Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highlie rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Then that our Sauiour was Christ Math. 16 the Sonne of the liuing God And briefly let S. Iohn that great secretarie of the Holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell Ioh 20. These thinges saith he are written that you may beleeue that IESVS is CHRIST the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth very well saying Rom. 10. This is the word of faith which we preach for if thou cōfesse with thy mouth our Lord IESVS CHRIST and shalt beleeue in thy hart that God raised him from death thou shalt be saued And in an other place ◠Cor. 15. I make knowne vnto you the Gospell which I haue preached and by which you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vayne What was that Gospell I haue deliuered vnto you that which I haue receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures was buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the creede is that justifying faith by which you must be saued And neither in S. Paul nor any other place of Holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we applie Christs righteousnes to our selues assure our selues of our saluation is either a justifying or any Christian mans faith but the very naturall act of that ougly Monster presumption Which being layd as the very corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humility and deuotion can they build vpon it The second difference in the manner of justification is about the formall act of faith which M. PERKINS handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as shorte as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many actes of faith feare hope and charity doe goe before our justification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. PERKINS Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the hart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification This joylie description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authority that deliuered it and so let it passe as already sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of this owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hartes be the only sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needes no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would fayne know by the way how litle infants that can not for want of judgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his justice are justified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrary to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before the come to any vnderstanding But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M. PER. findes two faults with it one that we teach faith to goe before justification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both justified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Marry this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and bloud of Christ and is already passed from death to life Io. 6.54 I answere that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his body in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthely obtayneth thereby life euerlasting as Christ saith expressely in that place And so this proofe is vayne Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before justification first by that of S. Paul Whosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord Rom. 10. shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in whome they doe not beleeue how shall they beleeue without a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto justification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterwardes to call vpon God for mercy and finally mercy is graunted giuen in justification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and justification This S. Augustine obserued when he said Faith is giuen first De prede◠sanct ca. 7 De spirit lit cap. 30 by which we obteyne the rest And againe By the lawe is knowledge of sinne by faith we obtayne grace and by grace our soule is cured If we list to see the practise of this recorded in holy write read the second of the actes and there you shall finde how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were stroken to the hartes and beleeued yet were they not straight way justified but asked of the Apostles what they must doe who willed them to doe penance and to be baptized in the name of IESVS in remission of their sinnes then loe they were justified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their justification In like manner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philippe announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that IESVS CHRIST was the Sonne of God no talke in those dayes of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnes yet was he not justified before descending out of his chariot he was baptized Act. 8. And three dayes passed betweene S. Paules conuersion and his justification as doth euidently appeare by the historie of his conuersion Act. 9. The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the minde stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the hart many good spirituall motions But this sayes M. PERKINS is as much to say that dead men only helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned by Gods spirit may haue many good motions for as our spirit giueth life vnto our bodies so the spirit of God by his grace animateth and giueth life vnto our soules But of this it hath beene once before spoken at large in the question of free will Pag. 84. THE THIRD DIFFERENCE CONCERNING FAITH IS this The Papists say that man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as the feare of God hope loue c. The reasons which are brought to maintayne their opinion are of no moment well let vs heare some of them that the indifferent Reader may iudge whether they be of any moment or no. M. PERKINS first Reason
bookes of holy Scripture put together do contayne all necessary instruction Now then the argument followeth but some of those bookes of holy Scripture haue bene lost therefore some poynts of necessarie doctrine contayned in them are not extant in the written worde and consequently to be learned by Tradition M. P. answereth First supposing some of the bookes to be lost that all needfull doctrine which was in them is in some of the others preserued But why did he not solue the Argument proposed were then those bookes supersluous Doth the Holie Ghost set men to pen needelesse discourses which this answere supposeth Therefore he giues a second more shamefull that none be perished which is most contrary vnto the plaine Scriptures * 1. Paral. vlt. 2. Paral 9. as S. IOHN CHRYSOSTOM prooueth * Hom. 9. in Mat. E◠Hom. 7. in priorem ad Corinth where he hath these expresse words That many of the Propheticall bookes are lost may be prooued out of the historie of Paralipomeneon which they translate Cronicles Now as for M. P. gesses that some of them are yet extant but otherwise called some were but little rolles of Paper some profane and of Philosophie I holde them not worth the discussing beeing not much pertinent and avowed one in word onely without either any reason or authoritie M. P. His fourth objection of the Jewish Cabala is a meere dreame of his owne our Argument is this MOSES who was the Pen-man of the Olde Law committed not all to writing but deliuered certaine poynts needefull to saluation by Tradition nor any Law-maker that euer was in any Countrey comprehended al in letters but established many things by customes therefore not likelie that our Christian law should be all written That MOSES did not pen all thus we prooue It was as necessarie for women to be deliuered from Originall sinne as men Circumcision the remedie for men could not possible be applyed to women as euery one who knoweth what circumcision is can tell neither is there any other remedie prouided in the written law to deliuer women from that sinne Therefore some other remedie for them was deliuered by Tradition Item if the Childe were likely to die before the eight daie there was remedie for them as the most learned doe hold yet no where