him but what is this to justification by only faith Marry M. PERKINS drawes it in after this fashion As nothing was required of them who were strong by serpents but that they should looke vpon the brasen serpent So nothing is required of a sinner to deliuer him from sinne but that he cast his eye of faith vpon Christs righteousnes and apply that to himselfe in particular But this application of the similitude is only mans foolish inuention without any ground in the text Similttudes be not in all poynts alike neither must be streatched beyond the very poynt wherein the similitude lyeth which in this matter is that like as the Israelites in the Wildernes stoung with serpents were cured by looking vpon the brasen serpent so men infected with sin haue no other remedy then to embrace the faith of Christ Iesus All this we confesse but to say that nothing else is necessary that is quite besides the text and as easely rejected by vs as it is by him obtruded without any authority or probability His 2. reason is collected of exclusiue speeches as he speaketh vsed in Scriptures Gal 2.16 As we are iustified freely not of the lawe not by the lawe not of workes not of our selues not of the workes of the lawe but by faith all boasting excluded Luke 8.50 only beleeue These distinctions whereby works the law are excluded in the worke of justification include thus much that faith alone doth justifie It doth not so for these exclusiue speeches do not exclude feare hope and charity more then they exclude faith it selfe Which may be called a worke of the lawe aswell as any other vertue being as much required by the lawe as any other But S. Paules meaning in those places is to exclude all such workes as either Iewe or Gentile did or could bragge of as donne of themselues and so thought that by them they deserued to be made Christians For he truly saith that all were concluded in sinne and needed the grace of God which they were to receiue of his free mercy through the merits of Christ and not of any desart of their owne And that to obtayne this grace through Christ it was not needefull nay rather hurtfull to obserue the ceremonies of Moyses lawe as Circumcision the obseruation of any of their feastes or fastes nor any such like worke of the lawe which the Iewes reputed so necessary Againe that all morall workes of the Gentiles could not deserue this grace which workes not proceeding from charity were nothing worth in Gods sight And so all workes both of Iewe and Gentile are excluded from being any meritorious cause of justification and consequently all their boasting of their owne forces their first justification being freely bestowed vpon them Yet all this notwithstanding a certaine vertuous disposition is required in the Iewe and Gentile whereby his soule is prepared to receiue that great grace of justification that say we is faith feare hope loue and repentance that say the Protestants is faith only Wherefore say we as the excluding of workes and boasting exclude not faith no more doe they exclude the rest faith being as well our worke and a worke of the lawe as any of the rest and all the rest being of grace as well as faith and as farre from boasting of as faith it selfe Now that out of S Luke beleeue only is nothing to the purpose For he was bid beleeue the raysing of his daughter to life and not that Christs righteousnes was his and faith alone may be a sufficient disposition to obtayne a myracle but not to obtayne justification of which the question only is Consider now good Reader whether of our interpretations agree better with the circumstances of the text and the judgement of the auncient Fathers The texts see thou in the Testament Take for a taste of the Fathers judgement S. Augustines exposition of those places of S. Paul of one of the chiefest of which thus he speaketh Men not vnderstanding that which the Apostle saith We esteeme a man to be iustified without the lawe De gra lib. aâ—b c 7. thought him to say that faith sufficed a man althoug he liued euill and had no good workes which God forbid that the vessell of election should thinke And againe De predest sanct c 7. Therefore the Apostle saith that a man is iustified by faith and not of workes because saith is first giuen and by it the rest which are properly called workes and in which we liue justlie are by petition obtayned By which it is manifest that S. Paul excluding the workes of the lawe and the workes donne by our owne only forces doth not meane to exclude good workes which proceede from the helpe of Gods grace THAT FAITH ONLY DOTH NOT IVSTIFIE MASTER PERKINS third Argument Very reason may teach vs thus much that no gift in man is apt as a spirituall hand to receiue and apply Christ and his righteousnesse vnto a sinner sauing faith loue hope feare repentance haue their seuerall vses but none of them serue for this ende of apprehending but faith only Amswere Mans reason is but a blinde mistris in matters of faith and he that hath no better an instructor in such high misteries must needs know little But what if that also faile you in this poynt then euery man cannot but see how naked you are of all kinde of probability I say then that reason rather teacheth the contrary For in common sence no man apprehendeth and entreth into the possession of any thing by beleeuing that he hath it For if a man shoulde beleeue that he is rich of honour wise or vertuous Doth he thereby become presently such a one nothing lesse His faith and perswasion is no fitte instrument to apply and drawe these thinges to himselfe as all the worlde sees How then doth reason teach me that by beleeuing Christes righteousnesse to bee mine owne I lay hand on it and make it mine Againe Christs righteousnes according to their owne opinion is not receiued into vs at all but is ours only by Gods imputation what neede we then faith as a spirituall hand to receiue it If they say as M. PERKINS doth that faith is as it were a condition required in vs which when God seeth in vs he presently imputeth Christs righteousnesse to vs and maketh it ours Then will I be bolde to say that any other vertue is as proper as faith to haue Christ applyed vnto vs there being no other aptnesse requisite in the condition it selfe but only the will and ordinance of God then euery thing that it shal please him to appoynt is alike apt and so M. PERKINS had small reason to say that faith was the only apt instrument to apply to vs Christs righteousnesse Moreouer true diuine reason teacheth me that both hope and charity doe much more apply vnto Christians all Christes merits and make them doe then faith For what faith assureth me of in
be set to worke and if it doe not act that which it is set too then there wanted some thing requisite And consequently that was not the whole cause of that worke Now to the second proposition But their imagined faith can not apply to themselues Christs righteousnes without the presence of hope and charity For else he might be justified without any hope of heauen and without any loue towardes God and estimation of his honour which are thinges most absurd in themselues but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification which is nothing else but the playne vice of presumption as hath beene before declared Yet to auoid this inconuenience which is so great M. PE. graunteth that both hope and charity must needes be present at the justification but doe nothing in it but faith doth all as the head is present to the eie whē it seeth yet it is the eie alone that seeth Here is a worthy peece of Philosophy that the eie alone doth see whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seing the soule being the principall cause of sight as it is of all other actions of life sence and reason and it is not to purpose here where we require the presence of the whole cause not only of the instrumentall cause And to returne your similitude vpon your selfe as the eie cannot see without the head because it receiueth influence from it before it cā see so cannot faith justifie without charity because it necessarily receiueth spirit of life from it before it can doe any thing acceptable in Gods sight The fourth reason if faith alone doe justifie then faith alone will saue but it will not saue ergo M. PERKINS first denyeth the proposition and saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an Innocent babe dye shortly after his baptisme wherein he was justified shall he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is justified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therefore this first shift was very friuoulous Which M. PERKINS perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shall also be saued that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement Then must those wordes of the holy Ghost so often repeted in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time will render vnto euery man according to his workes But of this more amply in the question of merits 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which justification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare Ecclesias 1. Rom. 8. Luc. 13. 1. Ioan. 3. cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you doe penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is justified because we loue the brethren Againe of baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. So we may also walke in newes of life To all these and many such like places of Holy Scripture it pleased M. PERKINS to make answere in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is only that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wayte patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he sayeth neither yea nor nay leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him so neither to exclude hope or charity or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of justification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scriptures let vs joyne here some testimonies of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein M. PER. citeth some for him The most auncient and most valiant Martir S. Ignatius of our justification writeth thus Epist ad Philip. The beginning of life is faith but the end of it is charity but both vnited and ioyned together doe make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Libr. 2. strom but feare doth build and charity bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these wordes Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued Hom. 70. in Mat. he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well Lib. 3. hypognost S. Augustine cryeth out as it were to our Protestants and saith Heare O foolish Heretike and enemy to the true faith Good workes which that they may be donne are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue beene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified De side oper c. 14. And Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the harts of the faithfull Least by euill security they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtayne it Now the doctrine which M. PERKINS teacheth is cleane contrary For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can doe by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kind of cause but faith a lone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnes for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by them magnified and called the only and whole cause of our justification is in the end become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be justified If it be an instrumentall cause Conditio sine qua non let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and choose whether he had leifer to haue charity or the soule of man without any helpe of grace But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these wordes As Moyses lift vp the serpent in the desart Ioh. 3. so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth
generall that hope applyeth vnto me in particular by faith I beleeue CHRIST to be the Sauiour of all mankind by hope I trust to be made partaker of that saluation in him But charity doth yet giue me a greater confidence of saluation for by the rule of true charity as I dedicate and imploy my life labours and all that I haue to the seruice of God so all that God hath is made mine so farre forth as it can be made mine according vnto that sacred lawe of friendshippe Amicorum omnia sunt communia And therefore in true reason neither by faith nor any other vertue we take such holde on Christs merittes nor haue such interest in his inestimable treasures as by charity which S. Augustine vnderstoode well when he made it the modell and measure of justification saying That Charity beginning De nat gra c. vlt. was Iustice beginning Charity encreased was Iustice encreased great Charity was great Iustice and perfect Charity was perfect Iustice M. PERKINS fourth Reason is taken from the iudgement of the auncient Church They are blessed to whome without any labour or worke donne Ambros in Rom. 4. iniquities are remitted So no workes or repentance is required of them but only that they beleeue To these and such like wordes I answere First that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses Secondly that that Author excludeth not repentance but only the workes of Moyses lawe which the Iewes helde to be necessary as circumcision and such like see the place and conferre with it that which he hath written in the same worke vpon the fourth to the Hebrewes where hee hath these wordes Faith is a great thing and without it it is not possible to be saued but faith alone doth not suffice but it is necessary that faith vvorke by charity and conuerse worthy of God M. PERKINS next authority is gathered out of S. Augustine De verb. Ap. ser 40. There is one propitiation for all sinners to beleeue in Christ True but where is it that we neede nothing else but to beleeue Hesichius saith Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone Leuit. li. 1. cap. 2. and not of workes that is we doe not meritte by our workes done before grace anything at GODS hand but of his mercy receiue both faith and iustification 4. Bernard hath Whosoeuer thirsteth after righteousnes let him beleeue in thee Sup. cant serm 22. that being iustified by faith alone he way haue peace with God Answere By faith alone he excludeth all other meanes that either Iewe or Gentile required but not charity Which his very wordes include for howe can wee abhorre sinne and thirst after justice without charity and in the same worke Serm. 24. He declareth playnely that he comprehendeth alwayes charity when hee speakes of a justifying faith saying A right faith doth not make a man righteous if it worke not by Charity And againe Neither workes without faith nor faith without workes is sufficient to make the soule righteous Gal. 3. 5. Chrysostome they said he who rested on faith alone was accursed but Paul sheweth that he is blessed who rested on faith alone Answere He speakes of the Iewes who held Christians accursed because resting on the faith in Christ would not obserue withall Moyses law the Apostle contrary wise denounceth them accursed Gal. 5. who would joyne the ceremonies of Moyses lawe with Christian religion and so faith alone there excludeth onely the old lawe not the workes of charity so he mangleth pittifully a sentence of S. Basils saying De humil Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified onely by faith in Christ If a man knowe him selfe iustified by faith in Christ howe can he acknowledge that hee wants true justice His wordes truly repeted are these Let man acknowledge that hee is vnworthie of true iustice and that his iustification comes not of his desert but of the meere mercy of GOD through Christ. So that by faith alone S. Basill treating of humility excludes all merite of our owne but no necessary good disposition as you may see in his Sermon de fide where he proues by manie textes of Holy Scripture that charity is as necessary as faith Rom. 3. M. PERKINS last testimony is out of Origen Who proues as M. PER. said that onely beleeuing without workes iustifieth by the example of the Theefe on the Crosse of whose good workes there is no mention Answere Origen excludeth no good disposition in vs to justification but saith that a man may be saued without doing outwardly any good workes If he want time and place as the Theefe did who presently vpon his conuersion was put to death which is good Catholike Doctrine but that you may perceiue how necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to justification you shall finde if you consider well all circumstances not one of them to haue beene wanting in that good Theefes conuersion First that he stood in feare of Gods just judgement appeares by these his wordes to his fellowe Doest thou not feare God c. He had hope to be saued by Christ out of which he said O Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdome By both which speeches is shewed also his faith both in God that he is the gouuernour and just judge of the world and in Christ that he was the Redeemer of mankinde His repentance and confession of his fault is laid downe in this And we truly suffer worthely His charity towardes God and his neighbour in reprehending his fellowes blasphemie in defending Christs innocency and in the middest of his greatest disgraces and raging enemies to confesse him to be King of the world to come out of all which we may gather also that he had a full purpose to amend his life and to haue taken such order for his recouery as it should please Christ his Sauiour to appoint So that the lacked not any one of those dispositions which the Catholike Church requires to justification Now that that great Doctor Origen meant not to exclude any of these good qualities out of the companies of faith is apparant by that which he hath written on the next Chapter where he saith Rom. 4. That faith cannot be imputed to iustice to such as beleeue in Christ vnlesse they doe withall put of the old man and a little before more playnlie saying I thinke that faith is the first beginning of saluation hope is proceeding in the building but the toppe and perfection of the whole worke is charity THE THIRD DIFFERENCE ABOVT IVSTIFICATION howe farre forth good workes are required thereto MASTER PERKINS saith Pag. 91. That after the doctrine of the Church of Rome there be two kindes of iustification the first when of a sinner one is made iust the which is of the meere mercy of God through Christ without any merit of man onely some certayne
