the cause of either which the Apostle doth so plainlie propound vnto vs. The proper working cause of death is sin so the Apostle saith The wages of sinne is death Rom. 6.23 so that no mans labour is more trulie the cause of his reward then sinne is the cause of death and condemnation Why did not S. Paul on the other side saie likewise the wages of good workes is eternall life Nay why said he the clean contrarie that eternall life is the free gift of God Can you tell vs anie cause but onelly to exclude from our works all merite of eternal life And where the Apostle admonisheth vs Phil 2 12. to finish our saluation in feare and trembling his meaning is nothing lesse then to ascribe the finishing of our saluation to good workes as though the Lord began and left the rest for vs to finish but to teach that we must runne our race in careful obedience to Gods commaundements vntil we come to the end of our course receiue our reward Nether may you beare vs in hand here because the kingdome of god is called in the scriptures a reward of our weldoing therfore it dependeth vpon the worthines and merit of our good deedes For it is a free reward of onely grace not of desert or merite as the father rewardeth his sonne of loue and fauour not of debt seeing he oweth him nothing at all This you haue bin answered a thousand times though you can saie nothing to purpose against it yet you will not submit your heartes to the trueth of God but seeke occasions of wrangling without ende Fourthly you say I vnderstand not the state of the question pag. 103. c. wherof I write and then you make a long discourse of grace and workes of mercy and iustice to prooue that in the regenerate there is not any contrariety betweene these but that they maie stand wel together A man would think your selfe were not altogether ignorant of the matter whereof you speake taking vpon you to reforme the iudgement of an other yet haue you herein bewraied more want of skill then I would haue thought hadde bene in you vnlesse perhaps you dissemble your knowledge which I do not easilie beleeue For although grace is not contrarie to workes because the cause cannot be contrarie to the thing whereof it is the cause yet whoe seeth not that grace may haue an other effect besides good workes where of it selfe alone is the cause and must not in that respect be ioined with good works but discerned and distinguished from them By grace in this controuersie I vnderstand not those graces of Gods spirit which are infused into vs when we are regenerate as our aduersaries doe making grace and workes all one but the loue and mercie of God as the scriptures haue taught vs to take the same as when the faithfull seruants of God are said to haue found grace in the eyes of the Lord and when the Apostle writeth 2. Tim. 1.6 that grace was giuen vnto vs in Iesus Christ before all worlds And so likewise in this question must it be taken when we are said to be elected called iustified saued by grace that is by the loue of God where with he embraced vs freelie vnles you will saie we had grace and good workes inherent in vs before we were create◠yea before the world it selfe was framed From this grace procede both good workes and our saluation yet so as saluation is to be imputed not to our workes but onelie to grace and although these two are not contrarie the one to the other yet in the matter of saluatiō there is not the least cooperation between good workes grace but works are whollie excluded from all societie or fellowship in that busines Rom. 11.6 So the Apostle hath plainlie taught If by grace not of workes Againe If righteousnes be by the law Gal. 2.21 Rom 4.2 then hath Christ died in vaine Againe If Abraham were iustifyed by workes he hath whereof to boast Gal. 3.11.18 but not with God Againe the iust shall liue by his faith but the lawe is not of faith Againe f the inheritance were of the lawe then were it not of promise wherefore in effecting our iustice and saluation good workes may not drawe in the same yoke with grace notwithstanding otherwise they agree well together Thus haue I brieflie answered all your friuolous discourse and shewed that you obiecting ignorance of the question to me in trueth neuer vnderstood it rightlie your selfe The scriptures you bring for your purpose to prooue that eternal life is of works as well as of grace are but wrested and shamfullie abused by you When S. Paule saieth Rom. 2.6 that God shall render to euerie man according to his workes we confesse and alwaies haue that God not onelie doth recompence the wickednes of the sinner with deserued punishment A rewarde we confes merit we deny but also rewardeth the vertues of the godlie with life and felicitie euerlasting And when Christ shall sit on his iudgement seate euerie man shal be tried by his workes which in the wicked doe deserue condemnation of themselues and in the children of God are signes and fruites of their faith whereby they haue laide holde vpon Iesus Christ their onelie Sauiour and iustifier But make your argument good if you canne which you gather of these words God shal render to cuerie man after his workes therefore good workes are efficient causes of our saluation or as you moste vntrulie and wickedlie doe sette downe good workes and euill are laide in indifferent balance so that one is the cause of heauen as the other is the cause of hell This diuinitie M. Rainolds you neuer learned of Saint Paule Pa 2.105 M.R. saith that good workes and euil are laid in indifferent balance that good workes are the cause of heauen as euil are the cause of hel but haue drawne it out of the stinking puddle of poperie and it smelleth so lothsomelie in the noses of the godlie that if your senses were not by custome of such filthie doctrine altogether stuffed you coulde not abide the sauour thereof Doe good workes deserue heauen as euill doe hell what Prophet or Apostle euer saide so sinne is indeede the cause of death and deserueth euerlasting paine because it is a transgression of Gods lawe but good workes are not the cause of heauen nor can deserue eternall life because they doe not perfectlie answere the iustice of Gods lawe which pronounceth them accursed Deut. 27.26 Gal. 3.10 that abide not in all things written in the law to doe them Are your good workes so absolute and entire in euerie respect that being examined by the lawe of God laid in the balance of perfect iustice they are found in nothing too lighte if you say so you are past all shame you forget your selues you know not God if otherwise how can you escape the curse but
but proude blaspemie to saie as the Rhemists saie that as death is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice seing the one stipend is of meere due and desert the other onelie of grace and mercie so that if God would enter into iudgement with vs according to the rigour of his iustice we could not chalenge euerlasting life for any iustice that we had wrought as all the scriptures doe moste aboundantlie and plainelie teach Their onelie excuse hangeth vpon Saint Augustine whoe in a certaine epistle writeth Epist 105. 