written in the Law Also many Gentils during that state of the Old Testament were saued as IOB and many such like according to the opinion of all the auncient Fathers yet in the Law or any other part of the Old Testament it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they should liue wherefore many things needefull to saluation were then deliuered by Tradition To that reason of his that God in his prouidence should not permit such a losse of any parte of the Scripture I answere that God permitteth much euill Againe no great losse in that according to our opinion who hold that Tradition might preserue what was then lost Now insteede of M. P. his fift reason for vs of milke and stronge meate wishing him a Messe of Pappe for his childish proposing of it I will set downe some authorities out of the written word in proofe of Traditions Our Sauiour said being at the point of his passiō * Ioh. 16.12 that he had many things to say vnto his Apostles but they could not as then beare them * Act. 10. Our Sauiour after his resurrection appeared often vnto his Disciples speaking with them of the kingdome of God of which little is written in any of the Euangelists * 1. Cor. 11 I commende you brethren that you remember me in all things and keepe the Traditions euen as I haue deliuered them to you * 1 Tim. 6. O TIMOTHY keepe the dispositum that is true which I deliuered thee to keepe * 2. Tim. 1 Hold fast by the holy ghost the good things committed vnto thee to keepe which was as S. CHRISOSTOM and THEOPHILACT expounde the true doctrine of CHRIST the true sence of holy Scriptures the right administration of the Sacramentes and gouernment of the Church To which alludeth that auncient holy Martir S. IRENEVS * Lib. 3. c. 4 saying that the Apostles layd vp in the Catholike Church as in a rich treasurie all things that belong to the trueth S. IOHN who was the last of the Apostles left aliue said * Epi. 3.13 that hee had many other things to write not idle or superfluous but would not commit them to inke and pen but referred them to be deliuered by word of mouth And to specifie for example sake some two or three poynts of greatest importance where is it written that our Sauiour the Sonne of God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of the same substance with his father Where is it written that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne aswell as from the Father Where is it written that there is a Trinitie that is three persons reallie distincte in one and the very same substance And that there is in our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS no person of man but the substance of God man subsisting in the second person of the Trinitie Be not all and euerie of these principall articles of the Christian faith and most necessarie to be beleeued of the learned and yet not one of them in expresse tearmes written in any parte of the holie Bible Wherefore wee must either admit Traditions or leaue the highest mysteries of our Christian faith vnto the discretion and courtesie of euerie wrangler as shal be more declared in the argument following The sixt and last reason for Traditions Sundrie places of holy Scriptures be hard to be vnderstood others doubtfull whether they must be taken liberally or figuratiuely If then it be put to euery Christian to take his owne exposition euery seueral sect will coyne interpretations in fauour of their own opinions so shal the word of God ordayned only to teach vs the trueth be abused and made an Instrument to confirme all errors To auoide which inconuenience considerate men haue recourse vnto the Traditions and auncient Records of the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and deliuered to the posteritie as the true copies of Gods word see the true Exposition and sense of it and thereby confute and reject all priuate and new glosses which agree not with those auncient and holy Comentaries So that for the vnderstanding of both difficult and doubtfull texts of Scripture Traditions are most necessarie M. P. His answere is that there is no such neede of them but in doubtfull places the Scripture it selfe is the best glosse If there be obserued first the analogie of faith which is the summe of religion gathered out of the cleerest places Secondly the circumstance of the place and the nature and signifycation of the wordes Thirdly the conference of place with place and concludeth that the Scripture is falsely tearmed the matter of strife it being not so of it selfe but by the
the working of grace by Gods spirit and the willing of it in man goe togither Yet in regarde of order grace is first wrought and mans will must first of all be acted and moued by grace and then it also acteth willeth and moueth it selfe And this is the last point of consent betweene vs and the Roman Church touching free will neither may we proceede farther with them Hitherto M. PERKINS Now before I come to the supposed difference I gather first that he yeeldeth vnto the principall point in controuersie that is freedome of wil in ciuill and morall workes in the state of corruption and all good works in the state of grace for in his first conclusion distinguishing foure estates of man he affirmeth that in the third of man renued or as we speake justified there is libertie of grace that is grace enableth mans will to doe if it please such spirituall workes as God requireth at his handes Yet lest he be taken to yeeld in any thing Pag. 16. he doth in shewe of wordes contradict both these points in an other place For in setting downe the difference of our opinions he saith that mans will in his conuersion is not actiue but passiue which is flat opposite vnto that which himselfe said a litle before in his first conclusion that in the conuersion of a sinner mans will concurreth not passiuely but is co-worker with Gods grace The like contradiction may be obserued in the other part of libertie in morall actions for in his third conclusion he deliuereth playnlie man to haue a naturall freedome euen since the fall of Adam to doe or not to doe the acts of wisedome Iustice Temperance c. Pag. 19. and proues out of S. Paul that the Gentils so did Yet in his first reason he affirmeth as peremptorily out of the 8. of Genesis that the whole frame of mans hart is corrupted and all that he thinketh deuiseth or imagineth is wholy euill leauing him no naturall strength to performe any part of morall dutie See how vncertayne the steps be of men that walke in darknes or that would seeme to communicate with the workes of darknes For if I mistake him not he agreeth fully in this matter of free will with the Doctrine of the Catholike Church For he putting downe the point of difference Page 1 saith that it standeth in the cause of the freedome of mans will in spirituall matters allowing then freedome of will with vs in the state of grace whereof he there treateth for he seemeth to dissent from vs only in the cause of that freedome And as he differeth from Luther and Caluin with other sectaries in graunting this liberty of will so in the very cause also he accordeth with Catholikes as appeareth by his owne wordes For saieth he Papists say mans will concurreth with Gods grace by it selfe and by it owne naturall power we say that Mans will worketh with grace yet not of it selfe but by grace either he vnderstandeth not what Catholikes say or else accuseth them wrongfully For we say that Mans will then only concurreth with Gods grace when it is stirred and holpen first by Gods grace So that Mans wil by his owne naturall actions doth concurre in euery good worke otherwise it were no action of Man But we farther say that this action proceedeth principally of grace whereby the will was made able to produce such actions for of it selfe it was vtterly vnable to bring forth such spirituall fruite And this I take to be that which M. PERKINS doth meane by those his wordes that the will must bee first moued and acted by grace before it can acte or will Hee mistooke vs thinking that we required some outward helpe only to the will to joyne with it or rather that grace did but as it were vntie the chaynes of sinne wherein our will was fettered And then will could of it selfe turne to God