie forsooth by our vertue meaneth the vertue that we haue of our owne strength when as Gregorie teacheth that we haue no vertue of our owne strength but onely by the gift of God u Greg. Moral lib. 24. cap. 5. Iustitia nostra dicitur non quae ex nostro nostra est sed quae diuina largitate fit nostra It is called our righteousnesse saith he in another place not which is ours of our owne but which by the gift of God becommeth ours According to this meaning he saith that x Ibid. li. 9 ca. 1. Sanctus vir quia omne virtuâis nostrae meritum vitium esse cânspexit si ab interno arbitro districté iudicetur rectè subiungit si voluero c. the holy man Iob because he saw all the merit of our vertue to be vice if it be strictly iudged by the internall Iudge did rightly adde If I will contend with him I shall not be able to answer him one for a thousand He applieth his speech to Iobs righteousnesse which he had no cause to imagine that Iob alledged as attained vnto by his own strength And shall we be so mad as to thinke that if Iob had bene perfect by a righteousnesse receiued by the gift of God he would say he could not therefore answer God because he saw all the merit of the vertue that he had by his owne strength to be but vice It is strange to see that these men should be so blinde as not to see the grosse absurdity of these shifts Gregory spake to the instruction of his hearers whom surely he thought not to be worse then the Pharisee but knew that they attributed their vertue and righteousnesse to the gift of God and of that righteousnesse which they confessed to be Gods good gift teacheth them to acknowledge that through our weaknesse
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. Deinâe 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 * ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 EuaÌgelio 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
c Cap. 4. Sect. 4. What need any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a iust Iudge Hence are those most insolent speeches of theirs that good workes are d Rhem. Annot. 2. Tim. 4.8 truly and properly meritorious and fully worthy of euerlasting life that heauen is the due and iust stipend which God by his iustice oweth to the persons working by his grace that we haue a right to heauen and deserue it worthily that it is our owne right bargained for and wrought for and accordingly payed vnto vs as our hire e Ibid. Heb. 6.10 that good workes be so farre meritorious as that God should be vniust if he rendered not heauen for the same Thereupon Tapper sticketh not to say f Ruard Tapper in explic art Louan tom 2 art 9. Absit vt iusti vi tam aeternam expectent sicut pau per eleemosynam Multò namque gloriâsius est ipsoâ quasi victores triumphatores eam possidere tanquam palmaÌ suit sudoribus debitam God forbid that the iust should expect eternall life as the poore man doth an almes for it is much more glorious that they should haue it as conquerers and triumphers as the prize due vnto their labours Thus you your selues haue written M. Bishop and do we slaunder you in reporting truly what you haue written No no your speeches are impudent and shamelesse in this behalfe and such as we wonder that your foreheads serue you to auouch Why doth it not suffice you to preach good workes simply as Christ and his Apostles did with commendation of Gods mercy in rewarding the same What need this vaine foolery of merite so improbable so absurd so impossible whereby you do not magnifie God but set vp the righteousnesse of man against the grace of God As for the definition of the Councell of Trent we esteeme it not knowing the same for the most part to haue bene but a conuenticle of base Italianate Machiauels who by equiuocations and sophistications haue deluded the world and by casting the chaffe of some phrases of the Fathers vpon the meeres and puddles of the schoolemen haue laboured to couer and hide the filth and mire thereof and indeed haue left them still to serue by false confidence and trust for gulfes and whirlpools to swallow vp and deuoure the soules of men Although the words of the Councell may beare some good construction according to the auncient fathers meaning of the name of merites yet by them they are deceitfully set downe to leaue open a gappe to the absurd and intollerable presumption of men in aduancing and lifting vp the desert of mens workes as if God were thereby greatly bound and beholding vnto them How farre their meaning extendeth will appeare by M. Bishop who will not haue vs thinke that he will speake any thing but by the authoritie of that Councell And first he telleth vs that they hold that eternall life is a grace which indeed they dare not denie because the Scripture expresly so affirmeth g Rom. 6.23 Eternall life is the grace or gift of God through Iesus Christ our Lord. But he addeth to grace a supply of workes quite contrary to the Scriptures for it is expresly sayd h Chap. