An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof…An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof…
An answer to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Jesuit in confidence whereof he offered disputation to the ministers of the Church of England, in the controversy of faith. Whereunto is added in brief marginal notes, the sum of the defence of those reasons by John Duræus the Scot, being a priest and a Jesuit, with a reply unto it. Written first in the Latin tongue by the reverend and faithful servant of Christ and his Church, William Whitakers, Doctor in Divinity, and the Kings Professor and public reader of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. And now faithfully translated for the benefit of the unlearned (at the appointment and desire of some in authority) into the English tongue; by Richard Stock, preacher in London. ...An ansvvere to the Ten reasons of Edmund Campian the Iesuit in confidence wherof he offered disputation to the ministers of the Church of England, in the controuersie of faith. Whereunto is added in briefe marginall notes, the summe of the defence of those reasons by Iohn Duræus the Scot, being a priest and a Iesuit, with a reply vnto it. Written first in the Latine tongue by the reuerend and faithfull seruant of Christ and his Church, William Whitakers, Doctor in Diuinitie, and the Kings Professor and publike reader of Diuinitie in the Vniuersitie of Cambridge. And now faithfully translated for the benefit of the vnlearned (at the appointment and desire of some in authoritie) into the English tongue; by Richard Stocke, preacher in London. ...
William Whitaker 1548–1595London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weaver, 1606London: printed by Felix Kyngston for Cuthbert Burby and Edmund Weauer, 1606
[40], 326 p. · 97k words · STC 25360 · ESTC S119870
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
From Sin you pass your speech to Grace:1 I would rather you your self did make passage: and you hope, that we who are so strict in the matter of sin, will play the Philosophers so gloriously about Gods Grace. Surely we shall think we play the Philosophers very well, if we refer all our Philosophy for the amplifying of the Cross of Christ.2 You also do treat of Grace, but as still you are wont, in few words. But what do you reprove in our Philosophy? because we place Grace out of us only in the favour of God. For you, Campian, would have your men to be persuaded, that we take all Grace from man, and do place it only in the mind of God, like Plato's Idea. But either you know not what you talk of in this place, and that you are ignorant of this Philosophy, or else you suffer not our opinion, being infolded in your slanders, to be manifest. For we make grace to be twofold (that I may omit many distinctions) wherein we do not disallow the Philosophy of your School men. For either Grace declareth the free goodwill and clemency of God toward us, or else it ⟨p. 224⟩signifieth those gifts, which flow out of that mercy of God to us. That they commonly call, Grace making acceptable; and this, Grace freely given. Now for thatx goodwill and favour whereby the Lord embraceth us in Christ, and forgiveth us our sins, and receiveth us into favour; we place it in God: but the effects of this Grace are in us: which effects are these, that we do by the holy Ghost perceive that we are ⟨p. 225⟩loved of God, that we believe in God, and repose all hope of salvation in that mercy of God. We do not therefore take away all grace from man, and place it only in Gods favour: but that first grace, whereby he hath reconciled us to himself in Christ, and wherein our salvation is contained, that alone we place in God; which being felt by us, faith, hope, and charity and other virtues do follow it, which are ours, and resident in us. But we deny that position of yours of infused grace, whereby you defend, that the grace whereby we are justified, is a certain habit situate in our minds within: and we acknowledge no other justifying
grace, but the great and free mercy of God, whereby he did elect and predestinate us in Christ before all eternity unto life everlasting, and hath called us in time and justified us.
From Sinne you passe your speech to Grace:1 I would rather you your selfe did make passage: and you hope, that we who are so strict in the matter of sin, will play the Philosophers so gloriously about Gods Grace. Surely we shall thinke we play the Philosophers very well, if we referre all our Philosophie for the amplifying of the Crosse of Christ.2 You also do treate of Grace, but as still you are wont, in few words. But what do you reproue in our Philosophie? because we place Grace out of vs only in the fauouer of God. For you, Campian, would haue your men to be perswaded, that we take all Grace from man, and doe place it only in the mind of God, like Platoes Idea. But either you know not what you talke of in this place, and that you are ignorant of this Philosophie, or els you suffer not our opinion, being infolded in your slanders, to bee manifest. For wee make grace to bee twofold (that I may omit many distinctions) wherein wee doe not disallow the Philosophie of your Schoole men. For either Grace declareth the free goodwill and clemencie of God toward vs, or else it ⟨p. 224⟩signifieth those gifts, which flow out of that mercy of God to vs. That they commonly call, Grace making acceptable; and this, Grace freely giuen. Now for thatx goodwill and fauour whereby the Lord embraceth vs in Christ, and forgiueth vs our sinnes, and receiueth vs into fauour; we place it in God: but the effects of this Grace are in vs: which effects are these, that we do by the holy Ghost perceiue that wee are ⟨p. 225⟩loued of God, that we beleeue in God, and repose al hope of saluation in that mercy of God. We do not therefore take away all grace from man, and place it only in Gods fauour: but that first grace, wherby he hath reconciled vs to himselfe in Christ, and wherin our saluation is contained, that alone wee place in God; which being felt by vs, faith, hope, and charity and other vertues do follow it, which are ours, and resident in vs. But we deny that position of yours of infused grace, whereby you defend, that the grace whereby we are iustified, is a certaine habite situate in our minds within: and we acknowledge no other iustifyingy grace, but the great and free mercy of God, whereby hee did elect and predestinate vs in Christ before all eternitie vnto life euerlasting, and hath called vs in time and iustified vs.z
xDVR. I know well your doctrine of imputative justice, than which I know not whether any man can devise one thing more against the Scriptures. WHIT. pag. 582. Thus you speak, like a Jesuit: but what is there that the Scripture doth more celebrate than imputative justice? Rom. 4.3.4.5.6. is a most clear text for it. But what? know you not that our sins were imputed to Christ? and why then may not Christs righteousness be imputed to us in l•ke manner? Think you that Christ had our sins really infused into him? I suppose, you will never say so: seeing then in the one part you are compelled against your will to confess an imputation, why do you not also grant it in the other, specially seeing the Apostle himself propoundeth us this Antithesis, 2. Cor. 5.21. Christ was made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him? Therefore we are so made righteousness in Christ, as he was made sin for us, which must necessarily be understood of imputation. And ve••ly whereas our injustice or iniquity is a debt, and Christ hath payed it, then must it of necessity follow, that, that payment is ours no otherwise then only by imputation. Again, I pray you, what can be imagined more absurd, then that the merit• of Saints should be imputed unto us, and Christ his righteousness cannot be? for they who buy indulgences with money, do not doubt but to reap much fruit from the merits of others. It then the merits of Saints, as you think, can make them more just, in whom they are not inherent, what an impious and absurd thing were it to give less power of imputation to the merits and righteousness of Christ? DVR. Charity i• the end of the Law. Rom. 13. For he that loveth his brother hath fulfilled the Law. So that if charity be truly in us, we have true justice: and well said Augustine, Charity begun, is justice begun; charity increased, is justice increased; great charity is great justice; perfect charity is perfect justice. WHIT. pag. 583. All is true you say touching charity. Love your neighbour as the law requireth, and you have fulfilled the second Fable: but this you cannot do; therefore be not brag in the opinion of your charity, which if it were as great as ever any man had, yet it should be far short of that the Law requireth, neither can it make you just. As for Augustine we confess as much as he saith: but this is not the justice which freeth us from the wrath of God, for that never increaseth or groweth, but is ever most absolute and perfect, that is Christ his obedience imputed unto us by faith. Of charity August. Epist. 29. writeth thus. As long as charity may be increased, that verily which is less, is faulty: by that which is faulty, there is none just upon earth.DVR. I know vvell your doctrine of imputatiue iustice, than vvhich I know not whether any man can deuise one thing more against the Scriptures. WHIT. pag. 582. Thus you speake, like a Iesuite: but vvhat is there that the Scripture doth more celebrate than imputatiue iustice? Rom. 4.3.4.5.6. is a most cleere text for it. But what? know you not that our sins were imputed to Christ? and why then may not Christs righteousnes be imputed to vs in l•ke manner? Thinke you that Christ had our sinnes really infused into him? I suppose, you will neuer say so: seeing then in the one part you are compelled against your will to confesse an imputation, why do you not also grant it in the other, specially seeing the Apostle himselfe propoundeth vs this Antithesis, 2. Cor. 5.21. Christ vvas made sinne for vs, that we might be made the righteousnes of God in him? Therefore we are so made righteousnes in Christ, as he was made sinne for vs, which must necessarily bee vnderstood of imputation. And ve••ly whereas our iniustice or iniquitie is a debt, and Christ hath payed it, then must it of necessity follow, that, that payment is ours no otherwise then only by imputation. Againe, I pray you, what can bee imagined more absurde, then that the merit• of Saints should be imputed vnto vs, and Christ his righteousnes cannot bee? for they who buy indulgences with money, doe not doubt but to reape much fruit from the merits of others. It then the merits of Saints, as you thinke, can make them more iust, in whom they are not inherent, what an impious and absurd thing were it to giue lesse power of imputation to the merits and righteousnes of Christ? DVR. Charity i• the end of the Law. Rom. 13. For he that loueth his brother hath fulfilled the Lavv. So that if charity be truly in vs, vve haue true iustice: and vvell said Augustine, Charitie begun, is iustice begun; charitie encreased, is iustice encreased; great charity is great iustice; perfect charitie is perfect iustice. WHIT. pag. 583. All is true you say touching charitie. Loue your neighbour as the law requireth, and you haue fulfilled the second Fable: but this you cannot doe; therefore be not brag in the opinion of your charitie, which if it were as great as euer any man had, yet it should be farre short of that the Law requireth, neither can it make you iust. As for Augustine wee confesse as much as hee saith: but this is not the iustice which fre•th vs from the wrath of God, for that neuer increaseth or groweth, but is euer most absolute and perfect, that is Christ his obedience imputed vnto vs by faith. Of charitie August. Epist. 29. writeth thus. As long as charity may be encreased, that verily vvhich is lesse, is faulty: by that vvhich is faulty, there is none iust vpon earth.
yDVR. Why do you not then freely confess that you do place all grace only in the favour of God without us, which favour doth neither amend the wicked, nor purge, nor illuminate, nor enrich them, but only dissemble their old remaining & stinking channel, God winking at it? WHIT. pag. 584. You cease not to trouble us with your ignorance: for doth it follow that we remove all grace from us, because we place justifying grace, which is the mercy of God in Christ, not in us, but in God only? for beside this grace, there is another grace communicated to all the Saints, whereby their souls •re purged and renewed. This consisteth in faith, and in the fruits of faith, which they commonly call Grace infused: therefore that channel of sin doth remain not within them, that have attained true righteousness, as you slander us to teach; but by the power of the holy Ghost it is daily purged out; yet so, that as long as we live there remain some relics of sin & old Adam. For if that channel were so purged, that no blots of sin did remain in us; neither would S. Paul complain of the law of his members, and the body of death, Rom. 7.23.24. Neither should we need the renewing of the spirit, 2. Cor. 4.16.DVR. Why do you not then freely confesse that you doe place all grace only in the fauour of God vvithout vs, vvhich fauour doth neither amend the wicked, nor purge, nor illuminate, nor enrich them, but only dissemble their old remaining & stinking chanell, God winking at it? WHIT. pag. 584. You cease not to trouble vs with your ignorance: for doth it follow that wee remoue all grace from vs, because wee place iustifying grace, which is the mercy of God in Christ, not in vs, but in God only? for beside this grace, there is another grace communicated to all the Saints, wherby their soules •re purged and renewed. This consisteth in faith, and in the fruits of faith, which they cōmonly cal Grace infused: therfore that chanell of sin doth remaine not within them, that haue attained true righteousnes, as you slander vs to teach; but by the power of the holy Ghost it is daily purged out; yet so, that as lōg as we liue there remaine some reliques of sin & old Adam. For if that chanel were so purged, that no blots of sinne did remaine in vs; neither would S. Paul complaine of the law of his members, and the body of death, Rom. 7.23.24. Neither should wee neede the renuing of the spirit, 2. Cor. 4.16.
