looke vppon vs from heauen aboue And with thy prayers eyther cease this pricke of the fleashe Or else praye that wée maye strongly beare it and ouercome it Now if M. Goughe will terme these graue Fathers and so holy men like as other moe Origen calling vppon Iob S. Ephrem calling vpon the martyrs S. Ierome calling vppon the famouse woman Paula and S. Chrisostome commending the Emperour for frequenting the Martyrs tombes and praying vnto them If he will call them all mad men foolishe men popish and superstitious Idolaters In Gods name let him do so I had leuer haue a dragm of their superstition than a great lump of leade of M. Goughes integritie 3 That onely fayth dooth not iustifie MAister Goughe likewyse in fewe woords would vehemently haue persuaded like as other heretofore him that sole fayth or onely fayth doth iustifie vs So did long agoe teache Eunomius of that fayth whiche he professed as S. Austen reciteth in his â–ª 6. Tome de Heresi M. Goughe To confirme his opinioÌ„ out of the scripture he brought the saying of the apostle Arbitramur iustificari per fidem hominem sine operibus legis We thinke or determine that a man is iustified by fayth without the works of the law concluding by this testimonie of S. Paule that works do in no maner of wise iustifie vs not only those which goe before faith but also those whiche doo follow faith For touching any iustification by works he maketh the like condition of them both M. Fecknam First I maruell that Maister Goughe will allowe this terme onely when it is not exppâ—ssed in Canonicall Scripture Next I am sure that there is nothing equiualent vnto it for fayth without the workes of the Lawe and fayth onely or fayth simplie without workes be not of one like condition Sainct Paule excluding workes of the law meaneth works that goe before fayth whiche do not iustifye S Iames in the Example of Abraham forbidding that fayth onely should iustifye speaketh of woorkes that followe faith which do also iustifye that is giue encrease of iustice Abraham pater noster nonne ex operibus iustificatus est offerens Isaac filium suum super altare Abraham our father was he not iustifyed by works when he offered his sonne Isaac vppon the altar To this effect S. Austen reconcileth these twoo Apostles saying Non sunt contrariae duorum Apostolorum sententiae Pauli et Iacobi cùm dicit vnus iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus alius dicit inanem esse fidem sine operibus quia ille dicit de operibus quae praecedunt fidem iste de his quae sequuntur fidem that is These sentences of the twoo Apostles Paule and Iames be not contrarie vnto them selues when the one sayeth that a man is iustifyed by fayth without woorkes the other sayeth that faith is vayne idle without workes for Paule speaketh of workes that goe before faith Iames speaketh of those that followe faith M. Goughe An other place he brought to expresse by Scripture this woorde onely That fayth onely doth iustifye alledging the saying of Chryst vnto Iairus prince of the synagoge Crede tantuÌ„ beleeue only A place very fitlie applied as if Christe there had spoken of the iustification of Iairus and not rather of the corporall reuiuing of his dead daughter M. Fecknam First S. Iames vnto this meaning of M. Goughe that faith only should iustifie whereby he meaneth to exclude al maner of iustification by workes done in faith hath a place that is cleane contradictorie saying thus after the example brought of Abraham Videtis quoniaâ— ex operibus iustificatur homo non ex fide tantum You sée that a man is iustified by workes and not by faith onely By faith onely to be iustified and not by faith only to be iustified be contradictorie This place therfore of S. Luke is violently handled of M. Goughe rather by force wrested to his owne peculiar stuffe than naturally applyed to the meaning of christ For there is no relation made to the faith of Iairus touching iustification as if Chryste had willed him onely too beleeue and then he should be iustified but to the weaknesse of that faith of his which began to faint and mistrust the power of Chryst in reuiuyng his daughter after that a messenger came from home and told him that his daughter was dead This fayth Christ erected confirmed by these words Beléeue onely as if he had said feare not misdout not but put thy only trust in mée as thou hast begon and thy daughter neuerthelesse shal be restored both to life and to health agein This is the finall ende of those wordes beléeue only Crede tantum which tooke their effect not in spiritual iustification of Iairus the father but in y corporall reuiuing of his daughter for any thing that is there in the scripture expressed S. Austen in his booke de fide operibus shewed the beginning fouÌ„dation of this much like heresie to haue bin in the Apostles times vpon the misconstruing of Paules Epistles saying Quoniam haec opinio tum fuerat exorta aliae Apostolicae epistolae Petri IoaÌ„nis Iacobi Iudae coÌ„tra eaÌ„ maximè dirigunt intentioneÌ„ vt vehementer astruant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse that is Bycause this opinioÌ„ was theÌ„ sprong vp other Apostolical epistles of Peter Iohn Iames and Iude do bende their drift and purpose most of all ageinst that opinion that they may boldly and vehemently affirme faith without workes to auayle nothing If it be faith only it is faith without works if faith only auayleth nothing faith only can not iustifie Likewise he saith in his booke de Trini very bréefly but pithily Sine charitate fides quidem potest esse sed non et prodesse that is without charitie faith may bée but without charitie it can nothing auayle vs. Of works that be done in faith IT is then a preposterous waye a blasphemous doctrine to extol the excelleÌ„cie of faith by reuyling extenuating the worthie fruts therof calling theÌ„ abominable vile and stinking in the face of God as if there were no difference betwene works done of infidels Idolaters of which Isai speaketh wheÌ„ he likeneth theÌ„ to a filthie cloth betwene workes done of christians and true beléeuers of which our sauior Christ speaketh in s. Mat. shewing how they shal be acceptable in Gods sighte and rewarded with lyfe euerlasting For there he maketh a distinct conference and separation betwéene the praying fasting and gyuing almes of the Scribes and Pharises which do it onely for vaine glories sake therefore they haue onely that vayne reward and betweene the praying fasting and giuing almes of those whiche bée true members of Christe which do it onely for Gods sake and therefore they shall haue a reward of him of lyfe euerlasting If these workes had bin so vile and so
in Moses seate but do not as they do And thus much touching this question God giue vs eyes to sée and hartes to vnderstande that if you be out of the way as you shewe your selfe to be you may come in If I my selfe as I am perfectly persuaded I am not that he will giue me grace to conuert And so pray I for vs both 3 That onely fayth doth not iustifie MAster Gough likewise in few wordes woulde vehemently haue persuaded lyke as others heretofore him that sole fayth or onely fayth doth iustifie vs So did long agoe teache Eunomius of that fayth which he professed as S. Augustine reciteth in his 6. Tom. de Haeresibus In so doyng as others haue done before him ▪ as Moyses as Christ as Paul as all the Prophetes and Apostles in teaching the Iustification of fayth onely yf you expound him not amisse he did the part of a faythfull Minister and preacher of Gods woord But you are disposed in this matter as in others to carpe and cauill euill construing that which is wel spoken You ioyne your woordes in this sorte sole faith or only fayth There is great difference in these two kindes of speaking a sole fayth is a barren an vnfrutefull a wicked a diuelish fayth which in déede is no fayth it hath but the glistering and shew of fayth it is but a lippe fayth and where so euer it is I warrant you there is Corde non creditur no beléef in hart Fayth only is an other manner of thing it is that which the Hebrewes cal Emunah that is a faith stable and sure as it is sayd