Of Bellarmine therefore we demaund why Saint Paul should instance in Abraham his purpose being as he and all his fellowes agree onely to shew that the first iustification is not attained by workes but by faith For inferring this conclusion the iustification of Rahab had beene more sit for in Saint Pauls dialect shee receiued the messengers by faith being as Bellarmine graunts destitute of all grace before But thus he answeres As Paul when he spake of the first iustification brought the example of Abraham which belonged to the second to prooue a maiori that no vniust man is iustified by workes without faith seeing iust Abraham was not made more iust by works without faith so Saint Iames when he spake of the second iustification where by a iust man becomes more iust brought in the example of Rahab which was per tinent to the first iustification where by an impious or vnregenerate man becomes iust to shew a maiori that a iust man is made more iust by workes and not of faith onely seeing Rahab of an harlot was made iust by workes not by faith onely For it is very probable shee was not onely an harlot but an infidell before such time as shee receiued the messengers but from that time to haue beleeued in God as being prepared to iustification by that worke of mercy yet so as that good worke done by faith was not simply meritorious of iustification but imperfectly and by way of congruity 5. Surely this Authors ill will vnto vs was greater then either the loue or reuerence he bare vnto Saint Paul vpon whose words least they should seeme to fauour our cause too much he labours to foster a meaning as ridieulous as thwart and contradictory to his purpose as the Diuell himselfe could haue deuised howbeit to acquit himselfe from suspition of partialitie or particular spleene against Saint Paul he spares not to father a sence and meaning altogether as foolish vpon Saint Iames as if the like palpable abuse offered to him had beene a satisfaction sufficient for the wrong done to his fellow Apostle The reader in the meane time cannot but hence take notice vnto what miserable plunges our aduersaries in this point are put when the sonnes are thus enforced violently to sumble against their mother fallen by dashing against the stone of offence to men Iewishly minded but the onely sure foundation of life to such as seek saluation aright as also how one absurditie suffered to passe by publicke authority imboldens inferiors to forge licences for a thousand The Trent Councell ignorant of any better hath giuen faire hints vnto her children for reconciling the former seeming contradiction betwixt S. Paul and Saint Iames as they expresly doe That S. Paul when hee affirmes we are iustified freely by faith without workes must be vnderstood of the first iustification whereby wee receiue grace without any worth or merit precedent S. Iames when he affirmes we are iustified by workes and not by faith alone implies the increment of grace or righteousnesse in the godly But what had Saint Iames to doe with this second iustification when as the parties whom he proposed to refute had altogether erred from the first Did hee intend they should accumulate iustifications as we doe degrees in schooles and be twise iustifyed at once Suppose hee did yet must the second iustifycation go in order before the first Or admitting hee spake ambiguously or indeterminately of both and authorized the Church when any controuersie should arise to dispose of his voice for either as shee pleased yet what instance could worse be fit the second iustifycation whereto the Romish Church applies his meaning then Rahab who til that time as Bellarmine grants was not onely an infidell but an harlot and therefore an impious person destitute of grace and if she were iustifyed or obtained the grace of iustifycation by this work done in faith without grace as the same writer glosses vppon this text how shal we reconcile him to the Romish church which hath peremptorily determined that the grace of iustifycation is not obtained by workes and to this purpose cites that of Paul If it bee grace then is it not of workes otherwise grace should be no grace Vnto this difficulty which thus diuides the tongs of Babell our answere is casie and consonant to the perpetuall voice of Gods spirit Rahab was iustified according to Saint Iames his minde this is presumed as iust or iustifiable as well by workes as by faith because her workes were a necessarie part of that inhere â—t righteousnesse which must be in euerie one that liues by faith for though wee liue by faith onely yet onely the Iust so liue This no way contradicts Saint Paul because she did not seeke saluation by workes but did therefore worke that shee might lay sure hold on Gods promises onely by faith which is alwaies as vnable or vnapt to iustifie to sue for