Dauid according to my righteousnesse and according to the purenesse of mine handes he recompensed me Yea it is a thing so certaine with God to reward y e good deeds of his faithful seruants that the best liuers giue great respect thereunto Moses saith S. Paul esteemed the rebuke of Christ greater riches then y e treasures of Egypt for he had respect to the recompence of the reward Which reward neuerthelesse proceedeth of Gods meere mercie bountifull benignitie without all desertes of man Which the great papist frier Iohn de Combis wel obserued wheÌ„ in his theological SuÌ„me he wrote in this maner Deus nos punit citra condignuÌ„ remunerat vltra condignum God punisheth vs lesse then we be worthy and rewardeth vs farre aboue our deserts The first obiection S. Iohn saith Qui facit iustitiam iustus est He that doth iustice he is iust Therefore a man becommeth iust euen by doing of good workes The answere I say first that the contrary illation is more fitly gathered out of Saint Iohns assertion albeit the papistes thinke this a bulwarke for their iustification by good works For when he saith he that doth iustice is iust it is all one as if he had said when one doth good works it is a signe that he is iust because none can do good works vnlesse hee be iust For as a tree cannot bring forth good fruit vnlesse it first be good euen so cannot any man do good works vnles he first be the child of god The reason is euident bicause the effect must folow not go before the cause For as saint Austen grauely saith Opera sequuntur iustificatum non praecedunt iustificandum Works follow him that is alreadie iustified but they goe not before him that is to be iustified I say secondly that hee that doth iustice is iust by inherent iustice but imperfectly as is alreadie prooued The second obiection Saint Iames saith that a man is iustified by good works and not by faith onely and he proueth it because Abraham was iustified by offering vp his sonne Isaac The answere I say first that Abraham was iustified indeede before he did any good worke and I prooue it by Saint Paul whose words are these For if Abraham were iustified by works he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God for what saith the scripture Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Nowe to him that worketh the wages is not counted by fauour but by debt but to him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnes euen as Dauid declareth the blessednes of the man vnto whome God imputeth righteousnesse without works Out of these words of the apostle I note first that whosoeuer ascribeth his iustification to works can haue no ioy with God I note secondly that righteousnesse was imputed to Abraham by reason of his faith not by reason of his works I note thirdly that if Abrahams works could haue iustified him his iustification shoulde haue beene of duetie and not by fauour or grace I note fourthly that the vngodly is freely iustified by faith in Iesus Christ without works I say secondly that Abraham offered his son Isaac not to worke his iustification by that fact but to giue a testimonie of his faith and that he was already the childe of God For as S. Paule saith that obâ—ation was for the triall of Abrahams faith These are the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By faith Abraham offered vp Isaac when hee was tried or prooued for so the Greek word doth significantly expresse And Moses maketh the matter more plaine in these wordes And after these things God did proue or try Abraham where the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to make triall And y e proofe followeth in these wordes Take nowe thine only sonne Isaac whom thou louest and get thee to the land of Moriah and offer him there for a burnt offering vpon one of the mountaines which I will shew thee Out of which words with the circumstances before and after recorded in the scripture I gather that Abraham was perfitly iustified before hee offered his sonne Isaac For first God had promised to blesse all nations in his son Isaac as it is written Sara thy wife shall beare thee a son in deede and thou shalt call his name Isaac and I will establishe my couenaunt with him for an euerlasting couenaunt and with his seede after him Again God appointed that sonne to be slaine in whom the promise was made Thirdly the sacrifice was the only sonne of Abraham euen the sonne which he loued most tenderly Fourthly Abraham himselfe was designed to be the butcher to his owne sweet childe Fiftly it passed mans reason how all nations could be blessed in the child that was presently to be slaine All this notwithstanding Abraham neuer once doubted of Gods promise but promptly prepared himselfe to execute Gods will Whereupon I conclude that Abraham was holy and iust in Gods sight before the oblation of his sonne otherwise he could neuer haue yeelded thereunto in such maner and with such alacritie of minde as he did I say thirdly that S. Iames speaketh of iustification before men which was nothing els but the testification of Abrahams righteousnesse to the world Which exposition came from heauen to Abraham in these wordes Lay not thine hand vpon the childe neither doe any thing vnto him for now I knowe that thou fearest God seeing for my sake thou hast not spared thine onely sonne Out of these wordes I note first that this offering vp of Abrahams sonne was to try Abrahams faith and obedience as I said before which I gather out of these wordes for now I knowe that thou fearest God I note secondly y t it was also to make known vnto the world that great faith feare and loue which Abraham had towardes God As if God had said I knew before thy faith and loue towards me but now I haue made the same knowne vnto the world The third obiection S. Iames saith plainly that a man may keepe the law perfitly and be iustified for so doing These are the words Whosâ— looketh in the perfite law of libertie and continueth therein hee not being a forgetfull hearer but a doer of the work shalbe blessed in his deed The answere I say first that no man can keep the law perfitly in this life as I haue alreadie prooued copiously I say secondly y t though the regenerate doe not fulfil the law exactly yet doe they continue therein so long as they striue against sinne and suffer not sinne to raigne in them For as S. Paule saith When wee doe that which we would not it is no more we that doe it but the sinne that dwelleth in vs. Whereupon S. Austen saith very finely Ecce quemadmodum qui ambulant in vijs domini non operantur peccatum tamen
The cause without which the latter shall not haue effect For as vocation iustification regeneration and glorification are the effectes of predestination euen so by Gods holy ordinance being predestinate wee are called by the hearing of his word vnto â—aith which faith is the cause of our iustification by apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus after wee be iustified of our iustification proceedes regeneration as who hauing remission of our sinnes and being ingraffed in Christ by faith are indued with more aboundant grace of his holy spirite thorough which we are dayly more and more regenerate and made new creatures after we be regenerate out of our regeneration spring good workes aswel internall as externall as who being made good trees begin to bring forth good fruits and so continuing are brought at the length of Gods free mercie to the possession of eternall life For as y e apostle saith we are created vnto good workes which God hath ordained that wee shoulde walke in them and continuing in them we shall at the dreadful day of doome heare this ioyfull sentence pronounced to our vnspeakable comfort Come yee blessed of my father take the inheritance of the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world For I was an hungred and ye gaue me meate I was thirsty and ye gaue me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in vnto you I was naked and ye clothed me I I was sicke and ye visited me I was in prison and ye came to me And with this it is true yet y t the apostle saith Not by the workes of righteousnesse which we had done but according to his mercie he saued vs by the washing of the new birth and by renuing of the holy Ghost which hee shed on vs aboundantly through Iesus Christ our sauiour that wee being iustified by his grace should be made heires according to the hope of eternall life This is a true saying and these thinges I will thou shouldest affirme that they which haue beleeued God might be carefull to shew forth good workes These things are good and profitable vnto men Thus saith S. Paule and therefore I thinke this a profitable conclusion By it rightly vnderstood many places of holy Scripture may easily be answered which seeme to ascribe iustification or glorification to good workes The 10. conclusion This popish assertion that workes doe iustifie and merite eternall life de condigno was for the space of a thousand and eightie yeares vnknowne to the church of God About which time Petrus Lombardus and his fellowes began their scholasticall theologie and disputed such matters doubtfully About the yeare of our Lord 1545. the late councell of Trent defined the same for an article of christian beliefe solemnely accursing al such as hold the contrary opinion This is the originall and antiquitie of this impudently defended heresie It is sufficiently confuted throughout the whole chapter CHAP. X. Of the popish idololatricall masse The 1. conclusion TO withhold from the vulgar and laycall sort of people the one part of the holy communion is a diabolical hereticall and sacrilegious fact I prooue it sundry waies First because it is flatly against the expresse scripture and Christes holy institution For Christ himselfe instituted and ministred the Sacrament in both kindes saying drinke yee all of it as Saint Mathew recordeth and they all dranke of it as witnesseth Saint Marke Saint Paule also taught all the Corinthians to communicate in both kindes protesting that hee deliuered the forme and maner of the holy communion euen as he had in spirite receiued it from the Lord. Secondly because the auncient fathers shew euidently that in their time it was the generall practise of the church to deliuer the holy communion to the lay people vnder both kindes Neither was the cup taken from the vulgar sort by any setled law vntill the late councell of Constance which was in the yere of our Lord God 1414. Origen hath these words Quis est iste populus qui in vsu habet sanguinem bibere haec erant quae in euangelio audientes ij qui ex Iudaeis dominum sequebantur scandalizati sunt dixerunt Quis potest manducare carnem sanguinem