euen of as many as are indeed true Christians according to the practise of our doctrine But to come neerer to the point we are to vnderstand that the Protestants Doctrine of free wil is that no man hath power by nature either without the grace of Gods spirit to do any thing acceptable vnto God or to procure this grace to himselfe or to receaue it when it is offered For our present purpose it shal be ynough to speake a word or two of the last point not by way of proofe but declaration Whereas then we deny a man poâ—er to receaue the grace of God being offred we do not meane that this grace workes vpon him as on a stone or block but as on a reasonable creature No man beleeues but willingly onely the question is how it comes to pasle that when two men haue grace offred them the one beleeues the other doth nâ—t The Papist in this case fetcheth the difference frâ— the good vse of his free will that beleeues we ascribe it to the diuers working of Gods spirit in his heart not denying that he vseth his free will to speake as they doe better then the other but acknowledging that therefore he so vseth it because the spirit of God teacheth and inclines and ineuitably brings him so to vse it that the difference may be from God and not from man To what end saith he tends this doctrine If it be possible that any man should be so blinde as not to see I will venture the losse of so much time and labour as may serue to shew him You aske vs why we say that men are saued by Gods grace not by their owne freewill Forsooth because we would haue God reape the glory of their saluation the pride of mans nature beaten down theÌ„ more beholding to God then to themselues None of which can be if a man by his owne free will make difference betwixt himselfe and another to the receauing of faith For he may truly say to God that he is no more beholding to him then many a one that is euerlastingly damned nay then euery one might haue bene if he would For what did God for him that he was not as ready to doe for another how many haue had as much grace offred them as he and yet are not iustified No more had he bene if he had not by his owne free-will helpt himselfe in speciall maner wheras God failed him leauing all to his choise to be saued or not to be saued Is this to teach carnall libertie you will say yea because it maketh a man negligent in disposing and preparing his soule How so for the difference is made by God What then to what purpose is it forme to prepare my selfe I maruell you aske not to what purpose it is for you to beleeue Are you yet to learne that although the cause of all goodnesse be grace yet God requires our endeuours as meanes to the receauing of this grace Did you neuer heare that we holde it for a monstrous absurditie to promise our selues any thing from God without vsing the meanes to obtaine it The same also I answere to the doing of good workes after sanctification the successe and euent proceeds onely and certainly from the spirit of God who Phil. 2. 13. workes in vs both to will and to doe Yet are we bound to vse all good meanes for the stirring our selues vp to holynesse and freely and willingly doe we whatsoeuer good worke we do by the grace of Gods spirit Therefore this similitude of the sicke Asse sheweth the Authors dangerous sicknesse eyther of ignorance if he know not the truth we holde or of malice if against this knowledge he wilfully peruert it They defend say you that men are iustified by faith alone That is we defend that God requireth nothing of man to his iustification but only that by faith he rest vpon Iesus Christ to be iustified by his suffrings The generall ground of this opinion is the end of all things created viz. the glory of God that man may haue nothing to boast of but simply ascribe the praise of his iustification to God that iustified him Neither doth this doctrine scorne God in reiecting it as much as you list eyther flatly ouerthrow or in any part diminish true repentance sorrowe for sinnes mortification of passions and all other vertues which will plainely appeare both before and after iustification for what though we be iustified onely by faith who knowes not that it is vnpossible for any man ordinarily to cast of this naturall and Popish confidence which he hath in his owne righteousnesse and to feele necessitie of being iustified by Christ If first he discerne not his damnable estate and being moued with horror thereof she from himselfe to Christ for iustification by pardon of sinne Now after a man is iustified can the knowledge of the meanes by which he is iustified kill these vertues in him Let the meanes and cause of his iustification be what you will If he may beleeue he is iustified and the Papists graunt some men haue knowne and more may know it at least by reuelation by your reason this effect must ensue So that it ariseth not from the doctrine of the meanes but from that of knowledge or assurance But how should these vertues be abolisht by iustification by faith only when as euerie man that is iustified is also sanctified Whosoeuer hath his sinnes forgiuen him hath withall the power of sinne abated in him How shall we that are dead Rom. 6. 2. to sinne liue any longer therein No man hath any incouragement by free iustification through faith to continue in sinne For if he be not sanctified he is not iustified If he be sanctified he is dead to sinne and aliue to righteousnesse True it is that prophane wretches will obiect against the Gospell now as they did in the Apostles time But this was not then nor is now any sufficient reason why the truth of God should be denyed or supprest for wicked mens abusing it to their owne damnation Yet perhaps you will reply that it is a more likly meanes to stir meÌ„ vp to repentance mortification and the practise of all vertues to teach them that they must deserue the first iustification of congruitie by their good preparation and fully make vp the measure of their second iustification by deseruing of condignitie for their good workes euerlasting life First let vs suppose it be likely in our corrupt iudgment yet may we not gratifie God with a lye nor doe euill that good may come of it And why should not we follow the practise of the Apostles whose course is in all their Epistles still to vrge grace in iustification and good workes for thankfulnesse not for merit yet we deny not but it is both warranted by the Scriptures and most conuenient to adde an edge to the workes of sanctification by threatning condemnation to sinners and promising reward to the
cleauing to the worke defiles it is by all meanes possible to be auoyded but not the worke it selfe to be forborne For we haue an absolute charge from God to exercise our selues in all good workes and a merciful promise of forgiuenesse of those infirmities which our corruptioÌ„ fasteÌ„s to our best indeauors In matters indifferent that are put to our choise to be done or left vndone it is a good rule to refraine because our weaknesse will bring forth some sinne in the doing of them As for example it is lawfull for me to play at chesse or tennisle but if I find by experience that I cannot vse these exercises without some special sinne as swearing cursing fretting losse of too much time c. I am bound in conscience to refraine them altogether The case stands otherwise in matters of necessary duty as thus I am commaunded to make my supplications to God by prayer daily experieÌ„ce teaches me that I cannot pray with such a measure of faith as I ought that wandring thoughts somtimes enuious couetous or ambicious deuices creâ—p into my heart quench my zeale in praying am I therfore wholy to giue ouer praying Nay rather I must pray more ofteÌ„ that it would please God to increase his grace in me to the subduing of this corruptioÌ„ The like I might truly say of other good workes but this is warraÌ„t ynough for me to coÌ„clud that the protestants are not bound in conscience to auoide al good works though to the doing therof they bring an infectioÌ„ of deadly sin as all sinne is deadly The answer to his syllogimse if it be a syllogisme is made D as I haue shewed by denying the assumption or Minor viz. that fasting prayer almes-deeds all good workes are deadly sinnes In steed of prouing this in his new edition he falles to discourse of a distinction and so leaues his argument still without proofe as before it was The distinction is that good workes being enioyed by God are not to be forborne though some imperfection distaine theÌ„ in the working but the imperfection onely He would seeme to take away this distinction by giuing particular instance against the truth thereof The generall syllogisme may be thus framed If a man be bound in conscience to forbeare the doing of some good workes because he cannot doe them without some greiuous synne then he is bound to auoyd al good workes because some imperfections alwaies accompany them But a man is bound in conscience to auoide some good workes because he cannot do them without some grieuous sinne Therefore he is bound in conscience to avoide al good workes because some imperfections alwayes accompany them I deny the consequence of your proposition First because all good workes are not of the same kinde some being absolutely commaunded some onely vpon condition such as Giuing of Almes is whereof in answere to the assumption Secondly because the imperfections are for the most part without our consent and against our liking whereas most grieuous sinnes are outward actions of disobedience as stealing to giue almes which is your owne though a most vnfit example I graunt your assumption vpon this supposition which notwithstanding I take to be very false that there are some things a man cannot doe without grieuous sinne and I come to the examining of your particulars which are brought to proue this assumption Giuing of almes is one of those good workes which are coÌ„manded conditionally if a man be able He that hath this 1. Ioa. 3. 