Of free justification by Christ written first in Latine by John Fox, author of the Book of martyrs, against Osorius, &c. and now translated into English, for the benefit of those who love their own souls, and would not be mistaken in so great a point.

OF Free Iustification by Christ.

In Reading your Books, Hierom Osorius, con∣cerning Righteousness, though I had not leisure accurately to trace every particular, on which you have enlarged, yet by what I have here and there collected, I think I do well enough perceive whereat you drive, what you design, and what you endeavour: For, according to my apprehension, you are endeavouring, not to strike at some part of Christian Doctrine of smaller concernment, but to cut the very Throat, and extinguish the Breath and Spirit of the Gospel, and to besiege the whole state of our Fe∣licity, and the Castle and chief City of Christian Liberty, and to pluck up from the very Foundation all the Munitions of Peace and Life: For what other thing dost thou in all these ten Books, whereby thou snatchest away out of the Hands, Studies, Minds and Consci∣ences of Men, and out of the Earth. as the Sun out of the World, that most glorious Light of our Free Iustification, purchased by the great bounty of Christ, and confirmed by the Eternal

Covenant of God: Which being taken away, I see not what thou leavest remaining to us, but Cimmerian and Osorian Darkness, in which we may grope like blind Moles: Which endeavours of thine, though of themselves being vain and frivolous, there is no great cause, why they should be feared in their opposition against the invincible force of Divine Truth; yet because they strive to with-hold from us that which is most excellent in all Religion; therefore I thought it was necessary to write these things unto thee, not being provoked by any Enmity or Hatred against thy Person, that I might vex thee, but that I might admonish thee both friendly and freely; and so much the more freely, in how much greater danger I see thou art entangled, unless thou return back, and en∣deavour to walk more uprightly according to the Gospel of Christ. For what think you, Sir? That by your deeds performed as well as can be imagined, and by the steps of your vertues, you can lay for your self a passage into the Kingdom of God? Or think you that any man living in this slippery condition of Nature, can root out all his Lusts, and utterly cut off all their entice∣ments, and so contain himself within the bounds of his duty, that he can equalize those habita∣tions of Eternal Glory, with a proportionable dignity of Righteousness, or dare promise them to himself upon such an account, unless the bounty of God had freely put this honour upon us? O be not of such an opinion! This is not the way to Heaven. Either you must change your mind, or lay down this hope.

Howbeit this opinion seems not to be yours only, but common to you with many, to wit, the late School-Divines, especially those, who have a greater veneration for the authority of the Pope, than the Writings of the Apostles, who being all infected with the same contagion of error, do boldly profess the same, that you affirm. But yet all of them do not proceed in the same manner and method. Those do so frame their notions, that all men may understand, they are the pro∣fessed Enemies of Divine Grace, and our Free Iustification in Christ, which they hiss out of the Schools, and openly anathamatize. Your ar∣guings are somewhat different, though you have undertaken, obstinately to maintain the same thing, that they do, but you hide the same ve∣nom with a more subtile artifice, so that it in∣sinuates more easily, and lies less open to rebuke. For I see you write Books concerning Righteous∣ness, and those not a few, nor un∣polished. When I look on the ar∣gument, I see it is honourable and plausible. When I look into your manner of Speech, your painted eloquence, and laudatory amplifi∣cations, wherewith you adorn the Glory, Love∣liness and Beauty of Righteousness with a Tra∣gedian-like sublimity of style, I confess this is not unworthy of praise; For who should not deservedly praise him, whom he sees so inflam∣ed with the praises of Righteousness? But if any man look more inwardly, and consider

with himself according to right reason, with what mind, for what end, for what pretence, and with what arguments you maintain those parts of righteousness so much praised, and com∣pare them with the Gospel of Christ, he will be forced to acknowledge that you are defective in many things. If you will permit me briefly to give my opinion of the whole frame of this work, (though you have lit∣tle regard to what my censure is) yet if you will allow me to speak freely to you as becomes me, I will do it according to my duty, and I will so do it, that you your self may perceive that there was nothing less in my design in writing to you, than a perverse inclination to find fault with other mens writings. And thus I judge, you have so handled this subject mat∣ter, that you appear to be a Philosopher Plato∣nick enough, and no bad Ciceronian Orator, but not a very Evangelical Divine, I can assure you nor skilful enough to plead the cause of Christian Righteous∣ness. First, As touching the Title of the Book, concerning Righ∣teousness, I find nothing blame∣worthy. Though the frailty of our Nature might persuade you rather to discourse some thing to us of Mercy. Yet seeing you chuse rather to discourse Philosophically of righteousness, you are not there∣in unworthy of your own praise; For being about to treat of righ∣teousness, you have undertaken a very honourable subject, and I

doubt too weighty for your Shoulders to bear: and a work indeed very difficult and excellent. For what is more excellent than righteousness in the whole nature of Divine and Humane things? Which seeing it comprehends within its circumference all kinds of vertues, the whole praise of Piety, and not only the highest perfection of the Law, but also the perfect Image of God: indeed it may be found in Hea∣ven, but on Earth it cannot be found, when you have said all you can. Where∣fore I am ready the more to won∣der and consider with my self, what secret design you had in your mind. that you have composed Books so accu∣rately exquisite concerning righteousness. If it was that by the Trumpet of your commenda∣tion, you might make it more acceptable to us, you have therein lighted on a matter, suitable to your wit, and large enough for setting forth the riches of your Eloquence, that I may confess the truth to you. But I wonder for what pur∣pose or end you did that, will you say, that men may the more evidently behold the beauty of righteousness, and admire it the more? But this hath been formerly attempted by Plato, and many Academicks and Peripateticks, and that with no bad success. And who is so void of all natural sense, but, though he is not himself endued with the excellency of righ∣teousness, yet he apprehends in his mind the Divine brightness thereof, and greatly admires it, and wishes for it with all his heart? If wishes in this case could do any good.

Inherent Righteousness unto that perfection which Osorius describes, can no where be found in this Nature.

AND I could wish that the Integrity of Na∣ture, wherein we were of old Created, had continued unto the compleat exact∣ness of all righteousness: But now in this ruinated and disabled nature, why do you seek after that which we have lost? rather bring forth something, if you can, whereby we may make up the loss: What can it profit a man already dead to know the danger, whereby he perished? Verily there is more need of a medicine, if you have any, by which you may either comfort him being destroyed, or restore him to the Life that was lost: Yea, this is the thing, say you, which I endeavour in these Books disputing of righteousness. For righteousness, as you say, is the only remedy for restoring Life, and regain∣ing Health; Yea, this is the very thing, Osorius, that I chiefly find fault with in these Books; not because you write of righteousness, for I commend the argument in which you are ex∣ercised; I commend also your praises of righte∣ousness, which are high and copious: righte∣ousness cannot be praised enough by any Man-But there is another thing for which all good Men should be angry with you: What that is, if you please, I will tell you freely and openly;

for in these Books you represent unto us a spectacle, not very much differing from that, which Origenes relates of Celsus and Antipho; who though they did write very contrary to truth, yet they recommended those very Books, that were against the Truth, with the title of (a true saying.) After which manner you do in a case not very unlike it, whilest you write indeed con∣cerning righteousness, but at such a rate, that nothing can be said more maliciously against true righteousness.

A twofold and different Account of Doctrine; one of the Law, and another of the Gospel.

FOR as there is a twofold manner of Cove∣nant, so also there is, of righteousness pro∣posed in the Scriptures: The one consists in pre∣cepts and works, under the weight whereof we all of necessity fall down to destruction. The other is that of the Gospel, which is safe-guarded, not by works, not by observance of the Law, not by any peformance of duties on our side, but by the sure and only Faith of Christ the Son of God. Verily whosoever rejecting the righteousness of Christ, whereof I speak, leads us aside unto any other manner of righteous∣ness, I say, that he pleads not for righteousness,

but against it, and doth not undertake the de∣fence of the Law of God, but is a professed Enemy of the Grace of Christ, and his Cross, and therefore doth not open, but wholly shuts up all passages to true Salvation, and all Gates and Doors of Divine Grace: For I beseech you, if we are willing to confess the truth with the Sacred Scripture, what is it else, in which all the fountains and causes of our destruction are contained, unto which, as the principal head and spring, we may attribute all our calamity, but this very manner of righteousness placed in God and his Law; by whose infinite immen∣sity not only our faults, but also all the Poizes of our righteousness are weighed down to the destruction of damnation. If there is nothing but the righteousness of Works, that may help our too scanty and short Obedience.

But perhaps these things, that have been said hitherto are enough concerning the Title of the Book. By which your prudence may lead you easily to suppose, what should be judged of the rest of the Work, In which, when I contemp∣late the external form and countenance of the Workmanship, verily I see that it is not with∣out beauty, nor unworthy to be looked upon; when I number the Books themselves, I take notice they are both many and large enough. When I look on the Words and Pages, I see whole Rivers and Sands that cannot be numbred; but when I turn to the things themselves, when I consider the Reasons and force of Arguments, when I compare the Words and Sayings of the

Scriptures, at a strange rate quoted, with the true sense of Scriptures not rightly understood by you; and also when I take notice of the end and scope of the whole disputation, I am not willing at present to discover to you what I find here, lest in what I say, I should seem to exceed the bounds of that modesty, which here I profess.

But yet that I may say something for the sake of Truth, to which I am more obliged. because of necessity something must be said, I will speak, but in a few words; If any other Man had Published these Books concerning Righte∣ousness amongst the common People, except your self, I should say to him openly, and to his face, that no Man could ever have brought in a greater plague into the Doctrine of the general Salvation of Christians, nor a filthier blot upon Religion, nor have done a greater injury to St. Paul, the Scriptures, and the Prophets, than is manifest in these Books. But in writing these things to you, I restrain my self for your sake, lest I pass the bounds of modesty, which I have set to my self: What then, should the cause of Truth therefore be deserted? You your self do not require that of me, as I sup∣pose. Wherefore that I may, as much as I can, observe that which is my duty in both respects, I have laid hold on this way of prosecuting this design, which you see, and which necessity hath laid upon me, whereby I might both less offend you, and likewise perhaps more benefit the cause I have undertaken to defend.

Therefore, seeing I judged it necessary to op∣pose your attempts in this matter, so I thought it most convenient, not that I should in this Book answer to all the small scraps of Reasons in the order that you observe (which indeed is none at all) in a tumultuary confusion in those Ten Books; but that I may by choice touch upon, and confute the chief of them.

How easie it is to err in the Doctrine of Iustification.

SEeing these things and others like unto them, contain the principal Heads, of all Christian Doctrine; therefore Divines should take a special care lest they err in these; which care, unless they take, there will follow a most grievous ruin and pertur∣bation of all things, the foundati∣ons being as it were put out of their places. And yet I know not how it comes to pass that error is no where more easily committed than in these Points. Neither is it so strange; for so it comes to pass, that this ani∣mal nature we call Human Reason, when consulted with about the things of God, is most blind, and sees nothing, unless it be Illuminated with the better Light of Divine Knowledge shining in upon it: For the right understanding of Divine things comes by the Spirit of God, and not by Human Capacity; and

though the Law, and the things of the Law, were in some sense born with us, and cleave unto our Nature; Yet the Mysteries of the Doctrine of the Gospel are not apprehended so easily, because the Nature of both is very different. Moreover, you may see many, who following the guidance of Nature, and her pre∣cepts more than is meet, do teach and dispute of things belonging to the Gospel; just as if a Philosopher should discourse of the Principles of Nature, or a Moralist of the perfection of Ver∣tues, in which they place their chiefest good; or as if a Pharisee sitting in the Chair of Moses, should dispute about the Righteousness of the Law.

But there will be another occasion of treating of these things, (if opportunity be granted.)

In the mean while, that I may speak ingenu∣ously of thee, O Osorius; with how much the greater natural parts God in his bounty hath adorned thee, and heaped upon thee, it is the more grievous to me that thou art violently drawn aside with others into that blindness of error:- That though you teach us many things in your reasoning about Righteousness, yet you scarcely teach any thing that makes much to the purpose, and nothing at all that is profitable for Salvation, but rather on the contrary that which is very hurtful. For, I beseech you, What assurance can there be of Salvation, if you shut out Mercy, and send us to our own Righteousness as the only way, which conveys us to Heaven? for all your Doctrine of Di∣vinity

looks that way. To wit, when discour∣sing of the hope of remedy, you affirm there is no other way, but that only, of becoming like unto God, and being united unto him; and that this is the only way of a Blessed Life, which consists wholly in Righteousness; which whoso do observe, those you affirm do abound with Divine Riches, and Eternal Glory.

As if there were no hope remain∣ing for him, that turns a little aside from these footsteps. Than which what could be said or in∣vented more repugnant to the Gospel? yea also elsewhere, repeating again the same thing, tho' in different Words: How should a Man be saved, say you? Is there any o∣ther paved way to Salvation, but what is contained in the Law of God? None at all, &c.

And again in another Book, as in all your Books reasoning about the Works of the Law; you assert, that Righteousness is purchased by these, that Men go up to Heaven by these as by steps, that eternal rewards are appointed for these; and you plead that this is the only way we have to Heaven, which is paved with renowned Works, &c. Moreover you pro∣claim yet with more open Mouth. Wherefore, say you, it must be at∣tested with greater freedom of Speech, that the ascent into Heaven is given to the Merits of the greatest Vertues, and that the Mansions of the

Everlasting Kingdom are given justly and deser∣vedly to Holy and Chast Men, &c.

It would take up a long time, and be much more troublesome to rake together out of every one of your Books, every one of those won∣derful sayings, which are more than Paradoxes, whereby you plead that all the safeguard of our Salvation, should be placed in nothing else but in the observance and care of Righteousness: which if you could as well perform in effect and reality, as you set them forth in Words magnificently; I should esteem that none were more happy, none more worthy of Heaven than you. But now let us suppose that, which I see you would so fain have granted, that Hea∣ven is only due to perfect Men no other ways, but upon the account of Righteousness, and that there is no other way of coming to those blessed mansions, but that which is trodden by the most pure footsteps of good men, and settled in the perfect integrity of Works. Now we are not against the deserved praises of righteousness, neither do we with-hold from it its rewards: Be it so indeed. But where shall we find this Righteousness? Dic quibus in terris, & erit mihi magnus Apollo. Tell me in what Country (and I shall esteem you to be a great Oracle,) This man of righteous life dwells, who will so direct the course of his Life according to this Idea of Vertue proposed by you, that he fails no where, who Roots out all manner of wickedness, who re∣frains himself from railing with his Tongue,

Suppresses the Haughtiness, Insolency, and mad∣ness of an Ambitious Spirit, and the rashness of a Headstrong Mind; who Crucifies the Flesh with its Lusts, who suppressing ungodly lustings, by frequent meditation upon Death, brings himself over from all Impurity and Impiety to the resemblance of Christ; who separating his mind from the Contagion of the Body, ap∣plies it wholly to the Imitation of Christ, who resembles the humility and meekness of Christ, his bounty and benevolence; and his excellent Holiness in all respects, and also cuts off all defilements of the mind, and all the roots of filthiness and impurity. I say, where will that man be found, who performs these and all other duties of true Piety, and so performs them, that nothing in his Life seems superfiuous, nothing is unequal in his duties, nor defective in his manners? I think he may be found in the Books of Osorius: but not in the Life, in the daily Confessions, or in the Holy Absolutions of Osorius. There was of Old, I confess the Image of this most perfect righte∣ousness seen and known upon the Earth: But that Phoenix hath long since left the Earth, and departed hence to Heaven, and now sits at the right hand of Majesty, drawing all to himself: and I wish that at length he may draw Osorius also to himself. What if the Lord himself looking down from Heaven upon the Sons of Men, is affirmed in the Prophetical Psalm, to have found

all their ways corrupted and depraved: if the Mystical and Royal Holy Psalmist durst not in confidence of his own righteousness enter in∣to judgment with his God, or present himself to be tryed by him, and con∣demns all other mortal men of un∣righteousness, without excepting so much as one. If Paul writing to the Romans in a very serious debate confirms the same, and stops the mouths of all men, that he may bring men over, having called them away from a vain trust in their own works, and convinced them of the vanity thereof, to the help of the Son of God only, which is pla∣ced in the faith of him: If Iohn the Apostle, yea and if that powerful proclaimer and defender of humane righteous∣ness could not himself deny but that in many things we offend all, I pray you, O Osorius! Will you now rise up after them, not the eighth but the ninth Proclaimer of Righteousness, being a mortal and sinful man, who dare affirm to others, that which you cannot perform your self after this manner: That it is either righteous∣ness or nothing, which obtains us the favour of God, and makes us acceptable and like unto him?

Qu. What do I hear? is there nothing else, I beseech you? What then? Is Faith nothing? Is Grace nothing? Is the Mercy and Promise of God nothing? Do the Merits of Christ profit nothing to Salvation? So that now there is no∣thing which reconciles us to God, but the righ∣teousness of works? What? Do you so place

all righteousness in works, that you think there is no righteousness of Faith?

Then you think perhaps that the righteousness of faith and works is one and the same, and you make no difference between the Law and the Gospel. whereas Paul teaches you far otherwise, who openly and with great fervency of Spirit de∣precates that other righteousness, which is of works, that he may be found in him, not having the righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is of the Faith of Christ, which is of God, righteousness by Faith. Do you not perceive here a manifest opposition between these two: To be justified by the Law, and to be justified by Faith, yea and those very things which Paul removed far away from him as Dung in respect of obtaining Salva∣tion, Will you pave that only way for us to Heaven? And in the mean while disputing about works, I discourse of these things with you, as if there were any such strength of so great vertues, in this life, as could deserve not only the reward of righteous∣ness, but also the name thereof. What will you say, if the most holy performances and endeavours, undertaken in what∣soever manner by the most perfect men, in this corrupted nature, are so unprofitable to the immortality of Life, that they are rejected by Christ as things without profit, yea

that they are despised and utterly contemned in the sight of God, like a menstruous cloth, as the Pro∣phet Isaiah witnesseth, unless they be underproped with better Grace, and the commendation of Faith? What if in Isaiah we are all said, and that truly, to have gone astray like Sheep every one in his own way, from whom so great a Pro∣phet doth not separate himself: What do you sup∣pose should be judged of our virtues and righ∣teousness? But you will say, this complaint of the Prophet belongs not to all in the general, but only to the Iews who in those times wick∣edly forsook their duty: but by the same reason you may affirm, that all the diseases of all men and times were not healed by the Death of Christ, but theirs only, who in those times had gone astray out of the way as lost Sheep. But how frivolous this cavilling is, it appears evident by the context of this Prophetical Prediction.

Whereby you see, (Osorius,) being convinced by Sacred Testimonies, that those merits of our greatest vertues, if they be looked upon in themselves, are far from the perfection of that righteousness, which your Philology Cloaths with very beautiful Colours; Which yet I would not have to be so said by me, nor under∣slood by you, as if those that live vertuosly, did nothing aright and praise worthy in this life: Or as if the Godly Works of the Saints were not acceptable to God, which

God himself hath commanded to be done; for thus you reason con∣cerning Works, that they come not indeed without Faith, and the Grace of God, but yet so, that when they come, you affirm, that the Kingdom of Eternal Salvation is due to them by the best right, not only as a recompense and reward, but also as a lawful Patrimony: as if the promise of Salvation depended not on Evange∣lical Faith, but on the Righteousness of the Law, and not on Christs merits only, unless a Covenant of Works be joined together with it: or as if faith it self profited nothing for the obtaining of Life upon any other account, but that it may procure Grace, which may stir us up to the praise-worthy performances of works, by which works we attain unto eternal Life.

Faith Iustifies no otherways, but upon the account of good works, according to the opi∣nion of Osorius.

For so your words do manifestly signifie, where treating of Faith, and enquiring why we are said to be saved by it, you presently add a cause: because, say you, we obtain the Divine protection only by faith, and so very easily observe the precepts of the law, and obey Divine Institutions; and again concluding to the same purpose.

No man that is in his right wits shall obtain Sal∣vation,

except he keep the Law, or, which is equiva∣lent thereunto, except he be ready and prepared in his mind te keept it.

And again in the same place dis∣coursing of the Salvation of Chri∣stians: Do you ask how a man is Sav∣ed? Is there another way prepared for Salvation, but what is eontained in the Law of God? none at all; Therefore we, miserable mortals, have a way to the Im∣mortal Kingdom laid out and shewed unto us, and that a very easie one, you Osorius, be∣ing our guide and teacher, which is con∣tained in the Law of God: So that besides this there is no other way laid open, neither in the Gospel, nor the Writings of the Apostles, whereby we may be brought to the Heaven∣ly Countrey, and its immortality, but that which is described only in the Law of God.

Suppose these things were granted you, which you affirm, though they be in themselves ab∣surd, and wholly Iudaical, but let me grant, or at least feign that this way which you shew, is the only way, and the most firmly founded, and also that the same is the most easie, and likewise that there is no other way by which we can come to Heaven, but that only which is proposed by the description of the Divine Law: Suppose we grant this, yet in the mean while see thou teach me this: how thou canst know that thou dost as many good works as are sufficient for a compleat obedi∣ence to the Law. Of old our first

Father Adam received but one command, and failed in the performance, and that in Paradise, being placed in the highest degree of Innocency. What? and thou a miserable mortal man, banished out of Paradise, com∣passed about with so much infirmity of the flesh, having received the Law of God, in which so many and so great things are imposed to be performed, and they are so imposed, that he is liable to a Curse, whosoever doth not most constantly continue in them all; do'st thou stand so firmly, that no storm of temptation can throw thee down at any time?

But what if having observed all other com∣mands of God exactly, so much as one tittle of the Law is neglected by thee? What will thy Righteousness say to us in this Case? Do you not see, that the Sentence of the Law be∣ing pronounced, you are as much in the fault, as if you were guilty of all 〈◊〉〈◊〉? And yet you talk to us of no other way to the Kingdom of Life, but that which is defined by the Ministry of the Law, and the Exercise of Charity.

But now how will you teach that? by what Scriptures, by what Masters shall this appear evident to us which you assert? by Paul, I trow. What then, says he he? To wit, this is the mind and opinion of Paul, say you, that he asserts that all manner of destroying and suppressing of Lust is placed in the Grace of God, which must be obtained by Faith, and teaches that there is no other way of extinguishing and

destroying it. And a gain elsewhere Paul was never the Man that dis∣approved the Offices of Bounty, as if they were little profitable for Salva∣tion, but taught that the only right way to Heaven was that, which was Fixed in the continual Exercise of Charity, &c.

I know indeed, and confess that all proceeds from the Grace of God alone, what∣soever is done by us aright, and commendably, whether in suppres∣sing the Allurements of Vices, or in observing the Discipline of Vertue. Moreover that should not be denied, which you do well assume accord∣ing to the mind of Paul, that we obtain this Grace from God by Faith. Likewise that is not ill said, which you add concerning Paul, that he was never the Man that disapproved Pious endeavours of Exercising Charity; seeing he every where extols those very things with wonderful praises For who knows not, that the excellent Sermons of Paul are exceeding full of very serious Pre∣cepts and Instructions for governing the Life: and that they are not in any matter more affectionate, than in this, that all every where, who profess the name of Christ, should, together with a sincere profession of Faith, joyn a proportionable Holiness of Life 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉for necessary uses.

Suppose this to be most true, as it is indeed; yet that was never the meaning of the Apostle,

to place our Salvation principally in the Law, as if he thought that the Kindom of God, and the Righteousness thereof should be measured by our worthy Deeds and Charity; or proposed Heaven to us as fit to be paid for, or sold for the commodities of our Works, as by a kind of Auction. Yea, when I read Paul's Epistles of a far different sense, this seems to me to be the only scope and mind of the Apostle, that he transfers all this Righteousness, which you attribute to the Law, unto Faith, and so transfers it, that he shuts out all mixture of Works; and leaves only Faith in the Son of God, which lays open for us a way into the Kingdom of Heaven.

For I beseech you, he that affirms, that we are justified by Faith, without Works, and who again says, but now without the Law the Righte∣ousness of God is made manifest, being testi∣fied by the Law and the Prophets? with what Words could he more evidently shut out the endeavours and merits of all our Vertues from the Divine gift of Iustification?

These things being thus agreed upon, and concluded by the weighty authority of Paul, of necessity from thence follows, That there is a twofold manner, or way of being righteous to be di∣stinguished, as I said, according to the different conditions of both Covenants; of which the one be∣longs to the Law, the other is

peculiar to Christ. Then both the Law and Christ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉have their own righte∣ousness; for as the Law, which is wholly exer∣cised in works of righteousness, endures no un∣righteousness, and renders the fruits of righte∣ousness plentifully to those, who persevering in that which is good, have filled up all the parts of perfect Innocency. Likewise Christ also hath his own righteousness, both much more power∣ful, and also not a little differing from the o∣ther; though not so much differing in respect of the matter, yet exceeding much in the manner of dispensing; for the Law communi∣cates only to them that Work, but Christ com∣municates to them that believe, perfect righte∣ousness, and often also to the un∣worthy and underserving, by a singular grace of dispensation. Therefore this Righteousness, is properly called the Righteousness of Faith; Which is necessarily to be distinguished by us from the other, which is called the Righteous∣ness of the Law: Which they who do not, verily they do a great injury to the Scriptures, and quench all light of Doctrine, confounding both their own Consciences, and the Con∣sciences of their hearers, with a won∣derful kind of disturbance, so that scarcely any Man can certainly know what should be hoped or feared; for they who dispute thus concern∣ing the Righteousness of the Law, and draw all things to that alone, as if there remained no o∣ther way to hope for Salvation, but that which

the strict and severe observation of the Law brings: I beseech you, what else do those Men do, but leave the Souls of Men in a doubtful wavering? And by what way those Men encourage us to hope, by the same they com∣pel us to fear and utterly to despair of Sal∣vation: seeing there is no Man in the World, to whom the daily offences of his Life gives not much more cause to fear, than his vertues give him to hope.

And what remedy then shall remain for the perplexed consciences of Men, if the Righte∣ousness of Christ being hid from their Eyes, you leave nothing for hope or consolation, but the righteousness of the Law? Or with what comfort will you raise up the Spirit of a fallen and afflicted Sinner, when the Law useth to shew what every Man should do aright, but can pardon no Man what is done amiss? must you not here of ne∣cessity be compelled to leave the Righteousness of the Law, and presently to ap∣peal to the Righteousness of Christ? And, I think, you will not at all deny that, but, say you, seeing this righteousness of Christ is no o∣ther, but that which is the righteousness of the Law, yea and the very perfection of the Law, therefore it is not necessary that we should make a twofold Righteousness, but one only both of Christ and of the Law. But 'tis not a difficult thing, to answer to this objection. Indeed it must be confessed, if you con∣sider the things by themselves,

and compare the one with the other by a mutual relation, there seems not to be any difference between the Righteousness of Christ, and of the Law. Because there is no∣thing in the Law so Holy and perfect; but it appears as evident in the Life of Christ: But if you consider the efficacy and manner of working; which the Righteousness of Christ and of the Law exercises in others; if you consider the effect and end of both, there is a great difference: For though Christ is no otherwise just in himself, than the Law it self is Holy and Iust: But yet this which is called the Righteousness of Christ, acts in us much otherwise, than that which is called the Righte∣ousness of the Law, so that nothing seems more unlike or more contrary.

The difference between the Righteousness of the Law and the Gospel.

FIRST, as touching the Law, what the Nature, Vertue, and Efficacy thereof is, it is unknown to no Man: To wit, that it is of it self a Holy and Perfect Rule, and Mistress to teach how to lead the Life; made for this purpose by the most Holy God, that Creatures might certainly know, what they should fly, and what they should follow, as it contains in it self the very Rule of all perfection in all respects compleat; so it requires perfect obedience in all respects and upon all accounts:

upon this condition, that he that doth these things, shall live in them. But on the contrary, he that doth otherwise, and abides not in all, the Law pronounces a Curse against him, and inflicts the vengeance of Death, and heaps up anger and indignation upon him. For by the Law the Wrath of God is declared from Hea∣ven, being justly kindled against all Men that are wicked and unjust upon any account.

Whereby it comes to pass, that the Law indeed, being it self Holy and Good, was not given for this, that it should bring Destruction, but Salvation; but yet the same being hindred by the infirmity of our flesh, it cannot but kill us, but cannot at all save us by its own means; not for any default, or tyranny of its own; but by taking just occasion from the refractory rebellion of our flesh, which as it naturally hath an enmity against God, so it cannot avoid be∣ing contrary to his Sacred Will, and Divine In∣stitutions. And hence break forth so many, and so great calamities, that fall upon this sin∣ful Nature of ours; hence so many proofs of the Divine Indignation and Anger; hence also that dreadful and unavoidable necessity of dying, which when it passes promiscuously through all ages and kindreds, which none of the most Holy Men could ever drive away from them∣selves, verily that one thing proves us all to be guilty of unrighteousness, and that there is not any perfection of righteousness in our most righteous works; for if the Wages of Sin be Death, it cannot be that there should be any

extinction of Life there, where no unrigh∣teousness is seen. Therefore, O Osorius! if the Law cannot defend thee in this Life with all thy works from Death, will the same save thee after Death, and restore thee to Life, when thou art Dead?

Concerning Evangelical Righteousness.

AND hitherto these things have been explained by us concerning the Righte∣ousness of the Law, as it is considered out of Christ. Now let us again turn our eyes unto Christ, and consider, what his Righteousness without the Law worketh in us. And here first of all a wonderful and most manifest difference between the Law and Christ presents it self unto us. For seeing the Law, as hath been said, can give no Life accord∣ing to the rigour of its Iustice, but only to perfect Men: Therefore it comes to pass, that because it finds nothing perfect in us, it being hindered through the infirmity of our flesh, can give no help, nor work any thing in us but wrath: Therefore being repulsed by the Law, and destitute of the help of Works, let us seek another Patron of Salvation, whosoever he be, who may help us: But there is none who doubts, that He is no other but Christ the only Son of God; whom we all alike profess through all

Churches. There is therefore no Controversie remaining between us and our Adversaries con∣cerning the Author of Salvation. Nevertheless there remains here another ambiguity or que∣stion, perhaps not yet cleared enough by all Divines. For whereas there is no man but con∣fesses that Righteousness is in Christ in its highest perfection: And we have already heard from the Law, that there is no fel∣lowship of Righteousness with Un∣righteousness; here some difficulty comes in, how it comes to pass, that the Lord Christ, all whose Iudgments are most just, can or ought against Righteousness favour those, who having forsaken their duty, have turned aside to Unrighteousness? For if the Law of God according to the nature of Righte∣ousness, cannot avoid condemning of those that are guilty of wickedness, some perhaps may ask, What way Christ, who doth not any thing, but what is most righteous, can procure Salvation to those without the violation of his Righteousness, whom the Law of Righteous∣ness justly condemns? Or if he do it, how, for what cause, and in what manner he does it, by Faith, or by Works? If by Faith, whether by Faith only, or by the help of Works joyned with it; if upon the account of Works, whe∣ther before Works, or after Works, or in the very Works? But if by Faith only without Works, hence ariseth a threefold question; 1. What then do good

Works avail? 2. What Faith that is, and of what sort it is, which is said to justifie? 3. Whom this Faith justifies? for they must be either sinners or righteous; if sinners, they are either penitent or stubborn; if you say both, you will speak against Righteousness, which cannot be well called Righteousness, unless it reward ac∣cording to every mans deeds and merits. But if they are righteous and not sinners, whom Christ helps: What need have the Righteous of a Redeemer? What need have the whole of a Physician? Moreover, how will that saying of Paul hold true; whereby Christ being made Man, is said to have come into the World, not to save the Righteous but Sinners.

I beseech you now, O ingenuous Man! ac∣cording to your Modesty, that I may deal very modestly with you: If any Man treat with you on this manner, in disputing about the Do∣ctrine of Iustification, what would you answer him, if he should ask these things of you? If any such Man should come to you, who being affrighted in his mind, and astonished at the greatness of his sins, and burdened with hor∣rour of Conscience, and almost dead with the fear of the Iudgment of God, should ask the help of counsel and comfort from you? of which sort there are found not a few Examples in the Folds of the Lord's Flock; what Re∣medy would you reach forth unto him? Per∣haps you will send him to those Books of yours concerning Righteousness; and what will he

find there, whereby his afflicted and cast down Mind may be refreshed and recover it self? what? will you send him to the Law? but what will he draw from thence fit for healing his wounds? especially seeing that Law of Righteousness can only bring us in guilty, be∣cause we have not kept the Law, and oblige us thereunto, as by bond; at least it cannot by any means restore Righteousness that was once lost, or satisfie the Iudge. It remains then, that you should bring over the miserable Soul of a Sinner from the Law, in which there appears no hope of defence, unto Christ, seeing it is He only by whose Wounds and Stripes we are healed; and who hath taken upon himself all the Impieties of us all, that he might communicate unto us his own Righ∣teousness. That is very true indeed, and upon that account I think you and yours are to be commended, who, though you seem not to have a clear enough sight of the genuine Office of Christ, and his Divine Greatness in pro∣curing our Salvation; yet ye refuse not to pro∣fess his Name, and a certain external reverence of Faith. But because at present you have to do with men that are troubled, and to whom it is not sufficient to retain only the Name of a Saviour, unless we have also a right under∣standing of the Efficacy of his Death which he suffered for us, and of the Power that he hath to save,

and the great benefits he hath bestowed upon us, and his exceeding great Love and Good∣will towards us, and the infinite Riches that are promised to us in him.

Therefore you must proceed further, and help the afflicted Minds of the Godly, as much as may be, that they may know and believe not only that there is eternal and durable Life in Christ, but also that they may be taught the way, and means, and manner how that Life comes to us, and to whom it belongs, and what we must observe in attaining unto it.

What the power and efficacy of Faith is; whom it justifies, and how.

IN which matter there is great variety of Sentiments and Opinions amongst Divines. For, whereas Paul proclaims with a very audible Voice, That Man is justified by Faith without the Works of the Law: Those Men by the additions of their Comments, do not explain the most evident meaning of the Apostle, but render it obscure; they do not expound, but cavil: So that some take the word Faith, not as Paul, for that Faith only which is in Christ Iesus, but which is formed by Charity and Works. Others interpret that, which Paul saith of Faith without Works, to be understood concerning Ceremo∣nial Works. Some interpret it of the Works of the Law in this sense,

that those works are undertaken not by Faith, but by the command of the Law without Grace. Others expound it otherwise; with∣out antecedent works only: Some think it should be understood of the first Iustification only, which they attribute to Faith alone, as in little Children that are Baptized, but the second in men come to years, they attribute to Faith indeed, but not without Works.

The scope of all which dispute is, that Faith being adorned with Works, may do something; and on the contrary, that, if Works are not joyned with it, it may seem a kind of rude matter, void of life and form, not only un∣profitable to purchase Righteousnes, but a cer∣tain dead and destructive thing. Which if it be true, I would know this of them, and chiefly I would ask of you, Osorius, in what Common-wealth, in what Church, in whose Kingdom, do you coyn this new piece of Divi∣nity? If it is the Church of Christ, that is not yours, It is his Kingdom, in which you are only a servant. What? Shall not Christ have a free power permitted to him of administring his own affairs, as in his own lawful Common∣wealth?

And whence is this your great boldness in anothers Dominion, in a Church that ye never founded, to alter and change as you list, the appointments and institutions of your Prince, contrary to Law and Right? Or by what au∣thority do you oppose your selves, but that every man may act in his own possession accord∣ing

to his own right, and freedom of com∣mand? What if it seems good in the Eyes of Christ to communicate freely the glory of his Kingdom, to whom he will? Will ye forbid him? What if the most Gracious Lord will pay a full reward to those that come to work at the last hour of the day, and make all equal by making the like agreement with them all, should your Eye therefore be evil because he is good?

But now the Lord himself, the Prince and Author of the Church professes in very evident words, that eternal life shall be given to them that believe in his name. What can be said more evident in signification, or more clear to be understood? He that believeth in me, saith he, hath eternal life. And again repeating the same, in the same words. He that believeth in the Son hath ever∣lasting life. And chap. 11. He that believeth in me, though he were dead yet he shall live. And lest he should seem to testifie this of himself with∣out the consent of his Father, he adds, This is, saith he, the will of him that sent me, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth in him should have life eternal. Who doth no less most evidently confirm these things by performances, which he expresses in word, adding also miracles thereunto. For how great a multitude do ye meet with every where through all the Evangelists, whom you see saved and healed by no other thing but

faith only, which relied on Christ. How of∣ten do we hear from the mouth of the Lord in the Gospel: thy Faith hath made thee whole, without hearing any mention of works? And what Christ performed to faith, will Osorius attribute that to Works: Christ invites unto himself Con∣sciences that are afflicted and burdened with sin: Isaiab calls all that are athirst to come without price or any exchange to the Fountains of Christ, that they may be refresh∣ed. Osorius will bestow the Kingdom, which God hath promised, upon none but righteous men, and eminent good works. I beseech you, Sir, according to your righteousness, what excellent good work brought that sinful Woman with her in the Gospel, out of whom seven Devils were cast? What righteousness appeared in the Thief on the Right Hand of Christ except faith only, why he should after the commiting so many evil deeds enter in to∣gether with Christ on the same day into Para∣dise? what other thing did the Woman of Canaan, that was a stranger, bring to Christ, but an importunate cry of faith, so that she carried home, not Crumbs, but whole Loaves of Divine Grace? What deserved the miserable Woman with the bloody Issue, or Iairus the Governour of the Syna∣gogue, or Zacchaeus of Matthew, or other Publicans with them? why they being perferred before the Pharisees, who seemed so much more righteous, should

obtain the benefit of free favour, being so ob∣vious and exposed unto them? There is almost an infinite number of others of the like condi∣tion that may be discoursed of after the same manner, in whom you can find nothing worthy of so great bounty of Divine Grace, but faith only: Blind Bartimeus cried, the Lepers cried, Iesus, Master, thou Son of David have mercy on us, and they were heard. For nothing cries louder than faith, nothing is more effectual to prevail. Let Osorius also cry, and let us all cry with the like noise of Faith, and we shall be heard alike. I speak of that faith, which is in Christ Iesus, besides which, there is not any passage into Heaven, nor access unto God, nor way of prevailing with God. Therefore that we may be heard, let us come, and knock, but let us do it aright, to wit, by Faith and in the name of only begotten. Otherways it is in vain to cry to God, who hears not sin∣ners, but drives them away, who regards not servants and guilty per∣sons, unless they come to the Son, or in the name of the Son. Now by what way we are heard, by the same we are Iustified: For the Divine reward is always joyned with righteousness.

Seeing then all of us, mortal men, are by na∣ture sinners, and servants of sin, therefore we must see what that is, which makes us of ser∣vants free men, of guilty persons sons, of sin∣ners righteous. For this is the whole subject matter of the debate, this is the question, on

which the whole controversie depends, which is not so difficult to be judged of, if the authority of Sacred Scripture may prevail upon impartial judgments. For the testimony of the Gospel remains sure and eternal, which no mortal man can weaken at any time, instructing our faith thus. As many as receiv∣ed him, to them he gave power to become the Sons of God, and that he may teach what it is to receive him, he presently explains the same, to them, saith he, that be∣lieve in his name, &c.

Whereby it appears evidently what it is, to which we are beholden for all that splendor and dignity, wealth and riches, yea and the possession of Heaven and Life. I know that in those excellent offices of good works, which you so much cry up, in the exercise of charity, and observance of Righteousness, there is great weight and also great benefit; as I consess also that the law it self hath great efficacy, if a man use it lawfully. Now the use of the law consists in this, that it should bring us to Christ, and be subservient to his glory. But when you have heaped all these things to∣gether into one, whatsoever were by God ei∣ther prescribed to us in his Law, or written within us, they are far from restoring perfecti∣on to a mans deeds that are altogether imperfect, or to a mans person that is wholly destroyed and ruinated. They are far from making us of servants freemen, of Slaves of Satan, Sons of God, heirs of his Kingdom, co-heirs of

Christ, fellow Citizens of the Saints, and Do∣mesticks of the highest Father. Verily that is not the Office of the Law, but of Christ: And it is not righteousness, but grace that does this. This is not the efficacy of works, but of Faith: which relying not upon works, but being strengthned only by the promise of God brings us from bondage to liberty, from death to life, adopts us being re∣conciled unto God, makes us Sons of the pro∣mise, which is so far from being joyned with Charity and Works, that it reconciles Charity it self, and all works of life unto God, and ju∣stifies them, without which they could not have place in Heaven, in the presence of the great God.

