An antidote or treatise of thirty controuersies vvith a large discourse of the Church. In which the soueraigne truth of Catholike doctrine, is faythfully deliuered: against the pestiferous writinges of all English sectaryes. And in particuler, against D. Whitaker, D. Fulke, D. Reynolds, D. Bilson, D. Robert Abbot, D. Sparkes, and D. Field, the chiefe vpholders, some of Protestancy, some of puritanisme, some of both. Deuided into three partes. By S.N. Doctour of Diuinity. The first part.

THE SIXTH BOOKE. (Book 6)

THE XXVI. CONTROVERSY, WHEREIN Is taught, that the Faithfull by the help of Gods grace do some works so perfect & intierly good, as they truly please the diuine Maieysty: a∣gainst Doctour Whitaker, Doctour Fulke, and Doctour Abbot.

CHAP. I.* 1.1

THERE be three false principles or totte∣ring groūds amōg the articles of Prote∣stants credulity, wheron they build the impossibility of keeping Gods cōmand∣ments, which I must first raze to the ground, before I begin to establish the possibility (if not facility) we haue by Gods Grace, to obserue them. The first is, that we can do nothing, entierly and perfectly good which may eyther please God or fulfill his law. The second is, that all the actions and thoughts of the iust, are stayned with sinne, and euery sinne little or great,

wittingly or vnwittingly done, is a breach of the law. The third, that not only our consent to euill motions which inuade our mindes,* 1.2 but the very inuasions and prouocations themselues, which vnvolun∣tarily assault vs, are true preuarications and formall transgressions. Hence our Ghospellers deduce, that seeing euery action we performe, is defiled with the blemish of sinne, we are so far from obseruing, that we violate the law in what∣soeuer we do.

2. From such detestable and hellish premisses, I do not wonder so damnable a conclusion is inferred: for to commence with the first point: Is it not iniurious to the vnspeakable goodnes of God, for him to intreate, to com∣mand,* 1.3 to affoard vs his helpe, to performe good workes in this frayle and weake estate, and yet not to be pleased with our working of thē? Is it not repugnant to sacred Writ which commendeth some holy men as perfect & grateful to God, mentioneth some workes acceptable to him, and yet to deny this approued verity? The Prophet Malachy sayth: The sacrifice of Iuda, and Hierusalem shall please our Lord. S. Paul calleth almesdeedes bestowed on him in prison: An odour of sweetnes, an acceptable sacrifice pleasing God. S. Peter exhorteth vs: to offer spirituall hostes acceptable to God; com∣mendeth the incorruptibility of a quiet and modest spirit, which is rich in the sight of God: Rich not before men, sayth S. Augustine, but before God, and where God seeth, there rich. Ezechias war∣ned by our Lord to prepare himselfe to death, began thus to implore his merey: I beseech thee, o Lord, remember I pray thee how I haue walked before thee in truth, and in a perfect hart, and haue done that which is liked before thee. And least you should iudge he might be mistaken, heare what God himselfe auoucheth of some singular men. Of King Ioas: Ioas did right before our Lord all the dayes that Ioyada the Priest taught him. Of Azarias: And he did that which was liked before our Lord, The same of Iosias: He did that which was liked be∣fore our Lord, and walked in all the wayes of Dauid his father: he declined not to the right hand, nor to the left. The quite contra∣ry the holy Ghost affirmeth of Ioachaz. Of Ieroboam:

And he did that which was euill before our Lord. Of Achaz King of Iuda: He did not that which was pleasing in the sight of the Lord* 1.4 his God, as Dauid his Father. Which comparisons refell M. Abbots, and his fellowes distinction of meere imputatiue righteousnes. For as Achaz, and Ieroboam, did not only euill by imputation of wickednes, but that which was in* 1.5 it selfe euil & displeasing to God: so Ioas, Azarias, and King Dauid performed not only that which was right, and good by imputatiō, but what was truly in itselfe, through the benefit of grace, right and acceptable in his sight.

3. Yea, sayth Fulke and the rest againe, they did that which was good and right, yet imperfectly, rawly, weakely. For so long as we liue heere, charity is neuer perfect in vs as it ought to be, neyther can any perfect good worke be effected by vs. But it hath pleased the holy Ghost to meet with this euasion too in tearming some actions, some men also, perfect in this life: Noë was a iust and perfect man in his generation, where the hebrew word Tamim, deriued from the verbe Tamam, signifyeth the height and fullnes of perfection: in so much as S. Chrysostome writeth of him, That he was perfect in euery vertue, which was requisite for him to haue. S. Ambrose sayth: He was praysed not by the nobility of his birth, but by the merit of his iustice and perfection. The same in effect hath S. Hierome, and S. Gregory. Likewise, that this might not be glozed by the enemy of his perfection, and iustice in the estimation of men, God witnesseth of him in the next Chapter: I haue seene thee iust in my sight in this generation. Behold in his sight, not in the sight of men alone. Agayne, to Abraham our Lord sayd: Walke before me & be perfect. S. Paul: We speake wisedome among the perfect. Our sauiour: If thou wilt be perfect, sell the things that thou hast &c. which things he might sell & attaine to perfection if he would. Likewise, be you perfect as also your heauenly father is perfect. Here he exhorteth vs not to weake & raw, but to such admirable perfection as in some measure or degree is likened & resembled to the vnmach∣able perfection of God himselfe. Moreouer of Patience in particular we read: Let Patience haue a perfect worke, that you

may be perfect & entire, fayling in nothing. Of faith: He (Abraham) was not weakned in faith: in the promise also of God he staggered not by distrust, but was strengthned in faith most fully knowing. Of* 1.6 Charity, whereof you haue the rash verdict of Protestants that it can neuer be perfect, wil you now heare the iudgmēt of S. Iohn: He that keepeth his word (to wit the commādment of our Lord) in him in very deed the Charity of God is perfected: If we loue one another, God abydeth in vs, and his Charity in vs is perfected. Will you heare the sentence of Christ: Greater loue then this no man hath, that a man yield his life for his friendes. But this hath beene acomplished by innumerable Martyrs* 1.7 of our Roman Church: they then haue arriued to the hi∣ghest pich or degree of Charity. After this sort S. Augustine teacheth, that not only the Charity of Christ, but the Charity also* 1.8 of S. Steuen, the charity of S. Paul was perfect in this life, accor∣dingly in his booke of the perfection of Iustice, and els where very often. But most perspicuously S. Hierom: He is truly and not in part perfect, who disgesteth in the wildernes the discomfort of solitude, and in the Couent or Monastery, the infirmi∣ties of the brethren with equall magnanimity. Which sentence because the Madgeburgian Protestants, could not with any dawbing besmeare, but that the beauty thereof would dis∣couer it selfe: they sprinkle it with the aspersion of an vn∣••itting, or bastardly kind of speach, and so cassiere it amōg other of his errours. But these reproachfull censures of such an eminently learned Saint rebound back with dis∣grace of the censurers, honour of the censured, and our acknowledged triumph, with which I go on to establish it further with a Theologicall proofe.

4. It is a strong grounded opinion among Deuines, that the actuall and supernaturall loue of some feruent & zealous persons heere vpon earth, exceedeth in essentiall perfection the burning charity of sundry inferiour Saints in heauen, whose Charity notwithstanding Protestants graunt to be perfect: for as the habituall grace and Cha∣rity of such as haue exercised many acts of loue, often re∣ceaued the sacraments, and augmented their inward ha∣bit,

surpasseth the grace and renouation of Baptisme, which infants dying before the vse of reason haue only ob∣tayned. So their actuall charity which is often answerable to the habituall (and by the help and supply of Gods spe∣ciall concurrence may sometyme be greater) surmounteth also the actuall loue of young children, who now re∣ioyce and triumph in the Court of blisse: such was the loue of our B. Lady, of S. Iohn Baptist, S. Peter and S. Paul.

5. To this Argument of the Schoolemen, I find no reply in any of our Reformers writings; but to the afore∣sayd passages of Scripture they commonly answere, that* 1.9 the workes of the faythfull are perfect and pleasing to God by acceptation: They please him (quoth Whitaker) as if they were entiere and pure, because he looketh vpon our persons, & he doth not make search into the worth, and merit of the worke. Ve∣rily in this later clause you say most truly, he maketh not search into the worth & merit of your workes, whch you denounce to haue no merit in them, which you pro∣clayme to be mingled with the corruption of sinne, yet your persons (perdy) because you are Protestants, are so a∣miable in the eyes of that supreme Monarch, that the things you do, delight and content him, as entiere and pure, howsoeuer they be in themselues impure. And whe∣reas the Publicans humility, Mary Magdelens teares, the Chananeans fayth, S. Peters sorrow endeared them to* 1.10 God, wheras all other good persons are accepted to him by reason of their workes, He that feareth God, and worketh iustice, is acceptable vnto him: only Protestants are such dar∣lings, as their works are not regarded by reason of their persons. He that sayd to Abraham: Because thou hast done* 1.11 this things, and hast not spared &c. I will blesse thee, blesseth them without reference to their doings: He that searcheth Hierusalem with lamps, that is, diligently sifteth his holyest Saints, maketh no such narrow scrutiny into his Prote∣testant fauourites: he with whome there is no acception of persons, accepteth the persons of Protestants without any exception. Go you and vaunt of this extraordinary

fauour, and passe yee without search or examination, to your peculiar heauen. God grant that we and our workes being weighed in the ballance of Gods iust triall, be not found too light, as Baltassars were, or fayling in any duty* 1.12 we are bound to accomplish. Against which M. Abbot de∣clameth as a thing impossible, because S. Augustine telleth vs: That there is no example of perfect righteousnes among men: That this is the perfection of man to find himselfe not to be perfect. To whome he also addeth the authorityes of S. Hierome, of Origen, calling our righteousnes in this life vnperfect, wan∣ting of perfection, and an image or shadow of vertu••. Likewise of the Apostles tearming himselfe according to S. Augu∣stine, vnperfect, a trauailler to perfection, not as one that was come vnto it. Thus he, not vnlike the Stoickes, whome S. Hie∣rome, and S. Augustine reprehend for their doting phrenzy, in cauilling, that he who profiteth in wisedome cannot be sayd to haue any wisedome vntill he come to be per∣fect therein.

6. But as concerning the matter in hand, I briefly reply with our Angelicall Doctour S. Thomas, and with* 1.13 all other Deuines commenting vpon him: That there is a threefold degree of perfection. The first is of them who are so firmely rooted in charity, as they detest all thinges contrary & repugnant to the law of God, that is, al mor∣tall and deadly crymes, by which charity is extinguished▪ this degree all the iust who are in the fauour of God at∣tayne vnto. The second, is that which excludeth not only euery grieuous sinne, but as much as our humane frailty with Gods grace can do, euery little imperfection, euery superfluous care, let, or impediment, which diuer∣teth our minds, or withdraweth our harts from the loue of soueraigne goodnes: to this not all the iust, but some religious, and zealous persons, by continuall mortifica∣tion, and abnegation of themselues haue also arriued. The third is, perpetually without intermission, withall the forces and powers of our soule, to be actually carryed away with the supernaturall streames of loue. This only

is proper to the Saints in heauen, and not axacted by God of any mortall creature, besieged with the infirmityes of flesh and bloud: in respect of this our iustice on earth, yea the iustice and perfection of S. Paul is tearmed vnperfect, it is an image or shaddow of vertues, it may be sometymes touched with the spots of vncleanes, and therfore of this* 1.14 only the Apostle auouched: Not that now I haue receaued, or now am perfect, yet in regard of the former two degrees, he arriued to perfection, and was already perfect, euen by the phrase of holy Scripture, which speaking of the first degree sayth, He that keepeth his word, in him in very deed the Charity of God is perfected. Of the second it is also written: If* 1.15 thou wilt be perfect, go sell the things that thou hast, and come, and follow me. By these degrees therefore of perfection, all the obiections may be easily warded, which our aduer∣saryes bring either out of Scriptures, or Fathers: as when they affirme our Iustice to be imperfect, defiled, with the touch of impurity, they speake of the first degree, soyled with the dust of wordly cares, and too often distayned with veniall defaults. When they exhort vs to greater perfection, that is, not to the common of all the iust, but to that singuler, of the mortifyed and feruent persons; fi∣nally when they teach, that we can neuer be perfect in this life: it is true, in the last acceptation of the word, according to the third degree heer specifyed. Which triple diuision of perfection keepeth the aduersary at such a bay as he knoweth not whither to turne him, how to escape, or what to mutter against it.

THE XXVII. CONTROVERSY, WHEREIN Our good workes are acquitted from the spottes of sinne: against Doctour Whitaker, Doctour Fulke, and Doctour Abbot.

CHAP. I.

THIS calumniation is euery where so rife and frequent amongst Protestant writers, as M.* 1.16 Abbot spendeth many Sections to attach his owne paynes and endeauours iustly, all other mens good workes wrongfully, yea pernici∣ously with the guilty stayne of sinne: and M. Whitaker vn∣dertaking the patronage and approbation of that drunken sentence of Luthers, All good actions be sinnes: if God be seuere in iudgement, they are damnable sinnes: If he be fauourable, they ••e but small ones, auoweth: Luther sayd this, and he sayd it truly: for in euery action of a man though neuer so excellent, there is some fault which may wholy marre the action and make it odious to God, if that which is done be weighed in the ballance of diuine iustice.

2. But if Luther sayd truly, then as Duraeus most pi∣thily argueth against M. Whitaker, the Apostle S. Paul

sayd not truly: If thou take a wife thou sinnest not: thē S. Peter sayd not truly: Doing these things, you shall not sinne at any time.* 1.17 S. Iohn sayd not truly: For this appeared the sonne of God, that he might dissolue the workes of the Diuell. If there be no worke which is not diuellish and sinnefull, he sayd not truly: Euery one that is borne of God committeth not sinne. Neyther did S. Paul wel to compare good workes to siluer, gould, and pretious stones, nor did the Prophets, and Apostles well to exhort vs to good workes, Christ did not well, as Car∣dinall Bellarmin prosecuteth the argumēt, saying: If the eye be simple, thy whole body shalbe lightsome, and: If then thy whole body be lightsome, hauing no part of darknes, it shalbe lightsome wholy, and as a bright candle it shall lighten thee. Where by the eye S. Augustine, and others vnderstand the intention of mā. By the whole body, Maldonate expoundeth all his facultyes, by the whole absolutely, of which it is also sayd, the whole shalbe lightsome, he interpreteth, all his human actions, which proceed frō the powers & faculties of the soule. All these sayth Christ flowing from the iust, and leuelled by a right intention, to a good end and obiect, are so bright as they inlighten the whole man, so pure and vnspotted as they haue no part of darknes, no blemish of sinne to destaine them. For which cause he calleth them in another place light: So let your light shine before men &c.* 1.18

3. Lastly if Luther sayd truely, God himselfe sayd not truly, writing of Iob: In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips, neyther spake he any foolish thing against God. And in the next Chapter, he calleth him A right man, fearing God,* 1.19 departing from euill, and retaining innocency. Whereby it is eui∣dent, that Iob in all his troubles committed no sinne, ney∣ther in thought, word, nor deed: not in word, because he sinned not, with his lips; not in deed, because he departed from euill; not in thought, because he still retayned innocen∣cy in his hart. And if we follow the Hebrew Text, all this may be gathered out of the former words of the first Chapter. For the Hebrew addeth not, with his lips, but without restriction absolutely readeth, Iob sinned not, or as

our Protestants translate: In all this did not Iob sinne. Which Origen and the Grecians, according to Pineda reférre, to his* 1.20 cogitations, to wit, that he entertayned no euill thought, or cogitation against God, but iudged wel of his goodnes: and the 70. Interpreters subscribe hereunto, who read, in all these things which hapned vnto him, Io•• sinned not at all, in the sight of our Lord. The like King Dauid affirmed of himselfe: Thou o Lord hast tryed me in fire, and there was no ini∣quity found in me. Therefore albeit he otherwise offended, yet at that tyme he was cleane from sinne, as also when he sayd: Iudge me o Lord, according to my iustice, and according to my innocency. Moreouer some workes of the iust are pro∣nounced by the holy Ghost to be good: God giueth vs all things abundantly to enioy, to do well, to become rich in good wor∣kes. That they may see your good workes, and glorify your Father which is in heauen. And yet they could not be good, nor commendable in Gods sight, much lesse pleasing sacrifices to him, as in the precedent discourse hath beene shewed, if they be defyled with sinne.

4. M. Abbot answereth: Therefore good works being tou∣ched, and infected with the contagion of sinne, before they can please God, must haue some meanes to take away the guilt, & imputation of the sinne &c. which Christ doth, perfuming them with the sweet* 1.21 incense of his Obedience. But how doth Christ take it away? By abolishing, or not imputing the contagion? By not imputing sayth Abbot, but thus he taketh away, according to them, the filth of adultery, of murder, of sacriledge, and all heynous crymes from the beleeuing Protestant. And are those sinnefull workes thereby made gratefull hostes, and acceptable sacrifices pleasing vnto God? No, sayth he agayne: Our good deedes are not sinnefull workes. Are they not? What is that guilt then of contagious sinne which must be taken away, before they can please God? If they be not sinnefull, no contagion of sinne is to be pardoned by not imputing: if they be sinfull, then your sinne∣ful acts inherently in themselues sinnefull, by not impu∣ting the guilt of contagion, become gratefull, pleasing

and acceptable vnto God. Neyther can M. Abbot any way cuade by his frequent, and worm-eaten answere, that the action we do is not sinnefull, because it is in substance a good* 1.22 worke, and the fruit of the good spirit of God, and the default and imperfection is only an accident to the worke. Nor Whitaker, who to the same purpose replyeth in his answere to Duraeus:* 1.23 We meane not that good workes are sinnes, but that they haue some sinne mixed with them. For it followeth not, that siluer is drosse, be∣cause it hath some drosse mingled with it. Seeing our dispute is not heere of the physicall substance, which in euery action euen of murder, theft, and the like, is transcendentally good, or in genere Entis, to vse the Philosophers tearmes: but of the morall bounty or deformity of a worke, which if it be tainted with the mixture of any euill, how accident∣tally soeuer, it cannot be good, sith it is true which Diony∣sius teacheth: Good ariseth from an entiere cause, euill from euery defect. So that Whitakers example, which Abbot also allead∣geth* 1.24 of gold or siluer mingled with drosse, is nothing to the purpose, because there be two materiall substances real∣ly distinct: heere we question of one morall act, which admitteth no distinction: there, although one metall be mingled with the other, yet by seuerall veynes, in seuerall places they are so incorporated, as the siluer is not drosse or drosse siluer; heere the same act flowing from the same will, aymed at the same end, must be both good and bad, pure and defiled, siluer and drosse, which is impossible. For as it inuolueth contradiction, that one and the same assent of vnderstanding should be at the same tyme, both true and false, in the agreement of all Philosophers and Deuines: so likewise it implyeth, that one, and the same acte of the will should be ioyntly at the same moment good and euill, laudable and vituperiall, pleasing & dis∣pleasing vnto God. Wherefore if euery action of it owne nature be euil, no worke of ours can be in substance good, as M. Abbot would haue it; none excellent, as Whitaker pretendeth; but the most excellent must needes in it selfe be wholy marred, wholy odious vnto God, wholy and

substantially naught, howsoeuer by outward acceptation it may seeme beautifull and fayre. Not so, say they, for our good workes are not wholy euill, not hatefull, not sinnes, but infected (quoth M. Abbot) with the contagion of sinne: We say not (quoth Whitaker) to marry a wife is sinne,* 1.25 but that they, who marry wiues intermixe some sinne in that good action. But you say that, that intermixed sinne may wholy marre the action, & make it odious to God, if that which is done be weighed in the ballance of diuine iustice: Therefore you say that the a∣ction of it selfe is wholy euill, wholy marred, altogeather odious vnto God, and hatefull of his owne nature, vnles you beleeue that an action weighed in the ballance of di∣uine iustice, becometh thereby worse, more odious, and abhominable then of it selfe it is, and that our supreme & highest Iudge, who iustly condemneth the wickednes of man, maketh it more wicked by the seuerity of his iudge∣ment.

5. Moreouer, from whence creepeth this spot of sinne into that good and lawfull action of marriage? Not from the will of taking a wife: for that is laudable & no sinne, according to the Apostle, not from the substance of the act, for that M. Abbot also alloweth to be good, not from any other accidentall circumstance of end, tyme, place, or person: for I suppose they be all guided by the rule of reason. How then is sinne intermixed in the good action of marriage? By the same act, which inseparably draweth the stayne of corruption with it, or by some other adioy∣ned?* 1.26 as by a wicked intention to which it is ordeyned, if by the same, one and the same action is both good and euill, a sinne and no sinne, agreable to reason and disa∣greable, consonant and dissonant to the will of God, the often refuted & vnauoyded implicancy, which you in∣curre. If by some other act or vicious intent, either this in∣tention is principall, and the cause of marriage, as to marry, the easier to contriue the murder of his wife, or some other, then the action of marriage is not good, but impious, wicked, and detestable: or it is a secondary in∣tent,

and followeth the desire of marriage, & so it cannot vitiate the former good desire, nor be termed a sinne in∣termixed therewith: which albeit obstinate and ignorant aduersaryes can hardly be drawn to confesse, yet will I make it so cleare, as they shall not be able to deny. Let vs take for example the act of louing God, or dying for his sake; what mixture hath it, or slyme of euill? any stayn that ariseth from the obiect beloued, or will which loueth it? Not from the obiect, for that is infinite goodnes with∣out all spot or blemish, therefore no blemish can be in∣termixed with that act, as it tendeth to so pure an obiect: nor from the will of louing it, for no feare of excesse, no danger of impurity, can possibly flow from desiring to loue the fountaine it selfe, and mayne sea of purity: not from the mudd of distraction, not from the scumme of vaine glory, not from the froath of pride, which some∣tyme may accompany that heauenly loue; for as it is im∣possible the act of loue, should be an act of distraction, vanity, pride, or any other then loue, so it is impossible the staynes of those sinnefull actions, should be intermi∣xed in the act it selfe of loue. Doth it proceed from some other fleshly motion, or rebellious inclination? But the* 1.27 motions of the flesh, do not a whit defile the operations of the spirit, they are distinct and seuerall actions, and these without consent, do not partake of their infection. What is the spot then of vncleanes, what is the muddy water this christall riuer of loue, hath drawen from our foule attainted nature? Is it nothing els then the defect, and want of greater perfection, which might be in that act? But thus the loue of many Saints, and Angells, in heauen, should be stayned with impurity, because none of the inferiour or lower orders arriue to the burning flames, or loue of the highest. Thus the sinnefull spots should not grow from any casuall and accidentall necessi∣ty, but from the substance it selfe of the act, and make the act of loue as it is substantially lesse perfect, so substātially euill, substantially naught; both which M. Abbot not∣withstanding

stoutly gainesayeth.

6. Besides, these spots which destayne our good workes, what be they? sinnes you graunt, but what sins? veniall or mortall? Veniall you vtterly reiect, in so much* 1.28 as M. Whitaker sayth, that they who allow them, do not only euert a true, but endeauour to set vp a false fundamentall point. Mortall then they are, & deadly crymes (howsoeuer you seeke to extenuate them with diminitiue words) they be transgressions of the precepts, preuarications of the law of God, or Nature; for euery deadly sinne is a breach of the Law. Then I pose you, whether these transgressions be actions distinct from the good workes which they defile, or not distinct? Say they be distinct, and you cannot say they be spots intermixed with our good actions; you can∣not say our pious workes are besprinkled with them, see∣ing their morall bonity is good and commendable, deui∣ded both in nature, obiect, quality, and action, from the deformity of these transgressions. Say they be not distinct, but that the same worke which is good, is spotted with deadly trespasses; then all good workes, be the neuer so excellent are deadly sinnes, al formal breaches & transgres∣sions of the law. From whence that manifestly followeth with which many heertofore haue rightly attached, and endited your Synagogue: That euery one is bouud to a∣uoyd all good workes, vnder payne of damnation. Se∣condly,* 1.29 it followeth, that M. Abbot hath wronged his Reader, and abused Doctour Bishop in disgracing his Syl∣logisme concerning this matter, as consisting of foure termes, wheras it consisteth only of three. For a worke to be a mortal sinne, and stayned with mortal sinne, is one & the same terme. How beit least he should cauill with me, as he hath done with him, I will frame my argument in the same mood and figure he himselfe requireth, thus:

No mortal sinne is to be done vnder payne ofdānation.

But all good workes are mortall sinnes.

Therefore, no good worke is to be done vnder paine of damnation.

M. Abbot denyeth the Minor proposition, and answereth: Though good workes haue some aspersion or touch of our* 1.30 corruption, yet do not thereby become sinnes. But I pro∣ue the contrary: for either that aspersion is a deadly offence morally separable from the good action, as with our infir∣mity in this life it is acheiued; or altogeather inseparable: if morally separable, we may sometyme exercise good wor∣kes, pure, and vnspotted without that sinnefull aspersion: if altogeather inseparable, the action which is done, stay∣ned (as you to soften the fault daintily speake) with the touch of corruption, defiled, as I demonstrate, with the contagion of deadly guilt, must needes be a mortall and deadly crime. For if the actions of stealing, killing, & ma∣ny others (which may be done sometyme without default, as by fooles or madmen) are notwithstanding, alwayes grieuous, and horrible offences, when to their positiue En∣tity, or Physicall substance, which is good, and to which God himselfe concurreth, any mortall deformity, or deadly infection is adioyned, by what forrain circum∣stance or casuall accident soeuer it be: how much more those actions which can neuer be wrought, without mor∣tall, foule, and deadly default (as all our good workes ac∣cording to Protestants) how much more are they mor∣tall, foule, and deadly trespasses?

