if he be not in state of grace it is long of himselfe and no want on Gods parte The second place hath not so much as any shewe of wordes for him thus he speaketh Let no man aske an other man Tract 5. in Epis Ioan. but returne to his owne hart and if he finde Charity there he hath securitie for his passage from life to death What neede was there to seeke charity in his hart for security of his saluation if his faith assured him thereof therefore this text maketh flat against him The next Author he citeth is Saint Hylarie in these wordes Sup. 5 cap. Mat. The Kingdome of heauen which our Lord professed to be in him selfe his will is that it be hoped for without any doubtfulnes of vncertayne will at all is an addition otherwise there is no iustification by faith if faith it selfe be made doubtfull First he saith but as we say that the Kingdome of heauen is to be hoped for without anie doubtfulnesse for wee professe certayntie of hope and deny onely certayntie of faith as M. PERKINS confesseth before And as for faith we say with him also it is not doubtfull but very certaine What maketh this to the purpose that a man must beleeue his owne saluation when S. Hilary speaketh there of faith of the resurrection of the dead His last Author is S. Bernard Epist 107. Who is the iust man but he that being loued of God loues him againe which comes not to passe but by the spirit reuealing by faith the eternall promise of God of his saluation to come which reuelation is nothing else but the infusion of spirituall grace by which the deedes of the flesh are mortified the man is prepared to the kingdome of heauen together receiuing in one spirit that whereby he may presume that he is loued and loues againe Note that he saith the reuelation of the spirit to be nothing else but the infusion of spirituall graces and comfort whereby a man hath some feeling of Gods goodnesse towardes him by which as he saith he may presume but not beleeue certainlie that he is loued of God But let S. Bernard in the same place interpret himselfe there he speaketh thus as I cited once before It is giuen to men to tast before hand somewhat of the blisse to come c. Of the which knowledge of our selues now in part perceiued a man doth in the meane season glory in hope but not yet in security His opinion then is expresly that for all the reuelations of the spirit made by faith vnto vs we are not assured for certainty of our saluation but feele great joy through the hope we haue hereafter to receiue it This passage of testimonies being dispatched let vs now come vnto the fiue other reasons which M. PERKINS produceth in defence of their opinion The first reason is That in faith there are two thinges the one is an infallible assurance of those thinges which we beleeue This we graunt and therehence proue as you heard before that there can be no faith of our particular saluation because we be not so fully assured of that but that wee must stand in feare of losing of it Apoc. 3. according to that Holde that which thou hast least perhaps an other receiue thy crowne But the second poynt of faith puts all out of question For saith M. PERKINS it doth assure vs of remission of our sinnes and of life euerlasting in particular Proue that Sir and we neede no more Iohn 1. It is proued out of S Iohn As many as receiued him he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God namely to them that beleeue in his name This text commeth much too short he gaue them power to be the sonnes that is gaue them such grace that they were able and might if they would be sonnes of God but did not assure them of that neither much lesse that they should so continue vnto their liues end I omitte his vnsauoury discourse of eating and beleeuing Christ and applying vnto vs his benefittes which he might be ashamed to make vnto vs that admitte no part of it to be true I confesse that therein faith hath his part if it be joyned with charity and frequentation of the Sacraments This is it which S. Paul teacheth Gal. 3. That not by the workes of Moyses lawe but by faith in Christ Iesus we receiue the promises of the spirit and shall haue hereafter the performance if we obserue those thinges which Christ hath commaunded vs. But what is this to certainty of Saluation But saith he it is the property of faith to apply Christ vnto vs and proues it out of S. Augustine Beleeue and thou hast eaten Againe Send vp thy faith and thou maist holde Christ in heauen c. To which Tract 25. in Ioh. and such like authorities I answere that we finde Christ we holde Christ we see Christ by faith beleeuing him to be the sonne of God and redeemer of the world and Iudge of the quicke and the dead and wee vnderstand and disgest all the mysteries of this holy worde But where is it once said in any of these sentences that we are assured of our saluation we beleeue all these poyntes and many more but we shall be neuer the neare our saluation vnlesse we obserue Gods commaundements The seruant which knowes his Masters will and doth it not shall be beaten with many stripes Luke 12. Ioh. 15. Then you are my friends saith our Sauiour when you shall doe the things which I commaund you which we being vncertaine to performe assure not our selues of his friendship but when to our knowledge we goe as neare it as we can and demaund pardon of our wantes wee liue in good hope of it The second reason is Whatsoeuer the holy Ghost testifieth vnto vs that certainly by faith we must beleeue but the holy Ghost doth particularly testifie vnto vs our saluation ergo the first proposition is true The second is proued thus S. Paul saith the spirit of God beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the children of God The Papists to elude this reason alleage that it doth indeede witnesse our adoption Rom. 8. by some comfortable feeling of Gods fauour towarde vs which may often be mistaken whereof the Apostle warneth vs when he saith beleeue not euery spirit but trie the spirits whether they be of God or no. But saith M. PERKINS by their leaue 1. Ioh. 4. the testimonie of the spirit is more then a bare feeling of Gods grace For it is called the pleadge and earnest of Gods spirit in our harts And therefore it takes away all doubting as in a bargaine the earnest giuen puts all out of question 1. Cor. 1. I answere first out of the place it selfe that there followeth a condition on our parts to be performed which M. PERKINS thought wisedome to conceale For S. Paul saith that the spirit witnesseth with our
containe in them all doctrine needfull to saluation whether it concerne faith or maners and acknowledge no Traditions for such as hee who beleeueth them not cannot be saued Before wee come to the Protestants reasons against Traditions obserue that we deuide Traditions into three sorts The first we tearmed Diuine because they were deliuered by our blessed Sauiour who is God The second Apostolicall as deliuered by the holy Apostles The third Ecclesiasticall instituted and deliuered by the Gouernours of the Church after the Apostles daies And of these three kindes of Traditions we make the same account as of the writings of the same Authors to wit we esteeme no lesse of our Sauiours Traditions than of the soure Gospels or any thing immediatly dictated from the holy Ghost Likewise asmuch honor credit do we giue vnto the Apostles doctrine vnwritten as writtē For incke paper brought no new holines nor gaue any force and vertue vnto either Gods on the Apostles words but they were of the same value and credit vttered by word of mouth as if they had bene written Here the question is principally of diuine Traditions which we hold to be necessarie to saluation to resolue determine many matters of greater difficultie For we deny not but that some such principall poynts of our Faith which the simple are bounde to beleeue vnder paine of damnation may bee gathered out of the holie Scriptures as for example that God is the Creator of the world Christ the Redeemer of the world the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier and other such like Articles of the Creede M. P. goeth about to prooue by these reasons following that the Scriptures containes all matter of beleefe necessary to saluation Testimonie * Deut. 4.2 Thou shalt not adde to the words that I command thee nor take any thing there from Therefore the written worde is sufficient for all doctrine pertaining to saluation If it be saide that this is spoken as well of the vn-written as written worde for there is no mention in the texte of the written worde then M. P. addeth that it must bee vnderstood of the written worde onely because these wordes are as a certaine preface set before a long Comentarie made vpon the written Law ANSWERE Let the words be set where you will they must not bee wrested beyond their proper signifycation The words cited signifie no more then that wee must not either by addition or subtraction change or peruert Gods commandements whether they be written or vnwritten Now to infer that because they areas a preface vnto MOSES Law that therfore nothing must be added vnto the same Law is extreame dotage Why then were the bookes of the Old Testament written afterward if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught besides that one booke of Deuteronomy Shall we thinke that none of the Prophets that liued and wrote many volumes after this had not read these words or that they either vnderstood them not or that vnderstanding them well did wilfullie transgresse against them one of these the Protestants must needes defend or else for very shame surcease the alleadging of this text for the all-sufficiencie of the written word M. P. His testimonie * Esa 8.2 ◠To the Law and testimonie if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth saith M. P. What is to be done in cases of difficultly men must not runne to the Wizardes and Soothsayers but to the Lawe and to the Testimonie commending the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer ANSWERE By the Lawe and testimonie in that place the fiue bookes of MOSES are to bee vnderstood if that written Worde bee sufficient to resolue all doubts what-so-euer What neede wee then the Prophets what neede wee the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles What Wizarde would haue reasoned in such sorte The Prophet willeth there that the Israelites who wanted wit to discerne whether it be better to flie vnto God for councell than vnto Wizardes and Sooth-sayers to see what is written in the Lawe of MOSES concerning that poynt of consulting-Wizards which is there plainely forbidden in diuerse places Now out of one particular case whereof there is expresse mention in the written worde to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoeuer are thereby to be decided is a most vnskilfull parte arguing as great want of light in him as was in those blinde Israelites 3. Testimonie * Iohn 20.31 These things were written that ye might beleue that IESVS is the CHRIST and in beleeuing might haue life euerlasting Here is set down the full end of the Gospell that is to bring men to faith and consequently to saluation to which the whole scripture alone is sufficient without Traditions ANSWERE Here are more faults than lines First the text is craftily mangled Things being put insteede of Miracles For S. IOHN sayeth Many other Miracles CHRIST did c. but these were written c. Secondly S. IOHN sayth not that for faith we shall be saued but beleeuing we should haue saluation in his name which hee clipped off thirdly