of Moyses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manus eius erant firmae stabiles vsque ad occasum solis his handes were steady and stable vntill the goyng downe of the sun So doth Paule terme it vaiehi iadan emunah the cōmon translation hath substantia it is that quod facit vt extent quae sperātur which maketh those things to exist which are hoped for This fayth can bée no more withoute fruytes than can the body bée without the soule to be a liuing body so that ther be time for wée knowe that vocation is diuerse some in the morning some at noone some at night are called and these laste because they are so soone cutte of that they could not but beleeue and not glorifie God before vs wée muste not therefore condemne them This fayth I say most florishing and decked with gorgious workes as shining both before God and man as the lilie doth only iustifie doth only apprehend the iustification of God giuen in Christ Iesus oure Sauiour doth trulie bring Christe into vs and vs into him So the faithfull man séeing himselfe purged from all his former sins and offences walketh in newnesse of lyfe in the wayes that God hath ordeyned for him that before men he may glorifie his father which is in heauen This faith Eunomius did not teache he was in his opinion a naughtie and wicked man as were many moe in the time of S. Augustine are now God make them fewer He writeth of him and others in this wise I wil laye his wordes before you that you your selfe may iudge whither you do rightly burdē vs with Eunomius or no. Apostolus predicans iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus non bene intellectus est ab eis qui sic dictum acceperunt vt putarent cùm semel in Christū credidissent etiāsi malè operarētur facinerosè flagitioseque viuerent saluos se esse per fidem posse that is The Apostle preaching that a mā is iustified by faith without workes was not well vnderstoode of them which tooke his saying in this sorte that they thought they might be saued by faith whē they had once beléeued in christ although they did wickedly although they liued most detestably and villenously And in an other place Non cogimur dicere iniustis non subditis scelestis contaminatis parricidis matricidis homicidis fornicatoribus masculorum concubitoribus plagiarijs mendacibus periuris si quid aliud sanae doctrinae aduersatur quae est secundum Euangelium gloriae beati Dei si tantum in Christum credatis sacramentum Baptismi eius accipiatis etiamsi vitam istam pessimam non mutaueritis salui eritis We are not constrayned to say to the vniust to the rebellious to the wicked to the defiled to the murderers of father mother to manslayers to fornicators to buggers to mē stealers to lyers to the periured if there be any other thing which is contrarie to the wholsome doctrine whiche is according to the glorious Gospell of the blessed God if you beléeue onely in Iesu Christe and receyue his Sacrament of Baptisme althoughe you chaunge not this wicked lyfe you shal bée saued This was Eunomius opinion and his fellowes it is not oures Our Preachers teach that faith only iustifieth yet not that a sole faith iustifieth therefore in so expounding his woordes as you do you do deceyuablie commit an Eleuche which we cal fallatia accidentis For whereas we say fayth iustifyeth only that is no other thing doth apprehend the iustice which GOD doth giue vs but oure faith you turne it and make this sense a bare faith voyde and destitute of all goodnesse doth attayne to the mercies of god Which in déed is an heresie For as the other is good allowable according to the scriptures There is no condemnation to them whiche are in Christe Iesus whiche walke not after the fleshe but after the Spirit so is this wicked and naught For if we liue after the fleshe we shall dye And thus much to shewe that we are no Eunomians Now to your Arguments To confirme his opinion out of the scriptures he brought the saying of the Apostle Arbitramur iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus Legis We thinke or determine that a mā is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Concluding by this testimonie of S. Paule that workes do in no manner of wyse iustifye vs not onely those which go before fayth but also those which do folow faith for touching any iustification of works he maketh the like cōdition of them both His allegation was good and his argument good For it foloweth wel we are iustified by faith Therfore workes done before do not iustifie neither workes after This consequēt you wil not deny simply for all your allegaciōs you bring do proue that workes before do conferre nothing to iustification For the Apostle preaching to the Gentiles saith When he sawe them that came to the lord iustified by faith that now they which did beleue should worke and do good dedes and not because they had done well they deserued to beleue he cried out and said boldly That man may be iustified by faith without the workes of the law Your sticking is vpō workes that folow as in déede not knowing what
difference is betwixt iustification and sanctification you should doubt whether sanctification were a piece of iustification or an effect of iustification Let vs then sée whether workes that follow doo conâ—erre any thing to the Iustification Marke I pray you the controuersie betwixt you and master Goughe The question is not whether good woorkes are necessarie to walke in Whether we are bound to walke in the feare of GOD after that he hath manifested vnto vs his election and called vs to embrace his frée mercy and Iustification I say the question is not whether we ought to do well that GOD may be glorifyed by vs But whether a man being already iustified his woorkes afterward may giue encrease of Iustice I pray you Sir after that Quéene Marie had made you Abbot of Westminster dyd you the office of an Abbot that you would be a more Abbot or to do your duetie to the which the Quéene of hir grace hadde called you For therefore shée bestowed it vpon you that you should doe the duetie and not dy doing the duetie to become a more Abbot So fareth it with the children of God Of this whole lumpe of earth which he made of this masse which we call Adam he of his free mercie and goodnesse hathe chosen some whereby he will bée glorified in this world by the good woorkes which they shall do before the face of men When this election of his beginneth to be manifest to euerye chosen when he moueth the hearts of his after they haue long slept in sinne to remember that they are hys that he hathe slayne hys Sonne for them that they are deliuered from the whole cursse of the lawe Is it not requisite thinke you that they walke worthie his vocation That they make sure their vocation Naye doe they in this their course in any parte delyuer them selues from the cursse of the lawe Doe they pay that raunsome which was paide before What is the iustice or Iustification of GOD Redemption and remission of sinnes in the bloud of christ Was then the bloud of Chryst answearable to all the Lawe did there remaine no parte vnpayde For whome then did he all this Not for him selfe for there was no guile found in his mouthe For whome then For the faithfull to whome God dothe giue this Faith not of merite but of grace Haue they then all the iustice of Christe haue they that which Christe dyd in his bodye put vppon them May they say as he sayde Death where is thy sting Hell where is thy victorie May they say death is swallowed vp in victorie May they say there is no condemnation to vs whiche are in Christe Iesus what remayneth then that they walke according to the Spirite not according to the fleshe that they glorifie God before men whiche hath already made them the children of god Not to do ageyn y which is done alreadie for that is impossible not to ioyne a piece to Christes as thoughe it were not perfect For he left no piece vnpayed But to receyue by faith that iustification that God doth giue them without the workes of the lawe For workes sequuntur iustificatum non praecedunt iustificandum they followe a man iustified and goe not before him that is to be iustified Effectus