zDVR. But what place of Scripture doth distinguish justification from sanctification? S. Paul doth not, 1. Cor. 6.11. Rom. 6.13. That also is a strange thing, that faith should justify us and not sanctify us: but more strange that Christ should impute his righteousness to us, that we may be just, and yet not holy and sanctified. WHIT. pag 586. Who can read the Scripture, specially the Epistle to the Romans, and not find these two distinguished? for in the first part of it he treateth of justification, in the latter of sanctification; what is more manifest then that he writeth, Rom 8.30. whom he hath called, those he hath justified; whom he hath justisted, those he hath glorified. Now this glorification signifieth the glorious renovation, which is begun here, and perfected in another life, as your Thomas upon this place hath observed. Again, 1. Cor. 1.30. Is not here justification and sanctification distinguished? justification and sanctification are inseparable, yet must they be distinguished: which because you do not, you place justification in sanctification Your place out of the Epistle to the Corinthians, doth plainly distinguish them. Your second place showeth that a kind of justification is in sanctification: but it is not that perpect justice, by which we are justified before God, but only an imperfect one. As for your wonders and strange things, they come from your ignorance: for we have never separated these two, but affirm that he who is by faith partaker of Christ his righteousness, must needs have the old man crucified, and the body of sin destroyed in him, that he may no longer serve sin.DVR. But vvhat place of Scripture doth distinguish iustification from sanctification? S. Paul doth not, 1. Cor. 6.11. Rom. 6.13. That also is a strange thing, that faith should iustifie vs and not sanctifie vs: but more strange that Christ should impute his righteousnes to vs, that vve may be iust, and yet not holy and sanctified. WHIT. pag 586. Who can reade the Scripture, specially the Epistle to the Romanes, and not find these two distinguished? for in the first part of it he treateth of iustification, in the latter of sanctification; vvhat is more manifest then that he vvriteth, Rom 8.30. vvhom he hath called, those hee hath iustified; vvhom hee hath iustisted, those hee hath glorified. Now this glorification signifieth the glorious renouation, which is begun heere, and perfected in another life, as your Thomas vpon this place hath obserued. Againe,
For grace infused, wherein regeneration and sanctification consisteth, and which the Scriptures call the new man, ⟨p. 226⟩is not strong enough to justify us,a because it never satisfieth the law of God in this life, and ought every day to be restored, and aspire to greater perfection. For so Paul saith,2 Although our outward man perish, yet our inward man is renewed daily: which place Augustine hath very often used in this cause. You see therefore both what grace we place in God, and what we confess to be infused into our hearts. For as for that you say we bark out, that grace is not strong enough for the resisting of sin, therein you go about thorough our sides to wound Paul himself, upon whom this your reproach reboundeth.3 For though he were endued with infused grace, as much as any other, yet he denieth that he could attain, to perfect that which is good:b for that he did not the good which he would, but the evil that he would not: and that when he desired to do good, evil was present with him: finally that the law of his members doth ⟨p. 227⟩so rebel against the law of his mind, that it maketh him captive to the law of sin. Hence you may know how great strength sin hath, which even the Apostle himself, albeit he were endued with singular grace, could not so fully resist, but that sometimes he was both overcome of it, and bound up in it, as Augustine speaketh. If you doubt, Campians, whether the Apostle spake this of himself, I had rather you should take advise of Augustine, 5than of the Masters of Trent, seeing they be very bad interpreters of the Apostle. What should I remember to you David, and the rest of the Fathers, who have taught by their examples, that it is not easy to resist sin? but herein you are like your self, in that you say, that Christ is no otherwise said by us to b• full of grace and truth, but th••, that the Father did very much favour him. I pray you Campian, whence could you gather this? Do we not say that Christ was full of grace so; that from his ⟨p. 228⟩fullness we all receive grace: who of us did ever deny that there was very great and infinite grace in Christ. For they that say that Christ was so full of grace, that all men did declare that he was worthy of the unspeakable favour both of God and men, they do not only hold, that Christ was no otherwise full of grace, but herein that God did very much favour him;
For grace infused, wherein regeneration and sanctification consisteth, and which the Scriptures call the new man, ⟨p. 226⟩is not strong enough to iustifie vs,a because it neuer satisfieth the law of God in this life, and ought euery day to be restored, and aspire to greater perfection. For so Paul saith,2 Although our outward man perish, yet our inward man is renewed daily: which place Augustine hath very often vsed in this cause. You see therfore both what grace we place in God, and what we confesse to be infused into our hearts. For as for that you say wee barke out, that grace is not strong enough for the resisting of sinne, therein you goe about thorough our sides to wound Paul himself, vppon whō this your reproch reboundeth.3 For though he were indued with infused grace, as much as any other, yet he denieth that he could attaine, to perfect that which is good:b for that he did not the good which he would, but the euill that he would not: and that when he desired to do good, euill was present with him: finally that the law of his members doth ⟨p. 227⟩so rebell against the law of his mind, that it maketh him captiue to the law of sin. Hence you may know how great strength sinne hath, which euen the Apostle himselfe, albeit hee were indued with singular grace, could not so fully resist, but that sometimes he was both ouercome of it, and bound vp in it, as Augustine speaketh. If you doubt, Campians, whether the Apostle spake this of himselfe, I had rather you should take aduise of Augustine, 5than of the Masters of Trent, seeing they be very bad interpreters of the Apostle. What should I remember to you Dauid, and the rest of the Fathers, who haue taught by their examples, that it is not easie to resist sinne? but herein you are like your selfe, in that you say, that Christ is no otherwise said by vs to b• full of grace and truth, but th••, that the Father did very much fauour him. I pray you Campian, whence could you gather this? Do we not say that Christ was full of grace so; that from his ⟨p. 228⟩
aDVR. Grace infused and our inherent righteousness, though it be not perfect, yet it is true justice, and doth justify us. WHIT. pag. 58•. By this you overthrow your doctrine of justification: for that justice which doth reconcile us to God ought to be most perfect, that such as neither the law nor God himself can require a more perfect. That which is not perfect, is in it kind corrupt. If then •n imperfect justice can please God, then a corrupt thing will please him, and so should he not be perfectly just: but being most just, that only pleaseth him, which is according to the prescription of the law, most perfect. Luk. 10.27.28. Levit. 18.5.DVR. Grace infused and our inherent righteousnes, though it be not perfect, yet it is true iustice, and doth iustifie vs. WHIT. pag. 58•. By this you ouerthrow your doctrine of iustification: for that iustice which doth reconcile vs to God ought to be most perfect, that such as neither the law nor God himselfe can require a more perfect. That which is not perfect, is in it kind corrupt. If then •n imperfect iustice can please God, then a corrupt thing will please him, and so should he not be perfectly iust: but being most iust, that only pleaseth him, which is according to the prescription of the law, most perfect. Luk. 10.27.28. Leuit. 18.5.
bDVR. S. Paul saith only, that he was assayed and tempted by those motions; but seeing it is not sin, where the consent of the vvill is not, be saith, it was not he that did it, but the flesh, for he doubted not but grace was sufficient for him, whereby be might overcome all these, seeing he had the word of Christ for it. 2. Cor. 12.9. And he shevoeth that by this grace we may overcome our corruptions,
but also they do set out Christs grace to have bin more abundant. For they do confess,1 both that the grace of the spirit was plentiful in Christ without measure, and also they hold that there did an outward grace so shine forth in Christ, that all did love him and did perceive that he was beloved of God, this doth Brentius and Bucer, and all our Divines acknowledge.
but also they doe set out Christs grace to haue bin more abundant. For they doe confesse,1 both that the grace of the spirit was plentiful in Christ without measure, and also they hold that there did an outward grace so shine forth in Christ, that all did loue him and did perceiue that he was beloued of God, this doth Brentius and Bucer, and all our Diuines acknowledge.
What thing therefore (say you) is Justice? 1you make answer to your self, a Relation. If you commence an action against us about Aristotle's Predicaments, certainly we fear not, but we shall have a Philosopher gentle enough in this cause. For though Justice bec a Relation, yet Philosophy will not be cashiered: but that it is a quality you can never prove, either out of the Predicaments, or out of the chiefest Philosophy. But your Theological virtues, faith, hope, and charity, had never any injury offered to them by us: indeed they be so handled by you, that you seem to take them not for Theological, but for Philosophical ⟨p. 229⟩virtues. But the cause that maketh us not to hold, that our righteousness is compounded of these virtues, as you would have it, is this, because they are never so perfect in this life, as throughly to satisfy the law of God: now the law must be satisfied or else we cannot be just. For the Lord doth allow no other righteousness, but the very same which is described in the law, which whosoever cannot attain, are pronounced guilty of eternal death. Therefore if we will be righteous and saved, and free from that horrible curse, such a righteousness must be sought out, than which the law cannot require a more absolute. And where shall we find this? Is it in our virtues, in our faith, in our charity? But these are weak many ways, and want that integrity which the law requireth, & whereunto it propoundeth righteousness. For faith is but begun, & we are always to pray that it may be increased in us. Now if faith be weak,3 other virtues which spring from faith, cannot be perfect. But righteousness must be of that kind, as that nothing at all may be added thereunto. From hence it followeth, that righteousness is not compounded of our virtues, as you unfitly speak, but it must be fetched elsewhere. Seeing therefore we had no such virtue, as might obtain righteousness for us with the Lord, Christ was given us by the Lord, who performed perfect obedience to the law, that by his obedience we might be made righteous. For this obedience of Christ imputed to us, and apprehended by faith,4 is that righteousness of ours, which you enquire after, not heaped up with our virtues, as you would have it, but place in Christ, who is made unto us of God, 5wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.
What thing therfore (say you) is Iustice? 1you make answere to your selfe, a Relation. If you commence an action against vs about Aristotles Predicaments, certainly we feare not, but we shall haue a Philosopher gentle enough in this cause. For though Iustice bec a Relation, yet Philosophie will not be cashierd: but that it is a quality you can neuer proue, either out of the Predicaments, or out of the chiefest Philosophie. But your Theologicall vertues, faith, hope, and charity, had neuer any iniurie offred to them by vs: indeed they be so handled by you, that you seeme to take them not for Theologicall, but for Philosophicall ⟨p. 229⟩vertues. But the cause that maketh vs not to hold, that our righteousnes is compounded of these vertues, as you would haue it, is this, because they are neuer so perfect in this life, as throughlie to satisfie the law of God: now the law must be satisfied or else we cannot be iust. For the Lord doth allow no other righteousnes, but the very same which is described in the law, which whosoeuer cannot attaine, are pronounced guilty of eternall death. Therfore if we will be righteous and saued, and free from that horrible curse, such a righteousnesse must bee sought out, than which the law cannot require a more absolute. And where shall we find this? Is it in our vertues, in our faith, in our charitie? But these are weake many waies, and want that integrity which the law requireth, & wherunto it propoundeth righteousnes. For faith is but begun, & we are alwaies to pray that it may bee increased in vs. Now if faith be weak,3 other vertues which spring from faith, cannot be perfect. But righteousnesse must be of that kind, as that nothing at all may be added thereunto. From hence it followeth, that righteousnesse is not compounded of our vertues, as you vnfitly speake, but it must be fetcht elsewhere. Seeing therefore wee had no such vertue, as might obtaine righteousnesse for vs with the Lord, Christ was giuen vs by the Lord, who performed perfect obedience to the law, that by his obedience we might be made righteous. For this obedience of Christ imputed to vs, and apprehended by faith,4 is that righteousnes of ours, which you enquire after, not heaped vp with our vertues, as you would haue it, but place in Christ, who is made vnto vs of God, 5wisedome, righteousnesse, sanctification, and redemption.
