A DEFENCE OF M. PERKINS BOOK, CALLED A REFORMED CATHOLIC: Against the cavils of a Popish writer, one D. B. P. or W. B. in his deformed Reformation. By Antony Wotton. AT LONDON Imprinted by FELIX KYNGSTON, for Cuthbert Burby, and are to be sold at his shop in Paul's Churchyard at the sign of the Swan. 1606. THE PRINCIPAL POINS HANDLED IN THIS BOOK. 1. Of Antichrist. pag. 41. 2. Of free-will. pag. 64. 3. Of Original sin. pag. 95. 4. Of the certainty of salvation. pag. 124. 5. Of justification. pag. 163. 6. Of inherent justice. pag. 184. 7. Of justifying faith; what it is? pag. 195. 8. How faith justifieth? pag. 206. 9 That faith alone justifieth. pag. 212. 10. Of good works, how far forth they are required to justification. pag. 239. 11. Whether it be possible for a man that is justified to fulfil the law of God. pag. 258. 12. Whether good works be stained with sin. pag. 265. 13. Whether faith may be without charity. pag. 277. 14. Whether faith may be without good works. pag. 285. 15. Of merits. pag. 287. 16. Of satisfaction. pag. 344. 17. Of Traditions. pag. 399. 18. Of vows. pag. 469. 19 Of the vow of single life. pag. 487. 20. Of wilful poverty. pag. 508. 21. Of regular obedience. pag. 522. 22. Of Images. pag. 524. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, ROBERT EARL OF SALISBURY, VICOUNT Cranborne, Baron of Essingdon, Principal Secretary to his Majesty, Master of the Court of Wards and Liveries, one of his highness most Honourable Privy Council, and Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. RIght Honourable, it hath pleased God to vouchsafe your Lordship no small honour in the profession of Christianity, that you have not only believed the truth of the Gospel, but also are made partaker of that glory of his children to suffer for it. To you it is given (saith the Apostle to the Philippians) for Christ, that not only Phil. 1. 24 you should believe in him, but also suffer for his sake. Given; as if it were a special favour, which no man attains to, but they only to whom it is granted by privilege from God. To you it is given (saith our Matth. 13. 〈◊〉. Saviour) to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven. And in another place: No man can come unto me, except john 6. 6. it be given him of my Father. This gift the Lord hath bestowed upon your Honour, that they which are enemies to him, should be persecutors of you, even to the death, if it lay in their power, for his quarrel. But the gracious providence of God hath manifestly showed itself, in this whole action, on your Lordship's behalf, in that not only you are still preserved, in despite of them, but also that you hold on that noble, and Christian resolution, to provide for the sasctie of Religion, his majesties person, and estate, with the hazard of your own life, regarding more what your Lordship ought to do, in duty to God, and your Sovereign, than what you may suffer by men, for so doing. Now on their part, who can say whether their malice, or their folly is the greater? when I consider the height of their hatred, that reacheth even to the taking away of life, which is in God's hands; me thinks I am not able to look beyond it. But when I remember their desperate resolving to commit such a murder, so openly, and their extreme indiscretion, in acquainting your Lordship with their intendment, it seems to me, that the lightness of their folly exceeds the weight of their malice. So that they give all men just occasion to suspect, that God hath given them over into a reprobate sense, as to destroy their souls by intending such a bloody sin, so to cast away their lives also by attempting it, with so great folly. But leaving them to the mercy and justice of God, for repentance, or confusion; give me leave (Right Honourable) to put your Lordship in mind of that, which I make no doubt, but you know, and think on; viz. That the Lord God (having taken your person, estate, and honour into his protection, against these and such like conspiracies) looketh for continuance, and increase of zeal, and care in your Lordship, for the securing, as much as may be in your power, of his holy religion, and his worthy Lieutenant, our gracious Sovereign's person, and dignity. Now the knowledge of danger being a good help to the avoiding of it, The Lord himself seems to have taken half the care already, in discovering those, that have been, are, and will be the continual practisers of his majesties ruin. I were more than conceited, and foolish, if I could but think myself either able or fit to advise your Lordship in matters of this nature. Yet let me humbly entreat your Honour, to vouchsafe the reading of that, which, in my poor thoughts, I have apprehended. That the safety of Princes dependeth upon the good pleasure of God, it is out of all question, especially in their account, who advisedly, and thankfully remember the late wonderful, and gracious deliverance, never to be forgotten. Neither can it be doubted, but it is Gods good pleasure to preserve them, as long as they have care to walk in obedience to him; especially in providing for his glory, by maintaining and advancing the true religion of jesus Christ. So then, the safety of religion is the security of the Prince; and the decay of God's true service, the forerunner of the King's destruction. As this is true (in general) concerning all Kings, and Governors; so hath it an especial evidence of truth, in his majesties particular. For it is apparent to every man, that the Papists quarrel to his Majesty is not for hatred of his person, but of his religion. And therefore so far forth will they plot against the former, as they can see likelihood of achieving the latter. His danger groweth by their hope; and their despair of bringing in Popish idolatry, must needs be the security of his life and state. Are we then desirous to rid his Majesty of this danger, and the whole state of this fear? we see the means of accomplishing that desire, to be no other, than to provide that true religion may grow and flourish, and Popish idolatry fade and wither. For neither may we look for any blessing from God on the Commonwealth, if he be continually dishonoured amongst us, by the increase of Popish heresy; nor reasonably promise ourselves any end of treacherous and bloody enterprises, as long as Papists conceive hope of prevailing for Antichrist, by such attempts. If their number daily increase, how should their hope lessen? And how is it possible to keep it from growing, if thousands in this kingdom, remaining in their ignorance, be left as pray to seducing Priests and jesuits? The conclusion is, that if there be not some religious and wise care taken, as to instruct the people in the knowledge of God's truth, which is the principal: so to ferret out those lurking Serpents, that breath Idolatry and treason into the hearts of his majesties people, and to keep out their like from entering into this Island, the glory of God, the safety of the King, and the prosperity of this kingdom, are all waning, in the last quarter. For howsoever it be very true, that some Popish errors hinder not men from remaining good and faithful subjects; yet (as his Majesty most wisely, and truly observed) None of those, that truly know and believe the whole grounds and conclusions of their School doctrine, can ever prove either good Christians, or faithful subjects. For the former, I refer myself to most of the points handled in this Treatise ensuing: for the latter, let the doctrine and practice of the Romish Synagogue itself give sentence. How can he possibly be a faithful subject, that is to be commanded (in the highest bond of conscience) by foreign authority? Shall we rest upon the Pope's holiness: as if he forsooth would not enjoin any thing, that should prejudice any Prince in his estate temporal? Let former examples pass; can any true, or just dealing be hoped for at his hands, whose vassals daily teach subjects, that it is meritorious to murder Princes. Would not the Pope, if he had misliked that doctrine, have checked it long before this time, either in some general Council, or by some definitive sentence of his own; as your Lordship hath prudently observed? And whereas their Archpriest Blackwell condemns all attempting of aught against Princes by any private authority, doth he not (which is also your Lordship's wise observation) reserve thereby a tacit lawfulness thereof, in case it be directed by public warrant? So impossible is it for a Papist (that believes the Pope cannot err, and holds himself therefore bound in conscience to obey him, in all his commandments) to be a faithful subject to any Prince in the world whatsoever. But I have been carried further in this matter, than I purposed; it remains, that I humbly crave pardon of your Lordship, and commend there my poor labours to your honourable and gracious acceptance; beseeching God to continue your life, and to increase your zeal, care, and wise lo●… to the glory of his name, the further adua●… of religion, the prosperi●●● of the estate, the sa●●●e and honour of his Majesty, ●…d your own present and everlasting comfort through jesus Christ. From my house on the Tower Hill February 18. Anno 16●● 〈◊〉 Lord●hips to be commanded in all Christian duty. A●●ONY WOTTON. TO THE READER. WHen I had finished my poor labours in answering, and compared Master Perkins Treatise, the Papists accusation, and my defence together; I could see no better course for thy understanding of all three, then to set down all three, every one in the Authers own words. Now I came at the last to view them all three together, the greatness of the book driveth me into some fear lest that which I intended for thy good in reading of it, should prove an occasion of thy forbearing to read it. Only my hope is, that knowledge of the truth being the end of thy reading, thou wilt not think much of a little more pains or cost, which necessity hath laid upon them, who desire to benefit themselves by understanding the difference betwixt the Gospel and Popery. That neither my tediousness nor darkness might offend or stay thee, I have laboured for as much plainness as I could well attain to, with so much brevity. The skoffing, reviling, and slandering of the Adversary, I have chosen rather to refer to God the revenger of all such Antichristian dealing, and to thy discreet and Christian consideration, then to answer in the like measure and kind of sinning. But if it please thee in reading of the book to compare the testimony he giveth of M. Perkins in his Preface to the Reader, with his carriage toward him in the whole course of his answering, thou shalt easily discern, that either the one or the other, or both, must needs be without judgement or conscience. For my course of answering I shall need to say nothing, because I spoke sufficiently of it in my answer to the twelve Articles. In this present book thou mayest know where M. Perkins, the Adversary, and my defence beginneth and endeth, as well by the difference of the print, as by the great or capital letters set in the margin; W. P. for William Perkins, D. B. P. for the Adversary unknown, hiding himself under those three letters, A. W. for Antony Wotton. And this course is observed throughout the whole book, save a few places, where the marginal notes would afford no room to those letters. I have further added some short answers in the margin here and there, which thou mayest perceive by the matter and letter. It remaineth that I humbly and earnestly entreat thee to examine what we have written without prejudice and partiality, and to acknowledge the truth with liking, where it shall please God to make it evident unto thee: which he will certainly do according to his promise, if thou call upon him in humility and faith, for the assistance of his holy Spirit; To whose gracious direction I commend thee now and ever. Tower hill Febr. 18. 1606. Thine in the Lord jesus, Antony Wotton. speaker D. B. P. TO THE MOST PVISSANT, PRUDENT, AND RENOWNED PRINCE, JAMES the first, by the grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, defender of the Faith, etc. MOst Gracious and dread Sovereign. Albeit my slenddr skill cannot afford any discourse worthy the view of your Excellency, neither my deadded, and daily interrupted, and * Not 〈◊〉 but pers●●s, that study 〈◊〉 plo● Treason persecuted studies, will give me leave to accomplish that little, which otherwise I ●…ght undertake and perform: Yet being unboldened, both by your high 〈◊〉, and gracious favour, ever showed unto all good literature, especially concerning Divinity: and also urged by mine own bounden duty, and particular affection; I presume to present unto your Highness this sho●…●…ing treatise. For your exceeding clemency, ●…es, and rare modesty, in the most eminent estate of to mighty a Monarch; as it cannot but win unto you great love, in the h●arts of all considerate Subjects: so on the other side doth it encourage them confidently to open their minds, and in dutiful manner to unfold themselves unto their so loving and astable a S●u●rai●ne. And whereas 〈◊〉 the no vulgar praise of your Majesty's p●…e) you have made open and often profession of your vigilancy and care, to advance the divine honour of our Sa●… Christ, and his most sacred Religion: Then what faithful Ch●…an should slagger, or fear to lay open, and deliver publicly, that which he assureth himself to be ver● expedient, necessary, and a reeable towards the furnishing, and se●ting forward of so heavenly a work? Moreover, if I your majesties poor subject, have by study at home, and travail abroad, attained unto any small talon of learning, and knowledge: to whom is the use and fruit thereof more due, then unto my so gracious, and withal, so learned a Liege? speaker A. W. Is it a dutiful manner of unfolding yourself, to charge his majesties government with persecution, and that of men's studies, with persecuting heavily the sincere professors of the only true Catholic faith? with molesting grievously great numbers of most civil biects? with mingling his government with bitter storms of persecution? to threaten him with fear of rebellion or treason? Indeed, I must needs say, you unfold yourself perhaps more than you would. For whereas your desire is to lie hid under the cloak of commending his Majesty, for exceeding mildness, clemency, affability, etc. before you are aware, the truth of your opinion breaks out, and bewrays itself to all the world. speaker D. B. P. Finally, for a proof of my sincerity, affection, and dutiful love towards your Majesty, this may I justly say that in time of uncertain fortune (when assured friends are most certainly tried) I both suffered disgrace, and hindrance for it, being styled in Print, A Scotist in faction: therein farther employing my pen in Atwo-solde discourse (which I hope hath been presented to the view of your Majesty) the one containing a defence of your highness honour: the other of your title, and interest of the Crown of England. And if than my zeal and love of truth, and obligation to your Majesty, drew me out of the compass of mine own profession, to treat of law courses: I trust your benign Grace will now licence me, out of the same fountain of ●●ruencie and like zeal unto God's truth, no less respecting your majesties eternal honour, and heavenly inheritance, something to say in matters of divinity: having been the best part of my study, for more than thrice sever, years. speaker A. W. The late quarrels betwixt the professed, and secret traitors, the Jesuits and Priests, have made all men of any judgement, able to discern, what disgraces and hindrances either part hath by other; when both parts can so easily and suddenly agree with the good liking of your laypapists. The best service you do his Majesty, in this book, is that you confess so plainly, that both his honour, and his title to the Crown of England, were not only called into question, but injured, and denied by your Popish saction. And yet this intelligence you give him, is no news: for it was discovered before out of a letter of Parsons in b 〈…〉 the Jesuits defence, against the Secular Priests. speaker D. B. P. Whereinto I may conveniently enter with that golden sentence, with which your Majesty began the Conference, holden in Ia●…y last, between certain of your ●…cts, about some controversy 〈◊〉 Religion: A jove principium: conformable to that in holy writ, I 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a●d Apoc. cap. 1. 8. Omega, that is, The begianing, and the end, saith our Lord: And ●…ying it unto Princes, I may be bold to say, that nothing is more expedient, and necessary for Kings: nothing more honourable, and of be●… assurance for their estate, then that in the very beginning of their ●a●gne, they take especial o●der, that the suprea●ne, and most puissant Monarch of heaven and earth, be purely, and uprightly served, aswell in their own exemplar lives, as throughout their Dominions. For of Almighty God his mere bouncde and great grace, they receive and hold their Diadems and ●…cely Seep●ers: and cannot possess and enjoy them (their mighty Forces, and most prudent Counsels notwithstanding) one day longer, then during his d●…e will and pleasure. Which that wise King witnesseth, speaking in the person of God's wisdom, Per me Reges regnant, Pronerb. 4. Dan. 4. By me Kings do reign. And Nabuchodonozer sometime King of Babylon, was turned out to graze with beasts, for seven years, and made to know and confess, that the highest doth comma●…d over the kingdoms of men, and disposeth of them, as pleaseth his d●uine wisdom. But I need not stand upon this point, being to well known, and duly confessed by your Ma●es●●e. speaker A. W. His Majesty wisely, and fitly applied the saying of the Poet, to signify, that whatsoever we undertake, must be begun in the name of God, with desire, and trust of his blessing. But what conformity hath that of Christ either with c Virg Eclog. 3 Theoc● it. Idyl. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the Poet's sentence, or his majesties purpose, or your own application? Our Saviour truly professes of himself, that he is d R●…. 〈◊〉. 1. 8. 11. & 2. 8. Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, which is, which was, and which is to come: the first, and the last: that is eternal. Neither the Poet, nor the King our of the P●●t intend to speak any thing of God's eternity. Neither can you reasonably apply that speech of our Saviour, to secure Princes in their estate, if they begin their government with Providing for obedience to God, by true religion. But how little agreement there is betwixt Christ's speech and the Poets, it may easily appear by this; that if his Majesty, in stead of Abs love Principiu●, should have said, I am Alpha and Omega, or Christ is Alpha and Omega, no man could have understood his meaning by his words. speaker D. B. P. But since there be in this our most miserable age, great diversities of Religions, and but one only, wherewith God is truly served and pleased, as saith the Apostle. One body, one Spirit, as you are called into one 〈…〉 hope of your vocation, one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism: My most humble suit and supplication, to your high Majesty is, that you to your eternal good, will imbra●e, maintain, and set forth that only true, Catholic, and apostolic faith, wherein all your most royal progenitors lived and died or if you cannot be won so soon, to alter that Religion in which it hath been your misfortune, to have been bred and brought up: That then in the mean season, you will not so heavily persecute, the sincere professors of the other. speaker A. W. It is an easy matter to persuade his Majesty to maintain, and set forth the only true Catholic and apostolic faith: that is, to do, that he doth already. But the Roman religion hath never an one of these properties: as it will appear in the survey of your reformation. divers of his majesties progenitors lived and died in the profession of true religion many years before a number of your Popish heresies were hatched. Neither doth he now maintainc it, because, by God's special providence, he hath been brought up in it; but for that as it appears in the ● Anno 1580. june 20. Confession of Scotland, after long and due examination his Majesty is thoroughly resolved in the truth by the word and spirit of God. Who would think that he which a little before justly commended his Majesty for exceeding clemency, mildness, lovingness and affablenes, should now challenge him for persecuting heavily the sincere professors of the only true Catholic and apostolic faith? speaker D. B. P. Very many urgent, and forcible reasons might be produced, in favour and de●e●ce of the Catholic Roman Religion, whereof divers have been in most learned treatises, tendered to your Majesty already. Wherefore I will only touch three: two of them chosen out of the subject of this book: The third selected from a sentence of your Majesties, recorded in the aforesaid Conference. speaker A. W. I doubt not but if those learned treatises, you brag of, be come to his majesties hands, either they have had, or shall ere long receive sufficient answer. In the mean while, let us consider these your reasons. speaker D. B. P. And because that argument is, as most sensible, so best assured, which proceedeth from a principle that is either evident in itself or else granted, and confessed for true: My first proof shall be grounded upon that your Majesties own resolute, and constant opinion (as it appeareth in the said Conference) to wit: That no Church ought further to separate it Pag. 7●. self from the Church of Rome, either in doctrine or ceremony, than she hath departed from herself, when she was in her flourishing, and best estate. From whence I deduce this reason: The principal Pillars of the Church of Rome in her most flourishing estate, taught in all points of Religion, the same Doctrine, that she now holdeth and teacheth; and in express terms condemneth for error and heresy, most of those Articles, which the Protestants esteem to be the principal parts of their reformed Gospel: Therefore if your Majesty will resolutely embrace, and constantly defend that doctrine, which the Roman Church maintained in her most flourishing estate; you must forsake the Protestant, and take the Catholic into your Princely protection. speaker A. W. The most flourishing and best estate of the Church of Rome is that out of question, of the sincerity whereof we have witness in the f Rom. 1. 8. Scripture: from which no Church ought, or may depart: not because they may not dissent from the Church of Rome; but because they must hold the true faith: for which the Apostle commends the Church of Rome, that then was. The antecedent of your reason is false. The Church of Rome, in the Apostles time, did not teach many of those points that the Popish Romish Church now holds; witness the Epistle to the Romans, wherein divers main matters of her faith are recorded. speaker D. B. P. To demonstrate unto your Majesty, that we now hold in all points, the very same Doctrine, which the most approved ancient Doctors, and holy Fathers held and delivered: Because it is too long for an Epistle, I reserve it to the book itself, for the points it handleth; and will here briefly note out of it, some such old reproved errors, that the Protestants do revive, receive, and avow, as the very sinews of their Gospel. speaker A. W. The most approved ancient Doctors & holy fathers, were the Apostles, with whom, how you show your agreement, in the points, this book handles, we shall see in the particulars: All other writers have those properties in a far inferior degree: from among whom, if I would deal strictly with you, I might pick the Fathers of the Greek Churches, and all those of the Latin that were not members of the Roman, as it was a distinct Church from all other: For so is the g Ambros. de sacra lib. 3. c. 1 Prosper de lib. a●b. ad Russin. Roman Church conceived, and spoken of by his Majesty. But I will not press you so hard, though I may chance to put you in mind of it now and then. All points that have been reproved by some of the ancient writers are not errors, and many times the same words have not the same meaning. speaker D. B. P. Martin Luther the ringleader of the new pretended reformation, layeth for the groundwork of his Religion, That man is justified by * By faith only, or by faith a●one, were english, so is not, by only faith. Aug. d● 〈◊〉 & openbus cap. ●4. Cap. 20. only saith: and in this he is applauded and followed of all Protestants: and yet as testifieth the most sound witness of antiquity, S. Austin, that only faith is sufficient to Salvation, was an error sprung up in the Apostles days; against which, the Catholic Epistles of S. Peter, and S. james, and S. john, were principally directed. And the author of that error was that infamous Sorcerer Simon Magus; as the blessed Martyr Ireneus hath recorded in his first book against heresies. speaker A. W. For the doctrine of justification by faith only, I refer the reader to the article of justification. That we are unlike the heretics, of whom S. Augustine speaks, it may thus ap●…. The faith they so magnified, was a dead faith The Apostle (〈◊〉 h De side●… oper. cap. 1●. Non quale 〈◊〉 〈…〉 〈◊〉, etc. Austin, in refutation of them) speaks not of every kind ●…, by which we believe in God; but of that wholesome and truly ●…angelicall faith, the works whereof proceed from love. And again: How long therefore will they be deceived that promise themselves everlasting life by a dead faith? Besides, they despised good works as needles, either before, or after justification. i Hoc Paulum arbitra●● sunt dic●re, 〈◊〉 ●alum, etc. They thought (saith Augustine) that Paul willed us to do evil that good might come of it. But it was not the Apostles meaning (saith he) that by the professing and enjoining of faith, k Vt opera justitia contem na●tur. good works of righteousness should be despised: But that every man might know that he may be justified, l ●…iamsi legis opera non prae●esterint. though he have not done the works of the Law before. For they follow him that is justified, not go before him that is to be justified. Yea m 〈…〉 cap. 20 Simon the Sorcerer doubted not, blasphemously to affirm, that the commandments of holy life were given by the Angels, that made the world, who thereby n ●…. brought men into sla●●rie. Of whom o 〈…〉 D. B. P. 〈…〉 cap. 〈◊〉 〈…〉 Aug. 〈…〉 Theod●ret saith, that because men are saved by grace and faith, therefore he gave by all means 〈◊〉 to commit wickedness. speaker A. W. another principal pillar of Friar Luther's Religion, con●… niall of free will; wherein he jumpeth with the old rotten 〈…〉 Manes, of whom the Mani●d cans were named. Manes so denied free will, that he took away all assent of the will, in men's daily sins, making the necessity of sinning natural, from the creation, as proceeding from the evil god, or beginning, which he blasphemously and absurdly devised: p August. d● side contra Manich. cap. 6. 7. & de hares. cap 46. He (saith Augustine) made two divers beginnings, each contrary to other, and both eternal. And from these two natures and substances of good and evil; so that he ascribed the beginning of sin, not to the freedom of will, but to the substance of the adverse faction. Yea so fair proceeded the Manichees, that they affirmed q Co●…. 〈…〉 Ma●ich. lib. 〈◊〉 cap. 8. (saith the same Augustine) that every living creature had two souls, r A gente l●… à gente 〈◊〉 brarum. one from light, another from darkness. Manes brought in fatal necessity s Histor. l●b. 〈◊〉 cap. 10. (saith Socrates) and took away free will. We chose acknowledge that there is but one God, or author of all things created, that he made us in our kind perfectly good. That sin came in first by freedom of will both in men and Angels, and that, by free will, without any necessity of constraint, it is daily committed. It appears further, to our comfort, in that place of t Pr●…●…al. co●… Pelag●… S. Hierome, that the Catholics, or true Christians in his time, were in like sort charged by the Pelagians, with the Manichees error, in denying free will; because they would not confess, that a man may be without sin, if he will: which is one point of difference betwixt us and the Papists. speaker D. B. P. One Pro●lus an erroneous Origenist taught that sin was not taken away 〈…〉 in Baptism, but only covered, as is recorded by that holy man, and ancient Father E●…anius. M. Per●ins (in the name of the Church of England) affirmeth in like manner, that original sin remaineth still, and reigneth in the regenerate, albeit it is not imputed unto them. speaker A. W. Neither Methodius, out of whom u Epiphan. tom. 1. lib. 2. haeres. 64. & ibid. Methodius. Epiphanius recites Proclus opinions, in many leaves together word for word; nor Epiphanius himself refute that of the remainders of sin, after Baptism: rather they both confess, that the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. sprouts and branches of concupiscence abide in us; yea that * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. sin dwells in us, by which the devil prevails. The Apostle (saith Methodius) Rom. 7. seems to make a threefold law. The first, the law of the mind, according to that good that is engrafted in us. The second, by the assault of the devil, urging and distracting the mind, by imaginations y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. full of passion. The third, which z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. triumphs in the flesh by sin; which the Apostle calls the law of sin dwelling in our members. That a Hieronym. contra Pelag. lib. 1. in princip. Hierom is of our opinion in this point, it appears in his book against the Pelagians. speaker D. B. P. jovinian was accounted a Monster by S. Augustine, for defending honest Marriage to be of equal virtue, and merit with chaste Virginity: and saith further that this heresy was so sottish and fleshly; that it could not deceive any one learned Priest, but only some few simple and carnal women. Yet this our English champion blusheth not to affirm that marriage is not only equal, but better also in divers respects than Perkin. pag. 163. Virginity. speaker A. W. S. Austin was neither so ancient, nor so holy, as S. Paul: having him on our side, we need not fear the other. But the report, you make of him, is untrue. For these are his words in English. b August. retract. lib. 2. cap. 22. This heresy prevailed so much in the city of Rome, that it is said to have thrown into the estate of marriage even some vowed virgins, of whose chastity there had been no suspicion before. So far is Augustine from calling them simple, and carnal. Beside he adds (though you will not be known of it) that he c Frangebat. weakened and overthrew the holy single life of holy men, by rehearsing and commending the Fathers, (Abraham, Isaac, jacob) who were married men. And whereas he saith, it could not come to the deceiving of d Aliquorum sacerdotum. any Priests, (for learned and any one is your gloss, besides the text) he seems to attribute it to the short continuance thereof. It was e August. de haeres. cap. 82. (saith he) quickly oppressed and extinguished, and could not come to the deceiving of any Priests. speaker D. B. P. The same old reprobate heretic, barked also against approved feasts and fasting days, so do most of our Ministers at this time. speaker A. W. Our Ministers do all generally approve both of feasts and fasting days, keeping the former more religiously, than you do ordinarily the Sabbath. The latter we observe with reverence and humility, whensoever they are appointed. 5. Eliz. cap. 5. Rascal's Abri●…ment of Ships and Shipping. Fish days superstitiously abused by you, are civilly retained by us with less riot than yourselves do use. speaker D. B. P. Vigilantius was sharply reproved by S. Hierome, in a book written against him, and hath been ever since unto this day, esteemed a wicked heretic, for denying prayer to Saints, and honour to be done unto their Relics: And yet, what point of Doctrine is more currant among the Protestants, than this? speaker A. W. f In censura sua in illum Hieronymilibrum. Erasmus, not without cause, finds want of modesty in that treatise of hierom's; he might have found want of truth too, if Vigilantius held no worse opinion, than those you recite. But of the former, namely praying to Saints, neither the one, nor the other speaks a word. And indeed it was not the manner in those days to pray to the Martyrs, but to pray g O●●phr. de ritu sepeliendi mortual. Eusebius hist. lib. 7. cap. 11. at their Tombs: which custom, it should seem remained till that time, according to the former practice of the Christians, who assembled ordinarily where the Martyrs were h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, dorters, sleeping places. Tertulliano Areae. ad Sc●pulam. Aug ad q. vul●, haeres. 53. buried, before they were suffered to have any Churches. speaker A. W. In like sort, one Aërius to the Arrian heresy, added this of his own; That we must not pray for the souls of our friends departed; as S. Augustine hath registered. And do not all Protestants embrace and earnestly defend the same? This doctrine of prayer for the dead, the denial whereof is counted an error in Aërius, hath no foundation in the Scripture, but was built upon the tradition of the Fathers, as i Epiphan. lib. 3. Tom. 1. haeres. 75. he, from whom Austin takes the accusation, confesseth. speaker A. W. A common custom it was of the Arrians, and of other more ancient heretics, to reject all Traditions, and to rely only upon the written D. B. P. Lib. 3. c. 20. Lib. 1. con. Maximinum. word, as testifieth S. Ireneus and S. Augustine. Do not ours the same, rejecting all Traditions as Man's Invention. A perilous error, no doubt, to rest wholly upon the written word: that is, to believe none but God, in matters of his own worship and religion. k Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 20. Ireneus, in the places alleged, hath no word of rejecting traditions: rather he speaks the contrary of Simon Magu●, who rejected the Scripture, to establish his own devices. S. Austin finds no fault with Maximinus for resting upon the Scriptures; nor indeed reasonably could: for it is his own doctrine in that l August. cont. Maxim. lib. 3. cap. 14. conference with the Heretic, and m Cont. Dona 'tis. lib. 2. cap. 6 & de v●…at. 〈◊〉. ●les. 2. 3. 6. other where. speaker D. B. P. Xea●…s a Barbarous Persian indeed, yet in show a counterfeited Christian; is noted for one of the first among Christians, that inveighed against the Images of Saints, and the worship done by true Christians unto them; as both Nicephorus, and Ced●… comppen●… do record. N●ceph lib. 10. 〈◊〉. The reprobate jews indeed before him, and after even until this day, the miscreant. Turks (enemies of all Christianity) do dwell still in the same er●…r: And yet is not this most vehemently auer●ed by our Protestants, and all ●alui●●sts; although they cannot deny but that above 900. years ago, in the second general Council holden at Nice, they are by the con●●nt of the best, and most learned of the world, for ever accursed that do deny reverence and worship, to be given unto the Images of Saints? speaker A. W. n 〈…〉 〈◊〉 of this ●ame, Callistus, and Gregores, both writers of histories. Nicephorus (you should have added Callistus, that the reader might have known whom you meant, and have quoted o Nicephor. Callist. lib. 16. cap. 27. lib. 16. not 10.) who lived not 400. years since, and p C●…nus pag. 290. Cedrenus, who lived, as it is thought, about the year 1058. are neither of antiquity, nor credit to avow a history not recorded by any of their ancients. But how could Xenaias, about the year 478 be one of the first, if the q Commentary in Dama●. Orthod. sid. li. 4. cap. 17. Commentary upon Damascen say true: That the worshipping of Images was condemned as superstitious, by some, about the beginning of the Gospel preached? Cedrenus saith be was one of the first; Callistus after him more than 200. years, saith he was the first. speaker D. B. P. The r See ●●y answer in the treatise of images toward the end. second Council of Nice was a conventicle of Idolaters, neither of the best, nor of the most learned; and was presently after condemned by the Council of Frankfort. I will omit sundry other heads of the Protestants Religion, by all approved antiquity reproved, and condemned, that I pass not the bounds of an Epistle, and seem over tedious unto your Majesty. Especially considering that these are sufficient, to convince that those points (wherein the Protestants affirm the present Church of Rome, to have so far degenerate from the ancient) are the very essential parts of saith, then maintained by the Romans: And the contrary opinions nothing else, but wicked heresies, of old invented, and obstinately held against the same Roman See, even as they are now our time: and of old also condemned by the same Church in her most flourishing and best estate. Wherefore your most excellent Majesty, being resolute in that singular good opinion, (that no Church ought farther to depart from the Church of Rome, than she is departed from herself in her flourishing estate,) must needs recall the Church of England, from such extravagant opinions, to join with the Roman Church in the aforesaid articles, which she in her best time held for parts of pure faith: And in all others also which they cannot directly prove (in a lawful disputation before your Majesty) to have been altered by her, particularly naming the point of Doctrine; the author o● the change: the time and place, where, and when he lived: who followed him, who resisted him, and such other like circumstances, which all be easily showed in every such revolt or innovation: because th● vigilant care of the Pastors of Christ's flock, have been always so great, as no such things could be unknown, let slip, or unrecorded. Thus much for my first reason, collected from the untruth of the Protestants religion. speaker A. W. What are nine points to nine score; that I may speak the least? and yet it is not proved, that any of these were held by the Romans, whose faith s Rom. 1. 8. S. Paul commends; nor indeed ever can be. It is enough for us, if we can show by record of Scripture, that the doctrine the Church of Rome now holds, is not that she maintained in her best estate: which we often have done, and always will be ready to do. Is it not a good plea in law, to prove by ancient evidences and deeds, that the land was mine, unless I can show when, and how the possession of every house, Meadow, Close, etc. was lost? yet it stands you upon to prove how you came by it, and by what right you hold it. Which you must do, when all comes to all, by the Scripture, or else your title will never be good. speaker D. B. P. The second shall be grounded upon the ungodliness of it, where I will let pass that high point of impiety, that they make God (who is goodness itself) the author of all wicked actions, done in the world: * Two monstrous vntr●… 〈◊〉 have showed else where. And will besides say nothing of that their blasphemy against our Saviour jesus Christ, that he overcome with the pains of his passion upon the Cross, did doubt, (if not despair) of his own salvation: being unwilling to touch any other points, than such as are afterwards discussed in this book. speaker A. W. You may well let both these pass: for they are your slanders, not our opinions, as hath been showed sufficiently t In my answer to the 12. Articles. part. 2. art. 5. and part. 1. art. 4. The disdain is at your idolagrie, not at the. elsewhere. The triumphant Citizens of heaven (who enjoy the presence of God, and happiest life that can be imagined) are by Protestants disdainfully termed, Dead men, and esteemed neither to have credit with God to obtain any thing, nor any care or compassion on men, among whom they once lived and conversed so kindly. The Saints departed we love and honour, but are forced to call them dead men, as u De vera relig. cap. 55. Austin doth, by reason of your Idolatry; with the same disdain, in our weak measure, with which the * Phil. 3. 2. Gal. 5. 2. Apostle disgraced Circumcision. Of their credit with God we doubt not; their care of men we deny not: but x See my answer to 12. Articl. par. 1. art. 4. H. What does your Po●e, that may release them all and will not? we know no calling they have to become our mediators, with dishonour to God and Christ. And as for the poor souls departed, who in Purgatory fire pay dear for their former delights and pleasures; they deprive them of all human succour, by teaching the world to believe that there is no such matter. speaker D. B. P. y See my answer to 12. Articl. part. 1. art. 4. l. Utterly untrue. We deprive them of nothing, that God in the Scripture allows them. Prove your Purgatory thence, and we will confess our error. Concerning us Christians yet living on earth, there is no less impiety in their opinions: For they teach that the best Christian is no better in effect, than a whited Sepulchre, being inwardly full of all wickedness, and mischief; and only by an outward imputation of Christ's righteousness unto them, are accepted of God for just. To think that there is inherent in the soul of Man, any such grace of God, as doth cleanse it from sin, and make the man just in his sight; is with them, to We acknowledge such a grace, though not to justification. raze the foundation of Religion, and to make Christ a Pseudochrist: wherein, I know not whether they be more envious against the good of Man, than they are injurious, either to the inestimable value of Christ's blood, as though it could not deserve any better estate for his favourites: or unto the virtue and efficacy of the holy Ghost; as not being able (by likeliehood) to purge men's souls from sin, and endue them with such Heavenly qualities. I omit the disgrace thereby done to the Blessed Godhead itself, making the Holy of Holies, father willing to cover and cleake our iniquity, then to cure it. And contrary to his infinite goodness, to love them whom hè seeth defiled with all manner of abominations. speaker A. W. We acknowledge every true Christian to be righteous in the sight of God after justification, by z 1. Cor. 6. 11. inherent, though imperfect, righteousness; and account none whited sepulchres, but those that brag or make she of holiness, a Matth. 23. 27 being but hypocrites. We ascribe our justification wholly and only to the mercy of God, in b Rom. 4. 3, 4▪ ●…. forgiving our sins, for Christ's obedience, by accounting c ●…. faith to us for righteousness. We envy not the good of man, but prefer God's truth before man's pride. Our Saviour Christ's sacrifice we megnifie, as infinitely perfect; but we know the whole e●…t thereof is not perfected at once in us, though the holy Ghost be of infinite power, which, in respect of us, is limited by the gracious and wise providence of God. We teach that God doth not only cover our sins, by forgiving them; but cure our corruption, by abolishing it wholly, yet d 1. Cor. 13▪ 〈◊〉. Rom. 7. 23. 2. Cor. 12. 9 by little and little. His love depends not upon our righteousness: for he loved us, e Rom. 5. 8. 1. joh 4. 10. when we were most unrighteous: but upon the estate of f Gal. 4 6. Rom. 8. 15. being his sons, members of his beloved son jesus Christ, and g Ephe●. 1. 3. 〈◊〉 elected to adoption and salvation by him, before the foundation of the world was laid. speaker D. B. P. Unto these paradoxes, impious against God, and slanderous to man: If it will please your Majesty to add, the profane carnality of some other points of the Protestant Doctrine; you will (doubtless) in short time loathe it. As for example: I hat it is as good and godly, by eating, to And ea●e of vn●…. feed the body, as to chastise it by fasting. That it is as holy, to fulfil the fleshly desires of it by Marriage, as by Continency, to mortify them; yea that it is flat against the word of God to vow Virginity: And also contrary to his blessed will to bestow our goods on the poor, and to give ourselves wholly to prayer, and fasting. All which, this Advocate of the English Congregation teacheth express●e Is this the purity of the Gospel? Or is it not rather the high way to Pag. 132. 162. 16●. Epicurism, and to all worldly vanity, and iniquity? speaker A. W. To chastise the body by fasting we hold it not only good, but of ten times h 1. Cor. 9 27. necessary: though we acknowledge neither merit, nor satisfaction in it, which accompany your popish fasts. Mortification of i Rom. 6. 〈◊〉 Col. 3. 5. all kinds of lusts, not only that one, we account a necessary part of sanctification; neither do we allow marriage to fulfil the lust of the flesh, k 1. Cor. 7. 2. 〈◊〉. but to remedy it: vowing of virginity we approve not, because a man cannot be sure that he shall keep his vow always, though for a time he be able: besides, all lawful vows being things indifferent, l 1. Cor 6 12. charity must give judgement of excediencie in making th●n. m See my answ●… 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of V●…. To make prayer and fasting our whole work, is to live in the world without a calling. To give away our goods to the poor, so to become chargeable to others, is to tempt God, and burden the Church: to do it with opinion of merit, is popish pride against God's glory. speaker D. B. P. I need not join hereunto, that they teach it to be impossible to keep God's Commandments; and therefore in vain to go about it: And farther, that the best work of the righteous man, is defiled with I deny both your consequences. Borrowed out of the twelve Articles, and answered by me heretofore. Rom. 6. sin. Wherefore, as good for him to lean all undone, as to do any. Nay, if this position of theirs were true, it would to low necessarily, that all men were bound under pain of damnation, never to do any good deed, to long as they live: for that their good deed being stained with sin, cannot but deserve the hire of sin, which according to the Apostle is: Death everlasting. If your majesties important affairs, would once permit you to consider maturely of these impieties, and many other like absurdities, wherewith the Protestant Doctrine is stuffed: I dare be bold to say that you would speedily either command them, to reform themselves, and amend their errors; or fairly give them their Congee. speaker A. W. We say it is n See my answer to 12. Articl. part. 2. art. 3. impossible to keep God's commandments perfectly to justification; but we deny, that therefore it is in vain to go about it. Yea we truly affirm, that we are o 1. Cor. 15. 58 bound to do our best endeavour, and shall have acceptation and reward of our works from God, though not upon any desert of ours. p ●o the 12. Art. part. 2. art. 2. That our best works are tainted with imperfections we profess plainly: That they are therefore to be left undone, neither we say, nor you can prove: The imperfection that cleaves to them, is by all good means to be avoided, but the works to be performed: for it is not the work, but the imperfection in it that is forbidden. speaker D. B. P. I will close up this my second reason, with this Epiphoneme. That it is impossible for a Protestant, firmly cleaning to the grounds of his own Religion, to hope for any salvation. For they do, and needs must grant, that no man can be saved without a lively faith; and also that a lively faith cannot be without charity, for otherwise it were dead: Now then to the purpose; No Protestant can have charity: for as witnesseth Saint john. This is the charity of God, that we keep his commandments. But it is impossible (according to the Protestants) to keep the commandments: 〈◊〉 Epist. cap. 5. 3 therefore also impossible to have charity; Which is the ●ulnes of Rome 13. the law: and consequently impossible to have a lively faith, which cannot be without charity. And so finally through want of that l●uely feeling faith, whereby they should lay hold on Christ's righteousness, to hale and apply that unto themselves, they can have no hope at all, of any favour, and grace at God's hands: Without which they must needs assure themselves of eternal damnation, in steed of their pretended certain●… of salvation. speaker A. W. True charity, though not perfect, may be had in this life, and by it the commandments of God may be, and are kept, though not perfectly: so that a Protestant, firmly cleaning to the grounds of his religion, may yet hope for salvation. speaker D. B. P. To these two arguments, gathered out of the treatise following, I add a third, collected from these your own memorable words related in the above named conference: viz. Are we now come to that pass, Pag. 69. that we must appeach Constantine of Popery and superstition? Which argueth that your Majesty judgeth them, to have little regard of either piety or civility, that would admit such a thought into their mind, as that the first Christian Emperor (our most renowned countryman) should be nuzzled and brought up in superstition: wherein your Majesty hath great reason, for he was most carefully instructed, and taught the Christian Religion, by such holy Confessors, whose sincerity in faith had been tried in the hot furnace of many strange persecutions: And he farther had the good hap to see, and hear together in the first general Council of Nice, many of the holiest, and best learned Bishops of Christendom. Therefore, is it most unlikely that so Royal a Person, devoted to Religion, add having so good means to attain to the perfect knowledge thereof, as no man could have better; should nevertheless in the purest time of it, be mislead into error, and superstition. If then, it may be proved, that this most Christian Emperor (the glittering ornament of our noble Island) did believe such articles of the present Roman Church, as the Protestants teach not to be believed: Will not your Majesty rather join in faith with so pee●les a Prince, who by the consent of all antiquity, was for certain right well informed, then with these, whom (doubtless) most men deem to be pitifully deceived ' Now that Constantine was of the same opinion, in matter of Religion, with the present Church of Rome, may evidently be gathered out of this that followeth. speaker A. W. He that denies Constantine to have been a worthy, a singular instrument of God, for the good of his Church, wrongs the worthy Emperor, and sins against God. But the trial of doctrine is to be fetched, not from the opinions and examples of men, though never so holy, but from the Holy of Holies. It may not seem strange if superstition were crept into the Church before Constantine's time, when the q 2. Thes. 2. 7. Apostle witnesses, that even in his days the mystery of iniquity was already begun. speaker D. B. P. First, he was so affectionate unto the sign of the Cross, that he would have it gloriously appear, both abroad in his business, and at home in his Palace: and in the midst of the City of ●o●e▪ with this Euseb. de vita Constan. lib. 3. cap. 2. Lib. 2. cap. 14: Lib. 4. cap. 26. Posy: In this sign of salvation, I have delivered the City. W●… it also he blessed his visage. With fasting and other corporal affliction, he chastized his body, that he might please God. He with incredible admiration, honoured processed Virgins, and made laws in their favour. He builded many Churches in honour of the Apostles, and Martyrs. Ibidem lib. 3. cap. 47. & alibi. Ch●y ●…om. 66. ad pop. Antioth. And as S. Chrysostome recordeth: He that was revested in purple, went to embrace the Sepulchers of S. Peter, and S Paul, and all Princely state laid aside, stood humbly praying unto the Saints, that they would be intercessors for him unto God. He farther took order for the burying of his own body, in the midst of the Tombs of the twelve Apostles, that after his death he might be partaker of the prayers, which should be there offered in the honour of the Euseb. in vita Const. lib. 4. c. 60 Ibid. cap 71. Apostles. Neither was he frustrated of his holy desire for as it followeth in the 71. Chapter of the same book, at his funerals, the people joining with the Priests, with many scars, and great sighs, powered out prayers for the good emperors soul. Again, at a 〈◊〉 feast which he held at the dedication of the Church built by 〈◊〉 jerusalem; some of 〈◊〉 clergy preached and expounded the holy Scriptures: and o'th' 〈◊〉 me with unbloody Sacrifice, and ●…st all cons●cr●lions, appeased the Godhead, and prayed for the Ibidem de vi●a Const. li. 4. ca 45 health of he Prince. Moreover this ●…alous E●pero●r reprehended Acasius, (a Novatian h●…ke) 〈◊〉 saying, that it was not in the power of Priests, but of Zozom. lib●. 1. hist. Eccl. cap. 21 God only to forgivesinnes. Finally, toward true Bishops, the law full Pastors of Christ's Church, he carried such a reverend 〈◊〉 that being in the Council of Nice, he would not ●iue dow●e, ●efore they 〈◊〉 back●ed unto him so to do. And Socr hist. lib. 1. cap. 5. was so far 〈…〉 upon h●● to 〈◊〉 p●came judge, in causes Ecclesiastical; that he 〈◊〉 th●re profesied, that it did not belong to him to judge of Bishop's 〈◊〉 to be iud●… by them. It was not the 〈◊〉, but the thing signified, viz. Christ crucified, to which Constantine showed his affection, and by whom he obtained all his victories; r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. by this God, not by this sign. The chastising of his body was not to please God by the work wrought, but to fit himself to prayer, whereby he might obtain mercy, s Euseb. de vita Constant. li. 2. cap. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. saith Eusebius, appeasing God by supplication. To make virginity a more divine life than the married estate, as t ib. 4. cap. 26 Eusibius in that place calls it, is to say Adam lived a more divine life before God created Eua●, than he could do afterward; and so to make her not an help, but an hindrance to him. u De ●aud Constant. 〈◊〉. Eusebius speaks not of the Apostles, but of the Martyrs, to whom the Churches were dedicated, but to God only, and were called the Lords houses, Dominicae, * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Kyrch, Churches. They were also named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not because they were built in honour of the Martyrs, but because (as I showed before) the Christians used anciently to assemble in the places x Euseb. hist. lib. 5. cap. 2. where the Martyrs had been buried; or because of Christ who was accounted the prince of Martyrs, in respect of whom the Martyrs refused the name, as belonging properly to him. Therefore Eusebius calls the Church, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, though the translator term it Martyrum domum, in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This testimony out of Chrysostome may well be suspected, y Plessy de Missa lib. 3. cap. 15. being in the same words in a Sermon falsely attributed to Austin, de Sancto Paulo, and alleged out of a later writer one Theodorus Daphnopathus, by Garret a Cannon at the least, we may well remember that caveat of z Biblioth. li. 6. Annot. 152. Sixtus Sene●sis, and take the speech to be hyperbolical. It a Chrysost. ad Pop. Antioch. honul. 66. was the Apostles glory, that people in such multitudes came to the places of their burial to pray, though they prayed not to them; nor thought their prayers ever a whit the better, because they were made there. And where there is mention in Eusebius of the people's praying for the Emperor (with more zeal than knowledge) there is no mention of honouring the Apostles by prayer. He should have said with b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. unbloody sacrifices; which were not Masts, but c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. prayers, and perhaps some offerings for relief of the poor, and maintaining of the Temple. Your author says that Acasius affirmed this only of the sin that is to death. Hereupon the Emperor replied; Set up a ladder for thyself (Acasius) and go alone into heaven: d Quae quidem arbitror imperatorem etc. Non quo eum laudaret. which (saith he) I think the Emperor said to Acasius, not that he might commend him, but that men might think, that they are not free from the stain of sin. Sozomen, that writes the history, thinks the Emperor did not intend to praise Acasius, but to instruct other; you affirm peremptorily that the Emperor reprehended him. speaker D. B. P. e Socrat hist. lib. 1. cap. 5. It pleased the gracious Emperor so much to honour those worthy and reverend Fathers; but it becomes not your Bishops or Popes therefore to exact such behaviour of their Sovereigns; and much less to make them f As Gregory the 7. s●raed the Emperor Henry the 4. his wi●e and eldest son. B●nno. dance attendance barefooted, or g As Frederick the 1. did to Pope Hadrian the 4. hold their stirrups: as for that profession of the good Emperor, it shows ●is zeal, but proves not that Princes may not judge Bishops, being their subjects: especially since the reason is strong, for Sovereigns principally, for Bishops, but as their deputies. h Ruffin. hist. lib. 1. cap. 5. You (saith the Emperor) are appointed gods to us, and it is not convenient that man should judge gods; but he only, of whom the i Psalm. 82. 1. Ruffi lib. 1. hist. cap 2. Psalmist saith, God sits in the assembly of gods. If then this right Puissant Emperor, and most sincere Christian, reverenced the Sacrifice of the Mass, and believed that there was power in Priests to remit sins, that Saints were to be prayed unto, and that prayer was to be made for the dead, and such like, as appear by the evident testimony, o● most approved Author, that lived with him: hath your Majesty 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 wisdom, upon mature and due consideration, how many old condemned errors the Protestants hold; and with a●lwell weighing that the whole frame of their Doctrine tendeth to the disgracing of God, and his Saints, to the discouragement of men, from well doing, and doth (as it were) loosen the reins unto all fleshly liberty, will in time make a most Godly resolution, to imitate that famous Emperor Constantine. He contrary to his former education, embraced with a●h spower that same Roman Religion, which we now profess: And (which is worthy to be observed) he feared nothing the contrary disposition of the multitude, or greater part of his subjects, that were wholly led another way. But following the blessed example of his most virtuous Mother S. Hel●●a, reposed himself in the powerful assistance of the Almighty, and chas●● all other Religions into corners, setting up and firmly ●stablshing the Roman Th●re can b●e no cause alleged, why your Majesty may not do the like, i●●t shall please God effectually to stir up your gracious mi●●e, and 〈◊〉 bend your heart to undertake it: for at that time there was more likelihood of resistance, than now: and no● much more help at hand, if any resistance should be offered. speaker A. W. If all you have said were proved, as it is not, there are yet many more monstrous abominations in the Romish superstition, at no hand to be approved or tolerated. speaker D. B. P. Pardon me dear Sovereign, if before I finish this argument, I seem overbold here to present unto your memory, that all your most gracious and Godly Progenitors, and all our holy Predecessors, who now (assuredly) stand before the tribunal of God; do demand and expect no less at your hands. For they founded not Bishoprics, Deaneries, and other spiritual ●●inges: th●y builded not Colleges, and Schools, for Protestants or their ●…s Ponder well therefore I beseech your Majesty, whether they do not, or may not justly challenge of you (to whom the administration of iust●● belongeth.) to see and proui●e: that such Churches, Church-●●ing●, and spiritual reward, of learning, as they erected and bequeathed to Roman Fishops, and Priests, be disposed of and bestowed according to their erections, and foundations. If it shall please the Protestants to erect any new Churches, o bestow any other revenues towards their minister's maintenance, let them have them hardly, and enjoy them quietly: only let ●hem be content, out of their equity: to leave us that which was provided for us and bequeathed unto us by our most Religious Ancestors. speaker A. W. Colleges, and livings were given, and founded, for the increase of religion and learning; for both which they are still continued. If they, by injury of the time, in ignorance mistook the truth, it is no wrong to keep their general purpose, with amendment of their particular error: if there be any merit in these actions, as you teach, they are much beholden to those Princes, who make their deeds truly meritorious by the right use of them. speaker D. B. P. If all these reasons, and exceeding many other which might be mu stired, and produced to the same purpose, will not suffice to effect in your Majesty, a love and desire, to embrace that ancient Roman f●…, which all your Renowned Progenitors, so highly reverenced, loved, and esteemed. Yet let me (prostrate on my knee) most humbly beseech your highness, in the name of thousands: that so far forth they may prevail with you, as you will not permit those rigorous laws, framed against recusant Catholics, to be put in practise and executed. For how can it seem comfortable to reason, in your majesties deep wisdom, and judgement? that your loving Subjects should by compulsion and constraint, under that intolerable penalty of loss of all their goods, conform themselves to such articles of Religion, that by the purest antiquity were censured to be erroneous and execrable? And what misery, and pity were it, to drive them perforce, either to swallow down the deadly poison of their souls, or else to endure besides the disgrace of the state, the loss of their worldly wealth and liberty. Consider, and weigh with yourself, ●y most gracious Liege, whether it will not be thought over great severity, to press men (even against human nature and condition,) with patience to hear their own profession and belief, both untruly slandered, and most bitterly reviled & inveighed against: as in most Ministers sermons it is commonly. Yea to give patient ear to them that blush not publicly, to call our blessed saviours body in the holy Sacrament, an abominable Idol; his glorious and immortal Saints, senseless dead Men; his Vicar and Vicegerent on earth Antichrist, and every Catholic an Idolater. With infinite other intolerable reproaches; Our constant hope, even yet, (though against hope) is, that your Majesty out of your own sweet natural disposition, and most mild carriage in government hitherto, will not only moderate, but suspend all such extremity: And not suffer it to be extended against them, who in former doubtful times, were (in manner) the only men, that defended and made manifest to the world, your Title and interest to the Crown of England; and were no less willing to receive you, when the time came: and as forward to have assisted you (if need had required) as any sort of Subjects within the land. And never since w●…ingly offended your sacred Majesty in any thing. It may be objected that they do not conform themselves unto a statute law, made against their Religion: Be it so. Then their Religion toward God, not any contempt of their lawful Superior, doth command them from the conformity, which is pardonable. Considering that they be no inventors, or follower's of novelties, but only hold on and persever in the ●aith of their forefathers. And what subject is there among the most dutiful, that doth not often transgress and give offence to one statute law or other: yet for no other law, men are so hardly dealt withal, albeit they violate many of them together. Only Catholics are for the tra●…ressing of one, hu●peled and handled as though they were some heinous rebels, and traitors: Who (be it spoken without disparagement to others) are (by them that live near them) esteemed co●…monly, the most orderly subjects; as true of their words, a●●●und in their deeds, of as great charity and hospitality towards their neighbours, and compassion of the poor: briefly, of as moderate and c●…le carriage and behaviour, as mo●… men in their Country: So that to beggar and undo them (as the execution of that law established, must needs do the poorer sort of them,) would be little less than to undo and destroy all good order, and Discipline in the common weal. speaker A. W. It is required by God at the Prince's hands to see, that all his subjects perform true worship to the true God: how then can his Majesty suffer thousands (as you say) to defile the land, and dishonour God by such a service, as he knows to be idolatrous? For the punishment, and reason of it, I refer all men to k To an Epistle of a Puritan-Papist. Why not Cui bono? Master powel's answer, lately published. speaker D. B. P. Before I make an end, I beseech your Majesty, that the old worthy saying of Cassian may be diligently examined: Cu● bo●um? For whose commodity, to what end and purpose must such numbers of most civil subjects, be so grievously molested? What is the cause why your peaceable and joyful government, should be so mingled with such bitter storms of persecution? Is it to extinguish the Catholic faith? It ●…eth not in man's power to suppress and destroy that, which the Almighty supporteth and maintaineth. The gates of ●●ll shall not preu●…e against the Catholic Church. And let but those grave and wise counsellors (who Matth. 16. have managed the state in our late Queen's days) inform your Majesty whether all those terrible persecutions that then were most vehemently pursued, did any whit at all diminish the number of Recusants: or rather did not greatly multiply and increase them, from one at the first to an hundred and more in continuance. But it may be, they intend by those penal laws, to enrich your Majesty, and to fill your coffers: Surely the receipts will fall our much too short, to g●ow to any such reckoning. And what delight to enrich your treasury, and stuff your coffers with regrets, and outcries of the husband, wife, children, widows, and poor infants, when as the best and most assured treasury of a King, is (by the prudent esteemed) to consist in the love, and hearty affection of his people? Or are these penal laws, and forfeitures ordained for rewards unto such dependants, as for these or the like do follow you? But the revenues, preferments, and offices, belonging to your Crown of England, are abundantly able to content and reward them, that shall deserve well of the commonweals, without that so heavy agrie●ance and heart bleeding of others your majesties good subjects. And your majesties high wisdom, and long experience in government, can best remember you, that such men are not so mindful of benefits received, as the daily want and misery, will continually renew and revive the memory of the oppressed. And when they shall see no hope of remedy, the state being now Now●●● are in your right vein. settled, and a continual posterity like to ensue of one nature and condition: God knoweth what that forcible weapon of necessary may constrain and drive men unto a● length. speaker A. W. Do you accuse his Majesty of desiring to extinguish the Catholic faith? or do you dally with him by this question? l To the 12. Art. ●art. 1. art. 1. D. The gates of hell are set open to all men by your catholic faith: so that the devil will never seek to prevail against it. Either the general opinion of all men, and the brags of your own side are very vain and false, or else for one Papist in her majesties days and government, there are three now at the least, upon the very hope of toleration. These are matters of estate undutifully propounding to the Pope's vassals occasion of heartburning against their Sovereign, to a worse purpose. m Bellarm. de summo pontiff. lib. 5. cap. 4. 6. 7 It is not lawful for christian's (saith your Cardinal Bellarmine) to endure a King that is an heretic, if he attempt to draw his subjects to his heresy. speaker D. B. P. If then there be no greater reason of weight and moment, why such dutiful and well deserving Subjects, should be so grievously afflicted Bellarm. de pontiff. lib. 5. cap. 4. 6. 7. Would you have greater reason of restraint than idolatry and treason? Matth. 13. A good reason to suffer all kind of heretics. for their conscience: let others conceive as they shall please, I will never suffer myself to be persuaded, that your Majesty will ever permit it, before I see it done. If it be further objected, why should not your Majesty aswell punish Catholics in your Kingdoms, as Catholics do Protestants in some other Countries: I answer, that in all Countries where multitudes of both sorts are mixed, as it is in England: The Protestants are tolerated, as in France, Polonia, Bohemia, the Catholic States of Germany, and Ca●tounes, according to that of the Gospel: Suffer both the wheat and co●kle to grow until harvest. In Spain, and Italy, where s●arse any Protestants be, the case is otherwise. But what is that to England? where are very many Catholic Recusants, and catholicly affected in every degree, not only of the Temporalty, but in the Clergy also, hardly of the highest degrees of honour to be excepted: therefore for their number and quality to be tolerated. speaker A. W. There is great reason to bear with Protestants in any country; because there is no apparent show of Idolatry in their serving of God; nor any foreign power, upon whom they must depend: but Papists are even outwardly also Idolaters, and, upon pain of damnation, must obey the Pope's definitive sentence (who cannot err, in seat of judgement) against all the Princes in Christendom. speaker D. B. P. Lastly, if there were no other cause, but the innumerable benefits which every degree and order of men throughout England, have, and do daily receive from our most Catholic ancestors: as the constituting of so many wholesome laws; founding of so many honourable, and rich rewards of learning, as Bishoprics, Cathedral Churches, Deaneries, Archdeaconries, Residencies, Prebends, and Benefices: the erecting, and building of so goodly Schools, Colleges, and Hospitals, and endowing of them with so ample possessions, which all proceeded out of the bowels of the true wisdom, piety, and virtue of their Catholic Religion: Is not this much more than a sufficient motive why their heirs in faith, should be most benignly, and lovingly dealt with? and not for the profession of the same Religion, so severely afflicted? Let the Protestants in those countries, where they are most molested, appear and show, that their predecessors in belief, have been so beneficial unto the public weal: and I dare undertake, that for their Ancestors sake, they shall find much more favour, than we sue for. Wherefore No doubt but you have all Princes and estates at command. they can have no just cause, to repine at your majesties goodness, if upon men of that Religion, which hath been so beneficial unto your whole Realm, you take extraordinary compassion. speaker A. W. This makes against you, rather than for you. For the strengthening of the Popish Clergy hath always been the weakening of the Prince; and the establishing of the Pope's absoluteness, above the authority of the Magistrate. Therefore, that the zeal of our ancestors may not become again dangerous to our state, it is not only meet, but necessary also, to keep out popish persons, and opinions. speaker D. B. P. It lying then in your majesties free choice and election, whether you will enlarge and extend your Royal favour, unto an infinite number of your most dutiful and affectionate Subjects, who are the most unwilling in the world to transgress any one of your laws, were they not Except the Pope will them. thereunto compelled by the law of God: or else utterly to beggar and to undo, both them and theirs, for their constant profession of the ancient Roman faith. My confidence in the sweet providence of the Almighty is, that he will mercifully incline your Royal heart, to choose rather to pardon, then to punish; because the way of mercy, consorteth better with your kind and tender nature: it is of better assurance to continue your peaceable and prosperous Reign: it will purchase mercy at God's hands, according to his own promise: Blessed be the merciful, Matth. 5. Thine eye shall not pity him. Deut. 13. 8. 9 for they shall obtain mercy. I need not add what a consolation and comfort it will be to many score thousands of your subjects, and the greatest obligation that can be devised, to bind them to you and yours for ever. Now what applause, and congratulation from foreign Catholic countries, would follow this your famous fact? Undoubtedly all the glorious company of Kings and Queens (now in heaven) of whom you are lineally descended: and among all the rest, namely, your most sacred and dear Mother, that endured so much for her constancy in the same Catholic faith, cannot but take it most kindly, if for God and their sakes, you take into your Princely protection their followers in the Roman faith, and defend them from oppression. Thus most humbly craving pardon of your Highness, if I have in any thing exceeded the limits of my bounden duty, I beseech your blessed Saviour to endue you, both with the true knowledge of his divine verity, and with the spirit of Fortitude, to embrace and defend it constantly; or at the least, graciously to tolerate and permit it. Your most excellent Majesties, most obedient, and loyal subject, and servant. W. B. speaker A. W. What course will best please God in this difference of profession, not human policy, but divine truth must determine. In which if we sincerely obey God, we shall not need to depend upon the liking, or misliking, either of foreign countries, or Kings, and Queens departed; who either are no Saints of God, if they love popish Idolatry; or, if they be Saints, love it not. speaker D. B. P. THE PREFACE TO THE READER. GEntle Reader, I mean not here to entertain thee with many words: the principal cause that moved me to write, was the honour and glory of God, in defence of his sacred verity, than the employing of his talon bestowed upon me: as well to sortifie the weaker sort of Catholics in their faith, as to call back and lead other (who wander up and down like to lost sheep, after their own fancies) into the right way. The like reasons have drawn me to this survey of your reformation, with a resolute purpose to acknowledge any truth, that you shall show me, though it be against the judgement of all the Churches in Christendom. I took in hand particularly the confutation of this book, not only for that I was thereunto requested, by a friend of good intelligence and judgement, who thought it very expedient: but also because perusing of it, I found it penned more Scholarlike, than the Protestants use to do ordinariely: For first the points in controversy, are set down dist●●ctly, and for the most part truly. Afterward in confirmation of their opinion, the chief arguments are produced from both Scriptures, Fathers, and reason: Which are not vulgar, but called out of their Rabbins, Luther, Peter Martyr, Calvin, Kemnitius, and such like, though he name them not. Lastly, he placeth some objections, made in favour of the Catholic doctrine, and answereth to them as well as he could. And (which I speak to his commendation) doth perform all this very briefly and clearly. So that (to speak my o●i●●on freely) I have not seen any book of like quantity, published by a Protestant, to contain either more matter, or delivered in better method. And consequently more apt to deceive the simple: especially considering that he withal counterfeiteth to come as near unto the Roman Church, as his tender conscience will permit him, whereas indeed he walketh as wide from it, as any other noveller of this age. speaker A. W. If the writings of Protestants have been less scholarlike, than in the handling of controversies it were fit they should have been; whose fault is it but the Papists, whom they have been forced to answer in their own kind? It is not unknown to any of our English Rhemists, or Romanists, that Doctor Fulke, long since, desired to have the matter brought to an issue, and tried by syllogisms, the very judgement seat of true reason. If you had known Master Perkins life, as well as you see his learning, you would never have accused him of counterfeiting: whereof also me thinks he may easily be acquitted by that clearness which you discern and acknowledge in him. speaker D. B. P. Wherefore I esteemed my spare time best employed about the discovering of it, being (as it were) an abridgement of the principal controversies of these times, and do endeavour after the same Scholastical manner, without all superfluity of words, no less to maintain and defend the Catholic party: then to confute all such reasons, as are by M. Perkins alleged for the contrary. Read this short treatise good Christian diligently, for thou shalt find in it the marrow and pith of many large volumes, contracted and drawn into a narrow rheum. And read it over as it becometh a good Christian, with a desire to find out, and to follow the truth, because it concerneth thy eternal salvation: and then judge without partiality, whether Religion hath better grounds in God's word, more evident testimony from the purest antiquity, and is more conformable unto all Godliness, good life, and upright dealing, (the infallible marks of the best Religion) and speedily embrace that. Before I end this short preface, I must entreat thy patience to bear with the ●aultes in Printing, which are too too many, but not so much to be blamed, if it be courteously considered that it was Printed far from the Author, with a Dutch composer, and overseen by an unskilful Corrector, the greatest of them shall be amended in the end of the book. speaker A. W. I will endeavour the like, or greater shortness and plainness, if I can; desiring nothing more of the Christian reader, than to remember that he is to seek the truth without partiality: The place to seek it in is the Scripture: the means to find it, the right use of true reason. He that hunts for it in men's writings, either finds it not at all, or, at the least, hath no certain knowledge that he hath found it. He that will trust other men's words rather than his own eyes, deserves in reason to be deceived. speaker D. B. P. Before the Printing of this part was finished, I heard that M. Perkins was dead. I am sorry that it cometh forth to late, to do him any good. Yet, his work living to poison others, a preservative against it, is nevertheless necessary. speaker A. W. It would have done Master Perkins good to see by experience, how vain it is for men to strive against God, for the Pope: but it would have been little to your advantage, to have had such an adversary. speaker W. P. TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL, SIR WILLIAM BOWS Knight, etc. Grace and peace. RIght Worshipful, it is a notable policy of the devil, which he hath put into the heads of sundry men in this age, to think that our religion and the religion of the present Church of Rome are all one for substance: and that they may be reunited as (in their opinion) they were before. Writings to this effect are spread abroad in the French tongue, and respected of English Protestants more than is meet, or aught to be. For let men in show of moderation, pretend the peace and good estate of the Catholic Church as long as they will; this Union of the two religions can never be made, more than the union of light and darkness. speaker D. B. P. MASTER PERKINS IN THE Epistle Dedicatory. It is a policy of the devil, to think that our Religion, and the Religion of the present Church of Rome, are all one in substance, or that they may be reunited. BEfore I am to deliver my opinion concerning this point, I had need to be informed, what this Author meaneth by these words our Religion: For there being great diversities of pretended Religions currant in the world, all contrary to the Church of Rome, how can I certainly know, whether of them h● professeth? Wherefore (good Sir) may it please you to declare, what Religion you understand, when you say our Religion? Is it that which Martin Luther (a licentious Friar) first preached in Germany? or rather that, which the martial Minister Zwinglius, contended with sword and shield, to set up in Switzerland? or perhaps that, which John Calvin, by sedition wrought into Geneva, expelling the lawful Magistrate thence, and by the aid of Beza (a dissolute turnecoate) spread into many corners of France? Or if by your Religion, you mean only to comprehend the Religion now practised in England. yet are you farther to show, whether you understand that established by the State, or the other more refined (as it is thought by many) and embraced by them, who are called Puritans, for of their leaven, savoureth that position of yours: That the article of Christ's descent into bell, crept into the Creed by negligence; and some other such like in this book. These principal divisions of the new Gospel (to omit sundry sub-divisions) being famous, and received of divers in England, according to each man's fantasy, it is meet you express, whether of them you speak of, that it may be duly considered, how the Roman Religion and it agree, and what union may be made between them. speaker A. W. Is this no superfluity of words? What reasonable man can doubt, that Master Perkins by our religion means, as you say afterward, the religion now professed in England? For your word (practised) is too scant for doctrine; some points whereof fall not into practice. If it be contrary to the Church of Rome, it is easily answered without any such inquiry, that contraries cannot be united. If difference in some points make a divers religion, how many kinds are there amongst you Papists? let the Franciscans and Dominicans go, with all the rest of former times; what say you to these main points, justification in n Albert. Pighius controvers. 2. Pighius, Predestination in o Bellarm de great & lib. arb. Bellarmine, Free will in p Lib. 21. c. 9 Barthol. Camerarius de lib. arb. Bartholomew Camerarius, three pillars of your Church? The difference betwixt q 12. Art. part. 1. Art. 1. Protestants and Puritans (as you call them) is not in any essential point of faith, but in matters of outward government and ceremonies. speaker W. P. And this shall appear, if we do but a little consider, how they of the Roman Church have razed the foundation. For though in words they honour Christ, yet in deed they turn him to a Pseudo-Christ, and an Idol of their own brain. speaker D. B. P. Now if you mean the hotchpotch and confusion of all these new Religions together, as by the opposition here unto the Church of Rome, and by the articles following may be gathered: then I am clear for you in this, that there can be no more concord between these two Religions, May there be an union betwixt 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church of ●ome? than there is between light and darkness, faith and insidel●tie, Christ and Beliall. Notwithstanding I think that the reason by you produced to prove the impossibility of this union, is of no value, to ●it, that they of the Roman Church ●aue razed the foundation; for though in words they honour Christ, yet indeed they turn him into a Pseudochrist, and an ●doll of their 〈◊〉 brain: A very sufficient cause (no doubt) of eternal breach and division, if it could be verified. But how prove you, that we Roman Catholics, who believe jesus Christ to be perfect God, and perfect Man, and the only Redeemer of Mankind, make him a false Christ, and an Idol? or before you go about to prove it, tell me I pray you, how this can well stand with your own definition of a reformed Catholic in your Preface? There you affirm him to be a Catholic reform to your liking, that holdeth the same necessary heads of Religion, with the Roman Church. Now, can there be any more necessary head of Religion, than to have a right faith in Christ? can any other foundation be laid besides jesus Christ? If then your reformed Catholic must agree with the Roman Church, in necessary heads 1 Cor. 3. of Religion, as you hold he must: either the Roman Church ●…th not the foundation, and maketh not Christ a Pseudochrist, as you say here, or else you teach your disciples very perniciously, to hold the same necessary heads of Religion with it. speaker A. W. It is no confusion to take from several men several opinions, agreeing with the word of God. Luther, having been a long time kept in the darkness of P●…pcrie, could not by and by discern the truth in all points. Was not your superstition, both for doctrine and ceremonics, patched up piece by piece, as it could procure allowance from time to time? Yea was not the truth of Religion made manifest by little and little in the Church, as God gave learned men occasion of study, and a blessing in their study, against the poison of Heretics? Such hath been, and such always will be the course of the Gospel: that truth will be more and more known, as there is more opposition against it, and as men bestow more pains in reading, praying, and studying. To deny the reason or argument, is to deny the consequence, not the antecedent: but you grant the consequence, viz. That razing the foundation, and turning Christ into a Pseudochrist, is a sufficient cause of eternal breach: only you deny the antecedent that the Church of Rome doth so. At the least, as well as you prove, q 12. A●●. part. 1. Art. 1. that the Church of England holding the same opinions of Christ, have no faith, no religion, no Church, no Christ, etc. But let us see how you disprove the antecedent. If your reformed Catholic (say you) must agree with the Roman Church, in many heads of religion, either the Roman Church razeth not the foundation, or else you teach your disciples very perniciously to hold the same necessary heads of religion with it. But he must agree with it in many heads of religion. Therefore either the Roman Church razeth not the foundation, or you teach your disciples very perniciously to hold the same necessary heads of religion with it. I deny the consequence of your proposition; because by paring of the errors, which Master Perkins requires, he shall keep himself from razing the foundation, though he hold the same necessary heads: for example he must hold with you, that a true Christian must have a right faith in Christ, but he must reject the faith, you profess, as not right. Again, he must hold, that no other foundation can be laid, but jesus Christ: not that you lay him aright for the foundation. speaker W. P. They call him our Lord, but with this condition, that the Servant of Servants of this Lord may change and add to his commandments: having so great a power, that he may open and shut heaven to whom he will; and bind the very conscience with his own laws, and consequently be partaker of the spiritual kingdom of Christ. speaker D. B. P. But to leave to you the reconciliation of these places, let us examine briefly, how you confirm your paradox, That the Church of Rome maketh Christ a false Christ: which you go about to prove by four instances. The first is, because the servant of his servants may change and add to his commandments, having so great power that he may open, and shut heaven to whom he will, and bi●de the very conscience with his own laws, and consequently be partaker o● the spiritual k●ngdome of Christ. Here are diverse reasons hu●●●d up in one, but all of 〈◊〉 moment: for all these several faculties, which the Pope enjoyeth, being received by the free gift of Christ, and to be employed in his service only, and to his honour and glory: are so far off from making Christ a Pseudochrist that they do highly recommend his most singular bounty towards his followers, without any derogation to his own divine prerogatives. ●he particulars shall be more particularly answered in their places hereafter Now I say in a word, that Christ's Vicar cannot change any one of God's commandments, nor add any contrary unto them: but may well enact and establish some other conformable unto them, which do bind in conscience: for that power is granted of God to every sovereign governor, as witnesseth S. Paul saying. Let every soul Rom. 1●. God birds the conscience as sar●e as the law is grounded v●on his Commandments. be subject to higher powers. And that (as it is in the fifth verse following) of necessity, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. So that to at tribute power unto one that is under Christ, to bind our consciences; is not to make Christ a Pseudochrist, but to glorify him much, acknowledging the power, which it hath pleased him to give unto men. In like manner, what an absurd illation is that, from the power to open and shut heaven gates, (which all both Catholics and Protestants, confess to have been given to S. Peter, and the rest of the Apostles,) to infer: that Christ is made a Pseudochrist; as who should say, the Master spoiled himself of his supreme authority, by appointing a steward over his household, or a porter at his gates, he must be both Master and Man too, belike. And thus much of the first instance. speaker A. W. First, you beg the question, in taking it as granted, that the Pope's power is received of Christ. Secondly, it doth not follow that Christ is not made a Pseudochrist, if the power be received of Christ, to be employed in his service only. For it may be employed by the Pope to another end, than it is given by Christ. As an army committed to a General by his Sovereign, may be turned against the Prince, to his overthrow. He that can r The Po●e may dispense against the lav● of ●atu●e. Glossa. ad caus. 15. q. 6. c. auto●i●atē. The Pope 〈◊〉 penketh against the Apostle. Di●●. 3●●ec●●r. & 〈◊〉 82 pr●…. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 15. 〈◊〉. 6 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. dispense with God's commandments, so that either a man shall be freed from doing that which is enjoined: or have liberty to do that which is forbidden; can change God's commandments. But such dispensations have been given by Popes, and may as well be still. In all things enjoined by the commandments of God, the law of the Magistrate binds men in conscience to obedience by virtue of the matter commanded. In things indifferent, the conscience is not always charged with sin, where that which is appointed is not done: but you Papists ( s 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. as it appears by your Catechisms) make the Commandments of the Church equal, or superior to God's commandments. The opening and shutting of heaven, by the work of the ministery, t ●…th. 16. 19 joh. 20. 23. which is the power that was given to the Apostles and Ministers of the Gospel, is not to be executed at their pleasure, but depends upon the people as much as upon them, if not more. For whosoever will repent and believe shall be saved, though all the Popes, Priests, and Ministers that ever were, are, and shall be, would shut him out of heaven. Therefore the Pope hath no authority nor power to open the door to one man more than to another; much less to let in, and shut out whom he list. He must open it, if he be a Minister of the Gospel, as much as lies in him, to all; if they will enter, they may, without any further leave, or power from him. speaker W. P. Again, they call him a Saviour, but yet in Us: in that he gives this grace unto us, that by our merits, we may partake in the merits of the Saints. speaker D. B. P. Come we now to the second: it is, that we make Christ an Idol, for albeit we call him a Saviour, yet in us, in that he gives his grace to us, that by our merits we may be our own saviours, etc. I marvel in whom he should be a saviour if not in us: What, is he the Saviour of Angels or of any other creatures? I hope not, but the mischief is, that he gives Is Of and In, alone with you? But the matter is not. grace to us, that thereby we may merit and so become our own saviours. This is a phrase unheard of among catholics, that any man is his own Saviour, neither doth it follow of that position that good works are meritorious; but well that we apply unto us the salvation, which is in Christ jesus, by good works; as the Protestants avouch they do by faith only: In which sense the Apostle S. Paul saith to his dear Disciple Timothy. For this doing thou shalt save both thyself, and them that hear thee. And this doth no more diminish the glory of our Sovereign Tim. 4. Saviour infinite merits, then to say that we are saved by faith only: good works no less depending, if not more advancing Christ's merits, then only faith, as shall be proved hereafter more at large in the question of merits. Now that other good men's merits may steed them, who want some of their own, may be deduced out of an hundred places of the Scriptures, namely out of those where God saith, that for the sake of one of his true servants, he will show mercy unto thousands, as is expressly said How are there ten then? saith Origen in Exod. Hom. 8. in the end of the first commandment speaker A. W. Christ is a saviour of us, by u 1. Cor. 1. 30. Rom. 3. 25. redeeming us, not a saviour in us, by making us redeem ourselves. Though the speech be not yours, the matter is: For if Christ be therefore a Saviour, because by his merits we are saved; look how much we merit our salvation, so much we are saviours of ourselves; yea, how much merit there is in our works, so much there wanted in Christ's satisfaction; or else our salvation is in part twice merited. * 1. Tim. 4. 16. The Minister saves, not by meriting, but by preaching the word of salvation; works must needs diminish Christ's glory more than faith, because this saves not by meriting; they do: the matter cannot be deduced from such places. x Exod. 20. 6. The mercy God shows in that respect, is either for the blessings of this life, or at the most for the outward means of salvation. speaker W. P. And they acknowledge that he died and suffered for us, but with this caveat, that the Fault being pardoned, we must satisfy for the temporal punishment, either in this world, or in Purgatory. speaker D. B. P. In like manner I answer unto your third instance, that for Christ to have taken away by his blessed Passion the eternal pain due unto our sins, and to have left a temporal to be satisfied by us, is not to make himself a false Christ, but a most loving, kind, and withal a most prudent Redeemer. Wiping away that by himself, which passed our forces, and reserving that to us, which by the help of his grace, we well may and aught to do: not only because it were unseemly, that the parts of the body, should be disproportionable to the head: but also because it is reasonable (as the Apostle holdeth,) that we suffer here with Christ before we reign with him in his Kingdom. Rom. 8. speaker A. W. To leave half of our punishment for us to bear, is to be but half a Saviour, and so a false Christ; there is neither kindness nor wisdom in it, to leave either our salvation doubtful, or punishment for us perhaps of 1000 years or more in Purgatory. That as y Rom. 8. 29. Christ hath been afflicted, so should we taste of affliction, it is proportionable and reasonable. That we should be like him, in making satisfaction for our sins, by punishment, is to make us redeemers with him, though not in the highest degree. speaker W. P. In a word, they make him our Mediator of Intercession unto God: but withal his Mother must be the Queen of Heaven, and by the right of a Mother command him there. Thus, in word they cry Osanna, but indeed they crucify Christ. speaker D. B. P. In your last instance you say, that we make Christ our mediator of intercession to God, thinking out of your simplicity, that therein we much magnify him, & sing hosanna unto him. Whereas we hold it for no small disparagement unto his divine dignity, to make him our Intercessor; that is to pray him to pray for us, who is of himself, right able to help Ridiculous: who ever expounded intercession so? us in all we can demand; being aswell God, as Man. And albeit one in thought singling out the humanity of Christ from his divine nature and person, might make it an intercessor for us; Yet that being but a Metaphysical conceit, to separate the nature from the person; since the Arrian heresy (which held Christ to be inferior to his Father) it hath not been practised by Catholics, who always pray our Saviour Was it practised before by Catholics? Your consequence is ●aught. Christ to have mercy upon us, never to pray for us. And consequently make him no mediator of intercession, but of redemption. And to come to your grievous complaint, that withal his Mother must be Queen of heaven, and by right of a mother command him there: Who can sufficiently marvel at their unnatural gross pares, who take it for a disgrace to the Son, to advance his own good Mother? or else who well in his wits, considering Christ's bounty to strangers and his enemies; will not be persuaded, that on his best beloved mother, he did bestow his most special favours? For having taken flesh of her, having sucked her breasts, & received his nutriture and education of her in his tender years, and being aswell followed of her, as of any other: is it possible that he should not be as good to her, as to others; unto whom he was not at all beholding? Again the very place of a mother, requiring pre-eminence, before all servants and subjects, of what dignity soever: And before sons too, if you will follow nature. doth not the right rule of reason lead us to think, that Christ the fountain of all wisdom, replenished the B. Virgin Mary his dear Mother with such grace as should make her fit for that place? it lying in his hands, and free choice to do it. And therefore is she truly termed, of holy and learned Antiquity, our Lady and Queen, exalted above all quyers of Angels. That which you impute unto us farther, that she must in the right of a mother command her Son, is no doctrine of the Roman Church, nor said in all her service: We say. Show thyself to be a mother: but it is not added by commanding thy Son: that is your gloss, which is accursed, because it corrupteth the text, for it followeth in that place, Sumat per te preces, etc. Present our prayers to him, that vouchsafed to be borne of thee, for us. If any private person by meditation, piercing more profoundly into the mutual love and affection, of such a Son towards so worthy a Mother; do deem her prayers as forcible in kindness as if they were commandments, and in that sense call them commandments, according to the French phrase: Vos pryers This flattering speech will not maintain that Blasphemy. me sont des commandments, that may be done without derogation to Christ's supreme dignity, and with high commendation of his tender affection, unto his reverent and best beloved mother. speaker A. W. We do not pray to Christ to pray for us, but we account z joh. 16. 23. his love to us, and his graciousness with God his Father to be such, that whatsoever we ask of God in his name, by a To the 12. Art. par. 1. Art. 4. H. our own prayers, shall certainly be obtained, as well as if all the Saints in heaven should entreat him for us. And this is to make him our Mediator of intercession, not simply as he is man, but as he is the b 1. joh. 2. 1. Gal. 3. 20. Advocate betwixt God and man; in which respect the c Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 7. 25. Scripture saith, that he makes request to God for us: whatsoever was true and lawful, before the Arian heresy, is so still. There was as much reason why he should make her head of the Church here on earth, as that she should be Queen of the Church in heaven, or Queen of heaven. But whatsoever she may be, once a Mediatrix she may not be, for that is Christ's office now in heaven. Those hyperbolical speeches of the ancients show their zeal, but maintain not your error. If those words, Roga patrem, iube natum, iure matris impera: Command in the right of a mother be not in any part of your Romish service; yet these speeches are in one, that is no mean man: d Bonaventur. in Psalte beat. Mariae, Psal. 35 Incline the countenance of God toward us, compel him to have mercy upon sinners. And why may she not compel, if (as you term her) she be e Idemin Corona Mariae. §. Imperatur. Empress and Lady of the world? If she be f Psalt Psal 12. the finder out of grace, if she constrained the uncreated word to take flesh of her, because she was a most humble Ladis. But will you have the very word of commanding? g Coro Mari. §. Imperatr. O our Empress and Lady, most bountiful, by the right of a mother command thy most beloved son, that he vouchsafe to lift up our minds to heavenly desires from the love of earthly things. What doctrine is this? and for what Churches service? was not Bonaventure the author of all these speeches, h In opuse. scrip opuse. a Cardinal of your Romish Church, your Seraphical Doctor, and which is most of all, is he not i Canonizatio Bonaventurae in opuse. a Saint canonised by your Pope, that cannot err? Is not the Virgin Mary in your k Horae beat. Maryae ad usum Sarisbur. Eccles. fol. 42. service, called the promise of the Prephets, the Queen of the patriarchs, the schoolmistris of the Evangelists, the teacher of the Apostles, the comforter of the quick and the dead? Who th●… saios devoutly this short prayer daily, (saith the Rubric) shall not depart out of this world, without penance, and ministration of the holy Sacrament. l Fol. 46. In another prayer in the same book, she is called m Mag●stra Euangelistarum veracissima. Doctrix Apostolorum sapien●issima. the most true schoolmistris of the Evangelists, the most wise teacher of the Apostles. The book was printed at Paris by Francis Regnault 1526. What profound piercing into such natural affection can exccuse these speeches? what French phrase can warrant it? But what should we strive about the forciblenes of her prayers, when it is not, nor can be proved that she prays at all. speaker W. P. Therefore we have good cause to bless the name of God, that hath freed us from the yoke of this Roman bondage, and hath brought us to the true light and liberty of the Gospel. And it should be a great height of unthankfulness in us, not to stand over against the present Church of Rome, but to yield ourselves to plots of reconciliation. To this effect and purpose I have penned this little Treatise, which I present to your worship, desiring it might be some token of a thankful mind, for undeserved love. And I crave withal, not only your Worshipful (which is more common) but also your learned protection; being well assured, that by skill and art you are able to justify whatsoever I have truly taught. Thus wishing to you and yours the continuance and the increase of faith and good conscience, I take my leave. Cambridge, june 28. 1597. Your W. in the Lord, William Perkins. Wherefore to conclude this Epistle, if there be no weightier cause than this by you here produced, why you and your adherent, do not reconcile yourselves unto the Church of Rome you may shortly by God's grace) become new men, for we are so far off, from making our Saviour Christ a Pseudoch●●st, or from drawing one jot of excellency from his sovereign power, merits, or dignity: that we in the very points by you put down, do much more magnify him then you do, For in maintaining the authority by him imparted unto his deputies, our spiritual Magistrates, and of their merits and satisfaction: We first say, that these his servants prer●… be his he gifts, of 〈…〉 grace bestowed on whom he pleaseth; which is no final praise of his great liberality: And withal affirm, that there is an infinite difference between his ov●ne power, merits, and satisfaction, and ours: Wherein 〈…〉 his sovereign honour is preserved entire to himself, without any comparison. Now you make Christ's authority so base, his merits and satisfaction so mean, that if he ●…part any degree of them unto his servants, he looseth the honour of all from himself. Whereupon it followeth invincibly, if you unfeignedly seek Christ jesus his true honour, and will esteem of his divine gifts worthily, you must hold out no longer, but vn●te yourself in these necessary heads of Religion unto the Catholic Church of Rome, which so highly exalted him, both in his own excellency, and in his singular gifts to his subjects. speaker A. W. The least of these is cause sufficient to withhold us from joining with the Church of Rome, at least in that point. The King's authority is not abased, because n 〈…〉 he cannot communicate any of his royalties to his subjects: That Christ must needs lose by it, I showed before; for it argues an insufficiency in his satisfaction. speaker W. P. THE AUTHOR TO THE CHRISTIAN READER. BY a Reformed Catholic, I understand any one that holds the same necessary heads of religion with the Roman Church: yet so, as he pares off and rejects all errors in doctrine whereby the said religion is corrupted. How this may be done, I have begun to make some little declaration in this small Treatise: the intent whereof is to show how near we may come to the present church of Rome in sundry points of religion: and wherein we must for ever dissent. My purpose in penning this small discourse is threefold. The first is, to confute all such politics as hold and maintain, that our religion, & that of the Roman Church differ not in substance, and consequently that they may be reconciled: yet my meaning is not here to condemn any Pacification that tends to persuade the Roman Church to our religion. The second is, that the Papists which think so basely of our religion, may be won to a better liking of it: when they shall see how near we come unto them in sundry points. The third, that the common Protestant might in some part see & conceive the point of difference between us and the Church of Rome: and know in what manner and how far forth, we condemn the opinions of the said Church. I crave pardon for the order which I use, in handling the sever all points. For I have set them down one by one, as they came to mind, not respecting the laws of Method. If any Papist shall say that I have not alleged their opinions aright, I answer, that their books be at hand, and I can justify what I have said. Thus craving thine acceptation for this my pains, and wishing unto thee the increase of knowledge, and love of pure and sound religion, I take my leave and make an end. speaker D. B. P. AN ANSWER TO THE Preface. UPON your preface to the Reader I will not stand, because it toucheth no point of controversy: let it be declared in your next, what you mean, when you desire your reformed Catholic to hold the same necessary I have showed you. heads of Religion with the Roman Church: for if the Roman. Church doth err in the matter of faith, and justification; in the number and virtue of the Sacraments; in the books and interpretation of the word of God; if she raze the foundation and make Christ a Pseudochrist, and an Idol; to omit twenty other errors in substantial points of faith, as in this your small discourse you would persuade: there will remain very few necessary heads of Religion for them to agree in. And be you well assured, that you are so wide from winning Catholics by this your work, to a better liking of your Religion: that you have taken the high way, to lead them to a far greater dislike of it; by teaching, that in so many material points it differeth so far from theirs. For all Catholics hold for most assured, that which the most ancient, learned and holy Doctor Athanasius in his creed delivereth in the 2. vers. The name Catholic, makes not your Religion Catholic. Which Catholic faith unless every man observe wholly and inviolably, (not omitting, or shrinking from any one article of it) without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. If S. Basil that reverent and blessed Father of the Church, doth hold it the duty of every good Christian, rather to lose his life, then to condescend to the alteration of any one syllable in matter of faith: you may be sure that we Catholics cannot but carry a Theod. 4. hist. cap. 17. very base conceit of your doctrine: who go about under the overworn and threadbare cloak of reformation, to deface and corrupt the purer and greater part of Christian Religion: especially when they shall perceive the most points of your pretended reformation, to be nothing else but old rotten condemned heresies, new scoured up and furbushed, and so in show made more saleable unto the unskilful, as in this treatise shall be proved in every Chapter. speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PREFACE. THere are many necessary heads of salvation, wherein we and you agree. 1. The Trinity: 2. Redemption by Christ against all jews and Heathen: 3. The Godhead of Christ against Arius: 4. The unity of his person against Nestorius: 5. The truth of his Manhood (though by consequence you overthrow it) against Eutyches: 6. The Godhead of the holy Ghost against Macedonius: and many other. Which I allege not, to make any Papist believe, that the differences betwixt us and you are few, or small: but to show, that Master Perkins speaks not against reason. We are persuaded, that no man may shrink from the truth of that which is delivered in Athanasius Creed; though we dare not peremptorily condemn every man, that hath not a distinct knowledge and belief of every one of the several articles. We are wholly of I asils judgement, that every Th●…et. ●…es. lib. 〈◊〉 cap 17. Qu●… in sa●…s 〈◊〉 e ducati, ne unam quidem ●yllabam diuino●… dogma●… prodi ●…unt. one ought rather to lose his life, than to suffer any one syllable of God's truth in the Scripture to be betrayed; and therefore we forbear to join with the Church of Antichrist, which prefers a corrupt translation, before the text itself. speaker W. P. REVEL. 18. 3. And I heard another voice from heaven say, Go out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and receive not of her plagues. speaker D. B. P. ANSWER TO THE Prologue. THE learned know it to be a fault, to make that the entry unto our discourse, which may as properly fit him, that pleadeth against us: exordium Commune. but to use that for our poem, which in true sense hath nothing for us, nay rather beareth strongly for our adversary, must needs argue great want of judgement: Such is the sentence above cited out of S. John by M. Perkins: for it being truly understood, is so far off from terrifying any one from the Catholic Roman Church, as it doth vehemently exhort all to fire unto it, by forsaking their wicked company that are banded against it. speaker A. W. TO THE REFORMATION OF THE PROLOGUE. IF it fall out, as I make no question but it will do, that the place chosen by Master Perkins, be proved to belong to the Church of Rome; where is the fault then? speaker W. P. IN the former chapter S. john sets down a description 〈…〉. of the whore of Babylon, and that at large, as he saw her in a vision described unto him. In the sixteenth verse of the same chapter, he foretells her destruction: and in the three first verses of this 18. chapter, he goeth on to propound the said destruction, yet more directly and plainly, withal alleging arguments to prove the same, in all the verses following. Now in this fourth verse is set down a caveat serving to forewarn all the people of God, that they may escape the judgement shall befall the whore: and the words contain two parts: a commandment, and a reason. The commandment: Come out of her my people, that is, from Babylon. The reason taken from the event, lest ye be partakers, etc. Touching the commandment, first I will search the right meaning of it, and then set down the use thereof and doctrine flowing thence. In history therefore are three Babylon's mentioned: one is, Babylon of Assyria standing on the river Euphrates, where was the confusion of Languages, and where the jews were in captivity: which Babylon is in Scripture reproached for Idolatry and other iniquities. The second Babylon is in Egypt, standing on the river Nilus, and is now called Cayr; of that mention is made, 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. (as some think) though indeed it is as likely and more commonly thought, that there is meant Babylon of Assyria. The third Babylon is mystical, whereof Babylon of Assyria was a type and figure; and that is Rome, which is without question here to be understood. And the whore of Babylon, as by all circumstances may be gathered, is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome, and appertain thereto. This may be proved by the interpretation of the holy Ghost: for in the last verse of the 17. chapter, the woman, that is, the whore of Babylon, is said to be a city which reigneth over the kings of the B. earth: now in the days when S. john penned this book of Revelation, there was no city in the world that ruled over the kings of the earth but Rome; it then being the seat where the Emperor put in execution his Imperial authority. Again in the seventh verse she is said to sit on a beast having seven C. heads and ten horns, which seven heads be seven hills, vers. 9 whereon the woman sitteth, and also they be seven kings. Therefore by the whore of Babylon is meant a city standing on seven hills. Now it is well known, not only to learned men in the Church of God, but even to the heathen themselves, that Rome alone is the city built on seven distinct hills, called Caelius, aventinus, Exquilinus, Tarpeius or Capitolinus, Viminalis, Palatinus, Quirinalis. Papists to help themselves, do allege that old Rome stood on seven hills, but now is removed further to the plain of Campus martin's. I answer, that howsoever the greatest part of the city in regard of habitation be not now on seven hills, yet in regard of regiment and practice of religion it is: for even to this day upon these hills are seated certain Churches and Monasteries and other like places where the Papal Authority is put in execution: and thus Rome being put for a state and regiment, even at this day, it stands upon 7. hills. And though it be come to pass that the harlot in regard of her latter days even changed her seat, yet in respect of her younger times in which she was bred and borne, she sat upon the 7. hills. Others, because they fear the wounding of their own heads, labour to frame these words to another meaning, & say, that by the whore, is meant the company of all wicked men in the world wheresoever, the devil being the head thereof. But this exposition is flat against the text: for she is opposed to the Chap. 18. 〈◊〉. kings of the earth with whom she is said to commit fornication: and in the last verse she is called a city standing on seven hills, and reigning over the Kings of the earth (as I have said) and therefore must needs be a state of men in some particular place. speaker D. B. P. For by the purple Harlot in that place is signified (as shall be proved presently,) the Roman Empire, as than it was, the slave of Idols, and with most bloody slaughter persecuting Christ's Saints: Those of the Church of Rome being as nearest unto it, so most subject to that sacrilegious bouchery. Wherefore that voice which S. john heard say, Go out of her my people, that you be not partakers of her sins, etc. can have none other meaning; then that all they who desire to be God's people, must separate themselves in faith and manners from them, who hate and persecute the Roman Church, as did then, the Heathen Emperors, and now do all Heretics: Unless they will be partakers of their sins, and consequently of their plagues. This shall yet appear more plainly in Your friendly offer is suspicious. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. S●phoc. in Aia●● slagel. the examination of this Chapter. Where I will deal friendly with my adversary, and advantage him all tha● I can; that all being given him, which is any way probable; it may appear more evidently, how little he hath to any purpose out of this place of the Apocalypse, whereof all Protestants vaunt and brag so much both in their books and pulpits. Well then I will admit that in the 17. and 18. Chapters of the Revel by the whore of Babylon, is understood the Roman state and regiment: which in lawful disputations, they are not able to prove: the most judicious Doctor S. Augustine, and diverse others of the ancient Popish you mean. Fathers, with the learned troop of later Interpreters, expounding it of the whole corpse and society of the wicked: And as for the 7. h●ll●s on the which they lay their foundation, they are not to be taken literally: The Angel of God in the very text itself interpreting the 7. heads of the beast, to be aswell 7. Kings, as 7. hills: But this notwithstanding to help you forwaid, I will grant it you, because some good writers have so taken it. And therefore omit as imperrinent that which you say in proof of it. What can you infer hereupon? Many that the Roman Church is that whore of Babylon: fair and soft good Sir, how prove you that? thus. The whore of Babylon is a state of the Roman regment, ergo the Roman Church is the whore of Babylon. What some of arguing call you me this? By the like sophistication, you may prove that Rom●…s and R●…s were the purple Harlot, which to affinne ●…. were ridiculous, or which is impious) that the most Christian Empe, 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉, and ●●codosius, were the whore of Babylon, because thes. held also the state of the Roman Empire and regiment, to make short the seeble force of this reason lieth in this: that they who ho●…eth the state, and govern in the same Kingdom, must needs be of like affection in Religion; which if it were necessary, then did Queen Mary of blessed memory, and her sister E●zabeth 〈…〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 same nundes towards the true Catholic ●ath, because they 〈◊〉 in the same chain of estate, and ruled in the same Kingdom. See I pray you what a shameful cau●… this is, to raze such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A simple Logician would blush to argue in the par●…s so loose and yet they that take upon them to control the learnedst in the world, often fall into such open tallacies. We desire no favour of you, but that you would acknowledge the truth, when you cannot reasonably gainsay it. What we can prove you shall see by and by; in the mean while, your reason is nought. For what though S. Austin, and divers other ancient writers, with the learned troop of your Popish interpreters do so expound it; doth it follow thereupon, that in lawful disputation the contrary cannot be proved? Could not they err? May not some other man see that, which they perceived not? But what if we shall match you in number and antiquity of writers for our exposition? First p Hieron an 〈…〉 Hierome, as you acknowledge afterward, makes for us, and not for you: so by your confession doth q Tertul. contra ludlow pag 131. & contra Mar●ion. lib 3. pag. 204. Tertullian: but what name I several men? The r A●etas in Apoc cap. 17. Greek Scholiast tells us, that divers Interpreters by the harlot understood old Rome; and he that so thinks, in his judgement errs not, though (saith he) it may be understood of new Rome, or the time of antichrist's coming. Yea s August de ci●●● lib 18. cap. 2. ●2. 27. ●● lib. ●● c. 17. Austin himself grants, that Rome, in Greek and Latin writers, is as it were a second Babylon, and he calls it Babylon of the West. More than that, your t Baptista Regnault in 〈…〉 ber●, &. R●be●a in epistola ad lector. own writers deny those Ho milies on the Apocalyps to be Au●tins, and think them rather to be written by Tie conius the Donatist, which Ribera the jesuit says u Certis argumentis deprehendi, eas Tyconij esse, non Augustini. he hath found, by certain arguments and evident reasons. Besides, * Babtist. Regnaul. ubi supra. Baptista Regnald affirms, that the Commentaries of diverse of the ancients, Bede, Ambrose, Aus●ert, Anselm, Prunasius and Austin are mystical and allegorical, not historical; so that we are not to rest upon any of them, for the true and proper meaning of the text. It shows more discretion than plain dealing, to omit that which you cannot answer; Master Perkins reasons are evident and strong. x See Doctor Downam of Antichrist, lib. 1. cap. 2. ss 3. & Master Powel de Antichristo lib. 1. cap. 11. ss 22. 23. The city that in S. john's days reigned over the Kings of the earth, is the whore of Babylon, Apoc. 17. 18. But Rome that is ( y Civitas, the state of Rome. civitas) the state of Rome, and Rome only, is that city that reigned over the Kings of the earth in S. john's days. Therefore Rome, and Rome only is the whore of Babylon. 2 The city that in S. john's days was seated on seven hills, is the seat of the whore of Babylon. Apoc. 17. 9 But Rome, that is ( z Vibs, the town of Rome. urbs) the town of Rome (is that only) is the city, that in S. john's days was seated on seven hills. Therefore Rome (and Rome only) is the seat of the whore of Babylon. To the proposition of the latter reason you answer, that a See Doctor Fulk against Rhem. Testam. revel. 17. 9 and Down. of Antic lib. 1. 〈◊〉. 2 ss 4. and R●em. Test. revel. 17. 9 the seven hills are not to be taken literally: because the Angel makes the seven heads aswell seven Kings, as seven hills. But surely that rather makes against you: for as the seven Kings are literally to be understood, so are the seven hills, both being signified by the seven heads; not that the seven hills are seven Kings. For the woman, or City, doth not sit upon the Kings, but rather the Kings upon her. Besides, it were a strange interpretation, to expound heads by hills, and hills by Kings; whereas heads do more resemble Kings, than hills do. speaker W. P. And the Papists themselves perceiving that this shift will not serve their turn, make two Rome's, heathenish Rome, and that whereof the Pope is head: now (say they) the whore spoken of, is heathenish Rome, which was ruled by cruel tyrants, as Nero, Domitian, and the rest: and that Rome whereof now the Pope is head, is not here meant. Behold a vain and foolish distinction: for Ecclesiastical Rome in respect of state, princely dominion, and cruelty in persecuting the Saints of God, is all one with the heathenish Empire: the See of the Bishop being turned into the emperors court, as all histories do manifest. speaker D. B. P. Well, then admitting the purpel harlot to signify the Roman state, we do say that the state of Rome must be taken as it was then, when these words were spoken of it; that is, Pagan, Idolatrous, and a hot persecutor of Christians. Such it had been a little before under that bloody Tyrant Nero, and then was under Domitian: which we confirm by the authority of them, who expound this passage of the Roman state. The commentary on the Apocalyps, under Saint Ambrose name saith the great where sometime doth signify Rome, specially which at that time when the Apostle written this, did persecute the Church of God: but otherwise, In cap. 178. It should be in cap. 17. Libr. 2. contra jovinian. doth signify the whole City of the Devil. And Saint Jerome who applieth the place to Rome affirmeth, that she had before his days blotted out that blasphemy written in her forehead, because then the state was Christian, which before had been Heathen: so that unto the party Pagan, and not unto the Church of God, he ascribeth these works of the wicked Harlot: which also the very text itself doth convince: for it hath That she was drunk with the blood of the Martyr's of jesus. Now Vers. 6. the Church of Rome hath not then by the confession of all men drawn any blood of Christ's Saints, but in testimony of his truth, had powered out abundance of her best blood. Wherefore it is most manifest, that the harlot could not signify the Church of Rome, so pure and free from slaughter: but the Roman Empire, which was then full gorged, with that most innocent and holy blood. Again that whore is expounded, B. To be a City which had kingdom, over the Kings of the earth. But the Church of Rome, had then no kingdom over the earth, or Vers. 18. any temporal dominion at all; but the Roman Emperors had such sovereign commandment over many Kings▪ wherefore it must be understood of them, and not of the Church. Now to take Kingdom not properly for temporal sovereignty, but for spiritual I●…isdiction, as some shifters do; is to she without any warrant, from the native signification of the word, unto fantastical, and voluntary imagination. And whereas M. Perkins saith, that Ecclesiastical Rome in respect of state, princely dominion, and cruelty against the Saints, is Pag. 5. Spoke of Rome then, as it is now. all one with the heath●…sh Empire; he both seeketh to deceive, and is greatly deceived: he would deceive, in that he doth apply words spoken of Rome, above 1500. years ago, unto Rome as it is at this day: and yet if that were granted him, he erreth fo●●e in every one of his particulars. For first, touching princ●●e dominion, the Roman Empire held then, all Italy, all France, all Spain, all England, a great part of Germany, of Asia, and also of Africa: having their Proconsulles, and The Pope's Legates have by one means or other equalled the Proconsul's authority, and the revenues of the Roman state. Indeed the church of Rome is no persecuter of heretics but of true Christians. other principal Officers in all those Countries, drawing an hundred thousand millions in money, and many other commodities out of them: Wherefore in princely dominion, and magnifical state, it surmounted Ecclesiastical Rome (which hath not temporal dominion over the one half of that one kingdom of Italy) more than an hundred degrees. And as for persecution, the Empire slew, and caused to be slain, more Saints of God in one year; then the Church of Rome hath done, of reprobates and obstinate heretics, in 1600. years. Having thus proved, that the whore of Babylon, signifieth the heathen state of Rome, and not the Ecclesiastical: let us now hear what you say against it. Marry that the distinction of the Empire of Rome, and Church of Rome is foolish, and coined of late to serve our turn▪ which to be far otherwise, I prove out of those very Authors, who do interpret that harlot to signify Rome; who are neither foolish, nor of late days: you have heard it before out of S. Ambrose commentaries. And farther, we gather it out of S. Hierome, in the Epistle which you Before it was under his name; have you learned since, that it was his in deed? What if there be? cite: for he having resembled Rome unto Babylon, for the multitude of the wicked, which yet remained in it: pointeth out a more pure part, saying; There is in deed the holy Church, there are the triumphant monuments of the Apostles and Martyrs, there is the true confession of Christ, there is the faith praised by the Apostle, etc. Be not there expressed two distinct parts of Rome? Again, Tertullian who lived in the second hundred year, under those persecuting Emperors, saith in one place, that Babylon is a figure of Rome, in respect of her proud Empire and persecution of the Saints. And in an other, that Rome was most happy for her holy Lib. cont. jud. De prasc●pt cap. 16. Church, unto which the Apostles with their blood had poured forth their whole doctrine: see a plain distinction between the Heathen Empire and the holy Church of Rome. Which finally may be gathered out of the express word of God. Where the Church in Babylon coelect, is distinguished from the rest of that city, which was Pagan. You say 1. Pet. 5●. (but without any author) that Babylon there doth not signify Rome, but either a city in Egypt, or Assyria: But Eusebins lib. 2. hist. c. 14. and S. Jerom. de Eccles. script. vers. Marcus, with other Authors more worthy He saith no more but that which is as likely, and more commonly Thought. Eusebius only recites it out of Papias. of credit, do expound it of Rome. And you yourselves take Babylon so. Rome, where you think that any hold may be taken against it, as in the 17. of the Revel. but in S. Peter's Epistle they will none of it, because it would prove too plainly, that S. Peter had been at Rome. speaker A. W. Master Perkins having proved that by Babylon Rome is signified, proceeds to answer two objections: First, b See Fulke Rhem. Testam. revel. 17. and Downam of Antichrist. lib. 1. cap. 2. § 2. that the city of Rome stands not now upon seven hills. But it did in S. john's days, as his reason lies; and at this day popish Churches, or Monasteries, are situated upon them, under the Pope's authority. Secondly, that by the whore the company of the wicked under their head the devil is understood. c revel. 18. 2. & 17. 18. But this the text will not bear; the whore being opposed to the Kings of the earth, and ruling over them: upon this foundation Master Perkins thus builds his reason. Either Rome Heathenish, or Rome Christian, is the whore of Babylon: But Rome Heathenish is not: Therefore Rome Christian is. This is plainly his reason, and not that which you gather. The proposition is evident, because the state of Rome was never but either Heathenish, or Christian. The assumption Master Perkins proves. But I must be feign to leave his course, and to follow this reformers steps. The state of Rome must be taken, as it is the d See Fulke, Downam, Abbot, Powel. seat of Antichrist: but it was not the seat of Antichrist in S. john's days; for Antichrist, e Bellarm. de Romano 'pon ●if. lib. 3. cap. 2 according to your doctrine, is not yet come. Again, it was no mystery, for heathenish Rome to be an Idolatrous and bloody persecutor of the Christians. Thirdly, the state that S. john calls the harlot, continues till the final destruction spoken of by him, and S. Paul: but the estate of heathenish Rome was decayed long since. Your proof is insufficient, for you allege but two of many, that make Rome Babylon: who, as they deserve commendation for discerning so much of the truth, so may they be excused, if seeing Rome in their time a Christian famous Church, they did not take it to be the seat of Antichrist. But Hierome seems rather to make against you, because even then he calls it Babylon, in respect of Antichrist to come. Your second and third reasons are of no more force. For S. john, as I have showed, spoke not of Rome as it was then, but as it was to be afterward, and now hath been almost one thousand years even in temporal authority, to which one of the Pope's swords belongs. Master Perkins rightly applies to Rome the words, that fifteen hundred years since were spoken of her, as she is now: the Pope's Legates were nothing inferior, either for authority, or exactions, to the Roman Proconsul's. But, as it was foretold in a mystery, under a colour of spiritual government, overruling both in Ecclesiastical and Civil matters: he that remembers the bloody massacre of so many thousands, in a few days, not many years ago in France, shall see that the Church of Rome shed blood enough, at that one time, to make her drunk as long as she shall continue: & yet what a small part was it, of that, which from time to time she hath bezeled in? This section is nothing to purpose. For who denies, that there were as well Christians as Heathen in Rome, in the emperors days? The distinction, Master Perkins denies, is, that S. john speaks of Rome, as it was under the Emperors, and not of it, as it hath been, and is under the Popes; which the authors, you allege, meddle not with. speaker W. P. S. john writ a prophecy, and therefore might well use allegories: besides, he describes his Babylon so plain, that f Rhem. Test. Revel. 17. Bellarm. de pon●…. Roma. lib. 3. cap. 5. 13. yourselves are forced to confess, he means Rome by it. S. Peter deals as an Apostle, not as a Prophet; and no where gives any inkling, that by Babylon Rome should be meant. Eusebius sets it not down as his own opinion, but only recites it out of Papias; from whom also it is apparent that H●●rome had it, and in whom ( g Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 36. Eusebius saith) there were many fabulous matters. But let the distinction be as they suppose, yet by their leaves, hereby the whore must be understood not only heathenish Rome, but even the Papal or Ecclesiastical Rome: for the holy Ghost saith plainly Chap. 17. 3. that she hath made all nations drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornication: yea it is added that she hath committed fornication with the Kings of the earth, whereby is signified that she hath endeavoured to entangle all the nations of the earth in her spiritual idolatry, and to bring the Kings of the earth to her religion. Which thing cannot be understood of the heathenish Rome, for that left all the Kings of the earth to their own religion and idolatry: neither did they labour to bring foreign Kings to worship their Gods. Again it is said, that the ten horns, which be ten Chap. 18. 16. Kings shall hate the wh●re, and make her desolate and naked, which must not be understood of heathenish Rome, but of Popish Rome: for whereas in former times all the Kings of the earth did submit themselves to the whore, now they have begun to withdraw themselves, and make her desolate; as the King of Bohemia, Denmark, Germany, England, Scotland, and other parts: therefore this distinction is also frivolous. They further allege that the whore of Babylon is drunk with the blood of the Saints and Martyrs, shed not in Rome, but in jerusalem, where the Lord was crucified: and the two Prophets Chap. 17. 6. being slain lie there in the streets. But this place is not revel. 11. 18. Epist 17. E●… & P●… ad Marcell●…. meant of Jerusalem, as Hierome hath fully taught, but it may well be understood of Rome: Christ was crucified there, either because the authority, whereby he was crucified was from the Roman Empire, or else because Christ in his members was and is there daily crucified, though locally in his own person he was crucified at jerusalem. And thus, notwithstanding all which hath been said, we must here by the whore understand the state of the Empire of Rome, not so much under the heathen Emperors, as under the head thereof the Pope. speaker D. B. P. Well, M. Perkins is content in fine, to allow of that distinction, of Heathenish and Ecclesiastical Rome, which before he esteemed ●o foolish: And then will prove that not the Heathenish, but Ecclesiastical 〈◊〉 is resembled to the purpell Harlot. See what confidence this man hath Show us whe●e if you can. Cap. 18. 3. in his own shutle wit, that now will prove this, and shortly after disprove it: but let us give him the hearing. The holy Ghost saith plainly, that she hath made all the world drunk v●●th the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and yet addeth: that she hath committed fornication with the Kings of the earth: But this cannot be understood of heathenish Rome, for that left all the Kingdoms of the earth unto their own Religion and Idolatry: and did not labour to bring them, to worship the Roman Gods. Ergo, it must be understood of Papal R●me. I answer. The Roman Empire being the head and principal promoter of all kind of Idolatry, and maintaining, and advancing them, that most vehemently opposed themselves against the Christian Religion; who with any show of reason can deny, but they chiefly committed spiritual fornication with the Kings of the earth, if not by persuading them to forsake their false Gods, which the Pagan Romans worship aswell as they; yet by encouraging and commanding them to persevere in that filthy Idolatry, and to resist, and oppress the Christians wheresoever? Neither is that true that the Roman Emperors did not labour to bring other Nations to worship new Gods, when Nero and Domitian would be worshipped Apol. ad Antonin. Euseb. lib. 4. hist cap. 8. It is applied to the Roman Church, w●●ch now is a strumpet. Cap. 17. 〈◊〉. 1●. as Gods, and for fear of Adrian, one Antinous his servant, was worshipped as a God of all men: as justinus Martyr testifieth. These words of the text then, agree very well with the Emperors, who both were Idolaters, and the chief Patrons of Idolatry: but can in no sort be applied to the Roman Church, which was th●n (as the Protestants cannot deny) a pure Virgin, and most free from all spiritual fornication. But that it is now become Idolatrous, M. Perkins doth prove by his second reason, gathered also (I warrant you, right learnedly) out of the text itself, where it is said, that the ten Horns, which signify ten Kings, shall hate the whore, and make her desolate and naked: which (as he saith) must be understood of Popish Rome: For whereas in former times, all the Kings of the earth did submit themselves, to the whore: now they have begun to withdraw themselves, and to make her desolate: as the Kings of Bohemia, Denmark, Germany, England, Scotland, and other parts. In these his words is committed a most foul fault, by gross oversight and ignorance in the very text. What, be England, Scotland, Denmark, (as for Bohemia ruled by a Catholic Emperor it must be omitted, as also many states of Germany,) be these Kingdoms your principal pillars of the new Gospel, comprehended within the number of the ten, mentioned there in S. john, which hate the harlot? Yes marry. Why then they are enemies of Christ, and Satan's soldiers; for in the 13. verse it is said of these, that they shall deliver their power unto the beast, (which signifieth either the Devil or Antichrist,) and shall sight Such they were when they gave their power to the beast. with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because he is Lord of Lords, and King of Kings. Is not this doting in an high degree, to infame so notoriously them, of whom he would speak most honour? and to make the special Patrons of their new Gospel, the devils Captains, and fiercely to wage battle against Christ jesus? See, how heat of wrangling blindeth men's judgements. But you proceed and say that we further hold, that the blood of the Saints and Martyrs, was not shed in Rome, but in jerusalem. Here is a confusion of Men, and matters; for Pag. 7. we say that the blood of many Saints, reheaised in the Apoc. was shed in Rome, by the tyrannical Emperors, but the martyring of those two Cap. 17. principal witnesses, Enoch and Elias, (recorded in the cleaventh of the same) shall be at jerusalem, aswell, because the text is very plainc for it; specifying that their bodies shall lie in the streets of that great City, Vers. 8. where their Lord was crucified; as for that the ordinary interpreters of that place do so take it. But M Perkins holdeth that the place where Christ was crucified, signifieth here not jerusalem, but Rome; because Christ was crucified there in his members: so it might aswell signify any other place of persecution as Rome. The reason therefore being nought worth, before'rt fiath it with the name of S. Jerome, but citeth in the margin a letter of two virtuous Matrons, Paula and Eustochium. Good Sir, if S. ●●reme had meant that that Epistle should have had his Epist. 17. Epist. 17. This Epistle is brought by yourself for Jero●e▪ own in the treatise of Images. authority, he would have set it out in his own name, which seeing he thought not expedient, set the authority of it aside, and vige his reasons, i● you think it worth your labour, and you shall be answered. In the mean season, (I hope) all sober Christians, will take the place where our Saviour Christ was nailed on the Cross, to signify rather jerusalem, than Rome. And consequently, all that you have alleged out of Scripture, to prove the whore of Babylon to figure the Ecclesiastical state of Rome, not to be worth a rush. speaker A. W. To make the world drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornication, is not to enforce men by file and sword, as the Roman Emperors did: but to allure them by poisoned doctrine, and counterfeit holiness; which course hath been almost proper to the Church of Rome. The like signification hath the other speech of committing fornication with the Kings of the earth; which argueth a delight, whereby they were drawn, not a violence of enforcement: yea the idolatry the Apostle speaks of, is not the gross worshipping of false gods by professed idolatry, but, in a mystery, the false worshipping of the true God. Against his reason you except not, but charge him with doting in a high degree, for making the Kings of England, Scotland etc. Satan's soldiers. And such in deed they were, h revel. 17. 1● when they gave their power to the beast, and as long as they continued the Pope's servants, but the Apostle shows, that i Revel. 17. 1●. at the last, after their drunkenness and fornication, the Lord having discovered their shame unto them; they should hate the whore etc. which they have happily done; yea even Bohemia, though a Popish Emperor, for this present governs it, and shall in God's good time wholly consume her flesh with fire. It is neither divinity, nor reason to imagine, that Henoch, and Eltas, having been taken from the earth by God, to their reward; should come again into the world, and be slain by Antichrist. As untrue is it, that, by that great city k revel. 14. 8. & 16. 19 & 18. 10. 16. 18 19 21 jerusalem is meant, for that term is never given to it, in all the Revelation, but to Rome ordinarily, especially l Revel. chap. 17. & 18. chapters 17. 18. yea our Saviour himself was not crucified m Leuit. 4. 24. Heb. 13. 11. 12. in jerusalem, but without it. In the great city, that is in the Roman Empire, he was indeed crucified: yet is he also daily crucified in his members, by the instigation and appointment of the Pope of Rome, by whom all the later persecutions of true Christians have been raised in several countries; howsoever the secular power hath been the instrument of his cruelty. speaker W. P. M. Perkins brings not only hierom's name, but his judgement, that Epistle being of n Erasmus in Carol. oper. ●●eronyn●. Ludo●…●●ues ad Aug ●e civit. de●, 〈◊〉. 18 cap 22. Rhem●● revel. 17. 5. his writing, in the name of those two Matrons: yet we stand nor upon his authority, though we might well enough against you, and your ordinary interpreters without name: but upon the reasons before delivered, which prove that the great city is not jerusalem, but Rome. Which exposition, besides the authority of the text, hath the savour and defence of ancient and learned men. Bernard saith, They are the ministers of Serm. in Cant. 33. Epist. 1. 25. Christ, but they serve Antichrist. Again, The beast spoken of in the Apocalyps, to which a mouth is given to speak blasphemies, and to make war with the Saints of God, is now gotten into Peter's chair, as a lion prepared to his prey. It will be said, that Bernard spoke these latter words of one that came to the Popedom by intrusion or usurpation. It is true indeed: but wherefore was he an usurper? He rendereth a reason thereof in the same place: because the Antipope called Innocentius was chosen by the kings of Almain, France, England, Scotland, Spain, Jerusalem, with consent of the whole Clergy and people in these nations, and the other was not. And thus Bernard hath given his verdict, that not only this usurper, but all the Popes, for this many years, are the beast in the Apocalyps: because now they are only chosen by the college of Cardinals. To this agreeth the decree of Pope Nicholas the second, ann. 1059. that the C. In nomine, dist. 23. Pope shall afterward be created by the suffrages of the Cardinal Bishops of Rome, with the consent of the rest of the Clergy and people, and the Emperor himself: and all Popes are excommunicate and accursed referent juello. 2. Thes. 2. as Antichrists, that enter otherwise, as all now do. joachimus Abbess saith, Antichrist was long since borne in Rome, and shall be yet advanced higher in the apostolic See. Petrarch saith, Once Rome, now Babylon. And Ireneus book 5. chap. last, said before all these, that Antichrist should be Lateinus, a Roman. speaker D. B. P. Now let us come to the ancient and learned men, whom you cite in favour of your exposition. The first is S. Bernard, who saith, that they are the ministers of Christ, but they serve Antichrist. Of whom speaketh that good religious Father? forsooth of some officers of the court of Rome. Good, who were (as he saith) the ministers of Christ, because they were lawfully called by the Pope to their places, but served Antichrist; for that they behaved themselves corruptly in their callings. And so this maketh more against you, then for you, approving the lawful officers of Rome, to be Christ's Ministers. The second pla●e is alleged out of him yet more impertinently, yourself confessing presently, that those words were not spoken of the Pope, but of his enemy. The reason yet there set down, pleaseth you exceedingly: which you vouch so clearly that it seemeth to bear flat against you; for you infer that the Pope, and all others since that time be usurpers, out of this reason of S. B●●nard. Because forsooth, that the Antipope called Innocentius, was chosen by the King of Almain, France, England, etc. and their whole Clergy, and people. For if fnnocentius were an Antichrist and usurper, because he was elected by so many Kings and people then belike he that had no such election, but is chosen by the Cardinals of Rome only is true Pope. This, your words declare, but your meaning Or else you understand them not. And answered if need require. (as I take it) is quite contrary. But of this matter and manner of election shall be treated hereafter, if need require; It sufficieth for this present, that you find no relief at all in S. Bernard, touching the main point, that either the Pope, or Church of Rome, is Antichrist. And all the world might marvel, if out of so sweet a Doctor, and so obedient unto the Pope, any such poison might be sucked: specially weighing well, what he hath written unto one of them, to whom he speaketh thus. Go to, let us yet inquire more diligently, who thou art, and what person thou Lib. 2. de Cons. ad Eugen. bearest in the Church of God, during the time. Who art thou? A great Priest, the highest Bishop: thou art the Prince of Bishops, the heir of the Apostles, and in dignity, Aaron, in authority, Moses, in power, Peter, thou art he to whom the Keys were delivered, to whom the sheep were committed: There are indeed also other Porters of Heaven, and Pastors of flocks; but thou art so much the more glorious, as thou hast inherited a more excellent name above them: they have their flocks allotted to them, to each man one: but to thee all were committed, as one flock, to one man: thou art not only Pastor of the sheep, but of all other Pastors, thou alone art the Pastor. And much more to this purpose, which being his clear opinion Are there blind places in your saints ar●tings? of the Pope, how absurd is it, out of certain blind places and broken sentences of his to gather, that he thought the Pope of Rome to be neither sheep, nor Pastor of Christ's Church, but very Antichrist himself. There is a gross fault, also in the Canon of Pope Nicolas as he citeth it, that the Pope was to be created by the Cardinals, Bishops of Rome. As though there were some 30. or 40. Bishops at once: but of the matter of election else where. M. Perkins having lightly skirmished with a broken sentence or two, out of one Catholic Author flieth to a late heretic, called joachim, and quoteth jewel for relator of it. A worshipful testimony of one heretic, Or rather you the falsest slanderer. and that upon the report of an other: and he the most lying Author of these days. As for the late Poet Petrarke his words might easily be answered, but because he quoteth no place, I will not stand to answer it. But to close up this first combat, a sentence is set down out of the famous Martyr Ireneus, that Antichrist should be Lateinos, a Roman. Here be as many faults, as words. That learned ancient Doctor discoursing of Antichrist his proper name, out of these words of the Revel, the number of the beast is 666. And observing the letters of the Greek Alphabet, Cap. 13. (by which they do number, as we do by cyphers) saith: that among others the word Lateinos, doth contain those letters, which amount just to the number of 666. and consequently that antichrist's proper name perhaps might be Lateinos, but more likely it is to be Teitan, as he saith there, & lastly that it is most uncertain what his name shall be. See the place (gentle reader) and learn to beware of such deceitful merchants, as make no conscience, to corrupt the best Authors: and Whose is the Index Expurgatorios? He saith it is very likely. being often warned of it, will never learn to amend. Jreneus leaveth it most doubtful what shall be antichrist's name: And among divers words esteemeth Lateinos, to be the unlikeliest. And yet M. Perkins reporteth him to say resolutely that his name shall be Lateinos: and then to make up the matter turneth Lateinos, a proper name with S. Ireneus; into Roman, an appellative, which noteth only his country. Fie upon that cause, which cannot be upholden and maintained, but by a number of such paltry shirts. Thus come we at length to the end of M. Perkins proofs, and reproofs in his prologue, where we finding little fidelity in his allegations of the Fathers, bad construction and foul oversight in the text, of holy Scripture, briefly great malice, but slender force against the Church of Rome, we are to return the words of his theme to all good Christians. Go out of her my people. Forsake the enemies of the Roman Church. And as our Ancestors did the Pagan Emperors, who drew out her most pure blood, so let us file in matters of faith, and Religion, from all heretakes that of late also spared not to shed abundance of the same most innocent blood, unless to your greater condemnation, you had leifer be partakers of her sins, and receive of her plagues. speaker A. W. o Bernar. serm. in Cantic. 33. They were the Ministers of Christ by their profession, as the Pope calls himself the servant of servants, though both he is, in truth, Antichrist, and they his ministers. M. Perkins reason out of Bernard lieth thus. He that gets into Peter's chair, without the consent of the Princes, Clergy and people of Christendom, is the beast spoken of in the Apocalypse. But all the Popes, from that schism hitherto, have so gotten into Peter's chair, viz. with consent of the Cardinals only. Therefore all the Popes since that schism are the beast in the Apocalypse. The proposition is Bernard's in effect, though notin words; for p Indeed Bernard makes them both Antichrists. he pronounces the Pope to be the Beast in the Revelation, because he was not chosen by consent of the Princes, Clergy, and people of Almain, France, England, etc. And this Master Perkins sets down very plain, at these words; And thus Bernard, etc. How wide then are you from his meaning, who make the quite contrary collection in his name? For if Innocentius (say you) were Antichrist, and an usurper, because he was chosen by so many Kings, and people; then belike he that had no such election, but is chisen by the Cardinals of Rome only, is true Pope. He concludes out of Bernard, that he was Antichrist, because he was not chosen by the Kings, Clergy, and people, but only by the Cardinals: you, that he was true Pope, because he was not chosen by the Kings, and but only by the Cardinals. The reason out of Bernard you answer not, but shift off the matter with alleging a sentence of his, in commendation of Pope Eugenius, which is so full of flattery (that I say not impiety) that it can carry no credit with any modest Christian. It should seem you saw so much yourself, and therefore craftily left out these absurd and vile speeches, viz. q Bernard de consider, ad Eugenium li. 2. Prima●● Ab●●, gubernation Noah, patriarcha●u Abraham, ordine Melc●…c, iudica●u Samuel unctione Christus. Thou art Abel in primacy, Noah in government, in Patriarkship Abraham, in order Melchisedech, in authority of judging Samuel, in unction (that is either in anointing, or in being anointed) Christ. If this be not a blind sentence on Bernard's part, and a broken sentence on yours, there is nothing but may abide the light, be it never so false; and be accounted whole, be it never so mangled. It is rather gross ignorance in you, to find fault with that you understand not. Master Perkins neither saith, nor means, that there were many Bishops of Rome at once, (and yet there have been three Popes together) but, according to the r Dist. 23. 〈◊〉 in nomine. Canon, calls the Cardinal's Bishops of Rome; referring this word (of Rome) not to Bishops simply, but to Cardinal Bishops. Now all Cardinals were Cardinals of Rome, or of the Romish Church. The Canon indeed puts not in those words of Rome; but the sense is nothing altered by the adding of them. For the clear understanding of the matter, we are to know, that all Cardinals are either Cardinal Bishops, whom the Canon appoints s Inprimis Cardinales Episcopi diligen●…sime simul de electione tractantes. first to consult about electing of the Pope; or Cardinal Clerks, that is of some inferior order of the Clergy, the general name whereof is Clerk, whether it be Priesthood, Deaconship, etc.: and these t Mox clericos Christi Cardinales adhibeant; sicque reliquus clerus & populus ad consensum novae electionis accedant. must in the second place be called to the election. Now let men judge whether Master Perkins, or you are in fault. This Canon is brought to prove the former proposition, that he is no lawful Pope who is chosen only by the Cardinals, and not also by the consent of the rest of the Clergy and people. If you had been as careful to avoid slandering, as that reverend and learned writer was to take heed of untruths, you would never have raised such a suspicion of him in this point. For the cleared of him, let his own defence against Master Hardings' reproaches speak. For the present, u Set out by the worthy and learned Sir Henry Savile. Roger Hoveden, * Bal. de script. Anglic. cent. 3. cap. 55. who lived in that time, records the history, and sets x Hoveden Annal. poster. in Richard. primo. down joachims' words to King Richard; That Antichrist was already borne in the city of Rome, and that he should be exalted into the apostolic seat. But you except against joachim as an heretic; so doth not y Bellarm. Append. de sumnio pontiff. cap. 11. Bellarmine, but only denies that he writ any such thing. It is true that z Council Lateran sub Innocent. 3. the Council of Lateran under Pope Innocent the third, condemned a certain book that Abbot joachim writ against Peter Lombard Bishop of Paris, commonly called the Master of the Sentences, concerning the unity or essence of the Trinity; but it did not reject him as an heretic: yea the Council specially adds, that they will not by their sentence any way derogate from the Abbey of Florence, whereof he was the a Institutor. orderer, as well because the orders in it were good, as also for that he had submitted all his writings to the apostolic see. Therefore b Coccius in thesauro Catholico. jodocus Coccius makes him one of his Latin Doctors, out of whom he confirms your Popish doctrine. And c Trithemius de scriptor. Eccles. Trithemius saith, that he was a man studious and exercised in the Scriptures, and that he writ many things against the jews, and other adversaries of the Catholic faith. petrarch, one of the lights of his age for learning, wrote about 250. years since, that d Petrarc. son. 108. Gia Roma, hor' Babylonia; falla e ria. Rome was become Babylon; and not only Babylon, but false and wicked Babylon. Further, in the same place he calls her, The fountain of grief, the lodge of wrath, the school of error, the temple of heresy, a shameless strumpet, which having been founded in chastity, humility, and poverty, hath lifted up her horns against her founders, the Emperors. e Sonnet. 107. In another place he calls her covetous Babylon, that hath filled up the measure of God's wrath, with impious and wicked vices, so that it runs over. f Sonnet. 92. In a third he terms her impious Babylon, from whom all shame is fled; the lodge of grief, and mother of errors, in whom there is no goodness. I set not down all he speaks against her: somewhat I have touched, that I might see how easily you will answer his words: but I think he that hath read g Bellarm de Roman. pont. append cap. 20 Bellarmine of this point, may guess before hand what you can say in the matter. h Irenae. lib. 5. cap. 25. Irenaeus, as you truly say, determines not what shall be antichrist's name, and leans more to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: yet neither doth he allow of that, because i Habet verisimilitudinem ut ex multis coll●gamus, ne forte Teitan vocetur qui venier. a man (as he saith) may with likelihood gather by many things, that his name perhaps shall not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he affirms that it is k Valde verisimile est quoniam verissinum regnum hoc habet voca●ulum. very likely: and gives his reason of it; because the most true kingdom had that name. Master Perkins expounded it not as a proper name, but as an appellative; because neither l revel. 13. the Evangelist nor Irenaeus do intend to show antichrist's proper name; but m See D●…name of 〈◊〉. l●b. 1. cap. 8. to make known the name of the Beast, which Antichrist should make all take. Now the Beast being the Roman or Latin state, the name also must be suitable thereunto, as we see it is: our Papists calling themselves Roman; that is Latin Catholics. I will not fall into exhortation hereupon; only I desire all men, that have care of their salvation, to consider, without prejudice, whether it be not evident that the state of Rome, whereof the Pope is head, is the whore of Babylon, prophesied of by S. john, revelat. 17. speaker W. P. Again, this commandment must not so much be understood of a bodily departure in respect of cohabitation and presence, as of a spiritual separation in respect of faith and religion. And the meaning of the holy Ghost is, that men must depart from the Romish Church in regard of judgement and doctrine, in regard of their faith and the worship of God. Thus than we see that the words contain a commandment from God, enjoining his Church and people to make a separation from Babylon. Whence I observe, That all those who will be saved, must depart and separate themselves from the faith and religion of this present church of Rome. And whereas they are charged with schism that separate on this manner; the truth is, they are not schismatics that do so, because they have the commandment of God for their warrant: and that party is the schismatic in whom the cause of this separation lieth: and that is in the Church of Rome, namely the cup of abomination in the whore's hand, which is, their heretical and schismatical religion. speaker D. B. P. And because I purpose (God willing) not only to confute what M. Perkins bringeth against the Catholic doctrine, but some what also in every Chapter to fortify and confirm it: I will here deliver what some of the most ancient, most learned, and most holy Fathers do teach concerning joining with the Church, and Pope of Rome: from whose society Protestant's labour tooth and nail to withdraw us. And because of this we must treat more amply in the question of supremacy, I will use here their authority, only whom M. Perkins citeth against us. S. Bernard is cited already, S. Ireneus Scholar of S. Polycarpe, and he of S. john the Evangelist of the Church of Rome writeth thus. To this Church, by reason of her more mighty principality, it is necessary that every Church, that is the saithful on all sides, to condescend and agree; in, Lib. 3. cap. 3. and by which, always, the tradition of the Aposiles hath been preserved of them, that be round about her. Saint Jerome writing to Damasus Pope of Rome, saith: I following none as chiefest, but Christ, do in participation join with thy blessedness, that is, with the chair of Peter, I know the Church to be builded upon that Rock. Whosoever doth eat the Paschall Lamb out of this house, is a profane fellow, he that is not found within the Ark of Noah, shall when the floods arise perish: And a little after, know not Vitalis, I refuse Meletius, I take no notice of Paulinus: he that gathereth not with thee, scattereth; that is, he that is not with Christ, is with Antichrist. Well sare a good gloss. Mark and embrace this most learned Doctor's judgement, of joining with the See of Rome, in all doubtful questions: he would not trust to his own wit and skill which were singular; nor thought it safe to rely upon his learned and wise neighbours: he durst not set up his rest with his own Bishop Paulinus, who was a man of no mean mark but the Patriarch of Antioch: but made his assured stay upon the See of Rome, as upon an unmovable Rock, with which (saith he) if we do not communicate in faith and Sacraments, we are but profane men, void of all Religion: In a word, we belong not to Christ, but be of antichrist's train. See, how flat contrary this most holy ancient Father is to M. Perkins. M. Perkins would make us of antichrist's band, Not because you cleave to Damasus in this point. Lib. 3. de Sacra. cap. 1. because we cleave unto the Bishop of Rome. Whereas Saint Hierome holdeth all to appertain to Antichrist, who be not fast linked in matters of Religion, with the Pope and See of Rome. And so to conclude with this point, every true Catholic must say with Saint Ambrose: I desire in all things to follow the Church of Rome. And thus much of his Prologue. speaker A. W. It is a weak fortifying of Popish doctrine, to allege a few sentences written one thousand, or more years since, in approbation of the Church of Rome, as it was then. Irenaeus, Hierome, Ambrose, would have all men join with the Church of Rome, which flourished in their days: therefore no man may separate from it, in these our days. Who sees not the feebleness of this consequence? And yet this is all the force that can be in the reason, till they have proved, that the Church of Rome either was then, or is not now, the Church of Antichrist. If that principality, Irenaeus speaks of, were in the Church of Rome, by any right of authority from God; how should the same Irenaeus be excused, who n Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. reproves Victor B. of Rome, for taking upon him to excommunicate some of the Eastern Churches, about observing of Easter? If it be in o Nicolas Galas. ad illum Irenaei●…um. respect of the truth which then flourished at Rome, no doubt all men must cleave unto it, as far as it cleaves to the truth of God. p Hieron. ad Damasum. Hierome a Roman, and at that time a young man, living in Syria, being pressed by an Arian Bishop to allow, by subscription that, which might tend to the countenancing of Arianisme, writes to Damasus his own Bishop, for his advice in the matter. But that he did, not in respect of his place, as if he could not err, because he was Bishop of Rome (for Liberius the very next Bishop before Damasus, by q Descriptor. eccles. in Fortunatiano. hierom's own confession, had subscribed to Arianisme) but in regard of his judgement, which was sound against that heresy: so that whosoever, in that question, gathered not with him, scattered, and held with Antichrist against Christ. Those, all things, that r Ambros. de sacra. lib. 3. cap. 1. Ambrose speaks of, are, according to the place alleged by you, to be restrained to the Liturgy, and Ceremonies of the Church of Rome. Wherein though Ambrose profess himself desirous to follow the Church (note by the way, that the Church of Rome is taken s Gabriel Biel in Canon. Missae, lect. 18. de quotidiana praefatione. as a particular Diocesan Church, such as the Church of Milan also was at that time, and not as the universal Catholic Church) yet he did not so follow it, because reason led him another way: his words are these: In all things I desire to follow the Roman Church: but t Et nos homines ●ensum habemus. yet we also being men have understanding: therefore that, which is otherwhere better observed, we also rightly keep: We follow the Apostle Peter himself, we stick unto his devotion, etc. Out of which speech of Ambrose, these points are to be observed. First, that the understanding of Christian men is to direct them, wherein they are to follow the Church of Rome, wherein to leave it. Secondly, that some other Churches might, and did better observe divers things, than the Church of Rome did. Thirdly, that the Church of Rome did not observe that, which the Apostle Peter (at least in Ambrose his judgement) had devoutly performed. Thus we see what help there is in the ancient writers to free the Pope and Church of Rome, that now are, from being the very Antichrist foretold of in the Revelation. speaker W. P. Now touching the duty of separation, I mean to speak at large, not standing so much to prove the same, because it is evident by the text, as to show the manner and measure of making this separation: and therein I will handle two things. First, how far forth we may join with them in the matter of religion: secondly, how far forth and wherein we must dissent and depart from them. And for this cause I mean to make choice of certain points of religion, and to speak of them in as good order as I can, showing in each of them our consent and difference: and the rather, because some harp much upon this string, that a Union may be made of our two religions, and that we differ not in substance, but in points of circumstance. speaker D. B. P. Afterward he taketh upon him to prescribe and show us how far forth we may join with the Church of Rome, by proposing many points in controversy, between us, and them, and in each showing in what points we consent together, and in what we differ. I mean by God's I hope you will note that disorder, when you come to it. grace to follow him, step by step, although he hath made many a disorderly one, aswell to discover his deceits and to disprove their errors, as also to establish the Catholic Doctrine, the which I will endeavour to perform (by the help of God) with all simplicity of language, and with as much brevity as such a weighty matter will permit. Yet (I hope) with that perspicuity, as the meaner learned may understand it, and with such substance of proof, both out of the holy Scriptures and ancient Fathers, as the more judicious (to whose profit it is principally dedicated) may not contemn it. speaker A. W. I will labour, as much as I can, both for plainness and shortness in all the several points, not doubting, but (by the grace of God) to maintain Master Perkins reasons and answers against all your cavils. speaker W. P. The first point wherewith I mean to begin shall be the point of free-will; though it be not the principal. I. Our consent. speaker W. P. free-will both by them and us, is taken for a mixed power in the mind and will of man: whereby discerning what is good and what is evil, he doth accordingly choose or refuse the same. speaker D. B. P. That I be not thought captious, but willing to admit any thing that M. Perkins hath said agreeable to the truth, I will let his whole text in As far as you think, it makes not against you. You shall find as much kindness as you offer. You pair off the sense too sometimes. You mean properly. Is this your perspicuity? places indifferent, pass, paring off only superfluous words, with adding some annotations where it shall be needful, and rest only upon the points in controversy. First then concerning freewill, wherewith he beginneth, thus he saith: Free will both by them and us, etc. speaker W. P. Annot. If we would speak formally, it is not a mixed power in the mind and will, * That Master Perkins was not ignorant of this, it appears in his treatise of God's free grace, and man's free will. pag. 17. but is a free faculty of the mind and will only, whereby we choose or refuse, supposing in the understanding, a knowledge of the same before. But let this definition pass as more popular. Your correcting of Master Perkins definition passeth my understanding: for if it be a ᵃ faculty both of the mind and will, out of doubt it is a mixed faculty. But it is more strange, that you add only of the mind only, or of the will only, are speeches that have some reason in them; but of the mind and will only is a phrase implying a contradiction, unless there be some third part of the soul unknown to ordinary Philosophers, whereof free will may be suspected to be a faculty. I. Conclus. Man must be considered in a fourfold estate, as he was created, as he was corrupted, as he is renewed, as he shall be glorified. In the first estate, we ascribe to man's will liberty of nature, in which he could will or nill either good or evil: in the third, liberty of grace, in the last liberty of glory. speaker D. B. P. Annot. Carry this in mind, that here he granteth man in the state of grace to have free will. Where doth he deny it. W. P. All the doubt is of the second estate: and yet therein also we agree, as the conclusions following will declare. II. Conclus. The matters whereabout free-will is occupied, are principally the actions of men, which be of three sorts, natural human, spiritual. Natural actions are such as are common to men with beasts, as to eat, drink, sleep, hear, see, smell, taste, and to move from place to place: in all which we join with the Papists, and hold that man hath free will, and even since the fall of Adam by a natural power of the mind doth freely perform any of these actions or the like. III. Conclus. human actions are such as are common to all men good and bad, as to speak and use reason, the practice of all mechanical and liberal arts, and the outward performance of civil and Ecclesiastical duties, as to come to the Church, to speak, and preach the word, to reach out the hand to receive the Sacrament, and to lend the ear to listen outwardly to that which is taught. And hither we may refer the outward actions of civil virtues; as namely, justice, temperance, gentleness, liberality. And in these also we join with the Church of Rome, and say (as experience teacheth) that men have a natural freedom of will, to put them or not to put them in execution. Paul saith, Rom. 2. 