not iustify and yet faith alone doth iustify If they say that they speake of one kinde of faith and we of another they say nothing to the purpose for euen that any faith alone should iustify is contrary to their owne positions who affirme that the former cause of our iustification is the inherent righteousnes of works and not the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith And thus I leaue the Article of iustification at farre with it selfe to be atoned by their best wits if it be possible 37. Let vs come to their doctrine of workes and see how that agreeth with it selfe and here first they hold that works done before faith and regeneration are not good workes but sinnes This is proued by them out of Saint Augustine who affirmeth that the workes of vnbeleeuers are sinnes and if the workes of vnbeleeuers then of all other wicked men which bee not regenerate seeing as the same Father else-where speaketh Impij cogitant non credunt the wicked doe not beleeue but thinke they haue but a shadow of faith without substance It may be prooued also by that generall and infallible axiome of the holy Scripture Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne but the workes of wicked men are all voyd of faith and therefore are no better then sinnes in the sight of God be they neuer so glorious and beautifull in the eyes of men Or as Gregorie Nazianzene saith As faith without workes is dead so workes without faith are dead and dead workes are sinnes as appeares Heb. 9. 41. Besides Bellarmine confirmeth the same by reason because they want a good intention to direct their workes to the glory of the true God whome they are ignorant of To which I adde another reason drawne from our Sauiours owne mouth Mat. 7. Because an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruit but euery man til he be ingrafted into Christ is no better then an euill tree and therefore cannot doe a good worke 38. This is their doctrine and it is sound diuinitie but see how they crosse it ouer the face with a contrary falshood for the same men that teach this notwithstanding affirme that the workes of Infidels are good suo genere in their kind so they are good and not good sinnes and yet good works but this is in their kind say they that is Morally and not Theologically I but morall vertues in the vnregenerate are by their owne principles sinnes how then can they be good any waies Can sinne which is a transgression of Gods law and simply in it owne nature euill be in any respect good as it is sinne But to take cleare away this scruple another of them auoucheth that they are not onely morally but euen Theologically good for he saith that such works as are done by the light of nature onely without grace doe dispose and make a man in some sort fit to iustification though it be longè valdèremotè remotely and a farre off for he that yeeldeth obedience to morall lawes is thereby lesse vndisposed and repugnant to diuine grace Now how can sinnes dispose or prepare a man for iustification is God delighted with sinnes Either therefore they are not sinnes or they doe not dispose to iustification neither farre nor neere or which is the present contradiction they are sinnes and not sinnes good and not good at one time and in one and the same respect And to put the contradiction out of all question the Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon of the sixt Session enacteth as much and denounceth Anathema to all that say the contrarie the words are these If any man shall say that all the works which are done before iustification by what meanes soeuer they are done are truely sinnes or deserue the hatred of God let him be Anathema And Andradius the interpretor of that Councill authorised by the Fathers of the same doth more perspicuously explaine the meaning of that Canon when hee saith that men without faith destitute of the spirit of regeneration may doe workes which are voyde of all filthinesse free from all fault and defiled with no sinne and by which they may obtaine saluation then which what can be more contradictory to that which before was deliuered that all the workes of Infidels and vnbeleeuers are sinnes be they neuer so glistering with morall vertue or more agreeable to the olde condemned errors of Iustine Clemens and Epiphanius who affirmed that Socrates and Her aclitus were Christians because they liued according to the rule of reason and that the Grecians were iustified by Philosophie and that many were saued onely by the law of nature without the lawe of Moses or Gospell of Christ 39. Againe their doctrine of doubel merit the one of Congruity the other of Condignity as they terme them is not onely contrary to the truth but to it selfe For this they teach that the merit of congruity which the Councill of Trent calleth the preparations and dispositions to iustification is grounded vpon the dignity of the worke and not vpon the promise of God but the merit of condignity requireth both a dignity of the worke and the promise of God to bee grounded vpon or else it is no merit This is Bellarmines plaine doctrine and is consonant to the residue of their Doctours both Schoole diuines and others for thus they define the merit of congruity It is that by which the subiect is disposed that it may receiue grace according to the reason of Gods iustice Here is onely iustice required and not any promise to the merit of congruity though I must confesse Gabriel Biel somewhat crosseth this definition when â—e saith that when a man doth what in him lyeth then God accepteth his worke and powreth in grace not by the due of Iustice but of his liberalitie And Aquinas who affirmeth that when a man vseth well the power of free-will God worketh in him according to the excellencie of his mercy But yet they all agree in this that the merit of congruity is not grounded vpon any promise as the merit of condignity is but onely vpon the worthinâ—s of the worke done Now here lurketh a flat contradiction for by this it should follow that the merit of congruity should bee more properly a merit then that of condignity Which Bellarmine denyeth in the same Chapter because this dependeth vpon it owne dignity and hath no neede of a promise as the other hath and so should bee also more meritorious and excellent then the other being neuerthelesse but a preparation and beginning to iustification and the other the matter of iustification it selfe And that a man that hath no grace dwelling in him but onely outwardly mouing him nor is yet iustified should haue more power to deserue and merite then he that is fulfilled with grace and fully iustified Thus error like a Strumpet bringeth foorth a monstrous brood of absurdities but let vs proceede 40. Their
sentences heere and there that see me to make for their purpose contrary to the whole scope and drift of the writer or lastly by blemishing our whole Religion by some sinister or exorbitant opinion maintained by some one or other vnaduised fellow though it bee contrary to the whole current of all other writers on our side as if for one mans errour wee were all flat Heretikes or because one souldier playeth the dastard therefore the whole army were cowards These bee their tricks of Legerdemaine by which they indeuour to disgrace our Religion and to countenance their owne but Veritas magna est preualebit I hope so to dispell and scatter these mists by the light of truth that they shall vanish like smoake and the truth bee more resplendent like the Sunne comming out of a cloud 61. To the purpose first they exclaime that our Religion is an enemy to good workes and that wee esteeme of them as not necessary to saluation which damnable errour some of them ascribe vnto vs as our direct doctrine others as a consequence of our doctrine and our secret meaning but that both are lying slanders I appeal first to our doctrine it selfe which is so cleare in this point that no man can doubt thereof but hee that is musled with malice for this we hold that though faith be alone in the worke of iustification yet that saith euer worketh through loue and is great with good workes as a woman with child which it bringeth forth also when occasion serueth and that if it bee disioyned from good workes it is but a dead carkas of faith yea the faith of Deuils and hypocrites and not of the elect And this as it is the constant doctrine of all our diuines so is it principally of Luther whom our aduersaries accuse as the chiefest enemy to good workes for thus hee writeth in one place touching the efficacy of faith Faith is a liuely and powerfull thing not an idle cogitation swimming vpon the toppe of the heart as a fowle vpon the water but as water heated by fire though it remaine water still yet it is no more cold but hote and altogether changed so faith doth frame and fashion in a man another mind and other senses and altogether maketh him a new man Again in another place he sayth that the vertue of faith is to kill death to damne hell to be sinne to sinne and a deuill to the deuill that is to be sins poison and the Deuils confusion Thus hee speaketh concerning the powerful efficacy of that true iustifying faith which wee rely our saluation vpon and they condemne as a nulli-fidian portion And touching good works their necessity and excellency heare how diuinely he writeth in one place Out of the cause of iustification no man can sufficiently commend good workes in another One good worke proceeding from faith done by a Christian is more pretious then heauen or earth the whole world is not able to giue a sufficient reward for one goodworke and in another place It is as necessary that godly teachers doe as diligently vrge the doctrine of good workes as the doctrine of faith for the Deuill is an enemy to both what can bee spoken more effectually for the extolling of the excellency of good wâ—rkesâ— and yet these fellowes make Luther the greatest aduersarie to them 62. Secondly I appeale to themselues many of the greatest Doctors amongst whom doe cleare vs from that imputation Maldonate The Protestants doe say that iustifying faith cannot bee without good workes Viega The Protestants affirme that iustification sanctification are so ioyned together that they cannot be parted Stapleton All Protestants none excepted teach that faith which iustifieth is liuely working by charity and other good workes Lastly Bellarmine The Protestants say that faith cannot stand with euill workes for hee that hath a purpose to sin can conceiue no faith for the remission of his sin and that faith alone doth iustifie but yet is not alone and that they exclude not the necessity but onely the merite of good workes nor the presence but the efficacy to iustifie Now then with what face can they bolster out this slaunder against our doctrine and accuse vs to be like the Simonian Heretike who taught that a man need not regard good workes and Eunomians who defended that perseuerance in sinne did not hinder saluation so that wee beleeued This is the first blasphemie against our Religion wherein they doe not so much thwart vs as crosse themselues and that one may see yet more clearely this to bee a malicious slaunder hearken what Bellarmine sayth concerning Luthers opinion of Christian liberty Luther seemeth sayth he to teach that Christian liberty consisteth in this that a godly conscience is free not from doing good workes but from being accused or defended by them let Luther himself speake againe By faith sayth he we are freed not from works but from opinion of workes that is from a foolish presumption of iustification to bee obtained by workes by all which we may easily iudge of the meaning of those sentences obiected Faith alone doth saue and infidelity alone doth condemne and where faith is no sinne can hurt nor condemne that they are to be vnderstood partly of sinnes before iustification and partly of such sinnes after as destroy not faith nor raigne in the beleeuer nor are perseuered in but repented of and laboured against and thus our Religion is iustified by the very aduersaries thereof from this great crime imputed vnto it 63. Againe they accuse vs as maintainers of this doctrine that all the workes of iust men are mortall sinnes and of this they make Luther Calume and Melancthon to be Patrones but with what shamelesse impudency let the world iudge To begin with Caluine these be his words Dum sancti ductu Spiritus c. i. Whilst being holy wee walke in the wayes of the Lord yet least being forgetfull of our selues wee should waxe proud there remain reliques of imperfection which may minister vnto vs matter of humiliation againe the best worke that can be wrought by iust men yet is besprinkled and corrupted with the impurity of the flesh and hath as it were some dregs mixed with it let the holy seruant of God chuse out of his whole life that which he shall thinke to haue beene most excellent let him well consider euery part thereof hee shall without doubt finde in one place or other something which sauours of the fleshes corruption seeing our alacrity in well doing is neuer such as it ought to be but our weakenes great in hindering the course although we see that the blots where with the Saints workes are stayned are not obscure yet grant that they are but very small workes shall they not offend the eyes of God before whom the starres themselues are not pure we haue not one worke proceeding from the Saints which if it be censured
