8 |7l7cltO IOLI €&

OLNOHO1 4O ALISHSAINN

EVERYMAN’S LIBRARY EDITED BY ERNEST RHYS

THEOLOGY & PHILOSOPHY

HOOKER’S ECCLESIASTICAL POLITY BOOKS I—IV WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE REV. RONALD BAYNE, M.A.

THE PUBLISHERS OF EVERY MANS LIBRARY WILL BE PLEASED TO SEND FREELY TO ALL APPLICANTS A LIST OF THE PUBLISHED AND PROJECTED VOLUMES TO BE COMPRISED UNDER THE FOLLOWING TWELVE HEADINGS:

TRAVEL ¢ SCIENCE ¢ FICTION THEOLOGY & PHILOSOPHY HISTORY ¢ CLASSICAL FOR YOUNG PEOPLE ESSAYS $ ORATORY POETRY & DRAMA BIOGRAPHY ROMANCE

IN TWO STYLES OF BINDING, CLOTH, FLAT BACK, COLOURED TOP, AND LEATHER, ROUND CORNERS, GILT TOP,

Lonpon: J. M. DENT & CO. New Yorx: E. P. DUTTON ἃ CO.

.

* : A ἢ Ἢ ΔΝ Σ᾽ . y a Ν % ΟΝ a

ἢ Ὶ

ὴ ei ς ᾿ , x ae Ni PECCLESI- eh | ASTICAL® ἐπε mM POLIT Y2® WW}

{| 6VRICHARD ΝΖ.

") HOOKER2 We

es ΖΞ ἢ Mi -BOOKS | to4- eZ, δὰ tT gto. Mf-<\\ Ry:

—

LONDON:PUBLISHE i Ny ἥν ὃ byIMDENT-S-CO Wy AND IN NEW YORK

BY EP-DUTTON &CO

Le ie I cree Sa

INTRODUCTION

ISAAC WALTON’S “Life of Richard Hooker” is an English classic, accessible to all readers, which no modern biographer can attempt to compete with, or to supersede. This intro- duction therefore must be of the nature of a supplement to Walton’s account, adding any facts which may have come to light since he wrote, and briefly considering the significance of Hooker for the twentieth century.

Richard Hooker was born in Exeter, probably in the be- ginning of the year 1554, just before his uncle, John Hooker, was made Chamberlain of the city. John Hooker’s fame has been hidden behind that of his more illustrious nephew, and therefore students of English literature and politics have not sufficiently realized the great interest and importance of his life and work. He was educated at Oxford, probably at Corpus Christi College like his nephew, studying civil law. He travelled in Germany, pursuing legal studies at Cologne, and also at Strassburg, where he lodged in the house of Peter Martyr and acquired his very definite sympathy with the religious views of the reformers. He came back to Exeter and engaged in the municipal affairs of the town. During forty-eight years he held the office of Chamberlain. He has himself left us an account of his various activities and of the _ growth in importance of his office, composed towards the end of his career, and contained ina large manuscript folio, along with other particulars relating to the history of Exeter. His fame as a student of English antiquities and history caused him to be entrusted with the editorship of the 158% edition of Holinshed’s “Chronicles,” but his modesty made him insert his own contributions to that work so unobtrusively that he has never won proper credit for them. The most interesting is his vigorous and graphic account of the 1549 rebellion, of which he was an eye-witness. Froude owes to Hooker his picturesque narrative of this outbreak in the West country, which was caused by the introduction of Edward VI.’s first - Book of Common Prayer. The excellence of Hooker’s English prose is not less remarkable than his clearness of vision and sagacity as an observer of men and affairs. His second con- tribution to Holinshed was a valuable account of recent Irish

vil

Vill Introduction

history. His aequaintance with Irish affairs was due to a singular circumstance. That picturesque Elizabethan paladin, Sir Peter Carew, whose English property was in the neighbour- hood of Exeter, where useless attempts had been made in his

youth to educate him at the Grammar School, convinced ©

himself from certain documents in his possession that he had claims upon extensive estates in Ireland. John Hooker's repu- tation as a lawyer and antiquary caused him to be chosen by Sir Peter to investigate the matter. He left Exeter for Ireland in May 1568 and was in Ireland for three years, holding a seat in the Irish Parliament and acquiring an intimate and first- hand knowledge of Irish affairs. But John Hooker had two

brothers. The younger, Roger, was the father of Richard, the |

author of the “ Ecclesiastical Polity.” Isaac Walton gives us no information about Roger except that he was too poor to send his son to college when the son’s exceptional abilities made that desirable ; and more recent biographers are equally without information about him. But in the papers of John Hooker some interesting facts come to light. In the first letter written by him from Ireland to Sir Peter Carew, dated May 26, 1568, John recommends his brother Roger to Sir Peter as a steward. He says housekeeping in Ireland is difficult ; spice, sugar, and such other foreign wares are not to be had; he himself is “but a bad steward”; and “forasmuch as an expert man in these things may do you pleasure here, I have thought to move you of one who was sometime servant and steward to Sir Thomas Chaloner, being ambassador in Spain, a man very expert and skillful, as also to his said master profitable, and of whose praise I would speak now as I have heard, if he were not mine own brother; he now dwelleth with the old Lady Mountjoy; and for his truth I will not refuse to give deposit as much as I am able to.” Roger in consequence went to Ireland, where he appears to have remained till his death.

Richard Hooker therefore, like William Shakespeare, be- longed to the provincial burgess class. His uncle was not rich. - He tells us himself how absurdly small his salary as Chamberlain was in the beginning, and with what difficulty he got it increased when his duties began to expand and multiply. This was why it was necessary for Richard’s “rich uncle,” as Walton calls him, to get for his nephew the patronage of Bishop Jewel, and why the keeping of him at college was

᾿ ἷ

ee ee

Introduction ΙΧ

always a strain upon the family, so that we find Richard Hooker’s name five times between 1570 and 75, in the lists of _ poor scholars helped by the benevolent London merchant, Robert Nowell.? 5

Richard’s education began at the Exeter Grammar School. The schoolmaster reported him “a little wonder,” but Walton’s delightful account is too obviously penned after the event ; it is so exactly what the youthful Richard ought to have been! “At his being a schoolboy he was an early questionist, quietly inquisitive why this was and that was not to be remembered ; why this was granted and that denied! This being mixed with a remarkable modesty and a sweet serene quietness of nature.” It was probably because of the absence of his uncle and father in Ireland that Richard’s entrance at Corpus Christi College was arranged. At all events it coincided with that absence, for it was in 1568 that the lad was admitted to the College, first as chorister and later on as clerk.

It is important that the modern student of Hooker’s works and character should have an idea approximately true of what an Oxford College was like during Hooker’s sixteen years of residence at Corpus. At Corpus there were twenty soczz or scholares, whom we should call “fellows” to-day, and twenty discifuli, in modern English “scholars.” Every socius had a discipulus who shared his bedroom and had to look after it. Only one or two of the senior officers of the College were allowed ser- vants, and women servants were not allowed till the seventeenth century. The juniors waited upon the seniors at meals. But while those whom we should call undergraduates performed for themselves and the graduates a number of menial offices, the few servants were much nearer the undergraduates than they have been since the sixteenth century. They shared the studies of the College, and if they showed ability could rise to high position in the University. The whole establishment was like a big family in which there was very little privacy, very little luxury and very little recreation. It was still monastic in many of its characteristics. A quotation from Thomas Lever, who was master of St. John’s, Cambridge, in the middle of the century, will open the eyes of the modern reader to the realities of student life in poor Colleges when Hooker was young. “‘ There be divers there,” he says, “ which rise daily betwixt four and five of the clock in the morning, and from five until six of the

1 Brother of the celebrated Alexander Nowell, Dean of St. Paul’s. ,

x Introduction

clock use common prayer with an exhortation of God’s word in a common chapel, and from six unto ten of the clock use ever either private study or common lectures. At ten of the clock they go to dinner, whereas they be content with a penny piece of beef amongst four, having a few porridge made of the broth of the same beef with salt and oatmeal and nothing else. After this slender dinner they be either teaching or learning until five of the clock in the evening, when as they have a supper not much better than their dinner, immediately after the which they go either to reasoning in problems or unto some other study until it be nine or ten of the clock, and there being without fire are fain to walk or run up and down half an hour, to get a heat in their feet when they go to bed.” At Corpus, Oxford, the hour of the first meal was eleven in Bishop Jewel’s time, but otherwise Lever’s description would be nearly accurate for Hooker’s years of residence. During Jewel’s residence the students were driven by the plague to Witney, where the College had a sort of sanatorium. Jewel suffered so severely from cold that he contracted rheumatism in his leg and limped for the rest of his life. In the sixteenth century therefore the student’s life was hard and his comforts few. But Lever’s touching appeal for the “living saints” must not lead us to idealize them overmuch. Corpus Christi College, Oxford, was founded in 1517 by Bishop Fox. The history of the College has been carefully written with much graphic detail. There is much in it that is mean and sordid.

The fifth President, Thomas Greenway, for instance, was aman of no dignity and very doubtful morality. Cole succeeded him just before Hooker came into residence, and seems to have been excellent in his fatherly care for the younger men—the discipuld and the probationary fellows ; but in his management of the College property and estates he was avaricious and grasping and almost dishonest, and therefore continually at feud with the senior fellows. On one famous occasion Bishop Horne, the Visitor of the College, threatened him with depriva- tion; Anthony Wood tells the story: “‘ Well, well, Mr. President, seeing it is so, you and the College must part without any more ado, and therefore see that you provide for yourself.’ Mr. Cole therefore, being unable to say any more, fetched a deep sigh and said, ‘What, my good Lord, must I then eat mice at Zurich again?’ Meaning that he must endure the same misery again that he did at Zurich when he was an exile in Queen Mary’s reign, when he was forced to eat carrion to keep life and

Introduction © xi

soul together. At which words the bishop being much terrified, for they worked with him more than all his former oratory had

done, said no more, but bid him be at rest, and deal honestly

with the College.” It was the custom of the President and senior fellows to make a kind of progress once a year to the College estates to collect rents and interview tenants. Of one of these progresses a witty account has come down to us composed by a fellow named Nicholas Morice, about 1582. It is in Latin with the title, “Dialogus de lustratione Geitonica, qui inscribitur Nuttus ;” that is, “A Dialogue of the Journey to Temple Guiting, which is entitled Nuttus.” Nuttus was William Nutt, another Corpus fellow for whom this amusing jeu a@’esprit was written. We are delighted to find one single mention of Hooker. The party has been listening to a foolish speech by one

of the Manor stewards. “If Reynolds had been listening to this

man,” says Morice, “he would have averted his eyes at many parts ; if Hooker, he would have smiled, with bent head.”! It is interesting to find this first reference to Hooker’s personality so exactly in accord with what we hear later. John Spenser,

_ eighth President, who was admitted to the College while

Hooker was still in residence, says of Hooker in 1604, “whose eyes in the humility of his heart were always cast down to the ground.” The Reynolds above mentioned was President after Cole, and became the leader of the “doctrinal” Puritan party in Elizabeth’s reign. At the Hampton Court Conference he played a leading part. From about 1568 he was Hooker's

_ tutor and remained his friend through life, being continually

consulted by him during the writing of the Ecclesiastical Polity.”

' Morice in his “Dialogus” speaks always most respectfully

of Reynolds, but his general tone brings out a point of very great interest. Morice belongs to the party in the College which sympathized with the old religion. Dr. Fowler? summarizes

the facts by stating that “the leaven of secret Romanism con-

tinued to work in the College long after the Reformation was definitely settled, certainly throughout the reign of Elizabeth.” At the end of the “ Dialogus” Morice takes occasion to sketch the characters of the Presidents of Corpus. On the last night of the progress, when dinner was cleared away, “The President calls for cards, cards. We have a game and do not get to bed till twelve. It is all fun, we know. There isno harm! Who

1 ‘© Si Hookerus, demisso capite, subrisisset.” 2 “ History of Corpus Christi College,” p. 99. .

ΧΙΪ Introduction

will say otherwise? But in that space of leisure Claymund would have been at his prayers on his knees ; Chedsey would have been at his studies ; Butcher would have snored ; Morwen would have had a chat with the farmer, and Greenway with the farmer’s wife.” Morice’s attitude to the religious question is conveyed in his exclamation: “A frank Papist I love: for an honest Protestant I can die the death: but an aged trimmer, as I live, I abominate.” !

Hooker graduated B.A. in 1573, M.A. in 1577, and became a full fellow of his College in 1579. In this same year his Hebrew scholarship received a remarkable recognition. The Regius Professor fell ill of some obscure mental disorder, and Hooker was appointed his deputy till he should recover. We are told that in his own College Hooker’s Logic lectures were remarkable, and gained him a wide reputation. He had the _ good fortune to gain the respect and love of two influential pupils. One was Edwin Sandys, a son of the Archbishop ᾿ of York, and the other George Cranmer, the grandnephew of the great Archbishop. Both young men proved their exceptional parts and abilities by their deep and lasting regard for their tutor. Comments by both of them upon portions of the “Polity” are extant and are still printed in illustration of their masters book. George Cranmer ended a career of great promise prematurely at the battle of Carlingford in Ireland, in 1600. Edwin Sandys was knighted by King James, and his book Europe Speculum; a “survey of -Yeligion in the Western parts of the World,” exhitits many interesting points of contact with Hooker’s mind and writings.

It was probably in 1581 that Hooker, having taken holy orders, was summoned by John Aylmer, Bishop of London, to preach at St. Paul’s Cross. The Sermon was fraught with important consequences for the preacher. Walton has told us how it occasioned his marriage with Joan Churchman, the daughter of a draper in Watling Street, but it may be said also to mark the beginning of inquiries which resulted in the “Polity.” Itis the starting-point of Hooker’s later life, in which the bashful, peace-loving Oxford student found himself a leader in the fierce controversies which divided the Elizabethan Church. In his sermon he developed the doctrine that in God we may conceive that there are two wills, one antecedent and another

1 “Papistam equidem ingenuum diligo: pro honesto Protestante emori possum: neutrum seniculum, ita vivam, abhominor.’

Pi i Ὡρῶν

Se rer pee ee ee,

Introduction Xill

consequent. But “this seemed to cross a late opinion of Mr. Calvin’s,” who had said in the “Institutes”! that “nothing is less accordant with the nature of God than that He should have a double will.” Hooker therefore became at once conspicuous as having differed from Calvin. He gives his own mature view on

_ the point in Book V., chap. xlix, of the “ Polity,” but his theory

was remembered against him and might have caused him trouble but for the presence of Bishop Aylmer himself at the sermon. In 1584 Hooker was presented to the vicarage of Drayton- Beauchamp in Buckinghamshire, but vacated it almost at once to become Master of the Temple. The previous Master, Richard Alvey, had been a pronounced Puritan, and his after- noon lecturer was Walter Travers, whose views were definitely Presbyterian. By these two men Presbyterian methods had been introduced into the management of the Temple Church and the views of the “ Disciplinarian ” Puritans as to public ‘worship very thoroughly adopted. Lord Burghley proposed Travers as Master, but Archbishop Whitgift objected to him as a man from whom no loyalty to the Prayer Book could be expected. The Queen would not accept Whitgift’s nominee, but rejected

‘Travers, and Hooker was appointed master, perhaps on the

recommendation of Archbishop Sandys and Bishop Aylmer, on March 17, 1584-5. It was not surprising that the famous duel between “ pure

e Canterbury in the morning and Geneva in the afternoon” began

ἢ Ν τ q ‘ be

almost at once. The end of it was that Whitgift inhibited the Reader, Travers, because he preached against the Master.

_ Travers at once «wrote a “Supplication” against the action

of the Archbishop, which he addressed to the Privy Council.

᾿ Hooker, finding this document in everybody’s hands, wrote an

ς Answer” in his own defence to the Archbishop. From these two documents it becomes plain that we have in

the two sermons printed below (pp. 1-75) the gist of what Travers

found objectionable in Hooker’s preaching. He complains first of the old sermon of 1581. Then he objects to the opening argument of the sermon on the Certainty and Perpetuity of Faith, and more especially the sentence, “that which we see by the light of grace, though it be indeed more certain : yet is it not to us so evidently as that which sense, or the light of nature will not suffer a man to doubt of.” We-have here the germ of the whole discussion of the relation between reason and

1 Instit., iii, 24.

χὶν Introduction

revelation, which is contained in Books II. and III. of the “Polity. . Hooker declines to use the Bible to strangle his human faculties, just as he declines to use it to fetter all freedom of human action.

in church government. But the Discourse of Justification is the ἱ

fullest statement of what Hooker taught at the Temple Church.

The “mother sentence whereof I little thought that so much trouble would have grown” was the simple observation, “1 doubt not but God was merciful to save thousands of our fathers living in popish superstitions, inasmuch as they sinnedignorantly.” But Hooker, when challenged, could not withdraw his statement ; on the contrary he enlarged and enforced it with passionate eloquence: ‘Surely in this case I have no respect of any person alive or dead. Give me aman of what estate or con- dition soever, yea, a cardinal or a pope, whom at the extreme point of his life affliction hath made to know himself: ... whose eyes are opened to see the truth . . . this one opinion of merits excepted; ... shall I think, because of this only error, that such a man toucheth not so much as the hem of Christ’s garment?” ‘There is nothing of Hooker’s that reveals his heart so fully as this sermon. The exquisite temper of the writer, his combination of sweet reasonableness with ardour for truth, which is the charm of the “ Polity,” appears full grown in the deeply-felt paragraphs of this noble discourse. The close connection ofthe “Polity” and the Discourse becomes clear in such a sentence as: “ By the masters of civil policy nothing is so much inculcated as that commonwealths are founded upon laws. .. - So it is in our spiritual Christian community.”

It was in pursuit of the truth about the matters raised in this controversy that Hooker took up the composition of the treatise which he called “ Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity.” But he found that he could not get on with it in London. “1 shall never be able to finish what I have begun,” he writes to Whit-

gift, “unless I be removed into some quiet country parsonage,

where I may see God’s blessing spring out of my mother earth and eat mine own bread in peace and privacy.” In 1591 he got his wish, being appointed Vicar of Boscombe, in Wiltshire. But the book he was working on was not to be concerned only with his own personal controversies. Whitgift desired that Hooker should review the whole course of the controversy between the supporters of Elizabeth’s religious settlement and those who wished to overthrow it. This controversy began by the publica- tion in 1572 of the virulent “ Admonition to Parliament” and

᾿

απ) ae oe Se ee

Introduction XV

“Second Admonition to Parliament,” which were fierce attacks upon the Prayer Book and the constitution of the Elizabethan Church. Whitgift, in 1572, produced “An Answer” to this, which Thomas. Cartwright, the leading Cambridge Puritan, re- plied to with “A Reply to an Answer,” in 1573. This was so able and impressive a piece of work that Whitgift could not leave it unanswered, and accordingly produced in 1574 a second treatise, in which his first ‘‘ Answer” was included, which he called “The Defence of the Answer... against dik Reply.” This is a large folio of 800 pages. Cartwright retorted with “The Second Reply of Thomas Cartwright” in 1575; and “The Rest of the Second Reply” in 1577. But Whitgift could not find leisure to answer these two final books by Cartwright, and it was made a reproach against him that he had suffered _ the redoubtable T. C. to have the last word. It was this con- troversy which the “ Ecclesiastical Polity” resumed and summed up. Hooker reviews all the main positions of Cartwright, carefully _ adopting Whitgift’s scrupulousness in quoting large sections of his opponent in the course of his argument. The first four _ books of the “ Polity” appeared in 1594, nearly twenty years after Cartwright’s third volume, but in the contents eight books are summarized. In 1595 Hooker was presented by Whitgift to Bishopsbourne, near Canterbury, and in 1597 he published Book V. of the “ Polity,” with a dedication to the Archbishop. ’ There can hardly be any doubt that before his death on No- ~ vember 2, 1600, he finished the last three books, but also there _ can be little doubt that they were, in their completed state, _ destroyed. What we now have as the last three books were not 3 printed till nearly the middle of the seventeenth century, and _ while we may feel confident that they are from Hooker’s pen, _ they are not finished, and do not correspond exactly to what he promised in 1594. His finished work is all included in the five books published before his death. Hooker’s five books made a great impression upon the English _ public, but a faint voice was raised in opposition. In 1599 _ there appeared a tract of fifty pages entitled, “A Christian Letter of certain English Protestants, unfained favourers of the present state of religion, authorised and professed in England : - unto that reverend and learned man, Mr. R. Hoo. requiring resolution in certain matters of doctrine (which seem to over- throw the foundation of Christian religion, and of the Church among us) expressly contained in his five books of ‘ Ecclesiastical

Xvi Introduction

Polity.” This treatise is not creditable either to the heart or — the head of the anonymous writer or writers, and is remembered —

only because Hooker read it and meditated an answer, and his

copy, copiously annotated by his own hand, is in the library οὐ

Corpus Christi College, Oxford. The tract is referred to in the notes of Books I. to V. of the “ Polity” as “Chr. Letter,” and many of Hooker’s caustic comments are quoted. At the end of Book V. certain longer fragments of Hooker’s contemplated answer are printed as Appendix I. The fragments are pre- served in the library of Trinity College, Dublin. These notes of Hooker’s are of unexpected interest, because they exhibit him as it were in undress, and prove how much fire and point and pungency his mind retained at the very end of his life, when undoubtedly his body was becoming frail and ailing. They show us the foundation of mother-wit and pithy English upon which the towers and temples of his “great argument” were raised. One sentence scribbled on the title-page of the tract was chosen by Keble in 1836 as a motto for his edition of Hooker’s works: “All things written in this book I humbly and meekly submit to the censure of the grave and reverend Prelates within this land, to the judgment of learned men, and the sober consideration of all others. Wherein I may haply err as others before me have done, but an heretic by the help of Almighty God I will never be.”

It is, no doubt, partly because Hooker wrote nearly twenty years after the controversy he sums up that there is in his book such a fine spirit of candour and tolerance; but his own singularly sweet and fair-minded temperament is the first cause of this. Hooker is a representative Elizabethan in the scope of his mind and sympathies. He contrived to unite and hold in a real equilibrium a deep sympathy with the three great spiritual currénts of his time. He was sincerely and deeply an Evangelical, a Catholic, and a Rationalist. Low Churchmen, High Churchmen, and Broad Churchmen, can all find them- selves to-day in Hooker, and claim him as their master. But for all of them the lesson of his personality is its inclusiveness, its harmony of apparently opposite qualities and habits of mind, which the intense national vitality of the age fused into a unity.

