A treatise of iustification· By George Dovvname, Doctor of Divinity and Bishop of Dery

A TREATISE OF IVSTIFICA∣TION.

THE SEVENTH BOOKE: Concerning good Workes.

CAHP. I. To avoid Popish calumniations, it is shewed, that we doe hold the necessity of good works, and doe urge the same by better arguments, than the Popish religion doth afford.

§. I.

AS touching his last argument, which he bringeth to prove, that faith doth not justifie alone, drawne from the neces∣sity of good works, I am now to treat. For this is the sixth capitall Errour of the Papists in the controversie of justi∣fication, in that they stiffely hold, that good workes are necessarily required unto justification, as causes thereof and to salvation as the merit thereof. But before I dispute the question, I am to meet with some calumniations of the Papists. The first, that wee by denying the necessity of good workes as being neither causes of justification, nor merits of Salvation, doe dis•…•…ourage the people from wel. doing; and by teaching that by saith alone we are justified and saved, doe animate and encourage them, to the practise of all sinne and iniquity.

I answere, that we doe not deny the necessity of good workes, and that

w•…•… use better arguments to deter the people from sin, and to encourage them to well doing, than the Papists by their doctrine can doe. For to teach men to do good works with an opinion either of satisfaction, pro∣pitiation, or of merits, which are the three chiefe arguments of the Pa∣pists, that they are satisfactory, propitiatory and meritorious, is to teach men to mar good works rather than to make them. Because a good work undertaken with an opinion, either of satisfaction or justification by them, or of merit, though otherwise it were good, becomes abomina∣ble unto God, as der•…•…gating from •…•…he alone and al-sufficient merit and satisfaction of Christ. Neither can they encourage men to well doing by these arguments, that by their good workes they are justified, and for them shall be saved; whiles t•…•…eir conscience must needs tell them, that besides the guilt of their manifold sinnes, their good workes are impure, and that they can merit nothing at the hands of God, but pu∣nishment These therefore who have just cause to doubt, or rather to despaire of justification by their workes, and of salvation by their me∣rits; cannot by these arguments receive true encouragement to well doing, but rather discouragement there from. But although wee deny good workes to be either causes of justification, or merits of Salvation: yet we affirme them to be not only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, good and a profitable, but also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, necessary. The which I will shew to prevent both the malitious slanders of the Papists, and also the prophane abuse of carnall Gospellers, who turne b the grace of God into wantonnesse. Good, I say, as being commended and commanded of God, and therefore to be ensued, Phil. 4. 8. Rom. 12. 17. Psalm. 34. 13. Profitable, as being re∣wa•…•…ded both beatitudine vice, c with the blessednesse of this life, and bea∣titudine patriae with the blessednesse d of the life to come, 1 Tim. 4. 8.

§. II. Necessary, though not necessitate efficientiae as causes; yet necessitate presentiae, as necessary consequents of justification, and as ne∣cessary antecedents of glorification. They are necessary, I say, by a ne∣cessity not onely privative (if I may so speake) but also positive. Priva∣tive, because without them the profession of faith is not onely vaine and unprofitable, but also hurtfull and pernicious: Vaine, because such a •…•…aith is dead e and counter•…•…eit, justifying neither alone nor at all. Hurt∣full, because being planted in the vineyard of God, that wee might be∣come trees f of righteousnesse; if we bring not foorth good fruit, wee must looke to be g cut downe, or stocked h up; or like the figtree which having greene leaves, but no fruit i Christ accursed. Such professours are like the barren ground, k which receiving the raine often falling up∣on it, and bringi•…•…g forth thornes and bryars, is rejected, and nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned. Like to the foolish l Virgins, who having a lampe of an externall profession, but wanting the oyle of sa∣ving grace, when the Bridegroome commeth, are to be shut out. Like the chaffe m in the floore, which is to be winnowed from the wheat. Like goates n in Christs flocke, which are to bee separated from the sheepe. Like bondservants in Gods house o which are not there to abide, but with the bondwoman and her p sonne are to bee cast out: who having a

formall profession of religion q, but denying the power of it, which is the faith of hypocrits, must looke to have their portion with hypocrits, r where is weeping and gnashing of teeth.

§. III. They are necessary also by a positive necessity, and that ma∣nifold. As first by the necessity of infallibility, in respect of Gods

• Decree,
• Word,
• Oath.

In respect of of his decree. For whom God hath predestinated to salvation, hee hath predestinated unto s sanctification; that they may be conformable to the t image of his Sonne. And therefore whosoever doth hope u to become like unto Christ in glory, he must endeavour, in some measure, to resemble him in grace. We exhort therefore our hea∣rers, that they doe not abase the doctrine of predestination, with those who were called predestinatiani, as to thinke, that either because they sup∣pose they are elected, they shall be saved, howsoever they live: or be∣cause they thinke, that they are not elected, they cannot be saved, though they should live never so godly: as if godlinesse, if they be elect, were needlesse, or if not, bootlesse. But forbearing to prye into Gods se∣cret counsels, (which are to be adored and not searched into) to have recourse to Gods word. For the secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but the revealed things to us, that wee may doe them. For there we shall finde these two things: first, that where God hath ordai∣ned the end, hee hath also ordained the meanes. And therefore as it is necessary, that the end should be accomplished, because decreed by God: so it is as necessary in respect of the same decree, that the end should be atchieved by the same meanes which God hath preordained. Now, whom God hath elected, them he calleth x, whom he calleth (ac∣cording to his purpose) them he justifieth by faith, whom hee justifieth by faith, them he sanctifieth by his Spirit▪ whom hee calleth, justifieth, and sanctifieth, them, and no other, he glorifieth. Therefore as it is ne∣cessary in respect of Gods decree, that those who are elected shall be sa∣ved: so it is as necess•…•…ry in respect of the same decree, that they should attaine to salvation by these degrees: that is, first they must be called and converted unto God, they must bee justified by a true faith, they must in some measure be sanctified by the holy Spirit. The second thing is, that in the word the Lord revealeth his purpose concerning those that live well or ill. Thou thinkest, because thou hast a conceit that thou art elected, thou canst not be damned, though thou live never so wic∣kedly. But be not deceived, for God hath revealed his purpose concer∣ning impenitent sinners, who live and dye in sinne unrepented of y, that there is no inheritance for them in the kingdome of God. As for example, thou art a drunkard and wilt not be reclaimed from this sinne, and yet presumest that thou shalt be saved, because thou hast a conceit, that thou art elected. But be not deceived; no drunkards shall inherit the kingdome of God. On the other side, thou hast a conceit, that because thou art not elected, thou canst not be saved, though thou

shouldest live never so godly. But the Scripture is plaine, that whoso∣ever truely beleeveth in Christ, whosoever unfainedly repenteth him of his sinnes, whosoever walketh uprightly before God making Consci∣ence of his wayes, hee shall bee saved. Therefore whatsoever thy con∣c•…•…it may bee, concerning thine election, or not election, if thou doest truely beleeve in Christ, and repenting of thy sinnes doest endevour to lead a good life, as sure as God is true, thou shalt be saved.

§. IV. Secondly, in respect of Gods Word which is infallibly true. Now the word plainely testifieth, that whosoever is in Christ,a is a new creature; that those who are in Christ,b live not after the flesh but after the Spirit: that they who are Christs, doe crucifiec the flesh with •…•…he lusts thereof: that Christ was made unto us, not onely righte∣ousnessed and redemption, but also sanctification: that Christ came not with water alone,e or bloud alone, but with water and blood: the bloud of redemption to cleanse us from the guilt of sinne: and the water of ablution to purge us from the pollution of sinne: that in whom Christ dwelleth by faith,f hee dwelleth in them by his Spirit, and that if any man have not the Spiritg of Christ, he is none of his: that faith being a fruit of the Spirit, and a grace of regeneration, it cannot bee where the Spirit of grace and regeneration is not, and that unlesse men bee rege∣nerate and borne a-new,h they cannot see the Kingdome of God.

§. V. Thirdly, in respect of Gods Oath, in which it is impossible i that he should lye. Now God hath sworne, that whom he redeemeth from the hand of their spirituall enimies,k he will give them to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the dayes of their life. For redemption is as well from the dominion of sinne, as from the guilt of it. As for those, who commit sinne,l that is, in whom sinne raigneth, they are the servants of sinne, and therefore not actually redeemed by Christ; for whom the Sonne freeth,m they are free indeed. Those that are freed from sinnen become the servants of righteousnesse. Those that are delivered from the hand, that is, the power of their spirituall ene∣mies, are ipso facto made the servants of Godo whose service is true free∣dome. Thus much of the necessity of infallibility.

§. VI. Secondly, they are necessary necessitate pracepti, imposing a necessity of duety, towards

• God.
• Our Neighbour.
• Our Selves.

Towards God: that wee may bee not onely obedient,p obsequious and well pleasing unto him: but also (which ought to be the chiefe re∣spect of all our actions) that wee may shew our selves thankefull unto him, who hath been so gracious unto us. First, by loving him againe, who hath lovedus firstq For when the love of God is shed abroad in our heartsr by his spirit, that is, when by faith wrought in us by his spirit we are perswaded of Gods infinite and unspeakable love towards us: it can∣not be, but that our hearts should reflect some love towards him; which is to be shewed in a willing observations of his Commandements. Se∣condly in bringing forth those fruits, which God expecteth, and in at∣chieving

that end, which God propoundeth to himselfe in all his bene∣fits bestowed upon us. This is the will of Godt even our sanctification: that fruit,u which he expecteth, that end, wh•…•…ch hee aimeth at in all his blessings. This is the end of our el•…•…ction that we may bee holy: of our vocation 1 Thess. 4. 7. of our redemption 1 Pet. 2. 24. Tit. 2. 14. Ephes. 5. 26, 27. Of our reconciliation Col. 1. 21, 22. Of our regenera∣tion, Ephes. 2. 10. Of all his temporall benefits, Psal. 105. 45▪ Third∣ly, by adorning the doctrine of God our Saviour, Tit. 2. 10. Fourthly and principally, by glorifying God who hath been so good unto us, and propounding his gloryx unto us in all things. For herein God is glo∣rified, if we bring forth much fruit, Ioh. 15. 8.

§. VII. Secondly, towards our Neighbour: first, for avoiding of offence, 1 Cor. 10. 32▪ Phil. 1. 10. making straight pathesy unto our feet, that others treading in our steppes need not stumble or fall, provi∣ding things honestz in the sight of all men, labouring and endevouring to have a good con•…•…cience void of offencea towards God and towards men. Secondly that wee may edifie our neighbours by a godly exam∣ple and provokeb them to good workes, and winne them unto Christ, 1 Pet. 3. 1. Thirdly, that wee may stoppec the mouthes of the adversa∣ries, which otherwise would bee open to blasphem•…•… the truth, Tit. 2. 5. Fourthly, that wee may cause them also to glorifie God, Matth. 5. 16. Fifthly, that wee may doe them goodd in exercising judgment,e and in practising the dueties of charity and mercie towards them.

Thirdly, towards our Selves. First, that wee may avoid those judge∣ments which are threatned against all sinnes both of omission and com∣mission. Deut. 28. 15▪ &c. Matth. 3. 10 & 25. 41, 42. Secondly, that wee may be made partakers of those blessings which are promisedf to those who a•…•…e obedient to the will of God, Psal. 84. 11.

§. VIII. Thirdly, they are necessary, necessitate signi, as necessary signes and evidences, whereby wee are to gather assurance to our selves of our justification, whereby our faith isg to bee demonstrated, whereby wee are to make our calling, and our electionh sure. Our election can not bee knowne à priori, by any foregoing thi•…•…gs, but à posteriori, and namely by the fruits of sanctification, which are also the fruits of our election. For by a godly life our faith and justification is manifested 1 Ioh. 3. 7. (•…•…n respect wherof the faithfull are said to be justified by their workes, Iam. 2. 21, 25.) being justified,i it is certaine, that they are called according to his purpose: and i•…•… so called, then elected: are they elect∣ed? then undoubtedly they shall bee saved. They are the cognizances of themk that are to bee saved; for by faith wee receive the inheritance among them that arel sanctified. They are the evidences, by which we shall be judged at the last day: at which time God will judge menm ac∣cording to their workes. For wee must all appeare before the judge∣ment seat of Christ, that wee may receive according to those things which we have done in the body,n whether it bee good or evill. Those that have done good,o shall goe into everlasting life: and they that have done evill, into everlasting punishment. For good workes, though

wee are not justified by them, nor saved for them: yet they are the evi∣dence, according to which our Saviour will pronounce the sentence of salvation Matth. 25. 34, 35. According to that Psal. 62. 12. And to thee Lord, mercie, for thou rewardest a man (meaning the godly man) accor∣ding to his workes.

§. IX. Lastly, they are necessary necessitate medij, and as that, which though it be no cause, is called causa sine qua n•…•…n. And thus they are ne∣cessary, first, as the way, which leadeth to life eternall, via qua nos perdu∣cturus est ad finem itsum quem promisit,p the way by which hee will bring us unto that end which he hath promised, saith Augustine. For those that are justified, and by justification entituled to the Kingdome of hea∣ven, they are to goe in the way of sanctification towards their glorifica∣tion, E•…•…h. 2. 10. good workes therefore though they bee not the cause of raigning yet they are the way to the Kingdome. And so saith Bellar∣min•…•… himsel•…•…e,q that although God in predestination hath determined to give the Kingdome of heaven to certaine men whom he loved with∣out any prevision of workes: notwithstanding hee did withall ordaine that in respect of the execution, the way to come to his Kingdome, should be good workes. I say then with the Prophet Esay,r this is the way let us walke in it. Secondly, as necessary fruits of our election, for wee are elected to that end that we should bee holy, Ephes. 1. 4. as neces∣sary fruits of faith, without which it is judged to bee dead, •…•…am. 2. 26. as unseparable consequents of our redemption and justification, Luk. 1. 74. And as they are necessary consequents of our justification, so they are necessary forerunners of salvation, by which wee are fitted for Gods Kingdome, because no uncleane thing can enter into the Kingdome of heaven, Apoc. 21. 27. and finally so necessary is a godly life, that with∣out it no man shall see God. Heb. 12. 14. I conclude with Bernard,s that good workes are occulia predestinationis jndicia, futur•…•… f•…•…licitatis presagia, via regni, non ca•…•…saregnandi, tokens of our secret predestination, presages of our future happinesse, the way to the Kingdome, but not the cause of our obtaining that Kingdome. For howsoever good workes are neces∣sary in many respects, as I have shewed, necessitate presentiae; yet they are not necessary necessitate efficientiae, as causes of our justification.

§. X. Secondly, the Papists calumniate us, as if wee taught that good workes are not necessary to sanctification, which slander, as all the rest, ariseth from their willfull and pernicious errour in consounding justific•…•…tion and sanctification. In the question of justification we hold, according to the Scriptures, that if our owne workes or righteousnesse should bee obtruded unto the Lord as the matter or merit thereof, whereby wee should bee both acquitted from our sinnes and so delive∣red from hell and also entituled to the Kingdome of heaven, they are not onely to bee rejected, but also detested ast menstruous clouts, as dung,u as losse. But in the question of sanctification, where they are considered, both as fruits of faith and the Spirit, as consequents of justi∣fication, whereby wee testifie our thankefulnesse to God, gather testi∣monies to our selves of our justification, benefit and edifie our brethren•…•…

and also as necessary forerunners of glorification, whereby we are fitted and prepared for Gods Kingdome (unto which by justification wee are entituled) and as the way wherein we are to walke towards our heaven∣ly countrey, and as the evidences according to which our Saviour will judge us at the last day, &c. wee doe acknowledge they are highly to be esteemed of, as those things wherein our sanctification doth in good part consist. For wee doe teach, that our sanctification is partly habi∣tuall, consisting in the habits of sanctifying graces, faith, hope, charity, humility, the feare of God, &c. which is the first justification of the Pa∣pists: and partly actuall consisting in our new obedience, or, which is all one, in good workes; which is their second justification. This then is that which we doe hold, that although good works doe not concurre with faith unto the act of justification, as any cause thereof: yet of ne∣cessity they must concurre in the subject, that is, the party justified, as ne∣cessary fruits of faith, as necessary consequents of justification, as necessa∣ry antecedents of salvation. And this is that, which not only we, but Bel∣larmine himselfe often citeth out of Augustine: Bona opera accedunt justifi∣cato, non praecedunt justificandum: or thus, bona opera non praecedunt justifi∣candum sed sequantur justificatum, good workes doe not goe before, but follow after justification, which is a pregnant proofe, that they are no causes thereof.

CAP. II. That we are not justified by Workes.

§. I.

HAving thus avoided the calumniations of the Papists, wee are now to dispute the question: which is to bee understood, not of justification before men, whereby we are declared or knowne to bee just: but of our justification before God, whereby hee maketh us just: nor of workes, as fruits and consequents, but as of causes of justifi∣cation. For we doe confesse, that men are justi∣fied declarativè, that is declared and knowne to be just to themselves or others by good works, as the proper fruits of faith, and undoubted con∣sequents of justification: but wee deny that we are justified before God by good works, as any causes therof. And this our assertion we will first prove by necessary arguments, and then defend the same against the ob∣jections of the Papists.

§. II. And first I prove it by all the arguments which I used before, to prove the five severall points already handled. For first, if justification

is not to be confounded with sanctification, as if it consisted in a righ∣teousnesse inherent in our selves, or performed by our selves; then are we not justified before God by workes, But the former hath beene clearely proved; therefore the latter is to be confessed.

.2 If wee bee justified by the meere grace of God, and that freely, without respect of any workes done by us; then are we not justified be∣fore God by works. For the holy Ghost maketh such an oppositiona be∣tweene grace and workes, that if we be justified by the one, we cannot be justified by the other. But the antecedent hath beene formerly pro∣ved, therefore the consequent cannot be denyed.

3. If we be not justified before God by righteousnesse inherent in, or performed by our selves, but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ through f•…•…ith, then are we not justified by workes. But the first I have demonstrated by many undeniable arguments: therefore the second must be granted.

4. If we be justified by imputative righteousnesse, that is to say by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to them that beleeve, the Lord imputing righteousnesse unto themb without workes; then it is evi∣dent, that wee are not justified by workes, but that is most true, as hath plentifully beene proved; therefore this.

5. If we be justified by faith alone, then not by workes. But we are justified by faith alone, as hath beene proved; therefore not by workes. The arguments reduced to these five heads, which were very many, and impregnable, might satisfie any reasonable man, who is not wilfully ad∣dicted to his owne erroneous conceits, though I should adde no more: but because wee have to deale with men unreasonable I will adde some.

§. III. And first out of Rom. 4. 4, 5, 6. He that worketh not, is not justified by workes: he that beleeveth, worketh not, as the Apostle there sheweth. And againe, to whom faith is impured unto righteousnesse without workes, they are not justified by workes: to all the faithfull faith is imputed unto righteousnesse without workes, therefore none of the faithfull are justified by workes. The assumption is thus proved: If to Abraham his faith was imputed for righteousnesse without works, then are all the faithfull justified without workes: for Abraham is by the Apostle propounded as a patterne: therefore as he was justified so are we, Rom. 4. 22, 23. 24.

But to Abraham his faith was imputed for righteousnesse, as the Apo stle teacheth, Rom. 4. 3, 4, 5. Therefore all the faithfull are justified with∣out workes.

2. The true doctrine of justification is taught in the Scriptures: justification by workes is not taught in the Scriptures: for the justifi∣cation taught in the Scriptures, is an action of God justifying a sinner, but this by workes, is neither an action of God, neither is it the justification of a sinner, but the action of the justitiary himselfe, who by the ex∣ercise and practise of good workes increaseth his inherent justice, or fanctification: which hath no affinity with that justification, which is taught in the Scriptures.

3. None that are justified by faith are justified by workes; all the faithfull are justified by faith, therefore none of the faithfull are justified by workes. The proposition is evidently proved by that opposition which the Apostle constantly maketh betweene faith and workes in the question of justification: asfirming that men though abounding with works of grace, are justified by faith without workes, and saved by faith and not by workes, Rom. 3. 28. & 4. 3, 4, 5. Ephes. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5.

4. If any be justified by workes, then either the regenerate man or the unregenerate: but neither the unregenerate, as the Papists con∣fesse: nor the regenerate, for they are justified already. Neither doe the Scriptures acknowledge any sorts or degrees of justification before God.

§. IV. 5. All that are justified by workes, are justified by that obe∣dience which they performe to the Law: But none are justified by the obedience which they performe to the Law: therefore none are justified by workes.

The proposition is manifest. Because the Law being a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnes, there neither are nor can be any good works, which are not prescribed in the Law. Yea, whatsoever worke is not con∣mable to the Law is sinne.

The assump•…•…ion may bee proved by many undeniable arguments. First, by all those places, which plainely testifie, that by the workes of the Law, that is, by obedience done to the Law, no man living shall be justi∣fied, Rom. 3. 20, 28. Gal. 2. 16. For by the workes of the Law wee un∣derstand all duties prescibed, and all that obedience which is required in the Law.

2. Those that are accursed by the Law are not justified by their obe∣dience of it. For to bee justified, is to bee blessed, Rom. 4. 6. and there∣fore to be justified, and to be accursed, are things repugnant.

But all men whatsoever, even those which seeke to bee justified by their obedience to the Law, are by the Law accursed. Therefore no man is justified by his obedience performed to the Law. And this is the Apostles argument, Gal. 3. 10. as I have shewed beforec. All transgres∣sours of the Law, are by the Law accursed.

All men since the fall are transgressours of the Law, Christ onely 〈◊〉〈◊〉 excepted; this assumption the Apostle omitteth, because hee taketh it for granted, as being a truth received among the faithfull in those times, though in these dayes denied by the justitiaries of Rome, but elsewhere it is by the Apostle expressed, as Rom. 3. 23. all have sin∣ned. Wherefore as God hath concluded all under sinne, Rom. 11. 32. Gal. 3. 22. so the Law hath concluded them under the curse.

3. All that are justified by their obedience to the Law doe perfectly fulfill it, by a totall, perfect, and perpetuall obedience: for he that doth not so fulfill it, by doing the things commanded, though he did nothing that is forbidden; by doing all, though he did the most; by continuing in doing all, and in that measure and degree, which the Law requireth, though he sinned but once in all his life, and that either by omission, or

comming short of his duety, is a transgressour of the Law, and there∣fore subject to the curse of the Law, because hee hath not continued in all things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them. And he that offendeth in one is guilty of all, Iam. 2. 10.

To whom the perfect fulfilling of the Law is impossible by reason of the flesh, they cannot be justified by their obedience performed to it.

To all, even the most regenerate, the perfect fulfilling of the Law is impossible by reason of the flesh, Rom. 8. 3. Gal. 5. 17. as elsewhere I prove at large. Therefore none though regenerate can bee justified by their obedience performed to the Law.

§. V. Sixthly, That Doctrine which is repugnant to the Scriptures is false.

The Doctrine of justification by workes, is repugnant to the Scrip∣tures.

Therefore it is false.

The assumption is thus proved, because the Scriptures in all places where they treat of justification before God, doe from the act of justi∣fication exclude workes. The places of Scripture which we produce to this end, Bellarmine reciteth (at least some of them) with purposed to answere them.

Rom. 3. 27. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what Law? Of workes? No, but by the Law of faith.

Verse 28. Therefore wee conclude that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law; to which hee might have added, verse 20. Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified.

Rom. 4. 2. If Abraham were justified by workes, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. To which he might have added vers. 5. & 6. To him that worketh not, but beleeveth on him that justifieth the un∣godly, his faith is counted for righteousnesse: even as David also de∣scribeth the blessednesse of the man, unto whom God imput•…•…h righte∣ousnesse without workes.

Gal. 2. 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law, but by the faith of Iesus Christ: to which adde the words fol∣lowing in the same verse, for by the works of the Law shall no flesh bee justified: adde also, Chap. 3. vers. 10. & 11. as many as are of the works of the Law, that is, who seeke justification by the workes of the Law are under the curse. For it is written cursed is every one that continueth not in all the things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them. But that no man is just•…•…fied by the Law in the sight of God, it is evident; for the just shall live by faith.

Ephes. 2. 8, 9. By grace are yee saved through faith, not by workes, lest any man should boast.

Phil. 3. 8, 9. I account all things but losse, and dung that I may gaine Christ, and may be found in him, not having mine owne righteousnesse which is of the Law, (as all inherent righteousnesse is,) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousnesse, which is of God by Faith.

Tit. 3. 5. Not by workes of righteousnesse, which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us.

§. VI. Bellarmine, before he maketh answere to these testimonies, noteth three things. First, what the Apostle meaneth, by the Law of workes, and by the Law of Faith. Secondly, what difference there is betwixt the justice of the Law: and the justice in the Law. Thirdly, what the Apostle meaneth by workes, when he saith a man is justified without workes. For the first: he cavilleth with Calvin and Chemnitius and others, as though they understood simply by the Law of workes, that which requireth workes, and by the Law of faith, which requireth faith: as if the Law of faith did not also require workes, and the Law of workes did not also require faith: whereas our writers distinguish the two covenants of God, that is, the Law and the Gospell, whereof one is the covenant of workes, the other, the covenant of grace: doe teach, that the Law of workes is that, which to justification requireth works, as the condition thereof: the Law of faith that, which to justifica∣tion requireth faith, as the condition therof. The former saith, doe this, and thou shalt live, Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Mat. 19. 17. the latter, beleeve in Christ, and thou shalt be saved, Iohn. 3. 16. Act. 16. 31. But the Papists, whiles they teach that in the Gospell perfect righteousnesse is required in us to justification and salvation as the condition thereof, as much or rather more than in the Law: they doe either confound the Law and the Gospell, making either of them to be the Law of workes; or else as the Apostle speaketh of the false teachers of the Galathians, they teach another Gospell than that which Christ and his Apostles taught: which whosoever doth, though he were an Angell from heaven, he ought to be held accursed. But you will say, is not obedience to the Law required in the Gospell? I answere, it is not required unto justifi∣cation and salvation as the condition: but the ability of performing obedience is the grace of the New Testament, which is promisede to those that beleeve. And therefore our new obedience is required, as the fruit of our redemption, and as the way wherein wee being justified are to walke towards our glorification, and as the cognizance of them that shall be saved.

§. VII. Bellarmine having rejected our exposition, setteth downe his owne, the summe and effect whereof in plaine termes is thus. That the Law of workes is the letter or the doctrine, whether of the Law or of the Gospell prescribing what is to be done, but affording no helpe to performe the same. And that the Law of faith is the Spirit, or the grace of the New testament promised to those that beleeve, whereby they are enabled to performe that which is commanded. Which di∣stinction betweene the letter and the Spirit, as it is propounded by Saintf Augustine, is true, but cannot bee applyed to this place, Rom. 3. 27. where, by Law on both parts is meant Doctrine, according to the proper signification of the Hebrew word Thorah. The Law of workes signifying the Morall Law, which unto justification requireth workes: the Law of faith, signifying the Gospell, which to justification requireth

faith onely, and is therefore called theg word of faith, and the Law of faith. For although Bellarmine elsewhereh seemeth to make this to be a principall difference betweene the Law and the Gospell: that the Law is the letter commanding: the Gospell is the Law of faith, mea∣ning thereby the grace of the New Testament, which is the Law writ∣ten in our hearts, wherby we are enabled to performe obedience to the Law: yet hee confesseth, that the Gospell in the Scriptures doth ever signifie the doctrine of the Gospell, and withall confesseth, the doctrine of the Gospell, as it commandeth any thing, to be a Law of workes. So that lex fidei (the Law of faith) according to this exposition, is as well opposed to the Gospell, as it signifieth the doctrine thereof, as to the Law. But the difference betweene the Law of workes, which is the mo∣rall Law, and the Law of faith which is the Gospell, in the question of justification, whereof the Apostle treateth, is to bee fetched from that righteousnesse, which either of them requireth to justification. For both of them require righteousnesse therunto. The Law requireth the righ∣teousnesse of workes: the Gospell, in which without the Law is revealed the righteousnesse of God (by which we are justified) teacheth the righ∣teousnesse of faith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉:i saith Chrysostome upon this place, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 what is the Law of saith? to be saved by grace. And this explication fitly agreeth to the scope of the Apostle, teaching that by the doctrine, not of the Law but of the Gospell, all boasting is exclu∣ded. As if the Apostle had thus argued: The true doctrine of justifica∣tion excludeth all boasting. See Ephes. 2. 8, 9. but the Law of workes, that is, that doctrine which teacheth justification by workes doth not exclude all boasting. See Rom. 4. 2. which the Law of faith doth, tea∣ching that wee are justified by remission of sinnes, and saved by grace, therfore that doctrine, which teacheth justification by works, is not the true doctrine, but that which teacheth justification by faith without workes.

§. VIII. As touching the difference which hee putteth betweene the justice of the Law, or that which is in it, or by it. I have spoken be∣forek in the third question of this controversie: where I shewed, that if it be admitted, according to Augustines meaning, who was the Author of it, it maketh wholly against Bellarmine. For though a man could per∣forme justitiam legis considered in the abstract, (as it is described in the doctrine of the Law, and as Bellarmine himselfe, De justif. lib. 1. cap. 1. doth consider it,) would justifie him, because it is perfect: yet considered in the concrete for that righteousnesse, which men attaine unto in or by the Law, doth not justifie, because it is unperfect. And therefore that righteousnesse which men have in or by the Law, doth not fulfill the righteousnes of the Law, which the Apostle calleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. These two distinctions Bellarmine hath devised to shift off onely two of the places cited, viz. Rom. 3. 27. and Phil. 3. 8, 9. both which, distinctions being rightly understood, make against himselfe, as I have shewed.

§. IX. Now he commeth to the third thing, viz. what is meant by workes. For saith he, our adversaries by workes, which the Apostle exclu∣deth

from justification, understand all works, whether done before or after faith; yea; faith it selfe considered as a work, which opinion to be most absurd, and pro∣ceeding from the ignorance of the Scriptures, Augustine, saith hee, teacheth.l Men not understanding what the Apostle saith, we make account that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law, have thought, that hee had said, that faith is sufficient to a man, though he live wickedly, and have no good workes, which, be it farre from that Vessell of Election to thinke. And farre bee it also from us so to thinke. But although faith alone doth not suf∣fice unto the perfection of a Christian who is to bee saved, yet it alone sufficeth unto justification: wherein wee have had the consent of many of the Fathers. And although to the act of justifying nothing in us con∣curreth with faith, but it alone sufficeth: yet in the party justified, there must concur with faith, both inward graces and also outward works. But here the Papists are divided among themselves. Some of them thinke that by the workes of the Law, are excluded, not the workes of the mo∣rall but of the ceremoniall Law: others, that the workes of the morall Law are also excluded; not all, but such as goe before faith, such as are done by the strength of nature without grace and without faith. I answere first to both joyntly, that not onely the workes of the Law are expressely excluded, but all workes whatsoever indefinitely, Rom. 4. 2, 6. & 11. 6. Eph. 2. 9. and more specially, the workes which wee have done in righteousnesse, Tit. 3. 5. the workes which God hath prepared for the regenerate, that they should walke in them. Ephes. 2. 9, 10. Againe, in him that is said not to worke, workes are not to bee distinguished, but all are understood to be excluded: but hee that is justified by fai•…•…h, is said not to worke, Rom. 4. 4, 5. and to have righteousnesse imputed to him without workes, verse 6. Therefore his workes are not to bee di∣stinguished but all are understood to be excluded.

§. X. To the former severally, I answere, first, that when the holy Ghost nameth the Law indefinitely, he meaneth either the whole Law which is calledm Mishmereth the observation of the Lord or his charge, containing three branches, the morall; the ceremoniall and the judicial Law, or the chiefe part, which is the morall Law. And that the Apostle meaneth it especially, because he speaketh of that Law, by which com∣meth the knowledge of sinne, and which was common both to Iewes and Gentiles, unto which the whole world was subject. Rom. 3. 19, 20. whatsoever the Law saith, it saith to them who are under the Law, that every mouth may bee stopped, and all the world may become 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 obnoxious to the judgement of God. Therefore by the deedes of the Law there shall no flesh, that is, neither Iew nor Gentile be justified in his sight: for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne.n More∣over it is evident, that the Apostle in that place speaketh of that Law, which forbiddeth morall offences mentionedo from the tenth verse to the ninteenth, and by which all both Iewes and Gentiles are convicted to be under sin, ver. 9. & 19. Secondly, it is unreasonable to be thought, that any man, who was a transgressour of the morall Law, should looke to bee justified by the observation of the ceremoniall Law which was

but a by-law, being but an appendice of the first table of the morall Law, as the judiciall was an appendice of the second table. And fur∣ther, the Apostle professeth, that whosoever would be circumcised, was bound to the performance of the whole Law. Therefore the observer of the ceremoniall law, could not be justified, without the observation of the morall law. Thirdly, this answer which is given by some of the Pontificians, is rejected by Bellarmine o and the greater part of learned Papists, who with us following the interpretation of Augustine and other of the ancient Fathers, doe confesse that by the workes of the law, which the Apostle excludeth from justification, are meant the workes of the morall law, as well as of the rest.

§. XI. But then say I, all good workes whatsoever are excluded. For in the Law, which is the perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse, all good workes are prescribed: and therefore those which proceed from faith. For if charity, which is the fulfilling of the law, proceedeth from faith unfained, 1 Tim. 1. 5. p then doe those good workes which the law prescribeth, proceed from faith also, or else they are not such as the law requireth. And therefore frivolous is the distinction of Bellarmine and other Papists, who by the workes of the law excluded from justificati∣on, under•…•…tand workes done before or without faith by the strength of nature, not workes proceeding from faith, or workes of grace. The ab∣surdity of wh•…•…ch distinction being applyed to the question in hand, may further appeare.

• 1. If workes going before justification bee excluded from being any cause thereof; then much more those workes which follow justifi∣cation: for causes doe not use to follow after, but to goe before their effects, at least, in order of nature.
• 2. The question concerning justification by workes, must of necessi∣ty be understood of good workes: for of those which are not good, no question ought to be made. But workes done before or without faith are not good. For whatsoever is not of faith is sinne: and without faith it is impossible to please God. Neither can the fruit be good, whiles the Tree is bad. Neither can it be imagined that a man should bee ju∣stified by the workes of the law going before faith, unlesse it bee pre∣supposed, that a man without faith and before grace, is able to fulfill the law. For hee that doth not fulfill the law transgresseth it, and hee that transgresseth it, is cursed, not justified by it.
• 3. When the Apostle termeth those workes which hee excludeth from the act of justification, the workes of the Law, the word Law is ad∣ded not by way of extenuation, as if hee spake of such as are not good, or devised by men, but of those good workes which God himselfe hath commanded, and to the perfect performance whereof hee hath promi∣sed justification, Rom. 2. 13. And life, Gal. 2. 12. Rom. 10. 5.
• 4. The holy Ghost speaketh generally of all men, whether regene∣rate or unregenerate, and of all workes, whether going before faith, or follo•…•…ing it, that a man, that is, every one, who is justified, is justified by faith without the workes of the law, Rom. 3. 28. that a man is not

• justified (that is, that no man is justified) by the workes of the Law, q but by the faith of Iesus Christ, for by the workes of the Law no flesh, that is, as the Psalmist r speaketh, no man living shall be justified. Gal. 2. 16. For as in the first act of justification wee are justified by faith without respect of workes; so our justification is continued unto us without re∣spect of our workes. And this appeareth most plainely in the examples of Abraham, of Iob, of David, of Paul, &c. as I shewed before s who, though they abounded with good works which they wrought by faith, t yet were not justified by them, but by faith onely. For that which Chrysostome saith of Abraham, is also verified of all the godly: for, saith hee, that a man having not workes should bee justified by faith, it is no unlikely thing: u 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but this, that a man flourishing in good workes, should not thereby be justified, but by faith, it was won∣derfull, and very much setteth forth the force of faith.
• 5. When the Apostle excludeth workes from justification, hee can∣not bee understood to exclude them from the first justification only of the Papists, for that as themselves teach is meerely habituall, consisting in the habits of grace. Now it is a senselesse thing to imagine, that the Apostle would so seriously labour to prove, that habituall Iustice is not actuall, or that good works are no part of habituall righteousnesse, nor doe concurre to habituall justification.

§. XII. Notwithstanding Bellarmine will prove that good workes on∣ly going before faith are excluded, first, out of Rom. 4. 4. To him that wor∣keth the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt. N•…•…w, saith hee, such onely are those which are wrought by the strength of free-will: for to works done by grace, that which is given is not simply merces, wages, but grace also, yea grace rather than wages.

Answ. First, the meaning of the Apostle is this, to him that fulfilleth the Law whether it bee by strength of nature, or by helpe of grace, if any such were, to him the reward of justification and salvation would bee due by Gods covenant, Doe this, and live. But to him that fulfil∣leth not the Law (which was the case of Abraham, and still is the case of the best) but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly (such as he doth judge himselfe to be in himself) he is justified gratis, or of grace, his faith being imputed unto him for righteousnesse without workes: this place therefore proveth justification by faith without workes.

Secondly, this assertion of Bellarmine is confuted both by other Pa∣pists, and by himselfe also in other places. For first there is no re∣wards due to him that fulfilleth the condition of the covenant, that is, to him that fufilleth the whole Law, for he that doth not fulfill the Law doth transgresse it, and to him that transgresseth, not reward but pu∣nishment is due. But to hold that a man before or without grace is able to fulfill the Law, is meere Pelagianismes. Againe, all men before or without grace are wicked sinners, and to such no reward is due but pu∣nishment. M•…•…ritis impii (saith Augustine) non grati•…•…, sed poena debetur. Secondly, the Papists and namely Bellarmine himselfe teach, that to

workes of grace proceeding from Charity the wages of eternall life is as due, as the promised hire to the workeman; and that by workes of Charity men doe merit, and that condignely, not onely ratione pacti by reason of the covenant, sed etiam ipsius operis for the worth of the worke it selfe: and yet forsooth the wages of their merit must be counted grace when the very place alleaged doth teach that the wages which is of debt is not of grace.

§. XIII. Secondly, from the scope of the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians, which was to perswade men, that without the faith of Christ neither the Iewes by the Law, nor the Gentiles by their Philosophie could bee justified or saved. Which is untrue. For the Apostle writeth not to un∣beleeving either Iewes or Gentiles, but to Christians, who were alrea∣dy perswaded of that truth. Neither was there ever any beleeving Iew, who held, that they might be justified by the works of the Law without faith, neither any beleeving Gentiles, who thought that by their mo∣rall works they might be saved without faith. That question therefore the Apostle doth nowhere dispute. But whereas many of the beleeving Iewes being zealous of the Law, and many of the beleeving Gentiles being misse-led by the Iewes were perswaded, that they were to be justi∣fied not onely by faith in Christ, but also by the observation of the Law that is to say by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves, and to bee per∣formed by themselves: The Apostle therefore sheweth, that the righ∣teousnesse, whereby we are justified, is the righteousnesse of God, and that neither Iewes nor Gentiles are justified by inherent righteousnesse wich is prescribed in the Law, to which end he proveth at large in the three first chapters of the Epistle to the Romanes, that both Iewes and Gentiles were sinners, and therefore were not to be justified by inherent righteousnesse, which is the observation of the Law, but were to be ju∣stified freely by the grace of God through the redemption which is in Christ, by or through faith that is to say, by the righteousnesse of Christ both active and passive apprehended by faith. This righteousnesse of Christ is that righteousnesse of God by which we are justified which is revealed in thex Gospell as being the principall argument thereof, Rom. 1. 17. for so the Apostle saith,y that we are justified through the redemption that is in Christ: that wee are justified by his bloud, Rom. 5. 5. reconciled to God by his death, vers. 10. and constituted or made just by his obedience, Rom. 5. 19. Of the scope of the Epistle to the Ga∣latians I am shortly to speake. But Bellarmine in his whole disputation impudently perverteth the Apostles scope, as if the question, which he disputeth, were not this: Whether faith doe justifie without workes, which every where he affirmatively concludeth; but whether workes doe justifie without faith, which the Apostle never mentioned nor meant; though Bellarmine makes him to conclude it negatively, viz. that workes without faith doe not justifie. And to this scope hee ma∣keth the whole discourse of the Apostle to aime. By this Sophisticall tricke Bellarmine seeketh to avoid the force of the Apostles arguments, as if he concluded not against them, we conclude that a man is justified

by faith without workes; but thus, wee conclude that a man is not ju∣stified by workes without faith, neither the Iewes by the workes of the Law, nor the Gentiles by their morall workes without faith as if with faith they did justifie. And this he maketh to be the Apostles meaning, that workes done before or without faith doe not justifie; but procee∣ding from faith, they doe justifie: and so is not ashamed to make the Apostle to contradict himselfe. But the Apostle doth constantly teach, that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law; by faith, and not by workes, and maketh such an opposition betweene faith and works in the question of justification, that if we bee justified by the one, we are not justified by the otherz for if by faith, then of grace; and if of grace, then not by workes; or if by workes, then not of grace. It is therefore a most shamelesse and Antichristian perverting of the Apo∣stles doctrine, to make him teach that works proceeding from faith doe justifie, and that we are justified both by faith and by workes: when hee plainely teacheth the contrary.