merite it and yet to haue it freely giuen if it be any wayes of merite then it is not euery way free Merite in the receiuer and freenesse in the giuer can in no respect stand together 33. Another contradiction in this Article is this that they say a man is iustified by his works and yet for all that he is iustified by grace too Both these propositions they peremptorily defend and take it in great scorne that we charge them to be maintayners of works against grace and call vs loud Lyers in casting that imputation vpon them But by their leaues they maintaine either works against grace or else they breathe hote and cold out of one mouth which the Satyre could not endure and speake contraries let them choose whether for the holy Ghost himselfe placeth these two Works and Grace in diametrall opposition If it be of grace it is no more of works or else were grace no more grace but if it bee of works it is no more grace or else were worke no more worke Here we see a manifest opposition betwixt grace and works so that one doth exclude the other and this in our election and therefore much more in our iustification which is but an effect thereof for election hath nothing to doe with our good works according to our doctrine nor with our euill according to theirs but iustification hath respect vnto our sinnes and euill deeds and therefore much greater must bee the opposition in this then in that greater reason that here works should be excluded by grace then in the other 34 Bellarmines exception is that the Apostle here excludeth onely the works that be of our selues without grace before we be iustified but as for those that come after they are works of grace and therefore be not excluded by grace but may well stand together To which I answere three things First that the Apostle hath no such distinction but speaketh generally of all works and therefore according to the olde rule Vbi lex non distinguit Where the law distinguisheth not there we must not distinguish To say therefore that it is both by grace and works is to confront the Apostle and to fasten vpon him a flat contradiction Yea it is to extinguish grace vtterly for as it hath beene before alledged out of Augustine grace is not grace in any respect except it bee free in euery respect Secondly that the Apostle meaneth works after grace and such as proceed from faith as well as works of nature appeareth by another like place where works are also excluded and opposed to the free gift of God that is to grace and that the Apostle intendeth works of grace appeareth by the reason following in the next verse For we are his workmanship created in Christ to good works Now in this last place works of grace must needs be vnderstood because he saith we are created in Christ Iesus vnto them and therefore the same also must necessarily bee meant in the former vnlesse wee will say that the Apostle or rather the holy Ghost disputes not ad idem Lastly I answere that in Abrahams iustification who was the Father of the faithfull and his iustification a patterne how all his spirituall posteritie should be iustified works of grace are excluded for at that time of which the Apostle there speaketh Abraham was regenerate as Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth and yet his works are excluded therefore works of grace are meant by the Apostle I but replyeth the same Cardinall when the Apostle saith that Abraham was iustified by faith and not by works he excludeth those works which Abraham might doe without faith for they which haue faith yet doe not alwaies worke by faith as when they sinne or performe meere morall duties without relation to God But this is no better then a meere shift without any ground of reason or truth for if it bee true which the Scripture saith that whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne then those morall works which hee mentioneth being not of faith are no better then sinnes and so need not to bee excluded by the Apostle for they exclude themselues Besides it is manifestly false that a iust and faithfull man doth any worke which is not sinne wherein he hath not relation vnto God if not in the particular act yet in the generall purpose of his minde for euery morning he prayeth to God for the direction of all his wayes and that all his works may be sanctified by his Spirit And thus it appeareth that in saying wee are iustified by grace and yet by works too they speake contraries 35. A third contradiction in this Article is about their works of Preparation which they say goe before the first iustification these they call vertuous dispositions good qualities good preparations merits of congruitie and that they haue a dignitie of worke in them and yet they say agayne that no good works goe before the first iustification belike then they are both good and not good by their doctrine and therefore thus I argue If they be not good why do they call them good if they bee good then it is vntrue that no good works go before the first iustification of a sinner either in the one or in the other they must needs erre and in holding both the one part of their doctrine crosseth the other 36. Fourthly they say that faith alone doth not iustify and yet notwithstanding they say Fide Catholica Christiana eaque sola hominem iustificari nulli vnquam negauerunt nec â—egant Pontificij That no Papist euer hath or doth deny that a man is iustified by the Catholike Christian faith and that alone This is the assertion of Miletus against Heshusius and it is not condemned by any of the rest but his booke approued as contayning nothing contrary to their Catholike Religion and so it seemes to be one of their Catholike doctrines And Bellarmine insinuates asmuch though not in playne speech yet by necessary consequence when bee saith that faith is the beginning and first roote of iustification Now if it be so then as soone as a man hath faith iustification is begun and taketh roote in him euen before he hath any other grace and if it hath taken roote then it is eyther whole iustification or a peece thereof but a peece it cannot be for it is indiuisible therefore eyther whole or none For grant there be degrees in iustification as they say which neuerthelesse they are neuer able to prooue yet they bee degrees of persection not of essence as a man is a man as soone as hee is borne though not a perfect man before hee come to complete age stature and strength So their supposed iustification is iustification in the roote though not perfect and absolute vntill it come to ripe age I speake in their language because I deliuer their owne doctrine Now how can these two contraries bee reconciled Faith alone doth
that is falshood to falshood now in this my taske is to demonstrate how it crosseth the word of God that is falshood to truth which being proued I hope no man which is not drunke with the poisonous cuppe of the whoore of Babylons fornication will doubt of the vanity and falshood thereof Now my purpose is not to enter into the lists of disputation and confute their opinions by strength of argument that combate hath beene valiantly performed by many of our Champions onely my intent is first to shew how their doctrines coÌ„tradict the plain text of Gods word and secondly to wipe away their subtle and intricate distinctions whereby they labour to make a reconciliation betwixt the word of God and their opinions which shall be my onely taske in this Chapter for it is to bee noted that there was neuer any generation so happie or rather so miserable in distinctions as the Romanists are they maintain their kingdomes by distinctions by them they blind the eyes of the simple dazle the vnderstanding of the vnaduised set a glose vpon their counterfeit ware couer the deformity of their Apostate Church and lastly extinguish the truth or at leastwise so darken and obscure it that it cannot shine so brightly as it would but in seeking to extinguish the light of truth they distinguish themselues from the trueth and as Iacob by his party-coloured stickes occasioned a brood of party-coloured sheepe and goates so they by their fond distinctions bring foorth a party-coloured and counterfeit Religion as I trust to lay open to the world in this discourse following 2. The maior or first proposition beeing without all controuersie I passe ouer in silence and come to the minor or second proposition which is that the Religion of the Church of Rome in many doctrines is apparently opposite to the word of God 3. The Gospell teacheth that 〈◊〉 one onely God is to bee inuocated and worshipped and that after that manner which he hath appointed in his word and that all the confidence of our saluation is to bee placed in him alone but the Romanists command not onely to inuocate God but also Angels and Saints departed and in time of danger to expect helpe and succour from them and to repose our trust and confidence in them also 4. Bellarmine distinguisheth and saith that God alone indeed is to be worshipped and inuocated with that kinde of adoration which is due onely vnto God but yet the excellent creatures may bee honoured and some of them inuocated not as gods but as such as are Gods friends that is with an inferiour kinde of worship 5. But these distinctions cannot extinguish the truth for first they giue by name the highest worship that can bee to wit Latria to the Image and reliques of Christ and the crosse and to a piece of bread in the Sacrament insomuch that Gregory de Valentia a famous Iesuite and Bellarmines compeere is in this regard driuen to say that some kinde of Idolatrie is lawfull Secondly if they should deny this yet their doctrine and practice doth apparently proclaime asmuch for when they say to their Agnus deis It breaketh and quasheth all sinne as Christs bloud doe they not equall them to Christ when they place their hope and confidence in Saints and reliques doe they not equall them to God when they pray that by the merit of a golden siluer or woodden crosse they may be freed from sinne committed doe they not equall it with our Sauiour that dyed on the crosse when they desire at the Saints hands grace and glory doe they not equall them to the God of grace and glory when they call the blessed Virgine the Queene of Heauen and giue vnto her one halfe of Gods kingdome euen the halfe of mercy doe they not equall her to her maker Lastly when they offer sacrifice to reliques and Images as namely burne frankincense set vp tapers offer the calues of their lippes doe they not equall them to God for all these dueties are proper and peculiar parts of Gods seruice and therefore in attributing them to creatures they giue vnto them plainely that seruice and worship which belongeth to God alone 6. The Gospell teacheth that remission of sinnes and euerlasting life is bestowed vpon vs freely not for any works or merits sake of our owne but for Iesus Christs sake the only begotten Sonne of God who was crucified for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification But the Romanists teach that wee are iustified and saued not by Christs merits onely but in part for Christs sake and in part for our owne contrition obedience and good works 7. Bellarmine answereth that their doctrine is falsely charged to say that sinners are iustified partly for their owne works sake and partly by Christ for saith hee by a distinction there bee three kinde of works one of those that are performed by the strength of nature onely without faith and the grace of God another of such as proceede from faith and grace but not from a man fully iustified and therefore are called works of Preparation as Prayer Almes Fasting Sorrow for sinne and such like and the third of such which are done by a man iustified and proceede from the Spirit of God dwelling in his heart and sheading abroad charity in the same Now concerning the first hee acknowledgeth that we are not iustified by them by the example of Abraham Rom. 4. and therefore that they most impudently belye their doctrine that fasten this opinion vpon them As touching the second he saith that these works Preparatiue are not meritorious of reconciliation and iustification by condignity and iustice yet in as much as they proceede from faith and grace they merite after a sort that is obtaine remission of sinnes The third sort of works hee boldly and confidently affirmeth to merite not remission of sinnes because that was obtayned before but euerlasting glory and happinesse and that truely and properly 8. This Bellarminian distinction may be distinguished by two essentiall qualities first Folly secondly Falsehood Folly for it maketh nothing to the taking away of the Antithesis before mentioned for when as he confesseth that the second kinde of works doe merite remission of sinnes after a sort and the third eternall life absolutely what doth â—e but acknowledge that which wee charge them withall and which himselfe reiected a little before as a slaunder namely that wee are iustified and saued partly by our owne merits and partly by the merits of Christ for the Gospell saith We are saued by Christs merits alone and he saith We are saued by our owne merits also And thus the folly and vanity of his distinction euidently appeareth 9. The falsehood sheweth it selfe in two things first in that hee affirmeth that they doe not teach that works done before grace doe merite any thing at Gods hand for though it be a Canon of the Councill of Trent charged with an Anathema If any