7. In fine D. Whitaker, D. Abbot, and all my ad∣saryes* 1.31 acknowledge that our good works sprinkled with the spot of impurity, haue not all things necessary vnder sinne, to satisfy the law, but by reason of our weaknes and in∣firmity swarue, and decline from the fullnes thereof. Secondly they acknowledge, that all swaruings, all declinings from the full prescript of the law, are of their owne nature damnable and mortall crimes: Therefore by their owne acknowledgment all our good workes are heynous and damnable sinnes. But all men are obliged vnder forfeite of saluation, to fly and detest all grieuous sinnes, therefore all men are obli∣ged by this hellish doctrine to fly and detest al good wor∣kes. Yea euery one is bound to auoyd the very duties thē∣selues

he is bound to do. For we al bound to performe our duties, in obseruing the lawes & cōmandments of the De∣calogue: but euery duety we accomplish is weake, raw, & defectiue, euery defectiue and imperfect duty, a deuiation,* 1.32 & falling away from the perfectiō of the law, euery falling away, euery deuiation a mortall sinne, euery mortal sinne we are bound to auoyde, therfore we are bound to auoyde euery duty, which we are bound to performe. M. Abbot, agayne denyeth my consequence, because the* 1.33 sinne is not implyed in the duety, but ariseth by casuall and acciden∣tall necessity, from the condition of the man. I perceaue the dint of this weapon pricketh you to the quicke, it draweth bloud, and forceth you to giue ground at euery blow. First, all our actions were sinnes if seuerely scanned, then our good workes are not sinnefull, but sinne is intermixed in them. And* 1.34 are they now neyther sinnes, nor sinnefull, nor is any sin implyed in our duty? Well, I am glad to see you re∣cant, so it be sincerely done, and from your hart. For if sinne be not infolded in this duety, then the duety no doubt is conformable to the law, it satisfyeth the tye and obligation thereof, whereinsoeuer it bindeth vnder the penalty of any blamable default; yea (quoth he, Fulke, and Whitaker with him) it doth so inded, yet imperfectly, rawly, in part only. Answere directly for shame. Is that raw, & imperfect duety, such as it fulfilleth the law, so far forth as it obligeth vnder sinne, or no? What say you? Are you mute? dare you not speake? Thē iudgemēt passeth against you, that eyther it fulfilleth not the obligation, & sinne is inuolued in the duety, and that so deeply, as the dutifull a∣ction is of it owne nature (according to you) a true deuia∣tion & breach of the Commandment: or it satisfieth the whole bād of the law, and so it is cōtaminated with no touch of sinne, in respect of that obligatiō: It is a pure, good & vndefiled action, it is the full accomplishment of whatsoeuer the law in that kind exacted: the only senten∣ce we expect from your mouth. Againe, though sinne be not implyed in the duty, yet the duety in their phantasti∣call

iudgment, is stayned, with the sinne; but euery a∣ction which is stayned with sinne, is necessarily sinneful,* 1.35 whence soeuer the sinne proceedeth, as S. Basil, S. Chryso∣stome, S. Thomas, with all the Schoole-men conformably teach. For as that which is endewed with whitenes must needs be white, from what cause soeuer the whitenes cō∣meth, whether from the naturall propriety and conditiō of the thing, as in a Swan; or from the outward act and industry of man, as in a white-limed wall. So if the due∣ty we performe be polluted with sinne, our dutye is sin∣full from whence soeuer the sinne ariseth, whether from the inward hart or outward obiect, casuall necessity, or accidentall condition of man.

8. I may weary my selfe, in skirmishing so long with such feeble aduersaries, and wounding them thus in so many places. Therefore I retire, inflicting for a fare∣well, this last and deadly stroake in true Syllogisticall* 1.36 manner.

• Euery action, euery duety, which is deficient and be∣reaued eyther of due conuersion to God, confor∣mity to reason, or of such moral rectitude, as by pre∣cept binding vnder mortall sinne ought to be in it, is a mortall crime, and true preuarication of the Law.
• But euery action, euery duty we acheiue, is (accor∣ding to Protestants) deficient, and bereaued of that conuersion, rectitude, or conformity, as by pre∣cept binding vnder mortall sinne ought to be in it.
• Therefore euery action, euery duty we accomplish is (according to them) a deadly cryme, a true b••each and preuarication of the law.

The Maior proposition, is the ruled definition of sinne agreed vpon by the best Deuines, who either affi me it to be a priuation of good, with S. Dionysius Areopagita, S. Gregory Nissen, S. Basil, and S. Iohn Damascene; o••an alienation, an auersion from the law of God, with S. Augustine, & Fulgen us; or a want, absence, and defect of rectitude, with S. Anselme;

or a desertion, a straying from vertue, with S. Basil againe, & Nicetus; or lastly, a deflection, a deuiation from the square of* 1.37 reason, or supreme rule of all actions, with S. Thomas, and the whole troupe of his followers.

9. The Minor, that our duety is deficient, bereaued of the good, fayling of that rectitude, or perfection of vertue, which ought to be in it, is auowed by our Ad∣uersaryes, when they contend, that it is not answerable, and correspondent to the whole taske, or amercement the Law exacteth vnder the fine of sinne, or forfeiture of disobedience, therefore the forementioned conclusion rightly inferred from these two premises, is vndeniable. And wheras some thinke to get away with their loose re∣ply, that although the dutyes they performe, be in them∣selues breaches of the law, yet those breaches are pardo∣ned,* 1.38 not imputed to the elect; these men, by seeking to get out, lap themselues faster in their owne inextricabe ne••s: for no sinne is to be attempted, no breach of the law can be lawfully incurred, that God may after pardon, & forgiue the fault, that he may not impute the trans∣gression of his law. Murder is pardoned, Adultery is not imputed in their conceit to the beleeuing Protestant; & may they therefore be committed, because they shalbe forgiuen? O malicious presumption! O presumptuous ma∣lice! For beare then, yee Sectaryes, forbeare your due∣tyes to God, your alleagiance to your Prince, forbeare your raw and imperfect obseruations of al diuine, and hu∣man laws, or els reuoke your calumnyes, abiure your he∣resies, that all vertuous deeds are bespotted with the stay∣nes of vice.

THE SECOND CHAPTER, IN WHICH The same is warranted by the Fathers: the ob∣iections answered: & the vnuoluntary mo∣tions of Concupiscence dischar∣ged of sinne.

FOVRE notable thinges are deliue∣red by the Doctors of the Church, to shew the falsity of the former calum∣niation. First, they auouch our good* 1.39 works to be free from the spots of de∣filement, S. Hierome, S. Augustine, S. Gregory, and S. Bernard in the places heere quoted in the margent. Secōdly they affirme them to iustfy vs before God by true incre∣ase, and augmentation of inherent iustice, to which pur∣pose I haue alleadged many in the controuersy of iustifica∣tion by workes. Thirdly they inculcate, that some heroi∣call* 1.40 acts are so pure, and acceptable to God, as they purge & clense vs from al dregs, from all remaynes of former de∣faults,

yea they are so worthy and meritorious, as they do not only purchase an increase of grace in this life, but a great crowne of glory in the next, as Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, Origen, and S. Cyprian affirme of the dignity of Martyrdom, whose sentences are set downe in the que∣stion of merit. Fourthly, they teach, that not only the workes of some holy men, but that they also themselues* 1.41 may befor a tyme innocent and cleane from all impu∣rity: We teach, that a man may if he will, not sinne &c. S. Hierome: A man may if he will, be without sinne ayded by God. S. Augustine (which he strengthneth by the authority of S. Ambrose) affirming him truly to impugne them who say à man cannot be without sinne in this life. And in the same booke: Sinne may be auoyded, but by his helpe who cannot be deceaued. Thus Origen affirmeth, that holy Iob, and his children were pure and spotles from the fault of transgression, in so much, as the Magdeburgian Protestants reprehend him for it, saying: Naughtily doth he attribute so much innocency to Iobs children, as Adam and Eue had in Paradise: naughtily also doth he ascribe vnto Iob, that he was naked, and deuoyd of sinne, of impietyes, of all vnlawfulnes. Likewise: that he neyther sinned in his cogitations, nor in the conferences of his soule, or affayres of his hart. Besides, in Lactantius they taxe this sentence of his: If any one be purified from all spot of sinne, let him not thinke he may abstayne from the worke of largition, or giuing almes, because he hath no sinnes to wash away. And in the same booke (I proceed with their owne words) vnfittingly doth he say, That one may be acceptable vnto God, and be free from all blemish, let him al∣wayes implore the mercy of our Lord &c. In Theodoret they re∣proue, and place among his errours: that he affirmed Paul therefore not to be hurt of the viper, because he was without sinne. In S. Hierome they distast this: Our soule as long as it abydeth in her infancy, wanteth sinn. So that Origen, Lactantius, Theodo∣ret, and S. Hierome are by our Aduersaries owne confession wholy with vs in this point of fayth.

2. Notwithstanding, against these auncient Fa∣thers* 1.42 they oppose on their side the Ancient of Dayes, euen

God himselfe speaking by the Prophet Isay: All we are be∣come as one vncleane, and all our iustices as the cloath of a menstrued woman. Therefore vnles we thinke our selues better then* 1.43 our forefathers, all good workes (say they) are stayned with iniquity: which M. Abbot contenaunceth with the like sayings of Origen, S. Hierome, S. Augustine, and S. Ber∣nard. I answere first with S. Hierome, vpon that place of Isay, that there he deploreth the desolation, and captiuity of the Iewes in behalfe of those sinners, for whose offen∣ces they were so miserably afflicted, and in their person vttereth those wordes not in his owne. Or in respect of the iust and holy men that then flourished amongst them. Se∣condly, I answere, that the Prophet speaketh not there, as Aluarez à Medina well noteth, of all the workes of the foresayd offendours in generall, but of their sacrifices, Ho∣locaustes, Kalends, and other externall solemnities, by which they falsly deemed themselues cleane and sanctified in the sight of God; these their iustices he pronounced to be like a menstruous & defiled cloath, because they consi∣sted only in the pompe of outward ceremony, without the sincerity of inward worship: after which manner God sayd by the mouth of the same Prophet: Offer sacrifice no* 1.44 more in vayne, Incense is abhomination vnto me; the new Moone, and the Sabaoth, and other festiuities I will not abyde; your assemblies are wicked; my soule hateth your Kalends, & your solemnities. Third∣ly, I answere, that al our iustices, al our pious workes, al∣beit good and holy, considered by themselues, yet com∣pared and paralelled with the vnmatchable purity and holynes of God, are truly termed vncleane, and defiled according to the accustomed phrase of holy Scripture which calleth thinges in themselues great, in comparison of him litle, or nothing: All nations as if they were not, so are* 1.45 they before him, and they are reputed of him as nothing. Thinges in themselues fayre and glittering, foule and vncleane contemplated by him: Beholde the Moone also doth not shine, &* 1.46 the stars are not cleane in his sight; how much more mā, rottenesse & the sonne of a man, a worme? Things most white and beau∣tifull,

filthy and loathsome matched with him: If I be was∣bed as it were with snow waters, and my hands shall shine, as im∣maculate, yet shalt thou dippe me in filth, and my garments shall abhorre me, that is, as S. Gregory commenteth, Although I be* 1.47 filled with the groanes of heauenly compunction, although I be exer∣cised by the study of vpright operation, yet in thy cleanesse I see I am not cleane.

3. For this cause the Royall Prophet how innocent* 1.48 soeuer, might cry out and say: Enter not o Lord into iudgment with thy seruant, because no liuing creature shallbe iustifyed in thy sight, which sentence Abbot vrging against vs, exaggera∣teth* 1.49 thus: Dauid sayth it, a Prophet sayth it, a man after Gods owne hart sayth it. And what if a Saint in heauen, what if a Cherubim should say it, might he not truly say it, mea∣suring his righteousnes, with the infinite sanctity and ho∣lines* 1.50 of God? For as S. Gregory writeth: Human iustice com∣pared with diuine, is iniustice, because a lanterne in darkenes is seene to giue light, but placed in the sunne beames, it is obscured and dar∣kned. And thus S. Hilary, S. Hierome, Arnobius, and Euthi∣mius expound that place of the Psalme: neyther doth S. Augustine dissent frō them, saying: By whose participation they are iust, by comparison with him they are not iust. Another expo∣sition is of the same S. Augustine, S. Hierome, and S. Gregory vpon that Psalme, that the Prophet vttered the former speach, in respect of veniall sinnes, with which the most iust, and holy men are often infected, and which God strictly examineth, and seuerely punisheth. The third in∣terpretation is of S. Augustine also vpon this Psalme: That no man can be iustifyed of himselfe before the face of God, but the iustice he hath he receaueth from him. So Caietan, Eugubinus, and Vatalbus expound those wordes of Iob: In his Angells he found prauity, or as Symmachus readeth, vanity, because they of themselues had no goodnes, no verity, no essence, or be∣ing, but participated all from the soueraygne bounty of God. According to these three last expositions, we satisfy al the ambiguous, and obscure sayings our aduersaries op∣pose against vs, euen that of S. Bernard, which they vain∣ly

boast to be vnanswerable: Shall not our iustice, if it be strict∣ly* 1.51 iudged be found vniust and scant? For vniust it is, meted with the iustice, which is wholy infinit, scant in compa∣rison of that. Likewise when he sayth: That our iustice is right, but not pure &c. for how can it be pure iustice, where fault as yet cannot be wanting, he denyeth it to be pure: he sayth, fault cannot be wanting, because it is most commonly conioyned with veniall defaults, which although they hinder not the true nature and perfection of iustice, yet they darken the luster and brightnes thereof, and are lya∣ble to the seuerity of Gods heauy punishment. Whereupon S. Augustine: Wo be to the laudable life of a man, if it be exa∣mined without mercy. To the other passage of this renow∣ned Doctour, where he affirmeth, most perfect charity which cannot be increased, is to be found in no man in this life, we grant it to be true. This clause which followeth: And as long as it may be increased that which is lesse then it tought to be, is of vice, of which vice it proceedeth that there is no man who doth good, and doth not sinne, is to be vnderstood not of formall vice or faulty sinne, but of that which is an infirmity, weaknes and defect of nature, from whence it groweth, that there is no man who doth alwayes good, and neuer sinneth, at least venially sometyme. Thus S. Augustine interpreteth* 1.52 himselfe a litle before: saying: Who therefore is without some vice, that is, without some fomite, or as it were root of sinne? Af∣ter which manner I haue shewed aboue in the second Chapter of Concupiscence, that not only he, but Vlpianus,* 1.53 Pliny, and Cicero vse the name vitium, vice, for any defect, either in nature or act. In the same sense S. Augustine taketh the word, peccatum in his booke of the perfection of iustice where he hath these wordes: It is a sinne when eyther that Cha∣rity is not, which ought to be, or lesse then it ought to be. Other∣wise* 1.54 he would haue crossed and contradicted what he a∣uouched before in his booke de spiritu & litera: That if our loue of God in this life, be not so great as is due to his full and per∣fect knowledg, it is not culpae deputandum, to be imputed to any fault. By sinne then in the former place S. Augustine meaneth a

defect only or falling from the brimme of perfection, yet no culpable sin. So also many prophane writers vse the* 1.55 word peccare to sin, for erring and doing amisse in any act or faculty; as Plautus sayth: If thou hadst fayled in one sillable: and Tully: If a Grammarian shall speake rudely, or he that would be counted a Musitiā, sing out of tune, he is the more to be bla∣med, quod in eo ipso peccet, that he erreth or cōmitteth a banger in the thing it selfe, whereof he professeth the skill. To Origen, to S. Hierome, and to the rest of S. Augustine, and S. Bernard which Protestants obiect, I neede not frame any parti∣culer reply. The three last generall answers to the Texts of Scripture, sweep all the dust away, which they de∣ceiptfully gather out of these, or any other of the Fathers writings.

4. Lastly it is obiected: If we shall say that we haue no sinne, we seduce our selues, and the truth is not in vs. Likewise: In many things we offend all. I answere both these places are vnderstood of veniall sinnes, as S. Augustine expoundeth them, which often creep into the purest actions we do, and from which we are seldome, or neuer wholy free, yet they distayne not the purity of our vertuous actions, they are not intermingled with the morall bonity therof, but extrinsecally accompany it, abating the cleare beames of our soule, without defyling the pure action whose adhe∣rents they are; an assertion manifest amongst Deuines,* 1.56 which Protestants conceauing not, run into diuers, and those pernicious absurdityes. Secondly S. Iohn is interpre∣ted also by S. Augustine of the fomite of sinne, which euery man hath, how perfect soeuer he be; yet he doth not meane that, that fomite is properly sinne, but materially, or the effect or cause of sinne: which interpretation of S. Iohns words, S. Bonauenture imbraceth, and addeth a third exposition, that S. Iohn doth not teach no man to be at any tyme without sinne, but that no man can say, to wit, assuredly affirme without reuelatiō, that he hath no sinne, wherein Lyranus, and Hugo Cardinalis agree with him, but Caietam vnderstandeth S. Iohn, of no sinne, neyther actu∣ally

committed, nor originally contracted heertofore. This no man (the Virgin Mary only excepted, as hath beene els where declared) can auouch without seduction of his hart, without he make God a lyar, who sent his beloued Sonne into the world, to cleanse vs from our sinnes.

5. I proceed therefore to the third Caluinian dotage, that all first motions or prouocations to euill, are truly sinnes, albeit we vanquish them, which I haue heere re∣futed in the Controuersy, and second Chapter of O∣riginall sinne, and somewhat touched in the Contro∣uersy of Free-wil, where I haue shewed that S. Augustine accounteth it a meere madnes, and such a barbarical phren∣sy,* 1.57 that man assaulted with temptations should sinne a∣gainst his will, as he sayth, the very Poets, sheepheards, learned, and vnlearned, yea al the world doth witnes it to be false. Seneca a heathen could write: Away with all excuse, no man sinneth against his will. And, It deserueth no prayse not to do, which do thou caust not. But S. Augustine agayne shal de∣cide this matter, with a sentence able to seale vp the mouths of Protestant Ministers, and quyet the harts of all faythful Christians. Whatsoeuer cause (quoth he) there be of the will impelling it to offend, if it cannot be resisted, it is yielded vnto* 1.58 without sin: but if it may, let it not be yielded vnto, & there shalbe no sinnne committed. What, doth it perchance deceaue a man vnawars? Let him therefore be wary, that he may not be deceaued: or is the de∣ceit so great, as it cannot be auoyded? If it be so, the sinnes therefore are none: for who doth sinne in that which can by no meanes be esca∣ped? Likewise, not in the euill desire it selfe, but in our consent do we sinne. Moreouer: In as much as it appertaineth vnto vs, with∣out sinne we might be alwayes vntill this euill (of Concupiscence) were healed, if we should neuer consent vnto it, to euill. But in such things in which if not mortally, yet venially we are ouercome of it, rebelling in those, we contract that, for which we may dayly say, for∣giue vs our trespasses. S. Chrysostome holdeth with him in most expresse and apparent termes.

6. But our Sectaryes with one voyce oppose the wordes of the Law, Non concupisces, thou shall not couet,

Which forbiddeth nor the consent only (say they) but e∣uery* 1.59 act, euery motion of concupiscence. I answere, the Holy Ghost hath other where explayned the meaning of that precept in Ecclesiasticus: Follow not thy strenght, the con∣cupiscence of thy hart; go not after thy concupiscences. By S. Paul: Let not sinne raygne in your mortall body, that you obey they concu∣piscences thereof. He doth not say, as Theodoret, and S. Chri∣sostome obserue, let it not exercise tyranny, but let it not raigne, because it cannot raygne and haue free dominion, vnles we will ac∣cept, & voluntarily be thrall vnto it. He doth not forbid it to be, nor the hauing of those desyres, as S. Augustine, and S. Gregory note, expounding if of the fomit, for that is impos∣sible, as long as the flesh warreth against the spirit: but he forbideth it to rule, or ouercome by drawing vs into sub∣iection, he forbiddeth our following, or obeying the de∣sires thereof. For he sinneth not in whome sinne doth not raygne, according to the forenamed S. Augustine. Likewise: Con∣cupiscence it selfe is now no sinne in the regenerate, when consent is not yielded vnto it, to vnlawfull workes. And if any go about to cauill with S. Augustin, the hebrew word vsed in Exodus, cuteth off all occasion of cauillation. For there insteed of concupisces, it is tachmod, deriued from chamadh, which doth not signify to haue the disease of concupiscence, but properly to desire or couet with the hart: and because he doth not so who valiantly resisteth or wrastleth against it, therefore S. Paul accounted the vnuoluntary appetite thereof no appetite or desyre of his, saying: But now not I, worke it any more, that is, not I willingly, not deliberatly, not as an humane act, in so much as it cannot be reckoned any coueting of mine. But if he did not couet, he obser∣ued* 1.60 the law of not coueting, albeit he felt the motions of concupiscence in his flesh against his will, which were not forbidden by the word tachmod, but the free and vo∣luntary only: yea some of the Iewes, Iosephus being wit∣nes, were so farre of from imagining any surreptions or naturall passions to be forbidden, as they tanght the meer internall thoghts, although deliberate, not to be compre∣hended

in the prohibitions of nor stealing, coueting &c. whose erour our Sauiour corrected, pronouncing the* 1.61 voluntary desires of concupiscence to be forbidden. See S. Chrysostome, S. Hierome, Cyrill, Basill, Gregory Nissen, Au∣gustine, Ambrose, and Prosper thus interpreting that precept of the decalogue.

7. Finally, some obiect S. Cyprian: The mind of man besieged, and on euery side entrenched with the infestation or anoy∣ance of the Diuell, hardly withstandeth, hardly resisteth euery one: If couetousnes be cast downe, lechery ryseth vp: if lechery be kept backe, ambition rusheth in: if ambition be suppressed, angerfre••t••th, Pride swelleth, drunknes allureth &c. which I cannot ward off better, then our renowned champion S. Augustine hath done, saying: God forbid we shouldiudge S. Cyprian eyther coue∣tous, because he wrastled with couetousnes, or vnchast because he fought with vnchastity, or subiect to anger because he stroue with wrath, or ambitious because with ambition, or fleshly because with fleshly sinnes, or a louer of this world, because he encountreth with wordly allurements, or lecherous because with lechery, or proud be∣because with pride, or drunken because with drunkenesse, or enuious because he warred with enuy. Nay the truth is he was none of thē al, because he did manfully resist these euil motions, partly comming from originall condition, partly from vse and custome. That which S. Augustine heere inferreth of the assault of S. Cyprian, we may conclude of euery carnall suggestion, or vicious intice∣ment, that it begetteth no sinne, as long as we fight against it, and haue not any lyking thereof.

THE XXVIII: CONTROVERSY, ESTABLIHSETH The possibility of keeping Gods Law: against Doctour Whitaker, Doctour Fulke, and Doctour Abbot

CHAP. I.

WHEN we teach that the Command∣ments of God, may by the help of his grace be obserued vpon earth, we do not meane that they may be perfectly fullfilled according to the whole end, and intent of the Law; nor that our duety should be so entiere and com∣plete, as nothing can be added to the full perfection ther∣of nor do we speake of the vniuersall obseruation of all precepts all the whole dayes of our life, for that is rare, & graunted but to few; nor yet of the perfect fullfilling of any of them, any long tyme without some veniall sinnes, or small imperfections, for this is an extraordinary pre∣rogatiue, & speciall fauour among al the children of Adam

communicated only to our Blessed Lady: But we defend it possible, if not easy, by Gods grace to fullfill the sub∣stance, and satisfy the whole obligation of the Law, as far forth as at any tyme it bindeth vs vnder the penalty of* 1.62 sinne. This D. Fulke, this D. Whitaker, this D. Abbot with other Protestants deny, and Whitaker dubbeth as a point fundamentall, and this is that which we vphould against them. First, by that of Deutronomy: This commandment that I command thee this day, is not aboue thee, nor so far of, nor situated in heauen, that thou mayst say, which of vs is able to ascend vnto hea∣uen to bring it vnto vs, that we may heare, and fullfill it in worke &c. but the word is very neere thee in thy mouth, and in thy hart to do it. These two later members wipe away our Pro∣testants exposition, interpreting this place of the meere knowledge, not of the obseruation of the law, because God speaketh there of fullfilling and doing it in worke.* 1.63 Yet if by reason of S. Paul, who allegorically only, not literally applyeth that sentence to Christ, they gloze it at least to be vnderstood of the Euangelicall doctrine of Fayth, then we also insist, that if the precept of fayth in substance supernaturall, may be obserued, how much more the naturall commandments of the Decalogue, of which S. Augustine, and Theodoret expound that of Deutero∣nomy.

2. Secondly the Apostle sayth: That which was impos∣sible to the law in that it was weakned by the flesh, God sending his, Sonne in the similititude of the flesh of sinne, euen of sinne damned sinne in the flesh, that the iustification of the law might be fullfilled in vs, who waike not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit: Therefore they that are regenerated in Christ, in whome the spirit of God dwelleth, who walke in new∣nes of life, do truly satisfy and fullfill the law of God. They* 1.64 do it (quoth Fulke, and Abbot) by the supply or imputation of Christs righteousnes imputed vnto them and made theirs, not by a∣bility giuen them to keepe it. But this guilefull commentary hath beene heertofore discarded in the Controuersy of In∣herent Iustice. And heere S. Paul flatly auerreth the com∣ming

of Christ to haue beene, that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs; in vs, whose earthly shape and similitude he tooke; in vs, in whose flesh he damned and abolished sinne: for in his owne he neuer extinguished any, because it was neuer touched with the least aspersion. Therefore he cannot be expounded of the obedience per∣formed by Christ in his own person, but of that which we atcheiue in ours, whome he cleanseth from vice, and adorneth with grace: that the iustification of the law might be fulfilled in vs, quickened by his spirit, which in flesh wea∣kened & infeebled by sinne, was otherwise without gra∣ce impossible to be kept. Likewise Christs righteousnes, according to Protestants is communicated vnto them by fayth only; but the Apostle heere writeth of a iustification obtayned by working, and going forward in newnes of life, by walking not according to the flesh, but according to the spi∣vit: then the causall preposition, for, which ensueth, the comparison betweene them that pursue their fleshly appe∣tits, and such as are swayed with the desires of the spirit, the correspondence and agreement with this other Text, Not the heares of the law are iust with God, but the doers of the law* 1.65 shalbe iustifyed, inuincibly proue that the Apostle speaketh of the iustification purchased by the doing and keeping of the law in our owne persons, and not of that which by* 1.66 your almighty-vaine beleefe is imputed vnto you. And so S. Augustine: When it is sayd (quoth he) the doers of the law shall he iustified, what other things is sayd, then the iust shalbe iustified? For the doers of the law verily are iust. Agayne: Fullfill* 1.67 the law which thy Lord thy God came not to breake, but to fulfill, for thou shalt fulfill that by loue, 〈…〉〈…〉 are thou couldst not. And a litle after: Our Lord will affoard his sweetnes, and our earth* 1.68 will yield ber fruit, that by charity yee may fulfill which by feare was hard to accomplish. In another place: The law teaching, & commanding that which without grace could not be performed, dis∣couered vnto man his infimity, that infirmity discouered might seeke out a Sauiour, from whome the will healed might be able to do, which infirme it could not do. The law therefore leadeth vnto fayth,

fayth impetrateth a more copious spirit, the spirit diffuseth Charity, Charity fullfilleth the law.

