the purpose yet we may conclude out of the former part of the discourse as before Faith receiues in charitie doth not therefore they are not alwaies together The consequence is naught as if vertues of diuers effects could not be giuen by the spirit at one time and alwaies keepe together in the soule iustified and sanctified speaker D. B. P. Now Sir if they could not applie vnto themselues Christs righteousnes without fulfilling all duties of the first and second table they should neuer applie it to them for they hould it impossible to fulfill all those duties so that this necessarie linking of charity with faith maketh their saluation not only very euill assured but altogither impossible for charitie is the fulnes of the law which they hold impossible and then if the assurance of their saluation must needs be ioyned with such an impossibilitie they may assure themselues that by that faith they can neuer come to saluation speaker A. W. I will do the best I can to vnderstand and examine what you say in this discourse wherein me thinkes you would perswade vs that this linking of faith and charity together makes our saluation altogether impossible because it requires of vs the fulfilling of the law that we may thereby applie Christs righteousnes to our selues which we hold to be impossible Now vpon this impossibilitie it should follow in your opinion that we may assure our selues we can neuer come to saluation by this faith All the matter lies in this proposition that the ioyning of these vertues exacts the fulfilling of the law to applie Christ by which hath no kind of truth in it for first the hauing of charitie doth not bind vs to keepe the law but enables vs in some measure to that dutie which we were bound to before Secondlie it is not the lincking of these two that doth enable vs but the hauing of charitie that is of iustifying grace Lastlie though they come and stay together yet haue they as their seuerall natures and effects so their seuerall ends also faith seruing to obtaine iustification charity to cause a holy conuersation If I haue mistaken you it is against my willâ— if there be any thing else in it that may make for you or against vs let me know it and I will yeeld to it or answere it speaker D. B. P. Let vs annex vnto these plaine authorities of holy Scripture one euident testimonie of Antiquitie That most incorruptiâ—… S. Augustine saith flatly That faith may well be vvithout charitie but it cannot profile vs vvithout charitie And That one God is vvorshipped sometimes out of the Church but that vnskilfully yet is it he Also that one faith is had without charitie and that also out of the Church neither therfore is not faith For there is one God one Faith one Baptisme and one iâ—â—aculate Catholike Church in which God is not serued only but in which only he is truly serued neither in which alone faith is kept â—…n which only faith is kept with charitie So that faith and that only true faith of which the Apostle speaketh One God one faith may be and is an many without charitie speaker A. W. In the former place alleaged Augustine hath no such word and if he had the answere is easie that he speakes not of that faith wherby we trust in God for iustification but of that which is onelie an acknowledgement of the truth of Scripture In the later thus he writes As one God is worshipped ignorantly euen out of the Church neither therefore is not he so one faith is had without charity euen out of the Church neither therefore is not it For there is one God one faith one Baptisme one incorrupt Catholike Church not in which alone God is worshipped but in which alone one God is rightly worshipped nor in which alone one faith is held but in which alone one faith with charity is held nor in which alone one Baptisme is had but in which alone one Baptisme is healthfully had In which discourse any man may see that Austin speakes of such a faith as beleeues the truth of Scripture To which purpose a little before he shewed that the Diuels also had the same faith or at least beleeued the same things of Christ that we doe in the Church And this faith which is indeed the same the Apostle speakes of may be and is often without charitie And yet by your leaue a man may reasonablie doubt whether this assent to the Scripture be wrought by the spirit of God in euery one that professeth religion according to the truth of his perswasion and be not rather in many an opinion receiued from meÌ„ as for the most part amongst you Papists who rest vpon the authoritie of men vnder the name of the Church in this very point speaker D. B. P. The Protestants bold asseuerations that they cannot be parted are great but their proofes very slender and scarce worth the disprouing speaker A. W. It becomes a Christian to be bold in matters of faith especiallie when it is gaine-said What our proofes are it shall better be seene hereafter if it please God In the meane while how strong yours are set euery man iudge with indifferencie THAT FAITH MAY BE WITHOVT good Workes speaker D. B. P. THe first He that hath not care of his ovvne hath denied his faith therfore saith includeth that good vvorke of prouiding for our owne Ans. That faith there seemes to signifie not that faith whereby we beleeue all things reuealed or the Protestants the certainty of their saluation but for fidelity and faithfull performance of that which we haue promised in Baptiâ—me which is to keepe all Gods commandements one of the which is to prouide for our children and for them that we haue charge of so that he who hath no such care ouer his owne charge hath denied his faith that is violated his promise in Baptisme There is also another ordinary answere supposing faith to be taken there for the Christian beleefe to wit that one may deny his faith two waies either in flat denying any article of faith or by doing something that is contrary to the doctrine of our faith Now he that hath no care of his owne doth not deny any article of his faith but committeth a fact contrary to the doctrine of his faith so that not faith but the doctrine of faith or our promise in Baptisme includeth good workes speaker A. W. These reasons are such as to my best remembrance I neuer read in any Protestant to this purpose if you haue you should haue quoted the places But howsoeuer I thinke neither we nor you will be bound to maintaine all the arguments that haue been brought in all questions to proue the doctrines we seuerally hold If it had bin your purpose to deale throughly in this point you might haue found out better reasons then these though not better for your turne If