14. The Gentiles that have not the law, do the things of the law by nature, that is, by natural strength: and he saith of himself, that before his conversion touching the righteousness of the law, he was unblamable. Phil. 3. 6. And for this external obedience, natural men receive reward in temporal things. Matth. 6. 5. Ezech. 29. 19 And yet here some caveats must be remembered. I. That in human actions (he should have said moral, saith D. B. P.) man's will is weak and feeble, and his understanding dim and dark; and thereupon he often fails in them. (This caveat is no caveat of the Protestants, but taken out of S. Thomas of Aquine, saith D. B. P.) And in Sum. 1. 2. q. 109. art. 4. & 8. all such actions with Augustine (you might have quoted the place, ●aith D. B. P.) I understand the will of man to be only wounded or half dead. speaker A. W. b See M. P. of God's free grace and man's free will, pag. 61. human is more general, and more fit; because moral cannot comprehend the first rank of actions, in the beginning of the section. Besides, it may be Master Perkins thought it not fit to give that title to any actions of natural men, because none of them are performed, according to the c Arist. Ethic. lib. 2. cap. 3. & 6. Philosopher's definition of moral virtue, by a habit with due observation of the circumstances required by him; howsoever they are magnified by you Papists. The caveat is not taken out d Thomas 1. 2. q. 109. art. 4. & 8. of those places, wherein Thomas shows no more, but that a man cannot, by his natural strength, either fulfil the law, or avoid sin. The place is quoted e Edition 1598. in the margin Hypognostic. lib. 3. which you shall find in tome 7. of Augustine's works; though indeed the book be thought to be none of Augustine's. speaker W. P. II. That the will of man is under the will of God, and therefore to be ordered by it: as jeremy saith, chap. 10. vers. 23. O Lord I know that the way of man is not in himself, neither is in man to walk or direct his steps. (Who knows not this? saith D. B. P.) speaker A. W. If there be no man that knows it not, perhaps every man remembers it not; and it is a caveat necessary for this question. The f jere. 10. 23. Prophet in the place brought by Master Perkins so speaks of it to God, as if it were not known to all men. O Lord I know that the way of man etc. And to say the truth, how can any man be said to know it, g Bo●●ius de consol. ph●losoph. lib. 5 pro●● 6. & Thomas ●bi. that fetches the knowledge, which God hath of things depending on man's will, from the sight of the things from all eternity, present to him? For the thing must needs be, in the order of nature at least, before it can be known to be. But of this point, when just occasion shall be offered, about Predestination. speaker W. P. IV. Conclus. The third kind of actions are spiritual, more nearly concerning the heart and conscience, and these be twofold: they either concern the kingdom of darkness, or else the kingdom of God. Those that concern the kingdom of darkness are sins properly: and in these we likewise join with the Papists and teach, that in sins or evil actions, man hath freedom of will. Some peradventure will say, that we sin necessarily, because he that sinneth cannot but sin: and that free will and necessity cannot stand together. Indeed the necessity of compulsion or coaction, and free-will cannot agree: but there is another kind of necessity which may stand with freedom of will: for some things may be done necessarily and also freely. A man that is in close prison, must needs there abide, and cannot possibly get forth and walk where he will: yet can he move himself freely, and walk within the prison: so likewise, though man's will be chained naturally by the bonds of sin, and therefore cannot but sin, and thereupon sinneth necessarily, yet doth it also sin feely. speaker D. B. P. Annot. The example of a close prisoner is not to the purpose, for it puts necessity in one thing, and liberty in an other. The solution is, that necessarily, must be taken for certainly, not that a man is at any time What is your certainly but infallibly? compelled to sin, but his weakness and the craft of the Devil are such, that he is very often over reached by the Devil, and induced to sin, but with free consent of his own will. speaker A. W. The example is to the purpose: as he that is in prison, if he will walk, must of necessity walk in the prison, and yet walks freely there, because he may choose whether he will walk or no: so he that is chained by sin, may choose whether he will do such an action or no: but, if he do it, he shall necessarily sin in doing of it: and thus, necessity and liberty are alike, in both parts of the similitude. There is nothing in your solution, that was not in Master Perkins distinction, save that you have put it in other words; you say certainly, he infallibly; you say man sins with free consent, and is not compelled; he says he sins freely, and not of compulsion. speaker W. P. V. Conclus. The second kind of spiritual actions or things, concern the kingdom of God: as repentance, saith, the conversion of a sinner, new obedience, and such like: in which we likewise in part join with the Church of Rome and say, that in the first conversion of a sinner, man's free will concurs with God's grace, as a fellow or co-worker in some fort. For in the conversion of a sinner three things are required: the word, God's spirit, and man's will: for man's will is not passive in all and every respect, but hath an action in the first conversion and change of the soul. When any man is converted, this work of God is not done by compulsion, but he is converted willis gly: and at the very time when he is converted, by God's grace he wills his conversion. To this end said Augustine, He which made thee without Serm. 15 de verb. Apost. de great & l. a. bitr. 1. thee, will not save thee without thee. Again, that is certain, that our will is required in this, that we may do any good thing well: but we have it not from our own power but God works to will in us. For look at what time God gives grace, at the same time he * Posse velle, & a●… velle recipere. giveth a will to des●●e and will the same grace: as for example, when God works faith, at the same time he works also upon the will, causing it to desire faith, and willingly to receive the gift of believing. God makes of the unwilling will, a willing will: because no man can receive grace utterly against his will, considering will constrained is no will. But here we must remember, that howsoever in respect of time, the working of grace by God's spirit, and the willing of it in men go together: yet in regard of order, grace is first wrought, and man's will must first of all be acted and moved by grace, and then it also acteth, willeth and moveth itself. And this is the last point of consent between us and the Roman Church touching Free will; neither may we proceed further with them. speaker D. B. P. Now before I come to the supposed difference, I gather first that he You gather that which is not scattered by M. P. yieldeth unto the principal point in controversy, that is freedom of will, in civil, and moral works in the state of corruption, and all good works in the state of grace, for in his first conclusion distinguishing four estates of man, he affirmeth that in the third, of man renewed, or (as we speak justified) there is liberty of grace, that is, grace enableth man's will to do if it please such spiritual works, as God requireth at his hands. Yet lest he be taken to yield in any thing, he doth in show of words contradict Pag. 16. We shall see that when we come to it. both these points in another place: For in setting down the disference of our opinions, he saith: that man's will in his conversion is not active, but passive, which is flat opposite unto that which himself said a little before in his first conclusion; that in the conversion of a sinner, man's will concurreth not passively but is co-worker with God's grace. The like contradiction may be observed in the other part of liberty That is just none at all. in moral actions: for in his third conclusion he delivereth plainly man to have a natural freedom, even since the fall of Adam to do, or not to do the acts of wisdom, Ius●ce, Temperance, etc. and proves out of S. Paul, that the Gentiles so did: Yet in his first reason, he affirmeth as peremptorily out of the 8. of Genisis, that the whole frame of man's Pag. 19 heart is corrupted, and all that he thinketh, deviseth, or imagineth, is wholly evil, leaving him no natural strength to perform any part of moral duty. speaker A. W. It is neither the principal point in controversy, nor any controversy at all, according to Master Perkins, whether man have freedom of will in moral works, before grace; and in all good works after grace. For of the former Master Perkins makes no question, but only h Conclus. 3. Caveat. 1. gives a caveat, of the feebleness of the will, and dimness of the understanding, in such matters: with the latter he deals not at all, professedly restraining the question to i Conclus. 1. in the end. our dissent about the second estate. Liberty in the state of grace, to will spiritual good, we thankfully acknowledge: but neither is it of k Rom. 7. 18. so large extent as your exposition makes it; and, l Phil. 2. 13. without the special work of God's spirit, by itself it brings no good thing to pass. He doth not say simply, that man's will in his conversion is not active; but that, in itself it is not active, but passive: Of which his other speech is not a contradiction, but rather a confirmation; That man's will concurs with God's grace, as a co-worker, in some sort: and a little after, man's will is not passive in all and every respect, but hath an action in the first conversion of the soul. Now what action it hath, and in what respect it is active, and passive, he shows presently after: the words are falsely alleged by you, viz. that it wils well only, as it moved by grace, being in itself neither active, nor passive. This latter contradiction is indeed like the former, that is, no contradiction at all. For he doth rightly expound m Gen. 8. 5. that place of a proneness to that which is as ill, and to nothing that is fully good: not simply excluding that which is civilly good, but that only which is properly referred to God himself, the sovereign good: and the other, in regard of it perfect goodness. II. The difference, or dissent. speaker W. P. The point of difference standeth in the cause of the freedom of man's will in spiritual matters, which concern the kingdom of God. The Papists say, man's will concurreth and worketh with God's grace in the first conversion of a sinner by itself, and by it own natural power; and is only helped by the holy Chost. We say, that man's will worketh with grace in the first conversion, yet not of itself, but by grace. Or thus; They say will hath a natural cooperation: we deny it, and say it hath cooperation only by grace, being in itself not active but pas●…; willing well only as it is moved by grace, whereby it must first be acted and moved, before it can act or will. And that we may the better conceive the difference, I will use this comparison; The Church of Rome sets forth the estate of a sinner by the condition of a prisoner, and so do we: mark then the difference. It supposeth the said prisoner to lie bound hand and foot with chains and fetters, and withal to be sick and weak, yet not wholly dead, but living in part: it supposeth also that being in this case, he stirreth not himself for any help, and yet hath ability and power to stir. Hereupon if the keeper come and take away his bolts and fetters, and hold him by the hand, and help him up, he can and will of himself stand and walk and go out of prison: even so (say they) is a sinner bound hand and foot with the chain of his sins: and yet he is not dead but sick, like to the wounded man in the way between jericho and jerusalem. And therefore doth he not will and affect that which is good: but if the holy Ghost come and do but untie his bands, and reach him his hand of grace, then can he stand of himself and will his own salvation, or any thing else that is good. We in like manner grant, that a prisoner fitly resembleth a natural man, but yet such a prisoner must he be, as is not only sick & weak but even stark dead: which cannot stir though the keeper untie his bolts and chains nor hear though he sound a trumpet in his ear: and if the said keeper would have him to move and stir, he must give him not only his hand to help him, but even soul and life also: and such a one is every man by nature; not only chained and fettered in his sins but stark dead therein: as one that lieth rotting in the grave, not having any ability or power to move or stir: and therefore he cannot so much as desire or do any thing that is truly good of himself, but God must first come and put a new soul into him, even the spirit of grace to quicken and revive him: and then being thus revived, the will beginneth to will good things at the very same time, when God by his spirit first infuseth grace. And this is the true difference between us and the Church of Rome in this point of free will. speaker D. B. P. See how uncertain the steps be of men that walk in darkness, or that would seem to communicate with the works of darkness. For if I As it is very like you will do for your advantage. Pag. 16. True: but not of the Popish Church. mistake him not, he agreeth fully in this matter of free will, with the Doctrine of the Catholic Church: For he putting down the point of difference, saith that it standeth in the cause of the freedom of man's will, in spiritual matters: allowing then freedom of will with us, in the state of grace, whereof he there treateth; for he seemeth to dissent from us, only in the cause of that freedom. And as he differeth from Luther, and Calvin, with other sectaries, in granting this liberty of will: so in the very cause also he acordeth with Catholics, as appeareth by his own words. For (saith he) Papists say man's will concurreth with God's grace by itself, and by it own natural power: we say that Man's will He differs not from Luther and Calvin. worketh with grace; yet not of itself, but by grace: either he understandeth not what Catholics say, or else accuseth them wrongfully: For we say that Man's will then only concurreth with God's grace, when it is stirred and holpen first by God's grace. So that Man's will by his own natural action, doth concur in every good work, otherwise it were no action of Man: But we farther say, that this action proceedeth principally of grace, whereby the will was made able to produce such actions: for of itself it was utterly unable to bring forth such spiritual fruit. And th●… I take to be that, which M. Perkins doth mean by those his words, that the will must be first moved and acted by grace, before it can act or will. He mistook●…, thinking that we required some outward help only to the will, to join with it, or rather, that grace did but a it were untie the chains of sin wherein our will was ●…eted, an● t●en will could of itself turn to God. No● understanding how Catholics take that Luk 10. The hol● Ghost intended not to describe the state of man in that p●…able. parable of the man wounded in the way, between jerusalem and jerico who was (not as the Papists only say, but as the holy Ghost ●aith) le●te half, and not stark dead. Now the exposition of Catholics is not, that this wounded man, (which signifieth all Mankind) had half his spiritual strength left him, but was robbed of all Supernatural riches, spoiled of all his original justice, and wounded in his natural powers of both understanding and will, and therein left half dead, not being able of his own strength, either to know all natural truth, or to perform all moral duty. Now touching supernatural works, because he lost all What is bec●me of your m●… of coag●…? Luk. 15. power to perform them; not being able so much as to prepare himself conveniently to them; he in a good sense may be likened unto a dead man, not able to move one finger that way of grace; and so in holy Scripture the Father said of his prodigal Son, he was dead, and is revived. Yet as the same son lived a natural life, albeit in a deadly sin: so man's will after the fall of Adam, continued somewhat free in actions conformable to the nature of man, though wounded also in them, as M. P. shows that the will is passive in receiving this inward fortifying. not being able to act many of them, yet having still that natural faculty of free will capable of grace, and also able, being first both outwardly moved, and fortified inwardly by the virtue of grace, to affect and do any work appertaining to salvation: which is as much as M. Perkins affirmeth. speaker A. W. You utterly mistake the matter; he speaks not of will in the state of grace, but in the state of nature, namely in the first conversion of a sinner; as his plain words are in this place. The difference stands in the cause of freedom: for it is impossible that a man should believe without freedom of will, believing being an action of the will. But the question is, whether the will work with God's grace, by itself, by it own natural power, or have this operation from grace, being in itself not active, but passive. And this is the very opinion of Luther, Calvin, and generally all Protestant Divines: who in this point thus dissent from you, that they ascribe the very act of the will, in repenting, believing, etc. to the especial work of God's spirit in their hearts, that repent and believe: whereas you chose, having furnished man with freedom of will, by nature, or I know not what grace, make his assent (for I must speak of faith as you do) to proceed, not from the spirit of God, inclining him certainly to believe, but from the good use of his free will, yielding of itself to the good motion of God's spirit: yet so as that it might for all the motion and operation of God's spirit forbear to assent, if it were not led to it by the goodness of free will. In a word, you ascribe no more to God, but the power that the will hath to will that which is good: we acknowledge, that the very act of willing well, both before and after grace, is caused by the spirit of God, to, and in every good desire that we bring well to pass. It is more than Master Perkins affirms, that the will, being outwardly moved, and inwardly fortified with the virtue of grace, is able to effect, and do any work appertaining to salvation. For this virtue is not of such strength, but that it needs the particular assistance of God's spirit, to incline and frame it to every good work of that nature. speaker D. B. P. And this to be the very Doctrine of the Church of Rome, is most manifestly to be seen in the Council of Trent, where in the sixth Session Cap. 1. are first these words in effect, concerning the unableness of man to arise from sin of himself. Every man must acknowledge, and confess, that by Adam's fall we were made so unclean and sinful, that neither the Gentiles by the force of nature, nor the jew by the letter of Moses law, could arise out of that sinful state. After it showeth, how our deliverance is wrought, and how freedom of v●ill is recovered in special, and wherein it consisteth, saying. The beginning of justification, in persons using reason, is taken from the grace of God, preventing us through Jesus Christ, that is, from his vocation, whereby without any desert of ours we are called, that we who were by our sins turned away from God, may be prepared by his grace, both raising us up, and helping us to return to our own Justification, freely yielding our consent unto the said grace, and working with it. So as God touching the heart of man by the light of the Holy Ghost, neither doth man nothing at all, receiving that inspiration, who might also refuse it: neither yet can he without the grace of God, by his free will, move himself to that, which is just in God's sight. And that you may be assured, that this Doctrine of the Council, is no other than that which was taught three hundred years before, in the very midst of darkness, as heretics deem: See what Saint Thomas of Aquine one of her principal 1. 2. q. 109. art. 6. pillars hath written of this point in his most learned Sum. Where, upon these words of our Saviour, No man can come to me, unless my Father draw him. He concludeth it to be manifest, that man joh. 6. cannot so much as prepare himself to receive the light of grace, but by the free and undeserved help of God, moving him inwardly thereunto. speaker A. W. n Sell. 6. cap. 5. The Council of Trent, as closely as it carries matters, could not but bewray itself in this point; wherein it leaves to the will of man, enlightened by the holy Ghost, o Inspirationem ●llam: bi● ce●e potest. the act of refusing and receiving grace. Which must needs be natural; because there was no former work of God, whereby this power to receive grace was bestowed upon it. And this doth p 1. 2. q. 109. art 6. Ad hoc, quod praepar●●●e homo ad susceptionem h●…s dont, non oportet ●…nere aliquod aliud donum habituale in anima. Thomas by you alleged make more plain, denying that there is any grace in the will of man, as from God, for the preparing of himself to receive habitual grace: because than we should need another grace for the former, and another for that before the former, and so without end. What then doth God in this case? He moves the heart inwardly (saith Thomas) or he breathes into us a good purpose. A man would think that Thomas hereby acknowledged the receit of some special grace: but it is not so, he means no more but this, that God puts a good motion into us, for the receiving of habitual grace; which it is in the power of our will by nature either to receive, or refuse. So that still, in the matter of justification, the reason that this man is justified, that is not, shall be from man, and not from God. Are they not in the midst of darkness that write such things? III. Our reasons. speaker W. P. Now for the confirmation of the doctrine we hold, namely, that a man willeth not his own conversion of himself by nature either in whole or in part, but by grace wholly and alone: these reasons may be used. The first is taken from the nature and ●…. measure of man's corruption, which may be distinguished into two parts. The first is the want of that original righteousness, which was in man by creation: the second is, a proneness and inclination to that which is evil, and to nothing that is truly good. This appeareth, The frame of man's heart (saith the Gen. 8. 21. Lord,) is evil even from his childhood: that is, the disposition of the understanding, will, affections, with all that the heart of man deviseth, frameth, or imagineth, is wholly evil. And Paul saith, The wisdom Rom. 8. 5. of the flesh is enmity against God. Which words are very significant: for the word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] translated wisdom, signifieth that the best thoughts, the best desires, affections, and endeavours that be in any natural man, even those that come most near to true holiness, are not only contrary to God, but enmity itself. And hence I gather, that the very heart itself, that is the will and mind, from whence these desires and thoughts do come, are also enmity unto God. For such as the action is, such is the faculty whence it proceedeth: such as the fruit is, such is the tree: such as the branches are, such are the roots. By both these places it is evident, that in man there is not only a want, absence, or deprivation of original righteousness, but a proneness also by nature unto that which is evil: which proneness includes in it an inclination not to some few, but to all and every sin: the very sin against the holy Ghost not excepted. Hence therefore I reason thus. If every man by nature doth both want original justice, and be also prone unto all evil, then wanteth he natural free will to will that which is truly good: But every man by nature wants original justice, and is also prone unto all evil. Ergo: Every man naturally wants free will to will that which is good. Reason. II. 1. Cor. 2. 14. The natural man perceiveth not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him, neither can know them, because they are spiritually discerned. In these words S. Paul sets down these points. I. that a natural man doth not so much as think of the things revealed in the Gospel. II. that a man hearing, and in mind conceiving them; cannot give consent unto them, and by natural judgement approve of them: but chose thinketh them to be foolishness. III. that no man can give assent to the things of God, unless he be enlightened by the spirit of God. And hence I reason thus. If a man by nature doth not know and perceive the things of God, and when he shall kn●w them, cannot by nature give assent unto them: then hath he no power to will them. But the first is evidently true. Ergo. For first the mind must approve and give assent, before the will can choose or will: and when the mind hath not power to conceive or give assent, there the will hath no power to will. Reason III. Thirdly the holy Ghost avoucheth, Eph. 2. 2. Coloss. 2. 13. that all men by nature are dead in sins & trespasses: not as the Papists say, weak, sick, or half dead. Hence I gather, that man wanteth natural power not to will simply, but freely and frankly to will that which is truly good. A dead man in his grave cannot stir the least finger, because he wants the very power of life, sense, and motion: no more can he that is dead in sin, will the least good: nay if he could either will or do any good, he could not be dead in sin. And as a dead man in the grave, cannot rise but by the power of God: no more can he that is dead in sin rise, but by the power of God's grace alone, without any power of his own. Reason IV. Fourthly in the conversion and salvation of a sinner, the scripture ascribeth all to God, and nothing to man's free will. john 3. 3. Except a man be borne again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Ephes. 2. 10. We are his workmanship created in Christ jesus to good works. And chap. 4. vers. 24. The new man is created to the image of God. Now to be borne again, is a work of no less importance than our first creation: and therefore wholly to be ascribed to God as our creation is. Indeed Paul Phil. 2. 12. 13. biddeth the Philippians work out their salvation with fear and trembling: not meaning to ascribe unto them a power of doing good by themselves. And therefore in the next verse he addeth, It is God that worketh both the will and the deed: directly excluding all natural free will in things spiritual: and yet withal he acknowledgeth, that man's will hath a work in doing that which is good, not by nature, but by grace. Because when God gives man power to will good things, than he can will them: and when he giveth him a power to do good, than he can do good, and he doth it. For though there be not in man's conversion a natural cooperation of his will with God's spirit, yet is there a supernatural cooperation by grace, enabling man when he is to be converted, to will his conversion: according to which S. Paul saith, 1. Cor. 15. 10. I have laboured in the faith, but least any man should imagine, that this was done by any natural power: therefore he addeth, yet not I, that is, not by any thing in me, but God's grace in me, enabling my will to do the good I do. Reason V. The judgement of the ancient Church. a August. de corrept. & great. c. 12. August. The will of the regenerate is kindled only by the holy Ghost: that they may therefore be able because they will thus: and they will thus because God works in them to will. And, b Epist. 105. We have lost our free-will, to love God by the greatness of our sin. Serm. 2. on the words of the Apostle. Man when he was created, received great strength in his free will: but by sinning he lost it. c Fulg. lib. Fulgentius, God giveth grace freely to the unworthy whereby the wicked man being justified is enlightened, with the gift of good will, and with a faculty of doing good: that by mercy preventing him he may begin to will well, and by mercy coming after, he may do the good he will. Bernard saith, d Bernard. de lib. arb. It is wholly the grace of God that we are created, healed, saved. Concil. Arausic. 2. cap. 6. To believe and to will is given from above by infusion, and inspiration of the holy Ghost. More testimonies and reasons might be alleged to prove this conclusion, but these shall suffice: now let us see what reasons are alleged to the contrary. speaker D. B. P. And this is all which M. Perkins in his pretended dissent averreth A poor shift. here, and goeth about to prove in his five reasons following: the which I will omit, as being all for us. And if any man desire to see more to that purpose, let him read the most learned works of that famous Cardinal, and right Reverend Archbishop Bellarmine. speaker A. W. You should, at the least, have propounded his reasons, that all men might have seen whether they make for you, or against you: but you took a wiser course for your own credit. Yet give me leave to show, that his conclusions are directly against you. He that hath naturally free will to receive a good motion inspired by God, hath naturally free will to will that which is good: for to receive such a motion, is to will that which is good. But every man, according to q 1. 2. q. 109. art. 6. Thomas, and r Concil. Trident. sess. 6. cap. 5. the Council of Trent, hath naturally free will, to receive a good motion inspired by God: for else he cannot receive any, or must have some habitual grace to prepare him for the receiving of it. Therefore every man hath naturally free will to will that which is good. This is your conclusion; to which his are contrary, viz. Every man naturally wants free will, to will that which is good. Secondly, Man, by nature, hath no power to will the things of God. Thirdly, Men naturally have no power to will the least good. Fourthly, Man cannot naturally will his own conversion. The testimonies alleged need neither confirmation, nor explication. Bellarmine's disputation shall be examined, if it please God to give leisure and opportunity. speaker D. B. P. Now the very point controversed, concerning free will, M. Perkins hath quite omitted, which consisteth in these two points, expressed in the Council: First, whether we do freely assent unto the said grace, when it is offered us, that is, whether it lie in our power to refuse it; And secondly, when we concur and work with it, whether we could if we listed refuse to work with it. In both which points we hold the affirmative part, and most sectaries of this time the negative. Of which our Author is silent: only by the way in his fourth reason, toucheth two texts out of S. Paul, which are commonly alleged against free will. The fir●●. I have (saith he) laboured more abundantly than all they, yet not I, but the grace of God, which is in me, attributing the whole work 1. Cor. 15. So doth Jerome read it. to grace. To which I briefly answer, that they do corrupt the text, to make it seem more currant for them: the Greek hath only He sun emoi, which is, with me, not, which is in me, so that the word in true construction makes much more for us, then against us: Saint Paul affirmeth the grace of God, which was working with him, to have done these things: And so Saint Augustine whom they pretend to follow most in this matter, expoundeth it. Yet not I, but the grace of God with De great. & lib. arb. cap. 15. me; that is, not I alone, but the grace of God with me. And by this, neither the grace of God alone: neither he alone, but the grace of God with him: thus Saint Augustine. The like sentence is in the book of Wisdom. Send that (wisdom) from thy holy heaven, that it may be with me, and Cap. 9 labour with me. speaker A. W. Master Perkins took that, as the most principal point, which doth most diminish the glory of God, the end of all true religion. s See 12. Art. part. 2. Art. 4. 〈◊〉. Now what opinion is more derogatory to God's glory, than that which gives man's will a power (by nature) to receive grace ofered, upon an inward motion of God, without any inclining of the will by him? And this answers your former quesion; denying that it lies in our own power to refuse gra●e, though we freely assent unto it. There is a necessity of in●…llibilitie, so that it cannot come to pass, that a man, inclined by God's spirit, should not receive grace; there is notwthstanding a freedom of will, because the will is not compelled to assent. The second question is like the former and answered in like sort, viz. that we might refuse, in re●…ect of the nature of our will, which is not forced to the choice, that in the event we cannot refuse, because God frames our will inevitably to make that choice. You saw it was not for you to deal with Master Perkins reasons, as they were set down by him, for than it would have been looked for that yo● should have answered directly to all the places of Scripture he brings against the strength of freewill by nature. Therefore you shift off the matter, and outof nine texts alleged in this question, you choose only th●e. Against which you think you are able to say somewho. And what is it you say? That Master Perkins attributes he whole to grace; utterly untrue. For he saith plainly, t 1. Cor. 15. 10. ●at there is a supernatural cooperation of man's will, with God's s●rit, by grace, enabling him to will his conversion. And adds fterwards, Not I, that is, I by any thing in me; but God's grace ●…e enabling my will to do that good, I do. u Hieron. contra ●ouin. lib. 2. If that translation irrupt the text, Hierome corrupted it, not we: and to say●e truth, it is all one to us, whether you read in me, or wh●me, so you acknowledge the strength, whereby the Apole works, to be of God, and not of nature. But for the prase, the grace of God, in the Scripture, signifies either the love and favour of God, which is wholly without a man, or some gift of his, which is a quality in the soul. Now it is a great deal more likely, that the Apostle speaks of some gift of God within him, whereby he is made able to labour, than of the favour of God without him, whereby his labour is blessed. We subscribe to * August. de great. &. lib. arb. cap. 15. S. Austin, That in all our good works we have a part; or rather, that the work itself is wholieours, though both the grace, whereby we are enabled to do it, and the inclination whereby we are brought to do i●, proceed from the spirit of God. speaker D. B. P. The second text is. It is God that woreth in us, both to will and to accomplish. We grant that it is God, bu●ot he alone without us, for in Phil. 2. 13. the next words before, Saint Paul, saith Work your salvation with fear and trembling. So that God worketh pincipally by stirring us up by his grace, and also helping forward our will, to accomplish the work; but Not only helping forward, but also inclining. Of this if occasion be offered in the point of justification. so sweetly and con●ormablie to our naure, that his working taketh not away, but helpeth forward our will toconcurre with him. Again, the whole may be attributed unto God, considering that the habits of grace infused, be from him as sole efficient cause of them, our actions endued also with grace, being only disposi●ons and no efficient cause of those habits: but this is an high point of school Divinity, very true, but not easily to be conceived of the vnlea●ed. speaker A. W. We also grant, as I have said, that it is God with us: herein we differ, that you ascribe no more to God in our first conversion, but a stirring of us up, and helpng forward of our will, leaving the event to our choice, an● so uncertain: we affirm, that God doth so work, that he ●…clines the will, so that the event shall in fallibly ensue ther●…on. The whole may not be attributed to God, though the habits of grace infused be from him, as a sole efficient case of them. For the question is not how we come by these●abits, but whether the actions done, when we have the hbits, be ours or no, speaking of good works after iustifi●tion. If the question be of our first conversion, we say ●, t●… act of believing is ours; but the grace, by which we are eabled to believe, is given by God; and made effectual; 〈◊〉 made to produce this effect of believing, by God also. speaker D. B. P. One other objection may be collected ou● of 〈◊〉. Perkins third reason, against free will, which is touched, as he saith, by the holy Ghost, in these You need not have troubled yourself with collecting objections, there are five plainly s●t down. Ad Ephes. 2. 2. He is so like a dead man, that he is dead indeed spiritually. words. When we were dead in sins. If a man by sin become like a dead man, he cannot concur with God, in his rising from sin. Answer. Sure it is, that he cannot, before God by his grace hath quickened, and as it were revived him, to which grace of God, man giveth his free consent. How can that be, if he were then dead? Marry, you must remember what hath been said before: that albeit man in sin be dead in the way of grace, yet he liveth naturally, and hath free will in natural and civil actions: which will of his being by grace fortified, and as it were lifted up unto a higher degree of perfection, can then concur and work with grace to faith, and all good works necessary to life everlasting. As (for example,) a crabtree ●…ocke hath no ability of itself to bring forth apples, and therefore may be termed dead in that kind of good fruit. Yet let a sian●e of apples be ga●ted into it, and it will be are apples: even so albeit our sour corrupt naure of itself be unable to fructify to life everlasting, yet having revived into it the heavenly graft of God's grace, it is enabled to produce he sweet fruit of good works: to which alludeth Saint James. Rece●e the engrafted word, Cap. 1. which can save our souls: again what more d●d than the earth? and yet it being tilled and sowed, doth bring forth, a●… bear goodly corn: now the word and grace of God is compared by ●ur Saviour himself unto seed, and our hearts unto the earth that received it: what marvel Matth. 13. then if we otherwise dead, yet revived by this livelyeed, do yield plenty of pleasing fruit? speaker A. W. The question is not, whether God can ma●e a man able to do good works, or no (for of that no mandoubts:) but Ephes. 2. 2. what a man can do by nature, to his own co●…ersion. Master Perkins saith, he is spiritually dead, and there●…re can do nothing. You answer, that he can do something, when God hath quickened him. But what can he do● to the quickening of himself? give his free consent, you say. Then it must needs follow, that he hath power by na●…e to will his own conversion: for as yet he hath received no grace, but only hath had a good motion made to him, or inspired into him by God: of which by his own free wil● he takes a liking, and so attains to justifying grace. speaker D. B. P. Having hitherto explicated the state of the question, and solved such He propounds none for you, and therefore misapplies none. objections as may be gathered out of Master Perkins against it, before I come to his solution of our arguments, I will set down some principal places, both out of the Scriptures, and ancient Fathers, in defence of our Doctrine, because he proposeth but few for us, and misapplieth them too. God hath appointed to bring them, to choose and like of salvation 〈…〉 Christ. speaker D. B. P. Unto these 〈…〉 of the old Testament, (one under the law of Nature, and the ●…er under Moses' law) let us couple two more out of the new Testament, The first may be those kind words of our Saviour unto the jews. Jerusalem, Matth. 23. Jerusalem, etc. how often would I have gathered together thy children as the hen doth her chickens under her wings, and thou wouldst not: Which doth plainly demonstrate that there was no want, either of Gods help inwardly, or of Christ's persuasion outwardly, for their conversion: and that the whole fault lay in their own refusing, and withstanding God's grace, as these words of Christ do plainly witness, and thou wouldst not. The last testimony is in the Revelat, where it is said in the person of God. I stand at the door and knock, if any man shall hear my voice and Cap. 3. open the gates, I will enter in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. Mark well the words: God by his grace, knocks at the door of our hearts, he doth not break it open, or in any sort force it, but attendeth, that by our assenting to his call, we open him the gates, and then, lo he with his heavenly gifts will enter in: otherwise he leaves us. What can be more evident in confirmation of the freedom of man's will, in working with God's grace? speaker A. W. h Matth. 23. 37 We acknowledge that the fault is wholly in every man, that is not saved: but we deny, that therefore he hath power, by nature, to choose life when it is offered: he fails indeed in doing of that which he might do, and aught to do, for his own furtherance, to this choice; as the jews did, in refusing to hear, to meditate, to yield to the miracles wrought by our Saviour Christ, and to believe the doctrine; which they could in no reasonable sort gainsay. It was i Perk. of God's free grace. p. 23 Lombard. 1. senten. dist. 45 voluntas signi, not beneplaciti: God offered them the outward means of his word, not the inward means of his spirit, for their conversion, which k Act. 16. 14. Lydia had. l revel. 3. 20. To break open the door, were to use compulsion; to m Perk. of God's free grace. p. 79 knock, is to use the outward means of converting a man; or if you will, to inspire a good purpose: upon which if any man open, out of doubt Christ will enter. But this doth no: prove, that a man upon this motion, can yield by the strength of his own free will, which is the point in question. speaker D. B. P. To these express places taken out of God's word, let us join the testimony of those most ancient Fathers, against whose works the Protestants can take no exception. The fi●●● shall be that excellent learned Martyr justinus in his Apology, who unto the Emperor Aatonine speaketh thus. Unless man by free will could she from soul dishonest deeds, and follow those that be fair and good; he were without fault, as not being cause of such things as were done But we Christians teach that mankind by free choice, and free will, doth both do well, and sin. To him we will join that h●ly Bishop and valiant Martyr Jreneus, who of free will writeth thus, not only in works, but in faith also, our Lib. 4. cap. 72. Lord reserved liberty, and freedom of will unto man: saying, be it done unto thee, according to thy faith. speaker A. W. I will add to that worthy company, Saint Cyprian: who upon those words of our Saviour, will you also depart, discourseth thus. Our Lord did joan 6. Lib. 1. Epist. 3. not bitterly inveigh against them, which forsook him, but rather used these gentle speeches to his Apostles, will you also go your way: and why so? Marry observing and keeping (as this holy Father declareth) that decree by which man left unto his liberty, and put unto his free choice, * Appetite, des●●es, or at the most, procure; not might deserve. might deserve unto himself, either damnation, or salvation. These three most ancient, and most skilful in Christian Religion, and so zealous of Christian truth, that they spent their blood in confirmation of it, may suffice to certify any indifferent reader; what was the judgement of the ancient and most pure Church, concerning this article of free wl specially when the learnedst of our Adversaries, confess all Antiquity, (excepting only S. Augustine) to have believed and taught free will. Hear the words This is but a popish slander to charge him with lying. Cent. 2. c. 4. col. 59 They were not led to this point by the Apostles, if the● sp●ke of spiritual actions. S●…ny answer in the Epistle ded●…atoru. of one, for all. Mathias Illyricus in his large, long lying history, having rehearsed touching free will, the testimonies of justine Ireneus and others, saith. manner●lement ●lement, Patriarch of Alexandria, doth every where teach free will, that it may appear (say these Lutherans) not only the Doctors of that age to have been in such darkness, but also that it did much increase in the age's following. See the wilful blindness of heresy. Illyricus confessing the best learned in the purest times of the Church, to have taught free will: yet had rather believe them to have been blindly led, by the Apostles and then best Scholars, who were their Masters: then to espy and amend his own error. These principal pillars of Christ's Church were in darkness belike as Protestants must needs say: and that proud Persian and most wicked heretic Manes (of whom the Manichees are named) who first denied free will, began to broach the true light of the new Gospel. n justin Apol. 2. ad Anto●●num. justin speaks of natural actions, not of spiritual: for these were utterly unknown to the Emperor being a heathen. He speaks also, perhaps, against the imputation of fatal necessity, wherewith the Christians were charged in those times. o Irenae. lib. 4. cap. 70. Irenaeus gives a man that freedom, which is contrary to constraint: God (saith he) made man free, from the beginning, etc. p Non Coactum à deo. not constrained by God. q Cyprian lib. 1. epist. 3. Cyprian speaks of using, or not using the outward means; such, as following Christ to hear the word of him, whereof r joh. 6. 66. the Evangelist there entreats. Now that this is in man's power, and that it is a means to procure salvation, or damnation, who denies? But Cyprian doth not say, that it is in a man's power by nature, to consent to God's motion for his conversion. speaker D. B. P. It cannot reasonably be denied, that, in the point of free will, some of the ancient writers, before Austin, * Sixtus Senens lib. 5. in praefat. Tolle●us in joh. 6. & Rom. 9 Maldonatus in joh. 6. Peter. in Rom. 9 Num. 33. spoke liker Philosophers, than Divines; and gave both occasion to Pelagius of his error, though they favoured it not, and also advantage for the confirming of it; as the place of the s Centur. 2. cap. 4. col. 59 Centuries alleged by you plainly proves. Other of them also spoke not so plain, as it was to be wished they had done: so that t Aug. de nat. & great. cap. 61. & seq. 2. Inst. c. 2. q. 4. It becomes not a divine to write so scornfully. Not to have spoken so plainly and warily. De spirit. & li●. 34. De gra. Chri. 14. Ad Simpl. q. 2. Tract. ●2. in joh. Ep. ●7. Austin hath much ado to defend them against Pelagius, and in the entrance to his defence is feign to lay this foundation, that he holds himself free for yielding to any writings of men whatsoever. Here I would make an end of citing Authorities, were it not that Calvin saith, that albeit all other ancient writers be against him, yet S. Augustine as he vaunteth, is clearly for him in this point, but the poor man is foully deceived, aswell in this, as in most other matters. I will briefly prove, and that out of those works which S. Augustine wrote after the Pelagian heresy was a foot; for in his others, Calvin acknowledgeth him to have taught free will. Of our freedom in consenting to God's grace, he thus defineth, to consent to God's calling, or not to consent, lieth in a man's own will. Again: Who doth not see every man to come, or not to come, by free will? but this free will may be alone, if he do not come, but it cannot be but holpen, if he do come. In another place, that we will (do well) God will have it to be his and ours; his, in calling us; ours, in following him. Yea more: To Christ working in him, a man doth cooperate, that is, worketh with him, both his own justification, and life everlasting: will you hear him speak yet more formally for us? We have dealt with your brethren and ours, as much as we could: that they would hold out and continue in the sound Catholic faith; the which neither denieth free will, to evil or good life, nor doth attribute so much to it, that it is worth any thing without grace. So according to this most worthy Father's judgement, the sound Catholic faith doth not deny free will, as the old Manichees and our new Gospelers do; nor esteem it without grace able to do any thing toward salvation, as the Pelagians did. And to conclude, hear S. Augustine's answer unto them, who say, that he, when he commendeth grace, denieth free will. Much less Lib. 4. con. ●ul. c. 8. would I say that, which thou lyinglie dost affirm me to say, free will to be denied, if grace be commended, or grace to be denied, if free will be commended. speaker A. W. Calvin doth not without cause affirm, that Austin is for him; not only in his writings after the Pelagian heresy, but in those before it also; though in the former he u Aug. Ret. act. lib. 1. cap. 9 speak not so warily, as in the latter; yet his judgement was all one. * Aug. de spirit. & lit. cap. 34. Austin saith no more, but that assenting, or dissenting, when God calls, is an action of man's will. That the difference betwixt man and man, why one believes, and another doth not, proceeds from the divers work of God's spirit, not from the choice of the parties, he speaks most plainly in the same place. * Ipsum velle credere deus operatur in homine. God works in a man the very willing to believe: and yet more; nay, If any man will draw us to the searching of that depth, y Cur illi ita suadeatur, ut persuadeatur, illi autem non. why this man is so persuaded, that he yields, he is not, there are only two things, which I think good to answer. z Rom. 11. 33. & 9 14. O the depth of the riches! And is there iniquity with God? Let him, whom this answer mislikes, seek for some that are more learned, but let him take heed that he find not some that are more presumptuous. Imagine then what Austin thinks of you Papists, who confidently affirm, that the reason of this difference proceeds from the good use of free will in the believer: not that you are more learned, but that you are more presumptuous. a Aug de gra. Christ. cap. 14. If you had added the words that follow immediately in Austin, you should have needed no further answer. Free will, if a man come to Christ, cannot be but holpen, b Et sic adiutum, etc. and so holpen, that not only he must know what is to be done, but do that he knows: and therefore when God teaches, not by the letter of the law, but by the spirit of grace, he teaches so, that a man doth not only see by knowledge that which he hath learned, but also desire it by willing, and perform it by doing. And by this divine manner of teaching, even the will and work itself, not only the natural possibility of willing and working is holpen. c Si enim sol●… posse nostrum, etc. For if only our power were helped by this grace, the Lord would thus speak: Every one that hath heard of the Father, and hath learned, can come to me. But he said not so; but every one which hath heard of my Father, and learned, doth come to me. To have power to come, Pelagius d Venire posse in natura ponit. ascribes to nature; or, as of late he hath begun to speak, to grace, what grace soever he mean; by which (as he saith) our possibility is helped: but to come, is in will and work. It follows not, that he which can come, e Etiam veniat, nisi id volverit, atque fecerit. cometh, unless he will, and do so; but every one that hath learned of the Father, not only can come, but comes. I have set down these words of Austin at large, as well that it may appear with what conscience this man cities the Fathers, as that S. Augustine's judgement of this point may be fully known to all men. There is great reason that we should expound f Aug. ad Simplicia. q. 2. lib. 1 such short sentences as this, by such large discourses as the former: but if we knew not that, this place makes nothing against us: for we have granted already, that to will is our work, but we say further, that God's calling, as his teaching, in g Aug. de great. Chri. cap. 14. that other place of Austin, works in us, not only to be able to will, but to will indeed. I h Aug. in joh. tract. 72. say of this as of the former, that it is not contrary to our doctrine: for we acknowledge, that in our justification, and salvation after election, we work with God; but not, as I have often answered, by any natural power of our free will, nor by any choice of our own, to which we are not inclined and brought by God's spirit. We say with i Aug. Epist. 47 Lib. 4. contra ●ulian. cap. 8. S. Austin, both in words and meaning, that true religion neither denies free will, either to a good or bad life, nor gives so much to it, that it should be of any force without grace; and we add, that therefore your religion is false, because it affirms, that the will of man can, by nature, assent to a good motion inspired. So to commend free will is indeed to deny grace; but to hold them both, as I have proved Austin did out of these very places which you allege for your opinion, and as we do, going not an hairs breadth from him in this question, is to glorify God's mercy, and confess our own weakness; which is the end of his love to us, in the whole work of our salvation. III. Objections of Papists. speaker W. P. Object. I. First they allege that man by nature may do that which is good, and therefore will that which is good: for none can do that which he neither willeth nor thinketh to do, but first we must will and then do. Now (say they) men can do good by nature, as give alms, speak the truth, do justice, and practise other duties of civil virtue: and therefore will that which is good. I answer, that a natural man may do good works for the substance of the outward work: but not in regard of the goodness of the manner: these are two divers things. A man without supernatural grace may give alms, do justice, speak the truth, etc. which be good things considered in themselves as God hath commanded them; but he cannot do them well. To think good things and to do good things are natural works: but to think good things in a good manner, and to do them well, so as God may accept the action done, are works of grace. And therefore the good thing done by a natural man is a sin, in respect of the doer: because it fails both for his right beginning, which is a pure heart, good conscience, and faith unfeigned; as also for his end, which is the glory of God. speaker D. B. P. Now in few words I will pass over the objections which he frameth The ●esse you meddle v●… them, the 〈◊〉 it will be for 〈◊〉 c●ed●s. in our names. But misapplieth them. First Objection. That man can do good by nature, as give alms, do justice, speak the truth, etc. And therefore will them without the help of grace. This argument we use to prove liberty of will in civil and moral matters, even in the corrupted state of man, and it doth demonstrate it: and M. Perkins in his third conclusion doth * He grants no more there, than he doth here. grant it. An ●his answer here is far from the purpose, for albeit (saith he) touching the substance of the work it be good, yet it faileth both in the beginning, because it proceeds not from a pure heart, and a faith unfeigned: and also in the end w●ich is not the glory of God. Answer. It faileth neither in the one nor other: for that alms may issue out of a true natural compassion, which is a sufficient good fountain to make a work morally good: faith and grace do purge the heart, and are necessary only for good and meritorious works: Again being done to relieve the poor man's necessity, God his Creator & Master, is thereby glorified. And so albeit the man thought not of God in particular: yet God being the final end of all good, any good action of itself, is directed towards him, when the man putteth no other contrary end thereunto. speaker A. W. Master Perkins, as any man may see, grants a freedom of will in moral actions, but denies those actions to be good, in regard of the goodness of the manner: and afterward, A man may give alms, etc. which are good things, considered as they are commanded of God: but he cannot do them well, that is, so as God may accept of the action done. If you will reply upon M. Perkins, you must prove, that such works of a natural man will be accepted of God; but that you cannot do. k Prosper. de vocat. gentium. lib 2. cap 3 Sine cul●u veri Dei etiam quod virtus vi detur esse, peccatum est. Aug in senten. Prosper. cap. 106. Omnis infidelium vita, peccatum est. For the person must be accepted before the work; l Hebr. 11. 6. and without faith he cannot be accepted, nor have faith being a natural man. The sum of the answer is, if it be not done as the law requires, it is not a good work: if it be, it is meritorious, and so must be accepted of God. speaker W. P. Object. II. God hath commanded all men to believe and repent: therefore they have natural free will, by virtue whereof (being helped by the spirit of God) they can believe and repent. Ans. This reason is not good: for by such commandments God shows not what men are able to do; but what they should do, and what they cannot do. Again, the reason is not well framed, it ought rather to be thus; because God gives men commandment to repent and believe, therefore they have power to repent and believe, either by nature or by grace, and then we hold with them. For when God in the Gospel commandeth men to repent and to believe, at the same time by his grace he enableth them both to will or desire to believe and repent, as also actually to repent and believe. speaker D. B. P. 2. Object. God hath commanded all to believe and repent, therefore they have natural free will, by virtue whereof being helped by the spirit of God, they can believe. The force of the argument consisteth in this, that God being a good Lord, will not command any man to do that, which he is no way able to do. Ans. M. Perkins answereth in effect (for his words be obscure) that To him that will not understand them. God commandeth that, which we be not able to perform, but that which we should do: Then I hope he will admit that he will enable us by his grace to do it, or else how should we do it? God surely doth not bind us by commandment to any impossible thing, he is no tyrant, but telleth us, that his yoke is sweet, and his burden easy. And S. John witnesseth, that his commandments are not heavy. He was far off Matth. 11. joh. 5. from thinking that God would tie any man by law, to do that which he was altogether unable to perform. This in the end M. Perkins himself approveth. speaker A. W. Master Perkins denies the consequence of the enthymem, viz. That therefore men have free will to believe and repent, because God commands them to believe and repent; you to help the matter, give a reason of the consequence, God being a good Lord, will not command any man to do that, which he is no way able to do: therefore since God commands men to believe and repent, they have free will to believe and repent. Here the consequence is worse than before; for who sees not that there may be other means of believing & repenting? namely, inclining the will by grace. The antecedent also is false: for God being a good Lord, may enjoin his servant that, which he made him able to perform, m Bernard. d● great. & lib. arb. fol. 263. Corruit de posse non peccare, in non posse non peccare. though by his own fault he be now unable. speaker W. P. Object. III. If man have no free will to sin, or not to sin, than no man is to be punished for his sins: because he finneth by a necessity not to be avoided. Answer, The reason is not good: for though man cannot but sin, yet is the fault in himself, and therefore he is to be punished; as a bankrupt is not therefore freed from his debts, because he is not able to pay them: but the bills against him stand in force, because the debt comes through his own default. speaker D. B. P. 3 Object. If man have no free will to sin, or not to sin, than no man is to be punished for his sins, because he sinneth by a necessity, not to be avoided. He answereth, that the reason is not good; for, though man cannot but sin, yet is the fault in himself, and therefore is to be punished. Against which, I say that this answer supposeth that which is false, to wit, that a man in sin, cannot choose but sin: for by the help of 1. Per. 3. God, who desireth all sinner's conversion, and thereunto affordeth grace sufficient; a sinner in a moment, may call for grace and repent him: and so choose whether he will sin or no, and consequently hath free will to sin or not to sin: And that example of a bankrupt is not to purpose, for he cannot when he will, satisfy his creditors, who content not themselves Not to your purpose, but to his very fit. with his repentance, without repay of their money, as God doth. speaker A. W. Here again Master Perkins denies the consequence; that therefore a man is not to be punished for sinning, because he hath no free will to sin, or not to sin. The reason of his denial is that, which I answered in the second objection: he may justly be punished, though he have not free will not to sin, because it is by his own fault that he hath it not. You reply, that the answer supposeth that which is false. The answer doth not suppose it, but, as I have showed, plainly denies the consequence. How your conceit, that every man hath help of God, so that he may repent and believe when he will, can stand with Augustine's judgement before set down, let every man, that hath reason, consider. The example of the bankrupt is fully to the purpose; for which Master Perkins brings it, to show, that a man is not always therefore to be borne with, for not doing that which he is enjoined, because he cannot do it: for when it is through his own fault that he cannot, why should he escape? Now concerning the force of this argument, hear S. Augustine's opinion De duab. animab. contra Manich. in these words. Neither are we here to search obscure books to learn, that no man is worthy of dispraise or punishment, which doth not that, which he cannot do: for (saith he) do not shepherds upon the downs, From the doing whereof he is for●●bly restrained. sing these things? do not Poets upon the stages, act them? Do not the unlearned in their assemblies, and the learned in their libraries acknowledge them? Do not masters in the schools, and Prelates in the pulpits, and finally all mankind throughout the whole world, confess and teach this? to wit, that no man is to be punished, because he did that, which he could not choose but do. Should he not then (according to S. Augustine's Who shall justify the matter of original sin, if no man may be punished for that which he could not avoid? censure) be hissed out of all honest company of men, that denieth this so manifest a truth; confessed by all Mankind? How gross is this heresy, that so hoodeth a man, and hardeneth him, that be he learned, yet he blusheth not to deny roundly, that which is so evident in reason, that even natural sense, doth teach it unto shepherds? God of his infinite mercy, deliver us from this strange light of the new Gospel. speaker A. W. Saint Austin disputing in that book n See my answer about the Manichees in the Epistle dedicatory. against the Manichees, who hold that there were two souls in every creature, of two divers substances; the one good, the other bad, by which they are forced to do good or evil, as either of them could overcome other; refutes them by this reason, among other, that if men do well or ill, by constraint, they were neither to be praised, nor dispraised for it. That he is thus to be understood, not only the course of his disputation shows, but also the definition that he brings of will: Will (saith o De duabus animabus contra Manic. cap. 10. Austin) is a motion of the mind ( p Nullo cogente. no man constraining it) to q Ad aliquid vel non amittendum, vel adipiscendum. the not losing, or to the getting of something. I showed before that we admit no such necessity of sinning, but only affirm, that whatsoever a natural man doth, it is sinful: so that we grant him liberty from constraint, for the doing, or not doing this or that action; but deny, that any action he doth is free from sin, and therefore he sins necessarily in all he doth. The second point. Of Original sin. speaker W. P. The next point to be handled, is concerning Original sin after baptism; that is, how farforth it remaineth after baptism. A point to be well considered, because hereupon depend many points of Popery. I. Our consent. Conclus. I. They say natural corruption after baptism is abolished, and so say we: but let us see how far it is abolished. In original sin are three things; I. the punishment, which is the first and second death. II. Guiltiness, which is the binding up of the creature unto punishment. III. the fault or the offending of God, under which I comprehend our guiltiness in Adam's first offence, as also the corruption of the heart: which is, a natural inclination and proneness to any thing that is evil, or against the law of God. For the first we say, that after baptism in the regenerate, the punishment of original sin is taken away; There is no condemnation (saith the Apostle) to them that be in Christ jesus. Rom. 8. 1. For the second, that is, guiltiness, we further condescend and say; that is also taken away in them that are borne anew: for considering there is no condemnation to them, there is nothing to bind them to punishment. Yet this caveat must be remembered, namely, that the guiltiness is removed from the person regenerate, not from the sin in the person: but of this more afterward. Thirdly, the guilt in Adam's first offence is pardoned. And touching the corruption of the heart, I avouch two things. I. That, that very power or strength whereby it reigneth in man, is taken away in the regenerate. II. That this corruption is abolished (as also the fault of every actual sin passed) so far forth as it is the fault and sin of the man in whom it is. Indeed it remains till death, and it is sin considered in itself, so long as it remains, but it is not imputed unto the person: and in that respect is as though it were not; it being pardoned. Annotations upon our Consent. speaker D. B. P. First, we say not, that the punishment of Original sin is in it, or any part of it, but rather a due correction, and as it were an expulsion of it: this is but a peccadillo. What is, but 〈◊〉 peccadillo●you ●you must needs show you are spanish. speaker A. W. Neither do we say, that the punishment of original sin is in it, or any part of it, but that, in handling that point, it is to be considered; much less do we charge you with saying so. What it is you call a peccadillo, or small sin, I understand not certainly. If you mean that original sin is small, and deserves no punishment, but a due correction, either r Rom. 5. 12. 1. Cor. 15. 21. the death of all men in Adam is no punishment, or God punisheth without desert. speaker D. B. P. But there lurketh a Serpent in that caveat; that the guiltiness of Original sin is removed from the person regenerate, but not from the sin in the person. The like he saith afterward of the fault, that it is a sin still in itself, remaining in the man till death, but it is not imputed to him, as being pardoned. Here he quillets of very strange Doctrine: the sin is pardoned, and yet the guiltiness of it, is not taken away. Doth not a pardon take away from the fault pardoned, all bond of punishment due unto it, and consequently all guiltiness belonging to it? Who can deny this, unless he know not, or care not what he say? If then Original sin be pardoned, the guiltiness of it is also removed from itself. Again, what Philosophy, or reason, alloweth us to say, that the offender being pardoned for his offence, the offence in itself remaineth guilty? as though the offence separated from the person, What vain i●…ions are these? were a substance, subject to law, and capable of punishment: can Original sin in itself die the first and second death, or be bound up to them? What senseless imaginations be these? speaker A. W. The sin is pardoned, so that the party shall not be punished for it: but it is not so pardoned, that in itself it hath not just cause of punishment; and this both philosophy and reason allow; all our actual sins are pardoned, as soon as we believe in Christ, and yet they are truly sins, whensoever afterward they are committed by us. speaker D. B. P. Again, how can the fault of Original sin remain in the man renewed by God's grace, although not imputed? can there be two contrarios in one part of the subject at once? can there be light and darkness There can, though the same t●…ing can not be virtue and vice in the same respect. He is not content it should be subject, and therefore he labours to purge and free it. It is taken away, that it reigns not: not that it hath no sway. And there answered. in the understanding, virtue and vice in the will at the same instant? can the soul be both truly converted to God, and as truly averted from him at one time? is Christ now agreed to dwell with Belial? and the holy Ghost oontent to inhabit a body subject to sin? all which must be granted contrary to both, Scripture, and natural sense, if we admit the ●ault and deformity of sin to remain in a man renewed, and endued with God's grace: unless we would very absurdly imagine that the fault and guilt of sin were not inherent and placed in their proper subjects, but were drawn thence, and penned up in some other odd● corner. speaker A. W. Remember also gentle Reader, that here M. Perkins affirmeth the power, whereby the corruption of the heart reigneth in man, is taken away in the regenerate: which is clean contrary to the first proposition, of his first reason following, as shall be there proved. Not being imputed, hinders not the being of the thing there, but rather proves it: for if it were not there, what favour were it not to impute it? Who knows not that contraries may be in one part of the same subject at once, though not in the same respect? Do s 1. Cor. 13. 9 we not, while we are here, know in part, and so remain ignorant in part? Is not our will imperfectly reform? The holy Ghost is not content that the body he doth inhabit should be subject to sin, and therefore he labours continually to free it from that subjection: but he is content to inhabit the man whom he hath begun to reform, that he may purge him thoroughly. II. The dissent or difference. speaker W. P. Thus far we consent with the Church of Rome: now the difference between us stands not in the abolishment, but in the manner, and the measure of the abolishment of this sin. Papists teach, that Original sin is so far forth taken away after baptism, that it ceaseth to be a sin properly: and is nothing else but a want, defect, and weakness, making the heart fit and ready to conceive sin: much like tinder, which though it be not fire of itself, yet is it very apt and fit to conceive fire. And they of the Church of Rome deny it to be sin properly, that they might uphold some gross opinions of theirs, namely, That a man in this life may fulfil the law of God: and do good works void of sin: that he may stand righteous at the bar of God's judgement by them. But we teach otherwise, that though original sin be taken away in the regenerate, and that in sundry respects: yet doth it remain in them after baptism, not only as a want and weakness, but as a sin, and that properly: as may by these reasons be proved. Reason I. Rom. 7. 17. Paul saith directly: It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me: that is, original sin. The Papists answer again, that it is so called improperly: because it cometh of sin, and also is an occasion of sin to be done. speaker A. W. I approve this interpretation of S. Paul, as taken out of that ancient D. B. P. But Saint Paul expounds himself otherwise. Lib. 1. cont. duas Epist. Pelag. cap. 10. Lib 〈◊〉 de nupt●… & concup. cap. 23. Is every one a Papist t●at agrees with you in any one poyn●? and famous Papist Saint Augustine: who saith expressly: Concupiscence, (whereof the Apostle speaketh) although it be called sin, yet is it not so called, because it is sin, but for that it is made by sin: a● writing is called the hand, because it is made by the hand. And in an other place repeating the same, addeth. That it may also be called sin, for that it is the cause of sin: as cold is called slothful, because it ma●es a man slothful: so that the most profound Doctor Saint Augustine is styled a formal Papist by M. Perkins, shall be well coursed by the plain circumstances of the place. If S. Austin were a Papist in this point, because of this sentence; questionless he was in the same point a Protestant, because of some other which I will recite. Dost thou not mark ( t Aug. contra julian. Pelag. lib. 6. cap. 5. saith Austin) dost thou not perceive, that he who doth so vehemently persecute his body, if he doth persecute nothing that displeaseth God, doth God great wrong, by persecuting his temple u Frustra. without cause? Now what, I pray you, displeaseth God, but sin? But this corruption we speak of, is also hated of God, and therefore day by day consumed. As the Physician (saith * Aug. in joan. tract. 41. Austin) hates the disease of the sick man, and labours, by curing it, to drive away the disease, and ease the diseased: so doth God labour by his grace in us to consume sin, and deliver man. And that it is not only sin, as it comes from sin, and causeth sin, but also properly as a disobedience, Austin shows evidently by this similitude: As blindness of heart ( x Aug. contra julian P●●●g. lib. 5. cap. 3. saith he) is both a sin, whereby we believe not in God; and a punishment of sin, whereby the proud heart is worthily punished; and a cause of sin, when any evil is committed by the error of the heart: so that concupiscence of the flesh, against which the good spirit lusteth is both sin, because there is in it disobedience against the government of the mind; and a punishment of sin, because it is y Reddita est meritis inobe dientis. laid by desert upon the disobedient; and the cause of sin, by the z Defectione con●…ionis. fault of consent, or the a Contagione na●cen 〈◊〉. contagion of birth. Yea Austin doubts not to say (as we do) that the guilt of concupiscence yet remaining, is pardoned, that it may not be imputed for sin. In them which are regenerate (saith b Aug. ubi supra. Austin) when they receive forgiveness of all sins whatsoever, it must needs be, that the guilt also of this concupiscence yet remaining is forgiven, that, as I said, it may not be imputed c In peccatum. for sin. Further it is plain, that Austin acknowledged it to be sin, because he d Aug. contra julian. Pelag. lib. 2. receives and allows of Ambrose his opinion, who calls it iniquity, because it is unjust that the flesh should lust against the spirit. This sin e Ad Rom. 7. Chrysostome and Theophylact understand, to be our slothful and corrupt will, and a violent inclination to evil. And f Lombard. lib. 3. ist. 19 Peter Lombard saith, that we are not altogether redeemed by Christ from the guilt or fault, but so that it reigns not in us. speaker W. P. But by the circumstances of the text, it is sin properly: for in the words following, S. Paul saith, that this sin dwelling in him, made him to do the evil which he hated. And. verse 24. he crieth out, O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death? For saith he, that S. Paul there takes sin properly, appears by the words following, That this sin dwelling in him, made him to do the evil which he ha●●a. How proves this, that sin there must be taken properly: it rather proves, that it must be taken improperly: for if it He ●ated it 〈◊〉 regenerate; he did it willing 〈◊〉 ●s 〈◊〉 ●ate. made him do the evil, which he hated: then could it not be sin properly, for sin is not committed, but by the consent and liking of the will: But S. Paul did not like that evil, but hated it, and thereby was so far off from sinning, that he did a most virtuous deed in resisting and overcoming that evil. As witnesseth S. Augustine, saying: Reason sometimes resisteth manfully, and ruleth raging concupiscence; which Lib. 〈◊〉. de Gen. cont. M●nic●. cap. 14. being done, we sin not, but for that conflict are to be crowned. This first circumstance then alleged by M. Perkins, doth rather make against him, than for him. speaker A. W. The reason lies thus: Original sin dwelling in the Apostle, made him do that evil he hates: therefore it is sin properly. You answer, it rather proves the contrary; because the which the Apostle doth with hatred of it, is not sin: for sin is not committed, but with liking and consent of the will. I answer, that whatsoever a man doth against the law of God, it is sin, whether he like or mislike it. Secondly, that the consent of the will makes it not sin, but our sin. Thirdly, the Apostle denies not, that he doth this evil with his will, for else he would not do it: but affirms that he doth it against his judgement, as g Arist. Ethi● lib. 7. cap. 3. even natural men do, that are overcome of their affections. Witness Medea in h Meta●…or. lib. 7.— Video me●●ora proboq● deteriora ●●quor.— Ovid: I see what is good, and like it, and do that is evil. Otherwise such actions of theirs should not be sin. I deny not that the regenerate have a greater hatred of the sins they fall into, and upon a better ground; but yet the natural men also oftentimes do that, which they mislike in general, though they do it willingly. That this was the Apostles meaning, he that will read the i Rom. 7. 15. Vers. 23. 25. chapter may easily perceive: I allow not (saith he) that I do: that is, I know it to be evil, and I would feign leave it undone: but the strength of my corruption is such, that I am carried away to the doing of it; and so, because I am but in part regenerate, in part I serve God, and in part sin. As for that you add out of k De Genes. contra Mani●. lib. 2 cap. 1● S. Austin, it makes not any whit against us, who acknowledge that reason, especially being regenerate, oftentimes overcomes concupiscence & shall have reward for it. Yet are not Augustine's words as you report them; but thus: Reason sometimes manfully l Ref●…t, atque compe●●●t. bridles and restrains concupiscence m Etiam com●…. even when it is stirred: when it so happens we fall not into sin, but n Cum aliquanta luctatione, corona●●ur. with some little wrestling are crowned. But sometimes again, as o Rom. 7. 2●. the Apostle plainly confesseth, it is vanquished by sin, or natural corruption, and drawn to the committing of some actual sin inward or outward; which being evident, Master Perkins reason is not answered, as the sight of it may prove. That which dwelling in S. Paul made him do that he hates, is sin properly. Indeed why should he hate it if it be not sin? But original sin dwelling in him, made him do that he hates. Therefore original sin is properly sin. speaker D. B. P. Now to the second. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death? Here is no mention of sin: how this may be Sin is implied in that body of death. drawn to his purpose, shall be examined in his argument where he repeateth it: so that there is not one poor circumstance of the text which he can find, to prove S. Paul to take sin there properly. speaker A. W. That original sin, called sin by the Apostle, is sin Chemnit. exam. part. 1. de reliq. orig. pecca Whitak. de orig. peccat. lib. 3. cap. 4. properly, our Divines prove by the description the Apostle makes of it in p Rom. 7. 18. Vers. 15. Vers. 23. that chapter: It is not good. It hinders us from doing good. It draws us to the doing of evil. It makes the Apostle cry out, Oh wretched man that I am! To which they add out of other places, q Heb. 12. 1. It is an evil that doth compass us about. r Gal. 5. 14. Rome 7. 8. It fights against the Commandment, Thou shalt not lust. s Col. 3. 5. 9 D. B. P. This conclusion is faulty. It is an evil to be crucified and mortified. Upon all these descriptions of it we conclude, that it is truly and properly sin. speaker A. W. Now I will prove by divers, that he speaks of sin improperly. First, by the former part of the same sentence: It is not I that do it: ●l● sin is done and committed properly by the person in whom it is: but this was not done by S. Paul. Ergo. Let us now see your proofs to the contrary: the first whereof you frame thus; All sin is done and committed properly by the person in whom it is: But this was not done by S. Paul. Ergo. First, your proposition is false: secondly, your conclusion is either false, or not to the purpose. Your proposition hath two faults: the one, that in stead of saying, All that is sin properly is done, etc. You say, All that is sin, is done properly; applying properly to the committing of sin, and not to the nature of it. The other fault is, that the matter of your proposition is untrue. For there is some sin, namely original, which is not done by him, in whom it is, but is bred with him. If in your assumption you mean, that the Apostle doth not properly do the evil which he hates, you are deceived. For whether it be an inward action of the mind, or an outward of the body, it must needs be performed by some nature that hath a true being: but there is no third nature in man, besides the soul and body, and what is done by either of these, is done by the man, of whom they are parts. If you say, it is done by a vicious quality in man, that quality having subsistence in man, as in the subject of it, is not properly the doer of the action, but the faculty, by which a man is fitted for the doing of it. To your proof I answer, that t Rom. 7. 1●. the Apostle consefleth he did it; I allow not that which I do. What I hate, that do I. I do that which I would not. The evil which I would not, that Vers. 16. Vers. 19 Vers. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. do I. And at last he concludes: I myself in my mind serve the law of God, but in my flesh the law of sin. Where he teacheth us to expound, his doing, or not doing. I do not the evil, which I hate, that is, in my mind, or in respect of my regeneration; I do, that is, in regard of my corruption. In my mind, I myself serve the law of God; in my flesh, I myself serve the law of sin. I do both myself; but the one in my mind regenerate, the other in my flesh unregenerate. If you will conclude (for that you leave at large in this reason, it should seem of purpose, because in the other two you set down your conclusion expressly) Therefore it is not properly sin, your conclusion is false: because it contains more than is in the antecedent. If your meaning be, either that original corruption is not sin, or that the evil which S. Paul hates, is not sin (as one of these two you must needs mean) your conclusion is from the purpose. For the question is not, whether original sin be sin, which both parts grant, but whether it be properly sin, or no: neither do you undertake to prove, that the evil which the Apostle did, with hatred of it, is not sin. So that this first proof of yours is neither for you, nor against us. speaker A. W. Secondly, out of those words, I know there is not in me, that is in my flesh, any good: And after. I see an other law in my members, resisting the D. B. P. The flesh and the soul are not contrary, but the flesh and the spirit. law of my mind. Thus, sin properly taken is seated in the soul: but that was seated in the flesh, ergo it was no sin properly. Sin properly taken is seated in the soul: But that was not seated in the soul: but in the flesh. Therefore it was no sin properly. As the image of God, after which we were created, was though principally, yet not only in the soul: so the corruption of nature, whereby that image is defaced, hath place both in soul and body, and therefore your proposition is not simply true. But your assumption is simply false. For by saying it was seated in the flesh, you must needs deny that it was seated in the soul, or else your syllogism will be nothing worth. Now by flesh the Apostle means nature unregenerate, both soul and body. u Rom. 8. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The wisdom of the flesh is enmity against God; signifying the very best part of a man's soul. Hence it is that he calls a natural man, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, animalem, and wils us to * Eph. 4. 23. Col. 2. 18. be renewed in the spirit of our mind, affirming that some are puffed up with their fleshly mind: and I pray you consider whence these works of the flesh arise; x Gal. 5. 20. Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, debate, heresies, etc. The Apostle ( y Aug. de civit. Dei, lib. 14. c. 3 saith Austin) ascribes those sins to the flesh, which bear principallsway in the devil, who, it is certain, hath no flesh: for he saith, enmity, contention, emulation, envy, are works of the flesh, the head and fountain whereof is pride, which reigneth in the devil, though he have no flesh. Yea z De amiss. gra. lib. 5. c. 15 Bellarmine himself grants, though with much ado, that concupiscence, though it be (as he saith) principally in the sensual part, yet hath place also in the mind. speaker D. B. P. The third and last, is taken out of the first words of the next Chapter. There is now therefore no condemnation to them that are in Christ jesus, that walk not according to the flesh, etc. Whence I thus argue: there is no condemnation to them, that have that sin dwelling in them, if they walk not according unto the fleshly desires of it: therefore it is no sin properly: For the wages of sin is death, that is eternal Rom. 6. damnation. speaker A. W. If (say you) there be no condemnation to them that have original sin dwelling in them, so they walk not according to the fleshly desires of it, than it is not properly sin. But there is no condemnation to them that have original sin dwelling in them, so they walk not according to the fleshly desires of it. Therefore it is not sin properly. If by these words, there is no condemnation, you mean they shall not be condemned, I deny the consequence of your proposition. For it may be properly sin, though they in whom it is have it not imputed to them to condemnation. I deny your assumption, whether you mean they are not condemned, de facto, or they deserve not condemnation, de iure. In the former sense you teach, that all infants which die unbaptized, are shut out of heaven: and yet none of them walk according to the fleshly desires of original sin. In the latter sense we and you are wholly of opinion, that original sin is a just cause of condemnation, even to infants, who actually sin not. The a Rom. 8. 1. place alleged by you, serves not to prove either of your propositions, as you have set them down: for the Apostle saith not, that there is no condemnation to them, which walk not according to the fleshly desires of original sin; but to them which are in Christ jesus. I grant that all, but they which are in Christ, do walk according to such desires; yet it is not all one to say the one and the other. For you seem to bring that as a reason, why there is no condemnation to them: whereas the Apostle adds these words to show, that they which are in Christ, do not walk after the flesh, but after the spirit; therein concluding his former disputation, of b Rom. 2. 4. 5. justification, and c Rom. 6. 7. sanctification. speaker W. P. Thence I reason thus. That which once was sin properly, and still remaining in man maketh him to sin, and entangleth him in the punishment of sin, and makes him miserable: that is sin properly. speaker D. B. P. But original sin doth all these. Ergo. Now to Master Perkins Argument in form as he proposeth it. That which was once sin properly, and still remaining in man, maketh him to sin, and entangleth him in the punishment of sin, and makes him miserable, that is sin properly: But Original sin doth all these ergo. speaker A. W. The Ma●or, which (as the learned know) should consist of three words, contains four several points, and which is worst of all, not It may consist of 40. points, and yet but three words according to Logic. one of them true. If you mean three words, as Grammar speaks of words, that you say, is false: for any proposition may contain three hundred such words, and yet not offend against Logic. If you understand three words, as a Logician, there may be forty several points in a proposition, and yet but three words, viz. The antecedent part, or subject: secondly, the consequent part, predicate, or attribute: and thirdly, the bond, by which they are coupled together. So that herein you have showed either little skill, or little honesty, to blame him for four several points, in stead of three words, as if his syllogism had (as Logicians speak) four terms, and so were false in the form of it. The four several points are these. 1. That which was once sin properly, 2. makes him to sin, 3. entangles him in the punishment of sin, 4. makes him miserable: all which make the first word, or antecedent of the proposition: the consequent is, sin properly; the 3. bond that ties these two together, the verb, is. Now let both learned and unlearned judge, whether the fault be in Master Perkins, or in your ignorance, or cavilling. speaker D. B. P. To the first; that which remaineth in man after Baptism, commonly called Concupiscence, was never a sin properly: but only the material part of sin, the formal and principal part of it, consisting in the deprivation of Original justice, and a voluntary aversion from the law of God, the which is cured by the Grace of God, given to the baptised, and so that which was principal in Original sin, do●h not remain in the regenerate. speaker A. W. It hath already been proved, that it is sin properly even after Baptism; if you mean that concupiscence, the d Rom. 7. 7. Gal. 5. 16. Apostle speaks of, against the commandment. If you do not, what have we to do with it in this question? Concupiscence, or the faculty of desiring, is no otherwise affected to sin, than reason is: but the blindness of the understanding, and the viciousness of the will, which the Apostle calls concupiscence, are part of original sin. The natural faculties are not the parts, but rather the seat of it, or the subject, which in some respect may be said to be the matter. Sure the form is (as of all sins in general) the aberration from, or the contrarines of it to the law of God. The deprivation (you should say the absence) of original justice, is comprised in the aberration I spoke of, and so is that voluntary aversion from God, and goodness; besides which, there is also an evil quality (I know not how else to call it) whereby we incline to that which is against the law of God. This we call original sin, or natural corruption, because we have it from Adam, the original of all mankind, and that from our first being, together with our nature, and in our nature; though by creation it was not in our nature. This is helped by the power of God's spirit, through the grace of sanctification, both in the principal point, and in the accessories; yet is not the concupiscence wholly taken away, but being deadly wounded, dies by little and little in the children of God, as they are assured it shall by the outward and inward baptism, through the power of Christ's death and resurrection. Notwithstanding as long as we live in this world, it remains the same thing it was before baptism, even sin properly; but the hurt it hath is unrecoverable, and the strength abated. speaker D. B. P. Neither doth that which remaineth, make the person to sin, (which was the second point,) unless he willingly consent unto it, as hath been proved heretofore: it allureth and enticeth him to sin, but hath not power to constrain him to it, as Master Perkins also himself before confessed. speaker A. W. I deny your consequence: it makes him to sin, though it do not constrain him, as the spirit of God makes us believe, though he enforce us not to it. speaker D. B. P. Now to the third, and entangleth him in the punishment of sin: how doth Original sin entangle the regenerate in the punishment of sin; if all the guiltiness of it be removed from his person, as you taught before in our Consent? Mendacem memorem esse oportet: Either confess that the guilt of Original sin is not taken away from the regenerate, or else you must unsay this, that it entangleth him in the punishment of sin. speaker A. W. This doubt is already answered, that it entangles him; because it makes him do that, by which he is guilty of sin, and deserves punishment, howsoever the Lord pardons his sin in Christ. speaker D. B. P. Now to the last clause, that the relics of Original sinen make a man miserable, a man may be called wretched and miserable, in that he is in disgrace with God, and so subject to his heavy displeasure: and that which maketh him miserable in this sense, is sin: but S. Paul taketh not the word so here, but for an unhappy man exposed to the danger of sin, and to all the miseries of this world, from which we should have been exempted, had it not been for Original sin, after which sort he useth the same word, If in this life only we were hoping in Christ, we were more miserable than all men: not that the good Christians were 1. Cor. 15. farthest out of God's favour, and more sinful than other men: but that they had fewest worldly comforts, and the greatest crosses, and thus much in confutation of that formal argument. speaker A. W. It is strange, you should so confidently set down an untruth in writing, whereof you may so easily and certainly be convinced. The e 1. Cor. 15. 19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Rom. 7. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Apostle doth not use the same word, but another, that signifies to be pitied, We were of all men most to be pitied. But that the Apostle complains of misery in respect of sin by that word, the use of it otherwhere may prove. The f Revel. 〈◊〉. 17. holy Ghost saith of the Church of Laodicea, that she was g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. miserable and wretched (the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying there, either the misery of sin, or pity for that misery) and beggarly and blind, and naked; Howl ye rich men (saith h jam. 5. 1. S. james) for the i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. miseries that shall come upon you. The Apostle speaks not a word of any worldly miseries (as you expound him) but of the misery he was in by the law of sin, which he served; and surely if in itself it be not sin, why should the Apostle so much complain of it, since by the trouble it put him to, it did but occasion him to show his valour (and as you Papists say) was a means to make him deserve a crown of glory? speaker W. P. Reason II. Infants baptised and regenerate, die the bodily death before they come to the years of discretion: therefore original sin in them is sin properly: or else they should not die, having no cause of death in them: for death is is the wages of sin, as the Apostle saith, Rom. 6. 23. & Rom. 5. 12. Death entered into the world by sin. As for actual sin they have none, if they die presently after they are borne before they come to any use either of reason, or affection. speaker D. B. P. Answer. The cause of the death of such Innocents, is either the distemperature of their bodies, or external violence: and God who freely bestowed their lives upon them, may when it pleaseth him as freely take their lives from them, especially when he means to recompense them with the happy exchange of life everlasting. True it is, that if our first parents had not sinned, no man should have died, but have been both long preserved in Paradise, by the fruit of the wood of life, and finally translated without death into the Kingdom of heaven: and therefore A ridiculous translation. Wood is not wyont to bear fruit. Rom. 5. Rom. 6. is it said most truly o● S Paul. Death entered into the world by sin. But the other place, the wages of sin is death, is foully abused, for the Apostle there by death understandeth eternal damnation, as appeareth by the opposition of it to life everlasting: and by sin there meaneth not Original, but Actual sin, such as the Romans committed in their infidelity, the wages whereof if they had no● repent them, had b●n hell fire: now to infer that Innocents are punished with corporal death, for Original sin remaining in them: because that eternal death is the due hire of Actual sin, is either to sh●w great want of judgement, or else very strangely to pervert the words of holy Scripture. Let this also not be forgotten, that he himself acknowledged in our Consent: Every one baptised is no● regenerate. that the punishment of Original sin was taken away in Baptism from the regenerate: how then doth he here say, that he doth die the death for it? speaker A. W. Master Perkins reason is thus to be framed: That, which is the cause of bodily death to infants baptized and regenerate, is sin properly: But Original sin is cause of bodily death to infants baptized and regenerate. Therefore it is sin properly. The proposition he proves by two k Rom. 6. 23. & 5. 12. places of Scripture: the assumption by showing, that they have no actual sin; and therefore, since death is not, but where sin is, original sin is cause of bodily death to infants, that die before they come to any use of reason or affection. First you deny the assumption, viz. that original sin is the cause of bodily death to infants. But the reason of your denial is insufficient. For it doth not follow, that original sin is not the cause of death to them, because the means of their death is distemperature, or external violence. For then the death of many reprobate men, were no judgement of God against sin: and though God, of his absolute power, may take away any man's life, because he gave it him: yet it pleased his Majesty to bind himself to a course in the creation, that death should be the consequent of sin. l Gen. 2, 17. The day thou eatest thou shalt die; so that wheresoever we see death, we may conclude there is sin, either really, as in all Adam's posterity, or by imputation, as in Christ. Then you come to the proof of the proposition, where you grant the m Rom. 5. 12. one place to be rightly alleged, because death indeed had not found any place of entry, had it not been for sin. n Rom. 6. 23. The other text you say is foully abused; first, because the Apostle understands by it eternal damnation: he doth so principally; but why may not death be taken as largely here, as o Gen. 2. 17. it is there, from whence all these phrases of Scripture come? But there it signifies both kinds of death. Here S. Paul chiefly puts them in mind of the greater, having showed before, that bodily death came into the world by the means of sin; and although the Apostle be occasioned to deliver that speech, by reason of the Romans actual transgressions; it doth not abate, but sharpen the edge of his exhortation, to expound the place of all sin whatsoever: for if there be no sin, no not original, but shall have death for wages, certainly these actual transgressions shall be punished with it. Master Perkins in p In our Consent. the place alleged speaks of that punishment, which is condemnation, as the very words following declare; in which he proves, that the punishment is taken away, by that of the Apostle: q Rom. 8. 1. There is no condemnation to them, that are in Christ jesus. It is true, that bodily death also is changed from being a punishment; yet the reason of that death is the dwelling of sin in the regenerate, which, by the dissolving of the body through death, must be abolished. If it had pleased God to have given Master Perkins life, that he might have seen this your exception, being better acquainted with your sleights, and his own meaning, he would have answered you more fully, as in other points, so in this also. speaker W. P. Reason III. That which lusteth against the spirit, and by lusting tempteth, and in tempting enticeth and draweth the heart to sin, is for nature sin itself; but concupiscence in the regenerate lusteth against the spirit, Gal. 5. 17. and tempteth as I have said, jam. 1. 14. God tempteth no man, but every man is tempted when he is drawn away by his own concupiscence, and is enticed: then when lust conceiveth, it bringeth forth sin. And therefore it is sin properly: such as the fruit is, such is the tree. speaker D. B. P. Answer, The first proposition is not true: for not every thing that enticeth us to sin, is sin: or else the Apple that alured Eve to sin, had been by nature sin: and every thing in this world one way or an other tempteth us to sin: according unto that of S. John. All that is in the world, is the Concupiscence of the flesh, and the Concupiscence of 1. Epist. 2. the eyes, and Pride of life: So that it is very gross to say, that every thing which allureth to sin, is sin itself, and as wide is it from all moral But not from spiritual. wisdom to affirm, that the first motions of our passions be sins. For even the very heathen Philosophers could distinguish, between sudden passions of the mind and vices: teaching that passions may be bridled by the understanding, and brought by due ordering of them into the ring of reason, and so made virtues rather than vices. And that same text which M. Perkins bringeth to persuade these temptations to be sins, proves the quite contrary. God tempteth no man; but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away by his own concupiscence, and is alured: afterwards when concupiscence hath conceived, it bringeth forth jacob. 1. sin: Mark the words well. First, Concupiscence tempteth, and allureth by some evil motion, but that is no sin, until afterward it do conceive, that is, obtain some liking o● our will, in giving ear to it, and not expelling it so speedily as we ought to do the suggestion of such an enemy. speaker A. W. The first proposition is true, and your answer but a shift; wherein you craftily leave out the principal point, to make a show of reason. The apple that alured Eve to sin, did not lust against the spirit, which is the first and chief point of Master Perkins proposition, whereof you make no mention. r Arist. Ethic. lib. 2. cap. 1. Philosophers speak according to their ignorance, granting to a man seeds and sparks of virtue by nature, not understanding, that it was sin to lust, because s Rom. 7. 7. the law of God, which forbade it, was unknown unto them. Besides they spoke of the passions, as natural things, and so they are not sin, but good, as being created by God: but our question is of them, as they are degenerated from their nature, and corrupt; a mere mystery to natural men. speaker D. B. P. The which that most deep Doctor Saint Augustine, si●●eth out very profoundly in these words. When the Apostle S. james saith, every man Lib. 6. in jud. cap. 5. is tempted, being drawn away and alured by his Concupiscence, and afterwards Concupiscence, when it hath conceived, bringeth forth sin: Truly in these words, the thing brought forth is distinguished, from that which bringeth it forth. The dam is concupiscence, the fool is sin. But concupiscence doth not bring sin forth, unless it conceive, (so than it is not sin of itself) and it conceiveth not, unless it draw us, that is, unless it obtain the consent of our will, to commit evil. The like exposition of the same place, and the difference between the pleasure tempting, that runneth before, and the sin which followeth after, Unless we resist manfully, may be seen in S. Cyrill, so that by the judgement of the most Lib. 4. in. johan. cap. 51. learned ancient Fathers, the text of S. James cited by M. Perkins, to prove concupiscence to be sin, disproveth it very sound: to that reason of his, Such as the fruit is, such is the Tree: I answer, that not concupiscence, but the will of man is the Tree: which bringeth forth, either good, or bad fruit, according unto the disposition of it: concupiscence is only an intiser unto bad. speaker A. W. Austin and Cyril speak as the Apostle doth of actual sin, which is committed by those degrees: and surely if concupiscence be not sin, without consent, because the Apostle saith it brings forth sin, when it hath conceived, by the like reason consent makes not sin deadly, because th● Apostle saith also; that sin when it is finished brings forth death. Now we know consent (even with you) may be deadly sin, and with us always is: so concupiscence is of itself sin, though not in that height and kind that outward actual sins are. The first motion to wickedness is sin, because it is an action against the commandment, t Exod. 20. 17. Rom. 7. 7. Thou shalt not lust, consent increaseth the wickedness of it: The outward act makes up the sin which the Apostle and the u Austin, Cyril. Fathers here speak of. It should seem the author of your gloss saw this; who expounds, Brings forth sin, * Glossa ordin. jacob. 1. 14. Perducit ad actum. Brings it to the act, or into action. If the Apostle saith (as he doth) That concupiscence brings forth sin, out of doubt concupiscence is the tree: and as in the tree the naughtiness of the sap is blamed for the badness of the fruit; so is the sinfulness of the will for the evil actions: though (properly) neither the sap, but the tree, brings forth the fruit, nor concupiscence, but the will, is the mother of sin: But that concupiscence is properly sin, I showed before. speaker W. P. Concupiscence against which the spirit lusteth, is sin, August. cont. Iu●. lib. 5. cap. 3 because in it there is disobedience against the rule of the mind: and it is the punishment of sin because it befalls man for the merits of his disobedience: and it is the cause of sin. speaker D. B. P. But S. Augustine saith, That concupiscence is sin, because in it there is Lib. 5. cont. julianum c. 3. disobedience against the rule of the mind, etc. I answer, that S. Augustine in more than twenty places of his works teacheth expressly, that concupiscence is no sin, if sin be taken properly: wherefore when he once calleth it sin, he taketh sin largely as it comprehendeth, not only all sin, but also all motions and inti●ements to sin; in which sense concupiscence may be termed sin: but is so called very seldom of S. Augustine, but more commonly an evil, as in the same w●●ke, is to be seen evidently: where he saith; That grace in Baptism doth renew Lib 6. cap. 5. a man perfectly, so far forth as it appertaineth to the deliverance of him from all manner of sin; but not so as it freeth him from all evil: so that concupiscence remaining after baptism, is no manner of sin, in S. Augustine's judgement: but may be called evil, because it provoketh us to evil. To this place of S. Augustine I will join that other like, Tract. 41. in johan. which M. Perkins quoteth in his 4. reason: where he saith, That sin dwelleth always in our members. The same answer serveth, that sin there, is taken improperly: as appeareth by that he seats it in our members: for according unto S. Augustine and all the learned, the subject of sin being properly taken, is not in any part of the body, but in the will This was answered before. and soul, and in the same passage he signifieth plainly, that in Baptism all sins and iniquity is taken away, and that there is left in the regenerate, only an infirmity or weakness. speaker A. W. Having proved so manifestly in the former sections by Scripture, that original corruption is properly sin, we are desirous so to expound the Fathers, as they may best agree with the truth of Scripture: if you had rather set them against the Scripture, not we, but you, are to be blamed as enemies to them, if any disgrace fall upon them. speaker W. P. Reason V. The judgement of the ancient Church. August. epist. 29. Charity in some is more, in some less, in some none: the highest degree of all which cannot be increased, is in none, as long as man lives upon earth. And as long as it may be increased, That which is less than it should be, is in fault: by which fault it is, that there is no just man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not: by which fault none living shall be justified in the sight of God. For which fault, if we say we have no sin, there is no truth in us: for which also though we profit never so much, it is necessary for us to say, Forgive us our debts, though all our words, deeds, and thoughts be already forgiven in baptism. speaker D. B. P. Ans. That here is never a word touching concupiscence, or to prove Original sin to remain after Baptism, which is in question but only hat the best men for want of perfect Charity, do o●ten sin venially, which we grant. speaker A. W. Indeed, as you pair it, leaving out all these words, By which fault none living shall be justified in the sight of God. For which fault if we say we have no sin, there is no truth in us, there is not much to prove the point; but your etc. hath cut off that which is most material, viz. By reason of our defect or failing in charity, which comes from our natural corruption, no man can say he is without sin, and by reason of which, we must call upon God for pardon of our sins. speaker W. P. Indeed Augustine in sundry places seems to deny concupiscence to be sin after baptism: but his meaning is, that concupiscence in the regenerate is not the sin of the person in whom it is. For thus he expounds himself, a Ad Valer. l. 1 c. 24. This is not to have sin, not to be guilty of sin. And, b Lib. 2. cont. jul. The law of sin in baptism is remitted and not ended. And, c Tract. 42. in job. Let not sin reign: he saith not, let not sin be, but let it not reign. For as long as thou livest, of necessity sin will be in thy members: at the least, look it reign not in thee, etc. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins having thus strongly (as you see) fortified his position with that one sentence of S. Augustine (which hath also nothing for his purpose) instead of all antiquity: confesseth ingenuously, that S. Augustine in sundry places denieth concupiscence to be sin: but expounds him to mean, that it is not sin in that person, but in itself: which is already confuted: for sin that is an accident, and, so properly inherent in his subject, cannot be at all, if it be not in some person, and the sin of And already answered. the same person. speaker A. W. Master Perkins, as the places he brings out of Austin, show, doth not deny it simply to be the sin of the person, in whom it is, but to be his to condemnation; of itself it deserves to be punished with eternal death, but in him it is not a sin procuring this punishment. x August. ad Vale●ian. lib. 1. cap. 24. Lib. 3. Instit. cap. 3. num. 10. This is not to have sin, not to be guilty of sin. speaker D. B. P. But it the Protestant Reader desire to be well assured of Saint Augustine's opinion in this point: let him see what their Patriarch john Calvin saith of it: where thus he writeth. Neither is it needful to labour much in searching out what the old writers thought of this point, when one Augustine may serve the turn: who with great diligence hath faithfully collected together all their sentences. Let the readers therefore take out of him, if they desire to have any certainty of the judgement of antiquity. Hitherto somewhat honestly: What followeth? Moreover between him and us, there is this difference: that he truly dares not call the disease of concupiscence a sin, but to express it, is content to use the word of infirmity, then lo doth he say, that it is made sin, when the act of our consent doth join with it. But we h●ld that very thing to be sin, wherewith a man is in any sort tickled. Observe first, good Reader, that S. Augustine's opinion with him carrieth the credit of all antiquity: Which is the cause that I cite him more In some questions of which he did collect their opinions; as Calvin expounds himself in the former sentence. often against them. Secondly, that he is ●●●tly on our side: teaching concupiscence not to be sin, unless we do consent unto it. Lastly, learn to mislike the blind boldness of such Masters: who having so highly commended. S. Augustine's judgement in this very matter, and advised all men to follow it: Doth notwithstanding fly from it himself. Presuming that some would be so shalow-witted as not to espy him, or else content to rely more upon his only credit, then upon the authority of all the ancient Fathers. For a taste of who●e consent with S. Augustine in this question, I will here put the sentences of some few, that I need not hereafter return to rehearse them. speaker A. W. Calvin saith not (as you translate him) Between him and us there is this difference; but this y Videri potest interest. may seem to be the difference; because he was loath to speak so plain, as we now are forced to do, though in Calvin his opinion, his judgement was all one with ours. speaker D. B. P. S. Chrysostome saith, Passions be not sins of themselves, but the unbridled excess of them doth make sins: And that I may for example sake Homil. 11. in epist. ad Rom. touch one of them: concupiscence is not a sin; but when passing measure it breaks his bounds, then lo it is adultery; not in regard of concupiscence, but in respect of the excessive and unlawful riot of it. S. Bernard (whom M. Perkins often citeth against us, and therefore may sometimes be alleged for us) hath these words: Sin is at the Serm. de sex tribul. door, but if thou do not open it, it will not enter in: lust tickleth at the heart; but unless thou willingly yield unto it, it shall do thee no hurt: withhold thy consent, and it prevaileth not. speaker A. W. S. Augustine and S. Cyrill, have been cited already, S. Hierome and S. Gregory shall be hereafter: who with the confession of Calvin, may serve sufficiently to prove, that approved antiquity is wholly for us. And And answered already. if any desire to know the founder of our adversaries Doctrine in this point: let him read the 64. heresy recorded by that ancient and holy Bishop Epiphanius: where he registereth one Proclus an old rotten sectary to have taught, that sins are not taken away in Baptism, but See my answer to the Epistle dedicatory, and to the Prologue. are only covered, which is as much to say, as sin remaineth still in the person regenerate, but is not imputed to him. Which is just M. Perkins, and our Protestants position. Chrysostome speaks of the affections, as they are natural; in which respect indeed they are not sins, but only as they are disordered against the law of God in their creation. The concupiscence he names, is not original sin, whereof we dispute, but the natural desire which Adam had by creation, and which is not in itself evil; but, as by our corruption, it inclines now to evil, and hath evil mingled with it in the act of desiring. Any man may see, that Bernard intends not to prove, that original sin is properly sin, but that it shall not prevail to make us commit gross sin outwardly, unless we consent to it: and thereby encourageth Christian men to resist it, affirming that it shall not hurt them to condemnation; in which respect Austin denies it to be sin. z See my answer to the Epistle dedicatory, and my defence of the Prologue. Proclus, howsoever deceived by Origen he erred in the point of the resurrection, yet in this matter taught nothing but that which he sufficiently confirmed by S. Paul's authority, of whom he had learned the doctrine: neither do Epiphanius or Methodius bring any good proof against his opinion, or for their own, as you write before of Hierome: urge their reasons, and you shall have answer. Objections of Papists. speaker W. P. The arguments which the Church of Rome allegeth to the contrary, are these. Object. I. In baptism men receive perfect and absolute pardon of sin; and sin being pardoned is taken quite away: and therefore original sin after baptism ceaseth to be sin. Answ. Sin is abolished two ways: first in regard of b Quoad imputationem. imputation to the person: secondly in regard of c Quoad existentiam. existing and being. For this cause, God vouchsafeth to man two blessings in baptism, Remission of sin, and Mortification of the same. Remission or pardon abolisheth sin wholly in respect of any imputation thereof unto man, but not simply in regard of the being thereof. Mortification thereof goeth further, and abolisheth in all the powers of body and soul, the very concupiscence or corruption itself, in respect of the being thereof. And because mortification is not accomplished till death, therefore original corruption remaineth till death,, though not imputed. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins answereth, that it is abolished in regard of imputation, And I hope sufficiently defended. A small sum. joh. 13. Neither ours, nor any Apostle a● all. Lib. 9 epist. 39 that is, is not imputed to the person, but remains in him still. This answer is sufficiently (I hope) confuted in the Annotations upon our consent: In confirmation of our Argument, I will add some texts of holy Scripture: First, He that is washed, needeth not but to wash his feet, for be is wholly clean. Take with this, the exposition of S. Gregory the great, our Apostle; He cannot (saith he) be called whaly clean in whom any part or parcel of sins remaineth: But let no man resist the voice of truth, who saith, he that is washed (in Baptism) is wholly clean: therefore there is not one dram of the contagion of sin left in him, whom the cleanser himself doth profess to be wholly clean. speaker A. W. Because you content yourself with your former answer, I will make no further reply, but proceed to examine your reasons. The place you bring is allegorical, and therefore being not expounded in the Scripture, unfit to prove any matter in controversy. But if we take it as spoken of baptism, it makes more against you, than for you: as appears by this syllogism. He that hath foul feet, is not wholly clean: But he that is washed hath foul feet. Therefore he that is washed is not wholly clean. So that our saviours speech must be thus understood: He that is washed, lacks but only making clean of his feet, and then he is wholly clean. a This Gregory was next neighbour to Boniface the third, the first Pope, in whom Antichrist was discovered. Gregory's speech (for it is more than I know that he is a Saint, and I am sure he was none of our Apostle, that never bestowed any pains to teach us) avows the proposition of my syllogism, that they which need to have their feet washed, are not wholly clean. Now the assumption our Saviour makes, affirming that he which is washed, hath yet need to have his feet washed, that he may be wholly clean: so that your proofs confirm my reason. speaker D. B. P. The very same doth the most learned Doctor S. Jerome affirm: saying. Epist. ad Oceanum. Psal. 50. How are we justified and sanctified, if any ●inne be le●t remaining in us? Again if holy King David say. Thou shalt wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow: how can the blackness of hell still remain in his soul? speaker A. W. There is no such thing in the epistle; and if there were, it could make nothing for your purpose; because Hierome disputes there, not of original, but of actual sin, viz. of that which was thought to be a sin, but indeed, as he plainly shows, was none; the marrying of a second wife after baptism. Besides, he speaks not of rooting out sin, but directly, as we do; of taking it away by pardoning of it. So also doth b Psal. 32. 1. 2. Rom. 4. 6, 7. 8. David, as it is manifest. Neither did he mean, that God should wash by baptism, and so cleanse him from original sin, but that he should take away the guilt and stain of the murder and adultery that he had committed. speaker D. B. P. Briefly it cannot be but a notorious wrong unto the precious blood of our Saviour, to hold that it is not aswell able to purge and purify us from sin, as Adam's transgression was of force to infect us. Yea the Apostle teacheth us directly, that we recover more by Christ's grace, than we lost through Adam's fault, in these words: But not as the offence, so also Rom. 5. the gift, for if by the offence of one, many died; so much more the grace of God, and the gift in the grace of one, man jesus Christ, hath abounded upon many. If then we through Christ, receive more abundance of grace, than we lost by Adam, there is no more sin left in the newly Baptised man, than was in Adam in the state of innocency, albeit other defects, and infirmities do remain in us, for our greater humiliation, and probation: yet all filth of sin is clean scoured out or our souls, by the pure grace of God powered abundantly into it in Baptism: and so our first Argument s●ands insoluble. speaker A. W. If we through Christ (say you) receive more abundance of grace, than we lost by Adam, there is no more sin left in the newly baptised man, than was in Adam in the estate of innocency: But we through Christ receive more abundance of grace, than we lost in Adam: Therefore there is no more sin left in the newly baptised man, than was in Adam in the state of innocency. I deny the consequence of your proposition. For though we receive more grace, yet it is not bestowed upon us at once, but grows by little and little, receiving perfection at our death, and not before. Your assumption is true, in respect of the assured continuance of grace, which Adam had not, but the measure is not greater. For Adam was created in true holiness and righteousness, perfect according to his, nature. But the place you allege, proves not the point. The c Rom. 5. 16. Apostle speaks not there of inherent righteousness, but of grace, that is, the favour and mercy of God; and of the gift by grace, that is, forgiveness of sins, as I will show (if it please God) hereafter, upon another occasion. speaker W. P. Object. II. Every sin is voluntary: but original sin in no man after baptism is voluntary: and therefore no sin. Answ. The proposition is a politic rule pertaining to the courts of men, and must be understood of such actions as are done of one man to another: and it doth not belong to the court of conscience, which God holdeth and keepeth in men's hearts, in which every want of conformity to the law is made a sin. Secondly I answer, that original sin was voluntary in our first parent Adam: for he sinned, and brought this misery upon us willingly; though in us it be otherwise upon just cause. Actual sin was first in him, and then original corruption; but in us original corruption is first, and then actual sin. speaker D. B. P. Reply. Full little knows this man what belongeth to the Court of conscience: there secret faults in deed be examined, but nothing is taken for sin by any one learned in that faculty, which is done without a man's free consent: all of them holding with S. Augustine. That sin is so voluntary an evil, that it cannot be sin, which is not voluntary: And Lib. 3. de lib. arb. cap. 17. to say with M. Perkins that any want of conformity to reason in our body is sin, is so absurd: that a man might (if that were true) be damned for a dream, how well soever disposed he went to sleep: if he chance to dream of uncleanness, whereupon doth ensue any evil motion in his flesh. This paradox of sinning without a man's consent is so contrary unto both, natural, and supernatural reason that S. Augustine averreth Lib. de vera Relig. cap. 14. Neither any of the small number of the learned, nor of the multitude of the unlearned do hold, that a man can sin without his consent. What unlearned, learned men than are start up in our miserable age, that make no bones to deny this, and greater matters too? speaker A. W. Master Perkins hath truly answered, that although men know no sin, but that which is voluntary, because they make all sin to be in the act: yet in God's judgement it is otherwise, who condemns all for sin, that is any way against his just and holy law. The place you allege out of Austin proves no more, but that those actions that are not voluntary, are not sin: which we easily grant. But d A second answer of Master Perkins omitted. Master Perkins adds a ●…ond answer, which you craftily, according to your custom, omit; because you know not what to say to it. The answer is, that original sin may be called voluntary, because Adam's sin was voluntary, and so ours in him: as e Retract. lib. 1. cap. 15. Bellarm. de amiss great. lib. 4. cap. 10. Austin truly affirms. Those dreams that are occasioned by any fault of ours, or by our natural corruption, are our sins, and to them that are not in Christ, damnable. speaker W. P. Object. III. Where the form of any thing is taken away, there the thing itself ceaseth also: but after baptism in the regenerate, the form of original sin, that is, the guilt, is quite removed: and therefore sin ceaseth to be sin. Answ. The guilt, or obligation to punishment, is not the form of original corruption, but (as we say in schools) an accident or necessary companion thereof. The true form of original sin, is a defect and deprivation of that which the law requireth at our hands in our mind, will, affections, and in all the powers both of soul and body. But they urge this reason further, saying, where the guilt and punishment is taken away, there is no fault remaining: but after baptism the guilt and punishment is removed: and therefore, though original corruption remain, it is not as a fault to make us guilty before God, but only as a weakness. Answ. Gild is removed, and not removed. It is removed from the person regenerate, which stands not guilty for any sin original or actual: but guilt is not removed from the sin itself; or, as some answer, there be two kinds of guilt, actual, and potential. The actual guilt is, whereby sin maketh man stand guilty before God: and that is removed in the regenerate. But the potential guilt, which is an aptness in sin, to make a man stand guilty if he sin, that is not removed: and therefore still sin remaineth sin. To this or like effect saith August. * Contra jul. lib. 6. c. 6. We say that the guilt of concupiscence, not whereby it is guilty (for that is not a person) but that whereby it made man guilty from the beginning, is pardoned, and that the thing it self is evil, so as the regenerate desire to be healed of this plague. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins shifteth in assigning a wrong form: affirming us to say that the form of Original sin is the guiltiness of it: which we hold to be neither the form, nor matter of it, but as it were the proper passion following it. S●e S. Thomas: who delivereth for the form of Original sin, the privation of Original justice, which justice made the 1. 2. q. & art. 3 will subject to God. The deordination then of the will, Mistress and commander of all other points in man, made by the privation of Original justice: is the Original sin is in all parts of the ●inde. form of Original sin, and the deordination of all other parts of man, (which by a common name is called concupiscence, as that learned Doctor noteth,) is but the material part of that sin, so that the will of the regenerate being by grace through Christ rectified, and set again in good order towards the law of God, the form of original sin, which consisted in deordination of it, is taken quite away by Baptism, and so consequently the sin itself, which cannot be without his proper form, as the argument doth convince. speaker A. W. The form of original sin (as I showed before) is not only the absence of righteousness, but also an habitual inclination to evil; which is not wholly taken away in this life, but only by degrees diminished, and in death utterly abolished. speaker W. P. Object. IV. Lastly, for our disgrace they allege that we in our doctrine teach, that original sin after baptism is only clipped or pared, like the hair of a man's head, whose roots still remain in the flesh, growing and increasing after they are cut, as before. Answ. Our doctrine is abused: for in the paring of any thing, as in cutting of the hair, or in lopping a tree, the root remains untouched, and thereupon multiplieth as before. But in the mortification of original sin after baptism, we hold no such paring: but teach, that in the very first instant of the conversion of a sinner, sin receiveth his deadly wound in the root, never afterward to be recovered. speaker D. B. P. Confer this last answer with his former Doctrine (good Reader) and thou mayst learn what credit is to be given to such Masters: no more constant than the wind. Here sin is deadly wounded in the root, there it remaineth still with all the guiltiness of it, although not imputed, there it still maketh the man to sin, entangleth him in the punishment of sin, and maketh him miserable: All this he comprehended before in this first reason, and yet blusheth not here to conclude, that he holdeth it as at the first: Neither clipped nor pared, but pulled up by the roots: Indeed Wounded in the ●oot●, not plucked up by the roots. they do him a favour, who say that he holdeth sin to be clipped, and as it were razed, for albeit hair razed grow out again, yet is there none for a season: but this Original sin of his is always in his regenerate, in vigour to corrupt all his works, and to make them deadly sins. But let this suffice for this matter. speaker A. W. This is a mere cavil of yours, and no contradiction of Master Perkins; original sin hath all these effects, and yet is not wholly rooted up, as you falsely make him speak, but wounded in the root so deadly, f See 12. Art. part. 1. art. 4. 〈◊〉 as that it neither shall, nor can recover, though it live and bring forth fruits of sin, for the time of our continuance in this mortal carcase. The third point: Certainty of salvation. I. Our consent. speaker W. P. I. Conclus. We hold and believe that a man in this life, may be certain of salvation: and the same thing doth the Church of Rome teach and hold. II. Conclus. We hold and believe that a man is to put a certain affiance in God's mercy in Christ for the salvation of his soul: and the same thing by common consent holdeth the foresaid Church: this point maketh not the difference between us. III. Conclus. We hold that with assurance of salvation in our hearts is joined doubting: and there is no man so assured of his salvation, but he at sometime doubteth thereof, especially in the time of temptation; and in this the Papists agree with us, and we with them. speaker A. W. To this conclusion the Papist answers, Not so Sir. But he shows not what it is he mislikes in it. IV. Conclus. They go further and say, that a man may be certain of the salvation of men, or of the Church by Catholic faith: and so say we. V. Concl. Yea they hold, that a man by faith may be assured of his own salvation through extraordinary revelation, as Abraham & others were; and so do we. speaker A. W. Here he adds, that, In this sense only the first conclusion is true: viz that there is no assurance but by revelation. We answer, that this revelation is common to all true believers in their several proportions. VI Conclus. They teach that we are to be certain of our salvation by * Bellar. lib. 3. pag. 1. 129. cl. special faith in regard of God that promiseth; though in regard of ourselves and our indisposition we cannot: and in the former point they consent with us. II. The dissent or difference. The very main point of difference lies in the manner of assurance. I. Conclus. We hold that a man may be certain of his salvation in his own conscience even in this life, and that by an ordinary and special faith. They hold that a man is certain of his salvation only by hope: both of us hold a certainty, we by faith, they by hope. II. Conclus. Further, we hold and avouch that our certainty by true faith is unfallible: they say, their certainty is only probable. III. Conclus. And further though both of us say, that we have confidence in God's mercy in Christ for our salvation, yet we do it with some difference. For our confidence cometh from certain and ordinary faith: theirs from hope, ministering (as they Here he adds false: but what he means by it he doth not express. say) but a conjectural certainty. Thus much of the difference: now let us see the reasons to and fro. III. Objections of Papists. Object. I. Where there is no word there is no faith: for these two are relatives: but there is no word of God saying, Cornelius believe thou, Peter believe thou, and thou shalt be saved. And therefore there is no such ordinary faith to believe a man's own particular salvation. Ans. The proposition is false unless it be supplied with a clause on this manner. Where there is no word of promise, nor any thing that doth countervail a particular promise, there is no faith. But (say they) there is no such particular word. It is true God doth not speak to men particularly, Believe thou, and thou shalt be saved. But yet doth he that which is answerable hereunto, in that he giveth a general promise, with a commandment to apply the same: and hath ordained the holy ministery of the word to apply the same to the persons of the hearers in his own name: and that is as much as if the Lord himself should speak to men particularly. To speak more plainly: in the Scripture the promises of salvation be indefinitely propounded: it saith not any where, if I●hn will believe, he shall be saved; or if Peter will believe, he shall be saved, but whosoever believeth shall be saved. Now then comes the minister of the word, who standing in the room of God, and in the stead of Christ himself, takes the indefinite promises of the Gospel, and lays them to the hearts of every particular man: and this in effect is as much as if Christ himself should say, Cornelius believe thou, and thou shalt be saved: Peter believe thou, and thou shalt be saved. speaker D. B. P. Here M. Perkins contrary to his custom, giveth the first place to our reasons, which he calleth objections, and endeavoureth to supplant them: and afterward planteth his own. About the order I will not contend, seeing he acknowledgeth in the beginning that he observeth none, but sets down things as they came into his head. Otherwise he would have handled justification before Salvation. But following his method, let us come to the matter. Reply. Good Sir, seeing every man is a liar, and may both deceive, The Minister's assurance is but conditional, as absolution is, if it be true. So is he as far as he agrees with the truth of the Gospel. Luk. 16. 16, and be deceived, and the Minister telling may err: how doth either the Minister know, that the man to whom he speaketh is of the number of the elect? or the man be certain that the Minister mistaketh not, when he assureth him of his salvation? To affirm as you do, that the Minister is to be believed aswell as if it were Christ himself, is plain blasphemy. Equalling a blind and lying creature, unto the wisdom and truth of God. If you could show out of God's word, that every Minister hath such a commission from Christ, then had you answered the argument directly, which required but one warrant of God's word: but to say that the assurance of an ordinary Ministers word countervails God's word, I cannot see what it wanteth of making a pelting Minister God's mate. On the otherside to aver that the Minister knows who is predestinate (as it must be granted he doth, if you will not have him to lie when he saith to Peter, thou art one of the elect) i● to make him of God's privy Council, without any warrant for it in God's word: Yea S. Paul not obscurely signifying the contrary in these words. The sure foundation of God standeth having this seal: our Lord knoweth who be his. And none else, except he reveal it unto them. speaker A. W. You utterly mistake Master Perkins, who doth not say, that the Minister is to assure any man of his salvation, but to apply the general promises of Scripture to every man particularly, upon condition of believing. The general is, Whosoever believes, shall be saved; the Ministers particular application, Cornelius believe thou, and thou shalt be saved. This is so plainly set down by Master Perkins, that I wonder how you could mistake him; and so certainly grounded upon the general, that there can no question be made of it. Neither doth this equal the Minister to Christ, but, as Master Perkins truly saith, is as much in effect, as if Christ himself should say, Cornelius believe thou, and thou shalt be saved. For if it be true, that whosoever believes shall be saved, it is as true that Cornelius shall be saved, if he believe. So that your discourse of the Ministers knowledge, and the man's election, is nothing to Master Perkins answer. speaker W. P. It is answered, that this applying of the Gospel is upon condition of men's faith and repentance, and that men are deceived touching their own faith and repentance: and therefore fail in applying the word unto themselves. Answ. Indeed this manner of applying is false in all hypocrites, heretics, and unrepentant persons: for they apply upon carnal presumption, and not by faith. Nevertheless it is true in all the elect having the spirit of grace, and prayer: for when God in the ministery of the word being his own ordinance, saith, Seek ye my face: the heart of God's children truly answereth, O Lord I will seek thy face. And when God shall say, Psalm. 17. 8. Zach. 13. 6. Thou art my people, they shall say again: The Lord is my God. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins then flieth from the assurance of the Minister, and leaves him to speak at ●andon, as the blind man casts his club; and attributeth all this assurance unto the party himself, who hearing in God's word, Seek ye my face, in his heart answereth, Lord I will seek thy face: And then hearing God say, Thou art my people, saith again, The Lord is my God. And then lo without all doubt he hath assurance of his salvation. Would ye not think that this were rather some silly old Woman's dream, than a discourse of a learned Man? How know you honest man, that those words of God spoken by the Prophet 2000 years past, to the people of Israel, are directed to you? Mine own heart, good Sir, tells me so. How dare you build upon the persuasion of your own heart any such assurance? When as in holy writ it is recorded. Wicked is the heart of man, and who shall know it? Are you ignorant how Saul before he jerem. 17. was S. Paul, being an Israelite, to whom those words appertained, persuading himself to be very assured of his faith, was notwithstanding foully deceived, and why may not you far more unskilful than he be in like manner abused? Moreover suppose that this motion cometh of the holy Ghost, and that he truly saith, The Lord is God, how long knoweth he that he shall be able to say so truly? When our Saviour Christ jesus Matth. 22. assureth us that many be called, but few of them are chosen to life everlasting. How knoweth he then assuredly, that he being once called, is of the predestinate? speaker A. W. Your question in scorn to the honest man is nothing to Master Perkins answer: he doth not say, that those places of the Prophet belong to every man; but that all the elect yield obedience to God, in the ministery of the word, believing as he commands them, and so, upon the knowledge of their belief, come to the assurance of their salvation. As for the doubt, that a man may be called, and be none of the predestinate, he, that truly believes the Scripture, casts it quite away; having learned of God that whosoever believes shall be saved: which could not be true, if it were possible that a man should believe, and not be predestinate. And it is a truth of God, that he which believeth knoweth that he believeth: and he that truly repenteth knoweth that he repenteth: unless it be in the beginning of our conversion, and in the time of distress and temptation. Otherwise what thankfulness can there be for grace received? speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins saith, that he who believeth, knoweth that he believeth Be it so; if he believe aright, and meddle no further then with those things, which be comprehended within the bounds of faith But that the certainty of salvation is to be believed, is not to be begged, but proved, being the main question, he saith further that he who truly repenteth, knoweth that he repenteth: he knoweth indeed by many probable conjectures, but not by certainly of faith: as wit●●l●●h that holy person. If God come to me, (as he dot● 〈◊〉 all repentant sinne●●,) I shall not see him, job. 9 and if he depart away from me, I shall not understand it: Which is sufficient to make him thankful, yea i● he received no grace at all, yet were he much beholding unto God, who offered him his grace, and would have freely bestowed it upon him, if it had not been through his own default. And thus our first Argument stands in his full strength and virtue, that no man can assure himself by faith of his salvation, because there is no word of God that warranteth him so to do. speaker A. W. If g 2. Cor. 13. 5. he that believes aright know he believes, and withal is sure, that no h Act. 13. 48. Rom. 8. 30. man doth believe but he that is predestinate, because that i Marc. 16. 16. joh. 1. 12. Rom. 8. 15, 16, 17. whosoever believes shall be saved, and k Rom. 8. 30. Ephes. 1. 〈◊〉. 4. Rome 9 11. none shall be saved but they that are predestinate, it is out of doubt that assurance of salvation by faith may and must be had. Now why, or how should it be more impossible to know we repent truly, then that we believe truly; especially since that and this necessarily and certainly go together? Every man that hath true faith, and no man but he that hath true faith, doth repent truly. That of l job. 9 10. job is not spoken of man's repentance, but of his inability to comprehend the works of God, as the whole discourse shows; neither are the words, If ye come to me, but (as also m Arias Montanus & Pagnin. ibi. Arias Montanus, and Pagnine expound them) Behold he passeth by. n Non cognosc●●us illum per opera. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vatablus understands the place of not knowing God by his works. Master Perkins asks what thankfulness there can be for grace received, if a man cannot know that he hath received any? As for the conjecture you speak of, it is likelier to breed fear, than thankfulness, being so uncertain: or at the least thankfulness by halves, because we can be but half persuaded that we have received grace. speaker W. P. Object. II. It is no article of the Creed, that a man must believe his own salvation: and therefore no man is bound thereto. Ans. By this argument it appears plainly, that the very pillars of the Church of Rome do not understand the Creed: for in that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed, every article implieth in it this particular faith. And in the first article, I believe in God, are three things contained: the first, to believe that there is a God: the second, to believe the same God is my God: the third, to put my confidence in him for my salvation: and so much contain the other articles, which are concerning God. When Thomas said, joh. 20. 20. My God, Christ answered, Thou hast believed Thomas. Where we see that to believe in God, is to believe God to be our God. And Psal. 78. 22. to believe in God, and to put trust in him are all one, They believed not in God, and trusted not in his help. speaker A. W. I a●mit all this, and add more (that M. Perkins be no longer ignorant 〈◊〉 Catholic knowledge of the creed,) that we must also love him D. B. P. You may be sure of your love, if you ●e sure of your faith. 1. joh. 3. wi●● a 〈◊〉 heart and strength: thus we understand it more fully than he: Yet find not out that thirteenth article, Thou must believe thine own particular salvation. For albeit, I believe and trust in God, yet not being sure of my love towards him, I am not assured of salvation, for as S. Iohn●estifieth ●estifieth. He th●…●…th not abideth in death. A man may be bound to believe his own salvation, though it be not among those twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed, o 12. Art. part. 〈◊〉. Art. 4. D. which yourselves deny to be the limit of belief. Master Perkins knew, as well as you, that by one part of God's worship the whole was signified; and, for the point in question, denies your assertion, viz. that he cannot be sure of his love towards God: For he that can be sure he hath faith, may be as sure he hath love; because no man is justified, but he that is also p Rom. 8. 9 10. sanctified. speaker W. P. And the articles concerning Remission of sins, and Life everlasting, do include, and we in them acknowledge our special faith concerning our own salvation. For to believe this or that, is to believe there is such a thing, and that the same thing belongs to me: as when David said, I should have fainted except I had believed to see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living. Psal. 27. 13. speaker D. B. P. So I answer to the second article, named by M. Perkins, that is, I believe that God of his infinite mercy, through the merits of Christ's Passion doth pardon all those, who being heartily sorry for their sins, do humbly confess them, and fully purpose to lead a new life: that I myself am such a one, I do verily hope, because I have as farforth as I O lying Pharisie. could, to my knowledge, performed those things, which God requires osme but because I am but a frail creature, and may perhaps not have done all that so well as I ought, or am not so well assured of that, which by God's help I have done, I cannot believe it, for in matter of faith (as you shall hear shortly,) there can be no fear or doubt. speaker A. W. He that will ground his hope upon his performance of that which God requires of him, as far forth as he can, hath no reason in the world to hope for any pardon. For who is so bewitched with self-love, that he discerns not how marvelously he hath failed in doing that he might do, both in nature and grace? But a true Christian believes that whosoever rests upon God for salvation by jesus Christ, is by that faith truly justified, and so much he knows of himself, though he be privy to many imperfections in his own carriage, about the means and measure of believing. speaker W. P. It is answered, that in those articles we only profess ourselves to believe remission of sins, and life everlasting, to be vouchsafed to the people and Church of God. Ans. This indeed is the exposition of many, but it stands not with common reason. For if that be all the faith that is there confessed, the devil hath as good a faith as we. He knoweth and believeth that there is a God: and that this God imparteth remission of sins, and life everlasting to his Church. And to the end that we being God's children, may in faith go beyond all the devils in hell, we must further believe, that remission of sins, and life everlasting belongs unto us: and unless we do particularly apply the said articles unto ourselves, we shall little or nothing differ from the devil, in making confession of faith. speaker D. B. P. The like answer is given to the article of life everlasting. I believe Matth. 19 that I shall have life everlasting, if I fulfil that which our Saviour taught the young man demanding what he must do to have life everlasting: to wit, if I keep all God's commandments, but because I am not assured that I shall so do (yea the Protestants (though falsely) assure us that no man by any help of God's grace can so do.) I remain in fear. But (saith M. Perkins) the Devil may so believe the articles of the creed, Utterly untrue: we say Adam might have kept th●m, and any man may now by the like measure of grace. unless we do apply those articles to ourselves. First, I say the Devils, know to be true all that we do believe, and therefore are said by Saint james to believe, but they want a necessary condition of faith, that is a godly and deuou● submission of their understanding unto the obedience of faith, and so have no ●aith to speak properly. Again they trust not in God for salvation, no● endeavour not any manner of way to obtain salvation, as Christians do, and so there is great difference between their bel●… in the articles of the creed, and ours. speaker A. W. The voice of the Gospel is, that q Ma●●. 16. 16. whosoever believes shall be spauld; That r Matth. ●9. 17. speech of our Saviour, is not a direction how to come to life everlasting by the Gospel. For it contains not sorgivenes of sins, nor faith in Christ, s Matth. 1. 21. Act. 10. ●3. the chief matter of it, but a le●●on for that proud Pharisie, that he might be convinced by his own confidence. Which appears by that t Matth. 19 21 second answer of our Saviour, wherein he shows, that the law requires per fit obedience, which he had not attained to. Indeed you Papists, and some, I grant, before Popery broke out, dream of a perfection beyond the law; but we account the law so perfect, that if the man's answer had been true, he might well have gone away assured of heaven, though he had given never a penny more to the poor, but died the richest man in all the world. Our claim to everlasting life is not by the law, u Rom. 10. 5. 6 11. Do this, but by the Gospel, Believe and thou shalt be saved. That which you bring of the devils believing, doth not any way overthrow Master Perkins answer. You propound two differences, that you have conceived, betwixt the faith of Christians and Devils; as if you would thereby refute Master Perkins, who saith not that their faith and ours is all one, but that if no more be required but to believe remission of sins, and life everlasting to be vouchsafed to the people and Church of God, their faith is as good as ours. You reply, that there are two differences; but this doth not weaken Master Perkins consequence: if there be no more required, their faith is as good as ours. You deny the assumption, viz. That the devils faith is as good as ours, and so dispute for him, against the objection. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins in his first exception grants, That commonly men do not Pag. 54. believe their salvation, as infallibly as they do the articles of the faith (yet saith he) some special men do. speaker A. W. Whereof I infer by his own confession, that our particular salvation is not to be believed by faith: for whatsoever we believe by faith, is In itself, because of God's word; to v● according to the measure of our ●aith. Is revelation from God but for ●…ope, and not for assurance. as infallible as the word of God, which assureth us of it. Then if the common sort of the faithful do not believe their salvation, to be as infallible as the articles of our creed, yea as Gods own word, they are not by faith assured of it. Now that some special good men, either by revelation from God, or by long exercise of a virtuous life, have a great certainty of their salvation, we willingly confess: but that certainty doth rather belong to a well grounded hope then to an ordinary faith. Your answer upon Master Perkins grant is insufficient; Commonly (saith Master Perkins) men do not believe their salvation, as they do the Articles of faith. Therefore (say you) by his own confession, our particular salvation is not to be believed by faith. I deny the consequence: your conclusion is not rightly inferred: men do not commonly; therefore they are not bound to do: or therefore it is not possible they should. Either of both the means you name, is sufficient to breed assurance of faith. For the former, who ever durst imagine that revelation from God breeds not certainty of faith? The latter also passeth hope: for a life truly virtuous, argues true sanctification, and that justification, which is not attained to but by true faith; and whosoever believes shall be saved. As for falling away from faith, it is impossible: as, if need be, shall be proved when occasion is offered. speaker W. P. Object. III. We are taught to pray for the pardon of our sins day by day, Matth. 6. 12. and all this were needless, if we could be assured of pardon in this life. Ans. The fourth petition must be understood not so much of our old debts or sins, as of our present and new sins: for as we go on from day to day, so we add sin to sin: and for the pardon of them we must humble ourselves and pray. I answer again, that we pray for the pardon of our sins, not because we have no assurance thereof, but because our assurance is weak and small: we grow on from grace to grace in Christ, as children do to man's estate by little and little. The heart of every believer is like a vessel with a narrow neck, which being cast into the sea, is not filled at the first; but by reason of the strait passage receiveth water drop by drop. God giveth unto us in Christ even a sea of mercy, but the same on our parts is apprehended and received only by little and little, as faith groweth from age to age: and this is the cause why men having assurance pray for more. speaker D. B. P. Good Sir, do you not see how you overthrow yourself? If your assurance be but weak and small, it is not the assurance of faith, which is as great, and as strong as the truth of God. We give God thanks for those gifts, which we have received at his bountiful hands, and desire him to increase, or continue them if they In such measure assured of. may be lost. But to pray to God to give us those things we are assured of by faith, is as fond, and frivolous, as to pray him to make Christ our Lord to be his Son, or that there may be life everlasting to his Saints in heaven, of which they are in full and assured possession. And so these three Arguments by M. Perkins propounded here for us, are very substantial and sufficient, to assure every good Christian, that he may well hope for salvation doing his duty, but may not without great presumption, assure him by faith of it. speaker A. W. It is necessary for us * 12. Art. par. 〈◊〉 art. 1. daily to crave pardon, although before we were assured of it in some measure: first, because we have a commandment, which must be simply obeyed: secondly, because we must renew our repentance, as we renew our sins. Our assurance, though it be weak, is the assurance of faith, failing not in truth, for the nature of it, but in quantity, for the measure: it should be without doubt, but it is not. speaker A. W. To these I will add two or three others, which M. Perkins afterwards D. B. P. And been replied upon. A disorderly order. seeks to salve, by his exceptions as he terms them. ●o his first exception, I have answered before. The second I will put last for order's sake, and answer to the third. Master Perkins having answered the popish objections propounded by him, proceeds to confirm our doctrine by six reasons: whereof the five first are drawn from the Scriptures. Against which the Papists except three ways. To those exceptions Master Perkins answers in their order and place. That order this Papist altars, and to serve his own turn, answers the exceptions, before he propound the reasons, to which they are taken. Afterward he shifts off the reasons as well as he can. The plainest course for me is, to set down Master Perkins words, and by A. B. C. to refer the reader to the Papists answers, and replies, as they belong to Master Perkins disputation. Our reasons to the contrary. speaker W. P. Reason I. The first reason may be taken from the nature of faith, on this manner. True faith is both an unfallible assurance and a particular assurance of the remission of sins and of life everlasting. And therefore by this faith, a man may be certainly and particularly assured of the remission of sins, and of life everlasting. And therefore by this faith a man may be certainly and particularly assured of the remission of sins, and life everlasting. That this reason may be of force, two things must be proved: first, that true faith is a certain assurance of God's mercy to that party in whom it is. Secondly, that faith is a particular assurance thereof. For the first, that faith is a certain assurance, Christ saith to Peter, Matthew 14. 31. O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? Where he makes an opposition between faith and doubting: whereby giving us directly to understand, that, To be certain, and to give assurance, is of the nature of faith. Rom. 4. 20. 22. Paul saith of Abraham, that he did not doubt of the promise of God through unbelief: but was strengthened in faith, and gave glory to God, being fully assured, that he which had promised was able to do it: where I observe first, that doubting is made a fruit of unbelief: and therefore unfallible certainty and assurance, being contrary to doubting, must needs proceed from true faith: considering that contrary effects come of contrary causes: and contrary causes produce contrary effects. Secondly I note, that the strength of Abraham's faith did stand in fullness of assurance: for the text saith, he was strengthened in the faith, being fully assured: and again, Heb. 11. 1. true saving faith is said to be the ground and subsistence of things hoped for: and the evidence or demonstration of things that are not seen: but faith can be no ground or evidence of things, unless it be for nature certainty itself: and thus the first point is manifest. The second, that saving faith is a particular assurance, is proved by this, that the property of faith is to apprehend and apply the promise, and the thing promised, Christ with his benefits. joh. 1. 12. As many, saith Saint john, as received him, to them he gave power to be the sons of God, namely to them that believe in his name. In these words to believe in Christ, and to receive Christ, are put for one and the same thing. Now to receive Christ, is to apprehend and apply him with all his benefits unto ourselves, as he is offered in the promises of the Gospel. For in the sixth chapter following, first of all he sets forth himself not only as a Redeemer generally, but also as the bread of life, and the water of life: secondly, he sets forth his best hearers, as eaters of his body, and drinkers of his blood: and thirdly, he intends to prove this conclusion, that to eat his body, and to drink his blood, and to believe in him, are all one. Now than if Christ be as food, and if to eat and drink the body and blood of Christ, be to believe in him, then must there be a proportion between eating and believing. Look then as there can be no eating without taking or receiving of meat, so no believing in Christ without a spiritual receiving and apprehending of him. And as the body hath his hand, mouth, and stomach whereby it taketh, receiveth, and digesteth meat for the nourishment of every part: so likewise in the soul there is a faith, which is both hand, mouth and stomach to apprehend, receive, and apply Christ and all his merits for the nourishment of the soul. And Paul saith yet more plainly, That through ●aith we receive the promise of the spirit, Gal. 3. 14. Now as the property of apprehending and applying of Christ belongeth to faith, so it agreeth not to hope, love, confidence, or any other gift or grace of God. But first by ●aith we must apprehend Christ, and apply him to ourselves, before we can have any hope or confidence in him. And this applying seems not to be done by any affection of the will, but by a supernatural act of the mind, which is to acknowledge, set down and believe that remission of sins, and life everlasting by the merit of Christ, belong to us particularly. To this which I have said agreeth Augustine, Why preparest thou Tract. 25 in joh. teeth and belly? Believe, and thou hast eaten. And, tract 50. How shall I reach my hand into heaven, that I may hold him sitting there? Send up thy faith, and thou la●est hold on him. And Bernard saith, Homil. in Cant. 76. Where he is thou canst not come now: yet go to follow him and seek him; believe and thou hast found him: for to believe is to find. Chrysost. on Mark, homil. 10. Let us believe, and we see jesus present before us. Ambr. on Luk. lib. 6. cap. 8. By faith Christ is touched, by faith Christ is seen. Tertul. de resurrect. carnis: He must be chewed by understanding, and be digested by faith. Reason II. Whatsoever the holy Ghost testifieth unto us, that we may, yea that we must certainly by B. faith believe: but the holy Ghost doth particularly testify unto us our adoption, the remission of our sins, and the salvation of our souls; and therefore we may and must particularly and certainly by faith believe the same. The first part of this reason is true, and cannot be denied of any. The second part is proved thus: Saint Paul saith, Rom. 8. 15. We have not received the spirit of bondage to fear: but the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, father: adding further, that the same spirit beareth witness with our spirits, that we are the children of God. Where the Apostle maketh two witnesses of our adoption: the spirit of God, and our spirits, that is, the conscience sanctified by the holy Ghost. The Papists to elude this reason, allege that the spirit of God doth indeed witness of our adoption, by some comfortable feelings of God's love and favour, being such as are weak and oftentimes deceitful. But by their leaves, the testimony of the spirit is more than a bare sense or feeling of God's grace: for it is called the pledge and earnest of God's spirit in our hearts, 2. Cor. 1. 21. and therefore it is fit to take away all occasion of doubting of our salvation: as in a bargain, the earnest is given between the parties, to put all out of question. Bernard saith, That the testimony of the spirit is a most sure testimony: Epist. 107. Reason III. That which we must pray for by C. God's commandment, that we must believe: but every man is to pray for the pardon of his own sins, and for life everlasting: of this there is no question: therefore he is bound to believe the same. The proposition is most of all doubtful: but it is proved thus. In every petition there must be two things: a desire of the things we ask, and a particular faith whereby we believe, that the thing we ask shall be given unto us. So Christ saith, Whatsoever ye desire when you pray, believe that you shall have it, and it shall be given unto you. And S. john further noteth out this particular faith, calling it our assurance that God 1. job. 5. 14. will give unto us, whatsoever we ask according to his will. And hence it is, that in every petition there must be two grounds: a commandment to warrant us in making a petition, and a promise to assure us of the accomplishment thereof. And upon both these, follows necessarily an application of the things we ask to ourselves. Reason four Whatsoever God commandeth in D. the Gospel, that a man must and can perform: but God in the Gospel commandeth us to believe the pardon of our own sins, and life everlasting: and therefore we must believe thus much, and may be assured thereof. This proposition is plain by the distinction of the commandments of the law, and of the Gospel. The commandments of the law show us what we must do, but minister no power to perform the thing to be done: but the doctrine and commandments of the Gospel do otherwise: and therefore they are called spirit and life: God with joh. 6. 36. the commandment giving grace that the thing prescribed may be done. Now this is a commandment of the Gospel, to believe remission of sins: for it was the substance of Christ's ministry, repent and believe the Gospel. And that is not generally to believe that Christ is a Saviour, and that the promises made in him are true (for so the devils believe with trembling:) but it is particularly to believe that Christ is my Saviour, and that the promises of salvation in Christ belong in special to me, as Saint john saith. This is his commandment that we believe in the name of jesus Christ: now to believe in Christ is to put confidence in him: which none can do, unless he be first assured of his love and favour. And therefore in as much, as we are enjoined to put our confidence in Christ, we are also enjoined to believe our reconciliation with him, which stands in the remission of our sins, and our acceptation to life everlasting. Reason V. Whereas the Papists teach, that a man E. may be assured of his salvation by hope: even hence it follows, that he may be unfallibly assured thereof. For the property of true and lively hope is never to make a man ashamed. Rom. 5. 