bibere sed populus Christianus populus fidelis audit haec amplectitur sequitur eum qui dicit nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis sanguinem meum non habebitis vitam in vobis ipsis quia caro mea verè est cibus sanguis meus verè potus est Who is that people that hath in custome to drinke bloud these were the thinges which the Iewes that followed Christ heard in the gospel and were scandalized and said Who can eate flesh and drinke bloud but the christian people the faithfull people heare these thinges and embrace them and follow him that sayth vnlesse ye shall eate my flesh drink my bloud ye shall haue no life in your selues because my fleshe is meate indeed and my bloud drinke indeed S. Hierome hath these words Sacerdotes quoque qui eucharistiae seruiunt sanguinem domini populis eius diuidunt impiè agunt in legem Christi The Priestes also that administer the eucharist and diuide the Lordes bloud to his people transgresse the law of Christ heynously Saint Cyprian with fourtie learned bishops in their ioynt Epistle to Cornelius write in this expresse maner Quo modo docemus aut prouocamus eos in confessione nominis sanguinem suum fundere si eis militaturis Christi sanguinem denegamus aut quo modo ad martyrij poculum idoâ—â—os facimus si non eis priùs ad bibendum in ecclesia poculum domini iure communicationis admittimus Howe doe we teache 〈◊〉 them to shed their bloud for the name of Christ if wee denie them the bloud of Christ when they go to warre or how doe we make them fit for the cuppe of martyrdome if wee doe not first admit them to drinke the Lordes cuppe in the Churche and that by the right of communion where I wishe the reader to note well that the lay people haue right to both kindes and consequently that the Romish church is become the whore of Babylon in that shee robbeth vs of our christian right which wee haue de iure diuino Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Est vbi nihil differt sacerdos à subdito vt quando fruendum est honorandis mysteriis Similiter enim omnes vt illa percipiamus digni habemur Non sicut in veteri lege partem quidem sacerdos comedebat partem autem populus non licebat populo participem esse eorum quorum particeps erat sacerdos Sed nunc non sic verum omnibus vnum corpus proponitur poculum vnum There is a place where there is no difference betweene the priest the lay person as when we are to communicate in the holy mysteries for we are all in
in this chapter the fourth to the Romaines I note thirdly that faith is counted our righteousnesse Which the apostle expresseth more liuely in the fift verse But to him that worketh not saith hee but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Loe not the worker but the beleeuer is iustified and that by imputation The same apostle after a long discourse to prooue that a man is iustified by faith onely in another place addeth these words We therfore think y t a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Loe the holy apostle after a long disputation which is implied in the worde therefore concludeth that we are iustified by faith without works As if he had said sole faith only faith or faith without works doth iustifie albeit the papistes cannot or will not it see This whole processe is confirmed by the vniforme testimonies of the auncient fathers who all ascribe our iustification to sole faith S. Ambrose hath these wordes Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicena reddentes sola fide iustificati sunt dono Dei They are iustified freely because they neither doing any worke nor making any compensation are iustified by sole faith through the grace of God The like sayinges hee hath in sundry other places S. Chrysostome hath these wordes Vnum hoc tantummodo donum Deo obtulimus quod futura nobis promittenti credimus atque hac solum via seruati sumus This one only gift do we present to God that we beleeue him when he promiseth vs future giftes and by this only way are we saued Againe in another place he writeth thus Aut fidem dicit decretum illam vocans Ex sola quippe fide nos saluauit Or hee meaneth faith calling it the decree For by only faith hath he saued vs. S. Hilarie hath these wordes Mouet scribas remissum ab homine peccatum hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat Fides enim sola iustificat It vexeth the Scribes that man forgiueth sinnes for they onely considered Christ Iesus to be man and that he forgaue that which the law could not doe For sole faith doth iustifie S. Basill hath these words Nam ea demum perfecta omnimodae gloriatio est in Deo quando neque propter suam ipsius quis extollitur iustitiam sed agnoscit se quidem verae destitui iustitia verùm sola in Christum fide iustificatum esse For that is the perfite ioy al maner of comfort we haue in God when no man is puffed vp by reason of his owne righteousnesse but acknowledgeth himselfe to be destitute of true iustice in deed and seeketh to be iustified by sole faith in Christ. Origen writeth in this maner Dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem ita vt credens quis tantummodo iustificetur etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum He saith that the iustification of sole faith is sufficient so as a man may be iustified if he only beleeue although hee doe no workes at all And the same Origen prooueth in the same place by a long and learned discourse that wee are iustified by sole faith and not by workes S. Austen is plaine in this point who writeth in this maner Opus autem fidei ipsa dilectio est And charitie it selfe is the worke of faith What plainer testimonie can be had what papist can inuent any solution for the same who but mad men will not yeeld thereunto August in Epist. Ioann tract 10. in initio The 6. conclusion The good works of y e regenerate do neither merite grace in this life nor glory in the world to come This conclusion is against a graund and mightie article in popishe doctrine but I will prooue it by strong and irrefragable reasons S. Paul writeth to the Romaines in these wordes the afflictions of this present time are not worthy of the glory which shalbe shewed vnto vs. The workes of the regenerate saith S. Paul as ye see are not worthy of heauen They cannot therefore say I merite heauen because as the papists themselues doe graunt to merite heauen and to be worthy of heauen is all one the difference is onely in wordes not in sense The papists perceiuing the force of this argument vse this seely euasion although say they the actions of man be not worthie of heauen neither merite grace as they proceed from mans free-will yet are they worthie of heauen and meritorious as they proceede from the holy ghost But this is a friuolous childish and miserable shift onely inuented by the suggestion of Satan to seduce simple soules For first our workes are only ours as they proceed of and from our selues Secondly when the holy ghost and man worke both one and the same work that which the holy Ghost doth can no more be deemed mans act then that which man doth can be deemed Gods act yet so it is that y t which man doth cannot be deemed Gods Ergo neither that which God doth can be deemed mans The assumption wherein resteth the difficultie if there be any at all is manifest by mans sinfull actions For the most cruell act that can be imagined is not done without the concourse of the holy ghost as all learned papistes doe and must confesse Neuerthelesse mans sinfull actes are so farre from being Gods actes as the deformities and irregularities thereof be onely mans and neuer Gods and yet doth God concurre more effectually to those wicked acts in that he is the principall agent of the real and positiue entities thereof then man doth or can concurre to any act of Gods that is to any good act himselfe doth Note well for God is the creator of the diuell as he is an angel but not as hee is such an aungell and euen so is God the authour of mans acts as they be acts but not as such acts This place of the Apostle is handled more at large in my book of Motiues I my self saith the Apostle in my mind serue the law of god but in my flesh the law of sin Out of which words I note first that Saint Paul speaketh of the regenerate throughout this whole chapter because hee nameth himselfe who was Gods chosen and elect vessel For which respect and the like expressed in this seauenth chapter to the Romaines S. Austen changed his opinion and granted the apostle to speake here of the regenerate I note secondly that the elect regenerate do serue the law of sinne I note thirdly that the best liuers are so far from meriting grace of glorie that they deserue in rigour of iustice eternal death because death is the rewarde of sinne Which for that Saint Augustine coulde not well digest at the first he thoght that S. Pauls words in this chapter were to be vnderstoode of the
vnder the obedience of the law bound to frame their liues according to the prescript rule thereof as other scripture maketh mention The replie How can any man frame his life after the prescription of the law if none liuing can keepe the law as you defend The answere I answere that if yee were well studied in your owne doctors and should marke well what they write yee coulde not be ignorant of this point Harken therefore what your owne Bernard saith and after you haue heard him remember well his words and neuer forget his holy instruction Thus writeth he in one place Cupiebat dissolui cum Christo esse sciens quòd peccatum separans inter nos deum penitùs auferri non poterit donec liberemur à corpore Sequitur itaque dico vobis genus illud peccati quod toties conturbat nos concupiscentias loquor desideria mala reprimi quidem debet potest per gratiam dei vt non regnet in nobis nec demus membra nostra arma iniquitatis peccato sic nulla damnatio esthis qui sunt in Christo Iesu sed non eiicitur nisi in morte quando sic discerpimur vt anima sepaietur à corpore The Apostle did couet to be dissolued and to be with Christ knowing that sinne which maketh a diuision betweene God and vs cannot wholy bee taken away while we remaine in this bodie I therefore say vnto you this kind of sin which so often troubleth vs I speake of concupiscence and euill desires ought may be repressed by the grace of God so as it raigne nâ—t in vs nor we giue our members to be weapons of iniquitie vnto sinne and so there is no damnation to those that are in Christ Iesus but it is not cast out saue only in death when wee are so torne that the soule is diuided from the body Thus he saith in another place Sit ergo in corde iustitia iustitia quae ex fide est Haec enim sola habet gloriam apud deum Sit etiam in ore confessio ad salutem securus iam