CHAP.
I.
The
explication
of
these
tearmes
.
First
,
Iustice
,
or
Righteousnesse
.
Secondly
,
Iustification
.
HAuing
by
Gods
Assistance
dispatched
two
of
those
generall
points
at
first
proposed
(
touching
the
Antecedents
and
Nature
of
true
Faith
)
we
are
now
by
the
same
help
to
goe
forward
to
the
third
generall
head
;
namely
,
Let
vs
begin
with
the
former
,
our
Iustification
,
the
doctrine
whereof
I
shall
endeauour
to
deliuer
vnto
you
,
as
briefely
and
plainely
:
as
so
large
and
difficult
a
subiect
will
giue
leaue
.
Wherein
because
the
opening
of
the
word
will
giue
vs
some
light
for
the
vnderstanding
of
the
matter
:
wee
are
in
the
first
place
to
see
what
is
meant
by
these
words
,
Iustification
,
and
Iustice
,
or
Righteousnesse
.
Iustice
,
therefore
,
or
Righteousnesse
(
that
I
meane
which
is
created
,
for
of
vncreated
Righteousnesse
,
wee
haue
not
to
speake
)
is
nothing
but
a
perfect
conformity
and
agreement
with
the
Law
of
God
.
For
Gods
will
being
originally
,
essentially
,
and
infinitely
righteous
;
must
needs
be
the
patterne
&
●ule
of
all
derivatiue
&
finite
righteousnesse
.
Now
this
righteousnesse
(
though
but
one
,
in
its
substance
,
neuer
thelesse
)
admits
a
double
consideration
,
being
called
either
,
1
Legall
and
of
Workes
,
which
stands
in
that
conformity
vnto
Gods
law
,
which
is
inherent
within
our selues
,
when
in
our
owne
persons
and
workes
we
possesse
and
practise
that
righteousnesse
which
is
required
of
the
Law
.
This
Legall
Iustice
is
also
double
,
1
Of
Obedience
,
when
all
such
things
are
done
,
as
the
Law
commandeth
;
or
left
vndone
which
it
forbids
.
Hee
that
doth
so
is
a
iust
man
.
2
Of
Punishment
or
Satisfaction
,
when
the
breach
of
the
Law
is
satisfied
by
enduring
the
vtmost
of
such
penalties
,
as
the
rigour
of
the
Law
required
.
For
not
onely
hee
who
doth
what
the
Law
commandeth
:
but
euen
he
also
that
suffereth
all
such
punishments
,
as
the
Law-giuer
in
Iustice
can
inflict
for
the
breach
of
the
Law
,
is
to
be
accounted
a
lust
man
,
and
reckoned
after
such
satisfaction
made
,
as
no
transgressor
of
the
Law
.
The
reason
of
this
is
plaine
from
the
name
of
penall
Lawes
.
For
first
,
where
the
penalty
is
suffered
,
there
the
will
of
the
Law-giuer
is
satisfied
;
for
as
much
as
his
will
was
,
either
that
the
Law
should
be
obserued
,
or
the
punishment
vndergone
.
If
therefore
he
,
to
whom
the
Law
is
giuen
,
doe
either
:
he
satisfies
the
will
of
the
Law-giuer
.
Had
his
will
beene
absolute
,
so
that
nothing
else
could
haue
contented
him
,
but
onely
obedience
:
then
it
had
beene
a
vaine
thing
to
haue
prescribed
a
determinate
penalty
.
But
when
as
a
penalty
is
limited
in
case
of
disobedience
,
't
is
manifest
that
though
the
intent
of
the
Law-giuer
was
in
the
first
place
for
Obedience
;
yet
,
in
the
next
place
it
should
suffice
,
if
there
were
satisfaction
by
bearing
of
the
penalty
.
Secondly
,
the
good
and
benefit
of
the
Law-giuer
is
hereby
also
satisfied
.
For
it
is
to
be
supposed
in
all
penall
lawes
,
that
the
penalty
limited
is
euery
way
proportionable
and
equivalent
,
vnto
that
good
which
might
accrew
by
the
obseruation
of
the
Law
.
Else
were
the
wisedome
of
the
Law-maker
iustly
to
be
taxed
,
as
giuing
an
apparant
encouragement
to
offenders
;
when
they
should
see
the
penalty
,
not
to
be
so
much
hurtfull
to
them
;
as
their
disobedience
were
gainfull
.
He
therefore
that
suffers
the
penalty
is
afterward
to
be
reckoned
as
if
he
had
kept
the
Law
:
because
by
his
suffering
,
he
hath
aduanced
,
the
Law-giuers
honour
,
or
benefit
,
as
much
as
he
could
by
his
obeying
.
2
Euangelicall
,
and
of
Faith
,
which
is
such
a
conformity
to
Gods
Law
as
is
not
inherent
in
our
owne
persons
;
but
being
in
another
is
imputed
vnto
vs
and
reckoned
ours
.
The
righteousnesse
of
the
Law
,
and
of
the
Gospell
,
are
not
two
seuerall
kindes
of
righteousnesse
;
but
the
same
in
regard
of
the
matter
and
substance
thereof
:
onely
they
differ
in
the
Subiect
and
Manner
of
application
.
The
righteousnesse
of
workes
is
that
holinesse
and
obedience
which
is
inherent
in
our
owne
persons
and
performed
by
our selues
:
the
righteousnesse
of
Faith
is
the
same
holinesse
and
obedience
inherent
in
the
person
of
Christ
and
performed
by
him
;
but
imbraced
by
our
faith
,
and
accepted
by
God
,
as
done
in
our
stead
,
and
for
our
benefit
.
These
are
the
diuers
acceptions
of
this
word
Iustice
or
Righteousnesse
;
so
farre
as
it
concernes
the
point
in
hand
.
In
the
next
we
are
to
enquire
of
this
word
Iustification
;
which
being
nothing
but
the
making
of
a
person
iust
or
righteous
,
may
be
taken
in
a
double
sense
.
For
a
person
is
made
iust
either
by
Infusion
,
or
Apology
.
Wee
will
take
it
in
these
tearmes
for
want
of
better
.
Iustification
by
Infusion
,
is
then
,
when
the
habituall
quality
of
Righteousnesse
and
Holinesse
is
wrought
in
any
person
by
any
meanes
whatsoeuer
;
whether
it
bee
created
&
infused
into
him
by
the
worke
of
another
;
or
obtained
by
his
owne
art
and
industry
.
Thus
Adam
was
made
iust
.
Eccle.
7.
29.
God
hauing
giuen
vnto
him
in
his
creation
the
inherent
qualities
of
Iustice
and
holinesse
.
Thus
also
the
regenerate
are
made
Iust
,
in
as
much
as
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
they
are
sanctified
through
the
reall
infusion
of
grace
into
their
soules
;
in
the
which
they
increase
also
more
and
more
,
by
the
vse
and
exercise
of
all
good
meanes
.
2
Iustification
,
by
Apology
is
,
when
a
person
accused
as
an
offender
is
iudicially
or
otherwise
,
acquitted
and
declared
to
be
innocent
of
the
fault
:
and
so
free
from
the
punishment
.
When
the
innocency
of
a
party
accused
is
thus
pleaded
and
declared
;
he
is
thereby
said
to
bee
iustified
,
or
made
iust
▪
according
as
,
on
the
contrary
by
Accusation
and
Condemnation
,
a
party
is
said
to
be
made
vniust
.
As
't
is
plaine
by
that
of
Isaiah
,
5.
23.
[
They
iustifie
the
wicked
for
a
reward
:
and
take
away
the
righteousnesse
of
the
righteous
from
him
]
that
is
,
they
condemne
the
righteous
,
which
is
a
making
of
them
,
vnrighteous
in
the
sight
&
estimation
of
men
.
So
in
1
Ioh.
5.
10.
[
He
that
beleeueth
not
God
,
hath
made
him
a
lyer
]
because
vnbeleeuers
do
in
their
hearts
call
Gods
truth
into
question
:
and
accuse
him
to
be
false
of
his
word
.
So
againe
,
Psal.
109.
7.
[
When
he
is
iudged
,
let
him
be
condemned
.
]
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Let
him
goe
out
a
wicked
person
.
For
so
his
condemnation
makes
him
(
that
is
)
declares
him
to
be
.
But
here
further
it
must
be
obserued
,
that
this
Iustification
of
a
person
,
by
pleading
to
,
and
absolution
in
Iudgement
,
is
of
two
sorts
;
according
as
the
Persons
to
be
iustified
,
are
likewise
of
two
seuerall
conditions
.
1
Some
are
truely
and
inherently
iust
,
being
no
Transgressors
of
the
Law
;
either
at
all
;
or
not
in
that
whereof
they
are
accused
.
In
this
case
if
any
crime
,
or
suspition
of
crime
,
be
layed
to
their
charge
;
they
are
iustified
;
either
by
a
plai●e
denyall
of
the
fact
,
alledging
that
the
fault
whereof
they
are
accused
,
was
neuer
by
them
committed
;
or
by
denying
the
euill
of
the
fact
,
alledging
that
in
so
doing
they
haue
done
well
,
because
they
haue
done
what
the
Law
commanded
;
and
that
s
their
warrant
.
Thus
Samuel
iustifies
his
gouernment
against
all
surmise
of
fraudulent
and
wrongfull
dealing
,
that
the
people
might
imagine
by
him
.
In
1
Sam.
12.
3.
&c.
Thus
Dauid
cleares
himselfe
before
God
,
from
that
crime
of
conspiracy
against
Saul
his
Master
,
and
seeking
of
the
Kingdome
(
which
Cush
and
other
Courtiers
accused
him
of
)
professing
his
innocency
;
and
desiring
God
to
iudge
him
according
to
his
righteousnesse
and
integrity
in
that
behalfe
:
as
it
is
Psal.
7.
3.
4.
8.
There
need
not
other
instances
in
so
plaine
a
matter
.
Those
that
are
iustified
by
this
meanes
are
iustified
by
that
Righteousnesse
which
is
of
the
Law
and
of
Workes
.
By
which
plea
though
man
may
be
iustified
before
man
:
yet
in
the
sight
of
God
no
flesh
liuing
shall
be
iustified
.
As
hereafter
we
shall
see
.
2.
Some
are
not
truely
righteous
in
themselues
:
but
are
in
their
owne
persons
transgressors
of
the
Law
.
These
(
when
they
are
accused
)
haue
no
other
meanes
whereby
they
may
be
iustified
,
but
by
confessing
the
crime
,
and
pleading
satisfaction
:
that
for
their
transgression
against
the
Law
,
and
offence
thereby
against
the
Law-giuer
,
they
haue
fully
satisfied
by
doing
or
suffering
some
such
thing
,
as
by
way
of
iust
penalty
hath
beene
required
of
them
.
Now
hee
that
can
plead
such
a
full
and
perfect
satisfaction
,
ought
therefore
to
be
accounted
innocent
,
and
free
from
all
desert
of
further
punishment
(
for
t
is
supposed
he
hath
endured
the
vtmost
of
euill
the
Law
could
inflict
:
)
and
so
he
is
to
be
esteemed
of
,
as
if
he
had
not
at
all
violated
the
Law
.
For
plenary
satisfaction
for
a
fault
,
and
the
non-Commission
of
such
a
fault
,
are
of
equall
Iustice
:
and
deserue
alike
Iustification
.
In
which
point
,
it
must
be
no●ed
,
that
if
the
party
offended
doe
pardon
without
any
satisfaction
taken
,
there
the
offender
is
not
iustified
at
all
.
And
againe
if
the
offence
be
such
,
as
there
can
be
no
satisfaction
made
:
then
it
is
vtterly
impossible
that
the
offender
should
euer
be
iustified
.
Now
this
satisfaction
which
an
offender
may
plead
for
his
Iustification
,
is
threefold
.
1
That
which
is
made
by
himselfe
in
his
owne
person
.
He
that
can
plead
this
kinde
of
satisfaction
,
is
iustified
Legally
by
his
owne
righteousnesse
and
merits
.
2
That
which
is
made
by
another
for
him
;
When
another
by
consent
and
approbation
of
the
party
offended
,
interposeth
himselfe
as
surety
for
the
party
delinquent
,
in
his
stead
and
name
to
make
that
satisfaction
,
which
is
required
of
the
party
himselfe
.
Whether
this
be
done
by
doing
or
suffering
the
same
things
which
the
delinquent
should
haue
done
or
suffered
,
or
some
other
things
but
of
equivalent
worth
and
dignity
.
He
that
pleades
this
kinde
of
satisfaction
,
is
iustified
Euangelically
by
grace
,
through
the
righteousnesse
of
another
imputed
to
him
,
and
accepted
for
as
his
.
3
That
which
is
made
partly
by
himselfe
and
partly
by
another
.
Which
kinde
of
satisfaction
may
haue
place
betweene
Man
and
Man
:
but
betweene
God
and
Man
it
hath
none
at
all
.
Neither
by
this
,
nor
by
that
first
kinde
of
satisfaction
which
is
done
in
our
owne
Persons
,
can
any
man
be
iustified
in
the
sight
of
God
,
but
onely
by
the
second
sort
,
that
satisfaction
which
is
made
by
another
for
vs
.
As
wee
shall
see
afterwards
.
CHAP
II.
In
what
sense
the
word
Iustification
ought
to
be
taken
in
the
present
controversie
,
and
of
the
difference
betweene
vs
and
our
Adversaries
therein
.
HAuing
thus
distinguished
of
these
words
,
it
followeth
that
in
the
first
place
,
we
enquire
in
which
of
the
fore-named
senses
wee
are
to
take
this
word
Iustification
.
The
difference
betweene
vs
and
our
adversaries
of
the
Romish
Church
,
is
in
this
point
very
great
and
irreconcileable
.
They
affirme
that
Iustification
is
to
bee
taken
in
the
first
acception
,
for
making
of
a
Man
Iust
by
infusion
of
Reall
Holinesse
into
him
.
So
that
with
them
to
Iustifie
beares
the
same
sense
as
to
purifie
or
sanctifie
.
that
is
of
a
person
vncleane
,
vnholy
,
vniust
,
to
make
him
formally
or
inherently
Pure
,
Holy
and
Iust
,
by
working
in
him
the
inherent
Qualities
of
Purity
,
Sanctity
and
Righteousnesse
.
We
on
the
contrary
teach
according
to
the
Scriptures
;
That
Iustification
,
is
to
be
taken
in
the
second
acception
,
for
the
pleading
of
a
persons
innocency
called
into
Question
:
wherby
he
is
iudicially
absolved
and
freed
from
fault
and
punishment
.
So
that
with
vs
to
justifie
a
person
is
in
iudiciall
proceeding
to
acquit
him
of
the
crime
whereof
hee
is
accused
,
and
to
declare
him
free
from
desert
of
punishment
.
Whether
of
vs
twain
be
in
the
right
is
very
materiall
to
be
determined
of
,
considering
that
all
ensuing
disputation
touching
the
Iustification
of
a
Sinner
is
to
bee
framed
vpon
one
of
these
grounds
,
rightly
taken
;
and
an
error
here
is
like
a
threed
misplaced
at
first
,
that
runnes
awry
afterward
through
the
whole
piece
.
Our
Adversaries
plead
for
their
Assertion
:
the
Etym●logy
of
the
word
iustificare
is
iustum
facere
,
in
that
sense
(
say
they
)
as
P●rificare
,
Mortificare
,
Vi●ificare
,
and
many
the
like
signifie
to
make
pure
,
to
make
dead
or
aliue
,
by
the
reall
induction
of
such
and
such
Qualities
.
Againe
they
alleadge
Scriptures
;
as
namely
Dan
:
12.
3.
[
They
that
turne
many
to
righteousnes
[
Heb.
that
iustifie
many
)
shall
shine
as
the
Starres
for
euer
]
Apoc.
22.
11.
[
Hee
that
is
righteous
(
iustificetur
)
Let
him
be
righteous
still
.
]
Tit.
3.
7.
[
He
hath
saued
vs
by
the
washing
of
Regeneration
,
&
renewing
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
—
That
being
iustified
by
his
grace
wee
should
bee
made
Heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternall
life
.
]
Againe
,
1
Cor.
6.
11.
[
And
such
were
some
of
you
:
but
yee
are
washed
,
but
yee
are
sanctified
,
but
yee
are
iustified
,
in
the
name
of
the
Lord
Iesus
,
and
by
the
Spirit
of
our
God
.
]
Out
of
these
with
some
other
places
(
but
such
as
haue
scarce
any
shew
of
good
proofe
)
they
would
faine
conclude
,
that
by
Iustification
nothing
else
is
meant
,
but
the
Infusion
of
the
Habite
of
Iustice
vnto
him
,
that
was
before
sinfull
and
vniust
.
Hereto
wee
answere
.
1.
First
for
the
Etymology
that
the
signification
of
words
is
to
bee
ruled
,
not
by
Etymologies
:
but
by
the
common
vse
:
—
Quem
penes
arbitrium
est
et
vis
&
norma
loquendi
—
as
the
Poet
truly
defines
.
Now
it
s
a
thing
notorious
that
in
the
custome
of
all
Languages
,
this
word
Iustificare
imports
nothing
but
the
declaration
of
the
Innocency
of
a
person
▪
and
lawfulnesse
of
any
fact
:
against
such
accusations
as
impleade
either
,
of
vniustice
and
Wrong
.
I
will
iustifie
such
a
Man
or
such
a
Matter
(
say
wee
in
English
)
and
what
English
Man
vnderstands
thereby
any
thing
but
this
,
I
will
make
it
appeare
such
a
Man
is
honest
,
such
a
fact
lawfull
,
howeuer
questioned
to
the
contrary
.
In
other
Languages
my
skill
serues
mee
not
,
nor
is
it
needfull
to
trouble
you
with
Instances
.
Those
that
haue
written
of
this
subiect
of
every
Nation
witnesse
every
one
for
their
owne
Language
.
And
further
this
word
Iustificare
being
of
a
latter●stampe
,
vnknowne
to
such
Latine
Authors
,
as
are
of
ancient
and
purer
Language
,
fitted
by
Ecclesiasticall
writers
to
expresse
the
meaning
of
those
two
words
of
the
Originall
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
;
it
is
apparent
the
Copy
must
follow
the
Originall
,
and
the
Latine
word
beare
the
same
sense
as
the
Hebrew
and
Greeke
words
doe
.
And
that
this
is
that
Legall
sense
which
wee
haue
spoken
of
is
a
point
so
manifest
throughout
the
whole
Bible
:
that
nothing
but
impudency
can
deny
it
.
As
wee
shall
presently
perceiue
.
For
in
the
next
place
.
2
As
to
the
Scriptures
which
they
alleadge
for
proofe
of
their
Interpretation
of
the
word
:
We
answere
:
That
of
a
Multitude
of
places
of
Scripture
,
wherin
the
word
Iustifie
is
vsed
,
our
Adversaries
may
truly
pick
out
one
two
or
three
that
seem
to
fauor
their
Assertion
of
Infusion
of
habituall
Iustice
:
yet
haue
they
gained
little
thereby
,
For
where
tenne
or
more
may
be
alleadged
against
one
in
which
the
contrary
signification
is
vsed
,
reason
tels
vs
,
that
an
Article
and
Doctrine
of
Religion
ought
to
bee
framed
out
of
the
signification
of
words
and
phrases
,
which
is
vsuall
,
ordinary
,
and
regular
;
and
not
out
of
that
which
sometimes
comes
in
by
way
of
particular
exception
.
Might
he
not
be
iudged
destitute
of
sense
or
modesty
,
that
would
quarrell
at
the
signification
of
the
word
Ecclesia
,
that
in
the
New
Testament
it
is
not
taken
for
the
Company
&
Assembly
of
the
faithful
,
because
in
a
place
or
two
(
as
Act.
19.
)
it
is
taken
for
any
ordinary
ciuill
meeting
of
people
together
?
Wherefore
we
may
grant
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
that
of
Dan.
12.
and
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
Apoc.
22.
)
is
to
be
made
iust
,
formaliter
,
by
infusion
of
inherent
Holinesse
in
a
Sinner
.
For
so
Ministers
may
be
said
to
iustifie
many
(
as
it
is
in
Daniel
)
viz.
by
Ministery
turne
many
to
righteousnesse
,
directing
them
to
the
meanes
of
Holinesse
,
and
as
Gods
Instruments
,
working
in
them
the
graces
of
Conversion
and
Regeneration
.
And
so
he
that
is
iust
(
in
the
Apoc.
)
may
be
iustified
still
:
(
that
is
)
encrease
in
the
inward
Habite
and
outward
Exercise
of
Holinesse
,
more
and
more
.
thus
we
may
yeeld
them
in
these
two
places
without
seeking
too
,
other
Interpretations
further
off
.
And
yet
will
this
be
no
prejudice
to
our
Doctrine
grounded
vpon
the
other
signification
so
generally
vsed
.
Wee
answere
,
i.
e
)
pardoned
and
absolued
rather
then
the
Pharisee
.
as
hee
and
his
fellowes
stand
for
.
These
aboue
the
rest
haue
most
apparance
,
namely
,
1
Cor:
6.
&
Tit.
3.
Rom
8.
30.
where
Iustification
is
,
say
they
,
confounded
as
one
and
the
same
with
Sanctification
;
&
Regeneration
.
Wherevnto
I
answeare
that
they
doe
ill
to
confound
those
things
that
the
Apostle
hath
distinguished
very
plainly
.
Hee
tels
the
Corinthians
;
that
the
Vnrighteous
shall
not
inherit
the
Kingdome
of
God
,
and
that
themselues
had
bin
such
,
euen
of
the
most
notorious
rancke
:
but
now
they
were
washed
,
sanctified
and
Iustified
.
By
three
words
the
Apostle
expresseth
the
change
of
their
former
condition
.
One
Metaphoricall
(
yea
are
washed
)
The
meaning
whereof
hee
declareth
in
two
proper
words
following
.
[
yee
are
Sanctified
]
that
s
one
degree
of
washing
or
clensing
from
the
corruption
of
Nature
(
in
part
)
by
the
[
Spirit
of
our
God
]
of
whome
is
the
gift
of
inherent
grace
.
And
[
ye
are
iustified
]
that
s
another
sort
of
washing
,
from
the
guilt
of
Sinne
(
in
the
whole
)
[
in
the
name
of
the
Lord
Iesus
]
that
is
,
by
the
Righteousnesse
a●d
Merits
of
Iesus
Christ
.
Nothing
can
be
more
perspicuous
and
elegant
.
That
place
to
Tit.
Chap.
3
is
also
as
plaine
.
God
(
sayeth
the
Apostle
)
speaking
of
the
Heires
and
sonns
of
GOD
in
Christ
)
(
hath
saued
vs
[
not
by
any
workes
of
ours
;
but
by
his
owne
mercy
.
ver.
5.
This
salvation
is
set
forth
to
vs
in
the
Meanes
and
in
the
End
.
The
meanes
are
two
Regeneration
and
Iustification
.
[
He
hath
saued
vs
by
the
washing
of
Regeneration
,
&
renewing
of
the
Holy
Ghost
]
This
is
the
first
Meanes
(
viz.
)
Regeneration
expressed
1.
by
its
properties
or
parts
.
1.
Washing
or
doing
away
of
the
filthy
Qualities
of
our
corrupted
Natures
.
2.
Renewing
,
the
Investing
of
it
with
new
Qualities
of
Graces
and
Holynesse
.
2
By
the
cause
efficient
the
Holy
Ghost
,
[
whome
hee
hath
shed
on
us
abundant●y
]
or
richly
,
following
the
Metaphore
,
Holy
Ghost
in
this
operation
to
water
powred
out
.
2
The
Meritorious
Cause
of
it
[
Through
Iesus
Christ
our
Saviour
]
who
hath
procured
the
sending
downe
of
the
[
Holy
ghost
]
into
the
hearts
of
the
elect
.
ver.
6.
This
is
one
stepp
to
Heauen
,
our
Regeneration
,
but
it
is
imperfect
and
cannot
abide
the
severity
of
Gods
Iudgements
:
now
we
must
be
absolutely
free
from
all
fault
and
guiltinesse
before
we
can
haue
hope
of
obtaining
eternall
Life
:
Therfo●e
followes
the
other
meanes
of
salvation
(
viz.
)
our
Iustification
,
by
the
free
grace
of
God
which
vtterly
frees
vs
from
all
blame
whatsoever
,
both
of
obedience
to
the
law
and
satisfaction
for
Sins
against
the
law
;
that
thus
being
Regenerate
and
Iustified
we
might
obtaine
the
end
of
our
salvation
,
eternall
Life
.
The
third
place
is
that
[
Rom.
8.
30
,
Whom
God
hath
Praedestinated
,
these
he
hath
called
,
whome
called
,
iustified
;
whome
iustified
,
glorified
]
In
this
place
Becanus
triumphs
.
For
(
sayth
he
)
The
Apostle
here
describing
the
order
of
Mans
salvation
,
first
in
Gods
decree
;
then
in
the
Execution
of
it
by
three
degrees
of
Vocation
Iustification
and
Glorification
:
it
followes
necessarily
from
thence
;
that
either
Sanctification
is
left
out
:
or
that
it
is
confounded
with
one
of
those
three
degrees
named
.
T
is
a
desperate
shift
to
say
that
Sanctification
is
signified
by
Vocation
or
Glorification
:
therefore
it
must
be
the
same
with
Iustification
;
And
this
cannot
be
avoyded
by
any
Elusion
.
We
leaue
shifts
to
the
Iesuites
,
returning
him
to
this
place
,
this
plaine
direct
answere
.
That
Sanctification
is
here
comprised
in
the
word
Vocation
.
For
whereas
the
linkes
of
this
golden
chaine
are
inseparable
,
and
all
those
that
are
called
must
needes
be
iustified
and
glorified
:
by
vocation
,
must
here
be
meant
that
calling
which
is
inward
and
effectuall
,
not
that
alone
which
is
outward
by
the
externall
Ministery
of
the
Word
.
For
all
that
are
thus
called
,
bee
not
iustified
,
as
is
apparent
;
and
againe
,
some
,
as
Infants
,
are
iustified
that
are
not
capable
of
such
a
Calling
.
But
now
;
wherein
stands
the
inward
vocation
of
a
sinner
?
Is
it
not
in
the
Infusion
of
inherent
sanctifying
Grace
,
enlightning
his
Eyes
,
opening
his
Eare
,
changing
his
Heart
,
turning
him
from
darkenesse
to
light
,
from
the
power
of
Satan
,
to
the
obedience
of
God
;
in
a
word
,
in
the
Renovation
of
his
Fac●lties
?
Which
what
is
it
else
but
Sanctification
?
or
Regeneration
?
or
Conuersion
?
Only
stiled
by
that
tearme
of
Vocation
in
regard
of
the
meanes
whereby
it
is
ordinarily
effected
(
that
is
)
the
preaching
of
the
word
.
He
must
needs
coyne
vs
some
new
Mystery
in
Divinity
:
who
will
perswade
vs
that
some
other
worke
of
Grace
is
meant
by
Vocation
;
and
not
that
of
Sanctification
.
Therefore
wee
haue
neither
one
Linke
snapt
out
,
nor
two
shuffled
together
in
this
chaine
of
our
Saluation
:
But
foure
,
as
distinct
,
as
vndivideable
.
Election
,
Sanctification
,
(
whereto
we
are
called
by
the
Gospell
preached
,
2
Thess.
2.
14.
)
Iustification
by
Faith
,
(
which
is
a
fruit
of
Sanctification
)
and
Glorification
.
The
fourth
place
is
that
in
the
Epistle
to
the
Hebrewes
,
Chap.
13.
14.
[
For
if
the
blood
of
Bulls
and
Goats
,
and
the
ashes
of
an
Heifer
,
sprinkling
them
that
are
vncleane
,
sanctifieth
as
touching
the
purifying
of
the
flesh
:
how
much
more
shall
the
blood
of
Christ
,
who
through
the
eternall
Spirit
offered
himselfe
without
fault
to
God
,
purge
our
consciences
from
dead
workes
,
to
serue
the
liuing
God
.
]
Hence
they
argue
;
That
as
Leuiticall
Sacrifices
and
Washings
did
sanctifie
the
flesh
from
outward
Legall
impurity
:
so
the
Sacrifice
of
Christ
doth
purge
the
Conscience
from
inward
spirituall
vncleanenesse
of
dead
Workes
or
Sinnes
.
This
purging
of
the
conscience
is
nothing
,
but
iustification
of
a
sinner
.
Wherefore
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
be
all
of
one
meaning
.
To
which
I
answere
,
That
the
Apostle
in
that
Chapter
,
and
the
next
disputing
of
the
vertue
and
efficacy
of
Christs
death
,
far
exceeding
the
force
of
all
Leuiticall
Sacrifices
(
the
shadowes
of
it
)
ascribes
vnto
it
what
could
not
be
effected
by
those
,
(
viz.
)
eternall
Redemption
[
verse
12.
]
purging
of
the
conscience
from
dead
workes
[
verse
12.
]
the
putting
away
of
sinne
,
[
verse
26.
]
The
Sanctification
of
the
Elect
,
[
Chap.
10.
7.
10.
]
made
Heires
according
to
the
hope
of
eternall
life
.
In
neither
then
of
those
places
is
our
sanctification
confounded
with
our
Iustification
:
but
both
distinctly
declared
,
as
two
seuerall
partes
of
graces
and
meanes
of
the
Accomplishment
of
our
eternall
Happinesse
.
'T
is
scarce
worth
the
labour
to
examine
those
other
Scriptures
produced
by
our
Aduersaries
,
whereof
some
part
doe
directly
crosse
,
and
the
rest
doe
but
onely
in
apparance
confirme
their
assertion
.
In
generall
therefore
for
them
,
thus
much
wee
confidently
affirme
,
that
let
the
Concordance
be
studied
,
and
all
those
places
examined
wherein
either
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
is
vsed
in
the
Old
or
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
in
the
New
Testament
:
there
will
not
one
be
found
,
no
not
one
,
in
which
those
wordes
carry
any
other
meaning
,
1
Iustification
is
sometimes
applyed
to
1.
God
,
when
Man
iustifies
God
.
As
Psal.
51.
4.
Rom.
3.
4.
[
That
thou
mightest
be
iustified
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
in
thy
saying
,
and
mightest
ouercome
when
thou
art
iudged
.
]
Matth.
11.
19.
[
And
wisedome
is
iustified
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
of
her
children
,
]
Luke
7.
35.
Luke
7.
29.
[
And
the
Publicans
iustified
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
God
,
being
baptized
with
the
baptisme
of
Iohn
.
]
Can
there
be
any
other
meaning
of
Iustification
here●
:
but
this
onely
?
That
God
is
then
iustified
,
when
his
workes
,
his
wisedome
,
his
sacred
ordinances
,
being
accused
by
prophane
men
,
as
vntrue
,
vnequall
,
vn●ust
,
and
foolish
,
are
by
the
Godly
acknowledged
,
or
any
other
meanes
evidently
cleared
vnto
all
men
,
to
be
full
of
all
Truth
,
Equity
,
Wisedome
,
and
Holinesse
?
2
Man
and
that
1
Before
Man
in
things
betweene
Man
and
Man
.
When
Man
iustifies
Man
,
Deut.
25.
1.
[
If
there
be
a
controversie
betweene
Men
,
and
they
come
vnto
iudgement
,
that
the
Iudge
may
iudge
them
,
then
they
shall
iustifie
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
the
righteous
and
condemne
the
wicked
,
]
Isaiah
5.
23.
[
Woe
to
them
wh●ch
iustifie
the
wicked
for
a
reward
,
and
take
away
the
righteousnesse
of
the
righteous
from
him
]
Prouerb
.
17.
15.
[
He
that
iustifieth
th●
wicked
,
and
condemneth
the
iust
,
euen
they
both
are
an
abomination
to
the
Lord.
]
2
Sam.
15.
4.
[
Oh
that
I
were
made
Iudge
in
the
Land
,
that
euery
man
that
hath
any
suit
or
cause
,
might
come
to
me
,
and
I
would
doe
him
Iusti●e
.
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
In
these
&
many
the
like
places
,
to
Iustifie
is
in
iud●
ciall
proceeding
to
absolue
a
party
from
fault
&
blame
:
whether
it
be
rightfully
or
wrongfully
done
.
Ezek.
16.
52.
[
Be
thou
confounded
and
beare
thy
shame
,
in
that
thou
hast
iustified
thy
sisters
]
speakes
God
vnto
Ierusalem
;
in
comparison
of
whose
abhomination
the
sinnes
of
Sodome
and
Samaria
,
were
scarce
to
be
accounted
any
faults
.
They
were
Saints
to
her
.
Of
the
Pharises
Christ
speakes
,
Luke
16.
15.
[
Yee
are
they
that
iustifie
your selues
before
men
:
but
God
knoweth
your
hearts
.
]
That
is
,
You
stand
vpon
the
defence
and
ostentation
of
outward
Holinesse
,
and
deeming
it
sufficient
to
make
it
appeare
before
Men
you
are
holy
:
without
regard
of
acquitting
the
sincerity
of
your
hearts
before
God
.
2
Before
God
,
where
God
iustifies
Man
Exod.
23.
7.
[
The
innocent
and
the
righteous
slay
thou
not
,
for
I
will
not
iustifie
the
wicked
.
]
by
esteeming
him
as
innocent
,
and
letting
him
goe
from
punishment
.
Isaiah
50.
8.
(
Hee
is
neere
that
iustifieth
me
,
who
will
contend
with
me
?
)
saith
the
Prophet
in
the
person
of
Christ
,
signifying
God
would
make
it
appeare
that
he
was
blamelesse
,
for
the
rejection
of
his
people
the
Iewes
who
perished
for
their
owne
and
not
his
fault
.
Rom.
5.
18.
(
As
by
the
offence
of
one
iudgement
came
on
all
Men
to
condemnation
:
So
by
the
righteousnesse
of
one
,
the
free
gift
came
vpon
all
men
to
the
Iustification
of
life
,
)
Rom
▪
8.
33.
34.
[
Who
shall
lay
thing
to
the
charge
of
Gods
Elect
?
It
is
God
that
iustifies
;
who
shall
condemne
?
1
Cor.
4.
4.
[
I
know
nothing
by
my selfe
:
yet
in
this
am
I
not
iustified
.
Hee
that
iudgeth
me
is
God
.
q.
d.
I
haue
kept
a
good
conscience
in
my
Ministery
,
but
God
is
my
iudge
,
though
my
conscience
pronounce
me
innocent
,
yet
God
is
my
sole
Iudge
that
iudgeth
me
and
my
conscience
.
Acts
13.
38.
39.
[
Through
this
Man
is
preached
vnto
you
the
forgiuenesse
of
sinnes
;
and
from
all
things
from
which
yee
could
not
be
iustified
by
the
Law
of
Moses
;
by
him
euery
one
that
beleeueth
is
iustifyed
.
By
which
places
(
not
to
name
more
)
it
appeares
pl●inly
:
that
Iustification
is
opposed
to
Accusation
and
Condemnation
:
and
therefore
can
signifie
nothing
else
but
the
defence
&
absolution
of
a
person
accused
for
an
offender
.
Which
thing
is
so
cleare
and
euident
that
it
cannot
be
gaynsayed
,
except
by
those
alone
who
are
wilfully
blind
,
and
obstinately
resolued
to
contradict
any
truth
,
that
makes
against
their
inveterate
errors
.
For
our selues
,
we
may
not
,
nor
dare
not
shut
our
eyes
against
so
cleare
Light
:
nor
ought
we
to
be
so
bold
when
God
hath
acquainted
vs
with
his
meaning
;
as
to
follow
another
of
our
owne
making
.
And
there
fore
according
to
the
Scriptures
we
acknowledge
and
maintaine
,
that
as
in
other
places
where
mention
is
made
of
the
Iustification
of
a
sinner
before
God
:
so
in
the
2
and
4
Chapters
of
the
Ep.
to
the
Rom.
and
third
Chapter
of
the
Gal.
(
where
the
Doctrine
there
of
is
directly
handled
)
by
Iustification
nothing
else
is
meant
;
but
the
gracious
Act
of
Almighty
God
whereby
hee
absolues
a
beleiuing
sinner
accused
at
the
Tribunall
of
his
Iustice
,
pronouncing
him
iust
and
acquitting
him
of
all
punishment
for
Christs
sake
.
CHAP
III
▪
The
Confutation
of
our
Aduersaries
cauils
against
our
acception
of
the
word
Iustification
.
OVR
Adversaries
haue
little
to
reply
against
these
so
plaine
places
.
Somthing
they
answere
,
namely
.
1
That
it
cannot
be
denied
but
that
Iustification
,
Quotiescunque
in
Scripturis
Deus
dicitur
iustificare
impium
:
semper
intelligendum
est
ex
impio
facere
iustum
.
God
cannot
declare
a
man
to
be
iust
:
but
of
vniust
he
must
make
him
iust
.
]
And
they
giue
the
Reason
.
Because
the
Iudgment
of
God
is
according
to
Trueth
Rom.
2.
2.
We
embrace
this
Rule
and
the
Reason
of
it
,
acknowledging
that
where
euer
there
is
Iustification
,
there
must
be
Iustice
some
way
or
other
in
the
party
Iustified
.
But
the
Question
stands
still
in
what
manner
God
makes
a
sinner
iust
:
whom
hee
in
Iudgemenr
pronounceth
so
to
be
.
They
say
by
bestowing
on
him
the
grace
of
Sanctification
&
perfect
Righteousnesse
inherent
in
his
own
Person
.
We
affirme
,
that
it
is
by
imputing
vnto
him
the
perfect
Righteousnesse
of
Christ
,
accepting
Christs
obedience
for
his
.
In
which
diuersity
let
vs
come
as
neere
them
as
Trueth
will
giue
leaue
.
Thus
●arre
we
goe
along
with
them
.
1
That
there
is
inherent
Righteousnesse
bestowed
vpon
a
Sinner
,
whereby
of
vnholy
,
impure
,
vniust
;
he
is
made
holy
,
cleane
,
and
iust
.
We
all
confessed
this
worke
of
the
Holy
Ghost
renewing
Man
in
the
spirit
of
his
mind
,
restoring
in
him
the
[
a
](A09274-e3220-b)
a
Eph●
.
4.
24.
Col.
3.
9.
Image
of
God
in
[
a
](A09274-e3230-b)
a
Eph●
.
4.
24.
Col.
3.
9.
Knowledge
,
Righteousnesse
,
and
Holinesse
.
That
the
Holy
Ghost
dwelles
in
the
Elect
,
as
in
[
b
](A09274-e3250-b)
b
1
Cor.
3.
16.
6.
19.
2
Cor.
6.
16.
Rom.
8.
Temples
dedicated
to
his
service
,
which
he
adornes
by
communicating
vnto
them
his
Heauenly
graces
.
That
hee
makes
them
Liuing
[
c
](A09274-e3260-b)
c
Rom.
12.
5.
1
Cor.
12.
11.
Members
of
Christs
Body
:
and
fruitfull
[
d
](A09274-e3280-b)
d
Ioh.
15.
4.
Braunches
of
that
true
Vine
.
That
this
grace
infused
is
a
fountaine
of
[
e
](A09274-e3290-b)
e
Ioh.
4.
14.
Living
water
springing
vp
to
eternall
Life
.
These
things
we
beleeue
and
teach
.
Wherfore
whereas
the
Popish
Doctors
fall
foule
on
our
reformed
writers
,
charging
Calvin
&
others
for
denying
all
Inherent
Righteousnesse
in
Beleeuers
,
&
maintaining
only
an
Imputed
Righteousnesse
without
them
:
We
tell
them
't
is
a
grosse
Calumny
forged
by
perverse
.
Minds
,
that
list
not
to
vnderstand
Mens
playnest
writings
.
Nor
Calvin
[
1
](A09274-e3330-b)
1
Cal.
Iustit
.
lib.
3
cap.
1●
.
nor
any
that
euer
maintained
the
trueth
with
him
,
euer
denied
the
Righteousnes
o●
Sanctification
.
But
this
he
denies
&
we
also
with
the
Scriptures
that
the
Righteousnesse
which
iustifies
vs
in
Gods
Iudgment
is
not
in
our selues
:
but
all
in
Christ
.
That
inherent
Righteousnesse
or
sanctification
allway
keepe
company
with
Iustification
,
in
the
same
Person
.
Severed
they
are
never
in
their
common
Subiect
(
viz
)
a
True
Beleeuer
.
as
appeares
Rom.
8.
30.
That
by
this
grace
of
Inherent
Righteousnesse
,
a
Man
is
in
some
sort
iustified
before
God
.
That
is
so
farre
as
a
Man
by
the
grace
of
God
is
become
truly
holy
and
good
:
so
farre
God
esteemes
him
holy
&
good
.
God
taketh
notice
of
his
owne
graces
in
his
Children
,
he
approues
of
them
and
giues
Testimony
of
them
in
case
it
be
needfull
;
as
appeares
by
the
Righteousnesse
of
Iob
,
Dauid
,
Zachary
and
other
holy
Men
;
who
were
good
and
did
good
in
Gods
sight
.
Yea
in
the
Life
to
come
when
(
all
corruptions
being
vtterly
done
away
▪
)
the
Saints
shall
be
invested
with
perfection
of
Inherent
Holinesse
:
by
the
Righteousnesse
of
their
owne
,
and
not
by
any
other
shall
they
then
appeare
iust
in
Gods
fight
.
Thus
farre
we
agree
with
them
.
But
herein
now
wee
differ
,
that
although
by
the
grace
of
Sanctification
infused
,
God
doe
make
him
righteous
and
holy
in
some
measure
that
was
before
altogether
vnholy
and
wicked
:
neuerthelesse
we
affirme
that
by
and
for
this
Holynesse
,
the
best
of
Saints
living
never
were
nor
shall
be
Iustified
in
Gods
sight
;
that
is
pronounced
iust
and
innocent
before
the
Tribunall
of
his
Iustice
.
For
we
here
take
vp
the
forenamed
Rule
layed
downe
by
our
adversaries
,
Whomsoeuer
God
pronounceth
to
be
perfectly
iust
;
he
must
needs
be
made
perfectly
iust
.
For
Gods
Iudgment
is
according
to
trueth
.
Now
that
no
man
in
this
life
,
is
made
perfectly
iust
by
any
such
inherent
Holinesse
in
him
as
is
able
to
outstand
the
severe
and
exact
triall
of
Gods
Iudgment
:
is
a
Trueth
witnessed
by
the
Scripture
and
confessed
alwaies
by
the
most
holy
Saints
of
God
.
Our
Aduersaries
indeed
stiffly
pleade
the
contrary
:
teaching
that
sinne
and
Corruption
in
the
Iustified
is
vtterly
abolished
.
The
error
and
pride
of
which
Imagination
we
shall
shortly
haue
occasion
more
at
Large
to
Discouer
vnto
you
.
Meane
while
let
that
much
stand
for
good
:
that
Man
being
not
made
perfectly
iust
in
himselfe
cannot
thereby
be
declared
perfectly
iust
before
God
:
and
therefore
some
other
Righteousnesse
,
&
not
that
of
Sanctification
is
to
be
sought
for
,
whereby
a
sinner
may
be
Iustified
in
Gods
sight
.
To
that
argument
of
ours
from
the
Opposition
of
iustification
to
Accusation
and
Condemnation
confirmed
by
so
many
places
of
Scripture
;
I
should
but
trouble
you
to
alleadge
more
of
their
Cavills
.
Let
thus
much
suffice
for
the
clearing
of
this
point
:
That
Iustification
and
Sanctification
are
to
be
Distinguished
and
not
confounded
.
The
Righteousnesse
of
the
one
is
in
vs
,
in
its
Nature
,
true
and
good
:
but
for
its
degree
and
measure
,
Imperfect
;
and
alwaies
yoaked
with
the
remaynder
of
naturall
Corruption
▪
And
therefore
if
a
sinner
should
plead
this
before
the
Iudgment
seate
of
God
,
(
offering
himself
to
be
iudged
according
to
this
Righteousnesse
and
Innocency
)
oh
how
soone
his
mouth
would
be
stopped
;
And
this
confession
wrung
out
from
out
his
Conscience
;
All
my
Righteousnesse
is
as
filthy
Raggs
!
And
againe
Vilis
sum
;
I
am
vile
,
what
shall
I
answere
thee
!
But
that
other
Righteousnesse
of
Iustification
is
without
vs
in
Christs
possession
:
but
ours
by
Gods
gratious
gift
and
acceptation
,
and
this
euery
way
perfect
and
vnreproued
in
the
seuerest
Iudgment
of
God
.
And
therefore
when
a
sinner
is
drawne
before
the
Barre
of
Gods
Iudgment
,
accused
by
the
law
,
Satan
,
his
Conscience
;
conuicted
by
the
euidence
of
the
Fact
,
and
to
be
now
sentenced
and
deliuered
to
punishment
by
the
vnpartiall
Iustice
of
God
:
In
this
case
he
hath
to
alleadge
for
himself
the
al-sufficient
righteousnesse
of
a
Mighty
redeemer
who
onely
had
Done
and
suffered
for
him
that
which
hee
could
neuer
doe
nor
suffer
for
himselfe
.
This
Plea
alone
and
no
other
in
the
world
,
can
stop
vp
the
Mouth
of
hell
,
confute
the
accusations
of
Satan
,
chase
away
the
Terrors
that
haunt
a
guilty
conscience
,
and
appease
the
infinite
Indignation
of
an
angry
Iudge
.
This
alone
will
procure
fauour
and
absolution
in
the
presence
of
that
Iudge
of
the
whole
world
.
This
alone
brings
downe
from
Heauen
into
our
Consciences
that
blessed
peace
,
which
passeth
all
vnderstanding
;
but
of
him
that
hath
it
.
Whereby
we
rest
our selues
secure
from
feare
of
Condemnation
;
being
provided
of
a
defence
that
will
not
faile
vs
,
when
after
death
wee
shall
come
into
Iudgment
.
SECT.
2.
CHAP.
I.
The
Orthodoxe
opinion
concerning
the
manner
of
Iustification
by
Faith
,
and
the
confutation
of
Popish
errours
in
this
point
.
HAuing
thus
cleared
the
meaning
of
this
word
[
Iustification
]
and
shewed
that
the
Scriptures
,
-
First
,
-
Secondly
,
the
matter
of
our
Iustification
.
-
Thirdly
;
touching
the
forme
of
Iustification
,
in
what
the
quality
of
this
iudiciall
Act
of
God
,
iustifying
a
sinner
,
consisteth
.
Concerning
the
first
at
this
time
.
The
condition
required
in
such
as
shall
be
partakers
of
this
grace
of
Iustification
is
true
faith
,
Rom
3.
28.
We
conclude
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
without
the
workes
of
the
Law
.
]
and
Rom.
4.
9.
[
For
we
say
that
faith
was
imputed
vnto
Abraham
for
righteousnesse
.
]
and
Rom.
5.
1.
[
Then
being
iustified
by
faith
we
haue
peace
towards
God
through
Iesus
Christ
our
Lord
.
]
With
other
the
like
places
.
Whence
it
is
agreed
vpon
on
all
sides
,
that
a
sinner
is
iustified
by
faith
:
but
touching
the
manner
,
how
he
is
said
to
be
iustified
by
faith
,
there
is
much
controuersie
and
brawle
,
betweene
the
Orthodoxe
of
the
reformed
Churches
,
and
their
Aduersaries
of
Rome
and
Holland
;
the
Arminians
,
and
the
Papists
.
The
sentence
of
the
reformed
Churches
touching
this
point
,
consisteth
of
two
Branches
.
First
,
that
a
sinner
is
iustified
by
faith
,
not
properly
as
it
is
a
quality
or
action
;
which
by
it's
owne
dignity
and
merit
,
deserues
at
Gods
hands
Remission
of
sinnes
;
or
is
by
Gods
fauourable
acceptance
taken
for
the
whole
and
perfect
righteousnesse
of
the
Law
,
which
is
otherwise
required
of
a
sinner
:
but
onely
in
relation
vnto
the
obiect
of
it
,
the
righteousnesse
of
Christ
;
which
it
imbraceth
and
resteth
vpon
.
Secondly
,
that
a
sinner
is
iustified
by
faith
in
opposition
vnto
the
Righteousnesse
of
workes
in
the
fulfilling
of
the
Law
.
Whereby
now
no
man
can
be
iustified
.
In
this
relatiue
and
inclusiue
sense
doe
the
Reformed
Churches
take
this
proposition
[
A
man
is
iustified
by
faith
.
]
They
explaine
themselues
thus
:
There
are
two
Couenants
that
God
hath
made
with
man
;
By
one
of
which
and
by
no
other
meanes
in
the
world
,
saluation
is
to
be
obtained
.
The
one
is
the
Couenant
of
workes
,
The
tenor
whereof
is
[
Doe
this
and
thou
shalt
liue
.
]
This
Couenant
is
now
vtterly
void
,
in
regard
of
vs
;
who
through
the
weaknes
of
our
sinfull
flesh
cannot
possibly
fulfill
the
condition
of
Obedience
required
therby
:
and
therfore
we
cannot
expect
Iustification
&
Life
by
this
means
.
The
other
is
the
Couenant
of
grace
the
Tenor
whereof
is
,
Beleeue
in
the
Lord
Iesus
and
thou
shalt
be
saued
.
The
condition
of
this
couenant
is
Faith
:
the
performance
whereof
differs
from
the
performance
of
the
condition
of
that
other
Couenant
.
Doe
this
and
Liue
is
a
compact
of
pure
Iustice
wherein
wages
is
giuen
by
debt
,
so
that
he
which
doth
the
worke
obeying
the
Law
,
may
in
strict
Iustice
for
the
worke
sake
claime
the
wages
,
eternall
life
,
vpon
iust
desert
.
Beleeue
this
and
liue
is
a
compact
of
freest
and
purest
Mercy
:
wherein
the
reward
of
eternall
life
is
giuen
vs
in
fauour
for
that
which
beares
not
the
least
proportion
of
worth
with
it
:
so
that
he
which
personnes
the
condition
cannot
yet
demand
the
wages
,
as
due
vnto
him
in
seuerity
of
Iustice
;
but
onely
by
the
grace
of
a
freer
promise
,
the
fulfilling
of
which
hee
may
humbly
sue
for
.
By
which
grand
difference
betweene
these
two
Couenants
clearely
expressed
in
Scriptures
,
it
appeares
manifestly
that
these
two
Propositions
.
[
A
man
is
iustified
by
workes
,
]
[
A
man
is
iustified
by
Faith
,
]
carry
meanings
vtterly
opposite
one
to
the
other
.
The
one
is
proper
and
formall
:
the
other
Metonymicall
and
Relatiue
.
In
this
Proposition
(
A
Man
is
iustified
by
workes
)
we
vnderstand
all
in
proper
and
precise
termes
:
That
a
righteous
man
who
hath
kept
the
law
exactly
in
all
points
,
is
by
and
for
the
dignity
and
worth
of
that
his
obedience
iustified
in
Gods
sight
from
all
blame
and
punishment
whatsoeuer
;
because
perfect
obedience
to
the
morall
Law
in
it selfe
,
for
it
owne
sake
deserues
the
approbation
of
Gods
seuere
Iustice
and
the
reward
of
Heauen
.
But
in
that
other
Proposition
(
A
man
is
iustified
by
Faith
.
)
We
must
vnderstand
all
things
relatiuely
thus
.
A
sinner
is
iustified
in
the
sight
of
God
from
all
sinne
and
punishment
by
faith
(
that
is
)
by
the
obedience
of
Iesus
Christ
beleeued
on
;
and
embraced
by
a
true
faith
.
Which
Act
of
Iustification
of
a
sinner
,
although
it
be
properly
the
onely
worke
of
God
,
for
the
onely
merit
of
Christ
:
yet
is
it
rightly
ascribed
vnto
faith
,
and
it
alone
,
for
as
much
as
faith
is
that
mayne
condition
of
that
new
Couenant
,
which
as
we
must
perform
if
we
will
be
iustified
:
so
by
the
performance
thereof
we
are
said
to
obtaine
iustification
and
life
.
For
when
God
by
grace
hath
enabled
vs
to
performe
the
condition
of
beleeuing
;
then
doe
we
beginne
to
enioy
the
benefit
of
the
Couenant
;
then
is
the
sentence
of
absolution
pronounced
in
our
consciences
;
which
shall
be
after
confirmed
in
our
death
;
and
published
in
the
last
iudgement
.
Secondly
,
our
faith
and
no
other
grace
directly
respects
the
promises
of
the
Gospell
;
accepting
what
God
offers
,
sealing
vnto
the
truth
thereof
by
assenting
thereto
,
and
imbracing
the
benefit
and
fruit
of
it
vnto
it selfe
,
by
relying
wholly
vpon
it
.
This
interpretation
of
that
proposition
the
Reformed
Churches
do
admit
,
&
none
other
:
reiecting
as
erronious
and
contrary
to
the
Scriptures
such
glosses
as
ascribe
any
thing
to
the
dignity
of
faith
;
or
make
any
combination
betweene
Faith
and
Workes
,
in
the
point
of
our
Iustification
.
Amongst
which
there
are
three
erronious
assertions
touching
mans
Iustification
by
Faith
;
which
we
are
briefly
to
examine
and
refute
.
1
That
faith
iustifieth
vs
[
Per
modum
Causae
efficientis
&
meritoriae
]
as
a
proper
efficient
and
meritorious
cause
.
Which
by
it's
owne
worth
and
dignity
deserues
to
obtaine
Iustification
,
Remission
of
sinnes
,
and
the
grace
of
well-doing
.
This
is
the
Doctrine
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
which
Bellarmine
labours
to
proue
▪
in
his
17.
Chap.
lib.
pr.
de
Iustificatione
,
where
disputing
against
Iustification
by
faith
alone
,
hee
tels
vs
.
If
we
could
be
perswaded
that
faith
doth
Iustifie
[
impetrando
,
promerendo
,
&
suo
modo
inchoando
Iustificationem
,
]
then
we
would
neuer
deny
that
loue
,
feare
,
hope
,
and
other
vertues
did
iustifie
vs
as
well
as
faith
.
Whereupon
he
sets
himselfe
to
prooue
that
there
is
in
faith
it selfe
some
efficacy
and
merit
to
obtaine
and
deserue
Iustification
.
His
Arguments
are
chiely
two
.
From
those
places
of
Scripture
,
wherein
a
man
is
said
to
be
iustified
,
[
a
](A09274-e4070-b)
a
Gal.
2.
16.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
[
b
](A09274-e4090-b)
b
Rom.
5.
1.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
[
c
](A09274-e4110-b)
c
Rom.
28.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
or
absolutely
without
Article
or
Preposition
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
per
fidem
,
ex
fide
(
or
)
fide
.
Wherein
these
Prepositions
,
signifie
,
saith
he
,
the
true
cause
of
our
Iustification
.
Which
he
proues
1
By
the
contrary
,
when
a
man
is
said
to
be
iustified
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
[
d
](A09274-e4170-b)
d
Rom.
4.
2.
&
3.
20.
Gal
2.
16.
Iam.
2.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
]
This
notes
the
true
efficient
deseruing
cause
of
his
Iustification
.
Secondly
,
By
the
like
in
other
places
where
we
are
said
to
be
redeemed
,
saued
,
sanctified
,
Per
Christum
,
per
sanguinem
,
per
mortem
,
per
vulnera
;
and
in
the
whole
11.
to
the
Heb.
The
Saints
are
said
to
doe
such
and
such
things
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
by
faith
.
All
signifying
the
proper
cause
.
From
those
places
of
Scripture
which
(
sayth
he
)
plainly
shew
:
Faith
doth
impetrare
remissionem
,
&
suo
quidem
modo
mereri
.
Such
are
those
[
Thy
Faith●
hath
saued
thee
]
or
made
thee
whole
.
A
speech
that
Christ
vsed
often
;
as
to
the
[
a
](A09274-e4310-b)
a
Luke
7.
5●
.
woman
that
washed
his
feet
;
To
her
[
b
](A09274-e4320-b)
b
Mat.
9.
22.
that
had
an
issue
of
Blood
;
To
the
[
c
](A09274-e4330-b)
c
Ma●.
10.
52.
blind
man
recovered
of
his
sight
.
And
that
to
the
Cananitish
woman
[
O
woman
[
d
](A09274-e4360-b)
d
Mat.
15.
21.
great
is
thy
Faith
]
now
see
what
the
merit
of
this
Faith
was
,
(
For
this
[
e
](A09274-e4390-b)
e
Mat.
7.
29.
saying
go
thy
way
the
Diuel
is
gone
out
of
thy
Daughter
)
Thus
Abraham
,
being
[
f
](A09274-e4420-b)
f
Rom.
4.
20.
strenghened
in
Faith
glorified
God
.
)
who
therefore
iustified
him
for
the
Merit
of
his
Faith
.
And
againe
in
the
eleuenth
to
the
Heb.
by
many
examples
we
are
taught
that
(
by
[
g
](A09274-e4450-b)
g
Heb.
21.
5
▪
6.
Faith
(
that
is
)
by
the
merit
and
price
of
Faith
Enoch
and
other
men
pleased
God
.
For
answeare
here
vnto
.
1
Vnto
the
Argument
from
the
Proposition
we
reply
;
That
if
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
must
be
needs
strictly
taken
in
the
same
kind
of
Causality
:
then
the
Iesuits
should
doe
well
to
stand
to
that
and
make
the
similitude
betweene
Faith
and
workes
runne
thus
.
A
Man
is
iustified
(
by
)
workes
that
is
for
the
proper
and
only
Merits
of
his
obedience
;
so
a
Man
is
iustified
(
by
)
Faith
that
is
for
the
only
merit
of
his
Beleeving
in
Christ
:
and
by
that
meanes
both
shall
be
true
and
effectuall
causes
of
Iustification
.
But
if
Bellarmine
dare
not
thus
presse
the
similitude
for
feare
of
being
found
guilty
of
despising
the
blood
of
the
New
Couenant
,
attributing
that
to
the
Merit
of
Faith
which
belongs
only
to
the
Merit
of
Christ
;
he
must
then
giue
vs
that
leaue
to
distinguish
which
he
takes
to
himselfe
;
and
if
he
fall
to
his
Qualifications
and
quodammodo's
:
he
must
pardon
if
we
also
seeke
out
such
an
Interpretation
of
those
places
;
as
may
not
crosse
other
Scriptures
.
Which
for
asmuch
as
they
testifie
that
(
We
[
i
](A09274-e4610-b)
i
Rom.
3.
24.
are
Iustified
by
his
grace
through
the
Redemption
that
is
in
Christ
)
that
(
All
[
k
](A09274-e4640-b)
k
Heb.
1.
3.
sinne
is
purged
by
the
blood
of
Christ
)
that
(
By
the
sacrifice
of
himselfe
he
hath
put
away
Sinne
)
and
(
With
offering
hath
consecrated
for
ouer
them
that
are
sanctified
.
)
:
we
dare
not
without
horrible
sacrilege
ascribe
the
grace
of
our
Iustification
vnto
the
worke
and
worth
of
any
thing
whatsoeuer
in
our selues
;
but
wholy
and
only
to
the
Righteousnesse
of
Christ
.
And
therefore
when
the
Scriptures
say
we
are
iustified
(
by
)
Faith
;
we
take
not
the
word
(
By
)
in
this
formall
and
legall
sense
;
we
are
iustified
by
the
efficacy
of
our
Faith
,
or
for
the
worth
of
our
Faith
,
according
as
't
is
vnderstood
in
Iustification
by
workes
:
but
we
take
it
Relatiuely
&
Instrumentally
:
We
are
Iustified
by
Faith
(
that
is
)
by
the
Righteousnesse
of
Christ
,
the
benefit
whereof
vnto
our
Iustification
,
we
are
made
partakers
of
by
Faith
,
as
the
only
grace
which
accepts
of
the
promise
,
and
giues
vs
assurance
of
the
performance
.
He
that
looked
to
the
Brasen
serpent
and
was
cured
,
might
truly
be
sayd
to
be
healed
(
by
)
his
looking
on
,
though
this
Action
was
no
proper
cause
working
the
cure
by
any
efficacy
or
dignity
of
it selfe
;
but
was
only
a
necessary
condition
required
of
them
that
would
be
healed
,
vpon
the
obedient
observance
whereof
,
God
would
shew
them
favor
:
so
he
that
looketh
on
Christ
beleeuing
in
him
,
may
truly
be
sayed
to
be
saued
and
Iustified
by
Faith
,
not
as
for
the
worth
,
and
by
the
●fficacy
of
that
act
of
his
;
but
as
it
is
the
Condition
of
the
promise
of
grace
,
that
must
necessarily
go
before
the
performance
of
it
to
vs
:
vpon
our
Obedience
where
vnto
God
is
pleased
of
his
free
grace
to
iustifie
,
Nor
is
this
Trope
,
any
way
harsh
,
or
vnusuall
to
put
Oppositum
pro
opposito
,
Relatum
pro
Correlato
,
Habitum
pro
Obiecto
.
In
Sacramentall
locutions
't
is
a
generall
Custome
,
to
put
the
signe
for
the
thing
signified
:
and
the
like
is
vsed
in
other
passages
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
And
the
[
n
](A09274-e4750-b)
n
Act.
6.
7.
&
6.
5.
word
of
God
grew
,
&c.
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
[
o
](A09274-e4790-b)
o
1
Tim.
3.
9.
&
4.
6.
mystery
of
faith
,
)
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
the
words
of
Faith
)
and
Rom.
8.
24.
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Spe
seruati
sumus
(
id
est
)
Christo
in
quem
speramus
.
Hope
that
is
seene
is
not
hope
,
that
is
,
res
visa
non
sperata
est
.
That
of
Ignatius
,
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
Like
to
that
(
Christ
our
Ioy
)
Anni
spem
credere
Terrae
)
Georg.
1.
before
Faith
came
,
we
were
kept
vnder
the
Law
,
shut
vp
vnto
the
Faith
,
which
should
afterward
be
reuealed
.
]
[
p
](A09274-e4940-b)
p
Gal.
3.
23.
That
is
,
Before
Christ
came
,
and
the
cleare
exhibition
of
the
Gospell
,
and
the
Righteousnesse
thereof
:
the
Church
was
kept
vnder
the
Ceremoniall
Law
,
as
vnder
a
Schoole-master
,
Wee
might
be
iustified
by
Faith
.
]
that
is
,
not
by
the
Lesson
of
the
Law
,
but
by
Christ
,
typified
and
figured
vnto
vs
therein
.
2
Vnto
the
other
Argument
prooving
the
merit
of
faith
,
we
reply
;
That
in
those
places
is
no
ground
,
at
all
for
such
a
conceit
.
[
Thy
Faith
hath
saued
thee
,
]
saith
Christ
to
some
whom
he
cured
both
in
Body
&
Soule
.
But
what
?
was
it
by
the
efficacy
and
for
the
word
of
their
faith
that
this
was
done
?
No
:
As
't
was
vertue
went
out
of
Christ
that
cured
their
bodily
diseases
;
and
his
compassion
that
mooued
him
to
it
:
so
't
was
his
grace
and
merits
and
free
loue
that
healed
their
soules
,
and
brought
them
pardon
of
their
sinnes
in
the
sight
of
GOD
:
Yet
he
saith
;
Their
faith
saued
them
,
because
by
beleeuing
in
the
Sonne
of
God
,
they
receiued
this
fauour
,
though
for
their
beleeuing
they
did
not
deserue
it
.
God
bestowes
mercy
where
he
findes
faith
,
not
because
faith
merits
such
fauour
at
his
hands
:
but
because
he
is
pleased
to
disperse
his
fauours
in
such
an
order
,
as
himselfe
hath
appointed
;
and
vpon
such
conditions
as
hee
thinkes
good
.
To
that
of
the
Canaanitish
woman
:
Her
great
faith
could
not
claime
by
desert
,
that
fauour
which
Christ
shewed
vnto
her
daughter
:
onely
Christ
was
pleased
to
honour
her
faith
by
his
testimony
of
it
;
and
to
helpe
the
daughter
at
the
Mothers
entreaty
.
Christ
did
it
vpon
that
request
of
hers
so
instant
and
full
of
faith
;
But
yet
who
can
say
she
merited
ought
at
CHRISTS
hands
by
that
her
faithfull
and
instant
petition
?
Her selfe
yet
liuing
would
deny
it
;
and
shee
doth
deny
it
there
,
counting
her selfe
a
dogge
vnworthy
of
the
childrens
bread
,
when
yet
shee
beleeued
strongly
,
and
was
a
child
of
Abraham
according
to
the
faith
▪
To
that
of
Abraham
who
gaue
glory
to
God
,
and
of
Henoch
and
others
,
who
pleased
God
by
their
faith
:
Wee
answere
:
That
it
is
one
thing
for
a
man
to
glorifie
and
please
God
by
his
Obedience
;
'T
is
another
,
by
so
doing
to
deserue
ought
at
his
hands
.
If
God
in
much
grace
and
fauour
accept
of
the
honour
and
contentment
wee
are
able
to
doe
him
by
our
Faith
and
Obedience
:
It
followes
not
that
therefore
we
must
in
iustice
merit
at
his
hands
.
Other
Arguments
for
them
there
are
:
but
so
weakely
knit
;
they
fall
in
sunder
of
themselues
.