CHAP. III. Bellarmines answers to the forenamed places of Scripture refuted.

§. I.

FRom these three things thus premised, Bellarmine saith, it will bee easy to answere all those places which were alleaged. And first to Rom. 3. 27. he shapeth an answere, unto which I have sufficiently replyed before; saving that here hee addeth, that not all glorying is excluded, but only, that which ariseth from such workes as are only done by the strength of •…•… mans owne freewill. And that hee proveth, because the Apostle saith, Ubi est gloriatio tua, Where is thy boasting? that is, that boasting whereby thou gloriest in thy selfe, and not in the Lord. Whereunto I reply: that the word tua thine is not in the originall. And if it were, yet that glorying whereby thou dost glory, though it bee in the Lord, though in the grace and favour of God, though in thy workes procee∣ding from grace, is thy glorying. As the Apostle saith, this is our glo∣rying even the testimony of our conscience, &c. 2 Cor. 1. 12. and 1 Cor. 9. 15. it were better for m•…•… to dye, than that any man should make my glorying void. 1 Cor. 15. 31. By our rejoycing which I have in Christ Iesus our Lord.

§. II. The second testimony recited by Bellarmin•…•…, was from the example of Abraham, Rom. 4. For if Abraham, who was a most excel∣lent precedent of faith and obedience, and is propounded as a patterne

for the matter and forme of justification, was not justified by his works, which proceeded from his faith; but notwithstanding that he aboun∣ded with workes of grace, hee was justified by faith without workes: then all the faithfull in like manner, though abounding with workes of grace proceeding from faith, are not justified by their workes of grace, but are justified by faith without workes: but the antecedent is evi∣dent by the testimony of the Apostle, therefore the consequent is a cer∣taine truth.

Bellarmine answereth, that Abraham was justified by faith, not by workes going before faith, because they could not bee truely just, unlesse it were in re∣spect of externall righteousnesse: and therefore if he had beene justified by them (which he could not have beene, unlesse they were truly just) hee should have had glory, but with men, not with God. But when we reply, that Abra∣ham at that time, whereof the Apostle speaketh, that he was justified by faith and not by workes, and that righteousnesse was imputed unto him without workes, was a man regenerate excelling in the grace of faith and abounding in good workes which he wrought by faith: And therefore when hee denieth him to bee justified by workes, he plainely teacheth, that the faithfull are not justified by workes proceeding from faith, but although they abound with workes of grace proceeding from their faith, yet they are justified by faith without workes.

To this unanswerable argument taken from the example of Abra∣ham, Bellarmine frameth two answeres, but such as men use to make when they are brought to a meere non-plus. First, he saith, that Abra∣ham indeed at that time, whereof the Apostle speaketh, was regenerate, and through faith wrought many good workes: Notwithstanding the Apostle, when hee saith that hee was justified by faith and not by workes, doth not reject his workes wrought by faith; but affirmeth, that they were not wrought without faith, because if they had beene such, they would not have justified him. Therefore he excludeth the workes which Abraham might have wrought not by faith.

§. III. Where Bellarmine first taketh that for granted, which the Apo∣stle professedly disputeth against, and concludeth the contrary: name∣ly that Abraham was justified by workes. As if the meaning of the Apo∣stle, when he argueth, that Abraham was justified by faith without works, had beene this; that he was justified by workes, but yet such, as were not without faith.

Secondly, he inverteth the question, and perverteth the disputation of the Apostle for the mainetenance of his owne errour. As if the question were not, whether faith doe justifie without workes, which the Apostle affirmatively concludeth: but whether works doe justifie with∣out faith: which question the Apostle doth not once mention, which I desire the readers to take notice of. For if the question which the Apo∣stle disputeth, be not this, whether works doe justifie without faith; but this, whethe•…•… faith doth justifie without workes, then are the Papists evidently confuted by the disputation of the Apostle.

3. He supposeth that faithfull Abraham endued with abundant grace,

might doe good workes without faith, and without grace: and that the Apostle excludeth such workes, not which Abraham did, but such as the might have done, but did not. For it is certaine that the faithfull, as when they sinne through infirmity, doing that evill, which they would not doe, may say with the Apostle Rom. 7. 17. Not I, but sinne that dwelleth in me: so when they performe any good worke they may say with the same Apostle, 1 Cor. 15. 10. Not I, but the grace of God which is with me.

4. It is against sense to make the Apostle dispute that Abraham was not justified by such works as he might have done, but did not: but more senselesse when he maketh the Apostle to dispute that Abraham was not justified by his sinnes. For how doth he prove that they who have faith may worke sometimes without faith? by two instances, as namely, first, when they sinne. As if the Apostle had said, though Abraham were a faithfull man, yet some workes he might doe not of faith, as namely when he sinned (for sinnes are not of faith) and by such workes hee was not justified. And the like is his second instance, when they doe workes purely morall without relation to God, for such, if they be not of faith, are sins. But these morall duties in the faithfull, because they are not workes of the flesh, must needs bee the fruits of the Spirit, Gal. 5. 19. 21. and although perhaps performed to men, yet are done in obedience to God.

5. Neither doth the Apostle distinguish betwixt Abrahams workes, as if hee were justified by some, and not by others; but in generall deni∣eth him to have beene justified by any workes at all. And that hee pro∣veth because his faith was imputed for righteousnesse. As if hee had said: to whom faith is imputed for righteousnesse, he is not justified by workes: to Abraham faith was imputed for righteousnesse, therefore Abraham was not justified by workes. The proposition is thus proved: to him that worketh, that is, to him that fulfilleth the Law, righteous∣nesse is not imputed or reckoned of Grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, that is, that doth not fulfill the Law, but beleeveth on him that justifieth a sinner (as all are and as hee acknowledgeth himselfe to be) who therefore can merit nothing but punishment, his faith is coun∣ted or imputed for righteousnesse.

6. By this example of Abraham, Bellarmine is notably confounded in two other respects.

§. IV. For first, whereas justification before God is but one, where∣in the Lord by imputation of Christs righteousnesse to a beleeving sin∣ner, doth absolve him from his sinnes, and also accepteth of him as righteous in Christ, not onely in the first moment of justification, wherein being a sinner in himselfe he was first constituted righteous in Christ: but also in the continuance of justification; wherein the be∣leever, being still a sinner in himselfe, is continued in the favour of God by the merits and intercession of Christ: and though a sinner in him∣selfe, yet beleeving in him, that justifieth a sinner, is made the righteous∣nesse of God in Christ. Bellarmine notwithstanding maketh two justi∣fications,

the first, wherein a sinner is made righteous by infusion of ha∣bituall righteousnes: the second, when a just man maketh himselfe more just by the practise of actuall righteousnesse, that is to say, of good works (which two are degrees of sanctification, and not of justification) and saith, that the Apostle in the Epistle to the Romans speaketh only of the former, wherein workes going before faith are excluded from the act of justification. So that in Bellarmines conceit, when the Apostle saith, that a man is justified by faith without workes, his meaning is, without workes going before justification. But what the Apostle speaketh of other men, hee affirmeth of faithfull Abraham, at what time he was a man regenerate, as Bellarmine consesseth, and abounded with good workes, which as the same Apostle testifieth, Heb. 11. 8. &c. he wrought by faith. And yet of him the Apostle saith, that he was justified by faith and not by works; that the Lord imputed unto him righteousnesse without workes; that his•…•… justification or blessednesse consisted in the remission of his sinnes, and imputation of righteousnesse: and being a sinner in himselfe, as all mortall men are, hee was in Christ the promised seed made blessed through faith. By the example of Abraham therefore we learne first, that that distinction of justification is forged. For Abraham, as when hee first beleeved was justified by faith without workes: so afterwards, when hee abounded with good workes hee was justified by faith and not by workes. And undoubtedly if ever any man attained to the second justi∣fication which the Papists ascribe to workes, Abraham had it then, when the Apostle affirmeth that he was justified without workes. Se∣condly, that workes are excluded from justification, not onely those which goe before faith, but also those that follow, and are wrought by it.

§. V. The second respect: when Bellarmine endeavoureth to recon∣cile the seeming difference, betweene the Apostle Paul Rom. 3. & 4. and Saint Iames Chap. 2. hee saith, that Paul speaking of the first justification, saith, that a man is justified by faith without workes, namely going before justi∣fication: but Saint Iames speaking of the second justification, saith, that a man is justified by workes and not by faith onely.

But both the Apostle use the example of Abraham for the proofe of their assertion: Paul proving that a man is justified before God by faith without workes, demonstrateth his assertion by the example of Abra∣ham; who, though hee were most fruitfull of good workes, yet he was justified by faith without workes. And as Abraham was justified, so are all the faithfull. Saint Iames, concluding that a man is justified, that is declared and knowne to be just by workes, and not by profession of faith onely; proveth also his assertion by the example of Abraham, who de∣monstrated his faith by his workes. By which though he were declared and knowne to be a just man, as Saint Iames saith; yet by them he was not justified before God, but by faith only, as Saint Paul teacheth. This example therefore of Abraham doth prove, that the Apostle Paul doth not speake of the first justification which is habituall, nor of workes one∣ly going before justification, for Abraham was a man long before rege∣nerated

and justified, and his workes were such as hee wrought by faith. But that this is a false and counterfeit distinction of justification it may further be proved. For if this be true, that the Apostle excluding workes from justification, speaketh of the first justification, which they say is meerely habituall, then the Apostle must bee thought to•…•… have taken all these paines to prove, that to habituall righteousnesse good workes doe not concurre, or that habituall righteousnesse is not actuall, which nee∣deth no proofe. And againe if onely workes going before grace be ex∣culded from justification, then the Apostle must be thought to have •…•…∣boured seriously to prove, that we are not justified by such workes, as are not good: which needeth no proofe, for how should a man be justified by that which is not just? This example therefore of Abraham is as Chrysostome speaketh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, abundant matter of much victory, wherein we may truely and seriously triumph.

§. VI. Bellarmine second answere is, that the Apostle speaketh with con∣dition; if Abraham was justified by workes not proceeding from the grace of faith, as they thought who to their owne strength attributed righteousnesse: then surely he had glory, but not with God. And because it is evident enough, that Abraham had glory even with God: thence hee gathereth, that hee was not justified by workes without faith, but by faith from which good workes truly proceed: hee should have said, by workes which proceed from faith, if he meant to contradict us: for we doe confesse, that he was justified by faith from which good workes did proceed; but withall we say, that he was justified by his faith and not by his workes.

But in this senselesse answere of Bellarmine, there are many absurdi∣ties: for first by incredible impudencie hee taketh for granted, that which the Apostle disputeth against, namely that Abraham was justifi∣ed by workes, viz. such workes as proceeded from faith: secondly, hee perverteth the question, as if the Apostle disputed, that Abraham was not justified by workes without faith, or not proceeding from the grace of faith, as they forsooth thought, who to their owne strength attribu∣ted righteousnesse. As though either Abraham had any good workes which did not proceed from grace, or the Apostle would busie himselfe to prove that he was not justified by such as he had not, or as if the justi∣tiaries among the Iewes did attribute righteousnesse to their owne strength, when the Pharisee himselfe, Luk. 18. 11. gave thankes to God for it, or as if they thought that Abrahams righteousnesse proceeded from his naturall strength; when they knew, that God did chuse a Abra∣ham, and by his preventing grace called him out of Ur of the Caldeans, where b they served other gods. Thirdly, hee doth againe contradict the Apostle, in saying that Abraham had glory with God, which the Apostle plainely denieth: the word in the originall is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which sig∣nifieth not glory, but glorying or boasting. If Abraham, saith the Apo∣stle, was justified by works, then had he wherof to glory or to boast: but he had no cause to glory or to boast before God. Fourthly, his contra∣dicting of the Apostle maketh against himselfe. For if Abraham had beene justified by workes done without grace, hee had more cause to

glory and that before God, than if his workes proceeded from grace. For in that case it might have beene said to him: what hast thou, which thou hast not received? And if c thou hast received it, why dost thou glory or boast, as if thou hadst not received it? wheras therfore the Apostle denyeth, that Abraham had whereof to glory before God, he is to be understood, as speaking of his workes proceeding from grace; by which if Abraham had beene justified, he had whereof to glory, but not before God. But being justified by faith without workes, all matter of glorying was taken away. By what Law? of workes? No, but by the Law of Faith, Rom. 3. 27. For by grace we are justified and saved, not by workes, lest any man should boast, Ephes. 2. 8, 9. And that this con∣tradiction maketh against himselfe, appeareth further by that which himselfe saith d in the same Chapter out of Rom. 4. 4. But unto him that worketh the reward is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt. Whence he proveth, that by workes which the Apostle exclu∣deth from justification, he meaneth such workes, whereto not grace is given but wages rendred. And such are onely those, saith hee, which are wrought by the onely strength of free-will. For to the workes which are wrought by grace, that which is rendred is not simply merces wages, but it is also grace, yea grace rather than wages. If therefore Abraham had beene justified by workes done by the power of his owne free-will, and not by grace, hee might have gloried, that he had made God a debtour unto him. But to Abraham his faith was imputed unto righteousnesse, and therefore his reward was of grace and not of debt. For to him that worketh, that is, fulfilleth the Law of God, the wages is not reckoned of grace, but of debt, as being due ratione pacti in respect of the covenant, Doe this and thou shalt live. But to him that worketh not, that is, that fulfilleth not the Law, (which the Apostle maketh to have beene Abrahams case) but beleeveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousnesse, Rom. 4. 4, 5.

§. VII. And this also confuteth the doctrine of the Papists concer∣ning the merit of good workes proceeding from grace: unto which Bellarmine here saith the reward is not rendred as of debt, but onely to such as are wrought by strength of nature. But he and his fellowes, when they treat of merit, ascribe to works of grace merit of condignity. In respect whereof the reward of eternall life is due unto them in justice, not onely in respect of Gods promise or covenant, but even in respect of the workes themselves. For every good worke proceeding from cha∣rity absolutely deserveth, as they teach, eternall life: insomuch that hea∣ven is no lesse due to the good workes of the faithfull, than hell to the sinnes of the wicked.

§. VIII. As to the example of Abraham, so to these three places, Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5. wherein all workes of all men are ge∣nerally excluded from the act of justification, Bellarmine answereth that in them all those workes onely are excluded, which are done before faith. But we will speake of them severally.

And first to that Gal. 2. 16. Bellarmine saith, that in that Epistle there

are two questions handled: the former speciall, whether the ceremonies of the Law doe belong to Christians, so that without them they cannot be saved. The other generall, whether by the Law and strength of Nature justification can happen to any man without grace and without the faith of Iesus Christ. Vnto both which the Apostle answereth negatively. And afterwards he saith, that the state of the Question in that Epistle is, whether workes doe justifie without faith.

Whereunto I reply, that no such question is mentioned in that Epi∣stle, nor the contrary concluded; as being altogether heterogeneous, and besides the purpose of the Apostle, which was to reclaime the Ga∣lathians from their errour: who thought that besides faith the workes of the Law must concurre to justification. For both the false teachers, c who seduced them were Christians, who, lest they should suffer per∣secution for the Crosse of Christ, perswaded them to bee circumcised, Gal. 6. 12. and the Galathians themselves, who were seduced, did not cease to bee Christians, neither were they perswaded to renounce the faith of Christ, but were made to beleeve, that unto their faith in Christ they were necessarily to joyne the workes of the Law, that by them both they might be justified. Against this assertion the Apostle disputeth directly, proving that a man is justified by faith, and not by the workes of the Law. But if he had disputed against the other, that workes without faith in Christ doe justifie, or that workes done by the knowledge of the Law only by the strength of nature doe justifie with∣out faith in Christ; his disputation had beene to no purpose. For the Galathians and their Teachers would in their owne defence have an∣swered, that they did not from justification exclude faith in Christ, (God forbid!) but did adde unto faith the observation of the Law, de∣siring (as the Papists now doe) to bee justified not by faith alone, but both by faith and workes together. And therefore as in the Epistle to the Romanes, so here, the question is not, whether wee bee justified by workes without faith in Christ (which asser•…•…ion never any Christian held) but whether by faith without workes, which the Galathians and their teachers would have with faith to concurre unto the act of justifi∣cation. To which purpose call to minde the words in the very place alleadged. Wee saith the Apostle, speaking of himselfe and Saint Peter knowing that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law, but one∣ly by the faith of Iesus Christ, even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the workes of the Law. For by the workes of the Law shall no flesh be justified. For if the faithfull, such as Peter and Paul, bee justified by faith, and not by workes: then are they justified without workes: Neither doe the workes of the faithfull concurre unto their justification.

§. IX. But for all this Bellarmine will prove, that in the Epistle to the Galathians, the workes only done without faith are excluded from justification, by certaine consequences, which the Apostle inferreth, which, saith he, are most strong against workes done without faith but most weake against workes wrought by faith.

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

That they are strong against the workes of nature, I doe confesse: but that they be weake against justification by workes of grace, they be∣ing equally strong against all, I doe deny. For the Apostle when in the question of justification hee excludeth workes, doth not distinguish of workes, whether proceeding from nature, or from grace, as if by the one wee were justified, and not by the other; but generally excludeth all even those, which are commanded in the Law of God, thereby mea∣ning all inherent righteousnesse whatsoever, even charity it selfe which is the f end of the Law, and proceedeth from faith unfained. For the Law is a perfect rule of all inherent righteousnesse, whencesoever it procee∣deth. Neither are the Papists able to produce any one place of Scrip∣ture, wherein the Apostle, either affirmeth, that wee are justified by workes proceeding from grace; or propoundeth this question to bee disputed, whether workes doe justifie without faith: but even whether faith doth justifie without workes; alwaies concluding the affirma∣tive, that wee are justified by faith without workes; thereby, teaching, that workes doe justifie before God, neither without faith, nor yet with it,

§. X. For the better understanding of this needfull point worthy to be insisted upon, and for the satisfying of Bellarmines objections, wherein hee pleaseth himselfe; wee are to take notice, that there are two wayes to life eternall, which God hath propounded to man: the one in the state of innocencie: the other, after his fall. The former, was the covenant of workes, or of inherent righteousnesse to be performed by himselfe; the Sacrament whereof was the Tree of life. But when man had broken this covenant and was fallen from the state of integri∣ty, into the state of disobedience and corruption, it being now not pos∣sible that he should be justified or saved by inherent righteousnesse, ac∣cording to the covenant of workes: the Lord therefore in his infinite mercie and love of mankind made with man, being now a sinner, the covenant of grace in the promised seed; that whosoever truly beleeveth in him (though in himselfe a sinner, as since the fall all are) should bee justified and saved by his righteousnesse. The faith in this covenant con∣cerning the justification of sinners and salvation by Christ, was profes∣sed from the beginning after the promise was once made, by all the Pa∣triarches and ancient beleevers, who had testimony that they pleased God, g and by faith in the Messias wrought those things which were pleasing to God, which without faith in Christ they could not have done. And it was represented and figured in the sacrifices, which were types and figures of Christs sacrifice, even from the h beginning. And the same was afterwards confirmed by Sacraments: viz. Circumcision which was ordained to bee a seale i of that righteousnesse which is by faith: and the passeover, which was a type of Christ our passeover, k who is immolated for us; and prefigured by the propitiatory, which covered the Arke, in which were the two tables of the Law; by the Scape-goate, which did beare away the sinnes of the people, by the high Priest, who was a type of Christ in many respects; but most plainely by

the brasen l Serpent, &c. But lest men should either through ignorance, or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias, and consequently their owne salvation, which is the common corruption of all naturall men; it plea∣sed the Lord to renew the covenant of workes, by publishing the Mo∣rall Law: not with purpose that any should by the obedience thereof be justified or saved which Bellarmine himselfe m confesseth: but partly that to naturall and unregenerate men it should bee a Schoolemaster unto Christ, discovering unto them their owne damnable estate in them∣selves, both in respect of their sinnes, and of the curse belonging unto them for the same, that so they might be forced to seeke for salvation out of themselves in Christ: and partly, that to men regenerated and justi∣fied it should bee a rule whereby to frame their lives, and as it were a councellour and a guide to direct them in the way, which God hath ap∣pointed them to walke in towards our country in heaven.

§. XI. Those therefore which looked to be justified by the observa∣tion of the Law, as the Galatians were taught by their false teachers, were in a pernicious errour: both because none can bee justified by the obedience of the Law, all men without exception being sinners, and subject to the curse: and also because there is such an opposition be∣tweene these two covenants in the matter of justification, that to bee justified according to the Covenant of workes by inherent righteous∣nesse, is a disanulling of the covenant of grace: which cannot bee disanulled in it selfe, though to him that seeketh to be justified by works, it is made void, as the Apostle proveth, Gal. 3. and therefore with him I say, n that if justification be by the works of the Law whatsoever, then the covenant of grace is disanulled and made void, then is the promise made of none effect, then Christ died in vaine, Gal. 2. 21. then is the in∣herent no more of promise, Gal. 3. 18. but faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect, Rom. 4. 14. then men are made debtours to the whole Law, and consequently Christ is become of none effect to them. And finally, they that seeke to be justified by the Law are fallen from grace, Gal. 5. 2, 3, 4. according to all the consequences alleaged by Bellarmine. From when I argue thus.

To them that are debtours to the whole Law, Christ is become of none effect, to them the covenant of grace is disanulled, and the promise made of none effect, &c.

They that seeke to be justified by the workes of the Law, that is, by righteousnesse inherent whatsoever, whether before or after grace are debtours to the whole Law.

Therefore to them that seeke to bee justified by righteousnesse inhe∣rent, Christ is become of none effect, &c.

The proposition is thus proved: Those that are debtors to the whole Law are subject to a double yoake of most miserable bondage opposite to the liberty of justification: the former, in that they are to be subject to the fearefull curse of the Law, if at any time they transgresse it, though in the least degree, as wee doe very often, and sometimes in an high degree: the other, to be excluded from justification, if they doe not •…•…o∣tally

perfectly and perpetually fulfill it, which by reason of the flesh is utterly impossible to us. Now Christ came to free us from this double bondage of the Law, himselfe being made a curse for us, and perfor∣ming all righteousnesse in our behalfe, that by the imputation of his suf∣ferings and of his obedience, wee might not onely bee freed from the curse, but also bee entituled to the Kingdome of heaven. And there∣fore to him that remaineth under this double yoake of bondage, Christ profiteth nothing. I come to the assumption: those that seeke to bee justified by the workes of the Law, that is, by righteousnesse inherent, are debtours to the whole Law; for neither are they free from the curse, if they breake it, as all doe. And therefore the Apostle concludeth o them who are of workes, that is, who seeke justification by righteous∣nesse inherent, are under the curse. Neither can they be justified, unlesse they perfectly keepe it. Therefore they, who seeke to be justified by the workes of the Law, that is by inherent righteousnesse whatsoever, whe∣ther going before, or following grace, to them Christ is become of none effect, to them he dyed in vaine, to them the covenant of grace is disanulled, to them the promise is of none effect, &c. So that whether you conceive of workes as going before, or following grace, the con∣sequences of the Apostle are one and the same.

§. XII. Indeed if the popish doctrine were true, that Christ hath merited for us the infusion of that righteousnesse by which we are justi∣ed, as hee hath done that by which wee are sanctified, and that hee hath merited for our workes to make them meritorious of eternall life: then those consequences would not be so strong against the workes of grace, as of nature. But the Scriptures teach us, that Christ doth justifie and save us, by his blood and by his obedience, that is by his owne personall righteousnesse and merits, and not by any satisfaction of ours purchased by him, nor by any merit of ours by him made meritorious. For if his satisfaction and merits for us be full and perfect, what need we to patch to them the ragges of our owne satisfactions and merits? But if that were the end why Christ died for us, that wee by his merits should ob∣taine both inherent justice whereby we should be justified, and also me∣rits of our owne whereby we should be saved, as the Papists teach: then, either that righteousnesse and those workes w•…•…ich wee have by grace, are sufficient to justifie and to save us, or else Christ died in vaine for us. But neither is that inherent righteousnesse, which we have from Christ sufficient to justifie us, nor those good workes of grace which wee per∣forme sufficient to merit eternall life, as I have in this treatise abundant∣ly proved; neither did Christ dye in vaine, for that to imagine were blasphemy. Therfore that was not the end why Christ our Saviour died for us. I say againe, if Christ dyed to this end, that he might merit grace for us, whereby we might in our owne persons satisfie the Law, and so be justified thereby; then he merited not onely that we should perfect∣ly and perpetually without any omission or intermission in all our life fulfill the Law, and be alwayes and altogether without sinne, which by reason of our sinfulnesse is utterly impossible, wee having beene sinners

from the wombe, yea in the wombe: but also that wee should in our owne person•…•… satisfie the penalty, which cannot be done but by punish∣ment eternall, or that which is equivalent, for where hath beene guilt of sinne, as in all hath beene, there the Law cannot be satisfied without the punishment threatned in the Law. And therefore if this were the end of Christs death, it must be confessed, that he died in vaine: but this consequent is Blasphemous, and therefore the antecedent is Anti∣christian.

§. XIII. To the fourth place which is Ephesians 2. 8, 9. Bel∣larmine vouchsafeth no severall answere, but sleights it over with that common answere, that it excludeth onely workes done before faith.

But this place ought not so to bee sleighted. For it doth ex professo teach, that salvation and all the degrees thereof, as namely justification, are to bee ascribed wholly to the grace of God in Christ through faith, and not to any workes or deserts of ours whether going before or fol∣lowing justification. For first, it may seeme needlesse, that the Apostle should tell the Ephesians, whom before in the same Chapter hee had convicted to have beene before their conversion children of wrath as all are by nature, dead in sinne, bondslaves of Satan, living according to to the course of this world in all manner of sinne, untill God in his abundant mercies in Christ (by whose grace they were saved) quickned them together with Christ: that hee I say should tell them, that they were not justified by the workes which they had wrought before their conversion. Secondly, when the Apostle saith, you are saved by grace and not by workes, will they say hee excludeth onely workes going be∣fore salvation? why then hee excludeth all. And that distinction with which Bellarmine contenteth himfelfe, as a sufficient answere, cannot be fitted to this place. If it be said, that the Apostle by Salvation meaneth justification. I confesse that among the degrees of Salvation hee doth specially meane justification, whereby we receive the right to our in∣heritancep, and are intitled to the kingdome of heaven, and saved in hope. But from hence it is inevitably proved, that by what wee are ju∣stified, we are saved; and by what we are saved we are justified. But we are saved, as the Apostle here saith, by the free grace of God through faith, not of any workes of ours whatsoever, or whensoever performed: therefore in the like manner we are justified. What then? will you say, if we bee neither justified by good workes nor saved for them, are they therefore to bee neglected? I answere in the third place, that good workes, though they be excluded from the act of justification, or merit of salvation: yet they are not excluded from the conversation of the faithfull, but are therein required, as necessary fruits of our regeneration and consequents of our justification, as also being the way, wherein wee are to walke towards our glorification. As the Apostle sheweth in the next words, vers. 10. for wee are, saith he, Gods wo•…•…kemanship created in Christ Iesus unto good workes, which God hath preordained, not that wee should bee justified by them, or saved for them, but that wee should walke in them, as the way to eternall life: where we are to ob∣serve

that those words being a prevention of a secret objection, viz. if wee be not justified by good workes nor saved for them, are they there∣fore to be neglected? No, saith the Apostle, they that are justified are the workemanship of God created unto good workes, which God hath prepared, that we being justified and regenerated should walke in them. And therefore the Apostle speaketh manifestly not of workes going be∣fore grace, but of such good workes as are consequents of our justifica∣tion and fruits of our regeneration, wherein we being regenerated and justified are to walke, as in the way, to our glorification.

§. XIV. The next place, viz. Tit. 3. 5. which is like to the former, Bellarmine shifteth off with the like common answere, that it speaketh of workes going before faith. But hee may not carry it so. For the Apostle having (as hee had done, Eph. 2.) signified, that all of us before our con∣version lived in all manner of sinne: But after that the kindnesse and love of God our Saviour to man appeared: not by the workes of righ∣teousnesse which wee have done, but according to his mercie hee saved us, &c. Where as in the former place he useth the phrase of saving, unto which, as I said, Bellarmines distinction cannot bee fitted. And second∣ly, the workes which he excludeth, hee doth expressely call the works of righteousnesse: which terme cannot agree to the works of such men as the Apostle describeth vers. 3. and such are all men unregenerate.

§. XV. The sixth and last testimony whereunto Bellarmine answe∣reth is, Phil. 3. 8, 9. Where the Apostle in the question of justificati∣on renouncing his owne inherent righteousnesse, which not onely hee had in his Pharisaisme, but which then hee had according to the Law, desireth to bee found in Christ, having that righteousnesse, which is through the faith of Christ. Bellarmine answereth, according to his distinction formerly used, that by the righteousnesse which is of the Law are meant workes done through the knowledge of the Law by the onely strength of nature: which I have before confuted. Neither would Paul make any question of his justification by his works done before his con∣version. For before his conversion, notwithstanding his Pharisaicall pro•…•…ession of righteousnesse, hee doth confesse, that he was a blasphemer and injurious, and of all sinners the chiefe 1 Tim. 1. 13, 15. And where∣as Chemnitius objecteth that Paul rejecteth, not onely his workes before his conversion, which he si•…•…nifieth speaking in the time past, ver. 7. (but what things were gaine unto me I counted losse for Christ but also the workes of his present condition, which hee noteth, speaking in the pre∣sent tence, and using particles of amplification 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, yea, doubtlesse, and •…•… doe count all things but losse, &c. As if he should have said, nay, more than that, I even now doe count all things as losse,—and I doe count all but as dung &c. Bellarmine answereth, that as the Apostle in the beginning of his conversion had counted them losse, so hee did still. But if the Apostle had spoken of the same workes, whereof he spake ver. 7. the am∣plification used vers. 8. would have been but an idle repetition, and the exposition which we give, was long since delivered by p Chrysostome. The Apostle, saith hee, having said, these things 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I counted losse for

Christ, he saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 yea, that which is more I doe count all things losse, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he said all, both past long since and also present.

§. XVI. But here Bellarmine thinketh he hath Chemnitius at a great advantage, as if hee had spoken blasphemy, for saying that the Apostle calleth his workes done after his calling (which were the fruits of the Spirit, and for which he expected a reward 2 Tim. 4. 7. even a Crowne of righteousnesse, &c.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dung. Whereunto I reply: in the question of sanctification wee doe highly esteeme of good workes: but in the question of justifi∣cation, if they shall be obtruded as the matter, by which wee stand just before God, by which we are both freed from hell and entituled to hea∣ven: if affiance or trust be put in them for our justification before God, then, seeme they never so glorious, they are to bee esteemed as things of no worth, yea, as losse. And in the like cause, as hath beene shewed, the godly q have compared their most righteous works to menst•…•…uous clouts. And in this sense Chemnitius r speaketh, that the Apostle quod attinet ad articulum justificationis did thus speake of his workes done after his renovation. Immo saith he, si fiduc•…•… justitiae cor am Deo ad vitam aeter∣nam illis operibus assua•…•…ur, pronunciat ille esse stercora & detrimenta, But if the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 translated by the vulgar Latine stercora offend Bellar∣mine, hee may translate it quisquilias, as Hierome s doth meaning thereby things of no value, such things as use to be cast to Dogges, or▪ Swine, ac∣cording to the notation of the word. For as Suidas saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or as others, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 t that which is cast to swine. And from hence is the verbe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifieth u to bee rejected as a thing of no worth. Chrysostome and Theophylact upon the place, by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 understand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chaffe. Photius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 straw or stubble. But He•…•…ychius expoundeth it by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 dung. I conclude, as Bellarmine doth against Chemnitius; Eat nunc Bellarminus & queratur, &c. Let him com∣plaine that wee are enemies to good workes, because in the question of justification, when men trust to them to bee justified before God by them, and so make Idols of them, which the holy Ghost calleth Deos stercoreos; wee esteeme them not onely as things of no •…•…alew but also as losse.

§. XVII. To these testimonies I added others out of the same Chapters or Epistles, no lesse pregnant than these, unto which more might bee adjoyned, as Rom. 3. 24. being justified freely by his grace, which text affordeth two arguments, from the words gratis and gratia, From the former I argue thus:

Those that are justified freely (gratis) are justified without workes.

All the faithfull are justified gratis, freely.

Therefore all the faithfull are justified without workes.

The assumption is proved out of the text. The proposition, because the word gratis is so expounded by all sor•…•…s of Writers, both old and new, both protestants and Papists, gratis, id est, si•…•…e •…•…ueribus, sine meritis, as I have shewed heretofore x Gratis, saith 〈◊〉〈◊〉, quia nihil •…•…perantes,

nec vicem reddentes, sola fide justificati sunt d•…•…ne Dei, by which words hee excludeth all workes, as well following after, as going before. Oecume∣nius 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. thou art saved freely without any good workes of thine, which words exclude all merits, as well from sal∣vation, as from justification. And so doe those words of the Apostle, Ephes. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5. To avoid this evident truth y Bellarmine coyneth a twofold distinction. First, that the word gratis may bee understood, as opposed to merits of condignity, going before justification: and so it excludeth not the dispositions and preparations, which the Papists teach goe before justification which according to their doctrine, are but merits of congruity. But it is evident, that not onely merits of con∣dignity, but all merit whatsoever, yea and all respect of our owne worthinesse and well doing is excluded: so that gratis is as much as without any cause in us, or any desert of ours, or worthines in our selves. And thus the councill of Trent z it selfe expoundeth this word. We are therefore said to be justified gratis freely, because none of those things which goe before justification, whether faith for workes, deserve the grace of justification: for if it be grace, then is it not of workes: for i•…•… it were of workes, then grace were not grace, as the same Apostle saith, Se∣condly, saith he, it may bee understood as opposed to our owne merits or good workes done without grace, for those that proceed from grace, are not opposed to grace, and therfore not excluded.

Whereunto I reply: we cannot have any good thing but by gift from God: and what good thing we have from God, that is called ours, as our faith, our Charity, our Hope, our good •…•…orkes: Neither can wee without grace merit any thing but punishment. It is therefore absurd to understand the Apostle as excluding merits without grace, when as if we should doe all that is commanded (which cannot be done without grace) we must confesse that we deserve not so much as thanks, because we have done but what was our duty to doe. Neither can wee bee said to be justified gratis if there be any meritori•…•…us cause of justification in our selves, though received from God In regard of our selves indeed wee are justified gratis: but it is not gratis in nor without paying a great price in respect of Christ. And therefore to those words justified freely by his grace, is added, through the redemption whi•…•…h is in or by Christ. By the word gratis therefore the Apostle signifieth tha•…•… in us there is no materiall cause, no merit of justification, but onely in Christ. And where he saith that grace cannot bee opposed to grace: I say it may, as in that opposition which is of relatives, as of the cause and the effect. For the effect cannot be the cause of its owne cause, and therfore works which are the fruits and effects of justification cannot bee the causes thereof.

The other argument is from the word grace. For if our justification be of grace, then not of workes, as the Apostle teacheth, Rom. 11. 6. and if of workes then not of grace. So Ephes. 2. 8, 9. you are saved by grace not of workes. For to him that worketh, the reward, that is, justificati∣on or salvation is not imputed of grace, but it is rendred as of debt, but

to him that worketh not, but onely beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is imputed, namely of grace, to righteousnesse, Rom. 4. 4, 5. Even as David also describeth the blessednesse of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes, verse 6.

CHAP. IV. Bellarmines arguments proving the necessity of good workes: and first, from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell: Secondly, from the Doctrine of Christian liberty.

§. I.

NOW I come to Bellarmines arguments concerning good works: which, when he should prove they concurre to justification as causes thereof; hee proveth them to be consequents thereof, rather than causes. And having little to say to the que∣stion it selfe, he intermingleth many impertinent discourses. Impertinent I say to the question, though not to his purpose: which was to ca∣lumniate us, as though we held all those assertions, which he laboureth to confute.

In his fourth booke therefore, which is de justitia operum, he propoun∣deth two maine questions to be disputed, unto which divers others are coincident. The former, concerning the necessity of good workes; the other, concerning the truth of them. As if we, either denied that good workes are necessary or that they are truely good. To the former, hee referreth three questions: the first, whether the faithfull are bound to keepe the Law of God: as though wee taught, they were not: the se∣cond concerning the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell, as if we taught that the difference standeth in this, that by the Law good workes are necessary, by the Gospell not. The third concerning Chri∣stian liberty: as though we taught, that the faithfull in their conscience and before God, are subject to no Law.

Concerning the truth of the righ•…•…eousnesse of good works, after hee hath disputed the question, whether the Law be possible, whether the workes of the righteous bee sinnes: he commeth at length to handle the controversie it selfe, whether good workes doe justifie or not. Con∣cerning the former questions, it shall suffice to shew, what our tenet is in every of them; and to defend our assertions against his cavils, •…•…o farre as concerneth this present controversie of justification by workes, passing by the rest as impertinent. As touching therefore the first principall question which concerneth the necessity of good works:

the Reader will beare me witnes by that which before I have delivered, that we hold good workes necessary in many respects, and that we urge the necessity of them by better arguments than the Romish doctrine doth afford: we confesse, that they are necessary, necessitate presentiae for persons come to yeeres, that are already justified, and are to bee saved: as necessary consequents of justification, and as necessary forerunners of Salvation onely we deny them to be necessary necessitate efficientiae, as causes either of justification or Salvation.

§. II. That good workes are necessary to Salvation (which we de∣ny not) Bellarmine greatly busied himselfe to prove: but that they are necessary to justification, as causes thereof, (which is the question be∣tweene us) for ought that I can discerne, he goes not about to prove in his whole discourse of the necessity of good workes, wherein he spen∣deth nine Chapters. For after he had in the first Chapter calumniated us, as if wee denied good workes to bee necessary to Salvation: in the Chapters following hee proveth they bee necessary, because as hee pro∣poundeth his proofes in the Argument of his booke, we are bound to keepe the Law of God. And that he proveth by discussing the other two questions concerning the difference betwixt the Law and the Gos∣pell, and concerning Christian liberty. But by these arguments Bellar∣mine neither proveth his owne assertion, nor disproveth ours. His asser∣tion is, that good workes doe concurre unto justification as a cause thereof, which we deny. He argueth they be causes: why? because they are necessary. As if every thing that is necessary were a cause. But whereto are they necessary? to salvation, saith Bellarmine. Why, but the question is of justification. Now many things are required to salvation, which doe not concurre to justification, as namely a confession, b holi∣nesse of life, c patience, d perseverance, &c. which, though they goe before salvation; yet they follow after justification; and therefore can∣not be causes thereof. In all this discourse therefore Bellarmine is farre from concluding the point in question.

Notwithstanding it will not be unprofitable: if I shall make a short excursion to follow him in his discourse, but not to answere every parti∣cular, which is not worth the answering. That therefore he may con∣fute our most pernicious errour as he calleth it, e he saith he will prove three things: first, that in the Gospell is contained the doctrine of workes and di∣vers Lawes, and that the promises thereof require the condition of fulfilling the Law: Secondly, that the just are not free from the observation of the Law of God: Thirdly, that good workes are simply necessary to Salvation.