〈◊〉 Sixtura that euerlasting life is repayed to our merites going before and yet may it well be called grace because our merites are wrought in vs by grace not gotten by our owne habilitie to like effecte he writeth in diuerse other places of his workes and treatises as euerie one knoweth that hath bene conuersant in reading his bookes What then shal we graunt Saint Augustine to be an author of this Popish and Sorbonicall doctrine of iustification by merite of workes Nothing lesse The answere is easie and no more easie then true that by merites Saint Augustine vnderstandeth good workes after the manner of speach in latine and by stipend or reward he meaneth that benefite or gifte which God repaieth to good workes to the workers of iustice What difference then is there betweene our Sorbonists and Saint Augustine with whome we also consent In wordes may seeme no difference at all in substance and truth of doctrine as great difference as is betweene heauen and earth life and death God and man We know and confesse with Saint Augustine according to the doctrine of holie scripture that life eternall is a reward of iustice and good workes but not as death is a stipend of sinne according to the Sorbonists and Rhemists religion And howsoeuer Saint Augustine pleaseth them in his exposition of this place the which notwithstanding being rightlie vnderstood maketh nothing for them yet other fathers haue obserued of the Apostles wordes set downe in this manner that eternall life is onelie a gift not deserued but freelie bestowed and that this was the cause whie the Apostle applied not the name of stipend to life euerlasting as he had done before to death Looke vpon Origen in his commentaries vpon the fourth of the Romans and the latter end of the sixt And this as it is sound and sincere doctrine so must it also of all Christians necessarilie be confessed For he that sinneth hath deserued death worthilie in respect of the sinne committed which is a transgression of Gods will and commaundement and for which without remission there is no hope to escape eternall condemnation But can he that worketh well for one or two or moe good workes claime vnto himself as a due debt the kingdome of heauen for the same For what if the Lord will examine our workes straitlie according to his lawe in euerie circumstance our inward zeale loue intention desire of Gods glorie continuance and perseuerance in well doing conformitie of our will with the rule of Gods word and shall finde in the worke and in the worker great infirmitie manie wants much imperfection manifold sins in the meane time both in thought in worde and deed shall the good workes notwithstanding being thus tried found in them-selues insufficient vnanswerable to gods iustice and also hauing manie sinnes inherent together with them in the same person stand vp before the Lorde and chalenge of right the reward of life euerlasting in his kingdome Neuer durste yet anie childe of God vpon trust and confidence of his owne iustice chalenge such debt at the handes of God or yet appeare at all in his presence The Prophet Dauid although he were a holie man and had not onelie repented hartelie for his wicked deedes but also brought forth manifold fruites of repentance and regeneration yet desireth moste humblie of the Lord that he would not enter into iudgement with him psal 143.2 for so much as if he woulde so doe neither he nor anie man liuing could escape condemnation And againe If thou saith he wilt marke our iniquities O Lorde whoe can stand before thee psal 130. â— Wherein he plainlie teacheth that for a man to trust in his workes how good or glorious soeuer they are or seeme to be and vpon this confidence of his merites to looke for heauen as a due reward at gods handes is not onelie to deceiue himselfe but to incurre that iudgemente and condemnation which the Lord for his sinnes and vnworthines that by examination he findeth in him might iustlie cast vpon him Therefore he saith in another Psalme that they are happie not which haue good workes wherein to trust psal 32. â— but whose sinnes are forgiuen and whose iniquities are couered And this haue also all the godlie fathers of Christes Church euermore confessed that their workes of due and debt deserued nothing of the Lord but punishment and therefore disclaiming all their merites and acknowledging their owne manifolde transgressions and imperfections they flie to the Lordes mercie onlie and trust to be saued by grace and remission of their sins not by desert or merite of their righteousnes that they haue wrought Yea the Romane Church it selfe which moste of all magnifieth the merites of workes yet being secretlie and as it were vnwittingly caried away with sway of this trueth hath sometimes made open confession thereof and taught all hir children to sing an other song then that which now so commonly is heard amongst them of iustification and saluation through merite of their workes For in the seruice that is prescribed for the dead this praier is set forth to be vsed of all and is oftentimes repeated Domine quando veneris iudicare terram vbi me abscondam á vultu irae tuae Quia peccaui nimis in vita mea In officis defunctoruns Commissa mea pauesco ante te erubesco dum veneris iudicare noli me condemnare Quia peccaui nimis in vitamea that is O Lord when thou shalt come to iudge the earth where shal I hide my selfe from the presence of thy wrath Because I haue siâ—ned exceading lie in my life My misdedes I am afraid of and I blush before thee when thou shalt come to iudge condemne me not For I haue sinned exceadingly in my life Thus is euerie one taught to praie and this you confesse to be a good praier and necessarie for all to vse as at other times so especially when death approcheth And verelie howsoeuer it is now for a fashion with great countenaunce and vehement disputation auouched by some that we merite heauen by our good workes yet I am perswaded that no aduersarie of conscience can otherwise thinke or dare in perill of death otherwise saie but that he hath deserued for his sinnes punishment and death euerlasting and cannot auoide the same if God will render to his workes the reward that of due belongeth vnto them and therefore casting awaie all trust in his workes will aske pardon and mercy not claime any debt or due reward of the Lord. So though in their life time many of them be obstinatlie bent and haue in their mouth nothing so much as good workes merite rewarde due debt recompense for their wel doing yet the time drawing neer when they must holde vp their handes at the barâ—e of the Lords iudgement seat and there must make answere for themselues and their workes must be tried by the lawe of God they giue ouer their former confidence they haue no ioie in them-selues yea they distrust their owne workes they tremble and quake inwardly they are in fearfull heauines and perplexitie of minde they knowe not whither to turne them-selues and if God giue such grace vnto them then they see and forsake their error of deseruing heauen then they confesse they are sinners and therfore guiltie of death and then learne that lesson in their end which afore in their life time they would not vnderstand Yet doth euerie faithfull Christian keeping as much as in him lieth the commandements of God hope for the kingdome of heauen aske eternall life yea and also in some sorte promise to his workes the crowne of glorie not for merite and worthines of his works but in respect of Gods meere mercy whoe hath promised to bestowe vpon vs and our workes greater reward then we can possiblie deserue This is the difference betweene the doctrine of Christ of the Prophets of the Apostles and of the fathers which we follow and the doctrine of the Sorbonistes and Rhemists and all Papists which whoe so holdeth shall be sure neuer to be saued Thus appeereth how vaine and childish it is that you intitle your schoole of Sorbone with the names of Salomon Dauid Esaie Ieremy Peter Paule Augustine as though they had euer bene entred into that Colledge and taken degree in your schoole whereas whosoeuer marketh the point of difference betweene their doctrine and that of Sorbone shall plainlie perceiue they were no Sorbonists nor euer alowed the Sorbonicall and pharisaicall iustice of merites How ignorantlie you obiect shamefull ignorance to me maie appeere by that which now and before hath bene aunswered it being indeed manifest that your selfe either know not the true state of the controuersie or els haue replied neuer a word aptlie to purpose Soli Deo sit gloria ERRATA Pa 37. lin 17. strange p. 86 15 there p. 143.1 meaning p. 144.17 renegates P 294 21 as well p 334.5 is as corrupt pag. 351 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in certaine copies p. 159. the last line and pag. 160. the first line read it thus before Valentinian to haue a Councell that a Councell by the Emperour c. Other errors perhaps haue escaped but the reader I trust will easilie espie correct and pardon them Imprinted by THOMAS THOMAS Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge 1585.