autem non praeiudicat causae as you knowe The effect neuer preiudiceth the cause Thorough al the course of our liues we worke bicause we are iustified and we do not worke that we may be iustified And this is the meaning of the Apostle in this place not as thoughe workes were to be ioyned with faith to deserue some thing For then should wée receyue reward due and not grace And thus much touching M. Goughe his argument Now to your Obiection Firste I maruayle that M. Goughe will allowe this terme Only when it is not expressed in Canonicall scripture Next I am sure that there is nothing equiualent vnto it for faith without the workes of the lawe and fayth onely or fayth simplie withoute workes be not of one like condition You néede not maruayle much if you would rightly consider it Paules whole disputation standeth vpon twoo Subiecta one Praedicatum as the people are twoo to whoÌ„ he addresseth his doctrine and must agrée in one The subiecta are these works or the Law fayth or Christ The Praedicatum is Iustification If then reasoning à diuisione the one be put away what remayneth If I reason thus Of all liuing creatures there is one that is risibile apte to laugh it is not Brutum any brute beast Therefore it is Homo man If I reason thus I say is not this consequent comprehended in Consequenti Therefore onely man is risibilis So likewise Paule reasoneth there is one thing which iustifieth It is not works therfore it is fayth Doth it not nowe folow that being but one and that one faith that we may wel conclude that faith only iustifieth And so adde we nothing to the scripturs which you séeme to lay to M. Goughes charge by a taunte but finde it in the verie letter although not literallie And in so doing we make no new inuentioÌ„ So taught before vs Theophilact whose wordes are these vt autem haberi pro comperto queat posse hunc deum qui impiè vixerit non solum à tormentis eximere sed iustum reddere illud subdit credenti autem in eum qui iustificat c. Num igitur est hic quippiam allaturus Fidem duntaxat that is But that it may be certaynely knowen that God can not onely deliuer froÌ„ torments but also iustifie him which liued wickedly he addeth that but to him that beléeueth in him which iustifieth c. Must he therfore also bring some thing Faith onely â–ª And Origenes vppon this same place whiche M. Goughe alleaged sayeth thus Nunc tam velut conclusionem suarum assertionum ponens in hoc loco dicit Vbi est ergo gloriatio tua Exclusa est â–ª per quam legem operum Non sed per legem fidei Arbitramur enim iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus legis dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem ita vt credens quis tantummodo iustificetur etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum Nowe making as it were a conclusion of his assertions sayeth in this place where is then thy reioysing it is excluded By what law of workes No but by the lawe of faith for we suppose or conclude that maÌ„ is iustified by faith without the workes of the Law and he sayeth that the iustification of only faith is sufficient so that a maÌ„ beléeuing onely may be iustified although that no work be don of him I will not alleage here Hierom on the 4. of this Epistle Conuertentem impium and agein vt omnes qui ex Gentibus c nor Amb. j. Cor. xj hoc constitutum est à Deo. c. nor Bernard ser. 22. super Can. Quamobrem
quisquis pro peccatiâ— â— in all which you find these wordes Sola fides ad iustitiam reputatur per solam fidem iustificat â–ª Deus saluus fit sine opera sola fide et soluÌ„ iustificatus per fidem that is only fayth is accompted vnto rightuousnesse By only faith God iustifieth that he may be saued without worke through onely fayth and beyng iustified only by fayth As for the works which follow as I sayd before we condeÌ„ne them not we prayse them as God did in Abraham Abraham beléeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnes and he was called the friend of god In that he beleued God within in his harte it consisteth in fayth onely concerning that he lead his sonne to sacrifise him in that without feare he armed his right hande in that he would haue stricken had he not bin witholden surelie it was a great fayth the worke also was great God praysed the worke when he sayd bycause thou obeyedst my voyce Wherfore then sayth the Apostle Paule wée conclude that man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the law and in an other place It is fayth whiche worketh by charitie how doth fayth worke by charitie how is a man iustified by fayth without the workes of the lawe This séemeth hard that a man shall bée iustified by fayth onely and yet that fayth must worke by charitie Not at all for in that that it is sayd to iustifie it sheweth what thou haste receyued of God in that it is sayd to worke by charitie it sheweth what thou owest to god For so muste iustification stand that it may bee applyed vnto all men whether they be called in the morning or at noone or at night There is one that beléeueth he hath receyued the sacrament of faith and is dead he hadde no time to worke what shall wée say that he is not iustified we say playne that he was iustified because he beléeued in him whiche iustifieth the wicked Therefore this man is iustified did not worke The sentence of the Apostle is fulfilled I conclude that a man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the law The théef which was crucified with Christ beléeued in hart to Iustice and confessed by mouth to saluation For fayth which worketh by charitie although it haue not wherein it may worke externally yet is it kept feruent in the harte If then fayth in these such like doth iustifie why shall it not in others Because one man lyueth longer than an other after his vocation shall therefore the rightuousenesses of God be changed shal therefore â–ª man be made fellowe with God in the worke of his saluation bicause he hath bestowed a greater benefite of longer lyfe vppon him Is this the thank that GOD shall haue at oure hands for giuing vs space to glorifie him to vse it as a meanes that we oure selues may glorie For surely if we deserue any thing we haue wherein to glorie But when all is done it is but an euil fauored glorie for it is not with god But let vs goe farther S. Paule excluding workes of the Lawe meaneth workes that goe before fayth which do not iustifie S. Iames in the example of Abraham forbidding that fayth only doth iustifie speaketh of workes that folowe fayth whiche doe also iustifie that is giue encrease of iustice Abraham pater noster nónne ex operibus iustificatus est offerens Isaac super Altare Abraham our Father was he not iustified by workes when he offered his sonne Isaac vppon the Altare If workes before fayth do not iustifie much lesse works after fayth before man had néede and after he hath no néede then is a benefite requisite when a man is in pouertie but when he is riche it is not néedfull To be shorte bycause I haue handled this before workes do neuer goe before iustification For the Scripture is playne If it be grace then not of works otherwayes were grace nowe no grace And this is as well for youre workes after as before As for that that is sayde often tymes and you alleage it before Factores legis iustificabuntur the dooers of the lawe shall bée iustified It is so to be vnderstanded to wit that they could not otherwise be dooers of the law vnlesse they be iustified So that Iustification coÌ„meth not to the dooers but iustification goeth before the dooers of the Law â–ª For what other thing doth this meane Iustified but made iust that is to say of him which iustifieth the wicked that he may become iust of wicked For sanctification goeth not before Iustification but Iustification before Sanctification Touching the place of S. Iames there is no such matter in it as you make You maye sée by the whole course of the chapter that he speaketh not how man is iustified before god but how they ought to shew before men that they are iuste before god So that he beateth downe the vayne opinion of them which thought that yf they beléeued it belonged not to them to do well and