3. Thirdly Christ pronounceth: May yoake is sweet, and* 1.69 my burthen light. S. Ioan: This is the law of God, that we keep his commandments, and his commandments are not heauy. To whom are they not heauy? To them to whome our Re∣deemer spake: Take vp my yoake vpon you, and learne of me,* 1.70 because I am meeke and humble, & you shall find rest to your soules: To them whome S. Iohn taught how to ouercome the world; but these men were inuironed with humane in∣firmityes, therfore men compassed with the frailty of our flesh, which M. Abbot gaine-sayth, may by the succour of* 1.71 Christ and assistance of his grace, take vp the yoke of Gods commandments, easily beare them, and sweetly ob∣serue them. Fourthly our Sauiour sayd to him who desired to learne the way of saluatiō: If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Is it possible then to enter into euerla∣sting* 1.72 life? Yes. And not by this meanes which Christ pro∣posed? No. No? Conceaue you so hardly of the blessed Redeemer, and louer of our soules, as to auouch, that he who came to teach the way of truth, who neuer counsail∣led the captious Pharisyes his deadly foes to run any vn∣couth, false, or straying path, did now perswade this Re∣ligious* 1.73 young man, whome he loued, who vnfeignedly sought, as S. Basil, S. Chrisostome, and Euthymius thinke, his eternall weale, to an erroneous and impossible course of of atteyning blisse? Did he say vnto him, hoc fac & viues, do this and thou shalt liue, which although he would, he could not do, or if he did, might not purchase life therby? For such is the impious answere which Caluin, and his followers returne to this heauenly admonition, or precept of Christ; forcing his meaning quite contrary to his words. Fifthly Kinge Dauid auoucheth of himselfe: I haue ran the way of thy com∣mandments: I haue kept thy law: I haue not declined from thy testi∣monyes: I haue kept thy commandments and testimonyes. And that you might be assured he sayd true, the holy Ghost addeth his seale, & subscription thereunto: Dauid did that which was

right in the sight of God, & turned from nothing that he comman∣ded him all the dayes of his life, except only the matter of Vrias the* 1.74 Hethi••e. Agayne: He was not like my seruant Dauid, who kept my Commandments. Of Ezechias he witnesseth the same. Of Zacharias and Elizabeth, Saint Luke recordeth: They were both iust before God, walking in all the commandments, and iustifications of our Lord without blame. Scan I pray these foure things. First, that they walked not in any one on∣ly, but in all the commandments. Secondly that they were iustifications which made them iust. Thirdly be∣fore God. Fourhly, without blame, viz. without any vicious defect, or culpable imperfection, which might eyther stayne the splendour of their iustice, or hinder their ful & complete obseruation of the law, which God required at their hands.

4. Lastly the keeping of the commandments is the sole marke, and true cognizance of a beleeuing Christian:* 1.75 If you loue me, keepe my commandments: He that hath my com∣mandments and keepeth them, he it is that loueth me. And: In this we know that we haue knowne him, if we obserue his command∣ments: He that sayth he knoweth him, and keepeth not his command∣ments is a lyar, and the truth is not in him. Wherefore if Pro∣testants cannot obserue the Commandments, they are not* 1.76 louers, nor knowers of God, or if they challenge his loue and boast of his knowledge, not fullfilling his law, they are lyars, blasphemers, and the truth is not in them. Their Ministers stinged with this sharpe censure, begin to startle and perswade their fauourits, that they keep the law cor∣respondently to the proportion of their loue and know∣ledge, that is, haltingly, weakly, imperfectly, as their loue is halting, their knowledge imperfect. Are these the new Apostles, diuine lightned Reformers, who sit in the sun-shine of their Ghospell, and rise to illuminate the world with their radiant beames? And do they con∣fesse their beames of truth to be dimmed with clouds, their flames of loue frozen with cold, with such misty clouds, with such nipping frost, as violate the precept of know∣ing

the commandment of louing God? For as their raw and imperfect obseruations (which hath been demon∣strated before in the precedent Controuersy) are of their owne nature, true breaches of the law; so their lame knowledge, their imperfect loue is a transgression of the precept of loue, a preuarication of the commandment of beliefe, which is the supernaturall knowledge of God, whereof S. Iohn speaketh. But if they violate the precept of fayth as often as they beleeue, with what conscience can they exercise an act of beliefe, who are charged ne∣uer to infringe the will of God? With what hart can they iudge that precept imposed, when neyther in this life, nor in the next (for then fayth ceaseth, and vanisheth away) it can be euer accomplished? With what tongue can they bragge of true beliefe (for this is commāded) wheras theirs transgresseth the commandment of God? With that false stringed tongue, with that hollow hart, with that seared conscience, with which they presume to auerre, that the Father of heauen doth esteeme and account their breaches obseruations, their violations accomplishments of what* 1.77 he commandeth, forcing him to vnder go for the loue of their persons, that heauy curse he threatneth to others: Wo be vnto you that call euill good, and good euill, esteeming darknes light, and light darknes, accounting bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.

5. Yet on the other side, if abhorring these blasphe∣myes, they dare pronounce their knowledge, or beliefe such, as it fulfilleth the precept of fayth, as far as it ought: thence we argue, that they may likewise obserue the pre∣cept* 1.78 of charity, as far forth as they ought, and by con∣sequence wholy obserue and fulfill the law. For Charity is the fulnes of the law, the summe or knot of perfection, on which the* 1.79 whole law and Prophets depend. Hence it is defined in the secōd Arausican Councell: That all the Christned, hauing receaued grace by Baptisme, Christ ayding and cooperating, may, and ought if they will diligently labour, to fullfill all things which belong to sal∣uation. S. Hilary saity; It is not hard if the will be prompt to obey

the precept of our Lord. S. Hierome: No man doubteth of this, but that God hath commanded things possible. S. Augustine: Neyther* 1.80 God who is iust can command things impossible, nor condenme man who is pious, for that which he could not auoyd. And agayne. Thinges impossible God commandeth not, but by cōmanding warneth thee, both to doe what thou art able, and to aske what thou art not able, and he helpeth thee that thou mayest be able. Yet because Protestants will strayne their wits to bow these sayings to some crooked sense, I will stand to the iudgement of such as their owne fellow Protestans furnish me withall, and whome they iudge to hold with vs without exception.

6. For the Century-writers affime, that the authour of Replyes extant among the workes or Iustin, with full mouth breaketh into these words: What is all the iustice of the law? to loue God more then himselfe, and his neighbour as himselfe, which truely is not impossible to men that are willing. Of Clemens Alex∣andrinus, mayster to Origen, they auouch: He with great er∣rour iudged the legall obedience to be altogeather possible to the re∣generate. Then passing to the three hundred years of Christ thus they deliuer their generall verdict of the Fathers of that age, They held concerning the law very exhorbitant opinions, as Tertullian in his booke against the Iewes disputeth, that the Saints in the old testament, as Noë, Abraham, Melchisedech, & others were iust by the iustice of the natural law. Hence with the like error (I vse the Centurists phrase) Origen heer and there inculcateth many things of the possibility of the law, as in his eyght homily vpon Exodus, where expounding the Decalogue, he seemeth to asseuere that the bap∣tized may according to all things fulfil the law. The same, sayth the Authour of homilyes vpon the Canticle, The diuine word is not mis∣shapen or without order, neyther doth it command things impossible. And Cyprian, because, sayth he, we know that which is to be done, and can do that which we know, thou conimandest me, o Lord that I loue thee; this both I can, and ought to do. Hitherto the Centurists producing witnesses against themselues.

THE SECOND CHAPTER; IN WHICH The possibility of keeping the Law is maintay∣ned, by other reasons: and obiections answered.

FIRST it were no lesse then tyranny to punish men euerlastingly for not keeping the Commandments, if it be not in their power by Gods helpe to* 1.81 keep them. Therefore to quit the so∣ueraigne goodnes from this merciles cruelty, the Fathers vniformely define: That it is a wicked thing to teach the Precepts of the spirit cannot be obserued. S. Basil: Accuse not God, he hath not commanded things impossible. S. Chrysostome: We stedfastly beleeue God to be iust & good, not able to command things impossible; hence we are admonished what we ought to do in things easy, what to aske in things hard and difficile. S. Augustine, & S. Hierome accurseth their blasphemy who teach any impossible things to be imposed by God vnto man. Which argument hath beene handled heertofore in the Cōtrouersy of Free will,

where the Aduersaryes cauils theretunto are reiected. The like impiety it were in God to cooperate with vs in such speciall manner, to affoard his heauenly grace, his super∣naturall ayde to the keeping of his Commandments, if we transgresse and sinne in keeping of them. For as our* 1.82 great Doctour S. Augustine teacheth: To commit sin, we are not ayded of God; but to do good things, or wholly fullfill the precept of iustice, we cannot, vnles we be ayded by God. Marke heere that by the ayde of God we may not in part, but wholy fullfill the precept, and that in fullfilling it we do not sinne, be∣cause thereunto we could not be holpen by God. To which my aduersaries cannot shape their worne-out, and thrid-bare reply, That our obseruation, our loue of God* 1.83 for example, is no sinne, but a good deed by acceptation. For as I haue often answered, God cannot accept that for good which is in it selfe naught and sinnefull, but it is good in the* 1.84 originall of grace from whence it proceedeth. Explane your selfe a little better, whether you meane it is perfectly or imper∣fectly good? Graunt perfectly, and you go on our side: yield only imperfectly, and you stand at the stay you were before: perhaps you imagine that it springeth per∣fect from the fountaine of grace, and after receaueth a ble∣mish from the weaknes of flesh? You imagine amisse: for the same indiuiduall & morall act which once is enriched with the dowry of perfection, cānot be after impouerish∣ed with any basenes of vice. Or, is it partly good as it is wrought by grace, and partly euill, as it runneth through the conduct of depraued nature? No such matter: the thing contradicteth it selfe, as hath beene often signifyed, nei∣ther is nature the conduct or pipe, but true cause of the act, in which there is not any part good, assignable to grace, distinct from that which is ascribed to man: but the en∣tiere action perfect, or lesse perfect, is wholy assigned to mans freewill, wholy thereunto ayded by grace: as the characters which the scholler frameth by the Maisters gui∣ding of his hand, are not seuerally drawne fayrely by one, and rudely by the other, but the same fayre or de∣formed,

rude or well fashioned, are wholy from both. Which forceth M. Abbot from that incongruous shift: We* 1.85 by our corruption do disgrace that, which proceedeth holy and pure from God. In like manner he is ferretted out of his other berry-hole: That the action is good in the will, and endeauour of* 1.86 the person, by whom it is done. For the will is weake, the en∣deauour mean, the person cloathed with human corrupti∣on, who if he may will, and endeauour that which is good, then some good may proceed from a fleshly man, perfect and entiere, free from all spot and blemish or els the will and intendment is no better then the worke: and* 1.87 this assignement of goodnes which you make to the will, is a meere shew or treachery to cloake the badnes of your cause.

2. Lastly, you say (although you place it not in or∣der last) that the duty we obserue is in substance good. Well, I am contented with this (but see you recant not) for heere I haue, that the substance at least of louing God, the substance of euery obseruation of the law, which we a∣chieue, is perfect, and entiere, able to satisfy the will of God, able to make vs acceptable vnto him. Yes say they: If he fauourably looke vpon it, and impute not the fault: but if he* 1.88 should strictly & narrowly deale with vs, he should haue iust cause of reiecting vs in the doing thereof. Forbeare these ifs, & ands, and come to the point. Is the substance of the action done entierely, good in it selfe, or no? abstracting from the fauour or dislike of God, whose indulgence, or seuerity* 1.89 being extrinsecall, doth not make the substance of the worke better or worse? It is not so good, as it may endure the try all of the precise, and perfect rule of righteousnes & truth. This is not the question, but whether it may stand with satis∣faction of his law? It cannot stand with it in such full complete, and absolute manner, as that nothing at all may be added thereunto, Neither is that the thing demanded: who euer dealt with such slippery companions? Must I still put you to the tor∣ture, to draw out the truth? My question is, whether the substance of the act satisfyeth the obligation of the law?

Let vs heere what you say to this. They answere as heer∣tofore: It is short of that which the law requireth, it cannot be such* 1.90 as it ought to be: as long as the flesh lusteth against the spirit, there can be no such entiere good in vs. Alwayes a man doth lesse then he ought to do. I thought you would flinch from your word: but I pursue you also flying. The act then of louing God is substantially short of that the law requireth, substan∣tially lesse then it ought to be, and not only lesse of that which ought to be, by perswasion or counsaile, but by precept binding to more, vnder payne of morall sinne; therefore the substance of this lesser act, is not morally good, but mortally defectuous, substantially faulty, a deadly sinne, and true transgression of the law, to which God cooperating must needs cooperate in particuler man∣ner to the accomplishment of sinne, & Protestants are bound to surcease from louing, praying, or endeauou∣ring to performe those mortall crimes, and bound to per∣forme them, because God commandeth them, as I further demonstrate by this dilemma. Either God commandeth the complete & perfect fullfilling of his law, which Protestants teach, no man in this life can euer atcheiue, & so his vnspeakable mercy degenerateth into tyranny, exa∣cting a tribute which we cannot pay, condemning vs for a fault which we cannot possibly eschew; or he comman∣deth vs to discharge our dutyes, according to our weake and limping manner, and then our vttermost endeauours satisfy his law, although they be lame and imperfect. If not? If our best endeauours transgresse his will, if they be wanting of the duty we ought to performe, and he com∣mand that defectuous duty; thus he himselfe commandeth a transgression, commandeth a sinne, and man by doing Gods will is bound to sinne. From which M. Abbot can∣not* 1.91 excuse him by saying: It is the duty only he is bound to, and not to the sinne. For if the duety be vnauoydably linked with the sinful transgression, whosoeuer commandeth the duty, commandeth the transgression, and whosoeuer is obliged to accomplish the one, is necessarily obliged to incurre the

other. Neither is this fallacia accidentis, or any sophisticall cauillation, as he would bleare the eyes of the simple, pro∣ducing to that effect these two examples against Doctour* 1.92 Bishop: A lame man is bound by law to come to the Church, he cannot come to the Church, but he must halt, therefore he is bound by law to halt. M. Bishop is bound to pay a man twenty poundes, but he cannot tell the money without soyling his fingers, therefore he is bound to soyle his fingers. So he, writing at randome: for i•• there were no other pace amongst men, nor other meanes to repaire to Church but only by halting, all those who were bound by law to go to the Church, should be boūd by law to halt to the Church, and whosoeuer was willed to go should in this case be willed to halt, if, I say, there were no other gate at all then halting: now in the opini∣on of Protestants there is no meanes of fulfilling the law of God heer vpon earth, but defectuous lame, and sinneful, therfore whosoeuer is tyed to that sinnefull fufilling, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 al∣so tyed and obliged to sin, and whosoeuer commandeth it, commandeth sinne.

3. His second example is more extrauagant, for no* 1.93 precept of the Decalogue can be obserued: The least (saith Caluin) is a burden more heauy then Aetna. No action of kee∣ping can be done without breach, & yet some money may be counted without soyling of fingers. I verily thinke many poore Artizans, many studēts also may receaue their rents without much soyling: howbeit the ample reue∣nues of great Lordships may stayne thē somewhat more; yet these staynes & defilements arise not immediatly from the action of counting or locall motion of the fingers, but from the money defilant & coyne which is soyled: clean∣se that, and your fingers will be cleane. But dare you say in like manner, that the impurity of our dueties, the spots of our actions are drawn from the things prescribed and commanded by God, from his spotted laws & defiled con∣stitutions? I cannnot iudge you guilty of so wicked a saying.

4. Secondly eyther English Protestants hold with

Caluin, that all and euery commandment is impossible to be kept, or some particuler only. Not euer one, for I* 1.94 consulte the consciences of your own Sectaries, whether some of your Iudges haue not beene free from murder, & bearing false witnes against their neighbours; whether some of your graue Matrons haue not beene faythfull to their husbands, not defiled neyther in thought, nor deed with the cryme of adultery; whether some Protestants children haue not beene obedient to their parents, some Protestants subiects loyall to their Prince? I for my part what soeuer the Caluinists libell to the contrary, vnfeig∣nedly iudge, that diuers among them haue fully obserued at least for a tyme some of these precepts: then euery com∣mandment is not impossible for some space to be kept.* 1.95 But some perchance be. Which are they? The two hardest in your opinion are, thou shalt not couet; and thou shalt loue God withall thy hart &c. Of the former it hath beene already pro∣ued, that it forbiddeth not the vnuoluntary motions, but the free consent, which we may refrayne; as some Pro∣testants no doubt, at some tyme or other, checke and sub∣due their desires of adultery, of reuenge, of coueting their neighbours goods, their liues &c. For it is an infamy too reproachfull that all their women should be adultresses, all their men & aged children reuengers of their wrongs, spillers of bloud, purloyners of the goods of others, eyther* 1.96 in hart or deed, as often as any such euill motion ariseth, or tentation is suggested vnto them. Agayne to affirme the first motions which inuade vs against our will, to be breaches of the precept, daunteth the courage of Christs valiant souldiers, it frustrateth the intent of Gods com∣maundement. For why doth he command vs not to couet but that we may fulfill his will in not coueting? Why do we fight against the motions of Concupiscence, but that we may not transgresse his law, yeilding to them? Which suppose it be, will we nill we, by their assaultes transgressed, we striue in vaine to keep of the receaued foyles, or preuent the woundes already inflicted. This

precept then we may keep as often as we bridle our in or∣dinate suggestions, and suppresse the inticements which prouoke vs to euill.* 1.97

5. The other also whereby we are commanded to loue God withal our hartes, with al our forces &c. may be fulfilled if we vnderstand it aright, of the appretiatiue loue of true frendship therein exacted, not of intensiue or affectionate loue (as the Deuines speake) that is, we ought to esteeme and prize God for his owne infinite goodnes before all thinges in the world, abandon al earthly riches, profits and emolumentes when occasion is offered rather then him, we ought to make him the only scope and fi∣nall end of all our desires: yet we are not charged to loue him with all the degrees of intention which may be, for that can neuer be shewed, nor to loue him with such per∣fection, as to imbrace voluntary pouerty or perpetuall chastity for his sake, these are only counsayled not com∣maunded by the force of that precept: neyther are we tied so to settle our hartes vpon him, as not to affect any other thing conducible to our estate, or profitable for the main∣tenance of our liues, but only not to affect any thinge contrary and repugnant to his seruice, which wee may easily do by the help of his grace, and wholy thereby dis∣charge our bond in fullfilling that sweet and comfor∣table* 1.98 law, as king Dauid discharged it, when he testified of himselfe: With my whole hart haue I sought after thee; I besought thy face with all my hart: I haue cried in my whole hart: I in al my hart will search thy commmandments. Howbeit he busied also* 1.99 himselfe in the affayres of the common wealth, and was often distracted with temporall cares; And the priestes and people prayed God with al their hart: although they were some∣tyme interrupted with other cogitations: All Israell is sayd* 1.100 to follow Absalom with al their hart, albeyt they managed some other affayres (no doubt) and affected some other thing besides him. Of Iosias God himselfe witnesseth, There was no king before him like to him, that returned to our Lord in all his hart, and in all his soule, and in all his power, according to the law

of Moyses, neyther after him did there arise the like to him.

6. In fine, Protestantes obserue the precept of Faith; by which they are likewise commaunded to beleeue withall their hart: Yf thou beleeue with all thy hart, thou maiest:* 1.101 notwithstanding they giue humane credit to many other authentical histories, or probable reportes, without hinde∣rance thereof, so they may accomplish the command∣ment of louing God, with all the powers of their soule, when this loue ouerswayeth the loue of all other thinges, when they make him the principall obiect of their hart, and summe of their desires, when they neyther imbrace nor execute any thing oppofite, or disagreable with his frendiship, which diuers haue, and euery one may by the prerogatiue of Grace atteyne vnto. Thirdly S. Paul pro∣fesseth, I can all thinges in him that strengthneth me, therfore he could by the strenght of grace fulfil the commaundments, or els you derogate both from the authority of the Apostle who affirmeth it, and from the power of grace by vertue whereof he many accomplish whatsoeuer. Moreouer* 1.102 God maketh this promise vnto vs: I will put my spirit in the middest of you, and I will make that you walke in my preceptes, and keepe my iudgements, and doe them. Christ testifieth the per∣formance: I haue manifested thy name to the men whome thou* 1.103 gauest me &c. and they haue kept thy word. Yet notwithstan∣ding, the possibility S. Paul speaketh of, notwithstanding the promise of God the Father, notwithstanding the ac∣complishment the Sonne mentioneth, do they breath v∣pon* 1.104 the earth, and vaunt of Christianity, who depose against them that neuer any fulfilled the law? That it is not possible for man to accomplish it?

7. Thus much for the mayntenance of our doctrine. Now to the obiections of aduersaries. First they vrge out S. Paul; Cursed be euery one that abideth not in all things that be* 1.105 written in the booke of the law to do them. But no man can ob∣serue euery iote of the law without some litle or veniall default, therefore he is obnoxious to that damnable curse.* 1.106 For whosoeuer shall keep the whole law, and offendeth but in one, is

made guiltie of all. Truly they haue framed an excellent Ar∣gument to proue themselues accursed, who freely confesse they cannot keep any one precept of the law, much lesse the whole. But we to whome the cōmandments by Gods* 1.107 grace are possible according to S. Hierome; we, who by the seed of God dwelling in vs do not sinne, but arriue to the full accom∣plishment of the law, and of all thinges written and con∣teyned therein; we I say, are free from that malediction, for veniall sinnes do not in that sense breake or violate the law. neyther doth S. Paul pronounce that curse of them, (as appeareth by the playne text of Deuteronomy, whence he reciteth those words) but of mortal and deadly crimes, of Idolatry, incest, murder &c. which are indeed grieuous breaches, & trānsgressions of the Law. Therfore* 1.108 he that obserueth the rest and cōmitteth any one of those, is liable to the curse of the law, he is made guilty, as S. Iames witnesseth, of the whole, not that he who stealeth should be guilty of adultery, or he who is an adulterer, is therein a murderer, or that he who trāsgresseth one cōmaundement shalbe as seuerely punished & tormented in hell, as if he had brokē al, but the sense is, that he who offēdeth in one, eyther incurreth the wrath and indignation of God the v∣niuersal authour & enacter of them al, or cā haue no more* 1.109 hope of obtayning saluatiō then if he were guilty of al; or that he sinneth as S. Augustine interpreteth, against the ge∣neral & great cōmandment of loue & Charity, the summe, the band, the plenitude and perfection of them all: for the breaking of the band is the dissoluing of the whole.

8. I answere agayne, that S. Pauls argument here allead∣ged inferreth the possibility of keeping the law for which we dispute, he reasoneth to this effect: Whosoeuer wil be iustified by the workes of the law, must fullfill the whole taske of the law: But without faith in Christ no man can by the force of nature vndergo, or do the whole taske of the Law: Therfore without faith, through the strength of nature, no man can be iustified by the workes of the law. Hence he inferreth, Christ hath deliuereth vs

frō the eurse of the law, he doth not meane as Protestants falsify him, that he hath discharged vs from the obserua∣tion of the law, as from a thing vnpossible; but that he inspireth fayth and affordeth grace from the Storehouse of of his merites, whereby we may keepe the law, and so eschewthe malediction, or curse of transgression which the delinquentes incurre.

9. Secondly it is opposed, Now therefore why tempt you God, to put a yoake vpon the neckes of the disciples, which neyther our Fathers, nor we haue beene able to beare? I answere, that S.* 1.110 Peter there calleth not the obseruation of the decalogue, but the ceremoniall law of the Iewes, a yoake insuppor∣table, because it was very hard and difficult, as S. Tho∣mas* 1.111 and Lyranus note, to be fulfilled. For all their precepts were, as Rabby Moyses, and Abulensis recount them, 600. or there about, amongst which were 218. that were affir∣matiue, and 365. negatiue commandements; then the obligation of them was strictly and punctually to be ob∣serued. the transgression capitall and punished with all seuerity, yet King Dauid, Zachary, Elizabeth, Moyses, Io∣sue, &c. fulfilled them: for of Iosue the Scripture gi∣ueth testimony: He accomplished all thinges; he omitted not of all the commandementes, not so much as one worde which our Lord had commanded Moyses. Now Christ hath exempted vs from that combersome yoke, from that Burthen (as S. Augustine calleth it) of innumerable Ceremonies (yet not, which Libertines pretend. from the * 1.112 obseruation of the decalogue) and in liew of them imposeth a light carriage,* 1.113 not pressing vs downe with weighty loade, but lifting vs vp, as it were with winges: A preceps of loue which is not heauy.

10. Furthermore a slaunderous reporte is spread a∣gainst vs touching the diuision of the Decalogue (which I thinke not amisse heere to insinuate, as it were by the way) that we leaue out one of the commaundments, the second as Protestants count it, of not worshiping grauen Idolls: but this is a meere cauill, for we deuide the deca∣logue with S. Augustine, branching the first Table into

three precepts which instruct vs in our duty to God, the second Table into seauē appertayning to our neighbour,* 1.114 and we proue this diuision to be most consonant vnto reason, because the internall desire of theft, as mainly di∣ffereth from the desire of adultery, as the externall actes vary amongest themselues in their specificall natures. Wherfore as it pleased God seuerally to forbid the out∣ward actes: so we distinguish the inward consentes into seuerall commandements, making two of the last, which Protestants combine in one, and vniting the first vpon far better grounds, then they distinguish it. For seeing he that draweth the pourtraiture, or ma∣keth the similitude of any creature, to the end to adore it, maketh to himselfe a straung God, another God besides the liuing God of heauen, which is forbidden in the first wordes of the first commandement, all the prohibitions appertayning thereunto, as thou shalt not make to thee a grauen thing: Thou shalt not adore &c. are but members and explications of the same precept, and so ought not to be deuided from the first: This is the cause why in our Catechismes, where a briefe summary or abridgement of the comandements is con∣tracted, we omit these declarations of the first, as li∣kewise of other preceptes for breuities sake, and not be∣cause they prohibite our adoration of images. For we allow euery member, word, and syllabe of the whole to consist there with as hath bin heretofore expounded.

11. Finally they obiect S. Augustine, S. Bernard, and S. Thomas affirming the precept of louing God to apper∣teyne* 1.115 to the life to come, and that it cannot be perfectly accomplished in this life, which S. Augustine also teacheth of that other commandment, Thou shalt not couet. I an∣swere, hey auouch both impossible to be kept, in the ana∣gogicall meaning of those preceptes for which they were enacted, that is according to the end or supereminent perfection as S. Augustine writeth, or deyned by God, which is that ex∣tirpating by little and little all euill inclinations, we may

perpetually without intermission, be inflamed with the loue of vnspeakeable goodnes: this is the marke at which those precepts ayme, this is the goale vnto which we must runne, and cannot heere arriue vnto it: yet they confesse that these, and al other commandements taken in their li∣terall* 1.116 sense may be perfectly accomplished, according to the substantiall fullfilling of them, and satisfaction of the whole bond they oblige vs vnto. Therfore S. Bernard: By cōmanding thinges vnpossible vnto vs he hath not made vs preuarica∣tors or trespassers (as M. Abbot englisheth it) but humbled vs; impo∣ssible he calleth thē in respect of the vnmatchable intēded purity, which admitteth not the least mixture of vnclea∣nes: possible notwithstanding and easy he accounteth thē to such as haue tried the sweet yoke of Christ. Impossible in respect of the end proposed; possible and easy by Gods grace in regard of the obligation exacted; ayming at that we increase in humility, crying for help to be discharged of the infirmities with which we are clogged: performing this, we become not trespassers or preuaricators, but doers & keepers of the law. In respect of that, there is no example of perfect righteousnes among men. S. Augustine: In regard of this we cannot deny (quoth he) the perfection of Iustice to be possible euen in this life. And, Grace doth now also perfectly renew man al∣together frō al sinnes; in respect of that: al the commandments are esteemed as kept, whē whatsoeuer is not done is pardoned, vz. * 1.117 what soeuer is not done according to some litle precept or smal circūstance binding only vnder venial sinne. In regard of this, the whole law is fulfilled, nothing is to be pardoned in respect of transgressing the cōmandement, because that which is wanting is not to be accounted a breach therof. And so I end with this my S. Augustine, who neuer maketh end of impugning our aduersaries. Neyther doth God command any impossible thing to mā, neyther is there any thing impossible to God for to help & assist him, to the performance of that which he cōman∣deth, & by this, man may if he wil, be without sinne, ayded by God.