remember to what faith S. IOHN ascribes the meanes of our saluation not to that whereby we applie vnto our selues Christs righteousnes but by which we beleeue IESVS to be CHRIST the MESSIAS of the Iewes and the Sonne of God which M. P. also concealed Now to the present matter S. IOHN saith that these miracles recorded in his Gospell were written that wee might beleeue IESVS to bee the Sonne of God and beleeuing haue saluation in his name c. Therefore the written word containes all doctrine necessarie to saluation ANSWERE S. IOHN speakes not a word of doctrine but of myracles and therefore to conclude sufficiencie of doctrine out of him is not to care what one sayeth But M. P. sore-seeing this sayeth it cannot be vnderstood of miracles onely for miracles without the doctrine of CHRIST can bring no man to life euerlasting True and therefore that texte speaking onely of myracles prooueth nothing for the sufficiencie of the written Worde CHRISTS miracles were sufficient to prooue him to bee the Sonne of GOD and their MESSIAS But that prooueth not Saincte IOHNS Gospel to containe al Doctrine needful to saluation For many other poynts of faith must be beleeued also And if it alone be sufficient what neede we the other three Gospelles the Actes of the Apostles or any of their Epistles or the same S. IOHNS Reuelations Finallie admit that S. IOHNS Gospell were all-sufficient yet should not Traditions be excluded for Christ sayeth in it in plaine tearmes * Ioh. 16. that he had much more to saye vnto his Apostles but they as then being not able to be are it he reserued that to be deliuered vnto them afterward of which high mysteries S. IOHN recordeth not much in his Gospell after Christs resurrection and so many of them must needes be deliuered by
with this the exposition of Saint Gregory the great Lib. 9. Ep. 39. our Apostle He cannot saith he be called wholie cleane in whome anie part or parcell of sinnes remayneth But let no man resist the voice of truth who saith he that is washed in Baptisme is wholy cleane therefore there is not one dramme of the contagion of sinne left in him whom the cleanser himselfe doth professe to be wholy cleane The very same doth the most learned Doctor S. Ierome affirme Epist ad Oceanum Psal 50. saying How are we iustified and sanctified if anie sin be left remayning in vs Againe if holy king Dauid say Thou shalt wash me and I shall be whiter then snowe how can the blackenes of hell still remayne in his soule briefly it cannot be but a notorious wronge vnto the pretious bloud of our Sauiour to hold that it is not as well able to purge and purifie vs from sinne as Adams transgression was of force to infect vs. Yea the Apostle teacheth vs directly that we recouer more by Christs grace Rom. 5. then we lost through Adams fault in these wordes But not as the offence so also the gift for if by the offence of one manie died so much more the grace of God and the gift in the grace of one man Iesus Christ hath abounded vpon many If then we through Christ receiue more abundance of grace then we lost by Adam there is no more sin left in the newlie baptised man then was in Adam in the state of innocencie albeit other defectes and infirmities doe remaine in vs for our greater humiliation and probation yet all filth of sinne is cleane scoured out of our soules by the pure grace of God powred abundantly into it in Baptisme and so our first Argument stands insoluble Now to the second 2. Object Euery sinne is voluntary and not committed without the consent of man but this concupiscence whereof we talke hath no consent of man but riseth against his will therefore is no sinne M. PERKINS answereth That such actions as are vsed of one man towardes an other must be voluntary but sinne towards God may be committed without our consent For euery want of conformity vnto the lawe euen in our body although against our will be sinnes in the Court of conscience Reply full litle knowes this man what belongeth to the Court of conscience there secret faultes in deede be examined but nothing is taken for sinne by any one learned in that faculty which is done without a mans free consent all of them holding with S. Augustine Lib. 3. de lib. arb cap 17. That sinne is so voluntarie an euill that it cannot be sinne which is not voluntary And to say with M. PERKINS that any want of conformity to reason in our body is sinne is so absurd that a man might that were true be damned from a dreame how well soeuer disposed he went to sleepe if he chaunce to dreame of vncleannes whereupon doth ensue any euill motion in his flesh This paradoxe of sinning without a mans consent is so contrary vnto both naturall and supernaturall reason that S. Augustine auerreth Li. de vera Relig. c. 14. Neither any of the smale number of the learned nor of the multitude of the vnlearned to hold that a man can sinne without his consent What vnlearned learned men then are start vp in our miserable age that make no bones to denie this and greater matters too The third reason for the Catholikes is this Where the forme of anie thing is taken away there the thing it selfe ceaseth but in baptisme the forme of originall sinne is taken away ergo M. PERKINS shifteth in assigning a wronge forme affirming vs to say that the forme of originall sinne is the guiltines of it which we hold to be neither the forme nor matter of it but as it were the proper passiō following it See S. Thomas 1. 2. q. art 3. who deliuereth for the forme of originall sinne the priuation of originall justice which justice made the will subject to God The deordination then of the will Mistres commaunder of all other points in man made by the priuation of originall justice is the forme of originall sinne and the deordination of all other parts of man which by a common name is called concupiscence as that learned Doctor noteth is but the materiall part of that sinne so that the will of the regenerate being by grace through Christ rectified and set againe in good order towardes the lawe of God the forme of originall sinne which consisted in deordination of it is taken quite away by baptisme and so consequently the sinne it selfe which cannot be without his proper forme as the argument doth conuince 4. Object Lastlie saieth M. PERKINS for our disgrace they alleadge that we in our Doctrine teach that originall sinne after baptisme is onely clipped or pared like the heare of a mans head whose rootes remayne in the flesh growing and encreasing after they be cut as before His answere is that they teach in the very first instant of the conuersion of a sinner sinne to receiue his deadly wound in the roote neuer after to be recouered Conferre this last answere with his former Doctrine good Reader and thou maist learne what credit is to be giuen to such Masters no more constant then the winter Here sinne is deadly wounded in the roote there it remayneth still with all the guiltines of it although not imputed there it still maketh the man to sinne intangleth him in the punishment of sinne and maketh him miserable All this he comprehended before in this first reason and yet blusheth not here to conclude that he holdeth it at the first Neither clipped nor pared but pulled vp by the rootes In deede they doe him a fauour who say that he holdeth sinne to be clipped and as it were razed for albeit haire razed grow out againe yet is there none for a season but this originall sinne of his is alwayes in his regenerate in vigour to corrupt al his workes and to make them deadly sinnes But let this suffice for this matter CHAPTER 3. OF THE CERTAYNTIE OF SALVATION OVR CONSENTS M. PERKINS FIRST CONCLVSION Pag. 37. WE hold and beleeue that a man in this life may be certayne of saluation and the same doth the Church of Rome teach M. P. 2. Conclu We hold that a man is to put certayne affiance in Gods mercy in Christ for the saluation of his soule and the same holdeth the aforesaid Romane Church M. P. 3. Conclu We hold that with assurance of saluation in our hartes is ioyned doubting and there is no man so assured of his saluation but he at sometime doubteth thereof especially in the time of temptation and in this the Papists agree with vs. Not so Sir M. P. 4. Conclu They goe further and say that a man may be certayne of the saluation of men and of the Church by Catholike faith
yet not being sure of my loue towardes him I am not assured of saluation for as S. Iohn testifieth He that loueth not abideth in death 1. Iohn 3. So I answere to the second article named by M. PERKINS that is I beleeue that God of his infinite mercie through the merits of Christs passion doth pardon all those who being hartely sorry for their sinnes doe humbly confesse them and fully purpose to leade a newe life that I my selfe am such a one I doe verely hope because I haue as farreforth as I could to my knowledge performed those thinges which God requires of me but because I am but a fraile creature and may perhaps not haue done all that so well as I ought or am not so well assured of that which by Gods helpe I haue done I can not beleeue it for in matter of faith as you shall heare shortly there can be no feare or doubt The like answere is giuen to the article of life euerlasting I beleeue that I shall haue life euerlasting Math. 19. if I fulfill that which our Sauiour taught the younge man demaunding what he must doe to haue life euerlasting to witte if I keepe all Gods commaundements but because I am not assured that I shall so doe yea the Protestants though falsely assure vs that no man by any helpe of Gods grace can so doe I remayne in feare But saieth M. PERKINS the Diuell may so beleeue the articles of the creede vnlesse we doe apply those articles to our selues First I say the Diuell knowes to be true all that we doe beleeue and therefore are said by Saint Iames to beleeue but they want a necessarie condition of faith that is a Godly and deuout submission of their vnderstanding vnto the obedience of faith and so haue no faith to speake properly Againe they trust not in God for saluation nor indeuour not any manner of way to obtayne saluation as Christians doe and so there is greate difference betweene their beleefe in the articles of the creede and ours M. PERKINS in his first exception grauntes Pag. 54. That commonly men doe not beleeue their saluation as infallibly as they doe the articles of the faith yet saith he some speciall men doe Whereof I inferre by his owne confession that our particular saluation is not to be beleeued by faith for whatsoeuer we beleeue by faith is as infallible as the word of God which assureth vs of it Then if the common sort of the faithfull doe not beleeue their saluation to be as infallible as the articles of our creede yea as Gods owne word they are not by faith assured of it Now that some speciall good men either by reuelation from God or by long exercise of a vertuous life haue a great certainty of their saluation we willingly confesse but that certainty doth rather belong to a well grounded hope then to an ordinary faith The third reason for the Catholikes is that we are bidden to pray daily for the remission of our sinnes Mat. 6. But that were needelesse if we were before assured both of pardon and saluation M. PERKINS answereth First that we pray daily for the remission of new sinnes committed that day Be it so What needes that if we were before assured of pardon Marry saith he because our assurance was but weake and small our prayer is to encrease our assurance Good Sir doe you not see how you ouerthrowe your selfe If your assurance be but weake and small it is not the assurance of faith which is as great and as strong as the truth of God We giue God thankes for those giftes which we haue receaued at his bountifull handes and desire him to encrease or continue them if they may be lost But to pray to God to giue vs those thinges we are assured of by faith is as fond and friuolous as to pray him to make Christ our Lord to be his Sonne or that there may be life euerlasting to his Saints in heauen of which they are in full and assured possession And so these three Arguments by M. PERKINS propounded here for vs are verie substantiall and sufficient to assure euery good Christian that he may well hope for saluation doeing his dutie but may not without great presumption assure him by faith of it To these I will adde two or three others which M. PERKINS afterwardes seekes to salue by his exceptions as he tearmes them To his first exception I haue answered before The second I will put last for orders sake and answere to the third first which is Pag. 56. The Catholikes say we are indeede to beleeue our saluation on Gods part who is desirous of all mens saluation very rich in mercy and able to saue vs but our feare riseth in regard of our selues because the promises of remission of sinnes depend vpon our true repentance Luke 13. Vnlesse you doe penance ye shall all perish And the promises of saluation is made vpon condition of keeping Gods commandements Mat. 19. 