of God whereby he accounteth and esteemeth that righteousnes which is in Christ as the righteousnes of that sinner which beleeueth in him By Christs righteousnes we are to vnderstand two thinges first his sufferings specially in his death and passion secondly his obedience in fulfilling the lawe both which goe together for Christ in suffering obeyed and obeying suffered And the very shedding of his bloud to which our saluation is ascribed must not onely be considered as it is passiue that is a suffering but also as it is actiue that is an obedience in which he shewed his exceeding loue both to his father and vs and thus fulfilled the lawe for vs. 3. Rule That iustification is from Gods mercies and grace procured onely by the merite of Christ 4. Rule That man is iustified by faith alone because faith is that alone instrument created in the hart by the Holy Ghost whereby a sinner laieth holde of Christs righteousnes and applies the same to him selfe There is neither hope nor loue nor any other grace of God within man that can doe this but faith alone now of the Doctrine of the Roman Church Because M. PERKINS settes not downe well the Catholikes opinion I will helpe him out both with the preparation and justification it selfe and that taken out of the Councel of Trent Where the very wordes concerning preparation are these Sess 6. c. 6. Men are prepared and disposed to this iustice when being stirred vp and helped by Gods grace they conceiuing faith by hearing are freely moued towardes God beleeuing those thinges to be true which God doth reueale and promise â—â—â—â—ely that he of his grace doth iustifie a sinner through the redemption that is in CHRIST IESVS And when knowledging them selues to be sinners through the feare of Gods iudgementes they turne them selues to consider the mercie of God are lifted vp into hope trusting that God will be mercifull vnto them for Christs sake and beginning to loue him as the fountayne of all iustice are there by moued with hatred and detestation of all sinnes Finally they determine to receiue baptisme to beginne a new life and to keepe all Christs commaundements After this disposition or preparation followeth Iustification and for that euery thing is best knowne by the causes of it all the causes of Iustification are deliuered by the Councell in the next Chapter which briefly are these The finall cause of the Iustification of a sinner is the glorie of God the glory of Christ and mans owne iustification the efficient is God the meritorious CHRIST IESVS Passions the instrumentall is the Sacrament of Baptisme the onlie formall cause is inherent iustice that is Faith Hope and Charity with the other giftes of the Holy Ghost powred into a mans soule at that instant of iustification Of the iustification by faith and the second iustification shall be spoken in their places So that we agree in this point that iustification commeth of the free grace of God through his infinite mercies and the merits of our Sauiours Passion and that all sinnes when a man is justified be pardoned him The point of difference is this that the Protestants hold that Christs Passion and obedience imputed vnto vs becommeth our righteousnes for the wordes of justice and justification they seldome vse and not any righteousnes which is in our selues The Catholikes affirme that those vertues powred into our soules speaking of the formall cause of iustification is our iustice and that through that a man is iustified in Gods sight and accepted to life euerlasting Although as you haue seene before we hold that God of his meere mercie through the merits of CHRIST IESVS our Sauiour hath freely bestowed that iustice on vs. Note that M. PERKINS comes to short in his second rule when he attributeth the merits of Christs suffringes to obedience whereas obedience if it had beene without charity would haue merited nothing at Gods handes And whereas M. PERKINS doth say that therein we raze the foundation that is as he interpreteth it in his preface we make Christ a Pseudochrist we auerre that herein we doe much more magnifie Christ then they doe for they take Christs merits to be so meane that they doe but euen serue the turne to deface sinne and make men worthie of the joyes of heauen Nay it doth not serue the turne but only that God doth not impute sinne vnto vs. We contrarywise doe so highly esteeme of our Sauiours inestimable merits that we hold them wel able to purchase at Gods handes a farre inferiour justice and such merits as mortall men are capable of and to them doe giue such force and value that they make a man just before God and worthy of the Kingdome of heauen as shall be proued Againe they doe great iniury to Gods goodnes wisedome and justice in their justification for they teach that inward justice or sanctification is not necessary to justification Yea their Ring-leader Luther saith That the iustified can by no sinnes whatsoeuer except he refuse to beleeue lose their saluation Wherein first they make their righteous man Like as our Sauiour speaketh to sepulchers whited on the out side with an imputed justice but within full of iniquity and disorder Then the wisdome of GOD must either not discouer this masse of iniquity or his goodnesse abide it or his justice either wipe it away or punish it But say they he seeth it well enough but couereth it with the mantle of Christs righteousnesse Why can any thing be hid from his sight it is madnesse to thinke it And why doth he not for Christes sake deface it and wipe it cleane away and adorne with his grace that soule whome he for his sonnes sake loueth and make it worthy of his loue and kingdome What is it because Christ hath not deserued it So to say were to derogate from the infinite value of his merits Or is it for that God cannot make such justice in a pure man as may be worthy of his loue and his kingdome And this were to deny Gods power in a matter that can be donne as we confesse that such vertue was in our first father Adam in state of innocencie And M. PERKINS seemes to graunt Pag. 77. That man in this life at his last gaspe may haue such righteousnesse If then we had no other reason for vs but that our justification doth more exalt the power and goodnes of God more magnifie the value of Christs merits and bringeth greater dignity vnto men our doctrine were much better to be liked then our aduersaries who cannot alleage one expresse sentence either out of holy Scriptures or auncient Fathers teaching the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs to be our justification as shall be seene in the reasons following and doe much abase both Christs merits and Gods power wisdome and goodnesse Now to their reasons M. PERKINS first reason is this That which must be our righteousnesse before God must satisfie the iustice of