Luc. 10. Not vnderstanding how Catholikes take that parable of the man wounded in the way betweene Ierusalem and Ierico who was not as the Papists only say but as the holy Ghost saieth lefte halfe and not starke dead Now the exposition of Catholikes is not that this wounded man which signifieth all Mankinde had halfe his spirituall strength left him but was robbed of al Supernaturall riches spoyled of all his originall Iustice and wounded in his naturall powers of both vnderstanding and will and therein lefte halfe dead not being able of his owne strength either to know all naturall truth or to performe all morall dutie Now touching supernaturall workes because he lost all power to performe them not being able so much as to prepare himselfe conueniently to them he in a good sence may be likened vnto a dead man not able to moue one singer that way of grace Luc. 15. and so in holy Scripture the Father said of his prodigall Son he was dead and is reuiued Yet as the same sonne liued a naturall life albeit in a deadly sinne so mans wil after the fal of Adam continued some what free in actions conformable to the nature of man though wounded also in them as not being able to acte many of them yet hauing still that naturall facultie of free will capable of grace also able being first both outwardly moued and fortified inwardly by the vertue of grace to effect and doe any worke appertayning to saluation which is asmuch as M. PERKINS affirmeth And this to be the verie Doctrine of the Church of Rome Cap. 1. is most manifestlie to be seene in the Councell of Trent where in the Session are first these wordes in effect concerning the vnablenesse of man to arise from sinne of himselfe Euerie man must acknowledge and confesse that by Adams fall we were made so vncleane sinnefull that neither the gentils by the force of nature nor the Iewes by the letter of Moyses lawe could arise out of that sinnefull state After it sheweth howe our deliuerance is wrought and howe freedome of will is recouered in speciall and wherein it consisteth saying The beginning of iustification in persons vsing reason is taken from the grace of God preuenting vs through IESVS CHRIST that is from his vocation whereby without any desert of ours we are called that we who were by our sinnes turned away from God may be prepared by his grace both raising vs vp and helping vs to returne to our owne Iustification freely yeelding our consent vnto the said grace and working with it So as God touching the hart of man by the light of the Holy Ghost neither doth man nothing at all receiuing that inspiration who might also refuse it neither yet can he without the grace of God by his free will moue himselfe to that which is iust in Gods sight And that you may be assured that this Doctrine of the Councell is no other then that which was taught three hundred yeares before in the very middest of darknes as heretikes deeme
righteousnes shall be perfect and then without perhaps it shall be most perfect in heauen So that one part of this answere ouerthroweth the other Wherefore I need not stand vpon it but will proceede to fortifie our partie with some authorities taken both forth of the Holy scriptures and auncient Fathers The first place I take out of these wordes of S. Paul And these thinges certes were you 1. Cor. 6. Dronkers Couetous Fornicators c. But you are Washed you are Sanctified you are Iustified in the name of our LORD IESVS CHRIST and in the spirit of our Lord Here iustification by the best interpreters iudgement is defined S. Chrysos Ambro. Theophil in hunc locum Tit. 3. to consist in those actions of washing vs from our sinnes and of infusion of Gods Holy giftes by the holy Ghost in the name and the sake of CHRIST IESVS The like description of our iustification is in S. Paul Of his mercy he hath saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renuinge of the Holy Ghost whome he hath powred into vs abundantly through IESVS CHRIST our Sauiour that being iustified by his grace we may be heires in hope and not in certayntie of faith of life euerlasting Where the Apostle inferring that being iustified by his grace declareth that in the words before he had described the same iustification to consist in our new birth of Baptisme and the renewing of our soules by the infusion of his heauenly giftes which God of his mercy did bestowe vpon vs for his Sonne Christs sake Many other places I omitte for breuitie sake and will be content to cite fewe Fathers because the best learned of our aduersaries doe confesse that they be all against them as I haue shewed before First S. Augustine saith That this iustice of ours De peccat merit re miss cap. 15 Epist 85. Lib. 12. de Trinit cap 7. Lib. 6. de Trinit which they call righteousnes is the grace of Christ regenerating vs by the Holy Ghost And is a beautie of our inward man It is the renuing of the reasonable part of our soule And twenty other such like whereby he manifestly declareth our justice to be inherent and not the imputed justice of Christ Let him suffice for the Latin Fathers And S. Cyrill for the Greekes who of our iustification writeth thus The spirit is a heate who as soone as he hath powred charity into vs and hath with the fire of it inflamed our mindes we haue euen then obtayned iustice THE SECOND DIFFERENCE ABOVT THE MANner of Iustification WE all agree in generall that faith concurreth to our justification but differ in three poyntes 1. How faith is to be taken 2. How it worketh in our justification 3. Whether it alone doth justifie Concerning the first poynt Catholikes holde a justifying faith to be that Christian faith by which we beleeue the articles of our Creede and all other thinges reuealed by God The Protestants auerre it to be a particular faith whereby they apply to themselues the promises of righteousnesse and of life euerlasting by Christ This to be the true justifying faith M. PERKINS saith he hath proued already he shoulde haue donne well to haue noted the place for I knowe not where to seeke it but he will here adde a reason or twaine 1 Reason The faith whereby we liue is the faith whereby we are iustified but the faith whereby we liue is a particular faith whereby we apply Christ to our selues as Paul saieth Gal. 2.20 I liue that is spiritually by the faith of the sonne of God which faith he sheweth to be a particular faith in Christ in the wordes following Who hath loued me and giuen himselfe for me particularly Answere The Maior I admitte and deny the Minor and say that the proofe is not to purpose For in the Minor he speaketh of faith wherby we apply Christs merits vnto our selues making them ours in the proof S. Paul saith only that Christ died for him in particular He makes no mention of his apprehending of Christs iustice and making of it his owne which are very distinct thinges All Catholikes beleeue with S. Paul that Christ died as for all men in generall so for euery man in particular yea and that his loue was so exceeding great towardes mankinde that he would willingly haue bestowed his life for the redemption of one only man But hereupon it doth not followe that euery man may lay handes vpon Christs righteousnes and apply it to himselfe or else Turkes Iewes Heretikes and euill Catholikes might make very bolde with him but must first doe those thinges which he requires at their handes to be made pertakers of his inestimable merits as to repent them hartely of their sins to beleue and hope in him to be baptized and to haue a full purpose to obserue all his commaundements Which M. PER. also confesseth that all men haue not only promised Pag. 152. but also vowed in Baptisme Now because we are not assured that we shall performe all this therefore we may not so presumptuously apply vnto our selues Christs righteousnes life euerlasting although we beleeue that he died for euery one of vs in particular That which followeth M. PER. hath no colour of probability that S. Paul in this manner of beleefe that is in applying to himselfe Christs merits was an example vnto all that are saued 1. Tim. 1 16 Phil. 3.15 See the places good Reader and learne to beware the bolde vnskilfulnesse of sectaries For there is not a worde sounding that way but only how