THE XXIX. CONTROVERSY DEFENDETH God, from being Authour of sinne: against Do∣ctour Fulke, and his Companions.

CHAP. I.

BECAVSE some moderne Protestants deeme both themselues and their gos∣pellers maliciously wronged with the false imputation of this detestable He∣resie, I will set downe the words of a chiefe Ringleader amongst English Reformers, that you may apparently* 1.118 see I challenge them no further then their owne writings giues me iust cause of combat, in defence of his Goodnes who neuer would haue permitted these or any other euils as S. Augustine teacheth, vnles he could from them draw forth some good. M. Fulke commenting vpon those words: Lead vs not into temptation, sayth: The text is playne, lead vs not, whereby is proued not only a permission, but an action of God in thē that are lead into temptation. Likewise all sinne is manifestly

against the will of God reuealed in his word, although nothing come to passe contrary to the determination and secret will of God &c. it is not against his secret will that there is sinne. God worketh not as an euill authour of sinne, but as a iust iudge &c. Caluin often* 1.119 affirmeth that sinne proceedeth from Gods direction, pur∣pose, counsell, commaundement; that he draweth, moueth, boweth, and necessitateth thereunto. Then Fulke addeth, that God re∣probateth whome he wil &c. not vpon the foresight of any demerits. And, the reprobate haue their will free, but from coaction; for to sinne it is thrall and slaue: Moreouer, Gods election and reproba∣tion dependeth no more of mans will, then the forme which the pot∣ter giueth to the clay, dependeth vpon the will of the clay, which it hath not. In another place: The execation of the Iewes is to be attributed to themselues, that obstinately refused to see, and to God who iustly punished them with that blindnes, that they could not see. Many heresies are heere inuolued, which I will particu∣lerly vnfould, manifesting withall our Catholike do∣ctrine.

2. First it is the heresy of Symon Magus, of Marcion, of* 1.120 Florinus, and the Manichies, that God is the authour of sinne. It is true, that God concurreth to the meteriall en∣tity or act of sinne, although not any way at all to the for∣mality of sinne, to the deformity of the fault. For these meerely proceed from the defectuous operation of mans free-will, not from Gods generall influence; which S. Thomas exemplifieth and declareth by the vertue of the soule in man, or mouing power which enableth the Crip∣ple* 1.121 to stirre and moue vp & downe, yet it causeth not him to moue lamely or haltingly, but that wholy ariseth from the defect of his limmes: hence it is, that God can neuer be sayd to be the willer or worker of sinne, much lesse to purpose or intend it. For the scripture teacheth that, he hateth noting of that which he doth. And yet of sinne and the sinner it deli∣uereth, The impious is odious to God and his impiety. Thine eies are cleane from seeing euill, and thou canst not looke towards iniquity. They haue built the high places of Baalim &c. which I commanded not, nor haue spoken of, neyther haue they ascended into my hart:

Thou art not a God that wilt iniquity: Thou hatest all who worke iniquity: God is no tempter of euill, he tempteth no man. All this our Sectaries will admit, but how? that he tempteth no* 1.122 man, willeth not iniquity as an euill authour, but as a righteous Iudge: God worketh not (quoth Fulke) as an euill authour of sinne, but as a iust iudge: The same one thing, sayth Cal∣uin, but not for the same one cause, not for the same purpose, or end.* 1.123

3. God, I wis, is much beholding vnto you, whom after you haue coupled with the Diuell in determining & causing sinne, you excuse his, and condemne the others intention: but how will you excuse S. Paul, who forbid∣deth euill to be done that good may come therby: els a man might lawfully steale to relieue the poore, or forsweare himselfe to saue anothers soule, which the whole Church of God vtterly condemneth, because that which is in it selfe naught and euill, as sinne is, cannot be vested with any good circumstance, to become thereby honest and good; for so S. Augustine teacheth, that a lie cannot therfore be at any time commended, because we lie sometimes for the safety of others. It is then a sinne, but veniall &c. And to the like purpose Tully sayth. It is no excuse of sinne, if in thy friends behalfe thou sinne: although the obligatiō of friendship, and purpose of plea∣suring a friend be good. Therfore you cannot iustify* 1.124 Gods intention supposing he actually cooperateth vnto sinne. Or let vs yield you may, let it be, he worketh not as an euill authour of sinne, but as a iust Iudge: Let it be, his counsaile, his end, his purpose be holy & good, yet thence we haue that* 1.125 he is authour and worker of sinne &c. For he must of ne∣cessity be authour of that which he determineth, purposeth & effectually worketh. Cease then those ourcries, those excla∣mations of yours, That we belye, we slaunder your pro∣fessours in appeaching them of making God the authour of sinne, for we neuer attached them in those termes, That* 1.126 he should be the authour or worker of sinne with a sinfull intention, or mischieous purpose. Of this diabolicall phrase neither Marcion, nor Simon Magus, nor Florinus was

euer accused, the enemy knoweth how to couer his poy∣soned cup with more pleasant spices, he teacheth you to guild your Creatours intention, that you may graunt his fact for which you are condemned. A fact so repugnāt* 1.127 to infinite Goodnes, as not only the wiseman auerreth, inspired by the holy Ghost, Al the workes of our Lord are excee∣ceeding good, but Plato by the glimse of naturall light, God only is to be called the cause of good thinges, but of euill thinges it* 1.128 becometh vs to seeke out another cause besides God. And Mercu∣rius Trismegistus: From God the maker, no vncleane, no euill thing can proceed. Our Catholique writers auncient & moderne more closely pursue and vrge the same, S. Basill, Ter∣tullian, S. Ambrose, S. Gregory: Neither is there in God (sayth S. Dionyse) nor from God any euill. Iniquity (sayth S. Augustine) which most vpright or inflexible Verity reproueth, he knoweth how to condemne, not how to do. Malice (sayth S. Am∣brose) riseth from our selues, not from God our creator &c. he desireth it shold be rooted out of the mindes of all men, how can he thē ingender it?

4. For it were a very preposterous, yf not tyranni∣call course to punish in others that which himselfe by thē performeth. An impotent and deceiptfull proceeding to intend iustice, and accomplish wickednes, as Protetestan∣tes feigne their God to do, who ayming at vertue, wor∣keth vice, proposing truth venteth heresies; either because he cannot fashion his worke answerable to his purpose which is impotency: or purposeth one thing and worketh another which is deceipt: or will haue the same formall worke which is of it owne nature euill, sinful, and eter∣nally punished in others, to be good, holy, laudable, as achieued by him, which is no lesse then inhumanity and fiercenes in any other then a Caluinian God. Because our true and soueraigne God, who is essentially good, yea goodnes it selfe, if it were possible for him vpon any pro∣iect neuer so holy, to purpose or desire euill, yet that in∣tended euill he could not do being essentially opposite & repugnant to his nature. The good tree cannot bring forth euill

fruite, nor the tree of life the blossomes of death: No contra∣ry (sayth S. Basil) can be engendred by his contrary. For neither* 1.129 is life wont to breed death, nor darcknes affoard beginning to light, nor doth sicknes cause health. And S. Gregory Nissen: The good* 1.130 man out of the aboundance of his hart vttereth not euill thinges, but such as are agreable and conuenient to his nature, how much more doth the fountaine of goodnes dispense from his naturall bosome no∣thing that is euill? It is impossible from the well-spring of purity, any mudde of vncleanes; from the splendour of the sun, any mo••e of darcknes; from the center of re∣ctitude, any line of obliquity; from the only rule and square of all actions, any detorted worke oraction should be drawne, to how good a purpose or holy an end soeuer it be directed; yet this proceedeth not from any imbecility or weaknes, but from the power it selfe and omnipotency* 1.131 of God, in so much as we may auouch with S. Ambrose: This impossible thing is no signe of infirmity, but of vertue, power & Maiesty. Likewise S. Augustine: God is omnipotent &c.* 1.132 how many thinges can he not do, yet he is omnipotent: and therefore he is omnipotent, because he cannot accomplish these thinges. For if he could die, he were not omnipotent, if he could lye, if be decea∣ued, if d•• vniustly he were not omnipotent, because if this were in him he were not worthy to be omnipotent. Which reason con∣uinceth also, that he cannot as a righteous Iudge, or for any good purpose, lye, deceaue, do euill, or work any sinne: For if his purpose and intent be good, why doth he not contriue and execute it by some good, vertuous & honest meanes? Is it becaause he will not, cannot, or thin∣keth not of it? choose which you will: For one of them must needes be the cause. Wil he not? It is wāt of goodnes. Can he not? It is want of power and omnipotency. Thinketh he not of it? It argueth ignorāce and inconside∣ration.* 1.133 To which effect it is recorded in Plato, That man may haue some profitable inducement to lye, because he cannot otherwise compasse his designed plots, but no∣thing can moue God thereunto. For nothing can he ap∣proue, which he cannot effectuate by the best meanes he

listeth. Fy then on these pernicious and hellish dotages, that God is the causer of heresies, the contriuer of sinne. Fy on them that thinke God yoke-mate with the diuell in the accomplishment of sinne, to atchieue his holy de∣signes.

5. The second herefie, by part interla••ded in the former, partly expressed in other passages, is: that euen as the di∣uine pietie of his own accord predestinateth some to glorie: so he reprobateth others from all eternitie, pur∣posly intending their damnation. Fulk: Gods election and* 1.134 reprobation is most free of his owne will, not vpon the fore-sight of the merits of eyther of them. Then Pharao was a vessell of wrath ordeined to destructiō, his reprobation was for the glorie of God, and antecedently intēded and appointed to that end. Caluin:* 1.135 To some, eternall life, and to some, eternall damnation is fore-ap∣poynted. He likewise affirmeth that Adam and his poste∣ritie fell by by Gods decree: which he confesseth to be an hor∣rible decree, yet, ordeyned by God. Gods election I let passe be∣cause it tendeth to good, it requireth not the preuision of workes, but for reprobation, which is the deputation of man (the only image, and similitude of God vpon earth) to eternall punishment, for this to be done without any fore-sight, absolute or conditionall of his demerits; and being done, that man hath not power to escape, or free will to auoide the sinnes which lead him head-longe to destruction, is more then Barbarian, more then Neroniā cruelty: because euery punishment iustly taxed, pre∣supposeth an offence; but both men, and Angells in that priority considered, are free from all offence, free from ill desert: therfore to preordain those harmles, and noble creatures to euerlastinge torments, which of necessitie they must incurre, before the preuision of any misdeed, is such wild, sauage, and outragious Caluinisme, as I know not whether it hath euer sound liking in the thoughts of any, but some hereticall, and Fulkish Caluinists. Cer∣tayne it is, that the Predestinats were longe since cōdem∣ned for the like assertions; and one Godescalcus a monke of

Rhemes, at a Synode of Magunce a cittie in Germanie.* 1.136 Yea the Arausican Councel anathematizeth both them, & our aduersaries in these words▪ We doe not only beleeue any to be predestinate to euill by diuine power; but if there be any who will beleeue so great an euill, with all detestation we pronounce them ac∣cursed.

6. The Prophets and Apostles cry out, I will not the death of him that dieth, sayd our Lord god: I will not the death of the impious, but that he conuert from his way and liue. Perdition is thine o Israell, only in me is thy help. God made not death, ney∣ther doth he reioyce in the perdition of the liuinge. Our Lord is not willing that any perish. By which sentences of holie writ, it is most euident, that the reprobation, and destruction of no creature, is absolutely, and antecedently intended by God, but only consequently, & cōditionally, presupposing their obstinacie in sinne, and finall impenitence: which he from all eternity foreseeing deputeth them accordingly to their deserued punishment. God (sayth S. Augustin) pu∣nisheth the reprobate, because he foreknew what they wold doe, but created them not to be punished. S. Chrysostome: For this end he framed euery creature and fashioned vs: not that we perish, nor to torment vs with punishments, but to saue vs. And els-where; It is manifest that God wold not haue Adam sinne, who before his fall did fense, and arme him. Adam could haue obeyed, which he wold not, because he chose rather to yield to the diuill. S. Fulgentius: Because God by foreknowledge saw the sinnes of men, he dictated the sentence of predestination. S. Prosper. The grace of God did not forsake the reprobate, before they foresooke him; and because he foresaw they would soe doe, by voluntarie defection, therfore he inrolled them not in the catalogue of the predestinate. Otherwise, irreuocably to purpose mans endlesse paynes, before the fore sight of his default, in that necessarie, and vnauoy∣dable manner, as Protestants teach, is as far beyond the immanity, and barbarousnes of other tyrants, as eternall death exceedeth temporall; or the paines of hell surmon•• the torments inslicted vpon earth. Neyther is this imma∣nity any thing lessened, whether that slauery, or thral∣dome,

wherby the reprobate are enchayned to mischeife, commeth from the corruptiō of sinne, (as Fulke holdeth)* 1.137 or from the decree of reprobation, which is the wil of God necessarily inferring the things decreed, as Caluin also auerreth; nor yet is that cruelty lessened, by the slime of originall infection, from whence you conuey this ne∣cessary slauery. First, because that taketh not place in the deuills who were reprobate not withstanding in the like sort with men: Secondly, because you teach, reprobation to haue been decreed before the preuision of original sin: Thirdly, for that you depriue the reprobate of freewill, in respect of all other actuall sinnes, for which they are (supposing that absurdity) without all right, and equity, eternally tormented.

7. Moreouer, this infamous doctrine maketh al∣mighty God not only cruell, and barbarous; but wicked also, and vniust: For S. Augustine speaking of the infected* 1.138 masse, or corrupted lump of humane nature out of which he deliuered some, leauing others, saith: If that masse were so between both, that as it meriteth no good, so it deserueth no euill; not without cause should it seeme iniquity, that vessells of dishonor should* 1.139 be framed of it. S. Fulgentius cōformably saith: If when man was created of God, he was so in his present worke good, that in his predestination he should be euill, without doubt he was to be euill by the worke of God, by whome he was predestinated to sinne: wher∣vpon he inferreth that God shold haue in himselfe the origē of iniquity, he shold be author of euill, his iustice should become iust: with other like Atheismes, with which our Reformers are* 1.140 incombred, although they giue out, that God doth soe, to manifest his power, glorie, and almightines; because if the meanes be ill, the end cannot be good; or if it could, it implieth contradiction, his power should achieue any thing which crosseth his mercy, and impayreth his iusti∣ce; he cannot decree that to the glory of his name, which derogateth from any other attribute, or perfection of his nature. Then what glorie can redound to God by that ignominious act of abandoning his creatures, without

their desert? Or what mercy on the other side by decreeing mās fall into sinne, that he might after rayse him vp? What mercy by making him miserable, to the intent he may haue mercy on him? For he that is sincerely mercifull (accor∣ding to S. Augustin) had rather there were nothing for him to pit∣ty &c. then to wish men wretched, to the intent he might pitty them.* 1.141

8. Againe, if God determined to create the reprobate, to proclayme his power, as he doth the elect, the shew the riches of his mercy, both originally flowing from his* 1.142 will, and purpose, it must needs ensue, as learned Eckius notably disputeth, that there should be many more chosen to blisse, then abandoned to damnation; because god is more prone to mercy, then to iustice, to doe good then to procure euill: Our Lord is sweet to all, and his mercies or com∣miserations are ouer all his workes: he desireth not a multitude of faythlesse, and vnprofitable children. Therfore the huge hoast of the reprobate, surpassing by so many degrees the small number of the elect, proceed not from his mercifull wil, but from their owne way ward, and rechelesse disposition in which he foreseeth they will finally persist, and depart this life.

9. Besides these detestable errors which attend on the aforsaid phrensy of our Sectaries, there is yet another reason à priori, why God can not reiect & cast away any,* 1.143 in such sort as they affirme: because reprobatiō is as act of hatred, as the Apostle doth insinuate; but God of himselfe cannot hate his owne workes, vnlesse they be defiled* 1.144 with sinne. God (as S. Augustine Writeth) hated not Esau a man, but Esau a sinner, that is, he hated him not in that priority, in which he ordeined to creeate him a reasonable man, but in that after-sight, in which he foresaw the con∣tamination of his sinne. Thou (sayth the Wiseman vnto* 1.145 God) louest all things that are, and hatest nothing of those which thou hast made; for thou didest not ordayn, or make any thing, ha∣ting it. Yea, he himselfe doth not only loue whatsoeuer he hath made, but ingendreth in all creatures the like loue to their of spring: he teacheth the Tyger to fight, the Lyon to

prey, all beasts and birds to venture their liues in defence of their yonge ones. What sauage mind then, can thinke him so sauage, as to hate, and destroy the works of his owne hands, without any cause, or default of theirs?* 1.146 What? doth the author of nature so much degenerate from the course of nature, as not to beare to his owne, the af∣fection he begetteth in all creatures to their of-spring? Do you thinke that he doth communicate the perfection of loue which he hath not? or by communicating it to others looseth it himselfe? both wayes you detract from Gods in∣finite goodnes. Do you thinke he naturally loueth that, which he eternally hateth? or cherisheth as his owne, what he abandoneth as none of his? Both wayes you approue a contradiction in God.

13. Lastly, if God hate the reprobate, and determi∣ne their ruine before they be seen to be euil, whence shold that art of hatred arise? Not from the person hated, for he (we suppose) deserueth it not: nor yet from God; he is vncapable of any such act; he is the Ocean of charity, & wel-spring of loue: Deus Charitas est, God is charity, he is* 1.147 loue it selfe. Therfore as no clowd of error can arise from the prime origen of truth; no sparcke of folly from the Oracle of wisedome; so no streame of hatred can flowe from the fountaine of loue. Hate then his creatures God cannot, by any act of hatred which shold be in himselfe; but only by reason of the hatefull obiect he discouereth in them, he doth so punish, and abandon them, as men are wont to do the thinges which they hate. Thus that infi∣nite goodnes, that sea of loue, hateth, and reprobateth such as he foreseeth by the determination of their will* 1.148 iustly to deserue it; otherwise he cannot possibly exercise any hatred, or decree of damnation against them: accor∣ding to this of S. Fulgentius. It is well known, that the wrath* 1.149 of God cannot be auouched, but where mans iniquity is beleeued to haue gone before. And the like of S Augustine: God is good, God is iust, he may deliuer some without good deserts, because he is good; he can damne no man without evill deserts, because he is iust.

The reason is, because to deliuer his elect, is an act of mercy, which presupposeth, & hath for her proper obiect Misery, wherin al mankind was enwrapped by original sinne: but to condemne, or depute to punishment, is an act of iustice, which must needs argue a fault in him* 1.150 that is punished, because as S. Augustine saith, God is not A reuenger, before man be a sinner. Therfore we conclude that he may predestinate vs independently of our merits, but he cannot reprobate any without the preuision of their demerits.

11. The third heresy is, that God purposely inten∣deth,* 1.151 not only the eternall damnation of the wretched, but their very obduration, blindnes, final irrepentance, and other enormous crimes, by which they are plunged into that hopelesse calamity. God hardeneth (quoth Fulke) the wicked not as an euill author, but as a righteous iudge, not by bare permission or suffering, but by with-drawing, and with-holding his grace, and deliuering them into their ownelust, or into the de∣ceipt of Sathan. In which deliuery, he graunteth an action of God, as his wordes both heere and elswhere import; not only to the meteriall entity (wherunto we also con∣fesse Gods generall concourse) but to that formall obdu∣ration, or precise formality of contempt and hardnes, to which we only allow his sufferance or bare permission, or els why doth he alwayes exclude this permission of ours? or seeke to excuse God, that he concurreth as a righteous iudge, vnles he meant that God actually concurreth as a righteous iudge, to the same specificall degree of willful resistance, or malicious purpose of abiding in sinne, to which man coo∣perateth as an euill actor, els to what end deuiseth he that distinction, that sinne is against Gods reuealed will, not a∣gainst his secret will, vnles he speake of formall sinne? for the materiall entity is not against his reuealed will, but only the formall obduration, or culpable blindnes; therfore he supposeth that God sendeth the spirit of errour, and gi∣ueth the wicked ouer to a reprobate sense, by speciall con∣course, to the very malice it selfe of their sinfull obstinacy.

12. It is also a principle of M. Fulkes, that God ap∣poynteth, before hand not only the end, but also the meanes by which men come to that end: but the meanes of damnation* 1.152 are finall impenitencie, and other foregoing sinnes; ther∣fore they in his diuelish opinion are preordeined by God. To which effect writeth of certaine Iewes, who refu∣sed to imbrace the fayth of Christ, forthat, they neither would, nor could be willing (to beleeue) because they were reprobate:* 1.153 making reprobation, and consequently Almightie God, the cause of their infidelitie, willfull peruersitie, & aboad in sinne. For whosoeuer captiueth others without their default, in such a bewitching thraldome, as they neces∣sarily sinne, and cannot auoide the bondage of sinne; must needes be the author, and cause of their sinnes: but thus doth God with the reprobate; he according to Fulke, before any desert foreseene of theirs, before he seeth the propension, inclination, or any concurrence at al of their will, ordeineth them to destruction by his immutable counsell which cannot be repealed: then supposing that vnchangeable will, and ordinance irreuersible, they haue not left them any power to repent, or grace to be∣lieue, but they are vnauoidably chayned to the fetters of* 1.154 vice, vnauoidably carried from vice to vice; therfore God (O most execrable Conclusion which necessarily follo∣weth out of these our Sectaries premisses) God, I say (though I feare to say it) is the cause, and only cause of* 1.155 all their incestes, murders, & other abhominable vices.

13. Against which I only oppose that excellent answere of S. Prosper. If to the deuill it should be obiected that he were the author, he the prouoker to such villaines; he might I ween acquit himselfe in some sort of that calumnie, and euince their owne will to be worker of those mischiefs. For though he were delighted with the furie of the delinquents, yet would he proue, that he * inforced them not to sinne. With what follie then, or with what madnes is that referred to the appoyntment of God; which cannot be wholy as∣cribed to the deuill? Who in the detestable acts of offenders, is to be thought the egger on of allurenients, not the causer of their wills?

Therfore God predestinated none of those businesses to be done; nor the soule that wil liue wickedly and beastly, did he prepare or prouide so to liue. Thus S. Prosper you see how dissonant from M. Fulke: yet Fulke was not the first broker of these atheis∣mes; for looke what he writeth in this kind, he coppied* 1.156 out of the originall of Caluins Institutions, where Caluin sayth, It is not meete &c. to assigne the preparing to destru∣ction, to any other thing, then to the secret counsell of God. The whole band of the wicked cannot comeyne, nor endeauour, nor do any mischiefe, but so far as God permitteth, but so far as he commandeth. Then discoursing of Gods concurrence vnto* 1.157 sinne he hath these words. I speake not heere of Gods vniuersal mouing, wherby as all creatures are susteyned, so from thence they take their effectuall power of doing any thing. I speake only of that especiall doing which appeareth in euery speciall act. In another place: If the blindnes, and mades of Achab, be the iudgement of God, then the deuise of bare sufferance is in vaine. A litle after* 1.158 auouching, That God blindeth the eyes of men, striketh them with giddines, maketh them drunke with the spirit of drowsines, casteth them into madnes, & hardneth their hartes; he immediatly addeth: These things also many doe referr to sufferance, as if for∣saking the reprobate, he suffred them to be blinded by Sathan, but that solution is too fonde. Lastly he concludeth: Now I haue shewed plainly inough that God is the author of all those things,* 1.159 which these iudges would haue to happen only by his idle sufferance. You read his words, you discouer no doubt the rancour of his hart, who disgorgeth such hatred against his creators goodnes: which he laboureth, to excuse in the same fa∣shion as Fulke is wont: that God doth all this as a righteous iudge, iustly punishing the wicked with their vngracious blindnes.

14. But the Iustice of his person, the puritie of his intention, as I haue already proued can no way acquit him, if his fact be wholy the same with the euill actors.* 1.160 For it is not lawfull (sayth S. Gregoric Nissen) to ascribe vnto God, actions dishonest, and vniust: because the iniquitie, and faultines of sinne must needes attend those sinfull actions

which the impeccable Piety according to our aduersaries purposeth, commandeth, and freely executeth, not by any generall, but by a particular, and speciall influence; not by bare permission, but by actuall concurrence to the ve∣ry naughty deeds and workes of miscreants. Therfore Ca∣stalio another principal protestant (singularly praysed by* 1.161 Doctor Humfrey) so much detesteth those diabolical phrē∣sies of Fulke, and Caluin, as he affirmeth them to frame the Idoll of a false God, directly opposite to our true, and so∣ueraigne God. Peruse his words: The false God (to wit Caluins Idoll) is slow to merc), prone to anger, who hath crea∣ted the greatest part of men to destruction, and hath predestinated them, not only to damnation, but also to the cause of damnation; therfore he hath decreed from all eternity, and he will haue it so, and bringeth to passe that they necessarily sinne. So that neyther thef∣tes, nor murders, nor adulteries are committed but by his constraint and impulsion. For he suggesteth vnto men euill, and dishonest af∣fections, not only by permission, sed efficaciter, but effectually (that is, by forcing such affections vpon them) and doth harden them in such sort, that when they doe euill, they do rather the worke of God, then their owne; he maketh God a lyar. So that now not the deuill, but the God of Caluin is the father of lyes; how∣beyt that God which the holy Scriptures describe, is altogether con∣trarie to this God of Caluin &c. And a little after. For the true God came to destroy the worke of that Caluinian God: & these two Gods as they are by nature repugnant one to the other, so they beget, and bring forth children of contrarie dispositions; that is to say, the* 1.162 God of Caluin, children without mercy, proud &c. Hitherto Castalio a famous Sacramentarie. For this cause the Pro∣testant Magistrates of Berna strictly prohibited the prea∣ching of that Caluinian and dānable doctrine throughout their Territories, and forbad their people by penal statutes to read any such of his books as conteyned that matter.

