kings gift calling him to the place implieth both So is it in our sanctificatiō which is the way that leadeth to the kingdom that God hath freely giuen vs and the dutie which that gift calleth vs to and therefore necessary in it owne kind and order no otherwise Which the Protestants holding do not teach thereby that men should neglect good workes but the contrarie they onely thinke them not necessary or requisite to our iustification for the satisfaction of the law because herein nothing concurreth with the merit of Christ or can do as many learned Papists themselues confesse and the ordinarie sort of people that now misconceiueth our doctrine in this point when they vnderstand it as I haue laid it downe will not denie Digression 35. Touching the merit of our workes and what is to be holden thereof 12 Next the Iesuite accuseth our doctrine of good works because it denieth the merit thereof For answer whereunto we beleeue assuredly our good workes shall be rewarded both in this life and in the life to come yea farre beyond that which they are worth onely we deny their merit that is to say we thinke this reward is not giuen for the merit or desert of the worke but of the meere grace and mercie of God for the merits of Christ Wherin we haue not onely the Scripture and ancient Doctors but the most skilfull and learned Papists that euer liued on our side t Exod. 20.6 The law saying the reward is of mercie and u Rom. 8.18 the Gospell telling vs The sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glorie in the life to come 13 That which the Papists meane by merit is this which I set downe in their own words and let the reader iudge whether the Protestants haue not reason to refuse it Andradius x Orth. expl l. 6 saith The heauenly blessednesse which the Scripture calleth the reward of the iust is not giuen them of God gratis freely but is due to their workes yea God hath set forth heauen to sale for our workes The Deane of Louan y Expl. Artic. Louan tom 2. art 9. saith Farre be it from vs that the righteous should looke for eternall life as a poore man doth for his almes for it is much more honour for them as victors and triumphers to possesse it as the garland which by their labour they haue deserued Bayus z De merit operum l 1. c. 9. saith That although the restauration of mankinde be ascribed to the merits of Christ yet it is not for Christs merits that our workes are rewarded with eternall life neither doth God when he giueth the reward looke toward Christs death but onely to the first institution of mankind wherein by the law of nature it was appointed that in the iust iudgement of God obedience should be rewarded with life as disobedience is with death Suarez a Tom. 1. in Tho. 3. d. 41. sect 3. §. Secundo oportet saith A supernaturall worke proceeding from grace within it selfe and of it owne nature hath a proportion and condignitie with the reward and a sufficient value to be worth the same The reward therfore is not giuen for Christs merit The merit of Christ cannot be made our merit therefore neither can our merits haue the power of meriting from Christs merits or any more worthinesse then they be ordained to haue of themselues It must not be denied but our merits are true merits so that the workes of the godly proceeding from grace haue of themselues an inward worthinesse and are proportionable to the reward in the same manner as if we conceiued a man to be iust and worke well without the merits of Christ as many thinke of the Angels and of man in the state of innocencie Thus the merits which the Protestants denie are not the reward of good workes but that inward condignitie which our aduersaries place in them whereby they thinke God is bound to reward them yea without any respect to the death or merits of Christ This we hold a detestable opinion because it abrogateth the Gospell and setteth on foote the couenant of workes 14 Beggers asking for almes shew their wounds but Papists will haue vs shew our merits and not aske heauen as an almes for Christs sake but challenge it as due for our workes sake but what saith one b Marc. herem de his qui putant se ex oper iustif He that doth good seeking reward thereby serueth not God but his owne will Origen c Ad Rom. l. 4. c. 4. saith I can hardly beleeue there is any worke that may require the reward of debt Austin d De gr lib. arb c. 9. writeth We must vnderstand that God bringeth vs to eternall life not for our merits but for his owne mercie And Bernard e De Annunc serm 1. That the merits of men are not such that eternall life should be due to them of right or that God should offer men iniurie if he did not therefore bestow it f In Cant. ser 61. The mercy of God is my merit g De grat lib arbit The things which we call our merits are the nurses of our hope the prouocations of loue the