This vowe is necessarie and must bee kept as a part of the true worship of God because it is a promise wherein wee vowe to performe all duties commaunded of God either in the law or in the Gospell It may be demaunded considering wee are bound to obedience how wee binde our selues in baptisme thereto Answ. Though we be alreadie bound partly by nature and partly by the written word yet may wee renew the same bond in a vowe and he that is bound may further binde himselfe so it be for this end to helpe his dulnes for want of zeale and to make himselfe more forward in duties of loue to men and the worship of God to this end Dauid sware to keepe the law of God Psal. 119. 116. though he were bound vnto it by nature and by the written law it selfe The speciall vowe is that which doth not reach to the person of al beleeuers but onely concernes some speciall men vpon some speciall occasions And this kind of vow is twofold The first is the vow of a ceremonial duty in the way of seruice to God and it was in practise in the Church of the Iewes vnder the old Testament examples hereof are two especially the first was the vowe of the Nazarites whereto no kind of men were bound by Gods commaundement but they bound thēselues God only prescribing the maner and order of keeping the same with rites pertaining thereto as abstinence from wine the not cutting of their haire and such like The second example is of the Iewes when of their owne accords they vowed to giue God house or land sheepe or oxen or any like things for the maintenance of the legall worship and of this also God prescribeth certaine rules Leuit. 27. Now these vowes were part of the Iewish pedagogie or ceremoniall law wherein God trained vp the Iewes in the old testament and beeing obserued of them they were parts of Gods worship but now vnder the Gospell they are not beeing all abolished with the ceremoniall law to which Christ put an ende at his death vpon the crosse It is true Paul made a vowe and since kept the same in in the time of the new Testament Act. 18. yet not as a part of Gods worship but as a thing indifferent for the time wherein he only condescended to the weakenes of the Iewes that by this meanes he might bring them the better vnto Christ. And whereas Christ is called a Nazarite Matth. 2. 23. we may not thinke he was of that very order because he did not abstaine from wine but he was so tearmed because hee was the veritie and accomplishment of this order For by it was signified that Gods Church was a peculiar people seuered or chosen out of the world and that Christ in respect of holines was also separated from all sinners And the words in Saint Matthew he shall be called a Nazarite are borrowed from the booke of Iudges cap. 13. where they are properly spoken of Sampson and in type or figure of Christ. For as Sampson saued Israel by his death so did Christ saue his Church And as Sampson killed his enemies more by death then by life so did Christ. It is plaine therefore that this kind of vowe bindeth not vs for there are no more ceremonies to bee kept vnder the Gospell for partes of Gods worship but the outwarde rites of Baptisme and the Lords Supper Vovves concerning meates and drinkes attire touching tasting times place daies were proper to the Iewes The second kinde of speciall vowe is that whereby a man promiseth freely to performe some outward and bodily exercise for some good ende and this vow also if it be made accordingly is lawfull and belongs both to the Church of the olde and new Testament In the olde wee haue the example of the Rekabites Ier. 35. who by the appointment of Ionadab their father abstained from strong drinke and wine from planting vineyardes and orchardes whereby Ionadab intended onely to breake them before hand and to acquaint them with their future condition and state that they should be strangers in a forraine land that so they might prepare themselues to indure hardnes in the time to come And now in the new testament wee haue warrant in like manner to vowe as if a man by drinking of wine or strong drinke finde himselfe prone to drunkennes he may vowe with himselfe to drinke no more wine nor strong drinke for so long time as hee feeles the drinking thereof will stirre vp his infirmitie and minister occasion of sinning Of this kind also are the vowes in which we purpose and promise to God to keepe set times of fasting to taske our selues in prayer and reading of holy Scriptures and to giue set almes for special causes knowne to our selues and to doe sundrie like duties And that wee be not deceiued in making such vowes certaine rules must be remembred I. that the vowe be agreeable to Gods will and word for if it be otherwise the making as also the keeping thereof is sinne Vowes must not bee the bondes of iniquitie II. It must so be made that it may stand with Christian libertie For wee may not make such things necessary in conscience which God hath made free Now Christian liberty allowes vnto vs the free vse of all thinges indifferent so it be out of the case of offence Hence it followes that vowes must be made and keept or not keept so farreforth as in conscience they may stand or not stande with our libertie purchased by Christ. III. The vowe must be made with consent of superiors if we be vnder gouernment Thus among the Iewes the vowe of a daughter might not stand vnlesse the consent of Parents came thereunto IV. It must bee in the power and abilitie of the maker thereof to do or not to doe A vowe made of a thing impossible is no vowe V. It must be agreeable to the calling of him that maketh it that is both to his generall calling as he is a Christian and to that particular calling wherein he liueth If it bee against either one or both it is vnlawfull VI. It must be made with deliberation no better things performed then God by his lawe hath bound vs to else man could deuise better obedience or more acceptable seruice to God then he himselfe hath appointed If by better good you meane be a greater measure of obedience then is commonly performed I doubt whether any man can do more then the law of God hath required of him which is the rule of perfect obedience If you vnderstand the meanes of stirring vp our selues to the doing of our dutie to God Master Perkins acknowledgeth that and compriseth it in the later part though he do not expresse it Secondly you say that it must proceede from our owne free choise and libertie The promise doubtlesse must haue our owne will for the ground of it and so much the word imports but the good must be a dutie commanded or at