Against
them
we
haue
to
obiect
the
Scriptures
,
that
so
often
say
,
[
We
are
iustified
]
gratiâ
and
gratis
;
and
the
Councell
of
Trent
which
they
respect
more
then
the
Scriptures
,
which
hath
defined
thus
:
Nihil
eorum
quae
Iustificationem
praecedunt
,
siue
fides
,
siue
opera
,
ipsam
Iustificationis
gratiam
promeretur
,
Sess.
6.
Cap.
8.
How
then
can
they
say
Faith
merits
Iustification
.
Heere
our
Aduersaries
haue
two
shifts
to
runne
vnto
,
whereby
they
would
avoide
the
absurdity
of
this
Assertion
.
1
That
this
merit
is
not
from
vs
:
but
of
God
.
Because
Faith
is
the
gift
of
Gods
grace
;
and
therefore
though
we
be
iustified
by
merit
:
yet
we
are
iustified
by
grace
,
because
merit
is
of
grace
.
'T
is
of
grace
that
our
faith
merits
.
This
you
may
be
sure
,
is
some
of
that
smoake
of
the
bottomelesse
pit
,
wherein
hell
vented
out
the
Iesuites
,
and
they
their
darke
Imaginations
;
all
to
confound
whatsoeuer
is
cleare
and
lightsome
in
Scripture
.
Scripture
opposeth
these
paires
;
Grace
,
Nature
,
Grace
and
Merit
.
As
the
Pelagians
of
old
confounded
Nature
&
Grace
,
teaching
that
we
were
saued
by
Grace
:
yet
affirming
that
we
are
also
saued
by
Nature
,
and
the
naturall
strength
of
free-will
.
Which
they
salued
thus
.
To
be
saued
by
Nature
,
is
to
be
saued
by
Grace
:
for
Nature
is
of
Gods
grace
and
giuing
.
So
these
confound
Grace
and
Merit
,
making
a
thing
Meritorious
,
because
it
s
of
Grace
.
Faith
merits
because
its
Gods
gracious
gift
.
Nothing
more
contradictory
.
If
it
be
his
gift
,
how
doth
it
merit
,
or
of
whom
?
Of
man
it
may
,
of
God
it
cannot
:
vnlesse
we
will
senslesly
affirme
,
that
the
gift
deserues
something
of
the
giuer
.
That
he
that
giues
an
hundred
pound
freely
,
is
thereby
bound
to
giue
an
hundred
more
.
Had
they
sayed
that
faith
is
good
,
because
of
Gods
giuing
;
that
were
true
,
and
we
may
grant
them
that
God
is
honoured
and
pleased
with
his
owne
gifts
:
but
that
euery
good
thing
merits
,
and
that
we
can
deserue
of
God
by
his
owne
gifts
,
is
affirmed
without
all
Reason
,
or
Scriptures
;
and
will
neuer
be
proued
by
either
.
But
there
is
yet
another
shift
.
2
Faith
merits
Iustification
[
Non
de
condigno
]
of
the
worthinesse
of
it
:
but
[
de
Congruo
]
of
the
fitnesse
:
2
In
distinguishing
vpon
tearmes
that
doe
not
convenire
t●ti
.
For
Worthinesse
agrees
to
merit
onely
:
but
fitnesse
belongs
to
Compact
.
So
that
in
plainer
English
,
the
distinction
runnes
thus
.
Merits
or
deserts
,
are
of
two
sorts
.
Some
,
that
are
merits
and
doe
deserue
because
they
are
worthy
of
a
reward
:
others
that
are
no
merits
and
doe
not
deserue
because
they
are
not
worthy
of
the
Reward
:
but
onely
obtaine
it
,
ex
Congruo
,
in
regard
of
Compact
and
Promise
.
For
this
Rule
is
most
certaine
,
That
a
worke
which
deserues
nothing
by
its
owne
worthinesse
:
can
neuer
deserue
any
thing
by
compact
or
promise
.
The
Iesuites
are
senselesse
in
defending
the
contrary
.
If
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
a
King
promise
a
Beggar
1000
▪
pounds
a
yeare
,
vpon
no
condition
,
then
indeed
the
Begger
doth
not
deserue
it
.
But
if
vpon
condition
he
shall
do
some
small
matter
,
as
that
he
shall
come
to
the
Court
and
fetch
it
,
or
bring
a
Pos●e
of
flowers
with
him
,
now
the
Begger
deserues
it
:
and
he
may
come
to
the
King
,
and
tell
him
,
hee
hath
merited
his
1000
pounds
a
yeare
.
Euery
man
,
but
a
Iesuite
,
would
say
't
were
extreame
impudency
in
a
Begger
to
make
such
a
demaund
,
so
derogatorily
to
the
Kings
gracious
bounty
.
Now
can
it
helpe
them
to
say
,
That
a
Promise
bindes
vnto
performance
,
so
that
God
should
be
vniust
and
vntrue
,
if
he
should
not
bestow
the
reward
promised
,
although
the
workes
bee
not
equall
to
the
reward
.
For
Gods
Iustice
and
Truth
in
performing
his
promise
,
doe
not
imply
our
merit
in
performing
the
Condition
.
We
doe
not
deserue
by
our
well-doing
;
because
God
is
iust
in
his
rewarding
.
And
the
reason
is
manifest
;
Because
God
in
making
the
promise
,
respected
meerly
the
freenesse
and
bounty
of
his
owne
grace
,
not
the
worthinesse
of
our
workes
.
And
therefore
that
obligation
whereby
he
hath
tyed
himselfe
to
performance
,
is
founded
meerely
in
his
owne
Truth
:
not
a
●ot
in
our
merit
.
Wherefore
when
they
tell
vs
,
that
faith
merits
Iustification
[
de
Congruo
]
they
intrappe
themselues
in
a
grosse
Contradiction
;
seeing
to
deserue
[
de
Congruo
]
is
not
to
deserue
at
all
;
but
onely
to
receiue
the
reward
by
meere
promise
:
God
hauing
promised
to
iustifie
beleeuers
.
Thus
much
touching
the
first
Assertion
,
that
Faith
is
the
proper
Cause
of
Iustification
,
working
it
by
it
owne
efficacy
and
merits
.
CHAP
II
▪
The
Confutation
of
the
Arminian
errour
,
shewing
that
faith
doth
not
iustifie
,
sensu
proprio
,
as
it
is
an
act
of
ours
.
The
second
Error
about
this
point
is
of
the
Arminians
,
with
whom
also
the
Papists
agree
:
T
is
this
.
2
That
we
are
Iustified
by
Faith
sensu
proprio
,
that
is
,
the
Act
of
beleeving
,
in
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
credere
,
is
imputed
to
vs
for
righteousnesse
,
being
accepted
of
God
and
accounted
vnto
vs
for
that
whole
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
which
we
were
bound
to
performe
.
So
that
our
very
Faith
is
that
Righteousnesse
,
for
which
we
are
iustified
in
the
sight
of
God
;
no●
quidem
merito
suo
:
sed
propter
gratuitam
acceptilationem
Dei
.
The
authors
of
this
opinion
are
Faustus
Socinus
that
vnhappy
Haereticke
in
his
most
Blasphemous
Booke
[
de
Christo
servatore
:
]
&
Michael
Servetus
a
Spanyard
in
his
second
Booke
[
de
lege
&
Evangelio
]
which
Errors
are
confuted
by
Calvin
in
his
opuscula
.
A
stiffe
de●ender
of
this
opinion
was
Christophorus
Ostorodius
a
Polonian
in
his
disputations
contra
Georgium
Tradelij
,
who
for
this
and
other
pestilent
errors
about
the
Article
of
Mans
Redemption
,
was
wi●h
his
companion
Andreas
Vaidonitus
banished
the
Low
Countreys
where
he
had
seated
himselfe
and
published
his
opinions
;
Arminius
,
and
his
followers
haue
bin
cheefe
promoters
of
it
.
Arminius
himselfe
,
as
in
other
his
opinions
:
so
in
the
publishing
of
this
vsed
much
closenesse
and
cunning
conveyance
.
In
his
private
disputations
[
Tit.
de
Iustificatione
]
he
seemes
plainly
to
condemne
it
,
saying
that
it
is
an
abuse
to
say
that
Fides
est
causa
formalis
Iustificationis
,
and
an
error
to
affirme
[
That
Christ
hath
deserued
,
vt
fidei
dignitate
et
merito
iustificemur
.
]
In
his
publique
disputations
he
opens
himselfe
somewhat
plainly
:
Thes.
19.
de
Iustificat
.
cat
.
Thes.
7.
These
are
his
words
.
[
Fidei
vero
Iustificatio
tribuitur
,
non
quod
illa
sit
Iustitia
ipsa
quae
rigido
&
seuero
De●
iudicio
oppont
possit
;
quanquam
Deo
grata
:
sed
quod
in
iudicio
mis●ri●ordiae
triumphans
supra
iudicium
absolutionem
a
peccatis
obtineat
&
gratiose
in
Iustitiam
imputetur
.
Cuius
rei
causaest
tum
Deus
iustus
&
misericors
,
tum
Christus
obedient●●
oblatione
et
intercessione
suâ
secundum
Deum
in
beneplacito
et
mandato
ipsius
.
]
Here
Faith
it selfe
is
imputed
for
Righteousnesse
.
But
t
is
not
in
Gods
seuere
Iudgment
,
but
in
his
Iudgment
of
Mercy
.
Faith
in
it selfe
is
not
worthy
:
but
yet
Christ
by
his
merits
hath
deserued
that
God
will
gratiously
accept
of
it
.
This
opinion
published
was
quickly
contradicted
:
wherevpon
Arminius
makes
knowne
his
mind
in
playner
Termes
,
In
declaratioue
sententiae
ad
ordines
Holland
:
&
Westfrisiae
he
confesseth
that
in
the
forenamed
Thesis
his
meaning
was
,
Responsione
ad
31.
Artic.
art.
4.
hee
brancheth
cut
his
opinion
in
three
distinct
propositions
.
-
1
Iustitia
Christi
imputatur
nobis
.
-
2
Iustitia
Christi
imputatur
in
iustitiam
.
-
3
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
credere
imputatur
in
iustitiam
.
The
first
of
these
Propositions
,
he
grants
:
That
Christs
Righteousnesse
is
imputed
to
vs
.
The
second
hee
denies
,
That
Christs
Righteousnesse
is
imputed
for
Righteousnesse
.
The
third
●e
grants
,
That
the
Act
of
beleeuing
is
imputed
for
Righteousnesse
.
Here
by
Mysteries
in
these
Propositions
,
hereafter
to
bee
vnfolded
.
Wee
now
meddle
with
the
last
which
yet
is
more
roundly
expressed
by
Arminius
in
his
Epistle
ad
Hyppolitum
.
[
Lege
princip.
Pa.
]
[
Ipsum
Fidei
actum
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
credere
,
dico
imputari
in
iustitiam
,
idque
sensu
proprio
non
metonymice
]
The
same
is
the
opinion
of
his
fellowes
the
Remonstrants
,
of
[
c
](A09274-e5850-b)
c
A●tibell
.
pag.
106.
Vorstius
,
of
[
d
](A09274-e5870-b)
d
Collat.
cu●
Sib.
Lubber
.
Peter
Bertius
,
of
[
e
](A09274-e5890-b)
e
Thesibu
,
de
●ustific
.
Episcopius
,
and
the
[
f
](A09274-e5910-b)
f
R●monstr●nt
.
In
Cell
.
Delphensi
.
Art.
2.
Antith
.
2.
[
Statuimus
Deum
Fidem
no●iram
nobis
imputare
per
obedientiam
:
ea●que
(
&
nos
in
illa
)
acceptos
habere
.
rest
.
With
whom
Bellarmine
agrees
pat
[
Liber
●
.
de
Iust.
cap.
17.
When
vpon
that
Rom:
4.
(
His
faith
is
imputed
for
righteousnesse
.
]
he
saith
thus
.
[
Vbiipsa
fides
censetur
esse
Iustitia
,
ac
per
hoc
non
apprehendit
fides
iustitiam
Christi
:
sed
ipsa
fides
in
Christum
est
iustitia
.
]
In
summe
,
their
opinion
runnes
thus
.
God
in
the
Legall
Couenant
required
the
exact
obedience
of
his
Commandement
:
but
now
in
the
Couenant
of
grace
,
he
requires
faith
,
which
in
his
gracious
estimation
stands
in
stead
of
that
obedience
to
the
Morall
Law
,
which
wee
ought
to
performe
.
Which
comes
to
passe
by
the
Merit
of
Christ
;
for
whose
sake
God
accounts
our
imperfect
saith
to
be
perfect
obedience
.
This
Assertion
we
reiect
as
erronious
,
and
in
place
thereof
we
defend
this
Proposition
.
God
doth
not
iustifie
a
man
by
Faith
properly
,
impuring
vnto
him
faith
in
Christ
for
his
perfect
obedience
to
the
Law
,
and
therefore
accounting
him
iust
and
innocent
in
his
sight
.
Which
we
proue
by
these
Reasons
.
1
We
are
not
Iustified
by
any
worke
of
our
owne
.
But
beleeving
is
an
Act
of
our
owne
:
Therefore
by
the
Act
of
beleeving
we
are
not
Iustified
.
The
Maior
is
most
manifest
by
the
Scriptures
,
which
teach
that
we
are
saued
by
grace
Ephes.
2.
5.
[
and
therefore
not
by
the
workes
of
Righteousnesse
which
we
had
wrought
.
]
Tit.
3.
6.
[
For
if
it
be
of
Works
,
then
were
grace
no
more
grace
]
Ro.
11.
6.
The
Minor
is
likewise
evident
.
[
That
Faith
is
a
worke
of
ours
.
]
For
though
Iohn
6.
29.
it
bee
said
,
[
This
is
the
worke
of
God
that
ye
beleeue
in
him
whom
hee
hath
sent
]
yet
will
not
our
adversaries
conclude
thence
,
that
Faith
is
Gods
worke
within
vs
,
and
not
our
worke
by
his
helpe
.
For
so
should
they
runne
into
that
absurdity
which
they
would
fasten
vpon
vs
.
(
viz.
)
That
when
a
Man
beleeues
,
t
is
not
man
beleeues
:
but
God
beleeues
in
him
.
To
beleeue
,
though
it
be
done
by
Gods
aide
:
yet
't
is
we
that
doe
it
;
and
the
Act
is
properly
ours
.
And
being
so
,
we
conclude
,
that
by
it
we
are
not
iustified
in
Gods
sight
.
Here
two
Exceptions
may
be
made
.
1
First
that
we
are
not
iustified
by
any
worke
of
our
owne
(
viz
▪
)
which
we
our selues
doe
by
our
owne
strength
without
the
help
of
grace
:
But
yet
we
may
be
iustified
by
some
worke
which
we
doe
(
viz
)
by
the
aide
of
Grace
;
and
such
a
worke
is
Faith
.
Wee
answere
.
This
Distinction
of
workes
done
without
Grace
and
workes
done
by
Grace
,
was
devised
by
one
that
had
neither
Wit
nor
Grace
;
being
a
T●icke
to
elude
the
force
of
such
Scriptures
as
exclude
indefinitely
all
workes
from
our
Iustification
,
without
distinguishing
either
of
Time
when
they
are
done
,
before
or
after
;
or
of
the
ayde
&
helpe
whereby
they
are
done
,
whether
by
Nature
or
by
Grace
.
Wherefore
it
is
without
all
ground
in
Scripture
thus
to
interpret
these
Propositions
:
A
man
is
not
iustified
by
workes
(
that
is
)
by
workes
done
by
worth
of
Nature
before
and
without
Grace
.
A
Man
is
iustified
by
Grace
(
that
is
)
by
workes
done
by
aide
of
Grace
.
These
Interpretations
are
meere
forged
inventions
of
froward
Minds
,
affirmed
but
not
proved
:
as
we
shall
more
hereafter
declare
,
2
That
we
are
not
Iustified
by
any
workes
of
our
own
,
(
that
is
)
by
any
works
of
the
Law
:
but
by
a
worke
of
the
Gospell
such
as
faith
is
we
may
be
iustified
.
Male
res
agitur
vbi
opus
est
tot
Remedijs
(
saith
Erasmus
in
another
case
.
)
T
is
a
certaine
signe
of
an
vntrue
opinion
when
it
must
be
bolstered
vp
with
so
many
distinctions
.
Nor
yet
hath
this
distinction
any
ground
in
Scripture
,
or
in
Reason
:
for
both
tell
vs
that
the
workes
commamded
in
the
Law
,
and
workes
commanded
in
the
Gospell
are
one
and
the
same
for
the
substance
of
them
,
What
worke
can
be
named
,
that
is
enioyned
vs
in
the
New
Testament
,
which
is
not
also
commanded
vs
in
that
summary
precept
of
the
Morall
Law
[
Thou
shalt
loue
the
L●rd
thy
God
with
all
thy
heart
and
with
all
thy
soule
and
with
all
they
strength
,
and
with
all
thy
mind
:
and
thy
neighbour
as
thy selfe
.
]
Luc.
5.
27.
Deut.
6.
5
What
sinne
is
there
against
the
Gospell
,
that
is
not
a
transgression
of
the
Law
?
If
the
Gospel
command
Charity
,
is
it
any
other
then
that
which
the
Law
commands
:
If
the
Gospell
command
Faith
,
doth
not
the
Law
enioine
the
same
?
you
will
say
No.
It
doth
not
command
Faith
in
Christ
.
I
answere
,
yea
,
it
doth
:
For
that
which
commands
vs
in
generall
to
Beleeue
what
euer
God
shall
propose
vnto
vs
:
commands
vs
also
to
beleeue
in
Christ
,
assoone
as
God
shall
make
knowne
that
t
is
his
will
we
should
beleeue
in
him
.
The
Gospell
discouers
vnto
vs
the
Obiect
;
the
Law
commands
vs
the
obedience
of
beleeuing
it
.
Wherefore
Faith
,
for
the
Substance
of
the
Grace
and
works
done
by
vs
,
is
a
worke
of
the
Law
;
and
so
to
be
Iustified
by
the
Action
of
beleeuing
,
is
to
be
Iustified
by
workes
and
by
our
owne
Righteousnesse
,
contrary
to
the
Scriptures
;
and
that
Phil:
5.
9.
(
That
I
may
be
found
not
,
&c.
This
of
the
first
Reason
.
2
God
accounts
that
only
for
perfect
Righteousn●sse
of
the
Law
,
which
is
so
in
deed
and
truth
.
But
Faith
is
not
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
the
Law
.
Therefore
God
doth
not
account
it
●or
such
.
The
Minor
is
granted
by
our
adversaries
;
That
Faith
is
not
the
exact
Iustice
of
the
Law
;
such
as
can
stand
before
the
severity
of
Gods
Iudgments
.
The
Maior
must
be
proued
:
That
God
accounts
not
that
for
perf●ct
Iustice
which
is
not
perfect
indeed
.
This
appeares
by
that
Rom.
2.
2.
[
The
iudgement
of
God
is
according
to
trueth
.
]
Where
therefore
any
thing
is
not
truly
good
and
perfect
:
there
God
esteemes
it
not
so
.
Here
also
twil
be
excepted
.
That
God
some
time
Iudgeth
Iudicio
iustitiae
,
according
to
exact
Iustice
;
and
then
he
●udgeth
nothing
perfectly
iust
,
but
that
whi●h
hath
true
perfection
of
Iustice
in
it
.
Sometimes
he
iudgeth
iudicio
misericord●ae
;
according
to
mercy
:
and
so
he
may
esteeme
a
Man
perfectly
righteous
for
that
which
is
not
perfect
righteousnesse
in
it selfe
;
namely
for
his
Faith
.
Surely
,
this
is
a
trimme
distinction
thus
applyed
,
that
sets
Gods
Mercy
and
Truth
together
by
the
Eares
.
As
who
would
say
,
When
God
iudgeth
out
of
Mercy
:
hee
then
doth
not
iudge
according
to
truth
.
The
Scriptures
doe
not
acquaint
vs
with
any
such
mercifull
iudgement
of
God
.
This
they
doe
acquaint
vs
with
,
That
God
iudgeth
according
to
mercy
,
not
when
he
doth
pronounce
and
cleare
a
Sinner
to
be
perfectly
righteous
for
that
righteousnesse
which
is
truely
imperfect
:
but
when
he
iudgeth
a
Sinner
to
be
righteous
for
that
righteousnesse
which
is
perfect
;
but
is
not
his
owne
.
In
this
Iudgement
there
is
both
Truth
and
Mercy
.
Truth
,
in
that
he
esteemes
me
perfectly
righteous
,
for
that
righteousnesse
sake
which
is
euery
way
perfect
:
and
mercy
,
that
he
accepteth
for
sinne
,
that
righteousnesse
which
is
performed
for
me
by
Christ
my
surety
;
but
is
not
mine
owne
.
Other
mercifull
Iudgement
of
God
besides
this
,
we
acknowledge
none
.
3
We
are
not
iustified
by
two
righteousnesses
existing
in
two
diuers
subiects
.
But
if
wee
be
iustified
by
the
worke
of
Faith
:
we
shall
be
iustified
partly
by
that
righteousnesse
which
is
in
vs
,
(
viz.
)
of
Faith
:
partly
by
the
righteousnesse
of
Christ
without
vs
.
Ergo
we
are
not
iustified
by
Faith
properly
.
The
Minor
is
apparant
.
The
Righteousnesse
of
Faith
is
●nherent
in
vs
.
and
by
it
we
are
iustified
(
say
our
Aduersaries
.
)
The
righteousnesse
of
Christ
is
inherent
in
him
:
and
by
it
are
we
iustified
,
say
the
Scriptures
.
[
Being
now
iustified
by
his
blood
,
we
shall
be
saued
from
wrath
through
him
.
]
Ro.
5
9.
&
v.
19.
[
By
the
obedience
of
one
,
many
shall
be
made
iust
.
]
Wherefore
either
we
are
properly
iustified
by
both
,
or
there
is
an
errour
,
and
one
part
must
stand
out
▪
We
cannot
be
properly
iustified
by
both
,
for
our
own
faith
and
Christs
obedience
too
:
for
if
we
be
perfectly
iust
in
Gods
sight
for
our
own
Faith
,
what
need
the
Imputation
of
Christs
obedience
to
make
vs
iust
?
If
for
Christs
righteousnes
we
be
perfectly
iustified
:
how
can
God
account
vs
perfectly
iust
for
our
faith
?
Arminius
and
his
friends
,
seeing
these
things
cannot
stand
together
;
haue
(
according
to
the
good
will
which
they
beare
toward
the
righteousnesse
of
Christ
)
kept
in
our
faith
,
and
thrust
out
Christs
obedience
,
denying
vtterly
that
it
is
imputed
vnto
vs
for
righteousnesse
.
But
my
Brethren
(
which
I
hope
make
a
better
choice
)
seeing
it
cannot
part
with
ours
:
part
with
our
owne
righteousnesse
,
leaning
wholy
vpon
the
righteousnesse
of
Christ
;
and
seeking
for
the
comfort
of
our
Iustification
in
his
perfect
obedience
,
and
not
in
our
weake
and
imperfect
saith
.
These
Reasons
may
suffice
to
shew
the
errour
of
that
Assertion
.
We
are
iustified
by
Fa●●h
,
sensu
prop●rio
,
God
accepting
the
Act
of
beleeuing
for
the
perfect
obedience
of
the
Law
.
And
therefore
that
in
those
places
,
Faith
is
imputed
for
righteousnesse
,
]
the
Phrase
is
to
be
expounded
metonymice
,
(
that
is
)
Christs
righteousnesse
beleeued
on
by
Faith
,
is
imputed
to
the
beleeuer
for
righteousnesse
.
Whereas
our
Aduersaries
say
that
faith
of
its
owne
dignity
and
desert
,
doth
not
obtaine
this
fauour
of
God
,
to
be
esteemed
for
the
perfect
righteousnesse
of
the
Morall
Law
:
but
this
comes
to
passe
onely
by
the
Merits
of
Christ
,
who
hath
procured
this
grace
vnto
vs
,
that
God
should
thus
accept
of
our
Faith
:
wee
answere
,
that
this
is
affirmed
,
but
't
is
not
prooued
.
They
speake
a
little
more
fauourably
then
the
Romanists
,
who
make
faith
of
it selfe
to
merit
Iustification
:
these
will
haue
it
not
to
merit
it
;
but
to
be
graciously
accepted
for
righteousnesse
.
But
wee
find
not
in
Scripture
any
such
Doctrine
as
this
,
[
Christ
hath
merited
that
wee
should
bee
iustified
for
our
faith
,
]
or
[
Christ
hath
merited
for
our
faith
,
that
faith
should
be
esteemed
by
God
for
that
perfect
Iustice
of
the
Law
;
whereby
we
are
iustified
in
Gods
sight
.
]
These
things
the
Scriptures
teach
not
:
they
teach
,
that
Christ
is
our
righteousnesse
,
and
that
we
are
iustified
by
his
blood
and
obedience
.
But
that
he
hath
merited
by
his
obedience
,
that
we
should
be
iustified
by
our
owne
obedience
and
righteousnesse
,
is
a
peruerse
assertion
of
men
that
loue
to
runne
about
the
bush
,
and
leauing
the
streight
,
to
runne
in
crooked
and
froward
wayes
.
And
it
differs
little
from
the
like
shift
of
the
Disciples
of
Rome
,
who
to
maintaine
Merit
of
our
workes
and
of
Christ
too
;
salue
it
with
this
tricke
.
Christ
hath
merited
that
wee
might
merit
.
But
we
acknowledge
,
as
no
other
merit
,
but
that
of
Christ
;
so
no
other
righteousnesse
to
Iustification
,
but
his
alone
.
Thus
much
of
the
second
Assertion
.
CHAP.
III.
The
confutation
of
Popish
Doctrine
,
that
other
graces
doe
iustifie
vs
,
and
not
faith
alone
.
THe
third
and
last
followes
,
wherein
the
Controuersie
is
betweene
vs
and
those
of
Rome
;
whose
Assertion
is
:
that
3
A
sinner
is
not
iustified
by
faith
alone
,
but
also
by
other
vertues
and
graces
;
as
Hope
,
Loue
,
Repentance
,
Feare
of
God
,
&c.
This
we
also
reject
as
an
error
,
contrary
to
the
Scriptures
,
wherby
we
are
taught
,
That
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
alone
.
For
opening
the
truth
of
which
point
:
you
must
call
to
minde
the
different
acception
of
the
word
Iustifie
:
wherein
it
is
taken
by
vs
,
and
by
our
Aduersaries
.
With
them
to
Iustifie
is
all
one
,
as
to
Sanctifie
:
of
vnjust
and
vnholy
,
to
make
inherently
iust
and
holy
.
With
vs
to
Iustifie
is
to
absolue
an
offender
,
quitting
him
from
blame
and
punishment
.
According
to
these
different
Acceptions
,
this
proposition
[
A
man
is
iustified
by
faith
alone
]
hath
a
double
meaning
;
one
thus
[
A
man
by
faith
alone
is
inherently
sanctified
]
another
thus
:
[
A
man
by
faith
alone
obtaines
absolution
in
Gods
Iudgement
,
from
all
faultinesse
and
punishment
.
This
latter
meaning
onely
is
true
,
and
t
is
that
onely
which
is
defended
by
vs
of
the
Reformed
Churches
;
Namely
,
that
faith
onely
is
the
grace
of
God
whereby
a
sinner
beleeuing
the
promise
,
and
resting
himselfe
vpon
the
righteousnesse
of
Christ
,
receiues
mercy
from
God
in
absoluing
him
from
the
fault
and
punishment
of
all
his
Transgressions
:
and
to
be
accounted
Righteous
for
Christs
sake
.
Which
gracious
priuiledge
God
hath
annexed
vnto
faith
,
as
vnto
the
Condition
of
the
New
Covenant
,
and
not
vnto
Loue
,
Hope
,
Feare
,
Repentance
,
or
any
other
grace
;
For
not
these
,
but
Faith
onely
,
respecteth
the
promise
of
the
Gospell
.
The
former
sense
of
that
Proposition
,
is
false
and
absurde
,
viz.
[
A
Man
by
faith
alone
is
inherently
sanctified
]
nor
doe
any
of
the
Reformed
deteine
such
a
Construction
thereof
.
Wherefore
when
Bellarmine
and
his
Complices
dispute
eagerly
against
Iustification
by
faith
alone
,
those
Arguments
wherewith
they
suppose
to
smite
through
the
Truth
of
our
Assertion
,
are
let
flye
at
a
wrong
Marke
;
being
all
aymed
at
this
Butte
,
(
viz
)
to
proue
;
That
a
man
is
sanctified
by
other
inherent
Graces
as
well
as
faith
.
Which
point
we
easily
yeeld
them
,
confessing
that
inherent
righteousnesse
,
consists
not
of
one
,
but
of
the
[
a
](A09274-e6730-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
manifold
graces
of
Gods
Spirit
,
wrought
in
the
heart
of
such
as
are
Regenerate
.
Neuerthelesse
for
the
shewing
of
some
points
which
may
be
doubted
of
;
Let
vs
briefely
take
a
view
of
the
chiefe
passages
of
Bellarmines
long
discourse
;
which
he
maintaines
from
the
twelfth
Chapter
of
his
first
booke
de
Iustificatione
,
to
the
end
.
For
to
proue
that
a
Man
is
iustified
not
by
faith
alone
.
Of
his
Arguments
which
are
few
,
I
shall
name
three
onely
,
which
are
materiall
.
1
If
other
vertues
Iustifie
as
well
as
Faith
,
But
other
vertues
doe
Iustifie
—
Therefore
,
&c.
The
Minor
he
prooues
out
of
the
Councell
of
Trent
,
Sess.
6.
cap.
6.
where
seauen
preparatory
,
graces
to
Iustification
,
are
reckoned
vp
.
1
Faith
.
2
The
Feare
of
God
,
3
Hope
in
his
mercy
.
4
Loue
of
God
,
as
the
Fountaine
of
Iustice
(
&
ad
benefactoris
,
saith
Bellarmine
)
5
Repentance
,
a
sorrow
and
detestation
of
sinne
.
6
A
desire
of
receiuing
the
Sacrament
of
Baptisme
.
7
A
purpose
to
leade
a
new
life
,
and
keepe
Gods
Commandements
.
All
these
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
doe
iustifie
a
Man
,
Praeparatoriè
,
antecedentèr
,
dispositiuè
.
Faith
,
that
s
the
roote
and
beginning
of
our
Iustification
,
the
rest
follow
in
order
;
all
must
goe
before
as
needfull
preparations
:
and
Iustification
followes
,
as
the
effect
of
all
in
common
,
&c.
Ergo
,
Not
of
Faith
alone
.
The
[
b
](A09274-e6880-b)
b
Lib.
1.
cap.
13.
Iesuite
goes
ouer
euery
particular
,
to
shew
by
Scriptures
what
force
each
of
those
graces
haue
to
Iustifie
.
But
t
is
not
worth-while
to
repeate
his
proofes
.
Vnto
the
Argument
,
wee
answere
two
things
.
1
That
it
is
framed
vpon
the
errour
which
puts
out
of
frame
the
whole
dispute
of
our
Aduersaries
,
about
this
Article
of
Iustification
;
namely
,
that
Regeneration
and
Sanctification
is
all
one
thing
with
Iustification
;
and
that
to
Iustifie
a
sinner
is
nothing
but
to
doe
away
inherent
corruption
,
by
infusion
of
inherent
righteousnesse
.
This
we
haue
heretofore
by
the
Scriptures
cleared
to
be
false
;
and
therefore
this
Argument
proouing
our
Sanctification
to
be
wrought
by
other
graces
as
well
as
by
faith
,
toucheth
not
the
point
of
Iustification
in
the
Remission
of
sinnes
,
which
faith
alone
obtaineth
through
the
promise
.
2
Touching
these
graces
which
they
make
preparatory
vnto
Iustification
,
that
is
to
Sanctification
:
Wee
answere
,
that
t
is
a
Philosophicall
dreame
of
such
as
measure
out
the
workes
of
Gods
Spirit
in
mans
conuersion
,
according
to
Aristotles
Physickes
;
and
those
disputes
touching
praeuious
,
or
fore-going
dispositions
,
that
qualifie
the
matter
for
receiuing
of
the
Forme
.
We
acknowledge
,
that
in
mans
Regeneration
all
graces
of
the
Spirit
are
not
perfected
at
once
.
But
as
the
ioynts
and
sinewes
in
the
bodily
:
so
the
graces
of
Sanctification
in
the
spirituall
New-birth
,
are
at
first
weake
and
feeble
:
Which
in
continuance
of
time
gather
more
strength
,
according
to
our
growth
in
Christ
.
But
yet
these
are
true
for
the
substance
:
though
imperfect
in
their
degrees
and
measure
.
There
is
now
true
Spirituall
life
in
such
a
one
which
was
before
dead
in
sinne
:
although
there
be
not
the
free
and
able
exercise
of
all
the
vitall
powers
.
Health
there
is
,
but
not
entire
from
all
degrees
o●
sicknesse
,
and
euery
kinde
of
disease
.
Wherefore
we
aff●●me
that
these
vertues
which
are
by
our
Aduersarics
reckoned
onely
as
dispositions
vnto
Regeneration
:
are
,
if
they
be
true
and
not
counterfeit
Mettall
,
the
maine
parts
and
fruits
of
Regeneration
.
Hence
we
beleeue
that
these
are
foule
errors
(
viz.
)
To
teach
that
a
man
without
grace
by
the
power
of
his
free-wil
may
dispose
himselfe
to
his
Regeneration
,
by
beleeving
in
Christ
,
fearing
and
louing
of
God
,
hoping
of
his
Mercy
,
repenting
of
his
sinnes
,
resoluing
vpon
amendment
,
and
all
this
with
true
and
sincere
affection
:
or
to
teach
if
a
man
cannot
do
these
things
of
his
owne
meere
strength
and
free-will
;
yet
by
the
Spetiall
aide
of
God
inciting
and
helping
him
;
〈◊〉
may
doe
them
whilst
he
is
vtterly
vns●nctified
in
statu
peccati
.
That
true
Faith
,
and
Feare
,
and
Hope
,
and
Loue
,
and
Repentance
,
and
purpose
of
Reformation
,
are
Vertues
and
Graces
in
a
Man
that
is
yet
gracelesse
and
without
Vertue
,
because
destitute
of
Sanctification
.
That
these
Graces
consisting
in
the
inward
motion
of
the
soule
,
and
change
of
the
Affections
,
are
wrought
in
Man
,
not
by
any
sanctifying
Grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
inwardly
touching
the
heart
:
but
by
some
other
kind
of
Vertue
and
aid
(
they
know
not
what
)
[
a
](A09274-e7010-b)
a
Lib.
1.
cap.
2●
.
Nectamen
est
a
Deo
intus
inhabitante
,
per
gra●●am
Sanctificari
:
sidextrins●cus
ad●●vante
,
&
exitonte
.
externall
,
[
a
](A09274-e7020-b)
a
Et
Cap:
13.
pag.
311.
H.
exciting
and
helping
forward
the
strength
of
Nature
.
[
a
](A09274-e7030-b)
a
Feare
.
All
these
are
monstrous
and
mis-shapen
imaginations
,
bred
in
proud
hearts
that
would
faine
share
the
glory
of
their
Conversion
,
betweene
Gods
grace
and
their
owne
free-will
,
and
maintained
by
curious
heads
,
whom
Philosophicall
speculations
haue
transported
beyond
the
simplicity
of
diuine
Truth
.
The
Scripture
speaks
otherwise
of
these
Graces
,
as
of
those
that
belong
to
such
as
are
not
in
the
way
to
be
made
good
,
but
are
made
so
already
.
[
Ye
are
al
the
Children
of
God
by
Faith
in
Iesus
Christ
]
saith
the
Apostle
Paul
Gal.
3.
28.
Whosoeuer
shall
confesse
that
Iesus
is
the
sonne
of
God
:
God
dwelleth
in
him
and
he
in
God
.
]
saith
Iohn
1.
1.
Ioh.
4.
15.
and
Chap.
5.
1.
[
Whosoeuer
beleeueth
that
Iesus
is
that
Christ
;
is
borne
of
God
.
]
Doe
we
by
true
Faith
become
the
Children
of
God
,
borne
of
him
,
in
whom
hee
dwelleth
and
we
in
him
,
when
as
yet
in
the
meane
time
we
are
yet
vnsanctified
,
vnholy
,
vncleane
,
&
not
in
the
state
of
Grace
?
Bellarmine
will
proue
that
a
man
may
haue
Faith
;
yet
not
the
Child
of
God
:
ou●
of
Iohn
1.
12.
[
As
many
as
receiued
him
,
to
them
he
gaue
power
to
become
the
Sonnes
of
God
:
euen
to
them
th●t
beleeue
on
his
name
.
]
See
(
s●●th
he
)
they
that
beleeue
are
not
yet
,
but
haue
power
if
they
list
,
to
become
the
Sonnes
of
God
,
(
viz.
)
by
going
on
further
from
Faith
to
Hope
and
Loue
,
and
the
rest
of
the
Tridenti●e
dispositions
.
For
t
is
Loue
properly
and
not
Faith
,
that
makes
vs
the
Sons
of
God
;
as
he
would
proue
(
contrary
to
that
expresse
place
of
the
Galat.
)
out
of
the
1
Ep.
of
Iohn
,
where
the
Apostle
hath
much
excellent
matter
,
but
nothing
to
that
purpose
.
To
the
place
of
Iohn
,
wee
answere
,
that
the
Iesuite
playeth
with
the
ambiguity
of
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
is
not
here
a
liberty
to
doe
what
we
list
;
as
if
we
could
at
our
pleasure
become
Gods
adopted
sonnes
:
but
t
is
a
right
and
priuiledge
which
Christ
the
naturall
Sonne
bestowes
on
true
beleeuers
,
to
be
made
Gods
adopted
sonnes
,
and
so
coheires
with
him
of
the
heauenly
inheritance
.
When
is
this
priuiledge
of
Adoption
bestowed
?
Then
when
they
beleeue
,
and
assoone
as
they
beleeue
,
before
they
be
Regenerate
?
No
,
Saint
Iohn
denies
it
.
[
He
giues
power
to
be
the
Sonnes
of
God
,
euen
to
those
that
beleeue
in
him
.
]
Who
be
they
?
Hee
answeres
,
vers.
15.
[
Which
were
borne
not
of
bloud
,
nor
of
the
will
of
the
flesh
,
nor
of
the
will
of
man
,
but
of
God
.
]
Faith
then
is
not
a
Preparatiue
to
Iustification
,
but
a
part
of
it
.
And
is
not
Feare
of
GOD
too
?
[
b
](A09274-e7300-b)
b
Psal
●11
.
10.
Pro.
●
.
7.
Faith
is
radix
:
a
part
of
the
tree
.
beginning
of
wisedome
(
that
is
)
of
a
perfect
Iustification
.
A
bad
interpretation
,
but
a
worse
Argument
.
T
is
the
beginning
,
therefore
not
part
.
Nay
;
If
the
feare
of
God
be
the
Alpha
of
Christian
graces
,
certainely
it selfe
makes
one
Letter
of
that
Alphabet
.
T
is
such
a
beginning
of
wisdome
:
as
its
selfe
is
wisdome
too
.
Else
God
himselfe
deceaues
vs
:
who
,
as
it
is
,
Iob
28.
28.
[
Sayd
vnto
man
:
Behold
the
feare
of
the
Lord
that
is
wisdome
,
and
to
depart
from
euill
is
vnderstanding
.
]
And
therefore
to
take
it
in
the
Iesuits
glosse
,
Feare
of
God
is
Iustification
as
well
as
the
beginning
of
it
.
For
Hope
;
viz.
)
That
[
c
](A09274-e7400-b)
c
Rom.
5.
5.
which
makes
not
ashamed
,
]
Which
is
the
[
d
](A09274-e7420-b)
d
Heb.
6.
18.
Anchor
of
the
Soule
,
sure
and
stedfast
,
that
entereth
within
the
Vaile
.
]
It
would
bee
knowne
what
difference
the
Iesuite
will
put
betweene
that
Hope
which
is
in
a
man
before
:
and
that
which
is
in
him
after
his
Sanctification
.
If
he
say
,
It
differs
onely
in
degree
:
then
hee
grants
,
t
is
the
same
in
substance
:
whence
wee
haue
a
faire
position
;
That
man
sanctified
and
vnsanctified
,
is
alike
capable
of
the
sauing
graces
of
Gods
Spirit
.
The
like
we
say
for
Loue
of
God
,
if
it
be
sincere
and
without
dissimulation
bred
in
the
heart
:
For
so
the
Trent
Fathers
will
haue
this
Loue
to
respect
God
,
vt
fontem
Iustitiae
)
then
we
affirme
this
spirituall
Loue
is
not
to
bee
found
but
onely
in
those
Hearts
,
that
are
in
some
measure
Regenerate
and
made
spirituall
.
In
(
whom
[
e
](A09274-e7520-b)
e
Rom.
5.
5.
this
Loue
of
God
is
shed
abroad
by
the
Holy
Ghost
that
is
giuen
to
them
.
]
as
the
[
a
](A09274-e7540-b)
a
Rom.
5.
5.
Apostle
speaketh
.
This
Bellarmine
is
so●ne
forced
to
grant
:
yet
he
puts
it
off
with
a
distinction
[
No
man
can
loue
God
perfectly
with
all
his
heart
,
without
the
Holy
Ghost
:
but
loue
him
he
may
imperfectly
without
the
Holy
Ghost
dwelling
in
him
,
though
not
without
the
speciall
aide
of
God
.
]
Whereto
we
answere
;
't
is
one
thing
to
loue
God
perfectly
,
and
another
to
loue
him
truely
.
To
loue
him
perfectly
,
is
to
loue
him
with
all
the
heart
,
all
the
soule
,
all
the
minde
,
&
all
the
strength
:
which
we
grant
no
man
can
doe
without
the
Holy
Ghost
:
but
we
also
affirme
,
that
no
man
did
or
shall
euer
doe
it
in
this
life
,
so
long
as
there
is
lustfull
corruption
in
him
causing
any
the
least
auersion
of
his
soule
from
God
in
any
motion
thereof
.
So
that
if
none
haue
the
Holy
Ghost
abiding
in
them
;
but
such
in
whom
Loue
is
thus
perfected
;
he
must
be
confined
with
the
Saints
in
heauen
,
and
not
haue
his
dwelling
with
the
faithfull
on
earth
.
But
if
imperfect
Loue
of
God
be
also
from
the
Holy
Ghost
,
dwelling
in
the
hearts
of
the
Godly
,
who
loue
God
truely
in
vnfeigned
vprightnesse
of
heart
;
though
in
much
imperfection
by
reason
of
sinne
,
which
diuerts
the
heart
vnto
other
pleasures
:
then
it
must
be
knowne
of
the
Iesuite
,
what
he
meanes
by
imperfect
Loue
.
Is
it
false
Loue
,
such
a
meere
naturall
Man
may
conceiue
vpon
generall
grounds
:
That
God
is
good
,
the
chiefest
good
,
iust
,
holy
,
and
full
of
all
excellency
?
He
will
not
say
for
shame
,
this
is
a
true
preparatiue
vnto
Iustification
.
Is
it
true
loue
,
but
in
its
degree
imperfect
,
not
so
vigorous
,
so
vehement
,
so
hot
as
coales
of
Iuniper
:
yet
such
as
hath
some
strength
and
warmth
of
spirituall
affection
?
Then
we
require
that
these
men
will
draw
vs
out
a
line
by
the
Rule
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
to
tell
vs
how
farre
the
true
Loue
of
God
may
come
,
without
the
grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
sanctifying
the
heart
:
But
after
t
is
past
such
a
degree
,
then
there
is
required
the
sanctifying
grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
for
it
.
T
will
trouble
their
Mathematickes
to
describe
vnto
vs
in
what
degree
of
Perfection
that
Womans
loue
was
situated
,
whose
example
they
alleadge
for
a
proofe
of
this
point
out
of
Luke
7.
47.
[
Her
sinnes
which
were
many
,
are
forgiuen
her
,
for
she
loued
much
.
]
Can
Bellarmine
tell
vs
how
much
this
was
?
that
so
by
that
patterne
we
may
know
how
farre
men
goe
in
the
true
Loue
of
God
before
they
bee
at
all
sanctified
by
inherent
Grace
?
For
such
wonders
they
would
make
vs
beleeue
concerning
this
penitent
Sinner
;
that
when
her
soule
was
full
of
Faith
and
Loue
to
Christ
,
her
heart
full
of
sorrow
,
her
eyes
full
of
teares
for
her
sinnes
;
yet
for
all
that
she
was
a
gracelesse
,
vnholy
person
,
whose
Loue
,
and
Faith
,
and
Sorrow
,
came
not
from
the
sanctifying
grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
but
onely
from
free-will
helped
with
some
kinde
of
externall
aide
of
God
.
We
haue
not
Faith
to
beleeue
such
Mysteries
as
these
.
Nor
yet
in
the
last
place
can
we
conceiue
how
there
should
be
true
repentance
,
Trent
:
yet
[
a
](A09274-e7810-b)
a
Tom.
2.
Tract
.
●
cap.
3.
Quest.
3.
Bell.
lib.
1.
c.
14.
Becanus
giues
it
ouer
in
plaine
Feild
;
numbring
these
fore
naming
sixe
graces
onely
,
choosing
rather
to
venter
the
Councells
credit
,
then
his
owne
,
by
defending
an
vnreasonable
position
.
2
Argument
.
But
t
were
absurd
to
affirme
,
that
Faith
can
Iustifie
without
other
vertues
with
other
vices
—
Ergo
,
The
force
of
Iustifying
is
not
in
Faith
alone
.
To
this
we
answere
.
That
this
sophisme
is
fashioned
vpon
the
same
Block
with
the
former
,
that
to
Iustifie
and
Sanctifie
are
all
one
.
In
which
sense
we
confesse
the
Consequence
is
vnauoydable
.
If
Faith
alone
by
it
owne
vertue
and
force
did
sanctifie
:
then
it
would
effect
this
not
onely
in
the
absence
of
other
graces
;
but
in
the
presence
of
their
contrary
Corruptions
:
and
the
similitude
which
we
bring
to
illustrate
our
assertion
,
would
confirme
that
of
the
Aduersaries
.
T
is
the
eye
onely
sees
,
say
our
Men
:
yet
the
Eare
is
in
the
Head
too
.
Yea
,
reply
they
,
But
the
eie
could
see
well
notwithstanding
the
Eare
were
deafe
.
T
is
the
[
a
](A09274-e7890-b)
a
〈◊〉
antid.
●onc
.
Trid.
Sess.
6
cap.
II.
Heate
onely
of
the
fire
or
Sunne
that
warmes
,
though
there
be
light
ioyned
with
it
.
True
say
they
,
But
if
there
were
no
Light
,
yet
if
heate
remained
,
it
would
warme
for
all
that
:
as
the
Heate
of
an
Ouen
,
or
of
Hell
,
burnes
,
though
it
shine
not
.
Thou
holdest
in
thy
hands
many
seedes
(
T
is
the
old
comparison
of
Luther
on
the
15
of
Gen.
)
I
enquire
not
what
t
is
together
but
what
is
the
vertue
of
each
one
single
.
Yea
,
reply
our
Aduersaries
;
that
s
a
very
needelesse
question
indeed
.
For
if
among
them
many
seedes
there
be
some
one
that
hath
such
soueraigne
vertue
;
that
it
alone
can
cure
all
diseases
,
then
t
is
no
Matter
whether
thou
haue
many
or
few
,
or
none
at
all
of
any
other
sort
in
thy
hand
.
Thou
hast
that
which
by
it
owne
vertue
without
other
ingredients
will
worke
the
Cure
Nor
haue
we
ought
to
make
answere
in
this
case
;
If
,
as
the
Eye
sees
,
heate
warmes
,
seeds
and
other
simples
doe
cure
by
their
owne
proper
Vertue
:
so
Faith
alone
by
its
owne
efficacy
did
sanctifie
vs
.
But
there
is
the
Errour
.
Faith
works
not
in
our
sanctification
or
Iustification
by
any
such
inward
power
&
vertue
of
its
own
,
from
whence
these
effects
should
properly
follow
.
For
Sanctification
Faith
,
as
we
haue
seene
,
is
part
of
that
inherent
Righteousnesse
which
the
Holy
Ghost
hath
wrought
in
the
Regenerate
:
and
t
is
opposed
to
the
Corruption
of
our
Nature
which
stands
in
Infidelity
Faith
sanctifies
not
as
a
cause
,
but
as
a
part
of
insused
grace
:
and
such
a
part
as
goes
not
alone
,
but
accompanied
with
all
other
Graces
of
Loue
,
Feare
,
Zeale
,
Hope
,
Repentance
,
&c.
Inasmuch
as
Mans
regeneration
is
not
the
infusion
of
one
;
but
of
the
Habit
of
all
graces
.
Againe
,
't
is
not
the
Vertue
of
Faith
that
iustifies
vs
;
The
grace
of
Iustification
is
from
God
,
he
workes
it
:
but
t
is
our
Faith
applies
it
and
makes
it
ours
.
The
Act
of
Iustification
is
Gods
meere
worke
;
but
our
Faith
onely
brings
vs
the
Benefit
and
Assurance
of
it
.
Iustification
is
an
externall
priuiledge
which
God
bestowes
on
beleeuers
;
hauing
therein
respect
onely
to
their
Faith
,
which
grace
onely
hath
peculiar
respect
to
the
Righteousnesse
of
Christ
and
the
promise
in
him
.
Whereby
t
is
manifest
that
this
argument
is
vaine
.
Faith
alone
is
respected
in
our
Iustification
:
therefore
Faith
is
or
may
be
alone
without
other
graces
of
Iustification
.
Bellar
:
[
b
](A09274-e7930-b)
b
Cap.
15.
eiu●dem
Lib.
primi
.
would
vndertake
to
proue
that
true
saith
may
be
seuered
from
Charity
and
other
Vertues
:
but
wee
haue
heretofore
spoken
of
that
Point
:
and
shewed
,
that
[
true
Faith
,
yet
without
a
Forme
:
]
[
true
Faith
,
dead
,
and
without
a
soule
]
be
Contradictions
as
vaine
as
[
A
true
Man
without
reason
]
[
A
true
Fire
without
heate
.
]
We
confesse
indeed
that
the
faith
of
Iesuites
(
the
same
with
that
of
Simon
Magus
)
may
very
well
bee
without
Charity
and
all
other
sanctifying
graces
;
a
bare
assent
to
the
truth
of
Divine
Reuelations
,
because
of
Gods
Authority
.
As
t
is
in
Diuels
,
so
t
is
in
Papists
and
other
Heretickes
.
But
we
deny
that
this
is
that
which
deserues
the
name
of
true
Faith
:
which
whosoeuer
hath
,
hee
also
hath
eternall
life
.
As
it
is
,
Iohn
6.
47.
3
Argument
.
But
the
Scripture
doth
not
affirme
that
wee
are
Iustified
by
Faith
alone
—
Ergo
,
so
to
teach
,
is
to
teach
false
Doctrine
.
This
Argument
toucheth
the
quicke
:
and
if
the
Minor
can
be
prooued
,
we
must
needs
yeeld
them
the
Cause
.
For
that
the
Iesuites
conceiue
that
this
is
a
plaine
case
:
Feare
not
,
beleeue
onely
,
and
shee
shall
be
made
whole
.
]
And
much
sport
they
make
themselues
with
Luther
:
That
to
helpe
out
this
matter
at
a
dead
lift
,
by
plaine
fraud
hee
foysted
into
the
Text
,
in
the
3.
to
the
Romans
,
the
word
(
Onely
.
)
When
being
taught
with
the
fact
,
and
required
a
Reason
:
He
made
answere
according
to
his
Modesty
,
(
Sic
volo
,
sic
iubeo
,
stet
pro
ratione
voluntas
.
)
T
is
true
that
Luther
in
his
Translation
of
the
Bible
into
the
Germane
tougue
:
read
the
28.
verse
of
that
Chapter
,
thus
.
(
We
conclude
that
men
are
iustified
without
the
workes
of
the
Law
:
onely
through
Faith
.
)
What
Luthers
Modesty
was
in
answering
those
that
found
fault
with
his
Translation
:
Luthers
Translation
;
Nor
that
place
in
the
8.
of
Luke
,
that
our
Doctrine
,
[
touching
Iustification
by
Faith
alone
,
]
is
founded
vpon
.
We
haue
better
proofes
then
these
:
as
shall
appeare
vnto
you
in
the
confirmation
of
the
Minor
of
this
Syllogisme
.
Whatsoeuer
the
Scriptures
affirme
,
that
's
true
doctrine
.
But
the
Scriptures
affirme
,
a
man
is
iustified
by
Faith
alone
.
Therefore
thus
to
teach
,
is
to
teach
according
to
the
word
of
whole-some
doctrine
.
Our
Aduersaries
demaund
proofe
of
the
Minor
.
We
alleadge
all
those
places
wherein
the
Scriptures
witnesse
:
that
we
are
Iustified
by
faith
,
without
the
workes
of
the
Law
.
Such
places
are
these
.
Rom.
3.
28.
(
Therefore
we
conclude
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
,
without
the
workes
of
the
Law
.
)
Rom.
4.
2.
3.
(
If
Abraham
were
iustified
by
workes
,
hee
hath
whereof
to
glory
:
but
not
before
God
.
For
what
saith
the
Scripture
?
Abraham
beleeued
God
:
and
it
was
counted
to
him
for
righteousnesse
.
)
And
vers.
14.
15.
16.
(
For
if
they
which
are
of
the
Law
be
heires
:
faith
is
made
void
,
and
the
promise
made
of
none
effect
.
Because
the
Law
worketh
wrath
,
for
where
no
Law
is
,
there
is
no
transgression
.
)
Gal.
2.
16.
(
Knowing
that
a
man
is
not
iustified
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
but
by
the
Faith
of
Iesus
Christ
:
Euen
we
haue
beleeued
in
Christ
,
that
we
might
be
iustified
by
the
Faith
of
Christ
,
and
not
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
.
For
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
shall
no
flesh
be
iustified
.
)
Gal.
3.
21.
22.
(
Is
the
Law
then
against
the
promises
of
God
?
God
forbid
.
For
if
there
had
beene
a
Law
giuen
,
which
could
haue
giuen
Life
:
verily
righteousnesse
should
haue
beene
by
the
Law
.
But
the
Scripture
hath
concluded
all
vnder
sinne
:
that
the
promise
by
the
faith
of
Iesus
Christ
,
might
be
giuen
by
them
that
beleeue
.
)
Ephe.
2.
8.
9.
(
For
by
grace
ye
are
saued
,
through
Faith
,
and
that
not
of
your selues
;
It
is
the
gift
of
God
:
Not
of
workes
,
least
any
man
should
boast
.
)
Phil
3.
8.
9.
(
Yea
doubtlesse
,
and
I
count
all
things
but
losse
for
the
excellency
of
the
Knowledge
of
Christ
Iesus
my
Lord
.
For
whom
I
haue
suffered
the
losse
of
all
things
:
and
doe
count
them
but
dung
,
that
I
may
winne
Christ
.
And
be
found
of
him
not
hauing
mine
owne
righteousnesse
,
which
is
of
the
Law
:
but
that
which
is
through
the
faith
of
Christ
:
[
a
](A09274-e8390-b)
a
Tit.
3.
5.
6.
7.
the
Righteousnesse
which
is
of
God
by
Faith
.
)
Out
of
which
places
,
not
to
name
more
,
expresly
touching
this
point
of
our
Iustification
,
we
argue
thus
.
A
Man
is
iustified
either
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
or
by
faith
in
Christ
.
But
hee
is
not
Iustified
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
.
Ergo
,
He
is
iustified
onely
by
faith
in
Christ
.
In
this
disiunctiue
Syllogisme
,
they
cannot
find
●ault
with
vs
for
adding
the
word
[
onely
]
in
the
Conclusion
;
which
was
not
in
the
Praemises
.
For
Reason
will
teach
them
,
that
where
two
Tearmes
are
immediately
opposite
,
if
one
bee
taken
away
,
the
other
remaines
alone
.
So
that
in
euery
disjunctiue
Syllogisme
,
whose
Maior
Proposition
standeth
vpon
two
Tearmes
immediately
opposite
:
if
one
be
remoued
in
the
Minor
,
the
Conclusion
is
plainely
equivalent
to
an
exclusiue
Proposition
.
As
if
we
argue
thus
.
Eyther
the
wicked
are
saued
:
or
the
godly
.
But
the
wicked
are
not
saued
.
Thence
it
followes
in
exclusiue
Tearmes
,
Therefore
the
godly
onely
are
saued
.
Our
Aduersaries
cannot
deny
,
but
that
the
Proposition
[
A
Man
is
iustified
by
workes
,
or
by
Faith
,
]
consists
of
Tearmes
immediately
opposite
.
For
else
they
accuse
the
Apostle
Paul
of
want
of
Logicke
,
who
Rom.
3.
should
conclude
falsely
,
[
A
man
is
iusitified
by
faith
without
workes
:
if
he
be
iustified
either
by
both
together
,
or
else
by
neither
.
Seeing
then
he
opposeth
Faith
and
workes
as
incompatible
,
and
exclude
workes
from
Iustification
:
wee
conclude
infallibly
by
the
Scriptures
,
That
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
alone
.
This
Argument
not
auoidable
by
any
sound
answere
,
puts
our
aduersaries
miserably
to
their
shifts
.
Yet
rather
then
yeeld
vnto
the
truth
,
they
fall
vnto
their
distinctions
:
whereby
,
if
t
were
possible
,
they
would
shift
off
the
force
of
this
Argument
.
Whereas
therefore
the
Scriptures
oppose
Workes
and
Faith
:
the
[
Law
of
Workes
,
]
and
the
[
Law
of
Faith
.
]
Our
[
owne
righteousnesse
which
is
of
the
Law
]
and
the
(
Righteousnesse
of
God
by
Faith
,
)
manifestly
telling
vs
that
we
are
Iustified
,
(
Not
by
Workes
,
by
the
Law
of
Workes
,
nor
by
our
owne
Righteousnesse
which
is
of
the
Law
,
but
that
we
are
iustified
by
Faith
,
by
the
Righteousnesse
of
God
by
Faith
.
)
Our
Aduersaries
haue
a
distinction
to
salue
this
Matter
withall
.
They
say
then
Workes
are
of
two
sorts
.
-
1
Some
goe
before
Grace
and
Faith
,
and
are
performed
by
the
onely
strength
of
free-will
:
out
of
that
Knowledge
of
the
Law
,
whereunto
Men
may
attaine
by
the
light
of
Nature
,
or
the
bare
Reuelation
of
the
Scriptures
.
These
workes
or
this
obedience
vnto
the
law
,
which
a
meere
naturall
man
can
performe
,
is
(
say
they
)
that
Righteousnesse
which
the
Scripture
cals
our
owne
.
By
this
kinde
of
Righteousnesse
and
Workes
,
they
grant
none
is
Iustified
.
-
2
Some
follow
Grace
and
Faith
:
which
are
done
by
Mans
free-will
,
excited
and
aided
by
the
speciall
helpe
of
Grace
.
Such
Obedience
and
Righteousnesse
is
(
say
they
)
called
the
(
Righteousnesse
of
God
,
)
because
it
is
wrought
in
vs
of
his
gift
and
grace
.
And
by
this
Righteousnesse
a
man
is
iustified
.
By
this
Invention
they
turne
of
with
a
wet
finger
,
all
those
Scriptures
that
we
haue
alleadged
.
Wee
are
Iustified
(
not
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
)
that
is
,
by
the
Obedience
of
the
Morall
Law
,
which
a
man
may
performe
without
Gods
Grace
:
But
we
are
Iustified
by
(
Faith
of
Christ
,
)
that
is
,
by
that
obedience
of
the
Morall
Law
,
which
a
man
may
performe
by
faith
,
and
the
helpe
of
Gods
grace
.
[
b
](A09274-e8640-b)
b
Rom.
3.
〈◊〉
.
Boasting
is
excluded
,
saith
the
Apostle
,
by
what
Law
?
By
the
Law
of
workes
,
that
is
,
by
the
Law
performed
by
the
strength
of
Nature
?
Nay
,
For
he
that
performes
the
Law
by
his
owne
strength
,
hath
cause
to
boast
of
it
.
By
what
Law
then
?
By
the
Law
of
Faith
,
that
is
,
by
faith
which
obtaines
Gods
grace
to
fulfill
the
Morall
Law
.
Now
he
that
obeyes
the
Law
by
Gods
helpe
,
hath
no
cause
to
boast
.
(
[
c
](A09274-e8650-b)
c
Rom.
9.
31.
32
How
knowes
Bellarm●ne
that
?
Bell.
lib.
1.
c.
19
▪
Israel
which
followed
the
Law
of
righteousnesse
,
could
not
attaine
vnto
the
law
of
righteousnesse
.
)
Wherefore
?
Because
they
sought
it
not
by
Faith
;
that
is
,
they
sought
not
to
performe
the
Law
by
Gods
Grace
;
(
But
as
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
)
that
is
,
by
their
own
strength
:
Thus
Paul
desires
to
be
found
in
Christ
,
(
not
hauing
his
owne
righteousnesse
which
is
of
the
Law
)
that
is
that
righteousnesse
he
performed
without
Gods
grace
before
his
Conversion
;
the
righteousnesse
of
God
which
is
by
faith
.
)
i.e.
That
righteousnesse
which
he
performed
in
obeying
the
Law
by
Gods
grace
after
his
Conversion
.
For
confirmation
of
this
distinction
,
and
the
Interpretations
thereon
grounded
,
Bellarmine
brings
three
reasons
to
shew
that
when
workes
and
faith
are
opposed
:
all
workes
of
the
Law
are
not
excluded
.
-
1
It
s
manifest
;
Faith
is
a
worke
:
and
that
there
is
a
Law
of
Faith
as
well
as
workes
.
If
therefore
,
Rom.
3.
all
workes
,
and
all
Law
be
excluded
from
Iustification
:
then
to
be
iustified
by
Faith
,
were
to
bee
iustified
without
faith
.
-
2
It
s
plaine
the
Apostle
,
Rom.
3.
intends
to
proue
that
neither
Iewes
by
the
[
a
](A09274-e8830-b)
a
Bell
lib.
1.
●
.
19.
naked
obseruation
of
the
law
of
Moses
:
nor
the
Gentiles
for
their
good
workes
;
before
they
were
[
b
](A09274-e8860-b)
b
〈◊〉
.
Tom.
2
,
tract.
4.
cap.
2
▪
quest.
6.
§.
15.
conuerted
to
the
faith
of
Christ
,
could
obtaine
righteousnesse
from
God
.
-
3
The
Apostle
shewes
,
Rom.
4.
4.
what
workes
he
excludes
from
Iustification
,
(
viz.
)
such
whereto
wages
is
due
,
by
debt
,
not
by
grace
.
Now
workes
performed
without
Gods
helpe
deserue
[
c
](A09274-e8910-b)
c
Bell.
cap.
19
▪
reward
(
ex
Debito
:
)
but
workes
performed
by
his
helpe
,
deserve
wages
(
ex
gratia
.
I
doubt
but
(
notwithstanding
these
seeming
Reasons
)
the
fore-named
distinction
and
expositions
of
Scripture
according
thereto
;
appeare
vnto
you
at
the
first
sight
,
strange
,
vncouth
,
farr
besides
the
intent
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
in
all
those
fore-reckoned
passages
of
Scripture
.
Let
vs
examine
it
a
little
more
narrowly
:
and
yee
shall
quickly
perceiue
;
that
in
this
Schoole
distinction
,
there
is
nothing
but
fraud
&
shifting
.
(
By
workes
done
,
by
the
strength
of
Nature
wee
are
not
iustified
.
By
workes
done
with
the
helpe
of
grace
wee
are
iustified
.
)
This
is
the
distinction
:
resolue
it
now
into
these
tearmes
which
are
more
proper
,
&
it
runs
thus
.
(
A
man
is
not
sanctified
by
those
workes
of
the
Mora●l
Law
which
he
doth
without
grace
:
but
a
man
is
sanctified
by
those
workes
of
the
Morall
Law
he
doth
by
Grace
.
)
Both
Sentences
are
squint
eyed
,
and
looke
quite
awry
from
the
Apostles
ayme
in
this
dispute
touching
Iustification
.
Is
it
his
intent
,
Rom.
3.
to
proue
that
a
sinner
destitute
of
grace
cannot
be
made
inherently
holy
,
by
Morality
,
or
outward
workes
of
Piety
?
or
thus
.
That
a
Sinner
cannot
attaine
to
Sanctification
by
his
owne
strength
:
but
he
must
attaine
to
it
by
the
grace
of
God
?
Take
a
suruey
of
the
Chapter
,
and
follow
the
Apostles
Argumentation
.
All
both
Iewes
and
Gentiles
are
vnder
sinne
,
verse
9.
therefore
(
euery
mouth
must
be
stopped
)
and
none
can
pleade
innocency
;
(
and
all
the
world
must
be
guilty
before
God
.
)
and
so
liable
to
condemnation
,
verse
19.
What
followeth
hence
now
?
(
Therefore
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
shall
no
flesh
be
iustified
in
his
sight
,
verse
.
20.
How
strange
were
this
Conclusion
,
taken
in
our
Adversaries
Construction
.
