who defend and holde the same doctrine that Saint Austen doth Nay how is it possible to haue Good Workes before wee haue fayth Seeing as the Apostle teacheth vs Without faith it is vnpossible to please GOD. Who so listeth to pervse my Suruey of Popery shall there find euery thing soundly aunswered whatsoeuer can bee sayde for Popery in this kinde of subiect But our Fryer will proue Good workes to go before iustification because Christ sayde to Mary Magdalen Many Sinnes are forgiuen her because shee loued much I answere that Christs Argument is not drawne from the cause but from the effect As if Christ had sayd wee may know by her great loue that great gifts are bestowed on her that many sins are forgiuen her For that no remission of her sinnes proceeded from her loue but her loue of the forgiuenesse of her sinnes appeareth by the similitude of the debters For Christ tolde Peter of two debters whereof the one ought fiue hundered pence the other fifty and that when they had not wherewith to pay the Creditour forgaue them both Hee therefore demaunded of Peter whether of the Debters loued the Creditour more Peter aunsvvered that he to vvhom more vvas forgiuen Christ approued Peters ansvver and concluded therevpon that seeing Mary Magdalen loued more he might know that she had more forgiuen her because saith Christ To whome little is forgiuen the same loueth little Neyther is it possible to draw any other meaning out of christs words The reason is euident because christ saith plainly that the debts were freely forgiuen the debters who were not able to pay the debts For otherwise Maries forgiuenesse shoulde haue no coherence with the similitude of the debters The second part of his position is that good works euer follow as fruits the tree the persons that are freely iustified This is most manifestly falfe in infants whereof many iustified in baptisme dye before they do any good worke And if his comparison of the tree be good some iustified neuer do good worke and al want them long time some giue ouer doing good as some trees are barren some cease to beare fruit and none beare alwayes T. B. This Fryer thinketh he can daunce in a net naked and yet no man see him but I weene euery indifferent Reader doeth easily espy his manner of dealing viz that he hath nothing in him but Cauils Slanders and notorious leasings Good workes sayth he cannot euer follow iustified persons as fruits follow trees because some trees neuer do good and all want a long time and none beare alwayes Is this Fryer trow ye wel in his wits Hath not malice so blinded him that he cānot see wood for trees Hath the Pope dispensed with him to say what hee list Good workes say I euer follow persons freely iustified as fruits follow the Tree by Gods mercy in Christ Iesus for his merits and condigne deserts Now what doth our Iesuite he aplies himselfe wholy to cauils extreme folly He perceiueth that truth wil preuail therfore strugleth with cauils and deceitfull dealing against the same First he leaueth out GODS mercy and the merites of Christ Iesus Secondly he inferreth a fond conclusion of his owne making and beareth the Reader in hand that it is mine Thirdly he triumpheth before the victory boasting that hee hath confuted my position when indeede hee hath onely confuted himselfe and fought the combate with his owne folly For I do not say that Good Workes do euer and continually without all interruption follow persons freely iustified Let the Reader duely and truely pervse my wordes and then tell me if our Fryer Iesuite be not a notorious lyar I say Good Workes do euer folow but not simply absolutely at all seasons but as fruites follow trees Now I pray you gentle Reader how doe fruits follow trees Our Fryer telleth vs. Some trees neuer haue any fruit sayth he some want a long time and none beare fruit euer Alas alas what a fond fryer-Iesuit is this Robert Parsons Where were their wits that made him the Prouinciall of England If good workes follow persons iustified no otherwise but as fruits follow trees which is my position then doubtlesse are they not to be expected euery hour but when the due circumstances of time place and persons do require For good trees do not euer bring forth their fruits but in due times and seasons S. R. His first argument is taken out of Saint Paule Rom. 6. 