A Golden Chain

The difference.

We dissent not from the Church of Rome in the doctrine of repentance it self: but in the damnable abuses thereof, which are of two sorts, general and special. General are these which concern repentance wholly considered: and they are these. The first is, that they place the beginning of repentance partly in themselves, and partly in the holy Ghost, or, in the power of their natural freewill being helped by the holy Ghost: whereas Paul indeed ascribes this work, wholly unto God. 2. Tim. 2.15. Proving if God at any time will give them repentance. And men that are not weak but dead in trespasses and sins, can not do any thing• that may further their conversion, though they be helped never so: no more then dead men in their graves, can rise from thence. The second abuse is, that they take penance, or rather repentance for that public discipline and order of correction that was used against notorious offenders in the open congregation. For the Scripture sets down but one repentance, and that common to all men without exception: and to be practised in every part of our lives for the necessary mortification of sin: whereas open ecclesiastical correction pertained not to all and every man within the compass of the Church, but to them alone that gave any open offence. The third abuse is, that they make repentance to be not only a virtue, but also a sacrament: whereas for the space of a thousand years after Christ, & upward it was not reckoned among the sacraments: yea it seems that Lombard was one of the first that called it a sacrament: and the school-men after him disputed of the matter & form of this sacrament: not able any of them certainly to define, what should be the outward element. The fourth abuse is touching the effect and efficacy of repentance: for they make it a meritorious cause of remission of sins and of life everlasting, flat against the word of God. Paul saith notably,