Hitherto S. Augustine Note first that he defineth the iustice which we haue in this life to be true iustice which is pure from all iniustice and iniquitie Then that it is also perfect not fayling in any dutie which we be bound to performe Lastly that it bringeth forth good workes such as merit life euerlasting True it is also that this iustice although perfect in it self so farre as mans capacity in this life doth permit yet being compared vnto the state of iustice which is in heauen it may be called imperfect not that this is not sufficient to defend vs from all formall transgression of Gods law but because it keepeth not vs sometimes from veniall sinne and hath not such a high degree of perfection as that hath speaker A. W. You may wel think we make no small account of works that make them the way to heauen that require them as necessary of euery man that looketh to be saued that allow them no small reward in heauen that ground part of our assurance of saluation vpon them First giue me leaue to obserue by the way that the life Austin heare speaketh of is not iustification but holines of conuersation Then to your first note the righteousnesse we haue in this life is true righteousnes in regard of the author thereof the spirit of God who cannot deceiue nor be deceiued It is also called perfect in some men not as you say without Austins authoritie because it faileth not in any dutie which we are bound to performe but in comparison of the imperfection of it in other men and the vncapablenes that by our corruption is in euery one of vs. By merits he meaneth good workes as your selfe also expound them and as the manner of speech that the auncient Church vsed requireth the reason whereof is not because they deserue euerlasting life Augustine hath no such word but because they shall haue a reward though not vpon desert but fauour It cannot be called imperfect because it doth not keepe vs from sinning If it be true that it is sufficient to keepe vs from all formall transgression of Gods law else we must say that Adams righteousnes was imperfect yea it may well be held That the Angels now and we hereafter in heauen shall be kept from sinning not by any strength of inherent righteousnes but by the speciall grace of God continually vpholding vs. That it may be proper to God that possiblie he cannot sinne by reason of goodnesse resting in him that I may so speake which cannot be lesse then infinite And sure it is to me somewhat strange that this perfection of righteousnes should be able to keepe vs free from deadly sinnes as you call them and not much more easily preserue vs from veniall speaker D. B. P. Saint Augustine hath the like discourse vvhere he saith directly that it appertaines to the lesser iustice of this life not to sinne So that vve haue out of this oracle of Antiquitie that many works of a iust man are without sinne speaker A. W. The other place of Austin rather maketh against you For if it belong to this lesse righteousnes not to sin and for al that measure of it we haue we are not kept from sinning it may seeme that this righteousnes is not perfect So haue you nothing out of this register of Antiquity to proue that any workes of a iust man are without sinne speaker D. B. P. To these reasons taken partly out of the Scriptures and partly out of the record of Antiquitie let vs ioyne one or tvvo dravvne from the absurdity of our aduersaries doctrine vvhich teacheth euery good vvorke of the righteous man to be infected vvith mortall sinne Which being granted it vvould follovv necessarily that no good vvorke in the vvorld vvere to be done vnder paine of damnation thus No mortall sinne is to be done vnder paine of damnation for the vvages of sinne is death but all good vvorkes are stained vvith mortall sinne ergo no good vvorke is to be done vnder paine of damnation speaker A. W. Your Syllogisme is naught because it hath foure termes as they are called your assumption not being taken out of your proposition nor your conclusion sutable to the premisses it should be thus framed No mortall sin is to be done vnder paine of damnation But all good workes are mortall sinnes Therefore no good workes are to be dono vnder paine of damnation Now the syllogisme is true but the assumption euidently false You chose craftily rather no make a false syllogisme which you thought euery one could not spie then a false assumption manifest to the eyes of the simplest If you should alter the proposition that would be as apparantly false as the assumption is Nothing stained with mortall sin is to be done vnder paine of damnation speaker D. B. P. It follovveth secondly that euery man is bound to sinne deadly For al men are bound to performe the duties of the first second table but euery performance of any dutie is necessarily linked vvith some mortall sin therefore euery man is bound to commit many mortall sinnes and consequently to be damned These are holy and comfortable conclusions yet inseperable companions if not svvorne brethren of the Protestants doctrine Novv let vs heare vvhat Arguments they bring against this Catholike verity speaker A. W. Your other Reason is thus to be framed He that is bound to performe the duties of the first and second table is bound to commit many mortall sinnes But euery man is bound to performe all such duties Therefore euery man is bound to commit many mortall sinnes The proposition is thus proued according to your collection If the performance of such duties be neerely linked with mortall sinne then he that is bound to performe such duties is bound to commit many mortall sinnes But the performance of such duties as the Protestants say is neerely linckt with mortall sinne Therfore he that is bound to performe such duties is bound to commit many mortall sinnes I deny the consequence of your proposition This onely followeth vpon the antecedent that he which is bound to performe such duties is bound to performe that which is neerely linckt with some mortall sinne And this we grant to be true we are bound to the performance of those duties in the doing whereof by our corruption there will be some sinne annexed which in it owne nature is deadly speaker D. B. P. First they alleadge these vvords Enter not O Lord into iudgment with thy seruant because no liuing creature shall be iustified in thy sight If none can be iustified before God it seemes that none of their vvorkes are iust in his sight speaker A. W. Ans. There are tvvo common expositions of this place among the auncient Fathers both true but farre from the Protestants purpose The commonnesse of an exposition is a presumption but not a proofe of the truth thereof for all these two there may be a