17 worlds good c. Beside wee speake not of sinning before the good deede but in the act it selfe and so this example is not to the purpose You are bound in conscience to refraine your enemies company vpon that supposall vnlesse there be necessitie of comming into it for the performance of some dutie of your general or particular calling It would also be remembred that comming into your enemies company is no good worke commaunâ—ed by God and therefore not pertinent to our question Eating of flesh is a thing indifferent and therefore vpon duty to God and our bretheren to be forborne when they shall be scandalized by it What is this to good works Neither am I to refraine Releeuing of the poore because I can not doe it without vaine glory and so shall haue no reward in heauen neither is the reward had here or lost in heauen for vaineglory but onely when a man makes that his end not when it windes in it selfe by our corruption against our liking If I can not effect my best actions say you without the infections of my naturall corruption I am boundia conscience to auoide those crimes and offences which can not possibly be performed without these vitious circumstances But I can not effect my best actions without such infections Therefore I an bound in Conscience to auoide those crimes and offences which can not possibly be perfourmed without these vitious circumstances I will neuer striue with you about this syllogisme which belonges nothing at all to the matter in question onely geue me leaue to wonder at this strange course of disputing Your reason added to proue I know not what but I am sure prouing neither part of your syllogisme seemes to conclude that which we deny not namely that Euery least corruption is sufficient to make the worke not to be perfectly good This I granted before and withall shewed that it did not follow herevpon that Therefore these good workes were to be auoided since it pleaseth God both to pardon the imperfection and reward the worke though imperfect Article 3. Papist The Protestants either haue no faith at all or lie most damnablie in denying that a man assisted by Gods grace can keepe the commaundements Protestant It may appeare by my answere to the former Article that a true Christian both can and doth performe acceptable obedience vnto God by keeping his commaundements But this obedience is vnperfect our workes being good in the sight of God not by their owne value but by Gods acceptation Our Papists that are sett vpon magnifying themselues more then glorifying God cannot abide to heare of any imperfection in their workes which may impeach or impaire the merite of them Therefore they raile at vs as this Author here doth because we say it is not possible for aman compassed about with naturall corruption to keepe the Commaundements of God fully and perfectly vpon which Doctrine of ours we are charged in this Article either to haue no faith at al or to lie most damnably in denying that a man assisted by Gods grace can keepe the Commaundements Papist Whosoeuer knoweth God keepes his commaundements But A all true Protestants know God Ergo All truâ— Protestants keepe his Commaundements The B. Ioh ep â— Chap. 5. 4. Maâ—or is expresse Scripture Qui â—icit se nosse Deum mandata eius non custodit mendax est in eo veritas non est Hee that saieth he knoweth God
the communion of saints some way Then belike there be saints in purgatory and the members of the Church militant are Saints But why say you nothing of the saints in heauen Is there no cōmunion betwixt thē those in purgatory yet are they al mēbers of one body I pray you what cōmunion is there betwixt these three kindes of Saints What do the saints in purgatorie in requitall of the triumphant and militant Saints kindnesse What nothing at all Why then what necessity is there to inforce any such duty on our parts towards the Saints in Heauen We as you say do not only pray but offer vp a bodily and spirituall sacrifice for them in purgatorie to God what reason is there then they should not pray to vs as well as wee praye to the Saints triumphant who do but halfe so much for vs and the lesse halfe too As for the places in the Margine no blast be it neuer so great can kindle the fire of purgatory by any heate that 1. Cor. 3. 13. 15. will arise from them the former is concerning the tryall of doctrine by the fire of Gods word Some mens workes shall burne therefore there are some in purgatorie burning Some What workes sayes the Apostle not men If any mans worke ver 15. burne he shall loose his labour but himselfe shall be saued yet as it were by fire Therefore there are some Saints burning in the fire of purgatory but that neither all mens workes are spoken of nor any assay is to be made by purging fire nor these places meant of purgatory it may appeare by these reasons 1. There are not any two places in all the new testament of any one point so full of controuersy for interpretation as these Therefore are they vnfit and vnsufficient to proue so doubtfull a matter as this of purgatory 2. Besides the former of them is wholly Allegoricall Theologia symbolic a non est argum entatiua Foundation Maister-builder Gould siluer Wood Hay Straw and therefore by the rules of disputation in diuinitie altogeather vnmeete for proofe of doctrine in matters of controuersie 3. The fire of Purgatory purges all bad workes this here medles with nothing but false doctrine as it is manifest 1. Because the Apostle speakes of builders onely such as himselfe Apollos vers 6. 2. The reward that shal be receaued vers 14. is to be geuen according to the labour of the Minister vers 8. 3. The People what good workes soeuer they haue are in this place considered but as the building or Husbandrie vers 9. 4. The fire of Purgatory doth not burne the worke but the soule of the worker but this fire shall burne the worke not the workeman vers 1. 3. 14. 15. 5. The fire of Purgatory doth not consume but purifie this fire doth not purifie but consume vers 15. 6. All mens workes must be tryed by this fire vers 12. 13. but not by the fire of Purgatory for that belongs to them onely that haue not made satisfaction for their sinnes or not bin absolued from them by the Sacrament of penance Since it is for the most part agreed vpon that the fier vers 13. doth not signifie Purgatory what reason shall perswade vs that this doth vers 15. The other place hath troubled all the Diuines that euer 1. Cor. 15. 29. writ vpon it both for the Grammar and the sense of it It shal be therefore sufficient for me to answere that till the Popish interpretation be better proued we haue no reason to seeke for the fier of Purgatory in the Baptisme of or for the dead especially since no ancient writer hath so expounded it Neither can it serue Saint Paules purpose being so vnderstood For how can the Resurrection of the body be proued by praying for the soules in Purgatorie But oh the heate of Popish charitie that can abide to let so many soules frie in Purgatory whereas multiplying of Masses would quench the fire and free the poore wretches or at least their holy father the Pope may deliuer as many as pleaseth him by plenarie indulgences and yet these men crie out vpon vs for want of charitie because we will not helpe them by prayer for whom we are sure that all the prayers that can be made are either needlesse or bootelesse Are these th◠reasons that must perswade men of Iudgment c. They that acknowledge not remission of sinnes as an effect in K. the Sacrament of Baptisme denie the Article of remission of sinnes Then it should seeme the meaning of the Article is that we beleeue the remission of sinnes as an effect of Baptisme I maruell how many popish Priests would giue a man this exposition that should aske them the meaning of this Article of the Creed There is more reason to say I beleeue that remission of sinnes is a priuiledge belonging to the holy Catholicke church which our Sauiour Christ hath purchased with his bloud But if the meaning be of Baptisme then we haue found in the Creed that Baptisme is a Sacrament which a little afore was denyed to shew the insufficiencie of the Creed to be the rule and limit of our beleefe He that confesses that Iesus Christ hath paide the ransome for the sinnes of his church by his bloud and procured the pardon of them cannot iustly be charged with denying this article of remission howsoeuer he do erre in iudging of the force and vse of baptisme But the Protestants say you acknowledge not remission of sinnes as an effect of the Sacrament of Baptisme The Protestants acknowledge the same effect in the sacrament of baptisme which the church of God acknowledged and receaued in the sacrament of circumcision that the Patriarches and fathers of Christs church before his comming receaued the forgiuenesse of sinnes no Christian can doubt that either they had it by the effect of the sacrament or that your sacrament hath another effect in substance then theirs had no Papist can proue at least this man hath not proued But shortly to deliuer our opinion we beleeue and professe that euery one who is effectually baptised hath receaued forgiuenesse of all his sinnes originall actuall past to come and if you will mortall and veniall for the guilt and for the punishment for the eternall and temporall punishment But we deny first that al which haue Baptismum Fluminis the baptisme of water haue also Baptismum Flaminis the baptisme of the spirit Secondly that none haue forgiuenesse but they which are baptised Thirdly that euery man that is baptised receaues forgiuenesse of sinnes which may thus appeare because many a man baptised is euerlastingly damned but no man that hath his sinnes forgeuen him is damned If you say they were forgiuen but now are not you destroy the nature of forgiuenesse which depends not vpon any condition to come If it do then can it not be truly affirmed that a man by Baptisme receaues forgiuenesse absolutely of those