man should say that a man may bee iustified by his owne works wrought by the power of nature without the diuine helpe by Christ Iesus and Bellarmine seemeth to affirme as much in this place Yet Andradius that famous Interpreter of that forenamed Councill one of the most learned men of his age and that knew well the mysteries of that Councill doth tell vs that by diuine helpe the Councill vnderstood not the grace of regeneration and speciall worke of Gods sanctifying Spirit but heroicall motions stirred vp in the vnregenerate and vnbeleeuers and that by this speciall helpe they might doe works void of all fault and meritorious of saluation And Bellarmine confesseth in other places that they are good suogenere that is morally and Salmeron the Iesuite that they dispose and prepare a man for iustification and the same Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon following doth curse them that shall say they are sinnes or that they deserue the hatred of God Now if these kinde of works be good in their kinde and preparatiues to iustification and not sinnes nor deseruing the hatred of God but such as whereby the Heathen were saued then it is a probable falsehood in Bellarmine when he saith by their doctrine that these works doe not iustifie nor helpe any thing to the iustification of a sinner 10. Secondly it is false also which he affirmeth concerning the second kinde of works to wit of preparation that though they proceede from faith and grace yet they doe not iustifie for Bellarmine in another place doth not stick to say that this faith iustifieth by way of merite and deserueth forgiuenes of sinnes after a certaine manner and here in this place that these works proceeding from faith doe merite after their manner and obtaine remission of sinnes which if it be true then it must needes be false which he sayd before That they make not our works to concurre with the merits of Christ for the remission of sinnes which is the point of opposition and that which also he affirmeth here That these works doe not iustifie seeing remission of sinnes is of the verie essence of iustification for none haue their sinnes forgiuen but they are iustified and none are iustified but they haue their sinnes forgiuen they concurre in one if they bee not one and the same And therefore if these works merite remission of sinnes they must needs also merite iustification And thus Bellarmines distinction doth no waies free their doctrine from opposition to the doctrine of the Gospell 11. The Gospell teacheth that hee which repenteth and heareth the promise ought to beleeue it and bee perswaded that not only other mens sins but euen his owne are pardoned for Christs sake and that he doth please God and is accepted of God and in this faith ought to come vnto God by prayer But the Church of Rome teacheth that a man must alwaies doubt of the remission of his sins and neuer be assured thereof which doubting as Chytraeus truely speaketh is plainely repugnant to the nature of faith and a meere heathenish doctrine 12. Bellarmine answereth here not by a distinction but by a negation denying flatly that the Scripture teacheth any such doctrine that a man may be assured of the remission of his sinnes and his reconciliation with God and this hee seemeth to prooue by two arguments one because it is contrary to other plaine and manifest places of Scripture another because all Gods promises almost haue a condition annexed vnto them which no man can iustly know whether hee hath fulfilled or no. 13. It is good for Bellarmine here to vse a plaine negation for their doctrine is so manifest that it will admit no distinction the Councill of Trent hath put that out of all question and distinction For it teacheth in expresse words that no man ought to perswade and assure himselfe of the remission of his sinnes and of his iustification no though he be truly iustified and his sinnes be truely and really pardoned This doctrine is so euident that Bellarmine could neither distinguish as his custome is nor yet deny it and therefore hee freely confesseth it and yet Gropper condemned it as an impious doctrine and Catharinus at the Councill of Trent defended the contrary that the childe of God by the certainty of faith knoweth himselfe to be in the state of grace And so did also Dominicus a Sotâ— and diuers others of their owne stampe But there is great cause why the Church of Rome should maintaine this doctrine of doubting very peremptorily for as Chemnitius well obserueth all the Market of Romish superstitious wares is built vpon this foundation for when as the conscience being taught to doubt of solution doth seeke for some true and sound comfort and not finding the same in faith through the merits of Christ then it flyeth to it owne works and heapeth vp together a bundle of superstitious obseruations by which it hopeth to obtaine fauour at Gods hands hence arise voluntary vowes Pilgrimages Inuocations of Saints works of Supererogation priuate Masses sale of Pardons and a number such like trash and when as yet they could not finde any sound comfort in any of these at last was Purgatory found out and redemption of the soules of the dead out of that place of torment by the suffrages and prayers of the liuing Now the Romanists fearing lest these profitable and gainefull wares whereby an infinite tribute is brought into their coffers should be bereft them haue barred out of their Church this doctrine of certainty of saluation by faith of which if mens consciences bee once perswaded they will neuer repose any more confidence in those superstitious trumperies 14. But we with Luther may boldly say that so odious and impious is this doctrine that if there were no other error in the Romane Church but this we had iust cause of separation from them and with Chytraeus that it is repugnant to the nature of faith and a meere heathenish doctrine For it doth not onely nourish mens infirmities who are too much proâ—e to doubting but euen encourage them thereunto and teach that we ought to doubt But that we may come to the point is not this indeede the doctrine of the Gospell that wee should not doubt of our saluation why then doth our Sauiour command all to repent and beleeue the Gospell By which he plainely teacheth where true repentance goeth before there beleefe in the Gospell that is assurance of forgiuenesse of sinnes by the bloud of Christ doth follow and that wee ought euery one to be thus assured seeing this is a precept Euangelicall which doth not onely giue charge of doing the thing commanded as the Law doth but also inspireth grace and power to effect it as Saint Augustine well informeth vs when he saith The Law was giuen that grace might bee sought and grace was giuen that the Law might bee fulfilled Why doeth Saint Paul say
but incourage men to deferre their repentance conuersion seeing it is in their power to accept it when they list 94. Secondly how can the doctrine of iustification by faith alone tend to loosenesse seeing we teach that faith is neuer seuered from good workes nor iustification from sanctification nor a right beliefe from an vpright life as hath beene shewed and that they which seuer and part those things which God hath coupled together seuer themselues from the mercie of God and merit of Iesus Christ With what brow of brasse then can they call this a solifidian portion and a doctrine of libertie I but manie take libertie hereby to lead a loose and wicked life building vpon this ground that they are iustified by faith alone and so they neglect all good workes True indeed many such there are but is it from our doctrine is it not rather from their mistaking of it So the Capernaites tooke offence at our Sauiour Christs heauenly doctrine Ioh. 6. touching the spirituall eating of his flesh and drinking his bloud insomuch that many of them departed from him was his doctrine therefore erronious or were not they rather ignorant in misconstruing impious in peruerting the same So is it with this mysterie of iustification which is the verie doctrine of Iesus Christ if any by mistaking it or by taking vp one piece of it and leauing another doe animate themselues vnto sinne is the doctrine to be blamed and not they rather that distort it to their owne shame and confusion In a word if this were a iust exception against this doctrine then no doctrine either of their or ours or the Gospell it selfe might bee freed from this challenge For as there is no herbe so sweet and wholsome but the Spider may sucke poyson out of it aswell as the Bee hony so there is no truth so sacred and holy but an vngodly minde may peruert and make it an occasion of his impietie Thus the grace of God is turned into wantonnesse by many as Saint Iude saith the word of God is the sauour of death vnto death Yea Christ Iesus our blessed Lord and Sauiour is a falling and a stone to stumble at and a rocke of offence so the doctrine of Iustification by faith alone may be an occasion of libertie and no otherwise that is not properly or by any effect issuing from itselfe but accidentally and by the malignitie of the obiect whereupon it worketh 95. Thirdly our doctrine of perseuerance though rayling Wright sayth of it that Epicurus himselfe could not haue found a better ground to plant his Epicurisme nor Heliogabalus haue better patronized his sensualitie nor Bacchus and Venus haue forged better reasons to inlarge their dominion yet to any single eye for his eyes are double-sighted with malice as Witches eyes are said to be it is rather a strong bridle to restraine from sensuality and Epicurisme and a bond to bind to obedience then a provocation vnto sinne for when men are perswaded that sincere faith true charitie and sauing grace cannot be lost it will cause them to take heed how they fall away lest they proue themselues to haue beene hypocrites before and their faith and charitie not to haue beene true but fained for he that falleth from God whom he pretend d to serue to the Deuil by an actual Apostasie into sinne plainly proueth that hee had neuer the seed of the spirit sowne in him nor the habit of charitie in his soule this is then a bridle to withhold men from sinne and not a spurre to pricke them forward vnto it And therefore whereas they say that men will thus reason If I be the child oâ— God I cannot fall away therefore I will doe what I list The contrarie is rather true that euery child of GOD yea euery one that is perswaded that hee is the childe of GOD will reason thus from the grounds of this doctrine I will not doe what I list neither will I giue my selfe ouer vnto sinne lest I proue my selfe by my falling into sinne not to be the child of