RONALD BAYNE.

1907.

ee ee δ ee eS τὰ,

LIST OF WORKS BY RICHARD HOOKER

Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie. Eyght Bookes by Richard

_ Hooker. Printed by John Windet, without date (1592, 15942). Only

- four books were given in this edition ; these were re-issued in 1604.

The Fifth Book, the last to be published in Hooker’s lifetime, was pub- lished in 1597; the Sixth and Eighth in 1648 and 1651. The Seventh Book first appeared in Gauden’s edition of Hooker’s works, 1662.

_ The “‘ Works” were re-issued, with Life by Izaak Walton, 1666, 1676, 1682; and there have been several later re-issues. The ‘* Works”

_ were edited by Keble and published 1836; revised edition (Church

᾿

and Paget), 1888. The First Book of the Polity, ed. Church (Clarendon

- Press), 1876; the Fifth Book, ed. by R. Bayne (‘‘ English Theological

ἣν ᾿ i

ah ~

Library”), 1902; An Introduction to Fifth Book, by F. Paget, 1899;

Selections, by Keble, 1839. There have been several abridgments of

the ““ Politie.” In 1612 several sermons were published separately, and in the same oe epee’ “Α Learned Discourse of Justification, etc., on Habak.

ΟΠ, 4,” and an ‘‘ Answer to the Supplication that Mr. Travers Made to

"athe Council”; two further sermons were published 1613. Finally, as an

_ Appendix to Launcelot Andrewes’ work, ‘‘A Summarie View of the - Government, etc., Contentions touching Church Government, out of the fragments by

39

appeared “ἃ Diaconety of the Causes of these

- Hooker,” but the authorship of this is questioned. Izaak Walton’s Life of Hooker was first published in 1665.

Ge hal Ὲ LEAT Pee EE OE RS Be Oe

xvii

NTENTS OF VOL. | 5

naa Aye ᾿ 14 ᾿:

ee, - ᾿ ene:

ECCLESIASTICAL POLITY—

te

ee Pee ee ee Ψ'-

ΣΝ ΦὙ Fe ἀν it χρὴ;

A LEARNED AND COMFORTABLE

SERMON

OF

THE CERTAINTY AND PERPETUITY OF FAITH IN THE “ELECT:

ESPECIALLY OF THE PROPHET HABAKKUK’S FAITH!

HABAK 1. 4.

[** Therefore the law is slacked, and judgment doth never go forth.’’]

_ Whether the Prophet Habakkuk, by admitting this cogitation into his

mind, ‘‘ The law doth fail,” did thereby shew himself an unbéeliever.

WE have seen in the opening of this clause which con- cerneth the weakness of the prophet’s faith, first what things they are whereunto the faith of sound believers doth assent : secondly wherefore all men assent not thereunto: and thirdly why they that do, do it many times with small

assurance. Now because nothing can be so truly spoken, but through misunderstanding it may be depraved ; there-

fore to prevent, if it be possible, all misconstruction in this cause, where a small error cannot rise but with great

danger, it is perhaps needful, ere we come to the fourth

point, that something be added to that which hath been

_ already spoken concerning the third.

1 [This and the Discourse of Justification, are now placed first among

-Hooker’s Opuscula, as having probably been earliest written. See _ Travers’s Supplication to the Council, in Dobson’s Hooker, ii. p. 464. ςς

Upon . . . occasion of this doctrine of his, that the assurance of that we believe by the word is not so certain as of that we perceive by sense,

‘I... taught the doctrine otherwise.—According to which course of

late, when as he had taught, ‘that the church of Rome is a true church,’ &c.” Compare Hooker’s Answer, § 9, 10, 11. _ It should seem as if these two, and the Sermons on Pride, were portions of a series on the Prophecy of Habakkuk preached in the Temple Church, 1585-6 ; and the present arrangement sets them in the order of their texts. ]

VOL. I. b

2 The Certainty and Perpetuity

That mere natural men do neither know nor acknowledge

the things of God, we do not marvel, because they are spiritually to be discerned ; but they in whose hearts the light of grace doth shine, they that are taught of God, why are they so weak in faith? why is their assenting to the law

so scrupulous? so much mingled with fear and wavering? —

It seemeth strange that ever they should imagine the law to fail. It cannot seem strange if we weigh the reason. If the things which we believe be considered in themselves, it may truly be said that faith is more certain than any science. That which we know either by sense, or by infallible demon- stration, 15 not so certain as the principles, articles, and conclusions of Christian faith. Concerning which we must note, that there is a Certainty of Evidence, and a Certainty of Adherence. Certainty of Evidence we call that, when the mind doth assent unto this or that, not because it is true in itself, but because the truth is clear, because it is manifest unto us. Of things in themselves most certain, except they be also most evident, our persuasion is not so assured as it is of things more evident, although in them- selves they be less certain. It is as sure, if not surer, that there be spirits, as that there be men; but we be more assured of these than of them, because these are more evident. The truth of some things is so evident, that no man which heareth them can doubt of them: as when we hear that “a part of any thing is less than the whole,” the mind is constrained to say, this is true. If it were so in matters of faith, then, as all men have equal certainty of this, so no believer should be more scrupulous and doubtful than another. But we find the contrary. The angels and spirits of the righteous in heaven have certainty most evident of things spiritual: but this they have by the light |, of glory. That which we see by the light of grace, though | it be indeed more certain ; yet is it not to us so evidently |. certain, as that which sense or the light of nature will not

ἡ suffer a man to doubt of. Proofs are vain and frivolous

except they be more certain than is the thing proved: and do we not see how the Spirit every where in the Scripture proveth matters of faith, laboureth to confirm us in the things which we believe, by things whereof we have sensible knowledge? I conclude therefore that we have less certainty

of evidence concerning things believed, than concerning —

sensible or naturally perceived. Of these who doth doubt

} {

Ὶ

αν τ ΠΥ ΡΥ ἢ a ΦΌΡΟΥ

ΡΣ Τ δὰ

of Faith in the Elect 3

at any time? Of them at some time who doubteth not? I will not here allege the sundry confessions of the perfectest

that have lived upon earth concerning their great imper-

fections this way ; which if I did, I should dwell too long upon a matter sufficiently known by every faithful man that doth know himself. :

The other, which we call the Certainty of Adherence, is when the heart doth cleave and stick unto that which it doth believe. This certainty is greater inus than the other. The reason is this: the faith of a Christian doth apprehend the words of the law, the promises of God, not only as true, but also as good ; and therefore even then when the evidence which he hath of the truth is so small that it grieveth him to feel his weakness in assenting thereto, yet is there in him

- such a sure adherence unto that which he doth but faintly

and fearfully believe, that his spirit having once truly tasted the heavenly sweetness thereof, all the world is not able quite and clean to remove him from it; but he striveth with himself to hope against all reason of believing, being settled with Job upon-this unmoveable resolution, “‘ Though God kill me, I will not give over trusting in him.”! For why ? this lesson remaineth for ever imprinted in him, “It is good for me to cleave unto God.” ?

Now the minds of all men being so darkened as they are with the foggy damp of original corruption, it cannot be that any man’s heart living should be either so enlightened in the knowledge, or so established in the love of that wherein his

_ salvation standeth, as to be perfect, neither doubting nor ‘shrinking at all. If any such were, what doth let why that man should not be justified by his own inherent righteous-

ness? For righteousness inherent being perfect will justify. And perfect faith is a part of perfect righteousness inherent ;

yea a principal part, the root and the mother of all the rest :

so that if the fruit of every tree be such as the root is, faith being perfect, as it is if it be not at all mingled with distrust and fear, what is there to exclude other Christian virtues from the like perfections? And then what need we the righteousness of Christ? His garment is superfluous: we

may be honourably clothed with our own robes, if it be

thus. But let them beware who challenge to themselves a strength which they have not, lest they lose the comfortable support of that weakness which indeed they have.

1 [Job xiii. 15.] 2 Psalm Ixxiii. 28.

4 The Certainty and Perpetuity

Some shew, although no soundness of ground, there is, which may be alleged for defence of this supposed per- — fection in certainty touching matters of our faith; as first —

that Abraham did believe and doubted not: secondly, that

the Spirit which God hath given us to no other end, but — only to assure us that we are the sons of God, to embolden — us to call upon him as our Father, to open our eyes, and to —

make the truth of things believed evident unto our minds, is much mightier in operation than the common light of nature, whereby we discern sensible things: wherefore we must needs be more sure of that we believe, than of that we see ; we must needs be more certain of the mercies of God in Christ Jesus, than we are of the light of the sun when it shineth upon our faces.

To that of Abraham, “ He did not doubt ;”! I answer, that this negation doth not exclude all fear, all doubting, but only that which cannot stand with true faith. It freeth Abraham from doubting through Infidelity, not from doubt- ing through Infirmity ; from the doubting of Unbelievers,

not of weak Believers ; from such a doubting as that whereof

the prince of Samaria is attainted, who hearing the promise of sudden plenty in the midst of extreme dearth, answered, “Though the Lord would make windows in heaven, were it possible so to come to pass?” 2 But that Abraham was not void of all doubtings, what need we any other proof than the plain evidence of his own words ἢ 8

The reason which is taken from the power of the Spirit were effectual, if God did work like a natural agent, as the fire doth inflame, and the sun enlighten, according to the uttermost ability which they have to bring forth their effects. But the incomprehensible wisdom of God doth limit the effects of his power to such a measure as seemeth best unto himself. Wherefore he worketh that certainty in all, which

sufficeth abundantly to their salvation in the life to come; —

but in none so great as attaineth in this life unto perfection.

Even so, O Lord, it hath pleased thee ; even so it is best.

and fittest for us, that feeling still our own infirmities, we may no longer breathe than pray, ‘‘ Adjuva, Domine ;” “Help, Lord, our incredulity.”* Of the third question, this I hope will suffice, being added unto that which hath

1 [Rom. iv. 20, οὐ διεκρίθη τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ.] 2 [2 Kings vii. 2.] 3 Gen. xvii. 17. 4 [S. Mark ix. 24.]

CP ee Ne rig "7

ee ge Oe te ee ey ον ee ee ee

of Faith in the Elect 5

been thereof already spoken. ‘The fourth question resteth, and so an end of this point.

That which cometh last of all in this first branch to be considered concerning the weakness of the Prophet’s faith, “Whether he did by this very thought, Zze law doth fail, quench the Spirit, fall from faith, and shew himself an unbeliever, or no?” ‘The question is of moment; the repose and tranquillity of infinite souls doth depend upon it. ‘The Prophet’s case is the case of many ; which way soever we cast for him, the same way it passeth for all others. If in him this cogitation did extinguish grace, why the like thoughts in us should not take the like effects, there is no cause. Forasmuch therefore as the matter is weighty, dear, and precious, which we have in hand, it behoveth us with so much the greater chariness to wade through it, taking special heed both what we build, and whereon we build, that if our building be pearl, our founda- tion be not stubble ; if the doctrine we teach be full of comfort and consolation, the ground whereupon we gather it be sure: otherwise we shall not save but deceive both

_ ourselves and others. In this we know we are not deceived,

neither can we deceive you, when we teach that the faith whereby ye are sanctified cannot fail; it did not in the Prophet, it shall not in you. If it be so, let the difference be shewed between the condition of unbelievers and his, in - this or in the like imbecility and weakness. ‘There was in Habakkuk that which St. John doth call ‘‘the seed of

_God,”1 meaning thereby the First Grace which God poureth into the hearts of them that are incorporated into Christ ;

which having received, if because it is an adversary to sin, we do therefore think we ‘sin not both otherwise, and also by distrustful and doubtful apprehending of that which we ought steadfastly to believe, surely we do but deceive our- selves. Yet they which are of God do not sin either in this, or in’any thing, any such sin as doth quite extinguish grace,

clean cut them off from Christ Jesus ; because the “seed of

God” abideth in them, and doth shield them from receiving

any irremediable wound. Their faith, when it is at the

strongest, is but weak; yet even then when it is at the

weakest, so strong, that utterly it never faileth, it never

perisheth altogether, no not in them who think it extin-

guished in themselves. ‘There are for whose sakes I dare 1 [1 John iii. 9.]

6° The Certainty and Perpetuity

not deal slightly in this cause, sparing that labour which must be bestowed to make it plain. Men in like agonies unto this of the Prophet Habakkuk’s are through the extremity of grief many times in judgment so confounded, that they find not themselves in themselves. For that which dwelleth in their hearts they seek, they make diligent search and inquiry. It abideth, it worketh in them, yet still they ask where ; still they lament as for a thing which is past finding: they mourn as Rachel, and refuse to be comforted, as if that were not which indeed is, and as if that which is not were; as if they did not believe when they do, and as if they did despair when they do not.

, Which in some I grant is but a melancholy passion, pro-

ceeding only from that dejection of mind, the cause whereof is the body, and by bodily means can be taken away. But where there is no such bodily cause, the mind is not lightly in this mood, but by some of these three occasions: one, that judging by comparison either with other men, or with themselves at some other time more strong, they think imperfection to be a plain deprivation, weakness to be utter

want of faith.

Another cause is, they often mistake one thing for another. St. Paul wishing well to the Church of Rome prayeth for them after this sort: ‘‘The God of hope fill you with all joy of believing.” + Hence an error groweth, when men in heaviness of spirit suppose they lack faith, because they find not the sugared joy and delight which indeed doth accompany faith, but so as a separable accident, as a thing that may be removed from it; yea there is a cause why it should be removed. ‘The light would never be so acceptable, were it not for that usual intercourse of darkness. Too much honey doth turn to gall; and too much joy even spiritually would make us wantons. Happier a great deal is that man’s case, whose soul by inward desolation is humbled, than he whose heart is through abundance of spiritual delight lifted up and ‘exalted above measure. Better it is sometimes to go down into the pit with him, who, behold- ing darkness, and bewailing the loss of inward joy and consolation, crieth from the bottom of the lowest hell, “‘ My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” ? than con- tinually to walk arm in arm with angels, to sit as it were in Abraham’s bosom, and to have no thought, no cogitation,

1 [Rom. xv. 13.] 2 [Psal. xxii. 1.]

Ee

5.-- χο ey en, a oe

of Faith in the Elect 7

but “I thank my God it is not with me as it is with other / men.” + No, God will have them that shall walk in light to feel now and then what it is to sit in the shadow of death. A grieved spirit therefore is no argument of a faithless ‘mind: : ~~ A third occasion of men’s misjudging themselves, as if they were faithless when they are not, is, they fasten their cogitations upon the distrustful suggestions of the flesh, whereof finding great abundance in themselves, they gather thereby, Surely unbelief hath full dominion, it hath taken plenary possession of me; if I were faithful, it could not be thus: not marking the motions of the Spirit and of faith, because they lie buried and overwhelmed with the contrary : _ when notwithstanding as the blessed Apostle doth acknow- _ ledge,? that ‘‘ the Spirit groaneth,” and that God heareth when - we do not; so there is no doubt, but that our faith may _ have and hath her privy operations secret to us, in whom, _ yet known to him by whom they are.

Tell this to a man that hath a mind deceived by too hard an opinion of himself, and it doth but augment his grief: he hath his-answer ready, Will you make me think other- wise than I find, than I feel in myself? I have thoroughly considered and exquisitely sifted all the corners of my heart, and I see what there is; never seek to persuade me against my knowledge; “1 do not, I know I do not believe.”

Well, to favour them a little in their weakness; let that be granted which they do imagine ; be it that they are faith- less and without belief. But are they not grieved for their unbelief? ‘They are. Do they not wish it might, and also strive that it may, be otherwise? We know they do. Whence cometh this, but from a secret love and liking which they have of those things that are believed? No man can love things which in his own opinion are not. And if they think those things to be, which they shew that they love when they desire to believe them; then must it needs be, that by desiring to believe they prove themselves true believers. For without faith, no man thinketh that things believed are. Which argument all the subtilty of infernal powers will never be able to dissolve.

The faith therefore of true believers, though it have many - and grievous downfalls, yet doth it still continue invincible ; it conquereth and recovereth itself in the end. The

1 [Luke xviii. 11.] 2 [Rom. viii. 26, 27.]

8 The Certainty and Perpetuity

dangerous conflicts whereunto it is subject are not able to — prevail against it. The Prophet Habakkuk remained faithful in weakness, though weak in faith.

It is true, such is our weak and wavering nature, we have no sooner received grace, but we are ready to fall from it: we have no sooner given our assent to the law, that it cannot fail, but the next conceit which we are ready to embrace is, that it may, and that it doth fail. Though we find in ourselves a most willing heart to cleave unseparably unto God, even so far as to think unfeignedly with Peter, “Lord, I am ready to go with thee into prison and to death ; 1 yet how soon and how easily, upon how small occasions are we changed, if we be but a while let alone and left unto ourselves? ‘The Galatians to-day, for their sakes which teach them the truth of Christ, content, if need were, to pluck out their own eyes,” and the next day ready to pluck out theirs which taught them. The love of the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, how greatly inflamed, and how quickly slacked.®

The higher we flow, the nearer we are unto an ebb, if men be respected as mere men, according to the wonted course of their alterable inclination, without the heavenly support of the Spirit.

Again, the desire of our ghostly enemy is so uncredible, and his means so forcible to overthrow our faith, that whom the blessed Apostle knew betrothed and made hand-fast unto Christ, to them he could not write but with great trembling: “I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy, for I have prepared you to one husband to present you a pure virgin unto Christ: but I fear, lest as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity which is in Christ.”4 The simplicity of faith which is in Christ taketh the naked promise of God, his bare word, and on that it resteth. This simplicity the serpent laboureth continually to pervert, corrupting the mind with many imaginations of repugnancy and contrariety between the promise of God and those ~ things which sense or experience or some other fore- — conceived persuasion hath imprinted.

The word of the promise of God unto his people is, “I will not leave thee nor forsake thee:”® upon this the 7

1 [Luke xxii. 33.] 2 [Gal. iv. 5.1 5. [Apoc. ii. 2, 4.7

22 Con χὶ 5. δ. 5 Jos. i, 53 Heb. xii 5. 4

rs

SR ne a ge Be ate το

ey eee τ

Betis τῶ νι κι

aa Ἢ {

ΠΥ ἘΡΉΜΟΥΣ ae ee

of Faith in the Elect 9

simplicity of faith resteth, and it is not afraid of famine. But mark how the subtilty of Satan did corrupt the minds of that rebellious generation, whose spirits were not faithful

unto God. ‘They beheld the desolate state of the desert im

which they were, and by the wisdom of their sense concluded the promise of God to be but folly: ‘‘Can God prepare a table in the wilderness ?” }

The word of the promise to Sarah was, “Thou shalt bear ason.” Faith is simple, and doubteth not of it: but Satan, to corrupt the simplicity of faith, entangleth the mind of the woman with an argument drawn from common experience to the contrary: ‘‘A woman that is old! Sarah now to be acquainted again with forgotten passions of youth!” 2

The word of the promise of God by Moses and the

_ prophets made the Saviour of the world so apparent unto

Philip, that his simplicity could conceive no other Messias, than Jesus of Nazareth the son of Joseph. But to stay Nathanael, lest being invited to come and see, he should also believe, and so be saved, the subtilty of Satan casteth a mist before his eyes, putteth in his head against this the common-conceived persuasion of all men _ concerning Nazareth: “Is it possible that a good thing should come from thence?” ®

This stratagem he doth use with so great dexterity, the minds of all men are so strangely bewitched with it, that it bereaveth them for the time of all perceivance of that which should relieve them and be their comfort; yea it taketh all

remembrance from them, even of things wherewith they are most familiarly acquainted. ‘The people of Israel could not

be ignorant, that he which led them through the sea was able to feed them in the desert: but this was obliterated and put out by the sense of their present want. Feeling the hand of God against them in their food, they remember not his hand in the day that he delivered them from the hand of the oppressor. Sarah was not then to learn, that “with God all things were possible.”* Had Nathanael never noted how “God doth choose the base things of this world to disgrace them that are most honourably esteemed "Ὁ

The Prophet Habakkuk knew that the promises of grace, protection, and favour, which God in the law doth make

1 Psal. Ixxviii. 19. 2 Gen. xviii. 12. 3 John i. 46.

4 Matt. xix. 26. SE Com, του, 28 B 2

10 The Certainty and Perpetuity

unto his people, do not grant them any such immunity as —

can free and exempt them from all chastisements: he knew that as God said, “1 will continue my mercy for ever towards them ;” so he likewise said, ‘‘ Their transgressions I will punish with a rod:”+ he knew that it cannot stand with any reason we should set the measure of our own punishments, and prescribe unto God how great or how long our sufferings shall be : he knew that we were blind, and altogether ignorant what is best for us; that we sue for many things very unwisely against ourselves, thinking we ask fish when indeed we crave a serpent: he knew that when the thing we ask is good, and yet God seemeth slow to grant it, he doth not deny but defer our petitions, to the end we might learn to desire great things greatly: all this he knew. But, beholding the land which God had severed for his own people, and seeing it abandoned unto heathen nations ; viewing how reproachfully they did tread it down, and wholly make havock of it at their pleasure ; beholding the Lord’s own royal seat made a heap of stones, his temple defiled, the carcasses of his servants cast out for the fowls of the air to devour, and the flesh of his meek ones for the beasts of the field to feed upon ; being conscious to himself how long and how earnestly he had cried, ‘ Succour us, Ὁ God of our welfare, for the glory of thine own name ;”? and feeling that their sore was still increased: the conceit of repugnancy between this which was object to his eyes, and that which faith upon promise of the law did look for, made so deep an impression and so strong, that he disputeth not the matter; but without any further inquiry or search inferreth, as we see, “The law doth fail.”

Of us who is here which cannot very soberly advise his

brother? Sir, you must learn to strengthen your faith by that experience which heretofore you have had of God’s great goodness towards you: ‘‘ Per ea que agnoscas preestita,

discas sperare promissa ;” ‘‘ By those things which you have ~

known performed, learn to hope for those things which are promised.” Do you acknowledge to have received much? Let that make you certain to receive more: “ Habenti

dabitur ;” “Τὸ him that hath more shall be given.” When ~

you doubt what you shall have, search what you have had

at God’s hands. Make this reckoning, that the benefits, — which he hath bestowed, are bills obligatory and sufficient —

1 [Ps. Ixxxix. 28, 32.] 2 [Ps. Ixxix. 9.]

of Faith in the Elect II

sureties that he will bestow further. His present mercy is still a warrant of his future love, because, ‘‘ whom he loveth,

᾿ he loveth unto the end.”! Is it not thus?