he hauing receiued mercy was made an example of patience M. PERKINS 2. Reason That which we must aske of God in prayer that we must beleeue shall be giuen vs but in prayer me must aske the merits of Christes righteousnesse to our selues ergo Answere Of the Maior much hath beene said before here I admitte it all due circumstances of prayer being obserued deny that we must pray that our Sauiour Christ Iesus merits may be made ours in particular for that were greatly to abase them but good Christians pray that through the infinite value of those his merits our sinnes may be forgiuen a justice proportionable vnto our capacity may be powred into our soules whereby we may leade a vertuous life and make a blessed end But it is goodly to beholde how M. PERKINS proueth that me must pray that Christs righteousnes may be made our particular justice because saith he We are taught in the Pater noster to pray in this manner forgiue vs our debts and to this we must say Amen which is as much to say as our petition is graunted I thinke the poore mans wits were gonne a pilgrimage when he wrote thus Good Sir cannot our sinnes or debts be forgiuen without we apply Christs righteousnes to vs in particular we say yes Doe not then so simply begge that which is in question nor take that for giuen which will
Moyses lawe but not without prouision of good workes issuing out of faith and the helpe of Gods grace as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits OF THE SECOND IVSTIFICATION THE fourth argument A man iust be fully iustified before he can doe a good worke and therefore good workes can not goe before iustification True not before the first justification of a sinner But good Sir you hauing made in the beginning of this last Article a distinction betweene the first and second justification And hauing before discussed the first and the second now remayning and expecting you why did you not say one word of it the matter being ample and well worthy the handling albeit you will not willingly confesse any second justification as you say Yet had it beene your part at least to haue disproued such arguments as we bring to proue a second justification Yee acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification But these degrees must be made downeward of euill worser and worst for if all our sanctification and best workes be like vnto defiled cloutes and no better then deadly sinnes as you hold and else where Pag. 76. let any wise man judge what degrees of goodnes can be lodged in it Againe how absurd is that position that there is but one justification whereby they take fast hold on Christs righteousnes which can neuer after be either loosed or increased Why then doe you with your brother Iouinian maintayne that all men are equally righteous If it so be Lib. 2. con Iouin Epist 81. Epist 57. Hom. 15. in Ezech. let him that desireth to see you well coursed read S. Hier. S. Amb. S. August S. Greg. At least we must needes vphold that a man is as just and righteous at his first conuersion as at his death how Godly a life soeuer he lead against which I will put downe these reasons following First that of the reuelations Let him that is iust be yet iustified or as your text hath it Cap. 22. He that is righteous let him be more righteous and that of feare not to be iustified euen vntill death Eccles 18. doe conuince that there are more justifications then one and that a man may increase in justification and righteousnes vntill death Which is confirmed where it is said That the path of a iust man proceedeth Prob. 4. as the light doth vntill it be perfect day Which is degrees more more And S. Paul teacheth the same where he saith to men that giue almes plentifully 2. Cor. 9. That God will multiply their seede and augment the increases of the fruits of their iustice Further S. Iames doth most effectually proue this increase of righteousnes and the second iustification in these wordes Abraham our father was he not iustified by workes offering Isaac his Sonne vpon the Aultar Cap. 2. That he speaketh of the second iustification is euident for Abraham was iustified before Isaac was borne as it is most manifest by the Scripture it selfe and by that heroicall act of not sparing his onely entirely beloued Sonne Genes 15. Rom. 4. his iustice was much augmented And the Apostle himselfe seemeth to haue forseene all our aduersaries cauillation and to haue so longe before preuented them First that common shift of theirs that this worke was a signe or the fruit onely of his faith and no companion of it in the matter of iustification is formally confuted for the holy Ghost speaking distinctly of both his faith and worke and joyning them both in this act of justification attributeth the better part of it vnto his worke thus Seest thou that faith did worke with his workes and by the workes the faith was consummate and made perfect Which he doth after fitly declare by a similitude comparing faith to the body and good workes to the soule which giue life and lustre to faith otherwise faith is of litle value estimation with God Which S. Paul also teacheth at large among other speeches including this That if he should haue all faith and wanted charity 1. Cor. 13 he were nothing And comparing faith charity together defineth expresly that charity is the greater vertue Which charity is the fountayne of all good workes And so by this preferring these workes of charity before faith he doth stop the other starting hole of the Protestants that Abraham forsooth was justified before God by onely faith but was declared just before men by his workes For if God esteeme more of charity then of our faith a man is more justified before God by charity then by faith Againe in the very place where this noble fact is recorded to shew how acceptable it was to God himselfe it is said in the person of God Gen. 22. Nowe I knowe that thou louest me and to conuince all obstinate cauilling is it not said that his faith did in this very fact cooperate with his workes and that the worke made his faith perfect which conjunction of both of them together doth demonstrate that he speaketh of his justification before God adding also That he was therefore called the friend of God Which could not haue beene if thereby he had beene only declared just before men thus doth S. Augustine reconcile the two places of the Apostles S. Paul S. Iames which seeme contrarie S. Paul saying that a man is iustified by faith without workes and S. Iames that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely That S. Paul speaketh of workes which goe before faith such as we of our owne forces without the helpe of grace are able to doe and such he saith not to deserue our first iustification But S. Iames disputeth of workes which followe faith and issue out of our soules nowe garnished with grace and such he holdeth vs to be iustified by that is made more and more iust See the place He saith directly L. 83. quest q. 76. Serm. 16. de verb. Apos that we are iustified and that this justice doth increase whiles it doth proceede and profit Nothing then is more certaine and cleare then that there our justification may daylie be augmented and it seemeth to me that this also bee graunted in their opinion For they holding faith to be the only instrument of justification cannot deny but that there are many degrees of faith it is so plainely taught in the worde O yee of little faith Math. 8. Luc. 19. And then a little after I haue not founde so great faith in Israell And O Lord increase our faith and many such like where many different degrees of faith are mentioned How then can the justification which dependes vpon that faith not be correspondent vnto that diuersity of faith but all one Pag. 54. Againe M. PERK deliuereth plainly That men at the first are not so well assured of their saluation as they are afterward If then in the certainty of their saluation which is the prime effect of their