23. But the gift of GOD is life euerlasting in Christ Iesu our Lord. He argueth in this manner Eternall life is the free gift of God therefore it can no way bee due to the merit of mans workes I aunswere that the Antecedent is false and neyther heere nor any where else taught by S. Paule T. B. Our Iesuite shall aunswere and confute himselfe for these are his owne words a little after Because sayth our Iesuite as workes are rewarded euen aboue their virtual proportionate equality as Diuines say vltra condignū no maruell if S. Paul called eternall life rather Grace or Gift then Stipend seeing it hath much more of Grace then it hath of Iustice yet he no where calleth it meere grace Beside that as Saint Austen writeth he might haue called it a Stipend as hec calleth Death in respect of Sinne but forbore least wee should thinke it were so iustly deserued by Good Workes as death is by euill Thus discourseth our Fryer Where we haue first by his owne free graunt that Workes are rewarded aboue their desert Albeit before hee called them condigne and of condigne merite These are his wordes Good workes saith he done in Gods grace are condignely meritorius of eternall life Secondly that Saint Paule calleth eternall life rather Grace then Stipend because it hath much more of Grace then it hath of Iustice where vnawares he confuteth himselfe doubtlesse because where there is more of Grace then of Iustice it is vnpossible to establish condigne merite For as the Apostle teacheth vs To him that worketh the reward is not reckoned of Grace but of debt or duety And the same Apostle declareth it more plainely in another place For by Grace saith he you are saued throgh faith that not of your selues for it is the gift of God not of workes least any man shoulde boast himselfe And again in another place thus Not by the works of righteousnesse which we did but according to his mercy he saued vs. Thirdly that the Apostle calleth eternall life rather grace then stipend as S. Austen writeth because it is not so iustly deserued by Good Workes as death is by euill workes No no S. Austen saith plainly Cum Deus coronat merita nostra nihil aliud coronat quam munera sua Whē God crowneth our merites he crowneth nothing els but his owne giftes First therefore seeing Good Workes are rewarded aboue their deserts Secondly seeing Good Workes haue more of grace then of Iustice. Thirdly seeing Good Workes cannot so merite heauen
as ill workes merite hell Fourthly seeing the best merits are nothing else but the meere giftes of GOD I must needes conclude that Workes are not condignely meritorious of eternal life S. R. Bell citeth Theophilact because he sayth Saint Paule called eternall life Grace and not a Reward as though he had sayd It is not the reward of our labors But this is nothing against vs who willingly confesse erernall life to be grace and not to proceede of our owne labours done by our selues but done and wrought also by the grace of Christ. T. B. Our Iesuite is so pinched and nipped by my Authorities and reasons that he had rather say any thing then acknowledge the truth that I defend Here as we see hee is become a Semi-pelagian Heretique for he affirmeth eternall life to bee wrought and doone of our selues yet not wholly of our selues but partly also of the holy Ghost And after such a silly manner he is enforced to answer all the rest viz euer against himselfe S. R. True it is that Augles as a follower of Scotus seemeth to thinke that the condignity of Good Workes riseth not of any equality which is in them vnto glory but of Gods promise to reward them T. B. It is well that ye wil once seeme to graunt a truth The truth is this that both Iosephus Angles and your Cardinall Bellarmine do freely grant being ouercome with the force of trueth that Good workes can merite nothing but by reason of GODS promise freely made vnto men I haue prooued the Controuersie so euidently that our Iesuite doth nothing else but weary both himselfe and his Reader in writing most friuolously against the same I referre the Reader to The Downfall it selfe where hee shall find euery Argument and peece of reason soundly answered before our Iesuite had published the same And therefore for mee to vse any further reply therein were but Actum agere For doubtlesse whosoeuer shall duly all partiality set aside peruse The Downfall as it came from my penne and lay downe this Iesuites aunswere to it in euery place and compare them together he will I am fully perswaded freely confesse that no further reply is necessary in that behalfe The sixt Article of the destinction of mortall and veniall sinnes S. R. ALl his proofes may be reduced to this Syllogisme What is against Gods Law is mortal sin all sin is against Gods law Ergo all sinne is mortall Beholde Bell here absolutely concludeth all sinne to be mortal and after calleth our veniall sinnes cursed and deformed which argueth that he thinketh all sin to be indeed mortal notwithstanding Gods mercy The propositioÌ„ he supposeth the assumption he prooueth out of scripture fathers and schoolemen T. B. This controuersie consisteth wholy in this viz whether euery sin be of it own nature moâ—al or no. I hold the Affirmatiue our Iesuite the Negatiue And for all that hee freely granteth vnawares as you see that I haue prooued mine opinion and doctrin both out of the holy scripture and also out of the fathers and schoole-Doctors S. R. Christ saith Bell telleth vs that we must giue account for euery ydle word and S. Iohn saith that euery sinne is Anomia that is Transgression of the law Saint Ambrose also defineth sin in generall to be transgression of Gods law and S. Austen describeth it to be euery word deed or desire