Saint Bernard It sufficeth to me for all righteousnes to haue him alone mercifull to me to whome alone I haue sinned All that he hath decreed not to impute to me is as though it had not bene at all Hominis iustitia indulgen tia Dei Sermon 61. Not to sinne is Gods iustice mans iustice is the mercifulnes of God In another sermon vpon the same booke If saith he the mercies of God are from euerlasting and for euer I also will sing the mercies of God for euer Shall I sing myne owne righteousnes Lord I will remember thy righteousnes onely For that is mine also For thou art made vnto me of God righteousnes Neede I feare lest that one be not sufficient for vs both It is not a short cloke which as the Prophet saith cannot couer two Thy righteousnes is an euerlasting righteousnes What is longer then eternitie It will couer both thee me largelie being a large and euerlasting righteousnes And in me it couereth the multitude of sinnes in thee O Lord what els but the treasures of piety the riches of goodnes Here S. Bernard teacheth vs two pointes against the Papistes one that our righteousnes whereby we are iustified before god is the righteousnes of Christ imputed to vs an other that we are saued not by the goodnes and desert of our workes but by couering and forgiuing of our sinnes Epist 190. Thus in an other place saith he to like purpose A man was indetted and a man made paiment For if one saith he died for al therfore all are dead Vt satisfactio vnius omnibus imputetur sicut ommum peccata vnus ille portauit that the satisfaction of one might be imputed to all as he alone bare the sinnes of all Againe in this same epistle he saith Therfore where reconciliation is there is remission of sinnes and what is that els but iustification If remission of our sinnes be our iustification then can not the Popish doctrine be allowed which teacheth that we are iustified and saued by our merites Yet further in an other place the same good father Ad. milit tem pli cap. 11. He that hath taken awaie the desert of sinne by giuing vnto vs his righteousnes he hath paied the debt of death and restored life For so death being dead life returneth as sinne being taken awaie righteousnes commeth againe Furthermore death is abandoned by Christs death and Christes righteousnes is imputed vnto vs. Mors in Christi morte fugatur Christi nobis iustitia imputatur Thus plainlie doth Saint Bernard teach imputed iustice which our Papists now a daies make a mock at but to the destruction of their owne soules One other place more out of S. Bernard wherein he writeth moste sweetlie and comfortablie that the testimony of a good conscience consisteth in three things For first of all it is necessarie to beleeue that thou canst not haue remission of thy sinnes but thorough the mercifulnes of God In. Annuntiat Marie ser 1 Secondlie that thou canst haue no good worke at all vnles he also giue it Lastly that thou canst deserue eternall life by no workes but also it must be giuen vnto thee freely And of this last pointe thus he addeth Now concerning eternall life we knowe that the sufferings of this life are not worthie the glory to come no not if one man should suffer all For mans merites are not such that for them eternall life is due by right or that God should doe any iniurie vnles he sholulde giue it For to omit that all merites are the giftes of God and so man for them is rather made debter to God then God to man what are all our merits to so great glorie Quid sunt me rita omnia ad tantam gloriā Thus notably doth S. Bernard approoue the verity of our faith doctrine concerning the cause and meanes of our saluation and treadeth downe and stampeth vnder his feete all Pharisaical and Papisticall merites And forsomuch as M.R. hath a special grace more then any of his fellowes to obiecte one Protestant against an other and with such oppositions hath replenished his booke I may be bolde to put him in minde what one of his graund masters hath taught touching this principal controuersie of our iustification and saluation Pighius against the Papists in the matter of iustification teacheth the verie same that we do I meane Alberte Pighius who notwithstanding he were a captaine Papiste and hath written much in maintenance of Popishe religion yet in this matter hath giuen al papistes the slippe hath subscribed to our doctrine Out of his long discourse I wil set downe onelie this sentence And thereof is it that our righteousnes is placed in Christes obedience Pighius Cōtrouers 2. because the same is imputed to vs being incorporate into him as though it were our owne so that by it we are accounted righteous And as once Iacob being not the first borne by natiuitie hyding him-selfe vnder his brothers garment hauing put on his coate which smelled most sweetlie did insinuate him selfe to his father that vnder an other mans person he might receaue the blessing of the first borne so also it is necessarie that we lie hid vnder the pretious purenes of Christ our eldest brother that we sauour of his sweete smel that our sins be buried couered with his perfection that we thus offer our selues to our most louing father that we may obtaine of him the blessing of righteousnes Herein as Pighius agreeth with the truth with vs so hath he much offended his own friends for thus leauing them in the plaine field Tapper the wise Deane of Louaine writeth bitterlie against him for his opinion herein and saieth he learned it by reading Caluines Institutions Which perhaps was true seeing of him also he learned much more You see Master Rainolds our doctring iustified both by the scriptures of God and by the testimonies of moste learned and godlie fathers and by consent of as learned a Papist as your Church hath in these later times bred anie Now then peruse ouer againe your wholl tale and weigh it in a true balance and you shall finde it lighter then anie fether Fiftlie you obiect that I vnderstand not our owne doctrine and here according to your maner Pag. 110. c. you wander vp and downe as a man that had lost his waie who though he knowe not whether to goe yet wil be going still It pitieth me to see your miserable follie and blindnes wherinto you are willingly fallen But thus wil the lord deale with such as wilfully giue ouer the knowne truth Where I saie that we must necessarilie suffer with Christ if we will be glorified with Christ this seely sophister asketh how this standeth with our doctrine of onelie faith as though there were anie likenes of contradiction at all betweene these two sayings For knowe you what is meant by onelie