Priestes with many teares and great sighes powred out prayers for the good Emperours soule Againe at a solemne feast which he helde at the dedication of the Church built by him in Ierusalem some of his cleargie preached and expounded the holy Scriptures Ibidem de vita Const lib. 4. ca 45. and other some with vnbloudy Sacrifice and Mysticall consecrations appeased the Godhead and prayed for the health of the Prince Zozom lib 1. hist Eccl. cap 21. Moreouer this zealous Emperour reprehended Acasius a Nouatian heretike for saying that it was not in the power of Priests but of God only to forgiue sinnes Finally toward true Bishoppes the lawfull Pastors of Christs Church he caried such a reuerend respect Socr. hist lib 1. cap. 5. that being in the Councell of Nice he would not sitte downe before they had beckned vnto him so to doe And was so farre from taking vpon him to be supreame judge in causes Ecclesiasticall that he openly there professed that it did not belong to him to judge of Bishoppes but to be judged by them Ruffi lib. 1. hist cap. 2. If then this right Puissant Emperour and most sincere Christian reuerenced the Sacrifice of the Masse and beleeued that there was power in Priests to remitte sinnes that Saints were to be prayed vnto and that prayer was to be made for the dead and such like as appeareth by the euident testimonie of most approued Authors that liued with him hath your Majestie any cause to doubt but that in matters of faith he agreed with the present Roman Church Wherefore my hope and trust in Almighty God is that you in your high wisdome vpon mature and due consideration how many old condemned errors the Protestants hold and with all well weighing that the whole frame of their Doctrine tendeth to the disgracing of God and his Saints to the discouragement of men from well doeing and doth as it were loosen the reines vnto all fleshly liberty will in time make a most Godly resolution to imitate that famous Emperour Constantine He contrary to his former education embraced with all his power that same Romane Religion which we nowe professe And which is worthy to be obserued he feared nothing the contrary disposition of the multitude or greater parte of his subjects that were wholy ledde another way But following the blessed example of his most vertuous Mother S. Helena reposed himselfe in the powrefull assistance of the Almighty and chased all other Religions into corners setting vp and firmely establishing the Roman There can be no cause aleadged why your Majestie may not doe the like if it shall please God effectually to stirre vp your gratious minde and to bende your hart to vndertake it for at that time there was more likelyhoode of resistance then nowe and nowe much more helpe at hand if any resistance should be offered Pardon me deare Soueraigne if before I finish this argument I seeme ouer-bold here to present vnto your memorie that all your most gratious and Godly Progenitors and all our holy Predecessors who now assuredly stande before the tribunall of God doe demaund and expect no lesse at your handes For they founded not Bishopricks Deaneries and other spirituall liuinges they builded not Colleges and Schooles for Protestants or their fauourers Ponder well therefore I beseech your Majestie whether they doe not or may not justly chalenge of you to whome the administration of justice belongeth to see and prouide that such Churches Church-liuinges and spirituall rewardes of learning as they erected and bequeathed to Roman Bishops and Priestes be disposed of and bestowed according to their erections and foundations If it shall please the Protestants to erect any new Churches or bestowe any other reuennues towardes their Ministers mayntenance let them haue them hardly and enjoy them quietly only let them be content out of their equitie to leaue vs that which was prouided for vs and bequeathed vnto vs by our most Religious Auncestors If all these reasons and exceeding manie other which might be mustered and produced to the same purpose will not suffice to effect in your Majestie a loue and desire to embrace that auncient Roman faith which all your Renowmed Progenitors so highly reuerenced loued and esteemed Yet let me prostrate on my knee most humbly beseech your highnes in the name of thowsandes that so farre forth they may preuaile with you as you will not permitte those rigorous lawes framed against recusant Catholikes to be put in practize and executed For howe can it seeme conformable to reason in your Majesties deepe wisdome and judgement that your louing Subjects should by compulsion and constrainte vnder that intollerable penaltie of losse of all their goodes conforme them selues to such articles of Religion that by the purest antiquitie were censured to be erronious and execrable And what misery and pitty were it to driue them perforce either to swallowe downe the deadly poyson of their soules or else to endure besides the disgrace of the state the losse of their worldly wealth and liberty Consider and weigh with your selfe my most gratious Liege whether it will not be thought ouer great seuerity to presse men euen against humane nature and condition with patience to heare their owne profession and beleefe both vntruely slaundered and most bitterly reuyled and inueighed against as in most Ministers sermons it is commonly Yea to giue patient eare to them that blush not publikely to call our blessed Sauiours body in the holy SACRAMENT an abhominable Idole his glorious and immortall Saintes senceles dead Men his Vicar and Vicegerent on earth Antichrist and euery Catholike an Idolater With infinit other intollerable reproaches Our constant hope euen yet though against hope is that your Majestie out of your owne sweet naturall disposition and most milde carriage in gouernment hitherto will not onely moderate but suspende all such extreamity And not suffer it to be extended against them who in former doubtfull times were in manner the only men that defended and made manifest to the world your Title and interest to the Crowne of England and were no lesse willing to receiue you when the time came and as forward to haue assisted you if neede had required as anie sorte of Subjectes within the lande And neuer since wittingly offended your sacred Majestie in any thing It may be objected that they doe not conforme themselues vnto a statute lawe made against their Religion Be it so Then their Religion toward God not any contempt of their lawfull Superiour doth commaund them from the conformity which is pardonable Considering that they be no inuenters or followers of nouelties but onely hold on and perseuere in the faith of their forefathers And what subject is the among the most duetifull that doth not often transgresse and giue offence to one statute lawe or other yet for no other lawe men are so hardly dealt withall albeit they violate many of them together Only Catholikes are for the