vnto vs. That is your Popish Heresie Nay we acknowledge with thankes to God and their iust commendation that the ancient writers haue brought great light to the true vnderstanding of scriptures Yea that many Papists haue interpreted some texts of scripture soundly religiously Moreouer we confesse that all and euery one of our writers either hath or may haue failed in his expositions I speake the last doubtfully because some haue written but little and my selfe haue not examined all If any Heretikes avow the truth of al their owne interpretations what should this preiudice our cause Who submitt whatsoeuer our expositions to be compared with the scriptures to be receaued or refused as they shal be found to agree or disagree with or from the word of God I would add hereunto the generall consent of the ancient writers but that it is a longer and more vncertaine course to try whether they be sutable vnto their owne writings then whether they be framed according to the holy Ghosts meaning For the maine doubt must needs accompany that tryall viz. who shal be Iudge whether we or the Papists rightly vnderstand and expounde the fathers wrytings If any man shall say their Bookes and Commentaries are plaine and easie I dare boldly say of him that either he neuer read what they write or cares not what himselfe sayes It wil not serue the turne to bring some plaine interpretations out of them for so can we alleage very many texts out of the Scripture But he that is desirous to iudge truly of the meaning of any writer must not snatch vp a sentence here and there but aduisedly consider both his manner of writing in other places and the signification of diuers phrases and custome of speech in those times wherin he writ the occasion of those particular words he would vnderstand and diuers other such points Which will proue as ere while I said more troublesome and lesse certaine then to search euery corner of the text for the true meaning of the scripture And here let vs remember that we are sure the scripture agrees with it selfe in euery place and point that any other writers do so who can be assured So that many times we shall beat our braines to reconcile those speeches which indeed are very certaine contrarieties Since that this difficultie remaines in vnderstanding the fathers writings which is the onely doubt in the scripture what madnesse were it to leaue beating of the text wherein we know the certaine truth is to be found and to run ryot in the wilde-feilds of mens inuentions where perhaps there is nothing to be had but errour Let vs vse the helpe of Ancient writers to finde the meaning of the holy Ghost but not rest vpon their authority therein If they proue their interpretations by reason let it be waighed that it may perswade vs to think as they do If there be none let vs labour to find some for their interpretation If that will be not let vs see what other reason we can haue of any other exposition If it please God to shew vs any Let vs craue pardon of the Fathers to dissent from them if none Let vs rather trust them then our selues where there is nothing but coniecture without difference of likelyhood We are far from bragging of any such speciall illumination as the Donatists challenged to themselues For we say not that the Church of God is only in our assemblies or the spirit tyed to vs. Who knowes not that this is a stale popish deuise to shutt vp the holy Ghost in the Popes brest so that neither all Councills without him can be any thing worth and hee of himselfe without any of them is alsufficient A litle flocke wee are in deed if wee bee compared with the huge swarmes of Infidells Papistes and other hâ—retickes Yea as many of vs as belong to the election of God are of that small flocke to which Luke 12. 32. it is Godâ— good pleasure to giue A kingdome To bee of any other Litle flocke wee accompt it no commendation Nay rather wee desire and pray that it would please God to enlarge the boundes of his Church and to increase the number of true professors But we are not ashamed of our small nomber though the Papists twight vs with all in comparison of their huge multitudes Therefore whereas this Papist likens vs to the Donatists Pelagians Nestorians Eutychians with all the rable of other damned heretickes we acknowledge it is our portion to be rayled on with our Master Christ and so shake of this froth of a malicious stomacke with that speech of the Archangell The Lord rebuke thee Now for a Conclusion that the end might be sutable to the beginning he laboures to disgrace the principles of our Religion by affirming as truely as he hath done all the rest that if our principles bee true then Saint Paule exhorts men to infidelity How many of our principles thinke you hee ouerthrowes by this reason But poore one if it were neuer so true and being false as it is not that neither Whosoeuer exhorts vs to doubt of that which we are bound to beleeue by faith exhorts vs to infidelitie The proofe of this might well haue bin spared and the strength you wastâ—nâ—â— reserued for the assumption which hath more need oâ— your help then it seemes your are aware of But Saint Paul doth exhort vs to doubt of our saluation which wee are bound to beleeue by faith according to the Protestants doctrine Because it makes for the better vnderstanding of this Reason I will in few wordes set downe what we teach concerning this point Namely that it behooues euery Christian to laboure for the perfection as of other graces so of the assurance that comes by faith also Which standes in a full perswasion of the loue of God in Iesus Christ and the continuance thereof to his euerlasting saluation In deed this is not the proper nature of faith which rather is that grace whereby we cast our selues vpon Christ to be saued by him But it is an effect of faith which euery Christian must striue to haue grounded in him selfe so that if he haue it not he failes in one duty to God But we may not imagine that whosoeuer hath not this feeling assurance of Gods loue to him either is without faith or shal be damned for the want of this perswasion Nay we make no question but that both faith it selfe this effect of it is in al or the most part very far from perfection euery one hauing his measure alotted vnto him according to the good pleasure of God who sees how much is necessary for euery one in regard of the inward and outward trialls which hee shall haue in this life This must wee indeuour by all good meanes to establish and augment herevnto belongs that exhortation of the Apostles With feare and trembling worke your saluation There are two kinds of men whom it doth concerne
this answere both is false in regard of that it affirmes concerning our being out of Christ and also doth not satisfie the whole doubt For it shewes no reason why we may pray for the forgiuenesse of any other sinnes then those great ones So that either we must not craue pardon for smal transgressions or els must do it needlesly since they are already pardoned as long as we abide in the body of our sauiour Christ Wherefore I had rather rest vpon the former answere which is agreeable to the word of God and warrantable by true reason Article 2 Papist The Protestants are bound in conscience to auoyd all good workes Protestant If this Papist would haue avoyded all slaundering the world should not haue bin troubled with such absurd collections Papist Euery man is bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoide all deadly sinnes But fasting prayer almesdeeds and all good workes according Luther in after ar 31 32. 39. Calu. lib. 3. inst c. 11. â— 4. c. 14 §. 19. Mclarch locc tit de peccat Confess Augusti articlâ— 6. Rom. 6. 23. Isa 64. 6. to the Protestants religion are deadly sinnes Ergo According to the Protestants religion all men are bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoide fasting prayer Almesdeedes all good workes B. The Maior is manifest for the wages of deadly sinne is death Stipendium peccati mors D. The Minor is as euident for according to the Protestants religion and common exposition of this text of scripture Facti sumns vt immundi omnes nos tanquam pannus menstruatâ— omnes iustitiae nostrâ— Wee are made all vncleane and al our Iustices are like a stayned cloth That is as they say the best workes wee can do are infected with deadly synne and consequently deserue eternall damnation and therefore to be auoided I am not ignorant that some wranglers with some shifting euasions go about to answer this article forsooth that the staines and imperfections the sinnes and spots ought to be auoyded but yet the good workes to be prosecuted A silly shift but put case it be impossible to wring out the staines then is not this monstruous cloth to be abhord put case I could not giue almes but I must steale am I not bound in conscience to auoide the giuing of almes Admit I could not see mine enemy but by experieÌ„ce long proued I should fall a quarrelling with him am I bound in conscience to auoide his company say that I could not eat flesh but I should scandalize the beholders ought I not to say non manducabo carnes in aternum I will not eat flesh for euer Graunt that I could not releeue the poore but I should staine this action with vaine glory Should I not heare of him that can not lye he hath receaued his reward and consequently that there remayneth no recompensation therefore in heauen So I say in like maner if the corruptioÌ„ of nature if the poyson of concupisceÌ„ce so staine my best actions that whatsoeuer I do or thinke I cannot possiblie effect them without these infections and corruptions then certainely I am bound in conscience to auoide these crimes offences the which cannot possibly be performed without these vitious circumstances for bonum constat ex integra causa malum nascitur ex quolibet defectu a good thing consisteth of all integrity but an euill thing is caused by euery defect that a man be in health euery humour must keepe his temper that he be sick it sufficeth one onely exceed keepe not his iust proportion so that a work be good it must be effected with all due circumstances that it be ill one only will defile as we commonly say one ill hearbe will spoile a whole potfull of pottage Protestant By an orderly course of disputation the first syllogisme should haue bin to this effect If al good works according to the Protestants religioÌ„ be deadly sins the ProtestaÌ„ts are bound in conscience to auoid al good works But al good works are deadly syns according to the Protesâ—ants Religion Therfore the protestants are bound in conscience to auoide all good workes This or some such syllogisme would haue saued me some labour for I should not haue needed to haue medled with any thing but the matter of it and you some blame for the forme of it would haue bene agreeable to logick Wheras now I must needs take paines to finde fault with the lamenes of your reason Euery man is bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoide all deadly synnes This syllogisme is faulty because the conclusioÌ„ agrees not with the questioÌ„ Your conclusioÌ„ is general of al men wheras your questioÌ„ is particular of protestantâ— Besides that runs vpon a penalty of eternall damnation this speakes of being bound in conscience If you answer that is is all one to bee bound in conscience and to be bound vpon pain of eternall damnation either all sinns deserue eternall damnation and then what will become of your purgatory distinction betwixt mortall and veniall sinnes or else no man is bound in Conscience to auoyde any but deadly sinnes and then what a window do you set open to an innumerable company of sinnes â— How empty will you make purgatory How short and bare will your auricular Confessions be It were as good therefore for you to do that you make a show of euen directly to conclude your question But let vs examine the matter of your syllogisme The Proposition I graunt is true that Euery man is bound in conscience or vpon paine of eternall damnation B. to avoide all sinne But what needs this popish distinction of Deadly sinnes Which is so alledged by you as if it had some allowance from our Diuines whereas we wholy reiect this fancy because there is no sinne that deserues not eternall damnation For proofe whereof wee need no other place of Scripture then that which this Papist himselfe bringes The wages of sinne is death Neither may it be preiudiciall Rom. 6. 