against Gods law Yea Bellarmine arffimeth euery sin to be against Gods law The Rhemists also confesse that euery sin is a swaruing from the Law Likewise Iosephus Angles and Durandus teach venial sins to be against the law To this argument Catholicks answer differeÌ„tly some by denial of the proposition others by denial of the assumption Some say that euery sin which is against the Law is not mortall but onely that which is perfectly against it Others say that veniall sinnes are not against the Law but besides the Law T. B. Heere is an answere aunswerelesse For first our Fryer graunteth that I haue prooued by the Scripture by Saint Ambrose by S. Austen by Bellarmine their famous Cardinall by the Rhemists their learned bretheren by Iosephus Angles their religious Fryer and reuerend Byshop and by Durandus their famous Schoole-Doctor that euery sin more and lesse is against the Law of God and consequently mortall of it owne nature Secondly our Fryer freely confesseth that this argument of mine doth so trouble the Papists that they cannot agree among themselues how to answere the same Some sayth he deny the proposition some deny the assumption other some say they cannot tell what and our Iesuite himselfe standes amazed whether it is better to yeeld to the truth or to face it out desperately and impudently with Legierdemain iugling falshood and deceitfull dealing S. R. Yet better it is to say that veniall sinnes are beside the Law then against the Lawe T. B. Our Iesuite being in perplexity like as Buridanus his Asse what to answere to my argument resolueth to take the best way as he supposeth for he thinketh as felons Traytors standing at the barre in their arraigment that it is the best to plead not guilty But I must tell him two things The one that to be beside the Law and against the Law is al one in effect For as our master Christ saith Hee that is not with him is against him and consequently if he do besides Christs commaundement hee doth against the same The other that Durandus and many Popish Schoole-Doctors confesse resolutely that euery sinne is against Gods law And Iosephus Angles affirmeth constantly that Dwrands opinion is now adaies the Doctrine of theyr Schooles Where I wish the Reader to note by the way the mutability of late start vp Romish Religion Read the Downefall where this point is set downe at large S. R. Therefore if Bell graunt indeede as he doth in words that by Gods mercy some sins are made veniall he must also confesse that by Gods mercy they are not against his charity and friendship T. B. I graunt that as all sinnes is mortall of their owne nature which I haue prooued copiously in The Downefall euen by the testimony of very famous Papists so are all sins veniall by Gods mercy for the merits of his sonne Iesus to the regenerate his elect children and consequently though all sins bee against Gods friendship who hateth and detesteth all sinne in their owne nature yet are all the sins of Gods elect reputed not onely as veniall but none at all in Christ Iesus they receiued into Gods fauour for Christs sake S. R. Bell prooueth out of Saint Ambrose that sin is defined the transgression of the law And out of S. Austen that it is diuine reason or the will of God commaunding the order of nature to be kept and forbidding it to bee broken But these Fathers define onely mortall sin T. B. Mark
iustification was neuer knowne to any of the holy Fathers nor to any ancient counsel so wil their saluation neuer bee knowne to Gods elect vnlesse they repent and reuoke this their damnable Doctrine Fourthly that God worketh our Good Workes in vs. Fiftly that God hath ordained Good Workes for this end that we walke in them This doctrine is confirmed by the same Apostle in another place where he hath these wordes Not by the Workes of Iustice which wee did but according to his Mercy hee hath saued vs. Loe the holy Apostle is still constant in his former position viz that We are not saued by the Workes of Iustice but of mercy grace For this cause saith S. Austen Woe vnto the best liuer vppon earth if God examin his life his mercy set apart For this cause saith S. Chrisostome si millies moriamur c. Though we die a thousand times and though we accomplish all vertues of the minde yet do wee nothing woorthy of those things which we receiue of God For this cause saith S. Theophilact Seruauit nos aeternum non ex operibus c. Hee hath saued vs eternally not of the workes which we haue done that is neither haue we done the works of Iustice neither are wee saued by them but his goodnes and his clemency hath wrought our saluation wholly Yea for this cause saith their highly renowned Abbot Bernardus Sic non est c. So there is no cause that thou shouldst now aske by what merits we hope for glory especially since thou hearest the Prophet say I will do it sayth the Lord not for your sake but for mine owne It is sufficient to merite to know that our merites are not sufficient Thus write these holy fathers with the famous popish Abbot