15. Besides Caluin doth not only attribute vnto God the lewd actions of the wicked, but the very deformitie of their faults, the malice of their hartes, & pernicious proiect of their intentions. For to these, we only assigne the Per∣mission

of God, yet he acknowledgeth him author of al those things which we say, fall out meerly by his sufferance. Ther∣fore in them he hath his hand as deeply as the very actors themselues. Yea he accounteth the bare sufferance of God in these cases, vaine and idle: But who, vnlesse he were more mischieuous then Sathan, would euer hold it a va∣nity* 1.163 and idlenes not to concurre to sinne? For sinne hath no efficient, but a deficient cause, as S. Augustine well noteth, neither is it any action, but a defection. Then the same re∣nowned Doctor expressly teacheth, that God doth not hardē by imparting malice, but by not affoarding mercy. And so God blindeth, so he hardneth, by forsaking, not by ayding. God (quoth he) is said to indurate him whome he will not mollify; to deceiue whome he suffereth to be seduced; to blind whome he will not illuminate; to repell whome he will not call. When you heare, I the Lord deceiued that Prophet, and, whome he will he hardeneth; consider his deserts whome he suffred so to be hardened, and seduced.* 1.164 And interpreting that place. Lead vs not into temptation: Suffer vs not (sayeth he) by for saking, to be lead into temptation. S. Chrysostome: he deliuered into a reprobate sense, is nothing els but he permitted. S. Iohn Damascene: It is the manner of holy scrip∣ture to cal the permissiō of God his act. Behold the solutiō which Caluin stileth so idle and fond a deuise. Not only the fathers, the scriptures themselues doe free almighty God, and attri∣bute vnto man his obstinacy, and blindnes, as, Let no man say, when he is tempted, that he is tempted of God, for God is not a tempter of euils, and he tempteth no man. Gentiles haue giuen* 1.165 vp themselues to wantonnes. The benignitie of God bringeth thee to pennance, but according to thy hardnes, and impenitent hart, thou heapest to thy selfe wrath. God exhorteth vs not to obdurate our harts: This day if yee shall heare the voice of our Lord, harden not your hartes. Why do you harden your hartes, as Aegypt and* 1.166 Pharao hardened their hart? But of this more hereafter in the answer to our aduersaries cheife obiections.

16. The fourth heresy lapped in the wrincles of the* 1.167 two last before mentioned is, that God hath not a will to saue all, neither doth he giue to euery man sufficient grace

for his saluation. An heresy plainly repugnant to these places of Scripture, God will all men to be saued, and come to the knowledge of truth. Our Lord is not willing that any perish, but that al returne to pennance, to which end he vseth these gene∣rall* 1.168 exhortations to all sinners. Conuert, conuert yee from your most euil wayes, and why will yee dye O house of Israel? O chil∣dren how longe do you loue infamy &c. turne yee at my correption. Come yee to me all that labour &c. that is, al that are burdened with any kind of sinne (as Cassianus excellently inter∣preteth it) which apparently sheweth that God hath a true antecedent primacy, and conditionall will, wherby he desireth the saluation of all, both men, and Angells: giueth them also grace, to which if they cooperate, as they should, he is ready to procure their future happines, and haue an effectuall will to saue them. God (sayth S. Chry∣sostome) doth much desire, and couet the saluation of vs, of those men also, whome for sinne he damneth. S. Augustine: All men if they will, may beleeue, may turne from the loue of visible and temporall things, and keepe the commandements; because that light (to wit the grace of God) illuminateth euery man that cometh into this world. Likewise, he prouideth aqually for all. God (saith S. Cy∣prian) as he accepteth no person, so no age, for asmuch as to the attaining of heauenly grace, he yeldeth himselfe, with euen-bal∣lanced equality, a like to all. And S. Prosper: Gods helpe by in∣numerable meanes eyther hidden, or manifest, is affoarded vnto all: and that many refuse it, it is attributed to their owne fault.

17. The fifth heresie not distinctly vttered, but per∣niciously inuolued in the precedent, is that which dero∣gateth from the vniuersality of Christs death and passion. For as God, in Protestants opinion, will not haue all men saued: so Christ according 〈◊〉〈◊〉 them, dyed not for all, but only for his elect. We, by the warrant of holy scripture, constantly teach, that how be it euery one doth not truly, and effectually participate the benefit of Christs death; yet that he offred a sufficient ransone for the full redemption of mankind, by which he pacified the wrath of his eternall Father, and obteyned whatsoeuer helps

were necessary in his behalfe for the remission of their sinnes, and perfect reconciliation vnto him. Therfore the Apostle calleth him the Sauiour of al men, especially of the faith∣full. Of all men, disbursing a price sufficient to defray the whole debt of sinne, especially of the faithfull, because they* 1.169 are effectually also ransomed, and saued therby. Likewise There is one God, one also mediatour of God and men, Man Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe a redemption for al. Moreouer: Christ died* 1.170 for all. And lastly, he is the propitiation for our sinnes, and not for ours only, but also for the whole worlds. S. Irenaeus: Our Lord hath restored vs into freindship by his incarnation, being made the* 1.171 mediatour of God, and men, propitiating truly his Father for all. Which S. Ambrose most perspicuously auerreth. The earth is full of the mercy of our Lord, because to all men is giuen remission of sinnes. Vpon all, the Sunne is commaunded to rise, and this Sunne indeed ariseth dayly vpon all: but that mysticall Sunne of Iustice arose vnto all, came for all, suffered for all, and rose agayne for al: and if any man beleeue not in Christ, be defraudeth himselfe of the generall benefit: as if a man shutting the window exclude the beames of the Sunne: the Sunne did not therfore not rise vnto all, because he defrauded himselfe of the heate therof; but as much as pertayneth to the Sunne, he keepeth his prerogatiue, it is the imprudent mans fault* 1.172 to debarr himselfe the comfort of the common light. S. Augustine: Christ shed his blood for the remission of all mens sinnes, and so died for the saluation of all. S. Prosper: We haue laboured to proue that* 1.173 the grace of God is at hand, or ready for all, with equall prouidence truly, and generall goodnes; but by diuers meanes, and vnequall measure, because eyther hiddenly or manifestly, he is (as the Apo∣stle sayth) the Sauiour of all men, and cheifly of the faithfull &c. For affirming that he is the Sauiour of all men; he hath approued the goodnes of God to be generall ouer all sortes of men, but adding* 1.174 especially of the faithfull, he sheweth that there is some part of man∣kind, which by merit of faith inspired by God is, by speciall benefits promoted to high, and eternall saluation.

THE SECOND CHAPTER, IN WHICH Some other Heresies are comprehended, and our Sectaries cheife obiections fully answered.

THE Sixt Heresy cleerly auouched by* 1.175 M. Fulke, is, the deniall of free will in the Reprobate, saying: The reprobate haue their will free, but from coaction; to sinne it is thrall, and slaue: bound to sinne, and not free: Pharao had his will free from constraint, but yet slaue to sinne. Whence it followeth, that the Protestāts God is not only tyrannical in punishing without default, and vniust in causing the impenitency of the faithfull (as hath bin shewed before), but so wic∣ked also, as he only perpetrateth sinne, not the sinners themselues. Not they; because, we sinne not, as S. Augustine teacheth, but by freewil. Likewise. He that is forced by necessity to do any thing, doth not sinne. And then: Man consented by his will to the persuasion of the peruerse Angell: For if he had done it by necessity, he had not bin guilty of sinne: but the reprobate are bouud by necessity to the thraldome of sinne, therfore

they commit no sinne at all. Secondly no man is faulty by doing that, which is not in his power to shunne, or decline. For, who (saith the same S. Augustine) offendeth* 1.176 in that, which can by no meanes be auoided? but the reprobate, according to you, cannot auoide the slauery of sinne, nor any way decline, alter, or resist the decree of Gods repro∣bation, so absolutely enacted by him, as it dependeth no more of mans will, then the forme which the potter giueth to the clay dependeth vpon the will of the clay, which it hath not: Therfore they are vnblameably carried by the necessity of sinne, and consequently do not sinne; but your sin∣full God is the sole worker of sinne, who only concurreth freely to sinne; (as the potter is the sole cause that the vessel is framed crooked or straight.) For when two causes cooperate to the same effect, one necessary, another free; (a mad man, for example, with a man in his right wits) sinne is neuer attributed to the cause which necessarily, but only to that which freely worketh; not to the mad, and crazed, but to the sound, and perfect man.

2. So in this present, because the reprobate necessa∣rily offend, and God only moueth, persuadeth, freely and actiuely contriueth both the euill intention, and self deformity of sinne, to him alone, and to no other is the guilt to be imputed: especially he being (as you maintaine) the principall agent, and they his instruments in atchie∣uing wickednes: which if you rightly beleeued in the true God of heauen, were so great an impiety as hell it self cannot breath forth a greater. Neither need I alledge pla∣ces of scripture they are so infinite, or other testimonies, the light of reason is manifest, and cleere, that our soue∣raigne God cannot sinne. And that the reprobate in ge∣nerall haue their wills free from the thraldom of sinne, the very lawes, and commandements of God and man, the re∣wards, and punishments of all common wealths; the threats and persuasions so often proposed vnto them in holy Scripture, do abundantly witnesse; as I haue els where largly demonstrated. Therfore I heere passe thē

ouer with this saying of S. Augustine, vvho discoursing of those reprobate who refused to come to the heauenly sup∣per* 1.177 prepared for them, sayth: Those that wold not come, ought not to attribute it to any other but only to themse∣lues:* 1.178 because, vt venirent v••cati, erat in libera voluntate: being called, it was in their freewill to come. The scripture likewise* 1.179 speaking of Pharao in particular, declareth his absolute freedome, saying: dismisse my people &c. but if thou wilt not.* 1.180 And in the next chapter: dismisse my people to sacrifice vnto me, and if thou refuse, and holdest them. And again: til when wilt thou not be subiect vnto me? Dismisse my people, but if thou resist, & wilt not &c. Wherefore vnlesse a man vvill be as obstinate as Pharao was, he must needs graunt, that his will was free,* 1.181 and not necessarily deteyned in the captiuity of sinne, els as Origen vrgeth, why doth god blame him saying; but thou, be∣cause thou wilt not dismisse my people, behold I will strike all the first borne in Aegypt? And S. Augustin expressely teacheth, that he was not thrall to sinne, but that he did freely of his owne accord rebell against the hand of God, comparing him thus with Nabuchodonozor: Touching their nature, they were both men, touching their dignity, both Kings, touching their cause, both deteyned the captiued people of God, touching their puni∣shment, both with chastisements were benignly admonished: what therfore made their ends so different, but that one feeling the hand of God, groaned, and lamented with the remembrance of his owne iniquity; the other warred with his freewill, against the mercifull truth of God.

3. The seauenth heresie auerreth that the liberty of free∣will* 1.182 is not only captiue in the reprobate, but abolished also in Gods elect: for these be Fulkes owne words. The eternall predestination of God excludeth the merits of man, and the power of his will, therby to attayne to eternall life. But S. Tho∣mas* 1.183 our Angelicall Doctour teacheth that predestination putteth nothing in the predestinate, nor any way altereth the faculty of his will: for it is nothing els according to him, and all other Deuines, but the eternal purpose, and decree, wherby God ordeineth, and directeth some by su∣pernaturall

meanes to the attayning of euerlasting blisse: which he sweet••ly bringeth to passe, not by any phisicall motion, or necessarie determination, but by certaine moral inspirations, callings, and persuasions &c. setting be∣fore them such forcible reasons, and motiues so effectuall, in tyme, and p••lace so fitt, with such apparant shew of ho∣nest, profitable, and delightsome good, as he mildly draw∣eth them without any let, or hinderance to the liberty of their will, leauing it to worke with the same connatu∣rall choice, and indifferency, as if there were no such de∣cree, or purpose at all: otherwise how are the elect coun∣sayled, exhorted, encouraged, and commanded in holy writ to purchase their heauenly blisse? How is the king∣dome of heauen proposed as a crowne, as a goale, as a reward to be wonne, bought and gayned by their labours, if they haue no power to gayne it? How are they honou∣red, and praysed who valiantly striue in this behalfe, they blamed & rebuked who are idle, & lazy, vnlesse they haue free power to work, & attayne their saluation? But of mās freedom euen in things supernaturall, I haue sayd inough in the 24. & 25. Controuersyes. Now I follow on my way.

4. From those latter heads of heresy, other heretī∣call* 1.184 positions take their beginning, to wit, that the elect, do what they will, cannot possibly be damned, nor the reprobate be saued: that they can neuer vtterly loose the fauour of God; nor these truly enioy it. For thus saith Fulke; Euery christian man which is indued with faith, and hope, may and ought to be infallibly assured that he is iustified, and shall be saued. Caluin: Let all the faithfull be bold safely to assure them∣selues, that they can no more faile of the kingdome of heauen, into which Christ is already entred, then Christ himselfe. Fox also: We haue as much right to heauen as Christ hath, we cannot be dam∣ned, vnlesse Christ be damned; nor can Christ be saued, vnlesse we he saued. But as touching the reprobate, they according to Fulke are antecedently ordeyned to destruction, by Gods immutable counsaile, they are necessarily tyed to the

slauery of sinne; they cannot repent, or beleeue, therfore they haue no power at all to gayne their saluation, or* 1.185 purchase the fauour of God. A most pernicions, and dam∣nable assertion cleane crosse to the saying of the Apostle; In a great house there are not only vessells of gold, and siluer, but of wood, and earth; and some truly vnto honour, and some vnto con∣tumelie: if any therfore shall cleanse himselfe from these, he shalbe a vessell for honour sanctified, and profitable for our Lord, prepared for euery good worke. Therfore the reprobate which are ves∣sels of wrath, and contumelie, may purge themselues, & become vessels of honour, vessels of election. Then, Cain* 1.186 was a reprobate, yet he might haue returned if he would into the state of grace, and fauour of the highest, as appeareth by the expostulation God vsed vnto him. Why art thou angry, and why is thy countenance fallen? By the condi∣tion he proposeth: If thou do well. By the promise he ma∣keth, shalt thou not receaue again? By the commination, or threat he addeth: but if thou doest ill, shall not thy sinne forth∣with be present? Esau was a reprobate, and yet S. Augu∣stin* 1.187 sayth of him: Esau was not willing, and runned not, but if he had bin willing, and had runned, he had arriued at the goale by the help of God; who also by calling wold haue giuen him to will, and to runne, if contemning his vocation, he had not become repro∣bate. Iudas was 〈…〉〈…〉 reprobate. Origen notwithstanding* 1.188 writeth of him that it was in his power if he wold to haue equalled in sanctitie S. Peter and S. Iohn. Pharao was a reprobate, of whome S. Chrysostome auerreth, that God did what lay in him to saue him, who if he were not saued the whole fault was his owne. He also teacheth, that euery one, if he en∣deauour, may arriue to the holines, and perfection of S. Paul. To which effect, it is defined by the Arausican Councell, that all the baptized, Christ, ayding, and coo∣perating with them, are able, if they will labour faithfully, and ought to fullfil the things that appeartaine to saluatiō.

5. In like manner••, that the Predestinate may for∣feit their saluation, loose their grace, and be damned, we need not seeke any other proof; then the testimonies of

holy Writ. For S. Paul an elect, witnesseth of his owne person. I chastise my body, and bring it into seruitude, least perhapes, when I haue preached to others my selfe become a repro∣bate.* 1.189 Of another it is testified, he was taken away least malice might change his vnderstanding, and fiction begiule his soule: ther∣fore he might haue bin altered, and deceiued, if he had not bin preuented by God. Of a third it is said: He could haue transgressed, and transgressed not, haue done euill, and did not. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Iohn in the Apocalyps exhorteth the predestinate to perscuere cōstant, least they be frustrated of their hope, Behold I come quickly, hold that thou hast, that no man receaue thy crowne. And S. Peter: Wherfore my brethren rather endeauour, that by 'good works you may make sure your vocation, and election. But these thinges haue bin sufficiently proued heertofore in the 24. and 25. controuersies.

6. The eight heresy falsly supposeth that Predestina∣tion, according to the whole chaine, and lincke of euery effect which followeth theron, is altogether of God: in so much as neither our iustification, saluation, nor any exe∣cution of his will in this kind dependeth of the sacraments of the Church, or of our good Works as their instrumen∣tall, or meritorious causes, but of Gods election (as Whi∣taker auerreth) of his promises, and Christs merits. And Fulke: Neither Baptisme, nor any works of Christian religion cause iusti∣fication; but Baptisme is a seale, good workes fruites therof. Again: the Elect work willingly to their saluation; &c. but they do not therby deserue their saluation; for saluation dependeth vpon their election. Howbeit, the holy ghost in his sacred Word di∣rectly teacheth, that by Baptisme, and other Sacraments, we are truly a 1.190 saued, b 1.191 regenerate, c 1.192 new borne, d 1.193 iu∣stified, e 1.194 incorporated to Christ, f 1.195 made one with him, & he with vs. That by g 1.196 thēwe receaue the holy Ghost, h 1.197 obteine re∣mission of our sinnes, i 1.198 inherēt grace, k 1.199 entrance to the kingdome of heauen, & l 1.200 are made heires of euerlasting life: Therfore they are true causes of our iustice, and instruments of our salua∣tion. To which Saint Augustine subscribeth, setting downe the differēce betwixt the sacramēts of the old law,

and of the new in these words. Some sacraments there are that giue saluation, others that promise a Sauiour. The Sacraments of the new Testament giue saluation; the sacraments of the old Testa∣ment* 1.201 promised a Sauiour. And S. Gregory: Outwardly we receaue the sacraments, that we may be inwardly replenished with the grace of the holy ghost.

7. Likewise the execution of Gods predestination is often furthered, and effected by the prayers of Saints, or other holy men vpon earth, as S. Augustine testifieth. If Stephen had not prayed, the Church had not enioyed Paul. Besids: Perchance there are some heere predestinate, to be graunted by our prayers. Moreouer he exhorteth vs to correct all sorts of* 1.202 sinners, because correction is a meane that the predesti∣nate may obteine their designed glory. The same is also taught by S. Gregory, Prosper, and others, and is groun∣ded on these words of Scripture. I susteine all things for the elect, that they also may obteine the saluation, which is in Christ Iesus with heauenly glory. For this doing thou shalt saue thy selfe, & others. By good works make sure your vocation, and election. So runne, that you may comprehend. Therfore by running we do comprehend, by running we winne the goale of eter∣nall felicity. Or if we do not, if saluation dependeth of gods election, and not of our good endeauous, dam∣nation dependeth in like sort of his reprobation, and not of our misdeeds; the doome pronounced by God against the accursed in the latter day, is not for their sinnes, as the causes of their perdition, but the true cause therof is the will of God, his eternalll will which in Protestants con∣ceit vndeseruedly reiecteth and abandoneth them. Let the Scriptures thē be false, the generall iudgment peruerse, the bookes of conscience brought foorth in vaine, their euidences reiected, the sentence of our iudge reuersed, and called back by you, as not deliuering the right cause of mans eternall torments; in brief, let heauen, and earth faile, and your phrensies only take place.

8. The ninth heresy which springeth from that ba∣stard* 1.203 root of making God the authour of mans destructiō, setteth abroach the contrary wills which M. Fulke assig∣neth

to God, to wit his reuealed, and secret will. For either he supposeth they are two distinct wills allowing that sa∣crilegious disunion and diuorcement of affection in our true soueraigne God, which Tullie disalloweth as the roote* 1.204 of dissention euen in his false and heathenish Gods; and as he distinguisheth his will, so he must deuide the vnity of his nature, he must needs confesse one God abhorring sinnes, the other approuing them with the viperous Mani∣chees. Or doth he meane there is but one wil, which as re∣uealed detesteth sinne, as secret and hidden liketh well of it, then let him tel me how he liketh or decreeth those thinges with his secret purpose, which he hath openly forbidden by his law?* 1.205 A demaund which so straggered Caluin, as he replieth; We conceaue not how God, in diuers manner, willeth, and willeth not one selfe thinge. I beleeue indeed he could not conceaue it, nor can any wit conceaue that which is vncōceauable: viz. that the same immutable and simple will should striue with it selfe, or faigne to forbid which it consaileth and decreeth. For concerning the will of God reuealed in his word, which is as you define, manifestly against sinne, either there is a true will in him correspondent thereunto, and so he inwardly hateth which he outwardly prohibi∣teth, or els he faigneth, dissembleth, or at least equiuocateth with vs in his reuealed will. Equiuocation I thinke you allow not in God, who so passionately censure it in his oppressed seruants: dissimulation ought much lesse to be ascribed vnto him, whose truth is alwaies constant and fi∣delity inuiolable. But howsoeuer, you make sinne dis∣cordant from the reuealed will, as long as you affirme it agreable to the determination and secret will of God, which is his inward immutable and substantiall will, you cause sinne it selfe to be no sinne which implieth contra∣diction, and that Protestantes may lawfully without of∣fence, perpetrate thefts, murders, adulteries, and all kind of sinnes. For the will of God is the inerrable square and supreme rule of all actions: Therfore whosoeuer le∣uelleth his thoughts, and deedes according to his will,

cannot stray or decline into fault or errour: But euery pro∣testant by committing sinne conformeth himselfe to the determination and secret will of God: no Protestant then* 1.206 swarueth from his duty, or offendeth his Maiesty by in∣curring theftes, murders, adulteries, or any other sinnes. Yf they answere, that sinne is against his reuealed will, and therefore they offend, although it be not against his secret wil: That answere fitteth not their purpose. For Gods true, secret, and substantiall will, intimated vnto them, is the right patterne, by which all actions must be drawne. Wherefore if sinne be fashioned, and squared to that, it must needes be streight, regular, or according to rule; and consequently no sinne, no offence to God. For this cause Abraham sinned not in offering to sacrifice his sonne; nor* 1.207 the people of Israel spoyling the Aegyptians; nor Osee the Prophet, taking a wife of fornications, and begetting children of fornications; nay they all pleased God herein, because they directed their actions according to the leuell of his secret and hidden will, made knowne vnto them in those particuler cases, although they did against his gene∣rall reuealed will in forbidding murder, thefts, and forni∣cation. Wherfore if Protestants by sinning follow the di∣rection of Gods determinatiō, if they do nothing against his secret will, they cannot be guilty of fault, albeit they transgresse his reuealed wil, which is only an outward to∣ken or signe of his will.

9. Neuerthelesse I proue, that sinne accordeth also with his will reuealed vnto Protestants: For they pre∣tend to know, that the secret will of God determineth, and purposeth sinne, that it is not against sinne. But how* 1.208 do they know this will to be such? It is secret, they can∣not pierce vnto it by themselues. God must disclose it, he must reueale vnto it by them. That reuelation, whatsoe∣uer it be, by which he manifesteth this mystery, is his re∣uealed will, which being the faithfull messenger, pro∣poser, and interpreter of his secret, sinne is not against it: Therefore in them, it is neither against his secret, nor re∣uealed

will. Nor by that Atheisticall Sophisme any sinne, but a regular and laudable action. Contrariwise, when God dissuadeth, prohibiteth, and condemneth sinne, ei∣ther he doth it in earnest, or in iest. If in earnest, he se∣cretly disliketh that which he forbiddeth, and so sinne is also repugnant to his secret will, repugnant to his deter∣mination, and hidden counsailes: if in iest, his dissuasi∣ons are but mockeries, his threats buggs to terrify babes, his iudgements not to be feared. Then trudge on in your sinful courses, imbrace the liberty of your Epicurean ghos∣pell, wallow freely in the mudd of Vice, ioyne hand with Atheists, there is no God to punish your iniquities.

10. The aduersary by this tyme surfetteth with the glott of his blasphemous heresies: let vs now view the daynty morsells which gorged him so full; They were* 1.209 these heauenly viands of holy Scriptures venomed with the corruption of some Marcion, or Manichean sause. viz. That God hath mercy on whome he will, and whome he will he doth indurate. God hath deliuered them into passions of ignominy; our Lord hath hardened the hart of Pharao; he hath blinded their eyes, and indurated their hart, that they may not see. He made al things for himselfe, euen the wicked man vnto the euill day. To this pur∣pose haue I raised thee, that in thee I may shew my power. He wor∣keth all things, according to the counsaile of his will. I answere; Those former things God is said to do, first by sufferance, and permission, because foreseeing the euent of their ma∣lice,* 1.210 he hindreth it not, but leaueth them to their owne vnnaturall desires. Secondly by subtraction of Grace, which somtime he iustly taketh from them vpon their desert. Thirdly by working miracles, preaching the truth, or achieuing some other good by which they take occasion to grudge, murmur, rage, and peruersly with∣stand his holy will: wherupon it is writtē of Pharao, that* 1.211 he indurated his owne hart himselfe. And in the same chapter vers. 32. where the latin readeth, Pharao's hart was hardened, the Hebrew saith, Pharao hardened his hart this tyme also, so in the 9. chapter vers. 7 the Hebrew rea∣deth

Pharaos hart hardened it self. Again vers. 35. he har∣dened his owne hart; he & his seruants. Of others S. Paul saith, they haue giuen vp themselues to impudicity; which because they actually effected, the like, as Caluin misinferreth, cannot therby be concluded of God. For that which with verity of faith according to S. Augustins rule may not be as∣cribed* 1.212 vnto him, ought to be expounded some other way. Therfore he himselfe interpreteth the foresaid sentences, by way of permission, saying: The manner by which man is deliuered vp into the power of the Diuell, ought not so to be vnder∣stood, as if God did it, or commaunded it to be done, but that he hath permitted it only, yet iustly. So Tertullian calleth God, not the doer, but the permitter, or sufferer of euill. And Fulgenti∣us: No man iustly sinneth, although God iustly permitteth him to sinne. Epiphaniu••s & Rupertus vse the same distinctiō, whome I ioyne to the rest, that you may abhorre the impudency of Caluin, who so often carpeth at this auncient and long approued solution, wherein I bewray both his and other heretikes hatred towards God. For where they read in holy writ any mystery which redoundeth to the honour of his name, they cloud, or extenuate it with metapho∣ricall constructions, as the Reall Presence in the Sacramēt, the remission of sinnes, and inward iustice of our soules. Where they discouer any sentences, which may seeme to darken the beames of his glory, they sticke fast to the let∣ter, and eagerly presse the rigour of the words: as heere when he is sayd to ••arden, to blind, to giue men ouer to a reprobate sense. Far otherwise all deuout, and fayth∣full Interpreters of Gods word. Otherwise S. Chrysostome, who teacheth that God susteyned Pharao with much patience, willing to reduce him vnto pennance. For if he had not desired this, he would not haue shewed so much lenity. Otherwise Rupertus, who commenting vpon this very allegation of Pharao (to this purpose I haue raysed or set thee vp) expoundeth it not with our Sectaries, of his creation, but of his aduance∣ment to his Kingdome, permittendo videlicet, non agendo, as much to say, by permitting, not by doing. Otherwise

Theodoret reciting diuers mutations of Pharaos will, how sometimes he would dismisse Israel, other tymes he would* 1.213 not, all these (saith he) Moyses recorded to teach vs, that neyther Pharao was of peruerse nature, neither did our Lord God make his mind hard and rebellious; for he that now inclineth to this part, now to that, plainly sheweth freewill of the mind.