God but an hypocrite Adde hereunto that as we teach that true faith and charitie cannot bee vtterly extinct in the elect So also we teach that this faith and charitie must bee nourished and preserued by the practice of all holy Christian duties and therefore they which neglect the conseruation of their faith and charitie and seek to extinguish them by the lusts of the flesh it is a signe that they neuer had these graces in grafted in their soules And what perswasion can be more effectual I pray you to stirre vp men vnto godlinesse then this is 96. So we may truly answere concerning the fourth doctrine obiected namely the impossibilitie of keeping Gods Commandements which though it be true in some part albeit not as they slanderously impute vnto vs. For wee hold that the regenerate person is able in some measure to keepe Gods Commandements though not to that perfection which the Law requireth exacting of euery one of vs the loue of God with all our heart soule and strength yet this openeth not but rather stoppeth the gap vnto fleshly libertie For is any man so madde as to say I will giue ouer all care of keeping Gods Law because I am not able fully and exactly to performe it rather euery one that hath but a reasonable soule will thus determine Because I am not able to performe perfect obedience to God therefore I will indeuour to doe what I can that my imperfections and wants may bee made vp by the perfect obedience of my Sauiour All men will account him a wilfull wicked wretch who being greatly indebted because he is not able to discharge the whole summe therfore will take no care to pay any part thereof which he is able to doe but lay all vpon his sureties backe so we condemne him for a desperate and damnable person that because he is not able to satisfie the whole debt of Gods Commandements therefore will not indeuour to pay as much as he can besides we teach withall that though this perfection be not attained vnto in this life yet there must be a continuall growth and increase in grace and goodnesse in all that belong to God that at length after this life ended they may doff off the olde man with the inabilities and corruptions thereof and attaine to the highest degree of perfection in the life to come the fruit of this doctrine then is not sensuall libertie but Christian humilitie not a prouocation to sinne but an incentiue and spurre vnto godlinesse 97. Thus I haue propounded vnto the view of the Christian Reader a short Epitome of the great volume of their slanders darted forth by them both against our persons our gouernment and our Religion it selfe all which indeed is but a taste and say of that which might be spoken in this subiect and which requireth an entire worke for the discouering of ther
so that their ignorance be simple and vnaffected may bee saued And hereupon they conclude that it is safer to bee of that Church wherein by our owne confession a man may be saued then of that to which they denie all hope of saluation but it is a conclusion made by confusion For who seeth not that that is more likely to be the true Church which is animated with charitie then that which is void of charitie and that it is safer to harbour vnder her wings that is charitably affected euen towards her enemies then vnder her that is so miscarried with enuie that she committeth all to the pit of Hell that are not of her fellowship and profession especially seeing Saint Paul chargeth the Thessalonians that If any man obey not the Gospell they should note him with a letter and haue no companie with him that hee may bee ashamed yet they should not accout him as an enemie but admonish him as a brother If then it be safer to thinke charitably of those that are without then vtterly to condemne them all then it must be also safer to bee a member of our Church then of theirs And to make the matter more cleare Saint Augustine is flat of our mind to thinke more Christianlike of Heretikes as they repute vs then they doe for writing against the Donatists thus he sayth They that defend their false doctrine without obstinate boldnesse especially if they be not such as haue beene authors of those errours but either receiued them from their Parents or were seduced by others and doe carefully seeke the truth being readie to be reformed assoone as they shall see their errours such men are not to be esteemed as Heretikes Thus writeth Saint Augustine whereby hee condemneth the practice of the Church of Rome and iustifieth ours as more agreeable to the rule of charitie and thus that reason whereby the Iesuites seduce many ignorant persons falleth to the ground and maketh more against them then for them 43. Thirdly if the Churches authoritie bee aboue the authoritie of the Scriptures then are men to bee preferred before God and that which is subiect to errour before that which can neither erre nor deceiue for the Church consists of men but the Scripture is immediately from God and the Church may erre though not in fundamentall points but the Scripture cannot erre no not in the least titte the truth of this allegation is grounded vpon those reasons First because euery particular Church may erre as is confessed and therefore the whole Chuchin generall may erre also for such as is the nature of the parts is the nature also of the whole Secondly Councels which are their Church representatiue haue erred as is notoriously knowne to all and confessed by Saint Augustine who sayth that the decrees of prouinciall Councels are subiect to reprehension Yea former generall Councels may be corrected by them that follow as the Councell of Arimine by the Councell of Constantinople the second of Ephesus by the Councell of Chalcedon the Councell of Carthage by the first of Nice and the second of Nice by the Councell of Franckeford Thirdly the Pope that is the Head of the Church hath erred this is also confessed therefore the bodie can claime no better priuiledge but sayth the same Augustine There is no doubt of the truth of any thing which is contained in the Scripture Therefore who can doubt to place the resolution of their faith as the safest course on the Scripture rather then on the Church especially seeing no particular writer of the holy Scripture can be taxed with the least errour but many particular parts of the Church whether we respect the imagined head which is vertually the whole Church in their estimation or the chiefe members in grosse as the Councels or the deuided ioynts as particular Congregations may iustly be challenged as tainted with diuers errours in doctrines of faith 44. Lastly the Church of Rome may be the whore of Babylon and so the See of Antichrist if not necessarily as wee auouch yet coniecturally as no man can denie because spirituall Babylon is said to bee a Citie situate vpon seuen hils and not onely so but that raigned ouer the Kings of the earth both which notes directly agree to the Citie of Rome but the Church of Protestants cannot by any likelihood bee that whore seeing neither of those markes doe in any respect belong vnto it Is it not safer then to rest our selues in her bosome which by al probabilitie is an honest Matrone then in her armes which is a suspected harlot If Caesar would haue his wife to bee without suspition then euerie Christian had need to looke to his faith whereunto he is as it were married by the Spirit of God wherby he is married vnto Christ that it be not onely sincere but also free from all suspition or likelihood of errour 45. Thus we see in these few maine points of the Romish Religion compared with our contrarie assertions that it is a farre safer course to bee a Protestant then a Papist let all indifferent persons iudge and discerne betwixt vs and I pray God direct them by his Spirit to choose the truth 46. There is one thing yet remaining whereby this may further appeare and so and end of this whole discourse and that is that there is no one point of doctrine wherein they differ from vs but is contradicted by some of their owne learned Writers shaking hands with vs and crossing their owne Pew-fellowes whence from ariseth not onely another strong argument of greater securitie in our Religion then in theirs which hath the suffrages of the greatest enemies to vphold it but also of vnresistable truth which worketh so vpon the consciences of the aduersaries thereof that it forceth them will they nill they to acknowledge it now and then as the Deuill himselfe was constrained to confesse Christ Iesus to be the Sonne of God I might write a whole Volume of this point alone but I will propound here onely some few instances and so shut vp this Treatise 47. Protestants teach that a man is iustified by faith alone whereby the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed vnto him and not by the inherent or adherent righteousnesse of his owne workes the same is confessed by Thomas Aquinas who sayth that no man is iustified with God by his workes but by the habit of faith infused and againe that there is in the workes of the Law no hope of iustification but by faith onely and by Pighius who holdeth that there is in vs no inherent righteousnesse whereby wee may bee iustified but that our iustification is by Christs righteousnesse imputed vnto vs and by the Diuines of Collen who affirme That the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto vs and apprehended by faith is the principall cause of our iustification and by Cassander who approueth of our doctrine of iustification by faith alone and imputed
dead and therefore lesse glory ascendeth vnto God by their doctrine then by ours But what doe I say lesse when indeed to giue any part of the Creators glory to the creature is vtterly to take all from the Creator for hee will haue all or none as Tertullian notably obserueth when he saith That true faith requireth this in defending the true God that whatsoeuer is his we make it onely his for so shall it bee accounted his if it bee accounted onely his by which rule the faith of the Romane Church cannot bee the true faith 12. And againe according to the second ground if to giue all the glory to God and none to our selues sauour of humility but to deuide stakes betwixt God and our selues hath a taste of pride then it must needs follow that God is more honoured by the one then by the other because by humility God is honoured and by pride dishonoured and therefore the Apostle saith that hee resisteth the proud and giueth grace to the humble for what cause but because the proud man seeketh his owne glory whereas the humble deuesteth himselfe of all and layeth it downe at the foote of God the proud man reioyceth in himselfe but the humble reioyceth in the Lord alone according as it is written Let him that reioyceth reioyce in the Lord. Now the Romanists that magnifie free-will haue iust cause their doctrine being presupposed to be true to reioyce in themselues which is an argument of pride for whereas our Sauiour saith Without me ye can doe nothing they may say Yes something for wee can either admit or reiect thy grace by our owne power and whereas the Apostle saith Who hath separated thee what hast thou which thou hast not receiued they may say I haue separated my selfe in doing that which I was able and so made my selfe fit for grace and this power I haue not receiued from Gods speciall fauour but from my owne free will All which kinde of speeches as they are full of pride and fleshly vanity so they are stuffed with impiety and blasphemie and manifestly tend to the dispoyling of the diuine Maiestie of that glory which is onely due vnto him And therefore I conclude with two notable sayings one of S. Augustines and another of Cassander a learned Reconciliater of late time Tutiores viuimus saith the Father si totum Deo damus c. that is We liue more safely if we attribute all wholy to God and not commit our selues partly to God and partly to our selues And this is the part of a godly minded man saith the Reconciliater to attribute nothing to themselues but all to Gods grace whence it followeth that how much so euer a man giueth to grace yet in so doing hee departeth not from pietie though hee detract something from nature and freewill but when any thing is taken from Gods grace and giuen to nature which belongeth to grace that cannot be without eminent danger So that by the confession both of this learned Romanist and also of that reuerend Father our doctrine in the poynt of free-will is both more agreeable to piety and respectiue to Gods glory then theirs is and therefore