Ergo
,
By
Obedience
vnto
the
Morall
Law
done
without
grace
no
flesh
can
attaine
Sanctification
in
his
sight
.
For
neither
doth
the
Apostle
speake
of
Sanctification
,
but
of
absolution
as
is
apparant
;
All
are
sinners
against
the
Law
,
Ergo
,
by
pleading
innocency
in
the
keeping
of
the
Law
,
no
Man
can
be
wholy
sanctified
nor
Iustified
nor
absolued
from
Blame
in
Gods
sight
.
Nor
yet
will
the
Reason
immediately
annexed
admit
that
glosse
[
Workes
without
Grace
]
By
the
workes
of
the
Law
shall
no
flesh
be
Iustified
in
his
sight
.
Why
]
For
by
the
Law
commeth
the
Knowledge
of
Sinne
]
that
is
,
By
the
Law
Men
are
conuinced
of
Sinne
,
and
declared
not
to
be
innocent
.
Which
reason
is
not
worth
a
Rush
,
according
to
our
Aduersaries
Construction
.
He
that
without
grace
shall
doe
the
workes
of
the
Law
:
he
is
not
thereby
made
holy
.
Why
?
Because
the
Law
is
the
knowledge
of
sinne
.
The
Law
thus
obserued
tels
him
he
is
a
sinner
.
In
which
reason
there
is
no
force
,
vnlesse
it
bee
true
on
the
other
side
.
He
that
by
the
helpe
of
grace
doth
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
is
thereby
sanctified
:
because
the
Law
thus
kept
tels
him
he
is
not
a
sinner
,
which
is
most
vntrue
.
In
as
much
,
as
not
onely
those
which
are
destitute
of
grace
;
but
those
that
haue
grace
also
,
and
by
the
helpe
thereof
,
keepe
the
Law
in
some
measure
,
are
by
the
Law
notwithstanding
convinced
to
be
sinners
.
The
Apostle
yet
goes
forward
.
(
If
we
be
not
iustified
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
by
what
then
?
He
answeres
,
(
verse
21.
)
But
now
is
the
righteousnesse
of
God
made
manifest
without
the
Law
.
)
We
are
iustified
by
the
righteousnesse
of
God
:
But
what
is
that
?
It
is
(
saith
the
distinction
)
that
obedience
to
the
Law
which
we
performe
by
Gods
grace
.
A
glosse
apparantly
false
.
For
the
righteousnesse
of
God
here
is
a
Righteousnesse
without
the
Law
:
But
obedience
to
the
Law
,
though
performed
with
grace
,
is
a
Righteousnesse
(
with
)
the
Law
;
because
t
is
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
.
For
t
is
all
one
,
he
that
obeyes
the
Law
by
his
owne
strength
;
if
he
doe
it
[
d
](A09274-e9150-b)
d
As
Adam
.
perfectly
he
hath
the
righteousnes
of
the
law
,
&
he
that
obeyethit
perfectly
,
by
Gods
grace
,
hath
still
the
same
righteousnes
of
the
law
,
and
no
other
.
For
so
the
Law
be
kept
,
it
alters
not
the
righteousnes
thereof
,
that
we
keepe
it
by
our
own
strength
,
that
wee
haue
of
our selues
,
or
another
helpe
that
giues
vs
strength
to
doe
it
.
For
then
that
strength
which
he
giues
vs
is
our
owne
.
Which
point
duely
obserued
cuts
in
sunder
the
sinewes
of
this
distinction
;
for
t
is
cleare
the
Apostle
distinguisheth
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
and
of
God
as
different
in
thir
kindes
:
these
make
them
to
be
one
and
the
same
thing
,
[
Obedience
to
the
morall
Lawe
]
but
done
by
diuers
helpes
;
one
by
meere
nature
:
the
other
by
Grace
.
This
is
most
contrary
to
the
Scriptures
,
and
specially
to
that
excellent
place
Rom.
10.
3.
4.
&c.
where
the
Apostle
shewing
the
difference
betweene
the
Righteousnesse
which
is
our
owne
or
of
the
Law
;
and
that
which
is
the
Righteousnesse
of
God
or
Faith
:
tels
vs
.
The
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
is
thus
described
[
Th
Man
that
doth
these
things
shall
liue
thereby
:
]
but
the
Righteousnesse
of
Faith
speaketh
on
this
wise
[
whosoeuer
beleeueth
on
him
(
i.
e.
Christ
)
shall
not
be
ashamed
.
)
Can
any
thing
be
more
plaine
;
then
that
the
Apostle
opposeth
heere
[
Doing
of
the
Law
;
and
[
Beleeuing
]
in
Christ
:
Not
[
doeing
]
the
Law
by
our
owne
strength
,
and
doeing
of
the
Law
by
[
Gods
grace
.
]
These
are
Iesuiticall
glosses
that
corrupt
Apostolicall
Doctrine
,
and
strangely
peruert
the
worke
of
Christ
in
our
Redemption
as
if
he
had
done
no
more
for
vs
but
this
[
a
](A09274-e9230-b)
a
So
Bellarmin●
cap.
19.
answering
that
place
▪
Gal.
2.
[
If
righ●teousnesse
be
by
the
Law
,
then
Christ
dyed
in
vaine
]
saith
:
Nay
,
seeing
we
are
iustified
by
faith
▪
and
workes
following
it
,
Christ
died
to
purpose
,
that
God
might
giue
vs
grace
so
to
be
iustified
.
(
viz.
)
procured
that
where
as
we
could
not
liue
by
doeing
of
the
Law
through
our
owne
strength
:
God
will
now
aide
vs
by
his
grace
,
that
we
may
fulfil
the
Law
,
and
by
that
Legall
Righteousnesse
obtaine
Iustification
and
remission
of
Sinnes
.
We
abhorre
such
Doctrine
,
and
doe
reiect
as
vaine
and
imaginary
that
distinction
whence
such
absurdities
necessarily
follow
[
b
](A09274-e9280-b)
b
Workes
without
grace
doe
not
iustifie
.
More
[
h
](A09274-e9290-b)
h
Why
?
because
imperfect
,
or
because
done
by
natures
strength
.
Not
the
later
:
For
then
Adam
not
iustified
.
Not
the
former
forse
all
good
works
of
the
best
are
imperfect
.
might
be
sayed
in
confutation
thereof
,
were
it
needefull
:
but
we
haue
dealt
long
vpon
this
point
,
and
t
is
time
to
hasten
forward
.
By
the
way
vnto
the
Iesuits
Arguments
in
the
defence
of
this
Distinction
We
answere
.
1
We
confesse
Faith
is
a
worke
,
and
in
doeing
of
it
we
obey
the
Law
,
because
(
as
Saint
Iohn
speakes
)
Iohn
.
3.
23.
[
This
is
Gods
Commandment
,
that
we
beleeue
in
the
name
of
his
Sonne
Iesus
Chris
.
]
,
And
therefore
the
Gospell
is
called
[
The
Law
of
Faith
.
]
because
the
promise
of
grace
in
Christ
is
propounded
with
Commandment
that
Men
beleeue
it
.
But
now
we
deny
that
Faith
iustifies
vs
,
as
't
is
a
worke
whi●h
we
performe
in
Obedience
to
this
Law
:
It
iustifieth
vs
onely
as
the
Condition
required
of
vs
;
and
an
Instrument
embracing
Christs
Righteousnesse
.
Nor
can
the
contrary
be
proued
.
2
The
Iesuits
are
mistaken
in
the
scope
of
the
Apostle
Rom.
3.
whose
intent
is
not
to
shew
the
Iew
or
Gentile
could
not
attaine
Sanctification
without
Gods
grace
;
by
such
Obedience
to
the
Law
;
as
they
could
performe
through
the
meere
strength
of
Naturall
Abilities
.
They
affirme
it
strongly
:
but
their
Proofes
are
weake
,
being
manyfestly
confuted
by
the
whole
File
of
the
Apostles
disputation
,
who
clearely
and
plainely
exclude
both
Iewes
and
Gentiles
,
from
being
Iustified
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
without
making
mention
or
giueing
the
least
Intimation
,
by
what
meanes
these
workes
must
be
performed
,
whether
without
grace
or
by
the
Helpe
of
grace
.
Yea
it
had
been
quite
besides
his
purpose
so
to
haue
done
.
For
the
Apostles
argument
is
cleare
as
the
Light
;
and
strong
as
a
threefold
cord
.
All
are
Sinners
against
the
Law
,
therefore
by
obedience
vnto
the
Law
,
(
Let
Men
performe
which
way
they
list
or
can
,
without
grace
or
with
grace
)
no
Man
is
in
Gods
sight
pronounced
innocent
,
3
To
the
Last
argument
out
of
Rom.
4.
4.
we
answere
,
The
Apostle
there
proues
:
that
the
Faithfull
,
children
of
Abraham
;
are
not
iustified
by
workes
.
Because
Abraham
the
Father
of
the
Faithfull
was
Iustified
by
Faith
;
and
not
by
workes
.
Where
wee
affirme
;
That
the
Apostle
excludeth
all
the
workes
of
Abraham
from
his
Iustification
:
both
such
as
he
performed
when
he
had
no
grace
,
and
those
he
did
when
he
had
grace
.
For
those
workes
are
excluded
wherein
Abraham
might
glory
before
Men.
Now
Abraham
might
glory
before
Men
as
well
in
those
workes
which
he
did
by
the
helpe
of
Gods
grace
:
as
those
which
he
did
without
it
.
Nay
more
in
those
:
then
in
these
.
As
in
his
obedient
Departure
from
his
owne
Country
at
Gods
command
;
his
patient
expectation
of
the
promises
;
his
ready
willingnesse
euen
to
offer
his
owne
Sonne
out
of
Loue
and
Duty
to
God
,
his
religious
and
Iust
demeaning
of
himselfe
in
all
places
of
his
abode
.
In
those
things
Abraham
had
cause
to
glory
before
Men
,
much
more
,
then
in
such
works
as
he
performed
before
his
Conuertion
:
when
he
serued
other
Gods
beyond
the
Flood
.
Therefore
we
conclude
that
Abraham
was
Iustified
;
neither
by
such
workes
;
as
went
before
Faith
and
grace
in
him
:
nor
yet
by
such
as
followed
after
.
This
is
most
cleare
by
the
v.
2.
[
If
Abraham
where
iustified
by
workes
,
he
had
wherein
to
glory
:
but
not
with
God
.
]
Admit
here
the
Popish
Interpretation
:
and
this
speach
of
the
Apostles
will
be
false
.
Thus
[
If
Abraham
were
iustified
by
workes
]
that
is
by
such
workes
as
he
performed
without
Gods
gratious
helpe
[
he
hath
wherein
to
glory
▪
]
viz.
before
Men
:
but
[
not
with
God
.
]
Nay
,
that
s
quite
otherwise
.
For
its
euident
.
If
a
Man
be
Iustified
by
obeying
the
Law
through
his
own
strength
:
he
may
boldly
glory
before
God
,
as
well
as
before
Men
;
seing
in
that
case
he
is
not
beholding
to
God
for
his
helpe
.
But
according
to
our
doctrine
,
the
Meaning
of
the
Apostle
is
perspicuous
.
Abraham
might
glory
before
Men
in
those
excellent
workes
of
piety
,
which
he
performed
after
his
vocation
:
and
in
mens
sight
he
might
be
iustified
by
them
.
But
he
could
not
glory
in
them
before
God
:
nor
yet
be
iustified
by
them
in
his
sight
.
So
then
all
workes
whatsoeuer
are
excluded
from
Abrahams
Iustification
:
and
nothing
lest
but
Faith
,
which
is
imputed
vnto
him
for
Righteousn●sse
;
as
it
is
v.
3.
Whence
it
followes
.
That
as
Abraham
:
so
all
others
are
Iustified
without
all
Merit
,
by
Gods
free
grace
and
fauour
.
For
so
it
followes
,
verse
4.
5.
[
Now
vnto
him
that
worketh
,
the
wages
is
not
counted
by
fauour
;
but
by
Debt
:
but
to
him
that
worketh
not
;
but
beleeueth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
,
his
faith
is
counted
for
Righteousnesse
.
]
These
words
runne
cleare
,
till
a
Iesuite
put
his
Foote
into
the
streame
to
raise
vp
the
Mudde
.
To
him
that
worketh
]
that
is
,
which
fulfileth
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Morall
Law
:
[
the
wages
of
Iustification
and
Life
[
is
not
counted
by
fauour
:
but
by
debt
]
for
by
the
perfect
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
▪
a
Man
deserues
to
be
iustified
and
saued
.
[
But
to
him
that
worketh
not
]
that
hath
not
fullfilled
the
righteousnesse
of
the
Law
in
doing
all
things
;
that
are
written
therein
:
[
But
beleeueth
in
him
that
iustifieth
the
vngodly
]
That
is
relyeth
vpon
Christ
,
who
by
his
Righteousnesse
obtained
absolution
for
him
(
that
is
)
Rightousnesse
in
himselfe
.
]
His
Faith
is
imput●d
for
Righteousnesse
]
that
is
.
He
by
his
Faith
ob●aynes
I●stification
in
Gods
sight
:
not
by
Merit
of
his
owne
,
but
Gods
gratious
acceptation
of
Christs
Righteousnesse
for
his
.
But
here
our
Aduersaries
trouble
the
water
by
a
false
Inte●●retation
.
[
To
him
that
worketh
]
that
is
,
say
they
that
fulfil
,
the
Law
by
his
owne
strength
.
Wages
is
not
counted
by
fauour
,
but
by
debt
,
]
but
if
he
fulfill
it
by
Gods
grace
,
his
wages
is
pai●●
him
by
fauour
,
not
of
debt
.
Where
vnto
we
reply
:
That
1
This
glose
is
a
plaine
corruption
of
the
Text.
For
by
workes
in
this
fourth
verse
the
Apostle
vnderstands
that
kind
of
workes
were
of
mention
is
made
v
2
By
which
Abraham
was
not
Iustified
:
and
these
as
we
haue
shewed
where
works
done
by
the
helpe
of
Grace
not
by
the
meere
strength
of
Nature
.
2
And
againe
for
the
Assertion
it selfe
,
namely
[
He
that
fulfils
the
m●rrall
Law
by
the
helpe
of
Gods
grace
is
iustified
,
by
fauour
not
by
debt
]
we
say
t
is
ether
a
manifest
falshood
or
at
best
,
an
ambiguous
speech
.
For
t
is
one
thing
to
bestow
Grace
on
a
Man
to
fulfill
the
Law
:
and
t
is
another
thing
to
Iustifie
him
;
when
he
hath
fulfilled
the
Law
.
If
God
should
giue
strength
to
a
Man
exactly
to
fulfill
the
Morral●
Law
that
were
indeed
of
his
free
fauour
and
grace
:
but
when
this
man
,
that
hath
receaued
this
stre●gth
shall
come
before
God
with
the
perfect
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
,
pleading
that
in
euery
point
he
had
done
what
was
required
God
is
bound
in
Iustice
to
pronounce
him
innocent
,
and
of
due
Debt
to
bestow
on
him
the
wages
of
eternall
Life
.
Adams
case
is
not
vnlike
to
such
a
Man
.
For
God
gaue
Adam
what
strength
he
had
:
yet
Adam
fulfilling
the
Law
by
that
strength
,
should
haue
merited
Iustification
and
Life
.
Therefore
when
the
Apostle
speake
〈◊〉
all
workes
in
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
the
Law
,
he
sai●h
,
that
[
to
him
that
worketh
Wages
is
not
counted
by
fauour
but
:
but
by
debt
:
]
he
speaketh
exactly
,
and
the
Iesuits
in
excluding
workes
done
by
Grace
comment
absurdly
.
Thus
much
touching
the
third
point
concerning
Mans
Iustification
by
Faith
alone
:
as
also
of
the
first
generall
Head
promised
in
the
Beginning
.
Namely
,
the
condition
required
of
vs
vnto
Iustification
(
viz.
)
Faith
.
SECT.
3.
CHAP.
I
▪
Of
the
righteousnesse
whereby
a
man
is
iustified
before
God
:
that
it
is
not
his
own
inherent
in
himselfe
:
that
in
this
life
no
〈◊〉
hath
perfection
of
holinesse
inherent
in
him
.
I
Proceede
vnto
the
second
Generall
,
1
Eyther
inherent
in
his
owne
Person
and
done
by
himselfe
.
2
Or
inherent
in
the
Person
of
Christ
:
but
imputed
vnto
him
.
A
Man
is
Iustified
either
by
something
in
him
and
performed
by
him
:
or
by
some
thing
in
another
performed
for
him
.
The
wisedome
of
Angels
and
Men
hath
not
bin
able
to
shew
vnto
vs
any
third
Meanes
.
For
whereas
it
is
affirmed
by
some
that
God
might
haue
reconciled
Mankind
vnto
himselfe
by
a
free
and
absolute
parden
of
their
Sins
without
the
interuention
of
any
such
Righteousnesse
,
eithe●
in
themselues
or
in
Christ
whereby
to
procure
it
:
to
that
we
say
That
God
hath
seene
it
good
in
this
matter
rather
to
follow
his
owne
most
wise
Counsailes
;
then
these
Mens
foolish
Directions
.
T
is
to
no
purpose
now
to
dispute
what
God
might
haue
done
,
whether
God
by
his
absolute
omnipotency
could
not
haue
freed
Men
from
[
a
](A09274-e9990-b)
a
〈…〉
Hell
,
by
some
other
Meanes
without
taking
satisfaction
for
Sinne
from
Christ
:
whether
God
ought
not
to
haue
the
same
priuiledge
which
we
giue
vnto
any
mortale
King
,
freely
to
pardon
a
Rebell
,
and
receaue
him
to
fauour
,
without
consideration
of
any
goodnesse
in
him
or
satisfaction
made
by
him
,
or
ano●
for
him
?
Or
,
whether
Sinne
doe
make
such
a
deepe
wound
in
Gods
Iustice
and
Honour
,
that
he
cannot
with
the
safegard
of
either
passe
by
it
without
amendes
.
Such
question
▪
as
these
are
vaine
and
curious
prosecuted
by
idle
and
vnthinkfull
▪
Men
,
who
not
acknowledging
the
Riches
of
Gods
〈…〉
and
grace
in
that
course
of
their
Redemption
which
god
hath
followed
;
would
accuse
God
of
Indiscretion
,
for
making
much
adoe
about
nothing
,
&
teach
him
to
haue
go●e
a
more
compendious
way
to
worke
,
then
by
sending
his
owne
sonne
to
〈◊〉
for
vs
.
〈…〉
stand
what
God
hath
not
tell
him
what
he
might
or
should
haue
done
.
sicioportuit
,
Thus
Christ
ought
to
suffer
,
Luc.
24.
26.
and
that
it
(
Behoued
him
to
be
like
vs
that
being
a
Faithfull
high
Priest
,
he
might
make
Reconciliation
for
our
Sines
.
)
Heb.
2.
17.
Leauing
then
this
new
way
to
Heauen
neuer
frequented
,
but
by
Imagination
;
let
vs
follow
the
old
wayes
of
Iustification
that
the
Scriptures
haue
discouered
vnto
vs
:
which
are
two
and
no
more
.
Either
by
our
owne
Righteousnesse
and
workes
:
or
by
the
Righteousnesse
&
workes
of
another
(
viz
)
Christ
.
The
former
is
that
way
whereby
Man
might
haue
obtayned
Iustification
and
life
,
had
hee
not
bin
a
Sinner
.
But
now
,
Man
,
that
is
a
Sinner
,
cannot
be
Iustified
and
saued
:
but
onely
in
the
later
way
(
viz.
)
by
the
Righteousnesse
of
Christ
the
Mediator
.
This
Duine
trueth
is
of
most
infallible
certainty
and
soueraigne
consolation
vnto
the
conscience
of
a
Sinner
:
as
shall
appeare
in
the
processe
of
our
Discourse
wherin
we
shall
first
remoue
[
our
owne
Righteousnesse
:
that
so
in
the
second
place
we
may
[
establish
the
Righteousnesse
of
Christ
]
as
the
onely
Matter
of
our
Iustification
in
Gods
sight
.
By
our
owne
Righteousnesse
we
vnderstand
as
the
Apostle
doth
Rom.
10
▪
[
The
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
or
of
workes
]
which
is
twofold
.
1.
The
fulfilling
of
the
Law
whether
by
the
[
Habituall
Holynesse
of
the
Heart
:
or
by
the
[
Actuall
Iustice
]
of
good
workes
proceeding
thence
For
the
Law
requires
both
,
That
the
P●rson
be
Holy
▪
endued
with
all
inward
qualities
of
[
Purity
and
Iustice
]
and
that
the
workes
be
Holy
being
performed
for
Matter
and
all
the
Circumstances
,
according
to
the
Commandment
.
2
The
satisfying
for
the
Breach
of
the
Law
.
For
he
that
makes
full
satisfaction
to
the
Law
,
which
is
broken
,
is
afterward
no
debter
to
the
Law
:
but
to
be
accounted
Iust
and
no
Violater
thereof
:
We
must
now
enquire
touching
these
two
:
whether
a
Man
can
be
Iustified
▪
by
his
owne
O-Obedience
to
the
Morall
Law
▪
Secondly
,
Whether
he
can
be
iustified
by
▪
his
owne
Satisfaction
for
Transgression
of
the
Morrall
Law
.
Concerning
which
two
Quaeres
:
we
lay
downe
these
two
Conclusions
which
are
to
be
made
good
.
-
1
No
Man
that
is
a
Sinner
is
Iustified
by
▪
his
owne
Obedience
to
the
Morrall
Law
.
-
2
No
Man
is
Iustified
by
his
owne
satisfaction
for
his
Transgression
.
For
the
former
.
It
is
the
Conclusion
of
the
Apostle
Rom.
3.
20.
Iustified
in
his
sight
]
which
we
proue
by
these
Arguments
.
The
first
shall
be
that
of
the
Apostle
in
the
forenamed
place
which
stands
thus
.
Whosoeuer
is
a
Transgressor
of
the
Morall
Law
:
he
cannot
be
Iustifi●d
by
his
Obedience
thereto
.
But
euery
Man
is
a
Transgressor
of
the
Morall
Law
.
ergo
,
No
Man
can
be
Iustified
by
his
obedience
thereto
.
The
Maior
is
an
vndeniable
Principall
in
Reason
.
It
being
a
thing
Impossible
that
a
party
accused
as
an
offender
should
be
absolued
and
pronounced
innocent
by
pleading
Obedience
to
that
Law
which
he
hath
plainely
disobeyed
.
Wherefore
the
Apostle
takes
this
Proposition
for
granted
in
these
words
of
his
[
For
by
the
law
commeth
the
Knowledge
of
Sinne
]
v.
20.
That
which
conuinceth
vs
to
be
sinners
:
by
that
t
is
impossible
we
should
be
declared
to
be
righteous
.
that
plea
wilneuer
quit
vs
;
which
proues
vs
guilty
.
Yea
t
were
not
onely
folly
,
but
madnesse
to
alledge
that
for
ones
iust
excuse
which
it selfe
is
his
very
fault
whereof
hee
is
accused
.
The
Maior
then
is
certaine
.
The
minor
is
no
lesse
.
(
viz.
)
That
euery
man
is
a
transgressor
of
the
Morall
Law
)
If
any
Sonne
of
Adam
will
deny
this
,
his
owne
conscience
will
giue
his
tongue
the
Lie
:
and
the
Scriptures
will
double
it
vpon
him
.
Which
hauing
concluded
[
[
a
](A09274-e10660-b)
a
Rom.
3.
Gal.
2.
all
vnder
Sinne
]
averre
.
That
[
b
](A09274-e10670-b)
b
Iohn
1.
8.
[
If
we
(
an
Apostle
not
excepted
)
say
We
haue
no
sinne
we
deceaue
our
sel●es
and
the
truth
is
not
in
vs
.
]
Yea
(
If
[
c
](A09274-e10700-b)
c
Verse
10.
we
say
we
haue
not
sinned
,
we
make
God
a
her
,
and
his
word
is
not
in
vs
]
The
conclusion
then
is
vnfallable
(
That
by
the
Obedience
of
the
Morall
Law
,
no
Man
shall
be
iustified
(
that
is
)
quitted
&
pronounced
innocent
before
Gods
iudgment
seate
.
]
This
Aposticall
argument
vtterly
ouerthrowes
the
pride
of
Man
in
seeking
for
Iustification
by
the
Law
:
and
it
is
of
so
cleare
euidence
,
that
the
Aduersaries
of
this
Doctrine
cannot
tell
how
to
avoide
it
.
But
,
for
asmuch
as
many
exceptions
are
taken
,
and
shifts
sought
out
,
for
the
further
manifestation
of
the
force
hereof
against
gainsayers
of
the
truth
:
it
will
be
requisite
to
examine
there
euasions
.
Which
we
shall
doe
in
the
next
argument
.
Which
is
this
.
2
Whosoeuer
hauing
once
broken
the
Law
&
can
neuer
after
perfectly
fullfill
it
:
But
Man
hauing
once
broken
Gods
Law
can
〈◊〉
after
that
perfectly
fullfill
it
.
Ergo
,
Man
cannot
be
Iustified
by
Obedience
of
the
Law
.
The
Maior
of
this
Argument
is
framed
vpon
another
ground
then
the
former
&
opposed
vnto
that
erronious
tenent
of
our
Aduersaries
.
[
That
howsoeuer
a
man
be
a
sinner
against
the
Law
,
yet
neurthelesse
afterward
be
may
be
iustified
by
his
obedience
of
the
Law
.
Because
God
for
the
time
following
▪
giues
him
grace
perfectly
to
fulfill
it
.
]
Which
opinion
is
directly
contrary
to
the
reason
of
the
Apostle
which
is
:
[
That
once
a
sinner
,
and
alwayes
vncapable
of
Iustification
by
the
Law
:
for
how
should
the
Law
declare
him
innocent
that
hath
,
though
but
once
transgressed
against
it
.
]
Hee
that
hath
stollen
in
his
youth
,
and
euer
after
liued
truly
and
iustly
,
can
neuer
quit
himselfe
in
Iudgement
from
the
guilt
and
punishment
of
thee
very
by
pleading
,
he
hath
kept
the
Law
in
his
latter
Times
.
Obedience
that
followes
after
,
iustifies
not
from
the
guilt
that
went
before
.
As
we
shall
see
more
●ereafter
in
the
point
of
Mans
satisfaction
.
But
let
vs
grant
that
the
Law
though
once
broken
,
yet
afterwards
fullfilled
would
Iustifie
a
Man
:
we
here
defend
the
Minor
(
That
Man
hauing
broken
G●ds
Law
,
can
neuer
after
wards
perfectly
fullfill
it
)
and
so
by
that
meanes
also
he
is
excluded
from
Iustification
by
it
.
This
Proposition
the
Romanists
will
not
yeeld
to
,
with
out
strong
proofe
:
Let
vs
explaine
it
and
confirme
it
.
The
Proposition
may
beset
downe
in
these
termes
[
No
Man
whosoeuer
can
perfectly
fullfill
the
Morall
Law
in
this
Life
]
Man
heare
we
consider
in
a
two-fold
estate
of
Nature
of
Grace
.
Touching
man
in
the
estate
of
nature
,
it
is
a
greed
on
both
sides
that
the
keeping
of
the
Law
is
vtterly
and
absolutely
impossible
vnto
him
.
But
concerning
Man
regenerate
and
iustified
,
they
of
Rome
affirme
he
may
keepe
the
Law
:
wee
of
the
Reformation
granting
that
absolutely
it
is
not
impossible
(
for
we
will
not
say
;
but
God
might
if
he
saw
good
bestowne
such
perfection
of
grace
vpon
a
Regenerate
Man
,
that
afterwards
he
should
Liue
without
all
〈◊〉
,
and
be
translated
to
Heauen
without
death
)
yet
,
according
to
the
order
which
God
now
holdeth
in
bringing
Man
to
saluation
;
we
deny
that
there
euer
was
or
euer
will
be
any
Mortall
Man
that
hath
or
shall
perfectly
fulfill
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Morall
Law
:
This
shall
appeare
vnto
you
,
by
parting
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
into
its
branches
,
whereby
you
may
see
what
it
is
to
fullfill
the
Law
,
and
how
impossible
it
is
so
to
doe
.
The
Righteousnesse
required
by
the
Morall
Law
is
of
two
sorts
.
1
Habituall
,
in
the
inherent
holinesse
of
Mans
whole
person
,
when
such
gratious
Qualities
are
fixed
and
planted
in
euery
faculty
of
soule
and
Body
:
as
doe
dispose
and
incline
the
Motions
of
both
onely
vnto
that
which
is
conformable
to
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
.
That
such
Righteousnesse
is
required
by
the
Law
,
is
a
plaine
Case
and
confessed
;
That
which
commands
the
good
,
or
forbids
the
euill
action
;
doth
command
the
vertuous
and
forbid
the
vitious
Habit
too
.
He
that
lookes
for
purity
in
the
streame
,
cannot
but
dislike
poyson
in
the
Fountaine
:
and
God
that
commands
vs
to
doe
good
,
bids
vs
also
to
be
holy
;
The
end
of
the
Commandement
is
loue
,
(
but
where
?
)
out
of
a
pure
heart
.
]
1
Tim.
1.
5.
2
Actuall
,
In
the
exercise
of
all
good
workes
enioyned
by
the
Law
,
and
forbearing
the
contrary
euill
workes
.
Whether
these
good
or
euill
workes
be
inward
in
that
spirituall
obedience
which
the
Law
required
;
(
viz.
)
in
the
right
ordering
of
all
the
motions
of
our
soules
,
that
euery
one
of
our
Thoughts
,
Imaginations
,
Purposes
of
our
minde
,
and
all
the
secret
workings
and
stirrings
of
our
affections
,
be
altogether
employed
vpon
Piety
and
Charity
,
not
so
much
as
touching
vpon
any
thing
,
that
is
contrary
to
the
loue
of
God
,
or
our
neighbour
.
Or
,
whether
these
good
and
euill
works
be
outward
in
the
bodily
obedience
vnto
the
Law
,
in
doing
all
and
euery
externall
dutie
of
Religion
towards
God
:
of
Iustice
and
Mercy
towards
man
;
and
in
leauing
vndone
the
contrary
.
Further
this
actuall
righteousnesse
of
the
Law
is
to
bee
considered
two
wayes
:
-
1
As
it
respects
all
the
Commandements
,
and
so
that
righteousnesse
is
onely
perfect
,
which
fulfils
all
and
euery
particular
precept
of
the
Law
.
-
2
As
it
respects
any
one
Commandement
,
or
any
one
dutie
therein
contained
.
And
so
we
may
call
that
righteousnesse
perfect
,
which
exactly
performes
any
one
point
of
the
Law
,
though
it
faile
in
others
.
So
you
see
what
is
to
be
done
of
him
that
will
perfectly
fulfill
the
Law
:
let
vs
now
see
whether
any
man
can
doe
so
,
or
no.
We
say
no
man
can
doe
it
;
and
we
make
it
good
in
the
confirmation
of
these
three
Propositions
.
-
1
No
man
in
this
life
hath
perfection
of
grace
and
holinesse
inherent
.
-
2
-
3
For
the
first
we
proue
it
by
this
Argument
▪
Where
sinfull
corruption
remaines
in
part
,
But
in
euery
Man
during
this
life
there
remaineth
sinfull
corruption
.
Ergo
,
In
no
man
is
there
,
during
this
life
,
perfect
inherent
holinesse
.
The
maior
is
without
exception
.
For
he
that
is
part
bad
and
sinfull
,
t
is
not
possible
,
he
should
be
totally
good
and
holy
.
The
minor
is
most
euident
by
Scriptures
and
each
Mans
experience
and
reason
it selfe
.
Gal.
5.
17.
The
Apostle
describes
the
Combat
that
is
betweene
the
flesh
and
the
spirit
,
(
that
is
)
betweene
corruption
and
grace
,
in
a
man
regenerate
.
[
The
flesh
lusteth
against
the
spirit
,
and
the
spirit
against
the
flesh
:
and
these
two
are
contrary
one
to
the
other
,
so
that
ye
cann●t
doe
the
same
things
that
yee
would
.
]
Who
can
say
that
holinesse
is
perfect
in
that
man
,
in
whom
corruption
of
Nature
,
not
onely
troubleth
,
but
hindreth
grace
in
its
holy
operation
?
Shall
we
say
this
contention
lasts
but
for
a
while
after
a
man
is
newly
regenerate
:
but
in
successe
of
time
the
Spirit
gets
an
absolute
victory
,
corruption
being
not
only
ouer-mastered
;
but
also
annihilated
?
If
we
say
so
,
experience
will
accuse
vs
,
&
conscience
will
iudge
vs
to
be
Lyars
Where
is
that
man
,
and
who
is
he
named
,
that
can
say
,
he
findes
no
rebellion
or
distemper
in
his
affections
or
desires
,
no
disorder
in
any
motion
of
his
soule
:
but
that
all
within
him
is
sweetly
tuned
vnto
obedience
,
without
iarre
and
discord
arising
from
corruption
?
Certainely
that
humble
confession
of
a
most
holy
Apostle
,
may
cause
blushing
in
any
such
proud
Iustitiary
▪
Had
Paul
the
body
of
sinne
in
him
,
and
hast
thou
no●e
?
He
fights
and
wrestles
,
[
against
the
Law
in
his
members
,
rebelling
against
the
Law
of
his
mind
.
)
yet
he
is
so
checkt
and
mated
by
it
,
that
[
He
can
neither
doe
the
good
hee
would
,
nor
auoid
the
euill
he
would
not
,
when
he
would
doe
well
,
euill
is
still
present
with
him
.
]
And
so
tedious
is
this
toyle
vnto
him
;
that
he
complaines
of
it
at
the
very
heart
,
and
cries
out
bitterly
for
helpe
in
this
conflict
.
Whereupon
though
he
haue
helpe
from
God
through
Iesus
Christ
,
yet
hath
hee
not
full
deliuerance
from
this
inherent
corruption
;
but
is
faine
to
conclude
in
this
pittifull
manner
,
[
So
then
I
[
a
](A09274-e11480-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
euen
I
my selfe
.
my selfe
in
my
minde
serue
the
law
of
God
:
but
in
my
flesh
the
law
of
sinne
.
]
Euen
Paul
serues
God
in
the
better
halfe
of
him
:
doe
what
he
can
,
sinne
will
haue
a
place
in
his
heart
,
&
a
part
of
his
seruice
,
though
he
be
vnwilling
to
yeeld
it
.
If
any
will
compare
and
preferre
himselfe
to
this
holy
man
:
he
may
prooue
himselfe
prouder
,
but
better
then
him
he
cannot
.
T
is
arrogance
for
a
simple
Fryer
to
claime
perfection
,
when
so
great
an
Apostle
disauowes
it
.
He
that
will
not
acknowledge
that
corruption
in
himselfe
,
which
Paul
(
in
the
name
of
all
)
confesseth
in
his
owne
person
;
t
is
not
because
such
a
one
is
more
holy
then
the
Apostle
:
but
because
he
is
ignorant
,
and
sees
it
not
;
or
high-minded
and
scornes
to
be
knowne
of
it
.
Furthermore
,
Reason
confirmes
what
Scriptures
and
experience
doe
witnesse
;
(
viz.
)
that
sinfull
corruption
will
hang
fast
vpon
vs
vnto
our
dying
day
:
for
if
we
suppose
an
vtter
abolishment
of
sinne
and
corruption
in
our
Nature
;
it
must
needes
follow
,
there
will
neuer
be
any
sinfulnesse
at
all
in
our
workes
and
liues
.
Where
the
Habit
is
perfect
,
the
Action
is
so
too
:
and
a
sweet
Fountaine
cannot
send
forth
bitter
waters
.
Wherefore
seeing
not
the
best
of
men
can
liue
without
manifold
actuall
sinnes
:
It
it
apparent
,
that
this
ill
fruit
comes
from
a
bad
humour
,
in
the
tree
,
and
this
defect
of
actuall
obedience
,
comes
from
the
imperfection
of
habituall
holinesse
.
This
is
sufficient
for
Iustification
of
the
truth
of
our
first
Preposition
[
That
inherent
holinesse
in
this
life
,
is
not
perfect
;
]
Because
t
is
alwayes
coupled
with
some
sinfull
corruption
.
But
here
our
Adversaries
cry
out
with
open
mouth
,
that
we
maintaine
moastrous
propositions
.
Namely
[
b
](A09274-e11600-b)
b
〈…〉
That
there
is
n●
inherent
holinesse
in
a
man
that
s
iustified
,
that
after
Iustification
,
a
man
still
remaines
a
sianer
and
vniust
.
That
in
Iustification
,
sinne
is
not
abolished
,
but
onely
couered
with
Christs
mantle
.
Thence
they
fall
to
their
Rhetoricke
,
That
all
Calvinists
are
but
painted
Sepulchers
,
faire
without
full
of
rottennesse
within
.
Like
foolish
Virgins
that
haue
no
oyle
of
their
owne
:
But
thinke
to
be
supplyed
by
that
of
other
folkes
.
Like
Wolues
in
a
Lambes
skinne
,
which
hides
,
but
takes
not
away
their
rauening
and
fierce
nature
.
Like
a
leprous
person
in
fine
cloathes
;
that
lookes
to
be
fauoured
and
imbraced
by
his
King
,
because
his
is
well
apparelled
.
For
this
is
(
say
they
)
to
teach
,
That
a
Man
iustified
is
yet
a
sinner
in
himselfe
.
That
corruption
,
filthinesse
,
and
vncleannesse
remain
in
him
,
when
yet
in
Gods
sight
he
is
accounted
pure
and
cleane
,
because
hee
hath
hid
himselfe
v●der
the
cloake
of
Christs
righteousnesse
.
Whence
also
they
tell
vs
it
well
follow
,
Wee
make
Christs
body
monstrous
,
a
holy
,
beautifull
head
ioyned
to
filthy
leprous
members
.
Christs
marriage
polluted
;
A
most
holy
and
faire
Bridegroome
coupled
to
a
foule
deformed
Spouse
.
To
this
we
say
.
Truth
is
modest
;
yet
shee
will
not
bee
out-faced
with
bigge
words
.
Their
eloquence
hath
slandered
;
partly
vs
,
partly
the
truth
.
Vs
,
in
that
they
affirme
we
deny
all
inherent
righteousnesse
in
a
person
iustified
,
which
is
an
impudent
calumny
.
The
truth
,
in
condemning
that
for
an
error
which
is
sacred
verity
taught
vs
by
God
in
the
Scriptures
,
(
viz.
)
That
a
person
iustified
,
is
yet
after
that
in
himselfe
in
part
sinfull
.
This
we
still
teach
and
maintaine
for
a
truth
,
firme
as
the
foundation
of
the
earth
,
that
cannot
bee
shaken
,
namely
,
That
although
a
Iustified
person
is
by
the
grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
dwelling
in
him
made
inherently
holy
:
yet
this
sanctity
is
not
that
perfect
purity
of
the
heart
,
which
the
Law
requires
,
because
some
degrees
of
impurity
and
corruption
doe
dwell
in
him
till
death
.
And
therefore
the
most
iustified
person
liuing
,
is
yet
in
himselfe
partly
sinfull
and
vniust
;
but
the
sinfulnesse
is
pardoned
vnto
him
in
CHRIST
.
Against
this
the
R●manists
contend
,
labouring
to
proue
,
that
in
him
that
is
iustified
.
Sinne
doth
not
remaine
at
all
:
but
is
vt●erly
abol●shed
.
They
proue
it
by
such
Arguments
as
these
.
1
The
Scriptures
testifie
,
That
Christ
is
the
[
c
](A09274-e11760-b)
c
Iohn
1.
29.
Lambe
of
God
,
that
taketh
away
the
sinnes
of
the
world
.
That
Hee
was
[
d
](A09274-e11800-b)
d
Heb
9.
28.
offered
to
take
away
the
sinnes
of
many
.
That
in
Repentance
,
our
sinnes
are
[
e
](A09274-e11830-b)
e
Acts
3.
19.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
blotted
out
.
That
God
will
subdue
our
iniquities
and
[
f
](A09274-e11880-b)
f
Micah
.
7.
19.
cast
our
sinnes
into
the
bottome
of
the
Sea
;
in
allusion
to
the
drowning
of
the
Aegyptians
in
the
red
Sea
.
Wherefore
if
sinne
be
taken
away
,
blotted
out
,
drowned
in
the
Sea
,
like
the
Aegyptians
:
then
sure
it
is
abolished
,
and
remaines
no
longer
.
-
2
They
prooue
it
from
the
Properties
which
are
ascribed
to
Sinne
;
as
namely
these
.
-
1
Sinne
is
compared
to
spotts
,
staines
and
filthynesse
:
but
from
thence
we
are
washed
by
the
powring
on
of
(
cleane
[
a
](A09274-e11980-b)
a
Ezek.
16.
2●
.
water
)
vpon
vs
;
and
by
the
(
Blood
of
Christ
)
-
2
Sinne
is
compared
to
Bonds
,
Fetters
,
&
the
Prison
,
whereby
we
are
holden
captiue
vnder
the
power
of
Satan
:
Now
Christ
hath
broken
these
Chaines
and
opened
these
prison
doores
,
hauing
(
deliuered
us
[
c
](A09274-e12050-b)
c
Col.
1.
13.
from
the
power
of
darknesse
)
and
(
redeemed
[
d
](A09274-e12080-b)
d
Tit.
2.
14.
us
from
all
iniquity
)
&
(
made
us
free
[
e
](A09274-e12100-b)
e
Rom.
6.
18.
2●
from
Sinne
to
be
come
the
seruants
of
Righteousnesse
.
)
-
3
Sinne
is
compared
to
sicknesses
,
diseases
,
&
wounds
.
Now
God
is
the
best
Phisition
,
the
most
skilfull
Chirurgian
:
and
where
he
vndertakes
the
Cure
,
he
doth
his
worke
throughly
:
he
cures
all
diseases
and
each
on
perfectly
.
He
doth
not
spread
on
a
sick
Man
a
faire
Couerlid
,
or
couer
a
festred
wound
with
a
faire
cloth
,
as
Caluin
imagines
:
but
by
a
purgatiue
potion
he
expelles
the
disease
,
by
a
healing
plaister
he
cures
the
wound
.
So
that
there
is
not
left
,
nor
corrupt
matter
,
nor
dangerous
sore
,
that
can
proue
deadly
according
to
that
Rom.
8.
1.
(
There
is
no
condemnation
to
those
that
are
in
Christ
Iesus
.
)
that
is
.
There
is
no
matter
at
all
for
which
they
deserue
Condemnation
,
as
those
expound
.
-
4
Sinne
is
likned
to
death
,
nay
it
is
the
spirituall
Death
of
the
Soule
.
Now
he
that
is
iustified
is
restored
to
Spirituall
Life
,
and
where
Life
is
there
death
is
quite
taken
away
,
seing
a
Man
cannot
be
aliue
and
dead
both
together
.
Wherefore
the
Apostle
saith
Rom.
6.
6.
[
Our
old
Man
is
[
f
](A09274-e12220-b)
f
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
crucified
with
him
,
that
the
Body
of
Sinne
might
be
[
g
](A09274-e12250-b)
g
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
destroyed
,
that
hence
forth
We
might
not
serue
Sinne
)
and
v.
11.
(
We
are
dead
vnto
Sinne.
)
Hence
they
conclude
.
If
the
filthinesse
of
sinne
be
washed
away
,
the
Chaines
of
sinne
broken
,
the
Diseases
and
hurts
of
Sinne
healed
,
the
Death
of
Sinne
abolished
:
then
it
followes
,
that
Sinne
is
quite
exstinguished
,
and
remaines
no
more
in
those
that
are
iustified
.
3
They
argue
thus
.
If
Sinne
remaine
in
those
that
are
iustified
and
be
onely
couered
:
then
God
either
knowes
of
the
sinne
or
knowes
it
not
.
To
say
he
were
ignorant
of
it
were
blasphemy
(
all
[
h
](A09274-e12350-b)
h
Heb.
4.
14
things
being
naked
and
bare
before
his
eyes
.
)
If
he
know
it
,
then
either
he
hates
it
or
he
hats
it
not
.
If
he
doth
not
hate
it
how
doth
the
Scriptures
say
true
that
he
is
a
(
God
that
hateth
Iniquity
.
)
If
he
do
hate
it
then
certainly
he
must
punish
it
:
God
cannot
see
a
fault
and
hate
a
fault
but
he
must
also
punish
it
to
.
If
he
punish
it
,
then
he
which
is
iustified
shall
yet
be
condemned
which
is
absurd
.
Vnto
these
Arguments
we
answere
.
Vnto
the
two
former
thus
.
When
we
say
Sin
remaines
in
a
Man
regenerate
and
Iustified
we
must
distinguish
the
ambiguity
of
the
word
Sin
.
In
Sin
,
to
vse
that
distinction
which
is
authenticall
with
ou●
Aduersaries
;
There
are
three
things
.
-
1
The
offence
of
God
,
which
is
the
fault
.
-
2
The
obligation
vnto
eternall
punishment
,
which
is
the
guilt
.
-
3
The
staine
or
pollution
of
the
soule
,
(
viz
)
the
inherent
vitious
inclination
of
it
vnto
euill
.
From
whence
the
fault
committed
first
issued
,
and
which
by
committing
of
the
fault
is
augmented
.
For
euill
once
committed
leaues
a
further
pronnesse
in
the
heart
to
doe
it
againe
.
This
we
call
the
corruption
of
Sinne.
Thus
then
we
answer
.
Sin
doth
not
remaine
in
those
that
are
iustified
,
&
regenerate
in
the
two
first
respects
,
viz.
of
the
fault
and
the
guilt
,
both
which
are
taken
away
by
the
death
of
Christ
.
But
Sin
doth
remain
in
the
regenerate
according
to
the
3
respect
,
(
viz.
)
the
vitious
quality
and
corruption
thereof
,
inherent
in
the
soule
:
We
shall
explaine
these
answeres
,
and
apply
them
to
the
Arguments
.
We
say
then
;
That
the
fault
&
guilt
of
sinne
in
the
regenerate
,
is
vtterly
abolished
by
the
death
of
Christ
.
Which
we
doe
not
take
in
such
a
sense
as
this
.
That
in
a
man
regenerate
there
is
not
at
all
any
one
fault
or
guilt
to
be
found
,
for
to
say
that
a
man
regenerate
,
when
he
sinnes
,
were
neither
faulty
nor
guilty
,
were
a
grosse
vntruth
,
●
seeing
t
is
impossible
that
man
should
sinne
,
yet
God
not
be
offended
;
that
man
should
sinne
,
and
yet
not
be
guilty
,
and
deseruing
eternall
death
.
Wherefore
we
confesse
that
in
the
holiest
of
men
,
if
they
sinne
,
there
's
a
true
fault
,
and
God
is
displeased
with
it
;
there
is
also
true
guilt
,
and
for
it
they
deserue
to
goe
to
Hell
.
But
yet
this
truth
also
must
be
acknowledged
withall
,
that
all
faultinesse
and
guiltinesse
are
quite
abolished
and
taken
away
from
them
by
Christ
,
because
that
both
are
pardoned
vnto
them
.
God
is
offended
;
but
yet
they
feele
not
the
wofull
effects
of
his
indignation
:
because
in
Christ
hee
is
graciously
contented
to
be
reconciled
with
them
.
Againe
they
haue
deserued
euerlasting
death
:
but
they
come
not
to
the
paines
thereof
,
because
freed
from
the
punishment
by
Christs
satisfaction
.
Thus
then
we
vnderstand
the
first
part
of
the
answere
.
That
the
fault
and
guilt
of
sinne
is
vtterly
abolished
,
that
is
,
totally
pardoned
vnto
the
Regenerate
,
by
meanes
of
Christ
,
so
that
no
finall
eternall
punishment
shall
befall
them
therefore
.
The
other
part
.
That
Sinne
(
in
the
uitious
quality
and
corruption
if
it
remaine
in
Men
iustified
)
we
vnderstand
with
this
necessary
[
a
](A09274-e12650-b)
a
Rom.
6.
12.
14.
Limitation
,
That
it
remaines
in
them
not
in
its
power
and
strength
:
but
in
its
Being
and
Life
.
It
hath
vitam
:
but
not
Regnum
.
It
reignes
where
there
is
no
Grace
at
all
:
but
it
liues
euen
where
Grace
is
.
which
though
it
mightily
abate
to
power
of
it
:
it
cannot
vtterly
d●stroy
its
being
.
Hence
now
its
easy
to
vnty
the
Arguments
.
Sinne
is
taken
away
,
b●otted
out
,
drowned
in
the
bottome
of
the
Sea
,
in
regare
of
those
mischieuous
effects
which
sinne
would
haue
brough
on
vs
:
God
is
reconciled
,
the
obligation
,
to
punishment
cancelled
;
and
all
the
power
,
force
,
&
strength
of
Sin
defeated
;
So
that
like
the
dead
Egyptians
they
can
no
longer
pursue
the
Israelites
to
annoy
them
,
not
shall
stand
vp
as
an
aduersary
in
iudgment
to
condemne
vs
.
The
Guilt
of
Sinne
is
washed
away
totall
by
the
blood
of
Christ
:
the
filthynesse
of
corrupted
Nature
is
in
part
by
Degrees
clensed
by
the
Spirite
of
Christ
powred
on
vs
in
his
sanctifieing
Grace
.
The
Fetters
and
bonds
of
Sinne
,
whereby
we
were
held
in
bondage
vnder
condemnation
,
these
are
quite
broken
asunder
:
but
those
chaines
,
whereby
with
Paul
,
Rom.
7
(
we
are
led
captiue
)
to
disobedience
are
some
broken
,
all
weakened
.
We
are
freed
from
the
power
of
Satan
and
feare
of
Hell
:
but
not
wholly
freed
from
Sinne
,
whereby
we
are
often
captiues
against
our
will
.
Sinne
is
a
sicknesse
,
and
God
is
the
Phisitian
;
a
wound
,
and
God
is
the
Chirurgian
,
true
:
but
the
cures
neither
perectly
,
yet
correct
that
word
.
He
cures
our
sicknesse
and
sores
perfectly
:
but
not
suddainely
,
where
he
begines
the
worke
he
will
finish
it
:
but
he
will
not
doe
all
in
a
day
.
The
cure
begins
and
goes
onward
to
perfection
during
this
life
:
but
t
is
neuer
finished
till
after
death
.
He
forgiues
[
b
](A09274-e12760-b)
b
Psal.
103.
3.
all
our
iniquity
and
that
s
done
●utirely
and
totally
[
and
healeth
all
our
infirmities
]
:
but
this
is
by
degrees
,
not
all
at
once
.
In
which
course
God
hath
no
cause
to
feare
the
censure
of
a
Iesuite
for
vnskilfulnesse
nor
stands
he
in
need
of
Mans
counsaile
,
for
prescription
,
nor
Mans
helpe
to
hold
his
hand
in
working
,
if
the
Cure
goe
on
more
slowly
then
our
foolish
hastinesse
thinkes
fit
.
That
s
fit
and
best
what
God
thinkes
so
:
and
if
we
count
him
faithfull
and
wise
in
his
art
;
t
is
our
duty
to
take
his
aduice
:
but
saucy
persumption
to
giue
him
any
.
Lastly
,
where
Sinne
is
said
to
be
the
(
Spirituall
Death
of
the
Soule
)
and
so
Life
being
restored
in
Iustification
Death
must
needes
be
quite
abolished
:
the
weaknesse
of
this
Argument
appeares
streight
,
if
the
metaphoricall
terme
be
changed
in
to
proper
.
The
death
of
Sinne
is
either
the
Separation
of
all
grace
from
the
Soule
,
or
the
Separation
of
Gods
Fauour
from
the
Soule
.
We
are
dead
in
trespasses
and
Sinnes
both
waies
:
In
regard
that
in
the
state
of
vnregeneration
the
Soule
is
vtterly
destitute
of
all
Grace
and
goodnesse
:
and
also
be
cause
in
that
condition
it
is
liable
to
eternall
Death
.
Now
the
Death
of
Sinne
that
is
eternall
death
in
the
perpetuall
Losse
of
Gods
fauour
this
is
cleane
taken
a
way
from
him
that
's
regenerate
.
Christ
by
his
death
hath
purchased
to
him
Life
and
immortality
.
But
touching
that
other
;
(
death
(
that
is
)
the
want
of
all
inherent
Grace
in
the
Soule
)
They
say
.
That
in
Regeneration
Grace
and
Holynesse
is
restored
to
the
Soule
,
yet
not
so
perfectly
as
to
abolish
euery
degree
of
Sinnefull
Corruption
.
Before
Regeneration
the
Soule
had
no
grace
atall
and
so
was
vtterly
dead
but
it
followes
not
,
That
therefore
in
Regeneration
,
it
hath
all
grace
giuen
it
in
all
perfection
,
and
so
made
perfectly
aliue
:
what
euer
harshnesse
there
is
in
the
Metaphore
,
the
plaine
termes
in
this
case
are
smooth
enough
.
A
Man
may
be
at
once
a
liue
and
dead
,
that
is
,
at
once
a
Man
may
bee
partly
holy
,
and
partly
sinnefull
.
[
Our
old
Man
is
crucified
with
Christ
vpon
whose
Crosse
it
receaued
a
deadly
wound
;
(
because
Christ
by
his
sacrifice
hath
procured
the
sending
of
the
Holy
ghost
into
the
hearts
of
the
Elect
;
who
by
sanctifying
them
,
abolished
their
naturall
corruptions
by
degrees
.
[
That
so
the
body
of
sinne
might
be
destroyed
.
]
that
is
,
not
presently
annihilated
:
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
made
of
no
force
and
strength
,
made
vnable
to
worke
strongly
in
vs
.
[
That
henceforth
we
might
not
serue
sinne
.
]
Though
alwayes
we
should
haue
sinne
in
vs
.
So
are
we
[
dead
to
sinne
]
not
as
if
sinne
were
vtterly
dead
in
vs
;
or
had
no
more
working
in
vs
,
then
it
hath
in
a
dead
carcase
:
but
because
the
guilt
of
sinne
is
fully
taken
away
,
and
the
power
of
sinne
hat●
receiued
a
deadly
wound
,
doth
bleed
out
some
of
its
life
now
,
and
shall
infall●bly
bleed
out
the
last
drop
of
its
life
hereafter
.
Vnto
the
third
Argument
,
we
answere
thus
,
That
the
Hornes
of
those
Dilemma's
be
made
of
wood
,
and
may
be
easily
battered
.
We
say
then
that
God
sees
and
knowes
the
sinfull
corruption
which
is
in
the
regenerate
;
for
wee
cannot
assent
vnto
that
wilde
and
franticke
imagination
of
some
;
who
haue
troubled
the
quiet
of
some
places
in
this
Land
,
by
preaching
that
God
doth
not
,
nay
cannot
see
any
iniquity
or
matter
of
blame
,
in
those
that
be
in
Christ
Iesus
.
We
beleeue
that
nothing
is
hid
from
his
eyes
:
nor
be
our
sins
lesse
visible
to
him
then
our
graces
.
God
knowes
what
sinnes
his
children
commit
,
he
iudgeth
them
to
be
faults
,
and
such
as
deserue
his
infinite
wrath
.
Yea
,
to
goe
further
,
as
hee
sees
the
sinne
of
the
regenerate
:
so
he
hates
it
with
a
perfect
hatred
;
it
being
impossible
,
that
his
pure
eyes
should
behold
impurity
and
loue
it
.
But
now
what
followes
hence
?
If
he
see
it
and
hate
it
,
then
he
cannot
but
punish
it
.
True
,
that
consequence
is
certaine
.
But
what
s
next
?
If
God
punish
that
sinne
which
is
in
the
Regenerate
how
then
is
their
sinne
couered
and
their
iniquities
forgiuen
?
How
doth
hee
account
them
Iust
,
whom
he
knoweth
and
punisheth
for
vniust
?
Here
's
a
Sophisme
.
He
sees
sinne
,
and
hates
sinne
,
and
punisheth
sinne
of
the
Regenerate
:
Therefore
he
punisheth
it
in
,
and
vpon
their
owne
persons
.
That
s
a
non
sequitur
.
Hee
punisheth
it
,
but
t
is
in
the
person
of
Christ
[
who
hath
troden
the
Winepresse
,
]
of
the
fierce
wrath
of
God
conceiued
against
all
sinfulnesse
whatsoeuer
in
his
Elect
:
by
which
meanes
his
hatred
towards
the
sinne
of
the
Regenerate
,
is
fully
satisfied
,
and
also
his
loue
towards
their
persons
procured
.
He
graciously
passeth
by
their
iniquity
,
pardoning
vnto
them
what
he
hates
,
and
hath
punished
in
Christ
:
in
which
respect
he
may
be
truly
said
not
to
see
that
sinne
in
them
which
he
will
neuer
punish
in
them
,
and
to
couer
that
sinne
which
shall
neuer
bee
layed
open
in
iudgement
against
them
.
CHAP.
II.
No
man
can
perfectly
fulfill
the
Law
in
performing
all
such
workes
,
both
inward
and
outward
,
as
each
commandement
requires
,
against
which
truth
Popish
Obiections
are
answered
.
ANd
thus
much
touching
the
first
Proposition
and
the
first
point
wherein
Man
fals
short
of
his
obedience
to
the
Morall
Law
,
(
viz.
)
in
the
imperfection
of
habituall
inherent
holinesse
.
We
goe
on
vnto
the
next
Proposition
,
touching
Mans
actuall
Obedience
vnto
the
whole
Law
.
Where
we
teach
,
That
no
man
can
perfectly
obey
the
Law
in
performing
all
such
workes
,
A
man
would
thinke
this
point
needed
no
other
proofe
but
onely
experience
.
In
all
the
Catalogue
of
the
Saints
,
can
you
pricke
out
one
that
after
regeneration
,
neuer
committed
sinne
against
the
Law
?
We
shall
kisse
the
ground
he
treads
on
,
if
we
know
where
that
man
haunts
,
who
can
assure
vs
that
since
his
conuersion
he
neuer
brake
the
Law
.
Shall
we
finde
this
perfection
in
a
Monkes
Cell
,
or
in
a
Hermits
Lodge
,
an
Anachorites
Mue
,
vnder
a
Cardinals
Hat
,
or
in
the
Popes
Chaire
?
All
these
are
Cages
of
vncleannesse
,
not
Temples
wherein
dwells
vndefiled
Sanctity
.
Neuer
to
sinne
;
that
s
a
happinesse
of
Saints
and
Angels
,
with
whom
we
shall
hereafter
enioy
it
:
but
whilst
w●e
are
mortall
we
can
but
wish
for
it
.
[
Thy
Law
,
(
saith
Dauid
)
is
exceeding
large
.
]
It
compriseth
in
it
not
a
few
,
but
many
and
manifold
duties
.
Good
workes
are
by
a
kind
of
Popish
Soloecisme
brought
to
a
short
summe
Prayer
,
Fasting
,
and
Almes-deedes
.
These
are
eminent
among
the
rest
:
but
not
the
hundreth
part
of
the
whole
number
.
There
is
besides
a
world
of
duties
enioyned
,
and
as
many
sinnes
forb●dden
:
each
Commandement
hath
it
seuerall
Rankes
,
euery
duty
its
manifold
Circumstances
;
to
reckon
vp
all
,
were
a
businesse
which
the
wit
of
the
subtilest
Iesuite
,
or
the
profoundest
Diu●ne
could
hardly
master
.
To
performe
them
is
a
taske
,
which
is
beyond
the
strength
of
the
holiest
Man
,
who
in
finding
it
a
great
difficulty
to
doe
any
one
well
,
would
forthwith
iudge
the
performance
of
so
many
an
impossibility
.
But
if
this
suffice
not
;
we
haue
expresse
Scriptures
to
proue
that
no
man
doth
actually
obey
the
Law
in
all
points
.
Such
places
are
these
:
-
(
1
)
1
Kings
8.
46.
There
is
no
man
that
sinneth
not
.
-
(
2
)
Eccles.
7.
20.
For
there
is
not
a
iust
man
vpon
ea●th
that
doeth
good
and
sinneth
not
.
-
(
3
)
Iames
3.
2.
In
many
things
we
offend
all
.
-
(
4
)
1
Iohn
1.
8.
If
we
say
that
we
haue
no
sinne
,
we
deceiue
our selues
,
and
the
truth
is
not
in
vs
.
Whence
we
conclude
,
that
[
de
facto
]
neuer
any
man
did
keepe
the
Law
:
but
brake
it
in
some
,
yea
,
in
many
things
.
And
therefore
we
say
that
the
dispute
of
our
Aduersaries
,
touching
the
possibility
of
keeping
the
Law
,
vanishes
to
nothing
.
For
seeing
no
man
hath
,
or
will
euer
actually
keep
it
(
as
the
Scriptures
witnesse
)
to
what
end
serues
all
the
quarrelling
a●d
dispute
about
the
possibility
of
keeping
it
.
No
man
shall
be
iustified
by
the
Law
,
because
he
hath
a
power
to
keepe
it
if
he
list
:
but
because
he
hath
actually
kept
it
.
Whence
it
is
manifest
that
the
reply
of
our
Aduersaries
is
ridiculous
.
No
man
indeed
doth
keepe
it
:
but
yet
they
may
if
they
will
.
For
1.
what
is
that
to
Iustification
?
Can
a
man
that
s
regenerate
be
iustified
by
his
obedience
of
the
Law
,
when
yet
after
his
regeneration
hee
doth
not
keepe
it
?
2.
And
againe
.
How
know
these
men
that
there
was
,
or
is
,
such
a
power
in
the
Saints
to
keepe
the
Law
,
when
yet
the
world
neuer
saw
it
brought
into
Act
?
Is
it
not
more
probable
that
what
neuer
was
nor
will
be
done
,
neuer
could
nor
can
be
done
?
Were
they
all
idle
,
and
did
not
doe
their
best
endeauour
?
T
is
true
,
none
doth
so
much
good
as
hee
should
and
might
;
but
yet
t
is
a
sharpe
censure
to
say
that
none
would
put
themselues
forward
to
the
vtmost
of
their
might
.
What
shall
be
said
of
Saint
Paul
,
(
Phil.
3.
12.
)
He
confesseth
that
himselfe
was
not
yet
perfect
:
but
that
he
sought
after
it
.
How
?
negligently
?
No
,
with
great
diligence
and
intention
.
He
followed
after
.
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
v.
12.
and
that
eagerly
,
Reaching
forth
to
catch
the
things
that
were
b●fore
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
v.
13.
And
pressing
towards
the
marke
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
v.
14.
Here
was
diligence
,
and
we
cannot
say
that
Saint
Paul
did
not
doe
his
best
.
Did
Paul
then
fulfill
the
Law
?
It
seemeth
so
,
for
here
we
see
he
was
willing
,
Paul
.
4.
13.
I
can
doe
all
things
through
Christ
that
strengtheneth
me
:
that
is
,
fulfill
the
Morall
Law
by
the
grace
of
Christ
.
Now
if
hee
were
willing
and
able
,
then
certainly
he
kept
it
.
Nay
t
is
certaine
he
did
not
keepe
it
.
Witnesse
the
Testimony
of
himselfe
.
I
doe
not
the
good
things
which
I
would
:
but
the
euill
which
I
would
not
,
that
doe
I
Rom.
7.
19.
Where
is
the
fault
then
?
In
the
Apostles
will
?
No
,
T
is
plai●e
he
would
haue
done
it
.
Wast
then
in
his
ability
?
Yea
,
this
was
it
.
to
will
was
present
with
him
:
but
he
found
no
meanes
to
performe
that
which
is
good
verse
8.
The
Iesuite
then
abuseth
vs
with
a
false
exposition
of
of
that
place
to
the
Philippians
interpreting
it
of
the
Apostles
ability
to
performe
the
morall
Law
,
which
himselfe
meant
concerning
that
strength
where
with
Christ
enabled
him
vnto
contentation
and
patience
in
all
conditions
whatsoeuer
.
Paul
was
able
to
beare
all
afflictions
patiently
,
to
vse
prosperity
soberly
:
but
to
fullfill
the
Law
in
all
things
perfectly
he
was
not
able
.
And
if
he
were
not
,
who
is
?
We
conclude
that
the
actuall
Obedience
of
the
morall
Law
in
fulfilling
all
the
commandements
exactly
,
is
impossible
to
a
regenerate
Man
in
this
Life
.
Let
vs
now
take
a
short
survey
of
our
Aduersaries
Arguments
whereby
they
would
proue
That
actuall
obedience
to
the
whole
Law
is
not
onely
possible
:
but
allso
very
easy
to
the
regenerate
and
Iustified
.
They
are
those
.
●
That
burden
which
is
light
may
be
carried
without
shrinking
vnder
it
,
[
c
](A09274-e13430-b)
c
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
grieuous
.
]
1
Iohn
5.
3.
Ergo
,
The
Morall
Law
may
be
easily
obserued
.
To
this
we
answere
,
That
the
place
of
Matthew
is
to
be
vnderstood
not
of
the
Morall
Law
:
but
of
the
yoake
and
burden
of
the
crosse
and
afflictions
which
euery
one
must
beare
,
that
will
follow
Christ
and
obey
the
Gospell
.