§. III. His intent in the first is to disprove that difference, which we make betweene the Law and the Gospell: from whence he had col∣lected in the former Chapter, that we deny the necessity of good works. The difference was this: That the Law propoundeth justification and salvation upon the condition of our fulfilling the whole Law. But the Gospell promiseth justification and salvation upon the condition of faith only; excluding works as the causes, by which we are justified, or for which we be saved: which difference if it be true, as it is most true,

plainely proveth justification by faith only, and disproveth justification by workes.

For the better understanding whereof, wee are to distinguish the termes both of the Law and Gospell: which are used sometimes more largely, sometimes more strictly and properly. More largely Thorah the Law signifieth the whole doctrine of the old Testament, whether writ∣ten and contained in the bookes of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalmes; or Preached. Written; thus it is said to have beene written in the Law, Ioh. 10. 34. which is written, Psalm. 82. 6. so Ioh. 12. 34. which is writ∣ten Psalm, 110. 4. so Ioh. 15. 25. which is written Psalm. 35. 19. The Law saith those things, Rom. 3. 19. which are cited out of the Psalmes, and out of the Prophet Esay, vers. 10, 11, 12. Thus 1 Cor, 14. 21. out of Esai. 28. 11. thus Gal. 4. 21. out of Gen. 21. 10. And thus by the Law in many places f is understood the whole doctrine of God contained in the Scriptures of the old testament, and is often used in the same sense promiscuously g with Gods word; insomuch that the Septuagints sometime translate Dabar h which signifieth the word, by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Preached, as Esai. 30. 9, 10. Psalm. 78. 1. Ier. 18. 18. Prov. 28. 9. & 29. 18.

In this large sense the Evangelicall promises made in the old testa∣ment are contained in the Law, though properly belonging to the Go∣spell, as i Bellarmine confesseth: the promises of remission of sinnes though they be in the Prophets, they doe not belong to the Law, but to the Gospell. And so the covenant of grace it selfe, which the Lord made with k Abraham, in making whereof he is said, Gal. 3. 8. to have prea∣ched before the Gospell to Abraham. Of the Doctrine of the Gospell (which was to begin at Ierusalem, Luk. 24. 47.) it is said Esai. 2. 3. & Mic. 4. 2. out of Sion the Law shall goe foorth. So more largely the Go∣spell is taken for the whole Doctrine of the new Testament, whether written by the Apostles and Evangelists, or preached Mark. 13. 10. Rom. 10. 16. Gal. 2. 5, 14. Ephes. 6. 19. Col. 1. 5. Phil. 1. 27. 2 Thes. 1. 8. Thus the histories of the life and death of CHRIST are called Gospels, Mark. 1. 1. Mat. 26. 13.

Preached, Rom. 2. 16. & 16. 25. 1 Cor. 4. 15. & 9. 18. Gal. 2. 7. 1 Thes. 1. 5. & 2. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 14. 2 Tim. 2. 8. In respect of this large sense it is truely said, that the Precepts, Promises, and Comminations of the Law are contained in the Gospell.

§. IV▪ More strictly and properly the Law signifieth the Cove∣nant of workes, which is also called the Law of workes, Rom. 3. 27. which upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience promiseth justifi∣cation and salvation to the observers thereof, Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Le∣vit. 18. 5. Ezek. 20. 11. Act. 13. 38. Rom. 3. 20, 28.

Likewise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Gospell which importeth l good tydings signi∣fieth more strictly and properly the Covenant of Grace, which is also called the Law of faith, Rom. 3. 27. and the word of faith, Rom. 10. 8. which freely promiseth justification, and right of salvation to all that be∣leeve in Christ, Ioh. 3. 15, 16, 36. & 6. 47. & 11. 25. & 20. 31. Act. 16. 31. Rom. 3. 24. 10. 6, 9. Eph. 2. 8, 9. Tit. 3. 5. 1 Ioh. 5, 13. This doctrine of God

concerning Salvation by Christ through faith, which properly is the Gospell, Luk. 4. 18. Matth. 11. 5. Rom. 1. 16, 17. Act. 15. 7. Gal. 1. 6. & 3. 8. Act. 10. 36. is called the Gospell of grace, Act. 20. 24. the word of recon∣ciliation, 2 Cor. 5. 18. the Gospell of peace, Ephes. 6. 15. the Gospell of salvation, Ephes. 1. 13. the Gospell of glory, 1 Tim. 1. 11. the Gospell of the glory of Christ, that is the glorious Gospell of Christ, 2 Cor. 4. 4. the Gospell of the Kingdome, Matth. 4. 13. & 24. 13. This doctrine teacheth us, that our gracious God out of his meere grace having elected his children in Christ before all times, did in the fulnesse of time send downe his Sonne to save us: and that the benefit of the Messias might be applyed unto us, vouchsafeth unto us the Gospell of grace, by which according to the purpose of his grace given unto us in Christ before all secular times, m he calleth us working in us the grace of faith: being endued with faith hee imputeth unto us the righteousnesse and merits of Christ, making us partakers of redemption, reconciliation, justification, and adoption, and so freeing us from hell: and from all the enemies of our salvation, hee entituleth us unto the kingdome of hea∣ven. And that wee may be fitted and prepared for his Kingdome into which no unholy thing may enter, Apoc. 21. 27. hee hath promised to them that beleeve, that being redeemed, reconciled, justified, adopted, and so entituled to the kingdome of heaven, hee will give them grace to worship him without feare in holinesse and righteousnesse before him all the dayes of our life, that is, in the voluntary, upright, and con∣stant obedience of his Law. Luk. 1. 73, 74, 75.

It is true, that the things which God in this Covenant of grace hath promised to give, as namely faith and new obedience, are also required of us Deo dante quod jubet, God giving to us what he requireth of us: the one, as the antecedent condition whereby we are entitled or have right to his kingdome, being saved in hope: the other as the consequent and fruit n of the former, whereby we being entitled to Gods kingdome, are prepared and fitted for it: without which, though none who are adulti are saved, Heb. 12. 14. yet none are saved by it, or for it; it being the way to the kingdome, but not the cause of it, nor the title that we have unto it: and therefore necessary, as I have said necessitate presentiae, as causa sine qua non, but not necessitate efficientiae as any true or proper cause thereof.

§. V. These things thus premised, it will be easy to answere Bellar∣mines arguments taken from the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell to prove the necessity of good workes. And they are two: the former disproving the supposed false difference, the other proving the pretended true. As touching the former: having first propounded an idle distinction of the divers acceptions of the word Gospell, that it sig∣nifieth either the doctrine which Christ and his Apostles taught, or the grace of the new Testament, which is the quickning Spirit, or the effica∣cie of the holy Ghost working in the hearts of the elect, or the Law writ∣ten in the heart, (which I therefore call idle, because as soone as he hath propounded it, he confesseth, that the word Gospell in the Scripture

doth never signifie any other, but the Doctrine) hee proveth, that in the Gospell is contained the Doctrine of good workes, and divers Lawe•…•…, divers comminations and divers promises made upon condition of good workes.

All which we doe confesse to be true as the word Gospell is taken in the larger sense. But as those promises and Doctrine of grace contai∣ned in the Bookes of the old Testament, did not belong to the Law pro∣perly which is the covenant of works, but to the Gospell which is the co∣venant of grace: so in the books of the new Testament, divers precepts, comminations and promises are contained, which belong not properly to the Gospell, which is the covenant of grace and Law of Faith, but to the Law of works. For even as the Preachers of the Gospell at this day, doe in their preaching intermingle many things appertaining to the Law either for the preparing of their auditours, who are not yet justifi∣ed, by the terrour of the Law; or for directing those that doe beleeve, to lead their life according to the rule of the Law: Even so our Saviour Christ, and his Apostles in their doctrine intermixed legall precepts, le∣gall promises and threatnings, as the necessity of their auditours requi∣red. But upon all this being granted, what will he inferre? he saith in the title of this Chapter (though in the Chapter it selfe he doth not expresse it) that from hence is proved the necessity of good works; which we deny not. So pertinent a disputer is this great Master of controversies.

§. VI. And forasmuch as the promise of eternall life, as of a reward, made to our obedience, is the principall ground, whereon the Papists build their Antichristian doctrine of the efficiencie and merit of good workes, I will endeavour to cleare this point. We are therefore to un∣derstand, that eternall life is vouchsafed to the faithfull in three respects. First, as the free gift of God without respect of any worthinesse in us. Secondly, as our inheritance purchased by Christ. Thirdly, as a free reward promised and given to our obedience. In the first respect, our salvation and all the degrees thereof, is wholy to be ascribed to the graci∣ous favor of God in Christ. In the second, to the mercy of God and me∣rit of Christ. In the third to the mercies of God redoubled and multipli∣ed upon us, and not to any desert of ours. For as touching the first, God before the foundation of the world was laid, of his free grace Elected us in Christ, o graciously accepting of us in his beloved without respect of any goodnesse in us; whom, when he foresaw fallen into the state of perdition, ex massa perdita humani generis did chuse us in Christ, in him, and by him to be justified and saved. And as out of his undeserved love he did chuse us; so by the same grace, whom he hath elected p, he hath called; whom hee hath called, he hath justified; whom hee hath justified, hee hath sanctified; and whom hee hath called, justified, and sanctified, he hath glorified, according to the purpose of his grace q given unto us in Christ before the world began. As therfore all the degrees of salvation are wholly to be ascribed to the grace, that is, the gracious fa∣vour of God in Christ, (for by his grace we were elected, called, justifi∣ed, regenerated and sanctified) so also by his grace wee are saved r and not of works. For although eternall death be the wages deserved by sin:

yet eternall life is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the free gift of God, through Iesus Christ our Lord, no way deserved by us. Rom. 6. 23. This his purpose of grace God revealed by his gracious promise to our first parents, and a•…•…ter to Abra∣ham and others, viz. that in the promised seed s all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed.

§. VII. Now that this his purpose of grace might be put in executi∣on, and this his gracious promise concerning •…•…he promised •…•…eed might be performed to the illustration of the glory, both of his mercie and al∣so of his justice: God in the fulnesse of time, out of his infinite good∣nesse and love to mankind, sent his owne and his only begotten Sonne into the world, that hee, taking our nature upon him, might not onely in the state of humiliation by his sufferings redeeme us from hell, and by his meritorious obedience purchase heaven for us: but also that in the state of exaltation he having conquered all the enemies of our sal∣vation in and before his resurrection, might by his ascension take pos∣session for us of that kingdome, which he had by his merits procured for us, and by his sitting at the right hand of his Father might make us to sit together t with him in heavenly places, and by his comming from thence againe might put us both in body and soule in possession o•…•… that heavenly inheritance, which he had purchased for us. And to the end, that the benefit of our blessed redeemer and Saviour might be applyed and communicated unto us, the •…•…ord according to the purpose of his grace u giv•…•…n unto us in Christ before all secular times, doth in his good time call those whom hee hath elected, by mini•…•…tery of the Gos∣pell ma•…•…e effectuall by the gracious operation of his h•…•…ly Spirit wor∣king the grace of faith in us, whereby wee receiving Christ with all his merits are actually made partakers of redemption, and are actually re∣conciled unto God justified and adopted, and by our justification en∣tituled to the Kingdome of heaven, and by our adoption made heires thereof and coheires with Christ; insomuch that being justified by faith, wee have thereby, not onely remission of sinnes, but also the in∣heritance, or at least the right and title to it: in respect whereof it is said in the Scriptures of so many as truely beleeve, that wee are saved, Ephes. 3. 5, 8. that we are passed from death to life, and that we now have eternall life, Ioh. 5. 24. & 6. 47. 1 Ioh. 5. 12, 13. And in this respect, eter∣nall life is our inheritance, which Christ hath purchased •…•…or us. And according to this tenure, Christ will put us in possession thereof at the last Day; when hee shall say unto us, Come yee blessed of my Father 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the beginning of the world, Matth. 25. 34. for you, I say, who before the beginning of the world were in Christ elected to be heires of this kingdome, which is not to he attained unto by any purchase or merits of ours, but shall bee given us as an inheritance intended from the beginning, and prepared for the elect, for whom Christ by his merits hath purchased it.

§. VIII. Now to those, who by Gods speciall grace doe beleeve in Christ, and by faith receive him, by whom so received they are justifi∣ed and adopted, and by their justification and adoption are in such •…•…ort

entituled to this kingdome as heires apparent thereof, that they are all∣ready said to bee saved, and to be set in heavenly places with Christ: to these, I say, that they might be fitted and prepared for this inheritance, unto which no uncleane x thing can come; h•…•…e hath in the covenant of grace freely, and out of his undeserved mercie promised the grace of sanctification by his holy Spirit, whereby wee are enabled, according to the measure of grace received, y to worship him in holinesse and righte∣ousnesse before him.

And to the end that we might be moved to performe the dueties of sanctification, hee doth not onely in his word seconded and made effe∣ctuall by his Spirit invite by exhortations and precepts to these due∣ties; but also that hee might encourage us thereunto, in his redoubled and multiplied mercies he hath promised not only the blessings of this life unto us, but also eternall life it selfe, as a gracious reward of our pie∣ty and obedience. Here therefore in admiration of Gods bounty to∣wards us we have just cause to exclaime with Augustine z: O the great goodnesse of God, to whom when in respect of our condition we ought to render unto him the duties of obedience, as servants to our Lord and God, as subjects to the Almighty, as captives saved to our redeemer, he doth promise unto us the rewards of friendship, that hee might draw from us the dueties of service which wee doe owe unto him. It was of Gods free grace, that hee elected any of us, that being elected hee called us, that being called and endued with faith hee justifieth and adoptet•…•… us, and thereby giveth us right to his kingdome; it was also of his free grace, that to them, whom hee redeemeth and justifieth, hee hath pro∣mised to bestow his graces upon them, whereby they are enabled to serve him in holinesse and righteousnesse and are fitted for his owne kingdome. But this is a multiplication of his grace upon us, that to en∣courage us to the Practice of Piety, whereby wee are fitted for the king∣dome of heaven, he doth promise to reward our good works with ever∣lasting happinesse, and in the end doth crowne his owne blessings with blessednesse, which, though hee bee pleased for our encouragement to call a reward, yet is it not deserved by us, but freely bestowed by him, as his free gift granted unto us in Christ before all times, as our inheri∣tance purchased by Christ: as his bountifull reward of his owne gifts, which as hee freely promiseth, so in his good time hee freely bestoweth, as his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is free gift.

§. IX. To this purpose let us consider the Lords dealing with Abraham, to whom the Lord at his first comming towards the Land of promise, made divers gracious promises, which afterwards hee often re∣peated. But when upon that Commandement of tryall to offer up his onely sonne, Abraham had by Gods speciall grace notably approved a his faith and obedience; hereupon the Lord doth sweare, that he will bestow upon him the things which before hee had promised, as the re∣ward of that his obedience, for so hee saith, because thou hast done this thing, and againe, because thou h•…•…st obeyed my voice. Can any man hereupon inferre that Abraham by his obedience had deserved these

promises which God long before had made unto him, and oftentimes repeated? Nothing lesse, so God in his eternall Counsell hath to the Elect designed eternall life, as his free gift by Christ, Christ by his merits hath purchased it to bee our inheritance, God hath graciously promi∣sed to bestow freely this inheritance on them that beleeve in Christ: when as therefore God doth promise to reward our piety with eternall life, wee may not thinke that by our piety it is deserved, which God long before had decreed and promised, and Christ our Saviour had purchased for us. But though it bee a reward, yet it is a most free, and undeserved reward.

§. X. When the Papists therefore object, that if eternall life be the reward of our obedience, then our obedience doth deserve it: I answere, first, thou canst deserve nothing at Gods hand, by that which he hath freely given, and much lesse that, which hee freely bestoweth on thee: Secondly, if thou shouldest doe all that is required of thee, thou coul∣dest deserve nothing thereby: for where is debt and duty, there is no merit, Luk. 17. 10. Thirdly, we doe not all that is commanded but come short of our duty, and that which we doe is unperfect, and defective in respect of manner and measure; and therefore in justice deserveth pu∣nishment, rather than reward: and consequently the reward, when it is given, is to bee ascribed to Gods undeservedb mercie and not to our merit. Fourthly, Sanctification, and the duties thereof are not causes of Salvation, and therefore in serie causarum, in the chaine of the causes of Salvation, Rom. 8. 30. they are left out: and where they are mentioned, they are inserted, not as a cause of Salvation, but either as the way unto it, Ephes. 2. 10. or as the markes and cognizances of them that shall be saved, or as the evidences according to which God will judge. As marks, I say for they are occulta praedestinationis indicia futurae faelicitatis praesagia, asc Bernard speaketh. Our Saviour setting downe the end of the mini∣stery of the Gospell saith, that a man being thereby called, may by faith obtaine remission of sinnes, and inheritance among them that are san∣ctified, Act. 26. 18. so also Act. 20. 32.

§. XI. And thus are wee to expound many Testimonies of Scrip∣ture, as speaking of notes, which the Papists expound, as speaking of causes. Thus Rom. 8. 16, 17. The Spirit it selfe beareth witnesse with our Spirit, that we are the Children of God, and if Children, Heires of God, and coheires with Christ, who shall be glorified with Christ, if hee hath given us grace not onely to beleeved, but also to suffer with him and for him, he doth not say that our suffering doth make us sonnes and heires of God who shall be glorified with him: but the Spirit beareth witnesse, that if we suffer with him, we are the sonnes and heires of God, who shall be glorified with him. So 2 Tim. 2. 11, 12. If we suffer, wee shall reigne with him; if we patiently suffer, it is (not a cause, but) a signe that we shall reigne with him, Rom. 8. 1. There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus. But how shall we know, who they are that shall be saved by Christ? that walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit: where walking after the Spirit, is not the cause of salvation, but a signe

of their being in Christ, which is the cause. Christ is the foundation and cause of all our happinesse; and faith is the only instrument where∣by wee receiving Christ are united unto him: all other graces and du∣ties unto which happinesse any where is ascribed, as it is to many, Matth. 5. 3. &c. Psalm. 112. 1. &c. are but notes of our being in Christ by faith, and presages of our future happinesse. Thus in the same chapter, Rom. 8. 13. If by the Spirit yee doe mortifie the deeds of the body, that is, of the flesh, as the vulgar Latine rendreth it, and as Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 9. 27. Ye shall live. So Rom. 10. 13. Whosoever calleth upon the name of the Lord shall be saved: that is whosoever hath this grace given him unto him truly to worship God, it is an evident signe and as∣surance unto him that he shall be saved, and so of the like: Ambrosee, this is the signe of justification in a man, that by that which dwelleth in him he that is justified may appeare to be the Sonne of God.

§. XII. As evidences, according to which the Lord will judge. For so it is often said, that God will judge men acccording to their workes. Thus Matth. 25. 34, 35. Come ye blessed of my Father, inhe∣rit the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for when I was hungry you gave me meat, &c. this rationall particle for, though it be called causall, and the sentence, where it is used is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the rendring of the cause, doth not imply a cause properly so called, but any argument or reason, as I have shewed heretofore: as here it implyeth an argument from the fruits, as signes and evidences of their bleessednesse in Christ by faith. The causes of this sentence of sal∣vation are set downe, vers. 34. First, because they are blessed of God, that is, justified. Secondly, because elected, for whom God in his eternall purpose hath provided this kingdome. Thirdly, in that it is called the inheritance purchased for them that truely beleeve in Christ, who as soone as they beleeve are by justification blessed, as being entitled or ha∣ving right to this Heavenly inheritance: and this is implyed in the Verbe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, inherit, shewing that they come to that kingdome by right of inheritance. Salvation therefore is given, as a fre•…•… gift of God depending upon election and justification, and as an inheritance pur∣chased by Christ for all true beleevers: and therefore not merited by them that are saved. But because God hath promised salvation to all that have true faith in Christ, which is a secret and inward grace, and many men deceive themselves with a vaine opinion and profession of it therefore the Lord will judge of men according to the fruits thereof: when as men therefore professing the true faith, doe demou•…•…trate their faith by good workes, and namely by the workes of charity and mercie, they give good proofe of their election, whereby this kingdome was prepared for them, and of their redemption by which Christ purchased this inheritance for them, and of their justification, whereby, they are entituled to this kingdome, and so are blessed of God. And therefore according to these fruits Christ pronounceth the sentence of salva∣tion.

§. XIII. Wherefore to proceed in my answeres to the afore said

objection for by that which hath beene said, it appeareth. Fifthly, that eternall life is not deserved by our obedience, because it is the free gift of God depending upon Gods free election. Sixthly, because we come to it, as to an inheritance purchased by Christs merits, and not by ours. Seventhly, though it be a reward, yet it presupposeth no merit of ours, because it is a free and undeserved reward, whereby the Lord out of his meere bounty doth crowne his owne gifts. Ea enim est Dei bonitas saith learned Casaubonf ut beneficia gratuitò in suos collata, ali•…•… beneficiis coronet, atque hoc mercedem appellet. such is the goodnesse of God, that such benefits as he hath freely bestowed upon his children, he crowneth with other benefits, and this hee calleth reward, nihil tamen, saith Cal∣vin, quasi debitum solvens, sed mercedis titulum imponens suis beneficiis, not as rendring any debt, but imposing the name of reward on his owne be∣nefits.

§. XIV. Now let us examine the testimonies which Bellar. alleageth wherein upon condition of obedience eternall life is promised. The first is Matth. 5. 20. unlesse your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnes of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven: which words containe directly a threatning and not a promise, for hee doth not say, if your righteousnesse doe exceed the righteous∣nesse of the Scribes and Pharisees (which was but externall and in outward shew) yee shall enter into the Kingdome of heaven: but if it doe not, which argueth that internall righteousnesse is necessary to sal∣vation necessitate 〈◊〉〈◊〉, as causa sine qua non, but doth not prove it to be so necessitate efficientiae. And so doe other threatnings, Heb. 12. 14. Luk. 13. 3. Matth. 25. 42. 1 Cor. 6. 9. Gal. 5. 21.

§. XV. The second testimony is Mat. 19. 17. If thou wilt enter in∣to life, keepe the commandements. Where a rich man being a justiti∣ray, as many of the Iewesh were, (quiai omnis spes sal•…•…tis apud Iudaeos in operibus erat non in fide) taking it for granted, that by his workes he must bee saved, but not satisfied (as justitiaries never are, but ever remaine doubtfull and uncertaine of their justification, as wee see in the Papists) I say, not satisfied with all that obedience which he had performed from hisk youth up; but finding, that something still was lacking, hee com∣meth to our Saviour to know, what goodl works those were, by doing whereof he might bee saved. Good Master, saith hee, what good thing shall I doe, that I may inherit eternall life. To him our Saviour fitteth his answere, and first to confute his errour, and to let him understand, that no man living, who is but a meere man, can be justified by inherent righteousnesse: he telleth him, that no man is good, that is purely and perfectly just: and therefore reproveth him, for that hee, thinking our Saviour to bee but a meere man, as others were, did call him good. But in the second place, to answere his question, hee telleth him, that if by his owne workes hee did hope to bee saved, hee must doe those workes which God himselfe had commanded; and so referreth him to the Co•…•…mandements of the Law, of which God himselfe had said, doe this and thou shall live, which is the legall promise, Levit. 18. 5. Rom. 10. 5.

Gal. 3. 12. Thus our Saviour fi•…•…teth according to the Law his answere to the disposition of the party, who was a justitiary. But ot•…•…erwise, when our Saviour and his Apostles were a ked the like q•…•…estion, they made answere according to he doctrine of the Go•…•…pell. For our •…•…a∣viour being asked, Ioh. 6. 28. what shall wee doe that we may doe the workes of God; answered vers. 29. This is the worke of God, that which he esteemeth in stead of all workes, that ye belee•…•…e in him whom hee hath sent: for he that beleeveth hath fulfilled the Law, Christ be∣ing the •…•…nd of the Law to every one that beleeveth, Rom. 10. 4. And the Apostle Paul, being demanded of the Iaylour, what must I doe to bee saved? answereth, beleeve on the Lord Iesus Christ, and thou shalt bee saved, Act. 16. 30, 31.

§. XVI. In the third place he alleageth testimonies, out of the do∣ctrine of the Apostles, viz. Rom. 8. 13, 17. 2 Tim. 2. 11, 12. Iam. 2. 8. 2 Pet. 1. 11. 1 Ioh. 1. 9. Apoc. 3 21. Answ. The place cited out of S. Iames is no promise, but a commendation: if you fulfill the royall law, ye doe well. Of Rom. 8. 13, 17 and 2 Tim. 2. 11, 12. I spake before.m But concer∣ning them and all others that are or may be alleaged, there is a distin∣ction of conditions to be held: that either they import the cause of the thing promised, which is sal•…•…ation or happinesse, or the proper markes and cognizances of such as shall be saved or are happy, which doe not shew propter quid 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sunt, vel servandi▪ sed qual•…•…s beats sunt, quales ser∣vandi. Christ our alone Saviour is the onely cause of salvation, and the onely foundation of our happinesse He is eternall life,n and whosoever hath him hath life eternall. Faith is the only instrument, whereby we re∣ceive Christ: and therfore to it also is salvation ascribed, in respect of the object, which it doth receive As when it is said thy faith hath saved thee, it is to be understood, as if it were said, Christ received by faith hath sa∣ved thee. A condition therfore of receiving Christ by faith or of Christ received by faith betokenetho the cause: but all other co•…•…ditions, either of graces, or of works, doe not signifie the cause of salvation, but the pro∣per markes and cognizances of those which shall be saved. And therfore prove, that the markes a•…•…e, or may be necessary by the necessity of pre∣s•…•…nce, but not by necessity of efficiencie.

§. XVII. And this also may se•…•…ve to answere his fou•…•…th and fifth ar∣guments. His fourth is fetched from the Doctrine of the Prophets. Ezek. •…•…8. 21 If the wicked shall turne from all his sins, that he hath com∣mitted, and shall keepe all my statutes and doe that which is lawfull and right, he shall surely live. That is, if he shall turne from the wrong way into the right, and goe on therein (as sinne is an aberration, and the er∣rourp of his way) hee shall come to the end of his way, which is salvati∣on. So that this condition is not the cause, but the way. Yea, but saith Bellarmine, in the same place to turne from righteousnesse and to breake the Commandements of God is a condition, upon which dependeth the comminati∣on of death, for if a righteous man turne from his righteousnesse and commit iniquity he shall surely die. Therefore, as the turning from righteousnesse unto sinne is the cause of death: •…•…o the turning from sinne to righteousnesse is the

cause of life. I answere, that there is not par ratio. there is no equality be tweene the sinne of the wicked, and the righteousnesse of the godly. Death is the dueq wages of sinne, and sinne is the meritorious cause of death. But eternall life is the free gift of God, and not merited by our righteousnesse. Sinne is of infinite demerit, and so deserveth death eternall. But not the obedience of any man, but onely of Christ, if it did merit at all, •…•…s, or can be of infinite merit to deserve eternall life. The sinnes of •…•…he wicked are purely and perfectly evill: but the righteous∣nesse of the re•…•…enerate is not purely and perfectly good. The sinnes of the wicked are their owne workes wholly proceeding from themselves, and to themselves the wages thereof is wholly and properly to be ascri∣bed and imputed: the good workes of the regenerate proceed from Gods free grace: and therefore when they are rewarded, God crow∣neth his owne graces in them, and not their merits.

That which he babbleth concerning promises absolute and conditi∣onall, as if we held all the promises of the Gospell to bee absolute, is a shamlesse and senselesse cavill. Wee are so farre from saying, that they be all a•…•…solute (as if indifferently and without condition they promised salvation to all,) that we rather say they are all conditionall. But we di¦stinguish of conditions, that some are from the cause, as where the con∣dition of faith is interposed, and such conditions, wee doe hold to bee necessary necessitate efficientiae: some from other arguments, and such are necessary onely necessitate presentiae.

§. XVIII. His fifth argument is taken from the condition of faith, which we doe not deny to bee contained in the Evangelicall pro∣mise. Now saith he by what words the Scripture requireth the condition of faith, by the same, or more cleare, it teacheth the condition of fulfilling the Law to be required. Answ. The condition of fulfilling the Law is required no where but in legall promises; and is a condition by reason of the flesh impossible. But in all these promises which hee citeth, excepting that Matth. 19. 17. not the condition of fulfilling the whole Law is requi∣red, but of some speciall duties, betweene which and the condition of faith is great odds. For faith, relatively understood, that is, Christ re∣ceived by faith, saveth alone, it alone entituleth us and giveth us right to salvation. Aske of any particular duty to which salvation is promised: will invoc•…•…tion Rom. 10. 13? will suffering, Rom. 8. 17? will any other du∣ty or grace save a man, or entitle him to salvation? No one part of righ∣teousnesse, though it may be a proper marke of them that shall be saved can save a man. But faith, that is, Christ received by faith saveth alone. Thus much may suffice to have answered his former Argument, in de∣fence of that difference, which wee make according to the Scriptures, betweene the Law and the Gospell, in respect of justification.

§. XIX. His other argument to prove the necessity of good works (which wee deny not) is taken from his true pretended differences be∣twixt the Law and the Gospell: whereof he setteth downe two princi∣pall, and six secondary differences arising from the principall. All of them impertinent to the matter in hand, excepting the first, and also

the last, which serveth to confute the first is, that such is the difference betweene the Law and the Gospell, as betweene a doctrine begunne and perfected for as in respect of the mysteryes to believed and the promises to be hoped for, the Gospell excelleth the Law (〈◊〉〈◊〉 should have said the new Testament excelleth the old, for of the the two Testaments that is, of the Law and the Gospell largely and not strictly taken, this difference is to be understood) so also in respect of the precepts, which are to be done. For to omit the ceremoniall and judiciall Lawes, which hee imperti∣nently mentioneth, hee saith, that the Law and the Gospell have in a maner the same morall precepts, but with this difference, that in the Gospell some more heavy or weighty things are imposed upon Christians, tha•…•… were in the Law exacted of the Iewes, as in the matter of polygamy and billes of divorce (which not withstanding by the morall Law were as much forbid∣bed to them, as now to us) Secondly, that Christ did perfect the moral Law, prescribing a more perfect righteousnesse, than the Law required. Thirdly, that to the precepts hee hath added Counselles tending to perfection? Answ. This difference is suitable to the rest of their wicked and Antichristi∣an doctrine, which in this whole treatise I confute, wherby as they confound justification and sanctification; so also the Law and the Gospell: saving that in the Gospell they say greater perfection is required of inherent righteousnes to justification, than the Law pre∣fcribeth: and so make it a Law of workes as much or rather more, than the Law it selfe.

§. XX. This is confuted by the eigth or last difference, wherin hee truely saith that the Law of Mose; was most heavy and unportable: but the Gospell of Christ is an easie yoake,r and a light burden. If Petor there∣fore exclaimed against those, which sought to impose the Law of Moses upon Christians Act. 15. 10. what shall wee thinke of our Po∣pish Rabbins that impose an heavier yoake, than the Law it selfe. For whereas Bellarmine saith, the Gospell is the easier, because of the grace of the newe Testament accompanying it: yet the difference is to be under∣stood in respect of the doctrine it selfe, and the letter, which if it re∣q•…•…ire more perfect obedience, is in it self the heavier burden.

II. This difference, by confounding the Law and the Gospell, doth make void the covenant of grace, which God made with Abra∣ham, and performed in Christ: which was concerning Iustification by faith, which as it could not be disannulleds by the Covenant of works: so much lesse was it repealed, but renewed and ratified in the Gospell. But if in the Gospell were taught justification by works and not by Christs righteousnesse apperhended by faith, the Covenant of grace made with Abraham should in the Gospell be repealed, rather than renewed. For the covenant of works promiseth justifi∣cation and life upon condition of perfect and perpetuall obedience: the covenant of grace, upon condition of faith. And these two, in the Article of justification are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 incompatible. If therfore the Gos∣pell doe teach justification by workes, it maketh void the covenant of grace, and thus the popish gospel overthroweth the Gospel of Christ.

Thirdly, This difference overthroweth a maine benefit, which we have by Christ, and without which we can neither be justified nor saved, which is this: that he hath freed us from the rigour of the Law, which standeth in an exaction of perfect righteousnesse to be inherent in us, and perfect obedience to be performed by us unto the acceptation either of our persons or actions, which by reason of our corruption is impossible unto us. And therfore miserable is their estcate, who are in bondage to the Law, either subjecting them to the curse, if they offend in the least degree, when in many things wee offend all: or excluding them from justification and salvation, if they yeeld not perfect and perpetuall obedience, which by reason of the flesh is impossible. From this curse Christ hath freed us in being madet a curse for us, bearing the punishment due for our sinnes: and from this exaction of perfect righteousnesse to be performed by our selves, hee hath freed us in being made unto us of Godu righteous∣nesse, even Iehovah our righteousnesse, performing perfect obe∣dience to the Law for us. But if the Gospell, which they call the new Law, require more perfect obedience, than the old Law unto justifi∣cation and salvation: then doe wee continue in that miserable estate, neither doth our blessed and most perfect Saviour availe us any thing. Neither will this free us from this bondage, that with the newe Law the grace of the new Testament, whereby we should be enabled to obey the Law is conferred. For first, it is conferred onely to those, who are already justified: and secondly, to whom it is confer∣red, it is not given in such perfection in this life, but that ever they are sinners in themselves, sinne alwayes abiding in them. So that still, if wee must be justified by no righteousnesse but that which is inhe∣rent in us, we remaine in that fearefull bondage: seeing we have no∣thing, either to free us from the curse in respect of our former sinnes, or to entitle us to the kingdome of heaven; our best righteousnesse being unperfect, and stayned with the flesh.

Fourthly, the righteousnes required in the new Law to justification, is either the same with that, which was prescribed in the old Law, or more perfect. If the same, how then are we not justified by the works of the Law? If more perfect, then the Law of God was not perfect; which the Scriptures testifie to be so perfect, as nothing can bee ad∣ded thereto. Neither did our Saviour Christ perfect the Law by ad∣ding more perfection unto it, in respect either of the precepts, or the counsells, which the Papists conceive to have bin added by Christ to the precepts. For as touching the precepts: he did but more perfectly explaine them, freeing them from the depravations of the Scribes and Pharisees, who rested in the outward letter, as if the Law were not spi∣rituall, nor did forbid any more, but the grosse sins, which in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Law are expressed. And as for the Counsells; they are also mo∣rall duties for omission wherof men may according to the sentence of the Law be condemned, as not to love our enemyes, not to forbeare swearing in ordinary talke, not to give a mans goods to the poore,

and to follow Christ, when hee is thereunto required. Mat. 19. 23. Mar. 10. 23. These things are so manifest, that Bellarminex in the end of the next Chapter doth confesse them viz, that our Saviour doth not say, except your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Law and the Prophets, but of the Scribes and Pharisees, to signisie that his meaning was not so much (he should say not at all) to adde to the burden of the precepts, as to take away the corruptions of the Scribes & Pharisees. And again, those things, which seem to be most heavie in the new Law, are to be found in the old, as the lo∣ving of our enemyes, the restrayning of concupiscence, & such like. For proofe wherof he quotes Augustine lib. contr. Adimant. cap. 3. & lib. 19. contr. Faustum c. 28. In the former place Augustine saith, Nulla in Evangelica at{que} Apostolica disciplina reperiuntur quamvis ardua & divina precepta, & promissa, quae illis etiam libris veterib. desint. In the latter, Vel omnia, vel penè omnia, quia monuit s•…•…u praecepit (Christus) ubi adjungebat, Ego a. dici vobis, in∣veniuntur & in illis veterib. libris. And so much of the first difference.

§. XXI. The second difference is, that the Law commeth alone, but the Gospell is accompanied with grace. Which is not a difference of the doctrine and letter of the Gospell from the Law, but of the covenant of grace from the covenant of works. For in the covenant of grace, as justification is promised to them, that being called doe beleeve: so sanctification to them, that are justifyed. Which as it proveth the concurrence of Good workes with faith in the party justified, as con∣sequents thereof: so it excludeth them from being any causes of justi∣fication. But as touching this second difference two popish errours are to bee avoided. First, in respect of the covenant of workes. For though that covenant doth not promise, nor afford the grace of sanctification, wherby a man should be enabled to performe the cove∣nant, which grace is promised in the covenant of grace, and given to them that beleeve; yet wee are not so to conceive, that they who li∣ved in the time of the law were void of grace, nor all that live under the Gospell, are endued with grace. For the covenant of grace hath alwayes bene in force from the beginning: so that to the faithfull, who beleeved in the Messias which was to come, the grace of sancti∣fication was given, according to the covenant of grace, so that in the old Testament, even under the Law, there were as excellent examp∣les of holynesse, as have bene in the time of the new, under the Gospell. So also the Law hath its use, even among those that live under the Gospell, insomuch that untill men doe beleeve, they are under the Law, and not under grace. Secondly, in respect of the grace of the new Testament: that it is not promised in such perfecti∣on in this life, where wee receive but the first fruitsy of the Spirit, as that wee may expect to be justified by it, or saved for it.

§. XXII. From these two difference the rest, as hee saith, arise, viz. from the first arise the third, the fourth and the fifth. The third is this, that the Law of Moses was given to one Nation; the Law of Christ, to all Nations. The fourth, that the Law of Moses, for the most part contayned shadowes and figures of things to come: the Gospell exhibiteth

the body and truth. The fifth, that the Law of Moses, because it was not perfect, was to be changed by the Law of Christ: but the Law of Christ was not to be changed by any succeeding Law.

These three differences of the Law doe not agree to the Law Morall, which belongeth to all nations, which did not consist of shadowes and figures, which was not to be changed, no not by ad∣dition, because it was, and is, a perfect, immutable, and perpetuall rule of righteousnesse. The other three, viz. the sixth, seventh, and eigth arise, as hee saith, from the second. The sixth, that the Law of Moses had no power to justifie, neither was it given, that it might justifie; but that it might shew the disease, and stirre up men to seeke the physitian. But the Law of Christ, that is, the Gospell hath power to justifie, and was given to that end. For as hee alleageth out of Rom. 1. 16. it is the power of God to salvation to every one that beleeveth, (he doth not say that worketh.) For therein is revealed the righteousnesse of God from faith to faith, as it is written, the just man shall live by faith. This is a true difference of the Law of faith from the Law of workes: but agreeth not to Bellarmines new Law, which is a Law of workes, as well as the old, conteyning the very same morall precepts with the morall Law; in the observation whereof not our justification but our sanctification consisteth, prescribing also the same righteousnesse viz Charity, which is the summe of the Law. The seventh, that the Law of Moses is a Law of fearefullnesse, and bondage: but the Gospell, the Law of love, and of liberty, which is true. For the obedience of men, who are under the Law, is forced by the terrour and coaction of the Law working servile feare in them. But the obedience of men, who are under grace, that is of men justified, is voluntary and cheerfull proceeding from faith, and from some measure of assurance of Gods love and favour to them in Christ. Therfore this voluntary obedience is no cause, but a consequent of justification, not onely before God, but also in the court of our owne conscience; that is, not onely of justification it selfe, but also of the assurance thereof in some measure. Of the eigth, which confuteth the first, I have already spoken.

§. XXIII. So much of the first thing which Bellarmine under∣tooke to demonstrate for the proofe of the necessity of good workes (which we hold as well, and urge as much as he.) Now followeth the se∣cond; which is to prove,z that the justare not free from the observation of the Law of God. For hee saith that we place Christian liberty in this, that we are not subject in our conscience and before God, to any Law, and that the de∣calogue it selfe doth not belong unto us. Which is a most devillish slander. We professe, that we (so many as truly beleeve) are by Christ freed from the curse of the Law; from the rigour and exaction of the Law requi∣ring perfect righteousnesse in us unto justification; from the terrour and coaction of the Law; from the irritation of the Law, as I have shewed in my treatise of Christian liberty; but not from the obedience of it. For freedome from obedience is the servitude of sinne. But wee being freed from sinnea become the servants of righteousnesse. And we

doe freely professe, that by how much wee have received the greater fa∣vours from God in redeeming us, and bringing us into the liberty of his children, in freeing us from sinne, and from the yoake of the Law: by so much the more are we bound to obedience; not to be justified, or saved by it, but to testifie our thankefulnesse, and to glorifie God, who hath beene so gracious unto us, &c. Much more might be said concer∣ning Christian liberty, but this is as much, as is pertinent to the questi∣on in hand. If any desire to bee better informed in this point, I referre them to my treatise of Christian liberty, which I published many yea•…•…es agoe.