Yet if we could reckon up as many evident, clear, un-. doubted signs of God’s reconciled love towards us as there are years, yea days, yea hours, past over our heads ; all these set together have not such force to confirm our faith, as the loss, and sometimes the only fear of losing a little transitory goods, credit, honour, or favour of men,—a small calamity, a matter of nothing,—to breed a conceit, and such a conceit as is not easily again removed, that we are clean crost out of God’s book, that he regards us not, that he looketh upon others, but passeth by us like a stranger to whom we are not known. Then we think, looking upon others, and com- paring them with ourselves, Their tables are furnished day by day ; earth and ashes are our bread: they sing to the lute, and they see their children dance before them ; our hearts are heavy in our bodies as lead, our sighs beat as thick as a swift pulse, our tears do wash the beds wherein we lie: the sun shineth fair upon their foreheads; we are hanged up like bottles in the smoke, cast into corners like the sherds of a broken pot: tell not us of the promises of God’s favour, tell such as do reap the fruit of them; they belong not to us, they are made to others. The Lord be merciful to our weakness, but thus it is.

Well, let the frailty of our nature, the subtilty of Satan, the force of our deceivable imaginations be, as we cannot

_ deny but they are, things that threaten every moment the utter subversion of our faith; faith notwithstanding is not

hazarded by these things. ‘That which one sometimes told the senators of Rome,? ‘‘ Ego sic existimabam, P. C. uti patrem szpe meum predicantem audiveram, qui vestram amicitiam diligenter colerent, eos multum laborem suscipere, ceeterum ex omnibus maxime tutos esse ;” ‘‘ As I have often heard my father acknowledge, so I myself did ever think, that the friends and favourers of this state charged them- selves with great labour, but no man’s condition so safe as theirs ;” the same we may say a great deal more justly in this case: our Fathers and Prophets, our Lord and Master, hath full often spoken, by long experience we have found it true, as many as have entered their names in the mystical Book of Life, ‘‘Eos maximum laborem suscipere,” they 1 John xiii. 1. 2 Sallust. Jugurth. c. 14.

~

12 The Certainty and Perpetuity

have taken upon them a laboursome, a toilsome, a painful profession, ‘“‘sed omnium maxime tutos esse,” but no man’s security like to theirs. “1 Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to winnow thee as wheat ;” here is our toil: ‘but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not ;” this is our safety. No man’s condition so sure as ours: the prayer of Christ is more than sufficient both to strengthen us, be we never so weak ; and to overthrow all adversary power, be it never so strong and potent. His prayer must not exclude our labour:

\ their thoughts are vain who think that their watching can \preserve the city which God himself is not willing to keep:

and are not theirs as vain, who think that God will keep the city, for which they themselves are not careful to watch? The husbandman may not therefore burn his plough, nor the merchant forsake his trade, because God hath promised “1 will not forsake thee.” And do the promises of God concerning our stability, think you, make it a matter indifferent for us to use or not to use the means whereby, to attend or not to attend to reading? to pray or not to pray that we “fall not into temptations?” Surely if we look to stand in the faith of the sons of God, we must hourly, con- tinually, be providing and setting ourselves to strive. It was not the meaning of our Lord and Saviour in saying,” ‘Father, keep them in thy name,” that we should be careless to keep ourselves. To our own safety, our own sedulity is required. And then blessed for ever and ever be that mother’s child whose faith hath made him the child of God. The earth may shake, the pillars of the world may tremble under us, the countenance of the heaven may be appalled, the sun may lose his light, the moon her beauty, the stars their glory ; but concerning the man that trusteth in God, if the fire have proclaimed itself unable as much as to singe a hair of his head, if lions, beasts ravenous by nature and keen with hunger, being set to devour, have as it were religiously adored the very flesh of the faithful man; what is there in the world that shall change his heart, overthrow his faith, alter his affection towards God, or the affection of God to him? If I be of this note, who shall. make a separation between me and my God? “Shall tribulation, or anguish, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword ?” 8 No; “1 am persuaded that neither tribulation, nor anguish, τ Tike xxii. 41, 32. 2 [John xvii. 11.] 8 [Rom. viii. 35, 38, 39.]

ee te ye gs

of Faith in the Elect 13

nor persecution, nor famine, nor nakedness, nor peril, nor sword, nor death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature,” shall ever prevail so far overme. “I know in whom I have believed;” I am not ignorant whose precious blood hath been shed for me; I have a Shepherd full of kindness, full of care, and full of power: unto him I commit myself; his own finger hath engraven this sentence in the tables of my heart, “Satan hath desired to winnow thee as wheat, but I have prayed _ that thy faith fail not:” therefore the assurance of my hope _ I will labour to keep as a jewel unto the end; and by _ labour, through the gracious mediation of his prayer, I _ shall keep it.

A

LEARNED DISCOURS.

OF

JUSTIFICATION, WORKS, AND HOW THE FOUNDATION OF FAITH IS OVERTHROWN!

HABAK. I. 4.

The wicked doth compass about the righteous: therefore perverse judgment doth proceed.

For better* manifestation of the prophet’s meaning in this place, we are, first, to consider ‘‘ the wicked,” of whom he saith, “that they compass about “‘the righteous: ” secondly, “the righteous” that are compassed about by them: and thirdly, that which is inferred; ‘‘ therefore ἢ perverse judg- ment proceedeth.” Touching the first, there are two kinds of wicked men, of whom in the fifth of the former to the Corinthians,° the blessed Apostle speaketh thus: ? ‘‘ Do ye

@ the better E. b Ergo D. ¢ Corinthes D.

1 [From a passage in Hooker’s answer to Travers’s Supplication, § 5. we know that this sermon was preached in the first year of Hooker’s mastership of the Temple. For he says, ‘‘I am able to prove that myself have now for a full yeer together borne the continuance of such dealings,” &c. And it appears from Strype’s Collections, inserted in Walton’s Life of Hooker, that the sermon was preached the 28th March, and that Travers’s notes of exception to it were ‘‘ set down and shewed ” March 30, 1585: but a MS. in the Harleian Collection, quoted above, vol. i. 59, gives March 1, 1585, as the date of the sermon ; erroneously, since the sermon was preached on a Sunday, (see Travers, Supplication, ὦ p- 561, 562, zzfra) and the 1st March did not fall on a Sunday in either of those years. The 28th did, in 1586. And this agrees with — what Travers in his Supplication states, ‘‘ that Hooker according to his —

course had of /ate taught that the church of Rome isa true church οὗ

Christ.”” He had been made Master of the Temple March 17, 1584-5. The sermon was collated by Archdeacon Cotton for the edition of 1836, with a MS. (A. 5, 6.) in Trin. Coll. Dublin, here designated by D. : the results of which collation, revised by Dr. Todd and Mr. Gibbings, are given in the margin below. ] ; Pt ant. Ye ΔΩ. 13" * Om. D.

if ) 14

os a

A Learned Discourse 15

not judge them that are within? but God judgeth them that are without.” There are wicked, therefore, whom the

Church may judge, and there are wicked whom God only

judgeth ; wicked within, and wicked without, the walls of the Church. If within the Church particular persons, being apparently such, cannot“ otherwise be reformed, the rule οἱ apostolical ὃ judgment is this,! “Separate them from among f

you: te whole assemblies, this, “Separate yourselves from among‘ them: for what society hath light with darkness ?” But the wicked, whom the prophet meaneth, were Babylo- nians, and therefore without. For which cause we have heard at large heretofore in what sort he urgeth God to judge them.

2. Now concerning the righteous, there neither is, nor ever® was, any mere natural man absolutely righteous in himself : that is to say, void of all unrighteousness, of all sin. We dare not except, no not the blessed Virgin herself ; of whom although we say with St. Augustine,? for the honour’s® sake which we owe to our Lord and Saviour Christ, we are not willing, in this cause, to move any question of! his mother; yet forasmuch as the schools of Rome have made it a ‘question, we must* answer with Eusebius Emissenus,* who speaketh of her to! this effect : “Thou didst by special prerogative nine months together entertain within the closet of thy flesh the hope of all the

ends of the earth, the honour of the world, the common

joy of men. He, from whom all things had their beginning,

ἃ be apparently such as cannot E. e of the apostolical E. f amongste D, in Ἐν

-& never D. 4 honour D. i about D. k may E. lin

».2 Cor. vi. 14-17." 2 [De Nat. et Grat. contra Pelag. § 42. x. 144. G. ‘* Commemorat

608, qui non modo non peccasse, verum etiam juste vixisse referantur,

Abel, Enoch, Melchisedech, &c. Adjungit etiam foeminas, . . . ipsam etiam Domini ac Salvatoris nostri matrem, quam dicit sine peccato confiteri necesse esse pietati. Excepta itaque sancta virgine Maria, de qua propter honorem Domini nullam prorsus, cum de peccatis agitur, haberi volo queestionem, (unde enim scimus, quid ei plus gratis colla- tum fuerit ad vincendum omni ex parte peccatum, que concipere ac parere meruit, quem constat nullum habuisse peccatum?) hac ergo virgine excepta, si omnes illos sanctos et sanctas, cum hic viverent, congregare possemus, et interrogare utrum essent sine peccato ; quid fuisse responsuros putamus; utrum hoc quod iste dicit, sive quod Joannes Apostolus ἢ

3 Or whosoever it be, that was the author of those Homilies, that go under his name.

* Om. D t Note om. D.

16 A Learned Discourse

hath™ had his own” beginning from thee; of thy body he took the blood which was to be shed for the life of the world ; of thee he took that which even for thee he paid. ‘4 peccatz enim veteris nexu, per se non est tmmunis nec ipsa genitrix Redemptoris:’1 The mother of the Redeemer herself, otherwise than by redemption, is not loosed from the band ° of that ancient sin.”?? If Christ have paid a ransom for all, even for her, it followeth, that all without exception were captives. If one have died for all, all4 were dead, dead in sin ;* all sinful, therefore none absolutely righteous in themselves; but we are absolutely righteous in Christ. The world then must shew a Christian*® man, otherwise it is not able to shew a man that is perfectly righteous: “Christ is made unto us wisdom, justice, sanctification, and redemption :”* wisdom, because he hath revealed his Father’s will; justice, because he hath offered himself* a sacrifice for sin ; sanctification, because he hath given us of" his Spirit; redemption, because he hath appointed a day to vindicate his children out of the bands of corruption into liberty which is glorious. How Christ is made wis- dom, and how redemption, it may be declared when occasion serveth ; but how Christ is made the righteousness of men, we are now to declare.

3. There is a glorifying righteousness of men in the world to come: and * there is a justifying and a sanctifying righteousness here. The righteousness, wherewith we shall be clothed in the world to come, is both perfect and inherent. That whereby here we are justified is perfect, but not inherent. That whereby we are sanctified, in-

m hath ov. E. π own om. E. ° bond E. P is not otherwise loosed from the bond of ancient sin, than by redemption E. 4 then all E. r were dead in sin E. 8. righteous E. t offered up himself E. ἃ of om. E. x as E.

1 Knowing how the schoolmen hold this question, some critical wits may perhaps half suspect that these two words, er se, are inmates. But, if the place which they have be their own, their sense can be none other than that which I have given them by a paraphrastical interpre- tation.

2 Hom. 2. de Nativ. Dom.* [t. v. pars ii. p. 545. Biblioth. Patr. Colon. ‘‘ Spem terrarum, decus seeculorum, commune omnium gaudium, peculiari munere novem mensibus sola possides : initiator omnium rerum abs te initiatur, et profundendum pro mundi vita sanguinem de corpore tuo accepit, ac de te sumpsit, quod etiam pro te solvat. A peccati enim,” &c. ]

“αν δῇ 4 [Rom. viii. 21.]

* Both notes om, D.

sae

Oe ay ee ee ee ee ee ee ee a ως «Οὐὐῶνεςς

i ni a NE

aa

LPT oe ἐς δ Bid ec eel poet ak OG ale Pa, ee oe etre: CP eae Speer οὶ eee ee.

of Justification 17

herent,’ but not perfect. This openeth a way to the plain 5 understanding of that grand question, which hangeth yet in

. controversy between us and the Church of Rome, about the

matter of justifying righteousness.

4. First, although they imagine that the mother of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ were, for his honour, and by his special protection, preserved clean from all sin, yet touching the rest, they teach as we do, that all have sinned ;* that infants which did never” actually offend, have their natures defiled, destitute of justice, and averted from God.. They teach as we do, that God doth justify the soul of man alone, without any other coefficient cause of justice ;° that in making man righteous, none do work efficiently? with God, but God. They teach as we do,

- that unto justice no man ever attained, but by the merits of

Jesus Christ. They teach as we do, that although Christ as God be the efficient, as man the meritorious cause of our justice ; yet in us also there is something® required. God is the cause of our natural life; in him we live: but he quickeneth not the body without the soul in the body. Christ hath merited to make us just: but as a medicine

which is made for health, doth not heal by being made, but

by being applied ; so, by the merits of Christ there can be no justification, without the application of his merits. Thus far we join hands with the Church of Rome.

5. Wherein then do we disagree? We disagree about the nature of the very essence‘ of the medicine whereby

‘Christ cureth our disease ; about the manner of applying it ;

about the number and the power of means, which God requireth in us for the effectual applying thereof to our soul’s comfort. When they are required to shew, what the

Υ is inherent E. * plain om. E. ® that all have sinned om. E. > never did E. . ὁ This clause in marz. EK. which also reads coeffective for coefficient. 4 work efficiently E. ὁ there is also somewhat D.

f nature and essence E.

1 * “Deus sine medio coeffectivo animam justificat.” Casal. de quadripart. Just. lib. vi. [pars I. lib. i. cap. 8, p. 24, G. ed. Venet. 1599.] Idem, lib. iii. c. 9. [‘‘Salvator noster est nostra justificatio, quia nos justificat effective secundum naturam divinam ; estque nostra justificatio, quia nos justificat meritorie secundum naturam humanam,” p- 304. Casal was bishop of Leiria in Portugal, and was distinguished at the council of Trent. See in Fra Paolo, vi. 53, his arguments for conceding the eucharistical cup to the laity ; and vii. 32, his assertion of the divine right of episcopacy. }

* Note om. D.

18 A Learned Discoure

righteousness is whereby a Christian man is justified, they answer,! that it is a divine spiritual quality ; which quality received into the soul, doth first make it to be one of them who are born of God: and, secondly, endue it with power to bring forth such works, as they do that are born of him; even as the soul of man being joined unto® his body, doth first make him to be in the number of reasonable creatures, and secondly enable‘ him to perform the natural functions which are proper to his kind; that it maketh the soul gracious and amiable* in the sight of God, in regard whereof it is termed Grace; that it purgeth, purifieth, washeth out,! all the stains and pollutions of sin;™ that by it, through the merit of Christ we are delivered as from sin, so from eternal death and condemnation, the reward of sin. This grace they will have to be applied by infusion ; to the end, that as the body is warm by the heat which is in the body, so the soul might be righteous by inherent grace : which grace they make capable of increase ; as the body may be more and more warm, so the soul more and more justified,? according as grace shall be augmented; the aug-

gs to KB. h of E. i inhable D, k amiableand gracious E. 1 and washeth out E. m sins E.

1 * Tho. Aquin. Summ. Theol. ii. pars i. quest. 100. ““ Gratia

gratum faciens, id est, justificans, est in anima quiddam reale et positi-—

vum ; qualitas queedam (art. ii. concl.) supernaturalis, non eadem cum virtute infusa, ut Magister, sed aliquid (art. iii.) preeter virtutes infusas, fidem, spem, charitatem, [110. art. 1.] habitudo queedam (art. iii. ad 3.) quze preesupponitur in virtutibus istis sicut earum principium et radix ;” essentiam animee tanquam subjectum occupat, non potentias, sed ‘‘ ab ipsa” (art. iv. ad 1.) ‘‘effluunt virtutes in potentias anime, per quas potentize moventur ad actus.” Plur. vid. queest. 113. de Justificatione. [t. xl. 253-255; 259, &c. ed. Antwerp. 1612. Comp. Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. Decr. de Justificatione, cap. vii. ‘‘ Justificationis unica formalis causa est, justitia Dei ; non qua ipse justus est, sed qua nos justos facit, qua videlicet ab eo donati renovamur spiritu mentis nostree, et non modo reputamur, sed vere justi nominati sumus; justitiam in nobis recipientes unusquisque suam, secundum mensuram quam Spiritus Sanctus partitur singulis prout vult, et secundum propriam cujusque dispositionem et cooperationem.” Ibid. can. xi. ‘*Si quis dixerit, homines justificari vel sola imputatione justitize Christi, vel sola pecca- torum remissione, exclusa gratia et caritate, que in cordibus eorum per Spiritum Sanctum diffundatur atque illis inhereat, aut etiam gratiam, qua justificamur, ésse tantum favorem Dei; anathema 511. ;

2 [Concil. Trident. ubi supr. cap. 10. ““ Mortificando membra carnis suze, et exhibendo ea arma justitize in sanctificationem, per observationem mandatorum Dei et ecclesize, in ipsa justitia, per Christi gratiam accepta,

cooperante fide bonis operibus, crescunt, atque magis justificantur : sicut — ἢ

* Note om. D.

an ee τὸ σδ

ee ee a ee eS eee

Bi Th he

he

bo ies eer Sees rie gee “ag. Mes eS

of Justification 19

mentation whereof is merited by good works,! as good works are made meritorious by it.2, Wherefore, the first

receipt of grace is in their divinity” the first justification ;

the increase thereof, the second justification.’ As grace may be increased by the merit of good works; so it may be diminished by the demerit of sins venial;* it may be lost by mortal sin.® Inasmuch, therefore, as it is needful in the one case to repair, in the other to recover, the loss which is made; the infusion of grace hath her sundry after-meals ; for which ° cause they make many ways to apply the infusion of grace. It is applied unto infants® through baptism, without either faith or works, and in them it really taketh away original sin, and the pwnishment due unto it; it is applied unto infidels and wicked men in their first P justifica-

tion through baptism, without works,’ yet not without faith ; and it taketh away both sin actual and original, together

with all whatsoever punishment eternal or temporal thereby deserved.® Unto such as have attained the first justification, that is to say, the first receipt of grace, it is applied further by good works to the increase of former grace, which is the second justification. If they work more and more, grace doth more and more increase, and they are more and more justified. ‘To such as have diminished 4 it by venial sins, it

is applied by holy water, Ave Marias, crossings, papal saluta-

π in their divinity is Ἐν} ° the which E. ‘P the first E. 4 diminish ἘΣ.

scriptum est, ‘ Qui justus est, justificetur adhuc.’” And can. xxiv. ““ Si

. quis dixerit, justitiam acceptam non conservari, atque etiam non augeri _coram Deo per bona opera ; sed opera ipsa fructus solummodo et signa

esse justificationis adeptz, non autem ipsius augendz causam ; anathema oit:?”]

1 [Ibid. cap. xvi. ‘‘ Bene operantibus usque in finem, et in Deo sperantibus proponenda est vita eterna et tanquam gratia filiis Dei per Christum Jesum misericorditer promissa, et tanquam merces ex ipsius Dei promissione bonis ipsorum operibus et meritis fideliter reddenda.”’]

2 [Ibid. ‘‘Cum ipse Christus Jesus, tanquam caput in membra, et

-tanquam vitis in palmites, in ipsos justificatos jugiter virtutem influat,

quze virtus bona eorum opera semper antecedit, comitatur et subsequitur, et sine qua nullo pacto Deo grata et meritoria esse possent,” ἄς. ]

3 [Catherinus, Dialog. de Justif. ad calc. Summ. Doctr. de Preedest. Rom. 1550. p. 60. ]

4 [See in Aquinas (2 Summ. pars ii. qu. xxiv. art. 10; t. xi. pars il. p- 63. A. Antwerp, 1612.) with what qualification this must be taken. ]

5 [Id. ibid. art. 11, 12.]

6 [Id. 3 Summ. qu. Ixix. art. 6. (t. xii. 221.)]

7 [Id. ibid. qu. Ixviii. art. 5. fol. 219.]

ΒΤ. kona: qu. Ixix, art; t,:2,,3. £220. ]

20 A Learned Discourse

tions,! and such like, which serve for reparations of grace decayed. To such as have lost it through mortal sin, it is applied by the sacrament (as they term it) of penance; which sacrament hath force to confer grace anew,” yet in such sort, that being so conferred, it hath not altogether so much power ® as at the first. For’ it only cleanseth out the stain or guilt of sin committed, and changeth the punishment eternal into a temporal satisfactory punishment, here, if time do serve, if not, hereafter to be endured, except it be either ® lightened by masses, works of charity, pilgrim- ages, fasts, and such like ; or else shortened by pardon for term, or by plenary pardon quite removed and taken away.* This is the mystery of thel#man of sin. This maze the Church of Rome doth cause her followers to tread, when they ask her the way of justification.* I cannot stand now to unrip this building, and to sift it piece by piece; only I will set a frame of apostolical erection by it in a few words,"

τ first, for Ὁ. * either om. E. t to justification E ἃ pass it by in few words E.

1 [Id. ibid. qu. Ixxxvii. art. 3. fol. 292. ‘‘ Triplici ratione aliqua causant remissionem venialium peccatorum. Uno modo, in quantum in eis infunditur gratia ;—et hoc modo... per omnia sacramenta novee legis . . . peccata venialia remittuntur. Secundo, in quantum sunt cum aliquo motu detestationis peccatorum : et hoc modo confessio generalis, tunsio pectoris, et oratio Dominica, operantur ad remissionem venialium peccatorum. . . Tertio modo, in quantum sunt cum aliquo motu reverentiz in Deum, et ad res divinas ; et hoc modo benedictio episcopalis, aspersio aquze benedictze, quzelibet sacramentalis unctio, oratio in ecclesia dedicata, et si aliqua sunt hujusmodi, operantur ad remissionem venialium peccatorum.”’]