To
those
that
are
wearied
and
laden
with
the
Crosse
,
Christs
speakes
by
way
of
Consolation
,
telling
them
whether
to
resort
for
helpe
.
(
Come
to
me
and
I
will
giue
you
rest
)
that
is
comfort
and
deliuerance
.
2
Then
he
perswades
them
to
patience
vnder
their
affliction
.
(
Take
vp
my
yoake
vpon
you
)
and
beare
it
chearefully
,
which
is
persuasion
he
strength
theus
with
three
arguments
.
1
From
his
owne
example
.
(
Learne
of
me
)
to
doe
and
suffer
as
I
doe
,
enduring
so
many
persecutions
and
afflictions
with
all
meeknesse
and
patience
.
For
I
am
meek
and
lowly
in
heart
,
quietly
bearing
all
wrongs
and
indignities
from
man
without
murmuring
against
God
,
repining
against
man
,
seeking
revenge
at
their
hands
that
haue
vniustly
persecuted
mee
.
2
From
the
successe
of
this
patient
enduring
according
to
CHRISTS
example
.
And
ye
shall
find
rest
vnto
your
soules
;
comfort
in
affliction
,
seasonable
deliu●rance
from
affliction
.
3
From
the
Nature
of
such
crosses
.
For
my
yoake
is
easie
,
&c.
Though
they
be
yoakes
and
burdens
which
for
the
present
seeme
grieuous
:
yet
they
be
easie
,
they
be
light
,
because
Christs
yoake
and
Christs
burden
which
he
layes
on
all
his
true
Disciples
that
follow
him
,
and
which
hee
will
giue
them
strength
to
support
and
beare
out
with
cheerefulnesse
.
This
seemes
the
most
naturall
interpretation
of
this
place
,
&
it
is
most
agreeable
to
the
twelfth
Chapter
to
the
Hebrewes
.
Where
the
like
Arguments
are
vsed
to
comfort
the
godly
in
such
afflictions
,
as
follow
the
profession
of
the
Gospell
.
But
yet
if
we
vnderstand
it
of
the
yoake
and
burden
of
the
Law
:
We
answere
to
it
,
and
that
place
in
Iohn
,
That
the
Commandements
of
God
are
not
grievous
to
the
Regenerate
;
not
because
they
can
perfectly
and
easily
fulfill
them
:
but
because
that
which
made
them
intollerable
and
vnsupportable
vnto
them
,
is
now
taken
away
.
What
s
that
?
The
rigor
of
the
Law
in
requiring
of
euery
man
exact
obedience
,
vnder
paine
of
the
curse
of
eternall
death
.
Here
was
the
vneasinesse
of
the
yoake
which
punched
man
in
his
sinfull
state
;
this
was
the
wai●ht
of
the
burthen
,
vnder
which
euery
man
out
of
Christ
must
needes
be
crushed
and
sinke
downe
to
Hell
.
Now
Christ
hauing
fulfilled
the
Law
,
and
satisfied
for
all
our
trangressions
thereof
,
hath
made
this
yoake
easie
for
the
neckes
,
and
this
burthen
light
vpon
the
shoulders
of
the
Regenerate
;
because
though
they
be
tyed
to
obey
;
yet
not
vpon
those
seuere
tearmes
of
being
eternally
accursed
,
if
they
at
any
time
disobey
.
Now
they
are
assured
their
hearty
obedience
shall
be
accepted
,
so
farre
as
they
are
able
to
performe
it
;
and
where
they
faile
they
shall
be
mercifully
pardoned
.
Which
is
a
singular
encouragement
of
a
Christian
heart
,
to
shew
all
willing
and
cheerefull
endeauour
in
obeying
Gods
Commandements
,
whereby
he
may
giue
good
proofe
of
his
vnfained
loue
vnto
God
himselfe
.
Againe
we
answere
that
his
vneasinesse
and
burdensomenesse
of
the
morall
Law
,
is
to
be
taken
in
regard
of
the
Enmity
and
opposition
which
a
carnall
man
beares
vnto
the
obedience
thereof
.
Vnto
a
naturall
man
it
is
the
greatest
toyle
and
wearisomnesse
in
the
world
,
for
him
to
be
made
to
draw
in
this
yoake
.
For
him
to
bridle
his
desires
:
to
checke
his
disordered
affections
;
to
restraine
himselfe
of
his
pleasures
;
[
b
](A09274-e13660-b)
b
Rom.
〈◊〉
.
delighteth
in
the
Law
;
takes
contentment
in
[
c
](A09274-e13680-b)
c
Psal.
119.
per
〈◊〉
the
obedience
of
it
,
and
is
full
of
singular
affection
and
desire
after
it
.
Whence
,
though
it
faile
in
many
things
through
manifold
infirmities
and
temptations
:
yet
it
ceaseth
not
in
a
willing
,
constant
,
and
cheerefull
endeauour
to
performe
all
.
Grace
fighteth
with
may
difficulties
,
and
in
the
combate
takes
many
a
foyle
:
but
yet
at
last
the
victory
falls
on
her
side
.
For
(
saith
Saint
Iohn
,
)
[
d
](A09274-e13710-b)
d
Verse
.
●
He
that
is
borne
of
God
ouercommeth
the
world
.
So
that
The
lust
of
the
eyes
,
the
lust
of
the
flesh
,
and
the
pride
of
life
;
which
he
vnderstands
by
the
world
,
(
1
Iohn
3.
16.
)
preuaile
not
against
him
,
to
turne
him
away
from
the
holy
Commandement
giuen
vnto
him
.
But
he
still
obeyes
cheerefully
and
syncerely
;
though
not
euery
way
perfectly
.
This
of
the
first
Argument
.
The
second
is
this
.
2
If
the
hardest
precepts
of
the
Law
may
be
kept
;
But
the
hardest
precepts
may
be
obserued
,
—
Ergo
,
the
rest
also
.
They
proue
the
minor
thus
.
Three
precepts
there
are
,
which
are
most
hard
as
all
confesse
.
-
1
Thou
shalt
loue
the
Lord
with
all
thy
heart
.
-
2
Thou
shalt
loue
thy
neighbour
as
thy selfe
.
-
3
Thou
shalt
not
couet
—
The
tenth
Commandement
.
But
now
all
these
three
commandements
may
be
kept
by
the
Regenerate
.
Ergo
the
rest
;
and
so
the
whole
Law
.
Wee
deny
the
minor
of
the
Prosyllogisme
;
and
say
that
those
three
precepts
are
not
to
be
kept
perfectly
by
any
man
in
this
life
.
They
proue
it
in
each
particular
.
1
That
a
man
in
this
life
may
loue
God
with
all
his
heart
.
This
they
prooue
.
●
By
Scripture
.
Deut.
30.
6.
The
Lord
thy
God
will
circumcise
thy
heart
,
and
the
heart
of
thy
seed
,
to
loue
the
Lord
thy
God
with
all
thy
heart
,
and
with
all
thy
soule
,
that
thou
mayest
liue
.
This
is
a
praediction
or
promise
of
that
which
was
heretofore
,
and
is
still
accomplished
in
the
regenerate
,
who
being
sanctified
and
purified
from
sinne
(
a
worke
of
Gods
Spirit
in
the
heart
figured
by
externall
circumcision
of
the
flesh
)
should
loue
God
with
all
their
hearts
.
2
By
example
of
Dauid
,
who
saith
of
himselfe
,
Psal.
1
9.
10.
With
my
whole
heart
haue
I
sought
thee
;
and
God
also
testifies
of
him
:
That
he
kept
his
commandements
,
and
followed
him
with
all
his
heart
,
to
doe
that
onely
which
was
righteous
in
his
eyes
,
1
Kings
14.
8.
The
like
is
recorded
of
Iosiah
,
2
Kings
23.
25.
And
like
vnto
him
was
there
no
King
before
him
that
turned
to
the
Lord
with
all
his
heart
,
and
with
all
his
soule
,
and
with
all
his
might
,
according
to
all
the
Law
of
Moses
:
neither
after
him
arose
any
like
him
.
These
men
then
loued
God
with
all
their
hearts
.
3
By
reason
;
For
to
loue
God
with
all
the
heart
,
carries
one
of
these
three
senses
.
First
,
to
loue
him
onely
,
and
nothing
else
,
and
so
wee
are
not
commanded
to
loue
God
with
all
our
heart
,
because
we
must
loue
our
neighbour
too
.
2
To
loue
him
tanto
conatu
,
quanto
fieri
potest
;
(
that
is
)
as
much
as
may
be
.
Nor
is
this
commanded
(
saith
Becanus
)
and
yet
if
it
were
,
who
would
say
t
were
impossible
to
loue
God
as
much
as
one
can.
3
To
loue
God
aboue
all
(
that
is
)
to
preferre
him
before
all
creatures
,
before
father
and
mother
,
as
Christ
did
,
Mat.
10.
37.
and
as
Abraham
did
;
before
his
onely
Sonne
.
Now
this
onely
is
to
loue
God
with
all
the
heart
,
and
this
,
men
may
doe
,
as
appeareth
in
the
Martyres
and
others
,
who
left
all
for
Gods
loue
.
Vnto
these
Arguments
we
answere
.
That
it
is
not
so
easie
a
matter
to
loue
God
,
with
all
the
heart
:
as
these
imagine
.
[
a
](A09274-e13980-b)
a
Lib.
4.
cap.
1●
.
Bellarmine
indeed
makes
a
(
But
)
at
it
.
There
is
nothing
required
(
saith
he
)
of
vs
:
But
to
loue
God
with
all
the
Heart
.
As
if
it
were
as
easily
done
,
as
spoken
.
But
wee
beleeue
that
in
this
(
But
)
God
hath
set
vp
a
white
,
which
all
the
men
in
the
world
,
may
and
must
aime
at
:
but
none
will
shoot
so
steadily
as
to
hit
it
.
Vnto
the
place
of
Deuteronomy
,
we
say
.
God
therein
tels
vs
what
his
gracious
worke
is
in
circumcising
,
or
sanctifying
our
hearts
,
&
what
our
bounden
duty
is
thereupon
(
viz.
)
to
loue
him
with
all
our
hearts
:
the
performance
whereof
wee
must
endeauour
syncerely
,
chough
we
cannot
doe
it
perfectly
.
For
the
examples
of
Dauid
and
Iosiah
,
who
are
said
to
follow
the
Lord
with
all
their
heart
;
there
is
nothing
else
meant
thereby
:
but
a
syncere
intent
and
endeauour
in
the
generall
to
establish
and
maintaine
Gods
pure
Religion
in
their
Kingdome
free
from
corruption
of
Idolatry
;
as
also
for
their
owne
particular
conversation
to
liue
vnblameably
.
For
Dauid
,
t
is
a
cleare
case
that
not
perfection
;
but
syncerity
is
his
commendations
;
whose
many
sinnes
recorded
in
the
Scriptures
witnesse
sufficiently
that
hee
had
in
his
heart
that
corruption
which
many
times
turned
the
loue
thereof
from
God
to
other
things
.
How
did
he
loue
God
with
all
his
heart
when
hee
defiled
Vriahs
bed
,
shed
Vriahs
blood
,
intended
to
murder
Nabal
,
iudg'd
away
an
honest
mans
Lands
to
a
fawning
Sycophant
,
with
such
other
faults
.
The
Prophet
himselfe
in
that
place
in
119.
Psal.
witnesseth
;
as
the
vprightnesse
of
his
heart
,
[
With
my
whole
heart
haue
I
sought
thee
:
]
so
withall
,
the
weaknesse
and
corruption
of
it
;
against
which
he
humblie
craues
Gods
assistance
in
the
very
next
words
,
[
Let
me
not
wander
from
thy
commandements
.
]
For
Iosiah
:
t
is
plaine
that
this
singular
commendations
is
giuen
him
,
because
of
his
through
reformations
of
the
most
corrupt
estate
of
Religion
,
which
was
before
his
reigne
.
Wherein
many
Godly
Kings
before
him
had
done
something
in
redressing
some
abuses
:
but
none
went
so
farre
in
a
zealous
reformation
of
all
,
according
to
Moses
Law
.
Wherefore
the
Text
saith
,
that
there
was
no
King
before
him
like
vnto
him
,
which
cannot
be
meant
absolutely
of
all
,
(
for
Dauid
is
said
to
follow
Gods
will
with
all
his
heart
;
as
well
as
Iosiah
:
)
but
since
the
time
that
Religion
began
to
bee
corrupted
in
the
Iewish
Church
,
there
was
none
of
all
the
Kings
of
Iudah
,
that
was
so
faithfull
as
Iosiah
,
to
restore
all
things
to
their
first
purity
.
Whence
he
hath
the
praise
,
that
he
turned
vnto
God
more
entirely
,
then
any
other
King
before
or
after
him
.
But
now
from
Iosiahs
zeale
in
reformation
to
conclude
,
that
in
euery
particular
of
his
life
he
kept
the
Law
perfectly
,
louing
God
with
all
his
heart
;
is
a
consequence
,
that
wants
strength
of
connexion
.
Vnto
the
reason
from
the
meaning
of
the
Law
,
we
grant
.
That
the
first
is
not
the
meaning
of
it
.
But
for
the
second
,
(
viz.
)
That
to
loue
God
with
all
the
heart
,
is
to
loue
him
as
much
as
may
be
.
The
Iesuite
hath
no
reason
either
to
deny
,
that
this
is
not
commaunded
;
or
to
affirme
that
if
it
were
commanded
,
t
is
yet
possible
to
doe
it
.
Would
any
man
say
;
except
he
care
not
what
he
say
,
that
God
doth
not
command
vs
to
loue
him
as
much
as
may
be
?
Or
will
it
bee
a
truth
from
any
mans
tongue
,
to
say
,
that
he
loues
God
with
as
great
perfection
as
may
be
?
It
cannot
.
Which
appeares
thus
.
Gods
will
is
,
that
we
should
loue
him
with
all
our
hearts
.
Now
Christ
hath
taught
vs
to
pray
.
Thy
will
bee
done
in
earth
as
it
is
in
Heauen
.
Thence
t
is
euident
,
Wee
on
Earth
are
bound
to
fulfill
the
Commandement
of
louing
God
:
as
the
Saints
in
Heauen
doe
fulfill
it
.
But
now
our
Aduersaries
themselues
grant
,
that
whil'st
wee
bee
[
in
viâ
]
wee
cannot
loue
God
so
much
as
we
shall
d
ee
[
in
Patriâ
]
Whence
it
followes
,
that
no
man
can
loue
him
so
much
as
may
be
,
and
as
he
ought
to
doe
:
seeing
no
man
hath
his
heart
replenished
with
that
measure
of
Diuine
loue
,
whereof
his
Nature
is
capable
,
which
either
Adam
had
in
his
inoncency
;
or
the
Saints
haue
in
glory
.
Touching
the
third
sense
of
the
words
,
we
grant
indeed
;
that
to
Loue
God
with
all
the
heart
,
is
to
loue
him
super
omnia
,
that
is
aboue
all
Creatures
.
But
the
Iesuites
take
here
but
one
part
of
true
loue
of
God
.
T
is
a
singular
part
of
Diuine
loue
,
when
the
heart
is
so
fixed
on
God
:
that
neither
the
loue
nor
feare
of
any
earthly
thing
can
draw
it
from
obeying
of
God
.
Which
we
say
,
is
a
matter
wherein
euery
one
failes
in
some
kinde
or
other
,
more
or
lesse
,
though
in
the
end
may
Martyrs
and
other
holy
men
,
haue
herein
by
faith
ouercome
the
world
.
But
this
is
not
enough
vnto
perfect
loue
,
to
preferre
God
before
all
Temporall
paines
and
pleasures
,
profits
or
discommodities
.
He
loues
God
with
all
his
heart
,
not
onely
who
loues
him
aboue
all
,
but
also
obeies
God
in
all
.
This
is
the
loue
of
God
,
that
we
keepe
his
Commandements
.
He
that
for
Gods
loue
will
not
obey
Gods
Law
:
he
loues
his
sinnes
more
then
God
.
Offend
but
in
the
least
thing
,
there
's
presently
want
of
loue
:
for
hee
that
will
not
doe
as
God
bids
him
then
,
is
voyde
of
that
loue
which
moues
him
to
obey
at
other
times
.
He
then
that
keepeth
Gods
word
,
in
him
is
the
loue
of
God
perfect
indeed
.
—
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
1
Iohn
2.
5.
Perfect
obedience
and
perfect
loue
are
inseparable
.
Now
seeing
the
former
cannot
be
found
in
mortall
men
:
we
cannot
in
them
seeke
for
the
latter
.
And
therefore
this
Commandement
[
Loue
God
aboue
all
things
]
cannot
be
kept
in
this
life
.
2
That
a
man
may
loue
his
neighbour
as
himselfe
.
For
which
purpose
they
turne
vs
vnto
Rom.
13.
8.
Hee
that
loueth
another
hath
fulfilled
the
Law
.
Because
the
Law
is
comprehended
in
this
saying
,
Thou
shalt
loue
thy
neighbour
as
thy selfe
,
v.
9.
and
loue
doth
not
euill
to
his
neighbour
:
therefore
is
loue
the
fulfilling
of
the
Law
,
vers.
10.
And
they
bid
vs
looke
Gal.
5.
14.
Where
we
reade
,
For
all
the
Law
is
fulfilled
in
one
Word
:
Thou
shalt
loue
thy
neighbour
as
thyselfe
.
Hereto
we
answere
.
That
there
's
in
these
places
,
nothing
that
needs
answering
.
We
grant
,
that
the
loue
of
our
neighbour
as
of
our selues
,
is
the
fulfilling
of
the
Law
;
that
is
,
of
the
second
Table
of
the
Law
,
touching
our
duty
vnto
man
,
and
so
much
these
places
witnesse
,
commanding
vs
also
so
to
doe
.
But
now
how
doe
our
Aduersaries
prooue
out
of
these
places
,
that
men
can
perfectly
ob●serue
this
Law
.
We
yeeld
the
Regenerate
loue
their
neighboars
as
themselues
:
but
that
perfection
of
loue
,
which
in
euery
point
fulfils
the
Law
,
doing
our
neighbour
no
hurt
,
but
all
good
,
in
all
our
thoughts
words
and
deeds
;
this
we
cannot
grant
them
,
vnlesse
vpon
better
proofes
.
Let
vs
goe
to
the
tenth
Commandement
,
which
they
say
may
be
kept
,
that
is
,
3
Thou
shalt
not
couet
.
This
tenth
Commandement
of
the
Decalogue
,
is
(
say
they
)
possible
to
be
fulfilled
by
a
Regenerate
man
.
For
three
things
must
be
obserued
,
touching
this
concupiscence
or
coueting
forbidden
in
the
tenth
Commandement
.
1
The
vitious
pro●enesse
and
inclination
of
Nature
vnto
baddesires
,
which
is
styled
concupiscence
in
actu
primo
.
As
to
haue
a
theeuish
minde
.
2
The
inordinate
motions
of
the
heart
immediately
arising
from
that
corrupt
disposition
,
which
preuent
reason
,
and
goe
before
consent
;
as
to
desire
another
mans
money
:
but
sodenly
vanisheth
of
it selfe
,
or
vpon
deliberation
t
is
checkt
.
3
The
consent
of
the
will
,
when
either
it
takes
〈◊〉
mediate
delight
in
such
desires
themselues
;
as
speculatiue
f●rnication
&c.
or
when
it
resolues
to
put
in
execution
what
the
heart
imagined
;
as
to
lay
a
plot
to
spoyle
another
of
his
goods
.
The
two
former
,
the
vitious
disposition
of
Nature
,
and
the
inordinate
desires
that
goe
before
consent
:
these
be
no
sinnes
(
say
the
Romanists
)
and
so
not
forbidden
in
the
tenne
Commandements
.
The
last
(
viz.
)
Euill
desires
with
consent
,
they
be
the
very
sins
which
are
forbidden
in
that
Commandement
;
Whence
they
conclude
that
a
Regenerate
man
may
auoid
the
breach
of
this
commandment
;
seeing
it
is
in
the
power
of
his
will
,
whether
he
will
consent
vnto
such
motions
of
the
heart
or
no
:
and
if
he
doe
not
consent
:
then
,
hee
sinnes
not
.
Herevnto
wee
answere
.
That
whereas
they
of
Rome
teach
,
that
the
Habituall
vitiousnesse
of
Nature
and
the
disorderly
motions
of
the
Heart
which
goe
before
Consent
,
are
no
Sinnes
:
they
therein
erre
grossily
against
Scriptures
and
sound
Reason
.
This
the
gift
of
these
Men
alwayes
to
iudge
flatteringly
and
fauourably
on
Natures
side
:
they
concipt
to
themselues
a
God
in
Heauen
like
their
God
in
Rome
,
Facilem
Deum
,
one
that
will
wincke
at
small
faults
,
and
graunt
Indulgence
by
the
Dozen
.
Looke
what
they
iudge
a
small
Matter
God
must
be
of
there
mind
:
or
else
they
are
not
pleased
.
His
Loue
must
fit
there
Humors
;
what
they
thinke
they
can
doe
;
that
God
shall
haue
leaue
to
command
or
forbid
:
but
if
otherwise
they
'le
tell
him
to
his
face
,
that
he
is
a
foole
ct
a
Tyrant
,
to
command
them
that
,
which
now
they
cannot
performe
.
For
God
(
say
they
)
to
require
of
a
Man
a
freedome
from
all
vitious
Inclinations
and
euill
desires
,
this
were
as
mad
an
injunction
,
as
for
a
master
to
command
his
seruant
neuer
to
be
hungry
,
or
thirsty
,
hot
or
cold
,
and
to
threaten
him
,
that
hee
should
looke
through
a
halter
,
in
case
it
bee
otherwise
with
him
.
This
errour
wee
shall
more
conueniently
speake
of
in
the
refutation
of
common
and
generall
exceptions
,
which
they
make
against
all
those
proofes
,
that
doe
demonstrate
the
impossibility
of
keeping
the
Law
,
whereof
this
is
one
,
that
Concupiscence
in
the
first
and
second
act
is
not
Sinne.
But
now
whereas
they
affirme
that
it
is
in
a
Regenerate
Mans
power
not
to
yeeld
consent
to
the
motions
of
Sin
,
and
that
therefore
he
may
fulfill
the
Law
which
sayed
(
thou
shalt
not
lust
:
)
we
graunt
them
that
the
Spirit
may
many
times
get
the
victory
,
ouermastring
such
vuruly
motions
of
the
heart
:
but
this
is
not
perpetuall
.
For
who
is
there
(
except
extreamely
ignorant
of
Grace
and
Nature
)
but
will
confesse
that
many
times
these
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
affections
of
Sinne
]
as
the
Apostle
cals
them
,
do
work
in
them
so
strongly
,
vpon
such
circumstances
and
aduantages
;
that
they
doe
not
only
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
combate
and
fight
]
against
the
powers
of
grace
:
but
also
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
vanquish
them
]
and
euen
leade
a
Man
regenerate
captiue
vnto
the
Law
or
command
of
sinne
.
The
Apostle
confesseth
so
much
of
himselfe
Rom.
7.
23.
Who
yet
was
able
to
doe
as
much
as
he
that
thinkes
himselfe
best
.
And
therefore
what
euer
power
we
may
seeme
to
haue
not
to
yeeld
consent
:
yet
't
is
certaine
that
we
shall
often
faile
in
in
our
practise
.
This
of
the
second
Argument
touching
the
obseruation
of
the
obseruation
of
the
hardest
precepts
of
the
Law
:
The
third
followes
.
3
If
a
Man
may
doe
more
then
the
Law
requires
:
But
a
Man
may
doe
more
then
the
Law
requires
.
Ergo
He
may
doe
as
much
.
The
minor
Bellarmine
proues
by
the
example
of
the
young
Man
Mat:
〈◊〉
9.
who
telling
Christ
that
he
had
obserued
all
the
commandements
and
that
from
his
youth
;
our
Sauiour
bids
him
doe
one
thing
more
and
then
he
should
be
perfect
.
[
If
thou
wilt
be
perfect
,
go
sell
that
thou
hast
and
giue
to
the
poore
and
follow
me
.
]
ver.
20.
Now
if
the
young
Man
had
done
this
,
he
had
done
more
then
the
Law
required
.
In
as
much
as
whatsoeuer
the
Law
required
he
had
obserued
formerly
.
For
do
you
not
beleeue
him
that
he
spake
true
?
[
All
these
things
haue
I
obserued
from
my
youth
]
verse
9.
Whereto
we
answere
.
That
we
doe
not
beleeue
the
Testimony
of
that
vaine
young
Man
touching
his
owne
Righteousnesse
.
Who
boosted
of
keeping
the
2.
Table
in
the
outward
duties
thereof
:
when
as
yet
he
wanted
inward
Charitie
towards
his
Neighbuor
and
Loue
towards
God
.
He
auou●hed
that
he
had
kept
all
perfectly
fulfilling
that
commandment
[
Thou
shalt
loue
thy
neighbour
as
thy selfe
:
]
and
there
vpon
is
so
bould
as
to
aske
Christ
.
what
lacke
I
yet
;
Christ
to
conuince
him
of
his
pride
and
wants
,
put
him
to
the
Triall
.
If
thou
hast
such
perfect
Charity
towards
Man
;
then
certainely
if
God
command
thee
to
bestow
,
that
a
part
,
but
all
thy
goods
vpon
the
poore
,
vpon
promise
of
better
things
to
thy selfe
:
thy
duty
vnto
God
and
singular
Charity
to
Men
,
will
make
thee
doe
so
.
[
Goe
then
sell
all
that
thou
hast
and
giue
[
a
](A09274-e14800-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈…〉
to
the
poore
.
]
Vpon
this
speciall
Commandment
,
this
couetous
mind
shews
it selfe
.
Nay
,
't
is
plaine
he
loued
not
his
Neighbour
,
so
well
as
his
riches
.
He
is
neither
so
dutifull
to
God
;
nor
charitable
to
the
poore
:
as
for
either
of
their
sakes
,
to
part
with
his
possessions
.
But
,
might
he
say
,
what
?
will
not
ordinary
almes
,
or
a
little
more
then
ordinary
serue
the
turne
?
Must
I
giue
away
all
.
Ind●ede
the
Law
requires
that
I
be
mercifull
to
the
poore
:
but
where
s
any
Law
that
bids
me
sell
my
whole
estate
and
distribute
to
them
that
want
?
Christ
layes
an
vnnecessary
burden
vpon
me
;
if
I
cannot
be
perfect
without
vndo●ing
my selfe
,
I
will
content
my selfe
as
I
am
,
and
not
seke
after
such
perfection
.
Heere
a
Papist
will
say
he
speake
reason
,
seeing
Christs
speech
was
but
acounsaile
of
more
perfection
,
then
the
Law
required
.
Now
a
Man
is
not
to
be
blamed
if
he
chuse
only
to
be
as
perfect
as
the
Law
commands
him
,
and
so
this
young
man
was
:
if
you
'le
beleeue
him
or
them
.
But
the
Scripture
makes
it
plaine
that
he
did
euill
in
disobeying
Christ
;
and
,
that
if
he
had
obeyed
him
in
that
particular
,
he
had
done
no
more
then
the
Law
required
at
his
hands
.
For
obedience
to
euery
speciall
Commandment
is
included
in
the
generall
.
The
Law
indefinitely
commands
vs
to
giue
almes
:
now
if
God
by
a
speciall
commandment
limite
how
much
we
shall
giue
;
whether
halfe
,
or
all
our
Estates
,
to
obey
such
a
perticular
precept
is
not
to
do
more
then
the
generall
Law
requires
vs
.
Such
a
particular
Commandment
was
this
of
Christ
vnto
the
young
Man
,
wherein
he
sets
him
a
spell
,
according
to
that
conceit
of
perfection
which
he
had
of
himselfe
:
putting
him
to
the
practise
of
the
highest
duty
which
the
Law
of
Liberality
can
possible
require
of
a
Man
(
viz.
)
to
part
with
all
.
This
he
ought
to
haue
done
vpon
Christs
particular
commandment
;
in
not
doing
of
it
he
brake
the
Law
,
and
proclaimed
his
heart
to
be
full
of
couetousnesse
,
deuoide
of
faith
in
God
;
and
true
Charity
towards
his
Neighbour
.
From
this
place
then
our
aduersaries
cannot
proue
,
that
this
young
Man
might
haue
doen
more
then
the
Law
required
:
or
that
wee
are
bound
at
any
time
to
doe
as
Christ
bid
him
.
Christs
command
was
for
his
particular
Triall
:
not
for
our
Imitation
.
They
that
take
it
otherwise
be
a
generation
of
men
that
professe
Beggery
;
and
possesse
Kingdomes
,
who
were
willing
enough
to
part
with
that
little
they
had
of
there
owne
,
that
so
they
may
liue
the
more
Largely
and
plentifully
vpon
other
Mens
.
Wee
goe
forward
to
the
next
argument
.
4
If
the
Law
were
impossible
to
be
kept
it
were
no
Law
:
for
there
is
no
Law
of
things
impossible
.
Yea
God
were
more
cruel
and
foolish
then
any
Tyrant
,
too
command
vs
to
doe
that
which
is
impossible
for
vs
to
doe
.
To
this
wee
answere
,
That
the
consequences
were
true
if
God
had
giuen
a
Law
which
Men
neuer
had
strength
to
performe
.
But
now
the
Law
written
in
tables
on
Mount
Sina
,
was
but
a
reuiuing
and
repetion
of
the
same
Law
,
which
was
written
in
Adams
heart
;
the
Characters
whereof
were
now
defaced
in
his
sinnefull
Posterity
.
Adam
had
strength
sufficient
to
fulfill
it
:
which
as
he
receaued
for
himselfe
and
vs
;
so
he
lost
it
for
both
.
Neuerthelesse
though
Strength
to
obey
be
lost
:
yet
the
obligation
to
Obedience
remaines
.
We
are
no
more
discharged
of
our
duties
,
because
we
haue
no
strength
to
doe
it
:
then
a
debter
is
quitted
of
his
Bands
because
he
wants
money
to
make
payment
.
Nor
is
this
cruelty
or
folly
in
God
,
that
when
he
published
this
Law
vnto
the
Isralites
,
he
did
not
qualifie
the
exactnesse
thereof
,
fitting
the
precepts
to
there
abilities
,
commanding
them
to
do
iust
as
much
as
they
could
or
would
do
.
Had
God
made
a
Law
in
that
sort
in
fauour
of
mans
sinfull
nature
:
they
might
with
better
reason
haue
layd
folly
to
his
charge
,
for
bending
the
rule
to
the
crokednesse
of
mans
heart
;
and
not
leuelling
it
according
to
the
streightnesse
of
the
Rule
.
God
was
to
set
forth
a
Law
of
Liberty
,
that
should
not
flatter
but
freely
rebuke
Man
of
all
vnrighteousnesse
;
[
a
](A09274-e14920-b)
a
Iam.
1.
25.
Psal.
197.
a
perfect
,
Law
containing
in
it
a
full
description
of
Holynesse
and
Iustice
,
which
Man
ought
to
haue
and
performe
towards
God
and
his
Neighbour
:
&
in
this
case
God
had
iust
reason
to
haue
respect
vnto
mans
duty
;
not
his
ability
,
which
once
he
had
;
but
now
had
forfited
and
lost
.
The
next
Argument
is
.
5
Euery
Prayer
made
in
Faith
according
to
Gods
will
is
heard
and
granted
.
Ergo
God
heares
vs
,
and
giues
vs
such
grace
that
we
can
doci
.
Hereto
we
answere
.
That
this
prayer
shewes
vs
what
we
are
bound
too
;
and
what
is
our
duty
continually
to
endeuour
.
That
we
may
doe
Gods
will
euery
day
more
perfectly
,
cheerefully
and
constantly
,
then
other
.
And
so
farre
God
heares
the
faithfull
prayers
of
his
louing
children
,
enabling
them
to
better
performance
,
the
longer
they
liue
.
But
that
such
perfection
of
Obedience
is
giuen
to
vs
in
this
life
;
as
the
Saints
enioy
in
Heauen
,
will
not
be
graunted
by
our
Aduersaries
themselues
.
Wherefore
they
must
also
grant
that
that
Prayer
is
heard
and
granted
vs
by
degrees
.
In
this
Life
we
attaine
such
perfection
as
God
sees
fit
for
vs
:
afterwards
,
that
which
is
compleate
.
6
They
proue
by
these
Scriptures
,
that
the
Law
may
be
fulfilled
.
We
answere
.
That
both
these
places
are
peruerted
by
false
Interpretations
.
Against
[
a
](A09274-e15030-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
▪
such
there
is
no
Law
sayth
the
Apostle
.
Against
what
?
such
persons
,
or
such
graces
?
If
it
be
meant
of
Persons
,
(
viz.
)
That
such
as
haue
the
Spirit
,
and
bring
forth
the
fruits
of
the
Spirit
there
mentioned
against
those
there
is
no
Law
:
we
must
take
it
in
the
Apostles
owne
meaning
,
which
hee
expresseth
.
verse
18.
[
If
yee
he
led
by
the
spirit
ye
are
not
vnder
Law
]
How
is
that
?
Are
not
the
Regenerate
vnder
the
Law
,
that
is
vnder
the
Obedience
of
the
Law
?
Yes
,
wee
graunt
on
both
sides
that
Grace
frees
vs
not
from
subiection
and
obedience
vnto
Gods
Law
.
How
then
are
they
not
vnder
the
Law
.
T
is
plaine
.
They
are
not
vnder
the
Curse
and
Condemnation
of
the
Law
,
as
those
be
that
walke
in
the
flesh
and
doe
the
workes
thereof
,
who
therefore
[
shall
not
inherit
the
Kingdome
of
God
]
v
,
19.
and
that
s
to
be
accursed
.
But
such
as
walke
in
the
Spirit
being
regenerate
and
Iustified
,
are
not
vnder
the
Curse
:
and
therefore
though
the
Law
may
and
doth
accuse
them
of
Sinne
:
yet
the
Law
is
not
so
against
them
,
as
to
bring
condemnation
vpon
them
(
as
it
doth
vpon
other
)
from
which
in
Christ
they
are
freed
.
If
the
clause
be
vnder
stood
of
the
Graces
of
the
Spirit
,
there
reckoned
vp
the
sense
is
this
.
Against
such
workes
there
is
no
Law
forbidding
them
,
as
there
is
against
works
of
the
flesh
:
these
agreeable
,
those
contrary
to
the
law
.
But
this
makes
nothing
to
our
Adversaries
purpose
.
For
the
place
in
Iohn
[
He
that
is
borne
of
God
doth
not
commit
Sinne
yea
cannot
.
]
If
our
Aduersaries
exposition
according
to
the
very
Letter
may
stand
good
it
will
●ollow
.
That
in
the
regenerate
there
is
not
onely
a
possibility
to
keepe
the
Law
:
but
also
an
impossibility
at
any
time
to
breake
it
.
But
they
easily
see
how
absurd
this
position
is
,
and
that
it
being
graunted
their
doctrine
of
falling
away
from
Grace
lies
flat
in
the
dust
;
seeing
Iohn
sayeth
expresly
.
That
a
man
regenerate
,
not
onely
,
doth
not
,
but
cannot
Sinne.
Therefore
certainely
he
cannot
fall
from
Grace
.
Wherefore
they
helpe
it
out
with
a
distinction
.
Hee
cannot
sinne
,
that
is
,
mortally
.
He
may
sinne
,
that
is
,
venially
,
and
veniall
sinnes
may
stand
with
grace
and
with
perfect
Obedience
of
the
Law
.
This
distinction
is
one
of
the
rotten
pillars
of
the
Romish
Church
;
tw'ill
come
in
fit
place
to
be
examined
hereafter
:
for
the
present
,
we
say
,
Hee
that
Sinnes
venially
(
as
they
mince
it
.
)
breakes
the
Law
;
and
againe
a
Man
Regenerate
may
sinne
mortally
;
which
is
true
not
onely
according
to
there
doctrine
who
teach
that
a
Man
may
fall
from
the
Grace
of
Regeneration
which
to
doe
is
a
mortall
Sinne
:
but
much
more
according
to
the
Scriptures
and
Experience
which
witnesse
that
Peter
,
Dauid
,
Solomon
,
and
Many
,
yea
all
the
Saints
,
haue
at
sometime
or
other
there
greivous
falls
;
out
of
which
notwithstanding
,
by
the
Grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
abiding
in
them
they
recouer
themselues
so
that
finally
they
fall
not
a
way
.
The
last
Argument
is
from
the
examples
of
such
men
as
haue
fulfilled
the
Law
.
7
The
Scriptures
record
that
diuers
men
haue
beene
perfect
in
fulfilling
the
law
in
all
things
:
[
b
](A09274-e15330-b)
b
Gen.
17.
1.
Abraham
,
[
c
](A09274-e15340-b)
c
Gen.
6.
9.
Noah
,
[
d
](A09274-e15350-b)
d
1
King
14.
8.
Dauid
,
[
e
](A09274-e15360-b)
e
2
King
23.
25.
Iosiah
,
[
f
](A09274-e15370-b)
f
2
Chro.
15.
17.
Asa
,
[
g
](A09274-e15380-b)
g
Luke
1.
6.
Zacharie
and
Elizabeth
,
the
[
h
](A09274-e15390-b)
h
Iohn
.
17
6.
Apostles
,
and
other
[
i
](A09274-e15400-b)
i
Phil.
3.
15.
holy
Men.
Therefore
the
Law
is
at
least
possible
to
bee
kept
by
some
.
Not
to
stand
in
particular
examination
of
all
the
places
of
Scripture
,
which
are
alleadged
for
proofe
of
these
examples
;
we
answer
briefly
.
That
it
is
euery
mans
duty
to
aime
at
perfection
in
his
obedience
,
according
to
Christs
Commandement
,
Mat.
5.
48.
Be
ye
therfore
perfect
,
euen
as
your
Father
in
Heauen
is
perfect
.
2
That
in
this
life
there
are
many
degrees
of
grace
,
which
God
bestowes
diuersly
on
diuers
men
,
according
to
his
owne
pleasure
,
and
their
greater
or
lesse
diligence
in
the
practise
of
Holinesse
.
So
that
comparatiuely
some
men
may
be
said
to
be
perfect
,
because
farre
more
perfect
then
others
,
as
the
greatest
starres
bee
said
to
be
of
perfect
light
,
because
they
shine
brighter
then
those
of
lesser
Magnitude
,
though
yet
not
so
bright
as
the
Sunne
.
But
3.
we
affirme
that
no
man
in
this
endeauour
after
perfection
,
goes
so
farre
,
as
for
inward
Holinesse
and
outward
obedience
to
answere
the
perfection
of
the
Law
in
all
points
.
Euen
in
these
holy
Saints
which
they
bring
for
instance
,
the
Scriptures
haue
recorded
vnto
vs
their
failings
,
that
in
them
at
once
we
may
see
a
patterne
of
Holinesse
to
be
imitated
,
and
an
example
of
humane
Infirmity
,
to
be
admonished
by
wee
haue
[
a
](A09274-e15490-b)
a
Gen.
15.
●
.
3.
Abraham
,
somtimes
misdoubting
of
Gods
promise
&
protection
,
and
helping
himselfe
by
a
[
b
](A09274-e15510-b)
b
Gen.
20.
11.
shift
scarce
warrantable
.
[
c
](A09274-e15520-b)
c
Gen.
9.
21.
Noah
ouer-seene
in
drinke
.
[
d
](A09274-e15540-b)
d
2
Sam.
11.
Dauid
breaking
the
sixth
and
seauenth
Commandements
,
one
after
another
.
[
e
](A09274-e15560-b)
e
2
Chron.
25.
v.
20.
21
22.
Iosiah
running
wilfully
vpon
a
dangerous
enterprise
against
Gods
Commandement
.
[
f
](A09274-e15580-b)
f
2
Chron.
16.
7
Asa
relying
on
the
King
of
Syria
for
helpe
against
the
King
of
Israel
,
and
not
vpon
the
Lord
,
[
g
](A09274-e15620-b)
g
Ver.
10.
&
in
a
rage
imprisoning
the
Prophets
for
reprouing
him
;
[
h
](A09274-e15630-b)
h
Ver.
12.
and
in
his
disease
seeking
not
to
the
Lord
:
but
to
the
Phisitians
.
[
i
](A09274-e15650-b)
i
Luke
1.
18.
Zachary
not
giuing
credence
to
the
Angels
message
.
The
[
k
](A09274-e15670-b)
k
Mar.
14.
50
▪
66.
&c.
Apostles
all
at
a
clap
forsaking
,
or
denying
Christ
.
We
cannot
then
in
these
Saints
finde
perfection
in
the
full
obedience
to
the
Law
;
amongst
whose
few
actions
registred
by
the
Holy
Ghosts
penne
:
we
may
reade
their
sinnes
together
;
with
their
good
workes
.
And
had
the
Scriptures
beene
silent
in
that
point
:
yet
who
could
thence
haue
concluded
,
that
these
men
or
others
had
no
faults
,
because
no
mention
is
made
of
them
?
It
was
Gods
purpose
to
relate
the
most
eminent
,
not
euery
particular
action
of
their
liues
;
euen
Christs
story
fals
[
l
](A09274-e15700-b)
l
〈◊〉
20.
30.
31.
short
of
such
exactnesse
.
Wee
conclude
then
notwithstanding
these
Arguments
.
Our
second
Proposition
standeth
firme
and
good
(
viz.
)
That
no
man
in
this
life
can
fulfill
the
Law
in
euery
duty
both
inward
and
outward
:
but
that
the
iustest
man
on
earth
will
faile
in
many
things
.
So
if
he
should
seeke
for
Iustification
by
this
his
actuall
obedience
to
the
Law
:
he
throwes
himselfe
vnder
the
curse
of
the
Law
.
For
cursed
is
euery
one
that
continues
not
in
[
all
]
things
,
which
are
written
in
the
booke
of
the
Law
to
doe
them
,
saith
the
[
m
](A09274-e15770-b)
m
Gal.
3.
10.
Apostle
out
of
[
n
](A09274-e15780-b)
n
Deut.
27.
26.
Moses
.
Which
curse
must
needs
light
on
those
,
that
are
of
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
that
is
,
seeke
for
Iustification
and
life
by
the
obedience
of
the
Law
,
which
yet
they
cannot
in
all
things
perfectly
obey
.
CHAP.
III.
No
man
in
this
life
can
performe
any
particular
good
worke
,
so
exactly
that
in
euery
point
it
shall
answere
the
rigour
of
the
Law
,
proued
by
conscience
,
Scriptures
,
reason
;
and
Popish
obiections
,
answered
.
I
Proceed
vnto
the
last
Proposition
,
Mans
actuall
Obedience
to
any
one
particular
precept
of
the
Law
.
Wherein
will
appeare
the
third
Imperfection
of
mans
Obedience
in
fulfilling
of
the
Morall
Law
.
We
haue
seene
.
That
no
man
hath
perfect
inherent
sanctity
free
from
Natures
corruption
.
Againe
,
That
no
man
can
performe
perfect
actuall
obedience
to
all
and
euery
duty
of
the
Law
without
failing
in
any
one
point
.
And
this
much
our
Aduersaries
will
not
much
sticke
to
yeeld
vnto
vs
,
and
confesse
.
That
there
is
no
man
,
but
sinneth
at
some
time
or
other
;
and
that
t
is
scarce
possible
to
avoide
veniall
sinnes
,
as
they
stile
them
.
But
then
they
deny
vtterly
.
That
a
man
sinnes
in
euery
particular
good
worke
;
though
he
cannot
doe
all
perfectly
,
yet
in
some
he
may
exactly
fulfill
the
Righteousnesse
of
the
Law
,
not
missing
in
any
one
circumstance
.
And
therfore
at
least
by
that
obedience
he
may
be
iustified
.
This
opinion
of
theirs
hath
neither
truth
in
it selfe
:
nor
yet
brings
any
benefit
at
all
to
their
maine
purpose
in
prouing
Iustification
by
workes
.
For
to
what
end
serueth
it
them
to
stand
quarrelling
for
the
perfection
of
our
obedience
in
some
one
or
two
good
works
;
when
yet
we
faile
in
many
things
besides
?
One
thing
well
done
will
not
iustifie
him
that
doth
many
things
ill
.
For
that
of
Saint
Iames
must
be
a
Truth
:
Hee
that
keepeth
the
whole
Law
,
and
yet
faileth
in
one
point
,
is
guilty
of
all
.
Iames
2.
10.
Much
more
guilty
is
he
,
that
keepeth
it
in
a
few
:
and
breakes
it
in
many
.
But
yet
further
,
we
reiect
this
opinion
also
,
as
an
Errour
:
and
we
teach
on
the
contrary
.
That
No
man
in
this
life
can
performe
any
one
particular
good
worke
,
so
exactly
,
that
in
euery
point
,
it
shall
answere
the
rigour
of
the
Law
,
and
the
seuere
tryall
of
Gods
Iudgement
.
About
this
Assertion
our
Aduersaries
raise
much
stirre
and
many
soule
slaunders
against
vs
,
proclaiming
vs
to
all
the
world
,
open
enemies
to
all
good
workes
,
that
wee
bee
Factors
for
the
Kingdome
of
darknes
,
promoting
as
much
as
in
vs
lyeth
all
licentiousnesse
in
evill
courses
,
and
taking
of
the
courage
and
endeauour
of
Men
after
pious
duties
.
For
who
will
set
himselfe
(
say
they
)
to
doe
any
good
worke
if
the
Protestants
doctrine
be
true
,
that
in
doing
of
it
he
shall
commit
a
mortall
Sinne
?
who
wil
pray
,
fast
,
and
giues
almes
,
if
when
he
doth
these
things
he
cannot
but
sinne
?
As
good
then
it
were
to
doe
euill
as
to
doe
good
:
a
man
can
but
sin
,
and
so
he
shall
,
let
him
doe
his
best
.
These
slanderous
incongruities
fastened
on
vs
,
spring
not
out
of
our
Doctrine
rightly
vnderstood
:
but
out
of
froward
and
peruerse
hearts
,
that
will
not
see
the
truth
.
Such
aspersions
will
easily
bee
wiped
of
,
when
after
the
confirmation
of
the
Trueth
wee
shall
make
answere
to
such
obiections
,
as
seeme
to
infringe
it
.
We
say
then
.
That
no
man
can
performe
any
good
worke
required
in
the
Law
with
such
exact
observation
of
every
circumstance
:
that
(
were
it
examined
by
the
rigour
of
the
Law
and
Gods
Iustice
)
no
fault
at
all
can
bee
found
in
it
.
This
we
proue
by
Conscience
,
by
Scriptures
,
by
Reason
.
First
we
here
apeale
vnto
the
Conscience
of
Man
,
the
Iudgment
whereof
is
to
be
regarded
;
and
whereunto
we
dare
stand
in
this
matter
.
Thou
that
boastest
that
in
such
and
such
good
workes
;
that
thou
hastnot
committed
any
Sinne
at
all
.
Darest
thou
indeed
stand
to
it
,
and
vpon
these
Tearmes
appeare
in
Gods
Iudgment
?
Darest
thou
abide
the
strictnesse
of
this
examination
standing
ready
to
Iustifie
thy selfe
against
euery
thing
that
hee
can
obiect
;
Wilt
thou
venter
thy selfe
vpon
this
Tryall
euen
in
the
best
works
thou
dost
,
That
God
cannot
with
his
most
piercing
eye
of
Iustice
spy
a
fault
in
them
,
if
he
number
them
,
he
shal
find
nothing
short
?
if
he
weigh
them
not
one
graine
too
light
?
Againe
let
conscience
speake
,
when
thou
hast
prayed
,
fasted
,
giuen
almes
,
done
any
other
excellent
worke
of
Piety
and
Charity
in
the
deuoutest
,
and
most
vnblameable
manner
thou
thinkest
possible
.
Thinkest
thou
verily
,
that
in
this
case
thou
doest
not
at
all
stand
in
need
of
Gods
fauour
,
to
passe
by
thine
infirmities
,
and
that
thou
needest
not
euen
in
this
behalfe
pray
;
Lord
forgiue
me
my
trespasses
?
What
man
durst
say
or
thinke
in
any
good
worke
:
Lord
in
this
particular
I
doe
not
desire
thou
shouldest
be
mercifull
vnto
me
?
Without
doubt
there
is
no
man
liuing
vpon
earth
that
shall
in
serious
consideration
of
the
seuerity
of
Gods
iudgement
,
and
the
great
infirmity
of
his
owne
Nature
,
compare
his
own
obedience
with
the
seuerity
of
Gods
Iustice
,
but
his
heart
will
presently
shrinke
within
him
,
and
his
conscience
shunne
this
tryall
;
as
much
as
euer
Adam
did
Gods
presence
.
The
thought
of
such
a
strict
proceeding
in
Iudgement
,
would
make
the
proudest
heart
to
stoope
and
tremble
,
the
boldest
face
to
gather
blacknesse
,
filling
the
soule
with
an
horrible
feare
in
the
expectation
of
that
day
;
should
the
most
innocent
life
,
the
most
holy
actions
of
men
be
there
scanned
according
to
the
rigour
of
Iustice
:
not
graciously
pittied
,
pardoned
,
and
accepted
according
to
that
mercifull
loue
of
God
which
couereth
and
passeth
by
multitudes
of
sinnes
.
T
were
arrogant
pride
in
any
man
to
vtter
that
speach
in
a
sober
temper
;
Whereunto
Iob
breakes
out
in
a
passion
,
chased
by
the
sense
of
his
miserable
tortures
;
and
the
froward
disputes
of
his
friends
.
[
a
](A09274-e16060-b)
a
Iob
16.
●1
.
Oh
(
saith
he
)
that
a
man
might
pleade
with
God
,
as
a
man
pleadeth
with
his
neighbour
.
And
againe
,
Lay
[
b
](A09274-e16100-b)
b
Iob
17.
3.
downe
now
,
put
me
in
a
surety
with
thee
,
who
is
he
that
will
strike
hands
with
me
?
And
againe
,
Oh
that
[
c
](A09274-e16130-b)
c
Iob.
23.
3.
4.
●
.
I
knew
where
I
might
find
him
,
that
I
might
come
euen
to
his
face
,
I
would
order
my
cause
before
him
,
and
fill
my
mouth
with
arguments
.
I
would
know
the
words
which
he
would
answere
mee
,
and
vnderstand
what
he
would
say
vnto
me
.
Speakes
the
man
reason
?
or
is
he
beside
himselfe
?
what
?
challenge
God
to
dispute
with
him
,
and
hope
to
make
his
party
good
in
the
quarrell
?
This
was
Iobs
infirmity
;
It
s
our
Aduersaries
arrogancy
,
who
dare
set
their
foot
against
Gods
;
and
bid
him
pry
as
narrowly
as
hee
list
into
their
good
workes
:
they
will
maintaine
the
righteousnesse
thereof
against
all
that
he
can
obiect
to
proue
the
least
sin●ulnesse
.
Iob
saw
his
folly
:
God
grant
that
these
may
theirs
.
In
a
calmer
temper
,
when
conscience
was
not
ouerclouded
with
griefe
and
anger
:
he
reades
vs
a
quite
contrary
lesson
.
In
the
9
Chapter
of
his
booke
.
How
should
man
be
iust
with
God
?
if
he
contend
with
him
he
cannot
answer
him
one
of
a
thousand
,
v.
2.
3.
And
againe
,
hauing
reasoned
&
questioned
of
Gods
wisdome
&
power
,
not
to
be
questioned
or
resisted
by
any
.
How
much
lesse
shall
I
answere
him
(
saith
he
)
&
chuse
out
my
words
to
reason
with
him
?
whom
though
I
were
righteous
,
yet
would
I
not
answer
:
but
I
would
make
supplication
to
my
iudge
,
v.
14.
15.
Further
,
If
I
would
iustifie
my selfe
mine
own
mouth
will
condemne
me
,
If
I
say
I
am
perfect
,
it
shall
proue
me
peruerse
.
Though
I
were
perfect
yet
would
I
not
know
my
soule
,
I
would
despise
my
life
,
v.
20.
21.
And
once
more
.
If
I
wash
my self
with
snow
water
,
&
make
my
hands
neuer
so
clean
,
yet
that
thou
plunge
me
in
the
ditch
,
&
mine
own
cloathes
shall
abhorre
me
.
For
he
is
not
a
man
as
I
am
that
I
should
answere
him
,
and
we
should
come
together
in
iudgement
,
vers
.
30.
31.
32
See
,
this
holy
Saint
,
who
elsewhere
stands
peremptorily
to
the
defence
of
his
Innocency
and
vprightnesse
against
that
wrongfull
imputation
of
hypocrisie
which
his
friends
charged
him
withall
,
telling
them
that
till
he
die
,
he
wil
not
take
away
his
innocency
from
himselfe
,
nor
his
heart
shall
not
reproue
him
of
his
dayes
:
yet
when
he
sets
himselfe
before
the
Tribunall
of
Gods
Iustice
,
he
dares
not
stand
out
in
his
own
Iustification
,
but
submits
himselfe
to
the
mercy
of
his
Iudge
,
with
humble
supplication
for
his
fauour
.
These
confessions
of
Iob
be
not
complements
out
of
a
fained
and
needlesse
modesty
:
but
the
fruits
of
a
conscience
rightly
informed
and
apprehensiue
of
its
owne
sinfulnesse
,
and
the
seuere
rigour
of
Gods
iudgment
.
The
serious
meditation
of
which
two
particulars
,
we
commend
vnto
our
Aduersaries
,
and
all
other
of
their
humour
;
that
are
apt
to
entertaine
fauourable
and
gentle
opinions
touching
their
sinnes
:
and
withall
to
nourish
high
conceits
of
their
owne
goodnesse
.
Whence
they
grow
by
degrees
to
thinke
,
that
Gods
iudgement
is
like
their
owne
foolish
imaginations
;
and
where
they
out
of
blindnesse
or
selfe-loue
cannot
see
a
fault
:
that
there
God
himselfe
can
finde
none
.
We
hardly
see
beames
in
our
own
eyes
:
are
we
then
so
skilfull
to
spie
the
smallest
moate
?
who
can
vnderstand
his
faults
(
saith
Dauid
)
wilt
thou
answere
him
;
Yes
I
doe
?
A
secret
fault
may
soone
s●●p
it
,
a
deceitfull
heart
may
in
one
circumstance
go
beyond
thy
wit
&
watchfulnesse
.
Here
then
humility
would
doe
well
,
and
prayer
for
thy
ignorances
,
for
thy
secret
sinnes
;
vnknowne
to
thy selfe
as
much
as
others
.
Here
true
modesty
would
haue
her
place
,
that
thou
preferre
Gods
wisedome
and
iudgement
aboue
thine
owne
,
remembring
that
he
iudgeth
not
as
man
iudgeth
:
but
sometimes
otherwise
then
thou
doest
,
accounting
that
abhomination
,
which
in
thine
eyes
is
much
set
by
;
and
alwayes
more
exactly
then
thou
caust
;
seeing
much
euill
in
that
where
thou
seest
little
,
and
some
euill
where
thou
think'st
there
is
none
.
And
therefore
alwayes
speake
vnto
thy selfe
in
those
excellent
words
of
Saint
Iohn
▪
If
my
heart
condemne
(
as
in
many
things
it
doth
)
God
is
greater
then
my
heart
,
and
knoweth
all
things
.
1
Iohn
3.
20.
God
forbid
then
that
in
any
thing
I
should
presume
to
pleade
with
him
in
my
Iustification
.
He
is
wise
in
heart
,
and
mighty
in
strength
;
who
hath
hardened
himselfe
against
him
and
hath
prospered
,
Iob.
9.
2.
Thus
much
touching
our
first
Argument
,
for
the
inward
witnesse
of
the
conscience
.
Which
in
the
most
innocent
life
,
often
in
the
most
holy
worke
,
drawes
backe
from
Gods
Iudgement
seat
,
and
is
afraid
to
put
it selfe
vpon
the
tryall
of
his
seuere
Iustice
.
Wee
haue
the
Scriptures
to
witnesse
vnto
vs
the
same
Truth
.
Psa.
143.
●
.
2.
[
Heare
my
prayer
O
Lord
giue
ear●
vnto
my
supplication
:
in
thy
faithfulnesse
answere
mee
and
in
thy
righteousnesse
.
]
Here
the
prophet
seemes
to
appeale
to
the
Iustice
of
God
requiring
his
helpe
vpon
such
tearmes
,
as
if
God
out
of
pure
Iustice
could
not
haue
denyed
him
.
But
t
is
nothing
so
.
T
is
the
mercy
of
God
the
holy
Prophet
sues
vnto
.
Answere
me
in
thy
faithfulnesse
and
Righteousnes
,
that
is
,
in
those
gratious
promises
,
wherin
thou
hast
made
mee
to
trust
,
where
vpon
I
doe
rely
.
Thou
art
iust
and
faithfull
:
in
keeping
promise
,
be
so
to
me
in
my
distresse
,
who
according
to
thy
promise
seeke
vnto
thee
for
succour
.
Vnto
this
Righteousnesse
of
God
Dauid
presents
himselfe
,
and
his
supplications
;
but
before
that
strict
&
severe
Iustice
of
God
he
dares
not
stand
,
but
in
all
submissiuenesse
prayes
in
the
next
words
.
[
And
enter
not
into
Iudgement
with
thy
seruant
.
]
He
craues
mercifull
audience
of
his
prayers
:
but
deprecates
the
strict
examination
of
his
Life
and
doings
.
He
knew
well
that
if
God
should
deale
with
him
vpon
so
hard
Termes
;
his
owne
Innocency
could
neuer
haue
made
his
prayers
exceptable
(
For
(
saith
he
)
in
this
shall
no
Man
liuing
be
Iustified
)
.
The
force
of
this
place
[
a
](A09274-e16360-b)
a
Lib.
1.
cap.
20.
Bell.
seekes
to
decline
by
three
poore
miserable
shifts
.
That
Dauid
would
not
haue
God
enter
into
Iudgement
with
him
to
iudge
him
(
seili●et
)
according
to
such
things
as
he
had
of
himselfe
:
Iudge
mee
not
according
to
that
righteousnesse
which
I
haue
by
Nature
:
but
according
to
that
righteousnesse
which
thou
hast
giuen
by
thy
Grace
.
)
Which
interpretation
how
ridiculous
a
phantasy
it
is
,
and
quite
besides
the
meaning
of
the
Prophet
,
t
is
easy
for
any
one
to
Iudge
by
reading
of
that
Psalme
.
Bell.
therefore
hath
another
string
to
his
Bow
:
but
as
rotten
as
the
Former
.
2
That
the
place
is
meant
of
veniall
Sinnes
without
which
a
Man
cannot
liue
,
and
though
they
be
small
faults
:
yet
would
it
be
no
Iustice
in
God
to
punish
them
.
So
that
the
meaning
is
,
[
Lord
enter
not
into
Iudgement
,
]
that
is
,
Lord
I
will
not
contend
with
thee
I
confesse
my selfe
a
sinner
and
craue
pardon
,
Diuers
small
faults
I
haue
committed
not
against
the
Law
:
but
besides
the
Law
,
and
thou
mayest
easily
pardon
them
.
My
case
is
not
singular
.
I
doe
therein
,
but
as
other
Men
doe
,
amongst
whome
,
there
is
none
so
iust
but
some
time
failes
and
offends
.
And
therefore
doe
not
lay
such
faults
to
my
charge
.
Men
of
corrupt
conscience
that
thus
sport
with
Sinne
and
play
with
the
Scriptures
.
The
Iesuite
must
bring
vs
better
proofes
,
then
he
doth
,
else
wee
shall
neuer
beleeue
that
Dauid
was
a
Man
of
Bellarmine
his
mind
touching
Veniall
Sins
.
That
doctrine
is
part
of
the
dregs
of
corrupted
Nature
,
maynatined
by
Popish
Moabites
,
who
are
setled
on
thier
Lees
,
infatuated
by
the
Loue
of
Sin
,
and
flattering
themselues
in
that
wickednesse
as
little
&
light
which
God
accounteth
worthy
to
be
ha●ed
.
wee
acknowledge
no
Veniall
Sinnes
:
but
such
as
deserue
eternall
death
,
which
hereafter
we
shall
make
good
.
And
therefore
if
Dauid
would
not
that
God
should
enter
into
iudgement
with
him
,
because
of
veniall
sinnes
that
accompany
his
holiest
practises
,
t
is
in
effect
,
that
which
we
say
;
the
difference
is
onely
in
an
Epithete
.
We
say
Dauid
prayed
not
to
come
into
iudgement
,
because
[
his
best
workes
were
sinfull
:
]
and
Bellarmine
addes
,
Because
venially
,
or
,
pardonably
sinnefull
.
Which
aduantageth
him
not
a
jot
.
For
let
him
mince
it
,
how
him
l●st●tis
manifest
,
that
these
were
such
sinnes
,
as
for
them
Dauid
durst
not
venter
his
best
workes
to
come
vnto
the
Barre
of
Gods
seuere
Iudgement
.
There
is
yet
another
deuise
.
That
thirdly
Dauid
speakes
by
comparison
.
(
viz.
)
That
that
though
the
Righteousnesse
of
his
workes
were
true
,
being
absolutely
considered
:
yet
being
compared
with
Gods
Righteousnesse
,
it
seemed
to
be
vnrighteousnesse
.
As
a
candle
set
in
the
Sunne
,
seemes
to
haue
no
light
:
and
a
little
light
compared
to
a
greater
,
seemes
darkenesse
.
Whereto
we
answere
that
Dauid
here
makes
a
confession
of
his
owne
sinfulnesse
;
not
a
comparison
of
his
owne
righteousnesse
,
with
the
righteousnesse
of
God
.
He
desires
that
God
will
not
enter
into
iudgement
with
him
;
not
because
he
had
not
so
much
righteousnesse
as
God
,
in
comparison
of
whom
it
seemed
little
or
nothing
:
but
because
he
was
sinnefull
,
and
had
not
so
much
Righteousnesse
as
he
should
.
Man
may
haue
a
Righteousnesse
of
his
owne
;
infinite
degrees
,
below
the
Righteousnesse
of
God
,
which
yet
may
passe
the
Tryall
of
Gods
Iudgement
without
all
reproofe
.
As
is
manifest
in
the
Righteousnesse
of
Adam
and
Christs
Humanity
:
both
which
,
though
inferiour
to
Gods
Righteousnesse
,
were
yet
able
to
endure
that
strict
examination
.
Wherefore
wee
are
not
accounted
vniust
for
that
imperfection
,
because
we
haue
lesse
Righteousnesse
then
our
Maker
:
but
because
wee
haue
not
so
much
as
we
ought
to
haue
,
according
to
the
capacity
of
our
Nature
wherein
hee
made
vs
.
But
of
this
more
hereafter
.
Let
this
serue
for
the
clearing
of
this
first
place
of
Scripture
,
and
the
exceptions
against
it
.
The
second
place
of
Scripture
,
is
that
,
Isa.
64.
6.
But
wee
are
all
as
an
vncleane
thing
,
and
all
our
righteousnesse
is
as
filthy
ragges
,
and
we
all
doe
fade
as
a
leafe
,
and
our
iniquities
like
the
winde
haue
taken
vs
away
.
This
is
the
confession
of
the
Church
of
God
,
submitting
herselfe
to
him
in
the
acknowledgement
of
her
sinnes
,
and
the
iustnesse
of
his
anger
against
her
.
The
confession
is
euery
way
generall
:
both
for
Persons
,
not
one
excluded
;
We
all
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
are
as
an
vncleane
thing
,
and
likewise
for
workes
,
none
are
excused
from
faultinesse
.
All
our
Righteousnesse
(
nay
in
the
plurall
)
all
our
righteousnes
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
are
as
filthy
ragges
.
Hence
they
acknowledge
that
God
is
iustly
angry
with
them
,
and
that
in
his
righteous
displeasure
,
they
are
afflicted
,
consumed
and
brought
into
great
aduersity
,
the
glory
of
the
Church
,
and
state
decaying
more
and
more
,
like
a
fading
leafe
that
fall●
from
the
tree
,
and
is
driuen
away
with
the
winde
;
And
wee
all
doe
fade
as
a
leafe
,
and
our
iniquities
like
the
winde
haue
taken
vs
away
.
Against
this
plaine
acknowledgement
of
mans
sinfulnesse
in
all
his
most
righteous
workes
,
the
Iesuites
except
diuers
wayes
.
1
That
the
Prophet
speakes
here
in
the
person
,
not
of
the
godly
:
but
of
wicked
,
who
make
here
this
confession
of
their
sinnes
.
And
how
proued
they
this
?
Thus.
The
Text
saith
.
Behold
thou
art
wrath
,
for
wee
haue
sinned
.
Now
God
is
not
angry
with
the
godly
:
but
with
the
wicked
.
Againe
,
the
Text
saith
,
There
is
none
that
calleth
vpon
thy
name
.
That
is
,
None
of
the
wicked
persons
,
for
the
godly
doe
call
on
Gods
Name
.
This
exception
is
manifestly
refuted
by
the
whole
order
of
the
Text
,
whereby
it
is
apparent
to
any
that
hath
but
halfe
an
eye
,
that
this
Recognition
of
Sinne
,
and
prayer
for
mercy
beginning
at
the
15
verse
of
the
63.
chapter
,
to
the
end
of
the
64
chapter
,
is
made
by
the
whole
Church
,
and
all
the
faithfull
therein
,
confessing
their
owne
faults
,
as
well
as
others
,
and
suing
for
reliefe
,
not
onely
in
behalfe
of
others
,
but
of
themselues
too
.