Baptisme commonly called Concupiscence was neuer a sinne properly but onely the materiall part of sinne the formall and principall part of it consisting in the depriuation of Originall iustice and a voluntary auersion from the lawe of GOD the which is cured by the Grace of GOD giuen to the baptised and so that which was principall in Originall sinne doth not remayne in the regenerate neither doth that which remayneth make the person to sinne which was the second point vnlesse he willingly consent vnto it as hath beene proued heretofore it allureth intiseth him to sinne but hath not power to constrayne him to it as M. PERKINS also himselfe before confessed Nowe to the third and intangleth him in the punishment of sinne howe doth Originall sinne intangle the regenerate in the punishment of sinne If all the guiltines of it be remoued from his person as you taught before in our Consent Mendacem memorem esse oportet Either confesse that the guilt of Originall sinne is not taken away from the regenerate or else you must vnsay this that it intangleth him in the punishment of sinne nowe to the last clause that the reliques of Originall sinne make a man miserable a man may be called wreatched and miserable in that he is in disgrace with God and so subject to his heauy displeasure and that which maketh him miserable in this sence is sinne but S. Paul taketh not the word so here but for an vnhappy man exposed to the danger of sinne and to all the miseries of this world from which we should haue beene exempted had it not beene for Originall sinne after which sort he vseth the same word 1. Cor. 15. If in this life onely we were hoping in Christ we were more miserable then all men not that the good Christians were farthest out of Gods fauour and more sinnefull then other men but that they had fewest worldly comforts and the greatest crosses and thus much in confutation of that formall argument Now to the second Infantes Baptised die the bodely death before they come to the yeares of discretion but there is not in them anie other cause of death besides Originall sinne for they haue no actuall sinne Rom. 5. Rom. 5. and death is the wages of sinne as the Apostle saith death entred into the world by sinne Answere The cause of the death of such Innocentes is either the distemperature of their bodies or externall violence and God who freely bestowed their liues vpon them may when it pleaseth him as freely take their liues from them especially when he meanes to recompence them with the happy exchaunge of life euerlasting True it is that if our first parentes had not sinned no man should haue died but haue beene both long preserued in Paradise by the fruit of the wood of life and finally translated without death into the Kingdome of heauen and therefore is it said most truely of S. Paul death entred into the world by sinne Rom. 5. But the other place Rom. 6. the wages of sinne is death is fouly abused for the Apostle there by death vnderstandeth eternall damnation as appeareth by the opposition of it to life euerlasting and by sinne there meaneth not Originall but Actuall sinne such as the Romans committed in their infidely the wagis where of if they had not repented them had bin hell fire now to inferre that Innocents are punished with corporall death for Originall sinne remayning in them because that eternall death is the due hire of Actuall sinne is either to shewe great wante of judgement or else very strangelie to preuert the wordes of Holy scripture Let this also not be forgotten that he himselfe acknowledged in our Consent that the punishment of Originall sinne was taken away in Baptisme from the regenerate howe then doth he here say that he doth die the death for it M. PERKINS third reason That which lusteth against the spirite and by lusting tempteth and in tempting intiseth and draweth the hart to sinne is for nature sinne it selfe but concupiscence in the regenerate is such ergo Answere The first proposition is not true for not euery thing that intiseth vs to sinne is sinne or else the Apple that allured Eue to sinne had beene by nature sinne and euery thing in this world one way or an other tempteth vs to sinne according vnto that of S. Iohn All that is in the world 1. Epl. 2. is the Concupiscence of the flesh and the Concupiscence of the eyes and Pride of life So that it is very grosse to say that euery thing which allureth to sinne is sinne it selfe and as wide is it from all morall wisedome to affirme that the first motions of our passions be sins For euen the very heathen Philosophers could distinguish betweene sodaine passions of the minde and vices teaching that passions may be bridled by the vnderstanding and brought by due ordering of them into the ring of reason and so made vertues rather then vices And that same text which M. PERKINS bringeth to perswade these temptations to be sinnes proues the quite contrary God tempteth no man but euerie man is tempted Iacob 1. when he is drawen away by his owne concupiscence and is allured afterward when concupiscence hath conceaued it bringeth forth sinne Marke the wordes well First Concupiscence tempteth and allureth by some euill motion but that is no sinne vntill afterward it doe conceiue that is obtayne some liking of our will in giuing eare to it and not expelling it so speedely as we ought to doe the suggestion of such an enemie the which that most deepe Doctor Saint Augustine sifteth out very profoundly in these wordes Lib. 6. in Iul. cap. 5. When the Apostle Saint Iames saith euery man is tempted being drawne away and allured by his Concupiscence and afterward Concupiscence when it hath conceiued bringeth forth sinne Trulie in these wordes the thing brought forth is distinguished from that which bringeth it forth The damme is concupiscence the fole is sinne But concupiscence doth not bring sinne forth vnlesse it conceiue so then it is not sinne of it selfe and it conceiueth not vnlesse it drawe vs that is vnlesse it obtayne the consent of our will to commit euill The like exposition of the same place and the difference betweene the pleasure tempting that runneth before and the sinne which followeth after Vnlesse we resist manfully may be seene in S. Cirill Lib. 4. in Iohan. ca. â—1 so that by the iudgement of the most learned auncient Fathers that text of S. Iames cited by M. PERKINS to proue concupiscence to be sinne disputeth it very soundly to that reason of his Such as the fruit is such is the Tree I answere that not concupiscence but the will of man is the Tree which bringeth forth either good or badde fruit according vnto the disposition of it concupiscence is onely an intiser vnto badde Lib. 5 con Iulianum cap. 3. But S. Augustine saith That concupiscence