2 [Conc. Trid. Sess. vi. Decr. de Justif. cap. xiv. ‘‘ Qui ab accepta justificationis gratia per peccatum exciderunt, rursus justificari poterunt, cum excitante Deo, per pcenitentiz sacramentum, merito Christi, amissam gratiam recuperare procuraverint.”’]

* [Ibid. ‘‘ Docendum est, Christiani hominis peenitentiam post lapsum multo aliam esse a baptismali, eaque contineri non modo cessationem a peccatis, et eorum detestationem, aut cor contritum et humiliatum ;

verum etiam eorundem sacramentalem confessionem, saltem in voto, et Ὁ

suo tempore faciendam, et sacerdotalem absolutionem ; itemque satis- factionem, per jejunia, eleemosynas, orationes, et alia vitae spiritalis exercitia, non quidem pro pcena zterna, quz vel sacramento vel sacra- menti voto una cum culpa remittitur, sed pro poena temporali, qu, ut sacree literae docent, non semper, ut in baptismo fit, dimittitur illis, qui gratize Dei, quam acceperunt, ingrati, Sp. Sanctum contristaverunt, et templum Dei violare non sunt veriti.” Comp. Sess. xiv. decr. de Poenit. at 9. et can. 13.]

[Ibid. Sess. xxv. Dicer de Purgatorio ; et Decr. de ati. i Comp. Aquin. in iv. Sent. dist. xx. qu. i. art. 3.]

a

of Justification 21

that it * may befall Babylon, in presence of that which God hath builded, as it? happened unto Dagon before the ark. 6. ‘* Doubtless,” saith the Apostle,! “1 have counted all things loss,” and I do” judge them to be dung, that I may win Christ; and be found’ in him, not having mine own righteousness, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God through faith.” Whether they speak of the first or second justification, they make the essence of it ¢ a divine quality inherent, they make it right- eousness which is in us. If it be in us, then it is® ours, as our souls are ours, though we have them from God, and can hold them no longer than pleaseth him ; for if he with- draw the breath of our nostrils, we fall to dust: but the righteousness wherein we must be found, if we will be _ justified, is not our own ; therefore we cannot be justified __ by any inherent quality. Christ hath merited righteousness for as many as are found in him. In him God findeth us, if we be faithful; for by faith we are incorporated into him. Then, although in ourselves we be altogether sinful and unrighteous, yet even the man which in himself is

impious, full of iniquity, full of sin; him being found in

Christ through faith, and having his sin in hatred” through repentance ; him God beholdeth with a gracious eye, putteth away his sin by not imputing it, taketh quite away the punishment due thereunto, by pardoning it ; and accepteth him in Jesus Christ, as perfectly righteous, as if he had fulfilled all that is! commanded him in the law: shall I say more perfectly righteous than if himself had fulfilled the whole law? I must take heed what I say: but the Apostle saith,? “God made him which knew no sin, to be sin for us ;* that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” Such we are in the sight of God the Father, as is the very Son of God himself. Let it be counted folly, or -phrensy, or fury, or! whatsoever. It is our wisdom, and our comfort ;™ we care for no knowledge in the world but this, that man hath sinned, and God hath suffered ; that God hath made himself the sin™ of men,° and that men are made the righteousness of God.

xthatE. - y in the presence E. * it om. E. 8. lost E. b Ido om. E. © to be found E. 4 it on. ? e it is E. f Christ E. 8 is impious in himself E. h remitted E. i was E. k to be sin for us,

who knew no sin E. 1 or om. E. m whatsoever, it is our comfort, and our wisdom E. » son E. ° man E.

1 Phil. iii. 8, 9. * 2 Cor. v.21.

22 A Learned Discourse

You see therefore that the church of Rome, in teaching justification by inherent grace, doth pervert the truth of Christ ; and that by the hands of his? Apostles we have received otherwise than she teacheth. 4 Now concerning the righteousness of sanctification, we deny it not to be inherent ; we grant, that unless" we work, we have it not;

only we distinguish it as a thing in nature different from®

the righteousness of justification: we are righteous the one way, by the faith of Abraham ; the other way, except we do the works of Abraham, we are not righteous. Of the one St. Paul,! “Το him that worketh not, but believeth, faith is counted for righteousness.” Of the other, St. John,? “Qui facit justitiam, justus est :—He is righteous which worketh righteousness.” Of the one, St. Paul® doth prove by Abraham’s example, that we have it of faith without works. Of the other, St. James* by Abraham’s example, that by works we have it,-and not only by faith. St. Paul doth plainly sever these two parts of Christian righteousness

one from the other. For in the sixth to the Romans thus ©

he writeth®, ‘Being freed from sin, and made servants to * God, ye" have your. fruit in holiness, and the end ever- lasting life.” “Ye are made free from sin, and made ser- vants unto God ;” this is the righteousness of justification : ‘“‘ Ye have your fruit in holiness ;” this is the righteousness of sanctification. By the one we are interested in the right of inheriting; by the other we are brought to the actual possessing * of eternal bliss, and so the end of both is ever- lasting life.

7. The Prophet HabakkukY doth here term the Jews “righteous men,” not only because being justified by faith they were free from sin; but also for that 5 they had their measure of fruit* in holiness. According to whose example of charitable judgment, which leaveth it to God to discern what men? are, and speaketh of them according to that which vas do profess ὁ themselves to be, although they be not holy ἃ whom men do think, but whom God doth know indeed to be such; yet let every Christian man know, that in Christian equity, he standeth bound so® to think and

P the Apostles E. 4 D. begins the section here. τ without D. 5 different in nature E. t unto D. 4 you D. x possession E. y Abakuk D. « because E. ® fruits E. b we E. ¢ they professt Ὁ 4 holy men E. . © for E.

1 ERom. iv. 5.] a ἘΠ John iii. 7.1 3 [Rom. iv.]

4 [James ii.] 5 Rom. vi. 22.

of Justification 23

speak of his brethren, as of men that have a measure in the fruit of holiness, and a right unto the titles wherewith God, in token of special favour and mercy, vouchsafeth to honour his chosen servants. So we see the Apostles of our Saviour Christ do use every where the name of. sazuts; so the prophet the name of 7vighteous. But let us all endeavour tof be such as we desire to be termed: “‘ Reatus tmpii est pium nomen,” saith Salvianus;! ‘‘Godly names do not justify godless men.” We are but upbraided, when we are honoured with names and titles whereunto our lives and manners are not suitable. If we have indeed® our fruit in holiness, notwithstanding we must note, that the more we abound therein," the more need we have to crave that we may be strengthened and supported. Our very virtues may be snares unto us. The enemy that waiteth for all occasions "to work our ruin, hath ever‘ found it harder to overthrow an ' humble sinner, than a proud saint. ‘There is no man’s case

so dangerous as his, whom Satan hath persuaded that his

" own righteousness shall present him pure aye blameless in _ the sight of God. If we could say, “we are K not guilty of _ any thing at allin our own! consciences,” (we know our- ' selves far from this innocency, we cannot say, we know nothing by ourselves ; but if we could,) should we therefore plead not guilty in™ the presence of our Judge, that sees ' further” into our hearts than we ourselves are able to see ἢ ὃ Τῇ our hands did never offer violence to our brethren, a _ bloody thought doth prove us murderers before him: if we _ had never opened our mouths? to utter any scandalous, offensive, or hurtful word, the cry of our secret cogitations is _ heard in the ears of God. If we did not commit the evils _ which we do daily and hourly, either in deeds, words, or _ thoughts,4 yet in the good things which we do, how many _ defects are there intermingled! God, in that which is done, _ respecteth specially’ the mind and intention of the doer. - Cut off then all those things wherein we have regarded our - own glory, those things which we * do to please men, or * to satisfy our own liking, those things which we do with any by-

f endeavour to om. E. & indeed we have FE. h herein D. i ever om. E. k were E. 1 own om. E. m before E. n farder D. ° ourselves can do K. P mouth E. a If we did not commit the sins which daily

and hourly either in deed, word, or thoughts we do commit E. τ specially om. E, 5. men EK. ‘ and E.

1 [De Gubern. Dei, lib. iv. p. 341. D; in Bibl. Patr. Colon. t. v. part. iii. ]

24 A Learned Discourse

respect," not sincerely and purely for the love of God ; anda small score will serve for the number of our righteous deeds. Let the holiest and best thing we do be considered. We are never better affected unto God than when we pray ; yet when we pray, how are our affections many times distracted ! How little reverence do we show to the grand majesty of that * God, unto whom we speak! How little remorse of our own miseries! How little taste of the sweet influence of his tender mercy do we feel! Are we not as unwilling many times to begin, and as,glad to make an end, as if God? in saying, ‘Call upon me,” had* set us a very burdensome task?

lt may seem somewhat extreme, which I will speak; there- fore let every man "ἢ judge of it, even as his own heart shall tell him, and no otherwise; I will but only make a demand: If God should yield to us, not as unto Abraham, if fifty, forty, thirty, twenty, yea, or if ten good persons could be found in a city, for their sakes that® city should not be destroyed ; but, if God 4 should make us an offer thus large, Search all the generations of men sithence the fall of your® father Adam, find one man, that hath done any‘ one action, which hath past from him 8 pure, without any stain or blemish at all; and for that one man’s one only action, neither man nor angel shall feel the torments which are prepared for both: do you think that this ransom, to deliver men and angels, would be found® among the sons of men? ‘The best things we do! have somewhat in them to be pardoned. How then can we do any thing meritorious, and * worthy to be rewarded ? Indeed, God doth liberally promise whatso- ever appertaineth to a blessed life, unto as many as sincerely keep his law, though they be not able exactly! to keep it. Wherefore, we acknowledge a dutiful necessity of doing well, but the meritorious dignity of well doing™ we utterly renounce. We see how far we are from the perfect right- eousness of the law; the little fruit which we have in holiness, it is, God knoweth,® corrupt and unsound: we

put no confidence at all in it, we challenge nothing in the -

world for it, we dare not call God to a reckoning,°® as if we had him in our debt-books: our continual suit to him is,

« by any respect E. x that om. E. y mercies E, * God om. E. * he had set E. b one E. ¢ this FE. 4 an if he E. ὁ our E. ? any om. E. & past him D. » could be found to be Εν. i which we do E. k or EK. 1 exactly able E. m doing well Εἰ. "knowesD.

® to reckoning E.

of Justification 25

and must be, to bear with our infirmities, to? pardon our offences.

8. But the people of whom the Prophet speaketh, were they all, or were the most part of them, such as had care to walk uprightly? did they thirst after righteousness? did they wish, did they long with the righteous Prophet,’ “Ὁ that our ways were made so direct that we might keep thy statutes”? did they lament with the righteous Apostle,” ‘Miserable men, the good which we wish and purpose, and strive to do, wecannot”? No; the words of other prophets 4 concerning this people do shew the contrary. How grievously doth Esay mourn over them!® “Ah sinful nation, people laden with iniquity, wicked seed, corrupt _ children!” All which notwithstanding, so wide are the ' bowels of his compassion enlarged, that he denieth us not, _ nonot when we are” laden " with iniquity, leave to commune _ familiarly with him, liberty to crave and entreat, that what _ plagues soever we have deserved, we may not be in worse ' case than unbelievers, that we may not be hemmed in by » pagans and infidels. Jerusalem is a sinful polluted city ; _ but Jerusalem compared with Babylon is righteous. And _ shall the righteous be overborne, shall they be compassed - about by the wicked? But the prophet doth not only ' complain; Lord, how cometh it to pass that thou handlest , us so hardly, over® whom thy name is called, and bearest ' with heathen nations, that despise thee? no, he breaketh _ out through extremity of grief, and inferreth thus ἃ violently, _ This proceeding is perverse; the righteous are thus handled, _ “therefore perverse judgment doth proceed.”

__ g. Which illation containeth many things, whereof it were - much better both for you to hear, and me to speak, if necessity did not draw me to another task.x Paul and _ Barnabas being requested 4 to preach the same things again _ which once they had preached, thought it their duties to _ satisfy the godly desires of men sincerely affected towards ¥ _ the truth. Nor may it seem burdenous to me, or for you” unprofitable, that I follow their example, the like occasion unto theirs being offered me. When we had last the Epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews in our hands*, and of that

Ρ and E. 4 the other prophet FE. r were E. 5 loden D. t of E. ἃ thus om. E. x stake D. Υ to Ey z ye KE. * in hand E. 1 [Psalm cxix. 5. ] 2 [Rom. vii. 19, 24. ]

® [Isa. i. 4.] 4 Acts xiii, 41-44.

26 A Learned Discourse

epistle these words,! “In these last days he hath spoken unto us by his Son;” after we had thence collected the nature of the visible Church of Christ, and had defined it to be a community of men? sanctified through the profession of that truth which God hath taught the world by his Son ; and had declared, that the scope of Christian doctrine is the

comfort of them whose hearts are overcharged with the

burden of sin; and had proved that the doctrine professed in the church of Rome doth bereave men of comfort, both in their lives, and at” their deaths: the conclusion in the end, whereunto we came,° was this; “The church of Rome being in faith so corrupted, as she is, and refusing to be reformed, as she doth, we are to sever ourselves from her: the example of our fathers may not retain us in com- munion and fellowship* with that church, under hope that we so continuing, might ° be saved as well as they. God, I doubt not, was merciful to save thousands of them, though they lived in popish superstitions, inasmuch as they sinned ignorantly : but the truth is now laid open ἢ before our eyes.” The former part of this last sentence, namely, these words, “Ἱ doubt not but God was merciful to save thousands of our Jathers living in popish superstitions, inasmuch as they sinned zgnorantly :” this sentence I beseech you to mark, and to sift it with the strict’ severity of austere judgment, that if it be found as gold,» it may stand, suitable’ to the precious foundation whereupon it was then laid; for I protest, that if it prove to* be hay or stubble, mine own hand shall set fire to it! Two questions have risen by occasion of the ™ speech before alleged : the one, ‘‘ Whether our fathers, infected with popish errors and superstitions, might” be saved:” the other, ‘‘ Whether their ignorance be a reasonable inducement to make us think that°® they might.” We are therefore? to examine, first, what possi- bility, and 4 then, what probability there is, that God might be: merciful unto so many of our fathers.

bin FE. ¢ the conclusion whereunto in thend we came of all D. 4 and ore ae om. E. e may E. open om. EK. 8 strict om. E. h to be gold E. i be suitable E. k prove to om. E. ! on it E. m this E. n may E. ° that om. E. P then E. 4 and om. E.

2 MRteb, ς δὲ

2 * By sanctification, I mean a separation nee others not professing as they do. For true holiness consisteth not in professing, but in obey- ing the truth of Christ.

* Notes om. D.

- benot... sinso

of Justification 27

to. So many of our fathers living in popish superstitions, yet by the mercy of God to be saved? No; this could not

be: God hath spoken by his angel from heaven unto his

people concerning Babylon (by Babylon we understand the church of Rome) :! ‘Go out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.”* For answer whereunto, first, I do not take these words to be meant only of temporal plagues, of the corporal death, sorrow, famine, and fire, whereunto God in his wrath had* condemned Babylon ; and that to save his chosen

7 people from these plagues, he saith, ‘‘Go out;” with like

intent, as in the Gospel, speaking of Jerusalem’s desolation, he saith,? “Let them that are in Judea flee unto the

_ mountains, and them which are in the midst thereof depart Ἢ out ; a “wife and thy daughters which are here, lest thou be _ destroyed in the punishment of the city : ” but forasmuch as

” or, as in former times unto Lot,’ ‘‘ Arise, take thy

here it is said, “Go out of Babylon, that ye be not partakers

of her sins, and by consequence of her plagues ;” plagues ’ eternal being due to the sins of Babylon ;* no doubt," their _ everlasting destruction, which are partakers herein, is either ' principally meant, or necessarily implied in this sentence.

How then was it possible for so many of our fathers to be

1 saved, sith they were so far from departing out of Babylon, _ that they took her for their mother, and in her bosom Ὁ yielded up the ghost?

11. First, the plagues* being threatened unto them that

are partakers in the sins of Babylon, we can define nothing

concerning our fathers out of this sentence ; unless we shew

_ what the sins of Babylon be, and who” they be that are _ such partakers in* them, that their everlasting plagues are - inevitable. The sins which may be common both to them _ of the church of Rome, and to” others departed thence, ' .must be severed from this. question. He which saith, _ “ Depart out of Babylon, lest ye be partakers of her sins,”

sheweth plainly, that he meaneth such sins, as except we separate ourselves, we have*no power in the world to avoid ;

: such impieties, as by law® they have established, and

* that ye be not partaker of her Ἐν E. 5. in wrath hath D. t that ye PR aE es om. u we doubt E. * for the plagues E.

‘Ag y what E. * which . of E. > to om. D. © by their law E.

1 Apoc. xviii. 4. 2 Matt. xxiv. 16; S. Luke xxi. 21. * Gren. Sie 18,

28 A Learned Discourse

whereunto all that are among‘ them, ‘either do indeed assent, or else are by powerable means forced in show and in® appearance to subject themselves. As for example, in the church of Rome, it is maintained, that the same! credit and reverence which‘ we give to the Scriptures of God, ought also to be given to unwritten verities ; that the pope is supreme head ministerial? over the universal church militant ; that the bread in the Eucharist is transubstanti- ated? into Christ; that it is to be adored,* and to be offered up unto God as a sacrifice propitiatory® for quick and dead ; that images are to be worshipped, saints to be called upon as intercessors,® and such like. Now, because

4 amongste D. 6 inom. E. f that E.

1 (Conc. Trid. Sess. iv. Decr. de Canonicis Scripturis. ‘‘ Ecclesia

. orthodoxorum Patrum exempla secuta, omnes libros tam Veteris

quam Novi Testamenti, cum utriusque unus Deus sit auctor, necnon

traditiones ipsas, tum ad fidem tum ad mores pertinentes, tanquam vel

ore tenus’a Christo, vel a Sp. Sancto dictatas, et continua successione in

ecclesia catholica conservatas, pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia suscipit ac veneratur.” Conc. Hard. x. 22.]

2 [Bulla ΡΠ IV. super Profess. Fidei, (containing what is commonly called Pope Pius’ Creed, to which all ecclesiastical persons must assent:) ibid. t. x. 201, a. ‘*Sanctam catholicam et apostolicam Romanam ecclesiam, omnium ecclesiarum matrem et magistram agnos- co; Romanoque Pontifici, beati Petri Apostolorum Principis successori, ac Jesu Christi vicario, veram obedientiam spondeo ac juro.”}

® (Conc. Trid. Sess. xiii. Can. 2. ‘Si quis dixerit in sacrosancto Eucharistiz sacramento remanere substantiam panis et vini una cum corpore et sanguine Dom. nostri J. C. ; negaveritque mirabilem illam et singularem conversionem totius substantize panis in corpus et totius substantize vini in sanguinem, manentibus duntaxat speciebus panis et vini, quam quidem conversionem catholica ecclesia aptissime transub- stantiationem appellat ; anathema sit.” t. x. 83.]

4 [Ibid. can. 6. ““81 quis dixerit, in sancto Eucharistize sacramento Christum unigenitum Dei Filium non esse cultu latriz, etiam externo, adorandum ; atque ideo nec festiva peculiari celebritate venerandum, neque in processionibus . . . solenniter circumgestandum; vel non

publice, ut adoratur, populo proponendum; et ejus adoratores esse

idololatras ; anathema sit.” x. 84.]

> [Ibid. Sess. xxii. Decr. de Missa, cap. 2. ‘‘Quoniam in divino hoc sacrificio, quod in missa peragitur, idem ille Christus continetur, et incruente immolatur, qui in ara cruci® semel seipsum cruente obtulit ; docet sancta synodus, sacrificium istud vere propitiatorium esse. . . Non solum pro fidelium vivorum peccatis, poenis, satisfactionibus, et aliis necessitatibus, sed et pro defunctis in Christo, nondum ad plenum purgatis, rite, juxta Apostolorum traditionem, offertur.” x. 127.]

ὁ [Bulla Pii IV. ubi supr. ‘‘Constanter teneo . . . sanctos uno

cum Christo regnantes, venerandos atque invocandos esse: eosque — _orationes Deo pro nobis offerre . . . Firmissime assero, imagines — Christi et Deiparze semper Virginis, nec non aliorum sanctorum, haben- —

πάντας

of Justification 29

some heresies do concern things only believed, as ¢ran- _ substantiating of® sacramental elements in the Eucharist ; some concern things which are practised also® and put in ure, as adoration! of the elements transubstantiated: we must note that erroneously the practice of that is sometime received, whereof the doctrine which* teacheth it is not heretically maintained. They are all partakers in the main- tenance of heresies, who by word or deed allow them, knowing them, although not knowing them to be heresies ; as also they, and that most dangerously of all others, who knowing heresy to be heresy, do notwithstanding, in worldly respects, make semblance of allowing that, which in heart and in! judgment they condemn: but heresy is heretically _ maintained, by such as obstinately hold it after wholesome ' admonition. Of the last sort, as also™ of the next before, I ' make no doubt, but that their condemnation, without actual ® ' repentance, is inevitable. Lest any man therefore should _ think, that in speaking of our fathers, I speak ° indifferently _ of them all; let my words, I beseech you, be well noted,’ ' “T doubt not but God was merciful to save thousands of ' our fathers;” which thing I will now by God’s assistance _ set more plainly before your eyes. » 12. Many are partakers of the error which are not of 4 the _ heresy of the church of Rome. The people following the '_ conduct of their guides, and observing as they did, exactly ~ that which was prescribed them,’ thought they did God good service, when indeed they did dishonour him. This

_ was their error: but the heresies* of the Church of Rome,

_ their dogmatical positions opposite unto Christian truth, _ what one man among ten thousand did ever understand ἢ - Of them, which understand Roman heresies, and allow - them, all are not alike partakers in the action of allowing. ~ Some allow them as the first founders and establishers of

them ;* which crime toucheth none but their popes and

- councils: the people are clear and free" from this. Of them _ which maintain popish heresy * not as authors, but receivers _ of it from others, all maintain it not as Masters. In this are not the people partakers neither, but only their predicants

ce & the transubstantiation of the E. 4 alsoow.E. ‘theadoration E. * that E.

linom.E. ™ alsoom. E. ®™anactualE. © should speak E. Ρ marked E.