suscipe eum qui in Bethlehem Iudae nascitur Iesum Christum filium Dei Let righteousnes therefore be in thine heart euen that iustice which is of faith for onely that righteousnesse or iustice hath glorie with God howsoeuer righteousnes be esteemed among men Haue also confession in thy mouth vnto saluation and then receiue him with security that is borne in Bethlehem of Iuda Iesus Christ the sonne of God Thus he saith in the third place Omne quod natum est ex Deo non peccat sed hoc dictum est de praedestinatis ad vitam non quòd omnino non peccent sed quòd peccatum ipsis non imputetur All that is borne of god sinneth not but this is spoken of the predestinate to life not because they sin not at al but for that sin is not imputed to them Thus doth he say in the fourth place Vtique quod factum est non potest non fieri ipso tamen non imputante erit quasi non fuerit Quod propheta quoque considerans ait Beatus vir cui non imputabit Dominus peccatum The sinne doubtlesse that is done can not be vndone yet for that God doth not impute sin vnto vs we shal be as if we had not sinned which the prophet considering saith Blessed is the man to whome God shall not impute sinne Out of these foure places conteining most comfortable and christian doctrine I note first that concupiscence remaineth in the regenerate euen vnto death I note secondly that it is properly sinne euen in the regenerate which being vttered by their owne deere Bernard giueth a deadly wound to the papists For he saith that that concupiscence which remaineth to death doth separate vs from God Which effect nothing but that which is properly sinne can possibly worke in man I note thirdly that although this concupiscence can not be taken awaie from the regenerate vntil death yet may it be so repressed by Gods spirite as it shall not raigne in them or haue dominion ouer them I note fourthly that it bringeth not damnation to the regenerate who striue against it and that because God doth not impute it to sinne I note fiftly that the regenerate are saide not to sinne not because they sinne not or haue no sinne indeede but because God of his meere mercie accepting their faith through the merits of Christ Iesus doth not impute sinne vnto them I note sixtly that no iustice but that which is of faith is or can be acceptable in Gods sight Ioyne these sayings of saint Bernard to the testimonie of saint Austen cited in the answer to the first obiection in the seuenth conclusion and that done a mightie article of popish doctrine will be vtterlie ouerthrowne The sixt obiection Wherefore saith S. Peter labour the more that by good works you may make sure your vocation and election Therefore good workes are a meane for vs to attaine to the effect of Gods predestination that is to life euerlasting as whose certainetie if the apostle say truelie is procured by mans freewil and good workes The answer I say first that God did elect and predestinate vs without regard of our works For as the apostle saith he chose vs in Christ before y e foundatioÌ„ of the world not bicause we were holy but that we should be holy I say secoÌ„dly that the words by good works are not in the originall Greek text but only in the popish latin vulgata editio For which like respects your late Tridentine council hath so magnified the same I say thirdly that good works are the proper effects of predestinatioÌ„ electioÌ„ and therfore are a sure testificaton therof in y e sight iudgement of man And if your translation be admitted wherin I wil not contend because y e sense is not much different yet can there no more be inferred vpon y e words vnlesse some wil say that the effect can go before the cause that which foloweth be the cause of that that went before But both their owne doctour Aquinas and their double glossa interlinialis and ordinaria doe giue the same exposition with mee to wit that the apostle willeth vs to make knowne our eleccion by doing of good works as which yeeld to man a morall certitude thereof The seauenth obiection Saint Paul willeth the Philippians to worke their saluation with feare and trembling but doubtlesse he that can worke his saluation may by his works merite heauen The answere I say first with the selfesame apostle in the next verse following that we are so far from meriting heauen by our works that it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deede euen of his good pleasure Yea as he saith in another place we are saued by grace through faith that neither of our selues nor yet
of works lest any man should boast himselfe And therfore the apostle meaneth nothing lesse then that we shoulde purchase and merite heauen by our good workes I say secondly with deuout Bernard that the ready way to attaine saluation is to beleeue the contrarie doctrine These are his expresse wordes Necesse est primò omnium credere quòd remissionem peccatorum habere non possis nisi per indulgentiam Dei deinde quòd nihil prorsus habere queas operis boni nisi hoc dederit ipse postremò quòd aeternam vitam nullis potes operibus promereri nisi gratis detur illa First of all thou must beleeue of necessitie that thou canst not haue remission of thy sinnes vnlesse God will giue thee a pardon for the same Againe thou must beleeue that thou canst not haue any good works at all vnlesse thou receiue it at Gods hand Last of all thou must beleeue that thou canst not merite eternall life by any works vnlesse it be freely giuen of mercie I say thirdly that the apostle meaneth nothing else but that as god hath called vs and offered saluation to vs and withal giuen vs power to will and to do well so we ought by faith to embrace his gratious gifts and to shew our selues thankfull by the obedience of his holy lawes For to this ende hath God chosen vs called vs and iustified vs not that we should liue idly and dissolutely but that we should exercise our selues in faith and good works and in obedience be answerable to his holy vocation For this respect doth the same apostle say in another place For we are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good works which God hath ordained that we should walke in them The eight obiection Redeeme thy sinnes with righteousnes saith the prophet and thine iniquities with mercie towards the poore Therefore with good workes we may satisfie for our sinnes and procure Gods fauour towards vs. The answere I say first with the apostle that no man is able to make satisfaction for his sinnes And I adde Bernards glosse vnto the same who writeth thus Iam verò de aeterna vita scimus quia non sunt condignae passiones huius temporis ad futuram gloriam nec si vnus omnes sustineat Neque enim talia sunt hominum merita vt propter ea vita aeterna debeatur ex iure aut Deus iniuriam aliquam faceret nisi eam donaret Nam vt taceaÌ„ quòd merita omnia Dei dona sunt ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debitor est quà m Deus homini quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriam denique quis melior est prophetâ cui dominus ipse tam insigne testimonium perhibet dicens virum inueni secundum cor meum veruntamen ipse necesse habuit dicere deo non intres in iudicium cum seruo tuo Domine Nowe touching eternall life wee knowe that the sufferings of this time are not worthy of y e glorie to come no not if one man abide al. For the merits of men are not such that for them eternal life is due by right or that god shuld do som iniury if he gaue it not For to let passe that all merits are the gifts of God and so man is rather debter to God for them then God to man what are al merits to so great glorie In fine who is better then the prophet to whom our Lorde giueth so worthie testimonie saying I haue found a man according to my heart for al that he had need to say to god Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord. In which words the papists are vtterly condemned by their owne approued doctour For first S. Bernard saith that nothing which man can doe or suffer in this life is worthy of the ioyes of heauen Secondly he saith that heauen is not due to anie man for his own deserts Thirdly he saith that god should doe no man wrong if hee should debarre him of heauen Fourthly he saith that man is more in debt to God then God to man and he yeeldeth this reason because it is the free gift of God what good soeuer be in man Fifitly hee alleageth holy scripture for the grounde of his assertion I say secondly that the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signifie to breake or dissolue in which signification the prophet seemeth to vse it here although it also signifie to saue or deliuer as if the prophet had said O king thou hast liued wickedly and dealt cruelly with Gods people nowe therefore make an end of sinne and begin a new course of life change thy cruelty into clemencie and thy tyrannie into mercie and conpassion toward the poore Thus doth Theodoretus expound this text I say thirdly that albeit we cannot redeeme our sins in Gods sight or make satisfaction for the same in the court of his iustice as is proued exactly out of holy Bernard yet may wee redeeme them before men while we reconcile our selues to those whome we haue offended and make restitution where we haue done wrong And of this kind of redemption may the Prophet not vnfitly be vnderstoode The replie Not only S. Bernard in the words by you alleaged but the other fathers vsually and generally do acknowledge the merit of good works which you and your solifidians cannot abide The answere I say first that though the fathers doe often vse the worde Merit when they speake of good works yet do they neuer take it in your popish maner nor expect heauen for the worthinesse of their works Which I wish the reader to obserue diligeÌ„tly because the papists euer wrest the word Merite to the wrong sense This is cleare by the words of Bernard alreadie cited to which for better confirmatioÌ„ I adde these his words in another place Deest gratiae quicquid meritis deputas Nolo merituÌ„ quod gratiaÌ„ excludat horreâ— quicquid de meâ— est vt â—im meus nisi quòd illud magis forsitan meum est quod me meum facit Gratia reddit me mihi iustificatuÌ„ gratis sic liberatum à seruitute peccati It derogateth from grace whatsoeuer thou ascribest to merite I will no merite that excludeth grace I abhorre whatsoeuer is of mine owne that I may be mine owne vnlesse perchance that is more mine owne which maketh me mine owne Grace iustifieth me to my self freely and so deliuereth me from the bondage of sinne I say secondly that the fathers tearme workes meritorious not for the worthinèsse thereof but for Gods acceptation and promise sake That is to say they tearme good works meritorious because God hath promised to accept the works of the faithfull as worthie for the worthines of his sonne and for his merits to reward them with heauen as if they had merited the same For which respect either euer or almost euer they ioyne merite and grace together This veritie wil be
