ipse Christus IESVS tanquam caput in membra tanquam vitis in palmites in ipsos iustificatos iugiter virtutem influat quae virtus bona eorum opera semper antecedit comitatur subsequitur sine quaÌ„ nullo pacto Deo grata meritoria esse possunt nihil ipsis iustificatis ampliùs deesse credendum est quo minùs plenè illis operibus quae in Deo sunt facta diuinae legi pro huius vitae statu satisfecisse vitam aeternam suo etiam tempore si tamen in gratiâ discesserint consequendam verè promeruisse censeantur For seeing Christ himselfe infuses vertu continually into persones allready iustified as the head into the parts and the vine into the branches wich vertu always precedes and accompanies and follows theyr good workes and without which they could not by any meanes be gratefull to God and meritorious it is to be beleeued that nothing else is wanting to them but that by those workes which are done in God they may be thought to haue satisfied the diuine law proportionably to the condition of this present life and truly to haue merited eternall life which is here afâ—er to be rendered to them if not withstanding they dy in the state of grace And to shew that this doctrine hinders not the humility of a Christian the Council giues this admonition Absit tamen vt Christianus homo in seipso vel confidat vel glorietur non in Domino cuius tanta est erga homines bonitas vt eorum velit esse merita quae sunt ipsius dona Farre be it notwithstanding that a Christian should eyther confide or glory in himselfe and not in our Lord whose goodnesse to men is soe greate that he wills that those which are his gifrs should be our merits And lastly to shew what it is which iust men merit by theyr good workes the Council deliuers this doctrine can 32. Si quis dixerit ipsum iustificatum bonis operibus quae ab eo pcr Dei gratiam IESV Christi meritum cuius viuum membrum est fiunt non verè mereri augmentum gratiae vitam aeternam ipsius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratiâ discesserit consecutionem gloriae augmentum anathema sit If any one shall say that a iust persone merits not truly by his good workes which are done by the grace of God and merit of Christ increace of grace eternall life and the attayning eternall life if he depart hence in state of grace and the increace of gloey let him be accursed From these definitions of the Council is cleare 1. that none saue persons allready iustified can haue these meritorious workes 2. That they must all be done by force and vertu of the gtace of Christ. 3. To make euen such workes which proceed from grace compleatly and truly meritorious is required the free and mercifull promesse of God wheron all merit is grounded 4. That this Promesse of God to reward such workes and the acceptation of those workes to be merits are grounded in the sole merits of Christ most sacred passion 5. That the things which are merited through such promises and merits of Christ are increace of internall grace eternall life the obteyning of eternall life and the increase of glory in heauen amongst which seeing the Council puts not actuall grace that is the inlightning of our vnderstanding by heauenly thoughts and the inflaming of our will by pious affections it giues free liber for all Christians to beleeue that noe iust persone can by his good workes or merits deserue to haue such actuall graces but that they all proceed from the free grace and mercy of God bestowed liberally vppon euery just persone for the sole merits of Christ and not dew to any whatsoeuer of his good workes 6. Hence the Council affirmes that all our merits are the true gifts of God coming from his free grace and that soe we are neyther to confide nor glory in our selues but only in God 7. Hence clearly follows that this doctrine of merits cannot possibly be any way injurious to our Sauiours passion seeing it is grounded both according to the grace where by such meritorious workes are produced and the free promesse of God to accept of them as meritorious and to render a reward to them for the sole passion of our dearest Sauiour the vertu whereof is applied to vs by the meritorious force of such workes as it also is by the impetratory force of prayres the first derogating noe more from the power of his merits then the second of his praires That which is here sayd of the impretatory and meritorious is to be extended to the satisfactory vertu of good workes For so the Council of Trent speakes of them Sessione 14. cap. 8. neque verò ita nostra est satisfactio haec quam pro peccatis nostris exoluimus vt non sit per Christum IESVM nam qui ex nobis tanquam ex nobis nihil possumus eo cooperante qui nos confortat omnia possumus ita vt non habeat homo vnde glorietur sed omnis gloriatio nostra in Christo est in quo viuimus in quo meremur in quo satisfacimus facientes fructus dignos poenitentiae qui ex illo vim habent ab illo offeruntur Patri per illum acceptantur à Patre Neythcr is this satisfaction soe ours which wee pay for our sinnes that it is not through IESVS Christ. For wee who of our selues as of our selues can doe nothing he cooperating who comforts vs we can doe all things soe that man hath nothing where of to glory but all our glory is in Christ in vvhom vve liue in vvhom vve merit in vvhom vve satisfie