grace or apprehend Gods mercies aright as it is to work when occasion is offered More repugnant is this distinction of iustification first and second to Saint Pauls minde or purpose or suppose though he did not entend or acknowledge it his discourse notwithstanding might admit of it there is lesse reason why his words should be retracted as Bellarmine doth to the first iustification then why those words of S. Iames of works a man is iustified and not of faith onely should be extended to the second or if Pauls might in part be appliable to it Dauid and Abraham which he makes the maine ground of his dispute are the most vnfit instances that could haue been chosen in all the Scriptures Abraham our aduersaries grant was iust before his beliefe of that promise which was imputed to his for righteousnes yet then reiustified not by workes though not without faith as Bellarmine minceth but by faith without workes as the Apostle strongly and peremptorily inferres For to belieue Gods promises concerning the birth of Isaac was the sole act of Faith yet by this act was Abraham iustified not the first time as Bellarmine grants Wherefore Faith without workes did iustifie him the second time vnlesse hee take iustification otherwise then S. Paul there doth And if this verie same Scripture which sayth Abraham belieued God concerning Isaacs birth and it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse were as Saint Iames auoucheth againe fulfilled in the offering of Isaac he was iustified the third time onely by belieuing God not by his worke neuer accomplished if wee take beliefe and iustification in the same sence the holy spirit by the mouth of Paul doth in the Epistles to the Hebrewes and the Romans Though to offer vp Isaac in sacrifice were a work yet did Abraham offer him onely by faith because faith onely impelled him to this worke yea by the very same act of Faith which had beene imputed to him for righteousnesse Hee considered sayth S. Paul that God was able to raise him vp euen from
should make loue to our meate the soule or forme of a perfect taste For meate wholsome and pleasant we cannot perfectly relish but we must loue it howbeit we liue not by louing it but by tasting eating and digesting it No more can we rightly belieue Christs death and passion but we must loue him and his members yet liue wee not by louing them but by tasting Gods loue and fauour to vs or as I need not be afraid to speake by eating Christs flesh and drinking his blood For though by faith one and the same wee Assent vnto euery article in our creed yet this faith doth not iustifie but as it respects Christs bodie giuen for our sinnes or as it cleaues vnto Gods mercies manifested in that eternall sacrifice alwaies breathing out life to men renot neing all trust and confidence euen in such graces as wee haue receiued from him All this notwithstanding if we compare loue and faith together as parts of that righteousnesse which is in vs not considering the necessary dependance Loue hath of Faith in nature to loue is more then to belieue because it necessarily includes beliefe so is it more to loue our meate then to taste it because loue supposeth taste howbeit in respect of life to taste our meate is of more vse then to loue it So is it more to moue then to liue for all vicall motion includes in it acts of life yet is not motion simply better then life or the sensitiue sacultie whence it proceeds because it wholly depends on them not they on it 9. The second principall place of Scripture they vsually alleage doth vtterly discredit themselues but breeds no difficulty to vs in this present argument for that the faith whereof Saint Iames speakes doth differ as much from that whereto S. Paul ascribeth righteousnesse as a liue man doth from a dead or a body endued with life and motion from a statue or painted image no heathen artist that could but vnderstand the very tearmes of their seeming contradictory propositions would deny albeit some Romish writers of no meane ranke haue been giuen ouer vnto such Iewish blindnesse as to abuse Saint Iames authority not onely to hold iustification by workes as well as faith wherto his words incline as the thing it self in his sence though not in that construction they make of it is most true but to perswade the ignorant that such faith as S. Paul commends may be without works or christian loue But their folly herein will worke shame in such of their successors as shall comment vpon these two Apostles writings as in some of their predecessors it hath done if they consider that those very workes without which faith in Saint Iames construction sufficeth not vnto saluation are expresly comprehended in that faith wherby S. Paul tels vs the Iust do liue Was not Abraham our father iustified through vvorks when he offered his son Isaac vpon the