Father bestowes a farme vpon his Son freely Who may by often presenting his Father of the pleasing fruits growing on the same deserue his further fauour Yea he may by the commodities reaped out of that farme buy any thing that it shall please his father to set to sale as well as if he had neuer receiued the farme from his fathers gift Which is so common a case and so sensible that euery man of meane witte may easely reach vnto it euen so by good manuring the giftes which God freely bestoweth vpon vs we may both merit the increase of them and according to his owne order and promise purchase thereby the kingdome of heauen which is plainely proued by that parable Mat. 25. Of the talents giuen by a King to his seruants the which they imploying well and multiplying were therefore esteemed worthy of farre greater and withall to be made pertakers of their Lordes joyes M. PERKINS then was not a little ouerseene to put for the first propriety of merit that it must be donne by a man and of a man himselfe The second That a man must doe it of his owne free will and pleasure and not of due debt carrieth in shewe an opposition but in deede there is no contradiction in it for a man may and euery honest man doth of his owne free will and pleasure pay his due debt but let vs pardon the disorder of wordes his meaning being nothing else but that the payment of that which is otherwise due debt cannot be any meritorious worke to which S. Augustine doth answere in these wordes Serm. 3. de verb Apost O great goodnesse of God to whome when we did owe seruice by condition of our estate as bond-men doe to their Lord yet hath he promised againe and againe the rewarde of friendes In which there is couched a comparison which being laide in the light will much helpe to the vnderstanding of this matter He that hath a slaue or bond-man may lawfully exact of him all kinde of seruice without any wages Bread and a whippe saith a Philosopher serue for a slaue Now suppose the Master to be soueraigne gouernour of a state then if it please him to make his man free and withall a member of his common weale the same man by performing many good offices to the state may justly deserue of his prince as great rewarde and promotion as any other of his subjects and yet may his Lord and olde Master say trulie to him all this that thou hast donne or couldst doe is but due debt vnto me considering that thou wast my bond man so fareth it with vs in respect of God all that we can doe is due debt vnto him because he hath made vs and endowed vs with all that we either be or haue yet it hath pleased him as a most kinde Lord to set vs at liberty through Christ and to make vs Citizens of the Saints and as capable of his heauenly riches as the Angelles if wee will doe our endeuour to deserue them and whereas hee might haue exacted all that euer we could doe without any kinde of recompence yet hee of his inestimable goodnesse towardes vs doth neither binde vs to doe all we can doe and yet for doing that little which he commaundeth hath by promise bound himselfe to repay vs a large recompence by which wee may well vnderstand those wordes of our Sauiour Luke 17. When you haue donne all these thinges that are commaunded you say that you are vnprofitable seruantes we haue donne that we ought to doe True By our natiue condition we were bounde to performe not only all these thinges that be now commaunded but whatsoeuer else it should haue pleased God to commaund and this we must alwaies confesse to preserue true humility in vs yet God hath bettered our estate through Christ and so highly aduaunced vs that we not only be Citizens of the Saints but his sons and heires and thereby in case to deserue of him a heauenly crowne and this is S. Ambrose exposition vpon the place S. Chrysostome pondering these wordes 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 Mat. 25. vers 21. Againe we may truly say when we haue donne all thinges commaunded that we are vnprofitable seruants as venerable Bede our most learned countriman interpreteth Because of all that we doe In Luc. 17. no commodity riseth vnto God our Lord in himselfe who is such an infinite ocean of all goodnesses that he wanteth nothing Whereupon Dauid saith That thou art my God because thou standest in neede of no good that I can doe Psal 15. And thus we fall vpon the third property of M. PERKINS meritorious worke Which is That it be donne to the profit of another and say that albeit God in himselfe receiue no profit by our workes yet doth he in the administration of his holy common weale the Church wherein good mens seruices doe much pleasure him Andin this sence is it said of S. Paul That by cleansing our selues from wicked workes 2. Tim. 2. Math. 5. Ioh. 15. v. 8. we shall become vesselles sanctified and profitable vnto our Lord. Againe God is glorified by our good workes That seeing your good workes they may glorifie your father which is in heauen Finally God doth reioyce at the recouery of his lost children Luke 15. If then good men trauayling painefully in Gods Vine-yarde doe yeelde him outwardly both honour joy and commodity that may suffice to make their worke meritorious M. PERKINS fourth property is That the worke and rewarde be equall in proportion If he vnderstande Arithmeticall proportion that is that they be equall in quantity to witte the one to be as great or of as long continuance as the other then we deny this kinde of equality to bee requisite to meritte there is another sort of proportion called by the Philosopher S. Athic Geometricall and the equality of that is taken by a reasonable correspondence of the one vnto the other as when a good office is giuen vnto a Citizen of desart it may be that the honour and commodity of the office is farre greater then was the meritte of the man yet he being as well able to discharge it as another and hauing better deserued it is holden in true justice vvorthy of it In like manner in a game where masteries are tryed the prize is giuen vnto him that doeth best not because the value of the rewarde is just as much worth as that act of the man who winneth it but for that such actiuity is esteemed worthy of such a recompence Now the crowne of heauenly glory 1. Cor. 9. is likened by Saint Paul vnto a Garland in a game where he saith That we all runne but one carrieth away the prize And He that striueth
person of the good Father Luc. 15. Doe on him that is on his prodigall sonne returning whome his former garment His second proposition is also false as hath bin proued at large in a seueral question To that of S. Iames although it belong not to this matter I answere that he who offendeth in one is made guiltie of all that is he shall be as surely condemned as if he had broken all Epis 29. ad â—lieron See S. Augustine His 5. reason We are taught to pray on this manner Giue vs this day our dayly bread where we acknowledge euery morsell of bread to be the meere gift of God much more must we confesse heauen to be Answere M. PERKINS taketh great delight to argue out of the Lords prayer but he handleth the matter so handsomely that a man may thinke him to be so profouÌ„dly learned that he doth not yet vnderstand the Pater noster for who taketh our daylie foode to be so meerely the gift of God that we must not either make it ours with our peny or trauaile we must not looke to be fedde from heauen by miracle by the mere gift of God but according vnto S. Paules rule either labour for our liuing in some approued sort or not eate Yet because our trauailes are in vaine vnlesse God blesse them we pray to God daily to giue vs our nuriture either by sending or preseruing the fruits of the earth or by prospering our labours with good successe or if they be men who liue of almes by stirring vp the charitable to relieue them So we pray and much more earnestly that God will giue vs eternall life Yet by such meanes as it hath pleased God to ordayne one of which and the principall is by the exercise of good workes which God hath appointed vs to walke in to deserue it And it cannot but sauour of a Satannicall spirit to call it a Satannicall insolency as M. PERKINS doth to thinke that eternall life can be merited when S. Augustine and the best spirit of men since Christs time so thought and taught in most expresse tearmes But let vs heare his last argument which is as he speaketh the consent of the auncient Church and then beginneth with S. Bernard who liued 1000. yeares after Christ He in I knowe not what place the quotation is so