2. Tim. 2. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Againe No man shall be crowned except he combat lawfully Now we not knowing whether we shall well performe these thinges required by God at our handes haue iust cause to feare lest God do not on his part performe that which he promiseth vpon such conditions To this M. PERKINS answereth That for faith and true repentance euery man that hath them knoweth well that he hath them To which I reply that for faith being rightly taken it may be knowne of the party that hath it because it is a light of the vnderstanding and so being like a lampe may be easely seene but true repentance requires besides faith both hope and charitie which are seated in the darke corners of the will and can not by faith be seene in themselues but are knowne by their effects which being also vncertayne doe make but conjectures and a probable opinion so that place of S. Paul may be omitted where he saith 2. Cor. 13. Proue your selues whether you be in faith or no. Because we accord that it may be tryed by vs whether we haue faith or no although I knowe well that S. Paules wordes carry a farre different sence But let that passe as impertinent To the other That we haue receiued the spirit which is of God 1. Cor. 2.12 that we might know the thinges which are giuen of God What thinges these are which the spirit reuealeth to vs S. Paul teacheth in the same place That which the eye hath not seene nor eare hath heard c. God hath prepared for them that loue him but to vs God hath reuealed by his spirit All this is true but who they be that shall attayne to that blessed Banquet by God so prepared God onely knoweth by his spirit reuealeth it to very fewe And will you learne out of S. Ierome that auncient Doctor the cause why In 3. caput Ione
for Christs wisedome power and other gifts are not imputed vnto vs as it is euident Why thē is his justice more then the rest we confesse that in a good sence all Christs gifts are ours that is they were all employed to purchase our redemption we doe dayly offer them to God that he wil for his Sonnes sake more and more wash vs from our sinnes and bestow his graces more plentifull vpon vs thus are all Christs riches ours so long as we keepe our selues members of his misticall body but this is nothing to the point which the argument touched how one man may formally be made just by the justice of an other rather then wise by the wisdome of an other 2. Object If we be righteous or iust by the righteousnes of Christ imputed vnto vs then is euery iust man as righteous as Christ himselfe hauing the same iustice his which is Christs but that is too too absurd ergo M. PERK answere Christs righteousnes is not applied vnto vs in the same measure as it is in Christ in him it is infinit but of it so much is applied to this or that man as will serue for his iustification And to helpe this answere foreward I will adde his marginall note euen as any starre partakes the whole light of the Sunne with the rest so farreforth as the light makes it to shine Reply That which is applied of Christs justice to this or that man is either infinite then the man is as just as Christ for there can be no greater then infinit in the same kinde Or it is not infinit but in a certayne measure as he seemeth to graunt and then it is no part of Christs infinit justice for all the partes of an infinit thing are infinit according vnto true Philosophy It remayneth then that a certayne limited portion of justice is deriued out of Christs infinit justice and powred into this or that man as in his owne example The light of euery starre is receiued from the Sunne beames Yet is not the light in the starre the same which is in the Sun for one accident cannot be in two subjects so far distant neither is it of like vertue to lighten the skyes as it is euident but is a farre dimmer light somewhat like vnto that of the Sunne from whence it came Euen so in our justification from the Sonne of justice CHRIST IESVS certayne beames of particular justice are conueyed into this or that mans soule whereby it is both lighned by faith and inflamed by charitie but there is exceeding difference betweene their two justices more then there is betweene the light of the sunne the light of a starre which S. August in expresse tearmes deliuereth saying How much differēce there is betweene the light that doth lighten Li. 12. conf cap. 15. that which is lightened that is the sun the starre light so much difference is there between the iustice that doth iustifie that iustice which is made by that iustification to wit betweene the justice of Christ and that which is in euery good Christian The third reason for the Catholike partie If men be made trulie and really just by Christs justice imputed vnto them in like manner Christ should be made really vnjust by the iniquity and sinnes of men imputed vnto him For there is no reason to the contrary but one may aswell be made vnjust by imputation as just especially considering that euill is made more easelie and more wayes then good M. PERKINS answere is that we may say Christ was a sinner trulie not because he had sinne in him but because our sinnes were laide on his shoulders That reason is naught for he is not trulie a sinner that paies the debt of sinne which an innocent and most just person may performe but he that either hath sinne trulie in him or is so by imputation stroken that the sins are made his owne really and he in all cases to be delt with all as if he sinned himselfe as they holde that one justified by imputation of Christs justice is really in Gods sight just and is both loued in this life and shall be rewarded in the next as if he were trulie just indeede But to auouch our Sauiour Christ to be so a sinner is to say that he was auerted from God the slaue of the Diuell and sonne of perdition which is playne blasphemy That sentence out of the Prophet Isay 53. He was counted with sinners is expounded by the Euangelists that he was so taken indeede but by a wicked Iudge and a reprobate people And therefore if you allowe of their sentence range your selfe with them as one of their number S. Chrysostome by him produced confirmeth the same saying that God permitted him to be condemned as a sinner not that he was one trulie Christ I knowe is called sinne by S. Paul but by a figure signifying that he was a sacrifice for sinne as hath beene before declared The same blessed Apostle when he speaketh properly Heb. 4 affirmeth in playne tearmes that Christ was tempted like vnto vs in all thinges excepting sinne 4 Obiect If a man be righteous only by imputation he may together be full of iniquity whereupon it must needes followe that God doth take for iust and good him that is both vniust and wicked but that is absurd when Gods iudgment is according to truth Here M. PERKINS yeeldeth That when God doth impute Christs iustice vnto any man he doth together sanctifie the partie giuing original sinne a deadly wounde Of orig sin pag. 31. And yet else where he said That originall sinne which remayned after iustification in the partie did beare such sway that it infected all the workes of the said partie and made him miserable c. But it is good hearing of amendment if he will abide in it Let vs goe on 5 Obiect or fift reason is inuented by M. PERKINS but may bee rightly framed thus Christ restored vs that iustice which we lost by Adams fall but by him we lost inhehent iustice ergo By him we are restored to inherent iustice The Maior is gathered out of S. Paul Rom. 5. who affirmeth that we receiue more by Christ Lib. 3. c. 20. li. 6. de gen 24. 26. 26. then we lost by Adam And is S. Ireneus and S. Augustines most expresse doctrine who say How are we said to be renewed if we receiue not againe which the first man lost c. Immortality of body we receiue not but we receiue iustice from the which he fell through sinne The sixt and last reason for Catholikes is The iustice of the faithfull is eternall dureth after this life and is crowned in heauen but Christs imputed iustice ceaseth in the end of this life ergo M. PERKINS answereth First that imputed righteousnes continueth with vs for euer and that in heauen we shall haue no other Secondly that perhaps in the end of this life inward
righteousnes shall be perfect and then without perhaps it shall be most perfect in heauen So that one part of this answere ouerthroweth the other Wherefore I need not stand vpon it but will proceede to fortifie our partie with some authorities taken both forth of the Holy scriptures and auncient Fathers The first place I take out of these wordes of S. Paul And these thinges certes were you 1. Cor. 6. Dronkers Couetous Fornicators c. But you are Washed you are Sanctified you are Iustified in the name of our LORD IESVS CHRIST and in the spirit of our Lord Here iustification by the best interpreters iudgement is defined S. Chrysos Ambro. Theophil in hunc locum Tit. 3. to consist in those actions of washing vs from our sinnes and of infusion of Gods Holy giftes by the holy Ghost in the name and the sake of CHRIST IESVS The like description of our iustification is in S. Paul Of his mercy he hath saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renuinge of the Holy Ghost whome he hath powred into vs abundantly through IESVS CHRIST our Sauiour that being iustified by his grace we may be heires in hope and not in certayntie of faith of life euerlasting Where the Apostle inferring that being iustified by his grace declareth that in the words before he had described the same iustification to consist in our new birth of Baptisme and the renewing of our soules by the infusion of his heauenly giftes which God of his mercy did bestowe vpon vs for his Sonne Christs sake Many other places I omitte for breuitie sake and will be content to cite fewe Fathers because the best learned of our aduersaries doe confesse that they be all against them as I haue shewed before First S. Augustine saith That this iustice of ours De peccat merit re miss cap. 15 Epist 85. Lib. 12. de Trinit cap 