good deuotions of the soule as the actes of Faith Feare Hope Charity Repentance goe before to prepare as it were the way and to make it more sit to receiue that high grace of iustification The second iustification is when a iust man by the exercise of vertues is made more iust as a Childe newe borne doth by nuriture growe day by day bigger of this increase of grace Catholikes hold good workes to be the meritorious cause M. PERKINS first graunteth that good workes doe please God and haue a temporall reward 2. That they are necessary to saluation not as the cause thereof but either as markes in away to direct vs towardes saluation or as fruites and signes of righteousnes to declare one to be just before men all which he shuffleth in rather to delude our arguments then for that they esteeme much of good workes which they hold to be no better then deadly sins The maine difference then betweene vs consisteth in this whether good workes be the true cause indeede of the increase of our righteousnes which we call the second justification or whether they be only fruits signes or markes of it M. PERKINS pretendes to proue that they are no cause of the increase of our justice and yet frames not one argument directly to that purpose but repeates those objections and proposeth them now at large which he made before against the first justification the which although impertinent to this place yet I will solue them first and then set downe our owne We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe 2 Rom. 3. Answere The Apostle there speaketh of the justification of a sinner for he saith before that he hath proued both Iewe and Greeke to be vnder sinne and that all haue sinned and neede the glory of God Wherefore this place appertaynes not vnto the second justification and excludes only either workes of the law as not necessary vnto the first justification of a sinner against the Iewes who thought and taught them to be necessary or else against the Gentils any worke of ours from being any meritorious cause of that first justification for we acknowledge very willingly as you haue heard often before that euery sinner is justified freely of the meere grace of God through the merit of Christ onely and without any merit of the sinner himselfe and yet is not a sinner being of yeares of discretion meerely passiue in that his justification as M. PERKINS very absurdly saith for in their owne opinion he must beleeue which is an action and in ours not onely beleeue but also Hope Loue Repente And this kinde of justification excludeth all boasting in our soules as wel as theirs For as they must graunt that they may not bragge of their faith although it be an act of theirs so necessarily required at their justification that without it they could not be justified euen so let them thinke of the rest of those good preparations which we hold to be necessary that we cannot truly boast of them as though they came of our selues but we confesse all these good inspirations as all other good to descend from the bounteous liberality of the father of lightes and for the yeelding of our consent to them we can no more vaunt then of consenting vnto faith all which is no more then if a man be mired in a lake and vnable of himselfe to get out would be content that an other of his goodnesse should helpe him out of it Yet obserue by the way that Saint Paul forbiddeth not all glorying or boasting Rom. 5. For he gloryeth in the hope of glory of the Sonne of GOD 2. Cor. 10. and in his tribulations Againe He defineth that we may glory in measure and that he might glory in his power And that he was constayned to glory in his visions and reuelations 2. Cor. 12. So that a good Christian may glory in our Lord and in his heauenly giftes so it be in measure and due season Acknowledging them from whence they come But to boast and say that eyther GOD needed vs or that our good partes were cause that GOD called vs first to his seruice is both false and vtterly vnlawefull Ephes 2. So that by grace yea are saued through faith and that not of your selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Is nothing against our Doctrine of justification but too too ignorantly or maliciously cited against it and note also with Saint Augustine that faith is there mentioned Lib. 83. q. 76. to exclude all merites of our workes which went before and might seeme to the simple to haue beene some cause why God bestowed his first grace vpon vs but no vertuous dispositions requisite for the better preparation to the same grace and therefore very fondly doth M. PERKINS inferre that in that sentence Saint Paul speaketh of workes of grace because in the text following hee mentioned good workes Whereas the Apostle putteth an euident distinction betweene those two kinde of workes signifying the first To be of ourselues The second To proceede from vs as Gods workemanshippe created in CHRIST IESVS and the first he calleth Workes simply the second Good workes prepared of God for vs to walke in after our first iustification What grosse ignorance then was it to take these two so distinct manner of workes for the same and to ground himselfe so boldly vpon it Now to his second reason If you be circumcised Gal. 9. you are bound to the whole lawe Hence thus he argueth If a man will be iustified by workes he is bound to fulfill the whole lawe according to the rigour of it That is Paules ground But no man can fulfill the lawe according vnto the rigour of it ergo No man can be iustified by workes He can apply the text prefixed vnto any part of the argument Erit mihi magnus Appollo Saint Paul only saith in these wordes That if you bee circumcised yea are bound to keepe the whole lawe of Moyses M. PERKINS That if a man will be iustified by workes he must fulfill the rigour of the lawe Which are as just as Germains lippes as they say But M. PERKINS sayes that it is Saint Paules ground but he is much deceiued for the Apostles ground is this That circumcision is as it were a profession of Iudaisme and therefore he that would be circumcided did make himselfe subject vnto the whole lawe of the Iewes Of the possibilities of fulfilling the lawe because M. PERKINS toucheth so often that string shall be treated in a distinct question as soone as I haue dispatched this M. PERKINS third Argument Election to saluation is of grace without workes wherefore the iustification of a sinner is of grace alone without workes because election is the cause of iustification Answere That election is of grace without workes done of our owne simple forces or without the workes of
Moyses lawe but not without prouision of good workes issuing out of faith and the helpe of Gods grace as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits OF THE SECOND IVSTIFICATION THE fourth argument A man iust be fully iustified before he can doe a good worke and therefore good workes can not goe before iustification True not before the first justification of a sinner But good Sir you hauing made in the beginning of this last Article a distinction betweene the first and second justification And hauing before discussed the first and the second now remayning and expecting you why did you not say one word of it the matter being ample and well worthy the handling albeit you will not willingly confesse any second justification as you say Yet had it beene your part at least to haue disproued such arguments as we bring to proue a second justification Yee acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification But these degrees must be made downeward of euill worser and worst for if all our sanctification and best workes be like vnto defiled cloutes and no better then deadly sinnes as you hold and else where Pag. 76. let any wise man judge what degrees of goodnes can be lodged in it Againe how absurd is that position that there is but one justification whereby they take fast hold on Christs righteousnes which can neuer after be either loosed or increased Why then doe you with your brother Iouinian maintayne that all men are equally righteous If it so be Lib. 2. con Iouin Epist 81. Epist 57. Hom. 15. in Ezech. let him that desireth to see you well coursed read S. Hier. S. Amb. S. August S. Greg. At least we must needes vphold that a man is as just and righteous at his first conuersion as at his death how Godly a life soeuer he lead against which I will put downe these reasons following First that of the reuelations Let him that is iust be yet iustified or as your text hath it Cap. 22. He that is righteous let him be more righteous and that of feare not to be iustified euen vntill death Eccles 18. doe conuince that there are more justifications then one and that a man may increase in justification and righteousnes vntill death Which is confirmed where it is said That the path of a iust man proceedeth Prob. 4. as the light doth vntill it be perfect day Which is degrees more more And S. Paul teacheth the same where he saith to men that giue almes plentifully 2. Cor. 9. That God will multiply their seede and augment the increases of the fruits of their iustice Further S. Iames doth most effectually proue this increase of righteousnes and the second iustification in these wordes Abraham our father was he not iustified by workes offering Isaac his Sonne vpon the Aultar Cap. 2. That he speaketh of the second iustification is euident for Abraham was iustified before Isaac was borne as it is most manifest by the Scripture it selfe and by that heroicall act of not sparing his onely entirely beloued Sonne Genes 15. Rom. 4. his iustice was much augmented And the Apostle himselfe seemeth to haue forseene all our aduersaries cauillation and to haue so longe before preuented them First that common shift of theirs that this worke was a signe or the fruit onely of his faith and no companion of it in the matter of iustification is formally confuted for the holy Ghost speaking distinctly of both his faith and worke and joyning them both in this act of justification attributeth the better part of it vnto his worke thus Seest thou that faith did worke with his workes and by the workes the faith was consummate and made perfect Which he doth after fitly declare by a similitude comparing faith to the body and good workes to the soule which giue life and lustre to faith otherwise faith is of litle value estimation with God Which S. Paul also teacheth at large among other speeches including this That if he should haue all faith and wanted charity 1. Cor. 13 he were nothing And comparing faith charity together defineth expresly that charity is the greater vertue Which charity is the fountayne of all good workes And so by this preferring these workes of charity before faith he doth stop the other starting hole of the Protestants that Abraham forsooth was justified before God by onely faith but was declared just before men by his workes For if God esteeme more of charity then of our faith a man is more justified before God by charity then by faith Againe in the very place where this noble fact is recorded to shew how acceptable it was to God himselfe it is said in the person of God Gen. 22. Nowe I knowe that thou louest me and to conuince all obstinate cauilling is it not said that his faith did in this very fact cooperate with his workes and that the worke made his faith perfect which conjunction of both of them together doth demonstrate that he speaketh of his justification before God adding also That he was therefore called the friend of God Which could not haue beene if thereby he had beene only declared just before men thus doth S. Augustine reconcile the two places of the Apostles S. Paul S. Iames which seeme contrarie S. Paul saying that a man is iustified by faith without workes and S. Iames that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely That S. Paul speaketh of workes which goe before faith such as we of our owne forces without the helpe of grace are able to doe and such he saith not to deserue our first iustification But S. Iames disputeth of workes which followe faith and issue out of our soules nowe garnished with grace and such he holdeth vs to be iustified by that is made more and more iust See the place He saith directly L. 83. quest q. 76. Serm. 16. de verb. Apos that we are iustified and that this justice doth increase whiles it doth proceede and profit Nothing then is more certaine and cleare then that there our justification may daylie be augmented and it seemeth to me that this also bee graunted in their opinion For they holding faith to be the only instrument of justification cannot deny but that there are many degrees of faith it is so plainely taught in the worde O yee of little faith Math. 8. Luc. 19. And then a little after I haue not founde so great faith in Israell And O Lord increase our faith and many such like where many different degrees of faith are mentioned How then can the justification which dependes vpon that faith not be correspondent vnto that diuersity of faith but all one Pag. 54. Againe M. PERK deliuereth plainly That men at the first are not so well assured of their saluation as they are afterward If then in the certainty of their saluation which is the prime effect of their
ought to doe and consequently doth not so well but that nowe and then he sinneth at the least venially and that therefore the said holy Doctor had just cause to say Li. 9. confess c. 13. Woe be to the laudable life of a man if it be examined without mercy Al which notwithstanding just men may out of that charity which they haue in this life doe many good workes which are pure from all sinne as hath beene proued They alleadge yet another place out of S. Augustine That belongeth vnto the perfection of a iustman Lib. 3. conduas Epist Pelag. c. 7. to knowe in truth his imperfection and in humility to confesse is True that is as he teacheth else where First that the perfection of this life is imperfection being compared with the perfection of the life to come Againe that the most perfect in this life hath many imperfections both of witte and will and thereby many light faultes Now come we vnto S. Gregory our blessed Apostle out of whose sweet wordes ill vnderstood they seeme to haue sucked this their poison Lib. 9. morall cap. 1. He saith The holy man Iob because he did see all the merit of our vertue to be vice if it be straightly examined of the inward iudge doth rightly adde if I will contend with him I cannot answere him one for a thowsand I answere that by our vertue in that place is to be vnderstood that vertue which we haue of our owne strength without the aide of Gods grace which we acknowledge to be commonly infected with some vice that S. Gregory so tooke it appeares by the wordes both going before and following before he writeth thus A man not compared to God receiued iustice but compared vnto him he leeseth it For whosoeuer compareth himselfe vnto the author of all good leeseth that good which he had receiued for he that doth attribute the good vnto himselfe doth sight against God with his owne giftes And after thus To contend with God is not to giue to God the glory of his vertue but to take it to himselfe And so all the merit of this our vertue which commeth not of God but is attributed vnto our selfe as proceeding onely from our selues is the very vice of pride and cannot be prejudiciall vnto true good workes al which we acknowledge to proceede principally from the grace of God dwelling in vs. He saith further with S. Augustine that in this life we cannot attayne vnto perfect purity such as shall be in heauen read the beginning of his first and second booke of Morales and there you shall finde him commending Iob to the skyes as a good and holy man by his temptations not foyled but much aduanced in vertue Now before I depart from this large question of justification I will handle yet one other question which commonly ariseth about it it is WHETHER FAITH MAY BE WITHOVT CHARITY I PROVE that it may so be first out of these wordes of our Sauiour Many shall say vnto me in that day Lord Lord Math. 7. haue we not prophecied in thy name haue we not cast out Diuels haue we not done many miracles to whome I will confesse that I neuer knewe you depart from me all yee that worke iniquitie That these men beleeued in Christ and perswaded themselues assuredly to be of the elect appeareth by their confident calling of him Lord Lord and the rest that followeth Yet Christ declareth manifestly that they wanted charity in saying that they were workers of iniquity Math. 22. 2. When the King went to see his guestes He found there a man not attired in his wedding garment and therefore commaunded him to be cast into vtter darknes This man had faith or else he had not beene admitted vnto that table which signifieth the Sacraments yet wanted charity which to be the wedding garment besides the euidence of the text is also proued where in expresse tearmes Apoc. 19. The garments of Christs Spouse is declared to be the righteousnes and good workes of the Saintes And that with great reason for as S. Paul teacheth 1. Cor. 13. Faith shall not remayne after this life With what instrument then trow you will the Protestants lay hold on Christs righteousnes That charity is that wedding garment S. Hierome vpon the same place doth witnesse saying That it is the fulfilling of our Lordes commaundements And S. Gregory doth in expresse wordes define it Hom. 38. in Euang. What saith he must we vnderstand by the wedding garment but charity So doe S. Hilary and Origen and S. Chrysostome vpon that place Can. 22. in Math. Tract 20. in Math. Math. 25. 3. The like argument is made of the foolish Virgins Who were part of the Kingdome of God and therefore had faith which is the gate entrance into the seruice of God Yea in the house of God they aspired vnto more then ordinary perfection Hauing professed Virginity yet either caried away with vayne glory as S. Gregory takes it Or not giuing themselues to the workes of mercy spirituall and corporall as S. Chrysostome expoundes it briefly not continuing in their former charity for faith once had cannot after the Protestants doctrine be lost were shut out of the Kingdome of heauen albeit they presumed strongly on the assurance of their saluation as is apparant By their confident demaunding to be let in for they said Lord Lord open vnto vs. Ioh. 12. 4. Many of the princes beleeued in Christ but did not confesse him for they loued more the glory of men then the glory of God What can be more euident then that these men had faith whē the H. ghost saith expresly that they beleeued in christ which is the onely act of faith And yet were destitute of charity which preferreth the glorie and seruice of God before al things in this world Cap. 2. 5. This place of S. Iames. What shall it profit my bretheren if any man say that he hath faith but hath not workes what shall his faith be able to saue Supposeth very playnlie that a man may haue faith without good workes that is without charity but that it shall auayle him nothing Caluin saith that the Apostle speakes of a shadowe of faith which is a bare knowledge of the articles of our creede but not of a justifying faith Without doubt he was litle acquainted with that kinde of faith by which Protestants be justified but he directly speakes of such a faith as Abraham was justified by saying That that faith did worke with his workes and was made perfect by the workes Was this but a shadowe of faith but they reply that this faith is likened vnto the faith of the Diuell and therefore cannot be a justifying faith that followeth not an excellent good thing may be like vnto a badde in some thinges as Diuels in nature are not only like that the very same as Angels be euen so a full Christian faith may be well likened