altar he meant no more nor was more pertinentto his intended conclusion then if he had thus spoken If Abraham had sayd as they did whose empty faith he disapproues I haue faith but had not proued his sayings true by his deedes or readinesse to offer vp his onely Sonne vvhen God commaunded him for actually hee did not offer him he had not been iustified before God Why because he had not belieued in such sort as Saint Paul meant when he sayth by faith Abraham offered vp Isaac when he was tried But it may bee this faith was informed perfected or instigated to this act by loue of whom not of Isaac for that was the maine obstacle to worke distrust the chiefe antagonist of his faith Not of Sarah or any other friends or neighbours all which doubtlesse had disswaded him had he acquainted them with his purpose Was it then the loue of God Him indeed he loued aboue all because he firmely belieued his mercy and louing kindnesse towards him but this loue supposed it vvas his Assent vnto Gods omnipotent power which as the Apostle expresly tels vs moued him to this act For hee considered that God was able to raise him from the dead from whence also hee receiued him in a figure This consideration or inducement was a worke yet a proper act of faith no way of loue But loue perhappes did make it meritorious The loue indeede wherewith God loued him made his working faith acceptable in his sight but that it was strength of faith not the quality of loue which God imputed vnto him for righteousnesse the same Apostle for doubtlesse the same hand it was which penned the eleuenth to the Hebrâ—es and the fowrth vnto the Romans puts it out of doubt beeing not weake in faith he considered not his body now dead vvhen he was now a hundred yeere old neither yet the deadnesse of Sarahs wombe He staggered not at the promise of God through vnbeliefe but vvas strong in faith giuing glory to God And being fully perswaded that what he had promised he vvas also able to performe And therefore it was imputed vnto him for righteousnesse One and the same faith it was and standing at the same bent vnlesse by continuance of like triall increased in strength which wrought in him a readinesâ—â— of minde to sactifice his onely sonne in hope of a ioyfull resurrection and to expect his birth from the dead wombe of Sarah The obiect likewise whereto his Assent did adhere was one and the same his fidelitie which had promised on which faithfully still relying it was impossible his other faculties or affections should not subscribe to whatsoeuer his Assent of faith should enioine them and that remaining in wonted strength it could not but bring forth perfect loue and good works which may be sayd in such a sense to perfect it as we are sayd to blesse God that is to declare his blessednesse For as Gods loue to vs was most apparent in offering his onely Sonne So Abrahams loue to God was best manifested by sacrificing his sonne Isaac vvhom he loued yet he sacrificed him by faith wherefore his loue did result from firme Assent to Gods couenant and mercie made to mankinde in him in the faithfull acceptance whereof and full acquiescence therein his righteousnesse as in due place shall be shewed did consist 10. This comment vpon the Apostles words concerning Abrahams workes giues vs the true meaning of the like concerning Rahab Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot iustified by vvorkes vvhen she receiâ—ed the messengers and had sent them out another way If she had said vnto these messengers only thus I belieue the God of heauen earth hath giuen you this whole land for a possession yet I dare not shew you any kindnesse in this city her belief had bin as dead as a body without breath or motion But what man or woman liuing is there of common sense which once firmly perswaded that God in iustice had giuen his natiue country vnto forreine people whom he loued
as true and good whilest considered onely in themselues without oppositions of such matters as they much value So our Sauiour telleth vs that some when they haue heard receiue the word with ioy and for a while belieue but in time of tentation depart and Saint Iohn that euen amongst the Rulers many belieued on him By true and liuely faith rooted in the heart So Bellarmine would perswade vs or otherwise wee might make the Scriptures as a nose of waxe or alter the nature of sacred phrase as wee do counters in accompts Yet if they had in heart belieued vnto righteousnesse they had confessed with their mouth vnto saluation but sayth the Euangelist because of the Pharisees they did not confesse him least they should be put out of the synagogue And was not this to be ashamed of him and of his Gospell before men And whosoeuer is so affected belieueth not in that sense the Prophet speakes whosoeuer belieueth on him shall not be ashamed for