whose words are so plaine for the truth which I defend as euery childe may with facility discerne the same For I did not say as our Iesuite woulde deceitfully perswade his Reader that Good Works are an impossible mean to come to heauen No nor that the young man did enquire of an impossible way to heauen For I know and I haue constantly affirmed the same in the Downfall that Goodworkes are a meane and the way that leadeth to heauen But withall I said then and now againe that neither can the best liuer on earth keepe the Commandements so exactly as the law requireth neither can any man for any works he doth condignly merit eternal life And this is the point indeede which I defend against the Papists Whosoeuer shall with a single eye pervse the Downfall will find it to be so For it is one thing to say that Good Workes are a meane or the way to heauen another thing to say that a man can fulfill the Law and by his Workes condignely merite heauen The former I graunt willingly the latter I deny constantly neither is any Papist able to answere my reasons in that behalfe For example the Pope Boniface sicke at Rome of his meere good wil bequeathed by his Testament 7000. crownes of Gold to Robert Parsons the Iesuite lame of hands and legs at Paris his lamenesse not knowne to the Pope to be giuen to the said Parsons whē he cōmeth to Rome in his own person to demand the same Now the said Parsons hauing inteligence of the said Legacy prouideth a good Gelding a strong man-like fellow and so taketh his iourney towards Rome where he no sooner demaundeth the saide 7000. Crownes but he in friendly manner receiueth the same acording to the true meaning of the Popes will In this case the Gelding the tall fellow and the iourney it selfe were good necessary meanes to receiue and possesse the said Crownes Howbeit neither did they merite the said Crownes neyther were they the cause of bequeathing them Euen so in our case Eternall life as the Apostle saith is the free gift of God it is of grace not of Workes neuerthelesse Goodworkes as the same Apostle telleth vs are the way which God hath ordained for vs to walke in and the vsuall ordinary vndoubted meanes by which God intendeth to bring his elect to heauen This notwithstanding this must euer bee a constant and vndoubted position with all the children of God viz that none not the best liuer vpon earth is able exactly to keepe Gods commandements and by the merit of his works to enter into heauen S. R. Will not Christ say in his last sentence Come ye blessed of my father possesse the kingdom prouided for you from the constitution of the world I was hungry and ye gaue me meate As well as he will say Go you from me you cursed into euerlasting fire For I was hungry and ye gaue me not to eate T. B. I answere first that the word For is not heere taken Causaliter but Consequutiue to speake as the Schoole-doctors do that is to say It doth not Connotate the cause but the euent as was saide before of Mary Magdalen So that the sence is not for giuing meat to Christ when hee was hungry or drink to him being thirsty they did merit heauen but that by doing such charitable works which are the effects of a true iustifying faith they shewed thēselues to bee the children of God and the heyres of his kingdome And this sence is deduced out of the very text it selfe For seeing the kingdome of heauen as Christ heere auoucheth was prepared for them before the foundation and consequently before they were borne and so before they could doe any Good Workes it followeth of necessity that their workes could not merite heauen but only signifie to the world that the inheritance of heauen was due vnto them as to the children of God the heyres of the same For as the Apostle sayth If we be sonnes then are we also heyres heyres of God and ioynt-heires with Christ. Yea as the same Apostle saith in another place As he chose vs in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and immaculate in his sight through loue who hath predestiuated vs into the adoption of children by Iesus Christ vnto himselfe according to the good pleasure of his will To which I must needs adde that which the same Apostle saith yet in another place Whom he did predestinate them also he called and whom he called them also he iustified and whom he iustified them also he glorified Out of this holy discourse of the Apostle of our Lord Iesus I obserue these golden lessons First that we are the sonnes of God not by nature for so we are his enemies and the children of wrath but by grace and adoption in Iesus Christ. Secondly that God chose vs to be his Children before we were borne Thirdly that he chose vs not because wee were holy but that we might be holy and immaculate in his sight Fourthly that he predestinated vs to bee his Children by adoption not for any Goodworkes