25 to vs that he hath foisted in Deadly since neither the Greeke hath any such word nor the latine which hee according to his fond custome to no purpose and here also vnwisely against himselfe sets downe We grant there are differences and degrees of sinnes but the least that can be is a transgression and breach of the law and therefore punishable by damnation but if his meaning were by deadly sins to signifie notorious grosse transgressions he doth vs wrong another way as in the assumption it shal presently appeare which is this But fasting prayer alâ—â—â—sdeedes and all good workes according C. to the Protestants religion are deadly sinnes But lying and slaundering are not according to the popish religion as it should seeme by your practise For surely if you thought they were you would neuer be so desperate to practise them against so manifest a truth in matters of so great impoâ—tance It is not possible you should thinke that
Protestants account good works to bee sinnes which they acknowledge both to be commaunded and also accepted of God Yea more then that to be wrought in the faithfull by the spirit of God and to haue a reward prepared for them in heauen But that which the Protestants teach concerning sinne in good works is that our Corruption distaines the best works of Gods spirit in vs so that not only they cannot be meritorious to the obteining of euerlasting life but also deserue eternall damnation in the iust district and perfect iudgement of God in whose sight nothing that is any way vncleane can appeare to receaue allowance but onely by his mercifull goodnes that pardons the sinne for Christes sake and affords the worke acceptance Yet doth not this admixtion of our sinnefulnesse change the nature of the worke as if it made that dutie a sinne which is of it selfe obedience but takes from the particular act all power to iustifie and deserue at Gods hands which otherwise it hath vpon Couenant betwene God and vs. For example Praying geuing of Almes and such like are not made sinnes by any Corruption of ours but the actions of these vertues being performed by vs vnperfectly and sinfully as they alwayes are if they bee examined in the seueritie of Gods iustice wil be condemned as sinnefull not rewarded as righteous because we haue desiled them And this himselfe acknowledgeth afterwards for our opinion where he sayes that wee affirme the best works wee can do are infected with deadly sinne But it is not all one to say that Fasting praier almes deeds c. and all good works done by vs are infected with deadly Sin and to auouch that fasting prayer almesdeeds and all good works are deadly sinnes He that sayes the body is infected with some disease doth not say the body is that disease But concerning deadly sinne if thereby hee vnderstaÌ„d notorious and willfull breaking of the law of God by some greiuous transgression we deny that all good works are so much as infected with dead y sinne For we knowe and professe that in the whole course of our obedience to God wee are ordinarily free from such sinnes and that the Corruption which defiles our works proceeds rather from weakenes then willfullnes As for those actions of ours which haue such grosse sinnes adioyned to them wee deny that they can any way truely challenge so much as the bare name of good workes in the sight of God Such are those vaineglorious and hypocriticall deeds of the Pharisies Which our Sauiour condemnes and such to come neerer home are popish good works Because they are grounded vpon an euill intent namely a purpose and Conceit of iustifying the doers thereof deseruing Ex rigore iustitia in the rigor of iustice euerlasting glory of almighty God This I auouch generally of all their good workes whatsoeuer and particularly of all the. 3. here named I say further that in some part for the very substance of them they are no better nor other then sinnes Fasting is not of it selfe any good worke as if it made a man more acceptable to God then moderate eating doth but in 2. respects it is vpon iust occasion to bee vsed either for testifying of our humiliation by acknowledging our selues vnworthy so much as to taste of any of Gods creaturs or els for the better preparing of our selues to call vpon God by prayer But Popish fasting accounts the very absteining from meat a parte of holines and not simply from meat but from some kinds of meat So that a man may fully and truely keepe a popish fast though he neither be humbled in the sense of his sinne nor consideration of Gods wrath dâ—e thereunto nor performe any extraordinary dutie of praier nor haue any occasion of fasting but perhaps of the Contrary Yea though he gorge and glut himselfe with all kinds of dainties and fill his stomacke and head too with most delicate wines Alwaies proâ—ided that hee touch not any flesh or whit meat And hence it is that a Popish fast by way of a prouerb signifies as much as a costly delicious baÌ„quet No this kind of fast is so far from beeing a good worke that it is meerely a carnall and superst tious worke of the flesh haâ—ing not so much as the outward forme of a fast which consists in refraining all kind of sustenance not this or that only Prayer indeed is of another nature as being a duty by which in it selfe God is properly honored whether it be by petition or thanksgiuing But Popish prayer standeth in vaine repetition of Pater-nosters Aue-maryes Creeds whereof the two last also are nothing lesse then prayers and that many times for a penance And out of doubt they are not much deceaued therein for it is a grieuous punishment of blindnesse and senselesnesse to imagine that such toylesome lip-labour can please God Yet all this might haue the better shew of prayer if that which is babled ouer were vnderstood but for the most part the common people pray as Parrats speake altogether by rote without knowledge what they say Shall I adde herevnto that the prayers which ordinarily are made by poore ignorant soules are not made to God but to creatures insomuch that it hath bene held here in England and so no doubt is yet in Popish countries for a certaine marke of an heretick for a man to offer vp his owne prayers to God in Iesus Christ without the mediation of some Saint or other All which considered we truly auouch that this Popish praying is sinne And the like we affirme of some almesgiuing howsoeuer we gladly acknowledge that the duty of it selfe is one of those sacrifices with which God is highly pleased But Heb. 13. 16. to giue almes first to be prayed for after death secondly to the singing of Masses and Diâ—â—ges thirdly to the mainteinance of idle bellies fourthly to the impouerishing and many times vndoing of the poore wife and children is no better then infidelitie if the Apostle truely say that he 1. Tim. 5. 8. which hath not care of his owne especially of his domesticals is worse then an Infidell Therefore if we speake of these workes as they are done and allowed by the Papists we say that they are deadly sinnes not only faulty by reason of infirmitie which for the most part is the estate of those good workes that the faithfull in weaknesse performe Yet are they not by reason thereof deadly sinnes nor infected with deadly sinne but only as all sinnes how light account soeuer the Papists make of them deserue eternall death Neither doth it follow vpon the graunt of this infection and desert that therefore they are to be avoyded no more then that a sicke man is bound to starue himselfe by fasting as Pomponius Atticus absurdly did because his feeding continued his disease and that as Hippocrates says the more you nourish some sycke bodyes the more you corrupt them The sinne indeed which
you will say they may keepe them though they doe not I would beleeue it if you could shew me an example of any that euer did it But these places I alledged a little before manifestly proue that they that are renowned for holinesse were priuie to their owne vnrighteousnesse Nay what Saints story haue you any thing largely set downe in the Scriptures whose life is not tainted with some disobedience did those worthies faint sometimes and can we stand without snaking It is more honourable to God and comfortable to Christians truely to acknowledge the imperfection of their owne workes and the perfection of Gods mercy who vouchsafes a reward to those poore endeuours which of themselues by reason of the corruption wherewith they are defiled deserue in the rigour of his iustice euerlasting condemnation There needs no farther examination of the proofe of his syllogisme Article 4. Papist The most points wherein the Protestants dissent from Catholikes tend to loosenes of life and carnell liberty Protestant If the pointes we hold Be warrantable by the scriptures feare of what may follow thereupon must not make vs prouide for conceited holinesse by denying a certaine truth Papist This article may be proued by a generall induction in all Luther in asser art 36. Melanc in locis communibus Perkins in his reformed catholike the 1. controuersie such matters as now the Protestants cal in questioÌ„ First they say that man hath no free wil to do good but all goodnesse proceedeth so froÌ„ grace that it lieth not in his power neither to haue it nor resist it