bringing forth worthy fruits of penance vvhich haue force from him are offered by him to the father and are accepted by the Father through him To these Athorities of the Council of Trent in declaration of the Romane doctrine I thought fit to adde one clause of the 39 articles which fauours much the merit of Good workes Arti. 12. Of Goodvvorkes Al be it that good workes which are the fruits of faith cannot put away sins and indure the seuerity of Gods iudgement yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ. If pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ then noe way sinfull but truly and absolutly good and iust for noe sin whether out of Christ or in Christ can be pleasing and acceptable to God for then God should not be a hater but a louer of sin and Christ should not take away sinnes but make them pleasing and acceptable to God which is a flat blasphemy If truly and absolutely without sin and iust then hauing in holy Scripture the promises of God annext to them to reward them and that we must receiue Gods promises in such vvise as they be generally set forth to vs in holy Scripture as saith article 17. sub finem it is most manifest
our Sauiour witnesses that the holy Apostle S. Paul in this place writes against these heretikes S. Epiphanius alsoe witnesses that Simon Mahus excluded our Sauiour from the office of mediatour and put the Angells in his place as the Apostle seemes here to say The Third mistake This text is made contrary to other texts of Scripture THirdly the Religion or worship of Angells here forbidden cannot be all kinde of worship exhibited to them for then this place of Scripture would be contrary to the other which I cited before Gen. 19. v. 1. Iosua 5. v. 14. where Angells were lawfully worshipped and so this place cannot conclude any thing against vs for if some worship may be lawfully giuen to Angells notwithstanding this place it can neuer be proued from hence that the worship we giue them is forbidden vnlesse it be first proued to be vnlawfull which can neuer be deduced from this generall prohibition And if any one should obiect here that seeing this word threskeia signifyes religion and vvorship thence may be gathered that all vvorship appertayning to Religion or all religius worship is forbidden to be giuen to Angells I answer that if wee take religion and religious worship as it is strictly and presly taken amongst the Doctours in its prime and formall acception for a vertue whereby due honour is giuen immediately to God it is true that all such religion or religious worship is there forbidden to be giuen to Angells and in this sense noe Catholike teaches that religious worship is to be giuen to Angells or any creature but only to the creatour of all things because he only it true God but if by religion or religious worship be vnderstood in a larger sense a vertue or reuerence belonging to religion and exceeding the bounds of nature and ciuill worship then religious worship to Angells is not forbidden in this place Now that religion may be taken in this larger sense is cleare as I haue allready shewed out of S. Iames now cited chap 1. v. 26. and 27. If any man amongst you seeme to be religiouus and bridleth not his tongue but deceiueth his owne hart this mans religion is vaine Pure religion and vndefyled before God and the father is to visit the fatherlesse and widowes in their afflictions and to keepe himselfe vnspotted from the world Where wee see that actions performed to creatures of piety and mercy are called religion and are religious actions and so this worship though it be done to creatures may according to the phrase of Scripture be called religious worship at least in this large sense that workes of piety and mercy are called religion or religious actions here by S. Iames. And thus much for the second place Wee are commanded to pray vnto God therefore no presumption but a bounden duty Proofes out of Scripture mistaken Come vnto me all yee that labour and are heauy loaden and I will giue you rest When you pray say our father which art in heauen And what soeuer yee shall aske the father in my name he will giue it you Aske and yee shall haue seeke and yee shall finde knocke and it shall be opened vnto you If the opponent meane here that wee are to pray to God without all presumption of our selues or our own workes for the words are obscure wee most willingly admit this whole obiection and all the proofes of it as most consonant with the doctrine of the Romain Church and only against Pelagian and Semipelagian Heretikes For shee teacheth that the good workes of Gods children are truly good and pleasing to God and meritorious of the increase of grace and eternall glory yet she teaches also that all good workes are the free gifts of God proceeding from his grace and not to be ascribed to any naturall force of ours left to it self which is not able to doe any thing at all pleasing to Allmighty God and so wee cannot glory in our selues but in God only as S. Paul teacheth vs Againe she teacheth that though the good workes of God's children be meritorious as is declared where they are yet no man can be in this life without a particular reuelation infallibly assured that he is the child of God or that he euer did any one worke