in reason to be preferred before it 13. The next doctrine whereby the glorie of God is darkened and the dignitie of Christs merites blemished is their doctrine of IustificatioÌ„ which I ioyne next vnto Free-wil because their sophistry cunning in this great maine pillar of Religion cannot well be discerned they so palliate the matter with faire glosses goodly words except their opinion touching the power of Free-will be first apprehended And here before I enter into the bowels of this poynt it is to be obserued that most of them vaunt and bragge that they doe much more magnifie Christs merites by their doctrine of Iustification then we doe which how true it is the discourse following I hope shall so manifest that euery indifferent man shall be able to say truely of them as Saint Augustine said of the Donatists These are the words of men extolling the glory of man vnder the name of Christ to the abasing of the glory of Christ himselfe 14. The doctrine therfore of our Church touching the iustification of a sinner is in effect thus much That a sinner is iustified that is accepted into the fauour and loue of God not by any thing in himselfe or from himselfe but by the perfect and vnspotted righteousnes of Christ Iesus imputed vnto him by the meere mercy of God through the couenant of grace and apprehended on his behalfe by the hand of faith The reason whereof is because that which must satisfie Gods iustice and reconcile a sinner vnto him must haue these two properties first it must be of infinite weight and value to counterpoyse with the rigour of Gods iustice and secondly it must be of sufficient ability to performefull and perfect obedience to the law of God so that a perfect satisfaction bee made both in respect of the obedience which the law requireth and also of the punishment that it inflicteth Now no righteousnesse of man is thus qualified but is both imperfect and vnsufficient no not the righteousnes of Angels themselues being though excellent yet â—â—finite Creatures sauing the righteousnes of Christ Iesus onely who is both God and Man and therefore his righteousnes onely and none other is that whereby a sinner must be iustified before God 15. From this it appeareth that when we say that a man is iustified by faith our meaning is not that faith is the cause of our iustification but onely the instrument and hand to apprehend that righteousnes of Christ whereby we are iustified when we say faith alone iust fieth we meane that it alone is the instrument of our iustification because it alone layeth hold vpon the righteousnes of Christ and applyeth it to our selues not that it is euer alone but alwaies accompanyed with charity and patience and zeale and temperance and other fruites of the spirit for we hold that the true iustifying faith is euer mâ—â—re grauida bonoruÌ„ operuÌ„ as one of their own fauourites affirmeth that is full of good workes and euer anon ready to bring them forth as occasion serueth Neither doe we deny as some of them falsly slander vs though many of their chiefest Writers gaine-say their fellowes and affoord vs that fauour to speake the truth of vs but that euery one that is iustified must also be truely sanctified and that saluation is not obtained by iustification alone but by sanctification also yet wee make sanctification and good workes not to be the causes but the effects nor the roote but the fruit nor the anticedents but the necessary consequents and attendants of our Iustification And as Bellarmine truely distinguisheth to be necessary Necessitate praesentiae non efficientiae by a necessity of presence not of efficacie as if they wrought our saluation In a word
should apply another to the patient It is the hand that applieth the medicine and not another medicine so it is faith that applieth Christs satisfaction vnto our sinnes and not our satisfaction Nay except the merits of Christ be applied to our best works and sufferings they cannot stand before Gods iustice neither can they be meritorious as they themselues confesse so that it will follow by this doctrine that our satisfactions are both the hand to apply Christs and the thing to which it is applied All which is most repugnant not only to Religion but euen to reason it selfe 42. Lastly when as Bellarmine affirmeth that ad maiorem c. that is for the greater glory of God who is satisfied and the greater honour of man satisfying it pleased Christ to ioyne his satisfaction to ours He plainely discouereth the scope of their doctrine to bee the aduancement of the dignity of man whereunto indeede he ioyneth the glory of God for else all men would cry fie vpon such a Religion but yet it both detracteth greatly from the glory of God in ascribing some dignity vnto man and peruerteth the true end of the Gospel which is not the partial but the entire honor glory of God For as S. Paul saith Gods power is most clearly seene in our weaknes and his righteousnes in the confession of our shame his glory in our basenes and vilenes that no flesh might reioyce in his presence but that he onely might be exalted at that day But by this Romish doctrine euery iust maÌ„ may reioyce in his own dignity may lift vp himselfe in the presence of God as if he were the ioynt cause of his own saluation together with Christ and that Christs satisfaction had beene nothing auaileable to him except he had applied it to himselfe by his owne satisfaction 43. Thus they deuide saluation as it were party parpale betwixt Christ and man and paralell them together And whereas they say that we must be like vnto Christ as in meriting so in satisfying what doe they but intrude man into the fellowship of Christs office for our imitation of Christ standeth in a conformity to his conuersation and life and of those things onely which concerne his person and are imitable but not in being like vnto him in his office and therefore when they say that we must be like vnto Christ in satisfying they make euery man that is saued a Iesus and Sauiour to himselfe because they make him to imitate him in those things wherein consisteth his being our Christ Then which what can be more contrary to the honour of Christ 44. These bee the foure principall poynts whereby the glory of Gods mercy and Christs merits and the holy Ghosts grace is greatly defaced and in stead thereof mans nature and merits exalted Besides these there are diuers other doctrines of the Church of Rome which bring forth the same fruit some of which I will onely name and so conclude this thâ—â—â— argument And first by the doctrine of the Popes supremacie they detract from the power of Christ and consequently from his glory for both they endow the Pope with those titles which properly belong to Christ as to be the Father in Gods family the vniuersall Pastor the head of the Church the husband and bridegroome of it and all other names which are giuen to our Sauiour Christ in holy Scripture whereby it is shewne that he is aboue the Church and also they attribute the same power to the Pope which belongeth properly to Christ as to pardon sinne to dispense with the law of God to open and shut the gates of heauen not ministerially but absolutely and iudicially to depose Kings and to dispose of Kingdomes and such like Now what a dishonour is this to him in whose thigh is written this glorious title The King of Kings Hee must not be the onely head of the Church but the Pope must be a ioynt head with him nor hee the sole Gouernor but the Pope must be his Vicar nor the sole husband of the Church but the Pope in his absence must be her husband in his roome Could a mortall man endure this iniurie And doe wee thinke that the Sonne of God will beare it Either Christ is not able to gouerne alone or not willing they will not say not able lest their blasphemy should be too too odious and if they say not willing how can hee not be willing to maintaine his owne glory or not bee vnwilling to be confederated with a sinfull Pope for so often they are in the disposition of his Kingdome Let them make the best that they can of it yet it appeareth that Christs gouernment is diuided betwixt the Pope and him and so must the glory also needs be diuided 45. Secondly by their doctrine of the Inuocation and Intercession of Saints what doe they but diuide the office and so the glory of the Mediatour-ship betwixt Christ and them for they teach that Christ is our Mediatour of Redemption but the Saints Mediatours of Intercession whereas we with the Scripture make Christ Iesus to be the onely and sole Mediatour both of Redemption and Intercession Wee honour the Saints but wee pray vnto God alone in the name of his Sonne they adore the Saints and make their prayers vnto them as well as vnto God yea more prayers do they powre out by numbers vnto them then vnto God What is to dishonour God and Christ if this be not 46. Thirdly by their doctrine of traditions they derogate greatly from the glory of Gods mercy towards his Church for they hold that the written word is not sufficient for a Christian man to saluation without the helpe of Ecclesiasticall traditions whereby they plainely insinuate that either God had not that care of his family the Church as he might haue had seeing hee left not for it a perfect and certaine rule for the gouernment thereof but sent it ouer to vncertaine traditions or that wisedome which all Law-giuers labour to attaine vnto seeing hee could not at the first prouide for all future occasions or that loue that he would not one of these doth necessarily follow from their doctrine 47. Lastly by their doctrine of worshipping of Images whereby they giue vnto stockes and stones part of that religious worship which is due vnto God We teach that all religious worship is due vnto God alone They on the contrary maintaine that latria that is diuine worship is Gods due but dulia that is seruice is to be giuen to Images Yea that the Crucifixe is to be worshipped with diuine worship which is due onely to God Who seeth not what manifest iniury they offer to Gods glory by this superstitious worship of dumbe and dead Images 48. And thus omitting many other like poynts which might be inserted in this place I hope that the Minor proposition is sufficiently demonstrated that the Church of Rome doth by many doctrines derogate from the
glory of God and the merits of Christ And therefore the conclusion must needs follow being built vpon an vnmooueable foundation that that Religion which maintaineth such doctrines is not the truth of Christ but the seduction of Antichrist MOTIVE V. That Religion deserueth to be suspected which refuseth to be tryed by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. THe first proposition in this Argument though it be most true and cannot without any shew of reason be contradicted yet that it may be without all doubt and exception it shall not be amisse to strengthen the same by sound and euident proofes deriued both out of Gods word and consent of ancient Fathers The Proposition consists of two parts first that it cannot be the true Religion which will not abide the alone tryall of the Scriptures Secondly that it will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe let vs consider of both these seuerally 2. And concerning the first if the Scripture be the fountaine of all true religion the foundation and basis of our faith the Canon and rule of all the doctrines of faith and the touch-stone to trye truth from falshood then to refuse to be iudged and tryed by the Scriptures alone is plainely to discouer that there is something in it which issued not from that fountain which is not built vpon that foundation which is so oblique and crooked that it dares not to be applyed to that rule and which is counterfeit and dares not abide the touchstone Now that the Scripture is such as I haue said let the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture beare witnesse Search the Scripture saith our Sauiour for in them you thinke to haue eternall life and they be they which testifie of me therefore the Scripture is the fountaine of all true religion for what is the Religion of Christians but the right knowledge of Christ Iesus This caused Saint Paul to say I desire to know nothing but Christ Iesus and him crucified Againe the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation through faith in Christ Iesus and are profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute and perfect to euery good worke Therefore the Scripture is the onely fountaine of true Religion for what is