Upon what account, and how Faith justifies Fallen Sinners.

NOW because I have demonstrated, what the power of Faith is, and what it per∣formeth, I must of necessity explain upon what account, and for what cause Faith procureth unto it self so great effi∣cacy and power of Iustifying; how it is said to Iustifie alone without Works, and what Men the same Iustifies, whether the righteous or the wicked? If the righteous, what need is there now of Iustification or Faith,

when the Law is sufficient? If the wicked, whether those that are penitent and converted, or the impenitent and rebellious? If the Faith of Christ justifies the penitent, frees them from guilt, and makes them righteous of un∣righteous, which neither you your self can de∣ny: Why then do you inveigh against Luther so unmodestly and undeservedly? Does Luther either say or teach any other thing? Where does he at any time let loose the Reins to sin, or promise liberty to the wicked, or preach Iustification otherways, than to those, who being reformed by Repentance, breathe after Christ, and joyn themselves to him by Faith? What? Will you shut out those from all hope of pardon? I trow not: And what remedy then will you shew them? Will you send us to the Faith of Christ, or to the Sen∣tence of the Law to heal our wounds? What if the Law gives no help here, and there is not any other thing in man, that can help righteousness once violated, except Faith only placed in Christ, which neither you your self can deny: And if this very Faith brings Salvation to none, but those that deplore the sins they have committed, which together with you Luther affirms, to what purpose are those out-cries against Luther so Tragical, and raised without any cause? Wherefore then dost thou de∣ceive us, O Luther? For when thou d'dst condemn pious tears, and didst cast reproaches upon wise sor∣rowfulness, and didst plead that all works were

not only unprofitable, but pernicious. And presently going on in the same stile, and waxing more violent. For when (say you) thou didst put so much in faith, that thou saidst, there was help enough in that only; the sense of thy words seems to be this: That Salvation is prepared for all without grief, without the lessening of Riches by communicating to the Poor, without the detestation of a fault committed. And after the interval of a few words. But if you think that a Wicked Man, though be flyes not at all from his wickedness, obtains righteousness by Faith only, who hath been more absurd, who hath been more out of his wits than thou since the Creation of Mankind?

That I on the other side, Osorius may answer to these things, but in a few words: If that were true, which you falsly say of Luther, per∣haps you might gainsome praise both of a Learned Orator, and an Honest Accuser. But now seeing he never so much as dreamed of these things, neither can you bring forth one word from so many of his Sayings and Deeds to maintain your unjust accusation; I say not in your words, Who hath been more absurd, who hath been more out of his wits than you since the Creation of Man? But if I may be allowed to say this, speaking very modestly, that you are too much forgetful, not only of your duty, but also of the argument, in which you are exercised and: whilst you are writing of Righteousness, you do so far against all Righteousness most basely bespatter and shamefully lash a Godly Man, a Servant of Christ, that never deserved ill at your hands,

with feigned Lyes and Reproaches, and all kind of abuses; either through ignorance find∣ing fault with the things you have not read, or wresting those things to a wrong Sense, which you are not willing to understand in a right Sense. What if the Eternal pos∣session of Salvation must not be hoped for from any thing else but works of Righteousness, as chiefly you Osorius do teach, (that I may comprehend also Hosius, and your familiar Friend Andradius in the same Category! What hope can you have of your own Salva∣tion from these works of yours; to wit, your most false Accusations, and reproachful Libels, in which, against Law and Right, breaking the bonds of all Righteousness, you vomit forth those lying slanders against your Neighbour, and that in the publick Theatre of the World, for no valuable cause, nor for any true reason, nor upon any other account, but because per∣haps you are stirred up with your own immo∣derate passion.

Luther indeed did write of Faith, I know, and confess it, but what then? What fault I pray you did he commit in so doing? What hath he deserved? Why might not he as well write of Faith, as you of Righteousness? but perhaps that displeases you, not that he did write of Faith, but because attributing too much there∣unto, he refers the whole of our Righteousness to this Faith. Be it so, and you on the con∣trary refer all to the works of the Law, which

of you two is worthiest to be accused? Which comes nearest to Evangelical Doctrine? You who refer all to, and comprehend all in the observance and study of the Law, or he that re∣fers unto, and comprehends all in the Faith of Christ? Let Paul be called for a Witness and Umpire between you, who though he him∣self was very careful in observing the Law of God, in his Epistle to the Philippians, proposing a two∣fold manner of Righteousness, the one of the Law, and the other of Faith, he judges the latter to be so much better, and prefers it so far before the other, that he esteemed all those other things of his own, though otherwise excellent and praise-worthy things, being placed in the study of the Law of God, yet he esteemed them all as loss, yea as dung, for the excellency of the knowledge of Iesus Christ, that he might be found in him, having on the Righteousness, not which is of the Law, but which is of the Faith of Christ, which is the Righteousness of God by Faith, &c. What then? shall you bring us away from this faith, which is placed in Christ, and call us back to that dung con∣trary to the will of Christ, and the Doctrine of Paul; that by your teaching and guideance we may be found to possess a righteousness, not that which is placed in Faith, but that which is only placed in the Law? And are you upon this account so outragiously invective against

Luther, because he chose rather to follow Pauls opinion, than yours in this point of Salvation? No, but there is some other thing in the wind, which puts you in such a heat of contending, not because Luther attributes Righteousness to faith, to which you your self use sometimes to attribute very much, but because he so shuts up our Salvation in this faith alone, that he seems wholly to exclude and despise the excel∣lent works of Charity and labours after Piety, in the point of Iustification and Righteousness before God.

In Academical exercises, where arguments are examined according to the Rules of Logick, those con∣clusions are justly found fault with, that proceed from a thing said in particular, to prove a thing said in the general, which thing there is no man, that is in any degree exer∣cised in these matters, but he may easily perceive in your Sophistry.

But if Luther had ever been a Man that had simply condemned the commendable diligence in good works, or ho∣nest actions of vertues; I should not save him from your lashes, or from being accounted worthy of such Ornaments as your modesty puts upon him, that he might be judged the plague of his Countrey, a turbulent Person, and disturber of Re∣ligion.

Add hereunto, if you please, the other flowers of your Satyrical E∣loquence, under which you expose him in such an appearance or dis∣guise, as one of the most cruel, and dreadful Monsters, that ever was in the World.

An Answer to the Accusations of Osorius, in defence of Luther.

BUT now passing by your Re∣proaches, let us consider the matter it self, and the strength and finews of your Discourse. For this is your Opinion; that, for the ob∣taining of righteousness the godly fruits of good works should by no means be removed from a Communion with faith, which other∣wise cannot be lively and saving, being with∣out charity. And because Luther does this, you conclude after this manner, that he con∣demns all works of good men; that he is an enemy and destroyer of all honest Discipline, an Au∣thor of prophane impurity and licentiousness, a plague of his Countrey, a troubler and disturber of all Re∣ligion, yea, and a Monster, and what not?

But I beseech you, Sir, bethink your self, and have a care what you belch forth against any man with an unbridled rash∣ness; the Law commands you to shun leasing. And do you, who are so great an extoller of righteousness, against

all righteousness tear honest and innocent men in pieces with false accusations? for if a Man doth not attribute unto works the chiefect effi∣cacy and preemince in the point of Iustification, is that sufficient cause to suppose that therefore he utterly condemns good works? Verily it is unreasonable so to do, as if a man disputing concerning Osorius, should thus conclude, that be∣cause he hath no power of governing in the Kings Chamber, therefore he hath nothing he can do at home a∣mongst his own family: Or because he is not at all excellent in military vertue to gain a victory, that there∣fore he hath no faculty or dexteri∣ty in managing the affairs of his own business. Luther separates charity from faith, and the Law from the Gospel, and does it not without cause. But it must be con∣sidered where, in what place, and for what cause he does it: Not to cause the godly works of good men to be despised, nor to discourage the exercise thereof, but that the power of justifying should not be attributed to the performance of them. Not that faith should not work by love before Men, but that it should not work before God. For it is one thing to work before Men, and another thing to work before God. Therefore one and the same faith acteth both ways, but one way before God, and another way before men; for before men it works by love, that it may perform obedience to the will of God, and be serviceable for the benefit of our Neighbour;

but before God it works not by any love, but by Christ only, that it may obtain the pardon of sins, and eternal life.

By which you see, what is the difference between faith and vertue, and wherein they both agree; and how different the working of both is; How faith is alone without works, and a∣gain how the same is not alone; for in the mean while Godly works are not therefore con∣demned, because they are not admitted to the justification of life, but the trusting in works is only overturned: Here then a wise and suitable division should be used, that things may be distinguished each by their own places and bounds lest one thing should rashly rush into the possession of another, and disturb the or∣der of its station. Therefore let the praise∣worthy merits of the greatest vertues have their own honour and dignity, which no man with∣holds from them: Nevertheless by their dig∣nity they will never be so available in the pre∣sence of the Heavenly Iudge, as to redeem us from our sins, to satisfie Iustice, to deliver us from the wrath of God, and everlasting de∣struction, to restore us that are so many ways ruinated, unto grace and life, to unite us as Sons and Heirs to God, and to overcome Death, and the World. These things cost a far dearer price, than that we should ever be able to pay so many and so great debts by any works or merits,

or means of our own. For so great is the se∣verity of Iustice, that there can be no reconci∣liation, unless Iustice be satisfied by suffering the whole punishment that was due. The wrath is so very great, that there is no hope of appeasing the Father, but by the price and death of the Son. And again, so great is the mercy, that the Father grudged not to send his own Son, and bestow him on the World, and so to bestow him, that he gives Life Eternal to them that believe in him: Moreover, so great is the loving kindness of the Son towards us, that he grudged not for our sakes to bring upon himself this infinite load of wrath which otherways our frailty, however assisted with all the help of moral vertues, had never been able to sustain.

Whence Faith hath received its efficacy.

BEcause Faith alone with fixed eyes looks upon this Son and Mediator, and cleaves unto him, who only could bring about this Atchievement of our Redemption with the Father; therefore it is, that it alone hath this vertue and power of justifying, not with works, nor for works, but only for the sake of the Mediator, on whom it relies. Therefore that is false, and worthy to be rejected with disdain,

which some unhappy and wicked School-Di∣vines affirm in discoursing of Charity, to wit, that it is the form of Faith, and that it must not by any means be separated from faith, no more than the vital Soul can be separated from the body, or the essential form from matter, which otherwise is a rude and unweildy Mass. In an∣swering of whom, I think there is no need of many words, seeing the whole meaning and drift of Scripture, if rightly understood, the very end of the Law; seeing Christ, and the instruction of the Apostles, and the whole na∣ture of the Gospel seem to be manifestly a∣gainst them, and wholly to overturn that most absur'd Opinion by so many Oracles, so many Signs, Examples, and Arguments to the con∣trary. Now if that be form, which gives sub∣sistence to a thing, how much more truly must it be said, that faith is the form of charity, without which all the works of charity are base and contemptible; as again the form of faith is not charity, but Christ only, and the promise of the word.

But what, say they, are not the pious works of Charity acceptable to God, being so many ways pre∣scribed unto us, and commanded by him? Are not these also remunerated with plentiful fruits of Righteousness, and heaped up with manifold Rewards in the Gospel? I was hungry, says he, and ye fed me, I thirsted and ye refreshed me with drink; so that not so much as a cup of cold water shall want a reward, when it is given in the name of Christ, besides an infinite number

of other things of that kind, which being ta∣ken out of the Scriptures are enlarged upon to the praise of Charity.

Indeed no man denys that pious and holy works of Charity are greatly approved of God, and it is an undoubted truth, that the love of God and of our Neighbour, as it comprehends the Sum∣mary of both Tables, and is the greatest com∣plement of the whole Law, so it hath excel∣lent promises annexed unto it. Neither is there any Controversie between us about that. But when we affirm that Charity pleases God, we ask this, how it pleases, whether simply of it self in respect of the very work, or upon the account of faith, and the Mediatour? and then whether the same Charity so pleases, that it justi∣fies us before God, and obtains the pardon of sins, and overcomes the terrours of death and sin, that it may be opposed to the judgment and anger of God? Moreover, whether it hath the promises of Eternal Life annexed unto it? If without a Mediatour and the faith of him, there is nothing which can please God, and it is impossible that works should please him, be∣fore the person of him that worketh be recon∣ciled; it follows that Charity depends on Faith, and not Faith on Charity: But that it rather goes before Love, and is so far from being joyned with it for justification, that it also ju∣stifies Charity, and makes all the works of Charity acceptable to God. The matters appear more evident by Example. Suppose a Iew or

Turk does daily bestow great gifts upon the poor with very great cost, and damage to his estate: and again, that a Christian gives only a cup of cold Water to a thirsty man in the name of Christ: in the things themselves, if merits only be valued; there seems a very great dis∣proportion. But there is much greater inequality in the distributing the reward. Though a Turk bestows many thousands of Talents upon the poor, he gains not any thing at all thereby with God. A Christian by one Cup, not of Wine, but of cold Water loses not his reward, yea he finds Life. What is the cause? What should you think, O Osorius, but because those things are not valued by merits, but by faith: not by the condition of the work, but of the worker; not by the price of the thing, but by the dignity of the person.

In Iustification not so much the Condition of the Deeds as of the Persons is regarded.

SEE, I beseech you, of how great concernment it is, that a person should first be reconciled to God, which unless he be received into his favour, it is not possible that his works should please him at any time. As in the civil and politick nature, it is of no small concernment, whether a Son or a Servant acteth upon the account of reward: in like manner in the Heavenly generation there is a

great difference between Sons and Servants. The Heirs of God and Mercenaries. For one thing is regarded in Servants, and another thing in Sons, and their condition appears to be far different. It belongs to Ser∣vants to be compelled by fear, but they that are Sons are drawn by love, and they do so much the more in the performance of their duties, how much the more gladly they endeavour to please their Father. They that serve, go about their business only for reward, and it is given unto them no otherways than according to their me∣rits. Who when they have done all, they re∣main nothing but Servants and unprofitable, they never do any thing worthy of an Inheri∣tance. On the contrary, they who are Heirs and Sons, though they shew themselves no less obedient, and observe the will of their Father, yet they do not therefore obey, that they may be made Heirs by Works, but because they are Heirs, Therefore they work.

Again, they that are in a servile condition, do not come, but when called by their Master, and perform his commands by the impulse of the Law. But the case is contrariways in Sons, who have always access with boldness into the presence of their Father, and cry Abba Father, performing much more of their own accord, than by the incitement of anothers prescription. Servants, after they have done their task, have their wages paid them according to their me∣rits, but they receive no reward of Inheritance. But they that are Sons and Heirs; an Inheri∣tance

is made sure to them, not according to their obedience, nor by their deeds, nor after their deeds, but by the faith of the promise, and a free donation before all obedience, con∣cerning which Faith, Paul said: It is therefore of Faith, that accord∣ing to Grace the Promise should be firm to all the Seed. Moreover in those that are Sons, it is only the dignity of the person, and not the merits of good life; it is the birth, and not the works that are regarded: But the case is contrariways in Servants; for it is not regarded what the person is, but what the man∣ner of life. In short, the Servant (as Christ wit∣nesseth) abides not in the house for ever. But the Son, to whom the House is delivered wholly and for ever, is never driven out of the House.

And here Christ only is a Son by Nature, we only by the Grace of Adoption. He by Birth, we by Deliverance, of which he himself testifies: if the Son, saith he, shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed, he being partaker of his Fathers Nature, is not made a Son by his life, but is born a Son; we being Servants by Nature, are not born Sons, but are born again, not by works, but by faith

But by Christ our Deliverer we are changed from Servants into Sons. Not that we cease now to be the same that we were, in this life sinners, miserable, weak, mor∣tal, for this transformation from

servants into sons, is not so much per∣formed in us, or in the change of our qualities, but chiefly in the love of God to us. For he hath so high an esteem, and puts so great a value on Christ his only begot∣ten, that with a fatherly love and affection he embraceth all those of mankind throughout the world, that believe in this Son of his; and looking upon them now as Sons adopts them for his Sons out of their servile estate, yea and makes them co∣heirs together with his Son. Whence St. Paul said; ye are not now servants, but sons: and if sons, then also heirs of God through Christ; for ye are all the Sons of God by Faith, which is in Christ Iesus.

Whosoever of you are baptized ye have put on Christ. Ye are all one in Christ Iesus. But if ye are Christs, then are ye the seed of Abraham, and heirs according to the promise. Concerning which also Iohn speaks to this pur∣pose; see what love the Father hath given us, that we should be called the Children of God. And again pre∣sently repeating the same, Dearly beloved, saith he, now we are the Sons of God, and it hath not yet appeared, what we shall be, &c.

The Absurdities that arise from the Osorian Righteousness.

WHich things, seeing they are guarded with most sure confirmations of Evangelical Scripture, hence it necessarily follows, that all this Discourse of yours about righteousness falls down from the foundation. For if there is no union with God the eternal father but to those, who by on exact observation of the law con∣form and direct all their actions to the will of God, which is the law of equity and rule of Iustice: you make us not now to be Sons, nor Heirs ac∣cording to the promise, but merce∣naries according to the condition of the law: Moreover by this means also it will come to pals. that the promise is sure to no man in his life time, which is directly oppo∣fite not only to the mind of Paul, but also to the genuine condition of Sons. For who in the time of this life lives so exactly according to the commands of God, that hi∣therto he hath never passed the limits thereof, or knows what he will do in the remainder of his life? Whereby it will come to pass that the mind must needs waver hither and thither, with a perpetual uncertainty. Moreover if that be accounted sure by the word and promise of the Gospel, that they are heirs as many as are ingrafted into Christ, then the Kingdom of God must of necessity be an inheritance,

If an inheritance, then it is not a recompence nor a reward, but a Patrimony, which is not due to deeds, but to the spiritual birth∣right. If to the birth-right, then the bestowing of the Inheritance goes before all deeds. Afterwards Pious deeds follow, according to the saying of Augustine, which is no less true than firm: Good works follow him, that is justified, but go not before him, that is to be justified. Where∣fore if that most pure and eternal Nature ac∣count us for Sons, as it was proved above, in which there sticks not any stain of unrighteous∣ness, upon the like account it fol∣lows, that the cause which joyns us to God as Sons, the same also makes us just in the sight of God.

But that we may rightly examine, what that cause is, first the degrees of causes must be distinguished, of which some are related un∣to God, and others to men. On Gods part in the first place comes his infinite Mercy, Pre∣destination, Election, the Grace of the Pro∣mise and Vocation, of which Paul speaks in more places than one: Who hath Predesti∣nated us, saith he, unto the adoption of Sons by Iesus Christ, whom he hath Predestinated, that they should be conformed to the Image of

his Son, them he hath also called, whom he hath called, them he hath also justified, &c.

In the next order follows the Donation of his Dear Son, his O∣bedience, Death, Sufferings, Merits, Redemption, Resurrection, For∣giveness of Sin: As for those things which proceed from God, there is no great controversie between us. But our Opinions differ concerning those things, which are called causes on Man's part; to wit, whether there is one cause only or more? Whether Faith only with∣out Works, or Works joined to∣gether with Faith? And this is the thing about which now we contend, O Osorius, for in these Books you do dispure about the righteousness of works at such a rate, that you suppose Faith, only without these additions, so Insufficient to perform any thing towards the purchasing Salvation, that it is your Opinion, That this Faith of Christ only, if it be separated from the help of Works, deserves not to be called the Faith of Chrit, but a head-strong rashness, an insolent confidence, an impudent boldness, an outragious madness, an execrable Wickedness: Which sort of Words, how little modesty they savour of, it is needless here to inquire. But how far they differ from truth, and the inviolable authority of Sacred Scriptures, it will be requisite to take notice; because at present this is the matter of debate between us.

And first, if you understand it concerning this common Fellowship of Men with one ano∣ther; and Offices of mutual obedience between Man and Man, there is no man so unreasonable as to separate Faith from the operation of Charity in that sense. For thus Faith, Hope, and Charity have a necessary connexion. But if the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is applied, beyound the publick society of Human Life to those things that peculiarly belong to Salvation, and have a relation to God himself; That if now the cause should be erquired for, which gives us a right to the adoption of the Sons of God, and which pur∣chases us righteousness before him. Herein Paul in Disputing against you, doth so far take away all righteousness from works, and leaves Faith alone, that he judges him that mingleth any thing besides for the obtaining Salvation, to be a destroyer of Faith, an Enemy of Grace, and consequently an Enemy of the Cross of Christ. For, if those, saith he, that are of the Law, are heirs, Faith is made void, the pro∣mise is made of none effect. And also elsewhere: If righteousness comes by the Law, then Christ dyed in vain. Thus you hear Paul manifestly asserting, what it is, that makes us heirs of the Inheritance and Salvation, not the Law, but Faith: And that these two are so contrary in the Office of Iustifying, that if

the Law be admitted, Faith is wholly over∣turned, the Death of Christ is made void, the grace of the promise fails.

Now let us compare Osorius disputing of righteousness with Paul, He affirms, that Man is justified by Faith without Works. Your opinion on the contrary pleads that righteous∣ness doth so much consist of Works without Faith, that Faith doth nothing else but prepare for Holy Works. He asserting a twofold righteousness of Works and of Faith, of Grace, and of Merit, so distinguishes between both, that he sets the one against the other, by a mu∣tual opposition; as if they were things, that could by no means consist together, but the one destroys the other: And he makes that evident by the example of the Israelites, and the Gentiles; of whom those grasping at righte∣ousness by Works, fell from true righteousness: These, because they sought after righteousness by Faith, solely and simply obtained it.

You on the contrary being neither deterred by their fearsul example, nor regarding the Apostolical Instruction; and making no di∣stinction between these so different kinds of righteousness, you seem to comprehend all in that one righteousness of the Law, as if the righteousness of Faith were none at all. The Words of Paul are very manisest: To him that worketh, the reward is reckoned to be, not of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is imputed unto him for righteousness.

What can any Man say more expresly? After∣wards he adds. freely, denying that it could be imputed freely if it were due for Works. On the contrary, Osorius seems to be of such an opi∣nion, that he acknowledges no imputation of righteousness at all. He who afferts we are justified by the Faith of Christ, and not by Works; What doth he else but remove Works utterly from the justification of Faith? Your assertion, which makes the Faith of Christ, if works are shut out, to be no Faith, but 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and execrable Wickedness: What else doth it in these words, but bring a Gospel not from Heaven, but from Portugal, wholly differing from that which we have received from Paul. Which seeing we are command∣ed by the Apostle not to suffer, so much as in an Angel, without wishing him accursed, what may be answered to you in this case, I commit to your self to consider. Paul reasons thus: If of Grace, then not of Works, other∣ways Grace is not Grace: If of Merit then not Freely: For in that which is free, there can be no merit or debt.

The Arguments of Osorius, whereby he attri∣butes Righteousness to Works, are an∣swered.

NOW it must be enquired, by what ar∣guments Osorius pleads for his opinion.

And first he brings that out of the Psalms: The Lord, saith he, is Righ∣teous, and loveth Righteousness, his countenance beholds the upright: And again, The Wicked, saith David, shall not dwell with thee; the Unrighteous shall not remain before thy eyes: and thou hatest all those that work Ini∣quity; thou shalt destroy all them that speak leasing, &c. And now what is gathered from these testimonies? To wit, That the Wicked have no society with the goodness of God. For see∣ing God is himself the very Law of Equity and Rule of Righteousness, according to which all our actions should be directed, therefore it is his opinion that it is not possible, that he who puts away the rule it self from him and hates it, should be joined to the same. But what do you drive at in all these florid expressions? it is this; He then that asserts it to be possible that God should approve the wicked, and join them to himself, asserts it to be possible for God not to be God.

These things need no prolix an∣swer: For though we grant this to be very true, which you mention from the Scriptures, that the rule of Divine Iustice is perfect, and that eternal light cannot endure any thing that is wicked, or not agreeable to equity: but you have not yet proved that those should be called wicked; who flying to Christ by Faith, receive from him the Pardon of their Sins, who having their Sins blotted out, and all Iniquity forgiven, are written by the same Psalmist among the number of the bles∣sed

whom God himself purifying by faith, and pouring his holy Spirit upon them, of ungodly he hath made them godly, and gra∣ciously received them into his fa∣vour, for the sake of his dear Son.

And such we were all formerly, as your Oration describes, wicked sinners, and all void of the glory of God, before Christ washed us with his blood: but now after we are washed from our former filthiness, sanctified and justified in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, and by the spirit of our God, Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? Those whom God Iustifies, who shall condemn? Then you go on, and deny that it is possible, that God should be unlike himself, to favour wickedness, or make friendship with wicked men of an unclean life. And therefore you conclude we must needs be first righteous, before we are re∣ceived into the favour of God. Right, but who are they, whom you call by the name of Iust? You must teach us that.

If you judge they are such, as are defiled with no pollution, or can say with Christ: Who amongst you will prove me guilty of Sin? Verily, I confess it seems not un∣like to truth; what you prove con∣cerning the conformity of the Righteous unto. God, and that we must needs be all of us such, if we would with acceptance have to do with that most pure Nature of the Divine Righ∣teousness,

without a Mediator and Redeemer.

But if you take those for Righ∣teous, who are Righteous by Faith not by Life, that is, those whom daily forgiveness received by faith, brings as righteous in the Presence of God, in that sense this debate of yours about Righteousness does us no diskindness: For by this means it comes to pass, that whom Faith dayly absolves, you your self cannot hold them guilty of any crime: Therefore if they are not unrighteous, nothing hinders them from being admitted with bold ac∣cess into the presence of the Divine Majesty, through the benefit of their Redeemer.

But you deny that it is agreeable to the nature of God, to account any man worthy of his approbation, except him, whom his countenance beholds to be righteous: Therefore it is necessary that our righteousness should go before the favour of God. But whence that righteousness should come to us, herein is all the contention between us. You seem to acknowledge no righteousness but that which the perfection of life procures. We place all our righteousness in Christ, not in our selves, in the faith of him only, not in our own works. What? say you, can any man obtain favour from that highest goodness as long as he hates not wick∣edness, as long as be puts not away Ini∣quity from him, which hath a perpetual War with Divine Equity? Who is igno∣rant of, or denies that? For how can it be, that that everlasting Law should not

hate sin and wickedness with the greatest abhor∣rency? Well, and what do these Mountains of Gilboa bring forth unto us? at length he concludes: That it is therefore necessa∣ry, that whosoever thinks to be receiv∣ed into the friendship of God, must first hate wickedness. Verily there is no man that denies it. For though we should grant that a wise and whole∣som (or) sound sorrow, whereof you speak, makes the first part of our conversion, and that the true righteousness of faith, doth not fol∣low, except some trouble of a pe∣nitent mind go before, it doth not therefore come to pass, that the very cause of justification should be attributed unto repentance; for if repentance be nothing else, but a grief of mind at the remembrance of sin, it proves indeed that sin went before, but takes not away that which was committed. It declares perhaps some change of mind in him that committed it, but takes not away the punishment, that is due to justice. Moreover repentance testifies that justice is lost, but repairs not the loss thereof: As pain com∣ing of a wound inflicted makes not a medicine to it self, but receives it from some other thing. In like manner, repentance goes before the re∣mission of sins, but doth not cause it, just as Seryphius did not cause the recovering of the City of Tarentum, who unless he had first lost it, Fabius had not recovered it. How many may you see in a common-wealth, who having

violated the publick Laws, or been guilty of Treason against their Prince, being overwhelm∣ed with grief and shame, with all their heart lament the wickedness of their crime, and they do not wickedly that they are ashamed and re∣pent. But yet they do not escape the due pu∣nishment of the Law. Therefore the detesta∣tion of their sin proves them guilty, but doth not free them from condemnation. But if there is so great severity of Laws and Iudgments in humane offences, which no deploring of ill life can wash away, what then should be judg∣ed of these that are committed against the high∣est and infinite Majesty? Which Angels offend∣ing in one thing were not unpunished, having been thrust out of Heaven, and whom no sor∣row could restore again, what should be said to us in this frail condition of sinful nature, in which dwelleth no good thing, who offend by a daily, either negligence of duties, or filthiness of deeds? Is it sufficient to turn away the ven∣geance of so great a God, to say, I have erred, unless there be some other thing besides the sense of grief to help guilty and wounded na∣ture, which may defend this weak part of our re∣pentance with a stronger safe-guard, and may be sufficient to appease and reconcile offended justice with a proportionable price, and, (so to speak,) can contend with Divine Iustice by opposing a righteousness equal thereunto? For as the wound is infinite, that is inflicted on our nature, so it is just, that a remedy of the like nature

should be applied, the strength and greatness whereof being infinite, may by proportionable greatness be suited to the Majesty offended; which verily consists not in repentance, or charity, or any offices of ours: but is contained in Christ only, who is the only be∣gotten Son of God. And because our Faith only lays hold on him, and he cannot profit any but Believers, therefore it comes to pass, that faith only with∣out works, that is, without any merits of works, compleats all our Righteousness before God.

Concerning the Praise of Repentance, the Dignity, and Benefit, and Peculiar Office thereof.

BUT you will say, to what purpose then is it to repent, and to amend evil deeds? or what shall be answered to these Scrip∣tures, which promise in more pla∣ces than one the pardon of all sins to those that lament their sins, and are converted unto a bet∣ter life? That I may answer these, I would have you take notice of this in the first place: When we attribute the vertue of justifying to Faith, and in this case place it alone, being helped by no addition of our works: Let no man so mis-understand, as if we

did drive away and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all saving Repent∣ance, and other holy Offices of Duty and Cha∣rity from every action of life, as Andradius falsly gathers against Chemnitius.

For, that we may openly confess the truth, what else is this whole life of Godly Men, but a continual repentance, and a perpetual detesta∣tion and condemnation of sin, whilst we are forced by the Gospel with daily groans to breath forth this Petition? Forgive us our sins, as if we were conflicting in a continual place of wrestling, in which sometimes we stand by the Spirit, sometimes we fall through the infirmity of the Flesh, and sometimes we again make new repentance, yet we always overcome and triumph by Faith, to wit, obtaining the pardon of our faults, and we obtain true righteousness for ever. Therefore away with impudent slanders; let just judgment be exercised, and let things be comprehended each in their own places and bounds.

Pious tears, a serious deploring of former de∣struction, and a just care of living a better life, with all other pious exercises, are things, which we do not thrust away, nor put out of their place, only we search what is the place, what is the peculiar office of those things. And in the first place this is a thing that should not be doubted of by any Man, that Repentance, as it is an excellent gift of God, so it brings forth fruits not to be repented of, according to its Office; the Office

or duty whereof I reckon to be twofold. The first is, that which duly detests the sins committed. The other, that which diligently endeavours the Reformation of the life, from which follows both great praise, and greater fruits, and also very great incitements to vertue. For he that being weary of his former wicked∣ness applys his mind wholly to amend his ungod∣ly Life by a future reformation; verily he hath made a great progress towards Salvation, but he is not therefore as yet put into a certain possession of Salvation, or because of that, ta∣ken up with the Penitent Malefactor into Pa∣radise. For it is one thing to weep for the things that one hath done amiss, and another thing to obtain the pardon of them. Verily he that seriously purposes with himself to a∣mend his life, I judge that he ought justly to be praised; but yet that is not enough, as I suppose, to turn away the anger of an offended God, to put away the heinous nature of Sin, to procure a clear tranquility of Conscience, and to shake off the tyranny of death; for to obtain that Victory, we will need another Panoply, or compleat Armour than Repentance, or the forces of our vertues; for nothing that we can do is sufficient to bring this to pass, but only faith in the Son of God. And therefore Repentance with Charity, and other Offices of that kind, have a necessary con∣nexion with faith; not that they may give form

to this as to a dead matter, but that ra∣ther they may receive life and Spirit from it: not that Faith hath need of these for justification, but that they themselves may be justified by the value received by Faith in Christ, which unless they were re∣commended upon the account of that Faith would all be abomina∣ble in the sight of God; and though they may be call'd works, yet cannot be call'd good works in Gods account, unless they are sup∣ported by Faith. Whence Augustin admonish∣ing, not without cause, commands us to be∣lieve in him that justifies the Wicked, that our very good works may be good works; for those deserve not to be called good, as long as they proceed not from a good root, &c. But here you object approved Testimonies and Ex∣amples, rehearsed out of the Sacred Oracles of Divine Scripture, in which, without any men∣tion of Faith, Salvation is assuredly promised to them that Repent, as in Ezekiel, I de sire not the death of a Sinner, but that the wicked should turn from his way and live: There are set before us the Ex∣amples of the Ninivites, of David, Manasseh and others; and lest I should weary you with Rehearsing of every one of them, which are infinite, I will make a short Col∣lection of the whole inatter. You say that thus the Prophets proclaim, and openly avouch this thing, that

there is no hope of Salvation shewed unto any, but only those, who are with their whole heart brought back from an unclean and wicked life to the practise of Holiness, &c. And presently concluding with this Opinion, you teach us that there is no other way at all either to avert destruction, or pro∣cure salvation.

Lest I should speak many things in vain, there is one Answer abundantly sufficient for all such Objections; that there is indeed ne∣cessarily required a sincere reformation of heart and life, in these who are to obtain life; as in an Heir, for whom there is appointed the possession of an Inheritance to be enjoyed, there is necessarily required dutifulness towards his Father, which dutifulness, nevertheless, when it is most exactly performed, is not any cause of obtaining the inheritance. And in like man∣ner there is nothing that can be more certain, than that Repentance and Renovation do much commend the life of Christians to God; yet it makes them not Christians, neither doth it so much commend the person of the Penitent, as it is it self commended by the dignity of the man: who, if he is a Christian, his Repent∣ance is approved. But, if he be an Alien from the faith, the lamenting of sin doth not at all profit for the obtaining of Righteousness, neither doth it take away Sin. But as you say, Repentance hath Divine Pro∣mises, and indeed I am not against your Opinion in that, for God doth not desire the death of a Sinner, promising also life to him that repents. That's right. But let

us see how he promises it, and by pondering the Circumstances of things, times, and per∣sons, let us consider what is promised, and to whom, and what is the true cause of promising. Indeed the old Law hath dark promises, the Gospel also hath its own promises, as both Co∣venants have likewise their own atonements. I do not deny it, but this I ask what manner of promises hath repentance in the Old Law? God promiseth life to them that return from their wickedness. What? doth he signifie an eternal or a temporary peace and felicity of this outward life? If you answer an eternal, I would then know what difference there will be be∣tween Legal and Evangelical Promises? but when I do stedfastly contemplate upon the na∣ture and kind of both times and testaments in the holy word of God, and compare the vertue of one Kingdom with the other, this seems to me to be the difference between Moses and Christ; that I suppose all his Bles∣sings and Rewards promised by God to those that lead their life accord∣ing to the prescript of the Law, go not beyond the bounds of a certain earthly blessedness and recompence. In which, not∣withstanding we think there are contained no small benefits of God. For what could happen to any man in this mortal state, to which we are all of necessity subject, not only more desirable, but also of a larger extent by the wonderful power of God, than when you are by the singular gift of God placed in such a Commonwealth, which by a wonderful fruit∣fulness, and plenty of all good things, excells all

other Nations whatsoever; you should then pass your life in it, being compassed about with the Divine Protection, that you may not only your self live long in the Land, which the Lord your God hath given you, but that it should also be well with your Sons after you, through all Ge∣nerations: that you may maintain your state with dignity, and abundance of all the best things, that the adversity of common fortune may have no power over you, that no Enemy may annoy you, no tempest may cloud your tranquility, that no storm of evil things may shake you: that at home and abroad, whether you are in the field, or in your house, going out or coming in, all things may happen suc∣cessfully to you, according to your hearts de∣sire; and moreover, that God should so bless all your wealth and works of your hands, and that at no time the powerful providence of God should forsake you unto the utmost bounds of the most aged life; unto these add the plen∣teous fruitfulness of the Land, the incomes of Fruits and Corn, the continual in∣creases of wealth, the constant fruitfulness of Cattle, besides other very plentiful Promises and Bles∣sings of the like kind, whereof there is a long Catalogue described in the Law, which are appointed for those, who inviolably obey the most holy Precepts of God, and turn from their Sins to Righteousness. All which Promises being by the Prophets set before the Penitent, seem to me to be of such a sort, that they either signifie temporary Re∣wards

in this World, and mitigate outward punishments in this Life; or if they be referred to eternal Life, they do at least imply the faith of a Media∣tour, by a certain silent condition. And therefore among Divines there are learned and famous men, who do rightly and learnedly prove, that the Preaching of Repentance belongs peculiarly to the Gospel and not to the Law. For the Law Preaches Damnation to Sinners. The Gospel Preaches Salvation to the Penitent. There∣fore when the Lord says, return and ye shall be saved, I desire not the death of a sinner, &c. It is not the Preaching of the Law, which pro∣nounces the Sentence of Condemnation without mercy: but it is the very voice of the Gospel.

And this seems to me to be the chief difference between Moses and Christ, that like as he being as it were a certain earthly Christ, pro∣cures an earthly liberty to the peo∣ple, and sets before them the duties that are incumbent upon them in leading their lives; so all the doctrine and bene∣fits of Christ are peculiarly and chiefly directed unto life eternal, and calls us thereunto espe∣cially from this world. But if we suppose that these legal promises should notwithstanding be referred to eternal life, yet when they did not pass the bounds of that people only, and reached not to other Nations, but to those peculiarly, who waited for the Seed promised to them, therefore the promises of the Law

included faith at least by a certain silent condition. Wherefore as touching those le∣gal promises, in which the holy Prophets held out unto them, that repented and were con∣verted, pardon and many other benefits, in these must be considered, not only what is promised, but also, to whom the promise is made, as being such, as belonged not to others, but those only, who being descended from the Seed of Abraham, were contained in the Convenant, and had a right to the Lamb slain from the beginning. Therefore according to the authority of Augustin, we ought always to look to the root in such promises, and the mind should always be raised up to the Media∣tor of the New Covenant, in whom alone all the Promises of God are yea and Amen. Which seeing it is so, and seeing all the Pro∣mises of Eternal Life are contained in this only Mediator Christ, as in the only Ark of the Covenant, neither is there any faculty given us by God, which attains to the knowledge of Christ and the understanding of his benefits, but faith only; therefore it is, that this illu∣minated faith, which only leads us to the know∣ledge of Christ, claims to it self only all power of Iustifying without any other means, not so much because of the dignity of its act, or upon some account of charity joined with it, whereby it should be formed,

but only upon the account, and by the vertue of its object, unto which it is bent, from whence it receives all this power of healing, just as the Israelites of old, when they were en∣venomed with deadly Poison, regained their health, not because they had Eyes and a power of beholding, but because they fastned their Eyes at the command of God upon the Serpent, that was set up before their Eyes. In like manner also it comes to pass to us, that whereas it is Christ only, that bestows ever∣lasting Life and Righteousness on them that behold him, and he be∣comes not a Saviour, unless he be received by Faith, hence the inward sight of Faith being fixed upon him, brings Salvation. Whence by evi∣dent demonstration, an argument is framed from principles and causes, issuing into conclusions by necessary consequence ac∣cording to Scriptures. As this,

Ma. The only beholding of the Serpent set up, without any other condition being added, healed the wounded.

Mi. Christ is the Serpent set up for us; Therefore,

Concl The only beholding of (that is, faith in) Christ set up for us, without any additions what∣soever brings healing to our wounds.