CAP. V. That good Workes are not necessary by necessity of Efficacie.

§. I.

ALL this while Bellarmine, as we have seene, hath wandred from the question; but now, he saith, he will come neerer unto it. For now hee will prove the necessity of good workes, not onely by way of pre∣sence, but by w•…•…y of efficacie. But to what will he prove them necéssary? to justification? no such matter. But yet that is the question, which hee ought to prove if hee will disprove justification by faith alone; that good workes doe concurre to justification, as cau∣ses thereof. For though they were (as they are not) causes of Salvati∣on: yet it is manifest, that they are consequents, and therefore no cau∣ses of justification. So that Bellarmine, though hee be come neerer the question, yet he is not come home to it. But perhaps it will be said, that Bellarmine prevented this objection, when he firsta propounded this, as his fifth principall argument to prove, that faith doth not justifie alone, because good workes are necessary to Salvation. His argument may thus be frarned. If faith did justifie alone, then it would save alone: but faith doth not save alone without good workes, which are necessary to Salvation in those that are come to yeares. Therefore faith doth not justifie alone without good workes, which are so necessary to Salvation etiam hominibus justifi∣catis, even to them that are justified, that without them faith alone doth not save. Answ. The proposition is denied; first, by Bellarmine himselfe: who teacheth, though falsely, that not all who are justified shall bee sa∣ved; when notwithstanding the Apostle saith,b •…•…hom the Lord hath justified, he also hath glorified. And further he holdeth, that they who are justified may utterly and finally lose their justification, though they lose not their faith: and farther, that they may also lose their faith

(which as he absurdly teacheth, is lost by any act of infidelity) and con∣sequently, both their justification and Salvation. Yea but saith Bellar∣mine, their justice cannot be lost, nor their Salvation, whiles they have faith, if they be justified by faith onely. But Bellarmine himselfe saith (though false∣ly) that the faith of them, who are justified, may be lost, and with it their Salvation: and therefore by his doctrine a man bee justified by faith, and yet not be saved by it. Secondly, it is denied by some of the Fathers, who, though they teach, that faith alone sufficeth to justification (as you have heard:) yet deny that it alone sufficeth to Salvation, because some other things, as namely good workes are thereunto required. To the assumption, that saith alone doth not save: If such a faith be meant, as is alone, severed from Charity and void of workes: I doe confesse, that it neither saveth, nor yet justifieth, I doe not say, alone, but not at all. But if he speake of a true lively faith in Christ, which purifieth the heart and worketh by love, (of which onely we speake) and understand it relatively, as we doe: then I constantly affirme, that faith in Christ alone, that is, Christ alone received by faith, is the onely meritorious cause of our Salvation: and that neither workes, nor any other graces, are causes of salvation, unlesse hee meane caussas sine quibus non, which are no causes.

§. II. But for the further proofe of his consequences, Bellarmine saith, that we cannot deny them, because Luther teacheth, that a Christian man cannot lose his salvation, unlesse he will not beleeve; and that the L•…•…the∣rans affirme, that salvation, as well as justification, is to bee ascribed to faith alone. Answ. Wee can deny, what either Luther, or those that are cal∣led Lutherans doe affirme without warrant of Gods word: therefore this was but a slender proofe. Howbeit, we doe not deny that assertion of Luther, nor the like; which, though full of true comfort, yet are most maliciously calumniated by the Papists, as if hee taught men not to care what sinnes they commit, so that they can say, they have faith. Whereas Luther delivereth speeches of that kinde to comfort, the distressed consciences labouring under the burden of sinne; as∣suring them, that although their sinnes bee many and great, yet they ought not to despaire, if they can finde in their heart to beleeve in Christ. Which is most true. For though our sinnes be many, the mer∣cies of God are more; though great, yet the merrits of Christ are greater. And though the Lutherans doe say, that salvation as well as justification is to bee ascribed to faith alone; yet that is no proofe of Bellarmines consequence, but a flat deniall of his assumption, which it behoveth him to prove. Upon these things thus premised, Bellarmine inferreth, that all the testimonies, which afterwards (namely in his fourth Booke) he was to alleage out of Scriptures, and Fathers, to prove, that good workes are so necessary to salvation, even to men that are justified, that without them faith alone doth not save them: doe also prove, that faith alone doth not justifie, which is the thing saith hee, which wee have undertaken to prove: which notwithstanding wee doe constantly deny, protesting against this inference of Bell•…•…mine, and affirming, that although good

workes be so necessary to salvation, as that that faith which is with∣out them doth not save a man; yet that doth not hinder our asser∣tion, that faith doth justifie alone, because they doe not concurre to the act of justification at all, and much lesse as the causes thereof, for they follow justification, though ordinarily they goe before salvati∣on; and howsoever that faith, which is alone, severed from charity and destitute of good workes doth neither justifie, as I have shewed heretofore, nor save: yet notwithstanding faith relatively under∣stood, that is, Christ received by faith doth save alone.

§. III. But (to returne to his fourth Booke) though Bellarmine still doe wander yet I must be content to follow him. To prove therefore that good workes are necessary to salvation by necessity of efficiency, as causes thereof, hee useth three kindes of proofes: testimonies of Scriptures, sentences of Fathers, and reason. Out of the Scriptures hoe produceth tenne testimonies, besides some whole Epistles. The first testimony Heb. 10. 30. For patience is necessary for you, that do∣ing the will of God ye may receive the promise. Here first, saith he, wee have the terme necessary, and that unto salvation, contrary to the Luthe∣rans, who deny good workes to be necessary to salvation; and againe we have, that patience is necessary not onely in respect of presence, but also of relation to salvation, that they may receive the promise. Answ. Hee hath not here the terme Necessary, but in the vulgar translation: the phrase in the originall is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 opus habetis, you have need of patience, which phrase is often used in the Scriptures to signifie things usefull or need∣full, without any shew or colour of signification implying the neces∣sity of efficiency, as Matth. 6. 8. Your father knoweth whereof 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 you have need, the Lord 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath need of the Asse and her colt, Matth. 21. 3. Buy those things 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whereof we have need against the feast, Ioh. 13. 29. &c. But wee grant, that patience is a ne∣cessary vertue, and that also to salvation; yea, but It is necessary, saith he, with relation to salvation, for so he saith; that you may receive the pro∣mise. Ridiculous: for how can it bee necessary to salvation without some relation to it? But every relation is not causall, or importing a cause, as in those examples which he alleageth. Meate is necessary, that we may be nourished, &c. But many times the relation is of other arguments, as of meanes and helpes and such other things without which the thing desired cannot well be had: as the Asse and her colt were needfull for Christ going to Ierusalem. Shooes or bootes are needfull for him that travaileth. And such is the relation of the way to the journies end. Hee therefore that would goe to heaven, had need to goe the way which leadeth to it, that is, the way of good workes, which God hath prepared for us to walke in them. And that is the meaning of this place: yee have need of patience, as of a ne∣cessary fruit of faith, that having by faith runne the race c that is set before you, viz. Of patience, you may come to the end of your faith, which is the salvation of your soules.

§. IV. His second testimony 1 Tim. 2. 14, 15. The woman being

deceived was in the transgression. But shee shall be saved by bearing of children, if shee continue in faith, and love and sanctification with sobriety. Where, saith hee, perseverance not onely in faith, but in faith, love, sanctification and sobriety is put as necessary to salvation, and as a cer∣taine condition without which the woman cannot bee saved. Answ. All this we grant: but Conditio, sine qua non, is no cause, nor doth import any efficiency. If hee would have taken hold of any thing in this Text, as implying efficiencie, hee should rather have urged the phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 per filiorum generationem, by childe-bearing, (as it is better trans∣lated than by bearing of children, to avoid ambiguity, because it is said in the words following, if they shall continue, which is not to bee understood of the children, but of the woman, that is to say, the sexe, which being a word collective, signifying a multitude, is per syn∣thesin joyned to a verbe of the plurall, as turbaruunt. As if childe∣bearing were a cause, or had some relation of efficiency to salvation, which notwithstanding is so farre from being in it selfe a cause of sal∣vation, that it was inflicted upon that sexe, as a curse. Howbeit to the faithfull the nature of it, as of all other afflictions, which in themselves be evill, is changed and they sanctified to them, as the strait way (or as the word d 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth a way of affliction) by which e they are to come to heaven. In such places therefore, though the prepositi∣on 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which many times importeth a cause, bee used: yet not the cause, but sometimes the way is signified, and sometimes the estate: The way, as Acts 14. 22. Paul and Barnabas confirming the soules of the Disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, affirmed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by or through many aflictions wee must enter into the Kingdome of God. Not that afflictions, or the patient bearing of them is the cause of salvation, as the Papists would collect out of some other places: but that afflictions patiently borne are the way to it. The estate: as Rom. 4. 11. Abraham the father of all that be∣leeve 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 being in uncircumcision. So in this place, as Beza hath well observed, where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And him doth Bellarmine follow. This is to bee noted, saith hee, f that per by the bearing of children is put for in. For it was not the Apostles meaning that procreation of children is a cause of salvation, but that a woman in the state of mar∣riage or in the state of childebearing shall bee saved, if shee abide in the faith. &c.

§. V. His third Testimony Phil. 2. 12. With feare and trembling worke your salvation. Surely, saith hee, if good actions worke salvation, they are necessary, not onely by way of presence, but also of efficiency. Answ. Very true. But where doth the Apostle say, that good actions doe worke salvation? Hee exhorteth indeed the Philippians, that they should worke, or rather worke out their salvation, not that they are the Authours or Workers of it: for salvation and every degree there∣of is the worke of God. We are his workemanship, g even in respect of our spirituall life: h He hath made us and not we our selves: i He worketh all our workes in us: k wee are not able to thinke a good

thought, as of our selves: but as it followeth in the next words, l God worketh in us both to will and to doe according to his good pleasure. And we are to observe, that this exhortation is directed to them Saints at Philippi, in whom God had begun this good worke. As therefore God himselfe having begun this worke, would as the Apo∣stle saith, finish it,n or bring it to perfection: so the Apostle exhorteth them, who had entred into the course of salvation, that they should goe on in the same course cooperating with God, and accomplishing their sanctification in the feare of God, as the Apostle elsewhere o speaketh.

§. VI. His fourth Testimony. 2 Cor. 7. 10. For the sorrow that is according to God, worketh penance unto salvation that is stable. Here also wee see, saith hee, the respect of efficiency. For sorrow worketh pe∣nance, penance worketh stable salvation. For sorrow doth truly worke in a man penance, that is, detestation of sinne, and a purpose to avoid sinne. Therefore penance also it selfe d•…•…th truly worke stable salvation, and is therefore necessary, not one•…•… in regard of presence, but as a cause. Answ. It is true, that godly sorrow, or the Spirit of God by it, worketh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 repentance never to be repented of, even repentance unto salvation. But it is not said, that either godly sorrow or repentance doth worke salvation. But the Apostle saith, that godly sorrow worketh repentance, even such repentance as is a forerunner unto salvation; or as the faithfull speake, Act. 11. 18. That God had given the Gentiles repentance unto life, and therefore such a repentance as was not to bee repented of. For the Apostle seemeth to have relation unto his owne words, verse 8. that he had repented, that hee had made them sorry. But when hee understood that their sorrow had brought forth in them repentance, he did not repent thereof. Repentance therefore which is unto sal∣vation, is indeed a necessary and undoubted forerunner of salvation, and salvation a certaice consequent of repentance: necessary I say, because without it a sinner cannot bee saved, Luke 13. 3. Undoubted, because to whom God hath given grace truely to repent, it is an in∣fallible token, that such an one shall be saved, Acts 11. 18. but a cause of salvation it is not, neither can bee, unlesse hee meane Causa sine qua non.

§. VII. His fifth Testimony. 2 Cor. 4. 17. For that our tribula∣tion, which presently is momentany and light worketh above mea∣sure exceedingly an eternall weight of glory in us. What could bee spo∣ken more plainely? If patience in tribulation doth worke a weight of eternall glory, who can deny, but that there is some relation betweene patience and sal∣vation? Vnlesse perhaps to worke salvation be not to worke something, or that upon the working, there followeth no relation. Answ. If the Apostle had said, that patience in affliction doth worke an eternall weight of glo∣ry, hee might from thence have had some colour, that patience hath a relation of efficiency to salvation, and yet but a colour. But when the Apostle doth not once mention patience, how could hee bee so confident, as to aske, what could bee spoken more plainely? The

Apostle speaketh of affliction, both light and momentany, and saith, that it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 worketh unto us an eternall weight of glory. Here then wee are to consider, in what sence affliction, which in it selfe is evill and miserable, should worke glory and happinesse; being light, should worke that which is most ponderous; being momentany, should worke that which is eternall, whether as a cause, properly and in it owne nature causing or working: or as an occasion, which besides, or rather contrary to it owne nature, which is evill, is to us sanctified of God to be a meanes and occasion of our so great good. And to this purpose let us consult with other places of holy Scrip∣ture: as Rom. 5. 3, 4. and Iam. 1. 12. In the former place, the Apostle saith, wee rejoyce in afflictions, knowing that affliction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 wor∣keth patience, and so Saint Iames 1. 3. Not that affliction in it selfe wor∣keth patience, but rather the contrary, as appeareth in men unregene∣rate, whom it maketh to murmure, and sometimes to blaspheme God, which the Divell by experience well knew, when hee moved God to •…•…fflict Iob, Chap. 1. 11. & 2. 5. Doe but touch all that he hath (saith he) and againe, touch his bone and his flesh, and hee will curse thee to thy face. But afflictions are said to worke patience in the faith∣full, because the holy Ghost sanctifieth their afflictions to them, and excercising them thereby worketh in them patience: and what fol∣loweth? Patience worketh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 probation, that is, as I have for∣merly expounded, it maketh him that by affliction is tryed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Not that patience maketh him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but that by patient bearing of affliction hee is found and knowne to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is a sound, appro∣ved, and upright Christian. For therefore God sendeth tryals of all sorts, that those who are p 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may bee knowne. Now when men have beene by patient bearing of afflictions found to bee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, they are crowned with eternall life, as Saint Iames saith, Chap. 1. 12. Blessed is the man who patiently beareth temptation, that is, afflicti∣on: for when hee shall bee found to bee 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hee shall receive the Crowne of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him. The meaning therefore of this place is, neither that affliction cau∣seth patience, nor patience salvation: but that when the godly are afflicted, the holy Ghost by affliction, where with they are exercised, worketh patience in them, and patience worketh probation, because by patience, when they are tryed, they are knowne to bee sound and approved, and probation worketh hope of salvation. For when upon try all men are found to bee approved, they shall receive the Crowne of life, which God hath freely promised to give them. And it is to be observed, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is translated to worke, is given not onely to causes, but also to occasions. And therefore in such places 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth signifie, it occasioneth, as when it it said, Rom. 4. 15. the Law 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 worketh anger.

§. VIII. His sixth Testimony. Rom. 8. 13. If by the Spirit yee mortifie the deeds of the flesh, you shall live: whence hee would prove, That the mortification of carnall conc•…•…piscence is necessary to salvati∣on,

as a condition and cause (and therefore hath relation to salvation) from the conditionall particle If, and from the antithesis of the words going before, if you live according to the flesh, you shall die. Answ. The conditionall particle used in conditionall or connexive propositions alwayes pre∣tendeth a necessity of consequence; insomuch that the connexion, if it bee not necessary, is not absolutely true, but the necessity of effi∣ciency it implyeth none. And as for the necessity of consequence, that ariseth not onely from causes, but from all other arguments. And whereas from the Antithesis hee would prove, that as to live accor∣ding to the flesh, causeth death: so to mortifie the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit, causeth life: I answere, that in both the parts the con∣nexion or consequence is equally, that is, necessarily true: for if it were not necessary, it were not absolutely true, but it is absolutely true be∣cause of the authority of the Scriptures which are infallible; which is sufficient to make good the Antithesis. But hence it followeth not, that the condition of either part should be taken from the same argu∣ments; seeing it may bee taken from any other. This sufficeth for the Antithesis, that if by the Spiri•…•… ye mortifie the deeds of the flesh, it is an evident argument, that you shall live: but if you live according to the flesh, it is an evident argument, that you shall dye: therefore though the condition of the latter part bee the cause of the conse∣quent: yet it is not so in the former, for sinne is the meritorious cause of damnation; but our obedience being a duety, and yet but unper∣fect, cannot merit salvation. A servant not doing his duety, but the contrary, is punished. A servant doing, or rather but endeavouring to doe his duety, is rewarded. In these two the arguments are not the same. A servant that doth not his duety deserveth punishment, and his disobedience is the meritorious cause of his punishment. But by doing his duety, especially if it bee done unperfectly (which is al∣wayes our case) he doth not deserve reward, and therefore if hee bee rewarded, it is to be ascribed to his masters bounty, and not to his de∣sert. Such an Antithesis the Apostle maketh betweene the reward of sinne, and of godlinesse, Rom. 6. 23. Death is the due wages of sinne, but eternall life (which is the reward of godlinesse) is the free gift of God. And further, as I said before, when I formerly answe∣red this allegation: In this and many other such conditionall speech∣es, the antecedent is not the cause, but a signe, token or presage of the consequent. If God have given you grace to mortifie the deeds of the flesh, it is an evident token, that you shall live. If God hath adorned you with his grace, it is to be presumed, that he will crowne his owne grace with glory.

§. IX. And such is his seventh testimony, p as before I have shew∣ed, Rom. 8. 17, 18. The Spirit beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the sonnes and heires of God and coheires with Christ, if we suffer with him, that wee may also bee glorified with him: where is no relation at all of efficiency, betwixt our sufferings and glory. But Bellarmine will prove it, first, by the conditionall particle, (of which

I spake in answere to the last argument) which doth not, as hee saith, point out the cause, but the evidence by which the holy Ghost doth assure us, that wee are the sonnes and heires of God, and coheires of Christ, who shall bee glorified with him; namely, if we suffer with him. Secondly, from the reason which is added concerning the excesse of glory to our sufferings which to my understanding doth plainly confute it. For if the sufferings of this life be not condigne (as the Vulgar readeth it) to the glory that is to come; how should they merit it ex condigno, as they arrogantly speake? But the scope of the Apostle in this place, is to encourage the faithfull to suffer for Christ; which he doth by two arguments: the one from the happy event, which is assurance of glorification, testified by the holy Spirit; who testifieth unto us, that if we have grace from God to suffer with Christ, that we are the sonnes and heires of God and co∣heires of Christ, who shall bee glorified with him. Not that ou•…•… suffe∣rings doe make us the sonnes and heires of God, &c. but that they are the signes and evidences by which the holy Ghost doth assure us, that we are so. The other from the disproportion betweene our sufferings from him, and the glory which we shall have with him. For the Apo∣s•…•…le having weighed both, resolveth, for so hee saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that all the sufferings of this life are not comparable to that glory, but of this place more hereafter.q

§. X. His eighth testimony: Rom. 10. 10. with the heart wee beleeve unto righteousnesse, and with the mouth confession is made unto salva∣tion. We see here, saith he, that faith sufficeth not to salvation, because it is not true and entire in the heart, unlesse thereto be added externall confession. And it seemeth that the Apostle alludeth to that speech of our Saviour, Matth. 12. 32, 33. Him that confesseth me before men, will I confesse before my Father: and him that denyeth me before men, will I deny before my Father that is in heaven.

Answ. All this we confesse, that besides faith, confession, and many other graces and duties are necessary to salvation, not as causes, but as causae sine quibus non, as I have often said, which are no causes.

§. XI. His ninth testimony: Matth. 25. 34, 35. Come yee blessed of my Father, possesse the kingdom prepared for you before the begin∣ning of the world. For I was hungry and you gave mee to eate, &c. Surely, saith hee, the reason, which is rendred, doth plainely shew, that good workes are aliquo modo some way causes of salvation, and that for them the kingdome of heaven is given. Answ. Of this place I have spoken before: r when I shewed that the causes of salvation were noted, vers. 34. Come yee blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world. And the reason, which is rendred, is taken from good workes, not as the cause, for which salvation is given, but as the evidence according to which our Saviour judgeth.

§. XII. His tenth testimony is out of the Epistle of Saint Iames, and it is twofold, the former Iam. 1. 25. He that is not a forgetfull hearer, but a doer of the worke, this man shall bee blessed in his deed: the latter, Iam. 2. 14. what will it profit my brethren, if a man say that he hath faith,

and have not workes, will faith save him? But how, saith hee, out of the former, is a man blessed in his deed, if his deeds have no relation to happin•…•…sse, but affo•…•…diheir idle presence. Answ. Wee confesse, that good works have relation to happinesse as they are necessary unto it, as the way, as the causa sine qua non. Neither doe I conceive how good works can be idle, where they are present, though they doe not merit that which infinitely exceedeth their worth. And as touching the other place Iam. 2. We confesse also, that that faith which is in profession onely, and is void of good workes, doth not save a man, because it is an idle and dead faith. This therefore proveth good workes to be necessary necessitate praesentiae but for necessity efficioncie there is no shew, nor colour.

§. XIII. After those severall testimonies he appealeth to the whole Epistles of Peter, Iohn, Iames, and Iude, whose chiefe intention was to prove, that to justified men good workes are necessary to salvation, and that faith alone doth not suffice as some in these times out of the Epistles of Paul, not well understood, began to preach. I answere, that as the Apostles, whom he na∣meth, urge the necessity of good workes, so doe all true preachers of the Gospell at this day; yea Paul himselfe did urge it, s as much as any of them, if not more. But the necessity of efficiencie he may as soone prove out of our sermons, as out of the writings of the Apostles.

§. XIV. To the Scriptures hee addeth the testimonies of the Fa∣thers, who, as they censured for heretickes those which denyed workes to bee necessary unto salvation: so themselves taught, that they bee ne∣cessary. To which both censure and doctrine of the Fathers, wee doe most willingly subscribe. And wee should greatly wonder, how this great Master of Controversies, could bee so idle, so impertinent, so fri∣volous a disputant; but that, as I said before, these his discourses, pro∣ving the necessity of good workes, though they bee impertinent to the maine Question, because they prove not that which is in controversie betwixt us: yet are not impertinent to his purpose, which was to calum∣niate us, and to beare the world in hand, that wee are such as deny the necessity of good workes. But if the question were tryed by voices of the Fathers, innumerable testimonies might bee produced out of their writings; wherein they teach, that wee are justified by faith and not by workes; yea in direct termes affirming, that which is the question be∣tweene us, that we are justified by faith t alone. But that workes are necessary, as causes, either to salvation, or (which is the question) to justi∣fication; not any one pregnant testimony out of the ancient Fathers, is, or as I suppose, can bee produced. But to prove the necessity of good workes by way of presence, I shall not need to recite the severall testi∣monies, seeing I have my u selfe delivered more to prove and to urge the necessity of good workes, than can be gathered out of all these testi∣monies put together.

§. XV. In the third and last place, he bringeth a reason like to that which he framed. l. 1. cap. 14. that faith alone doth not justifie. But doth he not dispute the same question here? did he not propound five princi∣pall arguments to prove, that faith doth not justifie alone; the fifth and

last wherof was from the necessity of good works; the handling where∣ofx hee put off to this place. Should he not then from the necessity of good workes prove, that faith doth not justifie alone. But in stead of proving that, hee endevoureth to prove, that faith doth not save alone. Thus craftily hee glydeth from one question to another for his owne advantage: because hee knew, that more is required to salvation, than was required to justification. For sanctification commeth betwixt ju∣stification and salvation. And although we are justified without works going before justification: yet we are not saved without workes going before salvation; they being the way, which God hath prepared for them that are justified to walke in towards their glorification. I might therefore, according to the Lawes of disputation, hold him to the que∣stion, or refuse to give him answere. But he is so farre from proving, that faith doth not justifie alone, that hee is not able to prove, that it doth not save alone, disputing in that sence, according to which we doe hold, that faith doth justifie alone. Now, for the understanding of our sence and meaning certaine distinctions heretofore propounded, must for avoiding of calumniations bee here repeated. First, that wee doe not meane that faith is the onely grace which doth sanctifie, as the Papists will needes misunderstand us: but that to sanctification not only other graces doe concurre with faith, but good workes also. And consequent∣ly, that besides faith, the said graces and good workes be forerunners of our salvation. Secondly when wee say, faith alone, wee doe not meane that faith which is alone, being a solitary, an idle, a counterfeit and dead faith severed from charity and other graces and destitute of goodworks; but we meane a true and lively •…•…aith which purifieth the heart and wor∣keth by love, which cannot be severed from charity and other graces, as I have heretofore proved. And therefore wee hold, that although in respect of the act of justifying or saving it alone: yet in respect of the be∣ing thereof, it never is, nor (if it be a true justifying and savingfaith) can be alone. Thirdly, when we doe say, that faith alone justifieth and saveth, wee speake with relation to the object, or relatively, meaning, that the object, which faith alone receiveth, doth justifie and save us, when wee say therefore, that we are justified or saved by faith alone, our meaning is, that we are justified only by the righteousnesse of Christ which is ap∣prehended by faith alone, and not by our owne righteousnesse: and that wee are saved by the merits of Christ alone received by faith, and not by our owne workes or merits: and consequently, that Christ re∣ceived by faith is the onely meritorious cause of our salvation.

§. XVI. Now let us heare Bellarmines dispute. Iffaith alone did save, and that workes were not otherwise •…•…ecessary than in respect of presence as the fruits and signes of faith: then it would follow, that faith could save, though it wanted all maner of good workes, and were joyned with all maner of vices and sinnes: but the consequent is false: therfore saith hee faith alone doth not save, and good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence, but also of some efficiencie. To the proposition I answere first, that it is senselesse, and implyeth a contradiction. For if good workes must

necessarily be present with saving faith (which hee confesseth wee doe hold) how can it be supposed without implying a contradiction, that it can save, being not onely destitute of all good workes, but also accompanied with all maner of sinne: this is sufficient to overthrowe his whole dispute. Secondly, I deny the consequence of his propo∣sition. For justifieing and saving faith, though it justifie and save alone, yet it never is nor can be alone. Even as the eye in respect of his being, cannot (if it be a true living eye) be alone, severed from other parts of the body: yet in respect of the act of seeing, unto which no other part doth concurre, it seeth alone. Even so faith, which is the spirituall eye of the soule, in respect of its being, cannot (if it be a true lively faith) be alone, severed from the other graces, which are with it fel∣low members of sanctification: but yet in respect of the Act of ju∣stifying and saving, unto which no other graces concurre with it as any causes therof, it justifyeth and saveth alone; because it alone, and no other grace doth receive Christ unto justification and salvation. Thirdly, we do not say that the presence of good workes is necessary to salvation onely as they are the fruits and signes of faith: but also as necessary forerunners, as causa sine qua non, as the way to salvation; and as the evidence, according to which the sentence shall be pro∣nounced. Which consideration disproveth the proofe of his conse∣quence: which is, that according to our doctrine good workes are re∣quired to the act of saving onely by accident, whose presence addeth nothing to the virtue of faith in justifying and saving, and so their ab∣sence detracteth nothing from it, and therefore being taken away, faith never the lesse saveth.

Answ. Things whose presence is necessary, cannot be said to bee present by accident. For such may be present or absent; but that which is necessary cannot be otherwise, the thing being safe. But we hold the presence of workes not to be contingent, but necessary; both in respect of salvation, as the way to it, and as Causa sine qua non; and of faith, as the unseparable fruits of it, without which it is said to be dead. For what will it profit a man, saith S^t. Iames, y if hee shall say, that hee hath faith, and hath not workes, will that faith save him? For as the body without the Spirit is dead, z so that faith, which is in profession onely, and is without workes is dead.

§. XVII. But this reason of his hee doth illustrate by two unlike similitudes. For, saith hee even as fire, because by its heat alone it heateth, if from the fire were taken away all other qualityes, which are by accident joy∣ned with heat, it would still without doubt heat. And as a father, because by the onely relation of paternity hee hath reference to his sonne, if from him, who is a father, all other attributes were removed, as knowledgen, •…•…bility, po∣wer, health, beauty, and in stead os them there should succeed ignorance, base∣nesse, weaknes, sicknes, deformity; and among all these attributes paternity should remaine: yet still that father should have relation to his sonne: Even so because a Christian apprehendeth salvation by faith alone, and unto it is re∣ferred by our adversaryes; surely it followeth, that faith remayning, hee may

be saved, although hee have no good workes, and have many ill.

Answ. In the former similitude hee compareth a Christian man to fire, faith to heat, and other graces and good workes to such other qualityes as in fire by accident concurre with heat. In which simili∣tude nothing is like. For neither doth a Christian man justifie or save others by faith, as fire by his heat doth heat other things, neither is hee justified or saved by his faith, as it is a quality inherent, but as it is the hand to receive Christ•…•… neither are other graces or duetyes of sanctification which wee call good workes, to be compared with, I know not what, accidentall qualityes concurring with heat; but to those unseparable qualityes of fire, viz, light and drynes. For even in the fire that is inflamed, there doe concurre necessarily with heat drynesse and light, neither were it a true fire without them: and yet the act of heating is to be ascribed to the heat of the fire properly, and not to the light or drynesse of the element: so in a true Christian that is justified, there doth concurre necessarily with faith, both other sanctifying graces answerable to the drynesse of the fire, and also the light of a Christian conversation, without which hee is not to be held a true Christian, or truely justified; and yet the act of justifying or saving is not to be ascribed, either to other graces, or to good workes, but onely to faith receiving Christ, or rather to Christ one∣ly received by faith. In the other similitude he compareth the re∣ference which faith hath to salvation, unto that relation with is be∣tweene father and sonne. But faith and salvation are no such relatives. Neither are the graces of the sanctification or good workes to be compared to those accidentall adjuncts attributed to a father, which may come and goe, as being not necessary to the being of a father; but rather to those properties of the humane nature, as reason, will, un∣derstanding, wit &c. For although a man cannot become a father without these: yet his being a father is not not to be ascribed to these.

§. XVIII. And whereas hee would seeme to take away the answeare of his adversaties, (who alleage, that his supposition is im∣possible,) both because in his first booke he had proved, that saith may truely and indeed be severed from charity and good workes: and also because at least in conceit, it may be severed from them; which he saith is sufficient for the con∣firmation of an hypotheticall pr•…•…position: neither can his adversaries deny it, who teach thah faith and workes have that relation, which is betweene the cause and the effect: Hereunto I reply First, that I have formerly not onely answered his arguments which hee produced to this purpose; a but also proved by unanswereable arguments that true justify∣ing faith cannot be severed from charity and good workes. Second∣ly, as I said even nowe, his supposition implyeth a contradiction, and therefore is impossible. Impossible, I say, that workes being sup∣posed to bee present necessitate presentiae, should in the same speech be truely supposed to be absent. Thirdly, If Bellarmine can conceive, that true justifying and saving faith may be without charity and good

workes, then hee may also conceive, that that faith may save which is severed from charity, and destitute of good workes.

His assumption I grant: for wee teach, according to the Scriptures, that that faith, which is alone severed from charity and good works, doth justify or save, neither alone nor at all, and doe ascribe lesse to such a faith, than the Papists themselves doe. But his conclusion is faulty, as contayning more than can be inferred upon the premis∣ses: that good workes are necessary not onely in regard of presence, but also of some Efficiencie, which was not so much as mentioned in the antecedent of the proposition, which the conclusion should gain∣say, and say no more. Thus much of the necessity of good workes.

CHAP. VI. Of the verity of the justice of works, and of the possibilitie of fulfilling the Law.

§. I.

NOw Bellarmine will discourse of the truth of the justice of workes, or of actuall righteousnesse. And in this dispute he spendeth eigth Chapters. But to what end? for, I feare, hee wandreth still. Hee had in the first booke propounded five principall arguments to prove that faith doth not justifie alone. The Fifth and last was, that good workes also doe justifie, and therefore not faith alone. This assertion hee laboureth to prove by divers arguments. The first from the necessity of good workes, which I have answeared. The second from the verity of the justice of workes, namely that the good workes of the faithfull and regenerate are truely good, which wee doe not deny, wee say indeed, that the seeming good workes of men unregenerate are not truely good: be∣cause an evill tree cannot bring forth good fruit. But the good workes of the regenerate, being the workes of grace, and the fruits of the Spirit, wee acknowledge to be truely good. But will it here∣upon followe, that therfore they are, or may be justified by workes? Nothing lesse. Hee must prove that the workes of the regenerate are not onely truely good, but also purely and perfectly good, and not onely that, but that they are also perpetually and universally good. For if they faile in any one particular (as in a many things we, saith Iames the just, offend all) they cannot be justified by their obedi∣ence. For hee that offende•…•…h in one is guilty b of the breach of the whole Law: and is so farre from being justified by his obe∣dience, that by the sentence of the Law hee is accursed: because

he hath not continued in all the things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them. unlesse therfore he can prove, that not one∣ly some, but all the workes of the faithfull are not onely truely, but also purely and perfectly good (which is impossible to be proved) he cannot possibly conclude, that they are justified by them: will you then know, to what end serveth this discourse? The subtile Sophi∣ster, because hee would seeme to have the better end of the staffe, chooseth rather to confute our pretended errours, than to defend his owne.

§. II. But indeed this whole dispute is defensive: serving to an∣sweare a piece of one of our arguments against justification by inhe∣rent righteousnesse: because our obedience is neither totall, nor perfect, nor perpetuall. Not totall, because wee neither doe nor can fulfill the whole Law of God. Not perfect, nor pure, because it is stayned with the flesh. Not perpetuall, because interrupted, either by omission of duetyes or commission of sinnes. To the two former Bellarmine answereth, (the third being unanswerable) and maintay∣neth the contrary assertions; setting downe the state of the question thus: Whether men justified may by the helpe of Gods grace so fulfill the Law of God, that their workes are not onely not to be called sinnes, but also deserve truely and properly to be called just. But this question commeth short of that which hee ought to prove, in two respects. For first if the just, meaning all the just, are justified by their workes, hee must proove that not onely some choice men may by the speciall help of Gods grace fulfill the Law, but that all doe; or else hee must confesse that they are not justified by their obedience. Neither is it sufficient, that their workes be not sinnes or truely just, unlesse their workes, not some, but all, be not onely truely, but also purely good. But of this question so propounded by him, he saith that we (whom hee calleth heretickes) hold the negative; The Papists (who are no heretikes) hold the affirmative; whose assertion hee setteth downe in three articles.

• First, that the Law of God to just men is absolutely possible, not indeed by the onely strength of nature, but by the help of divine grace.
• Secondly, That the workes of the righteous are simply, and ab∣solutely just, and after their maner prefect.
• Thirdly, That a man is truely justified by workes. Thus you see how, as it were by chance, hee stumbleth upon the maine question (where unto his whole dispute ought to be referred) bringing it in as a proofe of the verity of the justice of good workes; wher•…•… by it selfought to be either proved or defended, otherwise all this dis∣course of the verity of good workes is impertinent. These three he saith hee will prove in order. And in all three I must have the pati∣ence to followe him.

§. III. And first of the possibility or impossibility of fulfilling the Law. Concerning which, what wee doe hold, may appeare by

these distinctions, for first, wee doe not hold, that it is absolutely im∣possible: for God, if it so please him, can enable man perfectly to fulfill the Law, as hee did in our first creation, and as hee will doe at our full redemption. But in this estate, since the fall, to a man living in the flesh, it is not possible. And thusc Augustine, if the question bee whether God bee able to make a man to live without sinne, doth freely confesse it, but if the question bee, whether God ever enabled any man to be without sinne, that he denyeth. The second distincti∣on is concerning the regenerate and the unregenerate. For unto the unregenerate being fallen in Adam, the Law through their owne fault is impossible. But the regenerate may bee said to keepe the whole Law, and that in three respects. First, in regard of their faith: for hee ithat truely beleeveth in Christ hath fulfilled the Law: d for Christ is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the end and complement of the Law to every one that beleeveth, his obedience being imputed to them. Qui credit in Christum, saith e Theodoret, scopum Legis adimplet: he that beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the scope of the Law, andf Photius, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Apostle therefore saith, that hee which beleeveth in Christ fulfilleth the law. Ambrose likewise on thoseg words, not the hearers of the law, but the doers shall be justified: Hoc dicit, saith hee, quia non hi justi sunt, qui audiunt legem, sed qui credunt in Christum, quem tex promisit, & hoc est facere legem. This hee saith, because not they are j•…•…st who heare the Law, but they who beleeve in Christ, whom the law promised: and this is to performe the law: and againe, Qui credit in Christum hic fecisse legem dicitur: whosoever beleeveth in Christ hee is said to have performed the law. The like hath Sedulius, that faith standeth for the perfection of the whole law, in Rom. 10. 4. Secondly, in respect of our new obedience. Thirdly, in respect of Gods acceptation, accepting of our syncere, though weake endevour, and pardoning our defectivenesse therein; which being forgiven, our obedience is reputed, as if wee had performed all. For as Augustine saith,h Omnia ergo mandata facta deputantur, quando quicquid non fit, igno∣scitur. All the Commandements are esteemed as done, when that which is not done, is pardoned. But the question is properly under∣stood of our new obedience, in regard whereof another distinction is to bee acknowledged, betweene the keeping or observing of the law, and the fulfilling of it; which the Papists feeme to confound. For all the faithfull by their new obedience keepe the law according to the measurei of grace received; but none fulfill it. Their new obedience consisting In studio pretatis & justitia, in the study of piety and righteousnesse, whereby they are studious of good workes. This study standeth in a syneere desire, an unfained purpose, an upright endevour to walke in the obedience of all Gods Commandements. And this study and practise of piety, though accompanied with ma∣nifold 〈◊〉〈◊〉, yea, with many slippes both of omission and commission, happening contrary to their generall desire and purpose through humane infirmity; the Lord (who in his children accepteth

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

of the will ^k for the deed) esteemeth so highly of, that those things which are done with an upright heart and syncere endevour, are said in the Scriptures to bee done with the whole soule, and with a per∣fect heart, which must be evangelically, and not legally understood: this perfection standing not in the perfect performance, but in the uprightnesse of the heart, striving towards perfection. Thus all the faithfull keepe the law, who have a syncere desire, purpose and ende∣vour to obey it; but none doe or can fulfill it, unlesse they continue in all the things which are written in the Booke of the law to doe them. Which never any since the fall (Christ onely excepted) were able to doe: for the law is kept with the heart, Psal. 119. 34. 69. 129. but not fulfilled but by thel whole man, I say, the whole man, perfor∣ming the whole law, alwaies.

§. IV. But that the law is possible to the faithfull, Bellarmine en∣devoureth to prove, by Scriptures, Fathers, and Reason. Out of the Scriptures he produceth three sorts of testimonies: the first of these, Which testifie that the law is not onely possible, but also easie: as first, Mat. 11. 30. For my yoke is easie, and my burden light. Secondly, 1 Ioh. 5. 3. And his Commandements are not grievous. To the former I answere; that by the yoke and burden of Christ wee are not to un∣derstand the yoke of the law exacting perfect obedience to bee per∣formed by us unto justification, or for default thereof subjecting us to the curse; for this was the chiefe yoke of bondage which neither we nor our fathers were able to beare, Act. 15. 10. From which our Saviour hathm made us free: but by the yoke and burden of Christ we are to understand his Law and Doctrine evangelicall, which may bee reduced to two Heads, the Law and Doctrine of faith, the Law and Doctrine of obedience, and that twofold, the obedience of his precepts, which is called our new obedience, and Obedientia cru∣cis, which is the taking up and bearing our crosse. The law of faith resp•…•…cteth our justification; the Doctrine of our new obedience, respecteth our sanctification; the obedience of the Crosse is Chri∣stian patience or Tolerantia crucis. And these yokes or burdens Christ is it seemeth, would have men comming unto him to take upon them, by learning of him (which argueth, that by them Christs Doctrine or Discipline is meant) that they might bee eased from those yokes under which they labour, and those burdens under which they are wearied. And these are of two sorts, the guilt of sinne which is a most heavie yoke or burden under which the guilty conscience la∣boureth: and the corruption of sin wherewith men being overladen are wearyed. From the former men are freed in their justification by the law of faith, which is easie and light, Christ having taken our bur∣den upon him. For even as the Israelites in the wildernesse, when they were bitten by the fiery serpents, had no greater burden or taske laid upon them than to lift up their eyes towards the Brasen Serpent, and were cured:n Even so wee, when wee are stung by the old Ser∣pent and labour under the guilt of sinne, and desire to bee eased or

cured thereof: this charge our Saviour layeth upon us, to lift up the eyeo of faith to him that was figured by the brasen Serpent, and wee shall finde rest unto our soules. From the second men are freed in their san∣ctification by Christs Law or doctrine of obedience both active and passive. The active is our new obedience, whereof as of sanctification there are two parts: mortification, whereby we dye to sinne, and our vivification wherby we live to God, both which the Doctrine of Christ doth teach. Tit. 2. 11, 12. The grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared to all, teaching us, that we should renounce all ungodli∣nesse and wordly lusts (there is mortification) and that wee should live soberly, and justly, and holily in this present world, there is our vivifica∣tion. So Ephes. 4. 20, 21, 24. Those that have learned Christ have been taught to be put off the old man and to put on the new.

