of God And he gave them that liberty will you call that a hearing of Prayer Then say That hearing of Prayer is not an Act of Grace but of Vengeance for a liberty of doing mischief doth of it self tend to nothing but to the increase of damnation He that seriously considers Prayer to be an elevation of the soul to God will not easily allow it to be an engagement of the soul to the Devil 3. As for Gods hearing the good desires of naturall men that is also in my weak apprehension another exception against this generall Rule God heareth not sinners rather then an exposition of it So far am I from thinking that Aquinas intended to expound this rule by turning it into a question and much further was I from saying That he made a sufficient exposition of it For I must look upon all naturall men as God looks upon them that is as sinners so saith the Text most expresly God looked down from heaven upon the children of men to see if there were any that did understand that did seek God Every one of them is gone back they are altogether become filthy there is none that doth good no not one Psalm 53. 2 3. which is alledged by Saint Paul as a proof that both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin Rom. 3. 9 10 11 12. That is They are all under sin as they are in themselves or as naturall men And therefore as such that is As naturall men or as sinners God heareth them not Hitherto I think the generall Rule is not expounded but excepted and though naturall men may in some respects have good desires yet as such I do not see how they can have good prayers Good desires may be from nature but good prayers are only from grace 4. You may take to your self what liberty you please in some other opinions but scarce in this because it may easily be made destructive of true Christianity For every Christian Divine is bound not only to believe but also to profess That none can properly be said to Pray but only a Christian. And that no Christians prayers whatsoever he be are heard by vertue of his own but only by vertue of Christs intercession The Catholick Church having taught us the belief of both these doctrines by her constant obsecration in all her prayers Through Jesus Christ our Lord And the Holy Ghost having taught it his For no man can say that Jesus is the Lord much less our Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 12. 3. And he must not only say Our Lord but also Our Father that will truly pray that is he must draw near to God in the acknowledgement of Christs Communion and through the Faith of Christs intercession Our Father which art in heaven teacheth us both these Truths In that we call God Father we profess that we pray through his eternall Sons intercession for till he reconciled us we were enemies not children In that we call him Our Father we profess that we pray in his eternall Sons Communion who did graciously teach us to call him Ours because he had made him so Nor can any man say to God Our Father who knows not Christ nor any man that knows Christ truly say it but in that Communion whereof Christ is the Head If nature doth teach men to pray in faith of Christs intercession and in the acknowledgement of Christs Communion saying Through Jesus Christ our Lord then without doubt God may hear the Prayers which proceed from naturall men But if nature doth so indeed then am not I so much bound as I think and willingly acknowledge to Christ and his Church for teaching me to pray so And I had rather disown that is not embrace any mans opinion then disown the least part of my obligation to Christs Catholick Church which doth by me as Saint Paul did by the Galathians travaileth in birth of me till Christ be formed in me that I may offer to God such Prayers as proceed not from my nature but from his Grace and that not through my self but through Jesus Christ our Lord. And much more am I bound not to disown my obligation to my blessed Saviour by whose Grace I am enabled to pray and for whose sake God doth hear my Prayers In the merit of whose unspotted righteousness I offer and present my impure person in the righteousness of whose all-sufficient intercession I offer and present my imperfect prayers before the throne of the heavenly Grace as often as with my heart and not only with my lips I say unto my God Our Father which art in heaven For though men may number their prayers by their repetitions and by their beads yet surely God numbereth them by their sighs and by their grâ—…ans And it were to be wished that all men did likewise so number them having such an heavenly attention in their prayers as to be with Christ and such an heavenly affection as to be in Christ since it is requisite they should have their hearts in and with him in praying whose mediation they desire to have with their Prayers CAP. II. Of Priests Marriage 1. POpe Siricius blamed for speaking dishonourably of marriage and some Papists after him 2. To say that Priests marriage hath been forbidden by the Apostles or the Catholick Church is to accuse both of approving the doctrine of Devils 3. Christ allows of Priests marriage 4. The Popes of Rome did not attempt to forbid it till Siricius his daies 5. The Apostles neither taught nor decreed against it 6 For Priests to marry is not contrary to the Churches precept 7. Nine Popes of Rome the sons of married Bishops Priests and Deacons some in Europe some in Africa some in Asia shew that marriage was lawfull for all those orders of Clergy men in the Catholick Church till near nine hundred years after Christ. That the Prohibition thereof in the Church of Rome was not till the year 1074. by Pope Gregory the seventh 8. The second Canon of the second Council of Carthage rightly interpreted forbids Priests only the use of their marriage at some special feasts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being rendred secundum priora propria statuta speaks for the truth of the Greek Copies before the Latine The Pope in need of a Provinciall Councill to support his Decree 9. Abrahams being married a good instance for Priests marriage who need look for no better then his righteousness 10. God saying of all It is better to marry then to burn the Church may not gainsay it of Priests 11. The Trullane Fathers blame the Romanists aboout Priests Marriage yet their Canons confirmed by Pope Adrian who in this thwarts Siricius 12. Saint Paul allowed marriage to prevent the danger and not only the guilt of fornication The Church bound to follow his doctrine 13. Saint Pauls thorn in the flesh his poenall afflictions not his sinfull motions or his tribulations not his temptations in the flesh 14. Marriage better allowed