causes of religiō when they dreamed of an earthlie kingdome in this world yet this opinion is contrarie to a principal article of our faith were they void of holines when they beleeued that the gospell was to be preached to the Iewes onelie which is greatlie derogatorie to the grace of God and saluation of his people Then euerie error doth not ouerthrowe all holines in the seruants of God In the primitiue Church manie holie fathers were infected with the error of Christes raigning a thousand yeares on earth who notwithstanding are worthelie accounted Saints of God Cyprian and manie godlie Byshops with him erred about the baptisme ministred by heretikes yet lost they not for all that the opinion and name of holie fathers Thus the vanitie of your chalenge appeareth in finding fault with me for calling the fathers holie whome I charged with error it being such as in them did not raze the foundation of the gospell Your argument of the Church is friuolous True it is that he that maketh a schisme in the Church and cutteth himselfe from the same cannot be saued But to erre in this point as the fathers did is neither schisme nor so dangerous to saluation as schisme Nether is it like to the errour of the Galatians altogeather For it was in the fathers only an ouersight of infirmitie by leaning somewhat too much to their owne reason and not considering the matter so deepely as they ought and yet they held not that works are to be ioined with Christ as necessary causes of our iustification and saluation but ascribing the wholl work of our redemption vnto Christ they erred a litle in applying this redemption vnto them-selues Your case is the same that was of the Galatians For as they thought to be iustified by the workes of the Law so do you as they were warned of their error so are you as they without repentance lost the benefit of Christs sacrifice so shall you Yf the fathers had bene as often plainlie admonished as you haue bene they would being holy and sincere men haue reformed their iudgement and keeping the head though they erred in some part the Lord will not impute that error vnto them for condemnation All that you alledge here out of that worthy seruant of Christ M. Luther Pag. 120. c I acknowledge for true seeing it is the verie same that the Scriptures them-selues haue taught For this is the voice and doctrine of the gospell that by faith onelie in the mediator who by his sacrifice once offered vpon the crosse hath reconciled the father vnto vs we are iustified and saued Then to liue straitlie and to do good workes with this purpose and persuasion that thereby we shall obtaine iustice or saluation is contrary to the trueth of Christs gospell and may not in anie be allowed although otherwise moste learned and godly Will you reason hereby against Luther and me because we charge the fathers with some ouersight in the trueth of this doctrine in that they thought somewhat too well of their owne deedes we must therefore repute them for wicked men and make them no better then Papists They erred not somuch as you they erred not so wilfully as you and therefore though there besome likenes betweene their error yours yet we account not of them as of you who besides that you erre in this point of iustification most damnablie haue also multiplied your errours in other articles almost left no one ground of pure religion vnshaken And therefore you greatlie deceiue your owne heart M. Rainolds when you thinke your selfe to be in the same case that the fathers were in because sometime the fathers gaue more to their works then they should haue done you trusting to be iustified and saued by the worthines and merits of your workes which the fathers did not So betwene you and them there is a great space of distance although I graunt that some things which they haue written of this matter and practized in their liues tendeth somewhat to your heresie of iustification by workes For the mysterie of iniquitie which in papistry is fullie finished began to worke in the Apostles age so continued still forward in the fathers daies vntil it came to his height and perfection in the kingdome of popery They slipt a litle you are fallen headlong into the pit they were ouerseene through infirmitie you are blinde of malice they scattered some darnell in the Lords field you haue plucked vp by the roots the good corne They haue suffred losse of this building being not agreeable to the foundation yet are saued you ouerthrow the foundation it selfe and therefore cannot in this opinion be saued The contradiction which you haue found in my wordes Pag. 124. is a knott in a rush your head is crazie I perceiue by your wandring and friuolous talke or els your wit is often verie fugitiue Although the fathers sometime doe require satisfaction by workes not onelie in respect of the Church but of God as appeareth by Saint Cyprian plainlie in sundry places and therein haue obscured the doctrine of repentance and Iustification yet they neuer meant so groslie Satisfactions in respect of God taught and practised in the primitiue time what they were as you doe that this satisfaction of theirs should be a worthie and sufficient recompense to god for their sinnes committed against his moste holie maiestie but that they ought to craue humblie for pardon at gods hands by humbling themselues be fore him in fasting and praying and punishing their bodies in this life This appeareth by the 55. epistle of Saint Cyprian as I noted Ne exoretur precib satisfactionibus who speaking of Christians committing Idolatrie saith They make intercession that Christ may not be intreated by praiers and satisfactions This godlie father ascribeth remission of sinnes to the pardon of Christ being intreated by praiers and satisfactions If remission be of pardon then is it not of satisfaction as you meane if it be obtained by praiers then is it not giuen to the worthines of our workes Againe he saieth I imbrace with readie and perfecte loue such as returne with repentance confessing their sinnes with humble and simple satisfafaction Satisfactione humili simplice What els doth he meane by this humble satisfaction but humble and earnest supplication for pardon in his booke against Demetrian he saith speaking to the heathen we exhort while there is leaue that you satisfie God And can the workes of such men make a full satisfaction vnto God No But Saint Cyprian expoundeth himselfe by by in these words Thou euen at thy howre of death and end of this temporall life intreate God for thy sinnes who is one true pardon is giuen to him that confesseth and to him that beleeueth gratious remission is graunted of Gods mercie Thus with this godlie father to satisfie God is to make humble sute and request to God for our sinnes Salutaris