His
reasons
are
worth
nothing
.
God
is
not
angry
with
the
godly
,
saith
Bellarmine
.
No
?
Then
Peter
is
in
an
errour
,
who
saith
,
1
Pet.
4.
17.
18.
The
time
is
come
that
iudgement
must
begin
at
the
house
of
God
;
and
if
it
begin
at
vs
,
what
shall
the
end
of
them
be
that
obey
not
the
Gospell
of
God
;
And
if
the
righteous
be
scarsly
saued
;
where
shall
the
vngodly
and
sinner
appeare
?
Here
's
Iudgement
on
Gods
house
,
that
is
,
on
the
righteous
,
that
obey
the
Gospell
,
as
well
as
on
the
vngodly
that
obey
it
not
.
And
so
t
is
,
when
the
godly
sinne
,
they
smart
for
it
,
in
priuate
afflictions
,
in
publique
calamities
,
both
wayes
they
finde
God
is
not
well
pleased
with
their
ill
doings
.
When
a
Church
and
a
State
is
ruinated
,
may
not
the
most
righteous
take
vp
this
confession
.
Lord
thou
art
angry
for
we
haue
sinned
Euen
we
by
our
sinnes
haue
hastened
and
increased
the
publique
miseries
?
I
trow
,
none
will
deny
it
.
Againe
,
the
Text
speakes
of
those
that
doe
not
call
vpon
Gods
Name
.
But
the
godly
call
vpon
it
,
Ergo.
t
is
not
meant
of
them
.
True
,
they
doe
call
vpon
Gods
Name
:
but
is
this
done
alwayes
with
that
diligence
,
with
that
zeale
which
God
requires
?
How
comes
it
to
passe
then
,
that
the
godliest
men
are
many
times
secure
,
slothfull
,
cold
and
carelesse
in
the
duties
of
Gods
most
holy
worship
?
Yea
,
in
the
corrupt
and
declining
times
of
the
Church
this
happily
is
their
fault
chiefly
,
who
themselues
begin
to
freeze
in
so
generall
a
coldnesse
of
the
season
,
loosing
much
of
that
seruency
of
Spirit
which
the
Apostle
requires
of
vs
,
as
at
all
times
:
so
then
especially
,
when
it
should
reuiue
and
put
heat
into
others
,
when
their
loue
of
Religion
begins
to
waxe
cold
.
At
such
times
zeale
in
Gods
seruice
,
vehemency
in
prayer
,
constancy
in
all
Relious
exercises
,
resolute
,
but
discreet
forwardnesse
in
the
holy
profession
of
Religion
is
most
commendable
.
But
yet
it
so
comes
to
passe
,
that
euen
then
much
security
and
slackenesse
ouercomes
the
godly
,
and
whilest
they
should
be
a
meanes
to
preuent
a
mischiefe
,
they
hasten
it
vpon
themselues
and
others
.
And
thus
the
Iewish
Church
here
in
this
place
confesseth
,
that
there
were
none
that
called
on
the
name
of
the
Lord
,
a
carelesse
negligence
,
and
slacknesse
in
the
Seruice
of
God
,
was
come
vpon
them
,
so
that
as
it
is
in
the
next
words
,
[
there
was
none
that
stirreth
vp
himselfe
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
take
hold
of
God
.
]
None
awaked
and
rouzed
vp
himselfe
with
diligent
endeauour
to
apply
himselfe
to
the
worship
of
God
,
A
fault
wherewith
God
may
iustly
be
angry
:
as
hee
then
was
.
This
first
exception
then
is
friuolous
.
Others
there
bee
as
idle
.
2
That
by
(
all
)
in
this
place
is
to
be
meant
the
greatest
part
;
not
all
the
Iewes
,
nor
all
their
works
were
sinfull
;
but
the
greatest
part
.
For
so
the
word
[
All
]
is
taken
in
some
places
of
Scripture
:
and
therefore
the
Iesuits
thinke
,
it
must
needs
be
taken
so
here
.
3
That
if
it
be
meant
of
(
all
)
simply
:
yet
t
is
not
to
bee
vnderstood
at
all
Times
.
All
the
People
and
their
workes
were
nought
and
sinnefull
,
when
they
were
to
be
caried
away
Captiue
:
but
it
followes
not
,
that
they
were
so
at
other
times
.
4
This
must
be
restrained
to
the
righteousnesse
which
consistes
in
Obedience
to
the
Ceremoniall
Law
.
[
All
our
Righteousnesse
]
that
is
,
all
our
Ceremoniall
workes
in
Sacrifices
,
Obseruations
of
Sabboaths
,
New-moones
,
Fasts
and
such
like
,
[
are
as
filthy
clouts
]
being
done
in
that
manner
as
wee
doe
them
(
viz
)
without
Faith
and
Obedience
.
To
these
we
say
.
That
there
would
neuer
be
an
end
,
were
a
Man
bound
punctually
to
refute
euery
Cauill
,
which
an
Aduersary
may
frame
out
of
his
fancy-full
imagination
,
and
froward
heart
.
We
owe
the
Romanists
no
such
credit
:
as
to
assent
to
any
point
of
Religion
vpon
their
bare
affirmation
.
We
can
as
confidently
deny
such
Exceptions
as
these
,
without
yeelding
them
a
refutation
:
as
they
doe
boldly
make
them
without
bringing
any
proofe
.
And
certainely
most
vaine
and
vngodly
is
that
course
which
our
Aduersaries
or
any
that
tread
in
there
steps
doe
hold
in
their
Disputations
,
about
serious
points
of
Christian
Doctrine
:
when
being
vrged
with
conuincing
Scriptures
,
they
thinke
they
haue
done
the
part
of
Schollers
,
and
satisfied
the
Consciences
of
others
desirous
of
Truth
,
if
they
can
amuse
and
stonny
you
a
little
with
two
or
three
Interpretations
and
prety
exceptions
,
and
so
leaue
you
to
chuse
which
you
list
.
They
will
not
tell
you
which
they
will
stand
to
:
but
euen
when
there
answers
crosse
one
another
,
yet
all
shall
downe
,
that
if
one
helpe
not
,
another
may
,
and
altogether
may
vexe
you
,
when
they
cannot
satisfie
you
.
This
quarrelsome
humour
of
men
,
who
seeke
not
the
truth
in
loue
:
but
write
to
maintaine
,
to
dispute
,
is
not
the
least
vexation
of
the
spirit
,
and
wearinesse
to
the
flesh
of
man
;
as
all
those
will
witnesse
,
whose
much
reading
hath
led
them
along
into
the
perplexed
mazes
of
Schoole-learning
,
whether
Diuine
or
humane
.
The
third
place
of
Scripture
is
,
Psal
130.
3.
If
thou
,
Lord
shouldest
marke
iniquities
,
O
Lord
who
shall
stand
?
This
place
is
parallell
to
the
former
,
wherein
the
holy
Prophet
desires
God
to
be
attentiue
to
the
voice
of
his
supplications
,
craues
this
audience
meerely
of
Gods
fauour
;
not
vpon
any
righteousnes
or
worth
of
his
own
.
As
for
that
he
confesseth
.
That
if
God
should
be
strict
to
obserue
wherein
hee
and
all
men
doe
amisse
:
neither
himselfe
,
nor
any
other
could
be
able
to
stand
in
his
presence
.
Whence
he
flies
from
his
Iustice
vnto
his
mercy
.
But
there
is
forgiuenesse
with
thee
that
thou
mayest
be
feared
.
verse
4.
Presumption
then
it
is
,
and
arrogant
pride
for
any
Romanist
to
say
.
Lord
if
thou
doe
obserue
Iniquities
:
yet
I
shall
be
able
to
stand
.
In
such
and
such
good
workes
,
be
extreame
to
marke
what
is
done
amisse
;
I
feare
not
the
tryall
,
nor
will
sue
to
thy
mercy
.
From
Scriptures
we
come
to
Reason
.
Which
is
thus
.
Wheresoeuer
there
is
concupiscence
and
inordinate
motions
of
the
heart
;
wheresoeuer
there
's
a
defect
of
Charity
towards
God
and
Man
;
Wheresoeuer
veniall
sinnes
(
as
our
Aduersaries
cals
them
)
are
mingled
with
good
works
:
there
the
best
workes
of
men
are
not
free
from
some
corruptions
and
sinfulnesse
.
But
in
a
man
Regenerate
there
is
concupiscence
and
euill
motions
of
the
heart
present
with
him
,
when
hee
would
doe
good
;
there
is
a
want
of
that
measure
of
loue
to
God
and
Charity
to
Man
,
which
he
might
and
ought
to
haue
,
there
also
are
besides
many
veniall
faults
that
accompany
his
best
workes
.
Ergo
,
the
works
of
a
Man
Regenerate
are
not
euery
way
good
:
but
in
part
sinfull
.
The
Minor
is
cleere
and
confessed
by
our
Aduersaries
:
especially
for
the
two
former
circumstances
of
concupis●●●ce
,
and
imperfection
of
Charity
:
and
for
veniall
sinnes
,
they
also
acknowledge
it
a
very
hard
matter
to
〈…〉
in
any
good
worke
.
Wherefore
they
are
[
a
](A09274-e17540-b)
a
Bill
▪
lib.
〈◊〉
.
17.
driuen
in
a
desperate
manner
to
deny
the
Maior
and
to
auouch
.
That
neither
concupiscence
nor
imperfection
of
Charity
to
God
or
our
Neighbour
;
nor
yet
veniall
sinnes
mingled
with
good
workes
,
doe
at
all
impaire
the
goodnesse
and
perfect
righteousnesse
o●
our
obedience
to
the
Law
;
but
that
they
are
as
good
with
those
infirmities
,
as
without
them
.
Bad
causes
must
be
helpt
out
,
by
bold
and
desperate
attempts
;
and
so
it
●ares
with
our
Aduersaries
in
this
point
.
They
will
vtterly
deny
that
there
is
any
thing
euill
in
a
man
Regenerate
:
rather
then
be
forced
to
confesse
there
is
any
thing
euill
in
the
workes
,
that
he
performes
.
The
impudent
vnreasonablenesse
of
this
their
Assertion
,
we
shall
shortly
speake
of
.
In
the
meane
we
goe
on
vnto
the
consideration
of
such
Arguments
,
which
are
brought
by
our
Aduersaries
,
to
proue
.
That
the
good
workes
of
men
Regenerate
,
are
truely
and
perfectly
good
,
without
all
faultinesse
in
them
.
They
proue
it
then
.
1
From
the
examples
of
Iob
and
Dauid
.
Hereto
we
answere
.
That
we
doe
not
lay
sinne
vnto
the
charge
of
those
holy
men
:
nor
doe
we
say
they
did
ill
▪
where
the
Scriptures
witnesse
they
did
well
.
Iob
in
that
first
Act
of
his
tryall
quitted
himselfe
well
,
and
ouercame
the
Temptation
.
He
sinned
not
as
afterwards
he
did
,
breaking
forth
into
impatiency
:
and
that
is
all
the
Scripture
meant
by
that
speech
;
In
all
this
Iob
sinned
not
.
But
whether
Iobs
patience
were
in
this
first
conflict
euery
way
so
vnreproueable
,
that
not
the
least
fault
could
be
spied
in
it
,
in
Gods
seuere
Iudgement
,
is
more
then
we
dare
affirme
,
or
our
Aduersaries
will
euer
be
able
to
proue
.
For
Dauid
;
his
innocent
demeanor
of
himselfe
,
in
the
time
of
Sauls
raigne
was
such
:
that
no
Imputation
of
vnfaithfulnesse
or
ambition
could
iustly
bee
layed
to
his
charge
.
Wherefore
when
Sauls
followers
accuse
him
of
treason
against
their
Master
:
Dauid
appeales
vnto
God
desiring
him
to
deale
with
him
according
to
his
Innocency
in
that
behalfe
.
His
owne
conscience
,
and
God
with
his
conscience
,
after
tryall
made
,
acquit
him
from
plotting
and
practising
against
Saul
,
as
his
Aduersaries
said
hee
did
.
Thence
it
followes
that
Dauid
did
not
offend
in
that
kind
whereof
his
Aduersaries
accused
him
.
His
heart
was
vpright
;
his
life
was
innocent
;
neither
his
Aduersares
could
make
proofe
,
neither
did
his
conscience
accuse
him
,
or
God
condemne
him
of
these
faults
,
that
he
was
charged
withall
.
Thus
farre
Dauid
durst
stand
to
Gods
Iudgement
;
that
hee
was
innocent
in
those
particular
euils
,
whereof
man
had
accused
him
:
but
it
followes
not
therefore
hee
durst
enter
into
iudgement
with
God
;
and
plead
,
that
God
himselfe
could
find
no
fault
at
all
with
him
.
Hee
might
haue
many
secret
faults
and
imperfections
euen
in
this
most
innocent
passage
of
his
life
;
which
neither
himselfe
knew
,
nor
his
enemies
could
come
to
the
knowledge
of
:
and
therefore
though
he
dare
pleade
his
righteousnesse
before
God
,
so
farre
as
man
can
accuse
him
of
vnrighteousnesse
,
yet
he
dare
not
goe
further
to
cleare
himselfe
against
all
that
God
may
obiect
against
him
.
Heare
what
himselfe
saith
in
this
case
,
Psal.
139.
23.
24.
Search
me
,
O
God
and
know
my
heart
,
try
me
and
know
my
thoughts
.
Speakes
the
Prophet
this
out
of
confidence
,
that
God
vpon
search
and
tryall
,
shall
finde
no
euill
in
his
heart
and
thoughts
?
No
,
but
out
of
holy
desire
,
that
whatsoeuer
euill
is
found
in
him
may
bee
amended
.
Hee
knowes
well
that
many
things
may
be
found
faulty
in
him
:
and
therefore
he
stands
not
to
iustifie
himselfe
:
but
only
sues
for
grace
to
redresse
them
;
adding
in
the
next
words
.
And
see
if
there
be
any
wicked
way
in
mee
;
and
lead
mee
in
the
way
euerlasting
.
2
They
proue
that
the
workes
of
Men
regenerate
are
not
Sinnefull
by
the
Scriptures
which
call
them
good
workes
and
say
that
they
are
pleasing
vnto
God
.
1.
That
they
are
good
.
[
Let
your
light
so
shine
before
Men
that
they
may
see
your
good
worke
:
]
Matth:
5.
16.
(
Charge
the
rich
that
they
doe
good
and
bee
rich
in
good
workes
.
)
1
Tim.
6.
18.
[
wee
are
his
workemanshippe
created
in
Christ
vnto
good
workes
]
Eph.
2.
10.
[
why
trouble
yee
the
woman
;
for
shee
hath
wrought
a
good
worke
vpon
mee
.
]
Mat
▪
26.
10.
2.
That
they
are
also
pleasing
vnto
God
is
apparant
by
these
places
.
Ye
are
made
(
an
holy
●riesthood
to
offer
vp
spirituall
sacrifices
,
acceptable
to
God
by
Iesus
Christ
)
1
Peter
2.
5.
In
the
Epistle
to
the
Philippians
,
the
Apostle
calleth
their
almes
seat
vnto
him
(
An
odor
of
a
sweet
smell
,
a
sacrifice
acceptable
well
pleasing
vnto
God
)
Philip
4.
18.
Againe
.
(
To
doe
good
and
to
communicate
forget
not
,
for
with
such
sacrifices
God
is
well
pleased
)
Heb.
13.
16.
Hence
th●y
argue
.
If
the
workes
of
Men
regenerate
bee
good
and
acceptable
vnto
God
:
then
certainely
the
Protestants
erre
in
their
Doctrine
,
teaching
that
the
best
workes
of
Men
are
sinnefull
,
for
as
much
as
Sinne
is
neither
good
in
it selfe
nor
any
way
pleasing
vnto
God
.
Who
is
infinitely
,
offended
at
all
iniquity
.
Hereunto
we
answere
.
That
this
Argument
is
nothing
,
but
a
forward
and
wilfull
mistake
of
our
doctrine
.
Wee
teach
,
that
the
best
workes
of
the
best
men
are
in
part
sinnefull
.
They
thereupon
cry
out
that
wee
take
away
all
goodnesse
from
the
workes
of
the
godly
,
and
that
wee
account
them
to
be
[
in
se.
[
a
](A09274-e17900-b)
a
〈…〉
3.
c.
14.
§.
●
.
i.
e.
Ex
natura
sua
]
damnable
and
mortall
sinnes
.
This
is
a
foolish
calumny
of
Men
that
cannot
distinguish
,
betweene
the
disease
and
the
diseased
Body
:
but
straightway
conclude
that
the
whole
body
it selfe
is
nothing
else
,
but
a
meere
rotten
vlcer
,
because
it
hath
swellings
and
sores
in
some
parts
of
it
.
Wherefore
to
vnfold
their
eyes
in
his
point
,
they
are
to
vnderstand
that
wee
make
a
necessary
&
true
distinction
between
That
which
is
sinne
and
that
which
is
sinnefull
:
teaching
that
the
good
workes
of
the
Regenerate
be
not
sinnes
,
though
they
be
sinfull
.
Wee
explaine
it
thus
.
That
is
to
be
called
Sinne
in
its
owne
Nature
,
which
is
the
transgression
of
the
Law
in
doing
any
act
forbidden
;
or
in
leauing
vndone
any
act
commanded
by
the
Law
.
The
omitting
,
or
committing
of
any
such
act
is
properly
[
[
b
](A09274-e17950-b)
b
Bell
lib.
4.
c.
77.
erres
in
saying
.
[
Opera
b●na●x
gen●●e
●ue
ex
obiecto
,
sed
〈◊〉
circumsta●●●
〈…〉
And
it
is
false
which
he
addes
that
God
doth
simply
condemne
(
facto
)
almes-deeds
,
&c
done
with
a●●d
intention
for
vaine
glory
,
&c.
God
doth
not
simply
condemne
the
the
wo●●●
b●●
them
for
their
ill
doing
of
it
.
in
se
&
ex
Naturâ
suâ
]
a
sinne
.
Because
it
is
directly
and
totally
in
the
very
substance
of
it
against
the
Law
.
As
to
pray
to
a
false
God
,
or
neglect
prayer
to
the
true
God
,
are
both
of
them
sinnes
in
their
very
proper
Natures
:
because
both
are
forbidden
by
the
morall
law
.
That
wee
call
sinnefull
,
which
is
for
the
maine
substance
of
the
worke
conformable
to
the
Law
;
but
it
failes
and
offends
against
the
Law
in
some
circumstances
required
in
the
doing
of
it
,
when
the
thing
is
done
which
the
Law
commands
,
but
no●
perfectly
in
euery
point
as
the
Law
commands
it
:
such
a
worke
,
we
say
,
is
not
a
sinne
,
though
it
be
sinnefull
;
there
is
sinne
in
it
,
but
it
is
not
all
sinne
.
This
distinction
our
Aduersaries
cannot
but
admit
of
,
as
in
the
workes
of
the
Heathen
and
Christians
vnregerate
:
so
in
the
good
workes
of
the
Regenerate
themse●ues
.
Wee
and
they
confesse
that
the
morall
Vertues
of
the
Heathen
were
good
and
commendable
in
the
substance
thereof
:
nor
doe
we
thinke
there
is
any
men
so
deuoide
of
reason
,
as
to
affirme
that
the
Iustice
,
Temperance
,
Chastity
,
Liberality
of
a
Heathen
,
are
meere
vices
&
sinnes
.
We
all
grant
,
they
were
vertues
:
but
yet
our
Aduersaries
themselues
cannot
affirme
,
that
they
were
euery
way
vertuous
,
free
from
all
spots
and
staines
of
[
b
](A09274-e18120-b)
b
Su●t
Vitata
〈…〉
.
Vice
;
seeing
they
had
neither
faith
&
sanctity
from
whence
they
sprung
;
nor
the
glory
of
God
,
at
which
they
aimed
.
Now
as
the
vertues
of
the
naturall
man
,
are
in
part
vitious
:
so
the
good
workes
of
the
Regenerate
are
in
part
sinnefull
.
To
fast
,
to
pray
,
to
giue
almes
,
with
the
like
workes
of
Piety
or
Mercy
,
we
affirme
and
teach
that
they
are
good
workes
,
good
in
their
nature
and
vse
:
being
such
actions
as
the
Law
commands
.
We
know
none
of
our
side
so
farre
gone
with
passion
,
as
to
maintaine
that
a
godly
man
sinnes
,
because
hee
fasts
,
prayes
,
and
giues
almes
;
as
if
those
very
acts
were
nothing
but
damnable
sinne
.
We
detest
such
franticke
opinions
;
and
if
any
of
our
Writers
haue
let
slip
such
words
,
as
may
giue
occasion
to
our
Aduersaries
,
so
to
thinke
of
vs
:
we
doe
not
,
nor
are
we
bound
to
iustifie
euery
hot
and
cholericke
speech
,
breathed
out
in
eagernesse
of
disputation
.
Good
workes
they
be
,
truly
and
verily
good
:
but
they
are
not
perfectly
good
.
When
a
godly
man
prayes
he
doth
well
:
but
he
neuer
doth
so
well
;
but
he
may
doe
better
.
Nor
dare
any
man
in
the
world
auouch
,
that
either
the
roote
whence
good
actions
come
,
is
purged
by
perfect
Holinesse
:
or
the
manner
of
doing
them
,
is
so
exactly
kept
in
a
precise
obseruation
of
euery
circumstance
,
or
the
end
in
doing
them
Gods
glory
,
and
Mans
good
,
so
syncerely
and
truely
aimed
at
:
that
the
seuerity
of
Gods
Iustice
,
cannot
finde
any
the
least
failing
in
any
of
those
things
.
This
is
all
we
teach
touching
the
sinfulnesse
of
good
workes
,
and
thus
we
stand
too
:
as
a
most
certaine
truth
.
And
we
say
.
That
this
sinnefulnesse
accompanying
our
good
workes
,
is
sufficient
to
barre
vs
from
Iustification
by
them
.
For
we
deserue
not
reward
for
what
is
well
done
,
except
all
were
well
done
.
But
neuerthelesse
it
shall
not
hinder
Gods
gracious
acceptation
of
our
good
workes
,
who
is
well
pleased
with
the
obedience
of
his
children
so
farre
as
it
is
good
and
holy
:
and
when
it
failes
,
for
Christs
sake
he
mercifully
pardoneth
their
Trespasses
.
Thus
much
of
the
second
Argument
.
The
third
is
from
reason
grounded
on
Scriptures
.
3
Where
there
are
(
sufficientia
principia
rectae
operationis
)
sufficient
causes
and
meanes
of
well-doing
:
there
a
good
worke
may
be
done
without
all
fault
.
—
But
in
a
man
Regenerate
,
there
are
causes
and
meanes
sufficient
for
well-doing
—
Ergo
,
He
may
doe
well
,
and
not
offend
.
They
proue
the
Minor
thus
.
To
the
performance
of
any
good
worke
,
there
is
required
nothing
,
but
these
things
,
Knowledge
of
what
is
to
be
done
,
will
and
power
to
do
it
—
But
now
a
Regenerate
man
hath
all
these
.
For
first
,
his
vnderstanding
is
enlightned
,
so
that
hee
can
easily
know
what
is
good
to
be
done
.
Secondly
,
his
will
and
affections
are
sanctified
and
aided
by
grace
,
to
desire
and
endeauour
the
performance
of
it
.
And
thirdly
,
and
lastly
,
hee
hath
power
to
put
in
practise
what
he
knowes
and
desires
,
there
being
no
impediment
inward
,
or
outward
that
should
hinder
him
—
Ergo
,
he
may
doe
well
and
sinne
not
.
Here
we
desire
them
to
shew
vs
.
How
a
man
Regenerate
is
enduded
with
such
perfect
abilities
,
as
may
helpe
him
:
and
quite
rid
him
of
all
such
impediments
,
as
might
hinder
hi●
in
well
doing
.
This
(
they
say
)
is
done
by
the
grace
of
Sanctification
,
giuen
vnto
a
Regenerate
man
,
whereby
hee
is
freed
from
all
contagion
of
sinne
:
and
such
incombrances
,
as
hinder
him
in
well-doing
.
For
by
this
grace
giuen
to
him
,
hee
is
made
a
good
tree
:
now
[
A
good
tree
cannot
bring
foorth
●ad
fruit
,
Matth
7.
18.
—
And
ergo
,
a
good
man
cannot
doe
bad
workes
.
〈…〉
made
a
fruitfull
Branch
of
Christ
the
true
Vine
,
as
it
is
Iohn
15.
5.
I
am
the
Vine
,
yea
are
the
branches
,
he
that
abideth
in
me
,
and
I
in
him
,
the
〈◊〉
beareth
much
fruit
.
And
Ergo
,
That
fruit
onely
which
is
good
.
Which
Similitude
of
a
Branch
much
illustrates
the
matter
(
in
their
Imagination
.
)
For
as
in
a
Vine-Branch
.
If
first
it
haue
sufficient
moisture
from
the
Body
of
the
Vine
.
Secondly
,
if
it
haue
sufficient
heat
of
the
Sunne
to
digest
that
moysture
.
And
thirdly
,
if
it
be
not
hurt
nor
hindred
by
Frosts
,
Wette
,
Windes
,
Wormes
,
or
other
such
discommodities
of
the
Ayre
and
Soile
;
then
certainely
it
will
be
are
very
much
,
and
very
good
fruit
:
so
is
it
in
a
man
regenerate
.
From
Christ
he
receiues
sufficient
moisture
of
Diuine
Grace
,
which
is
in
him
,
[
as
a
well
of
water
springing
vp
vnto
euerlasting
life
.
Iohn
4.
14.
]
He
hath
heat
sufficient
of
spirituall
affection
,
to
cause
him
to
bud
forth
into
good
workes
.
For
Christ
saith
[
I
am
come
to
send
fire
on
the
earth
,
and
what
will
I
if
it
be
already
kindled
.
Luke
12.
49.
And
[
Did
not
our
hearts
burne
within
vs
]
said
the
two
Disciples
that
went
to
Emaus
,
Luk.
24.
32.
Ergo
,
they
haue
heat
enough
.
Finally
,
they
haue
no
impediment
.
Neither
inward
.
For
why
?
It
is
written
,
Rom.
8.
1.
There
is
no
condemnation
to
them
that
are
in
Christ
Iesus
.
Ergo
,
no
inward
impediment
to
well-doing
.
Nor
outward
.
For
it
written
,
[
nothing
shall
separate
vs
from
the
Loue
of
God
,
that
is
in
Christ
Iesus
our
Lord
,
Rom.
8.
38.
Ergo
,
no
outward
impediment
of
good
workes
.
Hereunto
we
make
answer
.
That
this
Argument
is
a
sophisticall
cauillation
;
which
proues
that
which
we
do
not
deny
.
They
say
that
a
Man
Regenerate
,
hath
sufficientia
principia
rectae
&
honestae
operationis
.
We
say
so
too
;
confessing
that
hee
is
made
a
good
tree
,
a
fruitfull
Branch
;
that
hee
is
enlightened
;
sanctified
,
and
strengthened
by
the
spirit
of
God
vnto
the
performance
of
good
workes
.
We
grant
that
now
he
is
enabled
to
doe
well
,
who
before
his
Regeneration
could
doe
nothing
saue●ll
:
but
the
question
still
remaines
,
whether
now
he
doe
so
well
,
as
that
he
doth
nothing
ill
when
he
doth
best
.
We
grant
that
the
Vine
,
which
in
former
time
yeelded
nothing
,
but
wild
grapes
,
now
being
transplanted
and
grafted
into
the
best
Vine
,
beares
good
grapes
:
but
we
deny
that
they
are
so
weet
and
kindly
in
eu●●
respect
,
as
not
to
haue
a
little
relish
still
of
their
former
wildnesse
and
sowrenesse
.
Wherefore
our
Aduersaries
doe
but
trifle
with
vs
to
tell
vs
that
Men
Regenerate
haue
meanes
sufficient
to
doe
those
workes
that
be
good
:
this
we
deny
not
;
but
we
question
whether
they
haue
helpe
sufficient
to
performe
any
worke
so
absolutely
and
perfectly
good
;
that
God
himselfe
cannot
charge
it
with
any
Sinne
at
all
.
This
we
constantly
deny
.
And
to
their
discourse
,
(
That
a
regenerate
Man
hath
sufficient
Knowledge
,
Power
and
will
to
doe
good
perfectly
)
in
this
they
affirme
more
then
will
euer
bee
proued
.
Our
imperfections
in
euery
one
of
these
three
particulars
witnessed
to
our
Conscience
by
Scripture
and
experience
doth
disable
vs
euer
from
doing
any
worke
entirely
and
totally
good
.
Knowledge
we
haue
:
but
much
darkned
by
ignorance
.
We
haue
a
will
to
doe
good
:
but
that
also
corrupted
with
much
forward
Rebellion
.
A
power
we
haue
to
do
good
:
but
alwayes
crossed
and
much
restrained
by
manyfold
Lusts
within
,
and
Temptations
without
vs
.
How
is
it
possible
for
vs
,
being
compassed
about
with
so
many
infirmities
:
but
wee
should
offend
in
one
thing
or
other
;
Becanus
here
brings
vs
an
instant
of
a
good
worke
:
and
bids
vs
shew
what
sinne
there
is
in
it
.
If
(
sayth
he
)
A
Man
regenerate
read
or
heare
those
words
of
Christ
.
Mat
:
6.
[
giue
almes
]
hee
being
enlightned
knowes
that
this
is
a
worthy
and
honest
worke
.
Wherupon
he
is
touc●ed
in
heart
and
stirred
vp
to
do
it
.
He
consents
to
this
motion
,
and
resols
vpon
the
execution
,
which
(
supposing
that
he
be
rich
)
nothing
now
can
hinder
because
he
is
both
able
and
willing
to
giue
.
Now
then
this
almes
being
thus
giuen
out
of
knowledge
,
and
a
pious
motion
of
the
Heart
tending
to
Gods
honour
and
our
Neighbours
good
,
the
Iesuit
desires
to
knew
of
vs
,
where
their
is
any
Sinne
in
it
.
Wee
say
there
is
some
euill
in
euery
good
worke
and
therefore
hee
would
haue
vs
tell
him
what
euill
there
is
in
this
Almesdeed
.
Vnto
this
we
say
,
that
this
enquiry
of
the
Iesuite
is
the
most
ridiculous
and
absurd
thing
,
that
can
be
.
He
asketh
vs
where
is
the
Sinne
?
what
if
we
answere
him
we
doe
not
know
;
Is
hee
now
euer
the
wiser
?
what
hath
he
gained
hereby
?
Are
other
Mens
worke
without
all
faults
because
we
know
not
what
they
be
?
Nay
,
are
they
without
fault
,
because
themselues
know
not
whether
there
be
any
in
them
:
or
no
?
what
silinesse
were
it
to
argue
in
this
sort
?
Therefore
when
wee
come
to
this
point
strictly
to
examine
the
workes
of
Men.
First
we
tell
the
Iesuite
that
he
must
not
put
Cases
touching
generalities
[
suppose
that
such
a
good
worke
be
done
so
and
so
what
then
]
we
dispute
now
touching
particulars
in
euery
Mans
reall
practice
.
The
enquiry
is
not
for
the
generall
.
(
What
euill
is
there
in
such
and
such
a
good
worke
)
done
thus
and
thus
,
according
as
the
Circumstances
are
framed
in
an
Imagined
Case
.
As
to
aske
what
Sinne
is
their
in
an
Almes-deede
done
out
of
Faith
and
Charity
to
Gods
glory
.
This
is
a
fond
question
thus
framed
vpon
generall
termes
we
say
their
is
no
Sinne
in
it
.
But
the
enquiry
is
in
particular
,
what
Euill
their
is
in
such
a
worke
done
by
this
or
that
,
Man
,
according
to
all
Circumstances
,
that
were
at
that
time
incident
to
the
worke
,
as
.
What
sinne
was
there
in
Zacheus
or
Cornelius
almes-deeds
?
This
question
we
admit
,
and
answere
to
it
,
That
some
Sinne
there
was
for
which
those
holy
Men
,
as
wel
as
others
,
would
not
haue
beene
willing
that
God
should
enter
into
iudgement
with
them
,
strictly
to
iudge
them
.
Yea
,
but
will
the
Iesuits
reply
,
name
what
Sinne
this
was
;
or
else
you
wrong
them
.
Now
this
is
meere
impudency
.
For
who
is
judge
of
their
actions
?
Are
we
?
or
is
it
God
and
their
owne
Consciences
?
we
can
be
no
judges
,
who
at
furthest
can
judge
but
accordrng
to
outward
appearance
.
We
know
not
their
Hearts
:
nor
are
we
priuy
vnto
euery
particular
Circumstance
,
that
did
accompany
those
actions
of
theirs
Circumstances
in
euery
particular
action
differ
infinitely
,
one
Man
may
offend
in
this
point
,
another
in
that
:
nor
haue
we
a
generall
Rule
whereby
to
judge
alike
of
all
.
And
therefore
it
is
a
childish
quaere
to
aske
on
Man
whether
another
Man
offendes
,
who
may
doe
euill
a
1000
times
,
not
only
secret
from
others
,
but
vnwitting
to
himselfe
.
If
then
the
Iesuite
will
haue
an
answere
to
his
question
,
he
must
resort
to
particular
mens
Consciences
,
and
to
God
:
for
only
the
spirit
of
Man
,
and
the
spirit
of
God
know
the
things
of
Man
.
Let
him
aske
a
Cornelius
when
he
giues
almes
,
whether
he
doe
thinke
this
worke
so
well
done
,
that
no
fault
can
bee
found
with
it
.
Doubtlesse
he
will
answere
,
that
he
cannot
excuse
himselfe
from
all
faultinesse
:
though
he
knew
nothing
by
himselfe
,
yet
he
dares
not
stand
to
Gods
judgment
.
His
confession
and
prayer
would
in
this
case
be
the
same
with
Nehemiahs
.
Nehem.
13.
22.
[
Remember
me
O
my
God
concerning
this
also
,
and
spare
mee
according
to
the
greatnesse
of
thy
mercy
.
]
at
once
begging
fauorable
acceptance
of
his
obedience
,
and
gratious
pardon
of
his
infirmities
.
If
this
suffice
not
in
the
next
place
,
the
Iesuite
is
to
repaire
to
God
almighty
and
question
him
,
where
the
Sinnes
in
such
and
such
a
good
workes
,
who
no
doubt
can
shape
him
an
answere
that
will
sore
confound
his
pride
and
folly
,
and
make
it
quickly
appeare
vnto
him
,
that
sinnefull
Man
,
when
he
pleades
with
God
,
is
not
able
to
answere
him
one
obiection
of
a
100
,
that
God
shall
make
against
him
.
This
of
the
third
Argument
.
That
Man
hath
sufficient
meanes
to
doe
well
and
not
Sinne.
The
last
followes
,
drawne
from
such
absurdities
,
as
they
say
doe
follow
vpon
our
Doctrine
.
Thus.
4
If
(
say
they
)
our
Doctrine
be
true
that
the
best
workes
of
Men
be
Sinfull
:
then
these
absurdities
be
likewise
true
doctrine
.
That
to
be
iustified
by
faith
is
to
be
iustified
by
Sin
.
That
no
man
ought
to
beleeue
,
because
the
worke
[
Beleeuing
]
is
Sinne.
That
all
good
works
are
forbidden
,
because
all
Sinne
is
forbidden
.
That
God
should
command
vs
to
commit
Sinne
:
because
he
commands
vs
to
doe
good
workes
.
That
God
bidding
vs
be
zelous
of
go●d
workes
,
should
in
effect
bid
vs
be
zealous
of
mortall
Sinne.
That
to
pray
for
the
pardon
of
Sinne
were
a
damnable
Sinne.
These
and
such
other
absurd
Positions
would
be
true
:
if
the
protestants
doctrine
concerning
the
sinfulnesse
of
good
workes
may
stand
for
good
.
Hereunto
we
answere
.
That
these
absurdities
issue
not
out
of
our
Doctrine
,
but
out
of
our
Aduersaries
malitious
Imaginations
.
Who
like
the
ragine
Sea
casting
vp
mire
and
Dirt
from
its
owne
Bottome
would
faine
throw
all
this
filth
in
the
face
of
the
Reformed
Churches
,
to
make
them
odious
and
hatefull
to
the
world
.
The
best
is
.
Truth
cannot
bee
disgraced
though
it
may
be
belyed
.
These
foule
Absurdities
;
touch
vs
not
:
but
follow
vpon
that
Doctrine
which
is
none
of
ours
.
Namely
,
That
the
good
works
of
the
Regenerate
are
in
their
very
Nature
altogether
sins
,
and
nothing
else
but
sordes
▪
inquinamenta
,
&
merae
iniquitates
.
Such
an
absurd
assertion
would
indeed
yeeld
such
an
absurd
consequence
.
But
we
defended
it
not
:
&
they
abuse
vs
grosly
,
when
in
their
writings
they
report
of
vs
the
contrary
that
we
doe
mainetaine
.
This
onely
we
teach
.
That
mens
good
workes
are
in
part
sinfull
.
Much
good
they
haue
in
them
:
but
with
all
some
euill
mingled
therewith
.
Amongst
the
gold
,
some
drosse
also
will
be
sound
,
that
will
not
be
able
to
abide
the
fire
of
Gods
seuere
Tryall
.
Imperfections
will
appeare
in
our
best
workes
,
so
long
as
humane
infirmity
and
mortality
hangs
vpon
vs
.
This
we
teach
,
and
from
this
Doctrine
all
that
haue
reason
,
may
see
that
no
such
vnreasonable
conclusions
can
be
collected
.
And
let
thus
much
suffice
for
the
clearing
of
this
third
Proposition
,
touching
the
imperfection
of
our
obedience
to
the
Morrall
Law
of
God
,
euen
in
the
good
workes
which
we
performe
.
From
whence
euery
godly
heart
should
le●rne
both
Christian
Humilitie
and
also
Industry
.
First
,
Humility
not
to
boast
in
the
flesh
and
glory
in
its
owne
Righteousnesse
,
thinking
that
God
must
highly
account
off
,
and
reward
largely
,
that
which
is
very
little
worth
.
Secondly
,
Industry
in
a
faithfull
indeauour
after
perfection
.
That
what
cannot
be
done
well
as
it
ought
:
wee
may
yet
euery
day
be
done
better
then
before
it
was
.
CHAP.
IIII.
Three
generall
exceptions
against
the
truthes
deliuered
in
this
third
Section
▪
THus
we
haue
stood
long
in
the
confirmation
of
our
second
Argument
,
touching
the
impossibility
of
Mans
fulfilling
of
the
Law
in
this
Life
,
and
so
consequently
of
iustification
by
the
Law
.
Against
all
that
haue
bin
sayed
for
the
profit
of
this
point
;
our
Aduersaries
haue
three
Common
and
generall
Exceptions
.
Which
are
these
.
-
1
That
Concupiscence
or
Naturall
Corruption
in
the
first
and
second
act
of
it
,
-
2
That
imperfection
in
our
Charity
and
Obedience
is
no
sinne
.
-
3
That
smaller
faults
,
or
(
as
they
tell
them
)
Venia●●
sinnes
,
doe
not
hinder
the
Iustice
and
goodnesse
of
any
good
worke
.
To
these
three
Positions
they
haue
continually
recourse
.
Sinnefu●l
motions
arising
thence
:
they
first
deny
,
that
,
either
these
Naturall
Corruptions
,
or
disordered
Motions
of
the
Heart
be
any
sinnes
.
Againe
,
they
confesse
that
no
man
hath
such
perfect
loue
of
God
and
Man
;
but
that
he
may
increase
in
charity
:
nor
be
his
good
workes
so
perfectly
good
;
but
that
they
ought
still
to
striue
to
doe
them
better
:
but
then
here
also
they
deny
,
that
this
imperfection
of
our
charity
and
good
works
,
is
any
sinne
.
Lastly
,
they
grant
that
no
man
can
auoide
veniall
sinnes
,
scarse
in
the
best
workes
he
doth
:
but
then
they
deny
that
veniall
sinnes
be
contrary
to
the
Law
,
so
that
albeit
a
man
commit
them
,
yet
he
may
perfectly
fulfill
the
Law
of
God
.
I
cannot
stand
largely
in
the
refutation
of
these
foule
errors
.
The
confutation
whereof
belongs
properly
to
the
Article
of
remission
of
sinnes
;
where
the
nature
and
kindes
of
sinnes
are
to
be
handled
.
For
this
present
I
shall
but
touch
on
them
briefly
,
and
proceed
to
the
matter
.
1
For
the
first
;
we
defend
this
conclusion
.
The
vitious
inclination
and
pronnesse
of
Nature
vnto
euill
,
That
the
inclination
and
pronnesse
of
Nature
to
sinne
is
a
sinne
,
we
proue
thus
.
It
is
expresly
so
called
by
the
Apostle
,
Rom.
7.
not
once
nor
twice
:
but
almost
in
euery
verse
of
the
Chapter
.
I
am
carnall
sold
vnder
sinne
.
The
sinne
that
dwelleth
in
me
.
ver.
17.
20.
The
Law
of
sinne
.
verse
23.
25.
In
it selfe
it
is
sinne
,
and
deserues
the
wages
of
sinne
,
eternall
death
.
For
which
cause
the
Apostle
there
cals
it
.
The
body
of
this
death
.
verse
24.
Because
this
inward
Corruption
(
which
is
like
a
Body
that
hath
many
members
consisting
of
diuerse
euill
affections
spreading
themselues
throughout
his
whole
Nature
)
made
him
lyable
to
eternall
death
,
from
which
onely
Gods
mercy
in
Christ
could
deliuer
him
.
2
To
rebell
against
the
Law
is
Sinne.
Ergo
,
To
haue
a
rebellious
inclination
is
sinne
likewise
.
That
the
euill
motions
of
the
heart
without
consent
be
sins
.
1
They
are
forbidden
in
the
Morrall
Law
.
In
the
tenth
Commandement
.
Thou
shalt
not
couet
.
For
motions
with
consent
are
forbidden
in
the
other
Commandments
.
As
appeares
manifestly
in
Christs
exposition
of
the
Commandements
.
Mat.
5.
22.
were
not
only
the
outward
act
of
Adultery
:
but
the
inward
desire
is
also
forbidden
;
if
wee
beleeue
Christ
the
best
interpreter
of
the
Law
:
When
Ergo
the
tenth
Commandement
forbids
coueting
[
of
our
Neighbours
Wife
,
it
either
meanes
the
same
kind
of
lusting
,
with
a
needelesse
Tautology
:
or
a
different
.
viz.
that
which
is
not
consented
vnto
.
Nor
can
our
Aduersaries
shift
this
off
:
though
Becanus
most
impudently
denies
it
,
2
We
proue
it
thus
.
Whatsoeuer
is
inordinate
and
repugnant
to
right
Reason
:
that
is
Sinne.
But
these
Motions
without
confent
be
inordinate
.
—
Ergo
They
be
Sinne
,
The
Minor
is
confessed
.
That
these
Motions
be
inordinati
&
recta
Rationi
repugnantes
.
The
Maior
is
apparant
.
For
what
is
Ordo
&
recta
Ratio
in
Moralibus
:
but
that
course
of
doing
any
thing
,
which
is
conformable
to
Gods
Law
and
his
will
.
God
is
the
God
of
order
.
rule
of
order
in
all
humane
actions
.
Recta
Ratio
what
is
it
;
but
the
conformity
of
mans
vnderstanding
and
will
vnto
Gods
will
,
which
only
is
the
rule
of
righteousnesse
;
We
neuer
purpose
and
will
matters
aright
:
but
when
wee
will
them
agreeably
to
Gods
will
.
Wherefore
it
is
a
grosse
absurdity
to
deny
the
Sinnefulnesse
of
these
disorderly
motions
:
seeing
no
man
can
breake
those
orders
which
God
hath
made
,
and
yet
be
faultlesse
.
Nor
is
it
possible
a
Man
should
doe
that
which
is
contrary
to
Gods
will
:
And
yet
be
without
Sinne
in
doing
of
it
.
These
motions
then
without
consent
be
confusions
in
Nature
opposites
to
the
righteousnesse
of
the
will
of
God
;
and
vnto
that
euen
and
streight
order
expressed
in
his
Law
.
We
conclude
then
that
Concupiscence
and
inordinate
motions
of
the
Soule
not
consented
vnto
,
are
Sinnes
contrary
to
our
Aduersaries
assertion
.
They
bring
some
Reasons
to
proue
they
are
not
.
1
Originall
sinne
is
taken
away
in
Baptisme
.
This
Argument
is
friuolous
.
In
Originall
sinne
,
there
are
two
things
,
First
,
the
guilt
.
Secondly
,
the
inherent
corruptions
.
We
say
in
Baptisme
the
guilt
is
altogether
washed
away
from
the
Baptized
Elect
,
by
the
blood
of
Christ
.
And
for
the
corruption
thereof
,
it
is
part
done
away
by
the
sanctifying
Spirit
of
Christ
,
powred
out
vpon
the
Regenerate
,
which
by
degrees
purgeth
out
the
inherent
sinfulnesse
of
Nature
,
by
replanting
the
graces
of
Sanctification
in
all
parts
.
Concupiscence
then
,
notwithstanding
Baptisme
remaines
in
the
Regenerate
,
and
is
a
sinne
in
them
,
the
guiltinesse
whereof
God
mercifully
pardons
in
Christ
.
2
What
is
not
in
our
power
to
auoide
:
But
t
is
not
in
our
power
to
auoide
the
Motions
of
the
heart
that
preuent
Reason
and
consent
.
Ergo
,
they
be
no
sinnes
forbidden
vs
.
To
this
we
answere
.
The
Maior
is
true
in
things
meerely
Naturall
,
that
fall
out
by
the
Necessity
of
Nature
well
disposed
.
So
we
say
,
Gods
Law
were
vncouth
,
should
he
command
a
man
neuer
to
be
an
hungry
or
thirst
,
which
things
he
cannot
auoide
,
but
they
come
vpon
him
,
will
he
,
nill
he
;
by
the
meere
necessity
of
Nature
.
But
concerning
inordinate
motions
,
there
's
no
such
matter
.
God
hath
layed
no
such
necessity
on
Nature
in
her
creation
:
but
we
by
our
sinne
haue
brought
it
upon
our selues
.
Now
such
a
necessity
excuses
vs
not
.
In
this
case
it
helpes
a
man
no
more
to
say
.
[
I
cannot
auoid
euill
thoughts
and
desires
:
]
then
it
doth
a
desperate
sinner
,
that
by
countenance
hath
hardened
himselfe
in
euill
courses
;
or
then
it
helpes
the
Diuels
and
the
damned
,
if
they
should
say
;
Wee
cannot
chuse
but
doe
euill
.
3
They
argue
thus
.
That
which
would
haue
beene
naturall
and
without
fault
in
man
,
in
puris
Naturalibus
;
that
is
,
no
sinne
nor
fault
in
vs
.
But
motions
preuenting
consent
,
would
be
naturall
,
and
without
fault
in
men
so
made
.
—
Ergo
,
In
vs
they
be
no
faults
of
themselues
.
Heere
our
Aduersaries
haue
made
a
Man
of
white
Paper
,
or
the
like
to
Materia
prima
:
that
hath
not
any
quality
in
him
morally
good
or
bad
.
That
is
.
A
Man
that
hath
neither
the
Image
of
God
in
knowledge
,
righteousnes
,
and
holines
,
engrauen
on
his
vnderstanding
,
will
,
affections
,
and
whole
person
;
nor
yet
,
though
it
haue
it
not
,
hath
in
him
any
contrary
euill
quality
,
that
comes
vpon
him
by
reason
of
such
a
defect
.
Now
of
such
a
Wiseaker
they
dispute
.
If
God
had
created
a
Man
thus
▪
in
puris
naturalibus
,
neither
good
,
nor
bad
,
then
.
What
then
?
As
the
old
word
is
.
If
the
Heauens
fall
,
we
shall
haue
Larkes
good
cheepe
.
Suppositions
framed
by
our
Imaginations
touching
what
might
be
done
,
are
vaine
and
needlesse
when
we
see
what
is
done
.
This
we
see
that
Man
was
created
in
God's
Image
invested
with
all
reall
Qualities
of
Righteousnes
and
Holinesse
.
This
we
see
also
,
that
Man
being
falne
is
borne
in
Originall
corruption
,
depriued
of
God's
Image
,
&
thereupon
depraued
in
his
whole
Nature
by
sinfull
infirmity
.
Wherefore
a
man
in
his
pure
Naturals
,
one
that
hath
neither
Grace
,
nor
Corruption
,
was
neuer
found
in
this
world
:
yea
,
't
is
a
contradiction
to
imagine
a
man
thus
naked
without
his
Qualities
;
that
he
hath
Reason
,
but
neither
enlightened
,
nor
darkened
,
a
will
but
meerely
indifferent
,
neither
enclined
to
good
,
or
euill
;
affections
,
but
neither
vertuously
,
nor
vitiously
disposed
.
In
a
word
,
that
he
is
a
Man
capable
of
Vertue
,
or
Vice
;
Holinesse
,
or
Sinfulnesse
,
and
yet
hath
neither
.
That
were
to
make
a
Man
litle
better
then
an
vnreasonable
Beast
.
But
to
follow
them
a
little
.
Suppose
a
Man
were
made
in
his
pure
Naturals
,
would
such
disorderly
motions
be
found
i●
him
?
Sensuall
,
ergo
,
these
parts
in
their
motions
and
desires
would
be
contrary
one
to
the
other
.
This
consequent
is
false
.
They
would
be
diuerse
,
not
opposite
and
repugnant
.
The
Body
and
the
Sensitiues
would
lead
a
Man
to
those
things
that
are
agreeable
to
the
Body
.
The
Soule
and
reasonable
appetite
,
or
will
would
incline
him
to
those
higher
and
more
noble
objects
agreeable
to
the
Soule
.
But
neither
of
these
inclinations
would
crosse
and
trouble
one
another
,
the
inferiour
faculties
,
like
the
lower
Spheares
would
moue
differently
from
the
superiour
:
but
yet
most
orderly
according
to
their
owne
nature
,
without
impeaching
the
Motions
of
the
other
.
Each
faculty
in
it's
place
would
worke
orderly
in
sweet
harmony
and
agreement
each
with
other
,
had
not
Sinne
brought
in
confusion
and
discord
into
the
world
,
as
betweene
God
and
Man
:
so
betweene
Man
and
himselfe
.
This
we
further
make
good
by
this
argument
.
Whatsoeuer
is
naturall
,
and
so
without
blame
in
Man
:
that
Christ
took
one
him
—
But
these
inordinate
Motions
of
the
sensitiue
appetite
,
repugnant
vnto
Will
and
Reason
;
Christ
tooke
not
on
him
—
Ergo
they
are
not
naturall
,
and
without
blame
.
The
Maior
we
proue
by
that
,
Phil.
3.
7.
He
was
made
like
vnto
Man
:
and
Heb.
2.
17.
In
all
things
it
behoued
him
to
be
made
like
vnto
his
Brethren
.
And
againe
,
Chap.
4.
15.
Wee
haue
not
a
high
Priest
which
cannot
be
touched
with
a
feeling
of
our
infirmities
:
but
was
in
all
things
tempted
in
like
sort
:
yet
without
Sinne.
Whence
't
is
manifest
that
Christ
taking
on
him
our
Nature
,
tooke
on
him
all
the
properties
of
our
Nature
,
and
with
all
such
infirmities
of
our
Nature
as
not
sinfull
in
themselues
,
or
the
effects
or
punishments
of
Sinne
in
vs
.
If
therefore
it
be
naturall
vnto
Man
,
that
the
Motions
of
the
sensitiue
appetite
should
preuent
and
be
repugnant
vnto
Reason
,
and
that
this
is
no
Sinne
except
consent
make
it
so
:
then
certainly
Christ
had
in
him
such
motions
and
inordinate
desires
.
But
to
affirme
that
,
there
were
in
Christ
such
disorderly
Motions
of
his
inferiour
Faculties
,
repugnant
vnto
his
Reason
and
Will
,
is
a
blasphemie
against
the
immaculate
Lambe
of
God
,
Christ
was
indeed
tempted
(
as
the
text
saith
)
and
in
like
sort
as
we
are
:
but
will
any
Man
heere
vnderstand
this
of
inward
Temptations
arirising
from
any
thing
within
Christ
,
as
if
he
were
like
vnto
vs
drawne
aside
with
[
b
](A09274-e21090-b)
b
Iam.
1.
〈◊〉
Concupiscence
and
inticed
,
the
motions
of
his
sensitiue
faculties
,
inclining
him
to
that
which
was
contrary
to
his
vnderstanding
and
will
?
We
confesse
that
he
was
fiercely
tempted
by
Satan
and
wicked
Men
from
without
:
but
that
he
was
tempted
by
any
thing
in
himselfe
,
by
disorderly
Motions
of
his
heart
tending
vnto
euill
,
and
ergo
checked
by
his
will
and
Reason
,
this
we
account
an
abominable
Errour
touching
the
spotlesse
humanity
of
our
Sauiour
.
Wherein
we
deny
,
that
there
euer
was
any
the
least
disorderly
desire
,
thought
,
word
,
or
worke
whatsoeuer
.
And
therefore
we
conclude
,
that
such
motions
are
not
naturall
vnto
Men
,
becomming
sinfull
only
by
accident
,
because
they
are
consented
vnto
:
but
they
are
accidentall
vnto
him
,
being
the
fruit
of
originall
Corruption
,
and
are
in
themselues
verily
and
properly
Sinnes
.
For
Conclusion
of
this
point
,
let
vs
heare
that
Argument
which
Bell.
makes
.
4.
Where
there
is
no
Law
,
[
c
](A09274-e21260-b)
c
Lib.
4.
cap.
1●
.
there
is
no
sinne
.
Rom.
4.
10.
But
there
is
no
Law
prescribed
vnto
sense
and
sensuall
appetites
.
Ergo
The
Motions
thereof
are
not
sinfull
.
The
Maior
we
grant
.
The
Minor
he
proues
▪
Because
the
Law
praesupposeth
Reason
in
all
that
whereto
it
is
giuen
.
But
the
sensitiue
part
of
Man
is
without
Reason
,
and
ergo
not
capable
of
a
Law
,
according
as
it
is
in
bruite
beasts
,
to
whom
ergo
no
Law
is
giuen
.
This
he
further
proues
by
that
place
,
Rom.
7.
20.
Now
if
I
doe
that
I
would
not
,
it
is
no
more
I
that
doe
it
,
but
Sinne
that
dwelleth
in
me
.
Where
't
is
plaine
(
saith
Bell.
)
that
the
Apostle
did
not
sinne
,
because
he
lusted
against
his
will
.
'T
was
not
he
did
the
worke
:
but
't
was
the
Sinne
in
him
.
Wherefore
he
saith
afterward
.
That
in
his
mind
,
i.
e.
in
his
superior
faculties
he
serued
the
Law
of
God
:
and
kept
it
:
although
in
his
flesh
,
i.
e.
sensitiue
appetite
and
inferiour
faculties
he
serued
the
Law
of
sin
:
yet
,
for
all
that
he
sinned
not
in
so
doing
,
because
sinne
cannot
be
but
in
the
minde
,
and
the
Law
is
not
giuen
to
those
facul●ies
that
be
vnreasonable
.
To
this
we
answere
.
That
God
giues
no
Law
to
vnreasonable
Creatures
,
but
such
as
haue
Reason
.
The
sensitiue
faculties
of
bruite-beasts
haue
no
other
Rule
then
Natures
instinct
,
which
guides
and
moderates
their
seuerall
motions
in
due
order
and
measure
.
But
in
man
those
inferiour
faculties
how
euer
vnreasonable
,
are
yet
capable
of
Reasons
Gouernment
,
which
according
to
Gods
Law
prescribes
vnto
the
motions
of
the
sensitiue
appetite
their
measure
and
bounds
,
beyond
which
they
may
not
passe
.
If
a
man
were
vncorrupt
,
the
appetite
would
obey
this
rule
of
Reason
and
keepe
it selfe
within
those
prescribed
Bounds
.
But
being
now
corrupt
by
Sinne
,
it
breakes
out
beyond
this
compasse
and
ouerbeares
Reason
and
will
,
which
in
their
sinfull
weaknes
are
not
able
to
bridle
these
vnrulie
motions
.
wherefore
when
Bell.
saieth
.
That
the
Law
is
giuen
to
the
reasonable
will
,
not
to
the
sensiue
appetite
;
it
is
vtterly
false
:
Because
in
Man
it
is
probable
of
gouernment
,
and
so
subject
to
the
Law
.
Our
Reason
hath
euen
in
this
our
corrupted
estate
a
ciuill
command
ouer
our
appetite
and
affections
;
so
that
it
can
moderate
them
by
faire
persuasions
now
and
then
.
That
which
it
can
doe
sometimes
,
it
ought
to
doe
alwaies
,
and
if
any
affections
can
obey
Reason
at
sometimes
,
were
they
not
infected
with
Sinne
,
they
would
doe
it
at
all
times
.
And
if
they
doe
well
when
they
obey
,
certainly
they
doe
euill
when
they
disobey
.
And
ergo
such
motions
of
them
,
as
are
repugnant
to
right
reason
,
are
nothing
but
rebellion
against
God's
Law
.
As
to
the
place
in
the
7.
Rom.
we
answere
.
That
that
Interpretation
of
it
which
Bell.
brings
is
most
peruerse
and
against
all
Sense
.
The
Apostle
complaines
that
he
did
the
Euill
,
which
he
would
not
;
no
doubt
in
so
doeing
he
did
sinne
.
But
what
is
it
now
which
committed
this
guilt
or
sinne
?
It
is
not
I
that
doe
it
saieth
the
Apostle
:
but
that
sinne
that
dwelleth
in
me
.
That
is
,
according
to
Bell
:
not
I
in
my
mind
,
or
superior
faculties
of
Reason
and
Will
:
but
my
inferior
Appetite
and
affections
which
doe
this
euill
against
my
consent
.
So
the
meaning
shal
be
Concupiscence
in
that
duell
in
the
Apostle
committed
Sinne
:
but
the
Apostle
himselfe
committed
it
not
.
Which
is
very
absurd
.
As
if
a
cholericke-Man
hauing
done
a
mischiefe
in
his
anger
should
sa●e
,
It
were
not
he
did
it
;
but
his
raging
passion
:
or
an
adulterer
,
that
't
was
not
he
committed
the
Sinne
;
but
his
sinfull
Affection
that
carried
him
further
then
reason
would
.
So
that
if
God
will
punish
such
a
sinne
;
he
must
not
punish
him
:
but
onely
his
sensitiue
appetite
which
was
in
fault
.
This
is
ridiculous
,
for
besides
that
it
crosseth
the
Romanists
Doctrine
manifestly
;
in
teaching
that
such
disorderly
motions
of
the
sensitiue
appetite
be
no
sinnes
,
which
heere
the
Apostle
contradicts
,
saying
plainly
(
that
the
Sinne
which
dwelt
in
him
did
doe
the
euill
he
would
not
.
(
viz
,
Sinne
:
)
it
draweth
after
it
this
grosse
Error
.
That
some
faecultie
in
man
may
sin
,
and
yet
the
man
not
sinne
himselfe
.
Wherefore
the
Apostle
in
that
speach
,
'T
is
not
I
doe
it
:
but
sinne
in
me
.
doth
not
oppose
one
facultie
against
the
other
,
the
reasonable
will
,
against
the
sensitiue
appetite
,
seeking
for
a
shift
to
excuse
his
sinne
,
by
putting
it
off
from
himselfe
,
to
that
which
was
not
capable
of
Sinne
:
but
he
opposeth
grace
in
euery
facultie
to
Corruption
in
the
same
facultie
;
as
two
contrarie
Principles
and
causes
of
his
actions
,
one
mouing
to
good
;
the
other
enclining
to
bad
.
Thence
the
Apostle
saieth
,
that
(
when
he
doth
euill
)
't
is
not
I
that
doe
it
.
i.
e
,
I
regenerate
according
to
the
Grace
,
that
dwelleth
in
me
,
for
that
inclines
me
to
doe
good
:
but
't
is
the
Sinne
dwelling
in
me
which
(
when
I
would
doe
well
)
inclines
me
to
doe
euill
.
He
heere
shewes
the
Roote
,
whence
this
Euill
comes
:
but
yet
he
doth
not
put
off
the
fault
from
himselfe
.
As
't
is
himselfe
doth
well
:
so
't
is
himself●
doth
ill
too
,
according
as
he
concludes
.
vers
25.
Then
I
my selfe
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
doe
both
well
and
ill
;
well
,
according
to
Grace
,
in
my
mind
that
is
regenerate
,
part
both
of
inferior
and
superior
facultie
.
I
serue
the
Law
of
God
;
but
ill
according
to
corruption
remaining
in
me
:
but
in
my
flesh
,
vnregenerate
part
the
Law
of
Sinne.
Much
more
might
be
added
:
but
't
is
not
my
purpose
,
heere
to
enter
vpon
the
common
place
at
large
,
I
proceed
to
the
second
quaestion
of
our
Aduersaries
,
who
teach
that
albeit
our
Loue
of
God
be
imperfect
:
yet
this
imperfection
is
not
sinne
in
vs
.
They
grant
.
That
no
man
hath
any
grace
of
the
spirit
:
but
he
may
encrease
in
it
daily
.
that
the
Loue
of
God
and
our
Neighbours
may
still
grow
on
to
farther
degrees
of
affection
;
That
no
grace
,
nor
good
worke
hath
that
full
perfection
,
which
it
might
haue
in
this
Life
,
or
which
we
shall
attaine
vnto
in
Heauen
.
But
they
deny
this
defect
to
be
any
fault
or
sinne
.
2.
Defectus
Charitatis
quod
(
viz
)
non
faciamus
opera
nostra
tanto
feruore
dilectionis
,
saieth
Bell.
and
againe
Charitas
nostra
quamuis
comparata
ad
Charitatem
beatorum
,
sit
imperfecta
:
tamen
absolute
perfecta
dici
potest
.
This
is
an
Error
,
against
which
we
defend
this
Conclusion
in
generall
,
touching
both
Charity
and
all
man
Righteousnes
.
The
defects
or
want
of
Perfection
in
Mans
Righteousnes
is
Sinne.
For
the
proofe
of
this
point
we
are
to
obserue
,
that
the
Imperfection
,
or
Perfection
of
any
thing
is
to
be
considered
of
two
waies
.
1
Comparatiuely
.
When
any
thing
set
by
another
is
more
or
lesse
perfect
,
then
that
other
.
2
Absolutely
.
When
considered
in
it selfe
,
it
hath
or
wantes
that
Perfection
which
it
should
haue
by
its
proper
Nature
.
Betweene
these
there
is
great
difference
.
For
Comparatiue
imperfection
is
not
euill
:
absolute
imperfection
is
Euill
.
We
may
see
it
in
an
example
,
The
Senses
that
are
in
Man
being
compared
with
their
like
in
other
creatures
,
't
is
manifest
they
are
much
excelled
by
them
,
as
by
an
Eagle
for
sight
,
a
spider
for
touch
.
&c.
Heere
we
say
that
the
eie
of
a
man
is
not
perfect
as
the
eie
of
an
Eagle
:
but
yet
we
doe
not
account
this
imperfection
any
Naturall
euill
of
the
eie
of
a
man
.
God
might
haue
giuen
a
stronger
and
a
clearer
sight
to
men
:
but
we
,
blame
not
his
workes
;
nor
count
our
sight
imperfect
because
it
hath
not
that
singular
Temper
which
is
in
other
Creatures
;
but
because
it
wants
at
any
time
that
temper
which
is
agreeable
to
our
nature
.
Such
a
defect
only
,
is
properly
an
Euill
in
Nature
,
when
something
is
wanting
to
the
perfection
of
any
part
,
which
by
the
Course
of
nature
should
be
there
.
Thus
't
is
also
in
Grace
.
Compare
we
the
Righteousnes
of
man
,
or
Angels
,
with
the
Righteousnes
of
God
;
we
saie
that
God's
is
infinitely
more
perfect
then
the
Creatures
.
But
now
is
this
imperfection
in
Humane
or
Angelicall
righteousnes
any
Euill
and
Sinne
in
them
?
We
saie
No.
Neither
are
the
Angels
sinfull
because
lesse
righteous
then
God
:
nor
Adam
sinfull
because
lesse
righteous
then
either
.
God
made
them
both
lesse
good
then
himselfe
:
yet
very
good
and
without
all
Sinne.
There
be
degrees
of
Righteousnes
,
and
though
the
Creature
be
infinitely
below
the
heighest
pitch
of
goodnes
(
which
is
God
:
)
yet
he
may
bee
still
aboue
that
lowest
descent
vnto
Sinne
and
vnrighteousnes
.
In
Phylosophie
we
dispute
whether
the
slackening
of
any
degree
in
one
Quality
,
be
the
mingling
of
another
that
is
contrary
.
As
heat
in
eight
degrees
if
it
decrease
vnto
seuen
,
whether
there
is
any
degree
of
cold
mingled
with
it
.
'T
is
heard
to
say
that
there
is
.