1Of Justice.Of Iustice.
cDVR. That which is not at all cannot be a real Relation. WHIT. pag. 600. But Christs righteousness is not, not at all. For Christ performed all things which the Law required, therefore was endued with the quality of perfect justice: but that reason which persuadeth us, to confess, that this righteousness of the Law in Christ was a quality, the same compelleth us to think that this righteousness is not a quality inherent in us; for that we never in our own person obeyed the Law. Now what doth let, that that righteousness in Christ cannot be made ours by relation and imputation? for common sense might have taught you this, if a man do pay money in your name, this payment is yours by imputation. If you ask, how that is yours, which is not inherent in you; I say again, which thing the Apostle doth so oft press, it is yours by imputation. Now rub up your Philosophy, if you can, to prove that nothing is made ours by imputation.DVR. That vvhich is not at all cannot bee a reall Relation. WHIT. pag. 600. But Christs righteousnesse is not, not at all. For Christ performed all things vvhich the Lavv required, therefore vvas indued vvith the qualitie of perfect iustice: but that reason which perswadeth vs, to confesse, that this righteousnesse of the Law in Christ was a quality, the same compelleth vs to thinke that this righteousnesse is not a quality inherent in vs; for that vvee neuer in our owne person obeyed the Lavv. Novv vvhat doth let, that that righteousnesse in Christ cannot bee made ours by relation and imputation? for common sense might haue taught you this, if a man do pay money in your name, this payment is yours by imputation. If you aske, how that is yours, vvhich is not inherent in you; I say againe, which thing the Apostle doth so oft presse, it is yours by imputation. Now rub vp your Philosophie, if you can, to proue that nothing is made ours by imputation.
And this is ourd righteousness, even ⟨p. 230⟩Christe himself, whosef righteousness and innocency being ascribed unto us, doth bring assured remission of sins, and true righteousness. This the Divines call the first justice, after which followeth another, compounded of these virtues of yours. For with that remission of sins, which dependeth on Christs obedience, faith, and hope, & charity are joined, which make us just also after a sort, but inchoatively not perfectly.
And this is ourd righteousnes, euen ⟨p. 230⟩Christe himselfe, whosef righteousnes and innocencie being ascribed vnto vs, doth bring assured remission of sinnes, and true righteousnes. This the Diuines cal the first iustice, after which followeth another, compounded of these vertues of yours. For with that remission of sinnes, which dependeth on Christs obedience, faith, and hope, & charity are ioyned, which make vs iust also after a sort, but inchoatiuely not perfectly.
dDVR. The Scripture plainly witnesseth, that as we are made sinners by Adam, so we are made just by Christ. Rom. 5. WHIT. pag. 602. You understand not the Apostle. For though we be just in Christ, as we were sinners in Adam, yet not after the same manner. In Adam we sinned, and had his sin by propagation derived to us: but the justice of Christ, thought it was communicated unto us by imputation, ye […] •as it not so derived unto us. The Apostle would only teach and say this, as Adam was the author of sin, so Christ was the author of righteousness.DVR. The Scripture plainly witnesseth, that as vve are made sinners by Adam, so vve are made iust by Christ. Rom. 5. WHIT. pag. 602. You vnderstand not the Apostle. For though we bee iust in Christ, as we were sinners in Adam, yet not after the same manner. In Adam we sinned, and had his sinne by propagation deriued to vs: but the iustice of Christ, thought it was communicated vnto vs by imputation, ye 〈…〉•as it not so deriued vnto vs. The Apostle would only teach and say this, as Adam was the author of sin, so Christ was the author of righteousnesse.
eDVR. Answer me I pray you, why the Apostles and Christ do so oft exhort us to the obedience of the law? and never bid us apprehend the righteousness of Christ by faith? as Luk. 10. Matth. 25. WHIT. pag. 603. Christ and his Apostles do exhort us to the obedience of the law, not to the end we may deserve everlasting life by our works, but because it is our duty to walk in that race of piety wherein we are placed, that we walking in those good works, and insisting in that way which the Lord hath propounded to us, may come at length to that most happy mark For albeit we never come to a mark unless we go the right way, yet the way is not the cause of the mark. Now whereas you say that we are no where commanded to apprehend Christ righteousness by faith, you bewray your miserable ignorance. Peruse therefore better these famous places for proof of that the Scriptures do command us this. Rom. 4.5. Rom. 5.19. Rom. 1.17. Gal. 2.16. Gal. 3.14. Jon. 3 18. Joh. 5.24. Act. 10.43. As for the cause for which Christ in Matth. 25. saith he vvill make mention of works in the day of judgement, it is for that as James (chap. 2.18.) saith, works do make show & proof of faith. But in that very place vers. 34. before Christ mentioneth those works of the Saints, he toucheth the true and proper causes of salvation. 1. Gods adoption in Christ [Greek or Hebrew] possess by the right of inheritance. For that which one possesseth by the right of inheritance, he doth not deserve it by his merits. 2. The eternal election of God, when he saith that it is a kingdom prepared for them from the foundations of the world. Now if your opinion be this, that God did prepare them this kingdom, because he did foresee their great good works, your own Thomas is an adversary against you. Thom de verit. quast. 6. art. 2. & Thom. 1. part quaest. 23. art 1.DVR. Answere me I pray you, why the Apostles and Christ do so oft exhort vs to the obedience of the law? and neuer bid vs apprehend the righteousnes of Christ by faith? as Luk. 10.
fDVR. Christ is called by S. Paul our righteousness: so in the same place he saith, that he is our wisdom, and our sanctification. WHIT pag. 609. That wisdom, and righteousness, & sanctification, which S. Paul affirmeth Christ to be made unto us, are not resident in us as qualities, nor are they otherwise ours, than as we do embrace and possess whole Christ by faith.DVR. Christ is called by S. Paul our righteousnes: so in the same place hee saith, that he is our vvisdome, and our sanctification. WHIT pag. 609. That vvisdome, and righteousnes, & sanctification, vvhich S. Paul affirmeth Christ to be made vnto vs, are not resi•ent in vs as qualities, nor are they othervvise ours, than as vve doe embrace and possesse vvhole Christ by faith.
I have declared to you in few words our opinion touching righteousness, sith you make inquiry, what it is. But your virtues cannot so clothe the soul round about, as that no naked thing may appear. For all our righteousnesses, are likeg filthy clouts,2⟨p. 231⟩and those not only defiled, but also torn and rent in many pieces.3 Christ himself must be put upon us, that we may be found in him, not having our ownh righteousness which is of the law, but that which is by the faith of Christ; namely the righteousness that is of God through faith. For God was in Christ and reconciled the world unto himself, not imputing their sins to them. With this clothing our souls must be clothed, that they may be beautified and gloriously adorned: neither are we ashamed of that word, upon which you play, when we say that our righteousness is a covering of the fault. For so doth the Prophet David pronounce him to be a blessed man,5 whose iniquities be forgiven, & whose sins are covered. And this pardon we apprehend only by faith: now this faith is not feigned, nor dead, nor separate from other virtues, nor void of good works, but it is of that nature, that it worketh by love. It is therefore faith alone, which justifieth, that is, which embraceth Christs obedience ⟨p. 232⟩wherein our righteousness consisteth; but yet this faith which justifieth, is never alone: for it is ever accompanied with hope, and charity, and doth not suffer it self to be disjoined from it. For as the heat alone of the fire doth set the wood on fire, and yet this heat is not alone, but continually joined with the light: so faith alone of it self doth justify, albeit it can never be quite alone.
I haue declared to you in few words our opinion touching righteousnes, sith you make inquiry, what it is. But your vertues cannot so cloath the soule round about, as that no naked thing may appeare. For all our righteousnesses, are likeg filthie clouts,2⟨p. 231⟩and those not only defiled, but also torne and rent in many peeces.3 Christ himselfe must be put vpon vs, that we may be found in him, not hauing our owneh righteousnes which is of the law, but that which is by the faith of Christ; namely the righteousnes that is of God through faith. For God was in Christ and reconciled the world vnto himselfe, not imputing their sinnes to them. With this cloathing our soules must be cloathed, that they may be beautified and gloriously adorned: neither are wee ashamed of that word, vpon which you play, when we say that our righteousnes is a couering of the fault. For so doth the Prophet Dauid pronoūce him to be a blessed man,5 whose iniquities be forgiuē, & whose sins are couered. And this pardon we apprehēd only by faith: now this faith is not feined, nor dead, nor separate from other vertues, nor void of good workes, but it is of that nature, that it worketh by loue. It is therefore faith alone, which iustifieth, that is, which embraceth Christs obedience ⟨p. 232⟩wherin our righteousnes consisteth; but yet this faith which iustifieth, is neuer alone: for it is euer accompanied with hope, and charity, and doth not suffer it selfe to be disioyned from it. For as the heate alone of the fire doth set the wood on fire, and yet this heate is not alone, but continually ioyned with the light: so faith alone of it self doth iustifie, albeit it can neuer be quite alone.
gDVR. Jf you speak of that justice, which we get to our selves without the help of Christ, you say truly: but if of that which Christ hath purchased for us by his blood, and poured into our harts, you do an intolerable juturie unto Christ. WHIT. pag 610. I speak of that righteousness which every regenerate man hath by the help of Christ. For do you think the Prophet wanted the help of Christ? yet he professeth his righteousness is impure and imperfect: if you think he did speak of their works which are not regenerate, you must deny that he was regenerate, who confesseth the imperfection of his works. Of this righteousness Beruard doth understand it, Serm. 5. de verbis Isay And all the godly have thus confessed of them clues. Psal. 130.3. Dan. 9.7. Ezra. 9.15. Job. 9.3.28. 1. Joh. 1.8. & 1. Joh. 2.7.DVR. Jf you speake of that iustice, vvhich vve get to our selues vvithout the helpe of Christ, you say truly: but if of that which Christ hath purchased for vs by his blood, and powred into our harts, you doe an intollerable iuturie vnto Christ. WHIT. pag 610. I speake of that righteousnes which euerie regenerate man hath by the help of Christ. For do you thinke the Prophet wanted the helpe of Christ? yet he professeth his righteousnes is impure and imperfect: if you thinke hee did speake of their workes which are not regenerate, you must deny that hee was regenerate, who confesseth the imperfection of his workes. Of this righteousnesse Beruard doth vnderstand it, Serm. 5. de verbis Isay And all the godly haue thus confessed of them clues. Psal. 130.3. Dan. 9.7. Ezra. 9.15. Iob. 9.3.28. 1. Ioh. 1.8. & 1. Ioh. 2.7.