7. Lib. 6. de Trinit which they call righteousnes is the grace of Christ regenerating vs by the Holy Ghost And is a beautie of our inward man It is the renuing of the reasonable part of our soule And twenty other such like whereby he manifestly declareth our justice to be inherent and not the imputed justice of Christ Let him suffice for the Latin Fathers And S. Cyrill for the Greekes who of our iustification writeth thus The spirit is a heate who as soone as he hath powred charity into vs and hath with the fire of it inflamed our mindes we haue euen then obtayned iustice THE SECOND DIFFERENCE ABOVT THE MANner of Iustification WE all agree in generall that faith concurreth to our justification but differ in three poyntes 1. How faith is to be taken 2. How it worketh in our justification 3. Whether it alone doth justifie Concerning the first poynt Catholikes holde a justifying faith to be that Christian faith by which we beleeue the articles of our Creede and all other thinges reuealed by God The Protestants auerre it to be a particular faith whereby they apply to themselues the promises of righteousnesse and of life euerlasting by Christ This to be the true justifying faith M. PERKINS saith he hath proued already he shoulde haue donne well to haue noted the place for I knowe not where to seeke it but he will here adde a reason or twaine 1 Reason The faith whereby we liue is the faith whereby we are iustified but the faith whereby we liue is a particular faith whereby we apply Christ to our selues as Paul saieth Gal. 2.20 I liue that is spiritually by the faith of the sonne of God which faith he sheweth to be a particular faith in Christ in the wordes following Who hath loued me and giuen himselfe for me particularly Answere The Maior I admitte and deny the Minor and say that the proofe is not to purpose For in the Minor he speaketh of faith wherby we apply Christs merits vnto our selues making them ours in the proof S. Paul saith only that Christ died for him in particular He makes no mention of his apprehending of Christs iustice and making of it his owne which are very distinct thinges All Catholikes beleeue with S. Paul that Christ died as for all men in generall so for euery man in particular yea and that his loue was so exceeding great towardes mankinde that he would willingly haue bestowed his life for the redemption of one only man But hereupon it doth not followe that euery man may lay handes vpon Christs righteousnes and apply it to himselfe or else Turkes Iewes Heretikes and euill Catholikes might make very bolde with him but must first doe those thinges which he requires at their handes to be made pertakers of his inestimable merits as to repent them hartely of their sins to beleue and hope in him to be baptized and to haue a full purpose to obserue all his commaundements Which M. PER. also confesseth that all men haue not only promised Pag. 152. but also vowed in Baptisme Now because we are not assured that we shall performe all this therefore we may not so presumptuously apply vnto our selues Christs righteousnes life euerlasting although we beleeue that he died for euery one of vs in particular That which followeth M. PER. hath no colour of probability that S. Paul in this manner of beleefe that is in applying to himselfe Christs merits was an example vnto all that are saued 1. Tim. 1 16 Phil. 3.15 See the places good Reader and learne to beware the bolde vnskilfulnesse of sectaries For there is not a worde sounding that way but only how he hauing receiued mercy was made an example of patience M. PERKINS 2. Reason That which we must aske of God in prayer that we must beleeue shall be giuen vs but in prayer me must aske the merits of Christes righteousnesse to our selues ergo Answere Of the Maior much hath beene said before here I admitte it all due circumstances of prayer being obserued deny that we must pray that our Sauiour Christ Iesus merits may be made ours in particular for that were greatly to abase them but good Christians pray that through the infinite value of those his merits our sinnes may be forgiuen a justice proportionable vnto our capacity may be powred into our soules whereby we may leade a vertuous life and make a blessed end But it is goodly to beholde how M. PERKINS proueth that me must pray that Christs righteousnes may be made our particular justice because saith he We are taught in the Pater noster to pray in this manner forgiue vs our debts and to this we must say Amen which is as much to say as our petition is graunted I thinke the poore mans wits were gonne a pilgrimage when he wrote thus Good Sir cannot our sinnes or debts be forgiuen without we apply Christs righteousnes to vs in particular we say yes Doe not then so simply begge that which is in question nor take that for giuen which will
Peters faith so much magnified by the auncient Fathers and highlie rewarded by our Sauiour was it any other Then that our Sauiour was Christ Math. 16 the Sonne of the liuing God And briefly let S. Iohn that great secretarie of the Holy Ghost tell vs what faith is the finall end of the whole Gospell Ioh 20. These thinges saith he are written that you may beleeue that IESVS is CHRIST the Sonne of God and that beleeuing you may haue life in his name With the Euangelist the Apostle S. Paul accordeth very well saying Rom. 10. This is the word of faith which we preach for if thou cōfesse with thy mouth our Lord IESVS CHRIST and shalt beleeue in thy hart that God raised him from death thou shalt be saued And in an other place ◠Cor. 15. I make knowne vnto you the Gospell which I haue preached and by which you shall be saued vnlesse perhaps you haue beleeued in vayne What was that Gospell I haue deliuered vnto you that which I haue receiued that Christ died for our sinnes according to the Scriptures was buried and rose againe the third day c. So by the verdite of S. Paul the beleefe of the articles of the creede is that justifying faith by which you must be saued And neither in S. Paul nor any other place of Holy Scriptures is it once taught that a particular faith whereby we applie Christs righteousnes to our selues assure our selues of our saluation is either a justifying or any Christian mans faith but the very naturall act of that ougly Monster presumption Which being layd as the very corner stone of the Protestants irreligion what morall and modest conuersation what humility and deuotion can they build vpon it The second difference in the manner of justification is about the formall act of faith which M. PERKINS handleth as it were by the way cuttedly I will be as shorte as he the matter not being great The Catholikes teach as you haue heard out of the Councell of Trent in the beginning of this question that many actes of faith feare hope and charity doe goe before our justification preparing our soule to receiue into it from God through Christ that great grace M. PERKINS Doctor like resolueth otherwise That faith is an instrument created by God in the hart of man at his conuersion whereby he apprehendeth and receiueth Christs righteousnes for his iustification This joylie description is set downe without any other probation then his owne authority that deliuered it and so let it passe as already sufficiently confuted And if there needed any other disproofe of it I might gather one more out of this owne explication of it where he saith that the couenant of grace is communicated vnto vs by the word of God and by the Sacraments For if faith created in our hartes be the only sufficient supernaturall instrument to apprehend that couenant of grace then there needes no Sacraments for that purpose and consequently I would fayne know by the way how litle infants that can not for want of judgement and discretion haue any such act of faith as to lay hold on Christ his justice are justified Must we without any warrant in Gods word contrary to all experience beleeue that they haue this act of faith before the come to any vnderstanding But to returne vnto the sound doctrine of our Catholike faith M. PER. findes two faults with it one that we teach faith to goe before justification whereas by the word of God saith he at the very instant when any man beleeueth first he is then both justified and sanctified What word of God so teacheth Marry this He that beleeueth eateth and drinketh the body and bloud of Christ and is already passed from death to life Io. 6.54 I answere that our Sauiour in that text speaketh not of beleeuing but of eating his body in the blessed Sacrament which who so receiueth worthely obtayneth thereby life euerlasting as Christ saith expressely in that place And so this proofe is vayne Now will I proue out of the holy Scriptures that faith goeth before justification first by that of S. Paul Whosoeuer calleth on the name of our Lord Rom. 10. shall be saued but how shall they call vpon him in whome they doe not beleeue how shall they beleeue without a preacher c. Where there is this order set downe to arriue vnto justification First to heare the preacher then to beleeue afterwardes to call vpon God for mercy and finally mercy is graunted giuen in justification so that prayer goeth betweene faith and justification This S. Augustine obserued when he said Faith is giuen first De prede◠sanct ca. 7 De spirit lit cap. 30 by which we obteyne the rest And againe By the lawe is knowledge of sinne by faith we obtayne grace and by grace our soule is cured If we list to see the practise of this recorded in holy write read the second of the actes and there you shall finde how that the people hauing heard S. Peters Sermon were stroken to the hartes and beleeued yet were they not straight way justified but asked of the Apostles what they must doe who willed them to doe penance and to be baptized in the name of IESVS in remission of their sinnes then loe they were justified so that penance and baptisme went betweene their faith and their justification In like manner Queene Candaces Eunuch hauing heard S. Philippe announcing vnto him Christ beleeued that IESVS CHRIST was the Sonne of God no talke in those dayes of applying vnto himselfe Christs righteousnes yet was he not justified before descending out of his chariot he was baptized Act. 8. And three dayes passed betweene S. Paules conuersion and his justification as doth euidently appeare by the historie of his conuersion Act. 9. The second fault he findeth with our faith is that we take it to be nothing else but an illumination of the minde stirring vp the will which being so moued and helped by grace causeth in the hart many good spirituall motions But this sayes M. PERKINS is as much to say that dead men only helped can prepare themselues to their resurrection Not so good Sir but that men spiritually dead being quickned by Gods spirit may haue many good motions for as our spirit giueth life vnto our bodies so the spirit of God by his grace animateth and giueth life vnto our soules But of this it hath beene once before spoken at large in the question of free will Pag. 84. THE THIRD DIFFERENCE CONCERNING FAITH IS this The Papists say that man is iustified by faith yet not by faith alone but also by other vertues as the feare of God hope loue c. The reasons which are brought to maintayne their opinion are of no moment well let vs heare some of them that the indifferent Reader may iudge whether they be of any moment or no. M. PERKINS first Reason