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of works otherwise grace is no grace i August contra Pelag. Celest lib. 2. ca 24. Non enim gratia Dei gratia erit vllo modo nisi fuerit gratuita omni modo Grace saith Saint Austin is not grace in any sort if it be not free in euery sort It is of grace saith M. Bishop and yet it is of workes also But still to make a shew of vpholding grace he telleth vs that though eternall life be by workes yet the first grace out of which those workes do issue is freely bestowed vpon vs. Which he saith only as ashamed to deny grace altogether and not of any conscience that hee maketh faithfully to auouch the same For if the grace whence those workes do issue which is the grace of iustification be freely bestowed vpon vs why doth he before labour to approue that we are iustified by workes Or if we obtaine the grace of iustification by workes how doth he say that the same is freely bestowed vpon vs The plaine truth is that by their works of preparation they make a man at least in some sort as we haue heard before out of Bellarmine to merit and deserue euen the first grace if by the first grace we vnderstand the grace of their first iustification as M. Bishop vsually doth But beside grace it is also a reward due in iustice saith he And how so Marry partly by the promise of God Now if he rested here we would not contend with him For promise is indeed grace and iustice in respect of promise is nothing but truth in the performance thereof neither is here any impeachment of the free gift of God But not contented herewith he addeth that it is due in part also for the dignitie of good workes And thus he confoundeth those things which the Scripture still very precisely distinguisheth aduertising vs that k Rom. 4.14 if they which are of the law that is of workes be heires then is faith made voide and the promise is made of none effect and againe l Gal. 3.18 if the inheritance be of the law that is of workes it is no longer by promise To be inheritors by workes and to be inheritors by promise are things so opposite as that the one wholly excludeth the other neither can they possibly stand together As for that which he saith of infants merite and dignitie it is also the schoolemens fiction and deuice Remission of sinnes is their saluation as it is ours and in them it standeth good which the Apostle saith m Rom. 5 2â As sinne hath raigned ouer them vnto death so grace also raigneth by righteousnesse that is by imputation of righteousnesse vnto eternall life not by any dignitie in them but through Iesus Christ our Lord. But as touching them that arriue to yeares of discretion he telleth vs that either they must by good vse of grace merite life or for want of such fruite fall into the miserable state of death A very hard sentence for himselfe for if he neuer haue life till he merite and deserue it we can well assure him that he shall go without it And I wonder that his heart did not tremble at the writing hereof but that he hath hardened the same against the truth and writeth but only for maintenance of that occupation and trade that must yeeld maintenance backe againe to him What will he say in the end when he shall lie wrastling with death and readie to resigne his soule into the hands of God Will he then craue for mercie who writeth now so earnestly for merite Let him take heede that God do not then answer him n Luk. 19.22 Out of thine
because the mercie of God alone sufficeth not Now it were wickednes thus to crosse and contradict the Apostles words and therefore doth he conclude that al is wholy to be ascribed vnto Gods mercie See then the good dealing or rather the lewd falshood of M. Bishop and his fellowes who teaching for the maintenance of their doctrine of merits that good works are principally indeed of God but yet partly of our selues do alledge S. Austine for the defence thereof who constantly teacheth to the vtter ouerthrow of merits that our good workes are wholy and onely of the grace of God and in no part of our selues This is one thing for which we iustly detest them as setting vp the glorie of man in stead of the glory of God the righteousnesse of man in stead of the righteousnesse of God and so by bearing men in hand with a merit of eternall life do bereaue them of Gods mercie by which onely they should attaine the same And yet all this is graced and shadowed with goodly faire words as we see here by M. Bishop who hauing said that the grace of God is principally the cause of our saluation and therein implied that our free will also is partly though not principally a cause thereof yet addeth that the grace of God is the onely fountaine of merit and all good workes If grace be the onely fountaine of all good workes then all good workes proceed onely from grace and if onely from grace then what can we merit or