truly good and pleasing to God and so liues and dyes wholy relying vppon the mercies of God and merits of our deare Sauiours bitter death and Passion of which he is assured by a firme and stedfast hope not presumptuously relying vppon his owne workes whereof he hath no sufficient assurance whereon to found his saluation and so he is kept in a most humble and low esteeme of himselfe and all he euer did through his whole life for it is not the beleeuing that good workes where thy are are meritorious but the beleeuing that wee haue such meritorious workes which can giue any shew of reason to rely vppon them I say beleuing with an infallible faith which Reformers teach for wee may and ought to haue a stedfast hope that through the grace of Christ wee haue done some good workes and meritorious as it is not the assurance that the abundance of mony and gould where it is is able to purchase great possessions but the assurance that one hath such an abundance of gould which makes one confide that he is able to compasse such a purchase and yet though a iust man should infallibly know that he had done workes truly pleasing to God he would not be presumptuous because he knowes they proceede from the grace of God If therefore this be all that is intended by this obiection that wee are commanded to pray to God without all presumption and vppon bounden duty wee haue nothing against it but if hereby be intended that wee are commaunded to pray to God vppon boundē duty and therefore it is noe presumption to pray to him yet so that wee are to pray to him alone as the insuing obiections and proofes seeme to insinuate then wee giue our reasons for the contrary in the insuing answer which will be alsoe common to this only à word or two vnto these fower places cited for proofe of this difficulty thus vnderstood The text of Mat. 11. v. 28. mistaken Come vnro me all yee that labour and are heauie loaden and I will giue you rest THis text is in the mouth of euery ignorant Protestant to proue that wee are neither to pray to saint nor Angell but to Christ alone Come vnto mee saith our Sauiour he bids vs not come vnto Saints ot Angells say some illiterate Scripturistes therefore wee must neither come to Saints nor Angells according to our Sauiours command But how far this discourse is from common sense euery vnderstanding person will easily discouer for to say that our Sauiour bids vs not here come to Saints or Angells expressly is most true but that shewes only that coming to Saints or Angells is not here commanded which no man makes
liuing spiritually by faith hinders not his liuing by good vvorks for as breath meate and drinke concurre to his temporall so faith an good works concurre to his spirituall life and euen Protestants themselues must confesse that this text the iust man liueth by fatih cannot possibly inferre that he liueth by faith only for S. Paul saith Rom. 3.24 being iustifyed freely by his grace and v. 18. euen so by the righteousnesse of one the free gift came vppon all men to the iustification of life So that according to S. Paul the iust liues by grace and by the righteousnsse of Christ as well as by faith and so not by faith only Neyther can it bee answeared that faith it self is that grace where of the Apostle speakes and consequently this objection of myne is to noe purpose for though faith be a gift and grace of God yet there are many more gifts and graces besides it signified by the word grace and particularly that preuentinge grace or diuine light and inspiration which the holy Ghost infuses into mans hart as the principles and causes of diuine faith in vs which is bestowed vppon vs purely gratis and out of mere mercy The 4. text Gal. 2. v. 11. Knowing that a man is not iustifyed by the vvorks of the law but by the faith of Iesus Christ that vvee might be iustifyed by the faith of Christ and not by the vvorkes of the law for by the vvorks of the law shall no flesh be iustifyed This text is mistaken These words prooue as little as any of the former that is nothing at all for iustification by faith only For as it is most manifest by the whol precedent context in the chapter the whol matter there handled is about Circumcision and obseruation of the ceremoniall law of the Iewes as different from the life and practice of the Gentills see v. 2.3.5.7.8.12.14 and chap. 4. v. 10. Yee obserue dayes and monthes and tymes and yeares saith S. Paul reprehending the Christians for returning to those empty elements of the ceremoniall law v. 6. and the like chap. 5. v. 1.2.3 about circumcision stand and be not held in againe vvith the yoke of seruitude behold I Paul tell you that if yee be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing and I testify again to euery man circumcising himselfe that he is a debtour to the whol law Now neither Romane Catholike nor English Protestant beleeue that they are iustifyed by the ceremoniall law of the Iewes which only is touched in this chapter And it is no lesse cleare that there mention is made of the first iustification wherby a sinner becoms a child of God v. 10. VVe sinners by nature Iewes and not of the Gentiles Nay the text it selfe obiected Gal. 2. v. 16. speakes clearly of the first iustification of a sinner to the state of grace for by