himselfe and not God of God So that he receiueth not his diuinitie from his father I answere that if we consider of Christ absolutely in respect of the essence he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himselfe to whom all things doe agree which are spoken of the diuine essence by it selfe but if we consider of him in respect of his person he is not of himselfe but sonne of the father yet coëternall and coëssentiall So saith Saint Augustine Christus ad se deus dicitur ad patrem filius dicitur that is Christ in respect of himselfe is called God and in respect of the Father is called sonne Saint Basil saith that it was an vndoubted principle of diuinitie in all ages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is The godhead to be begotten neither of it himselfe nor of any other but to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnbegotten And that Christ is God of himselfe I proue it thus He that is Iehoua is God of himselfe Christ is Iehoua ergo Christ is God of himselfe The first proposition cannot be denyed for God is called Iehoua because he hath his being of himselfe and all others haue their being of him And that Christ is Iehoua I thinke you will not deny and if you doe it may easily be proued For he that appeared to Esaias the Prophet cap. 6. and is there called Iehoua vers 3. is said of Saint Iohn to be Christ in these words These things said Esaias when he saw his glory and spake of him That which Esaias cap. 18. 13. 14. speaketh of Iehoua Saint Paul Rom. 9. 33. expoundeth of Christ The Angel that appeared to Moses in the bush is called Iehoua but Christ who is called the Angel of the couenant and the Angel of the great counsell was that Angel ergo Christ is Iâ—houa And so consequently is God of himselfe And therefore Epiphanius whom I trust you will not terme a Puritane calleth Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himselfe The Fathers of the Nicene councell in calling Christ God of God did thereby signifie that he is coëssentiall and of the same substance with the Father and not as you falsely affirme that he receiued his diuinitie of his Father which is in effect to make Christ no God For it is proper to God to be of himselfe The deitie is the diuine essence which is one and singular and the same wholy in the Father in the sonne and in the holy Ghost And so we acknowledge a Trinitie of persons and a vnitie of essence that is one only God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Saint Basil c. it is manifest that the names of Father and sonne doe not signifie the essence but the proprieties of the persons So Damascene saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is The deitie signifieth the nature or essence the word Father the person And the essence is wholy in the Father wholy in the sonne and wholy in the holy Ghost as euen your great Master of the sentences Peter Lumbard confesseth so that the Father is God of himselfe the Sonne God of himselfe the holy Ghost God of himselfe and yet not three Gods but one true and immortall God And therefore with Athanasius wee worship a vnitie in Trinitie and Trinitie in vnitie The fift article which you say those whom you disdainfully call Puritaines doe deny is the descension of Christ into Hell Can you shew and name any such puritanes which omit this article either in rehearsing it or in expounding it as you haue done the second commaundement of God I am sure you cannot Why doe you then say that they deny it forsooth because they receiue not your exposition of it to wit that Christ descended in soule to Hell and was there as long as his body was in the graue and there harrowed Hell and deliuered thence the patriarkes and all iust men there houlden in bondage vnto his death as your Rhemists write And doe all that receiue not this exposition deny this article Then did your owne Doctor Durand deny this article who held and published in writing that Christs soule did not in respect of the substance and essence thereof but by effect efficacy and operation descend into Hell Then did Iohn Picus that learned Earle of Mirandula and Cardinall Caietane whom the Pope sent into Germanie to suppresse Luther deny this article who concurre and agree with Durand yea I might say that then either Saint Cyprian or Ruffin denyed this article who expoundeth it of Christs buriall But you say that these nameles Puritans defend that Christ suffered the paines of Hell vpon the crosse whereby they blaspheme most horribly that sacred humanitie as if Christ had despaired of his saluation as if God had hated him and he had hated God c. I answere that this doctrine of Christs suffering the paines of Hell vpon the crosse is not so desperate as your collections thereof are false and blasphemous What desperatnes or absurditie is this that Christ our Sauior not in respect of himselfe but in that he became our suretie and tooke vpon him our debts and bare our sinnes in his bodie vpon the wood as Saint Peter saith did beare and indure in his humanitie the wrath of God and the paines and torments which our sinnes had deserued to deliuer vs from the wrath of God which we by our sinnes had prouoked and from the said paines and torments which we had merited We are not to thinke that Christ did suffer onely an externall and corpoÌ„ral death for then he had shewed greater weakenes then many meere natural men haue done who with great courage and cheerefulnesse haue gone vnto death but Christ our Sauiour was in such an Agonie that his sweate was like drops of bloud trickling downe to the ground so that an Angel appeared from heauen comforting him He cryed and said My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Whereby it doth euidently appeare that he suffered not onely an