"4 in Ὁ. τ them om. E. s heresy Εν. t of them om. D. u free and clear D. x heresies E. aud them for it.

_ das et retinendas esse, atque eis debitum honorem ac venerationem ΕΓ dmpertiendam.” x. 200. ]

30 A Learned Discourse

and*theirY schoolmen. Of them which have been partakers in the” sin of teaching popish heresy, there is also a differ- ence ; for they have not all been teachers of all popish heresies. ‘Put a difference,” saith St. Jude;! “have compassion upon some.” Shall we lap up all in one condition? shall we cast them all headlong, shall we plunge ~ them all in® that infernal and ever-flaming® lake? them ~ that have been partakers in ὃ the error ¢ of Babylon, together with them within * the heresy? them which have been the authors of heresy, with them that by terror and violence have been forced to receive it? them which have taught it, with them ‘ whose simplicity hath by sleights and con- veyances of false teachers been seduced to believe it? them which have been partakers in one, with them which® have been partakers in many? them which in many, with them which in all?

13. Notwithstanding I grant, that although the con- demnation of one® be more tolerable than another ;: yet from the man that laboureth at the plough, to him that sitteth in the Vatican; to all partakers in the sins of Babylon, our fathers,* though they did but erroneously practise that which their guides did heretically teach;! to all without exception, plagues worldly™ were due. The pit is ordinarily the end, as well of the guided as the guide® in blindness. But woe worth the hour wherein we were born, except we might persuade ° ourselves better things ; things that accompany men’s P salvation, even where we know that worse and such as accompany condemnation are due. Then must we shew some way how possibly they might escape. What way is there for sinners to4 escape the judgment of God, but only by appealing unto the seat of his saving — mercy? Which mercy we do not with Origen extend unto devils and damned spirits. God hath mercy upon thousands, but there be thousands also which be hardened.* Christ — hath therefore set the bounds, he hath fixed the limits of — his saving mercy within the compass of these two*® terms. In the third* of St. John’s Gospel, mercy is restrained to

Υ their om. E. 2 this E. 8. into E. - Β everlasting flaming E. ¢ of E. 4 errors E. ¢ which are in E. f those Ὁ. 8 that D. h them E. i these E. k to our fathers E. ' the guides... . taught E. m worldly om. E. » guide as of the guided E. ° promise E. Pp which... man’s E. 4 that sinners can find to E. τ he hardeneth E. * two om, E.

t E. zuserts In the third . . . . believers detween the two verses.

1 Ver. 22.

of Justification | 31

'

believers :! “God sent not his Son" to condemn the world, _ but that the world through him might be saved.” 2?‘ He | that believeth shall not be condemned: he that believeth not, is condemned already, because he believeth not in the Son of God.” In the second of the Revelation, mercy is _ restrained to the penitent. For of Jezebel and her sectaries _ thus he speaketh:® “1 gave her space to repent, and she ' repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them _ that commit fornication with her into great affliction, except _ they repent them of their works ; and I will kill her children _ with death.” Our hope therefore of the fathers is vain, if _ they were altogether faithless and impenitent.* .

_ 14. They be not all faithless that are either’ weak in _ assenting to the truth, or stiff in maintaining things any way” opposite to the truth of Christian doctrine. But as _ many as hold the foundation which is precious, though they ' hold it but weakly, and as it were by® a slender thread, _ although they frame many base and unsuitable things upon _ it, things that cannot abide ἢ the trial of the fire ; yet shall _ they pass the fiery “ trial and be saved, which indeed have ' builded themselves upon the rock, which is the foundation ' of the Church. If then our fathers did not hold the foundation of faith, there is no doubt but they were faithless. If many of them held it, then is there herein 4 no et but that ° many of them might be saved. Then _let us see what the foundation of faith is, and whether we may think that thousands of our fathers living‘ in popish _ superstitions, did notwithstanding hold the foundation.

_ 15. If the foundation of faith do import the general ground whereupon we rest when we do believe, the writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles are the foundation of Christian faith: ‘‘Credimus quia legimus,” saith St. Jerome.* Ὁ that the church of Rome did as° soundly interpret those ὃ

eee ui

4 ἃ own Son E. ~* is, if they were not altogether faithless and impenitent E. ΟΥ̓ either om. E. 2 any way om. E. @ with BE, b byde D. ¢ fire D. ἃ therein E. e that om. E. f being E. s these E.

1 John iii. 17. 2 John iii. 18. 8. Rev. ii. 21-23.

_ 4{[Ady. Helvid. c. 19. t. ii. pars i. p. 226. ed. Vallarsii. Venet. 1767. | :

_ ὅ They misinterpret, not only by making false and corrupt glosses _ upon the Scripture, but also by forcing the old vulgar translation as the only authentical : howbeit, they refuse no book which is canonical, _ though they admit sundry which are not.*

*| This note ὁ." Ὁ.

32 A Learned Discourse

fundamental writings whereupon we build our faith, as she : doth willingly hold and embrace them !

16. But if the name Foundation® do note the principal — thing which is believed, then is that the foundation of our faith which St. Paul hath unto Timothy: “(οὐ manifested - in the flesh, justified in the Spirit,” &c.:! that of Nathanael, © “Thou art the Son of the living God ; thou art the king of Israel : 2 that of the inhabitants of Samaria, ‘‘ This is Christ © the Saviour of the world:” he that directly denieth this, doth utterly raze! the very foundation of our faith. I have proved heretofore, that although the church of Rome hath ~ played the harlot worse than ever did Israel, yet are they © not, as now the synagogue of the Jews, which plainly © denieth * Christ Jesus, quite and clean excluded from the new covenant. But as Samaria compared with Jerusalem is © termed Aho/ah, a church or tabernacle of her own ; con- trariwise, Jerusalem Aholibah, the resting place of the Lord: SO, whatsoever we term the church of Rome, when we ᾿ compare her to! reformed churches, still we put a difference, — as then between Babylon and Samaria, so now between — Rome and heathenish ™ assemblies. Which opinion I must and will recall; I must grant, and will, that the church off Rome, together with all her children, is clean excluded ; there is no difference in the world between our fathers anda Saracens, Turks, or™ Painims, if they did directly deny Christ crucified for the salvation of the world.

17. But how many millions of them are® known so to © have ended their mortal? lives, that the drawing of their ~ breath hath ceased with the uttering of this faith, “Christ my Saviour, my Redeemer Jesus!’’ And shall we say that © such did not hold the foundation of Christian faith ? 4 Ἢ

Answer is made, that this they might unfeignedly confess, ~ and yet be far enough from salvation. For behold, saith the Apostle, “I, Paul, say unto you, that if ye™ be circum-— cised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” Christ, in the work — of man’s salvation is alone: the Galatians were cast away — by joining circumcision and other rites of the law with” Christ: the church of Rome doth teach her children to join other things likewise with him; therefore their faith, their belief, doth not profit them any thing at all. ͵

h name of foundation E. i raise D. k deny E. ! with EB. m the heathenish E. » and E. ° were FE. P mortal ov. E. 4 This sentence om. E. r you D. s the other E. 4

1 5 Tim. iii. 16. 2 John i. 49; iv. 42. 8. Gal.'v. 2.1

of Justification Es

It is true, they* do indeed join other things with Christ ; but how? Not in the work of redemption itself, which they grant that Christ alone hath performed sufficiently for the salvation of the whole world ; but in the application of this inestimable treasure, that it may be effectual to their salva- _ tion: how demurely soever they confess that they seek _ remission of sins no otherwise than by the blood of Christ, using humbly the means appointed by kim to apply the _ benefit of his holy blood; they teach, indeed, so many ΠΟ things pernicious to" Christian faith, in setting down the ' means whereof they speak, that the very foundation of faith _which they hold, is thereby plainly overthrown,! and the force of the blood of Jesus Christ extinguished. We may therefore dispute with them, press them, urge* them even with as dangerous sequels as the Apostle doth the Galatians. But I demand, if some of those Galatians, heartily embracing _the Gospel of Christ, sincere and sound in faith, this only ¥ error excepted, had ended their lives before they were ever “taught how perilous an opinion they held; shall we think that the damage of this error did so overweigh the benefit of their faith, that the mercy of God, his mercy,? might not -save them? I grant they overthrew the very foundation of ‘faith by consequent: doth not that so likewise which the?

t that they E. u in E. x disputing with them urge E. y one only E. κα his mercy oz. E.

ΟῚ Plainly in all men’s sight whose eyes God hath enlightened to behold his truth. For they which are in error are in darkness, and see _ not that which in light is plain. In that which they teach concerning the natures of Christ, they hold the same which Nestorius fully, the _ same which Eutyches about the proprieties of his nature.* [If taken in the full literal sense, it seems hardly possible that this note should be ᾿ς Hooker’s, considering on the one hand his unvarying acknowledgment _ that the church of Rome is orthodox regarding the doctrine of the _ Incarnation ; on the other hand his express condemnation of Nestorius _and Eutyches. Comp. (e. g.) b. iii. c. 1. 10; with b. v. c. xii. 133 lii. - 3, 4. It should be remembered that this sermon was not prepared by _ the author for the press, and that the Dublin copy of it has no notes at all. ] _ 2 The opinion of the Lutherans, though it be no direct denial of the foundation, may notwithstanding be damnable unto some ; and I do not _ think but that in many respects it is less damnable, as at this day some maintain it, than it was in them which held it at first ; as Luther and _ others, whom I had an eye unto in this speech. The question is not, whether an error with such and such circumstances; but simply, _ whether an error overthrowing the foundation, do exclude all possibility _ of salvation, if it be not recanted, and expressly repented οἱ. ἢ

* Note om. D. VOR. 1. Cc

Lutheran churches ὅ0 at this day so stiffly and so fiercely ἃ maintain? For mine ἢ own part, I dare not hereupon° deny ~ the possibility of their salvation, which have been the chiefest instruments of ours, albeit they carried to their grave a persuasion so greatly repugnant to the truth. Ἐοι- asmuch therefore, as it may be said of the church of Rome, © she hath yet “a little strength,” ! she doth not directly deny the foundation of Christianity: I may, I trust without © offence, persuade myself, that thousands of our fathers in — former times, living and dying within her walls, have found ~ mercy at the hands of God.

18. What although they repented not of their errors? — God forbid that I should open my mouth to gainsay that © which Christ himself hath spoken: “ Except ye repent, ye shall all perish.” 2 And if they did not repent, they perished. But withal note, that we have the benefit of a double repentance : the least sin which we commit in deed, word, © or thought, is death, without repentance. Yet how many — things do escape us in every of these, which we do not’ know, how many, which we do not observe to be sins! and | without the knowledge, without the observation of sin, there © is no actual repentance. It cannot then be chosen, but that ” for as many as hold the foundation, and have all known sin and error ° in hatred, the blessing of repentance for unknown sins and errors‘ is obtained at the hands of God, through — the gracious mediation of Christ Jesus, for such suitors as” cry with the prophet David, “ Purge me, O Lord, from my secret sins.” ὃ

19. But we wash a wall of loam; we labour in vain; all this is nothing ; it doth not prove, it cannot justify, that which we go about to maintain. Infidels and heathen men > are not so godless, but that they may, no doubt, cry God mercy, and desire in general to have their sins forgiven them. ‘To such as deny the foundation of faith, there can be no salvation, according to the ordinary course which God — doth use in saving men, without a particular repentance of that error. The Galatians, thinking that except they were | circumcised they could not be saved, overthrew the found- ation of faith directly: therefore if any of them did die so” persuaded, whether before or after they were told of their

* firmly E. b my D. ¢ here E. 4 thought or word E. . © holden | all sins and errors E. f error D. s unless ἘΝ

1 [Apoc. iii, 8.] 2 Luke xiii. 3. 3 [Ps. xix. 12.] 4

34 A Learned Discourse |

spite

of Justification 35

error,” their case: is dreadful; there is no way with them

but one, death and condemnation. For the Apostle speaketh

nothing of men departed, but saith generally of all, ‘If ye _ be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Ye are ' abolished from Christ, whosoever are justified by the law ; - thereason is the same. For whom Antichrist hath seduced, _ concerning them did not St. Paul speak long before, ‘‘ That _ because * they received not the love of the truth,! that they ' might be saved; therefore God would send them strong ' delusions to believe lies, that all they might be damned | which believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteous- 'ness”?? And St. John, “All that dwell upon the earth _ shall worship him, whose names are not written in the Book of Life”?® Indeed many of them™ in former times, as ' their books and writings do yet shew, held the foundation, _ to wit, salvation by Christ alone, and therefore might be ' saved. For™ God hath always had a Church among them, _ which firmly kept his saving truth. As for such as hold with » the church of Rome, that we cannot be saved by Christ ' alone without works; they do not only by a circle of con- » sequence, but directly, deny the foundation of faith ;+ they ᾿ς hold it not, no not so much as by a slender ° thread. ' 20. This, to my remembrance, being all that hath been as "yet opposed with any countenance or show of reason, I "hope, if this be answered, the cause in question is at an end. Concerning general repentance, therefore: what? a mur- _derer, a blasphemer, an unclean person, a Turk, a Jew, any sinner to escape the wrath of God by a general ‘‘ God forgive -me”?4 Truly, it never came within my heart, that a general _ repentance doth serve for all sins or for all sinners :* it serveth

; ‘ h errors E. iend E. k That because om. E. 1 word of truth E -™ofthemom.E. πα For om. E. ° slender om. E. P as yet om. E. _ 4 general repentance E. r This clause ov. ἘΣ.

Beet Gal, ν 2. 4.8) 22 Thess. ii, 10-12. 3 Apoc. xiii. 8. ' 4[Penry, ‘‘M. Some laid out in his colours,” &c. p. 29. “γε ᾿ς hold, that to him which dieth a papist, let him do never so many good - works, and build if it were possible ten thousand colleges or churches, _ the very gates and portcullis of God’s mercy are quite shut up, and all _ those his glorious works, how sweet soever they may be to others, will _ prove but wrack and misery to himself. And in this point if either M. Hooker, M. Some, or all the reverend bishops of the land, do stand _ against us, it shall little dismay us: we say with their own Doctor, (but yet not altogether as he,) ‘Instar mille,’ (he saith P/atonts, we say,) ‘veritatis calculus.’ 7]

36 A Learned Discourse

only for the common oversights* of our sinful life, atl | for faults* which either we do not mark, or do not know that they are faults. Our fathers were actually penitent for sins, wherein they knew they displeased God: or else they come" not within the compass of my first speech. Again, that otherwise they could not be saved, than holding the foundation of Christian faith, we have not only affirmed, but proved. Why is it not then confessed, that thousands of our fathers, although they lived * in popish superstitions, might yet, by the mercy of God, be saved? First, if they had directly denied the very foundation’ of Christianity, without repenting them particularly of that sin, he which saith, there could be no salvation for them, according to the ~ ordinary course which God doth use in saving men, granteth ~ plainly, or at the leastwise* closely insinuateth, that an ~ extraordinary privilege of mercy might deliver their souls from hell ; which is more than I required. Secondly, if the foundation be denied, it is denied by force * of some heresy which the church of Rome maintaineth. But how many were there amongst our fathers, who being seduced by the common error of that church, never knew the meaning of her heresies! So that if all popish heretics did perish, thousands of them which lived in popish superstitions might be saved. Thirdly, seeing all that held popish heresies did not hold all the heresies of the pope; why might not thousands which were infected with other leaven, live and® die un- soured by? this, and so be saved? Fourthly, if they all — had held® this heresy, many there were that held it πὸ doubt only in a general form of words, which a favourable — interpreter might expound in a sense differing far enough ~ from the poisoned conceit of heresy. As for example; did — they hold that we cannot be saved by Christ without — works ?#1! We ourselves do, I think, all say as much, with ~ this construction, salvation being taken as in that sentence, ~ “Corde creditur ad justitiam, ore fit confessio ad salutem ;” — except infants, and men cut off upon the point of their con- ~

i 4 -- a Pe eS ey

8 oversight Ὁ. t the faults F. u fall E. x which lived E. y foundations E. z at the least E. @ for fear E. b although E. ¢ live and om. E. 4 with E. 6. all held E. f but only E. 8 interpretation E. h good works E.

1 For this is the only thing alleged to prove the impossibility of their salvation: The church of Rome joineth works with Christ, which is a — denial of the foundation, and unless we hold the foundation, we cannot — be saved, *

* Note om. D.

of Justification 37

version, of the rest none shall see God, but such as seek

peace and holiness, though not as a cause of their salvation,

yet as’a way through ‘ which they must walk that * will be

saved. Did they hold, that without works we are not _ justified? Take justification so that! it may also imply sanc- _ tification, and St. James doth say as much. ™For except _ there be an ambiguity in some™ term, St. Paul and St. James _ do contradict each other ;° which cannot be. Now, there _ is no ambiguity in the name either of faith or of works, _ both? being meant by them both in one and the same ' sense. Finding therefore that justification is spoken of by _ St. Paul without implying sanctification, when he proveth _ that a man is justified by faith without works ; finding like- _ wise that justification doth sometimes imply sanctification -also with it; I suppose nothing more sound,‘ than so to interpret St. James as* speaking not in that sense, but in this. _ 21. * We have already shewed, that there are’ two kinds _ of Christian righteousness : the one without us, which we have _ by imputation ; the other in us, which consisteth of faith, “hope, charity," and other Christian virtues; and St. James _ doth prove that Abraham had not only the one, because the thing he * believed was imputed unto him for righteousness ; but also the other, because he offered up his son. God ‘giveth us both the one justice and the other: the one by “accepting us for righteous in Christ; the other by working Christian righteousness in us. ‘The proper and most imme- ‘diate efficient cause in us of this latter, is, the spirit of adop- " tion which Y we have received into our hearts. That whereof ‘it consisteth, where of it is really and formally made, are those ‘infused virtues proper and particular unto saints ; which the Spirit, in that * very moment when first it is given of God, _bringeth with it ; the effects thereof ὃ are such actions as the _ Apostle doth call the fruits, the works,” the operations of the Spirit; the difference of which® operations from the root whereof they spring, making it needful to put two kinds likewise of sanctifying righteousness, Habitual and Actual. _ Habitual, that holiness, wherewith our souls are inwardly en- _dued, the same instant when first we begin to be the temples of

oe i through ov. E. k which E, las E. ™ Paragraph here in D. e same E. © each the other E. P both om. E. 4 nothing to be δ τ ore sound E, τ as ook E. 8 No paragraph Ὄ. t be E. 4 and

ἃ ity E. x he ove. y which om. E. the E. a whereof E. ΟΡ fruits of works E. e ike which E.

38 A Learned Discourse

the Holy Ghost ; Actual, that holiness which afterward beauti- — fieth all the parts and actions of our life, the holiness for — which Enoch, Job, Zachary, Elizabeth, and other saints, — are in Scriptures? so highly commended. If here it be © demanded, which of these we do first receive ; I answer, — that the Spirit, the virtues of the Spirit, the habitual justice, — which is ingrafted, the external justice of Christ Jesus” which is imputed, these we receive all at one and the same time ; whensoever we have any of these, we have all; they go together. Yet sith no man is justified except he believe,

and no man believeth except he have? faith, and no man

hath faith, unless he have received the Spirit of Adop- tion! forasmuch as these* do necessarily infer justification, — but! justification doth of necessity presuppose them; we

must needs hold that imputed righteousness, in dignity being © the chiefest, is notwithstanding in order the last ™ of all these, — but actual righteousness, which is the righteousness of good — works, succeedeth all, followeth after all, both in order and ~ ἴῃ ἃ time. Which thing ° being attentively marked, sheweth plainly how the faith of true believers cannot be divorced from hope and love; how faith is a part of sanctification, and yet unto justification necessary ; how faith is perfected © by good works, and yet no works of ours good without faith : finally, how our fathers might hold, We ἃ are justified © by faith alone, and yet hold truly that without good * works © we are not justified. Did they think that men do merit — rewards in heaven by the works they perform on earth? The ancient Fathers* use meriting for obtaining, and in that sense they of Wittenberg have in their Confession: ‘‘ We teach that good works commanded of God are necessarily to © be done, and that * by the free kindness of God they merit © their certain rewards.1_ Others" therefore, speaking as our fathers did, and we taking their speech in a sound meaning, -

oN Pee ag ee

Kak piper ᾿

a ΘΑ ΨΩ ΠΈΡΙ

4 the Scriptures E. ¢ Jesus Christ E. f hath D. ‘ αὶ except E. h hath E. i hath faith comes after adoption E. k they E. 1 and E. ™ to the last E. » in om. E. ο thing om. E. P and not works of ours without faith E. 4. that we E. τ good om. E. "5. Fathers om. ἘΣ. t that om. E. ἃ Others om. ἘΣ.

1 [In Syntagm. Confess. pars ii. p. 106. Gen. 1654. ‘‘ Docemus bona opera divinitus preecepta necessario facienda esse, et mererz gratuita Dei clementia sua quedam sive corporalia sive spiritualia preemia.” This confession was exhibited at the council of Trent, 1552, by the deputies of the Duke of Wirtemberg. It was drawn up by Brentius, (Sleidan, I. 22. p. 277. ed. Argent. 1559.) and had been approved by the Saxon protestants. ] ! ΠΝ

of Justification 39

as we may take our fathers’, and ought,* forasmuch as _ their meaning is doubtful, and charity doth always interpret _ doubtful things favourably ; what should induce us to think _ that rather the damage of the worse’ construction did light - upon them all, than that the blessing of the better was _ granted unto thousands ? 4 Fifthly, if in the worst construction that can* be made, they had generally all embraced it living, might not many of ' them dying utterly renounce it? Howsoever men, when | they sit at ease, do vainly tickle their own * hearts with the ' wanton conceit of I know not what proportionable corre- spondence between their merits and their rewards, which, in ' the trance of their high speculations, they dream that God _hath measured, weighed, and laid up, as it were, in bundles ‘for them; notwithstanding we see by daily experience, in a number even of them, that when the hour of death approacheth, when they secretly hear themselves summoned forthwith to appear, and stand at the bar of that® Judge, whose brightness causeth the eyes of angels ° themselves to ‘dazzle, all those 4 idle imaginations do then begin to hide “their faces; to name merits then, 15 to lay their souls upon the rack, the memory of their own deeds is loathsome unto ‘them, they ‘forsake all things wherein they have put any ‘trust and‘ confidence ; no staff to lean upon, no ease, no rest, no comfort then, but only in Christ Jesus.® _ 22. Wherefore if this proposition were true, “To hold in ‘such wise, as the church of Rome doth, that we cannot be saved by Christ alone without works, is directly to deny the foundation of faith ;” I say, that if this proposition Were true, nevertheless so many ways I have shewed, whereby we may hope that thousands of our fathers living ἢ in popish Superstitions! might be saved! But what* if it be not

a x might E. | y worst E. z may E. ® own om. E. b the D. © the angels E. 4 these E. e merits is then E. f or E. & Jesus Christ E. h which lived E. i superstition E. ΓΚ what om. D.