but of necessitie â—tmust haue effect To what other end tendeth this senselesse doctrine and fatall fancy but to make men negligent in disposing and preparing their soules to receaue Gods grace and to rouse it vp and put it in execution after they haue it making man not much vnlike a sicke asse who neither can dispose nor prepare himselfe to seeke for his medicine but of necessitie must expect till his Maister thrusteth it into his throat neither after he hath druncke it can cause it cure his disease but carelesly letteth it worke as it will Secondly they defend that men be iustified by faith alone C. The which solifidian portion ouerthroweth flatly true repentance sorrow for sinnes mortification of passions and all other vertues which tend to the perfect reconciliation of the soule with God causing men onely to procure a certaine false fantasticall apprehension of Christs death and passion the which faith although they erroneously auerre cannot be seuered from charity vertues good workes yet both experience teacheth that it may or else 1. Cor. 13. Whitacherus contra camp aut fides perpetua est aut nulla est And it is one of the 11. art enacted and decreed of by the bishops at Lamber â— some 4. yeares ago few or none of them haue faith because few or none of them haue these workes and the Scriptures playnely proue that all faith yea and the most noble faith which hath force to remoue mountaines may be without charity D. Thirdly they assure vs that faith once had can neuer be lost the which vaine security openeth the gappe to al libertine sesuality for if a man be certaine that he hath true faith if it be impossible he should loose it if he be secured that by it alone he shal be saued why may he not wallowe in all licencious pleasures in this life neuer doubt of glory in the other Could euer Epicurus haue found a better ground to plant his Epicurisme Could euer Heliogabalus haue better patronized his sensuality Could Bacchus or Venus haue euer forged better reasons to enlarge their Dominion Fourthly they say a man can not keepe all the commaundements â— for what other cause I pray you but thereby to make men negligent in the keeping of them to pretend an excuse of impossibility whensoeuer they transgresse them F Fiftly why deny they the Sacrament of penance but to make men carelesse how they liue and neuer regard the avoyding of sinnes as though they were neuer to render an account of them To hinder that shame and blushing which men conceaue in discouering their sinnes the which are most excellent meanes to deterre men from sinning another time to shuffle vp Restitution satisfaction of iniuries committed against our neighbours to drawe men from remorse of conscience by burying their sinnes in eternal obliuion the soares whereof Confession rubbeth and causeth remembrance Sixtly why exclude they the true and reall body of G Christ from the blessed Sacrament of the Altar but for that they perceaued how by the presence thereof they were deterred from sinne and wickednesse For they knew well that sinnefull liues consorted not with those sacred mysteries and therfore they rather resolued to banish Christ from the Sacrament then sinne from their soules Finally for what other cause haue they coyned a new negatiue H. religion wholly standing vpon Negation of Sacraments Ceremonies Rites Lawes Customes and other principal points of the Catholicke Church but for Fasting to bring an Feasting for Praying Playing for Deuotion Dissolution for Religious feare of God vaine Security for zeale and mortification a number of vaine verball sermons and to conclude for a positiue working a flat denyall almost of all points of faith and religion A. Protestant In deed a generall or rather a particular induction of all matters that Protestants call in question is of necessity to the proofe of this Article But neither if such an Induction were made could any such thing bee done and that not being done there is not so much as any reasonable course taken for the proofe of it for what if all these points here set down tend to loosenesse of life Alas 7. are neither all nor the most part nor any thing neere the most part of those points wherein we dissent from the Papists So that if it it were true of euery one of these as it is of neuer a one of them that they tend to loosenesse yet were this authour as farre from proving that he hath vndertaken as 7. is from seauen score that I may be sure to speake within my compasse what shall we iudge then of this proofe where from the first to the last there is not one true point as by speciall examination it will appeare They say that man hath not free will B. Nay more then that wee say that free will is a mere fancie a bare name without any thing answerable vnto it in the nature of man at the least since his fall in Adam But if it be his meaning to charge vs with a purpose to bring in loosenesse of life and carnall liberty by the teaching of this Doctrine we appeale from this vniust slaunderer First to the iudgement of God that searcheth the hearts and the raines then to the testimony of our conscience and lastly to the preaching of our Ministers and conuersation of our people
righteous But we deny that eyther of these enforcements of such exhortation in any part weakens the doctrine of free iustification by onely resting vpon Iesus Christ Which he may easily conceaue that hath a sincere purpose to glorifie God by the saluation of his chosen For he knowes that as much as is giuen to man for iustifying himselfe is taken from God God and man after this reckoning may part stakes God may haue glory for affording meanes of saluation and abilitie to vse those meanes man may be proud of the well vsing of that abilitie and iustifying of himselfe by the meanes afforded Yet if all men that are inabled did so helpe themselues there were lesse cause of boasting more reason to giue God the glory of iustification For it might well seeme to proceed from the grace that God imparts to them that they are iustified But when some vse it well some ill and this difference of well or ill vsing it flowes from the free-will of men by their owne power what a small part of glory is left to God in the seuerall iustification of those that are saued Hence it follows that the doctrine of iustification by workes preparatorie before a man is at all iustified by workes meritorious after he is begun to be iustified is dishonorable to God the death of all goodnesse in those very workes that are done Because the intent which our Papists magnifie so much is directly derogatorie froÌ„ the glory of God without the true and sincere purpose whereof no workes of any man baptised are one iott better then the morall actions of heathen men But the sonnes of the bond-woman being of a seruile nature respecting themselues either only or principally being ignorant and without feeling of the affection of childreÌ„ can neuer be perswaded that any sonne of God will performe duties of kindnesse and thankfulnesse to his father but must needs doe that he doth like a hireling for loue of wages And by such meanes our Papists would procure and deserue the perfect reconciliation of their soules with God as if we were not perfectly reconciled in Christ in whom God reconciled the world to himselfe not imputing their sinnes What is it to be reconciled to God but to haue Gods displeasure remoued his fauor fatherly loue vouchsafed to vs This hath Christ procured by his death and bloud-shedding the increase of our sanctification in vs by the dayly dying vnto sinne and rising againe vnto newnesse of life restores more perfectly the image of God decayed in vs by naturall corruption and manifold actuall transgressions but reconciles vs neuer awhit the more to God When the Prodigall sonne Luc. 15. 20 came home to his father starued and euill coloured in his body ragged and torne in his apparrell who can doubt for all this but he was fully reconciled to his father when he fell on his neck kissed embraced and entertained him but as his flesh euery day came better and better as his colour mended and waxed more fresh when he was arrayed according to his estate he did more liuely represent the sonne of such a father The same is our case in Christ by his suffrings are we wholy reconciled vnto God For we are made his Children but we begin dayly more and more to resemble him as we Ioa. 1. 12. Gal. 4. 4. 5. growe in holinesse of nature and conuersation Therefore let the Papists imagine that they reconcile themselues to God by mortification of passions and I know not what supposed vertues It is sufficient for vs that Christ hath by his bloud made our peace and put vs in possession of his fathers loue and fauour If this be a false fantasticall apprehension of Christs death and passion to relie wholy vpon him for reconcilation with God by his bloud and propitiation then his dying the Apostles preaching and our beleeuing is all in vaine How then doth this Doctrine tend to loosenesse especially if it be remembred that we shut al men out from iustificatioÌ„ that are not sanctified by the spirit of Christ They tell vs saith hee that faith anâ— good workes can not be seuered Would you knowe what faith he meanes only a perswasion of the truth of the Scripture euen such an one as the Diuil is said to haue and that with a Popish preparatorie good worke namely Feare The diuills beleeue and tremble Iac. 2. 19. But if they would speake any thing to the purpose they should proue these 3. things 1. that to beleeue in Iesus Christ iâ— nothing els but to be perswaded that these points that the Scriptures teach of Christ are true Which will neuer be done as long as that famous distinction is retemed Credere Deum deo in deum To beleeue there is a God to beleeue that all that God sayes is true to beleeue or trust in God or to rest vpon him and as our Nor theme men speake very plainely and significantly to beleeue on God Secondly that a man thus relying vpon Christ to be saued by him for al this beleuing is not iustified contrary to the whole course of the Gospell Thirdly they must shew vs that a man may be iustified and yet not sanctified then which nothing is more repugnant to popery For the popish Doctors teach vs that to be iustified is To haue sinne abolisht and grace infused into vs whereby and for which wee are as they say truely and habitually iust in the sight of God If they answere that these maâ—ters haue bin already proued by their Diuins we reply that ours haue shewed the insufficiency of their proofes and that if either this accuser or any other Papist will vrge those scriptures that haue bin aledged to this end any further or bring any that yet haue not bin brought he shall receaue by the grace of God true and sufficient satisfaction if truth will satisfie him In the meane while it shall suffice to put this Author in minde that his experience failes him beeing made not of those that beleeue in Christ but of them that beleeue Christ or at the most geue credit to those things which are spoken of him in the Gospell Whereunto I ad that neither faith which hath force to remoue mountaines is so noble as that which makes a man heire of heauen nor because that faith can be without Charitie Therefore either he that beleeues in Christ can bee without iustification or he that is iustifyed without sanctification They assure vs saith he that faith once had can neuer be lost What then This vaine securitie saith he opens the gap to all libertine sensuality If he speake of the euent all experience refuts him because no men liue more soberly and Christianly then they that haue the greatest measure of this perswasion And indeed it cannot bee otherwise For this is no where but where the spirit of God is and where he is there only is true sanctification If he blame the doctrine in respect of