neuer cease to impeach accuse slaunder and condemne vs in this behalfe yet do we defend nothing heerein but that which their owne best Doctors and printed bookes doe teach vs yea euen such bookes as are dedicate to the Popes holinesse himselfe The conceites which this Bishop alledgeth to make good his intended purpose are childish and too too friuolous For first where hee sayth that the Fathers speake of good workes onely in respect of their naturall valure as hee tearmeth it I aâ—nswere that that glosse and exposition is onely inuented by him and his fellowes to salue their beggerly doctrine if it wold be For besides y t no father saith so they repute al works before grace meere sin as I haue prooued out of Austen And our Bishop vnwittingly confuteth himselfe of such force is the trueth when he graunteth that good works done in grace are vnworthy of heauen if Gods promise be set apart For if they merite ex condigno as he auoucheth then doubtlesse promise couenant and mercie is altogither needlesse Secondly where the bishop fleeth to distributiue iustice so to establishe the merite of workes I answere that both the fathers and his fellowes are against him yea euen Aquinas himselfe For they vnderstand iustice commutatiue and require arithmetical equalitie And if Geometricall proportion were to be admitted yet should greater equalitie be required then can be found between our workes and eternall life The 9 obiection Ye brag that the merite of good workes cannot be found in all the Scripture But therein you belie both vs and the holy scripture For in the booke of Ecclesiasticus I finde these expresse wordes Omnis misericordia faciet locum vnicuique secundum meritum operum suorum All mercie shall make place to euerie one according to the merite of his workes Loe here is made expresse mention of the merite of his good workes The answere I say first that the booke of Ecclesiasticus is not canonicall Scripture as which was not found written in the holy tongue I say secondly that it is not for nothing that your late councel of Trent hath so magnified your Latine vulgata editio For such stuffe as this it doth affoord you in time of neede I say thirdly that in the originall and Greeke text your worde merite may long seeke for lodging before it finde any For these are the expresse wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Make place to all almes for euerie one shall find according to his workes The 10. obiection One Scripture saith that if we giue almes all things are pure vnto vs. Another scripture saith that charitie couereth the multitude of sinnes And it is frequent with the holy fathers that good workes deliuer vs from hell The answere I say first that S. Luke reprooueth y e extortions of the Pharisies exhorteth them to works of charitie As if he had said not vnwashed handes make you eate vncleanly but your wicked extortions Vse therefore charitie and giue almes to the poore and then your soules shalbe cleane though the platter be vnwashed This sense is gathered out of the verses aforegoing I say secondly that almesdeedes and other good works proceeding of faith do neither merite nor iustifie as is prooued but yet they are testimonies before men that wee be iustified by faith through the merites of Christ Iesus For which respect iustification is often ascribed vnto them as to the effects therof I say thirdly that the fathers in many places doe speake of temporal remission which often is graunted for almes deeds and the like The replie If good workes can neither iustifie nor merite then is it but a vaine thing to exercise our selues therein The answere I say first that thus to say and thinke is a probable signe of the reprobate who hath no feeling of Gods holy spirite but is become senselesse in all spirituall contemplation I say secondly that albeit good workes doe neither iustifie nor merite in proper kinde of speech yet be there many good and necessary causes why we should doe good workes First because God is glorified therein Therefore saith Christ let your light so shine before men that they may see your good workes and glorifie your father which is in heauen Secondly because by good workes we shew our gratitude loue towards God Therfore saith Christ If ye loue me keep my coÌ„mandements Thirdly because it is the end for which we were created Therfore saith the apostle For we are his workmanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good works which God hath ordained that we should walke in them Fourthly because they are necessary effectes of our predestination and consequently yeeld and euident morall certitude both to our selues to our neighbours that we are y e childreÌ„ of God Therfore saith the apostle There is no coÌ„demnation to theÌ„ y t are in Christ Iesus which walk not after y e flesh but after the spirite as if hee had said Who soeuer are the childreÌ„ of God cannot but liue after Gods holy lawes Which is the selfe same doctrine that Christ himselfe taught vs saying If ye shall keepe my commaundementes yee shall abide in my loue as I haue kept my fathers commandement and abide in his loue And S. Iohn confirmeth the same in these wordes In this wee know that we loue the children of God when we loue God and keepe his commandementes For this is the loue of God that we keep his commandementes So then if we keep Gods commandementes it is an euident signe that we loue God and that by faith wee are of his free mercie made his children for the merites and righteousnesse of Christ Iesus See more hereof in the eleuenth preamble in my first booke of Motiues The 8 conclusion Although good workes doe neither merite grace in this life nor glorie in the life to come as which are imperfect polluted with sinne and in rigour of iustice worthy of condemnation as is alreadie prooued yet because God hath decreed in his eternal counsel to bring vs to heauen by them as by ordinary meanes and right fruites of a sound christian faith they may in a godly sense be termed The secundary instrumentall cause of eternall life but in no sense the cause of mans iustification Explico I say of mans iustification because the latter can neuer be the cause of the former and consequently good workes following our iustification as the immediate fruites thereof can by no meanes possible be the cause of the same In regard whereof S. Austen as in many other thinges so in this point saide very learnedly Quòd opera non praecedunt iustificandum sed sequuÌ„tur iustificatum That workes doe not go before iustification but followe him that is iustified I say of eternall life because when there be many gradual effectes of one and the same cause then the former may fitly be termed the materiall cause of the latter that is as the schooles terme it Causa sine qua non
credite For the verie inscription it selfe auoucheth roundly and boldly that that which followeth is but chaffe Out of which wordes I note first that the pope hath a long time seduced the worlde with fabulous vanities in printed bookes I note secondly that the foundations vpon which all poperie is built is nothing els but chaffe For to these foundations set downe in the 96. distinction of their owne decrees I doe not belie them reade the place who listeth and he shall finde it to be true the popish Canonists make this plaine inscription Palea Chaffe as if they should say Gentle reader be no longer seduced with such doctrine for that which followeth is but chaffe If any liuing can yeeld a fitter exposition I desire to know his skill I note thirdly that since the papists are enforced by the spirite of God to acknowledge the counterfeite groundes of the very principal articles in their religion published to the viewe of the worlde in their owne decrees and canon lawe euery discreete and wise reader may easily perceiue what credite ought to be giuen to their popish written vanities Decretall epistles Edictes Canons extrauagantes the like wherwith they haue these many yeres bewitched and dazeled the eyes of many men I answere thirdly that although they would haue vs to beleeue as an article of our Creede that Constantine was baptized at Rome by Siluester whereupon they ground many absurd consequentes yet doe most holy learned and ancient writers S. Hierome Eusebius Socrates Theodoritus Sozomenus Pomponius and Cassiodorus affirme the same to be a fable and that Constantine was christened at Nicomedia CHAP. VI. Of the warres betweene Constantine and Maxentius The most religious Emperour Constantinus preparing for warres against Maxentius who had thirsted the bloud of christians and fearing greatly the danger of the battell imminent did often lift vp his eies towardes heauen and humbly requested helpe at Gods hands Being at that time a great fauourer of christian religion and a zealous worshipper of the euerliuing God albeit hee had not as yet receiued the signe of Christes passion he saw in the firmament the euident signe of the crosse which so glistered with fierie brightnesse as he was astonied at the sight thereof While he was doubting with himselfe he beheld the angels of God standing by him and saying thus vnto him Constantine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Constantine in this signe get thou the victorie Constantine beeing ioyfull with this vsion and assuring himselfe of the victory against Maxentius made in his owne forehead the signe of the crosse which before he had seene in the firmament So write Eusebius Caesariensis Socrates Sozomenus Cassiodorus and many others of approoued antiquitie Whereupon the papistes would infer that it is lawfull to make images to set them vp in churches and to adore the same religiously For perspicuous confutation whereof with a manifest declaration of the state of the controuersie because it is maliciously defended by some vnsoundly impugned by others of others not throughly vnderstood I purpose to set downe these few conclusions The first conclusion The signe of the crosse appeared to the Emperour Constantine in the firmament at what time as hee was afraid to ioyne battell with Maxentius This conclusion is graunted and approoued by the vniforme consent of all learned writers Constantinus himselfe as Eusebius reporteth affirmed the same to Eusebius confirmed the veritie therof with an oth not only Eusebius but all the world for many hundreth yeares gaue credite thereunto Heereupon Constantinus and other christian kings