Now seeing that all our righteousness and happiness, do consist in the pardon of sins, we also teach that this ought to be most certainly persuaded to us and known of us, so as our souls may rest therein as in a most safe and quiet haven. For being justified by faith, we have peace toward God, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Now what could this peace be, it we were always distracted with a doubtful hope & thoughts, and tossed as it were with waves hither and thither about our salvation? Albeit therefore our consciences are set upon oftentimes by many terrors, so as they cannot be so secure in this life, as if we did already enjoy the endless joy of heaven; yet we say that this faith ought to depend most certainly and strongly upon the promises of God, so as we may expel all doubting about the grace of God, our adoption, and salvation. For true faith cannot agree with unbelief. It is the property of this to distrust Gods promises, but the property of that is to overcome and drive away all doubting; as much as may be. But if faith be full of doubting, wherein doth it go beyond unbelief? let us believe the Apostle, who both knew very well, and hath described exactly the nature of true faith. He propoundeth Abraham unto un, in whom we may behold a most notable image of true faith. What did he? did he stagger? was he in suspense with himself? did he doubt? nay in him all things were contrary:1 he against hope did believe under hope: he was not weak in the faith: he did ⟨p. 233⟩not discourse against the promise of God through unbelief: he was strengthened in the faith: he was fully persuaded, that God which had promised, could perform it. And this faith was imputed to him for righteousness.2 This was Abraham's faith: shall ours be unlike it? but he is our Father, we his children, and children should be like their father. The conclusion is made now against you Campian, that by faith we arei made certain of our salvation, and that your variable and suspicious faith is liker to infidelity than to faith.4kBasil saith excellently: What is the property of faith? a full or certain persuasion void of all doubting. But what mean I to convince you by testimonies of the ancient, whom the very Catechism of Trent doth confute?6 The word belief (saith it) as the holy Scriptures teach, hath the force of most certain consent.
Now seeing that all our righteousnes and happines, do consist in the pardon of sinnes, we also teach that this ought to be most certainly perswaded to vs and knowne of vs, so as our soules may rest therin as in a most safe and quiet hauen. For being iustified by faith, wee haue peace toward God, through our Lord Iesus Christ. Now what could this peace be, it we were alwaies distracted with a doubtful hope & thoughts, and tossed as it were with waues hither and thither about our saluation? Albeit therefore our consciences are set vpon oftentimes by many terrors, so as they cannot be so secure in this life, as if wee did alreadie enioy the endlesse ioy of heauen; yet we say that this faith ought to depend most certainly and strongly vpon the promises of God, so as wee may expell all doubting about the grace of God, our adoption, and saluation. For true faith cannot agree with vnbeliefe. It is the propertie of this to distrust Gods promises, but the property of that is to ouercome and driue away all doubting; as much as may be. But if faith be full of doubting, wherein doth it go beyond vnbeliefe? let vs beleeue the Apostle, who both knew very well, and hath described exactly the nature of true faith. He propoundeth Abraham vnto vn, in whom wee may behold a most notable image of true faith. What did he? did he stagger? was hee in suspense with himselfe? did he doubt? nay in him al things were contrary:1 he against hope did beleeue vnder hope: he was not weake in the faith: hee did ⟨p. 233⟩not discourse against the promise of God through vnbeliefe: he was strengthned in the faith: hee was fully perswaded, that God which had promised, could performe it. And this faith was imputed to him for righteousnes.2 This was Abrahams faith: shal ours bee vnlike it? but he is our Father, wee his children, and children should bee like their father. The conclusion is made now against you Campian, that by faith wee arei made certaine of our saluation, and that your variable and suspicious faith is liker to infidelity than to faith.4kBasil saith excellently: What is the propertie of faith? a full or certaine perswasion void of all doubting. But what meane I to conuince you by testimonies of the auncient, whom the very Catechisme of Trent doth confute?6
iDVR. You can never show out of Gods word, that forgiveness of all sins is given to them, who apprehend the righteousness of Christ by saith. WHIT. pag. 618. This that you deny to be showed in the Scriptures, is most plainly taught in them, as Joh. 3.16. Act. 10.43. Act. 13.39. DVR. But we know not whether we be endued with true faith. WHIT. pag. 620. Indeed it cannot be denied, that many are deceived with a feigned faith: but they who are endued with true faith, they do know that they have true faith: so did Paul 2. Tim. 1.12. know for himself & in 2. Cor. 13.5. he biddeth other learn to know it. So a Christian may know that he hath true faith, & that by the spirit that he hath given us, as 1. Joh. 3.24.DVR. You can neuer shew out of Gods word, that forgiuenes of all sinnes is giuen to them, vvho apprehend the righteousnes of Christ by saith. WHIT. pag. 618. This that you deny to be shewed in the Scriptures, is most plainly taught in them, as Ioh. 3.16. Act. 10.43. Act. 13.39. DVR. But vve know not vvhether vve be endued vvith true faith. WHIT. pag. 620. Indeed it cannot be denied, that many are deceiued with a fained faith: but they who are indued vvith true faith, they do know that they haue true faith: so did Paul 2. Tim. 1.12. know for himself & in 2. Cor. 13.5. he biddeth other learne to know it. So a Christiā may know that he hath true faith, & that by the spirit that he hath giuen vs, as
Wherefore he believeth, to whom any thing is certain and assured without doubting. Now we ⟨p. 234⟩believe everlasting life, therefore it ought to be most certain & assured to us without any doubting. I require now nothing more, the Catechism of the Council of Trent, ratified by the authority of the Pope and Council, teacheth me that a man ought to be certain of his salvation.
Wherefore he beleeueth, to whom any thing is certaine and assured without doubting. Now we ⟨p. 234⟩beleeue euerlasting life, therefore it ought to be most certaine & assured to vs without any doubting. I require now nothing more, the Catechisme of the Councell of Trent, ratified by the authoritie of the Pope and Councell, teacheth me that a man ought to be certaine of his saluation.
But are you not yet quiet, but still question farther, for (say you) how can a man be sure lof his future perseverance? That may be certain, Campian, by faith, which if it be true cannot utterly decay.2 The Apostle termeth faith them ground of things that are hoped for, & the evidence of things that are not seen. Now how are those things extant which be hoped for, or demonstrated which are not seen, if faith be not perpetual? But they which are endued with this faith, they do now after a sort enjoy those good things, which are yet hoped for, & they do contemplate those things, which cannot be seen with mens ⟨p. 235⟩eyes. So that faith admits us being alive here, and as the Apostle saith,4 walking by faith and not by sight, into the very possession of heaven, so as because we aren certain that we shall one day be there, we seem now after a sort to live and converse in heaven. But all these things would be fading and light, if saith could not persevere. Thereforeo Paul had a most certain persuasion, that neither life nor death, nor things present, nor things to come, nor any other creature can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. 7But such as do not persevere, they may be separated: but these cannot be separated, therefore they persevere. And for this cause the pledge of our adoption, even the holy Ghost himself is given to us, who assureth us most certainly that we are the sons of God, so as now we do not doubt to call God Father.8 But how dare such a one call him Father, who thinketh that he may be sometime not his son? for the Saints may profess with the Apostle,9 we know that we shall be like him. Knowledge is certain, & consisteth on assured principles: to doubt is the property of opinion, not of knowledge. Hear Cyprian: 10Let such a man fear to die, who not being borne again of water and the spirit, is thrall to the fire. Let him fear to die, that thinketh not he hath his part in Christs Cross and Passion. 11Chrysostom upon these words of the Apostle, Into this grace wherein we stand, writeth thus: The grace of God hath no end, it ⟨p. 236⟩knoweth no full point, but it maketh progress unto greater. And anon after, saith he, we must be fully assured not only of things given, but also of things to be given as well as of things given already. And Augustine:
But are you not yet quiet, but stil question farther, for (say you) how can a man be sure lof his future perseuerance? That may be certaine, Campian, by faith, which if it be true cannot vtterly decay.2 The Apostle termeth faith them ground of things that are hoped for, & the euidence of things that are not seene. Now how are those things extant which bee hoped for, or demonstrated which are not seene, if faith bee not perpetuall? But they which are endued with this faith, they doe now after a sort enioy those good things, which are yet hoped for, & they do contemplate those things, which cannot be seene with mens ⟨p. 235⟩eies. So that faith admits vs being aliue here, and as the Apostle saith,4 walking by faith and not by sight, into the very possession of heauen, so as because vve aren certaine that wee shall one day bee there, wee seeme now after a sort to liue and conuerse in heauen. But all these things would be fading and light, if saith could not perseuere. Thereforeo Paul had a most certaine perswasion, that neither life nor death, nor things present, nor things to come, nor any other creature can seperate vs from the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus. 7But such as doe not perseuere, they may be separated: but these cannot bee separated, therefore they perseuere. And for this cause the pledge of our adoption, euen the holy Ghost himselfe is giuen to vs, who assureth vs most certainely that we are the sonnes of God, so as now we do not doubt to call God Father.8 But how dare such a one call him Father, who thinketh that he may be sometime not his sonne? for the Saints may professe with the Apostle,9 we know that we shall bee like him. Knowledge is certaine, & consisteth on assured principles: to doubt is the property of opinion, not of knowledge. Heare Cyprian:
lDVR. Who could ever be certain of his own perseverance to the end, without the peculiar revelation of God? WHIT. pag. 626. In this speech you cut in sunder the sinews of Gods everlasting decree. For seeing Gods predestination is certain and unchangeable, it doth cause our calling, justifying, and glorifying to be as certain as it self. For is it in your power to dissolve and break in sunder that golden chain of the Apostle? Rom. 8.30. and to whom can his own perseverance be doubtful, seeing God testifieth his perpetual good will towards us, as these scriptures fully teach. Jer. 32 40. Joh. 13. 1. Luc 22.32. Job. 17.20.21. Matth. 21.22. Rom. 8.9. Joh. 14.16. Joh. 10.28. Phil. 2.6. Rom. 11.29. 1. Joh. 3.9. Matth. 24.24.DVR. VVho could euer be certaine of his ovvne perseuerance to the end, vvithout the peculiar reuelatiō of God? WHIT. pag. 626. In this speech you cut in sunder the sinevves of Gods euerlasting decree. For seeing Gods predestination is certaine and vnchangeable, it doth cause our calling, iustifying, and glorifying to be as certaine as it selfe. For is it in your povver to dissolue and breake in sunder that golden chaine of the Apostle? Rom. 8.30. and to vvhom can his owne perseuerance be doubtfull, seeing God testifieth his perpetual good wil towards vs, as these scriptures fully teach. Ier. 32 40. Ioh. 13. 1. Luc 22.32. Iob. 17.20.21. Matth. 21.22.
1because therefore (saith he) the promise is firm not according to our merits, but according to his mercy, no man ought with fearfulness to preach (the kingdom of Christ in his Saints) whereof he ought not to doubt. But Augustine is wholly ours. For as you did lately conclude, that Augustine did allow free will, because he wrote three books of free will, so may I reason after the same manner, that Augustine did think of perseverance, as we do, because he wrote one book of the good of perseverance. To this I will join Bernard, whose golden words these be,2 My conscience is troubled, but it is not over troubled, because I will remember the wounds of the Lord. But I will allege no more testimonies. Faith is either perpetual, or else it is none at all: either it perseveres to the last breath, or else that which is esteemed for faith, is but some fancy.
1because therefore (saith he) the promise is firme not according to our merits, but according to his mercy, no man ought with fearefulnes to preach (the kingdome of Christ in his Saints) whereof he ought not to doubt. But Augustine is wholy ours. For as you did lately conclude, that Augustine did allow free will, because hee wrote three bookes of free will, so may I reason after the same manner, that Augustine did thinke of perseuerance, as we do, because he wrote one booke of the good of perseuerance. To this I will ioyne Bernard, whose golden words these be,2 My conscience is troubled, but it is not ouer troubled, because I will remember the wounds of the Lord. But I will alleadge no more testimonies. Faith is either perpetuall, or else it is none at all: either it perseuers to the last breath, ot else that which is esteemed for faith, is but some fancie.