outward death of the body but did in his soule wrastle with the paines of Hell and beare the burden of Gods wrath dewe to our sinnes to deliuer vs from the same and to purchase the loue and mercie of God vnto vs. And when the prophet saith of him He hath borne our infirmities and carried our sorrowes he was wounded for our transgressions he was broken for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was laid vpoÌ„ him and with his stripes we are healed All we like sheepe haue gone astray we haue turned euery one to his owne way and the Lord hath laid vpon him the iniquitie of vs all Did not our Sauiour Christ heerein suffer the punishment which was due to our sinnes Saint Paul saith that Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the law being made a curse for vs for it is written Cursed is euery one that hangeth on the tree yet Iesus Christ
of truth concerning religion and saluation We haue learned and godly Bishops and Pastors to teach the truth of Gods word to confute both by preaching and writing errors and heresies And we haue Synodes although not generall yet prouinciall wherein controuersies may be decided and heresies condemned as heretofore the truth hath beene maintained and heresies confuted and confounded in some prouinciall Councels as that called Gangrense and some other Africane Councels as well as they haue beene in some generall I would faine know of you what other and better meanes the Church of God had for the space of three hundred yeeres after Christs in carnation then these to determine controuersies and abolish heresies Generall Councels they had not before Constantines time which therefore your fellow Papist Fighius counteth to haue been an inuention of his but your great Rabbin Rob. Bellarmine therein controlleth him and saith it is false So well these men be setled in vnitie of beleefe And to your great Master of Rome whom you now would make the Oracle of the world there was before that time but small respect and regard had as your owne Pope Pius 2. in these words confesseth Ante Concilium Nicenum sibi quisque viuebat ad Romanam Ecclesiam paruus habebatur respectus i. Before the Councel of Nice euery one liued to himselfe and there was small regard had to the Church of Rome Shew vs therefore what meanes the Churches of God then had for maintenance of vnitie of faith which we want You say that Christ willed vs to heare his Church if we would not be accounted for Ethnicks and Publicanes The which place your said Rob. Bellarmine Reader full wisely alleageth to proue the Pope and his Councel to be the supreme Iudge of controuersies As though our Sauiour Christ there spake of deciding of controuersies in doctrine or of expounding the Scriptures or by the Church meant the Pope and his Councel and that euery man against whom his brother trespasseth must goe to the Pope and his Councel to make his complaint These be vanities and follies which nullo impellente ruunt and neede no confutation You further alleage out of Ioh. 14. 17. that Christ promised vnto the Church the assistance of the holy Ghost where by the Church you meane the Pope and his Councell as your Master Bellarmine hath taught you who writeth vs Sed hîc in genere dicimus iudicem veri sensus Scripturae omnium controuersiarum esse ecclesiam id est Pontificem cum concilio in quo omnes Catholici conueniunt that is Wee generally say that the Church is the iudge of the true sense of the Scripture and of all controuersies that is to say The Pope with the Councel wherein all Catholikes doe assemble or rather dissemble together But our Sauiour Christ made this promise to his disciples saying I will pray the Father and he shall giue you another Comforter that he may abide with you for euer euen the spirit of truth whom the world cannot receiue because it seeth him not neither knoweth him but ye know him for he dwelleth with you and shall be in you This promise pertaineth not to all the successors of the Apostles but to all them that truly feare God and beleeue and obey the holy doctrine which Christ deliuered to his Disciples and which they preached the which when you shall soundly proue that your Popes Councels do then we wil grant that this promise of Christ belongeth to them In the meane time wee will follow Chrysostomes good counsell Si videris aliquem Euangelica repetentem profecto spiritum sanctum habet Venidt enins spiritus sanctus vt recordari vos faciat eorum quae docui Si quis igitur corum qui dicuntur habere spiritum sanctum dicat aliquid a scipso non ex Euangeliji non crodite meam doctrinam sequimini that is If thou see any man speaking out of the Gospell surely he hath the holy Ghost For the holy Ghost shal come to put you in remembrance of those things which I haue taught you If therefore any of them which are said to haue the holy Ghost doe speake any thing of himselfe and not out of the Gospels beleeue him not but follow my doctrine Whereas you say that you beleeue certainly that the Church cannot erre that the generall Councels cannot deliuer false doctrine c. I answere that you foolishly begge that which is in question For as wee acknowledge Councels assembled of godlie learned and modest men which simply seeke the glorie of God and the profit of his Church are good meanes to suppresse errors and heresies and to abolish abuses and enormities so to affirme that generall Councels cannot erre or deliuer false doctrine is most false absurd as by many both reasons and examples might be prooued But for shortnes sake I will touch but a few examples The councell of foure hundred Priests of Israel erred and Santan was a false spirit in the mouth of them all to the destruction of Achab that cursed king of Israel The councell of the Priests of Iuda erred in cōdemning Iesus Christ to death The Councell of the high Priest and other Priests Rulers Elders and Scribes erred in forbidding Christs disciples to speake or teach in the name of Iesus The councel of Neocaesarea erred in iudging hardly falsly of second marriages which Gods word alloweth Rom. 7. 