11. Concerning the latter wounds obiected against vs, that God made al things for himselfe, euen the wicked man to the euill day. To this purpose haue I raysed thee &c. they are spoken not of the chief and principall purpose for mostly inten∣ded as the cause of his creation, but of the euent, or after∣end* 1.214 to which he was consequently appoynted foreseeing his iniquity. For, although God be not the author (as S. Ful∣gentius saith) yet he is the ordeyner, and disposer of euill wills; so far forth as he ceaseth not to worke good of euill. Which he receaued of his maister S. Augustine: Of so great wisdome and power is God, that al things which seeme cōtrary to his wil, make towards those issues* 1.215 or ends, which he himselfe both good, and iust foreknew. After this manner God inclineth the harts of all obstinate sinners, either to exercise his seruants or make known his patiēce, or to giue a greater lustre to vertue by her contrary vice. After this manner not vnlike to the prouident, & skillfull work man who turneth that, to some base, which he can∣not fashion to a more noble vse: so God conuerteth the peruersenes of the impious to manifest his iustice, whome without preiudice to their liberty, he cannot winne to partake of his mercy. Lastly after this manner, he worketh all things according to the counsaile of his will, because whatsoe∣uer is done good by himselfe, or bad by others, he di∣recteth to the scope of his holy designs: or rather because all things which he doth (for sinnes which he doth not, are no thinges, but meere defects, and priuations) are* 1.216 full of wisdome, counsaile, freedome, and prouidence. So S. Hierome interpreteth this place saying: God worketh all thinges according to the counsaile of his will, not that all thinges which be done are accomplished by the will & counsaile of God (els sinnes might be imputed to God) but because al thinges which he doth

by counsaile and will, he doth, because for both they are full of the wisdome, and power of him that doth them. Where now was* 1.217 Caluins iudgement, or Fulkes witts, whiles perusing the Fathers, they discouered not these expositions? But what maruell though they marked not their Comments who so ouerth wartly crosse their very words and mea∣ning? For compare a little the sayings of these men with those of the Fathers.

12. Caluin: By gods predestination Adam fell; he both knowing, and so ordeyning. S. Chrysostome: It is manifest that God would not haue Adam sinne; who before his fall did fense, and arme him. Caluin: Man falleth, the prouidence of God so appoynting. S. Prosper: The ruine of no man is disposed by diuine ordination. Caluin: God willeth, commandeth, and inforceth to sinne. S. Augustine: God neither forceth, commaundeth, nor willeth sinne. Fulk: The text is plaine, Lead vs not into temptation: wherby is proued not only a permission, but an action of Gods in them that are lead into temptation. S. Augustine: Lead vs not into temptation: that is, Suffer vs not by forsaking, to be lead into temp∣tation. Fulke: Gods election and reprobation is most free, of his owne will, not vpon the foresight of the merits of either of them. S. Fulgentius: Because God by foreknowledge saw the sinnes of men, he dictated the sentence of predestination. Fulke speaking of some incredulous: The neither would nor could be willing (to beleeue) because they were reprobate. S. Augustine: If any man aske why they could not beleeue: I answere roundly, because they would not. And the Valentine Councell defineth, that the reprobate are not punished, because they could not, but because they would not be good. By these and diuers other oppositions you may see, how contrary the new inuentions of Protestants are to the doctrine of the Church. You haue reade how repug∣nāt to the Scriptures, how reproachfull, and derogatory from the passion of Christ. You haue reade what atheis∣mes, what execrations, what sacriledges they conteyne against God himselfe, against his infinite loue.

13. Let me therfore intreate euery sober Christi∣an, who is touched with the zeale of his creators honour

to abandon those bookes farced with such impieties, to infernall flames: to detest those Ghospellers who make* 1.218 God to hate vndeseruedly the workes of his handes; who link his diuine Maiesty (I dread to report it) in the same lease with sinners; who giue him the sterne to direct, and commaund their naughty proiects, whiles they as Oar-men row at his pleasure; who faigne him to pursue, and intend their sinfull ruine, in giuing them ouer to a reprobate sense. And thou, O bound lesse piety, O immea∣sureable bounty, to whose vnstayned breast no thought of sinne, or cogitation ascendeth: thou who neuer per∣mittest any euill, but to turne it vnto good; neuer omittest any good, which may be strayned out of euill; strayne I beseech thee out of the euill weeds of my deere Countri∣men, the good of their conuersion: turne their stubborne harts, bend their froward wills to loue, & imbrace thee, the center of ioy, and seate of true repose; that they may at length beleeue, and confesse with vs how farr thy mer∣cifull hart, and sacred will hath euer bin from working their obduration, or contriuing their blindnes: who with long patience expectest, with great lenity sustainest, with sweet callinge often inuitest, with many teares and groa∣nes of thy beloued sonne earnestly intreatest both them, and all rebellious sinners to returne vnto thee.

THE XXX. CONTROVERSY, IN WHICH The Merit of Good VVorkes is supported: Against Doctour Abbot, and Doctour Fulke.

CHAP. I.

GREAT is the slaunder, and intolle∣rable the reproach, with which our opponents as in many other, so like∣wise* 1.219 in this controuersy are wont to vprayd vs. viz. That we pull downe the merites of Christ to vp our owne: debase his honour, to glory in the dignity of our owne desertes: that we make our owne workes of themselues worthy of re∣ward, gratefull of themselues, and pleasing to God. Whereas we neuer affoard them any such priuiledge, as they are deri∣ued from our veines of earth, but as they take hea••, and are conueyed from the springes of heauen. For we hold three things necessary to eleuate and aduance them to the excellency of merit, all flowing from the celestiall and

deified streames of our Redeemers bloud. The first is, that no worke of man can truly merit, or deserue reward, vnles being wrought with ayde from aboue, it also proceed from inherent grace, from the spirit of adoption inhabi∣tant in our soules. The second is, that God adioyne the seale of his promise, and oblige himselfe to remunerate the worke. For although it be not dignified by the vertue of his promise, or benigne acceptatiō, as some conceaue, but by the prerogatiue of Grace from whence it springeth: yet his promise is requisite, that he be engaged to recompense our labours, who cannot be otherwise indebted to his cre∣atures. The third is, that all meritorious deedes be free∣ly and sincerely done; freely from the necessity or vio∣lence of compulsion, sincerely from the nakednes of sinister intention. These things presupposed we constātly mainteyne with the thrice holy and Oecumenical Coun∣cell* 1.220 of Trent, against M. Fulke, D. Abbot, and all the Secta∣ries of our time, a true worthines & dignity in all such actions as shalbe accompanied, graced, and enobled with the three forementioned conditions; not that these con∣ditions enhaunce them to the perfect value & Arithmati∣cal equality with the promised reward which in rigour of iustice one shilling (for example) hath with another, or the corne sold in the market hath with the common ta∣xed price thereof, but that they infuse virtuall equality and due proportion thereunto, as the seed sowed in the ground hath vertuall proportion to the statelines of the tree, and accidental qualities are sufficient and equiualent dispositions to the introduction of a substantiall forme. Such equiualent proportion, or dignity of merit the holy Scriptures & Fathers acknowledge in our workes achie∣ued by the helpe, and inspiration of the holy Ghost, as* 1.221 appeareth first by these places of holy Writ, where our good deedes and patient sufferinges are expressely sayd to be worthy of God, worthily to deserue the fruition of his sight, as: They shall walke with me in whites, because they are worthy: God hath tempted them, and found them worthy of himselfe:

Giuing thankes to God and the Father, who hath made vs worthy vnto the part of the lot of the Saintes in the light: We pray alwayes* 1.222 for you, that our God make you worthy of his vocation: so in the auncient Protestant translatiō it is, That our God would make you worthy; which errour escaped them, as Fulke acknow∣ledgeth saying: I confesse it is an imperfection in our translations: Therfore it is since corrected in the renewed Bible by his Maiesty to bolster the euasion, by which M. Fulke, D. Abbot and their fellowes seeke to delude the former textes. Their euasion is, That we be counted worthy through Gods free accepta∣tion by grace, & imputation of Christs iustice. Not of the merit of our constancy.

2. But neyther will the wordes beare that violent raking, nor God endure so great a wrong, that he should account those worthy, call them worthy who haue no wor∣thines in them. Then S. Paul there writeth of the Thessalo∣nians, who were counted worthy by true beliefe and im∣putation of Christes worthines long before: Therefore it had beene lost labour for him alwayes to pray for that which they had obtayned, and could not, by Protestants Sophismes, euer loose, or be further perfected and enriched therewith. It was the increase of inherent Godlines and holy conuersation for which he offered his prayers, that profiting heerein from day to day, they might be made* 1.223 worthy of the creation and society of Saintes, to which they were called, as many other Textes euidētly perswade which ascribe vnto our workes the dignity it selfe, and worthines of merit. S. Paul to the Hebrewes: Beneficence, and communication do not forget: For with such hostes God is prome∣rited. So Primasius scholler to S. Augustine: By such sacrifi∣ces,* 1.224 and giftes of almes, Deus promeretur adipisci, God is promerited, or vouchsafed to be gayned: The greeke hath, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God is well pleased: The Syriake, scaphar, pulchrescit, that is, God waxeth faire, he becometh more amiable, louing, and fauourable vnto them. S. Chrysostome, Oecumenius, Theo∣philact, and Erasmus read, God is pacified, & reconciled by mea∣nes of these workes, which could not be, vnles they had some

thing in them that procured his fauour. In Genesis also, where our Translation hath in latin and English, I am in∣feriour* 1.225 to all thy mercyes: in the Chaldeake, it is; My merits are lesse then all thy mercies which thou hast shewed to thy seruant. And in Ecclesiasticus, All mercy shall make a place to euery man according to the merites of his workes. And although the Gree∣ke hath only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, according to his workes, yet that importeth the same with the Latine, as I shall shew hereafter, and the Scripture witnesseth in those places, where eternall life prepared to good works is entitled mer∣ces, a reward or hire, which must needes be correspondent to merit or desert: Be glad and reioyce, because your reward is very great in heauen: Call the workmen, and pray them their hire: Let thy voyce cease from weeping, and thine eies from teares, because there is a reward for thy worke: God rendreth or giueth reward to the iust according to their workes, according to their owne labours.

3. Our aduersaries make answere to these and the like argumentes. First, that heauen is called a Crowne, a reward secundum quid, and in a respect simply and abso∣lutely, it is only a gift, because it is giuen according to grace, according to mercy, not according to desert or merit. But we reply, that although the originall from whence it proceedeth, be grace and mercy, yet that grace being communicated vpon this solemne bargaine, couenant, or promise of rewarding our workes performed, and digni∣fied therewith, it must of necessity include a dignity in them: For euery reward hath an absolute, and intrinse∣call* 1.226 reference to some proportion of worthines or merit. Heere is a true and absolute reward, therefore a true and absolute merit. For which cause the reward is termed a Crowne, not only of grace, but a Crowne of Iustice, due vnto vs by a certaine right of title of iustice: Friend I do thee no wrong &c. Take that is thine and go. Where he speaketh of the day-penny, by which S. Augustine, S. Hierome, S. Chry∣sostome, Theophilact, and Euthymius vnderstand the King∣dome of heauen, and yet he stileth it his, to wit, his by couenant, his by iustice, and not only by gift: vpon the

same ground S. Paul calleth God a iust iudge, in rewarding our workes: God is not vniust to forget your workes.* 1.227

4. The second Answere which D. Fulke, D. Ab∣bot, and the residue of their fraternity returne hereunto, is, That the reward is due by couenant, and so a debt in respect of Gods promise not of our desert: Likewise. God rendreth heauen (say they) as a iust iudge, not to the merit, and worthines of our workes, but to the merit and worthines of Christ imputed by faith, vnto vs. These be the guilty shiftes they deuise to entai∣le all vpon Christ, and vpon Gods promise, which he by those meanes most bountifully vouchsafeth to commu∣nicate vnto vs. For although it be true, that the diuine promise and Christs Iustice be necessary to enable vs to merit, yet they are not the chiefest thinges which God regardeth in rewarding our workes. For the Promise is the same, the Imputation the same equally made and at∣tributed vnto all; but the Remuneration is diuers, in e∣qually assigned, more, or lesse correspondent to the sla∣cknes,* 1.228 or industry of our labours. The Sonne of man will ren∣der to euery one according to his works: Euery man shall receaue his owne reward according to his owne labour: What thinges a man shall sowe, those also shall he reape: For he that soweth in his flesh, of the flesh shall reape corruption, but he that soweth in the spirit, shall reape life euerlasting. So that the seede, the price, and proper cause of euerlasting life, is not only fayth, nor the promise of God, or merits of Christ alone; but also our good deedes of piety and deuotion, which heere we sowe vpon earth. For the Apostle goeth forward in the same* 1.229 place: Doing good, let vs not faile, for in due time we shall reape not fayling: Therefore whiles we haue time let vs worke good to all: Behould I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to render to euery ma•• according to his workes. Fulke reading this phrase so often repeated in holy Scripture, graunteth: that euery one receaueth the crowne of glory, according to his workes, according to his labour, yet not according to the merit of his labour; which others more plainly explicating allow it giuen to our workes, as signes of our fayth, not as

causes meritorious of the same. But the latin text of Ecclesiasti∣cus, hath that very word, according to the merit of our workes,* 1.230 which necessarily implieth a meritorious cause. Besides holy Writ affirmeth, That we receaue the crowne of blisse, as the reward, wages, and hire of our labours, therefore according to the merit of our labours. For hire, wages, and reward, haue mutuall correspondence and inseparable connexion with merit, in so much as heauen* 1.231 is proposed vnto vs as a goale, or price, to be wonne by running, as a Kingdome inuaded by force, as an inesti∣mable gemme prized at the rate of our best indeauours, as a treasure to be bought by the value, worthines, or con∣dignity of our workes, the true meritorious and morall causes thereof. In the race, all runne indeed, but one receaueth the price: So runne that you may obteine. The Kingdome of heauen suffreth violence, & the violent beare it away. Againe, The King∣dom of heauen is like to a merchant-man seeking good pearles, & ha∣uing sound one precious pearle &c. sold all that he had and bought it. S. Augustine: Euerlasting life, and rest is salable and bought by tribulations for Christ. S. Basil: We are negotiators or merchan∣tes who trace the Euangelicall path, purchasing the possession of hea∣uen by the workes of the commundements: Let it not repent you to haue laboured, it is lawfull for you, if you will, to buy most precious saluation, with a proper treasure, by charity, and fayth, which truly is a iust price.

5. Moreouer I demonstrate it irrefragably in this Syl∣logisticall manner.

• When soeuer such proportion is kept in recompensing the labours we achieue, as to greater labours greater crow∣nes, to lesser, lesser rewards are alloted. Thē the crownes and rewards are giuen in respect of the workes done, not as signes and conditions, but truly according to the merit of our labours, as causes of the rewardes.
• But this proportion is obserued by our Soueraigne Iudge in remunerating the good deedes of the Iust which flow from his grace.
• Therefore he rewardeth them, not as signes, but as causes

• of our heauenly blisse, according to the worthines of their merit.

The maior is cleere, for what other then the dignity of the worke doth God regard, in ballancing the measure of them? The worthines of Christs merits imputed by faith: that is not our owne labour, not the thinges we do in our body, for which we must receaue eyther good or euill, as the Apostle writeth: that doth not dignify one aboue ano∣ther, but equally (as hath beene sayd) is referred to al. The promise which God maketh vnto vs? If God had his eye leuelled at that alone, it were as much broken in a little as in a greater, as faythfully kept in recōpensing a small, as in a weighty matter. Therein he looketh not to the greatnes of our endeauours, but to the fidelity of his owne word; in fulfilling whereof, the equality of recompen∣sation, the proportion of workes, the repayment of ser∣uice, the reward of labours, cannot be, as the Scriptures so often insinuate, the principall markes aymed at by God. Further, our vertues are rewarded as worthy of their hire, but the promise of God begetteth not any worthines or dignity in our workes, more then of themselues belong vnto them. For as our Schoolemen teach: He that shall* 1.232 promise a Lordship or Dukedome, in behalfe of some meane seruice, or peece of money of small value; doth not thereby enhaunce the price of the coyne, or estimate of his obsequious seruice; but the estate which is giuen in lieu of that plighted faith, although it require the per∣formance of the seruice, or payment of the money, as con∣ditions necessary to oblige him that promised; yet it doth as much exceed the rate of the one, and desert of the other, as if no promise had beene, no couenaunt made at all. Moreouer the Deuines proue, that if God should threaten to punish with eternall paine an officious lye, or other, light offence, that sinne should not mount thereby to the heynousnes of a mortall crime, nor be worthy of more punishment, then of his owne nature it deserueth: where∣fore, if the commination and threatning of greater tor∣ments,

then sinnes of themselues require, doth not aug∣ment the guiltines of their default, or change a small sin∣ne into the enormity of a greater: neither can the pro∣mise of aboundant remuneration increase the dignity of our workes, to which it is promised; nor the remunera∣tion it selfe be called a reward, weighed forth, as S. Gregory* 1.233 Nazianzen affirmeth, in the iust and euen ballance of God, nor equally imparted according to our labours, as the Holy Ghost often pronounceth; but a free gift, liberally giuen, through the gratefulnes and fidelity of the giuer, vnles be∣sides the promise, some worthines, or value, in our works be acknowledged; to which an agreable reward be cor∣respondently assigned.

6. The Minor, that God obserueth due proportion in* 1.234 recompensing our seruice, more or lesse, conformably to the diligence or slacknes thereof, is also manifest by the sundry textes already quoted, That euery one shall receaue accordinge to his owne labour: And by this of Saint Paul, He that soweth sparingly, sparingly also shall reape, and he that soweth in blessinges, of blessinges also shall reape. Which Cle∣mens Alexandrinus also gathereth out of these wordes of S. Matthew: He that receaueth a Prophet in the name of a Prophet, shall receaue the reward of a Prophet; and he that receaueth a iust man, in the name of a iust man, shall receaue the rewards of a iust man: both receaue rewards, yet not both the same, but seuerall, and vnequall, according to the seuerall sanctity of their persons, and inequality of their merits, whome they receaue. Hence the conclusion of my Syllogisme without checke or controle, is ineuitably inferred: That seeing Almighty God portioneth forth a greater, or lesser share of glory answerable to the greatnes, or slendernes of our workes, as the hire, wages, or reward of them; he truly remunerateth our pious endeauours, not as se∣quells of faith, not as meere gifts of grace, but as precedent causes, or condigne desertes of eternall life. Which when our aduersaries gainsay, they make our soueraigne God an accept our of persons, and not a iust and vpright iudge:

quit contrary to these texts of holy writ. (2. ad Timoth. 4. v. 8. ad Rom. 2. v. 11. 1. Pet. 1. v. 17. Act. 10. v. 34.) For acception of persons is a vice, directly opposite to distributiue iustice; as when a Iudge bestoweth a reward where there is no precedent merit: or when he giueth a more large reward, then the dignity of the merit in any sort deserueth. But God truly recompenseth the labours of his seruants, and recompenseth them with due pro∣portion of greater and lesser reward: therefore he either presupposeth in thē the diuersity of merits; or he violateth* 1.235 the lawes of distributiue iustice. In so much as S. Augustin•• might well say: If there be no merits, how shall God iudge the world. For take away them, and take away Iustice, take away iudgement, take away that article of our Creed, that Christ shall come to iudge the quicke, and the dead.

7. Another Argument or Enthymeme I frame in this sort, The sinnes and euill workes of the reprobate, are not eternally punished, eyther because they are signes of their infidelity, or by reason of Gods commination, and threates which he promulgateth of punishing them with euerlasting torments: But for that they be of themselues the true cause of damnation, merit Gods wrath, be in∣iurious, and offensiue to his infinite goodnes: Therefore the vertuous actes and good deedes of the elect, which flow from the streames of heauenly grace are not only re∣compensed as fruites of faith, or in regard of Gods pro∣mise made to reward them, but because they be true and proper causes thereof, because they be pleasing and accep∣table in his sight, and do deseruedly purchase and merit his fauour. The consequence is inferred out of the words of Christ, who attributeth after the same manner, and with the same causall propositions, the crowne of heauen to the pious workes of the iust, as he doth the punish∣ment of hell to the hard and vnmercifull hartes of sinners saying, Come yee blessed of my Father, possesse yee the kingdome pre∣pared for you, from the foundation of the world: For I was an hun∣gred, and you gaue me to drinke &c. Get you away frō me you cur∣sed

&c. I was an hungred, and you gaue me not to eate, I was a thirst, and you gaue me not to drinke. For this cause the Apostle* 1.236 auerreth the sufferances of his life to win, or cause falua∣tion. Our Tribulation which presently is momentary and light, wor∣keth aboue measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glory in vs, where for worketh our Protestants corruptly translated he∣retofore prepareth, albeit they haue since corrected it, be∣cause it is in Greeke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is potently, or forci∣bly worketh. In liew whereof Tertullian readeth perficiet in nobis, shall perfect and accōplish in vs an eternall weight of glory, yet not physically, as the efficient, but morally as the meritorious cause, which winneth and purchaseth the laurell of be atitude, as sinnes procure the bane of end∣les misery. Whereupon S. Augustine: Euen as death is rendred for astipend to the merit of sinne, so is euerlasting life, as a stipend to the merit of iustice. And S. Chrysostome, By good workes we deserue heauen, as by euill hell.

THE SECOND CHAPTER, IN WHICH The same is strengthned by other reasons & au∣thorities: and the Obiections satisfied.

THE third Argument to support the me∣rit of workes, is drawne from those pla∣ces of Scripture, which testify the sin∣gular valew & prerogatiue of Almes∣deeds,* 1.237 that it deliuereth from death, purgeth sinnes, maketh vs find merit and life euerlasting: Giue almes and behold all things are cleane vnto you: By mercy and faith sinnes are purged. By mercy and truth iniquity is redeemed. Redeeme thou thy sinnes with almes, and thy iniquities with the mer∣cies of the poore: which place by the Protestants former, and by their later translation set forth by commaundement of his Maiesty, is thus adulterated, Breake of thy sinnes by righte∣ousnes. For although the Hebrew, or rather Chaldeack word Peruk of Perak the roote, signifieth sometime to breake in pieces, to deuide, to rend in sunder, and also to redeeme, yet neuer properly to breake off, or cease to do, couering by righteousnes, as our sectaries wrest it, not

extinguishing by almes deeds, as the Verbe inforceth, the remaynes of sinne. But albeit the Chaldeake word had beene ambiguous, as in no indifferent mans iudgement it is in that place, yet the Latine word Redime, redeeme, at least the Greeke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (which hath no other natiue signification, then ransome or redeeme thy sinnes) should haue taken all doubt and ambiguity away, had those Protestant translations syncerely followed the originall fountaines as they pretend.

2. The fourth and last reason is insinuated in holy writ, in these very textes, which commend some vertu∣ous, and heroicall actes, as better in themselues, & more gratefull vnto God then others, although both the faith be equall & inhabitant grace by which they are wrought.* 1.238 For so S. Paul sayth, He that ioyneth his virgin in matrimony doth well, and he that ioyneth not, doth better. Likewise spea∣king of the widdow, Let her marry to whom she will only in our Lord, but more blessed shall she be if she so remaine. In like manner to distribute all our goodes to the poore and fol∣low Christ, is of it selfe more perfect, then to enioy the riches of the world, and bestow them in his seruice: Yf thou wil•• be perfect go and sell the thinges that thou hast, and giue* 1.239 to the poore &c. To sacrifice our liues in testimony of our faith, is more precious in the eies of God, then to releeue the poore with a cup of cold water, Greater loue then this no man hath, that a man yield his life for his friends. In so much as there is some valew, some worthines in the act of Martyrdome, which is not in almesdeeds, some dignity in voluntary pouerty which is not in rich liberality, some excellency of merit in virginity, beyond the degree, or holines of wedlocke, wherein least our aduersaries should wrangle, that they are more excellent and worthy, only as they are signes of greater faith, both our Sauiour and the Apostle speake absolutely, without any condition of greater or lesser prerogatiue of faith. Therefore the thinges considered in themselues are better, more gr••tefull and meritorious, all other circumstances being equally

weighed. For as conditionall assertions cannot be abso∣lutely* 1.240 vnderstood, no more can absolute and irrestreyned be expounded conditionally, vnles we peruert the ten our of Gods sacred lawes, and shake the whole fabrike of di∣uine oracles in peeces. Whereupon very religiously S. Ambrose, Bassian, and other Bishops without any conditi∣on of more feruent faith absolutely auouch; Mariage is good by which the posterity of Irumane succession is propagated, but Vir∣ginity is better whereby the inheritance is gotten of our celestiall Kingdome, and the succession is found out of heauenly merits. Also the same S. Ambrose with Bassian, and the rest a little be∣fore: It is a wild and rusticall howling to awaite or looke for no fa∣uour of virginity, no prefermēt of chastity, to be willing promiscuously to confound all thinges, to abrogate the degrees of diuers merits, and bring in a certeine pouerty of celestiall remunerations. S. Augustine: You see that clarity is promised to the bodies of Saintes, and a various lustre of clarity for the various merits of charity. But of him, S. Ambrose, Origen, Chromatius, S. Hierome, Tertullian and S. Ig∣natius the Apostles Scholler, I alleadge no other then the words of the Centuristes. It is apparant (say they) that Au∣gustine was of this mind, that Virgins deuoted to sanctimony haue more merit with God then the faithfull married folkes. For because Iouinian thought the contrary that they haue no more merite, this he reprehended in him. Ambrose to insolently pronounceth of the me∣rit of virgins. Origen maketh virginity a worke of perfection. Chro∣matius extolleth voluntary Pouerty, and sayth, that by the merite thereof the riches of the heauenly Kingdome are obteyned. Hierome de striuing too much for Virginity, is somewhat vniust, or aduerse to marriage. Tertullian attributeth merit to Fasting. It appeareth out of the Epistles of Ignatius, that men euen then (in the next age after Christ) began too studiously to loue and reuerence the state of Virginity.

3. Concerning the preheminence and merit of Martyrdome they record the like: howbeit M. Doctour Field with his wonted procacity outfacingly deposeth; The Century writers reproue not the Fathers for any such errour as the Papistes do maynteyne touching the force of martyrdome &c.