etiam involuntarios These thinges are spoken after the minde of Saint Austen who vnderstandeth all the motions euen those which bee involuntary to bee forbidden in some sort by this Commaundement Thou shalt not Lust. VVhere wee see that not onely Bellarmine theyr Cardinall but Saint Austen that woorthy Piller of the Church affirmeth both Originall concupiscence and the involuntary Motions thereof to be forbidden in this precept Where I may not forget to tell the Reader that though Bellarmine to make his matter good if it would addeth to Saint Austens wordes In some sort yet dooth Saint Austen write very simply and sayth flatly that they are prohibited and addeth not Quodam modo In some sort That is Bellarmines addition it is not in Saint Austen Secondly that habituall Originall Lust is not idle but woorketh ill desires in vs continually agaynst our vvill So sayth S. Austen in these words Agit n. Aliquid concupiscentia carnis c. For concupiscence of the flesh worketh somthing euen when there is not giuen vnto it either the consent of the heart where it may raigne or the members as VVeapons which may accomplish what it appointeth And what doth it but the very wicked and filthy desires For if they were good and lawfull the Apostle would not forbid to obey them Marke these wordes gentle Reader for they are of great consequence and giue a deadly blowe to the Papistes Two thinges are cleered by this Testimony of Saint Austen the one that Concupiscence to which consent is not giuen bringeth foorth ill desires the other that the sayde desires are vnlawfull and prohibited by the Law of GOD. And so wee haue euidently prooued that habituall Concupiscence to which the regenerate yeelde no consent but stoutly resist the same is so farre from beeing meritorious as the Papists would haue it that it is sinne formally and properly so called And wee haue further that habituall concupiscence worketh ill desires in vs against our will and therefore that those desires are truely called originall because vvee doe them not but rather suffer them to bee doone in vs. Thirdly that though the Law in saying Thou shalt not lust seemeth by the force of the word which signifyeth action to prohibite onely the voluntary act of concupiscence yet dooth it forbidde the very Originall Concupiscence it selfe withall the braunches effects and involuntary motions thereof as is already prooued at large Yea Saint Austen doth vnderstand it as Bellarmine himselfe doth grant Heere for the help of the Reader I note that a threefold Concupiscence is forbidden by the tenth Commandement The first is meerely called Originall This is that vvhich vve all contracted of Adam and which is the Fountaine of all concupiscences and sins and therefore truely called of the Apostle sin The second is partly Originall and partly Actuall Originall because it yssueth naturally from the Originall prauity of our nature Actuall for that we couet in act albeit against our wil and because it is against our wil it is more properly truly called Originall then actuall The third is meerely actuall because it is voluntary S. R. I must note Bels important vntruths First that Pope Vrban and Pope Innocent confirmed Saint Thomas his doctrine for authenticall Secondly that Pope Vrban gaue it the first place after cannonicall scripture T. B. This Fryer seemeth to bee framed of lying and as hee hath vsually spent his whole dispute so in the end of the article he closeth it vp with leasing Whosoeuer shal pervse The Downfall of Popery wil soon espy how this Fryer loadeth my back with slaunderous speeches and false reports I will heere in regard of breuity onely set downe the Testimony of a famous Papist Augustinus Hunnaeus by name in that Epistle which he sent to Pope Pius the fift These are his words Vrbanus c. Vrbanus that worthy Prelate of the Apostolique sea admiring the excellent doctrine of this man he speaketh of Aquinas beholding it as fallen from heauen to driue away the naturall mist of ignorance from mens minds doth grauely exhort to the study thereof and commaundeth the vniuersity of Tholouse to follow it as the cheefe in all their disputations and aunsweres concerning faith and manners Innocentius the fift of that name esteemed the same mans Doctrine so greatly that hee doubted not to giue it the first place after the Cannonicall scripture Thus writeth Hunnaeus By whose words it may appeare in what reuerence the Doctrine of Aquinas is with the Papists as also that our Iesuite cannot answere me but by lying And thus I will end this article with these words of our Iesuite Habituall cōcupiscence includeth not only pronesse to euill but also difficulty to do good and want of habibituall order in the inferior powers and therefore is both positiue and priuatiue euill Thus writeth our Iesuite who after he hath long wearied himselfe in struggling against the truth doth at the length vnawares confesse the same For doubtlesse when he graunteth that habituall Concupiscence in the regenerate includeth want of habituall order in the inferior powers and therefore is both positiue and priuatiue euill he graunteth in substance in the truth of the matter as much as I desire He