generally vsed the signe of the crosse vpon the garments of their souldiers so often as they had warres with Infidels and such as were enemies to the name of Christ Iesus For then there was great cause so to doe as since iust occasion hath been giuen to take the same away which thing heereafter by Gods assistance more planly shall appeare The second conclusion Simplie and absolutely to make images for ciuill vse is not prohibited by the word of God This conclusion is to be prooued three speciall waies By the authoritie of holy writ by the testimonie of learned writers and by the generall practise of christian kinges Touching the first God himselfe indued Bezaleel with the spirite of wisedome vnderstanding and knowledge that he might worke curiously in gold siluer brasse in grauing stones and in caruing woode and in all maner of fine worke In the temple of Salomon were grauen Lillies Pomegranates Cherubins Lions and Palme trees God commaunded Moses to make two Cherubines aboue the mercie seate He also commanded to make a fierie or brasen Serpent and to set it vp for a signe Touching the second S. Basill is so farre from condemning the ciuill vse of images that he hath commended the making and the vtilitie thereof These are his expresse wordes Nam magnifica in bellis gesta oratores saepenumero pictores pulcherrime demonstrant Hi oratione illi tabulis describentes atque ornantes amboque plures ad fortitudinem imitandam inducentes Quae enim sermo historiae per inductionem praebet eadem pictura tacens per imitationem ostendit For not onely Oratours oftentimes but euen painters also doe finely pourtray worthy martiall exploites the one sort by their fine oratiōs the other by their fitly pourtraied tables both perswading many to the imitation of fortitude For whatsoeuer the historie doth performe by perswasion the same doth the silent picture declare by imitation In which wordes it is cleere that S. Basill approoueth the ciuill and historicall vse of images Eusebius Caesariensis maketh mention of the images of our Sauiour of Peter and Paul which were not only in his time but long before his daies The historicall vse whereof he neither reprooueth nor condemneth S. Ambrose Gregorius Magnus and many auncient fathers holde constantly the same opinion Touching the third Constantinus the first Christian Emperour surnamed the Great caused after his couersion his owne image to be engrauen in his coyne whose example therein all christian kinges at all times in all ages haue de facto approoued to be good For all kinges no one or other excepted haue their inscriptions and images vpon their gold and money neither were they at any time in any age reprooued by anie learned writer for the same Yea our Sauiour Christ himselfe seemeth to approoue the same when hee requiring to know whose inscription the money had charged to giue to Cesar that which was his owne In fine the reformed churches in Germanie this day allow thereof and the church of England approoueth the making of the signe of the crosse in the forehead of baptized infantes The third conclusion To worship and adore images religiously is superstitious and idolatricall This conclusion is prooued by the expresse commaundement of God For in Exodus it is written thus Thou shalt not make any grauē image thou shalt not bow downe to them nor
the opiniō of the Pharisies who held that only God could forgiue sin I note secondly that if Christ had not been equall with God the father he would neuer haue taken vpon him to pardon sin and consequently that the pope who will giue a generall pardon of al sinnes must by S. Chrysostomes iudgement be either as good as God or worse then the diuell I note thirdly that it was needfull for Christ to shew himselfe to be God because otherwise he might iustly haue been charged with blasphemie because he did pardon sin And consequently y t our pope and his popish vassals our Iesuites moonkes and friers must either prooue themselues Gods by signes and myracles or else confesse themselues to blaspheme God while they remit and pardon sinne For they all chalenge this power of remitting sinne in their so termed sacrament of penance S. Ambrose and S. Hilary both are of the very same iudgement S. Ambrose writeth in this maner Cognosce interioris homines sanitatem cui peccata donantur quae cum Iudaei asserunt à solo Deo posse concedi Deum vtique confitentur suóque iudicio perfidiam suam produnt qui vt opus astruant personam negant Sequitur magna itaque infidae plebis amentia vt cum confessa fuerit solius dei esse donare peccata nō credat deo pecca ta donanti Acknowledge the curing of the inward man whose sins are forgiuen which when the Iewes confesse that onely God can forgiue they doubtlesse confesse him to be God by their owne iudgement bewray their false faith who to establish the work denie the person Great therfore is the incredulitie of faithles people who confessing that only God can forgiue sins doth not for all that beleeue in God that forgiueth sins S. Hilary hath these words Mouet Scribas remissum ab homine peccatam hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat fides enim sola iustificat Deinde murmurationem eorum dominus introspicit dicitque facile esse filio hominis in terra peccata dimittere verum enim nemo potest dimittere peccata nisi solus Deus ergo qui remittit Deus est quia nemo remittit nisi Deus It stirreth the Scribes that a man should forgiue sin because they beheld in Iesu Christ onely a man not God and that to be forgiuen by him which the law could not release For faith onely iustifieth Afterward the Lord looketh into their murmuring and saith that it is easie for the son of man to forgiue sins on earth for it is true that no man can forgiue sinnes but onely God therefore he that remitteth sinnes is God because no man remitteth sinnes but God By these testimonies it is euident that God and onely God can forgiue sins that our sauiour Christ did effectually proue himselfe to be God in that he could forgiue sin Which kind of reasoning had been of no force at all if others beside god as monks Iesuits could haue remitted sin The replie The text saith that the faithfull people did glorifie God for that he gaue such power to men as to remit sins and to do miracles knowing that so to doe by commission from God was not against his glory The answere I answer that although sundry of the people were reuerently affected towards Christ by reason of his miracles yet did they not behold or confesse God manifested in the flesh but still thought Christ to be a pure man though a great and holy prophet And the reason hereof is euident because they did not acknowledge Christ to be God but to haue receiued that power from God as an holy man for as the text saith the multitudes seeing it were afraid and glorified God that gaue such power vnto men Out of which words I note first that they beleeued not Christ to be God because they were afraid For as Saint Iohn saith he that confesseth Iesus to be the sonne of God wil loue him and be without feare I note secondly that they gaue glorie to god but not to the Sauior of the world for albeit that no man but Christ wrought the miracles yet did they glorifie God for giuing such power to men whereby it is cleare that they esteemed of him as of a pure man and that god had giuen that power to others as well as to him otherwise they would haue spoken in the singular number and not in the plurall of onely Christ whom they saw and not of moe whome they neither saw nor could see working in that diuine maner I note thirdly that it is a bluntish kinde of disputation when the conceit of the vulgar sort is alleaged to refute Christs diuine reasoning The third obiection S. Paul himselfe gaue pardon to the incestuous Corinthian who had committed fornication with his fathers wife The answere I say first that if popish pardons should be grounded vpon this place it would follow by a necessarie consecution that the Pope himselfe could pardon no more then euerie simple priest which sequele I coniecture cannot well stand with the Popes liking I proue it because the other ministers in Corinth gaue the selfe same pardon with S. Paul and therfore doth the Apostle say To whom ye pardon anie thing I also pardon I say secondly that popish confession must of necessity go before popish pardoning in al such as sin mortally and therefore since the apostle doth not once name popish confession it followeth perforce that he neither speaketh of popish pardoning I say thirdly that the pardoning whereof S. Paul speakketh is nothing else but that he who was excommunicate for his publique trespas may after signes of true remorce be restored to the church againe and after their sharpe censure of correction find pardon and mercie at their hands This much I prooue out of saint Paules owne words which are these It is sufficient to the same man that he was rebuked of many so now contrariwise ye ought rather to forgiue him and comfort him lest he should be swallowed vp with ouermuch heauines Wherefore I pray you that ye would confirme your loue towards him After this graue and godly exhortation he adioyneth these words To whom ye forgiue any thing I forgiue also as if hee had saide if yee be content to receiue him into the church againe I am therewith well pleased For he yeeldeth two reasons why the church of Corinth ought to pardon the excommunicate person the one is for that hee seemed to haue giuen sufficient signes of his vnfained repentance the other is lest too much rigour of correction should bring him to desperation For which cause S. Paul requesteth them to declare the consent of the whole congregation that hee was taken againe for a brother and pardoned for his offence So then S. Paul and the church of Corinth did pardon no otherwise indeede but euen as we our selues are