signes of our election the forerunners of our future happinesse the way to the kingdome not the cause why we raigne And Gregory himselfe who was a B. of Rome h Super. Ps 7. poenit saith It is one thing for God to reward men according to their works and another thing to giue the reward for the workes themselues When the Scripture saith according to our workes the qualitie of our workes is vnderstood that the reward shall be his whose the workes are for vnto that blessed life wherein we liue with God can no labour be compared no worke likened seeing the Apostle saith The suffering of this life is not worthy of the glorie of the life to come This that these fathers haue said is it we also say for our selues answer our accusers Now I know well enough a witty Romanist deuoted to contention can inuent some fine distinction to make these men speake good Romane Catholicke whatsoeuer they meant let him do vs the like fauour making the same distinction for vs that he will do for Austin Bernard or Gregorie and we shall be as good Catholickes as they 15 Moreouer it is diligently to be obserued that howsoeuer our aduersaries contend for their merits yet the learnedst and most iudicious among them disauow them teaching people at their way-gate to renounce them and holding that which I haue said to be the sounder doctrine so did Anselme the Bishop of Canterbury 500. yeares since teach the people to die in this faith i Refert Hos confes Petrico◠1. c. 73. confessing Lord I set the death of Christ betweene me and my bad merits and I offer his merits for my owne merits which I should haue but haue not
and betweene me and thine anger I interpose the death of my Lord Iesu So also k In Luc. c. 7. saith Stella God my Protector looke not vpon me but first looke vpon thy onely Sonne and place betweene me and thee him thy Sonne his crosse his bloud his passion his merits that so thy iustice passing through his bloud and merits when it cometh at the last to me it may be gentle and full of mercie Waldensis l Sacramental tit 1. c. 7. p. 30. idem Erasm â—eclarat ad Cens Paâ—is p. 197. saith He is to be reputed the sounder Diuine and the better Catholicke and more agreeable to the Scripture that simply denieth such merit confessing that simply no man meriteth the kingdome of heauen but obtaineth it by the grace free will of God that giueth it Bellarmine m De iustificat l. 5. c. 7. §. Sit tertia saith that by reason of the vncertaintie of a mans owne righteousnesse and for feare of vaine glory it is the safest way to repose our whole confidence in the sole mercy and goodnesse of God And he giueth the reason because no man without reuelation can be sure he hath true merits or that he shall perseuer therein and nothing is easier then to be tempted with the pride of his owne good workes Pighius n Controu 2. Ratiâ—bo saith We are made righteous not by our owne righteousnesse but by the righteousnesse of God in Christ who putteth his owne iustice betweene his Fathers iudgement and our iniustice vnder the which as vnder a shield he protecteth vs from the diuine wrath which we haue deserued Ferus o L. 3. commen in Mat. c. 20. saith The parable of him that hired labourers into his vineyard teacheth that whatsoeuer God giueth vs is of grace not of debt for all our righteousnesse is as a cloth polluted yea the very sufferings of this life are vnworthy of future glorie If therfore thou desirest to hold the grace and fauour of God make no meÌ„tion of thy merits And let all such as contend with vs about this point assure themselues their owne schooles were of our mind herein till of late Gregorius Ariminensis p 1. d. 17. q 1. â—â—t 2. p. 89. defendeth at large that no worke done by man though coming from the greatest charitie meriteth of condignitie either eternall life or any other reward either eternall or temporall because euery such worke is the gift of God And against that coÌ„ceit which saith there is an inward worthines in the nature of our works deseruing the reward which worthines is coÌ„monly called the merit of condignity he disputeth that the reward is simply due to no workes nor of their nature but onely through the free appointment of God who out of the abundance of his mercie hath ordained to reward such workes with eternall life But Durand is so plain that the merit-mongers are faine to disclaim him He q 2. d. 27. q. 2. p. 200. saith There is no merit of condignitie betweene man and God but onely betweene man and man the said merit being strictly taken as the Papists now do to import a voluntarie action whereto the reward is due of iustice so that if it be not giuen there is wrong offered And whatsoeuer we receiue of God whether it be grace or glory whether temporall or spirituall good whatsoeuer good worke we haue before done for it yet we receiue the same rather