true Religion but spirituall wisedome and holy perfection the one in contemplation the other in action the one in knowledge the other in practice for these two ioyned together do make a man truly religious but the Scriptures afford both as it is cleare in that saying of S. Paul and may be confirmed by another like speech of Salomon who affirmeth that the commandements of God will make a man to vnderstand righteousnesse and iudgement and equity and euery good path Righteousnesse and iudgement pertaine to knowledge equity and euery good path belong to practice And for this cause Origen compareth the Scriptures to Iacobs Well from whence not onely Iacob and his sonnes that is the learned and the skilfull but his sheepe and cattell that is the simple and ignorant doe drinke that is deriue vnto themselues the waters of life and saluation and therefore where the knowledge of the Scriptures flourished not as among all the Heathen both Romanes Grecians and Barbarians before their conuersion there no true Religion shewed it selfe but their Religion was all false and deuillish for in stead of the true God they worshipped dumb creatures and mortall men yea deuils themselues as Lactantius sheweth All which proceeded from hence that they had not the word of God for their guide which is the onely fountaine and well-spring of true Religion 3. Againe as it is the fountaine from whence so it is the foundation vpon which our faith relieth whether wee take faith for the act of beleeuing or for the matter and obiect of our beliefe Ye are built saith S. Paul vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Christ Iesus himselfe being the chiefe corner stone By the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine as all Expositours that I haue read yea their owne Aquinas and Caietane with one consent auouch and to bee built vpon this foundation is to haue our faith to relye and depend vpon it onely as a house relyeth onely vpon the foundation and without a foundation cannot stand that therefore is no doctrine of faith that is vpholden by any other foundation neither hath that any good foundation which is not built vpon the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine they build vpon sand that build vpon humane traditions euery stormy puffe of winde will shake the house of that faith but they which heare the word of Christ and keepe it build vpon a rocke against which neither the raine flouds nor windes no not the gates of hell are able to preuaile because they are grounded vpon the rocke which rocke indeede is Christ to speake properly as not onely S. Peter confesseth 1. Pet. 2. 7. but euen Christ himselfe that is this rocke Math. 16. 18. when hee saith Vpon this rocke will I build my Church that is vpon this truth that Christ is the Sonne of God yet the word of Christ may also be called the rocke because it is as firme and durable as Christ himselfe And that wee may know that Gods word onely is the foundation of faith S. Paul telleth vs plainely that faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God If any of them say as they doe that the word of God is not onely that which is written in Scripture but that which is vnwritten deliuered by tradition let them shew as good reasons to proue their traditions to be the word of God as we doe to proue the Scripture and we will beleeue them but since they cannot let them beare with vs if we vnderstand the Apostles words as spoken onely touching the written word and the rather because we haue for the warrantize of our interpretation both S. Paul himselfe in the same Chapter verse 8. when he saith This is the word offaith which we preach Where hee sheweth what is that word which is the ground of our faith namely the word preached And S. Peter who hauing magnified the word of God with this commendation that it endureth for euer presently expoundeth himselfe of what word hee spake saying And this is that word which is preached amongst you That is the word of the Gospell which was not in part but wholy and fully as preached by mouth so committed to writing And thus S. Basil also interprets it for he saith Quicquid est vltra scripturas Whatsoeuer is out of the Scriptures diuinely inspired because it is not of faith is sinne for faith is by hearing and hearing by
confesse afterward that it is indeed a rule but not a total and entire rule but a partiall and imperfect one If it bee any waies a rule then it was giuen by God and written by the men of God to that end to be the rule And so Bellarmines goodly reasons hang together like a sicke mans dreame the one part wherof ouerthroweth the other 18. But to answere in particular to them seuerally To the first I say that it is not farre from blasphemy to affirme that there is any thing in holy Scripture that is vnnecessary for though all things are not of equall necessity and profit yet there is nothing in the whole Booke of God from the beginning of Gen. to the end of the Reuel but may haue most profitable and necessary vse in the Church of God if not for the essentiall forme of faith yet for the adorning and beautifying of it and this may truely bee verified euen of those things which he excepteth against to wit the Histories of the Olde and New Testament and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles out of all which how many excellent doctrines may be deriued both for the confirmation of faith and edification of manners And therefore as in mans body God by nature hath not disposed all parts to be alike necessary but some haue no other vse but ornament and comelinesse so hath Almighty God mingled the parts of holy Scripture in that manner that some are as it were bones and sinews to our faith some flesh and bloud and some againe but exteriour beautie and fashion yet as in nature nothing is made in vaine so much lesse in Scripture is there any thing to be accounted superfluous and redundant nay in this diuine body there are no excrements that may be cast out and separated as it fareth in our earthly carkases but all is entire sound and perfect as the Prophet Dauid teacheth Psal 19. 7. when hee saith that the Law of God is perfect conuerting the soule and our Sauiour Math. 5. 18. when he auoucheth that till heauen and earth perish one iote or title of the Law shall not c. 19. To his second reason I answere three things first that it is entirely false that the Scripture doth not contayne all things necessarily required to the Essence of faith for if the Scripture be perfect and giueth wisedome to the simple if nothing may bee added to it nor taken from it if to teach any thing besides the Scripture deserueth the fearefull Anathema if it be able to make the man of God perfect to euery good worke if in them onely wee may finde eternall life if the Church of God be built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and lastly if our faith and hope doe arise from the Scriptures then there is nothing necessary to saluation but is fully and plenarily contained in them but the first is true as appeareth by all those testimonies before alledged and therefore the latter must by necessary consequence be true also 20. Secondly I answere that Bellarmine by that assertion crosseth the whole streame of the Fathers for most of them affirme the flat contrary Tertullian saith that when we once beleeue the Gospell Hoc prius credimus non esse quod vltra credere debemus This we beleeue first that there is nothing besides which we ought to beleeue Iraeneus saith that the Apostles committed to writing the Gospell which they preached Fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum To be the foundation and pillar of our faith Basil saith Quicquid extra diuinam scripturam est cum ex fide non sit peccatum est Whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture because it is not of faith is sinne Cyrill saith that all those things were written in holy Scripture which the Writers thought sufficient Tam ad mores quà m ad dogmata As well touching conuersation as doctrine Augustine saith that those things were chosen out to be written Quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Which seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue And againe he saith in another place Whether concerning Christ or concerning the Church of Christ or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith or life we will not say if we but if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospell let him be accursed Chrysostome saith Si quis eorum If any of them who are said to haue the holy Ghost doe speake any thing of him selfe and not out of the Gospell beleeue it not Ierome speaking of an opinion touching the death of Zacharias the father of Iohn Baptist saith Hoc quia ex Scripturis non habet authoritatem This because it hath not authority out of the Scriptures is as easily contemned as approued I supersede for breuity sake the residue of the Fathers who with full consent conspire in the same opinion yea not onely the Fathers but many also of their owne most learned Authors as Thomas Aquinas Antoninus Durandus Peresius Clingius and diuers others by all which we may see how little reckoning Bellarmine maketh of the ancient Fathers where they make for him hee magnifieth and exalteth them to the skies but when they are opposite to him he reiecteth them as drosse and the like account he maketh of his owne Doctors 21. Lastly I answere that of those things which he affirmeth not to be contayned in holy Scripture and yet to be of necessity of beliefe some of them are farre from either necessity or profit as that of the meanes whereby women vnder the Law were purged from originall sinne and how the Gentiles were partakers of the couenant hauing not the Sacrament and that Easter is to be celebrated vpon the Lords day If these things be of that necessity of beliefe which hee maketh them how many thousand then haue sinned greatly in being ignorant thereof for at this day not the hundreth part of Christians euer heard these things once named and yet by this ignorance they neither offended God nor hindered their owne saluation And what shall we thinke of Iraeneus and other godly Bishops in the East that held that Easter was not to bee celebrated euer vpon the Lords day Againe the other things nominated by him as that the books of the sacred Bible are the Canonicall Scripture and the word of the liuing God that the children of beleeuing parents are to be baptized that Christ descended into hell may easily be proued out of Scripture either by expresse testimonie or by necessarie consequence and deduction which is all one for Perinde sunt â—a quae ex Scripturis colliguntur atqueâ—a quae scribuntur c. saith Nazianzene 22. Thirdly being driuen by the power of truth to acknowledge the Scripture to be a rule he commeth in with a leaden distinction to wit that is not a totall but