3. 1. Cor. 7. 39. the words of the Councell be these Presbyterum conuiuio secundarum nuptiarum interesse non debere maxime cum praecipiatur secundis nuptijs poenitentiam tribuere that is A priest ought not to be present at the feast of second mariages especially because he is commanded to appoint penance to second mariages This Councell although it were prouinciall was confirmed by Pope Leo the fourth as appeareth by Gratian and the Papists hold that prouinciall councels confirmed by the Pope cannot erre The Councell of Ariminum wherein were assembled aboue foure hundred Bishops horribly erred in maintaining the blasphemous doctrine of Arius The like did the Councels of Millaine Seleucia and of Tyrus The second Councell of Ephesus erred and maintained the false doctrine of Eutyches These Councels the Papists confesse to haue erred and why because they were not allowed and confirmed by the Bishop of Rome A simple and shamelesse shift as though the Bishop of Rome had in those daies power either to call or confirme Councels any more then the other Patriarks had In that second Councel of Nice most vnlike vnto the first not only the wicked worshipping of Images was allowed and the Scriptures for the confirmation thereof most shamefully abused and detorted as appeareth by the said corrupt councell and Caluin and Mart. Chemnicius haue largely shewed but also in the same was decreed that the Angels haue bodies and that the soule of man is corporall and therefore they may bee
eorum mores dicitur diuinum discreuisse iudicium profectò illud euacuabitur quod praemisit Apostolus dicens c. i. But if it be said that the iudgement of God did discerne the manners of Esau and Iac̄ob which afterward would be then surely that which the Apostle said before shall be made frustrate and in vaine Not of workes but by him that calleth it was said The elder shall serue the younger For he saith not by the workes past but hauing said generally Not by workes he would thereby haue vnderstoode workes both past and to come workes past which were none to come which as yet were not Iacob was predestinate a vessell vnto honour because not by workes but by him that calleth it was said The elder shall serue the younger Againe Nam quid est quod ait Apostolus sicut elegit nos in ipso c. i. For what is that which the Apostle saith As he hath chosen vs in him before the foundation of the world The which if it be therefore said because God did foresee that they would afterward beleeue and not that he would make them to beleeue against this foreseeing the sonne speaketh saying You haue not chosen me but I haue chosen you A little after he saith Elegit ergo Deus fideles sed vt sint non quia iam erant i. God hath chosen the faithfull that they might be not because they now were Againe Vt essemus sancti immaculati Non ergo quia futuri eramus sed vt essemus i. That we might be holy and without blame therefore not because we should be but that we might be Againe Quos elegit c. i. Whom hee hath chosen before the foundation of the world by the election of grace not of workes either past or present or to come for then grace were no grace Thus Saint Augustine sheweth that Gods election is not his prescience and foreseeing of workes to come but his owne grace good pleasure and purpose Now I come to your illations which vpon these false assertions you falsely inferre To the first I answere that God impelleth no man to sinne and therefore God is not the author of sinne Secondly God inforceth not men vpon necessitie to sinne but they sinne willingly and by the instigation of the diuell who worketh in the children of disobedience therefore God is not the author of sinne In your third inference where you say that sinne is free or no sinne belike you hold with Pighius and some other Papists that originall sinne is no sinne for it is not free for vs to be without it And whereas you aske how man can sinne in conforming his will with Gods will I answere that they that sinne doe not conforme their will to Gods will but doe disobey it and oppose themselues vnto it This is the will of God saith Saint Paul your sanctification and that ye should abstaine from fornication Finally for as much as you can neuer shew that it is the Protestants confession that God moueth perswadeth and induceth men to sinne therefore you make a false and blasphemous collection for the which the Lord rebuke thee Satan Lastly whereas you thus charge vs to hold that God is the author of sinne I would desire you to shew where we doe write more hardly of this matter then Iohn Fisher Bishop of Rochester hath written hereof whose words be these Neutrum sane potest sine Deo nec ad bonum se parare neque malum opus facere Neque enim adulter absque generali fluxu Dei potest adulterandi facinus committere sed neque postquam ipsum admisit sine speciali auxilio Dei conari valebit vt resurgat i. Man can doe neither without God neither prepare himselfe to good nor doe that which is euill For the adulterer can neither commit adulterie without the generall influence of God nor after he hath committed it can hee endeuour to rise without the speciall helpe of God And againe Nam quantum ad substant iam actus etiam operibus malis cooperatur Deus Neque tamen recte quisquam Deo peccatum imput abit quia tametsi cooperetur Deus ad substantiam actus non tamen ipsam deficientiam operatur sed hoc agit sola voluntas i. As touching the substance of the acte euen God doth