of adultery discouered If by Vrias death it were not otherwise prouided for And that the place of Scripture by him alleaged is not to be wrested according to his fancy it may appeare by the 3. chap. 17. verse where it is said that he which shuts vp his bowells of compassion from his brother that hath â—eed hath not the loue of God abiding in him Yet I think this Papist will not condemne euery man as void of the loue of God vpon the refusall at some one time to giue almes to him that stands in neede Though it can not be denied but such a refusall is a breach of the lawe of God So then by this reason it is not proued that Dauid lost his faith or that faith may be lost Yf it could as easely haue bin proued out of Ezechiel 18. as said no doubt we should haue had it to the full But you shall giue vs leaue to beleeue it when wee see it done In the meane while it is inough to stop your mouth that your proofe may as easely be answered as you Imagine it may be made Especially if you remember that Ezâ—chiels speach is conditionall Conditionalis â—ihil poniâ— in esse A thing is not proued to be because if it be such or such an euent shall follow therevpon Artictle 7. Papist The Protestants shal neuer haue life euerlasting because they will haue no merits for which euerlasting life is giuen Protestant Miserable Protestants if the Pope had giuen that place and office to this man which he hath bestowed vpon Saint Peter to make him porter of heauen gates Papist A. Whatsoeuer is giuen as wages is giuen for works But the kingdome of heauen is giuen as wages Ergo the kingdome of heauen is giuen for works The maior or first proposition may be declared after this maner For example her Maiesty may bestow 1000. pounds a yeare vpon some suter either gratis of meere liberality so it is called a guift Donum a grace or fauor or vpon conditioÌ„ if he behaue himselfe manfully in the warres of Iâ—eland in this case the reuenue is called Merces wages Remuneratio Stipendium a reward or paiment And although her Maiesty did shew him a grace fauour to promise such a reward for performing such a work the which he was bouÌ„d vpon his allegeance otherwise to performe yet once hauing promised and the worke being performed her Maiesty is bound vpon her fidelity iustice to pay that she promised In like maner God may giue vs the kingdome of heauen without any respect or regard of works as he giueth it to litle Ad Rom. 4. v. 5. Children that are baptised and so it is a meere guift a pure grace Or hee may giue it with some respect vnto our works so he giueth it to al them who hauing vse of discretion keepe his commaundements for this cause it is called wages Mâ—rces a reward and thus the maior must be vnderstood to wit that Whatsoeuer God giueth as wages is giuen for works and such wages are called merits vvages then merits haue a mutuall relation for what are wages but a reward of merits what are merits but a desert of wages The minor is most plaine inculcated in scriptures Voca B. Apoc 22. vers 12. 1. Cor. 3. vers 8. Mat. 5. 12. cap. 6. vâ—rs â— 1. 1. Tim. 5. vers 18. operarios redde illis mercedem Call the workemen pay them their wages Ecce ego venio merces mea mecuÌ„ est reddere vnicuique secunduÌ„ opera sua â—oe I come my wages with me to giue to euery one according to his workes Vnusquisque propriam mercedem accipiet secundum suum laborem Euery on shal receaue proper wages according to his labour The like we haue in tweÌ„ty other places of scripture al which infallibly proue that the kingdoÌ„ of heaueÌ„ is giuen as wages for merits and consequently that Protestants who are enemies to merits shall neuer attaine to the kingdome of heauen which is purchased by good works and merits and for such men we may well say that heauen was neuer made no more then learning for him that will neuer studie nor vertue for him who despiseth the exercise thereof Protestant Any man may see with halfe an eye that the point in question is not concluded in this syllogisme But this fault is so common with this disputer that I am weary of noting it The reason stands thus being orderly shortly concluded If the kingdom of heauen be giuen for workes and the Protestants will haue no merits the Protestants shall neuer haue the kingdome of heauen But the kingdome of heauen is giuen for workes and the Protestants will haue no merits Therfore the Protestants shall neuer haue the kingdome of heauen See this popish sleight of confounding workes merits as if they were all one Indeed the ancient Latin writers put meritum desert or merit for opus worke somtimes mereri to deserue sometimes for consequi to obtaine or to be vouchsaft a thing But neither are they all one in truth and the scripture that speakes much of workes neuer vtters any word of merit Therefore the consequence of this proposition is little worth Neither is the assumption of this syllogisme any better as being altogeather false For how can the kingdome of heauen be giuen for works when as it is an Inheritance not a purchase For as many as are redeemed by Gal 4. 4 5. Ioa. 1. 12. Rom. 8. 17. Christ receaue the adoption of sinnes and all Gods sonnes are heires euen fellow heires with Iesus Christ Now to the heire the inheritance is due as descending vpon him neither can he make purchase of that which already is his owne by law Hireling indeed worke for wages yet many of them câ—not iustly plead desert in claiming their wages But whatsoeuer their plea be it is strange diuinitie law too for children to deserue their owne inheritance The weaknesse of this assumption is vnderpropt with this reason Whatsoeuer is giuen as wages is giuen for workes But the kingdome of heauen is giuen as wages Ergo The kingdome of heauen is giuen for workes This is your proofe to the which at the last we are come But you forget your selfe much therein For the question is not of workes but of desert by working so that if the conclusion of this syllogisme be granted the kingdome of heauen is giuen for workes yet are you farre enough from prouing your article that euerlasting life is giuen for merits Since some thing may be due vpoÌ„ promise by couenant which notwithstanding is no way deserued And this it should seeme you saw well enough and therefore chose rather to bring a weake similitude then to make offer of any sound proofe You tell vs a tale what the Lord may doe vtterly to no purpose Wherein I note onely these two things First that if all you
aske be graunted it helpes you nothing for what if euerlasting life be giuen for workes how often must you be told that working and deseruing are not all one We deny not that God will reward euery least good worke of any of his children but we cannot graunt that eyther the reward he will giue is euerlasting life or that any workes of his children deserue that reward which he will giue I doubt not which is the second thing I note in his similitude but you Papists your selues would thinke it extreame presumption for any subiect to claime as of merit that 1000. pound a yeare which was promised by the Prince for good seruice in Ireland especially if it may be truely obiected against such claime that though some fewe actions haue bene valiantly performed in part yet both in the best there hath beene defect and for one thing well done twentie haue beene left vndone How then shall any man proudly vaunt of merit that knowes what Gods law requires and what his owne deserts are It is the infinite goodnesse of God our father in Iesus Christ that he doth accept of our vnperfect obedience crowne it with glory for all the imperfections thereof But euerlasting life saith he is called wages and giuen as wages As if we denied that good workes shall receaue reward and need euery foote put you in minde of the difference of workes and merites But indeed euerlasting life or the kingdome of heauen is neuer I thinke called wages in Scripture There is a reward promised by God viz. an increase of glory which shal be imparted to the faithfull proportionably to the measure of grace and vse thereof in this life according to workes But the kingdome of heauen is an inheritance belonging to all the faithfull as members of Iesus Christ their head whose first and properly it is This I proued a little before and therefore will now onely set it out more plainely by a similitude or likenesse The sonne and heire of a King hath interest in the kingdome by right of inheritance the Kings moâ—eables may eyther in his life time by guift or by legacie after his decease be disposed of to whom he please The King to incite his sonne to valure and loue of vertue promiseth him that he will giue him some speciall reward for euery valiant exploit or attempt with true martiall discretion and resolution This reward is to be raised out of his moueables giuen indeed for workes but not to be claimed vpon desert in regard of some iust exception which the King his father may take against all such his enterprises and atchiuements Such is our estate in matters of euerlasting life by resting vpon Iesus Christ to be saued by him we become members of his mysticall body sonnes of God his father and ours by him heires of euerlasting life which is his inheritance and ours as members of him God our Father hath made promise to vs being now sonnes and heires and hauing thereby interest in his kingdome of reward of all things that we shall valourously atchieue or resolutely vndertake for the glorifying of his name according to his will This promise conueyes not to vs any title to the kingdome for that is ours already euen in possession by Christ but incourageth 1. Cor. 15. 