denyeth in wordes that Originall concupiscence is formally sinne but in effect and substance hee graunteth the very same Whosoeuer shal seriously ponder both my discourse heere and in the Downefall especially concerning the Nature definition and essence of sinne he will perceiue with all facility that the Iesuite woulde say as I write if hee were not affrayde to displease the Pope The fift Article of the merite of Good workes S. R. BEls first position containeth two partes the first is that good workes neither do nor can goe before Iustification Behold Bell euen where he would proue himselfe a friend to good workes sheweth himselfe to be an enemy and excluding them from any going before or any way concurring to iustification to which they so concurred in Saint Mary Magdalen as our Sauiour saide Many sinnes are forginen her because shee loued much making her loue a kind of cause viz disponent of her Iustification T. B. Our Iesuite wold gladly perswade his reader that I am an enemy to good workes The best mean he hath to defend himselfe and Popery withall is cogging lying and false dealing I must needs be an enimy to Good workes because I will not admit euill workes for good I say with S. Austen Sequuntur iustificatum non precedent iustificandum Good Workes follow him that is iustified but they go not before him that is to be iustified Behold here gentle Reader that S. Austen is the same enemy to Good workes that I am He affirmeth them to follow iustification and so doe I. Hee denyeth them to goe before iustification and so doe I. What a thing is this Our Iesuite dareth not call Saint Austen an enemy to Good Workes and yet doth he call mee so
for the present that the Apostle saith The best Liuers of all offend in many thinges And that the Prophet Dauid telleth vs That none liuing can be iustified in Gods sight Secondly to Saint Paule I answere as in the Downefall That the raging vnvoluntary motions of Concupiscence were sinne in him although he did not actually yeelde his consent vnto them And thereupon I inferred then and now againe That that sin which Saint Paule lamented in himselfe affirming himselfe to bee sold vnder sinne was truely and properly sinne indeede but not Actuall because hee gaue no consent vnto it Ergo hee must needes speake of Originall This point I deliuered so plainly in the Downfall of Popery as none but eitherfooles or malicious Readers can be ignorant thereof Of other Actuall sinnes I spake not S. R. Christ saith Bell being asked what good a man should doe to attaine eternall life aunswered If thou wilt haue eternall life by doing good workes then must they keepe Gods commandemēts but this is impossible saith Bell. Here is most shamefull abuse of Gods word and this sheweth Bell to haue a scared conscience For neither in the mans Question nor in Christes aunswere is there any word how a man should come to Heauen by this way or that way viz by beleeuing or by working or by both but only what was the meane in generall to come to Heauen which the man supposing to bee good asked what good he should doe to come thither Which Question of his is common either to Faith or Works or both foral include doing good And our Sauiour answered him If thou wilt enter not this way nor that way but absolutely Into life Keepe the Commaundements T. B. What a one is this Fryer Hee chargeth mee to haue a seared conscience which may more iustly bee imputed to himselfe I willingly acknowledge my selfe to be a great Sinner GOD forgiue mee yet may I stand at defiance with this Iesuite and withal the Iesuites in the World for any corrupt or falfe dealing either in the Scripture or in the Fathers Councels Histories Chronicles or other Writers whosoeuer they are alike to charge me withall Nay in this very point wherein he desperately accuseth me I am able to charge him too deeply and iustly retort that agianst himselfe which he would most falsly and vniustly impose vpon me He auoucheth most impudently that there is not any word neither in the mans question nor in Christs answere how a man should come to Heauen this way or that way Let vs therefore ponder the mans words seriously and then yeeld our censures according to the truth S. Matthew hath these wordes Good Maister what good thinge shall I doe that I may haue eternall life Saint Marke hath these wordes Good Maister what shall I doe that I may haue eternall life Saint Luke hath these words Good Maister by doing what shall I possesse eternall life Now I pray thee Gentle Reader whosoeuer thou art to be an indifferent Iudge betweene the Iesuite and me Thou seest euidently that the man demaunded of Christ what he should doe to possesse and inioy eternall life For he said plainely What shall I do by doing What shall I possesse eternall life Doth not he aske to go to Heauen this way or that way who asketh to goe thither by doing Goodworkes Yes doubtlesse it cannot be denyed For to go to Heauen by doing this or that to go to heauē this way or that way is al one in effect So