§. V. This yoake also is easie to the faithfull, and this burden light. First, because the faithfull being freed from the terrour and coaction of the Law are enabled to obey God with willing minds, as not being un∣der the Law, but under grace. Secondly, because as the Lord promised in the Covenant of grace, which is the doctrine of the Gospell, to give grace to the heires of promise, wherby they are enabled to serve him, with upright hearts and with willing and constant minds: so doth he assist them with his grace making them both able and willing to worship him in holinesse and righteousnesse.

Thirdly, because the new obedience required of us doth not consist in the perfect performance, which the Lord doth not expect from such weakenesse as is in the best of us, but in the sincere and upright desire, purpose, and endeavour to walke in obedience, according to the mea∣sure of grace received.

Fourthly, because our unperfect obedience is accepted of God in Christ, and the wants thereof pardoned by the intercession of Christ, who with the odoursp of his own sacrifice perfumeth the incense of our prayers and of other duties making them acceptable unto God. And this was figured by that ceremony of the goldenq plate as I have shew∣ed heretofore, which the high priest, who was a type of Christ, was to weare in the foresront of the Miter with this inscription, Holinesse of the Lord, that is, of the Messias, who is IEHOVAH our righteous∣nesse, to the end that Christ figured by the high priest might beare the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israell should hal∣low in all their holy gifts, and it was alwaies to bee upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the Lord.

Fifthly, because if through humane frailty, the flesh prevailing against the Spirit, the faithfull doe at any time offend, as in many things we all doe: we have an Advocate with the Father, Christ Iesus the righ∣teous and he is the propitiation for our sinnes, 1 Ioh. 2. 2. He sitting at the right hand of his Father maketh intercession for us, Rom. 8. 34. Heb. 9. 24.

§. VI. Against the fourth reason Bellarmine taketh exception. For whereas some of our Divines have taught, as he saith, that therefore it

is called an easie yoake and light burden because of the remission of such offences as the faithfull commit, he pusheth at them with this Di∣lemma. That this remission or not imputation, either taketh away the obliga∣tion of the Law, so that the faithfull •…•…hough they doe offend doe in•…•…urre no guilt: or else doth not take away this obligation, but that the faithfull con∣tract the guilt which afterward is remitted. If the former, then, saith hee, it ceasseth to be a Law. For it is no Law which doth not binde. If the latter, then it is a hard y•…•…ake and a heavy burden which cannot be borne. To the former I answere, that remission is of guilt contracted, and therefore it is ab∣surdly surmised, that there should be remission where was no guilt. To the latter: that according to the Law of faith the guilt contracted is re∣mitted to the faithfull returning unto God, confessing their sinne, and craving pardon in the name and mediation of Christ. Which proveth the Law of workes to bee an hard yoake and heavie burden: but the Law of faith to be easie and light. For by the Law of workes the guilt is contracted, and by the Law of faith it is remitted.

§. VII. But the obedience of the Crosse also serveth to free us from the Corruption of sinne. For hee that hath suffered in the flesh ceasseth from sinne. And therefore David pronounced the man bles∣sed whom the Lord chastenethr and teacheth out of his Law. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quae nocent doc•…•…nt. Wee learne obediences by that which wee suffer. David therefore professetht that it was good for him that hee had been afflicted, that hee might learne the statutes of the Lord and confesseth that before hee was afflictedu hee went astray: but now, saith hee, I have kept thy word. This also is a yoke; which Ieremy saith it is good for a man to beare, even in, or from his youth Lam. 3. 27. For to the Godly it is made an easy yoke, and light burden. First, In comparison of that superexcellent eternall weight of glory wherewith the Lord doth recompence our momentany and light afflictions, which arex no way comparable to the glory which shall be revealed.

Secondly, because affliction worketh patience, and patience pro∣bation, and probation hope, and hope of eternall glory makethus to swallow all the difficulties of this life, and with patience and comfort to beare afflictions, yea to rejoyce and to triumph in them, Rom. 5. 3. & 8. 37. Looking unto IESVSy the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the crosse, despising the shame, and is set downe at the right hand of the throne of God. Wherefore Saintz Iames and Sainta Peter in their Epistles, doe teach it to be a matter of joy to the faithfull when they are afflicted.

Thirdly, because the nature of afflictions to the faithfull is chan∣ged, being not evill, not punishments to them, but rather blessings, as being either fatherly chastisements, or tryals for their good: which proceeding from Gods love are so moderated by his mercy that they doe not exceed their strength, 1 Cor. 10. 13. and are through Gods providence made to worke for their good, Rom. 8. 28. and profit, that they may be partakers of his holinesse, Heb. 12. 10. Affliction there∣fore

to the faithfull is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a commodious or easie yoake.

Fourthly, because Christ by his Spirit doth minister such comfortp to the faithfull in their afflictions, that as their sufferings increase, so their consolation aboundeth by Christ, 2 Cor. 1. 4, 5.

§. VIII. So much of his first Testimony. In the second place, 1 Ioh. 5. 3. The Holy Ghost setteth downe two notes, whereby wee may know that we love God. For this, saith he, is the Love of God: first, that we keepe his commandements: for this in other places also is made the proper note of his Love, viz. to keepe his Commande∣ments, Exod. 20. 6. Iohn 14. 15. the second, that his Commandements are not grievous, forc nihil difficile amanti. Nothing is difficult to him that loveth. And sod Augustine answereth the Pelagian urging this place, quis nesciat—non esse grave quod diligendo fit, non timendo. So that if we truely love God, we will out of love, and not out of servile feare and constraint, yeeld willing obedience to the Commande∣ments of God. So that this is the meaning, to him that loveth God, the Commandements of God are not grievous, but he delighteth in them according to the inner Man, yeelding voluntary and cheerefull obedience thereto, not in perfection, but according to the measure of grace received. For when the Love of God is shede abroad in our hearts by the Spirit of God assuring us in some measure of Gods love towards us, then are our hearts enlarged to love God againe: and be∣ing enlargedf we doe not onely walke, but runne also in the way of Gods commandments, that is, willingly and cheerefully according to the measure of our faith and love, wee obey them. But though the faithfull doe willingly obey Gods commandements so according to their ability, yet they cannot perfectly fulfill them.

§. IX. His second sort of testimonies is of such as teach that the Law is kept by them that Love.

Of this sort he citeth three testimonies, the first, concerning the Love of God, Ioh. 14. 23. If a man love me, he will keepe my word. The other 2. concerning the love of our neighbor, Rom. 13. 8. he that loveth his neighbour hath fulfilled the Law, Gal. 5. 14. all the Law is fulfilled in one word, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe. From hence he argueth thus: They that are able to love God and their neighbour, are also able to fulfill the Law: the faithfull are able to love God and their neighbour, therefore they are able to fulfill the Law. The proposition hee proveth by these three testimonies of Scripture. The assumption, thus. If we cannot love God and our neighbour then can wee not be the disci∣ples or friends of Christ, but it is absurd to say, that none can be the disciples or friends of Christ: therefore we are able to love God and our neighbour. The proposition of this prosyllogisme he proveth out of, Ioh. 15. 35. Here∣by shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another, and Iohn. 15. 14. you shall be my friends if you doe the things that I command you. Now the thing which he did command was, that they should love one ano∣ther. To this long discourse a short answere may suffice: we doe con∣fesse, that all they who love God and their neighbour doe keepe Gods

commandements according to the measure of their love: but wee deny, that any can fulfill the Law of God, who have not a full and perfect love, and that to the perfection of love, such as the Law re∣quireth, none can attaine in this life. For our knowledge is but in part, therefore our love: our regeneration is but in part (wee being but partly spirituall and partly carnall,) and therefore our love. The Law is impossible, by reason of the flesh, therefore whiles the flesh remaineth in us, the Law is not possible unto us.

§. X. Bellarmine confesseth that our charity in this life is unperfect be∣cause it may be increased, and because it shall bee greater in our country. Not∣withstanding he holdeth, that it is so perfect as may suffice for the fulfil∣ling of the Law. But David saith, that the Law of God isg perfect, and so perfect as nothing may be added thereto, and therefore requireth perfect righteousnesse not onely in respect of the parts but also of the degrees unto which nothing can be added. For if any thing can bee added to it, then something is wanting, which is required to perfecti∣on: and what is wanting is a fault. Peccatum est, saithh Augustine, cum vel non est charitas qu•…•… esse debet, vel minor est quàm debet. It is a sin, either when there is not Charity which ought to be, or when it is lesse than it ought to be. And no doubt but it is lesse than it ought to be, when it is not so great as the Law requireth, and it is not so great as the Law requireth, whiles it may be increased. For asi Augustine saith, quamdi•…•… augeri potest (charitas) profectò illud quod minus est quam debet ex vitio est. Whiles Charity may be increased, assuredly that which is lesse than it ought to be, is faulty, or vicious. By reason of which vice: there is not a righteous man upon earth, that doth good and sinneth not. By reason of which vice no man living shall be justified before God. By reason of which vice if we shall say that we have no sinne, we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us. And for which though we be never so good proficients we must of necessity say, forgive us our debts, &c.

§. XI. Secondly, hee replyeth: that the Law which prescribeth love, requireth no more but that we should love with our whole heart. But that this not onely may be done, but also should be done in the new Testament, the Scripture doth witnesse, Deu•…•…. 30. 6. Answ. The Phrase of loving with the whole heart being legally understood accor∣ding to the perfection prescribed in the Law, doth signifie as it soun∣deth, neither can be performed by any mortall man, though regenerate, because he is partly flesh and partly Spirit. Neither can more, than the Law requireth in this behalfe, be performed in our Country. For ask Au∣gust. saith, in the life to come, our love shal be not only above that which here we have, but also far above that which we either aske or think. Not∣withstanding it can be no more than (what the Law requireth) with all our heart, with all our soule and with all our minde. For there doth not remaine in us any thing which may be added ad totum to that which is all; for if any thing remaine which might bee added, then it is not totum all. But the phrase is many times Evangelically understood, as in the place quoted, to signifie not absolute or legall perfection, but the

integrity and uprightnesse of the heart, which is the Evangelicall per∣fection, as I have shewed elsewherel, and shall againe ere long declare.

§. XII. Thirdly, he replyeth, that the Scriptures teach, that men may bee perfect in this life. And to this purpose alle•…•…geth, Gen. 6. 9. & 17. 1. Matth. 5. 48. & 19. 17. Phil. 3. 15. 1 Ioh•…•… 2. 5. The use of the word in these and some other places is to bee distinguished. For in the most of them it is not opposed to imperfection (and so many places are impertinently alleaged) but either to hypocrisie, and so it signifieth up. right and sincere, as Gen. 6. 9. & 17. 1. Or to partiality when wee are good to some but not to others, as Matth. 5. 48. Be you perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect, doing good to men of all sorts, both good and bad, both friends and foes: or to infancy and childhood, and so it signifieth adultus a growne man, and so it is used, 1 Cor. 14. 20. Heb. 5. 14. and so in the place cited, Phil. 3. 15. Where the Apostle ac∣knowledging that he had not attained to perfection but still labouring to bee a good proficient, exhorteth so many as are perfect to be of the same minde with him, that is to strive towards perfection, as having not yet attained to i•…•…. In 1 Iohn 2. 5. the phrase is varied. In him that kee∣peth Gods word the love of God is perfected, that is perfectly knowne, hereby we know that we are in him. And so is the word used, Iam. 2. 22. 2 Cor. 12. 9. There remaineth onely the answere of Christ to the justi∣tiary, Matth. 19. 17. If thou wilt bee perfect &c. Which as I have shewed before our Saviour fitteth to the disposition of that justitiary whom having a great conceit of himselfe, that he had kept all the com∣mandements of God from his youth, he thought good to discover and unmaske by a commandement of tryall. If thou wilt,m saith hee, bee perfect, that is, If thou wilt approve thy selfe to be a perfect observer of the Law, as thou pretendest, goe and sell that thou hast, and give to the poore, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come and follow mee. For if thou refusest so to doe, thou shalt bewray thy selfe to bee a meere wordling, preferring the love of the world besore the love of God, and desiring to retaine thy earthly wealth, rather than to obtaine the heavenly treasure.

§. XIII. His third sort of testimonies is of such as doe testifie, that some have kept the Commandements of God, and namely those of loving with the whole heart; and of not coveting. And to to this purpose he alleageth the examples of David, of Iosiah, of Asa and his people, of Iosuah, and others whom hee doth but name, of Zachary and Elizabeth, of the Apostles, and namely of Paul, and in conclusion of Ezechias and of Abraham. Answ. All these were sincere and upright keepers and observers of the Law: but none of them were perfect and perpetuall fulfillers of it; none of them w•…•…re w•…•…thout sinne.

David was a man according to Gods owne heart, in respect of his uprightnesse and integrity, 1 King. 3. 6. and for that, and not for any ab∣solute perfection he is commended in the places alleaged, Psal. 119. 10. 1 King. 14. 8. Act. 13. 22. 1 King. 15. 5. And yet for all this David was a sinner, and in many of his Psalmesn bewayleth his manifold sinnes,

desiring the Lord not to enter o into judgement with him, for if hee should, neither he nor any other could be just in his sight; placing his justification in the remission p of his sinnes, and in Gods acceptation of him imputing unto him righteousnesse without workes.

q Iosias, also was a godly and upright king, but yet not without fault; in that hee harkened not unto the Words of Necho from the mouth of God, but presumptuously fought against him, 2 Chron. 35. 22.

Of the people under Asa, no more can be gathered, r but that with upright hearts and willing minds they entred into a covenant to seeke the Lord in sincerity and truth. Of Asa himselfe, the Scripture in∣deed doth testifie, s that his heart was perfect, that is, upright, before the Lord all his dayes. Notwithstanding in the same place it is said, that the high places were not taken away: and in the next Chapter three sinnes of his are recorded: t that hee had relied on the King of Syria and not on the Lord: that being reproved therefore by the Pro∣phet Hanani, he committed the Prophet to prison: that in his sickenesse he sought not to the Lord but to the Physitians.

That which is said of u 〈◊〉〈◊〉 doth not concerne the observation of the Morall Law, but those politicke precepts, which the Lord had gi∣ven to Moses, and Moses to Iosu•…•…h, concerning the utter destruction of the Canaanites, whom the Lord had delivered into his hands.

Of x Zachary and Elizabeth it is said, first, that they were just before God, that is, upright: and secondly, that they walked in all the com∣mandements and ordinances of the Lord blamelesse, which latter they might doe, and yet bee farre from that perfection which the Law re∣quireth. For Paul professeth of himselfe, that even before his conversion he was, touching the righteousnes, which is in the Law blamelesse, Phil. 3. 6. They were blamelesse before men, but not faultles before God. For Zacharias did use to sacrifice for his owne sinnes, as well as for others, as Augustine saith in his answere to this argument alleaged by the Pelagi∣ans. And who knoweth not, that for the sinne of incredulity hee was both deafe y and dumbe for a time.

As touching the Apostles before the resurrection of Christ; though our Saviour call them his friends, and giveth them this testimony that they had kept his word: yet who can bee ignorant how farre they were at that time from perfection, and with how great imperfections they kept his word.

But it is strange, that he should alleage the example of S. Paul. Rom. 7. as one that had kept the Commandement forbidding concupiscence: when in that chapter hee doth not onely confesse, that by that Com∣mandement a hee was convicted to bee a sinner, in that hee had con∣cupiscence: but also that that habituall concupiscence might ap∣peare exceedingly sinnefull, it did take occasion by the Law to worke in him all manner of actuall concupiscence.

§. XIV. But Bellarmines conceit is, that concupiscence in the Apo∣stle was no sinne, because he did not consent to it. Whereto I answere, first, that as he was carnall b he did consent unto it, but not as he was spiritu∣all,

for so hee saith: I delight in the Law of God after the inward man; c but I see another Law in my members warring against the Law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the Law of sin which is in my members. Whereupon he cryeth out, v. 24. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? meaning therby the flesh, or the body of sin. Secondly, though the Apostle had not consen∣ted to concupiscence, yet both the habituall concupiscence it self remain∣ning in him after his regeneration, and the actual concupiscences going before co•…•…sent▪ arising from thence, were sins. The habituall is often cal∣led by the Apostle a sin, and is noted to be the sinning sin, which taking occasion by the Law to send forth evill concupiscences (namely which the Law forbiddeth) was exceedingly sinfull. As for those 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or first motions of sinne in the thought or affections going before consent, and arising from our owne concupiscence: they are those very sinnes which are directly forbidden in the tenth Commandement, for those which are joyned d with consent, are forbidden in the former Commande∣ments. Neither could Paul, who had beene trayned up in the Law, bee ignorant of that which the very heathen knew by the light of nature, that evill concupiscence, accompanyed with consent, was a sinne. But that which is forbidden in the tenth commandement, the Apostle had not knowne to bee a sinne, except the Law had said, thou shalt not lust, or thou shalt not have any evill concupiscence.

Hence Bellarmine concludeth, that because the Law hath beene kept by many, it is possible. Neither doe we deny it to bee kept by the faithfull, in respect of their upright walking in all the Commandements of God, but wee deny it to be perfectly fulfilled by them. Their new obedience which they performe with upright hearts and willing mindes, hath the title of perfection given unto it, and is a perfection begunne in respect of the parts (for even an infant that is formed in the wombe is perfect in respect of his parts) and is accepted of God in Christ, the Lord not im∣puting to the faithfull their imperfections. And it is a good saying of Augustine e O•…•…nia ergo mandata facta deputantur, quando quicquid non fit ignoscitur. All the Commandements are esteemed as done, when that wh•…•…ch is not done is pardoned.

§ XV. But this answere, concerning perfection of obedience be∣gunne, and the imperfections remitted, will not serve the turne, saith B•…•…llarmine. For he cannot absolutely be said to fulfill the Law, that sinneth in ke•…•…ping it. But the Scripture saith of the Fathers, that not onely, th•…•…y did ab∣solutely keep the Law, but also that they kept it with their whole hea•…•…t, and with a perfect heart. Yea •…•…zechias profess•…•…th that he had walked before the Lord in truth and with a perfect heart. And if Ezechias walked before God with a perf•…•…ct heart, who will deny it to Abraham, to whom it was said, f walke be∣fore me and be perfect. Answ. Wee doe read, that the faithfull did keepe the Law, but wee never read, that they did ab•…•…olutely fulfill it, but that all of them had their imperfections, and their sinnes. And although many o•…•… them abounded with good workes, yet their justification con∣sisted in the remission of their sinnes, and Gods acceptation of them in

Christ, imputing righteousnesse unto them without workes.

And where as it is said, that they obeyed God with their whole heart and with a perfect heart, this is to be understood of an entire or upright heart. The hebrew words Tham, Thom, T•…•…min, and Shalem, which sig∣nif•…•…e perfect or perfection, are synonyma or words of the same sence with •…•…ashar, Iosher, and Emeth, that is, upright, uprightnesse and truth, or sincerity, and are signified by the phrase of walking with God, or be fore God, and a•…•…e the same with the Greek words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all of them opposed, not to imperfection, but to hypocrisie. For Thom, Tham, and Thamin consider these places Psal. 35. 21. where Thom and Io∣sher are used as synonima, the latter being the exposition of the former. Let perfection and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 preserve mee. Iosh. 24. 14. Where Thamin and Em•…•…th are used promiscuously, serve the Lord in perfection and in truth. Psal. 37. 37. where Tham and Iashar are put for the same; observe the perfect man, and behold the upright, for the end of that man is peace. So Iob is commended to have been Ish Th•…•… Vejashar a perfect and upright man. The word Shalem, which in the same speech of Ezechi∣as, 2 King. 20. 3. is by the 72. translated 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, perfect is by them re•…•…dred Esay 38. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a true heart: as an upright heart is called Heb. 10. 22.

§. XVI. The phrase of performing dueties with the whole heart Deut. 26. 16 as to seeke God with all the heart, Deut. 4. 29. Psal. 119. •…•…, 10. to keepe his Commandements with all the heart and with all •…•…he soule, 2 King. 23. 3. Psal. 119. 34, 69. to turne unto the Lord with all the heart, Io•…•…l. 2. 12. importeth nothing else (where it is not legally under∣stood) but an entyre or upright heart, that is, not an heart and an heart, (as hypocrites use to speake, Psal. 12. 2.) 1 Chron. 12. 33. the phrase not with an heart and an heart, is expounded vers. 38. to be a perfect or up∣right heart. Thus to serve the Lord in truth, is to serve him with the whole heart, 1 Sam. 12. 24. and to praise God with the whole heart, Psal. 9. 1. & 111. 1. is to prai•…•…e him with uprightnesse of heart, Psal. 119. 7.

Thus to walke with God, or before God, is to bee perfect or upright Gen. 17. 1. and to bee perfect or upright is to walke with God, or before him, for to walke with God is for a man to behave himselfe as in his p•…•…e∣sence▪ and to walke before God is to behave a mans selfe in his sight, that is uprightly. Thus Hen•…•…ch, Gen. 5. 22. 24. No•…•…h, Gen. 6. 9. Abraham and Is•…•…ack, Gen. 48. 15. David, and others, are said to have walked before God. Of David it is said, that hee walked before God in truth and righteousnesse and uprightnesse of heart, 1 Kin. 3. 6, of Ezekias, 2 King. 20. 3. that hee walked before God in truth with a perfect, that is an up∣right heart. For you are not so to understand it, as if Ezekias had no imperfections. For when the Lord left him a little unto himselfe, that he might try him, and know, that is, make knowne unto him what was in his heart; he rendred not againe according to the benefits done to him, but h•…•…s heart was lifted up with pride, 2 Chron. 32. 24, 25, 31.

From this example of Ezechias, as it were, from the lesse, Bellarmine inferreth. If Ezechias walked before God with a perfect heart, who will deny it to Abraham, to whom it was said, walke before me and be perf•…•…ct.

Answ. I doubt not, but Abraham did walke before God▪ that is to say, was perfect or upright. For so much the Scriptures testifie of him, Gen. 24. 40. & 26. 5. & 48. 15. and that hee was the friend of God, 2 Chr•…•…. 20. 7. Esai. 41. 8. Iam. 2. 23. But Bellarmines proofe is very slender; that Abraham was such, because hee was required so to be. For so the whole people of Israel (which for the uprightnesse required in them, was called Iesh•…•…run, Deut. 32. 15. & 33. 5, 26.) are exhorted, Deut. 18. 13. thou shalt be perfect, that is, upright with the Lord thy God. Ios. 24. 14. serve him in perfection and in truth. 1 Sam. 12. 24. In truth with all your heart. And thus it appeareth, that the termes of perfect heart and whole heart in the places before mentioned, doe not import any legall perfection, but uprightnesse and integrity of hear•…•…: which though it be but a perfection inchoated, or begun, being only a perfection in respect of the par•…•…s, and not of the degrees, towards which notwithstanding it aspireth▪ yet neverthelesse it is the Evangelicall, the Christian, and the best perf•…•…ction, which we can attaine unto this life.

§. XVII. These were his proofes out of the Scriptures. Now g he will pr•…•…ve out of the Fathers, that the Law of God is not impossible, he sho•…•…ld say, (for so he propounded the state of the question) absolute∣ly pos•…•…ble.

But •…•…he Fathers may be distinguished into two rankes. For either they we•…•… such, as wrote before Pelagius spred his errour, or after. Those wh•…•…h wrote before, did as g Augustine saith, write more carelesly of thee things: insomuch that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 would seeme to father his errours up•…•… them. Those who wrote after hee had broached his heresies, as na•…•…ely Hierome in his latter dayes, and Augustine, had the like contro∣vere, though not altogether the same with Pelagius, that we have with the •…•…apists. For both doe hold the same assertion, that the Law is pos∣sibl•…•… both doe use the like arguments, and both doe abuse the same Test•…•…onies of Scripture to confirme their errour.

§. XVIII. There are, I confesse, two seeming differences betweene the P•…•…agians and the Papists. The one, that the P•…•…lagians held, that a man •…•…y strength of nature might fulfill the Commandements of God, which •…•…e Papists deny. The other, that a man might so fulfill the Law of God, as that he might live without si•…•…, which the Papists also deny. But if it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 considered, that the Pelagia•…•…s did call the power of nature Gods grac•…•… and did acknowledge, that the direction and instruction, which men ha•…•…e by the Word and Law of God was to bee ascribed to Gods grace; a•…•…d that the gr•…•…ce of God doth helpe men more easily to obey the Law o•…•… God: i•…•… will appeare, that there is no such great diffe∣renc•…•… in the fo•…•…er respect, as is pretend•…•…d.

Againe, the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 betweene the Pelagians and Papists is not in respect of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 or impossibility, but in respect of greater or lesse difficulty. For the Papists do•…•… not a•…•…knowledge, that men by nat•…•…re are dead in sinne, •…•…d utterly deprived of the Spirituall life: but that they are sicke and weake, and •…•…yed with the bands of sinne, so that they cannot fulfill the Law of God, unlesse they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 •…•…olpen and loosed by

grace: but being holpen by grace, then the fulfilling of the Comman∣dements is easie to them. The Pelagians likewise confesse, that by the grace of God, which they call bonum naturae, or the power or possibili∣ty of nature, they were enabled; by the grace of God vouchsafed in his Word and Law, guided and directed; by the justifying grace of God freed from the bond of their sinnes; and by the Sanctifying grace of God holpen with more ease to fulfill the Commandements of God. So that the Papists, although they doe not with the Pelagians deny originall sinne, or the necessity of saving grace: yet they doe extenuate the originall corruption, and so magnifie the strength of nature, that they differ not much from them. For whereas originall corruption is both a privation of the habit of originall righteousnesse, and also an evill and wicked disposition and pronenesse to all manner o•…•… sinne, in∣fecting all the parts and faculties of the soule: they make the •…•…rivation to be of the act onely and not of the habit or power; as if it were not a meere impotencie to that which is spiritually good, but a dfficulty: the evill disposition, either they altogether deny, saying that •…•…iginall sinne is onely carentia justitiae debit ae in esse the want of originall •…•…ighte∣ousnesse; or else they so extenuate it, that they make it to be lese than any veniall sinne, and in the regenerate no sinne at all. But Au•…•…ustine doth truly teach against both Pelagians and Papists, that man by •…•…nne lost both bonum possibilitatis, and also possibilitatem non peccandi: as I vill hereafter shew.

And as touching the other difference•…•… though the Papists hold, •…•…at a man cannot bee altogether without sinne for any long time, tho•…•…h for some short time (in which short time, if he shall say he hath no sine, he shall make Saint Io•…•…n, and not himselfe a lyar, 1 Ioh. 1. 8.) yet •…•…ey say, they may be without all si•…•…nes, excepting those which they do •…•…all veniall: which they doe so extenuate, that indeed they make the•…•… no sinnes, as being no anomies or transgressions of the Law com•…•…tted against the Law, or repugnant to Charity, but onely besides the •…•…aw; such as may well stand together with perfect inherent righteo•…•…esse. For they say, he onely is a righteous man in whom there is no si•…•…e, and yet that there is no man so righteous, as that he liveth without •…•…ese ve∣niall sinnes. But if they be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and not contrary to the Lw, then they are neither commanded nor forbidden, and so no sinnes •…•…t all, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, things indifferent.

§. XIX. But let us examine his testimonies, two wh•…•…reof are scarce worth the examining; the one out of h Orig•…•…n, the oth•…•…r out of Cyrill; and yet both of them so little to his purpo•…•…, as the•…•…seeme to make against him, rather than for him. Orig•…•… compareth •…•…to women such men, as say they are not able to observe certaine p•…•…epts of Christ; which the Papists doe not call precepts, but Counèlls, and therefore belong not at all, as they teach, but to those who would be thought to live in a state of perfection. Besides which notorio•…•…s hypocrites, all in the Church of Rome are by this testimony to be •…•…ompared to women; who not onely say they cannot, but also thinke •…•…hey need not to observe

them as to sell all that a man hath and give it to the poore (which indeed is neither a commandemen•…•…, nor counsell given by Christ unto all, but a precept of tryall to that one wealthy justitiary) i to him that striketh thee on the one cheeke turne to him the other also; blesse him that curseth thee, pray for him that persecuteth thee, and such like; which are indeed precepts given to all the faithfull, and not counsailes directed onely to such, as are, or would seeme to be perfect.

Cyrill. k saith hee, affirmeth that the precept it self, thou shalt not lust, which is noted to be most diffic•…•…lt, may through grace be fulfilled. Answ. That place of Cyrill, as it is translated into Latine, is in a maner without sence: neither can any thing be soundly inferred from it. He•…•… seemeth to say, that Christ restoring mans nature to his origi∣nall perfection (which is but begunne in this life) said▪ To them of old it was said, thou shalt not commit adultery, but I say unto you, thou shalt not lust; quamvis res sit, ut •…•…pinor, ad qu•…•…m pertingi nequeat, though it be a thing, as I suppose, which cannot be attained unto (namely in this life) yet to this perfection Christ hath reformed or re∣stored us, viz. inchoative in this life, and perfectly in the life to come.

§. XX. The rest of the testimonyes are of •…•…wo sorts: for either they deny the commandements of God to be impossible, as B•…•…sil. orat. in illud, attende tibi, Deut. 15. 9. Hier•…•…e. •…•…dvers. Pelag. lib. 3. & in Matth. 5. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. de Natura & gratia, Cap 43. &c. or else they affirme, that they are possible, if men would, as C•…•…ncil. Ar•…•…sican. 2. Can. ult. Hil•…•…ru in Psalm. 118. Chrys•…•…stom. in Matth •…•…om. 39. & in Hebr. homil. 16. &c.

Answ. To preserve these fathers from contradicting themselves, certaine distinctions are to be admitted. For the same men, who de•…•…y the law to be impossible, doe con•…•…esse l that God commandeth some things which wee cannot doe, a•…•…d that never any since the fall of Adam did, or could fulfill the whole law of God; and that there is no man that liveth without sinne. Their meaning therfore is, that al∣though no man can fulfill the law, yet it is not impossible. The first distinction is that, which I mentione•…•… before, b•…•…twixt the perfect ful∣filling, and the upright keeping of Gods commandments, for al∣though they cannot in this life be fulfilled in th•…•…t p•…•…rfection, which the law requireth: yet they may, and usually are kept of the faith∣full in sincerity and upright•…•…esse, which the Lord in the covenant of grace acceptech. The second is conser•…•…ing impossibility. For when it is said, that the law is impossible to be fulfilled p•…•…ctly; it is either understood simply & per se, as the fathers understood it, as it is impossi∣ble, saith Basil, for the eye of a man to see his owne backe; or conditi∣onally and per accidens in respect of mans condition or estate. For the law was possible to man in his integrity, when he was in the earth by Paradise before his fall; and shall be possible againe, when hee shall be fully renewed in the heavenly Paradise. But to man being fallen into the state of disobedience, the fulfilling of the law is impossible by

accident. For m 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the fleshly disposition of our corrupt nature, is not subject to the law of God, neither can it be. The third distinction is in respect of the persons, for men are either 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 unre∣generate; or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 regenerate. The regenerate man by the grace of God is both willing and able to keepe the law, according to the measure of grace received. The unregenerate man is not able to keepe the law, because hee will not; the very frame of his will being enmity against God. Rom. 8. 7. Gen. 6. 5. & 8. 21. And here it is to be observed, that those fathers, which had to doe with the Pelagi∣ans, who held that men by strength of nature were able to fulfill the Law of God, or else the Lord commandiug them unpossible things should be unjust, neither should the fault be in men who cannot obey, but in God who enjoyneth impossible things: did grant unto them, that God did not command impossibilityes: yet they did hold (which the Papists also confesse) that no man without grace could performe them. For indeed to an unregenerate man, who is dead in sinne, it is as unpossi•…•…le to fulfill the w•…•…ole law of God which is spiri∣tuall; as it is for a dead man to perf•…•…rme the actions of the naturall life. For as I said before out of Augustine n man by his sinne hath lost not onely bonum possibilitatis, so that •…•…ee can doe no good; but also o possibilitatem non peccandi, so that hee cannot but sinne, though hee sinne most freely. For this is the freedome of a man not regenerate, quâ potest peccare, & non potest non peccare, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 dam nabiliur, saith the Master p of the sentences, whereby hee is able to sinne, and can doe no other but sinne, and that damnably.

§. XXI. And further to those testimonies which affirme that men may fulfill the commandements if they will: I answeare that nothing can be inferred from thence u•…•…lesse it be proved, that men at all times are willing to fulfill them. For if they be not willing they are not able, and much lesse doe they actually performe them. Thus therefore they must argue.

To them that are allwaies willing to keepe the commandements, the Law is not impossible.

But all men are alwaies willing to keepe the Commandements:

Therefore to no man is the Law impossible.

The proposition is not generally true in respect of the regenerate themselves: unto whom to will is oftentimes present, when how to performe that which is good, they find not R•…•…m. 7. 18. For the good that they would they doe not, and the evill which they would not, that they doe v. 19.

But the assumption is manifestly false, and the contrary is general∣ly true. No man is allwaies willing &c. And therefore from those Testimonyes wherein the condition of the will is interposed, nothing can be concluded for the absolute possibility of fulfilling the Law, but rather against it. For those who are not at all times so willing as they ought to be to fulfill the Law, they cannot allwaies fulfill it. But no man is at all times so willing as he ought to be to fullfill the Law.

Augustine q averreth N•…•…minem esse qui tantum velit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 res exigit. therfore no man is able allwaies to fulfill it. For although perhaps he could, if hee would, (which as even now I said is not generally true of the regenerate themselves:) yet whiles hee will not, hee cannot. For the will of obeying is the chiefe part of obedience. The mea∣ning therfore of those Fathers is, that the impossibility of the Law is not to be ascribed to the Law, as if it were not possible, but to the will of man who will not obey it.

§ XXII. Now that the Fathers, who deny the Law to be impos∣sible doe not meane, that it is absolutely possible to be perfectly ful∣filled, appeareth by these reasons. First, because they yeelded so farre to the objection of the Pelagians, as not to deny it to be possi∣ble to the unregenerate, as I noted before. Secondly, because they held, that all men are sinners, and that no man in this mortall life can live without sinne, and consequently, without transgressing the Law. Now it is manifest, that hee who transgresseth th•…•… Law doth not fulfill it. But when we thus argue Bellarmine saith we confound two questions, which ought not to be confounded: whether the Commandements may be kept, and whether a man may live without sinne▪ which questions are so different, that to the former •…•…gustine allwayes answered affirmative∣ly, to which purpose •…•…ee citeth. D•…•… peccat. merit. & remiss. lib. 2. cap. 3. & 6. De N•…•…tur. & gratia. c. 69. De gratia & lib. arbitr. c. 16. in Psal. 56. And to the latter, negatively, to which purpose hee quo∣teth Lib. de Natur. & gratia. cap. 34. De spiritu & litera cap. ult. contr. 2. Epistolas Pelag. c. 14. Epist. 89. & 95. and the whole booke de perfectione justiti•…•….

A•…•…sw. This say I, is a plaine evidence, that Augustine, when hee saith (which wee also say) that a man may keepe the Commande∣ments, meaneth not the perfect fulfilling of the Law. For if the que∣stion be propounded concerning the perfect fulfilling of the Law, it is the same in effect with the other. For hee that perfectly fulfilleth the Law doth undoubtedly live without •…•…nne: and hee that doth not live without sinne, doth not perfectly fulfill the Law. Wherefore the affirmation of the one question understood of perfect fulfilling, and the Negation of the other, doth imply a contra∣diction.

Thirdly, Because the fathers explane their meaning, when they say that the Law is possible, and that a man may keepe the commande∣ments, not in respect of the perfect fulfilling: but partly, in respect of the since•…•…e study and upright endevour to performe: and partly in respect of Gods mercie in Christ, pardoning what is wanting in their obedience. So saith Augustine, r hîc studium pracepta servandi gratia Dei tribuit, qu•…•… si quid etiam in eis pr•…•…ceptis minus serv•…•…tur, ignoscit. Here the grace of God bestoweth the study of keeping the precepts: which also, if any thing in those precepts be not kept, it pardoneth & which I cited before, s all the commandements are reputed to be done when whatsoever is not done, is pardoned: And elsewhere hee saith,

t that our righteous•…•…esse in this life doth consist rather in remission of sins, than in perfection of virtues. For as touching perfection, he saith, u V•…•…rtutem quae nu•…•… est in homine justo, perfectam hactenus nominare, ut ad ejus perfectionem pertineat, etiam ipsius imperfectionis & in veritate agnitio, & in humilitate confessio▪ that the virtue, which now is in a just man, is •…•…o farre forth called perfect, that to the perfection thereof appertaineth, both the acknowledgment of the imperfection there of in truth, and the conf•…•…ssion of it in humilily.

§. XXIII. But he•…•…e Bellarmine holdeth a strange para•…•…oxe. That although a man cannot live without sin, yet he may perfectly fulfill the Law of God. The absurdity whereof hee hopeth to salve with the di∣stinction of sinnes into veniall and mortall; because veniall sinnes, with∣out which none are in this life, doe not hinder the fulfilling of the Law. But this distinction will not serve his turne, unlesse hee can prove that veniall sinnes are no sinnes. For if they be sinnes, they are transgressions of the Law. And if they be transg•…•…essions of the Law, as undoubtedly th•…•…y are, or else they be no sinnes; then hee that cannot live wit•…•…∣out them, cannot live without transgression of the Law; and hee th•…•…t cannot live without transgression of the Law, cannot perfectly fulfill it. I will not enter into the full discussing of this question at this time, because it is another controversy; onely for the clearing of the point in hand, I doe avouch according to the S•…•…riptures, that the wages of sinne or stipend, Rom. 6. 23. the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the just recompence of reward Heb. 2. 2. is death, and that the least sinne, according to the sentence of the Law, if it be a sinne, maketh a man subj•…•…ct to the curse of God Gal. 3. 10. And that as every sinne deserveth death and therefore in it self is mortall: so every sinne is punish•…•…d with death, either with the death of the party who hath no part in Christ, to whom all sinnes are mortall: or with the death of Christ, as the sinnes of those who are his members; to whom their sinnes, which in their owne nature are mortall, become veniall, as being allready pu∣nished in Christ, and the justice of God satisfied for them by the satis∣faction given by Christ: whose bloud doth cleanse us x from all our sinnes, both great and small, none being so small, but that it is of suf∣ficient weight to presse down the sinner to hell, being of infinit guilt, committed against infinite justice, deserving infinite punishment, for which the justice of God cannot be satisfyed, but by a propitiation of infinite value. Thus therefore I reason. That sinn•…•… which is puni∣shed with the death of Christ is in it selfe mortall; all and every, even •…•…he least, sinne of the faithfull is punished with the death of Christ: therfore all and every, even the least sinne of the faithfull is in it selfe mortall.

But Bellarmine hath a conceipt, y that veniall sinnes are not simply si•…•…nes, nor against the Law, but besides it. I answere. First, that which is besides the Law is an aberration from it, and a declination from it •…•…ither to the right hand, or to the left, and that is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ and is z absolutely forbidden. Secondly, to doe that which is besides the

Law, is not to doe that, which is commanded, but hee that doth not the thing commanded, that doth not all, that doth not continue in doing all is subject to the curse. Thirdly, Whatsoever is not agree∣able or conformable to the Law is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is a sinne. But that which is besides the Law is not conformable unto it; therefore it is a sinne, and a transgression of the Law, which whosoever committeth, hee doth not fulfill the Law.