of Gods liberalitie then of the debt of the worke And forasmuch as no mans free gift can bind him to giue more but he that receiueth more is the more bouÌ„d to him that giueth it therfore hence it followeth that by the good habits and deeds which God hath enabled vs to do he is not bound by the debt of his iustice to giue vs more that he should as the Papists now say be vniust if he gaue it not but we rather are bound to him and it is rashnesse yea blasphemy to thinke or say the contrary as r Vpon Heb. 6.10 the Rhemists do Then he concludeth that if God giue any reward to our well doings this is as the Protestants speake not that he is a debtor to the workes but of his owne liberalitie Marke the argument he vseth against merits and then iudge freely whether it can possibly be answered No man hauing freely bestowed a gift vpon another is bound by the good vse of the said gift to bestow more but he that receiueth it is rather bound to him that giueth it But all the workes of grace whatsoeuer though neuer so well vsed are freely bestowed vpon vs by God therefore God is not bound by the good vse thereof to bestow more And so consequently man is bound rather to God and all his reward is of mercie not of condignitie 16 Besides all Papists are not of one minde concerning these merits that men may see they talke against the Protestants abroad that which they are not agreed of among themselues at home which is more then ridiculous For Å¿ Scot. 4. d. 14 q 2. Ipse Scotus assignat quoddam meritum congruuÌ„ quod ipse vocat attritioâ—em ex putis naturalibus quae est ratio aliqua remissionis peccatorum iustificationis Dom. Bannes part 1 q. 23. art 5 p. 496. Tho 1 2. q. 114. art 3. 6. in 2. sent d. 27. q 3. Et ibi caeteâ—i scholastici some hold that a man doing what he is able by the power of his freewill before his conuersion omitting nothing that tendeth to the obtaining Gods fauour merits hereby of congruitie that God of his goodnesse which bindeth himselfe to accept euery one that turneth himselfe to him should prepare him to further grace but t Hos conf c 73 othersome reiect this kind of merit and accuse it of heresie that we might know what stuffe the Popes schooles now and then harbour in them And touching the merit of condignitie you heare what is commonly said u Rhem. annot vpon 1. Cor. 3.8 Heb. 6 10. Andrad Oâ—th explic l. 6. that our workes of their very nature deserue eternall life the reward whereof is a thing equally and iustly answering to the time and weight of the worke rather then a free gift so that God should be vniust if he gaue it not yet x Anselm Stella Waldens Bell. Pightus Ferus Ariminens Durand others whom I alledged immediatly before deny this and Bellarmine himself whether he were asleepe or what extremitie he was driuen to I know not but y Indic de lib. concord mendac 8. he writeth expresly To workes done by faith and the helpe of God we ascribe no such merit as hath the reward of iustice to answer them but onely the merit of impetration which the schoolemen called the merit of congruitie not of condignitie and yet I shewed before that Hosius saith the merit of congruitie is Pelagianisme Againe z Tho 2. d.
farre that when a man is at the perfectest yet can he not be sure he standeth in grace or shall perseuere therein Digression 38. Against the distinction of sin into mortall and veniall 26 The seuenth point of our doctrine condemned as an occasion of libertie is that we hold all sin to be mortall of it selfe and none veniall And we readily confesse indeed that this distinction in that sense is false and being deuised to maintaine the fancie of a mans perfect righteousnesse and power to fulfill the law we refuse it as idle and impious And because they say oâ—r so doing teacheth men to be carelesse in auoiding sin let the Reader iudge whether it restraine more to say as we do All your sinnes though neuer so small are mortall in their owne nature deseruing condemnation or as they do Not all are such but some are b Henriq sunâ— moral l. 4. c. 20. n. 5. veniall neither offering iniury to God nor deseruing hell nor binding vs to be so sory for theÌ„ but they c Tho. part 3. q. 83. 