5. And true hope followeth faith and ever presupposeth certainty of faith; neither can any man truly hope for his salvation unless by faith he be certainly assured thereof in some measure. Exception I. The Popish Doctors take exception to F. these reasons on this manner. First they say, it cannot be proved that a man is as certain of salvation by faith, as he is of the articles of the creed. I answer, First they prove thus much that we ought to be as cert●ine of the one as of the other. For look what commandment we have to believe the articles of our faith: the like we have enjoining us to believe the pardon of our own sins, as I have proved. Secondly, these arguments prove it to be the nature or essential property of faith, as certainly to assure man of his salvation, as it doth assure him of the articles which he believeth. And howsoever commonly men do not believe their salvation as unfallible, as they do their articles of faith: yet some special men do: having God's word applied by the spirit as a sure ground of their faith, whereby they believe their own salvation, as they have it for a ground of the articles of their faith. Thus certainly was Abraham assured of his own salvation: as also the Prophets and Apostles, and the Martyrs of God in all ages: whereupon without doubting they have been content to lay down their lives for the name of Christ: in whom they were assured to receive eternal happiness. And there is no question, but there be many now, that by long and often experience of God's mercy, and by the inward certificate of the holy Ghost, have attained to full assurance of their salvation. II. Exception. Howsoever a man may be assured of his present estate, yet no man is certain of his perseverance G. unto the end. Ans. It is otherwise: for in the sixth petition, lead us not into temptation, we pray that God would not suffer us to be wholly overcome of the devil in any temptation: and to this petition we have a promise answerable, 1. Cor. 10. That God with temptation will give an issue: and therefore howsoever the devil may buffet, molest, and wound the servants of God, yet shall he never be able to overcome them. Again, he that is once a member of Christ, can never be wholly cut off. And if any by sin were wholly severed from Christ for a time, in his recovery he is to be baptised the second time: for baptism is the sacrament of initiation or engrafting into Christ. By this reason we should as often be baptised as we fall into any sin, which is absurd. Again, Saint john saith, 1. john 2. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. Where he taketh it for granted, that such as be once in Christ shall never wh●ly be severed or fall from him. Though our communion with Christ may be lessened, yet the union and the bond of conjunction can never be dissolved. III. Exception. They say, we are indeed to believe H. our salvation on God's part: but we must needs doubt in regard of ourselves: because the promises of remission of sins are given upon condition of man's faith and repentance. Now we cannot (say they) be assured that we have true faith and repentance, because we may lie in secret sins; and so want that indeed, which we suppose ourselves to have. Answ. I say again, he that doth truly repent and believe, doth by God's grace know that he doth repent and believe: for else Paul would never have said, Prove yourselves whether you be in the faith or not: and the same Apostle saith, 2. Cor. 12. We have not received the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that we might know the things which are given of God: which things are not only life everlasting, but justification, sanctification, and such like. And as for secret sins they cannot make our repentance void: for he that truly repenteth of his known sins, repenteth also of such as be unknown, and receiveth the pardon of them all. God requireth not an express or special repentance of unknown sins: but accepts it as sufficient, if we repent of them generally: as David saith, Psal. ●9. Who knows the errors of this life? forgive me my secret sins. And whereas they add that faith and repentance must be sufficient: I answer that the sufficiency of our faith and repentance, stands in the truth and not in the measure or perfection thereof; and the truth of both where they are, is certainly discerned. Reason VI The judgement of the ancient I. Church. * De verbis De● Serm. 28. August. Of an evil servant thou art made a good child, therefore presume not of thine own doing, but of the grace of Christ: it is not arrogancy but faith: to acknowledge what thou hast received, is not pride but devotion. And, * Tract. 5. in Epist. joh. Let no man ask another man, but return to his own heart: if he find charity there, he hath security for his passage from life to death. Hilar. in Matth. 5. The kingdom of heaven which our Lord professed to be in himself, his will is that it must be hoped for, without any doubtfulness of uncertainty will at all. Otherwise there is no justification by faith, if faith itself be made doubtful. Bernard in his epist. 107. Who is the just man but he that being loved of God, loves him again? which comes not to pass but by the spirit revealing by Faith the eternal purpose of God of his Salvation to come. Which revelation is nothing else but the infusion of spiritual grace: by which, when the deeds of the flesh are mortified, the man is prepared to the kingdom of heaven—. Together receiving in one spirit that whereby he may presume that he is loved and also love again—. To conclude, the Papists have no great cause to dissent from us in this point. For they teach and profess, that they do by a special faith believe their own salvation certainly and unfallibly in respect of God, that promiseth. Now the thing which hindereth them is their own indisposition and unworthiness (as they say) which keeps them from being certain otherwise then in a likely hope. But this hindrance is easily removed, if men will judge indifferently. For first of all, in regard of ourselves and our disposition we cannot be certain at all, but must despair of salvation even to the very death. We cannot be sufficiently disposed so long as we live in this world, but must always say with jacob, I am less than all thy mercies, Gen. 32. and with David, Enter not into judgement with thy servant, O Lord, for none living shall be justified in thy sight: and with the Centurion, Lord I am not worthy, that thou shouldest come under my roof, Matth. 8. Secondly God in making promise of salvation respects not men's worthiness. For he chose us to life everlasting when we were not: he redeemed us from death being enemies: and entitles us to the promise of salvation, if we acknowledge ourselves to be sinners, Matth. 9 If we labour and travail under the burden of them. Matth. 11. If we hunger and thirst after grace. joh. 7. 37. And these things we may certainly and sensibly perceive in ourselves: and when we find them in us, though our unworthiness be exceeding great, it should not hinder our assurance. For God makes manifest his power in our weakness, 2. Cor. 12. and he will not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax. Isai, 42. Thirdly, if a man love God for his mercy's sake, and have a true hope of salvation by Christ, he is in Christ, and hath fellowship with him: and he that is in Christ, hath all his unworthiness and wants laid on Christ, and they are covered and pardoned in his death: and in respect of ourselves thus considered, as we are in Christ; we have no cause to waver, but to be certain of our salvation, and that in regard of ourselves. speaker D. B. P. The Catholics say, we are indeed to believe our salvation on God's part, who is desirous of all men's salvation, very rich in mercy, and able to save us, but our fear riseth in regard of ourselves, because the promises of remission of sins depend upon our true repentance: Unless you do Penance, ye shall all perish. And the promises of salvation, are made upon condition of Luk. 13. keeping Gods commandments. If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandments. Again, No man shall be crowned, except he combat Matth 19 2. Tim. 2. lawfully. Now we not knowing whether we shall well perform these things required by God at our hands, have just cause to fear, lest God do not on his part, perform that which he promiseth upon such conditions. M Perkins answereth, That for faith, and true repentance, every man that hath them, knoweth well that he hath them. To which I reply, that for F. justifying faith is in the will, if not wholly, yet principally. faith being rightly taken, it may be known of the party that hath it, because it is a light of the understanding, and so being like a lamp, may be easily seen: but true repentance requires besides faith, both hope, and charity, which are seated in the dark corners of the will, and cannot by faith be seen in themselves, but are known by their effects: which being also uncertain do make but conjectures and a probable opinion. speaker A. W. Your reply is nothing, but a bare denial of that which Master Perkins answered, whereas you should have disproved it. There is no less doubt of faith than of repentance, by your own reason: for that also hath it seat in the will, being a resting, or relying upon God, for salvation by Christ. The effects both of the one and of the other are as certainly discerned by a Christian, as ordinary trust in men, and worldly sorrow, by a natural man. speaker D. B. P. So that place of S. Paul may be omitted where he saith. Prove yourselves whether you be in saith or no.. Because we accord that it may be 2. Cor. 13. tried by us, whether we have faith or no: although I know well, that S. Paul's words carry a far different sense. But let that pass as impertinent. speaker A. W. It is not amiss for you to have it omitted; because it x 2. Cor. 13. 5. makes so plainly against you, the Apostle speaking there of such a faith, as necessarily hath hope and charity joined with it. When you show another sense, you shall have another answer. speaker D. B. P. To the other. That we have received the spirit, which is of God, that 1. Cor. 2. 12. we might know the things which are given of God. What things these are which the spirit revealeth to us, S. Paul teacheth in the same place, That which the eye hath not seen, nor ear hath heard, etc. God hath prepared for them, that love him: but to us, God hath revealed by his Spirit: All this is true: but who they be that shall attain to that blessed Banquet by God so prepared. God only knoweth, and by his spirit revealeth it to very few. And will you learn out of S. Jerome that ancient Doctor, the cause why? Therefore (saith he) it is put ambiguous and left uncertain, In 3. capu● joh. that while men are doubtful of their salvation, they may do Penance more manfully, and so may move God to take compassion on them. another reason of this uncertainty, yieldeth S. Augustine in these De cor. & gra. cap. 13. Lib. 9 moral. cap. 17. words: In this place of temptation, such is our infirmity, that assuredness, might engender pride. To this agreeth S. Gregory, saying: If we know ourselves to have grace, we are proud.. So that to strike down the pride of our hearts, and to humble us, and to make us travail more carefully in the works of mortification, God doth not ordinarily assure men at the first of their own salvation: but to cheer up their hearts on the otherside, doth put them in great hope of it, like to a discreet and good Lord, who will not at the first entrance into his service, infeafe his servant in the fee simpleof those lands, which after upon his good deserts he meaneth to bestow on him. speaker A. W. The things y 1. Cor. 2. 12. there spoken of, are by the spirit of God made known to true Christians, not only that they are prepared for some, but that they themselves have their part in them. Neither doth S. Hierome say any thing to the contrary; but only shows, that God doth not give men knowledge how he will deal with them concerning outward punishment; because he would have them the more earnest to repent, and cry for mercy. It is safety he speaks of, such as the Ninivites obtained by prayer and fasting, not everlasting salvation. But let it be understood of everlasting life: none of these ancient writers say, that either we ought not, or cannot be assured by faith of our salvation; but only thus much may be concluded out of them, that the measure of our assurance is not perfect, to the end we may be more careful to pray for pardon, and in less danger of being puffed up. speaker D. B. P. This is another kind of Doctrine, then that which M. Perkins in his last supply delivereth, to wit: That if we regard our own indiseosition, we must despair, because we be not worthy of his mercy. Not so good Sir, Because we know that he bestoweth mercy upon the unworthy, at the first justification of a sinner, but will not admit into the Kingdom of heaven any unworthy, but gives men grace while they live to work, that they are made worthy of his heavenly Kingdom according to that: They shall walk with me in whites, because they are worthy, but of this more fully in the chapter of merits. Apoc. 3. 4. speaker A. W. Master Perkins speaks not of unworthiness only, but of indisposition also; which is a reason to make every one despair, in regard of himself, though in respect of God's mercy he may conceive some hope. For if no man should find favour, but he that is disposed or fitted for it perfectly, sure we must needs despair of attaining to that fitness; how can we, in respect of that, look for salvation? the worthiness which is in them that shall come to heaven, is both in Christ, by whom they are worthy, as members of his mystical body, and also in themselves, who, departing out of this world, are made perfectly righteous by inherent righteousness, which before was begun in them. speaker D. B. P. If God bid us pray, that we fall not into temptation, and promiseth G. 1. Cor. 10. an issue forth: then the assurance depends upon prayer, and not upon our former faith. What then if we do not pray so as we should? may not the enemy then, not only wound, but kill us to? it cannot be denied: and therein, as in divers other works of piety, many have been too too slack as the pitiful fall of thousands have taught us. speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not say, that prayer doth assure us of perseverance; but that we resting upon God by faith, and calling on him, are upheld from falling away; not because our prayer is, for the manner and measure, such as it ought to be (for all should be perfect) but because Godhath promised to keep his children, and, that he may fulfil his promise, stirs them up to pray, according to his will, though with many imperfections. speaker D. B. P. Oh saith M. Perkins, it cannot be, that he which was once a member of Christ, can ever after be wholly cut off. O shameless assertion, and contrary O ●dle and false exclamation! to many plain texts, and examples of holy Scriptures: Doth not our Saviour say in express words, That every branch in me not bearing f●…, he will take it away? And again, If any abide not in me, he shall be cast forth as the branch, and shall whither, and be cast into the fire: which joh. 15. doth demonstrate, that some which were members of Christ, be wholly cut off, and that for ever. Are we not by faith made members of Christ by our adversaries own confession? and doth not our blessed Saviour say, expounding the Parable of the sour, That the seed which fell upon the rock, doth signify them, who with joy receive the word, and these I●ke 8. (saith he) have no root, but for a time they believe, and in time of temptation, revolt. Doth not S. Paul in express terms say, That some having 1. Tim. 1. 19 faith and good conscience, expelling good conscience, have made shipwreck of their faith: of whom were by name, Hymenaeus, and Alexander. The like, That in the last days, some should revolt from the faith: Again, That 1. Tim. 4. 1. Tim. 6. some for covetousness sake, had erred from the saith. speaker A. W. Do you call that a shameless assertion, which is so oft avowed by our Saviour himself? a joh. 4. 13. 14. He that drinks of that water that I shall give him, shall never thirst, but it shall be in him a well of water springing up to everlasting life. Again, b joh. 10. 27. 28 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand. And in another place, c joh. 6. 35. Vers. 40. I am the bread of life, he that comes to me shall not hunger; and he that believes in me, shall never thirst. This is the will of him that sent me, that every one that sees the Son, and believes in him, should have everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day. Now the places you allege prove no more, but that, if any man fall away from Christ, he shall perish: and that some may forsake the truth of doctrine, or, having had some show of a justifying faith for a time, may afterward manifest themselves not to have believed in Christ to justification. Of the former kind are those two places of john: of the latter all the rest. speaker D. B. P. And for example amongst other, take Saul the first King of Israel, There is no such testimony of him any where. 1. Reg. 19 1. Reg. 15. & 16 Act. 8. who was at his election (as the holy Ghost witnesseth) so good a man, that there was no better than he in Jsraell, and yet became reprobate, as is in the Scripture signified. The like is probable of Solomon, and in the new Testament of Judas the traitor, and Simon Magus whom S. Luke saith, that he also himself believed, and after became an Arch heretic, and so died: the like almost may be verified of all Arch-heretikes, who before they fell, were of the faithful. speaker A. W. That you say of Saul is utterly false: for the Scripture neither in that text, nor any where else, speaks so of him. And indeed how could it, Samuel being then alive, so holy and good a man? But the place you mean is in d 1. Sam. 9 20. the ninth chapter, where Samuel saith to him, whose shall all the best things of Israel be? as your translation reads it. That is (saith e Cuius enim optima quaeque Israel? Lyra ibi. your gloss) the dignity of the King, who may take the best things of the people subject to him. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The goodly things, saith the 70. All that is to be desired, Pagnin. What soever is to g Expedibile, Pagnin, Vatablns. be desired in Israel (saith Vatablus) and in his marginal note; All the desire of Israel: as if he should say, Thou shalt be King of Israel. And this agrees both with the word, and with the context: Care not for the asses, saith Samuel, for they are found, and besides, whose shall all the wealth of Israel be? Thus have you graced Saul, and belied the holy Ghost; so have you disgraced Solomon, whom the holy Ghost honoured with speaking by his mouth, and writing by his pen the great mysteries of God. Every Papist hath not power, like the Pope, to make whom he will a Saint, and whom he list a reprobate. judas, Simon, Hymeneus, Alexander, and the rest, believed the truth of the Gospel, at least in part, for a time, but never any one of these had at any time true justifying faith, to rest upon Christ for salvation. speaker D. B. P. But what need we further proof of this matter, seeing that this is cosen-german, if not the very same, with one of that infamous heretic jovinians erroneous articles, condemned, and registered by S. Hierome, Heraes. 82. li. 2. cont. jovin. and S. Augustine, who held, that just men after Baptism could not sin, and if they did sin, they were indeed washed with water, but never received the spirit of grace: his ground was, that he which had once received the spirit of grace, could not sin after, which is just M. Perkins M. Perkins hath no such proposition. proposition: so that to uphold an error, he falleth into an old condemned heresy. speaker A. W. We deny not that a man may sin, yea we confess that the very best men do sin: but we say, the Lord by his spirit keeps them that are justified, from falling away from Christ, either finally, or totally. h jac. 3. 9 He that is borne of God sinneth not, for his seed remaineth in him: neither can he sin, because he is borne of God. speaker D. B. P. And which is yet more absurd, in the next confirmation, he letteth slip at once a brace of other heresies: these be his words. And if by sin one were whol● severed from Christ for a time, in his recovery he is to be baptized the second time. Where you have first rebaptizing, which is the And that condemned by M. Perkins; so far is he from favouring it. M. Perkins saith no such thing, you make an absurd collection. Time, say we. principal error of the Anabaptists, and withal the heresy of the Novatians, who held that if any in persecution denied Christ after baptism, there was no remedy left in God's Church, for their recovery: but must be left to God; so saith M. Perkins, for that of rebaptizing he seems to bring in ex absurdo: so that the common saying is verified in him, (one absurdity being granted, a thousand follow after.) But doth he know no other means than Baptism to recover one cut off from Christ? hath he forgotten that corrupted sentence of the Prophet, wherewith they begin their common prayer? What hour soever a sinner doth repent him of his sin, etc. With them repentance, and with us the Sacrament of Penance, serve a man at any time of his life to be reconciled to Christ. speaker A. W. i 12. Art. part. 2. Art. 4. F. Baptism being the sacrament of imitating and engrafting men into Christ, must needs be equally necessary for all that are out of Christ. As for repentance, upon which God forgives a sinner, it is common to the baptised with the unbaptized: now you hold it needful at the first (as doubtless it is, so that the wilful neglect of it is damnable, though a man have repent) why should it be needless afterward, when a man is wholly out of Christ, as in the beginning he was? Your superstitious and proud satisfactory penance, we reject as Antichristian, neither allowing any second baptism, nor excluding them that fall never so grievously, either from heaven, or the Church in this world, if they repent. speaker D. B. P. But we must answer unto that of S. john. They went out from us, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would have continued 1. joh. 2. with us. I answer. If they went out from us, they were before with us: which confirmeth our assertion, that men may depart from their faith, and Christ's profession: but such men were not indeed of the number of the elect, of which S. john was, for then either they would have continued with them in the Christian faith, or else by hearty repentance would have returned unto it back again, which is S. Augustine's own exposition. And these be the Arguments for the Catholics, which M. De bono pierce. c. 8. Perkins through his confused order toucheth here, and there. speaker A. W. Who denies they were with the Church? or who can prove they were of it? you grant as much as we desire, that they were not of the elect: who only are in case to fall away from Christ; because the rest were never in him. Their returning by repentance is not into Christ's mystical body, as if they had been out of it, k 12. Art. part. 2. Art. 1. C. but either into the congregation of the faithful, or, into God's favour, in respect of their own feeling. speaker D. B. P. To which I will add one, taken out of the words of S. Paul. But thou Rom. 11 20. Phil. 2. 12. by faith dost stand, be not too highly wise, but fear, if God hath not spared the natural boughs lest perhaps he will not spare thee neither. And again. Work your salvation, with fear and trembling. There be above an hundred such texts in holy write, wherein the holy Ghost exhorteth us to stand in fear of our salvation, out of which I thus frame my argument. No man must stand in fear of that, of which he is by faith assured. But the faithful must stand in fear of their salvation. Ergo, they be not assured of it by saith. The Minor or second proposition is plainly proved by these places, cited before; the Mayor is manifest: there is no fear in faith, he that feareth, whether the thing be assured or no, cannot give a certain assent thereunto: Dubius in side in fidelis est. Put the case in another article, to make it more evident: He that feareth, whether there be a God or no, do we esteem that he believeth in God? So he that feareth whether jesus Christ be God, is he a Christian? hath he a true faith? You must needs anssvere no. So he that feareth whether he shall be saved or no, can have no faith of his salvation. speaker A. W. I may grant your conclusion; the faithful l 12. Art. part. 1. Art. 5. & part. 2. art. 1. are not ordinarily assured of their salvation by such a faith as hath no doubting annexed unto it. Yet is our assertion true, that they are assured of it by such a faith as shall never deceive them. And again, yet they ought to be assured without doubting. But I will answer to your syllogism: first by distinguishing on your proposition, no man must, nor indeed can, stand in fear of that of which he is assured by such a measure of faith, as admits no doubt; but his faith being weak, he may and must: for this fear is an especial means to keep him from falling away. In which respect the holy Ghost exhorts to it, by reason our faith is not perfect. Secondly, for your assumption, I say, the faithful are not simply willed to be afraid that they shall not be saved, but only are appointed to use the means of securing of themselves by wariness: because else it will come to pass, that they shall fall away in their own sense and feeling. Your example proves nothing, the measure of faith being so divers: and further, he may truly believe in God, that in some temptation falls into doubting, for a time, whether there be a God or no: as you must needs know, if you have any experience of the temptations, which sometimes befall the dear children of God. speaker D. B. P. To these invincible reasons grounded upon God's word, let us join some plain testimonies, taken aswell out of the holy Scripture, as out of the ancient Fathers. First, what can be more manifest to warrant us, that the faithful have not assurance infallible of their salvation, than these words of the Holy Ghost. There be just (and therefore faithful) and wise men, and their works be in the hand of God, and nevertheless a Eccles. 9 man doth not know whether he be worthy of hatred oer love, but all things are kept uncertain for the time to come. Where is then the Protestants Are, Pagnine, Vatablus, and Arias Montanus heretics? Comment. in hunc locum. certainty? And because one heretic cavilleth against the Latin translation, saying that a word or two of it may be otherwise turned, hear how S. Jerome, who was most cunning in the Hebrew text, doth understand it. The sense is, (saith he) I have sound the works of just men, to be in the hand of God, and yet themselves not to know, whether, they be loved of God or no. speaker A. W. Whether there be cause or no to find fault with the translation, let any man judge, that either understands the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Greek: or will look upon other interpretations of m Pa●nin. Vatablus, Arias M●ntanus. your own men. For the sense, our interpretation is confirmed by the course of the text, that a man cannot know by the outward things that befall him here, whether he be loved of God, or hated; because these happen alike both to the elect, and to the reprobate. He that will read the expositions of learned men, and weigh the likelihood of their reasons, shall see that the place is not clear enough to prove a controversy. speaker D. B. P. another plain testimony is taken out of S. Paul, where he showeth that it is not in us to judge of our own justice, but we must ●aue to God the judgement of it: these be the words. I am not guilty in conscience of any thing, but I am not justified herein, but he that judgeth me is our 1. Cor. Lord, therefore judge not before the time until our Lord do come, who also will lighten the hidden things of darkness, and will manifest the counsel of the heart, and then the praise shall be to every man of God. So that before God's judgement by S. Paul's testimony, men may not assure themselves of their own justice, much less of their salvation, how innocent soever they find themselves in their own consciences. See upon this place S. Ambrose, S. Basill, Th●doret on this place, who all agree, that Serm 5▪ in Psalm. 1●8. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 mo●a● c. 2. men may have secret faults, which God only seeth, and therefore they must live in fear, and always pray to be delivered from them. speaker A. W. If all you say be granted, it is nothing to us: for we do not fetch our assurance from the perfection of our righteousness, but from the truth of our faith. Neither deny we that a man hath many secret slips known to God only; but we say, he may be assured of his salvation, for all these, upon which it doth not depend. We acknowledge with those worthy men, that we must call upon God for pardon of our secret sins, with fear and humbleness of mind. speaker D. B. P. For the rest let S. Augustine's testimony, (whom our adversaries acknowledge to be the most diligent and faithful register of all antiquity) be sufficient. This most judicious, and holy Father thus defineth this matter: As long as we live here, we ourselves cannot judge of ourselves, I do not say what we shall be to morrow, but what we are to day. And De verb. Dom. Serm. 35. De civit. Dei, lib. 11. c. 12. yet more directly. Albeit holy men are certain of the reward of their perseverance, yet of their own perseverance, they are found uncertain. For what man can know that he shall persevere, and hold on in the action and increase of justice until the end, unless by some revelation he be assured of it from him, who of his just, but secret judgement doth not inform all men of this matter, but deceiveth none? So no just man is assured of his salvation This is not in Austin quoted by you. by his ordinary faith: by extraordinary revelation, some man may be assured, the rest are not. Which is just the Catholic sentence. speaker A. W. Austin speaks not n Aug. de verbis dom. serm. 35. misquoted for, Aug. homil. 50. homil. 35. there of the assurance of salvation, but persuades men to give no credit to flatterers, because we ourselves cannot judge of ourselves: and indeed we are oftentimes faulty in those things, wherein we suppose we have done very well. In o Aug de civit. dei. lib. 11. c. 12 the other place he denies that knowledge which is wholly without doubting, and to which we grant few or none attain ordinarily. speaker D. B. P. And because S. Bernard is by our adversaries, cited for them in this point, take his testimony in as precise terms as any Catholic at this time speaketh. Thus he writeth. Who can say, I am one of the elect, I am one of the predestinate to life, I am one of the number of the children? Who Serm. 1. de Septuag. Eccles. 9 (I say) can thus say, the Scripture crying out against him. A man knoweth not, whether he be worthy of love or hatred. Therefore we have no certainty, but the confidence of hope doth comfort us, that we be not vexed at all with the perplexity of this doubt. The word of God (according to S. Bernard,) crieth out against all them, that certainly assure themselves of their salvation: whereon then do they build their faith that believe it? speaker A. W. Bernard was by profession a member of the Popish Church, and therefore against us his testimony is nothing; but against you it is of great weight. For the point in question, first he is of opinion, p Serm. 1. in Sep●●ages. in that place by you quoted, that a q Quales sumus nosse possumus, vel ex pa●te. man may know in what estate he is for the present, at least in part: because God hath given certain manifest signs and tokens of salvation, r Vt indub●… bile sit. that it cannot be doubted, but that he is in the number of the elect, in whom those signs shall continue. Secondly, the reason why he denies the latter, is, because the signs he speaks of, being in outward obedience principally, may fail, and so breed some cause of doubting. The s Eccles. 9 1. scripture he allegeth for the ground of his uncertainty, hath nothing in it to that purpose. speaker D. B. P. If it may be permitted to join modern opinions with ancient, bad men with good, I could prove by the testimony of every principal sect of this time, that all other sectaries were deceived in this their persuasion of their salvation. For both Lutherans, Caluinists, and Anabaptists (to omit the rest) do hold every one of themselves assured of Lutherans and Caluinists as you tear me them, do not think each other damned. their salvation, and yet each sect holdeth every one not of his own band assured of damnation: so that by the sentence of the Lutherans, all Caluinists, and Anabaptists, are miserably deceived when they assure themselves of their salvation: In like manner if the Anabaptists be true censurers, both Lutherans, and Caluinists and all other, not of their heresy, err foully, when they bear themselves in hand that they shall be saved. Certain it is therefore by the consent of all the world, that very many who assure themselves of salvation, are indeed assured of damnation. speaker A. W. How doth your conclusion belong to this question? Very many, who to assure themselves of salvation, are assured of damnation; who denies it? But the course you take in coming to it, is out of the way of truth. Let all Anabaptists pass, whom t Calvin. Bulling●●. we, not you, have from time to time confuted; till of late you began to tread upon them, when we had beaten them down. Caluinists and Lutherans (as you maliciously call them) agree in this point, for the most part, and neither make any question but the other may be saved, for all their differences in some opinions: but both have very just cause to doubt of you, who fight against the main foundation, as in the next article. speaker D. B. P. With the testimonies of the ancient Doctors for us, I pray thee gentle Pag. 57 De verb. Dom. Serm. 28. Reader, confer those which M. Perkins in his sixth reason allegeth against us. First, S. Augustine in these words. Of an evil servant, thou art made a good child, therefore presume not of thine own doing, but of the grace of Christ. It is not arrogancy, but faith to acknowledge, what thou hast received, it is not pride, but devotion. What word is here of certainty of salvation? but that it belongeth to a faithfullman, to confess himself much bound to God, for calling of him to be his. Which every Christian must do, hoping himself so to be, and being most certain, that if he be not in state of grace, it is long of himself, and no want on God's part. The second place hath not so much as any show of words for him, thus he speaketh. Let no man ask another man, but return to his Tract. 5. in Epist. johan. own heart, and if he find Charity there, he hath security for his passage, from life to death. What need was there to seek charity in his heart, far security of his salvation, if his faith assured him thereof? therefore this text maketh flat against him. speaker A. W. There is this for certainty of salvation, that it is no presumption or a man to know he hath received the grace of Christ; it is not arrogancy, but faith; not pride but devotion: whereas you say it is presumption, arrogancy, and pride. Can any thing be more contrary? Not so much as a show of words: yet is there substance of matter: for if charity be a security for passage from life to death, and if a man may know whether it be in his heart or no, doubtless there is assurance of salvation to be had. But you will say, not by faith: else what need he seek for charity? as if it were amiss to have more proofs than one. He that hath tried the devils temptations, knows that all is little enough. But this assurance by charity is assurance by faith, because it proves we have such a faith, as shall certainly bring us to everlasting life. speaker D. B. P. The next Author he citeth is S. Hilary in these words. The Kingdom Sup. 5. cap. Mat. Of yours, not of M. Perkins who hath it not. of heaven which our Lord professed to be in himself, his will is that it be hoped for, without any doubtfulness of uncertain will (at all, is an addition) otherwise there is no justification by faith, if faith itself be made doubtful. First, he saith, but as we say, that the Kingdom of heaven is to be hoped for, without any doubtfulness; for we profess certainty of hope, and deny only certainty of faith, as M. Perkins confesseth before. And as for faith, we say with him also it is not doubtful, but very certain. What maketh this to the purpose, that a man must believe his own salvation when S. Hilary speaketh there of faith of the resurrection of the dead? u Hilar. in Math. ca 5. Spes bonorum aeternorum. Hilary requires such a hope as is grounded upon faith, and hath the same nature with faith, but that it particularly respects the time to come; whereas faith rests absolutely upon God for the present also. Neither speaks he of the resurrection from the dead in particular, but of every man's trust concerning his own enjoying of all heavenly felicity. speaker D. B. P. His last Author is S. Bernard: Who is the just man, but he that be●●g Ep●●. ●07. loved of God, loves him again? which comes not to pass● but by the s●…t, revealing by faith the eternal * 〈◊〉 saith 〈◊〉 Perk●ns out of Bernard. promise of God, of his salvation to come, which revelation is nothing else, but the infusion of spiritual grace, by which the deeds of the flesh are mortified, the man is prepared to the Kingdom of heaven, together receiving in one spirit, that, whereby he may presume, that he is loved, and loves again. Note that he saith the revelation of the spirit, to be nothing else, but the infasion of spiritual graces, and comfort, whereby a man hath some feeling of God's goodness towards him, by which (as he saith) he may presume, but not believe certainly, that he is loved of God. But let S. Bernard in the same place interpret himself, there he speaketh thus, as I cited once before. It is given to men to taste before hand, somewhat of the bliss to come, etc. Of the which knowledge of ourselves now in part perceived, a man doth in the mean season glory in hope, but not yet in security. His opinion then is expressly, that for all the revelations of the spirit made by faith unto us, we are not assured for certainty of our salvation, but feel great joy, through the hope we have hereafter to receive it. speaker A. W. Would Bernard have a man presume that God loves him, without warrant? or would he have him not believe the testimony of the spirit, which assures him of that love by such a pledge? * Aug. de verb▪ dom. serm. 28. Austin taught us before, that it is no arrogancy, but faith, to know what we have received: and Bernard teacheth us now, that the end of receiving is, that we may presume we are beloved of God: that is, that we may know it by faith. He adds further afterward, that this is the holy and secret counsel of God, which the Son hath received from the Father by the holy Ghost, and communicates to those that be his, so that they begin to know as they are known, it being granted to them to feel before hand somewhat of their blessedness to come, as it hath been hidden from all eternity in him that did predestinate, and shall appear more fully in him, x In beatificante. when he shall make us blessed. We believe with Bernard, that we have here but a taste of the joy to come, and that our security is not (ordinarily) without doubting. So that the certainty he speaks of, and that we say Christians have, is all one. speaker D. B. P. This passage of testimonies being dispatched, let us now come unto the five other reasons which M. Perkins produceth in defence of their opinion. The first reason is this, That in faith there are two things, the one is an A. infallible assurance of those things which we believe: This we grant, and there hence prove (as you heard before) that there can be no faith of our particular salvation, because we be not so fully assured of that, but that we must stand in fear of losing of it, according to that, Hold that which thou hast, lest perhaps another receive thy crown. Apoc. 3. speaker A. W. Faith in itself is a full assurance, but hath not this full work in every one that truly believes: and therefore your proof is insufficient. speaker D. B. P. But the second point of faith, puts all out of question. For (saith M. Perkins) it doth assure us of remissission of our sins, and of life everlasting in particular. Prove that Sir, and we need no more. It is proved out of S. john. As many as received him, he gave them poeer to be made the sons of God, namely, to them that believe in his name. This text cometh joh. 1 much too short he gave them power to be the sons, that is, gave them such grace, that they were able, and might if they would, be sons of God, but did not assure them of that neither, much less that they should so continue unto their lives end. I omit his unsavoury discourse of eating, and believing Christ, and applying unto us his benefits, (which he might Take your relish, be not merely natural. He proves that he brings, by the Scriptures alleged. be ashamed to make unto us, that admit no part of it to be true.) I confess that therein faith hath his part, if it be joined with charity, and frequentation of the Sacraments. speaker A. W. Master Perkins proves that faith is a particular assurance; because it is a particular applying of Christ by every man to himself. That it is so he shows, in that it is a receiving of Christ and all his benefits. The place of y joh. 1. 12. john is brought to prove, that to believe in Christ, and to receive Christ, is all one; to which your answer is altogether impertinent. So also is your exposition false: for the holy Ghost speaks not of a z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. power to be the sons of God; but of a privilege, whereby all true believers are the sons of God: Ye are all (saith the a Gal. 3. 26. Apostle) the sons of God by faith in Christ jesus. That discourse, so unsavoury to your corrupt taste, serves to manifest this point, that to receive, or believe in Christ, is to apply him particularly, as meat and drink are applied by eating and drinking. If you could as easily have disproved, as disliked that discourse, we should have seen the one, as we have the other. speaker D. B. P. This is it which S. Paul teacheth, That not by the works of Moses Gal. 3. This is your gloss. law, but by faith in Christ jesus we receive the promises of the spirit, and shall have hereafter the performance, if we observe those things which Christ hath commanded us. But what is this to certainty of Salvation? S. Paul speaks of receiving the spirit by faith, and no where vouchsafes any such privilege to works; which indeed have not to do in that matter: b Gal. 3. 2. Received ye the spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? speaker D. B. P. To those of Augustine and such like authorities, I answer, that we Tract. 25. in joh. find Christ, we hold Christ, we see Christ, by faith, believing him to be the Son of God, and redeemer of the world, and judge of the quick and the dead: and we understand, and digest all the mysteries of this holy word. But where is it once said, in any of these sentences, that we are assured of our salvation? we believe all these points and many more: but we shall be never the near our salvation, unless we observe Gods commandments, The servant which knows his Master's will, and doth Luk. 12. joh. 15. it not, shall be beaten with many stripes. Then you are my friends (saith our Saviour) when you shall do the things which I command you: which we being uncertain to perform, assure not ourselves of his friendship, Mere Phar●saisme. but when to our knowledge we go as near it as we can, and demand pardon of our wants, we live in good hope of it. speaker A. W. You seem to grant as much, concerning these places of Austin, as Master Perkins desires: but that you restrain this believing (against Augustine's words) to a belief of the truth; whereas the use of eating and drinking Christ, is not only to establish our judgement, but also, and that principally, to confirm the assurance of our salvation by his death and sacrifice. It is a strange kind of answering, to require the main conclusion in every pro syllogism, and not to understand to what purpose every several reason is alleged. The believing of never so many points brings neither assurance nor salvation; but the resting upon Christ for salvation, gives us assurance that we are the children of God, and shall continue so, receiving at the last the inheritance of sons, because of our adoption; not the wages of servants, for our imperfect labour, in which we use our best endeavour to do the will of our father, not the task of our master. speaker D. B. P. I answer first out of the place itself, that there followeth a condition on our parts to be performed, which M. Perkins thought wisdom to B. conceal. For. S. Paul saith that the Spirit witnesseth with our spirits, that we are the sons of God, and coheirs with Christ, with this condition, If yet we suffer with him, that we may be glorified with him. So that the testimony is not absolute, but conditional, and then if we fail in performance of the condition, God stands free of his promise, and will take his earnest back again. And so to have received the earnest of it, will nothing avail us, much less, assure us of salvation. speaker A. W. S. Paul sets down no condition at all, in c Rom. 8. 15. 16 Vers. 17. the place alleged by Master Perkins; the next verse propounds the course that God hath appointed to bring his children to glory: which depends not upon us, but upon God himself, who d Rom. 8. 29. makes all his sons conformable to their eldest brother Christ, according to his predestination, e Heb. 12. 6. and chastise all his children, by one kind of suffering or another. speaker D. B. P. This is the direct answer to that place, although the other be very good, that the testimony of the spirit, is but an inward comfort and joy, which breedeth great hope of salvation, but bringeth not assurance there of. This M. Perkins would refute, by the authority of Saint Bernard, in the place before cited, see the place, and my answer there. speaker A. W. The witness of the spirit, the Apostle speaks of, is, that And my Reply. Epist. 107. we are the children of God: the comfort and joy you mention, is an effect arising from that testimony of his, and our feeling; not the foundation of our assurance. We rejoice, because the spirit bears witness that we are the sons of God; not chose because we rejoice, therefore we have hope that we are Gods children, though this also be a secondary proof of our assurance. speaker D. B. P. This Argument is so proper for their purpose, that we return it upon their own heads: We must pray for salvation, therefore we are not C. Not fully assured as we ought to be. yet assured of it: For who in his wits prayeth God to give him that, whereof he is assured already? And a godly act of faith it is, in that prayer to believe that God will give that, which he is assured of before hand: such foolish petitions cannot please God, and therefore after their doctrine it is to be denied, that any faithfulman may pray for his salvation, but rather thank the Lord for it. But to answer directly, he who prayeth must believe he shall obtain that which he prayeth for, if he observe all the due circumstances of prayer, which be many, but to this purpose, two are required necessarily: the one that he who prayeth be the true servant of God, which first excludeth all those that err in faith, touched in these words. What you of the faithful shall desire when you pray, shall be given you: The other is, when we request matters of such moment, that we persevere in prayer, and continue our suit day by day, of these suits of eternal salvation, we must take these words of our Saviour to be spoken. We must always pray, and never be weary. And Lu●e 18. 〈◊〉 to doubt, but we shall in the end receive it. But because we are in Then belike there are degrees of assurance. doubt, whether we shall observe those necessary circumstances of prayerer no, therefore we cannot be so well assured to obtain our suit, although we be on God's part must assured, that he is most b●…ful, and readier to give, than we are to a ●e. speaker A. W. I deny your consequence, and answer to the proof of it, as before, that f 12. Art. part. 2. Art. 1. our faith is not without some doubting, and our feeling not so strong, as it should and may be. If that were the condition, we could never look to obtain any thing of God: for we are sure that we never observe all the circumstances required; but we are out of all doubt, that God will grant our requests, in his good time, if we make them in Christ's name, though we fail in circumstances, and pray not every day as we ought. For the g Rom. 8. 26. spirit we have received will rouse us up from our deadness, and teach us so to pray, that we shall speed, as it may be most for God's glory, and our own salvation. speaker D. B. P. But saith M. Perkins, S. john noteth out this particular faith, calling it, Our assurance, that God will give unto us, whatsoever we ask according 1. joh. 5. to his will. But where find we that it is God's will, to assure every man at the first entrance into his service, of eternal salvation? is it not sufficient to make him an assured promise of it, upon his faithful service and good behaviour towards him? speaker A. W. Where find you that we hold any such opinion? Nay we teach the contrary; that this assurance comes not at the first, but by little and little as God sees it requisite, according to the trial he hath appointed to make of us. But because God hath commanded us to labour for the perfection of all graces, we are sure this must be entreated for, and have promise that it shall be granted, as God seeth meet, both for the time and the measure of it. speaker D. B. P. The proposition is true, yet commonly denied by all Protestants, for D. God commands us to keep his commandments, and they hold that to be impossible: but to the assumption: That God commands us to believe our salvation, is proved (saith M. Perkins) by these words: Repent and believe the Gospel: Spectatum admissi, risum teneatis amici: Where is it written in that Gospel, believe your own particular salvation? thew us once but one clear text for it, and we will believe it. I do believe in Christ, and hope to be saved, through his mercy and merits, but know well, that unless I keep his words, I am by him likened Matth. 7. Matth. 26. Matth. 25. to a fool, that built his house upon the sanas. He commands me to watch and pray, lest I fall into temptation: and else where, wa●neth me to prepare oil to keep my lamp burning against his coming, or else I am most certain to be shut out with the foolish Virgins. An hundred such admonitions find we in holy Scriptures, to shake us out of this security of our salvation, and to make us vigilant to prevent all temptations of the enemy, and d●…gent to train ourselves in godly exercises of all virtue. speaker A. W. Master Perkins hath answered your objection against his proposition, that it is not a commandment of the Gospel, but of h Rom. 10. 5, 6 the law: Do this, and thou shalt live. His proof is easilier laughed at, than answered. To believe (saith he) is particularly to acknowledge Christ to be my Saviour: that is, to put my confidence in him for my salvation: which I cannot do, unless I be resolved of my reconciliation with him. To this you answer not a word, but barely allege the first proof, and deny it. All these things, and such like our Saviour commands, and assures me that God will enable me to the performing of them, because I rest upon him for this grace in Christ. speaker D. B. P. Hope indeed of heaven makes a man most courageously bear out all E. storms of persecution, and not to be ashamed of Christ's Cross, but to profess his faith most boldly before the most bloody tyrants of the world, our hearts being by charity fortified and made invincible. And this is that which the Apostle teacheth in that place: and saith before, that the faithful glory in the hope of the sons of God. And do not vaunt Vers. 2. themselves of the certainty of their salvation. This certainty of hope, is great in those that have long lived virtuously, specially when they have also endured manifold losses, much disgrace, great wrongs and injuries for Christ's sake, for he that cannot fail of his word, hath promised to requite all such with an hundred fold: But what is this to the certainty of faith, which the Protestants will have every man to be endued with at his first entrance into the service of God? When as S. Paul in●…th, that godly men pa● takers of the holy Ghost, yea after they Heb. 〈◊〉. They never had a justifying faith. have tasted the good word of God, and the power of the world to come, that is, have received besides faith, great favours of God's spirit, and felt as it were the joys of heaven, have after all this so fallen from God, that there was small hope of their recovery. speaker A. W. He that hopes for any thing, and glories in that hope, must needs be ashamed of his folly and presumption, if he fail to obtain it: but the children of God hope for everlasting life, and glory in this hope of theirs. Now the i Rom. 5. 3. 5. Apostle saith they shall not be ashamed of this hope: and therefore it must needs be that they shall have everlasting life. This interpretation your own k Gloss. Interlin. gloss avows; l Non facit erubes●…, quiae impletur. Hope makes not a man blush, because it is fulfilled: and expounding that which follows of the love of God, it saith, It is certain it shall be fulfilled, because we have the spirit to pledge. So doth m Lyra ibid. Lyra also interpret that hope: so n Theodoret, Chrysostome, Theophylact. Theodoret, so Chrysostome, so Theophylact, etc. And wherein, I pray you, differs this from the assurance of faith, which we teach, and you condemn? This grows every day in the hearts of true believers, who never fall away, though they are sometimes shaken. Those that the o Hebr. 6. 3. 4. Apostle speaks of, never had true faith to justification, as I will prove otherwhere. The fourth point: Touching the justification of a sinner. speaker W. P. That we may see how far we are to agree with them, and where to differ: first I will set down the doctrine on both parts: and secondly the main differences wherein we are to stand against them even to death. Our doctrine touching the justification of a sinner, I propound in four rules. Rule I. That, justification is an action of God, whereby he absolveth a sinner and accepteth him to life everlasting for the righteousness and merit of Christ. Rule II. That justification stands in two things; first in the remission of sins by the merit of Christ his death; secondly in the imputation of Christ his righteousness; which is another action of God whereby he accounteth and esteemeth that righteousness which is in Christ, as the righteousness of that sinner which believeth in him. By Christ his righteousness we are to understand two things: first his sufferings specially in his death and passion, secondly his obedience in fulfilling the law: both which go together: for Christ in suffering obeyed, and obeying suffered. And the very shedding of his blood to which our salvation is ascribed, must not only be considered, as it is passive, that is, a suffering, but also as it is active, that is, an obedience, in which he showed his exceeding love both to his father and us, and thus fulfilled the law for us. This point if some had well thought on, they would not have placed all justification in remission of sins as they do. Rule III. That, justification is from God's mere mercy and grace, procured only by the merit of Christ. Rule IV. That, man is justified by faith alone: because faith is that alone instrument created in the heart by the holy Ghost, whereby a sinner layeth hold of Christ his righteousness, and applieth the same unto himself. There is neither hope, nor love, nor any other grace of God within man, that can do this but faith alone. The doctrine of the Roman Church touching the justification of a sinner is on this manner. I. They hold that before justification there goes a preparation thereunto: which is an action wrought partly by the holy Ghost, and partly by the power of natural free will, whereby a man disposeth himself to his own future justification. In the preparation they consider the ground of justification, and things proceeding from it. The ground is saith, which they define to be a general knowledge, whereby we understand and believe that the doctrine of the word of God is true. Things proceeding from this faith, are these; a sight of our sins, a fear of hell, hope of salvation, love of God, repentance and such like: all which when men have attained, they are then fully disposed (as they say) to their justification. This preparation being made, then comes justification itself: which is an action of God, whereby he maketh a man righteous. It hath two parts: the first, and the second. The first is, when a sinner of an evil man is made a good man. And to effect this, two things are required: first the pardon of sin, which is one part of the first justification: secondly, the infusion of inward righteousness whereby the heart is purged and sanctified: and this habit of righteoutnes stands specially in hope and charity. After the first justification, followeth the second; which is, when a man of a good or just man is made better and more just: and this say they, may proceed from works of grace; because he which is righteous by the first justification, can bring forth good works: by the merit whereof, he is able to make himself more just and righteous: and yet they grant that the first justification cometh only of God's mercy by the merit of Christ. speaker D. B. P. Because M. Perkins sets not down well the Catholics opinion, I will You should have showed help him out, both with the preparation and justification itself, and that taken out of the Council of Trent. Where the very words concerning preparation are these. Men are prepared and disposed to this justice, wherein he failed. Seff. 6. c. 6. when being stirred up, and helped by God's grace, they conceiving faith by hearing, are freely moved to ward God, believing those things to be true, which God doth reveal and promise, namely, that he of his grace doth justify a sinner through the redemption, that is in Christ Jesus. And when knowledging themselves to be sinners, through the fear of God's judgements, they turn themselves to consider the mercy of God, are lifted up into hope, trusting that God will be merciful unto them for Christ's sake: and beginning to love him as the fountain of all justice, are thereby moved with hatred and detestation of all sins. Finally they determine to receive baptism, to begin a new life, and to keep all Christ's commandments. After this disposition, or preparation, followeth justification, and for that every thing is best known by the causes of it, all the causes▪ of justification are delivered by the Council in the next Chapter, which briefly are these. The final cause of the justification of a sinner, is the glory of God, the glory of Christ, and maas own justification: the efficient is God, the meritorious, Christ Jesus Passions, the instrumental, is the Sacrament of Baptism, the only formal cause, is inherent justice, that is, Faith, Hope, and Charity, with the other gifts of the Holy Ghost, powered into a man's soul, at that instant of justification. Of the justification by faith, and the second justification shall be spoken in their places. So that we agree in this point, that justification cometh of the free grace of God, through his infinite mercies, and the merits of our saviours Passion, and that all sins, when a man is justified, be pardoned him. speaker A. W. Master Perkins hath truly delivered the sum of that which you set down, out of the Council of Trent; and that more plainly for every man's understanding, than it is in the Council. I. Our consent and difference. speaker W. P. Now let us come to the points of difference between us and them touching justification. The first main difference is in the matter thereof, which shall be seen by the answer both of Protestant and Papist to this one question: What is the very thing, that causeth a man to stand righteous before God, and to be accepted to life everlasting: we answer, Nothing but the righteousness of Christ, which consisteth partly in his sufferings, and partly in his active obedience in fulfilling the rigour of the law. And here let us consider, how near the Papists come to this answer, and wherein they descent. Consent I. They grant, that in justification sin is pardoned by the merits of Christ, and that none can be justified without remission of sins: and that is well. II. They grant, that the righteousness whereby a man is made righteous before God, cometh from Christ, and from Christ alone. III. The most learned among them say, that Christ his satisfaction, and the merit of his death is imputed to every sinner that doth heleeve, for * Bellarm. de justif. lib. 2. c. 7. his satisfaction before God: and hitherto we agree. The very point of difference is this; we hold that the satisfaction made by Christ in his death, and obedience to the law, is imputed to us, and becomes our righteousness. They say, it is our satisfaction, and not our righteousness, whereby we stand righteous before God: because it is inherent in the person of Christ as in a subject. Now the answer of the Papist to the former question is on this manner; The thing (saith he) that maketh us righteous before God, and causeth us to be accepted to life everlasting, is remission of sins, and the habit of inward righteousness, or charity with the fruits thereof. We condesend and grant that the habit of righteousness, which we call sanctification, is an excellent gift of God, and hath his reward of God: and is the matter of our justification before men; because it serveth to declare us to be reconciled to God, and to be justified: yet we deny it to be the thing, which maketh us of sinners to become righteous, or just before God. speaker D. B. P. The point of difference is this: that the Protestants hold that Christ's Passion and obedience imputed unto us, becometh our righteousness: (for the words of justice and justification, they seldom use,) and not any righteousness, which is in ourselves. The Cathòlikes affirm, that those virtues powered into our souls, (speaking of the formal cause of justification) is our justice, and that through that, a man is justified in God's sight, and accepted to life everlasting. Although as you have seen before, we hold that God of his mecre mercy through the merits of Christ jesus our Saviour, hath freetie bellowed that justice on us. speaker A. W. The word justification we use continually, the cavil about our not using justice, but righteousness, for our advantage, is sufficiently answered by p Fulk against Martin's discovery, chap. 8. Against the Rhem. Luc. 1. 6. Doctor Fulke, against Gregory Martin, and the Rhemists. The true reason why our translators chose rather to say, righteous, and righteousness, than just and justice, was, because the former words are more general, the latter (for the most part) restrained in common use to one particular virtue betwixt man and man. We deny not that Christians being justified, are truly righteous by inherent righteousness; but that we are to plead our own imperfect righteousness before God, to our justification. speaker D. B. P. Note that M. Perkins comes to short in his second rule, when he attributeth the merits of Christ's sufferings to obedience; whereas obedience if it had been without charity, would have merited nothing at God's hands. speaker A. W. Master Perkins comes as near the mark, as you: acknowledging the love of Christ in his obedience, distinctly both to God and us. And indeed it were ridiculous to imagine obedience without love, though the q Phil. 2. 8. Apostle mentions the one without the other. speaker W. P. And this is the first point of our disagreement in the matter of justification: which must be marked; because if there were no more points of difference between us, this one alone were sufficient to keep us from uniting of our religions: for hereby the Church of Rome doth race the very foundation. speaker D. B. P. 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 aver, that herein we do much more magnify Christ, than they do, for they take Christ's merits to be so mean, that they do Are they mean merits, that appease God's wrath, and procure e●●●lasting glory? but even serve the turn to deface sin, and make men worthy of the joys of heaven. Nay it doth not serve the turn, but only that God doth not impute sin unto us. We contrariwise, do so highly esteem of our saviours inestimable merits, that we hold them well able to purchase at God's hands, a far inferior justice, and such merits as mortal men are capable of, and to them do give such force and value, that they make a man just before God, and worthy of the Kingdom of heaven, as shall be proved. speaker A. W. This slander was answered before. We acknowledge the power of Christ's death, as to justification, for the forgiveness of sins, so to sanctification for inherent righteousness; and that such righteousness, as is sufficient to make us pure and holy in the sight of God, though we attain not to the perfection of it, as long as we live in this mortal body. speaker D. B. P. Again, they do great injury to God's goodness, wisdom, and justice, in their justification, for they teach, that inward justice, or sanctification, is not necessary to justification; Yea their Ringleader Luther saith, Where? That the justified can by no sins whatsoever, (except he refuse to believe) lose their salvation. Wherein, first they make their righteous man, Like (as our Saviour speaketh) to sepulchres whited on the out side, with an imputed justice, but within, full of iniquity, and disorder. Then the wisdom of God must either not discover this mass of iniquity, or his goodness abide it, or his justice either wipe it away, or punish it: But (say they) he seeth it well enough, but covereth it with the mantle of Christ's righteousness. Why? can any thing be hid from his sight? it is madness to think it. speaker A. W. We do God no wrong in maintaining his truth, that sanctification follows justification, in nature, though in time they come together. Luther saith, as the truth is, that he which believes shall be saved; and that faith is not destroyed by any sin, but infidelity. A man justified (as I have said often) is righteous by inherent righteousness, and therefore not like a whited sepulchre. Our corruptions and sins God seeth, and mislikes: but having punished them in Christ, he lays them not to our charge. speaker D. B. P. And why doth he not for Christ's sake deface it, and wipe it clean away, and adorn with his grace that soul, whom he for his sons sake He doth, but not all at once. loveth and make it worthy of his love and kingdom. What? is it because Christ hath not deserved it? So to say, were to derogate from the infnite value of his merits. Or is it, for that God cannot make such justice in a pure man, as may be worthy of his love and his kingdom? And this were to deny God's power in a matter that can be done, as we confess that such virtue was in our first Father Adam, in state of innocency. And M. Perkins seems to grant, That man in this life at his last gasp, may have such righteousness. If then we had no other reason for us, Pag 77. but that our justification doth more exalt the power, and goodness of God, more magnify the value of Christ's merits, and bridgeth greater It exalts man's pride above God's mercy. dignity unto men: our doctrine were much better to be liked, than our adversaries, who cannot allege one express sentence, either out of holy Scriptures, or ancient Fathers, teaching the imputation of Christ's righteousness unto us, to be our justification, as shall be seen in the reasons following, and do much abase both Christ's merits, and God's power, wisdom, and goodness. speaker A. W. It is enough for us to know what God doth, without enquiring curiously into the reason of it. Yet in this case we may answer, that God doth not make us perfectly righteous at once, that we may continually depend upon him, and not think too highly of ourselves, as you, by reason of that conceit, do, ascribing the best part of your second justification to your own merits, proceeding from your will: which grace, as you say, hath wholly freed. But of this also I spoke before, and must say more hereafter. speaker W. P. Now let us see by what reasons we justify our doctrine; and secondly answer the contrary objections. Our reasons. Reason I. That very thing which must be our righteousness before God, must satisfy the justice of the law, which saith, Do these things, and thou shalt line. Now there is nothing can satisfy the justice of the law, but the righteousness or obedience of Christ for us. If any allege civil justice, it is nothing: for Christ saith, Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and pharisees, you cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. speaker D. B. P. This reason is not worth a rush, for when he requireth that our justice This answer is less worth. Gal 5. Gal. 5. must satisfy the justice of the law, I demand what law he meaneth? If Moses law: of which those words, Do this and thou shalt live, are spoken: Then I answer with the Apostle. That you are evacuated, or abolished from Christ, that are justified in the law. That is, he is a jew and no Chri stian, that would have Christian justice answerable to Moses law. If M. Perkins would only that men justified, must be able to fulfil Christ's law, I then grant, that they so be, by the help of God's grace, which will never fail them, before they fail of their duties. speaker A. W. He is neither Christian, nor jew, but worse than either, that abolisheth the moral law by the Gospel. The r Gal. 5. 3. Apostle speaks of joining the law with Christ to justification, not of making Christian justice answerable to Moses law. But is there any likelihood, that he which came to bring perfect righteousness, would destroy the law of righteousness? Are you they that find fault with us, because we say it is impossible for us to keep the Commandments so fully, as God requireth? Doth Moses law contain any other, or greater righteousness, than the perfect love of God, and of our neighbour? Is it not your common doctrine, that faith makes us able to keep the law? Nay, do you not teach, that our Saviour hath propounded greater perfection to his followers, than was required by the law of Moses? Beside, is not the law the very law of nature? And can any man be righteous that keeps not the law of nature? You must prove that God by Christ hath either abrogated the moral law, or dispensed with Christians for the breaches of it; not by pardoning of them, as the Apostle teacheth, but by freeing them from obedience to it. If this be false, than whosoever will be justified by any law, must fulfil Moses law, to which only the promise is made, Do this, and thou shalt live. speaker W. P. What? shall we say that works do make us just? that cannot be: for all men's works are defective in respect of the justice of the law. Shall we say our sanctification, whereby we are renewed to the image of God in righteousness and true holiness? that also is imperfect and cannot satisfy God's justice required in the law: as Isai hath said of himself and the people, All our righteousness is as a menstruous cloth. speaker D. B. P. But saith M. Perkins. That justice of man is unperfect, and cannot satisfy Isay 64. the justice which God requires in his law, and proves it out of Esay, who saith, All our righteousness is as a menstruous, or defiled cloth. I answer that the holy Prophet speaketh those words in the person of the wicked, and therefore are madly applied unto the righteous. That he speaketh of the wicked, of that nation, and of that time: appeareth plainly by the text itself. For he saith before, But lo thou hast been angry, for we have offended, and have been ever in sin: and after; There is no man that calleth upon thy name, and standeth up to take hold by thee. And although the words be general, and seem to the unskilful to comprehend himself also, yet that is but the manner of preachers, and specially of such as become Intercessors for others, who use to speak in the persons of them, for whom they sue: for if he had reckoned himself in that number, he had lied, when he said: There is none that call upon thy A foul and unmannerly speech. Luther and Calvin on this place. name, when as he immediately calleth upon him in most vehement sort for mercy, all which the best learned among them marking, confess that this sentence cannot be alleged against the virtue of good works. Hence, gather how dexterously M. Perkins handleth holy Scripture. That which the Prophet spoke of some evil men, of one place, and at one time: that he applieth unto all good men, for all times, and all places. speaker A. W. It is no proof that the Prophet speaks not of himself, as well as of the people, because Preachers sometimes do not in the like speeches. For sometimes also they do. Neither had the Prophet lied (as you grossly speak) if he had meant himself. For it is not his purpose to deny, that God had been called upon: but so called upon as he ought to have been. The Prophet speaks of their actions, which had some show of goodness, else he would not say our righteousness: besides, he speaks not of that which he presently was to do, as a Prophet, but of that which (ordinarily) he and other did with the infirmity of men. s Luther & Calvin. in illum locum Esaiae 64. 6. Luther and Calvin are of opinion, that the place doth not properly belong to the proof of this doctrine; but they deny not that the Prophet speaks of the faithful and their works. Yea Calvin plainly affirms, that he doth speak of them: The faithful (saith he) go forward in their complaint. And, The faithful must confess their guiltiness. So doth t Caietan ad 2. Cor. 3. 21. Caietan understand the place, alluding to it, Christ merit is called our righteousness, because it is true righteousness, before God's judgement seat: to make a difference betwixt it and our righteousness, which (at God's judgement seat) is as the clouts of a menstruous woman. u De verb. Esaiae ser. 5. Our humble righteousness, if it be any, is true perhaps (saith Bernard) but not pure; unless perchance we think ourselves better than our fathers, who no less truly than humbly said: All our righteousness is as the clouts etc. Therefore Bernard and Caietan expound this place of the righteousness of justified men, as Master Perkins doth. speaker W. P. To have a clear conscience before God, is a principal part of inward righteousness: and of it Paul in his own person saith thus, I am privy to nothing by myself, yet am I not justified thereby, 2. Cor. 4. 4. Therefore nothing can procure unto us an absolution and acceptance to life everlasting, but Christ's imputed righteousness. speaker D. B. P. But he will amend it in the next, where he proves out of S. Paul, that a clear conscience (which is a great part of inherent justice,) can nothing 1. Cor. 4. help to our justification. I am privy to nothing by myself, and yet I am not justified thereby. Here is a very pretty piece of cozenage. What, doth the Apostle say that he was not justified by his clear conscience? nothing less: but that albeit, he saw nothing in himself to hinder his justification yet God who hath sharper eyesight, might espy some iniquity in him, and therefore durst not the Apostle affirm himself to be justified, as if he should say, if there be no o●her fault in me in God's 〈◊〉, than I can find by mine own insight, I am justified, because I am 〈◊〉 of nothing, and so the place proveth rather the uncertain knowledge of our justification, as I have before showed. speaker A. W. If the Apostle were not justified by the law who can be? That he was not, himself (saith Master Perkins) confesseth, even then when he was not p●●uie to himself of any gross breach thereof. This is Master Perkins reason: to which you answer nothing, but frame another argument to yourself out of the Apostles speech. speaker W. P. And this will appear, if we do consider, how we must come one day before God's judgement seat, there to be judged in the rigour of justice: for than we must bring some thing that may countervail the justice of God: not having only acceptation in mercy, but also approbation in justice: God being not only merciful, but also a just judge. speaker D. B. P. But M. Perkins addeth, that we must remember, that we shall come to judgement, where rigour of justice shall be showed. We know it well, but when there is no condemnation to those that by Baptism be purged from original sin, as he confesseth himself, the Apostle to teach in Pag. 28. our consents, about original sin, what then needeth any justified man greatly fear, the rigorous sentence of a just judge? And Saint Paul saith himself in the person of the just: That he had ran a good race, etc. and therefore, there was a crown of justice laid up for him, by that just judge, and not only to him, but all them that love ●Crists coming. speaker A. W. Indeed he that is justified, needs not fear condemnation: but the question is, whether he can be justified in God's just judgement, who brings imperfect righteousness to justify himself withal: which S. Paul doth not: but being justified by faith in Christ, looks for a reward of his holy labours, according to the promise of God. speaker D. B. P. And concerning both, inherent justice, and the ability of it, to fulfil Serm. 18. de verb. Apost. the law; And what jaw, hear this one sentence of S. Augustine. He that believeth in him, he hath not that justice, which is of the law, albeit the law be good, but he shall fulfil the law, not by justice which he hath of himself, but which is given of God, for charity is the fulfilling of the law, and from him is this charity powered into our barts, not certainly by ourselves, but by the holy Ghost which is given us. speaker A. W. There needs * Aug. de verbis Apost. ser. 15. no man's authority to prove, that he which is justified hath inherent righteousness. For the Apostle saith, x 1. Cor. 1. 30. & 6. 11. Christ is made sanctification to us, and that by him we are sanctified: neither do we deny, that this inherent righteousness is such, as might enable us to keep the law, and shall, when it is perfect: but to keep the law, is not only to have charity, or righteousness, but to use it as the law commands. Righteousness (saith y Aug. ser de temp. ●er. 5●. Austin) is nothing else but not to sin: not to sin, is to keep the commandments of the law: that is (as himself presently expounds it) to do none of those things that are forbidden, and to do all those things that are commanded. But the chief point is, what law he means: out of doubt the law of Moses, which is always meant, when it is put alone without any addition or explication, as it is here. What law understands he, when he saith, that justice which is of the law? Of the same he saith, he shall fulfil z Legem ipsam. the law itself: besides, what a Rom. 13. law doth charity fulfil? questionless the law of Moses: the sum whereof is the love of God and man. speaker W. P. Reason II. 2. Cor. 5. 21. He which knew no sin was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God which is in him. Whence I reason thus. As Christ was made sin for us, so are we made the righteousness of God in him: but Christ was made sin, or, a sinner by imputation of our sins, he being in himself most holy: therefore a sinner is made righteous before God, in that Christ's righteousness is imputed and applied unto him. Now if any shall say, that man is justified by righteousness infused: then by like reason, I say Christ was made sin for us by infusion of sin, which to say is blasphemy. speaker D. B. P. I deny both propositions, the former because it hath a comparison in the manner of our justification, with the sin which Christ was made for us: for in the text of the Apostle, there is no signification of a similitude that Christ was so made sin, as we are made just. That is then M. Perkins vain gloss, without any likelihood in the text. The other proposition is also false, for Christ was not made sin by imputation, for sin in that place is taken figuratively, and signifieth according to the exposition Why do you not bring a better warrant from the Hebrew phrases of ancient Fathers, An host or sacrifice for sin: Which Christ was truly made: his body being sacrificed on the Cross for the discharge of sin, and not by imputation. speaker A. W. That there is some comparison of likeness implied by the Apostle, it appears by b Aug. Enchir. ad Laurent. cap 41. Austin: He therefore was made sin, that we might be made righteousness; not ours, but Gods; not in us, but in him; as he c Demonstravit. made show of sin, not of his own, but of ours; not d Constitutum. resting in him, but in us. speaker W. P. That interpretation indeed is generally best liked of, because of the hebraism: but yet the place may also be expounded otherwise, as e Lombard. Thomas, Caietan. Catharin Gloss. Interlin. your own writers show: He made him to be counted a sinner, saith Thomas; and Catharin more fully, f In illo posuit peccata nostrum omnium. He laid upon him the sins of us all, and especially that original sin, out of which, as out of a root, the other spring. And the exposition of this place by S. Hierome is not to be despised. Christ (saith he) being offered for our sins, took the name of sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him, Not ours nor in us. If this righteousness of God be neither ours nor in us, than it can be no inherent righteousness, but must needs be righteousness imputed. And Chrysost. on this place saith, It is called God's righteousness, because it is not of works, and because it must be without all stain or want: and that cannot be inherent righteousness. Anselm saith, He is made sin as we are made justice: not ours, but Gods: not in us, but in him: as he is made sin, not his own, but ours: not in himself, but in us. speaker D. B. P. How these words of the Apostle, justice of God, are to be understood, see Saint Augustine. One place I will cite for all. The justice of God (saith Tract. 26. in johan. Item Epist. 120. ad honorat. cap. 30. Item in Psalm. 30. Con●. 1. de spirit. & lib. c. 9 he) through the saith of Christ Jesus, that is by faith wherewith we believe in Christ: for as that faith is called Christ's, not by which Christ believes, so that justice is called Gods, not whereby God is just: both of them, faith and justice, be ours, but therefore they are termed Gods, and Christ's, because through their liberality they are given to us. Which interpretation may be confirmed out of that place of S. Chrysostome, which M. Perkins citeth, saying: It is called God's justice, because it is not of works, but of his free gift. So that it is, not that which is in God himself, but such as he bestoweth upon us. And that justice of itself is pure, and wanteth no virtue to work that, for which it is given, to wit, to make a man righteous. S. Anselm a A poor shift. What say you to Jerome? right virtuous and learned Catholic Archbishop of ours shall be answered, when the place is quoted. speaker A. W. The justice of God is expounded by the Apostle to be the forgiveness of sins, especially upon your interpretation. For what is it that Christ g Rom. 3. 25. 26 procures by his sacrifice but pardon, the wrath of God being appeased? It is indeed called the righteousness of God, because it is given us by God, and chiefly because it is appointed and approved of God. They that make it inherent in us (as it cannot be proved by this place that S. Austin doth) stretch it further than the Apostle useth to do, and make it comprehend sanctification also. It is but a shift to put off h Anselm. ad 2. Cor. 5. 21. A●s●lme, whom you cannot answer: it had been easy for you to conceive, that he means his Commentary upon that place. But how chance Hierome is passed over too? we must have some other excuse, for the place is quoted. speaker W. P. Reason III. Rom. 5. 19 As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners: so by the obedience of one, shall many be made righteous: mark here is a comparison between the first and second Adam. And hence I reason thus. As by the disobedience of the first Adam men were made sinners: so by the obedience of the second Adam, are we made righteous. Now we are not only made sinners by propagation of natural corruption, but by imputation. For Adam's first sin was the eating of the forbidden fruit: which very act is no personal offence, but is imputed to all his posterity, in whom we have all sinned. The c I●●n. l●br. 5. cap. ●7. Ch●… 〈◊〉. ad Neop●. Fathers call this very sin Adam's handwriting, making us debtor unto God. And therefore in like manner the obedience of Christ is made the righteousness of every believer, not by infusion but by imputation. speaker D. B. P. The comparison I allow, because it is the Apostles, and deny that men are made sinners by imputation of Adam's fault. And say that every one descended of Adam by natural propagation, hath his own personal iniquity stieking in them, which is commonly called Original sin, and an high point of Pelagiamsme is it, to deny it. For albeit we did not 〈◊〉 of the forbidden fruit in proper person, yet receive we the nature of man, polluted with that infection really, and not by imputation. And so the comparison serves not at all M. Perkins turn, but beareth very strongly against him, it being thus framed: As by Adam's disobedience many were made sinners, even so by Christ's obedience many shall be justified: This is his Mayor. Now to the Minor. But by Adam's disobedience they were made sinners, by drawing from him, every one his own proper inherent iniquity, First, by having his sin imputed to them. See how they are sane to disgrace arguments, that can not answer them. in like manner we are justified by Christ, not by imputation of his justice, but by our inherent justice, which is powered into our souls, when 〈◊〉▪ are in Baptism borne a new in him. See what penury of poor arguments they have, that to make some show of store are forced to propound such as make manifestly against them. speaker A. W. Your bare denial is no sufficient answer, especially since greater Clerks directly affirm the contrary, viz. that that sin of adam's makes us debtor to God; whereof we are all guilty, as having committed it in his loins. All men (saith i Aug. contra julian. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 2. Austin) are understood to have sinned in the first man, because all men were in him when he sinned: yea more than that, he saith, All men committed that sin in him, because all were that one man. As Levi (saith k Dominic. Soto ad Rom. cap. 5. Domingo a soto) many years before he was borne paid tithes in Abraham; in like sort we sinned in the loins of Adam. We deny not that we receive from Adam inherent unrighteousness by propagation; but affirm, that Adam's sin is imputed to us to our just condemnation. speaker W. P. Reason IV. A satisfaction made for the want of that justice or obedience which the law requires at our hands, is accepted of God as the justice itself. But Christ obedience is a satisfaction made for the want of that justice or obedience which the law requires, as the Papists themselves avouch. Therefore this satisfaction is our justice. And me thinks, the Papists upon this consideration have little cause to dissent from us. For if they make Christ's obedience their satisfaction, why should they not fully close hands with us, and make it their justice also? speaker D. B. P. For the Mayor he citeth Bellarmine. I have read the Chapter, and find Lib. 2. de Iusti●. cap. 7. no such words: further I say, there is a great difference between satisfaction for mortal sins, and justification: for satisfaction cannot be done by us; for the guilt of mortal sin is infinite, being against an infinite Majesty, and so no creature can make full satisfaction for it: wherefore the infinite valour of Christ's satisfaction is necessarily required, who having taken away the guilt of eternal punishment, due to sinners, leaveth us his grace to satisfy for the temporal pain of it, as shall be in his And answered as largely as shall be needful. due place, declared more at large. speaker A. W. Again, a man must needs have his sins pardoned, and grace given him, before he can make any kind of due satisfaction, for he must be in the state of grace before he can satisfy, wherefore he must needs fly to the benefit of Christ's satisfaction: There is nothing like in justification, for first to make a man just in God's sight, requires no infinite perfection but such as a mere man is very well capable of, as all must needs confess of Adam in the state of Innocency, and of all the blessed souls in heaven who be just in God's sight. Neither is it necessary to be infinite, for to be worthy of the joys of heaven, which be not infinite as they are The joys of heaven are as infinite as the pains of hell. enjoyed of Men or Angels, either who have all things there in number, weight, and measure. Master Perkins argument is wholly omitted by you; and a consectary, which he draws from it, propounded in stead of it. The argument is this: A satisfaction made for the want of that justice or obedience which the law requires at our hands, is accepted of God as justice itself. But Christ's obedience is a satisfaction, made for the want of that justice, or obedience, which the law requires. Therefore Christ's obedience is accepted of God, as the justice itself. Upon this he concludes yet further. If the Papists make Christ's obedience their satisfaction, why should they not make it their justice? The reason of the proposition is, because God accepts such satisfaction for justice. But they make Christ's obedience their satisfaction. Therefore why should they not make it their justice? Your answer must be applied to the consequence of the proposition; the proof whereof, as I have showed, is fetched from the former syllogism; to which you answer nothing at all. But let us take it as it is; and it is thus much in effect, that you have need of Christ's satisfaction, but no need of his justice. So then belike you will not accept of his righteousness as yours, because you are loath to be any more beholding to him than needs you must. That you need it not, you prove, because a mere man is capable of sufficient lighteousnes to justification. But that will not serve the turn, unless also he have as much as he is capable of: to which estate no man attains in this life, by your confession, who admit an increase of justice every day. speaker D. B. P. Briefly, it is a most easy thing for one man to pay the debts of an other but one man cannot bestow his wisdom or justice on an other, and not credible, that God (whose judgement is according to truth) will repute a man for just, who is full of iniquity: no more than a simple man will take a Black moor for white, although he see him clothed in a white suit of apparel. speaker A. W. Secondly, you take it not as yours, because Christ cannot bestow it on you. What? not so much as to have it imputed to you? why not, as well as Adam's sin is mads ours by imputation? But God (you say) whose judgement is according to truth, will not repute a man just, who is full of iniquity. Indeed God cannot be deceived, to hold a man not to be wicked that is wicked: but God can justify, that is, forgive and acquit him, though he know him to be wicked; and can take him for righteous in Christ, of whom he is a member, though in himself he be not righteous. So may the man, that will not take a black Moor for white, accept of him, as if he were white, without any error. speaker W. P. Reason V. The consent of the ancient Church. Bernard saith, epist. 190. The justice of an other is assigned unto man: who wanted his own, man was indepted and man made payment. The satisfaction of one is imputed to all. And why may not justice be from an other as well as guiltiness is from another. And in Cant. serm. 25. It sufficeth me, for all righteousness to have him alone merciful to me, against whom I have sinned. And, Not to sin is God's justice, man's justice is the mercifulness of God. And serm. 61. Shall I sing mine own righteousness, Lord I will remember thy righteousness alone: for it is mine also: in that even thou art made unto me righteousness of God. What, shall I fear lest that one be not sufficient for us both? it is a short cloak that cannot cover two: it will cover both thee and me largely, being both a large and eternal justice. speaker D. B. P. Master Perkins last reason, is taken from the consent of the ancient Which shows Augustine's judgement. Church, And yet citeth (saving one two lines) nothing out of any ancient writer, not out of any other, but out of only S. Bernard, who lived 1000 years after Christ, so that he signifieth that there is little relief to be had in Antiquity. speaker A. W. What relief there is for us, touching this point, in the Fathers, shall appear more fully hereafter, if it please God, in another treatise. In the mean while take a taste by these, who acknowledge their righteousness imperfect, and unable to abide God's judgement. This (saith l In concio. de humilitate. Basil) is perfect and sound rejoicing in God, when a man doth not brag, no not of his righteousness, but knows himself unworthy of true righteousness, and that he is justified only by faith in Christ. And in m Basil. in Psalm. 114. another place: Everlasting rest remains for them, which in this life have striven lawfully, not for the desert of their works, but by the favour of the most bountiful God, in whom they have hoped. Charity (saith n Aug. epist. 2● add Hietonym. Austin) in some is greater, in some less, in other none at all: but so great charity, as cannot be increased, is in no man so long as he lives here. Now, so long as it may be increased, surely that which is less than it should be, is faulty. By reason of which fault, there is not a righteous man upon earth, that doth good, and sins not: by reason of which fault, no man living shall be justified in the sight of God: because of this fault, if we say we have no sin, the truth is not in us: and for this also how much soever we have done, it is necessary for us to say, Forgive us our debts; though all our words, deeds and thoughts were forgiven in baptism. I will not boast (saith n De jacob. & vita beata ca 6 Ambrose) because I am righteous, but because I am redeemed: I will boast, not because I am void of sins, but because my sins are forgiven me. speaker D. B. P. Which Calvin declareth more plainly, for he commonly setting light ●ib. 3. instil. ca 11. num. 15 by all other in this question, rejecteth also S. Augustine saying. Yea not the sentence of Augustine himself is to be received in this matter, who attributeth our samctification to grace, wherewith we are regenerate in newness of life by the spirit. And Kemnitius in the first part of his examination of the Council of ●rent, saith: We contend not how the Fathers take justification: and a little after. I am not ignorant that they spoke otherwise then we do of it. Therefore M. Perkins had reason to content himself with some few broken sentences of later writers. speaker A. W. Calvin doth not commonly reject the Fathers in this point; but both he and Chemnitius allege divers things out of them, in this question of justification. For o Chemnit. de iustif. tit. I estimonia. Chemnitius look in the place you have named, in his disputation of justification. p Calu. Instit. lib. 3. c. 11. §. 15 Calvin's words will clear him sufficiently, if they be truly reported. Yea not the sentence of Austin himself, or at the least not his manner of speech, is q Per omnia. in all sorts to be received. For although he notably spoil man of all commendation of righteousness, and pass over all to God's grace, yet he refers grace to sanctification, whereby we are regenerate into newness of life, through the spirit. Indeed it is usual with Austin, and the Latin Fathers, to speak of r justificare, 〈◊〉 facere. justification, as the word seemed to lead them; and so to comprise under it sanctification also. In which respect Calvin, and Chemnitius say, they are the less to be received. But as for justification, they spoke ordinarily, as you heard before, when they speak properly, acknowledging even the charity of men regenerate (as I showed out of s Aug. epist. 29 ●d Hieron. Austin) by which the law is fulfilled, to be imperfect, and unable to justify us in the sight of God. speaker D. B. P. But was S. Bernard trow you in this one point a Protestant? Nothing Ep●s●. 190. less, his words be these. The justice of another is assigned unto man, who wanted his own: man was indebted, and man made payment, etc. But let his own reason there cited, serve for exposition of his former words, which is this. For why may not justice be from another, aswell as guiltiness is from another? Now guiltiness from Adam is not by imputation, but every one contracts his own, by taking flesh from him, even so justice 〈◊〉 The 〈◊〉 is double. from Christ powered into every man, that is borne again of water and the holy Ghost. In the second place he saith: That man's justice is the mercifulness of God: that is, by God's free grace and mercy it is bestowed upon us. speaker A. W. Your answer to the t Bern. spi. 19● first place of Bernard was refuted before, when I proved that Adam's sin was made ours by imputation. How will that agree with the former part of the sentence; u Bernard. in Cant. ser. 25. The justice of God is not to sin, but the justice of man is bestowed by God's free mercy? There is a poor difference betwixt these two, when as God may bestow such righteousness upon a man, that he shall be free from sinning. But thus stands the opposition; not to sin, is God's righteousness; not to have sin imputed, through God's mercy, is man's righteousness. speaker D. B. P. With S. Bernard in the third place, we acknowledge that we have no justice of our own, that is from ourselves, but from the goodness of God, through the merits of our blessed saviours Passion: read his first sermon, upon these words of the Prophet Jsaie. Vid● Dominum, etc. There you shall see him speak plainly of inherent justice, and how it Ser. 1. super Esaiam. is a distinct thing from the justice of Christ. speaker A. W. How vain and sleight an answer this is, the very words will show; * Bernard. in Cantic. ser. 61. Thou art made unto me righteousness of God: he speaks of such a righteousness, as is both his and Christ's; Shall I fear (saith he) lest that one be not sufficient for us both? It is not a short cloak that cannot cover, it will cover both thee and me largely, being both a large and eternal justice. In x Bernard. ser. 1 super Esai. the place, by you quoted, he speaks not a word of any righteousness: but in y Ser. 5. super Esai. the fifth sermon upon that text, he compares the righteousness of men and Angels with Gods; not inherent with imputed. But what if he speak of inherent righteousness, as he doth in many places? do we deny it? or is there, because of that, none imputed? or is that inherent righteousness sufficient to justify us in God's sight? Let z Bernard. ser. 5. de verb. Esaiae. Bernard speak for himself: Our humble righteousness, if there be any, is a Recte forsit 〈◊〉. true (perhaps) but not pure; unless perchance (saith Bernard upon that very place of Esay) we think ourselves better than our fathers, who said, no less truly than humbly, All our righteousness is as the clouts of a menstruous woman. For how can there be pure righteousness, whereas yet there cannot be fault wanting? It is no marvel then if you now make light of Bernard, whom otherwise you magnify. His testimony must needs be accounted of, that is so plain for us, and against you; whereas he was a member of your own Church, and erred with you in many points of Antichristianisme. speaker W. P. August. on Psal. 22. He prayeth for our faults, and hath made our fault: his faults, that he might make his justice our justice. speaker D. B. P. Another broken piece of a sentence, there is cited out of S. Augustine. In Psalm. 22. Tract. 27. in joan. Christ made his justice our justice. That is, by his justice, he hath merited justice for us, as he expoundeth himself. What is this, the justice of God, and the justice of man? The justice of God is here called that, not whereby God is just, but that which God giveth to man, that man may be just through God. speaker A. W. What a forced interpretation is this? Christ (saith b August. in Psalm. 22. Austin) made his justice our justice: that is (say you) by his justice he hath merited justice for us. He hath made his ours: that is, he hath by his purchased other for us. Who can bear such an exposition? Sure the words will not, nor the sense. For how shall we expound the former part of the sentence, which you craftily leave out? He hath made our sins his sins. Have our sins merited sin for him? If this be absurd, as it is, how shall your interpretation be avowed, the latter part depending upon the former? As for the exposition you bring out of c Aug. tract. 27. in joh. another place; where the justice of God is said to be that which God giveth man; this proves that, which before I delivered, that the Fathers sometimes make justification to comprehend sanctification too: but where they speak properly of justification, there they teach as we do. Objections of Papists. speaker W. P. Objections of the Papists proving inherent righteousness to be the matter of our justice before God, are these. Object. I. It is absurd, that one man should be made righteous by the righteousness of an other: for it is as much as if one man were made wise by the wisdom of another. Answ. It is true, that no man can be made righteous by the personal righteousness of another, because it pertains only to one man. And because the wisdom that is in one man, is his altogether wholly, it cannot be the wisdom of another: no more than the health and life of one body, can be the health of 〈◊〉. But it is otherwise with the righteousness of 〈◊〉: it is his indeed because it is inherent in him, as in a subject: it is not his alone, but his and ours together by the tenor of the Covenant of grace. Christ as he is a Mediator is given to every believer as really and truly, as land is given from man to man: and with him are given all things that concern salvation: they being made ours by God's free gift: among which, is Christ his righteousness. By it therefore as being a thing of our own, we may be justified before God, and accepted to life everlasting. speaker D. B. P. This answer solveth not the difficulty any whit at all, for Christ's wisdom, power, and other gifts are not imputed unto us, as it is evident. Why then is his justice more than the rest? we confess that in a good sense all Christ's gifts are ours, that is, they were all employed to purchase our redemption, and we do daily offer them to God that he will for his sons sake more and more, wash us from our sins, and bestow his graces more plentiful upon us: thus are all Christ's riches ours, so long as we keep ourselves members of his mystical body: but this is nothing to the point which the argument tou●…d, how one man may formally be made just by the justice of another, rather than wise, by This formality is a bare word. the wisdom of another. speaker A. W. The reason why our Saviour Christ's other gifts are not imputed to us, is, because we stand not in need of them, for the fulfilling of the law, to justification. They also belong to us, as members of his mystical body: we do not offer them to God, but entreat him for his sons sake (who was so and so qualified, and did such and such things; and, above all, who is so beloved) to be merciful unto us, and to accept us for his children. As for any formal wisdom, or justice, which should make any real change in us, we look not for it in justification, but in sanctification; and that is not Christ's, but ours personally. speaker W. P. Object. II. If a sinner be justified by Christ his righteousness, than every believer shall be as righteous as Christ: and that can not be. Ans. The proposition is false: for Christ his righteousness is not applied to us according as it is in Christ: neither according to the same measure, nor the same manner. For his obedience in fulfilling the law, is above Adam's righteousness, yea above the righteousness of all Angels. For they were all but creatures, and their obedience the obedience of creatures: but Christ his obedience is the obedience or righteousness of God: so termed, Rom. 1. 17. 18. 2. Cor. 5. 21. not only because God accepted of it, but because it was in that person which is very God. When Christ obeyed, God obeyed: and when he suffered, God suffered: not because the Godhead suffered or performed any obedience, but because the person which according to one nature is God, performed obedience and suffered. And by this means his righteousness is of infinite value, price, merit & efficacy. Hence also it cometh to pass, that this obedience of Christ serveth not only for the justifying of some one person ( * Namely for himself. as adam's did) but of all and every one of the elect: yea it is sufficient to justify many thousand worlds. Now to come to the point, this righteousness ousnesse that is in Christ, in this largeness and measure; is pertaining to us in a more narrow skantling: because it is only received by faith * As any one s●ar partakes in the whole light of the 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 ●●r forth as 〈◊〉 said light 〈◊〉 it to sin. so farforth, as it serveth to justify any particular believer. But they urge the reason further, saying; If Christ his righteousness be the righteousness of every believer, than every man should be a Saviour: which is absurd. Answ. I answer as before, and yet more plainly thus: Christ his righteousness is imputed to the person of this, or that man, not as it is the price of redemption for all mankind, but as it is the price of redemption for one particular man: as for example, Christ his righteousness is imputed to Peter, not as it is the price of redemption for all, but as it is the price of redemption for Peter. And therefore Christ his righteousness, is not applied to any one sinner in that largeness and measure, in which it is in the person of Christ: but only so sarreforth as it serveth to satisfy the law for the said sinner, and to make his person accepted of God as righteous, and no further. speaker D. B. P. That which is applied of Christ's justice, to this, or that man; is either infinite, and then the man is as just as Christ: for there can be no greater than infinite in the same kind. Or it is not infinite, but in a certain measure as he seemeth to grant, and then it is no part of Christ's in●n●t justice, for all the parts of an infinite thing, are infinite: according unto true Philosophy. It remaineth then that a certain limited portion of in stice is derived out of Christ's infinite justice, and powered into this, o● There is none at all po●●red in, but imputed. that man, as in his own example, The light of every star is received from the Sun beams. Yet is not the light in the star, the same which is in the Sun, for one accident cannot be in two subjects so far distant, neither is it of like virtue to lighten the skies, as it is evident: but is a far d●mmer light, somewhat like unto that of the Sun from whence it came. Even so in our justification from the Son of justice Christ jesus, certain beams of particular justice are conveyed into this, or that man's soul, whereby it is both lightened by faith, and inflamed by charity: but there is exceeding difference between their two justices, more than there is between the light of the Sun, and the light of a star; which S. Augustine in express terms delivereth, saying. How much difference there Lib. 12. cont. cap. ●5. is between the light that doth lighten, and that which is sightened, that is the sun and the star light, so much difference is there between the justice that doth justify, and that justice which is made by that justification: to wit, between the justice of Christ, and that which is in eue●… good Christian. speaker A. W. The justice of Christ's human nature (for of that now we speak) is not properly infinite, but only in regard of his person. Therefore, though it were all communicated to some man, yet should it not in him be infinite. You wholly mistake the matter. For Master Perkins doth not mean, that there is any part of Christ's righteousness inherently made ours, as the light of the star, received from the Sun, remains in it; but brings that similitude only to show, that the whole is applied to every one that is justified, in his several proportion. As for inherent righteousness, that is rather an effect, than an application of Christ's righteousness. It may be also Master Perkins was of opinion, that the stars (as the Moon) have no light in themselves, but only reflect the light of the Sun shining on them; and than it is true, that the light which comes from them is the very light of the Sun, varied according to the nature and position of each several star. Austin speaks of justification and justice, as they are largely taken, for sanctification also: neither doth he compare Christ's righteousness (as he is man) with ours, but shows how infinitely God's wisdom and justice exceed man's; as he doth d Aug. epist. 85 ad Consenti●●. elsewhere, by the same similitude. speaker W. P. Object. III. If we be made righteous by Christ his righteousness truly, than Christ is a sinner truly by our sins: but Christ is not indeed a sinner by our sins. Answ. We may with reverence to his majesty in good manner say, that Christ was a sinner, and that truly: not by any infusion of sin into his most holy person, but because our sins were laid upon him. speaker D. B. P. The third reason for the Catholic party. If men be made truly and really just by Christ's justice, imputed unto them, in like manner Christ should be made really unjust, by the iniquity and sins of men imputed unto him. For there is no reason to the contrary, but one may aswell be mand unjust by imputation, as just; especially considering that evil is made more easily, and more ways then good. M. Per●… answer is, that we may say Christ was a sinner truly, not because he had sin in him, but because our sins were laid on his shoulders. That reason is nought, for he is not truly a sinner, that pays the debt of sin, which What is it to str●ke by imputation? an innocent and most just person may perform: but he that either hath sin truly in him, or is so by imputation strooken, that the sins are made his own really, and he in all cases to be dealt withal, as if he sinned himself: as they hold that one justified by imputation of Christ's justice, is really in God's sight just, and is both loved in this life, and shall be rewarded in the next, as if he were truly just indeed: But to avouch our Saviour Christ to be so a sinner, is to say that he was averted from God, the slave of the devil, & son of perdition, which is plain blasphemy. speaker A. W. He is truly a debtor that binds himself to pay the debt; by that means taking it upon him, as if he were he that principally owes the money. e 12. Art. part. 1. Art. 4. It is no blasphemy at all to avow, that our Saviour Christ, having taken our sins upon him, was, in that respect, to God for us, as every one of us is, in himself, to God. Doth not the f Gal. 3. 14. Apostle say, that Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, becoming a curse for us? speaker W. P. Thus saith the holy Ghost, he which knew no sin was made sin for us, and he was counted with sinners, Isa. 53. 13. yet so, as even then in himself he was without blot, yea more holy than all men and Angels. On this manner said Chrysostome 2. Cor. 3. God permitted Christ to be condemned as a sinner. Again, He made the just one to be a sinner, that he might make sinners just. speaker D. B. P. That sentence out of the Prophet, He was counted with sinners, is Isay 53. expounded by the evangelists, that he was so taken indeed, but by a wicked judge, and a reprohate people. And theefore if you allow of their sentence, range yourself with them, asoneof their number. S. 〈◊〉 by him produced, confirmeth the same, saying that God permitted him to be condemned as a sinner not that he was one truly Ch●… I know is called sin by S. 〈◊〉, but by a figure, ●…ng that he as a sacrifice for sin, as hath been before declared. The same blessed Apostle when he speaketh properly, affirmeth in plain terms, that Christ was tempted like unto us, in all things excepting sin. Heb. 4. speaker A. W. The wicked jews accounted him to be sinful in himself; that blasphemy we disclaim, and hold him to have been always most pure and holy, save only for our sins charged upon him; as the g Leuit. 16. 21. sins of the people were, in a type, laid on the escape goat. speaker W. P. Object. IV. If a man be made righteous by imputation, than God judgeth sinners to be righteous: but God judgeth no sinner to be righteous, for it is abomination to the Lord. Answ. When God justifieth a sinner by Christ his righteousness, at the same time, he ceaseth in regard of guiltiness to be a sinner: and to whom God imputeth righteousness, them he sanctifieth at the very same instant by his holy Spirit: giving also unto original corruption his deadly wound. speaker D. B. P. If a man be righteous only by imputation, he may together be full of iniquity, whereupon it must needs follow, that God doth take for just and good, him that is both unjust and wicked: but that is absurd, when God's judgement is according to truth. Here M. Perkins yieldeth, That when God doth impute Christ's justice unto any man, he doth together sanctify the party, giving original sin a deadly wound. And yet else where he said, Of original sin pag. 31. That original sin, which remained after justification in the party, did bear such sway, that it infected all the works of the said party, and made him miserable, etc. But it is good hearing of amendment, if he will abide in it. speaker A. W. It is a good shift to multiply words, when you know not what to say. Master Perkins objection and answer, are almost in as few words as you make the objection. Is this to pair off superfluity? Here is nothing altered, that before was delivered: original sin remains the same it was, and so defiles our actions still, but it hath not the same strength. speaker W. P. Object. V. That which Adam never lost, was never given by Christ: but he never lost imputed righteousness: therefore it was never given unto him. Ans. The proposition is not true: for saving faith, that was never lost by Adam, is given to us in Christ: and Adam never had this privilege, that after the first grace should follow the * We have & posse & velle, he had no more but posse 〈◊〉 vellet, and ●●e wanted velle quod posset. August. de corrept. & great. cap. 11. second: and thereupon being left to himself, he fell from God: and yet this mercy is vouchsafed to all believers, that after their first conversion God will still confirm them with new grace: and by this means, they persevere unto the end. And whereas they say, that Adam had not imputed righteousness: I answer, that he had the same for substance though not for the manner of applying by imputation. speaker D. B. P. The fifth reason, is inverted by M. Perkins, but may be rightly framed thus. Christ restored us that justice which we lost by Adam's fall, but by him we lost inherent justice, ergo By Christ we are restored to inherent justice. The Mayor is gathered out of S. Paul, who affirmeth, that we receive Rom. 5. Lib. 3. c. 20. lib 6. de Gen. 24. 26. 26. more by Christ, than we lost by Adam: And is Saint Jreneus, and Saint Augustine's most express doctrine, who say, How are we said to be renewed, if we receive not again which the first man lost, & c? Jmmortality of body we receive not, but we receive justice from the which he sell through sin. speaker A. W. Master Perkins conclusion was to the purpose, though one of the propositions (as he hath proved, and you grant by not answering) was false. But the reason as you frame it is nothing at all against us: for we deny not that we receive inherent justice by Christ, but that to be justified is to be righteous in God's fight by inherent righteousness. speaker W. P. Object. VI justification is eternal: but the imputation of Christ his righteousness is not eternal, for it ceaseth in the end of this life: therefore it is not that which justifieth a sinner. Answ. The imputation of Christ's righteousness is everlasting: for he that is esteemed righteous in this life by Christ his righteousness, is accepted as righteous for ever; and the remission of sins granted in this life, is for ever continued. And though sanctification be perfect in the world to come, yet shall it not justify: for we must conceive it no otherwise after this life, but as a fruit springing from the imputed righteousness of Christ, without which it could not be. And a good child will not cast away the first garment, because his father gives a second. And what if inward righteousness be perfect in the end of this life, shall we therefore make it the matter of our justification? God forbid. For the righteousness whereby sinners are justified, must be had in the time of this life, before the pangs of death. speaker D. B. P. The sixth and last reason for Catholics is, The justice of the faithful is eternal, rueth after this life, and is ●…ned in bea●en, but Christ's imputed justice ceaseth in the end of this life. eigo. M. Perkins answereth. First, that imputed righteousness continueth with us for ever, and that in heaven, we all have no other. Secondly, that perhaps in the end of this life, in ward righteousness shall be perfect, and then without perhaps it shall be most perfect in heaven. So that one part of this answer, overthroweth the other. Wherefore I need not stand upon it, but will proceed to fortify our party, with some authorities, taken both forth of the holy Scriptures, and ancient Fathers. speaker A. W. There are many pitiful shifts in this answer. First Master Perkins denies the assumption; which you leave so overthrown, and run to fortify your own party. Secondly, he giveth the reason of his denial, That acceptation of us, as righteous, and forgiveness of sins shall be continued in heaven. Thirdly, he saith not that we shall have no other righteousness in heaven, but the quite contrary, viz. sanctification, which is inherent righteousness, here imperfect. Fourthly, he puts it not to perhaps, but resolutely affirms, that sanctification shall be perfect in the end of this life. Fiftly, there is not in his speech so much as a show of any contradiction; which ariseth wholly from that clause foisted in by you; we shall have no other. Lastly, as any man may discern, you change Master Perkins conclusion, and so his whole reason. speaker D. B. P. The first place I take out of these words of S. Paul, And these things 1. Cor. 6. certes, were you, (Dronkers, Covetous, Fornicators. etc.) But you are Washed, you are Sanctified, you are justified in the name of our Lord jesus Christ and in the spirit of our Lord: Here justification by the best interpreters S. Ch●ysost. Ambro. & Theophyl. 〈◊〉 hunclo●um. judgement is defined, to consist in those actions of washing us from our sins, and of infusion of God's holy gifts by the holy Ghost in the name, and the sake of Christ jesus. speaker A. W. First I answer, as before, that the Fathers often take justification for sanctification also. Secondly, I say h Bellarm de justif. lib. 2. c. 3. Bellarmine, out of whom you take this, hath deceived you. i Chrysost●ad. 1. Cor. 6. 11. Chrysostome doth not make justification consist in those actions of washing, etc. his words are these: God hath washed us; and not that only, but hath sanctified us; neither that only, but hath justified us. Now if washing and sanctifying be justifying, in Chrysostoms' judgement, how doth he rise from one to another, as divers things? k Theophy●▪ ibid. Theophylact makes them divers, at least in nature: God hath cleansed you from them (saith Theophylact) yea and sanctified you. How? By justifying you, faith he, for he hath washed you: then afterward, justifying he hath sanctified you. l Theodor. ibid. Theodoret expounds the place of forgiveness of sins in baptism. Your m Glossa ordin. ibid. ordinary gloss applies washing to baptism; sanctifying to the holy Ghost given us, that we may work well; and justifying, to our working well. n Ambros. ibid. Ambrose saith, that in baptism he that believes is washed, is justified in the name of the Lord, and is adopted a son to God, by the spirit of our God. But never a one of these saith, that justification consists in these actions of washing, and infusion of God's gifts. speaker D. B. P. The like description of our justification is in S. Paul. Of his mercy he Tit. 3. hath saved us by the laver of regeneration, and renewing of the holy Ghost, whom he hath powered into us abundantly, through jesus Christ our Saviour, that being justified by his grace, we may be heirs in hope (and not in certainty of faith) of life everlasting. Where the Apostle inferring that This is your gloss. being justified by his grace, declareth that in the words before he had described the same justification, to consist in our new birth of Baptism, and the renewing of oursoules, by the infusion of his heavenly gifts, which God of his mercy did bestow upon us for his Son christ sake. This is but your gloss. For the grace of God, in that place, signifies the favour of God: as o Rome 3. 24. 1. Cor. 15. 10. Heb. 2. 9 otherwhere the same phrase doth; or the love of Christ: who (as p Lyra ad Tit 3. Lyra there saith) makes us the adopted sons of God. q aietan. ibi. Caietan makes an opposition betwixt God's grace and our works, as the r Rom. 11. 6. Apostle doth: If it be of grace, it is no more of works. So doth s Chrysost. & Theoph. ad Tit. 3. Chrysostom and Theophylact understand it, of favour, not of debt: For if he saved us t Per grariam. by favour, When we were desperate and cast away; much more (saith Theophylact) shall he give us those good things to come, now we are justified, as the u Rom. 5. 10. Apostle saith; If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. speaker A. W. Many other places I omit for brevity sake, and will be content to D. B. P. You threaten kindness on your adversaries. De peccat. merit. & remiss. cap. 15. Epist 85. Lib. 12. de Trinit. cap. 7. Lib. 6. de Trin. cite few Fathers, because the best learned of our adversaries do confess that they be all against them, as I have showed before. First, S. Augustine saith, That this justice of ours, (which they call righteousness) is the grace of Christ, regenerating us by the holy Ghost; And is a beauty of our inward man. It is the renewing of the reasonable part of our soul. And twenty other such like, whereby he manifestly declareth, our justice to be inherent, and not the imputed justice of Christ. Let him suffice for the Latin Fathers. And S. Cyrill for the greeks, who of our justification writeth thus. The spirit is a heat, who as soon as he hath powered charity into us, and hath with the fire of it, inflamed our minds, we have even then obtained justice. In the x Aug de peccan. merry. & rem●ss. cap. 15 first place alleged by you, there is no such matter: only Austin proves against the Pelagians, that we are not sinners from Adam, by imitation alone; because than we should also be righteous from Christ by nothing but imitation. In the y Aug. epist. 85. ad Comentiu. Epistle to Consentius he speaks not of that righteousness, whereby we are justified, but of that which is inherent. What other thing (saith he) is justice in us, or any other virtue, by which we live orderly, and wisely, than the beauty of the inward man? This is true of those graces we receive by sanctification. z August. de Trinit. lib. 12. cap. 7. He doth not say, that the grace by which we are justified is the renewing of the reasonable part of our soul, but that the renewing of God's image in us, is the renewing of that part. Now this is done by sanctification, not by justification properly taken. I can find no such thing in that book of a Cyril de Trinit. lib. 6. Cyrill; but if ever he spoke so, what is that against us? who easily grant that we are inherently righteous, as soon as the sanctifying spirit of God hath kindled the fire of love in our hearts. II. Difference about the manner of justification. speaker W. P. All, both Papists and Protestants agree, that a sinner is justified by faith. This agreement is only in word, and the difference between us is great in deed. And it may be reduced to these three heads. First, the Papist saying that a man is justified by faith: understandeth a general or a Catholic faith, whereby a man believeth the articles of religion to be true. But we hold that the faith which justifieth, is a particular faith whereby we apply to ourselves the promises of righteousness and life everlasting by Christ. And that our opinion is the truth, I have The Papist asks where: I answer in handling the certainty of salvation. proved before: but I will add a reason or twain. Reason I. The faith whereby we live, is that faith whereby we are justified: but the faith whereby we live spiritually, is a particular faith whereby we apply Christ unto ourselves, as Paul saith, Gal. 2. 20. I live, that is, spiritually, by the faith of the son of God: which faith he showeth to be a particular faith in Christ, in the very words following, who hath loved me, and given himself for me, particularly: and in this manner of believing Paul was and is an example to all that are to be saved. 1. Tim. 1. 16. and Phil. 3. 15. speaker D. B. P. Ans. The mayor I admit, and deny the Minor: and say that the proof is not to purpose. For in the Minor he speaketh of faith, whereby we apply Christ's merits unto ourselves, making them ours, in the proof S. Paul saith only, that Christ died for him in particular. He makes no mention of his apprehending of Christ's justice, and making of it his own, which are very distinct things. All Catholics believe with Saint Paul, that Christ died, as for all men in general: so for every man in particular, yea and that his love was so exceeding great towards mankind, that he would willingly have bestowed his life, for the redemption of one only man. But hereupon it doth not follow, that every man If God had appointed him so to do. may lay hands upon Christ's righteousness, and apply it to himself (or else Tu●…s. jowes, Heretics, and evil Catholics, might make very bold with him) but must first do those things which he requires at their hands, to be made partakers of his inestimable merits: as to repent them heartily of their sins, to believe and hope in him, to be baptised, and to have a full purpose to observe all his commandments. Which M. 〈◊〉 also confesseth that almen have not only promised, but also ●ov●ed in Baptism. Now because we are not assured that we Pag. 152. shall perform all 〈◊〉, therefore we may not so presumptuously apply unto ourselves, Christ's righteousness, and life everlasting, although we believe that he died for every one of us in particular. speaker A. W. That which followeth in M. Perkins hath no colour of probability: that S. Paul in this manner of belief, that is, in applying to himself Christ's merits: was an example to all that are saved. See the places 1. Tim. 1. 16. Phil. 3. 15. The vain pride of Papists. good Reader, and learn to beware the bold unskilfulness of sectaries. For there is not a word sounding that way, but only how he having received mercy, was made an example of patience. Master Perkins proves his minor thus: The faith, by which Paul lived, was a particular faith, whereby he applied Christ to himself. But the faith, by which we live, is the faith by which Paul lived. Therefore the faith by which we live, is a particular faith, whereby we apply Christ to ourselves. The proposition Master Perkins proves by the b Gal. 2. 20. Apostles testimony; where he doth particularly apply Christ to himself, as having loved him, and died for him. You answer, that S. Paul makes no mention of his apprehending of Christ's justice; no more doth Master Perkins in his proposition. But the Apostle mentions such a particular faith, as Master Perkins speaks of, viz. a persuasion that Christ's benefits belong to him in particular, and that Christ hath particularly loved him; which is to apprehend Christ. And this is another manner of matter, than to hold that Christ died for every particular man; which the devils no doubt do acknowledge. The assumption is evident of itself: for there is no question, but that all which are justified, have and live by the same faith. But Master Perkins sets out the matter by two places of scripture: in the former whereof, c 1. Tim. 1. 16 the Apostle propounds himself to all men, as an example of God's mercy, that they may assure themselves, that if they will believe in Christ, as he did, they should have forgiveness of their sins, as he had. In d Phil. 3. 15. the latter, having showed that he cast off all confidence in his own righteousness, and accounted it as dung, resting only upon God for his righteousness, by faith in jesus Christ; he exhorts all men to follow his example, both in faith and holiness. speaker W. P. Reason 11. That which we are to ask of God in prayer, we must believe it shall be given us, as we ask it: but in prayer we are to ask the pardon of our own sins, and the merit of Christ's righteousness for ourselves: therefore we must believe the same particularly. The proposition is a rule of God's word, requiring that in every petition we bring a particular faith, whereby we believe, that the thing lawfully asked, shall be given accordingly, Mark. 11. 24. speaker D. B. P. Of the Mayor much hath been said before, here I admit it, all due circumstances Yea though they be not observed. of prayer being observed, and deny that we must pray, that our Saviour Christ jesus merits may be made ours in particular, for that were greatly to abase them: but good Christians pray, that through the infinite value of those his merits; our sins may be forgiven, and a justice proportionable unto our capacity, may be powered into our souls, whereby we may lead a virtuous life, and make a blessed end. speaker A. W. It is no abasing of our saviours merits, that is, of his obedience to the moral law, and his sufferings, that they should be communicated to every member of his mystical body, for their justification; as long as the work of redemption remains proper to him. speaker W. P. The minor is also evident, neither can it be denied: for we are taught by Christ himself to pray on this manner, Forgive us our debts: and to it we say, Amen, that is, that our petitions shall without all doubt be granted unto us. August. serm. de temp. 182. speaker D. B. P. But it is goodly to behold, how Master Perkins proveth that we must pray, that Christ's righteousness may be made our particular justice, because saith he, We are taught in the Pater noster, to pray in this manner: forgive us our debts, and to this we must say Amen, which is as much to say as our petition is granted. I think the poor man's wits were gone a pilgrimage, when he written thus. Good Sir, cannot our sins or debts be forgiven, without we apply Christ's righteousness to us in particular? we say yes. Do not then so simpl●… beg that which is in question, nor take that for given, which will never be granted. speaker A. W. Our sins cannot be forgiven, without that part of Christ's merits be applied to us, by which sin is satisfied for. As all men sinned in Adam, so all men satisfy for sin in Christ, namely all men, that by faith are one with Christ. speaker D. B. P. But a word with you by the way. Your righteous man must overskippe that petition of the Pater nos●er (sorgive us our debts) for he is well This hath been already refuted. assured, that his debts be already pardoned. For at the very first instant that he had faith, he had Christ's righteousness applied to him, and thereby assurance both of the pardon of sins, and of life everlasting. Wherefore he cannot without infidelity, distiust of his former justification, or pray for remission of his debts: but following the famous example of that formal Pharisie, in lieu of demanding pardon, may well●ay. O Luk. 18. God 〈◊〉 give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, v●●ust, * A ridiculous affectation of an obsol●te word. aduo●t●re●s, as also these Papists: Fearing the remission of my sins, or the certainty of my salvation, but am well assured thereof, and of Christ's own righteousness too, and so forth. speaker A. W. How false and idle this objection is, it hath appeared already: we have not assurance either at the first, or at all (ordinarily) but with some doubting now and then. speaker W. P. And here note, that the Church of Rome in the doctrine of justification by faith cuts off the principal partand property thereof. For in justifying faith two things are required: first Knowledge revealed in the word touching the means of salvation: secondly, an Applying of things known unto ourselves, which some call affiance. Now the first, they acknowledge. speaker D. B. P. So then by M. Perkins own confession, Catholics have true knowledge of the means of salvation, d●en h●▪ and his fellows err miserably. speaker A. W. Papists acknowledge in general the means of salvation, namely the mercy of God in Christ: but they fail much, both in the true understanding of that they hold, and in divers particulars necessarily belonging to the truth of that doctrine. speaker W. P. But the second, which is the very substance and principal part thereof they deny. speaker A. W. Catholics teach men also to have a firm hope, and a great confidence D. B. P. You confess as much as you are charged with. You make God store of sins against the holy Ghost. of obtaining salvation, through the mercy of God, and me●●ts of Christ's Passion. So they perform their duty towards God, and their neighbour, or else die with true repentance. But for a man at his first conversion, to ass●…e himself by saith of Christ's righteousness, and life everlasting; without condition of doing those things, he ought to do, that we Catholics affirm to be, not any gift of faith, but the heinous crime of presumption, which is a sin against the Holy Ghost, not pardonable, neither in this life, nor in the world to come. Neither do we teach any such assurance, as this man so oft harps upon: and if we did, it cannot be a sin against the holy Ghost, being of ignorance, and not of malice. speaker W. P. Reason III. The judgement of the ancient Church. * August. I demand now, dost thou believe in Christ, O sinner? Thou sayst, I believe. What believest thou? that all thy sins may freely be pardoned by him. Thou hast that which thou hast believed. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins third reason, is drawn from the consent of the ancient See S. Tho. 22. q. 21. art. 1. De verbis Domi●i. serm. 7. Church, of which for fashion sake to make some show, he often speaketh, but can seldom find any one sentence in them, that f●●s his purpose, as you may see in this sentence of Saint Augustine, cited by him. Augustine saith. I demand now, dost thou believe in Christ, O sinner? thou sa●…st I believe: what believest thou, that all thy sins may freely be pardoned by him? thou h●st that which thou believest. See, here is neither applying of Christ's righteousness, unto us by faith, nor so much as believing our sins to be pardoned through him, but that they may be pardoned by him. So there is not one word for 〈◊〉. Perkins. speaker A. W. e Aug. de verbis Dom. ser. 7 There is this for Master Perkins, though you will not see it, that he which believes in Christ, for the pardon of sins, hath that which he believes: that is, upon this faith is pardoned. speaker W. P. Bernard. The Apostle thinketh that a man is justified freely by faith. If thou believest that thy sins cannot be remitted but by him alone against whom they were committed: but go further and believe this too, that by him thy sins are forgiven thee. This is the testimony which the holy Ghost giveth in the heart: saying, thy sins are forgiven thee. speaker D. B. P. But S. Bernard saith plainly: That we must believe that our sins are pardoned us. But he addeth not by the imputed righteousness of Christ. No more do we. Again, he addeth conditions on our part, which M. Perkins crastelie concealeth. For S. Bernard granteth that we may believe our sins to be forgiven, if the truth of our conversion meet with the mercy of God preventing us, for in the same place he hath these words: So therefore shall his mercy dwell in our earth, that is, the grace of God in our souls, if mercy and truth meet together, if justice and peace embrace and kiss each other. Which is as S. Bernard there expoundeth it, if we stirred up by the grace of God, do truly bewail our sins and confess them, and afterward follow holiness of life and peace. All which M. Perkins did wisely cut off, because it dashed clean the vain gloss of the former words. speaker A. W. The point in question is not whether we must believe that our sins are pardoned, which is all you gather out of that testimony; but whether the faith which justifieth be a particular faith, whereby we apply to ourselves the promises of righteousness, and life everlasting by Christ. Master Perkins proves it to be such a faith by the judgement of f Berna. ser. 1. de Annuntiat. Bernard; in citing whereof, first the Printer did him wrong by leaving out these words, Thou dost well: which are the consequent part of the sentence, and without which there is no sense in it, as any man may see that reads it. This (which is strange in a man so desirous to cavil) you pass over, and omitting the principal matter, for which this place of Bernard was alleged, go about to answer that which Master Perkins urgeth not: namely, that we are not justified by the imputed righteousness of Christ, neither doth he for that purpose bring this testimony, but to show what that faith is by which we are justified. Secondly, you accuse Master Perkins for cutting off certain conditions added, on our part, by Bernard: but where are these conditions added? The words you allege, are above thirty lines after those that he cities, and depend not upon them; but are spoken concerning the certainty of salvation. So therefore (saith Bernard) doth this glory, viz. the inward glory and witness of our conscience, as in the words immediately before, dwell here in our earth, if mercy and truth meet together, and righteousness and peace kiss each other. For it is necessary that the truth of our conversion meet with mercy preventing it. And that afterward we follow holiness and peace, without which no man shall see God. This, and such like sentences declare, that it is in vain for a man to promise himself justification without sanctification. But they answer not the former testimony, which shows, that justifying faith is a particular applying of Christ, by believing the forgiveness of our sins. speaker W. P. * Serm. de Natal. Cyprian. God promiseth thee immortality, when thou goest out of this world, and dost thou doubt? This is indeed not to know God, and this is for a member of the Church in the house of faith not to have faith: If we believe in Christ, let us believe his words and promises, and we shall never die, and shall come to Christ with joyful security, with him to reign for ever. speaker D. B. P. S. Cyprian encourageth good Christians dying, to have a full confidence in the promises of Christ, and so do all Catholics, and bid them be secure too on that side, that Christ will never fail of his word and promise, but say that the cause of fear lies in our own infirmity: and yet bids them not to doubt, as though they were as likely to be condemned as saved, but animats them, and puts them in the good way of hope, by twenty kinds of reasons. But what they be you can s●arce tell. speaker A. W. g Cyprian. ser. de Natal. Cyprian affirms confidently, that God hath promised every true Christian immortality when he goes out of the world: so that if he believe this promise, and rest upon God for the performance of it by Christ, he shall certainly be made partaker of it. Your comfort is so cold, that a man were as good be without it, when his hope shall depend especially upon the good use of his own free will, in believing and keeping the law of Christ. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins having thus confirmed his own party, why doth he not after his manner confute those reasons, which the Catholics allege in favour of their assertion? Was it because they are not wont to produce any in this matter? Nothing less▪ It was then beli●e, because he knew not how to answer them. I will out of their from● take that one principal, Believe than he knew some better than those you bring. of the testimony of holy Scripture, And by that alone ●…ly prove, that the faith required to justification, is that Catholic faith, whereby we believe all that to be true, which by God is revealed, and not any other particular believing Christ's righteousness to be ours. speaker A. W. It should seem the reason was, that having (as he said before) proved our opinion to be true, he doth but add a● argument or two to his former proof. For that it was easy for him to answer those you bring, I hope it shall be manifest to all men: at the least, it had not been hard for him to choose out some that he could have answered. speaker D. B. P. How can this be better known then if we see, weigh, and consider well, what kind of faith that was which all they had, who are said in Scriptures to be justified by their faith. speaker A. W. Your reason is thus to be framed. If the faith of all them, who are said in Scripture to be justified by faith, was a belief of the truth of all that which was revealed by God, and not any other particular believing Christ's righteousness to be theirs; then justifying faith is so. But the faith of all them, who are said in Scripture to be justified by faith, was a belief of the truth of all, which by God is revealed, etc. Therefore a justifying faith is a belief of all that which is revealed by God, and not any other particular believing Christ's righteousness to be theirs. First, we must remember that we speak of that faith by which they were justified: for else the consequence of the proposition may be doubted of. This being understood, I deny the assumption: and to the proof of it I answer, first in general, that your examples are either effects of justifying faith, or the way and means to it, but not the faith itself. speaker D. B. P. S. Paul saith of Noah, That he was instituted heir of the justice, which is, by faith. What faith had he? That by Christ's righteousness he was assured Heb. 11. 7. of salvation? No such matter, but believe that God according to his word and justice, would drown the world, and made an Ark to save himself, and his family, as God commanded him. speaker A. W. Secondly, I say for the particulars, that this was not the faith by which h Heb. 11. 7. Noah was justified. For it is apparent that he i Gen. 6. 8, 9, 13 was justified, before he believed that God would drown the world. Add hereunto, that this faith of his was also a resting upon God for safety, according to his promise. The Apostle in this, and the like, propounds not the means of justification, but some notable effect of faith. Neither doth he declare what this righteousness of faith was, but saith, that the righteousness of faith remained (as k Lyra ad Heb. 11. Lyra expounds it) in him only, and his children: in which respect he is called the heir of it. l Chrysost. ad Heb. 11. Chrysostome saith, By this he appeared to be just, because he believed God. speaker D. B. P. Abraham the Father of believers, and the Pattern and example of justice by faith, as the Apostle disputeth to the Romans: What 〈◊〉 he Rom. cap. 4. was justified by. Let S. Paul declare, who of him and his faith, hath these words. He contrary to hope believed in hope, that he might be made the Father of many Nations, according to that which was said unto him. So shall thy seed be as the stars of heaven, and the sands of the sea: and he was not weakened in faith, neither did he consider his own body, now quite dead, whereas he was almost an hundred years old, not the dead Matrice of Sara, in the promise of God he staggered not by distrust, but was strengthened in saith, giving glory to God, most fully knowing, that wha●soe●e● he promised, he was able also to do, therefore was it reputed to him to justice. Rather because he tru●ed to God for that blessing upon himself and his wife Sa●●h. Lo, because he glorified God in believing, that old and barren persons might have children, if God said the word, and that whatsoever God promised, he was able to perform, he was justified. speaker A. W. Odd Abraham I answer, as of Noah, that he was justified long before God made him that promise, yea m Saunder. de 〈◊〉. before he came out of the land of Canaan. For n Heb 11 8. by faith he obeyed God, when he was called to go out into a place, which he should afterwards receive for inheritance. And this faith of his was not a bare believing that which God spoke, but a resting upon him accordingly: and so was that the o Rome 4. 11. 12 Apostle speaks of, whereby God was especially glorified: for this reposing himself upon God, argued the account he made of the favour of God to him. Now the belief in that promise was not only for the maltiplying of his natural seed, but for salvation by Christ to his spiritual children, that P should believe, as he had done: and therefore it is called the q Gal 3. 8. Gospel that he believed. This r Rom. 4. 3. faith was counted to him for righteousness, as every act is, whereby a man believing in Christ, rests upon the promise of God. But the particular thing that is accepted to his justification, is his believing in God for justification by jesus Christ. I will use no other proof but the phrase itself, s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. To believe in God, which necessarily implies a relying upon God, for that we desire being promised. speaker D. B. P. The Centurion's faith was very pleasing unto our Saviour, who said in commendation of it, That he had not found so great faith in Israel? What faith was that? Mary, that he could with a word cure his servant absent. Say the word only (quoth he) and my servant shall be healed. Matth. 8. ● Matth. 8. 9 speaker A. W. The Centurion's faith was not a justifying faith, but a means to it; begotten in him by the consideration of our saviours power in working miracles; though I doubt not but from this belief he was raised by God to a true faith for justification by the Messias. But this in itself was no more than u Marc. 1. 24. Math. 16. the devils have, acknowledging Christ's power. speaker D. B. P. S. Peter's faith so much magnified by the ancient Fathers, and highly rewarded by our Saviour, was it any other, Then that our Saviour was Christ, the Son of the living God? speaker A. W. S. Peter's confession x Matth. 16. 16 in that place, was no more in words, but of Christ's office, Thou art Christ; and his nature, The son of the living God. But if he had not also by faith rested on him to justification, this confession would have done him but little pleasure: for y Luc. 4. 34. Satan himself believes as much, and is damned. speaker D. B. P. And briefly let S. john that great secretary of the Holy Ghost, tell us joh. 20. what faith is the final end of the whole Gospel. These things, (saith he) are written that you may believe that jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name. speaker A. W. Doth the preaching of the Gospel aim at nothing else? Then what shall become of holiness of life, and good works, made by you the matter of your second justification? This is not the last end of the Gospel, but the first; and by this the other is wrought: we must believe that jesus Christ is the Son of God; so that by believing this, we come to him, that is, z joah. 6. 35. believe in him, or rest upon him for salvation, and thereby attain to everlasting life. speaker D. B. P. With the Evangelist the Apostle S. Paul acordeth very well, saying: Rom. 10 This is the word of faith which we preach, for if thou confess with thy mouth our Lord jesus Christ, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from death thou shall be saved. And in another place. I make known 1. Cor. 15. unto you the Gospel, which I have preached, and by which you shall be saved, unless perhaps you have believed in vain. What was that Gospel? I have delivered unto you that which I have received, that Christ died for our 〈◊〉, according to the Scriptures, was buried, and rose again the third day, etc. So by the verdict of S. Paul, the belief of the articles of the creed, is that justifying faith, by which you must be saved. speaker A. W. Such is the testimony of Paul. For it is more than apparent, that a man may believe in his heart, that God raised Christ from the death, and yet deny many necessary heads of religion, and be wholly cast away. But the Apostle in this implies the rest, and namely that a Rom. 10. 13. 〈◊〉 which follows, believing in God: that is, if I may so often repeat the same thing, resting upon him for justification, by our Saviour jesus Christ. The same answer I make to the other place; the point of the resurrection is of necessity to be believed of as many as look to be saved: but that is not all that is required. For if it be, neither your preparations to justification, nor your merits after justification, are to any purpose. speaker D. B. P. And neither in S. Paul, nor any other place of holy Scriptures is it once taught, that a particular faith whereby we apply Christ's righteousness to ourselves, and assure ourselves of our salvation, is either a justifying or any Christian man's faith, but the very natural act, of that ugly Monster presumption: Which being laid as the very corner stone of the You speak like a hired servant, not like a son. Protestants irreligion, what moral and modest conversation, what humility and devotion can they build upon it? speaker A. W. All those places that require of us faith in Christ, teach us also that a particular faith, whereby we apply Christ to ourselves, by trusting to him for justification, is the only proper justifying faith; because to it nothing can be added, for the matter of believing. A man may acknowledge that b Credere Deum. there is a God, and give c Credere Deo. credit, as to a certain truth, to all that God reveals, and yet not d Credere in Deum. believe in God to justification. But he that performs this latter, must needs also acknowledge the former. This then being the height of faith, is in the Scripture counted a justifying faith. speaker W. P. The II. difference touching faith in the act of justification, is this. The Papist saith, we are justified by faith, because it disposeth a sinner to his justification after this manner: By faith (saith he) the mind of man is enlightened in the knowledge of the law and Gospel: knowledge stirs up a fear of hell, with a consideration of the promise of happiness, as also the love and fear of God, and hope of life eternal. Now when the heart is thus prepared, God infuseth the habit of charity and other virtues, whereby a sinner is justified before God. We say otherwise, that faith justifieth because it is a supernatural Instrument created by God in the heart of man at his conversion, whereby he apprehendeth and receiveth Christ's righteousness for his justification. speaker D. B. P. The second difference in the manner of justification, is about the formal act of faith, which M. Perkins handleth as it were by the way, cuttedly. I will be as short as he, the matter not being great. The catholics reach as you have heard out of the Council of Trent, in the beginning of this question, that many acts of faith, fear, hope, and charity do go before our justification, preparing our soul to receive into it from God, through Christ that great grace. It is your proud Synagogue that doth magistraliter determinare. speaker A. W. If the matter be not great, it was but a small fault to be short in it; yea the contrary had been a fault indeed. It is not handled by the way, but propounded in plain terms, as a second difference betwixt us and you. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins Doctor like resolveth otherwise, That faith is an instrument created by God in the heart of man, at his conversion, whereby he apprehendeth and receiveth Christ's righteousness, for his justification. This jolly description is set down without any other probation, than his own authority that delivered it: and so, let it pass as already sufficiently confuted. And if there needed any other disprofe of it, I might gather one more out of his own explication of it, where he saith that the covenant of grace is communicated unto us, by the word of God, and by the Sacraments. For if faith created in our hearts, be the only sufficient Tou should add as supernatural instruments. supernatural instrument, to apprehend that covenant of grace, than there needs no Sacraments for that purpose, and consequently I would feign know by the way, how little infants, that cannot for want of judgement, and discretion have any such act of faith, as to lay hold on Christ his justice, are justified? Must we without any warrant in God's word, contrary to all experience, believe that they have this act of faith before they come to any understanding? speaker A. W. If it would have served your turn to cavil at, you would have found Master Perkins reason, and not have jested at his authority: I will plainly propound it for all men to judge of your dealing. That e joh. 1. 12. & 6. 35. whereby Christ is to be received, is an instrument to apply Christ. But faith is that whereby Christ is to be received. Therefore faith is an instrument to apply Christ. To this you answer nothing, but frame an argument against the question, as you would have it thought out of Master Perkins his own explication of it. Your argument is: If faith created in our hearts, be the only sufficient supernatural instrument to apprehend the covenant of grace, than there need no Sacraments. You should add, as supernatural instruments to that purpose. But there is need of the Sacraments. Therefore faith is not the only sufficient supernatural instrument to apprehend the covenant of grace. First there is more in your conclusion, than in the question. The question is, whether faith be a supernatural instrument created to that purpose or no: your conclusion is, that faith is not that only supernatural instrument. Secondly, I deny the consequence of your proposition: you may as well say (for that Master Perkins sets down too) that if faith be the only instrument, than the word is needless. The Word and Sacraments apply Christ outwardly, as means on God's part; faith receives it in on our part; the holy Ghost enlightening and inclining our hearts thereunto. Little infants (in my poor opinion) have no act of faith, but are justified, without any thing done by them; God for Christ's sake (according to his everlasting election) forgiving their sins, and adopting them for sons and heirs of glory. speaker W. P. In this their doctrine is a twofold error: I. that they make faith which justifieth, to go before justification itself, both for order of nature, and also for time; whereas by the word of God, at the very instant, when any man believeth first, he is then justified, and sanctified. For he that believeth, eateth and drinketh the body and blood of Christ, and is already passed from death to life. joh. 6. 54. speaker D. B. P. But to return unto the sound doctrine of our Catholic faith, M Perkins finds two faults with it, one that we teach faith to go before justification, whereas by the word of God (saith he) at the very instant, when any man believeth first, he is then both justified and sanctified. What word of God so teacheth? Marry this. He that believeth, eateth and drinketh the body and blood of Christ, and is already passed from death to life. I answer that our Saviour in that text speaketh not of believing, but of joh. 6. 54. eating his body in the blessed Sacrament, which who so receiveth worthily, obtaineth thereby life everlasting, as Christ saith expressly in that place. And so this proof is vain. speaker A. W. If you had meant plainly, you should have reported Master Perkins reproof of your opinion truly, as he hath delivered it, that you make faith go before justification, not only in order of nature only, which we grant, but in time also, which we deny. If I should only say the contrary, f joh. 6. 51. 54. that our Saviour doth not speak there of the Sacraments, I might conclude by as good reason, as you do; and so this answer is vain. But I oppose to your authority, not mine own, which is nothing worth, but g Gabr. Biel. in Canon. Miss. lect. 84. Nicol. Cusan. epist. 7. ad Bohemos. Caietan. in 3. q. 80. art. ult. Tapper. in explic. artic. 15. Lovan. Hestelius de come. sub una specie. jansen concord. evang. cap. 59 your own writers; yea h Concil. Tried. sess. 21. cap. 1. the Council of Trent, which leaves it free to all men to expound that chapter, either of the spiritual eating of Christ by faith only, or of eating him really in the Sacrament. And this i Greg. de valentia de legit. usu Euchar. cap. 4. pag. 489. liberty is grounded upon the diversity of opinions among the Fathers, concerning the sense of that chapter. This is sufficient to make Master Perkins reason good, against your denial. speaker D. B. P. Now will I prove out of the holy Scriptures, that faith goeth before Rom. 10. justification, first by that of S. Paul, Whosoever calleth on the name of our Lord, shall be saved, but how shall they call upon him, in whom they do not believe, how shall they believe without a preacher? etc. Where there is this order set down to arrive unto justification. First, to hear the preacher, then to believe, afterwards to call upon God for mercy, and finally mercy is granted and given in justification: so that prayer goeth between faith and justification. speaker A. W. k Rom. ●0 13. 13 Prayer cometh between in nature, but not in time: for he that rests upon God for salvation in Christ, doth withal call upon God for pardon of his sins: whereupon justification follows immediately, though not always in a man's own feeling. speaker A. W. This S. Augustine observed when he said. Faith is given first, by which we obtain the rest. And again: By the law is knowledge of s●nne, by D. B. P. De praedes. sanct. cap. 7. De spirit. & lit. cap. 30. faith we obtain grace, and by grace our soul is cured. The rest, that l Aug. de praedest. cap. 7. Austin speaks of, are graces of sanctification, or (as he calls them there) good works, in which we live: and these are supplied every day by God, or at least the increase and use of these virtues, whereby we live godly in the world: such is the cure of the soul by grace, to the loving of righteousness, and doing the works of the law. speaker D. B. P. If we list to see the practice of this recorded in holy writ, read the second of the Acts, and there you shall find, how that the people having heard S. Peter's Sermon, were strooken to the hearts and believed, yet were they not strait way justified, but asked of the Apostles what they must do, who willed them to do penance, and to be baptised, in the name of jesus, in remission of their sins, and then lo, they were justified, so that penance and baptism went between their faith, and their justification. speaker A. W. Those men m Act. 2. 37, 38. S. Luke there speaks of, were not yet come to a justifying faith, when they asked the Apostle what they should do; no nor to the knowledge of the Gospel: but only to n Vers. 23. 36. a sight of their own sins, in consenting to the murdering of Christ. speaker A. W. In like manner Queen Candaces Eunuch, having heard S. Philip * It is kindly to have as well strange word● as strange doctrines. Act. 8. Act. 9 announcing unto him Christ, believed that jesus Christ was the Son of God (no talk in those days of applying unto himself Christ's righteousness,) yet was he not justified, before descending out of his chariot he was baptised. And three days passed between S. Paul's conversion and his justification, as doth evidently appear by the history of his conversion. speaker D. B. P. The o Act. 8. 35. Eunuch had heard the Gospel expounded out of p Esa. 53. 7, 8, 11 Esay, and namely, that men were to be justified by the acknowledging of Christ: his desire of baptism was a proof of his faith, according to that he had learned; and baptism q Rom. 4. 10. 11 the seal of his pardon, or justification, upon that his belief of forgiveness by Christ's sufferings. It appears by the r Act. 9 9 18. story, that there were three days betwixt the vision and the baptism of the Apostle; but it is not any way showed, that he had justifying faith the first day, and yet was not justified till the third day; it is but your conceit, that tie justification to baptism. speaker W. P. The second is, that faith, being nothing else with them but an illumination of the mind, stirreth up the will: which being moved and helped, causeth in the heart many spiritual motions: and thereby disposeth man to his future justification. But this indeed is as much as if we should say, that dead men only helped, can prepare themselves to their future resurrection. For we are all by nature dead in sin, and therefore must not only be enlightened in mind, but also renewed in will, before we can so much as will or desire that which is good. Now we (as I have said) teach otherwise: that faith justifieth as it is an instrument to apprehend and apply Christ with his obedience; which is the matter of our justification. This is the truth, I prove it thus. In the Covenant of grace, two things must be considered: the substance thereof, and the condition. The substance of the covenant is, that righteousness and life everlasting, is given to God's Church and people by Christ. The condition is, that we for our parts, are by faith to receive the foresaid benefits: and this condition is by grace as well as the substance. Now then, that we may attain to salvation by Christ, he must be given unto us really, as he is propounded in the tenor of the foresaid Covenant. And for the giving of Christ, God hath appointed special ordinances, as the preaching of the word, and the administration of the sacraments. The word preached is the power of God to salvation to every one that believes: and the end of the Sacraments is to communicate Christ with all his benefits to them that come to be partakers thereof: as is most plainly to be seen in the supper of the Lord, in which the giving of bread and wine to the several communicants, is a pledge and sign of God's particular giving of Christ's body and blood with all his merits, unto them. And this giving on God's part, cannot be effectual without receiving on our parts: and therefore faith must needs be an instrument or hand to receive that which God giveth, that we may find comfort by this giving. speaker D. B. P. The second fault he findeth with our faith, is that we take it to be nothing else, but an illumination of the mind, stirring up the will, which being so moved and helped by grace, causeth in the heart many good spiritual motions: But this (says M Perkins) is as much to say, that dead men only helped, can prepare themselves to their resurrection. Not so good Sir, but that men spiritually dead being quickened by God's spirit, may have many good motions, for as our spirit giveth life unto our bodies; so the spirit of God by his grace animateth, and giveth life unto our souls. But of this it hath been once before spoken at large, in the question of free will. speaker A. W. Is not the latter your doctrine also, that a man, upon those good motions inspired, disposeth himself to justification, by the good use of his free will? let the s Concil. Trid. sess. 6. cap. 6. Council of Trent be judge, as yourself alleged it before. speaker W. P. The III. difference concerning faith is this: the Papist saith, that a man is justified by faith; yet not by faith alone, but also by other virtues, as hope, love, the fear of God, etc. The reasons which are brought to maintain their opinion, are of no moment. Reason. I. Luke 7. 47. Many sins are forgiven her, * Particula non causalis: sed illativa vel rationalis. because she loved much. Whence they gather that the woman here spoken of, was justified and had the pardon of sins by love. Ans. In this text, love is not made an impulsive cause to move God to pardon her sins, but only a sign to show and manifest that God had already pardoned them. Like to this, is the place of john, who saith, 1. joh. 3. 14. We are translated from death to life, because we love the brethren: where love is no cause of the change, but a sign and consequent thereof. speaker D. B. P. Observe first, that Catholics do not teach that she was pardoned for love alone, for they use not (as Protestants do) when they find one cause of justification, to exclude all, or any of the rest: But considering that in sundry places of holy write, justification is ascribed unto many several virtues, affirm that not faith alone, but divers other divine qualities concur unto justification, and as mention here made of love, excludeth not faith, hope, repentance, and such like: so in other places, where faith is only spoken of, there hope, charity, and the rest, must not also be excluded. This sinner had assured belief in Christ's power to remit sins, and great hope in his mercy that he would forgive them, great sorrow and detestation of her sin also she had, that in such an assembly did so humbly prostrate herself at Christ's feet, to wash them with her tears, and to wipe them with the hairs of her head. And as she had true repentance of her former life, so no doubt but she had also a firm purpose, to lead a new life. So that in her conversion, all those virtues meet together, which we hold to concur to justification, and among the rest, the pre-eminence worthily is given to love, as to the principal disposition. She loved our Saviour as the fountain of all mercies, and goodness, and therefore accounted her precious ointments best bestowed on him; yea, and the humblest service, and most affectionate she could offer him, to be all too little, and nothing answerable to the inward burning charity which she bore him. Which noble affection of hers, towards her divine Redeemer, no question, was most acceptable unto him, as by his own word is most manifest: for he said, That many sins were forgiven her, because she loved much. But M. Perkins saith, that her love was no cause that moved Christ to pardon her, but only a sign of pardon given before: which is so contrary to the text, that a man not past all shame, would blush once to affirm it. speaker A. W. In stead of answering your long discourse, grounded upon mere conjectures, for the most part, which for the woman's sake I will not examine; let me put you in mind, that if all this you report of her were true, she was justified before these actions; which could not proceed but from a great measure of grace; especially such an inward burning charity, as is not easily to be found in many a one that hath been justified a long time. speaker A. W. First Christ saith expressly, that it was the cause of the pardon: Because D. B. P. He proveth that many sins were forgiven her, he doth not show why they were forgiven. she had loved much. speaker D. B. P. Master Perkins hath answered you, that our Saviour saith not so, and hath proved his answer by the like place of t 1. joh. 3. 