id est secundum desiderium peccati in hoc non exauditur à Deo ex miserico diâ Sed quandoque ad vindictam quia Deus quaedam negat propitius quae concedit iratus Now Sir if Saint Thomas in that 16. Article approved of by you hath made a sufficient exposition of the blind mans words I do not see but Saint Augustine hath done the same The Answer HE that teacheth men to live righteously teacheth them to pray continually even to lift up holy hands and holy hearts to him that dwelleth in the heavens But sin must be poured on t of the soul before the soul can truly be poured out in prayer For in vain is Holiness in the mouth whiles wickedness is in the heart in vain are we Saints in our expressions whiles we are Sinners in our affections and in our actions in vain do we think of multiplying our prayers whiles we resolve to multiply our sins for that is not to ask God forgiveness of sins past but to ask him leave of future sinning So little reason is there for our eyes to be dazled at seeing that Truth which the born blind man could not but see God heareth not sinners John 9. 31. For there needs no other light to see the Sun withall but it s own And this being a Proposition so clear as to be known by its own light may very well stand for its own exposition But concerning Saint Augustines gloss it is thus at large in his own Tract for both Aquinas whom I alledged and Maldonat whom you alledge cite it imperfectly Adhuc inunctus loquitur nam Peccatores exaudit Deus si enim Peccatores Deus non exaudiret frustra ille Publicanus oculos in terram dimittens pectus suum percutiens diceret Deus propitius esto mihi peccatori He is yet blind whiles he speaketh this for God doth hear sinners for if God did not hear sinners in vain did the Publican fix his eye upon the ground and strike his hand upon his breast saying God he mercifull to me a sinner And surely this is not an Exposition but an Exception upon that generall rule given in the Text God heareth not sinners For it is resolved into this sense God heareth not a sinner as a sinner but only as a Penitent such as was the Publican when God heard him Which though it be an admirable doctrine yet is it delivered there by Saint Augustine as an Exception against not as an Exposition upon the blind mans words and was clearly so intended by him For it is certain that Saint Augustine was of the contrary perswasion and did believe that God doth hear sinners since himself professeth this belief Lib 1. Retr c. 3. Nec illud mihi placet quòd quùm dixissem Summa opera danda est optimis moribus mox addidi Deus enim noster aliter nos exaudire non poterit benè autem inventis facillimè exaudiet Sic enim dictum est tanquam Deus non exaudiat peccatores quod quidam dixit in Evangelio sed ille qui nondum cognoverat Christum Nor doth that please me that when I had said we must labour above all things to live vertuously I presently added for else our God cannot hear us but he will easily hear us if we live well For that was so spoken as if God did not hear sinners which a certain man said in the Gospel but he which yet knew not Christ. Now Sir look upon my words again and do not think I have mistaken Saint Augustine but rather that you have mistaken me and heaped up a company of heterogeneous quotations against me as if I had mistaken my self whereas all my guilt is that I did not follow Saint Augustines opinion because I took Peccatores in a stricter sense then he did not for those who unwillingly were under the infection but for those who willingly were under the dominion of sin Wherein however I did no more then Aquinas had done before me for whereas Saint Augustine thought it was not a true Proposition God heareth not sinners Saint Thomas said it was if the word Sinners were taken properly as it ought in every exposition for so is his ingenuous profession Quamvis possit verificari si intelligitur de peccatore in quantum est peccator per quem etiam modum oratio ejus dicitur execrabilis Though it may be made true if we understand it of a sinner as a sinner for so his prayer is called abominable He relates to Prov. 28. 9. He that turneth away his ear from Hearing the Law even his prayer shall be an abomination Oratio ejus erit execrabilis saith the Latine so that this is a most undoubted Truth not only made known to us by the light of nature as I formerly asserted but also by the light of Grace and the two conveyances of that light the Old and the New Testament that God heareth not sinners And it is more fully explained in the Old then in the New as are generally those Truths which the Law preacheth whose office it was to terrifie and frighten men into obedience for it is much more to say God will abominate or hate his prayer then to say God will not hear it 2. Now Sir if this be the generall rule God heareth not sinners as sinners t is clearly an exception of this rule to say He heareth sinners as Penitents since that gloss is not properly an Exposition but an Exception which changeth the originall sense and meaning of the Text as a sinner into no sinner that God may hear him And yet here will be found or must be made a greater change of the Text then this to make your ensuing allegations so many severall expositions and not rather so many severall exceptions or at least so many severall descants or variations upon this Rule For then we must put audit for non audit and say not hearing doth signifie hearing and so turn a negative proposition into an affirmative that we may expound it Truly Sir in my poor judgement it is safer and better to say God heareth the Sin not the Prayer when he heareth the sinner only in Anger That this is rather Gods not hearing then his hearing whiles he continues in his anger and mans not praying then his praying whiles he continues in his sin For I fear if I say otherwise I shall be forced to grant That God did once hear the Devils prayers since I find they besought him that He would not send them away out of the Countrey There 's such a kind of sinners praying and he suffered them to enter into the â—…rd of swine There 's such a kind of Gods hearing Mark 5. 10. They besought our blessed Saviour for a liberty to do mischief will you call that praying Then say Prayer may be without nay against Religion for how full may factious mens mouthes be of such prayers whiles their hearts are empty of faith and of the fear