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
and without delay wherein we honour and worship him as contrariewise they doe much dishonour him who breake with him as if he were of no better account then to be so deluded This thing in it selfe is so certaine and cleere that he who denyes it must needes either be ignorant in the nature of a Vowe or not know wherein the true worship of God consisteth for according vnto the holy Scriptures it selfe all good deeds done to the glorie of God be acts of the true worship of God And S. ANNE * Luk. 1 did worship God by fasting and prayer And * Phil. 4. almes bestowed on Gods prisoners is called a sacrifice pleasing and acceptable to God And it is said * Iac. 5. to be a pure religion before God to visite Orphanes and widdowes If then all other vertuous duties done to the glorie of God be parts of his true worship much more Vowes which by special promise dedicate a good deed to Gods honour they then being of their own nature special parts of his true worship of God it followeth necessarie that at all times they were and may be vsed to the true worship of God that they were in practise before MOSES Law is euident by that Vowe which IACOB made * Gen. 28. of setting vp a stone which should be called the house of God and of paying the tenthes of all his goodes Out of which Vowe wee also gather that God holdeth for agreeable any kinde of good seruice offred vnto him out of our owne deuotion albeit he hath not commaunded it for no such thing as IACOB there Vowed was commaunded him but hee being well assured that it would bee well taken by God which was offered of good will to his greater honour hee Vowed it and is in holy Scripture commended for it Againe that when S. PAVL * Colos 2. seemeth to disalowe voluntarie worship he must be vnderstood to speake either of irronious or of friuolous and foolish things promised to God which do not properlie serue to the setting forth of his honour Now that Vowes should bee frequented in the state of the Gospel besides the euidence of S. PAVLS Vowe * Act. 18. and diuerse other such like the Prophet ESAY did foretel in these words * Esa 19.18 They shal worship him with sacrifice and gifts and they shall Vowe Vowes vnto our Lord and performe them To which M. P. answereth first that by such ceremonial worship as then was in vse the Prophet doth expresse the spiritual worship of the Newe Testament This exposition is voluntarie and nothing proper For what is more vilde and absurde than to declare that Christians shall make no Vowes to say that they shall make Vowes as though one contrarie were sit or would serue to expresse the other This exposition being very vnmeete M. P. adjoyneth a second that in the New Testament wee haue Vowes of Morall and Euangelicall duties but such are not any parte of Gods worshippe so that first you shall haue no Vowes at all Secondlie the winde being changed you shall haue them but as no parts of Gods worship as though Morrall and Euangelicall duties vndertaken and performed to Gods greater glorie be not the verie synewes and substance of his seruice and worship Againe sayth M. P. they alleadge for Euangelicall Vowes * Psal 75 Vow vnto God and paye it M. P. his aunswere is that this bindes the Iewes hee would haue you vnderstande not the Christians Wee saye that it is no commaundement to either of them but an exhortation aswell to the one as to the other First because good Vowes doe tende to the greater glorie of God in all states as hath bene prooued before Secondlie for that the Prophet in the next verse yeelding the reason why wee must paye our Vowes sayeth That hee vnto whome wee haue Vowed is terrible vnto the Kings of the earth And therefore most likely that such Vowes he spake of there may be made of any sort of men inhabiting the earth Thirdly because the auncient Fathers take it to extende vnto vs Christians as well as vnto the Iewes let one Saincte AVGVSTINE serue in his Comentarie vppon this Psalme 75. Because wee haue handled those thinges sayeth hee peraduenture thou who wast willing before but nowe wilt not Vowe but marke what the Psalme saide vnto thee It sayeth not Doe not Vowe but Vowe and paye it wilt thou not Vowe Therefore wouldest haue Vowed but not haue fulfilled it naye rather doe both Let the one bee of thine owne promise the other shall be performed by the helpe of God Hee then tooke these wordes to belong vnto his Auditours who were no Iewes In the same place hee doth highlie commende Christians for Vowing some Chastitie some Hospitalitie some Pouertie But because contraries being set together each doe more liuelie appeare in his kinde Let vs with this Exposition compare M. Perk. his Comentarie vppon this place who sayeth that the Prophet speaketh of Vowes of Prayer and thankesgiuing For so sayth M. Perk. doeth hee expounde himselfe * Psal 56.12 My Vowes are vpon mee I will offer prayses vnto GOD Well aymed I warrant you The Psalme fiftie sixe written first is the Exposition of the Psalme seauentie fiue which was conceited and vttered after Againe in the Psalme seauentie fiue DAVID speaketh to others in the other hee speaketh of himselfe Thirdly the Prophets words in Psalme fiftie sixe confirme rather that which he taught before that all considerate Vowes are prayses and parts of Gods worshippe or as the wordes doe more literallie sounde because his Vowes that is his prayers and desires were by God accomplished therefore hee would prayse and thanke him Let vs now come vnto the second poynt wherein wee dissent They saith M. P. hold Vowes made of things not commanded as of Fasting Prayer c. to be parts of Gods worship and that they tende vnto a state of perfection We say flatly no holding that lawfull Vowes be stayes and props of Gods worship but not the worship it selfe this is long since confuted But here M. P. setteth vp a rotten prop or two to vp-hold his ruinous buylding saying S. PAVL sayth plainely * 1. Tim. 4 Bodely exercise profiteth litle but godlines profiteth much Where are you good Sir We treat here of Vowes which are formallie actions of the minde what do you now about bodely exercises Vowes ars principall parts of that godlines which is so profitable And if by bodily exercise Fasting and other corporall paine or labour be vnderstood then we say that such things of themselues would profite litle but our being directed to the chastising of the rebellious flesh to the end we may lesse offend better serue God then they may much profite vs. But let vs here M. P. his second reason against such Vowes Gods kingdome standeth not in outward things and therefore his worship standeth not in outward things ANSWERE Gods kingdome in it selfe standeth not