intercession before God it shal not be a thing inconuenient Out of which sayinges of Origen I note first that he speaketh only of the praiers which saintes in heauen make for vs and not one word of our praying to them I note secondly that to holde that the saintes in heauen doe pray for vs is not a constant position in Origens doctrine but only an opinion and disputable question I proue it because he saith arbitror I think Again because he saith non erit inconueniens it shal not be incoÌ„uenient Thirdly because he saith audiuâ— ita dicentem I heard one say so The fiâ—st obiection Origen in his book de paenitentia saith y t he will fall prostrate on his knees and inuocate all the saintes in heauen that they will helpe him because he dare not pray to God for himselfe The answere I say first that this assertion fathered vpon Origen will confute it selfe for how could Origen or anie faithfull christian be in feare humbly to inuocate our most mercifull God who willeth all to come to him that are in distresse who promiseth to heare all those that in their trouble call vpon him Who graunteth to vs whatsoeuer we aske in his sonnes name who hath appointed his sonne to make intercession for vs. I say secondly that this booke alledged in the obiection is not Origens but a plaine counterfeit And I prooue it effectually because their owne pope Gelasius hath so resolued The 2. obiection Origen saith that the fathers of the churche appointed the feast day of the holy Innocentes and that by the will of God that so their intercession might profite their parentes The answere I say first that if all this were graunted it could but at the most proue that the saints pray for vs which in a good sense may be admitted For I willingly graunt that the saintes in heauen doe in generall maner and termes pray for vs that is that they wishe vs to perseuere in the true faith and feare of God and y t in the end we may be partakers with theÌ„ of eternal glory I say secondly that sundry learned men doe thinke these homilies from whence this obiection is taken not to be any part of Origens workes I say thirdly that if Origen doe make that a constant doctrine in one place which he graunteth to be a disputable question in another place what remaineth but to thinke his opinion therein to be of no force I say fourthly that the papistes as their Ruffinus recordeth will admit nothing in Origen which disliketh them but reiect all such stuffe as infarsed into his workes by the heretickes Let them therefore giue vs leaue also to reiect in Origen if in any place he seeme to approoue inuocation of saintes as that which is infarsed by the heretickes specially because in other places he teacheth the contrary doctrine The fift Canon About 20. yeares after that Origen had doubtfully disputed the praying of saintes for vs S. Cyprian and S. Cornelius set down that point resolutely as standing no longer in doubt therof to wit that the saintes in heauen doe pray for the liuing here on earth For they made this couenaut that whether of them soeuer should die the first should pray for his brethren and sisters yet liuing These are S. Cyprians owne wordes Et si quis istinc nostrum prior diuinae dignationis celeritate praecesserit perseueret apud dominum nostra dilectio pro fratribus sororib apud misericordiam patris noncesset oratio And if either of vs shall through Gods mercie die before the other let our loue continue still in Gods sight let vs not cease to desire the fauour of God for our brethren and sisters yet liuing Thus saith S. Cyprian Out of whose wordes I note first that to be established in his time which was but in opinion and doubtfull case in the daies of Origen To wit that the saintes in heauen pray for vs here on earth I note secondly that the inuocation of saintes in heauen was neither established in saint Cyprians time neither once called into question I note thirdly that popish inuocation of Saintes sprung vp by little and little from one degree to another The sixt Canon About an hundreth yeares after S. Cyprian which was about 350. yeares after Christ some of the fathers by rhetoricall apostrophees did applie their orations to the dead as if they had been liuing Of which sort were S. Basill and saint Gregory Nazianzene who though they did but inuocate the saints figuratiuely and of a certain excessiue zeale yet did such their inuocations minister occasion to the papistes of all their superstition in that behalfe These are the wordes of S. Gregory Nazianzene Audite populi tribus linguae homines omnes cuâ—usuis generis aetaetis quicunque nunc estis existetis Infra audiat quoque Constantini magni anima si quis mortuis sensus est omnesque eorum qui ante eum imperium tenuerunt piae Christique amantes animae Heare O people kinreds tongues nations ages whosoeuer are now liuing or shalbe borne hereafter Let also the soule of Constantine the Great heare all the christian godly soules of the Emperors before him if the dead perceiue any thing at all And againe in another place he thus writeth At ô pascha magnum inquam sacro sanctum pascha totiusque mundi piaculum te enim quasi vita praeditum alloquor But O Passeouer the great I say and sacred Passeouer and the purgation of the whole world For I call vpon thee as if thou hadst life Thus writeth Nazianzene by whose wordes we may measure both the rest of his sayings and of the other fathers First therefore I note that hee doth inuocate aswell senselesse thinges as reasonable soules Secondly hee calleth vpon the soules of all the people in the world whereof some were damned in the bottome of hell and so could not heare as euery learned papist will admit Thirdly he inuocateth those that are yet vnborne Vpon these sandie foundations are built all popish superstitious inuocations The 7. Canon Catholique doctrine is that as Vincentius Lyrinensis who liued aboue a thousand yeares agoe defineth it which hath been receiued constantly of al the faithful at al times and in all places Which Vincentius is and euer was of great reputation with and amongst al learned papists and consequently since popish inuocation of Saintes neither was constantly receiued of all the faithfull neither in all places neither at al times as which was not heard of for many hundreth yeares after Christ it cannot be deemed catholicke doctrine no not by popishe proceeding This Canon ought to be well remembred as which of it selfe ouerthroweth al Romish religion An obiection S Chrysostomes Masse which was generally vsed in the Greeke church maketh expresse mention of the inuocation of Saintes and the same doctrine is taught in sundry places of his workes The
the same I say secondly that mans will is so brought into bondage and thraldome of sinne by the fall of Adam as man before his regeneration can neither do nor once will any one act which is acceptable in Gods fight Note well the second obiection with the answere to the same The second obiection If free will after the fall of Adam can not make election as well of good as of euill then doeth free will vtterly lose it owne nature for where sinne must needes be chosen of necessitie there can be no true libertie The answere I answere that there be three kinds of libertie as S. Bernard proueth learnedly in a peculiar treatise of free will the first is called Libertas à coactione vi vel necessitate Libertie from coaction violence or necessitie for all these three are one the same with him as euery one that readeth him seriously will perceiue The second is called Libertas à peccato liberty from sinne The third is called Libertas à miseria libertie from miserie The two latter liberties from sin miserie can not be had in this life the first was froÌ„ the creation is at this present and shalbe in al Adams posteritie world without end For such is the essence nature formall reason of will that it cannot be coacted or inforced The reason is euident because it implieth contradictioÌ„ that Wil do any thing which it is coacted or enforced to do For when we do any thing violently we doe it against our wil not with our wil. If this were not so the angels in heauen should haue no free wil contrary to the vniform consent of all learned men For they haue no more freedome in heauen to sin then the vnregenerate haue freedome on earth to do wel Further then this it would follow hereupon that the angels in heauen should not be happy For what happines can it be to wil do by coaction that which they wil do and yet it is certain y t they haue freedom only to do wel if any wil hold the contrarie he must likewise hold that angels in heauen may sinne and consequently that they may be damned into hel fire The third obiection If there be no free-wil to do good before regeneration then must all the morall good deedes of infidels be sin which to hold is most absurd For to serue our soueraigne to die in the defence of our countrey to honour our parents to feede the hungrie to cloathe the naked and such like which the infidels do cannot but be good acts The answer I answer that albeit these like moral deeds be indifferent in their owne nature glorious in the eyes of the world and right profitable to others yet are they meere sins in the doers displeasant in Gods sight And I prooue it because that without faith God cannot be pleased as the apostle witnesseth Again the same apostle saith that whatsoeuer is not of faith is sin and so euery act of the infidel must needs be sin because it is not of faith Neither wil it help to say that if the said acts of infidels be not good yet are they not euil For as their great popish canonist Nauarre their Romish cardinal Caietan auouch euery act in indiuiduo must perforce be good or euil the reason therof is euident For euery act must either be referred to some end or to no end at al if to no end then it is an idle act and wee must render an account for the same if it be referred to any other end then to God it is flat sin bicause as the apostle saith whatsoeuer we do we ought to do it for Gods glory S. Austen in his fâ—urth booke against Iulianus the Pelagian handleth this question so learnedly and in so ample and perspicuous maner as none that shal reade the booke with iudgement can stand any longer in doubt thereof I wil cite one onely periode for breuitie sake Thus doth he write Si gentilis inquis nudum operuerit numquid quod non est ex fide peccatum est prorsus in quantum non est ex fide peccatum est non quòd per se ipsum factum quod est nudum operire peccatum est sed de tali opere non in domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatuÌ„ If an infidell saist thou shall clothe the naked is such an act sinne because it is not of faith it is doubtlesse sinne in that it is not of faith not for that the worke it selfe is sinne of it owne nature for to clothe the naked of it owne selfe is not sin but to clothe the naked for any other end then for Gods glorie is sinne indeede And it is so manifest a sinne as none but the wicked can denie it to be sin Thus did Saint Austen answere the Pelagians then and thus do I answere the papists now telling them that they are become Semipelagians herein The replie If this be so indeed then may an infidel aswel rebel against his prince as truly serue his prince aswel betray his country as die in defence thereof as wel rob his neighbour as relieue him and so in the rest The answere I answer that it is farre otherwise because although they sin in so doing for want of faith in Christ Iesus yet shal their punishment bee so much more tolerable by how much their sinnes are the lesse Neither is this answere inuented of mine owne braine but long sithence framed by S. Augustine whose words are these Sed ad hoc eos in die iudicij cogitationes suae defendent vt tolerabilius puniantur quia naturaliter qua legis sunt vtcunque fecerunt scriptum habentes in cordibus opus legis hactenus vt alijs non facerent quod perpeti nollent Hoc tamen peccantes quòd homines sine fide non ad eum finem ista opera retulerunt ad quem referre debuerunt Minus enim Fabritius quam Catilina punietur non quia iste bonus sed quia ille magis malus minus impius quam Catilina Fabritius non veras virtutes habendo sed à veris virtutibus non plurimùm deuiando But in this their cogitations shall defend them in the day of iudgement that their punishment may be more tolerable because they haue done naturally in some sort those things that pertained to the law hauing the worke of the lawe so deepely written in their hearts that they did so to others as they wished to be doone vnto themselues Yet they committed this sinne that they beeing men without faith did not referre these workes to that end to which they should haue done For Fabritius shal be more gently punished then Catiline not because he is good but for that hee is not so bad as Catiline neither because he hath true vertues but for that he is not so farre from true vertues as Catiline The fourth obiection It is cleare by the