but me doth likewise say Thou shall invocate no other but me because invocation is the most proper and the most publick acknowledgement and worship of God For Invocation is required by the first though it is regulated by the third commandement That enjoyns the object and internal affection this only enjoyns the manner and the external expression Therefore Call upon me in the day of trouble Psal. 50. 15. belonging to the affirmative Call not upon any besides me doth belong to the negative precept in the first Commandement since these two are contraries and contraria sunt sub eodem genere posita contraries must be ranked or reckoned under one and the same Head For in vain doth your Cardinal seek to excuse bad words in prayers from the good sense or meaning of him that prays non agitur de verbis sed de sensu verborum Bell. l. 1. de sanct Beat. c. 17. because as a right intention in our prayers is required by the first so also a right expression in our prayers is required by the third Commandement God requirlng us no less to honour his Name by right words and professions in the One then to honour his Nature by right intentions and affections in the other For as we may not honour God with our lips whiles our hearts are far from him So neither may we dishonour him with our lips whiles our hearts are near him For as the one makes us Hypocritical so the other makes us blasphemous worshippers As the one is directly against the internal so the other is directly against the external Act of Religion as the one is against the morality of the first so the other is against the morality of the third Commandement But of this I have spoken elsewhere of purpose to justifie the Religion established and professed amongst us for which so many Orthodox Divines have lately lost their livelyhoods by Protestants and pray they may not come to lose their lives by Papists because I was there bound to shew the irreligion that I found not only in Faction which hath no Liturgie but also in superstition which hath corrupt Liturgie Justif. of the Church of England cap. 3. sec. 3. there you might have seen more work made for you upon the grounds of conscience then you have here made for me only upon the grounds of contention Thither if you please you may go for more of this argument but before you go take this Question along with you not Where was this your Religion of praying to Saints before Luther but where is it now For it is not in any of Gods Commandements concerning Religion nay 't is plainly against them all 'T is against the first in having a false Object and false internal acts of Religion against the second in having a false external act or manner of Religion by way of adoration against the third in having a false external act or manner of Religion by way of invocation or of Praise and Profession As it is not according to Gods Commandements so it cannot be Piety or Religion as 't is against Gods Commandements so 't is moreover impiety and irreligion Therefore boast not any longer of the general profession and practice of this or any other corrupt part of your Religion which you cannot justifie in its substance For 't is a miserable Religion which is to be found only in its exercise according to the purport of the fourth and not also in its substance according to the purport of the three first Commandements A Religion in its Name not in its Nature in its solemnity not in its purity in its followers not in it self That is in one word A Religion not of Gods but of mans making 12. To such a Religion belongs â—…hat Prayer Maria mater gratiae mater misericordiae Tu nos ab hoste protege horâ mortis suscipe which yet your Cardinal boldly imputeth to the universal Church sic loquitur ecclesia universa lib. 1. de Sanct. Beat. cap. 19. though its language speak only the Church of Rome and its rythme speaks only the late and corrupt ages of that Church and its irreligion doth in truth speak no Church For that is no Church whereof Christ is not the Head And he is not the Head of that Church which prayeth to such as he did not pray And he did never pray to his Mother but only to his Father teaching us o say Our Father not Our Mother whâ—…ch art in Heaven We cannot say the words of this Prayer in his Communion we cannot obtain the blessing oâ—… it by his intercession therefore if we wâ—…l â—…e his Church we must put this prayer oâ—… of our meutâ—…es because we dare not put it into His We have no pattern 〈◊〉 sâ—…ch prayers in all the Book of God and 〈◊〉 we can find better Patterns then God hath given we are bound to â—…ollow those of his giving or we shall leave his 〈◊〉 â—…oly Communion and lose his Soâ—…s blessed â—…ntercession in our prayers â—…or as we are sure the eternal Son of God hath â—…ot taught us thus to pray so we may be assured he will not he cannot 〈◊〉 us in this Prayer Esto mihi in Deum Protectorem Psal. 31. 4. will not agree with this Tu nos ab hoste protegeâ—… In maÌ„us tuas coÌ„mendo spirituÌ„ meuÌ„ will not agree with this Et horâ mortis suscipe why should I leave the Communion of Gods eternal Son either in not saying the one or in saying the other For I may no more now venter to have Religion then I may hereafter hope to have a salvation out of his Communion And though it be more like a Heathen then a Christian to say If it be a question of words and of names and of your Law Acts 18. 15. for words are to be regulated in the exercise of Religion according to Gods Law by vertue of the third Commandement no less then thoughts by vertue of the first Gestures by vertue of the second and Deeds by vertue of the fourth yet is that saying very unfitly applyed in the defence of this Prayer For this is as formal an Invocation of the Blessed Virgin as if she were God Calling her the Mother of Grace and Mercy and praying her to protect us in our life and to receâ—…ve us at our death And who can say more then this to God putting but Father instead of Mother who can ask more then this of God This is in effect to say Mater de coels Dea instead of Pater de coelis Deus miserere nobis miseris peccatoribus O blessed Mother of God instead of O God the Father of Heaven have mercy upon us miserable sinners And we ought to say Libera nos Domine Good Lord deliver us not so much in regard of any other evil and mischief as in regard of such Letanies Therefore this Invocation of the Mother of God is faulty in Objecto cultus in modo colendi both in the object