As for that, that you allege touching Luther, who you say affirmeth, that a Christian though he will cannot lose his salvation, unless he will not believe, this Luther never affirmed, either in that book or any where else. For if you shall turn over all Luther's writings, which you have not saluted, nor I believe, so much as seen, yet you can find this sentence no where. The Fathers of Trent have condemned this proposition and worthily: for it is impious, and to be reckoned among the chiefest paradoxes. But whose soever it was, certainly it was not Luther's. But, say you, Luther wrote so in his book of the captivity of Babylon. That is false: yet he wrote some such thing. I will tell you what it is; and that in a word. Luther reproveth the Papists, for that they thought that the grace of Baptism is quite lost by sin, and ⟨p. 237⟩withal they brought in Penance a new Sacrament, which they term a second board, whereby the grace of Baptism might be recovered. Therefore he denieth that the power and grace of Baptism can so be lost by sins, but that it may be repaired by faith; which thing he proveth by many and mighty reasons. In that therefore Luther taught, that the grace of Baptism cannot be lost, unless one will not believe; and this the Fathers of Trent and our countryman Campian do so interpret, as if he had said, that which these men object, that a Christian though he will cannot leese his salvation, unless he will not believe. Why should I confute so unsavoury an imagination with more words?
As for that, that you alleage touching Luther, who you say affirmeth, that a Christian though he will cannot lose his saluation, vnlesse hee will not beleeue, this Luther neuer affirmed, either in that booke or any where els. For if you shall turne ouer all Luthers writings, which you haue not saluted, nor I beleeue, so much as seene, yet you can finde this sentence no where. The Fathers of Trent haue condemned this proposition and worthily: for it is impious, and to bee reckoned among the chiefest paradoxes. But whose soeuer it was, certainly it was not Luthers. But, say you, Luther wrote so in his booke of the captiuity of Babylon. That is false: yet he wrote some such thing. I will tell you what it is; and that in a word. Luther reproueth the Papists, for that they thought that the grace of Baptisme is quite lost by sinne, and ⟨p. 237⟩withall they brought in Penance a new Sacrament, which they terme a second boord, wherby the grace of Baptisme might be recouered. Therefore he denieth that the power and grace of Baptisme can so bee lost by sinnes, but that it may bee repaired by faith; which thing he proueth by many and mighty reasons. In that therefore Luther taught, that the grace of Baptisme cannot be lost, vnlesse one will not beleeue; and this the Fathers of Trent and our countriman Campian do so interprete, as if hee had said, that which these men obiect, that a Christian though he will cannot leese his saluation, vnlesse he will not beleeue. Why should I confute so vnsauoury an imagination with more words?
You make hast to the Sacraments. 1And I will pursue you as much hast as you make. Now here you cry out most pitifully, O blessed Christ, they have left never a Sacrament, not two, not one. Dare you appeal to Christ, whose Sacraments ye have banished with great reproach out of the Church, that ye might bring in certain impure Sacraments not worthy to be named? we retain those Sacraments which Christ hath commended to us: if there had been need of more, he would have left more. We have two Sacraments, Baptism, and the Lords Supper: these Christ did institute,p these the ancient Church acknowledge, and with these the later Church ought to have been contented. For that it is most evident, that for seven Sacraments, for so many you hold, that not a footstep of antiquity can be found. O blessed Christ, they ⟨p. 238⟩have seven Sacraments, & yet they have no Sacrament, because they have not thine. For those Sacraments which are not thine, are no Sacraments at all. Their bread, say you, is poison, and what is our wine? but the common people among you taste not of that at all: belike, lest they should think that you did drink to them of a poison. We do use that bread and that wine in the Lords Supper, which Christ himself commanded to use. That which he delivered, we have received: that which he did, we do: in the bread and wine we celebrate the remembrance of our Redeemer. If those were wholesome, ours cannot be deadly. Baptism (say you) although it be as yet among them true, notwithstanding in their judgement it is nothing. You your self confess that our Baptism is true• I take it for granted. But why is it true? because we baptize so, as Christ hath commanded us. We keep the law of Christ, we throw your, I know notq what, trash away; the like have we done in the other Sacrament, not have we departed a nails breadth from Christs precept. If ours be true Baptism, then is out ⟨p. 239⟩rEucharist true also. But in their judgement (say you) it is nothing. Why so? It is not the water of salvation, it is not the conduit of grace, it doth not derive the merits of Christ into ut; but only it is a signification of salvation. All these things are feigned & false. For we preach it to be the saving water, and as channel of grace, and we doubt not but it deriveth Christs merits into us.
You make hast to the Sacraments. 1And I will pursue you as much hast as you make. Now here you cry ont most pittifully, O blessed Christ, they haue left neuer a Sacrament, not two, not one. Dare you appeale to Christ, whose Sacraments yee haue banished with great reproch out of the Church, that ye might bring in certaine impure Sacraments not worthy to be named? we retaine those Sacraments which Christ hath commended to vs: if there had been need of more, he would haue left more. We haue two Sacraments, Baptisme, and the Lords Supper: these Christ did institute,p these the auncient Church acknowledge, and with these the later Church ought to haue been contented. For that it is most euident, that for seuen Sacraments, for so many you hold, that not a footstep of antiquity can be found. O blessed Christ, they ⟨p. 238⟩haue seuen Sacramēts, & yet they haue no Sacramēt, because they haue not thine. For those Sacraments which are not thine, are no Sacraments at all. Their bread, say you, is poison, and what is our wine? but the common people among you taste not of that at all: belike, lest they should thinke that you did drinke to them of a poison. Wee doe vse that bread and that wine in the Lords Supper, which Christ himselfe commanded to vse. That which hee deliuered, we haue receiued: that which he did, we do: in the bread and wine we celebrate the remembrance of our Redeemer. If those were wholesome, ours cannot bee deadly. Baptisme (say you) although it be as yet among them true, notwithstanding in their iudgement it is nothing. You your self cōfesse that our Baptisme is true• I take it for granted. But why is it true? because wee baptize so, as Christ hath commanded vs. We keepe the law of Christ, we throw your, I know notq what, trash away; the like haue we done in the other Sacrament, not haue wee departed a nailes bredth from Christs precept. If ours be true Baptisme, then is out ⟨p. 239⟩rEucharist true also. But in their iudgement (say you) it is nothing. Why so? It is not the water of saluation, it is not the conduit of grace, it doth not deriue the merits of Christ into vt; but only it is a signification of saluation. All these things are feined & false. For we preach it to be the sauing water, and as
1Of the Sacraments.
pDVR. Our seven Sacraments stand upon good ground and reason, & hath antiquity for them. WHIT. pag. 643. You should then produce some antiquity for the proof of them; but having none, why do you so brag of it. I wonder not at your silence, because I know that, that this number was never heard of before Hugo de Sancto Victore, and Peter Lombard brought them into the Church: and yet for them Lombard never gathered any testimony of ancient Fathers. Neither ever any Councell, before the Florentine Councell, did approve or establish this number. But your five bastard Sacraments, 1. Order. 2. Confirmation. 3. Extreme Unction. 4. Penance. 5. Marriage. I prove thus to be no true Sacraments of Christs Church. 1. In every Sacrament is necessarily required and element or visible matter. But that neither your Order, not Confirmation, nor Penance, nor Marriage have, by any warrant of Scripture. 2. Those which are the proper Sacraments of the Church Christ did institute. But Christ instituted not any one of those five for Sacraments. 3. Sacraments belong to all Christians, But your Order, and Marriage pertain to a few in comparison. 4. Seeing you faine that grace lieth hid in the Sacraments, and is by them transmitted unto men, prove us which parts of these Sacraments do contain the grace enclosed. What answer soever you make you will be taken napping. Therefore these five bastard Sacraments, are no true Sacraments of Christs Church.DVR. Our seuen Sacraments stand vpon good ground and reason, & hath antiquitie for them. WHIT. pag. 643. You should then produce some antiquitie for the proofe of them; but hauing none, why do you so brag of it. I wonder not at your silēce, because I know that, that this number was neuer heard of before Hugo de Sancto Victore, and Peter Lombard brought them into the Church: and yet for them Lombard neuer gathered any testimony of auncient Fathers. Neither euer any Councell, before the Florentine Councell, did approue or establish this number. But your fiue bastard Sacraments, 1. Order. 2. Confirmation. 3. Extreame Vnction. 4. Penance. 5. Marriage. I proue thus to be no true Sacramēts of Christs Church. 1. In euery Sacramēt is necessarily required and elemēt or visible matter. But that neither your Order, not Cōfirmation, nor Penance, nor Marriage haue, by any warrant of Scripture. 2. Those which are the proper Sacramēts of the Church Christ did institute. But Christ instituted not any one of those fiue for Sacraments. 3. Sacraments belong to all Christians, But your Order, and Marriage pertaine to a few in comparison. 4. Seeing you faine that grace lye•h hid in the Sacraments, and is by them transmitted vnto men, proue vs which parts of these Sacraments do containe the grace inclosed. What answere soeuer you make you will be taken napping. Therefore these fiue bastard Sacraments, are no true Sacraments of Christs Church.
For it doth not only signify salvation, but also it performeth & bringeth it indeed to them that use Baptism aright and holily. For in Baptism we receive forgiven▪ of our sins, we are accepted into the family of Christ, we are endowed with the holy Ghost, we are raised up to a most certain hope of everlasting life. Are these matters of nothing to you, Campian? shall this Baptism be nothing, wherein we obtain so many and so great good things? but what manner of thing is your Baptism: or what hath it more, which ours ought to have? hath it grace? or the merits of Christ? or salvation? Ours also hath these things; what then is wanting in it, why it should not be true both in ours and others judgement? I know your meaning. It conveyeth not grace by the work wrought. This indeed is a magical and pestilent device, that you should thinkt grace to be enclosed in the water it self, as it were in a pipe, which sheddeth it self forth into all men, though quite void ⟨p. 240⟩of faith. For what availeth the Sacrament without faith, but to his perdition who receiveth the Sacrament: that monster I do abhor and detest with mine whole hart. You add, therefore they have made no more reckoning of the Baptism of Christ, then of Johns, that is, a mere ceremony. I am not ignorant what the Fathers thought of the Baptism of John. But I heed what the Scriptures teacheth, not what they imagined. In them both there was theu same ceremony, the same doctrine, and the same grace. If there were any thing unlike in these things, I refuse not to confess, that the Baptism of John and Christ were divers. Now John joined repentance,3 which is the fruit of true regeneration, with his Baptism, and off•ed this Baptism for the remission of sins. If the Baptism of John wanted not repentance and remission of sins, I see not why it should be held so much different from the Baptism of Christ. And what is the cause,* why the Fathers demand, wherefore Christ, who needed no regeneration, did come to the Baptism of John, but because they judged that his Baptism had the power of regeneration?