14. S. john, where u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the same word is used, and no cause propounded, but a sign only. Would you not have taken away this answer, if you had could? But the text itself clears the matter: first by x Luc. 7. 41, 42 Vers. 43. Vers. 44. Vers. 47. the parable propounded, with Simons answer, and our saviours approbation: then by the application of it: lastly, by the general doctrine gathered out of it; to whom a little is forgiven, he doth love a little. To this purpose y Basil. de baptismo. Basil saith, That he that owes much, hath much forgiven him, that he may love much more. Secondly, that her love went before, is as plainly declered, both by mention of the time past: Because she hath loved, and by the ●●●dence of her fact of washing, wiping and anointing his feet: for ●h● which saith our Saviour, than already performed: Many si●… are forgiven her. So that here can be no impediment of believing the Catholic Doctrine, so clearly delivered by the holy Ghost, unless one will be so blindly led by our new Masters, that he will believe no words of Christ, be they never so plain, otherwise than it please the Ministers to expound them. And this much of the first of those reasons which M. Perkins said were of no moment. speaker A. W. The mention of the time past is too weak a reason, to Vers. 47. overthrow so certain proof, out of the whole course of the text: especially since that notable conclusion is delivered immediately upon the former words, in the present time; to whom a little is forgiven, z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. he doth love a little. Neither doth our Saviour tie the pardon of her sins to that present time, but then giveth her knowledge of that which was done before, saying first to Simon: Many sins are forgiven her: and then to herself, Thy sins are forgiven thee. speaker W. P. Reason II. Gal. 5. 6. Neither circumcision, nor uncircumcision availeth any thing, but faith that worketh by love. Hence they gather, that faith doth justify together with love. Ans. The property of true faith is, to apprehend and receive something unto itself: and love, that goes always with faith, as a fruit and an unseparable companion thereof, is of an other nature. For it doth not receive in, but as it were give out itself in all the duties of the first and second table towards God and man: and this thing faith by itself cannot do: and therefore Paul saith, that faith worketh by love. The hand hath a property to reach out itself, to lay hold of any thing, and to receive a gift: but the hand hath no property to cut a piece of wood of itself without saw or knife, or some like instrument: and yet by help of them, it can either divide or cut. Even so it is the nature of faith, to go out of itself and to receive Christ into the heart: as for the duties of the first and second table, faith cannot of itself bring them forth; no more than the hand can divide or cut: yet join love to faith, and then can it practise duties commanded concerning God and man. And this I take to be the meaning of this text, which speaketh not of justification by faith, but only of the practice of common duties, which faith putteth in execution by the help of love. speaker D. B. P. Reply. That charity hath the chiefest part, and that faith is rather the instrument and hand ma●id of charity. My proof shall be out of the very text alleged, where life and motion is given to faith by charity, as the Greek word Euergoumene being passive, doth plainly show, that faith is moved, led, and guided by charity. speaker A. W. a Gal. 5. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Greek word is not of the passive, but of the middle voice; as it is in many other places of Scriptures: b Rom. 7. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The affections of the flesh did work in our members, operabantur, in your own translation. c 2 Cor. 4. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Death works in us, but life in you operatur: d Ephes. 3. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Accord to the power that worketh in us operatur: e Col. 1. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Accord to his working, which he worketh in me; quam operatur in me. And in this very place operatur, which cannot be taken passively, as every Grammar scholar knoweth. In the Interlinear, faith, which is f Effi●ax. effectual. Pagnin, g Agens. working by love. Faith (saith h Theophyl ad Gal 5. 6. Theophylact on that place) works by love; that is (saith he) ought always i Vivax & efficax commonstrari. to be showed to be alive, and effectual by love to Christ. And a little after, Learn therefore, that faith worketh by charity, that is (saith he) is showed to be alive. * Lombard. Thomas. Caietan. Catharin. D. B. P. The place is of works not of charity. The best of your own writers expound it, as we do. speaker A. W. Which S. james doth demonstrate most manifest, saying that. Even as the body is dead without the soul, so is faith without charity: Making charity to be the life, and as it were the soul of faith. Now no man is ignorant, but it is the soul that useth the body, as an instrument, even so than it is charity, that useth saith as her instrument and inferior, and not contrariwise. First the word, k jam. 2. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in that place, doth not signify the soul, but breath, as Caietan saith. Secondly, the Apostle saith not, without charity, as you do, but l Sine operibus without works: which cannot be taken for the life of faith, but are only effects of it. Thirdly, for the meaning of the place, let us here your own Cardinal Caietan speak. By the name of m Spiritus. spirit (saith Caietan) he understands not the soul, but the breath. And he fitly compareth works to breath: for as the body of a living creature, n Sinon spirat. if it breath not, is dead: so faith, o Sinon parit opus. if it bring forth no works, is dead: for breathing is an effect of a live body, and likewise working is the proper effect of a living faith: whereby it appeareth (saith he) in what sense p jam. 2. 17. 20 the Apostle said above, that faith without works was dead: not because he thought that works were the form of faith, but because he thought that works q Concomitantia fidem. accompany faith, as the breath accompanieth the life of the body. You see both his judgement and his reason, which is confirmed by that the r jam. 2. 17. Apostle said before: Faith, if it have not works, is dead. So that the meaning is, faith without works, that is, faith that hath not works, is dead. speaker D. B. P. Which S. Paul confirmeth at large in the whole Chapter, proving charity to be a more excellent gift than faith, or any other, concluding with these words. Now there remaineth faith, hope, and charity, these three, but the greater of these is charity. Whereupon S. Augustine resolveth 1. Cor. 13. thus. Nothing but charity maketh faith itself available, for faith (saith he) may be without charity, but it cannot be available without it: Lib. de Trinit. cap. 18. So that first you see that charity is the mover, and commander, and faith, as her instrument, and handmaid. speaker A. W. The s 1. Cor. 13. 1. 2. Apostle speaketh not of that faith, by which we believe in God to justification, but of that by which miracles are wrought. Besides it doth not follow, that love useth faith as an instrument to justify us, because in some respect it is superior; namely in the present use, for the good of our brethren: to which the Apostles exhortation tends, as it ●…y appear by his discourse, both in that chapter, and in the 12. going before, and the 14. that followeth. Austin, bringing the Apostles words, speaketh of the same faith that he meant: which may be indeed without charity, and cannot rise to the height of a justifying faith, but must needs be accompanied by charity, without which it is dead. speaker D. B. P. Now that in the work of justification, it hath the chief place, may be thus proved, I demand whether that work of justification by faith A senseless question. be done, for the love of God, and to his honour or no? If not, as it is void of charity; so it is a wicked and sinful act, no justification, but infection, our own interest being the principal end of it: now if it comprehend and conclude God's glory, and service in it, that is, if they apply Christ's righteousness to them, to glorify God thereby, then hath charity the principal part therein: for the directing of all, to the honour and glory of God, is the proper office and action of charity. speaker A. W. There is neither reason in your question, nor strength in your argument: the work of justification, by faith is God's action justifying a sinner, that believeth in jesus Christ. What sense then is there in this question? I demand whether that work of justification by faith, be done for the love of God, and to his honour, or no. That which followeth, in respect of God, is blasphemous, at least absurd: That the work of justification is a wicked act. To your reason: It is no wicked act to believe in God for justification by Christ, though in the particular act of believing, we think not upon the glorifying of God, but only respect our own salvation. For to believe in Christ is no act enjoined by the law of nature, or of Moses, whereby we should justify ourselves; but an extraordinary matter appointed by God, who respects nothing in it, on our parts, but that we believe. Not as if we might therefore neglect the glory of God, but that we may afterward give so much the more glory to him, the less cause there was he should pardon us, there being such a defect against our general duty in that act of believing. Further, if it were true that we desired to glorify God by believing in Christ, and that that desire proceeded from love; yet had not love either the principal, or any part in procuring our justification. Because God doth not justify us, for seeking to glorify him by belief, which is simply a work of the law, but only accepteth t joh. 6. 29. our believing for working; and, as u Rom. 4. 5. the Apostle speaketh, counts faith to us for righteousness. speaker A. W. All this reason that charity both concurreth to justification, and that D. B. P. Serm. 22. de verbis Apostol. as principal, S. Augustine confirmeth in these words: The house of God, (that is, a righteous and godly soul,) hath for his foundation faith, hope is the walls of it; but charity is the roof and perfection of it. Austin speaketh not of justification only, but of the whole building of God's house in the soul of man; which ( x Aug. de verbis Apostoli Ser. 20. saith he) is built with singing, founded with believing, set up with hoping, perfected with loving. The end of our election, justification, and sanctification, is holiness, without which a man is no true Christian; but justification is not the building of the soul. speaker W. P. Reason. III. Faith is never alone, therefore it doth not justify alone. Answ. The reason is nought, and they might as well dispute thus. The eye is never alone from the head, and therefore it seeth not alone: which is absurd. And though in regard of substance the eye be never alone, yet in regard of seeing, it is alone: and so though faith subsist not without love and hope and other graces of God, yet in regard of the act of justification it is alone without them all. speaker A. W. The third of these trifling reasons, is perversely propounded by D. B. P. You have suited them with answeres accordingly. M. Perkins thus. Faith is never alone, therefore it dothnot justify alone: That this argument is fond framed, appeareth plainly in that, that Catholics do not deny, but affirm that faith may be without charity, as it is in all sinful Catholics. The argument is framed upon our opinion: who maintain, that a justifying faith is never without hope, and charity. Hence it may seem to follow, that it doth not justify alone: but because you disclaim this reason, I will let it pass. speaker D. B. P. We then form the reason thus. If faith alone be the whole cause of justification, then if both, hope and charity were removed from faith (at least by thought, and in conceit,) faith would nevertheless justify. But faith considered without hope, and charity will not justify: ergo, it is not the whole cause of justification. The first proposition cannot be denied of them, who know the nature and propriety of causes, for the entire and total cause of any thing, being (as the Philosophers say) in act, the effect must needs follow, and very sense teacheth the simple, that if any thing be set to work, and if it do not act that, which it is set too, then there wanted some thing requisite. And consequently that was not the whole cause of that work. speaker A. W. I deny the consequence of your proposition. For though saith alone be the whole cause of justification; yet not every faith, but such an one as is accompanied with hope and charity. To your proof I answer, that such a faith is neither the whole, nor any cause of justification; and so though that be (as you say) in act, yet no such effect will follow. speaker D. B. P. Now to the second proposition. But their imagined faith cannot apply to themselves, Christ's righteousness without the preseace of hope and charity. This assumption is a great deal scanter than the former And before answered. For else he might be justified without any hope of heaven, and without any love towards God, and estimation of his honour, which are things most absurd in themselves: but yet very well fitting the Protestants justification, which is nothing else but the plain vice of presumption, as hath been before declared: Yet to avoid this inconvenience which is so great, M. Perkins granteth that both, hope and charity must needs be present at the justification, but do nothing in it, but faith doth all, as the head is present to the eye, when it seeth, yet it is the eye alone that seeth. Here is a worthy piece of Philosophy, that the eye alone doth see, whereas in truth it is but the instrument of seeing, the soul being the principal cause of sight, as it is of all other actions, of life, sense, and reason: and it is not to purpose here, where we require the presence of the whole cause, and not only of th● instrumental cause. speaker A. W. To the assumption I answer: Faith, considered without any act of hope or charity to justification, doth justify: but faith that is without these, doth not justify. To your proof I say further, that to our justification God accounteth for righteousness, neither our hope of heaven, nor our love towards himself, nor our estimation of his honour, but y Rom. 4. 3. 5. only our believing in jesus Christ. The similitude is true, and fit. True, because the eye doth see, though as an instrument fitted to that office by God: and thus Philosophers, Poets, Orators, and all kind of people do speak. He that would be more curious than wise, might find fault with you also, and say; that the act of seeing also is man's, and the soul the instrustrument whereby he doth see; as the hand is the instrument with which he reacheth. The fitness of the similitude appeareth thus; It is man that believeth, as it is man that seeth. The general instrument (as I may speak) for both these actions is the soul, though by divers faculties; the particular for sight is the eye, for believing, faith, outwardly there is none. The eye severed from the head seeth not; and yet it is the eye that seeth, and not the head: so saith, that is without hope and charity, justifieth not; and yet hope and charity doth not justify. You answer that it is not to purpose; because we require the presence of the whole cause, and not only of the instrumental. But you deceive yourself: for the question is not of the whole cause, or principal efficient, which is God, (for z Rom. 8. 33. it is he only that justifieth) but of the instrument, if we may so call it. To speak plainly, the matter is (as I have often said) what it is that God respects in us to our justification. We say it is only our believing in Christ: you say it is our believing, loving, and hoping; because we teach, that together with faith, by which (on our part) we are justified, we receive hope, charity, and other graces of sanctification, which are all present in the heart, when it believeth to justification, but are no way any causes of it. speaker D. B. P. And to return your similitude upon yourself, as the eye cannot see without the head, because it receiveth influence from it, before it can see, so cannot faith justify without charity, because it necessarily receiveth spirit of life from it, before it can do any thing acceptable in God's sight. speaker A. W. I deny your similitude, as faulty in the reddition or latter part of it. For faith receiveth no influence from any other virtue, whereby it hath life to work acceptably in God's sight: but the acceptableness of faith proceeds from the mere acceptation of God, a Rom. 4. 3. 5. counting it for righteousness. And whereas we say that such a faith only justifieth, as hath hope and love for companions, it is not our meaning that these make saith acceptable, but that he which believeth, and hath not these virtues, idly presumes of faith, when he hath it not; because the spirit of God, together with true faith, poureth these graces also into our souls. But of this whole point of justification, I shall one day (if it please God) write more distinctly and fully. speaker W. P. Reason IV. If faith alone do justify, than we are saved by faith alone: but we are not saved by faith alone: and therefore not justified by faith alone. Answ. The proposition is false: for more things are requisite to the main end, then to the subordinate means. speaker D. B. P. The fourth reason, if faith alone do justify, than faith alone will save, but it will not save, ergo. M. Perkins first denieth the proposition, and saith, That it may justify, and yet not save: because more is required to salvation, then to justification. Which is false, for put the case that an Innocent babe die shortly after his baptism wherein he was justified, shall he not be saved for want of any thing? I hope you will say yes: even so any man that is justified, if he depart in that state, no man makes doubt of his salvation, therefore this first shift was very frivolous. speaker A. W. It had been the part of a scholar to have refuted his reason, as well as to condemn his answer. But indeed the reason is sound; that justification, being but the subordinate means to the main end, salvation, more is required to this, than to that: not that any man can fail of salvation, b Rom. 8. 30. which hath attained to justification, but because God hath appointed to make supply of other graces, that we may come by degrees to glorification. Your reason is nothing worth. For the comparison of equality and likeness, is insufficient. For though infants need no more to salvation; yet men of discretion do. I appeal to your own doctrine: Do not you teach, that good works are necessary to salvation? and yet you grant, that infants may be saved without them; yea and men of years too, if they have no time to do them, after their first justification. Therefore more may be required to salvation than to justification, though infants want nothing after they are once justified: yea infants are justified without faith, as many as are justified. speaker W. P. And the assumption is false: for we are saved by faith alone, if we speak of faith as it is an instrument apprehending Christ for our salvation. speaker D. B. P. Which M. Perkins perceiving, flies to a second; that for faith alone we shall also be saved, and that good works shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement. Then must those words of the holy Ghost M. Perk. hath not a word of not regarding works. so often repeated in the Scriptures be razed out of the text. God at that time will render unto every man, according to his works. But of this more amply in the question of merits. speaker A. W. His second answer is, that the assumption is false; upon this distinction, that by saving, we understand being brought into the state of salvation. For that is performed, on our part, by believing only. Now in this case we are said to be saved, because whosoever is once justified by saith, shall certainly have other things ministered unto him, by which God hath appointed to bring him to salvation. It is your slander, not Master Perkins error, that good works shall not be regarded at the day of our judgement. speaker W. P. Reason V. We are saved by hope, therefore not by faith alone. Answ. We are saved by hope, not because it is any cause of our salvation. Paul's meaning is only this: that we have not salvation as yet in possession, but wait patiently for it, in time to come to be possessed of us, expecting the time of our full deliverance: that is all that can justly be gathered hence. speaker D. B. P. There be many other virtues, unto which justification and salvation are ascribed in God's word: therefore faith alone sufficeth not. The Antecedent is proved, first offeare it is said. He that is without fear, cannot be justified. We are saved by hope. Unless you do psnance, you shall Ecclesias. 1. Rom. 8. Luk. 13. 1. joan. 3. all in like sort perish. We are translated from death to life, (that is justified) because we love the brethren. Again of baptism. Unless you be borne again of water, and the holy Ghost, you cannot enter into the Kingdom of heaven: Lastly we must have a resolute purpose to amend our evil lives. For we are buried together with Christ by baptism into death, that as Christ is risen again from the dead, etc. S● we may also walk in newness of Rom. 6. life. speaker A. W. Master Perkins answered as much as he propounded: that which you have brought I will examine, and, I trust, satisfy. c Ecclesiastic. 1. 28. He that is without fear, cannot be justified. It is a strange course of proving, to bring that against us for scripture, which you know we deny to be scripture, and that with the consent of the ancient writers, and your own of late. d Interlin. Bibl. Arias Montanus, and they that joined with him, have left all the Apocryphal out of the Interlinear Bible. The Greek, which is the original, is far otherwise, e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, iracundus. An angry man: and so it is translated in f Bibl. Reg. Hispan. the great Bible, set out by Arias Montanus; and before that, by g Pa●nin. Pagnin, who also interpreteth it, shall not be justified, h Non poterit censeri justus. cannot be thought just, referring it to man's judgement, rather than to Gods. i Vatablus. Vatablus also so translateth it, and adds in the margin, that some copies read k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. unjust anger: and for your being justified, he translateth (as Pagnin doth) cannot be counted just. Besides I deny the consequence; he that is without fear cannot be justified: therefore justification is ascribed in God's word to some other virtue, and not to faith only. For though a man that is without fear cannot be justified, yet he is not justified in respect of his fear. To omit the absurdity of the translation, l Luk. 13. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. do penance, for repent; who makes any doubt that they shall perish, that repent not? What will you conclude thence? Therefore repentance justifieth, and not faith only? I deny your consequence, see the reason in the former section. The m 1. joh 3. 14. Apostle makes not the love of our brethren the cause, but the proof of our justification; as it is apparent by his words: We know we are translated from death to life, because we love the brethren: he that loveth not his brother, abideth in death. We are not translated by reason of our loving: for indeed we must be translated before we can love them; but we know by loving them that we are translated. And that is the scope of the Apostle: In this are the children Vers. 10, 〈◊〉 of God known, and the children of the devil: whosoever doth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother: Let us not love in word, nor in tongue, but indeed and in Vers. 18. 19 truth. For thereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall before him assure our hearts. First, you take that as granted which is full of doubt, that our Saviour Christ speaketh n joh. 3. 5. in that place of baptism. Secondly (admitting that) I deny absolute necessity of baptism, as well as of the other Sacrament: for which, in your judgement, those words are as strong, o joh. 6. 5●. Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Thirdly, I say we are justified by baptism, p Rom. 4. 10. 1● as Abraham was by Circumcision. Fourthly, I deny the consequence here also: None can enter into heaven, except they be borne again of water and the holy Ghost. Therefore not only faith, but also some other virtues are respected by God in our justification. The end of baptism is our sanctification, by dying to sin, and living to righteousness: therefore justification and salvation are ascribed to other virtues, beside faith. I deny the consequence. For q Rom. 6. 4, 5. though we must have a resolute purpose to amend our lives; yet God doth not justify us, in regard that we have such a purpose, but only in respect of our believing; neither, to speak truly, doth this purpose go before justification, but follow it. speaker D. B. P. To all these and many such like places of holy Scripture, it pleased M. Perkins to make answer in that one. You are saved by hope: to wit; Rom. 8. He answered all he propounded. that Paul's meaning is only, that we have not as yet salvation in possession, but must waire patiently for it, until the time of our full deliverance, this is all. Now whether that patient expectation, which is not hope, but issueth out of hope, of eternal salvation, or hope itself be any cause of salvation, he saith neither yea nor nay, and leaves you to think as it seemeth best unto yourself. S. Paul then affirming it to be a cause of salvation, it is best to believe him: and so neither to exclude hope or charity, or any of the foresaid virtues, from the work of justification, having so good warrant as the word of God, for the confirmation of it. speaker A. W. r Rom. 8. 24. S. Paul doth not affirm, that it is any cause of salvation, but only saith (as Master Perkins hath truly answered) that we must come to the possession of salvation, by continuing our hope of it with patience. To which purpose s Heb. 10. 36. the Apostle saith, that we had need of patience, that after we have done the will of God, we may receive the promise. Neither is the question of salvation, but of justification: so that here the consequence may justly be denied, we are saved by hope, therefore we are not justified by faith only. For more is required to salvation, than to justification. speaker D. B. P. To these authorities and reasons, taken out of the holy Scriptures, let us join here some testimonies of the ancient Church, reserving the rest unto that place, wherein M. Perkins citeth some for him. The most ancient and most valiant Martyr S. Ignatius, of our justification writeth thus. The beginning of life is faith, but the end of it is charity, but both Epist. ad Philip. united and joined together, do make the man of God perfect. speaker A. W. There is no such word in that t Ignatius ad Philip. Epistle to the Philippians; and if there were, the matter were not great. Such an author, as he showeth himself to be, that writ those epistles in Ignatius name, is an unfit judge in controversies of Divinity. But for the sentence itself, if it be any where to be found, it may well be answered, that sanctification is required to the perfection of a Christian, and not only justification: and this is all that is here affirmed. What proof is there in this, that faith only doth not justify? speaker A. W. Clement Patriarch of Alexandria saith. Faith goeth before, but fear doth build, and charity bringeth to perfection. D. B. P. Libr. 2. storm. u Clemens Stromat. lib. 2. Clement speaketh not either of justification, or of justifying faith; but (as the former author) describeth some of the means, and, as it were, the parts of Christian sanctification. speaker D. B. P. Saint john Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople hath these words: Hom. 70. in Math. Lest the faithful should trust that by faith alone they might be saved, he disputeth of the punishment of evil men, and so doth he both exhort the Jnfidels to faith, and the faithful to live well. speaker A. W. x Chrysost. in Math. hom. 70. Chrysostome speaks of that faith, whereby we give assent to the truth of the Gospel, not of that whereby we live in Christ. Neither entreateth he of justification, but of salvation. Further, he rejecteth such a faith as hath not good works: and so do we. speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine crieth out as it were to our Protestants, and saith: Hear Lib. 3. hypognost. O foolish Heretic, and enemy to the true faith. Good works, which (that they may be done, are by grace prepared, and not of the merits of freewill) we condemn not: because by them, or such like, men of God have been justified, are justified, and shall be justified. speaker A. W. Many doubt, and some, even of your own side, deny that book to be y Hypognost. lib. 3. Augustine's. But for the sentence alleged by you, it cannot be to the purpose; because our question is now only of the first justification, as you speak; to which the works of grace, that follow afterward, and of which Austin professedly speaketh in that place, cannot belong. Beside, there is no doubt but he speaketh as S. james doth, saying, that z jam. 2. 21. Abraham was justified by works: that is, approved and acknowledged for just, both by God and man: as a man is known to be alive by his breathing. speaker A. W. And, Now let us see that which is to be shaken out of the hearts of the D. B. P. De fide & oper. c. 14. faithful: Lest by evil security they lose their salvation, if they shall think faith alone, to be sufficient to obtain it. The words immediately following after those you have set down, and being a part of the sentence, make it manifest, that a Aug. de fide & oper. cap. 14 Austin speaks of a dead faith, which neglecteth good works. If they shall think (saith he) faith alone to be sufficient to obtain it, but shall neglect to live well, and hold on the way of God by good works. This (as he professeth b August. de doctr. Christ. cap. 13. otherwhere) he knew to be the course of some, who thought that faith, which (saith he) they feign they have, should avail them before God, without good works; and being deceived with this kind of error, commit heinous sins without fear, while they believe that God is a revenger of no sin, but c Persidiae. infidelity. And these were the Gnostickes, against whom such speeches are intended. speaker W. P. Now the doctrine which we teach on the contrary is, That a sinner is justified before God by faith: yea, by faith alone. The meaning is, that nothing within man, and nothing that man can do, either by nature or by grace concurreth to the act of iustistcation before God, as any cause thereof, either efficient, material, formal, or final, but faith alone. All other gifts and graces, as hope, love, the fear of God, are necessary to salvation, as signs thereof, and consequents of faith. Nothing in man concurs as any cause to this work, but faith alone. And faith itself is no principal, but only an instrumental cause whereby we receive, apprehend, and apply Christ and his righteousness for our justification. speaker D. B. P. Now the doctrine which M. Perkins teacheth, is clean contrary. For (saith he) A sinner is justified by faith alone, that is, nothing that man can do by nature or grace, concurreth thereto as any kind of cause, but faith alone. Farther he saith, That faith itself is no principal, but rather an instrumental cause, whereby we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousness for our justification. So that in fine, we have that faith so much by them magnified, and called the only and whole cause of our justification, is in the end become no true cause at all, but a bare condition, It is no where so called by us. without which we cannot be justified. speaker A. W. The doctrine Master Perkins teacheth, is not contrary, but the very same. For he holds that no man can be saved, who either neglecteth, or endeavoureth not to bring forth good works: though he allow these no place, as causes of a man's justification. At the last, you understand, that we make not faith the principal, much less the whole cause of our justification. To speak properly, we make it no true cause at all; but only, as you say, a condition, required by God on our part; which he accepteth in stead of fulfilling the law, and thereupon forgiveth us our sins, for Christ's sake. speaker A. W. If it be an instrumental cause, let him then declare what is the principal D. B. P. Conditio sine qua non. Neither of them. cause, whose instrument faith is; and choose whether he had liefer to have charity, or the soul of man without any help of grace. Your disjunction is nought. For neither charity, nor the soul, are the principal efficients, but man himself; not without any help of grace, but by such a special grace, as certainly produceth that effect in us, to our justification. speaker W. P. Reason I. joh. 3. 14. 15. As Moses lift up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the son of man be lift up: that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have eternal life. In these words Christ makes a comparison on this manner: when any one of the Israelites were stung to death by fiery serpents: his cure was not by any physic surgery, but only by the casting of his eye up to the brasen-serpent, which Moses had erected by God's commandment: even so in the cure of our souls, when we are stung to death by sin, there is nothing required within us for our recovery, but only that we cast up and fix the eye of our faith on Christ and his righteousness. speaker D. B. P. But to come to his reasons. The first is taken out of these words. As joh. 3. Moses lift up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lift up, that whosoever believeth in him, shall not perish, but have life everlasting. True, if he live accordingly, and as his faith teacheth him: but what is this to justification by only faith? Mary M. Perkins draws it in after this fashion. As nothing was required of them who were stung by serpents, but that they should look upon the brazen serpent: So nothing is required of a sinner, to deliver him from sin, but that he cast his eyes of faith upon Christ's righteousness, and apply that to himself in particular. But this application of the similitude is only man's foolish invention without any ground in the text. Similitudes be not in all points alike, neither must be stretched beyond the very point wherein the similitude lieth, which in this matter is, that like as the Israelites in the Wilderness stung with serpents, were cured by looking upon the brazen serpent: so men infected with sin, have no other remedy, then to embrace the faith of Christ jesus: All this we confess, but to say that nothing else is necessary, that is quite besides the text, and as easily rejected by us, as it is by him obtruded without any authority, or probability. speaker A. W. If we precisely urge the similitude, the latter part of the reddition is no part of the comparison: for there is nothing in the proposition, to which it answereth. But our Saviour adds the end of lifting up himself, to stir us up (as it may seem) to a more thorough consideration of the agreement betwixt health by the Serpent, and salvation by him. And surely it is not without reason to make a likeness in the deliverance, as well as in other points, that all men might understand by our saviours speech, how they should become partakers of that benefit. speaker W. P. Reason II. The exclusive forms of speech used in scripture prove thus much. We are justified freely, not of the law, not by the law, without the law, without works, not of works, not according to works, not of us, not by the works of the law, but by faith. Gal. 2. 16. All boasting excluded, only believe. Luk. 8. 50. These distinctions, whereby works and the law are excluded in the work of justification, do include thus much: that faith alone doth justify. speaker D. B. P. It doth not so: for these exclusive speeches do not exclude fear, hope and charity, more than they exclude faith itself. Which may be called a work of the law, as well as any other virtue, being as much required by the law as any other. speaker A. W. If they do not more exclude fear, hope and charity, than faith, it must be showed that they are directly, or by necessary consequence required, in opposition to the works of the law. For that is very manifest of faith, in divers places. d Rom. 3. 28. By faith without the works of the law. e Gal. 2. 16. Not by the works of the law, but by the faith of jesus Christ. f Ephes. 2. 8. By the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. g Vers. 9 Through faith, not of works. But this can never be showed of them. By reason of the opposition, I speak of, faith cannot be taken for a work of the law: neither is it any work, required by the law, to believe in Christ for justification; because the law saith, h Leuit. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5. Do this, and thou shalt be saved: namely, as an hired servant. But the Gospel saith, ⁱ Believe, and thou shalt have thy sins forgiven thee by justification. Now the law commands no suit for pardon, but calls for either obedience, or damnation. Hope indeed (as I showed before) differs little from faith, but depends upon it: fear and love are proper duties of the law, and so always performed. speaker D. B. P. But S. Paul's meaning in those places is, to exclude all such works, as either jew or Gentile did, or could brag of, as done of themselves, and so thought that by them, they deserved to be made Christians. For A n●… of in●…cation. he truly saith, that all were concluded in sin, and needed the grace of God, which they were to receive of his free mercy, through the merits of Christ, and not of any desert of their own: And that to obtain this grace through Christ, it was not needful, nay rather hurtful to observe the ceremonies of Moses law, as Circumcision, the observation of any of their feasts, or fasts, nor any such like work of the law, which the Iews reputed so necessary. Again, that all moral works of the Gentiles could not deserve this grace, which works not proceeding from charity, were nothing worth in God's sight. And so all works, both of jew and Gentile, are excluded from being any meritorious cause of justification, Boasting is not excluded by Popish justification. and consequently, all their boasting of their own forces, their first justification being freely bestowed upon them. speaker A. W. S. Paul speaketh not of deserving to be made Christians, but of attaining to salvation: as it is apparent by his disputation in the Epistle to the Romans. k Rom. 3. 19 By the works of the law no man living shall be justified. What is justified? shall be made a Christian, after your interpretation. So afterward, l Rom. 3. 28. a man is justified, that is made a Christian, by faith, and not by the works of the law. So have we a new interpretation of justification by faith. Besides, it would be remembered, that you distinguish betwixt works of nature, and works of grace; denying justification to them, and granting it to these: how will this stand with your answer? Neither doth the Apostle dispute, how they were to attain to the grace of Christ, but how they were to receive pardon, and acceptation to everlasting life; which he truly ascribeth, on our part, to belief in Christ, by which we obtain m Rom. 3. 28. Gal. 3. 26. both these privileges: As for meriting of justification, there is not a letter of it in any place of the new or old Testament. And though there be no meritorious cause of it in works, before grace; yet boasting by your doctrine, is not excluded. For may I not justly boast, that myself, being enlightened by God's spirit, and having a good motion inspired into me, by the power of mine own free will accepted of the grace of God offered me, and so am justified? where my cause of boasting is the greater, because many other men, who might have been justified as well as I, have not employed their free will so well as I have done, and therefore are damned. speaker D. B. P. Yet all this notwithstanding, a certainevertuous disposition is required in the jew and Gentile, whereby his soul is prepared to receive that great grace of justification: that say we, is faith, fear, hope, love, and repentance, that (say the Protestants) is faith only. Wherefore say we as the excluding of works, and boasting exclude not faith, no more do they exclude the rest, faith being aswell our work, and a work of the law as any of the rest, and all the rest being of grace, as well as faith, and as far from boasting of, as faith itself. speaker A. W. There is no virtuous disposition required of the one or the other, in respect whereof he shall be justified. Only the acknowledgement of sin, and such like, are used as means by God, to n Act. 2. 28. & 16. 30. bring a sinner to believe in jesus Christ to justification: yet so, as that neither these dispositions proceed from the free will of man, but from the spirit of God inclining them, that God will justify, to these actions, nor any of these, but only believing is respected of God, on man's part, to his justification. speaker D. B. P. Now that out of S. Luke, believe only, is nothing to the purpose. For he was bid believe the raising of his daughter to life, and not that Christ's righteousness was his: and faith alone may be a sufficient disposition to obt●aine a miracle, but not to obtain justification, of which the question on y is. speaker A. W. That place of o Luk. 8. 50. Luke showeth thus much (as also the ordinary course of the old Testament doth) that the thing God regardeth and requireth of man, to the obtaining of any favour, is resting upon him for that he stands in need of. Fasting, praying, and such like exercises, are means to make a man discern truly of his own unworthiness, and so the rather to trust to God's mercy and power: but the thing respected by God is, resting on him, and referring himself wholly to his will and pleasure. Consider now good Reader, whether of our interpretations agree better, with the circumstances of the text, and the judgement of the ancient Fathers. The texts see thou in the Testament. Take for a taste, of the Father's judgement, S. Augustine's exposition of those places of S. Paul, of one of the chiefest of which, thus he speaketh Men not understanding De gra. & lib. arb. cap. 7. that which the Apostle saith, We esteem a man to be justified without the law, thought him to say, that faith sufficed a man although he lived evil, and had no good works: which God forbid, that the vessel of election should think. speaker A. W. They that so understand the p Rom. 2●. Apostle, as the Gnostickes did, utterly mistake him. We are altogether of q Hypognost. lib 3. S. Augustine's opinion that faith cannot justify him that lives evilly, and hath no good works. For (as * De side & oper. cap. 14. he truly saith) Though they go not before justification, yet they accompany it: every justified man being also sanctified. Neither is the faith, he speaketh of such a faith as we understand, because it works not by love: but such, as the devil hath, who (saith Austin in the same place) hath not the faith, by which the just man lives, which works by love, that God may give him life everlasting, according to his works. speaker D. B. P. And again. Therefore the Apostle saith, that a man is justified by faith, De predest. sanct. cap. 7. and not of works, because faith is first given, and by it the rest (which are properly called works, and in which we live justly) are by petition obtained. speaker A. W. In this place, r Aug. de side & oper. cap. 14 Austin takes justification for the whole fitting of a Christian to a holy conversation; to which, justification indeed is but a foundation, the building being finished by sanctification. speaker D. B. P. By which it is manifest, that S. Paul excluding the works of the law, Not from the conversation of a Christian, but from his justification. and the works done by our own only forces, doth not mean to exclude good works, which proceed from the help of God's grace. He must of necessity, according to his course of disputing, exclude good works from that justification he there speaks of, but not from the life of a Christian man. speaker D. B. P. Reason III. Very reason may teach thus much. W. P. Man's reason is but a blind mistress in matters of faith, and he ●hat hath no better an instructor in such high mysteries, must needs know little. speaker A. W. Man's reason is not of itself sufficient to determine of truth and falsehood in Divinity, but being enlightened by the spirit of God with the knowledge of faith, it may easily see the divers use of that, from other graces and virtues. speaker W. P. For no gift in man is apt and fit as a spiritual hand to receive and apply Christ and his righteousness unto a sinner, but faith. speaker D. B. P. But what if that also fail you in this point? then every man cannot but see how naked you are of all kind of probability. I say then, that reason ●…. rather teacheth the contrary. For in common sense, no man apprehendeth and entereth into the possession of any thing, by believing that he hath it. For if a man should believe that he is rich, of honour, wise, or virtuous: Doth he thereby become presently such a one? nothing less. His faith and persuasion is no fit instrument to apply and draw these things to himself, as all the world sees. How then doth reason teach me, that by believing Christ's righteousness to be mine own, I lay hand on it, and make it mine. Again Christ's righteousness (according to their own opinion) is not received into us at all, but is ours only by God's imputation, what need we then faith, as a spiritual hand to receive it? If they say (as M. Perkins doth) that faith is as it were a condition required in us, which when God seeth in us, he presently imputeth Christ's righteousness to us, and maketh it ours: then will I be bold to say, that any other virtue is as proper as faith, to have Christ applied unto us: there being no other aptness requisite in the condition itself, but only the will and ordinance of God: then every thing that it shall please him to appoint, is alike apt: and so M. Perkins had small reason to say, that faith was the only apt instrument to apply to us Christ's righteousness. speaker A. W. Reason, perceiving that the Scripture, ordinarily, ascribeth justification to believing, and maketh believing in Christ the receiving of Christ, which is not granted to any other of those virtues; may well conclude, that faith only is the spiritual hand to take hold of Christ and his righteousness by, and not fear, love, hope, or repentance. speaker W. P. Indeed love, hope, the fear of God, and repentance, have their several uses in men, but none serve for this end to apprehend Christ and his merits: none of them all have this receiving property: and therefore there is nothing in man, that justifieth as a cause but faith alone. speaker D. B. P. Moreover, true divine reason teacheth me, that both hope and charity, Hope more particular than faith is vain. do much more apply unto Christians all Christ's merits, and make them ours then faith: For what faith assureth me of in general, that hope applieth unto me in particular: by faith I believe Christ to be the Saviour of all mankind: by hope I trust to be made partaker of that salvation in him. speaker A. W. None of these hath that aptness that is in faith. For the other have more show of desert in man, but God purposeth to set out his love to the soul he saveth. Which can be done by no means so well, as when the party to be justified doth nothing but rest upon God, to receive justification at his merciful hands. Of the difference betwixt faith and hope, I have spoken s 12. Art. part 〈◊〉. Art. 1. otherwhere; now I say only thus much, that to hope without faith is vain. If I believe, I may not hope alone, but be sure I am justified: if I do not believe, I may be sure of the contrary. speaker D. B. P. But charity doth yet give me a greater confidence of salvation: for by This is to plead de●e●t, not mercy. the rule of true charity, as I dedicate and employ my life, labours, and all that I have to the service of God, so all that God hath is made mine, so far forth as it can be made mine: according unto that sacred law of friendship: Amicorum omnia sunt communia. And therefore in true reason, neither by faith, nor any other virtue, we take such hold on Christ's merits, nor have such interest in his inestimable treasures, as by charity. speaker D. B. P. This were the way indeed to make God debtor to man, and man a more special cause of his own justification, than God: yea to make man (in t Ex congr●o. equity at the least) deserve his justification at God's hands. But what Prince would be so dealt withal by a traitor, especially if he meant to manifest the riches of his mercy in affording favour? Would he, trow you, have his traitorous subject plead an interest to his love, kindness and bounty, by employing his life and labours to do him service, and so to receive all benefits from him, u Rom. 5. 10. as a friend from a friend, by the law of mutual good will? who seeth not how directly this runs against the whole course of the new Testament? speaker A. W. Which S. Augustine understood well, when he made it the model, D. B. P. De nat. & gra. cap. ult. and measure of justification: saying, That Charity beginning, was Justice beginning: Charity increased, was justice increased: great Charity was great justice: and perfect Charity, was perfect justice. x Aug. de nature. & great. cap. ult. Austin speaks not of justification, but of walking cheerfully in obedience to God's commandments, after we are justified: which we cannot do, unless the love we bear to God, make all difficulties that we shall meet with, light and easy to us. In this respect charity beginning, is justice beginning; because he that hath begun to love, hath also begun to walk in the way of righteousness, making light of all hindrances, by reason of his love; and as his love groweth, so doth his righteousness in his whole conversation. speaker W. P. Reason IV. The judgement of the ancient Church. Ambr. on Rom. 4. They are blessed to whom without any labour or work done iniquities are remitted and sin covered: no works or repentance required of them, but only that they believe. And cap. 3. Neither working any thing, nor requiting the like, are they justified, but by faith alone through the gift of God. And 1. Cor. 1. this is appointed of God that whosoever believeth in Christ, shall be saved without any work by faith alone, freely receiving remission of sins. speaker D. B. P. To these and such like words, I answer. First, that it is very uncertain, whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses'. speaker A. W. You that could so confidently thrust upon us those Commentaries on the Revelation for Ambroses', which were never heard of, till within these last 80. years, should not have made a doubt of these on the Romans, that have been received for his so many hundreds of years. But I will not strive about the matter. Once this is out of doubt, that they are very ancient, and generally held to be y True for doctrine. orthodoxal. speaker D. B. P. Secondly, that, that Author excludeth not repentance: but only the works of Moses law, which the jews held to be necessary: as circumcision, and such like, see the place, and confer with it, that which he hath written in the same work, upon the fourth to the Hebrews: where he hath these words. Faith is a great thing, and without it, it is not possible to be saved, but faith alone doth not suffice: but it is necessary, that faith work by charity, and converse worthy of God. speaker A W. Not repentance? he names it expressly. z Ambros. ad Rome 4. vers. 7. Nulla ab his requisita poenitentiae opera No works, or repentance required of them. But he means, not works of the Ceremonial law only. He means both Ceremonial and Moral. a Ad vers 2. That law which the Gentiles had by nature; which if a man keep, he shall live: b Ad vers. 3. Abraham had not whereof to boast, because he was circumcised, or because he abstained from sin, but because he believed: c Ad vers. 4. To him that worketh, that is, to him that is subject to the law of Moses, or of nature: d Ad vers. 5. Ob●…oxius p●cca●is. To him that worketh not, that is, to him that is guilty of sin, because he doth not that which the law commands. e Ambros. ad Hebr. cap. 4. In that place upon the Hebrues, he speaketh not of justification, as in the other, but of our entering into rest, or heaven; to which no man shall come, that doth not live holily, beautifying (as he there speaketh) his faith with works. speaker W. P. * De verbis Dom. serm. 40 August. There is one propitiation for all sins, to believe in Christ. Hesyc. on Leuit. lib. 1. cap. 2. Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone, and not of works. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins next authority is gathered out of S. Augustine. There is De verb. Ap. serm. 40. Leuit. lib. 1. cap. 2. one propitiation for all sinners to believe in Christ; True, but where is it, that we need nothing else, but to believe? 3. Hesychius saith, Grace which is of mercy, is apprehended by faith alone, and not of works: that is, we do not merit by our works done before grace, any thing at God's hand, but of his mercy receive both, faith and justification. speaker A. W. This testimony of Austin, and the next of Hesychius, are answered by roate, and not by judgement. For they are both misquoted; which he must needs have observed, and then would have reproved, if he had looked for them in the places cited. The former I cannot find, and therefore let it pass without any answer. If f Hesych in Leuit. lib. 1. cap. 14. this interpretation may go for currant, I know not what may be refused, as counterfeit. Grace, which is of mercy, is apprehended by faith alone, and not of works: that is (say you) we do not merit by our works, done before grace, any thing at God's hand; but of his mercy receive both faith and justification. Hesychius saith, that grace is apprehended by faith alone: you make him say, that we receive both faith and justification of God's mercy: he speaketh of attaining to grace by faith; you expound him of receiving faith by God's mercy. But indeed Hesychius in his own speech maketh a distinction, affirming of grace, that it is g Praebetur. given us (viz. on God's behalf) of mercy and compassion, and is received on our part by faith alone, and not by works. * Supra Can●. ferm. 22. Bernard. Whoseever is pricked for his sins and thirsteth after righteousness, let him believe in thee, who justifieth a sinner, and being justified by Faith alone, he shall have peace with God. speaker D. B. P. 4. Bernard hath: Whosoever thirsteth after righteousness: let him believe in thee: that being justified by faith alone, he may have peace with God. Sup. Cant. ●e●m. 22. Ans. By faith alone, he excludeth all other means, that either lieu, or gentile required, but not charity: Which his very words include, for how can we abhor sin, and thirst after justice, without charity? and in the same work he declareth plainly that he comprehendeth always charity, when he speaks of a justifying faith: saying. A right faith doth not make a man righteous, if it work not by Charity. And again: Neither works without faith, nor faith without works is sufficient Serm. 24. to make the soul righteous. speaker A. W. The chief thing the jews stood upon was charity, which they knew the law especially required, and therefore to leave that in, was to advance the righteousness of the jews, at the least in their opinion. We may abhor sin for fear of punishment, and thirst for righteoosnes for desire of glory, without any respect of love, but to ourselves. In h Bernard. in Cant. ser. 24. those places you bring, he showeth what faith he meaneth, even as we do, who say that no faith can justify, but that which works by love; not in the very act of justifying, but in the course of our conversation. Therefore i Bernard. in Cant. ser. 24. in the former place, when he hath said, that being justified by faith alone, we shall have peace with God, he doth afterward distinguish justification from sanctification. They therefore that being justified by faith, k Desiderant deliberantque ●●ctari. desire, and resolve to follow after holiness, etc. And in the latter he saith, that faith without works is dead; to sever love from faith, is to kill it. But none of these things prove, that Bernard gave the habit, or the act of love any place of a cause in our justification, or any respect with God to our justification. For then, how could he have said, by faith only? speaker W. P. Chrysost. on Gal. 3. They said, he which resteth on faith alone, is cursed: but Paul showeth, that he is blessed which resteth on faith alone. speaker D. B. P. He speaks of the jews who held Christians accursed, because resting on the faith in Christ would not observe withal ●oses law: the Apostle chose denounceth them accursed, who would join the ceremonies of Moses law, with Christian religion, and so faith alone, there excludeth Gal. 5. only the old law, not the works of charity. speaker A. W. That l Chrysost. ad Gal. 3. Chrysostome speaketh of the Moral law, any man may see, that marks how he urgeth the Apostles reason, to prove them accursed, who will join the law with faith to justification: namely, that they are accursed, because they cannot fulfil every part of the moral law; for of it is that m Deut. 27. 26. sentence uttered. speaker W. P. Basil. de Humil. Let man acknowledge himself to want true justice, and that he is justified only by faith in Christ. speaker D. B. P. So he mangleth pitifully a sentence of S. Basils', saying: Let man acknowledge De humil. How I pray you? himself to want true justice, and that he is justified only by faith in Christ: If a man know himself justified by faith in Christ, how can he acknowledge that he wants true justice? His words truly repeated are these. Let man acknowledge that he is unworthy of true justice: and that his justification comes not of his desert, but of the mere mercy of God through Christ. So that by saith alone S. Basill treating of humility, excludes all merit of our own, but no necessary good disposition, as you may see in his Sermon, de fide, where he proves by many texts of holy Scripture, that charity is as necessary as faith. speaker A. W. That is (saith Basil) perfect, and full rejoicing in God's sight, when a man is not lifted up, no not for his own righteousness, but acknowledgeth himself indeed to be destitute of true righteousness, and to be justified only by faith in Christ. n Basil. in Ascet. de fide. Fides est a●●esus indubitatus ad ea●quae a●…tur. Basil in that place speaketh of faith, as it is an assent to those things that are taught by the grace of God, requiring works not to justification, but in our carriage here to salvation. speaker W. P. Origen. on. cap. 3. Rom. We think that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law: and he saith that justification, by faith alone sufficeth, so as a man only believing may be justified. And, Therefore it lieth upon us—, to search who was justified by faith without works. And for an example, I think upon the thief who being crucified with Christ cried unto him, Lord remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom: and there is no other good work of his mentioned in the Gospel: but for this alone faith, jesus saith unto him, This night thou shalt be with me in paradise. speaker D. B. P. Origen excludeth no good disposition in us to justification, but saith, that a man may besaved, without doing ourwardly any good works; If he want time and place: as the Thief did, who presently upon his conversion was put to death, which is good Catholic Doctrine: but that you may perceive how necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to justification, you shall find if you consider well all circumstances, not one of them to have been wanting in that good thieves conversion. First, that he stood in fear of God's just judgement, appears by these his words, to his fellow, Dost thou not fear God, etc. He had hope to be saved by Christ, out of which he said: O Lord remember me, when thou comest into thy Kingdom: By both which speeches is showed also his faith both in God, that he is the governor and just judge of the world, and in Christ, that he was the Redeemer of mankind. His repentance and confession of his fault, is laid down in this: And we truly suffer worthily: His charity towards God and his neighbour, in reprehending his fellows blasphemy, in defending Christ's innocency: and in the midst of his greatest disgraces, and raging enemies, to confess him to be King of the world to come: out of all which we may gather also, that he had a full purpose to amend his life, and to have taken such order for his recovery, as it should please Christ his Saviour to appoint. So that he lacked not any one of those dispositions, which the Catholic Church requires to justification. speaker A. W. Your discourse of the thieves virtues and good works, doth not refute the truth of Master Perkins allegation; but, if it do any thing, condemns origen's judgement of him. As for the dispositions you often mention, doubtless if Origen had thought that any such had been necessary, or respected by God, in the justification of that thief, he would never have said, that he was justified without works, that did so many good works in so short a time. speaker D. B. P. Now that, that great Doctor Origen meant not to exclude any of these good qualites out of the companies of faith; is apparent: by that which he hath written on the next Chapter: where he saith. That faith cannot be imputed to justice, to such as believe in Christ, unless they Rom. 4. do withal put off the old man, and a little before more plainly saying: I think that faith is the first beginning of salvation, hope is proceeding in the building, but the top and perfection of the whole work, is charity. speaker A. W. Neither do we mean to exclude such qualities. For they come together, but are not of like use, nor to the same purpose. Both the sentences you allege out of him we approve; that faith which is without sanctification, cannot justify; that faith is not all that is required to salvation; but all graces of regeneration are to be laboured for and obtained, before we can come to heaven. And by this we may see, that as the Fathers, so Origen also makes a difference betwixt justification, where faith only is respected, and salvation, to which all virtues are required. III. Difference. speaker W. P. The third difference about justification is concerning this point, namely how far forth good works are required thereto. The doctrine of the Church of Rome is, that there be two kinds of justification: the first and second, as I have said. The first is, when one of an evil man is made a good man: and in this, works are wholly excluded, it being wholly of grace. The second is, when a man of a just man is made more just. And this they will have to proceed from works of grace: for (say they) as a man when he is once borne can by eating and drinking make himself a bigger man, though he could not at the first make himself a man: even so a sinner having his first justification, may afterward by grace make himself more just. Therefore they hold these two things: I. That good works are meritorious causes of the second justification, which they term Actual: II. that good works are means to increase first justification, which they call Habitual. Now let us see how far forth we must join with them in this point. Our consent therefore stands in three conclusions. I. That good works done by them that are justified do please God, and are approved of him, and therefore have a reward. II. Good works are necessary to salvation two ways: first, not as causes thereof, either conservant, adiuvant, or procreant: but only as consequents of faith: in that they are inseparable companions and fruits of that faith, which is indeed necessary to salvation. Secondly, they are necessary as marks in a way, and as the way itself directing us unto eternal life. III. We hold and believe, that the righteous man, is in some sort justified by works, for so the holy Ghost speaketh plainly and truly, jam. 2. 21. That Abraham was justified by works. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins first granteth, that good works do please God, and have a temporal reward. Temporal is of your foisting in as if we denied good works rewarded in heaven. 2. That they are necessary to salvation, not as the cause thereof, but either as marks in a way to direct us towards salvation: or as fruits and signs of righteousness, to declare one to be just before men: all which he shuffleth in, rather to delude our arguments, then for that they esteem much of good works, which they hold to be no better then deadly sins. speaker A. W. This is no good dealing to foist in temporal; as if you would have men suspect, that we allow good works no reward in heaven. It had been enough for you to leave out his words, as you do, and thrust in your own, without adding at your pleasure. But these are popish shifts. Whereof you presently afford us another example, by putting in these words; Before men, to make the world believe, that we give no place to good works in the sight of God: whereas o Pag. 93. 88 Master Perkins professeth, that Abraham was justified by works even before God; not only before men, as you write. speaker A. W. To this you add in the third place a shameless slander, p 12. Art. part. 2. art. against your own knowledge, that we hold good works to be no better than deadly sins: whereas we teach, that those that are indeed good works, are able to justify a man perfectly in the presence of God, and to deserve everlasting life. Yea we maintain, that the imperfect works of the regenerate, are brought forth by the grace of God's spirit, and, for all their imperfection, are accepted, and shall be rewarded by God our Father in heaven. speaker W. P. Thus far we join with them: and the very difference is this. They say, we are justified by works, as by causes thereof: we say that we are justified by works, as by signs and fruits of our justification before God, and no otherwise: and in this sense must the place of S. james be understood, that Abraham was justified, that is, declared and made manifest to be just indeed by his obedience, and that even before God. Now that our doctrine is the truth, it will appear by reasons on both parts. speaker D. B. P. The main difference then between us, consisteth in this, whether good works be the true cause indeed, of the increase of our righteousness, which we call the second justification, or whether they be only fruits, signs, or marks of it. speaker A. W. The main difference, as Master Perkins propounds it, is, whether we be justified by works, as by causes meritorious of our justification; not, whether they be the true cause of our second justification; which he denies wholly, as a device of yours. And indeed they q Saunder. de iustif. lib. 6. c. 4. pag. 647. that have more nearly sifted this bran, have found that there is but one justification; because faith and works make one righteousness, begun by ●aith, and increased and perfected by works. justification (saith r Andrad Orthod. e plic. lib. 6. pag. 462. Andradius the great champion of the Council of Trent) consists of two parts; forgiveness of sins, and obedience to the law. s Stapleton. promptu. Cathol. ad joa. 8. 57 Stapleton speaks more plain: The Catholics say, that a man is justified by faith, and works, as by the formal cause. So that, according to your popish divinity, works are not only the meritorious efficient cause of our justification, but the formal cause also; as Stapleton directly affirms. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins pretends to prove, that they are no cause of the increase of our justice: and yet frames not one argument directly to that purpose: but repeats those objections, and proposeth them now at large, which he made before, against the first justification: the which although impertinent to this place, yet I will solve them first, and then set down our own. speaker A. W. This pretence is none of his; who would never deny, that our inherent righteousness is increased though not meritoriously) by our holy actions, which make us every day more and more fit to serve and please God. But Master Perkins understanding your opinion, better than yourself will be known to do, frames his reason against this position; That works are part of that righteousness, which we must plead before God, for the deserving of everlasting life: or, that our justification before God, is partly of works, and partly of faith: which is the doctrine of your Church, howsoever by you it be blanched. Our reasons. speaker W. P. I. Rom. 3. 28. We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law. Some answer, that ceremonial works be excluded here: some, that moral works: some, works going before faith. But let them devise what they can for themselves: the truth is, that Paul excludeth all works whatsoever, as by the text will appear. For vers. 24. he saith, We are justified freely by his grace: that is, by the mere gift of God: giving us to understand, that a sinner in his justification is merely passive, that is, doing nothing on his part whereby God should accept him to life everlasting. speaker D. B. P. Ans. The Apostle there speaks of the justification of a sinner: for he saith before, that he hath proved both jew, and Greek, to be under sin; and that all have sinned, and need the glory of God: Wherefore this place appertains not unto the second justification: and excludes only either works of the law, as not necessary unto the first justification of a sinner: against the jews who thought and taught them to be necessary: of else against the Gentiles any work of ours, from being any meritorious cause of that first justification: for we acknowledge ve●●e willingly (as you have heard often before) that every sinner is justified freely of the mere grace of God, through the merit of Christ only, and See the point of free-will. without any merit of the sinner himself. speaker A. W. Your answer of the second justification is idle, because the distinction, as I have showed, is vain. Master Perkins proveth, that justification is wholly of faith, because t Rom. 3. 28 the Apostle excludeth works from it: whereas you teach, that faith and works together make up that justice or righteousness, whereby a man is justified before God. speaker D. B. P. And yet is not a sinner (being of years of discretion,) merely passive in that his justification, as M Perkins very absurdly saith: for in their own opinion he must believe (which is an action:) and in ours not only believe, but also Hope, Love, and Repeet. speaker A. W. Master Perkins makes not a sinner merely passive in his justification, but in receiving the gift of faith; and in being stirred up to believe. And yet is he not in these neither passive, as fond you imagine we say: for he hears, and sometimes meditates, fears, hopes etc. but in this respect he is said to be passive, because his yielding to believe, proceeds not from any strength of his free will, upon the good motion inspired, but from the spirit of God inclining him inevitably, to believe freely. speaker W. P. And vers. 27. he saith, justification by faith excludeth all boasting, and therefore all kind of works are thereby excluded: and specially such as are most of all the matter of boasting, that is, good works. For if a sinner, after that he is justified by the merit of Christ, were justified more by his own works, than might he have some matter of boasting in himself. speaker D. B. P. And this kind of justification excludeth all boasting in ourselves, as well as theirs. For as they must giant, that they may not brag of their faith, although it be an act of theirs so necessarily required at their justification, that without it, they could not be justified: even so let them think of the rest of those good preparations, which we hold to be necessary, that we cannot truly bpast of them, as though they came of ourselves, but we confess all these good inspirations, as all other good, to descend from the bounteous liberality of the ●ather of lights: and For the yielding of our consent to them; we can no more vaunt, then of consenting unto ●aith, all which is no more than if a man be mired in a lake, and unable of himself to get out, would be content that another of his goodness should help him out of it. speaker A. W. From this ariseth the true difference betwixt you and us, concerning boasting; that we have nothing left us to brag of; because not only the ability, but the very act of believing is brought to pass by God's spirit inevitably: but your many actions of fearing, hoping, repenting, loving, believing, are caused by your own free will, without any certainty of event on God's part, as a cause thereof. speaker D. B. P. Yet observe by the way: that S. Paul forbiddeth not all glorying or boasting: For he ●orieth in the hope of glory of the Son of God, and in Rom. 5. 2. Cor. 10. 2. Cor. 12. his tribulations: Again, He defiveth that we● may glory in measure, and that he might glory in his power. And that he was constrained to glory in his visions and revolations: So that a good Christian may glory in our Lord, and in his heavenly gifts, so it be in measure, and due season. Acknowledging them from whence they come. But to boast and say that either God needed us, or that our good parts were cause, that God called us first to his service, is both false, and utterly unlawful. speaker A. W. The Apostle excludes no boasting, but in a man's self; and all that he must needs shut out, if he will reserve God's glory entire to him. For he that may truly say, that he is beholding to his own free will for his justification (as he may, who by the good use of it, at his choice▪ without being certainly inclined thereto by the spirit, procured his own justification) hath cause to boast of his own goodness, not caused by God, in respect of the act of believing. Now he that boasts of the inheritance of heaven, which God only hath provided for him; and fitted him to, boasteth not of himself, u Rom. 5. 23. though in the midst of tribulations he break out into this boasting. But how proou●● this, that therefore all boasting is not forbidden in the matter of justification? To which x 2. Cor. 10. ●3. the next place alleged, no way belongs, being spoken by the Apostle of himself, in respect of those gifts that God had bestowed upon him, for the work of his ministery. The y 2. Cor. ●…. last being of the same nature, is so far from proving the lawfulness of boasting, that the z Vers. 1. 5. 1. Apostle is sane to excuse himself for it, as a thing inexpedient. But howsoever, it can by no means prove, that the Apostle shuts not all boasting out of justification. speaker W. P. And that we may not doubt of Paul's meaning, consider and read Eph: 2. 8. 9 By grace (saith he) you are saved through faith: and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast himself. Here Paul excludes all and every work, and directly works of grace themselves; as appears by the reason following, For we are his workmanship created in Christ jesus unto good works: which God hath ordained that we should walk in them. Now let the Papists tell me, what be the works which God hath prepared for men to walk in, and to which they are regenerate, unless they be the most excellent works? and let them mark, how Paul excludes them wholly from the work of justification and salvation. speaker D. B. P. Ephes. 2. is nothing against our Doctrine of justification, but too too ignorantly or maliciously cited against it: and note also with S. Austin, that faith is there mentioned, to exclude all merits of our works, which Lib. 83. q. 76. went before and might seem to the simple to have been some cause why God bestowed his first grace upon us: but no virtuous dispositions requisite for the better preparation to the same grace. speaker A. W. What ignorance or malice there is in alleging this text against your doctrine of justification, it shall appear by and by: in the mean time, I answer concerning Austin; first, a Aug. lib. qq. 83. q. 76. that in the place you name, there is never a word of the sentence in question. Secondly, that his scope in that treatise is no more, but to show that they falsely understood such b Rom. 3. 27. 28. places of the Apostle, as speak against justification by works, who think, that when once they have believed in Christ, they shall be saved by faith, though they live never so wickedly. Thirdly, to refu●e that lewd conceit, Aust●… adds, that the Apostle c Ad hoc potius. rather therefore saith, that a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law; because he would have no man imagine, that he hath obtained justification by faith, upon the merit of his former works. This we grant to be true; but not all that the Apostle intendeth. For it cannot be doubted, but that he confuteth the opinion of the jews and Heathen, concerning justification; as it is plain by the d Rom. 1. & 2. & 3. three first chapters. Now they did not make account to deserve the grace of justification at God's hands, by their holy and virtuous living, but to inherit heaven by it. Neither could they that did believe, so much flatter themselves, as to dream, that their good deeds in particular had procured that favour; when it was easy for them to see, that many thousands both jews and Gentiles, as good, or better than e 1. Cor. 6. 10. 11. divers of themselves, for virtuous behaviour, notwithstanding attained not to this justification. Besides, if we mark the reasons, by which the f Rom. 1. & 2. & 3. Apostle beats down their pride, they are such as generally concern all both jews and Gentiles. Add hereunto, that Austin speaks no further for the use of good works, but to show, that they are necessary for a Christian man, as g Vacuam esse siden, si non bene operetur. without which his faith is void and idle: and that no man may dream, that if he believe, it h Non ad eum pertineat bene operari. pertains not to him to work well: which are the words that immediately go before these you bring. speaker D. B. P. And therefore very fond doth M. Perkins infer, that in that sentence S. Paul speaketh of works of grace: because in the text following he mentioned good works. Whereas the Apostle putteth an evident distinction between those two kind of works, signifying the first. To be of ourselves: The second, ●o proceed from us as Gods workmansh●o, created in Christ jesus, and the first, he calleth Works simply: the second, Good works, prepared of God for us to walk in after our first justification. What gross ignorance than was it, to take these two so distinct manner of works, for the same, and to ground himself so boldly upon it. speaker A. W. Master Perkins saith, that the Apostle bars all works before and after grace. He proves it by the very text itself. The reason may be thus more plainly propounded; We are not saved by works (saith i Eph. 2. 7. 8. Vers. 9 Vers. 10. the Apostle) that no man may boast. His proof followeth: For good works are appointed by God for us to walk in, for which purpose he hath made us anew in jesus Christ. That this tenth verse is a proof of the former, the conjunction (for) declares. But how it can serve to that purpose, if the two verses speak of divers kinds of works, some justifying, some not justifying, neither I see, nor (I think) you can show me. What though he call the former works simply, the latter good works? are not the former those works which the law moral and natural require? and are not they in their nature good works? But who knoweth not, that by works, without any addition, works of grace, after justification, are signified? let the Apostle k jam. 2. 14. 17. 18. 20. 21. 22. 24. 25. 26. james speak, who entreating of such works, and naming them almost in every verse, doth not once call them good works, but works simply. speaker W. P. II. Gal. 5. 3. If ye be circumcised, ye are bound to the whole law, and ye are abolished from Christ. Here Paul disputeth against such men as would be saved partly by Christ, and partly by the works of the law: hence I reason thus. If a man will be justified by works, he is bound to fulfil the whole law, according to the rigour thereof: that is Paul's ground. I now assume: no man can fulfil the law according to the rigour thereof: for the lives and works of most righteous men are imperfect, and stained with sin: and therefore they are taught every day, to say on this manner: forgive us our debts. Again, our knowledge is imperfect, and therefore our faith, repentance, and sanctification is answerable. And lastly the regenerate man is partly flesh, and partly spirit: and therefore his best works are partly from the flesh, and in part only spiritual. Thus then for any man to be bound to the rigour of the whole law, is as much as if he were bound to his own damnation. speaker D. B. P. If he can apply the text prefixed unto any part of the argument, Erit mihi magnus Apollo: S. Paul only saith in these words: That if you be circumcised, ye are bound to keep the whole law of Moses. M. Perkins, That if a man will be justified by works, he must fulfil the rigour of the S. Paul knew no other law, hut that of Moses to justification. law: Which are as just as Germans lips, as they say: But M. Perkins says that it is S. Paul's ground: but he is much deceived, for the Apostles ground is this. That circumcision is as it were a profession of judaism, and therefore he that would be circumcided, did make himself subject unto the whole law of the jew. Of the possibilities of fulfilling the law, because M. Perkins toucheth so often that string, shall be treated in a distinct question, as soon as I have dispatched this. speaker A. W. Master Perkins understood his own mind in this, and other arguments, better than I can do, and so could have afforded better answers for his defence. Yet thus much I may say, that the text of ¹ the Apostle may be applied to the proposition; because they that would be circumcised, Gal. 5. 3. would be justified by the works of the law. Whereupon it followeth, that he that will be justified by works, is bound to keep the whole law. For so the Apostle saith of them that will be justified by circumcision. speaker W. P. III. Election to salvation is of grace without works: therefore the justification of a sinner is of grace alone without works. For it is a certain rule, that the cause of a cause, is the cause of a thing caused. Now grace without works is the cause of election, which election is the cause of our justification: and therefore grace without works is the cause of our justification. speaker D. B. P. Ans. That election is of grace without works, done of our own simple forces, or without the works of Moses law: but not without provision of good works issuing out of faith, and the help of God's grace, as shall be handled more largely in the question of merits. speaker A. W. This answer is not only against the m Rom. 9 10, 11. Apostle Paul, and n Aug. Epist. 106. Augustine's exposition of him, but also contrary to o Lombard. lib. 1. dist. 41. Lombard, p Thomas. 1. q 23. art. 5. & in 1 senten. dist. 41. q. 1. art. 3. & qq. disp. q 6. de praed. art. 2. & add Rom. 9 Thomas, q Bellarm. de gra. & lib. arb. lib. 2. c. 10. 11. & seqq. Bellarmine, and generally the learnedst Papists: as it shall appear, if this writer give occasion. speaker W. P. IV. A man must first be fully justified, before he can do a good work: for the person must first please God before his works can please him. But the person of a sinner cannot please God, till he be perfectly justified: and therefore till he be justified, he cannot do so much as one good work. And thus good works cannot be any meritorious causes of justification, after which they are both for time, and order of nature. In a word, whereas they make two distinct justifications: we acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification, yet so as justification is only one, standing in remission of sins and God's acceptation of us to life everlasting by Christ; and this justification hath no degrees but is perfect at the very first. OF THE SECOND JUSTIFICATION. speaker D. B. P. THe fourth argument. A man must be fully justified, before he can do a good work: and therefore good works cannot go before justification. True, not before the first justification of a sinner. But good Sir, you He showed your distinction, he made none. having made in the beginning of this last Article a distinction between the first and second justification: And having before discussed the first, and the second now remaining, and expecting you, why did you not say one word of it, the matter being ample and well worthy the handling? speaker A. W. He that denieth a second justification, and hath disproved it, need not stand upon a device of yours, how worthy the handling soever you think it. speaker D. B. P. Albeit you will not willingly confess any second justification as you say: Yet had it been your partat least to have disproved such arguments as we bring to prove a second justification: Ye acknowledge that there be degrees of sanctification: But these degrees must be made downward of evil, worse and worst: for if all our sanctification and best This slander hath been often disproved. Pag. 76. works be like unto defiled clouts, and no better than deadly sins as you hold else where, let any wise man judge what degrees of goodness can be lodged in it. speaker A. W. But that you knew none of your side do use to read our books, nor dare, without your licence; neither you, nor other of your Popish complices, would for shame write in this sort. You have been often answered, that we acknowledge inherent righteousness, and labour for, and (by the grace of God) attain to the increase of it, in some measure, from day to day. speaker A. W. Again, how absurd is that position, that there is but one justification, D. B. P. Lib. 2. con. sovin. Epist. 81. Epist, 57 Hom. 15. in Ezech. whereby they take fast hold on Christ's righteousness, which can never after, be either lost or increased? Why then do you with your brother Jounuan, maintain, that all men are equally righteous? If it so be, let him that desireth to see you well coursed, read S. Hierome, S. Amorose, S. Augustine, S. Gregory. speaker D. B. P. We maintain that all men are equally righteous, in regard of justification; but unequally, in respect of sanctification. jovinian is rather one of your brood, who hold, that a man being justified, is r Hieron. contra jovin. wholly without sin, even in God's judgement. At least you must needs uphold that a man is as just and righteous at his first conversion, as at his death, how godly a life soever he lead: against which I will put down these reasons following. speaker A. W. First that of the revelations. Let him that is just be yet justified: or as Cap. 22. eccles. 18. your text hath it. He that is righteous, let him be more righteous. speaker D. B. P. He that is justified, is as righteous at the first as at the last, in respect of justification; but not inherent righteousness or sanctification: of which the places you allege are meant, and therefore need no further answer. But that you may the rather see our desire to satisfy you, I will speak a little of them. justified, in s revel. 22. 11. that place, signifieth to proceed in doing justly; as t Ribera in Apoc. 22. 11. Ribera the jesuit proveth, by the opposition in the other part of the sentence: Let him that hurteth, hurt still, that is, go forward in your hurting (saith he) and so, let him that hurteth no body, but giveth every man his due, go forward in so doing. Let him that doth good (saith u Glossa interlin. your gloss) yet x Impensiùs inferat. do good more abundantly. Let him that is righteous (saith y Cyprian de bono patient. cap. 13. & testimon. ad Quiri. lib. 3. cap. 23. Cyprian in two places) do yet more righteous things; and him that is holy, more holy. The z Aretas Apoc. 22. 11. Greek Scholiast read it thus: Let him that is righteous, a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. yet work righteousness. And so do the b Testam. Graec. Plantin. Greek Testaments printed by Plantin; and the c Interlin. Bib. Interlinear Bible too; so that there is not so much as the word, justified, in some of your own Greek copies. And that, fear not to be justified even until death: do convince, that there are more justifications than one, and that a man may increase in justification, and righteousness until death. speaker A. W. d Eccl. 18. 22. That of Ecclesiasticus would have been spared, till you have proved that book to be canonical, which you know we deny, and that, as we are sure, with the consent of the ancient Church: at least you should not have alleged it with so grosie an error in the translation. The Greek is e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. differ not; The old Latin was in all likelihood, f Ne veteris. Be not forbidden, or hindered, as it may appear by g Vatabl● 〈◊〉 pe. Ro●er. Steph. Vatablus edition of it, by Robert Stephens; h An●uerp. a▪ pud ●iduam Stelsij anno 1572. that of Antwerp, and that i Biblia cum gloss 1506. with the gloss: where k Lyra, ne prohibearis. Lyra expounds it, ne prohibearis. l And●ad. Orthod. explic. lib. 6. pag. 446. Andradius delivers it thus: Let there be nothing that may hinder thee from praying always, or m Prohibeat. may let thee from being justified, even until death. Some ignorant writer that copied out the book, finding ne veteris, be not let, and mistaking 't, for r, writ, ne n Ne verea●●s. vereris, fear not; barbarously, against true Grammar Latin. But the sense also, not only the words, is misconceived. For the meaning is, that we should not put off honesty, or good conversation to our last end. o Ne differas justum probare te. Vatablus. Put not off till death, to prove thyself a righteous man, saith Vatablus a Papist, very skilful in the tongues, and sometimes Hebrew Reader in Paris, where you have the very word, which p Bellarm. d● iusti●. lib. 4. cap. 19 Bellarmine condemns in Calvin, ne differas. Which also Pagnin useth, a notable Linguist and a Papist; q Nec tuam prob●tatem differas. Put not off thy honesty. r Arias Montanus. ne expectes. Arias Montanus hath the sense, though not the word, weight not. s Stapleton. de iustif. proleg. 2. a● lib. 5. Stapleton applieth it to the first justification; t Bellarm. de just. ubi supra. Prob. 4. 2. Cor. 9 Bellarmine to the second; whose reasons I will answer otherwhere. It is enough for the present, that a second justification cannot be proved out of these two places. speaker A. W. Which is confirmed, where it is said: that the path of a just man proceedeth, as the light doth until it be perfect day; Which is by degrees more and more: And S. Paul teacheth the same, where he saith to men that give alms plentifully. That God will maltiplie their seed, and augment the increases of the fruits of their justice. This u Prou. 4. 18. place proveth not, that there is a second justification, but either that the light of the righteous continueth, or at the most, that it increaseth to the end; which we denynot. And this much less, where x 2. Cor. 9 10. the Apostle exhorteth the Corinthians to cheerfulness in liberality to the poor, assuring them, that God will make them more able to bring forth such fruits of righteousness, by multiplying their seed and their store. Ye shall give them bread to eat (saith y Caietan. ad 2. Cor. 9 10. Caietan) and z Deut. 28. 11. seed, wherewith to sow again, and just or honest gain; whereas the gain that the wicked make, is unjust. speaker D. B. P. Further, S. james doth most effectually prove this increase of righteousness, and the second justification, in these words. Abraham our Father was he not justified by works, offering Isaac his son upon the Altar? That he speaketh of the second justification is evident: for Abraham was justified before Isaac was borne, as it is most manifest by the Scripture itself: and by that heroical act, of not sparing his only and entirely Cap. 2. beloved Son, * Not his justification. Genes. 15. Rom. 4. his justice was much augmented. And the Apostle himself seemeth to have foreseen all our adversaries cavillation, and to have so long before prevented them: First, that common shift of theirs (that this work was a sign, or the fivit only of his faith, and no companion of it, in the matter of justification) is formally confuted: for the holy Ghost speaking distinctly of both, his faith, and work, and joining them both in this act of justification, attributeth the better part of it, unto his work: thus; Seest thou that faith did work with his works, and by the works the saith was consummate and made perfect? Which he doth after fitly declare by a similitude, comparing faith to the body, and good works to the soul: which give life and lustre to faith, otherwise faith is of little value and estimation with God. speaker A. W. Though there is enough said before, for the cleared of a jam. 2. 21. this place; yet perhaps it shall not be amiss to follow him in these several points. That he speaketh not of the same justification which Paul doth, it is plain: but not that he meaneth your second justification, whereby the former is made perfect to deserve everlasting life. When we say works are no companions of faith in justification, we do not say, they are not present, but that they do not justify: neither speak we of testifying our justification by works, as the Apostle here doth, but of that which you call the first justification; to which questionless this fact of Abraham, in your own judgement, did not appertain. But he joineth faith and works together. How should they be severed; when there is no holy action, performed in any part of our life, but proceedeth from faith, which b Suapte natura. Caietan. ibi. of it own nature, worketh by love? now faith is not said to be perfited by works, as if it did justify a man by them, (for then had it not justified Abraham, till this great work was wrought) but because the act is the prose of the perfection of the virtue. Whereupon it followeth in the text, c jam. 2. 23. That by this work the Scripture was fulfilled, which had testified that Abraham was justified by faith. For now it manifestly appeared, that the testimony was true; Abraham making it clear to all the world, that he had true faith indeed: that is (saith Caieton) such a faith, as d Non renuentem, sed pa●atam opera●. Caietan. ibi. would not refuse, but was re●die to bring forth good works. And (in his opinion) this is that, which james saith, that we are not justified by a barren faith, but by a faith fruitful in good works. speaker D. B. P. Which S. Paul also teacheth atlarge, among other speeches including this: 1. Cor. 13. That if he should have all faith, and wanted charity, he were nothing: And comparing faith and charity together, defineth expressly, that charity is the greater virtue: Which charity is the fountain of all good works. And so by this preferring these works of charity before faith, he doth stop the other starting hole of the Protestants, that Abraham forsooth was justified before God, by only faith: but was declared just before men by his works: For if God esteem more of charity, then of our faith, a man is more justified before God by charity, then by faith. speaker A. W. God esteemeth more of Charity, for the use of our conversation amongst men, but of faith for our justification. And indeed it is a greater honour to God, for a man wholly to renounce himself, and rest upon him for justification, then to love God, in hope of such a favour to be received upon our being so prepared. speaker D. B. P. Again, in the very place where this noble fact is recorded, to show how acceptable it was to God himself, it is said in the person of God; Now I know that thou lovest me: and to convince all obstinate cavilling, Gen. 22. is it not said that his faith did in this very fact cooperate with his works, and that the work made his faith perfect? which conjunction of both of them together, doth demonstrate that he speaketh o● his justification We grant he doth. before God; adding also, That he was therefore called the friend of God. Which could not have been, if thereby he had been only declared just before men: and thus doth S. Augustine reconcile the two places of the Apostles, S. Paul, and S. james, which seem contrary. S. Paul saying that a man is justified by faith, without works and S. james, that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. That S. Paul speaketh of works which go before saith, such as we of our own forces, without the help of grace are able to do: and such he saith not to deserve our first justification. But S. james disp●teth of works, which sollow faith, and issue out of our souls, now garnished with grace, and such he holdeth us to be justified by, that is, made more and more just: See the place. He saith directhe, Lib. 83. quaest. q. 76. Serm. 16. de verb. Apos. that we are justified, and that this iusuce doth increase, whiles it doth proceed and profit. speaker A. W. This labour might have been saved. For we grant, that Abraham by this glorious fact was justified even before God, that is, was known to be justified, or to have true faith; as he e Gen. 22. 12. was known to fear God by it, not that God was ignorant before, either of his faith, or fear, but because it pleased him, by this deed to take as it were special notice of them both, as men do. That righteousness is increased by holy actions, I showed before, and that therefore we are justified by them, that is, more sanctified. speaker D. B. P. Nothing then is more certain and clear, then that our justification may daily be augmented: and it seemeth to me, that this also be granted in their opinion: for they holding faith to be the only instrument of justification, cannot deny, but that there are many degrees of faith, it is so plainly taught in the word: O ye of little faith. And then a little after, I have not found so great faith in Israel: And O Lord increase our saith: Math. 8. Luk. 19 and many such like, where many different degrees of faith are mentioned. How then can the justification which depends upon that faith, not be correspondent unto that diversity of faith, but all one? Again, M. Perkins delivereth plainly, That men at the first, are not so well assured Pag. 54. of their salvation, as they are afterwards; If then in the certainty of their salvation, which is the prime effect of their justification, they put degrees, they must perforce allow them in the justification itself. speaker A. W. Degrees of faith we deny not; but increase of justification thereupon, except it be in our feeling. In which respect, it receiveth continual growth, but in itself it cannot, because God doth f Rom. 4. 3. 5. account faith to us for righteousness, and forgive our sins, not by halves, but fully upon the least measure of true believing. Objections of Papists. speaker W. P. Psal. 7. 8. judge me according to my righteousness. Hence they reason thus; if David be judged according to his righteousness, then may he be justified thereby; but David desires to be judged according to his righteousness: and therefore he was justified thereby. Answ. There be two kinds of righteousness, one of the person, the other of the cause or action. The righteousness of a man's person, is, whereby it is accepted into the favour of God into life eternal. The righteousness of the action or cause is, when the action or cause is judged of God to be good and just. Now David in this Psalm, speaketh only of the righteousness of the action, or innocency of his cause, in that he was falsely charged to have sought the kingdom. In like manner it is said of Phineas, Psalm. 166. 31. that his fact in kill Zimri and Cosbie, was imputed to him for righteousness: not because it was a satisfaction to the law, the rigour whereof could not be fulfilled in that one work, but because God accepted of it as a just work, and as a token of his righteousness and zeal for God's glory. Object. II. The Scripture saith in sundry places, that men are blessed which do good works. Psal. 119. 1. Blessed is the man that is upright in heart, and walketh in the law of the Lord. Ans. The man is blessed that endeavoureth to keep God's commandments. Yet is he not blessed simply, because he doth so; but because he is in Christ, by whom he doth so: and his obedience to the law of God is a sign thereof. Object. III. When man confesseth his sins and humbleth himself by prayer and fasting, God's wrath is pacified and stayed: therefore prayer and fasting are causes of justification before God. Answ. Indeed men that truly humble themselves by prayer and fasting, do appease the wrath of God: yet not properly by these actions, but by their faith expressed and testified in them, whereby they apprehend that which appeaseth God's wrath, even the merits of Christ in whom the Father is well pleased: and for whose sake alone he is well pleased with us. Object. IV. Sundry persons in Scriptures are commended for perfection: as Noah, and Abraham, Zacharie, and Elizabeth: and Christ biddeth us all be perfect: and where there is any perfection of works, there also works may justify. Answ. There be two kinds of perfection: perfection in parts, and perfection in degrees. Perfection in parts is, when being regenerate, and having the seeds of all necessary virtues, we endeavour accordingly to obey God, not in some few, but in all and every part of the law: as josias turned unto God according to all the law of Moses. Perfection in degree is, when a man keepeth every commandment of God, and that according to the very rigour thereof, in the highest degree. Now than whereas we are commanded to be perfected, and have examples of the same perfection in Scripture: both commandments and examples must be understood of perfection in parts, and not of perfection in degrees, which cannot be attained unto in this life; though we for our parts, must daily strive to come as near unto it, as possibly we can. Object. V. 2. Cor. 4. 17. Our momentary afflictions work unto us a greater measure of glory: now if afflictions work our salvation, then works also do the same. Answ. Afflictions work salvation, not as causes procuring it, but as a means directing us thereto. And thus always must we esteem of works, in the matter of our salvation, as of a certain way, or a mark therein, directing us to glory, not causing and procuring it: as Bernard saith, they are via regni, non Lib. de great. 〈◊〉 lib. arb. causa regnandi: The way to the kingdom, not the cause of reigning there. Object. VI We are justified by the same thing whereby we are judged: but we are judged by our good works: therefore justified also. Answ. The proposition is false: for judgement is an act of God, declaring a man to be just that is already just: and justification is an other act of God, whereby he maketh him to be just, that is by nature unjust. And therefore in equity the last judgement is to proceed by works; because they are the fittest means to make trial of every man's cause, and serve fitly to declare whom God hath justified in this life. Object. VII. Wicked men are condemned for evil works: therefore righteous men are justified by good works. Answ. The reason holdeth not: for there is great difference between evil and good works. An evil work is perfectly evil, and so deserveth damnation: but there is no good work of any man that is perfectly good: and therefore cannot justify. Object. VIII. To believe in Christ is a work, and by it we are justified: and if one work do justify, why may we not be justified by all the works of the law. Answ. Faith must be considered two ways: first, as a work, quality, or virtue: secondly, as an Instrument, or an hand reaching out itself to receive Christ's merit. And we are justified by faith, not as it is a work, virtue, or quality; but as it is an instrument to receive and apply that thing whereby we are justified. And therefore it is a figurative speech to say, We are justified by faith. Faith considered by itself maketh no man righteous; neither doth the action of faith, which is to apprehend, justify: but the object of faith, which is Christ's obedience apprehended. These are the principal reasons commonly used: which as we see, are of no moment. To conclude therefore, we hold, that works concur to justification, and that we are justified thereby as by signs and effects, not as causes: for both the beginning, middle, and accomplishment of our justification is only in Christ: and hereupon john saith, If any man (being already justified) sin we have an advocate with the father, jesus Christ, and he is the propitiation for our sins. And to make our good works means or causes of our justification, is to make every man a Saviour to himself. speaker A. W. The objections which M. Perkins makes for us in this Article: do belong either to the question of merits, or of the possibility of fulfilling D. B. P. Pag. 200. This is but a de●●ce to s●●ft off the ans●vering of them. the law, or to the perfection of our justice: and therefore I remit them to those places: and will handle the two latter points, before I come to that of merit's. You are still the same man; shifting off that to which you have no answer ready. If you say any thing to these objections afterward, I will refer the reader to it by A. B. C. WHETHER IT BE POSSIBLE FOR a man in grace, to fulfil God's law. speaker A. W. MAster Perkins argueth, that it is unpossible. First, for that Paul took it for his ground, that the law could not be fulfilled. Admit it D. B. P. Pag. 95. Gal. 5. These objections he picketh out of other places here and there. Rome 8. were so. I than would answer, that he meant, that a man helped only with the knowledge of the law, cannot fulfil the law: but by the aid of God's grace, he might be able to do it. Which I gather out of S. Paul, where he saith, That, that which was impossible to the law, is made by the grace of Christ possible. Your answer is insufficient. For the ᵍ Apostle speaketh not of any strength to be had by the knowledge of the law, (which no reasonable man ever looked for) but denieth ability to the Galathians, who would have joined faith and works together to justification. That the h Rom. 8. 3 Apostle saith is this; That the law, which promiseth everlasting life to them that keep it, could not bestow it upon us, because we were unable to perform the condition: but God hath prepared that for us, in sending his Son to be a sacrifice for sin, that we might obtain that, which by the righteousness of the law was to be had, if we could have fulfilled it; which notwithstanding they only attain to that walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit. speaker D. B. P. 2. Object. The lives and works of most righteous men, are imperfect and stained with sin; * They are not justified by their works. ergo quid? Of this, there shall be a several Article. speaker A. W. All this is but trifling, to set down reasons as you list, and then to answer to them. You are too wise to tie any knots, but those you see how to untie. The conclusion you seek for, is, Therefore they cannot be justified by their works. speaker D. B. P. 3 Object. Our knowledge is imperfect, and therefore our faith, repentance, and sanctification is answerable. I would to God all our works were answerable to our knowledge, then would they be much more perfect than they are, but this Argument is also impertinent, and doth rather This is such a possibility as never had event. prove it possible to fulfil the law, because it is possible to know all the law: Then if our works be answerable to our knowledge: we may also fulfil it. speaker A. W. It asketh better proof than your word, that it is possible to know all the law; when i Psal. 119. 12. 18. 19 33. 34. David confesseth himself so short of that knowledge. And yet a man may know more than he can do. Our consequence is good, yours nought. speaker D. B. P. 4 Object. A man regenerate, is partly flesh, and partly spirit, and therefore Rom. 8. 13. his best works, are partly from the flesh. Not so, if we mortify the deeds of the flesh by the spirit, as the Apostle exhorteth. But these trifling arguments belong rather unto the next question. speaker A. W. If we could mortify them wholly, to which the k Rom. 8. 13. Col. 3. 5. Apostle exhorteth, they should not be at all of the flesh. But since that in this life is impossible, all our works savour of the flesh. speaker D. B. P. I will help M. Perkins to some better, that the matter may be more thoroughly examined. Why go ye about to put a yoke upon the Disciples Rom. 8. 13. necks, which neither we, nor our Fathers were able to bear? these words were spoken of the law of Moses: therefore we were not able to fulfil it. I answer first, that, that law could not be fulfilled by the only help of the same law, without the further aid of God's grace. Secondly, that it was so burdensome and cumbrous, by reason of the multitude of their Sacrifices, Sacraments, and Ceremonies, that it could hardly be kept with the help of ordinary grace: and in that sense, it is said to be such a yoke, as we were not able to bear. Because things very hard to be done, are now and then, called impossible. speaker A. W. Let us see your arguments, in comparison whereof Master Perkins are trifles. Belike in your judgement, a little help would have served: but it stands you upon to show, that we receive as much in this life, as is sufficient for that purpose. Of all parts of the law, the sacrifices, Sacraments, and Ceremonies had least need of grace to the keeping of them: and therefore that is not the reason why it was a burden. But this is spoken also of the Moral law; to l Gal. 5. 3. the keeping whereof circumcision binds. By such a distinction any slight thing may to some man be impossible. speaker A. W. Now that Josue, David, Josias, Zachary, Elizabeth, and many others, did fulfil all the law, is recorded in holy Scripture: Wherefore it is most D. B. P. jos. 11. 3. Reg. 14. Act. 13. 4. Reg. 23. Luke 1. manifest, that it might be kept. speaker D. B. P. They fulfilled the law (as m In his answer to the 4. Objection. Master Perkins hath truly answered you) in respect of their sincere endeavour, not in some, but in all known points of God's commandments; yet failed they in some now and then. That commendation of n jos. 11. 15. josua, is only in that point of rooting out the Heathen; wherein he also faulted not a little, o jos. 9 14. 15. by making peace with the Gibeonits, before he had asked counsel of God. How p 2. Sam. 12. 9 & 13. 39 & 24. 10. often and grievously David sinned, I had rather have the Scripture speak, than myself out of it. q 2. Chro. 35. 22. josiah is reproved for fight against Pharaoh Necho, and chastised for it with loss both of victory and life. r Luk. 1. 20. Rom. 7. Zachary is convicted of sin, and stricken with dumnes, for not believing the Angel: and yet in all probability he was as holy as his wife Elizabeth, both truly, but not perfectly righteous. To will is in me, but I find not how to perform: If Saint Paul could not perform that which he would, how can others? Ans. He speaks there of avoiding all evil motions, and temptations, which he would willingly have done, but he could not: Marry he could well by the assistance of God's grace, subdue those provocations to sin, and make them occasions of virtue: and consequently, keep all the commandments, not suffering those passions to lead him to the breach of any one of them. speaker A. W. Those very motions were no other than sins, arising from his natural corruption, and prevailing with him so far, s Rom. 7. 23. that they overcame him sometimes, and led him captive. speaker D. B. P. The like answer we make unto that objection, that one of the ten commandments forbids us to covet our neighbour's goods, his wife, or servants, which as they say is impossible but we hold, that it may be well done, understanding the commandment rightly, which prohibiteth not to have evil motions of covetousness and lechery: but to yield our consent unto them. Now it is so possible for a man by God's grace to refrain Libr. 10. conf. cap. 7. his consent from such wicked temptations, that S. Augustine thinketh it may be done of a mortified virtuous man, even when he is a sleep. And testifieth of himself, that waking he performed it. speaker A. W. If this be the meaning of it, what is it but a needless repetition of that which was before forbidden? For who knoweth not, t Math. 5. 28. that consent to those sins was condemned in the 7. and 8. Commandments? Besides, the Apostle might know by nature, that consent to lust was sin: but the true meaning of the commandment u Rom. 7. 7. he knew not, but by the law; so that withholding consent from these motions is not enough to free us from sinning by them: and yet perhaps that would not seem so easy, if we did not flatter ourselves now and then. The quotation out of Austin is false, and being of no great moment, I pass it over. speaker D. B. P. We do all offend in many things. And if we say we have no sin, we jac. 3. 2. 1. joan. 1. deceive ourselves. But if we could observe all the law, we should offend in nothing, nor have any sin. ergo. Ans. I grant that we offend in many things: not because it is not possible to keep them, but for that we are frail, and easily led by the craft of the Devil into many offences which we might avoid, if we were so wary and watchful as we ought to be: again, although we cannot keep ourselves from venial offences, yet may we fulfil the law, which is not transgressed and broken, unless we commit some mortal sins. For venial sins, either for the smallness of the matter, or want of consideration, are not so opposite to the law, as that they violate the reason, and purport of it, although they be somewhat disagreeing with it. But of this matter more fully in some other place. speaker A. W. It is an idle speculation to imagine a Christian, as Tully doth an Orator, and Castiglio a Courtier. And what else is he, whom in this answer you fancy? Such an one since the fall of Adam never was, not in this world ever shall be. Do you not see yourself what pitiful shifts these be? Venial sins disagree with the law, but they do not violate the purport and reason of it. Are they not against the pureness of God's image, in which we were created? are they not in a natural man damnable? Our obedience is to be squared according to the commandment of God: neither have we any warrant from him to excuse ourselves by the conceited reason, and I know not what purport of the law. For my part, though I acknowledge a great difference in degrees of sins, yet I see little reason why it should not be as mortal a sin, to be led away by carelessness to the committing of those things which we might easily avoid, as after a long and tedious fight, to be led captive by the violence of some mighty temptation. For this striving argueth a desire to please and serve God: but that needless sinning shows either presumption, or want of ordinary regard. speaker D. B. P. Lastly, it may be objected that the way to heaven is strait, and the gate narrow: which is so true, that it seemeth impossible to be kept by flesh and blood: but that which is impossible to men of themselves, is made possible, and easy too, by the grace of God. speaker A. W. Not every thing: for there are many impossible to man, that are never made possible and easy by the grace of God. So far as it pleaseth God to make things possible, so far they are made possible. But this possibility is not communicated to any, the examples of the most righteous do make it more than manifest. Which made S. Paul to say, I can do all things in him, that strengtheneth and comforteth me. Philip. 4. speaker A. W. He that confesseth he x Rom. 7 19 cannot do that good he would, showeth plainly that y ●hilip. 4. 13. God doth not enable him to all things: which in this place are to be restrained according to the text: I can do all things, that is (saith z Lyra ad Phil. 4. 13. your gloss) I can use all fortunes and estates well. So do a Theodoret. & Oecumenius ad hunc locum. Theodoret and Oecumenius take it. So do b Lombard. Thomas Caietan. Psal. 118. other of your Interpreters restrain it; showing that he meaneth not, he can do all things; but that he could not do all those things, that is, be content with any estate, were it not for the strength and comfort he hath from Christ. speaker D. B. P. And the Prophet David, after thou O Lord haddest dilated my heart (and with thy grace let it at liberty) I did run the wa●es of thy commandments: that is, I did readily, and willingly perform them. Of the loving of God with all our heart, etc. shall be treated in the question of the perfection of justice. speaker A. W. The Prophet David ran indeed, and that an excellent race; but not without stumbling, staying, and turning a little out of the way now and then: as c 2. Sam. 24. 1. 2. You overweened your strength as your answers show. Rom. 8. the last action in his health declareth. speaker D. B. P. Having now confuted all that is commonly proposed to prove the impossibility of keeping Gods commandments, let us now see what we can say in proof of the possibility of it: First, S. Paul is very plain for it, saying. That which was impossible to the law, in that it is weakened by the flesh, God sending his Son in the similitude of flesh, of sin, damned sin in the flesh, that the justification of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but according unto the spirit. See how formally he teacheth, that Christ dying to redeem us from sin, purchased us grace to fulfil the law, which before was impossible unto our weak flesh. speaker A. W. I showed the true meaning of d Rom. 8. 3. the place before, that God by his Son hath justified us, which the law could not do: because we were unable to keep it. Now the end of this justification is, that we should walk after the spirit, whereby we fulfil the law; though not perfectly, yet performing the same duties the law requires, but not in the same measure. speaker D. B. P. Again, how far S. john was from that opinion, of thinking Gods Cap. 5. Matth. 11. commandments to be impossible, may appear by that Epistle: And his commandments be not heavy. Which is taken out of our saviours own words. My yoke is sweet, and my burden is light. The reason of this is, that although to our corrupt frailty, they be very heavy: Yet when the virtue of charity is powered into our hearts by the holy Ghost, then lo, do we with delight fulfil them. For as the Apostle witnesseth. Charity is the fullness of the law. And, He that doth love his neighbour, hath fulfilled Rom. 13. Math. 22. the law: Which Christ himself teacheth, when he affirmeth, That the whole law, and Prophets depend upon these two commandments, of loving God, and our neighbour: Now both according unto our opinion and the Protestants, a man regenerate and in the state of grace hath in him the virtue of Charity: we hold it to be the principal part of inherent justice: they say that their justifying faith can never be separated from it: So that a righteous man, being also endued with charity, is able thereby to fulfil the whole law. speaker A. W. You have given the true meaning of e 1. joh. 5. 3. S. john: for therefore are Gods Commandments said not to be heavy, because our love to God, who hath given us the assurance of his love to us in jesus Christ, maketh us go willingly and cheerfully about them; for all those encumbrances we find by the world, the flesh and the devil. And in that respect we are said to fulfil the f Rom. 13. 13. law by charity; because the obedience we perform (weak and slender though it be) proceedeth from the love of God, and of our neighbour; which is the very sum of the law, g Math. 22. 40. upon which both the law and the Prophets depend. And all this proveth not perfect, but only true obedience; which all that are justified perform, howsoever they fail much (in the particulars) of that measure the law exacteth. speaker D. B. P. Let us adjoin unto these Authorities of holy write, the testimony of Serm in illud, Attend tibi. De nat. & gra. cap. 69. one ancient Father or two, S. Basil affirmeth, That it is impious and ungodly, to say that the commandments of the spirit be unpossible. S. Augustine defineth, That we must believe firmly, that God being just and good, could not command things that be impossible for us to fulfil: The reason may be, that it is the part of a tyrant, & no true lawmaker, to command his subjects to do that under pain of death, which he knows them no way able to perform: For those were not to be called laws, (which are to direct men, to that which is just) but snares to catch the most diligent in, and to bind them up to most assured perdition. speaker A. W. The sayings of the Fathers are to be understood (according to the Scriptures) of possibility to perform true obedience, which without grace no man can do; not of perfect keeping the law, which yet by our creation we were sufficiently enabled to perform. So that God not only may not, but reasonably cannot be suspected of injustice, if he require that at our hands, which he made us able to do, as with Austin we confess he did. Basil speaketh not of our ability to keep the Commandments, but only showeth, that the charge of looking to ourselves belongeth to the contemplation of the mind, not to the eyes of the body: because if it did, it were given in vain; no man being able to see the hinder parts of his body, nor his face, nor his inwards. Therefore the holy Ghost, who doth not command things utterly impossible, will have this precept of looking to ourselves to be understood of the searching of our heart, not of the viewing of our body. speaker A. W. Wherefore it was afterward decreed in an approved Council of Arausican, D. B. P. 2. Can. ult. The Arausican Council you should say, or the Council of Orange. Math. 19 as an article of faith in these words. This also we believe according to the Catholic faith, that all men baptised by grace there received, with the help and cooperation of Christ, both can, and aught to keep and fulfil those things, which belong to salvation. The principal whereof are after our saviours own determination to keep the commandments. If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He may do them without doubt, as I have often said, truly, and acceptably to God; yet not so fully as he ought, because our corruption will not suffer us to h Si fideliter laborare volverint. labour faithfully without intermission or infirmity; which the Council requireth, and you advisedly leave out. i Math. 19 17. That speech of our Saviour, is not the voice of the Gospel (though that also requires obedience, and allows a reward for it) but of the law; fit to be uttered to him that came to our Saviour full fraught with the conceit of his own righteousness, not so much with a desire to learn of him (saith k Hieron. apud Thomam in Catena. ad Math. 19 Hierome) as to try his skill. And this our Saviour spoke of the justification, which is of the law without faith. As it appeareth by l Beda, Lyra, Glossa Ordinaria, Rem●gius ibi. Beda, Lyra, the ordinary gloss, and Remigius. THAT GOOD WORKS BE NOT stained with sin. speaker D. B. P. NOw that just men's works be not sins: which I prove first, by some works of that pattern of patience, job. Of whom it is written, that notwithstanding all the devils power and craft in tempting of him, He continued still a single hearted, and an upright man, departing from evil, Cap. 2. and preserving his innocency. If he continued an innocent, he sinned not: Again, if in all these instigations to impatience, he remained patient: these his works were perfect. For S. james saith, Esteem it my brethren, Cap. 1. all joy, when you shall fall into divers temptations: knowing that the probation of your faith, worketh patience: And let patience have a perfect work, that you may be perfect and entire, failing in nothing. speaker A. W. This, as the last point, is a matter belike that this man thinks himself well prepared for: and therefore he runs a course of his own in them, having no such occasion given him by Master Perkins; yet let us follow him step by step. By jobs innocency continued, nothing else is meant but that he had not (as Satan had affirmed he would) uttered any blasphemy against God. But by this it cannot be proved, that there was no taint of sin in his patience. As for his sincerity and uprightness, they are virtues that always accompany true Christians, and without which all is hypocrisy. That perfection, or perfect work, is the proving that his faith is perfect, because it overcometh, as your m Glossa Ordin. & Lyra ad lac. 1. gloss expounds it; and he is counted a perfect man, but not simply without any spot in this patience. speaker D. B. P. 2 King David thus by the inspiration of the holy Ghost speaketh of himself: Thou hast (O Lord) proved my heart, thou hast visited me in Psal. 16. the night, thou hast tried me in fire, and there was no iniquity found in me. It must needs then be granted, that some of his works at least were free from all sins and iniquity. And that the most of them were such, if you hear the holy Ghost testifying it, I hope you will believe it: read then, where it is of record, That David did that, which was right in the sight of our Lord (and not only in the sight of men) and turned from nothing 3. Reg. 15. that he commanded him, all the days of his life, except only the matter of Urias the Hittite. speaker A. W. David, in that place, doth not clear himself of all sin, but only protesteth his innocency, in respect of any hurt intended by him against Saul, and the rest of his persecutors. David meaneth not (saith n Lyra ad Psal. 17. Lyra) to say, that he is free from all sin, but that he had committed no evil against Saul, for which he should persecute him. It was one thing for David's works to be righteous in God's sight, an other thing for them to be perfect. The former we grant, the later you can no way prove. That commendation the o 1 Reg. 15. 5. holy Ghost gives to his works, must needs be spoken in comparison (as p Lyra ibi. Lyra affirmeth) because it is certain, he q 2. Sam. 10. 29. wronged Mephthosheth, and r 2. Sam. 24. 〈◊〉. 2. numbered the people; but these sins were not comparable to that against Vr●ah, especially for the dishonouring of God by it, in the account of the heathen; This deed (saith s 2. Sam. ●2. 〈◊〉. Nathan) hath caused the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme. speaker D. B. P. 3 The Apostle affirmeth, That some men do build upon the only foundation 1. Cor. 3. Christ jesus, gold, silver, and precious stones: that is, being choice members of Christ's Catholic Church, do many perfect good works, such as being tr●●d in the furnace of God's judgement, will suffer no loss or detriment, as he there saith expressly: Wherefore they must needs be pure, and free from all dross of sin, otherwise having been so proved in fire, it would have been found out. speaker A. W. The Apostle doth not say so, but this only, that if t 1. Cor. 3, 1●. any man build on this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, timber, hay, or stubble, every man's work shall be made manifest. But put case he had said so; he speaketh of doctrine, built upon See 12. Art. par. 1. art. 4. 1. the true foundation, as the whole allegory proves: especially vers. 10. As a skilful master builder, I have laid the foundation, Vers. 10. and an other builds upon it; now in good works, one man layeth not the foundation, and another buildeth upon it, but every man begins and ends his own work himself. Farther, vers. 9 The Ministers are said to be God's labourers. Vers. 9 the people (not every man's work) God's husbandry and God's building: because he builds them up by their labour. This place is applied by you Papists to prove Purgatory, even by u Bellarm. d● Purgat. Bellarmine himself; but with what success, let any man judge, that either reads our answers to him, or considers the text. speaker D. B. P. 4 Many works of righteous men please God. Make your bodies a Rom. 12. 1. Pet. 2. Philip. 4. quick sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God: the same offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God: And S. Paul calleth alms bestowed on him in prison, an acceptable sacrifice of sweet savour, and pleasing God. But nothing infected with sin (all which he hateth deadly) can please God and be acceptable in his fight: God of his mercy through Christ doth pardon sin, or as the Protestants speak, not impure it to the person: but to say that a sinful work is of sweet savour before him, and a grateful sacrifice to him, were blasphemy: wherefore we must needs confess, that such works which so well pleased him, were not defiled with any kind of sin. speaker A. W. Your Reason is thus framed. No works infected with sin please God. Many works of righteous men please God. Therefore many works of righteous men are not infected with sin. I grant your assumption; though the proof of it, y Rom. 12. 1. 2 by the first testimony, is insufficient: for it doth not follow that we can do this or that, because we are exhorted to the doing of it. Your proposition I deny; no sin can please God, nor any action, as it is sinful; but God both can, and doth pardon the faultiness of his children's works, and accept the work itself in Christ, yea and reward it too with increase of glory. speaker D. B. P. Finally, many works in holy write be called good, as, That they may see your good works: to be rich in good works: We are created in Christ Math. 5. 1. Tim. 6. Ephes. 2. jesus to good works: but they could not truly be called good works, if they were infected with sin. For according to the judgement of all learned Divines, it can be no good work, that faileth either in substance, or circumstance, that hath any one fault in it: For, Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quolibet defectu. Wherefore we must either say, that the holy Ghost calleth evil good, which were blasphemy, or else acknowledge, that there be many good works free from all infection of sin. speaker A. W. No works infected with sin can be truly called good. Many works are called good in Scripture. Therefore many works are not infected with sin. Here is the same fault again. Your assumption is true, but your proof nought. For the places you allege, prove no more, but that the works which we should do, are good; not that they are good as we do them. Your proposition is false, as the other was. For the works enjoined by God are very good, but they have some allay, and abasement by our doing of them; which argueth not, that they are not truly, but that they are not perfectly good. speaker D. B. P. In am of the manifold testimonies of Antiquity, which doth nothing more than recommend good works, and paint out the excellency of them: I will set down one passage of S. Augustine wherein this very controversy is distinctly declared, and determined: thus he beginneth: Lib. 3. cont. duas epist. Pelag. cap. 7. The justice (through which the just man liveth by faith) because it is given to man by the spirit of grace is true justice: the which although it be worthily called in some men perfect, according to the capacity of this life, yet it is but small in comparison of that greater, which man made equal to Angels shall receive. Which (heavenly justice) he, that had not as yet, said himself to be perfect, in regard of that justice that was in him; and also imperfect, if it be compared to that which he wanted. But certainly this lesser justice, or righteousness, breedeth, and bringeth forth merits, and that greater, is the reward thereof. Wherhfore he that pursueth not this, shall not obtain that: Hitherto S. Augustine. Note first, that he defineth the justice which we have in this life, to be true justice, which is pure from all injustice and iniquity: Then, that it is also perfect, not failing in any duty, which we be bound to perform. Lastly, that it bringeth forth good works, such as merit life everlasting. True it is also, that this justice although perfect in itself, so far as man's capacity in this life doth permit: yet being compared unto the state of justice which is in heaven, it may be called imperfect, not that this is not sufficient to defend us from all formal transgression of God's law: but because it keepeth not us sometimes from venial sin: and hath not such a high degree of perfection as that hath. speaker A. W. You may well think we make no small account of works, that make them the way to heaven, that require them, as necessary of every man that looketh to be saved, that allow them no small reward in heaven; that ground part of our assurance of salvation upon them. First, give me leave to observe by the way, that the life z Aug. cont●● 2. Epist. Pelag. lib. 3. c. 7. Austin hear speaketh of, is not justification, but holiness of conversation. Then, to your first note, the righteousness, we have in this life, is true righteousness, in regard of the author thereof the spirit of God, who cannot deceive, nor be deceived. It is also called perfect, in some men, not (as you say, without Augustine's authority) because it faileth not in any duty, which we are bound to perform, but in comparison of the imperfection of it in other men, and the uncapablenes that by our corruption, is in every one of us. By merits he meaneth good works; as yourself also expound them, and as the manner of speech, that the ancient Church used, requireth: the reason whereof is, not because they deserve everlasting life (Augustine hath no such word) but because they shall have a reward; though not upon desert, but favour. It cannot be called imperfect, because it doth not keep us from sinning; If it be true, that it is sufficient to keep us from all formal transgression of God's law: else we must say, that Adam's righteousness was imperfect; yea, it may well be held; That the Angels now, and we hereafter in heaven, shall be kept from sinning, not by any strength of inherent righteousness, but by the special grace of God, continually upholding us. That it may be proper to God, that possibly he cannot sin, by reason of goodness resting in him (that I may so speak) which cannot be less than infinite. And sure it is to me somewhat strange, that this perfection of righteousness, should be able to keep us free from deadly sins (as you call them) and not much more easily preserve us from venial. speaker D. B. P. Saint Augustine hath the like discourse, where he saith directly, that it appertains to the lesser justice of this life, not to sin. So that we De spirit. & lit. ult. cap. have out of this oracle of Antiquity: that many works of a just man are without sin. speaker A. W. The other place of a Aug. de spirit. & litera cap. ult. Austin rather maketh against you. For if it belong to this less righteousness not to sin, and (for all that measure of it, we have) we are not kept from sinning; it may seem that this righteousness is not perfect. So have you nothing out of this register of Antiquity, to prove, that any works of a just man are without sin. speaker D. B. P. To these reasons taken partly out of the Scriptures, and partly out of the record of Antiquity, let us join one or two drawn from the absurdity of our adversaries doctrine, which teacheth every good work of the righteous man to be infected with mortal sin: Which being granted, it would follow necessarily, that no good work in the world, were to be done under pain of damnation: thus: No mortal sin is to be done under pain of damnation: for the wages of sin is death: but all Rom. 6. A plain paralogism, the Assumption and conclusion being faulty. good works are stained with mortal sin. ergo, no good work is to be done under pain of damnation. speaker A. W. Your Syllogism is nought: because it hath four terms as they are called, your assumption not being taken out of your proposition, nor your conclusion suitable to the premises: it should be thus framed. b See 12 Art. par. 〈◊〉. art. 2 No mortal sin is to be done, under pain of damnation: But all good works are mortal sins. Therefore no good works are to be dono, under pain of damnation. Now the syllogism is true, but the assumption evidently false. You chose craftily, rather no make a false syllogism, which you thought every one could not spy, than a false assumption, manifest to the eyes of the simplest: If you should alter the proposition, that would be as apparently false, as the assumption is: Nothing stained with mortal sin is to be done under pain of damnation. speaker D. B. P. It followeth secondly; that every man is bound to sin deadly. For all men are bound to perform the duties of the first & second table: but every performance of any duty is necessarily linked with some mortal sin: therefore every man is bound to commit many mortal sins: and consequently to be damned. These are holy and comfortable conclusions, yet inseparable companions, if not sworn brethren of the Protestants doctrine. Now let us hear what Arguments they bring against this Catholic verity. speaker A. W. Your other Reason is thus to be framed. He that is bound to perform the duties of the first and second table, is bound to commit many mortal sins. But every man is bound to perform all such duties: Therefore every man is bound to commit many mortal sins. The proposition is thus proved, according to your collection. If the performance of such duties be nearly linked with mortal sin, than he that is bound to perform such duties, is bound to commit many mortal sins. But the performance of such duties (as the Protestants say) is nearly linked with mortal sin. Therefore he that is bound to perform such duties is bound to commit many mortal sins. I deny the consequence of your proposition. This only followeth upon the antecedent, that he, which is bound to perform such duties, is bound to perform that, which is nearly linked with some mortal sin: And this we grant to be true; we are bound to the performance of those duties, in the doing whereof, by our corruption, there will be some sin annexed, which in it own nature is deadly. speaker D. B. P. First they allege these words, Enter not O Lord, into judgement with thy servant, because no living creature shall be justified in thy sight. If none Psal. 141. can be justified before God, it seems that none of their works are just in his sight. speaker A. W. Ans. There are two common expositions of this place, among the What if there be a third that maketh for it. ancient Fathers: both true, but far from the Protestants purpose. The commonness of an exposition is a presumption, but not a proof of the truth thereof: for all these two, there may be a third of more certainty. speaker D. B. P. The former is S. Augustine's, S. Hieromes, S. Gregory's in his Commentaries upon that place: who say, that no creature ordinarily liveth De perfect. justitiae. Epist. ad C●esiph. without many venial sins, for the which in justice they may be punished sharply, either in this life, or else afterward in Purgatory. Wherefore the best men do very providently pray unto God, not to deal with them according unto their deserts: for if he should so do, they cannot be justified and cleared from many venial faults. And therefore they must all crave pardon for these faults, or else endure God's judgements for them, before they can attain unto the reward of their good deeds. speaker A. W. c Aug. de perfect. justitiae. Austin hath not a word, in that place, of any venial sin, but delivereth the latter exposition, of comparison with God's righteousness. judge me not (saith Austin) according to thee, who art without sin, and that, which shall be in the world to come. That, which he saith shall not be justified, he refers to that perfection of righteousness which is not in this life. Neither saith d Hieron. epist. ad Ctesip. Jerome any such thing; but speaketh absolutely of all sin, as the other places alleged by him to the same purpose, manifestly show. e Gal. 3. 22. God hath shut up all under sin. f Rom. 3. 233. All have sinned; g 1. Reg. 8. 46. If they sin against thee; for there is no man that sinneth not, etc. Neither doth h Gregor. ad Psalm. 141. Gregory make that interpretation, unless we shall say, that there are no sins in the heart but venial. Many (saith he) though i Delinquunt in opere. they sin not in deed, yet slip now and then by vain and perverse thoughts. After he concludes thus: Therefore he shall not be justified in God's sight that k Cord delinquit. sins in heart, upon which God looketh. Where he useth not the word ˡ slipping, but sinning, as before of the deed. Therefore this first exposition hath not so much as any one authority, truly alleged, to countenance itself withal. speaker D. B. P. The second exposition is more ordinary, with all the best writers upon Lib. ad C●●sium cap. 10. Lib. 9 moral cap. 1. the Psalms: as S. Hilary, S. Hierome, S. Arnobius, S 〈◊〉, and others: Which is also S. Augustine, S. Gregory. All these say, that man's justice, in comparison of the justice of God, will seem to be no iusti●e at all: and so take these words, No creature, neither man nor Angel, shall be justified in thy sight: that is, if his justice appear before thine, and be compared to it. for as the stars be bright in themselves, and s●…ne also goodly in a clear ●ight: yet in the presence of the glitt●… sun beams, they appear not at all: even so man's justice, although considered by itself, it be great and perfect in his kind, yet set in the sight and presence of God's justice, it vanisheth away, and is not to be seen. This exposition is taken out of Job, where he saith: I kno●… 〈◊〉 it is job. 9 We take them in neither of these senses. even so, that no man compared to God, shall be justified. Take the words of the Psalm in whether sense you list (that either we have many ve●●all faults, for which we cannot be justified in God's sight, or else that in the sight of Gods most bright justice, ours will not appear at all) and it cannot be thereof justly concluded, that every work of the righteous man is stained with sin. And consequently, the place is not to purpose. speaker A. W. Let us see the other exposition; and first what m Hilar. ad Psa. 141. Hilary saith for it, who indeed applieth it to a comparison with God's justice, but not only in degree of righteousness. For he reciteth there divers passions, of anger, grief, lust, ignorance, etc. which are the cause why we cannot be justified. n Era●…s in Censur. Erasmus hath brought good reasons to prove that Commentary on the Psalms to be none of Hieromes. I will add one, which (I think) may put the matter out of question, that Hierome refuteth that interpretation, which this Papist would confirm by that place. They ( o Hieron. ●plstola ad Ctesiph. contra Pelagian. saith Hierome) delude this testimony (none living shall be justified in thy sight) under a show of godliness, by a new kind of reasoning. For they say that none is perfect in comparison of God; as if the scripture had said thus. Here is your exposition denied to be the meaning of this scripture. What is then the meaning? When he saith (in thy sight) he will have this understood ( p Hieron. ubi supra. saith Hierome) that even those, which to men seem holy, q Scientiae & notitiae Dei. in God's knowledge and approbation are not holy: for man looks upon the face, but God looks into the heart. Now if no man be righteous, when he looks into and considers the heart, whom the secrets of the heart do not deceive, it is manifestly showed, that the heretics do not extol men on high, but derogate from the power of God. Hierome then is so far from bringing that interpretation for his own, that he rejects and refutes it: and, that which is worth the observing, even in r Hieron. Epistola ad Cresiph. that place which this Papist alleged for his former exposition. It is no marvel if these men can prove any thing by the Fathers. Arnobius indeed doth so interpret it. But if we rest upon authority, his bare exposition is not to overweigh hierom's reason. Besides, he is far from thinking a man righteous in such perfection, as you dream of; as it is plain by his former words. Who dares say to God (saith s Arnobius ad Psal. 141. Arnobius) hear me in thy truth, and in thy righteousness? for it is true and just, that he which hath sinned, should be t Acerrimè. most sharply punished. Upon the beginning of the second verse he hath these words: It is thy righteousness, that being Lord, thou shouldest u Contemnas. think scorn to enter into judgement with thy servant. x Euthym. ad Psal. 141. Euthymius denieth that a man can be justified, if he be examined according to God's y Summam justitiam. perfect justice. But he adds further: Or if we consider the benefits of God, or his commandments. So that the righteous break even the Commandments of God, and are unrighteous. It is a needless matter to heap up authorities, for the proof of that whereof there is no question. Who doubts that both men and Angels, in comparison of God's infinite perfection, are imperfectly righteous? And this is all z Aug. contra Priscil. & Origen. Austin saith. But how can this prove, that the Psalm is to be understood of man's righteousness compared with Gods? This is to deceive your reader with bare names of men, not to persuade him by the consent of the ancient. Neither do you remember that a Aug. ad Psal. 141. Austin, where purposely he expounds that Psalm, gives no such interpretation of it; but makes (in his sight) to be, as it is indeed, in his judgement. Every living man (saith Austin) may perhaps justify himself b Co●am se, non co●am te. before himself, but not before thee. And afterward: c Quantumlibet ●ec●us. How upright soever I seem to myself, thou bringest a rule out of thy treasury, thou layest me to it, and I am found d Praws. evil. So that Austin understands this place wholly as we do. e Greg. Moral. lib 9 cap. 1. Gregory is as truly alleged as Austin, and as himself was before. For he doth not so much as allude to the Psalm: but only say (according to that text of f job. 9 〈◊〉. job, which he there expounds) that man, compared to God, cannot be counted righteous. That place of job hath the doctrine, which you would wring out of the Psalm: but where is the proof, that because it is there, therefore also it is here? But let me also show, that this which you rest upon, cannot be the meaning of g Psal. 142. 3 the Psalm. Which I take to be plain; because if we understand it so, it is no reason to move God not to enter into judgement. For what though no man be so righteous as God? If he be so rigeteous, as God requires such a creature should be, it can never hurt him, though God enter into judgement with him a thousand times. So the sentence should be vain, there being no occasion of it. Now the conclusion we make out of these and such like places, is, that no man should fancy to himself a possibility of keeping Gods Commandments, when the holiest men that ever were, dare not stand before God's judgement seat, to give account of those things they have done since they were justified, and (as the Papists say) received this grace. speaker D. B. P. One other ordinary hackney of theirs, is that out of the Prophet. All A lewd metaphor. Esay. 64. It was the fault of your bad horsemanship. our righteousness is as a menstruous or defiled cloth. The which I have already rid to death in the beginning of the question of justification, whereit was alleged: The answer is briefly, that the Prophet praying for the sins of the people, speaketh in the person of the sinful. Such as the common sort of them were, who had more sins then good works, and so their righteousness was like unto a spotted and stained cloth. Now this disproveth not, but that their good works although but few, yet were free for all sports of iniquity: it only proveth, that with their few good, they had a great number of evil, which defiled their righteousness, and made it like a stained cloth. speaker A. W. I will let pass your lewd allegory, and your coleworts twice sod, referring the reader to my former answer. Only this I will add, that the Prophet may well be thought to refuse your exposition, because he speaks in the plural. speaker D. B. P. h Omnes justitiae nostrae. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All our righteousnesses, or rather, to make English of it, all our good deeds. 3 There is not a man, who doth not sin: And, blessed is the man, whose sins be not imputed to him, And such like. I answer that the best men sin venially, and are happy when those their sins be pardoned: but all this is clean besides this question, where it is only inquired, whether the good works that the just do, be free from sin, and not whether they at other times do sin, at the least venially. This is all, which M. Perkins here and there objecteth against this matter. speaker A. W. Neither the former nor the latter can reasonably be applied to venial sin; that being i 〈◊〉. Reg. 8. 46. Salomon's in his prayer, at the dedication of the Temple, praying for the people, in regard of such sins as should provoke God to deliver them into their enemy's hands: The other k Psal 32. 2. David's, after those great sins of murder and adultery. Of that idle distinction of venial sin it is needless to say any thing, till it be better proved. speaker D. B. P. But because some others do allege also, some dark places out of the Fathers, I think it not amiss, to solve them here together. S. Cyprian saith: That the besieged mind of man, can hardly resist all assaults of the enemy: for when covetousness is overthrown, up starts lechery and so forth. Ans. All this is true, that the life of man is a perpetual warfare: yet man assisted with the grace of God, may perform it most valiantly, and never take any mortal wound of the enemies; although through his twne ●…tie he may be sometimes foiled. S. H. 〈◊〉 affirmeth: That then we are just when we confess ourselves to be sinners. 〈◊〉. 1. cap. Pelag. Ans. That all just men confess themselves to sin venially: but neither of these places come near the point in question, that not one good deed of the just man, is without some spot or stain of sin. S. Augustine hath these words: Most perfect charity, which cannot be increased, is to be sound in no man in this life: and as long as it may be Epist. 29. increased, that ●hich is less than it ought to be is faulty, of which fault it proceedeth, that there is no man who doth good, and doth not sin. All this we grant to be true: that no man hath so perfect charity in this life, but that sometimes he doth less than he ought to do: and consequently doth notso well, but that now and then he sinneth at the least venially, and that therefore the said holy Doctor had just cause to say. Woe be to the laudable life of a man, if it be examined without mercy. All Lib. 9 confess. cap. ●3. which notwithstanding just men may out of that charity, which they have in this life do many good works, which are pure from all sin as hath been proved. They allege yet another please out of S. Augustine. That belongeth unto the perfection of a just man, to know in truth his Lib. 3. con. dua● Epist. Pelag. cap. 7. imperfection, and in humility to confess it. True: that is as he teacheth else where. First, that the perfection of this life is imperfection, being compared with the perfection of the life to come. Again, that the most perfect in this life, hath many imperfections, both of wit and will, and thereby many light faults. Now come we unto S. Gregory our blessed Apostle, out of whose Never called to any Apostleship by Christ. Lib. 9 moral. cap. 1. sweet words ill understood, they seem to have sucked this their poison. He saith. The holy man job, because he did see all the merit of our virtue to be vice, if it be straightly examined of the inward judge doth rightly add, if I will contend with him, I cannot answer him one for a thousand. I answer that by our virtue in that place is to be understood, that virtue which we have of our own strength, without the aid of God's grace which we acknowledge to be commonly infected with some vice: that S. Gregory so took it, appears by the words, both going before and following: before he writeth thus. A man not compared to God, received justice: but compared unto him, he loseth it. For whosoever compareth himself unto the author of all good, loseth that good which he had received: for be that doth attribute the good unto himself, doth fight against God, with his ewne gifts: And after thus. ●o contend with God, is not to give to God the glory of his virtue, but to take it to himself. And so all the merit of this our virtue, which cometh not of God, but is attributed unto ourself, as proceeding only from ourselves, is the very vice of pride and cannot be prejudicial unto true good works, all which we acknowledge to proceed principally from the grace of God, dwelling in us. He saith 〈◊〉 there with S. Augustine that in this life we cannot attain unto 〈◊〉 purity, such as shall be in heaven: read the beg●…ing of his first and second book o● Morals, and there you shall find him commending job to the skies, as a good and holy man, by his temptations not soiled, but much ●…anced in virtue. speaker A. W. These places, for aught I know, are of your own devising, to be thus applied: and there fore I will never strive about them, though when occasion shall serve, it will appear that your answers to Augustine's and Gregory's testimonies, are but shifts. speaker D. B. P. Now before I depart from this large question of justification, I will handle yet one other question, which commonly ariseth about it: it is, WHETHER FAITH MAY BE without Charity. I Proole that it may so be: first out of these words of our Saviour, Many shall say unto me in that day, Lord Lord, have we not prop●●cied in thy name, have we not cast out Devils, have we not done many miracles, to whom I will confess, that I never knew you, depart from me, all Math. 7. ye that work iniquity. That these men believed in Christ, and persuaded themselves assuredly to be of the elect appeareth, by their confident The rich man in hell called Abraham father. calling of him, Lord, Lord, and the rest that followeth: Yet Christ Declareth manifestly that they wanted charity, in saying that they were workers of iniquity. speaker A. W. Your proof that they had a justifying faith, is too slender. They called him Lord. What if they had called him Saviour, must they needs therefore have had saith? The l Luk. 16. 24. rich man in hell calls upon Abraham by the name of father; shall I conclude as you do? speaker D. B. P. 2. When the King went to see his guests. He found there a man not attired in his wedding garment: and therefore commanded him to be cast Math. 22. into utter darkness. This man had faith, or else he had not been admitted unto that table which signifieth the Sacraments: yet wanted charity, which to be the wedding garment, beside: the evidence of the text is also proved, where in express terms, The garments of Christ's Spouse is declared to be the righteousness and good works of the Saints. Apoc. 19 And that with great reason: for as S. Paul teacheth. Faith shall not remain after this life: With what instrument then (trow you) will the 1. Cor. 13. Protestants lay hold on Christ's righteousness? speaker A. W. That charity is that wedding garment, S. Hierome upon the same place doth witness, saying: That it is the fulfilling of our Lords commandments. And S. Gregor●e doth in express words define it. What Hom. 38. in evang. Can. 22. in Math. Tract. 20. in Math. (saith he) must we understand by the wedding garment, but charity? So do S. Hilary, and Origen: and S. Chrysostome upon that place. Parables are no further any proofs, than the meaning of them is certainly known: but all your expositions of this, are at least uncertain. The table signifieth the Sacraments. What? Baptism too, and your other five? or how many, and what Sacraments? Besides, your consequence is very feeble. Was no man ever admitted to the Sacraments, that made show of faith, when indeed he had none? Your m Glossa Ordin. ad Mat. 22 ordinary gloss expounds it of being in the Church: n Chrysost. & Gregor. apud Thomam in ●atena ad Mat. 22. Chrysostome of the Scriptures; which sit at the table of the Scriptures: Gregory of the Church; He cometh into the marriage (saith Gregory) but without a wedding garment; that hath faith in the Church, but not charity. I might in like sort examine the rest of the parable, and find great diversities of opinions, as in such cases there must needs be. But to the point. First, I say, many hypocrites are in the Church, that have not so much as a persuasion of the truth of the Scripture, and so absolutely want their marriage garment. Secondly, I add, that this man, and many other, might have a general belief, and yet not rest upon God for justification by Christ; without which faith, there is no place for any man in heaven. Thirdly, let it be granted that charity is the marriage garment; what get you by it, unless you can prove, that the faith this man had, was a true justifying faith? which you can never possibly do. The general meaning of the parable seems to be no more but this, that many men thrust into the Church, who, when the day of trial comes, will be found to have no interest to the kingdom of heaven: which our saviours conclusion shows, o Math. 23. 14. Many are called, but few are chosen. I deny not, that sentence shall be given according to works, but that they, which want works, have faith. This is the point in question, and this can never be proved by this parable. speaker D. B. P. 3. The like argument is made of the foolish Virgins. Who were Math. 25. part of the Kingdom of God, and therefore had faith, which is the gate and entrance into the service of God. Yea in the house of God, they aspired unto more than ordinary perfection. Having professed Virginity, Popish perfection. yet either carried away with vain glory, as S. Gregory takes it. Or not giving themselves to the works of mercy, spiritual, and corporal, as S. Chrysostome expounds it: briefly not continuing in their former Or charity. charity (for faith once had, cannot after the Protestants doctrine be lost) were shut out of the Kingdom of heaven, albeit they presumed strongly on the assurance of their salvation, as is apparent: By their confident demanding to be let in, for they said, Lord, Lord, open unto us. speaker A. W. The very like indeed, and as uncertain as the former. p Math. 25. 1. 〈◊〉 These Virgins were part of God's kingdom in profession, but not in election, and therefore never had justifying faith. The perfection you fancy, might well be attained to without true faith, especially the profession of such perfection, which is all that they had for aught that can be proved by the text. If you understood the Protestants doctrine, as well as you would seem to do, you would know that we hold it as unpossible to lose Charity, as to lose Faith; affirming that he which hath not both to the end, never had either. Their confident demanding to be let in, shows rather their desire, than their hope: and yet how many hope without true faith in Christ? Is it not generally the case of all you Papists? speaker D. B. P. 4. Many of the princes believed in Christ, but did not confess him, for joh. 12. they loved more the glory of men than the glory of God. What can be more evident, then that these men had faith: when the holy Ghost saith expressly that they believed in Christ which is the only act of faith? And yet were destitute of charity, which preferreth the glory and service of God, before all things in this world. speaker A. W. They might q joh. 12. 42. 43 rest upon him as the Messiah, and yet not to justification: for who knows not that the jews, and especially the princes or chief men amongst them, look● for the Messiah, as a temporal deliverer, not as a spiritual Saviour? Beside, they might have a true justifying faith, and love too, and yet be led away, in this point, by vain glory, or fear, as r joh. 3. 2. & 19 39 Nicodemus was, who came to Christ by night; and s Math. 26. 70. 71. Peter, who denied his Saviour by swearing and cursing, and yet lost not either his faith or charity by it, though he sinned grievously against both faith and charity, in that fearful denial. speaker A. W. 5. This place of S. James. (What shall it profit my brethren if any man say that he hath faith, but hath not works: what, shall his faith be able to A. W. Cap. 2. This is your gloss, without truth. save?) Supposeth very plainly, that a man may have faith without good works, that is, without charity, but that it shall avail him nothing. You suppose that which will never be proved, that the Apostle takes works for charity. Do you think that they, against whom the Apostle writes, would grant that they were without the love of God? The Gnostics were never so absurd. But the question was, whether a man that professed jesus Christ to be the Saviour of the world, were not by this saved, how lewdly soever he demeaned himself? speaker D. B. P. Calvin saith that the Apostle speaks of a shadow of faith, which is a bare knowledge of the articles of our creed, but not of a justifying faith. Without doubt he was very well acquainted with it. Without doubt he was little acquainted with that kind of faith, by which Protestants be justified: but he directly speaks of such a faith, as Abraham was justified by: saying. That that faith did work with his works, and was made perfect by the works. Was this but a shadow of faith? speaker A. W. Calvin saith truly, that the Apostle speaks of a dead faith, which (we say) can justify no man; and of faith in profession, not in truth. The former is plain; t jam. 2. 17. Faith if it have no works, is dead in itself. u Verse 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Faith without works, is dead. The latter appears thus: x Ve●s. 14. Though a man sa● he have faith. y Vers. 18. Show me thy faith by thy works. You answer, he was little acquainted with our kind of faith. When you can prove he told you so, I will believe you. But you add further: That he speaks directly of such a faith as Abraham was justified by. True: for of such a faith these men did make profession. Therefore the Apostle shows, that this faith of Abraham was a living faith, that wrought by charity, and was acknowledged by God himself to be such, in regard of the works issuing from it; such as theirs is not, if it have no works, which are the evidences of a true faith, as z Vers. 26. breathing is a certain proof of life. speaker D. B. P. But they reply that this faith is likened unto the faith of the Devil, & therefore cannot be a justifying faith: that followeth not; for an excellent good thing, may be like unto a bad in some things, as devils in nature are not only like, but the very same as Angels be: even so a full Christian faith may be well likened unto a devils faith, when it is naked and void of good works in two points: First, in both there is a perfect knowledge of all things revealed: Secondly, this knowledge shall not stead them any whit, but only serve unto their greater condemnation, because that knowing the will of their master, they did it not. And in this respect S. james compareth them together: Now there are many points wherein these faiths do differ, but this one is principal. That Christians out of a goodly and devout affection, do willingly submit their understanding unto the rules of faith, believing things above human reason, yea such as seem sometimes contrary to it. But the devil against his will, believes all that God hath revealed: Because by his natural capacity he knows that God can teach, nor testify any untruth. speaker A. W. We do not say, that it is likened to the devils faith, but that the Apostle shows them, how insufficiently they reason, from the believing the truth of God, to justification. For the Devils (saith he) believe also; yea more than believe (say I) have one of your preparatory works, even fear of damnation. speaker D. B. P. Again, that faith may be without charity is proved out of these words of the same second Chapter. Ever as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. Hence thus I argue: albeit the body be dead without the soul: yet is it a true natural body in itself, even so faith is perfect in the kind of faith although without charity it avail not to life everlasting. speaker A. W. I answered you before, out of Cardinal a Caietan. ad ●ac. 2. 26. Caietan, that the Apostle speaks not of the soul, but of b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. breath; so that the comparison stands thus. As the▪ body, that breathes not, is dead: so faith, that brings not forth good works, is dead. speaker A. W. Lastly in true reason it is manifest that faith may be without charity, for they have several seats in the soul, one being in the will, and the D. B. P. Faith is in the will. God's goodness is the object of Faith. other in the understanding: they have distinct objects, faith respecting the truth of God, and charity the goodness of God. Your reason is without truth. They have divers seats in the soul, and distinct objects; therefore the one may be without the other. First, I deny the Antecedent, in respect of the former part thereof. For faith that justifies is not in the understanding, but in the will: secondly I deny your consequence altogether; because it proves no more, but only that there is no natural necessity of their being together, in regard of each other. Our doctrine is, that they are always joined, because the spirit, that gives a man faith to justification, doth also give him true inherent righteousness, together with that faith in Christ. speaker D. B. P. Neither doth faith necessarily suppose charity, as charity doth faith, for we cannot love him of whom we never heard. Neither yet doth charity naturally flow out of faith, but by due consideration of the goodness of God, and of his benefits & love towards us, into which good and devout considerations, few men do enter, in comparison of them who are led into the broad way of iniquity through their inordinate passions. This according to the truth, and yet more different in the Protestants opinion: for faith lays hold on Christ's righteousness, and receives that in. But charity can receive nothing in, as M. Perkins witnesseth. Pag. 85. But gives itself forth in all duties of the first and second table. speaker A. W. The like answer I make to the other two points that follow. Faith doth not (say you) necessarily suppose charity, as charity doth faith; neither doth charity naturally flow out of faith. What then? therefore is not every man sanctified, that is justified, I deny the consequence: he c joh. 1. 