vnlesse he acknowledge them in that day they shall not only bee ashamed but confounded with vnbelieuers yea the very reason the Euangelist giues why they did not confesse him condemns the Cardinals glosse either of great folly or impietie For sayth he they loued the prayse of men more then the prayse of God vnto which latter they had assented as much better had they so belieued as our Sauiour meanes when hee demaunds of the Iewes How can ye belieue which receiue honour one of another and seeke not the honour vvhich commeth from God onely Ere our faith become such as layes sure hold on life for of such in that place he speakes wee must Assent vnto the honour that comes from God alone as so much better then that we receiue of men that the later must seem as nothing in coÌ„parison of the former The same word beliefe oft-times is taken not only as it includes these last degrees or proper differences of Assent vnto diuine truthes but as it is accompanied with it essentiall properties or with such works as impulsiuely are from it though proper acts or exercises of other vertues faculties or affections whence they spring as from their naturall roote wherein they reside as in their natiue subiect The places are obuious to euerie one conuersant in Scriptures The like latitude of perfection whether from difference of essence or diuersitie onely in degrees knowledge or vnderstanding in the vse of sacred writers admits Nor did Saint Iohn in that speech He that sayth hee knoweth God and keepeth not his Commandements is a lyar contradict our Sauiour where he supposeth that many know their masters will and do it not For the disciple speakes of true and perfect knowledge the Lord of knowledge externall or imperfect The same analogie the Fathers retaine in the vse of beliefe or faith That the Pontificians can alledge their testimonies to proue faith may bee separated from works or charity is as little pertinent to the point in question betwixt vs and them as it would bee in the schooles to vrge the authority of late Philosophers that stones and mettals did not growe or that trees and plants had no locall motion against him that out of Aristotle did maintaine all bodies endued with life were capable of growth and diminution or all with sense of locall motion He that holds the former conclusions would account stones and mettals amongst bodies inanimate and trees and plants amongst vnsensitiue Now our question is not of euery sort or degree of faith but of that by which the Iust doe liue That no Father did affirme it should be without fruites or workes of holinesse is more then my small reading in them can secure me to affirme albeit reason I haue none to thinke otherwise but iust cause so to presume by the places our aduersaries alleadge so idle they are and impertinent Howsoeuer I dare vndertake for our assertion to bring three Fathers for one or testimonies thrice as many out of the best approued as any Iesuite shall do for his And because some of them scramble at some scattered sentences in Cyprians vvorkes or others fathered vpon him I will instance at this time in him especially the rather because he sealed the truth of his profession with his blood and had least reason to bee partiall for Faith against Charitie of whose abundance in his heart euery letter in his writings almost is a character yea so he esteemed of it that hee thought it impossible for him to prooue a true witnesse of Christ though dying in his cause if hee had liued without brotherly loue How doth hee say he belieues in Christ that doth not vvhat Christ hath giuen him in charge to doe Or how shall hee ataine to the reward of faith vvhich vvill not faithfullie keepe his Commaundements And againe Seeing to see Christ is our ioy nor can our ioy haue being vntill we see him what blindnesse of heart what mad nesse is this to loue the grieuances the paines and miseries of this world not rather to make hast vnto that ioy which neuer can be taken from vs Yet all this beloued brethren comes to passe because wee haue no faith because none belieues the truth of what God hath promised who is true whose word is eternally sure to belieuers If a graue man and of good note should promise thee any thing thou wouldst rely vpon his promise thou wouldst not belieue thou shouldst be deceiued or disappointed by him whom thou knowest to be constant in his words and deeds Behold God speaks to thee and â—ost thou perfidiously wauer through incredulity of minde God hath promised thee at thy departure out of this world immortality and eternity and dost thou doubt This is to be altogether without the knowledge of God this is to offend Christ the master of the faithfull vvith the sin of incredulity this is to haue a place in the Church and to be without faith in the house of faith The like hath Bernard who