For it doth not only signifie saluation, but also it performeth & bringeth it indeed to them that vse Baptisme aright and holily. For in Baptisme we receiue forgiuene▪ of our sinnes, we are accepted into the familie of Christ, we are endowed with the holy Ghost, we are raised vp to a most certaine hope of euerlasting life. Are these matters of nothing to you, Campian? shall this Baptisme be nothing, wherin we obteine so many and so great good things? but what manner of thing is your Baptisme: or what hath it more, which ours ought to haue? hath it grace? or the merits of Christ? or saluation? Ours also hath these things; what then is wanting in it, why it should not be true both in ours and others iudgement? I know your meaning. It conueigheth not grace by the worke wrought. This indeed is a magicall and pestilent deuice, that you should thinket grace to be inclosed in the water it selfe, as it were in a pipe, which sheadeth it self forth into all men, though quite void ⟨p. 240⟩of faith. For what auaileth the Sacrament without faith, but to his perdition who receiueth the Sacrament: that monster I doe abhorre and detest with mine whole hart. You adde, therfore they haue made no more reckoning of the Baptisme of Christ, then of Iohns, that is, a meere ceremonie. I am not ignorant what the Fathers thought of the Baptisme of Iohn. But I heed what the Scriptures teacheth, not what they imagined. In them both there was theu same ceremonie, the same doctrine, and the same grace. If there were any thing vnlike in these things, I refuse not to confesse, that the Baptisme of Iohn and Christ were diuers. Now Iohn ioyned repentance,3 which is the fruit of true regeneration, with his Baptisme, and off•ed this Baptisme for the remission of sinnes. If the Baptisme of Iohn wanted not repentance and remission of sinnes, I see not why it should bee held so much different from the Baptisme of Christ. And what is the cause,* why the Fathers demand, wherfore Christ, who needed no regeneration, did come to the Baptisme of Iohn, but because they iudged that his Baptisme had the power of regeneration?
tDVR. We think not so, but that it is in it, as in an instrument. And so hath Thomas taught. WHIT. pag. 664. Then you reject and condemn all your old Sophisters, who have taught that grace is included in the Sacrament, as health is in a medicine or salve. For as that doth cure the disease whether he believe or no that is sick, only if he take it: so the Sacrament doth give grace without any faith or good motion of the receiver, so he hath no mortal sin to hinder it.DVR. VVe thinke not so, but that it is in it, as in an instrument. And so hath Thomas taught. WHIT. pag. 664. Then you reiect and condemne all your old Sophisters, who haue taught that grace is included in the Sacrament, as health is in a medicine or salue. For as that doth cure the disease whether he beleeue or no that is sicke, only if he take it: so the Sacrament doth giue grace without any faith or good motion of the receiuer, so he hath no mortall sinne to hinder it.
uDVR. But Matth. 3.11. John baptised with water only, Christ with the Spirit. WHIT. pag. 669. Here is no comparison between the Baptism, but the persons: for not John only, but not Peter nor any Minister of the Gospel, can give the holy Ghost to those whom they do baptise. Men give but the outward sign, it is Christ who giveth the Spirit. DVR. Why were they Act. 19 4.5. baptised again whom John had baptised, if it be the same Baptism. WHIT. pag. 671. They were not rebaptized, as Ambr•se saith, de Spirit. Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 3. And the 5. vers. being S. Pauls words, they are to be understood not of those Ephesians, but of the people whom John baptised. As if S. Paul had said. John taught those who came to his Baptism to believe in Christ who was to come: and they when they heard it, were baptised in the name of the •ord Jesus. From this then can be gathered no difference of thes• two Baptisms.DVR. But Matth. 3.11. Iohn baptised with water only, Christ with the Spirit. WHIT. pag. 669. Here is no comparison betweene the Baptisme, but the persons: for not Iohn only, but not Peter nor any Minister of the Gospel, can giue the holy Ghost to those whom they doe baptise. Men giue but the outward signe, it is Christ who giueth the Spirit. DVR. VVhy vvere they Act. 19 4.5. baptised againe vvhom Iohn had baptised, if it be the same Baptisme. WHIT. pag. 671. They were not rebaptised, as Ambrse saith, de Spirit. Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 3. And the 5. vers. being S. Paule words, they are to be vnderstood not of those Ephesians, but of the people whom John baptised. As if S. Paul had said. John taught those who came to his Baptisme to beleeue in Christ who was to come: and they when they heard it, were baptised in the name of the ord Iesus. From this then can be gathered no differenc of thes tvvo Baptismes.
Concerning that which you annex: If you have it, it is well: if you want it, there is no hurt: believe, and ⟨p. 241⟩you shall be saved before you be baptised; we do not speak so loosely, as you imagine. For we will not have it to be in any ones choice, to be baptised if he will, and to leave it if he will not. Yet we do not think that Baptism is sox simply necessary to salvation, that he that is not entered by Baptism, must needs perish everlastingly. For the salvation of a Christian man consisteth in the mercy of God, which is not so tied & bound to any Sacraments,y as that he cannot save those, whom he will not have perish, without them. Where the opportunity of Baptism is not, Gods promise alone is abundantly sufficient of it self. But whosoever either neglecteth Baptism through heedlessness, or boldly contemneth it, him we condemn of very heinous sin. For he doth both diminish the Majesty of Christ, and also refuseth his own salvation. But he that committeth neither, shall not answer for the fault of another. Therefore very right was that judgement of Bernard, znot the want, but the contempt of Baptism is damnable.4
Concerning that which you annexe: If you haue it, it is well: if you want it, there is no hurt: beleeue, and ⟨p. 241⟩you shall be saued before you bee baptised; wee doe not speake so loosely, as you imagine. For wee will not haue it to be in any ones choice, to be baptised if hee will, and to leaue it if hee will not. Yet wee doe not thinke that Baptisme is sox simplie necessarie to saluation, that he that is not entred by Baptisme, must needs perish euerlastingly. For the saluation of a Christian man cōsisteth in the mercie of God, which is not so tyed & bound to any Sacraments,y as that he cannot saue those, whom he will not haue perish, without them. Where the opportunity of Baptisme is not, Gods promise alone is abundantly sufficient of it selfe. But whosoeuer either neglecteth Baptisme through heedlesnes, or boldly contemneth it, him we condemne of very hainous sin. For he doth both diminish the Maiestie of Christ, and also refuseth his owne saluation. But he that committeth neither, shal not answere for the fault of another. Therefore verie right was that iudgement of Bernard, znot the want, but the contempt of Baptisme is damnable.4
xDVR. What? If without Baptism infants may obtain eternal life, is it not your judgements, that it is no burt to them though they want Baptism? But Christ thought far • therwise. Joh. 3.5. WHIT. pag. 675. It is a wicked and batbarou• opinion to think that they who die before they can come to Baptism, are damned. For who will say, that the infants of the Jews, who died before the eight day did p• rish? And when in former ages they deferred Baptism till the hour of death, did they think it so absolute necessary? Will you say that an infant is not of the number of the elect, because God will that he die before Baptism? if you will, you shall be accounted bold, rash, and impious. As for the place of John. Christ doth not think that none can come into heaven, which wanteth the outward Baptism. The thief was with Christ in Paradise, and yet was unbaptized with the outward Baptism. But the truth is, by water Christ meaneth there the Spirit, as appeareth by conference of places. Matth. 3.11. As there fire, so here water signifieth the power of the Spirit: & Joh. 4.10.DVR. VVhat? If without Baptisme infants may obtaine eternall life, is it not your iudgements, that it is no burt to them though they want Baptisme? But Christ thought farre • therwise. Ioh. 3.5. WHIT. pag. 675. It is a wicked and batbarou• opinion to thinke that they who die before they can come to Baptisme, are damned. For who will say, that the infants of the Iewes, who died before the eight day did p• rish? And when in former ages they deferred Baptisme till the houre of death, did they think it so absolute necessary? Will you say that an infant is not of the nūber of the elect, because God wil that he die before Baptisme? if you will, you shall be accounted bold, rash, and impious. As for the place of Iohn. Christ doth not thinke that none can come into heauen, which wanteth the outward Baptisme. The theefe was with Christ in Paradise, and yet was vnbaptised with the outward Baptisme. But the truth is, by water Christ meaneth there the Spirit, as appeareth by conference of places. Matth. 3.11. As there fire, so here water signifieth the power of the Spirit: &
In the rest that follow, as being small matters, you do but trifle. For neither do you your self declare any thing of your own opinions, nor can you reprove any thing in ours. But I long to know, what you think of the faith of Infants. I suppose, you will grant that they have grace? For (say you) Baptism conferreth grace. But will you not yield that they have faith? I wish therefore you would teach me, to the end you may draw me wholly into your opinion, how there can be any grace more ancient than faith. But (say you) how can they believe, who do not yet understand whether they live or no? and do they therefore not live, because they understand not that they live? It is absurd. Wherefore if they live, although they do not understand they do so:a happily also they do believe, albeit they perceive not that they believe. That is hard (say you:) be it so. Nor do I speak these things, as if I were wholly of that mind, but to the end I may fish out your mind, which our University m•n doubtless make great account of. But let us hear Luther's medicine: It is better (saith he) to omit it, because except the Infant believe, he is washed ⟨p. 243⟩•e•er a whit. But this medicine came out of your shop, not out of Luther's. And indeed you have offered us many such like medicines, very unsavoury, and ill favouredly seasoned: so that all your confections seem to be corrupt. But Luther did never persuade that Baptism should be omitted; & he was always earnest on that part, that Baptism should be given to Infants: and therefore you are so much the more unjust in this place, in that you would mar Luther's opinion with your medley. For these things are so alleged by you, as if Luther said, it were better to omit Baptism. Therefore let us hear Luther himself, and let Campians medicine alone. And yet (saith he) we deny not that Infants are to be baptised, 2nor do we avow that they receive Baptism without faith: but we say, that at Baptism they do believe by the power of the Word. He addeth: Or otherwise there would be mere and intolerable lies, when the Baptizer demandeth of the Infant whether he do believe: as intending not to baptise, unless it be answered in the child stead, I believe. Wherefore doth the Minister ask whether he do believe, if i• be a certain thing that they do not believe, as Cocleus maintaineth? Then he concludeth thus:
In the rest that follow, as being small matters, you doe but trisle. For neither doe you your selfe declare any thing of your owne opinions, nor can you reproue any thing in ours. But I long to know, what you thinke of the faith of Infants. I suppose, you wil grant that they haue grace? For (say you) Baptisme conferreth grace. But will you not yeeld that they haue faith? I wish therefore you would teach me, to the end you may draw me wholy into your opinion, how there can be any grace more ancient than faith. But (say you) how can they beleeue, who doe not yet vnderstand whether they liue or no? and do they therfore not liue, because they vnderstand not that they liue? It is absurd. Wherefore if they liue, although they doe not vnderstand they do so:a happily also they doe beleeue, albeit they perceiue not that they beleeue. That is hard (say you:) bee it so. Nor doe I speake these things, as if I were wholy of that mind, but to the end I may fish out your mind, which our Vniuersity m•n doubtles make great account of. But let vs heare Luthers medicine: It is better (saith he) to omit it, because except the Infant beleeue, he is washed ⟨p. 243⟩•e•er a whit. But this medicine came out of your shop, not out of Luthers. And indeed you haue offred vs many such like medicines, very vnsauourie, and ill fauouredly seasoned: so that all your confections seeme to be corrupt. But Luther did neuer perswade that Baptisme should be omitted; & he was alwaies earnest on that part, that Baptisme should be giuen to Infants: and therefore you are so much the more vniust in this place, in that you would marre Luthers opinion with your medley. For these things are so alledged by you, as if Luther said, it were better to omit Baptisme. Therfore let vs heare Luther himself, and let Campians medicine alone. And yet (saith he) we deny not that Infants are to be baptised, 2nor do we anow that they receiue Baptisme without faith: but wee say, that at Baptisme they do beleeue by the power of the Word. He addeth: Or otherwise there would bee meere and intolerable lies, when the Baptiser demandeth of the Infant whether he do beleeue: as intending not to baptise, vnlesse it be answered in the child• stead, I beleeue. Wherfore doth the Minister aske whether he do beleeue, if i• be a certaine thing that they do not beleeue, as Cocleus maintaineth? Then he concludeth thus:
aDVR. But speak plainly; if Infants have no faith, your new Evangelical doctrine, teaching that the force of the Sacrament doth depend upon the faith of the receivers, must vanish. WHIT. pag. 681. I do no: think that Infants do believe, there being neither reason nor Scripture for it. And I answer that is not our doctrine you faine to be. We say, that to men of years without saith it is a Sacrament, but not a saving Sacrament: to children of believing patents, though they cannot for their years believe, yet it is a saving Sacrament, as Circumcision was to the Infants of the Jews. For we doubt not but the Spirit of God is powerful unto them after a hidden and wonderful manner. As in the examples of Jacob, Jeremiah, John Baptist, and others.DVR. But speake plainly; if Infants haue no faith, your nevv Euangelicall doctrine, teaching that the force of the Sacrament doth depend vpon the faith of the receiuers, must vanish. WHIT. pag. 681. I do no: thinke that Infants do beleeue, there being neither reason nor Scripture for it. And I answere that is not our doctrine you faine to bee. Wee say, that to men of yeares without saith it is a Sacrament, but not a sauing Sacrament: to children of beleeuing patents, though they cannot for their yeares beleeue, yet it is a sauing Sacrament, as Circumcision was to the Infants of the Iewes. For wee doubt not but the Spirit of God is powerfull vnto them after a hidden and vvonderfull manner. As in the examples of Iacob, Ieremie, Iohn Baptist, and others.