of my heart prove me and examine my thoughts look well if there be any way of wickedness in me and lead me this day and ever in the way ever lasting Ps. 139. 'T is an excellent observation of Abulenâ—…is Dicitur quod loquutus est Deus ne tantum beneficium vel tantus actus quantus est dare legem attribueretur Angelo ne crederent se Judaei obligatos Angelis Tost in Exod. 20. q. 1. It is said God spake all these words at the giving of the Law least if such a great blessing had been attributed to an Angel The Jews might think themselves obliged to the Angels The Jews might not think themselves obliged to the Angels for giving the Law and may Christians pray to them for assistance in keeping it If so how will you answer your own Baronius An. 60. n. 19. Quòd praecipuos Episcopos appellet Angelos planè significat instar hominum Angelos hominibus ministrare nec tantae esse excellentiae ut quae divina sunt iisdem tribuantur The Spirit of God in giving the Title of Angels to the chiefest Bishops doth plainly shew that as men so Angels do minister unto men and are not of so great excellency as that we should ascribe to them those things which belong to God All the world cannot say more against your daily prayer to your Guardian Angel He ministers to you no otherwise then your Bishop enlightning you Instrumentally by propounding directing applying heavenly thoughts to your understanding not efficiently by infusing or increasing them And by this reason you may no more invocate him for Illumination then you may your Bishop for he is not of so great excellency that you should ascribe to him those things which belong to God Till you can say of him that he hath opened the eyes of your body to receive the Light of nature how can you say to him Open the eyes of my Soul to rereive the light of Grace Till you can say of him he hath enlightned the darkness of the night how can you say to him Enlighten the darkness of mine understanding The Centurion had many servants under him and they all did come and go as he bade them to do any Acts of favourable assistance to the Jews should therefore the servants have the thanks and honour that was due unto their master I find that when Lazarus died he was carried by the Angels into Abrahams bosome yet I do not find that Lazarus said to his Guardian Angel who doubtless was one of them that carried him Into thy hands do I commend my spirit nor do I see how you can say so to yours unless you can also say unto him For thou hast redeemed me O Lord thou God of truth and if you cannot commend your Soul to your Guardian Angel when you die how can you commend your Soul to him whiles you live You may say with St. Stephen Lord Jesus receive my Spirit when it is to be carried to him by the Angels for they minister to this Lord But you cannot say Lord Jesus receive my Prayers when they are given or offered to his Angels for they are not fellow-sharers in his Lordship And this instance alone is enough to answer all your objections which you have gathered out of my ejaculations but if not you may take another The Psalmist saith The Angel of the Lord tarrieth round about them that fear him and delivereth them yet he saith not O Taste and see how gracious the Angel of the Lord is But O Tast and see how gracious the Lord is blessed is the man that trusteth in him Ps. 34. 7 8. My Guardian Angel is a ministring Spirit for my comfort but my God alone is an al-sufficient Spirit for my content None but he can give the Spiritual gust taste of a blessed immortality to my Soul who hath made it immortal and since my prayers are the chiefest means to procure this spiritual gust or Taste to my Soul how shall I pray to them who cannot give it I desire my Religion may be to me the beginning of my Salvation for so is Grace the inchoation of Glory and therefore cannot delight in such prayers as will not give my Soul the Antipast of eternity that is in such prayers as do not bid me say unto my self O Taste and see how gracious the Lord is because they do not ascend up so high as the Lord For prayer being a spiritual colloquy with him to whom we pray why should I pray to an Angel which probably may not be present to partake of this colloquy and indeed cannot partake of it if it be meerly spiritual that is only in the heart or if he could why should my heart leave conversing with God to converse with his Servant Is not this to undervalue that happiness which I can not deserve should not desert nay is it not to undervalue prayer to make it the depression of the Soul to the Creature which God hath appointed for the elevation of the Soul unto himself What though one Angel destroyed 185000. Assyrans may we therefore say unto him Remember not our iniquities nor the iniquities of our forefathers neither take thou vengeance of our sins And if we may not pray to Angels for the averting of Judgements then sure not for the obtaining of mercies since God useth them as his instruments for the one as well as for the other If we may as you infer humbly pray them to do those good offices for us which God hath appointed them we may also humbly pray God to give us leave to sin against Him in our Prayers for to break his Commandement is to sin against Him and he hath expresly commanded saying Call upon me in the day of trouble Psal. 50. 15. In that he hath said Call upon me he hath also in effect said Call not upon any of my Angels for that is not to call upon me Therefore dare I not pray to Angels for fear of bringing Judas his curse upon my prayers of whom it was said Let his prayer be turned into sin Ps. 109. v. 7. For if my prayer be turned into sin how will my sin be turned into Repentance or my repentance be turned into mercy and forgiveness If my prayer end in sin how will my sin not end in damnation your own Clement the 8. that corrected your Latine Translation which was of much longer standing in your Church then any of your corrupt devotions will rise up against you in Judgement if you will needs continue still in these corruptions For if he reformed your Bibles why should not you reform your Breviaries CHAP. VI. Of Justification 1. THe way of Truth in the Doctrine of Justification by Faith made dangerous by mens debates slippery by mens devices yet the truth it self never to be subverted or suppressed 2. The danger of not walking circumspectly in this way by taking either faction or phansie for faith 3. Gods Seers or Ministers above all are to