likewise he that saith shal I go to Heauen by doing this or by doing that and he that saith shal I go to heauen this way or that way saith one the same thing in effect Truly therfore did I answer to the Obiection by my selfe propounded cut of the Gospell viz that our Sauiour Christ did not shew in that place how men may attaine eternal life but shewed plainly vnto the man who trusted much vnto his workes and good life that perfect obseruation of the Law is required of him that thinketh to bee iustified by the workes of the Law The man did not say how shall I go to Heauen Or how shall I attaine eternall life But thus by doing what shall I haue eternall life Christ therefore aunswered directly to his manner of demaunding If thou trust so much to thy works and thine owne doings that thou thinkes thou canst go to Heauen by doing then do I tell thee that thou must looke well vnto the matter and see thou keep the Commandements This answere is directly and cleerely deduced out of the very text it selfe S. R. Bell saith that Goodworkes are so necessary to attaine eternall life as the vsuall ordinary vndoubted meanes by which God decreed from eternity freely for his owne name sake to bring his elect to saluation and that without them none haue beene are or shall be saued if time be graunted to doe them How are they now become an impossible meane to come to Heauen How did the man enquire of an impossible way to heauen by Goodworkes What need this challenger any aduersary who thus ouerthroweth himselfe T. B. If our Iesuite had either eyes to see eares to heare or wit to vnderstand he could not but both see perceiue that he confoundeth himselfe in his owne dispute For albeit the best liuer vpon earth cannot for any merit of his best workes by any possible meanes attaine eternall life for it is the gifte of God not of workes yet hath GOD decreed to bring vs to heauen by good workes which he of his great mercy freely worketh in vs. For these are the Apostles expresse wordes as the Rhemists haue put them downe For by Grace you are saued by Faith and that not of your selues for it is the gift of God not of workes that no man glory for we are his worke created in Christ lesus in goodworks which God hath prepared that we should walke in them Thus writeth the Apostle euen as our Papists alledge his words Out of which holy discourse of the chosen vessell of our Lorde Iesus I obserue these golden lessons First that we are saued By grace Secondly that saluation followeth not onely our first iustification so called of the Papists which they confesse to be of Grace but their second falsly supposed iustification also which they wold haue to come of Works For as we see here our saluatiō which is after al maner of iustification if ther were as many as the Papists imagine is only of grace not of Workes You are saued saith Saint Paule marke wel the word Saued He saith not you are iustified by grace which goeth before saluation but you are saued by grace which followeth your iustification Thirdly that the Apostle saith Negatiuely We are not saued of Workes and consequently that he confoundeth our Papistes who say that their second iustification and their saluation come of their works But as their second falsly so named
wee eyther had done or could doe but for his owne good pleasure to the glory of his grace For as to doe any workes at all before we are borne is altogether impossible so to doe Goodworkes when we are borne seeing we are conceiued in sin born in sinne and by nature the Children of wrath is impossible in like manner Fiftly that all our Goodworkes are the effects and fruits of our predestination For if it be true as it is most true else the Apostle should be a lyer that wee were elected to be holy and to do Goodworkes it is also true it cannot be denyed that holy life and Goodworkes are the effectes and fruites of our election and predestination in in Christ Iesus For this cause saith the Apostle that predestination proceeds freely of Gods eternall purpose Iustification of predestination and glorification of iustification For first hee chooseth vs in Christ then he iustifieth vs in Christ. Thirdly and lastly he glorifieth vs for his owne names sake For this cause saith that famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra in this manner Dicendum quod predestinatio diuina est preparatio gratiae in presenti gloriae in future ides cuÌ„sit aeterna sicut ab aeterno predestinauit alâ—queÌ„ ad beatitudineÌ„ ita preordinauiâ— moduÌ„ queÌ„ daret sibiillaÌ„ beatitudinem I answere saith this Popish Doctor that Gods predestination is the preparation of grace in this world and of glory in the World to come And therefore seeing it is eternall as hee hath predestinated any one from eternity to endlesse blisse or beatitude so hath he also fore-ordayned the meane by which hee would bring him to the same For this cause saith the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas that predestination includeth Gods will of bestowing both