therefore contemned good workes as who would say they were not bound to glorifie God before men who had glorified them with him self And touching the example of Abraham yf you conferre the scriptures togither as Genesis with Iames you shall sée that Abraham was iustified before and this is but the shew of his obedience vnto God that all the worlde might know he nothing misdouted the promise of God although his onely sonne must go to bée offered and this do your doctors teach which you heare recite To this effect S. Augustine reconcileth these two Apostles Non sunt contrariae duorum Apostolorum sententiae Pauli Iacobiâ—cum dicit vnus iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus alius dicit inanem esse fidem sine operibus quia ille dicit de operibus quae praecedunt fidem iste de his que fidem sequuntur These sentences of the two Apostles Paul and Iames be not contrarie vnto them selues when the one saith that a man is iustified by fayth without workes The other sayth that fayth is vayne and ydle without workes for Paule speaketh of workes that goeth before faith Iames speaketh of those that follow fayth I doe not sée to what great purpose this place is alleaged bée it that this reconciliation is good can you coÌ„clude that Augustin teacheth or Iames eyther that workes iustifie before God that can you neuer prooue The place you bring he hath in many places yet in none of them doth he conclude as you do But in euery one he teacheth this that therefore Iames writte this Epistle and likewise Peter his to shewe that after sayth receyued works of rightuousnesse ought not to be contemned that what soeuer workes they doo they are of a iustified man and not to iustifie a man For when it is sayd that the doers of the law shall bée iustified what other thing is sayd than this Let 〈◊〉 that
¶ An Answere to certein Assertions of M. Fecknam somtime Abbot of Westminster which he made of late against a godly Sermon of M. Iohn Goughes preached in the Tower the xv of Ianuarie 1570. Seen and allowed Imprinted at London by Henrie Bynneman CVM PRIVILEGIO To the right worshipfuls Sir Frauncis Iobson Knight Lieuetenaunt of the Toure Sir Henrie Neuell Knight and M. Pellam Lieuetenaunt of the Ordinaunce geue these YOur worships request was vpon Sunday last as I came from the Churche to know my lyking of M. Goughes Sermon Wherunto I answered that I was very lothe to finde any faulte with the sayings or dooings of any man being already in trouble as you knowe You replied and sayd that I was not able to find fault where no fault was I had theÌ„ no leisure to make any further answer you departing homewardes and I to my prison But now considering wyth my self that I might séeme vnto you a greater offeÌ„der in holding my peace than in speaking my mind when as saying nothing I might ingender an opinion in you that I am obstinate self willed and hâ—ue nothing to mislike but mine owne proper fansie On the other side to declare my minde I might signifie vntoo you the iust causes and true occasions which I haue to finde fault withall not so much for reprehending other men as to shew the necessary stayes of mine owne conscience I thought good vppon your lycence graunted and obteyned to expresse by wryting some faultie matter of his sermon wherby your worships might perceiue in the rest how much fault he is worthy of for speaking and how litle I deserue for not lyking of so vngodly pointes of doctrine Desiring you most humbly fauorably to interprete these my notes of reprehending his Sermon that is to proceede of a minde not desirous of contention but desirous of the truthe more seeking to satisfie your request and demaund than to minister any occasion of further argument 1 That it is not impossible to keepe Gods commaundements M. Fecknam MAster Gough in his sermon among other things said that gods precepts and commaundements giuen to man be so burdenous heauie as not possible of man to be obserued So taught long before him the Maniches and the Valentinians déenying free will which is the originall of that herisie M. Goughe For the profe of his doctrine he brought a familiar example likening almightie God and vs to a father and his litle sonne who being commaunded of his father to go and fetch a great lumpe of leade farre aboue his power weighing a hundred or two hundred weight not able to bring it yet making a profer the father accepteth his good will and so alloweth the thing to be done which otherwise was and is impossible M. Fecknam Contrarie to this doctrine is our sauior Christe where he willeth vs to take his yoke vpoÌ„ vs because it is light Tollite iuguÌ„ meuÌ„ super vos iuguÌ„ enim meum suaue est onus meuÌ„ leue Take my yoke vpoÌ„ you for my yoke is sweet my burden light If it be a light burden M. Goughs heauy exaÌ„ple hath not a penyworth of good skil S. Iohn to this effect sayth quod maÌ„data eius graua non sunt that his coÌ„maÌ„dements be not heauie If they be not heauie they be farre vnlike M. Goughs lumpe of lead impossible to bée taken vp and remoued S. Paul in rebuking these idle herers of the law which say they can hear it but not do it fulfil it writeth NoÌ„ auditores legis iusti suÌ„t apud deuÌ„ sed factores legis iustificabuÌ„tur For not the hearers of the law be iust with god but y doers shal be iustified If thei do the law then it may be don theÌ„ it is possible Sub esse ad possâ— is a good argument They do the workes of the law therfore they may bée done The EuaÌ„gelist S. Luke of these doers of the law bringeth a full example writing thus of Zacharie and Elizabeth Erant ambo iusti ante DeuÌ„ incedentes in omnibus maÌ„datis et iustificationibê° dnÌ„i sine querela that is They were both iust before god walking in al the coÌ„mandements iustificatioÌ„s of the lord without blame If s. Luke had the spirite of truthe when he said that these two walked in al the coÌ„maÌ„demeÌ„ts theÌ„ M. Gough by his denial impossibilitie put therof must néede haue the spirite of errour lying S. Iohn sayth Qui dicit se nosse deuÌ„ et maÌ„data eius noÌ„ custodit mendax est He y sayth he knoweth God kepeth not his commaundements is a lier S. Ierome writing of these teachers whiche say that it is impossible too kéepe the law hath these words Execramur coruÌ„ blaspemiaÌ„ q dicuÌ„t impossibile aliquid homini a deo pÌ„ceptuÌ„ esse maÌ„data eiê° noÌ„ a singulis sed ab omnibê° in coÌ„muni posse seruari that is Wée detest their blasphemy which say that god hath coÌ„maunded man to do any thing impossible and that the coÌ„maundements of god may be kept not of euery one in particular but of all in generall He witnesseth that gods coÌ„mandements may be obserued of euery one in particular and that god coÌ„maÌ„deth nothing impossible for he detesteth the coÌ„trary doctrin calleth it blasphemy therfore I haue litle cause to like it S. Austen likewise to the same ende sayeth Deus neque impossibiâ—e aliquid potuit imperare quia iustus est nec daâ—â—aturus est hominem pro eo quod non potuit vitare quia pius est that is God neither could commaund any thing that is impossible bicause he is not iust neither wil he condemne any maÌ„ for that which he could not auoid bicause he is merciful The contrary whereof to maintaine doth blasphemously argue God both of iniustice and impietie when he coÌ„maundeth vs to do that which M. Gough sayth is impossible and condemneth vs for that which he saith we could not auoid 2 That the holy Angels and Saincts of heauen may heare our prayers MAster Gough went forward tooke occasion to impugne al prayer inuocation intercession made vnto Saincts calling it a diuelish Doctrine So did long before him Vigilantius the hereticke ageinst whome doth write S. Ierom. M. Goughe To mainteyne his error he made this proposition that beside God no Angell no Spirit no Saint in heauen doth knowe what is done here vppon the earthe touching our internall or externall petitions And then sayth hee what a madnesse is it to pray vnto those which caÌ„not heare vs M. Fecknam To this opinion is cleane repugnant the saying of our Sauiour Chryst when he teacheth that more ioy shal bée in heauen before the Angels of God vppon one sinner dooing penance than vpon ninetie and nine iust meÌ„ which néed no penauÌ„ce But Angels can haue no ioye of that thing which they do not knowe neither if they doo knowe our penaunce shall they be