foundation maketh not Christ a Pseudochrist as you say here or else you teach your disciples very pernitiously to hold the same necessary heades of Religion with it But to leaue to you the reconciliation of these places let vs examine briefly how you confirme your paradox that the Church of Rome maketh Christ a false Christ which you goe about to proue by foure instances The first is because the seruant of his seruants may chaunge and adde to his commaundements hauing so great power that he may open and shut heauen to whome he will and binde the very conscience with his owne lawes and consequently be partaker of the spiritual kingdome of Christ Here are diuerse reasons hudled vp in one but all of litle moment for all these seuerall faculties which the Pope enioyeth being receiued by the free gift of Christ and to be employed in his seruice onlie and to his honour and glorie are so farre off from making Christ a Pseudochrist that they doe highly recommēd his most singuler bounty towardes his followers without any derogation to his owne diuine prerogatiues The particulars shal be more particularly answered in their places hereafter Now I say in a word that Christs Vicar cannot change any one of Gods cōmaundements nor adde any contrarie vnto them but may well enact establish some other conformable vnto them which doe bind in cōscience for that power is granted of God to euery soueraigne gouernour Rom. 13. as witnesseth S. Paul saying Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers And that as it is in the 5. verse following of necessity not only for wrath but also for conscience sake So that to attribute power vnto one that is vnder CHRIST to binde our consciences is not to make CHRIST a Pseudochrist but to glorifie him much acknowledging the power which it hath pleased him to giue vnto men In like manner what an absurde illation is that from the power to open and shut heauen gates which all both Catholikes and Protestants confesse to haue beene giuen to Saint Peter and the rest of the Apostles to inferre that CHRIST is made a Pseudochrist as who should say the master spoyled himselfe of his supreame authority by appoynting a stewarde ouer his housholde or a porter at this gates he must be both Master and Man to belike And thus much of the first instance Come we now to the second It is that we make Christ an Idoll for albeit we call him a Sauiour yet in vs in that he giues his grace to vs that by our merits we may be our owne sauiours c. I meruaile in whome he should be a sauiour if not in vs What is he the Sauiour of Angels or of anie other creatures I hope not but the mischief is that he giues grace to vs that there by we may merite and so become our owne Sauiours This is a phrase vnheard of among Catholiks that anie man is his owne Sauiour neither doth it folowe of that position that good works are meritorious but well that we applie vnto vs the saluation which is in CHRIST IESVS by good works as the Protestants auouch they doe by faith onlie In which sence the Apostle S. Paul sayeth to his deare Disciple Timothe Tim. 4. For this doing thow shalt saue both thy selfe and them that heare thee And this doth no more diminish the glorie of our Soueraigne Sauiours infinit merits then to say that we are saued by faith onlie good works no lesse depending if not more aduancing Christs merits then only faith as shall be prooued hereafter more at large in the question of merits Now that other good mens merits may steede them who want some of their owne may be deduced out of an hundred places of the Scriptures namely out of those where God sayeth that for the sake of one of his true seruants he will shewe mercie vnto thousands as is expressely said in the end of the first commandement In like manner I answere vnto your third instance that for Christ to haue taken away by his blessed Passion the eternall payne due vnto our sinnes to haue left a temporall to be satisfied by vs is not to make himselfe a false Christ but a most louing kinde and withall a most prudent Redeemer Wiping away that by himselfe which passed our forces and reseruing that to vs which by the helpe of his grace we wel may ought to doe not only because it were vnseemely that the parts of the body should be disproportionable to the head but also because it is reasonable as the Apostle holdeth Rom. 8. that we suffer here with Christ before wee raigne with him in his Kingdome In your last instance you say that we make Christ our mediator of intercession to GOD thinking out of your simplicity that therein we much magnifie him sing Osanna vnto him Whereas we hold it for no small disparagement vnto his diuine dignitie to make him our Intercessor that is to pray him to pray for vs who is of himselfe right able to helpe vs in all we can demaund being aswell God as Man And albeit one in thought singling out the humanity of Christ from his diuine nature and person might make it an intercessor for vs Yet that being but a Metaphisical cōceipt to separate the nature from the person since the Arrian heresie which held Christ to be inferior to his Father it hath not beene practised by Catholikes who alwayes pray our Sauiour Christ to haue mercy vpon vs neuer to pray for vs. And consequently make him no mediator of intercession but of redemption And to come to your grieuous complaint that withall his Mother must be Queene of heauen and by right of a mother commaund him there Who can sufficiently meruaile at their vnnaturall grosse pates who take it for a disgrace to the Sonne to aduaunce his owne good Mother or else who wel in his wits considering Christs bounty to strangers and his enemies will not be perswaded that on his best beloued mother he did bestowe his most speciall fauours For hauing taken flesh of her hauing suckt her breasts and receiued his nuriture and education of her in his tender yeares and being aswell followed of her as of any other Is it possible that he should not be as good to her as to others vnto whome he was not at all beholding Againe the verie place of a mother requiring preheminence before all seruants and subjects of what dignitie soeuer doth not the right rule of reason lead vs to thinke that Christ the fountayne of all wisdome replenished the B. Virgin Marie his deare Mother with such grace as should make her fit for that place it lying in his hands and free choise to doe it And therefore is she trulie tearmed of holy and learned Antiquity our Lady and Queene exalted aboue all quyers of Angels That which you impute vnto vs farther that she must in the right of a mother commaund her Sonne is no
doctrine of the Roman Church nor said in all her seruice We say Shew thyselfe to be a mother but it is not added by commaunding thy Sonne that is your glosse which is accursed because it corrupteth the text for it followeth in that place Sumat per te preces c. Present our prayers to him that vouchsafed to be borne of thee for vs. If any priuat person by meditation pearcing more profoundly into the mutuall loue and affection of such a Sonne towardes so worthie a Mother doe deeme her prayers as forcible in kindnes as if they were commaundements and in that sence call them commaundements according to the French phrase Vos priers me sont des commandements that may be donne without derogation to Christs supreame dignity and with high commendation of his tender affection vnto his reuerent best beloued mother Wherefore to conclude this Epistle if there be no waightier cause then this by you here produced why you your adherents doe not reconcile your selues vnto the Church of Rome you may shortly by Gods grace become new men For we are so farre off from making our Sauiour Christ a Pseudochrist or from drawing one jote of excellency from his soueraigne power merits or dignity that we in the very points by you put downe doe much more magnifie him then you do For in maintayning the authority by him imparted vnto his deputies our spirituall Magistrates and of their merits and satisfaction We first say that these his seruants prerogatiues be his free gifts of more grace bestowed on whome he pleaseth which is no small prayse of his great liberality And withall affirme that there is an infinite difference betweene his owne power merits and satisfaction and ours Wherein his soueraigne honour is preserued entire to himselfe without any comparison Now you make Christs authority so base his merits and satisfaction so meane that if he impart any degree of them vnto his seruants he looseth the honour of all from himselfe Whereupon it followeth inuincibly if you vnfeignedly seeke CHRIST IESVS his true honour and will esteeme of his diuine giftes worthelie you must hold out no longer but vnite your selfe in these necessary heades of Religion vnto the Catholike Church of Rome which so highly exalteth him both in his owne excellency and in his singuler giftes to his subjects AN ANSWERE TO THE PREFACE VPON your preface to the reader I will not stand because it toucheth no point of controuersie let it be declared in your next what you meane when you desire your reformed Catholike to hold the same necessarie heades of Religion with the Roman Church for if the Roman Church doth erre in the matter of faith and iustification in the number and vertue of the Sacraments in the bookes and interpretation of the word of God if she raze the foundation and make Christ a Pseudochrist and an Idoll to omitte twenty other errors in substantiall points of faith as in this your small discourse you would perswade there will remayne verie fewe necessarie heades of Religion for them to agree in And be you wel assured that you are so wide from winning Catholikes by this your worke to a better liking of your Religion that you haue taken the high way to lead them to a farre greater dislike of it by teaching that in so many materiall points it differeth so farre from theirs For al Catholikes hold for most assured that which the most auncient learned holy Doctor Athanasius in his creede deliuereth in the 2. verse Which Catholike faith vnlesse euerie man obserue wholy and inuiolably not omitting or shrinking from any one article of it without doubt he shall perish euerlastingly If S. Basil that reuerent blessed Father of the Church doth hold it the duty of euery good Christian rather to loose his life then to condescend to the alteration of any one sillable in matter of faith Theod. 4. his cap. 17. you may be sure that we Catholikes cannot but carry a very base cōceipt of your doctrine who goe about vnder the ouerworne threedbare cloake of reformation to deface and corrupt the purer and greater part of Christian Religion specially when they shall perceiue the most points of your pretended reformation to be nothing else but old rotten condemned heresies newe scoured vp and furbushed so in shew made more saleable vnto the vnskilfull as in this treatise shall be proued in euery Chapter THE THEAME OF M. PERKINS PROLOGVE And I heard an other voice from heauen say goe out of her my people that you be not partakers of her sinnes and receiue not of her plagues Reuelat. 18.3 ANSWERE TO THE PROLOGVE Exordium Commune THE learned knowe it to be a fault to make that the entry vnto our discourse which may as properly fit him that pleadeth against vs but to vse that for our proeme which in true sence hath nothing for vs nay rather beareth stronglie for our aduersarie must needes argue great want of iudgement Such is the sentence aboue cited out of S. Iohn by M. PERKINS for it being trulie vnderstood is so farre off from terrifying anie one from the Catholike Roman Church as it doth vehemently exhort all to flie vnto it by forsaking their wicked company that are banded against it For by the purple Harlot in that place is signified as shall be proued presently the Roman Empire as then it was the slaue of Idols and with most bloudy slaughter persecuting Christs Saints Those of the Church of Rome being as nearest vnto it so most subject to that sacrilegious butcherie Wherefore that voice which S. Iohn heard say Goe out of her my people that you be not partakers of her sinnes c. can haue none other meaning then that all they who desire to be Gods people must separate themselues in faith and manners from them who hate persecute the Roman Church as did then the Heathen Emperours now doe all Heretikes Vnlesse they will be partakers of their sinnes consequently of their plagues This shall yet appeare more plainly in the examination of this Chapter Where I will deale friendly with my aduersary aduantage him all that I can that all being giuē him which is any way probable it may appeare more euidently how litle he hath to any purpose out of this place of the Apocalipse whereof all Protestants vaunt and bragge so much both in their bookes pulpits Well then I will admitte that in the 17. 18. Chapters of the reuel by the whoore of Babilon is vnderstood the Roman state and regiment which in lawfull disputations they are not able to proue the most juditious Doctor S. Augustine and diuerse others of the auncient Fathers with the learned troupe of later Interpreters expounding it of the whole corps and society of the wicked And as for the 7. hilles on the which they lay their foundation they are not to be taken literally The Angell of God in the very text it selfe interpreting
that he when he commendeth grace denyeth free will Lib. 4. con Iul. c. 8. Much lesse would I say that which thou lyingly dost affirme me to say free will to be denied if grace be commended or grace to be denied if free will be commended Nowe in fewe wordes I will passe ouer the objections which he frameth in our names But misapplieth them First Obiection That man can doe good by nature as giue almes doe Iustice speake the truth c. And therefore will them without the helpe of grace This argument we vse to proue libertie of will in ciuill and morall matters euen in the corrupted state of man and it doth demonstrate it and M. PERKINS in his third cōclusion doth graunt it And his answere here is farre from the purpose for albeit saith he touching the substance of the worke it be good yet it faileth both in the beginning because it proceedes not from a pure hart and a faith vnfeigned and also in the end which is not the glory of God Answere It faileth neither in the one nor other for that almes may issue out of a true naturall compassion which is a sufficient good fountayne to make a worke morally good faith and grace to purge the hart are necessary only for good and meritorious workes Againe being done to relieue the poore mans necessity GOD his Creator and Master is thereby glorified And so albeit the man thought not of GOD in particuler yet GOD being the finall end of all good any good action of it selfe is directed towardes him when the man putteth no other contrary end thereunto 2. Obiection God hath commaunded all to beleeue and repent therefore they haue naturall free will by vertue whereof being helped by the spirit of God they can beleeue The force of the argument consisteth in this that GOD being a good Lord will not commaund any man to doe that which he is no way able to doe Ans M. PERKINS answereth in effect for his wordes be obscure that GOD commaundeth that which we be not able to performe but that which we should doe Then I hope he will admitte that he will enable vs by his grace to doe it or else how should we doe it God surely doth not bind vs by commaundement to any impossible thing he is no tyrant but telleth vs that his yoke is sweete and his burthen easie Mat. 11. And S. Iohn witnesseth that his commaundements are not heauy Ioh. 5. He was farre off from thinking that GOD would tie any man by lawe to doe that which he was altogether vnable to performe This in the end M. PERKINS himselfe approueth 3. Ob. If man haue no free wil to sin or not to sin then no man is to be punished for his sinnes because he sinneth by a necessitie not to be auoyded He answereth that the reason is not good for though man cannot but sinne yet is the fault in himselfe and therefore is to be punished Against which I say that this answere supposeth that which is false to wit that a man in sinne cannot choose but sinne For by the helpe of God who desireth all sinners conuersion 1. Pet. 3. and thereunto affordeth grace sufficient a sinner in a moment may call for grace and repent him and so choose whether he will sinne or no and consequently hath free wil to sin or not to sin And that example of a bankerupt is not to purpose for he cannot when he will satisfie his creditours who content not themselues with his repentance without repay of their money as God doth Nowe concerning the force of this argument heare Saint Augustines opinion De duab animab contr Manich. in these wordes Neither are wee here to search obscure books to learne that no man is worthy of disprayse or punishment which doeth not that which he cannot doe for saith he doe not shepheardes vpon the downes sing these thinges doe not poetes vpon the stages acte them Doe not the vnlearned in their assemblies and the learned in their libraries acknowledge them Doe not maisters in the scholes Prelats in the pulpits finally al mankind throughout the whole world confesse and teach this to wit that no man is to be punished because he did that which he could not choose but doe Should he not then according to S. Augustines censure be hissed out of all honest companie of men that denieth this so manifest a truth confessed by all Mankinde How grosse is this heresie that so hoodeth a man and hardneth him that be he learned yet he blusheth not to deny roundly that which is so euident in reason that euen naturall sence doth teach it vnto sheepheards God of his infinite mercie deliuer vs from this straunge light of the newe Gospell CHAPTER 2. OF ORIGINALL SINNE OVR CONSENTS M. PERKINS FIRST CONCLVSION Pag. 28. THEY say naturall corruption after Baptisme is abolissed and so say we but let vs see how farre forth it is abolissed In originall sinne are three thinges First the punishment which is the first and second death second guiltines which is the binding vp of the creature vnto punishment third the fault or the offending of God vnder which I comprehend our guiltines in Adams first offence as also the corruption of the hart which is a naturall inclination and pronesse to any thing that is euill or against the law of God For first we say that after Baptisme in the regenerate the punishment of Originall sinne is taken away Rom. 8.1 For there is no condemnation saith the Apostle to them that are in CHRIST IESVS For the second that is guiltines we further condescend and say that it is also taken away in them that are borne anewe For considering there is no condemnation to them there is nothing to binde them to punishment Yet this caueat must be remembred namely that the guiltines is remoued from the person regenerate but not from the sinne in the person But of this more hereafter Thirdly the guilt in Adams first offence is pardoned And touching the corruption of the hart I auouch two thinges First that the very power and strength whereby it raigneth in man is taken away in the regenerate Secondly that this corruption is abolished as also the fault of euerie actuall sinne past So farre forth as it is the fault and sinne of the man in whome it is In deede it remaines till death and it is sinne considered in it selfe so long as it remaines but it is not imputed to the person And in that respect is as though it were not it being pardoned Hitherto M. PER. Annotations vpon our Consent First we say not that the punishment of Originall sinne is in it or any part of it but rather a due correction and as it were an expulsion of it this is but a peccadilio but there lurketh a Serpent in that caueat that the guiltines of Originall sinne is remoued from the person regenerate but not from the sinne in the