deserue thereby If we merit and deserue thereby then they are partly of vs and of our free will then grace is not the only fountaine of merit and all good works Therfore let him not lye in this sort let him speake as he meaneth acknowledge that which they al maintaine that good works are therfore our merits because they proceed from our Free will and are no otherwise our merits neither do we otherwise deserue by them but as they proceed from our free will Yea when the grace of God hath done all that appertaineth to it to do all is nothing with them vnlesse man adioyne thereto the worke of his owne free will Either let him renounce his doctrine of Free wil or else let him leaue with colourable words thus to delude and mocke the simple and ignorant reader in saying that which he thinketh not that the grace of God is the onely fountaine of merit and all good works 9. W. BISHOP Ad Eph. 2. Ad Tit. 3. Now to those texts cited before about iustification We are saued freely not of our selues or by the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done I haue often answered that the Apostle speakes of workes done by our owne forces without the helpe of Gods grace and therefore they cannot serue against workes done in and by grace R. ABBOT The oftennesse of his answer sheweth the corruption of his conscience that was not moued with so often repeating a manifest vntruth What was it the Apostles meaning to teach the Ephesians that they were not saued by the workes which they did when they yet were a Eph. 2.1 dead as he saith in trespasses and sinnes or had the Ephesians any such opinion that the Apostle should need to reforme in them Did they renounce their former workes to come to Christ that they might be saued by him and did they afterwardes grow againe to a conceipt of being saued by their former workes These are grosse and palpable vntruths neither hath the Scripture any thing at all that may giue any shew for warrant of such constructioÌ Nay as hath bene before said when the Apostle hauing said b Ver. 9. Not of workes lest any man should boast addeth as a reason and proofe hereof c Ver. 10. for we are his workmanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes c. as if he should haue said We cannot be said to be saued by workes because our workes are none of ours but Gods works in vs he plainely sheweth that not onely workes before grace but after also are excluded from being any cause of our saluation The place to Titus likewise resteth our saluation only vpon d Tit. 3.5 Gods mercy and therefore leaueth no place to our good workes and therefore it is vsed by S. Bernard not only in this day for an exception against workes before grace but e Bernard in Cant. ser 50. that we may know at that day that not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercie he hath saued vs. 10. W. BISHOP Now to that text which he hudleth vp together with the rest although it deserued a better place being one of their principall pillars in this controuersie it is Rom. 8. The sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glorie to come The strength of this obiection lieth in a false translatioÌ of these words Axia pros tein doxan equall to that glory or in the misconstruction of them for we grant as hath bin already declared that our afflictions and sufferings be not equall in length or greatnesse with the glorie of heauen for our afflictions be but for the short space of this life and they cannot be so great as will be the pleasure in heauen notwithstanding we teach that this shorter and lesser labour imployed by a righteous man in the seruice of God doth merite the other greater and of longer continuance and that by the said Apostles plaine words 2. Cor. 4. for saith he That tribulation which in this present life is but for a moment and light doth worke aboue measure exceedingly an euerlasting waight of glory in vs. The reason is that iust mens works issue out of the fountaine of grace which giueth a heauenly value vnto his workes Againe it maketh him a quicke member of Christ and so receiuing influence from his head his works are raised to an higher estimate it consecrateth him also a temple of the holy Ghost and so maketh him partaker of the heauenly nature as S. Peter speaketh which addes a worth of heauen to his works 2. Pet. 1. Neither is that glory in heauen which any pure creature attaineth vnto of infinite dignitie as M Perkins fableth but hath his certaine bounds and measure according vnto each mans merits otherwise it would make a man equall to God in glorie for there can be no greater then infinite as all learned men do confesse R. ABBOT These words of S. Paule to the Romanes a Rom. 8.18 The afflictions of this time are not worthy of the glorie that shall be reuealed vpon vs are verie directly cited and are as pregnant to the matter here in hand M. Bishop saith that that text is one of our principall pillars in this controuersie and indeed it is so strong a pillar as that all M. Bishops strength is not able to shake it from vpholding that which we professe to teach by it But yet pro forma he