flesh Fecknam 2 That the holy Angels and Saincts of heauen may heare our prayers Salomon Ecclesiastes .ix. vers v. and .vj. For the lyuing know that they shal die but the dead know nothing at al neither haue they any more a rewarde for their remembrance is forgotten Also their loue and their hatred and their enuie is nowe perished and they haue no more portion for euer in all that is done vnder the sunne Fecknam 3 That onely fayth doth not iustifie S. Paule Rom. iij. vers xxviij and .xxx. Therefore we conclude that a man is iustified by faythe without the workes of the law For it is one God who shall iustifie circumcision of faith and vncircumcision through faith Fecknam 4 That euery sin is not mortall S. Iohn j. Ep. iij. vers iiij Whosoeuer committeth sinne transgresseth also the law for sin is the trāsgression of the law S. Paule Rom. vj. vers xxiij For the wages of sinne is death ▪ but the gift of God is eternall lyfe through Iesus Christ our Lord. To the right worshipfull Sir Frauncis Iobson Knight Liuetenaunt of the Tour Sir Henry Neuel knight and M. Pellam Lieuetenaunt of the Ordinaunce THere was deliuered vnto me vpon the .4 of March .1570 by a frend of mine a little pamflet written by M. Fecknam somtime Abbot of Westminster which he exhibited vnto your worshippes vppon demaund by you made of his liking of a godly Sermon preached by M. Goughe in the Toure the .15 of Ianuarie .1570 Which when I had red ouer I maruayled not a little bothe at the weakenesse of hys cauilling Obiections he vseth against suche godly poincts of Doctrine as he laboreth by forsing of Scriptures and Doctors to his purpose to ouerthrow and also at his boldnesse in offering the same vnto you For I thought vntill I had perused it that in so little a treatise so great ignorance of Scriptures of Doctors of the common Arte of Logicke which boyes after one or two yeares being in the vniuersities are not ignoraunt in could not haue ben foūd in him who carieth so great a name and countenaunce of learning Or at the least if his ignorance had bene such as by this I vnderstand it in dede to be that he coulde by politique silence haue concealed it and not by wryting to your worshippes men I doubte not but of perfecte knowledge and sound iudgement in al poynts of true religion reuealed both it and the weakenesse of their common cause which so fain he would support How be it for this latter in his Preamble he pretendeth some cause as the auoyding with your worships the opinion of obstinacie self wilfulnesse want of iust matter to mislike in the foresayd Sermon c and this in deede is but a bare pretence For the bitternesse of his stile and smothe scoffes which he vseth too oftē in so short a discourse vpon .iiij. point◠sheweth he rather by these cauils sought to rid his stomake of a litle choler than any thing else or to abuse and seduce your worships as men altogether ignorant in these questions But yet I will thinke the best as the rule of charitie teacheth me and conceiue hope of his conuersion for which also I pray with my whole harte And in case he blame me as not iudging rightly of this his writing being therunto requested by you let him waigh wel his owne last words in his preface vnto you say plainly whether a simple plain meaning may be gathered of them they be these More seking to satisfie your request and demaūd than to minister any occasiō of further argument What meaneth he hereby Is he rather moued with satisfying your request thā the cause it self he standeth in which he wold make appeare to the world to be the truth Or if the truth of his .iiij. assertions did more moue him than your requestes why feareth he least by his wryting occasion of further argument touching these questions be ministred If he know that he hath héere by good argument mainteyned a good cause then is there no cause why he should feare further debating but he ought like a good minister and teacher stand and offer him self ready prepared to the defence thereof yea though it were with daunger and losse of his lyfe But yf he bée guiltie in his owne conscience of the naughtinesse of the cause and his owne weake proues why doth he so much abuse your worships with a shew of confutation of the truth What iust causes and true occasions haue lead him to reprehend so godly points of doctrine taught by M. Gough I referre to the iudgement of any indifferent and learned Reader I haue vsed as much breuitie as I could in aunswering his arguments that the reading therof might not bée tediouse to you And last of all I thought good in mine own behalfe lest some might thinke amisse of me for mainteyning the quarrell made agaynst an other man as one desirous of contention vayne glorie c. to proteste vnto your worshippes that the earnest request of my very friend who knew me to haue a little spare time and M. Gough too be otherwise more profitably occupied forced me to say somwhat in way of an aunswere to M. Fecknam that I speake nothing of the truth of the common cause of religiō which of it self ought to moue any man zelous in Gods religion to take pen in hand agaynst any that shall séeke to impugn the same Thus much I thought good to let you vnderstand of the occasion of my dealing herein and partly also for a péece of an aunswere to such talke as M. Fecknam in his preface directeth specially too your worships The Lord Iesus confirme you in all truth daily encreasing his knowledge and all other good giftes in you Amen 1 That it is not impossible to keepe Gods commaundements BEfore I come to your proues allegations I must say a word or two of your coloured art and goodly shew you make in your first proposition It is the fashion of Rhetoricians as you know especially when their cause is not all of the best therfore misdoute the euent of their action so to behaue them selues in their Exordium that they may at the least purchase thus much that they may be heard some by one meanes some by an other the worst is not by procuring an euill suspicion too his aduerse partie So is your dealing in this present case to be better heard peraduenture or to make your cause séeme to bée better you geue forth that in M. Goughes doctrine of the impossibilitie of kéeping Gods commaundementes he followeth the race of the Maniches and the Valentinians A gréeuous accusation yf it were true and worthy to cause his doctrine to bee reiected yf all that you speake were a Gospell But peraduenture you thought you hadde the sexton of Paules in hand when you presented this your writing to the worships of these in déede worshipfull godly gentlemen The matter is thus not
many yeres since a good companion minding to recreate him selfe with the sexton charged him selfe with a baskette heauy laden as he made the matter appeare directing his way through Paules Churche because it was the shorter where he was mette of his mate and demaunded why in that solemne time he passed thorough that place so charged a thing not to bée endured the circumstaunces beyng considered This companion desired him to lette him passe for that hée was heauye laden with certayne plate and therefore the gladder too take the shorter way The sexton woulde not bée persuaded but alleadging the Quéenes profite caused him to sette downe his baskette and sente immediatlye for suche as too whome it appertayned to haue the view of such matters who thinking to haue found some â–ª greate matter as they had bin enformed by the sexton willed the basket to be opened and what found they for a cupbourde of plate a basket of hornes Thus had he his iest at the sexton but you M. Fecknam thankes be vnto God haue not to do with a sexton they doo well see your horny plate but bycause you your selfe deceyued your selfe thinking it to be plate they haue vsed this charitable way that it may be shewed vnto you that they are in deede but hornes And therefore this horne will nothing moue them as I trust vntill you bée