And I know the adversaries will not deny that Christ is the only

Serpent, who being made a Curse for us, makes a Medicine for our Wounds. But if you ask, how? They will answer one thing, and the holy Scriptures another: they affirm that this is performed on this account, because Christ be∣ing punished for us on the Cross, hath by his Merits obtained for us the infusion of Charity. Which because it is the perfection of the Law, therefore being acquired by the Merit of Christ, and received by our free-will, it brings forth righteousness, not that, whereby we are accounted for just, but whereby we are both truly just, and deserve life. But verily this Sophism neither agrees with the History of the Israelites, nor satis∣fies the argument propounded. For if those that were then wound∣ed by the Serpents, by only behold∣ing the Serpent without any other intermediate cause, received present health: verily either this type bears not the similitude of Christ, or Christ heals us by faith in his name only without interposing the remedy of Charity. Otherways the mutual proportion of similitude between us and them, between Christ and the Serpent, will not rightly agree. They lifted up their outward eyes, we our inward, they to the serpent, we to Christ. Both by beholding obtain health through the Promise of God; they the health of their Bodies, we of our Souls. They presently in beholding at the first sight, were healed in the same moment, by no en∣deavour of their own, but only upon the ac∣count

of the Object, and by vertue of the Promise. And what other thing doth this mysti∣cal adumbration signifie, but Iustification freely prepared and promised to us, by the sole con∣templation of the Object, whereby we appre∣hend Christ by Faith? Will you hear the Promise? That every one who seeth him may not perish, but have eternal Life? And elsewhere. And this righteous servant of mine by his knowledge shall Iustifie many. But what is it to see him, but to believe in him? What is the knowledge of that righteous one, but the Faith of Christ, which Iustifies from sin? There∣fore what external aspect was to them, that the light of Faith is to us. What Health was to them, Iustification is to us, whereby we are delivered from the Curse of sin, and are ab∣solved without punishment. But if you ask, what way? There is an answer in readi∣ness to wit, according to the very simili∣tude of the Serpent, not by any labour of ours, but by contemplation of the Object only, and by vertue of the Promise. I pray you what is more evident? What more agreeable? And what then should be said to those ill-employed men, who by their new doctrine translate Free Iustification, which is due only to Faith by vertue of the Promise of God, unto works of Charity.

Of Sin and the healing thereof by Christ.

FOR Andradius, Hosius, Vega the Spaniard, and those others of the same Faction con∣federate with these, seem so to contend about the Righteousness of Charity, that having al∣most banished Faith out of the City of Rome, they place all the parts of our Salvation, or at least the chiefest in Charity and Sanctification. And now by what Scriptures will they demon∣strate that? What, say they, doth not Christ heal us just as the Brazen Serpent healed the Wounds of those that were hurt? Were we not all healed by his stripes? Is not he the Lamb that takes away the sins of the World? Is not he the Life-giving Serpent, who gives cure for our wounds? And what are our Wounds, say they, but Sin? What is the healing of Wounds but the puting away of Sins? What then, shall the Serpent be more power∣ful in fixing his sting, than Christ in taking it out? Shall Alam be more powerful to infect Nature, than Christ to cleanse it? But how is nature purged, if yet the contagion of sin re∣mains? As in a diseased body, unless the hurt∣ful humours are purged off, health is not re∣covered, and as the Air being surrounded on every side with black darkness, begins not to shine, before the brightness of the Sun being returned the darkness vanishes: In like man∣ner

in the inward diseases of minds, the causes of maladies must first be taken away, before health is restored. But the causes of evils are sins, which if they are taken away by Christ, how can they remain in the Saints? But if they abide not, by necessary consequence then it follows, that the roots of all sins being cut away, they are righteous in the sight of God by that righ∣teousness, not which is imputed, but which properly inheres in them, which is free of all spot of sin, which carefully observes the Law, which informs the mind with Cha∣rity, and beautifies it with Divine Ornaments, and makes us partakers of the Divine Nature. But let us put all these together for brevities sake into the exact form of an argument.

Sin abolished doth not remain.

In the Baptized, and in those that are come to years, who are converted, sin is abolished. Therefore,

After Baptism and in those that are come to years after true conversion, there remains no more sin.

This argument having a bad con∣nexion, doth evidently destroy it self. First, there is no man that denies that actual sin is not abolished in Baptized Infants, in whom it is not committed. In those come to years, if all sins are so extinguished, that no relicks remain, what need is there of any con∣version?

For what place is there for repen∣tance, where nothing is committed contrary to duty? What if the Life of the Saints is no∣thing else, but almost a daily conversion and mourning for sin, how can a daily frailty of sinning be wanting there? But let us look upon the parts of the Argument. Sin abolished, say they, doth not re∣main. That is true indeed if per∣fect and compleat abolishment of sin be understood, both as to the Material of Sin, and as to the Formal, as the Schools speak. Therefore as touching the Major, in so much I acknowledge, sin doth not remain, in how much it is abolished in the Saints. But after what manner, and in what order it is abolished in the Baptized and in the adult, it follows next that this should be en∣quired into in the Minor.

Therefore I answer to the Minor with a di∣stinction, that sin is said to be abolished in the Adult that are Regenerate, it is partly true and partly false, with a different respect had to divers circumstances; But how that is un∣derstood it must be explained, first; as touching the death of the Me∣diatour, which brings Salvation, there is no defect in that, but it hath abundantly recover∣ed whatsoever perished by Adam: yea it hath brought us much greater benefits, than the evils which Adam procured unto us. But if it be asked how, and in what order the Death of

Christ effects this? I answer, not by denying, but by distinguishing. For seeing two things are conside∣rable in every sin, the guilt oblig∣ing, or the punishment of damna∣tion, which Lombard calls passive corruption: and then active corruption, or the very act of sin, or the infirmity of corrupted nature. Therefore there is again a twofold remedy prepared for this twofold evil, guilt Obliging to eternal punishment, is not only taken away in the life to come, but also in this life, by the holy laver, and continual re∣mission of sins for the sake of a Mediator. But the infirmity of sinning, which is con∣cupiscence in the flesh, and ignorance in the mind, (that I may speak with Hugo) it also is abolished in the regenerate, but yet after its own order, and by its own degrees. For it is daily diminished in this Life by the renewing of the Spirit, and it shall be abo∣lished in the Life to come, by the Resurrection of the Flesh. In the interim the relicks of in∣firmity stick yet in the Flesh, as both Death and Temporal punishments stick yet in the Flesh, to exercise the Saints unto Combat; not to condemn them to destruction. Iust as the Land of Canaan was promised to the Hebrews a great while before, which yet they did not suddenly take possession of: Neither was the frame of this World made immediately in one moment, but the Works of God were per∣fected in distinct intervals of Days: So nei∣ther

is the whole Flesh suddainly renewed, but by degrees, and daily increases, it is going on unto perfection.

An example may be conveniently taken from him, whom being Wounded, the Samaritan, cap. 10. Luc. doth not suddainly cure, but first pours Wine into his Wounds, washes off the Blood, afterwards he adds Oyl, that he may mitigate the grief, and the Wound may be∣gin to cleave together: Afterwards the Wound being bound up, he puts the Sick-man upon the Beast, and afterwards commands him to be cured in the Inn. Iust so Christ suffer∣ing the punishment of our Sins in his Body, by remission immediately takes away the guilt from us, pouring into our Wounds the gladning Oyl of the Gospel, joined together with the Wine of serious Repentance; whereby what∣soever is deadly in the Wounds, is washed away with a health restoring Pardon: But the Wounds are not yet altogether healed. But health will be compleat in Eternal Life. In the interim he will have diseases cured in the Church by Godly Exercises, the Cross, and constant Prayer. Briefly, if those Men desire to know what that is, which Christ hath abolished in us by his Death, I will say it in a word.

Whatsoever was laid upon Christ on the Cross, to be carried away for our sakes, that is taken away from us in this Flesh.

Only the guilt and punishment of Sin, not the matter it self of our actions was laid upon Christ to bear upon the Cross.

The act or substance of sin, is not wholly abolished by the Death of Christ in this flesh, but only the guilt and punishment of sin.

Or more briefly let them take it thus: What∣soever Christ by dying did bear for us, that only he took away by his death in this Life. Christ by dying did bear only the punish∣ment of our Sins, not the Sins themselves in his Body, whereof he had none. Therefore Christ in this Life took away only the punishment, not the matter it self of sin by his Death. But after∣wards by his power he shall also take away the whole matter of Sin in the Glory of the Resurection to come.

Concerning the necessity of the practice, and care of good Works.

THerefore in this place something hath been said of Faith, and all that manner of Righteousness; which the Divine Authority attributes to Faith only without Works. More things elsewhere have been explained by us in other Books: From which things just con∣clusions being drawn, it evidently appears, if I am not mistaken, wherein all our righte∣ousness consists, not in Works without Faith, nor joined together with Faith, but wholly in

Faith without Works; that is, without the merits of Works, or any condition of meri∣ting. For if Faith, which is nothing else but an internal and illuminated contemplation, and receiving of Christ the Son of God, receives a free promise of Life in him; I do not well see what the good deeds of our Life, thought ex∣cellent, can perform in this part of justification. Yet it doth not follow from hence that the Holy practice of good Works for necessary uses, that I may speak with Paul, is not upon any account necessary. Neither is it a reason forcible e∣nough, if any Man teaches that no trust should be put in Works, that therefore there is no need of any care to do good: For what Logick is this? Works should not be trusted in when they are performed: There∣fore there is no need to endeavour to perform Good and Holy Works. We are no other ways justified but upon the account of Faith which is in Christ Iesus: Therefore Offices of Piety are not necessary in those, who are justified by Faith. Faith only, not upon the account of Love, but of the Mediatour, pro∣motes us to righteousness; There∣fore, it profits nothing, to repent, and to weep and mourn for sins committed: It is of no concern∣ment after what manner every one leads his Life; for so you seem to gather, and not you only, O Osorius, but also as

many as being like to you, bear an enmity to Luther. And hence such fierce out-cries of yours a∣gainst him, such odious and bitter ragings, reproaches, evil reports, and outragious invectives, being filled not so much with Evil Speeches, as most filthy Lyes. But this is no new nor strange thing, either because you are of your old temper and dis∣position, or because it is, and always was the condition of the Gospel, which hath already been accustom∣ed enough to such like Enemies and reproaches. So Saul persecuted David a most moderate Prince, by whom he had never been hurt. So when Christ was born, Herod was troubled, and all Ierusalem with him: By the like fury Christ himself, the Prince of the Church, was slain. So of Old, Stephen was Stoned: The same also did the Ancient Mar∣tyrs of all Times, hear from their own People, which Luther now and other Ministers of Gods Word are forced to hear, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, take a∣way these Enemies of the god's; yea also that Divine Martyr, Iohn Huss, of latter memory, was brought forth to Death in a manner not unlike that, whereby Luther is brought forth by you after his Death: For they Cloathed him with odious Pictures of Devils, and abo∣minable Titles. Neither is Luther here handled much more handsomly by you; being Cloath'd with most vain Lyes, and set forth by you in such Colours, not as he really was, nor as his

Writings had persuaded you concerning him, which it seems you have not read, but as other accusers, to whom you use to give too much credit, have described him: For what other thing declares this your narrative which is curi∣ously fitted for calumny, whereby you make him liker a Monster, than a Man, as if he brought in a certain new kind of Faith, that was not heard of before, and was unknown in former times, as if he were an ex∣ample of Wickedness, an encou∣rager of Slothfulness, an Turbulent Person, and disturber of Religion, and trampled upon all Actions worthy of Praise, and exercises of Eminent Vertue; as things of no worth, and condemned Pious Tears, and judged those Men abominable and Wicked who wept and mourned for their Ini∣quities; or upon any account lamented the Sins they committed.

And as if he taught a certain new way of Sal∣vation, and such a one, as neither requires works of vis nor any sorrow, neither occasions any trouble to sinners, but teaches that confidence alone is sufficient, to wit, such a confidence whereby every Wicked and Ungodly Man may be supposed acceptable to God, tho'he himself do not at all endeavour to restrain his wickedness, or pretend to any desire after Piety, but only so supposeth in his own mind, that he is dear to God. That the favour of God is prepared for all, yea for the unclean and Wicked, though

sin rules and reigns with an universal dominion over them. Moreover that Luther should think it a great Wickedness to lament Mans first ruine, or fall, and to fear punishment, &c. Besides other things also of the like sort, no less absurd than false, which being wrested by you to a wrong sense, you use to lay to his charge, not that they are really true of him, but they are puposely feigned by you, that by any means possible ye may render him odious to the igno∣rant People! But these cunning attempts of yours avail nothing; for the Writings and Ser∣mons of Luther are publickly known. There are also extant the publick Confessions of the Saxon. Churches, first presented unto Carolus Caesar, in the Assembly of Augusta. Anno. 1530. And after∣wards Anno. 1551. Shewed and offered to the Council of Trent, in which what they teach concerning the true way of Iustification, ac∣cording to the Word of God, what they Iudge and Preach of repen∣tance, and the Holy Fruits of good Works; by all which they do sufficiently de∣fend themselves against your frivolous calum∣nies, and most vain accusations, that there is no need of any other defence besides.

The opposite Assertions of the Adversaries, against the Free Imputation of Righteous∣ness produced and examined.

WHich things, seeing they are so, and sufficient defence hath been made for those of our Profession, let us proceed to that which remains.

We will then first declare the opposite asser∣tions and decrees of the Adversaries, what they say and judge concerning Righteousness, Faith, Grace, Repentance, and Works; and next we will compare their Opinion with ours, and both together with the holy Gospel of God, that it may be the more evident to the Reader, what should be judged of both. And here first come forth unto us Osorius, none of the meanest Champions in this Cause, all whose contention against Luther drives at this, to destroy all im∣putation of Righteousness, and to leave no other way of Righteousness but that which consists in works, and observation of the Law, and which might maintain according to the Decrees of Trent, that we are not only esteemed righteous, but also are really or inherently Righteous in the sight of God even unto justification. In which way of justifying he doth not exclude Faith and Grace, but he so mingles these toge∣ther, that the praise it self of Righteousness is founded on works, and all else so subservient, that Faith first goes before, that it may

only prepare and make way for the obtaining of Grace. And Grace afterwards follows, which brings forth good works in us, and then works themselves perfect, and compleat Righteousness. For after this manner doth Osorius dispute in his Third Book. And this is the sum of what he says, therefore seeing the Law either written on Tables, or received by Re∣velation, cannot take away the un∣bridled lust of the mind, and whilst lust re∣mains in its vigour, no man can by any means obey the precepts of the Law, which are given for our at∣taining Righteousness: Therefore it is that no man relying only on the help of the Law can be holy, unless he be furnished with the immediate help of the Holy Spirit against lust; and farther, because we obtain this Divine help not by the Law, but by Faith. Therefore it is, that all actions of Cha∣rity are called works of Faith, not of the Law; both by other Divine Wri∣ters, and also by Paul; who frequently by the name of Faith understands all Offices of Charity, &c. You have here a Specimen of the Osorian Righteousness, so described by him, that Righteousness seems to consist not at all in Faith with∣out Works but in Works, which are called Works of Faith not of the Law. Which Righteousness whoso wants, he denies that it is possible for him to be re∣ceived into the favour of God, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chiefly upon this Argument; Because that Divine Na∣ture

being most holy, and most pure, and which can endure no filthiness of Iniquity, it behoveth him therefore that would enjoy the presence thereof, to conform himself unto the same Image: for there is no Communion between light and dark∣ness, there is no union between the ho∣liness of righteousness, and the wicked∣ness of unrighteousness. Which seeing it is so, he therefore concludes that Luther, & they of Luther's Party do err, first in this, that they dare assert that sin in those, whom that infinite purity hath united unto it self, by a most Holy Love, is not wholly removed, nor altogether abolish'd and pluck'd up by the roots, nor all its fibers quite extirpated. And also that they affirm that a Law is laid upon us by God, which cannot be kept. In the one of which the Divine Clemency and Bounty is distrusted: In the other, abominable reproach is cast upon his Infinite Power and God∣head.

Concerning Righteousness, and its definition given by Osorius, and others.

THou hast, ingenuous Reader, the whole Model of Osorian Righteousness described in a short compend: in which, what is true and what is faulty, it remains that we should exa∣mine with like brevity according to the Rules of Evangelical Doctrine, beginning first at the

very definition of righteousness, because there∣upon depends the substance of the whole Con∣troversie. For so Osorius defines Righteousness, that it is a state of Soul founded on the Law of God, and that bears a clear resemblance to the immutability of the Divine Vertue. In like man∣ner also Andradius not much differ∣ing from him. Righteoufness, saith he, is an unmoveable equity, and go∣vernment of mind, which measures all its actions and counsels by the Law of God. And the same again presently: Righteousness is a habit of mind fashioned by the Divine Law to obey that Divine Law and Will, as it perswades to perform the Offices of every vertue, &C. So that I need not here gather together the de∣finitions of others of the Party, of whom I find so many to be of the same Opinion, that they think a Righteous Man should be defined from works of Righteousness, just as a wise Man from Wisdom, a Musician from Musick; and other Artificers are formally denominated from the internal Skill they have in those Arts, and wherewith they are endued, as saith Tapperus; which would not seem very blame-worthy to me, if they understood this of the Divine Righteousness, whereby God is Righteous, or wherewith Angels are accom∣plished. But as touching our Righteousness, who are Men, and Sinners, this definition hath no place here at all.

Therefore that I may answer you, Osorius, and yours to these things, first I think you are not a little de∣ceived in examining the nature of Righteousness, not that any thing is put in the definition that I call false, or that it doth not agree to the thing de∣fined. For he that governs all his actions with such constant reason and equity, that in no part of his life he starts aside from truth and righte∣ousness, him I do esteem to be truly Righteous, yea to be God rather, or next to God; ve∣rily I find no mortal man such. Therefore herein is your errour, that whereas there is a two-fold and divers sort of Righteousness set before us in Scripture, the one which is of the Law, and peculiar to God; the other which is of Faith, and peculiar to us; you are only so taken up in defining the one, that you do not at all touch upon the other, a∣bout which the chiefest matter of Controversie is here: And so you proceed in setting forth the perfect excellency of the Divine Righte∣ousness, and justly so indeed to be accounted of, that in the mean while you leave no Righte∣ousness to Man at all. For what Righteousness shall Man have, if Righteousness be so strictly defined, that it cannot consist, but of works of perfect Righteousness, nor be communicated but only to perfect men? For now seeing no men are so perfect in this World, but that this miserable depravation of our Nature

is far from this exactness, and there is none (as Augustine witnesseth) as long as he is in this life, who pretends himself to be just in the sight of God. By necessary Consequence it follows, that either there is no Righteousness of ours at all in this life, or it must be another than that which your defini∣tion thus circumscribes to us; for thus you de∣fine it.

That it is an excellent state of mind conformed by the Divine Law, founded upon Divine Prescription, free from all wickedness, and coming near in its re∣semblance to the Divine Nature, &C. And in∣deed in that state we were Created in the beginning. But we have lost it long since, neither are we yet perfectly restored, but we shall be restored at length by the Divine power and bounty of Christ, on the day that this our corruption shall put on incorruption, and this mortal body shall rise again to immortality. In which state of Resurrection we believe with Augustin, that we shall fulfill Righte∣ousness, that is, we shall have com∣pleat Righteousness. In Comparison of that Resurrection, saith he, the whole life, that we now live is but dung, &c. And where now is that excellent habit of mind, coming so near in its resemblance to the Divine Nature? Where is that constant equity of reason, and moderation of mind free from all sin? Or what do you think

of this life, which Isaiah calls a menstruous cloth, and Augustin calls dung, if it be compared with that which is true Righteousness.

Whereby you do evidently discern, as I sup∣pose, what comes of this your famous Theolo∣gical Theory of Righteousness; for if there is no way of entring into the Kingdom of life but by Righteousness, and no Righteousness (ac∣cording to your Opinion) can consist but of a perfect observance of the Divine Law, and dignity of works, what follows then? You must either deny that we are sinners in this life, and assert that we are righteous by works; or if according to Scripture you confess us to be sinners, you must despoil us of all righteousness, and shut us out of the Kingdom of God? And what will you say to Augustin, who esteems all the Righteousness of this life as dung? What will you say to Isaiah, who says, it is as a menstruous cloth? What will you say to Paul, who accounted it as loss? What will you say to Christ, who calls them that acquit themselves most righteously, not only Servants, but also unprofitable Servants, if the Scripture evidently testifies that every man is a Lyar: If the belo∣ved Evangelist condemns him for a Lyar, who would seem to himself to be free from sin: If (according to the Te∣stimony of Paul) we have come short of the glory of God. If, as Iames testifies, in many things we offend all; if most holy Men in

Prayer cry daily, forgive us our sins; if Augustine doth manifestly deny that any man, after he hath obtained the remission of sins, hath lived so righteously in this flesh, or that he doth live so righteously, that he hath no sin at all: If with one mouth the publick consent of the most approved Fathers testifies the same; if moreover continual private con∣fessions, if Conscience it self, which is as a thousand Witnesses, convince even thy self to be a perpetual sinner, darest thou, who art a sinful man, confuted by thy own works, dream yet of the righteousness of works, and promise Heaven to thy self, and others by works? And doth not the example of the Pharisee in the Gospel affright you, who having been deceived by a false Opinion of his own Righteousness, and who whilst flattering himself, he thought he was not like other men, &c. He was yet so far from that which he perswaded himself concerning himself, that he went away worse than those whom he most despised in Compa∣rison of himself. But how much more mo∣destly would you behave your self, if with a humble meekness restraining that insolency of Spirit, you would either frame your self to the Example of David, who durst not come forth into the presence of God, or would put on that most humble mind of Tertullian, who comparing his Life with another Man, thou art a Sinner, saith he, like me, yea, a less

Sinner than I, for I acknowledge a pre-eminence in my sins, &c. At least you might and ought to be admonished by the sharp rebuke of the Laodiceans, who when they had highly flattered themselves with a false perswasion of their own righteousness, which they took upon them by works; They did not in any other thing more displease the Divine Iudgment; therefore Au∣gustin said right, let no man flatter himself: Let Man take Sin, which is his own, and let him leave Righteousness to God, &c.

But what is that, let him leave Righteousness to God; but aban∣doning all Righteousness of works, to confess our selves to be that which we are, sinners, and God only to be just? Which also Saint Paul doth more evi∣dently confirm in these words; to declare his Righteousness, that he may be just, and the justifier of him who Believe in Iesus. In which a two∣fold manner of Righteousness presents it self unto us; of which the one is Divine, and is attri∣buted to God only; the other is only referred to men. That therefore is peculiar to God, this is called our Righteousness; but what dif∣ference is between this and that, there is no great difficulty to discern. For that which is the Righteousness of God, appears evident in all his works, and the perfect exactness of his holiness. But that which is the Righteousness of men, is received by Faith only; not that

faith in acting is wholly without works, but because in justifying, works do nothing before God, and that is it which the Apostle seems to to intend in these words: saying, for this pur∣pose that he may be just, and the justifier of him, that is of the faith of Iesus Christ, &c. For this purpose, saith he, that he may be just; how is he just? by faith? no, but by works; that thou mayest be justified in thy say∣ings, and mayest overcome when thou art judged. But now what way are we justified? by works? not at all, but by Faith. Concern∣ing which the Apostle: A justifier of him who is of the faith of Iesus Christ, &c. He said not, him that behaved himself well by working, but him that is of the faith of Iesus Christ Whence a Disciple being witness, whosoever shall believe in Christ with a direct and intent faith, it follows by necessary consequence that this Man is esteemed Righteous, and is justified before God. For otherwise, to what purpose should God be said to justifie us by Faith, or what need would there be here of any mention of faith at all, if holy works of themselves were sufficient to make up a Righteousness?

By all which, things being thus deduced and confirmed, it is easie to understand what should be judged of this your definition. For if there is no other Righteousness, but that which by your definition is placed in holy works, and a

perfect obedience to the Law of God: it thence follows, that either we are not tainted with any sins at all, or that we must necessarily confess that we are excluded from all possession of Righteousness. Both of which are false; for though Sin and Righteousness, in respect of one and the same thing, through a mutual Antithesis, whereby they are opposed one against another, cannot come together, yet nothing hinders, but we may be both Sinners, and also Righteous upon a different account. You will say, how can that be? If you know not, (my good Friend,) I will tell you, and in a word, that you may understand the more expeditiously. We are Sinners in our selves, we are Righteous inChrist. Hereunto belongs the Mystery of Christ the Son of God given to us by his Father, that he with all his works and benefits may become wholly ours, for our right, and for our advantage. So he is said by the Prophet to be born; so he is said to be given, not to himself, but to us: So he was Righteous, so he fulfilled the Law, so he died and rose again, that his life might be to us Righteounsness, his death might be Redemption, and his Resurrection might be Life and Glory. Moreover, whatsoever is Christ's, yea, whatso∣ever Christ. is, is not so much his own as yours; O Osorius! as mine, and as it is all ours that by Faith are Iesus Christ's. Therefore our

Salvation consists of the Redemption purchas'd by another, and not of our works. For herein shines forth the more than stupendious mercy, and un∣speakable Grace of a most tender hearted God, that he even dedicated his only begotten Son wholly to our advantage, that so whatsoever was performed by him, was performed not for his sake, but for ours; neither had it respect to him who had no private need, but it re∣dounds as a publick good to us all, because he sustains the publick per∣son of All before his Father. Where∣fore if you desire to know, what is our Righteousness! Paul and Peter will shew it to you much better than it was defined by you. For our Righteousness is Christ, our righ∣teous Lord, through whose name, as many as believe in his name, receive Remission of sins. What more, I pray you, would you require unto perfect Righteousness, than that sins may never be imputed, and that the punish∣ments due to your sins may never be inflicted on you?

Concerning Inherent and Imputed Righ∣teousness.

BUT perhaps it is not enough to you, that the sins you committed are not imputed to you, but that nothing may be committed, which may be justly imputed. And for that

cause you think no man should be reckoned among the Iust, but he, whose life being upon all accounts untainted, is conformable to the perfect rule of the Law, having abolished the foot-steps of all sins. And indeed that should be wished for, if wishes in this case could do any good: But you will say that it is not difficult to the Infinite Power of the Almighty God, to give strength to perform it to those that ask it of him: And again there is not any thing more unsuitable to his Infinite Equity, and less honour able to his Infinite Goodness, than that he should command his Ser∣vants those things, which he knows cannot be observed by them.

But in answer, First, If those things cannot be kept by us, which are commanded by God, that comes not to pass through any default of his, but through our default: who being at first created by him, very good, brought this disability upon our selves, and threw our selves into that necessity of sinning. And then what if it so seemed good to his Omnipotent Wisdom, to do thus for a Declaration of his own Righteousnes, as St. Paul teaches, for this purpose that he should be Righ∣teous? that is, that his Righteousnes might by this means become the more evident through our unrigh∣teousness, which could not other∣ways have been, unless he only had,

been declared to be Righteous, and we upon the same account Unrighteous according to Works. Which if it had not been so, what need had there been, why he should justifie us by Faith, whom he had seen to be righteous and perfect by Works?

Yea, you say there is very great need of faith, and you add a reason: Because all the means of destroying and restraining Lust consists in the Grace of God alone, which must be obtained by Faith: and there is no other way shewed to extinguish and destroy it. There∣fore Faith, as you say, prepares the Mind for Righteousness, and makes it fit, that the great author of all good things should bring into it the seed of righteous∣ness.

What? And does Faith nothing but prepare us for Righteousness? But now, what way does it prepare? Because, say you, the Grace of God is obtained by Faith and the merit of Christ. But proceed; what follows after? For it is God only, by whose Almighty Power and Bounty we break the force of Lust, and restrain all its importunity, and maintain the perfect Offices of Vertue, &c. Who ever denied, that it is God only that can do those things? But what say you. O good friend? Is our whole Salvation and Righteousness in the sight of God, contained in that only, in driving out of the Mind those little Heats of all evil Lusts, whereof you speak,

in abolishing the roots of all vices, and in main∣taining duely and constantly the office of perfect Vertue.

How far the Works of Human Life are from the perfection of Righteousness.

But now, do you your self perform all these things, which you require in us for the perfection of righteousness? Hath the great Husbandman watered the happy ground of your mind, with so great a vigor and ver∣dure of his bounty, that no wild Vines nor Briars do any where appear in all your life? That no Lust draws you aside from your duty? No perturbation of affections throws you down from your state of constancy? No concupisence of the eyes defiles the purity of your mind? He that seeth a Wo∣man, saith he, to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his Heart. What if a man is accounted unchast before God, if so much as his Eyes are Adulterous, if he is next to a Mur∣therer that is so much as rashly an∣gry at his Brother; if he that calls his Brother Racha, or bespat∣ters the name of his Neighbour with the smallest reproach, is in dan∣ger

of the Council; what shall be said to him, who hath poured forth, not only volumes of reproaches, but Cart-loads of spiteful speeches against his Brethren and fellow Servants, with so much virulency and gall of bitterness? So that I need not here go through all the Precepts of the Divine Law, as concerning loving God above all, concerning the strictest love to our Neighbour, concerning shunning offences, put∣ing up injuries, praying for enemies, the abdi∣cation of this World, the framing the Life to a Dove-like simplicity, and other such like things. Which things, seeing they are so various in kind, and so difficult in the observation; I would know of you, not what ought to be done, but what you your self do express in deeds: Not what the Divine Grace is able to do in you, but what it does in effect: Whether he heaps you up with so many and so great gifts of his, that you are able to perform all things, that are written in the royal Law. Which if you can avouch so to be, I willingly congratu∣late your happiness, and I am not at all against your obtaining by way of merit, that which your works do merit, but that you may go up to the Kingdom, and may take your self Un∣pinioned Wings, as Arnobius saich wherewith you may go happily to Heaven, and 'may fly to the Stars, where you may reign with Christ, and you only, all other sinners being shut out, may with God overcome, when you are judg∣ed. But in the interim here it comes into my mind to ask you a thing, How will this

consist with that which the Church sings in a holy Hymn, and sings so aright: Thou only art holy? For how shall he only have the praise of that thing, as saith Hierom, which he hath common to himself with many? What if you think there is no difference between his Righteous∣ness and ours, and you suppose there is no Righ∣teousness but what proceeds chiefly from Works; either let your life shew to us the same Works, which Christ wrought, or if you cannot, let him only have the honour of this Ti∣tle, that Christ only may be righteous, and Oso∣rius may confess himself to be unrighteous and à sinner, that now that saying may truely have place here, which just now I cited out of Augustine. Let man take sin, to himself, which is his own, and leave Righteousness to God.

But, you will say, what then, is there no Righteousness which belongs to men? I do not deny that there is, but it is such a righteousness, as must be sought elsewhere than in works. But you may say, where then? Not only I, but also St. Paul will tell you, the Righteousness of God, saith he, to all, and upon all that believe. And again in the same Epistle: The Gentiles which followed not after Righteousness, laid hold on Righteousness, to wit, the Righ∣teousness of Faith: On the contra∣ry, Israel which followed after the

Law of Righteousness, attained not unto the Law of Righteousness. Why so? Because they sought it not by Faith, but as by the Works of the Law. And writing to the Galatians, knowing, saith he, that a man is not justified by the Works of the Law, but by the Faith of Iesus Christ, we also believe in Iesus Christ, that we may be justified by the Faith of Iesus Christ, and not by the Works of the Law, because no flesh shall be justified by the Works of the Law, &c. who is so dim∣sighted but he may clearly see what the mean∣ing of the Apostle is in these words? Where∣fore I the more wonder with my self, how great a stupidity darkens the minds of some of our own Country-men, and especially those Iesuits, who in a thing so perspicuous yield not unto A∣postolick Authority, so that they seem to have sallied out of some Trophonian Den, for no other purpose, but that waging War with St. Paul, they may differ wholly from him in their opinion. For what things can more fiercely encounter than such an opposition as this, Christ is our Righteousness? Faith is impu∣ted for Righteousness: If of Work, then Grace is not Grace. The Iust lives by Faith. And after this manner doth the Apostle and Prophet instruct us. What, say they? We are Iustified by Works, and yet Grace is no less Grace. The Iust doth not live by Faith, but the Believer Liveth by the righteousness of

Works. And whereas Paul doth so attribute our Righteousness to Faith only, that he attributes no∣thing to Works, so often repeat∣ing these exclusive words, without works, apart from works, not ac∣cording to works. If it is Grace, then it is not of Works: That I may be found in him, not having my own Righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is of the Faith of Iesus Christ: To him that believeth in him that Iustifies the Ungodly, Faith is imputed unto Righteousness: also placing Iews and Gentiles as in a Scheme, that by experience it self it may be evident how hazardous it is, to seat the hope of Salvation any otherways than in the Faith of Christ only. On the contrary, those men overthrowing all these sayings of Paul, endeavour this only by all the means they can, that they may measure the whole sum of our Iustification by the performance of Works, and not by Faith; that they may take away all imputation of the Righteousness of another from us, that Faith may no more contribute any thing to Righteousness, but that it may render us worthy and fit, on whom the Divine Grace should. confer freely for the Merit of Christ, the first infusion of inherent Righteousness. By which new qualities being received for the Merit of Christ, now man himself by that inherent Righteousness (as their words ex∣press it) merits a greater and fuller righteous∣ness, reconciliation and adoption, and at length

Life Eternal. Moreover, they proceed so far, that they assert, there is no Righteousness at all, but that which is peculiar to every man, and they so define it, that in all the nature of Righteousness there is no place at all for faith, and there appears not so much as any mention thereof. For thus they define it, the righ∣teousness of God, which is reveal∣ed in the Gospel, is a vertue in God which distributes to every one according to their deserving. Al∣phonsus adds, Evangelical righteous∣ness is an equal proportion of merits to re∣wards.

I beseech you, Pious Reader, those that pro∣fess such vile and absurd things, will any man suppose that they have been exercised with se∣rious meditation at any time in the holy Scrip∣tures, or that they have not rather bestowed their whole age and wits in Heathenish and Ari∣stotelian trifles? But now it will not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 amiss to take notice with what props of reason they confirm these their opinions.

Against the Iesuits and their Topick Argu∣ments, whereby they confirm Inherent Righ∣teousness out of Aristotle.

WHAT, say they, have you not at any time read that form of reasoning in Aristotle? He is righ∣teous, therefore he is endued with righteousness; Such a man is learned, therefore he hath learning? We have read it, Say they, in the Topicks of Aristotle. That is true indeed. But have ye not also at any time read in the Epistles of Paul, these forms of speaking, Christ is our Righteousness? We are made the righteousness of God by him? faith is imputed unto righteous∣ness? the Iust shall live by faith? What then? Shall we believe Ari∣stotle more than Paul? We believe Fishermen, Saith Ambrose, not Logicians. And should we translate our Faith, which we owe to God with faithful Abraham unto men that are Sophisters? But now, lest those Iesuits should say, that they are not answered, let us look more nearly into the force of their argu∣ment, and pierce them through with their own Dart. They deny that ever this external attribu∣tion was heard of since the World was; that a thing should receive a name extrinsically from qualities, that can be within, so that they should be accounted righteous before God, not by inherent qualities,

but the righteousness of another, to wit, Christs, which is applyed to us by Faith, &c. And in∣deed this Reason taken out of Aristotle, might perhaps be of some force, if they had omitted these words (before God.) But now seeing there is a twosold and divers righteousness, the one which is called the righteousness of the Law, the other which is called the righteous∣ness of Faith; and seeing the judgments of God and the judgments of men do differ, they do foolishly and ridiculously argue from hu∣mane things to divine, from the righteousness of the Law, to the righteousness of Faith; for men are not justified in the sight of God upon the same account that they are esteemed righ∣teous before men. Yea, oft-times it happens otherways, that those whom this World does most cry up, and judges just by their inherent qualities, God condemns the same men chiefly of unrighteousness out of those very same qua∣lities: and so on the contrary part, This may easily appear evident by the Example of the Pharisee and the Publican, either of which if they were to be valued according to the inherent merits of their life, what cause was there, I beseech you, why the Publican should go home more righteous than the Pharisee?

Even as with a like diversity the Scripture sometimes names them dead, whom humane Philosophy would judge to be alive, and in perfect health. Suffer ye, Saith he, the dead to bury their dead. But pray how dead? who,

unless they were alive, they could not bury their dead? What shall we then say? that the Scrip∣ture lyes, in calling them dead, which were alive? Or does that Iesuitical Rule rather lye, which judges those alive by reason of their in∣herent qualities, whom the Scripture calls dead? How shall these things, so contrary to one ano∣ther, agree together? But that it is one thing to live, to be dead, and to be righteous be∣fore God, and another thing before Men. The Books of Holy Scripture are full of such Ex∣amples, and they have been often heard of and seen by Men; and yet after all these things, those pleasant Gymnosophists deny, that this external attribution was ever heard of since the World was, that a thing should receive a name extrinsecally from qualities, whose nature is to be within. Is it so indeed that this was not heard of since the beginning of the World? what do I hear? have ye not then, good men, read these words of the Apostle in the Holy Scriptures of God? By the disobedience of one man many were made sinners; and again, by the obedience of one man many shall be made Righteous. I pray you, what is the meaning of these words, by the disobedience of one many are sinners? Again, by the obedience of one many are righteous? Does this attribution seem internal to you, or rather external? was that rebellion peculiar to Adam, or was it ours? If it was ours, how was it ours, but by external impu∣tation? What? when you hear these words of the Apostle: He made Christ to become sin

for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God through him, &c. Did either of us receive from qualities that can be said to be within; he, that he was made sin, or we, that we are called and made righteousness through him? Moreover, what is that, when the Publican in the Gospel is said to have gone to his house justified rather than the Pharisee? what was the cause why the one went away justified, and the other went a∣way unjustified? I think it came not so to pass by a habit of inherent righteousness, but upon this account rather, because the Publican con∣fessed his own unrighteousness, therefore of wicked he is made righteous; the other, be∣cause he seemed righteous to himself, through a false opinion of his own righteous∣ness, was manifested to be unrigh∣teous according to the testimony of Holy Scripture: The Righteous Man no sooner speaks than he accuses himself; and in another place, confess thy sins, that thou mayest be justi∣fied; therefore that aying of Augustine seems wor∣thy of Praise; this is the true way to perfection, if every man acknow∣ledge in truth, and confess in humi∣lity his own impersection. And Bernard spake no less to the purpose, who bids us consider the Pharisee praying; he was no Robber, said he, nor unjust, nor an Adulterer, nor careless of Fastings, nor un∣mindful of the poor, nor unthankful to God, what then was wanting?

This one thing was wanting, that he took no care to know what was wanting to him, but made the most of his own merit, and therefore re∣turned empty. On the contrary, the Publican, who emptied himself, and took care to bring an empty vessel, received the more plentiful grace.

By these things I suppose it is sufficiently evident, what this Righ∣teousness is, and of what sort, which makes us righteous before God, whether it is Christs or ours? If it is Christs, it is not ours? How then of works of our righteousness? If it is ours, it is not Christs: how is a man of wicked made righteous? If of wicked he is made righteous, that I may speak in the words of Augustine, what are the works of wicked men? Let the wicked man now boast of his works, I give to the Poor, I take nothing away from any man, &c. then thou art in this thy boast wicked, and thy works are none. These things said he, therefore it is a false Opinion, which men plead for, to wit, that a man cannot be cal∣led righteous by an external righteousness. Nei∣ther is it less Ass-like which those Balqamites do bray, who say, that it is the same thing for a man to be thus Righteous; as if a man should say, an Ass with the form of an Ass is a Mon; for by Faith we are called faithful, and by righteousness weare called righteous, &c. Be it so indeed, that no Man should rightly be called righteous, but upon

the account of Righteousness; what then, see∣ing Christ is our righteousness, is there not sufficient cause upon that account why we should be called righteous? should any man require a better righteousness than that which is Christs? And what form of expressing, though external, can hinder, but that the righteousness which is peculiar to Christ, may also be called ours, and may be common both to him and us, especially seeing he is wholly ours with his merits, ver∣tues, benefits, and all his goods? which qualities, though they are not properly in our selves, yet being received from him, they pass like∣wise into our possession. As the Bodies of the Stars and Planets, though dark of themselves, yet they shine and are made bright, not with their own, but anothers light, to wit, being inlightned with the light of the Sun; just so it comes to pass to us, that we are made Righteous, Kings, Priests, Sons and Heirs of God, not by any property of our nature or condition of works, but because the Son and Heir himself is said to be made Sin and a Curse for us, not for any sin inherent in him, but im∣puted to him.