speaking of the victory that is by faith thus resolues flesh and blood moouing doubts to the contrary Perchance it may tempt some in that they see so many acknowledging Christ to bee the Sonne of God still entangled with the lusts of this world How sayth the Apostle then who is he that ouer commeth the world but he which belieues that IESVS is the Sonne of God vvhen as the world it selfe belieues this truth yea do not the very diuels belieue as much and tremble but I reioine Dost thou imagine that he reputes CHRIST for the sonne of God whosoeuer hee be that is not terrified with his threats that is not allured with his promises which obeies not his commandements and rests not satisfied with his aduise doth not such a one albeit he professe he knowes God deny him by his deeds Valentian notwithstanding would perswade vs that the Fathers when they say faith without works is dead would onely giue vs to
helping and nourishing the poore For when Zacheus said Loe the one halfe of my goods I giue to the poore and if I haue defrauded any man I restore it fourefold Iesus answered and said This day is saluation come to this house was much as this man also is the sonne of Abraham For if Abrahams belieuing God were reputed vnto him for righteousnesse he likewise that giues almes according to Gods commandement belieues God and he that hath the truth of faith retaines the feare of God and he that retaines the feare of God hath God in his thoughts whiles he shewes compassion to the poore Therefore he workes because he belieues because he knowes all the word of God fore tels is true that the sacred scripture cannot lie that vnfruitfull trees i men barren of good workes must be cut downe and cast into the fire but the mercifull shall be called vnto the heauenly kingdome And in another place he cals such as are fruitfull in works faithfull denying this title to the vnfruitfull and barren If ye haue not beene faithfull in the vnrighteous Mammon who will commit the true riches to your trust And if ye haue not beene faithfull in that which is another mans who will giue you that which is your owne Saluianus * words here inserted in the margine imports no lesse 3. If the workes required by Saint Iames be not truely good without presupposall of saith nor iustification possible without presupposall of such workes the more opperatiue wee make Saint Pauls faith the more we rather draw then loose this former knot whose solution in this respect must be sought by vnfolding the diuerse acceptions of iustification Sometimes then it imports the decree or purpose of God to iustifie sinfull men as whom he predestinated them also he called and whom he called them also he iustified and whom he iustified them also he glorified About iustification in this sence there either is or neede to be no controuersie at least none pertinent to our present purpose But as God decreed before all times to create man yet did not create him vntill time had numbred sixe daies so although his purpose was from eternity to iustifie or absolue vs from our sinnes yet actually he doth not iustifie or absolue vs before we haue actuall being nor doth he iustifie all that haue such being but those onely which haue the seales or pledges of his calling of which whosoeuer are partakers are in a secondarie sence accompted iustified How shall we â—aith the Apostle that are dead to sin liue yet therein Know ye not that all we which haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ haue beene baptised into his death wee are buried then with him by baptisme into his death All persons baptized may be accounted iustified in the same sence they are dead to sinne and dead all such are to sinne not really or actually but by profession in as much as by receiuing this outward seale of Gods couenant or other like pledges of his fauour they binde themselues to abrogate the soueraigntie of sinne in their mortall bodies and to giue their members weapons of righteousnesse vnto God Thus when the Apostle speakes indefinitely of all their saluation or iustification to whom he writes his meaning can be no other then this that all of them haue receiued vndoubted pledges of Gods mercy and neede doubt of iustification actuall or finall absolution so they walke worthy of their calling Their error whose rectification Saint Iames sought did consist in holding these outward seales or conspicuous tokens of Gods fauour whereby their Assent vnto his promises as true was confirmed sufficient to finall approbation or admission into the inheritance of Saints albeit they did not consent vnto euery part of the Law as good in the practise Concerning iustification thus taken there is at this day little or no controuersie vnlesle betweene the spirit and the flesh or betweene our owne conscience and Sathan who still labours to perswade vs