neuer be graunted But a word with you by the way Your righteous man must ouer-skippe that petition of the Pater noster forgiue vs our debts for he is well assured that his debts be already pardoned For at the very first instant that he had faith he had Christs righteousnes applyed to him and thereby assurance both of the pardon of sinnes and of life euerlasting Wherefore he can not without infidelity distrust of his former justification or pray for remission of his debts but following the famous example of that formall Pharise in liew of demaunding pardon may wel say Luc. 18. O God I giue thee thankes that I am not as the rest of men extortioners vniust aduouterers as also these Papists Fearing the remission of my sinnes or the certayntie of my saluation but am well assured thereof and of Christs owne righteousnes too and so forth But to goe on with M. PERKINS discourse Here we must note that the Church of Rome cutteth off one principall dutie of faith for in faith saith M. PERKINS are two thinges first knowledge reuealed in the word touching the meanes of saluation Secondly an applying of thinges knowne vnto our selues which some call affiance the first they acknowledge So then by M. PERKINS owne confession Catholikes haue true knowledge of the meanes of saluation then he and his fellowes erre miserable The second which is the substance and principall they denie Answere Catholikes teach men also to haue a firme hope and a great confidence of obtayning saluation through the mercy of God and merits of Christs Passion So they performe their dutie towardes God and their neighbour or else die with true repentance But for a man at his first conuersion to assure himselfe by faith of Christs righteousnes and life euerlasting without condition of doing those thinges he ought to doe that we Catholikes affirme to be not any gift of faith but the haynous crime of presumption which is a sinne against the Holy Ghost not pardonable See S. Tho 22. q. 21. â—rt 1. neither in this life nor in the world to come M. PERKINS third reason is drawne from the consent of the auncient Church of which for fashion sake to make some shewe he often speaketh but can seldome finde any one sentence in them that fits his purpose as you may see in this sentence of Saint Augustine cited by him Augustine saith De verbis Domini â—erm 7. I demaund nowe doest thou beleeue in Christ O sinner thou saiest I beleeue what beleeuest thou that all thy sinnes may freely be pardoned by him thou hast that which thou beleeuest See here is neither applying of Christs righteousnes vnto vs by faith nor so much as beleeuing our sinnes to be pardoned through him but that they may be pardoned by him So there is not one word for M. PERKINS But S. Bernard saith playnlie That we must beleeue that our sinnes are pardoned vs. But he addeth not by the imputed righteousnes of Christ Againe he addeth conditions on our party which M. PERK craftely concealeth For S. Bernard graunteth that we may beleeue our sins to be forgiuen if the truth of our conuersion meete with the mercy of God preuenting vs for in the same place he hath these wordes So therefore shall his mercy dwell in our earth that is the grace of God in our soules if mercy and truth meete together if iustice and peace embrace and kisse each other Which is as S. Bernard there expoundeth it if we stirred vp by the grace of God doe truly bewaile our sinnes and confesse them and afterward follow holines of life and peace All which M. PERKINS did wisely cut off because it dashed cleane the vayne glosse of the former wordes His last authority is out of S. Cyprian who exhorteth men passing out of this life not to doubt of God promises but to beleeue that we shall come to Christ with joyfull security Answere S. Cyprian encouradgeth good Christians dying to haue a full confidence in the promises of Christ and so doe all Catholikes and bidde them be secure too on that side that Christ will neuer faile of his word and promise but say that the cause of feare lyes on our owne infirmities And yet biddes them not to doubt as though they were as likely to be condemned as saued but animates them and puts them in the good way of hope by twenty kindes of reason M. PERKINS hauing thus confirmed his owne partie why doth he not after his manner confute those reasons which the Catholikes alleadge in fauour of their assertion Was it because they are not wont to produce any in this matter Nothing lesse It was then belike because he knew not how to answere them I will out of their stoare take that one principall one of the testimony of holy Scripture And by that alone sufficiently proue that the faith required to justification is that Catholike faith whereby we beleeue all that to be true which by God is reuealed and not any other particular beleeuing Christs righteousnes to be ours How can this be better knowne then if we see weigh and consider well what kinde of faith that was which all they had who are said in Scriptures to be iustified by their faith S. Paul saith of Noe That he was instituted heire of the iustice which is by faith Heb. 11.7 What faith had he That by Christs righteousnes he was assured of saluation No such matter but beleeued that God according to his word and justice would drowne the world and made an Arke to saue himselfe and his familie as God commaunded him Abraham the Father of beleeuers and the Paterne and example of justice by faith as the Apostle disputeth to the Romans Rom. ca. 4. What faith he was iustified by Let S. Paul declare who of him and his faith hath these wordes He contrary to hope beleeued in hope that he might be made the Father of manie Nations according to that which was said vnto him So shall thy seede be as the starres of heauen and the sands of the Sea and he was not weakned in faith neither did he consider his owne body now quite dead whereas hee was almost an hundred yeares old nor the dead Matrice of Sara in the promise of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthned in faith giuing glorie to God most fully knowing that whatsoeuer he promised he was able also to doe therefore was it reputed to him to iustice Loe because he glorified God in beleeuing that old and barren persons might haue children if God said the word and that whatsoeuer God promised he was able to performe he was justified The Centurions faith was very pleasing vnto our Sauiour who said in commendation of it That he had not found so great faith in Israell What faith was that Marry that he could with a word cure his seruant absent Math. 8. Say the word onely quoth he my seruant shall be healed S.