cooperate or worke with euill workes yet may not any man rightly impute sinne vnto God for although God doth cooperate to the substance of the deede yet he doth not worke the defect of the deede but onely mans will doth that Either shew where we haue written more hardly hereof or else condemne this Bishop and Martyr for the Popes cause with vs. I trust you will not say that hee taught Atheisme which is so rife in Rome as I haue before shewed c. The Pamphlet That faith once had may be lost 6. Article WHosoeuer leeseth his charitie leeseth his faith But Dauid when he killed Vrias lost his charitie Ergo Dauid when he killed Vrias lost his faith The Maior is a principle vndoubted of in the schooles of Protestants for they peremptorily affirme that true faith such as was in Dauid one of Gods elected can no more be seuered from charitie then heate from fire or light from the sunne and therefore if Dauid killing Vrias lost his charitie no doubt but therewithall he lost his faith The Minor I proue for whosoeuer remaineth in death is without charitie but Dauid when he killed Vrias remained in death Ergo Dauid when he killed Vrias was without charitie If he was without that which once he had no doubt but then he lost it for he was depriued thereof for his sinne The Maior proposition of this last Syllogisme thus I proue for charitie is the life of the soule and it is as impossible for a man to haue charitie and remaine in death as it is impossible to be dead in body and yet indued with a resonable soule The Minor cannot be denied to wit that Dauid by killing Vrias remained in death for it is the expresse word of God Qui non diligit manet in morte He that loueth not his neighbour remaineth in death but certaine it is that Dauid loued not Vrias when he killed him Ergo likewise certaine it is that Dauid remained in death The same position might easily be proued out of the eighteenth chapter of Ezech. vers twentie foure Si autem aucrterit se iustus a iustitia sua c. Answere I Deny the Minor or second proposition that Dauid in procuring Vrias to be killed lost his charitie For although in this cōbat betweene the spirit and the flesh in Dauid the spirit retired and the flesh preuailed the new man was foyled and the old man ouercame yet was not the spirit vtterly extinguished nor the new man cleane killed In deede Dauids faith fainted his charitie was cooled and his other gifts and graces couered yet not cleane
so plentifully that God can aske no more of them And in his Latin booke against Luther he hath these words Secundo supponimus quod quanquam nemo sit cui non cumulatius praemium in coelis Deus largiatur quà m hic in terris ipse meruit innumeri tamen sunt qui longè grauiores aerumnas pertulerunt quà m adsuorum suffecissent delictorum expiationem that is Secondly wee make this supposition that although there is none to whom God doth not giue a greater reward in heauen then hee hath merited and deserued yet there be many which haue suffered farre more grieuous griefes and punishments then would haue sufficed to the expiation and purging away of their sinnes This is their doctrine and is this to beleeue the forgiuenes of sinnes or is it not rather to denie the Lord Iesus that hath bought vs For I may say with S. Paul that if righteousnes come by the law or by our satisfaction then Christ died in vaine And with what face can these men accuse vs of denying this article The forgiuenes of sinnes themselues teaching such blasphemous doctrine so manifestly opposite and contrarie vnto it Againe they denie the forgiuenes of the punishment due for sinne saying that Christ hath deliuered vs à culpa from the fault or offence but not à poena from the punishment or at leastwise he hath deliuered vs from eternall punishment but not from temporall which must be sustained in Purgatorie whereby our sinnes or soules must be purged and Gods iustice satisfied And yet the Popes Pardons Masses and Dirges may discharge and deliuer from it Wherein first what doe they but extenuate and greatly diminish the vertue and power of Christs death For if our Sauiour Christ haue not deliuered vs from the punishment due to our sinnes what great good hath hee done vs And if he haue discharged vs from eternall punishment in hell but not from the temporall in Purgatorie then is he not a full and perfect Sauiour but an halfe Sauiour Haue you the testimonie of all Antiquitie for this doctrine Tertullian saith Exempto scilicet reatu eximitur poena that is The guiltines of sinne being taken away the punishment is also taken away And Chrysostome saith Vbi enim gratia ibi venia vbi verò venia illic nulla erit poena that is Where grace is there is forgiuenes where forgiuenes is there shall be no punishment S. Augustine saith Ablato ergo peccato auferetur poena peccati The sin being taken away the punishment of sinne shall also be taken away By this let it be discerned who they be that denie this article of the forgiuenes of sinne Moreouer let the Christian reader consider how they attribute first that to their Purgatorie which is proper to the blood of Christ which as S. Iohn saith clenseth vs from all sinne and secondly more to their Dirges Masses Pardons and such paltries then they doe to the death and passion of Iesus Christ For they may deliuer from the paines of Purgatorie but Christs death doth not O coelum non sudas ô terra non tremes c. But now let vs come to your proofe of this your accusation of our denying of this article Your first reason is that wee acknowledge no such effect in the Sacrament of Baptisme c. We acknowledge that baptisme is a Sacrament of the forgiuenes of our sinnes by the death and passion of our Sauiour Iesus Christ whereby our faith is confirmed and wee assured that as water washeth