But we hold that Infants are not to be Baptised, •f it be true that they in Baptism do not believe. Luther then maintaineth and determineth, that little children do believe, and he reproveth the Papists, because they teach things contrary each to other, while they deny that an Infant hath faith and yet, to the end he may be baptised, they require faith of him. Who seeth not to what these things may be referred, so that he must needs be a most malicious man, who maketh Luther in these words a persuader of so wicked an opinion?
But we hold that Infants are not to be Baptised, •f it be true that they in Baptisme do not beleeue. Luther then maintaineth and determineth, that little children do beleeue, and he reproueth the Papists, because they teach things contrary each to other, while they deny that an Infant hath faith and yet, to the end he may be baptised, they require faith of him. Who seeth not to what these things may be referred, so that hee must needs bee a most malicious man, who maketh Luther in these words a perswader of so wicked an opinion?
. Is not heere iustification and sanctification distinguished? iustification and sanctification are inseparable, yet must they be distinguished: which because you do not, you place iustification in sanctification Your place out of the Epistle to the Corinthes, doth plainly distinguish them. Your second place sheweth that a kind of iustificatiō is in sanctification: but it is not that perpect iustice, by which we are iustified before God, but only an imperfect one. As for your wonde•s and strange things, they come from your ignorance: for we haue neuer sepa•ated these two, but affirme that he who is by faith partaker of Christ his righteou•nes, must needs haue the old man crucified, and the body of sinne destroyed in him, that he may no longer serue sinne.
fulnes we all receiue grace: who of vs did euer deny that there was very great and infinit grace in Christ. For they that say that Christ was so full of grace, that all men did declare that hee was worthy of the vnspeakeable fauour both of God and men, they doe not only hold, that Christ was no otherwise full of grace, but herein that God did very much fauour him;
. he •aith, he did that which he hated. Why did he hate it, unless it were worthy hatred? Now nothing is worthy hatred, but sin. And vers. 19. he addeth, he did the evil, which he would not. Then he sinned: for to be tempted with evil, is not to do that a man would not: but to be tempted and to overcome them, is to do that a man both should and would do. And vers. 23. he saith, he was led captive to the law of sin. How can he be a captive and not be overcome? Believe the Apostle then, and he could not resist sin always by all his grace. But you say his will did not give consent: be it so, yet those motions are sin against the tenth Commandment. For
. he showeth that he speaketh of concupiscence without consent. For lusts with consent, subduing the will, the Philosophers confessed to be sin. For the place you allege
. the sufficiency of Gods grace is but so much, that he should not be swallowed up of temptations. The godly fall often, but God lifteth them up again. For the other place,
. you are deceived by the corrupt Latin translation. For in the Greek it is, I thank God by Jesus Christ: you read it as if asking the question, who should deliver him from the body of death; he had answered himself; The grace of God by Jesus Christ, when he giveth thanks to God, as if he had said; Though this body of death be troublesome unto me, because it compelleth me to serve sin, yet I rest in that hope, which I have placed in Christ.
DVR. S. Paul saith only, that hee vvas assayed and tempted by those motions; but seeing it is not sinne, vvhere the consent of the vvill is not, bee saith, it vvas not hee that did it, but the flesh, for hee doubted not but grace vvas sufficient for him, vvhereby be might ouercome all these, seeing he had the vvord of Christ for it. 2. Cor. 12.9. And he shevoeth that by this grace vvee may ouercome our corruptions, Rom. 7.25. WHIT. pag. 594. But the Apostle sheweth that he was not only tempted by these, but ouercome. Rom. 7.15. he •aith, he did that vvhich he hated. Why did he hate it, vnlesse it were worthie hatred? Now nothing is worthy hatred, but sinne. And vers. 19. he addeth, hee did the euill, vvhich he vvould not. Then he sinned: for to be tempted with euill, is not to do that a man would not: but to be tempted and to ouercome them, is to do that a man both should and would do. And vers. 23. he saith, he was led captiue to the lavv of sinne. How can he be a captiue and not be ouercome? Beleeue the Apostle then, and he could not resist sinne alwaies by all his grace. But you say his will did not giue consent: bee it so, yet those motions are sinne against the tenth Commandement. For Rom. 7.7. he sheweth that he speaketh of concupiscence without consent. For lusts with consent, subduing the will, the Philosophers confessed to be sinne. For the place you alleage 2. Cor. 12.9. the sufficiencie of Gods grace is but so much, that hee should not bee swallowed vp of temptations. The godly fall often, but God lifteth them vp againe. For the other place, Rom. 7.25. you are deceiued by the corrupt Latin translation. For in the Greeke it is, I thanke God by Iesus Christ: you reade it as if asking the question, vvho should deliuer him from the body of death; he had answered himselfe; The grace of God by •esus Christ, when he giueth thankes to God, as if hee had said; Though this body of death be troublesome vnto me, because it compelleth me to serue sin, yet I rest in that hope, which I haue placed in Christ.
5August. de verb. Apost. Serm. 5 & alibi. Gal. 5.17.August. de verb. Apost. Serm. 5 & •libi. Gal. 5.17.
Matth. 25
. WHIT. pag. 603. Christ and his Apostles do exhort vs to the obedience of the law, not to the end wee may deserue euerlasting life by our workes, but because it is our duty to walke in that race of piety wherein vvee are placed, that vvee walking in those good workes, and insisting in that vvay vvhich the Lord hath propounded to vs, may come at length to that most happy mark For albeit we neuer come to a marke vnlesse we goe the right way, yet the way is not the cause of the marke. Novv vvhereas you say that we are no where commanded to apprehend Christ righteousnes by faith, you bewray your miserable ignorance. Peruse therefore better these famous places for proofe of that the Scriptures do commaund vs this.
. saith he vvill make mention of vvorkes in the day of iudgement, it is for that as Iames (chap. 2.18.) saith, works do make shevv & proofe of faith. But in that very place vers. 34. before Christ mentioneth those vvorkes of the Saints, he toucheth the true and proper causes of saluation. 1. Gods adoption in Christ 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 possesse by the right of inheritance. For that which one possesseth by the right of inheritance, hee doth not deserue it by his merits. 2. The eternall election of God, vvhen hee saith that it is a kingdome prepared for thē from the foūdations of the world. Novv if your opinion be this, that God did prepare them this kingdome, because he did foresee their great good vvorkes, your ovvne Thomas is an aduersarie against you. Thom de verit. quast. 6. art. 2. & Thom. 1. part quaest. 23. art 1.
hDVR. Saint Paul calleth the righteousness of the law, that which is gotten by the doctrine of the law without the help of Grace: And the justice of faith, not any apprehended by faith, but because they come unto it by faith. WHIT. pag. 613. In examining the place we shall see of what justice S. Paul speaketh: first he denieth that to be any part of justice, whatsoever he had gloriously done when he was a Pharisee; that though he was then according to the justice of the Law without reproof, & endued with many good qualities, yet he accounted all loffe for Christs sake. vers. 4.5.6.7. And lest any should think that he attributed any thing to his works oftener faith; he addeth that he rejecteth these also, neither ascribed his justification unto them. Adding in the 8. verse. that he accounted all things loss. Not the other, but these also I contemn: and upon this inferreth. vers. 9. Not having my own righteousness, which is of the law▪ but that which is through the faith of Christ. When then he excludeth all kind of works, he must needs understand the justice of Christ.DVR. Saint Paul calleth the righteousnes of the law, that which is gotten by the doctrine of the lavv without the helpe of Grace: And the iustice of faith, not any apprehended by faith, but because they come vnto it by faith. WHIT. pag. 613. In examining the place we shall see of what iustice S. Paul speaketh: first he denieth that to bee any part of iustice, whatsoeuer he had gloriously done when he was a Pharisie; that though he was then according to the iustice of the Law without reproofe, & indued with many good qualities, yet he accounted all loffe for Christs sake. vers. 4.5.6.7. And lest any should thinke that he attributed any thing to his workes ofter faith; he addeth that he reiecteth these also, neither ascribed his iustification vnto them. Adding in the 8. verse. that hee accounted all things losse. Not the other, but these also I contemne: and vpon this inferreth. vers. 9. Not hauing my owne righteousnes, which is of the law▪ but that which is through the faith of Christ. When then he excludeth all kind of workes, hee must needs vnderstand the iustice of Christ.
4Basil. in [Greek or Hebrew].Basil. in 〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
kDVR. That which you bring out of Basil and the Tridentime Catechism doth overthrow your self: & what certainty can a man have of his justification, when as S. Paul saith. 1. Cor. 4.4. I know nothing by my self, yet am I not thereby justified. And the like hath Job. cap. 9.15.20. WHIT pag. 622. If they attribute to faith a most certain persuasion without doubting, as they do, do they not confirm our doctrine, that a man may be certain of his salvation. For those temptations which come from the flesh, though they may shake it, yet they cannot overthrow it. As for S. Paul doth he deny himself to be justified, doth he doubt of his salvation? Read the end of the eight to the Romans, and you shall find him so certain of his justification and salvation, as that you Papists are glad to answer, that he had it by an extraordinary revelation of the spirit. And do you now make him doubting of his salvation? But you understand not Saint Paul in the place you allege: for he doth not not deny that he is justified; but he saith that thereby he is not justified, because he knoweth nothing by himself. Job also though he dare not trust to his own works and innocency, yet he showeth himself to be certain of his own salvation. Job 19.26.DVR. That which you bring out of Basil and the Tridentime Catechisme doth ouerthrow your selfe: & what certaintie can a man haue of his iustification, vvhen as S. Paul saith. 1. Cor. 4.4. I knovv nothing by my selfe, yet am I not thereby iustified. And the like hath Iob. cap. 9.15.20. WHIT pag. 622. If they attribute to faith a most certaine persvvasion without doubting, as they do, do they not cōfirme our doctrine, that a man may be certaine of his saluation. For those temptations which come frō the flesh, though they may shake it, yet they cannot ouerthrow it. As for S. Paul doth hee denie himself to be iustified, doth he doubt of his saluatiō? Reade the end of the eight to the Romans, and you shall find him so certaine of his iustification and saluation, as that you Papists are glad to ansvvere, that he had it by an extraordinary reuelation of the spirit. And do you novv make him doubting of his saluation? But you vnderstand not Saint Paul in the place you alleadge: for he doth not not deny that he is iustified; but he saith that thereby he is not iustified, because he knovveth nothing by himselfe. Iob also though he dare not trust to his owne workes and innocency, yet he shevveth himselfe to be certaine of his ovvne saluation. Iob 19.26.