Therefore saith he it is put ambiguous and left vncertayne that while men are doubtfull of their saluation they may doe penance more manfully and so may moue God to take compassion on them An other reason of this vncertayntie De cor gra cap 13. yeeldeth Saint Augustine in these wordes In this place of temptation such is our infirmity that assurednes might engender pride To this agreeth S. Gregory saying Lib. 9. moral cap. 17. If we knowe our selues to haue grace we are proude So that to strike downe the pride of our harts and to humble vs and to make vs trauaile more carefully in the workes of mortification God doth not ordinarily assure men at the first of their owne saluation but to cheere vp their hartes on the other side doth put them in great hope of it like to a discreet and good Lord who will not at the first entrance into his seruice infeafe his seruant in the fee simple of those lands which after vpon his good deserts he meaneth to bestowe on him This is an other kinde of Doctrine then that which M. PER. in his last supply deliuereth to witte That if we regard our owne indisposition we must despaire because we be not worthy of his mercie Not so good Sir Because we knowe that he bestoweth mercy vpon the vnworthie at the first justification of a sinner but will not admitte into the Kingdome of heauen any vnworthy but giues men grace while they liue to worke that they are made worthy of his heauenly Kingdome according to that They shall walke with me in whites Apoc. 3.4 because they are worthie but of this more fully in the chapter of merits The fift reason for our opinion is taken out of M. PER. second exception to witte howsoeuer a man may be assured for his present state yet no man is certaine of his perseuerance to the end And therefore although we might be assured of our Iustification yet can we not be certaine of our Saluation For he only that perseuereth to the end shall be saued M. PERK answere is that prayer doth assure vs to perseuer to the end for God biddes vs pray that we fall not into temptation and promiseth an issue forth 1. Cor. 10. So then the assurance dependes vpon prayer and not vpon our former faith What then if we doe not pray so as we should may not the enemy then not only wound but kill vs to it cannot be denyed and therein as in diuers other workes of pietie many haue bin too too slacke as the pitifull fall of thousands haue taught vs. Oh saith M. PERKINS it cannot be that he which was once a member of Christ can euer after be wholy cut off O shamelesse assertion and contrary to many playne textes and examples of holy Scriptures Doth not our Sauiour say in expresse words That euery branch in me not bearing fruit Ioh. 15. he will take it away And againe If any abide not in me he shall be cast forth as the branch and shall wither and be cast into the fire which doth demonstrate that some which were members of Christ be wholy cut off and that for euer Are we not by faith made members of Christ by our aduersaries owne confession and doth not our blessed Sauiour say Luke 8. expounding the parable of the sower That the seede which fell vpon the rocke doth signifie them who with ioy receiue the word and these saith he haue no roote but for a time they beleeue and in time of temptation reuolt 1. Tim. 1.19 1. Tim. 4. 2. Tim. 6. Doth not Saint Paul in expresse tearmes say That some hauing faith and good conscience expelling good conscience haue made shipwracke of their faith of whome were by name Hymenaeus and Alexander The like That in the the last dayes some shoulde reuolt from the faith Againe That some for couetuousnesse sake had erred from the faith And for example amongst other take Saul the first King of Israell who was at his election as the holy Ghost witnesseth so good a man 1. Reg. 19. that there was no better then he in Israell and yet became reprobate as is in the Scripture signified The like is probable of Salomon 2. Reg. 15. 16. and in the newe Testament of Iudas the traytor and Simon Magus whome S. Luke saith that he also himselfe beleeued and after became an Arch-heretike Act. 8. and so died the like almost may be verefied of all Arch-heretikes who before they fell were of the faithfull But what neede we further proofe of this matter seeing that this is cosen german if not the very same with one of that infamous heretike Iouinians erronious articles Heres 82. Li. 2. cont Iouin condemned and registred by S. Hierome and S. Augustine who held that just men after Baptisme could not sinne and if they did sinne they were indeede washed with water but neuer receiued the spirit of grace his ground was that he which had once receiued the spirit of grace could not sinne after which is just M. PERKINS proposition so that to vpholde an errour he falleth into an olde condemned heresie And which is yet more absurd in the next confirmation he letteth slippe at once a brace of other heresies these be his wordes And if by sinne one were wholy seuered from Christ for a time in his recouery he is to be baptised the second time Where you haue first rebaptizing which is the principall error of the Anabaptists and withall the heresie of the Nouatians who held that if any in persecution denied Christ after baptisme there was no remedie left in Gods Church for their recouerie but must be left to God so saith M. PERKINS for that of rebaptizing he seemes to bring in ex absurdo so that the common saying is verified in him one absurdity being graunted a thowsand followe after But doth he knowe no other meanes then Baptisme to recouer one cut off from Christ hath he forgotten that corrupted sentēce of the Prophet wherewith they beginne their common prayer What houre soeuer a sinner doth repent him of his sinne c. With them repentance and with vs the Sacrament of Penance serue a man at any time of his life to be reconciled to Christ But we must answere vnto that of S. Iohn They went out from vs 1. Ioan. 2. but they were not of vs for if they had beene of vs they would haue continued with vs. I answere If they went out from vs they were before with vs which confirmeth our assertion that men may departe from their faith and Christes profession but such men were not indeede of the number of the elect of which S. Iohn was for then either they would haue continued with them in the Christian faith or else by hartie repentance would haue returned vnto it backe againe which is S. Augustines owne exposition De bono perse c. 8. And these be the Arguments for the
if he be not in state of grace it is long of himselfe and no want on Gods parte The second place hath not so much as any shewe of wordes for him thus he speaketh Let no man aske an other man Tract 5. in Epis Ioan. but returne to his owne hart and if he finde Charity there he hath securitie for his passage from life to death What neede was there to seeke charity in his hart for security of his saluation if his faith assured him thereof therefore this text maketh flat against him The next Author he citeth is Saint Hylarie in these wordes Sup. 5 cap. Mat. The Kingdome of heauen which our Lord professed to be in him selfe his will is that it be hoped for without any doubtfulnes of vncertayne will at all is an addition otherwise there is no iustification by faith if faith it selfe be made doubtfull First he saith but as we say that the Kingdome of heauen is to be hoped for without anie doubtfulnesse for wee professe certayntie of hope and deny onely certayntie of faith as M. PERKINS confesseth before And as for faith we say with him also it is not doubtfull but very certaine What maketh this to the purpose that a man must beleeue his owne saluation when S. Hilary speaketh there of faith of the resurrection of the dead His last Author is S. Bernard Epist 107. Who is the iust man but he that being loued of God loues him againe which comes not to passe but by the spirit reuealing by faith the eternall promise of God of his saluation to come which reuelation is nothing else but the infusion of spirituall grace by which the deedes of the flesh are mortified the man is prepared to the kingdome of heauen together receiuing in one spirit that whereby he may presume that he is loued and loues againe Note that he saith the reuelation of the spirit to be nothing else but the infusion of spirituall graces and comfort whereby a man hath some feeling of Gods goodnesse towardes him by which as he saith he may presume but not beleeue certainlie that he is loued of God But let S. Bernard in the same place interpret himselfe there he speaketh thus as I cited once before It is giuen to men to tast before hand somewhat of the blisse to come c. Of the which knowledge of our selues now in part perceiued a man doth in the meane season glory in hope but not yet in security His opinion then is expresly that for all the reuelations of the spirit made by faith vnto vs we are not assured for certainty of our saluation but feele great joy through the hope we haue hereafter to receiue it This passage of testimonies being dispatched let vs now come vnto the fiue other reasons which M. PERKINS produceth in defence of their opinion The first reason is That in faith there are two thinges the one is an infallible assurance of those thinges which we beleeue This we graunt and therehence proue as you heard before that there can be no faith of our particular saluation because we be not so fully assured of that but that wee must stand in feare of losing of it Apoc. 3. according to that Holde that which thou hast least perhaps an other receiue thy crowne But the second poynt of faith puts all out of question For saith M. PERKINS it doth assure vs of remission of our sinnes and of life euerlasting in particular Proue that Sir and we neede no more Iohn 1. It is proued out of S Iohn As many as receiued him he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God namely to them that beleeue in his name This text commeth much too short he gaue them power to be the sonnes that is gaue them such grace that they were able and might if they would be sonnes of God but did not assure them of that neither much lesse that they should so continue vnto their liues end I omitte his vnsauoury discourse of eating and beleeuing Christ and applying vnto vs his benefittes which he might be ashamed to make vnto vs that admitte no part of it to be true I confesse that therein faith hath his part if it be joyned with charity and frequentation of the Sacraments This is it which S. Paul teacheth Gal. 3. That not by the workes of Moyses lawe but by faith in Christ Iesus we receiue the promises of the spirit and shall haue hereafter the performance if we obserue those thinges which Christ hath commaunded vs. But what is this to certainty of Saluation But saith he it is the property of faith to apply Christ vnto vs and proues it out of S. Augustine Beleeue and thou hast eaten Againe Send vp thy faith and thou maist holde Christ in heauen c. To which Tract 25. in Ioh. and such like authorities I answere that we finde Christ we holde Christ we see Christ by faith beleeuing him to be the sonne of God and redeemer of the world and Iudge of the quicke and the dead and wee vnderstand and disgest all the mysteries of this holy worde But where is it once said in any of these sentences that we are assured of our saluation we beleeue all these poyntes and many more but we shall be neuer the neare our saluation vnlesse we obserue Gods commaundements The seruant which knowes his Masters will and doth it not shall be beaten with many stripes Luke 12. Ioh. 15. Then you are my friends saith our Sauiour when you shall doe the things which I commaund you which we being vncertaine to performe assure not our selues of his friendship but when to our knowledge we goe as neare it as we can and demaund pardon of our wantes wee liue in good hope of it The second reason is Whatsoeuer the holy Ghost testifieth vnto vs that certainly by faith we must beleeue but the holy Ghost doth particularly testifie vnto vs our saluation ergo the first proposition is true The second is proued thus S. Paul saith the spirit of God beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the children of God The Papists to elude this reason alleage that it doth indeede witnesse our adoption Rom. 8. by some comfortable feeling of Gods fauour towarde vs which may often be mistaken whereof the Apostle warneth vs when he saith beleeue not euery spirit but trie the spirits whether they be of God or no. But saith M. PERKINS by their leaue 1. Ioh. 4. the testimonie of the spirit is more then a bare feeling of Gods grace For it is called the pleadge and earnest of Gods spirit in our harts And therefore it takes away all doubting as in a bargaine the earnest giuen puts all out of question 1. Cor. 1. I answere first out of the place it selfe that there followeth a condition on our parts to be performed which M. PERKINS thought wisedome to conceale For S. Paul saith that the spirit witnesseth with our
the lawe which saith doe these thinges and thou shalt liue Gal. 5. but there is nothing that can satisfie that iustice of the lawe but the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ ergo This reason is not worth a rush for when he requireth that our justice must satisfie the justice of the lawe I demaund what lawe he meaneth If Moyses lawe Gal 5. Gal. 5. of which those wordes Doe this and thou shalt liue are spoken Then I answere with the Apostle That you are euacuated or abolished from Christ that are iustified in the lawe that is he is a Iewe and no Christian that would haue Christian Iustice answerable to Moyses lawe If M. PER. would only that men justified must be able to fulfil Christs lawe I then graunt that they so be by the helpe of Gods grace which wil neuer faile them before they faile of their duties But saith M. PER. That iustice of man is vnperfect and cannot satisfie the iustice which God requires in his lawe and proues it out of Esay who saith All our righteousnesse is as a menstruous Isay 64 or defiled cloath I answere that the holy Prophet speaketh those wordes in the person of the wicked and therefore are maddely applied vnto the righteous That he speaketh of the the wicked of that nation and of that time appeareth playnlie by the text it selfe For he saith before But loe thou hast beene angrie for we haue offended and haue beene euer in sinne and after There is no man that calleth vpon thy name and standeth vp to take hold by thee And although the wordes be generall and seemes to the vnskilfull to comprehend himselfe also yet that is but the manner of preachers and specially of such as become Intercessors for others who vse to speake in the persons of them for whome they sue for if he had reckoned himselfe in that number he had lyed when he said There is none that call vpon thy name when as he immediately calleth vpon him in most vehement sort for mercy all which the best learned among them marking Luâ—â— Caâ—â— thiâ—â— confesse that this sentence can not be alleadged against the vertue of good workes Hence gather how dexterously M. PERKINS handleth Holy Scripture That which the Prophet spake of some euill men of one place and at one time that he applyeth vnto all good men for all times and all places But he will amend it in the next where he proues out of Saint Paul 1. 〈◊〉 that a cleare conscience which is a great part of inherent justice can nothing helpe to our iustification I am priuie to nothing by my selfe and yet I am not iustified thereby Here is a very prety peece of cousinage What doth the Apostle say that he was not iustified by his cleare conscience nothing lesse but that albeit he sawe nothing in himselfe to hinder his iustification yet GOD who hath sharper ey-sight might espie some iniquitie in him and therefore durst not the Apostle affirme himselfe to be iustified as if he should say if there be no other fault in mee in GODS sight then I can finde by mine owne insight I am iustified because I am guiltie of nothing and so the place proueth rather the vncertayne knowledge of our iustification as I haue before shewed But M. PERKINS addeth that we must remember that we shall come to judgement where rigour of justice shall be shewed We knowe it well but when there is no condemnation to those that by Baptisme be purged from originall sinne as he confesseth himselfe Pâ—â— the Apostle to teach in our consents about originall sinne what then needeth any iustified man greatly feare the rigorous sentence of a just judge And Saint Paul saith himselfe in the person of the just That he had ranne a good race c. and therefore there was a crowne of iustice laid vp for him by that iust iudge and not only to him but all them that loue Christs comming And concerning both inherent iustice and the ability of it to fulfill the lawe And what lawe Sâ—â— dâ—â— heare this one sentence of S. Augustine He that beleeueth in him he hath not that iustice which is of the lawe albeit the lawe be good but he shall fulfill the lawe not by iustice which he hath of himselfe but which is giuen of God for charity is the fulfilling of the lawe and from him is this charity powred into our hartes not certaynlie by our selues but by the Holy Ghost which is giuen vs. Now to the second argument He which knew no sinne was made sinne for vs that we might be made the righteousnes of God â— Cor. 5. which is in him Hence M. PERKINS reasoneth thus As Christ was made sinne for vs so we are made the righteousnes of God in him but Christ was made sinne by imputation of our sinnes he being most holy Therefore a sinner is made righteous in that Christs righteousnes is imputed vnto him I deny both propositions the former because it hath a comparison in the manner of our justification with the sinne which Christ was made for vs for in the text of the Apostle there is no signification of a similitude that Christ was so made sinne as we are made just That is then M. PER. vayne glosse without any likelyhood in the text The other proposition is also false for Christ was not made sin by imputation for sinne in that place is taken figuratiuely and signifieth according to the exposition of auncient Fathers An hoste or Sacrifice for sinne Which Christ was truly made his body being sacrificed on the Crosse for the discharge of sinne and not by imputation How these wordes of the Apostle Iustice of God are to be vnderstood see Saint Augustine Tract 26. in Ioan. Item Epist 120. ad honorat cap. 30. Item in Psal 30. Conc. 1. De spirit lib. c. 9. One place I will cite for all The iustice of God saith he through the faith of CHRIST IESVS that is by faith wherewith we beleeue in Christ for as that faith is called Christs not by which Christ beleeues so that Iustice is called Gods not whereby God is iust both of them faith and iustice be ours but therefore they are tearmed Gods and Christs because through their liberality they are giuen to vs. Which interpretation may be confirmed out of that place of Saint Chrysostome which M. PERKINS citeth saying It is called Gods Iustice because it is not of workes but of his free gift So that it is not that which is in God himselfe but such as he bestoweth vpon vs. And that iustice of it selfe is pure and wanteth no vertue to worke that for which it is giuen to wit to make a man righteous S. Anselme a right vertuous and learned Catholike Arch-bishoppe of ours shall be answered when the place is quoted Rom. 5. M. PERKINS third reason As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one