able to shewe that the denying of frée will to the establishing of the grace of God wherby wée are iustified from sinne and saued from infirmitie is the doctrine of Maniche or Valentinian This I remember Valentinian and his say that to vs qui ab Ecclesia sumus opera necessaria esse aliter enim impossibile est seruari which are of the Churche woorkes bée necessarie for otherwise it is impossible to bée saued and that teach you sâ—ipsos verò non per opera sed propterea quòd ex natura spirituales sunt penitus omnino saluari doceÌ„t but they teach that they them selues are wholy altogither saued not by workes but bycause of nature they bee spirituall and this teacheth not M. Gough Therfore that glose might well haue bin lefte out yf you hadde more thought vpon the truth of the matter how well you might haue alleaged it than onely for a cloke of your self barely to alleage it For to proue M. Gough a Manichean or any of his fellowes in his heresies it will bée hard for you and as impossible as to fulfill the law but to prooue you a Pelagian it is easie enough and as easie as in Christ Iesus for M. Gough and vs to kepe the lawe But to prooue you suche a one is not my chéef purpose my mind is rather to conuince your heresie and bring you to the flocke of Christ yf it so please God too giue you the eyes of vnderstanding and a hart to repent Therfore to doo the dutie of good ChristiaÌ„s let vs yeld our selues vnto God to be gouerned by his spirit submit our selues in huÌ„blenes to his word without al vayne opinion of wel or euil defending a question arrest our selues vpon his Prophetes Apostles which haue and doo shew vs the way to walke in and minister vnto vs the true light whereby wée may chase a way al these darknesses This waye if wee take no doubt he will shew vs the truthe if we reiecte it why should he not farther punish vs with blindnesse So then to come to your first position That it is not impossible to keepe Gods commaundements I wil aunswere youre places of the scripture alleadged and your Doctors and there withall shewe oute of them both the contrarie that it is impossible and so shall I shew I trust that in that article M. Goughe hath taught no vngodly point of doctrine and so will I do consequently with the residue And that it may be more plainly and euidently done that there may be no occasion of doubte in any braunche of my doctrine I wil first shewe howe they are impossible and by what meanes and after howe they are possible and howe they may be fulfilled This done I shall sufficiently aunswere youre places alleadged and if GOD so will take awaye this vayle from before youre eyes which is a let vnto you that you can not sée Touching the firste S. Paule dilating and amplifying his probation of the free iustification which we haue thorough the tender mercie of GOD in Christe Iesus sayeth in this wyse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For that that was impossible to the Lawe in as much as it was weake bicause of the fleshe God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull fleshe and for sinne condemned sinne in the fleshe The wordes are but fewe and therefore easie to be remembred nay therefore better to be considered God sent his owne sonne Why To condemne sinne in the fleshe Why so Bicause it was impossible to the lawe wherefore in as much as it was weake bicause of the flesh Why then we may conclude that the Lawe is a burden and so gréeuous a burden that neither wée nor oure Fathers were able to beare and that bycause of oure weakenesse Hereof it is that he sayth in an other place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For if there had bin a law giueÌ„ which could haue giuen lyfe surely rightuousnesse should haue bin by the Lawe It is the woorke of grace to saue and quicken the receyuers whereof althoughe they were extréeme enemies to the wholesome doctrine of the holy scriptures they become fréends It is not the worke of the doctrine which whosoeuer heare and reade without the grace of GOD they are made worse enemies Therefore the grace of God is not in the nature of free will and in the lawe and doctrine as the peruerse Pelagian dothe deceyptfully beleeue and teache but at euery moment it is giuen by his good wil and pleasure of whom it is sayd Thou o God sendest a gracious rayne vpon thyne inheritaunce For we lost both frée wil to loue god by the greatnesse of our first sinne and the lawe also and the doctrine thereof although it be holy and good and iust yet it killeth if the Spirite do not quicken by which spirite it commeth to passe that not by hearing but by obeying neither by reading but by louing it is obserued For the Lawe without grace is but a letter it remaineth to conuince sin but not to gyue saluation So sayth the Apostle For yf there had bin a lawe gyuen whiche could haue giuen lyfe surely rightuousnes shuld haue bin by the lawe But the Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ should be giuen to them that beléeue Of this letter he sayeth in an other place The letter killeth but the spirite quickeneth Thou hast the letter but thou dost not fulfill the letter And why dost thou not fulfil the letter Bycause thou presumest of thy selfe thou extollest thy
frailnesse of the flesh is one and the strength of the spirite an other For the fleshe desireth against the spirite and the spirite ageynst the flesh and these do so striue and contend eche with other that wée can not doo such things as wée would doe You shall neuer heare of me that nature is naught but how the fragilitie of the flesh is to bée reasoned of let vs learne of him whiche teacheth Aske him why he sayde for that whiche I would do that I do not but the euil which I hate that do I. What necessitie hindreth his will what force commaundeth him to do things so hatefull so that not that which he would but that which he hated and would not he is constrayned to doo He wil aunswerâ— you O man what art thou that so aunswerest God shall the clay say vnto the potter why hast thou made me so hath not the potter power ouer his claye to make of one lumpe a vessell to honour and an other to dishonour Concerning iustice and grace it may bée well sayd of the giltie whiche is absolued and of the giltie whiche is condemned Take that whiche is thine and go thy wayes I will giue this man that which is not due vnto him Is it not lawfull for me to do what I liste Is thy eye naught bycause I am good Héere yf he should say and why not to me he shall worthely heare O man what art thou that so aunswearest God whome thou séest towardes one of you to bee a moste bountifull bestower and towardes thée a most iust exactor and yet in nether of you vniust Seing that he should be iust yf he punished eyther he whiche is deliuered hath to giue thankes he which is condemned hath not to reprehend Sure it is that our flesh is frayle that our nature is corrupt and so corrupte that it letteth vs that we can not do our dutie let vs not séeke howe it is so but as S. Paul him self did how ye may be deliuered from it and still cry with our selues Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius who shall deliuer me out of the body of this death you stand vppon the possibilitie of the law there are diuersitie of gifts as you knowe can you attaine to all of them there are many sciences as Grammer Rhetoricke Logike c. Who is he of all vs bée he neuer of so excellent a wit that can bee a perfect Gramarian a perfect Logician a perfect Rhetorician a perfecte Philosopher a perfect lawyer a perfecte Phisician the excellent orator lawyer he sayeth There are few which attayne one but both no man can You sée then that God hath commaunded a possible thing and yet that whiche is possible no man can performe by reason of our nature He hath giuen therfore diuers precepts and diuerse vertues which wée can not haue all togither To bée shorte and to make an ende of this parte the olde saying is true non omnia possumus omnes there is none of vs all can doo all things and there is none or very rare is that riche man whiche in all his substaunce possesseth all thinges equallye God hath commaunâ—ed