12. Rom. 8. 9 10. Gal. 4. 6. that believes in Christ, hath the spirit of Christ, and where he is, there is sanctification. That with you add of the impossiblity of our salvation, if I rightly understand it (which I can hardly do, it is so confused) is not to the purpose, yet we may conclude, out of the former part of the discourse, as before, Faith receives in, charity doth not; therefore they are not always together. The consequence is nought, as if virtues of divers effects could not be given by the spirit, at one time, and always keep together in the soul justified, and sanctified. speaker D. B. P. Now Sir, if they could not apply unto themselves Christ's righteousness, without fulfilling all duties of the first and second table: they should never apply it to them, for they hold it impossible to fulfil all those duties, so that this necessary linking of charity with faith: maketh their salvation not only very evil assured, but altogether impossible, for charity is the fullness of the law, which they hold impossible, and then if the assurance of their salvation, must needs be joined with such an impossibility, Rom. 12. they may assure themselves, that by that faith, they can never come to salvation. speaker A. W. I will do the best I can to understand and examine what you say in this discourse, wherein (me thinks) you would persuade us, that this linking of faith and charity together, makes our salvation altogether impossible, because it requires of us the fulfilling of the law, that we may thereby, apply Christ's righteousness to ourselves; which we hold to be impossible. Now, upon this impossibility, it should follow, (in your opinion) that we may assure ourselves, we can never come to salvation by this faith. All the matter lies in this proposition, that the joining of these virtues exacts the fulfilling of the law, to apply Christ by, which hath no kind of truth in it: for first, the having of charity doth not bind us to keep the law, but enables us in some measure to that duty, which we were bound to before. secondly, it is not the lincking of these two that doth enable us, but the having of charity, that is of justifying grace. lastly, though they come and stay together: yet have they as their several natures, and effects, so their several ends also; faith serving to obtain justification, charity to cause a holy conversation. If I have mistaken you, it is against my will●; if there be any thing else in it, that may make for you or against us, let me know it, and I will yield to it, or answer it. speaker D. B. P. Let us annex unto these plain authorities of holy Scripture, one evident It was needles to prove that we deny not. Lib. 15. de Trin. cap. 17. Con. Crescen. lib. 1. cap. 29. testimony of Antiquity: That most incorrupti●… S. Augustine saith flatly, That faith may well be without charity, but it cannot profile us without charity. And, That one God is worshipped sometimes out of the Church, but that unskilfully, yet is it he. Also that one faith is had without charity, and that also out of the Church, neither therefore is not faith: For there is one God, one Faith, one Baptism, and one i●●aculate Catholic Church: in which God is not served only, but in which only, he is truly served: neither in which alone, faith is kept ●…n which only, faith is kept with charity. So that faith, and that only true faith, of which the Apostle speaketh, One God, one faith, may be, and is an many without charity. speaker A. W. In d Aug. de Tri nit. lib. 15. c. 17. the former place alleged, Augustine hath no such word; and if he had, the answer is easy, that he speaks not of that faith, whereby we trust in God for justification, but of that which is only an acknowledgement of the truth of Scripture. In e Aug. contra Crescen. lib. 1. cap. 29. the later thus he writes. As one God is worshipped ignorantly, even out of the Church, neither therefore is not he; so one faith is had without charity, even out of the Church, neither therefore is not it. For there is one God, one faith, one Baptism, one incorrupt Catholic Church, not in which alone God is worshipped, but in which alone one God is f Piè. rightly worshipped; nor in which alone one faith is held, but in which alone one faith with charity is held; nor in which alone one Baptism is had, but in which alone one Baptism is g Salubriter. healthfully had. In which discourse any man may see, that Austin speaks of such a faith, as believes the truth of Scripture. To which purpose, a little before he showed, that the Devils also had the same faith, or at least, believed the same things of Christ, that we do in the Church. And this faith, which is indeed the same, the Apostle speaks of, may be, and is often, without charity. And yet by your leave, a man may reasonably doubt, whether this assent to the Scripture, be wrought by the spirit of God, in every one that professeth religion, according to the truth of his persuasion; and be not rather in many an opinion received from men, as for the most part, amongst you Papists; who rest upon the authority of men, under the name of the Church, in this very point. speaker D. B. P. The Protestants bold asseverations, that they cannot be parted, are great: but their proofs very slender, and scarce worth the disproving. speaker A. W. It becomes a Christian to be bold in matters of faith, especially when it is gainsaid. What our proofs are, it shall better be seen hereafter, if it please God. In the mean while, how strong yours are, set every man judge with indifferency. THAT FAITH MAY BE WITHOUT good Works. speaker D. B. P. THe first, He that hath not care of his own, hath denied his faith: therefore 〈◊〉. Tim. 〈◊〉. saith includeth that good work, of providing for our own: Ans. That faith there seems to signify, not that faith whereby we believe all things revealed, or the Protestants the certainty of their salvation: but for fidelity, and faithful performance, of that which we have promised in Baptism, which is to keep all God's commandments one of the which, is to provide for our children, and for them that we have charge of: so that he who hath no such care over his own charge, hath denied his faith: that is, violated his promise in Baptism. There is also another ordinary answer supposing faith to be taken there for the Christian belief, to wit, that one may deny his faith two ways: either in flat denying any article of faith, or by doing something that is contrary to the doctrine of our faith. Now he that hath no care of his own, doth not deny any article of his faith, but committeth a fact contrary to the doctrine of his faith: so that not faith, but the doctrine of faith, or our promise in Baptism, includeth good works. speaker A. W. These reasons are such, as (to my best remembrance) I punc; never read in any Protestant to this purpose, if you have, you should have quoted the places. But howsoever, (I think) neither we, nor you, will be bound to maintain all the arguments, that have been brought, in all questions, to prove the doctrines we severally hold: If it had been your purpose, to deal thoroughly in this point, you might have found out better reasons then these, though not better for your turn. If you ask where? I will show you, God willing, in another treatise. For the answering of these arguments, is nothing to Master Perkins reform Catholic, nor the reason of any moment: but as it may well be suspected, of your own devising: that you might make babies to dally with all. speaker D. B. P. 2 There are among you that believe not; for he know who believed, joh. 6. and who was to betray him: Opposing treason to faith, as if he had said: faith contained in itself fidelity. This Argument is far fetched, and The more unwise you to trouble your reader with it. What could the doctrine of the Sacrament hinder Judas gain? little worth. For albeit faith hath not fidelity and love always necessarily joined with it, yet falling from faith, may well draw after it, hatred and treason: yea ordinarily wickedness goeth before falling from faith, and is the cause of it: which was judas case, whom our Saviour there taxed, for he blinded with covetousness, did not believe Christ's Doctrine of the blessed Sacrament, and by incredulity opened the Devil a high way to his heart, to negotiate treason in it. speaker A. W. First, I demand in what the doctrine of the Sacraments could hinder judas from growing rich, that the fault of his not believing it, should lie upon his covetousness? Secondly I wonder how it can be proved, that judas did not believe it? If you ground your conceit upon that of h joh. 6. 64. john, as it is likely you do, first prove that our Saviour spoke there of the Sacrament. Thirdly, it is not plain by any place of Scripture, that judas unbelief in that doctrine, opened the way to the Devil; nay rather the text lays the blame upon his i joh. 12. 6. 7. covetousness, k Math. 26. 15. and malice, stirred up by our saviours defect of Mary against him, when she had bestowed such costly ointments upon him, in Bethania. speaker D. B. P. 3 They object that. Who saith be knows God, and doth not keep 1. joh. 2. See 12. Art. par. 2. art. 5. his commandments is a liar. Ans. He is then a liar in grain who professing the only true knowledge of God, yet blusheth not to say, that it is impossible to keep his commandments: but to the objection, knowing God in that place, is taken for loving of God, as I know ye not: that is, I love you not. Our Math. 7. & 25. Psal. 1. joh. 14. Lord knows the way of the just: that is approves it, loves it, so he that knows God, keeps his commandments, as Christ himself testifieth. If any love me, he will keep my word. And he that loveth me not, will not keep my words. Lastly, they say with S. Paul. That the just man liveth by faith. But if faith give life, than it cannot be without charity. speaker A. W. Ans. That faith in a just man is not without hope and charity, by all The question is of works; your conclusion of charity. Not justifying faith. which conjoined he liveth, and not by faith alone. But faith is in a sinful and unjust man, without charity: who holding fast his former belief, doth in transgressing Gods commandments, break the bands of charity. And so it remains most certain, that faith may be and too too often is without the sacred society of charity. These objections were not worth the making; neither will I wast time and paper in examining your answers to them. The fifth point. Of Merits. speaker W. P. By merit, understand any thing, or any work, whereby God's favour and life everlasting is procured: and that for the dignity and excellency of the work or thing done: or, a good work done, binding him that receiveth it to repay the like. speaker D. B. P. Observe that three things are necessary to make a work meritorious. First, that the worker be the adopted Son of God, and in the state of grace. Secondly, that the work proceed from grace, and be referred to the honour of God. The third, is the promise of God through Christ, to reward the work. And because our adversaries either ignorantly With a matter of truth. or of malice do slander this our Doctrine, in saying untruly, that we trust not in Christ's merits, nor need not God's mercy for our salvation, but will purchase it by our own works. speaker A. W. We charge you, and that truly without ignorance, or slander, and according to your doctrine of merits, that you need neither Christ's merits, nor God's mercy, for so much of your purchase of everlasting life, as is made by good works. For if your works be such, as that l Ex rigor● justitiae. in the rigour of justice, they deserve everlasting life as wages, what need they either Christ's blood, or God's mercy to make them meritorious? The m Rom. 3. 2●, 26. Eph. 1. 7. Heb. 10. 1. 4. 11. 12. use of Christ's blood, is to wash away sin. Where there is no sin, what should Christ's blood do? n Rom. 4. 4. Sess. 6. cap. vl●. Now to him that works, the wages is not counted of favour, but of debt. speaker D. B. P. I will here set down what the Council of T●ent doth teach concerning merits. Life everlasting is to be proposed to them that work well, and hope well to the end: both as grace, of mercy promised to the Sons of God through Christ jesus, and as a reward by the promise of the same God to be faithfully rendered unto their works and merits, So that we hold eternal life to be both a grace; aswell in respect of Gods 'gree promise through Christ, as also for that the first grace (out of which they issue) was freely bestowed upon us. And that also it is a reward in justice, due partly by the promise of God, and in part of the dignity of good works. Unto the worker, if he persevere and hold on unto the end of his life, or by truerepentance lise to the same estate again. speaker A. W. The Council of Trent hath (as much as well it could) made a show of some reformation; but indeed retained (for the most part) the former errors of her Antichristian Church, you also (to mend the matter) according to the policy of the crafty Council, pick out a sentence and propound it, as the whole doctrine of the Council concerning merits. The same afterward you expound; but so as that neithe text, nor the gloss are sufficient to make your whole doctrine known to us. For whereas you claim heaven of God, as wages due to the deserts of your works, here is no mention but only of reward; yet somewhat is slipped from you, whereby the Counsels dealing may well grow into suspicion. For whereas that says no more but, that it is a reward, by the promise of God to be faithfully rendered to their works and merits: you tell us, that it is a reward in justice, due partly by the promise of God, and in part, for the dignity of good works. Where I would feign know of you, how you part this debt? what part is due upon promise, what upon desert? For it may well be, though the reward be due upon promise, now God hath promised that it was simply due, for the dignity of the work, whether God had promised it or no: And then it was a small favour of God, to make us a promise of that, to which we had full interest by desert, before this promise, so that he could not in justice, but pay us our wages, for our work, though he had not promised it. And indeed this is the very main point of your doctrine of merits, howsoever you blanch it with the name of grace. I prove it first by the Council itself, then by Andradius the expounder of the Counsels meaning. o Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. cap. 16. Seeing that Christ jesus (says the Council,) * jugiter virtutem influat. doth continually infuse virtues into them that are justified, as the head into the members; which virtue always goes before, accompanieth and followeth their good works, and without which, they could in no sort be acceptable to God, and meritorious: we must believe, that there is nothing else wanting to them that are justified, why they should not be thought p Divinae leg● plene satisfecisse. full●e to have satisfied the law of God, (as far as the estate of this life requires) by those works, q In Deo sacta. that are done in God; and to have truly deserved at their time, everlasting life, provided that they depart in the estate of grace. Andradius, who was present at the Council, and one that debated matters with other Doctors, though he had no voice in determining, because he was not a Bishop: yet he could not choose but perfectly understand the points that were agreed upon: otherwise (we may be sure) he should never have been suffered to undertake the defence of the Council, as he hath been, if not chosen to it. He then thus opens the matter: r Andrad. Orthod. exp●…. lib. 6. pag. 517 518. That everlasting felicity is no less due to the works of the righteous, than everlasting torments are to their sins that obey not the Gospel, nor know God; that heavenly felicity, which the Scripture calls the rewards and wages of the righteous, is not so much freely and liberally bestowed upon them by God, as it is due to their works. Which he proves thus: When Paul (saith s Andrad▪ ubi supra. Andradius) would show, that Abraham was justified by faith, and not by works; he doth it especially by this reason: t Rom. 4. 5. To him that worketh, the wages is not counted of favour, but of debt: therefore if Abraham's righteousness were the wages of his works, it ought to be called debt rather than grace. For the a Mercedis ratio cum nomine gra●●ae ex adverso pugnat. nature of wages is directly contrary to the name of grace. Upon this reason he concludes: That everlasting felicity must not be counted according to grace, but according to debt. And a little after: x Andrad. pag. 519. Therefore if any wages be due to the worthy actions of the righteous, there is in them y Vera & integra ratio. the true and whole nature of merit. This then is the doctrine of the Church of Rome concerning merits; That the good works of them that have the first justification, do truly and wholly deserve everlasting felicity of God, as wages due to them by debt, not by grace. Let no man be deceived, because (to colour the matter) they make mention of virtue coming continually from Christ, as from the vine into the branches: for this is nothing else but the increase of grace, whereby Christians are enabled to do good works, and added no more worthiness to the action, than should be in it if this grace were received from Christ all at one instant, as (for the substance of it) it is at the time of our justification. speaker D. B. P. In infants baptised there is a kind of merit, or rather dignity of adopted Sons of God, by his grace powered into their souls in baptism, whereby they are made heirs of the Kingdom of heaven, but all that arrive to the years of discretion, must by the good use of the same grace either meritlife, or for want of such fruit of it, fall into the miserable state of death. speaker A. W. Infants baptised, if they belong to God's election, have indeed the prerogative to be God's children, and thereby an interest to the kingdom of heaven, as their inheritance. All that come to years of discretion, must bring forth fruits of faith, and shall have reward for them in heaven, not upon merit, because their best works are defective; but only upon Gods gracious promise, and merciful acceptance in jesus Christ. Our consent. speaker W. P. Touching merits, we consent in two conclusions with them. The first conclusion, that merits are so far forth necessary, that without them there can be no salvation. The second, that Christ our Mediator and Redeemer, is the root and fountain of all merit. The dissent and difference. The Popish Church placeth merits within man, making two sorts thereof: the merit of the person, and the merit of the work. The merit of the person, is a dignity in the person, whereby it is worthy of life everlasting. And this (as they say) is to be found in Infants dying after baptism, who though they want good works, yet are they not void of this kind of merit, for which they receive the kingdom of heaven. The merit of the work, is a dignity or excellency in the work, whereby it is made fit and enabled to deserve life everlasting for the doer. And works (as they teach) are meritorious two ways: first, by covenant, because God hath made a promise of reward unto them: secondly, by their own dignity; for Christ hath merited that our works might merit. And this is the substance of their doctrine. From it we descent in these points. I. We renounce all personal merits, that is, all merits within the person of any mere man. II. And we renounce all merit of works, that is, all merit of any work done by any mere man whatsoever. And the true merit whereby we look to attain the favour of God, and life everlasting, is to be found in the person of Christ alone: who is the storehouse of all our merits: whose prerogative it is, to be the person alone in whom God is well pleased. God's favour is of infinite dignity, and no creature is able to do a work which may countervail the favour of God, save Christ alone: who by reason of the dignity of his person, being not a mere man but God-man, or Man-God, he can do such works as are of endless dignity every way answerable to the favour of God: and therefore sufficient to merit the same for us. And though a merit or meritorious work agree only to the person of Christ, yet is it made ours by imputation. For as his righteousness is made ours, so are his merits depending thereon: but his righteousness is made ours by imputation, as I have showed. Hence ariseth an other point, namely that as Christ's righteousness is made ours really by imputation to make us righteous: so we by the merit of his righteousness imputed to us, do merit and deserve life everlasting. And this is our doctrine. In a word, the Papists maintain the merits of their own works: but we renounce them all, and rest only on the merit of Christ. speaker D. B. P. With the former Catholic Doctrine M. Perkins would be thought to agree in two points. First, That merits are necessary to salvation. 2. That Christ is the root and fountain of all merit. speaker A. W. Master Perkins, in the point of our consent with you, meant not merits, as you take them, and as himself before had defined them, but only as good works, which the ancient writers oftentimes call merits: not because they truly and wholly have the nature of merits, as z Andrad. ubi supra. Andradius speaks of them, but for that they are not performed without labour on our part, and shall have reward on God's part in heaven. speaker D. B. P. But soon after like unto a shrewd cow, overthrows with his heel the good milk he had given before. Renouncing all merits in every man, saving only in the person of Christ: whose prerogative (saith he) it is, to be the person alone, in whom God is well pleased. speaker A. W. This dealing of yours is more common with you than commendable. He that meant plainly, would take things as they lie, as far as reasonably he may, and not draw matters out of divers heads, to confound the reader's understanding, and hide the force of his adversaries disputation. But I must be feign to follow you, though you follow not Master Perkins. speaker D. B. P. Then he addeth, that they good Protestants, by Christ's merits really imputed to them, do merit life everlasting. Even as by his righteousness imputed unto them, they are justified and made righteous. To which I answer that we most willingly confess our blessed saviours merits to be infinite, and of such divine efficacy that he hath not only merited at his Father's hands, both pardon for all faults, and grace to do all good works: but also that his true servants works, should be meritorious of life everlasting. speaker A. W. That our works should be accepted and rewarded of God, our Saviour hath merited; but that being imperfect, they should have the true and whole nature of merit, no infiniteness nor divine efficacy can deserve or procure. For it is a manifest contradiction, that this or that work should have need of pardon, and yet fully satisfy the law of God; and by that satisfaction deserve everlasting life, as wages, at God's hands. speaker D. B. P. As for the real imputation of his merit to us, we esteem as a feigned It is not really in us. imagination, composed of contrarieties: For if it be really in us, why do they call it imputed? and if it be ours only by God's imputation, then is it not in us really. speaker A. W. You make yourself more work than you need. Master Perkins doth not say, it is really in us, but really imputed to us; not, as you trifle, by a supposed imputation, but in deed and truth, we being the members of Christ our head by faith in him. speaker D. B. P. Further to say that he only is the person in whom God is well pleased, jac. 2. Eccles. 45. Act. 13. joh. 16. Rom. 1. judicio charitatis, non sidei. is to give the lie unto many plain texts of holy Scriptures. Abraham was called the friend of God: therefore God was well pleased in him. Moses was his beloved. David was a man according unto his own heart. God loved Christ's Disciples, because they loved him. Briefly all the Christians at Rome, were truly called of S. Paul, the beloved of God. And therefore although God be best pleased in our Saviour, and for his sake is pleased in all others, yet is he not only pleased in him, but in all his faithful servants. speaker A. W. It is Christ's privilege to be the person in whom God is fully pleased, as in one who by his excellency of nature being God everlasting, and man absolutely pure, deserves his love: which all other men attain to in their measure, not by the merit, but acceptation of their persons. speaker D. B. P. Now to that which he saith that they have no other merit than Christ's imputed to them, as they have no other righteousness, but by imputation, I take it to be true: and therefore they do very ingenuously and justly, renounce all kind of merits in their stained and defiled works. But let them tremble at that which thereupon necessarily followeth. It is; that as they have no righteousness nor merit of heaven, but only by a supposed imputation, so they must look for no heaven, By a real imp●…, not a supposed. but by imputation: for God as a most upright judge will in the end repay every man, according to his worth: wherefore not finding any ●eall worthiness in Protestants, but only in conceit: his reward shall be given them answerablie, in conceit only: which is evidently gathered out of S. Augustine, where he saith. That the reward ca●… go before Lib. 1 de mo●●. Eccles cap. 25. the merit, not be given to a man before be be worthy of it: for (saith he) v●●at were more injust than that, and what is more just than God? Where he concludeth that we must not be so hardly as once to demand, much jesse so impudent as to assure ourselves of that crown, before we have deserved it. Seeing then that the Protestants by this their proctor renounce all such merit and desert, they must needs also renounce their part of heaven, and not presume so much as once to demand it according unto S. Augustine's sentence: until they have first renounced their erroneous opinions. speaker A. W. We are really members of Christ's mystical body, and so have an interest in the real imputation of his merits. Beside, we have also true, though not perfect righteousness inherent in us, & good works (in some poor measure) suitable thereunto; a See 12. Art. part. 2. art. 7. according to which we certainly look for our reward of God; not for the worthiness of those works, but for his gracious acceptance of them and us in jesus Christ. So that we demand not our reward before our work, which Austin (after the phrase of the ancient) calls merits; but deny our work to be of such a value, as man's pride would make it. Now to requite your kindness, I beseech you by the mercies of God, and the love of jesus Christ, that you do not lay claim to everlasting life, as the wages of servants, lest it be denied you, as an inheritance belonging to sons. speaker W. P. That our doctrine is truth, and theirs falsehood, I will make manifest by sundry reasons; and then answer their arguments to the contrary. Our reasons. The first shall be taken from the properties and conditions that must be in a work meritorious, and they are four. I. A man must do it of himself, and by himself: for if it be done by an other, the merit doth not properly belong to the doer. II. A man must do it of his own freewill and pleasure, not of due debt: for when we do that which we are bound to do, we do no more but our duty. III. The work must be done to the profit of an other, who thereupon must be bound to repay the like. IV. The reward and the work must be in proportion equal, for if the reward be more than the work, it is not a reward of desert, but a gift of good will. Hence follows a notable conclusion: That Christ's manhood considered apart from his Godhead, cannot merit at God's hand: though it be more excellent every way then all men and Angels. For being thus considered, it doth nothing of itself, but by grace received from the godhead: though it also be without measure. Secondly Christ's manhood is a creature, and in that regard bound to do whatsoever it doth. Thirdly, Christ as man cannot give any thing to God, but that which he received from God: therefore cannot the manhood properly by itself merit, but only as it is personally united unto the godhead of the Son. And if this be so, then much less can any mere man, or any angel merit: yea it is a madness to think, that either our actions or persons should be capable of any merit whereby we might attain to life eternal. speaker D. B. P. But M. Perkins, will nevertheless prove, and that by sundry reasons, that their doctrine is the truth itself, and ours falsehood. First, by a sorry short syllogism containing more than one whole It is said afterwards to be nakedly proposed. page. It is taken out of the properties of a meritorious work: Which must be (saith he) four. First, That the work be done of ourselves, without the help of another. Secondly, That it be not otherwise due debt. Thirdly, That it be done to the benefit of another. Fourthly, That the work and reward be equal in proportion. These proprieties he sets down pithagorically without any proof. But inferreth thereon, as though he had proved them invincibly, that Christ's manhood separated from the Godhead cannot merit: because whatsoever he doth, he doth it by grace received, and should be otherwise due. He might in like manner as truly say, that Christ's manhood united to the Godhead could not merit neither: for he received his Godhead from his Father, and whatsoever he doth is therefore his Fathers by due debt. And so the good man, if he were let alone, would disappoint us wholly of all merits, as well the imputed of Christ's, as of all ours done by virtue of his grace. speaker A. W. The syllogism that troubles you so with the length of it, is this: Every work that merits everlasting life, must be done of and by the worker himself, not of debt, to the profit of God, with proportion to the reward. No work of man can be so done. Therefore no work of man can merit everlasting life. Is not this a perilous long syllogism (trow you) to take up more than a whole page? If this great scholar, that so often blames Master Perkins ignorance, would (for I will not doubt but he could) have distinguished the syllogism from the explication of the proposition, he would not have been so much offended with it. Sure there was small cause he should be, if he say truly afterward, that Master Perkins reason was nakedly proposed; or try whether himself can make it any shorter; or compare it with his own tedious answer, containing three whole pages in quarto in a smaller letter. But what if there be another syllogism also implied in this reason? as there is this. If the manhood of Christ, properly by itself, could not merit, then can no man merit: But the manhood of Christ, properly by itself, could not merit. Therefore no man can. The consequence of the proposition is proved: because the manhood of Christ is more excellent every way, than all both men and Angels. The assumption is made manifest; because every work of Christ's manhood, considered apart from the Godhead, would be defective in three points concerning merit. To the two former you answer, that whereas Master Perkins saith, Christ's manhood could not merit, because he did nothing of himself, but by grace received, and that that he did was due; that he might as truly say, that his manhood could not merit united to the Godhead. Your reason is; for that he received his Godhead from his Father, and whatsoever he doth, is therefore his Fathers by due debt. But your reason is false: for b See 12. Art. par. 1. art. 4. 〈◊〉 Christ had his Sonship (as I may speak) of his Father (for the property of the Godhead is to be of itself) yet there is not any thing due from the Son to the Father, more than from the Father to the Son, if they be of equal nature and dignity. So that this latter point disproves the former, because it infers a superiority of the Father over the Son, and so an inequality: which at no hand may be granted. speaker D. B. P. Wherefore we must a little ●ist his four forged proprieties of merit: and touching the first. I say that one may by the good use of a thing received by free gift, merit and deserve much even at his hands that gave it. For example the Father bestows a farm upon his Son freely: Who may by often presenting his Father of the pleasing fruits growing on the same, deserve his further favour: Yea, he may by the commodities, reaped out of that farm, buy any thing that it shall please his father to set to sale, as well as if he had never received the farm from his father's gift. Which is so common a case, and so sensible, that every man of mean wit, may easily reach unto it: even so by good manuring the gifts which God freely bestoweth upon us, we may both merit the increase of them, and according to his own order and promise, purchase thereby the Kingdom of heaven, which is plainly proved in that parable, Of the talents given by a King to his servants; the which they employing Matth. 25. well, and multiplying, were therefore esteemed worthy of far greater, and withal to be made partakers of their Lords joys. M. Perkins then was not a little overseen, to put for the first propriety of merit, that it must be done by a man, and of a man himself. speaker A. W. The first of the four properties is, that a man must do it of himself, and by himself. You answer, that one may merit by the good use of a thing received by free gift. But not if the use of it also be of him, of whom he should merit. The Son that receives the farm, receives not withal continually from his Father the power to use the farm in that sort, and much less the will and the use itself. But a man that hath received grace from God, hath continually from him c Phil. 2. 13. both to will and to do, and therefore cannot properly merit of him. The parable hath not one word of any merit; only it is said, that the King commended his servants for employing their talents well, and gave them authority over much, because they had been faithful in a little; and further, received them into his joy. But that he dealt thus with them upon due debt, or that they did truly merit, is your gloss, besides the text. speaker D. B. P. The second, That a man must do it of his own free will and pleasure, and not of due debt: carrieth in show an opposition. But indeed there is no contradiction in it: for a man may, and every honest man doth, of his own free will and pleasure, pay his due debt: but let us pardon the Show it first to be a fault. disorder of words: his meaning being nothing else, but that the payment of that which is otherwise due debt, cannot be any meritorious work. speaker A. W. Is there not a contradiction in the meaning? yourself confess it by and by, where you expound it. Disorder in words is, when they are not set in such order as they should be: here is no such fault. If there be any, it is that he might have spoken plainer. But any man know his meaning by his words well enough. speaker D. B. P. To which S. Augustine doth answer in these words. O great goodness of God, to whom when we did own service by condition of our estate, as Serm. 3. de verb. Apost. bond men do to their Lord, yet hath he promised again and again, the reward of friends. speaker A. W. S. Austin answers nothing against us, or for you. It is free for God to promise a reward, as we gladly acknowledge he doth, even to those works that are due. But an action of duty cannot be made to put on the true and whole nature of merit, which is the question. speaker D. B. P. In which there is couched a comparison, which being laid in the light, will much help to the understanding of this matter. He that hath a slave, or a bondman, may lawfully exact of him all kind of service, without any wages: Bread and a whip (saith a Philosopher) serve for a slave: Now suppose the Master to be sovereign governor of a state: then if it please him to make his manfree, and withal a member of his common weal, the same man by performing many good offices to the state, may justly deserve of his Prince as great reward and promotion, as any other of his subjects: and yet may his Lord and old Master say truly to him, all this that thou hast done, or couldst do, is but due debt us to me, considering that thou waste my bondman. So fareth it with us in respect of God: all that we can do, is due debt unto him, because he hath made us, and endowed us, with all that we either be, or have: yet it hath pleased him, as a most kind Lord, to set us at liberty through Christ, and to make us Citizens of the Saints, and as capable of his heavenly riches, as the Angels, if we will do our endeavour to deserve them: and whereas he might have exacted all that ever we could do, without any kind of recompense: yet he of his inestimable goodness toward us, doth neither bind us to do all we can do, and yet for doing that little which he commandeth, hath by promise bound himself to repay us a large recompense. The comparison you show us is feigned by you, not intended by Austin: and, if it be granted you, makes nothing to the purpose. No more indeed doth the conclusion of your whole discourse; for it saith no more than we yield, that God will recompense those services, which are debt, on our part, and that exceeding bountifully; but not upon their desert. speaker D. B. P. By which we may well understand those words of our Saviour: When Luke 17. you have done all these things that are commanded you, say that you are unprofitable servants: we have done that we ought to do. True. By our native condition we were bound to perform, not only all these things, that be now commanded, but whatsoever else it should have pleased God to command: and this we must always confess, to preserve true humility in us: yet God hath bettered our estate through Christ, and so ●…ighly advanced us, that we not only be Citizens or Saints, but his sons and heirs, and thereby in case to deserve of him a heavenly crown. speaker A. W. It hath no show of reason in it, that our Saviour should teach his Apostles, whom he had truly freed, that they should say, they are unprofitable servants, because they do that which they were once bound to do, but now are not: as if a man that was once bound to pay double custom, because he was a stranger, should count himself unprofitable to the King, though being absolutely freed, he pay the same custom still, because once forsooth he was by duty to pay so much. I would feign know what duty we were bound to do in our natural estate, from which we are freed in our spiritual: for (to my seeming) our bond is doubled; both in equity, because we have received so undeserved kindness, and in God's intent, who hath given us his grace that we might do him better service. speaker A. W. And this is S. Ambrose exposition upon the place. D. B. P. That Ambrose giveth no such exposition, his own words shall testify: Therefore (saith d Ambros. ad Luc. 17. Ambrose) as thou dost not only not say to thy servant, sit down, but requirest further service of him: so neither doth God content himself with one work or labour of thine; because while we live we must always work. Therefore acknowledge thyself to be a servant, e Plurimis obsequijs defoenerarum. bound to very many services; f Non te praeferas. do not extol thyself, because thou art called the son of God; his favour is to be acknowledged, but thy nature not to be unknown; neither brag if thou hast served well, which thou wert bound to do. These are his words; out of which no man can wring any such interpretation. We owe service though we be sons: for it is plain Ambrose speaks of our service after we are regenerate. First, because he saith, we must work always. Secondly, because he mentions, having served well, which befalls no man in his natural estate before grace. speaker D. B. P. Saint Chrysostome pondering these words let us say, taketh it for a wholesome counsel for us to say, that we be unprofitable servants, lest pride It is as true as wholesome. Matth. 25. 21. destroy our good works: and then God will say, that we be good and faithful servants, as it is recorded. Again, we may truly say, when we have done all things commanded, that we are unprofitable servants, as venerable Bede our most learned countryman interpreteth: Because of all that we do, no cammoditie riseth unto God our Lord in himself: who is such an infinite ocean of all In Luc. 17. Psalm. 15. goodnesses, that he wanteth nothing: Whereupon David saith, That thou art my God, because thou standest in need of no good that I can do. speaker A. W. You should have quoted the place: g Chrysost. ad Luc. 17. Chrysostome in his homily upon that chapter saith no such thing. But wheresoever he saith it (if he say it at all) it cannot prove that we are not bound to do good service in the state of grace; nor that we can merit at God's hands; nor that you interpret S. Luke aright: wherefore then is it alleged? h Theophyl. ad Luc. 17. Theophylact, who follows Chrysostome every where, expounds it of our service after grace; and concludes upon it, that we may not for the doing of any work, necessarily require reward or honour. For it shall be of the Lords bounty if he bestow any thing upon us for it: and woe be to us if we do not our duty. And i Cyril apud Thomam in caten. ad Luc. 17. Cyrill is wholly of the same opinion, who also denies that which before you affirmed; that subjects can deserve any thing of their Sovereign: Consider (saith he) that they which rule amongst us, do not thank any of their subjects, if they do any of those things that are enjoined them; but oftentimes by their bounty stirring their subjects affections, they breed in them a greater desire to serve; so God requires service of us by right: Now, because he is merciful and good, he promiseth honours to them that labour; and the greatness of his bounty overpasseth the pains of his subjects. Your k Glossa Interlin. ad Luc. 17. gloss saith, that we are servants, because we are bought with a price; unprofitable, because God hath no need of our good works, or because our present sufferings are not worthy of the glory that shall be revealed in us. Which reasons of our unprofitableness, l Beda apud Thomam. Thomas also brings out of Bede: so do your m Glossa ordin▪ & Lyra. ordinary gloss, and Lyra expound it, making us servants even after regeneration; as n August. in Psalm. 124. Austin truly saith, that Christ did not make us free men of servants, but of evil servants good servants. speaker D. B. P. And thus we fall upon the third property of M. Perkins meritorious work. Which is, That it be done to the profit of another: and say that albeit God in himself receive no profit, by our works: yet doth he in the administration of his holy common weal the Church, wherein good And bad men's too. 2. Tim. 2. Matth. 5. joh. 15. v. 8. men's services do much pleasure him. And in this sense is it said of Saint Paul, That by cleansing ourselves from wicked works, we shall become vessels sanctified, and profitable unto our Lord. Again, God is glorified by our good works, That seeing your good works, they may glorify your Father which is in heaven. Finally, God doth rejoice at the recovery of his lost children. speaker A. W. Not only good, but also o Ezra 6. 3. & 7. 11. Dan. 3. 29. 30▪ & 6. 26. bad men's services may be said to profit God, if every thing that benefits his Church must be held to be of profit to him. But we neither can profit nor pleasure him, nor glorify him truly and properly, but only in his acceptation. And so whatsoever reward shall be given for these services, it proceeds from God's gracious bounty, not from our desert. speaker D. B. P. If then good men travailing painfully in God's vineyard, do yield Luk. 15. him outwardly both honour, joy, and commodity: that may suffice to make their work meritorious. speaker A. W. To the conclusion you infer hereupon; which is the proposition of a syllogism, to prove the main point that our works are meritorious: I answer, by denying the consequence thereof, and say, that it doth not follow, that our works merit everlasting life, because our travail doth yield him outwardly honour, joy, and glory. The reason of my denial is this; that a slave may by his pains and service procure all these things to his master, and that out of his love to him, and yet deserve nothing at his hands. The assumption that should be added, I denied, and refuted in the former part of my answer. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins fourth property is, That the work and reward, be equal in proportion. speaker A. W. If you pleaded for nothing but reward, the suit were ended. For we (as I have said before) grant, that God will reward the least good work of any of his children. But the question is, whether he do this of his bounty only, or of necessity, being bound to it by the law of justice. This we deny, you affirm; viz. that the good works of a man justified, do p Vere prome●eri. truly or of right deserve increase of grace, everlasting life, and q Consecutionem. the fruition of it (if he depart in grace) and also increase of glory: and further, r Concil. Trident. sess. 6 can. 32. you accurse all them to hell that say otherwise. speaker D. B. P. If he understand Arithmetical proportion, that is, that they be equal in quantity, to wit, the one to be as great, or of as long continuance as the other: then we deny this kind of equality to be requisite to merit: there is another sort of proportion, called by the Philosopher 5. Ethic. Geometrical: and the equality of that is taken by a reasonable correspondence of the one unto the other: as when a good office is given to a Citizen of desert, it may be, that the honour and commodity of the office is far greater, than was the merit of the man: yet he being as well able to discharge it as another, and having better deserved it, is holden in true justice worthy of it. speaker A. W. It is no true merit (such as you avow it to be, in s Vera & integra ration● meriti. the true and whole nature of merit) unless it be fully answerable in value to the reward. Therefore to speak properly, and truly, the citizen you name doth not simply deserve the office, but (as yourself confess) in comparison of other his fellow subjects. So that though there were more in him than in other, why the Prince should bestow that place upon him; yet it is rather a gift than a debt, else should the King offend against justice, if he did not give it him. speaker D. B. P. In like manner in a game where masteries are tried, the prize is given unto him that doth best not because the value of the reward, is just as much worth, as that act of the man who winneth it: but for that such activity is esteemed worthy of such a recompense. Now the crown of heavenly glory, is likened by S. Paul, unto a Garland in a game: where he ●a●th, That we all run, but one carrieth away the prize. And He that 1. Cor. 9 2. Tim. 2. striveth for the mastery, is not crowned, unless he strive lawfully. It is also resembled unto places of honour. I will place thee over much. And Matth 25. joh. 14. Matth. 13. 1. joh. 3. I go to provide you places. speaker A. W. Grace is also in many places of Scripture, compared to seed: For the seed of God tarrieth in him. But a little ●eede cast into good ground, and well manured, bringeth forth abundance of corn. Briefly, than such equality as there is between the well deserving subject, and the office, between him that striveth lawfully, and the crown, between the seed, and the corn, is between the reward of heaven, and the me●●t of a true servant of God. If it be nakedly proposed, there was small cause to blame the length of i●. And thus much of M. Perkins first Argument, more indeed to explicate the nature and condition of merit, then that his reason nakedly proposed, did require it. What shall I need to answer to your similitude of games, since yourself deny, that it is truly and properly desert? But to make the matter more plain, let us a little consider it in this sort; where there is an agreement (as in these games) though there be not properly any merit: yet there may be somewhat that shall come near to the nature of merit. That there is no merit you yield, in granting, that the reward is more in value than the act of him that winneth. Notwithstanding, if the prize (be it what it will) be propounded to them, that shall not only pass other men in the race, but also run home to the goal, in such a space of time, with such, or such a carriage of the body, without any kind of stay or treading a hairs breadth out of a path appointed, with other like circumstances: I grant that he which observes all these conditions exactly, may be said, in some good sense, to have deserved the hire that he laboured for, though it were far greater than such a race could truly and properly merit. But if this man should fail, in many, or any of these circumstances, though he came nearer the performance of the whole than any other man did, might he in justice claim the prize, as due to him upon desert? This is our case in the point of merit. There is no man but he fails very much, and often, in his best works, some less, some more; but every one more or less. So that no man had any cause to accuse God of injustice, though he should deny all men the reward, due to the keepers of his Commandments. speaker W. P. Reason II. Exod. 20. 8. And show mercy upon thousands in them that love me, and keep my commandments. Hence I reason thus: where reward is given upon mercy, there is no merit; but reward is given of mercy to them that fulfil the law: therefore no merit. What can we any way deserve, when our full recompense must be of mercy? speaker D. B. P. In that text is nothing, touching the reward of heaven, which is now in question: God doth for his loving servants sake, show mercy unto their children or friends, either in temporal things, or in calling them to repentance, and such like: but doth never for one man's sake, bestow the kingdom upon another, unless the party himself be first made worthy of it. speaker A. W. What though he do not? and yet it must needs be implied in the text, if your interpretation be true. For to whomsoever God gives true repentance, which is never without faith, to him he will certainly give the kingdom of heaven. But the reason is strong, by a comparison from the less to the greater. For if these outward favours, which God bestows upon them that keep his Commandments, be of mercy, how should heaven be of debt? speaker W. P. And this appears further by Adam: if he had stood to this day, he could not by his continual and perfect obedience, have procured a further increase of favour at God's hand, but should only have continued that happy estate in which he was first created. speaker A. W. That confirmation of his, that Adam by his continual and perfect obedience, could not have procured a further increase of God's favour, is both besides the purpose, and most false: for as well he, as every good man sithence, by good use of God's gifts, might day by day, increase them: And that no man think that in Paradise it should have been otherwise. S. Augustine saith expressly, That in the felicity of Paradise, righteousness preserved, should have ascended into better. And Adam finally, and In Inchir. Cap. 25. all his posterity (if he had not fallen) should have been from Paradise translated alive into the kingdom of heaven: this by the way. speaker A. W. It is not beside the purpose; because it proves the question thus: If Adam's continual and perfect obedience could not deserve increase of favour; then our interrupted and imperfect obedience cannot. But his could not, therefore ours cannot. Your answer is little to the purpose. For Master Perkins speaks not of Adam's increasing his own righteousness, but of procuring, or rather deserving a more happy estate: whereof the testimony alleged out of Austin saith nothing. And surely, unless men will needs be wiser in this point than the Scripture can make them, it is not possible for them to know any such thing touching Adam. For the t Ge●. 2. 17 Scripture only sets down a penalty that should ensue upon the breach of the commandment that was given him, and neither makes mention, nor gives signification of any reward at all; much less upon desert. speaker W. P. Reason III. Scripture directly condemneth merit of works. Rom. 6. 23. The wages of sin is death: but the gift of God is eternal life through jesus Christ our Lord. The proportion of the argument required that S. Paul should have said: The reward of good works is eternal life, if life everlasting could be deserved, which cannot: because it is a free gift. speaker D. B. P. True. But we speak of good works, and not of bad, which the Astle calleth sin: where were the man's wits? but it followeth there, That eternal life, is the grace or gift of God. speaker A. W. Nay, where was your conscience when you cavild so against your knowledge? Master Perkins reciteth the former part of that text, to show what the proportion of the argument required: namely, that the wages of good works is everlasting life, as the wages of sin is death. And thus, without question, would the Apostle have spoken, to make his exhortation to holiness of life more effectual, if everlasting life could be deserved. speaker D. B. P. This is to purpose: but answered 1200. years past, by that famous Father S. Augustine, in divers places of his most learned works. I will note one or two of them. First, thus here ariseth no small doubt, which by God's help I will De gra. & lib. arb. c. 8. now discuss. For if eternal life be rendered unto good works, as the holy Scripture doth most clearly teach (note) how then can it be called grace: when grace is given freely, and not repaid for works: and so pursuing the points of the difficulty at large, in the end resolveth: that eternal life is most truly rendered unto good works, as the due reward of them: but because those good works could not have been done, unless God had before freely through Christ, bestowed his grace upon us, therefore the same eternal life, is also truly called grace: because the first root of it, was Gods free gift. The very same answer doth he give, where he hath these words. Eternal Epist. 106. life is called grace, not because it is not rendered unto merits: but for that those merits to which it is rendered, were given. speaker A. W. S. Austin, u Aug. de gra. & lib. arb. ca 8. in the places alleged by you, neither expounds that text, nor speaks of any proportion, betwixt the desert of death by sin, and life by good works. But, because I am not ignorant, x Aug. de gra. & lib. arb. ca 9 De correp. & great. cap. 13. that it is his opinion, that everlasting life is due to good works, if you will give me leave, I will salve the matter by fetching this due from the promise of God, not from the dignity of the work, which I think to have been his meaning; because he speaks so often, and so much, of the imperfection of our works. If, to countenance your own error, you will needs have Austin thought to have erred (which is not impossible) at the least show some good reason why y Rom. 6. 23. the holy Apostle should forbear to say, Everlasting life is the wages of good works, when it would so fitly have served his turn for exhortation, and when the nature of the sentence required it. z Chrysost & Theoph ad Rom. 6. 23. Chrysostome and Theophylact deny all recompense and reward of labours past, and refer all to grace. He doth not say, that the wages of righteousness is everlasting life (saith a Ca●●tan. ad Rom. 6. Caietan) but the gift of God is everlasting life; that we may understand, that we attain to everlasting life for our end: not by our merits, but of his free gift: wherefore also he adds, In Christ jesus our Lord; Behold the merit, behold the righteousness; the reward whereof is everlasting life, but to us it is a gift, by b Ratione ipsius Christi. reason or in regard of Christ jesus himself. speaker D. B. P. In which place he crosseth M. Perkins proportion most directly, affirming, that S. Paul might have said truly, eternal life is the pay or wages of good works: but to hold us in humility partly, and partly to put a difference between our salvation, and damnation, chose rather to say, that the gift of God, was life eternal: because of our damnation, we are the whole and only cause, but not of our salvation, but principally the grace of God, the only fountain of merit, and all good works. speaker A. W. The reasons you give, why the Apostle would not speak, as was fittest for his purpose, are too weak. First you say, he would keep us in humility; but his principal end was more to be respected, which was the stirring of us up to holiness of conversation. Beside (if it be as you teach) Christians are acquainted with this doctrine of meriting everlasting life; and therefore the concealing of it here was to small purpose. I would your Council of Trent had thought upon this reason; and then (perhaps) they would not have valued the good works of men at so high a rate. The difference, you speak of, was put before in handling the doctrine of justification. Neither could any Christian be so foolishly proud, as to think he could of himself do good works; how then could he look for everlasting life simply by his own strength? speaker W. P. Again, Tit. 3. 5. We are saved not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us. And Ephes. 2. 8. 10. By grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: not of works which God hath prepared that we should walk in them. If any works be crowned, it is certain that the sufferings of Martyrs shall be rewarded: now of them Paul saith, Rom. 8. 18. The sufferings of this life are not worthy of the glory to come. Where then is the value and dignity of other works? To this purpose Ambrose saith, The just man though he be tormented in the brazen bull is still just, because he justifieth God, and saith he suffereth less than his sins deserve. speaker D. B. P. Now to those texts cited before about justification, We are saved Ad Ephes. 2. Ad Tit. 3. But you never proved 〈◊〉, and have been answered. Rom. 8. freely, not of ourselves, or by the works of righteousness, which we have done. I have often answered that the Apostle speaks of works done by our own forces, without the help of God's grace: and therefore they cannot serve against works done, in, and by grace. Now to that text which he hudleth up together with the rest, although is deserved a better place, being one of their principal pillars in this controucrise: It is The suffering of this life, are not worthy of the glory to come. The strength of this objection, lieth in a false translation of these words, Axia pros ten doxan, equal to that glory, or in the misconstruction of them: For we grant (as it hath been already declared) that our afflictions and sufferings be not of equal in length, or greatness, with the glory of heaven: for our afflictions be but for the short space of this life, and they cannot be so great, as will be the pleasure in heaven, notwithstanding, we teach, that this shorter, and lesser labour employed by a righteous man, in the service of God, doth merit the other greater, and of longer continuance: and that by the said Apostles plain words, for (saith he.) That tribulation which in this present life, is but for a moment 2. Cor. 4. and light, doth work above measure exceedingly an everlasting weight of glory in us. The reason is, that just men's works issue out of the fountain of grace, which giveth a heavenly value unto his works. Again, it maketh him a quick member of Christ, and so receiving influence from his head, his works are raised to an higher estimate: it consecrateth him also a temple of the holy Ghost, and so maketh him partaker of the heavenly nature as S. Peter speaketh. Which adds a worth of heaven to his works. 2. Pet 1. Divine nature. speaker A. W. For the translation, we have the warrant of the syriac interpretation, which is all one with ours; as c Aria's Moncanus. your own men expound it, and d Theophyl. ad Rom. 8. Theophylact in his Commentary saith not only that they are not e Dignae, pares. equal, but also that they are not worthy. Indeed the Apostles purpose is to compare the sufferings of this life with the glory of the life to come, and to show how wonderfully that exceeds these. But yet we may also from thence conclude, that because of this inequality, there can be no proper and true merit by these. ᶠ 1. Cor. 4. As for that you allege, of their working an everlasting weight of glory in us, it is to be understood, that this is by God's bounty, not the worthiness of the person, or matter. Which must needs be apparent to every man, that considers what infirmities accompany the sufferings of the best of God's children. By being a member of Christ, he doth not receive ability to merit, but privilege, to be partaker of his head our Saviour Christ's glory; neither by being the temple of God are we made able to deserve; nor by g 2. Pet. 1. being partaker of the divine nature; which is nothing else, but to have the spirit of God dwelling in us, by the graces of righteousness and holiness; which is the image of God, according to which we were at the first created. For these graces, being not perfect in us, bring forth unperfect fruits, which can never merit truly and properly. speaker A. W. Neither is that glory in heaven, which any pure creature attaineth D. B. P. Where saith be so? According to our works, but not for the value of them. unto of infinite dignity, as Master Perkins fableth; but hath his certain bounds and measure, according unto each man's merits, otherwise it would make a man equal to God in glory: for there can be no greater than infinite; as all learned men do confesle. You should have showed, where Master Perkins saith, that the glory of any creature can be infinite; as well as you reprove him for saying so, and that with such scorn as you do. Master Perkins knew, as well as you can teach him, that no finite nature is capable of any infiniteness; but yet he truly denies full proportion, betwixt our present sufferings and our glory to come: which yourself confess to be true. speaker W. P. Reason IV. Whosoever will merit, must fulfil the wholelaw: but none can keep the whole law: For if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, 1. joh. 1. 7. And he that sins against one commandment is guilty of the whole law. And what can he merit, that is guilty of the breach of the whole law? speaker D. B. P. I deny the first proposition: for one good work done with his due Why do you not show what those properties be. Popish learned you mean. Luc. 15. circumstances doth bring forth merit, as by all the properties of merit may be proved at large: and by his own definition of merit set down in the beginning. Now if a man afterward fall into deadly sin, he loseth his former merit: but recovering grace, he riseth to his former merit, as the learned gather out of that saying of our Saviour, in the person of the good Father. Do on him (that is on his prodigal son returning home) his former garment. His second proposition is also false as * J● had been if your strongth had been as good as your stomach. Epist. 29. ad Hieron. hath been proved at large in a several question. To that of S. james, although it belong not to this matter, I answer that he who offendeth in one, is made guilty of all: that is, he shall be as surely condomned, as if he had broken all; See S. Augustine. speaker A. W. You deny the proposition; but if you did remember that the question is of meriting everlasting life, which requires the keeping of the whole law, you would never stick at it, for h jam. 2. 10. no man can be guilty of the whole law, as every one is that fails in any one commandment, and yet deserve everlasting life. The reason of your denial is not sufficient, for no one work done with never so due circumstances, can bring forth any merit of everlasting life, whereof Master Perkins speaks in his definition. Indeed this reason is nothing, but a bare denial of Master Perkins proof. That you add of a man's losing, and recovering his merit, is liker a dream, than a point of divinity, as it may well appear by the poor proof you bring of it, viz. a speech out of an allegory, and that also falsely translated, his former garment, for that best i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. or principal garment. Your vulgar k Editio Latina vulgar. latin calls it the first garment: l Pagnin. Vestem primam, praecipuam. Pagnin that principal, your m Glossa Interlin. interlinear gloss expounds it to signify the garment of the holy ghost: and the n Glossa ordin. ordinary gloss gives a reason why it is called the first, because it is the garment of innocency, in which the first man was created, which interpretation is taken out of o De qq. Euangel. Austin. But to the matter, What reason is there that merit should not be recompensed according to justice? If a man have once deserved everlasting life, why should he not have it? Or if that merit be once lost, how can it be restored again, but only by God's acceptation? and then how can it be truly and properly merit? You must not only say, but show too, that the place of S. james belongs not to this matter, else it is an easy matter to answer any authority of scripture. Let us grant your own interpretation, that he which breaks one commandment, shall be certainly condemned, how then can he deserve everlasting life without keeping all the commandments? And what a strange and unsavoury doctrine is it, that he which hath merited everlasting life may be damned? But the meaning of the Apostle is that the several commandments are as it were several conditions of a covenant betwixt God and man, whereof if any one be broken, the whole bond is forfeited, how exactly soever all the rest have been performed, what merit then can there be of life, where the party is liable to damnation? speaker W. P. Reason V. We are taught to pray on this manner, Give us this day our daily bread. Wherein we acknowledge every morsel of bread to be the mere gift of God without desert: and therefore must we much more acknowledge life eternal to be every way the gift of God. It must needs therefore be a satanical insolency for any man to imagine, that he can by his works merit eternal life, who cannot merit bread. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins taketh great delight to argue out of the Lords prayer: Master Perkins knew how to make better use of it, then to patter it over as you do. He understood it better than you do his argument. What needeth that, if we deserve it? but he handleth the matter so handsomely, that a man may think him to be so profoundly learned, that he doth not yet understand the Pater noster: for who taketh our daily food to be so merely the gift of God, that we must not either make it ours with our penny, or travail? we must not look to be fed from heaven by miracle, by the mere gift of God: but according unto S. Paul's rule, either labour for our living in some approved sort, or not eat. Yet because our travails are in vain, unless God bless them, we pray to God daily to give us our nuriture, either by sending or preserving the fruits of the earth, or by prospering our labours with good success: or if they be men who live of alms, by stir ring up the charitable to relieve them So we pray, and much more earnestly that God will give us eternal life: Yet by such means as it hath pleased God to ordain; one of which and the principal is by the exercise of good works, which God hath appointed us to walk in, to deserve it. And it cannot but savour of a Satanical spirit, to call it a Satanical insolency (as M. Perkins doth) to think that eternal life can be If we will believe your word. merited: when Saint Augustine and the best spirit of men, since Christ's time so thought and taught in most express terms. speaker A. W. You take greater pains to disgrace Master Perkins Arguments, then to disprove or understand them: his reason lies thus: He that cannot merit bread, cannot merit everlasting life. But no man can merit bread. Therefore no man can merit everlasting life. The proposition stands upon the comparison of inequality, from the less to the greater, for it is a less matter to deserve bread, then to merit everlasting life. The assumption is proved by that clause of the Lords prayer, wherein we beg our daily bread, which we might claim of due debt, if we could deserve it. In stead of answering some part of the syllogism, you tell us, that we must not look to be fed from heaven by miracle without our own travel or cost, which is as much to purpose as if you should say, we must eat our bread when we have it, if we will be fed. It is but a mockery to pray to God for it if we know we have deserved it, unless perhaps we think him so unjust, that it is well if we can get our own of him by any means whatsoever. We deny not that we are to use the means both for the one and the other, but that we can deserve either by using the means. speaker W. P. Reason VI Consent of the ancient Church. * De interpellatione David. 4. vel ps 72. Yet is he one of your Saints. Bernard, Those which we call our merits, are the way to the kingdom, and not the cause of reigning. speaker D. B. P. But let us hear his last argument, which is (as he speaketh) the consent of the ancient Church: and then beginneth with S. Bernard, who lived 1000 years after Christ: He (in I know not what place, the quotation is so doubtful) saith. Those things which we call merits, are the way to the Kingdom, but not the cause of reigning. speaker A. W. You that twight us so much with ignorance, and brag so much of your own knowledge especially in the old writers, should have all these places at your finger's ends, but this answer if it were true must needs be more by guess then by cunning. Bernard says merits are the way, not the cause, if he had meant as you would have him he should and would have said, that they were not the whole cause, but the party or joint cause, but he denies them altogether the nature of causes by giving them another place to be the way to heaven. speaker A. W. I answer, that merits be not the whole cause, but the promise of God D. B. P. Serm. 68 in Cantic. through Christ, and the grace of God freely bestowed on us, out of which our merits proceed. Which is Bernard's own doctrine. What is p Bernard ser. 68 in Cantic. Bernard's own doctrine? your whole answer, or only the later part of it? let the reader judge. These are Bernard's words, As it is enough to merit, not to presume of merit, so to want merits is enough to condemnation. If he speak of merits properly taken what presumption is it for a man to demand his right? But because our good works, which he (as other ancient writers) calls merits, are imperfect, therefore our greatest merit is, to know we merit not: for the later part of his sentence, we grant, that it is enough to damnation, for a man to be without good works. It follows in Bernard: No infants regenerate want merits, but have Christ's, whereof notwithstanding they make themselves unworthy, if they had opportunity to add their own, and neglected it, which is the danger of riper years. Infants (says Bernard) have Christ's merits, but, if they come to years, they must also have some of their own. What? merits to deserve heaven? then were Christ's insufficient; but they must have good works, without which they make themselves unworthy of any benefit by Christ. Is not this wholly our doctrine? let us hear his conclusion. Have a care (says Bernard) to have merits, having them, know they were given thee, hope for the fruit of them by the mercy of God, and thou hast avoided all danger, of poverty, unthankfulness, and presumption. We must have good works, else we are poor; we must know they are not of ourselves, else we are unthankful; we must look for reward of mercy, not of debt, else we are presumptuous. So that Bernard requires good works, not as the cause, but as the way, betwixt God's promise, and performance of giving everlasting life to them that are justified and sanctified. speaker W. P. August. Manual. cap. 22. All my hope is in the death of my Lord. His death is my merit—: my merit is the passion of the Lord. I shall not be void of merits, so long as God's mercies are not wanting. speaker D. B. P. Secondly, he citeth Saint Augustine. All my hope is in the death of my Manual. c. 22. Lord: his death is my merit. True in a good sense: that is, by the virtue of his death, and passion, my sins are pardoned, and grace is bestowed on me to do good works, and so to merit. speaker A. W. You leave out the better half of that which was alleged out of Austin; which indeed overthrows your answer, That Christ hath procured pardon and grace for you to merit by: but Austin saith, that the death and passion of the Lord are his merit: that is (by your interpretation) his merit of grace, not of glory. For that he must merit, by well using the grace which Christ hath deserved for him; to cut off this, Austin adds: q Aug. Manual. cap. 22. I shall not be void of merits, so long as God's mercies are not wanting. Have those works the true and whole nature of merit, which receive their worth from God's mercy? If you will answer, that by God's mercy he means not his accepting of the work, but his supplying us with grace to work: I reply, that he may, for all that mercy, want merits: because it depends upon his own free will, when God hath done his uttermost, whether he will work or no. But that which follows in Austin, shows, that all is in God's mercy: If (saith he) the mercies of the Lord be many, I am much in merit: the mightier he is to save, the more am I secure. So that Austin takes all from himself, and gives it to God. speaker W. P. Basil. on Psal. 114. Eternal rest is reserved for them, which have striven lawfully in this life: not for the merits of their doings, but upon the grace of the most bountiful God, in which they trusted. speaker D. B. P. These words are untruly translated: for first, he maketh with the Apostle, eternal life to be the prize of that combat, and then addeth that it is not given according unto the debt, and just rate of the works, but in a fuller measure, according unto the bounty of so liberal a Lord: Where hence is gathered that common and most true sentence. That God punisheth men under their deserts, but rewardeth them above their merits. speaker A. W. Wherein lies the error of the translation? You take too much upon you; as if all the world were bound to allow your word, without any further proof. But let us examine the translation. Eternal rest (saith Basil) r Manetillos'. is reserved for them who in this life have striven lawfully; not as s Debitum operibus reddi●●m. a debt paid them for their work, but given them upon the most bountiful grace of God, in whom they have hoped. He is desirous to pick quarrels that finds fault with such translations. What one word hath Master Perkins left out, or misinterpreted, that might be any thing to your advantage? But the testimony was too plain to admit any cavil, else the translation had been good enough. But your proof is, at least, as bad as your accusation. To prove the words are untruly translated, you tell us, that Basil makes eternal life the prize of the combat: what is this to the purpose? where is the fault of the translation? But let us take your interpretation of his meaning. If the reward be not given according to debt, but in a fuller measure, and yet no greater thing given than everlasting life; doubtless our works deserve not truly and wholly the reward of everlasting life, that God bestows on them of bounty. speaker W. P. August. on Psal. 120. He crowneth thee, because he crowneth his own gifts, not thy merits. speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine was to wise, to let any such foolish sentence pass his pen: What congruity is in this. He crowneth thee, because he crowneth his own gifts, not thy merits. It had been better said: He crowneth thee not, etc. speaker A. W. It may be apparent to all men, who consider this man's course, in answering the testimonies of the Fathers, that he doth it by rote, and not by skill, not caring what their meaning was, but guessing what, in his conceit, it might be. If he had looked for the place, here alleged, he would certainly have answered, that Austin hath no such speech upon that Psalm; and then perhaps he might with more reason have denied that he hath it at all. The truth is the Printer misplaced the cipher, and of Psalm 102. made 120. But Master Perkins truly alleged Augustine's words and sentence, which this bold censurer calls foolish, and confidently affirms, that Austin would not let any such foolish sentence pass his pen. Let himself judge, whether Austin say so or no. We (saith t Aug. in Psal. 102. Austin) that are overcome in ourselves, have overcome in him; therefore he crowns thee, because u Quia dona sua coronat. he crowns his own gifts, not thy merits. The sense is, that if God should look to our actions of striving against sin, as they are weakly performed by us, he would never crown them; but considering that we strive by his grace, he vouchsafes them a reward, though on our part altogether undeserved. speaker D. B. P. But he mistook belike this sentence of Saint Augustine. When God crowneth thee, he crowneth his gifts, not thy merits. Which is true, being taken in that sense, which he himself declareth. To such a man so De great. & hb. arb. cap. 6. thinking (that is, that he hath merits of himself, without the grace of God,) it may be most truly said: God doth crown his own gifts, not thy merits. If thy merits be of thyself, and not from him: but if we acknowledge our merits to proceed from grace working with us, then may we as truly say, that eternal life is the crown and reward of merits. speaker A. W. Austin hath the same sentence, for the substance of it, in x Aug in Psal. 98. & epistola 105. & de gra. & lib. arb. ca 6. many other places, and namely in that you allege, though not altogether as you allege it. For, after those words, If thy merits be of thyself, it follows in y De great. & lib. arb. cap. 6. Austin, for these, if they be such, are nought; those that are nought, God crowns not; but, if they be good, they be the gifts of God. The rest, and the greater half of the sentence is none of Augustine's, but yours; yet closely conveyed by you, as if it were his no less than the former. speaker W. P. And Psal. 142. Lord thou wilt quicken me in thy justice, not in mine: not because I have deserved it, but because thou hast compassion. speaker D. B. P. His other place on the Psalm, is not to this purpose: but appertains to the first justification of a sinner, as the first word, quicken and revive Psal. 142. me showeth plainly: now we confess that a sinner is called to repentance and revived, not for any desert of his own, but of God's mere mercy. speaker A. W. It will not serve the turn to say, It is not to this purpose, but speaks of the first justification of a sinner. For David, who is held to be the penner of it, was truly justified, before the writing of that Psalm: yea the whole course of the Psalm itself manifestly proves, that it was the prayer of one greatly in God's favour, and strongly persuaded of his succour. But what need I seek any proofs? Have you forgotten, that a few lines before you confessed as much, when as you would have shifted off that place, in the second verse of this Psalm, by answering, that the Prophet prayed only for venial and light sins? How then is the case so suddenly altered? Forsooth, because he saith, Thou shalt quicken me. For so indeed he saith, and not, Quicken me, as you write. But this quickening, is not giving him grace to justification, but comforting, and relieving him in the troubles he speaks of; and (as z Lyra ad Psalm. 142. Lyra truly expounds it) delivering him from the danger of death, which hung over his head, by reason of his son Absoloms unnatural rebellion. Objections of Papists. speaker W. P. Object. I. In sundry places of Scripture, promise of reward is made to them that believe and do good works: therefore our works do merit: for a reward and merit be relatives. Answ. Reward is twofold: of debt, and of mercy. Life everlasting is not a reward of debt but of mercy, given of the good will of God, without anything done of man. speaker D. B. P. Having thus at length answered, unto all that M. Perkins hath alleged against merits: Let us see what can be said for them, following as near as I can M. Perkins order. First, in sundry places of Scripture, promise of reward is made unto good works. If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? To him that doth Genes. 4. prover. 11. Eccles. 18 Matth. 5. well there is a faithful reward. Fear not to be justified unto death, because the reward of God remaineth for ever; and. When you are reviled and persecuted for my sake, rejoice, for great is your reward in heaven. And a hundred such like: therefore such works do merit heaven, for a reward supposeth that there was a desert of it. M. Perkins answereth first, that the reward is of mere mercy without Without any thing deserved by doing. any thing done by men. But this is most apparently false: for the Scripture expresseth the very works whereof it is a reward: Again, a reward in English supposeth a former pleasure, which is rewarded, otherwise it were to be called a gift, and not a reward: and much more the Latin, and Greek word, Misthos, Merces, which rather signify a man's hire and wages, than a gift or reward. speaker A. W. M. Perkins saith not, that reward is promised to works, but to them that believe and do good works: where, if there be any desert, it is wholly in the person, if not only. Yea all the places, you needlessly allege, mention reward to the doer, not to the deed. To the former part of the place out of a Ecclesiastic. 18. Ecclesiasticus, I answered before; I add now concerning the latter, which belongs to this argument, viz. Because the reward of God remains for ever; that it is not in the b Greek copy, Caraffa. Pagnin. Greek copy, nor in Caraffas Latin, nor in Pagnines. c Vatablus Vatablus hath it indeed, but within two hooks, as a sentence suspected. The edition of Complutum and A●●as Montanus wholly omit it. Complute●s. A●●as Montanus. There is nothing done by man that can deserve such a reward, though there be something done, for which the doer is rewarded. A reward supposeth some action which is rewarded, but not always upon desert. It may well be called a reward, because it is given in respect of the work, howsoever not for the worth of it. The Greek d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, merces. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Latin merces, signify a reward for somewhat done, either upon covenant, or otherwise, but prove not any merit in the work. speaker W. P. Secondly, the kingdom of heaven is properly an inheritance given of a father to a child, and therefore it is called a reward not properly, but by a figure or by resemblance. For as a workman having ended his labour, receiveth his wages: so after men have lead their lives and finished their course in keeping faith and good conscience, as dutiful children, God giveth them eternal life. And hereupon it is termed a reward. speaker D. B. P. Wherefore M. Perkins skips to a second shift: that forsooth eternal life is an inheritance, but not a reward. Reply. We know well that it is an inheritance, because it is only due unto the adopted Sons of God: but that hindereth not it to be a reward, for that it is our heavenly father's pleasure, that all his Sons coming It is due, because they are Sons. to the years of discretion, shall by their good carriage either deserve it, or else for their bad behaviour be disinherited. speaker A. W. An inheritance is not due to the son only, because none, except he be a son, can have it, but is his proper right, because he is a son. And therefore it is unreasonable, both in Divinity and Law, that the son should be bound to purchase that by his labour, to which by a natural right he hath full interest. This is our case: for though we are not sons by nature, but e Gal. 4. 5. Rom. 8. 17. by adoption, yet being sons and heirs, yea joint heirs with Christ, the natural son, of whose body we are members, the very nature of our sonship, or being sons, conveys unto us a sufficient and certain title to the inheritance. It is indeed the pleasure of God our Father, that we should labour to express our thankfulness, by all holy obedience to him, that hath adopted us for his children, and that we, after this labour, should receive the inheritance; not deserve that by our labour, to which we have already a far better claim, by being sons. speaker W. P. Thirdly, if I should grant that life everlasting is a deserved reward, it is not for our works, but for Christ's merit imputed to us, causing us thereby to merit: and thus the relation stands directly between the Reward and Christ's Merit applied unto us. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins having so good reason to distrust his two former answers, It is not distrust in 〈◊〉 ●ormer answer, but desire to give satisfaction. flies to a third: and granteth that eternal life is a reward, yet not of our works, but of Christ's merits imputed unto us: This is that Castle wherein he holds himself safe from all Canon shot, but he is foully abused, for this answer is the most extravagant of all the rest, as being furthest off from the true sense of the Scripture: examine any one of the places, and a babe may discover the incongruity of it. Namely Christ saith that great is their reward, who are reviled and persecuted for his sake. Assigning the reward unto their constant bearing and enduring of tribulation for God's sake; and not to his own merits imputed, and if you desire a formal sentence, fitting this purpose take this. Every man shall receive 1. Cor. 3. his reward, according unto his own proper labour: And not according to Christ's merits imputed unto him. So a doer of the work shall be blessed jacob. 1. in his deed. And not in the imputation of another's deed. speaker A. W. Master Perkins did not, nor needed mistrust either of his former answers; but because he knew that divers men were moved with divers reasons, he added this third, to see, if by God's blessing this might give satisfaction, where the other were not fully understood. It is not Master Perkins meaning to say, that in these our works there is desert by Christ's merit imputed, but that, if the children of God must needs be thought to receive everlasting life, as of merit, the merit is judge (indifferent Reade●) what there ●s in this reason either obscure or hard, that the Pa●●st in his ans●…e should w●… properly Christ's imputed to them. speaker W. P. Object. II. Christ by his death merited that our works should merit life everlasting. Answ. That is false: all we find in Scripture is, that Christ by his merit procured pardon of sin, imputation of righteousness, and life everlasting: and it is no where said in the word of God, that Christ did merit, that our works should merit: it is a dotage of their own devising. He died not for our good works to make them able to satisfy God's anger: but for our sins, that they might be pardoned. Thus much saith the Scripture, and no more. And in that Christ did sufficiently merit life eternal for us, by his own death: it is a sufficient proof that he never intended to give us power of meriting the same: unless we suppose that at some time he gives more than is needful. Again, Christ in the office of mediation as he is a King, Priest, and Prophet, admitteth no deputy or fellow. For he is a most perfect Mediator, doing all things by himself, without the help of any. And the Ministers that dispense the word are not his deputies, but reasonable and voluntary instruments, which he useth. But if men by works can merit increase of grace and happiness for themselves, then hath Christ partners in the work of redemption: men doing that by him, which he doth of himself, in procuring their salvation. Nay, if this might stand, that Christ did merit, that our works should merit, than Christ should merit that our stained righteousness being for this cause not capable of merit, should nevertheless merit. I call it stained; because we are partly flesh, and partly spirit: and therefore in ourselves deserving the curse of the law, though we be regenerate. Again, for one good work we do, we have many evil, the offence whereof defaceth the merit of our best deeds, and makes them too light in the balance of the law. speaker D. B. P. Instead of our second reason, blindly proposed by M. Perkins, I will confirm the first with such texts of holy writ, as specify plainly your good A poor shift. works to be the cause of eternal life. speaker A. W. The second reason is so clearly set down, that (me thinks) you dare not look upon it, for fear of having your eyes dazzled by the brightness of it. A silly shift to avoid an argument, which you cannot answer. speaker D. B. P. Come unto me ye blessed of my Father, possess a Kingdom prepared for Matth. 25. you: And why so? For when I was hungry, ye gave me meat. And so forth: the like is in the same Chapter of the servants, who employed well their talents: for their Lord said unto them. Because you have been faithful in few things, I will place you over many. And many such like; Not because your faithfulness hath fully deserved it. where good works done by the parties themselves are expressly said to be the very cause, why God rewardeth them with the kingdom of heaven: Thorefore he must needs be holden for a very wrangler, that doth seek to pervert such evident speeches, and would make the simple believe, that the cause there formally specified, is not to be taken for the cause, but doth only signify an order of things. speaker A. W. The places you bring to prove that good works are the cause of eternal life, prove not that the things that were done, did truly and wholly deserve such a reward; which is the question. No more doth f August. in Psalm. 49. Augustine's exposition. We are judged according to our works: so that if any man should wonder, why these are received into heaven, those cast into hell, rather than those into heaven, these into hell; our Saviour tells them, that he doth not err in the difference he makes, which must be according to works: These have done well, and therefore are they that must be saved: Those evil, and therefore are the men that must be condemned. So that his judgement is right, because it is according to works, though works be not the meritorious cause of life truly and wholly. speaker D. B. P. But if any desire besides the evidence of the text, to see how the ancient Fathers take it. Let him read S. Augustine: Where he thus briefly handleth this text. Come ye blessed of my Father, receive: What shall In Psal. 49. we receive? A Kingdom. For what cause? Because I was hungry, and you gave me meat, etc. Of the real imputation of Christ's merits, there was no tidings in those days: And that judicious Doctor, found that good works was the cause of receiving the kingdom of heaven. speaker A. W. In this, and such like sentences of the Fathers we must remember that observation of g Sixtus Senens. biblioth. sanct. lib. 6. annot 152. Sixtus Senensis a learned Papist, and not press their words to the uttermost. It follows in Austin immediately, what is so h Tam vile. little worth, what so earthly, as to break bread to the hungry? i Tanti valet regnum coelorum. That is the price of the kingdom of heaven. Now will any man be so absurd, as to imagine that Austin thought, that the giving of a piece of bread to a poor body was in deed the price of heaven, by which it might be truly and wholly bought? If it be of no greater value, it was scarce worth the purchasing with the blood of the Son of God. The reverend Father rhetorically amplifies the point, to enforce his exhortation to works of charity, which is also our saviours reason in that parable. Now that the reward we receive is not truly and wholly deserved by the works there mentioned, it may appear, because k Chrysost. & Theophyl. ad illum locum Matth. 25. Chrysostome and Theophylact stand so precisely upon the manner of speech. He saith not Take it (say they) but possess it as an inheritance, whereas you say it is both an inheritance, and a reward. Besides l Opus imperfect. in Matth. homil 54. apud Chrysostom. another saith, That God did not make the kingdom of heaven of no greater value than man's righteousness could deserve: and after, not according to the narrowness of man's righteousness. And lastly, God (saith he) appointed not the reward of the saints, according to the reward of men, but according to his own bounty. speaker D. B. P. Here by the way M. Perkins redoubleth that common slander of This is drawn out of Master Perkins second reason, which you durst not propound. theirs: that we take away a part of Christ's mediation. For saith he, if Christ's merits were sufficient, what need ours? It hath been often told them, but they will never learn to understand it: I will yet once again repeat it. We hold our saviours merits to be of infinite value, and to have deserved of God all the graces and blessings, which hath or shall be bestowed upon all men, from the beginning of the world unto the end of it: yet his divine will and order, is that all men of discretion, having freely received grace from him, do merit that crown of glory, which is prepared for them, not to supply the want of his merits, which are inestimable, but being members of his mystical body, he would have us also like unto himself in this point of meriting: and further desirous to train us up in all good works, he best knew, that there could be no And so of redeeming ourselves by meriting. better spur to prick our dull nature forward, then to ordain and propose such heavenly rewards unto all them, that would diligently endeavour to deserve them. speaker A. W. Master Perkins truly chargeth you to make yourselves partners with Christ in the work of your salvation, for he that is by his own works a deserver of everlasting life, is (in some part at least) a saviour of himself, so that howsoever you magnify in words the infiniteness of Christ's satisfaction and merits, yet in truth you make it either not sufficient, or not effectual to the saving of them, who must by their works truly and wholly merit everlasting life, and receive it, not as joint heirs with Christ by the right of sons, but as hirelings for wages due to their works. If you would grant us an assured interest to heaven by virtue of our being sons, and claim no more of God, but increase of glory upon his promise, according to our works, without pleading desert, you and we should agree in this point; neither should we be driven either to over value our own righteousness, by thinking it deserves heaven, or to despair altogether of salvation, because we cannot do such works as do truly and fully merit heaven. That God would have us like unto his Son in true obedience, and patient suffering, we find in the m Phil. 2. 5. 8. 〈◊〉 Rom. 8. 29. scriptures, and believe; that we should also be like him in meriting, when you prove by the same authority, we will believe. In the mean while give us leave rather to rest upon Christ only and his merits, the sufficiency whereof we certainly know, then to trust to our own deserts, which (when they are at the best) seem to us worthy of damnation rather than reward, which notwithstanding we assuredly look for upon God's promise, and acceptation, not upon our desert or perfection, which comes always short of that which is enjoined us. But it is God's purpose to train us up in good works, it is so out of question, n Ephes. 2. 10. for we are his workmanship, created in Christ jesus, unto good works, which God hath ordained, that we should walk in them. And is there no sufficient means (think you) to prick us forward to do good works, unless we may persuade ourselves, we shall merit heaven by them? See the difference betwixt children and servants. And yet forsooth you would bear the world in hand that you do all of pure love to God, whereas indeed you would do nothing at all, but that your pride is satisfied for the present by the persuasion of the good use of your free will, and your hope fed with opinion of everlasting life to be paid you hereafter, as the deserved hire of your worthy works: we on the other side o Rom. 8. 17. being led with the affection of children, p Rom. 12. 1. pricked on with the feeling of God's incomprehensible mercy: q 1. Cor. 15. 58 encouraged by his gracious promises of accepting our poor endeavours to do him service; r Rom. 5. 3. ravished with the expectation of such a reward as is assured us, though without desert; s Psalm. 16. 2. Matth. 25. 37. ashamed in ourselves every day of our unkindness and unthankfulness in doing no more; t Psal 130. 3. & 143. 2. Dan. 9 7. 8. 20. yea condemned in our own hearts for doing our best works so unperfitly; yet by the blessing of God, and assistance of his spirit, press forwards to the reward that is prepared for us, through the way of good works which our father hath set us in. I have been carried on in this course farther than I purposed. Let every man that hath a true desire to glorify God more than himself judge betwixt us and you, out of the sincerity of his heart, whether our doctrine or yours be more to God's glory. speaker D. B. P. The man seems to be much ignorant in the matter of Christ's mediation: I will therefore help him a little. It consisteth in reconciling man to God: which he performed by paying the ransom of our sins, in purchasing us Gods favour, and in ordaining means how all mankind might attain to eternal life, in the two first points, we do for the most part agree: to wit, that oursinnes are freely pardoned through Christ's passion: and that we are as freely justified, and received, first into God's grace and favour: although we require other preparation than they do, yet we as fully deny any merit of ours to be cause of either, as they do. Marry about the means of attaining to heaven, we differ altogether: for they say that God requires no justice in us, nor merit at all on our parts, but only the disposition of faith, to lay hold on Christ's righteousness and merits: but wesay that Christ's righteousness and merit, are incommunicable unto any mere creature: but that through his merits, God doth power into every true Christian, a particular justice, whereby he is sanctified, and made able to do good works, and to merit eternal life. Which ability we receiving of God's free gift, through Christ merits, doth much more magnify both God's grace, and Christ's merits: for the greater that the gift is, the greater is the glory of the giver. And to argue that to be a derogation unto his mediation and merits, which he hath appointed to be the very instrument of applying the virtue of them to us, is indeed under colour of magnifying Christ's merits, to undermine, and blow out all the virtue of them. speaker A. W. Though you deny all merit in the first justification, yet you make every man's free will the cause that he particularly is justified, and so make him more beholding to himself, then to God, because he hath from God, that he may be saved if he will; from himself, that he wils, and so is saved. It is a greater gift to vouchsafe us everlasting life without our desert, then to make us able to deserve it; and more for God's glory that we should have it, of his free gift, then of our deserving by his gift, since the ability only to use the gift well is from him, but the using of it from our own free will, as before. speaker D. B. P. But says M. Perkins, what should we talk of our merits, who for one good work we do, commit many bad, which deface our merits, if we had any. speaker A. W. True it is, as it was once before said, that every mortal sin, blotteth We must not plead merit, because we deserve damnation. out all former justice and merit: but by repentance, both are recovered again: but must we not speak of any good, because we may hap to do evil? that is a fair persuasion, and well worthy a wise man. Of this jest, whereby merit is made to rise and fall, I spoke a little before, and showed how unjust & impossible it was. You may speak of, and do what good you will, but not plead desert, because you have so many sins to condemn you. speaker W. P. Object. III. Our works merit by bargain or covenant, because God hath promised to reward them. Ans. The word of God sets down two covenants: on Legal, the other evangelical. In the legal covenant life everlasting is promised to works, for that is the condition of the law; Do these things, and thou shalt live. But on this manner can no man merit life everlasting, because none is able to do all that the law requires; whether we respect the manner, or the measure of obedience. In the evangelical covenant, the promises that are made, are not made to any work of virtue in man, but to the worker: not for any merit of his own person or work, but for the person and merit of Christ. For example, it is a promise of the Gospel, Be faithful unto death, and I will give thee the crown of life. Revelat. 2. 10. Here the promise is not made to the virtue of fidelity, but to the faithful person; whose fidelity is but a token that he is in Christ: for the merit of whose obedience God promiseth the crown of life. speaker D. B. P. Let us come to our third Argument. God hath by covenant and promise, bound himself to reward our works with life everlasting: Therefore good works do in justice deserve it: for faithful promise maketh due debt. The covenant is plainly set down: where God in the person Matth. 20. of an householder agreeth with his workmen, for a penny a day: that is, to give them life everlasting for travailing in his service during their life time, as all ancient interpreters expound it. speaker A. W. The antecedent being granted that God hath promised to reward our works, your proving that might have been spared, especially being such as it is, fetched from a parable not expounded any where in the scripture. Yea the Fathers themselves have observed something in the parable, as that of their murmuring, who had wrought all day, which will not be handsomely expounded, of the reward given in heaven, as any man may perceive by the divers expositions that are used to help the matter, by u Chrysost. Gregor. Hieron. Hilar. Glossa ordin. apud Thom. in Caten. ad Matth. 20. Chrysostome, Gregory, Jerome, Hillary, and the author of your ordinary gloss. Therefore x Lyra ad Matth. 20. Lyra doubts not to say plainly, that the literal sense is, that in the beginning of the Church the jews that were converted murmured, because the Gentiles obtained like favour to them, which he proves out of the y Act. 11. 2. Acts. And indeed that seems to have been the end of the parable, to show the z Matth. 19 30 & 20. 1. 16. rejection of the jews, who were the first, and the receiving of the Gentiles, who were the last. To which purpose a Hieron. ad Matth. 20. Jerome saith, that the jews which were the head shall be turned to the tail, and the Gentiles who were the tail shall be changed to the head. And for the penny, he seems to expound that of grace, rather than glory. A penny (saith he) hath the figure of the king, thou hast therefore received the reward I promised, that is, my image and likeness, which was also b Cyprian. Epist. 66. ad Magnum. §. 10 Heb. 6. 2. Thes. 1. Lib. 2. cont. jovin. c. 2. Cyprians opinion, as it appears in his epistle to Magnus. speaker D. B. P. Whereupon S. Paul inferreth, that God should be unjust, if he should forget their works, who suffered persecution for him: And saith, If it be just with God, to render tribulation to them that persecute you, and to such as are persecuted, rest with us: Upon the same ground S. Hierome saith, Great truly were the injustice of God, if he did only punish ●●●ll works, and would not as well receive good works. To all th●se, and much more such like, M. Perkins answereth, that covenant for works was in the old Testament, but in the new, the covenant is made with the workman, not with the work. speaker A. W. Reply. All that I cited in this Argument, is out of the new Testament, You mean the book, not the coverant. Matth. 19 Both these are of the old covenant. where express covenant is made for working, and works, as you have heard. And as it was said in the old law, Do these things and thou shalt live: so is it said in the new, If thou will enter into life, keep the Commandments: and life eternal, is the hire, and wages, for labouring in God's vineyard, and not of the imputed justice, or merits of Christ: Upon what doth c Heb 6. 10. 12 S. Paul infer that? not upon that parable; and much less upon the expositions of it, which then were not hatched: but upon the promises of God, made to them which through faith and patience attain to the inheritance of those promises. And this is that justice the d 2. Thes. 1. 6. Apostle speaks of, having no ground, but God's gracious promise to accept and reward our works, though their worth deserve no such recompense. Which e Chrysost. ad Matth. 20. Chrysostom signifieth in his Commentary upon the other place, where he saith, The reward shall be greater than the work; not only in continuance, whereof also he speaketh, but in the measure too. He joins them (saith Chrysostome) in respect of their crowns, with those who have done far greater things than they. So that everlasting life is not truly and properly deserved by works, but is given by promise to them that do work. If you will urge the point of justice, I answer, the Apostle speaketh according to the common speech of men, who count it a matter of injustice, not to do well to them that do well; and ill to them that do ill. And in this general respect God indeed deals justly, punishing them that have behaved themselves lewdly and wickedly, and rewarding them that have lived righteously and virtuously: So that herein stands his justice, in giving every man according to his own works; without the following of which course, there cannot be (ordinarily) any justice. And therefore f Hieron. cont. jovin. lib. 2. c. 2 Jerome truly saith, that God doth both punish evil works, and receive or accept of good works: but not as if there were an equality of merit in either sort of works, to the punishment or reward he gives; only, as he saith there, because he would have none that are fallen despair of God's mercy, he thus amplifies his regard of them; as though it were an unjust thing for God, as Chrysostome speaks, to contemn and forget them that have exercised themselves in works of charity. You have brought no place of any express covenant, but that which being allegorical, and (as I said before) not expounded in the Scripture, can hardly afford any certain proof: and none at all of the matter, for which you bring it. Whereas if the point were so clear, as you would make it, being of so great importance, doubtless it would have more direct confirmation in Scripture, than by allegories and exhortations. But it seems you do not rightly understand Master Perkins distinction; who denies not that a reward is promised for working, and works, even in the new covenant, but makes this difference, that by the covenant of the law the wages is due to him that works, upon the value of his work; but by the covenant of the Gospel the reward is given, not for the worth of the deed, but because the work is accepted for the workman's sake, who by faith is the son of God. Neither of those speeches are any part of the new covenant, though they be recorded in the new Testament. And the g Matth. 19 17 latter was our saviours own speech, to beat down the pride of him that would be justified by the law: but of this before. The parable is often urged, but nothing proved out of it. He that will have everlasting life, as hire of his travail, proclaimeth himself to be a hireling, not a son. speaker W. P. And therefore Christ saith further, I come quickly, and will give to every man according to his works: mark, he saith not to the work, or for the work, but to the worker according to his works. And thus the bond of all other promises of the Gospel, in which God willingly binds himself to reward our works, do not directly concern us, but have respect to the person, and obedience of Christ, for whose sake alone God binds himself as debtor unto us, and gives the recompense or reward, according to the measure of our faith testified by our works. And therefore it cannot be truly gathered, that works do merit by any promise or covenant, passed on God's part to man. speaker D. B. P. But look about you, and behold the goodly mark which M. Perkins sets up: Mark saith he, that it is said, God will render unto every man according to his works: not to the work, or for the work. O sharp and over fine wit? doth he render according to the works, and doth he not render for the works? if the rate of the works be the measure of the reward, that for fewer or lesser works, there is a lesser reward, and for many and worthier, a greater: surely, in my simple understanding, he that giveth according unto the works, giveth for the works. speaker A. W. We deny not that the reward is to and for the work; but that the value of the work deserves it: which worth being wanting, the reward is bestowed upon the party according to his work; not for the desert of it. In another sense, it is all one to say, according to the work, or for the work. As in general he rewards them that do well, because they do well; and he punisheth them that do ill, because they do ill; and so gives to both according, or for their works. speaker W. P. Some may say, if works merit not, why are they mentioned in the promises? I answer, not because they merit, but because they are tokens that the doer of the work is in Christ, for whose merit the promise shall be accomplished. speaker D. B. P. That other addle invention (that works are there mentioned, not because they are rewarded, but because they are tokens, that the doer is in Christ, for whose obedience God promiseth the crown of life) is not worth the confuting, it is so flat contrary to the text: which ascribeth distinctly that reward unto the workman for his works, and not for Christ's obedience imputed unto him. speaker A. W. What text mean you? Sure neither of both those, to which Master Perkins answers, hath any such direct ascribing of the reward to the workman for his works. But it is the latter (I think) you speak of, which you have laboured to confute: what is there in that, but that Christ will give to every man according to his work? That is, as h revel. 22. 11 the verse next before shows, to punish the unjust and filthy, and to reward the righteous and holy. speaker W. P. Object. IV. Good works are perfect and without fault, for they are the works of the holy Ghost, who cannot sin: therefore they merit. Ans. If works did proceed only and immediately from the holy Ghost, there could not be any fault in them: but our works come from the holy Ghost, in and by the will and understanding of man: and by this means they are tainted with sin: as water in the fountain is both clear and sweet, yet the streams thereof passing through the filthy channel, are defiled thereby. Again, they reason thus: That which we are bound to do hath no fault in it: but we are bound to do good works: therefore they are perfect. Answ. The proposition must be expounded: that which we are bound to do, in itself, according to the intention of the commander, hath no fault: or, that which we are bound to do according as we are bound to do it, hath no fault, yet in regard of the intention of the doer, or in regard of our manner of doing, it may be faulty. speaker A. W. M. Perkins fourth objection for us, is proposed unskilfully, yet could D. B. P. What miserable shuffling is this? Which confutation hath already been answered. Was there none therefore, he not answer it, but by relying upon that which is most untrue, that forsooth no one action of the best man is without fault: whith hath been already confuted, and might be by instances of Abraham's oblation of his Son, S. john Baptists preaching, and reprehending of Herode. Stephen's martyrdom, with infinite such like, in which M. Perkins, nor any else will be able to show in particular, what fault there was. Will this shifting never be left? What want of skill find you in propounding the objection? If you could have told, we should have been sure to hear of it. Well, let reasonable men judge. There lacks only the proposition, which any man may supply; and the assumption, wherein the doubt lies, is proved by a further reason. speaker D. B. P. What means this, yet? as if he had propounded it unskilfully, that he might answer it the easier. Is not his answer plain, and direct to the proof of the assumption, in which the strength of the argument consists? But you say, his answer hath been already confuted. I reply, that the confutation hath been already answered. And to the instances you now bring, I add further, that howsoever we cannot allege any particular faults in the worthy actions of some extraordinary men; yet we entreat you to remember that they were men, having i Gal. 5. 17. Rom. 7. 24. the flesh in them lusting against the spirit, natural corruption not wholly abolished, to taint their works; and k Hieron. epist. ad Ctesiph. cont. Pelag. Matth. 6. Luke 12. that God can see an error, or want, where men think the thing cannot be bettered. Again, our Saviour saith: That if the eye be simple, the whole body is lightsome, not having any part of darkness in it: and very reason teacheth us, that a man's action, for substance and all due circumstances, may be perfect. speaker A. W. I would feign hear what you would conclude upon that l Matth. 6. 22. Luk. 11. 34. place of the eyes simpleness. If by the eye you understand the heart, and think to prove that men's actions are good, because the heart is good, either your consequence of the proposition is nought, if by heart you mean intent, (for a good intent makes not by and by a good work) or else your assumption will be false, imagining such a measure of pureness in the heart as is not in this life to be found. Your m Glossa ordin. ad Matth. 6. Gloss upon the place refers it to the intention, but argues not from thence any perfection. If thou do good works with as pure intention as thou are able, they are the works of light, though it seem not so to the world. And n Glossa Interlin. ibid. another Gloss saith, that by the intent works are discerned, whether they be works of light, or of darkness, not as you say, whether they be perfect, or unperfit. A third o I yea ibid. Gloss restrains it more, saying, it is a metaphorical speech, as if he should have said, as thy bodily eye directs thy bodily actions, so the eye of the mind by a right intention directs human actions p In quantum inest ratio boni moralis. as far as concerns the nature of moral goodness. If the intent of the mind be right, the whole heap of thy actions shall be good and bely, so that the work be lawful, q In genere. for the kind of it. I will add no more, let all men judge what truth there is like to be in that doctrine, that can find no better warrant of scripture. speaker A. W. It was then a very silly shift to say, that never any man did any one D. B. P. He doth not say so in his answer. action, with all his due circumstances. Whose shift is this? sure not Master Perkins in this answer. But why is it a shift? because you say that reason teacheth us that a man's actions, for substance, and all due circumstances, may be perfect. I dare not take it for true upon your word, in moral actions, according to the light of nature: and if it were true in them, I should not be resolved, that therefore it were also true in them, according to the law of God. speaker D. B. P. But instead of that fourth Argument, I will put this: If a greater reward be due unto them that do better works, than a reward is due un-them that do good works, whici is evident in reason: But a greatot reward is provided for them that do better. speaker A. W. He that considers this reason of yours, would think, there was small cause why you should condemn Master Perkins for want of skill in propounding the last argument. for you to mend the matter, first bring us out a false syllogism, and then conclude that, which we deny not. your syllogism is false, because the assumption is not taken out of the proposition, as it should be, but is a new matter, as it were a fourth term brought in. for your assumption should be, But a greater reward is due: in steed whereof you say, a greater is provided. Now to be provided, and to be due, is not all one, because many things are provided for mere gifts, which are no way due. your conclusion must be, Therefore a reward is due to them which do good works. who saith otherwise? but this due is of promise, not of desert. speaker D. B. P. As S. Augustine grounded upon God's word, proveth in sundry places: Serm. 46. de verbis Dom. 1. Cor. 15. Serm. 95. Lib. de virg. cap. 44. namely, upon that, For star dissereth from star in glory, so shall be the resurrection from the dead; specifying that virginity shall shine after one sort, chastity in wedlock after another, and holy widowhood yet after another: all (saith he) shall be there, but they shine diversly: And of the same work affirmeth, That martyrdom, shall be higher rewarded, than any other work. The like doth he upon those words, One ground shall yield thirty fold, another threescore fold, another an hundred fold: Comparing chastity in wedlock to the thirty, in widows to the sixty, and in virgins to the hundred. But most directly in his sixty seven treatise upon S. john's Gospel upon this verse: In my Father's house are many mansions: where he saith, that albeit some be holier, juster, and more valiant than others, yet there shall be fit rooms for them all, where every one is to receive his place according unto his merit. That penny spoken Matth. 20. of (by which saith he is signified eternal life) shall be given to every man equally: because every one shall live for ever, and not one longer than another: but many mansions do signify the different dignities of merits in the same everlasting life. speaker A. W. And Saint Gregory in most express terms, doth teach the same doctrine, Lib. 4. mo●. cap. 42. saying: Because in this life there is a difference of works amongst us, there shall be in the other life without all doubt a distinction of dignities: that as one here exceedeth another in merit, so there one surpasseth another i● reward. Finally, S. Augustine, and S. Hierome, condemn it De haeres. haer. 82. Lib. 2. cont. jovin. as an heresy, to hold that there is not diversity of merits in this life, and rewards in the next: Whereon followeth most manifestly, that there be merits and rewards. All this labour of heaping up needless testimonies might well have been spared, especially since they prove not that which you should have assumed, That greater reward is due; but that which you did assume, That greater reward is provided. Wherefore letting pass the three former, which are nothing to the purpose; to the r Aug. ●n joh. tract. 67. last I answer: that by merits, good works are meant, as by meriting, working, not that which is truly and properly desert. Beside, it is expressly set down in that testimony out of Gregory, wherein that which is termed work in the former part of the sentence, in the latter is called merit. The same answer I make to the other two testimonies of Austin and Jerome: granting a diversity of reward, according to the divers dignity and number of good works. speaker W. P. Obict. V. Christ saith revel. 3. 4. that the faithful in the Church of Sardis shall walk with him in white: for they are worthy: therefore believers merit. Answ. Every believer is worthy to walk with Christ; yet not worthy in himself, but in Christ, to whom he is united, and made bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh. And by reason of this conjunction it is, that men are said to be worthy, because they are enriched with Christ's merits and righteousness. speaker A. W. The fifth reason is taken out of those texts, which reach that men are worthy of eternal life: They shall walk with me in whites, because they D. B. P. Apoc. 3. Sap. 3. 2. Thes. 1. Luk. 20. 35. be worthy. God proved them, and found them worthy of himself. That you may be esteemed worthy of the kingdom of God: Now if men be worthy of eternal life, it must needs be granted that they have deserved it. I deny the consequence of the proposition. First, because infants (at the least in your doctrine) are worthy of everlasting life; and yet it were hard to say, they have deserved it. Secondly, in that we are the sons of God, we have a certain worthiness of our inheritance: yet have we not truly and wholly deserved everlasting life. Thirdly, there is also a worthiness in God's acceptation, whereof the Apostle speaks, s 2. Thes. 1. 5. That you may be esteemed worthy: and our Saviour, t Luk. 20. 35. They that shall be esteemed worthy. Fourthly, they that are justified, shall have a special worthiness in themselves, when they come to receive their inheritance, because they shall be truly and fully sanctified. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins answereth: that they were indeed worthy, but not for their own merits, but for Christ's imputed unto them. This is his only refuge, Not in words. yet hath he not, nor cannot show any one text in Scripture that speaketh so. speaker A. W. Master Perkins rightly understanding the question, that it is of such a worthiness, as truly and fully deserves everlasting life for wages, denies that they of Sardis were in that sort worthy of heaven, by any other thing, than by being members of Christ's mystical body, and so partakers of his worthiness, in their measure. Which Master Perkins proves, though he name not the place, by showing, that u Ephes. 5. 30. we are bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh, receiving x 1. Cor. 15. 22. as our resurrection, so everlasting life, by, and with him our head. speaker D. B. P. But to refel him, turn only to the places, and there you shall find, Apoc. 3. that this worthiness rose of good works, as Christ saith: I know thy works, and find them not full: yet there be some amongst yo●, who ●aue not defiled their garments (but have their works full) they shall walk with me in whites, because they be worthy. speaker A. W. That this worthiness is not such, as the Council of Trent speaks of, that truly and wholly deserves heaven as wages, it may easily appear; because the y revel. 3. 4. holy Ghost gives this commendation, rather for refraining from those sins, whereof the Sardians generally were guilty, than for any principal works of obedience. Now whereas you add, but have their works full, it is without authority from the text, though it be in the second verse. Yea the change of the phrase in this verse, may cause us to think, that by that want in the former verse, some actual transgressions are signified, by which their garments were defiled, as the holy Ghost here speaks. So that this worthiness was by Christ's acceptation, and in comparison of the rest of the Sardians. speaker D. B. P. And By sustaining persecutions, they were made worthy of that Kingdom. 2. Thes. 1. And in the words following, the Apostle signifieth, that it is as just for God to requite good works with the joys of heaven, as he doth punish wicked, with the pains of hell. speaker A. W. That which I said of the Sardians is evident (as I showed before) of the z 2. Thes. 1. 5. Vers. 6. Thessalonians, who were esteemed worthy for their works. Yet not precisely for the value of them, being such as they were bound to do, and could not without sin leave undone. The justice of God, which you urge out of the Apostle, proves nothing but this, that in justice the persecutors are to be punished, and the persecuted relieved. But it doth not prove an equality of desert on each side; because to suffer for Christ, if occasion be, is a duty; and many imperfections overtake the best in suffering, and overthrow all true merit. speaker W. P. Object. VI 2. Tim. 4. 8. Everlasting life is termed a crown, and a crown of righteousness to be given of a just judge: therefore man for his part by his works deserves the same. Answ. Everlasting life is called a crown only in resemblance. For as he which runneth a race, must continue and run to the end, and then be crowned: even so must we continue to walk in good works unto the end, and then receive eternal life. speaker D. B. P. The sixth reason M. Perkins delivereth thus: Eternal life is termed a crown, and a crown of righteousness to be given by a just judge: 2. Tim. 4. therefore in this life it must be justly deserved, otherwise it were not well called a crown of justice, nor could be said to be rendered by a just judge. speaker A. W. It should seem you like the delivering of it well enough, or else it is to be presumed you would have mended it, or blamed it; whereof you make a show by your preface to it. The proof of the consequence, which you add, will be discussed in your answers. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins answereth, that it is called a crown by resemblance, because it is given in the end of the life, as the crone is given in the end of the race. speaker A. W. Master Perkins denies the consequence of the Enthymem, viz. that therefore everlasting life must be deserved, because it is called a crown. He adds the reason of his denial; That it is called a crown, not because it is deserved, but because it is given as a reward, after we are come to the end of our race; as the a 2. Tim. 4. 7, 8 Apostle shows plainly, I have fought a good fight, and have finished my course, I have kept the faith, henceforth is laid up for me a crown of righteousness: he saith not, therefore I have deserved the crown. speaker A. W. If that were all the cause, and that there were no respect to be had so D. B. P. A gross comparison. We grant the likeness, but deny the equality. former deserts, it might then as well be called a halter by resemblance, because that also is given in the end of life: and in their opinion, more properly: because all their works are defiled like a menstruous cloth: and a halter is the end of such wicked works. But as a halter is due to a thief, so is a crown of glory the just reward of the righteous man. That I may omit your lewd dallying, in saying that everlasting life might, in that respect, as well be called a halter; consider whether your answer be not absurd. For that which is given upon continuance of walking in good works, as Master Perkins saith the crown is, cannot in any reason be as well termed a halter, as a crown: though there be not in the works, the true and whole nature of merit, to deserve the crown. Everlasting life (saith b Glossa Ordin. ad 2. Tim. 4. 8 & Lombardus ibi. your gloss) is as it were the reward of faith, and God seems to pay it, c Quasi ●●●ces. Videtu● deus tanquam debitum reddere. gloss. as it were debt. speaker W. P. And it is called a crown of righteousness, not because it belongs to any man by due and desert; but because God hath bound himself by a promise to give it, in performing whereof he is termed just: and by virtue of this promise it is obtained, and no otherwise. These are the principal objections, by which we may judge what the rest are. And thus we see what is the truth, namely, that merit is necessary to salvation: yet neither merit of man's work, or person, but the merit of Christ imputed to us, whereby we being in him do procure and deserve the favour of God and life eternal. speaker D. B. P. Secondly he answereth, that it is called a crown of justice, because God hath bound himself by his promise to give it: here then at length we have by his own confession, that by God's promise, eternal life is He never denied it. Is every thing deserved that is due by promise? Math. 20. Math. 25. due debt unto the righteous: but as having over-shot himself, he adds, not for any desert of theirs, but only for the promise sake. But as you have heard before, out of S. Matthew, that promise was made for working the time of our life in his vine yard, and so there was some desert on their part, and the servants were rewarded, because they employed their talents well. speaker A. W. Needs it any defence to say, it is due debt by promise, but not upon desert? Who knows not, that (for the most part) these two are, if not contrary, at the least divers. Therefore rather you shoot beyond true reason, than Master Perkins overshot himself. That which you repeat out of Saint Matthew, was answered before. speaker D. B. P. And in this very place, S. Paul reckoneth up his good services, for which the just judge would render him a crown of justice: and therefore the justice is not only in respect of God's promise. speaker A. W. S. Paul reckons up his good services: and good reason; for the reward is not due to any by promise, but to them that do good works. For else what should be rewarded? But why should it be called a crown of justice? Because it is given to the just (saith d Thomas ad 2. Tim. 4. 7. Thomas) e Secundunc opera justa. according to their just works. And in that respect God is called a just judge, in giving this crown: because he gives good for good. Yea that very justice, whereby good is given for good, is not without mercy, saith the f Glossa. Ordin. bona pro bonis. gloss, and g Lombardus ibi. Lombard. speaker D. B. P. And if you will not believe me, proving that I say out of the very text, rather than M Perkins on his bare word, let S. Augustine be arbitrator between us: who most deeply considereth of every word in this sentence: Let us hear (saith he) the Apostle speaking, when he approached near unto his passion, I have (quoth he) fought a good fight, I have accomplished Lib. 50. hom. Hom. 4. my course, I have kept the faith: concerning the rest, ●there is laid up for me a crown of justice, which our Lord will render unto me in that day, a just judge: And not only to me, but to them also that love his coming: He saith that our Lord a just judge will render unto him a Crown: he therefore doth owe it, and as a just judge will pay it. For the work being regarded, the reward cannot be denied. I have fought a good fight, is a work: I have accomplished my course, is a work: I have kept the faith, is a work. There is laid up for me a crown of justice, this is the reward. So that you see most clearly by this most learned Father's judgement, that the reward is due for the work sake, and not only for the promise of God. speaker A. W. This place of Austin is brought as a proof, that a man hath nothing of himself, which he hath not received. Whereas if your doctrine of merit and free will were true, a man, having grace from God, whereby he is enabled to work, might of his own free will so use this grace, that everlasting life should be due to him, as wages for his work. But if these good works proceed from grace, not only in respect of our ability to do them, but of the particular actions; what true merit can there be in them? Immediately after the words you allege, it follows h Aug. lib. 50. Hom. Homil. 14. in Austin: In the reward thou dost nothing, in the work nothing alone. The crown is from him, the work from thyself; yet not without his help. Which help we must understand to be more than an ability to work; or else, as I said, our free will shall have the chief commendation in all our good works. But to the testimony; we grant that the reward is due to the work, which is your conclusion out of Austin; but we deny that it is due upon desert of the work. For neither doth the work, if it were perfectly done, truly and properly deserve the reward, because it is a matter of duty, and but one work, whereas many thousands are due to make up true merit by works; and being imperfect, as all our best works are, it is so far from deserving everlasting life, that it rather might increase our sins, if God should strictly in justice examine it. speaker D. B. P. See him upon that verse of the Psalm. I will sing unto thee O Lord, Psal. 100 mercy and judgement. Where he concludes, that God in judgement will on't of his justice crown those good works, which he of mercy had given grace to do. speaker A. W. We do wholly subscribe to S. Austin, That God cannot but reward our works, because of his promise, and because they are such, for the substance of them, as he hath enjoined. And so (as I have said often) in general justice, they that do well must have well. But we add hereunto, first, that these works did not by their due worth wring this promise from God, as if he had been unjust, unless he had made it. Which must have been, if they be truly and wholly such merits, that everlasting life is necessarily due to them as wages. Secondly, the promise being made, we say further, that none of our works are so exactly performed, according to the rule of God's justice, but that he might justly deny us the reward promised. Thirdly, we affirm, that it is not everlasting life, or the kingdom of heaven properly taken, which God hath promised and owes to our works, but only the measure of glory in heaven. The kingdom is due to us, as an inheritance, by the right of sons; the divers measure of glory is met out to every one according to his works, and for his works; yet not upon their desert, but upon God's gracious promise, and merciful acceptance, pardoning our sins, and rewarding us above our deserts. speaker D. B. P. And that the reader may understand, that not only S. Augustine doth so confidently teach this doctrine of merits, (which M. Perkins blushed not to term the invention of Satan.) I will fold up this question with some testimonies of the most ancient and best Authors. speaker A. W. Saint Ignatius the Apostles auditor saith. Give me leave to become the Epist. add Roman. food of beasts, that I may by that means merit and win God. For answer to the testimonies of the ancient writers, we must remember, that to merit doth signify in them to work, and to obtain, and that very commonly: and in like sort, merits are ordinarily taken for good works. Beside, their testimonies for the most part entreat of reward, not of wages; and we deny not, that God will reward every least good work of his children. Now to the several allegations; we may easily observe, in this i Ignatius ad Roman. Ignatius, that overuehement desire of martyrdom, that carried away very many, as it appears by Gregory k Greg. Nazian. monod. in obitum Ba●ilij. Nazianzen, who commends Basils' father, because he had no such zeal without knowledge, and condemns (though not by name) this counterfeit Ignatius, who is so hot upon martyrdom, that he sayeth, he will provoke the wild beasts to tear him in pieces, if they (as sometimes it fell out, questionless by l Dan. 6. 22. Hebr. 11. 33. Gods great providence) should refrain to fasten on him. Now if this man should somewhat overprize his deserts, I think it were no great wonder: but I had rather excuse him, if you will let me, and say, he means by meriting nothing but enjoying God, which he was to obtain after this life, and therefore so much longed for his dissolution. As for the other word win, it is your addition, to make the allegation the more likely. If you will not allow of this excuse, I say plainly, this man's testimony is nothing worth, because he was of little judgement in divinity, as it is evident by his whole epistle, and especially by this absurd sentence. Whosoever (saith he) doth not fast every Lord's day or Sabbath, except Easter day only, is a murderer of Christ: but he may serve your turn for number, though not for weight. D. B. P. Apolog. 2. aunt med. Worthy of Gods will and counsel is no English nor sense. speaker A. W. justine a glorious Martyr of the next age hath these words, speaking in the name of all Christians. We think that men who by works have showed themselves worthy of the will, and counsel of God, shall by their merits live and reign with him, free from all corruption, and perturbation. m justin. Apo. log. ad Anton. justin neither speaks, nor thinks in that place of the question in hand, but writing to a heathen Emperor, tells him that Christians hold this doctrine, That they which show themselves n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. conformable, or fitted to Gods will by their works, o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, dignatum iri. shall be vouchsafed his company, and reign with him free from corruption and passion. If you will have the word translated thought worthy, it is all one, though the latin be otherwise, and the meaning of the other word, as the case in the greek shows, and the translation, both being the Dative, howsoever you mistook the latin, which is not the Ablative case, as you translate it. speaker A. W. Saint Ireneus saith. We esteem that crown to be precious, which i● D. B. P. Lib. 〈◊〉. con. hae●●●. cap. ●2. gotten by combat and suffering for God's sake. Irenaeus te●s us, that the Apostle Paul exhorts to strive, or fight, that we may think the crown precious, for indeed (as he saith p 〈◊〉. lib. 4. cap. 27. there) we make most account of those things which we hardliest come by, so that the more pains we take in striving, the more precious shall we think the crown to be: this is Irenaeus true meaning, as any man may see that will look on the place. But what is this to prove, that our works deserve everlasting life for wages? as for the suffering for God's sake, it is of your devising, and adding, not of Irenaeus writing. speaker D. B. P. Saint Basill. All we that walk the way of the Gospel, as Merchants Ora. in initium prou. Lib. de Spirit. Sancto c. 24. do, buy and get the possession of heavenly things, by the works of the commandments. A man is saved by works of justice. We acknowledge a comparison of likeness betwixt Merchants and Christians, but we deny an equality of value in the commodities we are to utter: which we do the rather, because in those parables, to which q Basil. Orat. in initium Proverb. Basil in this place alludes, r Mat. 13. 44. 45. Though the field and the pearl are said to be bought, yet no man imagines that the price paid for them is of equal worth to the purchase: neither doth it follow, that if (as Basil saith) a man be saved by s Per iusti●am operum. the righteousness of works, than his works are of full value to the salvation he obtains by them. speaker D. B. P. Saint Cyprian, If the day of our return shall find us unloaden, swi●t, Serm. de el●● mo●. in fine. and running in the race of works, our Lord will not fail to reward our merits. He will give for works, to those that win in peace, a white crown, and for martyrdom in persecution, he will redouble unto them a purple crown. speaker A. W. What saith t Cyprian servant de ●l●●mos. in fine. Cyprian, but that God, if we persevere to the end in well doing, will reward our works according to the diversity of them, with less or more glory? we say as much. But the question is, whether our works fully deserve everlasting life or no. speaker A. W. Saint Hilary. The kingdom of heaven, is the hire and reward of them that live well and perfectly. D. B. P. Can. 5. in Mat. u Hilar. in Mat. Can. 5. Hilary expounding that exhortation of our Saviour, x Math. 6. 33. seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, counsels men to seek it y Vitae nostrae stipendijs. with the labour of their life, and this (saith he) is the reward (for there is but one word merces) of them, that live well and perfectly: he saith not, that any man's work is perfect enough truly and wholly to deserve it. speaker A. W. Saint Ambrose. Is it not evident that there remaineth after this life, either reward for merits, or punishment? D. B. P. Lib. 1. de office cap. 15. z Ambros. de Offic. lib. 1. cap. 15. Ambrose speaks not of the value of good works, but labours to take away that offence that commonly troubles men, when they see that evil men fare better than good in this world: he answers, that in the world to come the case shall be altered, the one shall be rewarded, and the other punished for their works, which he calls merits. speaker D. B. P. Saint Hierome. Now after Baptism it appertaineth to our travails, according unto the diversity of virtue to prepare for us different rewards. speaker A. W. You might as well have left out Jerome's testimony, as you do the quoting of it, for it makes nothing for you, nor against us, that we are to prepare different rewards for ourselves, according to the diversity of virtue, what if he had said merit? do we not grant it? But where is deserving everlasting life in Jerome's words? speaker A. W. Saint Bernard. Provide that thou have merits, for the want of them is a pernitions' poverty. D. B. P. Serm. 68 in Cant. Penury of works (saith a Bernard. ser. 68 in Cantic. Bernard) is dangerous poverty, who denies it? it follows, but presumption of spirit is deceitful riches. who presumes if he do not, that thinks himself absolutely worthy of heaven, as wages? speaker D. B. P. Briefly that this was the universal Doctrine of all good Christians, above a thousand years past, is declared in the Council of Arausicane. Reward is debt unto good works, if they be done, but grace which was not debt, goeth before that they may be done. These testimonies of the Can. 18. most ancient, and best learned Christians may suffice, to batter the brazen forehead of them that affirm the Doctrine of merits, to be a Satanical invention, and to settle all them, that have care of their salvation, in As pride is Satanical. the most pure doctrine of the Catholic Church. The b Concil. Arausic. can. 18. Council of Orange saith nothing that was not said before in the testimonies of the Fathers, neither needs any other answer. The doubt is not, whether reward be due to good works, but by what right it is due, whereof the Council saith nothing expressly. The doctrine of merits, as it was held and taught by the ancient Christians, before the discovery of your Romish Antichrist, we acknowledge and embrace, howsoever perhaps some particular men may have gone a little too far in their amplifications. But the doctrine that is maintained by your Church, and Council of Trent, we disclaim, and detest, as the principal means next to direct Pelagianisme, to puff up the pride of man's heart, and to take away true thankfulness and trust in God, that is to overthrow the Gospel, the end whereof is believing in Christ to justification and salvation. For if, as by your doctrine it must needs be, man do at the first, by the good use of his free-will, receive grace, and by the same free-will, though in both cases enlightened and inspired, merit his salvation truly and wholly as the day labouring man doth his wages, what glory can God have, or what thanks doth Christ deserve for any particular man's salvation? he provided the means, you will say that Peter (for example) might be saved, if he would. So did he that judas might be. He offered the means to Peter, & to judas too. How chance Peter received this grace and judas did not? you answer, because Peter would, and judas would not. But how came it to pass that Peter would and judas would not? Here is the first difference, was it because God of his love to Peter wrought in his heart by his spirit, so that it could not come to pass but he should believe, and left judas to himself, who so left would never believe? so we teach according to the truth of the Gospel. But you persuade your people that it was Peter that made the difference betwixt himself and judas, not God, who left the matter to the free will of both alike, that either, or neither of them might be saved, as pleased them. But what? is Peter by this believing in Christ, an heir of heaven? no, only he is now in such an estate, as that he may if he will earn everlasting life, as the hire and wages of his works. I appeal now to any Christian soul that hath but the least desire to advance God's glory above his own, to give sentence of this matter out of the truth of his heart: what doth God by the doctrine of popery, but only provide that men may come to heaven if they will? And how? forsooth upon our Saviour Christ's deserts, he is content to give men grace, whereby they may be able to merit their own salvation. But he will give this grace to no man, who shall not first upon good motions inspired, prepare himself, of his own free will, by faith, fear, hope, love, repentance, to the receiving of it: having received it, he must now by good works, to which he is enabled, deserve everlasting life so fully, as that God should be unjust, if he should not give it him, for the worthiness of the work he hath done. For whereas he made a promise of a reward, it was no more than he was bound to do in true justice, our works, without his promise, deserving the reward truly and wholly. This is the doctrine of your Church touching faith, and works, which Master Perkins justly calls a satanical invention, because it overthrows the glory of God's mercy, to establish the pride of man's free will. Now whereas we teach, that our works do not by their worth deserve everlasting life, what hurt is it (if it were false, but only that it were false) to make men think themselves wholly bound to God, for their justification and glorification? for we urge necessity of works, and assurance of reward, as well as you, though not to merit everlasting glory by them. If any man be so thankeles, or so proud, that he will not work, unless he may merit by working, he never felt himself to be a son, and shall receive the wages of servants, the just hire of his sins, damnation. The sixth point. Of Satisfaction. Our consent. speaker W. P. Conclus. I. First, we acknowledge and hold Civil or Politic satisfaction; that is, a recompense for injuries, and damages offered any way to our neighbours. This Zacheus practised, when at his conversion he restored fourfold things gotten by forged cavillation. Again, by civil satisfaction I understand, the imposition of fines, mulcts, and penalties upon offenders, and the inflicting of death upon malefactors. For all these are satisfactions to the law, and societies of men when they are wronged. All these we maintain as necessary: for, neither Church, nor commonwealth can well be without them; considering they are notable means to uphold civil peace: and otherwhiles they are fruits of true faith, as the satisfaction of Zacheus was. speaker A. W. This is wittily acknowledged by him, but little exercised among Pro D. B. P. Luk. 10. Are you so p●●●y to their accounts? testants, for where the Sacrament of Confession is wanting, there men use very seldom to recompense so much as onefold, for their extorsion, bribes, usury, and other crafty overreaching of their neighbours. Whatsoever our practice be (and yet if it did not exceed yours, we had good cause to be ashamed of it) the question is now of our doctrine; which Master Perkins hath truly delivered. As for the help you would have imagined to come from Auricular confession, to the exercise of satisfaction; who is so ignorant of your courses in appointing penance, that he knows not how little you enjoin this satisfaction, and how easily it may be bought out, if it be enjoined, with some contribution to some of your Abbeys, Friaries, Churches, Chapels, and such like? speaker D. B. P. But of this kind of Satisfaction, which we commonly call restitution, we are not here to treat: nor of that public penance, which for notorious crimes is done openly. speaker A. W. There was reason to mention this public penance: as well that all men might the better understand what is in question, as also because the testimonies, which in this case your men allege, are wholly, or principally of that kind of satisfaction. Then there may be satisfaction not voluntary. speaker D. B. P. But of such private penance, which is either enjoined by the confessor, or voluntarily undertaken by the penitent, or else sent by God's visitation to purge us from that temporal pain, which for sins past and pardoned, we are to endure, either in this life, or in Purgatory, if we die before we have fully satisfied here. speaker A. W. Your speech and matter are both very strange: who would speak so? By visitation, that is by punishment, to purge men from pain that should be endured? May a man satisfy against his will, or without his knowledge? for both these fall out in God's visitations, that a man is visited against his will, wholly, if he could help it; and that he doth not so much as once think upon satisfying for his sins by it: yea sometimes, if he should, he should think amiss: for all visitations of God are not c jon. 9 1. 2. job. 1. & 2. chastisements for sin, but special trials and means of God's glory. speaker W. P. Conclus. II. We acknowledge Canonical or Ecclesiastical satisfaction: and that is, when any having given offence to the Church of God, or any part thereof, do make an open public testimony of their repentance. Mirian for murmuring against Moses, was stricken with leprosy, and afterward by his prayer she was cleansed, and yet for all that she must go seven days out of the tent and congregation, that she might make a kind of satisfaction to the people for her trespass. And in the old testament, sackcloth and ashes were signs of their satisfaction. Conclus. III. We hold that no man can be saved, unless he make a perfect satisfaction to the justice of God for all his sins; because God is infinite in justice, and therefore will either exact an everlasting punishment, or satisfaction for the same. The dissent and difference. The points of our difference and dissent are these. The Church of Rome teacheth and believeth, that Christ by his death hath made a satisfaction for all the sins of men, and for the eternal punishment of them all: yet so, as they themselves must satisfy the justice of God for the temporal punishment of their offences, either on earth or in purgatory. We teach and believe, that Christ by his death and passion hath made a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction to the justice of God for all the sins of men, and for the whole punishment thereof both eternal and temporal. Thus we differ, and herein we for our parts must for ever stand at difference with them: so as if there were no more points of variance but this one, it should be sufficient to keep us always from uniting our religions, and cause us to obey the voice of Christ, Come out of her my people. For as in the former points, so in this also, the papists err, not in circumstance, but in the very foundation and life of religion. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins in his third conclusion, decreeth very solemnly, That no man can be saved, unless bs make a perfect satisfaction, unto the justice of God, for all his sins. Yet in the explication of the difference between Not by himself having made satisfaction by and in Christ. us, defineth as peremptonly, that no man is to satisfy, for any one of all his sins, or for any temporal pain due to them: Which be flat contradictory propositions, and therefore the one of them must needs be false. But such odd broken rubbish doth he commonly cast into the ground work of his questions, and thereupon raiseth the tottering building of his new doctrine: and lets not, like a blind man, to make an outcry, that in this matter the Papists err in the very foundation and life of religion. speaker A. W. Is it contradiction to say, that every man must make satisfaction, and that Christ hath made satisfaction? Might you not easily have understood (if you did not) that the satisfaction which Christ hath made, is made by every one that believes in him? So then the latter proposition doth not contradict the former, but show by what means that satisfaction is made, which in the former was required. Every man must satisfy, and every man doth satisfy, by and in Christ, are not contradictory propositions, as a man with half an eye may see. The very foundation and life of religion, is the acknowledging of full redemption by the sacrifice of jesus Christ. But how can that be acknowledged, where satisfaction remains to be made by (perhaps) many thousand years punishment? Our reasons. speaker W. P. I. A satisfaction that is made imperfect either directly or by consequent, is indeed no satisfaction at all. But the Papists make Christ's satisfaction imperfect, in that they do add a supply by human satisfactions: and thus much a learned schoolman, Biel Super lib. 3. dist. 19 concls. 3 in plain words confessed: Although (saith he) the passion of Christ be the principal merit, for which grace is conferred: the opening of the kingdom and glory: yet is it never the alone and total meritorious cause: it is manifest, because always with the merit of Christ, there concurreth some work, as the merit of congruity or condignity of him that receiveth grace or glory, if he be of years and have the use of reason: or of some other for him, if he want reason. For that which admits a supply by another, is imperfect in itself. Therefore human satisfactions cannot stand. speaker D. B. P. This is a substantial argument to raise the cry upon: which hath both propositions false. The first is childish: for he that satisfieth for half his debts, or for any part of them, makes some satisfaction, which satisfaction is unperfect, and yet cannot be called no satisfaction at all, as every child may see. speaker A. W. Satisfaction is a full discharge of the debt, so that the bond thereupon is void: but he that pays half, or three quarters of his debt, if he pay not all in such sort as the bond requireth, hath the bond still against him in full strength and virtue: so that, though he hath paid part of his principal debt, he hath made no satisfaction at all. speaker W. P. Learned Papists make answer, that Christ's satisfaction and man's may stand well together. For (say they) Christ's satisfaction is sufficient in itself to answer the justice of God for all sin and punishment: but it is not sufficient to this or that man till it be applied: and it must be applied by our satisfaction made to God for the temporal punishment of our sins. But I say again, that man's satisfaction can be no means to apply the satisfaction of Christ: and I prove it thus. The means of applying Gods blessings and graces unto man are twofold: some respect God himself, and some respect man. Those which respect God, are such whereby God on his part doth offer and convey his mercies in Christ unto man: of this sort are the preaching of the word, baptism, and the Lords supper, and these are as it were the hand of God whereby he reacheth down and giveth unto us Christ with all his benefits. The other means of applying on man's part, are those whereby the said benefits are received. Of this sort there is only one, namely faith, whereby we believe that Christ with all his benefits belong unto us. And this is the hand of man, whereby he receiveth Christ as he is offered, or exhibited by God in the word and sacraments. As for other means beside these, in Scripture we find none. Foolish therefore is the answer of the Papists, that make men's satisfactions means to apply the satisfaction of Christ unto us: for by human satisfactions, Christ is neither offered on God's part, nor yet received on man's part: let them prove it if they can. speaker A. W. His second is as untrue: but man's satisfaction is not to supply the want of Christ's satisfaction, but to apply it to us, as M. Perkins saith, his D. B. P. M●… hath resisted this pag. 121 Prove there is such a will. faith doth to them, and to fulfil his will and ordinance. First, the speech is beyond any ordinary man's understanding; to make satisfaction, is to apply another man's satisfaction to us. Secondly, to make satisfaction, is to deserve, that because of our satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to our sins, Christ's satisfaction for the eternal may be available to us. Thirdly, if man's satisfaction be not to supply the want of Christ's satisfaction, either there is no temporal punishment belonging to sin, or Christ hath made satisfaction for that, as well as for the eternal; and than God cannot require any satisfaction of us, because he is already satisfied both for the eternal and temporal punishment. Fourthly, if we do nothing by our satisfaction, but apply Christ's satisfaction to us, which is only for the eternal punishment, the temporal remains wholly without satisfaction made for it. speaker D. B. P. God doth in baptism for Christ's sake pardon both all sins, and taketh fully away, all pain due to sin, so that he who dieth in that state, goeth presently to heaven. But if we do afterwards ungratefully forsake God, and contrary to our promise transgress against his commandments, then lo the order of his divine justice requires, that we be not so easily received again into his favour: But he upon our repentance pardoning the sin, and the eternal punishment due unto it, through Christ, doth exact of every man a temporal satisfaction, answerable unto the fault committed: not to supply Christ's satisfaction, which was of infinite value, and might more easily have taken away this temporal punishment, than it doth the eternal. But, that by the smart and grief of this punishment, the man may be feared from sinning, and be made more careful to avoid sin: and also by this means be made members conformable to Christ our head, that suffering with him, we may reign with him. And therefore he having satisfied for the eternal punishment, which we are not able to do, doth lay the temporal pain upon our shoulders, that according unto the Apostle. Every man do bear his own burden. Gal. 6. speaker A. W. Here is a long discourse to little purpose; neither answering any part of Master Perkins syllogism, nor defending any point of your own answer; but only affirming that, which before was said, that God exacts a temporal satisfaction; and affording us some reason to confute your opinion by, in this sort. If Christ's satisfaction was sufficient more easily to take away the temporal punishment than the eternal, how will you prove it did not? It stands you upon to show us good evidence out of the record of Scripture, that God agreed with Christ, not to take the full desert of his sufferings and satisfaction, but to leave man still indebted to him, though in truth the debt were paid. If no such agreement can be showed, for my part I see not how God in justice can ask the same debt twice, being once fully satisfied. That which you add is wholly our doctrine, viz. that God, by smart and grief, would fear us from sinning, and make us conformable to his Son our Saviour. But you teach, that he punisheth us, and so takes satisfaction for sins past, as if he were to be revenged on us, at least by temporal punishment, for our sins committed. You repeat your conclusion, but with no dependence upon your former matter, or proof from that which follows: where d Gal. 6. 5. the Apostle tells the Galathians, that they may not be always finding fault with other men, and so grow into a conceit of their own goodness, but look to themselves; because every man must give an account to God for his own sins, and not for another man's. If you will needs abuse the Apostle, and apply his words to that he thought not on; why do you not, by the same reason, lay the eternal punishment upon us too? for that was our burden, as well as the temporal. speaker W. P. Others, not content with this their former answer say, that our satisfactions do nothing derogate from the satisfaction of Christ: because our works have their dignity and merit from Christ's satisfaction: he meriting that our works should satisfy God's justice for temporal punishment. But this is also absurd and false, as the former was. For if Christ did satisfy that man might satisfy, than Christ doth make every believer to be a Christ, a jesus, a Redeemer, and a priest in the same order with his own self. But to make sinful man his own redeemer, though it be but from temporal punishments, is a doctrine of devils. For the holy Ghost teacheth that the priesthood of Heb. 7. 24. Christ is incommunicable, & cannot pass from him to another. Now to make satisfaction for sin or any part of the punishment thereof, is a duty, or a part of Christ his priesthood, and therefore to make satisfaction is a work that cannot pass from his person to the person of any man. speaker D. B. P. Nay (saith M. Perkins,) we must then be new Christ's, and redeemers, and Priests of the same order with himself: Nothing so, but having grace from him, we may in virtue thereof satisfy, not for the crime itself, or everlasting punishment, which is linked with it: because that would require an infinite virtue: But for the temporal pain of it, one endued with grace may satisfy, for the measure of stripes must not exceed the rate of the fault, the punishment then resting unsatisfied being limited, a creature may pay it. speaker A. W. It was not for nothing that you would not set down Master Perkins words. For you saw well enough, that if you should do so, your poor blinded Papists would venture to read them (which now they dare not do) and so your weakness in answering might be discovered. Master Perkins hath refuted your answer of applying Christ's satisfaction, before it was hatched: you pass it by as not seen, and propound his answer to another objection by halves, leaving the objection out altogether. I will make the matter as plain as I can with shortness. You Papists say, that Christ's satisfaction merited, that man's works should satisfy for temporal punishment: Master Perkins denies it upon this reason: If Christ did satisfy that man might satisfy, he made every believer a Christ, a jesus, a Redeemer, a Priest, in the same order with himself: But he did not make men Christ's and jesuses, Redeemers and Priests, in the same order with himself. Therefore he did not satisfy, that man might satisfy. The assumption he proves; e Hebr. 7. 24. because Christ's Priesthood cannot be communicated to any other; the consequence of the proposition depends upon this, that satisfaction is a part of Christ's Priesthood: you deny the consequence; but neither show any reason of your denial, nor answer his proof: only you tell us, that a man is able to bear the temporal punishment, though not the eternal; as though we denied temporal, because a man cannot bear it. speaker D. B. P. And that the Reader may better perceive what we mean by the temporal pain: Let him consider that in sin there are two things, the one is the turning away from God, whom we offend, the other is the turning to the thing, for the love of which we offend: as for glory, lust, lucre, or such like the sinner transgresseth: Now when he is by the grace of God converted, his turning away from God, both the sin and the eternal pain due unto it, are freely through Christ pardoned, but for the pleasure which he took in the sin, the man himself is to satisfy: and so according unto the greatness of that his pleasure, he is to do penance. speaker A. W. First, your distinction belongs not to all sins, and so proves satisfaction needful but for some sins only. To what doth a man turn, when (in the error of his judgement) he denies Christ to be God, without any respect of glory, lucre, lust, or such like? Again, may not a man swear unadvisedly, and rashly, without this turning, and without any pleasure in that sin? Yea, may not a man think the murdering of his Sovereign lawful and meritorious (as many Popish traitors have done) without this turning to I cannot tell what? Sin is the transgression of God's commendements: as for this turning to and from, it is an idle speculation of men, that seek a knot in a rush: he that doth that which God forbids, whatsoever the occasion or end of his doing be, sins in so doing. He that makes his money his god, sins; not because he loves his money, or turns to his money, but because he loves it otherwise than he should, and so turns from God to it. Secondly, what a fond distinction is that, betwixt the sin, and the pleasure in the sin? Is not that pleasure in the sin, a sin too, if it be voluntary? and if it be not voluntary, but only be a consequent upon the sin, having no ground in the will any way, how is it punishable? speaker W. P. Again, if Christ by his satisfaction give power to man to satisfy, than man doth satisfy by Christ and Christ beside his own satisfaction upon the cross, must daily satisfy in man to the end of the world: but this cannot be: for Christ upon the cross, when death was upon him, said, It is finished, that is, I have fully satisfied for all the sins of mankind, both in respect of the fault and punishment. As for Christ's burial & resurrection which followeth his death, they served not to satisfy but to confirm and ratify the same. speaker D. B. P. But Christ (saith M. Perkins) said. On the Cross it is finished: Wherhfore all satisfaction was at Christ's death ended: as well temporal as eternal. Ans. That those words have a far different sense: To wit, that Christ had then ended his course, and fulfilled all prophecies, and endured all such torments, as pleased God to impose upon him for the redemption of mankind: of satisfaction temporal there is no mention, neither can any thing be drawn thence against it. speaker A. W. There is no mention of any satisfaction at all, and yet you grant, that eternal satisfaction is there signified. You must then show some good reason, why the one was then finished, and not the other; which it is unpossible for you to do; because you confess, that both were then performed for all sins before Baptism. Look by what reason you can draw that doctrine from that place, by the same will we conclude the other. If you will say, all was done that belongs to man's redemption: I ask whether Christ have not also redeemed us from temporal punishment? You grant, from all that was due to sin before Baptism. I demand further, whether these punishments were not part of that penalty, which the breach of God's law lays upon us? if they were, then either we are redeemed from them by Christ, or he hath not made perfect redemption. But questionless his redemption is perfect, and these are punishments due to sin. Therefore he hath freed us from these also. speaker W. P. Again Paul saith, 2. Cor. 5. 