_ 1 They may cease to put any confidence in works, and yet never think, living in popish ,superstition, they did amiss. Pighius died popish, and yet denied popery in the article of justification by works long before his death. [See Bayle, art. Pighius. He died at Utrecht, December 26, 1542: having the same year published at Cologne, “ Controversiarum preecipuarum in comitiis Ratisponensibus tractatarum, et quibus nunc potissimum exagitatur Christi fides et religio, diligens et luculenta replicatio.” In the 2nd Controversy, De Fide et Justificatione, Sign. G. ii. is the following: ‘‘In illo iustificamur coram Deo, non in

40 A Learned Discourse

true? What if neither that of the Galatians concerning cir- _

cumcision, nor this of the church of Rome about ™ works, be ©

any direct denial of the foundation, as it is affirmed that

troversy, the matter which first was brought into question being so cleared," as I hope it is. Howbeit, because I desire that the truth even in this ° also may? receive light,

I will do mine® endeavour to set down somewhat more

plainly : first, the foundation of faith, what it is: secondly, what it is directly to deny the foundation: thirdly, whether they whom God hath chosen to be heirs of life, may fall so far as directly to deny it: fourthly, whether the Galatians did so by admitting the error about circumcision and the law: last of all, whether the church of Rome, for this one opinion of works, may be thought to do the like, and thereupon to be no more a Christian church, than are the assemblies of Turks or’ Jews.

23. This word foundation being figuratively used, hath ~

always reference to somewhat which resembleth a material

m by E. n clear E. ο that E. P should E. 4« my D. r and E.

nobis ; non nostra sed illius justitia, que nobis cum illo jam communi- ~ cantibus imputatur. Proprize justitiee inopes, extra nos in illo docemur justitiam quzerere. . . Non nostra, sed Dei justitia justi efficimur in Christo. © Quo jure? amicitize, qua communionem omnium inter amicos facit, juxta ~ vetus et celebratissimum proverbium : Christo insertis, conglutinatis, et — unitis, etiam sua nostra facit ; suas divitias nobis communicat ; suam justi- tiam inter Patris judicium et nostram injustitiam interponit, et sub ea, — velut sub umbone et clypeo, a divina, quam commeruimus, ira, nos abscon- ~

dit, tuetur, ac protegit ; immo eandem nobis impertit, ac nostram facit,

qua tecti ornatique audacter et secure divino nos sistamus tribunali ac ©

judicio, justique non solum appareamus, sed etiam simus.” Sign. G. 11. ‘* Justificat nos Deus Pater bonitate sua gratuita qua nos in Christo complectitur: dum eidem insertos innocentia et justitia Christi nos induit : quee una ut vera et perfecta est, quae Dei sustinere conspectum ~ potest, ita unam pro nobis sisti oportet tribunali divini judicii, et velut causee nostrz intercessorem eidem repreesentari.” Ibid. et G. iv. ©

‘

both are? I need not wade so far as to discuss this con- —

3

Pa Pe

Sa li σε, τς ς τσ

‘*Dissimulare non possumus, hance vel primam doctrinze Christianze partem obscuratam magis quam illustratam a scholasticis speciosis ~ plerisque quzestionibus et definitionibus, secundum quas nonnulli, magno supercilio primam in omnibus auctoritatem sibi arrogantes, et de omnibus facile pronunciantes, fortassis etiam nostram hanc damnarent sententiam, qua propriam et que ex suis operibus esset coram Deo- justitiam derogamus omnibus Adz filiis, et docuimus una Dei in Christo niti nos posse justitia, una illa, justos esse coram Deo, destitutos propria.” It appears that he was censured in his own church as having a tendency to the Calvinistic notion of justification: and accused o Pelagianism both by Calvin and the Jansenists. ]

of Justification 41

building, as both the doctrine of the Christianity * [of Christ- ianity | and the community of Christians do. By the masters _of civil policy nothing is so much inculcated, as that com- monwealths are founded upon laws; for that a multitude cannot be compacted into one body otherwise than by a common acceptation * of laws, whereby they are to be kept in order. (The ground of all civil laws is this: “‘ No man ought to be hurt or injured by another:” take away this persuasion, and you"take away all laws ;* take away laws,

_ and what shall become of commonwealths?) So it is in

our spiritual Christian community: I do not now’ mean that body mystical? whereof Christ is the only” head, that building undiscernible by mortal eyes, wherein Christ is the chief corner-stone: but I speak of the visible church ; the

_ foundation whereof is the doctrine 8 of * the Prophets and

_ Apostles profest. The mark whereunto their doctrine ' tendeth, is pointed at in those ἢ words of Peter unto Christ, _ “Thou hast the words of eternal life:” in those of ὁ Paul to ' Timothy, “The holy Scriptures are able to make thee wise ' unto salvation.” It is the demand of nature itself, “‘ What shall we do to have eternal life?” + The desire of immor- tality and οἵ" the knowledge of that whereby it may be attained,‘ is so natural unto all men, that even they which ὅ are not persuaded that they shall, do® notwithstanding wish that they might, know a way how to see no end of life. And because natural means are not able still‘ to resist the force _ of death, there is no people in the earth so savage, which _ hath not devised some supernatural help or other, to fly _ unto for aid and succour in extremities, against the enemies _ of their lives. A longing therefore to be saved, without _ understanding the true way how, hath been the cause of all _ the superstitions in the world. O that the miserable estate _ of others, which wander in darkness, and wot not whither

a they go, could give us understanding hearts, worthily to

_ esteem the riches of the mercies ! of God towards us, before _ whose eyes the doors of the kingdom of heaven are set wide

s that doctrine of laws E. ὁ acceptionE. » ye E. * thelaws E. y now om. E. z only the E. ἃ which E. b these E. ¢ those words of E. 4 herself KE © of om. E. ἢ obtained ΕΒ. & who E. 4 whattheyshalldoD. i still om. E.

3 k laws E, 1 mercy E.

3 **Vocata ad concionem multitudine, quze coalescere in populi unius corpus nulla re preeterquam legibus poterat.” Liv. de Romulo, lib. i. [c. 8.

2 Ephes. i. 23; iv. 15. 3 Ephes. ii. 20.

4 John vi. 68; 2 Tim. iii. 15.

A2 A Learned Discourse

open! Should we not ™ offer violence unto it? It offereth violence to us, and we gather strength to withstand it.

But I am besides my purpose when I fall to bewail the cold affection which we bear towards that whereby we should be saved; my purpose being only to set down what the ground of salvation is. The doctrine of the Gospel pro- poseth salvation as the end: and doth it not teach the way of attaining thereunto? Yes," the damsel possest® with a spirit of divination spake the truth: “‘These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation:” ‘A new and living way, which Christ hath prepared for us through the vail, that is, his flesh ;”? salvation purchased by the death of Christ. (By this founda- tion the children of God, before the time of the written? law, were distinguished from the sons of men ; the reverend patriarchs both profest 4 it living, and spake expressly 2 of it at the hour of their death. It comforted Job? in the midst of grief; it was afterwards likewise*™ the anchor-hold of all the righteous in Israel, from the writing of the law till the time of grace ; every prophet maketh mention of it. It was so " famously spoken of, about the time, when the coming of Christ to accomplish the promises, which were made long before,* drew near, that the sound thereof was heard even amongst the Gentiles. When he was come, as many as were his acknowledged that he was their salvation ; he, that long- expected hope of Israel; he, that “seed, in whom all the nations of the world" should * be blest.”¥ So that now his name is a name? of ruin, a name of death and condemna- tion, unto such as dream of a new Messias, to as many as look for salvation by any other than by him : (“ For amongst men there is given no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved.” *) ‘Thus much St. Mark doth intimate by that which he putteth* in the very” front of his book, making his entrance with these words: “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” His doctrine he termeth the Gospel, because it teacheth salvation ; the Gospel of Jesus Christ,° the Son of God, because it teacheth salvation by him. This is then the foundation, whereupon

τὰ not om. E. n Yet E. © possessed D. P before the written E. 4 possessed E. t likewise om. E. ’ so om. E. t before it E. ἃ earth E. x shall E. y blessed E. * he isa name E. « doth put E. b very on. E. | ¢ Christ om. D. '

1 Acts xvi. 17; Heb. x. 20. ᾿ 2 Gen. xlix. 3 Job xix. 4 Acts iv. 12.

of Justification A3

the frame of the Gospel is erected ; that very Jesus whom the _ Virgin conceived of the Holy Ghost, whom Simeon em-

-braced in his arms,! whom Pilate condemned, whom the Jews crucified, whom the Apostles preached, he is Christ, the Lord, the only Saviour of the world: ‘other foundation can no man lay.”? ‘Thus I have briefly opened that prin- ciple in Christianity, which we call the foundation of our faith. It followeth now that I declare unto you, what it is directly to overthrow it. This will better appear, if first ° we under- stand, what it is to hold the foundation of faith.

24. There are which defend, that many of the Gentiles, who never heard the name of Christ, held the foundation of Christianity : and why? they acknowledged many of them the providence of God, his infinite wisdom, strength, and‘ power ; his goodness, and his mercy towards the children of _ men ; that God hath judgment in store for the wicked, but ' for the righteous that seeks® him rewards, &c. In this _ which they confessed, that lieth covered which we believe ; ' in the rudiments of their knowledge concerning God, the ' foundation of our faith concerning Christ lieth secretly ' wrapt® up, and is virtually contained: therefore they held » the foundation of faith, though they never heard‘ it. Might ' we not with as good colour* of reason defend, that every _ ploughman hath all the sciences, wherein philosophers have ', excelled? For no man is ignorant of the ! first principles, ' which do virtually contain whatsoever by natural means _ either™ is or can be known. Yea, might we not with as _ good ® reason affirm, that a man may put three mighty oaks _ wheresoever three acorns may be put? For virtually an ' acorn is anoak. To avoid such paradoxes, we teach plainly, _ that to hold the foundation is, in express terms to acknow- ledge it. :

_ 25. Now, because the foundation is an affirmative | proposition, they all overthrow it, who deny it ; they directly - overthrow it, who deny it directly ; and they overthrow it by - consequent, or indirectly, which hold any one assertion ' whatsoever, whereupon the direct denial thereof may be _ necessarily concluded. What is the question between the _ Gentiles and us, but this, Whether salvation be by Christ ἢ

ro Je ieee Bree ia P τὰν

| ἂὰ - be better opened E. © first om. E. f and om. E. & which serve E. _ * wrapped Ὁ. i had E. k a colour E. * their E. m either om. E.

_ ὦ great E.

1 Luke ii. 28. 2 Cor. iii. 11.

44 A Learned Discourse

What between the Jews and us, but this, Whether by this Jesus, whom we call Christ, yea or no? This to be the main point whereupon Christianity standeth, it is clear by that one sentence of Festus concerning Paul’s accusers : “They brought no crime of such things as I supposed, but had certain questions against him of their own ° superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.”! Where we see that Jesus, dead and raised for the salvation of the world, is by Jews? denied, despised by a Gentile, and by a Christian apostle maintained. The Fathers therefore in the primitive church when they wrote ; Tertullian, the book which he calleth 4 Apologeticus ; Minu- tius Felix, the book which he entitleth * Octavius ; Arnobius, his* seven books against the Gentiles; Chrysostom, his orations against the Jews ; Eusebius, his ten books of evan- gelical demonstration : they stood‘ in defence of Christ- lanity ἃ against them, by whom the foundation thereof was directly denied. But the writings of the Fathers against Novatians, Pelagians, and other heretics of the like note, refel positions, whereby the foundation of Christian faith was overthrown by consequent only. In the former sort of writings the foundation is proved ; in the latter, it is alleged as a proof, which to men that had been known directly to deny it, must needs have seemed a very beggarly kind of disputing. All infidels therefore deny the foundation of faith directly: by consequent, many a Christian man, yea whole Christian churches, have * denied it, and do deny it at this present day. Christian churches denying ¥ the founda- tion of Christianity? Not 5 directly, for then they cease

to be Christian churches; but by consequent, in respect ~

whereof we condemn them as erroneous, although, for hold- ing the foundation, we do and must hold them Christian. 26. We see what it is to hold the foundation; what

directly, and what by consequent, to deny it. The next '

thing which followeth is, whether they whom God hath chosen to obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, may,

being * once effectually called, and through faith truly justi- —

fied,” afterwards fall so far, as directly to deny the foundation which their hearts have before embraced with joy and comfort in the Holy Ghost; for such is the faith, which

° ownom. E. Ρ the Jews D. 4 called E. τ entitled E. * the E. +t standE. © « the Christianity D. x have om. E. y denying om. E. « Christianity, not Ὁ. a being om. EK. b justified truly E. ~

1 Acts xxv. 19.

᾿ wr i . EE Pe I σδή

Ae αν δ ne Sd

oe

mn on

δι

πὰ ee ee μενος

Sr ee ee ΣΤΝ 1,

of Justification 45

indeed doth justify. Devils know the same things which we believe, and the minds of the most ungodly may be fully persuaded of the truth ; which knowledge in the one and persuasion’ in the other, is sometimes termed faith, but _ equivocally, being indeed no such faith as that whereby a _ Christian man is justified. It is the spirit of adoption _ which worketh faith in us, in them not; the things which _ we believe, are by us apprehended, not only as true, but also as good, and that to us: as good, they are not by them _ apprehended ; as true, they are. Whereupon followeth a _ third“ difference ; the Christian man the more he increaseth in faith, the more his joy and comfort aboundeth : but they, _ the more sure they are of the truth, the more they quake _ and tremble at it. This begetteth another effect, wherein °

_ the hearts of the one sort have a different disposition from the other. “Non ignoro plerosque conscientia meritorum, _ nihil se esse post’ mortem magis optare quam credere ;

ΟΠ malunt enim exstingul penitus, quam ad _ supplicia repa- ΤΑΙ." J am not ignorant, saith Minutius, that there are _ too many,’ who being conscious what they are to look for, _ do rather wish that they might, than think that they shall, ' cease to be," when they cease to live ; because they hold it _ better that death should consume them unto nothing, than _ God receive them unto: punishment. So it is in other ' articles of faith, whereof wicked men think, no doubt, many times they are ‘too true: on the contrary side, to the other, there is no grief nor* torment greater, than to feel their _ persuasion weak in things, whereof, when they are persuaded, _ they reap such comfort and joy of spirit: such is the faith _ whereby we are justified ; such, I mean, in respect of the 4 quality. For touching the principal object of faith, longer - than it holdeth that! foundation whereof we have spoken, _ it neither justifieth, nor is ; but ceaseth to be faith when it _ ceases to believe, that Jesus Christ is the only Saviour of _ the world. The cause of life spiritual in us, is Christ, not _ carnally or corporally inhabiting, but dwelling in the soul of _ man, as a thing which (when the mind apprehendeth it) is _ said to inhabit and™ possess the mind. The mind con- _ ceiveth Christ by hearing the doctrine of Christianity. As _ the light of nature does cause the mind to apprehend those

Ἢ © persuasion ov. E. 4 the third E. e where E. f per E. _ 8 there be many E. h to be om. E. into E. k or E. 1 the E. » ™ or E.

1 Octav. c. 34.

46 A Learned Discourse

truths which are merely rational; so that saving truth, which is far above the reach of human reason, cannot other- — wise, than by the Spirit of the Almighty, be conceived. All — these are implied, wheresoever any one” of them is mentioned — as the cause of spiritual 5 life. Wherefore when we read,? ~ that! the spirit is our life; or,? ‘the Word of our life;” or,? — “‘Christ our life :”? we are in every of these to understand, that our life is Christ, by the hearing of the Gospel appre- — hended as a Saviour, and assented unto by4 the power ofthe ~ Holy Ghost. The first intellectual conceit and comprehen- — sion of Christ so embraced, St. Peter calleth* the seed ~ whereof we be new born: our first embracing of Christ, is our first reviving ὃ from the state of death and condemna- tion. “ He that hath the Son hath life,” saith St. John,® — and he that hath not the Son of God, hath not life.” If therefore he which once hath the Son, may cease to have the Son, though it be but" a moment, he ceases for that moment to have life. But the life of them which live® by the Son of God * is everlasting, not only for that it shall be everlasting 7 in the world to come," but because 8 as “‘ Christ being raised from the dead dieth* no more, death hath no more power over him;” so the’ justified man, being alive * to God in Jesus Christ our Lord, doth as necessarily from that time forward always live, as Christ, by whom he hath life, liveth always.°

I might, if I had not otherwhere largely done it already, shew by sundry * manifest and clear proofs, how the motions and operations of life are sometimes so undiscernible, and secret, that they seem stone-dead, who notwithstanding are still alive unto God in Christ.

For as long as that abideth in us, which animateth, quick- © eneth, and giveth life, so long we live; and we know that the cause of our life® abideth in us for ever. If Christ, the fountain of life, may flit and leave the habitation where once ~ he dwelleth, what shall become of his promise, “I am with ~

» one om. E. ο the spiritual E. P if we hal read E.

4 through E. τ for E. * that Ὁ. t which have the Son E «is | everlasting in the world to come E. x died E. y the om. E. 2 allied Ev @ many and sundry E. > so secret E. © faith Ε

1 Rom. viii. 10. 2 Phil. ii. 16.

® Col. iil. 4. 1 Fee ἂν 23. J

5 Ephes. ii. 5. 6 1 John v. 12.

7 1 John v. 13. Perpetuity of faith ; Rom. vi. 10. #

be omitted ?] 9 John xiv. 19.

8 [Should not ‘‘ but’

of Justification 47

you to the world’s end?” If the seed of God, which containeth Christ, may be first conceived and then cast out; how doth St. Peter! term it immortal? How doth ‘St. John ? affirm it abideth? Ifthe Spirit, which is given to cherish and preserve the seed of life, may be given and taken away, how is the earnest® of our inheritance until redemption ; how doth it continue‘ with us for ever? If therefore the man which is once just by faith, shall live by faith, and live for ever, it followeth, that he which once

' doth believe the foundation, must needs believe the founda-

tion for ever. If he4 believe it for ever, how can he ever directly deny it?® Faith holding the direct affirmation ; the direct negation, so long as faith continueth, is excluded. ' But yef will say, ‘That as he which to-day 8 is holy, ' may, to-morrow forsake his holiness, and become impure ;

' asa friend may change his mind, and become ἢ an enemy ; _ as hope may wither: so faith may die in the heart of man,

' the Spirit may be quenched, Grace may be extinguished, | they which believe may be quite turned away from the ᾿ truth.”

_ The?‘ case * is clear, long experience hath made this mani- ' fest, it needs no proof. I grant we are apt, prone, and ready, to forsake God ;® but is God as ready to forsake us? Our minds are changeable; is his so likewise? Whom God hath justified, hath not Christ assured, that it is

. ἃ he om. D. 5 Object. But E. f you E. 8 that is to-day E. h be made E. i Sol. The E. k cause E. Ag Se he Me 2 2 1 John iii. 9. 3 Ephes. i. 14.

4 John xiv. 17. - § [**Mr. Miller in his madness denied it, and yet died faithful as I hear.” Anonymous note in the Dublin MS. of this sermon. ] 6 [‘*Bolton’s end in despair, after persecution suffered in Queen _ Mary’s time.” Ibid. Strype, Mem. iii. i. 576. ‘‘ John Bolton, some- _ time of Reading, who lying in gaol for religion, grew mad, and in his _ raving fits railed upon Queen Mary; who thereupon was cruelly tormented in the said prison. Which Bolton becoming sober, and of a

better mind, Thackham took pity upon the man, because he seemed to

be of good religion, and . ... when by reason of the time, his very friends durst not become surety for such a traitor and rank heretic, as Bolton was then thought to be, he desired the mayor to take him alone _ with Bolton, which the mayor gently granted. And so this poor man was set at liberty and departed. But when the sessions came, Bolton _ left Thackham to pay the forfeiture.” It seems by a letter among _ Strype’s documents, Mem. iii. ii. 427, that this Bolton recanted so far as to attend mass, and yet afterwards printed ‘‘a certain story of his own great trouble and another’s recanting.” He was a silk weaver in Long-lane, Smithfield. ]

48 A Learned Discourse

“his Father’s will to give them a kingdom?” Which king- dom,! notwithstanding, shall not™ otherwise be® given them, than ‘“‘!if they continue grounded and stablished in the faith, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel ;” “21 they abide in love and holiness.” Our Saviour therefore, when he spake of the sheep effectually called, and truly gathered into his fold,® “1 give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hands ;” in promising to save them, promised,° no doubt, to preserve them in that without the which there can be no salvation, as also from that whereby salvation is? irremediably4 lost. Every error in things appertaining to* God is repugnant unto faith; every fearful, cogitation, unto hope; unto love every straggling inordinate desire; unto holiness, every blemish whereby * either the inward thoughts of our minds, or the outward actions of our lives, are stained. But heresy, such as that of Ebion, Cerinthus, and others, against whom the Apostles were forced to bend themselves, both by word and also by writing; that repining discouragement of heart which tempteth God, whereof we have Israel in the desert for a pattern; coldness, such as that in the angel of Ephesus ; foul sins, known to be expressly against the first or the second table of the law, such as Noah, Manasses, David, Solomon, and Peter, committed: these are each in their kind so opposite to the former virtues, that they leave no place for salvation without an actual repentance. But infidelity, extreme despair, hatred of God and all godliness,* obduration in sin, cannot stand where there is the least" spark of faith, hope, love, or* sanctity ; even ascold inthe ~ lowest degree cannot be, where heat in the first’ degree is — found. :

Whereupon I conclude, that although in the first kind, no man liveth that sinneth not; and in the second, as perfect as any do live, may sin: yet sith the man which is born of God hath a promise, that in him “the seed of God shall abide ;” 6 which seed is a sure preservative against the sins of* the third suit ; greater and clearer assurance we cannot

! Which kingdom ov. E. ™ it shall not E. » be otherwise E. ohe promised E. P whereby it is E. 4 irrecoverably E. τ unto E. * wherewith E. t goodness E. u but the least E. x and E. y highest E. 2 which E. @ that are of E.