Luke 7.47 MANY sinnes are forgiuen her because she hath loued much whence they gather that the woman there spoken of had pardon of her sinnes and was iustified by loue Answere In this text loue is not made an impulsiue cause to moue God to pardon her sinnes but only a signe to shew that God had already pardoned them Reply Obserue first that Catholikes doe not teach that she was pardoned for loue alone for they vse not as Protestants doe when they finde one cause of justification to exclude all or any of the rest But considering that in sundry places of holy write justification is ascribed vnto many seuerall vertues affirme that not faith alone but diuers other diuine qualities concurre vnto justification and as mention here made of loue excludeth not faith hope repentance and such like so in other places where faith is only spoken of there hope charity and the rest must not also be excluded This sinner had assured beleefe in Christes power to remitte sinnes and great hope in his mercy that he would forgiue them great sorrowe and detestation of her sinne also she had that in such an assembly did so humbly prostrate her selfe at Christes feete to wash them with her teares and to wipe them with the haires of her head And as shee had true repentance of her former life so no doubt but shee had also a firme purpose to leade a newe life So that in her conuersion all those vertues mette together which we holde to concurre to justification and among the rest the preheminence worthely is giuen to loue as to the principall disposition She loued our Sauiour as the fountayne of all mercies and goodnes and therefore accounted her pretious oyntements best bestowed on him yea and the humblest seruice and most affectionate she could offer him to be all too little and nothing answerable to the inward burning charity which she bare him Which noble affection of hers towardes her diuine Redeemer no question was most acceptable vnto him as by his owne word is most manifest for he said That many sinnes were forgiuen her because she loued much But M. PERKINS saith that her loue was no cause that moued Christ to pardon her but only a signe of pardon giuen before which is so contrary to the text that a man not past all shame would blush once to affirme it First Christ saith expreslie that it was the cause of the pardon Because shee had loued much Secondly that her loue went before is as playnlie declared both by mention of the time past Because she hath loued and by the euidence of her fact of washing wiping and anoynting his feete for the which saith our Sauiour then already performed Manie sinnes are forgiuen her So that here can be no impediment of beleeuing the Catholike Doctrine so clearly deliuered by the holy Ghost vnlesse one will be so blindly ledde by our new Masters that he will beleeue no wordes of Christ be they neuer so playne otherwise then it please the Ministers to expound them And this much of the first of those reasons which M. PERKINS said were of no moment 2. Reason Neither Circumcision nor prepuce auayleth any thing Gal. 5.6 but faith that worketh by charity Hence Catholikes gather that when the Apostle attributeth iustification to saith he meanes not faith alone but as it is ioyned with charity and other like vertues as are requisite to prepare the soule of man to receiue that complete grace of iustification M. PERKINS answereth that they are joyned together But it is faith alone that apprehendeth Christs righteousnes and maketh it ours It vseth charity as an instrument to performe the duties of the first and second table but it hath no part with faith in the matter of our iustification Reply That it hath the chiefest part and that faith is rather the instrument and hand mayd of charity My proofe shall be out of the very text alleadged where life and motion is giuen to faith by charity as the greeke word Energoumene being passiue doth playnlie shewe that faith is moued led and guided by charity Which S. Iames doth demonstrat most manifest saying that Euen as the body is dead without the soule so is faith without charity Making charity to be the life and as it were the soule of faith Now no man is ignorant but it is the soule that vseth the body as an instrument euen so then it is charity that vseth faith as her instrument and inferiour and not contrarywise which S. Paul confirmeth at large in a whole chapter prouing charity to be a more excellent gift then faith or any other concluding with these wordes Now there remayneth faith hope and charity 1. Cor. 13. these three but the greater of these is charity Whereupon S. Augustine resolueth thus Nothing but charity maketh faith it selfe auaylable Li. de Trinit cap. 18. for faith saith he may be without charity but it can not be auaylable without it So that first you see that charity is the mouer and commaunder and faith as her instrument and hand mayde Now that in the worke of justification it hath the chiefe place may be thus proued I demaund whether that worke of justification by faith be done for the loue of God and to his honour or no If not as it is voyd of charity so it is a wicked and sinnefull act no justification but infection our owne interest being the principall end of it now if it comprehend conclude Gods glory and seruice in it that is if they apply Christs righteousnes to them to glorifie God thereby then hath charity the principall part therein for the directing of all to the honour and glory of God is the proper office and action of charity All this reason that charity both concurreth to justification and that as principall S. Augustine confirmeth in these wordes Serm. 22. de verbis Apostol The house of God that is a righteous and Godly soule hath for his foundation faith hope is the walles of it but charity is the roofe and perfection of it The third of these trifling reasons is peruersly propounded by M. PER. thus Faith is neuer alone therefore it doth not iustifie alone That this argument is fondly framed appeereth playnlie in that that Catholikes doe not deny but affirme that faith may be without charity as it is in all sinnefull Catholikes we then forme the reason thus If faith alone be the whole cause of justification then if both hope and charity were remoued from faith at least by thought and in conceipt faith would neuerthelesse justifie But faith considered without hope charity will not justifie ergo it is not the whole cause of justification The first proposition can not be denyed of them who knowe the nature and proprietie of causes for the entire and total cause of any thing being as the Philosophers say in act the effect must needes followe and very sence teacheth the simple that if any thing
justification they put degrees they must perforce allowe them in the justificatiō it selfe And thus much of this question Pag. 200. the objections which M. PERKINS makes for vs in this Article doe belong either to the question of merits or of the possibility of fulfilling the lawe or to the perfection of our justice and therefore I remitte them to those places and will handle the two latter poynts before I come to that of merits WHETHER IT BE POSSIBLE FOR A MAN IN GRACE to fulfill Gods lawe Pag. 95. Gal. 5. MASTER PERKINS argueth that it is vnpossible First for that Paul tooke it for his ground that the lawe could not be fulfilled Admitte it were so I then would answere that he meant that a man helped only with the knowledge of the lawe cannot fulfill the lawe but by the ayde of Gods grace he might be able to doe it Which I gather out of S. Paul Rom. 8. where he saith That that which was impossible to the lawe is made by the grace of Christ possible 2 Object The liues and workes of most righteous men are imperfect and stayned with sinne ergo quid Of this there shall be a seuerall Article 3 Object Our knowledge is imperfect and therefore out faith repentance and sanctification is answerable I would to God all our workes were answerable to our knowledge then would they be much more perfect then they are but this Argument is also impertinent and doth rather proue it possible to fulfill the lawe because it is possible to knowe all the lawe Then if our workes be answerable to our knowledge we may also fulfill it 4 Object A man regenerate is partly flesh and partly spirit and therefore his best workes are partly from the flesh Not so if we mortifie the deedes of the flesh by the spirit Rom. 8.13 as the Apostle exhorteth But these trifling arguments belong rather vnto the next question I will helpe M. PERKINS to some better that the matter may be more throughly examined Why goe yee about to put a yoke vpon the Disciples neckes Act. 1.15 which neither we nor our Fathers were able to be are these wordes were spoken of the lawe of Moyses therefore we were not able to fulfill it I answere first that that lawe could not be fulfilled by the only helpe of the same lawe without the further ayde of Gods grace Secondly that it was so burdensome and comberous by reason of the multitude of their Sacrifices Sacraments and Ceremonies that it could hardly be kept with the helpe of ordinary grace and in that sence it is said to be such a yoke as we were not able to beare Because thinges very hard to be donne are now and then called impossible Now that Iosue Ios 11.3 Reg. 14. Act. 13. 4. Reg. 23. Luke 1. Dauid Iosias Zachary Elizabeth and many others did fulfill all the lawe is recorded in holy Scripture Wherefore it is most manifest that it might be kept To will is in me but I finde not how to performe Rom. 7. If S. Paul could not performe that which he would how can others Answere He speakes there of auoyding al euil motions and temptations which he would willingly haue donne but he could not Marry he could well by the assistance of Gods grace subdue those prouocations to sinne and make them occasions of vertue and consequently keep all the commaundements not suffering those passions to leade him to the breach of any one of them The like answere we make vnto that objection that one of the ten commandements forbids vs to couet our neighbors goods his wife or seruants which as they say is impossible but we holde that it may be well donne vnderstanding the commaundement rightly which prohibiteth not to haue euill motions of couetuousnes and lechery but to yeelde our consent vnto them Now it is so possible for a man by Gods grace to refrayne his consent from such wicked temptations Libr. 10. conf c. 7. Iac. 3.2 1. Ioan. 1. that S. August thinketh it may be donne of a mortified vertuous man euen when he is a sleepe And testifieth of himselfe that waking he performed it Wee doe all offend in many thinges And if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues But if we could obserue all the lawe we should offend in nothing nor haue any sinne ergo Answere I graunt that we offend in many thinges not because it is not possible to keepe them but for that we are fraile and easely ledde by the craft of the Diuell into many offences which we might auoyde if wee were so warie and watchfull as we ought to be againe although wee cannot keepe our selues from veniall offences yet may wee fulfill the lawe which is not transgressed and broken vnlesse we committe some mortall sinnes For veniall sinnes either for the smalnesse of the matter or want of consideration are not so opposite to the lawe as that they violate the reason and purport of it although they be somewhat disagreeing with it But of this matter more fully in some other place Lastly it may be objected that the way to heauen is straite the gate narrowe which is so true that it seemeth impossible to be kept by flesh and bloud but that which is impossible to men of themselues is made possible and easie too by the grace of God which made S. Paul to say I can doe all thinges in him that strengthneth and comformeth me Philip. 4. Psal 118 And the Prophet Dauid after thou O Lord hadest dilated my hart and with thy grace set it at liberty I did runne the waies of thy commaundements that is I did readely and willingly performe them Of the loving of GOD vvith all our hart c. shall be treated in the question of the perfection of justice Hauing nowe confuted all that is commonly proposed to proue the impossibility of keeping Gods commaundements let vs now see what we can say in proofe of the possibility of it First S. Paul is very playnlie for it Rom. 8. saying That which was impossible to the lawe in that is weakned by the flesh God sending his Sonne in the similitude of flesh of sinne damned sinne in the flesh that the iustification of the lawe might be fulfilled in vs who walke not according to the flesh but according vnto the spirit See how formally he teacheth that Christ dying to redeeme vs from sinne purchased vs grace to fulfill the law which before was impossible vnto our weake flesh Againe how farre S. Iohn was from that opinion of thinking Gods commaundements to be impossible may appeare by that Epistle cap. 5. lath 11. And his commaundements be not heauy Which is taken out of our Sauiours owne wordes My yoke is sweete and my burthen is light The reason of this is that although to our corrupt frailty they be very heauy Yet when the vertue of charity is powred into our hartes by the holy Ghost then
vnto a Diuels faith when it is naked and voyde of good workes in two points First in both there is a perfect knowledge of all thinges reuealed Secondly this knowledge shall not stead them any whit but only serue vnto their greater condemnation because that knowing the will of their master they did it not And in this respect S. Iames compareth them together Now there are many points wherein these faithes doe differ but this one is principall That Christians out of a goodly and deuoute affection doe willingly submitte their vnderstanding vnto the rules of faith beleeuing thinges aboue humane reason yea such as seeme sometimes contrary to it But the Diuell against his will beleeues all that God hath reuealed Because by his naturall capacity he knowes that God can teach nor testifie any vntruth Againe that faith may be without charity is proued out of these wordes of the same second Chapter Euer as the body without the spirit is dead so also faith without workes is dead Hence thus I argue albeit the body be dead without the soule yet is it a true naturall body in it selfe euen so faith is perfect in the kinde of faith although without charity it auayle not to life euerlasting Lastly in true reason it is manifest that faith may be without charity for they haue seuerall seates in the soule one being in the will and the other in the vnderstanding they haue distinct objectes faith respecting the truth of God and charity the goodnes of God Neither doth faith necessarily suppose charity as charity doth faith for we cannot loue him of whom we neuer heard Neither yet doth charity naturaly flow out of faith but by due consideration of the goodnes of God and of his benefits and loue towardes vs into which good deuout considerations few men doe enter in comparison of them who are led into the broad way of iniquity through their inordinate passiōs This according to the truth yet more different in the Protestants opinion for faith laies hold on Christs righteous receiues that in But charity can receiue nothing in Pag. 85. as M. P. witnesseth But giues it selfe forth in al duties of the first second table Now sir if they could not apply vnto themselues Christs righteousnes without fulfilling all duties of the first second table they should neuer apply it to them for they hold it impossible to fulfill all those duties so that this necessary lincking of charity with faith maketh their saluation not only very euill assured but altogither impossible for charity is the fulnes of the law which they hold impossible then if the assurance of their saluation Rom. 12. must needes be joyned with such an impossibility they may assure themselues that by that faith they can neuer come to saluation Let vs annex vnto these playne authorities of holy Scripture one euident testimony of Antiquity That most incorrupt judge S. Augustine saith flatly Lib. 15. de trin c. 17. Con crescen lib. 1. cap. 29. That faith may well he without Charity but it cannot profit vs without Charity And That one God is worshipped sometimes out of the Church but that vnskilfully yet is it he Also that one faith is had without charity and that also out of the Church neither therefore is not faith For there is one God one Faith one Baptisme one immaculate Catholike Church in which God is not serued only but in which only he is trulie serued neither in which alone faith is kept but in which only faith is kept with charity So that faith and that only true faith of which the Apostle speaketh Ephes 4. One God one faith may be and is in many without charity The Protestants bolde asseuerations that they cannot be parted are great but their proofes very slender and scarce worth the disproouing THAT FAITH MAY BE WITHOVT GOOD WORKES 1. Tim. 5. THE first He that hath not care of his owne hath denied his faith therefore faith includeth that good worke of prouiding for our owne Answ That faith there seemes to signifie not that faith whereby we beleeue all thinges reuealed or the Protestants the certainty of their saluation but for fidelity and faithfull performance of that which we haue promised in Baptisme which is to keepe all Gods commaundements one of the which is to prouide for our children and for them that wee haue charge of so that he who hath no such care ouer his owne charge hath denyed his faith that is violed his promise in Baptisme There is also another ordinary answere supposing faith to be taken there for the Christian beleefe to witte that one may deny his faith two wayes either in flatte denying any article of faith or by doing some thing that is contrary to the doctrine of our faith Now he that hath no care of his owne doth not deny any article of his faith but committeth a fact contrary to the doctrine of his faith so that not faith but the doctrine of faith or our promise in Baptisme includeth good workes Ioh. 6. 