21. He that knew no sin was made sin for us, that is, the punishment of sin for us: but if the Church of Rome say true, that Christ doth daily satisfy, than Paul spoke too short, and should have said further, that Christ was made sin for us, and in us too: and that God was not only in Christ but also in us reconciling the world to himself. But Paul never knew this learning: and therefore let them turn themselves which way they will, by putting a supplement to Christ's satisfaction, they do indeed annihilate the same. speaker D. B. P. No more can be out of this other. Christ was made sin for us: That 2. Cor. 5. is, the punishment of sin, as M. Perkins gloseth it: but the learned say, an host or sacrifice for sin. But we ●raun● that he suffered the punishment For our sin, and say consequently: that all sin is pardoned freely for his sake, and the pain of hell also, which is punishment of sin: but not other temporal pains, such as it hath pleased the justice and You beg, not prove this. wisdom of God, to reserve unto every si●ner, to bear in his own person. And after this sort, and no other was God in Christ, reconciling the world to himself. speaker A. W. If Christ were a sacrifice for sin, I say, as before, either he was an unperfect sacrifice (which to say were blasphemous) or he wrought our redemption from the whole wrath of God, and so from all punishment ensuing thereupon: unless (as I noted before) you can show any agreement to the contrary, betwixt God and Christ. speaker D. B. P. And that S. Paul understood well. that Christ sufferings did not take Collos. 1. away ours, may be gathered by these his words. I rejoice in suffering for you, and do accomplish those things, that want of the passions of Christ, in my flesh for his body, which is the Church. But of this point more, when we come unto the Arguments for the Catholic part. speaker A. W. We do not say, that Christ's sufferings take away ours; for we must still suffer, for divers reasons above recited; but that his satisfaction leaves us no place for ours: we suffer, but not to satisfy: neither doth Saint Paul say any such thing. speaker W. P. Reason II. In sundry places of Scripture, especially in the Epistles of Paul, we are said to be redeemed, justified, and saved Freely: which word Freely, doth import that we are justified and saved without any thing done on our part or by ourselves in the matter of our salvation: and if this be so, then can we do nothing at all that may satisfy the justice of God for the least punishment of our sins. If we satisfy in our own persons we are not saved freely: and if we be saved freely, we make no satisfaction at all. speaker D. B. P. Now to M. Perkins second reason. In sundry places (saith he) of Scripture, we are said to be redeemed, justified, and saved freely: but this word freely importeth that we are saved without doing any thing ourselves in that matter of salvation. speaker A. W. Ans. Not so good Sir, for even in your own Doctrine, it is necessary that ye believe, and bring forth the fruits of repentance, and that now and then, ye make some short prayers, and receive the communion, and do many other odd things in that matter of salvation: Wherefore the word freely doth not exclude all our working, and suffering in that All to merit or satisfy by matter. Master Perkins means not to exclude all doing, on our part, but all doing to merit, or satisfaction. As it appears by the proposition of his syllogism in the end: If we satisfy in our person, we are not saved freely: If we be saved freely, we make no satisfaction at all. Now although all doing be not against free salvation, yet all doing to merit and satisfy is directly against it. speaker W. P. Reason III. We pray daily, forgive us our sins: now to plead pardon, and to satisfy for our sins be contrary: and for all things, for which we can make satisfaction, we need not crave a pardon: but we are taught in the foresaid petition wholly and only to use the plea or pardon for our sins, and therefore we acknowledge that we cannot make any satisfaction at all. speaker D. B. P. If our sins be mortal, we crave pardon both of the sin, and the eternal punishment annexed, and do willingly withal satisfy for the temporal pain: as the man who is convicted of high treason, and having both his life, honour, lands, and goods, pardoned and restored unto him, doth very joyfully endure three months imprisonment, and any reasonable fine set on his head. speaker A. W. In this, as in divers other arguments, namely the very next before, you only set down the first lines, and never propound the reason that you may answer to it directly; I must do it for you. If we can satisfy for sin, we need not crave pardon for it: But we need crave pardon for it. Therefore we cannot satisfy for it. Your answer cannot well be applied to any part of this syllogism, but in effect it seems to be as much, as if you should deny the assumption: not simply, but with this distinction, that we need crave pardon for the eternal punishment, but not for the temporal. Then the meaning of that petition in the Lord's Prayer is, forgive us the eternal punishment due to our sins: which is to ask forgiveness by halves. f Lyra ad Math 6. Lyra saith, We pray that our sins may be g Totaliter. wholly forgiven, both in respect of the fault, and of the punishment. And that he means temporal punishment too, it appeareth by his reason; because so long as that remains, we cannot enter into blessedness. Witness the poor souls that ●●ie so many years in your Purgatory. speaker D. B. P. 〈◊〉. If our sins be venial: then that prayer is a special mean, both to obtain pardon of the fault, and release of all the pain, as witnesseth S. Augustine: saying. That for the daily, short, and light offences, without In Enchirid cap. 71. which this life is not led, the daily prayer of the faithful doth satisfy. speaker A. W. You seem also to deny the consequence of the proposition, in your answer about venial sins. For which (you say) we may satisfy by praying for pardon. But this is a marvelous strange satisfaction, that a man should be said to satisfy, by desiring to be pardoned. And then we have a further meaning in the Lord's Prayer, that God would accept it as a satisfaction for our venial sins. Can any reasonable man imagine, that our Saviour did not teach us to pray for the full pardon of all punishment due to sin, and yet never gave notice of any such distinction? But of this more afterward. Austin speaks of the different course that is to be held in repenting of our sins, that according as they are greater or less, so we should be the more or less careful of obtaining pardon. Which for ordinary sins, may be had by ordinary praying; not as if this made a sufficient amends to God, which satisfaction imports, but because he looks not for so much sorrow and care for these sins, as for those; by which, if we commit them, we shall highly dishonour him, and therefore need to grieve more, that we may the more carefully avoid them. If you will draw Austin to the worst, we may not follow him, against the truth of the Scripture. speaker D. B. P. And that is not true which M. Perkins adds, that we are taught in that prayer, wholly and only, to use the plea of Pardon. For in thesame petition, we are taught also to pardon others, even as we will look to be pardoned. speaker A. W. We are taught only to plead pardon; the clause that is added, is not to satisfy God, or deserve forgiveness, but to persuade God to forgive us, as we pardon other, or (as h Luk. 11. 4. Luke expounds it) for even we are so kind, as to forgive them that offend us. How then should God not show his kindness, when he is entreated? speaker D. B. P. Again, if there were only a plea of pardon, it would not serve Master Perkins purpose. For who would say, that within the compass of the Pater noster, all things necessary to salvation be contained. speaker A. W. If praying for pardon of sin be a sufficient means, for the procuring of it to them that believe in Christ, surely there is no satisfaction necessary. That it is such a means, it is plain; because our Saviour wils us not here to use any other means, and yet assures us that our requests shall be granted. You answer, that all things necessary are not contained in the Pater noster. What of that? It will serve our turn, that the Lords Prayer prescribes sufficient means for the obtaining of pardon, and yet meddles not with satisfaction. But what speak you of things necessary to salvation? The satisfaction in question is of no such nature. For you tell us, that all fear of eternal punishment is taken away by Christ, and a man may come to heaven, though he never dream of any temporal satisfaction; the worst is but the enduring of the painted fire of Purgatory for a certain time. speaker A. W. Besides prayer is one part of satisfaction, as shall be proved hereafter: D. B. P. An easy cause to satisfy. and so by oft praying for pardon, we may well satisfy for much temporal punishment. Praying for pardon is a poor satisfaction, else might a fellow, or a traitor easily satisfy for his fault, and the punishment, especially for the imprisonment and fine you speak of. But we shall examine this better, when we come to answer your proof of it. speaker W. P. Reason IV. The judgement of the ancient Church. Tertul. de Baptism. Guiltiness being taken away, the punishment is also taken away. speaker A. W. M Perkins fourth Argument is taken out of certain odd fragments D. B. P. You are glad i● patch up your arguments with such fragments. Tertul. de Baptis. Pag. 28. of ancient writers. Guiltiness being taken away, the punishment is also taken away. True: he that is guilty of nothing, cannot justly be punished: for guiltiness is a binding up to punishment (as M. Perkins defineth) then if the band to punishment be canceled, the party is freed: but all this is nothing to the purpose, for guiltiness of temporal punishment doth remain after the sin and guilt of eternal be released. If by these odd fragments you mean the treatises of the authors whence the testimonies are fetched, you are glad to patch up your profess out of these odd fragments. If you mean the sentences alleged, what bring you of this kind but odd fragments? And what else can be brought, unless a man should absurdly write out the whole treatise? speaker D. B. P. Your answer is nothing to tertullian's purpose, who speaks of washing by baptism, in which both guilt and punishment are wholly taken away. Death (saith i Tertul is. cap. 5. Tertullian) is destroyed by washing away of sins, but death is the whole punishment of sin, k Gen. 2. 17. The day thou eatest thou shalt die, therefore freedom from death, is freedom from the whole punishment. speaker W. P. * Serm. 37. de verbis Apost. August. Christ by taking upon him the punishment and not the fault, hath done away both fault and the punishment. speaker D. B. P. Just: the eternal punishment which was due to that fault, not the temporal: as S. Augustine himself declareth. God of compassion doth In Enchir. cap. 70. blot out our sins committed, if convenient satisfaction be not on our parts neglected. speaker A. W. To what was the temporal punishment due? if to the fault, it is taken away, unless there be some fault, for which Christ hath not satisfied, or that punishment may be due, where there is no fault. Beside the punishment that Austin speaks of, as you would easily have seen, if you had looked upon the place, and not answered by guess rather than by skill, is our mortality, which is no part of the eternal punishment. He (saith l Aug. de verb. Dom. Ser. 37. Austin in his sermon 37. de verbis Domini, not de verbis Apostoli, where there are in all but 34.) had two good things, righteousness, and immortality; we two naughty things, sin, and mortality. Sin (as he shows afterward) was our fault, mortality our punishment. This Christ took upon him, that he did not, and by taking the one freed us from both, namely so, that mortality is no longer a punishment, and we by him shall be come immortal. As for the satisfaction he requires, it is not to procure release of any punishment belonging to us, but to show our repentance, which God will take knowledge of by outward actions, so that when he sees them he may seal up our forgiveness by assurance of it. speaker W. P. And Tom. 10. hom 5. he saith, when we are gone out of this world, there will remain no compunction or satisfaction. Some new Editions have foisted in the word [aliqua] and so have turned the sense on this manner: There will remain no compunction or some satisfaction. But this is flat against Augustine's meaning, who saith a little before, that when the way is ended there is no compounding of our cause with any. speaker D. B. P. To that other sentence out of him: When we are gone out of this Tom. 10. Hom. 5. Th●▪ thought not so, that ●●●sted in 〈◊〉. world, there will remain no compunction or satisfaction: It is easy to answer without the help of any new edition. For it will be too late then to repent, and so there is no place left to compunction, that is, contrition of heart: neither consequently to confession, or satisfaction: as if he had said, before we go out of this world, there is place for both compunction, and satisfaction, and so that place is rather for us. speaker A. W. The satisfaction required by Austin, is nothing else but true repentance, or newness of life, that we love God, our neighbours, and our enemies, as it followeth immediately upon the words set down, That we may (saith m Aug. lib. hom. 50. homil. 5. Austin) do all these things, that is, have compunction, and make satisfaction by the help of God, let us love, not our friends only but our enemies also, that that may be fulfilled in us which is written, The whole law is fulfilled in one word, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: now this is a necessary duty, and cannot be properly any satisfaction. But for such satisfaction as we make by repentance there is place in this world. And howsoever a man himself cannot make satisfaction in his own person but by suffering after this life, yet by your doctrine he may by other men, and have full pardon and release, procured him at the Pope's hands, or otherwise by masses and alms paid for, and bestowed after his departure. And therefore in your learning Austin shows either his ignorance, or his craft, in telling us, that we cannot satisfy hereafter, which is not true, but of satisfying in our own persons. speaker W. P. Chrysost prooem. in Esa. Say not to me, I have sinned: how shall I be freed from so many sins? Thou canst not: but thy God can. Yea, and he will so blot out thy sins that there shall remain no print of them: which thing befalls not the body, for when it is healed there remains a scar: but God as soon as he exempts thee from punishment, Luc. 22. Petri negat. he giveth thee justice. speaker D. B. P. All this is most true, and much against M. Perkins doctrine of the infection of original sin: but nothing touching satisfaction: for we hold that the soul of a sinner when he cometh to be justified, is washed whiter than snow: so that there is no stain or print left in it, of the filth of sin. It is also freed from all eternal punishment, but not from some temporal. speaker A. W. n Chrysostom. proem, in Esaiam. Chrysostome speaks not of original sin, but of daily actual transgressions (as his whole discourse shows) which God by pardoning of them so takes away, as that neither guilt nor shame of them remains in his sight, yea he makes supply of the contrary virtues. To Master Perkins purpose they are thus to be applied, that Chrysostome requires nothing of him that is to be pardoned for his full release, but repentance only, which thing he repeats oftentimes in that poem before Esay, without any the least inkling of temporal satisfaction, which is almost as needful as the other if your doctrine be true: for it is in our shallow estimation as fearful almost to fry (I know not how many thousand years) in Purgatory, as to be for ever in hell. Everlastingness we cannot comprehend, many thousand years are as much as we can reach to, therefore since Chrysostome in that one preface so many times promiseth so full pardon, and requires nothing but repentance, it is more than likely he knew not your satisfaction. speaker W. P. Ambrose saith, I read of Peter's tears, but I read not of his satisfaction. speaker D. B. P. Now gentle Reader, prepare thyself to behold a proper piece of cozenage. Ambrose saith, I read of Peter's tears, but I read not of his satisfaction: Luk. 22. The colour of the craft, lieth in the ambiguity of this word Satisfaction, which is not always taken for the penance done to satisfy for the former fault. But is sometime used for the defence, and excuse of the fact: So speaketh S. Paul, Bono animo prome satisfaciam, with good courage I will answer in defence of myself, or give you satisfaction: in Act. 24. 10. like manner Ready always to satisfy every one that asketh you a reason of that hope which is in you: In this sense doth S. Ambrose use the word as 1. Pet. 3. is most plainly to be seen to them that read the place: and confer it with the very like of his, I find not (saith he) what Peter said, but I find that he wept: I read his tears, but I read not his satisfaction: but that which Lib. 10. in Luc. cannot be defended, may be washed away. So that nothing is more manifest, than that satisfaction in this, and the like places, is taken for defence and excuse of his fault, which Peter used not, but sought by tears and bitter weeping, to satisfy in part for it, for this bewailing of our sins, is one special kind of satisfaction as Saint Ambrose testifieth, saying: That he who doth penance, must with tears wash away his Lib. 2. de poenit. cap. 5. sins. speaker A. W. A man may easilier behold malice in you, that construe every thing to the worst, than cozenage in the allegation of Ambrose: for if your interpretation of it be never so true, it is such as might escape a diligent reader, and not be seen, yea perhaps if it had not been so priest by our men, you would have read Ambrose over a good many times before you had dreamt of that sense. o Bellarm. de purgat. lib. cap. 13. Bellarmine (from whom you had this as the rest of your answers for the most part) lays no such matter to Peter Martyrs charge, out of whom he brings this objection; you see not more than he did, but write with more spleen. If Master Perkins had read, and, at the writing of this sentence remembered Bellarmine's answer, either he would not have alleged it, or else have given some special reason for his allegation. But this (me thinks) may be observed out of this testimony, that p Ambros. Ser. 46. Ambrose accounted confessing, and craving of pardon to be the satisfaction God looks for, which is always performed by a sinner, before he can have any true hope that his sins are forgiven. This therefore going before the pardon of the eternal punishment, what other satisfaction shall need for the temporal? Now that Ambrose in that place understands by satisfaction both confessing his fault to Christ whom he had offended, and entreating for pardon, it appeareth by these speeches, and such like, q Ambros. ad Luc. 22. lib. 10 cap. Petrus. Therefore Peter broke out into tears, entreating nothing by voice. Tears wash sins, which it is a shame to confess. Tears are as it were silent prayers. I find why Peter hold his peace, lest the craving of pardon so soon might more offend. Tears are part of repentance, when they come from the true grief of the heart, but not any part of satisfaction for temporal pain, which we should else endure, as that very sentence of Ambrose proves. He (saith Ambrose) that reputes, must not only wash away his sins with tears, but also cover and hide his former sins with better deeds, that sin be not laid to his charge. Now where sin is not imputed, there can no punishment be due; and where such repentance is not, there sin is imputed even to eternal damnation. So that the tears Ambrose speaketh of are parts of outward repentance, for pardon of sin, not satisfaction for temporal judgements remaining after pardon. speaker W. P. Again, let us adore Christ that he may say unto us, De bono mor. fear not thy sins of this world, nor the waves of bodily sufferings: I have remission of sins. speaker D. B. P. The other place cited out of S. Ambrose, de bono mortis, Let us adore Christ, that ●e may say unto us, fear not thy sins, nor the waves of worldly sufferings, I have remission of ●●n●es: is rather for us then against us: for if by adoring and serving of God, we may be put out of fear of our sins, and the punishment of them: then doth it follow, that prayers, and such like service of Christ, doth acquit us of sin, and satisfy for the pain due to them. speaker A. W. This adoring of Christ is coming to him, whereupon ensueth escaping of death, as it followeth a few lines after. Whosoever (saith r Ambros. de bono mortis cap. 12. Ambrose, in our Saviour Christ's person) s joh. 6. 35. comes to me, (that is, believes in me) shall never see death. By this adoring we are freed from all sins, and all punishment due to them, whereas, if your doctrine of satisfaction should be received, for all our coming to Christ by faith and true repentance, we might and ought stand in fear of grievous punishment for many years in Purgatory. Neither doth it follow, that if by serving God we may be put out of fear of our sins, than such service doth satisfy, for by true repentance we may be put out of fear of eternal damnation, and yet no man will say that therefore true repentance doth satisfy for eternal pain. speaker W. P. Hierome saith in Psalm. 31. The sin that is covered is not seen, the sin that is not seen is not imputed: that which is not imputed, is not punished. speaker D. B. P. To wit, with hellfire: which is the due punishment of such mortal sin, whereof he speaketh: or sin may be said to be covered, when not only the fault is pardoned, but all punishment also due unto it is fully paid. speaker A. W. If it be t Hieronym. in Psalm. 31. not imputed, how can it be punished? for punishment is laid upon a man in respect of sin, which he is charged with; neither can any thing be justly punished with any kind of pain eternal, or temporal, but only sin. Your second answer is wholly for us: for if sin be then said to be covered, when the fault and the punishment are forgiven, doubtless he that is justified, is freed from both: witness u Rom. 4. 6. 7. 8 Paul, and x Psal. 32. 1. 2. Lib. 2. de poenit. cap. 5. David, who avouch that justification covers sin, and suffers it not to be imputed. speaker D. B. P. So doth S. Ambrose take that word covered, saying: The Prophet calleth both them blessed, as well him, whose iniquities is forgiven in Baptism, as him, whose sins are covered with good works: For he that doth penance, must not only wash away his sins with tears, but also with better works cover his former sins, that they be not imputed unto him. speaker A. W. If y Lib. 2. de poenit. cap. 5. S. Ambrose take the word covered in that sense (as indeed he and all men else do that speak of covering sin) justification takes away the fault, and punishment of all sin) so that he which is justified needs make no farther satisfaction. speaker W. P. Chrysostome on Matth. hom. 44. Among all men, some endure punishment in this life and the life to come: others in this life alone: others alone in the life to come: others neither in this life nor in the life to come. There alone, as Dives, who was not Lord so much as of one drop of water: Here alone, the incestuous man among the Corinthians. Neither here nor there, as the Apostles and Prophets, as also job and therest of this kind: for they endured no sufferings for punishment, but that they might be known to be conquerors in the fight. speaker D. B. P. Now we must back again unto Chrysostome, belike he had forgotten this, when he cited the other, or else this was reserved to strike it deed. Such excellent holy personages sufferings as are mentioned in the Scriptures, were not for their sins: for they committed but ordinary light offences, for which their ordinary devotions satisfied abundantly: the great persecutions which they endured were first to manifest the virtue and power of God, that made such frail creatures so invincible, then to daunt the adversaries of his truth, and withal, to animate and encourage his followers. Finally, that they like conquerors triumphing over all the torments of this life, might enter into possession of a greater reward in the kingdom of heaven. All this is good doctrine, but nothing against satisfaction, that their surpassing suffering, were not for their own sins: and thus much in answer unto M. Perkins Arguments against satisfaction. speaker A. W. You that are so desirous to find faults, would not have let Master Perkins scape without reproof, if you had looked this place in z Chrysost. in Math. homil. 42. & 44. Chrysostome, and found it to have been misquoted, though it was most like to have been the Printers fault. In stead of answering to this testimony, you fall a discoursing of the end of the persecutions of holy men, whereas many of them were not persecuted at all: and Chrysostome speaks generally of sufferings, not of persecutions. But this must be observed in your discourse, that howsoever you mince the matter of their ordinatie light offences, yet they themselves had another opinion of their sins. If thou Lord (saith a Psal. 130. 3. one of them) strictly mark what is done amiss, who shall stand? In b Psal. 143. 2. another place one cries to God not to enter into judgement with his servant, because in his sight no man living shall be justified. Yea Daniel, that c Dan. 10. 19 beloved man, d Dan. 9 7. 8. 11. 20. confesseth his own, and his people's sins to God, as matters that deserve no small punishment; yea there is almost no man's story set down any thing at large in the scripture that hath not some special sin observed and recorded, which notwithstanding, if their sufferings were not punishments, to satisfy, how do you teach, that all sins must be satisfied for by us in part? Objections of Papists. speaker W. P. Object. I. Leuit. 4. Moses according to God's commandment prescribed several sacrifices for several persons: and they were means of satisfaction for the temporal punishments of their daily sins. Answ. Those sacrifices were only signs and types of Christ's satisfaction to be offered to his father in his alone sacrifice upon the cross: and whosoever offered any sacrifice in the old testament, did thus and no otherwise esteem of it, but as a type and figure of better things. Secondly, the said sacrifices were satisfactions to the Church, whereby men did testify their repentance for their offences, and likewise their desire to be reconciled to God and men. And such kind of satisfactions, we acknowledge. speaker D. B. P. Now to the reasons which he produceth for it. Lib. 3. instit. cap. 4. num. 29. And albeit he like an evil master of the camp, range our Arguments out of order, placing that in the sore-front of our side, which Calvin presseth out against us, yet will I admit of it, rather than break his order. speaker A. W. How good a master of a camp soever he were, he were of no great discretion, that having the marshalling of his enemy's battle in his hands, would not order it most for his own advantage. But to Master Perkins it was all one which was first, which last, if you think him beholden to you for your kindness, he hath fully paid you, in bearing with your reciting of this, and divers other his reasons. speaker D. B. P. 1. Moses according to God's commandment prescribed several sacrifices, Leuit. 4. 5, 6. for the sins of several persons, and ordained, that they should be of greater and lesser prices, according unto the diversity of the sins. Whence we argue thus: These men's faults upon their true repentance, joined with faith and hope in Christ to come were pardoned: Therefore their charges in buying of sacrifices to be offered for them, their pains, and prayers in assisting during the time of the sacrifice, being painful works done to appease God's justice, were works of satisfaction. speaker A. W. To let pass your propounding the argument otherwise then Master Perkins doth, I answer to your Enthymem, by denying the consequence. Their sins (say you) were pardoned upon their faith and repentance, therefore their sacrifices, and other painful works, were works of satisfaction. It follows not, for these very works were part of their repentance, which without them, when they could be done, was insufficient, and they were as requisite for the pardon of the eternal punishment (I speak as you Papists do) as of the temporal. speaker D. B. P. Master Perkins answereth, many things as men do commonly when How many Not above two. they cannot well tell what to say directly to the purpose: First, that those sacrifices, were types of Christ's suffering on the Cross: what is this to the purpose? speaker A. W. How many things, trow you, doth Master Perkins answer? But poor two, and those more to the purpose, than you would. The objection was, That those sacrifices which Moses prescribed several persons, were satisfactions for sin. This Master Perkins denieth directly, saying, that e Hebr. 10. 1. they were appointed to be types of Christ's satisfaction; which is most certain. Do you ask what this is to the purpose? To show, that there was another end of these sacrifices, than you imagine. But you will say, this doth not disprove their being for satisfaction. Remember yourself. Master Perkins answers, and you reply: who must prove, he or you? He hath given you a reason of his denial, which is as much as in extremity can be looked for of an answerer. Further reply shall have further answer. speaker D. B. P. Secondly, that those sacrifices were satisfactions to the congregation; and what needed that, when they had offended God only, and not the congregation as in many offences it happeneth. speaker A. W. The sacrifices for those sins, by which the congregation had not been offended, were not properly for the satisfaction thereof: but only thus far, that the people might perceive, how careful each man was to repent even of his secret sins, and to have them also purged by the blood of the Messiah to come, whereof those sacrifices were types. speaker D. B. P. Again, if satisfaction must be given to the congregation, how much more reason is it, that it be made to God? Read those Chapters, and you shall find, that they were principally made, to obtain remission of God: as these words also do witness: And upon that sacrifice, the sin shall be Leuit. 4. 20. The sin as yourself confessed was forgiven before. forgiven them: So that sacrifices were to satisfy God, who thereupon forgave the sin, and all pain due to it. speaker A. W. First, satisfaction was made to God already, by the sacrifice of the Messiah to come, in whom they believed. Secondly, there was danger to the congregation by their sin, which might be an example of sin to other. Thirdly, the people by these sacrifices was to be taught, that their sins provoked the wrath of God, and were to be purged by the sacrifice of the Messiah. There is nothing in those chapters to prove, that the end of those sacrifices was the obtaining of God's mercy, otherwise for temporal punishment, than for eternal. And I am sure you will not say, they were to satisfy in that respect, though upon that sacrifice the sin should be forgiven, that is, upon their faith and repentance; of which those sacrifices were enjoined to be proofs and parts. speaker W. P. Object. 11. Men, whose sins are all pardoned, have afterward sundry crosses and afflictions laid upon them, unto the end of their days: therefore in all likelihood they make satisfaction to God for temporal punishments. As for example, the Israelites for murmuring against the Lord in the wilderness were barred all from the land of promise; and the like befell Moses and Aron for not glorifying God, as they should have done at the waters of strife. Answ. Man must be considered in a twofold estate, as he is under the law, and as he is under grace. In the first estate, all afflictions are curses or legal punishments, be they little or great: but to them that are in the second estate & believe in Christ, though the same afflictions remain, yet do they change their habit or condition, and are the actions of a Father serving to be trials, corrections, preventing, admonitions. 1. Cor. 11. 32. When we are judged we are nurtured of the Lord: and, Heb. 12. 7. If we endure chastisement, God offereth himself unto you as children. And Chrysostome saith, 1. Cor. hom. 28. When we are corrected of the Lord, it is more for our admonition then damnation: more for a medicine then for a punishment: more for a correction then for a penalty. And whereas God denied the believing Israelites, with Moses and Aaron to enter into the land of Canaan, it cannot be proved that it was a punishment or penalty of the law upon them. The Scripture saith no more but that it was an admonition to all men in all ages following, to take heed of offences, as Paul writeth, All these things came unto them for ensamples, and were written for our admonition, 1. Corinth. 10. 11. speaker D. B. P. The reason for us (which indeed is the very groundwork of satisfaction) may thus be framed: many after pardon obtained of their sins, have had temporal punishment laid upon them for the same sins, and that by Gods own order: wherefore after the forgiveness of the sin, and the eternal punishment of it through Christ's satisfaction, there remaineth some temporal pain to be endured by the party himself for We deny that any man hath been punished to satisfy for his sin. the same sin: which is most properly that which we call satisfaction. They deny that any man hath been punished temporally for any sin, which was once pardoned. speaker A. W. If this groundwork of satisfaction prove ruinuos, the whole building will quickly fall. But it cannot be sound, because it is deceitfully laid. If by enduring temporal punishment for sin, you mean no more but that, by occasion of sin committed, many men have had such chastisements, we grant your conclusion. But if you understand by it, as the question is, that they have borne these punishments to satisfy some part of God's wrath, to which our saviours sacrifice either could not, or upon composition betwixt his Father and him, was not to reach, we deny the antecedent of your Enthymem, and say, that no man, believing in the Messiah, ever suffered any such punishment for sin. speaker D. B. P. We prove it first by the example of the Israelits, whose murmuration against God, was at Moses intercession pardoned: yet all the elder sort Numb. 14. of them, who had seen the miracles wrought in Egypt for their deliverance, were by the sentence of God deprived of the ●●ght of the Land of promise, and punished with death in the wilderness, for the very same their murmuration. speaker A. W. Was the eternal punishment, due to this their murmuring, pardoned at Moses request? If it were not, your example is not to the purpose: for our question is of them only, who have that forgiven. If it were, than all the people had true faith in the Messiah; which is a very bold assertion, without all likelihood of truth. But, no doubt, some of them were indeed true believers. They were, and of them it remains to be proved, that their shutting out of Canaan, was to appease the remains of God's wrath against their murmuring. There is no such thing in the text, but f Num 14. 22, joa 9 1. 2, Num. 14. 23. that God did it to make all the earth see his glory. Add hereunto, that this punishment was not occasioned by this sin only, but by former murmurings, and those many (perhaps) not at all pardoned, by any such special entreaty of Moses. speaker D. B. P. The like judgement was given against Moses himself and Aaron, for not glorifying Gad at the waters of contradiction: both of them had their sin pardoned, yet were they both afterwards for the same de Numb. 20. Deut. 32. barred from the entrance into the holy Land. speaker A. W. The like answer I make to the example of Moses and Aaron; that is, I deny the antecedent. g Num. 20. 11. Moses and Aaron were not punished, that God might be satisfied for the temporal punishment belonging to their sin, but that they and the people might learn, to put their trust in God's promises made to them, and to weight on him with patience. The end of their punishment was not God's satisfaction, but their reformation, and the peoples. speaker D. B. P. To this M. Perkins answereth, first, that man must be considered in a twofold estate, as he is under the law, and as he is under grace: In the former estate, all afflictions were curses of the law: in the latter, they are turned unto them that believe in Christ, from curses into trials, corrections, For satisfaction was made by Christ. preventions, admonitions, instructions, and into what you will else, saving satisfaction. Now to the purpose: Whereas God (saith he) denied the believing Israelits, with Moses and Aaron to enter into the land of Canaan, it cannot be proved that it was a punishment, or penalty of the law laid upon them: the Scripture hath no more but that it was an admonition unto all age's following, to take heed of like offences, as Paul writeth: All th●se things came unto them for examples, and were written for our admonition. 1. Cor. 10. Reply. He that will not be ashamed of this audacious assertion, needs not to care what he saith: Hath the Scripture no more of their fact, then that it was an admonition to others? Turn to the original places, where the whole matter in particular is related: First their murmuration, than Moses intercession for them, and the obtaining of their pardon, and lastly, after all the rest, God's sentence of deprivation of them from entering into the land of promise, for that their murmuration: Again, Numb. 14. Numb. 20. vers. 24. Deut. 32. 51. Aaron shall not enter into the land, because he hath been disobedient to my voice: and of Moses. Because he hath trespassed against me at the waters of strife. So that nothing is more clear even by the testimony of the holy Ghost, then that their days were shortened, and their hope of entrance into the land of promise cut off, in punishment of those offences, which were before forgiven them. And these things being recorded as S. Paul testifieth, for our admonition and instruction: we are to learn thereby, that God so deals daily with all those sinners that he calleth to repentance. speaker A. W. Master Perkins denies not that this punishment was laid upon them for those sins, but that the Scripture affords any proof to show, that it was a penalty of the law, as a h Deut. 27. 26. part of the Curse, which appertains to sinners by the law, i Gal. 3. 13. for which Christ hath fully satisfied. The punishments, in themselves, were penalties of the law: but they are notsuch to them, who, by k Rom. 3. 25. 26. true faith in Christ, have all their sins fully satisfied for by him. speaker W. P. Object. III. David was punished after his repentance for his adultery, for the child died, and he was plagued in his own kind, in the incest of Absalon: and when he had numbered the people he was yet punished in the death of his people, after his own repentance. Answ. I answer as before that the hand of God was upon David after his repentance: but yet the judgements which befell him were not curses unto him properly, but corrections for his sins, and trial of his faith, and means to prevent further sin, and to renew both his faith and repentance: as also they served to admonish others in like case; for David was a public person and his sins were offensive, both within the Church of God and without. speaker D. B. P. What dotage is this to grant the very same thing, which he would be thought to deny: but yet in other terms, that the simple (whom only What dotage is it for you to take one thing for another? he can beguile) may not perceive it: If the hand of God were upon David correcting him for his sin, and that after his repentance: did not David then suffer temporal punishment for his sins before forgiven: Which is most properly to satisfy for them. speaker A. W. David was punished, but not to satisfy God's wrath, remaining after the eternal punishment was taken away, by the sactifice of the Messiah, made effectual to David by his faith. The reason of his punishment (as l 2. Sam. 12. 14. the Scripture expressly saith) was the stopping of the Heathens mouths, who were likely to blaspheme God, because of David's sin; as if God either would not have seen, or had not cared what manner of man by his special providence he had preferred to the kingdom of Israel. Master Perkins truly and constantly denies the same thing still, viz. that David's punishment was for satisfaction to God, by bearing part of the curse due to sinners by the law; which only is to satisfy. The reason of this denial (that I may answer once again for all) is, that m Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us. speaker D. B. P. Yea over and beside this punishment inflicted by God, he of his own devotion performed far greater satisfaction, by putting on sackcloth lying on the bare ground, by watering his couch with tears, and making He never dreamt of satisfaction in all this repentance. Psal. 50. ashes his food, and in this most pitiful plight, he made most humble supplication unto God, to wash him more and more from his iniquity: he never dreamt that this his satisfaction, should be any derogation unto the satisfaction of his Lord and Saviour: but in the Psalm saith. That such an humble and contrite heart, is a sweet sacrifice unto God. speaker A. W. David had not so little feeling either of his saviours love, or his own sin, as to think that the one had satisfied by halves, or the other by such outward carriage could be satisfied for. His praying and humbling of himself was to another end; n 2. Sam. 12. 16. partly to entreat for the child's life, whom he loved most dearly; and partly o Psal. 51. 8. See 12. Art. part. 2. art. 1. 〈◊〉. to obtain the recovery of that joy and comfort, which he had formerly taken in the sense of God's love to him; to which he was not to be restored but upon earnest repentance at God's good pleasure. speaker D. B. P. We deny not but the punishment of one, is a warning and admonition unto another, to take heed of the like: so may not they deny, but that correction is to the party himself, as an admonition to beware afterward, so a correction and punishment of the fault past. Which S. Augustine upon this verse of the Psalm. Thou hast loved truth, teacheth Psal. 50. most plainly: saying. Thou hast not left their sins whom thou diddest pardon, unpunished: for thou before didst so show mercy, that thou mightest also preserve truth: thou dost pardon him, that confesseth his fault, thou dost pardon him, but so as he do punish himself: and by that means both mercy and truth are preserved. speaker A. W. That p Aug. ad Psa. 50. punishment of a man's self, which Austin speaketh of, is not to make satisfaction, but to show repentance; as it may well be gathered, because it is joined to forgiveness; which can have no place where the debt is paid. If I make satisfaction, God forgives me not: If God forgive me, what do I satisfy for? Therefore the grief and humiliation of a sinner, is not to satisfy God, that he need not be forgiven, but to repent that he may be forgiven. So far is David from pleading satisfaction by punishing himself, that he entreats for pardon, upon confession of his fault. Because (saith q Glossa. Ordin. ad Psal. 50. 6. è Castiodo●o. the Gloss, out of Cassiodorus) he had told the truth by confessing, which God desires more than sacrifice: therefore he entreats for help. speaker W. P. Object. IV. The Prophets of God, when the people are threatened with the plague, famine, sword, captivity, etc. exhort them to repent and to humble themselves in sackcloth and ashes: and thereby they turned away the wrath of God that was then coming forth against them. Therefore by temporal humiliation, men may escape the temporal punishments of the Lord. Answ. Famine, sword, banishment, the plague, and other judgements sent on God's people, were not properly punishments of sin, but only the corrections of a father, whereby he humbled them that they might repent. speaker D. B. P. Our fourth reason the Prophets of God, when the people were threatened with Famine, the Sword, the Plague, or such l●ke punishments for their sins, did commonly exhort them to works of penance, as fasting, prayer, haircloth, and the like to appease God's wrath, justly kindled against them: which being performed by them, God was satisfied. So (for example sake) the Ninivits at jonas preaching, doing penance in sackcloth and ashes, turned away the sentence of God against them. M. Perkins answereth, that famine, the plague, and such like scourge● of God, were not punishments of sins, but corrections of a Father. Reply. This is most flat against a thousand express texts of the Scripture: which declare that for the transgressions of God's commandments, he hath sent those punishments upon the people of Israel. And what is the correction of a Father, but the punishing of a shrewd son for some fault committed, yet in a mild sort? Or doth the Schoolmaster (which is Calvin's example) whip the Scholar, or strike him with the f●●ula, but to punish him for some fault? So that great Rabbins seem not to understand, what they say themselves, when they admit those scourges of God to be the corrections of a Father, but not the punishment for a fault. As though Fathers used to correct those sons, who never offended them: Or Masters to beat such Scholars as commit no faults. speaker A. W. It is against never a one of those places, if there were ten thousand of them. Sin was the occasion of those punishments, but they were not properly punishments for sin to any of the people, who were pardoned by resting upon Christ's satisfaction through faith, and manifested their true repentance by their humiliation. And such is the correction of a father, oftentimes perhaps more severe, than some punishment of a Magistrate; yet not for revenge and satisfaction, but properly for correction and admonition. You much mistake the matter, when you think we deny that they are laid upon us for sin, and, because of your own error, condemn our writers of not understanding what they say. Correction is for the fault, but not to satisfy for it. speaker W. P. O● thus, they were punishments tending to correction, not serving for satisfaction. speaker D. B. P. But saith M. Perkins, these punishments be tending to correction, not serving for satisfaction: what senseless rhyming is this? By due correction of the fault, the party is satisfied in justice: and when he that hath offended, doth abide such punishment as the grievousness of his offence did require, there is both due correction of the offender, and due satisfaction unto the party offended. speaker A. W. A professed scholar might know how to make difference betwixt rhymes & figures of Rhetoric. Did you never hear of Epistrophe, when the like sound is repeated in the clauses of sentences? It is very like Master Perkins did not regard the figure, but hit upon it, as it were, by chance. Howsoever, it is not a rhyme; because the vowels in the syllables, which have the accent, are divers. Well, for the matter you answer, That a punishment may be both for satisfaction and correction. What then? Therefore these are so. I deny the consequence; because (if I may repeat the same answer, as oft as you bring the same objection) satisfaction is, in this case, made already by Christ for as many as truly believe in him. speaker W. P. And the punishments of God are turned from them, not because they satisfy the justice of God in their own sufferings, but because by faith they lay hold on the satisfaction of the Messias, and testify the same by their humiliation and repentance. speaker D. B. P. As we first grant that all satisfaction hath his virtue, from the grace of God, dwelling in us, which is given us for Christ's sake: so to say that Christ's satisfaction taketh away all other satisfaction, is just to beg the principal point in question, and therefore an old trivants trick, to give that for a final answer, which was set in the beginning to be debated. speaker A. W. The answerer is not said to beg the question, but the replier. For to beg the question, is to take that for a proof which is in question. Now it belongs not to the answerer to prove, but to the replier, whose person in this argument, not Master Perkins, but you sustain. speaker D. B. P. Look upon the forenamed example of the Ninivits, of whom it is not certain that they had any express knowledge of the Messias, and therefore were far enough off from laying hold on his satisfaction. But most certain and evident it is in the text, that God upon the contemplation of their works of penance, took compassion on them, and was satisfied; as by turning away the threatened subversion is most manifest. speaker A. W. The example of the Ninivites is from the purpose: for if (as you confess) they did not lay hold on the Messiahs satisfaction, how could they, by this repentance of theirs, apply this satisfaction of his to the purchasing of God's favour; which (as you taught us before) is the use of your satisfaction? Secondly, if they had not true saith in the Messiah, r Bellarm. de poenit. lib. 2. cap. 12. their eternal punishment was unsatisfied for; and we speak of that satisfaction which is made for the temporal, after the eternal is discharged. From this, and such like examples, we may conclude, that God sometimes for bears to lay outward judgements upon sinners, s 1. Reg. 21. 29 when, and because they humble themselves: but that these men made satisfaction to God, either by applying Christ's satisfaction to themselves, or by redeeming the temporal punishment, remaining after the pardon of the eternal, or by making God amends for their former sins, neither can it be proved, nor (I think) you, upon better advice, will affirm. speaker W. P. Object. V. Dan. 4. 24. Daniel giveth this counsel to Nabuchadnezar, redeem thy sins by justice, and thine iniquities by alms deeds. Behold (say they) alms deeds are made means to satisfy for man's iniquities. speaker D. B. P. If by such good deeds our sins may be redeemed, as Holy writ doth testify, than it followeth that such works yield a sufficient satisfaction for them, for redemption signifieth a full contentment of the party offended, as well as satisfaction. speaker A. W. This example of Nabuchadnezzar is no more to purpose, than that of the Ninivites. For the satisfaction we dispute of, cannot be performed by any, but him that hath his sins forgiven, in respect of the eternal punishment, by the satisfaction of Christ: such as this King, at the least at this time, of the Prophet's counsel was not. speaker W. P. Answ. The word which they translate to redeem, [as the most learned in the Chaldie tongue with one consent avouch] doth properly signify to break off, as if the Prophet should say: O King, thou art a mighty Monarch, and to enlarge thy kingdom thou hast used much injustice and cruelty, therefore now repent of thine iniquity, and break off these thy sins, testify thy repentance by doing justice, and give alms to the poor whom thou hast oppressed. Therefore here is nothing spoken of satisfaction for sin, but only of testification of repentance by the fruits thereof. speaker D. B. P. To Authors in the air, without any pressing of the propriety of the word no answer can be given. speaker A. W. Either your knowledge and reading is less than you would have it thought to be, or you knew this answer to be true; and did but shift it off, that you might not seem to Dan 4. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be overcome. The word indeed is hebrew, signifying to rub, and so to break off by rubbing. It is properly spoken of cattle, which being yoked, rub against a tree, or wall, or some other hard thing, till they have fretted their yoke in sunder, and so freed themselves. Hence is that speech of Gen. 27. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isaac to Esau: Thou shalt rub his yoke off thy neck. And from hence it is, that the word signifies to redeem, or deliver; yet not by making satisfaction, but by breaking the bonds in sunder. Servants have ruled over us, saith the Prophet, and Lament. 5. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is no man that rids us out of their hands. So Aaron bids the people to take or break off their ear-rings, viz. by opening the ring, by which they were fastened. Agreeably hereunto Exod. 32. 2. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prophet in this place adviseth the King to break off his sins, which held him captive, and so to free himself from them. And this is the first sense of the word; as it appears also in the Hebrew Concordance and Dictionaries. Concor. l. Haebraic. Pagnin. Auenar. Beside, the only way for him to escape the judgement threatened, which was temporal, was to give over those sins, for which it was denounced: in which sense he might be said to redeem his sins, in respect of the punishment to come; that is, to avoid and free himself from the evil, which else would fall upon him. speaker D. B. P. But let us admit that it be broken off; his sin not being co●etousnes, but pride and lack of acknowledging all Kingdoms to depend upon God as the text itself doth specify. To break off this sin by alms, and compassion of the poor, is nothing else but by such works of charity, in some sort to satisfy God's justice, thereby to move him to take compassion of him. speaker A. W. The chief sin was pride of his own estate; the next to it, and issuing from it, oppression of many people: of that t Dan. 4. 22. 24. the Prophet spoke in expounding the vision; here he deals with him about the other, willing him to practise the contrary virtues, that he might so escape the destruction that was threatened: for the Prophet knew, that it was possible, even for wicked men, to avoid punishment denounced, upon the forsaking of their outward sins, whereby they had provoked the Lord to use those threatenings. And that by almesdeeds we are cleansed from our sins, our Saviour Daniel 4. Luc. 11. himself doth teach, saying. Give alms, and behold all things are clean unto you. speaker A. W. That alms should be of force to cleanse men from their sins, and sins of a different nature from the contrary to alms giving, is a matter that hath no likelihood of truth in it. And much less can it be proved by that place of u Luk. 11. 41. S. Luke, where our Saviour reproving the hypocrisy of the pharisees in washing so carefully before meats, as if they thought themselves otherwise clean, when they respected not what wrong they did, and what extortion they used, exhorts them rather to purge their hearts of their covetousness, and to give to the poor, and then all these outward things, meat, drink, and such like should be clean, and ●it for them, without such superstitious washing. speaker W. P. Object. VI Matth. 3. 2. Do penance: and bring forth fruits worthy of penance, which (say they) are works of satisfaction enjoined by the Priest. speaker A. W. Our sixth, Bring forth the worthy fruits of penance. That is, do such D. B. P. Math. 3. Luc. 3. works, as become them who are penitent. john, seeing the pharisees come to his baptism, exhorts them not only to make show of repentance, but to bring forth fruits, x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. be seeming or worthy of them that repent. The same is otherwise thus expressed, y Act. ●6. 20. To repent and turn to God, and to do works worthy repentance; to z Ephes. 4. 1. walk worthy of their calling. But for the interpretation we agree in sense. speaker D. B. P. Which (as S. Chrysostome expoundeth) are: He that hath stolen away Hom. 10. in Math. another man's goods let him now give of his own: he that hath committed fornication, let him abstain from the lawful company of his own wife, and so forth. Recompensing the works of sin, with the contrary works of virtue: The same exposition giveth Saint Gregory, and to omit all others, Hom. 10. in evang. In Psal 4. venerable Bede interpreteth them thus Mortify your sins by doing the worthy fruits of penance, to wit, by afflicting yourselves so much for every offence, as worthy penance doth require, which will be a sacrifice of justice, that is, a most just sacrifice. speaker A. W. So do we acknowledge the exposition which the ancients give of it, though we think the exhortation to be somewhat larger than they seem in the words alleged, to make it: for it comprehends all kind of holy conversation, not only the change of the gross outward sins, which we doubt not was their meaning also, as it is manifest by Chrysostome in a Chrysost. ad Math hom. 10 that place you bring, who describes the repentance that he speaks of to be not only a leaving of our former sins, but a fulfilling of good works, which he proves by that place of the Psalm, b Psal 37. Eschew evil and do good: and c Chrysost. ad Math. hom. 11. expounding those words, bring forth fruits etc. It is not enough saith john to fly from naughtiness, unless we betake ourselves to the practice of well doing. You see what he saith (quoth Theophylact) that we must not only avoid evil, but also bring forth the fruit of virtue. To which he adds for proof that place of the Psalm. Yea we refuse not that of d Beda ad Psalm. 4. & add Math. 3. & add Luc. 3. Bede, for it is indeed a sacrifice fit for us in justice to offer, that our repentance be answerable in proportion to our sins. But what is all this to prove, that there remains tempo all pain to be endured, whereby God's wrath may be satisfied? especially when as Chrysostome saith plainly, that john persuading the people to repentance, did it not that they might be punished, but that being made humble by repenting, and condemning themselves, because of their sins, they might come to the gift of pardon. speaker W. P. Answ. This text is absurd: for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifieth thus much, change your minds from sin to God, and testify it by good works, that is, by doing the duties of the moral law: which must be done, not because they are means to satisfy God's justice for man's fine, but because they are fruits of that faith and repentance which lies in the heart. speaker D. B. P. Reply. His answer is most absurd, for we argue out of these words (Worthy fruits of penance.) And he answereth to the word going before, repent: which we use not against them and for his gloze or testifying our repentance, is sufficiently confuted, by the Fathers before alleged. speaker A. W. Surely a reasonable man might well think that you that hold a necessity of satisfaction, and bring that text, did ground your argument upon john's charge to do penance. The authors alleged do not confute that interpretation, by bringing another, which is not 〈◊〉 ●…ty to it, at the least we deny your consequence upon their words. And S. john expressly maketh them the means to esca●… wrath D. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. of God: saying, that the 〈◊〉 was set to the ●…ose of the ●rie, and un less by worthy fruits of penan●… they 〈◊〉 God, they 〈◊〉 ●e 〈◊〉 up, and cast into hell fire: and 〈◊〉 h●… confute the ●aying ●…d on Christ's satisfaction by faith: saying 〈◊〉 w●●l not help you to say th●● ye are the Sons of Abraham, who was ●…her of all true beleeveis: as much as if he had said, trust not to your faith hand off ye generation of vipers. For notwithstanding ye be the Sons of the faithful, unless ye amend your lives, and for the evil works, which ye have deno●… tofore, make recompense, and satisfy the justice of God with good, y●● shall be cast into hell fire. speaker A. W. Neither doth john speak of any satisfaction for the temporal punishment after the pardon of the eternal, but threatens them with everlasting damnation, except they bring forth the fruits of repentance, as well as make a profession of it, by being baptized, so that if satisfaction be required in those words, doubtless it is that satisfaction which may free them from hell fire: but that (you confess) is not to be performed by every man, for himself, but by Christ, for all that trust in him. To whom seems he to confute the very matter of all his preaching? not to e Beda ubi supra. Bede, who in the place alleged by you tells us, that john exhorts the pharisees to humility, who were so proud because they were Abraham's children, that they would not confess themselves to be sinners: nor to f Lyea, at Matt. 3. Lyra, who writes thus, Because the pharisees & Lawyers refused Abraham's faith of Christ, therefore they lost the name of Abraham's sons. And certainly it had been against reason for john to have dissuaded the Saducees and pharisees from trusting in Christ, as well because it was his especial commission to persuade men by all means to believe in Christ, as also for that there was not the least cause of suspicion, that they would be g Math. 11, 28, joan. 6. 35 too forward to trust in him, who had so strong a persuasion of their own righteousness, that they could find no want of his help. speaker W. P. Object. VII. 2. Cor. 7. 10. Paul setteth down sundry fruits of repentance: whereof the last is revenge, whereby repentant persons punish themselves, thereby to satisfy God's justice for the temporal punishment of their sins. Answ. A repentant sinner must take revenge of himself, and that is only to use all means which serve to subdue the corruption of his nature, to bridle carnal affections and to mortify sin: and these kind of actions are restrainments properly, and not punishments: and are directed against the sin, and not against the person. speaker D. B. P. The 7. objection with M. Perkins. Paul setteth down sundry fruits of repentance, whereof one is revenge, whereby repentant persons punish 2. Co. 7. 10. themselves to satisfy God's justice, for the temporal punishment of their sins. M. Perkins answereth. A repentant sinner must take vengeance of himself, and that is, to use all means to subdue the corruption of nature, and to bridle carnal affections, which kind of actions are restrainements properly, but no punishments, directed against the sin, but not against the person. Reply. I never saw any writer so contradict himself, and so dull, that he doth not understand his own words. If this subduing of our corrupt It this he whom you so commended in the beginning? nature, be restrainments only from sin hereafter, and not also punishments of sin past, how then doth the repentant sinner take vengeance of himself, which you affirm that he must do? Revenge as every simple body knoweth, is the requital of evil past: We grant that all satisfaction is directed against sin, and not against the person, but for the great good of the man, albeit that for a season it may afflict, both his body and mind too, as S. Paul's former Epistle did the Corinthians. speaker A. W. If he understood not his own words, he is like to have small help of you, who either cannot, or will not conceive his meaning aright. The revenge that a sinner must take of himself is (saith Master Perkins) to use all good means which serve to subdue his corruption: but this is not properly a punishment of the person, against whom it is not directed, but against the sin, wherein now lies the contradiction? for sooth because revenge is a requital of evil past, therefore the sinner in his revenge, punisheth himself for his sin. But Master Perkins hath already answered, that the revenge the Apostle speaks of, is of an other kind, being directed to the reformation of the party, not to the punishing of him. It is called revenge, because the Corinthians used the same means for the reforming of themselves, that men commonly do when they revenge. If this word revenge would not bear this interpretation (which you have not proved nor can prove) yet were not Master Perkins guiltic of contradiction, or not understanding his own words, but only of mistaking the sense of the word. speaker D. B. P. But this sorrow being according unto God, doth much benefit the The text speaketh not of appeasing God's wrath. person, as the Apostle declareth. For besides this revenge taken on himself to appease God's wrath, it breedeth (as it is in the text following) in our corrupt nature, that loveth not such chasusement, A fear to return to sin, lest it be again punished. For where there is no fear of pains, and much pleasure, thither our corruption will run headlong. It stirreth up also in us, Indignation against sin, and all the wicked instruments of it, A defence and clearing of ourselves, with the honester fort, And an emulation, and desire to she as fairy from sin as other our equals, and consequently, A love of virtue and honest life, which freeth us from that sorrow and all other troublesome passions, all which are plainly gathered out of the same text of Saint Paul. speaker A. W. Let us put the case to your liking, that this revenge was a requite all of evil past, will it follow thereupon that therefore they did it to satisfy God for the temporal punishment which otherwise they were to have endured: I trow not, your h Glossa Interlin. ad 2. Cor. 7. 11. gloss reserres it to their care to punish sin, not to satisfy by punishing, that they might show they misliked and hated sin, because (saith the Gloss) you punish even yourselves when you sin, since you punish (saith another i Lyra ad 2. Cor. 7. Gloss) your own sins, and especially (since you punish) k Aliena potissimum. other men's. But if it were for satisfaction, a man would punish his own especially, that he might avoid a greater judgement. Your ordinary Gloss applies that revenge to the sin of the incestuous person. You have showed (saith the m Glossa Ordin. ad 2. Cor. 7. 11. Gloss) by punishing him that committed the incest, that n Incontaminatos. you were undefiled: so doth o Caretan. ad 2. Cor 7. Caietan also expound it, This (saith he) was the last effect against the incestuous person, for they used revenging justice in excommunicating him: so p Chrysostom. Theophylact. Hieronymab. Chrysostome, You punished them that had sinned against the laws of God, so Theophylact, so Jerome. speaker W. P. Lastly they make three works of satisfaction, prayer, fasting, and alms deeds. For the first it is mere foolishness to think, that man by prayer can satisfy for his sins. speaker D. B. P. That prayer doth appease God's justice, and obtain pardon, God himself is witness, saying. Call upon me in the day of tribulation, and I will deliver Psal. 49. thee. Prayer cannot be made without saith in God's power, and hope in his goodness, and therefore must needs be pleasing in God's sight: by prayer we humble ourselves before God, and acknowledge his omnipotency, and our infirmity. By prayer we lament with bitter tears our own ingratitude, folly and wickedness, and bewail the grievousness of our sins: such prayer made King David (as his Psalms do testify) water his couch with tears, making them his food day and night: and by them he satisfied for his former offences. So did a far greater sinner than he, King Manasses: who falling into tribulation, prayed unto This of satisfying is quite beside the text. a. Paral. 33. Of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. See 12. Art. par. 2. art. 2. C. the Lord his God, and did great penance before the God of his Fathers, and prayed, and entreated earnestly, and God heard his prayer, and brought him back again to jerusalem into his Kingdom. speaker A. W. God pardons sinners that call upon him for mercy and deliverance, therefore their prayers appease his justice. There is no show of truth in this consequence. What though true prayer please God? doth it therefore satisfy his justice? Whom doth it not please, that he which hath offended, should crave pardon? yet is not this a satisfaction to justice. David and Manasses lamented their sins, and called upon God for mercy, but what scripture saith, they satisfied for their sins by so doing? It were an easy matter to satisfy justice, if entreating pardon would make satisfaction. speaker W. P. It is all one as if they had said, that a beggar by ask of alms should deserve his alms: or, that a debtor by requesting his creditor to pardon his debt, should thereby pay his debt. speaker D. B. P. A beggar doth not deserve his alms; because he makes not this former kind of prayer, * Such as your Ave-maries Huddled up. but the short flight one of the Protestants from the lips outward: The like we say of a debtor, whose creditor being a needy man, will not be paid without money, but God who needs none of our goodness, highly esteemeth of a humble and contri●e heart, grieved much for having sinned in the sight of God, and humbly suing unto him for pardon. To such a one he said. Did I not forgive thee all thy debt, because thou besough est me. Math. 18. speaker A. W. Belike than if a beggar do entreat an alms from his heart, by a set speech, as long as one of your Auemaryes, he deserves that he asks. If he deserve it, it is small charity to give it, and injustice not to guide it. What if the creditor be not a needy man, and would be content to be paid his debt by a days labour, which, upon the man's entreaty he releaseth also, doth the debtor satisfy by entreating? God forgives upon entreaty, therefore entreating makes satisfaction. These loose consequences fall asunder of themselves without touching. speaker W. P. Secondly, fasting is a thing indifferent, of the same nature with eating and drinking and of itself conferreth nothing to the obtainement of the kingdom of heaven, no more than eating and drinking doth. speaker D. B. P. What an Epicurian, and fleshly Doctrine is this? Why then did the It is one thing to say fasting pleaseth God, another to say it satisfieth for sin. Math. 6. Ninivits fast, put on sack cloth, and lie on the ground (all which bodily afflictions are reduced to fasting) rather than eat, and drink, and presume of God's mercy, if the one had been as acceptable to God as the other? Why is S. john Baptist commended for his rough garments and thin diet, if cherishing the flesh please God as well, as punishing of it? Christ saith expressly. That if we fast in secret, his heavenly Father will repay us openly: Will he reward eating, and drinking so liberally? but of falling we shall have a whole Chapter hereafter. Therefore Briefly I here conclude, that this Doctrine tendeth to the establishment of the Kingdom of Atheists and Epicures, whose sweet speech is. Let us eat, and let us drink, for after death there is no pleasure. True: for such Belly-gods and th●● followers. speaker A. W. What a bad practice and foolish question are these of yours? Master Perkins saith, that fasting (of itself) confers no more to the obtaining of heaven, then eating doth. You leave out the principal point in reporting his opinion, and then you ask, why the Ninivits fasted, if eating be as acceptable to God (you must add, of itself) as fasting? because though of itself it pleased not God, yet as part of repentance it doth when it shows humiliation and sorrow. But they might have fasted long enough, without being humbled, and have been never awhit the nearer for it. But let it be granted, that fasting did please God (of itself) as prayer doth, will you thereupon conclude that therefore it satisfies God's justice? Prove the consequence; john Baptist is described to have lived upon such meat as the place where he abode did ordinarily afford, but it is not said that he used a thin diet, much less is he commended for it, as if the thing (of itself) had pleased God. It was fit for him, by the extraordinary direction of God's spirit, to follow such an austere course of life, not to satisfy for any punishment, but q Luk. 7. 31. 32. 33. to make the Israelites the more carefully attend so extraordinary a man's preaching. The r Math. 6. 18. reward that God will give to them that in private repent of their sins with fasting, is not because fasting (of itself) pleaseth him, but for that such fasting is part of their repentance. speaker W. P. Thirdly and lastly alms deeds cannot be works of satisfaction for sins. For when we give them as we ought, we do but our duty, whereunto we are bound. And we may as well say, that a man by paying one debt may discharge another: as to say that by doing his duty he may satisfy God's justice for the punishment of his sins. These we confess be fruits of faith, but yet are they no works of satisfaction: but the only and all-sufficient satisfaction made to God's justice for our sins, is to be found in the person of Christ, being procured by the merit of his death, and his obedience. And thus our doctrine touching satisfaction is cleared: and it is to be learned carefully of our common people, because the opinion of human satisfaction is natural, and sticks fast in the heart of natural men. Hereupon when any have sinned, and feel touch of conscience any way, their manner is, then to perform some outward humiliation and repentance, thinking thereby to stop the mouth of conscience, and by doing some ceremonial duties to appease the wrath of God for their sins. Yea, many think to satisfy God's justice by repeating the Creed, the Lords prayer, and the ten Commandments, so foolish are they in this kind. speaker A. W. A man might suppose, that this man were prettily well seen in Carolo D. B. P. That is for you travailers. Bussone, that thus ruffleth in grave matters with his simple Similes. If the similes were as simple as your answers to them, a man should lose both his time and his labour to read either of them, show their unfitness for the purpose, if you can. speaker D. B. P. That Almesdeeds redeem our sins, purge us from them, and make And already answered. Serm. de opere & eleenios. all things clean unto us, hath been already proved out of holy scriptures, I will join thereunto this one testimony of that worthy Maityr Saint Cyprian. Our frailty could not tell what to do, vulesse the goodness of God, by teaching us the works of justice and mercy, had showed us a certain way of preserving our salvation, which is, that with Almesdeeds we might wash clean away the filth of sins, which we had contracted after Baptism. The holy Ghost speaketh in the Scripture, and saith. Sins are purged by almesdeeds and saith. speaker A. W. Cyprian intending to exhort all men to alms deeds, is somewhat too far carried with his earnestness to persuade, especially since he ascribes to it the purging of sin, whereas it can reach no farther at the uttermost by your doctrine, then to satisfy for the temporal punishment. His proof s Prou. 15. 27. out of scripture is not there to be found, for though your vulgar translation have it, yet it is not in the original, nor in your t Interlin. bibl. Aria's Mont. Chald. paraphr. Vatablus. interlinear Bible, nor in Montanus, nor in the Chaldee Paraphrase, nor in Vatablus. The Greek seems to have had it added out of the u Tobi. 4. 11. Apocryphal. speaker D. B. P. Now to M. Perkins Simile. We deny that a man is bound to give all the alms that he can: We are bound to give that which we may well spare, when there is great want: But alms (which is a part of satisfaction) is not given out of our superfluity, but spared from our necessary uses. And is many times bestowed, when there is no such great need, upon building Schools, Colleges, Hospitals, and Chapels, And this may Whom may it serve? No reasonable man. serve to answer M. Perkins Similes against these three works of satisfaction: If any man desire to know why we make special reckoning of these three works, it is principally for two causes: First, we being to satisfy, must perform it with such things, as be our own, which be of three sorts, either they belong to our soul, or to our body, or to our external goods; the goods of our mind, we offer to God by prayer, by fasting, and other bodily discipline, we exhibit unto him, A living host, holy and pleasing God. By Almesdeeds we make him an agreeable present Rom. 12. 1. of our goods. Secondly, all sin as S. john teacheth, may be reduced 1. Epist. 2. to three principal heads. The concupiscence of the flesh: that is heacherie, which is cooled by fasting and such like afflicting of the body; Concupiscence of the eyes, Covetousness, which is purged and chased away by almesdeeds: And pride of life, which is suppressed by humble prayer, and often meditation of our own miseries. speaker A. W. When we give alms, as we ought (saith Master Perkins) we do but our duty. You answer, that we are not bound to give all the alms we can. Is this to gainsay him? We are bound to spare, even from our necessary use, when the necessity of our brethren requires it. He that hath no more meat than to fill his own belly, is bound to give his brother part of it, if he see him ready to starve. As for other giving, when we cannot spare that we give, and there is no necessity, it is so far from being a satisfaction for old sins, that it is a committing of new. But whence comes this distinction? It is not either in Cyprian, or in Toby, or that place thrust into the book of Toby. And out of question it was not daniel's meaning, that King Nabuchadnezzar should give to the poor, so that he should come into want himself by giving; Neither (I think) can you prove it was our saviours meaning, when he exhorted the pharisees to alms deeds. But do you not perceive that you mar all by this doctrine? Who will give any thing at his death to your Monasteries, if he may not by giving make some satisfaction? And what satisfaction▪ can then be made, when a man gives all of superfluity, as having need of nothing? There must be some help thought on for this matter, or all will be nought. That which follows, presumes there must be satisfaction made, and shows why you think those the fittest means for to satisfy by. But where the foundation is overthrown, what shall we need to thrust at the building. Only I will add here in the end of this discourse, a few, of many means, for the procuring of pardon by satisfaction. Pope john the 22. granted seven hundred years of pardon to every one, that should kiss three times the measure of our Lady's foot (as Pardon. 700. years. you call her) and should say devoutly three Ave-maries to her blessed honour and worship. The measure is to be had in Spain, printed together with the grant of pardon, I have caused it to be printed and inserted in this place. Monstra te esse Matrem: sumat per te preces. Qui 〈◊〉 nobis N●… tus tulit 〈◊〉 se tuus. Show thyself to be a Mother: let him by thy mediation receive our prayers. Who f●… our sak●… vouchs●… to be th●… Son. El Papa ivan 22. Concedio a quien besare esta medida tres vezoes, y rezare tres ave Maria's devotament, a su bendito honour y reverencia, gana setecientos anos de pardon. Y es libre de muchos peligroes. Teniendo la Bula de la santa Cruzada. Impressa con licencia. Dirigida a la devotion del Cavallero de Gracia. Pope john the 22. granted to every one, that shall kiss this measure three times, and shall say three Aue-maries' devoutelie to her honour and worship, to have seven hundred years of pardon; and to be free from many dangers; always provided that he have the Bull of the holy Cruzada. Printed by authority, directed to the devotion of the Knight of Grace. Sixtus the 4. granted to all them that devoutly say a short Horae Virgins Mariae ad usum Sarisburiensis Ecclesiae. Fol. 42. a. Years 11000. Fol. 38. b. prayer (beginning ave Maria matter Dei) before the image of our Lady, the sum of eleven hundred years of pardon. He that shall devoutly say that prayer (Obsecro te Domina) etc. before our Lady of Pity, she will show him her blessed visage, and warn him the day and hour of his death, and in his last end the Angels of God shall yield his soul to heaven, and he shall obtain five hundred years, and so many Lents of pardon, Years 500 Lents. 500 granted by five Popes. Enough for failing. Sixtus the Pope to every one (being in the state of grace, which Fol. 45. a. must be observed) that shall say (in the morning, after three tellings of the Aue-bell) three times the whole salutation of our Lady, granted for every time so doing, of the spiritual treasure of holy Church three hundred days of pardon. Toties quoties. Days 300. toties quoties. Fol. 50. b. Deliver 15. souls of Purgatory, Convert 15. finners. Confirm 15. righteous. Fol. 54 a. Years 32755. These be fist●●ene Oos, which S. Bridget was wont to say, etc. who so say these a wheel year, shall deliver fifteen souls out of Purg●… of his next kindred, and convert other fifteen sinners to goodlife, and other fifteen righteous men of his kind, shall persevere in good life. To all them, that before this Image of Pity, devoutly say five Pater nosters, and five Aves, and a Credo, piteously beholding these arms of Christ's passion, are granted thirty two thousand, seven hundred, fifty five years of pardon. Sixtus the 4. made the fourth and fifth prayers, and hath * Caused his pardon to be bulled. Fol. 58. a. Days 3000. for deadly sins. Years 10000 done bulled his foresaid pardon. john the 22. hath granted to all, that devoutly say this prayer, after the elevation of our Lord jesus Christ, three thousand days of pardon for deadly sins. Boniface the 6. granted ten thousand years of pardon, upon the saying of another prayer, between the elevation, and the three Agnus This. Sixtus the 4. hath granted to all them that be in the state of Fol. 60. a. Clean remission of all their sias perpetually enduring. grace, saying this prayer following, immediately after the elevation of the body of our Lord, clean remission of all their sins perpetually enduring. And john the 3. hath granted to all them that devoutly say the same prayer before the Image of our Lord crucified, as many days of pardon, as there were wounds in the body of our Lord, in of the time of his bitter passion; the which were 5465. Days 5465. The number wounds that were in our Lord's body in the time of his Passion. Fol. 66. a. Years 1000000. Fol. 72. a. Who that devoutly say these prayers, shall obtain ten hundred thousand years of pardon for deadly sins: granted by john the 22. Who that devoutly with a contrite heart daily say this Orison; if he be that day in the state of eternal damnation, than this eternal pain shall be changed him into temporal pain of Purgatory; then, if he have deserved the pain of Purgatory, it shall be forgotten and forgiven, through the infinite mercy of God. But, that I may not tyre the reader, and make him cast his gorge at such abominations, which are Popish satisfactions for sins, I will give you a view of the number of years for which pardon is granted in this one book, viz. * Yet Purgatory is to last no longer than the world. 1076832. speaker D. B. P. But now to knit up this question. Let us hear briefly what the best learned, and purest antiquity hath taught of this satisfaction done by man, and because M. Perkins began with Tertullian, omitting his ancients. Let us first hear what he saith of it in his book of penance. How How many of his ancients can you allege foolish is it (saith he) not to fulfil our penance, and yet to expect pardon of our sins, this is not to tender the price, and yet to put out a hand for the reward: for God hath decreed to set the pardon at this price: he proposeth impunity to be redeemed with this recompense of penance. speaker A. W. This is but a trick, to make a show, as if Master Perkins had omitted some ancienter than Tertullian, which else you could have alleged. But who is so little acquainted with your courses, that he knows not we have here the best you can bring? Tertullian, as the ancient writers generally, speaks of repentance, without which it is unreasonable and vain to look for pardon. Now, whereas they mention, and urge oftentimes the outward works, it was, because without them, neither the Church could be satisfied, and men would easily deceive themselves with an opinion of repentance; or at the most with some slight thinking upon, and grieving for their sins. This appears in x Tertull de poenit. cap. 6. that very place immediately after: Therefore if they that sell, first try the coin which they are to receive, that it be not clipped, nor washed, nor countenfeit, we may well think that God will first make trial of the repentance, especially since he is to grant us so great a reward of eternal life. But let us defer the truth of repentance a while. By which words it is plain, that Tertullian speaks of testifying our repentance to be true, by those outward signs of it, which do ordinarily accompany it where it is true. speaker D. B. P. His equal in standing, and better in learning Origen, thus discourseth. But worse for errors. Hom. 3. in lib. Indic. See our good Lord tempering mercy with severity, and weighing the measure of the punishment in a just and merciful balance: he delivereth not up a sinner for ever. But look how long time thou knowest thyself to have offended, so long do thou humble thyself to God, and satisfy him in the confession of penance. speaker A. W. That which I answered before of Tertullian, is made good by this place of Origen: that repentance is the satisfaction they required. Look not (saith y Origen. hom. 3. ad judic. Origen) immediately upon the former words, That Chusarsacon should humble thee, and necessity drive thee (spite of thy teeth) to repentance: but prevent thou this tormentors hands: because if thou amend and correct thyself, God is pitiful and merciful, who will temper revenge toward him that hath prevented it by repentance. So that it is not satisfaction, but amendment that God looks for. speaker D. B. P. That glorious Martyr, and most learned Archbishop S. Cyprian, is wonderful vehement against them, that would not have severe penance done, by such as fell in persecution, saying. That such indiscreet men, labour tooth and nail, that satisfaction be not done to God, highly offended against them. And saith further, That he who withdraweth our brethren from these works of satisfaction, doth miserably deceive them, causing them that might do true penance, and satisfy God their merciful Father, with their prayer and works, to perish daily. And to be more and more seduced to their further damnation. speaker A. W. The former testimony out of * Cyprian. Epist. 10. §. 1. Cyprian is falsely alleged. The words are these: Our brotherhood is deceived by certain amongst you, who while they desired to be plausible, without regard of restoring z Salutis. health, do more hurt them that are fallen. There is no word of satisfaction to God. The case was this, certain Christians had fallen from the profession of religion in time of persecution, who were restored to the enjoying of the word and Sacraments, before they had sufficiently repent, and testified their repentance to the congregation. By this presumption and rashness in receiving these men; the honour of the Martyrs, shame of the Confessors, and the peace of all the people (as Cyprian saith) were disturbed. He therefore writ this epistle, against that bad practice of admitting them that had denied Christ, to the Sacrament●, before either the Church were satisfied, or these men had repent toward God, as was meet. Whereby it came to pass, that whereas by being held out, they might have been brought to true repentance, by this hasty receiving of them they made light of their grievous sins, and remained in state of damnation. Which is the very thing, that Cyprian affirms, in the other testimony, which follows in the same epistle, presently Cyprian. Fp. 10. §. 2. after the amplifying of the sin, by certain places of Scripture. speaker A. W. S. Basil saith. Look to thyself, that according to the proportion of thy fault, thou mayst hence also borrow some help of recovering thy health. Is it D. B. P. Lib. 1. Epist. Lib. 3. Ep. 14. Orat. in illa verba attend Libi. Idem Am. ●d virg. lap. cap. 8 a great and grievous offence? it hath then need of much confession, bitter tears, a sharp combat of watching, and uncessant and continued fasting: if the offence were light and more tollerabte, yet let the penance be equal unto it. a Basil. in illa verba attend tibi. Basil saith no more than we grant; That our repentance must be proportionable to our sin. If you gather from thence that we must satisfy God thereby, I deny your consequence. The end is, that we may become more careful of sinning, and more truly humbled, to increase our thankfulness to God, for pardoning us. speaker D. B. P. S. Gregory Nazianzen saith, It is as great an evil to pardon without some punishment, as to punish without all pity. For as that doth lose the Orat. in sanct. lum. Idem de paup. amor. bridle to all licentiousness, so this doth strain it too much. By compassion on the poor and faith, sins are purged, therefore let us be cleansed by this compassion, let us scour out the spots and filth of our souls with this egregious herb, that makes it white, some as wool, others as snow, according to the proportion of every man's compassion and alms. speaker A. W. b Nazianzen. ●ratione 39 in sancta lumina. Nazianzens' end of requiring punishment (as himself makes it plain) is the restraining of us from sinning: but this proves not, that we can, or must satisfy for the temporal punishment of our sins to God. For this effect may easily be wrought in us, though we be not pu●t up with a conceit of our ability to satisfy. What is it that should encourage us, but hope of immunity? But neither do we promise, nor can any man look for freedom in this case. For though God look not for any further satisfaction than our Saviour Christ hath made him, yet he will chastise our sins sharply, for example to other men, and our own amendment. His other c Nazianzen. de pauper. amore. speech is an earnest exhortation to compassion and mercy, and (as Sixtus Senensis hath taught us) may not be priest to the uttermost. There is no doubt, but God likes of mercy and pity on the poor very highly, and rewards it with increase of grace even in this life, by which we may be said to find favour with God for the avoiding of divers chastisements, not because of their worth, but for that the Lord by them graciously takes knowledge that we have a desire and care to please him. speaker D. B. P. S. Ambrose saith, We have many helps whereby we may redeem our De Helia & jejune. sins, ●ast thou money? Redeem thy sin, not that our Lord is to be bought and so●●, but thou thyself art sold by thy sins, redeem thyself with thy works, redeem thee with thy money. speaker A. W. d Ambros. de Elia & jeiunio, cap. 20. Ambrose having taught before, that being redeemed by the blood of Christ, we are not to have to do with the works of the devil, and that if we do sin, he that once hath pardoned us will not remember the wrongs we have done him, proceeds to exhort us to the redeeming or satisfying for our sins, by all outward means of true repentance, and namely by using well the goods that God hath bestowed on us: he that will press this by the word, may urge satisfaction for sin by it, not only for punishment. Redeem thy sin. Beside, you told us before that satisfaction is not made, but by that, which is spared from our necessary uses. Ambrose here speaks of abundance. Make (saith he) of the instrument of co●etousnes, a help of mercy. And he brings that out of the e Prou. 13. 8. D. B. P. Epist. 82. Proverbs, though misapplied, A man's riches are his redemption. speaker A. W. And, How could we be saved, unless we washed away our sins by fasting. f Ambros. Epist. 82. The other testimony also speaks of washing away, not satisfying for the punishment due to it in Purgatory. He that will read the place, and see the weak proofs that are brought for it, will not greatly rely upon the authority of the writer in that case, yet I had rather expound this and such like passages, of repentance so testified and assured to ourselves and God, then of satisfaction. speaker D. B. P. S. Hierom maketh Paula a blessed Matron say, My face is to be dissigured, which against the commandment of God I painted: my body is to be afflicted, that hath taken so great pleasure: my often laughter, is to be recompensed with continual weeping: my silks and soft clothing, it to be Ad Eustoch. de obitu Paulae. changed into rough hair. speaker A. W. The like may be said to that of g Hieron. ad Eustoch. de obitu Paulae. Jerome, and this beside, that Paula had now resolved, as it followeth in that place, to give herself to please Christ, and not the world, which she could not well do if she continued in the vanities thereof. speaker D. B. P. Read another Epistle of his to the same Eustochium, about the preserving of her virginity, and see what penance himself did, being a most virtuous young man. speaker A. W. As for the penance (as you call it) that Jerome himself did, it was not to satisfy God's wrath for his sins, but to subdue his own corrupt affections, which makes me the rather so expound the former of Paula. I subdued (saith he h Hieron. ad Eustoch. de virginit. in that place) the rebelling flesh, by fasting divers weeks. And afterward, if they suffer this, (that is as the place shows, if they be so tempted) who, their body being consumed, are assaulted by thoughts only, what temptations is a virgin subject to, who lives in the abundance of delights? Yea, Jerome's whole epistle to her, persuades to the avoiding of courtly temptations, by the forsaking of the place of danger, not to satisfaction by penance. speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine saith, He that is truly penitent, looks to nothing else, then that he leaves not unpunished the sin which he committed: For by that Epist. 54. means, not sparing ourselves, he whose high and just judgement no contemtuous person can escape, doth spare us. speaker A. W. The argument of the i Aug. Epist. 54. ad Macedon. epistle to Macedonius, is the anowing of the priests praying for them, who having sinned, promise ecclesiastical penance. The clause you allege out of it makes nothing against us, who confess, that our looking into our own faults, and condemning ourselves for them, and (if you will) afflicting our minds and bodies to, became we have offended, is many times an occasion that God withholds his hand from shiking. For his end being our reformation, by the sight of our sin, and his judgement due unto it, in the nature of the thing, when this effect is already wrought in us, to what purpose should God draw his sword to chastise? D. R 〈◊〉. Lib. 〈◊〉 hom. Ho●…. 50. cap. 1●. speaker A. W. And he showeth how that a penitent sinner doth come to the Priest, and receive of him the measure of his satisfaction. The very beginning of the k Aug lib. hom. 5. homil. 50. cap. xi. homily showeth, that it is true repentance Austin there entreats of, because he proves the necessity and profit of that which he there requires, by those places of scripture which urge humiliation, and amplifies the parable of the Publican, who was justified in his humility, rather than the Pharisie, though he fasted twice a week, and gave tithes of all that he possessed. The end of coming to the priest, Austin makes this, that he may judge whether the sin require any public satisfaction to be made to the Church, or no, that if his sin (saith Austin) be not only to his great hurt, but also to the offence of other, and it seem expedient to the priest, for the benefit of the Church, he may not refuse to do penance before many, or even before the whole multitude, and not by shamefastness add pride to the deadly sore. speaker D. B. P. And he saith directly against our Protestants position, That it is not Cap. 15. sufficient to amend our manners, and to depart from the evil which we have committed, unless we do also satisfy God, for those things which we had done. speaker A. W. How is this testimony of l Aug hom. 50 cap. 15. Austin against our position? do we say it is enough to leave sin, though we sorrow not for it? nay do we not teach, that no man can leave that sin, for which he is not truly and heartily grieved, unless perchance he change one sin into another? The satisfaction that God requires is that which Austin there describes out of the m Psal. 51. 17. Psalm, The sacrifice to God is a troubled spirit, an humble and contrite heart God will not despise. This is all that the Prophet whom he allegeth requires in that place. Austin adds alms, which we willingly acknowledge as a sacrifice greatly pleasing God, and fit to testify true repentance, that having found mercy at God's hands, we may also show mercy to other. speaker A. W. S. Gregory saith, That sins are not only to be confessed, but to be blotted out with the austerity of penance. D. B. P. Li. 6. in 1. Reg. speaker D. B. P. What saith n Gregor. lib. 6. cap. 15. in 1. Reg. In Psal. 1. Gregory more than I have oft acknowledged? that we may not think it sufficient to confess we have sinned, but must also bewail our sins committed. I will close up these testimonies, with this sentence of our learned countryman venerable Bede: Delight (saith he) or desire to sin, when we do satisfaction is lightly purged by almesdeeds, and such like: but consent is not rubbed out, without great penance: now custom of sinning is not taken away, but by a just and heavy satisfaction. speaker A. W. You were ashamed to set down Beads proof of these three points, lest the weakness of his reasons might lighten the weight of his authority. Delight in sin (saith o Beda in Psalm. 1. Bede) is likened to jairus daughter, who was raised to life by the touching of her hand, (he forgot that Christ bade her rise) so is that purged by alms, and such like light satisfaction. Consent is signified by the young man that was carrying out to be buried, and is not wiped out but by heavy penance. Will you hear his proof, for our Lord doth not reach out his hand to him, but saith to him as it were p Pulsu & gravitate. with a certain moving of him, and gravity, young man I say unto thee arise. By Lazarus, having lain four days in the grave, and stinking, both the simple act, and the custom of sinning is signified, which is not taken away and pardoned, but by a right and heavy satisfaction, which is understood by the loudness of our Lord's voice, and his groaning in spirit at the raising of him. As weak as this groundwork is to bear so weighty a building, we will not offer to push at it, if you will give us leave to make that reasonable interpretation, which I have proved to be intended by divers of Beads ancients, that he means only to teach us, that as sins differ in heinousness, so must our ret entance in weight and measure: if this like you not, whatsoever damage this work of bead shall have, the fault shall be yours wholly, and not ours at all. speaker D. B. P. And if you please in few words, to hear the Protestants works of penance and satisfaction: Instead of our fasting, and other corporal correction: they fall to eating, and that of the best flesh they can get, and take in the Lord, all such bodily pleasure, as the company of a woman will afford. In am of giving alms to the poor, they pill them by fines and unreasonable rents: and by usury and crafty bargains, are not ashamed to cousin their nearest kin. Finally, in place of prayer, and washing away their own sins by many bitter tears, they sing merely a Geneva Psalm, and rail, or hear a railing at our imagined sins, or pretended errors. And so leave, and lay all pain and sorrow upon Christ's shoulders, thinking themselves (belike) to be borne to pleasure and pastime, and to make merry in this world. speaker A. W. This spiteful and slanderous invective of yours savouring neither of conscience, nor civility, whereby you charge your sovereign, his counsellors, nobles, gentry, and all, that any where in sincerity profess the Gospel of jesus Christ with flat Epicurism, I wittingly omit, holding it more Christian like to be railed upon without cause, then to rail upon desert. We use our liberty with moderation, how you priests and jesuits observe that which fear of damnation, hope of reward, the laws of your superiors, and your own vows bind you to, I had rather every man should judge according to his knowledge, then suspect by my reporting of that, which would not seem very unlikely. The seventh point. Of Traditions. speaker W. P. Traditions are doctrines delivered from hand to hand, either by word of mouth, or by writing, beside the written word of God. Our consent. Conclus. I. We hold that the very word of God, hath been delivered by tradition. For first God revealed his will to Adam by word of mouth: and renewed the same unto the patriarchs, not by writing, but by speech, by dreams, and other inspirations: and thus the word of God went from man to man for the space of two thousand and four hundred years, unto the time of Moses who was the first penman of holy scripture, For as touching the prophesy of Enoch, we commonly hold it was not penned by Enoch, but by some jew under his name. And for the space of this time, men worshipped God and held the articles of their faith by tradition, not from men but immediately from God himself. And the history of the new testament (as some say) for eighty years, as some others think, for the space of twenty years and more, went from hand to hand by tradition, till penned by the Apostles, or being penned by others was approved by them. speaker D. B. P. Hitherto we agree (but not in this which he interlaceth) that in the state of nature, every man was instructed of God immediately in both matters of faith and religion: For that God then as ever since used the ministery aswell of good fathers, as godly masters; as Enoch, No, Abraham, and such like, to teach their children and servants the true worship of God, and true faith in him; otherwise, how should the word of God pass by Tradition from Adam to Moses, as M. Perkins affirmeth: If no child learned any such thing of his Father, but was taught immediately from God, but M. Perkins seemeth to regard l●●tle such petty contradictions. speaker A. W. If you were not more desirous to pick quarrels, then to acknowledge truth, you would never feign such contradictions. Master Perkins says no such thing, as you charge him with, but speaks only of the patriarchs, by whose ministery the rest were taught, as he shows r Idolatry of the later times. otherwhere, making it an argument to persuade householders to the like duty. speaker W. P. Conclus. II. We hold that the Prophets, our Saviour Christ, and his Apostles, spoke and did many things good and true, which were not written in the Scriptures: but either came to us, or to our ancetours only by tradition. As 2. Tim. 3. 20. it is said, that jannes' and jambres were the Magicians that withstood Moses: now in the books of the old testament we shall not find them once named, and therefore it is like, that the Apostle had their names by tradition, or by some writings then extant among the jews. So Hebr. 12. 21. the author of the Epistle recordeth of Moses, that when he saw a terrible sight in Mount Sinai, he said, I tremble and am afraid: which words are not to be found in all the books of the old testament. In the Epistle of Jude mention is made, that the Devil strove with Michael the Archangel about the body of Moses: which point (as also the former) considering it is not to be found in holy writ, it seems the Apostle had it by tradition from the jews. That the Prophet Esai was killed with a fullers club, is received for truth, but yet not recorded in Scripture: and so likewise that the Virgin Mary lived and died a virgin. And in Ecclesiastical writers many worthy sayings of the Apostles and other holy men are recorded, and received of us for truth, which nevertheless are not set down in the books of the old or new Testament. And many things we hold for truth not written in the word, if they be not against the word. speaker D. B. P. His 2. Conclus. We hold that the Prophets, our Saviour Christ and his Apostles spoke, and did many things good and true, which were not written in the Scriptures, but came to us by Tradition: but these were not necessary to be believed: For one example he puts; that the blessed Virgin Marie lived and died a Virgin: but it is necessary to salvation to believe this, for helvidius is esteemed by S. Augustine an Heretic, for denying it. * De haeres. ad Quod. lib. 14. speaker A. W. Master Perkins saith nothing of the necessity of believing. That point of the virgin Maries perpetual virginity, we hold to be true, but we dare not lay a burden upon any man's conscience where the scripture is silent. S. Augustine's judgement though he were a singular light of the Church, is not of weight enough to determine, without all warrant of scripture, what is heresy, and what is not; especially since s In praefat. de haeres: b. himself confesseth that it cannot at all, or very hardly be declared t Regulari definitione. by a lawful definition what makes a man an heretic. Besides, Austin thus delivers the matter concerning the Heluidians heresy. The Heluidians (saith he) so gain said the virginity of Mary, that they confidently affirm, she had other children after Christ by her husband joseph. So that it may well be Austin counted them heretics especially for avouching that peremptorily which they could no way make good by scripture. speaker W. P. Conclus. III. We hold that the Church of God hath power to prescribe ordinances, rules, or traditions, touching time, and place of God's worship, and touching order and comeliness to be used in the same: and in this regard, Paul 1. Cor. 11. 2. commendeth the Church of Corinth for keeping his traditions, and Act. 15. the council at lerusalem decreed that the Churches of the Gentiles should abstain from blood, and from things strangled. This decree is termed a tradition, and it was in force among them so long as the offence of the jews remained. And this kind of traditions whether made by general Counsels or particular Synods, we have care to maintain and observe: these caveats being remembered: first that they prescribe nothing childish or absurd to be done. speaker D. B. P. See what a ●…erent opinion this man carrieth of the Church of God, governed by his holy spirit, that it nevertheless may prescribe things both childish and absurd. But I must pardon him, because he speaketh of his own Synagogue, which is no part of the true Church speaker A. W. He that observes what your Romish synagogue hath brought into God's service, and remembers that the Church (that is, men which bear sway in it) may fond err, will acknowledge this caveat most needful. No stage-play is so full of fooleries as your Masse-game. speaker W. P. Secondly that they be not imposed as any parts of God's worship. speaker D. B. P. This is contrary to the conclusion, for order and comeliness to be used in God's worship, which the Church can prescribe, is some part of the worship. speaker A. W. Order and comeliness are no parts of God's worship, but adjuncts, serving to the better performance thereof, as the observation of due and fit circumstances give a grace and furtherance to any action whatsoever. speaker W. P. Thirdly, that they be severed from superstition or opinion of merit. speaker D. B. P. This is needless; for if it be not absurd, which was the first proviso, it is already seneted from superstition. speaker A. W. That is absurd which is contrary to common reason or sense, but all things superstitious are not so, yea many points of superstition have so much show of reason for them, that without God's commandment to the contrary, a wise man might think them very fit means of God's worship, and meritorious. Such u Col. 2. was the Gentiles worshipping of Angels, supposing they had worshipped none but God: such is your worshipping of Angels, and he saints and she saints now adays; such is your fear of displeasing God, if you eat flesh on saints eavens, or in Lent, and such like. speaker W. P. Lastly that the Church of God be not burdened with the multitude of them. And thus much we hold touching Traditions. speaker D. B. P. The fourth, touching multitude may pass; these be but mere trifles And yet afterward you bring this very decree to prove that the Apostle Paul alleged Tradition, end rested not on 〈◊〉 Scripture. That is of more importance, that he termeth the decree registered, in the 15. of the Acts of the Apostles, a Tradition: whereas before he defined Traditions to be all doctrine delivered, besides the written word. Now the Acts of the Apostles is a parcel of the written word, as all the world knows: That than which is of record there, cannot be termed a Tradition. Though the Acts of the Apostles be a part of the written word: yet was not the book written when that decree was first observed; neither doth Master Perkins give it the name of himself, but saith, it is termed a tradition. The difference. speaker W. P. Papists teach, that beside the written word, there be certain unwritten traditions, which must be believed as profitable and necessary to salvation. And these they say are twofold: Apostolical, namely such as were delivered by the Apostles and not written; and Ecclesiastical, which the Church decreeth as occasion is offered. We hold that the Scriptures are most perfect, containing in them all doctrines needful to salvation, whether they concern faith or manners: and therefore we acknowledge no such traditions beside the written word, which shall be necessary to salvation: so as he which believeth them not, cannot be saved. speaker D. B. P. Before we come to the Protestants reasons against Traditions; observe that we divide Traditions into three sorts: The first we rearme Divine, because they were delivered by our blessed Saviour, who is God: Thesecond, Apostolical, as delivered by the holy Apostles: The third, Ecclesiastical, instituted and delivered by the Governors of the Curch, after the Apostles days. And of these three kinds of Traditions, we make the same account, as of the writings of the same Authors: to wit, we esteem no less of our saviours Traditions, than of thefoure Gospels, or any thing immediately dictated from the holy Ghost. Likewise as O eloquence! So do we to all known to be the Apostles. much honour and credit do we give unto the Apostles doctrine unwritten, as written. For ink and paper brought no new holiness, nor gave any force and virtue unto either Gods or the Apostles words; but they were of the same value and credit uttered by word of mouth, as if they had been written. Here the question is principally of divine Traditions, ●ou confess afterward that the Gospel comprehendeth the principal points of faith. which we hold to be necessary to salvation, to resolve and determine many matters of greater difficulty. For we deny not but that some such principal points of our Faith, (which the simple are bound to believe under pain of damnation) may be gathered out of the holy 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 Creed. speaker A. W. Divine traditions are such as were delivered by our Saviour (say you) and are divers from those that the Apostles left. So that the controversy is (principally) of those matters that Christ only spoke; and neither the Evangelists nor Apostles have set down in writing. But (that we may understand what we do) it is further to be known, that the question is not, whether, if there be any such traditions, we are bound to believe them (for that is out of all doubt) but whether there be any such or no; or whether the Scriptures do not contain sufficient direction, for the determining of all matters of importance to salvation, and for the substance of religion. You, that you may discredit the Scriptures, to advance traditions, do not so much as acknowledge that the main grounds of doctrine are there plainly taught, but mince the matter, with your some such principal points, and may be gathered out of the holy Scripture: whereas not only those two you name; but, if not all, yet many more are manifestly therein declared. Our reasons. speaker W. P. Testimony I. Deutr. 4. 2. Thou shalt not add to the words that I command thee, nor take anything therefrom: therefore the written word is sufficient for all doctrines pertaining to salvation. If it be said that this commandment is spoken as well of the unwritten as of the written word, I answer: that Moses speaketh of the written word only: for these very words are a certain preface which he set before a long commentary made of the written law, for this end to make the people more attentive, and obedient. speaker D. B. P. Let the words be set where you will, they must not be wrested beyond their proper signification. The words cited signify no more, then that we must not either by addition or subtraction, change or pervert God's commandments, whether they be written or unwritten. speaker A. W. To interpret x Deut. 4. 2. this place of unwritten traditions, is to y Marc. 7. 5. 13. strengthen the jews error, and to void our saviours reproof. And if there were any such, though the particulars were not to be recorded; yet it is strange, that Moses should not once make mention of them in general. z Thomas 3. q. 60. art. 8. ad primum. Thomas expounds it of adding to the words of the Scripture. And if it be lawful for all these prohibitions to add other doctrines, why doth a Chrysost. ad Mat. hom. 52. Chrysostome reprove the jewish Priests, for having added many things to the law, though Moses with threatening charged them they should not? For it is certain, they never added to nor any way corrupted the text. But Chrysostome accuseth them of adding, because they delivered doctrines that were not written in the Scripture: as b Math. 15. 9 our Saviour also saith of them. Cardinal c Caietan. ad Deut. 4. 2. Caietan wils us to gather from this place, that the law of God is perfect. speaker D. B. P. Now to infer, that because they are as a preface unto Moses Law, that therefore nothing must be added unto the same Law, is extreme dotage. speaker A. W. What is it to refute that which your adversary saith not? Master Perkins proves, that Moses spoke of the written law, because he sets it as a preface before his Commentary upon the same law. You answer nothing to that, but cry out upon extreme dotage, for inferrring, that because it is a preface to Moses law, therefore nothing must be added to it. Who infers any such matter, but yourself? You need not make work: you have your hands full. speaker D. B. P. Why then were the books of the old Testament, written afterwards, if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught, besides that one book of Deuteronomie? Shall we think that none of the Prophets that lived and wrote many volumes after this, had read these words; or that they either understood them not; or that understanding them well, did wilfully transgress against them? one of these the Protestants must needs defend, or else for very shame surcease the alleging of this text for the all sufficiency of the written word. We neither need, nor will defend either of them. But we deny your consequence; if no man might add any thing A. W to the law of God delivered by Moses, than the Prophets offended in writing so many volumes. The reason is, that the Prophets writ not as men, but as d 2. Pet. the instruments of God's spirit, inditing and penning by them. God did not tie his own hands by that commandment, that he might not from time to time instruct his people, as it should seem good to his infinite wisdom. To speak yet more plainly; the Prophets and Apostles writings, are nothing else but expositions of that, the sum whereof is delivered in the five books of Moses; wherein the whole doctrine of the Law and the Gospel is contained. speaker W. P. Testimony II. Isai. 8. 20. To the law and to the testimony. If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Here the Prophet teacheth what must be done in cases of difficulty. Men must not run to the wizard or southsaier, but to the law and testimony, and here he commends the written word as sufficient to resolve all doubts and scruples in conscience whatsoever. speaker D. B. P. Here the Prophet teacheth (saith M. Perkins what is to be done in cases of difficulty. Men must not run to the Wizards and Soothsayers, but to the Law and to the Testament, commending the written word, as sufficient to resolve all doubts. By the Law and testimony in that place; the five books of Moses are to be understood. If that written Word be sufficient to resolve all doubts whatsoever: What need we then the Prophets? what need we the Evangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles? What Wizard would have reasoned in such sort? speaker A. W. The Scripture is not to resolve all doubts; but all doubts and scruples of conscience whatsoever, which you craftily leave out in propounding our reason. Your consequence is false: If the five books of Moses be sufficient for the resolving of all doubts; what need any writings of the Prophets, Evangelists or Apostles? Is not the Civil and Canon law (in your judgement) sufficient to resolve all doubts, in cases concerning them? is there therefore no need of any exposition thereof? The rest of the Scripture is a Commentary upon those five books. Besides, is nothing required in the scripture but resolving of doubts? The history of the Church is worth the knowing, for our instruction, comfort, exhortation, imitation, and such like. speaker D. B. P. The Prophet willeth there, that the Israelites who wanted wit to discern whether it be better to fly unto God for counsel, than unto Wizards and soothsayers, to see what is written in the Law of Moses concerning that point of consulting. Wizards, which is there plainly forbidden in divers places. Now out of one particular case, whereof there is express mention in the written word, to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoever are thereby to be decided, is a most unskilful part, arguing as great want of light in him, as was in those blind Israelites. speaker A. W. The Prophet doth not send them to the Law, and to the testimony, to see whether it be lawful to inquire of Soothsayers or no: but tells them, that they must look into the book of God, to see whether such judgements, as the Prophets threatened, should not befall them, if they continued their sinning against God. So that he wils them, not to hearken what the Soothsayers say, of their escaping the judgements that the Prophets denounced, but to try whether their promises of safety, or the others threatening of destruction, were agreeable to the word of God. Though the case be particular (which you put amiss) yet if the trial of the Prophet's doctrine be to be made by the scripture, as it is, wherein may we look to unwritten traditions? speaker W. P. Testimony III. john, 20. 31. These things were written that ye might believe that jesus is the Christ, and in believing might have everlasting life. Here is set down the full end of the Gospel, and of the whole written word: which is to bring men to faith and consequently to salvation: and therefore the whole scripture alone is sufficient to this end without traditions. speaker D. B. P. 3. Testimony, * joh. 20. 31. These things were written, that ye might believe that jesus is the Christ: and in believing, might have life everlasting. Here is set down the full end of the Gospel, that is, to bring men to faith, and consequently to salvation: to which, the whole Scripture alone is sufficient without Traditions. Ans Here are more faults than lines. First the text is craftily mangled: Things being put in steed of Miracles. For S. john saith, Many other Miracles Christ did, etc., but these were written, etc. speaker A. W. Mangling is cutting off some part, not putting one word for another; especially such a word as contains the other. Things-comprehends both doings and sayings; and to both doth one of your Glosses refer this narration, even on the former verse, where the word miracle is set down; He shows (saith e I yea ad joa 20. 34. Lyra) the insufficiency of the Scripture, in respect of Christ's excellency f In opere & doctrina. in work and doctrine. speaker D. B. P. Secondly, S. john saith not that for faith we shall be saved, but believing we should have salvation in his name, which he clipped off. speaker A. W. What saith Master Perkins more, than g Glossa Ordin. ibi. your gloss doth acknowledge? That faith may be anowed, by which life may be had. And h Lyra. ibi. another gloss expounds that believing, of faith form by charity; which you grant justifies. It helps us nothing at all to leave out those words in his name, and therefore there was no clipping in it. speaker D. B. P. Thirdly, remember to what faith S. John ascribes the means of our salvation, not to that whereby we apply unto ourselves Christ's righteousness, but by which we believe Jesus to be Christ the Messias of the jew, and the Son of God, which M. Perkins also concealed. speaker A. W. The faith, spoken of in this text, is not properly justifying faith, but that is signified in the latter part of the verse, where it is said, that we have life in his name, that is, by resting upon his power to save us. The concealing of those words doth more hurt, than help us. speaker W. P. If it be said, that this place must be understood of Christ's miracles only: I answer, that miracles without the doctrine of Christ and knowledge of his sufferings, can bring no man to life everlasting, and therefore the place must be understood of the doctrine of Christ and not of his miracles alone, as Paul teacheth, Gal. 8. 1. If we or an Angel from heaven preach unto you any thing beside that which we have preached, let him be accursed, And to this effect he blames them that taught but a divers doctrine to that which he had taught, 1. Tim. 1. 3. speaker D. B. P. Now to the present matter, S. john saith, that these miracles recorded in his Gospel, were written, that we might believe jesus to be the Son of God; and believing, have salvation in his name, etc. Therefore the written word contains all doctrine necessary to salvation. Ans. S. john speaks not a word of doctrine, but of miracles: and therefore to conclude sufficiency of Doctrine out of him, is not to care what one saith. But M. Perkins foreseeing this, saith, it cannot be understood of miracles only; for miracles without the doctrine of Christ, can bring no man to life everlasting: True, and therefore that text speaking only of miracles, proveth nothing for the sufficiency of the written Word. Christ's miracles were sufficient, to prove him to be the Son of God, and their Messias: But that proveth not S. john's Gospel, to contain all Doctrine needful to salvation: For many other points of faith must be believed also. speaker A. W. Master Perkins proves, that the Evangelist speaks not only of miracles, because he speaks of such a faith as will bring a man to everlasting life; which the faith that comes by miracles only will not do. You offer not to answer his reason, which stands still in force against you, but deny the conclusion, that he speaks not only of miracles. This reason we have confirmed, as also the interpretation by that place of Austin; john the Evangelist (saith i Tractat. 49. in joan. ●ustin) witnesseth, that our Lord Christ both said and did many things that are not written. But those things were chosen out to be written, which seemed sufficient for the salvation of the believers. And whereas you would restrain the text only to the proof of Christ's being the Messiah, k Lyra ibi. Lyra may teach you, that in this l Epilogo. conclusion the profit also of the doctrine is declared. And m Hugo ibi. Hugo Cardinalis saith, that in these words specially the intent of the book, but generally the end of all the Scripture is declared. Now the end of the Scripture is our salvation. To the same purpose writes n Cyrill. in joa. lib. 12. cap. 68 Cyrill: All things that our Lord did, are not written, but those that the writers thought to be sufficient for manners and doctrine, that we glistering with true faith, good works and virtue, might come to the kingdom of heaven. speaker D. B. P. And if it alone be sufficient; what need we the other three Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, or any of their Epistles, or the same S. John's Revelations. speaker A. W. There are some that think (and the opinion is not unlikely) that the Evangelist speaks of all the books of the new Testament, which he saw before his writing of this Gospel; unless perhaps the revelation were penned by him afterward. But the objection shows itself to be vain, by my former answer to the like, about the five books of Moses. speaker D. B. P. Finally, admit that S. John's Gospel were all-sufficient, yet should not Traditions be excluded; for Christ saith in it in plain terms, * joh. 16. that he had much more to say unto his Apostles, but they as then being not able to bear it; he reserveth that to be delivered unto them afterwards; of which high mysteries S. John recordeth not much in his Gospel after Christ's resurrection; and so many of them must needs be delivered by Tradition unwritten. speaker A. W. First if it be granted that o joh. 16. 12. our Saviour had (at that time) some new matter to deliver, which they had not heard of, what get you by it? It will not follow thereupon, either that all things necessary to salvation are not contained in the scriptures, or that your traditions are the things that our Saviour meant, for (as p Tract. 96. i● joan. Austin truly affirmeth) since Christ hath not signified any where in scripture what they were, it is rashness for any man to presume to say, they were such, or such things. No man (saith your q Glossa Interlin. ibi. Gloss) may determine what they were. Secondly, there is no show of consequence in your reasoning, Christ had many things to say not long before his death: Therefore though the Gospel be all sufficient, yet there are many things not written which were needful to be believed. Because they were afterward to be spoken, therefore were they not written at all by the Apostles and Evangelists? sure Christ forbade not the writing of them in those words. Thirdly, this is the place which heretics abuse to the countenancing of their traditions, as you do of yours. All foolish heretics (saith r Aug. Tract. 97. in joan. Austin) that will have themselves counted Christians, endeavour to colour their bold fantastical inventions with that sentence of the Gospel, I have yet many things to say to you. Lastly I answer, that those many things of which Christ speaks, were the same that before he had taught them, which they partly understood not, and partly remembered not. I prove it thus: Our Saviour said before, that he s john. 15. 15. had taught them all things which he had heard of his father, and promised to send them the holy ghost, t john. 14. 26. that should teach them, and cause them to remember whatsoever he had said to them, whereof we have a worthy example in u joan. 2. 22. that speech of Christ concerning building the temple again. This (saith the Gospel) the disciples than understood not, but after his resurrection they came to the true understanding of it. We say not, that our Saviour delivered to them every point of doctrine distinctly, but that he furnished them with so much knowledge, as that they might easily by that light gather and write whatsoever was needful to be believed; to the penning whereof they had the special direction of the spirit both for matter and manner. x jansen. ad joan. 16. jansenius Bishop of Gaunt is wholly of the same opinion, affirming that those many things were not divers from those which he had taught them before, but a more plain exposition of them: and to that purpose he alleages very fitly that place of the y 1. Cor. 3. 1. Apostle, I could not speak to you, as unto spiritual men, but as it were unto carnal men, to little ones in Christ. z Didymus apud Tho. in caten. ad joa. 16. Didymus about the year 580. expounded the place thus, This he saith, that his auditors a Omnia verborum consecuti. had not yet conceived all things which he had told them, that afterward they were to suffer for his name sake. And afterward, as yet also (saith Didymus) being under the type of the law, and shadows, they could not discern of the truth, the shadow whereof the law carried. speaker D. B. P. This place of S. john, M. Perkins patcheth up with another of S. Paul If we or any Angel from heaven preach unto you any thing besides that * Gal. 1. 8. which we have preached, let him be accursed: And to this effect he blames them that taught but a divers doctrine, to that which he had taught, * 1. Tim. 1. 3. Ans. Now we must look unto the Gentleman's fingers: There were three corruptions in the text of S. john: here is one, but it is a foul one. Instead of preaching unto them another Gospel, he puts (preach unto them any other thing:) when there is great difference between another You give more to the Gospel in this place, than before to all the Scripture. Gospel, and any other thing. The Gospel comprehendeth the principal points of faith, and the whole work of God's building in us: which S. Paul like a wise Architect * 1. Cor. 3. 12. had laid in the Galathians; others his fellow workmen, might build upon it, gold, silver, and precious stones, with great merit to themselves and thanks from S. Paul: Marry if any should dig up that blessed and only foundation, & would lay a new one, him S. Paul holdeth for accursed. So that, that falsification of the text is intolerable; and yet when all is done, nothing can be wringed out of it, to prove the written word to comprehend all doctrine needful to salvation: for S. Paul speaketh there only of his Gospel, that is, of his preaching unto the Galathians, and not one word of any written Gospel: No more doth he in that place to Timothy: And so it is nothing to purpose. speaker A. W. The Greek is (word forword) if we, or an angel from heaven shall preach unto you, b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. beside that which we have preached, let him be accursed. Your vulgar, Latin all one with it in a manner, c Praeterquam quod. praeterquam quod, for d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. praeter id quod, as it is in the next verse, where the greek is all one: your e Interlin. Bib. praeter quod. interlinear praeter quod, in both verses. You will have the Apostle mean another gospel, and so will Master Perkins: for by another thing he understands such another thing, as shall be necessary to salvation, and yet divers from that, which the Apostle had delivered. And what is that else, but another Gospel? You tell us the gospel comprehends the principal points of faith, whereas before in this point you give no more to the whole scripture but that some principal points may be gathered out of it: this would have made a contradiction in Master Perkins. But is there any thing necessary to salvation, that is not a principal point of faith? Is not that a principal point, without which a man cannot be saved? But if (as you add) the gospel comprehend also the whole work of God's building in us, either I conceive not what you mean by those words, or else he that teacheth any other course of God's building in us then the gospel prescribes, preacheth another gospel: which doctrine will go near to overthrow the greatest part of your will worship. You proceed and say, that the Apostle speaks of such a doctrine as digs up the foundation. What is the foundation? If it be not digged up, as long as Christ is held to be the Messiah, and that without him there is no salvation, as you commonly expound the gospel of faith in Christ, questionless the Apostle speaks not of overthrowing the foundation, because the Galathians, against whom he writes, did not think that any salvation could be had without Christ, but f Gal. 5. 1. 2. 3. that the law moral and ceremonial was to be joined with Christ to justification. If the foundation may be razed, though those points be not denied; and if to join the law with Christ, be to lay another foundation, and to preach another gospel, how can your popish synagogue be a true member of Christ's Church, in which the foundation is shaken, in coupling the law with Christ, and another Gospel preached, by teaching such points of doctrine for matter necessary to salvation, as the Apostles never delivered? Master Perkins therefore understanding by any thing, only things, that make another Gospel, as the question in hand, and g 1. Tim. 1. 3. the other place alleged show A divers doctrine, may neither be charged with, nor suspected of false dealing. h Bellarm. de verbo Dei non script. lib. 4. cap. 10. Bellarmine a Cardinal, and a man of as great judgement as you, affirms, that the Apostle in that place speaks both of the written and unwritten word, not as you would have it, only of the gospel preached. And i Aug. contr. lit. Petil. lib. 3. cap. 6. Austin applies the text to the scripture of the law and of the gospel; other than that which you have received in the legal and evangelical scriptures, that is, in the old and new Testament. k Basil. Moral. sum. 72. cap. 1. Basill also saith the like of the same matter, that the hearers must examine those things that are delivered by their teachers, and receive those that are l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. agreeable to the Scripture, and reject those m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Praeterquam quod. that are divers, which he proves by that place to the Galathians. And whereas Bellarmine would have their testimonies, understood of things contrary only, the very words refute him. But it is apparent, that all that Paul preached is in the scriptures; for out of them doth he still confirm his doctrine. They of n Act. 17. 10. 11 Berea found that, which he taught them, to agree with the scriptures, and o Act. 26. 12. himself avoucheth before Festus, that he preached nothing but that which Moses and the Prophets had taught. And so both these places are to purpose. speaker W. P. Testimony IV. 2. Tim. 3. 16. 17. The whole Scripture is given by inspiration of God & is profitable to teach, to improve, to correct, and to instruct in righteousness, that the man of God may be absolute, being made perfect unto every good work. In these words be contained two arguments, to prove the sufficiency of the Scripture without unwritten verities. The first: that which is profitable to these four uses: namely, to teach all necessary truth, to confute all errors, to correct faults in manners, and to instruct in righteousness, that is, to inform all men in all good duties, that is sufficient to salvation. But scripture serveth for all these uses: and therefore it is sufficient: and unwritten traditions are superfluous. speaker D. B. P. In these words are contained (saith M. Perkins) two arguments to prove the sufficiency of Scripture: The first; that which is profitable to these four uses, to teach (all necessary truth is not in the text) to confute Neither doth M. Perkins put it in. An interpretation is not addition to the text. errors, to correct faults in manners, to instruct (all men in all duty, is M. Perkins his addition to the text) that is sufficient to salvation: But the Scriptures serve for all these uses, etc. Ans. This text of holy Scripture, is so far from yielding our adversaries two Arguments, that it affordeth not so much as any probable colour of half one good argument. In searching out the true sense of holy Scriptures; we must observe diligently the nature and proper signification of the words; as M. Perkins also noteth out of S. Augustine, in his sixth objection of this question; which, if the Protestants did here perform, they would make no such account of this text: for S. Paul saith only, that all Scripture is profitable, not sufficienty, to teach, to prove, etc. How are they then carried away with their own partial affections, that cannot discern between profitable and sufficient? Good Timber is profitable to the building of an house, but it is not sufficient, without stones, mortar, and a Carpenter. Seed serves well, yea, is also necessary to bring forth corn: but will it suffice of itself, without manuring of the ground, and seasonable weather? And to fit our purpose more properly; good laws are very profitable: yea, most expedient for the good government of the commonwealth: But are they sufficient without good customs, good governors, and judges, to see the same law and customs rightly understood and duly executed? Even so the holy Scriptures (S. Paul affirmeth) are very profitable; as containing very good and necessary matter, both to teach, reprove, and correct: but he saith not they are sufficient, or that they do contain all doctrine needful for these four ends: And therefore, to argue out of S. Paul, that they are sufficient for all those purposes; when he saith only, that they are profitable to them, is plainly not to know, or not to care what a man ●…h: And to press such an impertinent cavil, so often and so vehemently as the Protestants do, is nothing else but to bewray, (unto the indifferent reader) either their extreme ignorance, or most audacious impudence, that think they can face out any matter, be it never so impertinent. speaker A. W. The text was set down before without any addition, now Master Perkins shows how he gathers his argument out of the text, without adding to it at all, but interpreting it. Now whereas he saith all necessary truth, how much less affirms p Lyra ad 2. Tim. 3. Lyra, when he adds, to q Veritatem. teach the truth? for if by that word he should mean no more but some truth, it were but a bare exposition, but that he understands by it all truth, I gather out of his other exposition that follows, for which also you blame Master Perkins, to instruct all men in all duty. The word is in all righteousness, that is, to r Glossa Interlin. ibi. make him righteous with legal righteousness (saith Lyra) which is all s Omnis virtus. or every virtue. That the profitableness of the Scripture to those purposes argues a sufficiency, it is the judgement of the best Interpreters: There is no sickness of the soul (saith t De dupl. martyr. cap. 43 Cyprian) for which the Scripture of God affords not a present remedy. He proves it by the place of Timothy. u Hieron. ad 2. Tim. 3. Jerome saith, The Scripture was given to teach us, that doing all things by the advice thereof, we might do just things justly. x Chrysost. ibi. Chrysostome is yet more plain: If we be to learn, or to be ignorant of any thing, there we shall learn it: if to convince falsehood, thence we shall fetch it: if we be to correct or chastise for exhortation, if any comfort be wanting, which must be had, out of the Scripture we shall learn it. And upon those words, That the man of God may be perfect: Therefore without the Scripture he cannot be made perfect. In steed of me (saith Paul) thou hast the Scriptures: if thou desire to learn any thing, thence thou shalt, or there thou mayst have it. The Scripture (saith y Theophylact. ibi. Theophylact) is profitable to us, teaching us, if any thing be to be learned. For there is nothing that cannot be answered by the holy Scripture. If vain and false things be to be reproved, thence also it may be done: if any thing be to be corrected, if any man be to be instructed, that is to be taught to righteousness, that is, that he he may do that which is righteous, this also is ready for thee in the Scripture. And afterward he makes the Apostle speak thus to Timothy: If thou wilt be perfect and holy, etc. let the Scriptures be thy Counsellors in steed of me. And upon these words, Perfect to every good work. Not simply (saith Theophylact) z Particeps bonorum operum. partly fitted to good works, but perfect: not so that he shall be fitted to this and not to that, but to every good work. That he may be perfect to every good work, saith a Lombard. ad 2. Tim. 3. Peter Lombard, expounding the word instructus, which is in your vulgar translation. b Thomas ibi. Thomas goes further, to every good work: Not only to those works which are for necessity of salvation, but to those also that are of supererogation. And a little before: If the effect of holy Scripture be fourfold, to teach the truth, to convince falsehood, for speculation; to draw from evil, and bring to good, for practise; the last effect of it is, that it brings men to perfection. c Non enim qualitercunque bonum facit, sed perficit. For it doth not make a man good in part, but perfectly. It is proper to the holy Scripture (saith d Caietan. ibi. Caietan) to teach the igrant, and that he may be perfect in all things, that belong to the perfecting of a man of God. And afterward: See whether the profit of the holy Scripture teads, to the perfection of the man of God: that is, of him who gives himself wh●ly to God; to such a perfection I say, that he may be perfect to the practice of e●ery good work. I have been som● what the larger in this, because this Papist chargeth us so hard, not to know, or not to ●…e what we say. And yet what say we, that hath not been said before by the ancient writers, and many Papi●…s themselves? Now for the further confirmation of this exposition (though against a Papist there needs no further) we may observe out of Chrysostome, and Theophylact, that the Apostle Paul, being, as he e 2. Tim. 4. 6. saith afterwards, shortly to be offered up, commends the Scriptures to Timothy for instructors in his steed, to which he may have recourse, as often as any truth is to be taught, any error to be confuted, any fault to be reproved, or any good duty to be enjoined. Further, we understand by the Apostle himself, that f 2. Tim. 3. 15. the Scriptures are able to make him wise to salvation. And thence we conclude, that they contain all things necessary to salvation. And if any thing else were requisite, it is strange that the Apostle should not commend the especial meditation thereof unto him, since without it he could not be perfect. speaker W. P. The second: that which can make the man of God, that is Prophets, and Apostles, and the Ministers of the word, perfect in all the duties of their callings: that same word is sufficient to make all other men perfect in all good works. But God's word is able to make the man of God perfect. Therefore it is sufficient to prescribe the true and perfect way to eternal life, without the help of unwritten traditions. speaker D. B. P. The same answer I make unto M. Perkins his second argument, out of the same place: that the holy Scriptures be profitable to make the man of God absolute, but not sufficient. speaker W. P. The same reply make I against this answer, that both the Apostle and the interpreters alleged prove, that they are so profitable, that they make the man of God sufficient. Besides, any man may observe, that you answer to neither part of Master Perkins syllogism, but rove at the imagined exposition of the place. speaker D. B. P. I say moreover; that Master Perkins doth falsely English these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the whole Scriptures: when it signifieth all Scripture, that is, every book of Scripture: and is there put to verify, that the old Testament only serves to instruct to salvation: For, in the words next before, S. Paul showeth, how that Timothy from his infancy, had been trained up in the knowledge of the holy Scriptures: which, saith he, can instruct thee to salvation: And annexeth, as the confirmation thereof the Text cited: All Scripture inspired of God, is profitable to teach, etc. Now, in Timothy's infancy, no part of the new Testament was written, and therefore, all Scripture which is here put, to prove that Scripture which Timothy in his Infancy knew; cannot but by unreasonable wresting, signify more than all the books of the old Testament. speaker A. W. The words are rightly translated: that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, these places manifestly prove: g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Col. 2. 9 In him dwells the whole fullness of the Godhead: h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Act. 20. 27. The whole counsel of God. Luk. 21. 32. All the people. Ephes. 4. 16. The whole body. Rom. 4. 16. The whole seed. 2. Thess. 1. 11. All the good pleasure. Matth. 3. 5. All judea, and all the region thereabout. That it must be so taken, in this place i Dionys. Carthus. ad 2. Tim. 3. Dionysius the Carthusian witnesseth; All, that is k Tota Scriptura. the whole Canonical scripture. The Scriptures (saith l Glossa Ordin. ibi. your ordinary Gloss.) And in that sense did the Interpreters expound it. If we take it, as you do, every Psalm, every verse, yea every word, as being from God by inspiration, must have all these properties. For whereas you would restrain it to every book of scripture, the words will not bear it, If the old Testament only without the new had this sufficiency, can it be insufficient now the new is added? which indeed is rather an explication, than an addition to the former. It is more than can be proved, that no part of the new Testament was written in Timothy's childhood, he being at this time but a young man, and this being one of the last Epistles, if not the very last, that ever the Apostle wrote a little before his martyrdom. speaker D. B. P. So that there are three foul faults in this the Protestants Achilles': The first, in falsification of the text, that it might seem to be spoken of the whole, which is spoken of every part. The second, in applying that which is spoken of the old Testament, unto both the old and new. The third, in making that to be all-sufficient which S. Paul affirmeth only to be profitable. And this is all they can say out of the Scripture, to prove that the written Word contains all doctrine needful to salvation. speaker A. W. Your first and second faults are none at all: The translation is true, and the reason good; though you expound the place only of the old Testament. The third is sufficiently clear, that the profit the Scripture brings, is the perfecting of the man of God to every good work. speaker D. B. P. Whereupon, I make this invincible argument against them out of Let us see your Achilles. this their ov●ne position. Nothing is necessary to be believed, but that which is written in holy Scripture. But in no place of Scripture is it written, that the written word contains all doctrine needful to salvation, as hath been proved. Therefore, it is not necessary to salvation to believe the written word, to contain all doctrine needful to salvation. speaker A. W. Your invincible reason is like your great Masters invincible Armada, so strong in your conceit, not in truth. I deny the assumption of your syllogism, as it lies; that place of Timothy, if there were no more, proves the matter sufficiently. But if by written in the Scripture, you mean set down in plain words, I deny also the proposition. For many things are contained in the Scripture, that are not expressly delivered; and that your great champion m Bellarm. de verbo Dei scripto. lib. 4. cap. 〈◊〉. Bellarmine knew well enough, when he propounded your opinion so craftily by that word express, expressly. speaker D. B. P. And by the same principle, I might reject all testimony of Antiquity as needless, if the Scriptures be so all-sufficient as they hold. Yet let us here what testimony M. Perkins brings out of antiquity, in favour of his cause. speaker A. W. Not only you may, but you must also reject all testimony of antiquity, that would bring in any doctrine necessary to salvation, which cannot be proved by scripture. Indeed the writings of the ancients are (as you call them) testimonies, that is, witnesses of the truth delivered in the scripture, not authentical records of any other truth. To this purpose they are highly to be esteemed, when they agree with the truth, and to beheld as agreeing, when there is not some good reason to be brought to the contrary. speaker W. P. V. the judgement of the Church. Turtul. * De resurrect. carnis. saith, Take from heretics opinions which they maintain with the heathen, that they may defend their questions by Scripture alone, and they cannot stand. speaker D. B. P. Here Scripture alone is opposed (as every one may see) unto the writings of Heathen Authors, and not to the Traditions of the Apostles; and therefore make nothing against them. speaker A. W. The Scripture is n Tertull. de relurrect. carnis, cap. 3. here appealed to, as the only competent judge in matters of controversy about religion. For otherwise if Heretics would fly to revelations, and thereby defend their errors, they might be said not to do against this rule of Tertullian. Yea, if traditions were of force to prove, they might easily answer Tertullian in this case, that it skilled not though they could not maintain their opinions by Scripture, as long as traditions perhaps might make for them. But Tertullian condemns their errors, because they cannot be avowed by the Scripture, making that the only trial. speaker W. P. Again, We need no curiosity after Christ jesus, nor inquisition after the Gospel. When we believe it, we desire to believe nothing beside: for this we first believe that there is nothing more which we may believe. speaker D. B. P. By the Gospel there, is understood all our Christian doctrine, written and unwritten; and not only the written word of the four Evangelists, else we should not believe the Acts of the Apostles, or their Epistles, no more than Traditions: which Christian doctrine, written and unwritten, we only believe by divine faith; to all other Authors, we givesuch credit as their writings do deserve. speaker A. W. By o Tertull. de praeser. advers. haeret. cap. 8. the Gospel, the doctrine of salvation by Christ is understood, which is no less plainly and fully delivered in the other writings of the new Testament, than in those four books, which we call by that particular name. But that traditions should be commended under the title of the Gospel, it is neither true, nor likely. You must show some place of this author, or of some other about his time, to give credit to your interpretation. But it is apparent you answered at adventure, not knowing where it is to be found in Tertullian. speaker D. B. P. If any man desire to see tertullian's judgement of Traditions, let him read his book of prescriptions against Heretics, where he averreth, that Traditions serve better than the Scriptures themselves, to confute all Heresies: Heretics always, either not allowing all the books of Scripture, or else perverting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures. speaker A. W. He that hath to do with such Heretics, as p Tertull. de praeser. advers. haeret. tertullian's adversaries than were, and you Papists in part now are, must of necessity have recourse to the judgement of the Church. For what other means can be used against them, that deny the sufficiency of the Scripture? Therefore Tertullian and Irenaeus too, who had to deal with the same kind of men, labours to beat them with their own weapons, and yet bring not in any new doctrine beside the Scripture, but maintain the doctrine of the Scripture against them, that condemn the Scripture, by the testimonies of learned men, custom of the Church, but he saith nothing of giving like authority to the traditions, and written word. Beside, here is no speech of doctrine, but only of observing certain outward ceremonies not necessary to salvation. speaker W. P. Augustine book 2. cap. 9 de doct. Christ. In those things which are plainly set down in Scripture, are found all those points which contain faith and manners of living well. speaker D. B. P. All things necessary to be believed of every simple Christian, under As if there were not one and the same belief for the saving of learned, and unlearned. pain of damnation, that is, the Articles of our Belief, are contained in the Scriptures, but not the resolution of harder matters, much less of all difficulties, which the more learned must expressly believe, if they will be saved, which distinction S. Augustine elsewhere doth signify. * De peccatorum meritis cap. ult. speaker A. W. The question is only of such points as are necessary to salvation, which are all one to the learned, and unlearned, unless there be divers means of salvation for them. True it is, that a Minister ought to have more knowledge than an ordinary Christian, and that the neglect of labouring for it is damnable to him, as all sin is damnable; but that which is necessary to salvation, is equally necessary for all men: neither doth Austen allow any such distinction, but refutes it rather a Aug. de doctri. Christ. cap. 9 in that very place: for he saith, that all that fear God do seek the will of God in the Canonical scripture; but the words alleged are most plain, All those points that contain faith and manners of living well, that is hope, and charity. Now what is necessary for any man to salvation, that is not comprised in one of these? speaker D. B. P. And is gathered out of many other places of his works, as in that matter of rebaptizing them, who became Catholics after they had been baptised by Heretics. He saith, * Lib. 5. contr. Donat. cap. 23. The Apostles truly have commanded nothing hereof (in their writings) but that custom which was laid against S. Cyprian, is to be believed to have flowed from an Apostolical Tradition, as there be many things which the universal church holdeth, and therefore are to be believed. speaker A. W. In that place Austen makes no mention of any such difference betwixt the learned and unlearned to salvation, but teacheth directly contrary to your doctrine in both points. For the hard matters you speak of, thus saith b Aug. de peccat. merit. & remiss. lib. 2. cap. 36. Austin, when we dispute of dark matters, where c Scripturarum certis claris. documentis. the certain and clear instructions of the holy Scriptures do not help us, a man's presumption must restrain itself, and not incline to either side. This is Austin's judgement, he leads us not in these cases to traditions as you do. Now for the other point, he adds presently after that, if the knowledge of hard questions could not be wanted, without loss of salvation, there would be some clear authority of Scripture to instruct us in them, so far was Austen from seeking to any traditions, as necessary to salvation. This testimony is falsely alleged by you in the later part of it, which is thus in d Aug. contr. Donatist. lib. 5. cap. 23. Austin, and therefore are to be believed to have been enjoined by the Apostles. You put the matter indefinitely are to be believed, that so they may be thought necessary to salvation, of which there is not a word in this place of Austen. speaker D. B. P. The same saith he of the custom of the Church in Baptizing Infants. * De genes. ad lit. lib. 10. c. 23. And in his Epist. 174. of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is not in the holy Scripture, and yet nevertheless is defended to be used in the assertion of faith. As also (saith he) we never read in those books that the Father is unbegotten, and yet we hold that he is so to be called. * And S. Augustine holds that the holy Ghost is to be adored, though it be not written in the word. speaker A. W. Of the custom of baptising infants, Austin saith, that it is not to be despised, nor by any means to be thought superfluous, and that it were not at all to be believed, unless it were an Apostolical tradition, where he speaks not of any doctrine necessary to salvation, but of the Church's practice, and that indeed in a case grounded on the Scripture. We speak of doctrine, not of words, as e Aug. de Genes. ad lit. lib. 10. cap. 23. Austin doth in those places. The matter which is signified by those words, that f Aug. contra Maximin. lib. 3 cap. 3. Christ is of the same substance with his father, that the father was not begotten, may be proved by the Scripture, and must needs be held: the words are neither in the Scripture, nor bring any danger of salvation, though they be denied, if the points of doctrine signified by them be believed; yet were it a great presumption and folly for any man to refuse such words, as have been fitly applied by the former Churches. The other point of adoring the holy ghost, hath a strong foundation on those places of Scripture which prove him to be God, as many do. But what is all this to the purpose for the stablishing of any doctrine necessary to salvation by tradition? speaker D. B. P. The like of the perpetual Virginity of our B. Lady, * Haeresi 4. out of which and many more such like, we gather most manifestly that S. Augustine thought many matters of faith, not to be contained in the written word, but to be taken out of the Church's treasury of Traditions. speaker A. W. The fourth heresy in Austin is the Basilidians, who held no such opinion of the virgin Mary. Indeed there were other heretics, the g Aug. de haeres. haeres. 6. non. 4 6. in number, who denied her virginity after our saviours birth, falsely, as we verily persuade ourselves; but this is no matter necessary to salvation, though it be an heresy to hold that as a matter of faith, which hath no warrant from the Scripture, but rather the contrary. speaker W. P. Vincentius Lyrinen. saith, the Canon of the Scripture is perfect, and fully sufficient to itself for all things. speaker D. B. P. I think that there is no such sentence to be found in him; hesays by way of objection: What need we make recourse unto the authority of the Why did you not look? Ecclesiastical understanding, if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect? He affirmeth not that they be fully sufficient to determine all controversies in religion, but throughout all his book he proves the clean contrary, that no heresy can be certainly confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures, without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholic Church. speaker A. W. h Vincentius cap. 2. Vincentius saith, that the Canon of the Scripture is i Satis, superque sufficit. sufficient, and more than sufficient for all things: and in another place, the Canon of the scripture sufficeth itself for all things. The k Vincentius Lyrin. cap. 41. former place is those very words which you allege falsely, where Vincentius thus speaks. Here perhaps some man will demand, what the authority of the Ecclesiastical understanding of the Scripture needs, seeing the Canon of the Scripture is perfect, and more than sufficient to itself for all things? His answer is, that the interpretation of the Church is requisite, because divers men expound the Scripture diversly: but what is this against the sufficiency of the Scripture, or for the authority of traditions, concerning matters not contained in the Scriptures? Beside these testimonies, other reasons there be that serve to prove this point. I. The practice of Christ and his Apostles, who for the confirmation of the doctrine which they taught, used always the testimony of Scripture, neither can it be proved, that they ever confirmed any doctrine by tradition. Act. 26. 22. I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the Prophets and Moses did say should come. And by this we are given to understand, that we must always have recourse to the written word, as being sufficient to instruct us in matters of salvation. speaker D. B. P. First, for our Saviour Christ jesus, he out of his divine wisdom delivered his doctrine most commonly in his own name, (But I say unto you) And very seldom confirmeth it with any testimony out of the Law. The Evangelists do often note how Christ fulfilled the old prophecies; but never, or very seldom seek to confirm his doctrine by test moneys; their own they do sometimes; but to say they never wrote any thing out of Tradition, proceeds of most gross ignorance. Where had S. Matthew the adoring of the Sages? S. john Baptists preaching? briefly, that was done before his own conversion, but by Tradition? S. Mark wrote the most part of his Gospel out of Tradition, received from S. Peter, as witnesseth Eusebius, * Lib. 2. hist. cap. 14. S. Luke testifieth of himself, that he wrote his whole Gospel, * Cap. 1. as he had received it by Tradition, from them who were eye-witnesses. What desperate carelessness was it then to affirm that the Apostles never used Tradition, to confirm any doctrine? when some of them built, not only parcels, but their whole Gospels upon Traditions? speaker A. W. Our Saviour doth ordinarily confirm his doctrine, especially if there be any question of it, out of the books of the old testament: by that Math. 4. 8. he repelled Satan; by that Math. 12. 3. he confuted the pharisees, and defended his disciples eating the ears of corn on the Sabbath; by that he Math. 13. 14. 35. taxeth the jews blindness, and maintains his own speaking in parables. By the same Math. 15. 4. he overthrows the jews traditions, and rebukes their hypocrisy, he Math. 19 refutes their errors about divorces, but what should I run over the particulars? the Gospels are full of such examples. Master Perkins hath never a word of the Evangelist, who did but write the history of our saviours doings and sayings, and yet even they (as yourself confess) prove, that he is the Messiah by the Scriptures of the old Testament, applying them to the things he did and suffered. You devise matters to confute. Master Perkins speaketh of confirming doctrine by traditions, and you answer, that they wrote something out of tradition, that is, they set down somewhat in writing which themselves had heard of other, and not read in the old Testament. And then you ask, where q Math. 2. 1. 2. S. Matthew had the adoring of the Sages? even there where Moses had the creation of the world, and the whole story of Genesis. From a better ground than tradition, viz. from the Spirit of God, the author and enditer of the Scripture, from whom also the other Evangelists had the matter and penning of their Gospel, though two of them Mark and Luke first came to the knowledge of those things by the preaching of the Apostles, which had all one authority with the word written. This is apparent of Mark by r Euseb. hist. lib. 2. cap. 14. Eusebius himself, who saith, that the Romans entreated him to set down in writing those things which the Apostle Peter had taught them by word of mouth, and which he also had heard him deliver. The like is to be said of S. Luke, who was a companion of the Apostle Paul, and wrote (as the other did) that which he heard of him, and other of the Apostles. But howsoever the things delivered by them came first to their knowledge, it wants not much of blasphemy, to make traditions the foundation of the Gospels written by them. For either the holy Ghost did not inspire them with the matter and manner of their penning, or else, if it be as you would have it, the holy ghost built upon tradition, which is but an uncertain kind of knowledge depending upon men's memories, which may often fail them, especially in carrying away speeches of discourse, and disputation. speaker W. P. II. If the believing of unwritten traditions were necessary to salvation, than we must believe the writings of the ancient Fathers as well as the writings of the Apostles, because Apostolical traditions are not elsewhere to be found but in their books. And we may not believe their sayings as the word of God, because they often cry being subject to error: and for this cause their authority, when they speak of traditions, may be suspected: and we may not always believe them upon their word. speaker D. B. P. His otherreason is, that if we believe unwritten Traditions were necessary to salvation, than we must aswell believe the writings of the ancient Fathers, as the writings of the Apostles: because, Apostolical Traditions are not elsewhere to be found, but in their books; but that were absurd, for they might err. Ans. That doth not follow for three causes: First, Apostolical Traditions, are aswell kept in the mind of the learned, as in the ancient Father's writings: and therefore have more credit than the Father's writings. speaker A. W. It may be they were kept in the mind of the learned till they were written, but that afterward, and to this day they are in men's minds otherwise then as they have learned them by reading, it is not very likely. Beside, how can traditions be kept without adding and altering, if they have no better guide then the memories of men? speaker D. B. P. Secondly, they are commonly recorded of more than one of the Fathers, and so have firmer testimony than any one of their writings. speaker A. W. What is that to Master Perkins reason? unless you will say that we are as well to believe the writings of the fathers, where more than one writ the same thing, as we are one of the Apostles or Evangelists alone, which (I persuade myself) you will not affirm. speaker D. B. P. Thirdly, if there should be any Apostolical Tradition, related but of one ancient Father, yet it should be of more credit than any other thing of his own invention, because that was registered by him, as a thing of more estimation. And gain, some of the rest of those blessed and Godly personages, would have reproved it, as they did all other falsehoods, if it had not binsuch indeed as it was termed: Which when they did not, they gave a secret approbation of it for such; and so that hath the interpretative consent at least of the learned of that age, and the following for Apostolical Tradition. it so, because they were taught by our Lord: yet Paul's case is proper to himself, and altogether extraordinary. The third particular is somewhat more to purpose; because s 1. Cor. 11. 16. S. Paul having proved by many reasons, that women might not come into the congregations bareheaded, adds in the conclusion, that it was enough to stop any contention's man's mouth, that the Apostles, and the Churches of God allowed of no such custom. But first, this hatescripture Papist must be put in mind, that whereas he calls these wranglers scripturists, as if they had alleged scripture for their defence, there is no such thing in the text, nor any one objection so much as signified by the Apostle. Secondly, this custom of the Church is not alleged because (as he seems to presume, by his conclusion afterward) he wanted other reason to prove the point. For as Chrysostome and others have observed, he hath in the former part of the chapter, proved it to be against nature, and against scripture too. Thirdly, he reason's not about any matter of doctrine, but about the outward carriage of men and women in the assembly of God's service. Lastly, it doth no way follow, that because the custom of the Church must overway private men's fancies in things indifferent, therefore the Scripture contains not all things necessary to salvation, but must be supplied therein by traditions. Neither doth the Apostles example warrant his conclusion. The Apostle having proved that he exhorts to by reason and Scripture, last of all alleages custom, against contentious men, in a thing which they took to be indifferent: therefore we must allege Scriptures, when they be plain for us, and when they are not plain, tradition, even in matters of salvation. Who sees not that this follows not upon that? Objections for Traditions. speaker W. P. First they allege, 2. Thess. 2. 