the workes of the law shall no flesh be iustified the word flesh signifijng most familiarly in S. Pauls Epistles that which is not yet spirituall but carnall vnder the guilt of sin and corruption of nature For though such as are already iustified retayne the concupiscenses of the flesh in them yet because they resist and subdue them so long as they remaine iustified they are not called flesh by S. Paul but rather spirituall men And that he speakes of the law as known by its own force light and doctrine is euident also v. 16. For if by the law be righteousnesse then Christ is dead in vayne which is most true if we speake of the law as known to vs and working in vs by its owne force wholy independent of the grace and illumination of Christ but can haue no true sense if we speake of the law as iustifying by the grace of Christ for then Christ will not haue dyed in vaine because by his death he merited that grace and light by vertu of which only the law iustifyes And chapter 3. v. 2. Haue yee receaued the Spirit by the vvorks of the law or by the hearing of faith wherby is manifest both that he speakes of the workes of the law as working before the receiuing the holy Ghost and of the first iustification or receiuing of the Spirit by the faith of Christ. and v. 18. For if a lavv vvere giuen vvich could viuificate righteousnesse vvere truly from the lavv which shewes euidently that the Apostle speakes of the law as considered in it selfe and its proper force for if we consider it as illuminated by faith and the grace of Christ it is able to viuificate and consequently to iustify as the Apostle here plainly affirmes And that he speakes of the law as preceding the faith of Christ is out of all question v. 23. Before faith came we were concluded vnder the law into that faith which was to be reuealed Therefore the law was our schoolmaster in Christ that we might be iustifyed from faith THE FOVRTH CONTROVERSIE Of the merit of Good workes The Doctrine of the Roman Church deliuered by the Council of Trent in this Point Sessione 6. THe Couneil of Trent hauing deliuered as appeares in the former Controuersie that noe worke truly pleasing to God which only we vnderstand by good workes esteemed by vs meritorious can possibly be done eyther by the force of nature or of the law without the inspiration of the holy Ghost nor that any good motion of the will assisted by such Inspirations can merit the grace of our first Iustification the Council supposes that none can produce any good worke truly meritorious of heauenly blessings but such as are allready iustified and in state of grace and soe deliuers the insuing doctrine Sessione 6. c. 16. Bene operantibus vsque in finem in Deo sperantibus proponenda est vita aeterna tanquam gratia filiis per Christum Iesum misericorditer promissa tanquam merces ex ipsius Dei promissione bonis ipsorum operibus ac meritis fideliter reddenda Eternall life is to be propounded to those who doe well and hope in God both as a grace mercifully promised through IESVS Christ to childeren and as a reward faithfully to be rendered through the promesse of God to theyr good workes and merits And yet the Council giues an other ground of Christian merits Ibidem c. 26. Si quis dixerit iustos non debere pro bonis operibus quae in Deo fuerint facta expectare sperare aeternam retributionem à Deo per eius misericordiam IESV Christi meritum â—i bene agendo diuina mandata custodiendo vsque in finem perseuerauerint anatheme sit If any one shall say that iust men are not to expect and hope for an eternall recompence for theyr good workes which were done in God through the mercy of God and the merits of Christ if they perseuer to the ende in doing well and keeping Gods commandements let him be accursed And the full reason of this doctrine is giâ—en Sess. 6. c. 16. Cùm enim ille
our Religion and tending finally to the acknowledgment of God and our Sauiours honour as authour of our faith and Religion Soe that hauing these references to Gods honour though those Acts of Religious worship tend immediately to the acknowledgement of some created supernaiurall excellence in that which wee worshipp by them yet that hinders not theyr beeing Religious acts in this larger sence As appeares by these following texts of Scripture where Moyses is commaunded to prescribe certaine ceremoniall rites in Sacrifices Holocausts amongst which one was that the brest right Shoulder of that which was offered in sacrifice should be giuen to the Priests as belonging to them by right and ordinance of God The giuing of these two parts of the thing offered to the priest was an action done immediately to a pure creature and not to God and yet it is called Religion as appeares by the words These things God commaunded to be giuen to them that is to Aaron and his ofspring as it is in the precedent words from the children of Israell by a perpetuall Religion in theyr generations Secondly S. Iames. Pure and vndefiled Religion with God and the father is this to visite the orphanes and widowes in theyr tribulation and to keepe himselfe vnspotted in this life where a worke of mercy to the pore is called Religion that is a worke proceeding from Religion and belongrg to Religion though done to creatures such as are orphanes and