But
concerning
Grace
and
Righteousnes
't
is
certaine
,
there
is
that
remissio
graduum
without
any
admixtion
of
Sinne
and
iniquity
.
As
the
Holines
of
Saints
is
lesse
then
that
of
Angels
;
that
of
Angels
lesse
then
the
Holines
of
Christs
glorified
Humanity
,
this
lesse
then
his
Diety
.
And
yet
in
the
least
of
these
Righteousnesses
there
is
no
Vnrighteousnes
at
all
to
be
found
,
no
not
in
the
seuere
judgement
of
God
.
Except
we
say
there
is
vnrighteousnes
in
Heauen
where
no
vncleane
thing
can
enter
.
Well
then
.
What
Imperpection
of
mans
Righteousnes
is
it
,
which
is
Sinne
?
We
say
.
That
Imperfection
,
when
man
in
any
Grace
or
good
Worke
wantes
that
degree
of
goodnes
,
which
he
ought
to
haue
.
As
in
nature
.
If
the
Eye
want
that
cleernes
of
sight
which
should
be
in
it
:
't
is
a
naturall
Euill
.
In
Morality
if
a
man
want
that
Temperance
or
degree
of
Temperance
he
ought
to
haue
,
it
s
a
vitious
and
morall
euill
:
so
in
Grace
the
want
of
that
righteousnes
or
degree
of
righteonsnes
which
God
requires
to
be
in
man
,
is
a
Sinne
and
spirituall
Euill
.
All
such
priuations
of
what
should
be
present
are
Euill
in
what
kind
soeuer
.
If
they
be
in
nature
they
be
malamiseranda
,
deserue
pity
and
cure
:
if
in
Vertue
and
Grace
;
they
be
mala
culpanda
worth
of
blame
and
punishment
.
Such
defects
as
these
in
Grace
,
when
man
fals
short
,
not
onely
of
that
which
is
in
others
;
but
that
which
should
be
in
himselfe
,
doe
alwaies
arise
from
the
mixture
of
Corruption
and
Sinne.
Hee
that
loues
n●t
God
or
his
neighbour
so
much
as
he
ought
to
doe
:
't
is
because
his
heart
be
wicked
,
at
the
least
in
part
;
and
that
he
loues
others
things
more
then
he
should
doe
.
These
things
are
certaine
and
vndeniable
according
to
those
words
of
St.
Augustin
that
are
authenticall
.
[
a
](A09274-e22930-b)
a
〈…〉
Profecto
illud
quod
minus
est
quam
debet
,
ex
vitio
est
.
And
againe
.
[
b
](A09274-e22950-b)
b
Lib.
de
perfect
.
〈…〉
.
15
Pec●atum
est
,
vel
cum
non
est
charitas
,
quae
esse
debet
:
vel
minor
est
quam
debet
.
'T
is
a
Sinne
,
not
to
loue
.
God
at
all
:
or
to
loue
him
lesse
then
we
should
.
Wherefore
heere
we
aske
the
Iesuite
whether
Charity
and
other
Graces
in
a
man
regenerate
be
so
perfect
in
this
Life
,
as
they
ought
to
be
?
If
he
say
,
they
be
not
so
perfect
,
as
they
ought
to
be
.
how
can
he
affirme
that
this
defect
is
no
fault
nor
Sinne
:
Can
a
man
possibly
doe
worse
,
or
be
worse
then
he
should
;
and
yet
be
i●
no
fault
therefore
?
If
he
say
they
be
as
perfect
as
they
should
be
,
his
owne
Conscience
and
the
Conscience
of
all
the
men
in
the
World
will
gain-say
him
for
a
liar
.
No
man
can
say
,
that
he
loues
God
and
his
Neighbour
asmuch
as
he
ought
to
doe
:
and
that
he
is
not
bound
in
euery
grace
and
good
worke
to
ariue
at
greater
perfection
,
then
hee
hath
for
the
present
.
He
that
thinkes
himselfe
come
nearest
vnto
the
marke
,
will
yet
be
driuen
to
confesse
,
that
he
fals
many
bowes
short
of
those
patternes
which
we
ought
to
imitate
,
Adam
in
his
Innocency
;
Christs
Humanity
,
and
the
Saints
in
Heauen
.
Wee
here
bid
them
(
Depinge
ubi
sistam
)
make
a
point
where
we
shall
stoppe
:
that
when
we
are
come
so
farre
,
we
need
seeke
no
further
perfection
.
If
they
cannot
do
this
,
then
they
must
confesse
,
as
the
truth
is
,
that
euery
man
is
bound
by
Gods
command
to
be
more
holy
,
to
be
more
perfect
in
all
Graeces
and
good
workes
;
and
so
farre
as
he
wants
any
degree
or
dramme
of
goodnesse
,
that
should
be
in
him
and
his
works
,
so
farre
he
is
sinfull
and
guilty
of
a
fault
.
3
I
goe
on
to
the
last
Assertion
of
our
Aduersaries
,
which
is
to●ching
veniall
sinnes
,
(
viz.
)
That
these
doe
not
hinder
the
righteousnesse
of
mens
good
workes
.
A
man
may
be
a
perfect
iust
man
,
though
he
commit
many
veniall
sinnes
.
The
reason
whereof
they
make
to
be
[
because
veniall
sinnes
are
not
contrary
to
charity
,
the
loue
of
God
and
our
neighbour
,
and
so
may
stand
well
enough
with
the
fulfilling
of
the
Law
.
Against
this
errour
,
tending
to
the
obduration
of
mans
hart
in
impenitency
&
loue
of
sin
:
we
maintain
this
conclusion
.
Those
sinnes
which
the
Church
of
Rome
cals
veniall
,
This
we
proue
by
this
one
Argument
.
Whosoeuer
transgresseth
the
Law
,
he
is
vnrighteous
in
so
doing
.
But
he
that
commits
veniall
sinnes
,
transgresseth
the
Law
.
Ergo
,
He
that
commits
veniall
sinnes
is
an
vnrighteous
man
.
The
Maior
is
vndeniable
.
For
the
Minor
our
Aduersarie
is
at
a
stand
.
They
are
loath
to
grant
it
:
yet
cannot
tell
how
to
deny
it
with
any
honesty
.
Bellarmine
after
one
or
two
shuffling
distinctions
of
simpliciter
,
veniall
sinnes
be
contrary
to
the
Law
.
For
answering
vnto
those
places
in
Iames.
[
In
many
things
we
offend
all
,
]
and
that
in
Iohn
.
[
If
we
say
we
haue
no
sinne
,
we
deceiue
our selues
.
]
Hee
saith
they
cannot
hansomly
shift
themselues
of
those
places
,
who
hold
that
veniall
sinnes
be
[
propriè
contra
Legem
.
]
Such
as
bee
of
that
opinion
[
Let
them
looke
to
it
(
saith
he
)
what
they
will
answere
to
that
of
Saint
Iames.
]
He
that
keepes
the
Law
in
one
point
,
&c.
]
He
therefore
will
be
more
wise
and
wary
.
[
Sol●da
igitur
respensio
est
(
saith
he
)
Peccata
venialia
,
sine
quibus
non
viuitur
,
non
esse
peccata
simpliciter
,
sed
imperfectè
&
secundum
quid
:
neque
esse
contra
Legem
,
sed
praerer
Legem
.
]
And
thus
saith
he
,
Omnia
cohaerent
(
like
a
Pebble
in
a
Withe
)
[
Nam
qui
ostendit
in
vno
praeuaricans
scilicet
vnum
praeceptum
,
reus
est
omnium
&
simpliciter
iniustus
constituitur
&
tamen
in
multis
offendimus
omnes
,
quia
tametsi
nihil
facimus
contra
Legem
;
tamen
multa
facimus
praeter
Legem
.
Et
qui
●atus
est
ex
Deo
,
non
peccatat
transgrediendo
Legem
,
&
tamen
si
dicamus
q●ia
peccatum
non
habemus
.
(
viz.
)
nihil
praeter
Legem
faciendo
:
no●
ipsos
seducimus
,
&
veritas
non
est
in
Nobis
.
]
This
is
an
vnbound
Besome
,
as
will
appeare
by
vndoing
that
distinction
which
seemes
to
hold
it
together
.
Veniall
sinnes
are
not
against
the
Law
:
but
besides
the
Law
.
Well
,
we
must
now
know
what
is
against
the
Law
,
&
what
besides
.
veniall
sinne
,
doth
some
such
act
as
the
Law
neither
forbids
nor
commands
.
Here
then
we
aske
.
Be
veniall
sinnes
,
sinnes
?
Yea
,
they
be
.
Is
God
offended
with
them
?
Yea
,
and
he
may
iustly
punish
them
,
on
vs
with
the
losse
of
Heauen
.
For
so
Bellarmine
himselfe
confesseth
.
But
now
if
those
veniall
sinnes
bee
mentioned
in
Gods
Law
:
then
are
such
actions
either
commanded
or
forbidden
.
If
commanded
,
then
the
not
doing
of
such
a
thing
,
is
plainely
contrary
to
the
Law
.
As
for
example
.
[
c
](A09274-e23660-b)
c
〈…〉
To
steale
a
penny
,
or
some
other
small
matter
,
to
please
an
idle
word
,
to
tell
an
officious
lie
;
these
be
veniall
sinnes
say
our
Aduersaries
.
But
how
hnow
they
,
they
be
sinnes
?
who
told
them
so
?
The
Scriptures
they
will
say
.
Where
?
In
the
8
and
9
Commandement
.
Aske
them
now
.
Did
God
intend
in
those
Commandements
to
forbid
those
actions
of
stealing
and
lying
?
Yea
,
or
No
?
If
he
intended
it
not
;
then
t
is
no
sinne
at
all
to
doe
them
,
seeing
it
cro●seth
not
Gods
will
,
nor
offends
him
.
If
he
did
intend
to
forbid
vs
those
things
:
then
to
doe
them
is
a
sinne
,
manifestly
contrary
to
the
holy
will
of
God
,
the
Lawgiuer
.
Wherfore
let
vs
here
remember
that
excellent
rule
of
Bernard
.
Minor
Proposition
stands
firme
:
That
he
who
committeth
veniall
Sinne
,
transgresseth
the
Law
of
God
,
and
therefore
is
vnrighteous
for
his
so
doing
.
[
a
](A09274-e23820-b)
a
Tom.
2.
tract.
2
cap
2
q.
2.
Becanus
here
forsakes
the
Cardinall
in
this
distinction
:
and
helpes
him
by
an
other
deuis●
.
He
grants
that
Veniall
Sinnes
be
against
the
Law
,
and
proues
it
,
[
because
euery
Veniall
Sinne
is
moraliter
malum
,
and
Ergo
contra
rectam
rationemet
Legem
aeternam
.
)
But
here
s
now
the
distinction
:
It
is
one
thing
to
be
contra
Legem
;
another
contra
finem
Legis
.
All
Veniall
sinnes
be
against
the
Law
:
but
no
veniall
sinne
is
properly
against
the
end
of
the
Law
.
that
is
,
against
Charity
the
Loue
of
God
or
our
Neighbour
.
Is
not
this
a
superfine
Inuention
?
If
ye
loue
mee
keepe
my
Commandem●nts
)
saith
Christ
.
Iohn
.
14.
15.
Nay
(
say
the
Romanists
)
we
loue
him
and
yet
breake
his
Commandements
.
(
Loue
doth
none
eu●l
to
his
Neighbour
)
saith
the
Apostle
Romans
.
13.
.
10
Nay
(
say
the
Iesuits
)
Loue
may
doe
euill
to
his
Ne●ghbour
:
and
yet
keepe
the
name
of
loue
.
A
man
may
be
angry
with
another
without
cause
,
reuile
him
,
and
call
him
Racha
,
hee
may
defraude
him
in
small
matters
(
for
these
they
make
veniall
sinnes
)
and
yet
in
the
meane
time
,
all
this
without
breath
of
Charity
.
Himselfe
would
not
willingly
be
so
vsed
:
but
hee
will
vse
another
in
this
sort
;
and
yet
looke
to
bee
thanked
for
his
loue
too
.
Such
grosse
absurdities
doe
our
Aduersaries
runne
in
to
,
by
coyning
such
senselesse
distinctions
of
(
Sinnes
not
against
:
but
besides
the
Law
)
of
sinnes
not
against
the
end
of
the
Law
:
though
against
the
Law
it selfe
.
Our
Consciences
cannot
be
satisfied
with
such
silly
shiftes
:
and
therefore
we
leaue
them
vnto
those
that
can
content
themselues
;
and
choake
vp
their
Consciences
with
a
little
sophistry
.
Men
who
make
a
pastime
of
sinne
;
and
take
liberty
to
qualifie
and
dispence
with
Gods
Law
as
they
thinke
agreeable
to
their
Conscience
;
hoping
by
tricks
of
wit
and
dodging
Distinctions
to
a
void
the
accusations
of
Conscience
,
and
to
elude
the
seuerity
of
Gods
Iudgement
.
SECT.
4.
CHAP
I
▪
Iustification
by
workes
makes
void
the
couenant
of
grace
of
the
difference
between
the
law
&
the
Gospel
.
of
the
vse
of
the
Law
.
of
the
erroneous
conceit
of
our
Aduersaries
in
this
point
.
THus
much
of
these
three
Exceptions
of
our
●econd
Arg●ment
,
prouing
the
impossibili●y
of
our
Iustification
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
because
we
cannot
perfectly
fulfill
the
●aw
.
We
goe
now
forward
vnto
two
Arguments
more
;
taken
,
the
one
from
the
difference
of
the
two
Couenants
God
hath
made
with
man
.
First
of
works
,
the
other
of
grace
:
and
the
other
from
the
Nature
of
true
Christian
Lib●rty
obtained
for
vs
by
Christs
death
.
[
3
](A09274-e24250-b)
3
〈◊〉
.
Argument
.
That
which
makes
voide
the
Couenant
of
Grace
is
a
false
and
haereticall
doctrine
.
But
Iustification
of
workes
of
the
Law
,
makes
void
the
Couenant
of
Grace
.
Ergo
,
T
is
false
and
haeriticall
so
to
teach
.
For
confirmation
of
the
minor
in
this
Argument
wee
must
briefly
shew
.
1
(
What
the
Couenant
of
Grace
,
what
the
Couenant
of
workes
is
)
2
What
opposition
their
is
betweene
these
two
.
By
the
Couenant
of
Grace
Gospell
,
i.
e.
the
gratious
appointment
of
God
to
bring
man
to
Saluation
by
Iesus
Christ
.
In
the
administration
of
this
gratious
purpose
of
God
we
must
obserue
foure
periods
of
time
,
where
in
God
hath
diuersly
ordered
this
meanes
of
Mans
saluation
.
1
The
first
is
from
Adam
vntill
Abraham
.
the
seede
of
the
woman
should
breake
the
Serpents
head
)
This
blessed
promise
containing
the
whole
substance
of
mans
redemption
by
Christ
,
was
religiously
accepted
of
,
and
embrased
by
the
seruants
of
God
in
those
times
.
who
witnessed
their
Faith
in
it
,
by
their
offering
of
sacryfice
as
God
had
taught
them
:
and
thier
Thankfulnesse
for
it
,
by
their
Obedience
and
holy
Conuersation
.
The
second
is
from
Abraham
to
Moses
.
After
that
men
had
now
almost
forgot
Gods
promise
and
their
owne
duty
:
and
Idolatry
was
crept
into
those
Families
,
wherein
by
succession
the
Church
of
God
had
continued
,
God
cals
forth
Abraham
from
amongst
his
Idolatrous
kinred
,
&
with
him
renues
that
former
promise
in
forme
of
a
League
and
Couenant
confirmed
by
word
&
solemne
Ceremonies
.
God
on
the
one
side
promising
to
be
the
God
of
Abraham
,
and
of
his
seed
,
&
that
in
his
seed
all
the
Nations
of
the
earth
should
be
blessed
:
Abraham
for
his
part
beleeuing
the
promise
,
and
accepting
the
condition
of
●bedience
to
walke
before
God
in
vprightnesse
.
This
Couenant
with
Abraham
is
rat●fied
by
two
externall
Ceremonies
.
One
of
a
fi●e-brand
p●ssing
between
the
pieces
of
the
Heifer
and
other
Beasts
with
Abraham
,
according
to
custome
in
making
of
Leagues
had
diuided
in
twaine
.
Gen.
15.
The
other
the
Sacrament
of
Circumcision
vpon
the
flesh
of
Abraham
and
his
posterity
.
Gen.
17.
The
third
period
is
from
the
time
of
Moses
vntill
Christ
.
When
(
after
the
Church
multiplyed
vnto
a
Nation
,
and
withall
in
processe
of
time
,
and
continuance
among
the
Idolatrous
Aegyptians
,
grew
extremely
corrupt
in
Religion
and
Manners
)
God
againe
reuiues
his
former
Couenant
made
with
Abraham
.
Putting
the
Iewes
in
remembrance
of
the
Couenant
of
grace
in
Christ
.
1
By
adding
vnto
the
first
Sacrament
of
circumcision
another
of
the
Passeouer
,
setting
forth
vnto
the
Iewes
,
the
Author
of
their
deliuerance
;
as
well
from
the
spirituall
slauery
and
punishment
of
sinne
;
as
from
the
bodily
bondage
and
plagues
of
Aegypt
.
2
Afterwards
by
instituting
diuers
Rites
&
Ceremonies
concerning
Priests
sacrifices
,
&c.
all
which
were
shadowes
of
good
things
to
come
(
viz.
)
of
Christ
,
the
Churches
Redemption
by
his
death
.
Which
things
were
prefigured
vnder
those
types
,
though
somewhat
darkely
,
yet
plainely
enough
to
the
weake
vnderstanding
of
the
Iewes
.
Who
in
that
Minority
of
the
Church
stood
in
need
of
such
Schoolemasters
and
Tutors
to
direct
them
vnto
Christ
.
The
fourth
period
and
last
is
from
Christs
death
,
to
the
end
of
the
world
.
Who
in
the
fulnesse
of
time
appearing
in
our
flesh
,
accomplished
all
the
Prophecies
and
promises
that
went
before
of
him
:
and
by
the
Sacrifice
of
himselfe
,
confirmed
that
Couenant
a
new
:
which
so
long
before
had
beene
made
with
the
Church
.
Withall
hauing
abolished
whatsoeuer
before
was
weake
and
imperfect
,
hee
hath
now
replenished
the
Church
with
aboundance
of
knowledge
,
and
of
grace
,
still
to
continue
and
increase
,
till
the
consummation
of
all
things
.
In
all
these
periods
of
time
,
the
grace
of
God
that
brings
saluation
to
man
was
euer
one
and
the
same
:
onely
the
Reuelation
thereof
,
was
with
much
variety
of
circumstances
,
as
God
saw
it
agreeable
to
euery
season
.
In
the
first
t
was
called
a
Promise
,
in
the
second
a
Couenant
,
in
the
two
last
Periods
,
a
Testament
;
the
Old
from
Moses
till
Christs
death
;
the
New
from
thence
to
the
worlds
end
,
in
both
Remission
of
sinnes
,
and
Saluation
bequeathed
as
a
Legacy
vnto
the
Church
:
and
this
bequeast
ratified
by
the
death
of
the
Testator
,
typically
slaine
in
the
Sacrifices
,
for
confirmation
of
the
Old
:
Really
put
to
death
in
his
owne
Person
,
for
the
Sanction
of
the
New
Testament
.
But
notwithstanding
this
or
any
other
diuersity
in
circumstance
,
the
substance
of
the
Gospel
,
or
couenant
of
Grace
,
is
but
one
&
the
same
,
throughout
all
ages
.
Namely
,
Iesus
Christ
yesterday
,
and
to
day
,
and
the
same
for
euer
.
In
the
next
place
.
By
the
Couenant
of
Workes
,
Tree
of
knowledge
of
good
and
euill
.
2
The
second
Administration
of
this
Couenant
was
the
renuing
thereof
with
the
Israelites
at
Mount
Sinai
:
where
(
after
that
the
light
of
Nature
began
to
grow
darker
,
and
corruption
had
in
time
worne
out
the
Characters
of
Religion
and
Vertue
,
first
graued
in
mans
heart
)
God
reuiued
the
Law
,
by
a
compendious
and
full
declaration
of
all
duties
required
of
man
,
towards
God
or
his
Neighbour
,
expressed
in
the
Decalogue
.
According
to
the
Tenor
of
which
Law
God
entred
into
Couenant
with
the
Israelites
,
promising
to
be
their
God
;
in
bestowing
vpon
them
all
blessings
of
Life
and
Happinesse
,
vpon
condition
that
they
would
be
his
people
,
obeying
all
things
that
he
had
commanded
.
Which
Condition
they
accepted
of
,
promising
an
absolute
Obedience
.
All
things
which
the
Lord
hath
said
we
will
doe
.
Exod.
19.
24.
and
also
submitting
themselues
to
all
punishment
in
case
they
disobeyed
;
saying
Amen
to
the
Curse
of
the
Law
.
Cursed
be
euery
one
that
confirmeth
not
all
the
words
of
this
Law
to
doe
them
:
and
all
the
people
shall
say
,
Amen
.
Deut.
27.
26.
We
see
in
briefe
what
these
Couenants
of
Grace
&
Workes
are
.
In
the
second
place
we
must
inquire
what
opposition
there
is
betweene
these
two
;
Grace
and
Workes
;
the
Gospell
and
the
Law
.
The
opposition
is
not
in
regard
of
the
End
whereat
both
doe
aime
.
They
agree
both
in
one
common
end
,
namely
the
Glory
of
God
in
Mans
eternall
Saluation
.
The
disagreement
is
in
the
meanes
,
whereby
this
End
may
be
attained
;
which
are
proposed
to
Men
in
one
sort
by
the
Law
,
in
another
by
the
Gospell
.
The
diuersity
is
this
.
The
Law
offers
life
vnto
Man
vpon
Condition
of
perfect
Obedience
,
cursing
the
Transgressors
thereof
in
the
least
point
with
eternall
Death
:
The
Gospell
offers
Life
vnto
Man
vpon
another
condition
,
viz.
Of
Repentance
,
and
Faith
in
Christ
,
promising
Remission
of
sinnes
to
such
as
repent
and
beleeue
.
That
this
is
the
maine
Essentiall
and
proper
difference
betweene
the
Couenant
of
workes
and
of
Grace
(
that
is
)
betweene
the
Law
and
the
Gospell
,
we
shall
endeauour
to
make
good
against
these
of
the
Romish
Apostasy
who
deny
it
.
Consider
we
then
the
Law
of
Workes
,
either
as
giuen
to
Adam
before
the
promise
:
or
as
after
the
promise
it
remained
in
some
force
with
Adam
&
all
his
posterity
.
For
the
time
before
Mans
fall
.
It
is
apparant
that
perfect
obedience
was
the
condition
required
for
the
establishing
of
Adam
in
perpetuall
blisse
.
Other
meanes
there
was
not
:
nor
needed
any
be
proposed
vnto
him
.
But
when
Man
had
failed
in
that
Condition
;
and
so
broken
the
Covenant
of
Workes
:
God
to
repaire
Mans
ruined
Estate
,
now
desperate
of
euer
attaning
vnto
happines
by
the
first
means
:
he
appoints
a
second
offering
vnto
Adam
a
Sauiour
;
that
by
Faith
in
him
,
and
not
by
his
owne
vnspotted
Obedience
,
hee
might
recouer
Iustification
,
and
Life
which
he
had
lost
.
So
that
what
Adam
should
haue
obtained
by
workes
without
Christ
:
now
hee
shall
receiue
by
Faith
in
Christ
without
Workes
.
Since
the
time
of
Mans
fall
we
must
consider
,
that
the
Law
and
Gospell
though
they
goe
together
,
yet
as
they
still
differ
in
their
vse
and
office
betweene
themselues
:
so
also
the
Law
differs
from
it selfe
,
in
that
vse
which
it
had
before
,
and
which
it
hath
since
the
Fall
.
To
vs
now
,
it
hath
not
the
same
vse
which
it
had
in
Mans
innocency
.
It
was
giuen
to
Adam
for
this
end
,
to
bring
himselfe
to
Life
,
and
for
that
purpose
it
was
sufficient
both
in
it selfe
,
as
an
absolute
Rule
of
Perfection
:
and
in
regard
of
Adam
who
had
strength
to
haue
obserued
it
.
But
vnto
Man
fallen
,
although
the
Band
of
Obedience
doe
remaine
:
yet
the
End
thereof
(
viz.
)
Iustification
and
Life
by
it
,
is
now
abolished
by
the
promise
,
because
the
Law
now
is
insufficient
for
that
purpose
,
not
of
it selfe
,
but
by
reason
of
our
sinfull
flesh
,
that
cannot
keepe
it
.
This
is
most
manifest
by
the
renewing
of
the
first
Couenant
of
Workes
with
the
Iewes
,
when
God
deliuered
vnto
them
the
Morall
Law
,
from
Sinai
,
at
which
time
God
did
not
intend
that
the
Iewes
should
obtaine
Saluation
,
by
Obedience
to
that
Law
.
God
promised
Life
if
they
could
obey
,
and
the
Iewes
,
as
their
duty
was
promised
they
would
obey
;
but
God
knew
well
enough
they
were
neuer
able
to
keepe
their
promise
,
and
ergo
't
was
not
God's
intention
in
this
Legall
couenant
with
the
Iewes
,
that
any
of
them
should
euer
attaine
Iustification
,
and
Life
by
that
meanes
.
As
that
first
the
Promise
need
not
to
haue
bin
made
vnto
Adam
,
if
the
Law
could
haue
suffised
for
the
attaining
of
Life
:
so
after
the
Promise
was
once
made
,
the
Law
was
not
renewed
with
the
Iewes
;
to
that
end
that
Righteousnes
and
Life
should
be
had
by
the
obseruation
of
it
.
This
is
the
plaine
doctrine
of
the
Apostle
.
Gal.
3.
in
that
his
excellent
dispute
against
Iustification
by
the
Law
.
The
doubt
that
troubled
the
Galatians
was
this
.
God
had
made
an
Evangelicall
couenant
with
Abraham
,
[
a
](A09274-e26080-b)
a
〈◊〉
.
that
in
Christ
he
and
his
faithfull
seed
should
be
blessed
;
that
is
,
Iustified
.
Afterward
430
yeares
,
he
made
a
Legall
couenant
with
Abraham's
posterity
,
that
they
should
liue
,
that
is
,
be
justified
and
saued
,
if
they
did
fulfill
all
things
written
in
the
Law
.
The
Quaestion
now
was
,
which
of
these
two
couenants
should
stand
in
force
,
or
whether
both
could
stand
together
.
The
Apostle
answere
,
that
the
former
couenant
should
stand
in
force
,
and
that
the
later
did
not
abrogate
the
former
;
not
yet
could
stand
in
force
together
with
the
former
.
This
he
expresseth
v.
17.
18.
And
this
I
say
,
that
the
couenant
that
was
confirmed
afore
of
God
in
respect
of
Christ
,
the
Law
which
was
430
yeares
after
,
cannot
disanull
that
it
should
make
the
Promise
of
none
effect
.
For
if
the
inheritance
(
viz
)
of
Righteousnes
and
life
,
be
by
the
Law
;
it
is
not
by
the
Promise
:
but
God
gaue
it
to
Abraham
by
Promise
,
Heere
now
they
might
object
,
Wherefore
then
serueth
the
Law
?
If
Men
cannot
bee
iustified
by
keeping
the
Law
,
to
what
end
was
it
giuen
so
long
after
the
Promise
was
made
?
To
this
the
Apostle
answeres
.
It
was
added
(
vnto
the
Promise
)
because
of
the
transgressions
.
Here
's
the
true
vse
of
the
Morall
Law
,
since
the
fall
of
Man
,
not
to
justifie
him
and
giue
life
:
but
to
proue
him
to
be
vniust
and
worrhy
of
death
.
It
was
added
[
because
of
transgressions
.
]
that
is
.
1.
To
convince
Man
of
Sinne
,
that
he
might
be
put
in
remembrance
what
was
his
duty
of
old
;
and
what
was
his
present
infirmity
in
doing
of
it
,
and
what
was
God's
wrath
against
him
for
not
doing
it
.
That
seeing
how
impossible
it
was
for
him
to
attaine
vnto
life
by
this
old
way
of
the
Law
.
First
appointed
in
Paradise
,
he
might
be
humbled
and
driuen
to
looke
after
that
new
way
,
which
God
had
since
that
time
layed
forth
,
more
heedfully
attending
the
Promise
,
and
seeking
vnto
Christ
,
who
is
the
End
of
the
Law
vnto
euery
one
that
beleeues
in
him
.
Which
vse
God
pointed
out
vnto
the
Iewes
,
figuring
Christ
vnto
them
in
the
Mercyseate
,
couering
the
Arke
wherein
the
Tables
of
the
Couenant
were
kept
,
and
in
the
Sacrifices
appointed
for
all
sorts
of
Transgressions
against
this
Couenant
.
To
admonish
the
Iewes
a
further
thing
was
aimed
at
in
giuing
them
the
Law
,
namely
the
bringing
of
them
—
to
Christ
the
promised
seed
,
in
whom
Remission
of
Sinnes
,
and
Life
Eternall
was
to
bee
had
.
1.
To
restraine
Man
from
Sinne.
That
the
Law
might
be
a
perpetuall
rule
of
Holinesse
and
Obedience
whereby
Man
should
walke
and
glorifie
God
to
the
vtmost
of
his
power
.
That
so
those
Iewes
might
not
thinke
that
God
by
making
a
gracious
Promise
,
had
vtterly
nullified
the
Law
,
and
that
now
Men
might
liue
as
they
list
;
but
that
they
might
know
these
bounds
prescribed
them
of
God
,
within
which
compasse
they
were
to
keep
themselues
,
that
so
the
ouer-flowing
of
Iniquity
might
be
restrained
.
These
most
excellent
,
perpetuall
and
necessary
vses
of
the
morall
Law
,
God
intended
in
renewing
of
the
Legall
couenant
with
the
Iewes
:
&
ergo
the
Apostle
concludes
,
that
God
did
not
crosse
himself
,
when
first
he
gaue
the
Inheritance
to
Abraham
by
promise
,
and
afterwards
made
a
Legall
couenant
with
the
Iewes
his
posterity
.
Is
the
Law
then
against
the
Promises
?
(
saith
the
Apostle
)
God
forbid
.
For
if
there
had
beene
a
Law
giuen
,
which
could
haue
giuen
Life
,
surely
Righteousnesse
should
haue
bin
by
the
Law
:
But
the
Scripture
hath
concluded
all
vnder
Sinne
,
that
the
promise
by
the
Faith
of
Iesus
Christ
might
be
giuen
to
all
that
beleeue
.
ver.
21.
22.
Whence
it
is
most
cleare
that
the
Law
and
the
Gospell
in
some
things
are
subordinate
and
vphold
one
another
;
in
other
absolute
,
and
destroy
one
another
:
As
the
Law
by
the
discouery
of
Sinne
and
the
punishment
of
it
,
humbles
man
and
prepares
him
to
receaue
the
Gospell
.
2.
As
the
Law
is
a
sacred
direction
for
Holines
and
Obedience
to
those
that
haue
embraced
the
Gospell
and
all
others
.
3.
As
the
Law
requires
satisfaction
for
the
Breach
of
it
,
and
the
Gospell
promiseth
such
satisfaction
:
thus
the
Law
and
Gospell
agree
well
together
and
establish
one
another
.
But
as
the
Law
giues
life
to
them
that
perfectly
obey
it
,
and
the
Gospell
giues
Life
to
them
that
stedfastly
beleiue
it
:
thus
the
Law
and
Gospell
are
one
against
the
other
;
and
ouerthrow
one
another
.
And
ergo
if
God
had
giuen
such
a
Law
to
the
Iewes
,
as
could
haue
brought
Saluation
to
them
through
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
it
:
't
is
apparant
that
God
had
made
voide
his
former
Couenant
vnto
Abraham
,
because
Righteousnes
should
haue
bin
by
the
Law
,
and
not
by
Christ
.
But
now
God
gaue
no
such
Law
,
as
could
be
kept
by
the
Iewes
,
as
the
Apostle
proues
,
because
all
were
sinners
against
it
;
and
therefore
it
followes
that
notwithstanding
the
giuing
of
the
Law
,
the
Promise
standes
good
for
euer
;
and
Righteousnes
is
to
be
odtained
onely
by
the
Faith
of
Iesus
Christ
.
From
hence
we
conclude
firmely
.
That
the
difference
betweene
the
Law
and
the
Gospell
,
assigned
by
our
Diuines
is
most
certaine
and
agreable
to
the
Scriptures
.
viz.
That
.
The
Law
giues
Life
vnto
the
Iust
vpon
Con●ition
of
perfect
Obedience
in
all
things
:
The
Gospell
giues
Life
vnto
Sinners
vpon
Condition
,
they
repent
and
beleiue
in
Christ
Iesus
.
Whence
it
is
plaine
.
That
in
the
point
of
Iustification
these
two
are
incompatible
,
and
that
therefore
our
minor
Proposition
standes
verified
.
That
Iustification
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
makes
voide
the
Couenant
of
Grace
.
Which
Proposition
is
the
same
with
the
Apostles
assertion
else-where
.
Gal.
2.
21.
If
Righteousne
:
be
by
the
Law
Christ
died
in
vaine
.
and
Gal.
5.
4.
Ye
are
abolished
from
Christ
:
whosoeuer
are
iustified
by
the
Law
;
yee
are
fallen
from
Grace
.
By
somuch
more
iuiurious
are
these
of
the
Romish
Church
vnto
the
Gospell
of
Christ
,
when
,
by
denying
this
difference
,
they
would
confound
the
Law
and
Gospell
:
and
bring
vs
backe
from
Christ
to
Moses
,
to
seeke
for
our
Iustification
in
the
fulfilling
of
the
Morall
Law
.
They
would
persuade
vs
that
the
Gospell
is
nothing
,
but
a
more
perfect
Law
,
or
the
Law
perfected
by
addition
of
the
Spirit
,
enabling
men
to
fulfill
it
;
That
the
promises
of
the
Gospell
be
vpon
this
Condition
,
of
fulfilling
the
Law
▪
with
such
like
stuffe
.
Their
Doctrine
touching
this
point
is
declared
vnto
vs
by
Bellarmine
.
Lib
4.
de
Iustificat
.
cap.
3.
4.
Where
he
comes
many
distinctions
betweene
the
Law
and
Gospell
:
but
will
by
no
meanes
admit
of
that
which
our
Reformed
Diuines
make
to
be
the
chiefe
.
The
cheife
distinction
which
he
conceaues
to
be
betweene
them
he
frameth
thus
.
The
Gospell
(
saieth
he
)
is
taken
in
a
double
sense
.
For
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
,
and
his
Apostles
by
them
preached
and
written
;
2.
For
the
Grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
giuen
in
the
New
Testament
,
which
he
makes
to
be
the
Law
written
in
our
Hearts
,
the
quickening
Spirit
,
the
Law
of
Faith
Charity
shed
abroad
in
our
Hearts
,
in
opposition
to
the
Law
written
in
stone
,
to
the
dead
and
killing
Letter
,
the
Law
of
Workes
,
the
Spirit
of
bondage
and
feare
.
Vpon
this
he
proceeds
to
the
difference
betweene
the
Law
and
the
Gospell
.
Thus.
The
Law
teacheth
vs
what
is
to
be
done
,
the
Gospell
(
if
it
be
taken
for
the
Grace
of
the
holy
Ghost
)
so
it
differs
from
the
Law
;
because
it
gaines
strength
to
doe
it
:
but
if
it
be
taken
for
the
Doctrine
deliuered
by
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
so
it
agrees
with
the
Law
,
teaching
vs
,
as
the
Law
doth
,
what
things
are
to
be
done
.
This
Argument
the
Iesuite
illustrates
and
proues
in
three
particulars
.
1.
The
Gospell
containes
,
Doctrinam
operum
,
or
Leges
.
For
Morall
praecepts
,
they
be
the
same
in
the
Gospell
,
that
be
in
the
Law
;
Which
,
though
a
Trueth
,
yet
is
very
ridiculouslie
proued
by
the
Cardinall
out
of
.
Mat.
5.
Nisi
abundauerit
&c.
Vnlesse
your
Righteousnes
exceed
.
What
?
He
saieth
not
the
righteousnes
of
the
Law
and
Prophets
:
but
of
the
Scribes
and
Pharisees
;
yee
shall
not
enter
&c.
A
profound
Glosse
.
(
Christ
would
not
add
to
the
Burden
of
the
Law
:
but
take
away
from
the
false
glosse
of
the
Scribes
and
Pharisees
.
)
Surely
good
cause
had
our
Sauiour
to
taxe
both
the
Doctrine
of
the
Pharisees
in
interpreting
,
and
their
manners
in
their
hypocriticall
practice
of
the
Law
in
outward
matters
;
without
inward
Obedience
;
But
litle
Reason
was
there
that
Christ
should
require
of
man
more
perfection
then
Gods
Law
required
and
't
is
a
fancie
to
dreame
of
any
such
meaning
,
in
our
Sauiours
speach
.
2
The
Gospell
containes
Comminations
,
and
threatnings
as
the
Law
doth
.
Witnes
the
many
woes
from
Christ's
owne
mouth
against
the
Scribes
and
Pharisees
;
together
with
those
frequent
denunciations
of
Iudgement
and
Damnation
to
such
as
are
vngodly
,
that
doe
not
repent
and
obey
the
Gospell
.
3
Thirdly
the
Gospell
containes
promises
of
Life
and
happines
:
but
these
Euangelicall
promises
be
not
absolute
but
vpon
the
same
Condition
,
that
the
Legall
are
.
(
viz
)
Cum
conditione
implendae
Legis
,
Cum
conditione
Iustitiae
actualis
,
&
operosae
,
quae
in
perfecta
Mandatorum
obseruatione
consistit
.
Cap.
2.
This
the
Iesuite
would
proue
vnto
vs
.
1.
From
that
.
Math.
5.
Vnlesse
your
Righteousnes
aboud
&c.
(
that
is
,
in
Bellarmines
Construction
)
so
far
as
,
vnto
the
perfect
keeping
of
the
Law
:
you
shall
not
enter
into
the
Kingdome
of
Heauen
.
2.
From
Mat.
19.
17.
Mat.
10.
19.
Where
Christ
speakes
to
the
yong
man
.
Asking
him
what
he
should
doe
to
be
saued
.
If
thou
wilt
enter
into
Life
keepe
the
Commandements
.
And
to
the
Lawyer
.
(
10.
28.
)
who
asked
the
like
Question
he
answeres
.
This
doe
and
thou
shalt
liue
.
That
is
.
Fulfill
the
Law
,
and
thou
shalt
be
saued
.
In
which
wordes
they
say
;
That
Christ
did
preach
the
Gospell
,
and
shewed
vnto
these
men
the
very
Evangelical
way
to
Saluation
.
3.
From
the
many
places
of
Scripture
.
Wherein
Mortificati●n
of
Sinne
,
and
the
studious
practice
of
Holines
.
and
Obedience
is
required
of
vs
.
As.
Rom.
8.
If
yee
mortifie
the
deed
's
of
the
flesh
by
the
Spirit
:
yee
shall
liue
.
So.
Ezekiel
18.
21.
If
the
wicked
will
returne
from
all
his
Sinnes
,
that
he
hath
committed
;
and
keepe
all
my
statutes
,
and
doe
,
that
which
is
lawfull
and
Right
:
he
shall
surely
liue
and
not
die
.
With
a
Number
such
like
places
.
4.
From
the
very
Tenor
of
the
Gospell
.
He
that
belieueth
shall
be
saued
:
but
he
that
belieueth
not
,
shall
be
damned
.
If
we
doe
such
and
such
workes
.
From
hence
the
Romanist
concludes
:
That
seeing
the
precepts
,
threatnings
,
and
promises
of
the
Gospell
,
be
for
matter
the
same
,
that
those
of
the
Law
are
:
the
true
difference
betweene
the
Law
and
Gospell
shall
be
this
.
That
the
Law
nakedly
proposeth
what
is
to
be
done
without
giuing
grace
to
performe
it
:
but
the
Gospell
not
only
proposeth
what
is
to
be
done
,
but
withall
giueth
Grace
and
strength
to
doe
it
:
and
therefore
the
Law
giuen
by
Moses
the
Law-giuer
cannot
iustifie
,
because
it
was
giuen
without
the
grace
of
fulfilling
it
:
but
the
Gospell
giuen
by
Christ
the
Redeemer
doth
justifie
,
because
it
is
accompanied
with
the
grace
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
making
vs
able
to
keepe
the
Law
.
For
which
cause
also
the
Law
of
Moses
is
a
yoake
vnsupportable
,
the
Law
of
[
a
](A09274-e27640-b)
a
●om
8.
15.
〈◊〉
4.
24.
25.
feare
and
bondage
;
because
it
giues
not
grace
to
keepe
it
,
but
onely
conuinceth
our
Sinne
,
and
threatens
vs
punishment
:
but
the
Law
of
Christ
,
the
Gospell
is
a
light
yoake
,
a
Law
of
loue
and
liberty
;
because
it
giues
grace
to
keepe
it
,
and
of
loue
to
God
and
man
:
and
so
by
fulfilling
frees
a
man
from
feared
punishment
.
This
is
the
summe
of
the
Romish
Doctrine
touching
the
difference
betwixt
the
morall
Law
and
the
Gospell
in
the
point
of
Iustification
,
as
it
is
deliuered
vs
by
Bellarmine
,
the
rotten
pillar
of
the
antichristian
Synagogue
.
Wherein
we
haue
scarce
a
syllable
of
distinct
Trueth
:
but
all
peruerted
by
aequiuocations
and
grosse
Ambiguities
,
as
shall
appeare
by
a
short
surucy
of
the
former
discourse
.
Whereas
then
he
distinguisheth
the
Gospell
into
the
doctrine
of
Christ
,
and
his
Apostles
,
and
into
the
Grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
:
let
vs
follow
him
in
these
two
parts
.
First
for
Doctrine
.
We
grant
that
the
Gospell
is
often
so
taken
:
but
in
this
matter
about
Iustification
,
this
acception
,
on
is
too
large
;
and
not
distinct
enough
.
For
although
,
by
a
Synecd●che
of
the
chiefest
&
most
excellent
part
,
the
whole
Doctrine
and
Ministry
of
Christ
and
his
Apostles
with
their
successors
,
be
called
the
doctrine
of
the
Gospell
,
and
[
b
](A09274-e27700-b)
b
Rom.
12.
16.
At
that
day
when
God
shall
iudge
,
the
secrets
of
Men
by
Iesus
Christ
according
to
my
Gospell
.
the
Ministery
of
the
Gospell
:
yet
all
things
which
they
preached
or
wrote
,
is
not
the
Gospell
properly
so
called
.
But
as
Moses
chiefly
deliuered
the
Law
vnto
the
Iewes
,
though
yet
with
all
he
wrote
of
Christ
,
and
so
in
part
reuealed
vnto
them
the
Gospell
:
so
Christ
and
his
Ministers
,
though
chiefely
they
preach
the
Gospell
,
yet
in
its
place
they
vrge
the
law
withall
,
as
that
which
hath
its
singular
vse
in
furthering
our
Christian
faith
and
practise
.
Wherefore
when
we
speak
of
the
Gospell
as
opposite
to
the
Law
,
t
is
a
Iesuiticall
equiuocation
to
take
it
in
this
large
sense
.
For
the
whole
doctrine
of
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
preached
by
them
,
and
written
for
vs
in
the
Booke
of
the
New
Testament
,
we
follow
the
Apostle
in
his
dispute
of
Iustification
.
Gal.
3.
4.
5.
And
according
as
he
doth
take
the
Gospell
strictly
for
the
promise
of
Iustification
and
life
made
vnto
man
in
Christ
Iesus
.
This
is
in
proper
tearmes
the
Gospell
(
viz.
)
that
speciall
Doctrine
touching
mans
Redemption
and
reconciliation
with
God
by
the
meanes
of
Iesus
Christ
;
the
Reuelation
whereof
was
indeed
[
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
]
the
gladdest
tidings
that
were
euer
brought
to
the
eare
of
mortall
man
.
Which
Gospell
in
strict
teārmes
the
Angels
preached
.
Lue.
2.
10.
11.
Behold
,
I
bring
you
glad
tidings
of
great
ioy
,
which
shall
be
to
all
people
,
That
vnto
you
is
borne
this
day
in
the
Citie
of
Dauid
,
a
Sauiour
which
is
Christ
the
Lord
.
And
afterward
Christ
and
his
Apostles
fully
explained
the
mysteries
thereof
vnto
the
world
.
According
to
this
necessary
distinction
,
we
answer
.
That
if
we
take
the
Gospell
in
that
large
Acception
;
t
is
true
which
Bellarmine
hath
.
That
the
Gospell
containes
in
it
the
Doctrine
of
workes
(
viz.
)
the
Morall
Law
,
euen
the
very
same
precepts
,
prohibitions
,
threatnings
,
&
promises
which
are
deliuered
in
the
Law
.
All
which
as
Christ
and
his
Hpostles
preached
:
so
may
all
Ministers
without
blame
,
yea
,
they
must
,
if
they
will
auoid
blame
,
presse
the
same
vpon
their
hearers
,
seasonably
and
discreetly
,
that
the
Law
may
make
way
for
the
better
receiuing
and
entertainment
of
Grace
in
the
Gospell
.
But
hence
it
followes
not
,
that
the
Gospell
properly
so
taken
,
is
to
be
confounded
as
one
and
the
same
thing
with
the
Law
;
because
the
Law
is
conjoyned
with
it
in
the
preachings
and
writings
of
the
Ministers
of
the
New
Testament
.
They
still
are
deuided
in
their
Nature
and
Offices
:
nor
hath
the
Gospell
any
affinity
with
the
Law
in
praecepts
,
threatnings
,
or
promises
.
Wherefore
when
Bellarmine
teacheth
vs
.
That
Euangelicall
promises
be
made
with
condition
of
perfect
fulfilling
the
Law
.
T
is
a
desperate
errour
,
and
that
in
the
very
foundation
.
You
heard
his
proofes
before
recited
:
see
now
a
little
how
passing
weake
they
be
.
1
Mat.
5.
Except
your
righteousnesse
,
&c.
To
this
wee
answere
.
The
plaine
meaning
of
the
place
is
this
.
Our
righteousnesse
must
abound
more
then
that
of
the
Pharises
(
that
is
,
)
It
must
not
be
outside
onely
as
theirs
was
:
but
inward
Righteousnesse
of
the
heart
,
in
inward
sanctity
of
the
thoughts
and
affections
,
as
well
as
of
the
outward
Action
:
or
else
such
our
hypocrisie
will
keepe
vs
from
entring
into
Heauen
.
But
doth
it
hence
follow
,
that
because
we
must
be
more
perfect
then
these
Pharisees
,
we
must
be
as
perfect
in
all
things
as
the
Law
requires
:
we
must
exceed
them
,
ergo
,
equall
the
holinesse
of
the
Law
in
all
points
?
Because
wee
must
be
syncere
without
hypocrisie
,
ergo
,
we
must
be
perfect
in
all
things
without
blame
?
Such
consequents
as
these
,
the
Iesuit
hath
concluded
out
of
his
own
head
,
not
out
of
the
text
.
Touching
that
speech
of
Christ
to
the
yong
man
.
Mat.
19.
and
the
Lawyer
.
Matt.
10.
That
if
they
did
fulfill
the
Law
,
they
should
liue
.
We
answere
,
that
Christ
in
so
speaking
vnto
them
did
not
preach
the
Gospell
:
but
shewed
vnto
them
the
Legall
way
to
Saluation
.
For
these
erring
that
grand
error
of
the
Iew
in
seeking
for
righteousnesse
not
by
faith
but
by
the
works
of
the
Law
,
seuering
the
Law
,
from
Christ
the
end
thereof
;
(
as
the
Apostle
shewes
.
Rom.
9.
31.
32.
&
10.
3.
and
so
supposing
to
be
saued
by
doing
some
good
thing
.
Christ
answeres
them
in
their
humour
,
as
euery
one
should
be
answered
,
that
swels
with
high
conceits
of
his
own
righteousnesse
&
workes
,
That
there
was
a
Law
to
be
kept
:
and
if
they
could
fully
obserue
the
righteousnes
of
it
,
they
should
be
saued
,
sending
them
of
purpose
to
the
Law
,
that
they
might
be
humbled
thereby
and
see
their
great
folly
in
seekeing
for
life
by
that
,
which
they
were
so
vnable
to
keepe
.
Against
which
answere
the
[
a
](A09274-e27980-b)
a
Calv.
I●st
.
lib.
●
.
cap.
18.
§
9.
Iesuit
hath
nothing
to
rely
;
but
stands
much
in
confuting
of
another
answere
made
by
some
of
our
Diuines
.
That
Christ
spake
these
things
Ironically
.
This
Bellar.
seeks
to
confute
;
nor
do
I
labor
to
confirm
it
;
though
it
might
be
justified
for
any
thing
he
brings
to
the
contrary
.
3
Vnto
those
those
places
of
Scripture
that
euery
where
almost
promise
life
,
blessednesse
,
the
fauour
of
God
,
vpon
condition
of
[
holinesse
in
life
and
conversation
,
that
we
mortifie
the
lusts
of
the
flesh
,
walke
in
the
Spirit
,
ouercome
the
world
,
&c.
]
We
answere
,
that
,
Obedience
is
one
thing
,
perfect
obedience
is
another
.
We
say
that
the
promises
of
the
Gospell
bee
all
vpon
condition
of
obedience
:
but
none
vpon
condition
of
perobedience
.
T
is
an
iniury
done
vnto
vs
,
when
they
say
;
we
teach
that
Euangelicall
promises
be
absolute
and
without
condition
,
as
if
God
did
promise
and
giue
all
vnto
vs
;
and
wee
doe
nothing
for
it
on
our
parts
.
We
defend
no
such
dotage
.
The
promises
of
the
Gospell
be
conditionall
(
viz.
)
Namely
vpon
condition
of
repentance
and
amendment
of
life
.
That
we
study
to
our
power
to
obey
God
in
all
things
;
but
this
is
such
a
condition
as
requires
of
sincerity
and
faithfulnesse
of
endeauour
,
not
perfection
of
obedience
in
the
full
performance
of
euery
jot
and
Tittle
of
the
Law
.
Vnto
the
last
Argument
,
from
the
tenour
of
the
New
Couenant
(
viz.
)
That
we
must
beleeue
if
we
will
be
saued
;
ergo
,
the
promise
of
the
Gospell
is
with
condition
of
fulfilling
the
Law
.
This
is
an
Argument
might
make
the
Cardinals
cheeke
as
red
,
as
his
Cap
,
were
there
any
shame
in
him
.
Faith
indeed
is
a
worke
:
and
this
worke
is
required
as
a
condition
of
the
promise
:
but
to
doe
this
worke
,
To
beleeue
,
though
it
be
to
obey
Gods
Commandement
;
yet
it
is
not
perfectly
to
fulfill
the
whole
Law
;
but
perfectly
to
trust
in
him
,
who
brings
mercy
and
pardon
for
transgressions
of
the
Law
.
CHAP.
II.
Of
Bellarmines
erroneous
distinction
of
the
word
Gospell
.
SO
much
of
the
first
member
of
the
Iesuits
distinction
,
wherin
his
sophisticall
fraud
appeares
,
taking
the
Gospel
for
the
whole
doctrine
of
the
New
Testament
,
published
by
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
and
ergo
,
confounding
the
Law
&
Gospell
as
one
:
because
he
findes
the
Law
as
well
as
the
Gospell
deliuered
vnto
vs
,
by
our
Sauiour
and
his
Ministers
:
I
proceed
to
the
second
branch
of
it
.
The
Gospell
(
saith
he
)
is
taken
for
the
grace
of
the
holy
Ghost
giuen
vs
in
the
New
Testament
:
whereby
men
are
made
able
to
keepe
the
Law
.
T
is
so
taken
.
But
where
is
it
so
taken
?
The
Iesuit
cannot
tell
you
that
:
[
Vt
verum
fatear
(
saith
he
)
nomen
Evangelij
non
videtur
in
Scripturis
uspiam
accipi
,
nisi
pro
doctrind
,
]
No
good
reason
for
it
,
in
as
much
as
t
is
euident
to
all
me
,
that
there
is
great
difference
betweene
the
doctrine
of
Mans
saluation
by
the
Mercy
of
God
through
the
Merits
of
Christ
(
which
is
properly
the
Gospell
)
and
the
graces
of
the
Holy
Ghost
bestowed
on
man
in
his
Regeneration
,
whereby
he
is
made
able
in
some
measure
,
to
doe
that
which
is
good
.
But
the
fault
is
not
so
much
in
the
name
in
calling
the
grace
of
God
in
vs
by
the
name
of
Gospell
:
as
in
the
mis-interpretation
of
the
matter
it selfe
.
Wherein
two
errours
are
committed
by
the
Iesuite
.
1
In
that
he
maketh
the
grace
of
the
New
Testament
,
to
be
such
strength
giuen
to
man
:
that
thereby
he
may
fulfill
the
Law
.
2
In
that
he
saith
.
The
Law
was
giuen
without
grace
to
keepe
it
.
In
both
which
assertions
their
is
ambiguity
and
Error
.
For
the
first
.
We
grant
that
grace
to
doe
any
thing
that
is
good
,
is
giuen
,
by
the
Gospell
,
not
by
the
Law
.
The
Law
commands
:
but
it
giues
no
strength
to
Obey
,
because
it
persupposeth
that
he
,
to
whome
the
command
is
giuen
,
hath
,
or
ought
to
haue
already
in
himselfe
strength
to
Obey
it
.
And
Ergo
,
we
confesse
it
freely
,
that
we
[
Receaue
th●
Spirit
not
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
:
but
by
the
hearing
of
Faith
preached
]
as
it
is
Gal.
3.
2.
The
Donation
of
the
Spirit
in
any
measure
whatsoeuer
of
his
sanctifying
graces
is
from
Christ
as
a
Sauiour
,
not
as
a
Lawgiuer
.
Thus
when
we
agree
.
That
all
Graces
to
doe
well
is
giuen
vnto
vs
by
the
Gospell
;
but
next
we
differ
.
They
teach
that
the
Gospell
gies
such
grace
vnto
man
,
that
he
may
fulfill
what
the
Law
commands
:
and
so
be
Iustified
by
it
.
we
deny
it
,
and
say
that
Grace
is
giuen
by
the
Gospell
,
to
obey
the
Law
sincerely
without
hyppocricy
:
but
not
to
fulfill
it
perfectly
without
infirmities
.
In
which
point
the
Iesuite
failes
in
his
proofes
which
he
brings
.
1
Out
of
those
places
where
contrary
Attributes
are
ascribed
to
the
Law
and
Gospell
.
Vnto
the
Law
.
That
it
is
[
the
ministry
[
a
](A09274-e28690-b)
a
2
Cor.
3.
7.
of
death
and
Condemnation
]
[
b
](A09274-e28710-b)
b
2
Cor.
3.
6.
[
Killing
[
d
](A09274-e28730-b)
d
Gal.
5.
1.
Letter
]
that
it
(
workes
wrath
)
that
it
is
a
[
Yoake
[
d
](A09274-e28770-b)
d
Gal.
5.
1.
of
Bondage
a
[
Testament
[
c
](A09274-e28790-b)
c
Rom.
4.
15.
1
Cor.
15.
56.
bringing
forth
Childeren
vnto
Bondage
]
.
But
vnto
the
Gospell
,
[
e
](A09274-e28820-b)
e
Gal.
4.
24.
that
it
is
[
The
ministry
[
f
](A09274-e28840-b)
f
2
Cor.
3.
6.
of
Life
]
and
[
of
Reconciliation
]
[
g
](A09274-e28870-b)
g
2
Cor
5.
19.
the
[
h
](A09274-e28880-b)
h
2
Cor
3.
6.
7.
17.
Gal.
4.
16.
(
Spirit
that
quickeneth
)
the
(
Testament
that
bringeth
forth
Childeren
to
Liberty
)
which
opposition
Bellarmine
will
haue
to
bee
,
because
The
Law
giues
precepts
without
affording
strength
to
keepe
them
:
but
the
Gospell
giues
grace
to
doe
what
is
Commanded
.
But
the
Iesuite
is
here
mistaken
.
These
opposite
attributes
giuen
to
the
Law
,
are
ascribed
to
it
in
a
twofold
respect
,
1
Inregard
of
of
the
punishment
which
the
Law
threatens
to
offenders
(
viz.
)
Death
.
In
which
regard
principally
the
Law
is
said
to
be
the
ministry
of
Death
,
to
worke
wrath
,
to
be
not
a
dead
,
but
a
Killing
Letter
:
in
asmuch
as
being
broken
it
leaues
no
hope
to
the
Transgresser
:
but
a
fearefull
expectation
of
eternall
Death
and
condemnation
of
the
Law
vnder
the
Terrors
whereof
it
holds
them
in
bondage
.
But
on
the
Contrary
the
Gospell
is
the
ministery
of
Life
,
of
reconciliation
of
the
quickening
spirit
and
of
Liberty
,
because
it
reueales
vnto
vs
Christ
in
whom
we
are
restored
to
Life
;
from
the
deserued
Death
and
condemnation
of
the
Law
,
vnto
Gods
fauour
,
being
deliuered
from
the
wrath
to
come
,
vnto
liberty
;
being
freed
from
slauish
feare
of
Punishment
.
This
is
the
cheefe
Reason
of
this
opposition
of
Attributes
.
Secondly
the
next
is
in
regard
of
Obedience
.
In
which
respect
the
ministry
of
the
Law
is
said
to
be
the
Ministery
of
the
Letter
written
in
tabels
of
stone
:
but
that
of
the
Gospell
is
called
the
ministery
of
the
Spirit
which
writes
the
Law
in
the
fleshly
tables
of
the
heart
.
Because
the
Law
bearely
commands
:
but
Ministers
not
power
to
obey
;
&
so
is
but
as
a
dead
Letter
without
the
Vertue
of
the
Spirit
.
But
in
the
Gospell
grace
is
giuen
from
Christ
,
who
by
the
Holy
Ghost
sanctifieth
the
heart
of
his
Elect
,
that
they
may
liue
to
Righteousnesse
in
a
sincere
thought
not
euery
way
exact
conformity
to
the
Law
of
God
.
The
like
answere
we
giue
vnto
another
proofe
of
his
.
2
Out
of
that
place
(
Iohn
1.
17.
The
Law
came
by
Moses
:
but
Grace
and
truth
by
Iesus
Christ
)
that
is
(
saith
Bellarmine
)
The
Law
came
by
Moses
without
grace
to
fulfill
it
:
but
grace
to
keepe
it
,
by
Christ
.
We
answere
.
The
true
interpretation
of
these
words
is
this
:
Moses
deliuered
a
twofold
Law
,
morall
and
ceremoniall
.
Opposite
to
these
Christ
hath
brought
a
twofold
priuiledge
.
Grace
for
the
morall
Law
,
whereby
we
vnderstand
not
only
power
giuen
to
the
regenerate
in
part
to
obserue
this
Law
,
which
strength
could
not
come
by
the
Law
it selfe
:
but
also
,
much
,
more
Remission
of
sinnes
committed
against
the
Law
and
so
our
Iustification
and
freedome
from
the
guilt
of
sinne
and
course
of
the
Morall
Law
.
Secondly
,
Truth
for
the
Ceremoniall
Law
the
substance
being
brought
in
and
the
shadowes
vanished
.
wherefore
the
Iesuite
erres
greately
in
this
point
,
when
he
makes
the
grace
of
the
New
Testament
to
consist
in
this
.
That
strength
is
thereby
giuen
us
to
fulfill
the
Law
.
The
grace
of
God
in
the
Gospell
is
chiefely
our
Iustification
and
Redemption
from
the
curse
of
the
Law
:
and
in
the
next
place
strength
afforded
vs
to
Obey
the
Law
in
some
measure
not
perfectly
as
our
Aduersaries
would
haue
it
.
In
the
next
point
he
erres
as
much
in
saying
that
the
Law
of
Moses
was
giueu
without
grace
to
obey
it
.
A
false
assertion
.
For
although
the
Law
of
it selfe
giue
not
grace
:
yet
t
is
certaine
that
grace
was
giuen
by
Christ
euen
then
when
Moses
published
the
Law
.
Sufficient
for
the
proofe
hereof
are
.
1
These
excellent
properties
ascribed
vnto
the
Law
of
God
,
as
in
other
places
of
the
old
Testament
:
so
spetially
in
the
Booke
of
the
Psalmes
.
And
amongst
them
in
the
19.
and
119.
Psalmes
.
Where
the
Law
of
God
is
said
to
(
giue
light
to
the
ei●s
,
to
conuert
the
Soule
,
to
reioice
the
Heart
&c.
)
which
it
could
not
doe
of
it selfe
,
had
not
the
grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
being
giuen
in
these
times
.
without
which
the
Law
could
worke
no
such
sauing
Effects
.
2
Experienee
of
those
times
in
the
Faith
,
Patience
,
and
●bedience
,
and
all
sorts
of
graces
shining
in
those
ancient
Saints
(
who
liued
before
and
after
the
Law
was
giuen
.
Which
graces
they
receaued
from
the
Holy
Ghost
,
shed
vpon
their
hearts
by
vertue
of
Christs
mediation
,
whereby
they
receaued
strength
to
liue
holily
in
Obedience
vnto
the
Law
of
God
.
The
difference
betweene
these
times
,
and
those
vnder
the
Law
,
is
not
.
That
we
haue
grace
and
they
had
none
:
but
only
in
the
m●asure
and
extent
of
the
same
grace
bestowed
,
both
on
vs
and
them
.
In
those
times
as
the
Doctrine
of
the
Gospell
was
more
obscurely
reuealed
:
so
the
grace
which
accompanies
it
was
more
sparingly
distributed
,
being
confined
to
to
a
Church
collected
of
one
nation
,
and
bestowed
vpon
that
Church
in
a
lesser
measure
,
then
now
;
though
yet
suffitiently
in
that
measure
.
But
in
the
times
of
the
New
Testament
,
the
light
shines
more
brightly
,
and
grace
is
dispenced
more
liberally
,
being
extended
indifferently
to
all
Nations
and
poured
vpon
the
Godly
in
a
larger
Abundance
:
according
as
was
promised
Ieremiah
31.
Though
also
this
comparison
must
be
restrained
vnto
whole
Churches
,
what
generally
is
now
done
;
for
no
doubt
in
many
particulars
some
men
vnder
the
Law
exceede
for
abundance
of
Grace
,
many
vnder
the
Gospell
.
Wherefore
it
is
a
notable
iniury
vnto
the
Bounty
of
God
,
and
the
honour
of
those
Saints
of
old
,
to
exclude
them
from
partaking
of
the
Gospell
;
to
affirme
that
they
were
led
only
by
the
Spirit
of
Feare
,
[
b
](A09274-e29630-b)
b
See
Beca●●●
Tom.
2.
Tract.
4.
cap.
●
Quest.
1.
2.
3.
that
they
were
not
Sonnes
though
vnder
Tutors
and
gouernors
,
as
we
confesse
they
were
but
very
Seruants
held
in
Bondage
and
excluded
from
the
inheritance
of
Grace
,
and
glory
till
after
Christs
Death
.
So
that
at
best
their
adoptio●
was
but
conditionall
with
regard
of
Time
to
come
:
but
,
for
the
present
,
they
were
handled
as
slaues
fear'd
with
temporall
punishments
allured
by
temporall
rewards
,
like
a
heard
of
Swine
fed
with
base
achors
and
huskes
.
These
be
absurd
Errors
bred
out
of
Scripture
misvnderstood
.
Especially
that
of
Iohn
1.
Grace
came
by
Christ
.
Ergo
,
not
before
Christs
In●arnation
.
A
sily
Argument
.
Christ
is
as
old
as
the
World
and
his
Grace
as
ancient
,
as
the
Name
of
Man
vpon
Earth
.
grace
alwaies
came
by
Crhist
,
&
was
in
its
measure
giuen
by
him
long
before
he
appear'd
in
the
flesh
.
He
was
euer
the
head
of
his
Church
,
and
that
his
Body
,
which
he
alwaies
quickned
by
the
blessed
influence
of
his
Spirit
ministered
therevnto
.
Whereby
the
Godly
before
as
well
as
since
his
incarnation
were
made
liuing
members
of
that
his
misticall
Body
.
Wherefore
it
is
apparant
,
that
grace
is
not
to
be
tied
to
the
Times
of
the
Gospell
and
seuered
from
the
Law
.
Nay
,
as
of
old
the
Law
was
not
alwaies
without
grace
:
so
now
many
times
the
Gospel
it selfe
is
without
grace
Christ
himselfe
being
a
stumbling
stone
and
rocke
of
offence
,
the
Gospell
a
Sauiour
of
Death
to
those
many
vpon
whome
Grace
is
not
bestowed
;
to
beleeue
and
embrace
it
.
I
conclude
then
.
That
this
difference
,
with
our
Aduersaries
make
betweene
the
Law
and
Gospell
is
false
:
and
that
their
Error
is
pernitious
in
makind
the
Gospel
to
be
nothing
,
but
a
Spirit
added
to
the
Law
that
man
may
fulfill
it
to
his
Iustification
.