prooued For as the Apostle reasoneth if Christes person be perpetuall as it is and if he make for vs perpetuall intercession as he doth and if by his one sacrifice offered once he hath wrought a full and perfect redemption as he hath then is it hereof in proper signification prooued that Christs priesthood also is perpetuall and then haue these malapert papists blasphemed in denying the Apostles arguments to be good in proper signification which is in effect to take from them all credit and authoritie Let Master Rainolds deuise what cunning shift he can yet in truth neuer shall he be hable to wipe out this blot of blasphemie when the Apostle hath of purpose laboured to prooue Christs eternall priesthood and prooued it indeede most inuinciblie for these Collegiates of Rhemes to come in with their censure vpon the Apostle and to set downe in plaine termes that all this prooueth not the matter in proper signification and that the Apostle hath omitted the chiefe and proper proofe thereof This is a blasphemie against Christ and against the holy spirit of God by which the Apostle in writing was directed But what can Master Rainolds saie in excuse of this so manifest blasphemie pag. 534. He asketh first Where saie we that of all those things proposed by the Apostle it followeth not that Christs priesthood is eternall Must you againe be put in minde of your owne Annotation which your selfe haue at large rehearsed Haue you not therein expreslie in writing published All this prooueth not that in proper signification his priesthood is perpetuall And what differeth this from that which I haue affirmed of you Hath the Apostle propounded any thing concerning your pretended sacrifice If he hath shew vs where in what words after what sort If any thing at all can be shewed to this purpose as nothing indeed can and without this be shewed in your opinion the eternitie of Christs priesthood is no wais sufficientlie prooued doe you not plainlie declare your iudgement to be that it followeth not of al those thinges which the Apostle hath said that Christes priesthood is eternall yea but M.R. saith that they haue auouched the cleane contrary in saying that all the fathers gather of this deepe and diuine discourse the eternitie of his Priesthood The fathers indeed haue gathered of this discourse most truelie the eternitie of Christs Priesthood and therein they confute your wicked dannotation that saith all this prooueth not Christes Priesthood to be perpetuall They vnderstood the Apostle rightlie and they expounded his meaning faithfully Shew me now one ancient father if you can M. R. that euer saide as you saie that all this alledged by the Apostle prooueth not in proper signification that Christes priesthoode is perpetuall or els that he taught as you teach that Christ must continuallie be sacrificed in forme of bread and wine This is the point this shew vs if you can For in your Annotation no such thing is shewed and all the fathers confesse with one consent that the Apostle hath prooued soundly the eternitie of Christs Priesthood and that no other sacrifice remaineth to be offered but onelie a remembrance and sacrament of that one euerlasting sacrifice to be continued in the Church to the end of the world Secondlie it is confessed by Master Rainolds that the Apostle maketh not anie expresse mention of that oblation of bread and wine pag. 536. But what reason was there why the Apostle entreating of Christes eternall preisthood omitted the principall part thereof Consider good reader into what miserable straites these men are driuen and what absurde deuises they are enforced to forge For their best excuse is that because the Iewes beleeued not the first singular and soueraigne sacrifice of the crosse therefore he would not vrge them with this secondarie and dependente sacrifice of the Church Which in trueth is nothing els but a seelie shift to salue a desperate sore For first it is euident the Apostle writ to those that were not ignorant of Christian religion seeing they had learned alreadie the principles thereof and are exhorted by the Apostle to proceed to perfection therin Hebr. 6.1 Secondlie whereas the Apostle hath discoursed so plentifullie of the principal and soueraigne sacrifice what reason was there to keepe silence of the secondarie sacrifice as you call it Might they heare of the greater and not of the lesse Might the Apostle vrge so earnestlie vnto them the sacrifice of the crosse and might he not in a word mention the sacrifice of the Altar Coulde the one be more offensiue vnto them then the other Let all men iudge what trueth there is in this deuise Of that which followeth concerning this matter nothing deserueth answere pag. 540. saue onelie that Master Rainolds asketh of me whether Melchisedech did not sacrifice I saie no doubt Melchisedech did sacrifice for otherwise he had not bene a priest But Saint Paul saith he maketh no expresse mention thereof What then I praie you Forsooth by Master Whittakers iudgement Saint Paul omitteth some principall part of Melchisedechs priesthood Whoe euer heard a more foolish collection it was sufficient for the Apostle that Melchisedech was a priest which is confirmed by plaine testimonie of scripture to rehearse anie speciall kinde of sacrifice by him offered was nothing necessarie to the purpose in hand And therefore the Apostle hath not omitted any principall part of Melchisedechs priesthood vnles you will say it cannot be prooued necessarilie that one hath bene a priest except euerie particular sacrifice that euer was offered by him be recorded and auouched This being moste absurd see how vaine a conceite of yours this was that the Apostle hath omitted some principall parte of Melchisedechs priesthood because he hath not declared expresselie what speciall sacrifice Melchisedech offered An other example I noted out of the sixt Chapter to the Romanes pag. 543. c. in that notable place where the Apostle writeth that the stipend of sin is death but life euerlasting is the gift of God Rom. 6.23 Vpon these words our Rhemists haue noted that the sequell of speach required that as he saide death or damnation is the stipend of sinne so life euerlasting is the stipend of iustice and so it is Wherein euerie man may behould their intollerable saucines and presumption in setting the holie Apostle to schoole in controling his speach in corrupting his meaning For if the case had stood so clearlie and roundlie as these men teach that euen as condemnation is the stipend of finne so is eternall life the stipend of iustice it had bene as casie for the Apostle to haue so written as to alter his wordes and hauing saide that death is the wages of sinne to affirme after an other manner of speach that life euerlasting is not the wages of iustice but the gift and free gift of God And doutles according to the doctrine of S. Paul and the holie ghost it is no other