Touching the merite, satisfaction, and expiation of sinnes which they fancy to be in the bloud of martyrs, of which impiety the Father* 1.241 neuer thought. Deale once sincerely M. Field, I pray belie vs not, gaynesay not that which is euident in the Cen∣turistes. We allow not any merit, satisfaction, or expia∣tion of sinnes in the bloud of Martyrs, but in the noble re∣solution of their mind, and in the heroicall act of shee∣ding their blood. And of this the Century-writers so vn∣doubtedly controule the auncient Fathers, as he is past all shame who goeth about to deny it. I will produce their sayinges, and referre them to the iudgement of any not ouerpartiall sectary. First chronicling the vnfitting spea∣ches (as they terme them, because they fit not their er∣rours) with which the doctours of the first two hundred yeares garnish the resplendent crowne of Martyrdome, thus they write. They (the Fathers of the next age after Christ) beganne to thinke too honourably of Martyrdome, in so much as they attribute vnto it a certaine expiation of sinnes. For Clemens expresly sayth; Martyrdome is a cleansing, or expurgation of ossences with glory: and Ignatius in diuers of his Epistles speaketh very daungerously of the merit of Martyrdome. Then proceeding* 1.242 to the Fathers of the third hundred yeares, to Tertullian, Origen, and S. Cyprian. All the Doctours (say they) of this age, extoll Martyrdome beyond measure. For Tertullian doth almost equall it with Baptisme. Filth, or dregs (sayth he) are washed a∣way by Baptisme, but spots are made white with Martyrdome. And īn his Apology: Who, when it cometh to passe, doth not long to suffer, that he may purchase the grace of God, that he may obteine all pardon from him, by the satisfaction or recompense of his bloud: for to this worke all sinnes are forgiuen. And in his booke of the soule, Yf thou diest for God, thy bloud is the whole key of Paradise. But Origen much more insolently then Tertullian, preferreth Martyr∣dome before Baptisme, and holdeth vs to be made more pure by that, then by Baptisme. Likewise that by Baptisme, sinnes passed are scowred forth, but by Martyrdome future are killed: he sayth, that Diuells cannot appeach the soules of Martyrs, for so much as they are rinsed in their owne liquour, clarified in their death, washed

in their bloud. Cyprian also affirmeth immortality to be gayned by the bloud of Martyrs. And in his booke of exhortation to Martyr∣dome, he aduenturously teacheth Martyrdome to be a Baptisme, grea∣ter in fauour, more subly me in power, in honour more precious then the Baptisme of regeneration. In the Baptisme of water the remis∣sion of sinnes is receaued, in that of bloud the Lawrell of vertues. Hitherto the Centurists word by word, who if they re∣prooue not the Fathers for the same errour which we maintaine, if they assigne not to the excellency of martyrdome out of the Fathers writinges, Merit, Recompence, Satisfaction, Ex∣piation, Purging, Cleansing, forgiuenes of sinnes, clarity, whitenes, immortality, glory, the laurell of vertues, the key of Paradise, which openeth the gates of heauen; then let M. Feildes shameles wantones in denying, be accounted hereafter well aduised sobernes, in excusing these thinges.

4. Other Protestant writers although they treate not of Martyrdome in particular, yet of merit in particular they accuse the auncient Church. Bullinger auoucheth:* 1.243 The doctrine of merit, satisfaction, and iustification of workes did incontinently after the Apostles time lay their first foundation. Do∣ctour Humfrey: It may not be denied, but that Irenaeus, Clement and others haue in their writings the opinions of freewill and merit of workes. Doctour Whitgift: Almost all the Bishops of the Greke Church & Latin also for the most part were spotted with do∣ctrins of freewil, of merit, of inuocation of Saintes &c. Some wrā∣gler may cauill, as Bell the Apostata doth, that the merit which the primitiue Church allowed, is not the same which we defend, but the merit of impetration only, as though merit were not a thing quite different from impe∣tration. 1. The begger doth impetrate, he doth not merit his almes. The hired seruant meriteth, he doth not impe∣trate his wages. 2. Merit ariseth from the worthines of de∣sert, impetration from the earnestnes only of request. 3. That is grounded in some title of iustice, or clayme of right, this in meere prayers and supplications, directly excluding the right of clayme. 4. That hath intrinsecall re∣ference to a due reward or payment, presupposing a di∣gnity.

in the worke, this to a liberall gift without any res∣pect to the value of the worke: wherefore seeing S. Gre∣gory Naziazen sayth, that for good workes we may exact reward, not as grace, but as a plaine debt, seeing the rest auow with* 1.244 him that we deserue heauen, as the stipend or crowne of our workes, they cannot be wrested to be vnderstood of impetration, but of true and proper merit, or else the Mag∣deburgian Protestants with their english Collegues were to blame, in reprehending the Fathers for that kind of merite, which for impetration no doubt they would ne∣uer haue done.

5. Neuertheles it is obiected, that eternall life is the free* 1.245 gift of God, imparted by grace, bestowed vpon vs of mercy: That it is proposed in scripture vnder the condition of an inheritance, which befalleth to children without their desertes. I graunt all this, yet I find that as it is affirmed to be giuen by grace, so also to be gotten by violence: as it is called a free gift, so a price or reward: as a goale of mercy, so a crowne of iustice: as an inheritance belonging to children, so a payment, hire or wages purchased by workmen, deserued of labourers.* 1.246 Therefore we ought not so to adhere to one text, or man∣ner of speach that we defeate the force of the others, as Protestants are accustomed, but we must allot to euery one the life, and vigour of their natiue signification. We allow therefore that our happy life, is a free gift, giuen by grace, bestowed of mercy, in regard of the benefite of re∣conciliation, or first iustice most freely and mercifully communicated vnto vs, yet being iustified, encouraged to worke, and promised to be accordingly rewarded, it* 1.247 is then not only a gifte, but a true price, recompense, or payment due vnto vs by diuine conuenant, or bargaine. In which sort S. Augustine often interpreteth the former savings, and teacheth, that euerlaging blisse, is a reward to iustice, a grace & fauour vnto man, that is, a grace to man, en∣dewed only with his naturall qualities, a reward to him renewed, iustified, and diligently labouring with Gods assistance, a grace to the infidell, a debt to the faithfull, a

grace to Saul a blasphemer, a debt to him a beleeuer, as the same S. Augustine in another place largely declareth; ad∣ioyning these words; Hearken how Paul asketh a debt, or a•• due, who first receaued grace, not due &c. There remaineth to me a crowne of iustice: now he craueth a debt, now he exacteth a debt. So heauen is our inheritance as we are the adopted chil∣dren of God and coheires of Christ, our Crowne as we fight and conquere the assaults of the diuell, our hire wages, and day-peny also as we are workers, and colla∣bourers with Christ in the vineyard of his Father. For al∣beit terrene and worldly patrimonies are by succession without labour or desert often deuolued to vnworthy in∣heritours, to vngracious childrē, sometime rashly without iudgment, euen against the will of their parentes, yet our* 1.248 heauenly inheritance is neuer graunted (infantes only ex∣cepted) but to such as deserue it, to such dutifull and obe∣dient children, as by their labours, merits, and vertuous demeanour, are made worthy of that celestial Kingdome.

6. All which is cleerely testified, and profoundly taught; by that graue learned and auncient doctour of the greeke Church S. Basil the great. Grace, sayth he, is thine after some sort, by which thou shalt deseruedly enter crowned. For if thy creatour had giuen thee all before hand, by what fauour should the gates of the heauenly kingdome be opened vnto thee meriting nothing? But now something he hath bestowed, some thing he hath left to be accomplished, that when thou hast in thy self brought it to perfection, thou mayest be pronounced no whit vnworthy, to receaue the reward of thy imployed labour, God redeeming his pledge. As many wordes, so many euidences doth he bring to witnesse for vs: for grace is not so free a gift, but that it is some way ours. To wit, by our working and cooperation with it. 2. We are nothing vnworthy, but we deseruedly enter crowned into our most happy inheritance. 3. God giueth not all, but leaueth some thing for vs to be done, holpen by his grace. 4. When we haue persued that in our selues, we receaue the reward, not of Gods promise, not of Christs merits, no•• of our saith only, but of our imployed labour and paynes. 5. The reward of glory,

is not a meere donatiue, but a iust redemption, by with God redeemeth his formerly pledged, and engaged grace. Nothing can be spoken more excellently, nothing writtē more vnanswerablely for our aduersaries conuiction, if conuicted they would yeald.* 1.249

7. But M. Abbot ashamed to yield, obiecteth againe out of S. Paul: The afflictions of this time are not worthy of the glory to come that shalbe reuealed vpon vs. Then he alleadgeth the like sayinges of many Fathers, to proue that our tribula∣tions merit not the glory of heauen. I answere, they haue not any merite in themselues, according to their na∣turall valew, worthy of the guerdon prepared for vs: After which manner S. Augustine, S. Basil, S. Gregory, S. Bernard, and the rest, exclude the recompense of our me∣rites. S. Augustine expresly sayth, God crowneth not thy merits but as his giftes. Howbeit the Apostle discourseth of our tribulations, as they are sprinckled with grace, and pro∣ceed from the iustified, yet doth not say, as Protestantes corruptly translate, they are not worthy of the glory, but, are not condigne to the glory to come that shalbe reuealed in vs, that is, they haue no condigne equality, because our passions are momentary, our felicity eternall; these small, tolerable and measured forth according to our weaknes, that infi∣nitely great, immense, and heaped vp beyond all mea∣sure, and so of no account in comparison of it, as a mo∣ment is nothing paralelled with eternity: yet if they had not some true proportion of merite, the Apostle would not say, as he plainly doth, that our tribulation which pre∣sently is momentay, and light, worketh aboue measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glory in vs. The short and temporall* 1.250 pleasures, which the reprobate take in sinning, are not comparable to the euerlasting tormentes they endure in hell, yet they truly merit & deserue their damnation. The very heroicall and most excellent actions of our Sauiour Christ, his bitter passions were not equall to the prehe∣minence of glory he receaueth in heauen, and yet no Pro∣testant will deny them to haue beene of infinite merit▪

both to himselfe and vs, because of the dignity of his per∣son; Therefore notwithstanding our afflictions, ney∣ther in length of time, nor extremity of paine, be answe∣rable to the excessiue ioyes reserued for vs: yet they be tru∣ly meritorious of themselues, by reason of the worthy streames of grace, and diuine dignity of supernaturall life from whence they flow. For this cause it is true which M. Abbot diligently obserueth out of the Fathers: That God vouchsafeth to giue vs aboue our merites. Aboue them* 1.251 we graunt in magnificence of payment, yet according to them also in some proportion of reward, as the Em∣perour liberally dispenseth by the rules of distributiue iustice the spoyles taken in warre, vnto his souldiours, answerable to the exployts of euery man, yet aboue the rate of their desertes. But he insisteth further partly out of S. Fulgentius, and partly out of S. Bernard, That Gods reward doth so incomparably exceed all the merite, and worke of man, a•• that eternall life is not due thereunto by right, neyther should God do any wrong if he did not giue it; Which is easily solued, that it is not due vnto vs by absolute right, independant of all precedent mercy and grace, or that God should do any such wrong, as in rigour of meere iustice, without re∣gard to any fauour or promise of his, he should be absolu∣tely bound to recompense our labours. This right in e∣xacting this wrong, or iniury in not repaying, those Fa∣thers deny, but neuer that right which is grounded also in mercy. For of that S. Bernard flatly pronounceth; S. Paul doth confidently exact the promise; the promise truly of mercy, but not of iustice to be fullfilled. And S. Fulgentius: God of his benignity vouchsafeth to make himselfe a debtour: A debtour (sayth S. Augustine) he is made vnto vs &c. to whome we may say repay that which thou hast promised, because we haue done that which thou hast commanded. Likewise: Thou vouchsafest, o Lord because thy mercy shineth for euer, by thy promises to become a de••∣tour to them, to whome thou forguiest all their debtes.

8. Their last obiection or cauill rather, is, That our merites are preiudiciall, and iniurious vnto Christ, a decrease of the

full tide of his aboundant merits. As though it were a lessening to the Sun, that the starres shine with his borrowed light: A wrong to the fountayne that sundry pipes are filled with his streames: An iniury to the tree that all her braunches be loaden with fruite. Our Sauiour sayth: In* 1.252 this my Father is glorified, that you bring very much fruite. Is the Father glorified by the plenty of our fruitfull and vertu∣ous deedes, and is not Christ honoured by the accrew of our merites? I am content to stand to the iudgement of a Protestant, of that most graue and learned Father Brentius▪ so he is stiled by M. Iewell) who inueigheth against vs not for extenuating, but for magnifying hereby too much the vertue of Christ, and of his passion: To attribute (sayth he) vnto Christ, that, not only he by his death had deserued the ex∣piation of our sinnes, but also hath imparted that merit to our good workes, this is to assigne much more to Christ, then eyther he ack∣nowledgeth, or the thing it selfe can suffer: and it is contumely not only to detract from the glory due to any thing but also to ascribe too* 1.253 much praise and glory to it &c. Notwithstanding M. William Reynolds our famous Champion, dexterously conuinceth by the verdicte of Andreas Frisius another zealous Protestāt, That we neither dishonour, nor magnify too much our Redeemers merites, but keep the current of golden me∣diocrity, not bending to the right hand, nor to the left. Thus Frisius writeth. Although Christ take not away all infir∣mity from such as be regenerate, and renewing them by his spirit, and planting in them vertues of new life, and imparting to them me∣rite and his iustice, most truly and with singular fruite he is sayd to liue in them. And by this meanes the glory of Christ is not obscured, but clarified: the Crosse of Christ is not euacuated but made more co∣pious, the price of the bloud shed for vs is not diminished, but increa∣sed. So he, manifestly demonstrating these two remar∣keable thinges. First that our meritorious workes do not blemish or extenuate, but adde greater renowne, & lustre vnto the merites of Christ. Secondly that the worthines of our merites, spring not from the old roo••es of nature, but from the new plantes of vertue, grafted in vs by the

spirit of adoption, we receaue from God; which new spirit, that it should bring forth seedes of merit is so con∣sonant vnto reason, as no iudicious person can speake a∣gainst it. For if the vitall breath, or soule of man, infused into this lumpe of humane flesh, causeth beauty, motion; speach, and other actions of naturall life; if the morall ha∣bit or roote of vertue, worketh and produceth actes of morality correspondent thereunto; if the purchased ha∣bites of Philosophy, Theology, and the like, beget new Philosophicall and Theologicall discourses, new actes, new propositions; what should hinder the diuine habit and supernaturall fountaine of grace, from achieuing di∣uine and supernaturall works meritorious of new grace, meritorious of glory, worthy of God, worthy of the re∣ward he bestoweth vpon them, supposing alwaies his promise, by which he obligeth himselfe to be a debtour vnto vs. Hereupon the grace which is giuen is called our regeneration, or new birth, because it aduanceth vs to a new state of life by which we are enabled to bring forth new and supernaturall actions, which could not be* 1.254 wrought out of the forge of nature. As S. Augustine most cleerly testifieth in these wordes. When grace is giuen, then beginne also our good merits, by the meanes of that grace; for if grace be taken away, man doth presently fall headlong by his owne free∣will: therfore when a man beginneth to haue good merits, he ought not to attribute them vnto himselfe but to God, to whome it is said in the psalme: O Lord be my helper, and do not forsake me.

8. And thus, seeing the store of our meritorious deeds is honorable vnto Christ, glorious vnto God, and pro∣fitable to our selues, giue me leaue to seale vp this Trea∣tise* 1.255 with that exhortation of the Apostle: Therefore my be∣loued brethren, be stable, and immoueable, abounding in the wor∣kes of our Lord, alwayes knowing that your labour is not vayne in our Lord: but so pretious in his sight, as euery houre spent, e∣uery worke accomplished in his fauour, he remunerateth with the guerdon of incomparable felicity. For as no hayre of your head, so no moment of tyme shall perish (sayth S. Ber∣nard.)

But more elegantly S. Ambrose and venerable Bede by those wordes (a haire of your head shall not perish) vnder∣stand,* 1.256 that not only the noble exploytes of Saintes, but that their least thoughtes, and cogitations, shalbe scored vp by our iust Iudge, and be copiously rewarded in the day of retribution: For what doth it auile me (sayth S. Am∣brose) if God keepe an account of all my haires? But this redoun∣deth to my profit, if he a watchfull witnes of my workes, bestoweth vpon them the remuneration of eternall glory. With what care then, and sollicitude, with what diligence and alacrity, should we endeauour to treasure vp great plenty of ver∣tues, now whilest the tide serueth, and haruest lasteth; ••ow when short labours may purchase perpetuall crow∣nes, repentant teares euerlasting ioyes, voluntary almes riches of immortality: Now when euery good thought meriteth a Kingdome, euery moment may gaine Eter∣nity.

Laus Deo, & immaculatae semper V. M.

The end of the sixt Booke.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Abbot. •• 4. sect. 4 4 f. 580. VVhitak. in his an∣swere to the 8. reason of M. Camp. VVhitak. l. 8. aduers. Duraum, Fulke in c. 7. ad Rom.
• * 1.2

  Abbot in his defence c. 4. sect. 10. fol. 559.
• * 1.3

  Malac. 3. v. 4. Philip. 4. v. 18. 1. Petr. 2. v. 5. 1. Pet. 2. v. 4. August. ••le decal. & conuen. 10. Plagarum cum illo c. 7. 4 Reg. 20. v. 3. 4. Reg. 12. v. 2. Ibidem c. 15. v. •• 4. Reg. 22 v. 2. 4. Reg. 23. v. 32. 4. Reg. 14. v. 24.
• * 1.4

  4. Reg. 16. v. 2.
• * 1.5

  Fulke loc•• citat. inc. 13. ad Rom. sect. 1. in c. 3. ep. 1. Ioā. sect. 6. Abbot c. 4. sect. 44. f. 579. & sect. 49. f. 602. VVhitak. l. 8. aduers. Duraeum. pa. 702. Gen. 6. v. 9 Chrys. hom. 23. in Gen. Ambr. l. de Noê & Arc. c. 4. Hier. trad. haebr. in Gen. & Greg. l. 5. moral. & 36 in 3. Iob. Gen 7. v. 1. Gen. 17. v. 1. 1. Cor. 2•• v. 6. Matt. 19. v. 21. Item. Matt. 5. v. 48.
• * 1.6

  Iac. ••. v. 4. Rom. 4. v. 19. 20. 21. 1. Ioan. 2. v. 5. Ibid. c. 4. v. 11.
• * 1.7

  Ioan. 15. v. 13.
• * 1.8

  August. tract. 5. &. 6. in 1. Ioā. c. 3. Item l. de perf. iust. tom. 3. ex sent. sent 311. despir. & lit. c. 5. & vlt. l. de doct. Chri. cap. 39. l. 1. de pec. mer 23. & remis. c. Hiero. l. 2. comm. in lament. Ie∣rem. haec de Hier. Cent. 4. c. 10. col. 1250.
• * 1.9

  VVhitak: in his an∣swere to the 8. reason of M. Campi•• fol. 251. VVher in are the marginall nots out of his reply so Duraeus
• * 1.10

  Act. c. 10▪ v. 35.
• * 1.11

  Gen. 21. v. 16. & 17. Sophon. 1. v. 12.
• * 1.12

  Abbot c. 4. sect. 45. August. de spir. & lit c. 35. Aug. de temp. serm. 49. Hier. l. 1. aduers. Pe∣••ag. & l. 3. de Fulg. l. 1. ad Mon. Orig. ad Rom. c. 6.
• * 1.13

  August. co••t. ••. ep Pelag. l. 3. 6. 7. Augu. de spir. & lit. c. 36. Hier. l. ••. cont. Pela. Aug. ep. 26. S. Thom. q. 24. art 8. Ba••nes, Lor. & ••∣lij in eum articul.
• * 1.14

  Philip. 3. v. 12. 1. Ioan. 1. v. 5.
• * 1.15

  Matth. 19. v. 21.
• * 1.16

  Abbot in his defence c. 4. sect. 44. 45. 46. VVhitak. in his an swere to the ••. reason of M. Camp. f. 250. in the translation whereunto is added in brief mar∣ginal notes the summ•• &c.
• * 1.17

  VVhitak▪ ibid. fol. 251. 1. Cor. 7. v. 28. 2. 2. Pet. 1. vers 10. 1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. 1 Ioan. ••. v. 9. 1. Cor. 3. v. ••1. Matth. 6. v. 22. Luc. 11. v. 36. August▪ l. 2. qq. E∣uang. c. 15. Maldon. in c. 11. Luc. Matth. 5. v. 17.
• * 1.18

  Matth. 5. v. 17.
• * 1.19

  Iob. c. 1. v. 22. Iob. 2. v. 3.
• * 1.20

  Origen in his commē∣tary vpon Iob. Pineda in ••um loc. Nihil pec∣cauit Iob coram Do∣mino. Psal. 16. v. 3. Psal. 7. v. 9. 1. Tim. ••. v. 17. 18. Matt. 5. v. 17.
• * 1.21

  Abbot c. 4 sect. 44. fol. 578. & 579▪
• * 1.22

  Ibid. ••7••.
• * 1.23

  VVhitk •• in his an∣swere to Duraeus l. 8. pag. 698.
• * 1.24

  Dionys. de diuin. no∣min. c. 4. par. 4. Bo∣num ex v∣na & tota causa; ma∣lum ex multis par∣ticularibu•• que profi∣ciscitur de∣fectibus.
• * 1.25

  Abbot & VVhitak. in the pla∣ces cyted a∣boue.
• * 1.26

  The desire of taking a wife for a good end in such as may law∣fully mar∣ry, is free from all sinne,
• * 1.27

  The cor∣rupt mo∣tions of the flesh infect not the work e of the spi∣rit.
• * 1.28

  VVhitak. cont. •• q. 6. c. 3. fol. 582. 583.
• * 1.29

  Protestāts are bound to eschew all good works be∣cause they are dam∣nable crimes by the force of their doctrine▪
• * 1.30

  Abbot c. 4. sect. 46.
• * 1.31

  Abbot in his defence. c. 4. &c. 2. Feild in his 3. booke of the Church c. 26. VVhitak. l. 8. aduer. Duraum.
• * 1.32

  Abbot c. 4 sect. 46. fol. 588.
• * 1.33

  VVbitak. & Abbot vbi supra.
• * 1.34

  Abbot in his defence c. 4. sect. 43. & 44. Fulke. in c. 1. Luc. sect. 7. &. in 14. Ioan. sect. 1. VVhitak. l. 8. aduers. Duraeum.
• * 1.35

  Basil. serm. 2 de Bap•• ••. 7. & 8. Chrys or the author vpon the imperfect work of 8. Matthew. S Thom. 1. 2. q. 18. art. 4 ad ••. & q 19. art 7. ad 3.
• * 1.36

  Dionys de diuin. nom. c. 4. par. 4. Greg. Niss. hom. 2. in Cant. & orat. cated c. 5. Basil. bom. 9. ••oan. Damas. l. 2. de fi••e c. 4. Aug. l. 2. de lib arbr. c. vlt. & l. 12 de ciuit. •• 1 3. & 7. Fuig de fi∣de ad Peter. c. 21. Auselm. o. per. de praese. & praed. c. ••.
• * 1.37

  Basil in cō∣stit. Mon. Nicet. in o∣rat. 40. Nazian. q. insanct. Baptism. ••. Thom ••. 2. q. 71. art. 1. & ••. & ••. con. Gent. c. 7.
• * 1.38

  Another obiection vnanswe∣••ed▪
• * 1.39

  Hier. l. ••. aduers. Pe∣lag. Augu. de spir. & lit. c. vlti. Greg. l. 2. moral. c. 8.
• * 1.40

  Bern. l. de praecep. & dispens.
• * 1.41

  Hier. l ••3. cont. Pela. August. de pec. mer. & remis. l. 2 c. 6. Ambr. de na. & gra c. 3. In eodem l. c. 67. Orig. l. 1. in Iob. Cent. 3. c. 4. col. 78. Lact. l. 6. cap. 25. Cent. 4. c. 4. col. 192. In eodem. l. c 25. Theod. q 19. in Gen Cent. 5 c. 10. col. 1008. Hier. l. 4. comm. in Ezech. Cent. 4. ••. 10. col. 1249.
• * 1.42

  Isa. 64. v. 6.
• * 1.43

  Abbot c. 4. sect 3. Orig. ad Rom. c. 3. Hier. in. Isa. c. 64. Aug, soli∣••o. c 28. Bernar. ser. 1. in fest. omn. sanct. de verb. Isa. ser. 5. in dedic. Eccles. ser. 5. Aluarez à Medina in eum loc.
• * 1.44

  Isa. c. 1. v. 13. & 14.
• * 1.45

  Isa. 40. v. 17.
• * 1.46

  Iob. 25. v. 5. & 6.
• * 1.47

  Greg. l. 9. mor. c. 19.
• * 1.48

  Psal. 141.
• * 1.49

  Abbot c. 4. sect. 47. fol. 590.
• * 1.50

  Greg in c. 4. Iob. Hilar. Hieron. Arnobius & Euthi. in eundem psal. Aug l. adu Orosium c. 10. Aug. l. de perfect. iustie. Hier. ep ad Ctesiphou. Greg. in eun. psal. Aug. in eun. psal. Iob. 4. v. 28. Caietan. Eugub. & Vatablus in eun. loc. Symmach.
• * 1.51

  Bern in fest. omn. sanct. s••r. 1. Abbot e. 4. sect. 3. fol. 393. Bern ser. 5. de verb. Isa. Aug. l. 9. confess. c. 13. Idem ep. 29.
• * 1.52

  August. ibid.
• * 1.53

  Aug. in l. de perfect. iusti••. c. 15.
• * 1.54

  August de spir. & lit. c. vlt.
• * 1.55

  Plautus in Baceb. Si vnam pec∣cauisses syl∣labam. Tull. 2. Tusc. Quod in eo ipso peccet cuius pro∣fitetur sci∣entiam. 1. Ioan. 1. v. 8. Iac. 3. v. 3. August. tract. 1. epist. Ioan. & l. de nat. & gra. a. c. 36, & 38.
• * 1.56

  August. ep. 29. & 50. l. de virg. cap. 48. 49. l. 4. cont. 2. ep. Pelag. c. 10. Bonau. 3. distinct 3. part. dub. 1.
• * 1.57

  Seneca. l. de mor. Aug. tom. 7. l. de na▪ & gra. ••. 67.
• * 1.58

  Idem tom. 4. in expos. quarun. propos. prop. 17. Tom. 7. cont. Pela, l. 2. circa. finem. Chry. cited by S. Iohn Damas. q. 2. phrall, c. 27. Eccles. 5. v. 2. &. c. 18. v. 30.
• * 1.59

  Rom 6. v. 12. Theod in. eum loc. Chrys. in eum loc. Aug. in psal. 118. conc. 3. de nuptijs & concup. l. 1. c. 17. & in exp. ep. ad. Gal. c. 5. Greg. 14. moral. c. 9. Aug. in ex∣pos. ep. ad Gal. c. 5. & l. con. sul. Pel. c. 3. & 5. &. l 1 de nupt. & concup. c. 23. Exod. 20. v 17. In bebrew for non concu∣pisces, it is lotachmod.
• * 1.60