2 There are among you that beleeue not for he knewe who beleeued and who was to betray him Opposing treason to faith as if he had said faith conteyned in it selfe fidelity This Argument is farre fetched and little worth For albeit faith hath not fidelity and loue alwaies necessarily joyned with it yet falling from faith may well drawe after it hatred and treason yea ordinarely wickednes goeth before falling from faith and is the cause of it which was Iudas case whome our Sauiour there taxed for he blinded with couetuousnes did not beleeue Christs Doctrine of the blessed Sacrament and by incredulity opened the diuell a high way to his hart to negotiate treason in it 3. They object that Who saith he knowes God and doth not keepe his commaundements is a lyar 1. Ioh. 2. Answere He is then a lyar in graine who professing the only true knowledge of God yet blusheth not to say that it is impossible to keepe his commaundements but to the objection knowing God in that place is taken for louing of God as I knowe yee not that is I loue you not Math. 7. 25. Psal 1. Ioh. 14. Our Lord knowes the way of the just that is approues it loues it so he that knowes God kepes his commaundements as Christ himselfe testifieth If any loue me he will keepe my word And he that loueth me not will not keepe my wordes Lastly they say with S. Paul That the iust man liueth by faith But if faith giue life then it cannot be without charity Answere That faith in a just man is not without hope and charity by all which conjoyned he liueth and not by faith alone But faith is in a sinnefull and vnjust man without charity who holding fast his former beleefe doth in transgressing Gods commaundements breake the bandes of charity And so it remaynes most certayne that faith may be and too too
answere is the most extrauagant of all the rest as being furthest off from the true sence of the Scripture examine any one of the places and a babe may discouer the incongruity of it Namely Christ saith that great is their reward who are reuiled and persecuted for his sake Assigning the reward vnto their constant bearing and enduring of tribulation for Gods sake and not to his owne merittes imputed and if you desire a formall sentence fitting this purpose take this 1. Cor. 3 Euery man shall receiue his reward according vnto his owne proper labour And not according to Christs merittes imputed vnto him So a doer of the worke shall be blessed in his deede And not in the imputation of an others deede Iacob 1. In stead of our second reason blindly proposed by M. PERKINS I will confirme the first with such textes of Holy write as specifie playnelie our good workes to be the cause of eternall life Math. 25 Come vnto me yee blessed of my father possesse a Kingdome prepared for you And why so For when I was hungry yee gaue me meate And so forth the like is in the same Chapter of the seruants who imployed well their talentes for their Lord said vnto them Because you haue beene faithfull in fewe thinges I will place you ouer many And many such like where good workes donne by the parties themselues are expresly said to be the very cause why God rewardeth them with the Kingdome of heauen Therefore he must needes be holden for a very wrangler that doth seeke to peruert such euident speeches and would make the simple beleeue that the cause there formally specified is not to be taken for the cause but doth onely signifie an order of thinges But if any desire besides the euidence of the text to see howe the auncient Fathers take it Let him reade Saint Augustine Where he thus briefly handleth this text Come yee blessed of my Father In psal 49 receiue What shall we receiue A Kingdome For what cause Because I was hungry and you gaue me meate c. Of the reall imputation of Christs merittes there vvas no tydinges in those dayes And that iuditious Doctor found that good workes was the cause of receiuing the Kingdome of heauen Here by the way Master PERKINS redoubleth that common slaunder of theirs that we take away a part of Christs mediation For saith he if Christs merittes were sufficient what neede ours It hath beene often told them but they will neuer learne to vnderstand it I will yet once againe repeate it We hold our Sauiours merits to be of infinite value and to haue deserued of God all the graces and blessinges which hath or shall be bestowed vpon all men from the beginning of the world vnto the end of it yet his diuine will and order is that all men of discretion hauing freely receiued grace from him doe meritte that crowne of glory which is prepared for them not to supply the want of his merittes which are inestimable but being members of his misticall body he would haue vs also like vnto himselfe in this point of meriting and further desirous to trayne vs vp in all good works he best knewe that there could be no better spur to pricke our dull nature forward then to ordayne and propose such heauenly rewardes vnto all them that would diligently endeuour to deserue them The man seemes to be much ignorant in the matter of Christes mediation I will therefore helpe him a little It consisteth in reconciling man to God which he performed by paying the ransome of our sinnes in purchasing vs Gods fauour and in ordayning meanes how all mankinde might attayne to eternall life in the two first poynts we doe for the most part agree to witte that our sinnes are freely pardoned through Christes passion and that we are as freely justified and receiued first into Gods grace and fauour although we require other preparation then they doe yet we as fully deny any merit of ours to be cause of either as they doe Marry about the meanes of attayning to heauen we differ altogether for they say that God requires no justice in vs nor merit at all on our partes but only the disposition of faith to lay holde on Christes righteousnes and merittes but we say that Christes righteousnes and merit are incommunicable vnto any meere creature but that through his merittes God doth powre into euery true Christian a particular justice whereby he is sanctified and made able to doe good workes and to merit eternall life Which ability we receiuing of Gods free gift through Christes merits doth much more magnifie both Gods grace and Christes merittes for the greater that the gift is the greater is the glory of the giuer And to argue that to be a derogation vnto his mediation and merits whith he hath appoynted to be very instrument of applying the vertue of them to vs is indeede vnder colour of magnifying Christs merittes to vndermine and blowe out all the vertue of them But saies M. PERKINS what should we talke of our merittes who for one good worke we doe committe many bad which deface our merits if we had any True it is as it was once before said that euery mortall sinne blotteth out all former justice and merit but by repentance both are recouered againe but must we not speake of any good because we may happe to doe euill that is a faire perswasion and well worthy a wise man Let vs to our third Argument God hath by couenant and promise bound himselfe to reward our workes with life euerlasting Therefore good workes doe in justice deserue it for faithfull promise maketh due debt Math. 20. The couenant is plainely set downe where God in the person of an housholder agreeth with his workmen for a penny a day that is to giue them life euerlasting for trauayling in his seruice during their life time as all auncient interpretours expound it Whereupon Saint Paul inferreth Heb. 6. that God should be vnjust if he should forgette their workes who suffered persecution for him 2. Thes 1. And saith If it be just with God to render tribulation to them that persecute you and to such as are persecuted rest with vs Vpon the same ground S. Hierome saith Li. 2. cont Iouin c. 2. Great truly were the iniustice of God if he did only punish euill workes and would not as well receiue good workes To all these and much more such like M. PERKINS answereth that couenant for workes was in the olde Testament but in the newe the couenant is made with the workman not with the worke Reply All that I cited in this Argument is out of the newe Testament where expresse couenant is made for working and workes as you haue heard And as it was said in the olde lawe Math 19. Doe these thinges and thou shalt liue so is it said in the newe If thou wilt enter into life keepe the
vine-yard and so there was some desart on their part and the seruants were rewarded Mat. 25. because they imployed their talents well and in this very place S. Paul reckoneth vp his good seruices for which the just judge would render him a crowne of justice and therefore the justice is not only in respect of Gods promise And if you will not beleeue me prouing that I say out of the very text rather then M. PERKINS on his bare word let S. Augustine be arbitrator betweene vs who most deepely considereth of euery worde in this sentence Let vs heare saith he the Apostle speaking Li. 50. hom Hom. 4. when he approached neare vnto his passion I haue quoth he fought a good fight I haue accomplished my course I haue kept the faith concerning the rest there is laide vp for me a crowne of iustice which our Lord will render vnto me in that day a iust iudge And not only to meet but to them also that loue his comming He saith that our Lord a iust iudge will render vnto him a crowne he therefore doth owe it and as a iust iudge will pay it For the worke being regarded the rewarde cannot be denyed I haue fought a good fight is a worke I haue accomplished my course is a worke I haue kept the faith is a worke There is laide vp for me a crowne of iustice this is the rewarde So that you see most clearly by this most learned fathers judgement that the reward is due for the worke sake and not onely for the promise of God See him vpon that verse of the Psalme I will sing vnto thee O Lord Psal 100. mercy and iudgement Where he concludes that God in judgement will out of his justice crowne those good workes which he of mercy had giuen grace to doe And that the reader may vnderstand that not onely Saint Augustine doth so confidently teach this doctrine of merittes which M. PERKINS blushed not to tearme the inuention of Satan I will fold vp this question with some testimonies of the most auncient and best Authours Epist ad Roman S. Ignatius the Apostles auditour saith Giue me leaue to become the foode of beastes that I may by that meanes meritte and winne God Apolog. 2. â—ntemed Iustine a glorious Martir of the next age hath these wordes speaking in the name of all Christians We thinke that men who by workes haue shewed them selues worthy of the will and counsaile of God shall by their merittes liue and raigne with him free from all corruption and perturbation Lib. 4. con â—erel c 72. S. Ireneus saith We eesteme that crowne to be pretious which is gotten by combate and suffering for Gods sake Ora in iniâ—ium prou Li de Spir. â—ancto c. 24 S. Basil All we that walke the way of the Gospell as Marchants doe buy gette the possession of heauenly thinges by the workes of the commaundements A man is saued by workes of iustice Serm. de eleemos â—nsine S. Cyprian If the day of our returne shall finde vs vnloaden swift and running in the race of workes our Lord will not faile to reward our merittes He will giue for workes to those that winne in peace a white crowne and for Martirdome in persecution he will redouble vnto them a purple crowne Câ—n. 5. in Mâ—th S. Hilarie The Kingdome of heauen is the hier and reward of them that liue well and perfectly Lib. 1. de offic c. 15. S. Ambrose Is it not euident that there remayneth after this life either reward for merittes or punishment S. Hierome Now after baptisme it appertayneth to our trauails according vnto the diuersity of vertue to prepare for vs different rewardes Serm. 68. â—n Cant. S. Bernard Prouide that thou haue merittes for the want of them is a pernitious pouertie Briefly that this was the vniuersall Doctrine of all good Christians aboue a thousand yeare past is declared in the Councell of Aransicane Reward is debt vnto good workes Can 18. if they be done but grace which was not debt goeth before that they may be done These testimonies of the most auncient and best learned Christians may suffice to batter the brasen forehead of them that affirme the Doctrine of merittes to be a Satannicall inuention and to settle al them that haue care of their saluation in the most pure doctrine of the Catholike Church CHAPTER 6. OF SATISFACTION MASTER PERKINS Acknowledgeth first ciuill Satisfaction Pag. 117 that is a recompence for iniuries or damages any way donne to our neighbour such as the good Publican Zacheus practised who restored fourfold the thinges gotten by extorsion and deceite This is Luc. 19. wittily acknowledged by him but litle exercised among ProtestaÌ„ts for where the Sacrament of Confession is wanting there men vse very seldome to recompence so much as onefold for their extorsion bribes vsury and other crafty ouer-reaching of their neighbours But of this kinde of Satisfaction which we commonly call restitution we are not here to treate nor of that publicke penance Which for notorious crimes is done openly but of such priuate penance which is either enjoyned by the confessor or voluntarily vndertaken by the penitent or else sent by Gods visitation to purge vs from that temporall payne which for sinnes past and pardoned we are to endure either in this life or in purgatorie if we die before we haue fully satisfied here M. PERKINS in his third conclusion decreeth very solemnely That no man can be saued vnlesse he made a perfect satisfaction vnto the iustice of God for all his sinnes Yet in the explication of the difference betweene vs defineth as peremptorily that no man is to satisfie for any one of all his sinnes or for any temporall payne due to them Which be flat contradictory propositions and therefore the one of them must needes be false But such odde broken rubbish doth he commonly cast into the ground worke of his questions and thereupon raiseth the tottering building of his newe doctrine and lets not like a blinde man to make an out cry that in this matter the Papists erre in the very foundation and life of religion Which in his first argument he goes about to proue thus Imperfect satisfaction is no satisfaction at all But the Papists make Christs satisfaction imperfect in that they doe thereunto adde a supply of humane satisfaction ergo they make it no satisfaction at all Answere This is a substantiall argument to raise the cry vpon which hath both propositions false The first is childish for he that satisfieth for halfe his debts or for any part of them makes some satisfaction which satisfaction is vnperfect and yet cannot be called no satisfaction at all as euery child may see His second is as vntrue but mans satisfaction is not to supply the want of Christs satisfaction but to apply it to vs as Master PERKINS saith his faith doth to them and to fulfill