Austin in Psal 102. hath these words o August in Psal 102. Ergo coronat te quia donae suae coronat non merita tua He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne gifts not thy merits Which is the same in effect with that which M. Bishop putteth in place of it very often repeated by S. Austin either in the same or very neare the same words that God when he crowneth vs p IdeÌ epist 105. et in Ioan. trac 5. de grat et lib. arb cap. 6. 7. crowneth his owne gifts not our merits But he answereth hereto very vntruly and deceitfully It is true indeed that S. Austin there speaketh to him that thinketh he hath merits of his owne and of himself that God wil not crowne those because they are onely euill and he giueth not the crowne to euill workes but he crowneth onely his owne gifts because in vs there is no good worke to which onely the crowne is giuen but onely by Gods gift q De grat et lib. arb ca. 6. Prorsus talia cogitanti veriffimèdicitur dona tua coronat Deus non merita tua si tibi teipso non ab illo sunt merita tua Haec enim si talia sunt mala sunt quae autem mala sunt non coronat Deus Si autem bona sunt Dei dona sunt To him that so thinketh sayth he it is rightly said God crowneth his owne gifts not thy merits if thou haue thy merits of thy selfe and not of his gift for if they be such they be euill and God crowneth not those that be euill but if they be good they be the gifts of God Now to those words M. Bishop addeth in the same letter as if it were S. Austins whether by the Printers fault or by his owne lewd falshood he can best tell himself this animaduersion But if we acknowledge our merits to proceed from grace working with vs then may we as truly say that eternall life is the crowne and reward of merits But M. Bishop did S. Austine tell you so Will you so wilfully abuse him and peruert his words and meaning Surely in the beginning of the next Chapter which is but ten lines after the words cited S. Austine saith thus r Jbid. cap. 7. Siergo Dei donae sunt merita tua non Deus coronat merita tua tanquam merita tua sed tanquam dona sua If then thy good merits be Gods gifts God doth not crowne thy merits as thy merits but as his owne gifts In which words he plainely denieth that there is any respect of our merit or that God accounteth vs as hauing merited but that he giueth the crown and reward onely as to his owne gifts which he himselfe hath bestowed vpon vs. How bad a man then is M. Bishop to make S. Austin say that God crowneth our good workes proceeding from his grace as our merits when S. Austin expressely and flatly denieth the same But there is yet some further poison hidden in his words for when he nameth merits proceeding from grace working with vs he diuideth betwixt God and vs that which S. Austin maketh entirely the gift of God The worke is not meerely of the grace of God in vs but of grace working with vs because we also as well as grace are partakers of the worke So then S. Austin must not say that God crowneth his owne gifts not our merits but God crowneth partly his owne gifts and partly our merits because the good workes which he crowneth are partly of his grace and partly also of our owne freewill By this meanes Maister Bishop will hold it very absurd which the same Saint Austine saith in the other place Å¿ Epist 105. Câââ Deus coronat merita nostra nihil aliud coronat quà m namerae sua When God crowneth our merits he crowneth nothing else but his owne gifts for if he crowne nothing else but his owne gifts if he crowne nothing at all of ours then what part of the câowne is it that we can say is merited and deserued by vs His answer to the last words of Austine is excluded by the very words themselues t Aug Psal 14â Propter ââmen tuum D ââine viuificabis âeâin tua iustitia non in mea noÌ quia ego merut sââ quia tu miseritis Lord for thy names sake thou wilt quicken me in thy righteousnesse not in mine not because I haue deserued it but because thou art mercifull This place he saith appertaineth to the first iustification of a sinner but it seemeth he gaue the answer somewhat too early in the morning before his eyes were well opened for otherwise he might haue seene that these are the words of a man alreadie iustified vttered in the name of the Prophet of God not in the preterperfect tense as of a thing past but in the future tense as of a thing to come Thou shalt or wilt quicken me and therefore cannot be vnderstood of any first iustification The Prophet being alreadie in part reuiued to the life of God prayeth stil to be reuiued and quickened more and more and promiseth to himselfe by assurance of faith through the holy Ghost that God will so do not in my righteousnesse