be set to worke and if it doe not act that which it is set too then there wanted some thing requisite And consequently that was not the whole cause of that worke Now to the second proposition But their imagined faith can not apply to themselues Christs righteousnes without the presence of hope and charity For else he might be justified without any hope of heauen and without any loue towardes God and estimation of his honour which are thinges most absurd in themselues but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification which is nothing else but the playne vice of presumption as hath beene before declared Yet to auoid this inconuenience which is so great M. PE. graunteth that both hope and charity must needes be present at the justification but doe nothing in it but faith doth all as the head is present to the eie whē it seeth yet it is the eie alone that seeth Here is a worthy peece of Philosophy that the eie alone doth see whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seing the soule being the principall cause of sight as it is of all other actions of life sence and reason and it is not to purpose here where we require the presence of the whole cause not only of the instrumentall cause And to returne your similitude vpon your selfe as the eie cannot see without the head because it receiueth influence from it before it cā see so cannot faith justifie without charity because it necessarily receiueth spirit of life from it before it can doe any thing acceptable in Gods sight The fourth reason if faith alone doe justifie then faith alone will saue but it will not saue ergo M. PERKINS first denyeth the proposition and saith That it may iustifie and yet not saue because more is required to saluation then to iustification Which is false for put the case that an Innocent babe dye shortly after his baptisme wherein he was justified shall he not be saued for want of any thing I hope you will say yes euen so any man that is justified if he depart in that state no man makes doubt of his saluation therefore this first shift was very friuoulous Which M. PERKINS perceiuing flies to a second that for faith alone we shall also be saued that good workes shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement Then must those wordes of the holy Ghost so often repeted in the Scriptures be razed out of the text God at that time will render vnto euery man according to his workes But of this more amply in the question of merits 5. Reason There be many other vertues vnto which justification and saluation are ascribed in Gods word therefore faith alone sufficeth not The Antecedent is proued first of feare it is said He that is without feare Ecclesias 1. Rom. 8. Luc. 13. 1. Ioan. 3. cannot be iustified We are saued by hope Vnlesse you doe penance you shall all in like sort perish We are translated from death to life that is justified because we loue the brethren Againe of baptisme Vnlesse you be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen Lastly we must haue a resolute purpose to amend our euill liues Rom. 6. For we are buried together with Christ by baptisme into death that as Christ is risen from the dead c. So we may also walke in newes of life To all these and many such like places of Holy Scripture it pleased M. PERKINS to make answere in that one Rom. 8. You are saued by hope to wit that Paules meaning is only that we haue not as yet saluation in possession but must wayte patiently for it vntill the time of our full deliuerance this is all Now whether that patient expectation which is not hope but issueth out of hope of eternall saluation or hope it selfe be any cause of saluation he sayeth neither yea nor nay leaues you to thinke as it seemeth best vnto your selfe S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of saluation it is best to beleeue him so neither to exclude hope or charity or any of the foresaid vertues from the worke of justification hauing so good warrant as the word of God for the confirmation of it To these authorities and reasons taken out of the holy Scriptures let vs joyne here some testimonies of the auncient Church reseruing the rest vnto that place wherein M. PER. citeth some for him The most auncient and most valiant Martir S. Ignatius of our justification writeth thus Epist ad Philip. The beginning of life is faith but the end of it is charity but both vnited and ioyned together doe make the man of God perfect Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith Faith goeth before Libr. 2. strom but feare doth build and charity bringeth to perfection Saint Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople hath these wordes Least the faithfull should trust that by faith alone they might be saued Hom. 70. in Mat. he disputeth of the punishment of euill men and so doth he both exhort the Infidels to faith and the faithfull to liue well Lib. 3. hypognost S. Augustine cryeth out as it were to our Protestants and saith Heare O foolish Heretike and enemy to the true faith Good workes which that they may be donne are by grace prepared and not of the merits of free will we condemne not because by them or such like men of God haue beene iustified are iustified and shall be iustified De side oper c. 14. And Now let vs see that which is to be shaken out of the harts of the faithfull Least by euill security they lose their saluation if they shall thinke faith alone to be sufficient to obtayne it Now the doctrine which M. PERKINS teacheth is cleane contrary For saith he A sinner is iustified by faith alone that is nothing that man can doe by nature or grace concurreth thereto as any kind of cause but faith a lone Farther he saith That faith it selfe is no principall but rather an instrumentall cause whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnes for our iustification So that in fine we haue that faith so much by them magnified and called the only and whole cause of our justification is in the end become no true cause at all but a bare condition without which we cannot be justified If it be an instrumentall cause Conditio sine qua non let him then declare what is the principall cause whose instrument faith is and choose whether he had leifer to haue charity or the soule of man without any helpe of grace But to come to his reasons The first is taken out of these wordes As Moyses lift vp the serpent in the desart Ioh. 3. so must the sonne of man be lift vp that whosoeuer beleeueth in him shall not perish but haue life euerlasting True if he liue accordingly and as his faith teacheth
him but what is this to justification by only faith Marry M. PERKINS drawes it in after this fashion As nothing was required of them who were strong by serpents but that they should looke vpon the brasen serpent So nothing is required of a sinner to deliuer him from sinne but that he cast his eye of faith vpon Christs righteousnes and apply that to himselfe in particular But this application of the similitude is only mans foolish inuention without any ground in the text Similttudes be not in all poynts alike neither must be streatched beyond the very poynt wherein the similitude lyeth which in this matter is that like as the Israelites in the Wildernes stoung with serpents were cured by looking vpon the brasen serpent so men infected with sin haue no other remedy then to embrace the faith of Christ Iesus All this we confesse but to say that nothing else is necessary that is quite besides the text and as easely rejected by vs as it is by him obtruded without any authority or probability His 2. reason is collected of exclusiue speeches as he speaketh vsed in Scriptures Gal 2.16 As we are iustified freely not of the lawe not by the lawe not of workes not of our selues not of the workes of the lawe but by faith all boasting excluded Luke 8.50 only beleeue These distinctions whereby works the law are excluded in the worke of justification include thus much that faith alone doth justifie It doth not so for these exclusiue speeches do not exclude feare hope and charity more then they exclude faith it selfe Which may be called a worke of the lawe aswell as any other vertue being as much required by the lawe as any other But S. Paules meaning in those places is to exclude all such workes as either Iewe or Gentile did or could bragge of as donne of themselues and so thought that by them they deserued to be made Christians For he truly saith that all were concluded in sinne and needed the grace of God which they were to receiue of his free mercy through the merits of Christ and not of any desart of their owne And that to obtayne this grace through Christ it was not needefull nay rather hurtfull to obserue the ceremonies of Moyses lawe as Circumcision the obseruation of any of their feastes or fastes nor any such like worke of the lawe which the Iewes reputed so necessary Againe that all morall workes of the Gentiles could not deserue this grace which workes not proceeding from charity were nothing worth in Gods sight And so all workes both of Iewe and Gentile are excluded from being any meritorious cause of justification and consequently all their boasting of their owne forces their first justification being freely bestowed vpon them Yet all this notwithstanding a certaine vertuous disposition is required in the Iewe and Gentile whereby his soule is prepared to receiue that great grace of justification that say we is faith feare hope loue and repentance that say the Protestants is faith only Wherefore say we as the excluding of workes and boasting exclude not faith no more doe they exclude the rest faith being as well our worke and a worke of the lawe as any of the rest and all the rest being of grace as well as faith and as farre from boasting of as faith it selfe Now that out of S Luke beleeue only is nothing to the purpose For he was bid beleeue the raysing of his daughter to life and not that Christs righteousnes was his and faith alone may be a sufficient disposition to obtayne a myracle but not to obtayne justification of which the question only is Consider now good Reader whether of our interpretations agree better with the circumstances of the text and the judgement of the auncient Fathers The texts see thou in the Testament Take for a taste of the Fathers judgement S. Augustines exposition of those places of S. Paul of one of the chiefest of which thus he speaketh Men not vnderstanding that which the Apostle saith We esteeme a man to be iustified without the lawe De gra lib. aâ—b c 7. thought him to say that faith sufficed a man althoug he liued euill and had no good workes which God forbid that the vessell of election should thinke And againe De predest sanct c 7. Therefore the Apostle saith that a man is iustified by faith and not of workes because saith is first giuen and by it the rest which are properly called workes and in which we liue justlie are by petition obtayned By which it is manifest that S. Paul excluding the workes of the lawe and the workes donne by our owne only forces doth not meane to exclude good workes which proceede from the helpe of Gods grace THAT FAITH ONLY DOTH NOT IVSTIFIE MASTER PERKINS third Argument Very reason may teach vs thus much that no gift in man is apt as a spirituall hand to receiue and apply Christ and his righteousnesse vnto a sinner sauing faith loue hope feare repentance haue their seuerall vses but none of them serue for this ende of apprehending but faith only Amswere Mans reason is but a blinde mistris in matters of faith and he that hath no better an instructor in such high misteries must needs know little But what if that also faile you in this poynt then euery man cannot but see how naked you are of all kinde of probability I say then that reason rather teacheth the contrary For in common sence no man apprehendeth and entreth into the possession of any thing by beleeuing that he hath it For if a man shoulde beleeue that he is rich of honour wise or vertuous Doth he thereby become presently such a one nothing lesse His faith and perswasion is no fitte instrument to apply and drawe these thinges to himselfe as all the worlde sees How then doth reason teach me that by beleeuing Christes righteousnesse to bee mine owne I lay hand on it and make it mine Againe Christs righteousnes according to their owne opinion is not receiued into vs at all but is ours only by Gods imputation what neede we then faith as a spirituall hand to receiue it If they say as M. PERKINS doth that faith is as it were a condition required in vs which when God seeth in vs he presently imputeth Christs righteousnesse to vs and maketh it ours Then will I be bolde to say that any other vertue is as proper as faith to haue Christ applyed vnto vs there being no other aptnesse requisite in the condition it selfe but only the will and ordinance of God then euery thing that it shal please him to appoynt is alike apt and so M. PERKINS had small reason to say that faith was the only apt instrument to apply to vs Christs righteousnesse Moreouer true diuine reason teacheth me that both hope and charity doe much more apply vnto Christians all Christes merits and make them doe then faith For what faith assureth me of in