worlde there will remaine no compunction or satisfaction It is easie to answere without the helpe of any newe edition For it will he too late then to repent and so there is no place lest to compunction that is contrition of hart neither consequently to confession or satisfaction as if he had said before we goe out of this worlde there is place for both compunction and satisfaction and so that place is rather for vs. Trem. in Esa Now to Chrysostome who saith That God so blotteth out our sinnes that there remaynes no print of them which thing befalles not the body for when it is healed there remayneth a skarre but when God exempteth from punishment he giues thee iustice All this is most true and much against M. PERKINS doctrine of the infection of originall sinne but nothing touching satisfaction for we holde that the soule of a sinner when he commeth to be justified is washed whiter then snowe so that there is no stayne or print left in it of the filth of sinne It is also freed from all eternall punishment but not from some temporall Now gentle Reader prepare thy selfe to beholde a proper peece of cousonage Luke 22. Ambrose saith I reade of Peters teares but I reade not of his satisfaction The colour of the craft lyeth in the ambiguity of this worde Satisfaction which is not alwayes taken for the penance donne to satisfie for the former fault But is sometime vsed for the defence Act. 24.10 and excuse of the fact So speaketh S. Paul Bono animo pro me satisfaciam with good courage I will answere in defence of my selfe or giue you satisfaction 1. Pet. 3. in like manner Ready alwaies to satisfie euery one that asketh you a reason of that hope which is in you In this sence doth S. Ambrose vse the word as is most plainely to be seene to them that reade the place and conferre it with the very like of his Lib. 10. in Luc. I finde not saith he what Peter said but I finde that he wept I reade his teares but I reade not his satisfaction but that which cannot be defended may be washed away So that nothing is more manifest then that satisfaction in this and the like places is taken for defence and excuse of his fault which Peter vsed not but sought by teares and bitter weeping to satisfie in part for it for this bewayling of our sinnes is one speciall kinde of satisfaction as S. Ambrose testifieth saying That he who doth penance Libr. 2. de penit ca. 5. must with teares wash away his sinnes The other place cited out of S. Ambrose de bono mortis let vs adore Christ that he may say vnto vs feare not thy sinnes nor the waues of worldly sufferinges I haue remission of sinnes is rather for vs then against vs for if by adoring and seruing of God we may be put out of feare of our sinnes and the punishment of them then doth it followe that prayers and such like seruice of Christ doth acquit vs of sinne and satisfie for the paine due to them Hierome saith The sinne that is couered is not seene not being seene In psal 31. it is not imputed not being imputed it is not punished Answere To witte with hell fire which is the due punishment of such mortall sinne whereof he speaketh or sinne may be said to be couered when not only the fault is pardoned but all punishment also due vnto it is fully paide So doth S. Ambrose take that worde couered saying Libr. 2. de penit ca. 5. The Prophet calleth both them blessed as well him whose iniquities is forgiuen in Baptisme as him whose sinnes are couered with good workes For he that doth penance must not only wash away his sinnes with teares but also with better workes couer his former sins that they be not imputed vnto him Now we must backe againe vnto Chrysostome belike he had forgotten this when he cited the other or else this was reserued to strike it dead He saith Some men endure punishment in this life and in the life to come Hom. 44. sup Math. others in this life alone others alone in the life to come other neither in this nor in the life to come there alone as diuers here alone the incestuous Corinthian neither here nor there as the Apostles and Prophets as also Iob and the rest of this kinde for they endured no sufferings for punishment but that they might be knowne to bee conquerours of the fight Answere Such excellent holy personages sufferinges as are mentioned in the Scriptures were not for their sinnes for they committed but ordinary light offences for which their ordinary deuotions satisfied abundantly the great persecutions which they endured were first to manifest the vertue and power of God that made such fraile creatures so inuincible then to daunt the aduersaries of his truth and with all to animate and encourage his followers Finally that they like conquerours triumphing ouer all the torments of this life might enter into possession of a greater reward in the kingdome of heauen All this is good doctrine but nothing against satisfaction that their surpassing suffering were not for their owne sinnes and thus much in answere vnto M. PERKINS Arguments against satisfaction Now to the reasons which he produceth for it And albeit he like an euill master of the campe rang our Arguments out of order Li. 3. instit cap. 4. num 29. placing that in the fore-front of our side vvhich Caluin presseth out against vs yet will I admitte of it rather then breake his order Leui. 4.5.6 1. Moyses according to Gods commaundement prescribed seuerall sacrifices for the sinnes of seuerall persons and ordeyned that they should be of greater and lesser prices according vnto the diuersity of the sinnes Whence we argue thus These mens faultes vpon their true repentance joyned with faith and hope in CHRIST to come were pardoned Therefore their charges in buying of sacrifices to bee offered for them their paines and prayers in assisting during the time of the sacrifice being painefull vvorkes donne to appease GODS justice were vvorkes of satisfaction M. PERKINS answereth many thinges as men doe commonly when they cannot well tell what to say directly to the purpose First that those sacrifices were tipes of Christes suffering on the crosse what is this to the purpose Secondly that those sacrifices were satisfactions to the congregation and what needed that when they had offended God only and not the congregation as in many offences it happeneth Againe if satisfaction must be giuen to the congregation how much more reason is it that it be made to God Reade those Chapters and you shall finde that they were principally made to obtayne remission of God as these wordes also doe witnesse Leuit. 4. vers 20. And vpon that sacrifice the sinne shall be forgiuen them So that sacrifices were to satisfie God who thereupon forgaue the sinne and
the fault the party is satisfied in justice and when he that hath offended doth abide such punishment as the grieuousnes of his offence did require there is both due correction of the offendour and due satisfaction vnto the party offended M. PERKINS finally flieth vnto his old shift of imputatiue satisfaction that forsooth our sufferinges doe not satisfie but the party punished by faith layeth hold on the satisfaction of the Messias and testifie the same by their humiliation and repentance Reply As we first graunt that all satisfaction hath his vertue from the grace of God dwelling in vs which is giuen vs for Christs sake so to say that Christs satisfaction taketh away all other satisfaction is just to begge the principall point in question and therefore an old triuants tricke to giue that a finall answere which was set in the beginning to be debated looke vpon the forenamed example of the Niniuites of whome it is not certayne that they had any expresse knowledge of the Messias and therefore were farre enough off from laying hold on his satisfaction But most certayne and euident it is in the text that God vpon the contemplation of their workes of penance tooke compassion on them and was satisfied as by turning away the threatned subuertion is most manifest Our fift reason Daniell giueth this counsaile to Nabuchodonosor Daniell 4. Redeeme thy sinnes with almes and thy offences with mercy on the poore If by such good deedes our sinnes may be redeemed as Holy write doth testifie then it followeth that such workes yeelde a sufficient satisfaction for them for redemption signifieth a full contentment of the party offended as well as satisfaction M. PERKINS answereth The skilfull in the Caldey teach that the word importeth rather a breaking off then redeeming Reply To Authours in the aire without any pressing of the propriety of the word no answere can be giuen but let vs admitte that it be broken off â—iâ— sinne not being couetuousnes but pride and lacke of acknowledging all Kingdomes to depend vpon God as the text it selfe doth specifie To breake off this sinne by almes and compassion of the poore is nothing els but by such workes of charity in some sort to satisfie Gods justice there to moue him to take compassion of him And that by almes deedes we are cleansed from our sinnes our Sauiour himselfe doth teach saying Luc. 11. Giue almes and behold all thinges are cleane vnto you Our sixt Bring forth the worthy fruits of penance Math. 3. Luc 3. That is doe such workes as become them who are penitent Which as Saint Chrysostome expoundeth are He that hath stolen away another mans goodes Hom. 10. in Math. let him nowe giue of his owne he that hath committed fornication let him abstayne from the lawfull company of his owne wife and so forth Recompensing the workes of sinne with the contrary workes of vertue Hom. 10 in Euang. In Psal 4. The same exposition giueth Saint Gregory and to omitte all others venerable Bede interpreteth them thus Mortifie your sinnes by doeing the worthy fruits of penance to witte by afflicting your selues so much for euery offence as worthy penance doth require which will be a sacrifice of iustice that is a most iust sacrifice To this M. PERKINS answereth that this text is absurd for the word repent signifieth onely chaunge your mindes from sinne to God and testifie it by good workes Reply His answere is most absurd for we argue out of these wordes Worthy fruits of penance And he answereth to the word going before repent which we vse not against them and for his glose or testifying our repentance is sufficiently confuted by the Fathers before alleadged And S. Iohn expresly maketh them the meanes to escape the wrath of God saying that the Axe was set to the roote of the Tree and vnlesse by worthy fruits of penance they appeased God they should be cut vp and cast into hell fire and seemeth to confute the laying hold on Christs satisfaction by faith saying it will not helpe you to say that yee are the Sonnes of Abraham who was Father of all true beleeuers as much as if he had said trust not to your faith hand off yee generation of vipers For notwithstanding yee be the Sonnes of the faithfull vnlesse ye amend your liues and for the euill workes which yee haue donne heretofore make recompence and satisfie the justice of God with good yee shall be cast into hell fire 2 Cor. 7.10 The 7. objection with M. PERKINS Paul setteth downe sundry fruits of repentance whereof one is reuenge whereby repentant persons punish themselues to satisfie Gods iustice for the temporall punishment of their sinnes M. PERKINS answereth A repentant sinner must take vengeance of himselfe and that is to vse all meanes to subdue the corruption of nature and to bridle carnall affections which kinde of actions are restraynements properly but no punishments directed against the sinne but not against the person Reply I neuer saw any writer so contradict himselfe and so dull that he doth not vnderstand his owne wordes If this subdueing of our corrupt nature be restraynements onely from sinne hereafter and not also punishments of sinne past how then doth the repentant sinner take vengeance of him selfe which you affirme that he must doe Reuenge as euery simple body knoweth is the requitall of euill past We graunt that all satisfaction is directed against sinne and not against the person but for the great good of the man albeit that for a season it may afflict both his body and minde too as Saint Paules former Epistle did the Corinthians but this sorrowe being according vnto God doth much benefit the person as the Apostle declareth For besides this reuenge taken on himselfe to appease Gods wrath it breedeth as it is in the text following in our corrupt nature that loueth not such chastisement A feare to returne to sinne least it be againe punished for where there is no feare of paynes and much pleasure thither our corruption will runne headlong It sturreth vp also in vs Indignation against sinne and all the wicked instruments of it A defence and clearing of our selues with the honester sort And an emulation and desire to flie as farre from sinne as other our equals and consequently A loue of vertue and honest life which freeth vs from that sorrowe and all other troublesome passions all which are playnelie gathered out of the same text of Saint Paul Lastly sayeth M. PERKINS They make three workes of satisfaction Prayer Fasting and Almesdeedes For the first it is meere foolishnesse to thinke that a man by prayer can satisfie for his sinnes it is all one as if you had said that a begger by asking an almes can deserue the almes or a debtor by requesting his creditor to pardon his debt should thereby pay his debt That Prayer doth appease Gods justice and obtayne pardon God him selfe is witnes saying Call vpon mee in the
Tradition vnwritten This place of S. IOHN M. P. patcheth vp with an other of S. PAVL * Gal. 1. ◠If we or an Angell from heauen preache vnto you any thing besides that which wee haue preached let him be accursed And to this effect he blames them that taught but a diuers doctrine to that which he had taught * 1. Tim. 1.3 ANSWERE Now wee must looke vnto this Gentle-mans singers There were three corruptions in the text of S. IOHN here is one but it is a soule one In steed of Preaching vnto them an other Gospell he puts preach vnto them any other thing when there is great difference betweene an other Gospell any other thing The Gospel comprehendeth the principal poynts of faith the whole worke of Gods building in vs which S. PAVL like a wise Architect * 1. Cor. 3 12. had layd in the Galathians others his fellow-work-men might build vpon it gold siluer and pretious stones with great merit to themselues and thankes from S. PAVL Mary if any should digge vp that blessed and onely foundation and would laye a new one him S. PAVL holdeth for accursed So that that falcification of the text is intollerable and yet when all is done nothing can be wringed out of it to prooue the written word to comprehend all doctrine needefull to saluation for S. PAVL speaketh there onely of his Gospell that is of his preaching vnto the Galathians and not one worde of any written Gospel No more doth he in that place to TIMOTHY And so it is nothing to purpose The fourth Testimonie * 2. Tim. 3.16 The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and to instruct to righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect vnto euery good worke In these words are contayned saith M. P. two arguments to prooue the sufficiencie of Scripture The first that which is profitable to these foure vses to teach al necessarie truth is not in the text to confute errors to correct faults in maners to instruct all men in all dutie is M. P. his addition to the text that is sufficient to saluation But the Scriptures serue for all these vses c. ANSWERE This text of holy Scripture is so farre from yeelding our aduersaries two Arguments that it affoordeth not so much as any probable colour of halfe one good argument In searching out the true sence of holy Scriptures wee must obserue diligently the nature proper signifycation of the words as M. P. also noteth out of S. AVGVSTINE in his sixt objection of this question which if the Protestants did here performe they would make no such account of this text for S. PAVL saith only that all Scripture is profitable not sufficient to teach to reproue c. How are they then carried away with their owne partiall affections that cannot discerne betweene profitable and sufficient Good Timber is profitable to the buylding of an house but it is not sufficient without stones morter a Carpenter Seede serues well yea is also necessarie to bring forth corne but will it suffice of it selfe without manuring of the ground and seasonable weather And to fit our purpose more properlie good lawes are verie profitable yea most expedient for the good gouernment of the common-wealth But are they sufficient without good customes good gouernours and judges to see the same Laws customs rightly vnderstood and duely executed Euen so the holy Scripturs S. PAVL affirmeth are very profitable as contayning very good necessary matter both to teach reproue correct but he saith not they are sufficient or that they do containe all doctrine needfull for these foure ends And therefore to argue out of S. PAVL that they are sufficient for all those purposes when he saieth onely that they are profitable to them is plainely not to know or not to care what a man saith And to presse such an impertinent cauil so often and so vehemently as the Protestants do is nothing els but to bewray vnto the indifferent reader either their extreame ignorance or most audacious impudencie that thinke they can face out any matter be it neuer so impertinent The same answere I make vnto M. P. his second argument out of the same place that the holy Scriptures bee profitable to make the man of God absolute but not sufficient I say more-ouer that M. P. doth falsely English these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the whole Scriptures when it signifyeth all Scripture that is euerie booke of Scripture and is there put to verifie that the Old Testament only serues to instruct to saluation For in the words next before S. PAVL sheweth how that TIMOTHY from his infancie had bene trayned vp in the knowledge of the holy Scriptures which saith he can instruct thee to saluation And annexeth as the confirmation thereof the Text cited All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach c. Now in TIMOTHYS infancie no parte of the New Testament was written and therefore all Scripture which is here put to prooue that Scripture which TIMOTHY in his Infancie knew cannot but by vnreasonable wresting signifie more than all the bookes of the Olde Testament So that there are three soule faultes in this the Protestants Achilles The first in falsification of the text that it might seeme to bee spoken of the whole which is spoken of euerie part The second in applying that which is spoken of the Olde Testament vnto both the Olde and New The third in making that to be all-sufficient which S. PAVL affirmeth onely to be profitable And this is all they can saye out of the Scripture to prooue that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation Where-upon I make this invincible argument against them out of this their owne position Nothing is necessarie to be beleeued but that which is written in holy Scripture But in no place of Scripture is it written that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation as hath bene prooued Therefore it is not necessarie to saluation to beleeue the written worde to containe all doctrine needefull to saluation And by the same principle I might reject all testimonie of Antiquitie as needelesse if the Scriptures be so al-sufficient as they hold Yet let vs here what testimonie M. P. brings out of antiquitie in fauour of his cause TERTVLLIAN * De resur carnis saith Take from Heretikes the opinions which they defend with the Heathens that they may desende their questions by Scripture alone and they cannot stand ANSWERE Here Scripture alone is opposed as euerie one may see vnto the writings of Heathen Authors and not to the Traditions of the Apostles and therefore maketh nothing against them Againe saieth M. P. out of the same Author We neede no curiositie after IESVS CHRIST nor inquisition after the Gospel when we beleeue it we desire to beleeue nothing besides it for