15. where the Apostle bids that Church keep the ordinances which he taught either them by word or letter. Hence they gather, that beside the written word, there be unwritten traditions, that are indeed necessary to be kept and obeyed. Answ. It is very likely, that this Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that ever Paul writ to any Church, though in order it have not the first place; and therefore at the time when this Epistle was penned, it might well fall out, that some things needful to salvation were delivered by word of mouth, not being as yet written by any Apostle. Yet the same things were afterward set down in writing, either in the second Epistle or in the Epistles of Paul. speaker D. B. P. Observe first, that instead of Traditions (according to the Greek and Latin word,) they translate * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ordinances; ever flying the word Tradition, where any thing is spoken in commendation of them. But if any thing sound against them, than thrust they in the word Tradition, although the Greek word bear it not. See for this their corruption, and many other: a learned Treatise, named, The Discovery of false translation, penned by M. Gregory Martin, a man most singularly conversant in the Greek and Hebrew tongues. speaker A. W. Gregory Martinus cavils were answered long since t Fulke against Martin's Discou. cap. 2. by Doctor Fulke, and the answer never yet replied to (that ever I heard of) by any Papist. Your old translation hath, in steed of traditions, u 1. Cor. 11. 2. precepts, and in the Gospel, every where, traditions; and yet the former place is to the commendation of traditions, and all in the Gospel to their dispraise. x Vatablus. Vatablus also useth his liberty in translating this word, sometimes y 1. Cor. 11. 2, Col. 2. 8. Marc. 7. 8. 2. Thes. 2. 15. & 3. 6. Instituta, sometimes Constitutio, sometimes Institutio; the difference in our translation, as far as I can perceive, is this, that we call men's precepts, traditions; the Apostles doctrines, ordinances. speaker D. B. P. Secondly, is it not plain dotage, to avouch that this second Epistle to the Thessalonians, was the first that ever he wrote? Surely, if none of his otherwere written before it, yet his first to the same Church must needs have been written before it. But let us give the man leave to dream sometimes. speaker A. W. It is easy to see that Master Perkins compares not this epistle with the other to the same Church, but with other that were written to other Churches, and generally with the books of the new Testament; among which, if we may believe z Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. Euseb. hist. lib. 5. c. 8. Irenaeus, it was the ancientest, except the former, and perhaps the Gospel of S. Matthew: for it was written when Paul taught at Athens, some seventeen or eighteen years after our Lord's Ascension; whereas the Gospel of S. Matthew, as Irenaeus saith, was penned when Paul and Peter preached and founded the Church at Rome, twenty years or more after the Ascension. Neither doth Master Perkins avow this for a truth, but sets it down as very likely. speaker D. B. P. To the point of the answer, that all was written after in some other of his Epistles, which before had been delivered by word of mouth. How proveth M. Perkins that? the man hath such confidence in his own word, that he goeth not once about to prove it. Good Sir, hold you not here; that nothing is needful to be believed, which is not written in the word? show us then where it is written in the word, that Saint Paul wrote in his later Epistles, that which he taught by word of mouth before? or else by your own rule it is not needful to believe it. speaker A. W. It is not the answerers' duty, as I have been feign to put you in mind before, to prove his denial, but the repliers to disprove what he answers. But for your satisfaction, let me tell you, that if these things the Apostle speaks of were matters necessary to salvation, it is proved that they were written afterward, or before in some part of the Scripture; because the ᵃ 2. Tim. 3. 14. Scripture is sufficient to make a man wise to salvation. speaker D. B. P. But yet for a more full satisfaction of the indifferent reader, I will set down the opinions of some of the ancientest and best Interpreters of this place of the Apostle, that we may see whether they thought that S. Paul committed all to writing, and left nothing by Tradition. speaker A. W. All this labour might have been saved, unless it were to more purpose. For we say not, that the Apostle wrote all things he spoke; but that all things necessary to salvation, are expressly or by consequence contained in the Scriptures. It is out of doubt, in my poor opinion, that the Apostle preached many things, which were not written by him in these two Epistles, and those also, matters of moment, which he wils them to observe: but the question is, whether it can be proved by this text, or any other, that those matters are not any where recorded in the holy Scriptures, and yet are points necessary to salvation. speaker D. B. P. S. Chrysostome in his most learned and eloquent Commentaries upon this text, concludeth thus. Hereupon it is manifest that the Apostles delivered not all in their Epistles, but many things also unwritten; and those things are aswell to be believed, as the written. Oecumenius and Theophylactus upon that place teach the same. speaker A. W. To the testimony out of Chrysostom's interpretation I answer, first, that Chrysostome saith not they were matters necessary to salvation. Secondly, that b Chrysost. 〈◊〉 Psal. 95. otherwhere he ties us to the Scriptures, if we will be believed in that we deliver. Thirdly, that many things may be, and are in other parts of the Scripture, which are not to be found in the Epistles. Fourthly, that it doth not follow, the Apostle Paul spoke something to the Thessalonians, which he wrote not to them, therefore the Apostles spoke some things which they never writ. For this place speaks only of S. Paul's doings, not of other Apostles. Yet I make no question, but they also did in like sort, but it cannot be certainly concluded from this place. Fiftly, I grant, that all that the Apostles delivered, was to be received as true, and fit for the Church in those times to which they were delivered. The doctrine of the Gospel is perpetual, matters of circumstance, appointed by them for the use of the Churches perpetually, are as well to be observed, as the doctrine, if there be any such: yea traditions of this nature are equal to things written. But here lies the matter, we say there are no such traditions. And indeed who can think that the Apostles would write matters of small importance, which were also not to continue perpetually, and leave great and weighty points of faith unwritten? The like answer I make to c Oecumen. & Theophylact. ad 2. Thess. Oecumenius, and Theophylact; whereof the one professedly sets down Chrysostoms' opinion; the other, according to his custom, writes him out in this place word for word. speaker D. B. P. S. Basil * De sp● cap. 27 speaketh thus, I hold it Apostolical to persever in Traditions not written: for the Apostle ●●ith, I commend you that ye are mindful of my precepts: and, do hold the Traditions, even as I delivered them unto you: and then allegeth this text: Hold the Traditions which you have received of me either by Word or Epistle. speaker A. W. d Basil, de spirit. sanct. c. 27. Basil saith not, that these traditions were matters necessary to salvation. 2. He defines not what these traditions were. 3. The consequence is nought. The Apostle wils the Thessalonians to keep things delivered by mouth: therefore the Church is always to keep some things not written. There was a necessity to lay that charge upon them, for else they had needed to care for no more than was set down in those Epistles. 4. The Papists themselves observe not all the traditions there mentioned as Apostolical by Basil. 5. His judgement in this case is not much to be accounted of, who pronounceth, that without those traditions, the Gospellis not available, and that they are of equal force with the Gospel to piety. speaker D. B. P. S. john Damascen acordeth with the former saying, * Lib. 4. De fide cap. 17. That the Apostles delivered many things without writing. S. Paul doth testify, when he writeth, Therefore brethren stand and hold the Traditions which have been taught you either by word of mouth or by Epistle. These holy and judicious expositors of S. Paul, free from all partiality, gather out of this text of his, that many things necessary to be believed, even until their days remained unwritten, and were religiously observed by Tradition; which throweth fiat to the ground M. Perkins his false supposition (fenced with neither reason nor authority) that S Paul put in writing afterwards all that he had first taught by word of mouth. speaker A. W. Damascen is neither greatly to be respected, nor saith any thing, but that which I have answered already and granted in part as nothing to the purpose. He might well err in matter of Tradition, that e Damascen. de Orthod. fide lib. 4. c. 18. accounts the Apostles Canons, set out by Clement Bishop of Rome, to be Canonical scripture: which opinion the Papists themselves reject. Master Perkins would gladly have acknowledged any tradition, that could have been proved to be Apostolical; namely so far as it was intended by the Apostles. Whatsoever they taught, that he would hold to be the truth of God; if they ordained any thing for those times, he would confess it to have been most fit. Did they appoint any custom to be perpetual? M. Perkins would have embraced it with both his arms, and, if occasion had been offered, have maintained it with his life. But neither can you show any such tradition, nor he is to prove the contrary. But you are to make good your proposition, that the Apostles left some doctrines, necessary to be believed to salvation, by word of mouth only, without any ground in Scripture for the particulars either expressly, or by good and necessary consequence. Prove this, and the controversy is at an end. Moreover S. Paul immediately before his death in one of the last of his Epistles, commandeth his dear Disciple Timothy, * 2. Tim. 2. To commend unto the faithful, that which he heard of him by many witnesses; and not that only which he should find written in some of his Epistles, or in the written Gospel. I deny your consequence: Paul wils Timothy to commend to the faithful those things which he had heard of him, therefore he delivered some things which are not written in any part of the Scripture. I might add, and those necessary to salvation, but the other hath work enough for you. speaker W. P. Object. II. That Scripture is Scripture, is a point to be believed, but that is a tradition unwritten; and therefore one tradition there is not written, that we are to believe. Answ. That the books of the old and new Testament are Scripture, it is to be gathered and believed not upon bare tradition, but from the very books themselves, on this manner. Let a man that is endued with the spirit of discerning, read the several books, withal let him consider the professed author thereof, which is God himself, and the matter therein contained, which is a most divine and absolute truth full of piety: the manner and form of speech, which is full of majesty in the simplicity of words. The end whereat they wholly aim, which is the honour and glory of God alone, etc. and he shall be resolved that scripture is scripture, even by the Scripture itself. Yea, and by this means he may discern any part of Scripture, from the writings of men whatsoever. Thus then Scripture proves itself to be Scripture: and yet we despise not the universal consent or tradition of the Church in this case: which though it do not persuade the conscience, yet is it a notable inducement to move us to reverence, and regard the writings of the Prophets and Apostles. It will be said, where is it written that Scripture is Scripture? I answer, not in any one particular place or book of scripture, but in every line and page of the whole Bible to him that can read with the spirit of discerning, and can discern the voice of the true Pastor, as the sheep of Christ can do. speaker D. B. P. The second Argument for Traditions, is this, to believe that there be so many books of holy Scripture, and no more: and that those be they which are commonly taken so to be, is very necessary to salvation; now this is not to be found written in any place of holy Scripture, but is received only by Tradition, wherefore it is necessary to salvation to believe some Tradition. speaker A. W. You propound not Master Perkins reason, but frame one of your own. To which I answer, that is called in this question necessary to salvation, without the belief where of a man cannot be saved; but the knowledge of the number of the books of Scripture, and what they be, is not so necessary, but that without it a man may attain to salvation. Yea who doubts that he may be saved which knows not that there are any books of scripture at all, so that by the preaching of the word he believes truly in jesus Christ? And if those two points be absolutely necessary, what shall we think of them that have doubted of some parts of Scripture, as the Epistles to the Hebrews, and that of james? Damascen added one to the number, your Papists many. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins answereth that the books of the Old and New Testament, be Scripture, is not believed on bare Tradition, but by the books themselves on this manner. Let the man who is endued with the spirit of discerning, read the books and consider first the Author of them, who is God; then the matter contained, which is divine; the manner of speech, which is full of majesty in simple words: Lastly, the end aimed at, which is God's honour, and by this means he shall discern any part of Scripture from the writings of men whatsoever. speaker A. W. Reply. A wise and deep observation I warrant you, and well worthy A scornful reproof and unworthy of a Doctor's gravity 1. Cor. 12. a grave Author: Let us examine it briefly; first he will have his man endued with the spirit of discerning: Who shall endue him with the spirit? M. Perkins seemeth to say, that every Sheep of Christ hath his spirit. But S. Paul * De doctrine. Christ. cap. 8. 18. de civit. Dei 36. lib. 2. cont. ep. Gaudent. 23. teacheth plainly the contrary; that some certain only have the judgement to discern. And touching this matter of discerning which books are Canonical, which are not: Not the learnedst in the Primitive Church would take upon him to discern which they were, three hundred years after Christ, was left vndefined by the best learned, whether the Catholic Epistles of S. james and Jude: the second of S. Peter. the second and third of S. john, and his Apocalyps, were Canonical or no, as is confessed on all parts: hath then every Christian this spirit of discerning, when the best Christians wanted it? Who more profound, more skilful to discern, than that subtle and sharp Doctor S. Augustine, and yet the Protestants will not allow him the true spirit of discerning which books be Canonical. For he, in divers places of his works, * De praedest. Sanct. 14. holdeth the books of the Maccabees, to be Canonical Scriptures,; and expressly proveth the book of Wisdom so to be. * And yet our Protestant's will not admit them. See therefore how foolish and vain his first rule is: Come to the second. Master Perkins denies the assumption of the contract syllogism propounded by himself, affirming that the scripture is to be believed to be scripture upon bare tradition. If you will refute him, you must prove that assumption, till that be done, his answer must stand for sufficient, howsoever that he adds for the confirmation of it, be true or false. But let us examine that he brings. First he saith, a man must have the spirit of discerning, to which you knowing not what to answer, tell us, that Master Perkins seems to say, that every Sheep of Christ hath his spirit. If he did say so plainly, he saith no more than our Saviour himself doth, and his Apostle Paul. But he doth not once glance at that point, in any part of his answer, yet you refute that but slenderly, for the f 1. Cor. 12. 2. 3. Apostle speaks of an extraordinary gift bestowed upon some men, not denying this general ability which all true Christians have in some measure; neither doth the Apostle speak of discerning doctrine, but spirits, that is (saith your g Glossa Interlin. ad 1. Cor. 12. gloss, and h Lombard. ●b●. Thomas. Ca●…an. Lombard, Thomas, and Caietan) that he may discern that he hears, with what spirit it is spoken, with a good spirit, or with a bad. By this gift the children of God are enabled, or rather directed by the spirit of God to acknowledge those books to be scripture, though they can not determine of every particular among them. Augustine's judgement we reverence in this, and other matters, though we cannot always rest upon it. He calls the books Canonical, not properly, but because they were used in the Church to be read as the Canonical were, but he makes them not of equal authority with the other, because they were not then so generally received, in which respect he made some doubt of those which were indeed Canonical. Thus we expound Austin, that he may not be thought to contradict other fathers in this point. speaker D. B. P. His second is, that he who goeth about to discern whether the book be Canonical or no, must consider the Author, who is God. If he must at the first take God to be the Author of the book, what needs any further labour? It must needs be Canonical that hath God for the Author. This man's wi●s were surely from home, when he discoursed thus; and therefore it should be but folly to stand upon his particularities. speaker A. W. Is there no difference trow you betwixt saying God is the professed Author, and God is the Author? Let a man consider God who is professed, to be the author of these books, and seeing how the things in them agree to that which is befitting God, according as he hath learned by men, and been persuaded by the holy ghost, he shall come to acknowledge them indeed to be from God, wherein his glory is principally aimed at, and in the penning whereof his divine Majesty clearly shines. speaker D. B. P. Let this one reason in general serve to confute him; all this manner put together, serveth only to help particular men to discern which books are Canonical, who may, easily after their d●l●gent inquiry err and be de●●i●ed in this point, because every man is a liar. * Rom. 3. And if there be 〈◊〉 more certain means to assure them of this which is the ground of all their Religion, than every particular man's discretion and judgement, than out of doubt their whole Religion is most unwisely builded upon mean men's inventions and discretion, who also for the most part do neither understand the language in which they were first penned, nor the usual phrases of Scriptures translated; that I say nothing of the figures, parables, prophecies and controversies which seem to be; and many other difficulties, and yet these men need not doubt having learned some halfe-dozen-lines of Master Perkins, but that reading any book, they shall be able presently to discern whether 〈◊〉 be Canonical or no. A goodly mocketie. speaker A. W. If this reason be good, since all men together are liars as well as every man in particular, and so may be deceived, though not so easily, we are little the nearer, at the least not sure for any help you can afford us. There is yet a better assurance by the i See 1●. Art. par. 1. Art. 〈◊〉 holy ghosts directing the elect in this trial, and teaching and assuring them so far, as shall serve for their necessary instruction and salvation. Men were not so taught in the Primitive Church, but the most skilful and wisest in discerning Canonical books, trusted not unto their own judgement, but leaned always upon Apostolical Traditions. So did Serapion an ancient holy writer (as Euse●●us reporteth) reject certain books set out in the Apostles names, because they had not received from their Predecessors any such. The like doth element of Alexandria, Cap. 11. Cap. 19 and that famous Origen * Lib. 35. ca 6. of the same book, who observe the Ecclesiastical Canon, as he had learned and received by Tradition. So doth he deliver his opinion of the four Evangelists, and other books of Canonical Scripture, and not relying on his own wit, which was excellent, or learning which was singular in all manner of languages and matters: That S. Augustine was of the same mind, may be gathered out of these words of his, * Contra Faustum. Of what book can there be any assurance, if the letters, which the Church propagated by the Apostles, and by such excellency declared throughout all Nations, doth teach and hold to be the Apostles, should be uncertain, whether they be the Apostles or no? So that he maketh the declaration of the Church descended of the Apostles, to be a sure pillar to rest upon, for the certain knowledge of Canonical Scripture and other spirits whatsoever, if they follow not that rule to be rejected; so far is he off from encouraging every sheep of Christ's fold, to take that weighty matter upon himself as M. Perkins doth. And what can be more against the most prudent providence of the divine wisdom than to permit every one to be a judge of the books of Canonical Scripture. For if all those books, and no others should pas●e ●u●rant for Ca●…call, (which any Christian taking upon 〈◊〉 lib. 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Lib 1. cap. 〈◊〉. 2●. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 6. Lib. 32. cap 〈◊〉. him the spirit of discerning, would censure to be such) then alway with all the Old Testament, because divers esteemed it to proceed of some evil spirits, as witnesseth I●●neus and Ep●…s: Yea, not only all the Old must be abrogated, but all the New also, because it hath many falsehoods mixed with the truth; as some prefuming greatly of their spirit and skill in d●…ning did teach: so testifieth 〈◊〉. Augustine, 〈◊〉. Fa●…st. Some would have had but one of the four Gospels, some five, some six, some seven; some rejected all S. Paul's Epistles: Many, and those of the faithful did not admit for Canonical some of the other Apostles Epistles not the Revelations. If then the divine foresight of our Saviour had not prevented this most foul inconveniency by instituting a more certain means of discerning and declaring which books were penned by inspiration of the holy Ghost, which not, then by leaving it unto every man's discretion he might be thought to have had but slender care of our salvation, which every true Christian heart doth abhor to think: and therefore we must needs admit of this most holy and provident Tradition of them from hand to hand: as among the Protestants Brentius doth in his Prolegomenis, and also Kemnitius, handling the second kind of Traditions, in his examination of the Council of Trent; albeit they reject all other Traditions, besides this one. speaker A. W. Neither doth Master Perkins, or any Minister, teach the people now to rely on their own wit or judgement, but to use the means prescribed, and by prayer and faith to call and to rest upon the spirit of God for assurance in this case. The judgement of the Church we are so far from discrediting, that we hold it for a very special ground in this matter: condemning them as void of shame and reason, that refuse those books upon their own judgement, which have been from time to time, even from the Apostles days counted Canonical. But it is utterly from the question in hand to dispute this point, and beside divers other k Whitak. de scripture. Doctor Whitacker hath handled this matter very sufficiently, though every man cannot read his disputation, because it is latin; but for the matter in hand, concerning traditions, it falls not into this question to be disputed what is scripture, and what is not. For it is presupposed that the Scriptures are the word of God, and thereupon this doubt ariseth, whether the word of God contain all things necessary to salvation or no. If that be doubted of, it is idle and absurd to inquire, whether there be, besides that, another word of God divers from it, though not contrary, which is not written, but only as men have now and then set down some part of it in their writings: so then leaving this point, let us come to those which follow. speaker W. P. Object. III. Some books of the canon of the Scripture are lost, as the book of the wars of God. Num. 21. 14. The book of the just. josu. 10. 13. the books of Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and juda. 1. King 14. 19 the books of certain Prophets, Nathan, Gad, Iddo, Ahiah, and Semiah: and therefore the matter of these books must come to us by tradition. Answ. Though it be granted that some books of Canonical Scripture be lost; yet the Scripture still remains sufficient, because the matter of those books (so farforth as it was necessary to salvation) is contained in these books of Scripture that are now extant. speaker D. B. P. The two next arguments for Traditions, be not well propounded by You should have s●…d the faults. M. Perkins. The third is to be framed thus: Either all the books of holy Scripture contain all needful doctrine to salvation, or some certain of them without the rest; not some of them without the rest, for then the other should be superfluous, which no man holdeth: therefore all the books of holy Scripture put together, do contain all necessary instruction. Now than the argument followeth, but some of those books of holy Scripture have been lo●t; therefore some points of necessary doctrine contained in them, are not extant in the written Word, and consequently to be learned by Tradition. M. Perkins answereth: First supposing some of the books to be lost, that all needful doctrine, which was in them, is in some of the others preserved. But This Argument was not proposed to him. why did he not solve the Argument proposed? were then those books superfluous? Doth the holy Ghost set men to pen needless discourses? which this answer supposeth. speaker A. W. Because you think the reason makes for your advantage, as you have framed it yourself, I will follow your steps, and leave his argument as you do. That I may answer orderly, I deny your assumption: All things necessary to salvation are contained in some certain books of the scripture, so that although the rest were wanting, we should have sufficient to salvation for the matter. To your reason I say farther, that the consequence is nought, if some certain are sufficient to salvation, the rest are superfluous: for first it cannot be superfluous to have any book of God's word kept for the use of the Church, though the matter of it be in some other. Secondly, if your consequence be good, it is also superfluous to have the same psalm or story recorded in two places of the scripture, especially the later. But to say so were to condemn the holy ghost of having taken superfluous pains to no purpose, which were blasphemy. I prove it by these particulars; for example l Psal. 18. 2. Sam. 22. Psal. 18. is in the book of Psalms, and in the second book of Samuel. The history of Ezechiah m 2 Reg 19 & 20. & Esai. 35. & 37. & 38. is 2. Reg. 29. and so forward, and Isai 36. 37. 38. The like I might bring out of the books of Kings and Chronicles. Thirdly, though the matter be all fully and perfectly in certain books, yet every point is not so plain in one book as in another, and therefore it is not superfluous to have all these books, though all matter necessary to salvation be comprised in some few of them. Fourthly, the purpose of the holy ghost in penning the scriptures, was, not only to teach matters necessary to salvation, but to set forth the glory of God in his providence, justice, mercy, wisdom, and such like, to afford us examples of divers kinds of virtues, to exhort us to faith, and good works, and (in a word) to provide for God's glory by us here, as well as for our glorifying by him in heaven, to which there is no book, nor sentence of scripture, but serves more or less, and therefore no book of it can be thought superfluous, though the necessary matters belonging to salvation be contained in certain of them very sufficiently. speaker W. P. Again, I take it to be a truth (though some think otherwise) that no part of the Canon is lost: for Paul saith, Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, etc. Rom. 15. 4. where he takes it for granted, that the whole Canon of holy Scripture was then extant. For if he had thought, that some books of Scripture had been lost, he would have said; whatsoever was written and is now extant, was written for our learning and comfort. For books that are lost serve neither for learning nor comfort. Again, to hold that any books of Scripture should be lost, calls into question God's providence, and the fidelity of the Church, who hath the books of God in keeping, and is therefore called the pillar and ground of truth. And touching the books before mentioned, I answer thus: The book of the wars of God, Num. 21. 14. might be some short bill or narration of things done among the Israelites, which in the days of Moses went from hand to hand. For sometime a book in Scripture, signifieth a roll or Catalogue, as the first chapter of Matthew, which containeth the genealogy of our Saviour Christ, is called the book of the generation of jesus Christ. Again, the book of the just, and the books of Chronicles, which are said to be lost, were but as the Chronicles of England are with us: even politic records of the acts and events of things, in the kingdom of juda and Israel: out of which the Prophets gathered things necessary to be known, and placed them in holy Scripture. As for the books of Iddo, Ahiah, Semiah; Gad, and Nathan, they are contained in the books of the Kings and Chronicles and in the books of Samuel, which were not written by him alone, but by sundry Prophets, 1. Chro. 29. 29. as also was the book of judges. As for the books of Solomon which are lost, they did not concern religion and matters of salvation, but were concerning matters of Philosophy and such like things. speaker D. B. P. Therefore he gives a second more shameful, that none be perished, which is most contrary unto the plain Scriptures: * 1. Paral. vit. 2. Pa●●●. 9 as S. john Chrysostome proveth: * Rom. 9 in Math & 〈◊〉. 7. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. where he hath these express words: That many of the Prophetical books are lost, may be proved out of the history of Paral●pomeneon (which they translate Chronicles.) Now as for M. Perkins guesses, that some of them are yet extant, but otherwise called: some were but little rolls of paper; some profane and of Philosophy, I hold them not worth the discussing, being not much pertinent, and avowed on his word only, without either any reason or authority. speaker A. W. Saving the better judgement of Chrysostome, and other learned men, I cannot persuade myself that any part of the Canonical scripture is lost, when you have brought your proof out of any place of the scripture, I will either answer, or yield to it. But it makes nothing to your argument whether any be lost or no, for (as you see) I deny your assumption and the proof of it, which overthrows your whole reason. The jews and the skilfullest Christians in the Rabbins and antiquities of the jews that I know, are of a divers judgement from Chrysostome concerning this point. speaker W. P. Object. IV. Moses in mount Sina, beside the written law, received from God a more secret doctrine, which he never writ, but delivered by tradition or word of mouth to the Prophets after him: and this the jews have now set down in their Cabala. Answ. This indeed is the opinion of some of the jews, whom in effect and substance sundry Papists follow: but we take it for no better than a jewish dotage. For if Moses had known any secret doctrine beside the written law, he could never have given this commandment of the said law, Thou shalt not add any thing thereto. speaker D. B. P. Master Perkins his fourth objection of the jewish Cabala, is a mere dream of his own: our Argument is this; Moses who was the pen man of the old Law, committed not all to writing, but delivered certain points needful to salvation by Tradition, nor any Lawmaker that ever was in any Country comprehended all in letters, but established many things by customs, therefore not likely that our Christian Law should be all written. speaker A. W. Your argument is in effect all one with his: but let us take yours. Moses committed all to writing, that was necessary to salvation; so do all wise lawmakers: and if any thing be left unprovided for, that is of moment, it is because the lawgiver perceived it not, or knew not how to help it; which, in God's laws, and Moses the holy Ghosts Scribes writing, could be no hindrances. For what is there that God seeth not by his wisdom, or cannot order as he list by his power? speaker D. B. P. That Moses did not pen all, thus we prove. It was as necessary for women to be delivered from Original sin as men. Circumcision the remedy for men, could not possibly be applied to women, as every one whoknoweth what circumcision is can tell; neither is there any other remedy provided in the written law, to deliver women from that sin: Therefore some other remedy for them was delivered by Tradition. speaker A. W. Circumcision was not provided for remedy of original sin, any more than for actual; neither did it remedy the one, or the other: nay it was not of Moses appointing, but was long before him. The remedy for all sin is the sacrifice of the Messiah; the means to apply it, faith: which Moses taught in divers places of those five books. If women without circumcision cannot be freed from original sin, how were Adam and Eve freed, and all that died before God enjoined it to Abraham? speaker D. B. P. Item, if the Child were likely to die, before the eight day, there was remedy for them, as the most learned do hold, yet no where written in the Law: Also, many Gentiles, during that state of the old Testament, were saved, as job, and many such like, according to the opinion of all the ancient Fathers: yet in the Law, or any other part of the old Testament, it is not written, what they had to believe, or how they should live; wherefore, many things needful to salvation, were then delivered by Tradition. speaker A. W. The remedy for infants, aswell before the eight day, as upon it, and after it, was the mercy of God upon his covenant. As for the means, you would imagine, which were you cannot tell what, and devised by you cannot tell whom; remember what you answered about the Chaldee word in Daniel, To means and authors in the air, no thing need be, nor can be answered. speaker D. B. P. To that reason of his; that God in his providence should not permit such a loss of any part of the Scripture: I answer, that God permiteth much evil: Again, no great loss in that, according to our opinion, who hold that Tradition might preserve what was then lost. Although God in his providence permits much evil, it follows not, nor is at all likely, that he would suffer his own holy word, indicted by his spirit, to perish. Neither can it help the matter, that tradition might preserve the truth, unless God should miraculously hold in men, from mingling their inventions with his traditions. Experience makes the matter clear: few things, or none yet remaining, that are indeed of antiquity, both for the substance and use of them. But what answer you to Master Perkins other reason out of S. Paul? That was too heavy for your shoulders. speaker W. P. Object. V. Heb. 5. 12. God's word is of two sorts, milk, and strong meat. By milk, we must understand the word of God written, wherein God speaks plainly to the capacity of the rudest: but strong meat is unwritten traditions, a doctrine not to be delivered unto all, but to those that grow to perfection. Answ. We must know, that one and the same word of God is milk and strong meat, in regard of the manner of handling and propounding of it. For being delivered generally and plainly, to the capacity of the simplest, it is milk; but being handled particularly and largely, and so fitted for men of more understanding, it is strong meat. As for example: the doctrine of the creation, of man's fall, and redemption by Christ, when it is taught overly and plainly, it is milk: but when the depth of the same is thoroughly opened, it is strong meat. And therefore it is a conceit of man's brain, to imagine that some unwritten word is meant by strong meat. speaker A. W. Now instead of M. Perkins his fifth reason for us of milk and strong meat, wishing him a Mess of Pap for his childish proposing of it: I D. B. P. Your wish is better, than your answer would have been. will set down some authorities out of the written Word, in proof of Traditions. I make no question but Master Perkins had all the reasons he propounds for you in any matter, in some of your own writers; as perhaps hereafter, upon better search, at more leisure, I shall find and prove to all the world. To the testimonies I answer in general, that no argument can be drawn from any, or all of them, to prove that any doctrine necessary to salvation is to be learned by tradition, and is not written in the Scripture. Let any man conclude the point out of them, and we will yield, if we show not a reasonable cause to the contrary. Secondly, I add further, that if it were granted that there were some such traditi●…s ●●et (as n Au●…n joa. tract. 41. Austin saith of the first place) who can say these, or those be they? For the most part of the traditions, that are now thrust upon the Church, by you Papists, are (in comparison) but new, and very trifles, or mere superstitious. speaker D. B. P. Our Saviour said, being at the point of his passion That he had many joh. 16. 12. Act. 10. things to say unto his Apostles, but they could not as then bear them. Our Saviour after his resurrection, appeared often unto his Disciples, speaking with them of the kingdom of God, of which little is written in any of the Evangelists. I commend you brethren, that you remember me in all things, and keep 1. Cor. 11. the Traditions, even as I have delivered them to you. speaker A. W. Now for the particulars, the o joh 16. 12. first is answered already; the p Act. 10. second makes a bad consequence. Christ spoke often with his Disciples of the kingdom of God, of which little is written in the Evangelists: therefore there are some points necessary to salvation, not recorded in Scripture. His talk with them might be for exhortation and consolation especially. Who can say, whatsoever it were, that it is not written in the Epistles? By traditions q Ambros. ad 2. Thess. 〈◊〉. Ambrose understands in the 2. Thessaly. nothing but the Gospel; in that place r 1. Cor. 11. 1. to the Corinthians, the Apostle seems in all likelihood to speak of ceremonies, or circumstances, in their carriage, about God's service: which neither is matter of salvation, nor to be always alike in all places, and at all times. So doth s Ambros. ad 1. Cor. 11. Ambrose understand him. speaker D. B. P. O Timothy keep the depositum, that is, that which I delivered thee to keep, Hold fast by the holy Ghost, the good things committed unto thee to 1 Tim. 6. 2. Tim. 1. 〈◊〉, which was as S. Chrysostom and Thesphilact expound, the true doctrine of Christ, the true sense of holy Scriptures, the right admini- words be not set down in Scripture, yet the matter is: if not expressly, which is not needful, yet by necessary consequence: as it may evidently appear by the Council and Fathers, wherein and by whom the contrary to those opinions is condemned and confuted. The first point is implied necessarily in all those places, by which our Saviour is proved to be true God, that is, the same God with his Father; which you shall find in p Athanas. contr. Ana. & Concil. Nicen. 1. Athanasius writings, and the first Council of Nice. The second, of the holy Ghosts proceedings from the Son, as well as from the Father, is proved by q Thom. cont. gentle. lib. 4. cap. 24 Thomas out of the Scripture, and by other against the Greek Church. The third, beside r 1. Io●. 5. 〈◊〉. that place of john, is necessarily concluded (since there can be but one God) out of the texts, that prove every one of them severally to be God; and by s Ma●h. 〈◊〉. 19 that of Matthew. The fourth is proved out of Scripture, by t Concil. Ep 1. the first Council of Ephesus, against Nestorius; so that for these points we need no traditions. speaker W. P. Object. VI Sundry places of Scripture be doubtful: and every religion hath his several exposition of them, as the Papists have theirs, and the Protestants theirs. Now then seeing there can be but one truth, when question is of the interpretation of Scripture, recourse must be had to the tradition of the Church, that the true sense may be determined, and the question ended. Ans. It is not so: but in doubtful places Scripture itself is sufficient to declare his own meaning: first, by the analogy of faith, which is the sum of religion gathered out of the clearest places of Scripture: secondly, by the circumstances of the place, and the nature and signification of the words: thirdly, by conference of place with place. By these and like helps contained in Scripture, we may judge which is the truest meaning of any place. Scripture itself is the text, and the best gloss. And the Scripture is falsely termed the matter of strife, it being not so of itself, but by the abuse of man. And thus much for our consent concerning Traditions, wherein we must not be wavering but steadfast, because notwithstanding our renouncing of Popery, yet Popish inclinations and dispositions be rife among us. Our common people marvelously affect human traditions; yea man's nature is inclined more to be pleased with them, then with the word of God. The feast of the nativity of our Saviour Christ, is only a custom and tradition of the Church, and yet men are commonly more careful to keep it then the Lords day, the keeping whereof stands by the moral law. Positive laws are not sufficient to restrain us from buying and selling on the Sabbath; yet within the twelve days no man keeps market. Again, see the truth of this in our affection to the ministery of the word: let the Preacher allege Peter and Paul the people count it but common stuff, such as any man can bring: but let men come and allege Ambrose, Austin, and the rest of the fathers; oh, he is the man, he is alone for them. Again, let any man be in danger any way, and strait he sendeth to the wise man or wizard: God's word is not sufficient to comfort and direct him. All this argues that Popery denied with the mouth, abides still in the heart: and therefore we must learn to reverence the written word, by ascribing unto it all manner of perfection. speaker D. B. P. The sixth and last reason for Traditions: Sundry places of holy Scriptures This 〈◊〉 ●all out but in some places: many other are very ●…in and easy. be hard to be understood, others doubtful whether they must be taken literally or figuratively: If then it be put to every Christian to take his own exposition, every several sect, will coin interpretations in favour of their own opinions: and so shall the word of God, ordained only to teach us the truth, be abused and made an Instrument to confirm all errors. To avoid which inconvenience, considerate men have recourse unto the Traditions and ancient Records of the Primitive Church, * Still you beg the question. received from the Apostles, and delivered to the posterity, as the true copies of God's word; see the true Exposition and sense of it, and thereby confute and reject all private and new glosses, which agree not with those ancient and holy Commentaries: So that for the understanding of both difficult and doubtful texts of Scripture, Traditions are most necessary. M. Perkins his answer is, that there is no such need of them, but in doubtful places, the Scripture itself is the best gloss: If these be observed; first the analogy of faith, which is the sum of religion, gathered out of the clearest places. Secondly, the circumstance of the place, and the nature and signification of the words. Thirdly, the conference of place with place; and concludeth, that the Scripture is falsely termed the matter of strife, it being not so of itself, but by the abuse of man. speaker A. W. First, this reason can conclude nothing against our opinion: We must have recourse to traditions, for the expounding of doubtful places. Therefore the Scripture contains not all doctrine necessary to salvation. I deny the consequence: This rather proves the sufficiency of the Scripture, as being sufficient in itself, if it be rightly understood. Secondly, I say there is no such danger as you imagine: For though some may abuse it, to confirm error: yet may their false interpretations be confuted, by diligent examination of the text, without resting upon the authority of man's interpretation: as it appears manifestly by the courses that the ancient writers took, for the confuting of all heresies. And if without this it could not have been done, what should have become of the truth, before the writings of men were extant in any number? For it were ridiculous to imagine, that every particular text was expounded by the Apostles, and so left by tradition to the Church. Thirdly, who shall determine when the time, to count ancientness by, ended? especially since every man's writings were new when they were written, and cannot grow in truth, as they do in age by continuance: we acknowledge them for helps of interpretation, not for warrants. speaker D. B. P. Reply. To begin with his latter words, because I must stand upon the former: Is the Scripture falsely termed matter of strife, because it is not so, of his own nature? why then, is Christ truly called the stone of offence or no, to them that believe not? Saint Peter saith, Yes, No saith 1. Pet. 2. M. Perkins because that cometh not of Christ, but of themselves. But good Sir, Christ is truly termed a stone of offence, and the Scripture, matter of strife, albeit there be no cause in them of those faults, but because it so falleth out by the malice of men. The question is not wherefore it is so called, but whether it be so called or no truly: That which truly is, may be so called truly: But the Scripture truly is matter of great contention, every obstinate Heretic understanding them according to his own fantasy, and therefore may truly be so termed, although it be not the cause of contention in itself, but written to take away all contention. speaker A. W. Master Perkins denies the scripture to be matter of strife, and that it may so be slandered to the disgrace of it, as some Papists have most shamelessly spoken of it, to draw people from the reading and loving of it. What blasphemies (almost) have not your writers uttered against the holy word of God? u Albert. Pigh. con●● 〈◊〉 d● feels Pighius calls them dumb judges, and in x Pigh. Hierar. lib. 3. cap. 3. another place commends the truth and pleasantness of his speech that compared the scriptures to a nose of wax. Did not y Hosius contt. Bren. lib. 2. Hosius say of David's Psalms, we write poems every body learned and unlearned? speaker D. B. P. But to the capital matter; these three rules gathered out of S. Augustine, be good directions, whereby sober and sound wits may much profit in study of divinity, if they neglect not other ordinary helps of good instructors, and learnëd Commentaries: But to affirm that every Christian may by these means be enabled to judge which is the true sense of any doubtful or hard text is extreme rashness and mere folly. S. Augustine himself well conversant in these rules, endued with a most happy wit, and yet much bettered with excellent knowledge of all the liberal Sciences; yet he having most diligently studied the holy Scriptures, for more than thirty years, with the help also of the best Commentaries he could get, and counsel of the most exquisite; yet be ingeniously confesseth, That there were more places of Scripture, that after all his study, he understood not, than which he did understand, And shall every simple Epist. 119 cap. 21. man furnished only with M. Perkins his three rules of not twice three lines be able to dissolve any difficulty in them whatsoever? Why do the Lutherans (to omit all former Heretics) understand them in one sort, the Caluinists after another, The Anabaptists a third way, and so of other sects? And in our own Country, how cometh it to pass that the Protestants find one thing in the holy Scriptures, the Puritans almost the clean contrary? Why I say is there so great, bitter, and endless contention among brothers of the same spirit, about the sense and meaning of God's word: If every one might, by the aid of those trivial notes, readily disclose all difficulties, and assuredly boult out the certain truth of them; It cannot be but most evident to men of any judgement, that the Scripture itself can never end any doubtful controversy, without there be admitted some certain judge to declare what is the true meaning of it. And it cannot but redound to the dishonour of our blessed Saviour to say, that he hath left a matter of such importance at random, and hath not provided for his servants an assured mean to attain to the true understanding of it. If in matters of Temporal justice it should be permitted to every contentious smatterer in the Law, to expound & construe the grounds of the Law and statutes, as it should seem fittest in his wisdom, and not be bound to stand to the sentence and declaration of the judge, what iniquity should not be Law, or when should there be any end of any hard matter; one Lawyer defending one part, an other the other: One counsellor assuring on his certain knowledge, one party to have the right, another, as certainly averring, not that, but the contrary to be Law, both alleging for their warrant sometexts of Law: What end and pacification of the parties could be devised, unless the decision of the controversy be committed unto the definitive sentence of some, who should declare whether counsellor had argued justly and according to the true meaning of the Law? none at all, but bloody debate and perpetual conflict, each pursuing to get or keep by force of arms, that which his learned counsel avouched to be his own. speaker A. W. No man saith so, but that by these a man may judge which is the truest, that is, the likeliest interpretation of a doubtful place. But I pray you tell me, can you, or any Papist, by the help of tradition added to the other three rules certainly determine, what is the sense of every hard place of scripture? If you can, S. Austin by that means was likelier to have it then any of you, as he was nearer the Apostles, from whom those traditions are said to have come. If you rest upon the Commentaries of the Ancient, what means had they to further them, in understanding the Scripture that we now want? is it not apparent, that we have all they had, and their pains, and judgement beside? You ask then, how chance divers men understand them diversly? not because they want the tradition you talk of. For who knows not that the Fathers differ exceedingly one from another in their expositions? And do all the popish interpretations agree? who, it should seem by you have recourse to that main help of Tradition. He that looks into your Commentaries, and books of controversies, shall find very divers, and sometimes contrary expositions. Our Saviour Christ hath provided sufficiently for his Church, by delivering in scripture the grounds of religion so plainly, some here, some there, that any reasonable man may with small labour understand them, from which, they that have knowledge of the tongues, and arts, especially of Logic and Rhetoric, may come to understand the harder places, though perhaps not every one, yet (at the least) so many, and such, as shall serve to instruct the people of God in the knowledge of his will for the obtaining of everlasting life. speaker D. B. P. To avoid then such garboils and intestine contention, there was never yet any Lawmaker so simple, but appointed some governor and judge, who should see the due observation of his Laws, and determine all boubts that might arise about the letter and exposition of the Law, who is therefore called the quick and lively law; and shall we Christians think that our divine Lawmaker, who in wisdom, care, and providence, surmounted all others, more than the heavens do the earth, hath left his golden Laws at random, to be interpreted as it should seem best unto every one pretending some hidden knowledge from we know not what spirit? no no, It cannot be once imagined without too too great derogation unto the sovereign prudence of the Son of God. speaker A. W. For the avoiding of outward garboils by force, or preaching false doctrine, our Saviour hath appointed principally the civil magistrate, secondarily the governors of the Churches. For the keeping of his children from perishing by error, he hath ordained, beside the outward helps of Pastors and Doctors, the most certain direction of his vicegerent the holy spirit, who preserves all that are Christ's from falling away from the substance and foundation of truth to damnation. Not that every man may take upon him to interpret scripture upon pretence of I know not what spirit, but that he may assure himself of being kept from all error, that may overthrow his salvation, by the direction of God's spirit, upon whom he calls by prayer, and rests by faith to this purpose as I said before. sure, and who therefore were appointed to be heard without exception. This befalls not any men nowadays, and therefore none can justly claim any such credit. The ancients that so wrote in this point of S. Paul's going to see Peter, have wholly mistaken the Apostle, who denies that of himself which they affirm of him. For he saith, c Gal. 1. 1. First, that he was not an Apostle of men, nor by man. Secondly, that he went up to jerusalem, not d Gal. 2. 6. 7. to have confirmation of his doctrine from them who were no way superior to him, but that the Gentiles might know he taught the same things that the other Apostles did. If he had done it for his own assurance, he e Act. 26. 19 had not believed the vision, and discredited our saviours extraordinary teaching of him, and had taught for a time such things, as he was not sure to be the truth of God. But if this should be his case, he had sinned grievously in his former preaching, and he had wholly overthrown the authority of his ministry, which in these two Chapters he labours especially to uphold, avouching, that f Gal. 2. 6. 7. 8. 9 he neither learned any doctrine, nor received any allowance of his authority from james, Cephas, and john, which were esteemed to be pillars; yea g Gal. 2. 11. he did openly reprove Peter, if not of error in doctrine, yet of misbehaviour in his conversation. As for the controversy of abrogating Moses law, it was a case determined by scripture, and no man might refuse to obey any one of the Apostles charge concerning that point. But that the Brethren might have the better satisfaction, it pleased the holy ghost that the Apostles should in a Council decide the question by h Act. 15. 6. 23. joint consent of themselves, and the brethren there assembled, which any one of them might (of himself) have ended. But because divers parts of the Church were converted by divers Apostles, and each Church made most account of their own Apostle, the readiest and safest way was to conclude of the matter by common consultation: so afterward in all lawful Counsels the written word was held sufficient for the consutation of the heresies that arose from time to time: but for the better stopping of the heretics mouths, and satisfying of all men, sometimes the consent of former Divines, Churches, and Counsels was added, in good discretion for men's sake, not for the matter which might be and was abundantly proved, or discovered, as occasion served, by the scriptures. speaker D. B. P. See Cardinal Bellarmine, I will only record two noble examples of Tom. 1. lib. 3. cap. 6. Lib. 11. cap. 〈◊〉. this recourse unto Antiquity, for the true sense of God's word, The first, out of the Ecclesiastical History, whereof Saint Gregory Nazianzen and Saint Basil, two principal lights of the Greek Church, this is recorded: They were both noble men, brought up together at Athens: And afterwards for thirteen years space, laying aside all profane books, employed their study, wholly in the holy Scriptures. The sense and true meaning whereof they sought, not out of their own judgement and presumption, (as the Protestants Both are untrue. both do, and teach others to do) but out of their Predecessors writings and authority: namely, of such as were known to have received the rule of understanding from the Tradition of the Apostles: These be the very words. speaker A. W. The examples you bring, are nothing against us in this question. Nazianzen and Basil sought the true sense of the Scripture, not out of their own judgement but out of their predecessors writings and authority. What then? Therefore the Scripture contains not all doctrine necessary to salvation. This consequence hath often been disproved. Neither is the Antecedent true, if it be generally taken. For their own writings show every where, that they used the help of learning and discourse, to find out the sense of scripture in many places, and set down that in their Commentaries, which by study they came to understand. If any thing were doubtful, we presume they did, i See 12. Art. par. 1. Art. 2. E, & Art. 5. per ●●t. as we are sure the Protestants now do, where they had not apparent reason to the contrary, rest upon the authority of their predecessors, rather than upon their own. This reverence we give to the Father's writings, and read them with as great dilig●…, as they that make more brags of th●ir knowledge in ●he●. And if that rule (which the story) 〈◊〉 and or you name 〈◊〉 R●…. hist Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 9 not, but it is Austin, speaks of 〈◊〉 one of them, which we follw in searching out th●… 〈◊〉 of the Scripture, ●…treate ●ou to make 〈◊〉 to us, and you shall find that we will take it 〈◊〉 and use it diligently, if we cannot show you certain reasons to the contrary. If the rule be, to take for truth whatsoever the ancients have delivered; how many things, yea contrary expositions, shall we hold for true? If you say, the rule is to believe the ancientest; what shall we do where they say nothing? where their expositions are contraried by those you name, and other about their time? But this can be no rule of understanding any more of the Scripture, than that which they have expounded, which is very little: and Origen, one of the ancientest and greatest expositors, is generally condemned for an Heretic, by Epiphanius, Jerome, Austin, and the best writers in Divinity. Yea l Bellarm. de Purgat lib. 2. cap. 8. c Prato spirituali citat 27. Synod. Bellarmine showeth, that Origen was seen in hell with Arius, and Nestorius; and affirmeth that m Synod. quinta. cap. 11. the fifth Synod cursed him amongst other Heretics. This rule, if it be a rule, will serve in very few places of the Scripture. speaker D. B. P. The other example shall be the principal pillar of the Latin Church, S. Augustine, who not only exhorteth and adviseth us to follow the decree of the ancient Church, if we will not be deceived with the obscurity of doubtful questions, but plainly affirmeth, That he would not believe the Gospel, if the authority of the Church did not move him unto it. Lib. contra Crescon. c. 33. Cont. Epist. fund. cap. 5. Which words, are not to be understood as Caluine would have them that S. Augustine had not been at first a Christian, if by the authority of the Church, he had not been thereunto persuaded: but that when he was a learned and judicious Doctor, and did write against Heretics; even than he would not believe these books of the Gospel to have been penned by divine inspiration, and no others, and this to be the true sense of them; unless the Catholic Church (famous then for antiquity, generality, and consent) did tell him, which and what they were: So far was he oft from trusting to his own skill and judgement in this matter, which notwithstanding was most excellent. This matter is so large, that it requireth a whole question: but being penned up within the compass of one objection, I will not dwell any longer in it, but here fold up this whole question of Traditions, in the authorities of the ancient Fathers; out of whom, because I have in answering M. Perkins and elsewhere, as occasion served, cited already many sentences; I will here be brief. speaker A. W. n Aug. contra Crescon. lib. 1 cap. 33. Austin wils us to consult with that Church, which the holy Scripture shows us to be the Church, without any ambiguity: the ancient Church he names not, but, by the Church so commended, he understandeth the universal Church, as he calls it: that is, he appeals, in the question about Baptism among the Donatists, to the general practice of the Church, in the several congregations: which no doubt is of great force to persuade any reasonable man in any matter, that cannot be decided by the scripture. For in matters of indifferency the Church's judgement is a kind of law: so that he, which in such things would not be deceived, cannot do better than to follow it. There is no word in o Aug. contra Epist. funda. cap. 5. that place of Austin, to allow your interpretation of that sentence: but rather the whole course of the speech makes for Calvin. I will propound the matter, let any indifferent man judge. Manes or Manicheus in his epistle of the foundation, as he termed it, called himself the Apostle of Christ: Austin answers, that he did not believe him to be so; and then demands of the Manichean, what course he would take to prove it to him. Perhaps (saith Austin) you will read the Gospel to me, and assay to prove Manicheus person to me out of it. But what if you should light upon one, that doth not yet believe the Gospel? I truly p Non crederem. had not believed the Gospel, if the authority of the Church q Commo●●ret. had not moved me: why should I not obey them (saith Austin) when they will me, not to believe Manicheus, whom I obeyed, when they willed me to believe the Gospel? These are Augustine's words: to which I will add those that follow r Cap. 14. afterward, that, First we believe that, which as yet we cannot s Intueri. discern: that being made stronger in faith, we may attain to the understanding of that we do believe, not men now, but God himself confirming, and enlightening our mind within. speaker A. W. S. Ignatius the Apostles Scholar, doth exhort all Christians, To stick D. B. P. Euseb. lib. 30, 36. fast unto the Traditions of the Apostles, some of which he committed to writing. I showed before what little credit many of the writings we have of Ignatius deserve. Eusebius authority is more worth, but he is t Euseb. hist. lib. 30. 36, for lib. 3. cap. 32. neither quoted, nor alleged truly. The former I take to be the Printers fault, the latter must needs be yours. Ignatius (saith Eusebius) as he passed through Asia, under guard, in every City where he came, by preaching and exhortation strengthened the parishes, that they should especially take heed of heresies, than first newly sprung up; and should cleave fast to the u Traditioni. Tradition of the Apostles, which also, for more surety, he thought it necessary for him to write. Now the heresies, which at that time troubled the Church, were those of the Simonians, Menadcians, Ebionites, Nicolaitans, Cerinthians, Saturninians, Basilidians; for the refuting whereof, the scripture is all-sufficient to a reasonable man. speaker D. B. P. Polycarpus, by the authority of the Apostles words, which he had received from their own mouths; confirmed the 〈…〉 truth, and overthrew the Heretics. speaker A. W. Polycarpus might well refute them by authority of the Apostles words, which himself had heard, if without the Scripture they would believe him, that he heard them of the Apostles. But x Euseb. hist. lib. 5. cap. 18. Eusebius reports of him, in Irenaus words, that he recited all things, in that refutation, agreeable to the holy Scriptures. It was much for the persuading of the people, to whom (as Irenaeus saith) he spoke those things, that he could truly say, he had heard those things of the Apostles by word of mouth, which they might find written in the Scriptures. speaker D. B. P. S. Ireneus, who imprinted in his heart Apostolical Traditions, received from Policarp, saith, If there should be a controversy about any mean Ibid. lib. 5. cap. 20. question, ought we not to run unto the most ancient Churches, in the which the Apostles had conversed, and from them take that which is clear and perspicuous to define the present question? For what if the Apostles had not written any thing at all, must we not have followed the order of Traditions, which they delivered to them to whom they delivered the Churches? speaker A. W. y Iren. Epist. ad Floren. & lib. 3. cap. 4. Irenaeus, in his epistle to Florinus above mentioned, saith that he imprinted in his heart the whole carriage, and discourse of Polycarpus refuting the Heretics; but of Apostolical traditions he speaks never a word more, than that Polycarpus had heard those things of the Apostles, which he then delivered, agreeable to the Scriptures. In any such mean question, as is not resolved of in Scripture, it was fit to have recourse to those Churches, in which the Apostles had lived: yea, if they had written nothing, we must have repaired to the books of the old Testament, the known word of God, for all matters of substance: in things indifferent, the judgement of such Churches is of great authority. speaker A. W. Origen teacheth, that the Church received from the Apostles by Tradition, D. B. P. Rom. 6. to baptise Infants. Origen calls the tradition of the Apostles, their practice of baptizing infants, which hath sufficient ground of scripture, though not in express words; as your Church also holds, and as z Origen. in Leuit. hom. 91 & in ●●c. homil. 14. Origen himself acknowledgeth, by showing the reason that moved the Apostles to baptise them, as he conceives; though indeed there is also other better warrant for it. speaker A. W. Athanasius saith: We have proved this sentence to have been delivered D. B. P. Lib. de decret. Niceni conc. from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers: but ye, O new jews, and sons of Caiphas, what Ancestors can ye show of your opinion? speaker A. W. Where reason failed the Arians on their side, and could not move them in behalf of the Church, Athanasius adds this as a further proof for their confutation; that the doctrine of Christ a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being one with his Father, had been held from time to time in the Church: whereas they had no consent of antiquity for their opinion. Yet had he himself proved the point, by many certain reasons out of the Scripture, and brought this argument from the authority of men, for confutation of their false assertion, that the former Divines were not of that judgement. This Athanasius refuteth by the testimonies of Theognostus, Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria, whom he calls b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. eloquent, and one other Dionysius Bishop of Rome, and Origen whom he terms c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. B. P. De Spu. Sanct. 27. Of Nazianzen in the treatise of Images. painful. S. Basil hath these words: We have the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church; partly written, and part we have received by Tradition of the Apostles in mystery, both which be of the same force to godliness, and no man opposeth against these, who hath at the least, but mean experience of the Laws of the Church. See Gregory Nazianzen Orat. 1. in julian. If you will give me leave, I will defend Basils' speech by that, which may be gathered out of him, viz. that he holds them things to be by tradition, which are not expressed in the Scriptures. My ground for this exposition are these words of his: Out of what Scripture have we (saith d Basil. de spirit. sanct. c. 27. Basil) the very speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine, some thousand two hundred years ago, recordeth the very form of arguing, which the Protestants use nowadays, in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first book against him in the beginning. If thou shalt (saith this Heretic) bring any thing out of the Scriptures which is common to all, we must needs hear thee, but these words which are without the Scriptures are in no sort to be received of us: when as the Lord himself hath admonished us, and said: in vain do they worship me, teaching commandments and precepts of men. How S. Augustine And before answered. Hom 62. Cantica. opposed against them unwritten Traditions, hath been afore declared. The like doth S. Bernard asfirme of certain Heretics of his time, called Apostolici. So that most truly it may be concluded, that even as we Catholics have learned of the Apostles and ancient Fathers, our noble progenitors, to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we have received by word of mouth, aswell as that which is written: Even so the Protestants have received as it were from hand to hand, of their ignoble predecessors, old condemned Heretics, to reject all traditions, and to she unto the only Scriptures. speaker A. W. The Heretic Maximinus asked nothing but reason of Austin if he stood upon the matter, and not upon the m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. terms; neither doth Austin find fault with this condition, nor could he in reason, because (as I answered before) himself appeals to that kind of trial in that very disputation. Neither must I (saith n Aug. contra. Maxim. lib. 3. cap. 14. Austin to Maximinus) allege the Council of Nice in prejudice of the matter, nor you the Council of Ariminum, neither am I tied with the authority of this Council, nor you with the authority of that; let matter strive with matter, 〈◊〉 with cause, reason with reason, by the authority of the scriptures which are not proper to you or me, but common to us both. But will you hear him speak more like Maximinus? Read me this (saith o Aug. de pastor. cap. 14. Austin) out of a Prophet, read it out of a Psalm, recite it out of the Law, recite it out of the Gospel, recite it out of an Apostle. Thence recite I the Church, dispersed over the whole world, and our Lord saying, my sheep hear my voice. And a little after, away with men's papers, let p Sonent voces divinae. the voice of God sound. And q August. in Psal. 57 in another place, away with our papers, let God's books come forth: hear Christ, hear the truth speaking. If these speeches be heretical, we confess ourselves to be Heretics, but so, that we have Austin on our side for an arch-heretic. r Bernard ser. 66. not 62. in Cantica. Bernard speaks of the Heretics called apostolics, not in his 62. but in his 66. sermon upon the Canticles, where he saith never a word of their rejecting Traditions. No more hath s Aug. haeres. 40. Austin, nor t Epiphan. lib. 2. tom. 1. haeres. 61. Epiphanius, where they write of them. And if they did reject traditions, it was because they would establish their own heretical books, viz. the Acts of Thomas and Andrew, and the gospel of the Egyptians, which, to say the truth, are to be counted traditions, because they have no warrant of the scripture, nor are any part of the Canon. It were easy for me to turn your own sentence against you, and (as all men may see) with good reason, but it shall suffice me that I have refuted your slanders and shows with sound proof of arguments and authority. I consider, losers must have leave to speak. The eighth point. Of Vows. Our consent. speaker W. P. Touching vows this must be known, that we do not condemn them altogether, but only labour to restore the purity of doctrine touching this point: which by the Church of Rome from time to time hath been corrupted and defaced. We hold therefore that a vow is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed unto him: and it is twofold, general, or special. The general vow is that which concerns all believers: and it is made in the covenant both of the law, and of the Gospel. I will here only speak of the vow which is made in the covenant of the Gospel, in which there be two actions: one of God, the other of man. God in mercy on his part promiseth to men the remission of sins and life everlasting: and man again for his part promiseth to believe in Christ, and to obey God in all his commandments. All men ever made this vow unto God, as the jews in circumcision: which also they renewed so often as they received the Passeover: and in the new Testament all that are baptised do the like. And in baptism this vow is called the stipulation of a good conscience whereby we purpose to renounce ourselves, to believe in Christ, and to bring forth the fruits of true repentance: and it ought to be renewed so oft as we are partakers of the supper of the Lord. This vow is necessary and must be kept as a part of the true worship of God; because it is a promise, wherein we vow to perform all duties commanded of God either in the law or in the Gospel. It may be demanded, considering we are bound to obedience, how we bind ourselves in baptism thereto. Answ. Though we be already bound partly by nature and partly by the written word, yet may we renew the same bond in a vow, and he that is bound may further bind himself, so it be for this end, to help his dullness for want of zeal, and to make himself more forward in duties of love to men and the worship of God: to this end David swore to keep the law of God. Psal. 119. 116. though he were bound unto it by nature and by the written law itself. The special vow is that, which doth not reach to the person of all believers, but only concerns some special men upon some special occasions. And this kind of vow is twofold. The first, is the vow of a ceremonial duty in the way of service to God: and it was in practice in the Church of the jews under the old Testament: examples hereof are two especially, the first was the vow of the Nazarites, whereto no kind of men were bound by God's commandment, but they bound themselves: God only prescribing the manner and order of keeping the same with rites pertaining thereto, as abstinence from wine, the not cutting of their hair, and such like. The second example is of the jews, when of their own accords, they vowed to give God house or land, sheep, or oxen, or any like things for the maintenance of the legal worship: and of this also God prescribeth certain rules, Leuit. 27. Now these vows were part of the jewish pedagogy or ceremonial law, wherein God trained up the jews in the old testament: and being observed of them they were parts of God's worship: but now under the Gospel they are not: being all abolished with the ceremonial law, to which Christ put an end at his death upon the cross. It is true Paul made a vow, and since kept the same, in in the time of the new Testament. Act. 18. yet not as a part of God's worship: but as a thing indifferent for the time, wherein he only condescended to the weakness of the jews, that by this means he might bring them the better unto Christ. And whereas Christ is called a Nazarite, Matth. 2. 23. we may not think he was of that very order, because he did not abstain from wine: but he was so termed because he was the verity and accomplishment of this order. For by it was signified that God's Church was a peculiar people severed or chosen out of the world: and that Christ in respect of holiness was also separated from all sinners. And the words in Saint Matthew, he shall be called a Nazarite, are borrowed from the book of judges, cap. 13. where they are properly spoken of Samson, and in type or figure of Christ. For as Samson saved Israel by his death, so did Christ save his Church. And as Samson killed his enemies more by death then by life, so did Christ. It is plain therefore that this kind of vow bindeth not us: for there are no more ceremonies to be kept under the Gospel for parts of God's worship, but the outward rites of Baptism and the Lords Supper. Vows concerning meats, and drinks, attire, touching, tasting, times, place, days, were proper to the jews. The second kind of special vow is that whereby a man promiseth freely to perform some outward and bodily exercise, for some good end: and this vow also (if it be made accordingly) is lawful, and belongs both to the Church of the old and new Testament. In the old we have the example of the Rekabites, jer. 35. who by the appointment of jonadab their father abstained from strong drink, and wine, from planting vineyards and orchards: whereby jonadab intended only to break them before hand, and to acquaint them with their future condition and state, that they should be strangers in a foreign land; that so they might prepare themselves to endure hardness in the time to come. And now in the new testament we have warrant in like manner to vow: as if a man by drinking of wine or strong drink, find himself prone to drunkenness, he may vow with himself to drink no more wine nor strong drink for so long time, as he feels the drinking thereof will stir up his infirmity, and minister occasion of sinning. Of this kind also are the vows in which we purpose and promise to God, to keep set times of fasting, to task ourselves in prayer and reading of holy Scriptures, and to give set alms for special causes known to ourselves, and to do sundry like duties. And that we be not deceived in making such vows, certain rules must be remembered: I. that the vow be agreeable to Gods will and word: for if it be otherwise, the making as also the keeping thereof is sin. Vows must not be the bonds of iniquity. II. It must so be made, that it may stand with Christian liberty. For we may not make such things necessary in conscience, which God hath made free. Now Christian liberty allows unto us the free use of all things indifferent, so it be out of the case of offence. Hence it follows that vows must be made and kept or not kept, so farforth as in conscience they may stand or not stand with our liberty purchased by Christ. III. The vow must be made with consent of superiors, if we be under government. Thus among the jews the vow of a daughter might not stand unless the consent of Parents came thereunto. IV. It must be in the power and ability of the maker thereof, to do or not to do. A vow made of a thing impossible, is no vow. V. It must be agreeable to the calling of him that maketh it: that is, both to his general calling as he is a Christian, and to that particular calling wherein he liveth. If it be against either one or both, it is unlawful. VI It must be made with deliberation. no better things performed then God by his law hath bound us to, else man could devise better obedience, or more acceptable service to God than he himself hath appointed. If by better good, you mean be a greater measure of obedience than is commonly performed, I doubt whether any man can do more than the law of God hath required of him, which is the rule of perfect obedience. If you understand the means of stirring up ourselves to the doing of our duty to God, Master Perkins acknowledgeth that, and compriseth it in the later part, though he do not express it. Secondly, you say, that it must proceed from our own free choice and liberty. The promise doubtless must have our own will for the ground of it, and so much the word imports, but the good must be a duty commanded, or at the least allowed by warrant out of the word of God in the scriptures, or out of the light of true reason, and the law of nature, or out of Revelation before the scriptures. speaker D. B. P. The second point of our supposed consent is, that Vows were some part of God's worship in Moses Law, but are not so in the Gospel, which we also deny, M. Perkins proves his assertion thus. Vows belonged to the ceremonies of Moses Law, but all those Ceremonies are abolished, by Christ's Passion. Ans. That Vows in themselves were no part of the Ceremonies of Moses Law, but true parts of the worship of God in all estates; as well in the state of Nature and the Gospel, as in Moses Law: but this point M. Perkins handleth again in the first point of our difference, where it shell be discussed. Thirdly he saith, that special Vows may be made in the New Law, to perform some bodily exercise for some good end, as to fast, to task ourselves to prayer, or study of holy Scripture, and such like: but many rules must then be observed: that we Vow an honest thing agreeable to God's word: this we allow. speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not say as you conceive, that all vows belonged to the ceremony of Moses law, but that the vow of a ceremonial duty in the way of service to God, appertained thereto, whereof he brings two examples of the Nazarites, and of the people generally at their choice. speaker D. B. P. Secondly, that it be so made, that it may stand with Christian liberty: that is, that it make not such things necessary in conscience, which Christian religion leaves at liberty: This rule of his is flat repugnant to the nature of a Vow, and contrary to himself. For he saith a little before; that a Christian may Vow Fasting, Prayer, almsdeeds. I then demand, having Vowed these things; is he not bound to perform them? Yes, or else he breaks his Vow, with which God is highly displeased. An unfaithful promise displeaseth God. Then is it manifest, that all Vows Deut. 83. Eccles. 50. do abridge us of our liberty, and make that unlawful for us, which before our Vow was lawful: which is so evident of itself, that I marvel where the man's wit and memory was, when he written the contrary. speaker A. W. He speaketh agreeably to the truth, without any contrariety to himself, for the vow altars not the nature of the thing in itself, but only layeth a duty upon the vower, which also is so to be performed, as that by the performance of it he be not always deprived of his christian liberty, but that upon occasion, he may do against his vow, without any just scruple of conscience for so doing, though he have vowed otherwise in general. speaker A. W. His other rules, that a Vow be made with good deliberation, and with D. B. P. Do you then allow all, that is taken out of your Doctors? Quest. 88 consent of our Superiors; and not only of things possible, but also of the better sort, we allow, for they are taken out of our Doctors: See S. Thom. Your cotation is somewhat with the shortest, naming nothing but the x Tho. 2a, 〈◊〉, q. 88 art. 8. question; so is also the determination of your DD. upon it; for, although they grant in general, that we must have the consent of our superiors to vowing, y Art. 9 yet they exempt us in this case from subjection, as soon as we are out of our nonage, and that they draw us out of very quickly, that a maid of 12. or 14. years old may vow herself a Nun, and so a youth at 18. or 20, or perhaps sooner, may vow himself a Friar, without any consent of their parents, yea directly contrary to their express will and commandment. The dissent or difference. speaker W. P. The points of difference between us touching vows are specially three. I. The Church of Rome teacheth that in the new Testament we are as much bound to make vows, as was the Church of the jews, and that even in external exercises. We say no: considering the ceremonial law is now abolished: and we have only two ceremonies by commandment to be observed, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Again we are not so much bound to make or keep vows as the jews were: because they had a commandment so to do, and we have none at all. speaker D. B. P. First, the Church of Rome (saith M. Perkins) teacheth, that in the New Testament, we are as much bound to make Vows, as was the Church of the jews, we say no; Considering that the Ceremonial Law is now abolished, and we have only two Ceremonies by commandment to be observed for parts of God's worship: Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord. Ans. What, is not your Holiday service (which you call divine service) any part of God's worship in your own opinions? Can a public assembly instituted to honour God by prayer and thanksgiving with external ceremony of time, place, apparel, kneeling, standing and sitting, be no part of God's worship? In your irreligious Congregations, assembled together against Christ and his Catholic Church, be it so. But admitting as you do, your service to be good; it could not truly be denied to belong unto the worship of God. speaker A. W. Whereunto belongs this idle question? is it a ceremony think you to assemble ourselves for the service of God? all outward service of God is not ceremonial, though the use of it be in part to express our inward affection. speaker D. B. P. But to the matter of difference, you grow very careless in your reports of our doctrine: for we hold that neither in the Old nor New law, any man is bound to Vow, but that it is and ever was a counsel, and no commandment, nevertheless, a thing of great devotion & perfection in both states, * O strange eloquence not to be understood! intrinsically belonging and much furthering the true worship of almighty God, which we prove in this sort. In a Vow are two things, the one is the good which is Vowed, called the material part: as for example, Fasting, etc. The other, the promise itself made to God, which is the form; the material parts do belong unto their several virtues: but this promise and performance of it be substantial parts of God's worship. For by promising of any good thing unto God, The performance is no part of the Vow ●rither the matter nor the form of it. we acknowledge and profess that God is the sovereign goodness itself, and taketh great pleasure in all good purposes and determinations: therefore, to honour and worship him, we make that good promise. Again, In performing that good service of God, we testify, that he is most majestical, reverend, and dreadful. And consequently, that all promises made to him, are to be accomplished most diligently, and without delay, wherein we honour and worship him, as contrariwise they do much dishonour him who break with him, as if he were of no better account then to be so deluded. This thing in itself is so certain and clear, that he who denies it, must needs either be ignorant in the nature of a Vow, or not know wherein the true ●…orship of God consisteth: for according unto the holy Scripture itself, all good deeds done to the glory of God, be acts of the true worship of God. And S. Anne did worship Luk. 1. Philip. 〈◊〉. jac. 5. God, by fasting and prayer: And alms bestowed on God's prisoners, is called a sacrifice pleasing and acceptable unto God: And it is said, to be a pure religion before God to visit Orphans and widows: If then all other virtuous duties done to the glory of God, be parts of his true worship; much more Vows, which by special promise dedicate a good deed to God's honour: they then being of their own nature, special parts of his true worship of God: it followeth necessarily that at all times they were and may be used to the true worship of God. speaker A. W. If we be bound to vow in neither, as indeed we are not, yet are we as much bound in the one, as in the other, which is all Master Perkins saith. But indeed (as I conceive) he means, bound to it, as a service of God. We grant that you say of a vow, and withal confess, that it is a means of God's service; but not properly a part, otherwise then all obedience, whereby we glorify God; and all helps, by which we fit ourselves to obedience, are parts of his worship. But those actions only are held to be properly the parts of his worship, which are performed immediately for service to him, not used for the better performance of it. speaker D. B. P. That they were in practice before Moses Law is evident, by that Vow Gen. 28. which jacob made of setting up a stone, which should be called the house of God, and the paying the tenths of all his goods. Out of which Vow, we also gather, that God holdeth for agreeable, any kind of good service offered unto him out of our own devotion: albeit he hath not commanded it, for no such thing as jacob there Vowed was commanded him, but he being well assured that it would be well taken by God, which was offered of good will to his greater honour, he Vowed it, and is in holy Scripture commended for it. speaker A. W. Again, that when S. Paul seemeth to disallow voluntary worship, he Colos. 2. As most orale of your ceremonies are. must be understood to speak either of erroneous, or of frivolous and foolish things, promised to God, which do not properly serve to the setting forth of his honour. z Gen. 28. 2●. Jacob's action was directed immediately to God's service, not intended, or used as a help to further him in the worship of God. That which you gather out of his example, is not warrantable by it, unless you restrain those words (good service) otherwise, than you Papists commonly do. For it doth not follow, that because God accepted of t●… vow, therefore he will like whatsoever a man shall promise him, so it be (as he imagines) to the greater honour of God. The former of these two was (in likelihood) enjoined Adam by God, and so continued among the true worshippers of God: the latter is grounded upon that principle, that we must glorify God in our souls, bodies and goods, though the manner be left free to every man's discretion, according to his ability and opportunity: but no man may conclude hereupon, that God in his solemn worship allows of whatsoever we out of our devotion invent, and appoint to serve him by. That a Col. 2. 18. of Paul must needs be understood of such things; but such are all that are devised by man to worship God by, without warrant from the word of God, either generally or particularly, expressly, or by necessary consequence. For all such serving of God, is worship, depending wholly upon the will of man, and so will-worship. The ceremonies of your Romish Church are generally foolish and ridiculous, yea those in your Mass: your Doctrines, besides Scripture, erroneous, as I showed in the last article. speaker W. P. But they allege to the contrary the Prophet Esay, cap. 19 20. who speaking of the time of the Gospel, saith, the Egyptians shall know the Lord, and shall vow unto him and keep it. I answer two ways: first, that the Prophet in this place expresseth and signifieth the spiritual worship of the new Testament by ceremonial worship then used: as he doth also in the last chapter where he calleth the ministers of the new Testament Priests and Levites. Secondly, we grant, the Church of the new Testament makes vows unto God, but they are of moral and evangelical duties: which must not be left undone: and if vowing will indeed further them, it is not to be neglected. And therefore so oft as we come to the Lords Table, we in heart renew the vow and promise of obedience. And though vows be made of things and actions indifferent, yet are they not any parts of God's worship, which is the point to be proved. speaker D. B. P. Now that Vows should be frequented in the s●…e of the ●…pell, besides Act. 1●. Esay. 19 18. the evidence of S. P●…, Vo● and divers other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●●e Prophet Esay did foretell, in th●se word●: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrifice and gifts, and they sh●ll Vo● Vo●●s 〈◊〉 our●…. To which M. Perkins answereth first, that by such cere●… as th●n was in use, the Prophet doth express the spiritual 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the new Testament. This exposition is voluntary and nothing 〈◊〉: For what is more vild and absurd, than (●o declare that Christians shall make 〈◊〉 proper a● so●●re. no Vows) to say that they shall make Vows, as though one contrary were fit or would serve to express the other. This exposition being very unmeet, M. Perkins adjoineth a second, that in the new Testament, we have Vows of Moral and evangelical duties, but such are not any part of God's worship: ●o that first you shall have no Vows at all: Secondly, the wound being changed, you shall have them, but as no parts of God's worship, as though Moral and evangelical duties undertaken and performed to God's greater glory be not the very sinews and substance of his service and worship. speaker A. W. That b Act. 18. 1●. S. Paul's vow maketh nothing for you, Master Perkins hath showed. It is marvel you would name the example, and not refute his answer. Belike the truth of it was too evident. And yet it had been no hard matter perhaps, to find as good a shift for that place, as you have for the other c Esay. 19 2●. of Esay. Master Perkins answered to it, that the Prophet signifieth the spiritual worship of the new Testament by the ceremonies of the old, then in use: and he proves his interpretation by the Prophet himself; who d Esay. 66. 21. afterwards calls the Ministers of the new Testament, Priests, and Levites, which were offices and names proper to the old. You slip over the reason, and ●ell us, that it is vile and absurd to say, that Christians shall make vows, to declare, that they shall make none. But the Prophet means to de- from Senacherib. The general doctrine ensuing from it is this, that we are to be thankful to God, when he hath delivered us out of any extraordinary danger. Your second reason is of less force, for first, by the Kings of the earth, the u Lyra ibid. Kings bordering upon jerusalem, and those parts, are signified, who should be driven into a fear of God, that had so destroyed the Assyrians. Secondly, if it be general, it follows not that therefore the vows he speaketh of there may be made of any sort of men, but that all men must perform the duty of thankfulness upon like occasions. speaker D. B. P. Thirdly, because the ancient Fathers take it to extend unto us Christians, aswellas unto the jowes; let one S. Augustine serve in his Commentary upon this Psalm 75. Because we have handled those things (saith he) pe●…ture thou who waste willing before, but now wilt not Vow: but m●…ke what the Psalm said unto thee: It saith not, Do not Vow, but Vow and pay it: wilt thou not Vow? Therefore wouldst thou have Vowed, but not have fulfilled it ●ay rather do both: Let the one be of 〈◊〉 own promise, the other shall be performed by the help of God: He than took these words to belong unto his Auditors who were no Iewes. In the same place, he doth highly commend Christians for Vowing, some Chastity, some Hospitality some Poverty. speaker A. W. x 〈◊〉. ibid. Theodoret, ancienter than Austin, and not inferior to him, in expounding the Scripture, applies it to bringing of gifts, as also the y Psalm. 76. 〈◊〉 Psalm itself in the later part of the verse, and the z 2. 〈◊〉. 32. 2● practice of the people at that very time warrant him. So also may a Auust. ad Psalm. 75. Austin himself, for all those words, be understood. For what do they import, but an exhortation to thankfulness, under the legal terms of vowing? If Austin, or any man else will ground other doctrine upon it, he delivers his own conceit, not the Prophet's meaning. I think there is no man that readeth those Commentaries of Augustine's upon the Psalms, but finds, that he mistakes the sense very commonly, which is to be imputed to his want of knowledge in the tongues, especially in the Hebrew. speaker D. B. P. But because contraries being set together, each do more lively appear in his kind: Let us with this Exposition, compare M. Perkins●his ●his Commentary upon this place: who saith, that the Prophet speaketh of Vows, of Prayer and thanksgiving: For so (saith M. Perkins:) doth he expound himself, My Vows are upon me, I will offer praises unto Psalm 56. 1●. God: Well aimed I warrant you; The Psalm fifty sixth, written first, is the Exposition of the Psalm seventy five, which was conceited and uttered after: Again, in the Psalm seventy five David speaketh to others: in the other he speaketh of himself. Thirdly, the Prophet's words in Psalm fifty six, confirm rather that which he taught before, that all considerate Vows are praises and parts of God's worship, or as the words do more literally ●ound, because his Vows, that is, his prayers and desires were by God accomplished, therefore he would praise and thank him. speaker A. W. That by vows in this place prayer is meant, not only the b Hebr●i in●e●p. 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Septuaginta, and c Ambr. orate. Ambrose witness, but d Esai. 38. 9 10 Hezekiahs' practice confirms. To deny that thankfulness is urged, is not to understand the occasion of the Psalm, and the end of the exhortation, which requireth vows, be they what they may be, but only in that respect. Master Perkins therefore needed not any further proof, than the text itself: but, for the better avowing of his exposition, he brought e Psalm. 56. 22 another place of the Psalms, where vows do signify praise or thanksgiving. Now whereas he saith, that David expounds himself, and you refute that by the placing of the Psalms, your answer is not sufficient. For any man may see, the Psalms were not set in order, as they were penned in time; and if that 75. Psalm were a prophesy of Senacheribs' overthrow, as I showed f Theodoret. ad Psalm. 75. Theodoret thinks, it might well be written before Psalm 56. But Master Perkins had no such meaning; only he expounds the word Vows, used in this place by the certain sense of it in another, which course is agreeable to the rules of interpreting the scripture. But in the one you say David speaketh of himself, in the other he speaketh to other. What then? is it not more then likely that he exhorts others to the duty he practised himself? If in his own person he mean by vows praise, what else should be understood by exhorting other men to vow, especially upon the like occasion, that is, as you say afterward, upon having their prayers & desires accomplished? Your collection, that David should prove, that all considerate vows are praises, and part of God's worship, hath no likelihood of truth in it. For the Prophet declares by that speech, that he had vowed to praise God, as the next verse before showeth in part, and the practice of David, and the rest of the godly every where in scripture confirmeth. And this is a sacrifice of special honour to God, as by the g Psal. 50. 23. Psalm 50. appears, by which h Lyra ad Esai. 19 Lyra expounds that of Esai, whereof before. See i Hieronym. & Theodor. ad Psalm. 49 & 56. & 65. Jerome on Psalm 49. and 56. and 65. and Theodoret on the same places. speaker W. P. II. Point of difference. They also hold that vows made even of things not commanded, as meats, drinks, attire, etc. are parts of God's worship, yea that they tend to a state of perfection, in that the keeping of them brings men to an higher estate than the keeping of the law can do. We flatly say, no: holding that lawful vows be certain * Adminicula cultus divini. stays and props of God's worship, and not the worship itself. For Paul saith plainly, 1. Tim. 4. 8. Bodily exercise profiteth little, but godliness is profitable for much. Again, as God's kingdom is, so must his worship be: and God's kingdom standeth not in outward things, as in eating, drinking, and such like actions: and therefore his worship standeth not in outward things. speaker D. B. P. Here M. Perkins setteth up a rotten prop or two, to uphold his ruinous 1. Tim. 4. building, saying, S. Paul saith plainly, Bodily exercise profiteth little, ●●t godliness profiteth much. Where are you good Sir? We treat here of Vows, which are formally actions of the mind: what do you now about bodily exercises? Vows are principal parts of that godliness, which is so profitable. And if by bodily exercise, Fasting, and other corporal pain or labour be understood, than we say, that such things of themselves would profitlittle; but being directed to the chastising of the rebellious flesh, to the end we may less offend, and better serve God, than they may much profit us. speaker A. W. The reason why Master Perkins brings this place, is, because, as it should seem, some Papists allege it, to prove the lawfulness of vowing bodily exercises, to honour God by them. You answer, that vows are actions of the mind. What of that? if the performance of the vows be of small profit, doubtless the vowing of them is a poor piece of service to God. Yet may there be good use of fasting, and such like, to us, in that they may be made good means to further our service to God, though of themselves they be no worship. speaker D. B. P. Bu● let us here M. Perkins his second reason against such Vows. God's kingdom standeth not in outward things, and therefore his worship standeth not in outward things. Ans. God's kingdom in itself standeth not in outward things, and as it is in us also, it doth consist chiefly in inward worship, by faith, hope, charity, and religion, in whose kingdom Vow's hold a honourable rank: but a great part of this worship among us, depends of outward things; for be not the two only parts of God's worship among Protestants (as M. Perknis saith in this question) Baptism and our Lord's Supper, both which partly consist in outwardly, both speaking and doing. And is not faith (which is the root of all Christian Religion) gotten by outward preaching and hearing? But it would weary a willing man to trail after all M. Perkins his impertinent errors. speaker A. W. The kingdom of God stands not in such outward actions, as eating, drinking, etc. Master Perkins denies not, that we are to perform outward worship to God, which consists among us in prayer, praise, thanksgiving, and such like duties, not only, as you would have your followers falsely imagine of us, in administering, and receiving the sacraments. You that would seem so unwilling to trail after Master Perkins errors, are glad to make some of your own, and father them upon him, lest ofttimes you should have nothing to say. I have showed divers particulars of this kind in the course of my answer to your cavils against him. speaker W. P. III. Point of difference. They maintain such vows to be made, as are not agreeable to the rules before named: and herein also we are to dissent from them. The first and principal is, the vow of continency, whereby a man promiseth to God to keep chastity always in single life, that is, out of the estate of wedlock. This kind of vow is flat against the word of God: and therefore unlawful. For Paul saith, 1. Cor. 7. 9 If they cannot contain let them marric. 1. Tim. 4. 1. It is a doctrine of devils to forbid to marry. Heb. 13. 4. Marriage is honourable among all, and the bed undefiled. speaker D. B. P. This kind of Vow, is flat against the word of God, as hesaith which he proveth first out of S. Paul, If they cannot contain, then let 〈◊〉 Marry: True, if they have not Vowed Chastity before, as the common 1. Cor. 7. Christians of Corinth, (to whom S. Paul there speaketh) had not. For such, ●f they cannotlive otherwise chastened, it is better they marry then be burned that is, defiled with incontinency. But to them who had Vowed chastity before, S. Paul writeth in another stile, That if they but desire to marry, they incur domnation, because they have made frustrate and broken their former faith and promise made unto God of their 1. Tim. 5. chastive: So that this first text is a Furlong wide at the least from the mark. speaker A. W. The text is general, and implies no such exception. k Epiphanius holds it to be a better course for them that have vowed, to marry, then to continue in sin against God. And l Aug de bono viduit. ca 9 10 Austin saith, that the marriages of such men are not to be condemned, as if they were no marriages at all, which opinion that they are no marriages he there refutes. And indeed who can think in any reason that it is more displeasing to God for a man to break the promise he hath made, then by making a show of keeping it, to live in uncleanness? It is but one fault to break a vow, though it be never so lawful, but it is a double fault both to do against the vow, by continuing subject to such lusts, and to refuse the remedy that is afforded. In which respect m Epiphan. ubi supra. Epiphanius saith, it is better to have one sin, than many sins. Therefore n Cyril. in Leuit. lib 3. Cyrill giveth council to marry even after the vow of single life, and to confess our sin in so doing, if we cannot live chastened. Yea o 22. q. 4. I● malis. the Common law bids a man not to do that which he hath vowed unadvisedly. It is no doubt a fault not to keep our vow, but to make such a vow as a man is not sure he shall be able to keep, is a greater fault. If the case fall out to be so, p Hieron. ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 act. 〈◊〉 34. Jerome and q Austen hold it the less evil to marry. It cannot be proved out of the text, that the Apostle speaketh there of any votaries, but only of such widows as having for a time employed themselves in the service of the Church, at the last left both the Church and Christ, and followed Satan by marrying with Infidels. But take it as you will, we have already seen the judgement of the Ancients, who for all their high conceit of virginity, allow marriage even after vows. speaker D. B. P. The second is much like: It is a doctrine of devils, to forbid to marry: 1. Tim. 4. What reverence when you think it defiles your Priests? Ephes. 5. They are soon of years ripe enough in your account. Lib. 3. contra Faust. manich. cap. 6. truth, if one should hold marriage in itself to be wicked, and therefore condemn it in all sorts of persons, as Montanus, and the Manichees did. But we have a more reverend opinion of marriage, than the Protestants themselves. For we with the Apostle hold it to be a great Sacram●…: they, that it is a morail contract only. Notwithstanding, we maintain, that such persons, who being of ripe years, have advisedly Vowed chastity, may not marry; not because marriage is not honourable, but for that they have solemnly promised to God the contrary which we also hold to be better, than if he had married. And so to use S. Augustine's words, H. forbiddeth to marry, who sayeth it to be evil, but not be who before this good thing, preferreth a better. And a little after, you see (saith he) that there is great difference between persuasion to Virginity, by preferring the greater good before the less, and forbidding to marry, by accusing lying together for issue. The first is, the doctrine of the Apostles, which we teach, the latter only of devils. speaker A. W. The r 1. Tim. 4. 1. Apostle speaketh of all forbidding marriage at the least as an unclean thing, but so it is forbidden by you, because it defiles your priests, that they cannot be fit to offer up their maker, yea that they cannot pray, as s Harding against the Apology in Juel. sol 210. Harding saith. You take marriage for such a Sacrament that it is too base for your holy priesthood. We acknowledge it to be t Gen. 1. 18. 19 etc. the ordinance of God, of another manner of bond than a moral contract only. We deny not that single life is in some respects to be preferred before marraige, but that marriage is to be forbidden any sort of men, as if of itself it made them less holy. speaker D. B. P. The strength of this place lieth in a double corruption of the text: For this verb (is) is not in the text, nor cannot by the courle of the Apostles speech, requiring a verb of the Imperative Mood, as both the sent nces before and after do convince. speaker A. W. The sentences before and after prove no such thing, rather the opposition in the u Hebr. 13. 4. later part of the verse shows that it should be [is] marriage is honourable, but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge: whereas if it had been so intended as you would have it, the other part must have been, for God will judge, by way of a reason, as your vulgar translation reads it without ground. If we corrupt the text, by adding the verb is, what do x Theodoret. Chrysost. Theophyl. Oecum. Heuten. ad Hebr. 1●. Theodoret, Chrysostome, Theophylact, Oecumenins, and Heutenius the Papist that translated him, y Hesych. in Leuit. lib. 5. cap. 1●. Hesychius, z Fulgent. ad Galla. de statu. viduit. cap. 2. Fulgentius, a Damasc. Orthod fidei. lib. 4. cap. 26. Damas●en, who so expound it. b Primas. ad Hebr. 13. Primasius gives the reason why the Apostle speaketh so, because some at that time condemned marriage as unclean. speaker A. W. Again, if you will have the Apostle say, that Marriage is honourable among all men; we must also needs take him to say, that the bed is also undefiled among all, which was not true. Also, that their conversation was without covetousness, etc. For there is no reason why this word (is) should be joined with the one more than with the other. And nothing but passion doth cause them to make the middle sentence an affirmative, when they turn both the other into exhortations. speaker D. B. P. There is great reason why it should be joined with the one, as hath been showed. With the other, as you join it, it is absurd: but it must thus be joined, that, is honourable, be repeated; and the bed undefiled is honourable. In the sentence following it cannot be understood, with any reason; and therefore the c Vulgar Latin, sint. vulgar Latin puts in sint, and the d Rhemis. English, Let be. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Rhemists English, let be: which in the former verse neither of them doth. You so interpret it. The second corruption is in these words (among all) when they should translate (in all) and the adjective being put without a substantive, must in true construction have this word (things) joined with it, and not (men) wherefore the text being sincerely put into English, it would carry no colour of their error: For the Apostles saying is: Let marriage be honourable in all things, and the bed undefiled: Here is no willing of any man to marry, but only a commandment to them that be married to live honestly in marriage, to keep (as he else where saith) their vessels in sanctification, and not in dishonour, and then shall their marriage be honourable in all things, that is, in all points appertaining to Matrimony: So that now you see that M. Perkins is not able to bring any one place out of Scripture to disprove the Vow of chastity. speaker A. W. The adjective may be as well the Masculine, as the Neuter; and that which followeth in the other part of the verse, of whoremongers and adulterers, directs us to expound it of the persons. So doth e Theophyl. ibid. Theophyl. understand it. In all (saith Theophylact) is not only in men of riper age, and not in young men also, but in all men, or in all means and times: not in affliction only, and in rest otherwise; not honourable and precious in this part, in that part otherwise; but the whole throughout is honourable. So that both your cavils at the translation are vain, and the sense is wholly for us. speaker D. B. P. The Scripture being so barren for him, he shall be like recompense it with the abundant testimony of antiquity, in favour of his cause: but oh unhappy chance, he hath clean forgotten in this question the record of the ancient Church: What was there not one Father? who with You know what is wont to be said of proffered service. some one broken fragment of a sentence or other, would relieve you in this your combat against the Vow of Chastity? I will help you to one, but I fear me, you will scarce thank me for my pains: It is such a one, as is neither holy nor father, but the ancient Christian Epicure Jovinian, who as S. Augustine hath recorded, and Saint jerom did hold that Haeres. 82. ad Quodvult. Lib. 1. cont. iovi. Virginity of professed persons, men and women was no better than the continency of the married. So that many professed Virgins believing him did marry, yet himself did not marry, as Friar Luther did; not be cause he thought chastity should be rewarded in the life to come, with a greater crown of glory; but because it was fit for the present necessity, to avoid the troubles of marriage; see just the very opinion of M. Perkins and our Protestants. But this heresy saith S. Augustine in the same This was answered in the Epistle. Lib. 2. retract. 22. place, was quickly suppressed and extinguished; it was not able to deceive any one of the Priests: And in another place thus he speaketh of jovinian: Holy Church most faithfully and valiantly resisted this monster: So that no marvel, if that M. Perkins could find small relief in antiquity for this his assertion, which the best of them esteemed no better than a monstrous sacrilegious heresy. speaker A. W. But the Fathers are not for us. What then? is nothing true, that cannot be confirmed by their testimony? Then are there very many untruths in Popery. Indeed it is one of the blemishes of the ancient writers, that they were too highly conceited of single life. The use whereof a kind of necessity bred at first, by reason of persecution, experience of constant profession confirmed, and opinion of holiness thereupon at the last perfected: so that it is not to be looked for, that antiquity should afford us any testimony against the practice and judgement of those days. And yet it is apparent in those places I alleged before, and divers other, that neither the Clergy (as you call it) was bound to make any such vow, and that after it was made, it was held a less sin to break it, than to continue it in uncleanness: which tained then to vow; but first to vow, and then to look for strength from God to fit us for the keeping of our vow, is against all Divinity and reason. And therefore the persuasion to vow, upon presumption of ability to perform that which is vowed, shows (at the least) zeal without knowledge; and can be no matter of commendation to the ancient Church, if they simply allowed it. Howsoever, they were far better than you, because they enjoined breach of vow, rather than increase of sin. speaker D. B. P. But to the further confirmation of this point, let us hear what the holy Fathers teach touching the possibility of this Vow. speaker A. W. You labour to disprove Master Perkins Antecedent, by the testimony of the ancient writers. To which I answer in general, that as we freely acknowledge their authority, where there is nothing but men's authority to be weighed; so we account it lighter than nothing, in all cases contrary to Scripture: such as we can prove this to be. speaker D. B. P. Tertullian near the end, expounding these words: He that can take, let him take, Choose (saith h●) that which is good: if thou say thou canst not, it is Lib. de monog. Matth. 19 because thou wilt not, for that thou mightest if thou wouldst, he doth declare who hath left both to thy choice. speaker A. W. g Tertullia. de Monogam. cap. 14. tertullian's testimony is not worth the answering. Not only because (as I showed before out of Hilary) his heresy discredited all his writings, but because this is the book wherein he chiefly maintains that his heresy, and blasphemy too; accounting Montanus the holy Ghost, and Comforter, whom our Saviour promised to send. Upon his authority doth Tertullian forbid second marriages as unclean, and brings h Math. 19 22 this place, you allege, to that purpose. Such conscience make you of citing authorities against the truth. But I answer Tertullian, that our Saviour hath left it to no man's choice, but to his that hath received the gift. speaker D. B. P. Origen upon the same place, He that will take this word that is set down of chastity, let him pray for it, believing ●…m that said, ask and it Matth. 19 shall be given you, and he shall receive it; which doth plainly confute M. Perkins. Who saith, that although we ask never so much, we cannot obtain this gift. speaker D. B. P. To Tertullian Origen may well be joined, a man condemned of heresy, or rather of many heresies, by Jerome, Austin, Epiphanius, Theophilus, and a whole Council. Further, it is strange that he should be reported to have offered such violence to his own body, if he thought the gift of continency so easy to be obtained. More especially I say that i Origen. in Matth. 19 Tract. 7. Origen mistakes the matter. For our Saviour Christ bids not every man pray for it that will have i●, but him to take it that can; implying that every one cannot. The promise is of things needful, such is not continency; nor convenient for all. speaker D. B. P. With Origen agreeth S. Jerome upon the same place, who saith, It is given unto them who have requested it; who have desired it, and travailed that they might receive it. speaker A. W. k Hieronym. in Math. 19 lib. 3 Jerome's authority is in itself more worth; in this case not much; because he goes directly against our saviours words, who makes it a gift particular to some, and not once mentions any means of coming by it, but bids them take it that can. His reason is the same with origen's, and answered before: yet even there he wils all men to consider their strength, whether they be able to go thorough with it, or no. speaker D. B. P. The same Song chanteth Gregory Nazianzen which is of three kinds Orat. 31. of Eunouches. l Nazianzen. in Matth. 19 orat. 36. Nazianzen goeth somewhat further, making it no more but a matter of a man's own inclination. When thou hearest (saith he) to whom it is given, add, it is given to them m Valentibus. that are able, and to them who are so carried by the inclination of their mind. As if our Saviour had said, Take it who will, not who can; as if nothing wanted but resolution. speaker D. B. P. S. Chrysostome saith, it is possible to all them who make choice of it: and further addeth, that our Saviour Christ himself doth prove it there after this sort: Think with thyself if thou hadst been by nature an Eunuch, or by the malice of men made one, what wouldst thou then have done, when thou shouldest both have been deprived of that pleasure, and yet not have had any recompense for thy pain. Therefore thank God, because thou shalt have a great reward, and a glittering Crown, if thou live so as they must do without any reward: yet (saith he) thou mayest do it more easily, safely, and pleasantly, both, because thou art fortified with hope of recompense, and also comforted with a virtuous conscience. speaker A. W. n Chrysost. in Matth. 19 honul. 63. Chrysostoms' Rhetoric is better in this place than his Logic: Our Saviour exhorts them, that can, to take it; he saith not, every man that will may. Those are they which have made themselves chaste, who having the gift of continency from God, use it accordingly, and forbe are marriage, that they may with more cheerfulness, and less encumbrance, serve God: yet is there no shadow of any proof in this place, that every one may vow continency. speaker D. B. P. We will wrap up this point with S. Augustine, who directly confuteth M. Perkins by many reasons and exampl●… Lib. 2. De ada●…erinis coniug.. cap. 12. Et de bono vid●●●. ●ap. ●0. speaker A. W. And upon the Psalm, an hundredth thirty seven, he yieldeth another reason, why God will more really a●… them, saying. He that exhorteth thee to Vo●, will help thee to fulfil it. All which heavenly Doctrine, because it is spiritually judged, (as the Apostle speaketh) the Carnal man cannot understand: And therefore M. Perkins being persuaded that few can live chastened except they marry, avoucheth that this Vow, doth bring forth innumerable abominations in the World: Not the hundredth part, so many as the fleshly Heretics imagine, and out of flying and lying tales report and bru●te abroad: Nay, I dare affirm, that Whence came that old proverb: Priests and Doves make foul houses? See the Ploughman's tale in Chawcer. let the authentical Records of our Realm be well perused, and you shall find more lewd filthy Lechery, to have been practised by Ministers and their Wives this last age, than was in a thousand year before, by all the Catholic Priests and Religious persons of the Land. There is not a word of this place, either o Aug. de a●ulter. coniug. cap. 12. in that twelfth Chapter, or in any part of that book: how then doth Saint Austin directly confute Master Perkins by many reasons and examples? The question propounded by Pollentius, and there handled by Austin is, whether the Apostle 1. Cor. 7. forbid her to marry, who is departed from her husband, though not because of fornication. In p Aug. de bono viduit. c. 20 the other place Austin shows no more but this, that it is possible to refrain from fornication and adultery: which it never came into our mind to deny. But this is not enough to chastity and continency. If the ancient Fathers hereto fore, and you now, count all them chaste, that defile not their bodies with outward uncleanness of that kind, monstrous filthiness may be chastity. But admit (which we grant may be, and like enough hath been in many carnal men, yea is perhaps at this day in some Turks and other Heathen) that the outward act should be utterly for borne; yet may they, that so forbear, burn in continual lust, and live in the breach of God's Commandments. What doth this discourse of Augustine's then concern that which Master Perkins affirms, when he is ready to grant as much as Austin saith, and yet holds his former conclusion, that chastity and continency are virtues of Gods special gift, and not matters to be attained to by every one that will vow to continue unmarried, in hope to prove able to keep his vow? q August. in Psalm. 137. This third place is like the first, alleged by you, without any ground at all. For there is no such speech in that Commentary, nor any occasion of it in the Psalm. The likeliest place for it, in his exposition of the Psalms, is upon the r Psalm. 75. 75. Psalm, where he discourses of the vow of continency at large. But there it is not; so that it is not to be taken for Augustine's, till you bring better proof that it is his. If I would answer at adventure, I could say, that God exhorts none to this vow, but them on whom he hath bestowed the gift, and they have his help to fulfil that they have vowed. We envy not this your special judgement, nor respect your slanderous challenge: only this I answer, that if all the Ministers and their wives, had been as lewd, as your malice can imagine, they could not have come near the thousand part of that filthiness, which your Bishops, Priests, Friars and Nuns committed in this land, by record of popish histories. Yea let just trial be made, and we will adventure our lives, that time for time, there have been, since the renewing of the Gospel, more and more beastly unclean persons, among your Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Monks, Friars, and Nuns, in that one City of Rome, than among all the Ministers, and their wives, in this whole realm of England. speaker W. P. Yet here mark in what manner we do it. First of all, though we mislike the vow; yet we like and commend single life. Marriage indeed is better in two respects: first, because God hath ordained it to be a remedy of continency to all such persons as cannot contain: secondly, because it is the seminary both of Church and Commonwealth; and it bringeth forth a seed of God for the enlarging of his kingdom. Yet single life in them that have the gift of continency, is in some respects to be preferred. First, because it brings liberty in persecution. Thus Paul saith, 1. Cor. 7. 26. I suppose it to be good for the present necessity for a man so to be. Secondly, because it frees men from the common cares, molestations, and distractions that be in the family, vers. 2. 28. Such shall have trouble in the flesh, but I spare you. Thirdly, because single parties do commonly with more bodily ease and liberty worship God: it being still presupposed, that they have the gift of continency. vers. 34. The unmarried woman careth for the things of of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit. Again, though we mislike the vow, yet we hold and teach, that men or women being assured that they have the gift of continency, may constantly resolve and purpose with themselves to live and lead a single life. 1. Cor. 7. 38. He that standeth firm in his own heart that he hath no need, but hath power of his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virginity, he doth well. And we embrace the saying of Theodoret on 1. Tim. cap. 4. for he doth not (saith he) blame single life, or continency, but he accuseth them that by law enacted compel men to follow these. And men made themselves chaste for the kingdom of heaven, Matth. 19 12. not by vow, but by a purpose of heart, which is far less than a vow, and may be changed upon occasion, where as a vow cannot, unless it do evidently appear to be unlawful. Thirdly, for such persons as are able to contain, to live single for the ends before named, indeed we hold it to be no counsel of perfection; yet do we not deny it to be a counsel of expedience, o● outward ease: according to that which Paul saith, vers. 25. I give mine advise,— and, 35. I speak this for your commodity not to entangle you in a snare. Lastly, we think that if any having the gift of continency, do make a vow to live single, and yet afterward marry (the said gift remaining) they have sinned. Yet not because they are married, but because their vow is broken. And thus said Augustine of widows that married after their vow. lib. de bono viduit, c. 9 speaker D. B. P. This may serve for a reproof of all that M. Perkins objecteth against the Vow of chastity: afterwards, the man would somewhat reason the matter by showing how he condemneth not chastity: yet saith, that Marriage is better than it, in two respects. If jovinian was reputed by the learnedst and holiest Fathers (a Christian Epicure and a Monster) because he durst make marriage equal with Virginity: What shall this A good shift, when you know not how to answer. man be who saith it is better? His reasons are so childish, that by the like you may prove, dirt to be better than gold: wherefore I will not stand upon them. He nevertheless afterwards concludeth, that one may purpose constantly with himself to lead a single life, but so as he may change upon occasion, and this to be a counsel of expedience, but not of perfection. Lastly, that if any having the gift of continency, do Vow, and atferward mar●ie (the gift remaining) they have sinned, which is flat against his own second rule, which prohibits us to lose our liberty, and to make any thing unlawful in conscience, which Christian Religion leaveth at liberty. Now to supply M. Perkins his default, who was accustomed to rehearse, although many times untowardly, yet lightly always some reasons for the Catholic party; which in this question he hath wholly omitted. speaker A. W. He that will but read what Master Perkins writes, and what you answer, shall see a true image of popish dealing, whereby you slubber over the matter, to which you know not what to say. Is it a wrong to single life, or virginity, to hold that marriage in some respect is better than it? I will go further than Master Perkins hath done, and not doubt to affirm, that it is simply better than virginity: my reason is, that it belongs to the perfection of humane nature, that there should be continuance and multiplying of the kind by propagation: beside, God appointed it as an especial blessing for Adam, when he was in God's especial favour But if that estate be worse than the single life, in which he lived before, God did not bless, but punish him rather by that change: therefore marriage simply is better. But that virginity might have his due, Master Perkins sets down presently after, three respects, wherein it is to be preferred before marriage, all which you do not once name. Those Christian Fathers dealt unchristianly with jovinian, who ascribed as much to virginity as our Saviour Christ, or his Apostles gave to it in any place of Scripture, according to that conclusion of s Theodoret. Decret. divin. de virginit. Theodoret, who ends his discourse of virginity with these words, Such things we have received, being appointed and decreed by men endued with the knowledge of heavenly things, which are such, as do not accuse marriage, but exhort us to a life void of cares. This jovinian acknowledged, and worthily denied all difference of merit betwixt a married and single life, which no enemy of jovinian can disprove, no more can you Master Perkins reasons, though you disgrace them all you can. speaker D. B. P. I will briefly prove by an argument or two, that it is both lawful and very commendable for men and women of ripe years, and consideration Who denieth this? having well tried their own aptness to Vow virginity; if by good inspirations, they be thereunto inwardly called. My first reason is this, that which is more pleasant and grateful unto God, may very well be Vowed to him, but Virginity is more acceptable to God then marriage. The first proposition is manifest, and hath no other exception against it, but that which before is confuted, to wit, if we be able to perform it. The second is denied by them, which we prove in express terms out of S. Paul. He that joineth his Virgin doth well, but he that joineth her not, doth better: and again of Widows: They shall be more 1. Cor. 7. Esai. 56. happy by S. Paul's judgement, if they remain unmarried: This may be confirmed our of Esay, Where God promiseth the Eunuch that holdeth greatly of the thing that pleaseth him, that he will give him in his household, and within his walls a better heritage and name, than if they had been called sons and daughters. I will (saith God) give them an everlasting name. And also, out of the book of Wisdom, Blessed is the Eunuch which hath Cap. 3. wrought no unrighteousness, etc. For unto him shall be given the special gift of faith, and the most acceptable portion in our Lord's Temple: for glorious is the fruit of God: Which is also plainly taught in the Revelations, Where it is said, that no man could sing that song but 14400. and the cause Revelat. 14. is set down, These be they which have not been defiled with women, for they are Virgins. To these latter places, M. Perkins aniwereth page 24●. that to the Eunuch is promised a greater reward; but, not because of his chastity, but because he keepeth the Lord's Sabbath and covenant. but this is said unadvisedly; for to all others that keep Gods commanments; shall be given a heavenly reward: but why shall they have a better heritage, and more acceptable portion than others, but because of their special prerogative of chastity? speaker A. W. What needs that be proved which we grant? it is questionless lawful for such as being free, find themselves fitted by God to single life, to resolve upon the continuance of it as long as they shall be in that case. But I doubt your reasons are scarce good. The first hath a suspicious assumption, because it implies that single life of itself should please God better than marriage, which t Theodoret. Decret. divin. de virginit. & ad 1. Cor. 7. I have showed to be false. To your proof I answer, that the happiness the Apostle speaks of is that which u Theodoret. ubi supra. Theodoret names, viz. being without care, and having more free liberty to serve God, as he proves out of the Apostle himself, who showeth by his whole discourse, that he prefers that single life before the married, only in regard of the present times, and opportunity of serving God generally. This x 1. Cor. 7. 26. Vers. 28. Vers. 32. 33. (saith he) is good for the present necessity, vers. 26. such shall have trouble in the flesh. I would have you without care. The unmarried careth for the things of the Lord. That of y Esai. 56. 4. 5. Esay proves nothing to the purpose, for the Prophet speaks not of them that had made any vow of continency, but of such as were made eunuchs by men against their wills, to whom he makes promise, not for their continency, which was no way voluntary, but for their keeping of his Sabbaths, and choosing the thing that pleaseth him, and taking hold of his covenant. The Eunuch, and the Gentile (saith z Lyra ad Esai. 56. Lyra) coming to faith, shall obtain as much grace and glory (other things alike Now these young Widows, if the Protestants doctrine were true, not having the gift of continency, did very well to marry, and were in no sort bound to keep their Vows, which was not in their power: But the Apostle doth not acquit them of their Vow, but teacheth that they were bound to keep it; in that he pronounceth damnation to them if they marry. speaker A. W. It must be proved that there was such a vow made to Christ, before it can be truly affirmed that the o 1. Tim. 5. 12. Apostle speaks of it in this place. The first faith, or vow of a Christian to God, is that general promiss of obedience in Baptism, or the undertaking of the profession of Christianity, as it appeareth by p Hieron. in prooem. in epist. ad Tit. Jerome speaking of Martion and Basilides, two infamous heretics, they are not worthy of credit (saith Jerome) they have forsaken their first faith. But if you will needs refer this to the matter there particularly in question, the fault is, not leaving to be a widow, but forsaking the calling in the Church, which they had of their own will undertaken. This necessarily ensued upon their marriage, because only widows had that office of looking to the poor and diseased. It is farther to be observed, that the Apostle seems to lay the fault upon their wilful wantonness, and not to grant that there was any necessity of using marriage for a remedy: when such a case falls out, it is the judgement of the ancient writers, that it is better to marry, then to continue in uncleanness. We must (saith q Ad Demetriadem virginem. Jerome) plainly charge vowed virgins, whose behaviour defames, and shames the holy purpose of virgins, and the glory of the heavenly and angelical family, that either they marry if they cannot contain, or contain, if they will not marry. They marry not (saith r De sancta virginit cap. 34. Austin) because they cannot without rebuke, yet better were it for them to marry, then to burn. It may happen (saith s 2 a. 2ae. q 88 art. 10. Thomas) that in some case a vow may be either utterly ill, or unprofitable, or an hindrance unto some other good thing of greater weight. And therefore it must of necessity be determined, that in such a case a vow ought not to be kept. An adulterer's case (saith t Lib. 4. epist. 2 Cyprian) is worse than his that hath betrayed the faith. And Ambrose, when he had said that a vowed virgin, if she have a mind to marry, committeth adultery, and is made the handmaid of death; yet adds afterwards, that she is twice an adulteress, which is defiled with secret and privy filthiness, feigning herself to be that which indeed she is not. speaker D. B. P. Thirdly, the example of our heavenly Saviour, who would never marry: Aug. cap. 44. de virg. Bed. 1. Luc. Cle. Alex. lib 3 storm. lib. 1. cont. lovin. In apol. 2. ad Aut. Tertul. ap. 2. cap. 9 and of the blessed Virgin S. Mary, who Vowed perpetual Virginity. And of the glorious Apostles, as who S. ●rome witnesseth, were in part Virgins; and all after their following of Christ, abstained from the company of their Wives. And of the best Christians in the purest antiquity, who as justinas, one of the ancientest Greek Authors among Christians: And Tertullian his peer among the Latins, do testify, did live perpetual Virgins. Out of these examples, we frame this Argument. Our Captains and ringleaders, who knew well which was the best way; and whose examples we are to follow as near as we can, Vowing Virginity: we must needs esteem that state for more perfect, specially, when as the single man careth only how to please God, that to be holy in body and mind (as the Apostle writs) when as the married are choked with cares of this world. And unless a man had made a league with hell, or were as blind as a Beetle, how can he ever persuade himself, that to wallow in fleshly pleasure and satisfying of the beastly apperites, is as grateful to God, as to conquer and subdue them by Fasting and Prayer. speaker A. W. Our captains and ringleaders say you vowed virginity, therefore we must needs think the state of virginity more perfect than that of marriage. First I deny your antecedent, neither our Saviour, nor his mother, nor his Apostles vowed virginity; prove it of any of them if you can. Indeed our Saviour was never married, and all men may easily see it was no way fit he should be. His mother was, and therefore questionless never made any such vow of single life, though we believe that (as it was very fit it should be) she continued a virgin till her death. That some of the Apostles had wives, it is apparent by scripture; that they kept them after their office undertaken, it is more than likely, by u 1. Cor. 9 5. Vxorem saith Vatablus, as indeed the order of the ●ords requires. the like warrant of scripture, whatsoever some have thought, without any sufficient ground of reason or authority to the contrary. Peter and Philip (saith x Stromat. lib. 3. pag. 97. Clement of Alexandria) had children; Philip also bestowed his daughters in marriage; and Paul y Non veretur suam appellare coniugem. is not afraid in a certain Epistle of his to mention his wife, whom he did not lead about with him, because he z Non ma●no ei opus esset ministerio. had no need of any great service. Your consequence also is very weak. They were virgins, therefore it was a state of greater perfection. It was more fit for those times, and their occasions; yea we grant it is a freer kind of life for God's service, and therefore they that can live so, do well to use that their liberty: but this proves not, that single life is simply better than marriage. That which you add, of wallowing in filthy pleasure, and satisfying of the beastly appetites, bewrays the beastly opinion you have of marriage, and shows, that you would be filthy, though you were married: what you are now as I know not, so I will not judge. But this I will say, that few or no married men live so unchastlie and abominably, as a See D Downame of Antichrist, lib. 1. c. 6 §. 4. 5. 6. 1. Cor. 7. many of your vowed virgins have done, by record of your own stories. speaker D. B. P. Finally, if S. Paul give counsel to the married, to contain during the time of Prayer, Priests and religious (that must always be in a readiness to minister the Sacraments, and to think upon such things as belong unto our Lord) are therefore upon a great consideration bound to perpetual chastity. speaker A. W. The Apostle giveth no such counsel, but forbids the married the restraining of each others company, except it be for a time, that they may give themselves to fasting and prayer. The reason is, that at such special times, special humiliation is requisite, to which the forbearing all kind of lawful pleasure is a principal furtherance; otherwise, the moderate use of marriage is no hindrance to any duty either of Christianity, or the Ministry, but a special means to preserve necessary Chastity. speaker D. B. P. We will close up this point with some sentences taken out of the ancient Fathers, in praise of Virginity, which Master Perkins in all this question vouchsafeth scarce once to name, as though Virgins and Virginity were no English words, or not as plain as continency. speaker A. W. We acknowledge that virginity, where it is pure, as it ought to be, is worthy of very singular commendation: but it consists not only in abstaining from the outward act of marriage. Master Perkins did very well approve both of the thing and the word: but because it was not general enough for this question, as not reaching to all that were single, he rather chose to use the word continency, being of larger extent. speaker D. B. P. S. Cyprian, De habitu Virginum: entitleth Virgins to be the most noble and glorious person of Christ's flock: and addeth, that they shall receive of God the highest reward and greatest recompense. Saint Chrysostome saith, Virginity to be the top of perfection, and the Lib. 3. cont. vitup. vit. neces●. highest typ of virtue. And Athanasius, De Virginitate; in the end bursteth out into these words: O Virginity, a treasure that wasteth not, a garland that withereth not; the Temple of God, the Palace of the Holy Ghost, a precious stone, whose price is unknown to the vulgar, the joy of the Prophets, the glory of the Apostles, the life of Angels, the Crown of Saints. S. Ambrose Lib. 1. de Virginibus paulo post init. Virginity is a principal virtue, and not therefore commendable that it is found in Martyrs, but because it maketh Martyrs: Who can with human wit comprehend it which nature doth not hold within her laws, it hath fetched out of Heaven that it might imitate on Earth: neither unsitly hath it sought a manner of life in heaven, which hath found a spouse for her in heaven. This surmounting the clouds, the stars and Angels hath found the word of God in the bosom of his Father; etc. See who list to read more to this purpose the rest of the Fathers in their works of Virginity; of which most of them have written. And S. Jerome, who is behind none of the rest, in his books against jovinian and helvidius, all which do most diligently exhort to Vow Virginity; do teach how to keep it, and most vehemently inveigh against all them that do break it. And if any be so mad as to credit rather our fleshly ministers, than all that honourable and holy senate of the ancient Fathers, he deserveth to live and die in perpetual darkness. speaker A. W. In this matter I have stayed somewhat longer, because our carnal He calleth the estate of marriage, ●l●shly and beasily liberty. teachers, with the lewd example of their dissolute Disciples, have corrupted ourage with fleshly and beastly liberty: In the other points, I will recompense it with brevity. These hyperbolical commendations of virginity show the opinion of some ancient writers concerning it, but prove nothing. We dissuade no man from continuing a single life, so he be able to overcome that burning, which the Apostle condemns: yea rather we exhort them, that have the gift, to use it. But we deny, either that all have it, or that they which have it do please God any more by the use of it, that they that have it not; but as they employ it to the better, and more free serving of God. speaker W. P. The second, is the vow of poverty and Monastical life, in which men bestow all they have on the poor: and give themselves wholly and only to prayer and fasting. This vow is against the will of God. Act. 20. 35. It is a more blessed thing to give then to receive. Pro. 28. 7. Give me neither riches nor poverty. Deut. 28. 22. Povertie is numbered among the curses of the law: none whereof are to be vowed. And it is the rule of the holy Ghost, 2. Thess. 3. 10. He that will not labour, namely, in some special and warrantable calling, must not eat. And vers. 12. I exhort that they work with quietness and eat their own bread. Now when as men live apart from others, giving themselves only to prayer and fasting, they live in no calling. And it is against the general vow made in Baptism, because it freeth men from sundry duties of the moral law, and changeth the proper end of man's life. For every man must have two callings. The first is a general calling of a Christian, by virtue of which he performeth worship unto God, and duties of love to men. The second is a particular calling, wherein according to his gift, he must do service to men in some function, pertaining either to the Church or Commonwealth, whereof he is a member. And the first of these twain must be performed in the second: and the second in and with the first. The end of man's life is, not only to serve God by the duties of the first table, but by serving of man in the duties of the second table to serve God. And therefore the love of our neighbour is called the fulfilling of the whole law. Rom. 13. 10. because the law of God is practised not apart; but in and with the love of our neighbour. This being so, it is manifest that vowed poverty in Monkish life makes many unprofitable members both of Church and Commonwealth. speaker D. B. P. Concerning the Vow of poverty and monastical life, in which, as M. Perkins acknowledgeth, men bestow all they have upon the poor, and give themselves to Prayer and Fasting: yet he is not ashamed to avouch that this Vow is against the will of God, and assayeth to prove it: Act. cap. 20. vers. 35. It is a more blessed thing to give, than to receive. Ans. As the very proposition (that it is displeasing to God to cut off all cares of the world, and to betake ourselves wholly to his holy service and contemplation of heavenly matters) is in itself profane and ungodly, so the proof thereof is devoid of natural wit and sense. Mark the Argument: It is against God's will to give away all, because it is more blessed to give, than to receive: Why, if it be a more blessed thing to give, than they please God better that give. So that this his proof, improves flatly his own assertion: But the dreamer means perhaps, that if you give all at once, you shall not be able to give afterwards, but rather stand in need to receive. Reply. But no such human prudence can be drawn out of that sentence, which encourageth rather to give for the present, then to provide for hereafter. speaker A. W. The true meaning of the place, is to exhort Christians to labour and travail, at vacanttimes to get their own living, and to provide some thing also to bestow upon them who stand in need rathenr then to be idle, and to stand in need of alms, as S. Paul himself did: which they did best perform, who had sold all they had and distributed it to the poor, as the example of Paul himself, and the first Christians doth sufficiently declare, who sold all, and laid the price at the Apostles feet. Act. 4. The proposition is true, that it is displeasing to God for a man to sever himself from all cares of the world, to serve him in contemplation, without respect of any duty to his brethren. For the cares of the world are part of every man's lot in this life, and the b Phil. 1. 23, 24. 25. good of our brethren is to be preferred for a time, before our own happiness in heaven: neither is any service of praying and fasting continually, so much to God's glory, as a Christian carriage in some lawful calling. The argument is good: For he that gives away that upon which he should live, as your Votaries do, brings himself into a less blessed estate, to live on other men's alms, than spirit. The like is to be said of hungering and thirsting, being full and satisfied, which followeth in the same place. speaker D. B. P. Thus M. Perkins his texts of Scripture against poverty failing him, he fetcheth about another way, saying, that it is a rule of the holy Ghost: He that will not labour (namely, in some special and warrantable calling) must not eat. Thes. 2. Ans. I allow both the text and the gloss, and find nothing there against religious persons, whose calling is special perfect, and therefore best warrantable; not so (saith he) because they give themselves to prayer and fasting: What a profane stupidity is this? Is not a life given to prayer and fasting agreeable to the will of God, and Laws of his Church? albeit many religious men do over and besides very great services to God's Church, in preaching, teaching, & writing of most learned books. But suppose they did nothing else but fast and pray, did they not very well deserve their sustenance? yes much better than they which travail To fast and pray, is the general duty of all Christians. all the year about the providing of it: For in vain do men labour, if God bless not their work, with seasonable weather, which he doth rather at the prayer and instance of such good innocent souls, that are to be fed with it, than for the Ploughman's own labours sake. And if by their Fasting, Watching, and such like afflictions of their bodies, they do partly satisfy for our superfluous pampering of the flesh, and teach us by their good example to bridle and correct it: do they not deserve at our hands bodily sustenance? And who better performs all duties of the second Table than they, being most obedient to all their Superiors, and not hurting their neighbour in life, persons, or any manner of their goods? And so in their several callings offend no honest men, and do much good both unto the Church and commonwealth. speaker A. W. It is no lawful calling, nor agreeable to the will of God, that any man should live in the Church without any charge, or means to profit the Church by. Fasting and praying are both lawful and acceptable; but they are general duties of all Christians, and may not therefore be made proper callings of certain men. For callings differ, as other things, by their special form; but their praying and fasting is divers from the same exercise practised by other Christians, only in quantity more or less. The services these men do beside, are merely voluntary, and not lying upon them by any duty of their calling: which is only I know not what stinted devotion, after the laws of each several order of Monks, Friars, Nuns, and such like. They no way deserve their sustenance, since they have vowed to take no course whereby they may provide for it. Their prayers do no good, no not so much as to themselves, being made with a proud opinion, to merit, by a conceited perfection. A poor husbandman, that labours all the week for his living, and useth the best means he can to grow in knowledge and obedience to God, may look for a greater blessing from God, upon his bodily and spiritual labours, by his own poor prayers, and the supplications of the Congregation in which he liveth, than by all the fasting and praying of the holiest Covent, Abbey, or Nunnery in the country. As for their satisfactions, they are like a broken reed, which will not only fail him that trusts to it, but hurt him also. I have showed, that we need no other satisfaction, being delivered by our Saviour Christ's sufferings: and there are few or none, except perhaps the begging Friars, that had not more need to satisfy for their own idleness and gluttony, than ordinarily any other kind of men whatsoever; if we may believe either the reports of travelers, or the records of your own histories. Can they be said to be obedient to their Superiors, that in the very making of their vow oftentimes, wilfully disobey their fathers and mothers? Or may they be thought to hurt none, who live idle upon the sweat of other men's brows? and are only a charge to the state, whereof they are unprofitable members? But not to hurt, is a kindness perhaps, to be commended in thieves: what due praise it can have in a state of perfection, for my part I cannot see. Which I speak upon supposition, that they are not so hurtful to men and women, as it is commonly thought. speaker W. P. And though we mislike this vow also, yet we do it, holding these conclusions. First, that a man may forsake all his goods upon special calling, as the Apostles did, when they were sent to preach the Gospel through the whole world. Secondly, goods may be forsaken, yea wife, children, parents, brethren, and all, in the case of confession, that is, when a man for the religion of Christ is persecuted and constrained to forsake all he hath. For then the second table gives place to the duties of the first. Mark. 10. 29. II. That, for the time of persecution, men may withdraw themselves (just occasion offered) and go apart to wildernesses or like places, Hebr. 11. 37. yet for the time of peace I see no cause of solitary life. If it be alleged, that men go apart for contemplation and spiritual exercises, I say again that God's grace may as well be exercised in the family as in the cloister. The family is indeed as it were a school of God, in which they that have but a spark of grace may learn and exercise many virtues, the acknowledgement of God, invocation, the fear of God, love, bountifulness, patience, meekness, faithfulness, etc. Nay here be more occasions of doing or taking good, then be or can be in a cloister. III. That, we condemn not the old and ancient Monks, though we like not every thing in them. For they lived not like idle bellies, but in the sweat of their own brows, as they ought to * Zozom. lib. 1. cap 13. Epiph. bar. 78. August. de Mon. Eccl. li. 2. c. 31. & de opere Monach. cap. 17. do: and many of them were married: and in their meat, drink, apparel, rule, vow, and whole course of life, differed from the Monks of this time, even as heaven from earth. speaker D. B. P. After all this wast-wind, M. Perkins confesseth, that a man may upon a special calling, s●ll all his goods, as the Apostles did. What then (good Sir) shall become of your former arguments? May one then Vow a curse of the Law, and leave off prayer for neither poverty nor riches, and say that it is not a blesseder thing to give, then to receive? All these arguments which were whilom of great force, must now be nothing worth: because it pleaseth M. Perkins, the wind now sits in an other corner, such weathercockes surely are to be much respected. speaker A. W. Master Perkins speaks not a word of selling all a man hath, but of forsaking it, when he hath some calling from God, which requireth such a course for the following of it, as will not afford a man leisure to look to his worldly affairs. But this is no wilful casting away the care of our estate, but preferring the duties especially laid on us by God, before our own business. Neither is it any vowing of poverty, with a fond conceit of perfection, but a faithful labouring in our necessary calling, with neglect of the world, in comparison of our duty. In such a case a man must rely on God's providence, and use the best means he can to provide for himself, that he may not be chargeable to other, but helpful rather: not renouncing all propriety in worldly things, but carefully saving, and thriftily spending that, which it pleaseth God to send by any good means whatsoever. This overthrows no piece of any argument Master Perkins brought before. speaker D. B. P. He faith further; in time of persecution, a man may also leave all: he should rather have said, he must leave all, or else loose all; for the persecutor will not spare him. Lastly, he doth not condemn old ancient Monks, who lived by the sweat of their brows, and were married, many of them, as he saith, but his authors cited, saith not so, neither shall he be able to cite one ancient allowed and approved writer, who saith that the ancient Monks lived with their wives, if perhaps they had been married before. But no marvel if fleshly Ministers think it no life without their fleshly mates. As for labouring at vacant times, it was always, and is to this day in practice among many religions. If other do in good studies, writing or teaching, employ that time of labour, no doubt but they do far better. speaker A. W. He may and must leave all, if need be. It was sufficient for Master Perkins purpose, to show that our goods, in some cases, might be forsaken, though poverty might not be drawn upon us, by any proud vow of supposed perfection. He doth not condemn those Monks, though he thinks many things they used not warrantable. The report was (as k Lib. 1. cap. 14. Zozomen saith) that Ammon the Monk of Egypt, by the importunity of his friends, married a wife, though he never companied with her. Which how he might with good conscience refuse, being married, let them judge that read what the l 1. Cor. 7. 3. 4. 〈◊〉 Apostle writes of this matter; yet (as they say) he lived with her eighteen years in that course, before she was brought into the liking of a Monkish life. But belike it was lawful then for them to marry, and no man can excuse this Ammon of great sin, that would adventure to marry one, of whose continency and willingness to contain, he could have no knowledge before marriage. Other Monks that were married ere they became Monks, could not vow without consent of their wives. If labouring at vacant times be in practice among many religions (as indeed there is a multitude of religions among you Papists) it is but a work of supererogation above their calling; for their profession is idleness. But that this will not serve the turn, m De oper. monach. c. 17. Austin showeth directly, enjoining it as a matter of necessity. speaker D. B. P. In defence of the Catholic party, M. Perkins hath not a word, wherefore I will briefly supply his want and prove it to be very grateful to God to sell all, and give it to the poor. I omit the example of our blessed Saviour, (who would not have any poor cottage of his own, so much as to rest his head in, but would wholly live of alms) and come unto his heavenly doctrine. He teacheth a young man whom he loved, in flat words, That if he would be perfect, he should Matth. 19 go and sell all he had, and give it to the poor, and come and follow him, and then should have a treasure in heaven. These words are so express and evident, that there can be but one way to shift from them, which M. Perkins flieth unto pag, 244. to wit, that these words were only meant unto that young man, and not to be applied unto any others, no more than those words to Abraham of sacrificing his son Isaac. But this silly shift of our poor Protestants is confuted, manifestly in the same Chapter of S. Matthew, where a little after S. Peter saith. Lord, behold we have left all things, and have followed thee, what reward shall we therefore have: We have done (as S. Jerome expoundeth it, and the very sequel of the text doth plainly require) that which thou commandest in the words before, to that young man. What answer made our Saviour? That his commandment was only meant unto that young man, and that they had done foolishly in so doing? nothing less, but promiseth that they shall therefore sit with him in twelve seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And that whosoever would forsake Father, Mother, Lands, Goods, etc. for his sake, should receive an hundredth fold, and possess life everlasting. Can any thing be more plain out of the word of God itself, than that, not this or that man, but whosoever shall forsake all for Christ, doth very blessedly? speaker A. W. If this be the best supply that can be made, who can justly blame Master Perkins for saying nothing in defence of your Popish party? For if all you offer to prove were granted you, all were nothing to the purpose. Say it be grateful to God to sell all and give it to the poor: doth it follow hereupon, that therefore it is lawful to vow wilful poverty, as a state of perfection? I trow not. But that is the question betwixt us. You might have done well to omit it indeed, being so little to the matter. For what kind of conclusion call you this? Our Saviour would not have any poor cottage of his own: Therefore poverty may be vowed as a state of perfection: or therefore it is greater perfection to have no house, than to have one. Our Saviour being to travel from place to place, both for the preaching of the Gospel, and his own safety, thought it not convenient to have any certain dwelling place: yet your Monks, Friars and Nuns have, and those the pleasantest and richest for the soil and air, that can be found in the whole countries where they are. But what did our Saviour sell, that he might thereby fall into wilful poverty? His example helps you not: let us see his doctrine, he teacheth a young man, you say, whom he loved, that if he would be perfect, he should sell all he had and give it to the poor, and follow him, and then he should have treasure in heaven. First for our saviours loving him, which yet n Matth. 19 21 Matthew records not, but o Marc. 10. 21. Mark, who leaves out that clause of being perfect, it is more than plain, that this cannot be understood of any special love. For neither did the man believe in him, as the Messiah, and he was falsely conceited of his own righteousness, than which nothing is a greater hindrance to salvation, and therefore nothing less beloved by our Saviour Christ. This love therefore signifies not an approbation of his vain brag, or a desire of making him perfect, but either a pitying of his conceit, or some kind gesture used towards him: which later signification especially both the p See ●●nius on Marc. 10. 21. Greek and Syriake words will well admit. Secondly I answer, that our Saviour doth not intend to show him how he may be perfect, but by urging him to sell that he had, means to discover his want of love to God, and his neighbour. That he meant not to persuade him to any perfection, it is evident. First, because no man, without true faith, which this justiciary wanted, can come any thing near to perfection. Secondly, for that a man may q 1. Cor. 13, 2. sell all that he hath, etc. and yet not be perfect. For single life, in your account, is a matter of no small perfection. But our Saviour would make his vanity in the opinion of his own righteousness, apparent to him and other, as it fell out indeed. For refusing to obey him in that matter, he bewrayed his covetousness, which he preferred before following our Saviour, whom he acknowledged to be a worthy teacher, and before the love of his brethren. Lastly I say, the chief point of perfection here mentioned is not selling of our goods, but following of Christ, which is a duty r Luc. 9 23. belonging to all Christians, so that without it no man is a Christian. In the following of Christ by the works of charity (saith your s Lyra ad Matth. 19 21. gloss) perfection consists principally in wilful poverty, but as in the beginning, by way of renouncing that which hinders, and disposing of us, because by it the care of temporal things is taken away, which hinders the soul from the love of God, and the soul is fitted to free contemplation of God. To sell all and give to the poor sufficeth not to perfection (saith t Libr. 3. ad Matth. 19 Jerome) unless after the despising of riches we follow Christ, that is, leaving evil do good. And after, Many leave riches, but not follow our Lord. He follows our Lord who doth imitate him, and treads in his steps. And again afterward, Because it sufficeth not to leave, he adds that which is perfect, and have followed me. So that this is no state of perfection, but rather a remedy against our being drawn away from following Christ, which was as necessary to salvation both before and under the law, as it is now in this light of the Gospel: and if without wilful poverty it cannot be done, doubtless neither those worthies of the former ages, Abraham, Moses, David, etc. could follow Christ in duties of charity, and we not only may, but must sell all we have, that we may follow him. It was spoken and intended only to that young man; neither doth Peter say that the Apostles had sold all, and given it to the poor, which is no where recorded of them in the scriptures, but that they had forsaken all and followed him, that is, had left their ordinary callings (by which in likelihood they might have thriven) to attend upon our Saviour, and to be employed in his service. And to the following of Christ either only or specially doth that of Jerome belong. Peter speaks confidently (saith u Libr. 3. ad Matth. 19 Jerome) we have left all. And because it is not sufficient only to leave, he adds that, which is perfect, And have followed thee, we have done that x Quod iussisti. Mat. 4. 19 22. thou commandest, that is, we have given over the hope of our increase in worldly riches rather than we would not serve thee. But by the way let me put you in mind, if you will needs have that speech of Jerome's belong to wilful poverty, you must needs make it a commandment by your own interpretation. It is not only a counsel but a commandment, that every man should forsake his goods rather then his profession of Christianity, or any special duty, to which God shall call him. If any man (saith our y Luc. 14. 26. Saviour) come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. speaker D. B. P. And if need were, I could cite most of the ancient Fathers, teaching those words of Christ, Go and sell all, to be an heavenly counsel given generally unto all. S. Antony took them spoken to him, In vita eius apud Athanas. S. Augustine to him: Ad Hilarium. To omit latter religious Epist. 89. men, I will only cite S. Jerom who doth briefly both declare our Catholic doctrine, and shows also who was the Author of the Protestants opinion, saying thus: To that which thou affirmest, that they do better, who Lib. cont. Vigilant. use their goods, and do by little and little distribute to the poor, the profits of their possessions, than others who selling them, give all at once, not I, but our Lord shall answer: If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all thou hast and give it to the poor. Christ speaketh to him that will be perfect (not to the young man only) who with the Apostles, forsook both Father ship and nets: That which thou Vigilantius commendest, obtaineth the second and third degree: so that the first (which is to sell all at once) be preferred before the second and third: Which is, to give by little and little, the fruit of our revenues to the poor. speaker A. W. The authority of the ancient writers is lessened by the knowledge of the ground they built upon, which was a misconceit of our saviours speech, begun at the first by some man, who did not sufficiently weigh the place, and continued from one to another, without any due examination, till it had got such strength, that it carried away the best learned, who contemning the world, were easily persuaded to think themselves to be in an estate of perfection. speaker D. B. P. I might confirm this former argument with the example of the sore●●ide best Christians, who having possessions and lands, sold all and Act. 〈◊〉. brought the price of them, and laid it at the Apostles feet: and more yet enforce it by the fact of Ananias and Saphira, his wife, who having sold all theirs, presented but part of the money unto the Apostles, and reserved the rest unto themselves. Belike they were of M. Perkins his mind, that it is better to give then to receive, and therefore kept part to that purpose; but they therefore were both punished with present death: Which proveth invincibly, both how laudable it is to sell all, and how dangerous to halt in such holy works. But to avoid prolixity, I do but point at the places: And that Ananias; as the ●est had promised this to God (which is a Vow) it appeareth in the text, where it is said, that he lied not unto men, but unto God, in not performing his promise. And here we deduce very clearly, that such a Vow is much pleasing unto God, thus: That which is commended by our saviours own both example and doctrine, and was practised by the Apostles and most holy Christians, that may be Vowed very laudably: but to sell all and give it to the poor is such. speaker A. W. The example of those Christians is nothing to the purpose, who upon special occasion made their goods common to the use of the whole Church in jerusalem; yet z Act. 2. 4. is it not said of them, that they sold all they had; yea the contrary may reasonably be gathered by the facts of a Act. 4. 37. Barnabas and b Act. 5. 