this Sacrament there is a cōmemoration of that sacrifice of the crosse which was once offered this he spake conuicted by the truth And the Councill of Trent also in another place doth almost if not fully speake asmuch when it sayth that Iesus Christ left to his Church a sacrifice by which that bloudy sacrifice which hee made vpon the crosse might bee represented and the memory thereof continued which if it be true then being conuicted by their owne consciences and confessions it remaines that that doctrine which holdeth that the masse is a true reall propitiatory sacrifice is opposite to the doctrine of the Gospell which teacheth the contrary and so this fourth Antithesis is safe and sound for all that Bellarmine can say against it 21. The Gospell teacheth that both parts of the Sacrament are to bee ministred to all Christians and of the cup it sayth expresly Drinke ye all of this but the Church of Rome hath decreed that none should drinke of the cup but the Clergie and that the people should content themselues with the other part of the Sacrament 22. Bellarmine distinguisheth of the word All and saith By it is not to be vnderstood all the faithfull but the Apostles onely which hee prooueth by Saint Marke who sayth that they dranke all of it that is all the Apostles which sate at table with our Sauiour Christ and not all the Christians that beleeued in him 23. But to his distinction not all Christians but all Apostles I answere that this is Bellarmines conceit or rather deceit and hee borrowed it of Andradius the famous expositer of the Councill of Trent but it is a miserable glosse woe bee to it that so soully corrupts the text first the fathers vnderstood by the vniuersall All all the faithfull and that the Apostles heere in this great action were not Pastors but sheep Christ himselfe the great shepheard beeing the distributer and diuider of this Sacrament I shall not need to repeat their words they are so euident and ordinary Let the margent direct the Reader to them if they desire satisfaction in this point 24. Secondly many of their owne Doctors so interprete it as Thomas Aquinas Durand Biel Alphonsus de Castro Lorichius the author of the glosse and diuers others Cassanders testimony shall stand in stead of all the rest he sayth plainly that the Westerne Church beleeued for a thousand yeeres that our Sauiour Christ gaue this Sacrament to his disciples representing the persons of all the faithfull and he addeth reasons why the wine as well as the bread was to bee receiued both for a more full representation of the passion of Christ and signification of our full spirituall nourishment in Christ and also the full and perfect redemption of our bodies and soules by the body and soule of our Sauiour This Cassander repeats to haue beene the opinion of the Latine Greeke Church for the space of a thousand yeeres What an vpstart distinction then is this of Bellarmine who notwithstanding ceaseth not to bragge that they haue all antiquity on their side 25. Thirdly wee haue Saint ` Paul thus interpreting the words of his Lord and Master who spake nothing but by the direction of the Spirit for whereas our Sauiour sayth Drinke yee all of it Saint Paul sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eat of this bread and drinke of this cup. But all must examine themselues before they come to the sacrament therefore all are enioyned to drinke of the Sacramentall cup let vs chuse then whom wee will beleeue whether Saint Paul or Bellarmine for Saint Paul interprets this All one way and Bellarmine cleane contrary 26. Lastly reason it selfe disapprooueth this exposition for first I would aske him whether that which our Sauiour commanded to bee done at his last Supper were to bee done once and no more or often euen to the end of the world If hee say once and no more the words will confute him which say Doe this in remembrance of me if often then by All he meant not the Apostles onely for the Apostles liued not till the end of the world Againe if by All was intended the Priests onely then not onely the people should bee excluded from the cup but from the bread also for if in these words Drinke ye all of it hee speaketh to Priests onely then in these words Eat ye all of it hee speaketh to none but Priests for they are both spoken to one and the same persons And thus the people should haue no part of the Sacrament at all for the same All that is in one is in the other And to conclude if the Apostles stood heere in stead of Pastors or Priests why did they not minister the Sacrament It is the part of a Priest as hee is a Priest to minister the Sacrament to others and when hee receiueth it himselfe then hee standeth for a common Christian and not for a Priest for a sheepe not for a shepheard But they did not minister but receiue therefore they stood not here for Priests but for the whole body of the faithfull And thus this distinction being battered by the testimony of fathers confession of their owne Doctors authority of Saint Paul and strength of reason doth fall to the ground like Babel and this fift Antithesis is nothing weakened by Bellarmines Sophistrie 27. The Gospell teacheth that true repentance or conuersion to God is an earnest sorrow of heart for sinnes committed and faith perswading that they are certainely remitted for Christs sake But the Church of Rome teacheth that contrition indeed is one of the parts of repentance but they faine that it meriteth a remission of sinnes and to it they adde auricular confession not commaunded by God satisfaction or voluntary workes by which they say that the punishments of sinne are satisfied that these also may be redeemed by money and purse-penance All which whole doctrine is very blasphemous against the merit of the Son of God who onely made satisfaction for our sinnes 28. Bellarmine heere from distinguishing falleth to rayling and accuseth vs of manifest lying and falshood in laying that to our charge which wee are not guilty of but whether is the lyar hee or wee let the Reader iudge First therefore that true repentance is not a bare sorrow of heart for sin but such a sorrow as is ioyned with and ariseth from faith appeareth by this because contrition without faith leads to desperation and not to saluation as the wofull examples of Cain Esau and Iudas declare and therefore the Romanists themselues doe not exclude all manner of faith from repentance but onely that faith which apprehendeth remission of sinnes by Christ which speciall faith whereby remission of sinnes is beleeued and obtained is ioyned with repentance Luke 24. 47. Act. 26. 18. This is our doctrine and it is warranted by the holy Scripture though it pleaseth Bellarmine to say that it is a
bare assertion without Scripture 29. As touching their crossing of it wee need fetch no other proofe then from the Councill of Trent which in expresse words denounceth Anathema to those that make this faith whereby wee beleeue the remission of our sinnes a necessary ingredient into true repentance and yet it propoundeth reconciliation and remission of sinnes to such as doe repent let all the world therefore know to the eternall shame of the Romish Religion that remission of sinnes and reconciliation by their doctrine may bee obtained by repentance without faith then which what can bee more opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ 30. If they reply that they make faith the foundation of repentance I answere why doe they then exclude it out of repentance is the foundation no part of the house yes it is the chiefest part either therefore it is not the foundation of repentance or els it is necessarily required to the essence of it one or the other must needs bee false but heere is the mystery of this iniquity by faith they meane nor a beliefe of the remission of our sinnes by the bloud of Christ which is the true Euangelicall faith but a generall perswasion of the truth of their Religion and a particular conceit that he which performeth the worke of penance in the three parts thereof shall thereby obtaine pardon of his sinnes and reconciliation with God 31. Secondly whereas hee sayth that wee doe not satisfie for the eternall but for the temporall punishments of our sinnes either heere in this life or in Purgatory hee speaketh nothing for the clearing of their doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for the Gospell teacheth that Christ our Redeemer hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sinnes of all the world yeelding a sufficient and worthy recompence and contentment to God for them and therefore they which say that wee must giue any manner of satisfaction our selues whether for the temporall or eternall punishment due vnto them doe euidently crosse the doctrine of the Gospell And this Aquinas one of their owne illumined Doctors doth in effect confesse when hee sayth that the passion of Christ was a sufficient and super abundant satisfaction for the sinne and guilt of punishment of mankind his passion was as it were a price or paiment by which we are freed from both these obligations to bring in then the foggy mist of humane satisfactions is to eclipse and darken the glory of Christs all-sufficient redemption 32. Thirdly whereas hee findeth fault with Chytraus for saying without proofe that auricular confession is not commanded of God and yet hee himselfe doth not proue it is we might driue out one naile with another and returne vpon him his owne answere but I reply further that diuers of his owne fellow Doctors haue auouched asmuch for Maldonate Erasmus the glosse in Gratian and Gratian himselfe and Rhenanus with diuers others are of the same minde as may appeare in the texts quoted in the margent whose wordes I forbeare to set downe because I shall haue occasion to handle the same in a more proper place one thing I cannot omit that the testimony of Rhenanus is so plaine that our aduersaries not able to giue answere sufficient vnto it haue by their peremptory authority said Deleatur let it bee blotted out as they deale also with Polidore Virgill in the like point and with all other that stand in their way 33. Lastly the redeeming of penance by the purse though Bellarmine shuffle it ouer neuer so cunningly yet is so palpable an abuse and so contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell that the very naming of it is a sufficient declaration of the foulnesse of that Religion which maketh a mart of sinne and setteth repentance which is the gift of God to sale for a little earthly drosse and exchangeth punishment due to the body and soule for a little pinching of the purse 34. The Gospell teacheth that marriage is permitted and set free for all men both Priests and people and that the prohibition of marriage and meats is a doctrine of Deuils But the Romish Religion forbids marriage to a great part of men to wit Priests and Monkes and commands to abstaine from certaine meates vpon certaine dayes 35. Bellarmine excepteth and saith by a distinction that when the Apostle sayth Marriage is honourable amongst all men hee meaneth not all in generall for then it should bee honorable betwixt the father and the daughter the brother and the sister but onely those that are lawfully ioyned together which they that are bound with a vow cannot bee 36. It is a strange fore-head but no maruaile seeing it is the fore-head of the whore of Babylon when the Scripture sayth Marriage is honorable amongst al men to exempt their Votaries from this honour as if they were not in the number of men but beasts and as the assertion is strange in impudency so the reason is more strange in folly for though the father may not marry the daughter nor the brother the sister without incest yet the father may marry and the daughter may marry and the brother and the sister also so that they take those that are not prohibited by the Law of God and nature Now let him shew that Gods Law forbiddeth Votaries to marry and then hee sayth something to the purpose but by his owne confession together with many of his pew-fellowes the prohibition of marriage is no diuine but humane ordinance and institution yea the Councill of Trent it selfe calleth it but an Ecclesiasticall Law and therefore not a Law of God but a decree of the Church 37. Adde to this impudency and folly his crossing of all antiquity for in the Councill of Nice Paphnutius alleadgeth this place of Scripture against those that went about to take away the vse of marriage from the Clergie and in the sixt generall Synode it is expressely applied to the same purpose And Ierome in defence of Charterius a married Bishop produceth the same text 38. As touching Chrysostomes speech to Theodorus the Monke alledged by Bellarmine though it seemeth a little to fauour them at the first view yet in another place he cleereth himselfe from that suspition for he saith plainely that Marriage is so honourable and precious that a man with it may ascend into the sacred Chaire of a Bishop What hath Bellarmine got now by Chrysostomes testimony Surely this If all that Chrysostome saith bee sound doctrine then it is an error in the Church of Rome to inhibite all that are consecrated by holy Orders from the vse of the marriage bed For by Chrysostome Bishops may marry Saint Augustines testimonies alledged by him in the one and twentieth Chapter are little to the purpose for in the first he saith plainely that the Church of God doth not forbid marriage but onely preferre virginitie before it as a greater good and in the second hee approoueth onely abstinence from