Argument. But here again, and a∣gain those impure Sophisters object, that this was never heard from Ari∣stotle, and that it is not agreeable to reason, that he should be called

learned, that hath no learning, or righteous, that is not endued with righteousness. And perhaps that may seem true in moral vertue: Now seeing there is a twofold righteousness, as I have said, one which they call Ethick, a∣nother which is Theological, that consists in manners, this in faith; we must judge far other∣wise of this than of that. For the righteous∣ness of which Aristotle treats, as it is a moral vertue distinguished from prudence, courage, and temperance, thus it is referred to the ha∣bits of the mind and internal qualities, accord∣ing to which men are denominated of what sort they are by Philosophers.

And though we confess this to be true in some respect, it doth not at all hurt our cause nor discourage our enterprize in clearing this point.

For all this Controversie undertaken by us drives at this, that we should search for a righ∣teousness, which is no moral humane vertue, but which is a Spiritual Grace and gift of God, which is not ours, but which is proper to Christ; whence he only is called holy and just, and we are called justified in him, not upon the account of works, but faith, which God im∣putes for righteousness unto them that believe in his name. And hence it is rightly called the righteousness of faith, and there∣fore faith it self is righteousness; whereby we are accounted righ∣teous before God, being endued not with that external righteousness, about which those men Philosophize, but being beau∣tified

and adorned with a peculiar and most in∣ternal righteousness, which being so, who sees not that it is false and sophistical which those men take out of Aristotle; that we are justified by works, or should upon no account be called just? why so? because no man can be called just but upon the account of the righteousness, which every man possesses for his own in himself. For thus do those sharp-witted Men argue, who cannot endure the free justification of Faith. To whom, that I may make answer, let us hear this first from them: Whether faith, whereby we believe in Christ, seems to them a vertue or not? If they judge so, I ask whether it is a moral vertue, or a theological? And then whe∣ther it is internal, and inherent, being inwardly placed, or whether it should be called external? If faith is an internal thing, and the same is our righte∣ousness in the fight of God. Why then should not this seem an allowable form of arguing a∣gainst the Iesuites, who deny that we are other∣wise justified than by internal and inherent righteousness?

Argument.

Ma. Our Faith is Righteousness before God.

Mi. Our Faith is an internal and inherent vertue.

Concl. Therefore we are made righteous before God by an internal and inherent vertue.

But here again the Adversaries object, that they do not at all deny, but that Faith is an internal vertue in us, which nevertheless makes us faithful, but makes us not just. Why so? because we are said to be faithful from faith, but we are said to be righteous only from righteousness; O sweet and understanding men! as if those who are faithful in Christ Iesus, were not also just before our God, or as if these things should only be looked upon in their names, and needed not to be considered rather in their causes and effects. And what will they then say to these words of Paul, being ju∣stified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ? What if the cause being granted, the effect also must necessarily be grant∣ed, and faith is a justifying cause (as the Apo∣stle witnesseth) how can it be, that those who receive the name of faithful from faith, should not also upon the same account receive the cause of righteousnes, whence they are not only called righteous, but made so also in reality.

And these things we have said by the by, a∣gainst the objections of the Iesuits; who seeing they so strictly examine the Divine Theorems of our Religion, according to the Logical forms of arguing, it is reasonable that we also should keep them entangled, and expedite our selves out of their nets, as much as may be. Here therefore, seeing they require of us Arguments

conformed unto the modes of Aristotle, let them so receive them.

Argument.

Ma. Men from Righteousness are rightly and formally called Righteous.

Mi. The Faith of Christ is Righteousness imputed to us by God.

Concl. Therefore from Faith men are rightly and formally called righteous before God.

Again.

Ma. They that do justly should be called just before God.

Mi. They that believe in the Son of God do most justly.

Concl. Therefore they that be∣lieve in the Son of God, are deser∣vedly called just.

For what can any man do more justly, or more holily, than to be∣lieve in the only begotten Son of God, and to embrace him with all his faith, as the Gospel bears witness. This is the work of God, that ye should believe in him, whom he hath sent. And what Doctrine is more excellent, than to know Christ the Son of God aright, and the power of his Death, and Resurrection? Which knowledge, how much it is valued by God above all other disci∣plines and arts, it may appear by this, which is foretold unto us of Christ by the Divine Pro∣phet,

and my Righteous Servant, saith he, by his Knowledge shall justifie many. What if our Iustification is placed only in the know∣ledge of the Son of God, and the Faith of the Son is nothing else but knowledge Divinely In∣spired; what credit then should be given to those Iesuitical Sophisters, who neither admit of any external cause of justifying, nor acknow∣ledge any other but this, which they themselves place in Works.

And now what will they an∣swer to this Argument of Au∣gustin?

Ma. Whence we are saved, thence we are just.

Mi. By Faith we are saved and reconciled to God, and become Conquerors; according to that saying of the Gospel: This is the Victory, which overcomes the World; our Faith.

Conclu. Therefore, by Faith the name of Righteousness is rightly given to us, according to the Testimony of Augustin.

But those Praters will not yet hold their Peace, neither do they endure any either Internal or Ex∣ternal Righteousness, but this only which they de∣scribe in Works, and the observance of the Law: And they endeavour to prove it by this caption. First then as touching Faith, though that is an in∣ternal Vertue, yet they plead that it doth not o∣therways justifie, but upon the account of Cha∣rity. But thus they dispute concerning the righte∣ousness of Christ: Because it is not our own,

but is peculiar to Christ. There is no cause why a Man should take upon him the Name of Righteous, from that Righteousness, which is anothers; to wit, accord∣ing to the Law of Aristotle. Which how frivolous it is, and contrary to the Faith of the Gospel, it will not be difficult to demonstrate by very clear words of Scrip∣ture; for, to what purpose is the Divine Love Preached in the Gospel, and in the Prophets, to have given Christ his only begotten Son unto the World: Unless he had been willing to make us partakers together with him of all his Wealth, Vertues, Merits, and whatsoever good things belong to him? Whence Paul. He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him freely give us all things? What if Christ was given to us byhis Father, poured forth, exposed, and is wholly made ours, with all his goods and gifts, is there any thing in him, whether Wisdom, or Iustice, or Sanctification, or Life, or Victory, or Death, or any other thing besides, which we may not by a due right lay claim to as our own? If it is ours, upon what account then do those Gymnosophists Preach that it belongs not to us? Of which thing we may reason thus.

Ma. Whatsoever Christ did for us, is e∣steemed ours, just as if it had been done by our selves.

Mi. Christ fulfilled all Righteousness for us.

Conclu. Therefore all the Righteousness of Christ is ours by Faith, just as if it had been fulfilled by us.

It is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by the Example of Adam, that Christ's Righteousness is ours.

PErhaps the thing will appear more evident by Example. Let us look upon Adam, and in him let us behold the publick calamity of our Nature: And also let us contemplate Salvation restored again by the second Adam, from the ruine received by the first.

For, if the Doctrine and Force of contra∣ries be the same, according to Philosophers, it will be more easie by that means from the Evil of the one, to judge of the advantages of the other. Then let us compare both Adams with one another, The first Earth∣ly of the Earth, with this second Heavenly from Heaven! Who though in their whole Nature they are most different one from another: Yet by the singular Wisdom of God, it so comes to pass, that there is a wonderful resemblance between things that differ very much and the reason of our Salvation being restored,

agrees most aptly with the reason of the ruine received.

First, in this, that both were Originally Princes, and Authors of our Propaga∣tion, one of the Earthly and the other of the Heavenly. And then afterwards there was added another thing in which he was a wonderful Type and Image of Christ who was to come a long time after. How that came to pass we shall very well learn of Paul himself. As, saith he, by the Disobedience of one Man many were made Sinners: So by the Obedi∣ence of one, many shall be made Righteous: and doubling the same again and again in many words: As, faith he, by one Man Sin entred into the World, and by Sin Death came upon all Men, in that all have Sinned, &c. And presently: If therefore by the Sin of one Man, Death came upon all Men to Condemnation; in like manner by the Iustification of one Man, good is propagated unto all Men to the Iustification of Life. What is more clear than these words of the Apostle? The whole force and summ of the Argument drives at this, that the true Nature of our Righteousness is not due to our Vertues, but we must be beholden for it to the merit of another. Setting before us such a sense as this by Argument.

Argument.

Ma. In what manner Unrighteousness is propagated in the World, in the same manner also Righteousness comes.

Mi. Unrighteousness is propa∣gated by the Sin of one Man Only.

Conclu. Therefore, also Righteousness by the merit of one only, is derived unto all that are allied to Christ by Faith.

Otherways.

Ma. As the matter is between Adam and us, after the same manner is the matter be∣tween us and Christ.

Mi. The sin of one Adam is im∣puted to all his Posterity, yea, all those who transgressed not with him.

Conclu. Therefore: The Righteousness of one Christ is imputed to all his Posterity, to wit, that believe in him; though they did

not obey with him. Which things, seeing they are of themselves clear and conspicuous, the Point calls us to return to you, O most ex∣cellent Osorius, who seem either not to head carefully enough, or else perniciously to deny that which Paul Discourses of Imputation, so copiously and weightily: Where∣fore again, and again beseeching you, I appeal to this sacred Righte∣ousness, whereof you write, and also to the equity of your own humanity; that having somewhat cleared your Eyes, you may search more ex∣actly into the meaning of the Apostles debate, and the force of his reasons. And first, I would have you see, into this, what it is the Divine Apostle chiefly treats of here, what he breaths after, what he drives at by this simili∣tude, whereby he compares Adam together with Christ, and proposes him as a Type and Figure of Christ. But where there is a Type, it is necessary there should be something, which by certain agree∣ment of similitude may be an∣swerable to the Type. On the contrary, where there is no agreement, there is no Type: Where there is no significa∣tion, there is no similitude discerned. Now whereas the former Adam, bears a type and resemblance of him that was to follow; let us consider in what this similitude consists. What, in propagating sin?

Not at all in the very Nature of the Persons? What is more unlike? Where then is similitude? To wit, not in the persons, nor things themselves, but only in the manner of the thing. But it must be explained what that manner is: For herein lyes all the contro∣versie between us and the Papists. For other∣ways as touching the things themselves, and the Persons, we are well enough agreed in that, for there is no Man who is asked concerning Adam, and concerning Christ, but will answer concerning both, according as the thing is in truth, that he is by nature earthly, and in his life a Sinner, and that he brought upon us not only an Example, but also a cause of sinning by a certain venomous contagion of Nature. And on the contrary, that Christ is from Heaven Heavenly, and most pure from all defilement of sin, and that he only is the Saviour of the World. Concerning which, if I am not mis∣taken, there is an agreement between us and our Adversaries: But concerning the man∣ner how these either good or evil things, come to us from these two Originally, herein con∣sists all the matter of controversie between us. for as there are many who think we are no other way guilty, but that by the ex∣ample of sinning; we imitate Adam the first Author of Sinning; So you may see many, who think we are upon no other account righteous and acceptable to God; but that being helped by Grace, we attain unto Christs most Holy Works, and his most pure Innocency of

Life, or do very nearly resemble the same. Who though they seem to say something, yet is not all contained in that: For though good Education, and imitation wisely used, hath no small influence for the becoming Vertuous, where∣by it may come to pass, that some perhaps may seem less wicked than others, and in some respect to excel others in the praise of Piety: But imitation, or any instruction of discipline will never perform this: In short, nor any way besides will be sufficient for this, that you may shake form off your neck that which you drew from Adam, or that you should attain that which is in Christ, that is, that you should appear righteous in the sight of God; unless Christ come in to your succour another way, than by any of your endeavours how great soever You will say, After what man∣ner is all this? No Men can tell you that bet∣ter than St. Paul: For after what manner the former Adam ruin'd you, after the same manner the Second Adam Christ restores you. That first Author of your kind, whilest thou was not yet born, killed thee in the root by his, not by thy rebellion. and drew thee into misery and destruction. In Adam behold Christ, for in like manner, being born and having dyed for thee, by his won Innocency, not by thine, hath restored thee again to true 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and Paradice. As therefore the trans∣gression of Adam was imputed to thee, who didst not Sin, after the similitude of his trans∣gression:

So the Righteousness of Christ is imputed unto thee, who didst not Work after the similitude of Christ. In the one of whom behold the severity of Iudgment, in the other the ex∣cellency of Grace. What if this perhaps seems hard and strange to any Man in Adam, that I should suffer the punishment of another Man's Sin, and that those should be punished for the crime of another, who com∣mitted nothing. (For it must needs be another Mans crime; seeing I am deprived of Righte∣ousness not for my own fault, but for the fault of my Parent.) Let this same Man again, leaving Adam, cast back his Eyes upon Christ: In whom the bounty of a most plentiful cle∣mency makes amends, by a counterpoize for the severity of the former Iudgment: For from one Man Death passed upon all, on them also who sinned not: And justly, Though I do not so much regard merit here, I only consider the manner of the thing. Come then, let us compare the Type with the Anti∣type; from the disobedience of one Man, as I said, death passed upon all Men, who sinned not after his example; which is a thing that can∣not be denied. After the same manner again, from the Righteousness of one Man, Life is communicated unto all, who did not like him work Righteousness, which is agreeable by the like reason; for otherways Christ could not

agree to his Type. Here now consider, whosoever thou art, Christian Reader, whether the judgments of God in Adam should be more dreaded by thee, in which the severity of God imputed unto thee, being not yet born, that which thou hadst not committed, or mercy in Christ the Lord, should be more loved, who, tothee, not working, but believing in him, that justifies the wicked, imputes the Righteousness thou didst not de∣serve.

By which you see, worthy Man, if Paul the Apostle should be credited, how unworthy of any credit your Doctrine is, whereby you take away the Grace of all Imputation, and leave no Righteousness besides to miserable Sinners, but what every Man purchases by his own good deeds; which how true it is, let us examine by that place of Paul, which convinces you of a Lye, and a shameful Error by this most evident Argument.

Argument.

Ma. After what manner Christ was made sin for us, after the like manner we are made the Righteousness of God by Christ.

Mi. Christ was made sin for us no other way, but by Imputation only.

Concl. Therefore we are made Righteous before God no other way but by imputation only.

I beseech you? by your Chatholick Chari∣ty what will you say? or what will you feign, O most dear Osorius, to this so clear evidence of manifest Scripture? Do you not see that you are tyed on every side with Bonds that are Apostolick and wholly of Adamant? Now what Turning, what Hole to escape at can you find? Christ is made sin for us. Wherefore? That we might be made the Righteousness of God by him, saith the Apostle: Will you deny it? I suppose you will not: What way then was he made sin? Will you say by committing it? No, By Imputation then? Certainly it is so: Right indeed; What if he who knew no sin, is made a sinner before God, by the im∣putation of the sin of another? What, and shall not we who are by nature unrighteous, in like manner be made Righteous before God by the same dispensation of mercy and imputa∣tion? What can hinder but that as the rebel∣lion of one was imputed to us all to destruction, after the same manner the obedience of one may be imputed to us all for Salvation? Let your Wisdom consider what you should answer in this case, not only to me, but also to Paul. But now, that this may be more clear, first, you see this common and fatal necessitv of Dying, whereunto all mortal men are liable: which with the same Foot beats at the Gates of Kings Palaces, and at the Doors of Poor mens Cot∣tages. Now I would know of you. whence this cause and necessity of dying had its first original, and began to make havock? Whe∣ther through our fault, or the fault of another?

You will say, not through our fault. What if Death had snatched your self away in your Infancy, you had then deserved nothing your self: And yet was you not then born on that condition that you could dye? Verily many Infants and Innocents are dayly snatched away, who deserved nothing themselves, yet they were born on those very Terms that they were Mortal and lyable to dye at some time. Why so I beseech you? Unless it be because they proceed from him, the Transgression of which one Man was imputed to all, to suffer the punishment of Death; so that that is cause sufficient why you should dye, because you are propagated from him, who deserved Death; you will say by a hard enough Law. I also would fay the same with you, unless the same Iustice of the Eternal Deity had opposed an equal remedy to this great ca∣lamity, making amends for, and alfo over-balancing just severity with a like kind of mercy. You will say, what way? That way which St. Paul mentions in this place, he that knew no Sin, saith he, was made Sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God through him. What is that, I pray you, to be made sin for us, but to undergo what was due to our Sins? Which if the most merci∣ful Father condescended to Translate unto his only begotten Son, not for any demerit of his,

but for our sakes only. Verily it cannot be, neither is it agreeable to the Iustice of God, nor to reason neither, that he should punish both his own Son, and us also for our Sins; so that one of those two must needs follow, that if Christ hath made satisfaction for us, either Iustice hath nothing now in us, that it may accuse us of: Or if it have, it is false then, which is mentioned in this place by Paul: Christ was made Sin for us; and that is false, which we hear in the Prophet. And he shall bear their iniquities, &c. For how did he bear them, if they remain yet tobe born by us? Whence the Apostle concluding very well, he reasons to this purpose: That we might be made, saith he, the Righteousness of God through him, as if he had said; as Christ did bear our Sins, so also we do bear his Righteousness. He was punished not for his own Sins, but ours; in like manner we are endued with Righteousness, which is not ours but his.

In which thing the admirable Ar∣tifice of our Redemption is seen: Where Mercy encountering with Iustice doth so contend that it over∣comes also, and yet so overcomes, that in the mean while there is not made any violation of Iustice, but a just recompence for sins. For as unjust as it is, that he, who was free from sin, should suffer the punishment of sin for the guilty; It is again as unjust, that our sins already expiated in him for us, should again

be punished in us by the judgment of condem∣nation. And upon a different account how just it was, that the sin of one, who sustained the person of all nature, should be propagated unto all that came of him, and should be given to publick condemnation: Again, it is as agreeable to Iustice, that the obedience of one man, who undertook the cause and person of all men, should be likewise communicated to all rege∣nerated of him, to the imputation of righteous∣ness.

But you on the contrary plead, that it seems not to be just at all, that any man should seem just by another mans righteousness, who is un∣righteous himself. I answer to the contrary, and thus I plead; neither was it just that Christ being inno∣cent should be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 into the condemnation of Death, who was in himself free of all spots; You object to me the definite nature of Iustice: Which because it is a vertue, giving to every man according to his desert, therefore you argue that it cannot be, but it must measure unto all men by equal right, whatsoever is due to their merits: Be it so, and why then doth not this same justice, my good friend, distri∣bute to Christ the Son of God according to his deserving? Why is the innocent beaten with stripes? Why is he torn unjustly with pu∣nishments? wherefore contrary to his deserv∣ing, contrary to Right and Iustice is he drawn to the judgment of Death, and being innocent, is stretched forth upon the Cross? What can you answer me in this case? What say you?

What have you, whereby you may defend this distributive Iustice? What will Iustice it self bring for it self, which is the most exact and perfect of all things, so often proclaimed by you, and in so many books; Which it may probably make a pretence for the receiving of so great an injury? Except that it may say this only: That we, and the sins of us all, came under punishment in this one most innocent body of his, and there were with deserved punishments most justly recompensed by God.

Which unless it were so, Iustice it self had sinned against him most unjustly. Now the singular Provi∣dence of the Most High Artist hath governed the matter with that mo∣deration, that he did both wisely look to the glory of his own Son, and our Salvation, and also to his own justice, so that there is nothing wherein his Iustice may be accused, neither is any thing found in us, in which the very Law of Iustice may justly condemn us: Whence it is rightly said by the Apostle, that there is no condemna∣tion to them that are in Christ Iesus.

For otherwise, to what purpose did Christ dye, if he died not for sins and sinners? or how did he dye for sins, if the punishment of sin re∣mains to be suffered again by us? How was he made sin and a curse for us, if we yet fall under the Curse? Or what fruit will redound to us from this most Holy Sacrifice, if Christ by the

right of Redemption hath not taken away that which is due to our sins by the Law of Iustice? But if he took it away, where is then the condemnation due to Sinners? I speak of those Sinners, who being turned from their sins by serious Repentance, fly to Christ by Faith. But methinks I do already hear what your Divinity in this case will mutter against us: you will not deny that Christ died for us, and that our righteousness is placed in him, but yet so, that these benefits of his, and rewards of justice, come not to us by Faith, nor by imputation, but by the study of Works and Holiness, which being given to the Merits of Christ, we receive in this Life by the free gift of God. There∣fore, that we who were of old, shut up in darkness; And even extinct by the strength of death, now we do escape the tyranny of Death, that we do now recover the gifts of divine righteousness formerly lost and slipt out of our hands: and that we obtain the reward of life proposed to ver∣tue, all that consists in this, that we should wholly abdicate and forsake whatsoever we have from our first Father, and transfer our selves wholly to the similitude and imitation of our second Father, and so it will come to pass that we shall purchase immor∣tal and divine riches, and eternal glory and true righteousness, with everlasting praise, not by our merits, but only by the vertue of Christ, Who works all these things in us.

Therefore according to this sort of Divinity the merits of Christ do nothing else in Heaven, but that they obtain unto us Divine Grace, whereby we may by way of imitation more easily resemble the most holy footsteps, and simi∣litude of Christ our second Father, and lead our lives well in this World according to his Laws. But now what if we cannot exactly follow the footsteps of his holiness? What if imitation falter sometimes and stagger? What if the servency of charity, and the care of our most holy Religion, and the observance of Iustice becomes too remiss? Yea, what if somewhere a defilement of sin creeps in, as in∣firmity may occasion? Or, what if, that I may use the words of Hierom, he that rows a Boat against the stream, slacken his hands a little, doth he not presently slide back, and is carried by the stream whither he would not? and who is not remiss sometimes? Seeing Paul also confesses that he is sometimes drawn thither whither he would not: And then where is the righteous∣ness which was hoped for by Works? where is the immortality proposed to vertue? Verily unless the greater mercy of our most gracious Father, had so taken care for us, that our whole Salvation should be laid up in the righ∣teousness of his Son, and if faith and imputa∣tion did not help us more than imitation of life, our condition had stood on a miserable enough, and too broken foundation. But

eternal thanks be to Almighty God the Father of all mercies, who, according to his unspeak∣able Wisdom, which reaches from end to end strongly, and disposes all things sweetly, hath not settled our estate by any law of works, but by faith, that according to Grace the Pro∣mise may be sure to all the Seed, that though we our selves are weak, and void of all righ∣teousness, yet it is sufficient, that there is one in our Nature which hath fulfilled all righteous∣ness, and that he only is righteous for all. How, say you, for all? Why not, as well as the unrighteousness of one Adam of old was sufficient to bring ruine upon all? Therefore let us behold Christ in Adam, and compare the one with the other. Who, though they are very unlike to one another, yet agree in this, that both being First Fathers of Propagation, by an equal similitude something came from both as Progenitors, which hath spread abroad upon all Men. To wit, Death and Life; Sin, and justice. Therefore one Man destroyed all Men: And in like manner one Man saves all Men; nei∣ther do you your self deny this. But let us see how the one destroys, and how the other saves those that are destroyed: Through his fault, say you, not our own, we contracted the pollution of Sin in our Birth, these are your very words. Which, as I entertain willingly, so if they are true, and if he in this respect was a Type of Christ, which is

shewed out of Paul, what hinders but that we also in like manner in Regeneration may obtain the reward of Righteousness, not for our own Obedience, but his? The one sinned, and by his wickedness ruinated all Men; the other obeyed, and by his righteousness saves all. You say, it is true, if so be we lead our Life well according to the Imitation and Example of him. And where then is the agreement of similitude between Christ and Adam? if the one destroyed us in our being Born, as you your self confess, but Christ cannot save us in our Regeneration, except Imitation be joyned. And where now is the Grace of Im∣putation, and the Imputation of Faith unto Righteousness, so oft repeated in the Scrip∣tures, taught by the Apostles, testified by the most Ancient Fathers, received and delivered by the Church? Shall it be sufficient cause to inflict Death upon thy Body that thou wast propagated from Adam, and shall it not have cause enough for the justification of thy Soul, that thou art born again in Christ? What say you? Do none dye, but they that Sin after the Example of Adam? Are none saved but those that by a due imitation attain unto the most Holy Vertues of Christ? And what then doth Baptism, the Sacrament of Faith in Regenera∣tion, if Salvation is purchased by no other thing but by treading in the Footsteps of Christ?

The Objection of Osorius is Answered, where the Imitation of Christ is discoursed of at large.

BUT you will say, what, is it not an excel∣lent thing? is it not a Pious thing? is it not very necessary for every Man, who counts his Life and Salvation dear to him, who looks for Immortal Glory? who seeks stable and e∣ternal pleasures; that he separate himself as much as he can from theImitation of the Earth∣ly Father, and frame himself wholly to the imitation of the Heavenly?

Who denies or is Ignorant of that, O Osorius? Who is so void of all Religion and Sense, but is ready of his own ac∣cord, and with his whole Heart to confess that very thing to you; which that you may persuade; you do not only explain, but also draw forth all the force and efficacy of Speech that you can upon it with so much earnestness and vehemency? First, who is so Ignorant, but knows what we received from both our Parents, of which you dispute so prolixly? The thing it self, and the experience of all things does abundantly make it evident into what deceits and straits, into what a gulf of miseries the former hath brought us into: So on the contrary, how many, and how great good things have proceeded from the other

Father; I think it is unknown to no Man. Whose acts for us if we consider, what is more excellent? If the greatness of his bene∣fits, what more Divine? If his Life it self every way perfect with all purity of the greatest Vertues, what more admirable? Unto whose example, as the most perfect rule for imitation, seeing you invite us so earnestly; I must needs both willingly approve of your Piety therein, and also give you thanks upon this account for your diligence. And so much the more, upon the account that the unhappy calamity of these times does so greatly need such incitements, which I know not by what means, having obliterated the footsteps of the Heavenly Adam, seem to have degenerated again unto the Earthly Father, with a perfect conspiracy. Wherefore, I could the rather with to these manners and times, that those things which are very well discoursed of by you, concerning following the Example of Christ, concerning the resembling of his Death, concerning imitating his Divine Life; may pierce not only the Ears of Men, but also the most inward parts of their minds. For what is more solid for Advice, or more seasonable for the Time, than that which you so much enlarge upon, with a plentiful am∣plification of Words; that every Man ac∣cording to his power should propose unto himself Christ the chiefest Example of all Vertue, and Master of Life, for Imitation and Resemblance: That having rooted out the filth and relicks of the Old Nature;

He may drive away very far from him with a resolved and magnanimous Spirit all Taints of impurity: And because, as you say, we cannot be in the middle between the two, therefore it remains, that having forsaken the party of the body, we should so fight under the banner of Christ our Prince, we should so subdue the body it self, by the power of his saving Crosi; all rebellion of the body should so be overcome in us, that this unbridled lust, which maintains ever∣lasting enmity against God, may at length yield to his command; and that we may not lessen any endeavour, or labour howsoever great in this most holy observance of Iustice, and imitation of Christ.

As these things are proposed by you, most ex∣cellent Osorius, no less Holily than Eloquently; so I would that in like manner your Rhetorick might make a suitable Harmony concerning the Imitation of Christ, in the Ears of the Roman Bishops and Cardinals: That these Men, having abdicated the perishing and transitory Wealth of this World, with which they overflow beyond all measure of their own profession, and also above royal magnificence, may at length think of the poverty of Christ, that they may di∣minish their Possessions, and large Inheritances heaped together, their Diadems, and their other regalities; I say, not according to the example of the Ancient Philosophers, but ac∣cording to the contentation of the most Holy Apostles; that seriously rejecting the luxury, and superfluity of this Life, their vain glory,

their needless vanities and trifles may at length cease to be conform to the wicked fashions of this World: And that laying aside all haughtiness and pride of Life, they may sub∣mit themselves to the humility of Christ, and restrain and compose the exorbitancy of their Minds and Spirits: And laying down this Popish Cruelty and Tyranny, learn to become meek of Christ, that most per∣fect pattern of meekness, Learn, saith he, of me, because I am meek and lowly of Spirit. I do not re∣quire that those Roman Priests should wash the Feet of the Poor according to the example of Christ, but that they should not embrue their cruel Hands in the Blood of their Brethren; neither do I require that they should give Water to refresh the Disciples of Christ, but that they should not heap up Flames and Faggots to burn their Bodies, nor lay Snares for them, or devise to entrap them privily, design their ruine and destruction, furnish Darts and Weapons to slay them, for whom Christ was Sacrificed, and by whom they themselves were never hurt.

If Example should be taken from Christ, I pray you, what doth the Divine Father and Creator commend more unto us? what else doth his whole life breath but mutual Charity, both towards Friends, and also towards Enemies? Who not only doth not break the shaken and bruised Reed, but upon the Cross prays for his very Crucifiers.

Therefore we have an example singularly excellent, which we may

imitate. We have also together with an ex∣ample, a commendation by the mouth of the A∣postle, by whom Charity is called the bond of perfection. Moreover there is not wanting the Preaching of Divines, who in their Books, in their Exercises, in their Sermons, do attribute so much to Charity, that they call It the form, the perfection, and the very life of faith, with∣out which there is no other vertue, that can be helpful to Salvation: And now I need not here in many words declare what agreement there is between the Doctrine of those great extollers of Charity, and the practice of their lives; seeing there are so many proofs before our eyes, so many ten thousands of men slain do witness it, and so great abundance of Christian blood shed; there is so great outrage of Persecution every where; there is nothing safe from slaugh∣ter, fury, tumult, snares, contentions, dan∣gers, articles of Inquisition, bonds, and imprisonments. In some places the Turk makes havock with the Sword, and elsewhere with flames and smoak. And the Fathers of the Roman Court exercise Cruelty. First, they make Laws written with blood, which afterwards they commit to Political Mo∣narchs to be promulgated, and to the other Of∣ficers to be executed by Law. On the sudden, Citizens of good re∣pute, and Learned Ministers are violently haled to examinations, and afterwards to death, if any Man dare but open his mouth against the manifest

abuses of errours, they spare neither Age, nor Sex, nor Condition. Thus (forsooth) those perfect Roman Catholick Nobles imitate the Charity of Christ, so they follow his Divine Life, so they resemble his death, so they shew forth his meekness, so they bear the Image of the Divine Father, so they wholly and more than wholly form and fashion themselves from the imitation of the earthly Father, to the ex∣ample of the Heavenly. Who justly deserve to hear from the Lord: ye are those that justifie your selves before men, but God knoweth your hearts; for that which is of high account be∣fore Men, is abominable before God. What if the most Holy Popes, and purple Cardinals, those Chiefest Dignitaries of the Church, with all this your Order of Bishops, and the most strict Orders of Monks, who by Place, Dig∣nity, and Profession seem to approach nearest unto Christ, and to supply his place upon earth, differ so much from him, what cause is there why we should hope better of the whole body of the common people, or that any Man should promise himself Salvation in following the footsteps of Christ? but (God willing) I shall elsewhere make enquity into this just matter of complaint.

Now let us return to you, Osorius, whose so godly and eloquent exhortations about putting on and imitating Christ, I am so far from slighting, that I desire they may remain most firmly fixed in the minds of men; for as nothing appears in the most holy manners of Christ, which is not very worthy of imitation; so no

part of duty seems more agreeable to every Christian, than that all of us should endeavour with all our might to resemble the image pro∣posed unto us; especially seeing Paul so gravely, and that in more places than one, calls us here∣unto, who making a Comparison of both Fa∣thers, Adam, and Christ, declares what we received of both. By Man, saith he, came death, and by Man came the Resurrection from the dead. And presently after, proceeding on that matter, the first Man was of the earth earthly, the second Man is the Lord from Heaven. And after∣wards concluding with words to the same pur∣pose, and exhorting us to imitate the example of his obedience, he subjoyns; as we have born, saith he, the image of the earthly, let us bear also the image of the heavenly. And the Apostle Peter, not differing much from Paul, proposes Christ for an Example of all long suffering; for, saith he, Christ also suffered for us, giving us an Example, that ye should follow his foot∣steps, who did no sin, who when he was revi∣led, reviled not again, when he suffered, he threatned not, but committed all judgment to his Father, &c.

Therefore, that you contend so earnestly with the Blessed Apostles for following the foot∣steps of Christ, herein we do very willingly both hear you, and assent unto you. But that you place all the dignity of our Salvation in this, that you refer all the promises of God to this one head, as if there were no cause of Sal∣vation,

but that which is placed only in pre∣cepts and instructions of Life, herein your dis∣course seems to pass far beyond the bounds of sound and Apostolick Doctrine.

For though it is a thing of very great con∣cernment, that we should frame all the en∣deavours and Offices of Life to the imitation of him; yet Salva∣tion is not therefore promised, because our actions agree to this rule of Righteousness, neither is the title of Righteousness given us, because we live vertuously, but because he was made Righteousness for us: For we do not become just before God by imitation, but by Regeneration. As of Old, not through our fault, but Adams, not by Imi∣tation, but by Birth and Propa∣gation, the pollution of his Sin was imputed to us unto Condem∣nation. So by vertue of the Se∣cond Adam, not by any power of our own, by being born again, not by imitating, is Righteousness imputed to us unto the Iustification of Life: Neither doth it therefore follow, that the examples of Christ are not proposed to us for Imita∣tion.

It is one thing to reason from causes to effects, another thing to reason from effects to causes. What if the cause is enquired into, that makes us righteous before God? Paul will answer, That Christ is the external cause, who was made Sin for us, that we might be made the Righteousness of God through him: But the Internal is our Faith in Christ; which is imputed to them that believe, forRighteousness.

But if you ask, what are the the effects of this cause? Who knows not that they are the Fruits of Pious Works, and this very imita∣tion of Christ, which you so greatly (yea and so deservedly cry up and) extol? For who can rightly call himself a Christian, as you say very well, who doth not apply his mind as much as he can. to separate himself from all society of the Earthly Father, and frame and conform himself wholly to the example of the Heavenly: I grant this, to be very true, as indeed it is. For, I do not disallow of that which you do rightly assume, but I confute that, which you would falsly gather from hence. For thus you con∣clude; To wit, that the whole Ma∣gazine of our Salvation is placed in this, that by our Pious Labour and Industry, we should purchase the King∣dom of God for our selves: That they, who af∣firm Faith only is sufficient for Salvation, are mad, and singularly serviceable to the Old Serpent; and that every action we undertake, is wholly

unprofitable, if Faith only is sufficient. This is the summ of the Epilogue of this whole de∣bate of yours. In which, what do you else, but by an unskilful huddle of things, and without order in disputing, turn causes into effects, and again effects into causes? What? when the Apostle Admonishes that Wives should be subject to their Husbands, and acknowledge their Authority, as the Church is subject to Christ her Husband, shall she therefore, that is by a Lawful Covenant Mar∣ried to her Husband, not be a Wife before there is added a testimony of due obedi∣ence?

So Children, born of Creditable Parents, use to resemble them not only in the Linea∣ments of their Bodies, but also in the likeness of their Manners, of whom they are begotten: What, if in some part their re∣semblance fails? What if their manners are dissolute? What if they have such a Son as the parable of the Gospel represents to us: Who leaving his Father, doth no part of his duty, shall he therefore cease to be a Son? Or, shall any Man by the merits of his Life attain to be a Son, who is by nature a Servant?

You may say, to what purpose are these things? That by these examples you may un∣derstand, that effects depend on causes, and causes are not governed by effects. An honest Matron, carries with that subjection to her Husband that becomes her, and he on the other∣side

performs his duty in cherishing his Wife. These things follow the Conjugal bond, but they do not make it; just so it is in the Spiri∣tual descent, which, like another nature, rege∣nerates us to Christ, and transforms us as new Creatures into the Sons of God. Of which thing, if the cause be enquired, not Works, not Hope. not Charity, but only Faith in Christ: Not any Imitation, but Baptism being the Sacrament of Faith performs it. Concerning which, let us hear Paul testifying in very evident Words. All of you, saith he, are the Sons of God through Faith in Christ Iesus. Whosoever of you are Baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. He that walks being Cloathed with Christ, What can be wanting to him, unto all Glory and Beauty of Righteousness? What can any Man desire more for the se∣curity of Eternal Life? What is more bound∣less than Sublimity? What is more Sublime than Nobility of Birth? What is more ex∣cellent than the dignity of high degree? Than to be received not only for Ser∣vants, or Dependents of the Mighty God, who comprehends all things by his Power; but also as Sons. yea, and Heirs? But if you design to be taught how these so many, and so great good things come to us, Paul makes Answer: By Faith, saith he, ye are all Sons: If Sons then Heirs according to promise. And if

you ask when that comes to pass, whether after the merits of Works, or before Works; the same Paul will teach you: As soon as you are Baptized, saith he, you have put on Christ.

To which also Chrysostom sub∣scribing, saith, as soon as a Man Belives, he is presently also Iusti∣fied. Which if it be true, then it is false, which you assert. For you affirm that the ob∣taining of Salvation consists wholly in this, that we should transform our selves entirely into the similitude of Christ. And again youn say, there is no other way of Salvation estab∣lished for us, but that which is con∣tained in the Law of God. And the same you affirmed elsewhere, ha∣ving openly asserted: That ascent into Hea∣ven is given to the merits of the greatest Ver∣tues, and that the Mansions of the Eternal Kingdom, are given justly and deservedly to Holy and Pure Men. For so, Say you, it comes to pass that the Immortal Kingdom is due by the best right to Iust Men; not only as a recompence and remard, but also as a Lawful Inheritance, being founded upon the Wisdom and Bounty of the Father.

All which things, as being represented gloriously by you, seem at a distance to have some shew of Truth, if they be referred to that Platonick Righteousness of yours, or to the state of our First Innocency. But now in this wounded and destroyed Nature, they have no place at all, but that they may wholly

prelude from us all passages into the Eternal Mansions of the Kingdom. I know indeed that the Everlasting reward of Righteousness is due by best right to Pure and Holy Men, as you say, and those that observe the Law unblameably.

But, I know likewise that the Eternal Pun∣ishments of Hell are due to those, that do not perform the Royal Law accord∣ing to the Scriptures. What would you do in this case, good Friend? What good can your Platonick Philosophy do here? I am not Ignorant, what the Lord said to the Rich Pharisee: If you will enter into Life, keep the commands: That indeed is true. Do you then perform what he was commanded to do; Sell all that you have, and give to the Poor, and follow Christ Naked: But if you do it not, what else can you look for, but to perish together with him? But now the goodness of God hath found out another way to consult our Infirmity, who hath not only put upon us the beauty of Righ∣teousness, but whole Christ, so that you may not only, being Naked, follow Christ, but that whole Christ may live in your self, and Cloath you, and also may make you a Son of God by Faith.

What then, may some Man say, is not the Holy Spirit given to them that trust in Christ, to Illuminate their minds with new light, to renew their Hearts, to enrich them plentifully with the Riches, Gifts, and En∣dowments

of good Works, and to adorn them exceedingly with all kind of Vertues? What, do these good Works nothing with God, which are performed by the influence of the most Holy Spirit? Do they contribute no∣thing towards Righteousness? have they no use nor place upon. the account of reward? For this seems to be the Foundation of all your arguing: Where you write these words; If we be∣lieve the promises of God, we pre∣sently obtain the help of God, that we may very easily do all things that are com∣manded us, and so may be saved: And presently after the Interposition of a few words; You say, Faith causes us to have the Law of God Written in our mind, and so to make an everlast∣ing Covenant of Salvation with the Lord. Therefore when we have the Law of God put into the most inward parts of our mind; it comes to pass, that Lust being subdued, Evil concupi∣sence extinguished, the pravity of a stubborn mind taken away, the mind becomes on a sudden, a Temple of the Holy Ghost, and is stirred up with all its might, to the study of the Law of God: And that I may express it in one word, such a Man contains the Magnificence, and Glory of Divine Righteousness comprehended in his mind, And a little after you say; Therefore it is of Faith, Saith Paul, that according to Grace, the pro∣mise may be firm. What manner of promise is that? That they who come to the Lord with

the Faith of Christ, may both be freed from their Wickedness, and delivered from the Curse, whereunto they were lyable, and may have the Law of God Written in their Hearts, and have the very Divinity of the Holy Spirit comprehend∣ed in their mind, and not defile their Life with any wicked deed: But may govern it by the Law of God, or as it is in Ezekiel, They may walk in the commands of God; and perform Holy and excellent works; and also that they may be Righteous: For hereunto all the promises of God are referred, &c.