teach it so humane reason cannot so well defend it and doth so much the worse oppose it nor do I see how these arguments can be answered unlesse they can be denyed nor how they can be denyed â—…ince they are so exactly agreeable with the Analogy of the text and therefore cannot disagree from the Analogy of Faith Many arguments have been used by excellent Divines drawn out of several places of the holy Scriptures which have been agreeable with the Analogy of Faith though not with the Analogy of the text and they have passed for good Theological arguments because they have been agreeable only with the Analogy of Faith how much rather should those arguments be taken for Theological which are agreeable not only with the Analogy of faith in the doctrine they prove but also with the Analogy of the Text in the manner of their proof And surely if all Divines did more use this way of arguing they would have much lesse of Contention and much more of Conscience in their arguments you have here shewed me this good way and I was very glad to see it and as willing to follow it for in all this Paragraph you have quoted nothing but Scripture all the fault is you have made unwarrantable inferences from your quotations 9. For first you say Here are works required to justifie as well as Faith because St. Paul saith we wait for righteousnesse by Faith which worketh by love Gal. 5. 5 6. He saith the Faith by which we are justified is a Faith working by love you thence inferre that we are justified by our works as well as by our Faith you may as well say because our eyes wherewith we see are in our heads we see with or by our heads as well as with or by our eyes or because our hands wherewith we handle are joyned to our armes we handle with our armes as well as with our hands for as the eye that is out of the head seeth not and as the hand that is parted from the arme handleth not so Faith that is without works justifieth not yet have works no more to do in justifying than the head hath in seeing or the arme hath in handling 10. Again you say Charity is greater than faith and must therefore needs have the greater influence in our justification I cannot see the reason of this consequence no more than of that a lyon is greater than a Hare therefore he must needs run faster If the Apostle had spoken of justification and had said Charity was greater than Faith your consequent would have been good but speaking not at all of justification your consequence cannot be good concerning that but must be made good concerning somewhat else viz. concerning those other things whereof he speaketh as particularly concerning those admirable acts of suffering not envying not vaunting bearing all things beleeving all things hoping all things enduring all things to which the soul is disposed by Faith but in which it is confirmed and perfected by charity or concerning the everlasting duration and continuance of Charity for that shall never fail but shall go with us into heaven and abide there with us for ever because that very motion of the soul in the fruition of God wherein consisteth eternal blessednesse is an act of Charity But Faith being of things not seen must needs vanish when we come to see God face to face by a clear vision and Hope being of things not enjoyed must needs vanish when we come to enjoy him by a full and immediate comprehension only Charity which in this life outpasseth Faith and Hope by more immediately uniting the soul to God shall in the next life out-passe it selfe when it shall taste the incomparable sweetnesse and enjoy the immortal comforts and feel the incomprehensible delights and joyes of that union In these respects which are named 't is most true that Charity is greater than Faith but not in respect of justification which is not named unlesse you will say the Apostle put more in the Conclusion than in the Premises nay though it should be granted that the Apostle doth not here speak comparatively but positively or else that Charity is greater than Faith yet will it not follow that Faith may not be greater than Charity in some one respect as particularly in this of justification for though Charity be the more noble in it selfe yet Faith is the more needful for us Charity may have the absolute preeminence in regard of its excellency and yet Faith may have a comparative preeminence in regard of its use Charitie may be the greater in regard of innocent men who can stedfastly and comfortably see God as he is in himselfe but Faith must be the greater in regard of sinful men who cannot see God as he is in himself either stedfastly because of their weaknesse or comfortably because of their sinfulnesse and therefore must look on him as he is in his Son who took upon him our weaknesse to give us his strength and our sin to give us his righteousnesse so far is it from a true consequence Charitie is greater than Faith must needs therefore have the greater influence in our justification 11. You have yet one more Quotation to prove justification by works and that is Rom. 2. 13. Not the hearers of the law there is Faith are just before God but the doers of the law there are good works shall be justified here I cannot question your inference which you do not make but I must question your interpretation which you have made For this place only sheweth that both Jewes and Gentiles might justly be condemned because both had sinned against the knowledge which God had given them of his law but it doth not shew how either might be justified yet you have interpreted it of Justification and by your interpretation have laid a kind of slurre and reproach upon Faith saying Not the hearers of the law there is Faith as if Faith were placed in the ear busied only in the hearing of the law not considering that Faith is the gift of God the most precious gift that ever he gave to sinful man excepting his Son in and for whom he gives it and that the gifts of God are to be received with our thankfulnesse unlesse we would have them recalled and reversed with his repentance for since we cannot deserve them if we will not highly prize them we shew our selves unworthy of what we have and make our selves uncapable of having more Come sir I will speak plainly that I may speak honourably of so great a gift If Faith be not in our hearts Christ is not there for he dwelleth in the heart by Faith Ephes. 3. 17. and if Christ be not in our hearts we can neither have good words in our mouths nor good works in our hands for out of the abundance of the heart as the tongue speaketh so also the hand acteth therefore pray le ts have no more of this Divinitie not