92. Satisfaction for sinnes wrought onely by the sacrifice of Christs death is grounded vpon the rock that neuer can be shaken euen the word of god that abideth for euer For as the redemption of mankinde is to be ascribed onelie to the sacrifice of Christes death and cannot without singular blasphemie be assigned to anie other thing so likewise is the satisfaction for sinne appropriated to the same sacrifice of Christ cannot without like blasphemie be giuen to any workes of man how excellent soeuer You make it a small matter to satisfie for sinne that teach it is in the power of man by his owne paines and penance to appease the wrath of God wherby it plainly appeareth you neither know the grieuousnes of sinne nor the iustice of god that requireth a greater punishment for sin then any man is able to suffer yea you charge the Lord himself with iniustice in that hauing laid the guiltines of our sins vpon his sonne and punished them al in him is not content with that punishment satisfaction If we do satisfie for our sinnes then hath not Christ satisfied for them but exacteth of vs a further paiment and satisfaction for the sinnes for which Christ hath once sufficientlie satisfied alreadie The prophet saith He is punished for our transgressions Esai 53.5 he is bruised for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace is layde vpon him by his stripes are we healed And immediatlie againe he repeateth the same and sayth The Lord maketh the punishment of vs al to light vpon him Veâ— 7. 1. Ioh. 1.7 The Apostle Iohn saith The blood of Iesus Christ doth purge you from all sâ—â—ne Apoc. 1.5 And in his reuelation he saieth that Christ hath washed vs from our sins in his blood Thus are we taught in the scriptures of God to beleeue that our sinnes are forgiuen and we reconciled to God not for anie thing that we can worke or suffer but onelie for the death blood-sheading of Christ So all your satisfactions are hanged vpon the hedge and serue for nothing els but to plunge you deeper into the pitte of condemnation which you shall neuer escape so long as you trust to anie satisfaction but onelie of Christ As for your Tridentine councell which you alleadge it is but a bable A childe may soone espie the vanitie and falshood of this diuinitie that you deliuer vs here by warrant of that Councell Concil Trident sess 14. ca. 8. This it is The satisfaction which we vndertake for our sinnes is ours but yet by Christ Iesus which in effect is all one as if they had said that Christ him selfe hath not satisfied for our sinnes at all but onelie hath purchased to vs a facultie and habilitie euerie man to satisie for his owne sinnes The scriptures teach that Christ himselfe hath satiâ—fied for our sinnes 1. Pet 2.24 This is the mysterie of your satisfactions a mysterie of great impietie For the scriptures teach the cleane contrarie S. Peter saith that Christ hath borne our sins in his bodie vpon the crosse And how hath he borne them if he hath not satisfied for them did he take them vpon himselfe to returne them back to vs againe or did he not perhaps fullie satisfie for them Tell vs then how farre Christ hath satisfied and how much remaineth for vs to satisfie that we maie know how to deuide aright the satisfaction betweene Christ and vs. But accursed for euer be they that deny the satisfaction of Christe to be most perfecte and will supplie it by their owne diligence and labour Christ hath perfectlie redeemed vs therefore Christ hath perfectlie satisfied for vs. The work of Christs redemption is our satisfaction For this redemption consisteth in fully satisfying the warth of God against sinne Neither is it possible for any to satisfie for sinne but a redeemer onely For this cause was the name of Iesus giuen to our Redeemer because he saueth vs from our sinnes Matth. 1.21 And how is this saluation wrought 2. Cor. 5.21 In that he became man for vs that is our sinnes were imputed to him Heb. 10.14 and he made a sacrifice for them and by this one oblation hath consecrated for euer those that are sanctified Then is there left to vs no parte of satisfaction but when soeuer we repent of our sinnes and beleeue in the satisfaction of Iesus Christ we are clerelie acquitted of all our offenses for the merit of that perfect sacrifice which Christ offered for vs. If you denie this thinke of your selfe as you liste you haue no more parte in Iesus Christ then hath an Infidel That you rehearse out of Brentius pag. 93.9.4 and Andreas Fricius is idle and serueth onely for stuffing Brentius saith truelie we must not onelie take awaie nothing from Christ that belongeth vnto him but not giue him more then the scriptures haue taught to be due vnto him For he is iniuried and dishonoured both waies neuertheles this that you will seeme to giue him more then we is by no means to be accepted for so much as it taketh from him a thousand times more then it can pretend to bestowe vpon him For in ascribing that vertue to the sacrifice of Christ to make our workes of force to satisfie for our selues you pull awaie from it violentlie that full and perfect power of satisfying once for all of it selfe which doth truelie and properlie belong vnto it so herein you may well be compared to those wicked Iewes that made cursie to our Sauiour Christ and yet did buffet him on the face with their fists Andreas Fricius if he haue anie priuat opinion of his owne let him take it to him selfe he may not obtrude it vpon the Church without warrant of Gods word And yet out of his wordes by you rehearsed what can you gather seruing for proofe of mans merits or satisfactions What your opinion and iudgement is Pag 95 c. M. Rainolds of my learning and writings I trust you thinke I make no great account Verilie among the wholl rable of popish proctors there is none that I haue read of lesse wit and learning then your selfe What account your fellowes make of you I cannot report but if they esteeme you for one of their worthies you are more beholding to them then you haue deserued of them For alas what haue you brought thâ— in truth is worthie answere what haue you said wherein appeereth any learning more then moste common what cause haue you thus to bragge in your selfe thus to contemne others God giue you grace to see to know to examine your selfe that you maie perceiue your owne weakenes and pouertie If I should boaste of my selfe mine owne tongue would condemne me this childish profane manner I leaue to you and your companions who hunte so greedelie for the praise of learning that you despise the simplicitie of Gods trueth and Gospell Yet there is none of vs how