is othervvise due debt cannot be any meritorious vvorke speaker A. W. Is there not a contradiction in the meaning your selfe confesse it by and by where you expound it Disorder in words is when they are not set in such order as they should be here is no such fault If there bee any it is that he might haue spoken plainer But any man know his meaning by his words well enough speaker D. B. P. To vvhich S. Augustine doth ansvvere in these vvords O great goodnes of God to vvhom vvhen vve did ovve seruice by condition of our estate as bond men do to their Lord yet hath he promised againe and againe the reward of friends speaker A. W. S. Austin answers nothing against vs or for you It is free for God to promise a reward as wee gladly acknowledge he doth euen to those workes that are due But an action of dutie cannot be made to put on the true and whole nature of merit which is the question speaker D. B. P. In vvhich there is couched a comparison vvhich being laide in the light vvill much helpe to the vnderstanding of this matter He that hath a slaue or a bond-man may lavvfully exact of him all kind of seruice vvithout any vvages Bread and a vvhippe saith a Philosopher serue for a slaue Novv suppose the Master to be soueraigne gouernour of a state then if it please him to make his manfree and vvithall a member of his common vveale the same man by performing many good offices to the state may iustly deserue of his Prince as great revvard and promotion as any other of his subiects and yet may his Lord and old Master say truly to him all this that thou hast done or couldest do is but due debt vs to me considering that thou vvast my bond-man So fareth it vvith vs in respect of God all that vve can do is due debt vnto him because he hath made vs and endovved vs vvith all that vve either be or haue yet it hath pleased him as a most kind Lord to set vs at liberty through Christ and to make vs Citizens of the Saints and as capable of his heauenlie riches as the Angels if vve vvill do our endeuour to deserue them and vvhereas he might haue exacted all that euer vve could do vvithout any kind of recompence yet he of his inestimable goodnes tovvard vs doth neither bind vs to do all vve can do and yet for doing that little vvhich he commandeth hath by promise bound himselfe to repay vs a large recompence The cōparison you shew vs is fained by you not intended by Austin and if it be granted you makes nothing to the purpose No more indeede doth the conclusion of your whole discourse for it saith no more than wee yeeld that God wil recompence those seruices which are debt on our part and that exceeding bountifully but not vpon their desert speaker D. B. P. By which we may well vnderstand those words of our Sauiour VVhen you haue done all these things that are commanded you say that you are vnprofitable seruants vve haue done that vve ought to doo True By our natiue condition we were bound to performe not only all these things that be now commaunded but whatsoeuer else it should haue pleased God to command and this we must alwaies confesse to preserue true humility in vs yet God hath bettered our estate through Christ and so ◅ighly aduaunced vs that we not only be Citizens or Saints but his sonnes and heires and thereby in case to deserue of him a heauenlie crowne speaker A. W. It hath no shew of reason in it that our Sauiour should teach his Apostles whom hee had truly freed that they should say they are vnprofitable seruants because they doe that which they were once bound to doe but now are not as if a man that was once bound to pay double custome because he was a stranger should count himselfe vnprofitable to the King though being absolutely freed he pay the same custome still because once forsooth he was by dutie to pay so much I would faine know what dutie we were bound to doe in our naturall estate from which wee are freed in our spirituall for to my seeming our bond is doubled both in equitie because we haue receiued so vndeserued kindnes and in Gods intent who hath giuen vs his grace that wee might doe him better seruice speaker A. W. And this is S. Ambrose exposition vpon the place That Ambrose giueth no such exposition his own words shall testifie Therefore saith Ambrose as thou doest not onely not say to thy seruant sit downe but requirest further seruice of him so neither doth God content himselfe with one work or labour of thine because while we liue we must alwaies work Therefore acknowledge thy selfe to be a seruant bound to very many seruices doe not extoll thy selfe because thou art called the sonne of God his fauour is to be acknowledged but thy nature not to be vnknowne neither bragge if thou hast serued well which thou wert bound to doe These are his words out of which no man can wring any such interpretation We owe seruice though we be sonnes for it is plaine Ambrose speaks of our seruice after we are regenerate First because he saith we must worke alwaies Secondly because he mentions hauing serued well which befalles no man in his naturall estate before grace speaker D. B. P. Saint Chrysostome pondering these words let vs say taketh it for a holsome counsaile for vs to say that we be vnprofitable seruants least pride destroy our good workes and then God will say that we be good and faithfull seruants as it is recorded Againe we may truly say when we haue done all things commaunded that we are vnprofitable seruants as venerable Bede our most learned countriman interpreteth Because of all that vve doe no cammoditie riseth vnto God our Lord in himselfe vvho is such an infinite ocean of all goodnesses that he vvanteth nothing Whereupon Dauid saith That thou art my God because thou standest in need of no good that I can doe speaker A. W. You should haue quoted the place Chrysostome in his homily vpon that chapter saith no such thing But wheresoeuer he saith it if he say it at all it cannot prooue that we are not bound to doe good seruice in the state of grace nor that wee can merit at Gods hands nor that you interpret S. Luke aright wherefore then is it alleaged Theophylact who followes Chrysostome euery where expounds it of our seruice after grace and concludes vpon it that we may not for the doing of any worke necessarily require reward or honour For it shall be of the Lords bountie if he bestow any thing vpon vs for it and woe be to vs if we doe not our dutie And Cyrill is wholy of the same opinion who also denies that which before you affirmed that subiects can deserue any