saith he as Austin expresseth it not because I haue deserued it but for his owne names sake for his owne mercies sake giuing to vnderstand that not onely the beginning of the worke of God but also the proceeding thereof is not for any merit of man but by the mercie of him by whom it was first begun And whereas he saith that they confesse that a sinner is called to repentance and reuiued not for any desert of his owne but of Gods meere mercie he doth but blind his Reader with a concealed distinction of merit hauing himselfe u Of Iustification Sect. 21. before taught that his workes of preparation are the cause of the iustification of a sinner as he hath corruptly argued out of the words of Christ Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she hath loued much So that the terme of meere mercie is vsed only colourably and for fashion sake neither doth he acknowledge the meere mercy of God in any sort but as the Pelagian heretickes did in the first offer of his grace 14. W. BISHOP Hauing thus at length answered vnto all that M. Perkins hath alledged against Merits let vs see what can be said for them following as neare as I can M. Perkins order Obiections of Papists so he termeth our reasons First in sundry places of Sâripture promise of reward is made vnto good works Gen. 4. Prou. 11. Eccl. 18. Mat. 5. If thou do well shalt thou not receiue To him that doth well there is a faithful reward Feare not to be iustified vnto death because the reward of God remaineth for euer and When you are reuiled and persecuted for my sake reioyce for great is your reward in heauen and a hundreth such like therfore
but God no Angell no Archangell no creature whatsoeuer could merit at the hands of God and yet this man sticketh not blasphemously to affirme that in this point of meriting we are like vnto the Sonne of God And all this meriting for ought he saith remaineth still needlesse and causelesse because for shame he dareth not deny that in words which indeed he doth deny that Christs merits are inestimable and haue deserued all graces and blessings for vs. Which being graunted to what end should we be like vnto Christ in meriting Nay we rightly conclude thereof because God doth nothing idlely that therefore he doth not appoint vs to merit that for our selues which Christ hath already merited in our behalfe Wheras he saith that God desirous to traine vs vp in all good workes best knew that there is no better spurre to pricke forward our dull nature then to ordaine and propose such heauenly rewards we acknowledge that so farre he saith truly but where he addeth that they are proposed to such as wil endeuour to deserue them I must remember him of the sentence of Marke the Hermite before alledged that a Marc. Herem Supra sect 14. some keeping the commandements expect the Kingdome of heauen as a wages deserued or due vnto them and that these faile of the Kingdome of heauen Now here M. Bishop in his brauery sitteth him downe in his chaire and taketh vpon him to teach M. Perkins as a man much ignorant in the matter of Christes mediation but if M. Perkins had knowne it in no better sort then he teacheth him we might haue taken him indeede for a very simple and ignorant man True it is which he saith that the office of Christes mediation consisteth in reconciling man to God and that he performed this by paying the ransome of our sinnes by purchasing Gods fauour and ordaining meanes how all mankinde might attaine to eternall life But he saith very vntruly that in the two first points for the most part we agree for they are farre from agreeing therein with vs or with the truth of the Gospell of Christ They do not hold that our sinnes are freely pardoned or that we are freely iustified albeit he is ashamed to confesse that they hold it otherwise For what is it to say freely but b Rhem. Testam explication of words in the end for nothing as his Rhemish Maisters haue expounded it and they do not hold that our sinnes are pardoned or we iustified for nothing but for works And that appeareth by that he addeth next although we require other preparation then they do For the workes of preparation they make to be the cause of the forgiuenesse of sinnes and iustification as he himselfe hath c Of Iustification Sect. 21. before disputed onely he thinketh the matter handsomly salued that workes are the cause of iustification but not the merit of works and with this iugling deuice he addeth that they as fully denie any merit of ours to be cause thereof as we do Wheras the Scripture saith nothing of the merit of workes but absolutely excludeth workes from being any part of the cause of our iustification before God neither opposeth each to other grace and merits but grace and workes not saying If it be of grace it is not of merits but d Rom. 11.6 If it be of grace it is not of workes otherwise grace were no grace Therefore these words of his