iustos facit To conclude the onely formal cause is the iustice of God not that with which himself is iust but with which he maketh vs iust This decree is quite contrarie to my conclusion they learned it of Aquinas their angelicall doctour whose direction they followe in all theologicall questions Thus doth Aquinas write Gratia non dicitur facere gratum effectiuè sed formaliter quia per hanc homo iustificatur dignus efficitur vocari Deo gratus secundum illud Colos. 1. vers 12. dignos nos fecit in partem sortis fanctorum in lumine Grace doth not make one acceptable effectiuely but formally because man is iustified by grace and is made worthie to be accepted of god according to that which the apâ—stle saith He hath made vs worthie of the fellowship of saints in light Thus writeth Aquinas whose opinion being once confuted al other papists shalbe confuted in him I therfore say first that Aquinas was deceiued with the popish vulgar latin translation called vulgata editio which for al that the late disholy synode of Trent hath wonderfully magnified extolled aboue the starrie skies For where their vulgata editio hath worthie there the greeke and original hath meete or fit these are the very words of the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Giuing thanks to god euen the father who hath made vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light I say secondly that since his foundation was a false translation his conclusion inferred thereupon must of necessitie bee false also And therefore wee may not reade as Aquinas did who hath made vs worthie but who hath made vs meete or fitte for the fellowshippe of Saintes and so their owne linquist Arias Montanus doth interpret it to their confusion And because the verie life of this question standeth wholly in this if there be any forme or qualitie inherent in man by which hee is worthy of glory and eternall life I will prooue pithily and succinctly that man neither hath in him nor can haue any such qualitie at all but that the formall cause of mans iustification is in Christ Iesus not in himselfe The first argument No infinite accident can be in any finite subiect but the grace of iustification is infinite Ergo it cannot be in man a finite subiect The argument is in forme the proposition is graunted of all as well Philosophers as Diuines and the assumtion is manifest because the transgression was infinite as is prooued in the third conclusion The second argument Being iustified freely by his grace saith the Apostle thorough redemption which is in Christ Iesus Where we must obserue first y t when the apostle saith freely hee doth exclude all workes and all qualities in man We must obserue secondly that when he saith by his grace he giueth vs to vnderstand that the grace of iustification is in Christ and not in our selues For otherwise he would haue termed it our grace and not his grace because that which is inherent in our selues is properly ours We must obserue thirdly that when hee concludeth the period thus which is in Christ Iesus the word which hath no lesse relation to grace then to redemption and so thone must be in Christ aswel as the other The 3. argument Being therfore iustified by faith we haue peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ through whom we haue accesse by faith into this grace in which wee stand In which wordes of the Apostle wee are taught three thinges First that our iustification is by faith Secondly that our iustification giueth vs peace with God Thirdly that by faith we haue accesse to the grace of iustification and consequently that this grace of iustification is not in our selues For vnproperly are wee saide to haue accesse to a thing inherent in our selues The 4. argument Not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is of the law but that which is through the faith of Christ euen the righteousnesse which is of God through faith In which wordes the Apostle teacheth vs two thinges First that the formal cause of our iustification is not our owne in these wordes not hauing mine owne righteousnesse for if our iustice or righteousnesse were inherent in our selues it should be our owne Secondly that our iustice is through faith and in faith and consequently that the formall iustice of the papists is not that true christian iustice whereof Saint Paul speaketh for they say that charitie which is the chiefest part of their formall inherent iustice is neither through faith nor in faith but aboue faith and the forme of faith The fift argument He that knewe no sinne suffered the paine due for sinne for our sakes that wee might be made the iustice of God in him In which wordes the apostle teacheth vs two thinges First that Christ died for our iustification Secondly that this iustification is the application of the iustice of God in Christ. But doubtlesse the iustice of God cannot be our inherent iustice For first Gods iustice is infinite but ours is finite Secondly Gods iustice is perfite but ours is vnperfit Thirdly Gods iustice is absolute but ours is relatiue The 6. argument For they being ignorant of the righteousnesse of God and going about to stablishe their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the righteousnesse of God For Christ is the end of the law for righteousnesse vnto euery one that beleeueth In these wordes of the apostle wee are taught two thinges First that to ascribe anie righteousnesse to our selues is flatly to fall from the iustice of God Which certes could not be so if y t iustice by which we are iustified were inherent in our selues Againe that Christes righteousnesse is applied to euery one by faith Which thing shalbe yet more plaine by the next conclusion The 5. conclusion Man is iustified by sole and only faith that is to say faith onely is the instrument by which man applieth to himselfe the righteousnesse of God in Christ Iesus This conclusion containeth three thinges First that Gods righteousnesse is that iustice which we present for our iustification Secondly that it is ours for the merites of Christ Iesus Thirdly that we apprehend and take hold vpon it by faith only and so we haue the explication howe sole faith doth iustifie Which because the papistes so bitterly impugne I will prooue it both by y e scriptures and the fathers If Abraham saith S. Paule were iustified by works he hath wherin to reioyce but not with God For what saith the Scripture Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Thus saith the Apostle Out of which wordes I note first that workes did not iustifie Abraham before God I note secondly that that iustice by which man standeth cleere before God is only imputatiue and not really inherent in himselfe Which imputatiue iustice the Apostle doth often inculcate
For first the cup doth figuratiuely signifie the liquour in the cup. Again the cup is called the testament and yet it is but the figure or signe of the testament I say secondly that y e figure Metonymie is very frequent in the holy scripture aswell in the old as in the new testament In the old testament we haue these examples this is the passeouer That is this doth signifie the passeouer Againe this is my couenant that is to say this doth signifie my couenant or this is a signe of my couenant Againe the 7. good kine are 7. yeares and the seuen good eares are seuen yeares Againe the the seuen thinne and euill fauoured kine are seuen yeares Againe the seuen emptie eares blasted with the East-wind are seuen yeares of famine In all which places the figure Metonymia is vsed For neither the kine nor the eares were the seeuen yeares as euery childe knoweth but they did signifie the yeares to come they were a signe and figure thereof In the newe testament we haue these examples I am the vine Againe I am a doore Againe My father is an husbandman Againe The seed is the word of God Againe We that are manie are one bread Againe The rocke was Christ. Againe The lyon which is of the tribe of Iuda the root of Dauid hath obteined to open the booke In which places Christ neither was the vine nor the rocke nor the lyon neither was the seed the word of God neither was God the father an husbandman neither are the fathfull one bread but al these things are figuratiuely spoken by the vsuall custome of the holy Scripture I say thirdly that not only the ancient fathers but euen the papistes also haue acknowledged this figure their words and testimonies are alreadie cited I say fourthly that the verie wordes of institution are figuratiue which thing is so plaine as euerie child may perceiue the same For thus saith S. Luke This cup is the newe Testament in my bloud which is shed for you Where I am well assured euerie papist small and great will confesse with me that the cup by the figure metonymia is taken for the liquour in the cup. And so against their will they are enforced to acknowledge a figure euen there where they so obstinately denie a figure The fift obiection The Prophet Malachie hath such a plaine testimonie for the reall presence and sacrifice of the altar as it can neuer be aunswered till the worldes end These are the wordes In euery place incense shall be offered to my name and a pure offering These wordes of the Prophet being effectually applied will confound the respondent