away the filth of the bodie so all the filth and guiltines of our sinnes is so purged in the blood of Christ that wee be accepted for iust and righteous before God But we do not acknowledge that Baptisme or any other Sacrament do conferre grace of themselues or haue grace included in them as in a vessell but wee affirme that they be seales of Gods promises and instruments whereby God worketh in his elect and chosen people those graces which he hath in his word promised and Iesus Christ hath purchased for them But all that be outwardly baptized be not inwardly clensed as Simon Magus who being baptized was yet still in the gall of bitternes and in the bond of iniquitie For the spirit of God worketh by them in whom when and how much it pleaseth him Neither doe we beleeue that Baptisme serueth onely for the remission of sinnes committed before it as you say here but that the vse and benefit of it pertaineth to our whole life continually to assure vs and confirme our faith in the forgiuenes of al our sinnes by Iesus Christ And whereas you say that this our doctrine is contrarie to the expresse word of God which calleth this Sacrament the lauer of regeneration for that in it the soule dead by sinne is newly regenerate by grace I answere that Baptisme is so farre from being in this place of S. Paul expressed that it is not mentioned neither necessarily to be vnderstanded Saint Pauls sweet words be these When the bountifulnes and loue of God our Sauiour towards man appeared not by the workes of righteousnes which wee had done but according to his mercie he saued vs by the washing of the new birth and renewing of the holy Ghost which he shed on vs aboundantly through Iesus Christ our Sauiour Where is baptisme here mentioned or expressed to be the lauer of regeneration Saint Paul doth here attribute this washing whereby wee be regenerate and renewed to the holie Ghost alluding as it were to the words of God by the Prophet Ezechiel Then will I powre cleane water vpon you and ye shall be cleane yea from all your filthines and from all your Idols will I clense you By this cleane water is vnderstood the spirit of God as it is expounded in the two next verses following I confesse that Baptisme is a Sacrament and pledge vnto vs of this washing and clensing of the holie Ghost to whom this washing is to be attributed and not to baptisme as though it were included in it or affixed to it for as I said many be outwardly baptized which be not inwardly clensed but only the faithfull children of God in whom Gods spirit inwardly worketh that which by the word of God is promised and in baptisme sealed and confirmed And therefore this lauer is the spirit of God by whom we be regenerated and renewed Saint Augustine saith well Ea demum miserabilis est seruitus signa prorebus accipere supra creaturam corpoream oculum mentis ad hauriendum aeternū lumen leuare non posse that is This is miserable seruitude to take the signes for the things signified and not to be able to lift vp the eye of the minde aboue the corporeall creature to receiue eternall light Your second proofe is that we allow not the sacrament Penance wherin all actuall sins committed after Baptisme are cancelled Your popish
was Bernards iudgement concerning our keeping of Gods commandements and fulfilling of the law Ferus also a late Frier but yet a man of better iudgement in many matters then many others were or be hereof writeth thus Per Christum implenda erat omnis iustitia per quem solum lex poterat impleri nam maledicta erat natura humana legemque implere non potuit iuxta illud neque nos neque patres onus hoc portare potuimus that is All righteousnes was to be fulfilled by Christ by whom onely the law could be fulfilled For mans nature was accursed and could not fulfill the law according to that saying neither we nor our Fathers were able to beare this burden Againe the same Ferus saith Si nemo potest gloriari se á peccato immunem nec quisquam gloriari potest se legem seruasse cum peccatum nihil aliud sit quà m transgressio legis that is If no man can glorie that hee is free from sinne neither can any man glorie that he hath fulfilled the law seeing that sinne is nothing else but the transgression of the law Hence from it followeth that zealous Protestants want neither a liuely faith in Gods mercies nor true obedience to Gods commaundements although they vnfainedly confesse their manifold imperfections and sinnes by which they bee farre from perfectly fulfilling the law of God And now pro coronide I will requite you with another Syllogisme They that thinke they can fulfill the law of God be proud Hypocrits and Pharisees but the Papists thinke that they can fulfill the law of God yea can doe superarrogant workes I should say workes of Supererogation aboue them that the law requireth Ergo the Papists be proud Hypocrites and Pharisees The Pamphlet The most points wherein the Protestants dissent from the Catholikes tend to loosenes of life and carnall libertie 4. Article His article may be proued by a generall induction in all such matters as now the Protestants call in question First say they that man hath not free will to doe good but all goodnesse proceedeth so from grace that it lyeth not in his power neither to haue it nor resist it but of necessitie it must haue effect To what other ende tendeth this senceles doctrine and fatall fancie but to make men negligent in disposing and preparing their soules to receiue Gods grace and to rouse it vp and put it in execution after they haue it making man not much vnlike a sicke asse who neither can dispose nor prepare himselfe to seeke for his medicine but of necessitis must expect till his master thrusteth it into his throate neither after hee hath drunke it can cause