Tradition vnwritten This place of S. IOHN M. P. patcheth vp with an other of S. PAVL * Gal. 1. ◠If we or an Angell from heauen preache vnto you any thing besides that which wee haue preached let him be accursed And to this effect he blames them that taught but a diuers doctrine to that which he had taught * 1. Tim. 1.3 ANSWERE Now wee must looke vnto this Gentle-mans singers There were three corruptions in the text of S. IOHN here is one but it is a soule one In steed of Preaching vnto them an other Gospell he puts preach vnto them any other thing when there is great difference betweene an other Gospell any other thing The Gospel comprehendeth the principal poynts of faith the whole worke of Gods building in vs which S. PAVL like a wise Architect * 1. Cor. 3 12. had layd in the Galathians others his fellow-work-men might build vpon it gold siluer and pretious stones with great merit to themselues and thankes from S. PAVL Mary if any should digge vp that blessed and onely foundation and would laye a new one him S. PAVL holdeth for accursed So that that falcification of the text is intollerable and yet when all is done nothing can be wringed out of it to prooue the written word to comprehend all doctrine needefull to saluation for S. PAVL speaketh there onely of his Gospell that is of his preaching vnto the Galathians and not one worde of any written Gospel No more doth he in that place to TIMOTHY And so it is nothing to purpose The fourth Testimonie * 2. Tim. 3.16 The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and to instruct to righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute being made perfect vnto euery good worke In these words are contayned saith M. P. two arguments to prooue the sufficiencie of Scripture The first that which is profitable to these foure vses to teach al necessarie truth is not in the text to confute errors to correct faults in maners to instruct all men in all dutie is M. P. his addition to the text that is sufficient to saluation But the Scriptures serue for all these vses c. ANSWERE This text of holy Scripture is so farre from yeelding our aduersaries two Arguments that it affoordeth not so much as any probable colour of halfe one good argument In searching out the true sence of holy Scriptures wee must obserue diligently the nature proper signifycation of the words as M. P. also noteth out of S. AVGVSTINE in his sixt objection of this question which if the Protestants did here performe they would make no such account of this text for S. PAVL saith only that all Scripture is profitable not sufficient to teach to reproue c. How are they then carried away with their owne partiall affections that cannot discerne betweene profitable and sufficient Good Timber is profitable to the buylding of an house but it is not sufficient without stones morter a Carpenter Seede serues well yea is also necessarie to bring forth corne but will it suffice of it selfe without manuring of the ground and seasonable weather And to fit our purpose more properlie good lawes are verie profitable yea most expedient for the good gouernment of the common-wealth But are they sufficient without good customes good gouernours and judges to see the same Laws customs rightly vnderstood and duely executed Euen so the holy Scripturs S. PAVL affirmeth are very profitable as contayning very good necessary matter both to teach reproue correct but he saith not they are sufficient or that they do containe all doctrine needfull for these foure ends And therefore to argue out of S. PAVL that they are sufficient for all those purposes when he saieth onely that they are profitable to them is plainely not to know or not to care what a man saith And to presse such an impertinent cauil so often and so vehemently as the Protestants do is nothing els but to bewray vnto the indifferent reader either their extreame ignorance or most audacious impudencie that thinke they can face out any matter be it neuer so impertinent The same answere I make vnto M. P. his second argument out of the same place that the holy Scriptures bee profitable to make the man of God absolute but not sufficient I say more-ouer that M. P. doth falsely English these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the whole Scriptures when it signifyeth all Scripture that is euerie booke of Scripture and is there put to verifie that the Old Testament only serues to instruct to saluation For in the words next before S. PAVL sheweth how that TIMOTHY from his infancie had bene trayned vp in the knowledge of the holy Scriptures which saith he can instruct thee to saluation And annexeth as the confirmation thereof the Text cited All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach c. Now in TIMOTHYS infancie no parte of the New Testament was written and therefore all Scripture which is here put to prooue that Scripture which TIMOTHY in his Infancie knew cannot but by vnreasonable wresting signifie more than all the bookes of the Olde Testament So that there are three soule faultes in this the Protestants Achilles The first in falsification of the text that it might seeme to bee spoken of the whole which is spoken of euerie part The second in applying that which is spoken of the Olde Testament vnto both the Olde and New The third in making that to be all-sufficient which S. PAVL affirmeth onely to be profitable And this is all they can saye out of the Scripture to prooue that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation Where-upon I make this invincible argument against them out of this their owne position Nothing is necessarie to be beleeued but that which is written in holy Scripture But in no place of Scripture is it written that the written worde containes all doctrine needefull to saluation as hath bene prooued Therefore it is not necessarie to saluation to beleeue the written worde to containe all doctrine needefull to saluation And by the same principle I might reject all testimonie of Antiquitie as needelesse if the Scriptures be so al-sufficient as they hold Yet let vs here what testimonie M. P. brings out of antiquitie in fauour of his cause TERTVLLIAN * De resur carnis saith Take from Heretikes the opinions which they defend with the Heathens that they may desende their questions by Scripture alone and they cannot stand ANSWERE Here Scripture alone is opposed as euerie one may see vnto the writings of Heathen Authors and not to the Traditions of the Apostles and therefore maketh nothing against them Againe saieth M. P. out of the same Author We neede no curiositie after IESVS CHRIST nor inquisition after the Gospel when we beleeue it we desire to beleeue nothing besides it for