the hearers of the law there is Faith for what can any sacrilegious Enthusiast say more who robs God of mens hearts in regular and sound prayers to place all Religion in the ear sure there were many hearers of St. Pauls Sermon for it was preached on the Sabbath and in a place where prayer was wont to be made Act. 16. 13. who heard more than the law for they also heard the Gospel yet only one Lydia for ought we know was judged faithful unto the Lord and the text gives this reason of her Faith whose heart the Lord opened that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul Therefore the hearers of the law have not Faith but the doers of it at least in vote and desire i. e. those who labour to do it yet they when they have done all are taught to say we are unprofitable servants we have done that which was our duty to do Luk. 17. 10. Their doings cannot fully reach the obligation of their duty and how can they be a satisfaction for their undutifulnesse All their works of righteousnesse when they have laboured to do all those things which are commanded and as they are commanded them will leave them unprofitable and much more must their works of unrighteousnesse make them unacceptable so that you have only supposed a false Faith in the hearers of the Law not disprov'd Justification by Faith in the doers of it for he that saith not the hearers of the Law are just before God but the doers of the Law shall be justified doth not thereby suppose much less averre any men to be so compleat doers of the Law as to rely upon their good deeds for their justification 12. You might happily better have appealed to St. James than to St. Paul for justification by works and yet neither would he have befriended this your appeal much lesse have justified that your position for St. James doth not contradict the doctrine of St. Paul but doth only correct those who had misunderstood or at least misapplied it bidding them add to their Faith Vertue as St. Peter had done before 2 Pet. 3. 5. or not expect to be justified by it wherefore those two Apostles may very well be said to have delivered but one and the same doctrine concerning justification if we take their words not as we please but as they intended them for St. Paul writing against proud Justitiaries among the Jews who sought for righteousness from their own works according to the Law of Moses and rejected the righteousnesse of God by Faith in Christ strongly denyed Justification by works meaning works properly so called that is to say a perfect and perpetual observation of the whole Law because all men whatsoever Christ only excepted had many wayes transgressed the Law But St. James writing against licentious and profane Hypocrites among the Christians who pretending to Faith in Christ lived not according to the Rule of the Christian Faith but altogether neglected the study and practice of good works affirmed Justification by works meaning by works the very obedience of Faith or a working by love and obedience The one writ against the proud opposers the other against the fond Pretenders of Faith in Christ therefore the one tells the proud Jews that their works were not answerable to the Law in which they trusted that he might teach them the necessity of Faith in Christ The other tell the hypocritical Christians that their works were not answerable to the Gospel of which they boasted that he might teach them the obedience of that Faith accordingly as often as St. Paul affirmeth in sense at least if not in words That we are justified only by Faith so often he understandeth a Faith working by love Gal. 5. 6. or an unfained unhypocritical Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such a Faith as belongs not to hypocrites 1 Tim. 1. 5. And as often as St. James denieth that we are justified only by Faith so often he understandeth a Faith not working by love a Faith only in profession or in perswasion not in obedience or in affection a Faith belonging to hypocrities not to good Christians a Faith in noise and in word but not in truth and in deed as appeares from the manner of his expression ver 14. If a man say he hath Faith for the Apostle would not say it for him because he had only a dead Faith A Faith without works and therefore without life operari sequitur esse the Faith of devils from the evidence or power of truth convincing the understanding not the Faith of Abraham or Rahab from the acceptance and love of truth converting the will therefore these two positions are not contrary A man is justified before God not by the works of the Law which he cannot have but only by Faith in Christ which alwaies worketh by love and A man is justified before God not only by Faith that is an historical knowledge of the Gospel and an emptie profession of Faith but also by works that is an affectionate love of the Gospel and a sincere obedience of Faith The former position is maintained by St. Paul against those Jews who rejected the Gospel of Christ the latter position is maintained by St. James against those Christians who profaned the same Gospel Both Apostles teach one and the same Justification by Faith in Christ only St. Paul speaks of Faith more in relation to its proper object even to Christ because he went to convince gainsaying Jews and to make them Christians St. James speaks of Faith more in relation to its proper effect even good works because he went to convert revolting Christians and to make them good Christians For so himself saith concerning Abraham Seest then how Faith wrought with his works and by work was Faith made perfect ver 23. He saith not By works was his justification made perfect but only his Faith whereby he was justified requiring works only to the Faith that justifieth but not to the act of justification And after the same manner are we to understand his conclusion ver 24. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by Faith only as if he had said From this example of Abraham you may gather that 't is not the wording but the working not the professing but the performing Faith that justifies a man before God requiring works in that man which is justified but not denying to Faith the power and prerogative of justifying 13. You have well reconciled St. Paul with St. James in your question But what Faith which intimaâ—…eth that a justâ—…fying Faith is such a 〈◊〉 as workeâ—…h by love but you have ill reconciled your selfe with St. Paul in your position That works are required to Justification as well as Faith which plainly asserteth the contradictory of St. Pauls doctrine And surely 't is not safe for any Divine to differ in this Doctrine of Justification from St. Paul no more than it is safe for him