they done it to gaine any thing thereby in disputation but onely to keepe the common people from infection whereas they spare none neither Fathers nor Councels nor moderne Writers and that not so much lest the common sort should bee infected as that the learned might be depriued of those weapons wherewith they might fight against them and wound their cause Seeing the case now so stands that hee which can muster vp together the greatest armie of Authours to fight vnder his colours is thought to haue the best cause their dealing then with vs is like that of the Philistims against the Israelites who despoyled them of all weapons and instruments of warre that they might dominiere ouer them with greater securitie but ours is not so towards them And therefore both in this and all the former respects it is a miserable vntruth and a desperate cuasion to say that wee are more guiltie of this crime then they are 107. Lastly whereas in his first answere hee pleadeth the lawfulnesse of the fact let vs heare his reasons to moue thereunto and in the interim remember that in prouing it to bee lawfull hee confesseth it to bee done But why is it lawfull Mary first because the Church being supreme Iudge on earth of all Controuersies touching faith and Religion hath authoritie to condemne Heretikes And therefore also the workes of Heretikes and if this then much more to correct and purge their Bookes if by that meanes shee can make them profitable for her vse and beneficiall to her children To which I answere two things First that it is not the Church that doth this but the sacred Inquisitors to wit certaine Cardinals and Lawyers deputed to that office who for the most part are so farre from being the Church that they are often no sound members thereof Iâ— it be said that they haue their authoritie from the Pope who is vertually the whole Church why doe they then speake so darkly and say the Church hath this authoritie when as they might in plaine termes say that the Pope hath it but that hereby they should display the feeblenesse of their cause and the fillinesse of this reason for thus it would stand Why is it lawful for Books to be purged because the Pope thinkes it lawful And must not he needs think so when the Authors crosse his triple crowne and speake against his state and dignitie Adde hereunto that it is a fallacie in reasoning when that is taken for granted which is in question For we deny their Synagogue to be the true Church and much more the Pope to bee the supreme Iudge and therefore till those things be proued the reason is of no effect 108. Secondly most of those things which are purged by them are so farre from being heresies or errours that they are the most of them sound doctrines of faith grounded vpon the authoritie of Gods sacred truth for they blot out many things in both olde and new Authours that they themselues dare not accuse to bee hereticall as that place in Saint Cyril before mentioned touching the power of faith which is no more in direct termes then that which is said in the Scripture Act. 15. 15. that faith purifieth the heart and that in the Basil Index of Chrysostome The Church is not built vpon a man but vpon faith and those propositions which are commanded by the Dutch Index to be wiped out of the Table of Robert Stephens Bible to wit that sinnes are remitted by beleeuing in Christ that he which beleeueth in Christ shall not die for euer that faith purifieth the heart that Christ is our righteousnes that no man is iust before God and that repentance is the gift of God with a number of like nature These they purge out of Stephens Index which notwithstanding are directly and in as many words recorded in the Booke of God and so it may iustly be thought that they are so farre from clenfing Bookes from the drosse and dregs of errour that they rather purge out the pure gold and cleare wine of truth and leaue nothing but dregs and drosse behind 109. His second reason is because nothing is more dangerous to infect true Christian hearts then bad Bookes Therefore it is not onely lawfull but needfull and behoouefull to the Church of God that such Bookes should bee purged and burned too if it bee so thought meete by the Church to the end that the sinceritie of one true faith and Religion might be preserued I answere all this is true which he saith but are they heresies which they purge no they are sound and orthodox opinions for the most part as hath beene proued in the answere to the former reason And doe they it to keepe Christian men from infection no their chiefe end and drift is to depriue their aduersaries of all authorities that make against them that so they might triumph in the antiquitie of their Religion and noueltie of ours which is one of their principall arguments which they vse though with euill successe for defence of their cause dealing herein as Holofernes did with the Israelites at the siege of Bethulia breaking the Conduits cutting the pipes and slopping the passages which might bring vs prouision of good and wholsome waters out of the cisternes of olde and new Writers this is their purpose and no other whatsoeuer they pretend for if they meant any good to Gods people for preuenting of infection they would haue purged their lying Legends of infinite fables their Canon Law of horrible blasphemies and their Schoolemen of many strange opinions Yea they would haue condemned the Bookes of Machiauel and of that Cardinall that wrote in commendation of the vnnaturall sinne of Sodomie and a number such like filthy and deuillish Writings which are printed and reprinted among them without controulement And againe is it vnitie in the true faith and religion that they seeke no it is conspiracie in falshood and consent in errour and not vnitie in the truth till the Romish Religion bee proued to bee the true Religion which can neuer be this reason is of no force to iustifie their proceedings Lastly is it Christian policy no it is deuilish subtletie and craftie forgerie for the case so stands betwixt them and vs as in a tryall of land betwixt partie and partie wherein hee that bringeth best euidence and witnesse carrieth the cause now if one partie either suborne false witnesses or corrupt true or forge euidences to his purpose or falsifie those that are extant all men will count him as a forger and his cause desperate and iudge him worthie the Pillorie so betwixt vs the question is who hath the right faith and the best title to the Church Our euidences are first and principally Gods Word then the writings and records of godly men in all ages now then they that shall purge pare raze blurr falsify or corrupt any of these must needs bee thought to bee subtle and craftie companions and not honest
our merits are from Gods mercie and grace and that our good workes are dyed in Christs bloud and thence receiue all their vertue and rigor yet it is but a false pretence false because they acknowledge some merits before grace as those of congruitie and such as issue from grace yet in part to be of nature aswel as of grace as hath beene alreadie discouered and a pretence because if they receiue all their vertue from Gods grace and Christs bloud then they are not to be termed our merits but Gods neither can bee said to deserue any thing at Gods hand of a proper worthinesse as they teach they doe but of Gods grace and mere mercie which they disclaime a false pretence then is this and doth not free them from this danger of diminishing Gods glorie and this also is confessed by S. Augustine who sayth that we liue more sasely if we attribute all wholly to God and d ee not commit our selues partly to God and partly to our selues this the Romanists doe they diuide stakes betwixt God and man grace and nature Christ and Adam 7. Thirdly of making the best vncertaine of their saluation for as they teach no man can bee certaine of his owne righteousnesse nor of the goodnesse of his workes by reason of the manifold defects that cleaue vnto their best deeds and also in respect of the vnscrutable deceit of mans owne heart which is hidden not onely froÌ„ the eies of other men but euen from a mans owne selfe and is knowne onely vnto God as the Prophet Ieremie telleth vs and also in respect of the strict rule of Gods iustice whereby they must bee examined For which cause the holy man Iob sayth of himselfe according as it is in the vulgar Latine translation I was afraid of all my workes And Saint Augustine sayth and affirmeth the same That though Iob was a righteous man yet he himselfe was afraid of himselfe And Gregory speaketh to like effect when hee sayth That the holy man Iob because he saw all the merit of our vertue to be faultie if it be strictly iudged by him which iudgeth within sayth rightly If I will contend with him I shall not bee able to answere one for a thousand Now that which befell righteous Iob how can it but bee incident to all Gods children So that though they talke of meritorious workes in generall yet no man can be sure that his workes in particular are such and therefore no man be he neuer so iust can be sure of his saluation I speake not here of that certaintie which is by faith which they deny but that assurance which is by hope which they confesse for a man cannot possibly hope that he shall by saued by his workes when as he cannot possibly know whether his best workes are such as deserue the fauour or disfauour of God And if it is the propertie of all Gods children by the example of Iob to be afraid of their workes then how can they repose any hope and confidence in them now all this is so euident that Bellarmine himselfe is driuen after his long disputes and much adoe in strengthening their doctrine of inherent righteousnesse and merit of workes to confesse ingeniously like a good honest man being as it were sorrie for all that hee had said that because of the vncertaintie of their owne righteousnesse and the perill of vaine glorie the safest way is to repose our whole trust and confidence in the onely mercie and goodnesse of God But this wee teach men to doe that flying from all vaine confidence in their owne merits they may repose themselues onely on the mercy of GOD in Christ Iesus and therefore ours is the safest way 8. And if ours be the most safe then theirs is most dangerous which also S. Bernard in as plaine termes affirmeth when he sayth Periculosa habitatio illorum qui in meritis sperant perculosa quia ruinosa dangerous is the dwelling of those which trust in their owne merit it is dangerous because it is ruinous Now who that is wise will not chuse to walke in the safest way and refuse the dangerous or to dwell in a strong and safe house which will keepe out the wind and weather and not bee ouerblowne with any tempest rather then in a ruinous cottage which euery blast is able to ouerturne 9. The doctrine of Free will is of like nature for is it not dangerous thinke you to ascribe some power to mans own will for his conuersion as the Church of Rome doth when it teacheth that it is in mans free choice to accept â—rrâ—iect Gods grace offered vnto him and so eyther to be or not to be conuerted And is it not a safer course to ascribe all to grace and nothing at all to will and to say with our Sauiour Christ that without him we can doe nothing and with Saint Paul That wee haue no sufficiencie in our selues to thinke a good thought as of our selues And againe That it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deed of his good pleasure In the one God hath all the glorie of the worke in the other man is equalled with God will with grace yea preferred before it for they not onely teach that grace and will are like two men carrying one stone neyther of them adding any strength vnto the other and both free when they will to cast off the burthen but also that Gods grace and working dependeth vpon mans will not mans will vpon Gods grace For thus they are not ashamed to say euen the best and most iudicious amongst them Licet in codem prorsus momento temporis naturae Deus volunt as operari incipiant tamen Deus operetur quia voluntas operatur non contra .i. Though the God of nature and freewill beginne to worke together at the same instant yet God worketh because the will worketh not the will because God Now is not this not onely to equall but also to subiect Gods grace to mans will and to make the creature more powerfull then the Creator For by this doctrine if a man himselfe bee willing and giue admittance to grace he may be saued but if God bee neuer so willing to saue vs if we our selues willnot entertaine his sauing grace all his labour is vaine and so mans will must needs be of greater power and efficacie then Gods grace which how dangerous yea impious a thing it is to affirme let all men iudge I am sure Saint Augustine was of another mind who sayth not as the Romanists that it is left to our free choice either to vse or to refuse the grace of Christ that standeth at the doore of our heart to bee let in or thrust out as we list but it is sayth he by grace not onely that we can doe what we will but that we are willing to doe what wee can and againe He worketh in vs