doudtfull saith Those thinges which wee call merittes are the way to the Kingdome but not the cause of raigning I answere that merittes be not the whole cause but the promise of God through Christ and the grace of God freely bestowed on vs out of which our merittes proceede Which is Bernards owne doctrine Serm. 68 in Cantica Manuali c. 22. Secondly he citeth S. Augustine All my hope is in the death of my Lord his death is my meritte True in a good sence that is by the vertue of his death and passion my sinnes are pardoned and grace is bestowed on me to doe good workes and so to meritte 3. Basil Eternall life is reserued for them that haue striuen lawfully In Ps 114. not for the meritte of their doing but vpon the grace of the most bountifull God These wordes are vntruly translated for first he maketh with the Apostle eternall life to be the prize of that combate and then addeth that it is not giuen according vnto the debt and just rate of the workes but in a suller measure according vnto the bounty of so liberall a Lord Where hence is gathered that common and most true sentence That God punisheth men vnder their deserts but rewardeth them aboue their merittes 4. M. PERKINS turnes backe to Augustine vpon the Psal 120. Where he saith as M. PERKINS reporteth He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne giftes not thy merittes Answere S. Augustine was to wise to let any such foolish sentence passe his penne What congruity is in this He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne giftes not thy merittes It had beene better said He crowneth thee not c. But he mistooke belike this sentence of S. Augustines When God crowneth thee he crowneth his giftes not thy merittes Which is true being taken in that sence which he himselfe declareth To such a man so thinking that is De grat l b. arb c. 6. that he hath merittes of him selfe without the grace of God it may be most truly said God doth crowne his owne giftes not thy merittes If thy merittes be of thy selfe and not from him but if we acknowledge our merittes to proceede from grace working with vs then may we as truly say that eternall life is the crowne and reward of merittes Psal 142. His other place on the Psalme is not to this purpose but appertaynes to the first justification of a sinner as the first word quicken and reuiue mee sheweth playnelie nowe wee confesse that a sinner is called to repentance and reuiued not for any desert of his owne but of Gods meere mercy Hauing thus at length answered vnto all that M. PERKINS hath alleaged against merittes Let vs see what can be said for them following as neare as I can M. PERKINS order Obiections of Papists so he tearmeth our reasons First in sundry places of Scripture promise of reward is made vnto good workes Genes 4. Prouer 11. Eccles 18. Math. 5. If thou doe well shalt thou not receiue To him that doeth well there is a faithfull rewarde Feare not to be iustified vnto death because the rewarde of God remayneth for euer and. When you are reuiled and persecuted for my sake reioyce for great is your reward in heauen And a hundreth such like therefore such workes doe meritte heauen for a reward supposeth that there was a desart of it M. PERKINS answereth first that the reward is of meere mercy without any thing donne by men But this is most apparantly false for the Scripture expresseth the very workes whereof it is a reward Againe a reward in English supposeth some former pleasure which is rewarded otherwise it were to be called a gift and not a reward and much more the Latin and Greeke word Misos Merus which rather signifie a mans hier and wagis then a gift or rewarde Wherefore M. PERKINS skippes to a second shift that forsooth eternall life is an inheritance but not a reward Reply We knowe well that it is an inheritance because it is onely due vnto the adopted Sonnes of God but that hindreth not it to be a reward for that it is our heauenly fathers pleasure that all his Sonnes comming to the yeares of discretion shall by their good carriage either deserue it or else for their badde behauiour be disinherited M. PERKINS hauing so good reason to distrust his two former answeres flies to a third and graunteth that eternall life is a reward yet not of our workes but of Christs merits imputed vnto vs This is that Castle wherein he holdes himselfe safe from all Canon shotte but he is fouly abused for this
all paine due to it The reason for vs which indeede is the very ground worke of satisfaction may thus be framed many after pardon obtayned of their sinnes haue had temporall punishment laide vpon them for the same sinnes and that by Gods owne order wherefore after the forgiuenes of the sinne and the eternall punishment of it through Christs satisfaction there remayneth some temporall paine to be endured by the party himselfe for the same sinne which is most properly that which we call satisfaction They deny that any man hath beene punished temporally for any sinne which was once pardoned we proue it first by the example of the Israelites whose murmuration against GOD Numb 14. was at Moyses intercession pardoned yet all the elder sort of them who had seene the miracles wrought in Egipt for their deliuerance were by the sentence of God depriued of the sight of the Land of promise and punished with death in the wildernesse for the very same their murmuration The like judgement was giuen against Moyses himselfe and Aaron for not glorifying God at the waters of contradiction Numb 20. Deut. 32. both of them had their sinne pardoned yet were they both afterward for the same debarred from the entrance into the holy land To this M. PERKINS answereth first that man must be considered in a two folde estate as he is vnder the lawe and as he is vnder grace In the former estate all afflictions were curses of the lawe in the latter they are turned vnto them that beleeue in Christ from curses into triales corrections preuentions admonitions instructions and into what you will else sauing satisfaction Now to the purpose Whereas God saith he denied the beleeuing Israelites with Moyses and Aaron to enter into the land of Canaan it cannot be proued that it was a punishment or penalty of the lawe laide vpon them the Scripture hath no more but that it was an admonition vnto all ages following to take heede of like offences as Paul writeth All these thinges came vnto them for examples 1. Cor. 10. and were written for our admonition Reply He that will not be ashamed of this audatious assertion needes not to care what he saith Hath the Scripture no more of their fact then that it was an admonition to others Turne to the originall places where the whole matter in particular is related First their murmuration then Moyses intercession for them and the obtayning of their pardon and lastly after all the rest Gods sentence of depriuation of them from entring into the land of promise for that their murmuration Numb 14. Numb 20. vers 24. Deut. 32.51 Againe Aaron shall not enter into the land because he hath beene disobedient to my voyce and of Moyses Because he hath trespassed against me at the waters of strife So that nothing is more cleare euen by the testimony of the holy Ghost then that their dayes were shortened and their hope of entrance into the land of promise cutte off in punishment of those offences which were before forgiuen them And these things being recorded as S. Paul testefieth for our admonition and instruction we are to learne thereby that God so dealeth daiely with all those sinners that he calleth to repentance Now to the next example which M. PER. maketh our third reason King Dauid was punished for his aduoultry after his repentance for the child died 2. Reg. 12. and was plagued in the same kinde of incest by Absolon And when he had numbred the people 2. Reg. 24. he was after his owne repentance punished in the death of his people M. PERKINS answereth that the hand of God was vpon him after his repentance but those judgementes which befell him were not curses to him properly but corrections of his sinnes Reply What dotage is this to graunt the very same thing which he would be thought to denie but yet in other tearmes that the simple whome onely he can beguile may not perceiue