as you take them and as himselfe before had defined them but onely as good workes which the ancient writers oftentimes call merits not because they truly and wholy haue the nature of merits as Andradius speaks of them but for that they are not performed without labour on our part and shall haue reward on Gods part in heauen speaker D. B. P. But soone after like vnto a shrewd cowe ouerthrowes with his heele the good milke he had giuen before Renouncing all merittes in euery man sauing only in the person of Christ whose prerogatiue saith he it is to be the person alone in whom God is well pleased speaker A. W. This dealing of yours is more common with you than commendable He that meant plainly would take things as they lie as farre as reasonably he may and not draw matters out of diuers heads to confound the readers vnderstanding and hide the force of his aduersaries disputation But I must be faine to follow you though you follow not Master Perkins speaker D. B. P. Then he addeth that they good Protestants by Christs merits really imputed to them do merit life euerlasting Euen as by his righteousnes imputed vnto them they are iustified and made righteous To which I answere that we most willingly confesse our blessed Sauiours merits to be infinite and of such diuine efficacy that he hath not only merited at his Fathers hands both pardon for all faults and grace to doe all good workes but also that his true seruants works should be meritorious of life euerlasting speaker A. W. That our workes should bee accepted and rewarded of God our Sauiour hath merited but that being imperfect they should haue the true and whole nature of merit no infinitnes nor diuine efficacie can deserue or procure For it is a manifest contradiction that this or that work should haue need of pardon and yet fully satisfie the law of God and by that satisfaction deserue euerlasting life as wages at Gods hands speaker D. B. P. As for the reall imputation of his merit to vs we esteeme as a fained imagination composed of contrarieties For if it be really in vs why do they call it imputed and if it be ours only by Gods imputation then is it not in vs really speaker A. W. You make your selfe more worke than you need Master Perkins doth not say it is really in vs but really imputed to vs not as you trifle by a supposed imputation but in deed and truth wee being the members of Christ our head by faith in him speaker D. B. P. Further to say that he only is the person in whom God is vvell pleased is to giue the lie vnto many plaine texts of holy Scriptures Abraham vvas called the friend of God therefore God vvas vvell pleased in him Moses vvas his beloued Dauid vvas a man according vnto his ovvne hart God loued Christs Disciples because they loued him Briefly all the Christians at Rome vvere truly called of S. Paul the beloued of God And therefore although God be best pleased in our Sauiour and for his sake is pleased in all others yet is he not only pleased in him but in all his faithfull seruants speaker A. W. It is Christs priuiledge to be the person in whom God is fully pleased as in one who by his excellencie of nature being God euerlasting and man absolutely pure deserues his loue which all other men attaine to in their measure not by the merit but acceptation of their persons speaker D. B. P. Novv to that vvhich he saith that they haue no other meritte then Christs imputed to them as they haue no other righteousnesse but by imputation I take it to be true and therefore they do very ingenuously and iustly renounce all kind of merittes in their stayned and defiled vvorkes But let them tremble at that vvhich thereupon necessarily follovveth It is that as they haue no righteousnes nor merit of heauen but only by a supposed imputation so they must looke for no heauen but by imputation for God as a most vpright iudge vvill in the end repay euery man according to his vvorth vvherfore not finding any â—eall vvorthines in Protestants but only in conceipt his revvard shall be giuen them ansvverablie in conceipt only vvhich is euidently gathered out of S. Augustine vvhere he saith That the revvard caâ—… goe before the merit not be giuen to a man before be be vvorthie of it for saith he vâ—â—at vvere more iniust then that and what is more iust then God Where he concludeth that we must not be so hardly as once to demaund much Iesse so impudent as to assure ourselues of that crovvne before vve haue deserued it Seeing then that the Protestants by this their proctour renounce all such merit and desert they must needs also renounce their part of heauen and not presume so much as once to demaund it according vnto S. Augustines sentence vntill they haue first renounced their erronious opinions speaker A. W. We are really members of Christs mysticall bodie and so haue an interest in the reall imputation of his merits Beside wee haue also true though not perfect righteousnes inherent in vs good works in some poore measure sutable thereunto according to which we certainly looke for our reward of God not for the worthines of those workes but for his gratious acceptance of them and vs in Iesus Christ. So that we demaund not our reward before our worke which Austin after the phrase of the ancient calles merits but denie our worke to bee of such a value as mans pride would make it Now to requite your kindnes I beseech you by the mercies of God and the loue of Iesus Christ that you doe not lay claime to euerlasting life as the wages of seruants least it be denied you as an inheritance belonging to sonnes speaker W. P. That our doctrine is truth and theirs falshoode I will make manifest by sundrie reasons and then answere their arguments to the contrarie Our reasons The first shall be taken from the properties and conditions that must be in a worke meritorious and they are foure I. A man must doe it of himselfe and by himselfe for if it bee done by an other the merit doth not properly belong to the doer II. A man must doe it of his owne free-will and pleasure not of due debt for when wee doe that which wee are bound to doe wee doe no more but our dutie III. The worke must be done to the profit of an other who thereupon must bee bound to repay the like IV. The reward and the worke must be in proportion equall for if the reward bee more then the worke it is not a reward of desert but a gift of good will Hence followes a notable conclusion That Christs manhood considered apart from his Godhead cannot merit at Gods hand though it be more excellent euery way then all men and Angels For being thus considered it doth