87. ar 3. Ouand 4. d. 16. pr. 77. Linwood l. 3. de celebrat miss c. Linte amina § vlt. may be forgiuen by knocking the brest going into a Church receiuing holy water or the Bishops blessing or crossing ones selfe or by any worke of charitie though we neuer thinke actually of them Let this conceit be well beaten into mens heads and withall define many * As for example Quamius formalis maledictio ex suo geneâ—e sit peccatum mortale vt doâ—et D. Tho. Poteâ—t â—amen et idem tra â—it esse tantum veiâ—le raâ—ioâ—e â—â—liâ—et paâ—â—itaâ—â— maâ—ctâ— it 〈…〉 bâ—â—â—ous qui 〈…〉 in 〈…〉 gâ—â— peccatâ—â— Atqâ—e hinc possunt saepe excusâ—i a mortal pâ—â—eâ—teâ— maledicentes filijs alio qui grauâ—bê° verbis vt commendando illos daemoni Greg. de Valen. tom 3 pag. 1090. B. grosse and vnseemly things very incident to the life of man to be such venials and then see who they be that vntie sinne most 27 And though we thus reiect this distinction yet is not our meaning hereby that all sinnes are equall and of like deformitie or haue the same effects or stand in one degree of contrarietie to grace or that none are veniall through the mercie of God for our trust is that through the bloud of Christ and true repentance d Matth 12.31 1. Iohn 2 1. O â—ee Christe SpeÌ„ capâ—o sore quicquid ago veniab le apud te Quamlibet indignum venia faciamque loquarque Prud. Hâ—mart in sine the mortallest sins that are shall be forgiuen vs. But we thinke it a false and presumptuous opiâ—ion to hold any sinne veniall of it owne kind that is including nothing that offendâ—th God or deserueth his iudgment Wherein we haue many great Papists on our side that our accusers may behold their conscience in smattering against that in vs which is printed for good diuinitie in their owne bookes Almaine e Moral tract 3 c. 20. saith It is a question among the schoole-doctors whether there be any such sin or no and himselfe concludeth out of Gerson that no sin is veniall of it selfe but onely through the mercie of God it being a contradiction that God should forbid an act vnder a penaltie and when he hath done the said act should not be mortall of it owne nature because being thus forbidden it is against his law and that which is against his law is of infinite euill and so mortall Of the same iudgement is f Contra artic Lutheri art 32. Fisher the Bishop of Rochester and g De vit spir lect 1. Gerson the Chancellor of Paris h Vocab Theol verbo PeccatuÌ„ veniale who comparing the rules that are ordinarily giuen to distinguish betweene mortall and veniall concludeth he can find no difference Besides i Opinio est Altisiodorensis celebrata in scholis quòd peccata venialia minuunt charitateÌ„ Haec opinio non tam improbabilis est sicut solet videri Altisiod sum l. 3. tract 6. ca. 5. q. 1. Fr. Victor re l. 8. par 2. n. 21 some schoolemen confesse that which they call venial sinne diminisheth charitie and k Duran 2. d. 42. q. 6. Nauar. manual praelud 7. n. 16. Vega def Trid. l. 11 c. 20. Greg. de ValeÌ„t tom 2. pag. 634. Et Caietan 1. 2. q. 72. ar 5. Azor. instit mor. par 1 l. 4. c. 19. others denie not but it is properly against the law of God whence it followeth that it deserueth the curse and so is mortall because l Deut. 27.26 the law saith Cursed be he that performeth not all the words of this law to do them Yea the very name of sinne attributed to it sheweth it is mortall and partaketh the very nature of sinne the diuision of sin into mortall and veniall being as Durand and Nauar hold * Est diuisio vniuoci quia ratio peccati simpliciter vniuoce saluatur in vtioque Dur. the diuision of that which signifieth the same thing and vpholdeth the selfe same forme of sin in the parts deuided that we may see how they are crossed at home in their owne schooles m Bell. de amis gr l. 1. c. 11. § QuintuÌ„ arguin who say venials are sin by analogie and imperfectly and not vniuocally Thus the Papists themselues haue misliked this distinction as well as we whose discretion should be more commended if they would spare our doctrine and ouersee it at least vntill they haue made sure it finde no secret friends in their owne Church For as long as they that wrangle against it are driuen by the truth thereof to yeeld vnto it the Protestants will take courage thereby and embrace the faith yet more ioyfully which hath aduocates to pleade for it at the Popes owne gates This is not said to condemne the vse of this distinction of sinne by the * Melancthon Remisit P. Martyâ— Vrsinus c. Protestants in another sence not of the different nature of sinne but of the diuers state and condition of the persons that sinne as they sinne either against their knowledge and conscience or of ignorance surreption and such infirmitie in which respect they call the former mortall or raigning sinnes excluding the rule of grace and drawing vpon the sinner the guilt of death the other veniall as consisting with grace and a liuing faith by meanes whereof they are pardoned and not imputed Digression 39. Touching the satisfaction that men are bound vnto for their sinnes 28 Next he accuseth vs for teaching against penance and satisfaction taught by Iohn Baptist and our blessed Sauiour wherin he speaketh vntruly of vs. For touching penance I will answer n §. 58. below in a fitter place And concerning satisfaction we beleeue that although Christ hath satisfied for the fault and punishment both eternall and temporall of our sinnes yet our selues are bound to satisfie the commandements of the Gospel