it cure his disease but carelesly letteth it worke as it will Secondly they defend that men be iustified by faith alone the which solifidian portion ouerthroweth flatly true repentance sorrow for sinnes mortification of passions and all other vertues which tend to perfect reconciliation of the soule with God causing men only to procure a certaine false fantastical apprehension of Christs death and passion the which faith although they erroniously auerre cannot be seuered from charitis vertues and good workes yet both experience teacheth that it may for also few or none haue faith because few or none of them haue these workes and the Scriptures plainely proue that all faith yea and the most noble faith which hath force to remoue mountaines may be without charitie Thirdly they assure vs that faith once had can neuer be lost the which vaine securitie openeth the gap to all libertine sensualitie for if a man be certaine that he hath true faith if it be impossible he should lose it if he be secured that by it alone he shall be saued why may be not wallow in all licencious pleasures in this life and neuer doubt of glorie in the other could euer Epicurus haue found a better ground to plant his Epicurisme could euer Heliogabalus haue better patronized his sensualitie could Bacchus or Venus euer haue forged better reasons to enlarge their dominion Fourthly they say a man cannot keepe all the commaundements for what other cause I pray you but thereby to make men negligent in keeping of them to pretend an excuse of impossibilitie whensoeuer they transgresse them Fiftly why deny they the Sacrament of penance but to make men careles how they liue and neuer regard the auoyding of sinnes as though they were neuer to render an account of them to hinder that shame and blushing which men conceiue in discouering their sinnes the which are most excellent meanes to deter them from sinning another time to shuffle vp restitution and satisfaction of iniuries committed against our neighbours to draw men from remorse of conscience by burying their sinnes in eternall obliuion the sores whereof confession rubbeth and causeth Sixtly why exclude they the true and reall body of Christ from the blessed Sacrament of the altar but for that they perceiued how by the presence thereof they were deterred from sinne and wickednes for they knew well that sinfull liues consorted not with those sacred mysteries and therefore they rather resolued to banish Christ from the Sacrament then sinnes from their soules Finally for what other cause haue they ioyned a new negatiue religion wholy standing vpon negation of Sacraments ceremonies rites lawes customes and other practicall points of the catholike Church but for fasting to bring in feasting for praying playing for deuotion dissolution for religious feare of God vaine securitie for zeale and mortification a number of vaine verball sermons and to conclude for a positiue working a flat deniall almost of all points of faith and religion Answere COncerning this article I will first answere these cauils which this cauiller obiecteth to the slaundering of our doctrine as tending to loosenes of life and carnall libertie Secondly I will shew to what loosenes and wickednes of life the doctrine of the Church of Rome tendeth and what fruites or rather weeds of wickednes it hath brought fourth euen in Popes their clergie and namely in Rome that holy Citie where that holy Father resideth and whereupon he especially breatheth and blesseth He beginneth with free will wherein he neither setteth downe truely our doctrine nor the state of the controuersie which is a vsuall customewith his companions to peruert and alter the state of the question as Doctor Whitakers sheweth that Bellarmine vseth to do I wil therefore lay downe our doctrine truely as we teach concerning this matter wee beleeue that although in worldly matters concerning this life man haue wit reason and vnderstanding to know and will for the choise of good and euill iust and vniust yet in spirituall matters pertayning to eternall life and the worship of God we beleeue that mans reason is so darkened and will so corrupted that he can neither truely know loue nor couet much lesse doe and performe those things which be agreeable to Gods will and acceptable vnto his Maiestie vntill God
quenched but there remained sparkes of Gods spirit which afterwards being stirred vp and blowne by Nathans bellowes kindled and flamed to Gods glorie and Dauids eternall comfort and saluation Shall we thinke that Dauid had lost all loue of God of his law and of man was he cleane depriued of Gods spirit it appeareth by his owne words that he was not Who vpon Nathans preaching and reprouing of his sinne prayed and said Take not thy holy spirit from me Whereupon I reason thus He that was not cleane depriued of Gods spirit had not wholy lost faith and charitie But Dauid was not cleane depriued of Gods spirit therefore he had not wholy lost faith and charitie The first proposition is euident by the words of Dauid the second is manifest For it is absurd to say that the spirit of God should continue in him that hath lost all graces and gifts of the spirit It is with Gods elect and chosen children as it is with fire which in the night is so hid and couered that none appeareth and yet in the morning is stirred vp and is made to burne and to flame and as with a tree which in the winter hath neither fruite nor leafe vpon it yet it hath a sappe fallen into the roote which in the spring springeth and bringeth forth both leafe and fruite So is it with Gods holy Saints they be sometimes so ouertaken and ouercome with temptations that they seeme to be as trees without fruite withered and perished yet there remaineth a sappe of Gods