are but words of hypocrisie and falshood and vsed onely to blinde the vnskilfull Reader and to conceale that venime and poison that would otherwise easily be espied Albeit his maister Bellarmine sticketh not to tell vs that e Bellarm. de iustificat lib. 1. cap. 17. Iustificat per moduÌ meriti suo quodaÌ modo meretur remissioneÌ peccatorum faith which is one of their preparations doth iustifie by way of merit and doth in some sort merit forgiuenesse of sinnes that we may know that very vntruly and against his owne knowledge M. Bishop affirmeth that they as fully deny merit to be the cause of forgiuenesse of sinnes or iustification as we do About the meanes of attaining to heauen he saith we differ altogether For they say saith he that God requires no iustice in vs. Where as he hath sought to cleare his owne part with a lye so doth he with a lye seeke to disgrace ours We do not say that God requireth no iustice in vs we only deny that the iustice which God requireth in vs is the cause of our iustification before God or can yeeld vs any merit towards God and therefore in this respect we desire f Phil. 3.9 to be found in Christ and by faith to stand vnder the couerture of his merits and righteousnesse and in the imputation thereof to be accepted vnto euerlasting life Now against this he saith that Christes righteousnesse and merits are not communicable vnto anie meere creature But he saith he knoweth not what for what should hinder but that what Christ hath done for vs should be communicated and imputed vnto vs And is not Christ himselfe communicated vnto vs g Esa 9.6 borne vnto vs giuen vnto vs become h Iohn 17.23 one with vs Accordingly therefore he is i 1. Cor. 1.30 of God made righteousnesse vnto vs euen k Ierem. 23.6 the Lord our righteousnesse that we may say l Psal 71.14 I will go forth in the strength of the Lord God and will make mention of thy righteousnesse onely But he will haue it that through Christes merits grace is giuen vnto vs to do good workes and to merit eternall life One part whereof we acknowledge to be true that through Christes merits grace is giuen vnto vs to do good workes because good workes are the way wherein we are to walke to that eternall life which he hath merited and purchased for vs. But the other part thereof is false and we denie that he hath appointed vs by our good workes to merit for our selues eternall life It is a Romish fancie which we maruell they so busie themselues to coÌmend to others when none of them dare presume of it in himselfe M. Perkins by sound argument hath confuted it and M. Bishop is content againe barely to affirme it without either proofe of his owne part or disproofe of that that is said against it In a word we do not finde in Scripture that Christ died for our good workes that they might merit but onely for our sinnes that they might be pardoned This is the auncient receiued faith of the Church of Christ but the other is a nouelty which antiquity neuer imagined but is lately deuised in the Church of Rome He saith that they by this doctrine of Merits do much more magnifie Gods grace and Christes merits then we do And why For the greater the gift is saith he the greater is the glory of the giuer But I answer him that the gift is greater in that Christ giueth himselfe to be
bootelesse sorow a blinde horrour and anguish of minde wherein there is nothing but darknesse and feare but onely as it receiueth light and comfort in the bloud of Christ for the mitigating and asswaging of it If it selfe for it selfe can giue no comfort it is no satisfaction in it selfe and therefore in all our repentance our satisfaction is in him onely who as S. Austine saith i Aug. in Psal 31. Soluit quod non debebat vt nos à debito liberaret Paid that which was no debt of his to free vs from our debt These things are spoken by due and iust course and therefore M. Bishop must take here againe the triuants tricke in that he would with so bare a shift slip ouer a direct and formall answer 12 W. BISHOP Our fift reason Daniel giueth this counsaile to Nabuchodonosor Daniel 4. Redeeme thy sinnes with almes and thy offences with mercy on the poore If by such good deedes our sinnes may be redeemed as holy writ doth testifie then it followeth that such works yeeld a sufficient satisfaction for them for redemption signifieth a full contentment of the party offended as well as satisfaction M. Perkins answereth The skilfull in the Caldey teach that the word importeth rather a breaking off then redeeming Reply To Authors in the aire without pressing of the proprietie of the word no answer can be giuen but let vs admit that it be broken off his sinne not being couetousnesse but pride and lacke of acknowledging all kingdomes to depend vpon God as the text it selfe doth specifie To breake off this sinne by almes and compassion of the poore is nothing else but by such works of charity in