it If the hand of God were vpon Dauid correcting him for his sinne and that after his repentance did not Dauid then suffer temporall punishment for his sinnes before forgiuen Which is most properly to satisfie for them Yea ouer and beside this punishment inflicted by God he of his owne deuotion performed farre greater satisfaction by putting on sacke-cloath lying one the bare ground by watering his couche with teares and making ashes his foode and in this most pittifull plight he made most humble supplication vnto God to wash him more and more from his iniquity he neuer dreamed that this his satisfaction should be any derogation vnto the satisfaction of his Lord and Sauiour Psal 50. but in the Psalme saith That such an humble and contrite hart is a sweete sacrifice vnto God We denie not but the punishing of one is a warning admonition vnto an other to take heede of the like so may not they deny but that correction is to the party himselfe as an admonition to beware afterward so a correction punishment of the fault past Psal 50. Which S. Augustine vpon this verse of the Psalme Thou hast loued truth teacheth most playnelie saying Thou hast not left their sinnes whome thou didest pardon vnpunished for thou before didest so shewe mercy that thou mightest also preserue truth thou doest pardon him that confesseth his fault thou doest pardon him but so as be doe punishe himselfe and by that meanes both mercy truth are preserued Our fourth reason the Prophetes of God when the people were threatned with Famine the Sword the Plague or such like punishmentes for their sinnes did commonly exhort them to workes of penance as fasting prayer haire-cloath and the like to appease Gods wrath justly kindled against them which being performed by them God was satisfied So for example sake the Nimuites at Ionas preaching doeing penance in sacke-cloath and ashes turned away the sentence of God against them M PERKINS answereth that famine the plague and such like scourges of God were not punishments of sinnes but corrections of a Father Reply This is most flat against a thousand expresse textes of the Scripture which declare that for the transgressions of Gods commaundements he hath sent those punishments vpon the people of Israell And what is the correction of a Father but the punishing of a shrewde sonne for some fault committed yet in a milde sorte Or doth the Schoolmaster which is Caluins example whippe the Scholer or strike him with the ferula but to punish him for some fault So that great Rabbins seeme not to vnderstand what they say them selues when they admitte those scourges of God to be the corrections of a Father but not the punishment for a fault As though Fathers vsed to correct those Sonnes who neuer offended them Or Masters to beate such Scholers as committe no faultes But saith M. PERKINS these punishments be tending to correction not seruing for satisfaction what senceles ryming is this By due correction of
the fault the party is satisfied in justice and when he that hath offended doth abide such punishment as the grieuousnes of his offence did require there is both due correction of the offendour and due satisfaction vnto the party offended M. PERKINS finally flieth vnto his old shift of imputatiue satisfaction that forsooth our sufferinges doe not satisfie but the party punished by faith layeth hold on the satisfaction of the Messias and testifie the same by their humiliation and repentance Reply As we first graunt that all satisfaction hath his vertue from the grace of God dwelling in vs which is giuen vs for Christs sake so to say that Christs satisfaction taketh away all other satisfaction is just to begge the principall point in question and therefore an old triuants tricke to giue that a finall answere which was set in the beginning to be debated looke vpon the forenamed example of the Niniuites of whome it is not certayne that they had any expresse knowledge of the Messias and therefore were farre enough off from laying hold on his satisfaction But most certayne and euident it is in the text that God vpon the contemplation of their workes of penance tooke compassion on them and was satisfied as by turning away the threatned subuertion is most manifest Our fift reason Daniell giueth this counsaile to Nabuchodonosor Daniell 4. Redeeme thy sinnes with almes and thy offences with mercy on the poore If by such good deedes our sinnes may be redeemed as Holy write doth testifie then it followeth that such workes yeelde a sufficient satisfaction for them for redemption signifieth a full contentment of the party offended as well as satisfaction M. PERKINS answereth The skilfull in the Caldey teach that the word importeth rather a breaking off then redeeming Reply To Authours in the aire without any pressing of the propriety of the word no answere can be giuen but let vs admitte that it be broken off â—iâ— sinne not being couetuousnes but pride and lacke of acknowledging all Kingdomes to depend vpon God as the text it selfe doth specifie To breake off this sinne by almes and compassion of the poore is nothing els but by such workes of charity in some sort to satisfie Gods justice there to moue him to take compassion of him And that by almes deedes we are cleansed from our sinnes our Sauiour himselfe doth teach saying Luc. 11. Giue almes and behold all thinges are cleane vnto you Our sixt Bring forth the worthy fruits of penance Math. 3. Luc 3. That is doe such workes as become them who are penitent Which as Saint Chrysostome expoundeth are He that hath stolen away another mans goodes Hom. 10. in Math. let him nowe giue of his owne he that hath committed fornication let him abstayne from the lawfull company of his owne wife and so forth Recompensing the workes of sinne with the contrary workes of vertue Hom. 10 in Euang. In Psal 4. The same exposition giueth Saint Gregory and to omitte all others venerable Bede interpreteth them thus Mortifie your sinnes by doeing the worthy fruits of penance to witte by afflicting your selues so much for euery offence as worthy penance doth require which will be a sacrifice of iustice that is a most iust sacrifice To this M. PERKINS answereth that this text is absurd for the word repent signifieth onely chaunge your mindes from sinne to God and testifie it by good workes Reply His answere is most absurd for we argue out of these wordes Worthy fruits of penance And he answereth to the word going before repent which we vse not against them and for his glose or testifying our repentance is sufficiently confuted by the Fathers before alleadged And S. Iohn expresly maketh them the meanes to escape the wrath of God saying that the Axe was set to the roote of the Tree and vnlesse by worthy fruits of penance they appeased God they should be cut vp and cast into hell fire and seemeth to confute the laying hold on Christs satisfaction by faith saying it will not helpe you to say that yee are the Sonnes of Abraham who was Father of all true beleeuers as much as if he had said trust not to your faith hand off yee generation of vipers For notwithstanding yee be the Sonnes of the faithfull vnlesse ye amend your liues and for the euill workes which yee haue donne heretofore make recompence and satisfie the justice of God with good yee shall be cast into hell fire 2 Cor. 7.10 The 7. objection with M. PERKINS Paul setteth downe sundry fruits of repentance whereof one is reuenge whereby repentant persons punish themselues to satisfie Gods iustice for the temporall punishment of their sinnes M. PERKINS answereth A repentant sinner must take vengeance of himselfe and that is to vse all meanes to subdue the corruption of nature and to bridle carnall affections which kinde of actions are restraynements properly but no punishments directed against the sinne but not against the person Reply I neuer saw any writer so contradict himselfe and so dull that he doth not vnderstand his owne wordes If this subdueing of our corrupt nature be restraynements onely from sinne hereafter and not also punishments of sinne past how then doth the repentant sinner take vengeance of him selfe which you affirme that he must doe Reuenge as euery simple body knoweth is the requitall of euill