Answer.

What do I hear? Are then all the pro∣mises of God referred to this? That there is no hope of Righteousness, no way of Salvation, no reconciliation for us, nor remission of Sins, un∣less the Law be kept? And where then is that peace with God, which the Apostle Preaches: Being justi∣fied by Faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Iesus Christ? Where is that access to the Throne with boldness? Where is the hope of Glory, Happiness, the Blessing, the Inheritance of Eternal Life, ac∣cording to promise; if these good things come no otherways, as you suppose, but by a Co∣venant of Life, which no spot of Sin defiles? What, hath your profession of God received this Gospel from the teachings of the Apo∣stles, or from the opinion of Plato? It is

therefore of Faith, Saith Paul, that the promise may be firm according to Grace. But what way is it firm, if it is of Works upon any ac∣count? Or how is it of Faith, if you confine all the Promises of God to the Law of Righteous∣ness, which may confirm the minds of all men, with a sure hope of Righteousness, as you say? Or what will that assurance of Righteousness be, if you with the Tridentine and Iesuitical Iebusites detaining us in a doubtful wavering of hope, take aways all encouragement of good hope?

Concerning the Promises of God, what, to whom, and how God hath promised.

BUT now, because here there is a conveni∣entoccasion of speaking concerning the Pro∣mises of God, it remains that we should hear from you, who treat of these things so sharply, what that is, which God hath promised, to whom he hath promised, how, and for what cause he doth it. Now there are both many and great Gifts of God and Ornaments partly bestowed upon us, and partly promised through the singular bounty of his Grace; yea, seeing there is nothing in this Workmanship of Na∣ture, nor in the meanest things, but what we ought to acknowledge to be his free Gift, if we would be thankful: And also amongst all these things, which being so many and so great he hath conferted upon us with so liberal a hand,

I esteem that nothing is more glorious nor more admirable, than this large honour of his Kingdom, which the Lord himself promises us in the Gospel. Fear not, saith he, little Flock, for it is the good will of your Father to give you the Kingdom. Which Paul also makes mention of, writing both elsewhere, and also to the Co∣lossians: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and translated us unto the Kingdom of his dear Son, &c. Of which also Daniel, a most famous Prophet, hath given an ample Testimony; The Kingdom, saith he, and the Domi∣nion, and the largeness of the Kingdoms under the whole Heaven shall be gi∣ven to the People of the Saints of the most High, &c.

In which one benefit, seeing the whole Sum of our Felicity is comprehended; to wit, re∣conciliation with God, imputation of Righte∣ousness, remission of Sins, Peace with God, access with boldness, hope, the glo∣ry of God, eternal blessedness and salvation, the Inheritance of Eter∣nal Life, freedom from the accusa∣tion and condemnation of the Law: What can any Man either by de∣sires wish for, or by Faith conceive more glorius? For he that is pro∣moted unto the possession of a King∣dom, what more can be added to him, unto the highest splendour

of Glory, and the degree of the most honour∣able Dignity?

Therefore we have, as you see, O Osorius, the hereditary Mansions of the Eternal Kingdom promised to us, and that not of Works, but of Faith; not according to Bargain, but according to Grace, and therefore according to Grace, that the Promise may be firm and sure to all the Seed.

It is a very weighty Cause, and Authority not to be contemned: For what is more firm for all manner of security, than that which relies on the certain faithfulness of God, and a free promise? On the contrary, what is more un∣stable than that which depends on the most un∣certain condition of our Works, which are ei∣ther for the most part evil, or always uncer∣tain? Why then wilt thou cast us again out of the most firm safeguard of most sure confidence proposed to us, which rests most safely in the free bounty of God promising, as if thou dro∣vest us out of a Haven of Tranquil∣lity procured for us, to be tossed in the tempestuous Waters and Straits of Diffidence and Desperation? And do you make those things doubtful and uncertain, which through the bounty of God, we do as it were hold in our hands with a most assu∣red Faith, so that now there is not any thing certain which a man may satisfie his own Soul about touching Salvation? for, I pray you, what can be certain, if so be the Grace of the Promise being taken away, if Imputation of Righteousness being neglected, which is placed

in Christ for us, the whole matter is brought to the account of our actions? and you plead that we are not otherways righteous before God, than by performing the Offices of the Divine Law?

Objection. But (you will say) What, hath not God promised in Iere∣remiah and Ezekiel, to those that come to God by Faith, that they shall have his Law written in their mind, that they shall have the very presence of the Holy Ghost with∣in their mind, and defile their life with no sin, but govern it by the Law of God, and walk in the Pre∣cepts of God, and perform excellent and holy works, and moreover that they shall be righteous? &c.

Ans. 1. As touching the promise of the Spirit of God, it is very true, what you cite out of Ieremiah: For God in his bounty hath promi∣sed, that he will write his Law not only in Tables of Stone, as before, but in the inward Tables of their minds, and indeed accordingly he hath performed, and doth perform daily what he hath promised. And what doth your Logical reasoning gather thence?

Therefore, say you, seeing we have the Law of God put into our inward parts, it comes to pass, that giving cre∣dit to the promises of God, we do pre∣sently obtain the help of God, that we may very easily do all things that are commanded us, and so be saved, &c.

Therefore by these many things, which have been hitherto mentioned by you concerning the Law and its Office, I perceive you have two Opinions, both of which are false. First, That you affirm that we being supported by the Grace of God, and guarded by his help, can very easily perform all things, whatsoever are commanded by the Law of God. Secondly, Be∣cause you plead that all the nature of our Righ∣teousness and Salvation consists in performing God's Commands; and that there is no other way to Heaven but that which is contained in the Law of God: Both which Reasons of yours, how absurd they are, how contrary to the Grace of God and the Gospel, and how much disallowed and confuted, not only by all Authority of Divine Scripture, but also long since contradicted by the sayings of the most Antient Fathers, and how void of all support of reason and experience, there is no Man that hath so little Reason or Religion, but evidently perceives it, and clearly takes notice of it. For, though we do not deny that by the help of the grace of the Divine Spirit there are wonderful, various, and manifold effects produced, and great gifts are shed abroad in the minds of the Regenerate, for governing all parts of Life piously and holily; but whence, I pray you, will you teach that so great strength, and so great power to observe Righteousness is given by God, and committed unto mortal Man, which may be sufficient for performing all things that are prescribed in the most holy Law of God?

Concerning the Perfection of Righ∣teousness, and compleat Obedi∣ence of the Law.

You proceed to press again and again that Antient Song out of the Prophet; I will put, saith he, my Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts: And also out of the other Prophet; And I will give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in my Precepts, and keep my Iudgments, and also may do these things, which are just, &c.

I hear the Oracles of the Prophetical Promise, uttered with great evidence, from whence cer∣tainly works of New Obedience do proceed, which necessarily follow Faith; so that if any Man do now enquire for the cause of good works, presently he learns hence, that it should not be attributed to the strength of Man's Will, but the Gift of the holy Spirit; but now whence does this Gift proceed, but from the Merits of Christ? or to whom is it given, but to them that believe in Christ? For the holy Spirit is received by Faith, according to that of Paul; That we may receive the promise of the Spirit by Faith. Wherefore seeing Faith is the only thing, which procures unto us the holy Spirit,

therefore it cannot otherways be, but that having received the Divine Spirit of Sanctifica∣tion, a new Life, and spiritual motions do fol∣low in the hearts of the Regenerate. For a mind rightly qualified with the Faith of Christ, and being now reconciled to God, as it cannot be destitute of the favour of God, so being stirred up by his holy breathings, begins now to be a Law to it self, whereby it fears God, and according to its power honours him with due Reverence, cleaves unto him with all its might, refers its actions and counsels to him, calls on him by prayers, adheres to him in ad∣versity, celebrates his benefits with a thankful remembrance, lays its hope and confidence, and its whole self upon him, and also for his sake loves and cherishes all the Brethren.

And as there is no Man that de∣nies, these Offices of necessary Obe∣dience, performed by the help of the Spirit of God are fruits of a well∣instructed Faith: So there is no con∣troversie between us and you in that matter, especially seeing you your self also together with us con∣fess, That these are not works of the Law, but of Faith, and that they should not be referred so much to the Law, as to the holy Spirit, and Faith relying upon his help, as you say.

But the greatest difference that is between us consists in this; that whereas we assert, That the Obedience of Man born again by the Di∣vine Power, is but begun and imperfect in this

mortal infirm state: You on the contrary dream of I know not what perfection of obe∣dience in works, the Spirit of God so working in us, that whosoever is qualified therewith, needs nothing that belongs to compleat per∣fection of righteousness; for all your debate a∣bout this matter, seems to drive at this, as being concluded with this one Syllogism.

Argument.

Ma. Whosoever walk in the Precepts of the Lord, and perform them, should be called perfect, who can easily live without sin.

Mi. All the Faithful according to the pro∣mise of God, walk in his precepts, and per∣form them, because God promises nothing, but what he can and will perform.

Concl. Therefore, according to the promise of God nothing hinders, but Believers may be perfect here, who are capacitated to live with∣out sin.

That I may answer the Argument, it is a Sophistical Argument from secundum quid, to simpliciter, because in the Major those are called perfect, who walk in the Precepts of the Lord, and frame their life according to them: it is true in them who simply and perfectly perform all those things, which are commanded in the Law, according to that perfection which is re∣quisite. According to which Rule, if the

major be understood, that which is assumed in the minor must be upon this account deny'd. For though God hath promised to his Saints, that the Assisting grace of his Spi∣rit shall not be wanting, which may help forward pious attempts in his Elect, and stir up their endeavours after more holy obedience; but where hath he at any time promised, or on whom hath he bestowed that happiness in walking, which turns no where to the right hand, nor to the left? which stum∣bles not through the whole life? which in all kind of vertues, by a constant perseverance so conforms the course of life to compleat inno∣cency, that it never fails in any thing? The Adversaries use for the defence of their own cause, to catch at the words, that were just now cited out of Ierem. chap. 31. and Ezek. chap. 26. I will cause you to walk in my Precepts, and keep my Iudgments, &c. And then out of Deut. chap. 30. I will Circumcise, saith the Lord, the fore-skin of your heart that ye may love the Lord with all your heart, and with all your soul. I know indeed, that in these words there is a glorious promise con∣tained of the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the restoring of new obedience; but because there is a twofold per∣fection, and a twofold righteous∣ness according to Hierom. one,

which is suited to the vertues of God, ano∣ther which is agreeable to our frailty. And a∣gain, seeing, according to the Authority of Augustine, there is a twofold kind of Obedience; one that is seen in this Life, being but begun and im∣perfect. Another that is perfect, which is compleated in the life to come. It is not difficult to dis∣cern in what sense the perfection of Reno∣vation should be understood in the Scrip∣tures: To wit, not simply and absolutely, but according to the measure and capacity of this Life. Therefore Augustine says well, that a Man is some∣times called perfect, because he hath profited in a great degree. And the same again. But, where∣as Men are called Saints, some∣times, and perfect in the Scriptures, I say to this, that it is a certain manner of perfection, whereby Holy Men acknowledge their own imperfection. They are also called perfect, who in any respect imi∣tate the perfection of the Hea∣venly Father, who rains on the Iust and Unjust, &c.

And again the same Augustine writing to Boniface: The Vertue, saith he, which is now in a Righteous Man, is called perfect upon this account, because it belongs to his perfection, both to acknowledge in Truth, and confess in Humility his own Imper∣fection.

Moreover, Hierom not much differing from him answered wittily: To whom, when that place of St. Paul was objected: Who∣soever of us are perfect, we understand this: To this Hierom, says: What then do we understand, yea, what ought we to understand, that we who are perfect, should acknowledge our selves to be unperfect, and that they have not yet comprehended, nor yet attained unto perfection. This is, saith he, the Wis∣dom of Man, to know himself to be imper∣fect; and that I may so speak, the perfection of all Righteous Men in the Flesh, is im∣perfect, &c. And afterwards again in the same Book.

Therefore, we are Righteous then, when we confess our selves to be Sinners For our Righte∣ousness consists not of our own merit, but of the mercy of God, as the Scripture says: The Righ∣teous Man is an accuser of himself in the be∣ginning of his Speech: And again to Ctesiphon; This is Mens only perfection, saith he, if they know themselves to be imperfect, &c. More∣over the Adversaries set upon us with ano∣ther Argument, also, which they produce out of the words of Deut. 30. To defend the perfection of their own Righteousness after this man∣ner.

Ma. In these two commands, thou shalt love thy God with all thy Soul, and thy Neighbour as thy self, is contained the summ of all perfection.

Mi. They that are regenerate can love God with all their Heart, and all their Soul, and their Neighbours as themselves, according to the promise of God, Deut. 30.

Concl. Hence then it follows, that the Re∣generate, by the help of the Spirit of God, can fulfil all Righteousness by the Works of the Law.

This reasoning, as it differs not much from the former, so there is implied in it a certain kind of fallacy not unlike it: Which, of what sort it is, if I may with your allowance, Osorius, I will declare. For there lurks under the words of Scripture, not rightly understood, a fallacy or venom wholly Pelagian.

But Augustine will Ingeniously Confute this Fallacy for us, in his Book; The Title whereof, is concerning the Perfection of Righ∣teousness. Where he speaks after this man∣ner: That the state of this Controversie a∣bout the perfection of Love, is exercised a∣bout two Questions, To wit, By whom? And when?

First, as if the Question be, by whom a Man may attain unto such perfection, that he may be with∣out Sin; He answers, that comes not to pass by the strength of Free Will, but by the Grace of God: And so far there is no debate be∣tweeen us, and the opposite party: But if there be enquiry made a∣bout the time, when such a perfection is at∣tained: Augustine, speaks expresly, that this comes not to pass in this Life, but in that which is to come. And this same Augustine, no less oppositely, in another Book dis∣pels the mists of this Argument with very evident Words. This precept of Righteousness, saith he, concerning loving the Lord with all the Heart, and with all the Soul. And also; that of loving our Neigh∣bour, we shall fulfil in that Life, where we shall see Face to Face: But here some will object, wherefore is it commanded, if it is not fulfilled here? Augustine Answers: To wit, That we may be Instructed, what we ought to ask by Faith, and whither to send Hope before; and unto what things, that are before us, we should press forward, not being satisfied with any thing that is behind.

Therefore, according to my opinion, saith he, that Man hath made a great progress in this Life, in that Righteousness, which is to be perfected, who by profiting knows how

far he is from the perfection of Righteous∣ness, &c.

What is that? Which wri∣ting to Bonifacius, he thus reasons about Divine Grace: The Grace of God, saith he, gives in this Life, an endeavour to keep the commands, (And here you have the Obedience begun, as we call it) and the same, if any thing is not fully observed in the precepts, Pardons, &c.

And so all commands of God are reckoned as performed, be∣cause whatsoever is not perform∣ed is pardoned. By which, as I suppose, you see, that our Righ∣teousness in this Life is of such a sort, that it consists rather of the remission of Sins, than the perfection of Vertues, which perfection must be looked for by us in the Life to come.

Moreover there is another thing, that must not be paffed by in this place, that the same Augustine writing to Hierom (in the 29th Epistle,) saith, Charity is a Vertue, whereby that which should be beloved, is beloved. This in some is greater, in others lesser, in others none at all. But the fullest that cannot be increased, as long as Man lives here, is in no Man. But as long as it can be increased, verily that which is less, than it ought to be, is faulty; by rea∣son of which default, there is not a just Man

upon the Earth, that doth good, and sinneth not: Because of which default no Man living shall be justified in the sight of God. By reason of which viciousness, if we say that we have not sin we deceive our selves, and the Truth is not in us, because of which, how much soever we have profited, it is necessary for us to say, For give us our debts.

The Books of the Antient Orthodox Di∣vines are full of very Authentick Testimonies confirming this Opinion. It is an excellent and grave saying of Cyprian, speaking of the Rege∣nerate; Let no man, saith he, flatter himself up∣on the account of a pure and unspotted heart; that trusting to his own Innocency, he should suppose that his wounds need no medicine; see∣ing it is written, Who shall glory that he hath a chast heart? or who shall glory that he is clean from sins? But if no Man can be with∣out sins, whosoever shall call himself unblame∣able, is either a proud man, or a fool &c. For this, saith Hierom, shall every one that is godly pray unto thee; if he is godly, how doth he pray for pardon of iniquity? if he hath ini∣quity, how is he called holy?

There is not so great a Harmony found in any one man, saith Ambrose, that the Law, which is in the Members doth not oppose the Law of the mind Therefore that which the Apostle Iohn said, is true of all Saints in the general. If we say

that we have no sin, we deceive our selves, and the truth is not in us. I may also add that of Ber∣nard, which is very agreeable to this matter.

Who dare arrogate to himself, saith he, that which Paul himself confesses he had not attain∣ed unto? Indeed he that gave the command was not ignorant, that the weight thereof ex∣ceeded the strength of men; but he judged it useful, that by this very thing they should be convinced of their own insufficiency, and that they should know what end of Righteousness they should endea∣vour with all their might to attain unto. Therefore by commanding things impossible, he did not make men transgressors, but humble, that every mouth might be stopped, and all the World might lie under the Iudgment of God.

I can bring innumerable Testimonies of the like sort out of well approved Authors. But why do I take up my time in rehearsing the Names of Men, or reckoning their approba∣tions? when, that I may speak it in one word, all the Antiquity of former Ages, the publick consent of the former Church, and the choicest Writers out of all Eldest Time, as ma∣ny as ever rejected the Antient Pelagianism; all those with one mouth agree in this matter against you, That there is no inte∣grity of Righteousness in this Life, which is not imperfect, which needs not forgiveness; That there is not so great an Innocency here, which

is without any wound, which needs no Medicine; and that none of all the Saints have so lived, that a great deal was not wanting to him to compleat Righteousness, and who needed not daily to pray for the pardon of his iniquity: As Au∣gustine testifies; Because saith he, there is daily offending, therefore there must be also daily remission. Which things being confirmed by most evident Testimonies of very Learned Witnesses: Where 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is that Salvation, which, according to your description is placed in Righteous∣ness, Holiness, Religion, and the ex∣cellent Merits of all Vertues? Where is that Righteousness of Works which reconciles us to God, and makes us like God? Where is that Way, which is paved to Heaven for us with the excellent Merits of Works? Where is that Ascent into the Heavenly Kingdom, which is opened by the Merits of the greatest Vertues? Where are the Mansions of the Everlasting Kingdom, which you as∣sert are justly and deservedly given to holy and pure men? Where is also that Immortal Kingdom, which you conclude is due by best right, not only as a Recompence and Reward, but also as a Legal Patrimony founded by the wis∣dom and bounty of the Father? What if accord∣ing to your Discipline, there is no other way laid open to Salvation, but by keeping the Commandments; and if according to the Iudg∣ment of Bernard, the Law is of such a weight, that it wholly exceeds humane strength, (which

was just now shewed) what hope of Salvation does there now remain for us?

Verily, say you, if any man consi∣der his own strength, in so great a frailty of humane strength, it will be most difficult to attain unto a divine state of righteousness; but if you consider in your mind the divine riches, which, if you will, will al∣ways be present with you, nothing is more easie. Hence, as Moses says, this Commandment, which I command thee this day, is not above thee, nor far off, nor placed in Heaven, that thou shouldest say, who of us can ascend into Heaven? Neither is it placed beyond the Sea, that thou shouldest say, who will pass over the Sea. Neither do you bear it now engraven on stones, but engraven upon the heart by Faith. For if we believe the Promises of God, we presently obtain the help of God, that we may very easily perform all things that are com∣manded us, and so be saved.

Must we be thus saved, O Osorius, in keep∣ing God's Commands? is this your harangue, and think you this so easie to be performed? Why not, say you, when the Spirit of God helps? How little does this Saying differ from that An∣tient one of the Pelagians, which Augustine re∣hearses in a certain place, writing against Iulian the Pelagian, for thus they said. By an easie endeavour after holiness, which God helps, a Man may be without sins. But let us hear Augustine an∣swering, both them and you: We deny not, saith he, that the help

of God is so powerful, if he will, that at this day we might have no evil concupisences, a∣gainst which we should fight, though with the greatest certainty of Conquest. And yet you your self deny not, that it doth not so come to pass, but why it comes not to pass, who hath known the mind of the Lord? Yet I know not a little, when I know, whatsoever that cause is, that it is not the iniquity of a just God, nor the insufficiency of an Almighty God. Therefore there is something in his deep and hidden Counsel, why as long as we live in this mortal flesh, there is something in us, against which our mind should fight: There is also some∣thing why we should say, forgive us our sins; and a little after, that Man understands these things who being hunger-bitten, returns to himself, and says, I will arise and go to my Father, and presently he subjoyns, therefore it comes to pass in this place of infirmity, that we should not live proudly, and that we should live under the daily remission of sins: But whether that be the cause, or another; which I am much more ig∣norant of, yet that which I cannot doubt is, how much soever we get forward under this burthen of a corruptible body, if we say that we have no sin, we deceive our selves, &c. This he said, but why should I urge you with humane Authority, seeing the matter it self carries against you with a very strong voice, and the whole Scripture gives this honour only to Christ, and the Universal experience and

example of Men, and the practice of life, be∣sides your very own retired Sense, the Dome∣stick Witnesses of your Conscience, do pub∣lish a manifest Testimony against you? You say, we presently obtain the help of God, whereby we may most easily perform all things, that are commanded us, &c. Is it so? all things? what then if I ask you of that first Command of Love, which you owe to the Lord your God with all your heart, and all the endeavour of your mind? or of that, whereby you are commanded not to covet at all? do you perform it? I know what a di∣stinction the talkative Schools of the Sophisters use here, according to the substance of the act, and according to the intention of the Law∣giver. But I do not value these Fables of subtleties. We know this by the writings of Paul, that the Law is Spi∣ritual, we are Carnal and sold under sin. I ask if thou thy self being compassed about now with this frailty of the flesh, dost fulfill this Spiritual Law of God, with that sincerity of Spirit that thou oughtest? An∣swer ingenuously, are you silent? What I my self do by my own strength, say you, I do not dispute here, yet I can by the help of the grace of God. O cun∣ning device: After all your debate it comes to this, that you plead the commands of God are easie, and you would have nothing appointed by him, which cannot be observed by us. Now after a most heavy dream (that I may speak with Hierom) to deceive ignorant Souls, you

in vain endeavour to add, (not without grace.) But I enquire not what the Almighty Grace of God can do of it self, but what it does in you, or in any other mortal Man? You make the Precepts of Righteousness easie, which when the Divine Grace assists, do not exceed our best endeavour; and yet you cannot produce one Man that hath fulfilled them all. Now what an Argument is that, that a thing can be which hath not been? that that can be done, which you bear witness none hath done; and to attribute that to I know not whom, which you cannot prove to have been in the Patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles. Paul the Apostle himself complains of the re∣fractory rebellion of his Members, who was not able to do the good which he desired, crying out that he was both carnal and miserable, and captive. Augustine testifies that sins may be de∣minished in this life, but that they cease not until death. And the same Augustine writing to Petrus concerning holy and righteous Men, bids him hold that most firmly, that righteous and holy men themselves, except Infants that are Baptized, none of them all do live without sin in this World. And do you think that all the roots of Unrighteousness are so plucked up in the Saints, that you can say, it is most easie by the help of God, which is never wanting to them that desire to pass the life without sin, and so obtain Salvation?

But Hieron is of a far different Opinion; for I judge, saith he, thus: That no Creature can be per∣fect, according to true and com∣pleat righteousness: That one differs from a∣nother, and that there are divers righteousnesses in Man, no Man doubts; and that one is greater or lesser than another; and that according to their state or measure they may be called just, who in comparison of others are not just. Briefly, that there is none of the Saints, nor Prophets, nor Apostles, that possess'd all Vertues; for now we Prophesie in part, and we know in part: for all things cannot be in any one Man. And to Ctesiphon. This should be attri∣buted to him only, concerning whom it is written as peculiar to him, who did no sin, neither was guile found in his Mouth. Wherefore that I may bespeak you with Hierom, and in the same words. Hierom, if you would have this com∣mon to you with Christ, that you can be without fin, what do you leave him, that is peculiar to him? But if not, what remains then, but that those high Mountains of righteousness with which you are so puffed up, should not only fall, but also vanish into smoke?

You proceed yet, seeking as it were a knot in a rush, which yet is broke through with no difficult wedge. You ask to what purpose the Law was prescribed by God with 〈◊〉〈◊〉 great so care, or for what end did he require the Law should al∣ways

remain in the minds of them, whom be in∣structed in the Law, if none of those things which be established by Law was to be in the Power of Men? What then, say you, did God make a jest of the Law? did he mock Man∣kind, commanding them to do those things, which they could by no means perform? and then concluding the matter with a merry Sarcasm, you cry, O what a jesting God, if to mock Mankind he hath bestowed so much pains in preser∣ving and instructing that Generation, which you say is just as if a Man should bid one that is a Cripple, run a Race, or one that is blind, view things exactly, that are done afar off. All which things are comprehended in the sum of this Argument.

Argument.

Ma. That is in vain command∣ed which cannot be performed.

Mi. God commands nothing in vain.

Conclu. Therefore the Precepts of God are not impossible.

Ma. A just and prudent Lawgiver, never prescribes those Laws, which exceed the strength and nature of the Subjects.

Mi. God is the most Iust, and most Wise Lawgiver of all.

Concl. Therefore, the things which are pre∣scribed in the Law of God are not above the strength and nature of the Creature.

Answer.

To the major, I Answer two ways: First, That it holds indeed in these Laws, which are given only for this end, that they may be exactly fulfilled by the Subjects, that Sal∣vation might be obtained by the same act of Obedience.

But now, though God willed this very much, that his Laws should be performed most exactly by all, yet besides this end, there are other, both many and weighty causes, why the Law, which is a rule of perfect Righ∣teousness, though it could not be kept by us in respect of perfect Obedience, yet it was necessary that it should be promulagated, ei∣ther that there might be a publick Testimony of the Iudgment, and Anger of God against Sin, or that we our selves might be brought more easily to the knowledge of our Sins and Frailty. Concern∣ing which Paul said, when the Law came, Sin revived: Or that taking notice of the frailty of corrupted and ruinated Nature, being more strongly driven by this necessity; we might be pressed forward, as by the Ferula of a Pedagogue to Christ, who is the end of the Law, as also the Law is called a Peda∣gogue

to Christ: Or that we may be taught, as it were by this same Pedagogy, whither we must go: That if we cannot attain unto a full obedience of the Law, yet we may profit in the Inchoation of obedience as much as we can.

Wherefore seeing there are so many and so great causes of making a Law, it appears evident enough from hence, that there is no cause why the Law should seem to be im∣posed upon us by God in vain: And yet it doth not therefore follow, because the Law of God, after the fall, is impossible to Human Nature, as to the compleat obedience there∣of, that therefore it is unprofirable, seeing the same hath advantages so remarkable. Therefore the major of the Ar∣gument implies a fallacy: Which by the Logicians is called Argu∣ing form that which is not a cause, as if it were a cause. But let us proceed to the other rea∣sons in your arguments, which are not reasons, but deceits and fallacies; For so you argue against Luther, whom you bring forth most unjustly, as a certain most bitter Adversary of Eternal Righteousness.

What is more contrary to Iustice and Equity, say you, than that one should be punished upon that account, because he hath not performed those things which he could by no means so much as begin? I hear you; and what fol∣lows? You proceed also to represent the matter as it were before the Eyes

of a Man, by the framing of a simili∣tude, as if some Haughty and Ill∣natured Lord, going from home, should command one of his Servants, who is so tyed up in bonds, that he can∣not move out of the place, where be is, to pro∣vide him a Dinner, to dress his Meat curi∣ously, to clean the House, to cover the Table, and to spread the Hangings; I say, he that would seriously require such things of a Man tyed up; Who is there, but would judge him to be mad, and out of his wits?

Then if the same Lord afterwards returning, should whip and torture the same Servant, who could by no means free himself from the bonds, because he had not performed his command; should we suppose that Man, who is so cruel to his Servant, to be a Man, or rather a cruel Beast, hid under the shape of a Man, &c?

You have, Pious Reader, an Example of very Tragical Cruelty: Now receive the Catastrophe of the Tragedy: What? And shall there be any Man so Wicked, that he dare so Impudently impute so great Furiousness, and such a kind of Abominable Wickedness, than which none seems more outragious, to that most High, most Excellent, and most Wise Lord, Crea∣tour, and Governour of all things?

No body, for ought that I know, good Friend. If your self knows any, I pray you point at him with your Finger to us: Though I am not Ignorane what Men you aim at here. But passing by Names, let us

search the force of your Argument, and answer to each of its parts, being digested in order.

Answer.

Ma. It is contrary to Iustice, that any man should suffer punishment for those things, which he could by no means perform.

Mi. God doth all things with perfect Righ∣teousness and Equity.

Conel. Therefore God exacts not punishment for those things, which cannot be performed.

A Fallacy of the Accident is committed. For this want of strength and impotency should have a just excuse, if Nature had been properly and simply so created. But when this weakness was not at first created with Nature it self, but crept in some other way against Na∣ture by Sin, we must therefore see not only what this corrupted Nature now can do, or cannot do, but also what it ought simply to do: Therefore I answer to the Ma∣jor, and freely own that punishment is not unjustly inflicted for those things, which there is no cause but they might have been observed, either in regard of the Law∣giver himself, or in the nature of the things themselves, but only by reason of the impo∣tency of the Subjects themselves, an impotency contracted through their own default; as if a

Prince send forth an Ambassador any whither very sound and whole, to whom afterwards he had commanded some things which he could easily have performed, unless he had made him∣self Cripple & lame thro' his own default. Now if in performing the Commands the Ambas∣sador wants ability, is there cause why this impotency should be imputed to the Prince, and not rather to the Ambassador, who depri∣ved himself of his own soundness? And that is it which Augustine signifies, lib. de Iustic. perfect. Yea therefore, saith he, it is man's fault, because it came to pass by the will of Man only; that he is come to that necessity, which the will of Man only cannot shake off. There∣fore that representation which is brought in by you of a Servant in Bonds, is nothing to the purpose, unless you likewise prove this, that this impediment was cast upon him, not thro' any fault or cause in himself; which seeing it cannot be denied by you, what cruelty should there be reckoned to be in it, if a Lord, re∣quire just punishment to be inflicted on a Ser∣vant that is corrupt and flagitious? Yea, be∣hold rather singular Clemency in the Lord, who is so far from inflicting upon the Servant the punishment which he deserved, that he re∣ceives him into favour without any merit; yea moreover, exposes his dearly beloved Son to undergo punishment for the Servant? Go now, Osorius, and when you have sufficiently consi∣dered with your self about this matter, then tell, who those are, that are enraged with so

great fury, that so impudently cast such a filthy blot of Injustice and Cruelty upon Eternal Goodness? What if you judge so of Luther and Calvin, of whom you speak so bitterly; what other thing do they but proclaim, ac∣cording to the Gospel, the free pardoning grace of God to all that by Faith embrace Christ, who was slain for us? They are so far from being guilty of this Calumny, which you most unjustly cast upon them, that you can no where find any, who with greater earnestness do de∣clare the infinite Riches of Divine Grace to Mortal Men.

How Christ takes away Sins: With an An∣swer to the Objections of Osorius.

BUT this goodly Antagonist rushes upon us again with ano∣ther caption, which at the first sight may somewhat puzzle the mind of the Reader. For he asks of those that deny Sin to be utterly extirpated by the Grace of Christ in this Life; Whether they distrust his Power or his Clemency? For if Christ doth not abolish all Sins in them, whom he receives into favour, that comes to pass either because he cannot, or because he will not. If you say he cannot, you take away his Power. If you plead that he is not willing, you rob him not only of the praise of his Clemency, but also of his Faithfulness. Therefore whatsoever way you

defend your Opinion, you trample upon the Son of God, and cast great reproach upon him. Well said, most excellent Man. And now by what confirmation do you prove this? For seeing his Infinite Power can∣not be hindered by any difficulties from performing suddenly the things which he willeth: And seeing his Love is so great, that of old he bath engaged his Faithfulness, that through Christ he would abo∣lish Sins, and would deliver Mankind from all wickedness; what boldness then is this of most im∣pure men, who deny that Sin is utterly destroyed in those, whom he hath joyned to himself with a holy Love? and assert that Sin is not wholly cut off? nor plucked up by the roots? that all the remainders thereof are not extirpated? These things said he.

Argument.

Ma. Nature can shut out all Sin, being helped by the Grace of God.

Mi. The Grace of God helps those who are born again in Christ.

Concl. Therefore, all necessity of sinning is excluded in those that are born again.

If you understand it of the perfect help of of Grace, which is hindered by no difficulties, but that the infirmity of Nature may be taken away; so the Major is true, but the Minor false. For though I confess that the Riches of Divine Grace are infinite, and that the Gifts are

excellent, which God bestows upon his own, yet this grace of God doth not so perfect any man in this Life, but that oft in small things we offend all, and pray daily, that our debts may be forgiven us. Yea, what is all the discourse of the Saints to God but a continual praying and deprecating, as Hierom witnesses, whereby it extorts the Clemency of the Creatour, that we who cannot be saved by our own strength, may be saved by his Mercy. Con∣cerning which there is also heard a Mystical Song of the Psalm. For this, saith he, shall every Saint pray unto thee in a time when thou mayest be found. Whence Hierom infers not without reason. If he is a Saint, saith he, how doth he pray for the par∣don of sin? If he hath iniquity, upon what account is he called holy? to wit, after that manner whereby it is elsewhere said, A just man falleth seven times a day, and riseth up again. And again, A just man is an accuser of himself in the beginning of his speech, &c. Therefore the Grace of God helps our infirmities, that they may be diminished: But we deny that he so helps them, that they are wholly taken away. It helps indeed infirmities, as hath been said, but yet it leaves us infirm, that it may always help us. No man is ignorant how great power of Christ appeared in the holy Apostles, which yet did not fully compleat their strength, but it was rather perfected by their infirmity. We

know, saith he, in part, and we prophesie in part: But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. We now see darkly through a Glass, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know as I am known.

Therefore that I may answer in a word: If you suppose there is that help of Divine Grace, which makes Obedience in this Life to be wholly unblameable and perfect; Augustine will presently deny that. Who discoursing of the first Precept of Righteousness, whereby we are commanded to love God, with all our heart, and our Neighbour as our selves: We shall fulfil that, saith he, in that Life, where we shall see face to face; and presently; And there∣fore that man hath profited much in this Life in that Righteousness, which is to be perfected, who by profiting knows how far he is from the perfection of Righteousness.

Moreover, that which is argued from the power of Divine Grace, is not sufficient to exclude the necessity of sin. They say indeed, that by the perfect Grace of God it is possible that a man may not sin at all in this life: Be it so; Yet all things are not made which can be made by the singular power of God. So by the power of God helping us we could flie, yet we do not flie: For God willeth not all things, which his power is able to do: But, you say, he willeth and commandeth with great Authority,

that we should observe his Precepts, which he would not command unless he knew them to be possible. It is true indeed, if they be understood according to that Nature, which he first created in us, So that in him there is no cause but that the Pre∣cepts, as they should be judged right, so also they should be judged possible. But hearken to Hierom answering you, and aptly untying this Knot. God hath commanded things possible, saith he, this no man doubts of. But because men did not possible things, therefore all the World is become subject to God, and needs his Mercy, &c.

I know that there is not any thing so difficult in humane things but infinite Omnipotency can do it by a word of his Power; to whom it would not be difficult to restore this frailty of Fallen Na∣ture to its Antient State of Inno∣cency, if he would. And there is no doubt, but he would do it, if he had decreed to do as much by his secret Counsel, as he could do by his Infi∣nite Majesty. Now therefore either prove, that all infirmity of the flesh is taken away in the Regenerate, and that they are restored to their former Innocency, which is without all sin, and also freed from a necessity of dying, or cease to dream of that Perfection of Righte∣ousness in this Life, which hitherto hath not been found in any of the Saints, whether Apostles (that I may speak in the words

of Hierom) or Patriarchs or Pro∣phets. phets. But that we may pass by this debate about the Power of God, from which we detract no∣thing, what shall we say in the mean while of Grace, and his most Gracious loving kindness and good will? What shall we answer to God promising to us? For, What, saith he, hath not God of old engaged his faithfulness, by a most sure Covenant, that be would ablolish all our Sins through Christ? Is not this Grace promised to be obvious and prepared for all that are willing to obtain it, which frees Mankind from all Wickedness, which immediately imprints the form of Divine Righteousness upon the minds into which it enters, and furnishes them with most invincible strength, whereby it is possi∣ble to destroy Lust, to drive away all the pollutions of the Mind, and extirpate all re∣mainders of fi••thiness and impurity: So that now Lust being subdued, evil concupiscence extinguished, the pravity of a stub∣born mind being taken away, the mind being strengthened by the Divine support, it is stirred up with all its desire to the Study of the Divine Law, and most easily keeps the Law of God, and obtains Salvation.

What then, when the Majesty of the most high God hath all things in his Power, and under his Command, and his goodness is no less Infinite than his Power: Do we suppose he will at any time be wanting to help the Creature, or shall we dis∣trust

the Clemency of the most hountiful Crea∣tour?

An Answer.

God forbid. But pray tell me, where hath God so engaged his faithfulness, whereof you speak, that the remainders of all Sin, be∣ing cut off, and all Infirmity of sinning being taken away, he would so heal Mankind, ha∣ving so thoroughly purged them from all Sin, that evil concupiscence being subdued, and all matter of the Antient Contagion being blotted out, no relicks of Sin should remain in this Life, but that it may be most easie to obey the commands of God, and so obtain Salvation?

By what Author, by what Witness, by what Doctor, by what Testimony, or Ex∣ample, do you prove this to be true, which you Preach?

First, You say, is not this cer∣tain, that Sin is hateful to God, which necessarily through its vio∣lence and outragiousness divides us from Union with God? And how can it be that the Lord, who is by Na∣ture just, and a Lover of Righteousness, should not take away all Sins out of the minds of them, whom he designs to unite unto himself by Love? Moreover he that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all; How, saith Paul, will he not with him give us all things? If then the

Testimony of Paul be true, it is thence evi∣dent, that those are delivered from all Wick∣edness, whom that infinite purity joins unto it self by most pure Love.

For, otherways if God did not take away Sin, be would be so far from giving us all things, that he would suffer us in the chiefest re∣spects to be miserable, unhappy, and wretched. And so it would come to pass, that God would seem to have conferred upon us no great benefit by Christ, if he left us in the bondage of Sin, if he did not throw off the servile Yoke from our Necks, as he had pro∣mised of Old. Moreover the Blood of Christ poured forth on the Cross had yet brought us no advantage: For yet we are in great misery, we cannot but be miserable whilest we are held in the bonds of our Sins: There are also very evi∣dent Testimonies of the Holy Scriptures confirm∣ing this Assertion: To wit, that by the Divine Power of Christ, Sin is extirpated, Lust is de∣stroyed, Evil Concupiscence is restrained, and the minds of Men being freed from Sin, put on a Di∣vine form.

For so it is recorded to us by Holy David. As far as East is from the West, so far hath he removed our Transgressions from us. And thou shalt sprinkle me, O Lord, with Hysop, and I shall be cleansed, thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter than Snow.

And Isaiah foretold that it should come to pass, that all that live in the Church by Faith, should be called Holy: And he hath blotted out as a Cloud thy Iniquities, and thy Sins as a thick Cloud. Likewise Ieremiah: At that time, saith the Lord, the Iniquity of Israel shall be sought, and it shall not be, and the Sin of Iudah, and it shall not be found. And in Ezekiel, he saith, I will pour clean Water upon you, and ye shall be cleansed from all your defilements. Also Micah: He will cast all our Sins into the depths of the Sea.