no pleasure True for such Belly-gods and thâ—â— followers speaker A. W. What a bad practise and foolish question are these of yours Master Perkins saith that fasting of it selfe conferres no more to the obtaining of heauen then eating doth You leaue out the principall point in reporting his opinion and then you aske why the Niniuits fasted if eating be as acceptable to God you must adde of it selfe as fasting because though of it selfe it pleased not God yet as part of repentance it doth when it shewes humiliation and sorrow But they might haue fasted long inough without being humbled and haue bin neuer awhit the neerer for it But let it be granted that fasting did please God of it selfe as prayer doth will you thereupon conclude that therefore it satisfies Gods iustice Proue the consequence Iohn Baptist is described to haue liued vpon such meate as the place where he abode did ordinarily afford but it is not said that he vsed a thin diet much lesse is he commended for it as if the thing of it selfe had pleased God It was fit for him by the extraordinarie direction of Gods spirit to follow such an austere course of life not to satisfie for any punishment but to make the Israelites the more carefully attend so extraordinary a mans preaching The reward that God will giue to them that in priuate repent of their sinnes with fasting is not because fasting of it selfe pleaseth him but for that such fasting is part of their repentance speaker W. P. Thirdly and lastly almes deedes cannot be works of satisfaction for sinnes For when wee giue them as we ought wee doe but our dutie whereunto wee are bound And we may as well say that a man by paying one debt may discharge another as to say that by doing his dutie he may satisfie Gods iustice for the punishment of his sinnes These we confesse be fruits of faith but yet are they no workes of satisfaction but the onely and all-sufficient satisfaction made to Gods iustice for our sins is to bee found in the person of Christ being procured by the merit of his death and his obedience And thus our doctrine touching satisfaction is cleared and it is to be learned carefully of our common people because the opinion of humane satisfaction is naturall and sticks fast in the heart of naturall men Hereupon when any haue sinned and feele touch of conscience any way their manner is then to performe some outward humiliation and repentance thinking thereby to stop the mouth of conscience and by doing some ceremoniall duties to appease the wrath of God for their sinnes Yea many thinke to satisfie Gods iustice by repeating the Creede the Lords prayer and the tenne Commandements so foolish are they in this kinde speaker A. W. A man might suppose that this man were pretely well seene in Carolo Bussone that thus ruffleth in graue matters with his simple Similes If the similies were as simple as your answers to them a man should lose both his time and his labour to reade either of them shew their vnfitnes for the purpose if you can speaker D. B. P. That Almesdeeds redeeme our sinnes purge vs from them and make all things clean vnto vs hath bin already proued out of holy scriptures I will ioyne thereunto this one testimonie of that worthy Maityr Saint Cyprian Our frailtie could not tell vvhat to doe vulesse the goodnes of God by teaching vs the vvorkes of iustice and mercy had shevved vs a certaine vvay of preseruing our saluation which is that vvith Almesdeeds we might vvash cleane avvay the filth of sins vvhich vve had contracted after Baptisme The holie Ghost speaketh in the Scripture and saith Sinnes are purged by almesdeeds and saith speaker A. W. Cyprian intending to exhort all men to almes deeds is somewhat too farre caried with his earnestnes to perswade especiallie since he ascribes to it the purging of sin whereas it can reach no farther at the vttermost by your doctrine then to satisfie for the temporall punishment His proofe out of scripture is not there to be found for though your vulgar translation haue it yet it is not in the originall nor in your interlinear Bible nor in Montanus nor in the Chaldee Paraphrase nor in Vatablus The Greek seemes to haue had it added out of the Apocryphall speaker D. B. P. Now to M. Perkins Simile We deny that a man is bound to giue all the almes that he can We are bound to giue that which we may well spare when there is great want But almes which is a part of satisfaction is not giuen out of our superfluity but spared from our necessarie vses And is many times bestowed when there is no such great need vpon building Schooles Colledges Hospitals and Chappels And this may serue to answere M. Perkins Similes against these three workes of satisfaction If any man desire to know why wee make speciall reckoning of these three workes it is principally for two causes First we being to satisfie must performe it with such things as be our owne which be of three sorts either they belong to our soule or to our body or to our externall goods the goods of our mind we offer to God by prayer by fasting and other bodily discipline we exhibite vnto him A liuing hoast holy and pleasing God By Almesdeeds we make him an agreeable present of our goods Secondly all sinne as S. Iohn teacheth may be reduced to three principall heads The concupiscence of the flesh that is heacherie which is cooled by fasting and such like afflicting of the bodie Concupiscence of the eyes Couetousnes which is purged and chased away by almesdeeds And pride of life which is suppressed by humble prayer and often meditation of our owne miseries speaker A. W. When we giue almes as we ought saith Master Perkins we doe but our dutie You answer that we are not bound to giue all the almes we can Is this to gainsay him We are bound to spare euen from our necessarie vse when the necessitie of our brethren requires it He that hath no more meate than to fill his owne belly is bound to giue his brother part of it if he see him readie to starue As for other giuing when we cannot spare that wee giue and there is no necessitie it is so farre from being a satisfaction for old sins that it is a committing of new But whence comes this distinction It is not either in Cyprian or in Toby or that place thrust into the book of Toby And out of question it was not Daniels meaning that King Nebuchadnezzar should giue to the poore so that he should come into want himselfe by giuing Neither I thinke can you prooue it was our Sauiours meaning when he exhorted the Pharisies to almes deedes But doe you not perceiue that you marre all by this doctrine Who will giue any thing at his death to your Monasteries if he may not by