vnlearned soeuer you thinke we are but by the grace of God and light of his word can easilie discouer the falsehood and corruptions of your Religion Let vs now consider vpon what points you were bolde to vtter so fondlie your iudgement of me and thereby make triall of that profound learning which you take to your selfe with out cause as shall here and euerie where appeere First you charge me Pag. 98. that I vnderstand not M. Martins meaning which though it were true yet were it I trust a veniall offense But I perceiued his meaning well inough framed mine answere directlie to the same The question was whether to attribute to our sufferings the vertue of satisfying for our sins be not iniurious to the passion satisfaction of Christ I said it was and so I saie still Master Martin alleadgeth against me the words of the Apostle Saint Pauls who saieth we shal be heires with God Rom. 8.17 and follow heires with Christ if we suffer with him that we may be glorified with him Mine answere was that our suffrings are required not as causes of our saluation and eternall glorie yet to be borne of necessitie vnles we wil fall awaie from his grace and glorie Wherein now haue I swarued from M. Martins purpose His argument was you saie to prooue that good workes are not iniurious to saluation because the scripture requireth them as necessarie to saluation But why tell you not how M. Martin meant they are required as necessarie then had you disclosed your owne folly For we graunt they are necessarilie required in that sense that the Apostle teacheth and are not in that respect anie waies iniurious or derogatory to the sacrifice of Christ But this prooueth not that they satisfie for our sinnes for then should they be efficient causes of our saluation as you would haue them to be thought and then should they derogate greatlie from the merites of Christ Were you so astonied that you could not make mine answere agree to M. Martins argument or had you a pleasure thus to cauill Secondlie you say pag. 99. c. I vnderstand not S. Paule alleaged by M. Martin your selfe setting downe such an exposition of his wordes as both is contrarie to his wholl doctrine disprooued by the verie words themselues For where you saie this place of the Apostle prooueth inuinciblie that workes are the efficient causes of our saluation it shall easilie appeare that herein you doe not onelie misconstrue the Apostle but vtter blasphemie against the blood of Christ such a notable expositor are you become of the holie scriptures S. Paule saith we are ioint heyres with Christ Rom. 8.15 if so be we suffer with him that we may also be glorified with him Doth this prooue our workes or sufferings to be causes efficient of our saluation By what diuinitie by what Logick by what sophistrie wherein lieth the inuincible necessitie of this consequence doth not the Apostle himselfe conclude the contrary in the wordes immediatlie following when he saith Rom. 8.18 I account that the sufferings of this present time are not worthie of the glorie that shal be reueiled vnto vs Our sufferings are not worthie the glorie of heauen and therfore deserue it not If then there be not anie proportion at all betweene our sufferings and eternall glorie as the Apostle plainlie affirmeth how can our sufferings be causes efficient of that moste excellent glorie saluation which Christ hath purchased for vs doth he not cal it our inheritance when he saith we are the heires of god fellow heires with Christ then doth it follow most inuincibly that it is not obtained by our workes but doth belong vnto vs by the right of our adoption whereby we are made the sonnes of God Neuertheles as the father requireth obedience of his sonne to whome he leaueth his inheritance so the Lord most iustly may exact of his children to whome he hath prepared a kingdome Eternall life belongeth vnto vs by right of our adoption and is not purchased of vs by our workes all duties of seruice and obedience And as the obedience of the childe is not the cause efficient of the earthlie inheritance no more are the workes of godlines wherein the faithfull are occupied causes efficient of immortalitie and saluation When the earthlie father saith to his naturall sonne and heire thou shalt inherit my landes and goodes if so be thou wilt obeie my will can your wisdome hereof gather an inuincible argument that this obedience in the heire is the proper and efficient cause of that inheritance so when the Lord speaketh to his children in like manner I wil giue vnto you eternall life if you can be content patientlie to waite for the time of your ful deliuerance and to suffer afflictions in this life as it is necessarie for you to do who but a blinde papist wil argue hereof that these afflictions endured in the meane time are causes of eternal life which is the free gift and grace of God and yet is this M. Rainolds inuincible argument or rather inuincible sollie and ignorance Now where he maketh a comparison betweene Christes sufferings ours pag. 100. and because Christes sufferings merite eternal life No comparison betwene the merites of Christ and our good workes reasoneth that ours therfore do the same he deserueth that all the boies in the schoole should clap their hands against him as not onely disputing moste absurdlie but dishonouring our sauiour Christ intollerablie Will you match your selues with Christ your workes and your sufferings with his you make a verie vnequall moste vnreasonable comparison For is there in you that perfection of vertue and excellencie of grace that was in Christ wherby he fullie satisfied the law of God and therfore deserued worthelie the Kingdome of heauen All our righteousnes is vnperfect all our obedience is full of infirmitie whatsoeuer we can do or suffer is stained with some pollution of sinne and therfore of due can merite nothing at the hands of God much lesse the Kingdome of heauen and life euerlasting Thus your summe was not rightlie gathered as you maie see Pag. 102 Rom. 6.23 Eternall life is a free gift and therefore is not obtained by merite of good workes Thirdlie M. Rainolds saith I vnderstand not S. Paul alleadged by my selfe that eternal life is the gift of god Whereupon I gather that seing it is the free gift of God our workes are not the causes therof For if our workes were causes efficient of eternal life the Apostle would not saie that eternal life is giuen freely vnto vs by God seeing to giue freelie and to giue vpon desert cannot be verified of one thing But eternall life is a free gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Apostle doth affirme expressly and therefore is not purchased by merit of our good works where is to be noted the opposition betweene eternall death and life touching