Moreover, Zechariah declares that Everlast∣ing Fountain, which was to be opened, to wash away the filth of all. And how glorious is that Testimony of Iohn the Baptist. Be∣hold the Lamb of God that taketh away the Sins of the World?

Which Testimonies being so many, and to∣gether with these infinite others; what do they all drive at, but that we may under∣stand that by Christ, all the pollutions of our sinful Nature are done away, &c. For this is the sum of those things which you cite and heap together, with a long Circumlocution of Words.

Unto which being so many, there is one Answer, and a well fitted one out of Augustin: Distinguish the times, saith he, and you will reconcile Scriptures. Our Sins are done away by Christ; no Man doubts of that. But we must see how they are done away: He does them away in this Life, he will also do

them 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in the Life to come; but not after one and the same manner: For Iniquity is taken away and Sin receives an end, as is evident by the Prophecy of Daniel. But if you ask how in this Flesh? Augustin will answer you: None, saith he, takes away Sin, but Christ, who is the Lamb of God that takes away the Sins of the World: And he takes them away, both by removing the Sins that were done, and by helping, that they may not be done, and by bring∣ing to the Future Life where they cannot be done at all.

Therefore in this Life, there is only a race to Righteousness, and in the other Life will be the prize. This then is our Righteousness now whereby we run Hungering and Thirsting to the perfection, and fulness of that Righteousness, wherewith we shall afterward be satisfied in the other Life. Hence the Apostle saith: Not that I have already attained, or am al∣ready perfect. Brethren, I do not think that I have apprehended, but one thing I do, for∣getting the things that are behind, and being stretched forth to those things that are before, I press forward to the mark of the high call∣ing of God in Christ Iesus, &c.

Therefore according to Augustin here is the Race, here is the Pro∣gress, there will be the Perfection. Here as running in a Race, we

proceed from Vertue to Vertue. There we are perfected.

Now we have only the Seeds of Vertues begun, then in that fulness of Charity, when that shall be perfected in us, which now is imperfect, that precept shall be fulfilled, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart, and with all thy Soul. For whilest there is yet any Car∣nal concupiscence, which may be restrain∣ed by continency; God is not in all re∣spects loved with all the Soul, for the Flesh doth not Lust without the Soul, though the Flesh is said to Lust, because the Soul Lust∣eth Carnally, &c.

Therefore as long as the Saints are bur∣thened with this Flesh, which they cannot shake off, verily Sin dwelling in the Flesh cannot be absent.

Objection.

But how, say you, is Sin taken out of the World, If the Corruption of Sin yet does reign in the Saints?

Answer.

I will tell you briefly, to wit, after the very same manner that the death of Christ hath driven 〈◊〉〈◊〉 from our necks, and yet we dye. The same comes to pass in the destroying

of sin, that being freed from Sin by Christ, yet we are not without sin, for these two things come always together, being tied to one ano∣ther by a very near connexion. That where sin is, there by necessary consequence death follows; wherefore if the flesh is yet held in bonds by the cruelty of death, by the same rea∣son it is proved, that the relicks of sin remain also in the flesh. But now where is then that righteousness which Christ hath pur∣chased for us? Would you know, O Osorius? where our life is, there is also our righteous∣ness. Not in this flesh which we put off, but in that body which we shall in due time put on uncorrupted. For such are all the benefits of Christ purchased for us, that the promise of them being shewed afar off, as of old the Holy Land to the Hebrews, it is apprehended by Faith, and the Spirit in this life, but the full possession belongs only peculiarly and in the whole to the other life.

Christ begins his Benefits in this Life, and perfects them in the Life to come.

Now these great Benefits of the Son of God consist chiefly in this, that sin being totally abolished, death being destroyed, he re∣stores us, being plucked out of the Kingdom of the Devil, unto the possession of eternal Life, in which God communicates himself wholly to us, and is wholly all in all. And this most glorious work of his, most full of the highest dignity, he begins in this miserable life, and will compleat it in the other life, when that shall come to pass, which is written Death is swallowed up in Victory: O Death where is thy Victory? O Death where is thy Sting? Howbeit these things are not said upon this account, as if there were nothing in the interim, or but little in this life, which the help of the grace of Christ does for us. As of old the help of the Eternal God was never wanting to the Is∣raelites in the waste Widerness, whom he was to bring into the habitations of promise; so verily neither are Christs benefits towards us little, and the riches of his bounty are not small, which the present Grace of Christ pours

daily upon us with a full hand, when in this sinful Nature he often helps our infirmities, forgives our sins, instructs us with his word, refreshes us with hope, supports us by Faith, feeds and strengthens us by the Sa∣craments, and refreshes us by his own Spirit, adorns us with his gifts, renews our hearts, and stirs them up to spiritual motions of better life and obedience, restrains vitious affections, by whose guidance there increase in us the beginnings of eternal life, the knowledge of God, invocation, fear, faith, true repentance, a new law, and the image of him, who Created us, &c.

And seeing Christ works these things in us with continual care, daily more and more, promoting and bringing unto maturity that which he hath begun in us; there is therefore no cause why the Graces of Christ here should seem needless to any Man.

But these beginnings of Divine Grace must be distinguished from that perfect and compleat reno∣vation of Nature, which shall be seen in the glorified after this life. For though it should not be doubted but great advantages are communicated to Be∣lievers by the Divine help of the Holy Spirit, both to shun those things that are grievously offensive, and also to exercise the Offices of

Piety; of which Paul Rom. 8. They who are led, saith he by the Spirit of God, are the Sons of God. Yet there is not given to the regenerate in this life a compleat conformity to the Law of God, but it is reserved for the other life; for the life of the Saints in this World should not be called a life of the flesh but of Faith rather, not a life of perfect, but of begun love and mortifica∣tion; as being not so much discerned in justice as in justification, not in perfect holiness, but in sanctification; not in perfect purity, but in purification, not in perfection, but in going forward.

But this good Friend ours thinks this should by no means be suffered: Who so fights against us, as if all the Na∣ture of Salvation consisted not in Iustification (the name whereof he doth not account worthy of any mention) but in Iustice it self, not in the growth, but in the per∣fection of Vertues: And as if it were not allowable, otherways to aspire to those just rewards of Felicity, but by performing these Offices of Life, which are contained in the Law.

O miserable condition of Mortal Men, if those things are true, which you Evangelize to us. But by what Authority of the Gospel do you confirm those things, which you assert?

You say, There is no reason that any Man should be joyned to God, unless he be a Friend to him. I hear you. What then? But no Man can be his friend unless he be like him. That is harder: Let the induction proceed. But the Divine similitude consists wholly of the study and exercise of true Vertue. From all this there∣fore it is concluded. That there is no other way, that joyns us to God, but what consists in the performance of Vertue, and in worthy Offices.

And now what will become of those, who being Iust Men fall seven times a Day, and yet rise up again? What also will be∣come of all those, concerning whom Iames speaking, saith, in many things we offend all? Moreover, what will become of those, whom Christ bids Pray, Lord forgive us our debts.

Moreover whereas you say, that no Man is joyned to God, or received into favour, but he that is his Friend: If that be so, How then doth God agree to his own Law, which commands not only to love Friends, but to pray for Enemies? I beseech you, when God so loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son, what else was this World then, but an Enemy to God, which yet he had so great a favour to? Yea, Paul expresly testifies, that we were reconciled to God, not when we were Friends, but Enemies; and therefore he says the love of Christ is commended in

this, that he dyed for Enemies. And again, if, whilst we were Enemies, we were reconciled unto God, by the Death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his Life.

See. I beseech you, how great a difference is between Paul's Assertion and yours, Osorius. He affirms we were reconciled to God when we were Enemies, you admit no Man unto favour, but him that is a Friend to him, and conform to him in the whole fimilitude of his Life. And how then will that com∣mand of Christ consist, concerning loving Enemies, and that by the example of his Father's bounty, who bestows the benefit both of Sun and Rain, not only on Friends, but also on Enemies; if so be the Grace of Di∣vine favour is accessible to none but Friends. and those that are like himself.

And that I may by the by touch some∣thing here of the Mysteries of Prophetical Scriptures, tell me what else is pointed at unto us by the reception of Iacob, and his Sons into the Land of AEgypt. Gen. chap. 47. Whom that very loving King being brought unto him, to whom they had not been so much as known before, received for Inhabitants of Foreigners, and for dear Subjects of Men unknown; not only into the Common Wealth, but into Friendship, not at all for their own sakes, who brought nothing with them but hunger and poverty: But only for the sake of Ioseph,

whom the King had a very dear love for. What else doth Ioseph represent to us, but the sublime Son of God, dearly beloved of him? What else should you understand in the Brethren, Father, and the whole Kindred, but us miserable Sinners, whom being dead in Sins, Christ hath quickned, and of Ene∣mies reconciled us in Friendship to his Fa∣ther, not for any merit of our Works or Conformity, but only by that favour, where∣by he is powerful with the Father.

But now let us briefly bring the Osorian Argument into a re∣gular form, that we may the bet∣ter view each part thereof.

Argument.

Ma. Those only are joyned in friendship with God, who are like unto him.

Mi. They who are infected with the pol∣lution of Sins, are not like God.

Concl. Therefore, none of those, to whom pollution of Sin cleaves, have any Union with God.

And thence on the contrary sense it is ga∣thered, that it must be concluded by necessa∣ry consequence, that all spots of Sins being abolished; That man who desires Union with God, should agree with him by a certain eminent resemblance.

I Answer, First, to the major which is not always true. Though the similitude of man∣ners hath oftimes no small strength to procure Friendship in the com∣mon use of Life, as Cicero says; yet all things that are any way un∣like are not so opposed, that they cannot consist together without fighting one against another. As there are many differences in things, yet every difference doth not unty the bond of love. As again neither do all Men every where cleave to one another by a firm bond of Friendship, who∣soever do some way agree in en∣dowments and Ingeny. Verily in the Divine Love, this agreement of Conformity hath no place; That they should be received into favour, who came nearest to his Image. For so it would come to pass that all other Creatures being excluded, Almighty God would embrace only Angeli∣cal Vertues, with his Divine Favour.

Though neither here, if you look to Angels themselves, doth any proportion of similitude unite into one with the Divine Holyness, ac∣cording to the Testimony of Rof∣fensis: Who says that the Righte∣ousness of Men is another than that of Angels; and again, that their Righteousness is another than that of God. As therefore this Righteousness of Angels, if you compare it with the Righteous∣ness

of God, will seem imperfect, and beyond all comparison coming short of that highest Righteousness, and which yet perhaps is with∣out Sin: So if you compare Human Perfecti∣on with Angelical, it will have some Imper∣fection; yet so, that all its works are not subject to Sin. Hitherto spake Roffensis. Augustin also comes to this Point, who comparing our Righteousness which now is with that which is to come, hath these words con∣cerning its dissimilitude; when that Righteousness, saith he, according to which they live, shall be, and where no evil con∣cupiscence shall be, let every Man measure himself what he is now and what he shall be then, and he will find in comparison of that Righteousness, that all his works now are loss and dung, &c.

And presently after: In the Resurrection we believe we shall fulfil Righteousness, that is, that we shall have full Righteousness. In comparison of that all the Life we live now is dung, &c. And now, Osorius, what Agree∣ment of similitude will you find between this Life of dung, and that highest Author, and Prince of all Holiness.

The Assertion of Osorius, whereby he proves that there can be no Reconciliation to God, unless all the Relicks of Sin be utterly cut off.

BUT perhaps some Osorian will here again object; Though dissimilitude doth not divide the connexion of friendship; but yet things that are so different, that they are op∣posed to one another by a mutual repugnancy, it cannot by any means be, that those things should be joyned together; of which sort are Virtue and Vice, Righteousness and Sin, Love and Hatred. Therefore seeing God is altoge∣ther so just in his own Nature, that he cannot but hate Sin; and on the contrary, Man is so wholly drowned in sin, that in every good work, according to the Opinion of Luther, the Saints themselves also do sin, in this so great dissimilitude of things that are opposite to one another; how can it be that Infinite Holiness can be joyned by any Communion with Man, if he is such a one as Luther describes him? For so Oso∣rius, from things well said by Luther, but badly understood by him, and worse wrested for the occasion of cavilling, doth very ill argue, not because it is true, but because it seems so to him. But let us first oppose the frivolous Ob∣jection; and then let us take Luther's part, as well as we can, against the cruel Incursions of his Adversaries, And first indeed it cannot

be denied that Iustice and Sin are repugnant to one another by the most con∣trary opposition. Likewise we must confess that it is no less true, that all impurity of sin is hateful and abomi∣nable to God: For the Anger of God is re∣vealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who ditain the Truth in unrighteousness; as the Apostle speaks very evidently. Which being so, what remains then, but that the Life of the Godly should either be free of all sin in this World, as Oso∣rius contends; or if that cannot be, as Luther affirms, all must be liable to the Wrath of God. I answer with the Apostle Paul; That indeed would follow, unless there comes a Me∣diatour, who may interpose himself against the Anger of God in the sinners behalf; who may satisfie for sin, who may obtain pardon, who may mollifie the rigour of Iustice; yea, who may transpose all the Iudgment given against the guilty upon himself, and that now he himself may be Iudge of the Cause, who is the forgiver of the Crime. For so we hear in the Gospel; My Father judgeth no man, but hath given all Iudg∣ment to the Son. And again; All things are delivered unto me by Father. All which benefits, seeing we receive from Christ, the most bountiful Mediatour, in such plenty as exceeds all belief, there is no cause, O Osorius, why in such great abundance of grace, you

should press us with such strict weights of Iu∣stice, as if we were now under the Law, and not under Grace? But how much more agree∣able would it be both to your Duty, and Salva∣tion, that you should by a submission common to you and us, give place to the Grace of God, and acknowledge the benefits of the Mediatour, and apply your self with all gratitude of mind to his everlasting praises, that are worthy to be celebrated through all Generations.

Therefore that we may expedite a matter not very difficult in a few words: Whereas you say sin is hateful to God, nothing is more true. But it is one thing to speak of sin, and another thing to speak of Man that is a sinner; he indeed hates sin, and the Physician also hates the disease, but yet not so, that he should destroy the dis∣eased person, but that he should heal him. Concerning which thing, if you do not trust me, hear Augustin; he is not a God that condemns some sins, and justi∣fies and praises other sins: He praises none, but hates all, as a Phy∣sician hates the disease, and by curing endea∣vours to drive away the disease: So God by his Grace procures that sin is con∣sumed in us. But how is it con∣sumed? It is diminished in the life of them that are going on to Perfection: it shall be consumed in the life of the perfect, &c.

The Assertion of Luther against Osorius con∣cerning the Sins of the Saints, is defended.

I Come now to Luther, whom you reproach after such an unworthy manner, and with such shameful slanders, yea and lyes so tragical∣ly. Why so? to wit, because he durst accuse the Saints themselves of sin; which seems to you so execrable a wick∣edness, as if no greater reproach could be cast, not only on holy men themselves, but also on the Author and Prince of all Holiness.

You may upon the same account cast re∣proaches in like manner upon Hierom, Augustin, and Bernard, and other most approved Writers of the Primitive Times: Whom you must ei∣ther by necessary consequence absolve with Luther, or not condemn Luther without them: Seeing there is none of all these, that thought this Title of Honour should be attributed to any man, but Christ only, that he should be wholly

without all stain of sin. No, but Luther, say you, pleads that all mor∣tal men, though confirmed in Faith, are yet in a state of sinning, and that sin is lively also in the Saints. even so long as they live by Faith; and also he profeses that the same do sin in every good work. And what hath any man said or done so rightly, but it may be depraved by re∣lating it wrong, especially when calummy makes the Interpretation. That which Luther asserts concerning the sins of the Saints, if the words be suitably weighed with the state of the Que∣stion, there is no offence in it. As if it be asked, whether the works of the Regenerate should be called good in this Life, or sins: Lu∣ther denies not that the pious deeds of the Re∣generate are good; but affirms this very thing, That they are good in the sight of God, and pleasing to him, which comes not to pass upon the account of the work it self, but upon the account of Faith and a Mediatour, for whose sake the pious endeavours of his own are pleasing to God, and their begun obedience, though it is other∣ways of its own nature imperfect. Therefore this is not the Controver∣sie, whether the Regenerate by the help of the Grace of God can do any thing in this Life piously and commendably. Neither is this the Controversie, whether the absolute

Grace of God in the Regenerate is able to per∣form this, that their work should be free of all sin. But whether the Grace of God in this flesh, furnishes any of the Regene∣rate with so great a power of per∣fecting Righteousnns, that any work of his is so compleat and per∣fect, if it be examined according to the Rule of the Divine Law, that it needs no Pardon nor Mediatour. But if it needs Mercy, then it is ne∣cessarily joyned with pollution and sin, so that now the Praise belongs to the Mediatour, and not to Man; to Imputation, not to Action; to Grace, not to Merit; to Faith, not to Works; that God accepts of the Works of the Regenerate and most holy men. Neither is the rectitude of our good things any thing else but the forgiveness of God, and the remission of his just severity. Whence the Apostle rightly con∣cludes, that those who are of the Works of the Law (not speaking of evil works, but the most perfect Works) are under the Curse, and upon this account it is true, which Luther says, that a righteous man

sins in every good Work. Not that the Work it self being appointed by the Law of God is a sin; but because, according to the say∣ing of Augustin, whatsoever is less than it ought to be, is faulty: From whence it ap∣pears evidently, that in this Life there is no Work so perfect, but something is wanting in it, that is there is Sin in it, if it be judged according to the strict rigour of the Law.

Concerning the Grace of God, how it is de∣fined by Osorius, with a confutation of his Definition.

ARguments increase, because here menti∣on falls in of the Grace of the regene∣rate. It is shewed, though against the Rules of Logick, that the Grace of God is nothing else but Iustice and Vertue, upon this account: because it being that chiefly, which makes us ac∣ceptable to God, and nothing can be acceptable to God, which is not like unto him, be thinks he pre∣vails sufficiently by this conclusion; That, because nothing 〈◊〉〈◊〉 us like God but Righrecusness and Vertue, Therefore Grace is nothing, if it is not Vertue and Iustice. Why do I use many words on this matter? If that Grace be understood by Osorius, which St. Paul so often commends to us in all his Epistles, both are false, which here the Bishop assumes against the Apostle. For Grace is not rightly

defined after this manner, that it is nothing else but Vertue and Iustice, and first, that it is a Vertue Thomas did flatly deny in his sum of Theology: Part. 12. Quest. 110. Artic. 3. where disputing of the Grace of God, though he denies not that it may be re∣duced to the first species of quali∣ty, yet he wholly denies, and con∣futes its being a Vertue, conclude∣ing at length after this manner, that it is a certain habitude pre∣supposed to infused Vertues, as the Principle and Root of them, &c.

Moreover in Sentent. lib. 2. dist. 26. Art. 4. proving concerning the same thing that Grace and Vertue are not the same: If Vertue, saith he, should hold from the same, both that it was a Ver∣tue, and that it rendred a Man acceptable to God, it would fol∣low that all Vertue would do the like. And so seeing some Vertues are acquired by acts and not by infusion, it would follow according to the Pelagian heresie; that a Man should be made acceptable to God by his free will. But if it holds from another, and not from the same, from one that it is a Vertue, and another that it renders acceptable to God, it must needs be, that Grace and Vertue are not the same in reality. For so divers principles necessarily are suitable to divers effects, that are found in division from another.

Now if so be Grace is denied to be a Vertue, verily upon the same account also, it cannot be called Iustice, seeing Iustice is necessarily comprehended under the general name of Vertue: and what wonder is it, in the interim that this Antagonist of ours is so ill agreed with the Lutherans; who is not well enough agreed with the Angelical Doctors, and Leaders of his own Sect in such evident Heads of Divinity? But now let us consider his Reasonings, and the Confirmations of his Arguments, of what sort they are.

Argument.

Ma. That reconciles us, and makes us ac∣ceptable to God, which makes us like unto him.

Mi. It is only Righteousness, which makes us like unto God.

Con. Therefore, Righteousness only recon∣ciles us, and makes us acceptable.

There follows also another consequence of these things being first pre-supposed, built up∣on the same foundation.

Argument.

Ma. Grace makes acceptable to God, and unites unto him.

Mi. Righteousness makes us acceptable to God, and unites us to him.

Con. Therefore, Iustice is either Grace and a Vertue, or it is nothing.

First, Both these Arguments are equally ly∣able to the same reprehension: Because con∣trary to the Lawful Rules of Reasoning they conclude Affirmatively in the second figure, as they are placed by Osorius, lib. 5. but let us help the defect of the worthy Mans Lo∣gick. For, if I am not mistaken, he would rather gather thus from the definition of Grace.

Argument.

Ma. To whatsoever the definition agrees, the thing defined well agrees unto the same.

Mi. The definition of Grace doth very well agree to Righteousness.

Con. Therefore, the thing defined agrees to Righteousness.

I answer to the minor by de∣nying; for that which is the pro∣per definition of Grace, doth not agree to Righteousness, seeing the things themselves do very much differ from one another, both as to their Effects, and as to

their Causes. For, if we believe Thomas, Grace is the Principle, and Cause of Iustice, and of all Vertues. Iustice is not the cause of Grace, but rather an effect thereof. Yea, Albertus Ratisponensis does not much differ from the opinion of Thomas; who commenting upon the same sentence, in the same Dist. Ar. 4. saith thus.

Grace is a habit of Life universally well ordered, not according to the degrees of things ordered, but as it is called a Relation of the whole Life to the obtaining of the End. But Iustice doth not this, nor Vertue; for Iustice doth not necessarily make worthy of Eternal Life, upon the account that it is Iustice, or Vertue, &c. What if the proper and true cause which reconciles us to the love of God, and makes us worthy of Eternal Life, should be searched for. We shall find, that it lyes not in the Works of Iustice, but that it proceeds from another cause.

And what that cause is, Christ himself the best Master will teach you in the Gospel. Whom I request, and beseech you not only to hearken unto, but to believe. For these are his words in the Gospel: For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have be∣lieved that I came from the Father. By which you see that it comes to pass not for the sake of our Iustice or Vertue, but for the sake of his own dearly beloved Son, that God the Fa∣ther cares for us, and loves us.

What then, say you, doth not Iustice make Men that live holily and justly in this World acceptable to God? Which if it is so, it cannot be judged to be any other thing but Grace. For whatsoever ren∣ders us acceptable to God, is justly e∣steemed to be Grace. Iustice makes us acceptable to God, therefore it is Grace. As touching the minor, I deny not that Iustice, as it is very acceptable to God, so it renders acceptable to God, if it is perfect and a∣greeable to the Divine perfection; which not be∣ing given to us in this Life, another altar must be sought, there is need of other helps. Therefore if we would find any favour in the sight of God, we must betake our selves to Christ, and embrace him by Faith. Though I am not Ignorant what this good Disputant drives at, and what Masters he follows, and on what foundation he builds. For he builds upon that old and stale distinction of the Schoolmen, as much used, as it is light and frivolous, and vain: They according to their subtilty divide the manifold efficacy of grace, most of them into two parts, and some of them into three or more. To wit, into grace freely given, and that which makes acceptable. And again they subdivide this lat∣ter, as it were by an Anatomical Dissection into more Veins, into Operative grace, which again they divide into three Rivulets, Preventing, Be∣ginning,

delivering, and afterwards into co∣operating, which likewise is threefold: Fol∣lowing, promoting, assisting.

O holy Christ! with what study, with what labour, what Cobwebs do these Praters here weave, that they may darken the wholesome Doctrine of Grace with Smoke and Soot of their idle Talk; for if we speak of that Grace, unto which our whole Salvation is referred, who is there but understands by the Writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, that it is thus descri∣bed? to wit, that it is the only thing, which being placed in the free Indulgence of God towards miserable sinners, doth with dear Love in Christ the Son of God, embrace all that believe in him, and forgive their sins, and for the sake of his own Son bestows his Spirit and Eternal Life and Felicity upon them, tho' otherways they are unworthy: And tho' the Operation of this Grace is not one, and the Effects are divers, and the Gifts various ac∣cording to the diversity of donations; yet the Divine Grace it self is only one, which is both freely given to us for Salvation, and makes those acceptable to God, whom it saves, and is one and the same Cause both of Salvation and Renovation: Wherefore their distinction is justly found fault with, who by grace making men grateful or acceptable understand habits, and gifts communicated by God; and they do most frivolously

conclude, that men are made acceptable to God by these; whereas it is only Mercy in Christ the Mediatour, which doth not on∣ly account us dear to it self, but also chose us, before we were adorned with any Orna∣ments of gifts. Moreover, if the matter be so as those men define, that not only Faith in Christ, but gifts and habits of vertues infused by God make us acceptable to God: What then shall be said of those, who also out of Christ have possessed many such excellent gifts as well as we, in which many of them are not only equal to us, but some of them also ex∣cel us; such as are variety of Tongues, gifts of Healing, Prophecy, excellent Powers, sharpness of Wit, strength of Body, Ornaments of Mind? The Iews have a strong hope in God. The Turks maintain Love towards one another. But what, shall we affirm that those men also are by these things made acceptable to God? which is absurd and unreasonable. Therefore that we may conclude, we confess that such gifts are things which adorn this Life, beautifie Nature, and declare the liberal Bounty of God, but which nevertheless neither regene∣rate nor justifie us in the sight of God: For that is due to Christ only by Faith; neither is it convenient to attribute it to any other Creatures whatsoever: According to that of St. Paul; Being justified therefore by Faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Iesus Christ. Though in the mean while I am not ignorant, what they answer here; that they treat not

of those Works, which the Heathen perform by the strength of Nature; nor those Works, which are done by the Iews without Faith by the guidance of the Law only, but those Works which are of the Faith of Christ. What then, say they, are not such excellent performances of Works pleasing to God? Is not that very pleasing and acceptable to God, whatsoever is right, whatsoever is joyned with vertue and honesty, whatsoever being under∣taken with Faith is rightly perform∣ed according to Duty and Piety? That I may answer this, three things by the by must be observed, First, What manner of Works these are, which are discoursed of, whether perfect or not? And then, how they please, of themselves, or upon the account of Faith? Thirdly, How much they please, whether so much as to de∣serve Eternal Life, and obtain the pardon of violated Righteousness; and being set against the wrath of God, to turn away all vengeance, and be effectual to satisfie Iustice without any remission of sins? For all these must be re∣garded with necessary attention. First, Because God the great Creatour of the World, is per∣fectly holy in his own Nature, and the Perfe∣ction of all Goodness; it is evident that no∣thing is of it self acceptable to him, and well∣pleasing, which being defiled with any spot of imperfection, doth not agree in all respects to the most exact Purity.

But now seeing it is most true, which neither Osorius himself denies, That there is no man hath led his life so exactly, that in the whole course of his life he hath not been guilty of any gross offence: And that there is not any state of Mind so framed by Divine Grace, although it abounds with Divine Bene∣fits, in which nothing was ever violated by perfidiousness, or offensive through errour of mind, or omitted through negligence; or which doth not more consist of the remission of sins, than the perfection of vertues: What re∣mains then, but that it should either be false, which this Osorius of ours cracks of an hu∣mane perfection, or at least it behoveth that something should be searched for, besides the vertues themselves, which may commend these first beginnings of our imperfections to the Divine Perfection, and reconcile them to his favour.

And now then this remains to be search∣ed into; What it is that reconciles sinners to God, and restores them to his favour? and because this Recon∣ciliation cannot be perfected by the Righteousness of our vertues; therefore we must confess that all the Office of reconciling consists in the Grace of God only, which the Papists themselves will not deny unto us, who agree with our Party in this, That Man is justified by Grace; for so we hear it testified expresly

by Osorius himself in these words: Therefore, saith he, They that give Heaven to the Merits of holy men, do not weaken the Grace of God, as some ignorant men say, but they cele∣brate the wonderful effect of his Grace with due praises; for we are such as judge all the Morits of the Saints should be referred to the Bounty and Grace of God; so that it should al∣ways be said; Not unto us, Lord, not unto us, but unto thy Name give glory, &c. I hear in∣deed very good words; if you had not already imposed upon us sufficiently with words, O Oso∣rius! But he that will with judicious attention consider the matters themselves, and the Ar∣guments, and the whole tenour of your discourse, will find it to be far otherways, that you do not at all intend what your words pretend, and that you drive at nothing more in all your endeavours, than to hide under the plausible title of grace so hidden an adversary of grace, (that I may speak with Augustin) together with the other Companions of your Society; who being all instructed in the same School, seem to make a Conspiracy about this one thing, as it were giving notice by a watch-word, viz. to overthrow all the efficacy of Evangelical Grace, to destroy the assurance of Faith, to oveturn all: For what place is there for Grace, I beseech you, if Heaven is given not by the free gift of the bestower, but to the Merits of holy men, as you say? And what will you answer Paul the Apostle, who denies

that grace is any more grace, if men deal with God by Works? whence that may be brought not without just cause against you and yours, which Au∣gustine of old brought in his con∣tending with the Antient Pelagians of his time. For thus you plead; That Heaven is justly and deservedly given to the Merits of holy men. On the contrary, Augustine being taught by Apo∣stolick Authority, If it is given, saith he, to any Merits; it is not then given freely, but is ren∣der'd as due; and by this means it is not by a true name called grace, where the reward, as the Apostle speaks, is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt. But that it may be true grace, that is, free, it finds nothing in Man to whom it should be due; otherways, according to the mind of the Apostle, grace would not be grace, &c. And now with what fair colours cast on them, will those things, be∣ing contrary to one another, be made to agree? Augustine with St. Paul affirms, that grace finds nothing in Man, to which it should be due; That it may be free. On the contrary, the Papists contend that Heaven is given as a due debt to the Merits of the Saints. What is more contrary? Grace, saith he, doth not on∣ly help the righteous man, but also justifies the ungodly: in which there appears a twofold effect and fruit of Divine Grace, both in help∣ing the righteous, and justifying the ungodly: With the one of which you being contented,

ye either unworthily pass by the other, or which is more abominable, ye oppose it wickedly, whilst ye admit no grace of justify∣ing, but that which seems to be joyned with Vertue, and the Iustice of Merits.

And yet after all these things, whereas nothing more contrary to grace can be spoken, this sweet Oratour would perswade us with his flourished speeches, that they are no such men as overturn the Grace of God, as some ignorant men say; but that they celebrate with due praise the wonderful effect of grace, and teach that all the Merits of the Saints should be referred to the Grace of God.

Now we acknowledge this to be most cer∣tain, that there is not any thing, but what should be referred to the Grace of God; whence Hierom accounts it for Sacrilege, if any man thinks he can abstain from sinning without grace. But here there is need to ex∣plain what the word grace signifies according to the caution of the Gospel. For grace in the holy Scriptures is not only understood concern∣ing the help of the Holy Spirit, but it compre∣hends both free Imputation, which is by Christ (which the Papists can∣not endure) and the help of the Holy Spirit in performing the Offices of Vertues.

How the Papists and Protestants agree and differ in understand∣ing the word Grace.

Now whereas both Papists and Protestants seem to attribute Man's Iustifaication to grace, herein they both agree. But they say this after their manner of speaking, & we after ours. For this is the difference between these and the Protestants, that the Papists by the name of grace understand only gifts, that are conferr'd upon those that are justified, to wit, habits, which they call infused, and excellent Endow∣ments of lovely Vertues, and other things of that kind, wherewith the Elect are adorned by the free gift of God. But the contrary party being otherways taught by the Scriptures, and confirmed by the sayings of the Fathers, perceiving these very gifts of the Spirit of God, as long as they live in this flesh, are im∣perfect, through our default; they deny that men can be justified by these, because Divine Iustice cannot at all be satisfied by these. And therefore it is, that they attribute Iustification only to the grace and mercy of God; which consists not of any remune∣ration of Vertues, but rather impu∣tation of Righteousness, and for∣giveness of sins. For we do not find fault with this in them, that they do rightly affirm, that

all our good works should be referred to the grace of God; which neither the Iews them∣selves nor the Turks will deny. But we justly disapprove, that they do not define this grace according to Scrip∣ture. For whereas grace is so de∣fined by this sort of men, that it is nothing else but a habit infused by God, like his own goodness and love, whereby he that hath it is rendered acceptable to God; and it makes Works acceptable to him and merito∣rious: It is easily demonstrated both by Scrip∣tures and Reason, how faulty this definition is, because the thing defined is of a larger ex∣tent than the definition: For the grace where∣by God loved Iacob, and hated Esau, before they did either good or evil, was grace; which ye•• ••as not any Habit, either begotten in them by the power of Nature, or infused by grace, whereby Iacob, that had it, that I may use their words, was render'd acceptable to God. After the like manner the grace which in the midst of his persecution of Saints changed Paul into an Instrument in the hand of Electing grace, was not an infused Habit, but went be∣fore an infused Habit, and first made him a man acceptable to Christ, before the Habit mak∣ing acceptable was infused. The same should be said of the Thief, the Publican, the Leper, and many others in the History of the Gospel, who were not saved by an infused Habit, but

only by an infused Faith; for otherways what did that word so often repeated in the Gospel signifie; Thy Faith hath saved thee? Which word, if it be true, then either Faith is Righ∣teousness, or else Righteousness can by no means save us. And the same reason is to be given of the Conversion of the Gentiles; whom of old the grace of God brought from impure Paganism to the Communion of the Gospel; not for any Inherent Righteousness, but for his great Love wherewith he loved the unworthy and the wretched sinners.

Moreover, what shall be said of the Apostles themselves, whom Christ verily chose not being just, as Augustine speaks, but to be justi∣fied, when he said; I chose you out of the World? What if Christ chose them out of the World; that they might be just; then they were first unjust in the World, whom he chose out of the World, that they might be just. If they were first just, and not sin∣ners of the World, whom Christ chose out of the World; then they first chose Christ, that they being just, might be chosen by him. But it was not so; for he himself says to them; Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, &c.

These things said Augustine; by which it evidently appears how our Election and Iusti∣fication purchased by Christ is perfected not by any Righteousness of Works, but only by the free gift of Grace; whence it is called by Paul the Election of Grace, not of Righte∣ousness,

to wit, by this Argument: What if it is by Grace, saith he, it is not now by Works, or else grace is not grace; but if it is of works, then it is not grace; or else work would not be work, &c. Which things being so, it necessarily follows, that the Righ∣teousness, which is wholly exercised in the Observance of Works, is not rightly called Grace by Osorius.

Therefore take the Argument of Augustine.

Argument.

Ma. It is grace which both elects and ju∣stifies the ungodly.

Mi. Inherent Righteousness doth not justifie the unrighteous; for if he be ungodly, how is he just? If he is just, how shall he be called unjust?

Concl. Therefore righteousness is not grace; otherways according to St. Paul; If righteous∣ness is of works, then grace is not grace.

Moreover the grace of God, which is his free Indulgence, be∣cause it hath no place properly, but where vengeance would be just; neither is there any just vengeance, where perfect righteousness flourishes; There∣fore

it must be false, which Osorius assumes; That it is either righteousness which makes us acceptable to God, and that it is grace, or it is nothing. But now that we may grant this to Osorius for the sake of disputing; that it is perhaps possible, that this observance of righteousness and glorious furni∣niture of most holy Vertues, wherewith the di∣vine grace adorns us, receives this name, being given to it by some Writers, so that in some re∣spect it is called grace: But what then? what relation hath this to our Controversie? seeing that it is not the grace, which justifies us before God, but there will be need of another grace whereby that same grace may be justified: For it is not a doubtful case in this place, whether all that we have should be referred to the grace and bounty of God: For who is so ignorant as to doubt thereof? neither is it a matter of doubt, whether the pious works of Christians are pleasing to God? but whether Christians do so please God upon the account of their pious works, that they are there∣fore justified; that they escape wrath, that being dead they revive; that they put on Immortality, that they are received into heavenly glory. This your whole discourse contends for, as if there were no other way, or manner of turning away the wrath of God, and purchasing eternal life, but by the continual exercise of Charity, and pious and holy actions. And because all instruction of living well, proceeds not only from

the strength of our nature, but from the grace of God, which is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by faith; Therefore whatso∣ever you any where in reading the holy Scrip∣tures of God meet with of the words grace and faith, presently you wrest that as a most sure Testimony to confirm the Righteousness of good Works, and also to the defence of Grace and Faith. Which that the Reader may perceive the more evidently, and also admire the sharp 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of this sweet Inter∣preter; I thought good, to bring forth one out of many and almost innumerable, for an Example. As where Paul says these Words: Not by Works which we have done, but according to his own mercy he saved us, &c. Osorius ha∣ving followed his own Hosius, in∣terprets this place, as if these words of the Apostle should not be otherways understood, than of Works, not those which are peculiarly ours, but those which are performed by faith 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in vi∣gour and stirred up, &c. We have heard Osorius: Receive also Hosius, who makes a noise out of the same Tridentine Oracle. The works, saith he, which they do, are good in this respect, as they are Christ's Works, not theirs. For in as much as they are tbeirs, though they seem to be good Works, they conduce nothing at all to Eternal Life: But in as much as they are God's, and the Works of his hands, so through bis bounty they are esteemed worthy both of the title of Righteousness, and the reward of

the Heavenly Kingdom, &c. Whence all their reasoning and discourse of good works is of this kind: God doth not see and Crown our Works in us, but his own. And moreover the same Hosius adds, pleading after his own manner, that the re∣ward of the Heavenly Kingdom will be given to the Works, which indeed are ours, but not for their dignity as they proceed from us, but for Christ's sake, whose handy-works they are, as Aug. says: For he that lives and dwells in us works them. And for that cause (which is more ridicu∣lous) this Phormio goes on to rail at the Lu∣therans as Enemies of Grace; Who, forsooth, as he says, do much more grievously detract from the Glory of Christ, than they, and make void his Cross, and diminish the price of his blood. For when they detract from the Works of the regenerate, they do not derogate from their merits, but from Christ, whence all their dignity de∣rives, &c.

These things said Hosius, to whom Andradius agrees in a Speech not much differing; writing these words: When we say that Righ∣teousness is inherent in us, we do not at all derogate Power and Authority from the Righteousness and Merits of Christ, to whom we are beholden for all the Orna∣ments of the mind. But we rather augment and amplifie them: When we say he hath merited for us not a feigned and imputa∣tive Righteousness, whereby those who are

really wicked; are esteemed just, but are not so; but a Righteousness that is true, solid, ex∣press, and engraven wonderfully upon the mind, &c. And a little lower, he said: Yea, in∣deed ye Lutherans are injurious to the Son of God, the Saviour of Mankind, ye, I say, Endeavour to lessen and depress his very gracious benefits: Who say that those Sins remain, which, he hath washed away in the laver of his own Blood; ye judge those to be defiled with pollutions, whom he hath cleansed by his infinite Vertue, and you en∣deavour to take away from us that Righte∣ousness, which he hath merited for Mankind with many labours and Blood. Hitherto spake Andradius.

I need not here warn you, Pious Reader, what should be judg∣ed of the designs and discour∣sings of those Men, and what you your self must beware of: with what deceit they prevent the simplicity of the Apostolick Doctrine, with what dark∣ness they cover their own deceits, what Man is so void of understanding, or hath been so little exercised in the Reading of Sacred things, but may with his Eyes shut discern, how these things are not at all agreeable to the mind of the Apostle? By which there is an easie oppor∣tunity given to judge, what should be judged of this whole Generation of Men and their

Church, which they by a false Name boast to be Catholick, which broaches amongst the common People, these so great monsters of errours, and tares of Opinions, defends them in Schools, Preaches them in Churches, which sends forth into the midst of us such Dogmatists, and Artificers of deceits, who not only corrupt the small Veins and Rivulets of sin∣cere Doctrine, but also proceed to the Fountains themselves, and Invalidate the Foundations of Apostolick Insti∣tution, and cut and tear the very sinews of the simple verity. For what greater injury can be done to the Scriptures of God? What more cruel against the Grace of Christ, what more Hostile against the mind of Paul, and more gross against the soundness of the Christian Faith can be said or devised, than what those Roman Potters have contributed by their commentitious deceits, to the plague and ruine of the Christian Common-wealth? For, what may we judge should be hoped for concerning the common Religion, the Sins of every one, and the state of the Christian Com∣mon-wealth, if the matter come to this, that this largeness of Evangelical mercy being taken away or contracted, we must be called back again to the account of good Works.