some sort to satisfie Gods iustice thereby to moue him to take compassion of him And that by almes-deedes we are cleansed from our sinnes Luk. 11. our Sauiour himselfe doth teach saying Giue almes and behold all things are cleane vnto you R. ABBOT This obiection serueth much for the clearing of that that hath bene said in the former section and to open a way to the true vnderstanding of many phrases which by the Papists are abused to the maintenance of their absurd position of humane satisfaction We are to consider what the person is to whom they are spoken and in what respect the Prophet spake them Nabuchodonosor was a heathen King voide of the grace and spirit of God hauing no knowledge nor yeelding any acknowledgement of God but what God by miracle wrested from him and yet thenceforth drowning that also in pride oppression cruelty tyrannie and all kinde of iniquitie iniustice Now therfore by the doctrine of the Romish Schooles he was not in case to do any worke of satisfaction For M. Bishop telleth vs as we haue seene before that all satisfaction hath his vertue from the grace of God and Thomas Aquinas saith that a Thom. Aquin. suppl q. 14. art 2. in corp Sine charitate opera facta non sunt satisfactoria works done without charity haue no power of satisfaction therefore where grace and charity are not no satisfaction can be done If then Nabuchodonosor were not capable in their meaning to do a worke of satisfaction how impudently do they deale to alledge that that was said to him to the maintenance of their doctrine of satisfactions How should he be aduised according to their meaning to redeeme his sinnes from whom by their owne rules nothing could proceed that might in their meaning be a redemption for his sins Againe here is nothing intended as touching the true forgiuenesse of sins wherein consisteth the spirituall reconcilement of man to God but onely as touching the auoiding of a threatned outward iudgement and the preseruation of temporall earthly state which God yeeldeth euen to ciuill and morall change of former euill courses as before was said Daniel had threatned vnto him from God the losse of his vnderstanding and the casting of him forth to the companie of bruite beasts He aduiseth him yet to alter his former doings by which he had drawne that sentence vpon himselfe to trie whether haply God would be moued thereby to reuoke the iudgement which he had pronounced b Theod. in Dan. 4Vn clementiae fructum percipere Hanc eandeÌ erga eos osteÌdito qui vnam tecuÌ sortiti sunt naturam ita enim iudici persuadere poteris vt minas extinguat neque sinat eas ad exitum perduci Wilt thou saith he as Theodoret resolueth the speech receiue the fruite of mercy shew the same then to them who haue obtained the like condition of nature with thy selfe for so thou maiest perswade the Iudge to put away his threatnings and not to suffer them to be brought to effect Where Hierome conceiueth that c Hieron in DaÌ 4. Fecit iuxta Danielu consiliuÌ miserecordias in pauperes idcirco vsque ad meÌsem duodecimuÌ in eum dilata est sententia Sed quia postea ambulans in aula Babylonis gloriatur c. bonum miserecordiae perdidit malo superbiae Nabuchodonosor according to Daniels counsell did shew mercy to the poore and therefore for twelue moneths the sentence was deferred vntill vpon glorying in his Babel by sinne of pride he lost the benefit of mercy So then we see the forbearing of the punishment graunted to a meere outward reformation yet the King being an infidell there was no remission of the sinne There could therefore be no satisfaction because satisfaction cannot be without remission whereof it followeth that sith Daniels words had their effect without any satisfaction therefore there can no satisfaction be concluded therof For further confirmation hereof we are to note what Origen saith as touching this matter who obseruing that d OrigeÌ in Mat. trac 35. Operis boni aliud est quod facimus propter homines vel secundum homines aliud auteÌ quod propter Deum vel secundum DeuÌ c. Vt puta benè quis facit homini naturali iustâtia motus no prepter DeuÌ quomâdo faciebant interdum gentes multi faciunt homines Opus illud olâum est vulgare non magnio doris tamen acceptabile apud Deum sicut Daniel significat dicens ad Baltasar Deum non cognoscentem Audi c. Tale aliquid dicit Peirus apud Clementem quoniam opera bona quae siunt ab infidelibus in hoc seculo eis prosunt non in illo ad consequendâm vitaÌ aeternam Et conuenientèr quia nec illi propter Deum faciunt sed propter naturam humanam Qui autem propter Deum faciunt idest fideles non solum in hoc seculo proficit eis sed in illo magis autem in illo of good workes there is one sort which we do for men or according to men another which we do for God or according to God for example thereof saith A man doth good being moued by naturall iustice and not in respect of God euen as heathens