possible things I graunt it But all these possible things wée can not euery one haue not for the weaknesse of nature that is as it was firste made of God least you slaunder God but for the wearinesse of minde which can not haue all vertues togither and alwayes And thus much touching these twoo partes wherby you may vnderstande how wee say that the kéeping of the law is possible And how it is vnpossible This considered I come to your argumentes Your first is taken out of the eleuenth of Mathew and your woordes are these Contrarie to this doctrine is our Sauiour Christ where he willeth vs to take his yoke vppon vs because it is light Tollite iugum meum super vos iugum enim meum suaue est â–ª onus meum leue Take my yoke vppon you for my yoke is sweete and my burden is lighte If it bee a light burden M. Goughs heauy example hath not a peny worth of good skill This is neyther contrarie to his doctrine M. Fecknam neyther is his heauy example voyd of skill But that which causeth you to thincke it to bée contrarie is that you deceyue your selfe and make a Paralogisme as the Logicians call it à fallacia accidentis which I shall bée able to shew you by your doctours For you doe not reason with M. Gough in sensu vniuoco and in his proposed matter He taught you in his sermon that to fulfill the law was impossible you oppose and lay for an aunswere that the yoke of Christe is easie S. Ierome vppon the same place teacheth you that here bée subiecta diuersa therfore in your disputation there is no vniuocatio Your subiectes are Lex and Euangelium the lawe and the Gospell of which two he sayeth thus Quo modo leuius lege Euangelium quum in lege homicidium in Euangelio ira damnetur Qua ratione Euangelij gratia facilior quuÌ„ in lege adulterium in Euangelio concupiscentia puniatur In lege multa precepta sunt quae Apostolus non posse compleri plenissime docet How is the gospell lighter than the law séeing the murder is condemned in the law and anger is condeÌ„ned in the gospel How is the grace of the gospell easier seeing that in the law adulterie and in the gospell concupiscence is punished Many things are commauÌ„ded in the law which the Apostle sheweth most plainly that they can not be accomplished In the law works are required which who soeuer doth shal liue in theÌ„ In the Gospel the will is required which although it haue not the effect yet it léeseth not the reward So that by this Doctor here is a comparison betwixt the law and the gospel and as farre difference there is betwixt your two arguments as is betwixt velle and facere And marke then is this a good argument Non possum facere ergo noÌ„ possum velle I am not able to do therefore I am not able to will or this Possum velle ergo possum facere I am able to wil therfore I am able to do Take which you wil these are your arguments I am sure you sée how little holde there is in them therfore coÌ„fesse the truth giue glorie to God and be not ashamed to haue erred but be ashamed to remayne in your error The gospel sure is easier than the law the grace of Iesus Christ forpasseth surmounteth the letter If you will coÌ„sider your heauy burden and come vnto Christ craue pardoÌ„ for your sins haue a mind to walke in his pathes and where you fall downe desire him to lift you vp to cloth your nakednesse with his garmente you shall find reste and refreshing and this is an easie yoke But yf you will néedes doo when he requireth the will you will
burden your self with an heauie yoke I could alleage vppon this same place of Mathew Theophilact and Glossa ordinaria whiche neyther of them take the place as you do but I passe them ouer because I would be short You your self may read them Your second argument is of like force Where you say thus S. Iohn to this effect sayth Quod mandata eius grauia non sunt That his coÌ„mandements be not heauy yf they be not heauy they be far vnlike M. Goughs lump of lead impossible to be taken vp and remoued It is I say of like sorte as Nicholas de Lyra interpreting the place of Mathew doth alleadge out of Augustine where he sayth thus Mandata graâ—ia non sunt quod exponens Aug. dicit s. amanti The commaundementes are not heauy which S. Augustine expounding sayth that is to the louing S. Iohn sayth so him self in effecte 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For all that is borne of God ouercometh the world For in déede the commaundements beyng tempered with the mercie and goodnesse of our heaueÌ„ly father accepting then all donne when that is pardoned which is not done and as Dauid sayth c. Chy immecha haselichach For with thée is pardon that thou mayst bée feared Then to the child of God to him that hath the victorie of the world that hath Emunah a sure and a stable faith that beléeueth in Christ Iesus the son of God to him the commaÌ„demeÌ„ts are not gréeuous nay they are hamnechmadim mizahab more desirous than gold vinethukim middebasch â–ª and swéeter thaÌ„ honie this is the true sense of the place Your third is this S. Paule in rebuking these idle hearers of the law which say that they can heare it but not doo it and fulfill it writeth Non enim auditores legis iusti sunt apud Deum sed factores legis iustificabuntâ—r For not the hearers of the lawe be iust with God but the doers shall be iustified If they doe the law then it may be done then it is possible Ab esse ad posse is a good argument They do works of the law therfore they may be done First touching the scope of the Apostle you are deceiued Pardon me I speake it not of malice or to taunt I protest but for the truth of the matter The Apostles purpose is not there to rebuke idle hearers of the law say that they can heare it but not fulfil it But he goeth about to conclude al vnder sinne and shew that euery one hath néede of the glory of God and therfore maketh this occupation The Iewes can not exempt them selues from this senteÌ„ce bicause they had the law amongst them NoÌ„ enim qui audiunt legem c. For not they which heare the law are iust with god c. And they did not the lawe as it appeareth in the same place Therefore I maruaile how you conclude out of these words your so strong argument Ab esse ad posse If you wil néedes folow your owne sense muse vpon these wordes Factores legis iustificabuntur the doers of the law shall be iustified Heare what you haue in Glossa ordinaria Iustificabuntur .i. iusti deputabuntur vel iustifient a Deo vt sint factores Non qui ante erant factores post iustificabuntur vt si diceretur homines creabuntur quia ipsa creatione sit vt sint homines Sic ipsi non qui ante erant factores iustificabuntur quia etiam gentes They shal be iustified that is they shal be accompted iust or they shal be made iust of God that they may be doers not which were doers shal be iustified As if it should be sayd men shal be created bicause by the creation they are made men So likewise not they which were doers before shall be iustified bicause the gentiles also This would I repeat vnto you as a thing which you know well inoughe bicause I thinke you haue often read it for that he sayeth wel and truely and according to the scriptures although not verye fit to this place to the end that you may see how litle it serueth for you if you be not mynded to folow my first answer which I thinke and hope you will if you will looke vppon the place And here I beseech you in the mercies of Christ Iesus to consider with your selfe your owne state I thinke the best of you I think you haue not the Bible and other books about you If you had you would neuer alleadge places in such sorte so farre from the purpose of the holy ghost so little to purpose I speake it with griefe of hart the Lord knoweth I am sorie to sée you in such blindnesse right glad would I be to sée the glorie of god appéere in you to your health and saluation â— not to your destruâ—ction Wel the Glosa interlinealis goeth farther Non enim auditores legis .i. pro auditu legis sed factores .i. gratia iustificat eos vt adimpleant legem quia non faciunt vt iustificeÌ„tur sed iustificantur vt faciant For not the hearers of the law that is for the hearing of the law But the dooers that is