+ Col. 4.23: 2 1 Tim. ii. 15.

3 John x, 28. 4 χα John iii. 9.

of Justification 49

have of anything, than of this, that from such sins God shall preserve the righteous, as the apple of his eye, for ever. Directly to deny the foundation of faith, is plain infidelity ; where faith is entered, there infidelity is for ever excluded :

therefore by him which hath once sincerely believed in Christ, the foundation of Christian faith can never be directly denied. Did not Peter, did not Marcellinus,! did not many others, both directly deny Christ after they » had believed, and again believe after they had denied? No doubt, as they may “ confess in word,? whose condemnation nevertheless is° their not believing (for example we have Judas); so likewise, they may believe in heart, whose condemnation, without repentance, is their not confessing. _ Although therefore Peter and the rest, for whose faith Christ _ had? prayed that it might not fail, did not by denial sin the ' sin of infidelity, which is an inward abnegation of Christ _ (for if they had done this, their faith had clearly failed) : yet, because they sinned notoriously and grievously, com- mitting that which they knew to be so & expressly forbidden 7 by the law, which saith, ‘“‘ Thou shalt worship the Lord thy _ God, and him only shalt thou serve :” necessary it was, that he which purposed to save their souls, should, as he did, touch their hearts with true unfeigned repentance, that his mercy might restore them again to life, whom sin had made the children of death and condemnation. Touching this point, therefore, I hope I may safely set it ® down, that if

Ὁ after that they E. © may om. E. 4 words E. e is nevertheless E. f hath E. & so om. EK. h it om. E.

- 1 [Platin. Vitt. Pontiff. p. 39. Colon. Ubiorum. 1600. ‘‘ Marcel- linus pontifex” (A.D. 304) ‘‘ad sacrificia gentium ductus, cum minis instarent carnifices, ut thura diis exhiberet, metu perterritus, deos alienos adoravit. Habito deinde non ita multo post concilio clxxx. episcoporum in Sinuessa urbe Campanize, eo et Marcellinus squalidus et _ pulverulentus et cilicio indutus proficiscitur, petitque ut sibi pro incon-

stantia debita poena tribuatur. Qui eum damnaret, in tanto concilio nemo-unus inventus est, cum dicerent omnes ea ferme ratione Petrum peccasse, ac flendo peccati poenam luisse. Rediit Romam Marcellinus

᾿ς iratus, Diocletianum adiit hominemdue increpat, qui se impulerit diis

gentium immolare. Ducitur ad martyrium Diocletiani jussu... . Inter eundum vero Marcellum presbyterum admonet, ne corpus suum sepulturee traderet, quod diceret ob negatum Salvatorem se id nequaquam - mereri.” This story is examined by Tillemont (among others) and _ shewn to be incredible, Mem. t. v. p. 613. The Donatists in Africa circulated such an account, which is mentioned by St. Augustin, contra Lit. Petil. lib. 11. § 202. t. ix. Rik and rejected by him as unworthy of notice, § 208. p. 280. |

50 A Learned Discourse

the justified err, as he may, and never come to understand his error, God doth save him through general repentance: but if he fall into heresy, he calleth him? either at* one time or other by actual repentance ; but from infidelity, which is an inward direct denial of the foundation, preserveth ! him by special providence for ever. Whereby we may easily know what to think of those Galatians, whose hearts were so possest with love™ of the truth, that if it had been possible, they would have plucked out their very” eyes, to bestow upon their teachers. It is true, that they were after- wards ° greatly | changed, both in persuasion and affection ; so that the Galatians, when St. Paul wrote unto them, were not now the Galatians which they had been in former times,? for that through error they wandered, although they were his sheep. Ido not deny, but I4 should deny, that they were his sheep, if I should grant, that through error they. perished. It was a perilous opinion which they held, in them* which 5 held it only as an error, because it overthroweth the found- ation by consequent. But in them which obstinately

maintained* it, I cannot think it less" than a damnable ~

heresy.

We must therefore put a difference between them which err of ignorance, retaining nevertheless a mind desirous to be instructed in the* truth, and them which, after the truth is laid open, persist in stubborn defence of their blindness. Heretical defenders, froward and _ stiff-necked teachers of circumcision, the blessed Apostle calleth? dogs: silly men, that were seduced to think they taught the truth, he pitieth, he taketh up in his arms, he lovingly embraceth, he kisseth, and with more than fatherly tenderness. doth so temper, qualify, and * correct the speech he useth towards them, that

i him om. D. k either at om. E. 1 he preserveth E, m the love E. n very om. E. ° afterwards om. E. P time E. 4 but that I KE. τ perilous even in them E. s that E. t maintain E. ἃ it is less Ὁ. x the om. E. y the stubborn E. z calls E. 2 and om. D.

1 Howsoever men be changed, (for changed they may be, even the best amongst men,) if they that have received, as it seemeth some of the Galatians, which fell into error, had received, the gifts and graces of* God, which are called ἀμεταμέλητα, such as faith, hope, and charity are, which God doth never take away from him to whom they are given, as if it repented him to have given them; if such might be so far changed by error, as that the very root of faith should be quite extinguished in them, and so their salvation utterly lost, it would shake the hearts of the strongest and stoutest of us all. See the contrary in Beza’s Observations upon the Harmony of Confessions. *

* This note om. D.

ἧ

'

'

of Justification 51

a man cannot easily discern, whether did most abound, the love which he bare to their godly affection, or the grief which the danger of their opinion bred him.” ‘Their opinion was _dangerous ; was not theirs so° likewise who thought that 4 the kingdom of Christ should be earthly? was not theirs which thought that ® the gospel should be preached? only to the Jews? What more opposite to prophetical doctrine, concerning the coming of Christ, than the one? concerning the catholic Church, than the other? Yet they which had these fancies, even when they had them, were not the worst men in the world. The heresy of freewill was a millstone about the Pelagians’ neck ;& shall we therefore give sentence of death inevitable ἢ against all those Fathers in the Greek _ church, which being mispersuaded, died in the error of free- p will?!

4 Of those‘ Galatians, therefore, which first were justified,? _ and then deceived, as I can see no cause, why as many as ' died before admonition might not by mercy be saved,*® _ even in error; so I make no doubt, but as many as lived till they were admonished, found the mercy of God effectual in _ converting them from their error,* lest any one that is Christ’s _ should perish. Of this, as! I take it, there is no controversy : only against the salvation of them which died, though before admonition, yet in error, it is objected, that their opinion was a very plain direct denial of the foundation. If Paul and Barnabas had been so persuaded, they would haply have used their ™ terms otherwise, speaking of the masters them- _ selves, who did first set that error abroach, “‘certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed.” ° What difference

e > them E. ¢ theirs also Εἰ. 4 that om. E. e that om. E. f only should be preached E. & necks D. h inevitably E. i these E. k received E. las om. E. m the E.

_ 1 [** They might err in freewill, yet not as Pelagius, who was enemy to the grace of God.” Anonymous note in D.] 2 [ον were they justified, when their faith was subverted?” Ibid. ] _ 8 [**S. Paul saw they were turned to another gospel, therefore in a - damnable state.” Note in.D.] ὶ 4 Error convicted, and afterwards maintained, is more than error ; for although opinion be the same it was, in which respect I still call it error, _ yet they are not now the same they were, when they are taught what the truth is, and plainly taught.* 5 Acts xv. 5. [““ Zguzvocally, as the priests, John xii.” Note in

* Note om. D.

52 A Learned Discourse

was there between these Pharisees ™ and other, from whom by a special description they are distinguished, but this ? They ° which came to Antioch, teaching the necessity of circumcision, were Christians ; the other, enemies of Chris- tianity. Why then should these be termed so distinctly believers, if they did directly deny the foundation of our belief; besides which, there was none? other thing, that made the rest to be unbelievers?4 We need go no further than St. Paul’s very reasoning against them, for proof of this matter :1 “Seeing ye’ know God, or rather are known of God, how turn you again unto impotent rudiments? 2 The law engendereth servants, her children are in bondage : they which are begotten by the gospel, are free. ὃ. Brethren, we are not children of the servant, but of the free woman, and will ye yet be under the law?” That they thought it unto salvation necessary, for the Church of Christ to observe days, and months, and times, and years, to keep the ceremonies and the sacraments of the law, this was theif error.4 Yet he which condemneth their error, confesseth notwithstand- ing,® that they knew God,° and were known of him; he taketh not the honour from them to be termed sons begotten of * the immortal seed of the gospel. Let the heaviest words which" he useth be weighed ; consider the drift of those dreadful conclusions :® ‘‘ If ye* be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing : as many as are justified by the law, ye ¥ are fallen from Grace.” It had been to no purpose in the world so to urge them, had not the Apostle been persuaded, that at the hearing of such sequels, ‘‘ No benefit by Christ,” ‘*a defection from grace,” their hearts would tremble and quake within them: and why? because they 2 knew, that in Christ, in grace,* their salvation lay, which is a plain” direct acknowledgment of the foundation.

Lest I should herein seem to hold that which no one godly and learned*® hath done, let these words be considered, which import as much as 1 affirm.’ ‘Surely those brethren

» other Pharisees E. ° These E. P nok. 4 no believers E. r you E. s that notwithstanding E. t by D. u which ov. D. x you D. y yeom. E. τ because that ἤν E. * and in grace E. b with a plain D. © godly or learned E.

1 Gal. iv. 9. 2 Ver. 24. 3 Ver. 31. * Ver. Io.

δ [“ The elect among them all were to be reclaimed from ene error.’ Note in D.] 8 Gal. -v. 24:3

7 Bucer. de Unit. Eccles, Servanda.* [The editor has not found in —

* This reference om. D.

; é ee ee ee

of Justification 53

_which, in St. Paul’s time, thought that God did lay a necessity

upon them to make choice of days and meats, spake as they ‘believed, and could not but in words condemn that liberty,

which they supposed to be brought in against the authority - _ of divine Scripture. Otherwise it had been needless for St. Paul to admonish them, not to condemn such as eat, with- out scrupulosity, whatsoever was set beforethem. ‘This error, if ye weigh what it is of itself, did at once overthrow all _ Scripture, whereby we are taught salvation by faith in Christ, all that ever the prophets did foretell, all that ever the _ Apostles did preach of Christ ; it drew with it the denial of Christ utterly: insomuch that? St. Paul complaineth, that his labour was lost upon the Galatians,° unto whom this error was obtruded ; affirming that Christ, if so be they were circumcised, should not profit them any thing at all. Yet so far was St. Paul from striking their names out of Christ’s book, that he commanded others to entertain them, to accept them with singular humanity, to use them like brethren ; he knew man’s imbecility, he had a feeling of our blindness which are mortal men, how great it is, and being sure that they are the sons of God, whosoever be endued with his fear, would not have them counted enemies of that whereunto they could not as yet frame themselves to be friends, but did even of‘ a very religious affection to the truth, unwittingly ® reject and resist" the truth. ‘They acknowledged! Christ to be _ their only and their‘ perfect Saviour, but saw not how repug- _ nant their believing the * necessity of Mosaical ceremonies was to their faith in Jesus Christ.”

᾿ Hereunto! reply™ is made, that if they had not directly ' denied the foundation, they might have been saved ; but _ saved they could not be; therefore their opinion was, not _ only by consequent, but directly, a denial of the foundation. _ When the question was about the possibility of their salva- _ tion, their denying of the foundation was brought for proof” _ that they could not be saved : now that the question is about _ their denial,° the impossibility of their salvation is alleged to _ prove they denied the foundation. Is there nothing which

ee PETE EE ΡΥ ee ane PIN, MET Ye he ΜΎΤΑΥ Sa yk Ἢ

= as D. € spent upon the Galatians in vain Ὁ. f ever upon E. 8 willingly E. h and resist om. E. i their om. E. k of D _ 1 Hereupon FE, ™ a reply E. » to prove E. ° their denial of the

| foundation E.

_ Bucer’s works any tract with this title, and suspects that the name is _ put erroneously for that of some other reformer. ] 1 [**Not true.” Note in D.]

54 A Learned Discourse

excludeth men from salvation, but only the foundation οἵ faith denied? I should have thought, that beside this, many other things are death, except they be actually repented of: as indeed this opinion of theirs was death,4 unto as many as, being given to understand” that to cleave thereunto was to fall from Christ, did notwithstanding cleave unto it. But of this enough. Wherefore I come to the last question, ‘“ Whether the * doctrine of the Church of Rome, concerning the necessity of works unto salvation, be a direct denial of the foundation of* our faith? ἢ

27. I seek not to obtrude unto you any private opinions ἢ of mine own. The best learned! in our profession are of this judgment, that all the heresies and* corruptions of the church of Rome do not prove her to deny the foundation directly ; if they did, they should prove’ her simply to be no Christian church. ‘‘ But I suppose,” saith one,? “that in the papacy some church remaineth, a church crazed, or, if you will, broken quite in pieces, forlorn, misshapen, yet some church:” his reason is this, ‘‘ Antichrist must sit in the temple of God.” Lest any man should think such sen- tences as this? to be true only in regard of them whom that church is supposed to have kept by the special providence of God, as it were, in the secret corners of his bosom, free from infection, and as sound in the faith, as we trust, by his mercy, we ourselves are; I permit it to your® wise con- siderations, whether it be not” more likely, that as phrensy, though itself take away the use of reason, doth notwithstand- ing prove them reasonable creatures which have it, because none can be frantic but they; so Antichristianity being the bane and plain overthrow of Christianity, may nevertheless argue the church wherein © Antichrist sitteth to be Christian.® Neither have I ever? hitherto heard or read any one word

P besides E. 4 except . . death om. E. τ understanding E. 5 that the E. t the foundation of om. E. ἃ opinion Ἐν. x heresies and om. E. y grant E. * these E. ® permit at your D. > not om. E. ¢ where E, 4 heretofore D.

1 [**Who be they?” Ibid.]

2 Calv. Ep. 104. [p. 126. ed. Gen. 1617. ‘*‘ Quod Ecclesize reliquias manere in Papatu dico, non restringo ad electos, qui illic dispersi sunt, sed ruinas dissipatee Ecclesiee illic extare intelligo. Ac ne mihi longis rationibus disputandum sit, nos Pauli auctoritate contentos esse decet, — qui Antichristum in templo Dei sessurum pronunciat. Quanquam et hoc rationibus satis validis me probasse puto, Ecclesiam licet semiruptam, _ immo si lubet diruptam ac deformem, aliquam tamen manere in Papatu.” — This is from a letter to Lzelius Socinus, 9 Dec. 1549. |; a

3 [** God’s house a den of thieves.” Note in D. |

of Justification Ὁ Be

alleged of force to warrant, that God doth otherwise than so

as hath been in the two next questions before declared,°

bind himself to keep his elect from worshipping the beast,

and from receiving his mark in their foreheads ; but he hath _ preserved, and will preserve, them from receiving any deadly _ wound at the hands of the man of sin, whose deceit hath _ prevailed over none to death, but only such f as never loved _ the truth, such as took pleasure 8. in unrighteousness : they in _ all ages, whose hearts have delighted in the principal truth, _ and whose souls have thirsted after righteousness, if they _ received the mark of error, the mercy of God, even erring, _ and dangerously erring, might save them; if they received _ the mark of heresy, the same mercy did, I doubt not, con- _ vert’ them.! How far Romish heresies may prevail over _ God’s elect, how many God hath kept from falling into them, _ how many have been converted from them, is not the ques- tion now in hand: for if heaven had not received any one of _ that coat for these thousand years, it may still be true,” that _ the doctrine which at" this day they do profess, doth not _ directly deny the foundation, and so prove them simply to _ be no Christian church. One I have alleged, whose words, in my ears, sound that way; shall I add another, whose ' speech is plainer?! ‘I deny her not the name of a church,” - saith another,® ‘‘no more than to a man the name of a man, as long as he liveth, what sickness soever he hath.” His _ reason is this: ‘‘ Salvation in Jesus Christ, which is the mark _ joineth the Head with the body, Jesus Christ with his * _ Church, it! is so cut off by man’s™ merits, by the merits of

_ . 6 before hath been declared E. f unto such E. Β tooka ae Ὁ. hh αἱ οϑγ. E. i plain E. k the E, 1 it om. ἘΣ. m many

1 [** Giving Christian repentance, and knowledge of the truth neces- 4 ay to salvation, 1 Tim. ii.” Note in D.]

mo { They deny the sufficiency of the scriptures, which you make the _ foundation.” Ibid.]

_ ® Morn. de Eccles. [c. 2. p. 32. ed. 1594. ‘Si de Christi officio, et ᾿ς queerenda in Christo salute agatur, quo, tanquam jugulo, corpori caput, ᾿ς Kcclesize Christus conjungitur: sic meritis hominum et sanctorum, indul- _ gentiarum sordibus, et infinitis blasphemiarum machinis pars heec doc- : _trinze labefactata est, ut jam e tenui filo vita ecclesiz penderet, eoque _ mox abrumpendo, (quee fuit Artichristi in agendo sedulitas, ) nisi tempore Dominus, qui eum compescerent, servos suos emisisset. Quamdiu vel ~ tenui illud filum reliquum manet, Ecclesie nomen non denegamus, ut ' nec ei gui morbo contabescit nomen hominis quamdiu vivit.” The _ author of this work was the Breton nobleman, Philip Mornay du Plessis, leader of the more serious party among the French protestants: it was ἣν p first published, A.D. 1577.]

56 A Learned Discourse

saints, by the pope’s pardons, and such other wickedness, that the life of the Church holdeth by a very little thread,” yet still the life of the Church holdeth. A third hath these — words : 1 “1 acknowledge the church of Rome, even at this — present day, for a church of Christ, such a church as Israel under® Jeroboam, yet a church.” His reason is this: “Every man seeth, except he willingly hoodwink himself, that as always, so now, the church of Rome holdeth firmly and steadfastly the doctrine of truth concerning God, and the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and baptizeth in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; con- ~ fesseth and avoucheth Christ for? the only? Redeemer of — the world, and the Judge that shall sit upon quick and dead, ~ receiving true believers into endless joy, faithless and god- — less men being cast with Satan and his angels into flames unquenchable.”

28. I may, and will, rein the question shorter than they do. Let the Pope take down his top, and captivate no more men’s souls by his papal jurisdiction ; let him no longer count himself lord paramount over the princes of the earth,4 no longer use’ kings as his tenants* paravazle;* let his stately senate submit their necks to the yoke of Christ, and cease to dye their garments, like Edom, in blood; let them, from the highest to the lowest, hate and forsake their idolatry,

n little ov. E. ο did E. P to be EL a world E. r hold E.

® servants E.

1 Zanch. Preefat. de Relig. [‘* Nescio quo singulari Dei beneficio, hoc adhuc boni in Rom. ecclesia servari nemo non videt, nisi qui videre non vult ; quod nimirum, sicut semper, sic nunc etiam constans et firma — in vera de Deo, deque personze D. N. Jesu Christi doctrina persistit ; et baptizat in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti; Christumque agno- scit ac przedicat pro unico mundi redemptore, futuroque vivorum et. mortuorum judice, qui veros fideles secum in zternam vitam recepturus, incredulos autem et impios in sternum ignem cum Diabolo et angelis ejus ejecturus sit : que causa est, cur ecclesiam hanc pro ecclesia Christi — etiamnum agnoscam: sed quali? qualis et ab Osea aliisque Prophetis ecclesia Israelis sub Jeroboamo, et deinceps, fuisse describitur : nunquam enim resipuit a suis fornicationibus.”” Ad calc. Operis de Sacra Scriptura. t. villi. ed. 1605. |

2 [** Not true altogether.” Note in D.]

3 [Blackstone’s Commentaries, vol. ii. p, 60. ed. Coleridge. ‘‘ Ifthe — King granted a manor to A, and he granted a portion of the land to B,

. the King was styled Lord Paramount, A was both tenant and — lord, or was a mesne lord; and B was called tenant pavavaz/, or the — lowest tenant ; being he who was supposed to make avaz/, or profit, — of the land. 2 Inst. 296.” Ὶ

of Justification 57

abjure all their errors and heresies, wherewith they have any way perverted the truth ; let them strip their church, till they leave no polluted rag, but only this one about her; “ By Christ alone, without works,! we cannot be saved:” it is enough for me, if I show, that the holding of this one thing doth not prove the foundation of faith directly denied in the Church of Rome.

29. Works are an addition to the foundation :* be it so, what then? the foundation is not subverted by every kind of addition: simply to add unto those fundamental words, is not to mingle wine with puddle," heaven with earth, things polluted with the sanctified blood of Christ: of which crime indict them, which* attribute those operations in whole or _ in part to any creature, which in the work of our salvation _ are wholly’ peculiar unto Christ ; and, if I open my mouth ' to speak in their defence, if I hold my peace, and plead not against them as long as breath is in? my body, let me be* guilty of all the dishonour that ever hath been done to the Son of God. But the more dreadful a thing it is to deny salvation by Christ alone, the more slow and fearful I am, except it be too too manifest” to laya thing so grievous

_ unto any man’s charge. Let us beware, lest if we make

too many ways of denying Christ, we scarce leave any way for ourselves truly and soundly to confess him. Salvation only by Christ is the true foundation whereupon indeed Christianity standeth. But what if I say, γε cannot be saved only by Christ, without this addition, Christ believed in heart, confessed with mouth, obeyed in life and convers- ation? Because I add, do I therefore deny that which directly I did‘ affirm? ‘There may be an additament of explication, which overthroweth not, but proveth and con- cludeth the proposition whereunto it is annexed. He that® saith, Peter was a chief Apostle, doth prove that Peter was an Apostle: he which saith,? Our salvation is of the Lord, through sanctification of the Spirit, and faith of the truth,

t to the foundation ow. E. u water E. x that D. y wholly are Εἰ. * within FE. 8. be ow. D. 5 to manifest E, e you E. 4 1 did directly E. e which E,

1 [** Ambiguous, if they hold Christ’s redemption without works to be insufficient.” Note in D. Dr. Todd states that ‘‘this note is not easily decyphered, and ends imperfect, as if it had never been finished. It seems to be, ‘ Ambiguous, if they hold workes, Christ’s Redemption without workes thus to be unsufficient or—’ ’’]

2 [2 Thess, ii. 13.]

ae A Learned Discourse

proveth that our salvation is of the Lord. But if that which is added, be such a privation as taketh away the very essence of that whereunto it is adjoined,’ then by sequel® it over- throweth. He which saith, Judas is a dead man, though in word he grant Judas to be a man, yet in effect he proveth him by that very speech no man, because death depriveth him of his being.’ In like sort, he that should say, Our election is of grace for our works’ sake, should grant in sound of words, but indeed by consequent deny, that our election is of grace; for the grace which electeth us is no grace,! if it elect us for our works’ sake.