Fourthly, Things forbidden in the Law are against the Law. Those, which they call veniall sinnes, are forbidden in the Law. For either they are forbidden, or commanded, or neither forbidden, nor commanded. If they be commanded, then are they duetyes and not sinners: if neither commanded, nor forbidden, then are they 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 things indifferent; it remayneth therefore that they are forbidden.

§. XXIV. Now because the proofe of this point, that the ful∣filling of the Law is not possible unto us, is a matter of great conse∣quence; for thereby the popish doctrine of justification by inherent righteousnesse in generall, and by workes in particular is evidently confuted; I will to those arguments heretofore a used, adde the testimonies of antiquity, in requitall of Bellarmines allegations out of the Fathers.

First, Therefore Iustin Martyr b saith, that never any man did accurately performe all the things that are commanded. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Secondly, Eusebius Caesariensis demonstrates c that things required in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to all men impossible.

Thirdly, Ambrose. d Tanta mandata sunt, ut impossibile sit servari ea, so great things are commanded, that it is impossible they should be kept, whence Peter in the Acts of the Apostles saith, why doe you impose a yoke upon the brethren, which neither our fathers, nor we were able to beare.

Fourthly, Chrysostome: e what did the Law intend? to make a man just, but it was not able, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for no man did ful∣fill it.

• 2. No man f could be justified by the Law, unlesse hee fulfilled all 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But this was not possible to any man, therfore that righteousnesse it self is quashit.
• 3. That the Apostle g by Testimony cited out of Deut. proveth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that no man hath fulfilled the Law.

Hierome and Augustine in this point deliver the same things against the Pelagians, which wee doe against the Papists.

Fifthly, Quoniam a. saith Hierome, h nemo potest implere legem, that no man can fulfill the Law, and doe all things that are commanded, the Apostle testifieth also elsewhere. For that which was impossible of the Law, in that it was weake through the flesh Rom. 8. 3. &c.

• 2. This is the onely perfection of men i if they know themselves to be unperfect. And you, saith hee, when you have done all, say, wee are unprofitable servants, wee have done what was our duety to

• doe. If hee be unprofitable who hath done all, what is to be said of him who was not able to fulfill?
• 3. And againe, thou saist the Commandements of God are easie, & tamen nullum proferre potes qui universa compleverit, and yet canst bring forth none that hath fulfilled them all.
• 4. God, k saith the Pelagian, hath given possible Commandements and who denyeth this? but how this sentence is to bee understood the vessell of election most plainely teacheth, that which was impossible of the Law, in that it was weak through the flesh, & c▪ that is, that the Law is not simply impossible, but by reason of the flesh, that which was possi∣ble before the fall, is since the fall impossible, by reason of mans corup∣tion.
• 5. When l the Pelagians said, that although no man bee without sinne, yet he might be without sinne; what kinde of arguing saith he, is this, posse esse quod nunquam fuerit, that that may be which never was: pos∣se fieri quod nullum fecisse testeris, that that may be done which your selfe testifie never any man did, and to attribute that I know not to whom, which you can never prove to have beene in the Patriarches, or Pro∣phets, or Apostles.
• 6. That m which our Saviour Christ saith, if thou wilt be perfect, is said to him, who could not, yea, would not, and therefore could not.
• 7. Then n are we just, when we confesse our selves to be sinners; and our righteousnesse consisteth not of our owne merit, but of Gods mercie.
• 8. If o wee doe not that which we would, but worke that which wee would not, how say ye, that a man may be without sinne, if he will? Be∣hold the Apostle and all beleevers are not able to accomplish what they would.
• 9. Having cited many testimonies, to prove, that no man is justified by the workes of the Law, all these, saith he, p I runne through ut osten∣dam a nullo legem esse im•…•…letam, that I might shew that the Law is fulfilled of none; meaning by the Law all the Commandements which are con∣tained in the Law.
• 10. If you q can shew the man, who hath fulfilled all, then may you shew a man, who needeth not Gods mercie.
• 11. The r Law is made weake, quoniam nemo potest i•…•…plere eam, nisi Dominus, because none but our Lord can fulfill it.

VI. Augustine s saith, that to that immortall life appertaineth that precept; thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, with all thy soule, and with all thy might: but to this life let not sinne reigne in your mortall bodies to obey the lusts thereof, to that life, thou shalt not lust: to this, thou shalt not goe after thy lusts.

• 2. God doth t so worke righteousnesse in his Saints labouring un∣der the temptation of this life, that notwithstanding there remaineth, both what he may largely adde to them when they aske, and also what he may mercifully forgive, when they confesse.
• 3. In the same chapter, hee had said, that the two Commandements

• of loving God with all our heart, and our neighbours as our selves, wee shall fulfill, when we shall see face to face. But, saith he, the same is now commanded us, ut admoneremur quid fide exposcere, quò spem praemittere; ut oblivis•…•…endo quaeretro sunt, in quae anteri•…•…ra nos extendere debeamus, that wee might be admonished, what by faith to desire, whether to send be∣fore our hope, unto what things which are before we should preasse for∣ward, forgetting what is behind.
• 4. That the virtue u which now is in a just man is so farre to be called perfect, that to the perfection thereof there belongeth the acknowledg∣ment of its imperfection in verity and the confession thereof in humili∣ty; for then this petite justice is according to its small measure infirme∣ly perfect, when it understandeth what is wanting to it selfe. And there∣fore the Apostle saith, both that he is unperfect, and that hee is perfect: unperfect, considering how much he wanted unto justice, the fulnesse whereof he did as yet hunger after and thirst, perfect, both because he is not asha•…•…ed to confesse his imperfections, and goeth forward well that he may attaine unto it.
• 5. Surely, hee that is renewed from day to day (which is the cause of the most regenerate) is x not yet wholly renewed, and how much he is not yet renewed, so much he is in his old estate, &c.
• 6. It is y the fulnesse of virtue, which the Law saith, thou shalt not covet, hoc, modò impleri non potest, this now cannot bee fulfilled.
• 7. So long z as love may and ought to bee increased (as in this life alwayes it may and ought) certainely, that which is lesse than it ought to be is faulty, by reason of which faultinesse there is not a just man upon the earth, that doth good and sinneth not. By reason of which faultinesse no man living shall be justified in Gods sight, &c.

VII. Sedulius a upon those words, for Christ is the end of the Law &c, that is, saith he, perfectionem legis habet qui credit in Christ•…•…, hee hath the perfection of the Law who beleeveth in Christ. For seeing no man was justified by the Law, quia nemo imple•…•…at legem, because none did fulfill the Law, &c.

VIII. Oecumenius, b for this cause they, who adhere to the Law are accursed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because they are not able to fulfill the Law.

IX. Bernard, c neither was the Law-giver ignorant, that the weight of the Commandement did exceed the strength of men, but hee judged it profitable, that by this meanes they might bee admoni∣shed of their insufficiencie, and that they might know unto what end or perfection of righteousnesse they ought, according to their ability, strive, wherfore mandando impossibilia by commanding things impossi∣ble, hee made not men transgressours, but humble, &c.

2. Therefore d he hath straightly comanded his Commandements to be kept, that seeing our imperfection to be defective, & non posse implere quod d•…•…bet, that it cannot fulfill what it ought, we might flee to mercie.

X. Thomas Aquinas e on those words Gal. 3. 10. For it is written,

Cursed, &c. he proveth, saith hee, his purpose, viz. that no man can be justified by the workes of the Law, quia nullus potest servare legem be∣cause no man can keepe the Law in that manner that the Law prescri∣beth, Deut. 27. because every one is accursed, who doth not continue in all things which ar•…•… written in the booke of the Law to doe them, that is, who doth not fulfill the whole Law. Sed implere totam legem est impossibile, but to fulfill the whole Law it is impossible.

XI. Cardinall C•…•…sanus f Nemo vunquam adimplevit legem never any man fulfilled the Law which consisteth in love, but Christ only, who came not to breake the Law but to fulfill it.

Against all these the sacred Councell of Trent g denounceth Ana∣thema.

CAP. VII. Bellarmines sixe reasons to prove that the Law of God is absolutely possible, answered and refuted.

§. I.

NOW I come to Bellarmines Reasons, which are in number sixe. The first, A man may doe more than is commanded; therefore much more hee is able to fulfill the Commandement. The antecedent hee proveth by three testimonies. The first of Christ, Matth. 19. Who after he had said, if thou wilt en∣ter into life, keepe the Commandements, and the par∣ty had answered, all these I have kept from my youth; he saith unto him againe, a if thou wilt be perfect, goe and sell all that thou hast, &c. The second of Chrysostome, who saith, b that many exceed the Com∣mandements. The third of Augustine, c who saith, no great burden is impo∣sed upon Virgins: greater love hath imposed a greater weight. As if they should say, what dost thou command? that we should not bee adultresses? Is this that, which thou commandest? In love to thee we doe more than thou commandest.

I answere by distinction. For when he saith a man may doe more than is commanded; that more may be understood either extensivè, to things not commanded at all; or inte•…•…sivè, in respect of things comman∣ded, but done in greater perfection, than is commanded. And thus he meaneth either some speciall Commandement, or the whole Law. If he meane the whole Law, I deny the antecedent. For I have proved that no mortall man is able to fulfill the whole Law, and much lesse to doe more. The Law of God is a perfect rule of righteousnesse, unto which nothing can or ought d to bee added. And to him that goeth about to adde to Gods Law God will adde e his judgements because

hee addeth nothing but will-worship and sinne. And to such it will be said, Who required these things at your hands? Neither is that obedience to God, which God hath not required. And this is the case of all the religious Orders among the Papists, who professe greater perfection, than God hath required: the severall Religions being so many by-wayes misleading them from that way, which lead∣eth to heaven. And this overthroweth all their superarrogant workes of supererogation. For there can bee no workes of supererogation over and above the Law, unlesse first the whole Law be fulfilled, and then more bee added thereunto. Neither of which can bee done. If hee meane either things not commanded, or the duties of any one speciall Commandement, then I deny the consequence. For as touch∣ing things not commanded; it is manifest, that they who are addi∣cted to will-worship, doe many things not commanded, who not∣withstanding neglect the things commanded, making the Comman∣dements of God of none effect f through their traditions. And this is the condition of all popish Votarles, who though they should fully observe the rules of their severall Orders, yet would bee very farre from fulfilling the whole Law of God. If hee meane some speciall Commandement, as by his proofes it seemeth hee doth, then also I deny the consequence. For though •…•… man should doe more than is required in some speciall Commandement; yet hee would bee de∣fective in respect of others: and hee that faileth in any, is guilty of all.

§. II. But I suppose it would be hard for any Papist to shew, that in respect of any necessary morall duety more can bee laudably performed, than is by duety required. For whatsoever can be done, it is either commanded of God, or forbidden, or neither comman∣ded nor forbidden. If it be forbidden, it is evill, and not to be done. If it bee commanded, it cannot bee done in greater perfection, than God in his Law doth require it to be done. If it be neither comman∣ded nor forbidden, then it is in it owne nature indi•…•…erent; and there∣fore in respect of our Christian liberty free, either to bee done, or to be left undone. But because our liberty is not a loose licentiousnesse, but a true liberty, bounded with the Lawes of piety and charity; therefore we are so to use or forbeare the use of these things, as that therein wee doe not offend against either piety or charity. If there∣fore wee shall use these things as meanes or helpes to performe the dueties either of piety or charity, or refuse them as impediments to either, having either in the using or refusing respect to the glory of God, to the good of our selves or of our brethren: wee shall doe more than is commanded in respect of the particular thing it selfe, which is simply neither commanded nor forbidden▪ but not more in respect of the generall lawes of piety and charity▪ which as they command us to love God with all our soules, and our neighbour as our selves, and forbid the contrary vices: so they command all the meanes and helpes which may bee used for the p•…•…formance of these

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

duties of piety and charity, and forbid both all impediments of the dueties commanded, and also all provocations to the evils forbid∣den. Now in these things which are neither simply commanded nor forbidden, counsels have place, either for the using or refusing of them, as shall bee most for Gods glory, the benefit of our brethren, and our owne spirituall good: which counsels as it is a vertue to obey, so to disobey them is a sinne: and consequently the observer of them doth no more than hee ought to doe. And therefore the Papists whiles they enjoyne the observation of the counsels onely to them who would seeme to live in a state of perfection, they teach all others to sinne by disobeying them, as not being tyed to the obser∣vation of them. As for example, not to sweare in ordinary commu∣nication, not to revenge, nor to resist evill, to blesse them that curse us, to pray for them that persecute us, and many such like, among which they reckon the eigth beatitudes, Matth. 5. 3. &c. In which a good part of the power of Religion consisteth. So that to sweare ordinarily in common talke, to seeke private revenge and such like are no sinnes with the Papists.

§. III. But let us come to his proofes. The first whereof is, Mat. 19. 21. If thou wilt bee perfect, Goe and sell all that thou hast, &c. upon which place they ground their counsell of voluntary poverty. But it is evident by that which before I have said, that this was not a precept or counsell given to all, that would aspire towards perfecti∣on (which is the duety and property of all true Christians) but a pre∣cept of triall directed in speciall to that rich Iustitiary, to discover un∣to him his owne imperfection•…•…. Or if it had been but a counsell, ac∣cording to the popish co•…•…ruction, given to one that had already ful∣filled all the Comma•…•…ements (which no man can bee said to have fulfilled untill he •…•…ave fulfilled his course) then had it been no sinne for him not to obey this counsell, nor any hinderance to his salvati∣on. For having fulfilled all the Commandements, as the Papists con∣ceive of him, he might enter into life, though he did not this, which here hee is advised unto. But he sinned in disobeying this precept of triall; which if he had obeyed, hee had done no more than in duety he was bound to doe, having received a speciall Commandement to that purpose. Neither had hee fulfilled those Commandements, which hee saith hee had kept from his youth, otherwise than accor∣ding to the interpretation of the Scribes and Pharisees; and conse∣quently according to their righteousnesse, which whosoever doth not g exceed shall not enter into the kingdome of heaven, and much lesse had he fulfilled all the Commandements of God. For by diso∣beying this Commandement of Christ, he plainely bewrayed him∣selfe to be a transgressour of the first and last Commandements: yea, that he did not truely affect and prize his owne salvation, but being a meere worldling preferred the love of his pelfe to the love of God, and desired rather to enjoy his worldly wealth for a short time, than to obtaine and for ever to enjoy the heavenly treasures, which Christ

promised him, if hee would follow Him. And for this his sinne in disobeying Christ his entrance into heaven was hindered. Insomuch that of him, and all such as he was, our Saviour giveth this h censure, that it is easier for a Camell to goe through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man (that setteth his heart upon riches, as this man did) to enter into the kingdome of God.

§. IV. As for their counsell and vow of voluntary poverty: though I will not insist thereupon, it being another controversie: yet thus much briefly will I say. First, that it hath no ground in the Scriptures; and therefore being obtruded as a matter of Religion, it is meere will-worship, which is neither acceptable to God, nor availeable to themselves. Secondly, as it is practised among the Pa∣pists it is nothing worth, being done neither out of the love of God, nor of their neighbour: but out of a Pharisaicall conceit▪ by their works of supererogation to make God their debtour. For as the Apo∣stle saith, If I should bestow all my goods to •…•…eed the poore, and have not charity, it would profit me nothing. 1 Cor. 13. 3. Thirdly, it is repugnant to the Scriptures and namely to the eigth, the fifth and second Commandement. In the eigth Commandement (as I could shew) there is required a moderate desire of temporall blessings, avoiding the contrary extremes of cove•…•…ing too much, or of affecting voluntary poverty. And accordingly wee are to frame our prayers and our practice. Our prayer, as our Saviour i hath taught us to begge of God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, that portion of temporall bles∣sings, which God in his wisedome doth know to bee expedient for us, that is, as Agur prayeth, Prov. 30, 8. Give mee neither poverty (or beggary as the Latine rendreth it) nor riches; feed mee with food convenient for me. Where Lechem ch•…•…qqi is the very same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Our practice, not to live idlely upon the sweat of other mens browes, as Friars mendicants and other lusty beggars doe; but every mans duety is, to worke with his hands the thing that is k good, that is, to earne his living by the lawfull workes of his lawfull cal∣ling, not onely that hee may eate his owne bread, which our Saviour teacheth us to begge of God, and the Apostle, to labour for, that we may eat our owne bread, 2 Thes. 3. 12. And the Psalmist promiseth as a blessing to him that feareth God, Psal. 128. 2. For thou shalt eat the labour of thine owne hands: but also that hee may have to give to others, Ephes. 4. 28. Therefore the Apostle, Act. 20. 34, 35. exhor∣teth the faithfull, by labouring in their lawfull callings, to support the impotent, and to remember the words of our Lord Iesus, for though the Papists esteeme them to live in a state of perfection who live in voluntary beggary; yet our Saviour was wont to say, it is a more blessed thing to give than to receive. And therefore a more blessed estate it is to be able to give, than to live upon the almes of others.

The fifth Commandement teacheth us to honour our private and our publike parents in the Church and common wealth, and the common mother of us all, that is, our Country: all which we are to

honour with our service and with our goods as occasion is offered, and need requireth; and not to behave our selves, as if we were borne for our selves alone, neglecting others whom we ought to honour. And ther∣fore by this their counsell the Papists teach men (especially when they take young men or women into their Cloisters against the liking of their parents) to breake the Commandement of God as thel Pharisees did. Neither can they truely say, that they helpe others with their de∣votion, for their devotions▪ are superstitious and Idolatrous: or if they were good, they needed not to goe into a Cloister to performe them, which might and ought to be afforded in a lawfull calling.

The second Commandement under that one kind, of making to ourm selves images, forbiddeth willworship aud all devised meanes of Gods worshipn according to the doctrine and inventions of men: as all the religions of those manifold orders among the Papists, are willworship and superstition. And under that one kind of worshipping of Images or of God by them he condemneth all false and counterfeit worship, and namely hypocrisie, but the seeming poverty of popish votaries is hypo∣criticall. For under the profession of voluntary poverty they live in all ease and aboundance. For although the severall Monks and Fryers pro∣fesse that they have nothing in their owne proper possession, yet they are rich in the common possessions of their Monastaries, which being many times very large are imployed for the maintenance of them. So that a carnal man who maketh no conscience of living incontinently in single life, and maketh account that he was borne for himself alone, hath reason to choose this monasticall life above all others, as most likely to give contentment to his idle and c•…•…rnall disposition. Now then to obtrude this vowed poverty, which as it hath no ground in the scriptures, so it is repugnant therunto in so many respects, as a matter not only of religi∣on, but also of satisfaction both for themselves and others, of merit, of perfection, of supererogation, is a thing to bee detested as most wicked and Antichristian.

§. V. As for his other testimonies: it is plaine, that Chrysostome and Augustine speake but of that one Commandement which forbid∣deth adultery. But though a man were able to doe more than that one Commandement requireth: yet it would not follow, that hee were therefore able to doe more than the whole Law requireth. But indeed in respect of that one Commandement more cannot bee done lawfully, than that Commandement prescribeth: or if more should be done, it would not be done in obedience to that Commandement. Indeed if you respect onely the outward letter of that commande∣ment, as the Fathers did, it being a prohibition of the externall act of adultery: it cannot be denyed, but that all, who are not adulterers, have fulfilled that Commandement. But if these two things be con∣sidered: first, that the Law iso spirituall, and therefore forbiddeth not onely the outward act of adultery, but all uncleannenesse whatso∣ever in tho•…•…ght, in word, and indeed, insomuch that he who lookethp on a woman to •…•…ust after her, hath broken this Commandement:

and secondly, that this Commandement, as all the rest, hath two parts, the negative forbidding all uncleannenesse, the affirmative, com∣manding allq chastity both outward, and also inward, which is the pu∣rity or cleannenesse of the soule from all the lusts of the flesh: it must be granted, that nothing can bee added to the perfection of chastity, which this Commandement prescribeth: Yea, but the chastity in single life is more than is commanded. For the Law forbiddeth women to be adulte∣resses: but they that follow this cou•…•…sell, v•…•…w perpetuall virginity, which is more, as Saint Augustine saith. It is more than the letter of the nega∣tive forbidding onely the outward act of adultery, doth require; but not more than the affirmative, being spiritually understood, doth pre∣scribe. Which is to observe chastity in that condition wherein wee live, whether it be in single life or in marriage. Indeed no where is it simply either commanded or forbidden to live, either in single life, or in wedlocke, it being in its owne nature a thing indifferent. But chasti∣ty in both is absolutely required. For there is a chastity of wedlocke, as well as of single life: though the Papists most wickedly oppose wedlocke to chastity. Chastity, I say, is simply commanded to all, as an especiall ornament of the soule, from whence it hath itsr name, being the purity and cleanenesse of the soule from all unlawfull lusts. But single life or mariage, are not simply either commanded or for∣bidden, but to certaine persons. For to them who have not the gift of continencie, which all have not, neither are all capable of (for so much is signified in the Verbe, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Matth. 19. 11.) but onely they to whom it is given, to them marriage is commanded, as an holy ordi∣nance of God, and as an holy remedy against lust: and to them be∣ing not able to containe, continuance in single life is forbidden. For the avoiding of fornication and all uncleannesse, every mans that hath not the gift of continencie, is commanded to have his wife: and every woman, that hath not the gift of continencie, is commanded to have her husband. Of them who have the gift of continencie, some are not fit for procreation, but are impotent from their mothers wombe, Math. 19. 12. to these marriage is forbidden. Others are not unfit for procreation, and to those whiles they have the gift of conti∣nencie, which in very few who are fit for procreation is perpetuall, they are neither commanded to marry, nor to live single, but as they finde it to be expedient for them. And that estate, which they finde most expedient for the glory of God, and their owne good, they are to choose. And if they make choice of single life in love to God (whom they cannot love sufficiently.) and to their owne soules u•…•…to which they ought not to bee wanting, making themselves •…•…unuches for the Kingdome of God, Matth. 19. 12. they in their choice do•…•… no more than they ought to doe: they being bound by the Law to that perfection of chastity, which no man in this life can attaine unto. For besides the externall, there are two degres of inward chastity: the one is a purity and cleanenesse of the soule, not on•…•…ly from all passions, but also motions of lust, which are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and this is

pure and perfect chastity, which we cannot attaine unto whiles wee are infected whith originall or habituall concupiscence, the other is called continencie, which is a virtue restrayning and repressing the concupiscences of the flesh, which t warre against our soules maintai∣ning a continuall warfare against them. To this, those who have the gift of continencie in some measure attaine; but notwithstanding come farre short of that purity, which the Law of God requireth.

§. VI. As for the vowed chastity among the Papists: it is so farre from being a state of perfection, or supererogation, as that it is, for the most part, a sinnefull state, and that in three respects. First, in respect of making the vow. For it is sinne to vow that, which a man doth not know to be lawfull, or not in his owne power, then doth hee sinne with an high hand, not onely resolving, but also vowing to sinne, and to continue therein. Secondly, in respect of the performing the vow, when the thing vowed, viz. continencie in single life, doth ap∣peare not to be in their power, and yet to performe their vow of sin∣gle life, live in incontinency and uncleanenesse. Many times it falleth out, that a man at the first doth not know the thing vowed to be either not lawfull, or not in his power: yet because he doth not know it to be lawfull and in his power, he sinneth by rash vowing: but when after∣wards it doth appeare to be, either unlawfull, or not in his power, he is not bound to keepe that vow, which rashly he made, but hee is bound to breake it: for by performing it he addeth sinne to sinne, and many times a greater sinne to a lesse, that is to the rashnesse of his vow, the incontinencie of his life. And this is perpetuall among the Po∣pish votaries, who never dissolve their vow, though the performance of it bee never so wicked. Thirdly, because the vowed single life among the Papists being for the most part so filthy and abominable, that all the world cryeth shame upon them for their filthinesse: yet by them is obtruded unto God, as a matter not onely of religion, and satisfaction, but also of merit, of perfection, and supereroga∣tion.

And the like might be said of their vow of blinde obedience. For simple and absolute obedience is onely to bee vowed and performed to God. But to vow the like towards any sinfull man, who either doth, or at least may command that which is unlawfull, as sometimes they doe, to murther Princes, or to attempt other traiterous practi∣ses, &c. and to thinke that in so doing he doth merit and supererogate, it is to forsake God.

§. VII. His second reason: If the Commandements were impossible, they would binde no man. And so the precepts should bee no precepts: for it cannot bee imagined, how any man should sinne in that which hee cannot avoid, &c.

His reason is thus to be framed, To that which is impossible no man is tyed: To the Commandements all men are tyed: Therefore the Commandements are not impossible.

The assumption, which no man denyeth, he proveth, because if they did not binde, they were no precepts, neither were the transgression of them a sinne.

The proposition he proveth, because it cannot bee imagined how a man should sinne in that which he cannot avoid.

I answere, as heretofore, by distinction. That the Commande∣ments are said to be impossible, either simply, or by accident. If there∣fore the meaning of his conclusion be, that the Commandements bee not simply and absolutely impossible, then I grant all, for wee never held that the Commandements are simply impossible: for to man, both before his fall, and after his resurrection, they were and shall be absolutely possible. But since the fall they are impossible in respect of the perfect performance in and by our selves, not simply, but by rea∣son of the flesh, that is to say, through our owne default. For if wee would not have sinned in Adam, the Law had beene possible unto us: but by our voluntary sinne we lost both 〈◊〉〈◊〉 possibilitatis, and also possibilitatem non peccand•…•…. Now it were absurd to imagine, that our fault should free us from obedience. Howbeit, even after the fall there is a distinction to be held betweene men unregenerate in the corrupt state of nature, and the regenerate in the state of grace. To the unre∣generate the Law is impossible through their owne default, which doth not lessen their sinne: for they sinne voluntarily and many times of malice, as the devils also doe: who though they have brought upon themsel•…•…es a necessity of sinning, so that they can doe no other but sinne: yet this doth not, as I said, extenuate their sinne (for they commit sinne with greedinesse) but rather aggravate their finfulnesse. Those that are habituated in sinne, in whom custome is become as it were another nature, they can no more of themselves ceasse from sinning, than a Black-moore can wash away his blackenesse, Ier. 13. 23.

§. VIII. Yea, but saith Bellarmine, It cannot bee imagined, how a man should sinne in that, which hee cannot avoid. Answ. That seemeth to be true in respect of the liberty of contradiction, but not in respect of the liberty of contrariety. In respect of a sinfull action a man hath liberty to doe it or not to doe it: which wee call the liberty of contradiction. But he hath not liberty to doe that which is good, his naturall will ena∣bling him onely to sinne. So that although a naturall man may abstaine from this or that sinfull act: yet he sinneth in whatsoever he doth, nei∣ther can he doe any other but sinne. If therefore they doe not sin, who are not able to fulfill the Law, then all Infidels, yea all naturall men, who c•…•…n doe nothing but sinne, should be exempted from sinning, which is absurd. To the regenerate man, as I said before, the Law is possible, both in respect of his faith. For he that truely beleeveth in Christ hath fulfilled the Law in Christ. Secondly, in regard of his new obedience: and that in three respects. For first, his new obedience, though it be not compleat; yet it is obedientia inchoata: and though it be not a fulfilling of the Law, yet it is an acceptable keeping thereof. Secondly, though it be unperfect, and stayned with the flesh, yet being •…•…ntyre, that is, sincere

and upright, it is in Christ accepted as perfect. Thirdly, because the imperfection thereof being covered with Christs perfect obedience, and cured by his intercession, is remitted. Now all is esteemed done, when that which is not done, is remitted.

§. IX. His third reason: If God should command things impossible, he should be more cruell (horresco referens) and more foolish than any tyrant: in exacting atribute from his owne friends, which none were able to pay, and making such Lawes, which he knew none were able to performe. But the Con∣sequent is blasphemous, therefore the antecedent. To the proposition I an∣swere as before by distinction. That if God should command things simply impossible, there would besome colour for his blasphemous con∣sequence. But the Lord commandeth nothing, but what to man in his first creation was absolutely possible: neither doth he exact any tribute which he did not make us able to pay, nor make any law which we were not able to observe. And although now wee cannot in our selves fulfill it; yet God was not tyed to accommodate his Law, like a Lesbian rule, to our weakenesse contracted by our owne default: but it became him, to propound such Lawes as were answerable to our first integrity, de∣scribing what we were, and not what we are: that seeing from what wee are fallen, we might seeke to bee repaired in Christ, who is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth, Rom. 10. 4. The covenant of workes God made with man in his state of integrity, when he was able to keepe it. But after the fall, because it was not possible that man should performe that covenant in, and by himselfe, he in great mercie made with man the Covenant of grace in Christ. But lest any man should either through ignorance or pride neglect the benefit of the Messias: it pleased God to renew the Covenant of workes, not to that end that men should be justified or saved thereby, but that it might bee a meanes to drive them unto Christ. And fo Bellarmine himselfe hath taughtu Lex non data erat ut justificaret, sed ut morbum •…•…stenderet, & ad quaer•…•…ndum medicum excitaret. The Law was not given to that end that it should justifie, but that it might shew the disease, and stirte up men to seeke to the Physitian.

Againe a distinction is to be made, as in the answere to the second reason, of the parties to whom the law is given. For to the wicked and reprobate, who are Gods rebellious subjects, the law is indeed impossible through their owne default: and yet God exacteth most justly that righteousnesse in which hee did create them: hee requi∣reth most justly an accompt of those talents which hee committed to them, though now they be not able to pay. The debt is duely ex∣acted of the debtour, though through his own default hee bee not now able to make payment. As for the elect, whom the Lord hath, before they were, loved in Christ, hee hath given his law to them, not to this end, that either by the observation thereof in their own persons they should bee justified, or by the breach thereof they should bee condemned (for then who could be saved?) But the use of the law to them before their conversion is, that it might bee unto

them a Schoolmaster unto Christ: and after their conversion and justification, it might bee a rule whereby to frame their lives and conversation: aspiring alwaies towards that perfection which the law prescribeth, though they cannot fully attaine unto it. Why then, saith Augustine, should not this perfection bee enjoyned to man, though no man in this life have it? Non enim rectè curratur, si quò cur∣rendum est nesciatur. quomodo autem sciretur, si nullis praeceptis ostendere∣tur. For men cannot runne well, if they know not whither they must runne, and how should they know that, if by precepts it be not made known to them? And worthy is that saying of Bernardx to be repeated againe and againe. Neither was the commander ignorant, that the weight of the commandement doth exceed the strength of men, but hee judged it profitable, that hereby they should be ad∣monished of their owne unsufficiencie, and that they might know to what end (or perfection) of righteousnesse they should aspire. Therefore by commanding impossible things hee did not make men transgressors, but humble, that every mouth may bee stoppody and the whole world made obnoxious to God. For by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified in his sight. For receiving the comman∣dement, and feeling our defectivenes, wee shall cry to heaven, and God will have mercie on us. And wee shall know in that day, that not by the workes of righteousnesse,z which wee have done, but according to his mercie hee hath saved us.

§. X. His fourth reason is collected out of three places of scripture. Rom. 8. 4. Mat. 6. 10. Heb. 5. 9. In the first it is said, that Christ suf∣fered, that the justification of the Law might be fulfilled in us. In the second, we are taught to pray, that Gods will may bee done upon earth, as it is in heaven. In the third, that Christ is made to all that obey him the cause of eternall salvation. But saith hee, if we can∣•…•…t fulfill the Law, then Christ misseth of his end. For notwithstanding his sufferings, the justification of the Law is not fulfilled in us: neither is our prayer ever obtayned, of fulfilling G•…•…ds will and commandements on earth as in hea∣ven: neither is Christ the authour of salvation to any, because none obey him. Answ. As touching the first place: because it is often alleaged by Bellarmine, I will somewhat insist upon it. The place is two wayes expounded, either of sanctification, or of justification. Ifit be to be understood of sanctification, as the Papists commonly expound it; we acknowledge, that our sanctification is the end and fruit of our redemption by Christ, and that this end is atchieved i•…•… all those, who live not after the flesh but after the Spirit, that is, in all true belie∣vers. I say it is archieved 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in this life, and perfectly in the life to come. But as I suppose, it is rather to be understood of justi∣fication. For the Apostle having assured the faithfull vers. 1. that not∣withstanding sinne, and the body of sinne and of death (wherof hee had complayned chap. 7.) remayneth in them; yet forasmuch as we are delivered from the same by Iesus Christ our Lord vers. 25. there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ, as his members,

whom hee describeth by this character, that they walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit: In the verses following he confirmeth the same conclusion, showing how Christ hath delivered us. For saith hee vers. 2. the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Iesus hath de∣livered me from the law of sinne and of death. Whereby the law of the Spirit of life we understand the virtue and power of holynes or sanctification not in us, but in Christ Iesus, (for so hee saith, though they doe not observe it, who understand this place of sanctification and righteousnesse inherent) who by his righteousnesse and merits hath delivered us from the power of sinne and of death. But the Apostle, as in the former chapter vers. 24. so here in the singular number speaketh of himself, teaching by his owne example every true Christian to apply the benefits of Christ to himself. For that which was impossible for the law to doe, that is, to justifie us, in that it was weake through the flesh; God sending his owne sonne in the likenes of sinfull flesh, that is, in the humane nature subject to passions and infirmities, and that for sinne, that hee might take away the sinne of the world (for so saith 〈◊〉〈◊〉a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) condemned sinne in the flesh, that is, exacted the due punishment of sinne in his humane nature, that the guilt of our sinnes being taken away by his alsufficient sa∣tisfaction, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that which the law requireth unto justifica∣tion might by Christ bee fulfilled in us who are his members, which walke not (as also hee had said in the first verse) not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

§. XI. As if the Apostle had said: Although the body of sinne and death remaine in us, who are both justified; which made mee cry out chap. 7. 24: yet forasmuch as wee are delivered therefrom by Ie∣sus Christ our Lord, to whom all thanks is therefore due vers. 25. I doe therfore now assure all the faithfull and true members of Christ (who may be knowne by this marke, that they live not after the flesh but after the Spirit) that they are delivered from damnation, and their salvation is sure. Now there are 2. things whereby Christ hath delivered us from the law of sin and death, that is, from the power or guilt of sin and of death: the former is the power and merit of Christs perfect obedience and holynes, which is called the law of the Spirit of life in Christ: the other his sufferings, wherein he yeelded an all∣sufficient satisfaction by bearing the punishment, whereby sinne was condemned in our nature which had sinned; which nature though 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 free from sinne as Chrysost•…•…meb speaketh, yet like to the sin∣full flesh, that is to say, passible, hee therefore tooke upon him, that because by the observation of the law in our owne persons, it was impossible by reason of our flesh to be justified, all which the Law re∣quired to justification, might, •…•…ee doth not say by us, but in us, that is in our nature be performed by Christ, for it is Christ, asc Chrysost•…•…me saith, that fulfilled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in us and for us who are his true members, and are to be knowne as I said by this marke, that live not

after the flesh but after the Spirit. And therefore this place proveth, that because it is impossible by reason of the flesh to bee justified by that righteousnesse which is prescribed in the Law: therefore God in his mercy sent his Sonne to take our nature upon Him, that there∣in he might performe for us whatsoever the Law it selfe required to justification. Thus this place is expounded byd Chrysostome, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, saith he, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not to be subject to the curse, and that Christ fulfilled it for us.e Oecumenius in like maner: If any man should say, what is this to us? He saith, these things Christ did, that the scope of the Law (for that is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) might be fulfilled in us. And what is the scope of the Law? That wee should not bee obnoxious to the curse. Or asf Chrysostome in another place: the end of the Law is that a man might be justified. For what did the Law intend? To make a man just; but it was not able, because no man fulfilled it.g Theodore•…•…, when the Law was not able to performe what it intended by reason of their weakenesse to whom it was given,—the onely begotten Word of God made man, by the humane flesh overcame sinne; having fulfilled all righteousnesse. And being not infected with any blemish of sinne, and having undergone the death of sin∣ners, as if hee had been a sinner, &c. And on those words, that the righteousnesse of the law might bee in us: hee paid our debt, saith hee, and performed the end and scope of the law, What was that? That he might declare them to be just (that is, that hee might justifie them) to whom the law was given.h Ambrose, Quando impletur in •…•…bis justificati•…•… (Legis) nis•…•… cum datur remissi•…•… omnium peccatorum? when is the justification of the law fulfilled in us, but when the remission of all our sinnes is granted to us? for as I have before alleaged out ofi Augustine, All the Commandements are reputed done, when that which is not done is pardoned. If therefore this place were to bee understood of our fulfilling the righteousnesse of the law in or by our selves, Christ had not obtained his end▪ for so long as the flesh, that is, our inbred cotruption, by reason whereof it is impossible for the law to justifie, remaineth, as in this life it alwayes doth, even in the best; so long it is not possible, either to fulfill the law, or to be justi∣fied by the observation of it.

§. XII. To the second place, which is the third petition of the Lords Prayer, I answere, that wee pray not, that we upon earth may in equality of obedience match the Angels in heaven: but that we may imitate their obedience, and bee like to them in doing the will of God, willingly, readily, faithfully, constantly. For the particle, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as, signifieth not parity but likeness•…•…. In the life to come wee shall indeed be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Matth. 22. 30. as the Angels, but here wee may not dreame of Angelicall perfection.

To thek third I answere, that our Saviour is Authour of salvation to all that obey him: which is to bee understood both of the obedi∣ence of faith, which is the principall, for this is thel worke of God, (by which in Christ wee fulfill the law) that wee beleeve in Christ;

and also of our new obedience. But neither of both doth argue the perfect fulfilling of the law in our owne persons. This threefold cord therefore is easily dissolved.

§. XIII. His fifth reason, Whosoever have the holy Spirit, they fulfill the Law.

All that are truely justified have the holy Spirit, Rom. 5. 5. & 8. 15. 1 Cor. 3. 16. Gal. 3. 2. Tit. 3. 6.

Therefore all that are truely justified fulfill the Law.

The proposition hee proveth thus, Whosoever have the fruits of the Spirit, Gal. 5. they fulfill the Lawe: All that have the Spirit have the fruits of the Spirit: Therefore all that have the Spi∣rit fulfill the Law.

This second proposition hee proveth, because against those who pro∣duce the fruits of the Spirit, as charity, joy, peace, &c. There is no Law, that is, the Law hath not whereof to accuse them, as the breakers thereof. There∣fore whosoever is justified, by the helpe of the Spirit he fulfilleth the Law: and if he doe not fulfill the Law, then hath he not received the Spirit, neither is he truely justified.

To the proposition of the first syllogisme, I answere, that those who have received the Spirit doe keepe the Law. But none fulfill the Law, who have not the fulnesse of the Spirit; and none have the fulnesse of the Spirit, in whom the flesh remaineth lusting against the Spirit. In whom this conflict is, as it is in the best, They cannot doe the things that they would, Gal. 5. 17. And much lesse can they fulfill the Law, from which they are so farre, as that the good things they would, they doe not; and the evill things which they would not, they doe, Rom. 7. 19.

And so to the proposition of the second syllogisme, that those who have the Spirit, have the fruits of the Spirit, but not without measure, nor in full measure, but according to the measure of the gift of Christ, Ephes. 4. 7. Having received but the first fruits of the Spirit, Rom. 8. 23.

As for his third prosyllogisme, that against such there is no m law, the meaning is not, that those which have the fruits of the Spirit doe never transgresse the law, for in many n things we offend all: but the words are to be understood, either of the fruites of the Spirit, that against such there is no law, but against the contrary fruites of the flesh: or of the persons indued with the fruites of the Spirit, and then the meaning is, either as 1 Tim. 1. 9. That the law is not given to such: or as Gal. 5. 18. That those who are led by the Spirit, are not under the law; that is, they are neither under the curse, not yet un∣der the terrour and dominion of the law, as if they needed thereby to bee forced to obedience, but they are, as it were, a law unto them∣selves, willingly performing obedience to that which the law pre∣scribeth, according to the measure of grace received; not but that sometimes they faile, the flesh prevailing against the Spirit. Not under the curse, nor subject to the accusation and condemnation of

the Law, because in Christ, who hath freed them from the curse, their sinnes are forgiven. o Who then shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods children, seeing it is God that doth justifie, who shall condemne, seeing Christ who dyed for us, maketh also intercession for us. But this doth not prove, that therefore the faithfull sinne not. But this proveth, that when having sinned they confesse their sinnes, God is just to forgive them, because wee have an Advocate with the Father; Christ Iesus the righteous, and hee is the propitiation for our sinnes. In this forgivenesse of our sinnes, and Gods acceptation of us in Christ, and not in our obedience doth our justification consist. But he that fulfilleth the Law needeth not remission of sinnes, which all doe need. And therefore desperate is Bellarmines conclusion, that whoso∣ever is justified fulfilleth the Law; and whosoever doth not fulfill the Law (which no man doth) is not justified.