3 de Sacra c. 1. I desire in all thinges to follow the Church of Rome And thus much of his prologue Afterward he taketh vpon him to prescribe shewe vs how farre foorth we may joyne with the Church of Rome by proposing many points in controuersie betweene vs and them in each shewing in what points we consent togither in what we differ I meane by Gods grace to followe him steppe by steppe although he hath made manie a disorderly one aswell to discouer his deceipts to disproue their errors as also to establish the Catholike Doctrine the which I will endeuour to performe by the helpe of God with all simplicity of language and with as much breuity as such a weighty matter will permitte Yet I hope with that perspicuity as the meaner learned may vnderstand it and with such substance of proofe both out of the holy Scriptures and auncient Fathers as the more iuditious to whose profite it is principally dedicated may not contemne it CHAPTER I. OF FREE WILL. OVR CONSENTS THAT I be not thought captious but willing to admit any thing that M. PERKINS hath said agreable to the truth I will let his whole text in places indifferēt passe paring of only superfluous wordes with adding some annotations where it shall be needfull and rest only vpon the points in controuersie First then concerning free will wherewith he beginneth thus he sayeth Free will both by them and vs is taken for a mixt power in the minde and will of man whereby discerning what is good and what is euill he doth accordingly choose or refuse the same ANNOT. If we would speak formally it is not a mixt power in the minde and will but is a free facultie of the minde and will only whereby we choose or refuse supposing in the vnderstanding a knowledge of the same before But let this definition passe as more populer M. PERKINS 1. Conclusion Man must be cōsidered in a fourefould estate as he was created as he was corrupted as he is renued as he shal be glorified in the first state we ascribe vnto mans will libertie of nature in which he could will or nill either good or euill note that this libertie proceeded not from his owne nature but of original Iustice in which he was created In the third libertie of grace in the last libertie of glorie ANNOT. Carry this in minde that here he graunteth man in the state of grace to haue free will M.P. 2. Conclusion The matters whereabout free will is occupied are principally the actions of men which be of three sortes Naturall Humane Spirituall Naturall actions are such as are common to men and beasts as to eate sleepe c. In all which we joyne with the Papists and hold that man hath free will euen since the fall of Adam M.P. 3. Conclusion Humane actions are such as are cōmon to al men good bad as to speake to practize any kinde of arte to performe any kinde of ciuill duty to preach to administer Sacraments c. And hither we may referre the outward actions of ciuill vertues as namely Iustice Temperance Gentlenes and Liberality and in these also we joyne with the Church of Rome and say as experience teacheth that men haue a naturall freedome of will to put them or not to put them in execution S. Paul saith The gentils that haue not the lawe doe the thinges of the lawe by nature Rom. 2.14 that is by naturall strength And he saith of himselfe that before his conuersion touching the righteousnes of the lawe he was vnblameable Phil. 3.6 Mat. 6.5 Ezech. 29.19 And for this externall obedience naturall men receiue reward in temporall thinges And yet here some caueats must be remembred First that in humane actions he should say morall mans will is weake and his vnderstanding dimme thereupon he often failes in them This caueat is no caueat of the Protestants but taken out of S. Thomas of Aquines Summe 1. 2. q. 109. art 4. 8. And in all such actions with S. Augustine you might haue quoted the place I vnderstand the will of man to be only wounded or half dead 2. That the will of man is vnder the will of God and therefore to be ordered by it Who knowes not this M.P. 4. Conclusion The third kinde of actions are spirituall more nearely these be two fold good or bad In sinnes we joyne with the Papist and teach that in sinnes man hath freedome of wil. Some perhaps will say that we sinne necessarily because he that sinneth cannot but sinne and that free will and necessity can not stand together In deede the necessity of compulsion and free will can not stand together but there is an other kinde of necessity or rather infallibility which may stand with free will for some thinges may be donne necessarylie and also freely ANNOT. The example of a close prisoner is not to the purpose for it puts necessitie in one thing and libertie in an other The solution is that necessary lie must be is taken for certaynlie not that a man is at any time compelled to sinne but his weaknes and the crafte of the Diuell are such that he is very often ouer reached by the Diuell and induced to sinne but with free consent of his owne will M.P. 5. Conclusion The second kinde of Spirituall actions be good as repentance Faith Obedience c. In vvhich we likewise in parte joyne with the Church of Rome and say that in the first conuersion of a sinner mans free wil cōcurreth with Gods grace as a fellow or co-worker in some sorte for in the conuersion of a sinner three thinges are required the word Gods spirit and Mans will for Mans will is not passiue in all euerie respect but hath an action in the first conuersion chaunge of the soule when any man is conuerted this worke of God is not donne by compulsion but he is conuerted willinglie at the verie time when he is conuerted by Gods grace Serm. 15. de verb. Apost he willeth his conuersion to this end saith S. Augustine He which made thee without thee will not saue thee without thee Againe that it is certaine that our will is required in this that we may doe any thing well it is not only then required in our first conuersion if it be required to all good thinges which we doe but we haue it not from our owne power but God workes to will in vs. For looke at what time God giues grace at the same time he giues a will to desire and wil the same As for example when God workes faith at the same time he workes also vpon the will causing it to desire faith and willingly to receiue the gift of beleeuing God makes of the vnwilling will a willing will because no man can receiue grace vtterly against his will considering will constrained is no will But here we must remember that howsoeuer in respect of time
the working of grace by Gods spirit and the willing of it in man goe togither Yet in regarde of order grace is first wrought and mans will must first of all be acted and moued by grace and then it also acteth willeth and moueth it selfe And this is the last point of consent betweene vs and the Roman Church touching free will neither may we proceede farther with them Hitherto M. PERKINS Now before I come to the supposed difference I gather first that he yeeldeth vnto the principall point in controuersie that is freedome of wil in ciuill and morall workes in the state of corruption and all good works in the state of grace for in his first conclusion distinguishing foure estates of man he affirmeth that in the third of man renued or as we speake justified there is libertie of grace that is grace enableth mans will to doe if it please such spirituall workes as God requireth at his handes Yet lest he be taken to yeeld in any thing Pag. 16. he doth in shewe of wordes contradict both these points in an other place For in setting downe the difference of our opinions he saith that mans will in his conuersion is not actiue but passiue which is flat opposite vnto that which himselfe said a litle before in his first conclusion that in the conuersion of a sinner mans will concurreth not passiuely but is co-worker with Gods grace The like contradiction may be obserued in the other part of libertie in morall actions for in his third conclusion he deliuereth playnlie man to haue a naturall freedome euen since the fall of Adam to doe or not to doe the acts of wisedome Iustice Temperance c. Pag. 19. and proues out of S. Paul that the Gentils so did Yet in his first reason he affirmeth as peremptorily out of the 8. of Genesis that the whole frame of mans hart is corrupted and all that he thinketh deuiseth or imagineth is wholy euill leauing him no naturall strength to performe any part of morall dutie See how vncertayne the steps be of men that walke in darknes or that would seeme to communicate with the workes of darknes For if I mistake him not he agreeth fully in this matter of free will with the Doctrine of the Catholike Church For he putting downe the point of difference Page 1 saith that it standeth in the cause of the freedome of mans will in spirituall matters allowing then freedome of will with vs in the state of grace whereof he there treateth for he seemeth to dissent from vs only in the cause of that freedome And as he differeth from Luther and Caluin with other sectaries in graunting this liberty of will so in the very cause also he accordeth with Catholikes as appeareth by his owne wordes For saieth he Papists say mans will concurreth with Gods grace by it selfe and by it owne naturall power we say that Mans will worketh with grace yet not of it selfe but by grace either he vnderstandeth not what Catholikes say or else accuseth them wrongfully For we say that Mans will then only concurreth with Gods grace when it is stirred and holpen first by Gods grace So that Mans wil by his owne naturall actions doth concurre in euery good worke otherwise it were no action of Man But we farther say that this action proceedeth principally of grace whereby the will was made able to produce such actions for of it selfe it was vtterly vnable to bring forth such spirituall fruite And this I take to be that which M. PERKINS doth meane by those his wordes that the will must bee first moued and acted by grace before it can acte or will Hee mistooke vs thinking that we required some outward helpe only to the will to joyne with it or rather that grace did but as it were vntie the chaynes of sinne wherein our will was fettered And then will could of it selfe turne to God Luc. 10. Not vnderstanding how Catholikes take that parable of the man wounded in the way betweene Ierusalem and Ierico who was not as the Papists only say but as the holy Ghost saieth lefte halfe and not starke dead Now the exposition of Catholikes is not that this wounded man which signifieth all Mankinde had halfe his spirituall strength left him but was robbed of al Supernaturall riches spoyled of all his originall Iustice and wounded in his naturall powers of both vnderstanding and will and therein lefte halfe dead not being able of his owne strength either to know all naturall truth or to performe all morall dutie Now touching supernaturall workes because he lost all power to performe them not being able so much as to prepare himselfe conueniently to them he in a good sence may be likened vnto a dead man not able to moue one singer that way of grace Luc. 15. and so in holy Scripture the Father said of his prodigall Son he was dead and is reuiued Yet as the same sonne liued a naturall life albeit in a deadly sinne so mans wil after the fal of Adam continued some what free in actions conformable to the nature of man though wounded also in them as not being able to acte many of them yet hauing still that naturall facultie of free will capable of grace also able being first both outwardly moued and fortified inwardly by the vertue of grace to effect and doe any worke appertayning to saluation which is asmuch as M. PERKINS affirmeth And this to be the verie Doctrine of the Church of Rome Cap. 1. is most manifestlie to be seene in the Councell of Trent where in the Session are first these wordes in effect concerning the vnablenesse of man to arise from sinne of himselfe Euerie man must acknowledge and confesse that by Adams fall we were made so vncleane sinnefull that neither the gentils by the force of nature nor the Iewes by the letter of Moyses lawe could arise out of that sinnefull state After it sheweth howe our deliuerance is wrought and howe freedome of will is recouered in speciall and wherein it consisteth saying The beginning of iustification in persons vsing reason is taken from the grace of God preuenting vs through IESVS CHRIST that is from his vocation whereby without any desert of ours we are called that we who were by our sinnes turned away from God may be prepared by his grace both raising vs vp and helping vs to returne to our owne Iustification freely yeelding our consent vnto the said grace and working with it So as God touching the hart of man by the light of the Holy Ghost neither doth man nothing at all receiuing that inspiration who might also refuse it neither yet can he without the grace of God by his free will moue himselfe to that which is iust in Gods sight And that you may be assured that this Doctrine of the Councell is no other then that which was taught three hundred yeares before in the very middest of darknes as heretikes deeme
often is without the sacred society of charity CHAPTER 5. OF MERITTES MASTER PERKINS saith By meritte vnderstand any thing or worke whereby Gods fauour and life euerlasting is procured and that for the dignity and excellency of the worke or thing done or a good worke binding him that receiueth it to repay the like Obserue that three thinges are necessary to make a worke meritorious First that the worker be the adopted Sonne of God and in the state of grace Secondly that the worke proceede from grace and be referred to the honour of God The third is the promise of God through Christ to reward the worke And because our aduersaries either ignorantly or of malice doe slaunder this our Doctrine in saying vntruely that we trust not in Christs merittes nor neede not Gods mercy for our saluation but will purchase it by our owne workes I will here set downe what the Councell of Trent doth teach concerning merittes Sess 6. cap. vlt. Life euerlasting is to be proposed to them that worke well and hope well to the end both as grace of mercy promised to the Sonnes of God through CHRIST IESVS and as a reward by the promise of the same God to be faithfully rendred vnto their workes and merittes So that we hold eternall life to be both a grace aswell in respect of Gods free promise through Christ as also for that the first grace out of which they issue was freely bestowed vpon vs. And that also it is a reward in justice due partly by the promise of God and in part for the dignity of good workes Vnto the worker if he perseuer and hold on vnto the end of his life or by true repentance rise to the same estate againe In infantes baptised there is a kinde of meritte or rather dignity of the adopted Sonnes of God by his grace powred into their soules in baptisme whereby they are made heires of the Kingdome of heauen but all that arriue to the yeares of discretion must by the good vse of the same grace either meritte life or for want of such fruit of it fall into the miserable state of death OVR CONSENTS WITH this Catholike Doctrine M. PER. would be thought to agree in two points First That merits are necessary to saluation 2. That Christ is the roote fountayne of all meritte But soone after like vnto a shrewd cowe ouerthrowes with his heele the good milke he had giuen before Renouncing all merits in euery man sauing onely in the person of Christ whose prerogatiue saith he it is to be the person alone in whome God is well pleased Then he addeth that they good Protestants by Christs merittes really imputed to them doe merit life euerlasting Euen as by his righteousnes imputed vnto them they are justified and made righteous To which I answere that we most willingly confesse our blessed Sauiours merittes to be infinite of such diuine efficacy that he hath not onely merited at his Fathers handes Both pardon for all faultes and grace to doe all good workes but also that his true seruantes workes should be meritorious of life euerlasting as for the reall imputation of his meritte to vs wee esteeme as a fayned imagination composed of contrarieties For if it be really in vs why doe they call it imputed and if it be ours only by Gods imputation then is it not in vs really Further to say that he only is the person in whome God is well pleased is to giue the lye vnto many playne textes of holy Scriptures Abraham was called the friend of God therefore God was wel pleased in him Iac. 2. Moyses was his beloued Dauid was a man according vnto his owne hart Eccles 45. Act. 13. Ioh. 16. Rom. 1. God loued Christs Disciples because they loued him Briefly all the Christians at Rome were truly called of S. Paul the beloued of God And therefore although God be best pleased in our Sauiour and for his sake is pleased in all others yet is he not onely pleased in him but in all his faithfull seruantes Now to that which he saith that they haue no other meritte then Christs imputed to them as they haue no other righteousnes but by imputation I take it to be true and therefore they doe very ingenuously and justly renounce all kinde of merittes in their stayned and defiled workes But let them tremble at that which thereupon necessarily followeth It is that as they haue no righteousnes nor meritte of heauen but only by a supposed imputation so they must looke for no heauen but by imputation for God as a most vpright judge wil in the end repay euery man according to his worth wherfore not finding any reall worthines in Protestants but only in conceipte his reward shall be giuen them answerably in conceipte only which is euidently gathered out of S. Augustine where he saith Lib. 1. de morib Eccles cap. 25 That the reward cannot goe before the merite nor be giuen to a man before he be worthy of it for saith he what were more iniust then that and what is more iust then God Where he concludeth that we must not be so hardy as once to demaund much lesse so impudent as to assure our selues of that crowne before we haue deserued it Seing then that the Protestants by this their proctour renounce all such meritte and desart they must needes also renounce their part of heauen not presume so much as once to demaund according vnto S. Augustines sentence vntill they haue first renounced their erronious opinions But M. PERKINS will neuerthelesse proue and that by sundry reasons that their doctrine is the truth it selfe and ours falshood First by a sorry short sillogisme cōtayning more then one whole page It is taken out of the properties of a meritorious worke Which must be saith he four First That the worke be done of ourselues without the helpe of another Secondly That it be not otherwise due debt Thirdly That it be done to the benefit of an other Fourthly That the worke and reward be equall in proportion These proprieties he sets downe pithagorically without any proofe But inferreth thereon as though he had proued them inuincibly that Christs manhood seperated from the Godhead cannot meritte because whatsoeuer he doth he doeth it by grace receiued should be otherwise due He might in like manner as truly say that Christs manhood vnited to the Godhead could not merite neither for he receiued his Godhead from his father whatsoeuer he doth is therefore his Fathers by due debt And so the good man if he were let alone would disapoint vs wholy of all merites aswell the imputed of Christs as of all ours done by vertue of his grace Wherefore we must a little sift his foure forged proprieties of merit and touching the first I say that one may by the good vse of a thing receiued by free gift merit and deserue much euen at his handes that gaue it For example the