30. Now whereas the church of Rome addeth works, we must note further, that the adding works*? is not like the adding of circumcision unto Christ. Christ came not to abrogate and to take away! good works:? he did, to change circumcision ; for we see that in place thereof he hath sub- stituted holy baptism. To say, ye cannot be saved by Christ except ye be circumcised, is to add a thing excluded, a thing not only not necessary to be kept, but necessary not to be kept* by them that will be saved. On the other side, to say, ye cannot be saved by Christ without works,® is to add things not only not excluded, but commanded, as being in their™ place and in their kind necessary, and therefore subordinated unto Christ, even™ by Christ himself, by whom the web of salvation is spun:® ‘‘ Except your righteousness exceed the

t added E. & by the sequel E. h granteth E. i of being E. k adding of works E. land put away Εἰ. m their om. D. 4 even Om. Ὁ,

1 Rom. xi. 6,

2 I deny not but that the church of Rome requireth some kinds of works which she ought not to require at men’s hands. But our question is general about the adding of good works, not whether such or such works be good. In this comparison it is enough to touch so much on the matter in question between St. Paul and the Galatians, as inferreth those conclusions. ‘‘Ye are fallen from grace ; 3; Christ can profit you nothing :”’ which conclusions will follow upon circumcision and rites of the law ceremonial, if they be required as things necessary to salvation. This only was alleged against me: and need I touch more than was alleged ἢ *

* [“* But to justify us by faith without the merit of good works.” Note in D.]

4 [‘*The keeping of circumcision hindereth not salvation, but the opinion of the necessity thereof.” Ibid.]

5 [** Ambiguous.” Ibid. ] ;

ὁ [The words ‘‘ web” and **spun” in D. are underlined, and upon them written ‘‘ tapinosis.”’]

* Note om. D.

Ope a oe a ee spare ουοΝ

of Justification 59

righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye° shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”! They were rigorous

exacters of things not utterly to be neglected and left un-

done,” washings and tithings,P &c.. As they were in these things,4 so must we be in judgment and the love of God. Christ, in works ceremonial, giveth more liberty, in moral much less,? than they did. Works of righteousness there- fore are not so repugnantly* added in the one proposition ; as in the other circumcision is.

31. But we say, our salvation is by Christ alone; there- fore howsoever, or whatsoever, we add unto Christ in the matter of salvation, we overthrow Christ. Our case were very hard, if this argument, so universally meant as it is proposed, were sound and good. We ourselves do not teach

g Christ alone, excluding our own faith,® unto justification ;

Christ alone, excluding our own works, unto sanctification ; Christ alone, excluding the one or the other as" unnecessary

*- unto salvation. It is a childish cavil wherewith in the

matter of justification our adversaries do greatly please themselves, exclaiming, that we tread all Christian virtues

3 under our * feet, and require nothing in Christians but faith ; because we teach that faith alone justifieth : whereas we by

this speech * never meant to exclude either hope and " charity from being always joined as inseparable mates with faith in the man that is justified; or works from being added as necessary duties, required at the hands of every justified man: but to shew that faith is the only hand which putteth on Christ unto justification ; and Christ the only garment, which being so put on, covereth the shame of our defiled natures, hideth the imperfections of our works, preserveth us blameless in the sight of God, before whom otherwise the very * weakness of our faith were cause sufficient to make us culpable, yea, to shut us out’ from the kingdom of heaven, where nothing that is not absolute can enter. That our dealing with them be not as childish as theirs with us ; when we hear of salvation by Christ alone, considering that (“alone” is* an) exclusive particle, we are to note what it doth exclude, and where. If I say, ‘Such a judge

° you Ὁ. P tithing Be 4 things om. E. τ as om. E. 5 our ow. D. t by this speech we E. orE. + * very om. ἘΣ. Υ out om. E. zasE. 1 Matt. v. 20. 2 Luke xi. 39. *Matt.-v. Sis

4 [** The merit of works is most repugnant.” Note in D.] 5 [**Sophistry.” Note in D.]

60 A Learned Discourse

only ought to determine such a cause,” * all things incident unto the determination thereof, besides the person of the judge, as laws, depositions, evidences, &c. are not hereby excluded ; persons are, yet not” from witnessing herein, or assisting, but only from determining and giving sentence. How then is our salvation wrought by Christ alone ? is it our meaning,° that nothing is requisite to man’s salvation, but Christ to save, and he to be saved quietly without any more to do?4 No, we acknowledge no such foundation.°® As we have received, so we teach that besides the bare and naked work,! wherein Christ, without any other associate, finished all the parts of our redemption, and purchased salvation himself alone; for conveyance of this eminent blessing unto us, many things are required,‘ as, to be known and chosen of God before the foundations of the world; in the world to be called, justified, sanctified ; after we have left the world, to be received into 8 glory ; Christ in every of these hath somewhat which he worketh alone. Through him, according to the eternal purpose of God before the foundation of the world,? born, crucified, buried, raised, &c., we were in a gracious acceptation® known unto God long before we were seen of men: God knew us, loved us, was kind towards us: in Christ Jesus,‘ in him we were elected to be heirs of life. Thus far God through Christ hath wrought in such sort alone, that ourselves are mere patients, working no more than dead and senseless matter, wood, or stone, or iron, doth in the artificer’s hand,'! no more than the clay, when the potter appointeth it to be framed for an honourable use ; nay, not so much. For the matter where- upon the craftsman worketh he chooseth, being moved by ™ the fitness which is in it to serve his turn; in us no such thing. ‘Touching the rest, that ® which is laid for the founda- tion of our faith, importeth® further, that by him we be called, that we have redemption, remission of sins through his blood, health by his stripes ; justice by him; that he doth sanctify his Church, and make it glorious to himself; that entrance into joy shall be given us by him; yea, all things by him alone. Howbeit, not so by him alone, as if in us, to our vocation, the hearing of the gospel; to our

@ case E. b are not excluded E. ¢ it is not one meaning Εὖ. ἃ ado? E. © This sentence om. ἘΣ f are of necessity required E, Ε unto EK, h acception E. i tous E, k Jesus Christ E. 1 hands E. m with Ὁ). » that om. E. ° it importeth E.

1 [‘* A base phrase.” Note in D.] © emis 3,- 28,

|

am

of Justification 61

justification, faith; to our sanctification, the fruits of the

spirit ; to our entrance into rest, perseverance in hope, in

faith, in holiness, were not necessary.

_ 32. Then what is the fault of the church of Rome? Not

that she requireth works at their hands that will be saved : _ but that she attributeth unto works a power of satisfying God for sin ; and? a virtue to merit both grace here, and in heaven - glory. That this overthroweth the foundation of faith, I _ grant willingly; that it is a direct! denial thereof, I utterly - deny. What it is to hold, and what directly? to deny, the ' foundation of faith, I have already opened. Apply it ' particularly to this cause, and there needs no more ado. _ The thing which is handled, if the form under which it is _ handled be added thereunto, it sheweth the foundation of any doctrine whatsoever. Christ is the matter whereof the _ doctrine of the gospel treateth ; and it treateth of Christ as _ ofaSaviour. Salvation therefore by Christ is the foundation . of Christianity : as for works, they are a thing subordinate, no otherwise necessary? than because our sanctification cannot® be accomplished without them. The doctrine ' concerning them is a thing builded upon the foundation ; _ therefore the doctrine which addeth unto them power? of _ satisfying, or of meriting, addeth unto a thing subordinated, _ builded upon the foundation, not to ** the very foundation itself; yet is the foundation consequently by this addition ὅ -*overthrown, forasmuch as out of this addition it may _ negatively be" concluded, he which maketh any work good and acceptable in the sight of God, to proceed from the _ natural freedom of our will ; he which giveth unto any good work * of ours the force of satisfying the wrath of God for sin, the power of meriting either earthly or heavenly rewards ; _ he which holdeth works going before our vocation, in - congruity to merit our vocation ; works following our first, _ to merit our second justification, and by condignity our last _ reward in the kingdom of heaven, pulleth up the doctrine of _ faith by the roots; for out of every of these the plain direct _ denial thereof may be necessarily concluded. Nor’Y this,

f a EK. 4 necessary om. Ἐν. τ the power E. 5. to om. D.

of ‘al this addition consequently E. u be negatively E. x works E. y Not E

1 «<7 All the controversy brought to a term.” Note in D.]

2 ἐς All men take not ‘directly’ as he doth.” Ibid. ]

3 ** How is the sanctification of infants accomplished?” Ibid. ]

She [** Merit addeth to the very foundation, as the papists themselves - will confess.”” Ibid. ]

62 A Learned Discourse

only, but what other heresy is there which? doth not raze the very foundation of faith by consequent? Howbeit, we make a difference of heresies ; accounting them in the next — degree to infidelity, which* directly deny any one thing to ~ be which is expressly acknowledged in the articles of our belief ; for out of any one article so denied, the denial of the very foundation itself is straightway ἢ inferred.! As for ~ example; if a man should say, ‘*There is no catholic © Church,” it followeth immediately hereupon,° that this Jesus whom we call the Saviour, is not the Saviour of the world ; because all the prophets bear ¢ witness, that the true Messias should “shew light unto the Gentiles ;”? that is to say, gather such a Church as is catholic, not restrained any longer unto one circumcised nation. In ἃ ὃ second rank we place © them, out of whose positions the denial of any of f the fore- — said articles may be with like facility concluded ; such ares they which have denied, either the divinity of Christ, with ~ Hebion, or with Marcion, his humanity ; an example where- ~ of may be that of Cassianus defending the incarnation of the Son of God against Nestorius bishop of Antioch,? which? — held, that the Virgin, when she brought forth Christ, did not bring forth the Son of God, but a sole and mere man. Out of which heresy the denial of the articles of Christian? © faith he deduceth thus:4 “If thou dost deny our Lord ~

that E. * who Ὁ. > straightwaies Ὁ, ¢ thereupon E. 4 bere or bare D. e the E. f of om. E. & such as are E. hwhok |

the Christian E. ᾿

1 «« Heec ratio ecclesiastici sacramenti et Catholicee Fidei est, ut qui partem divini sacramenti negat, partem non valeat confiteri. Ita enim 5101 connexa et concorporata sunt omnia, ut aliud sine alio stare non possit, et qui unum ex omnibus denegaverit, alia ei omnia credidisse non prosit.”’ Cassian. lib. vi. de Incarnat. Dom. [c. 17.*]

2 Acts xxvi. 23.

ὅ [1 think he was bishop of Constantinople.” Ussher. ]

4 Lib. vi. de Incar. Dom. cap. 17. [‘* Si negas Deum Dominum Jesum Christum, necesse est ut Filium Dei denegans etiam Patrem ~ neges. Quia juxta ipsius Patris vocem, ‘Qui non habet Filium, nec ~ Patrem habet ; qui autem habet Filium et Patrem habet.’ Negans ergo genitum, etiam genitorem negas. Negans quoque Filium Dei in carne — natum, consequens est, ut etiam in spiritu natum neges, quia idem natus — in carne, qui prius natus in spiritu. Non credens ergo in carne editum, necesse est etiam passum esse non credas. Non credens autem illius ~ passionem, quid reliquum est, nisi ut etiam resurrectionem neges ? Quia ; fides suscitati ex fide mortui est. Nec stare potest ratio resurrectionis, — nisi fides mortis ante preecesserit. Negans ergo passum et mortuum, © negas quoque ab inferis resurgentem. Consequens utique est, ut neges —

* Note om. E.

of Justification 63

Jesus Christ to be God,* in denying the Son, thou canst

not choose but deny the Father; for, according to the voice _ of the Father himself, ‘He that hath not the Son, hath not _ the Father.’ Wherefore denying him that! is begotten, thou deniest him which doth beget. Again,™ denying the Son of God to have been born in the flesh, how canst thou believe him to have suffered? believing not. his passion, what remaineth, but that thou deny his resurrection? For _ we believe him not raised, except we first believe him dead: _ neither can the reason of his rising from the dead stand, _ without the faith of his death going before. The denial of his death and passion inferreth the denial of his rising from the depth.". Whereupon it followeth, that thou also deny his ascension into heaven: the Apostle affirming,°® ‘That he which ascended, did first descend.’ So that, as ' much as lieth in thee, our Lord Jesus Christ hath neither ' risen from the depth, nor is ascended into heaven, nor sitteth at the right hand of God the Father, neither shall he » come at the day of final account, which is looked for, nor _ shall judge the quick and dead. And darest thou yet set foot in the Church? Canst thou think thyself a bishop, ' when thou hast denied all those things whereby thou didst 4 ' obtain a bishoply calling?” Nestorius confessed all the ' articles of the creed, but his opinion did imply the denial ' of every part of his confession. Heresies there are of a third” sort, such as the church of Rome maintaineth, which _ being * removed by a greater distance from the foundation, _ although indeed they overthrow it; yet because of that _ weakness, which the philosopher noteth in men’s capacities when he saith, that the common sort cannot see things _ which follow in reason, when they follow, as it were, afar

- * to be God ow. E. 1 which E. τ again om. E. » from death Ὁ. ὁ affirmeth E. Ρ death D. a dost E. τ the third E. 5 be E.

' etiam ascendentem: quia ascensio sine resurrectione esse non potuit. Et ' qui resurrexisse non creditur, necesse est nec ascendisse credatur : dicente Apostolo, ‘Qui enim descendit, ipse est qui ascendit.’ Ergo, quantum in te est, Dominus Jesus Christus neque ab inferis resurrexit, neque ccelum ascendit, neque ad dexteram Dei Patris sedet, neque ad illum qui expectatur examinationis ultimze diem veniet, nec ‘vivos nec ' mortuos judicabit.” c. 18. ‘* Intelligis itaque, O infelix et furiosa per- _versitas, evacuasse te penitus omnem symboli fidem, omnem spei sacra- -mentique virtutem? Et in ecclesia insuper stare ausus es, et esse te _ acerdotem putas, cum illa omnia denegaveris, per quee sacerdos esse a cepisti?” in Bibl. Patr. Colon. t. v. pars ii. p. 80. ]

64 A Learned Discourse

off by many deductions ; therefore the repugnancy between * such heresy and the foundation is not so quickly nor" so easily found, but that an heretic of this, sooner than of the former kind, may directly grant, and consequently neverthe- less deny, the foundation of faith.

33. If reason be suspected, trial will shew that the church ~ of Rome doth no* otherwise, by teaching the doctrine she ~ doth teach concerning works.’ Offer them the very funda- — mental words, and what one?” man is there that will refuse to subscribe unto them? Can they directly grant, and deny directly ἃ one and the very selfsame thing? Our own pro- ceedings in disputing against their works satisfactory and meritorious do shew, not only that they hold, but that we acknowledge them to hold, the foundation, notwithstanding — their opinion. For are not these our arguments against them? “Christ alone hath satisfied and appeased his Father’s wrath: Christ hath merited salvation alone.’? We should ~ do fondly to use such disputes, neither could we think to prevail by them, if that whereupon we ground, were a thing which we know they do not hold, which we are assured they will not grant. Their very answers to all such reasons, as are in this controversy brought against them, will not permit us to doubt whether they hold the foundation or no. Can any man, which° hath read their books concerning this ~ matter, be ignorant how they draw all their answers unto these heads? ‘That the remission of all our sins, the — pardon of all whatsoever punishments thereby deserved, the rewards which God hath laid up in heaven, are by the ~ blood of our Lord Jesus Christ purchased, and obtained — sufficiently for all men: but for no man effectually for his benefit in particular, except the blood of Christ be applied particularly unto him by such means as God hath appointed it? to work by: That those means of themselves being but — dead things, only the blood of Christ is that which putteth — life, force, and efficacy in them to work, and to be avail- — able, each in his kind, to our salvation: Finally, that grace — being purchased for us by the blood of Christ, and freely without any merit or desert at the first bestowed upon us, ~ the good things which we do, after grace received, are® thereby made satisfactory and meritorious.” Some of their sentences to this effect I must allege for mine own warrant. —

ee eee συν ὡς πρναι

‘of E. u or E, x not D. y good works E. z one om. KE. | * directly deny E, Ὁ hold with Ὁ, -e that E, 4 that E. «be BE, +)

of Justification 65

If we desire to hear foreign judgments, we find in one this

confession: ‘‘ He that could reckon how many the virtues

and merits of our Saviour Christ have’ been, might like-

wise understand how many the benefits have been that are come® unto us by him, forasmuch? as men are made partakers of them all by the mean? of his passion: by him 15 given unto us remission of our sins, grace, glory, liberty, praise, | peace,] salvation, redemption, justification,! justice, sanctification,* sacraments, merits, doctrine,! and all other _ things which we [he] had, and were behoveful™ for our _ salvation.” * In another we have these oppositions and _ answers made unto them: “All grace is given by Christ _ jesus. True; but not except Christ Jesus be applied. _ He is the propitiation for our sins ;" by his stripes we are _ healed; he hath offered up himself°® for us: all this [us 'all: this??] is true, but apply it. We put all satisfac- ' tion in the blood of Jesus Christ; but we hold, that the _ means which 4 Christ hath appointed for us in this case to "apply it, are our penal works.”® Our countrymen in

Ὁ See Say ee, ee

pf hath D. Ε are tocome E. h for so much FE, i means E. k satis- ' faction E. 1 doctrine om. E. m behooful D. 2 sin E. ° himself up E. P No stop in D. 4 of D.

' 1? [The word ‘‘justification”’ is not either in the original or the English translation. |

| ὁ Lewis of Granada, Medit. ch. last. 32. [‘‘ Of Prayer and Medi- _ tation. Wherein are contained fourteen devout Meditations for the _ seven days of the week, both for the Mornings and Evenings. And in ' them is treated of the consideration of the principal Mysteries of our _ Faith. Written first in the Spanish tongue by the famous religious _ Father, F. Lewis de Granada, Provincial of the holy order of Preachers -in the Province of Portugal.”” Paris 1582. fol. 317. The writer was one of the most distinguished ascetic and devotional writers of Spain. _ He was confessor to the Queen Regent of Portugal, and died 1588. | Biog. Univ.]

_ ὃ Panigarola lett. 11. [‘‘ Disceptationes Calvinicze a Joanne Tonso ᾿ς Mediolan. Patritio in Latinum converse.” Milan 1554. Discept. xi. 'p. 272, 3. ‘**Omnis gratia data est nobis per Christum Jesum :’ verum; at per applicationem. ‘Ipse est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris :’ verum; at applica. ‘ Livore ejus sanati sumus:’ at applica. ‘ Pro nobis Ese obtulit τ at applica. . . . Omnem enim satisfactionem in sanguine —locamus ; sed applicationem hac in re tribuimus, quibus ipse tribuit _ Christus, poenalibus scilicet nostris operibus.” Francis Panigarola was one of the most distinguished preachers of Italy in the 16th century, _ The work from which the above is translated was a course of lectures "against the Calvinists, addressed to Charles Emanuel, Duke of Savoy, _by whom Panigarola was made Bishop of Asti, A.D. 1587: he died in 1594. See Tiraboschi, Storia della Letteratura Italiana, t. vii. part. i. lib. iii. c. 6. No. 12-14.]

VOL. 1. D

66 A Learned Discourse

Rhemes make the like answer,! that they seek salvation no other way than by the blood of Christ; and that humbly — they do use prayers, fasting,” alms, faith, charity, sacrifice, — sacraments, priests, only as the means appointed by Christ, ~ to apply the benefit of his holy blood unto them: touching ~

our good works, that in their own natures they are not meri- — torious, nor answerable unto the joys of heaven; it cometh © by the grace of Christ, and not of the work itself, that we ©

have by well-doing a right to heaven, and deserve it worthily. If any man think that I seek to varnish their opinions, to set the better foot of a lame cause foremost ; let him know, that

since® I began throughly to understand their meaning, Τὸ

have found their halting in this doctrine* greater than per- haps it seemeth to them which know not the deepness of Satan, as the blessed Divine speaketh.? For, although this be proof sufficient, that they do not directly deny the found- ation of faith ; yet, if there were no other leaven in the whole

lump of their doctrine but this, this were sufficient to prove, ©

that their doctrine is not agreeable with" the foundation of Christian faith. The Pelagians, being over-great friends unto

nature, made themselves enemies unto grace, for all their ~ confessing, that men have their souls, and all the faculties — thereof, their wills and the ability * of their wills, from God. — And is not the church of Rome still an adversary unto Christ’s

merits, because of her acknowledging, that we have received

the power of meriting by the blood of Christ? Sir Thomas ~ More setteth down the odds between us and the church of Rome in the matter of works thus: “ Like as we grant them, ~ that no good work of man is rewardable in heaven of his¥

own nature, but through the mere goodness of God, that

list to set so high a price upon so poor a thing; and that this price God setteth through Christ’s passion, and for

that also that they be* his own works with us; (for good works to God-ward worketh no man, without God work in

fastings E. 5. seyns D. t in this doctrine om. E. ἃ unto KE. |

x all the ability E. Υ its.E. z lists E, @ also they be E.

1 Annot. in 1 Johni. [v. 7. ‘* Whether sins be remitted by prayers, » by fasting, by alms, by faith, by charity, by sacrifice, by sacraments, or by the priests, (as the holy Scriptures do plainly attribute remission to | every of these,) yet none of all these do otherwise remit, but in the

force, by the virtue and merit, of Christ’s blood: these being but the.

appointed means and instruments, by which Christ will have his holy

blood to work effectually in us.”] 2 [Apoc. ii. 24. ]

=

ων

of Justification 67

him:) and as we grant them also, that no man may be

proud of his works, for his own imperfect ὁ working ; and

for that in all