That
thus
a
man
may
be
saued
by
Christ
through
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
the
Law
.
Which
is
a
monstrous
and
vncouth
Doctrine
laying
an
vnsupportable
burthen
vpon
the
conscience
of
man
and
hazarding
his
soule
to
●ternall
distruction
,
whiles
by
this
meanes
he
frustrates
the
Grace
of
God
in
Christ
;
and
withall
frustrats
his
owne
hopes
of
life
expecting
to
obtaine
it
by
that
Law
which
he
is
neuer
able
to
fulfill
.
SECT.
5.
CHAP.
I.
Iustification
by
fulfilling
the
law
,
ouerthrowes
Christian
libertie
,
the
parts
of
our
Christian
libertie
.
SO
much
of
the
Third
Argument
:
The
last
followes
drawne
from
the
Nature
of
Christian
Liberty
.
Which
is
this
.
4.
Arg.
But
Iustification
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
ouerthrowes
the
spirituall
Liberty
of
Man
obtained
for
him
by
Christ
.
Ergò
.
'T
is
an
Haeresie
against
the
Gospell
.
For
the
proofe
of
the
minor
Proposition
,
let
vs
in
briefe
consider
wherein
stands
that
Liberty
wherewith
Christ
hath
made
vs
free
,
that
so
we
may
the
better
perceiue
what
part
thereof
,
this
doctrine
of
Iustification
by
works
doth
nullifie
and
depriue
vs
of
.
The
Liberty
wee
haue
in
Christ
is
either
in
regard
of
the
Life
to
come
,
or
of
this
praesent
life
.
The
first
is
the
Liberty
of
Glory
consisting
in
a
fu●l
deliuerance
from
that
state
of
vanity
and
misery
,
both
sinfull
and
painfull
,
wherevnto
we
are
now
subiect
.
And
not
we
only
,
but
the
whole
Creation
,
which
with
vs
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
groaneth
and
trauaileth
in
paine
,
till
with
vs
it
also
be
deliuered
,
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
;
From
the
bondage
of
Corruption
,
into
the
Glorious
libertie
of
the
Sonnes
of
God
,
)
as
the
Apostle
declares
Rom.
8.
19.
&
seq
.
This
Liberty
we
haue
in
hope
,
not
in
possession
.
The
next
we
actually
injoy
in
this
life
,
and
that
is
the
Liberty
of
Grace
.
This
we
may
diuide
not
vnfitly
into
3
branches
:
1
Freedome
from
Sinne.
2
Freedome
from
the
Law
:
3
Freedome
from
Men.
1
Our
Freedome
from
Sinne
stands
in
2
things
;
1
In
our
deliuerance
from
the
Punishment
of
Sinne.
For
whereas
euery
Sinne
of
it's
owne
Nature
brings
with
it
guiltines
,
and
a
sure
obligation
vnto
punishment
,
binding
ouer
the
transgressor
vnto
the
paines
of
God's
aeternall
wrath
by
a
stronger
chaine
then
of
Steele
or
Adamant
:
Christ
by
his
meritorious
satisfaction
hath
broken
these
bonds
,
and
ransomed
vs
from
this
fearefull
Bondage
vnto
Hell
and
destruction
.
He
being
made
a
Curse
for
vs
,
hath
redeemed
vs
from
the
Curse
of
the
Law
.
Gal.
3.
13.
That
is
,
By
taking
on
himselfe
the
punishment
of
our
Sinnes
,
in
his
owne
person
suffering
,
and
satisfying
the
wrath
and
Iustice
of
God
,
he
hath
once
for
euer
set
vs
free
from
the
dreadfull
vengeance
of
God
,
which
we
deserue
should
fall
vpon
vs
for
our
Iniquities
.
2
In
our
deliuerance
from
the
Power
of
Sinne
,
which
though
it
abide
in
vs
in
the
Reliques
of
our
corrupted
Nature
:
yet
by
the
power
of
the
Holy
Ghost
dwelling
in
the
Hearts
of
the
Regenerate
,
it
is
subdued
and
kept
vnder
,
that
it
doth
not
reigne
nor
exercise
it's
commanding
authority
without
Controle
.
So
that
whereas
the
Vnregenerate
be
the
Seruants
of
Sinne
,
wholly
at
the
command
of
Satan
and
wicked
affections
,
the
Regenerate
are
freed
from
this
slauery
being
ruled
and
guided
by
the
Spirit
of
the
Lord
,
which
wheresoeuer
it
is
,
there
is
liberty
,
as
the
Apostle
speakes
,
2
Cor.
3.
17.
Liberty
from
that
blindnes
wherein
we
are
holden
by
Nature
,
not
knowing
what
the
will
of
God
is
.
Liberty
from
that
rebellion
and
infirmity
of
our
Nature
,
whereby
we
are
,
nor
willing
,
nor
able
to
doe
the
will
of
God
.
From
which
we
are
freed
in
part
by
the
Spirit
of
Christ
,
inlightning
our
Mindes
,
and
changing
our
Hearts
.
This
Liberty
from
Sinnes
dominion
and
damnation
,
S.
Paul
joynes
together
,
Rom.
8.
2.
(
The
Law
of
the
Spirit
of
Life
,
which
is
in
Christ
Iesus
,
hath
freed
me
from
the
Law
of
Sinne
and
of
Death
.
)
And
againe
,
Rom.
6.
14.
Sinne
shall
not
haue
Dominion
ouer
you
,
for
ye
are
not
vnder
the
Law
,
but
vnder
Grace
.
|
2
Our
freedome
from
the
Law
is
eithr
from
the
|
Ceremoniall
|
|
or
|
|
Moral
law
.
|
The
Ceremoniall
Law
contained
in
it
diuerse
Carnall
Ordinances
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
to
endure
vntill
the
time
of
reformation
.
New
Testament
,
as
namely
.
1.
From
the
whole
burthen
of
Legall
ceremonies
whatsoeuer
vsed
in
the
worship
of
God
.
Those
resemblances
are
of
no
vse
now
,
when
the
substance
it selfe
is
come
in
place
:
nor
may
such
beggarly
and
impotent
rudiments
be
sought
after
,
when
greater
perfection
is
to
be
had
.
Gal.
4.
9.
2.
From
that
restraint
in
things
indifferent
,
whereunto
the
Iewes
were
tied
,
but
we
are
not
bound
.
Such
are
the
obseruations
of
dayes
,
of
Meates
and
Drinkes
,
of
Garments
,
with
the
like
.
Wherein
the
Iewes
were
rest●ayned
:
but
our
consciences
are
left
free
,
being
taught
that
euery
Creature
of
God
is
good
being
sanctified
by
Prayer
and
thankesgiuing
.
1.
Tim.
4.
4.
5.
And
that
to
the
[
b
](A09274-e30740-b)
b
1
Ti●
.
1.
15.
pure
all
things
are
pure
.
Onely
this
being
obserued
,
that
we
abuse
not
this
our
Liberty
,
but
that
as
we
are
informed
by
Faith
that
all
things
are
lawfull
for
vs
:
so
we
should
be
taught
by
charity
to
see
what
are
expedient
in
regard
of
others
.
may
be
scandalized
,
as
the
Apostle
commands
,
Rom
14.
21.
By
which
●eanes
Knowledge
on
the
one
side
still
preserues
vs
,
that
our
consciences
be
not
i●snared
with
superstition
,
and
charity
on
the
other
side
shall
keepe
our
Liberty
from
degenerating
into
Licentiousnesse
,
and
vnchristian
contempt
of
our
weake
Brethren
.
2
Our
freedome
from
the
Morall
law
stands
in
this
,
that
whereas
the
Law
requires
of
euery
Man
,
vpon
strictest
termes
of
Necessity
,
full
and
compleate
Obedience
to
all
things
whatsoeuer
contained
in
it
,
if
he
will
auoide
the
punishment
of
Hell
fire
:
Christ
hath
freed
all
that
belieue
in
him
from
this
heavy
and
rigorous
exaction
of
the
Law
,
taking
away
from
our
Consciences
this
obligation
vnto
a
necessary
fulfilling
thereof
,
vpon
paine
that
we
shall
forfeit
Heauen
if
we
doe
it
not
.
As
we
shall
see
more
anon
.
3
In
the
last
place
our
Freedome
is
from
Men
:
humane
Traditions
,
Opinions
,
or
Ordinations
whatsoeuer
to
tye
his
conscience
vnto
obedience
by
vertue
of
his
own
authority
,
such
a
one
trenches
vpon
Gods
high
Praerogatiue
,
&
vsurpes
tyrannically
ouer
the
soules
of
Men
,
according
,
as
at
this
day
,
that
Man
of
Sinne
doth
.
But
here
we
must
obserue
that
Humane
Constitutions
be
either
Ecclesiasticall
or
Politicall
.
Ecclesiasticall
concerne
either
the
matter
and
substance
of
God's
&
worship
when
any
thing
is
invented
by
Man
,
&
commanded
,
wherein
and
whereby
to
worship
God
.
2
The
Manner
and
externall
order
of
God's
worship
in
the
determination
of
indifferent
circumstances
tending
to
decencie
and
comelinesse
.
For
the
former
we
renounce
and
reiect
all
humane
authority
whatsoeuer
,
that
shall
without
warrant
from
the
Scriptures
,
prescribe
vnto
the
Church
any
doctrine
to
be
receiued
as
a
diuine
Trueth
or
Custome
,
Ceremony
or
Practise
whatsoeuer
,
to
be
obserued
as
a
proper
part
of
God's
most
holy
worship
.
According
as
our
reformed
Churches
haue
happily
recouered
their
Liberty
by
breaking
asunder
those
cordes
,
&
casting
away
that
Yoake
of
false
doctrine
of
Superstitions
,
●●r●moniall
will-worships
,
wherewith
not
Christ
,
but
Anti-Christ
had
insnared
and
oppressed
the
Church
.
And
they
haue
God's
owne
warrant
for
so
doing
,
Isay.
29.
13.
ratified
and
explained
by
Christ
,
Mat.
15
,
9.
(
In
vaine
they
worship
me
,
teaching
for
doctrine
Mens
precepts
:
)
which
was
a
thing
contrary
to
God's
expresse
commandement
,
Ezech.
20.
18.
●●
.
(
Walke
yee
not
in
the
ordinances
of
your
Fathers
,
neither
obserue
their
manners
,
nor
defile
your selues
with
their
Idoles
:
I
am
the
Lord
your
God
,
walke
in
my
Statutes
,
and
keepe
my
Iudgements
and
doe
them
.
)
For
the
later
,
namely
humane
Constitutions
concerning
indifferent
Circumstances
in
God's
worship
,
tending
to
orderly
decency
,
agreeable
to
the
simplicity
and
purity
of
the
Gospell
:
herein
wee
must
acknowledge
the
authority
of
the
Church
though
not
ouer
our
Consciences
to
binde
them
:
yet
ouer
our
practises
to
order
&
limit
them
.
Accordingly
as
also
we
doe
in
the
other
branch
of
humane
Obediences
.
viz.
Politicall
or
ciuill
,
comprising
all
Law
,
touching
lawfull
things
made
for
the
gouernance
of
Kingdomes
;
or
inferior
states
by
the
supreame
Magistrate
,
that
hath
authority
so
to
doe
.
Wherevnto
we
(
must
be
subject
,
not
because
of
wrath
onely
,
but
also
for
conscience
sake
.
)
For
Conscience
sake
,
not
because
the
highest
Monarch
on
Earth
hath
power
ouer
the
Conscience
of
his
meanest
subject
;
to
binde
it
by
vertue
of
his
owne
authority
:
but
because
God
hath
established
the
Magistrates
authority
and
commanded
subjects
Obedience
in
lawfull
things
,
and
therefore
we
cannot
disobey
them
without
breach
of
Conscience
,
in
disobeying
and
viol●ting
also
Gods
Commandement
.
But
otherwise
for
any
immediate
power
over
the
conscience
,
to
restraine
the
inward
liberty
thereof
,
no
man
without
praesumption
may
arrogate
its
nor
any
without
slauish
basenes
yeeld
to
another
,
ye
are
bought
with
a
price
,
be
not
yee
seruants
of
men
.
)
This
is
in
breife
the
Doctrine
of
Christian
or
spirituall
l●berty
,
which
we
call
Christian
:
1.
from
the
cause
of
it
,
Christ
,
by
whose
purchase
we
enioye
it
.
2.
From
the
subject
of
it
,
Christians
,
in
opposition
to
the
Iewes
,
who
had
not
this
liberty
in
all
parts
of
it
as
we
haue
.
Namely
in
freedome
from
the
Ceremoniall
Law
,
and
restraint
in
things
indifferent
.
In
all
other
parts
they
in
their
measure
were
freed
by
Christ
as
well
as
we
.
Againe
we
call
it
spirituall
in
opposition
to
ciuill
and
bodily
Liberty
:
because
it
stands
in
the
freedome
of
So●le
and
Conscience
,
not
in
the
freedome
of
the
outward
man
;
the
bondage
and
subjection
whereof
is
no
impeachment
to
this
spirituall
freedome
:
As
Anabaptisticall
Libertines
would
perswade
the
world
contrary
to
the
Apostles
decision
.
1.
Cor.
7.
22.
(
He
that
is
called
in
the
Lord
being
a
seruant
,
is
the
Lords
Free-man
.
CHAP.
II.
Iustification
by
workes
subjects
vs
to
the
rigour
and
curse
of
the
Law
WE
are
now
in
the
next
place
to
see
which
braunch
of
our
liberty
is
cut
off
by
the
doctrine
of
Iustification
by
workes
.
Not
to
meddle
with
others
whereat
it
giues
a
backblow
,
but
to
take
that
which
it
directly
strikes
at
:
we
say
,
it
destroies
our
Liberty
from
the
moral
Law
,
which
stands
heerein
,
that
we
are
not
obliged
vnto
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
that
Law
,
vpon
paine
of
aeternall
Daemnation
,
if
we
doe
it
not
.
This
gratious
liberty
Christ
hath
enfranchised
vs
withall
,
whosoeuer
beleiue
in
him
:
and
they
that
now
teach
we
are
justified
by
workes
of
the
Law
,
doe
rob
our
Consciences
of
this
heauenly
Freedome
,
bringing
vs
again
vnder
that
miserable
bondage
vnto
the
Law
,
wherein
all
men
are
holden
,
which
are
in
state
of
infidelity
&
vnregeneration
,
from
whom
the
Law
in
extremest
rigour
exacts
perfect
Obedience
if
they
will
be
sau●d
.
For
the
cleering
heereof
,
this
in
the
first
place
is
manifest
.
That
he
which
will
be
justified
by
the
workes
of
the
Law
,
is
necessarily
tied
to
fulfill
the
whole
Law
:
seeing
ti
's
impossible
the
Law
should
justifie
them
that
transgresse
it
.
In
the
next
place
then
we
must
proue
,
that
for
a
mans
Conscience
to
be
thus
tyed
to
the
fulfilling
of
the
Law
for
the
obtayning
of
Iustification
,
is
an
vnsupportable
yoake
of
spirituall
Bondage
,
contrary
to
that
liberty
,
wherewith
Christ
hath
made
euery
beleeuer
free
.
This
shall
appeare
in
confirming
of
this
Proportion
.
A
Man
regenerate
endued
with
true
faith
in
Christ
Iesus
,
is
not
bound
in
Conscience
vnto
the
fulfilling
of
the
whole
Law
for
his
Iustification
.
This
Proposition
seemes
very
strange
vnto
our
adversaries
and
to
be
nothing
else
but
a
ground-plot
wherein
to
build
all
licenciousnes
and
Libertinisme
,
as
if
we
did
discharge
men
of
all
Alleageance
to
God
&
subjection
to
his
Lawes
.
But
their
Calumnies
are
not
sufficient
confutations
of
orthodox
Doctrine
:
for
the
stopping
of
their
mouthes
we
throw
them
this
distinction
,
whereon
they
may
gnaw
while
they
breake
their
teeth
,
before
they
bite
it
in
pieces
.
Mans
conscience
stands
bound
vnto
the
Law
of
God
in
a
two
fold
obligation
.
Either
1.
Of
Obedience
,
that
according
to
the
measure
of
Grace
receiued
he
endevour
to
the
vtmost
of
his
power
to
liue
conformably
to
the
Law
of
God
in
all
things
.
2.
Of
fulfilling
the
Law
,
that
in
euery
jot
and
tittle
he
obserue
all
things
whatsoeuer
it
commands
vpon
paine
of
everlasting
condemnation
for
the
least
transgression
.
We
teach
that
no
true
Beleeuer
is
freed
from
the
Obligation
vnto
Obedience
,
but
so
farre
as
by
grace
giuen
him
he
is
enabled
,
he
ought
to
striue
to
the
vtmost
,
to
performe
all
duties
towards
God
&
man
commanded
in
the
Law
,
if
he
will
justifie
his
faith
to
be
sound
,
without
Hypocrisy
.
And
ergò
our
Doctrine
is
no
doctrine
of
Licentiousnes
.
But
on
the
other
side
we
teach
,
That
euery
true
beleeuer
is
freed
from
that
obligation
vnto
the
fulfilling
of
the
Law
,
for
the
attaining
of
life
&
justification
by
it
.
Which
materiall
difference
for
the
cleering
of
our
doctrine
not
obserued
or
rather
suppressed
by
[
a
](A09274-e32250-b)
a
Lib.
4.
de
Iustif
.
cap.
5.
Bellarmine
,
causeth
the
Iesuite
to
labour
much
in
a
needlesse
dispute
,
to
proue
against
vs
,
That
a
Christian
man
is
tyed
to
the
obseruation
of
the
morall
Law
.
He
tells
vs
that
Christ
is
a
Law-giuer
aswell
as
a
Redeemer
of
his
Church
,
praescribing
orders
for
all
in
common
,
for
each
one
in
particular
.
That
he
is
a
Iudge
that
sentenceth
according
to
Law
.
That
he
is
a
King
that
ruleth
ouer
subjects
vnto
a
Law
.
That
Christ
by
his
comming
did
not
destroy
,
but
fulfill
the
Law
,
expounded
it
&
enioyned
it
to
be
observed
by
vs
.
That
his
Apostles
vrge
it
in
euery
Epistle
.
That
a
Christian
man
sinniug
offends
against
the
Law
,
&
ergò
is
bound
to
keepe
the
Law
.
In
all
which
the
Iesuite
encounters
his
owne
phantasy
&
not
our
doctrine
which
is
not
wounded
by
such
misguided
weapons
.
For
we
grant
without
striuing
,
that
every
Christian
is
tyed
to
obserue
the
Morall
Law
,
and
we
averre
that
it
is
a
most
vnchristian
&
Iesuiticall
slaunder
to
affirme
,
as
he
doth
,
that
we
teach
(
Christianum
[
b
](A09274-e32350-b)
b
Ibid
〈◊〉
nulli
Legi
obnoxium
&
subjectum
esse
in
Conscientia
coram
Deo
.
)
Nay
we
teach
that
he
is
bound
to
obey
to
the
vtmost
of
his
power
:
and
from
this
obligation
no
authority
of
Man
or
Angell
,
Pope
or
Deuill
,
can
discharge
him
.
So
much
we
grant
the
Arguments
alleaged
by
the
Cardinall
doe
enforce
,
and
nothing
else
.
They
proue
Obedience
necessary
to
a
beleeuing
Christian
:
but
they
can
neuer
proue
perfect
fulfilling
of
the
Law
,
to
be
necessarily
required
of
him
.
From
this
heauy
burthen
Christ
hath
eased
the
shoulders
of
all
such
as
are
in
him
by
a
liuely
Faith
,
of
whom
God
doth
no
longer
exact
perfect
Obedience
to
his
Law
in
those
strict
and
rigorous
termes
.
that
they
shall
be
accursed
if
they
fulfill
it
not
.
This
we
proue
by
these
Scriptures
.
1.
Gal
,
1.
2.
3.
(
Stand
fast
(
saith
the
Apostle
)
in
the
Liberty
wherein
Christ
hath
made
vs
free
,
and
be
not
entangled
againe
with
the
yoake
of
bondage
.
)
But
what
is
this
Yoake
of
Bondage
?
Is
it
onely
the
obseruation
of
the
Ceremoniall
Law
?
No.
That
was
indeed
part
of
the
yoake
which
the
Apostles
sought
to
lay
on
the
Consciences
of
the
Galatians
.
But
't
was
the
least
and
the
lightest
part
,
the
weightiest
burthen
was
the
fulfilling
of
the
Morall
Law
,
wherevnto
by
the
doctrine
of
the
false
Apostles
,
the
Galatians
stood
obliged
.
This
is
plaine
by
the
Text
in
the
words
following
.
(
Behold
,
I
Paul
say
vnto
you
that
if
you
be
circumcised
,
Christ
shall
profit
you
nothing
.
For
I
testifie
againe
to
euery
man
,
which
is
circumcised
,
that
he
is
bound
to
keepe
the
whole
Law
)
The
Apostles
dispute
is
heere
evident
.
The
Galatians
may
not
be
circumcised
,
not
obserue
the
Ceremoniall
Law
.
why
?
Because
if
they
did
Christ
should
not
profit
them
at
all
.
But
what
reason
is
there
for
this
,
that
Circumcision
&
the
Ceremonies
should
frustrate
the
benefit
of
Christs
death
?
The
Apostle
alleageth
a
good
reason
,
because
the
obseruation
of
the
Ceremoniall
Law
,
tied
them
also
to
the
fulfilling
of
the
whole
Morall
Law
.
The
Argument
is
thus
framed
.
They
who
are
bound
to
keep
the
whole
Law
haue
no
profit
at
all
by
Christ
.
But
they
who
are
circumcised
,
are
bound
to
keepe
the
whole
Law
.
ergo
,
They
that
be
circumcised
haue
not
profit
at
all
in
Christ
.
The
minor
in
this
Argument
is
the
expresse
words
of
the
Text
,
and
the
proofe
of
it
is
euident
in
Reason
,
because
the
retaining
of
Legall
ceremonies
did
in
effect
abolish
Christ's
comming
in
the
Flesh
,
who
by
his
comming
in
the
Flesh
,
had
abolished
them
.
And
ergo
,
they
who
in
reviving
them
,
denied
Christ's
death
,
had
no
meanes
at
all
to
be
saued
:
but
only
by
the
fulfilling
of
the
Morall
Law
.
Wherevnto
they
were
necessarily
bound
,
if
they
meant
not
to
perish
.
Which
reason
yet
is
of
no
force
before
Christ
his
comming
,
and
ergo
then
circumcision
and
other
legall
ceremonies
,
did
not
lay
vpon
the
Iewes
such
a
strict
obligation
to
fulfill
the
whole
Law
.
The
Maior
Proposition
is
the
very
reason
of
the
Apostles
Enthymeme
;
thus
.
(
Men
circumcised
are
bound
to
keep
the
whole
Law
:
Ergo
,
Christ
shall
not
profit
them
)
The
Reason
of
the
consequence
is
this
Proposition
,
(
Whosoeuer
are
bound
to
keepe
the
whole
Law
,
Christ
profiteth
them
nothing
at
all
.
)
This
Argument
,
and
the
Reason
thereof
,
will
hardly
passe
with
approbation
in
the
Iesuites
Schooles
,
(
Men
are
bound
to
the
whole
Law
,
ergo
,
Christ
shall
not
profit
them
.
)
Nay
,
will
they
reply
:
That
's
a
non
sequitur
.
For
by
that
doctrine
,
Christ's
death
hath
cancelled
that
streight
obligation
of
fulfilling
the
Law
:
But
euery
one
that
beleeues
the
promise
of
saluation
in
Christ
,
is
yet
notwithstanding
obliged
to
fulfill
the
whole
Morall
law
.
For
this
is
(
say
they
)
the
very
Condition
wherevpon
he
must
haue
benefit
by
the
promise
,
euen
(
[
a
](A09274-e32900-b)
a
Lib.
4.
cap.
2.
Perfecta
Mandatorum
●bservatio
:
)
and
therefore
he
is
so
farre
from
being
freed
by
Christ
from
this
obligation
vnto
the
Law
,
that
for
a
certaine
,
except
he
fulfill
it
,
he
shall
neuer
be
saved
;
as
[
b
](A09274-e32930-b)
b
Lib.
4.
cap.
7.
(
Si
Promissio
vitae
aeternae
est
conditionata
,
ut
cap.
1.
probavimus
,
certè
necessarium
est
implere
Conditionem
,
si
quis
sal●us
fieri
vel●●
.
●●s
;
●
iustus
non
est
liber
ab
ebligatione
Legis
divine
:
certè
nisi
eam
impleat
●onsaluabitur
,
)
Bellarmine
peremptorily
and
bloodily
determines
.
These
Men
when
they
list
are
wondrous
mercifull
toward
Sinners
,
and
can
teach
them
trickes
by
very
easie
meanes
,
to
merit
Heauen
and
Remission
of
Sinnes
.
But
their
crueltie
betrayes
their
kindnes
in
other
matters
;
in
as
much
as
when
all
comes
to
the
vpshot
,
a
Sinner
is
driuen
to
this
.
If
he
wil
be
saued
by
Christ
,
he
must
as
he
is
bound
,
perfectly
keepe
the
whole
:
law
else
there
's
no
hope
for
him
.
This
is
cold
comfort
for
the
poore
beleeuer
:
but
't
is
happy
we
haue
not
Iesuites
,
Pharaoh's
taske-masters
,
set
ouer
vs
,
to
exact
the
whole
Tale
of
Bricke
:
but
a
Iesus
,
who
hath
freed
our
soules
from
this
bitter
thraldome
and
deliuered
vs
from
the
power
of
so
rigorous
and
strict
commands
of
the
Law
.
We
beleeue
an
Apostle
of
Christ
against
all
the
Sycophants
of
Rome
,
and
tell
them
that
they
giue
the
holy
Ghost
the
lie
,
when
they
teach
that
in
beleeuers
the
obligation
to
keepe
the
whole
Law
stands
still
in
full
force
&
vertue
not
discharged
by
the
death
of
Christ
;
directly
contrarie
to
this
Argument
of
the
Apostle
.
(
Ye
are
bound
to
keep
the
whole
law
,
ergo
,
Christ
shall
not
profit
you
.
)
Whence
we
argue
thus
.
Whosoeuer
are
bound
to
keepe
the
whole
law
,
to
such
Christ
is
vnprofitable
.
But
vnto
true
beleeuers
Christ
is
not
vnprofitable
.
Ergo
True
beleeuers
are
not
bound
to
keepe
the
whole
law
.
A
conclusion
most
certaine
,
as
from
these
irrefutable
praemisses
:
so
from
most
euident
Reason
.
For
if
such
as
beleeue
in
Christ
,
(
Who
through
the
Spirit
waite
for
the
hope
of
Righteousness
through
Faith
)
as
the
Apostle
speakes
here
,
v.
5
;
if
such
be
yet
bound
to
fulfill
the
whole
Law
for
their
Iustification
,
to
what
end
is
it
to
belieue
in
Christ
,
vnto
Righteousnesse
and
Iustification
?
If
when
all
is
doen
we
must
be
saued
by
doing
,
what
profit
comes
there
by
beleeuing
?
Can
the
conscience
find
any
benefit
and
comfort
at
all
in
Christ
,
when
we
shall
come
to
this
wofull
Conclusion
;
that
notwithstanding
there
is
in
Scripture
much
talke
of
Faith
,
of
Christ
,
of
Promises
,
of
Grace
;
yet
all
this
will
bring
vs
no
commoditie
,
except
this
condition
be
performed
on
our
parts
,
the
whole
worke
of
Redemption
,
seeing
in
fine
't
is
the
Law
that
we
must
liue
by
,
and
not
by
Faith
:
the
perfect
fulfilling
of
the
Law
must
make
vs
righteous
in
God's
sight
:
and
not
our
beleeuing
in
Christ
,
that
we
may
be
justified
.
For
he
that
keepes
the
whole
Law
,
is
thereby
righteous
,
and
by
nothing
els
.
Here
't
is
but
a
bare
shift
to
say
,
Though
we
be
bound
to
fulfil
the
Law
;
yet
Christ
profits
vs
,
because
he
giues
vs
Grace
to
performe
our
Band
in
exact
Obedience
.
This
evasion
might
it
stand
good
,
Saint
Paul
were
indeed
finally
confuted
as
a
weake
disputant
.
But
the
Errour
of
this
hath
bin
touched
before
,
and
if
nothing
els
were
said
,
this
Apostolicall
Argument
is
sufficient
to
refute
it
.
I
proceed
to
other
Scriptures
.
2.
1
Tim
1.
9.
(
Ye
know
that
the
Law
is
good
,
if
a
man
vse
it
lawfully
;
knowing
this
,
that
the
Law
is
not
made
for
a
righteous
man
,
but
for
the
lawlesse
and
disobedient
,
for
the
vngodly
,
for
Sinners
,
for
vnholy
,
and
prophane
,
&c.
)
The
Law
is
not
giuen
to
the
Righteous
.
How
must
this
bee
vnderstood
?
Is
it
not
giuen
(
quoad
directionem
)
as
a
Rule
prescribing
what
is
to
be
done
,
what
is
not
to
be
done
?
Yes
,
we
all
agree
in
that
.
How
is
it
then
not
giuen
?
'T
is
answered
,
(
quoad
coactionem
&
maledictionem
)
as
it
compels
to
obedience
,
and
curseth
the
Transgressors
.
Thus
is
it
not
giuen
to
the
Iust.
This
answer
is
full
of
ambiguitie
,
and
needes
some
explication
,
that
we
may
know
what
is
the
coaction
or
compelling
force
of
the
Law
,
from
which
the
Iust
are
freed
.
In
vnfolding
whereof
our
aduersaries
and
we
differ
.
Whether
are
in
the
right
,
we
shal
see
by
the
proposal
of
both
our
Interpretations
.
They
say
,
(
The
Law
hath
no
coactiue
or
compelling
power
ouer
the
Iust
,
because
the
Iust
doe
obey
it
,
spoute
,
libentèer
,
&
alacritèr
,
&
ex
instinctu
charitatis
)
that
is
,
willinglie
,
out
of
Loue
:
but
it
hath
a
compulsiue
force
ouer
the
vniust
,
because
they
recalcitrant
&
cogi
quodammodò
debent
ad
obsequium
)
that
is
,
they
obey
vnwillinglie
,
being
forced
to
it
by
Terrors
and
Threatnings
,
and
therefore
;
The
law
rules
not
ouer
the
iust
,
as
seruants
who
obey
for
feare
:
but
sonnes
who
obey
for
Loue
.
We
expound
it
otherwise
.
The
Law
hath
not
coactiue
power
ouer
the
just
,
because
the
just
(
that
is
)
true
beleeuers
in
Christ
Iesus
,
are
freed
from
the
necessity
of
perfectly
fulfilling
it
,
for
the
obtaining
of
saluation
.
But
the
Law
hath
a
coactiue
power
ouer
the
vnjust
&
vnbeleeuers
,
because
they
are
obliged
vnto
the
perfect
fulfilling
thereof
,
or
else
to
be
certainly
accursed
.
And
ergo
we
say
,
the
Law
command's
ouer
the
just
as
ouer
Sonnes
requiring
of
them
a
faithfull
and
willing
endeavour
:
but
it
commands
ouer
the
vnjust
,
as
ouer
Seruants
,
of
whom
it
exacts
the
vttermost
farthing
,
and
vpon
the
legall
default
threatens
eternall
malediction
.
The
difference
then
betwixt
them
&
vs
,
is
this
.
They
make
the
coaction
of
the
Law
to
consist
in
the
manner
or
quality
of
mans
obedience
to
it
.
The
Law
compels
when
men
obey
vnwillingly
.
We
make
the
coaction
of
the
Law
to
consist
in
the
quality
of
the
command
,
&
condition
,
wherevpon
Obedience
is
required
.
The
Law
then
compels
,
when
it
exacts
full
obedience
vpon
poenalty
praecisely
threatned
to
the
disobedient
.
Wherein
the
trueth
is
manifestly
on
our
side
.
For
't
is
plaine
,
that
compulsion
in
a
Law
must
be
taken
in
opposition
to
direction
,
not
persuation
,
for
Lawes
persuade
not
,
but
command
.
For
if
we
speake
properly
a
Law
cannot
be
sai'd
to
compell
those
,
to
whom
't
is
giuen
,
as
if
by
any
real
and
physicall
operation
it
did
enforce
them
to
obedience
.
sub
coactione
.
This
must
of
necessity
be
vnderstood
thus
,
the
just
are
not
vnder
the
coactiue
power
of
God's
Law
,
●●cause
it
doth
not
exact
of
them
full
obedience
vpon
paenalty
of
aeternall
death
,
to
be
otherwise
inflicted
on
them
.
As
it
doth
exact
of
the
vnjust
.
For
otherwise
there
will
be
no
difference
betweene
the
just
and
the
vnjust
in
regard
of
this
coactiue
power
of
the
Law
,
if
both
the
one
and
the
other
be
obliged
to
yeeld
,
alike
,
perfect
obedience
vpon
the
like
paenalty
.
In
this
case
the
Law
will
be
as
coactine
to
one
,
as
the
other
,
exacting
aequall
obedience
,
vpon
aequall
termes
,
both
of
the
just
and
vnjust
.
(
viz
)
obey
fully
in
all
things
:
or
you
shall
be
cursed
.
The
Sonne
and
Seruant
shall
be
all
one
,
and
the
Law
shall
still
command
,
over
the
children
,
with
as
much
terrour
,
as
ouer
the
Bondslaue
.
There
is
no
difference
in
the
world
;
in
our
adversaries
doctrine
,
both
sorts
are
bound
to
obey
perfectly
,
or
else
certainly
they
shall
not
be
saued
.
So
that
the
Law
of
itselfe
shall
be
as
rigorous
towards
one
;
as
the
other
.
But
we
know
the
Scriptures
offer
vnto
vs
more
mercy
:
and
that
Christ
hath
discharged
vs
from
this
rigour
of
the
Law
,
vnder
which
euery
one
,
that
is
out
of
him
in
the
state
of
vnbeleefe
is
holden
in
bondage
.
As
to
the
difference
they
make
(
the
iust
obey
willingly
,
the
vnjust
vnwillingly
,
&
ergo
the
Law
compels
these
and
not
those
)
this
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
.
For
it
alters
not
the
nature
of
the
Law
,
that
it
is
obeyed
with
diuers
affections
.
The
Law
is
the
same
,
for
its
command
&
authority
;
howsoeuer
it
be
obeyed
willingly
or
vnwillingly
;
that
matters
not
.
The
Law
ceaseth
not
to
be
coactiue
,
because
ti
's
willingly
obeyed
:
euen
as
a
slaue
ceaseth
not
to
be
vnder
the
coaction
&
compelling
power
of
his
Master
,
though
he
loue
his
master
;
and
out
of
a
willing
mind
be
content
to
abide
in
thraldome
.
And
as
Adam
,
though
he
obeyed
the
Law
willingly
;
yet
was
vnder
the
coactiue
power
of
it
;
because
he
was
tyed
to
obey
it
,
or
else
he
should
certainly
die
the
death
for
his
transgression
of
it
.
Wherefore
I
conclude
,
that
the
just
are
not
freed
from
the
Laws
direction
,
nor
from
the
Lawes
compulsion
,
as
it
compels
or
enioynes
them
absolute
obedience
in
all
things
,
and
for
default
thereof
threatens
the
vnauoydeable
malediction
of
Gods
aeternall
wrath
.
3
Lastly
for
proofe
of
this
point
we
haue
those
places
formerly
alleaged
,
Rom.
6.
14.
[
We
are
not
vnder
the
Law
,
but
vnder
Grace
.
]
Gal.
5.
18.
[
If
we
be
led
by
the
spirit
,
we
are
not
vnder
the
Law
.
]
Now
the
Lord
is
the
Spirit
,
and
where
the
Spirit
of
the
Lord
is
,
there
is
Liberty
.
]
Gal.
3.
13.
[
Christ
hath
redeemed
vs
from
the
Curse
of
the
Law
,
being
made
acurse
for
vs
.
]
All
which
,
with
[
b
](A09274-e33860-b)
b
Rom.
7.
1.
2.
&c.
other
the
like
,
doe
establish
this
orthodoxe
Doctrine
;
That
beleeuers
haue
ohtained
freedome
by
Christ
,
from
the
rigour
of
the
Morall
Law
,
and
are
not
any
longer
bound
in
conscience
to
the
perfect
fulfilling
thereof
vpon
this
assured
perill
:
that
if
they
keepe
it
not
,
they
shall
not
be
saued
.
We
might
stand
longer
vpon
each
Testimony
:
but
let
that
which
we
haue
said
,
suffice
for
the
vindicating
of
our
conscience
from
that
Torture
and
Bondage
wherewith
these
●●opish
Doctors
would
ensnare
vs
.
The
knowledge
of
which
our
Liberty
,
is
not
to
giue
vs
occasion
of
security
or
licentiousnesse
,
as
these
Men
calumniate
:
but
to
restore
peace
&
spirituall
rest
vnto
our
soules
,
knowing
that
we
are
now
deliuered
from
the
necessity
of
obeying
,
or
of
perishing
,
which
before
we
were
in
Christ
,
lay
more
heauy
vpon
our
soules
then
a
mountaine
of
Lead
.
That
so
being
freed
from
this
thraldome
,
we
might
serue
him
who
hath
freed
vs
,
thankfully
,
and
chearefully
,
obeying
him
in
all
duty
,
by
whom
wee
haue
obtained
this
glorious
priuiledge
;
that
whereas
perfect
obedience
was
sometimes
strictly
exacted
of
vs
:
now
our
sincere
,
though
imperfect
indeauours
,
shal
be
mercifully
accepted
at
our
hands
.
SECT.
6.
CHAP.
I.
The
reconciliation
of
that
seeming
opposition
,
betweene
S.
Paul
,
and
S.
Iames
in
this
point
of
Iustification
.
THus
much
of
this
Argument
and
of
the
first
Branch
of
mans
Righteousnes
,
whereby
if
it
were
possible
he
should
be
justified
.
viz.
His
Obedience
to
the
Law
of
God
.
By
which
meanes
we
haue
shewed
,
no
flesh
shall
be
justified
in
Gods
sight
.
We
are
to
proceed
vnto
the
text
branch
heereof
.
Mans
satisfaction
for
his
transgression
of
the
Law
.
Wherein
we
haue
also
to
proue
,
that
a
Sinner
cannot
be
acquitted
before
god's
judgment
seat
,
by
pleading
any
satisfaction
,
that
himselfe
can
make
for
his
offences
.
But
in
our
passing
vnto
that
point
we
are
to
giue
you
warning
of
that
stumbling
stone
which
St.
Iames
,
(
as
it
may
seeme
)
hath
layed
in
our
way
:
lest
any
should
dash
his
Faith
vpon
it
;
and
fall
,
as
our
adnersaries
haue
done
into
that
Errour
of
Iustification
by
workes
.
That
blessed
Apostle
,
in
the
second
Chapter
of
his
Epistle
,
seemes
not
only
to
giue
occasion
:
but
directly
to
teach
this
doctrine
of
Iustification
by
workes
.
For
in
the
21.
ver.
&c.
He
sayeth
expressly
,
that
Abraham
was
justified
by
workes
when
he
offered
his
sonne
Isaack
vpon
the
altar
;
and
also
that
Rahab
was
in
like
manner
justified
by
workes
,
when
she
entertained
the
spies
.
Whence
also
he
sets
downe
ver.
22.
a
generall
Conclusion
.
That
a
Man
is
justified
by
workes
and
not
by
faith
alone
.
Now
in
shew
,
nothing
can
be
spoken
more
contrary
to
St.
Paule
his
Doctrine
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Romans
and
else-where
.
For
in
the
fourth
chap.
speaking
of
the
same
example
of
Abraham
,
he
saieth
cleane
contrary
,
that
Abraham
was
not
justified
by
workes
,
for
then
he
might
haue
boasted
.
ver.
2.
And
in
the
3
chap.
treating
generally
of
mans
Iustification
,
by
faith
;
after
a
strong
dispute
he
drawes
forth
this
conclusion
.
That
a
man
is
justified
by
Faith
without
the
workes
of
the
Law
.
v.
28.
Which
Conclusion
is
in
appearance
contradictory
to
that
of
St.
Iames.
This
harsh
discord
betweene
these
Apostles
seemes
vnto
some
not
possible
to
be
sweetned
by
any
qualification
,
who
knowing
that
the
Holy
Ghost
neuer
forgets
himselfe
haue
concluded
that
if
the
spirit
of
trueth
spake
by
St.
Paul
it
was
doubtlesse
the
spirit
of
error
,
that
spake
by
the
author
of
this
Epistle
of
Iames.
For
this
cause
most
likely
it
was
doubted
of
in
ancient
times
,
as
[
a
](A09274-e34420-b)
a
Hist.
Eccl.
2.
cap.
22.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Eusebius
and
Hier●me
witnes
.
But
yet
then
also
publiquely
allowed
(
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
)
in
many
Churches
,
and
euer
since
receaued
in
all
:
Out
of
which
for
the
same
cause
Luther
and
others
of
his
followers
,
since
him
would
againe
throw
it
forth
,
accounting
the
author
of
it
to
haue
built
not
gold
and
siluer
;
but
straw
and
stubble
vpon
the
foundation
.
Erasmus
assents
to
Luther
.
And
Musculus
agrees
with
them
both
,
who
in
his
Commentaries
vpon
the
fourth
to
the
Romans
,
speakes
his
mind
simply
,
that
he
sees
not
how
Iames
and
Paul
can
agree
together
,
and
therefore
he
turnes
out
St.
Iames
for
the
wrangler
,
supposing
that
this
Iames
was
one
of
the
Desciples
of
Iames
the
Apostle
,
the
brother
of
Christ
,
who
vnder
pretence
of
his
Master's
name
and
authority
,
continually
snarled
at
the
Apostle
Paul
,
and
opposed
his
Doctrine
.
Howbeit
his
Epistle
got
credit
in
after
times
,
(
cum
veritas
paulatim
inualescente
mendacio
proculcari
caeperit
.
)
That
is
.
When
error
by
degrees
praevailed
against
the
trueth
.
But
this
medicine
is
worse
then
the
disease
,
and
is
rather
violence
,
then
skill
,
thus
to
cut
the
knot
where
it
cannot
bee
readily
vntied
.
A
safer
and
milder
course
may
be
holden
;
and
some
meanes
found
out
for
the
according
of
this
grand
difference
without
robbing
the
Church
of
somuch
pretious
Treasure
,
of
diuine
knowledg
,
as
is
stored
vp
in
this
Epistle
.
Wherefore
both
they
of
the
Romish
and
we
of
the
reformed
Churches
,
admitting
this
Epistle
for
canonical
doe
each
of
vs
search
after
,
a
fit
reconciliation
betweene
the
Apostles
.
But
they
and
we
betweene
our selues
are
irreconcileable
in
our
seuerall
reconcileations
of
them
.
They
reconcile
them
thus
.
By
distinguishing
.
1.
of
Iustification
.
2
of
Workes
.
Iustification
(
say
they
)
of
two
sortes
.
1.
The
first
when
a
man
of
vnjust
is
made
just
and
holy
,
by
the
Infusion
of
Grace
,
or
the
Habit
of
Charitie
.
2.
The
2.
When
a
man
of
just
is
made
more
just
by
the
augmentation
of
the
Habit
of
Grace
first
giuen
vnto
him
.
Againe
they
diuide
workes
into
two
sortes
.
1.
Some
goe
before
Faith
,
being
performed
by
the
meere
strength
of
nature
,
and
free-will
without
the
helpe
of
grace
;
and
such
workes
as
these
are
not
meritorious
.
2.
Some
follow
Faith
,
being
performed
by
the
aide
and
assistance
of
grace
giuen
vnto
man
:
and
such
workes
as
these
be
meritorious
.
These
distinctions
praepared
,
the
worke
is
now
ready
for
the
soddering
,
which
they
finish
artificially
glewing
togeather
the
proposition
of
the
two
Apostles
in
this
sorte
.
St.
Paul
saieth
that
Abraham
,
and
all
men
are
justified
by
Faith
without
workes
.
This
(
say
they
)
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
the
first
Iustification
,
and
of
workes
done
before
Faith
,
without
grace
,
by
the
strength
of
nature
.
So
that
the
meaning
of
Paule's
proposition
(
Abraham
and
all
men
,
are
justified
by
faith
without
workes
is
this
.
Neither
Abraham
,
nor
any
other
can
deserue
the
Grace
of
Sanctification
,
whereby
of
vnjust
and
vnholy
they
be
made
just
and
holy
,
by
any
workes
done
by
them
,
when
they
are
Naturall
Men
,
destitute
of
Grace
,
but
only
by
Faith
in
Christ
Iesus
,
or
thus
.
No
Man
merits
Grace
to
make
him
a
good
Man
of
a
Bad
,
by
any
thing
he
doth
before
he
beleeue
in
Christ
;
but
by
beleeuing
he
obtaineth
this
.
On
the
other
side
S.
Iames
saith
,
that
(
Abraham
and
all
others
are
iustified
by
Workes
,
not
by
Faith
only
.
)
This
(
say
the
Romanists
)
is
meant
of
the
second
Iustification
,
and
of
such
workes
as
are
done
after
Faith
,
by
the
aide
of
Grace
:
So
the
meaning
of
the
Proposition
shal
be
this
.
Abraham
and
other
Men
being
once
made
good
and
just
,
deserue
to
be
made
better
,
and
more
just
by
such
good
workes
as
they
performe
through
the
helpe
of
Grace
giuen
vnto
them
;
&
not
by
faith
only
.
Being
once
sanctified
,
they
deserue
the
increase
of
Sanctification
through
that
merit
of
their
Faith
,
and
good
workes
out
of
Faith
and
Charity
.
Is
not
this
difference
between
these
Apostles
finely
accorded
think
you
?
They
will
now
walke
together
being
in
this
sort
made
friends
through
the
mediation
of
the
Schoole-men
.
But
it
is
otherwise
.
They
are
so
far
from
reconciling
them
,
that
they
haue
abused
them
both
,
and
set
them
farther
asunder
making
them
speake
what
they
neuer
meant
.
Neither
in
S.
Paul
nor
S.
Iames
is
there
any
ground
at
all
,
whereon
to
raise
such
an
interpretation
of
their
words
.
And
therefore
we
respect
this
reconcilement
,
as
the
shifting
quercke
of
a
Scholeman's
braine
,
that
hath
no
footing
at
all
in
the
text
.
Which
we
doe
vpon
these
Reasons
.
1.
That
distinction
of
Iustification
(
that
is
of
Sanctification
)
into
the
first
giuing
of
it
,
and
the
after
increase
of
it
,
(
howsoeuer
tolerable
in
other
matters
)
is
vtterly
to
no
purpose
,
as
it
is
applied
vnto
the
doctrine
of
these
Apostles
.
Who
when
they
speake
of
Iustification
of
a
sinner
in
God's
sight
doe
vnderstand
thereby
the
Remission
of
Sinnes
through
the
imputation
of
Christ's
Righteousnes
,
and
not
the
infusion
,
or
increase
of
inherent
Sanctity
in
the
soule
of
man
.
This
confusion
of
Iustification
with
sanctification
is
a
prime
error
of
our
adversaries
in
this
article
,
as
hath
bin
shewed
,
in
clearing
the
acceptions
of
the
word
Iustification
:
and
shall
be
shewed
more
at
large
in
handling
the
forme
of
our
Iustification
,
2.
The
distinction
of
Iustification
taken
in
their
owne
sense
,
is
falselie
applied
to
St.
Iames
as
if
he
spake
of
the
2.
Iustification
,
and
to
St.
Paul
as
if
he
spake
of
the
first
.
For
first
[
a
](A09274-e35230-b)
a
Lib.
4
dé
Iust.
cap.
18.
Lorin
〈◊〉
Iac.
Bellarmine
himselfe
being
judge
St.
Iames
in
the
example
of
Rahab
speakes
of
the
first
Iustification
,
because
(
as
he
saieth
)
she
was
then
,
at
the
first
made
a
beleeuer
of
an
infidell
a
righteous
woman
of
an
harlot
.
And
againe
Paul
,
he
speakes
of
the
2.
Iustification
in
the
example
of
Abraham
,
which
is
alleaged
by
both
the
Apostles
.
Heere
's
then
a
confusion
insteed
of
a
distiction
.
Paul
speakes
of
the
first
,
Iames
speakes
of
the
2.
and
yet
both
do
speake
of
both
Iustifications
.
Againe
when
they
say
Iames
speakes
of
the
second
Iustification
,
whereby
of
just
a
man
becomes
more
just
,
ti
's
a
groundlesse
imagination
for
asmuch
as
it
was
to
no
purpose
for
the
Apostle
Iames
to
treat
of
the
second
Iustification
,
whereby
men
grow
better
:
when
those
Hypocrites
,
with
whom
he
had
to
doe
,
had
erred
from
their
first
iustification
,
whereby
they
were
not
,
as
yet
,
made
good
,
as
the
learned
[
b
](A09274-e35410-b)
b
Iackson
of
lust
.
Faith
.
S.
2.
cap.
6.
Iackson
obserues
.
Nay
there
is
not
in
all
St.
Iames
his
dispute
,
any
s●llable
,
that
may
giue
any
just
suspicion
that
by
Iustification
,
he
meanes
the
increase
of
inhaerent
Iustice.
[
c
](A09274-e35460-b)
c
Leeo
supra
●●tat
.
Bellarmine
catcheth
at
the
clause
.
v.
22.
(
By
workes
Faith
was
made
perfect
)
which
is
,
in
the
Iesuites
construction
,
Abraham's
inhaerent
justice
,
begun
by
faith
,
receiued
increase
and
perfection
by
his
workes
)
But
this
is
onlie
the
Iesuites
phrensie
.
Abraham
his
faith
and
his
Righteousnes
,
whereof
his
Faith
is
but
a
part
,
was
not
made
but
declared
to
be
perfect
,
by
so
perfect
a
worke
)
which
it
brought
forth
,
as
euen
Lorinus
another
of
that
sect
expounds
it
orthodoxly
.
3
Thirdly
,
that
distinction
of
workes
done
before
Faith
,
without
grace
,
and
after
Faith
by
grace
,
is
to
as
litle
purpose
,
as
the
former
;
in
this
matter
of
our
Iustification
.
Heretofore
we
haue
touched
vpon
that
distinction
and
shewed
the
vanitie
thereof
,
in
limiting
St.
Paul
to
workes
done
without
grace
,
when
simplie
he
concludes
all
workes
from
our
Iustification
.
And
St.
Iames
though
he
require
workes
of
grace
to
be
ioyned
with
that
Faith
which
must
justifie
vs
:
yet
he
giues
them
not
that
place
and
office
in
our
Iustification
,
from
which
Paul
doth
exclude
them
,
and
wherein
our
adversaries
would
establish
them
,
as
it
shall
appeare
anon
.
Leauing
then
this
sophisticall
reconcilement
coined
by
our
aduersaries
I
come
to
those
reconciliations
which
are
made
by
our
diuines
;
wherein
we
shall
haue
better
satisfaction
vpon
better
grounds
.
Two
waies
there
are
whereby
this
seeming
difference
is
by
our
Men
reconciled
.
1.
The
1.
by
distinguishing
the
word
(
●
Iustification
)
|
which
may
be
taken
either
|
1
,
For
the
absolution
of
a
Sinner
in
Gods
iudgement
.
|
|
2
,
For
the
declaration
of
a
mans
Righteousnes
before
men
.
|
This
distinction
is
certaine
and
hath
its
ground
in
Scripture
which
vseth
the
word
Iustifie
in
both
acceptions
,
for
the
quitting
of
vs
in
Gods
sight
,
and
for
the
manifestation
of
our
innocency
before
man
against
accusation
or
suspicion
of
faultines
.
They
applie
this
distinction
for
the
reconciling
of
the
two
Apostles
.
Thus.
St.
Paul
speakes
of
Iustification
,
(
in
foro
Dei
)
S.
Iames
speakes
of
Iustification
(
in
foro
hominis
)
A
man
is
justified
by
faith
without
workes
saieth
S.
Paul
:
that
is
in
God's
sight
,
a
man
obtaines
remission
of
Sinnes
and
is
reputed
just
only
for
his
Faith
in
Christ
,
not
for
his
workes
sake
.
A
man
is
justified
by
workes
;
and
not
by
Faith
onely
saieth
S.
Iames
that
is
,
in
mans
sight
we
are
declared
to
be
just
by
our
good
workes
,
not
by
our
Faith
onely
:
which
with
other
inward
and
invisible
Graces
,
are
made
visible
vnto
man
onely
in
the
good
workes
,
which
they
see
vs
performe
.
That
this
application
is
not
vnfit
for
to
reconcile
this
difference
,
may
be
shewed
by
the
parts
.
1.
For
S.
Paul
,
ti
's
agreed
on
all
sides
that
he
speakes
of
mans
iustification
in
God's
sight
.
Rom.
3.
v.
20.
2.
For
S.
Iames
we
are
to
shew
that
with
just
probability
he
may
be
vnderstood
of
the
declaration
of
our
Iustification
and
righteousnes
before
men
.
For
proofe
whereof
the
Text
affords
vs
these
reasons
.
1.
Verse
.
18.
Shew
me
thy
Faith
without
thy
Workes
and
I
will
shew
thee
my
Faith
by
my
workes
.
Where
the
true
Christian
speaking
to
the
Hypocriticall
boaster
of
his
Faith
,
requires
of
him
a
declaration
of
his
faith
and
Iustification
thereby
,
by
a
reall
proofe
,
not
a
verball
profession
,
promising
for
his
part
to
manifest
and
approue
the
trueth
of
his
owne
Faith
by
his
good
workes
.
Whence
it
appeares
,
that
before
man
,
none
can
justifie
the
soundnes
of
his
Faith
:
but
by
his
workes
thene
proceeding
.
2.
V.
21.
Abraham
is
saied
to
be
justified
when
he
offered
vp
his
sonne
Isaak
vpon
the
Altar
.
Now
ti
's
manifest
that
Abraham
was
justified
in
Gods
sight
long
before
;
euen
.
25.
yeares
Gen.
15.
6.
Therefore
by
that
admirable
worke
of
his
in
offering
his
Sonne
he
was
declared
before
all
the
world
to
be
a
just
man
and
a
true
Beleeuer
.
And
for
this
purpose
did
God
tempt
Abraham
in
that
triall
of
his
Faith
:
that
thereby
all
beleeuers
,
might
behold
a
rare
patterne
of
a
liuely
and
justifying
Faith
,
and
that
Abraham
was
not
without
good
cause
called
the
Father
of
the
Faithfull
.
3.
V.
22.
It
is
saied
that
Abrahams
faith
wrought
with
his
worke
and
by
workes
was
his
faith
made
perfect
.
Which
in
the
iudgement
of
popish
[
a
](A09274-e36190-b)
a
Lor●●
in
lacob
.
Expositors
themselues
,
is
to
be
vnderstood
of
the
manifestation
of
Abrahams
faith
by
his
workes
.
His
Faith
directed
his
workes
:
his
workes
manifested
the
power
and
perfection
of
his
Faith
.
It
is
not
then
without
good
probability
of
Reason
,
that
Caluin
and
other
Expositors
on
our
side
,
haue
giuen
this
solution
vnto
this
doubt
.
[
b
](A09274-e36260-b)
b
Lib.
4
cap.
18.
Bellarmine
labours
against
it
and
would
faine
proue
that
justification
cannot
be
taken
heere
pro
declaratione
Iustitiae
.
But
his
Argument
cannot
much
trouble
any
intelligent
reader
,
and
therefore
I
spare
to
trouble
you
with
his
sophistry
.
This
now
is
the
first
way
of
reconciling
the
places
.
Howbeit
the
trueth
is
,
that
although
this
may
be
defended
against
any
thing
that
our
aduersaries
objected
to
the
contrary
:
yet
many
and
those
very
learned
divines
chose
rather
to
tread
in
another
path
and
more
neerely
to
presse
the
Apostles
steps
;
whom
also
in
this
point
●
willingly
follow
.
2
The
second
way
then
of
reconciling
these
places
,
is
by
distinguishing
of
the
word
(
Faith
)
which
is
taken
in
a
doubled
sense
.
1.
First
for
that
Faith
,
Faith
which
worketh
through
loue
)
and
is
fruitfull
in
all
manner
of
Obedience
.
2.
Secondly
for
that
Faith
which
is
false
and
dead
,
being
onely
a
bare
acknowledgment
of
the
trueth
,
of
all
Articles
of
Religion
accompanied
with
an
outward
Formality
of
Profession
:
but
yet
destitute
of
sincere
Obedience
.
This
distinction
of
this
word
(
Faith
)
is
certaine
by
the
Scriptures
,
as
hath
heretofore
bin
shewed
in
handling
of
that
Grace
.
Our
Men
now
apply
it
thus
.
S.
Paul
when
he
affirmes
that
we
are
justified
by
Faith
onely
,
speakes
of
that
Faith
which
is
true
and
liuing
working
by
Charity
.
S.
Iames
when
he
denies
a
Man
is
justified
by
Faith
only
,
he
disputes
against
that
Faith
which
is
false
and
dead
,
without
power
to
bring
forth
any
good
workes
.
So
that
the
Apostles
speake
no
contradictions
,
where
Paul
teacheth
we
are
iustified
by
a
true
Faith
,
and
S.
Iames
affirmes
we
are
not
justified
by
a
false
Faith
.
Againe
S.
Paul
saith
we
are
not
iustified
by
workes
.
S.
Iames
saith
we
are
justified
by
Workes
.
Neither
is
here
any
contradiction
at
all
.
For
S.
Iames
vnderstands
by
Workes
,
a
(
working
Faith
)
in
opposition
to
the
idle
and
dead
Faith
before-spoken
of
(
by
a
Metonymie
of
the
Effect
.
)
Whence
it
is
plaine
that
these
two
Propositions
(
Wee
are
not
iustified
by
Workes
)
which
is
Pauls
,
and
(
We
are
iustified
by
a
working
Faith
)
which
is
Iames
,
doe
sweetly
consort
together
.
Paul
seuers
Works
from
our
Iustification
,
but
not
from
our
Faith
.
Iames
ioyned
Workes
to
our
Faith
,
but
not
to
our
Iustification
.
To
make
this
a
litle
plainer
by
a
similitude
or
twaine
:
There
is
great
difference
betweene
these
two
sayings
,
(
A
Man
liues
by
a
Reasonable
soule
)
and
(
A
Man
liues
by
Reason
.
)
The
former
is
true
,
and
shewes
vs
what
qualities
and
power
are
ess●ntiall
vnto
that
soule
,
whereby
a
Man
liues
.
But
the
later
is
false
,
because
we
liue
not
by
the
quality
,
or
power
of
Reason
,
though
we
liue
by
that
soule
which
hath
that
quality
necessarily
belonging
to
it
,
without
which
it
is
no
humane
soule
.
So
also
in
these
Propositions
,
(
Planta
vivit
per
animan●
auctricem
)
and
(
Planta
vivit
per
augmentationem
)
each
Puny
can
tell
that
the
former
is
true
,
and
the
other
false
.
For
although
in
the
Vegetatiue
soule
whereby
Plants
liue
,
there
be
necessarilie
required
to
the
(
Being
)
of
it
,
those
3
faculties
of
Nourishment
,
Growth
,
and
Procreation
:
yet
it
is
not
the
facultie
of
growing
that
giues
life
vnto
Plants
,
for
they
liue
when
they
grow
not
.
In
like
manner
.
These
two
Propositions
(
we
are
iustified
by
a
working
Faith
)
&
(
We
are
iustified
by
Workes
)
differ
much
.
The
first
is
true
,
and
shewes
vnto
vs
what
qualities
are
necessarilie
required
vnto
the
(
Being
)
of
that
Faith
,
whereby
the
Iust
shall
liue
.
Namely
,
that
beside
the
power
of
beleeuing
in
the
Promise
,
there
be
also
an
Habituall
Pronnesse
and
Resolution
vnto
the
doing
of
all
good
Workes
,
joined
with
it
.
But
the
later
Proposition
is
false
.
For
although
true
Faith
be
equallie
as
apt
to
worke
in
bringing
forth
Vniuersall
Obedience
to
God's
will
;
as
it
is
apt
to
beleeue
and
trust
perfectlie
vnto
God's
promises
:
yet
neuerthelesse
we
are
not
justified
by
it
as
it
brings
forth
good
Workes
;
but
as
it
embraceth
the
promises
of
the
Gospel
.
Now
then
Iames
affirmes
that
which
is
true
,
that
(
We
are
iustified
by
a
working
Faith
,
)
and
S.
Paul
denies
that
which
is
false
:
viz.
(
That
we
are
iustified
by
workes
.
CHAP.
II.
The
confirmation
of
the
Orthodoxe
reconciliation
of
S.
Paul
and
S.
Iames
,
by
a
Logicall
Analysis
of
S.
Iames
his
disputation
in
his
second
Chapter
.
THis
Reconciliation
is
the
fairest
,
and
hath
the
most
certaine
grounds
in
the
text
.
It
will
,
I
doubt
not
,
appeare
so
vnto
you
,
when
it
shall
be
cleered
from
these
Cavils
that
can
be
made
against
it
.
There
are
but
only
two
things
in
it
that
may
occasion
our
Aduersaries
to
quarrell
.
The
first
is
touching
the
word
(
Faith
)
we
say
that
S.
Iames
speakes
of
a
false
and
counterfeit
Faith
.
They
say
he
speakes
of
that
which
is
true
,
though
Dead
without
Workes
.
This
is
one
point
.
[
a
](A09274-e37300-b)
a
Bell.
lib.
1.
de
●ust
.
cap
15.
The
second
is
touching
the
interpretation
of
the
word
(
Workes
)
vsed
by
S.
Iames
when
he
saith
,
(
We
are
iustified
by
Workes
.
)
This
we
interpret
by
a
Metonymie
of
the
Effect
for
the
Cause
,
We
are
justified
by
a
working
Faith
,
by
that
Faith
which
is
apt
to
declare
and
shew
it selfe
in
all
good
Workes
.
This
interpretation
may
happily
proue
distastefull
to
their
nicer
Palates
,
who
are
very
readie
when
it
fits
their
humour
,
to
grate
sore
vpon
the
bare
words
and
letter
of
a
Text.
These
cauils
remoued
,
this
reconciliation
will
appeare
to
be
sure
and
good
.
For
the
accomplishment
of
this
I
suppose
nothing
will
be
more
commodious
,
then
to
present
vnto
you
a
briefe
resolution
of
the
whole
dispute
of
S.
Iames
touching
Faith
,
that
by
a
plaine
and
true
exposition
thereof
we
may
more
easily
discouer
the
cauils
and
sophisticall
forgeries
wherewith
our
Adversaries
haue
pestered
this
place
of
Scripture
.
The
disputation
of
S.
Iames
beginnes
at
the
14.
v.
of
the
second
Chapt.
to
the
end
thereof
.
The
scope
and
summe
whereof
is
.
A
sharpe
reprehens●ion
of
hypocriticall
Faith
of
vaine
Men
as
they
are
called
(
v.
20
)
Which
in
the
Apostles
time
vnder
pretence
of
Religion
thought
they
might
liue
as
they
list
.
Two
extremes
there
were
,
whereunto
these
Iewes
,
to
whom
the
Apostle
writes
,
were
mis-led
by
false
teachers
and
their
own
corruptions
.
The
1.
That
notwithstanding
Faith
in
Christ
;
they
were
bound
to
fulfill
the
whole
Law
of
Moses
;
Against
which
Paul
disputes
in
his
Epistle
to
the
Gal.
who
also
were
infected
with
that
Leven
.
The
other
was
,
that
Faith
in
Christ
was
sufficient
without
any
regard
of
Obedience
,
to
the
Law
:
so
they
beleeued
the
Gospell
,
acknowledging
the
Articles
of
Religion
for
true
,
&
made
an
outward
profession
all
should
be
well
,
albeit
in
the
meane
Time
Sanctitie
and
syncere
Obedience
were
quite
neglected
.
The
former
Errour
brought
them
in
Bondage
:
this
made
them
licentious
pleasing
haeresie
if
any
other
,
whereof
there
were
and
will
be
alwayes
store
of
sectaries
who
content
themselues
to
haue
a
forme
of
Godlines
,
but
deny
the
power
thereof
.
Against
such
hypocrites
&
vain
Boasters
of
false
Faith
and
false
Religion
,
S.
Iames
disputes
in
this
place
,
shewing
plainly
that
such
men
leaned
on
a
staffe
of
Reed
,
deceiuing
their
owne
selues
with
a
counterfeit
&
shadow
of
true
Christian
Faith
insteed
of
the
substance
.
The
reproofe
with
the
maine
Reason
is
expressed
by
way
of
interrogation
in
the
(
14.
v.
)
What
doth
it
profit
my
Brethren
,
though
a
Man
say
he
haue
(
as
many
then
did
,
and
alwaies
will
say
,
boasting
falselie
of
that
which
they
haue
not
in
truth
,
)
And
haue
not
workes
;
that
is
,
Obedience
to
God's
Will
,
whereby
to
approue
that
Faith
he
boasts
of
?
Can
that
Faith
saue
him
?
so
that
Faith
without
Workes
a
sauing
Faith
,
that
will
bring
a
Man
to
Heauen
?