spirit and grace in them which afterward riseth and buddeth forth good fruite And therefore to the second proposition of your secoÌ„d Syllogisme I say that although Dauid by those foule and fearefull offences deserued eternall death yet he did not remaine in death and although God hated those sinnes yet hee neuer hated Dauid For whom God loueth he loueth to the end and the giâ—ts and calling of God are without repentance If we loue a man and yet hate some sinne that he committeth might not God who is loue it selfe hate Dauids sinne and yet loue him and keepe some sparkes of his spirit and grace in him and so preserue as the externall life of the body so the internall life of the soule in him So that neither Dauid remained in death neither was his loue no not to Vrias altogether extinguished in him No doubt but he did loue him as his true and faithfull subiect and might loue him as the seruant of God yet in that temptation his owne selfe loue and desire to couer his owne sinne and shame did preuaile against his loue to Vrias and did draw him to doe an act which was no fruite nor effect of loue and charitie and yet did not wholy quench loue in him The Maior of your latter Syllogisme which needeth no proofe you seeke to proue by a false assertion in barely saying According to your manner but not by any place of Scripture prouing that charitie is the life of the â—oule I say that faith is the life of the soule the which I proue by these two sayings of the Scripture The Prophet Habacuk saith The iust shall liue by his faith Saint Paul saith In that I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith in the sonne of God who hath loued me and giuen himselfe for me Let this man shew two such plaine places of Scripture to proue charitie to be the life of the soule Properly Christ is the life of our soules Saint Paul in the place before alledged saith Christ liued in me And when Christ which is our life shall appeare And our Sauiour himselfe saith I am the way the truth and the life For when wee were dead in sinnes hee hath quickned vs and at he hath restored life vnto vs so hee doth continually nourish and preserue life in vs. But this is attributed to faith because by it Christ dwelleth in vs and we by it be put into the possession of Christ and of all the benefits of his passion Concerning the place of Ezechiel because you doe not vrge it I will not stand vpon it We doubt not but men may and doe fall from God and iust actions vnto wicked and vngodly deedes and may haue a temporall faith and fall away from the grace of God But this we say that true faith in Gods elect which are sealed with the spirit of adoption and to whose spirit Gods spirit doth beare witnes that they are the sonnes of God is neuer wholy lust in them and the same spirit worketh by charitie which in them may bee cooled but neuer cleane quenched But of the losing of faith and of the coniunction thereof with charitie I haue before intreated Now to returne this argument in some sort vpon you whereas the Papists auerre that the Popes faith cannot faile I reason thus He that loseth his charitie may lose his faith the Pope may lose his charitie Ergo the Pope may lose his faith The first proposition I haue proued alreadie and haue shewed that true faith is not separated from charitie but worketh by it And most manifest it is by Saint Iames that the faith which is without charitie and good workes is dead So that if the Pope be without Charitie then hee hath but a dead faith And a dead faith is as much faith as a dead man is a man That the Pope may bee without charitie I thinke they will not deny and if they doe it may be proued by many examples Pope Iohn the twelft or as Platina reckoneth the thirteenth tooke two of his Cardinals and cut off the nose of the one and the hand of the other as witnes Platina Blondus and many others Stephanus the sixt did take the bodie of Formosus his predecessor out of the graue after he was dead put him out of his pontificall habite and put on him a lay mans attire cut off the two fingers of his right hand where with he did consecrate and threw them into Tiber. Pope Sergius the third tooke vp againe the body of the same Formosus did cut off his head as if hee had been a liue and threw the bodie into Tiber as vn worthie of buriall Boniface the seuenth tooke Iohn a Cardinall and put out his eyes Vrban the sixt of seuen of his Cardinals which hee apprehended at Nuceria tooke fiue of them put them in sackes and cast them into the Sea Innocentius the seuenth caused by Lewes his nephew certaine citizens of Rome which sought the restitution of their ancient liberties and the reformation of the Common-wealth decayed by his euill gouernment to be throwne out of windowes and so killed Alexander the sixt caused both the right hand and tongue of Antonius Mancinellus to bee cut out because hee had written an eloquent oration against his wicked and filthie life Many such other pranckes of Popes might bee alleadged which were no more fruites of