the least allowed by warrant out of the word of God in the scriptures or out of the light of true reason and the law of nature or out of Reuelation before the scriptures speaker D. B. P. The second point of our supposed consent is that Vowes vvere some part of Gods vvorship in Moses Law but are not so in the Gospell which vve also deny M. Perkins proues his assertion thus Vovves belonged to the ceremonies of Moses Lavv but all those Ceremonies are abolished by Christs Passion Ans. That Vovves in themselues vvere no part of the Ceremonies of Moses Lavv but true parts of the vvorship of God in all estates as vvell in the state of Nature and the Gospell as in Moses Lavv but this point M. Perkins handleth againe in the first point of our difference vvhere it shell be discussed Thirdly he saith that speciall Vovves may be made in the Nevv Lavv to performe some bodily exercise for some good end as to fast to taske our selues to prayer or study of holy Scripture and such like but many rules must then be obserued that vve Vovv an honest thing agreeable to Gods vvord this vve allow speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not say as you conceiue that all vowes belonged to the ceremonie of Moses law but that the vow of a ceremoniall duty in the way of seruice to God apperteined thereto whereof he brings two examples of the Nazarites and of the people generally at their choyse speaker D. B. P. Secondly that it be so made that it may stand vvith Christian liberty that is that it make not such things necessary in conscience vvhich Christian religion leaues at libertie This rule of his is flat repugnant to the nature of a Vovv and contrary to himselfe For he saith a little before that a Christian may Vovv Fasting Prayer almsdeeds I then demaund hauing Vovved these things is he not bound to performe them Yes or else he breakes his Vovv vvith vvhich God is highly displeased An vnfaithful promise displeaseth God Then is it manifest that all Vows do abridge vs of our libertie and make that vnlawfull for vs vvhich before our Vovv vvas lavvfull vvhich is so euidenâ— of it selfe that I maruaile vvhere the mans vvit and memorie vvas vvhen he vvrote the contrarie speaker A. W. He speaketh agreeably to the truth without any contrarietie to himselfe for the vow alters not the nature of the thing in it selfe but only layeth a dutie vpon the vower which also is so to be performed as that by the performance of it he be not alwayes depriued of his christian libertie but that vpon occasion he may do against his vow without any iust scruple of conscience for so doing though he haue vowed otherwise in generall speaker A. W. His other rules that a Vovv be made with good deliberation and with consent of our Superiours and not only of things possible but also of the better sort vve allovv for they are taken out of our Doctors See S. Thom. Your cotation is somewhat with the shortest naming nothing but the question so is also the determination of your DD. vpon it for although they graunt in generall that we must haue the consent of our superiors to vowing yet they exempt vs in this case from subiection as soone as we are out of our noneage and that they draw vs out of very quickly that a maide of 12. or 14. yeeres old may vow herselfe a Nunne and so a youth at 18. or 20 or perhaps sooner may vow himselfe a Frier without any consent of their parents yea directly contrary to their expresse will and commandement The dissent or difference speaker W. P. The points of difference betweene vs touching vowes are specially three I. The Church of Rome teacheth that in the new Testament wee are as much bound to make vowes as was the Church of the Iewes and that euen in externall exercises We say no considering the ceremoniall law is now abolished and wee haue onely two ceremonies by commaundement to bee obserued Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord. Againe wee are not so much bound to make or keepe vowes as the Iewes were because they had a commaundement so to doe and we haue none at all speaker D. B. P. First the Church of Rome saith M. Perkins teacheth that in the New Testament we are as much bound to make Vowes as was the Church of the Iewes we say no Considering that the Ceremoniall Law is now abolished and we haue only two Ceremonies by commaundement to be obserued for parts of Gods worship Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord. Ans. What is not your Holy-day seruice which you call diuine seruice any part of Gods worship in your owne opinions Can a publike assemblie instituted to honour God by prayer and thankesgiuing vvith externall ceremony of time place apparrell kneeling standing and sitting be no part of Gods worship In your irreligious Congregations assembled together against Christ and his Catholike Church be it so But admitting as you do your seruice to be good it could not truly be denied to belong vnto the worship of God speaker A. W. Whereunto belongs this idle question is it a ceremonie thinke you to assemble our selues for the seruice of God all outward seruice of God is not ceremoniall though the vse of it be in part to expresse our inward affection speaker D. B. P. But to the matter of difference you grow very carelesse in your reports of our doctrine for we hold that neither in the Old nor New law any man is bound to Vow but that it is and euer vvas a counsell and no commandement neuerthelesse a thing of great deuotion perfection in both states intrinsecallie belonging and much furthering the true worship of almightie God vvhich vve proue in this sort In a Vovv are two things the one is the good vvhich is Vovved called the materiall part as for example Fasting c. The other the promise it selfe made to God which is the forme the materiall parts do belong vnto their seuerall vertues but this promise and performance of it be substantiall parts of Gods vvorship For by promising of any good thing vnto God vve acknovvledge and professe that God is the soueraigne goodnesse it selfe and taketh great pleasure in all good purposes and determinations therefore to honor and vvorship him vve make that good promise Againe In performing that good seruice of God vve testifie that he is most maiesticall reuerend and dreadfull And consequently that all promises made to him are to be accomplished most diligently and without delay wherein vve honor and vvorship him as contrarivvise they do much dishonor him vvho breake vvith him as if he were of no better account then to be so deluded This thing in it selfe is so certaine and cleere that he vvho denies it must needs either be ignorant in the nature of a Vovv or not knovv wherin the true â—…orship of God consisteth for according