Let such a man feare to die, who not being borne againe of water and the spirit, is thrall to the fire. Let him feare to die, that thinketh not hee hath his part in Christs Crosse and Passion.
Chrysostome vpon these words of the Apostle, Into this grace wherein we stand, writeth thus: The grace of God hath no end, it
⟨p. 236⟩
knoweth no full point, but it maketh progresse vnto greater. And anone after, saith he, we must be fully assured not only of things giuen, but also of things to be giuen as well as of things giuen alreadie. And Augustine:
mDVR. No man ever doubted but that all those things which we believe are most certain. But you ought to show that every ode ought to believe that he shall persevere in that faith to his end, Saint Paul she weth that certain had made shipwreck of faith. 1. Tim. 1.19. WHIT. pag. 627. The question is not whether things believed be certain or no: for that the Devils do certainly know; which is as much as you Papists do believe, by your own confession, and so you confess your selves to be void of true faith But the faith, the Apostle speaketh of, doth not only believe those things are true in themselves, but that they are partakers of them. Therefore he saith, it is the ground of things hoped for, because it enjoyeth those good things which are prepared for another life by a certain & an approved hopes and the evidence of things not seen, because it now beholdeth things that are hid from our eyes. The perseverance then of the faithful is so certain, that they may think they have the possession of those things which they shall receive in another world. Now the faith S. Paul speaketh of, is not a justifying faith, but only true and sound doctrine, of which Hym•naeus and Alexander had made shipwtacke.DVR. No man euer doubted but that all those things which vve beleeue are most certaine. But you ought to shevv that euery ode ought to beleeue that he shall perseuere in that faith to his end, Saint Paul she vveth that certaine had made shipvvracke of faith. 1. Tim. 1.19. WHIT. pag. 627. The question is not vvhether things beleeued be certaine or no: for that the Diuels do certainly knovv; vvhich is as much as you Papists doe beleeue, by your ovvne confession, and so you confesse your selues to bee void of true faith But the faith, the Apostle speaketh of, doth not only beleeue those things are true in themselues, but that they are partakers of them. Therefore he saith, it is the ground of things hoped for, because it enioyeth those good things vvhich are prepared for another life by a certaine & an approued hopes and the euidence of things not seene, because it novv beholdeth things that are hid from our eies. The perseuerance then of the faithfull is so certaine, that they may thinke they haue the possession of those things vvhich they shall receiue in another vvorld. Novv the faith S. Paul speaketh of, is not a iustifying faith, but only true and sound doctrine, of vvhich Hym•naeus and Alexander had made shipvvtacke.
nDVR. 1. Cor. 10. He that standeth let him take heed lest he fall. Phil. 2. work out your salvation which fear:the like. Heb. 4. WHIT. pag. 633. 1. You have falsified, 1. Cor. 10. for Pauls words are, he that thinketh he standeth let him take heed lest he fall. Wherein you go against even your own authentical Latin translation. Blush you not at this? 2. The very Saints themselves are diligently to be admonished, to fly carnal security, to be ware of Sathans assaults, and to be in continual care. And yet this hind•eth not, but that they are in the mean while most certain of their salvation. For although Paul (Act. 27) sailing, did not doubt a whit whether he should come safe to land, yet he let pass nothing, which it behooved a man careful of his safety, to care for and to do.DVR. 1. Cor. 10. He that standeth let him take heed lest he fall. Phil. 2. vvorke out your saluation vvhich feare:the like. Heb. 4. WHIT. pag. 633. 1. You haue falsified, 1. Cor. 10. for Paules vvords are, he that thinketh he standeth let him take heed lest hee fall. Wherein you go against euen your ovvne authenticall Latin translation. Blush you not at this? 2. The very Saints themselues are diligently to be admonished, to flie carnal securitie, to be ware of Sathans assaults, and to be in cōtinual care. And yet this hind•eth not, but that they are in the meane vvhile most certaine of their saluation. For although Paul (Act. 27) sayling, did not doubt a whit whether he should come safe to land, yet he let passe nothing, vvhich it behooued a man carefull of his safetie, to care for and to do.
oDVR Will you say that the Apostle speaketh in the person of all t•e elect. WHIT. pag. 629. The Apostle proveth it, speaking •n their person; what shall separate us (not me only) from the love of Christ. And again, I am persuaded that nothing shall separate us (not me only) from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. Therefore he speaketh of all those who are predestinated.DVR Will you say that the Apostle speaketh in the person of all t•e elect. WHIT. pag. 629. The Apostle proueth it, speaking •n their person; vvhat shall separate vs (not me only) from the loue of Christ. And againe, I am persvvaded that nothing shall separate vs (not me only) from the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus. Therefore he speaketh of all those vvho are predestinated.
chanell of grace, and we doubt not but it deriueth Christs merits into vs.
qDVR. What is that you call trash? which of the ancient Fathers have been. who have not made mention of our ceremonies. WHIT. pag. 658. Christ commanded nothing to the Church touching these trifles; & though we read often of Baptism in the word, & of many, yet there is no word touching any of these Shall we then think that the Church in later times hath known better, what ceremonies were fitter for the Sacrament then Christ and his Apostles? where did ever any of them use salt, spittle, candles, &c. in this Sacrament.DVR. What is that you call trash? vvhich of the auncient Fathers haue been. vvho haue not made mention of our ceremonies. WHIT. pag. 658. Christ cōmaunded nothing to the Church touching these trifles; & though we reade often of Baptisme in the word, & of many, yet there is no word touching any of these Shall we then thinke that the Church in later times hath knowne better, vvhat ceremonies vvere fitter for the Sacrament then Christ and his Apostles? vvhere did euer any of them vse salt, spittle, candles, &c. in this Sacrament.
rDVR. When bread and wine is your Eucharist (neither do you believe Christ gave any other thing in the Supper) we leave you your Eucharist also. WHIT. pag. 660. If we have true Baptism; why not the Eucharist? we follow Christs commandment in both. Further you falsely accuse us, who think bread & wine to be but one part of the Sacrament, as Ireneus and antiquity hath done; & Christ his body and blood the other. But you have no Eucharist at all, who profess you have neither bread nor wine.DVR. VVhen bread and vvine is your Eucharist (neither doe you beleeue Christ gaue any other thing in the Supper) vvee leaue you your Eucharist also. WHIT. pag. 660. If wee haue true Baptisme; why not the Eucharist? wee follow Christs commandement in both. Further you falsely accuse vs, who thinke bread & wine to be but one part of the Sacrament, as Ireneus and antiquity hath done; & Christ his body and blood the other. But you haue no Eucharist at all, who professe you haue neither bread nor wine.
sDVR But Calvin denieth all this, making it only a sign and seal, by which we are assured of the grace best••ed upon us. WHIT. pag. 663. Doth it follow hence that grace and remission of sin is not given unto us in Baptism? As if by the seal of the Kings Charter some thing is not both given unto us, and confirmed? And in Baptism this confirmation is but a more bountiful donation.DVR But Caluin denieth all this, making it only a signe and seale, by vvhich vve are assured of the grace best••ed vpon vs. WHIT. pag. 663. Doth it follow hence that grace and remission of sinne is not giuen vnto vs in Baptisme? As if by the seale of the Kings Charter some thing is not both giuen vnto vs, and confirmed? And in Baptisme this confirmation is but a more bountifull donation.
*DVR. Because that Baptism did prepare men to regeneration, of which preparation Christ had no need. WHIT. pag. 673. This is but your coined distinction, for the Fathers speak and answer otherwise. Christ. in 3. Matth. not that he should receive remission of sin by baptism, but that be might leave sanctified waters for those who should after be baptised. And August. in cat. •ur. in 3. Matth. Our Saviour would therefore be baptised, not that be might be sanctified, but that he might sanctify the waters for us.DVR. Because that Baptisme did prepare men to regeneration, of vvhich preparation Christ had no need. WHIT. pag. 673. This is but your coyned distinction, for the Fathers speake and answere otherwise. Chrys•st. in 3. Matth. not that he should receiue remission of sinne by •aptisme, but that be might leaue sa•ctified waters for those who should after be baptised. And August. in cat. •ur. in 3. Matth. Our Sauiour would therefore be baptised, not that bee might bee sanctified, but that he might sanctifie the waters for vs.
yDVR. God hath showed his vvill, Joh. 3.5. And •hen S. Paul makes all by nature the Children of wrath: Ephes. 2.3. If there be no remedy against this evil in the Scripture, but Baptism, what can be, but that they who die without Baptism, must needs die in the same condition? WHIT. 677. God in no place hath showed this to be his will; that they who die without Baptism, shall perish. Of the words of Christ have •in spoken, which if they be understood of Baptism, they belong only to those who are of grown years. That by no other means we can be freed from the miserable state of nature, but by Baptism, is very false. For the Spirit of God doth in and without the Sacrament, doth communicate his graces.DVR. God hath shewed his vvill, Ioh. 3.5. And •hen S. Paul makes all by nature the Children of wrath: Ephes. 2.3. If there be no remedie against this euill in the Scripture, but Baptisme, what can be, but that they vvho die vvithout Baptisme, must needs die in the same condition? WHIT. 677. God in no place hath shewed this to bee his will; that they who die without Baptisme, shall perish. Of the words of Christ haue •in spoken, which if they be vnderstood of Baptisme, they belong only to those who are of growne yeares. That by no other meanes we can be freed from the miserable state of nature, but by Baptisme, is very false. For the Spirit of God doth in and without the Sacrament, doth communicate his graces.
zDVR. He speaketh not of infants, but of those who endued with true faith, were prevented by an untimely death that they could not be baptised. WHIT. pag. 680. How truly you speak we may judge out of the same Epistle. For he thus writeth. Who is ignorant that in former times they had other remedies against original sin; besides Baptism? for to Abraham and his seed ut as the Sacrament of Circumcision given to this end. But in other nations, so many as were found faithful, we believe that they, who were of years, were sanctified by faith and sacrifices: but the parents faith did profit their infants, yea and was sufficient for them. If this was so before Christ, shall we think the condition of infants is now worse?DVR. He speaketh not of infants, but of those vvho indued with true faith, were preuented by an vntimely death that they could not be baptised. WHIT. pag. 680. How truly you speake we may iudge out of the same Epistle. For he thus writeth. VVho is ignorant that in former times they had other remedies against originall sinne; besides Baptisme? for to Abraham and his seed vt as the Sacrament of Circumcision giuen to this end. But in other nations, so many as vvere found faithfull, vvee beleeue that they, vvho vvere of yeares, vvere sanctified by faith and sacrifices: but the parents faith did profit their infants, yea and vvas sufficient for them. If this was so before Christ, shall we thinke the condition of infants is now worse?