generall that hope applyeth vnto me in particular by faith I beleeue CHRIST to be the Sauiour of all mankind by hope I trust to be made partaker of that saluation in him But charity doth yet giue me a greater confidence of saluation for by the rule of true charity as I dedicate and imploy my life labours and all that I haue to the seruice of God so all that God hath is made mine so farre forth as it can be made mine according vnto that sacred lawe of friendshippe Amicorum omnia sunt communia And therefore in true reason neither by faith nor any other vertue we take such holde on Christs merittes nor haue such interest in his inestimable treasures as by charity which S. Augustine vnderstoode well when he made it the modell and measure of justification saying That Charity beginning De nat gra c. vlt. was Iustice beginning Charity encreased was Iustice encreased great Charity was great Iustice and perfect Charity was perfect Iustice M. PERKINS fourth Reason is taken from the iudgement of the auncient Church They are blessed to whome without any labour or worke donne Ambros in Rom. 4. iniquities are remitted So no workes or repentance is required of them but only that they beleeue To these and such like wordes I answere First that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses Secondly that that Author excludeth not repentance but only the workes of Moyses lawe which the Iewes helde to be necessary as circumcision and such like see the place and conferre with it that which he hath written in the same worke vpon the fourth to the Hebrewes where hee hath these wordes Faith is a great thing and without it it is not possible to be saued but faith alone doth not suffice but it is necessary that faith vvorke by charity and conuerse worthy of God M. PERKINS next authority is gathered out of S. Augustine De verb. Ap. ser 40. There is one propitiation for all sinners to beleeue in Christ True but where is it that we neede nothing else but to beleeue Hesichius saith Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone Leuit. li. 1. cap. 2. and not of workes that is we doe not meritte by our workes done before grace anything at GODS hand but of his mercy receiue both faith and iustification 4. Bernard hath Whosoeuer thirsteth after righteousnes let him beleeue in thee Sup. cant serm 22. that being iustified by faith alone he way haue peace with God Answere By faith alone he excludeth all other meanes that either Iewe or Gentile required but not charity Which his very wordes include for howe can wee abhorre sinne and thirst after justice without charity and in the same worke Serm. 24. He declareth playnely that he comprehendeth alwayes charity when hee speakes of a justifying faith saying A right faith doth not make a man righteous if it worke not by Charity And againe Neither workes without faith nor faith without workes is sufficient to make the soule righteous Gal. 3. 5. Chrysostome they said he who rested on faith alone was accursed but Paul sheweth that he is blessed who rested on faith alone Answere He speakes of the Iewes who held Christians accursed because resting on the faith in Christ would not obserue withall Moyses law the Apostle contrary wise denounceth them accursed Gal. 5. who would joyne the ceremonies of Moyses lawe with Christian religion and so faith alone there excludeth onely the old lawe not the workes of charity so he mangleth pittifully a sentence of S. Basils saying De humil Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified onely by faith in Christ If a man knowe him selfe iustified by faith in Christ howe can he acknowledge that hee wants true justice His wordes truly repeted are these Let man acknowledge that hee is vnworthie of true iustice and that his iustification comes not of his desert but of the meere mercy of GOD through Christ. So that by faith alone S. Basill treating of humility excludes all merite of our owne but no necessary good disposition as you may see in his Sermon de fide where he proues by manie textes of Holy Scripture that charity is as necessary as faith Rom. 3. M. PERKINS last testimony is out of Origen Who proues as M. PER. said that onely beleeuing without workes iustifieth by the example of the Theefe on the Crosse of whose good workes there is no mention Answere Origen excludeth no good disposition in vs to justification but saith that a man may be saued without doing outwardly any good workes If he want time and place as the Theefe did who presently vpon his conuersion was put to death which is good Catholike Doctrine but that you may perceiue how necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to justification you shall finde if you consider well all circumstances not one of them to haue beene wanting in that good Theefes conuersion First that he stood in feare of Gods just judgement appeares by these his wordes to his fellowe Doest thou not feare God c. He had hope to be saued by Christ out of which he said O Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdome By both which speeches is shewed also his faith both in God that he is the gouuernour and just judge of the world and in Christ that he was the Redeemer of mankinde His repentance and confession of his fault is laid downe in this And we truly suffer worthely His charity towardes God and his neighbour in reprehending his fellowes blasphemie in defending Christs innocency and in the middest of his greatest disgraces and raging enemies to confesse him to be King of the world to come out of all which we may gather also that he had a full purpose to amend his life and to haue taken such order for his recouery as it should please Christ his Sauiour to appoint So that the lacked not any one of those dispositions which the Catholike Church requires to justification Now that that great Doctor Origen meant not to exclude any of these good qualities out of the companies of faith is apparant by that which he hath written on the next Chapter where he saith Rom. 4. That faith cannot be imputed to iustice to such as beleeue in Christ vnlesse they doe withall put of the old man and a little before more playnlie saying I thinke that faith is the first beginning of saluation hope is proceeding in the building but the toppe and perfection of the whole worke is charity THE THIRD DIFFERENCE ABOVT IVSTIFICATION howe farre forth good workes are required thereto MASTER PERKINS saith Pag. 91. That after the doctrine of the Church of Rome there be two kindes of iustification the first when of a sinner one is made iust the which is of the meere mercy of God through Christ without any merit of man onely some certayne
loe doe we with delight fulfill them For as the Apostle witnesseth Rom. 13. Charity is the fulnes of the lawe And He that doth loue his neighbour hath fulfilled the lawe Which Christ himselfe teacheth when he affirmeth â—lath 22. That the whole lawe Prophets depend vpon these two commaundements of louing God and our neighbour Now both according vnto our opinion and the Protestants a man regenerate and in the state of grace hath in him the vertue of Charity we hold it to be the principall part of inherent justice they say that their justifying faith can neuer be seperated from it So that a righteous man being also indued with charity is able thereby to fulfill the whole lawe Let vs adjoyne vnto these Authorities of holy write the testimony of one auncient Father or two Serm. in ilâ—ud Attenâ—ie tibi De nat gra cap. 69. S. Basil affirmeth That it is impious and vngodly to say that the commaundements of the spirit be vnpossible S. Augustine defineth That we must beleeue firmely that God being iust good coulde not commaunde thinges that be impossible for vs to fulfill The reason may be that it is the part of a tyrant and no true lawemaker to commaund his subjectes to doe that vnder payne of death which he knowes them no way able to performe for those were not to be called lawes which are to direct men to that which is just but snares to catch the most diligent in and to binde them vp to most assured perdition Wherefore it was afterward decreed in an approued Councell of Aransican 2. Can. vlt. as an article of faith in these wordes This also we beleeue according to the Catholike faith that all men baptised by grace there receiued with the helpe and cooperation of Christ both can ought to keepe and fulfill those thinges which belong to saluation The principall whereof are after our Sauiours owne determination to keepe the commaundements Math. 19. If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements This by the way concerning the possibility of fulfilling the lawe THAT GOOD WORKES BE NOT STAYNED WITH SINNE NOVV that just mens workes be not sinnes which I proue first by some workes of that patterne of patience Iob. Of whome it is written that notwithstanding all the Diuels power and craft in tempting of him He continued still a single harted and an vpright man departing from euill Cap. 2. and preseruing his innocency If he continued and innocent he sinned not Againe if in all these instigations to impatience he remayned patient these his workes were perfect For S. Iames saith Esteeme it my brethren Cap. 1. all ioy when you shall fall into diuers temptations knowing that the probation of your saith worketh patience And let patience haue a perfect worke that you may be perfect and entire fayling in nothing 2 King Dauid thus by the inspiration of the holy Ghost speaketh of himselfe Thou hast O Lord proued my hart thou hast visited me in the night Psal 16. thou hast tried me in fire and there was no iniquity founde in me It must needes then be graunted that some of his workes at least were free from all sinne and iniquity And that the most of them were such if you heare the holy Ghost testifying it I hope you will beleeue it reade then where it is of recorde That Dauid did that 3. Reg. 15. which was right in the sight of our Lord and not only in the sight of men and turned from nothing that he commaunded him all the dayes of his life except only the matter of Vrias the Hethite 3 The Apostle affirmeth 1 Cor. 3. That some men doe builde vpon the only foundation Christ Iesus golde siluer and pretious stones that is being choyce members of Christes Catholike Church doe many perfect good workes such as being tried in the fornace of Gods judgement will suffer no losse or detriment as he there saith expresly Wherefore they must needes be pure and free from all drosse of sinne otherwise hauing beene so proued in fire it would haue beene found out 4 Many workes of righteous men please God Rom. 12. 