58. vs to Christian obedience to be stedfast vnmoueable aboundant alwayes in the worke of the Lord for as much as we know that our labour is not in vaine in the Lord. And yet this is not our onely or greatest motiue to good workes For that ariseth from our Child-like affection to so kind and bountifull a father Which if the Papists haue not let them not therfore deny that there is any such thing like the mole that will not beleeue that any beast can see because she her selfe is blind What if they like hirelings will doe nothing but for wages The sonnes of God in this life take as great pleasure in their present obedience as in their future reward which notwithstanding they most assuredly looke for according to his promise that can not faile euer God our Father To whome with the sonne and Holy Ghost bee all obedience thanks and glory from this time for euer and euer Amen A Conclusion vnto his most speciall friend Maister F. T. THus my deare friend I haue sett downe those reasons which induced me to receaue the Catholick faith and for which I continue therein Consider I pray you whether they be not so substantiall and waightie as any wise man might accept and allow of or at least might cause a reasonable doubt of religion arise in his minde concerning the Protestants faith for if these bee true as questionlesse they are most true what man of iudgment will hazard his soule vpon a religion pestered with so many notorious absurdities and palpable errors Eternall damnation is a matter of no small moment when the soule is once plunged into those flames it is past recouery farre he â—eapes and ill he lights that iumpeth into hell and questionles without true faith you shall neuer come to Heauen Vrge your Ministers therefore to satisfie your conscience in answering these articles Will them to reply with maturitie and cause them answere distinctly and as they thinke in their consciences For I feare they will rather do it for a forme to seeme to say some thing then they wil be iudged ignorant by silence in saying nothing And with this I rest at your deuotion expecting what your newe Euangelists can answere to these iust accusations of their erroneous religion From my chamber in Antwerpe this first of March your louing freind H. T. FINIS As much of this post-script as hath any need of answere is touched in my Preface I will therefore loose no more time in examining such discourses The abridgement of the former answer ART 1. Papist THe Protestants haue no faith nor Religion Protestant The question is whether the Protestants by their doctrine professe any faith or religion Papist If the Protestants haue any faith charity repentance Iustification church altar sacrifice priest religion Christ then the world was without them for fifteene hundred yeeres But the world was not without them for 1500. yeares Therefore the protestants haue no faith no hope no charity no repentance no iustification no church no altar no sacrifice no priest no religion no Christ. Protestant I deny the consequence of your proposition neither doe we confesse any such eclipse of our Church for a thousand yeares yet the same being eclipsed ceases not thereby to be in the world but rather is proued to be neither can you proue any such thing as you brag of Trie when you will ART 2. Papist The learned Protestants are Infidels Whosoeuer buildeth his faith vpon his owne priuate singular exposition of Scripture is an Infidell But all Protestants in England do build their faith vpon their owne priuate exposition of Scripture Ergo all the Protestants of England are
sinneth most greeuously in asking GOD pardon for them But all true Protestants are assured by faith that their sinnes are forgiuen them Ergo all true Protestants sinne grieuously in asking pardon of God for them Protestant The principall syllogisme for the proofe of the Article omitted I know not vpon what reason by this author is thus to be concluded Whosoeuer synne greeuously in asking God forgiuenesse of their synnes are bound in conscience neuer to aske him forgiuenesse But the Protestants synne greeuously in asking God forgiuenes of their sinnes Therefore the Protestants are bound in conscience neuer to aske God forgiuenesse of their sinnes The Assumption of this syllogisme he proues thus Papist Whosoeuer is assured by faith that his sinnes are forgiuen sinnes greeuously in asking God pardon for them But all true Protestants are assured by faith that their sinnes are forgiuen them Therefore all true Protestants sinne greeuously in asking God forgiuenesse of their sinnes Protestant That the proposition is false it appeares by the practise of Psal 32. 1. 51. 1. 2. Dauid who prayed to God for the pardon of that sinne which he beleeued by faith was forgiuen for so was he assured 2. Sam. 12. 13. before from the Lord by the Prophet Nathan Papist If none but an Infidell or a mad man would demaund of God the creation of the world or Christs incarnation or the institution of Sacraments which already is effected then none but such a one would aske of God pardoÌ„ for his sinns being assured by faith that they are forgiuen him But none but an Infidell or a mad man would demaund of God the creation of the world or Christs incarnation or the institution of the sacraments Therefore none but a mad man or an Infidell would aske of God pardon for his synnes being assured by faith they are alreadie forgiuen them Protestant I deny your consequence because it presumes of an equality where there is none For we do not beleeue the later with so great assurance as the former besides we haue a commaundement for the latter but not for the former Papist Whosoeuer demaunds that which he hopes not to obtaine synns greuously by demaunding it But whosoeuer is assured by faith that his sinnes are forgiuen him in asking pardon demaunds that which he hath no hope to obtaine Therefore whosoeuer is assured by faith that his synnes are forgiuen him synnes greeuously in asking pardon for them Protestant I deny your proposition for he only sinnes greeuously in praying for that he possesseth who beleeues certainly that he doth possesse that he prayeth for not he which hauing some true perswasion hath also some doubt withall Neither is the assumption true Because with the assurance there is some doubt euen in those that beleeue truly the forgiuenesse of their sinnes The doubt is sinne but the asking pardon because of this doubt is noe sinne The Protestants do not teach that all Christians haue this absolute assurance but that they ought to labour for it Vpon this reason he gathers this conclusion Papist He that cannot without note of Infidelity aske forgiuenesse of synnes cannot with a safe conscience say the Lords prayer But no protestant can without note of infidelity aske forgiuenesse of synnes Therefore no Protestant can with a safe conscience say the Lords prayer Protestant If by note of Infidelity you meane sinning by weakenesse of faith your proposition is false For a man that doubts of pardon may craue it without sinne though he cannot doubt without synne If by it you vnderstand being an Infidell because of asking that which he is sure he hath your assumption is false for a true Protestant is not an Infidell by such doubting though he should not doubt Article 2. Papist The protestants are bound in conscience â—â— auoide all good workes Euery man is bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoide all deadly sinnes But fasting praier allmesdeeds and all good works according to the Protestants Religion are deadly sinnes Ergo according to the protestants religion all men are bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoyd fasting prayer and all good workes Protestant By an orderly course of proceeding in disputation the first syllogisme should be to this effect Euery man is bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoyd all good workes But the Protestants are bound in conscience to auoide that which euery man is bound vpon paine of eternall damnation to auoyde Therefore the Protestants are bound in conscience to auoide all good workes Instead of that he hath set vs downe the proofe of the proposition The assumption whereof I vtterly deny as false in it selfe and slaunderous to our doctrine For neither Fasting praying almesdeeds c. are deadly sinnes neither doe we teach any such thing but onely as this man himselfe confesses in expounding that place of Esa 64. 6. that the best workes we can doe are infected with deadly sinne And it is one thing I trow to say that a man in his best health is neuer without an Ague and another thing to say that a mans best health is an Ague Further we must obserue these two points in this matter that by deadly sinne we meane not as the Papists doe the grosse breaches of Gods commaundements For the good workes of a regenerate man are ordinarily voide of all such transgressions but slippes of infirmity by which wâ— defile these good workes To which if any man replie that we are bound to refraine all such sinnes I willingly subscribe vnto him But withall I deny that we are bound to auoide all good workes because we can doe none without this taint of corruption For the workes are commanded and accepted of God and shal be rewarded for all this infirmity of ours which cleaues vnto them and would make both them and vs for them hatefull vnto God but that it hath pleased him to pardon it in Iesus Christ Art 3. Papist The Protestants either haue no faith at all or els lye most damnably in denying that a man assisted by grace can keepe the commandements Whosoeuer knoweth God keepeth his Commaundements But all true protestants know God Ergo all true protestants keepe his commandements Protestant It is more troublesome to apply this Syllogisme to the question then hard to answere it But I haue performed that taske in my larger discourse and now onely speake to his syllogisme as it lyes Where first I graunt him the conclusion according to S. Iohns minde For indeed euery true protestant keepes Gods commaundements though not perfectly Which imperfection our papists must needes graunt as long as they runne to dip their best workes in Christs bloud which needed not if they were perfect of themselues Secondly I say the text of Saint Iohn doth proue that he is not to be vnderstood of perfect obedience because he speakes without exception of all Christians that know God to euerlasting life Many whereof yea euen the best as Dauid oftentimes sinne greeuously Art 4. Papist