Concerning the Vertue and Efficacy of Di∣vine Grace, a more enlarged dispute a∣gainst the Adversaries; Answering their Objections.

BUT Those Men will deny that they detract any thing from the Grace of God, yea, they say that this is the common Sin of the Lutherans, not theirs, because all that they drive at is to maintain the mercy of God and to celebrate it with due praises: Why so I pray? for what, say they? Do not the Pious Works of the Saints please God? Well, and what next? Should not the same Works having proceeded from God himself the Author, be referred to his bounty and mercy Why not?

Now then Catholick Reader, re∣ceive a conclusion, Roman Catholick enough? as I suppose. Therefore he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 detracts from good works wrought by Christ, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 from the Grace and Mercy of God: Well said, but pray who detracts from those? Who denies good Works, which Christ living and dwelling in us Works, to be good Works? Does any Man take away due praise and dignity from those? Now Hosius talks, Osorius pleads, Andradius crys out, that the Lutherans do it eagerly. Why so, I beseech you? Because they do not at∣tribute

unto the performance of good Works, the Salvation that is due to them, but tran∣slate it to Faith only.

What then, such as do not attribute Sal∣vation to good Works, should they be there∣fore supposed to attribute nothing to Works, or to cast reproach upon the grace of God? On the contrary, they that detract the pro∣mise of Eternal Life from the Christian Faith, Shall they be accounted Friends to Grace?

By the same reason we may turn Light in∣to Darkness, and Darkness into Light: Let Christ remain in his Sepulcher, let Moses rise again to be Iudge of the Living and the Dead. But now what Arguments do they rely upon in disputing thus? Because, say they, Works of Righteousness flow from the Fountain of Divine Grace. But what? Is not Faith in Christ the Mediatour as singu∣lar a gift of God; and does it not pro∣ceed from the Election of Divine Grace? But now let us hear an Argument more than Catholick.

Argument.

Ma. We are justified by the Grace of God only.

Mi. Our good Works have their rise from the Grace of God only.

Con. Therefore all our Iustifi∣cation consists in good Works.

The deceit of this Paralogism must be drawn forth: And again the word Grace must be explained: Which is taken one way in the major and another way in the minor; for there it is taken for mercy, and the free good will of God, where∣by he hath redeemed us freely, whereby he loves us in Christ Iesus, and forgives us our Sins, and whereby also he imparts his Spirit and Life Eternal to us. And this is peculiarly called Grace of forgiveness, of which the writings of the Apostles speak aloud in many places. It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that run∣neth, but of God that sheweth mercy: And again: Sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the Law but under Grace. And what the same Apostle cites out of a Psalm: Blessed are they whose Iniquities are for∣given, and whose Sins are covered, &c.

And also that which elsewhere he testified very evidently: They are justified freely by his Grace; moreover that none should be un∣certain, what is understood by the word Grace, presently subjoining, and as it were ex∣plaining himself, he infers next: By the Re∣demption which is in Christ Iesus. But what

other thing does this adding of Redemption signifie, but the Re∣mission of all Sins? That this may be the Argument: We are justi∣fied by that Grace, whereby we are redeemed. But Grace by renewing us doth not redeem us. Therefore we are not justified by Grace renewing us.

I come now to the minor, in which the word grace is taken otherways than in the major. For there it is put for remission or re∣demption, here for renovation: That is, for the effectual energy of the Divine Inspiration; in com∣municating Gifts and Endowments, wherewith he afterwards adorns those whom first he hath justified: Whence arises a twofold manner of distinguishing Grace, according to the twofold diversity of effects on this side, and on that side, of which one consists in the remission of evil Works, the other in the operation of good Works. And that is called pardoning Grace, and this is called renewing Grace: From the one where∣of proceeds the Salvation and the Iustification of the Ungodly, and from the other come the good Works of the Godly; and yet those are not full, nor perfect.

Therefore, I answer the Argu∣ment proposed, which hath more errours than one. Moreover it is made up of mere particulars: Also in the minor contrary to the man∣ner of Disputants, the case is changed, where∣as

the same case should be kept that goes be∣fore in the major, and the minor should fol∣low thus: But our good Works are by the grace of God only; or at least, in the major the same case of the minor should have been kept, after this manner: Our Iustification arises twice from the grace of God. There∣fore all our Iustification flows from good Works. So that the true nature of this Pseu∣dosyllogism, belongs not to the first, but the second figure simply concluding both affirmatively and also most absurdly, just as if a Man should argue thus: Our corporeal Na∣ture was made of the slime of the Earth: Earthen-Pots are made of the slime of the Earth, there∣fore our corporeal Nature was made of Ear∣then-Pots. What need is there of words? Whatsoever way these Men form their Ar∣gument, or reform it, they shall never be able to prove, that the works of the Law, whe∣ther such as we our selves have wrought, or such as the Divine Grace works in us, do contain in themselves any cause of Salvation. For what manner of consequence is this? Because habitual influences of Works, which make us acceptable to God, proceed no o∣therways but from co∣operating Grace: There∣fore Faith without inherent Righteousness doth not justifie, neither doth Sal∣vation consist of any other thing but good Works. But because there is a twofold sort of Works,

one of those which go before Faith, ano∣ther of those which follow Faith, I would know of which of those rwo parts they un∣derstand it. If of the preoedent they will not deny those to be Sins: For that which is not of Faith is of Sin: But if they under∣stand it of Works subsequent to Faith, they will say that those are either perfect or im∣perfect. If perfect, and of such a sort, that they answer the things commanded in the Law, not only according to the substance, but also according to the manner of doing. To what purpose then is that daily saying of the Church made mention of: Forgive us our debts? Or what will they answer to Augustine, who evidently confutes what they maintain?

On the contrary, if they are Imperfect, Languid, and Lame, upon what account will they make us acceptable to God the Iudge, which are of themselves defective,. and be∣sprinkled with faults, and spots, and need another Grace, by the commenda∣tion whereof they may be plea∣sing to God? What if that infi∣nite and Eternal purity, for the most part in the Levitical Sacri∣fices did not endure whatever seemed any way defective, or deformed, or defiled with the

least pollu on, and which was not exquisitely entire and blameless in all respects; if so great integrity of all parts was required in the Levites and Priests, that it was not lawful to suffer any one to enter into the holy place of the Sanctuary, who was wounded in any member of his body, or deformed in any part, or had a Wen: Do you think that you can endure the presence of the most holy God with that half-torn and ragged Imperfection? Where∣fore seeing it must needs be perfect and un∣blameable upon all accounts, which by Iusti∣fication indemnifies and frees us from all sin before the dreadful Tribunal of most perfect Righteousness; surely no man can believe that it consists in our works, but only in the works of the Son of God; not those which his ha∣bitual grace works in us, but those which he himself hath both graciously undertaken to do for us, and also, having undertaken them, hath performed them to the full.

What Benesits come to us from Christ, and what should be chiefly regarded in these Benefits.

NOW this is it in which chiefly the un∣speakable amplitude of Divine Grace to∣wards us doth evidently shine forth, that God the Almighty Governour and Creatour of the World, according to his fingular Mercy,

wherewith he hath loved the World, having given his Son, sent him to us, and so sent him, that he for us hath fulfilled all Righteousness; for there was no need that he should fulfil it for himself, and if he hath fulfilled it for us, what hinders now, but that may be ours, which was done for us? or to what purpose should he do that for us, which he knew was neces∣sary to be done by our selves for our Salvation? But what if accord∣ing to the saying of Thomas, What∣soever things we can do by Friends, we our selves are said to be able to do it in some respect: How much better then may we our selves be sup∣posed both to be able to do, and also to have done those things which a Friend is not only able to do for us, but hath also done for us? and this is that grace chiefly, which every where the Evangelical Writings sound sorth unto us; unto which all our both consolation & salvation should be referred; which Paul the Apostle having received from Christ, did propagate it with so continued labour among the Gentiles and taught it with so great fervour of spirit and made it evident with so many Signs and Mi∣racles, and also confirmed it with so many Scriptures and most sure Testimonies. Where∣fore those Papists are the more worthy to be abhorred as being Enemies to Antiquity, and Enemies to Paul; who seem to be busied about nothing else, but to abolish the Gospel of Christ, and to overturn the Foundations of

the Doctrine of the Apostles, that have been long since very well laid by our first Fathers, and to sow another Gospel in the minds of Christians: For what else doth all their Doctrine drive at, who disputing about Grace, Faith and Righteousness, do so handle the matter by their Philosophical Prin∣ciples, that he who observes their Collections, Distinctions, Corollaries and Opinions, will perceive that they do not teach as Christians out of the Gospel, out of Christ, out of Paul, but that the Antient Philosophers of the old Academy, or the Thalmudists of the Law of Moses are again risen up and alive; except that this only difference is between them, and the Antient Philosophers, that these do palliate with the name of Grace, and Faith in words, at least in some manner, but in reality, as touching the signification of the word Grace, or the force of the word Faith, they seem to be so very blind, as if they had read Paul little, or at least had not at all understood him. I do not rail at the men themselves, whom I rather account worthy of pity, but it is not at all convenient to endure the Errours of men, be∣cause they cast no small blot upon Religion, and are injurious to Christ, and do violence to Paul, overthrow the simplicity of the Christian Faith; moreover they adulterate all the sincerity of E∣vangelical Doctrine with their Ni∣ceties,

and after a certain manner subdue it unto humane Philosophy. Which that it may appear the more evidently to the Minds and Eyes of beholders, let it not be tedious to you to hearken a while, first what Divine Truth, and then what Humane Opinions teach us.

But because there are two things chiefly in which the whole sum both of our Salvation and Religion is contained, Grace, and Faith, of which the one belongs to God towards men, the other agrees to men towards God: It ve∣ry much concerns Christians, that their Minds be very well instructed in both. And Grace indeed is discerned in those good things that are given to us, and promised by God. Faith is exercised in those Offices, which are chiefly due from us to God, and are greatly requisite. Therefore that we may rightly apprehend the nature of Grace, we must see what and how great those gifts are, which the bounty of God hath partly bestowed upon us, and partly promised: Concerning which thing it remains that we should examine what the Scriblers of Popish Divinity do hold. Now what they teach about this matter, is for the most part to this purpose. They place the end of humane Life in blessedness, and the School-Divines dispute about this very blessedness just after such a manner as the Phi∣losophers of old did of their chief∣est good; unto which every man, must endeavour according to his power, to attain by industry and

diligent labours, and the merits of the great∣est Vertues. And when the former Pela∣gians affirmed that we could do that by the strength of Nature, there were not wanting others at the same time, who valiantly op∣posing the help of the Grace of God to Free-will, successfully re∣jected and exploded this wicked Opinion by the Scriptures. After this came another kind of Divines, who having followed Augustine, disputed thus against the Pelagians, that we cannot so much as will good by Free-will without Grace, or merit Eternal Life by any means without Grace. And that is true indeed. But that those same men joyning Grace again, deny not that we can merit Life by Works, and that ex condigno according to their worth; I do not see what difference is between these and the Pelagians in that; except that in the manner of working they somewhat differ; for those work without grace, these no otherways but by grace; but both do equal∣ly err from the scope of true Iustification: For as untrue as that is, that it is in our power to perform any thing aright without the Grace of God: It is again as false, that this grace of working was not given by God for any other purpose, but to pro∣duce meritorious works, whereby we may be justified. Though I deny not that by any

means that the Divine grace of the Spirit is both fruitful and abounding with the greatest Ver∣tues, which can never be idle; but it doth not therefore follow by sufficient strength of Reason, that the reward of Eter∣nal Salvation is due to the merits of these Vertues, as the generality of Sophisters chatter with a great noise in Schools: For thus Tho∣mas the Prince of this Faction, and the others that are partakers of his Discipline discourse of grace, and in their Summularies do define this grace, as if it were nothing else, but a certain habitual infusion of the heavenly gift in the essence of the Soul, because, (as they suppose) it is a principle of meri∣torious works; for so Thomas de∣fines it. And Guillermus not much differing from him, calls this grace a form freely given to us by God without merits, which makes him that hath it acceptable, and makes his work good, and meritorious. Of these then is a vulgar definition made up, and it thus defines grace unto us, that it is, a gift of good will freely given, making its pos∣sessor acceptable, and rendring his work good. And Albert shews the manner how it makes a man good; in as much as by infused Vertues, as he says, it perfects the will of man for act, &c.

By these things, I suppose, it ap∣pears evident enough what Opinion hitherto hath been usual amongst those men in the Popish School. In which neither their Divines them∣selves are well enough agreed with one another; for some place this habitual gift of influencing grace in the essence of the Soul subje∣ctively (that I may speak in their own Dialect) amongst whom is Thomas and Bonaventure. Others chose rather to refer it not to the essence, but the powers of the Soul as its proper subject, of whom is Scotus, and the Allies of that Order.

Again, There are those who think grace is nothing else but a Vertue; which is the thing that Osorius strongly defends in his Books. But Thomas confutes this Heresie with much greater strength, and bears it down with suitable Reasons. But the summ of all their summs drives at this, that Faith only may be excluded from Iusti∣fication, and that they may not acknowledge any other Iustification, but what consists in exercising of Works: Neither do they think this grace to be given to us upon any other account, but for this end, to fulfil (as they

say) the Commands of God, ac∣cording to the due manner, with∣out which the fulfilling of them cannot otherways be meritorious.

The Errour of the Tridentines in defining Grace is examined.

I Have explained the sayings of some Di∣vines, which differ several ways from one another, yet they are all wonderfully agreed in this one thing, as it were by a common Conspiracy, that they may take away from sinners that saving Grace which only justifies us. Let us joyn also unto these, if you please, the Sophisters of later times, and especially the Nobles of Trent, and the Hereticks of that Council, whose Writings, Opinions, and De∣crees, when they are read, what do they de∣clare? I will say in a word, and truly, no∣thing that is sound, nothing that is not full of Errour, nothing that does not disagree with the genuine verity of the Word. But what that Errour is, lest we should seem to accuse them without cause, let us explain in a few words, but true; to wit, seeing there is a two∣fold Testimony of the Grace of the Father to∣wards us in the Scriptures; the one whereby in a free gift he bestowed his Son upon us 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the other, whereby he bestowed his Spirit: The Son to die for us, the Spirit to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 our Life; there is not any man, but should con∣fess

that they are both great gifts. He gave his Son, than whom nothing was dearer to him; he bestows his Spirit, than which nothing is higher in Heaven. But for what purpose doth he bestow both? how does he give them for our advantage? for what end? with what fruit? what did he design in so doing? by what Reason was he persuaded? by what ne∣cessity? by what mercy was the most gracious Father and maker of the World moved? I would very willingly ask this first, either of Thomas Aquinas, or rather of those Tridentine fellow-Priests; for if Free-will being helped by the grace of the Sprit of God, as they say, could do so much by meriting through the infused Vertues, even as much as was suffi∣cient for obtaining Salvation, what cause then was there why all this charge should be put upon Christ the Son of God? What need. was there of his blood? Why did not the most gracious Father spare his Life? But if so be that all other helps of grace could afford no help to expedite the business of our Redemption; Then it remains to be asked of those men, what they affirm of Christ, whether they acknowledge him the only Saviour or not? And indeed I know that they will not deny that Christ is the on∣ly Saviour. But in the mean while it re∣mains that they should answer me this, af∣ter what manner this only Saviour saves his own, whether only by his Innocency and Death, or by adding other helps besides? Now if they judge that other securities are

necessarily required, it must be known what sort of Securities these are. Aquinas with his Asso∣ciates answers, that those are gifts procured by the Holy Spirit, and habitual Infusions of Charity, and the like faculties of exercising Righteousness, which helps unless they are added, the Death of Christ, according to his Opinion is not of such efficacy that it should be able enough of it self alone to merit Salvation. And now, what then if those are added? doth then at length full and perfect Righte∣ousness arise from these together, partly from the blood of Christ, and partly from renovation by new qualities, which may reconcile us being justified unto God. For thus Andradius with his fellow. Tridentines divides Iustification, which Paul attributes simply to Faith, into two parts, of which he affirms that the one consists in the remission of sins, and the other in the obedience of the Law. O

the Pest of Sophistical Divinity, and intole∣rable deceits! for by this distinction it will come to pass, that Christ is not the only Saviour, nor a compleat one, but the Spirit that be∣stows these qualities; for if the only formal cause of our Iustification consists in nothing but only the renovation of the inner man, by a willing receiving of grace and gifts; what shall now remain that may be attributed to Christ the Saviour and his blood, but that he should only give a Dye to our merits, which being so Dyed, may bring us di∣rectly into Heaven. But if it be so, that the Death of Christ alone doth not fully compleat our Re∣demption; to what purpose, or what way did he say it was finish∣ed, when his passion was finished? Or how are all things in Heaven and in Earth reconciled by the blood of his Cross, as Paul wit∣nesseth? Moreover, the same Paul in many places, and in all his Epistles, places the price and Re∣demption in no other thing, but only in the Blood and Cross of the Son of God: In whom, saith he, we have Redemption through his blood: But how shall we say that all things are reconciled by blood, if Charity and the other

gifts of Renovation, and Merits are the things which make us acceptable to God, and claim unto themselves, the greatest part of our Reconciliati∣on? What is this else, but to thrust Christ down not only from his Office, but also from the Throne of his glory with a gigantick fury?

Concerning the Reward and Merits of good Works.

VVHat then? Are there no Merits then, say they, of the Righteous? Is there no reward by way of Merit left in Heaven, which Christ promises to be so plentiful in the Scriptures? What, will all that provision of inherent Righteousness avail us nothing towards Life? Will so many labours and store of most Holy Works profit nothing, wherewith we be∣ing Cloathed by the Holy Spirit, are advanced daily more and more towards the fulness of Righteousness? Augustin will answer to these things, and first of Merits. If you ask, saith he, whether there are no Merits of the Righteous?

There are indeed, because they are Righteous; but there were no Merits, that they might be Righte∣ous. For they were made Righte∣ous

when they were justified, &c. Therefore they were not made Righteous by Merits, if we believe Augustin, but Merits proceed from the Iust: By which you may under∣stand, that a Person is not valu∣ed by the Dignity of his Works or his Grace; but that the Diginity of Merits receives its value from the Iustified Person. Wherefore see∣ing Men are not made Righteous by Merits, as Augustin witnesseth, but Merits receive their Virtue and Dignity from the Iustified, it easily appears from hence, what should be judged of reward by way of Merit. For if after the like manner it be asked, whether there is no reward of the Saints in Heaven: that which Augustin answers concerning the Merits of the Righte∣ous, the same do I also acknowledge concern∣ing the reward of the Saints, that the Saints want not a reward, and that a large one in the Heavens. For they who are Holy. a Reward shall be ap∣pointed for them, not for the Works themselves, because they are Holy, but because they that work are Holy.

For not Heaven, but a reward in Heaven is given not to Holy Works, but to the Workers. But if any proceed to ask, whence they are Holy: I return to Augustin, That they are Holy from thence, whence they are also made Iust, not by Works, but by the Faith

of the Workers. As for Example, if any Heathen or Pharisee, who is a stranger to the Faith of Christ, should do this same thing, that a Christian does, though he should do also greater things, yet the Works would not please God. And why should his Works displease? Or why should the Works of a Christian please, unless it were for Faith? And that is it which Prophetical verity in old time foretold should come to pass, that the Iust should live by Faith; he says, not that the Faithful should live by Righteousness: By which you see, that this Life whereby we live by the Faith of the Son of God, is not rendered unto the Merits of Works, but consists of Faith and Grace; for grace and the gift of God, is Etrenal Life: If grace, where is reward? If a gift, where then is Merit? But what shall be said in the mean while unto Testimonies, that are frequent in the Scriptures, which oft-times propose great Rewards to Pious Works? First, it is to be considered by the very Name of Obedience, Debt and Duty are implyed: Now the Obedience we owe, can pro∣perly deserve no grace: What Man at any time commanding a hired Servant to do his Duty, bestows grace or praise upon him for that which he owed upon the account of O∣bedience, or therefore doth assign unto him a∣ny portion of his Inheritance? What does the Lord himself an∣swer to such Servants in the Gospel? Say ye, we are unprofitable Servants,

we have done that which was our duty to do, &c. Now then where∣fore are those things called by the Name of reward, which God ren∣ders unto our good Deeds? I will tell you: God proposes rewards: verily so he does: but the same God proposes Dangers and Combats. The most excellent Master of the Wrestlings sees what and how great storms of Temptations must be undergone, how many labours must be endured, how many difficulties lye before them: He sees through how many Casualties and Dan∣gers, the strait way to the Kingdom must be undertaken by them, who are planted in Christ: And therefore that they may not faint in their minds, but proceed with the greater courage in their undertaken Warfare, rewards are shewed to them as certain prizes, and recompenses of Victory, to stir up their minds; whereby the most Gracious Father may mitigate the crosses of his own Servants, and comfort them in their Sufferings, with proposing hope of Rewards.

And hence is that frequent mention of Re∣ward and Recompenses in the Scriptures. Not that those things which the Saints suffer in this life, are worthy of rewards.

For the sufferings of this time are not wor∣thy of the glory that shall be revealed in us: But because it so seemed good to the Clemency of God, to esteem those Merits of ours which are none, as if they were Merits indeed, and to Crown them, as if they were very great, which deserve no grace at all. For who hath

thanked a Servant, as the Gospel Witnesses for the Service, which he owed to his Master af∣ter he did his Commands? And would not ra∣ther have punished him if he had not done them? But if he find any praise or reward beyond his Merit, he hath cause to give thanks to his Master, but not to boast of his own Merits. Therefore Augustin admonishes rightly and understand∣ingly: If you would be a stranger to grace, saith he, boast of your Merit. And verily Bernard was not wholy without sight, though he saw not all things, when he said it was sufficient for Merit, to know that Merits are not sufficient.

Briefly, that we may express the thing in a word, whatsoever it is, which is called a re∣ward in Mystical writings, is nothing else but Grace proposed in the place and name of reward. What if this present Life, which we enjoy in the Flesh, if the conveniency of Life, and other Ornaments, though transito∣ry, and temporary, are very rightly accounted, not to be, our Merits, but the Gifts of God, how much more rightly shall that Heavenly and everlasting reward of Life, wherewith the most gracious Father crowns us, seem to proceed, not from the dignity of our Works, but from his singular Mercy and Grace. Which though sometimes it takes the name of reward, yet if we rightly consider the matter, we shall find nothing in all this whole Fabrick of our Redemption, but the only and singular Grace of God.

First, because he endued thee with Faith, and the knowledge of his Son: And because afterwards he washes thee in the saving laver of Faith, and because having wash∣ed thee, he calls thee forth to be a partaker of the Inheritance of the Saints, translating thee into the Kingdom of his Son, whom he freely gives unto thee; and Adopts thee for his Son to∣gether with him, and appoints thee for his Heir: Promises the Heredetary Kingdom, and adorns, changes, refreshes and comforts thee with his Spirit; beautifies thee with Vertues, justifies thee by Faith, over∣looks very many of thy Sins, esteems thy good deeds which are very small, as if they were the greatest, and rewards them as if they were eminent.

He brings thee forth to the Combat, looks upon thee Fighting, adds Strength to thee, guards thee with Patience, restores thee when fallen, gives thee a way of escape in Temptations, and raises the up, when thou art Dead, and exalts thee to the Mansions of never perishing Glory.

What do you contemplate, I beseech you, in these, but the boundless and altogether In∣finite greatness of Grace? And to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 all that hath been said of it, whatso∣ever it is, that we are, or shall be, that we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that we live, and are to live; What is 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but the grace of God, that shews Mercy?

Not of Man that willeth or runneth? Ex∣amine and search your self, and all things that are yours: First consider your Vocation, who calls thee to this Grace; it regards those only, whom Divine Grace sets apart for it self, not those that are puffed up with Human Learning, not those that are of the noblest extraction, and dignified with the high Titles of their Ancestors, but God hath chiefly chosen the base and unpolished things of this World, which seemed contemptible and of small value, according to the vulgar opinion. And that I may express it in a word, those things that were nothing he exalts unto the high∣est Sublimity. Why so? But that he may have all the glory to his own free Grace, and no place for glorying left for Human en∣deavours, and merits? Of which thing if any Man require more sure examples, let him call to mind the calling of Peter. with the rest of the Fish∣ermen, that were his sellow Apostles, and chiefly let him admire the stupendous History of Paul's Conversion: In whom if we look at his very Original, as Augustin speaks, and seek for his Merits, we shall find that they be∣longed to Damnation, not to Salvation.

The calling of God and his Grace, are Free and Gratuitous, beyond all Merits of our Works.

LET Us come down nearer to our seves, and now take Example from thy self, Christian Brother, whosoever thou art: con∣sider with your self both what you now are, and what formerly you have been; You stand in Faith, Who gave it you? You con∣tinue in the Faith, Who upholds you? You are assaulted by Temptations, but do not succumb, Who helps you? You are perpetually in danger amongst so great a Multitude that perish; Who supports you? You Sin daily, Who forgives you? Dangers, Terrours, Mi∣series, weariness besiege you on every side, Who gives you help? Moreover, whither∣soever you turn your self, what do you see else, but all Arguments of Favour and Grace, which take away from Men all confidence in Works, and glorying in Merits? And where then is that thrice accursed curse of the Tridentines, whereby all and every one are devoted to the dreadful destruction of Damnation, who setting aside the helps, the Coadjutor-ship of Merits, asserts that the Grace of God, whereby we are justified, consists only in the favour of God: And whoever dare say that a Man is justified by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness only, or by the remissi∣on

of Sins only, whilest Charity doth not together with it communicate its influence in the Hearts of the Godly, and that the grace of working well is not joined thereunto, &c. Which if it be true, what should be judged of the Prophets, what should be judged of Christ himself, who are of a contrary judg∣ment? We must either acknowledge that those were destitute of the Spirit of God, or else that those Tridentine Sanctions are con∣trary to Divine Grace. The Prophet cries with a loud Voice, the Apostle also cries, that it is not of him that runneth or willeth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

And, will the Tridentine Councellours re∣monstrate against this; that Man's Salvation consists only in the Favour of God? Where∣in then? Running, say they, must be added, and the choice of Free-will must be added thereto. Who denies it? We run all of us, each one for his own Portion, being placed in our Stage by God: For the Christian Life is a race, not a play, an exercise, not a vacuity from business, a warfare, not slothfulness. Be it so indeed, yet in this same race how un∣happily do we oftiems run? How often do we stumble? How many ways do we fall, how blind and traver∣sed a way do we often go? And so sometimes we run head long, either wandering every one his own way as the Prophet speaks, or with the Sheep of the Gospel wander sometimes out of the Folds? But we return presently, say you,

into the Way. well: But who, I beseech you, calls you back? Your own will, or the grace of him, that hath mercy? I see that you re∣turn, and I praise it, but to whom is this praise due? To the strength of your will, or to free mercy? And now I would have you teach me what this running of yours deserves. You only look at how much you proceed in running, but you do not also take heed how much you fail in your race. And after all these things do you yet boast of your merits, as if the reward of the Everlasting state were due to your Labours? In which assertions I do not drive at this, to dissolve the Pious endeavours of making Pro∣gress, or to dishearten them by desperation.

For the Admonition of the Apo∣stle is not in vain; so run that ye may obtain. And again: no Man is Crowned, except he strive Law∣fully. Let us therefore so strive, that we may be Crowned, let us so run that we may obtain. But we do not therefore obtain, because we run; but we do therefore run, because the promise is made to them that run, not to them that slumber: So that the running is not the cause of the promise, but the promise stirs up to running, and adds ala∣crity to the runners. Therefore the Apostle that he may make them the more valiant in striving, adds this promise, your labour shall not be in vain in the Lord. And speaking of himself, I have fought, saith he, the good fight, and a

Crown of Righteousness is laid up for me, &c. What then, do you not see that labours well performed, have their own reward due to them?

Be it so indeed: But we treat not here of the labours of Men, but of the merits of Labours, we do not ask, with what rewards the goodness of God dignifies us, but what we our selves deserve to receive. For there is no small difference between Gift and Merit. If Merit is called that, to which a recompense of reward is due by reason of its equality, it is certain there is no equality between those things which we do here on Earth, and those things which being promised we expect in Heaven. The Inheritance of the Everlasting Kingdom is promised, not that which upon the account of hire is due to our Works, but which is promised to our Faith by the free gift of God.

Whence Paul, when he said the wages of Sin his Death, he doth not add next there∣unto, the reward of them that live Godly is Life Eternal: But the grace, saith he, or the gift of God is Eternal Life.

And why doth he not as well say, the re∣ward of Righteousness is Eternal Life? But that the difference between gift and reward, between grace and recompence might be evident. For if it is of grace, than it is not of works: If of works, than it is not of grace. But now that he might manifest the Infinite

Riches of Divine Grace towards us through Christ Iesus: He Proclaims openly that we are saved through Grace by Faith. And that not of our selves, it is the gift of God, not of Works, lest any Man should boast. Which also elsewhere inculcating more clearly, He says, not by works of Righteousness which we have done: How then? But according to his mercy hath he saved us.

And now what is that mercy, but the fa∣vour and loving kindness of God, which re∣mitting the rigour of Iustice, spares those that are unworthy, pardons the penitent, receives them that are undone into favour, which fa∣vour or mercy also glories against Iudgment? All which being so, what should be said of the Hypocritical Fathers of Trent, who by the publick decree of their Senate, pronounce those accursed, whosoever dare say, that the grace of God, whereby we are justified is only the favour of God.

The Absurd Paradox of the Tridentines, whereby they deny that we are justified by the favour of God only.

BUT Now by what other thing then will they say that we are justified, if we obtain it not by the favour of God only? By the Law? But that works Wrath? By the works of the Law? But the Apostle expresly excludes those: Not of works, lest any Man should boast. But here I call to mind the ordinary Glosse, which doth resolve no difficulty, but makes one, by it's subtile comment, partly affirm∣ing that we are justified by works, and partly denying it. For thus it says, our works, as they are ours, have no power to justifie, yet consider them as they are not from us, but are wrought by God in us through Grace, they merit Iustification. And for that cause the Apostle would not say, the wages of Righteousness is Eternal Life: But chose rather to say, the grace of God is Eternal Life. Why so? Because, saith this device, those merits, to which Eternal Life is render∣ed, are not from us, but they come from grace, whence they receive the vertue of meriting: O wise, yea rather wild talk to vilifie grace? What if the Spirit of Christ

influencing the Hearts of his own, stirs up the Holy Offices of Charity, and excellent moti∣ons to Piety? What doth not the same Spi∣rit also vouchsafe all other gifts to his Church, bestowing on some gifts of Prophesie, on others divers kinds of Tongues, on others ad∣mirable Vertues of Curing and Healing; and on others of Teaching, for the Edification of the Saints. What shall we therefore place our whole Iustification in those gifts received from Christ?

I know that there are both many and emi∣nent vertues, wherewith the Spirit of Christ always adorns his Church; but it is one thing to adorn, another thing to justifie the Church. The gift of Sanctification is one thing, the cause of justifying is another: both whereof, though Christ perform by his grace, yet he Sanctifies one way, and Iustifies another, for he Sancti∣fies by his Spirit; but he Saves and Iustifies on∣ly by his Death and Blood: But you will say, if Salvation is not placed in Grace, why then is the grace of God called by Paul Eternal Life? Verily it is certain, and must be confes∣sed, which Paul teaches, that our Life must be attributed wholly unto grace, to which also it behoves us to attribute all other things. But we must look what way this grace saves and justifies; for it is that on which the whole con∣troversy depends: In which the generality of the adversaries are greatly deceived.

Against the Tridentines.

It is Demonstrated by the Scriptures, that the grace of God whereby we are Iustified, consists only in the free favour of God, and Remission of sins, not in the Merits of Works, or Infusion of Charity.

THomas Aquinas, and they that follow him, according to the gloss which they call ordinary, do not deny that which the Apostle affirms, That we are saved by the Grace of God: But if you ask after what manner: they answer, that it comes to pass upon the ac∣count of good Works. For these are the words of the Gloss: Grace, says it, is called Eternal Life, because it is rendered to those Merits, which grace hath conferred. And to the same Sense are the Comments of Orbelius, Bonaventure, Halensis, and others, because, say they, without grace no Man can observe the Commands of God. And Thomas adds elsewhere, that to ful∣fill the Commands of the Law according to the due manner, Grace is necessarily requisite, to wit, to fulfill them with that Charity that ought to be, by which the fulfilling of them becomes Meritorious. Which Comment of theirs, we having formerly explained how false and frivo∣lous it is, there is no need now of any new Ar∣guments.

Verily the Christian Doctrine teach∣es us far otherways; for though we confess that which is reasonable: That the Divine Grace is never idle, but always stirs up the minds of the Regenerate to the best things; yet these Works are never of so great value, as to pro∣mote them unto Eternal Life, which is freely promised by God, not to them that Work, but to them that Believe; or if Salvation is pre∣mised to them that Work, it is not therefore promised because they Work: But they that truly believe, do therefore Work, because Salvation is promised. Therefore Iustification first pro∣ceeds in the most direct Order, as the cause of good Fruits, but that is not effected by these: But it con∣sists only of the free favour of him that confers it upon them, not upon the account of them that Merit, but upon an∣other account; to wit, That where∣by the most bountiful Father of his own Will, hath given to us, Meri∣ting nothing, his only begotten Son, who hath fulfilled the Law for us, and hath satisfied the Iustice of God for our Unjustice. For herein consists all our Salvation, and the Efficacy of Divine Grace, and the praise there∣of appears very evidently, Not that we in the mean while being idle, should do nothing; but that doing all things, we should Attribute no∣thing to our selves, imputing all to the Mercy of God.

Which things that they may be confirmed with the greater evidence and certainty, let us compare them with the most sure Oracles of Sacred Scripture. And First, beginning at the very first Head of that Book, let us consider Adam, that Miserable Progenitor, and Overturner of our Nature. Who when he had both privately and publickly destroyed both himself and us all, by an abominable Wickedness, received at length the most Blessed Tidings of the promised Seed. What could the bounty of God have promised more firmly, or given more largely to any Man, though he had been most Holy? And what did that first and chiefest sinner deserve to receive? Abraham was comman∣ded to leave his Native Country, and to go out whither God called him, thereunto was added a very glorious pro∣mise of giving him an Inheritance, and he o∣beyed him that called him. The promiser did not fail, he was increased and enriched above measure; but if I ask, by what Merit of his own, what can the Admirers of Works answer me here? Afterwards Ifaac was born to him, when his Father and Mother were so Old, that there was no hope remaining of their begetting Children. Why so? But that God might make it manifest, that in the benefits of God, there is not left any thing for Human Pride, wherein it may glory? Ioseph very kindly helped

his Brethren, who were in danger to Pe∣rish for Hunger, though they had very inhumanly Conspired his Destruction, nei∣ther did he only furnish them with plenty of Corn, but also promoted them to great Ho∣nours. And now what Merits did they bring with them, that they should be so Honourably Entertained? The same may be asked concerning the Israelites, who having slain a Lamb without blem∣ish, were delivered from most grie∣vous Bondage: for what Vertues of their own? Whether for keeping the Law? But the Law was not yet made, at least it was not yet written. Was it be∣cause they obliged the Prophet Mo∣ses with kindnesses, whom rather they endeavoured to betray, by most unjust ways and complaints? After they had endured so many laborious Travels and Iourneys, they came at length to the promised Land of their Inheritance, in which, First, the Town of Iericho is Besieged, the Walls fall down, not by strength, but by sounds. Afterwards having slain and subdued so many Kings in one day, the People is placed in their Habitations. It was verily a great Miracle of Victory, but whence happened this Victory? What shall we say? Because the Israelites were more in number: I suppose it was not so: was it because they were stronger? Neither was that the cause: What, did they then excell all the other Nati∣ons in Vertues? Yea, what Nation was ever

more perverse? But you will say, they obliged God to befriend them by observance of his Worship. Yea, how often and how grievously did they exasperate God with their sins? How wickedly did they murmur against their Lead∣ers, and so provoked the anger of God against themselves? How often was the Clemency of God by their Perfidious Rebellion, Wicked Contrivances, Untractable Stubbornness, Mur∣muring Concupiscence and Perverseness, not on∣ly provoked, but also almost overcome, so that he would have utterly destroyed the Rebellious People with all their Posterity, unless Moses, the meekest of Men, by Humble Prayer with hands lifted up, had turned the provoked An∣ger of God into Mercy? But it is better to take notice, what the Lord himself speaks against this People with his own Mouth: Say not, saith he, in thy Heart, when the Lord thy God shall destroy those Nations before thee; For my Righteousness the Lord brought me in, to possess this Land, whereas those Nations were destroyed for their own Abominations: For thou shalt not enter in to possess their Lands, for thy own Righteousness, nor for the upright∣ness of thy Heart, but because they did wick∣edly, they were destroyed at thy entring in: And that the Lord might fulfill the Word which he promised by Oath to thy Fathers, A∣braham, Isaac and Iacob. Know therefore, that the Lord thy God hath not given thee this Land for thy Righteousness, for thou art a stiff-neck∣ed People, &c.

Ye have heard the naked and simple Histo∣ry, but yet true, of the thing that came to pass, and not only true, but also much more Mystical. If all things hap∣pened to them, as the Apostle wit∣nesseth, under a figure, what else should we judge concerning this History, but that under the History, lies hid a more hidden Mystery: For it can not be doubted, that this Land of Canaan, that was promised to the Israelites, Represents those Celestial and Immortal Mansions of the in∣heritance above, which if it be true, let us com∣pare the truth with this figure and shadow, the Antitype with the Type. Iust as they, not being helped by any Merites, of their own, yea, contrary to all their Merits, neither for any peculiar cause in them, but through the singular favour of God promising, and for the sake of the Fathers, to whom it was promised by Oath, received by gift the possession of the Country that flowed with Milk and Honey: So also we should Iudge of the Heavenly Country of Immortality: That it is not due to any Vertues or Works of ours, but that it comes to us by the free promise of God, for the sake of his Son, into whose hands all things are given, that are in Heaven and in Earth.

What will the Angelical Dogmatist answer here with his gloss? But that either those things did not happen to them in a figure, and that they belong not at all to us; or he must needs acknowledge that our Interests are hereby Represented answerable to theirs. That I

we may proceed in the Sacred Myste∣ries of Scripture, what shall I now: say of those, who being bitten by Serpents, had no other way of Recovery, but by the Serpent set up upon a pole? Again what shall I say of those in the Prophet Ionah; who being in dreadful danger, as soon as they had thrown out Ionah, and had committed him to the mercy of the Waters, the Tempest being presently quieted, escaped safe with the Ship? What else do all these Arguments teach, but that casting away confidence in all other things, and distrusting our selves, we may account that all the help for our obtaining Salvation, is placed in no other thing or vertue, but in his death only, who by his Blood, hath Recon∣ciled all things both in Heaven and in Earth. How often in the Psalms, in the Prophers, in the Gospel, doth the Scripture, shutting up all under fin, take away from Man not only Me∣rits, but oft-times drives the Holiest unto this by an acknowledgment of his own unrighte∣ousness, that he acknowledges his Salvation to be placed, not in those things that are given, but those that are forgiven to him by God. For as touching the name of Merit or Reward, if it be found any where (for it is found some∣times) let no Man from hence flatter himself, as if God owed it to any Man: But let him know rather, upon what account he is said to do that: not because the Deeds, which of them∣selves are imperfect, deserve life (yea, which

rather stand in need of Pardon:) But because the bounty of God imputes these Works, such as they are for Merits to them who Work: Why so? To wit, because they are the Works of the Faithful; who, if they were not Believers, their Merits would have no room at all, nor be of a∣ny value in the sight of God. As if a Father say to a Son, if so be thou lovest Learning, thou shalt ob∣tain any thing of me, and be my dearly beloved Son: By this Speech the Father doth not so oblige him∣self to the Son, as if for no other cause, but for performing Obedience, he would receive him to himself for a Son, yea, because he is a Son; therefore the Father commands what he will, and the Son performs what he ought. God useth sometimes thus to propose a Recompense and Rewards to the Regenerate, whereby we may be stirred up to do well: And there is no doubt but the Rewards promised, will follow the office performed.