Grace and Glory And hee addeth these words Nam praedestinatio ect causa eius quod expectatur in futura vita à praedestinatis selt gloriae eius quod percipitur in presenti selt gratiae For predestination is the cause both of that which is expected in the life to come that is to say of Glory and also of that which the predestinate receiue in this life that is to say of Grace For this cause saith our Iesuite Bellarmine that Goodworkes follow predestination as effects follow their causes These are his expresse wordes Itaque sunt opera bona effectus praedestinationis Therefore Goodworkes are the effect of predestination Againe in another place thus Itaque illa propositio deus ab aetet no praedestiaaut hominibus dare regnum per opera bona praeuisa potest vera esse falsa Nam si illud per opera praeuisa referaetur ad verbuÌ„ praedestinauit falsa erit significabit n. Deum praedestinasse homines operaillorum bona praeuiderat si referatur adverbum dare vera erit quia significabit executionem futuram esse per opera bona siue quod est idem glorificationem effectum esse iustificationis operum bonorum sicut ipsa iustificatio effectus est vocationis vocatio praedestinationis Againe in another place thus Non ideo pendet praedestinatio ab operibus sed opera à praedestinatione Therefore predestination doth not depend of workes but workes depend of predestination Againe in another place thus Alia ratio est praedestinationis alia exequutionis constituit n. in praedestinatione regnum caeloruuÌ„ dare certis hominibus quos absque vlla oper uÌ„praeuisione dilexit tamen simul constituit vt quo ad exequâ—â—tionem via perueniends ad regnuÌ„ essent opera bona There is one reason of predestination another of execution for in predestination God decreed to giue the Kingdome of Heauen to certaine men whom hee loued without any fore-sight of workes Howbeit hee decreed withall that in respect of the execution Goodworks should be the way to come to the Kingdome For this cause say our Rhemists that our first iustification is of Gods Grace and not of our deseruinges because none of all our actions that were before our iustification could merite or iustly procure the Grace of iustification Out of this discourse of the famous Popish Doctours I obserue these memorable Lessons for the great good of the Reader First that all the Grace Faith and Goodworkes which we haue in this world and the glory which we expect in the World to come doe wholy proceed from Gods predestination without all deserts of man Secondly that as God prepared the kingdome of heauen for his elect before they were borne or had done any Goodworkes so did he also prepare the way and means by which he intended to bring them thither Thirdly that no works either done or foreseene to be doone did mooue God to predestinate any man to the ioyes of heauen Fourthly that Goodworkes are not the cause but the effect of predestination Fiftly that Goodworkes are the way and meanes which God ordained for the execution of predestination and for the accomplishment of glorification Sixtly that not onely predestination but also iustification proceed of Gods meere fauour grace and good pleasure without all deserts of man Seuenthly that our vocation our iustification and our glorification are the effects of predestination I therefore conclude that Good workes are not the cause vvhy Gods Children possesse Heauen as their inheritance seeing it is the effect of Gods predestination yet that they are the ordinary way and meanes by which God decreed in his eternall purpose to bring his elect to Heauen For as hee ordained the end that is to say the kingdome of heauen or eternall life so also ordained he the way and meanes to attaine the same that is to say vocation iustification faith and Goodworkes Secondly that there is great disparity betweene saluation and damnation and therefore that Goodworkes cannot merite Saluation though euill workes bee enough for damnation The reason is euident both in Phylosophy and Diuinity because as Saint Dionysius Areopagita saith and the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas approoueth the same Bonum ex integra causa existit malum ex quolibet defectu Good is of an intire and whole cause but euill comes of euery defect yea that more is required to good then to euill daily experience teacheth vs for one may soone do that hurt to his Neghbour which cannot without great cost and long time be cured againe This S. Austen well obserued when hee left in writing to be read of all posteritie that it is a greater thing to iustifie the wicked man then to make heauen and earth S. R. I proue the conclusion because Christ saith My yoke is sweete and my burthen light And Saint Iohn saith his commaundementes are not heauy Ergo they are possible Bell aunswereth that these words are not meant in respect of vs but of Christ whose keeping the Commaundements is imputed to vs. Which Saint Austen saith hee meant when he writ thus Then are all the Commandements reputed as done when whatsoeuer