1. Ananias, of whom it is recorded, that they sold each of them a possession that he had, and laid down the money at the Apostles feet. Now to imagine that they had no other goods and chattels but that land, nor any movables, is a conceit unwarrantable by any reason. Ananias and Sapphiras mind was to make a show of more bounty than they had any will to perform. That they had made any vow, or promise to God of any such sale, cannot be proved by the text, but rather the contrary, because the Apostle Peter saith, that it was in his choice before he sold it, whether he would sell it or no, and that after he had sold it, it was in his own power, viz. to give all, or half of it as he thought good. The lie he made was to say that he had brought in all the money he sold it for, whereas he kept back part. I have stood the longer upon this argument, because you bring no more but this, and think this unanswerable. Therefore also beside your custom you draw it into a Syllogism now at the last. That (say you) which is commanded by our saviours own example and doctrine, and was practised by the Apostles, and most holy Christians, that may be vowed very laudably: But to sell all, and give it to the poor is such: Therefore it may be vowed very laudably. I deny your proposition, because some things have been commended and practised by our Saviour, his Apostles, and other holy Christians, of which a man may not make a vow. For example, both he and they have commended, and endured persecution for the Gospel: yet doth it not follow that therefore a man may wilfully by a vow bring persecution upon himself, as by the vow of poverty you cast yourselves into a state of beggary. Your assumption also is false. Neither our Saviour, his Apostles, nor other holy Christians (I speak of the examples you bring out of the Acts) have practised any such matter, as in my former answers it hath appeared. To which I add yet further, that they in the Acts so gave that they did give, that themselves had their relief out of it, if need required, as well as any other. Of the conclusion I say, that it contains not the whole matter in question betwixt us, though it be rightly drawn from the premises. For though we should grant that vows of selling all and giving it to the poor may laudably be made (which is false) yet is it not proved, that a man may vow wilful poverty, and refuse to possess any worldly goods. They in the Acts, if they gave all away, which is all- made in our Creation, we remember nothing of it, nor never heard speak of it by any good author, not that we make, or renew any Vows when we receive the blessed Sacrament. These be but novelties of words, and the raving of some decayed wits. speaker A. W. You utterly mistake Master Perkins, for he makes not comparison betwixt your account of baptism, and ours, but betwixt your estimation of the vow in Baptism, and these other 3. vows devised by yourselves. And though with you the covenant in baptism be no vow, yet with c Ad Psalm. 75 S. Austin it is. What must we vow? saith he upon that place which you allege to prove the lawfulness of vowing. He answers, to believe in him, to hope for everlasting life of him, to live well, according to a common manner of living well. The vow in our creation Master Perkins calls the bond, by which we are tied to obedience in respect that we hold all we have of God by creation. As the benefits sealed to us in Baptism are renewed in the Lord's supper, every time we receive it; so by us in like sort the promise or vow made in baptism is also to be renewed, which is implied in that name of the sacrament, which signifieth d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. thanksgiving. The ninth point. Of images. Our consent. speaker W. P. Conclus. I. We acknowledge the civil use of images as freely and truly as the church of Rome doth. By civil use I understand, that use which is made of them in the common societies of men, out of the appointed places of the solemn worship of God. And this to be lawful, it appeareth because the arts of painting and graving are the ordinance of God: and to be skilful in them is the gift of God, as the example of Bozaleel, and Aholiab declare, Exod. 35. 30. This use of Images may be in sundry things. I. In the adorning and setting forth of buildings; thus Solomon beautified his throne with the image of lions. And the Lord commanded his temple to be adorned with the images of palm trees, of pomegranates, of bulls, cherubes, and such like. II. It serves for the distinction of coins: according to the practice of Emperors and princes of all nations. When Christ was asked, Matth. 22. whether it was lawful to give tribute to Cesar or no? he called for a penny and said, whose Image or superscription is this? they said, Caesar's: he then said, give to Cesar the things that are Caesar's: not condemning but approving the stamp or image upon his coin. And though the jews were forbidden to make images in way of representation, or worship of the true God: yet the Sycle of the sanctuary, which they used, specially after the time of Moses, was stamped with the image of the Almon tree, and the pot of Manna. III. Images serve to keep in memory friends deceased whom we reverence. And it is like, that hence came one occasion of the images that are now in use in the Roman church. For in the days after the Apostles men used privately to keep the pictures of their friends departed: and this practice after crept into the open congregation: and at last, superstition getting head, images began to be worshipped. Conclus. II. We hold the historical use of images to be good and lawful: and that is, to represent to the eye the acts of histories, whether they be human, or divine: and thus we think the histories of the Bible may be painted in private places. Conclus. III. In one case it is lawful to make an image to testify the presence or the effects of the Majesty of God, namely when God himself gives any special commandment so to do. In this case Moses made and erected a brazen serpent, to be a type, sign, or image to represent Christ crucified. joh. 3. 14. And the Cherubs over the mercy seat served to represent the Majesty of God, to whom the Angels are subject. And in the second commandment it is not simply said, Thou shalt not make a graven image: but with limitation, Thou shalt not make to thyself, that is, on thine own head, upon thine own will and pleasure. speaker D. B. P. Christians (saith M. Perkins in his first conclusion) used privately to keep the Pictures of their friends departed; which afterward (saith he) by abuse came to be set in Churches and worshipped. This by the way is a very wilful perverting of those words (to thyself) which cannot signify, but, to thine own use, that is, to adore them, as is plainly deelared in the text following. speaker A. W. It is no small advantage that you take by reporting Master Perkins words as please you. Here (as also otherwhere) you set them down by halves, as if he certainly affirmed that, which he doth but gather by likelihood. It is like (saith he) that hence came one occasion of the images that are now in use in the Roman Church. speaker W. P. The most that any indifferent man can make of it, is, but a mistaking of the true sense, unless he be able to prove that Master Perkins knew the meaning to be otherwise, which is not to be thought of any man upon a bare presumption. It may be also he did rather so expound it, because in e judg. 2. 19 Psal. 106. 29. 39 divers places of scripture where the jews idolatry is reproved, they are charged to have followed their own f Adinuentiones. inventions, as your Latin translates. IV. The right images of the new Testament, which we hold and acknowledge, are the doctrine and preaching of the Gospel, and all things that by the word of God pertains thereto. Gal. 3. Who hath bewitched you that ye should not obey the truth to whom jesus Christ was before described in your sight and among you crucified. Hence it follows that the preaching of the word is as a most excellent picture in which Christ with his benefits are lively represented unto us. And we descent not from Origen. contra Ce●s. lib. 8. who saith, We have no images framed by any base work, but by such as are brought forth and framed by the word of God, namely patterns of virtue, and frames resembling Christians. He means that Christians themselves are the images of Christians. speaker D. B. P. These be metaphorical Pictures, not belonging to this purpose: for it is one thing to describe in words, another to express in lively colours, and lineaments. speaker A. W. g Concil. Constantinop. vniuers. 7. Actione 6. These are the only pictures that we need, Preaching of the Word, administering of the Sacraments, and considering the lives of the true Saints, as they are recorded in the Scripture, and offer themselves to our knowledge, by good histories and daily sight. speaker D. B. P. These conclusions contain, as M. Perkins affirmeth, the doctrine of the Church of England; which I would believe, if I did not see the Magistrates publicly to take away Pictures from catholics, to tear and burn them, which were kept but in private places: yea, their more servant disciples, cannot abide a Cross standing by the high way side, or in any, never so profane a place, but either they bea●e and hale them down, or most despitefully deface them: bewraying indeed unto all moderate men, their cankered stomaches against him that died on the Cross: who He will confound you Idolaters. will one day (w●on he pleaseth) confound them. But to cover this their malice, they cast over it the mantle of zeal, saying that the Papists make them their Gods, and that therefore they are to be abolished. speaker A. W. Against which of the former conclusions is the practice of the Magistrate, that you should deny that to be our doctrine, because of this? Not against the first, nor the second. For both we ourselves use them for ornament, and remembrance, and all your Papists, you speak of, to religious purposes. Not against the third: For you have no image that God hath appointed to be made: much less against the fourth, which allows none of your Images. It would have becomed you therefore to forbear both the accusing of the Magistrate, for doing against our doctrine, and the condemning of our doctrine, as being other than it is. For the people, though many amongst them justly mislike crosses, because they are by you ordinarily abused to Idolatry; yet I think you can bring few examples of any such disorderly course, and I am persuaded none at all, which the Magistrate hath not corrected. speaker A. W. O men blinded with spite against true devotion. We Catholics are a thousand times morezealous of the true honour of the living God, than D. B. P. These rhetorical explanations prove nothing. You devil by ill neighbours. any Protestants ever were or will be: And that small reverence which we yield unto Images, is more different from the honour and obedience due unto Almighty God, than the cope of heaven is distant from the centre of the earth. You zealous of the true honour of the living God, whose glory you turn into the likeness of a mortal man, and of a pigeon? whom you dishonour by stocks and stones? whom you crush up into a baggage wafer cake? whom you devour and swallow down into your bellies, and cast out into a place not fit to be named? There never was the like senseless and barbarous Idolatry among the Gentiles. If some reverence you give be small, some again is a degree at the least above that, as h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the very words show. But tell me, is it small reverence to give the same honour to the image, which belongs to the party whose image it is? Do you not worship the images of the Trinity, and of Christ alone, with divine worship? Are not you they who maintain that idolatrous second Council of Nice, in which i Carol. mag. de imag. lib. 3. cap. 17. Constantine Bishop of Constance in Cyprus blasphemously affirmed, that he received and embraced honourable, holy and venerable Images, according to that service of adoration, which he gave to the consubstantial and quickening Trinity? But of this afterwards. speaker D. B. P. And that these hotter brethren may see what reason M. Perkins had to allow of the civil and historical use of Images: I think it expedient to note here, how in the purest antiquity, Images were made and respected. That famous Image of our blessed Saviour, which the woman cured of the bloody floxe, set up in Brass at Caesarea Philippi. upon a Pillar of Matth. 9 stone, is not unknown unto any that have read the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, Lib. 7. cap. 14. And how God did approve it by giving virtue unto an herb when it did grow, to touch the hem of that Picture, to cure all manner of diseases. Which Image, Eusebius himself did see standing until his days, which was ●300 years ago, as he there testifieth: as also, that he saw divers others, namely, of Saint Peter and Paul. speaker A. W. This goodly statue being most memorable both for antiquity of it, being made our Saviour yet living, and for the miracles wrought by that herb, growing at the foot of it, julian the Apostata for malice against our Saviour, caused to be broken down, and set up his own Image in the place of it: but his was presently with lightning and thunder from heaven consumed into ashes, and our saviours, by the Christians Lib. 5. hist. cap. 20. carried into their Church, as witnesseth Sozomenus. Eusebius delivers that story as a matter of report, not knowledge: They say that her house is yet to be seen, and that admirable monuments of that benefit our Saviour bestowed upon her, are yet remaining. And it is worth the observing, that Eusebius makes a difference betwixt that which he knew by the Gospel, and that which he heard by report. Of her healing by our Saviour Christ he speaketh thus: Whom we know by the holy Gospels, that our Saviour freed from her disease. Of her dwelling at Caesarea Philippi, of her house, and that Image, with the herb and virtue of it: k Ferunt. They say, of the Image also in particular, they say this statue hath the image of jesus. Neither doth he affirm, that he saw it himself: It remained also (saith Eusebius) until our times, as it may be seen of them that go into that City. But I wonder at your confidence, that ever you would add a word of the Images of Peter and Paul; Eusebius report and judgement being in that very place against your opinion of Images. Let us hear himself speak: It may not seem strange (saith Eusebius presently upon the former words) that such of the Gentiles as were cured by our Saviour did these things: seeing we have seen the Images of his Apostles, viz. of Paul and Peter, and of Christ himself kept painted in tables: because the ancients, by an heathenish custom of the Gentiles, were w●nt in that manner to honour those whom they counted their preservers. This woman being a Heathen, and perhaps converted, in her ignorance did like the rest of the Heathen. The miracle was received, and delivered by Eusebius only upon report; of the continuance whereof, with the Images enduring, he saith nothing. But in this case I will only put you in mind of that, which l Gab●. Biel in can. 〈◊〉 lee. 49. one of your own schoolmen writes concerning such miracles, that they are wrought often times by the operation of Devils, to deceive the inordinate worshippers of such Images, God permitting, and the infidelity of men necessarily requiring it. Such might this be, if there were any such. m Sozom. hist. lib. 5. cap. 20. Sozomen notes in his preface to the story, that this destroying of julians' image, showed the power of Christ, and his anger against julian: but this proves not that our Saviour had any liking of the Image; it was julians' malice, as yourself call it, that provoked our Saviour, not the respect of the Image. The latter part you report very craftily, as if the Christians had set up that Image in their Church: but Sozomen saith not so; only he telleth us, that when the Gentiles had dragged it to pieces, the Christians gathered up the pieces, and laid them up in their Church; where they were kept till the time of his writing. speaker D. B. P. Another Picture of our saviours visage, he himself is reported to have sent unto Abgarus Prince of Edessa, as witnesseth Metaphrastes In vita Constantini, Damascen, and Euagrius, who doth in the same chapter rehearse a notable miracle, wrought by the same Image, to deliver Lib. 10. de imagis. Lib. 4. hist. cap. 28. the Town from the sacking of the Persians. And in his fifth book and eighteenth chapter, recordeth another miracle done by the Image of the blessed Virgin Mary in a prison at Antioch. speaker A. W. The n Damasc. orthod. fid. lib. 4. cap. 17. chief author you allege for this fable, writ 800. years after Christ, and setteth it down but o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. as a report; as you might have seen, if you had looked in him; which by p Damasc. de imagine. lib. 10. the wrong quotation, it should seem you did not. q Lib. 1. c. 13. Eusebius, who writ the Ecclesiastical history 400. years before Damascen, and set down that matter out of the record of Abgarus own country, hath not one word of any such Image. Yea, in his r citant Gregor. Neocaes'. in Concil. Nice. secundo, actione 6. epistle to the Empress Constantine Augusta, who writ to him for an image of Christ, he showeth that her desire is not warrantable, and discourses that matter at large. s Lib. 4. c. 26. Euagrius another of your authors, about six hundred years after Christ, telleth such a story as you mention; not upon his own, but Procopius credit, who lived in the same age with him, and writ that miracle by the report of I know not t A veteribus commemorata. what old men. It is enough to discredit it, that Eusebius maketh no mention of any such Image, though he writ the history of that matter betwixt our Saviour and Abgarus at large; and that, as I said before, out of the records of Edessa, where Abgarus ruled. If these former authors cannot procure credit to that story, what should Simeon Metaphrastes do, who u Anno 950 Coccius in Thesauro Catholico. came some hundreds of years after Procopius, and Euagrius? But of this and like miracles, if they were indeed wrought, we heard Biels' judgement before. speaker D. B. P. The third Image representing our blessed Saviour, is said to have been made by Nicodemus his secret Disciple, which afterwards was taken by the jew, and in despite of Christ, was crucified, and to their confusion, much blood issued out of it. This history is in the ●…orke of S. Athanasius that sound pillar of the Church, entitled De passione imaginis, and is either his, or some other very ancient and grave writers. For it is related in the seventh general council. Act. 4. speaker A. W. There is no likelihood that Athanasius would record any such story, his x Contr. Gentes seu contra idola. other writings are so directly against all Idolatry. But which of the two copies will ye ascribe to Athanasius? For he that reads them advisedly, will rather take them for two several men's doings, than think either of them to be written by Athanasius. And therefore y Praefat. in Athanas. Nanius a great Doctor of Louvain, makes no bones to place it amongst those writings, which are none of Athanasiuses: neither indeed was it ever known, till that idolatrous second Council of Nice, eight hundred years after Christ very near. Yea the story itself seems to have been younger, than Athanasius, almost four hundred years: For z In chronic. Anno 775. Sigibort affirms it happened in the year 775: a Histor. ●…onibard. legend. cap. 30. D. B. P. Lib. 1. collectam. Lib. 14. hist. 1. 2 the history of Lombardie, in the year 750. speaker A. W. That S. Luke the evangel drew the Picture of our blessed Lady, is registered by Theodorus Lector 1000 years ago, and Metaphrasies, In vita Lucae, and Nicephorus. Those fragments of b Theodor. in Callecta. Theodorus gathering deserve no such credit, that a thing done more than five hundred years before he was borne, and recorded by none of his ancients, that are known, should, upon his bare word, be held for true. But let us grant as much as you desire, that S. Luke drew the Virgin Maries counterfeit. What of that? will it follow that therefore it is fit or lawful to make Images, now in this certain danger of Idolatry, when no man knows any more of the Virgin's favour and feature, than he doth of our great Grandmother Euahs'? It should seem c Callistus lib. 2. cap. 24. Nicephorus did not give any great credit to the story, though Theodorus had written it long before him. For he brings it in with a suspicious preface: It is said: And I marvel, if you read it in Nicephorus yourself, that you add not the rest of his report, in that place, of the Evangelist Luke's picturing our Saviour also, and the chief of his Apostles. Simeon Metaphrastes is too young to witness a matter, done so many years before his birth. speaker D. B. P. Tertullian, an author of the second hundredth year after Christ, hath Lib. 2. de pudicitia. left written, that the Image of Christ in shape of a shepherd carrying a sheep on his shoulders, was engraven upon the holy Chalices used in the Church. speaker A. W. d Tertul. lib. 1. de pudicit. Tertullian hath left this written, that the image of a Shepherd carrying a sheep, was engraven upon the Cups or Chalices: but he never gives any signification of the holiness of those Cups, nor approbation of the picture, further than to make them serve his purpose, to show, that by the sheep all kind of men are signified, as well Heathen as Christians. And surely he that reads e Tertul. de idololat. his book of Idolatry, and considers that he makes Idols and Images all one for their nature, will not think him any favourer of Images. speaker D. B. P. In the time of S. Chrysostom, they were so common, that they were carried in rings, drawn on cups, painted in Chambers. See Theodoret. In histor. relig. in vita Simeonis Stelitae. Aug. lib. 2. de cons. evang. cap. 10. And the 7. Synod Act. 4. This briefly of Images in general: Now a word or two of the sign of the Cross, which our Protestants have banished from all their followers: Nevertheless it cannot be denied to have been in most frequent use among the best Christians of the Primitive Church. speaker A. W. We also, as they had in Chrysostom's time, and in all times and places, where the Art of graving and painting was used, have Images in Rings, Cups, Chambers. But what Images, or to what purpose? you neither tell us what they were, nor quote the place, that we may look and examine the matter. f Hist. Theod. in Simeone cap. 26. Theodoret speaks not of Images in Rings, Cups, or Chambers, but only tells of a report, that the people of Rome did set up little Images of Simeon in all g In Officinal, vestibulis, & p●rticibus. their shopdoores, and walking places, or galleries. But Artificers are no fit judges in such controversies; and yet it is but a report that they did so. h Aug. lib. 1. de cens. evang. cap. 10. Austin jesting at them, who say that our Saviour Christ writ certain books to his Apostles Peter and Paul; wherein the art whereby he wrought his miracles was contained: I believe (saith he) they hit upon these two Apostles, as the men to whom he writ, because they had seen him and them in many places painted together. But what approbation gives he to the use of these pictures? So (saith he) they deserve to err, that seek Christ and his Apostles, not in the holy books, but upon painted walls. As for that i Concil. Nicen. 2. idolatrous Synod, it is ridiculous to urge the authority of that against us, when you know we wholly disclaim it, and plead against it from the k Concil. Francofor. Council of Frankford, and the book l Carolus magnus de imagine. of Charlemaigne the Emperor, in both which it was refuted and condemned. If you bring no better proof for the Cross in particular, than you have for mages in general, I doubt me the Protestants will not repeal the act of banishment made against it, whatsoever you talk of the most frequent use thereof among the best Christians in the Primitive Church. speaker D. B. P. Tertullian hath these words, At every going forward and return, when De corona militis. we dress us and pull on our shoes, when we wash and sit down, at the lighting of Candles, and entering into our Chambers, finally, when we set ourselves to any thing, we make the sign of the Cross on our foreheads. speaker A. W. The sign of the cross as it is here spoken of by you, doth not indeed belong to this question, which is of such images as are set up to be outwardly worshipped, such as this sign of the cross never was among the ancient Christians. But because, as you say, it is the form that you worship which is made, though it continue not, and for that your Divines maintain the worshipping of it even outwardly, as I will show, let it pass in the rank where you have set it. Now that the sign of the cross is so to be worshipped, first m Bella m. de imag. lib. 2. cap. 19 Bellarmine shows, where he saith, The sign of the cross which is made upon the forehead, or in the air, is holy, and to be worshipped. n Costerus in Enchir. de sanct. cruse, cap. 11. Costerus his fellow jesuit speaketh more plain, Christians (saith he) ever since Christ's time, have always worshipped with great reverence both the wood of our Lords cross itself, and the sign of the cross, with which they daily fence themselves. o Suarez in Thom par. 1. disp. 56. sect. 3. Suarez another jesuit is more plain than he, The sign of the cross (saith he) is worthy of reverence and adoration, for it hath the use and signification of a Sacrament, And it skills not that it is made in a matter, or by an action that passeth away, because the only difference of the matter when the fashion is all one, hinders not the adoration. p jacob, de Graph. decis. aur. lib. 2. c. 12 sect. 15. jacobus de Graphijs giveth also the reason of this, We worship it (saith he) with divine honour, for that it puts us in mind of our Lord's passion; which is performed by the sign of the cross on the forehead, as well as by a cross painted on the wall. Lastly, q Vasq. de ador. cultu lib. 3. cap. 4. num. 61. pag. 493. Gabriel Vasquez saith, that the cross of Christ, by what means soever expressed, is worthy of veneration, as well as the cross itself on which he suffered. That the cross was in common use among the ancient Christians, it was never denied, yet have we no record of it in any ancient authentical writer before Ireneus, as r Fulke against Marti. Art. 1. fol. ●38. Doctor Fulke hath truly avouched against martial. As for the counterfeit writings of s Ignat. epist. ad Philip. Ignatius, t Martial. epist. ad Burdeg. Martialis of Burdeaul. and u Dionys. Eccles. hierar. cap. 2. 4. 5. 6. Dionysius Areopagita, both the stile and the matter refute the titles, and bewray partly ignorance even in the language, and partly authors of later times. x Xystus Betul. ad Lact. lib. 4. cap. 27. Instit. Xystus Betuleius would have us believe his word, that the ceremony of crossing was used even when the Apostles laid on their hands, but neither doth the scripture affirm any such thing, neither brings he any authority or reason to prove it. But let the author of it be unknown as he is, yet if the occasion and use of it were certain and warrantable, there were more reason to find fault with the leaving of it. But who can resolve us of this doubt? y August. in Psal. 141. & de verb. Do●●. ser. 18. & de verb. Apost. ●erm. 8. Austin seems to be very uncertain, fetching this custom of crossing from a desire to make profession of Christianity in the sight of the pagans. z Aug. de Catechi●. rudib. cap. ●0 & in joa. 〈◊〉 55. ad cap. 1●. He seems otherwhere to attribute it to an imitation of the jewish Ceremony, in marking the door posts with the blood of the paschal lamb. What should I speak of the doubt concerning the form itself, which is the thing that you professedly worship? What is that form? the sau●●oir or S. Andrews cross? resembling as some think not the cross of our Saviour, but the a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 X 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. first letter of his name in Greek, b Euseb. in vit. Constant. lib. 1. cap. 25. which also was set on the top of Constantine's standard. Or is it nothing else but two cross lines, cutting each other in a right angle, as it is commonly made, which some will have to be resembled by that standard of Constantine's, the staff and the banner making such a cross, c Ambros. ser. 56. like to the mast and the sail yard. It is all one what the form was if the use were good and lawful. But how shall that be avowed when it is not certain what it was. All which notwithstanding we are desirous so to interpret the ancients concerning this point, as that we may free them from superstition if it be possible. We would gladly therefore expound their speeches of the efficacy and virtue of the cross, not of the wood nor of the form, but of the passion and sufferings of our Saviour Christ, d 1. Cor. 1. 17. 18. Gal. 2. 16. & 6. 14. Eph. 2. ●6. Phil. 3. 16. Col. 1. 20. in which sense the scripture speaks of it most truly and gloriously. I could to this purpose allege divers places out of the Fathers, but I must needs confess that I can bring many other out of their writings which will not bear that exposition. What if I should say that they used it only as an outward gesture when they prayed to God for any blessing, and therefore continually signed themselves as e Tertul. de coron militis. Tertullian, and f August. de ●ectit. ●ath. conue●… & de tempor. ser. 100L. Austin show? I could cite some places, by which this conjecture might be made somewhat likely; yea I could add hereunto the judgement of your late jesuits, who g Coster. Enchir. de cruse. c. 11. pag. 360. acknowledge that use of the cross amongst them, and h Vasquez de adora. cultu lib. 3. cap. 5. num. 7. p. 500 deny that it puts any virtue into the thing that is signed. But neither would this content you, and many speeches of the ancients are such as can admit no such interpretation. Wherefore all that I will answer is this, that howsoever the use of crossing (as it was amongst the Fathers within 200. years after our saviours ascension, and for a long time afterward) cannot be sufficiently warranted by any ground of scripture: yet the Cross was never made an Idol, by any outward worship amongst them, as it is altogether with you Papists. Whereupon it follows that the testimonies which you allege out of the Fathers are falsely applied by you to countenance such Idolatry as they never dreamt of. speaker D. B. P. S. Ambrose exhort, us to begin all our works with the sign of the Serm. 43. Crosse. speaker A. W. To that of Ambrose I answer more particularly, first, that your quotation of his i Ambr. ser. 84. 84. Sermon is false, for there is not a word of any such matter in all that Sermon. Secondly, that in k Ambr. ser. 43. the place you mean he saith not we must begin all our works with the sign of the cross, but rather speaketh of prayer, according as before I expounded him. We must (saith Ambrose) when we rise give thanks to God, and l Omne diei opus in signo facere salvatoris. 11 S. In loan. do every work we take in hand all the day in the sign of our Saviour, that is, with prayer to Christ. speaker D. B. P. S. Augustine, What is that ensign of Christ, which all men know, but the Cross of Christ, the which sign, unless it be made on the foreheads of the faithful, yea, on the water by which they are regenerate, and on the Oil and Chrism, wherewith they are anointed, and on the sacrifice wherewith they are nourished, not one of them are orderly and duly administered. Our Protestant's then that have neither holy Oil, nor sacrifice to make the Cross upon, are in pitiful taking. speaker A. W. Such outward things not enjoined by our Saviour nor his Apostles, follow the custom of particular Churches and times: so that though in m Aug. in ●●a. tract. 118. Augustine's days the Sacrament was appointed to be so administered, and otherwise the action was not n R●… perficitur. duly and orderly performed; yet we may and do baptise well enough, as long as we keep the order commanded by our Saviour, and practised by his Apostles: Baptizm (saith o Matth. 28. 19 he) in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the holy ghost, which they did as occasion offered itself in any common water, without oil or cross. speaker A. W. But hear also what some of the best Greek Doctors do say of this D. B. P. And with him is answered. Ca●●●h. 4. You 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 H●…m. De Spirit sanct. 27. same sign of the Crosse. S. Cyrill agreethfully with Tertullian, saying: Make this sign of the Cross both eating and drinking, both sitting and standing, and walking and speaking, in sum, at all times. Saint Basil accounteth this making of the sign of the Cross among some of the principal Traditions of the Apostles. p Basil. de Spirit. sanct. c. 27. Basil lived 300. years after the Apostles, and recites other customs as Apostolical traditions, which have neither any warrant by likelihood of reason, nor some of them allowance by the practice of your own Church. Turning to the East when we pray, one of his traditions hath no ground of reason: so the soul be present with God (saith q Eucher. in lib. Reg. comment. lib. 2. cap. 58. Eucherius) there is no commandment for the site of the body. And r Socrat. hist. lib. 5. cap. 21. Socrates writeth, that the Christians of Antioch turned to the west when they prayed. Another of his traditions is concerning the words of invocation, when the bread and wine are showed in the Sacrament, which form of invocation your Church doth not observe at your elevation, nor in any part of your Mass. speaker A. W. Origen yieldeth one reason why we make this sign, affirming that D. B. P. Hom. 6. in cap. 15. Ex. fear and trembling doth fall upon the evil spirits, when they see the sign of the Cross made with faith. That of s Origen hom. 6. in cap. 15. Exod. Origen, as also many other sentences of the Fathers, applied by you Papists to the sign of the cross, is spoken of our saviours death upon the cross by a Metonymy of the subject. What (saith Origen) do the devils fear? at what tremble they? without doubt at the cross of Christ, whereby he triumphed over them, whereby they were stripped of their principality and power. Fear therefore and trembling shall fall upon them when they shall see the sign of the cross t In nobis fideliter 〈◊〉. fixed in us by faith, and the greatness of that arm which our Lord stretched out upon the cross as he said, u Esay. 65. 2. All the day long have I stretched out my hands. Therefore they will not fear thee, x Nisi videant in to crucem Christi. unless they see in thee the cross of Christ, unless thou also can say, y Gal. 6. 14. God forbid I should glory but in the cross of my Lord Christ, by which the world is crucified to me, and I to the world. But it is not the wooden cross, nor the sign of it that crucifieth the world, but the power of our saviours death. speaker A. W. S. Gregory Nazianzen reporteth, that the wicked Apostata julian, being frighted with spirits made the sign of the Cross, which he had renounced, D. B. P. Orat. 1. in lulian. and yet it delivered him from them. It is but a report, that z Nazianz. in julia. orat. 2. quae est 47. Nazianzen makes upon other men's credit: It is (saith he) reported by many, and a Non abhorret ab illius moribus. it is not unlike his custom. But, which is more to be observed, it must either come from julian himself, or the conjuror who was then alone with him at his Conjurations, or else it must have been devised by some man that could not see it. Now judge you what credit is to be given to such report. Yet we deny not but this might be; the Lord, to julians' further just condemnation, showing his mighty power, when he was called upon by him, in so great an extremity. speaker D. B. P. S. Chrysostom most largely discourseth of the glorious use of the Cross Ora. quod Christus sit Deus. See the place, among an hundred other commendations of it, he hath these words: That the heads of Kings are not so decked with their Diadems, as with the sign of the Cross, and concludeth, that all men strive to pass other in taking to them this admirable Cross, and that no man was ashamed of it, but esteemed themselves more beautified with that, than with many jewels, borders and chains, garnished with Pearl and precious stones. speaker A. W. There is no doubt but a true Christian thinks himself more honoured by the profession of his faith in Christ, than by any, or all the ornaments in the world. While it was needful to make show of that profession by such means, we condemn not the use of it. Now that occasion amongst Christians in these parts is ceased, and the thing grown to monstrous superstition, we make no question, but that if they lived now, and saw the abuse of that custom of theirs, they would both refrain and abolish it, if it lay in them. It is not their using of that sigue in such sort, as I have showed, but your idolatrous abusing of it, and discrediting of it and them, which we mislike. Neither is it at all against reason, or custom of the Church, that such outward actions, as some special occasion bred, should with that occasion die and cease. speaker D. B. P. H●… quantum mutamur ab ipsis: Alas, what a pitiful change is this, that that which was of the best Christians reputed dear and holy, should now be accounted a point of superstition and plain witchcraft. speaker A. W. But what is all this ado about the Cross to the credit of Images? seeing (as I noted afore) there is nothing affirmed in the testimonies you bring but that the sign of the cross was used, either to testify the profession of Christianity, or as an outward gesture in calling upon the name of our Saviour Christ? speaker D. B. P. By all which we learn, that the best Christians both used always and highly esteemed of holy Images, even from our saviours own days, and God himself hath by divine testimony of miracles recommended them unto us, not only for the civil and historical uses of them, but more to honour them whose Pictures they were: for no man in his right wits can deny but that it is and hath always been reputed, as a great honour done to the deceased, to erect him an image, to eternise the memory of his noble acts: as also that it is a great encouragement to all beholders of such Pourtraits, to endeavour to incitate their glorious examples: The very sight of the Image of Polemon, a most chaste and holy parsonage, moved an unchaste woman to change her life, as out of S. Gregory Synod. 7. act. Nazianzen is related. speaker A. W. Having so great testimony for the ancient use of Images, and such It might become your obedience, to give him such title as his Majesty vouchsafeth him. manifold commodities, by the discreet and holy practice of them, he must needs be furiously transported with blind zeal, that makes war against Crosses, and burns holy Pictures; as of late the superintendant of Hereford did in the market place openly. Here is not one sufficient testimony (as I have showed) to prove that ever there were any such Images, as you speak of; then what miracles could be wrought for the countenancing of our Saviour by them? It is an honour indeed to have Images erected in memory of the deceased, but not for him that is God: neither is it a religious honour, but a civil; proceeding not from our devotion, but from our love, whatsoever the ground of our love be, in respect of them whom we so honour. How slight and vain a motion to the imitation of any man's virtues the sight of his Image is, let all experience testify; which indeed can bring no more but the remembrance of it at the most. But suppose there were some more force in it, all the helps that can be imagined likely to come by it, will not countervail the danger of Idolatry, and so the breach of God's commandment, in erecting them for any use of Religion; whereupon Idolatry will most certainly ensue. That fable of I cannot tell what b A man, saith Charlemaigne out of the Colicill. lib. 3. c. 21 pag. 402. woman, moved to some civil outward carriage by the beholding of Polemons Image, seems to have been devised out of the Heathen history of another Polemon, who was brought to the like civil virtue by hearing the Philosopher Xenocrates discourse of continency and temperancy; a far more likely matter, whether it be true or false. But what have we to do with that lying Conventicle, which tells us of such a thing out of Athanasius, as was written (if they say true) some four hundred years before, and never heard of until that time, when there was such special need of it? No, no, that dealing of that Council is too well known, to purchase any credit with men, that will not wilfully be blinded. In the like sort, they deal with Basil, Cyril, Ambrose, Chrysostome, Gregory, and the Apostles themselves, whose decrees they fetch out of a counterfeit Synod at Antioch. The difference. speaker W. P. Our dissent from them touching images stands in three points. I. The Church of Rome holds it lawful for them to make images to resemble God, though not in respect of his divine nature: yet in respect of some properties and actions. We on the contrary hold it unlawful for us to make any image, any way to represent the true God: or, to make an image of any thing in way of religion, to worship God, much less the creature thereby. For the second commandment saith plainly, Exod. 20. 4. Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image, or the likeness of any thing in heaven etc. The Papists say the commandment is meant of the images of false gods. But, will they, nill they, it must be understood of the images of the true jehovah; and it forbids us * So saith the Roman Catech. 2. Com. to resemble God, either in his nature, properties, or works, or to use any resemblance of him for any sacred use: as to help the memory, when we are about to worship God. Thus much the holy Ghost who is the best expounder of himself, teacheth most plainly, Deut. 4. 15. 16. Thou sawest no image at all (either of false or true god) and therefore thou shalt not make any likeness of anything. And again, the Prophet Esay, c. 40. 18. reproving idolaters asketh to whom they will liken God, or, what similitude will they set up to him. And vers. 21. Know ye nothing? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? as if he should say, have ye forgotten the second commandment, that God gave unto your fathers: And thus he flatly reproves all them that resemble the true God in images. speaker D. B. P. This passeth all kind of impudency to quote the Roman Catechism in defence of that opinion, which it doth of set purpose disprove. It teacheth indeed, that the very nature and substance of God, which is, wholly spiritual, cannot be expressed and figured by corporal lineaments and colours, and all edgeth the places produced by M. Perkins to prove that unlawful; yet by and by annexeth these words: Let no man therefore think it to be against religion, and the Law of God, when any person of the most holy Trinities is portrayed in such sort as they have appeared, either in the Old or New Testament, etc. But let the Pastor teach, that not If you had grace, you would not say so. Belike some nature of God not pro●●● 〈◊〉. the nature of God, but certain properties and actions appertaining to God, are represented in such Pictures. If the man be not past grace he will surely blush at such a foul error. His texts of Scripture are taken out of the same place of the Catechism, and do prove only, that God's proper nature cannot nor may not be resembled in any corporal shape or likeness. speaker A. W. If you would have dealt as kindly with Master Perkins in this quotation, as I have dealt with you in many, you might have applied it to the former part, that the commandment is meant of the Images of the true jehovah: which your Catechism grants, though only so far as concerns the expressing of his form by an Image, as yourself also confess. And the c Concil. Trid. sell. 25. de 〈◊〉. Council of Trent affirms that to be un- being all one in the coveting of wife, and coveting of house, servant, maid, ox, ass, and whatsoever else, as the h Rom. 7. 7. Apostle expresseth it, without mentioning any particular. But the two first differ almost as much as may be. The first forbidding the worship of any other God, but the true: the second prohibiting the worshipping of him by an Image or Idol. The last reason, which only your Catechism brings, beside Augustine's authority, and custom of your Church, is insufficient also. For it was very fit that God should add that reason of promise, and threatening to that, rather than any of the rest, because he had special care of that, and knew that the jews, and all men generally, were likely to worship him after their own devices, and namely by Images. Beside, is not the reason annexed to the third Commandment as general, that God will not hold him guiltless which breaks any of his laws? why then do you not make that also a part of the first Commandment? speaker W. P. And the distinction they make that an Image is the representation of true things, an Idol of things supposed, is false. speaker D. B. P. But Master Perkins goeth on and saith, that our distinction between Image and Idol (that an Image representeth a thing that is, but Idol, a thing supposed to be, but is not) is false and against the ancient writers, who make it all one: We prove the contrary, First, by the authority of the ancient Doctors, Origen and Theodoret, who in express words deliver the same difference of Image and Idol: which is taken out of How. 8. in Exod. Q. 38. in Ex. 1. Cor. 8. S. Paul, laying that an Idol is nothing in the world: that is, such Idols as the Heathen take for their Gods, are nothing formally, that is, though they be great pieces of wood or stone materially; yet they represent a thing that is not, that is, such a thing to be a God, which is nothing less. Let M. Perkins but quote one place in the whole Bible, where they are used both for one. I will cite some, where if you use the one for the other, you must offend all good Christian ears; As where man is said to be made after the Image of God, may you say after the Idol of God? Christ is said to be the Image of his Father; will you call him the Idol of his Father? Surely he cannot deny, but the seventh general Council holden about 900. years past and gone, is so far off from making Image and Idol all one, that it doth accurse all them, who call the Image of Christ and his Saints, Idols. speaker A. W. Master Perkins saith no more, but that it is false, without adding, that it is against the ancient writers; and yet he might have said so well enough, for all Origen and Theodoret. For they two are but a few of many, and by their other writings overthrow that distinction betwixt Image and Idol. To make the case plain, we must understand, that they call an Image the resemblance of any thing that hath a being in nature. For example, if you carve, grave, paint, or cast the form of a man, horse, tree, plant, fowl, fish, Sun, Moon, Star, or any such like thing, you make an Image: but if you make a monster, as a man half flesh, half fish, like our Mairmaides; or a beast compounded of divers parts of sundry creatures; for example, the head of a man, the body of a horse, the feet of a lion, etc. or in a word, as the common opinion is of Gryphins, which are said to have the forepart like an Eagle, and the hinder part like a Lion; that is an Idol: because in truth there is no such creature in the world. By this it is manifest, that no shape of a man, by their doctrine, can be an Idol. For that shape hath some thing like it in nature. Yet i Origen. lib. 1. in cap. 1. ad Rom. Origen doubts not, with the Apostle, to condemn them of Idolatry, who worshipped God in the likeness of an Image of a corruptible man, of fowls, four-footed beasts, and creeping things. So doth k Theodor. de de curan. Graec. affect. ser. 3. de Dijs & Angel. Theodoret, where he disputes against the Gentiles, out of that same place of the Apostle, reciting his words, who calls those Idols of the Gentiles, l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. likenesses of the image of a corruptible man. Theodoret grounds his interpretation upon the words of the commandment mistaken, but he meddles not so much as by any signification with that place of the Apostle. Indeed Origen hath it, but not in your sense, as appeareth by your exposition, which agrees not with Origen nor Theodoret about the difference betwixt an Image and an Idol. For you coming nearer to the m 1. Cor. 8. 5. Apostles meaning, expound that Nothing, to signify no God, or divine power, as if the error were in making that a God, which is nothing less. But they upon whom you would build your distinction, make an Idol such a shape as hath no substance answering to it in nature. And therefore they deny that the image of a man is an Idol, though it be worshipped, as I showed before: you make it an Idol, be it of what shape it will, if it represent such a thing to be God, as is nothing less. He makes an Idol (saith Origen) who (according to the Apostle that saith an Idol is nothing) makes that which is not. Mark you what Origen saith? That which is not; you say, that which is not God. But he proceeds. What is that (saith he) which is not? a shape which the eye hath not seen, but the mind feigns to itself. For example, if a man be made with a dog's head, etc. And Theodoret propounds for example of an Idol Sphinx the monster, n Huginus fab. 〈◊〉. c. 151. which had a maid's face, a birds wing, and a dog's body, and the Tritons or Sea-gods, half men, half fishes; and the Centaurs, half men, half horses. So that the only authors you can bring of that distinction, make nothing at all for it, as you understand it: yea they make against it, call that an Image, which you term an Idol, namely the statue of jupiter, Mars, Venus, and the rest of the heathen Idols, who both had the shapes of men or women, and that such men and women as had a true being in nature, though they were no Gods. Besides, Origen the first founder of that distinction, brings it but doubtfully, with o Opinor. I think; though Theodoret 150 years after came to affirm it without doubting. But what skills it whether there be such a distinction or no betwixt the Greek words, seeing the p Exod 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hebrew, wherein the Commandment was written will not admit any such difference, and both Origen and Theodoret hold Images forbidden by the Commandment as well as Idols; and your vulgar translation follows not the Greek, but the q Sculptile. Hebrew? Yea the Greek translators r 〈◊〉. 16 1. Deut. 7. 5. & 1●. 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉. 15. jud. 17. 13. 14. & 18. 14. 18. 30. otherwhere and that often for the same Hebrew word, give the s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. general Greek word, that expresseth it very fully, and sometimes the very word t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Image. But I must handle this point more largely than I thought, because you challenge us to bring one place in the whole Bible where they are used both for one, which I show thus. The word which in the Commandment they translate Idol, in u Isay. 40. 〈◊〉. another place they interpret Image. He seeks a cunning workman to prepare an Image; and in the 19 verse, The workman melteth an Image. Besides, the word Image is often put for the Idols of the heathen. x 2. Reg 1●. 1● Then the people of the land destroyed the house of Baal with his Altars and his Images; y Ezech 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 16. 17. & ●3. 14. They made Images of their Abominations. Thou madest thyself Images of men. When she saw men painted upon the wall the Images of the Chaldeans, that is, the Idols o● the Chaldeans, attired after the fashion of the people of that country. Lastly, that 〈◊〉 word which the Chalk Paraphrast 〈◊〉. useth in the Commandment, and so generally, where the word of the Commandment is in the Hebrew, the Greek doth commonly translate Image, as you may see in the places last recited. I think it is very hard to find any two words that agree in all significations, both proper and tropical. Neither do we say that Idol may be used wheresoever image may, for custom is the rule of speech. But we deny both that distinction which Origen devised, and that which you would have passed for currant, as if Idol did signify some certain kind of shape, and not generally any form, as the word Image doth. speaker W. P. Tertullian * De Idol. c. 3. saith, that every form or representation is to be termed an Idol. speaker D. B. P. But Tertullian (saith M. Perkins) affirmeth them to be all one; not so De Idololar. neither: For he maketh Idolum a diminuture of ●●dos, which signifieth a form or similitude: So that Jdolon, is but a small similitude or slender Image, not so much for the quantity, as for that it representeth but darkly. speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not say so of Tertullian, that he affirms them to be all one, but that Tertullian saith Every form or representation is to be termed an Idol. 〈◊〉 (saith b Tertull. de Idolola●● 3. Tertullian) in Greek signifies formam, a form or shape, from thence by derivation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is framed, and hath in like sort with us made the word Formulam, therefore c Omnis for●…, 〈◊〉 formula. every shape great or little must be called an Idol. Thence comes Idolatry, which is any service about any Idol. judge yourself now whether Master Perkins did not report tertullian's opinion truly, and whether you do not wrong him by making him say that he never meant. So do you Tertullian himself, in giving a false reason of the word not intended by him. And howsoever the word may in derivation be a diminutive, yet in use it is not so, but signifieth any shape great or little, representing a thing perfectly or imperfectly, as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth. speaker W. P. And Isidore * Etym. lib. 8. saith, that the heathen used the names of image and idol indifferently in one and the same signification. speaker D. B. P. Eustathius and excellent Greek interpreter, upon the eleventh book of Homer's Odyssea, describeth Idolum to signify a vain and vanishing Image, as the shadow of a man, a ghost, or fantastical imagination. And so it cannot be, that all profane Authors use these two words indifferently, seeing both in proper signification, and by the declaration of the learned, there is great difference between them. speaker A. W. d Eustath. in Hormer. Odyss. 11. Eustathius doth not undertake to deliver in that place the proper nature of the word, but to show what Homer there means by it, namely, that he useth it to signify the ghosts or shapes of men departed, e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. fashioned of air, or f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. imprinted in the air by a certain shadow or slight resemblance, where the g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. very word coming from image, is put to express the likeness. The same word (Idol) Homer useth h Homer. Iliad. lib. 5. otherwhere to signify the shape or likeness which Apollo made of Aeneas to save him from Diomedes. Both these kinds of Idols Virgil (who understood Homer well enough, and knew the nature and use of Greek and Latin words) calls Images. For the former, viz. the shapes of the deceased, thus he speaks of Aeneas wife Creusa, i Virgil. Aeneid. lib. 2. Infoelix simulachrum atque ipsius umbra Creüsae, visa mihi ante oculos, & nota maior image: where having termed Creusa's ghost first a likeness, and then a shadow, last of all he calls it an Image, and presently after comparing it to the wind, and to a sleep or a dream, he gives it the name of Image again. Ter frustra comprensa manus effugit image, par levibus ventis volucrique simillima somno. So he speaks of k Virgil. Aeneid. 〈◊〉. 3. Anchises ghost, using the very same verses, and in the l Lib. 4. fourth book. Turbida tenet imago; so again of him Tua tristis Imago. And of Adrastus, m Lib. 6. Adrasti pallentis Imago; yea the apparitions of the Centaurs, and Sea-Monsters, which by origen's distinction are Idols, Virgil calls n Lib. 6. — Tenues sine corpore vitas, and saith that they fly up and down,— Cava sub imagine formae. The other shapes made of air, or some such thin stuff, he describes by the same word Image, as in that fiction of Aeneas shape, made by juno to draw Turnus out of the battle, which he cais o Lib. 10 — Tenuem sine viribus umbram, and compareth it to the ghosts of the deceased, and to apparitions in dreams. This he calls an Image, At primas laeta ante acies exultat imago, which Homer would have termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Whom would you refute by this? p Isidor. Etymol. lib. 8. Isidore is the author, Master Perkins the reporter only. But you strike at adventure, not respecting where the blow light, but where you mean to hit; yet you should have said no more than they do, that the heathen use the names indifferently; not that all profane authors do so, and you should have understood them aright too, as I showed before; not that both words are used in all significations, in which either is, but that they are used indifferently for any kind of shape, whether it have something or nothing answering to it in any true natural being. speaker W. P. And. S. Steven in his apology, Act. 7. 41. calls the golden calf an Idol. speaker D. B. P. But S. Stephen calls the golden calf an Idol, so it was indeed: What is that to the purpose? speaker A. W. Do you ask what it is to the purpose, that * Act. 7. 41. S. Stephen calls the golden Calf an Idol? it directly overthrows the distinction against which Master Perkins disputes. For a Calf is a thing that hath a real being in nature, and is not an imagination of the brain, as Sphinx, and Triton, and such like are, according to the authors you allege in this case. speaker D. B. P. Hierome * In Isai. 37. saith, that idols are images of dead men. speaker W. P. And S. jerom saith, That Idols are the Images of deadmen (add) that are taken for Gods: True, many Idols be Images: all such as truly represent any person that was once living here; but no Images be Idols, unless it be taken for a God: And so Idols requires besides the Image, that it be made a God, or the Image of a false God. speaker A. W. If we add your gloss, we shall add nothing in defence barbarous Nations, Scythians, Numidians, Seres, and Persians; he answers, that they agree indeed in the matter, refusing to build, or use any Altars and Images, but that the reasons of their opinions are divers; they following I know not what fancies, the Christians refraining these things, in obedience to God's Commandments, namely the first and second, which he there recites. Therefore Origen holds it forbidden in those Commandments to make, or use any Image in the service of God. To this doctrine of Origen the practice of the Primitive Church is agreeable, that I may please you with more testimonies. We are slatly forbidden (saith a Clemens Alexa●… in 〈◊〉 ad ge●…s. Clement of Alexandria) to use that deceitful craft or art. For the Prophet saith, Thou shalt not make the likeness of any thing in heaven, or earth below. And again, We have no b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. material image, but such an Image as is perceived by the understanding: God, who only is the true God, is conceived by understanding, not by sense. c Clemens Stromat. lib. 6. In another place: Moses, many ages ago, made a direct law, that we should not make any graven, cast, or painted image; that we might not used sensible things, but might pass to the consideration of those things which are perceived by the understanding. And further, d Ibid. The daily fight or beholding of an Image, causeth the majesty of God to become vile and contemptible; and, to worship, by a material thing, that which is conceived by the understanding, is to make it vile by sense. God (saith e Tertul de Idololatr c. 4. Tertullian) forbids as well the making as the worshipping of an Idol. And afterward, For this cause, namely to root out the matter of Idolatry, the law of God proclaims, Make no Idol: and adding, nor likeness of any thing in heaven, in earth, or in the Sea, forbids the servants of God all over the world to use that Craft. In f Tetul, de coron. militis. cap. 20. another place: john saith, Babes keep yourselves from Idols; he saith not now from Idolatry, as from the service of them, but from Idols, that is, from the shape of them. For it is an unworthy thing, that g Vt imago Dei vini, imago idoli & mo●●●i fiat. the image of an Idol, and dead thing, should be made the image of the living God. That I will not let pass (saith h Lilius Girald. de dijs gentium. Syn●…. 〈◊〉. Lilius Giraldus) that we Christians, as sometimes also the Romans, had no Images in the Primitive Church. Optatus an ancient Bishop of Africa, counted it a defiling of the Altar, to have an Image set upon it, and i Optat. lib. 3. penè in extremo. saith, that when it was reported, that Paul and Macarius would come and place an Image on the Altar, they that heard it were astonished at it, and accounted it as execrable to partake with it. Images (saith k August. in Psal. 113. Austin) are of more force to corrupt the miserable soul, because they have a mouth, eyes, ears, nostrils, hands, and feet, than to instruct it, because they speak not, hear not, smell not, handle not, walk not: out of which place of Austin, l Cassander. in consul. ad Masimil imperat. de imag cap. 21. Cassander concludes, that there was no use of Images in Churches in Augustine's time. The reason is alike, wheresoever they be used to religion. Arguments of the Papists. speaker W. P. The reasons which they use to defend their opinions are these. I. In Salomon's temple were erected Cherubins, which were images of angels, on the Mercieseat where God was worshipped: and thereby was resembled the Majesty of God, therefore it is lawful to make images to resemble God. Answ. They were erected by special commandment from God, who prescribed the very form of them, and the place where they must be set: and thereby Moses had a warrant to make them; otherwise he had sinned: let them show the like warrant for their images if they can. Secondly the Cherubins were placed in the holy of holies in the most inward place of the Temple, and consequently were removed from the sight of the people, who only heard of them: and none but the high Priest saw them, and that but once a year. And the Cherubins without the vail, though they were to be seen, yet were they not to be worshipped. Exod. 20. 4. Therefore they serve nothing at all to justify the images of the Church of Rome. Object. II. God appeared in the form of a man to Abraham, Gen. 18. 1. 13. and to Daniel, who saw the ancient of days sitting on a throne, Dan. 9 Now as God appeared, so may he be resembled: therefore (say they) it is lawful to resemble God in the form of a man, or any like image, in which he showed himself to men. Answ. In this reason the proposition is false: for God may appear in whatsoever form it pleaseth his majesty; yet doth it not follow; that man should therefore resemble God in those forms; man having no liberty to resemble him in any form at all: unless he be commanded so to do. Again, when God appeared in the form of a man, that form was a sign of God's presence only for the time when God appeared, and no longer; as the bread and wine in the sacrament are signs of Christ's body and blood, not for ever, but for the time of administration: for afterward they become again, as common bread and wine. And when the holy Ghost appeared in the likeness of a dove, that likeness was a sign of his presence no longer than the holy Ghost so appeared. And therefore he that would in these forms represent the Trinity, doth greatly dishonour God, and do that for which he hath no warrant. speaker D. B. P. Having confuted the Protestants arguments against the making of You overween yourself. You should show why. Genes. 18. Images, to represent some property or action of God; I now come unto the Catholic proof of them. The first reason set down by M. Perkins I reserve to the next point: the second is; God appeared in the form of a man to Abraham and to Daniel, Who saw the ancient of days sitting on a throne. Now as God hath appeared, so may he be purtraied Dan 9 and drawn: M. Perkins his answer is, not so, unless it be expressel●● commanded by God. Reply, This first is flat against his own second conclusion, where he holdeth it lawful to present to the eye in Pictures, any histories of the Bible in private places, both the foresaid apparitions be in the Old Testament, and therefore may be painted in private places, which cannot be truly done without you do represent God in the same likeness, as there he appeared. And what reason leadeth in words to represent those actions of God, the same serveth to express them in lively colours: Not so saith M. Perkins, because when God appeared in the form of man, it was a sign of God's presence, for that time only, and for no longer: be it so, it might notwithstanding be recorded in writing, that the memory of such majesty joined with loving kindness might endure longer. And if it pleased God, that this short presence of his should be written to be perpetually remembered, even so the same might be engraven in brasle, to recommend it to us so much the more effectually: For as the famous Poet doth by the light of nature sing. Segnius irritant animos demissa per aures, Quam quae sunt oculis subiecta fidelibus. Such worthy acts as by the ears are to the mind conveide, Do move us less than that which is by faithful eye descried. speaker A. W. It is your advantage that Master Perkins is not alive to answer you, who was better able to express his own meaning, than any otherman can be. But, in my opinion, it was his purpose, in that second conclusion, to grant the portraying of those histories only, which had nothing to be painted that was forbidden, as he always took the resembling of God to be. That was general, as rules of Grammar are; exceptions are not contradictions, but rather parts of those rules. If you speak of that reason, which moved God to inspire Moses for the writing of that story, we grant that he might to the same end have also enjoined the painting or engraving of it. But since it pleased him not so to do, we answer, that your argument proves nothing: There is the same reason (say you) for painting that, and such stories; therefore they may as well be painted, as written. The consequence is false: For the one was inspired, as I said, and the other not. Upon the writing, because it is God's word, we may look for a blessing from him. Not so upon our own devices, accompanied with danger of Idolatry. For my part (saving other men's better judgement) I persuade myself, that God, who commanded the Israelites to write the words of the law about their houses, and in other places for instruction and remembrance, would have enjoined the painting of his especial miracles and works in their favour, if he had not seen it to be dangerous, in respect of Idolatry that might ensue. For questionless, a picture or an Image is of great force, chiefly if the word be added for exposition of it; as we see in Emblems and Impresas. But this help, in the most wise judgement of God, was not thought so much worth, that for it the danger of Idolatry, to which all men are so prone by nature, should be adventured. Therefore we must not be led in this case by the show of human reason, but assure ourselves it was not for nothing, that God, when he taught the jews by signs and shadows, appointed not the use of painting divine histories, for instruction, memory, or devotion. Concerning m Horat. de art poetic. ad Pison. Horace's testimony, if you had seen as far into the meaning of it, as you imagine he did into the use of Pictures, you would never have alleged it to such purpose, as now you do. For you might easily have perceived, that the Poet grounds not his precept upon any light of nature, but upon experience of men's affections; and (which is the principal thing) that he speaks not at all of any dumb pictures, but of the lively gestures of Players upon the stage. Some things (saith he) are acted on the stage, some are only reported there, and supposed to be done in some other place. Now betwixt these is this comparison made, that those things do more affect which we see done, than those that we only hear reported; what is this to pictures? your Poetry fails you, as well as your Divinity. speaker D. B. P. This argument may be confirmed by the Pictures of Angels, of Virtues, and other such like of spiritual or accidental nature: for if such things as have no bodily proportion or shape, may notwithstanding be counterfeit and resembled in some qualities, why may not some property or action of God be in like manner represented? speaker A. W. But some qualities of Angels (say you) which are spiritual substances, and the qualities of Angels and men, which we call virtues (and which, by your leave, have as true a being as other creatures, though they never be of themselves, but adjoined to some spiritual subject) may be counterfeited and resembled. Therefore why may not some property or action of God be in like manner reputed? First, I think, you are hardly able to prove your antecedent, that such things may be resembled in outward forms for God's service. Secondly, though that be granted, yet your consequence is nought. For there is a commandment of God against the later, as we heard out of Clement, lest his Majesty should by such resemblances grow into contempt; to which I add, lest Idolatry should ensue upon it. speaker D. B. P. That thou mayest (Reader) understand the better what we meanee observe that Pictures represent after three sorts. Some express to the quick, the very shape, proportion and colour of the pattern; as the lively Picture of man, or of any such corporal thing: others represent things as they did appear and were acted, as if the Painter should express the meeting of God with Abraham and his entertainment, he must then resemble God in the same likeness of a man in which he showed himself to Abraham. speaker A. W. Thirdly, an Image of a spiritual thing, may be drawn not to resemble the nature of it, but to lead our understanding by such a similitude, into some better knowledge of that thing: so are Angels painted like goodly young men with wings, to teach us that they be of an excellent pure nature, ever flourishing and most ready to dispatch with all expedition any employment to which God sends them; and so may God the Father be portrayed, as a goodly old grave man, sitting in his throne of majesty, attended upon by millions of Angels, (as he is described in Daniel 9) to instruct us how he is eternal, insinit, wise, and of most redoubtable majesty: in either of these two latter sorts, we hold that God In the idolatrous second Council at Nice. may be represented, and so in the seventh general Council, the drawing of the holy Ghost, in form of a Dove, as he appeared. Mat. 3. is approved. Your discourse of the divers representations intended by pictures, I pass over, as nothing to purpose. For the reason of our denying images, is not only because God can not be resembled, as being a spirit and infinite, but principally, because he himself hath forbidden it, as a certain occasion of Idolatry. This painting of Angels like fair young men with wings, of denial from the Tabernacle built by Moses, wherein you will not remember that the pattern showed to Moses, was a direction for Solomon, and a warrant in all things that were agreeable to Moses work. But Master Perkins might have had enough to say, though he had answered directly, viz. that Solomon was a Prophet, and had also direction for his building from the kingly Prophet David his father. And therefore it doth not follow, that because Solomon made such Cherubins, every man that builds any Church may set up the like. Or, to speak indeed directly according to his consequent, it is not lawful for us to make images to resemble God, because Solomon adorned the Temple with Cherubins. speaker D. B. P. Moses indeed had an express precept for the making of them, as he had for the Curtains and Curteine-rods, and every particular belonging to the Tabernacle. But Solomon without any special commandment For it was a pattern appointed by God for his house. out of his high and holy wisdom, understood that he might most lawfully and laudably imitate that heavenly pattern of Moses: And as the building was far more sumptuous and stately: so in the number and quantity of Pictures exceeded, which is a sufficient instruction and warrant for all men after his days to make and set Images in the Church. And this finally M. Perkins seems to grant, when he saith, that these Cherubs without the veil, were there to be seen, but not to be worshipped: so that we have gotten one step further; that Images may not only be made, but also set up in the Churches. speaker A. W. Now to your Enthymem. In Salomon's temple there were Cherubins within the holy of holies, and without upon the walls and doors. Therefore all holy pictures may be placed in Churches. First concerning your Antecedent, it must be remembered, that those Cherubins were not in the utter court, where the people used to come and pray, but in the holy place where the Altar of Incense stood, and where n Luke 1. 9 10 Leuit. 16. 17. none came but the Priests, and in the holy of holies, into o Exod 30. 20 Leuit. 16. 2. Heb. 9 7. which the high Priest only might enter, and that but once a year, where the Ark was. So that these images were removed out of the people's sight, and that by Salomon's prophetical wisdom. Secondly there was no use of these images to any purpose of religion, but they served only for ornament and state, as the other work of the temple did, except the two Cherubins upon the mercy seat. Ere I answer to your consequence, I may not forget to note, that in your consequent or conclusion you call Images holy, as if by I know not what holiness, they had some right to be placed in Churches, as also you speak afterward, where should holy pictures of holy men be more properly bestowed then in holy places? Nothing is to be counted holy, but that which either hath a quality of holiness in it, as all that are sanctified have, or else is belonging to the service of God. And whatsoever is of this later kind is rather hallowed then holy, and hath no holiness in it, but by being consecrated to such a use. Neither is this consecration, as that of the Ceremonial law was, whereby a thing was made indeed holy ceremonially, as nothing with us can be, the ceremonies being abrogated. So that such things are no longer nor farther holy, than they are employed in that service; and therefore the water with which we baptise, and the bread and wine with which we celebrate the Supper of the Lord, after those actions are past, are no more holy than any other matter, bread, or wine. Images therefore can no way be holy more than any other work in Churches: therefore setting apart this bare title of holiness, I deny the consequence of your Enthymem: Solomon adorned the inner parts of the Temple where the people came not with pictures of Cherubins, Therefore it is lawful to set up images in Churches where the people ordinarily come. Who seeth not great difference between the Antecedent and the Consequent? To omit that which I answered before on Master Perkins behalf, concerning Salomon's warrant for his so doing, his father and himself being Prophets. speaker D. B. P. Which is fortified by the testimony of Tertullian, in the place cited before: where he saith, that our Saviour was Pictured upon holy Chalices, which were used at the Altars: and of Sozomenus, who witnesseth that our saviours Picture was taken into the Church. speaker A. W. The authority of other men's doings is of less weight. Tertullian saith, Christ was pictured like a Shepherd upon the chalices: Nazianzen trimmed up Images: Basil allowed of the Martyr Barlaams' picture in the Churches: Damasus saith Constantine set up a silver image of our Saviour: Chrysostome and Austin say, that the Cross was on the holy tables, Therefore it is lawful to set up Images in Churches. Of the Antecedent by and by, in the mean while I deny the consequence. They allow of Images, therefore they are lawful. If your Church think it possible for these men to err, as I am sure it doth, then may it not be taken for lawful because they approve it. But to the Antecedent, what doth p Tertull. de pudicit. lib. 1 Tertullian but tell us what the Chalice-maker had done in likelihood, for the setting forth of his work? both this, and that of q Sozom. hist. lib. 5. cap. 20. Sozomens report is answered before: it is not proved there ever was any such Image of our Saviour. speaker A. W. S. Gregory Nazianzen maketh mention of Images in the Church of D. B. P. Epist. 49. Orat. in Barlaam. Neocaesarea, trimmed up by himself. Saint Basil, pointeth to that holy man's Picture, standing in the Church. r Nazianzen. epist. 49. ad Olympium. Nazianzen and s Basil. orat. in Barlaam Martyr. Basil speak not of images to any use of Religion, whereof only our question is, but either for ornament, as the former saith, t Nazianzen. omne nostrum in eo exornando studium. All our labour and care in the beautifying of it; or for honour to the martyr, which was civil, not religious, and yet scarce justifiable. Damasus * In vita Silu. showeth how Constantine in the Church of S. john Lateran erected a silver Image unto our Saviour. speaker A. W. S. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 demonst. quod Christ. sit Deus: And S. Augustine * Serm. 19 de sanct. do teach, that the Cross was on the holy Tables, and used at all holy functions. This u Da●…us in vita Syluestri. report of Constantine's erecting a silver image, seemeth to depend upon the tale of his being baptized at Rome by Sylvester, whereas it is apparent by x Euseb. le vita Const. lib. 4. cap. 62. Eusebius and y Theodoret. hist. Eccles. lib. 1 cap 32. Theodoret that he was not baptized till the very end of his life, and in Asia, many hundred miles from that Church of Saint john Lateran in Rome, in Nicomedia, now called by the Turk who possesseth it, Nichor, a town of Bythinia. z Chrysost. in demonst. quòd Christus sit Deus. Chrysostome speaketh of the general use of the cross in all places, not for any holiness of the sign, but as a mark of profession. The cross (saith he) is in the purple robes, in the Crowns; the cross is at our prayers, the cross is in our armour, the cross is upon the holy table, the cross is over all the world, yea, the cross glisters above the sun. If this cross were an Image, a Optat. lib. 3. Optatus (as we heard before) counts the presence of it a defiling of the Altar. That place of b Aug. ser. 19 de Sanct. if it be Augustine's. Austin entreats of the cross, both for the sign, and image of it most superstitiously: ascribing strange effects to it, which no moderate or reasonable man can defend, except he will expound it as I showed before, of an outward ceremony used in prayer, to which purpose we may apply that speech of his in the end of that discourse, Look what the presence of Christ's body did upon the earth, that doth the famous memory of the victorious cross, with a faithful calling upon the name of Christ. Otherwise it is wonderful strange that Austin should so highly esteem of the cross, whereas Optatus a worthy Bishop of the same country, in c Anno 380. the beginning of Augustine's time accounts so meanly of it. speaker D. B. P. And the reason why Images should principally be set in Churches, is very pregnant. For where should holy Pictures of holy men be more properly bestowed, than in holy places? And the Church being a resemblance of heaven (as S. Paul teacheth,) is most conveniently decked up Hebr. 9 They are representations of them, as they were earthly creatures. with Images, the representations of heavenly creatures: that men entering into that holy place, may by the view and consideration of such a heavenly show, retire their minds from worldly business, and lift them up unto the sovereign Monarch of both heaven and earth. speaker A. W. The d Hebr. 9 23. Apostle saith no such thing of any Church now, but affirms, that the Tabernacle of the jews was ceremonially a shadow of heavenly things. And yet it would be remembered, that the Tabernacle and Temple had no Images, but in the holy places, where the people came not. We hold it very convenient to have our Churches modestly adorned, rather than sumptuously, and with such kind of ornaments, as may not carry away the mind by the outward sense, either to a vain imagination, or to some superstitious conceit. speaker D. B. P. Now let us come to those two obiectione of M. Perkins, which see me to be against the erection of Images in Churches. The first is out of the Council of Eliberis cap. 36. which commandeth, that nothing should be painted on the walls of the Church, that was adored of the people. Ans. That if the Council speak of the Image of God (in which sense. M. Perkins citeth it, and the word (adored) doth insinuate) than it may be said, that the Council inhibiteth that sort of God's Images, which are made to express the divine nature. If it be extended unto all sorts of Images: I answer, that they were then forbidden to be drawn upon the Church walls, but not to be set in Tables upon the Altar, or in any other place. The reason is, because that Council was holden in time of persecution, as appeareth by the twenty five Canon of it: and then, if the persecutor had found out the place of their assembly, as they often did: those Pictures must needs either have been defaced by themselves, or left unto the derision and despite of the Heathens; And Pictures also painted upon such poor walls as they had then to their Churches, would either by the moisture of the walls, or other incommodity, have been quickly disfigured: wherefore, to the greater honour of such sacred things, those grave Father's thought it not meet to have them drawn upon the Church walls, there being many more meet places for them in the Churches. speaker A. W. You e Concil. Eliber. cap. 36. come back now to those two allegations, which should, and might have been answered as fitly in their due place. Your first answer hath no show of reason in it. For it is absurd to imagine, that any Christians, to whom only the Council speaks, would think the divine nature, which is spiritual and infinite, could be expressed by any picture. But if it be possible for the people to be so blind, yet the Bishops and Ministers, who had the charge of such places, must needs know it to be unlawful, and unpossible. Besides, if they meant to forbid such Images only, why do they not call them Idols after your distinction? why do not they express their meaning more plainly, but speak so dangerously, to make all Images thought unlawful? As the word (Adored) was (in your opinion) a warrant for Master Perkins to apply that Canon to the Images of God; so by the same reason is the other word (worshipped) which the Council hath, a sufficient authority to stretch the decree to all Images that may be worshipped. Your conjectures are mere shifts, refuted by the very words of the Council. It is decreed (saith the Council) that there may be no Images in the Church: what will become then of your Images upon Altars, unless you will remove your Altars out of the Church? That which followeth, doth not respect the walls, more than any other part of the Church; but names them specially, upon which Images most commonly were painted. But what a toy is it, that you talk of persecutors finding out the place of their assembly, when they could hold a Council, and had Churches to repair to? Could their Churches be unknown? Further, if their care had been to provide, that the moisture of the walls might not disfigure the Images, they would have said plainly, We will have no Images on Church walls, lest that which is adored and worshipped, come to some disgrace: and this would also have included the other reason of the persecutors despite. But it is manifest, that the meaning of the decree is this, that they will not suffer any Images in Churches, because that which is worshipped and adored, may not be resembled by pictures. The decree indeed speaks only of the Images of God, to whom only religious adoration and worship is due, and may lawfully be performed. speaker D. B. P. The second objection is out of a postscript of Epiphanius letter, unto john Patriarch of jerusalem, in which is written, as M. Perkins falsely reporteth: that it is against the authority of Scripture, to see the Pictures of Christ, or of any Saint to hang in the Church. Ans. It is there only, to see the Picture of a man. Now that he should It is expr●… said. mean of Christ or of some Saint is only gathered, yet M. Perkins makes no bones to thrust them both into the Text: even so do we think that some old enemy of Images added that postscript unto Epiphanius letter. Our reasons are, because it hath no coherence with the former letter or st●e. Again, in the seventh Council, when all that could be found out of antiquity, was cited against Images: no tidings there of this place, which if it had been true, might have been one of the principal. thirdly, in the same Council, other two places brought, as it were out of Epiphanius 〈◊〉 6. works, were found to be none of his: And for Images was alleged, that Epiphanius own disciples erected an Image to their Master, and set it in the Church; which they would never have done, if he had taught them to be against the Scripture so to do. speaker A. W. Master Perkins doth not undertake to report Epiphanius words, but his matter, which he performs truly. I found (saith f Epiphan. 〈◊〉 ad ●●an. 〈◊〉 osol. Epiphanius, speaking of a Church at Anablatha, in his travel to Bethel) in the Church door a vail hanging, stained and painted, and having the Image as it were of Christ, or some Saint: for I remember not well whose image it was. When I saw this, that against the authority of the Scripture, the image of a man hung in the Church of Christ, I rend it. These are Epiphanius words; whereout I observe, first, that it is against the authority of the Scripture, and therefore against God's Commandment, that the image of a man should hang in Christ's Church. But the Images of all your Saints are such, & those of the Trinity too, except that Dove for the holy Ghost. Secondly, I add, that it is rightly gathered by necessary consequence (which is as good every whit, as plain words) that it is against Scripture to have the picture of Christ, or any Saint in the Church. For he saith expressly, that the Image he saw, was the image of Christ, or some Saint; and that it was unlawful to have any Image of a man there. There is no reason to call it a postscript; unless every last point of any letter not depending upon the former, be a postscript. g Hieronym. ●n illa epist. Hierome, that translated the Epistle out of Greek into Latin, found no such diversity of stile in it; neither indeed is it to be found: and this latter part is brought in according to the course of writing in the former. Epiphanius clears himself to john Bishop of jerusalem, for having ordered a Deacon in his Diocese, he begins his excuse thus: I have heard etc. In the latter part he defends himself concerning the renting of the vail, and begins that also in the like sort, I have heard. This was written, and translated three hundred years before that Idolatrous Council, though perhaps they thought it no wisdom to take knowledge of it. The other places, brought in that Council, were for Images, and so allowed of by that Council, and have since been discerned to be counterfeit; as that is of his Disciples, no thanks to that counterfeit Synod: which dealeth in the same sort also with Basil (you afterward allege the place for Images) with Cyrill, Ambrose, Athanasius, Chrysostome, Gregory, and the Apostles themselves, as I showed before. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins observes a special reason in Epiphanius other counterfeit testimony: That Images must not be suffered in the common house, because we must carry God in our minds. To which we answer, that Images must be suffered in all places, that we may the better carry-God in our hearts, being by the sight of them, both often put in mind of him, and much moved to honour and love him. speaker A. W. In steed of answering the other testimony out of Epiphanius, you go about under hand to strike at him through Master Perkins sides; but there is no great force in your blow. For (as I said erewhile) there is more danger of Idolatry in the suffering of Images, especially in any place where God is to be worshipped, than hope of instruction or devotion by the sight of them. And (as h Epiphan. cont. Encratit. citat. in Concil. Constantinop. 7. Epiphanius saith in this place) It is not meet that a Christian should be exercised by the eyes, but by the meditation of the mind: For such sight (as i Clemens Strom. lib. 6. Clement taught us before) abaseth the Majesty of God, and begets in us erroneous opinions. speaker W. P. Object. III. Man is the image of God, but it is lawful to paint a man, and therefore to make the image of God. Ans. A very cavil: for first a man cannot be painted, as he is the image of God, which stands in the spiritual gifts of righteousness and true holiness. Again, the image of a man may be painted for civil or historical use, but to paint any man for this end to represent God, or in the way of religion, that we may the better remember and worship God, it is unlawful. Other reasons which they use, are of small moment, and therefore I omit them. Differ. II. They teach and maintain, that images of God and of Saints my be worshipped with religious worship, specially the crucifix. For * Summ. part. 3. quaest. 25. art. 3. Thomas of Watering saith, Seeing the cross doth represent Christ, who died upon a cross, and is to be worshipped with divine honour: it followeth that the cross is to be worshipped so too. We on the contrary, hold they may not. Our principal ground is the second commandment, which containeth two parts: the first, forbiddeth the making of Images to resemble the true God, the second forbids the worshipping of them, or God in them, in these words, Thou shalt not bow down to them. Now, there can be no worship done to any thing less than the bending of the knee. speaker D. B. P. Now I come unto a third point, which M. Perkins maketh the second of our difference: That Images may be not only made and set in Churches, but also worshipped. M. Perkins holds the contrary: and his principal ground is the second commandment; which contains, saith he, two parts. The first, forbids the making of Images to resemble God; the second, the worshipping of them or God in them, in these words: Thou shalt not bow down to them. Ans. If it be only forbidden to make the Image of God, and to adore it: then the making and worshipping of the Image of Christ, or of any other creature, is not there prohibited: And so this second commandment more than thrice alleged, will not serve the turn against any other Image but God only. And in plain reason, according also to Master Perkins his own confession, the Commandments of the first Table, touch only our duty towards God, that we give him all his due honour, and do not give any part thereof unto any thing else whatsoever: Wherefore divine and godly worship is only there spoken of, and not such worship as we give unto any creature, or to the picture of it: and consequently, there is nothing there against the worshipping of our holy Images. speaker A. W. It is not only forbidden to make the Image of God, and to worship it, but (as Master Perkins said before) to make an Image of any thing in the way of Religion, to worship God, much more to worship the creature thereby. Therefore the Assumption, that should be added to that proposition of yours, if it be only forbidden, etc. namely; but it is only forbidden to make the image of God, and to adore it, is false, and so the second Commandment is against all Images for God's service. The Commandments of the first table touch only our duty to God. True; and it is an especial part of our duty to him, that we give no religious honour to any thing whatsoever, but to him only. For as Religion is a duty of the creature to the Creator, and not any bond betwixt creature and creature: so is religious honour due only to him, to whom religion is appropriated. Therefore the Heathen were never so sottish, as to worship any man or thing with religious worship, whereto they did not first ascribe some kind of divinity, according to which they proportioned their worship thereto. speaker D. B. P. Observe that there is a sovereign worship due to God, as to the Creator and governor of all the world, and to give this to any creature, is Idolatry. Another honour by infinite degrees inferior, yet absolute in itself, is ascribed unto Angels, and men as creatures endued with reason, and made after the likeness of God; and to exhibitth is to whom it is due, is civility and not Idolatry. This honour may be divided into two parts, because these creatures are like to God, aswell in their natural powers and qualities, as in their supernatural: And that honour which is given to man or Angel (in respect of any natural quality, may be called moral or civil; But that which is attributed unto them, in regard of their supernatural gifts may well be called religious and spiritual, because it is due unto them only for their spiritual and religious qualities. There is a third kind of worship, yet meaner than the other; which is a kind of dependent and respective worship; as when a servant is honoured or cherished, not for his own, but for his master's sake. And this is that worship which we allow unto Images, which for the Saint's sake whom it doth represent, we do either reverently regard, or take off our hat, or bow our knee unto it. This third kind of worship, being all we allow He is altogether an idolater that so worshippeth any Image. unto Pictures, were he not that understands it, more than half frantic, that should think it a great disparagement unto the incomprehensible worship of God, that to one of his servants Pictures, I should yield some such petty reverence; or that God should forbid this in the forefront of his ten Commandments? nothing less. speaker A. W. This discourse, to colour your Idolattie by a distinction of worship, hath more craft than truth. For first, if you mean plainly, why do you not tell us what that sovereign worship is, which you acknowledge due to the Creator only, that we may consider whether you give it to any creature or no? Secondly, what is the meaning of those words, that the honour ascribed to men and Angels, is absolute in itself, and to what purpose is it here alleged? Thirdly, the chief reason of worshipping God, is our dependence upon him, as k 〈◊〉. d● 〈◊〉. lib. 1. the Heathen acknowledge, and experience shows, in that civil worship we give to Princes & Magistrates. And howsoever Epicurus denying the providence of God, and his governing of the world, thought to avoid some blame in allowing worship to the Gods, as you do, in regard of their excellent and blessed nature; yet neither was that accounted sufficient by the statesmen or learned, and in truth it procures generally rather a reverend opinion, than any true worship. Lastly, I pray you remember, that the worship, which afterward you divide into civil and religious, is here in the general nature made civil, yea even that to Angels. That which the creatures lack in weight, it seems you will make up by number. They may not have (say you) the sovereign worship due to God. But to make them amends, you allow them two kinds of worship: civil, in regard of their natural resemblance of God, and religious, in respect of their supernatural likeness to him. Whereas God, having nothing in him supernatural, must have but one of the two only, and that as it may seem by proportioning the worship to creatures, not Civil, but Religious. For why should God have religious honour for those properties, above all degrees, and creatures for the same, have but civil in their degrees? since in your judgement they are capable of that honour also, which is religious? Besides, is this difference of honour in respect of the gifts, or of the manner of giving? if the latter, it is God, who must then have this divers worship, according to his divers manner of working, and not man in whom he works. So shall civil honour belong to God for the natural gifts he bestoweth upon men. If you regard the excellency of the gifts, why should they not be accounted of proportionably in the Image, which is man, as they are in the substance and pattern, which is God? But in him those properties, the resemblance whereof you call natural in man, are of as great excellency as the other, which in man you term supernatural; yea, which is more; though in God, his nature and his properties be all one, yet in man the natural qualities are the more principal, & the other as it were but adjuncts thereunto. The natural parts of the soul, that I may so speak, are the understanding and the will; all gifts and graces whatsoever, are but qualities belonging to these two, which are the very substance of the soul. Further, there is no reason why any religious worship should be performed to man, by reason of these qualities, because none was due to him before his fall, when he had these: else should Adam have been worshipped by Eve, with religious worship, and she by him; For each of them had the Image of God, according to the nature of such creatures, entire and perfect; and if we believe your Popish doctrine, they had those qualities by an especial grace of God above nature. Moreover what reason can you give, why Angels should not perform religious worship to the Saints departed, and both they and the same Saints to those men living here on the earth, who have received those supernatural qualities from God, for which religious worship is due to them, on whom they are bestowed? Therefore this distinction of religious and civil worship, is a mere devise, without any ground of true reason; and all religious worship is due to God, civil worship only belongs to men. That respective worship is no other but civil; as it may easily appear, because it may be, and must be given even to profane and reprobat men, if any such be employed by God in government over us. For howsoever the outward manner of the honour we give to Princes, and Magistrates, depends upon the Laws and Customs of the Countries, wherein we live; yet the duty of honouring them, lies upon us in conscience to be performed, because they are Gods Lieutenants and Stewards. This worship if you accounted it civil, you might give to whom you thought good, and should not be condemned of us for Idolatry, but for folly, though you gave it to Images. Yet such folly, as the Gentiles are not guilty of, who never used such reverence to the statues of any famous men, but where first they had an opinion of some divine nature. I marvel how you could persuade yourself to write so untruly, that the honour you give to Images, is meaner than the former; and that you would craftily deceive the ignorant, as if taking off your hat, and bowing your knee were all the honour you give them. Why did you not then refute Thomas, whom M. Perkins brings in speaking thus. l Thom. 3. q. 25. art. 3. Seeing the Cross doth represent Christ, who died upon the Cross, and is to be worshipped with divine honour; it followeth that the Cross is to be worshipped so too. Did you never read that of Bellarmine, let this (saith he) m Bell●… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●…mp. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. be one preposition, that the Images of Christ and the Saints are to be worshipped not only by accident and unproperly (this is your dependent and respective worship which you say is all you allow unto Images) but also properly, so that the n A●…o. worship rest in the Image, not only as o Vt ●●eem ge●●● ex●mp●●●s. it is instead of the party; whose Image it is? Will you hear a third speak yet more plainly? It is the constant opinion of Divines (saith p Azorius Inst. lib. 9 cap 6. Azorius) that the Image is to be worshipped with the same worship and honour, with which he is worshipped whose Image it is. Belike you are no divine, or else you would acknowledge another manner of worship due to Images. Let us hear another jesuit. The old Schoolmen (saith q Gabr. Vasq. de ador. lib. 2. disp. 8. cap. 3. & cap. 8. Vasquez) absolutely affirm that the Images of Christ are to be worshipped with divine worship. Now for the particular worship, r Concil. Trid. ●elf. 25. de venerat. the Council of Trent, as crafty and wary as it was, saith more than you do, that you fall down before Images, and kiss them. But who knoweth not, that you perform all outward worship to them; you perfume them with incense, though they cannot smell; you set up lights before them, though they cannot see. (and yet it is hard to say whether you or they be the blinder.) You kiss them, you kneel down to them, you lie prostrate on the ground before them, you pray, sing, and say your special services before them; How could you do more outward worship to our Saviour jesus Christ, than you do to these babies, and puppets? Was it not more than need think you, that the Lord of heaven and earth, should in the very heat of his jealousy, make a law against such abominations? we may well see it was not for nothing, that he threatens so long a continuance of his heavy wrath upon the breakers of the second Commandment. speaker W. P. Again, the brazen serpent was a type or image of Christ crucified, joh. 3. 14. appointed by God himself: yet when the people burned incense to it, 2. King. 18. 4. Hezekias broke it in pieces, and is therefore commended. And when the devil bade our Saviour Christ, but to bow down the knee unto him, and he would give him the whole world: Christ rejects his offer, saying, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Matth. 4. 10. Again, it is lawful for one man to worship another with civil worship, but to worship man with religious honour is unlawful. For all religious worship is prescribed in the first table: and the honour due to man is only prescribed in the second table and the first commandment thereof, Honour thy father, which honour is therefore civil and not religious. Now the meanest man that can be, is a more excellent image of God than all the images of God or of Saints that are devised by men. speaker D. B. P. But let us go on with M. Perkins his argument: His second is; the brazen Serpent was an Image of Christ crucified, appointed by God: yet when the children of Israel burned incense unto it, Ezechias broke it in 4. Reg. 18. pieces. Ans. So when Christians generally give godly honour to Images, as those Israelits did to the Serpent, let them also be broken by their lawful superior, if no better remedy may be found: But as that very brazen Serpent duly worshipped many hundred years by the same people before they fell to Idolatry (as witnesseth S. Augustine, where he reckoneth the brazen Serpent, among those signs which are worthy of religious worship) so good Christians, may worship all sorts of holy Pictures, so they think no God to dwell in them, nor put any trust in the Pictures, but use them only to stir up devotion, to keep their minds from wandering after their domestical affairs, and to conserve the memory of God's happy servants. speaker A. W. By godly honour English men understand, not that which is proper to God, but that which is agreeable to the will of God. If to burn Incense to the brazen Serpent, were to give it divine honour, your Images are ordinarily worshipped with divine honour. Besides s joh. 3. 14. 1●. this brazen Serpent was an Image of Christ crucified, and therefore by your Divinity, might and ought to be worshipped with divine honour, as Christ himself. Yet Hezekiah broke it down; that is the Magistrate: it is pity he lacked you to have advised him of some better remedy. But t Aug. de civit. Dei lib. 10 c. 8. Augustine commends him for it, as u Religiosa potestate Deo ●e●●iens, cum magna pieta tis laud control'st. having in it done a special service to God, with great commendation of piety. But what speak I of Augustine? doth not the x 2. Reg. 18. 3. 4. holy Ghost reckon it amongst the actions of his upright walking in the sight of God, according to all that David his Father had done? Doth he not join it with taking away the high places, breaking the Images, and cutting down the groves, actions precisely commanded by God himself? The brazen Serpent was never worshipped by the people, but Idolatrously, namely with Incense burned to it. Unto those days (saith the y 2. Reg. 18. 〈◊〉. holy Ghost, speaking of Hezechiahs' time) the children of Israel did burn Incense to it; As for z Aug. lib. 3. de Trinit. c. 10 Augustine, he giveth no suspicion of any such thing. All he saith is this, that such things as God hath appointed to signify some action of his person, a Honorem habere possunt ut religiosa. may have honour, as things used to religion. What honour is this, but a reverend estimation according to the use, to which they are applied by the commandment of God? which may appear, because he joins with the brazen Serpent, b Sicut & literae the writings that God ordained to the like purpose: viz. the Scriptures, which are indeed to be reverently accounted of, but cannot be worshipped without Idolatry. The common sort of Papists do put as great trust in their Idols, as ever the Heathen did in theirs. Do you not teach them to pray to the Cross, c O crux ave spes unica. All hail our only hope? To entreat of the Cross, that it d Auge pijs justitiam, reisque dona veniam. would increase righteousness in the godly, and give pardon to the guilty? Neither may it be shifted off, with saying that this belongeth to Christ's Passion, and not to the Crosse. For e Thom. 3. q. 5. art. 4. Thomas Aquinas proveth by that Hymn of the Church, that the very Cross is to be worshipped with divine worship, and hope of salvation to be placed in it. Thus he reasoneth; we must give divine worship to that, in which we place the hope of our salvation. But we place the hope of our salvation in the Crosse. This Assumption he proveth by the authority of that Hymn: whereupon he infers his conclusion. Therefore the Cross of Christ is to be adored with divine worship: Is not the chief use of your Images, to please God, and to do service to them, whose Images they are, by worshipping of them? Did I not show a little before out of Bellarmine and other, that the Image must have the honour due to the party, whose Image it is? yea that ᶠ Ita ut te●●●net●● ano●…tio in 〈◊〉 D. B. P. 〈…〉 the Seas to Rome and Rheims have wild wits. O charitable P●…t! the honour must rest in the Image? speaker A. W. Now to the third argument, which is jolly and worthy the wild-wit of a mad-minister. Christ would not so much as bow his knee unto the devil, although he would have given him the whole world for doing of it. Therefore we must not adore Images; true, if the Image were Master Bezas ensign, or of their Master the devil, or any of his helhounds. Our saviours refusing to bow his knee to the Devil, is not brought to prove the unlawfulness of worshipping Images, (and yet some of your saints are not much better than Thomas Becket) but to show that bowing the knee is a worship, how light soever you account of it, forbidden by God himself under the name of worship to be given to any but himself. speaker D. B. P. M. Perkins his fourth reason: A man (saith he) may be worshipped with civil honour; not with religious, which is wholly prescribed in the first Table, and yet the meanest man is a more excellent Image of God, than any painted one. Ans. A man may be worshipped with religious honour, in respect of his supernatural gifts aswell as with civil honour of his natural properties, as hath been before declared: and no other religious honour is either And before consumed. prescribed or proscribed in the first Table, than such only as is proper to God. speaker A. W. You should have answered his proof as well as you deny his proposition. Master Perkins holds, that all religious worship is proper to God, and therefore contained in the first Table: you answer, that no religious honour is prescribed, or proscribed (was it you that found fault with Master Perkins rhyming?) in the first table, but such only as is proper to God. Your adversary granteth as much, and adds, that all religious honour is proper to him. Part. 3. qu. 2● 〈◊〉. 3. speaker D. B. P. But (saith he) Thomas of Watering holds, that the Crucifix is to be adored with the same honour that Christ is. Leaving Thomas of Watering and of Wapping to them that deserve it: I answer to the place of To Traitorous Jesuits and such other Papists. S. Thomas of Aquine, that he speaketh (like a most learned Philosopher and divine) very profoundly; that the Image may be considered in itself, and so he saith, it is not to be worshipped at all: or as it doth convey our mind unto that which it doth represent: and so because there is but one and the same motion of our understanding and will towards Christ and the Crucifix: we do adore them both at once with the same act of adoration, but in a far different degree: for Christ we adore properly as the true God, but the Crucifix accidentally as a thing joined with Christ. Even as (saith he expounding himself) art. 4. when one doth his homage unto the King, he worshippeth withal his purple garment, not that any worship is due to the rob, but the whole is given unto the person, which cannot be separated from that which is so closely joined to the person: Even so the divine person of Christ is properly adored, but improperly all things conceived together with it, are said also by that deep Doctor to be adored. He that hath care of hearing, let him hear: for our purpose it sufficeth to know, that he assigns very small worship to themselves. speaker A. W. Thomas of waterings is the old english name of Thomas de Aquino; the place may so be called, because of some Chapel or religious house built there in honour of him. It was not Master Perkins intent nor his vein to disgrace Thomas by that name, though he do not acknowledge any such sainctship belonging to him. In your answer, first you grant, that g Tho. 3. q. 25. art. 3. Thomas saith, We must worship the cross of Christ with divine worship. Therefore you grant as much as Master Perkins affirms, and thereby prove that to be false, which before you delivered, that the worship you give to Images, is very small: for you worship some of them by your own confession, with divine worship. It appeareth also by this answer, that your Images are not only to stir up devotion etc. but to be worshipped too. Secondly I would feign know how this doctrine of Thomas can agree with that of Bellarmine, who will have the honour to rest in the Image, and not to be only accidental, and unproper? Thirdly, this distinction doth in no sort satisfy us, who deny that an Image may be worshipped in any respect whatsoever. To the proof out of h Arist. de memor. & reminise. Aristotle I answer more particularly, that Thomas presupposeth that which we deny, that it is lawful to have such an Image to such purposes. Besides, if all he say be granted him, he doth not prove that it is lawful to intend worship to the Image, but that the worship performed to the party whose Image it is, by occasion of the Image, is also given to the Image, though to the one principally, to the other but accidentally. Lastly to the similitude I say, it is not true that he which doth his homage to the king doth worship his purple garment, because it is no part of him; neither should he that had worshipped Christ hanging on the Cross at the time of his passion, have worshipped the Cross together with Christ, no more than he that worships the king being on horseback, worships the horse on which he rides. Indeed he that worships Christ, worships him God and man (though the worship be done to him only in respect of his Godhead) but the reason is, that Chrst is as well man as God. There is no such conjunction betwixt the Image, and the party whose image it is, and therefore for our purpose it sufficeth to know, that how small honour soever he or you assign to the Images themselves, if it be religious it is Idolatrous, if civil, ridiculous. But what should I spend time in refuting this distinction of Thomas, when as one of your own Schoolmen hath done it i Anno 1350. long ago: our Countryman k Robert. Ho● cot in lib Sapient. lict. 7. Holcot having propounded the question, whether it be lawful for Christians to adore any Images, and having proved it unlawful, as by other reasons, so by the second Commandment, objects against himself out of Thomas in this sort. To this question (saith he) Thomas answereth, That an Image may be considered two ways, either as it is an Image, and so no honour is due unto it, as none is due to wood or stone: otherwise it may be considered, as there is the same motion to the Image, and to that, whose Image it is, and so the same honour is due to the Image, and to him, whose Image it is. But against this answer (saith Holcot) I object, first thus, Divine honour is due to God only, But no Image is God, Therefore such honour is due to no Image. Therefore it implies a contradiction, to say, that divine honour is due to God only, and yet that it is due to the Image of Christ, and to Christ. Beside, if the same honour be due to the image of Christ, and to Christ, the same honour is due also to a stone and to Christ, and by consequence, the same honour is due to Christ, and to a creature, which is not to be believed. Again, he that worships any thing with divine honour, confesseth it to be God. Therefore if any man might lawfully give divine honour to the image of Christ, he might lawfully protest, and confess something that is not God, to be God. Therefore (saith Holcot in his conclusion) It may otherwise be said. That no adoration is due to an Image, and that it is not lawful to adore any Image. For true adoration is in spirit and devotion, and in the highest degree of love; and this we may not direct to any creature. speaker W. P. Augustine, and long after him Gregory, in plain terms denieth Images to be adored. speaker D. B. P. Lastly M. P. ●●ins saith, without quoting any place that Augustine and Gregory in plainetearmes deny Images to be adored; and so do we too, taking adoring as they do for the worship that is proper to God. speaker A. W. The places alleged being unknown to you, your answer must needs be made by guess; and indeed agrees not with either of them, which Master Perkins quotes: for l Edit. 1598. he quotes both particularly, though you deny it. m August. de morib. eccles. cap. 35. Austin speaks of the Idols of the Gentiles; and I hope you will not allow them any kind of worship, not only not adoration. Master Perkins truly holding all your Images that you worship to be Idols also, condemns the adoring of them by that place of Austin, though it be intended specially against the Idols of the Heathen. n Gregor. lib. 〈◊〉. epist. 9 Gregory's testimony, in the place quoted by Master Perkins, allows no further use of any Images, than to be Lay men's books. They are not set up in the Churches (saith he) to be adored, but only to instruct the minds of the ignorant. If they were set up to be worshipped with any kind of worship, how is this speech of Gregory's true? But indeed there was no religious worship but adoration known in Gregory's time, and that was proper to God, as religion itself is. speaker W. P. The Papists defend their opinions by these reasons, I. Psalm. 99 5. Cast down yourselves before his footstool. Answ. The words are thus to be read, Bow at his footstool: that is, at the Ark and Mercy-seat, for there he hath made a promise of his presence: the words therefore say not, bow to the Ark, but to God at the Ark. The first reason by him proposed is this Psalm 98. Cast down yourselves before his sootes●oole, which was the Ark: now if the Ark were to be worshipped, because it represented God's footstool, much more may the Image be worshipped. M. Perkins answereth, that the words must be englished thus, Bo● at or before the Ark, notto the Ark, but to God before the Ark. Reply. If it were so, yet must they admit that we must kneel, at or before Images, so we kneel to honour or pray to God: against which, some of their Preachers do crielike madmen: but the Hebre● phrase carrieth, that we must kneel to the ark, as they who be skilful in the language do know, and that the ark was worshipped of the Israelites is otherwise very evident: for first none but the high Priest might come into the place where it was: and it was carried before the campewith great solemnity * 1. Reg, 4. Cap. 6. to search out a reasting place for the whole host. And when they were to sight against the Philistines, * they had great confidence in the presence of the ark: and cap. 6,50000. of the Bethsamites were slain for seeing the ark; and * 1. Reg. 2. Oza was by God smitten to death for touching the ark. Doth not all this convince in what reverence the ark was had, even by Gods own testimony? speaker A. W. Your first reason to prove the worshipping of Images is this: If the Ark were to be worshipped, because it represented God's footstool; much more may the Image be worshipped. But the Ark was therefore to be worshipped: Therefore much more may the Image be worshipped. I deny your whole Antecedent: first the consequence of your proposition: For it doth not follow, that we may worship Images devised by men to represent God, because we may worship the Ark, where God himself promised his presence, and which he did appoint as an assurance of his presence. If you can show us the like promise to your Images, you say somewhat; else nothing. Your Assumption also is false; The Ark was not to be worshipped. To your proof Master Perkins answers truly, that the Psalm doth not command worshipping of the Ark, but worship before the Ark. You reply first, that therefore it is lawful to kneel before Images. I answer, your consequence is false, because your Images are your own wicked devices, and have no promise of God's presence: therefore it is senselessness to kneel before them, not madness to cry out against such folly. Your second reply is, that the Hebrew phrase carrieth it, that we must kneel to the Ark, as the skilful in that language know. First remember, that these are Authors in the air, as you answered about that place of Daniel. Secondly know, that they that are skilful say otherwise. What say you to the o Chaldae. Paraphrast. ad Psal. 99 5. Chaldee Paraphrast, who expounds it; Worship in the house of his Sanctuary; and yet he keeps p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the proposition that is in the Hebrew. So doth the Latin translation in the same Psalm, where the same proposition is used, q Vers. 9 Adorate in monte sancto eius. worship in his holy mountain: the r Chaldae. Paraphrast. ad vers. 9 Chaldee hath, in the mountain of the house of his Sanctuary: the s Graec. 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greek, not much unlike, In, or toward his holy hill. The same seems to have been t Theodor. in Psal. 98. Theodoret's judgement of the place in question: His footstool was sometimes thought to be the Temple at jerusalem; but now the Churches, which are over all the earth, and Sea, wherein we worship the most holy God. Of the same opinion is u Vatablus ad Scabellum. Vatablus: Cast down yourselves before his footstool, that is (as he expounds himself in his note there) In the Temple, or before the Ark, in which God exhibited his presence. So doth x Lyra ad Psal. 99 Lyra interpret it, who was a jew borne, and a Christian by profession, worship his footstool, that is, before his footstool. The y Glosla ordin. & interlin. ibi. ordinary, and Interlinear glosses expound it out of z Chrysost. de Trinit. Ambros de spirit. sanct. lib. 3. Aug. in Psal. 98. the Fathers, of Christ's manhood to be worshipped, by reason of the hypostatical union of it with the Godhead; what is that to the worshipping of Images? For the further avowing of that translation, we have also a R. David Kimchis ibid. R. David Kimchis authority. Lastly, you bring divers proofs, that the Ark was had in great reverence; all needless: for who denies it? Was there not great reason to esteem highly of that, whereby God was extraordinarily present with the jews, as with no people, nor in any place of the world beside? What then? was it therefore worshipped by the Priest, when he went in once a year where it was? Did the people worship it, when it was carried before them? As b 1. Sam. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 for that confidence the jews put in it, they got little by it, because they superstitiously abused it, against God's commandment, putting trust in the presence of it abroad, when it should have been in the Tabernacle where God had promised his presence with it. Was this worship to the Ark, which the Lord delivered into the hands of the Philistines? c 1. Sam. 6. 〈◊〉. Neither were those 50070. Bethsamites slain for not worshipping it, but for presuming to look into it; and d 2. Sam. 6. 〈◊〉 Vzzah for touching it, not because he did not worship it. speaker D. B. P. To this may be added the authority of S. jerom, * Epist. 17. ●ap. 〈◊〉. who doth teach that it was the more worshipped for the Cherubins and pictures of angels that were erected at the ends of it▪ whereby he declareth that he thought Images worthy of religious worship. speaker A. W. Of jeroms 17. Epistle, alleged by Master Perkins to prove that Rome is Babylon, you answer thus: Good sir, if S. Jerome had meant, that that Epistle should have had his authority, he would have set it out in his own name: which seeing he thought it not expedient, set the authority of it aside, and urge his reasons, if you think it worth your labour, and you shall be answered. These your own words shall serve in steed of answer. But for the satisfying of all men I will set down Jerome's words, that they may see with what care and truth you cite the testimonies of the ancient writers. The jews (saith Jerome) in former times e Venerabantur sancta sanctorum. worshipped the Holy of Holies, because there were the Cherubins, and the Propitiatory, and the Ark of the Testament, Manna, Aaron's Rod, and the golden Altar. Doth Jerome teach in these words, that the Ark was the more worshipped, for the Cherubins and pictures of Angels, that were erected at the end of it? First, he makes no mention of any pictures of Angels, but only of the Cherubins. Secondly, he speaks not of worshipping the Ark, but the Holy of Holies, because of the things that were in it. Thirdly, he makes the Propitiatory, Manna, Aaron's Rod, and the golden Altar, causes of that worship, as well as the Cherubins. Lastly, in the words following, he counts the Sepulchre of our Lord f Venerabilius. more worthy of worship. But to answer plainly to your false allegation of Jerome's authority; what an indignity were it to the Majesty of God, that the assurance of his presence should be the more worshipped, because of the Cherubins and pictures of Angels, that were erected at the ends of it; which also, with the Ark itself, were hid from all men's sight, in the Holy of Holies? Jerome meaneth, that those things made the people conceive more reverently of that Holy of Holies, and struck them with a kind of awe. speaker D. B. P. To this we may join that of S. Paul, * Hebr. 11. that Jacob by faith adored the top of his son joseph's rod: so doth the Greek text of S. Paul say, as Erasmus also translateth it: The Protestants mangle the text pitifully, to avoid the place: see the Annotations of Rheims Testament. speaker A. W. g Heb. 11. 21. The text in the Greek is according to your own editions, h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. worship upon the top of his own staff. So doth your i Interlin. bibl. ibi. Interlinear read it. So k Arias Montan. ibi. Arias Montanus. l Erasmus, Ad. Erasmus notes the error of your old translator in leaving out the preposition ☐ which he himself interpreteth, ad, as it were to ward the top. The m Syriac. inter. Pagnin. ibi. syriac translateth as we do, upon the top of his staff. n Vatablus ibi. Pagnine thus, he worshipped leaning upon his staff. o Ad summum ●aculi. Vatablus keepeth the words of the old translation, but he expoundeth them in this sort, Adored, that is (saith Vatablus) give thanks: The top of his staff, 〈◊〉 toward the top of his staff, that is, q Innixus baculo suo, prae senecture. Leaning upon his staff for age. r Theodor. ibi. Theodoret maketh the adoration civil, to figure out the kingdom of Israel in the tribe of Ephraim jacobs younger son. Your s Glossa interlin. Gloss saith, he worshipped Christ by whom he had domination, and a sceptre of authority in Egypt: or the kingdom of Christ, which in that was sigured to be, and to come among the Gentiles. t Glossa ordin. Another gloss saith directly, he worshipped God, presently upon his son joseph swearing. u Lyra. ibi. Lyra layeth out the matter more largely, and plainly after this manner: jacob (saith Lyra) believed that Christ should be buried, and rise again in the Land of promise: therefore he made joseph swear, that he would cause his body to be carried thither. After he had sworn, he worshipped God with thanks, turning himself towards the bed's head, according to the translation of S. Jerome; as it appeareth Genes. 47. The 70. translate as it is in this place, and both are true. For he worshipped towards the bed's head, which stood west; toward which part the jews do worship; and because he was old, he had a staff, upon the top whereof he leaned, when he gave thanks to God. Therefore we must not conceive, that he worshipped the top of the Sceptre or staff, but he worshipped God, leaning upon the staff. So doth x Theoph ib● Theophylact expound it, Leaning and resting upon his staff for age. Though he doth also follow the exposition of y Chrysost. in Hebr. hom. 26. Chrysostome concerning the kingdom of Israel in the Tribe of Ephraim. The same exposition bringeth Occumenius the Greek Scholiast, out of z Photius apud Oecumenium Photius, upon the top of his staff, that is, a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being now old, the same bring b Lombard, Thomas. Caietan. ibi. Lombard, Thomas and Caietan. It is strange, that a man professing knowledge, should speak so untruly. Do we mangle the text pitifully? or rather do not you slander us shamefully? we neither take away, nor alter any word, syllable, letter, or accent in the text: but leaving that whole, only add two words in a different letter, to make the meaning more plain; and that by c Aug qq. in Gen. q 162. Augustine's authority, as your d Rhem. Test. ad Heb. 11. 2●. Rhemists confess, and as I have showed with the allowance of your best Interpreters, for both the words. I will conclude with that of Jerome; in this place (saith e Hieron. in quaest. Hebr. in Genes. he) some feign without cause, that jacob worshipped the top of joseph's Sceptre, because forsooth, honouring his son, he honoured his power. But in the Hebrew, it is far otherwise. And Israel worshipped (saith the Hebrew) toward his bed's head: namely, because after his son had sworn to him, being assured of the thing he had requested, he worshipped God, f Contra caput. over against his bed's head. speaker W. P. Object. II. Exod. 3. 5. God said to Moses, Stand a far off, and put off thy shoes: for the place is holy. Now if holy places must be reverenced, then much more holy images, as the cross of Christ, and such like. Ans. God commanded the ceremony of putting off the shoes, that he might thereby strike Moses with a religious reverence, not of the place, but of his own Majesty, whose presence made the place holy. Let them show the like warrant for images. speaker D. B. P. The second reason is taken out of Exodus 3. Where God said to Moses, Put off thy shoes, for the place where thou standest is holy. Now if places be holy and to be reverenced by reason of the presence of Angels: why not, aswell the Image that representeth an Angel or some Saint, which is equal to Angels? Master Perkins his answer rather confirmeth than solveth this argument: for he saith, that the Ceremony of putting off his shoes, was commanded to strike Moses with a religious reverence; not of the place but of the person there present, which was not God but an Angel, as the text there expresseth. * Exod. 3. The place then being holy, required the reverend respect of putting off his shoes, and that reverence done to the place; stroke Moses with a religious reverence of the Angelspeaking in the person of God: even so holy pictures being first duly reverenced, do strike men with a religious regard of the Saint represented. speaker A. W. Your second reason is thus framed. If places be holy, and to be reverenced by reason of the presence of Angels, why not aswell the Image, that represents an Angel or some Saint, which is equal to an Angel? But places are holy and to be reverenced by reason of the presence of Angels. Therefore the Image that represents an Angel or some Saint, equal to an Angel, is holy and to be reverenced. I deny your whole Antecedent; and first the consequence of your proposition. Because although we should grant that some place were holy, because of the presence of the Angels; yet would it not follow that therefore Images are holy, where there is no presence of an Angel. For all your consecrating and conjuring of Images cannot make any Angel, or Saint to afford his presence in them. Your assumption is false. There is no holiness in places, because of the presence of Angels; as may appear by the Scriptures, where their apparitions are described, no action of reverence at all being performed to the places of their presence. In particular to your proof M. Perkins answereth, that this was done, not because the place where Angels appear is holy, but upon an especial commandment of God, to strike Moses with a reverence of God's Majesty, who was there present. You reply, first that God was not present there, but an Angel; I answer that God was there present, as it is plain, because the Angel was lehovah. g Exod 3. 2. And lehovah saw that he turned to see. And h Vers. 7. lehovah said. Yea the whole discourse showeth, that God himself was the Angel, namely the second person in Trinity, who is called i Malac. 3. 1. the Angel of the Conenant, because he was sent for the salvation of Gods elect. So k Act. 7. 31. 33. Stephen though he call him an Angel, calleth him ass the Lord. And indeed who but God could say, I am that I am, l Exod. 3. 14. as the Angel there doth? Secondly, you say the Answer rather confirms than solves the Argument: Because as that astion struck Moses with a reverence of the Angel, so holy Pictures duly reverenced, strike men with a religious regard of the Saint represented. What is this but to beg the question? you take it as granted, that there may be Images, and that religious reverence may be given to them: but these are the very doubts, we dispute of. Indeed if it were true, that there may be such Images, and that religious honour is to be yielded to creatures, there were somewhat in your Similitude to the purpose: and yet similitudes do not prove but illustrate. The source of your reason is, that Moses was commanded by god to put off his shoes, that he might be stricken thereby with reverence of God: Therefore we must worship Images, that we may be stricken with reverence of Angels and Saints. The consequence is nought. God's particular charge to Moses at that time, warranteth not men to enjoin worship to Images, that Angels may be worshipped by them. speaker D. B. P. To this, let us annex that days be truly called holy and worshipped, as the first and last days be truly called holy and worshipful, as the first and last days of the feast of Easter be. * Exod. 12. 1●. And the vestments of Priests * Exod. 28. 5. , because they are dedicated and employed to holy uses: even so Images which are made in honour of God and his Saints, and erected to move and teach us to embrace heavenly courses. speaker A. W. Add it if you will that days appointed by God are called holy: for of worshipful days I think no man ever heard, though your Latin translation say, m Eadem festivitate venerabilis. The seventh day shall be venerable, with the same festivity, that is, shall be kept with like solemnity to the first. The words in the Hebrew are all one, in the former and later part of the verse, and therefore so should the translation be; Now in the former your translation is, the first day shall be holy and solemn. The Hebrew as n Aria's Mon. ad Exod. 12. Montanus translateth it, on the first day (shall be) a convocation of holiness, and on the seventh day shall be a convocation of holiness; that is (as o Vatab. ibi. Vatablus truly expounds the Hebrew phrase) An holy Convocation. So doth p Pagnin. ibi. Pagnine also translate it. But this holiness which you rightly expound to be a dedication or employment to God's service, neither doth require, nor will admit any worshipping of the days or garments: but Images are not holy, for they are neither commanded of God, nor allowed. speaker W. P. Object. III. It is lawful to kneel down to a chair of estate in the absence of the king or Queen: therefore much more to the images of God, and of Saints in heaven glorified, being absent from us. Answ. To kneel to the chair of estate, is no more but a civil testimony, or sign of civil reverence, by which all good subjects when occasion is offered, show their loyalty and subjection to their lawful Prince. And this kneeling being on this manner, and to no other end, hath sufficient warrant in the word of God. But kneeling to the image of any Saint departed, is religious, and consequently more than civil worship, as the Papists themselves confess. The argument than proveth nothing, unless they will keep themselves to one and the same kind of worship. speaker D. B. P. He proposeth our argument to the halves, or else this answer had been prevented. For thus runneth our reason: As the chair of estate is to be worshipped with civil reverence, in respect of the temporal Prince, whom it representeth: even so the Images of holy personages that reign now in heaven, are to be worshipped with a holy and religious kind of courtesy: for as Temporal honour is due unto a Temporal Prince, so religious and spiritual honour, is due unto spiritual and most holy personages: And as a good subject testifieth his loyalty and good affection towards his Prince, by honouring his regal throne: So doth a good Christian give testimony of his dutiful, both estimation & devotion toward those heavenly creatures, by giving honour unto their Images. At leastwise, why do not the Protestants exhibit civil reverence aswell unto the representations of God's Saints, as to the shadows of the secular majesty? unless it be because they are fallen out with the Saints of God, and are become adorers of sinful men. speaker A. W. Master Perkins drew your argument from a comparison of quantity, as the Logicians call it, from the greater to the less; you fetch it from a comparison of quality by way of Similitude, which, as I answered before, serves to make a thing more plain, not to prove it true, as the other comparison doth, if it be rightly made. You report his answer by halves, for he denies the consequence of the argument which he propounded; adding this reason of his denial, that the civil worship hath warrant sufficient in the word of God, but your religious worship hath not: so that either you must make your worshipping of Images civil, or else your comparison holds not. His answer is sufficient to overthrow your reason, as you propound it, for it denies that the things are alike, adding farther against your proof, that no religious honour is due to any but God only: if you can show warrant for it in the word, he yields. But alas you cannot, your chief Champion Thomas of Aquine having made an objection against worshipping of the image of Christ with divine worship, because there is no tradition to be found in Scripture for the adoring of Images, is feign for answer to flee to unwritten traditions. We must answer (saith q Thom. 3. q. 25. Act. 3 ad 4. Thomas) that the Apostles by the familiar instinct of the holy ghost, delivered certain things to the Churches to be observed, which they have not left in writing, but only in the observation of the Church by the succession of the faithful. And surely he that will take pains to consider the allegations of the seventh Council, the s●…d at Nice, which was called of purpose to establish the worshipping of Images, shall find very pitiful proof out of Scripture. Therefore having warrant and charge to perform all civil honour to princes, we do accordingly; having neither for any devotion or religious reverence to Angels or men departed, though Saints in heaven, we dare not worship their images: which also we know to be particularly forbidden in Scripture. And that is the reason why we give no reverence to any idolatrous representations of holy men now in heaven, devised by men to a purpose, that hath no warrant by commandment, or example in scripture. As for civil reverence, it is due to them only with whom we have some dealing in worldly matters, and so cannot belong to any in heaven, and much less to their pictures, without any liking of themselves. speaker W. P. Differ. III. The Papists also teach, that God may be lawfully worshipped in images, in which he hath appeared unto men: as the Father, in the image of an old man: the Son, in the image of a man crucified: and the holy Ghost in the likeness of a dove, etc. But we hold it unlawful to worship God, in, by, or at any image: for this is the thing which (as I have proved before) the second commandment forbiddeth. speaker D. B. P. Master perkins makes a third point of difference, that we may not worship God in any such Image, in which Bee hath appeared unto men. In this we do not differ, unless he takes it otherwise then he delivereth it. Those Images we hold more reverend than any others, as representations nearer approaching unto the divinity, yet because they do not express the deity, God is not directly apprehended not worshipped in them, but only by collection: as for example. The form of a ●raue old man, in Daniel, doth not represent God's person, but we gather by that ancient form God's eternity, whereby we a●●se to a more perfect conceit of God, whom we adore: now other Images of Christ and his Saints, do carry ou● minds directly upon their proper persons, whom in their Images we adore and worship after their degrees. But we worship Images with far meaner reverence than any of the Saints, in regard only, that they do represent such presonages, and do induce us more to love and honour them, and do stir up our dullness more often and ardently to honour God in the Saints, and the Saints in their degrees: as also to imitate their holy example as hath been said more than All religious honour is Gods once, that all may understand how far off we are from giving God's honour unto either Saint or Image. speaker A. W. Do you not differ from Master Perkins in worshipping God in the images in which he hath appeared? First, he saith, that it is unlawful to worship God, in, by, or at an Image, those are his words in this very place. Secondly, do you only hold those Images more reverend than other? Do you not give them divine honour, even the same honour that is due to God himself, though accidentally, as you hold against Bellarmine? Is not Thomas his reason for worshipping the Image and Cross of Christ with divine honour, as strong for the image of God the Father, and of God the holy ghost? But what should I go about to prove so plain a matter. I would your being ashamed to defend so gross Idolatry, would make you forsake it. Do you not grant that you worship God in these Images, though, as you say here, not directly? How do you then agree with Master Perkins, who delivers his meaning plainly, that in such images God may not be at all worshipped, no not by them, nor at them? and yet for very shame you would not be thought to speak against so manifest a truth, though without shame you make show of agreement where there is none, and against all equal dealing accuse Master Perkins of seeming to take the matter otherwise then he delivers it. By person you mean one property of God common to all three persons, or else the nature of the Godhead. But I pray you tell me, by what warrant of scripture you paint God the Father like this old man in Daniel, if you do it not by the authority of this place. If it be the end of this picture to signify God's eternity, surely he that appropriates this image to the Father, makes the Father only eternal. This is that more perfect conceit of God that you come to by this image, namely, to deny the Eternity, and so the Godhead of the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Further, give me leave to understand you if I can. What can you possibly know concerning God's eternity, by the sight of this grave old man? If you did not believe that God is eternal, before you looked upon that image, it is not possible you should learn it, or give credit to it, by seeing the picture, especially if it represent not as you speak the person of God. But indeed the gazing on such Idols is more likely to draw men into a conceit, that God grows old, and so his eternity is wearing away, then to teach them that he never had beginning, and never shall have end. You will reply, that Daniel doth so describe him. True, as the scripture every where doth for our capacity, applying affections, parts, and actions of men to God. The Lord, who of his infinite wisdom appointed the penning of these things for our instruction, hath promised a blessing to every part of his word, that it may be read & heard without danger; but Idols are accursed by him, even such pictures of old men, because whatsoever the pretence of making them be, they fill ignorant people with error and superstition. What Images mean you? sure not all, for you worship the image of the Father, of Christ, of the holy ghost, yea, the r Thom. 3. q. ●5. art. 4. Bellarm. de Imag. lib. 2. cap. 27. wood of the cross on which he died, and every part and piece of it, though never so little a scrap, with divine honour. To other Images (as I showed before, out of your own writers) you give the same honour that you do to the Saints themselves, because Thomas teacheth you out of Aristotle, that there is but one motion of our understanding and will, towards the Saint, and the image of the Saint. speaker W. P. And the fact of the Israelites, Exod. 32. in worshipping the golden calf, is condemned as flat idolatry; albeit they worshipped not the calf, but God in the calf: for vers. 5. Aaron saith, To morrow shall be the solemnity of jehovah: whereby he doth give us to understand, that the calf was but a sign of ●ehouah whom they worshipped. Object. It seems the Israelites worshipped the calf. For Aaron saith, verse 4. These be thy Gods (O Israel) that brought thee out of Egypt. Answ. Aaron's meaning is nothing else, but that the golden calf, was a sign of the presence of the true God. And the name of the thing signified is given to the sign, as upon a stage he is called a King that represents the King. And Augustine saith, that images are wont to be called by the names of things whereof Ad Simpli●. 〈◊〉 2. q. 3. they are images, as the counterfeit of Samuel is called Samuel. And we must not esteem them all as mad men to think that a calf made of their earings, being but one or two days old should be the God that brought them out of Egypt with a mighty hand many days before. And these are the points of difference touching Images, wherein we must stand at variance for ever with the Church of Rome. For they err in the foundation of religion, making indeed an Idol of the true God, and worshipping an other Christ than we do, under new terms, maintaining the idolatry of the heathen. And therefore have we departed from them: and so must we still do, because they are idolaters: as I have proved. speaker D. B. P. But this point of difference is made to bring in a common argument of theirs, to wit, that the worshipping of the golden Calf is condemned as flat Idolatry: * Exod. 3●. and yet the Israelits worshipped not the Calf, but God in the Calf, to which we say, they did not worship the true God in the Calf, but the God of the Egyptians, which was taken by them to have the shape of a black Calf, with white spots. See S. Augustine. * Lib. 18. de ciui●. cap. 5. And therefore making the golden calf to represent this false god, and attributing their deliverance, unto that supposed god, and not unto the God of Israel, committed idolatry, which the text proveth most manifest, De nat. deo●, Vers. 4. these be thy gods that brought thee out of Egypt. M. Perkins answereth, that the meaning is nothing else, but that the golden Calf was a sign of the presence of the true God: such glosses without any authority of the ancient fathers is ridiculous, being against the plain text: but saith he, we must not thinks them so ●adde, as to take a Calf made with their carerings to be their God, no: but we may well think them so ungrateful unto the true God their deliverer, that they did ascribe their deliverance not to him, but unto that God, which the Egyptians served, whose portraiture was that Calf. speaker A. W. This point of difference is brought in, not to avow any argument of ours, but to answer a distinction of yours, who being dri●●n to shifts, think to help the matter by telling us that the jews worshipped the golden Calf, and therefore were condemned. To which we reply, that the jews did worship jehovah in or by the Calf, which we prove by the text itself. ˢ Exod. 32. 4. These be thy Gods that brought thee out of the land of Egypt. But it was the true God that brought them out of Egypt, even ᵗ Exod. 3. 14. jehovah. You answer, that they attributed their deliverance to that false God of the Egyptians. Then did they think the Egyptian God to be jehovah; for to jehovah do they consecrate the day of dedicating the Calf. ᵘ Exod. 32. 5. Tomorrow shall be the holy day to jehovah. But how ridiculous a conceit is this, to feign, that the jews should imagine that the Egyptians God was their deliverer, whereas they knew, that the great wise men of Egypt, the chief worshippers of that God, had striven against Moses, and their deliverance, by all means possible, x Exod. 8. 19 till at last they and the power of their God were overcome? So that indeed, it was impossible they should be so sottish as to dream, that the Egyptian God had delivered them. And if this had been their fault, being a thing so monstrous and senseless, God would certainly have charged it upon them, when he laid out their sin to Moses. But he rather accuseth them for breaking his commandment by making a molten Calf, affirming to it, and proclaiming, y Exod. 3. 8. These are thy Gods that brought thee out of Egypt. This is farther confirmed by those two calves, which in imitation of this, z 1. Reg. 11. 28 jeroboam set up to worship the true God by, and so continued even by a 2. Reg. 10. 16. 29. jehu, who destroyed the heathen Idols. The text proves nothing for you, These be thy Gods that brought thee out of Egypt. For the Egyptians had no such Calf to their God, though the Ox or Calf called Apis (as b August. de civit. Dei lib. 18. cap. 5. Austin●aith ●aith in the place alleged) was consecrated to their chief God Serapis. If we brought nothing for our exposition but authority, you might stop our months with the contrary judgement of the ancient writers, but against reason authority is of small force, and yet you bring none for yourself, nor answer Master Perkins, showing that Images are called by the names of the things they re●… 〈◊〉, and so that calf, made to be a token of jehovahs' presence, that brought them out of Egypt, is said to be the God, that brought them out of the land of Egypt. speaker D. B. P. But now before we end this question, I must let you ●●●erstand what worthy men they were that fi●st began to wage batte●● 〈◊〉 ●…ages: they were the ●ewes in their ●alm●●. Ord. 2. tra●… 〈◊〉. a●… 〈◊〉 ●…od 〈◊〉. Act. 5. A barbarous Persian Xenias, as 〈◊〉 N●… 〈◊〉▪ 16 cap. 27. Then Ma●●met the great god of the Turks. Al●… 〈◊〉 15. & 17. with such like infidels, ●o●●●ers, and the scum of the earth. See Cardinal Bella●mme de Jmag. lib. 2. cap. 6. speaker A. W. If these be the ancientest Authors you can bring, that have waged against Images, I can go beyond you many hundred years. What say you to c Gen. 35. 〈◊〉 jacob, who made all his household give him their Images, which he buried under an Oak, that was by Shechim, about the year of the world 2270? The commandment of God given on Mount Synah, the preaching of the Prophets, & the zeal of many worthy Kings of juda, were long before the jews Talmud, d Talmud begun to be gathered 300. years after Christ. which was begun to be gathered, and written more than 300. years after Christ, and was not e Finished about the year 506. finished till about the year 506. long before which time, as I have showed, Origen and Clement did not only speak against the Heathen Idols, but defend the Christians, for refusing to have any Images, and prove that the use of them was unlawful and unfit. I f In my answer to t●e Epistle Dedicatory. showed before about this matter of Xenaias, who at soon was above 400. years after Christ, that Images were withstood as unlawful, even in the beginning of preaching the Gospel. This Nicephorus wrote not much more than 300. years since. As for Blasphemous Mahomet, who patched up his abominable Alcoran, with pieces of all kinds of professions, though his intent was damnable, and his writing most sottish, yet hath he many things agreeable to the truth, taken out of the books of Moses; and in this point of Images, his acknowledging of the truth, shall make the more to your condemnation. What should we do looking in Bellarmine? if there were any thing for your advantage, more than that which you have alleged, you might and would have made bold with it, as you do generally in all your answers. Bellarmine there tells us a story of the mislikers of Images, but he neither begins where ●e should, and dissents without any sufficient reason, from Alphonsus a Castro, and maketh that seventh Council his chiefest bulwark. speaker D. B. P. I will with one or two testimonies of the ancientest Father's, finish this controversy I octant. I● car. de pass. Christ. Kneel down and adore the venerable w●od of th● Crosse. H●●rome, 〈◊〉 vita Paulae: She adored prostrate before the Cross, as if she had se●●e Christ hanging on it. Basil against J●lian cited, Act. 2. Synod. 7. I honour the history of the Images, and do properly worship them. Finally, in the 7. general Council holden 900. years past, they are condemned of heresy, that deny the use and worshipping of holy Images. speaker A. W. Lactantius, though he were an ancient Christian, was not divine; and in these verses (if they be his) he showeth himself liker a light Poet then a grave writer; whose authority should be taken in so great a matter. jerom reporteth what Paula did in jerusalem. For which he that well considereth what it was, may find more cause to commend her zeal, then to like of her actions. She went into the Sepulchre, and kissed the stone of his resurrection, which the Angel had removed from the door of the Tomb; The place of his body, where the Lord had lain, as if she had thirsted for the desired waters, she licked with her faithful tongue. who sees not more zeal than knowledge, in this behaviour? Neither P●ter, nor john, nor any of the Disciples, are reported to have done any such thing, though they came to the grave by and by after our saviours resurrection. Was she more devout? no, but more ignorant, and passionate. This testimony of Basil is no where to be found, but in this Council, which was packed for the nonst to confirm Idolatrous Image worshippers. I showed the like practice of the Council before, concerning other writers. Now for a conclusion of this point, I will briefly note the beginning of Images among the Christians, and speak a little of that seventh Council so often alleged against us. The first use of any Images, after our saviours ascension, was brought in by Simon the Sorcerer, who was also the first, and principal heretic. Of whom g Theodore●. haerer. lib. 〈◊〉 princip. Theodoret and h August. d● haeres. cap. 1. Austin write, that he gave his own, and his strumpet Selenes Images to his followers, to be worshipped by them. After him, one i August. ibid. cap. 7. Marcellina, of the sect (as it is said) of the Carpocratians, worshipped the Images of jesus, Paul, Homer, and Pythagoras. The Gnostics presently after her, worshipped the Images of Christ, and are condemned for it by k Irenae. lib. 1. cap. 23. 24. Irenaeus. They have painted Images (saith l Epipha. lib. 〈◊〉. ●om. 2. haeres. 27. Epiphanius of Carpocrates, and the Gnostics) which they say are the Images of jesus, and that they were made under Pontius Pilate, while our Saviour lived: but they keep these Images secret yet (as he observeth) they worshipped those Images. Amongst true Christians the beginning of Images may well be thought to have been such, as m Euseb. hist. lib. 7. cap. 17. Eusebius guesseth it was, namely an imitation of the Gentiles, who used to make and keep the Images of them, by whom they had received any special good. Yea the Gentiles, being newly converted, could not by and by be weaned from all use of Images, more than from other superstitions. It was necessary (saith n Tertull. d●●oro. militis. Tertullian) in former times, to yield many things to the Christians, who (for the most part) were converted from Paganism to religion, when they were old, and so could hardly leave those things, to which all their life time they had been accustomed, But as yet they had no Churches, nor use of Images, in their assemblies. That seems to have grown by the o Basil. in orat. de Ba●laam Martyr. painting of the histories of Martyrs in tables, and setting them up in Churches. Which advantage the Devil, that always watcheth his opportunity, to bring in Idolatry by little and little, greedily apprehended and followed, and at the last brought to such a height, that the p Leo 3. Isau●…cus. Emperor Leo, the third surnamed Isaurius, was feign to call a q Concil. Constantinop. anno 729. Council at Constantinople, about the year 729. wherein it was decreed, that the Images should be pulled down. This Gregory the second Bishop of Rome, who some 13. years before had caused Images to be allowed in a r Concil. Roman. sub Cregor. 2. Council at Rome, took very heinously; and so much the rather because the Emperor had required obedience of the Latin Church, to the decrees passed in that Council at Constantinople. But the Bishop was so far from yielding obedience, that he took this commandment of the Emperor, as an occasion to withdraw his allegiance from his Sovereign, and seized into his hands all the authority, that was yet remaining to the Empire in Italy. This contention, after the death of Leo, grew more hot; in so much that his son Constantine Copronymus, to make some good end of the matter, assembled another s Concil. Constantinop. sep●imum sub Constantino Coprony more. Council at Constantinople, about the year 755. which he calleth the seventh general Council, where there were present 308. Bishops, and wherein Images were again condemned. About some 34. years after, t Jrene; widow to the Emperor Leo 4. Irene daughter to a King of the Tartars, and widow to the Emperor Leo the 4. (a Pagan by birth, and little better in religion) during the nonage of her son Constantine, called a Council at Constantinople, wherein a great number of Bishops maintained by the word of God, that Images ought to be abolished. Which the Empress perceiving, found means to break up the Council; and afterwards appointed another again the next year at u Concil. se●●nd. Nicen. 〈◊〉 ●rene. Nice in Bythinia: wherein it was decreed, that Images should be worshipped, and that Council of Nice should be counted the seventh general Council, and not the other, which had been held before at Constantinople against Images. This is that seventh Council which our Papists so magnify; and it passeth under the name of that famous Council of Nice, wherein Arius was condemned, every man not knowing, that this was a second Council betwixt three and four hundred year after the former. But that all men may be the better able to judge of this foresaid Council, let me propound the speeches of some of the Bishops on the behalf of Images. x Carol. Magnus de imag. lib. 3. cap. 17. I receive and embrace honourably (saith Constantine Bishop of Constans in Cyprus) holy and reverend Images, according to the service of adoration, which I perform to the Consubstantial and life giving Trinity: And them that do not so think, nor glorify them, I separate from the Catholic and Apostolical Church, and lay them under the Curse, and join them with such as have denied the Incarnation of Christ our God, for our salvation. y joan. Oriental. legatus in Concil. Nicen. 2. Act. 4. The holy Father hath said plainly, that the Image of the King is called the King, and yet there are not two Kings: so that it is clear that he which shall adore the Image, and say it is Christ, sins not. The most holy Patriarch, z Tharasius i● cod. Concil. Act. 3. Tharasius said, let us observe that the old Scripture ●ad signs, and that out of it the new hathtaken Cherubins of glory, shadowing the propitiatory. The holy Synod answered very well Sir, so is the truth. The most holy Patriarch said; if the old Scripture had Cherubins shadowing the Propitiatory, we also will have the Images of jesus Christ, and of the holy mother of God, and of the Saints shadowing our Altars. a Theodosius apud. Carol. Magn. lib. 2. cap. 6. Theodosius Bishop of Ancyra said, whatsoever things are written, are written for our learning; therefore the holy Images and Pictures graven, and painted, are painted and set up for our learning, zeal, and example. b Elias apud Carol. ubi supra. Elias the most holy Bishop of Crete, said, According to the most reverend letters of Adrian, most holy Pope of old Rome, I confess and hold Images to be holy and worthy of worship, never laying them away, but adoring them perfectly; them that confess otherwise, I accursse. The othet most holy Bishops and venerable Monks cried out; c Concil. Ni● cen. 2. Act. 3. And we all together receive, and embrace, and adore Images, with very great honour. d Concil. eod. Act. 2. Stauratius' Bishop of Chalcedon said, I receive, embrace, and honour Images, as being the pledges of my salvation. e Ibid. Peter Bishop of Nichor said, I receive venerable Images, and adore them, and will always teach the doctrine, that I may one day give account to God our judge, in the world to come. f Act. 4. john the most religious Priest, Lieutenant of the apostolic thrones said. Therefore an Image is greater than prayer. And this is come to pass by the providence of God, for ignorant men's sakes. g Act. 1. The same man counteth the denying of worship to Images, the worst of all heresies, as that which overthrows the government of our saviours house. I forbear to set down their reasons which are taken from Tradition, miracles, and some places of Scripture so ridiculously applied, that it is little better than blasphemy to make the holy Ghost precedent of so Idolatrous and sottish a Council. h Bergomensis lib. 10. Centur. 8. cap. 9 col. 629. Constantine having subscribed to this Council by his mother's persuasion and example in his noneage; after he came to years of discretion, and his own government, by the advise of divers learned men, repealed the decrees of it concerning Images; and ere long after took the whole sway of the Empire from his mother (who had usurped it as protectrix) into his own hands, which dealing of his did incense the ambitious, and idolatrous woman, i Zonar. tom. 3. Paul Diacon. lib. 23. Sigebert. Anno 798. that she caused certain traitors, first to pluck out his eyes; and afterward to murder him: yea so great was her malice and fear, that she ceased not, till she had made his sons her grandchildren's, or nephews eyes to be pulled out also: such an author, and patrons had that Idolatrous and wicked Council; the chief foundation of Popish Images. Such as it was notwithstanding, the decrees of it were sent by Pope Adrian the first to the Emperor Charlemagne, that he might allow of them: But he held another k Concil. Francofor. sub Carolo Magn. Council at Franckfort; wherein it was concluded, that the second Council of Nice, whereof we have spoken, should not be held either for general, or for the seventh, or for a thing of any worth. The decrees of that Council condemning Images, were by this repealed, and a book written by express commandment of the Council of Franckfort, and published in the name of Charlemagne, in which, as the Council of Constantinople is reproved, for taking away all use of Images, even for history and memory: so that second Council of Nice is particularly confuted and condemned. The like entertainment found the decrees of that Council, amongst our countrymen here in England, as you shall see by the testimony of a Monk, that writ 300. years ago. The l Anno 795. Mathae. Westmonast. same year (saith Matthew of Westminster) Charles King of the Frenchmen sent into Britain m Librum Synodalem. a book of decrees, wherein many things were found contrary to the true faith, and that especially, that it was determined by the joint consent of almost all the Doctors of the East, That Images are to be adored, which the Catholic Church utterly detests. Against this, Albinus writ an Epistle wonderfully indited, according to the authority of the holy Scriptures ●●d carried together with that book of decrees to the King of Fr●…ce in the name of the Bishops and Nobles. Yet was not this Council of Franckfort, nor the Epistle written by Albinus, nor the book set out in Charlemaine's name of sufficient strength to stop the course of Idolatry, so violent it is where it finds any way made for it, whereupon n Claudius' Taurinens. Episc. Claudius' Bishop of Turin having been brought up and preferred by Charlemagne, opposed himself by writing afresh against it, and (as o jonas Aurelianens. Epist. jonas Bishop of Orleans saith, who writ against him) proceeded farther to cast them out of all the Churches of his diocese. This opinion and fact of his, jonas writ against, yet so, as that he wholly agreed with him about the unlawfulness of adoring Images against the second Council of Nice. But in the East the quarrels about Images were more hot and dangerous, p Synod. Parisiens'. pag. 8. which moved the emperors Michael and Theophilus, to send their Ambassadors into France to the Emperor Lewis q Le debon naire. the courteous, son of Charlemagne about the year 823, to signify to him, that the superstitious abuse of Images in their dominions, had made them assemble a Council about the matter, in which it was decreed, that they should not be worshipped with incense, lights, kneeling prayers, songs and service before them, all which notwithstanding, that some of their clergy refusing to yield obedience, had withdrawn themselves to the Pope of old Rome, complaining to him, and slandering the East Church, that they therefore had sent their Ambassadors both to him, and to the Pope, for the clearing of themselves of all such false imputations, and that they might understand what the judgement of their Churches was in those points. Hereupon Lewis the Emperor called a national Council at Paris the r Anno 824. year following 824. wherein the conclusion was (as in the Council of Franckfort) against both pulling down, and worshipping of Images, as appeareth by an Epistle sent from the said Synod to Lewis and Lotharius, by two Bishops, Italitgarius, and Flamarius, and according thereunto answer was returned to the emperors Michael, and Theophilus. Thus much I thought good to set down, as briefly as I could, he that would read of these matters more at large, may find enough to content him in that excellent treatise of the s Plessy of the Mass. lib. 2. cap. 2. 3. 4. Lord Plessy against the Mass, in the second book, the second, third, and fourth Chapters. The judgement of all these matters I leave to all men whatsoever, that will vouchsafe to weigh things by the Balance of the Sanctuary, with the hand of true reason. Others, that had rather believe what is told them, then try that they believe, I commit and commend to the mercy of God. Whom I beseech, according to his good pleasure, to enlighten our hearts, and incline our affections every day more and more, that we may discern and acknowledge his most holy truth, to his glory, the good of his Church, and our own everlasting salvation, through his Son jesus Christ. To whom with the Father, and holy Spirit, one God, immortal, invisible, and only wise, be all glory, power, obedience, and thanksgiving for ever and ever, Amen. FINIS. Errata. Pag. 11. lin. 1. read, in our time p. ead. l. 29. r. yes. p. 17. l. 11. r. were not dedicated p. 36. l. 22. r. out. p. 44. l. 10. in the margin, r. Pope's breast p. 45 l. 21. r. and that. p. 57 l. 17. r. etc. p. ead. l. 35. r. them Cardinal p. 68 lin. 18. r. is moved. p. cad l. 22. deal as. p. 87. l. 4. in the margin, r. Appetit. p. 100 l. 10. in the margin, r consentientis. p. 129. l. 34. r. he. p. ead. l. ult. in margin, r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 132. lin. 34. r. conscience. p. 136. lin. 12. r. thereby. p 144 l. 15. r. uncertain. p. 148. l. 9 r. since. p. 155. l 23. deal, to. p. 158. l. 5. in the margin, r. take heed your. p. 159. l. 9 r. his. p. 181. l. 9 r. it is not a short, p. 183. l. 27. I. cannot cover two. p. 208. l. 24. deal, only. p. 250. l. 29. deal, your. p. 252. l. 4. r. he. p. 262. l. 30. r. But that this. p. 296. l. 35, r. for though Christ. p. 353. l. 11. r. temporal satisfaction. p. 359. l. 2. in the marg. r. way. p. 380 l. 27. r sin. p. 390. The measure of our Ladies most holy foot. p ead. l. 3. r. ●●zes. p. 403. l. 22. r. good. p. 405. l. 17. r. three. p. 422. l. 16. r. authority. p. 425 l. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 426. l. 30. r. is at those. p. 441. l. 39 r. away. p. 451. l. 28. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 461. l. 36. r. Russin. p. 464. l. 6. r. Menandrians. p. 466. l. 24 r. Cerdon. p. 476. l. 4. deal be. p. 488. l. 31. r. Canon law. p. 502. l. 33. r. Austin. p. cad. l. 35 r. our opinion. p. 506. l. 21. r. refraining. p. 521. l. 10. r. commended. p. 527. lin. 7. deal by. p. 548. l 36 r. terret. p. 552. l. 34 read, that the image of the living God should be made the image of an idol. and dead thing. p. 580. l. 14. r. the preposition. lin. 26. the same preposition. p. 592. lin. 30. read, offering to it.