to differ from the whole scope of the Law and of the Gospel since it is undeniable that Christ with his righteousnesse is the end of the Law and the subject of the Gospel This is St. Peters Divinitie Act. 10. 43. To Him give all the Prophets witnesse that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins i. e. in one word shall be justified And indeed what were all the propitiatory and expiatory sacrifices of the Law but so many types of Christs sacrifice upon the Crosse who is the Propitiation for our sins 1 John 2. 2. so that in truth this part of the Ceremonial Law was little other than a dark representation of the Gospel foreshewing in shadows what the Gospel was to declare in substance that the Lamb of God should tâ—…ke away the sinnes of the world whence St. Paul ascribeth the Justification of the Jew and of the Gentile to one and the same sacrifice Aâ—… Christ hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour Eph. 5. 2. Their sacrifices did expiate sin only by vertue of this sacrifice And this is that which the same Apostle proves to the Jews in his Epistle which he peculiarly sent to them the sum whereof is briefly this That Jesus Christ whom he did preach to them in that Epistle being the eternal Sonne of God coessential and coequal with his Father perfect God and perfect man in one and the same person was that Messiah which God from the beginning of time had promised and in the fulnesse of time had sent into the world as the only King to Govern as the only Priest to reconcile as the only Prophet to instruct his Church according to the Covenant made before the Law to the types and figures given under the Law and all the predictions explications additions and confirmations by the Prophets so that unlesse they would reject all the documents given to them in their own Law and by their own Prophets throughout all the Old Testament they must thankfully acknowledge heartily embrace and dutifully obey Jesus Christ as the sole Author of their redemption and salvation or to speak yet neerer to our debate though not to Gods Truth as the sole author of Justification to redeem them from the guilt and of sanctification to redeem them from the bondage of their sins This is the Doctrine of the whole Epistle to the Hebrews which is briefly delivered in the first words and confirmed and enlarged in the sequele of that Epistle God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the Fathers by the Prophets hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son There 's our blessed Saviour as Prophet to instruct the Church Whom he appointed heir of all things by whom also he made the worlds There he is as King to govern the Church which is his inheritance as man his workmanship as God When he had by himself purged our sins There he is as Priest to offer himself for a Sacrifice to reconcile the Church And all the Epistle after this in the doctrinal part of it is nothing else but an enlargement upon these Three Heads shewing the necessity of Christs three Offices and the excellency of his Person according to each Office viz. according to his Kingly Office in the first and second according to his Prophetical Office in the third and fourth Chapters and according to his Priestly Office in the rest till the nineteenth Verse of the tenth Chapter After which He treateth of those Offices and Duties which belong to Christians and that in the same method or manner as he had before of the Offices belonging unto Christ first briefly summing them up together and then fully and largely explaining them For so cap. 10. v. 22. He exhorts us to Faith and a good Conscience v. 23. To a firm hope and undaunted profession v. 24. To charity and to good works v. 25. To the publike exercise of all those duties of Piety which God had appointed for the nourishment and the increase of Faith Hope and Charity and the rest of the Epistle afterwards is but an enlargement upon these Will you say because he speaks so much for good works in the latter part of his Epistle He therefore requires them to Justification as well as Faith Look on the tenth Chapter you will soon recall that saying For there it is proved That the Law Sacrifices could not take away sin that is could not justifie those who offered them by two irresistible Topicks ab absurdo ab impossibili First From the command of the Law enjoyning those Sacrifices to be repeated every year which had been needless and therefore absurd if the worshippers could have been purged by them so as to have had no more Conscience of sin vers 23. Secondly From the nature of the Sacrifices that were offered which were not of so great an efficacy as to purge sin much less of so great an excellency as to expiate it For it is not possible that the blood of Bulls and of Goats should take away sins v. 4. And surely he that makes it his work to shew the weakness of the Law-Sacrifices to take away sin could not make it his intent to set up the Gospel-Sacrifices whether of the Heart by Meditation or the Lips by Prayer or of the Hand by Alms-deeds as expiations for our sins For the same Objections still hold against the one which were made against the other The necessity of their repetion is as great the proof of their imperfection is far greater I ask the soul of the most religious Votary that now lives whether he dare say that he ever prayed so devoutly but that either for want of firmness in his attention or of zeal in his affection he needed to ask forgiveness for his Prayers There was nothing of sin in the worst of Legal there is something of sin in the best of Evangelical Sacrifices and how then can it make an atonement for another sin 14. Therefore what ever be the excellency of good works as to Gods acceptance or the efficacy of them as to mans salvation yet they cannot be so excellent as to deserve nor so efficacious as to procure the Justification of a sinner no it cost more to redeem a soul so that He even the most righteous man that is must let that alone for ever Non dabit Deo placationem suam pretium redemptionis animae suae He can give to God what may please his goodness not what may appease his anger or satisfie his Justice He can offer up the homage he cannot offer up the price of his soul Accordingly we are bound to interpret all these and the like Texts concerning good works as declaring their indispensable necessity not as declaring their meritorious efficacy to our salvation as shewing them ot be consequents of the Faith that justifieth not Causes of Justification That honour must