§. XIV. And such also is his last argument, which may thus bee framed.

Whosoever sinneth not fulfilleth the Law. Of every justified man it may be verified, that he sinneth not. Therefore every justified man fulfilleth the Law.

The proposition he proveth, because he that sinneth not, doth not transgresse the Law: and he that doth not transgresse the Law, doth fulfill it.

First, I answere to the proposition and the proofe thereof: that they are true, if understood of continued acts; as thus, hee that sin∣neth not, that is, that never sinneth: hee that transgresseth not the Law, that is, that never doth transgresse it, doth fulfill it. For none doe fulfill the Law but they who continue in all the things that are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them, which is duely to bee marked. For the Papists seeme to bee of this opinion, that by any one act of obedience, wherein a man sinneth not, hee doth fulfill the Law. And so they feare not to say, that every worke of charity doth absolutely merit eternall life; wherein they doe grievously erre; imagining, that as one act committed against charity doth absolute∣ly deserve damnation: so any one act proceeding from charity doth absolutely merit salvation. But who knoweth not, that the whole law of God is copulative, and so to bee understood. As therefore in a copulative proposition consisting of many, suppose twenty parts; if any one bee false, though all the rest be true, the whole propositi∣on is false, and to be denyed. So if a man should keepe all the Com∣mandements, and transgresse any one though it were but once, hee is a transgressor of the law, and is, as p Saint Iames saith, guilty of all; and by the sentence of the law is subject to the curse, because he hath not q continued in all the things which are written in the Booke of the law to doe them. Hee that would bee thought to fulfill the law, must not onely abstaine from all the things forbidden, but hee must also doe the things commanded, hee must doe all, hee must continue in doing all. And thus if the proposition and the proofe thereof bee

understood, he that sinneth not, he that transgresseth not the Law, that is, he that never sinneth, he that never transgresseth the Law doth fulfill it, are true, but otherwise they are false and to be denyed.

§. XV. I come to the assumption, which Bellarmine proveth thus. Whosoever is regenerate and borne of God sinneth not.

All that are justified are regenerate; and that, because no man deny∣ethit, he proveth by manifold testimonies, Ioh. 1. 12, 13. & 3. 5. 1 Pet. 2. 1 1 Ioh. 4. 7. Rom. 8. 15. Therefore those that are justified sinne not.

The proposition he proveth out of 1 Ioh. 3. 9. Whosoever is borne of God sinneth not, neither can he sinne, because he is borne of God. Yet I will not answere him as he answereth us,r viz. that there be five exposi∣tions of this place, and never a one of them to the purpose, and so dis∣misse it, being indeed unanswerable: but I answer, that the Apostle doth not meane that the regenerate are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or doe not sinne at all, for to that erroneous sense both Iouin. and Pelag. did abuse that place, as Bellar. here doth: but his meaning may be explained out of his own words in the same Epistle, for as in the fifth chapter. v. 18. When he saith, whoso∣everis borne of God sinneth not, he meaneth, as appeareth by the words going before, that he sinneth not unto death: that is committeth not that unpardonable sin, for which we are not to pray, v. 16. so here, when hee saith, whosoever is borne of God doth not commit sin, his meaning may be collected out of the next verse going before vers. 8. compared with Ioh. 8. 34. he that is borne of God worketh not sinne, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for hee that worketh sinne, he that is a worker of iniquity, is of the Devill, as hee saith vers. 8. He that worketh sinne, saith our Saviour, Ioh. 8. 34. is the servant of sinne, and therefore in him sinne reigneth. As there∣fore in the fifth chapter when hee saith, he that is borne of God sinneth not, he meaneth, that he doth not so sinne as he had said vers. 16. viz. un∣to death: so here when it is said he cannot sinne, his meaning is in that manner, as a worker of iniquity, as the child of the Devill, as the servant of sinne, in whom sinne reigneth. And in this sense Augustines saith in quo peccatum non regnat, non peccat, in whom sinne reigneth not, he sin∣neth not, namely as those who in the scriptures are calledt sinners, that is impenitent sinners, servants of sinne, in whom sinne reigneth, wor∣kers of iniquity, Luk. 13. 27. Matth. 7. 23. who shall bee condemned. But although they, who are borne of God are not such as the Scripture calleth sinners, neither doe so sinne as the servants of sinne, in whom sin reigneth, yet they are penitent and beleeving sinners, in whom sinne re∣mainteh, who often sinne through humane frailty. There is no man that sinneth not saith Salomon,t yea there is not a righteous man upon earthu that doeth good and sinneth not; in many things we, saith Iames the just, doe offend all. If we say that wee have not sinned, or that wee have no sinne, saith the most holy Apostle Saint Iohn wee deceive our selves, we make him a lyer, and there is no truth in us. And therefore desperate againe is Bellarmines assertion, that whosoever is justified or regenerated, sinneth not, that is, never sinneth: and on the other side, whosoever sinneth is not a man regenerate nor justified, which is to

exclude all men from Iustification, and consequently from Salva∣tion.

§. XVI. And thus have I answered Bellarmines arguments concer∣ning the possibility of the Law. Now it may be expected that I should propound and mainetaine ours. But this taske I have already perfor∣med in handling the third question of this controversie concerning the matter of our justification, where among many other arguments, pro∣ving that we are not justified by any righteousnes inherent in us, or per∣formed by us, but onely by the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him, we used thisx for one. By what righteousnesse we are justi∣fied, the Law is satisfied: By Christs righteousnesse alone the Law is satisfied, and not by that which is inherent in us, or performed by us. And this assumption wee prove, because wee are not able to sati fie the Law, neither in respect of the Commandement, it being by reason of the flesh impossible unto us; nor in respect of the penalty, which can∣not be satisfied by us, but with endlesse torment. So that, as I said be∣fore, all this discourse of the possibilitie of the Law is nothing but a defence against a piece of one of our arguments.

Now I should follow him to the second point, which hee propoun∣ded to prove that the workes of the righteous are simply and absolute∣ly just, and after their manner, perfect: Which may also seeme to be an answere to another piece of our argument. For that righteousnesse by which wee are justified is perfect, such onely is the righteousnesse of Christ which is out of us in him, such is not that which is inherent in us as the habituall; or performed by us, as the actuall. Bellarmine there¦fore in opposition to that breach concerning perfect actuall righteous∣nesse, propounded the proofe of this point. But that our best righte∣ousnesse is unperfect and stained with the flesh, I have fully proved be∣fore, and have answered all the arguments which Bellarmine produceth here, in my fourthy Booke, whereunto I referre the reader. Here one∣ly I signifie againe, that Bellarmine falleth very short in his proofes: for where he should prove, that the workes of the faithfull are simply and absolutely just, and perfect: as hee propounded the question; hee now seemeth to prove this, that the good workes of the righteous are truely good, which we deny not.

§. XVII. Yes but you Protestants, will they say, doe teach, that the best workes of the faithfull are sinnes, &c. Ans. We doe not say that their good workes, as namely their prayer or their almes, &c. are sinnes: but that in them, they being otherwise good, there are some imperfe∣ctions and staines which are sinnes: in respect whereof the faithfull man in doing that, which is good, sinneth, according to that, Eccl. 7. 20. We doe confesse that the duties which the faithfull performe are good workes, and so called in the Scriptures, though not purely and perfect∣ly good; but having their imperfections, and being stained with the flesh. Even as we call a man regenerated, a just or a good man, though he be not perfectly just, being partly flesh and partly spirit. Thus a ves∣sell wherein there is wax mixed with hony before it be clarified, is truly

called a vessell of hony, though not sinceri mellis, of pure or sincere ho∣ney. A cup of wine wherein is a mixture of some water with wine, is truely called a cup of wine though not vini meraci, of pure wine. In like manner a wedge of gold, wherein there is some drosse, is truely called a wedge of gold, though not of pure gold. An heape of corne in the floore wherein there is perhaps as much chaffe as wheat, is truly called an heape of wheat. A field, wherein are tares and other weeds, as well as corne, is notwithstanding called a corne field, the denomina∣tion being taken from the better part. Verily, whiles we live in this world, we are as gold wherein there is much drosse, and never are fully refined untill wee are to bee translated into the celestiall house of God. Whiles we are in the Church militant, as it were in Gods floore, we are mingled with much chaffe, and are never perfectly cleansed from the chaffe of our corruptions, untill we are to be translated into the Lords Granaries. And such as wee are, such also are our actions: such as the tree is, such is the fruit. But if hee will prove that men are justified by their workes, hee must prove, not onely that they are truely good, but also purely and perfectly good: and not onely, that some of their workes are truely and purely good, but that all their workes are truely and perfectly, and not that onely, but also perpetually good. For if any of his workes bee sinnes, he cannot be justified by his workes. But this can never be proved. Neither doth hee goe about to prove that all the actions of justified men are good, but some onely, and these not purely, and perfectly, but truely good. To which purpose he spendeth three wholez Chapters, which I have fully answered in my fourth Booke.

CHAP. VIII. Whether good Workes doe justifie. Bellarmines proofe, but especially that Testimony of Saint Iames, Chapter 2. fully discussed, and clared.

§. I.

AFter so many wandrings, Bellarmine at length commeth to make good his fifth Argument, which he propounded to prove, that faith alone doth not justifie, because good workes doe also justifie; though here, as I have noted, this Ar∣gument is brought in to prove the truth of actu∣all righteousnesse. The Title of this Chapter is, that good workes are not onely just, but that also they doe justifie. In stead whereof he presently propoundeth this assertion to be proved, that by good workes a just man is more justified, and made more just. But this is not the Question. For we doe con∣fesse, that a man already justified before God, by the practise of good works increaseth in righteousnesse inherent, and is made more holy and just. The thing which we deny is this, that good workes doe not con∣curre with faith unto the act of iustification before God, as any cause thereof. Against this assertion he ought to have disputed, if he would seeme to contradict us. But he hath altered the question, because he is not able to mainetaine the contradictory of our assertion; and maketh the question to be this, whether by good workes men are justified, that is to say, made more just, viz. in respect of righteousnesse inherent. But we deny, that there are any degrees of justification, or that a man may be more justified, or that justification doth ever signifie increase of righteousnesse: wee reject their new▪ found distinction of justification into the first and second, and acknowledge no other justification, but that, which in the Scriptures and Fathers is called the justification of a sinner: and thereby wee understand a continued act of God: who, as when we being sinners did first beleeve, did justifie us; so remaining sinners in our selves he doth still justifie us, by imputation of Christs righteousnesse, acquitting us from our sinnes, and accepting of us as righteous in Christ. And this justification, which is onely acknowled∣ged by the Scriptures and Fathers, is every where ascribed to faith. Whereas the first justification of the Papists is ascribed to charity as the onely forme; the second to workes, as to the merit thereof. But all this ariseth from their erroneous and wilfull confounding of justificati∣on and sanctification. For their first justification is that, which the Scrip∣tures

call regeneration, and is the first act of Sanctification, by which we are habitually sanctified, for they make it to be nothing else, but the infusion of the habits of grace: Their second justification, is their actuall fanctification, or exercise of good workes, whereby their inhe∣rent righteousnesse or sanctification is increased. But the question is not of sanctification, but of justification; which the Papists by their wicked doctrine, confounding it with sanctification, have wholly abo∣lished, it being the maine benefit of the Messias, by which we are both freed from hell, and entitled to heaven. Neither is the question un∣derstood of justification before men, but before God. For before men we doe confess•…•… that by good workes men are justified, that is declared and known•…•… to be just, as by the fruits, effects, consequents, and signes of justification by faith: but before God we are not justified, that is, made or constituted just by work•…•…s, as any cause thereof, for good workes goe not before justification, but follow after, which is a plaine evidence that they are no cause of it.

§. II. But let us examine his proofes; the first and principall is out of Iames 2. which being the onely place of Scripture, whereupon with any shew of probability they ground their doctrine of justification by workes: I will not content my selfe to answere Bellarmines cavils alone: but I will endevour to stop the mouthes of all the Papists, who use to vaunt of this place, especially of the 24. verse; where they bragge, that their assertion is expressed, and ours confuted in plaine termes: yee see then that a man is justified by workes, and not by saith onely. Which words are a consectary or conclusion deduced from the example of Abraham: who though he were justified by faith without works as Saint Paul tea∣cheth; yet was hee also justified by workes and not by faith onely, as Saint Iames affirmeth. A conclusion therefore in shew of words con∣tradictory to that of the Apostle Paul, Rom. 3. 28. wee conclude, that a man is justified by faith without the workes of the Law, and Gal. 2. 16. we know, that a man is not justified by the workes of the Law▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, but onely by faith: which no doubt was the Apostles mea∣ning. For as I have shewed heretofore, if this be a good disjunction, that we are justified either by faith, or by works; (that is, either by the righte∣ousnes of Christ which is out of us in him apprehended by faith or by the works of the Law, that is, by righteousnes inherent in our selves all which is prescribed in the Law) as undoubtedly it is; for a third thing cannot be named, whereby we might be justified, and by both we can∣not; (for if by faith, then of grace; and if of grace, then not of works, and contrary wise Rom. 4. 4, 5. 11. 6.) then it followeth necessarily, that if we are not justified by workes, we are justified by faith alone. Hence ariseth this great controversie between the true Catholiks and the Papists: we affirming, that we are justified by faith without works, or by faith alone; The Papists contending, that wee are justified by workes and not by faith only: we alleaging the authority of Saint Paul in his Epistles, to the •…•…omanes, Galatians, Ephesians; the Papists this Testimony of Saint Iames.

§. III. The way to determine this weighty Controversie is to re∣concile

the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles. Some, a when they were not able to untye this Gordian knot, have sought, with Alexander, to cut it, by questioning without just cause the autho∣rity of that Epistle of Saint Iames. But the Papists and wee are thus farre agreed. First, as they doe not deny those Epistles of S. Paul, which were never questioned; so we acknowledge this of Saint Iames, though it hath beene questioned, to bee canonicall. Secondly, that the two Apostles, acted by the same Spirit of truth in penning their Epistles, could not possibly deliver contrary assertions: and consequently, that they onely are to bee esteemed to hold the truth, who fitly reconciling the seeming variance betweene the two Apostles, doe teach that do∣ctrine, which is agreeable to both. Here then I am to demonstrate, both against the Papists, and for our selves: against the Papists three things. First, that the doctrine which they ground upon this place of Saint Iames, is contrary to that of Saint Paul. Secondly, that their expositi∣on of Saint Iames they make him contradict the Apostle Paul. Thirdly, that their doctrine cannot be grounded upon this Text. For our selves two things. First, that by our exposition the two Apostles are easily re∣conciled. Secondly, that the assertion of the two Apostles, according to our doctrine, not onely may well stand together, but also of necessity must goe together. For the first: wee have the same controversie with the Papists, as I have noted before, which the Apostle maintayned against the justiciaryes of his time. And their opposite doctrine to Saint Paul, which they would gladly father upon Saint Iames, standeth in those six maine errours, which I have plainely and fully confuted in this treatise. And namely in this particular; they affirming, that men are justified by workes, which the Apostle every were constantly deny∣eth. To the second, whiles they understand the two Apostles to speake in the same sense, of faith, of workes, of justifying; as namely, that both speake of a true justifying faith; of workes, as causes of justification; of justifying, as making just by righteousnesse inherent: they make the one directly to contradict the other. For if Paul affirme, that men are justified by a true faith without workes, and Iames deny it: If Paul deny, that we are justified by workes, as the causes of justification, and Iames affirme it: If Paul deny, that wee are made just before God by workes, and Iames affirme it; how doe they not contradict one another?

§. IV. Bellarm. hopeth to salve the matter with his new-found di∣stinction of the first and second justification: that Paul speaking of the ju∣stification, wherein a man of a sinner is made just, excludeth workes done by the strength of nature without faith and without grace: and that Iames speak∣ing of the second justification, wherein a just man is made more just, saith, that by the workes of grace proceeding from faith a man is justified.

Answ. Such a distinction might be applyed to sanctification, which is partly habituall, the which they call their first justi•…•…cation, con∣sisting chiefly in charity: and partly actuall, which is their second justfication, consisting in good workes: but being applyed to ju∣stification, it hath no ground, either in the Scriptures or in the an∣cient

fathers. Neither can any such distinction possibly bee applied to that justification, which the Scriptures teach, as I have showed b heretofore. Secondly, if there could be such a distinction, I would say, that Paul, when hee denyeth Abraham to have been justi∣fied by workes did speake of the second justification, wich Bellarmine himselfe confesseth. For Abraham, when he was said to be justified by faith without workes, did abound which workes, as Bellarmine confesseth, and yet was not justifyed by them. And that Iames when hee speaketh of Rahab the harlot, whom hee affirmeth to have been justified by workes, speaketh of the first justification, as Bellarmine also affirmeth. If therefore Paul say, that in the first justification none are justified by workes, and Iames affirme that some are, as namely Rahab: If the Apostle Iames say, that Abraham in his second j•…•…stification was justified by workes, and Paul doe as planiely deny it, how are they reconciled? Againe saith Bellarmine, Paul from justifi∣cation onely excludeth the workes done without grace; Iames includeth onely the workes of grace. I answeare, that Paul excludeth from justification Abrahams workes, which as else where c hee testifieth, he wrought by faith: And Iames includeth the workes of Rahab the harlot, which was done, as Bellarmine saith, without grace going before. Where I desire the reader to observe what Bellarmine answeareth. As Paul, saith hee, when he did speake of the first justification, brought the example of Abraham, which was indeed of the second, that hee might prove, as it were à majori, from the greater, that a sinner cannot bee justified by workes done without faith, if righteous Abraham was not made more just by his workes done without faith: even so Iames, when hee did speake of the second justification, brought the example of Rahab, which is of the first justifica∣tion, that hee might prove à majori, (hee should say à minori, if my lo∣gicke faile me not) from the lesse, that a just man is made more just by his workes and not onely by faith, if Rahab of an harlot was made just by workes and not onely by faith. Answ. Thus then hee maketh the Apostles to argue. If Abrahams workes would not have justified him with∣out faith, much lesse would the good workes of the wicked. And if Rahab by her worke of mercie was of an harlot made just: how much more shall the good workes of the righteous make them more just?

§. V. Where by the way you may note diverse absurdities, which I have partly touched before. First, that the Apostle forsooth bring∣eth Abraham as an example of justification by workes: when it is most evident, that hee bringeth him as an example of justification by imputation of righteousnesse without workes, and maketh his example the exemplar or patterne of all others, who in like maner are justified by faith without workes, or by imputation of righteous∣nes without workes.

Secondly, That Paul produceth Abraham as an example to prove, that a just man is more justified by his workes; for which there is no colour praeter impudentiam asseverandi, the contrary is proved, that

Paul speaking of the justification of a sinner applyeth, what hee saith, to Abraham. For hee proveth that Abraham was not justified by workes, because the Scripture saith, d Abraham beleeved God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse. Now to him that work∣eth is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but beleeveth on him that iustifieth the ungodly (which was Abrahams case) his faith is counted for righteousnesse.

Thirdly, the Apostle when he excludeth Abrahams workes from iustification, doth not exclude his good and gracious workes, but such as hee did, or might have done without grace, that is to say, gracelesse workes. But no doubt the Apostles intent in producing the example of Abraham, which Chrysostome also hath observed; was this: If Abraham who did abound with so many notable works, which hee wrought by faith, was not iustified by them but onely by faith: then it is certaine, that none are iustified by workes, though their workes be never so gracious.

Fourthly, He supposeth, that gracious Abraham might have done good workes without grace, and that the Apostle denyeth him to have bene iustified by such workes, as hee might have done, but did not.

Fifthly, By an impudent devise, whereof there is no colour, hee maketh the Apostle from the example of Abraham to argue à ma∣jori. If Abrahams workes would not have iustified him, unlesse they had proceeded from faith: then much lesse can the workes of sin∣ners and unregenerate men done without faith iustifie them.

Sixthly, He shamefally inverteth the Apostles question, and per∣verteth his whole disputation; As if the Apostle disputed this que∣stion, whether workes doe iustifie without faith (which hee doth never so much as mention;) and not, whether faith doth iustifie without workes, which is indeed the question.

Seventhly, Where hee saith; that the Apostle excludeth workes onely from their imaginary first iustification, which is meerely habi∣tuall; hee conceiveth, that the Apostle tooke all these paines, to prove, that workes are no part of habituall righteousnesse.

Eightly, Where hee saith, that the Apostle excludeth from iusti∣fication workes of nature and not of grace, it is as much as if hee should have said, that the Apostle doth so seriously labour to prove, that men are not justified by such workes as are not good, but evill.

To conclude, it is evident, that the Apostle Paul excludeth from the act of justification all workes in ge•…•…all, whether done before grace or after; of all men, whether unregenerate, or regenerate, even of Abraham himself. Yea more specially the workes of the faithfull and regenerate. First, Because he speaketh of good workes, even the workes of righteousnesse which wee (the faithfull) have done Tit. 3. 5. Secondly, The question being, whether faith doth justi∣fie without workes, or whether faith and workes together; the

Apostle must be understood to exclude those workes from the act of justification, which with faith concurre in the party justified. Even as Abraham, though his faith was accompanied with store of good works yet he was justified, and so are all the faithfull, by faith without works.

If therefore St. Iames doe affirme, that men are justified in the same sence that Paul denyeth the same; and that Abraham was justi∣fied by his workes, which Paul denyeth; he is made to contradict the Apostle Paul.

§. VI. But as the Popish doctrine is repugnant to the doctrine of the Apostle Paul, so neither can it bee grounded upon this text, which may appeare by a briefe Analysis thereof. Where first, you are to consider the occasion of this discourse, and thereupon the scope of the Apostle therein. The occasion was the dissolute life of many Christians, who, as Iude speaketh vers. 4. did turne the grace of God into wantonnes, vaine men, as S^t. Iames calleth them vers. 20. who, when they had learned, that a man is justified by faith without workes, hereby tooke occasion to cast of all care of good workes. As if it were sufficient for them howsoever they lived, to professe them selves to believe.

The scope therfore and intendement of the Apostle is, not to con∣fute the doctrine of Paul concerning justification by faith alone, but according to Pauls direction Tit. 3. 8. to perswade all those, who professe themselves to believe, to be studious of good workes. And that hee doth by this argument: because, howsoever faith doth ju∣stifie alone, yet the profession of faith alone without good workes will not justifie nor save a man; but is altogether vaine and unprofi∣table. The 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or state of the question, which hee propoundeth to argue, manifestly appeareth by the proposition, wherein the que∣stion is propounded, and by the conclusion wherein the questi∣on is concluded, the proposition, vers. 14. What profit my bre∣thren, if a man say hee hath faith, and hath not workes, will 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that faith save him? Marke the wordes: if a man shall say, hee hath faith, that is, if a man shall professe himself to believe, and hath not works, that is a conversation answerable in some measure to his profession; will that faith, which is in profession onely justifie or save him? this interrogation implyeth a most Emphaticall negation: wherein hee doth not onely deny that faith, which is onely in profession, and doth not worke by love, doth justifie or save a man; but also, for the truth of his deniall, hee doth appeale, as it were, to their con∣science; sor so much is meant by the interrogation. The question then is not, whether true faith doe justifie alone, as Bellarmine would have it; but whether that faith, which is alone, and by it selfe; vers. 17. without workes, without a Christian conversation, be a true justifying or saving saith. This the Apostle denieth, and so doe wee. In the rest of the discourse hee proveth this negative assertion by an argument from the contrary, namely that this fruitlesse faith is not a true faith, because it is dead. Where the Apostle argueth to

this effect: That faith, which is dead, doth not iustifie or save a man: The faith which is profession onely, and is alone without workes is dead. Therefore that faith which is in profession onely, and is alone without workes, doth not iustifie or save a man.

The assumption hee proveth in this whole discourse, where the con•…•…lusion is alwayes this, that the faith which is alone and without workes is dead, and therefore that is the question wich is disputed and concluded.

§. VII. Now that the faith which is alone and without workes is dead, hee proveth by five arguments.

1. The first à par•…•…: That charity which is onely in word and not in deed is vaine and unprofitable vers. 15. 16. Even so pariratione, that faith which is in profession only having no works to accompany it, is dead, vers. 17.

2. The second argument is taken from the effects. For a true lively faith may bee demonstrated by good workes: and that which cannot be demonstrated by good workes, is but a dead faith. And this hee proveth vers. 18. against the carnall Gospeller, as it were, by the partyes owne testimony, or forced confession, provo∣king him to make experience, which kind of proofe is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Thou professest the faith having no workes: I also professe the faith and have workes, come now to the tryall, hee that hath a true faith may approve it by the fruits: shewe then they faith, if thou canst, by thy workes (which thou knowest thou canst not doe) and I by my workes will approve my faith.

3. The third argument is from the subject. For a true justify∣ing faith is not common to all men. 2. Thes. 3. 2. and much lesse to Devils, but is proper to the Elect, Tit. 1. 1. But that faith, which men professe without charity and without good workes is common to Devils. vers. 19. Thou professest, that thou believest that there is one God, thou doest well: but if this thy beliefe be not accompa∣nied with charity and good workes; know this, that the devils them∣selves who hate God, doe, though with horrour, knowe and perforce believe the same.

4. The fourth argument to prove, that faith onely professed, or which is in profession onely, is not a true and a lively, but a conterfeit and a dead faith; is a twofold example, of Abraham, and of Rahab, who were justified, that is, declared and knowne to be just by their workes. For in this sence, as the word is often used in the Scriptures as M•…•…t. 11. 19. Luk 7. 29. R•…•…. 3. 4. 1. Tim. 3. 16: so of necessity it must bee taken in this place. For by good workes, which alwaies followe, and never goe before justification, wee are not made just: but being already justified, wee are by them declared and knowne to be just. For hee is a righteous e man that worketh righte∣ousnesse. And this the Schoolmen themselves doe teach, that works do•…•… justifi•…•… •…•…clarativè Th•…•…s Aquinas saith, f Opera n•…•…n sunt ca•…•…sa quòd aliqui•…•… sit i•…•…tus apud Deum, &c. workes are not the cause why

any man is just before God, but rather they are the executions and manifestations of iustice. Nam nullus per opera iustificatur apud Deum sed per habitum fidei. For no man is iustified before God by workes, but by the habit of faith. And whereas it might bee obiected out of Iam. 2. that Abraham was iustified by workes: hee answeareth, g the word to be iustified many be taken two wayes: whereof the one is, quantum ad executionem iustitiae, & manifestationem inrespect of execu∣tion and manifestation of iustice, & hoc m•…•…do iustificatur homo, i. iustus ostenditur ex operib. operatis, and thus a man is iustified, that is decla∣red be iust by the workes which hee hath done. And thus the ordi∣nary glosse expoundeth the word in this place. But let us come to the words. vers. 20.

§. VIII. But wilt thou know O vaine man, that faith, that is, that faith professed or in profession onely without workes is dead, or that the faith which is without workes is knowne to be dead. For the life of faith it self doth not depend upon workes as the cause, but is thereby knowne as by the effects. You see againe what the question is which hee will conclude: namely that the faith which is without workes, or which is in profession onely without workes, is not a li∣vely but a dead faith, and consequently not a justifying faith. For a justifying faith is like the faith of Abraham and of Rahab: but that faith which is in profession onely and wanteth workes is not like the faith of Abraham and of Raba•…•…. For though Abraham was iustified by faith without workes as the Apostle Paul proveth, yea by faith alone as the Papists themselves confesse; yet the faith by which hee was justified was not alone, but was fruitfull of good workes, by which both hee and his faith were justified, that is knowne to be just and upright.

§. IX. Vers. 21. was not Abraham our Father, saith hee, justified by workes, when hee had offered his sonne Isaack upon the Altar? Of which wordes the meaning is not, that Abraham by that worke was justified before God, or made just, for long before, the holy Ghost gave him this testimony Gen. 15. Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for righteousnesse: not, that then hee first be∣lieved, or was then first justified: for when hee first left his countrey, which hee left by faith Heb. 11. 8. hee had believed, and his faith no doubt was imputed to him for righteousnesse: but that by that spe∣ciall worke after hee was proved, hee was approved and knowne to be a righteous man. For upon Abrahams approbation of his faith and obedience, when he was tryed, the Lord gave him this testimony, Gen. 22. 12. Now I know, that thou fearest God &c. Did not God know it before? Yea no doubt, but hee speaketh after the maner of men. He had tempted Abraham, that is, by a commandement of tryall hee had proved his faith and obedience; not that hee did not know, but that he would make it knowne to Abraham and others. As on the contray, God is said 2. Chron. 32. 31. to have left Ezechias to try him, that hee might know, that is, that hee might make knowne

all that was in his heart, when as therefore Abraham being tryed, had by that act of offering his sonne approved his faith and obedi∣ence, the Lord saith, Now I know, that is, now by this tryall it is made knowne, that thou art a just man and one that feareth God. And in this sence, as it is most manifest, hee is said by his workes to have been justified, that is, knowne, declared, approved to be a just man.

§. X. Hereupon St. Iames inferreth vers. 22. Doe you not see, how faith did co-operate to or with his workes? The verbe 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be understood two wayes, either that faith with other graces did co-operate to the bringing forth of this worke, as namely with the feare of God, and love of God, Gen. 22. 12. though faith was the principall, Heb. 11. 17. Or else, that faith did co-operate with his workes, not to justifie him before God, but to manifest, declare and approve his righteousnes. In which sence we must understand the word Faith, as in the proposition (vers. 24.) for faith professed: or the profession of faith which doth concurre together with workes to make a man, truely justified, to bee knowne. And in this sence faith doth co-operate with works, and may be said to justifie by declaring a man to be just, though Bellarmine holdeth the contrary. For that a man may bee acknowledged to be a man truely justified before God by faith, two things must concurre; the profession of the true faith, and a Christian conversation, neither of which alone is suf∣ficient.

It followeth in the same verse: and by workes was faith made per∣fect. Which words saith Bellarmine cannot signifie any other, but that his righteousnesse, which was begunne by faith, was perfected by good works. Answ. But Iames doth not say, that his righteousnesse, but his faith was perfected, and whereas hee saith the words cannot signifie otherwise, I say they may be understood two other wayes. First, that faith by workes is perfected, because by workes it is manifested, and perfectly knowne, in which sence Gods strength is perfected in our weakenesse 2. Cor. 12. 9. Secondly, because workes bring the fruits and effects of faith to be perfected, when it bringeth forth good fruits according to his kind. For when any thing hath attayned to the end (as it hath when it doth effectually produce those uses or fruits, for which it was ordayned) it is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be perfect. Now the end of our justification by faith is our sanctification. For when faith was wrought in us (that is to say, in our regeneration) we were the workemanship of God created unto good workes, which God hath preordayned that wee should walke in them. Eph. 2. 10. Faith therefore may then bee said to be perfected, when it doth effectually bring forth the fruit of good workes: whereby a man is not made, but declared to be just.

§. XI. Vers. 23. And this appeareth yet more plainely by that which followeth. And the Scripture was fulfilled, which saith, Abra∣ham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse.

This Scripture was fulfilled Gen. 15. 6. above 30. yeares before his offering of Isaake: and here againe it is said to have been fulfilled in this act, that is, the truth of that testimony, which was given him so long before was then manifested, when by this worke hee evident∣ly declared, that hee was indued with a true lively iustifying faith. And to the like purpose the same sentence might, as Bellarmine con∣fesseth, be applyed to Abraham in respect of any other notable fruit of his faith: that then also that sentence was verified, Abraham be∣lieved God &c. For then it was declared and manifested, that hee was indued with a true iustifying faith. As for that conceipt of Bel∣larmine, that if the Hebrew word be well scanned, it will appeare, that the meaning of the words is, that Abrahams believing God was a •…•…ust worke, it is but a poore shift. For Paul understandeth it of Abrahams person, and maketh that text his principall ground of the iustification of the faithfull by imputation of righteousnesse without workes. And Iames likewise understandeth it of Abrahams person: shewing that by this act of offering his sonne the truth of that testimony was mani∣fested, that hee was indued with a true faith, by which hee was iustified.

It followeth in the same verse, and hee was called the friend of God. 2. Chron. 20. 7. Esai. 41. 8. that is, by this act hee approved him∣selfe to bee such a one.

§. XII. Hereupon Saint Iames, Verse 24. inferreth this consecta∣ry or conclusion: you see then by this example of Abraham, that a man who is justified before God by faith alone, as Abraham was, and that by imputation of righteousnesse without workes; is also justified by workes, as Abraham was, that is, by them, as by fruites and effects hee is declared and approved to bee just, and not by faith professed onely. Hee doth not say, a man is justified by workes as causes, but as the effects. For that, and not the other is deduced from the example of Abraham.

§. XIII. The other example is of Rahab, Verse 25. For though you may thinke, that you need not compare with Abraham, and yet have a true justifying faith; yet you will bee ashamed to bee behinde Rahab the harlot; who was no sooner justified before God by faith, but she was also justifyed, that is, declared and knowne to bee just by her worke of charity towards the Espyes, which shee wrought by faith, Heb. 11. 31.

Concerning this example of Rahab, Bellarmine hath foure Asserti∣ons: of which never an one agreeth with another. First, That Ra∣hab was not declared to bee just, because shee was an harlot: which is false. For though shee had beene an harlot, yet now she beleeved, and by her faith was justifyed before God, and by her worke which shee wrought by faith, was justified, as Saint Iames saith, that is, declared to bee just. Secondly, That Iames bri•…•…geth the example of Rahab to prove, that by good workes a righteous person is made more righteous: which also is false, and contrary to his former Assertion. Thirdly, That by

this worke of mercy shee was truely justified, and of a sinner made just. But Rahab, as Bellar•…•…ine saith, was an example of the first justification; and therefore of a sinner not made just by her worke, but by the ha∣bit of grace infused. The trueth is, by faith shee was justifyed before God, and by her worke shee was declared to bee just before men. Fourthly, That by that worke, as a disposition, she was prepared unto justifi∣ca•…•…ion. Which agreeth neither with his third, where he said, that by this worke shee was truely justifyed, and of a sinner made just, nor with Saint •…•…mes, whose meaning plainely is, not that shee was prepa∣red unto justification by this worke, no more than Abraham was by his; but that she was declared by this worke, as a fruite of her faith and a consequent of her justification, as Abraham was by his workes to be justifyed before God. And thus much of the two examples.

§. XIV. There rema•…•…eth his fifth Argument, which is a simili∣tude, Verse 26. For as the body without the Spirit is dead, so faith without workes, or that faith which is without workes is dead, which words also may bee two wayes expounded. For either the Apostle Iames speaketh of the habit of faith, or of the profession of it. If of the habit, then the comparison standeth thus: As the body of man without the Spirit, that is, without breath (which is the prime signi∣fication of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to breathe, in which sense it is called the spirit of the mouth, and spirit of the nostrils) I say, as the body without breath is dead: so that saith, which is without workes, which are as it were the breathing of a lively faith, is judged to be dead. For as h Bern•…•…rd also saith, As we discerne the life of this body by its motion, so the life of faith by workes. If therefore faith it selfe be here meant, wee must by Spirit understand breath and not the soule. For although the Papists absurdly make charity, which is a fruite of faith, 1 Tim. 1. 5. to be the forme of it; yet me thinkes they cannot bee so absurd, as to compare faith to the body, and workes to the soule: as though workes, which are the fruites and effects both of faith and of charity, were the forme, and as it were, the soule of faith.

If by faith we understand faith professed or the profession of faith, as in this discouse hitherto it hath beene used, and as it is used else∣where, as Act. 14. 22. R•…•…m. 1. 8. then you may understand the simili∣•…•…de thus: As the body of man without the Spirit, that is, the •…•…oule is dead: so the profession of faith without a godly life, which is as it were the life and •…•…oule of our profe•…•…on, is also dead. For hypocrites whose life is not conformable to their profession, though they have a •…•…ame, that they live, yet they are dead. Ap•…•…c. 3. 1.

Thus by five arguments Saint I•…•…mes hath proved, that the faith, which is alone, and without workes, is not a true and a lively, but a dead and counterfeit faith, and yet 〈◊〉〈◊〉, both here and Lib. 1. d•…•… justif. cap. 15. will needs have Saint •…•…ames to speake of a true faith, as if he supposed, that a true faith might be without workes.

Therefore the Popish Doctrine of justification by workes as

causes thereof cannot be grounded on this T•…•…xt of Saint Iames.

§. XV. Yea, but will some say, the contradiction is not yet salved. For Saint Paul affirmeth, as you say, that faith alone doth justify, and Saint Iames in plaine termes denyeth, that a man is justifyed by faith onely. I answere, when we say, that faith onely doth justify, we doe not meane absolutely, that nothing doth justify but faith in no sense whatsoever. For many things may truely bee said to justify ali•…•… atque ali•…•… sensu, in divers senses, as I have shewed heretofore. God the Fa∣ther as the prime efficient, Christ as the meritorious cause, God as the Iudge, Christ, as the Advocate. God, as the Creditour, Christ, as the Surety. The grace of God as the moving cause, the righteousnes of Christ as the matter, the imputation thereof as the forme, the ho∣ly Ghost as the applying cause, the Word and Sacraments as the in∣struments of the holy Ghost, Faith as the hand of the receiver, works as testimonies and signes, &c. but our meaning is, that we are justified by the righteousnesse of Christ onely, which is apprehended by faith alone, and that in us nothing doth concurre to the act of justification, but faith alone, it being the onely instrument whereby wee receive Christ.

And thus have you heard what is to be alleaged against the Papists. First, that their doctrine concerning justification by workes which they would build upon this Text, is repugnant to the Scriptures. Se∣condly, that by their exposition they make Saint I•…•…mes to contradict Saint Paul. Thirdly, that their doctrine cannot bee grounded on this Text.

§. XVI. Now for our selves, I will shew, that by our exposition the seeming difference betweene the two Apostles is manifestly re∣conciled: and that by our Doctrine their Assertions, not o•…•…ely may well stand together, but also must necessarily goe together. The re∣conciliation is easily made, if we consider two things, first, the diver∣sity of the Parties, with whom the two Apostles had to deale. For the Apostle Paul having to deale with Pharisaicall Iustitiaries, who sought to bee justified by a righteousnesse inherent in themselves, and by an obedience performed by themselves, proveth by invincible ar∣guments, that a man is justified by faith without workes. Saint Iames having to deale with carnall Gospellers, vaine men, turning the grace of God into wantonnesse, who having heard, that faith doth justifie without workes, did cast off all care of good workes, thinking it suf∣ficient to professe themselves to beleeve, though their life were dis∣solute. Against these Saint Iames proveth, that vaine is the profession of faith without good works •…•… that the faith, which is without works, is not a true, liuely justifying faith, but a dead and counterfeit faith: that whosoever is justified before God by faith, must also be justified, that is, declared and approved to bee just, not onely by profession of his faith, but also by the practise of good workes. Wherefore in this respect there is no more difference betweene the two Apostles Paul and Iames, than betweene L•…•…ther, and us, who are Preachers of the

Gospell at this day. For as Luther having to deale with Popish justiti∣a•…•…ies who taught justification by workes, urgeth most zelously justifica∣tion by faith alone, and in the question of justification, after the exam∣ple of Saint Paul, speaketh contemptuously of workes: so we, having to d•…•…le with Libertines and carnall gospellers, insisting in the steppes of Saint Iames, urge the necessity of good workes.