But in the mean while let us see to whom this promise was made, and for what cause it was made; of which thing let us understand what is the Opinion of Osorius: God hath promised, faith he, to all that live righteously, great wealth, exceeding great pleasures, and an immortal Kingdom, very great dignity, everlasting glory, &c. There are many faults in these vicious Argu∣mentations, and that is none of the least, which is committed by making a division not

sufficient: In which kind Osorius offends here: For whereas there are two kinds of promises very much differing from one another; the one beliong∣ing to the Law, being annexed un∣to certain conditions; the other belonging to the Gospel, being free, without all condition of Law. The whole discourse of Osorius is so taken up in that Legal kind, that he doth not so much as make mention of the other. God hath promised, says he, to all that live righteously, &c. That is true indeed, if we look to those things that belong to the Law: For the Law, as it hath its threatnings, so also it hath its promises proposed to them that live unblameably; in which we are command∣ed to do this and live. Concerning which Paul also saith, Peace and life to every one that doth good, &c. So then the Law promis∣eth, and the Gospel also promiseth, but upon a different account; for they differ in this; The promises of the Law regard the Desert of Life: But the Grace of the Gospel doth not so much regard the manner of Life, as the Faith of the Person, and measures his dignity, not by the merits of Works, but measures the merits of Works themselves, by the Faith of the Be∣liever, and the dignity of the Object only on whom he believes. Wherefore as touching Rewards proposed in the Gospel, it is not enough to look only on the things themselves, which are proposed, but the consideration must be referred to the Faith and Person of Be∣lievers,

of what sort they are, whether plant∣ed in Christ by Faith, or out of Christ, to whom the promise is made? If out of Christ they are servants and unbelievers, no promise or expectation of reward belongs to them. But if in Christ they are Sons and regenerate by Faith; then all is due to Faith, not to Works: It is of Grace, and not of Merit, whatsoever the Father either promises his Sons for Love's sake, or imputes unto them in the place of a reward. And indeed this Im∣putation, in which all the confidence of our Salvation is contained, proceeds from the grace and favour of God only; and also it must be considered, that there is a twofold kind of Imputation with God; the one, whereby the Righteousness of Christ is ascribed to us, and when for his sake, our petty duties are impu∣ted for great, and recompensed with the highest rewards; the other, when he doth not punish, but pardon great crimes in his own that are regenerate: Concerning which the Apostle said, God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them. But the Sons of the Papacy do in no ways endure this Imputa∣tion. Why so? Andradius together with Mon∣hemius and the Colognists think it an unworthy thing, that any man should be called righteous by another man's Righteousness, which is not inherent in himself. Tiletanus cries that it is more than

absurd, and that it hath not been heard of in the World, that that can be the true form of any thing, which is not in it. As if a man should call Cicero couragious with the Courage which is not in himself, but in the mind of Achilles. To whom that I may answer, this cavilling would take place, if our affair were carried on by Nature, and not by Grace; if by Law, and not by Redemption.

I know that our Debt is infinite, the pay∣ment whereof the Law doth necessarily re∣quire of us. Neither do I deny that we are not able to pay, nor will ever be able to pay that debt, if our ability be considered. But what if some rich King intervene, who paying the debt that was owing, gets himself a right to the in∣debted Citizens, and having freed them from all obligation, makes them subject to his own command; what will those furious and impor∣tunate pleaders for Works say here? May we not enjoy the bounty of another, because we have no ability of our own? what, will they say that no payment is just, but what is paid with a man's own money. That which is done by a Friend for the sake of a Friend, is it not just as if it had been done by himself? If that which was due from us, be paid by the price of Christ, is there any Law so cruel as to exact the same debt of us again? and what will the Adversaries require more here? that he should be condemned for unjust, whosoever hath no

Righteousness of his own: And indeed I ac∣knowledge this to be true in Iudicatories, if no Redemption intervene, which may satisfie in the room of another. But now seeing our Affairs are in such a condition, that the con∣demnation of the Law, hath nothing that it can demand of us; I think that is a sufficient Plea for us, which was done by him, who made satisfaction for us. But these men do again cry out against us, saying that it cannot be by Nature, and that it is no less contrary to all natural Reason, that any thing should take its being from that form, which is not its own, but another's.

I answer, That it is true indeed formally, as to the essence of a thing, but not judicially: For tho' the Righteousness of another, which is not inherent in us, cannot render us essentially just, who are by Nature unjust: But nothing hinders but the Righteousness of another may help our Righteousness, according to Iu∣dicial Imputation; just as nothing hinders, but the Riches of another may be cast upon ano∣thers Poverty, by a certain Communion or Im∣putation of good things; so that he who in himself is poor, yet may be esteemed rich in another: And not unlike unto this is our Communion of mutual Imputation with Christ; for as our sins being imputed to Christ, were hurtful to him, even unto the damage of pu∣nishment; so by the like Mystery of dispensa∣tion, the Righteousness of Christ being ad∣judged and imputed to us, though it doth not inhere in us essentially, yet in respect of pos∣session

and dispensation of Iudgment it is pro∣fitable to us for a reward of Life, just as if it had been our own Righteousness; for otherways to what purpose is Christ said to have done and suffered all these things for us, if what he did and suffered, serve not for our advantage? But if they serve for our advantage, why cannot those things be justly accounted for ours, which were undertaken in our name, and for our sake? If the name of Imputation doth so greatly offend them, which they think doth not well agree with Christian Piety, wherefore then doth Paul so often seem in his Writings not only to use this word Imputation, but to delight in it? But afterwards, Christ willing, we shall discourse of this matter more largely in its own place.

Notes

• The necessity of this De∣fence against Osorius.
• The Enemies of the Grace of God under the Title of righteousness.
• The Books of Osorius con∣cerning righ∣teousness.
• The Title of the Books concerning righteousness.
• The image of righteous∣ness descri∣bed by Osori us.
• The praise of righteous∣ness.
• The Plato∣nick Catho∣lick righte∣ousness.
• Osorius in Writing of Righteousness doth greatly oppose Chri∣stian Righte∣ousness.
• A twofold manner of righteousness.
• The righte∣ousness of the Law.
• Human Rea∣son under∣stands not the Doctrine of Free Iustifi∣cation.
• Osorius de justit. lib. 1. pag. 3.
• Lib. 10. de Iustit. pag. 232.
• Lib. 2. p. 44.
• Lib. 6. pag. 148.
• All have fin∣ned and come short of the glory of God.
• The Idea of the Osorian righteousness, can be more easily found in his Books, than in his Mauners.
• The Son of God only was perfectly Ho∣lly. Pals. 14.
• Rom. 3. 1 Io. 1. Iacob. 3.
• Oso. 1. 5. p. 21.
• Osorius con∣founds the righteousness of faith and works with∣out any di∣stinction.
• Phil. 3. It is one thing to be justified by faith, and a∣nother thing to be justified by the Law.
• There are no performances of the most perfect men, that are with∣out some im∣perfection in the sight of God.
• We are all as unclean, and all our righte∣ousness as a menstruous cloth. Isa. 64.
• All we like Sheep have gone astray. Isa. 5. 3. A frivolous exception of Osorius.
• The Papists do not clearly enough ex∣plain why Works are called good.
• What good works do es∣sect accord∣ing to the opi∣nion of Pa∣pists.
• Lib. 9. 233. What sort of righteousuess is that of Oso∣rius. Lib. 9. p. 232. Lib. 9. p. 232.
• what way men come to Heaven ac∣cording to the opinion of Osorius.
• Adam.
• De justit. lib. 4. pag. 90.
• Lib. 3. p. 68. The right way to Hea∣ven consists in the Exercise ofChuity ac∣cording to the Opinion of Osorius.
• An answer to things alledg∣ed. Paul a great 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Charity.
• Paul a great Preacher of Charity.
• Not Charity, but Faith o∣pens a way to the King∣dom of Hea∣ven. Rom. 3. 4.
• A twofold manner of Righteousness of the Law: and of the Gospel, or Faith.
• The Righte∣ousness of Faith.
• The necessa∣ry distinction of Legal and Evangelical Righteous∣ness.
• The Office of the Law.
• How the Righteous∣ness of the Law and Christ is one, and not one.
• The strength and operati∣on of the Law.
• The Law as out of Christ is confidered what it doth.
• The diffe∣rence be∣tween the Law and Christ.
• Christ the only Antidote against the Stings of the Law.
• A question by what righ∣teousness can Christ deliver the unrighte∣ous.
• What way, and in what manner the benefits of Christ are derived to us.
• A threefold question.
• 1 Tim. 1. 1.
• In a despe∣rate conditi∣on Christ on∣ly can help.
• It is not suf∣ficient to re∣tain the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Christ only, unless also we learn the Greatness of his of∣fice and his Power to save.
• Rom. 3.
• The various Interpreta∣tion of the Papists con∣cerning Iusti∣fying Faith.
• Roffen. contra lut. Articul. 31.
• Ioh. 6. Ioh. 3. Ioh. 11.
• Only Faith in Christ is proved to jastisie by ex∣ample,
• Mat. 11. Isa. 55. Proof by ex∣amples.
• Mat. 15. Mat. 9.
• How Prayers are heard.
• From whence is li∣berty, salva∣tion and righ∣teousness to be sought.
• Ioh. 1.
• Wherein consists the use and scope of the Law.
• Charity is ju∣stified by Faith, not Faith by Charity.
• For what cause the power of Iu∣stifying is at∣tributed unto Faith.
• An unjust complaint against Lu∣ther.
• Osor. de justit. lib. 2. p. 29. Osorius a∣gainst Luther.
• An Answer for Luther a∣gainst Osorius.
• The unjust slander of O∣sorius, and Andradius a∣gainst Luther.
• A defence of Luther.
• A twofold manner of Righteous∣ness menti∣on'd by Paul, the one re∣ceived, the other re∣jected. Philip. 3. Righteous∣ness of the Law, Righte∣ousness of Faith, in Faith of God.
• The Argu∣ment of Oso∣rius drawn from dictum secundum quid, to dictum sim∣pliciter. Ma∣king that to be true in the general, which is only so in parti∣cular.
• Osor. lib. 2. p. 28.
• The Re∣proaches of Osorius cast upon Luther.
• The deceit∣ful con∣nexion of Osorius
• Exod. 23.
• Luther sepa∣rates charity from faith, and the Law from the Gospel, not simply, but in such a manner as things should be distin∣guished each by their own bounds. Where and how Faith works by love
• What is the union of Faith with Charity, and again what is the differ∣ence of both.
• Trust in works is ex∣cluded.
• There is no∣thing can be opposed to the judge∣ment of God but Christ only.
• What doth faith without works per∣form, and from whence doth it re∣ceive its effi∣cacy in act∣ing. The form of faith is not charity, but rather the form of cha∣rity is faith.
• Objection.
• Answer.
• Confirma∣tion by Ex∣amples.
• One conditi∣on of Sons, another of Servants.
• A compari∣son of Sons and Servants.
• Rom. 4.
• Christ a Son by Nature, we by Christ.
• Christ is born a Son by na∣ture, we by faith are born again Sons, not by works, in the Son.
• The cause why God a∣dopts us for Sons. Gal. 4.
• Gal. 3.
• 1 Ioh. 3.
• Osorius. The servile and mercena∣ly doctrine of the Papists.
• The King∣dom of God is an Inheri∣tance, there∣fore not a re∣ward, it be∣longs to Sons, therefore not to Servants. August. lib. de haeres.
• The cause which makes us the Sons of God, the same also makes us Iust; but faith only makes us Sons, therefore the same also makes us Iust. The cause which justifies on God's part is his Predestination. Ephes. 1.
• Rom. 8. Vocation, the Donation of Christ, his Obedience, Death and Merits,
• What the cause of justi∣fication is on Man's part. Lib. 2. de just. Osorius.
• Faith, Hope, and Charity in what 〈◊〉〈◊〉 they are joyned toge∣ther.
• Rom. 4. Gal. 2. Arg. If righteousness comes by the Law, Christ dyed in vain. Gal. 2. Christ dyed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in vain, therefore righteousness is not by the Law. The 〈◊〉〈◊〉 between Paul and Osorius.
• Roman. 4.
• Galat. 2.
• Lib. 2. pag. 46.
• Osor. lib. 2. p. 39.
• Answer.
• Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, &c. Psal.
• 1 Cor. 5.
• Rom. 8.
• Whence this righteousness of Osorius shall be found.
• Who are cal∣led righteous in a Gospel sense.
• Osor. de just lib. pag. 39, & 40.
• Of what sort is the Osorian righteousness.
• A false and lying accusa∣tion of Osori∣us.
• Dejust. lib. 2.
• Repentance. Repentance proves a man to be a sinner, but takes not away sin, it causeth not remission, nor satisfies ju∣stice.
• The violation of Infinite majesty can∣not be expia∣ced but by an infinite price.
• The death of Christ 〈◊〉〈◊〉 none but be∣lievers, and hence arises the diguity of Faith.
• The benefit and necessity of Repent∣ance.
• The lying calumny of Andradius, a∣gainst Chem∣aitius.
• What Re∣pentance doth by it self, what to∣gether with Faith.
• Repentance consistsof two parts.
• How far the fruit of Re∣pentance 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• Faith in Christ justi∣fies Charity, but Charity doth not ju∣stifie Faith. Augustin in quinquage, Prolo. Psal. 31.
• Ezek. 18.
• Ionah 3. 2 Sam. 12. 2 Kings 21. Osor. lib. de just. p. 42. An 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of Osorius. An Answer.
• Ier. 11. Ezek. 33. Ezek. 18.
• Legal Promi∣ses.
• Blessings proposed in the Law.
• The Preach∣ing of repen∣tance belongs to the Gos∣pel.
• Moses was a certain earth∣ly Christ, Christ is a certain hea∣venly Moses.
• The object of Faith. We are justi∣fied in the New Testa∣ment after the same manner, that the Hebrews were healed, when they were stung by the Serpents.
• Ioh. 3. That every one that sees the Son and Be∣lieveth in him may have e∣ternal life. Ioh. 8. Unless ye believe that I am he, ye shall dye in your sins.
• The Papists deny not Christ to be a Saviour, but they do not well agree in the manner how he Saves. The Council of Trent, Hosius, Andradius, Canisius.
• A typical si∣militude be∣tween Christ and the Ser∣pent healing wounds. Ioh. 3. Isa. 53.
• Isa. 53. An objection of the Adver∣saries.
• Inherent righteousness.
• Argument.
• Answer.
• The Material of Sin. The Formal of Sin.
• How sin in this Life is a∣bolished, and how it re∣mains.
• The guilt of sin. The frailty of sinning.
• Hugo.
• A similitude.
• Argument.
• Christ by dy∣ing upon the Cross did bear only the punishment of Sin, but not our Sins: and after∣wards by raising us up again, he will destroy both the punish∣ment and the whole matter of Sin in due time.
• Works, tho' they do not justifie, yet are not de∣nied to be ne∣cessary.
• The calum∣nies of the Adversaries against Pious Doctors.
• Luther is un∣justly reviled as a despiser of Good Works.
• It is fatal to the Gospel to suffer vio∣lence, and un∣dergo calum∣nies.
• Mat. 2. Mat. 26, 27. Act. 8. Eusebius, See the History of Huss.
• The shame∣less reproa∣ches of Osori∣us, cast upon Luther. Osor. lib. 2. de justit.
• Pag. 30. Pag. 43.
• A defence of Luther.
• The Con∣fessions of the Saxon Churches, presented at Augusta, Ann. 1530. offer∣ed after∣wards Trid. Coun. 1551.
• Osor. lib. 3. de just. num. 70.
• Why works are said to be not of the Law, but of Faith.
• A description of the Osorian Righteous∣ness.
• Osor. l. 2. p. 31.
• Lib. 2. p. 34.
• Pag. 39. b.
• Andrad. lib.6. de just. p. 459 Andrad. ibid. page 461.
• Tapper. Artic. 8. de justit. pag. 18.
• An Answer whereby the definition of Osorius is con∣futed.
• A two-fold sort of righte∣ousness.
• Aug. de tempore Serm. 49.
• Osor. lib. 5. pag. 114. a. b.
• Aug. de tempore, Serm. 49.
• Isaiaeb 1. 64.
• Isa. 64. Phil. 3.
• Luke 17. Psel. 115. Romans 3. Iohn 1. Iames 3.
• Aug. de perfect. ju∣stitiae.
• Luke 18.
• Tertul. lib. de paenitentia.
• Apoc. 3.
• August. in Iohn, Hom. 48
• Romans 3.
• Rom. 3.
• Psalm 51. Rom. 3. God is justi∣fied one way, and men are justified be∣fore God a∣nother way.
• Nothing hin∣ders us to be both Righte∣ous and Sin∣ners insa dif∣ferent ac∣count. Sinners in our selves. Righteous in Christ.
• Isaiah 9.
• Whole Christ is ours.
• Christ bears our publick person before the Father.
• What is our Righteous∣ness accord∣ing to Paul.
• Osor. de just. lib. 2. lib. 7. p. 187. lib. 9. p. 228.
• Osor. de just. lib. 2. lib. 7. p. 187. lib. 9. p. 228.
• God com∣mands not any thing which cannot be observed by men, ac∣cording to the opinion of Osorius it is no fault in God, if he command those things which cannot be kept by us.
• Rom. 3.
• There had been no need for God to Iustifie us by Faith, if we could be justified by works, de justit. lib. 4. pag. 90.
• Pag. 105. Preparation for Righte∣onsness.
• Mat. 5. Whatsoever things the law 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it saith to those that are in the law, that every mouth may be stop∣ped and all the World may be guilty before God.
• R. 3.
• Rev. 15. 4. The Ecclesi∣astical Hymn, thou only are holy. Hierom. ad Ctesiphon∣tem. Dial. 2.
• Aug. in Io. Hom. 49.
• Rom. 3.
• Rom. 9.
• Gal. 2.
• 1 Cor. 1. Rom. 4. Rom. 11. Hab. 2.
• Rom. 4. Gal. 3. 2 Tim. 1. Ephes. 2.
• Tit. 3. Rom. 11. Phil. 3. Rom. 4. Rom. 9.
• Concil. Tri∣dent. Sess. 6.
• A definition of rig hteous∣ness accord∣ing to the Ie∣suits of Colo∣nia. Censur. Coloniensis 186 frat Alpbonsus Philip 4. p. 34.
• Argum. ex Topicis Aristot. 1 Cor. 1. 2 Cor. 5. Rom. 4. 3.
• Answer to the Iesuitical quibbles.
• Men judge by qualities, but God judgeth o∣therwise.
• 2 Cor. 5.
• Prov. cap. 8.
• Aug. ad Boniface, lib. 3. cap. 7.
• Bernard in Dominic. Serm. 3.
• By what Righteous∣ness they are justified be∣fore God, by Christs, or our own.
• Aug. in Psal. 31.
• Christ is wholly ours, with all his good things.
• As Christ was made sin, so we are made righ∣teous. But Christ was not made sin by inherent sin. Therefore we also are not made righteous by inherent rightcousness.
• The Righte∣ousness of Faith.
• Internal and inherent righteousness whereby we are justified according to the Gospel.
• Faith is a most internal and inherent righteousness.
• This is the work of God, that ye should be∣lieve in him whom he hath sent. Iohn. 6.
• Augustine.
• Iohn 3. So God loved the World that he gave his only be∣gotten Son, that all that believe in him, &c. Rom. 8.
• 1 Cor. 1. A rule of Law, that which a Man doth by ano∣ther, he seems to have done by himself.
• A compari∣son of Adam and Christ.
• The former Adam, a Type of the second. Rom. 5.
• As Evil was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ed by the Sin of one, so good is propagated by the Iustification of one; by the Disobedience of one, many were made Sinners, Rom. 5.
• As many dyed by the Sin of one, so by the grace of one, many are justified, Rom. 5.
• After what manner the sin of one, is imputed un∣to all; in like manner also the Righte∣onsness of one is imputed to all: Other∣ways there would be no resemblance between Christ and Adam.
• Adam a Type of Christ.
• Wherein the similitude of Adam and Christ con∣sists.
• A 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• Imitation of Life.
• Christ to be seen in Adam.
• The severi∣ty of the Iudgment of God in Adam again the ex∣cellency of Mercy in Christ.
• The Type is compared with the Archetype.
• Death took its beginning of making havock from the Sin of one, not of many.
• The heavi∣ness of Iustice was again made amends for, and o∣ver-balanced by as great mercy. 2 Cor. 5.
• Isaiah 53.
• The Blood of Redemption encountering with Righte∣ousness, yet not violating Righteousness but Redeem∣ing it.
• An Answer.
• The singular providence of the Eter∣nal God in governing the business of our Re∣demption.
• Rom. 6.
• Christ Iusti∣fies Sinners, but what Sin∣ners?
• Oso. dejust. lib. 7.
• The whole nature of our Salvation consists in nothing else but in the imitation of Christ, and expressing a resemblance of him ac∣cording to Osorius.
• In what re∣spect the si∣militude of Christ and Adam agrees.
• Death and Sin from Adam.
• Osor. de just. lib. 7. p. 179. Osorius is op∣posed to Oso∣rius.
• Only by be∣ing propaga∣ted from Adam, we perish: And why are we not as well saved by being born again from Christ?
• Object. Osor. pag 180. Answer.
• The imitati∣on of Christ is very ne∣cessary for all.
• Matt. 11.
• Charitv the bond of per∣fection. Colos. 3.
• How no sign of Charity appears in the Roman Tyranny.
• The Laws of the Popes are written with blood.
• 1 Cor. 15.
• 1 Pet. 2.
• The promi∣ses of God are not tyed to the imita∣tion ofChrist, but to Faith.
• A compari∣son of the First and Se∣cond Adam.
• Christ the external cause of justi∣fication, Faith in Christ the Internal. Effects, causes.
• De just. lib. 7. pag. 186.
• An argument from like things.
• Luk. 18.
• Baptism a Sa∣crament of Faith. Galat. 3.
• what Faith in Christ performs ac∣cording to Paul. Galas. 3.
• Chrysostom.
• Oso. de just. lib. 7. de just. 1. 9. p. 232. de just. 1. 6. p. 148.
• Iames. 2.
• Mat. 12.
• What the re∣newing of the Holy Ghost makes in us.
• Oso. de just. lib. 9. P. 233.
• De just. lib. 9. P. 234.
• Rom. 5. Ephes. 3. Rom. 4.
• De just. lib. 9. pag. 234.
• We are be∣holden to the grace of God for all bene∣fits and what that is which his singular favour to∣wards us is ehiefly seen. Luke 12. Daniel 7.
• Romans 5. Romans 4. Titus 3. Romans 8.
• On what foundation doth the free Promise of God chiefly stand.
• Theassurance of confidence and persua∣sion from the free promise of God.
• Osor. de just. 1. 9. pag. 234.
• Ibid. p. 233.
• Lib. 9. p. 232. Two Para∣doxes of Oso∣rius, both of which are false.
• Ier. 31. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 11. Osor. l. 9.
• No man de∣nies that the works of new Obedience proceed from the fountain of Divine Grace, and the Merits of Christ.
• Every faith∣ful man that is truly born again in Christ, is a Law to him∣self, or ought so to be. Works of Faith. Osor. de Iust. lib. 3. p. 71.
• Ier. 32. Ezek. 11.
• How far the Spirit of re∣novation promised and given by God reaches.
• Ier. 31. Ezek. 36. Deut. 30.
• Hier. cont. Pelag. Dial. 1. A twofold perfection, or a twofold righteousness according to Hierome. August. cont. duas Episto∣las. Pela. l. 3. cap. 8.
• A twofold sort of O∣bedience ac∣cording to Augustine.
• Aug. de peccat. merit. & re∣miss. lib. 2. cap. 15. Aug. de peccat. merit. & remis. lib. 1. cap. 7. Aug. ad Boni∣fac. lib. 3. cap. 7.
• Hierom. Ad∣vers. pelag. lib. 1.
• Hierom. ibid. Prover. 18. Hierom. ad Ctesiphontem.
• Deut. 30. I will Circum∣cise the Fore∣skin of thy Heart, that thou mayst love me with all thy Heart, and with all thy Soul.
• Pelagianism.
• August. of the Perfection of Righteous∣ness. By whom Righteous∣ness is obtain∣ed.
• When Per∣fection is at∣tained. Aug. of the Spirit and Letter.
• Aug ad. Bonifac. lib. 3. cap. 7. Begun Ob∣dience.
• Imputation of Righteous∣ness accord∣ing to Augustine.
• Augustine to Hierom.
• Epist. 29.
• Cpprian cited by Augustine.
• Hierom. ad∣versus Pelagi.
• Ambros. lib. 10.Epist. 84. Aug. lib. 10. Epist. 84.
• Bernard super Cantic. Serm. 50.
• Why God commanded things impos∣sible.
• Hieron. Augustin. Cyprian. Orig. hom. 21. on 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• Cyprian de Tentatione Christi. August. de ve∣ra & salsa poe∣nitentia. Osor. de Iust. l. 5. p. 128.
• Lib 2. pag. 49. Lib. 6. p. 148.
• Ibidem.
• Osor. de Iust. lib. 9. p. 131, 132.
• Aug. cont. Iulian Pelagia l. 4. c. 3.
• A hidden counsel of God in com∣manding those things which cannot be done by us.
• De just, lib. 9. pag. 231.
• A Sophistical Distinction.
• Rom. 7.
• It is not en∣quired what grace can do, but what it doth.
• Hierom to Ctesiphom.
• Hieron. contra Pelag. Dial. I.
• I Cor. 13.
• Hieron. ad
• Osor. de just. lib. 8. page 197.
• Page 168.
• Argument of Osorius.
• The end and Scope of the Promulgatio∣on of the Law. Rom. 7.
• A fallacy from that which is not a cause, as if it were a cause.
• Oson. de just. lib. 8. pag. 8.
• The Hypo∣crisie, or Fiction of Osorius.
• An Answer to the Ficti∣on proposed.
• Anargument taken from the words of Osorius.
• A fallacy of the Accident.
• An Answer to the Major.
• August. lib. de perfect. Iu∣stitiae.
• Osor. de Iust. lib. 2. p. 34. A Dilemma of Osorius.
• Ibidem.
• Ibidem.
• The connex∣ion of the Argument.
• An answer to the Major.
• Iames 2. Hieron. contraI Pelag. Dial. 3.
• Psalm 32.
• Proverbs 24. Proverbs 28. My strength is perfected in weakness. 2 Cor. 12. 1 Cor. 12.
• Aug. cte spiri∣tu & litera, cap. 36.
• God can do the things that he wil∣leth, but he wills not all things that he can.
• For it is not the fault of the Com∣mander, but the frailty of the Hearer, that all the world should become sub∣ject to God.
• Hier. Dial. 2.
• Hierom. Dial. 1. A•• Answer to the minor Osor. de just. lib. 2. Osor. lib. 40. pag. 89.
• De just. lib. 6.
• A confirma∣tion of the Osorian Asser∣tion.
• Osor. de just. lib. 2. pag. 34.
• Os. lib. 2. p. 35. Ps. 103. Ps. 51. Isa. 61.
• Ierem. 50. Ezek. 36.
• Micah. 7.
• Ioh. 1.
• Augustin.
• Sins are done away by Christ, after what man∣ner. Dan. 6. August.
• August lib. de perfect. just.
• Phil. 3.
• Aug. de Spi∣ritu & litera.
• August. de perfect. justitiae.
• Therefore fits also after the same manner is taken away by Christ.
• Hosea 13. 1 Cor. 15.
• The Land of Promise the figure of our inheritance. What and how great benefits the grace of Christ con∣fers upon us in the pre∣sent life.
• The grace of Christ is ne∣ver idle in his own.
• Rom. 8.
• The life of the Saints in this World is not so much life of the flesh as of saith; it is not so much discerned in justice as in justification.
• Osorius by no means receives the word justifi∣cation.
• Osor. de just. lib. 4. pag. 96.
• Proverbs 24. 1 Iames 3.
• Iob. 3.
• Rom. 5.
• Gin. 47.
• Osor. de just. lib. 9. Nu. 96. lib. 8. nu. 20.
• There is no∣thing that so much allures unto Friend∣ship as simili tude, where∣by it comes to pass that good Men love good Men. Cicero, in Lelius. The like al∣ways cleaves to the like. Plat. of Love.
• Roffens. cont. Luther. Articul. 38.
• Aug. de tem∣pore: Sermone 49.
• Another Ca∣lumny of Oso∣rius against Luther.
• Romans 1.
• A Confuta∣tion of the Cavil. All Iudg∣ment is com∣mitted to the Son, Iob. 3. Luke 10.
• Sin is one thing, and a man that is a sinner is ano∣ther thing in the sight of God.
• Aug. Tract. 41. in Iobannem.
• Sin is dimi∣nished in this life, but not taken away.
• August. of true and false Repeniance, c. 5. Why did the Lord wash the seet of Peter, but be∣cause there was a daily sinning, it behoved that there should be a daily remission, &c. Cyprian. But if no man can be without sin, whosoever saith that he is unblameable, is either proud or a fool. Hier. contra Pelag. Dial. 1. But to be perpetually without sin is only in the power of God: Therefore either give an example of one that was always without sin; or if you can∣not confess your weakness, and do not set your mouth against Heaven to deceive the Ears of fools, by that which really is, and that which can be.
• Osor. de Iust. lib. 2. p. 35. 36.
• How the works of the Regenerate are good and how they are sins. Aug. in primo quinqua. Psal. 31. Believe in him that ju∣stifies the ungodly, that your good works may be good, for I should not call them good as long as they come not from a good Root, wherein consists the state of the Controversie.
• Aug. de Civi∣ate, lib. 19. cap. 17. Our righteousness it self is so great in this life, that it consists more in the remis∣sion of sins, than in the perfection of Vertues. Hieron. in Ezek. lib. 14. cap. 46. It is evident that every man, though he had come to perfection, needs the Mercy of God, &c. Aug. Epistola 31. ad Hieron. Charity whereby we love that which ought to be loved. This is more in some, and less in others, and in others none at all; but the fullest that cannot now be increased as long as a man lives here is in no mau; but as long as it can be increased, that which is less thau it ought to be is faulty, &c. Idem in Psal. 142. No man hath at any time done a good work with as much Charity as he could and ought.
• Osor. de Iust. lib. 5. Nu. 127, 128.
• A definition of Grace ac∣cording to Osorius. Tho. 12. quest. 110.
• Grace is not the same thing with Vertue but only a Prin∣ciple of Ver∣tue.
• Osorius Con∣futed by Thomas Aqui. That Grace and Iustice are not the same.
• An Answer to the Ar∣gument.
• Albertus mag∣nus in Sentent. lib. 2. Dist. 16. Ar. 4.
• Ioh. 16.
• The Argu∣ment of Oso∣rius, whereby Iustice is proved to be nothing but Grace.
• A various di∣stinction of Grace a∣mongst the School-men, Lombardus, Sentent. lib. 2. dist. 16. Gratia ope∣rans, praeveni∣ens, incipiens liberans. Gratia co-ope∣rans, subse∣quens, proficiens, adjuvans.
• What the word Grace fignifies in the writings of the Evan∣gelists and Apostles.
• Against Lom∣bard, Thomas, Scotus, and their follow∣ers.
• Romans 5.
• Three things to be regard∣ed in good Works.
• Osor. lib. 5. pag. 119.
• Aug. de Civit. Dei. l. 19. c. 27.
• All Iustifica∣tion is com∣prehended in the Grace of God only.
• Osor. de Iust. lib. 6. nu. 151. The Papist would seem to refer all things to the Bounty and Grace of God, though they do no∣thing less in reality.
• Aug. lib. depa∣tienti. 1, cap. 20.
• Romans 4. An Antitlie∣sis between Grace and Merit. Aug. de pati∣entia, cap. 20.
• Osor. lib. 6.
• The word Grace is di∣stinguished.
• What the Pa∣pists, & what the Protestants understand by the word Grace.
• After what manner, and in what sense the Grace of God justifics us.
• A definition of Grace ac∣cording to the School∣men.
• An infused Habit.
• The refuta∣tion of the definition. Iacob, Esau. The Exam∣ples of the Thief, Publi∣can, the Le∣per, &c.
• Romans 11. There was a remnant ac∣cording tothe Election of Grace, &c. Osor. lib. 5. p. 127, 128.
• Aug. Epistola 10. ad Alipin. It is grace whereby the unjust are ju∣stified, of which it is unlawful for us to doubt.
• There par∣don is free where ven∣geance might be just.
• Osor. lib. 5.
• The Papists err from the scope of the Question. Osor. lib. 3. p. 68, 69. Osor. lib. 4. nu. 103, 104.
• Tit. 3. Hosius. Osor. lib. 4. Nu. 104.
• Ex Hosio con∣fut. lib. 5. pag. 451.
• Hosius ibid.
• Ex Hosio lib. 5. Nu. 452.
• Andra. lib. 6. pa. ibi. Orthod. Explic.
• An Answer to the Ad∣versaries.
• The Roman Church is a Pseudocatho∣lick.
• Enemies of Faith and Grace under the Vizard of Religion.
• Osor. lib. 6. p. 151.
• 〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• A pseudo∣syllogism.
• An Answer to the Argu∣ment.
• Pardoning Grace, or Grace of Re∣mission.
• Rom. 9. 6, 4. Coloss. 1. Rom. 3.
• Renewing Grace.
• Grace is di∣vided into Two parts.
• The Syllo∣gism is re∣dundant with four Termini.
• Aparalogism in the second figure con∣cluding affir∣matively.
• A twofold sort of Works Rom. 14.
• Aug. of Na∣ture and Grace. The reparation of the Grace of Christ, though it is begun in respect of the mind, it is not yet perfected in re∣spect of the Flesh: Which shall be in the Countrey where Man shall not only be able to persevere, but shall not be able to Sin.
• An Argu∣ment from like Com∣parison.
• Levit. 22. Deut. 15.
• Christ fulfil∣led all the Law, not for himself, but for us; if for us, then we also fulfil it by him. Tho. 12. 109. pag. 259.
• The Roman Catholicks falsly so cal∣led, obtrude another Gos∣pel upon us,
• The sum of all our Salva∣tion and Re∣ligion is chiefly dis∣cerned in two things, Faith and Renovation by Grace. Grace. Faith.
• Wherein Be∣atitude con∣sists accord∣ing to the Shcolastick Doctors. Divines dis∣puting about the chief good.
• Pelagians Adversaries of Grace.
• Augustine a defender of Grace against the Pelagi∣ans.
• The Papists Semipelagi∣ans.
• Wherein the Papists agree with the Pe∣lagians.
• How Thomas Aquin. and the Thomists define grace.
• Tho. 129. 109. Art. 6. That the will may be prepared to work well, and to enjoy God, there is required an habitual gift of Grace, which is the principle of a meritorious work.
• Guillerm. in sentent. lib. 2. qu. 26. Art. 1. a common definition among the Schoolmen. Albert. in sen∣tent. lib. 2. dist. 26. Art. 2.
• Grace is a ha∣bit in the es∣sence of the Soul, which according to infused Ver∣tues make perfect for act, & makes the possessor good. A vulgar and usual defini∣nition of Grace in the Schools. The School∣men disagree with one a∣nother in the manner of Grace. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉, 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• Osor. lib. 5. p. 26. Dost thou deny Grace to be a Vertue? what then is Grace if it is not a Veatue? Thomas a∣gainst Osorius.
• Faith exclud∣ed from Iu∣stification by the Thomists. Thom. 12. q. 109. Art. 5.
• why the ho∣ly Spitit is given. Thom. 12. qu. 114. Art. 4. The motion of humane mind to the fruition of divine good, is a proper act of Chari∣ty, by which all acts of other Vertues are appoint∣ed for this end, accord∣ing to which other Ver∣tues are com∣manded by chariey, and therefore the merit of E∣ternal Life belongs chief∣ly to chari∣ty. &c. Censura Golo∣loniens. fol. 148, 149. christ by his Death hath merited this, that Be∣lievers are endued with charity and other Vertues, which qua∣lities, being now received by the Merit of christ, man him∣self by. Inherent Righteousuess merits a greater Righteous∣ness, Reconciliation, and at length Life Eternal, &c. And fol. 170, Faith is only the preparatory Cause and way to Iustification, that afterwards we may by another thing be righteous before God, not by Faith apprehending Christ, &c. Iustification is divided into two parts.
• Iacob. Pava. Orthod. Exp. 6. p. 470. Then the Spirit is com∣municated, when, at the coming of Righteous∣ness; we are made righte∣ous; when all our sins be∣ing extin∣guished, we are renewed by charity spread abroad in our hearts by the Spirit; which Charity, be∣cause it in∣forms the mind with the Love of the Divine Law, is called Righteous∣ness. Of how large an extent the fruit of the Lord's passion is.
• Ephes,
• Christ only by his Perso∣nal Office is a Saviour, and the Holy Spirit by his Office is a Helper and Comforter of them that are saved.
• Answers. Aug. Epist. 65.
• Righteous∣ness receives not its vertue from Merits, but Merits re∣ceive vertue from the Iu∣stified.
• The Dignity of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is valued by the Person of the believer, not the Person by the Deeds.
• How the Re∣ward of the Saints is ap∣pointed in the Scrip∣tures.
• Heaven is not a reward to the Saints, but in the Heavens.
• Ro. 6. An Objection concerning the rewards proposed. Answer.
• That which is due upon the account of Obedience deserves no grace.
• Lu. 17.
• Ro. 8.
• August. praefa∣tione in Psal 31.
• Grace is often signi∣fied in the Scripture, un∣der the name of reward. Whatsoever we are or shall be, we are in debt to the Grace of God sor it.
• A wonderful and secret o∣peration of the Grace of God is shew∣ed by Ex∣amples.
• Trident. Concil. Sess. 6. Can. 11.
• Free Will.
• Isa. 53.
• 1 Cor. 9. 2 Tim. 2.
• The promise is not there∣fore made, because we run: But we do therefore run because the promise is made. 1 Cor. 15. 2 Tim. 4.
• Difference between Gift and Merit.
• Rom. 6. Ephes. 2.
• Council of Trent. Sess. 6. Canon. 11.
• The Triden∣tines deny that we are justified by favour only. Glossa ordina∣ria in cap. 6. ad Rom. The ridicu∣louscomment of the Glosse of theSchool∣men.
• Tho. Aqui. lib. 2. sent. dist. 26. q. 6.
• Glos. 9. Ro. 6. Orbelius lib. 2. Sent. dist. 2. Bonaventure. Alex. Halensis.
• Salvation is promised to them that Work, not for the sake of the Works themselves.
• Rom. 11.
• In what thing chiefly the Efficacy of Divine Grace appears.
• Examples of Divine Grace are produced out of the Scriptures. AdamGen. 3.
• Abraham. Gen. 12.
• Isaac. Gen. 27.
• Ioseph. Gen. 65.
• The Israelites delivered fromthe Bon∣dage of Pha∣raoh. Exod. 12.
• The Law was promul∣gatedbyGod, after the de∣liverance of the People.
• The Land of promise, the Victory of the People of Israel. Deut. 9.
• 1 Cor. 7. The Land of promise is a Type of the promised Kingdom.
• Thomas A∣quinas with the ordinary Gloss.
• The Hebrews recover their Health by looking on the Serpent. Ionas a Type of Christ, sa∣ving the lives of his own by his Death.
• The Pious Works of Believers are impured for Merits, not according to Righteous∣riess, but ac∣cording to Grace.
• Osor. de Iust. lib. 6. p. 150.
• Legal promi∣mises. Evangelical promises.
• Romans 2.
• Imputation twofold.
• 2 Cor. 5. Romans 4. Psalm 32.
• Andrad. lib. 6. Orthod. Explic. pag. 477. 454.
• Tiletanus in A∣polog. contra 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 226.
• By the Law it is reckoned that he did a thing, who does it by another.
• There is fre∣quent men∣tion of Im∣putation in Paul's Wri∣tings.