this kinde of iustification might suffice Thirdly in as much as God decreed to iustifie man by faith which euen in such as are saued by it is not ordinarily perfected in a moment we are said sometimes to be iustified when the first seeds of that faith which by taking firme roote by fructification or perfection added by the immediate hand of God becomes saluificall are first sowne in our hearts Hee that hath but a resolution for the present syncere though variable to walke in all the waies of his God is in scripture often instiled iust or righteous and may by this resolution or purpose be truely said iustified in the sight of God not absolutely but in respect of opposite prophanenesse or expresse dissimulation If the righteous saith the Lord vnto his Prophet turne away from his righteousnesse and commit iniquities in his transgression that he committed and in his finne that hee hath sinned in them he shall die And againe The righteousnesse of the righteous shall not deliuer him in the day of transgression c. when I shall say vnto the righteous that he shall surely liue if hee trust to his owne righteousnesse and commit iniquitie all his righteousnesse shall be no more remembred but for his iniquitie that he hath committed he shall die for the same And vnto such as are here specified though not vnto such alone that speech of Saint Iohn is litterally appliable Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc he that is righteous let him be righteous stil or more iustified Nor can that other of S. Paul be restrained to those that haue attained sauing faith or final absolution The hearers of the law are not righteous before God but the doers of the Law shall be instified That is God doth approue their deeds so farre as they are consonant to his law and accounts the syncere practise of morall dueries whereunto light of nature did leade the Gentiles much better then the outward obseruance of legall ceremonies or sabhatarian delight in hearing Thou art not farre from the kingdome of God saith our Sauiour to him that that had discreetely acknowledged this truth to loue the Lord withall the heart and with all the vnderstanding and withall the soule and withall the strength and to loue his neighbour as himselfe is more then all burnt offerings and sacrifices Now if by such workes as the heathen or auditors of the Law not yet sanctified often practised much more by those workes which accompany true and liuely faith we may in a higher degree of the same sence be accounted iustified that is approueable in the sight of God or passiuely capable of a finall absolution or effectuall iustification And this was all Saint Iames meant in that assertion Yee see then how that a man of workes is iustified and not of faith onely which words are but equiualent to the like precedent what auaileth it my brethren though a man say he hath faith when he hath no workes
can the faith saue him The conclusion intended in both places as in that whole discourse was no more but thus No man may presume hee is already in the state of iustification or saluation vnlesse hee finde himselfe vnpartially deuoted vnto good workes of euery kinde Or albeit his faith haue once or twice shewed it selfe by his workes or readinesse to doe ods will he must not here let vp his rest or rely on what is past Abraham had obeyed Gods will once in leauing his fathers house and againe in cancelling his owne resolution for making his seruant his heire vpon Gods promise to make his seed like the starres of heauen his beliefe hereof was accounted to him for righteousnesse But did he thus iustified by faith cease to work No his faith by working became more perfect and improued his former approbation of being reputed righteous so farre as to be thenceforth called the friend of God And this was written for our instruction vt qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc that euery one which hath attained to morall hope of saluation should make his election sure by practise of such workes as perfect faith and enapt it for sure reliance on Gods promises Did Saint Paul then euer affirme that a man could be saued or iustified without such workes No he alwaies supposed them as a qualification most necessary in the party which expected finall absolution or benefit of Gods generall pardon In what sence then doth he say we are iustified by faith not by workes Not by workes ceremoniall Not by such as were the best that Abraham or Dauid euer did The forme of Salomons interrogation who can say I haue made mine heart cleane I am cleane from my sinne upposeth his father could neuer haue truely auouched thus much yea Dauid himselfe euen in his best daies and purest thoughts vnfainedly disclaimes all such purity or perfection as this briefe demaund to reserue others and the full handling of this to their