past We graunt that all satisfaction is directed against sinne and not against the person but for the great good of the man albeit that for a season it may afflict both his body and minde too as Saint Paules former Epistle did the Corinthians but this sorrowe being according vnto God doth much benefit the person as the Apostle declareth For besides this reuenge taken on himselfe to appease Gods wrath it breedeth as it is in the text following in our corrupt nature that loueth not such chastisement A feare to returne to sinne least it be againe punished for where there is no feare of paynes and much pleasure thither our corruption will runne headlong It sturreth vp also in vs Indignation against sinne and all the wicked instruments of it A defence and clearing of our selues with the honester sort And an emulation and desire to flie as farre from sinne as other our equals and consequently A loue of vertue and honest life which freeth vs from that sorrowe and all other troublesome passions all which are playnelie gathered out of the same text of Saint Paul Lastly sayeth M. PERKINS They make three workes of satisfaction Prayer Fasting and Almesdeedes For the first it is meere foolishnesse to thinke that a man by prayer can satisfie for his sinnes it is all one as if you had said that a begger by asking an almes can deserue the almes or a debtor by requesting his creditor to pardon his debt should thereby pay his debt That Prayer doth appease Gods justice and obtayne pardon God him selfe is witnes saying Call vpon mee in the
giuen any credit vnto the Apostles doctrine vnlesse by S. PETER and the other Apostles it had bene first examined and approoued * Tertal li. 4. in M rc Hierom. ep 89. que est 11. inter ep Augustinâ— August lib 28. cont faâ—st c. 4 Againe when there arose a most dangerous question of Abrogating MOSES Lawe Was it left to euerie Christian to decide by the written Worde Or would many of the faithful beleeue S. PAVL that worthie Apostle in the matter Not so but vp they went to Ierusalem to heare what the Pillers of the Church would saye Where by the decree of the Apostles in counsell the controuersie was ended Which S. PAVL afterward deliuered in his Preaching commanding all to obserue and keepe the decree and ordinance of the Apostles * Act. 16. And if it would not be tedious I could in like maner shew how in like sort euery hundreth yeere after errors and heresies rising by misconstruction of the written Word they were confuted and rejected not by the written Worde onely but by the sentence and declaration of the Apostles Schollers and successors See Cardinall BELLARMINE * Tom. 1 lib 3. cap 6 I will onely recorde two noble examples of this recourse vnto Antiquitie for the true sense of Gods word The first out of the Ecclesiasticall Historie * Lib. 11. cap. 9 whereof Saint GREGORY NAZIANZEN and Saint BASIL two principall lights of the Greeke Church this is recorded They were both noble men brought vp together at Athens And afterwarde for thirteene yeeres space laying aside all profaine bookes imployed their studie wholie in the holy Scriptures The sense and true meaning whereof they sought not out of their owne Iudgement and presumption as the Protestants both doe and teach others to doe but out of their Predecessors writings and authoritie namelie of such as were knowen to haue receiued the rule of vnderstanding from the Tradition of the Apostles These be the verie wordes The other example shall be the principall pillar of the Latine Church S. AVGVSTINE who not only exhorteth aduiseth vs to follow the decree of the auncient Church if we will not be deceiued with the obscuritie of doubtful questions * Lib. cont Crescon cap. 33. but plainely affirmeth That he would not beleeue the Gospel if the authoritie of the Church did not mooue him vnto it * Cont. ep fund c. 5. Which words are not to be vnderstood as Caluin would haue them that S. AVGVSTINE had not bene at first a Christian if by the authoritie of the Church hee had not bene thereunto perswaded but that when he was a learned and Iudicious Doctor and did write against Heretikes euen then he would not beleeue these bookes of the Gospell to haue bene penned by diuine inspiration and no others and this to be the true sense of them vnlesse the Catholike Church famous then for antiquitie generallity and consent did tell him which and what they were So farre was he off from trusting to his owne skill and judgement in this matter which notwithstanding was most excellent This matter is so large that it requireth a whole question but being penned vp within the compasse of one objection I will not dwell any longer in it but here fold-vp this whole question of Traditions in the authorities of the auncient Fathers out of whom because I haue in answering M. P. and else-where as occasion serued cited alreadie many sentences I will here be briefe S. IGNATIVS the Apostles Scholler doth exhort all Christians * Euseb lib 30.36 To sticke fast vnto the Traditions of the Apostles some of which he committed to writing POLICARPVS by the authoritie of the Apostles words which he had receiued from their owne mouthes confirmed the faith full in trueth and ouerthrew the Heretikes * Ibid. lib 5 cap. 20. S. IRENEVS who imprinted in his heart Apostolicall Traditions receiued from POLICARP sayeth * If there should be a controuersie about any meane question ought wee not to runne vnto the most auncient Churches in the which the Apostles had conuersed and from them take that which is cleere and perspicuous to define the present question For what if the Apostles had not written any thing at all must we not haue followed the order of Traditions which they deliuered to them to whom they deliuered the Churches ORIGEN teacheth that the Church receiued from the Apostles by Tradition to baptize Infants * Rom. 6 ATHANASIVS sayeth e Lib. de decret Nâ—caeni conâ— We haue prooued this sentence to haue bene deliuered from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers but ye O new Iewes and sonnes of Caiphas what Auncestors can ye shew of your opinion S. BASIL hath these words * De Spâ— Sanct. c. 2 We haue the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church partly written and part we haue receiued by Tradition of the Apostles in mysterie both which be of the same force to godlinesse and no man opposeth against these who hath at the least but meane experience of the Lawes of the Church See GREGORY NAZIANZ Orat. 1. in Iulian. Because I haue cited alreadie some of the Latine Auncient Doctors Insteede of the rest I will recorde out of them in a worde or two how olde rotten Heretikes vsed alwaies to reject vnwritten Traditions and flie wholy vnto the written worde See the whole booke of TERTVLLIANS prescriptions against Heretikes which principally handleth this verie poynt The same doth IRENEVS witnesse of the Valentinians and Marcionis * Lib. 3. c. 2 The Arrians common song vnto the Catholikes was I will not admit to be read any words that are not written in the Scriptures as witnesseth S. HILARY in his booke against CONSTANTIVS the Emperour against whom he alleadgeth the preaching of the Apostles and the authoritie of the auncient Bishops expressed in his liuely colours S. AVGVSTINE some thousand two hundreth yeeres agoe recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now-a-daies in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first booke against him in the beginning If thou shalt saith this Heretike bring any thing out of the Scriptures which is common to all wee must needes heere thee but these wordes which are without the Scriptures are in no sorte to bee receiued of vs when as the Lorde himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine doe they worship me teaching commandements and precepts of men How S. AVGVSTINE opposed against them vnwritten Traditions hath ben afore declared The like doth S. BERNARD affirme of certaine Heretikes of his time called * Hom. 62 Cantica Apostolici So that most truely it may be concluded that euen as we Catholikes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by worde of mouth aswell as that which is written Euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their