righteousnes by whose stripes we are healed The blood of Iesus Christ his sonne clenseth vs from all sinne Hee hath loued vs and washed vs from our sinnes in his blood and made vs Kings and Priests vnto God his father As these places attribute our iustification and saluation onely to Iesus Christ and his merits so others doe detract and take the same from our workes and deseruings To him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnes If it be of grace it is no more of workes or else were grace no more grace but if it be of workes it is no more grace or else were worke no more worke By grace ye are saued through faith and that not of your selues It is the gift of God not of workes least any man should glorie Who hath saued vs and called vs with an holy calling not according to our workes but according to his purspose and grace c. Not by the workes of righteousnes which we had done but according to his mercie he saued vs. Although this which I haue said may seeme sufficient to answere this article yet I will say something to this syllogisme To the Maior or first proposition I answere that with men wages is giuen for workes but with God whose thoughts are not as our thoughts nor waies as our waies it is otherwaies Man may do labour and seruice to man which may merit and deserue by equitie and iustice wages and reward For that there may be a proportion betweene the seruice and reward and also a benefit and commoditie commeth to him to whom the seruice is done As in this example here alleaged the Lord Deputie or some other may doe some such singular seruice in Ireland that if her Maiestie should bestow vpon him 1000. pound a yeere he might in some proportion deserue it and her Maiestie may receiue double benefit by it But can wee doe any workes that can either merit and deserue the kingdome of God or bring any benefit vnto God Dauid saith My weldoing extendeth not to thee And as S. Paul saith that all the afflictions of this present life are not worthie of the glorie that shall be shewed vnto vs so may I say that all our imperfect and stained workes are not worthie of the kingdome of God which we haue not deserued but Iesus Christ by his death and passion hath purchased for vs. Can a bond seruant by any seruices looke to deserue an earthly kingdome and can we which are bond seruants to God in respect both of creation and of redemption looke to deserue the kingdome of God Christ our Sauiour saith Doth he thanke that seruant because hee did that which was commaunded vnto him I trow not So likewise ye when ye haue done all things which are commaunded you say we are vnprofitable seruants we haue done that which was our dutie to doe If he that hath done all things which were commaunded must confesse himselfe to be an vnprofitable seruant how much more must wee confesse our selues to be vnprofitable seruants who haue both omitted many things commaunded and committed many great and grieuous sinnes prohibited So saith Hierome Si inutilis est qui fecit omnia quid de illo dicendum est qui explere non potuit .i. If hee be vnprofitable that hath done all what is to be said of him that could not fulfill all Therefore wee are not to trust in our owne merits but in Gods mercie which importeth our miserie and not worthines But for the proofe of your Minor you alleage the saying of our Sauiour Christ Call the labourers and giue them their wages I graunt that God doth giue to them that labour in his vineyard a reward which is called wages because it followeth pietie and good workes as outward wages followeth labour But that this heauenly wages is not deserued by our workes as that other is by our labour it euidently appeareth by that parable where they that had wrought but one houre receiued as much as they did which had borne the burden and heate of the day Which sheweth that this reward came of grace and not of merit and so S. Ambrose doth expound it Non labori praemium soluens sed diuitias bonitatis suae in eos quos sine operibus eligit effundens vt etiam hij qui in multo labore sudarunt nec amplius quam nouissimi acceperunt intelligant donum se gratiae non operum accepisse mercedem i. Not paying a reward vnto our labour but powring foorth the riches of his goodnes vpō them whom he hath chosen without works that they also which in great labour haue toyled and haue receiued no more then the last may know that they haue receiued a gift of grace and not a wages of workes To your other places Apocal. 20. 12. and 1. Cor. 3. 8. I say with S. Paul that God will reward euery man according to his workes but not for the merite and desert of their workes To them that continuing in well doing seeke glorie honour and immortalitie hee will giue euerlasting life and vnto them that are contentious and disobey the truth and obey vnrighteousnesse shall be indignation and wrath tribulation and anguish vpon the soule of euery man that doth euill But you will say why is not euerlasting life the wages of good workes as euerlasting death is of euill workes and sinnes I answere that our euill workes be simply euill and being transgressions of Gods righteous law offend his infinit maiestie prouoke his infinit wrath and deserue infinit paine and punishment But our workes are not simply and perfectly good but be imperfect and are stained with the corruption of our finfull nature as I haue before declared and therefore cannot satisfie Gods infinit iustice nor pacifie his infinit anger nor deserue his infinit glorie but rather require Gods great mercie as hath been shewed And therefore Saint Paul in the sixt to the Romanes hauing said that the wages of sinne is death doth not say which had been most meete to haue been said if this pharisaicall doctrine were true the wages of good workes is eternall life but hee saith the gift of God is eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord as also Oecumenius doth wel obserue You confidently affirme that the Protestants who are enemies to merits shall neuer attaine to the kingdome of Heauen which is purchased by good workes and merits Where first I would aduise you to take heede that you be not brethren to those old heretikes called Hieraclitae to whom Saint Augustine doth ascribe this as an heresie that they denied infants to appertaine to the kingdome of Heauen because they had no merits His words bee these Hieraclitae ad regnum coelorum non pertinere paruulos dicunt quia non sunt eis vlla merita certaminis quo vitia superentur i. The Hieraclites say that infants