1. Pet. 2. Make your bodies a quicke sacrifice holy and acceptable to God the same offering spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God And S. Paul calleth almes bestowed on him in prison Phil. 4. an acceptable sacrifice of sweete sauour and pleasing God But nothing infected with sinne al which he hateth deadly can please God and be acceptable in his sight God of his mercy through Christ doth pardon sinne or as the Protestants speake not impute it to the person but to say that a sinfull worke is of sweete sauour before him and a gratefull sacrifice to him were blasphemy wherefore we must needes confesse that such workes which so well pleased him were not defiled with any kinde of sinne Finally many workes in holy write be called good as Math. 5. 1. Tim. 6. Ephes 2. That they may see your good workes to be rich in good workes Wee are created in CHRIST IESVS to good workes but they could not trulie be called good workes if they were infected with sin For according to the judgement of all learned Diuines it can be no good worke that fayleth either in substance or circumstance that hath any one fault in it For Bonum ex integra causa malum exquolibet defectu Wherefore we must either say that the H. Ghost calleth euill good which were blasphemy or else acknowledge that there be many good workes free from all infection of sinne In lieu of the manifolde testimony of Antiquity which doth nothing more then recommend good workes and paint out the excellencie of them I will set downe one passage of S. August wherein this very controuersie is distinctly declared and determined thus he beginneth The iustice through which the iust man liueth by faith because it is giuen to man by the spiritte of grace is true iustice Li. 3. cont duas epist Felag c. 7. the which although it be worthely called in some men perfect according to the capacitie of this life yet it is but small in comparison of that greater which man made equall to Angelles shall receiue Which heauenly iustice he that had not as yet said himselfe to be perfect in regard of that iustice that was in him and also imperfect if it be compared to that which he wanted But certainely this lesser iustice or righteousnesse breedeth and bringeth forth merittes and that greater is the rewarde thereof Wherefore he that pursueth not this shall not obtayne that Hitherto S. Augustine Note first that he defineth the justice which we haue in this life to be true justice which is pure from all injustice and iniquity Then that it is also perfect not fayling in any dutie which we be bound to performe Lastly that it bringeth forth good workes such as merit life euerlasting True it is also that this justice
often is without the sacred society of charity CHAPTER 5. OF MERITTES MASTER PERKINS saith By meritte vnderstand any thing or worke whereby Gods fauour and life euerlasting is procured and that for the dignity and excellency of the worke or thing done or a good worke binding him that receiueth it to repay the like Obserue that three thinges are necessary to make a worke meritorious First that the worker be the adopted Sonne of God and in the state of grace Secondly that the worke proceede from grace and be referred to the honour of God The third is the promise of God through Christ to reward the worke And because our aduersaries either ignorantly or of malice doe slaunder this our Doctrine in saying vntruely that we trust not in Christs merittes nor neede not Gods mercy for our saluation but will purchase it by our owne workes I will here set downe what the Councell of Trent doth teach concerning merittes Sess 6. cap. vlt. Life euerlasting is to be proposed to them that worke well and hope well to the end both as grace of mercy promised to the Sonnes of God through CHRIST IESVS and as a reward by the promise of the same God to be faithfully rendred vnto their workes and merittes So that we hold eternall life to be both a grace aswell in respect of Gods free promise through Christ as also for that the first grace out of which they issue was freely bestowed vpon vs. And that also it is a reward in justice due partly by the promise of God and in part for the dignity of good workes Vnto the worker if he perseuer and hold on vnto the end of his life or by true repentance rise to the same estate againe In infantes baptised there is a kinde of meritte or rather dignity of the adopted Sonnes of God by his grace powred into their soules in baptisme whereby they are made heires of the Kingdome of heauen but all that arriue to the yeares of discretion must by the good vse of the same grace either meritte life or for want of such fruit of it fall into the miserable state of death OVR CONSENTS WITH this Catholike Doctrine M. PER. would be thought to agree in two points First That merits are necessary to saluation 2. That Christ is the roote fountayne of all meritte But soone after like vnto a shrewd cowe ouerthrowes with his heele the good milke he had giuen before Renouncing all merits in euery man sauing onely in the person of Christ whose prerogatiue saith he it is to be the person alone in whome God is well pleased Then he addeth that they good Protestants by Christs merittes really imputed to them doe merit life euerlasting Euen as by his righteousnes imputed vnto them they are justified and made righteous To which I answere that we most willingly confesse our blessed Sauiours merittes to be infinite of such diuine efficacy that he hath not onely merited at his Fathers handes Both pardon for all faultes and grace to doe all good workes but also that his true seruantes workes should be meritorious of life euerlasting as for the reall imputation of his meritte to vs wee esteeme as a fayned imagination composed of contrarieties For if it be really in vs why doe they call it imputed and if it be ours only by Gods imputation then is it not in vs really Further to say that he only is the person in whome God is well pleased is to giue the lye vnto many playne textes of holy Scriptures Abraham was called the friend of God therefore God was wel pleased in him Iac. 2. Moyses was his beloued Dauid was a man according vnto his owne hart Eccles 45. Act. 13. Ioh. 16. Rom. 1. God loued Christs Disciples because they loued him Briefly all the Christians at Rome were truly called of S. Paul the beloued of God And therefore although God be best pleased in our Sauiour and for his sake is pleased in all others yet is he not onely pleased in him but in all his faithfull seruantes Now to that which he saith that they haue no other meritte then Christs imputed to them as they haue no other righteousnes but by imputation I take it to be true and therefore they doe very ingenuously and justly renounce all kinde of merittes in their stayned and defiled workes But let them tremble at that which thereupon necessarily followeth It is that as they haue no righteousnes nor meritte of heauen but only by a supposed imputation so they must looke for no heauen but by imputation for God as a most vpright judge wil in the end repay euery man according to his worth wherfore not finding any reall worthines in Protestants but only in conceipte his reward shall be giuen them answerably in conceipte only which is euidently gathered out of S. Augustine where he saith Lib. 1. de morib Eccles cap. 25 That the reward cannot goe before the merite nor be giuen to a man before he be worthy of it for saith he what were more iniust then that and what is more iust then God Where he concludeth that we must not be so hardy as once to demaund much lesse so impudent as to assure our selues of that crowne before we haue deserued it Seing then that the Protestants by this their proctour renounce all such meritte and desart they must needes also renounce their part of heauen not presume so much as once to demaund according vnto S. Augustines sentence vntill they haue first renounced their erronious opinions But M. PERKINS will neuerthelesse proue and that by sundry reasons that their doctrine is the truth it selfe and ours falshood First by a sorry short sillogisme cōtayning more then one whole page It is taken out of the properties of a meritorious worke Which must be saith he four First That the worke be done of ourselues without the helpe of another Secondly That it be not otherwise due debt Thirdly That it be done to the benefit of an other Fourthly That the worke and reward be equall in proportion These proprieties he sets downe pithagorically without any proofe But inferreth thereon as though he had proued them inuincibly that Christs manhood seperated from the Godhead cannot meritte because whatsoeuer he doth he doeth it by grace receiued should be otherwise due He might in like manner as truly say that Christs manhood vnited to the Godhead could not merite neither for he receiued his Godhead from his father whatsoeuer he doth is therefore his Fathers by due debt And so the good man if he were let alone would disapoint vs wholy of all merites aswell the imputed of Christs as of all ours done by vertue of his grace Wherefore we must a little sift his foure forged proprieties of merit and touching the first I say that one may by the good vse of a thing receiued by free gift merit and deserue much euen at his handes that gaue it For example the