is indued with the spirit of discerning reade the bookes and consider first the Author of them who is God then the matter contained which is diuine the maner of speech which is full of majestie in simple words Lastly the end aymed at which is Gods honor and by this meanes he shall discerne any parte of Scripture from the writings of men whatsoeuer REPLIE A Wise and deepe obseruation I warrant you and well-worthy a graue Author Let vs examine it briefely first he wil haue his man endued with the spirit of discerning Who shall endue him with that spirit M. P. seemeth to say that euery Sheepe of Christ hath his spirite But S. PAVL * 1. Cor. 12 teacheth plainely the contrarie that some certaine onely haue the judgement to discerne And touching this matter of discerning which bookes are Canonicall which are not Not the learnedst in the Primitiue Church would take vpon him to discerne which they were three hundred yeeres after CHRIST was left vndefined by the best learned whether the Catholike Epistles of S. IAMES and IVDE the second of S. PETER the second and third of S. IOHN and his Apocalips were Canonical or no as is confessed on all parts hath then euery Christian this spirite of discerning when the best Christians wanted it Who more prosound more skilfull to discerne than that subtile and sharpe Doctor S. AVGVSTINE and yet the Protestants wil not allow him the true spirit of discerning which bookes be Canonicall For he in diuers places of his workes * De doct Christ c. 8 18. de ciui dei 36. lib. cont ep gaudent 2 holdeth the bookes of the Machabees to be Canonical Scriptures and expressely prooueth the booke of Wisdome so to be * De prae dest Sancâ— 14. And yet our Protestants wil not admit them See therefore how foolish and vaine his first rule is Come to the second His second is that he who goeth about to discerne whether the booke be Canonicall or no must consider the Author who is God If he must at the first take God to be the Author of the booke what needes any further labour It must needes be Canonicall that hath God for the Author This mans wits were surelie from home when he discoursed thus and therefore it should be but follie to stand vpon his particularities let this one reason in generall serue to confute him all this maner put together serueth onely to helpe particuler men to discerne which bookes are Canonicall who may easely after their diligent inquirie erre and be deceiued in this poynt because euery man is a lyar * Rom. And if there be no more certain means to assure them of this which is the grounde of all their Religion then euery particular mans discretion and judgement then out of doubt their whole Religion is most vnwisely buylded vpon meane-mens inuentions and discretion who also for the most part doe neither vnderstand the language in which they were first penned nor the vsuall phrases of Scriptures translated that I say nothing of the figures parables prophecies and controuersies which seeme to be and many other difficulties and yet these men need not doubt hauing learned some halfe-dozen-lines of M. P. but that reading anie booke they shall be able presentlie to discerne whether it be Canonicall or no. A goodly mockerie Men were not so taught in the Primitiue Church but the most skilfull and wisest in discerning Canonicall bookes trusted not vnto their owne judgement but learned alwaies vpon Apostolicall Traditions So did CERAPION an auncient holy writer as EVSEBIVS reporteth reject certaine bookes set out in the Apostles names because they had not receiued from their Predecessors any such The like doeth CLEMENT of Alexandria * Cap. 11. and that famous ORIGEN * Cap. 1â— of the same booke who obserue the Ecclesiasticall Canon as he had learned and receiued by Tradition So doth he deliuer his opinion of the foure Euangelistes and other bookes of Canonicall Scripture and not relying on his owne wit which was excellent or learning which was singuler in all manner of languages and matters That S. AVGVSTINE was of the same minde may bee gathered out of these wordes of his * Lib. 35 cap. 6. Contra Faustum Of what booke can there be any assurance if the letters which the Church propagated by the Apostles and by such excellencie declared throughout all Nations doeth teach and holde to be the Apostles should be vncertaine whither they be the Apostles or no. So that hee maketh the declaration of the Church descended of the Apostles to be a sure pillar to rest vpon for the certaine knowledge of Canonicall Scripture and other spirits whatsoeuer if they follow not that rule to be rejected so far is he off from encourageing euerie sheepe of Christs sold to take that weightie matter vpon himselfe as M. P. doth And what can be more against the most prudent prouidence of the diuine wisedome than to permit euery one to be a judge of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture For if all those bookes and no others should passe currant for Canonicall which any Christian taking vpon him the spirit of discerning would censure to be such then awaie with all the Olde Testament because diuers esteemed it to proceed of some euill spirites as witnesses Freueus * Lib. 1. ca. 20.21 22. and Ephiphanius * Haeres 6.6 Yea not onely all the Old must be abrogated but all the New also because it hath many false-hoodes mixed with the truth as some presuming greatly of their spirit skill in discerning did teach so testifyeth S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 32. cap. 2. Cont. Faust Some would haue had but one of the soure Gospells some fiue some sixe some seauen some rejected all S. PAVLS Epistles Many and those of the faithfull did not admit for Canonicall some of the other Apostles Epistles nor the Reuelations If then the diuine sore-sight of our Sauiour had not preuented this most soule inconueniencie by instituting a more certaine meanes of discerning and declaring which bookes were penned by inspiration of the holy Ghost which not then by leauing it vnto euery mans discretion he might be thought to haue had but slender care of our saluation which euey true Christian hart doth abhorre to thinke and therefore we must needes admit of this most holy and prouident Tradition of them from hand to hand as among the Protestants Brentius doth in his Prologemenis also Kemnitius handling the second kinde of Traditions in his examination of the councell of Trent albeit they reject all other Traditions besides this one The two next arguments for Traditions bee not well propounded by M. P. The third is to be framed thus Either all the bookes of holy Scripture conteine all needfull doctrine to saluation or some certaine of them without the rest not some of them without the rest for then the other should be supersluous which no man holdeth therefore all the