Church as appeares in that these words which are the 6 7 8. Canons of the second Milevitane Council in Binnius for the Western are the 115 116 117. Canons of the Council of Carthage in Balsamon for the Eastern Churches 17. Wherefore this being an undoubted Principle among all Christians for who can doubt that which comes to us Originally from the Scriptures and derivatively from the Catholick Church That all men have sinned and come short of the glory of God Rom. 3. 23. we cannot reasonably but only perversely deny this conclusion That no man can be justified by his own righteousnesse For having sinned he must needs be under the condemnation of sin and coming short of the glory of God in his duty or obligation he must also come short of his own glory in his merit of justification for his sin which makes him come short of righteousness must needs also make him come short of being reputed righteous For shall not the Judge of all the earth do right how then shall he acquit that man for righteous whom he knows to be a sinner we find he hath in effect given a contrary judgment already Hag. 2. 12 13. where this is the summe of his determination concerning two questions which neerly concerne this case 1. Whether a man that is unclean may contract purity from the touch of hâ—…ly things which he denies 2. Whether Holy things do not contract impurity from the touch of a man that is unclean which he affirmes and then makes this inference ver 14. So is this People and so is this Nation before me saith the Lord and so is every work of their hands and that which they offer there is unclean The same reason holds in us as in them The Jew was unclean by the touch of a dead body and so is the Christian. O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from this body of death Rom. 7. 24. The Jew by his uncleanness did pollute the holy things so doth the Christian even those holy works that proceed from Gods Holy Spirit and Grace The holy things by their Purity did not make him pure among the Jews who was unclean in himself so is it also among the Christians The best inherent righteousness we have from Gods Grace doth not purge away the impurity of that sin which we have from our selves therefore we must confesse that because of our Original and actual uncleanness every work of our hands and that which we offer to our God is unclean and consequently our works cannot justifie themselves much less can they justifie us And we find the same judgment of God confirmed likewise in the New Testament Luk. 17. where the Lepers pray heartily Jesus Master have mercy on us there 's one good work of piety and devotion they obey readily in going to shew themselves to the Priests as they had been commanded there 's another good work better than the former for obedience is better than sacrifice And one of them when he saw that he was cleansed turned back and with a loud voyce glorified God and fell down on his face at our Saviours feet and gave him thanks there 's many good works together one of devotion he glorified God another of zeal with a loud voyce a third of reverence he fell down on his face a fourth of humility at our Saviours feet a fifth of praise and thanksgiving he gave him thanks here is soul and body and all the powers and faculties of both wholly set upon good works yet our Saviour saith Arise go thy way thy Faith hath made thee whole v. 19. So is it also in the leprosie of our souls we are bound to pray heartily Jesus Master have mercy on us and to shew our selves to the Priests that is to use all the means of salvation which God hath appointed in the communion and by the Ministers of his Church yet when all is done if we will speak with our Saviour we must say to the Leper thy Faith hath made thee whole The good works may be acknowledged as adjunctâ—… but not as causes of the cure that must be attributed only to Faith in him who is the Physician of our souls For without doubt that holy ejaculation The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God though he be not clean according to the purification of the sanctuary is a prayer as needful now as it was in the dayes of Hezekiah or it would not have been left upon record for us 2 Câ—…ron 30. 19 It is the Lords Pardon not the mans preparation that makes him clean according to the purification of the Sanctuary and so Kimchi confesseth in his gloss upon those words ver 20. And the Lord healed the people that is saith he The Lord forgave their sin according to that of the Psalmist heal my soul for I have sinned against thee The Lord pardoned their sins that he might accept them and why should not we say that pardon and forgivenesse of our sins is the best ground and means of our acceptance with God For this is the only way to be clean according to the purification of the Sanctuary that is to be clean from all sin even to be made clean of which it is said The blood of Jesus Christ his Son 〈◊〉 us from all sin 1 Joh. 1. 7. If I haâ—… but one sin left upon my soul not washed away by Faith in his blood and the tears of my own repentance I shall not be clean enough to appear before the Throne of his Grace much lesse to appear at the bar of his justice I shall not be innocent enough to serve him much lesse to be judged by him I shall not be able to stand comfortably before his mercy and much less to stand confidently against his Judgement Therefore can I not hope to be saved by the first innocency that of obedience or of righteousness but only by the second innocency that of Faith and repentance And if any other man hath a better hope I pray God he may not find a worse salvation But surely God himself in his consultation how to save the Israelites concludes to do it not by their obedience but by their Faith and repentance Jer. 3. 19. But I said How shall I put thee among the children and give thee a pleasant land a goodly heritage There 's his consultation how to save them And I said thou shalt call me My Father and shalt not turn away from me there 's his conclusion to save them by their Faith and by their repentance By their Faith Thou shalt call me My Father and by their repeâ—…tance Thou shalt noâ—… tuâ—…n away from me that is not so turn away but thou shalt return again and therefore this promise is not to be interpreted of their obedience but of their repentance he that is most obedient in some cases cannot say he doth not turn away from God in other but he that is truly penitent can