proper place is for the present proofe sufficient k Who can vnderstand his faults cleanseme from my secret sinnes This assures vs there is another acception of iustification yet behind most frequent with Saint Paul to wit the actuall sentence of the iudge acquitting or absoluing or for finall absolution or actuall acquittance of the parties so qualified as Saint Iames requires And as we are not capable of Gods promises of eternall life or happinesse without workes and yet we apprehend them not by workes but by faith so this finall sentence of ioy and comfort is apprehended by faith alone although so truely apprehended it cannot be by parties destitute of workes nor doe we onely by faith alone apprehend the truth or deriue the benefit of diuine promises to our selues but by it alone though accompanied with all other sanctifying graces and attended with the whole traine of workes morall or ceremoniall we expect and pray the promises may be fulfilled not for our sakes or for any righteousnesse we haue in vs or can hope for in this life but only for the merits of CHRIST by his sole mediation and intercession 4. The seeming contradiction betweene these two great Apostles is hence easily and cleerely thus dissolued Saint Iames affirming we are iustified by workes and not by faith alone speakes of the passiue qualification in the subiect or party to be iustified or made capable of absolute approbation or finall absolution this qualification supposed Saint Paul speakes of the application of the sentence or of the ground of our plea for absolution the one by his doctrine must be conceiued and the other sought for onely by saith the immediate and onelie cause of both he still contends not to be in vs but without vs and for this reason when hee affirmes that wee are iustified by faith alone he considers not faith as it is part of our qualification inherent or the foundation of other graces but as it includes the correlatiue tearme or immediate cause of iustification wherunto it alone hath peculiar reference or continuall aspect This is that which in other tearmes some haue deliuered fides iustificat relatiue non effectiue aut formaliter faith iustifies relatiuely not formally or by way of merit or efficiency To this purpose he alleageth the Prophets testimony the iust shall liue by his faith Faith then makes him iust and iustifies him in that sence Saint Iames meant as it is operatiue but he liues by it as it vnites him to the Lord of life yea by it alone in as much as by it alone not by it and other parts of grace as ioint supporters he trusts in Gods mercies offered in CHRIST wholly relying on them not partly on them and partly on righteousnesse inherent That the Prophet in faith included this confidence and reliance vpon Gods mercies in CHRIST was a point vnto the iudicious Sasbout so cleere that if the Apostle in the first to the Romanes had otherwise taken it he knew not how they could be reconciled That so much imports in the tenth and eleuenth to the Hebrewes is euident and will so appeare from the very proposall of his speeches Cast not away therefore your confidence which hath great recompence of reward For ye haue need of patience that after ye haue done the will of God ye might receiue the promise For yet a little while and he that shall come will come and will not tarry Now the iust shall liue by faith but if any man draw backe my soule shall haue no pleasure in him But we are not of them who draw backe vnto perdition but of them that beleeue to the sauing of the soule That Paul wheresoeuer he attributes iustificaion to faith alone alwaies includes the principall obiect of true faith as the sole immediate cause whereby of men iustifiable because actually partakers of Gods graces we become actually iustified or absolued his coment vpon these words of Moses Abraham beleeued God and it was counted vnto him for righteousnesse doth put it out of controuersie Was it therefore such righteousnesse as deserued absolution or reward Rather rewarded as such by gracious acceptance as is there implied Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that worketh not to the loiterer or idle person No to him that faithfully workes as Abraham did and yet seekes saluation onely by firme beleefe in him which iustifies the vngodly his faith or rather his faith thus set vpon it proper obiects is imputed to him for righteousnesses But the Iesuite demaunds when is it thus imputed After grace infused or whiles it remaines inherent or at the first infusion only Not after grace infused by which in his diuinitie he ceaseth to be impious Was Abraham then destitute of inherent grace before he belieued the promise concerning Isaac Sosome Romanists consequently to their Churches erroneous interpretation of scripture haue auouched whom Bellarmine dares not follow