euen a verie scomme of auncient new errours or as it were a bodie consisting of rottennes and corruption Their free will their merite of workes their purgatorie their sacrifice for quick and dead their transsubstantiation their Popes Supremacie their superstitious fastes their worshipping of Images their praying vnto Saincts their praying for the dead their satisfaction forgiuenes by workes of penance whereof Master Rainolds hath now taken in hand to speake and other manie moe the like points of false doctrine they can as soone proue out of the scripiures as they can drawe a fountaine of water out of a flinte And therefore although for a fashion in defense of some of these they pretend scriptures yet being easilie beaten from them they fall at last to raile on them as not containing sufficient doctrine and rather wil be tried and iudged by the writings of fathers at whose hands albeit they finde not such reliefe as they would make men beleeue in no one controuersie betwene vs them as hath bene oftentimes plainlie prooued notwithstanding by reason of the fathers manifold ouersightes and slips the corruptions that dailie increased in the Church they maie bring somewhat such as it is for their maintenance wherefore that we will not admitte the fathers for iudges in matters of Religion but holde them hard to the triall of the Scriptures which they cannot abide this doth put them out of patience driueth them into vehement passions But let them mend themselues where they can they shall neuer gett at our handes more then this to receiue that which the scripture deliuereth to reiect that which the scripture reprooueth to read the fathers with indifferent and free iudgement waying all their doctrine in the balance of gods word and thereby either alowing or refusing the same This we must doe or els of fathers we make Gods of mens writings we make canonical scriptures of doctors opinions we make articles of faith And herein we doe no otherwise then we are taught both by scriptures and fathers to doe as hath beene shewed a thousand times This shal be your answere more you are not to looke for of me neither in this question of penance nor in anie other and though it be your griefe to haue your nose held to this grindstone yet shall the trueth thus be cleared from your mistes God shall haue the glorie Where I haue said Pag. 87. True repentance wherin it consisteth that repentance consisteth in inward sorowe for our sinnes and amendement of life not in outward penalties and chastisments of our bodies M. Rainolds graunteth the former part but denyeth the latter Ioyne them both together saith he the◠greatlie please God Though he labour with all his force to smother the truth and keepe it from shining forth yet is he constrained to confesse that no externall chastisment of the bodie or rigorous maner of discipline whatsoeuer we can submitt our selues vnto profiteth any thing without the inward griefe of minde conceiued for our sins Wherein as he hath giuen a right sentence agreably to gods word so hath he marked with a black cole the superstition of the Romish sectaries whose whol repentance is nothing els but a voluntarie affliction of their bodies by abstaining frō meats by whipping their carcases by putting on rough apparrel by lying hard and such other outward exercises of which the Apostle generallie pronounceth 1. Tim. 4.8 they profit but a litle Then he must confesse that Repentance standeth not in outward penance as they tearme it but in the inward sorowe of the soule For this alone pleaseth God turneth awaie his wrath from vs although we doe not ioyne therewith externall penance but externall penance is nothing worth vnles we haue an inward sorowe Seeing then true repentance maie stand without that painful and extreame punishing of the body I cōclude by necessarie consequence of reason that it is not anie parte of true repentance although sometime it hath a profitable vse for the furthering and practizing of repentance If you graunt this as you must then we shall agree in this matter For I denie not but some outward penalties maie be vsed and doe please God not of them selues but because they helpe as meanes in true repentance As for example he that offendeth in eating or drinking too much must not thinke tha he hath sufficientlie repented of his sinne if he punish him selfe by fasting neuer so much vnles he be also inwardlie sorowfull for the same and purpose euer after to liue soberlie which affection if it be wanting though a man fast all his life long yet he hath not truelie repented But the godlie Christian whoe hath perhappes oftended in surfeting or dronkennesse and is trulie sorowfull therefore hath repented though he fast not euerie Fridaie from morning to night but vseth a sober and moderate diet euerie day Neuertheles if he prescribe vnto himselfe without superstition of satisfaction or merite some abstinence for a time that thereby he may be further estraunged from that vice whoe will denie but this is well and Christianlike done And this was commaunded by God in publike and priuate fastes and practised by the godlie as wee read in the scriptures Thus may you see what an idle head you haue that alleadge so many testimonies of scripture to prooue a thing which no man euer hath denied I perceiue your leisure is great but you should haue more discretion to vse it well In a plaine case wherein we need not your helpe you bring plentie of scriptures in a matter of controuersie and debate which beggeth reliefe at your hands you passe by as though you heard not which yet I impute not to want of compassion but of habilitie We dispute not whether the children of God haue vsed and ought to vse sometimes outward punishing and afflicting of their bodies for this we do willinglie confesse but whether this outward affliction be a proper part of repentance and whether it satisfieth for sinnes The first is an error the second is an heresie or rather blasphemy These things you should haue prooued for these we denie the other being not denied required no proofe The Apostles place was rightly alleadged Pag. 90. Colos 2 23. you cannot tel how to shift it from you He condemneth the superstition of such as put holines in outward things and namelie in punishing of the bodie which Ambrose calleth vexing of the body Oecumenius not regarding the body whether this belong to you let all the world iudge seeing you make it a part of repentance and think to deserue therby a great recompense at the hands of almightie God But because you perceaue the edge of this scripture to be sharper then you would you seeke to blunt it some what and therefore saie it is obscure whereas nothing could be spoken more plainlie if the light of your vnderstanding were not dammed vp The reason which I brought against the workes of satisfaction pag.