  Rom. 7. v. 17. Ioseph l. 22. antiq. c. ••1. Matth. 5. v. 23. &. 29.
• * 1.61

  Chrys. ho. 12. in Matt. Hieron. ad. Eustoch. Cyril. l. 3. contra Iul. Basil. de cō∣stit. Mona. c. 2. Greg. Niss. l. de. 8. beatic. Aug. l. 1. cont. 2. ep Pela. c. 10. 13. & 6. contra Iul. c. 11. l. 2. de pecca. mer c. 4. 33. & 34. Ambr. l. ••▪ offic. c. 2 Pros. l. 2. de vit. con. templ. 3. & l. 3. c. 4. Cypr. l. de morta. Aug. l. 2. cont. Pela. cap. 8.
• * 1.62

  Fulke in c. 8. ad Rom. sect. 1. Abbot c. 4. VVhitak. cont. 2. q. ••, c. 3. fol. 580. Deutr. 30. v. 11. 12.
• * 1.63

  Rom. 10. v. 6. August de na. & gra. c. 69. & q. 54 in Deu∣teron. Theod. q. 38. in Deu∣teron. Rom. 8. v.
• * 1.64

  Fulk in. 8. ad Rom. sect. 1. Abbot c. 4. sect. 38. & 43.
• * 1.65

  Rom. 2. v. 13.
• * 1.66

  Augu. de spir. & lit. c. 26.
• * 1.67

  Aug. in psal. 32.
• * 1.68

  August: ep. 144. ad Anast. Idem de spir. & lit. c. 30.
• * 1.69

  Matt. 11. v. 30. 1. Ioan. 5. v. 3.
• * 1.70

  Matt. c. 11. v. 29.
• * 1.71

  Abbot c. 4. sect. 43.
• * 1.72

  Matth. 19. v. 17.
• * 1.73

  Marc. 10. v. 21. Basil. hom. cont dini∣tes auaros. Chrys. & Euthim. in eum locū. Calu. in Harm. in c. 19. Matt. Marc. 10. Luc. 18. Psal. 118. v. 31. v. 55. 51. 168.
• * 1.74

  3. Reg. 15. v. 5. 3. Reg. 14. v. 8. 4. Reg. 18. Luc. 1. v. ••.
• * 1.75

  Ioan. 14. v. 15. v. 21. ••. Ioan. 2. v. 3. &. 4.
• * 1.76

  Abbot c. 4. sect. 43. fol. 566. & 568. VVbitak. l. 8 aduers. Duraeum. Fulke in c. 1. Luc. sect. 7. & Ioan. 14. sect. 1. Perkins in the 4. cha. of bis re∣form. Cath.
• * 1.77

  Isa. 5. v. ••0
• * 1.78

  Rom. 13. v. 10.
• * 1.79

  Concil. A∣rausic. c. vlti. Hilar. in Psal. 118
• * 1.80

  Hier. l. 3. cont. Pela. Aug. ser. 61. & 191. de tempo. Aug. lib. de natur. & gratia cap. 43. Cent. 2. 4. col. 58. Author respon. ad quaest. 130. Cent. 2. c. 4. col. 61. Ibidem col. 61. Obedi∣entiam le∣galem re∣••atis om∣nino possi bilem esse magno er∣rore iudica∣uit. Cent. 3. c. 4. col. 78. Orig. hom. ••. super Exod. Videtur as∣seuerare, quòd bap∣tizati per omnia pos∣sint legem implere. Cypr. ser. de Baps. Christ.
• * 1.81

  Basil. Orat in illud Attende tibi. Chrys. ho. 8 de poenio Aug. tom. 7. denat. & grat. c. 6••. Hier. ep. ad Damas. de expos. Symboli.
• * 1.82

  August. de pec. mer. & remis l. 2. c. 5.
• * 1.83

  Abb cap. 4. sect. 44.
• * 1.84

  Abbot ibid. sol. 579.
• * 1.85

  Abbot cap. 4. sect. 44. fol. 579.
• * 1.86

  Abbot ibid.
• * 1.87

  VVhitak. in his an∣swere to the 8. reason of M. Camp. VVhitah. l. 8. aduers. Duraum. Abbot cap. 4. sect. 44. fol. 578
• * 1.88

  Abbot. c. 4. sect. 47. fol. 596.
• * 1.89

  VVhitak. in his an∣swere to the 8. reason of M. Campiā.
• * 1.90

  VVhitak. in his an∣swere to the 8. reason of M. C••m∣plan. and lib. 8. ad∣uer. Duraeū Abbot cap. 4. fol. 60••
• * 1.91

  Abbo•• cap. 4. sect. 46. fol. ••88.
• * 1.92

  Abbot. ibi.
• * 1.93

  Caluin in Antido. Conc. Tri¦sess. ••. c. 12
• * 1.94

  Caluin loc. citato.
• * 1.95

  The pre∣cept of not coueting may be kept.
• * 1.96

  Protestāts themsel∣ues obser∣ue some of the com∣mandmēts
• * 1.97

  The Cō∣maund∣ment of louing God may be also ob∣serued.
• * 1.98

  Psal. 118. v. to v 58. v. 145. v. 68
• * 1.99

  Iudith. ••. 17. 2. Reg. 5. v. 1••.
• * 1.100

  4. Reg. 23. v. 25.
• * 1.101

  Act. 8. v. 3••.
• * 1.102

  Philip. 4. v. 13.
• * 1.103

  Ezech. 36. v. 27.
• * 1.104

  Ioh. 17. v. 6
• * 1.105

  Gal. 3. v. 10.
• * 1.106

  Iac. 2. v. 10.
• * 1.107

  Hier. Ep. ad P••efiph. 1. Iob. 3. v. 6. & 9.
• * 1.108

  Deu••. 17•• v. 26.
• * 1.109

  Aug. ep. 26
• * 1.110

  Act. 15. v. 10.
• * 1.111

  S. Thom. in 2. dist. 28. q. 1. at. 4. ad 3. Lyran. in. bunolocū Rab. Moy. 3. duct. dub. cap. 56. 57. Abulen. in c. 1. Ruth. q. 24. Ios. 11. v. 15.
• * 1.112

  Aug. con. 2. epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 4.
• * 1.113

  Aug. ser. 9. de verb. Domini.
• * 1.114

  Aug. de perfect. iustit. c 15. Sarcinam subleuantē vice penna∣rū. Aug. de nat. & gra. c. 43. & 69. Aug. q. 71. in Exod.
• * 1.115

  Augu. de spir. & lit. c. vltim. & in l. de pers. iustit. Bern. serm. so. in Cant. S. Thom. 3. 2. 444. art. 6.
• * 1.116

  Bern. serm. 50. in Cant Abbot. cap. 4. sect. 43. ful. 572. Bernar. in l. de praec. & dispens. c. 15. August de. spir. & lit. c. 35. Aug. com. 3. de spirit. & lit. c. 5. item. l. 6. cont. luliā. c. 5.
• * 1.117

  Gabr. Vasquez in 1. 2. disp. 212. c. 2. Stapleton. l. 6. de perfe. iustit. c. 23. August. de spir. & lit. cap. 36. August. de pec. mer. & remis. l. 2. c. ••.
• * 1.118

  Aug. in enchir. cap. 100. &. l. de corr. & gra. cap. 10. Ful. in cap. 6. Matth. sect. 6. 4. 3. ad Rō. in sect.
• * 1.119

  Caluin l. 1. instit. cap. ••8. §. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. & l. ••. cap. 4. l. 3. cap. 23. §. 4. &. 7. Fulke in c. 9. ad Rom. sect. 1 ibid sect. 2. &. sect. 7. In. cap. 28. Act. sect. 2.
• * 1.120

  Vinc. Lyr. cōtra pro. haer. nou. cap. 34. Iren. l. c. 20. Euseb. l. 5. cap. 19. Aug. ber. 46.
• * 1.121

  S. Tho. 2. 2. q. 79. ars. 2. in corpore. Sap. 11. v. 25. Sapien. 14. v. 9. Haba. 1. v. 13. Ier. 19. c. 5.
• * 1.122

  Ier. 19. v. 9▪
• * 1.123

  Psal. 5. v. 5. ibid. v. 7. Iac. 1. v. 13. Fulke in c. 11. ad Row. sect. 5. Caluin. l. 1. instit. cap. 18. §. 4. & l. 2. c. 4. §. 21 ad Rom. 3. v. 8. Aug. in Enchirid c. 22.
• * 1.124

  Cicero lib. de Amicit.
• * 1.125

  Fulke in c. 11 ad Rom. sect. 5. Caluin lo. citato.
• * 1.126

  Ecclesias. 49. v. 25.
• * 1.127

  Plat. dial. 2. de repub.
• * 1.128

  Mercurius Trismeg. in Poem ••. cap. vlt. S. Basil. hom. 2, in exam. & bom. 9. Quod Deus non fit au∣thor malo∣rum. Ter∣tul. lib. 2. contra Mar. cap. 14. S. Grego. l. 19. mora. c. 31. Dion. cap. 4. de diui. nom. Aug. cap. 105. Amb. l. ex∣am. cap. 8.
• * 1.129

  Matt. 7.
• * 1.130

  Basil. hom. 2. in hexa. Gregor. Ni••••ē. hom. 2. in Eccl.
• * 1.131

  Ambr. l. c. Ep. ep. 37.
• * 1.132

  Aug. li. ••. de symb. ad catechu. c. ••
• * 1.133

  Plato l. 2. derepub.
• * 1.134

  Fulk in c. 9. ad Rom. sect 21. ibid. sect. 5.
• * 1.135

  Caluin l. 3. cap. 12. §. 5. ibid cap. 23 §. 4. 7. 8, 9. Decretum quidē hor∣ribile fa∣••eor.
• * 1.136

  See Fr••do∣ard. lib. 3. c. 13. Serraen. l. 1. rerum Mogunt; c. 33. Ba∣ron. an. Domini 400. & 818. Conc. Araufic. c. 25. Ezech. 18. v. 32. &c. 33. v. 11. osee 13. v. 9. Sap. 1. v. 13. 2. Pet. 3. v. 9. Aug. lib. 6. Hypogno. Chrysos. hom. 3. in Genes. hom. de in∣terdict. ar∣boris ad Adā quae habetur post hom. in Genes. Eulgent. li. ad Monim. Prosper in lib. respons. ad Ga••lorū capitula sub 〈…〉〈…〉 in ••••nt. super cap. 7.
• * 1.137

  Fulk in ca. 11. Math. sect. 1. Caluin. lib. 3. institut. cap. 23. § 8.
• * 1.138

  Aug. epist. 106. ad Pau∣linum.
• * 1.139

  Fulgent. lib. 1. ad Monim. cap. 21.
• * 1.140

  Ibid. c. 22.
• * 1.141

  Aug. l. 3. Conf. cap. 2
• * 1.142

  Echlus in Chrysopasso praedest. cent. 3 nu. 52. Psal. 144. v. 9. Eccles. 15. v. 22.
• * 1.143

  Rom. 9.
• * 1.144

  Aug. lib. 1 ad Simplie. 9. 9. 2.
• * 1.145

  Sap. 10. 25
• * 1.146

  Beza in tract. theo∣log. is meruai∣lously per∣plexed with this argumēt: and after much a do rather blasphe∣meth then answereth it.
• * 1.147

  ••. Ioan. 4. 8.
• * 1.148

  Fulgen. l. 1. ad Monim.
• * 1.149

  Aug. l. 3. in Iulian. c. 18.
• * 1.150

  Fulk in c. 13 Matth. sect. 2.
• * 1.151

  Fulk in̄ ca. 6. Math. sect. 5. in c. 1. ad Rom. sect. 10. in cap. 11. ad Rom. sect. 5.
• * 1.152

  Fulk in cap. 27. Act. sect. 3.
• * 1.153

  Fulk in cap. Ioan. sect. 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 1.154

  Prosper in respons. ad obiec. 11.
• * 1.155

  Note that it is al cne Whether God infor∣ce, or ne∣cessitate men to sinne in re∣pect of ma∣king him author of sinne.
• * 1.156

  Caluin. l. 3. instit c. 23. sect. 4. & 8.
• * 1.157

  Calu. l. 8. instit. c. 17. §. 11.
• * 1.158

  Calu. l. 2. Instit. c. 4. &. 2. Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 18. §. 1.
• * 1.159

  Calu. in the same place. §. 2▪ Calu. l. 1. Inst. c. 18. §. 3.
• * 1.160

  Greg. Nys∣sen. l. 7. philos. c. 1.
• * 1.161

  Humfred. de rat. in∣terpret. l. 1. pag. 26. Castal. in l. aduer. Calu. de praedest.
• * 1.162

  vide literas Senat. Bern ad minist. &c. 1555.
• * 1.163

  Aug. l. 12. de ciuit. dei c. 7. Aug. ep. 105. & tract. 53 in Ioan. Idem. l. de pred. & grat. & l. de gra. & llb. arb. c. 23
• * 1.164

  Aug. ep. 89. q. 2. Chrysost. in cap. 1. ad Roman. Damascen. l. 4. c. 20. de fid. ortho. dox.
• * 1.165

  Iac. l. 1. 13. Epes. 4. v. 19. Ro. 2. v. 4.
• * 1.166

  Psal. 49. ••. 1. Reg. 6 6.
• * 1.167

  Caluin. l. 2. institut. c. 3 sect. 10.
• * 1.168

  1. ad Ti∣moth. 2. 4. 2. Pet. 3. 9. Ezechiel. 33. Prouerb. 1. 22. & 23. Matt. 11. 2. 8. Cassian. col∣lat. 13. c. 7. Chrysost. hom. 1. al Ephesios. Aug. l. 1. de Gen. cont. Manich. c. 3. & in psal. 45. Cyprian. l. 3. ep. 8. ad Fidum. Prosper l. 2. de vocat. gent. c. 16.
• * 1.169

  1. Tim. 4. 10.
• * 1.170

  1. Tim. 2. 5.
• * 1.171

  2. Cor. 5. 15. 1. Ioan 2. 2. Iron. lib. 5. c. 17. Ambros. ser. 8. in Psal. 118.
• * 1.172

  Aug. tract 92. in Io••••.
• * 1.173

  Prosper. l. 2. de vocat. gent. c. vlt.
• * 1.174

  ••. ad Tim.
• * 1.175

  Fulk in ca. 9. ad Rom. sect. 2. in cap. Ioan. sect. 3. in 9. ad Rom. sect. 7. in cap. 27. Act. sect. 3. in cap. 12 Ioan sect. 3. Aug. lib. 1. de lib. ar••. c. 1. Idem lib. 6. con∣tra Fortu∣nat. Mani∣ch. disput. 1. Idem lib. ver. relig. c. 14.
• * 1.176

  Aug. lib. 3. de lib. arb. cap. 18.
• * 1.177

  Aug. li. 83. qq. q. 63.
• * 1.178

  Exod. 8. 2.
• * 1.179

  Exod 9. 1. & 2.
• * 1.180

  Exod. 10. 3. & 4.
• * 1.181

  Aug. lib. de praed. & gr. cap. 15.
• * 1.182

  Fulk. in ca. 8. ad Rom. sect. 8.
• * 1.183

  S. Thom. 1. p. q. 23. ••rt. 2.
• * 1.184

  Fulk in ca. 8. ad Rom. sect. 9. Cal∣uin l ••. in∣stitut. §. 7. 28. 29. 43. & l. 4 in. s••it. cap. ••7 §. 2. Fox Act▪ and Mon••. Tom. 2. where h•• re••itethand approueth these words of Tindaii••
• * 1.185

  2. Timoth. 2. 20.
• * 1.186

  Gen. 4. 6.
• * 1.187

  Aug. l. ••. ad Simplic. q. 2.
• * 1.188

  Orig. l. 8. in ep. ad Rom. Chrysost. hom. 16. in cap. 9. ad Rom. Chrysost. hom 4 de la••d. Paul. ad fin. Concil. Ar••usican. ••ap. 25.
• * 1.189

  1. Cor. 9. 27. Sap. 4. 11. Eccles. c. 31. 10. Apocalyps. 3. 11. 2. Pet. 1. 10. VVhitak. cont. 2. q. 6. cap. 3. Fulk in c. 6. ad Ro∣man. sect. 2. & 5.
• a 1.190

  Marc. vlt. v. 16.
• b 1.191

  Tit. 3. 5.
• c 1.192

  Ioa. 3. 5.
• d 1.193

  Tit. 3. 7.
• e 1.194

  1. Corin. 10. 17.
• f 1.195

  Ioan. 6. 56.
• g 1.196

  Act. 8. 18.
• h 1.197

  Act. 2. 38.
• i 1.198

  2. ad Tim. 1. 6.
• k 1.199

  Ioan. 3. 5.
• l 1.200

  Tit. 3. 7. Aug. in ps. 7••.
• * 1.201

  Gregor. l. 6. c. 3. in prim. Re∣gum.
• * 1.202

  Aug. ser. 1. de sanct. Aug. de bon. perf. 2. Timoth. 2. 10. 1. Timoth. 4. v. vlt. 2. Pet. 1. 10. 1. Corinth. 9. Ther shold be noe iud∣genunt at all (sayth S. Augu∣stin) if men sinned by the will of God. Aug. tom. 7. ad artic. sibi falso impositos. artic. 10.
• * 1.203

  Fulk in ca. 3. ad Rom. sect. 4.
• * 1.204

  Tull. l. 2. de nat. Deorum.
• * 1.205

  Caluin l. •• inst. c. 8. § ••.
• * 1.206

  S. Tho∣mas. 1. 2. q. 19. art. 9. & 10. Durand. l. 1. distinct. 48. q. 2.
• * 1.207

  Gen. 22. Exod. 11. Osee. 1.
• * 1.208

  Fulke in the place aboue cited.
• * 1.209

  Rom. 9. 18. Rom. 1. 26. Exod. 7. 8. & 9. Ioa. 12. 40. Prouerb. 16. 4. Rom 9. 17. Ephes. 3. 11.
• * 1.210

  Vasques in 1 part. to. 1 dis••ut. 55 cap. 10. Exod. 8. 15.
• * 1.211

  Ibid p. 32. ca. 9. v. 7. & 35.
• * 1.212

  Aug. de doct. Chri▪ l, 3. cap 10. Aug. l. 13. de trin. ca. 12. Tertul. l. aduer. Her. mog. Ful∣gen l. 1. ad Monim ••. 13. Epiphā. haeres. 66. Rupert. in c. 9. Exod. Chrysost. hom. 16. in c. 9. ad Ro. (Tulit multa cum lenitate vo∣lens ipsum ad paeniten∣••iam addu∣cere &c. qui fi serua∣tus minim•• fuit, rei to∣tius culpa ab illius a∣nimo acci∣dit.) Rupertus in eum locū Exod.
• * 1.213

  Theod. 9. 17 in Exodum
• * 1.214

  Fulgent. l. 1. ad Mon.
• * 1.215

  Aug. li. 22. de ciu. Dei cap. 1.
• * 1.216

  Hierom. in ••om su∣per hunc ••o••••m.
• * 1.217

  Caluin l. 3 I••stit. cap. ••3. §. 4. & 7. & lib. de aeterna Dei praedest. fol. 916. Chry∣sost. hom. de interdict arb. ad A∣dā quae ha∣betur post hom. in Ge¦nes. Caluin sup. 8. Pros. lib. 2. de vo. cat. gen••. cap. 1. 12. Caluin lib. Instit. c. 17 & 18. lib. 2. c. 4. l. 3. c. 23. Augu. tract. 53. in Ioan. Fulk in cap. 6. Mat. sect. 6 Aug. ep. 8•• q. 2. Fulk in cap. 12. Ioan. sect. ••. Aug. tract. 3••. in Ioan. Con. Valēt. cap. 2.
• * 1.218

  Caluin l. ••. Instit. c. 4. §. 2. Idem ergo facinus Deo, satha∣nae, homini assignari videmus nō esse absurdū Deus clauū tenet. Caluin l. 1. c. 18. 6. 1. Caluin. lib. 1. Instit. c. 17. §. 11 & cap. 18. lit 2. cap. 4. lib. 3. c. 23.
• * 1.219

  Abot in his defence c. 4 & 5. Fulk and al other Pro∣testants.
• * 1.220

  Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. c. 16.
• * 1.221

  Apoc. 3. v. 4. Sap. 3. v. 5. ad Coloss. 1. v. 12. 2. ad Thess. 1. v. 11.
• * 1.222

  Fulk in ca. 1. 2. ad Thess. sect. 1. Fulk in Ep. 2. ad Thess. c. 1. sect. 1. I•• c. 1. ad Coloss. sect. 3. Abbot in his defence c. 5. sect. 7. 8. & 14.
• * 1.223

  Ad Heb. 1••. v. 16. Pri∣mas. in e∣••m locum.
• * 1.224

  Chrysostō, Oecumen. Theophil. & Erasm. in eum locū
• * 1.225

  Gen. 32. v. 10. Ecclesiast. ••6. v. 15. Matt. v. ••2. Matth. 20. v. ••. Ier. 31. v. 16. Rom. 2. v. 6. ad Co∣rinth. 3. v. 8. Apoc. 22. v. 12. Abbot in his defence c. 5. sect. 14 fol. 686. Fulk in ca. 3. 1. ad Co∣rinth. sect. 2. In ••p. 4. 2. ad Tim. sect. 4. in c. 25. Matth. sect. 6.
• * 1.226

  2. ad Tim▪ 4. Matt. 20. v. 4. & v. 13. & 14. Aug lib. de sāct. virg. c. 26. Hie. l. con. Iou. Chrysost. Theophil. & Euthim. in eum locū
• * 1.227

  2. Tim. 4. ad Heb. 6. 10. Fulk. in c. 4. 2. ad Tim. sect. 4. Abbot in his defence ••. 5▪ sect 1. 4.
• * 1.228

  Matth. 1••. v. 27. ••. ad Cor. 3. v. 8. ad Gal. 6. v 7. ••. Ibidem v. 9
• * 1.229

  Apoc. 22. v. 12. Fulk. in ••. ad Cor. 3. sect. 2. Cal∣uin 3. instit. cap. 18. §. ••. & 7.
• * 1.230

  Eccles. 16▪ v. ••••.
• * 1.231

  ••. ad Cor. 9. v. 24. M••••••. 11. v. ••2. Matt. 13. v. 45. Aug. in Psal. 93. prope finem Basil in hom. quam scripfit in initium. Prouerb. Clem. A••••. in paraen••••.
• * 1.232

  Gab. Vasq. in 1. 2. tom. 2. disp. 214 cap. 5. & others ibid. in q. 114. D. Tho.
• * 1.233

  Greg. Na. orat in san. Bap. extre∣ma.
• * 1.234

  2. ad Cor. 9. v. 6. Clem. Alex. l. 4. strom Matth. 10. v. 4.
• * 1.235

  Aug. ep. 46. ad Va∣lent.
• * 1.236

  Matth. 25. v. 34. v. 41. 1. Cor. 4. v. 17. Tertult. l. de r••sur. carnis c. 40 in Scorp. cap. 13. Aug. ep. 105. Chrysost. hom. 3. de Lazaro.
• * 1.237

  Tob. 1••. v. 9. and Eccles. 3. v. 33. Prou. 25. v. 27. Pro. 16. v. 6. Dan. 4. v. 24.
• * 1.238

  1. Cor. 7. v. 38. ••bidem v. 39. & 40. Matt. 19•• v. ••1.
• * 1.239

  Ioā. 15. v. 13
• * 1.240

  In conc. Mediolan. Ambros. Epist. 81. Ambr. ibid. ep. 8 c. Aug serm. 143. de tēp. (Diuersa specits cla∣ritatis quia diuersa sūt merita cha∣ritatis.) Centur. 5. c. 4. col. 518. Aug. l. 3. de peccat. meritis. Contur. c. 4 4. col. 301. Amb. l. 2. ad Marcel. Cent. 3. 4. col. 86. Orig l. 10. ep. ad Rom. Cent. 4. c. 4. Col. 192. Cbrom. in concion. de Beat. Cent. 4. c. 10 col. 1250. Ierom aduer. Iou. Cent. 3. c. 4. col. 86. Tertul l. de Ieiunio. Cent. 2. c. 4 col. 64.
• * 1.241

  Ignatius in ep. ad An∣tioch. ad Her••. ad Tarsen. Field in his 3. book. c. 21. fol. 1. ••. Cent. 2. c. 4. Col. 64. Clem. in strō. Igna. in ep. ad Smir. ad Antioch. & Polycar▪
• * 1.242

  Cent. 3. c. 4. col. 85. Tertul in. Scorpiaco. & in Apo∣logia, & in lib. de anima. Origen. Homil. 7. in lud. Cypr. l. 2. epist. 6.
• * 1.243

  Bulling▪ vpon the Apoca. ser. 87. fol. 270. Humfrey Ies. part. 2. pag. 530. Bell in his downe fall. pag. 61.
• * 1.244

  Nazian. ora. 3. in hap.
• * 1.245

  ad Rom. 6. v. 23. 1. Io. 5. v. ••1. Abbot in his defence c. 5. very often.
• * 1.246

  Aug. ep. 105. de cor∣rep. & gra. c. 13. in en••h. c. 107. & lib. arb. c. 8. & 9.
• * 1.247

  Aug. tra. 3. in euang Ioan. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 debitū flagitatiam debitum exigit.)
• * 1.248

  Basil. he. ••••. i•• He∣xametr. Tua aliqua ex part•• est gratia, quare me∣rito ingre∣di••ris co∣ronatus pronoun∣ciere nihil indignus qui merce∣dem in∣sumptae operae deo repignorāt ••ecipias.
• * 1.249

  ad Rom. 8. v. 18. M. Abbot c. 5. sect. 9. fol. 6••7. 668. Aug. l d•• gra & lib. arbit. c. 7.
• * 1.250

  2. ad Corin. 4. v. ••7.
• * 1.251

  Abbot in his defence c. 5. sect. 13. fol. 683. Abbot in▪ the same place & fol. 669. Fulgē. ad Mon. l. ••. Bern. in aununt. sect. 1. Bernard l. de gra. & lib. arbit. propefinē. Fulgen. in prol. lib. ad Mon. Redde quod pro∣mifisti, quia fecimus quod iussi∣sti. Aug. ser. 16. de ver. Apost. Aug. l. ••. Confess. c. 9. in fine.
• * 1.252

  Ioan. 1•• 9. v. 8. Brentius in Apol. con∣f••ss witem. c. de contri.
• * 1.253

  M. VVil∣liam Rey∣nolds in his refutation of M. whi. Reprehens. fol 94. 95. Andr. ••ri•• de Eccles. lib. 4. c. 12.
• * 1.254

  Aug. de gra. & lib. arb. c. 6.
• * 1.255

  ••. ad Cor. ••5. v. 58. Bernard. ser. in illa∣verba, Ecce nos reliqui∣musomnia.
• * 1.256

  Amb. in prolo. l. 2. de sp. sanc. Beda. l. 6. in Luc.