person of the good Father Luc. 15. Doe on him that is on his prodigall sonne returning whome his former garment His second proposition is also false as hath bin proued at large in a seueral question To that of S. Iames although it belong not to this matter I answere that he who offendeth in one is made guiltie of all that is he shall be as surely condemned as if he had broken all Epis 29. ad â—lieron See S. Augustine His 5. reason We are taught to pray on this manner Giue vs this day our dayly bread where we acknowledge euery morsell of bread to be the meere gift of God much more must we confesse heauen to be Answere M. PERKINS taketh great delight to argue out of the Lords prayer but he handleth the matter so handsomely that a man may thinke him to be so profouÌ„dly learned that he doth not yet vnderstand the Pater noster for who taketh our daylie foode to be so meerely the gift of God that we must not either make it ours with our peny or trauaile we must not looke to be fedde from heauen by miracle by the mere gift of God but according vnto S. Paules rule either labour for our liuing in some approued sort or not eate Yet because our trauailes are in vaine vnlesse God blesse them we pray to God daily to giue vs our nuriture either by sending or preseruing the fruits of the earth or by prospering our labours with good successe or if they be men who liue of almes by stirring vp the charitable to relieue them So we pray and much more earnestly that God will giue vs eternall life Yet by such meanes as it hath pleased God to ordayne one of which and the principall is by the exercise of good workes which God hath appointed vs to walke in to deserue it And it cannot but sauour of a Satannicall spirit to call it a Satannicall insolency as M. PERKINS doth to thinke that eternall life can be merited when S. Augustine and the best spirit of men since Christs time so thought and taught in most expresse tearmes But let vs heare his last argument which is as he speaketh the consent of the auncient Church and then beginneth with S. Bernard who liued 1000. yeares after Christ He in I knowe not what place the quotation is so doudtfull saith Those thinges which wee call merittes are the way to the Kingdome but not the cause of raigning I answere that merittes be not the whole cause but the promise of God through Christ and the grace of God freely bestowed on vs out of which our merittes proceede Which is Bernards owne doctrine Serm. 68 in Cantica Manuali c. 22. Secondly he citeth S. Augustine All my hope is in the death of my Lord his death is my meritte True in a good sence that is by the vertue of his death and passion my sinnes are pardoned and grace is bestowed on me to doe good workes and so to meritte 3. Basil Eternall life is reserued for them that haue striuen lawfully In Ps 114. not for the meritte of their doing but vpon the grace of the most bountifull God These wordes are vntruly translated for first he maketh with the Apostle eternall life to be the prize of that combate and then addeth that it is not giuen according vnto the debt and just rate of the workes but in a suller measure according vnto the bounty of so liberall a Lord Where hence is gathered that common and most true sentence That God punisheth men vnder their deserts but rewardeth them aboue their merittes 4. M. PERKINS turnes backe to Augustine vpon the Psal 120. Where he saith as M. PERKINS reporteth He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne giftes not thy merittes Answere S. Augustine was to wise to let any such foolish sentence passe his penne What congruity is in this He crowneth thee because he crowneth his owne giftes not thy merittes It had beene better said He crowneth thee not c. But he mistooke belike this sentence of S. Augustines When God crowneth thee he crowneth his giftes not thy merittes Which is true being taken in that sence which he himselfe declareth To such a man so thinking that is De grat l b. arb c. 6. that he hath merittes of him selfe without the grace of God it may be most truly said God doth crowne his owne giftes not thy merittes If thy merittes be of thy selfe and not from him but if we acknowledge our merittes to proceede from grace working with vs then may we as truly say that eternall life is the crowne and reward of merittes Psal 142. His other place on the Psalme is not to this purpose but appertaynes to the first justification of a sinner as the first word quicken and reuiue mee sheweth playnelie nowe wee confesse that a sinner is called to repentance and reuiued not for any desert of his owne but of Gods meere mercy Hauing thus at length answered vnto all that M. PERKINS hath alleaged against merittes Let vs see what can be said for them following as neare as I can M. PERKINS order Obiections of Papists so he tearmeth our reasons First in sundry places of Scripture promise of reward is made vnto good workes Genes 4. Prouer 11. Eccles 18. Math. 5. If thou doe well shalt thou not receiue To him that doeth well there is a faithfull rewarde Feare not to be iustified vnto death because the rewarde of God remayneth for euer and. When you are reuiled and persecuted for my sake reioyce for great is your reward in heauen And a hundreth such like therefore such workes doe meritte heauen for a reward supposeth that there was a desart of it M. PERKINS answereth first that the reward is of meere mercy without any thing donne by men But this is most apparantly false for the Scripture expresseth the very workes whereof it is a reward Againe a reward in English supposeth some former pleasure which is rewarded otherwise it were to be called a gift and not a reward and much more the Latin and Greeke word Misos Merus which rather signifie a mans hier and wagis then a gift or rewarde Wherefore M. PERKINS skippes to a second shift that forsooth eternall life is an inheritance but not a reward Reply We knowe well that it is an inheritance because it is onely due vnto the adopted Sonnes of God but that hindreth not it to be a reward for that it is our heauenly fathers pleasure that all his Sonnes comming to the yeares of discretion shall by their good carriage either deserue it or else for their badde behauiour be disinherited M. PERKINS hauing so good reason to distrust his two former answeres flies to a third and graunteth that eternall life is a reward yet not of our workes but of Christs merits imputed vnto vs This is that Castle wherein he holdes himselfe safe from all Canon shotte but he is fouly abused for this
in outward things and as it is in vs also it doth consist chiefely in inward worshippe by faith hope charitie and religion in whose kingdome Vowes hold a honorable ranke but a great part of this worship among vs dependes of outward things for be not the two onely parts of Gods worship amonge Protestants as M. P. sayeth in this question Baptisme and our Lords Supper both which partly consist in outwardly both speaking and doing And is not faith which is the roote of all Christian Religion gotten by outwarde preaching and hearing But it would wearie a willing man to trayle after all M. P. his impertinent errors Let vs then at length come vnto the principall poynt in controuersie Catholikes saith he maintaine such Vowes to be made as are not agreeable to the rules afore-named The first is that of Continencie whereby a man promiseth to God to keepe chastity in a single life that is out of the state of Wedlocke This kinde of Vowe is flat against the word of God as he sayeth which he prooueth first out of S. PAVL If they can not containe then let them Marrie True if they haue not Vowed Chastitie before * 1. Cor. 7. as the common Christians of Corinth to whom S. PAVL there speaketh had not For such if they can not liue otherwise chastelie it is better they marrie then be burned that is defiled with incontinencie But to them who had Vowed chastitie before S. PAVL writeth in an other stile That if they but desire to marrie they incurre damnation * 1. Tim. 5 because they haue made frustrate and broken their former saith and promise made vnto God of their chastetie So that this first text is a Furlong wide at the least from the marke The second is much like * 1. Tim. 4. It is a doctrine of diuels to forbid to marrie truth if one should hold mariage in it selfe to be wicked therefore condemne it in all sorts of persons as Mountanus the Manichees did But we haue a more reuerende opinion of marriage than the Protestants themselues For we with the Apostle * Ephes 5. hold it to be a great Sacrament they that it is a morall contract onely Notwithstanding we maintaine that such persons who being of ripe yeeres haue aduisedly Vowed chastitie may not marrie not because marriage is not honorable but for that they haue solemnlie promised to God the contrarie which we also hold to be better than if he had married And so to vse S. AVGVSTINES words He forbiddeth to marrie who sayeth it to be euill but not he who before this good thing preferreth a better And a little after you see saith he that there is great difference betweene perswasion to Virginitie by preferring the greater good before the lesser and forbidding to marrie by accusing lying together for issue The first is the doctrine of the Apostles which we teach the latter only of deuils Lib 3. cont Faust Manich cap. 6. M. P. His third and last text is * Heb. 13.4 Marriage is honorable among all and the bed vndefiled The strength of this place lyeth a double corruption of the text For this verbe is is not in the text nor cannot be the course of the Apostles speech requiring a verbe of the Imperatiue Moode as both the sentences besore and after do conuince Againe if you will haue the Apostle saye that Marriage is honorable among all men wee must also needes take him to say that the bedde is also vndefiled among all which was not true Also that their conuersation was without couetousnesse c. For there is no reason why this word is should be ioyned with the one more than with the other And nothing but passion doth cause them to make the middle sentence an affirmatiue when they turne both the other into exhortations The second corruption is in these words among all when they should translate in all and the adjectiue being put without a substantiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must in true construction haue this worde things joyned with it and not men wherefore the text being sincerelie put into English it would carrie no colour of their error For the Apostles saying is Let Marriage be honorable in all things and the bed vndefiled Here is no willing of anie man to marrie but onely a commandement to them that be marryed to liue honestlie in marriage to keepe as he else where sayeth their vessels in sanctifycation and not in dishonour and then shall their marriage bee honorable in all things that is in all poynts appertaining to Matrimony So that now you see that M. P. is not able to bring any one place out of Scripture to disprooue the Vowe of chastitie the Scripture being so barren for him he shall belike recompence it with the abundant testimonie of antiquitie in fauour of his cause but oh vnhappie chance he hath cleane forgotten in this question the recorde of the auncient Church What was there not one Father who with some one broken fragment of a sentence or other would releeue you in this your combat against the Vowe of Chastitie I will helpe you to one but I feare me you will scarse thanke me for my paines It is such a one as is neither holy nor father but the auncient Christian Epicure IOVINIAN who as S. AVGVSTINE hath recorded * Heres 82 ad Quod vult and S. IEROM * Lib. 1. cont Ioui did hold that Virginitie of professed persons men and women was no better then the continencie of the married So that many professed Virgins beleeuing him did marrie yet himselfe did not marrie as Fryer Luther did not because hee thought chastitie should be rewarded in the life to come with a greater crowne of glorie but because it was fit for the present necessitie to auoyde the troubles of marriage see just the verie opinion of M. P. and our Protestants But this heresie saith S. AVGVSTINE in the same place was quickly suppressed and extinguished it was not able to deceiue any one of the Priestes And in an other place * Lib. 2. reâ—roct 22. thus he speaketh of IOVINIAN Holy Church most faithfully and valiantly resisted this monster So that no maruaile if that M. P. could finde small reliefe in antiquitie for this his assertion which the best of them esteemed no better than a monstrous sacrilegious heresie But M. P. hath an argument that shall neuerthelesse demonstrate the Vowe of perpetuall chastitie to be intollerable For sayth he this Vowe is not in the power of him that Voweth for continencie is the gifte of God who giueth it not vnto all but vnto whom he will when he will and as long as he will And if wee object that by prayer and fasting the gift of continencie may be obtained of God he aunswereth that it cannot because it is not necessarie to saluation We replie that it is necessarie for all them that haue Vowed chastitie And be it