represented and so in the seauenth generall Councell the drawing of the Holie Ghost in forme of a Doue as he appeared Mat. 3. is approoued The first poynt then being obtayned that such Images of God may be made I come to the seconde That all holie Pictures may bee placed in Churches which I prooue by the argument that M. P. made for our first objection In SALOMONS Temple were erected Cherubins which were Images of Angels on the Mercie seate where God was worshipped and vppon the walles and verie doores of the same pictured To this M. P. answereth that they were erected by speciall commandement from God who prescribeth the verie forme of them and the place where they should be set and thereby MOSES had a warrant to make them let them shewe the like warrant for their Images if they can Secondly sayth he the Cherubs were placed in the most inward place of the Temple so were remooued from the sight of the people and the Cherubs without the vaile though they were seene yet were they not worshipped REPLY This mans wits were gone a wool-gathering when proposing to himselfe the Cherubs erected in SALOMONS Temple he answereth of the Cherubs made by MOSES 350. yeares before a most grosse ouer-sight and a shameful shift but such as men desperatly defending vntruths must needes vse For if he had answered directly he had not had a word to saye for neither did God prescribe the forme of them nor giue any speciall commandement to SALOMON to make and erect any such Cherubs as he that pleaseth to read the Chapter may see there they were placed not onely in the inwarde but also in the outward parts of the Temple vpon the walles and very doores that they might be seene of all the people which M. P. finding flitted from thence and did flie vnto an other which because it spake of Cherubs he thought would serue to blinde his simple followers MOSES indeed had an expresse precept for the making of them as he had for the Curteines and Curteine-rods and euery particular belonging to the Tabernacle But SALOMON without any speciall commandement out of his high and holy wisedome vnderstood that he might most lawfully and lawdably imitate that heauenly patterne of MOSES And as the building was far more sumptuous and stately so in the number and quantie of pictures exceeded which is a sufficient instruction warrant for all men after his daies to make and set Images in the Church And this finallie M. P. seemes to graunt when he sayeth that these Cherubs without the veyle were there to be seene but not to be worshipped so that wee haue gotten one step further that Images may not onely be made but also be set vp in the Churches which is fortifyed by the testimonie of TERTVLLIAN in the place cited before where he sayeth that our Sauiour was pictured vpon holy Chalices which were vsed at the Altars and of SOZOMENVS who witnesseth that our Sauiours Picture was taken into the Church S. GREGORY NAZ * Epist 49. maketh mention of Images in the Church of Diocesaraea trimmed vp by himselfe Saint BASIL * Orat. in Barlaam poynteth to that holy mans Picture standing in the Church DAMASVS * In vita Siluest shewes how CONSTANTINE in the Church of S. IOHN LATERAN erected a siluer Image vnto our Sauiour S. CHRYSOSTOME In demonst quod Christ sit Deus And S. AVG. * Serm. 19 de sanc do teach that the Crosse was on the holie Tables and vsed at all holy functions And the reason why Images should principallie be set in Churches is verie pregnant For where should holy pictures of holy men be more properlie bestowed than in holie places And the Church being a resemblance of heauen as S. PAVL teacheth * Heb. 9 is most conueniently decked vp with Images the representations of heauenlie creatures that men entring into that holie place may by the viewe and consideration of such a heauenly shewe retire their mindes from worldly businesse and lift them vp vnto the soueraigne monarch of both heauen and earth Now let vs come to those two objections of M. P. which seemes to bee against the erection of Images in Churches The first is out of the Councell of ELIBERIS cap. 36. which commaundeth that nothing should bee paynted on the walles of the Church that was adored of the people ANSWERE That if the Councel speake of the Image of God in which sense M. P. cyteth it and the word adored doeth insinuate then it may bee saide that the Councell inhibiteth that sort of Gods Images which are made to expresse the diuine nature If it be extended vnto all sorts of Images I answere that they were then forbidden to be drawen vpon the Church walles but not to be set in Tables vpon the Altar or in any other place The reason is because that Councell was holden in time of persecution as appeareth by the twentie fiue Canon of it and then if the persecutors had found out the place of their assembly as they often did those pictures must needes either haue bene defaced by themselues or left vnto the derision and despight of the Heathens And pictures also paynted vpon such poore walles as they had then to their Churches would either by the moysture of the walles or other incommoditie haue bene quick y disfigured wherefore to the greater honour of such sacred things those graue Fathers thought it not meete to haue them drawen vpon the Church walles there being manie more meete places for them in the Churches The second objection is out of a post-script of EPIPHANIVS letter vnto IOHN PATRIARKE of Ierusalem in which is written as M. P. falsely reporteth that it is against the authoritie of Scripture to see the Pictures of Christ or of any Saint to hang in the Church ANSWERE It is there only to see the picture of a man Now that he should meane of Christ or of some Saint is onely gathered yet M. P. makes no bones to thrust them both into the Texte euen so doe wee thinke that some olde enemie of Images added that postscript vnto EPIPHANIVS letter Our reasons are because it hath no coherence with the former letter or stile Againe in the seauenth Councell when all that could be found out of antiquitie was cited against Images no tidings there of this place which if it had bene true might haue bene one of the principall Thirdly in the same Councell * Act. 6. other two places brought as it were out of EPIPHANIVS workes were found to be none of his And for Images was alleadged that EPIPHANIVS owne disciples erected an Image to their maister and set it in the Church which they would neuer haue done if he had taught them to be against the Scripture so to doe M. P. obserues a speciall reason in EPIPHANIVS other counterfeit testimonie That Images must not be suffered in the common house because wee must carrie God in our mindes To which