whatsoeuer hee shall answere For first the prophet speaketh of the oblatiō of the new testament as your selues cannot deny Secondly the prophet saith that this oblation must be in euery place and so it cannot be vnderstoode of Christs bodie offered vpon the crosse for that oblation was but in one place euen without the walles of Ierusalem Thirdly it cannot be vnderstood of the sacrifice of praise thanksgiuing bicause whatsoeuer proceedeth from vs is impure polluted Yea as an other prophet saith Al our righteousnes is as filthie clouts and so no oblation that is ours can be pure Therefore he speaketh of Christs body offered in the masse which is a pure oblation indeede The answere I answere to this insoluble so supposed argument that the prophet speaketh of the sacrifice of prayer and thankesgiuing And I prooue it by the flat testimonies of the holy Fathers Saint Irenaeus hath these wordes In omni loco incensum offertur nomini meo sacrificium purum Incensa autem Ioannes in Apocalypsi orationes esse ait sanctorum Incense is offered to my name in euery place and a pure sacrifice and Saint Iohn in the Reuelation saith that this incense is the prayers of the Saints Saint Theodoretus doeth expound this place after the same maner in his Commentaries vpon the same text Saint Hierome hath these wordes Sed thymiama hoc est sanctorum orationes Domino offerendas non in vna orbis prouincia Iudaeâ nec in vna Iudaeae vrbe Hierusalem sed in omni loco offerri oblationem But incense that is the prayers of saints must be offered to the Lord and that not in Iudea one onely prouince of the world neither in Ierusalem one onlie citie thereof but in euery place must an oblation be made Now where it is said that al our actions be impure and polluted I answere that that is true indeed when our actions be examined in rigour of iustice But not so when we are clad with the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus and haue washed our sins in his bloud for whose sake God doth not impute our pollutitions and filth vnto vs. Not so when God dealeth with vs according to mercie Not so when God accepteth our sinfull and imperfect acts as pure iust and innocent For our owne vnworthienesse the Prophet desired God not to enter into iudgement with his seruants but for Christs righteousnesse the Apostle pronounceth vs free from condemnation For though our sinnes be red as scarlet yet so soone as they be washed in the bloud of the immaculate Lambe they become by acceptation as white as snow This whole discourse Saint Augustine handleth finely in these golden wordes Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam Woe euen to the laudable life of men if thou examine it thy mercie set a part And in this sense the obiection taketh place Neuertheles god of his great mercie doth accept our works as iust and pure through faith in Christ Iesus our sweet redeemer for whose sake he doth not impute our sins to vs. So saith the Apostle not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee haue done but according to his mercie hath he saued vs by the washing of the new birth the renewing of the holy Ghost So saith S. Iohn These are they which came out of great tribulation and haue washed their long robes haue made them white in the bloud of the lamb through the merits of which lambe our prayers and works are reputed pure Therefore saith Saint Paul I will therefore that the men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doubting The 6. obiection If the words of consecration be trophicall and figuratiue so as there is but a bare signe of Christs body and bloud then shall our sacraments of the newe Testament bee no better then the sacraments of the old The reason is euident because they did signifie Christs death and passion euen as ours do and yet is it cleare by the scriptures that we haue the verity wherof they had but the figure onely The answere I say first that our sacraments excell the olde sundry waies first because they are immutable and shall not bee altered till the worlds
cannot erre neither all generally nor one finally 207 Emperours of Rome 86 Errour may be in the church 206 Errours how they come 342 The Eucharist giuen to infants 186 The Eucharist expounded by Chrysostome 461 The Eucharist is not Christs body 467 The Eucharist vnder one kindâ— 402 The Eucharist broken 484 Eutiches and his heresie 181 F Abrahams Faith did iustifie him 383 Sole Faith iustifieth 370 Faith can not be without good woorkes 399 The first Faith broken how vnderstoode 241 A true Fast 72 Fasting and choice of meates 60 The Fathers doe erre very often 342 Festiuall dayes 116 Fidelitie allegeance condemned by the pope 528 Free-will how it remaineth 358 G Grace that iustifieth is not inherent 370 The Grace of the Manicheâ—s 176 Saint Paul iustified by Grace yet a sinner stil 374 Grace infused may stand with sinne 350 The virgin Mary abounded with Grace yet not freâ— from sinne 28â— The Greekes and their supputation 8â— Gryphus at strife with his vncle 123 The Gouernement of the Iewes 135 H The Heresie of Arrius 178 Of Nestorius 180 Of Macedonius 181 Of Eutiches ibidem Of Mahomet 182 The Historie of Nectarius 509 Of Spiridion 64 Hierusalem besieged 153 Destroyed 25 Holy dayes and Sabbaths 116 I Iesuites are humble 144 Dissemblers 145 Images 139 Indulgences 270 Inuocation of Saints 319 Ioseph and his acts 57 Iosue 58 Of the Israelites but seuentie persons went into Egypt 53 Israelites 400. yeeres in Egypt 54 Iustice inherent 383 Iustice of the regenerate vnperfit 351 Iustification by faith 370 Iustification formall in Christ ibid. Iustification by workes 383 and 384 Iulianus Apostata 175 K Kings of the Assyrians 74 Of Egypt 128 Of the Iewes 135 Of Israel 20 24 Of Iuda 24 Of Macedonia 116 Of the Medes 76 Of the Persians 94 Of the Romanes 83 Of Syria 123 Kings are supreame gouernors in causes ecclesiasticall 34 and 426 Kings that afflicted the Iewes 147 Kissing the altar 483 The pax 482 The patine 483 The Popes feete 487 L The Law impossible after Adam 350 c. The Law fulfilled by faith 370 Euery transgression of the Law a mortal sin 381 What time the Law was giuen 56 The Lie in the midwiues 55 The Librarie of king Ptolomie 132 M Macedonius â—81 The Maniches 176 Marriage of Priests prohibited onely by mans lawe 216 Gratian alloweth priests marriage 231 The Nicene councell alloweth priests marriage 233 The Masse how it is called a sacrifice 428 The canon of the popish Masse 480 Masse in one kinde contrary to Christs institution and antiquitie 402 Popish Masse iniurious to Christs passion 417 Popish Masse is not a propitiatorie sacrifice 432.433 c. Popish Masse a clowted beggars cloake 476 Priuate Masse is diabolical 414 c. Masse ought to be saide in the vulgar tongue 476 Melchisedech what he offered 422 c. No Merit in mans worke 372 c. The Merit which the fathers ascribe to good workes 394 c. The Meritorious cause of iustification 345 The popish Miter 486 A Monarchie contained not all power in it 129 The Monarchie of the Assyrians 74 Of the Greekes 121 Of the Persians 92 Of the Romanes 149 Moses and his actes 55 N The seuerall Names of the ten tribes 43 Nectarius abolished confession 510 Nestorius 180 Nero and his wicked actes 150 Noah his floud 27 Nouatus the cause and beginning of popish confession 512 Nunnes may lawfully marry euen after vowes 235 O Olympias 116 The Olympiads 81 The Originall of confession 509 c. Of kissing the Popes feete 487 Of pardons 270 Of pilgrimage 341 c. Of popish masse 480 Of changing Popes names 486 The Originall of praying for the dead 296 Of praying to Saints 311 Of praying on beades 487 Of popish primacie 187 Of purgatorie 296 Of single life 224 Of transubstantiation 436 P Pardons 270 Pax vsed in poperie 481 Phocas author of primacie 188 Pilgrimage 341 c. Popes and their wicked dealing 529 Of kissing the Popes feete 487 Changing the Popes name 486 Praying to Saints 311 For the dead 296 In the vulgar tongue 476 Vpon beads 487 Primaâ—â—â— 187 Priuate masse 414 Purgatorie 296 Ptolomaeus his librarie 232 R Reliques of Saints not to be adored 349 Remus how slaine 82 The Romish church hath erred 203 c. The church of Rome holdeth many things whereof it can yeelde no reason 186 The church of Rome vseth to wrest the scripture ib. Rome how it had the name 82 Rome when builded ibidem S The alteration of the Sabbath 108 c. The Sacrifice of the masse 428 The Saracens 182 A Scribe what it signifieth 133 The Scripture must try euery trueth 342 The Sects of Romish religion and when they began 530 The Septuagints and their celles 131 Succession of kings See Kings Succession in the Romish church 194 c. Supremacie of the Romish church 187 T The Temple when it was built 2â— Transubstantiation when it began 436 The destruction of Troy 81 All Trueth to be tried by the scripture 342 V No sinne Veniall of it owne nature 381 Vestments and their colour 490 The Virgin Mary a sinner 287 Virgins may marry after their vowes 235 The Visible church clogged with superstitions See Church Vowes cannot dissolue lawful marriage 253 c. Vowes vnlawfull 265 W The Wearing of a Cardinalles hat 488 The seuentie Weekes in Daniel are declared 101 The scripture must Witnes trueth 342 A Woman pope of Rome 191 A Woman clad in mans apparell 74 Good Workes cannot iustifie before God 383 c Good Workes do not merit 392 Widowes damned for breaking their first faith 241 FINIS Among other faults escaped in the Printing these especially are thus to be corrected Pag. 2. for Cabatist reade Cabalist Pag. 13. for 432 443 Pag. 19 for 428 443 Ibidem for 4082 4097 Pag 21. The first two lines as part of the sentence afore-going Pag. 37. for Achab Achaz Ibidem for eight seuenth Pag. 74. for hadle handle Pa. 75. for Tantanes Tautanes Ibid. for Tantens Tantens Pag. 1â—â— deest made with other literall faultes which the ingenious Reader may easily espie and amend Act. 9.1 2. Act 9.4 1 Cor. 15.9 1. Cor. 2.8 1. Tim. 1.13 Gal. â— 10 Genes 2. vers The state of 〈◊〉 in his creation The vertue of the tree of life â—ugust de ciuit 〈◊〉 3 cap. 20. â—enes 2.16 â—enes 3.19 â—enes 1. â—9 â—enes 9.3 Aug. de ciuit libr. 22. cap. 30. The difficultie consisteth not in the ages but in the supputatâ—â—on of the yeareâ— Exceeding greâ—â— varietie of opinâ—â—ons 〈◊〉 first age second age August quaest sup Gen. q. 25. Mal. 1. verse 2 3. â— Par 4. v 1. Actes 7. verse â— The third age â—ee the Fift Sectiâ—n of the eight â—hapter where â—his is handled more at large This point must be well noted See Athanasius in synopsi Anno mundâ— 3088 4. Reg. 25. Ier. 52. Iosephus his â—â—â—putation 〈◊〉 be allowed 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉 be 〈◊〉 443. yeares 〈◊〉