vnto the holy Scripture itself all good deeds done to the glorie of God be acts of the true vvorship of God And S. Anne did worship God by fasting and prayer And almes bestovved on Gods prisoners is called a sacrifice pleasing and acceptable vnto God And it is said to be a pure religion before God to visite Orphanes and vviddovves If then all other vertuous duties done to the glory of God be parts of his true worship much more Vovves vvhich by speciall promise dedicate a good deed to Gods honour they then being of their ovvne nature speciall parts of his true vvorshippe of God it follovveth necessarily that at all times they vvere and may be vsed to the true vvorship of God speaker A. W. If we be bound to vow in neither as indeed we are not yet are we as much bound in the one as in the other which is all Master Perkins saith But indeed as I conceiue hee meanes bound to it as a seruice of God Wee graunt that you say of a vow and withall confesse that it is a meanes of Gods seruice but not properly a part otherwise then all obedience whereby we glorifie God and all helps by which we fit our selues to obedience are parts of his worship But those actions onely are held to be properly the parts of his worship which are performed immediatly for seruice to him not vsed for the better performance of it speaker D. B. P. That they were in practise before Moses Law is euident by that Vovv which Iacob made of setting vp a stone which should be called the house of God and the paying the tenthes of all his goods Out of which Vow we also gather that God holdeth for agreeable any kind of good seruice offered vnto him out of our owne deuotion albeit he hath not commaunded it for no such thing as Iacob there Vowed was commaunded him but he being well assured that it would be wel taken by God which was offered of good will to his greater honor he Vowed it and is in holy Scripture commended for it speaker A. W. Againe that when S. Paul seemeth to disallow voluntary worship he must be vnderstood to speake either of erroneous or of friuolous and foolish things promised to God which do not properly serue to the setting forth of his honor Iacobs action was directed immediatly to Gods seruice not intended or vsed as a helpe to further him in the worship of God That which you gather out of his example is not warrantable by it vnlesse you restraine those words good seruice otherwise than you Papists commonly doe For it doth not follow that because God accepted of tâ—… vow therefore he will like whatsoeuer a man shall promise him so it be as he imagines to the greater honor of God The former of these two was in likelihood inioyned Adam by God and so continued among the true worshippers of God the latter is grounded vpon that principle that we must glorifie God in our soules bodies and goods though the manner be left free to euery mans discretion according to his abilitie and opportunitie but no man may conclude hereupon that God in his solemne worship allowes of whatsoeuer wee out of our deuotion inuent and appoint to serue him by That of Paul must needes be vnderstood of such things but such are all that are deuised by man to worship God by without warrant from the word of God either generally or particularly expresly or by necessarie consequence For all such seruing of God is worship depending wholy vpon the will of man and so will-worship The ceremonies of your Romish Church are generally foolish and ridiculous yea those in your Masse your Doctrines besides Scripture erronious as I shewed in the last article speaker W. P. But they alleadge to the contrarie the Prophet Esay cap. 19. 20. who speaking of the time of the Gospell saith the Egyptians shall know the Lord and shall vowe vnto him and keepe it I answere two waies first that the Prophet in this place expresseth and signifieth the spirituall worship of the new Testament by ceremoniall worship then vsed as hee doth also in the last chapter where he calleth the ministers of the new Testament Priests and Leuites Secondly we graunt the Church of the new Testament makes vowes vnto God but they are of morall and euangelicall duties which must not be left vndone and if vowing will indeede further them it is not to bee neglected And therefore so oft as wee come to the Lords Table wee in heart renew the vowe and promise of obedience And though vowes be made of thinges and actions indifferent yet are they not any parts of Gods worship which is the point to bee prooued speaker D. B. P. Now that Vowes should be frequented in the sâ—…e of the â—…pell besides the euidence of S. Pâ—… Voâ— and diuers other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—â—e Prophet Esay did foretell in thâ—se word◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrifice and gifts and they shâ—ll Voâ— Voâ—â—s 〈◊〉 ourâ—… To which M. Perkins answereth first that by such cereâ—… as thâ—n was in vse the Prophet doth expresse the spirituall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the new Testament This exposition is voluntary and nothing 〈◊〉 For what is more vild and absurd than â—o declare that Christians shal make no Vowes to say that they shall make Vovves as though one contrarie vvere fit or vvould serue to expresse the other This exposition being very vnmeete M. Perkins adioyneth a second that in the nevv Testament vve haue Vovves of Morall and Euangelicall duties but such are not any part of Gods vvorship â—o that first you shall haue no Vovves at all Secondly the vvind being changed you shall haue them but as no parts of Gods vvorship as though Morall and Euangelicall duties vndertaken and performed to Gods greater glory bee not the very synevves and substance of his seruice and vvorship speaker A. W. That S. Pauls vow maketh nothing for you Master Perkins hath shewed It is marueile you would name the example and not refute his answere Belike the truth of it was too euident And yet it had been no hard matter perhaps to finde as good a shift for that place as you haue for the other of Esay Master Perkins answered to it that the Prophet signifieth the spirituall worship of the new Testament by the ceremonies of the old then in vse and he prooues his interpretation by the Prophet himselfe who afterwards calles the Ministers of the new Testament Priests and Leuites which were offices and names proper to the old You slip ouer the reason and â—ell vs that it is vile and absurd to say that Christians shall make vowes to declare that they shall make none But the Prophet meanes to de from Senacherib The generall doctrine ensuing from it is this that we are to be thankefull to God when he hath deliuerd vs out of any extraordinary danger Your second reason is of lesse force for first