Grace iustifieth theÌ„ that they may fulfill the lawe bicause they do not the law that they may be iustified but are iustified that they may do it I shall not néede to stand vpon these wordes vt adimpleant legeÌ„ that they may fulfill the Lawe for by that whiche I haue sayde before I trust you vnderstand howe they are to be taken Well let vs go to your fourth Argument The Euangelist Saint Luke of these doers of the Lawe bringeth a full example writing thus of Zacharie and Elizabeth Erant ambo iusti ante Deum c. They were both iuste before God walking in all the commaundementes and iustifications of the Lorde without blame If S. Luke had the Spirit of truthe when he sayd that those twoo walked in al the commaundements then M. Goughe by his deniall and impossibilitie put thereof must needs haue the Spirite of erroure and lying Saint Iohn sayeth Qui dicit se nosse Deum mandata eius non custodit mendax est Hee that sayeth he knoweth God and keepeth not his commaundements is a lyer No doubt M. Fecknam but Sainct Luke had the Spirite of truthe and yet hath not M. Goughe the Spirit of errour and lying He teacheth no contrarie doctrine why you should so conclude Well let vs examine the woordes and so shall wée sée They were both iust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before God. Not the god had nothing to lay to their charges putting Christs deliueraÌ„ce a syde not that he had nothing in their liues to find fault withal his mercie being put a parte NoÌ„ est qui faciat bonum non est vsque ad vnum there is not one that doth good in such sorte not one I truste you will not so say Well how then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .i. Before God You knowe M. FecknaÌ„ which are learned in tongues that this phrase is borowed of the Hebrewe tongue biphne Iehouah and that is so to walk in the sight of the Lord as in the eyes of god As he sayd Si Deos hominesque celare possum If I could or might hyde this from Gods and men c. meaning that hée and she walked vprightly not as dissembling Hipocrites not in a faire shewe to the world as others but their iustice was such as which is done in the sight of God playn and sincere without al dubblnesse And that is be leb hatum and not â–ª be leb tahur And this doth partly note vnto you both Theophilactus and Lyra vpon this place I referre you to the places I néed not to recite the words Let vs goe forward Walking in all the commandements Non quod noÌ„ procauerint sayth your Glossae interlinaris c. Not bicause they sinned not but bicause that thei being washed with the grace of God left to sinne I trust you wil not stumble here neither as though they sinned no more For if we say so veritas Dei non est in nobis the truth of god is not in vs the last word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inculpate blamelesse How this is to be vnderstanded I refer you to Iustinus Martyr in Soluâ—q 141. where he hath in effect these words Iustus ex lege dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui cùm pÌ„cauerit in ijs quae possunt coÌ„donari sà crificioruÌ„ oblatione delicti redemtione remissione accepta mundus efficitur a crimine liber He is said to be iust by the law who after he hath sinned in those things which may be forgiuen hauing remission by the offering of sacrifice redemption of the offence is made cleane frée from fault and so are Elizabeth Zacharie said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blamelesse Touching your last place of s. Iohn chap. v. I haue sayd sufficient before in the place of the .j. Iohn chap. v. This wil I adde by the way that in déede the knowledge of God can not be without efficacie and therfore they that brag them selues to be the childreÌ„ of God and to haue a fayth and walke not in his commaundementes are but lyers Nowe to your authorities of S. Hierome and Augustine S. Ierom wryting of these teachers which sai that it is impossible to kepe the law hath these words Execramur eoruÌ„ blasphemiaÌ„ qui dicunt impossibile aliquid homini à Deo praeceptum esse et mandata eius non a singulis sed ab omnibus in communi posse seruari That is we detest their blasphemie which say that God hath commaunded man to doe any thing impossible and that the commaundements of God may be kept not of euery one in particular but of all in generall He witnesseth that Gods commaundementes may be obserued of euery one in particular and that God commaundeth nothing impossible for he detesteth the contrarie doctrine and calleth it blasphemie and therfore I haue little cause to like it I will not say as other do as I might wel that this is suspect I haue his mind in the same question when he was vrged with the same argument of the Pelagian Possibilia inquit mandata dedit Deus Et quis hoc negat Sed quomodo haec intelligenda sit sententia c. God gaue sayth he coÌ„maundementes which are possible and who denyeth it But how this sentence is to be vnderstode the chosen vessell dothe plainly declare That which was impossible to the law in as much as it was weak bicause of the flesh God sending his owne sonne in the similitude of sinful flesh c. and in an other place he sayth Possibilia praecepit Deus c. God commanded things possible and I graunte it but all these possible things we can not euery man haue Not for the weakenesse of nature least thou slaunder God but for the wearinesse of the minde which can not haue al vertues togither and always Therefore if these be both Ieromes and Ierome be not contrary to him selfe you muste thus vnderstand youre place that he is to be detested which sayeth that God hath commaunded maÌ„ to do any thing that was impossible in it self to be fulfilled had not the frailnesse of mans nature other wayes bin a let and them also that say that euery one in particular beyng a true beleeuer can not fulfill them in him of whose fulnesse wée all receyue and whose Iustice is ours by his gifte and grace And in thus taking of it I trust you will neyther reiect my aunswere neyther condemne M. Gough as one of that sort Now to your place of S. Augustine S. Augustine likewise to the same ende sayth Deus neque impossibile aliquid potuit imperare qui iustus est nec damnaturus est hominem pro eo quòd non potuit vitare qui pius est That is God neyther could commaund any thing that is impossible who is iust neyther will he condemne any man for that which he could not auoyd who is mercifull The contrarie whereof to mayntaine doth blasphemously argue God both of iniustice and impietie VVhen he commaundeth vs to do which M. Gough saith is impossible and condemneth vs For that which he sayth we could not auoyde This place of Augustine is easie enough and hath in it self sufficient to answere you not swaruing a whitte from the state which I haue made you and the true meaning of M. Gough He exhorteth them ther vnto charitie and reprehendeth withall the folish tergiuersations and resistances which they made against the scriptures But a man will say sayth he I can by no meanes loue mine enimies In all the Scriptures God sayth vnto thée that thou canst thou on the contrary part answerest that thou canst not Marke nowe whether should a man beléeue thée or god And therefore bicause the truthe can not lie let mannes frailenesse now leaue his vain excuses Quia nec impossibile c â–ª Bicause he could neither coÌ„maund any thing which is impossible who is iust neyther will condemne man for that that he could not eschue who is mercifull it foloweth Why dost thou resist in vaine Nemo enim quantum possumus For no man knoweth better what we can do or may do than he that hath giuen vs ipsum posse that we may Therefore if the commaundements in themselues are not impossible but by reason of our weakenesse and God dothe giue vs abilitie in this our defect in suche sort as I haue declared before it must néedes follow that his iustice ageinst those that do it not is good and iust and this M. Goughe teacheth He saith also in the beginning of his Epistle In reliquis operibus bonis c. In other good works a man may sometimes pretend some maner of excuse but in hauing charitie no man can excuse him selfe A man may