§. XVII. Secondly, wee are to consider the divers acceptions of the words, faith workes justifie, in the writings of the two Apostles. Paul speaking of a true lively faith, which worketh by love, saith (in effect) that faith alone doth justifie. Iames, speaking of the faith of hypocrits, which is in profession only, s•…•…vered from the grace of sanctification, and destitute of good workes; •…•…aith, that such a faith doth neither justifie alone nor at all, as being not a true, but a dead and counterfeit faith.

Paul, speaking of the c•…•…uses of justification before God, denyeth workes to concurre to the act of justification, as any cause thereof▪ Iames speaking of the effects and •…•…ignes of justificati•…•…n, whereby it may be•…•… knowne, affirmeth, that workes must concurre in the parties justified, that by them our faith may be demonstrated, •…•…nd our justification ma∣nifested. Paul therefore rejecteth workes obtruded, as causes of justifi∣cation; Iames urgeth th•…•…m, as effects and signes thereof.

Paul, speaking of Iustification in the proper sense, as it signifieth that gracio•…•…s action of God, whereby wee are made or constituted just; af∣firmeth, that wee are justified by faith without workes. Iames, speaking of th•…•…t justific•…•…tion, whereby we are (not m•…•…de just before God, but) de∣clared and 〈◊〉〈◊〉, to God, our 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and our conscience to bee just, and indued with a true faith; 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that we are so justified, not onely by the profession of faith, but also by good workes.

Now these 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉 very well stand together. For although it be most true, which Saint Paul affirmeth, that true faith doth just fie alone: yet it is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 true, which Saint Iames faith, that the faith, which is alone, doth not justifie neither •…•…lone nor at all, because it is not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 true and a lively, but a 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and dead faith. For 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the living eye, though it see alone, yet is not alone, so a liuely f•…•…ith, though it justifie alone, yet never i•…•… alone, though it justifie without workes, yet it is not without work•…•…s. Though good workes doe not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to the act of justification, a•…•… any cause ther•…•…of, according to Saint Pauls doctrin•…•…: yet they must concurre in the same subject, that is the party justified, as necessary fruit•…•… and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of •…•… true justifying •…•…aith, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Saint Ia•…•…es •…•…∣cheth. Though we be justified before God, that is, both absolved from our 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and accepted in Christ as righteous by faith alone without respect of work•…•… as Saint Paul teacheth: yet, according to the doctrine of •…•…aint Iames, we•…•… are to bee justified, that is, declared and approved to be just not onely by faith professed, but also by good workes. Finally, though good workes n•…•…n 〈◊〉〈◊〉 〈◊〉〈◊〉, yet, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 justifica∣•…•…, as Augustin•…•… useth to speake, or as he also saith, non pr•…•…edunt iusti∣fi•…•…andum, sed justificat•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉, though they doe not go•…•… before justifica∣tion, as caus•…•…s, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 P•…•…l teacheth; yet they must follow in the parties ju∣stified,

as effects, according to Saint Iames his doctrine.

§. XVIII. But the assertions of the 2. Apostles not only may wel stand toge•…•…her; but also according to our doctrine they must necessarily goe together. For if we shall be altogether conversant in setting forth the commendation of good works, and in urging the necessity thereof, not informing the people in the doctrine of justification by faith alone: they will be ready to place the matter of their justification, and the merit of their salvation in themselves, as the Papists doe. And so being igno∣rant of Gods i righteousnesse, and seeking to establish their owne righ∣teousnesse, they doe not submit themselves to the righteousnes of God. But wee must so urge the necessity of good workes in the doctrine of sanctification, that wee remember, that in the question of justification they are of no value. On the other side, if wee shall be wholly taken up in the doctrine of justification by faith alone, teaching, that in the que∣stion of justification they are of no worth, and doe not withall informe the people of the profit and necessity of good works in other respects; how ready will they bee to cast off all care of good workes, and content themselves with a bare profession of faith? But wee joyne these asserti∣ons together, after the doctrine and practise of the Apostles in their k Epistles. Wee teach that justification and sanctification are unsepa∣rable companions. And theresore, as they who are sanctified, may bee assured of their justification; so without sanctification none can bee assured of their justification. It is true, that there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus, but who are they? that live not after the flesh, but after the Spirit, R•…•…. 8. 1. that are new creatures 2 Cor. 5. 17. that crucifie the flesh with the lusts thereof, Gal. 5. 24. It is true, that a true lively faith doth justifie alone, but what manner of saith is that? that purifieth the heart, Act. 15. 9. and worketh by love, Gal. 5. 6. and may be demonstrated by good workes. Iam. 2. 18. It is true, that wee are not justified by our workes, nor saved for them, yet those are neither justified, nor saved, that are without them, for as they are necessary con∣sequents of justification, so they are necessary antecedents of salvation. For though they be not the cause of our salvation; yet they are the way by which we are to come to salvation: though they be not causa reg•…•…an∣di, as Bernard saith, yet they are via regni. Though they bee not the me∣rit of salvation; yet they are the evidence, according to which God will judge us. By faith wee have our inheritance, and our title to Gods Kingdome, but it is to be inherited among those that are l sanctified. A godly conversation, though it be not properly a cause of our glorifica∣tion; yet it is causa si•…•…e q•…•… n•…•…n. For as the Apostle saith, without ho∣linesse no man shall see God. Heb. 12. 14. And for this cause we serious∣ly exh•…•…rtall men, who professe themselves to beleeve, and to be iusti∣fied by faith, to be careful, that they may be m precedents of good works, for these are good, and profitable, and necessary, as I shewed before, when I propounded those arguments which wee doe use to move men unto good workes. So much of his first testimony.

§. XIX. To that place of Saint Iames he addeth n sixe other testi∣monies,

to which a short answer will suffice. To the first out of Eccles. 18. 21: I have fully answered in the first o controversie.

2. His second testimony is Rom. 6. 19. As you have exhibited your members to serve uncleanness•…•… and iniquity unto iniquity: so now exhi∣bit your members to serve justice unto sanctification. Where, unto sancti∣fication, doth not signifie to get the first holinesse, sor he speaketh to them who were holy and just, but to increase sanctification. But that by sanctification is meant justification: and by sanctity, justice, it is plaine by the antithesis, for he opposeth sanctification to iniquity. His argument is thus framed: Sancti∣fication may and must bee increased by good workes, which is proved by this text, and not denyed by us.

Iustification is sanctification. And that he proveth, because what is opposed to iniquity is justification: sanctification is here opposed to iniquity. Therefore here sanctification signifieth justification. Ans. That justification and sanctification are by no means to be confounded. I pro∣ved at large in the first p question, for this is the source of all their errours in the doctrine of justification. The Apostle doth carefully distinguish them. For having in the former chapters treated of justification by faith without works; that men should not abuse that doctrine to licen∣tiousnesse of life; in this, and the next chapter, he treateth of sanctifica∣tion shewing in this q chapter that sanctification is a necessary compa∣nion of justification. And therefore exhorteth those that are justifi•…•… to the dueties of sanctification. The abuse he preventeth vers. 1. and 15. for wheras he had taught in the doctrine of justification, that where sinne abounded grace did superabound; he maketh this objection, what then? shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound? God forbid! So againe, by Iustification we are freed from the curse of the Law, and from the rigour and terrour or dominion it? what then? shall we sin, because wee are not under the Law, but under Grace? God forbid!

The unseparable conjunction of these two benefits is shewed by the r Sacrament of Baptisme for as it is a seale of that righteousnesse, which is by faith, unto us being baptized into the remission of sins: so it is the laver of regeneration, wherin, as the Apostle saith, we are baptized into Christs death and resurrection; that as he dyed, so we should dye unto sin: and as he rose againe never to dye any more: so wee should arise from the grave of sinne never to dye any more: for how should they that are dead to sinne live any more therein? And hereupon followeth his exhortation, that we should not let sinne reigne in us, nor give our members as instruments of unrighteousnes unto sin, &c. And as he doth dehort us from suffering sinne to relgne in us: so he assureth the faith∣full, that sinne shall no more haue dominion over them, because they are not under the Law but under grace, and having prevented the abuse of that doctrine, vers. 15. he reneweth both his dehortation from suffering sinne to reigne in them, because if it did reigne in them, they must needes be the servants of it: when as in their redemption they were freed from the bondage of sinne, that they might become the ser∣vants s of righteousnesse; and also his exhortation vers. 19. that they

would yeeld their members, as seruants to holinesse, &c.

To his reason, that by sanctification here is meant justification, because it is opposed to iniquity: I answere, that both justification and sanctification are opposed to sinne and iniquity; but with this difference. In sin there are two things, the guilt, and the corruption or pollution. By justifica∣tion, which is opposed to accusing and condemning Rom. 8. 33. wee are freed from the guilt of sin and damnation: by our sanctification, which is opposed to pollution, wee are freed in some measure from the cor∣ruption, that it is to say, from the dominion of sinne.

§. XX. His third testimony is 2 Cor. 7. 1. where the Apostle exhor∣teth that having these promises (of our justification and adoption, chap. 6. 16, 28) wee should cleanse our selves from all pollution of the flesh and spirit, perfecting or accomplishing our sanctification in the feare of God. The Apostle doth not exhort us unto justification, (for that is ne∣ver done in all the Scriptures) but being justified and adopted, wee are exhorted with our justification and adoption to joyne the dueties of sanctification, and therein to grow and increase, untill wee come to a perfect man in Christ.

§. XXI. His fourth testimony, 2 Cor. 9. 10. he will multiply your seed and will augment the increases of the fruits of our justice. Where we are taught saith he, that by alm•…•…s-giving our wealth is diminished, but our j•…•…stice is increased. Answ. We answere, that by the Christian practice of vertues our justice, (but not our justification) is increased. Howbe∣it, the Apostle doth not speake of justice it selfe to be increased, but of the fruites of justice; by justice in this place meaning, as vers. 9. and Matth. 6. 1. liberalitie in almes-giving: and by the fruites of righte∣ousnesse, almes. Unto which, that they might bee more and more en∣abled, the Apostle prayeth, that their seed may be multiplyed, meaning thereby their store (which in the faithfull is as it were the seed of almes) that having alwayes all sufficiency in all things, they might abound to every good worke, being enriched in every thing to all bountifulnesse, ve•…•…s. 8, 11. so farre is the Apostle from signifying that by their almes∣giving their wealth should be diminished

§. XXII. His fifth testimony, Ioh. 14. 23. If any love me, hee will keepe my word, and my Father will love him. This new living after the fulfilling of the Commandements, what is it, sath he, but the increase of love, and thereby of righteousnesse, which by observing the Law of God is required. Answ. Wee confessè, that by the observance of the Law of God, our love of God is exercised and our righteousnesse increased, though it be not proved out of this place. For this love, after the keeping of Christs word here mentioned, is Gods love to us, not ours to him.

§. XXIII. His sixth testimony is Apoc. 22. 11. hee that is just, let him be justified yet. Answ. The word yet or still doth not signifie in∣crease but continuance: or if increase were meant, it could not bee un∣derstood of the righteousnesse of justification but of sanctification. But to this allegation I have answered twice before.

To conclude, in these six places wee have seene scarce any colour of

proofe either of justification by workes, or of increase of justification; and yet these, besides Iam. 2. are all the testimonies which he hath allea∣ged out of the Scriptures: which being compared with those plen∣tifull and pregnant Testimonies that plainely deny justification by workes, doe manifestly shew the cause of the Papists to bee most de∣sperate.

But it may bee you will say, that although the Scriptures faile him, yet hee hath store of testimonies of the Fathers, and plenty of reasons. Out of the Fathers, he produceth not one testimony: Neither doth he give any reason, but such as have beene already confuted.

§. XXIV. To these testimonies, saith he, two reasons may be added out of those things, which have been proved in the former Chapters concerning the possibility of the Law, and the truth of actuall righteousnesse: for, saith he, if a just man can fulfill the Law, as before it hath beene demonstrated, then •…•…ay he also without doubt be justified by workes. Againe, If a just man can performe workes truly good, which are polluted with no vice, as we have shew∣ed before, then he may worke righteousnesse, and consequently may by multiply∣ing of just workes increase his justice. Answ. He should say his justificati∣on. But in both hee disputeth a posse ad esse: it is possible for a man to fulfill the Law and consequently to be justified by workes it is possible, that a righteous man may performe some workes truely and purely good by multiplying whereof he may increase his justice. But the que∣stion is not, whether some choise man one of a million, can fulfill the Law, and bring forth workes purely good; but whether every one that is justified doth fulfill the Law, that is, doth continue in all the things which are written in the Booke of the Law to doe them. Whether the workes, yea all the workes of every one, that is justified, be purely good. For if he should transgresse in any one particular, though it were but by omission, he hath not fulfilled the Law. If any of his workes were not truely and purely good, or if all his workes be not pure, then hee cannot be justified by workes. But he is so farre from proving these things as it were the esse, that he is not able to prove the posse, that any one mortall man is able to fulfill the Law; or that any one action of any one rege∣nerate man is purely and perfectly good. The contraries of both which I have plentifully proved before.

Notes

• The first ca∣lumniation, that we deny the necessity of good workes.
• a

  Tit. 3. 8, 14.
• b

  Iude 4.
• c

  1 Tim. 6. 6.
• d

  Matth. 7. 21. 25. 46.
• God works ne∣cessary: first, by a privative ne∣cessity.
• e

  Jam. 2. 14. 20. 26.
• f

  Esai. 61. 3.
• g

  Matth. 3. 10.
• h

  Luk. 13. 6.
• i

  Mat. 21. 19.
• k

  Heb. 6. 8.
• l

  Mat. 25. 3, 12.
• m

  Mat. 3. 12.
• n

  Mat. 25. 32, 33.
• o

  Iohn 8. 34.
• p

  Gal. 4. 30.
• q

  2 Tim. 3. 5.
• r

  Mat. 24. 51. Necessary, by a positive neces∣sity; and so of infallibility: first, in respect of Gods decree.
• s

  Ephes. 1. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 13.
• t

  Rom 8. 29.
• u

  1 Iohn 3. 3.
• Deut. 29. 29.
• x

  Rom. 8. 30.
• y

  1 Cor. 6. 9, 10. Gal. 5. 21. Ephes. 5. 5, 6.
• Secondly, in re∣spect of Gods Word.
• a

  2 Cor. 5. 17.
• b

  Rom. 8. 1.
• c

  Gal. 5. 24.
• d

  1 Cor. •…•…. 30.
• e

  1 Ioh. 5. 6. Ioh. 19. 34, 35.
• f

  Eph. 3. 17.
• g

  Rom. 8. 9.
• h

  Ioh 3. 3.
• Thirdly, in re∣spect of Gods Oath.
• i

  Heb. 6. 18.
• k

  Luk. 1. 73, 74, 75.
• l

  Ioh. 8. 34.
• m

  vers. 36.
• n

  Rom. 6. 18.
• o

  1 Cor. 6. 19. Servi quia ser∣vati.
• Secondly, by necessity of precept or of duety.
• p

  Rom. 12. 1, 2. 2 Cor. 5. 9. Heb. 12. 28.
• That we may shew our selves thankefull, first by loving him.
• q

  1 Ioh. 4. 19.
• r

  Rom. 5. 5.
• s

  1 Ioh. 5. 3. Ioh. 14. 15.
• t

  1 Thess 4. 3.
• u

  Rom 6. 22.
• Eph. 1. 4.
• x

  1 Cor. 10. 31. Esa 61. 3.
• Towards our Neighbour.
• y

  He•…•…. 12. 13.
• z

  Rom. 12. 17.
• a

  Act. 24. 16.
• b

  Heb. 10. 24. 2•…•… Cor. 9. 2.
• c

  Tit. 2. 8. Rom. 2. 24. 2 Sam. 12. 14. 1 Pet. 2. 12.
• d

  Gal. 6. 10.
• e

  Mic. 6. 8.
• Towards our selves.
• f

  Deu. 28. 15, &c. Psal 84. 11. Luk. 1•…•…. 28.
• Thirdly, by ne∣cessity of the signe.
• g

  Jam. 2. 18.
• h

  2 Pet. 1. 10.
• i

  Rom. 8▪ 30.
• k

  Psal. 15. Psal. 24. 3, 4.
• l

  Act. 26., 8. & 20. 32.
• m

  1 Pet. 1. 17. Mat. 16. 27. Rom. 2. 6. Apoc. 22. 12.
• n

  2 Cor. 5. 10.
• o

  Mat. 25. 46. Ioh. 5. 29.
• Fourthly, neces∣sitate medis.
• p

  Aug. in Psal. 109.
• q

  De gratia & lib. arbitr. lib. 2. cap. 13.
• r

  Esa. 30. 21.
• s

  De gratia & lib. arbitr in sine•…•…
• The second ca∣lumniation.
• t

  Esa. 64. 6.
• u

  Phil 3, 8, 9.
• In what sense we deny works to justifie.
• Proved, first from all the five articles be∣fore handled.
• a

  Rom. 11. 6. Ephes. 2. 8, 9.
• b

  Rom. 4. 5, •…•….
• Foure other reasons.
• Our sifth argu∣ment.
• c

  Lib. 4.
• d

  De justif. li. cap. 19
• Rom 3. 27, 28.
• Rom. 9. 20.
• Rom. 3. 2, 5, 6.
• Gal. 2. 16.
• Gal. 3. 10, 1•…•….
• Eph. 2. 8. 9.
• Phil. 3. 8. 9.
• Tit. 3. 5.
• Bellarmines preamble to his answere, in which he no∣teth three things: first, what is meant by the Law of workes and by the Law of faith.
• Gal. 1. 6, 8, 9.
• e

  Luk. 1. 74. Jer. 31. 33. Heb. 8. 10.
• Bellarmines ex∣position.
• f

  De spir. & lit.
• g

  R•…•…m. 10. 8.
• h

  De jus•…•…is. l. 4. cap. 2.
• i

  In Rom. 3 27. homil. 7.
• Iu∣stice Of the Law. In & by the law.
• k

  Lib. 4. cap. 8. §. 2, 3, 4.
• Thirdly, what is meant by workes.
• l

  De gratia & lib. arb. c. 7.
• Some of the Papists under∣stand the cere∣moniall Law onely.
• m

  Deut. 11. 1.
• n

  Rom. 7. 7.
• o

  Rom. 3. 10, &c.
• o

  De justis. l. 1. cap. 19.
• Bellarmine and others under∣stand also the workes of the morall law, but yet such onely as goe before 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• p

  Esponc. in 1 Tim. 1. the end, that is, the ful∣filling and con∣summation of the Comman∣dement, that is by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 doche of the law, is •…•…ove both of God and our neighbour, out of a pure heart, that is purisied by faith. Salme∣ro, the end, that is, the comple∣ment or fulfil∣ling of the pre∣cept, that is, of the law, is the love of God and our neigh∣bour procee∣ding from faith unfained, wher∣by a man be∣leeveth in Christ from his heart.
• q

  Gal. 2. 16.
• r

  Psal. 143. 2.
• s

  Lib. 4. c. 8. §. 15.
• t

  Heb. 11. 8, 9. •…•…7.
• u

  In Rom. 4. 1. hom. 8.
• Rom. 1. 16, 17. 3. 21.
• x

  Rom. 3. 21.
• y

  Rom. 3. 24.
• z

  Rom. 4. 3, 4, 5. 16. Rom. 11. 6.
• De iustif. l. 1. c. 19. §. Ex his.
• His answere to Rom. 3. 27.
• His answer to the second te∣stimony, Rom. 4. 2. from the example of Abraham.
• Bellarmines first answere refu•…•…ed.
• Bellarmine confounded in two respects. The first.
• The second respect.
• Bellarmines se∣cond answere refuted.
• a

  Nehem. 9. 7.
• b

  Ios. 24. 2.
• c

  1 Cor. 4. 7.
• d

  §. excludi.
• Merit con∣futed.
• c

  Act. 15. 5.
• See l. ib. 6. c. 8. §. 7. n. 2.
• B•…•…llarmines ar∣gument from the conse∣quences in the epistle to the Galatians.
• f

  1 Tim. 1. 5.
• That the con∣sequences make against justification by works of grace.
• g

  Heb. 11.
• h

  Gen. 4. 9.
• i

  Rom. 4. 11.
• k

  1 Cor. 5. 8.
• l

  Ioh. 3. 14, 15.
• m

  De justis. l. 4. c. 4 di•…•…fer. 6. Lex Mosis non erat data, ut justifi∣caret, sed ut mo•…•… bum osten∣deret, & ad qu•…•…∣rendum medi∣cum excita•…•…et.
• All the conse∣quences allea∣ged by Bellar∣mine are strong against justifi∣cation by works of grace.
• n

  Gal. 3. 17, 18.
• o

  Gal. 3. 10.
• Christ hath not merited for us that we should be justified by our owne righ∣teousnesse, or saved by our owne merits.
• His answere to Ephes. 2. 8, 9.
• p

  Tit. 3. 7.
• His answere to Phil. 3. 8, 9.
• p

  In locum.
• q

  Esa. •…•…4. 6.
• r

  Exam. concil. Trid. part. 1. de jus•…•…if. pag. 135.
• s

  Advers. Pelag. l. 2. omnia pro Christ•…•… ducit quisquilias.
• t

  I. Scapula.
• u

  Hesyc•…•…ius.
• Gill•…•…lim. Deut. 29. 17. Ezek. 22. 3.
• His answere to Rom. 3. 24.
• x

  Lib. 3 de gratia.
• y

  De justif. l. 1. cap. 21.
• z

  Sess. 6. cap. 8.
• Bellarm. de iu∣•…•…tif. l. 4.
• Bellarmines Method.
• He proveth workes neces∣sa•…•…y, not to iu∣sti•…•…ication, but to salv•…•…tion.
• a

  Rom. 10. 10.
• b

  Heb. 12. 14.
• c

  He•…•…. 10. 36.
• d

  Matth. 10. 22. & 24. 13.
• e

  De justif. l. 4. cap. 2.
• Of the diffe∣rence between the Law and the Gospell.
• The accepti∣ons of the words Law, and Gospell, either in a large or strict sense.
• f

  Psalm. 1. 2. & 19. 7. Psalm. 119. 18, 72, 142. Mic. 4. 2. Esai 2. 3.
• h

  Psal. 119. 57, 104.
• i

  De iustif. l 4. c. 2. § probator quartò.
• k

  Gen. 22. 18.
• The strict signi∣fication of the Law and the Gospell.
• l

  Luk. 2. 10. Rom. 10. 15.
• m

  2 Tim. 19.
• n

  Rom. 6. 22.
• His disproofe of the difference which we as∣signe.
• Whether the promise of Sal∣vation made to our obedience doe prove the merit of good workes.
• Eternall life three waies promised▪ first, as a free g ft.
• o

  Epbes. 1. 6.
• p

  Rom. 8. 30. 10. 13, 14. 2 Thes. 2. 13, 14.
• q

  2 Tim. 1. 9.
• r

  Ephes. 2. 8, 9.
• s

  Gen. 22. 18.
• 2. As our inhe∣•…•…itance.
• t

  Eph 2. 6.
• u

  2 Tim. 1. 9.
• Act. 26. 18. T•…•…t. 3. 7.
• 3. As a reward.
• x

  Ap•…•…c. 21. 27
• y

  Luk. 1▪ 73, 74, 75. Ier. 3▪ 33, 34. Heb. 8. 10, 11, 12.
• z

  De verbis Do∣mini serm. 3. O magna boni∣tas Dei: cui cum pro conditione reddere debea∣mus obsequia utpote servi Do∣mino, famuli Deo subjecti potenti, mancip•…•…a Re∣demptori, amici∣tiarum nobis prae 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ut nobi•…•… obsequi•…•… debita servituti•…•… ext•…•…r∣queat, &c.
• The example of Gods dea∣ling with Abra∣ham.
• a

  Gen. 22. 16, 18.
• Objection, if eternall life bee the reward of our obedience, then our obe∣dience doth merit it.
• Rom. 6. 23.
• b

  Psalm 62. 12. Ephes. 2. 7.
• c

  De gratia & lib. arbitr.
• Places wh•…•…ch the papists un∣derstand of cau∣ses, to be under∣stood of notes.
• d

  Phil. 1. 29.
• e

  In Rom. 8.
• Or of eviden∣ces.
• Three other answeres to the foresaid obje∣ction.
• f

  Ad annal. ec∣cles. Baronii ex∣ercit. 15. n. 17.
• g In Gen. 22.
• Bellarmines al∣legations de ju∣stis. l. 4. c. 2. §. Ve niamu•…•…. first, Mat. 5. 20.
• His second te∣stimony.
• h

  Rom. 9. 32.
• i

  Au•…•…tor operis imper•…•…ecti in Matth. hom. 33.
• Mat. 19 17.
• k

  Vers. 20.
• l

  Stapleton in promptuar. ca∣thol. Dominica 1•…•…. post pente∣cost▪ quaerebat, quid sac•…•…endo, id est pe•…•… qu•…•… 〈◊〉〈◊〉 opera it maeternam 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• His other testi∣monies answe∣red.
• m

  Supra. §. •…•….
• n

  1 Ioh. 5. 11, 12, 20.
• o

  Heb. 5. 9.
• His argument from Ezek. 18. 2•…•….
• p

  Iam. 5. 20.
• q

  Rom. 6. 23.
• His fifth argu∣ment from the condition of faith.
• Bellarmines proofe from his pretended true differences.
• De justif. l. 4. cap. 3.
• The first diffe∣•…•…ence confuted by the last.
• r

  Mat. 11. 29.
• s

  Gal. 3. 17.
• t

  Gal. 3. 13.
• u

  1 Cor. 1. 30.
• Ier. 23. 6.
• x

  De justif. l. 4. cap. 4.
• The second dif∣ference.
• y

  Rom. 8. 23.
• The other 6. differences.
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Of Christian liberty.
• z

  De justif. l. 4. •…•…ap. 5.
• a

  Rom. 6. 18.
• De ius•…•…if. l. 4. c. 7.
• a

  Deiustif. l. 1. c. 18. §. Simile.
• b

  Rom. 8. 30.
• Bellarmines proofe of his consequence.
• Bellarm. proofes sor necessity of efficiency.
• De Iustif. Lib. •…•…. Cap. 7.
• His first testi∣mony. Heb. 10. 36.
• c

  Heb. 12. 1.
• His second testimony. 1 Tim. 2. 14, 15.
• d

  Matth. 7. 14.
• e

  Act. 14. 22.
• f

  De Sacrament. matrim. cap. 2. §. & confirmatur.
• His third testi∣mony. Phil. 2. 12.
• g

  Ephes. 2. 10.
• h

  Psal. 100. 2.
• i

  Esay 26. 12.
• k

  2 Cor. 3. 5.
• l

  Phil. 2. 13.
• m

  Phil. 1. 1, 6:
• n

  Phil. 1. 6.
• o

  2 Cor. 7. 1.
• His fourth te∣stimony, 2 Cor. 7. 10.
• His fifth testi∣mony, 2 Cor. 4. 17.
• p

  1 Cor. 11. 19.
• His seventh testimony, Rom. 8. 17, 18. p Lib. 7. cap. 4. §. 11.
• q

  Lib. 8. c. 2. §. 18, &c.
• His eighth te∣stimony.
• Rom. 10. 0.
• His ninth testi∣mony, Mat. 25, 34, 35.
• r

  Supr. Cap 4. §. 12.
• His tenth testi∣mony, Iam. 1. 25. & 2. 14.
• The Epistles by him vou∣ched.
• s

  Rom. 6. Tit. 3. 8. 14. Heb. 1•…•… 14.
• Testimonies of Fathers. De ju∣stif. l. 4. c. 8.
• t

  See Lib. 6. c. 9.
• u

  Lib. 7. cap. 1.
• His reason. De justif. l 4 c. 9.
• De justif. l. 1. cap. 13.
• x

  De justif. l. 1. c. 18.
• Bellarmiues rea∣sons that faith doth not, save alone.
• y

  Iam. 214.
• z

  Iam. 2. 26.
• Bellarmine his unlike likenes∣ses.
• a

  Lib. 6. Cap. 2. & 3.
• De justif. lib. 4. cap. 10.
• Of the truth of the justice of good workes, not denyed by us.
• a

  Iam. 3. 2.
• b

  Iam. 2. 10.
• Bellarmines dis∣pute is indeed defensive.
• Whether the faithfull doe or can fulfill the Law.
• c

  De peccator. meritis & re∣miss. l. 2. c. 6. & 7.
• d

  Rom. 10. 4.
• e

  in Rom. 10.
• f

  Apud Oecum. in Rom. 10.
• g

  in Rom. 2. 13.
• h

  Retract. Lib. i. cap. 13.
• i

  Ephes. 4. 7.
• 2 Cor. 8. 12.
• l

  Qui legem im∣plet, observat totus, totam, per totam vitam. That the Law is possible Bel larmine proveth by 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Matth. 11. 30.
• m

  Gal. 5. 1.
• n

  Ioh. 3. 4, 5.
• o

  Ioh. 6. 40.
• Christs yoke easie in respect of our new obe∣dience.
• p

  Apoc. 8. 4.
• q

  Exod. 28. •…•…6, 38.
• Bellarmines di∣lemma.
• The obedience of the crosse, is also the yoke of Christ.
• r

  Psal. 94 12.
• s

  Heb. 5. 8.
• t

  Psal. 119. 71.
• u

  Vers. 67.
• 2 Cor. 4. 17.
• x

  Rom. 8. 18.
• y

  Heb. 12. 2:
• z

  Iam. 1. 2, 12.
• a

  1 Pet. 1. 8. 4. 13.
• p

  Psal. 94. 19•…•…
• His second place. 1 Ioh. 5. 3.
• c

  Gen. 29. 20.
• d

  Lib. de perfe∣ctione justitiae.
• e

  Rom. 5. 5.
• f

  Psal. 119. 3•…•…:
• His second rank of testimonies.
• Bellarmines reply.
• g

  Psal. 19. 7.
• h

  De perfect. ju∣stif. ad 15.
• i

  Epist. 29.
• His second reply.
• k

  De spiritu & litera, cap. 36.
• l

  Covenant of grace, c•…•…ap. 10. His third reply.
• m

  Vers. 21.
• n

  Psal. 25. 7. 11. 38. 4, 18.
• Psal. 51. 5, 119. 17•…•….
• o

  Psal. 143. 2. & 130. 3, 4.
• p

  Psal. 32. 1. Rom. 4. 6.
• q

  2 King. 23. 25.
• r

  2 Chro. 15. 15.
• s

  2 Chro. 15. 17.
• t

  2 Chro. 16. 7, 10, 12.
• u

  Iosh. 11. 14, 15.
• Deut. 7. 2.
• x

  Luk. 1, 6.
• y

  Luk. 1. •…•…0. 62.
• z Luk. 12. 4.
• Ioh. 15. 15.
• Joh. 17. 6.
• a

  Rom. 7. 7, 8.
• Whether con∣cupiscence in the Apostle were a sinne.
• b

  Rom. 7. •…•…4. 25.
• c

  Rom. 7. 23.
• d

  Mat. 5. 28.
• e

  Retract. l. 1. cap. 19.
• Bellarmines in∣stance that the godly before mentioned, ab∣solutely fulfil∣led the Law and were per∣fect.
• f

  Gen. 17. 1.
• What is meant by a perfect heart.
• What is meant by whole heart.
• g

  De justif. l. 4. cap. 12.
• His testimonies out of the Fa∣thers.
• g

  Contr. Iulian Pelag. lib. 1. c. 2.
• The difference betweene the Pelagian•…•… and Papists not great.
• §. 20.
• h

  In Ios. h•…•…mil. 9. in sin. in c. 8. 35.
• i

  Mat▪ 19. 21.
• k

  Cont. Iulian. lib. 3.
• To the rest of Fathers.
• l

  Hier. adv. Pelag. l. 3. Aug. de Nat. & gr. cap. 43. De Grat. & lib. arb. cap. 6.
• m

  Rom. 8. 7.
• n

  Hypognost. l. 3.
• o

  De Nat. & gra. cap. 48.
• p

  Lib. 2. dist. 25. F. G.
• Answ. to those testimonies which affirme, that men may fulfill the law if they will.
• q

  De pec•…•…at. me∣rit. & remiss. Cap. 14.
• That the fathers did not meane that the Law is ab∣solutely po•…•…i∣ble.
• r

  Contr. 2. Epist. Pelag. lib. 3. c. 7
• s

  Retract. l. c. 19.
• t

  De 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Dei l. •…•…9. c 27▪
• u

  Contr. 2 Epi∣s•…•…olas Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 7.
• B•…•…llarmines •…•…pa∣radox, that a man may fulfill the Law, though he can∣not live with∣out sinne.
• 1 Io•…•…. 3. 4.
• x

  1 Ioh. 1. 7, 8. Tit. 2. 14.
• y

  De justi•…•…. l. 4. c. 14. ad 4.
• z

  Deut. 5. 32. & 28. 14.
• Testimonyes of the Fathers that the law is not possible to be fulfilled of us.
• a

  Lib. 4 cap. 5. §. 5. &c.
• b

  Dialog. cum 〈◊〉〈◊〉, pag. 98.
• c

  Demonstr. Evang. l. 1.
• d

  In Gal. 3.
• e

  In Rom. 10. 4. hom. 17.
• f

  In vers. 5.
• g

  In Gal 3.
• h

  Lib. 2. in Gal. 3. 10.
• i

  Ad Ctesiph•…•…nt. advers. Pelag. 254.
• k

  Ibid. 255.
• l

  Ibid. 256.
• m

  Contr. Pelag. lib 1. 264. in•…•… l∣lud M•…•…t. 19. si vis esse perse cius.
• n

  Ibib. 265.
• o

  Lib. 2. advers. Pe•…•…ag. 283.
• p

  Ibid. 284. f.
• q

  Lib. 3. 298.
• r

  In Psal. 67.
• s

  De spiritu, & litera. c. 36.
• t

  Ibid.
• u

  Contr. 2. episto∣las Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 7.
• 2 Cor. 4. 16.
• x

  De peccat. merit. & remiss. l. 2. c. 7.
• y

  De temp. serm. 45.
• z

  Epist. 29.
• a

  In Rom. 10.
• b

  In Gal. 3.
• c

  In Cantic. serm. 50.
• d

  In vigil. Na∣tivit. Dei serm. 2.
• e

  Th•…•…. Aqui. in Gal. 3.
• f

  Exercit. l. 10. serm. in para∣sceue pag. 664.
• g

  Sess. 6. can. 18.
• De justif l. •…•…: cap. 13.
• Reason 1. be∣cause a man may doe more than is com∣manded.
• a

  Mat. 19. 21.
• b

  De panit. hom 8.
• c

  De verbis Ape∣stoli serm. 18.
• d

  Deut. 4. 2: & 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6.
• e

  Ap•…•…c. 22. 18.
• f

  Matth. 15. 6.
• Whether in a∣ny morall due∣ty more can be well performed than is com∣manded.
• His first proof•…•…▪ Matth. 16. 21.
• g

  Matth. 5: 20.
• h

  Matth. 19 24.
• Counsell of vo∣luntary pover∣ty.
• i

  Matth. 6. 11: Luk. 11. 3.
• k

  Ephes. 4. 28.
• l

  Matth. 15. 4, 5, 6.
• Mark. 7. 10, 11, 12, 13.
• m

  Non facias tibi.
• n

  Cor▪ 2. 22, 23.
• Of the •…•…ounsell and vow of sin∣gle life.
• o

  Rom. 7. 14.
• p

  Matth. 5. 28.
• q

  1 Thes. 4. 3, 4, 5.
• r

  Ca•…•…titas, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• s

  1 Cor. 7. 2.
• t

  1 Pet. 2. 11.
• The vowed sin∣gle life among the Papists a sinfull state.
• His s•…•…cond rea∣son, if the pre∣cepts were not possible, they would binde no man.
• Bellarmines ob∣jectio•…•…s that a man doth not sinne in that which he can∣not avoid.
• His third rea∣son, God should be more cruell and more foo∣lish than any tyrant, &c.
• u

  De iustif. l 4. c, 4. §. Sextum discrimen.
• De perfectione justiti•…•…. 970.
• x

  InCantic serm. 50.
• y

  Rom. 3. 19. 20.
• z

  T•…•…. 3. 5.
• His fourth rea∣son collected out of three te∣stimonies.
• The 1. place. Rom. 8. 4.
• a

  Rom. 8.
• The text Rom. 8. expounded.
• b

  Oecum. in Rom. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• c

  Homil. 13. in Rom. 8. 34.
• d

  In Rom. 8. 4.
• e

  In locum.
• f

  In Rom. 10. Hom. 17.
• g

  In locum.
• h

  In locum.
• i

  R•…•…tract. Lib. •…•…. cap. 19.
• Answ. To his second and third testimo∣nies. Mat. 6. 10.
• k

  Heb. 5. 9.
• l

  Io•…•…. 6. 29.
• His fifth reason.
• m

  Gal. 5. 23.
• n

  Iam. 3. 2.
• o

  Rom. 8. 33, 34.
• His sixth rea∣son, because the righteous sinne not.
• p

  Iam. 2. 10.
• q

  Gal. 3. 10.
• r

  De justif. 3. 3. c. 15.
• s

  Expos in G•…•…l. c. 5.
• t

  Ioh. 9. 31.
• t

  1 King. 8. 46.
• u

  Eccl. 7. 20.
• 1 Ioh. 1. 8, 10.
• Our proofes that the Law is not possible, were propoun∣ded before.
• x

  Lib. 4. cap. 5.
• His discourse concerning the perfection of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 s, was before re∣futed, Lib. 4.
• y

  Lib. 4. c. 2. §. 8. 9. & cap. 3. & 4.
• Whether the best workes of the faithfull be sinnes.
• z

  De justif. l. 4. c. 15. 16. 17.
• Lib 4. c. 2. 3. 4.
• De justif. lib. 4. c. 18.
• The place of Jam. 2. 14. &c. fully discussed and cleared.
• A seeming dif∣ference b•…•… tweene Saint Paul and Saint Iames.
• How it may be reconciled. a Erasm. Cajetan Musculus, &c.
• Bellarmines re∣conciliation of Paul and Iames.
• b

  Lib. 1. c. 1. §. 8. & l. 2. c. 6. §. 5.
• c

  Heb. 11. 8, 9, 17.
• Bellarmines ab∣surdities noted.
• d

  Rom. 4. 4, 5.
• The Popish doctrine not grounded on Iam. 2.
• The Analysis of that passage beginning at the foureteenth verse.
• That the faith which is with out workes is dead, proved by five argu∣ments.
• e

  1 I•…•…hn 3. 7.
• f

  Jn Gal 3. lect. 4.
• g

  Ibid.
• Verse 20. ex∣pounded.
• The example of Abraham, Verse 21.
• Verse 22.
• Verse 24.
• Verse 25. The example of Rahab.
• The fifth argu∣ment •…•… simil•…•…. verse 26.
• h

  De resurrect. serm•…•… •…•….
• Object. Concer∣ning the con∣tradiction, of faith onely, and not onely.
• Our reconcilia∣tion of the two Apostles.
• First, from the diversity of the Partie•…•… with whom they dealt.
• Secondly, from the divers ac∣ceptions of the words, fa•…•…th, ju∣stifie, wo kes.
• By our doctrine the •…•…ssertions of the two A∣postles must goe together.
• i

  R•…•…▪ 10. 3.
• k

  Rom. 6. 1, &c. •…•…ph. 2. 8, 9, 10. Tit. 3. 8.
• 1 Ioh. 1. 7, 9. & 2, 1, 2, 3, 4.
• l

  Act. 26. 1•…•…. & 20. 32.
• m

  Tit. 3. •…•….
• Sixe o•…•…her te∣stimonic•…•… •…•…l∣leaged by Bel∣l•…•…rmine.
• n

  De justif. l. 4. c. 19.
• o

  Lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 2. & 3.
• Testimon. 2. Rom. 6. 19.
• p

  Lib. 2.
• q

  Rom. 6
• r

  Rom. 6. 3, 4, &c.
• s

  Vers. 18.
• His third tes•…•…i∣mony, 2 Cor 7. 1.
• His fourth tes•…•…∣mony, 2 Cor. 9. 10
• His fif•…•…h •…•…esti∣mony, Ioh. 14. 23
• His sixth testi∣mony, Apoc. 22. 11.
• Lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 5. & cap. 5 §. 10.
• Bellarmines two Reasons.