The most points wherein the protestants dissent from Catholickes tend to loosnesse of life and carnall liberty If the 〈◊〉 points following tend to loosnesse of life carnall 〈◊〉 then the most points wherein the Protestants dissent from Catholicks do so But the seauen points following tend to loosenesse of life and carnall liberty Therfore the most points wherein the Protestants dissent from Catholicks tend to loosnesse of life and carnall liberty Protestant First I answere to the whole syllogisme that if the Protestants teach nothing in these points of dissent which is not warranted by the Scriptures then it skils not what in the corrupt iudgement of man may be argued to ensue Rom. 6. 1. 9. 19. therevpon Secondly I say the consequence of the proposition is false For these seauen points are not the seauenth part of those wherein we dissent from the papists Thirdly I deny that any of these points tends to loosenesse of life Papist If man haue not free-will to do good he may be negligent in preparing his soule to serue God But man hath not free-will as the protestants teach Therefore he may be negligent in preparing his soule to serue God Protestant I deny the consequence of the proposition For God that commaunds a man to be carefull in preparing his soule to serue him must be obeyed simply though we see not the particular reason of the commaundement But indeed wee deny not but men freely both prepare their soules and receaue Gods grace but we say that it is God which makes difference betwixt the beleeuers and vnbeleeuers yet not without their owne labour and willingnesse to which they are stirred vp in respect of the euent necessarily Papist The doctrine of Iustification by faith onely tends to loosenesse of life You would neuer say so if you knew that we beleeue and teach that no man is iustified but he that is also sanctified and no man is sanctified but he that walkes in obedience to God We hold a necessity of workes but not to iustification and we looke for a reward of workes but not vpon desert Wherein we dissent from the Papists without preaching carnall liberty Wherefore though faith once had can neuer be lost yet where there is no holinesse of life there neuer was faith and where there is not a conscience of refraining all sinne there is no holinesâ—e aâ— all Therefore he that is giuen to carnall liberty hath no faith to loose Neither doth our want of liberty to keepe the commaundements euer a whit discourage or withdraw vs from indeuouring to doe well since that God both accepts of our willingnesse and we acknowledge our selues bound to perfect obedience which we must striue to so much the more by how much the lesse we can attaine to it The sacrament of penance we refuse because it is a patch of Antichrist because it brings a sâ—auery and sâ—are vpon mens consciences because it makes men cease to trust in Christs satisfactions and trust to their owne because it breedes securitie in them that receaue Popish absolution Wee deny the carnall presence in the Sacrament because there is neither Scripture nor reason to prooue it because it is an occasion of most senslesse Idolatrie and surely it is so farre from restraining men from sinne that rather it encourages them to despise such a God as is crusht vp into a bagage Cake and whom if they should be afraid of him they might cast into the fire and burne as one of your Popes did Lastly wee neither haue coyned any Religion nor 7. haue a negatiue religion but we hold the truth of God reuealed in the scriptures and reiect your popish errors contrary thereto The Iewes by the same reason condemned our Sauiour Christ and the Gentils accused his Apostles for bringing in a new Religion whereby they denyed and abollished the heresies of the one and the Idolatry of the other Article 5. Papist The Protestants make God the author of synne the onely cause of synne that man synneth not that God is worse then the Diuil Whosoeuer defendeth that God commaundeth perswadeth vrgeth impelleth to sinne maketh God the author of synne But all protestants say that God commaundeth perswadeth vrgeth and impelleth to synne Ergo the Protestants make God the author of synne Protestant The proposition in the 3. latter points is altogeather true in the former thus it is to be conceiued of that if God commaund that which by some law of his owne is sinne as that Abraham should kill his sonne he is not the Authour of sinne but onely so farre as he commaunds that which of it selfe without that speciall dispensation of his were sinne but by that it ceaseth to be sinne The assumption is false no Protestant defends any such thinge howsoeuer we all acknowlege that it was Gods will that Iudas should betray Christ c. But we deny that either Iudas had any commaundement or warrant from God or that God put that wicked thought into his heart or that he inclined him to the liking of it Neither do wee deride any permissiue will in God but that which makes him an Idle beholder of things without any determination of their being or not being but onely such as dâ—pendâ—s wholly or principally vpon the creature We beleeue and professe that God workes otherwise by the wicked then by the godly in these by putting in good thoughtes and bringing theÌ„ to effect by their wil labour In the wicked he doth not worke but onely by them bringing his owne purpose to passe without commaunding perswading vrging or impelling to sinne this latter you may if you will call permission without feare of being derided by any Protestant yea with the good liking of all Protestants so you acknowledge a necessity of euent Article 6. Papist That faith once had may be lost Whosoeuer looseth his charity looseth his faith But Dauid when he killed Vrias lost his charity Ergo Dauid when he killed Vrias lost his faith Protestant As before so here also he leaues out the principall syllogisme which I thus supply If Dauid lâ—st his faith then faith once had may be lost But Dauid lost his faith Therefore faith once had may be lost The assumption is false which he labours to confirme notwithstanding by the reason afore rehearsed To the which I answere first by distinguishing on the proposition whosoeuer leeseth his charity altogeather that there remains no grace of sanctificatioÌ„ hath no faith but it is not true that whosoeuer commits some greeuous sinne against the law of Charity thereby leeseth his faith I deny your assumption Dauid lost not his charity because he was still sanctified though he fell grieâ—ously Papist Whosoeuer remaineth in death is without charity But Dauid when he killed Vrias remained in death Therefore Dauid when he killed Vrias was without charity Protestant I distinguish againe vpon your proposition hee that remaines in death is so farre without charity as he remaines in death But a man may in respect of some sinfull actions be in death and for all that be truely sanctified though not throughly as the hand may be dead to any motion towards the head and yet aliue to all motions downward The proofe is both false and absurd For if there be any life in the Heb. 10. 38. soule abiding in it as a quality that must be faith Some Papists call chairty the life of faith but none that euer I read or heard of the life of the soule The assumption not only may be but must be denyed because it is vntrue 1. Ioh. 3. 14. is to be expounded by the 17. where it is said He that shâ—â—s vp his bowels of compassion from his brethren that hath need hath not the loâ—e of God in him And yet no Papist wil say that a man is void of the loue oâ— God vpoÌ„ the refusal at somtimes to giue almes to him that stands in need He that is quite without loue that is he that hath not in him the loue of his neighbour is without sanctification and Iustification but this a man may haue and Dauid had in some good measure though he faile as he did in that one particular of loue towards Vriaâ— When you bring any proofe out of that place of Ezechiell 18. 24. you shall haue an answer to it In the meane while I say no more but this that conditionalis nihil pâ—â—it in esse a thing is not proued to be because if it be such or such an euent shall follow therupon Article 7. Papist The Protestants shall neuer haue life euerlasting Because they will haue no merits for which euerlasting life is giuen Whatsoeuer is giuen as wages is giuen for workes But the kingdome of heauen is giuen as wages Therefore the kingdomâ— of heauen is giuen for workes Protestant Any man may easily perceiue that the question is not concluded in this syllogisme But I will not in this short answer trouble my selfe with any more then answering to the point Papist Whatsoeuer is giuen as wages is giuen for workes But the kingdome of heauen is giuen as wages Ergo the kingdome of heauen is giuen for workes Protestant If we graunt him the whole syllogisme he gets nothing by it vnlesse he can proue that workes and merits are all one which is vtterly false I deny your assumption which none of these places you bring doth proue the first is a parable signifying that the Gentiles shall haue place in heauen aswell as the Iewes though they came later to the knowledge of the truth The other two mention reward but not wages and these two are your common â—rrors in most of your arguments concerning the question oâ— workes that you without all authority of Scripture or reason confound workes with merits and reward with wages Which you professing a schollerlike disputation should not haue done without some speciall proofe of their being all one especially since you can hardly be ignorant that we alwaies distinguish the one from the other not without reason as we surely perswade our selues FINIS