wedows All that I haue cited out of Scripture in the discouery of this second mistake will I hope haue coÌ„uinced the iudicious and well minded Reader that there is a Supernaturall created excellency communicated liberally from Allm God to some creatures infinitely below the diuine excellency of God and yet far aboue all naturall and ciuill worth which therefore must deserue honour and worship seeing that naturall and ciuill excellencies euen according to protestants though far inferiour to them deserue it which worship seeing it is done in acknowledgment of the Spirituall and supernaturall dignities which are only proper to Gods true religion and soe are religious excellencies may be rightly termed a religious worship in the fore named sense For seeing the humble acknowledgmeÌ„t of diuine perfections is deseruedly termed diuine worship and of ciuill perfections rightly styled ciuill worship soe the humble acknowledgment of religious perfections for the like reason is to be named Religious worship which will yet seeme lesse strange to an indiffereÌ„t eye if one consider that the some different degrees may be found in Acts of other vertues which are here fouÌ„d in worships I haue allready proued from Scripture that there are different kinds and degrees of feares and loues whence it followes that when one feares the iustice and wrath of some ciuill Prince or magistrate it may be called ciuill feare but when one feares the iustice and authority of an Apostle a Prophet c. whose power is drawn from Religion it may be named a Religious seare Thus the feare of Adam hiding himselfe from God was a diuine feare The feare of Adonias flying from king Salomon was a ciuill feare but the feare of the Primâ—tiue Christians of S. Peeter when Ananias fel down dead at his feete was a Religious feare And the same distinction is in differeÌ„t ordres of loue S. Peeter loued our Sauiour as his God and Redcemer with diuine loue Ifack loued Esau with a ciuill loue but the Primitiue Christians loued S. Paul with a Religious loue And in the same manner as I haue allready Proued Moyses worshipped the infinit maiesty of God with a diuine worship the children of Iacob worshipped the power and excellency of Ioseph with a ciuill worship but rhe Sunamite worshipped Elizeus and the captaine of fifty men Elias whose authorities were deriued known and acknowledged only from faith and Religion with Religious worship And the giuing such a Religious worship as this which I haue described to a creature is soe far from derogating any thing from the due worship of God or from ascribing any worship proper to him to any creature that it would be an insufferable iniury to God And horrid Sacriledge to affirme that he is to be worshipped with any such worship for that were to acknowledge in him only a created finite imperfect excellencie which were to make him an Idoll a false God Neyther can his honour be any thing diminished by exhibiting this kinde of Religious worship to a creature indued with spitituall graces for his honour cannot be iniured but by giuing to a creature the wotship proper and due to him only seeing therefore this is no worship due to him neyther only nor at all it cannot be any way a preiudice to his honour For as ciuill and religious feare and loue commanded to be giuen to creatures is no way preiudicious to the diuine feare and loue which we-owe to God Soe neyther can ciuill nor religious worship commaunded to be exhibited to creatures as I haue proued be preiudicious to the highest diuine worship which we owe to God And thus much Allm God seemes to say by his Ptophet Isay. I am the Lord this is my name I will not giue my glory to any other nor my praise to Idols where he saith not I will not giue glory to any other for that would be contrary to the words of the Psalmist speaking of man in his first creation Thou hast crowned him with glory and honour but I will not giue my glory to an other that is that infinite glory which properly belongs to God only wich is specifyed in the precedent words I am the Lord this in my name soe that God wil neuer giue that which is his proper name and title to be Lord of all things to an other which is yet more expressely set down by the same Prophet And I will not giue my glory to an other heare o Iacob and Israell whom I call I I my selfe am the firrst and I am the last And my hand also layd tbe foundarions of the earth and my right hand measured the heauens c. This is that glory proper to him alone of being the eternall God creator of heauen and earth which he will not giue to an other which soe long as he keepes inuiolable to him selfe all vnder glories limited and created which are like soe many little motes compared with the infinite extent and light of his glory he both liberally giues himselfe and wills they should respectiuely be giuen to his creatures If not withstanding all these euidences both of Scripture and Reason any one should remayne soe strangely willfull and immouable by force of education and continuall custome from his infancie as to deny all kind of Religious worship in how large a sence soeuer it be taken to be lawfully exhibited to any saue God alone I say if any such should be found soe long as he yeelds to the thing it selfe that is to