These
sharpe
Interrogations
must
be
resolued
into
their
strong
Negations
.
And
so
we
haue
these
two
Propositions
.
1
Containing
the
maine
summe
of
the
Apostle's
dispute
:
The
other
a
generall
Reason
of
it
.
The
[
1
](A09274-e37930-b)
1
Arg.
of
S.
Iames.
is
this
.
Faith
without
Obedience
is
vnprofitable
.
The
second
prouing
the
first
,
is
this
.
Faith
without
Obedience
will
not
saue
a
Man
.
The
whole
Argument
is
.
That
Faith
which
will
not
saue
a
man
is
vnprofitable
,
of
no
vse
.
But
the
Faith
which
is
without
Obedience
will
not
saue
:
Ergo
Faith
without
Obedience
is
vnprofitable
.
The
Maior
of
this
Argument
will
easilie
be
granted
.
Th●t
it
is
an
v●pro●itable
Faith
which
will
not
bring
a
Man
to
life
and
Happines
.
But
how
doth
S.
Iames
proue
the
Minor
.
That
a
Faith
without
workes
will
not
doe
that
?
though
it
scarse
need
any
proofe
▪
yet
because
hypocrisie
is
euer
armed
with
sophistrie
,
for
a
plainer
Conviction
,
the
Apostle
proues
it
by
this
manner
of
Argumentation
.
That
Faith
which
saues
a
Man
is
a
true
Faith
.
But
a
Faith
without
workes
is
not
a
true
Faith
.
Ergo
A
Faith
without
workes
will
not
saue
a
Man
.
The
Maier
is
euident
to
all
that
haue
Reason
.
The
Minor
S.
Iames
proues
by
diuerse
Arguments
.
1.
drawne●
pari
,
from
comparison
with
another
like
vertue
.
Namely
Charity
towards
the
poore
.
The
Argument
is
thus
.
If
Charity
towards
the
poore
professed
in
Words
,
but
without
workes
be
counterfeit
,
then
Faith
in
God
professed
in
like
manner
without
Obedience
is
also
counterfeite
not
true
.
But
Charity
towards
the
poore
in
words
professed
without
deeds
is
a
counterfeit
Charity
.
Ergo
,
Faith
in
God
without
Obedience
is
a
counterfeit
and
false
Faith
.
The
Reason
of
the
maior
Proposition
is
euident
,
from
the
similitude
that
is
betweene
all
Vertues
and
Graces
.
There
is
no
vertue
,
but
men
may
counterfeit
and
falsely
arrogate
it
to
themselues
;
as
they
may
boast
of
a
false
Faith
,
so
also
(
as
Salomon
and
experience
speakes
)
of
a
false
Liberality
,
false
Valour
,
false
Prudence
,
&c.
Now
there
is
but
one
way
to
discouer
this
counterfeiting
in
any
kind
,
and
that
is
to
goe
from
words
to
workes
,
from
praesumptions
and
boastings
to
actions
.
This
way
all
count
most
certaine
,
nor
will
any
man
beleiue
words
against
workes
,
or
be
persuaded
by
faire
speaches
,
that
the
habites
of
vertues
and
graces
be
truly
seated
in
his
mind
,
whose
tongue
tells
vs
they
be
so
:
but
his
doeings
confute
his
sayings
.
Wherefore
the
Apostle
in
his
comparison
proceedes
on
an
vndeniable
ground
.
Now
for
the
minor
(
that
the
Charity
which
is
rich
in
good
words
,
and
poore
in
almesdeeds
,
is
not
true
but
counterfeit
pitty
)
the
Apostle
shewes
by
an
ordinary
instance
(
If
a
brother
or
sister
be
naked
,
and
destitute
of
daily
food
)
that
is
.
If
a
beleiuing
Christian
want
food
and
raiment
or
other
necessaries
(
and
one
of
you
say
vnto
them
,
depart
in
peace
,
and
be
ye
warmed
and
filled
)
If
he
giue
him
kind
words
,
Alas
poore
soule
I
pitty
thee
and
wish
thee
well
,
I
Would
I
had
to
giue
thee
,
goe
in
God's
name
where
thou
mayest
be
releiued
,
and
so
let
him
passe
with
a
few
pittifull
Complements
,
notwithstanding
yee
giue
them
not
those
things
which
are
needfull
for
the
body
:
what
doth
it
profit
.
Is
the
poore
man's
backe
euer
the
warmer
?
or
his
belly
the
●●ller
,
with
a
few
windy
complements
?
Can
such
a
man
persuade
any
that
he
hath
in
him
indeed
the
bowells
of
mercie
and
compassion
towards
the
needy
,
when
they
find
such
cold
entertainment
at
his
Gates
:
'T
is
manifest
that
this
is
but
a
meere
mockery
,
and
that
such
pittifull
words
come
not
from
a
heart
that
's
truely
mercifull
.
The
Apostle
now
applies
this
touching
Charity
,
vnto
Faith
.
v.
17.
Euen
so
Faith
if
it
haue
not
workes
is
dead
being
alone
.
As
that
Charity
,
so
also
that
Faith
which
men
professe
without
Obedience
is
false
and
fained
,
and
therefore
vnprofitable
to
saue
a
man
.
It
is
dead
:
How
must
this
be
vnderstood
?
Faith
is
a
quality
of
the
soule
,
and
qualities
are
then
saide
to
be
dead
,
when
they
are
extinguished
.
As
if
we
should
say
such
a
man's
Charity
is
dead
;
it
is
because
he
hath
lost
it
;
that
which
was
in
him
is
abolished
.
But
this
is
not
the
meaning
.
For
then
when
St.
Iames
saieth
that
Faith
is
dead
being
alone
:
his
meaning
should
be
that
Faith
seuered
from
workes
,
is
no
Faith
at
all
:
but
quite
extinguished
.
Now
this
is
not
so
.
For
there
's
a
Faith
seuered
from
workes
in
Hypocrites
,
Haeretiques
,
Reprobates
and
Deuills
.
Which
Faith
is
a
generall
assent
to
all
diuine
truthes
:
and
this
Faith
in
them
hath
a
true
being
,
but
no
sauing
vse
.
Wherefore
.
it
is
called
●
dead
faith
in
regard
of
the
effect
:
because
't
is
nothing
availeable
to
bring
them
in
whom
it
is
,
to
Life
and
Saluation
as
a
true
and
liu●ng
Faith
is
.
Heere
our
Aduersaries
haue
much
strange
Contemplation
,
telling
vs
that
Faith
without
workes
though
it
be
a
dead
Faith
,
yet
't
is
a
true
Faith
.
Euen
as
an
Instrument
is
a
true
Instrument
,
though
it
be
not
vsed
.
So
that
in
their
Philosophy
ti
's
one
and
the
same
true
Faith
which
is
dead
without
,
and
liuing
with
workes
.
Euen
as
't
is
one
and
the
same
Body
which
liues
with
the
Soule
and
is
dead
without
it
:
or
as
water
is
the
same
whether
it
stand
still
in
a
Cisterne
or
runne
in
a
Riuer
.
Whence
they
proceed
to
discourse
that
Charity
is
the
forme
of
Faith
:
and
conclude
that
it
is
not
the
inward
and
Essentiall
forme
of
it
,
as
the
Soule
is
the
forme
of
a
man
(
for
that
workes
are
not
essentiall
to
Faith
)
nor
the
accidentall
forme
as
whitenes
is
of
Paper
;
because
Faith
according
to
their
Schooles
,
is
in
the
vnderstanding
,
and
Charity
in
the
will
▪
But
it
is
the
externall
Forme
of
it
,
because
it
giues
to
Faith
a
merit
and
worthines
for
the
deserving
of
Heauen
.
These
fond
speculations
of
the
Forme
and
merit
of
Faith
I
passe
by
now
,
hauing
touched
vpon
them
heeretofore
.
To
that
which
they
say
.
That
a
liuing
Faith
,
and
a
dead
Faith
is
one
and
the
same
true
Faith
:
't
is
vtterly
false
,
they
differ
asmuch
as
Light
and
Darknes
.
1.
In
their
subject
.
a
dead
Faith
is
in
the
Reprobate
Men
and
Deuills
.
A
liuing
Faith
only
in
the
Elect.
2.
In
their
Object
.
A
dead
Faith
assents
to
diuine
Reuelations
as
barely
true
or
good
onely
in
the
generall
:
a
liuing
Faith
assents
to
them
,
as
truer
and
better
in
themselues
;
then
any
thing
that
can
be
set
against
them
.
3
,
in
their
Nature
.
A
dead
Faith
is
no
sanctifying
Grace
:
but
a
common
gift
of
Creation
as
in
the
deuill
;
of
ordinary
illumination
as
in
Reprobate
Men.
A
liuing
Faith
is
a
sanctifying
Grace
,
a
part
of
inhaerent
holines
wrought
in
the
heart
by
the
speciall
power
of
the
Holy
Ghost
.
All
which
haue
bin
heeretofore
cleared
in
handling
the
Nature
of
Faith
.
Wherefore
vnto
those
arguments
or
Sophismes
rather
,
which
[
a
](A09274-e39140-b)
a
Lib.
1.
de
Iust.
cap.
15.
Bellarmine
brings
to
proue
that
Iames
speakes
of
a
true
diuine
,
infused
,
Catholique
,
Christian
Faith
,
though
it
be
dead
faith
;
I
answere
breifely
.
That
we
grant
a
dead
Faith
to
be
a
true
Faith
:
but
it
is
in
its
kind
.
Because
it
hath
a
true
being
in
men
and
deuils
,
in
whom
it
is
,
and
ti
's
directed
toward
true
objects
:
But
it
is
not
that
true
Faith
which
is
Catholique
Christian
&
sauing
.
This
is
of
another
kind
,
and
in
comparison
of
this
,
that
other
is
but
a
meere
shadow
and
counterfeit
resemblance
of
true
Faith
.
Wherefore
when
those
Hypocrites
accounted
themselues
to
haue
that
faith
which
is
truely
Christian
and
sauing
,
S.
Iames
shewes
them
,
that
this
their
faith
which
was
alone
naked
of
Obedience
,
was
nothing
so
:
but
a
Faith
of
another
kind
,
a
dead
faith
,
hauing
onely
a
false
shew
of
a
true
and
liuing
faith
.
This
of
the
first
Argument
.
2
The
[
2
](A09274-e39330-b)
2
2d
Arg.
of
S.
Iames.
Argument
is
contained
.
v.
18.
being
drawne
from
an
impossibility
,
in
prouing
the
trueth
of
it
.
The
Argument
stands
thus
.
That
Faith
,
which
is
truely
Christian
may
be
shewen
and
proued
so
to
be
.
But
a
Faith
without
workes
cannot
be
demonstrated
to
be
a
true
faith
.
Ergo.
A
Faith
without
workes
is
no
true
Faith
.
The
major
is
omitted
as
most
euident
of
itselfe
.
Because
there
is
no
morall
vertue
,
or
grace
of
the
Holy
Ghost
truely
planted
in
the
heart
:
but
it
may
be
knowne
by
some
externall
Actions
,
which
it
is
apt
to
bring
forth
.
Euen
as
life
is
knowne
by
breathing
,
or
beating
of
the
Pulse
.
The
trueth
of
an
inuisible
Grace
hath
it's
demonstration
in
visible
workes
.
But
now
for
the
Minor
,
S.
Iames
proues
that
Faith
without
Obedience
cannot
appeare
by
any
proofe
to
be
true
faith
.
Which
he
doth
in
a
Dialogue
betweene
a
true
beleeuer
and
a
Hypocrite
.
Yea
a
man
may
say
,
thou
hast
Faith
,
and
I
haue
Workes
shew
me
thy
faith
without
workes
,
and
I
will
shew
thee
my
faith
by
my
workes
.
That
is
.
Thou
saiest
thou
hast
a
true
Faith
,
though
thou
hast
no
workes
:
I
say
I
haue
true
faith
because
I
haue
workes
.
Come
wee
now
to
the
triall
,
and
let
it
appeare
who
saieth
true
,
thou
or
I.
If
thou
saiest
true
;
proue
thy
Faith
by
something
or
other
to
be
true
.
Shew
me
thy
Faith
[
b
](A09274-e39490-b)
b
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
not
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
The
former
reading
is
most
agreeable
to
the
Art
gument
of
the
Apostle
▪
So
the
Syriack-Beza
,
the
Vulgar
,
the
French
,
our
last
Translators
.
Pareus
●ollowes
the
other
reading
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
and
so
Piscator
.
But
they
giue
no
good
reason
of
this
she
is
so
doing
.
The
change
was
easie
from
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
into
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
without
thy
wotkes
.
Workes
thou
hast
none
,
whereby
to
shew
thy
faith
,
make
it
then
appeare
by
something
else
.
But
that
's
impossible
.
Where
workes
are
wanring
,
ther
's
no
demonstration
else
whereby
to
justifie
the
trueth
of
faith
.
And
therefore
thou
art
driuen
to
confesse
that
thou
vainely
boastest
of
that
which
thou
hast
not
.
But
on
the
otherside
(
saieth
the
true
Beleeuer
)
I
can
make
good
,
that
which
I
say
,
prouing
that
my
faith
is
true
by
my
workes
.
I
will
shew
thee
my
faith
by
my
workes
.
My
sincere
Obedience
is
a
reall
demonstration
:
that
my
beleife
is
no
verball
ostentation
and
vaine
bragg
.
This
proofe
of
S.
Iames
is
very
con●incing
,
and
gripes
the
Consciences
of
Hypocrites
,
smiting
them
with
shame
and
confusion
when
they
come
to
this
triall
;
and
so
haue
their
false
and
fraudulent
hearts
laied
open
.
But
heere
it
will
be
asked
what
workes
doe
demonstrate
the
trueth
of
faith
,
and
also
how
they
doe
proue
it
.
Whereto
wee
answere
Workes
are
of
two
sortes
.
1.
Ordinary
,
such
workes
of
Sanctity
&
Obedience
,
as
are
required
to
a
holy
Conuersation
.
2.
Extraordinary
.
viz
,
Miracles
.
We
say
S.
Iames
vnderstands
the
former
,
and
those
onely
:
our
aduersaries
conclude
both
.
But
erroneously
,
for
asmuch
as
S.
Iames
speakes
not
of
the
doctrine
of
faith
,
but
of
the
Grace
of
faith
.
The
Grace
requires
good
workes
of
Piety
and
Charity
as
perpetually
necessary
for
the
conmirmation
of
it's
Trueth
.
So
doeth
not
the
doctrine
of
Faith
alwaies
require
Miraculous
workes
for
the
confirmation
of
it's
divinity
:
But
oney
at
the
first
publication
thereof
.
Wherefore
Lorinus
is
very
ridiculous
,
who
vpon
this
place
tels
vs
,
that
they
may
justly
demaund
of
vs
Haeretiques
(
For
so
they
bedust
vs
)
Miracles
for
the
confirmation
of
our
new
and
false
Doctrine
.
Indeed
were
it
new
and
false
their
request
were
not
vnreasonable
,
that
we
should
make
our
doctrine
credible
by
doing
of
Miracles
.
But
sure
the
Iesuite
iudgeth
of
our
doctrine
by
his
owne
,
which
did
he
not
suspect
for
a
new
Error
,
wee
see
no
reason
they
should
still
require
Miracles
for
confirmation
of
an
olde
Truth
For
our selues
we
seeke
not
the
aide
of
a
lying
Wonder
to
vphold
a
true
doctrine
:
nor
doe
we
count
it
any
disgrace
at
all
to
our
Religion
,
that
we
cannot
by
our
Faith
so
much
as
cure
a
lame
Horse
,
as
the
Iesuite
out
of
[
a
](A09274-e39890-b)
a
De
lib.
arbi●
Erasmus
scoffes
at
vs
.
Now
surely
if
such
a
beast
as
Bellarmine's
deuout
Mare
,
want
helpe
to
set
her
on
all
foure
,
we
cannot
be
yet
so
well
perswaded
of
that
vertue
of
Romish
Faith
,
as
to
thinke
that
a
Frier
will
doe
more
good
at
such
a
jadish
miracle
,
then
a
Farrier
.
But
whereas
the
Iesuite
goes
forward
to
require
of
vs
the
other
sort
of
good
workes
,
of
Piety
and
Charity
for
the
demonstration
of
our
Faith
hee
hath
reason
so
to
doe
,
though
not
so
much
as
he
imagines
,
when
hee
chargeth
vs
with
neglect
of
good
Workes
and
vnbridled
licentiousnesse
.
Would
to
God
we
could
cleere
our
practise
from
such
neglect
,
as
well
as
we
can
our
doctrine
from
teaching
it
.
But
yet
,
by
their
fauour
,
if
we
come
to
comparisons
,
we
know
no
Reason
why
we
should
runne
behind
the
dore
,
as
more
ashamed
of
our
practises
,
then
they
may
justly
be
of
theirs
,
in
which
case
we
boldly
bid
him
amongst
them
;
that
is
without
sinne
to
cast
the
first
stone
at
vs
.
To
proceed
.
Seeing
Workes
of
Obedience
are
the
proof●s
of
a
true
Faith
,
it
must
be
considered
in
what
sort
they
proue
it
.
For
may
not
good
Workes
be
counterfeited
as
well
as
Faith
?
I
answere
.
That
in
this
triall
the
judgment
of
verity
&
infallibility
belongeth
vnto
God
,
who
only
knowes
the
heart
and
conscience
,
being
able
to
discerne
euery
secret
working
of
the
Soule
,
and
so
to
judge
exactly
whether
or
no
all
outward
appearances
come
from
inward
syncerity
.
But
for
the
judgement
of
Charity
that
belongs
to
vs
.
If
we
behold
in
any
man
the
Workes
of
Obedience
to
God's
will
;
of
such
a
Man
we
are
to
judge
that
he
hath
true
Faith
.
Though
yet
herein
we
must
as
farre
as
humane
frailtie
will
giue
leaue
,
iudge
also
not
according
to
appearance
,
but
iudge
righteous
iudgment
.
Mens
practises
must
be
examined
:
if
hypocrisie
bewray
it self
,
(
as
't
is
hard
for
a
Counterfeit
not
to
forget
himself
at
some
one
time
or
other
,
if
he
be
duly
obserued
)
there
Charity
must
not
be
blinde
:
it
must
see
and
censure
it
.
'T
is
not
a
charitable
,
but
a
peruerse
Iudgment
to
call
euill
good
:
nor
is
it
any
offence
to
call
that
a
barren
or
bad
Tree
,
that
beares
either
no
fruit
at
all
,
or
none
but
bad
;
And
thus
of
this
second
Argument
of
the
Apostle
,
that
these
Hypocrites
Faith
was
vaine
,
because
,
when
it
comes
to
the
proofe
,
it
cannot
be
iustified
to
be
found
and
good
.
3
The
[
3
](A09274-e40150-b)
3
Arg
of
●
.
Iames.
Argument
is
v.
19.
from
the
example
of
the
diuels
themselues
,
in
whom
there
is
a
Faith
without
Workes
,
as
well
in
hypocrites
:
and
ergo
it
is
in
neither
of
them
a
true
Faith
.
The
Argument
is
brought
in
to
confute
a
Cauill
with
the
hypocrite
might
make
against
the
former
reason
.
True
might
he
say
,
I
cannot
shew
my
Faith
by
my
Workes
:
yet
for
all
that
I
haue
a
true
Faith
.
And
why
?
Because
I
beleeue
the
Articles
of
Religion
,
that
there
is
one
God
,
with
the
rest
.
Hereto
the
Apostle
replies
.
That
such
a
beliefe
is
not
a
true
Christian
Faith
,
because
it
is
to
be
found
euen
in
the
diuels
.
The
Argument
runnes
thus
.
That
faith
which
is
in
the
diuels
is
no
true
Christian
faith
.
But
a
bare
assent
to
the
Articles
of
Religion
without
Obedience
is
in
the
Diuels
.
Ergo
A
bare
assent
without
Obedience
is
no
true
Christian
faith
.
The
Maior
of
this
Argument
will
easily
be
granted
.
That
the
diuels
haue
not
that
true
Faith
which
is
required
of
a
Christian
Man
to
his
saluation
.
The
Minor
is
also
euident
.
That
the
diuels
doe
belieue
the
Articles
of
Christian
Religion
.
S.
Iames
instances
in
one
for
the
rest
,
namely
the
Article
of
the
Godhead
,
whereto
the
Diuels
assent
aswell
as
Hypocriticall
Men.
Thou
beleeuest
that
there
is
one
God
,
saith
the
true
beleeuer
to
the
hypocrite
,
pleading
that
he
beleeued
the
Articles
of
Faith
,
Thou
doest
well
.
'T
is
a
laudable
and
good
thing
to
acknowledge
the
Truth
of
Religion
.
But
withall
thou
must
know
that
the
diuels
deserue
as
much
commendation
for
this
beleefe
,
as
thou
doest
.
The
diuels
also
beleeue
.
Euen
they
confesse
the
Truth
of
that
and
the
other
Articles
of
Religion
.
An
euident
proofe
whereof
is
this
,
that
they
tremble
at
the
power
,
wrath
,
and
iustice
of
God
,
and
the
remembrance
of
the
last
iudgment
,
which
did
they
not
beleeue
,
they
would
not
feare
:
but
now
they
expect
it
with
Horrour
,
because
they
know
it
will
come
vpon
them
.
Whence
't
is
plain
that
the
Faith
of
Hypocrites
and
diuels
is
all
one
,
neither
better
then
other
,
both
vnfruitfull
to
bring
forth
Obedience
,
both
vnprofitable
to
bring
vnto
saluation
,
and
therefore
neither
of
them
that
true
Faith
,
which
is
Christian
and
sauing
.
This
Argument
of
the
Apostles
,
pincheth
our
Aduersaries
sore
,
who
stiffly
maintaine
that
S.
Iames
speakes
of
a
True
,
though
of
a
dead
Faith
.
For
they
can
not
for
shame
say
that
there
is
a
true
Faith
in
the
diuels
and
damned
Spirits
.
But
yet
S.
Iames
hath
concluded
that
they
haue
that
dead
Faith
which
hypocrites
boast
of
.
What
then
?
Then
a
dead
Faith
is
no
true
faith
,
as
our
[
a
](A09274-e40570-b)
a
Bell.
lib.
1.
d●
Iustif.
cap.
15.
Adversaries
affirme
it
is
.
Wherefore
to
helpe
themselues
,
they
deny
that
it
is
one
and
the
same
dead
Faith
,
which
is
in
hypocrites
and
euill
Spirits
.
Indeed
ex
parte
obiecti
,
they
grant
that
the
Faith
of
diuels
is
as
true
and
catholique
as
that
of
wicked
Men
,
because
they
both
beleeue
the
the
same
things
.
And
also
in
regard
of
the
effects
,
they
grant
their
Faith
to
be
alike
,
because
both
be
vnfruitfull
.
But
not
ex
parte
subiecti
,
so
they
say
there
's
much
difference
.
The
Faith
of
diuels
is
of
one
sort
,
and
the
Faith
of
hypocrites
of
another
.
But
heere
they
make
a
litle
to
bold
with
the
blessed
Apostle
,
ouerturning
the
force
of
his
argument
,
to
vphold
their
owne
fancie
.
The
Apostle
proues
against
Hypocrites
that
their
idle
Faith
without
Obedience
is
not
true
sauing
Faith
.
Why
?
Because
the
diuel
's
idle
Faith
destitute
of
Obedience
is
no
true
sauing
Faith
.
But
now
.
Is
the
Faith
of
diuels
&
hypocrites
of
the
same
kinde
and
Nature
.
Yea
,
or
no
?
No
,
they
be
not
,
they
be
of
a
diuerse
nature
,
say
the
Adversaries
.
Let
it
be
then
considered
,
what
force
there
is
in
the
Apostle's
Argument
.
Faith
without
workes
in
Deuils
saues
them
not
.
Ergo
Faith
without
workes
in
wicked
Men
,
saues
them
not
.
Might
not
one
prompted
by
a
Iesuite
,
reply
vpon
the
Apostle
.
Nay
by
your
leaue
,
your
Argument
is
inconsequent
,
because
you
doe
not
dispute
,
ad
idem
.
Faith
in
the
diuels
is
of
one
kinde
,
Faith
in
Hypocrites
is
of
another
:
&
therefore
though
Faith
without
works
cannot
saue
diuels
;
yet
Faith
without
works
may
saue
Men.
Thus
were
the
Apostle's
Argument
laide
in
the
dust
,
if
these
Mens
Opinions
may
stand
for
good
.
But
would
you
know
what
distinction
these
Men
make
betweene
the
faith
of
diuels
and
wicked
Men
,
which
St
Iames
takes
for
the
same
.
'T
is
thus
.
First
the
Faith
of
Euill
Men
is
free
,
the
Faith
of
diuels
is
compelled
and
extorted
from
them
by
a
kinde
of
force
.
So
[
b
](A09274-e40790-b)
b
〈◊〉
Bellarm.
Fides
hominum
malorum
libera
est
,
captivante
nimir
ùm
piâ
voluntate
intellectum
in
obsequium
Christi
:
Fides
vero
Daemonum
est
coacta
,
&
extracta
ab
ipsàrerum
Evidentiâ
.
Quod
insinuavit
idem
Iacobus
dicens
.
Daemones
credunt
,
&
contremiscunt
.
Nos
enim
non
credimus
contremiscentes
,
id
est
,
inviti
&
coacti
,
sed
spontè
&
libentèr
.
Wicked
Men
beleeue
freely
and
willingly
.
Why
?
Because
their
pious
and
godly
Will
captiuates
their
vnderstanding
to
the
Obedience
of
Christ
,
so
causing
it
to
assent
vnto
the
Truth
.
The
diuels
beleeue
vpon
compulsion
,
being
forced
to
it
by
the
Euidence
of
the
things
themselues
.
Which
Saint
Iames
intimates
,
They
beleeue
and
tremble
:
that
is
,
they
beleeue
against
their
Wills
.
Is
not
this
a
shamelesse
Iesuite
that
will
say
any
thing
to
patch
vp
a
broken
cause
?
For
be
not
these
absurd
Contradictions
to
say
,
that
wicked
Men
haue
godly
Wills
,
that
by
a
pious
Motion
of
the
Will
,
their
vnderstanding
is
captiuated
to
the
Obedience
of
Christ
,
and
yet
they
be
hypocrites
and
wicked
Men
still
.
No
Man
can
relish
such
assertions
,
who
knowes
how
averse
and
fromward
the
will
of
Men
is
to
embrace
any
thing
that
is
of
God
,
till
such
time
as
it
be
regenerate
by
sanctifying
Grace
.
It
is
therefore
without
all
reason
,
to
affirme
that
wicked
Men
beleeue
willinglie
,
and
't
is
against
all
experience
,
which
shewes
that
vngodly
Men
are
vtterly
as
vnwilling
to
beleue
any
truth
that
makes
against
them
in
any
kinde
whatsoeuer
;
as
a
beare
is
to
be
brought
to
the
stake
.
Indeed
in
matters
that
like
them
,
or
such
as
be
of
an
indifferent
Nature
,
neither
fauouring
nor
crossing
their
Corruptions
,
they
'll
be
apt
to
beleeue
,
though
not
out
of
a
pious
affection
,
as
the
Iesuite
dreames
:
but
out
of
selfe-loue
and
other
selfe-considerations
.
But
take
them
in
any
other
point
of
Religion
,
that
doth
any
way
grate
vpon
their
wicked
affections
,
all
the
perswasion
and
instruction
in
the
World
,
cannot
worke
them
to
a
beleefe
of
it
,
till
the
Conscience
(
spite
of
their
hearts
)
be
convicted
by
some
notable
Euidence
of
the
Trueth
.
Now
what
else
can
be
said
of
the
diuels
;
who
will
as
willinglie
beleeue
what
makes
for
them
,
(
if
any
thing
did
)
or
what
makes
not
against
them
;
as
any
wicked
man
can
doe
?
And
they
are
as
vnwilling
to
beleeue
any
thing
,
that
makes
against
them
,
as
any
wicked
Man
is
.
Nor
would
they
beleeue
it
,
did
not
the
cleerenes
of
diuine
Reuelations
convince
them
of
the
certaine
Truth
thereof
.
So
that
there
is
no
difference
at
all
in
this
respect
,
as
the
one
,
so
the
other
beleeue
vnwillingly
;
as
diuels
,
so
wicked
Men
beleeue
with
trembling
.
The
diuels
indeed
with
greater
horror
,
as
their
beleefe
and
knowledge
is
alwaies
more
distinct
then
Mans
:
but
yet
Men
with
horror
too
,
when
their
Consciences
by
fits
are
awakened
to
behold
the
woes
,
that
are
comming
vpon
them
.
Vnto
this
difference
of
[
c
](A09274-e40940-b)
c
Becanus
.
Bell.
others
adde
two
more
.
Namely
:
1
That
the
Faith
of
diuels
is
naturall
;
that
of
wicked
Men
supernaturall
and
infused
.
2
That
the
Faith
of
Diuels
is
dishonest
,
the
Faith
of
wicked
Men
is
an
honest
Faith
.
Whereto
we
say
thus
much
.
That
touching
the
first
difference
,
we
grant
indeed
that
the
Faith
of
the
diuels
is
not
supernaturall
except
it
be
in
regard
of
the
obiect
.
The
faculties
which
they
receiued
in
their
creation
are
not
so
farre
corrupted
in
them
:
but
that
they
are
able
to
assent
vnto
,
and
apprehend
diuine
Reuelations
without
further
helpe
,
then
of
their
owne
naturall
Abilities
.
Man
in
his
fall
sustained
greater
losse
in
the
spirituall
powers
of
his
soule
,
&
therefore
stan●s
in
need
of
helpe
.
Which
helpe
is
afforded
euen
vnto
the
vngodly
;
but
this
is
by
ordinary
illumination
,
not
by
speciall
infusion
of
any
sanctifying
Grace
.
Enlightned
they
are
aboue
the
ordinary
pitch
of
naturall
blindnes
:
but
not
aboue
that
whereto
a
meere
naturall
vnderstanding
may
be
aduanced
.
Yea
were
Mans
Vnderstanding
raised
vp
to
that
perfection
which
is
in
diuels
:
this
were
more
then
Nature
,
yet
lesse
then
Grace
.
This
common
gift
of
Illumination
bestowed
on
wicked
Men
,
but
not
on
diuels
,
is
no
proofe
that
their
Faith
is
of
a
diuerse
kinde
.
As
to
the
last
difference
we
are
not
so
far
studied
in
Moralities
,
as
to
conceiue
wherein
the
dishonestie
of
the
diuel
's
Faith
,
and
the
honestie
of
Hypocrites
Faith
doth
lie
.
To
ordinarie
vnderstanding
it
seemes
euery
way
as
honest
&
commendable
a
matter
,
for
a
wicked
fiend
,
as
for
a
wicked
Man
,
to
beleeue
what
God
reueales
vnto
him
.
If
not
,
we
must
expect
to
be
further
informed
by
these
Iesuites
Men
that
are
better
read
in
that
part
of
Ethickes
,
whether
diabolicall
or
hypocriticall
.
4.
[
4
](A09274-e41060-b)
4
〈◊〉
of
S.
Iames.
This
of
the
Apostle's
third
Argument
.
we
come
to
the
fourth
.
The
4.
Argument
is
contained
in
the
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25
verses
.
Before
which
the
Apostle
repeates
his
maine
Conclusion
.
That
Faith
without
Obedience
is
a
false
and
dead
Faith
.
But
wilt
thou
know
O
[
a
](A09274-e41110-b)
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
as
an
empty
Vessell
without
liquor
vaine
Man
(
or
hypocrite
)
that
Faith
without
workes
is
dead
?
v.
20.
For
the
convincing
of
him
further
,
he
proceeds
to
a
new
Argument
to
proue
it
vnto
him
.
The
Argument
is
this
.
That
Faith
which
will
not
iustifie
a
Man
is
a
false
and
dead
Faith
.
But
the
Faith
which
is
without
workes
will
not
iustifie
.
a
Man
.
Ergo
'T
is
a
dead
and
a
false
Faith
.
The
Maior
the
Apostle
omits
as
most
evident
of
it selfe
.
The
Minor
he
proues
by
an
induction
of
two
Examples
.
Thus.
If
Abraham
and
Rahab
were
instified
by
a
working
faith
,
thou
that
Faith
which
is
alone
without
workes
will
not
iustifie
.
But
A●raham
and
Rahab
were
so
iustified
,
viz.
by
a
working
Faith
.
Ergo
Faith
without
workes
will
not
iustifie
a
man
.
The
Reason
of
the
Consequence
is
manifest
.
Because
as
Abraham
and
Rahab
:
so
all
other
must
be
justified
.
The
meanes
of
justification
and
Life
,
were
euer
one
and
the
same
for
all
men
.
Which
also
the
Apostle
intimates
in
that
clause
v.
21.
Was
not
our
Father
Abraham
&c.
implying
that
as
the
Father
,
so
also
the
children
,
the
whole
stocke
and
generation
of
the
Faithfull
,
were
and
are
still
justified
by
one
vniforme
meanes
.
The
two
instances
the
Apostle
vrges
,
that
of
Abraham
.
v.
21.
22.
23.
that
of
Rahab
.
v.
25.
The
conclusion
with
aequally
issues
from
them
both
,
he
interserts
in
the
middest
,
after
the
allegation
of
Abrahams
Example
.
v.
24.
I
shall
goe
ouer
them
as
they
lie
in
the
Text.
In
the
example
of
Abraham
,
the
Apostle
v.
21.
sets
downe
this
proposition
.
That
Abraham
was
justified
by
a
working
Faith
.
For
this
interrogatiues
Was
not
our
Father
Abraham
justified
by
workes
?
must
be
resolued
into
an
affirmatiue
Abraham
our
Father
was
justified
by
workes
.
That
is
a
working
Faith
.
Which
proposition
the
Apostle
confirmeth
by
it's
parts
.
1.
Shewing
that
Abrahams
Faith
was
an
operatiue
faith
declared
and
approued
by
his
workes
.
Secondly
,
prouing
that
by
such
a
working
Faith
Abraham
was
justified
in
God's
sight
.
That
the
faith
of
Abraham
was
operatiue
,
full
of
life
and
power
to
bring
forth
Obedience
vnto
God
,
the
Apostle
alleageth
one
instance
insteed
of
all
the
●est
to
proue
it
.
And
that
is
that
singular
worke
of
Obedience
vnto
God's
command
.
When
he
offered
vp
his
sonne
Isaak
vpon
the
Altar
.
Many
other
workes
there
were
performed
by
Abraham
abundantly
justifying
the
trueth
of
his
Faith
:
But
the
Apostle
chooseth
this
aboue
all
other
,
as
that
worke
which
was
of
purpose
enjoyned
him
by
God
for
a
triall
of
his
faith
.
Wherein
Abraham
mightily
ouer●oming
all
those
strong
temptations
to
disobedience
and
infidelity
,
made
it
appeare
,
that
his
faith
was
not
an
idle
,
dead
and
empty
Speculation
,
but
an
actiue
and
working
Grace
.
Wherefore
the
Apostle
adds
ver.
22.
Seest
thou
how
faith
wrought
with
his
workes
,
and
by
workes
was
faith
made
perfect
?
That
is
as
in
other
workes
of
that
holy
Patriarch
,
so
specially
in
that
sacrificing
his
sonne
,
all
that
can
see
,
may
plainely
behold
,
the
strength
and
life
of
his
faith
.
Faith
wrought
with
his
workes
.
That
is
.
His
faith
directed
and
supported
him
in
the
doing
of
that
worke
,
as
the
Apostle
Paul
expounds
it
.
Heb.
11.
17
By
faith
Abraham
offered
vp
Isaack
:
that
worke
had
not
binne
done
,
if
faith
had
not
wrought
it
.
In
euery
circumstance
thereof
faith
did
all
in
all
from
the
beginning
of
the
worke
to
the
end
.
This
interpretation
is
most
simple
and
generally
receaued
.
Faith
wrought
with
:
That
is
.
In
or
by
his
workes
,
vnto
the
performance
whereof
the
force
of
faith
was
in
spaeciall
manner
assesting
.
Pareus
reads
the
words
by
a
[
a
](A09274-e41680-b)
a
〈…〉
tmesis
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
(
that
is
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
scilicet
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
(
that
is
)
Faith
being
with
his
workes
wrought
.
What
?
his
Iustification
.
But
this
construction
seemes
somewhat
hard
and
not
necessary
for
this
place
.
The
other
sense
is
much
plainer
,
shewing
vs
by
or
with
what
vertue
Abraham's
workes
were
wrought
.
viz.
By
the
vertue
of
his
faith
,
which
in
most
powerfull
manner
incited
and
inabled
him
to
obey
.
The
Apostle
goes
forward
,
And
by
workes
was
faith
made
perfect
.
That
is
declared
to
be
perfect
.
[
b
](A09274-e41790-b)
b
〈…〉
For
workes
did
not
perfect
Abrahams
Faith
essentially
,
in
asmuch
as
long
before
this
time
,
it
was
perfect
,
as
is
plaine
in
that
Abraham
was
justified
by
it
25
yeares
before
the
oblation
of
his
sonne
Isaack
,
and
also
by
the
strength
of
his
Faith
had
done
many
excellent
workes
and
obtained
great
blessings
at
the
hand
of
God
.
So
that
the
offering
vp
of
Isaack
was
not
the
cause
but
a
fruite
of
the
perfection
of
Abrahams
Faith
,
the
great
difficulty
of
that
worke
shewed
the
singular
petfection
of
that
Grace
which
was
able
so
to
encounter
and
conquer
it
.
The
goodnes
of
the
fruit
doth
not
worke
,
but
declare
the
goodnes
that
is
in
the
tree
;
the
qualities
of
the
fruits
alwaies
depending
vpon
the
nature
of
the
Tree
:
but
not
on
the
contrary
.
Thus
then
the
first
part
of
the
Proposition
is
plainly
proved
by
the
Apostle
.
That
Abrahams
Faith
was
a
liuely
and
working
Faith
declaring
and
approuing
it's
owne
trueth
by
the
workes
of
his
Obedience
.
The
next
part
.
Namely
.
That
Abraham
was
justified
in
God's
sight
,
by
such
a
working
Faith
,
he
proue●
.
1.
By
a
Testimony
of
Scripture
.
2.
By
an
effect
or
consequent
thereof
,
Both
are
expressed
in
the
23.
v.
The
first
in
these
words
.
And
the
Scripture
was
fulfilled
which
sayeth
.
Abraham
beleeued
God
,
and
it
was
imputed
vnto
him
for
Righteousnes
.
The
application
of
this
testimony
is
very
heedfully
to
be
obserued
,
because
it
serues
excellently
for
the
clearing
of
the
Apostles
meaning
,
when
he
saieth
we
are
justified
by
workes
.
And
the
Scripture
was
fulfilled
saieth
S.
Iames.
When
?
At
the
time
,
that
Isaack
was
offered
.
But
was
it
not
fulfilled
before
that
time
?
Yes
.
Many
yeares
,
when
the
promise
of
the
blessed
seed
was
made
vnto
him
,
as
appeares
Gen.
15.
6.
Whence
this
testimony
is
taken
.
How
was
it
then
fulfilled
at
the
oblation
of
Isaack
?
Thus.
The
Trueth
of
that
which
was
verified
before
,
was
then
againe
confirmed
by
a
new
and
euident
experiment
.
Well
.
Thus
much
is
plaine
enough
.
But
heere
now
the
difficulty
is
,
how
this
Scripture
is
applyed
vnto
the
Apostles
former
dispute
.
In
the
21.
v.
He
saieth
that
Abraham
was
justified
by
Workes
when
he
offered
Isaack
.
How
proues
he
,
that
he
was
so
justified
?
why
by
this
testimony
.
Because
the
Scripture
was
fulfil●ed
at
that
time
,
which
saieth
,
Abraham
beleeued
God
&c.
Marke
then
the
Apostle's
Argument
.
When
Abraham
offered
Isaack
the
Scripture
was
fulfilled
which
saieth
Abraham
was
iustified
by
faith
.
For
that
's
the
mea●ing
of
that
Scripture
.
Ergo
,
Abraham
when
he
offered
Isaac●
was
justified
by
workes
.
This
at
first
sight
s●emeth
farre
set
,
and
not
onely
besides
,
but
quite
contrary
to
the
Apostles
purpose
to
proue
he
was
then
justified
by
workes
,
because
the
Scripture
saieth
,
he
was
then
iustified
by
Faith
.
But
vpon
due
consideration
,
in●erence
appeares
to
be
euident
,
and
the
agreement
easie
.
The
Apostle
and
the
Scripture
alleaged
,
haue
one
and
the
same
meaning
:
the
Scripture
saieth
.
He
was
iustified
by
Faith
,
meaning
,
as
all
confesse
,
a
working
Faith
fruitefull
in
Obedience
.
S.
Iames
affirmes
the
very
same
,
saying
,
that
he
was
justified
by
workes
,
that
is
.
Metonymically
by
a
working
Faith
▪
And
therefore
the
Apostle
rightly
alleageth
the
Scripture
for
confirmation
of
his
assertion
:
the
Scripture
witnessing
.
That
by
Faith
he
was
iustified
;
the
Apostle
expounding
what
manner
of
Faith
it
meanes
.
Namely
a
Faith
with
workes
or
a
working
Faith
.
So
that
the
application
of
this
Testimony
vnto
that
time
of
offering
vp
of
Isaack
is
most
excellent
:
because
then
it
appeared
manifestly
what
manner
of
Faith
it
was
,
wherefore
God
had
accounted
him
just
in
former
times
.
Without
this
Metonymie
it
appeares
not
that
there
is
any
force
in
the
application
of
this
Scripture
and
the
Argument
from
thence
.
The
Scripture
witnesseth
that
Abraham
was
then
justified
by
Faith
.
Ergo
't
is
true
,
that
he
was
then
justified
by
Workes
.
What
consequence
is
there
in
this
Argument
except
we
expound
S.
Iames
by
that
metonymie
,
Workes
,
that
is
a
working
Faith
?
And
so
the
Argument
holdes
firme
.
Take
it
otherwise
,
as
our
aduersaries
would
haue
it
,
or
,
to
speake
trueth
,
according
to
the
former
interpretation
of
our
diuines
;
it
breeds
an
absurd
construction
either
way
.
Abraham
in
offering
Isaack
was
justified
by
workes
,
that
is
,
secundâ
Iustificatione
of
good
he
was
made
better
.
How
is
that
proued
?
By
Scripture
.
Because
the
Scripture
saieth
.
That
at
that
time
he
was
justified
by
faith
.
That
is
,
primâ
Iustificatione
of
bad
he
became
good
.
Is
not
this
most
apparent
Non-sence
.
Againe
according
to
the
Interpretations
of
our
diuines
,
Abraham
at
the
offering
vp
of
Isaack
was
iustified
by
workes
(
that
is
,
say
they
)
declared
iust
before
men
.
How
is
that
proued
?
by
Scripture
.
Because
the
Scripture
saieth
.
That
at
that
time
,
he
was
justified
by
Faith
.
that
is
,
accounted
just
in
God's
sight
.
In
which
kind
of
arguing
I
must
confesse
I
apprehend
not
how
there
is
any
tolerable
consequence
.
Wherefore
we
expound
S.
Iames
metonymically
,
putting
the
effect
for
the
cause
;
workes
,
for
a
working
Faith
,
as
the
necessary
connexion
of
the
text
enforced
vs
.
Nor
is
there
any
harshnes
at
all
,
nor
violent
straining
in
this
figure
,
when
two
things
of
necessary
and
neere
dependance
one
vpon
the
other
,
(
as
workes
,
and
a
working
Faith
)
are
put
one
for
another
.
Neither
haue
our
aduersaries
more
cause
to
complaine
of
vs
for
this
figuratiue
interpretation
of
workes
,
then
we
haue
of
them
for
their
figuratiue
interpretation
of
faith
.
For
when
we
are
saied
to
be
justified
by
faith
,
they
vnderstand
it
dispositiuè
&
meritoriè
not
formaliterè
Faith
in
itselfe
is
not
our
sanctification
,
nor
yet
the
cause
of
it
.
But
it
merits
the
bestowing
of
it
,
and
disposeth
vs
to
receaue
it
.
Let
reason
iudge
now
,
which
is
the
harsher
exposition
.
Theirs
?
faith
iustifies
(
that
is
)
Faith
is
a
disposition
in
vs
deseruing
that
God
should
sanctifie
vs
by
infusion
of
the
habit
of
Charity
.
Or
ours
?
Workes
justifie
,
that
is
,
the
Faith
whereby
we
are
acquited
in
God's
sight
,
is
a
working
Faith
.
Thus
much
of
this
Testimonie
of
Scripture
prouing
that
Abraham
was
justified
by
a
true
and
working
faith
,
In
the
next
place
the
Apostle
shewes
it
by
a
visible
effect
or
Consequent
that
followed
vpon
his
Iustification
expressed
in
the
next
words
:
And
he
was
called
the
freind
of
God
.
A
high
prerogatiue
,
for
God
the
Creator
to
reckon
of
a
poore
mortall
Man
as
his
familiar
freind
;
but
so
entire
and
true
was
the
faith
of
Abraham
,
so
vpright
was
his
heart
,
that
God
not
onely
gratiously
accounted
it
to
him
for
Righteousnes
:
but
also
in
token
of
that
gratious
acceptance
entered
into
a
league
with
Abraham
taking
him
for
his
especiall
freind
and
confederate
;
A
League
of●ensiue
and
defensiue
.
God
would
be
a
Freind
to
Abraham
[
Thou
shalt
be
a
blessing
]
and
a
freind
of
Abrahams
Freinds
.
I
will
blesse
them
that
blesse
thee
;
I
will
curse
them
that
u●se
thee
.
Which
League
of
freindship
with
Abraham
before
the
offering
vp
of
Isaack
was
therevpon
by
solemne
protestation
and
oath
renued
,
as
we
haue
it
Gen.
22.
v.
16.
&c.
Thus
we
haue
this
first
example
of
Abraham
.
From
thence
the
Apostle
proceeds
to
a
generall
conclusion
in
the
next
verse
(
24
)
Yee
see
then
how
that
by
workes
a
man
is
iustified
,
and
not
by
Faith
only
.
That
is
.
Therefore
it
is
euident
.
That
a
man
is
iustified
by
a
working
faith
:
not
by
a
faith
without
workes
.
Which
Metonymicall
interpretation
is
againe
confirmed
by
the
inference
of
this
conclusion
vpon
the
former
verse
.
The
Scripture
saieth
,
That
Abraham
beleeued
God
and
it
was
imputed
vnto
him
for
Righteousnes
.
Ergo
(
saieth
●
Iames
)
Yee
see
how
a
man
is
iustified
by
workes
and
not
by
Faith
onely
.
A
man
might
heere
say
.
Nay
rather
.
Wee
see
the
contrary
.
That
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
onely
and
not
by
workes
.
For
in
that
place
of
Scripture
there
is
no
mention
at
all
made
of
Workes
.
Wherefore
of
necessity
we
must
vnderstand
them
both
in
the
same
sense
.
And
so
the
conclusion
followes
directly
.
That
euery
man
is
iustified
by
an
actiue
not
an
idle
Faith
,
because
the
Scripture
witnesseth
,
that
Abraham
was
instified
by
the
like
Faith
.
Our
Aduersaries
collection
then
from
this
place
.
(
That
Faith
and
Workes
be
compartners
in
Iustification
,
we
are
〈◊〉
partly
by
faith
,
partly
by
workes
)
is
vaine
&
inconsequent
.
For
when
the
Apostle
saies
,
A
Man
is
iustified
by
workes
and
not
by
faith
only
:
his
meaning
is
not
,
that
workes
and
faith
are
two
Coordinate
causes
by
their
ioynt-force-working
our
Iustification
;
but
the
Apostle
vtterly
excludes
Faith
onely
from
Iustification
,
and
attributes
it
wholy
vnto
workes
.
For
by
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Faith
onely
,
he
vnderstands
faith
alone
,
that
faith
which
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
v.
17.
alone
,
solitary
,
by
itselfe
,
without
workes
.
And
such
a
dead
faith
whereof
these
hypocrites
boasted
.
S.
Iames
excludes
wholly
from
justifying
of
a
man
.
I
say
then
that
he
is
not
iustified
by
faith
onely
:
but
that
he
is
iustified
by
workes
.
That
is
a
working
faith
that
is
fruitfull
in
Obedience
.
The
Apostle
goes
forward
from
the
Example
of
Abraham
vnto
that
of
Rahab
verse
.
Likewise
was
not
Rahab
the
Harlot
iustified
by
workes
?
That
is
in
the
same
manner
as
Abraham
:
so
also
Rahab
was
iustified
by
a
working
saith
.
Which
appeared
to
be
so
by
that
which
shee
did
when
she
receaued
the
messengers
,
entertained
the
two
spies
which
were
sent
to
search
the
land
,
lodged
them
in
her
house
without
discouering
them
.
And
when
by
accident
they
were
made
knowne
,
hid
them
secretly
vpon
the
roofe
,
and
afterwards
sent
them
out
another
way
,
conveied
them
away
priuily
,
not
by
the
vsuall
,
but
by
another
way
(
that
is
)
through
the
window
letting
them
downe
ouer
the
wall
by
a
Cord
as
the
story
hath
it
.
Ios.
2.
In
this
dangerous
enterprise
,
wherein
this
weake
woman
ventured
her
life
in
succouring
the
Enemies
of
her
King
and
Country
:
it
appeares
plainly
that
she
had
a
strong
and
liuely
Faith
in
the
God
of
Israel
:
and
that
the
confession
which
she
made
with
her
mouth
to
the
spies
(
The
Lord
your
God
,
he
is
the
God
in
Heauen
aboue
and
in
the
Earth
beneath
.
Iosh.
2.
11.
)
proceeded
from
a
truely
beleeuing
heart
,
insomuch
as
her
words
were
made
good
by
works
,
that
followed
them
.
Wherefore
the
Apostle
iustly
parallels
these
2
examples
of
Abraham
offering
his
sonne
;
and
Rahab
in
the
kind
vsage
of
the
Spies
,
because
both
those
facts
were
singular
trialls
of
a
liuely
faith
which
was
able
in
that
sorte
to
ouercome
what
was
hardest
to
be
conquered
.
viz.
Naturall
affection
.
In
Abraham
both
fatherly
affection
to
the
life
of
a
deere
and
only
sonne
:
and
in
Rahab
the
Naturall
loue
to
ones
Country
and
a
mans
owne
Life
did
all
stoope
and
giue
way
,
when
once
true
Faith
commands
Obedience
.
Here
againe
our
adversaries
trouble
themselues
,
and
the
Text
with
needlesse
speculations
telling
vs
,
that
now
the
Apostle
hath
altered
his
cliffe
,
and
gone
from
the
second
Iustification
in
Abrahams
example
,
to
the
first
Iustification
in
this
of
Rahab
.
That
Rahab
was
conuerted
at
this
time
of
receauing
the
spies
being
made
a
beleeuer
of
an
infidell
,
a
good
woeman
of
a
bad
.
That
she
by
this
good
worke
did
expiate
her
former
sinnes
and
merited
the
grace
and
fauour
of
God
,
notwithstanding
that
she
committed
a
venial
sinne
in
handling
of
the
businesse
,
telling
a
downe-right
lie
,
which
though
she
should
not
haue
done
;
yet
it
hindred
not
the
meritoriousnes
of
the
worke
,
with
such
other
fond
imaginations
peruerting
the
simplicity
of
the
Trueth
.
But
first
they
are
not
agreed
among
themselues
whether
the
Apostle
doe
in
that
sort
shift
from
one
Iustification
to
another
.
Bellarmine
affirmes
it
and
many
moe
.
But
others
deny
it
,
as
may
be
seene
in
Lorinus
his
exposition
of
the.
21.
v.
of
this
Chapter
.
And
were
they
agreed
vpon
it
,
sure
I
am
they
should
disagree
from
the
Apostle
,
who
makes
this
second
instance
of
the
same
nature
with
the
former
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
In
like
manner
saieth
he
,
was
Rahab
iustified
:
viz.
as
Abraham
was
.
Againe
when
they
say
Rahab
became
a
true
beleeuer
at
that
time
of
receauing
the
spies
,
not
before
,
't
is
more
then
they
can
proue
.
By
the
circumstances
of
the
story
it
appeares
plainely
,
that
she
beleeued
before
they
came
,
by
the
relation
of
the
great
workes
which
God
had
done
for
his
people
,
and
the
promises
that
were
made
vnto
them
,
that
they
should
possesse
Rahabs
countrey
.
This
bred
feare
in
others
:
but
faith
in
her
,
by
the
secret
working
of
the
holy
Ghost
:
See
Ioshua
2.
9.
&c.
And
certainly
;
(
had
she
not
had
Faith
,
before
the
spies
came
,
who
can
thinke
she
would
haue
giuen
entertainment
to
such
dangerous
persons
?
But
she
knew
them
to
be
the
Seruants
of
the
God
of
Israel
in
whom
shee
beleeued
;
and
therefore
by
this
[
a
](A09274-e43430-b)
a
Heb.
11.
31.
Faith
she
receaued
them
peaceably
;
though
Enemies
of
her
Countrey
.
Lastly
to
that
of
the
Merit●riousnes
of
the
worke
of
Rahab
,
to
deserue
Grace
and
Life
aeternall
;
we
reiect
it
,
not
only
as
a
vaine
but
an
impious
conceit
,
which
neuer
entred
into
the
humble
hearts
of
the
S●
.
of
old
:
but
hath
bin
set
on
foote
in
the
last
corrupt
ages
of
the
world
by
men
drunken
with
selfe-Loue
,
and
admiration
of
their
owne
Righteousnes
.
Thus
we
haue
these
2
Examples
whereby
the
Apostle
hath
proued
sufficiently
,
that
the
Faith
which
is
separated
from
Obedience
,
will
not
justifie
a
Man
,
&
therefore
that
it
is
a
dead
Faith
,
and
not
a
true
liuing
Faith
according
as
was
proposed
.
v.
20.
Now
for
a
close
of
this
whole
dispute
he
againe
repeates
that
conclusion
,
adding
thereto
anew
similitude
to
illustrate
it
by
,
in
the
last
verse
of
the
Chapter
.
For
as
the
Body
without
the
Spirit
is
dead
,
so
faith
without
workes
is
dead
,
that
is
,
As
the
Body
without
the
Spirit
,
i.
e.
the
Souls
,
or
the
Breath
and
other
Motion
(
is
dead
)
vnable
to
performe
any
liuing
action
whatsoeuer
:
So
Faith
without
workes
is
dead
;
that
is
,
vtterly
vnable
to
performe
these
liuing
actions
,
which
belong
vnto
it
.
What
are
those
?
Two
.
1.
To
repose
it
stedfastly
vpon
the
promise
of
life
in
Christ
,
which
is
the
proper
immediate
liuing
Action
of
Faith
.
2.
To
justifie
a
Man
in
the
sight
of
God
,
which
by
a
speciall
priuiledge
is
the
consequent
of
the
former
.
These
liuing
actions
cannot
be
performed
by
that
Faith
which
is
dead
,
being
destitute
of
good
workes
.
That
Faith
which
hath
not
power
to
bring
forth
Obedience
,
is
thereby
declared
to
be
a
dead
Faith
,
deuoide
of
all
power
to
embrace
the
promise
with
confidence
and
relyance
as
also
to
justifie
.
A
Man
would
thinke
this
were
plaine
enough
,
and
needed
not
to
be
troubled
with
any
further
C●villations
.
But
't
is
strange
what
a
coile
our
Adversaries
make
with
this
similitude
,
writhing
and
straining
it
to
such
Conclusions
as
the
Apostle
neuer
intende●
▪
Hence
they
gather
.
1.
That
as
the
Soule
giues
life
to
the
Body
,
as
the
●●rme
of
the
Body
:
so
Workes
giue
life
to
Faith
as
the
forme
of
it
2
That
as
the
Body
is
the
same
true
Body
without
the
Soule
&
with
it
:
so
Faith
is
one
and
the
same
true
Faith
without
workes
and
with
them
,
which
are
nothing
but
sophisticall
speculati●●●
besides
the
purpose
of
the
Text.
The
Apostle
intends
nothing
but
to
shew
the
Necessity
of
the
Copulation
of
a
liuing
Faith
and
Obedience
together
:
by
the
similitude
of
the
like
Necessitie
of
the
vnion
of
a
liuing
Body
,
and
the
Soule
.
But
his
purpose
is
not
to
shew
,
that
the
manner
of
their
Connection
is
the
same
,
that
just
in
euery
point
as
the
Soule
is
to
the
Body
,
or
the
Body
to
the
Soule
:
so
Workes
are
vnto
Faith
,
and
Faith
vnto
Works
.
It
sufficeth
to
his
intent
,
that
as
in
the
absence
of
the
Soule
,
the
Body
:
so
in
the
absence
of
Obedience
,
Faith
is
dead
.
But
thence
it
followes
not
,
that
workes
by
their
presence
doe
the
same
thing
to
Faith
;
as
the
Soule
to
the
Body
by
it's
presence
;
or
that
Faith
in
the
absence
of
Workes
remaines
the
same
;
as
the
Body
doth
in
the
absence
of
the
Soule
.
If
we
must
needs
be
tied
to
the
strict
termes
of
the
Similitude
:
let
vs
a
little
examine
the
comparison
,
and
we
shall
see
our
Aduersaries
all
flye
off
first
from
it
.
Let
the
comparison
be
first
thus
.
Betweene
the
Body
and
the
Soule
,
Faith
and
Workes
as
the
termes
be
in
the
Text.
As
the
Body
without
the
Soule
is
dead
because
the
Soule
giues
life
,
i.
e
sense
,
breathing
,
and
all
other
Motion
to
the
Body
.
So
Faith
without
Workes
is
dead
,
because
Workes
giue
life
vnto
Faith
.
But
now
this
Comparison
will
not
runne
on
all
foure
.
For
Workes
are
not
vnto
Faith
as
the
Soule
is
to
the
Body
;
but
as
sense
and
motion
is
to
the
Body
.
Seeing
Workes
are
externall
acts
,
not
internall
habits
:
and
so
are
proportionable
not
to
the
Soule
,
but
to
the
liuing
actions
thence
issuing
.
Wherefore
't
is
as
absurd
to
say
,
that
Workes
giue
life
vnto
Faith
,
as
't
is
ridiculous
to
affirme
,
that
Sense
&
Motion
giue
life
to
the
Body
,
which
are
not
Causes
;
but
Effects
&
signes
of
Life
.
Therefore
when
Faith
without
Workes
is
dead
,
't
is
not
spoken
in
that
sense
,
because
Workes
giue
life
to
Faith
,
as
the
Soule
doth
to
the
Body
.
L●●
then
the
Comparison
bee
thus
.
Between
the
Body
and
the
Soule
.
Faith
and
Charity
.
As
the
Body
without
the
Soule
is
dead
,
because
the
Soule
is
the
forme
of
the
body
,
and
giues
life
to
it
.
So
Faith
without
Charity
is
dead
,
because
Charity
is
the
Forme
of
Faith
,
and
giues
life
to
it
.
But
neither
will
the
Comparison
hold
vpon
these
termes
.
For
1.
our
Adversaries
here
put
in
Charity
the
habit
,
for
Workes
the
act
:
which
is
more
then
themselues
ought
to
doe
,
seeing
they
will
tye
vs
at
short
Bitts
,
to
the
very
letter
of
the
Text.
For
though
we
can
be
content
to
admit
that
interpretation
,
would
they
admit
of
the
Apostle's
plaine
meaning
,
&
not
straine
for
querkes
:
yet
seeing
they
argue
so
precisely
from
the
Words
of
the
Comparison
,
they
must
not
now
haue
libertie
from
vs
to
goe
from
them
,
but
be
content
to
take
the
Words
as
they
lie
in
the
Text
,
and
make
their
best
of
them
.
Yet
seeing
't
is
most
senselesse
to
make
Workes
(
that
is
)
externall
Actions
the
Forme
of
Faith
an
internall
habit
:
let
them
take
Charity
insteed
of
them
,
an
internall
habit
likewise
,
Wil
it
be
any
better
now
?
belike
so
.
Then
't
is
thus
.
As
the
Soule
is
the
Forme
of
the
Body
:
so
Charity
is
the
forme
of
Faith
.
and
as
the
Soule
giues
life
and
action
to
the
Body
,
so
Charity
vnto
Faith
.
Will
they
stand
to
this
?
No.
Here
againe
they
fly
off
in
both
Comparisons
.
Charity
is
one
habit
,
Faith
another
distinct
betweene
themselues
,
and
therefore
they
deny
,
as
there
's
good
reason
,
that
Charity
is
either
the
Essentiall
forme
of
Faith
,
as
the
Soule
of
the
liuing
Body
:
or
the
accidentall
Forme
,
as
whitenes
of
Paper
.
They
say
't
is
onely
an
externall
Forme
.
But
this
now
is
not
to
keepe
close
to
the
Apostle's
comparison
,
but
to
runne
from
it
at
their
pleasure
,
when
they
fall
vpon
an
absurdity
in
pressing
of
it
so
strictly
.
The
Soule
is
no
externall
,
but
an
internall
essentiall
Forme
,
&
therefore
Charitie
must
be
so
,
if
all
runne
round
.
Againe
doth
Charitie
giue
life
or
liuing
actions
vnto
Faith
as
the
Soule
doth
vnto
the
Body
?
Neither
dare
they
hold
close
to
this
Comparison
.
For
the
proper
worke
or
action
of
Faith
is
to
assent
vnto
the
Trueth
of
diuine
reuelations
,
because
of
Gods
authoritie
,
as
themselues
teach
.
Whence
now
comes
this
assent
?
From
the
Habit
of
Faith
,
or
of
Charity
?
They
grant
that
it
comes
immediatlie
from
the
Habit
of
Faith
,
which
produceth
this
action
,
euen
when
it
s
seuered
from
Charity
.
Then
't
is
plain
that
it
is
not
Charitie
that
giues
life
to
Faith
,
which
can
performe
the
proper
action
that
belongs
to
it
,
without
it's
helpe
.
How
then
doth
Charity
giue
life
vnto
Faith
?
For
this
,
they
haue
a
sillie
conceit
.
Charity
giues
Life
,
that
is
Merite
vnto
Faith
.
The
beleefe
,
or
assent
vnto
diuine
Trueth
is
meritorious
if
it
be
with
Charity
.
If
without
,
then
't
is
not
meritorious
,
This
is
a
fine
toy
,
wherein
againe
they
runne
quite
from
the
Comparison
of
the
Apostle
.
For
the
Soule
giues
liuing
Actions
to
the
Body
,
not
only
the
Qualifications
of
the
Actions
:
and
so
Charitie
is
not
like
the
Soule
,
because
it
giues
only
the
qualification
of
Merit
vnto
the
Action
of
Faith
,
&
not
the
action
it selfe
.
Beside
.
A
most
vaine
interpretation
it
is
,
without
any
ground
from
Scripture
,
to
say
a
liuing
Faith
,
(
that
is
)
a
meritorious
Faith
:
when
euen
in
common
sense
,
the
life
of
any
habit
consists
onelie
in
a
power
to
produce
those
actions
,
that
naturallie
and
immediatlie
depend
vpon
that
Habit.
And
what
Reason
is
there
in
the
World
why
the
Habit
of
Charity
should
make
the
actions
of
Faith
meritorious
,
or
,
why
Charity
should
make
Faith
meritorious
,
rather
then
Faith
make
Charity
meritorious
,
seing
in
this
life
there
is
no
such
praeeminency
of
Charity
aboue
Faith
?
Wherefore
we
despise
these
speculatiue
Sophismes
,
which
with
much
faire
glozing
,
our
Aduersaries
draw
from
the
Text
:
but
yet
when
all
comes
to
the
Triall
,
themselues
will
not
stand
to
the
strict
application
of
the
similitude
,
because
it
breeds
absurdities
,
which
euen
themselues
abhorre
.
Now
if
they
take
liberty
to
qualifie
and
interpret
,
they
must
giue
vs
leaue
to
doe
so
too
,
or
if
they
will
not
we
shall
take
it
.
To
shut
vp
all
.
Their
other
Collection
is
as
weake
as
the
former
:
namely
.
A
dead
body
is
a
true
body
.
ergo
a
dead
Faith
is
true
Faith
.
This
Argument
forceth
the
Similitude
,
and
so
is
of
a
Force
.
In
materiall
things
which
haue
a
diuerse
being
from
different
Causes
,
it
may
hold
.
But
't
is
not
so
in
Vertues
and
Graces
.
Trueth
and
Life
are
both
essentiall
to
such
qualities
.
True
Charity
is
a
liuing
Charity
(
i.
e.
)
actiue
,
as
the
Apostle
himselfe
proues
.
v.
15.
True
Va
-
Valour
.
And
so
of
euery
vertuous
quality
,
if
it
be
true
,
't
is
liuing
and
stirring
in
Action
:
if
it
be
otherwise
,
't
is
counterfeit
,
some
other
thing
that
hath
onely
a
shadow
of
it
.
All
these
Trickes
are
pin
vpon
the
Apostle
to
pervert
his
plaine
meaning
;
viz:
That
as
it
is
necessary
to
the
being
of
a
liuing
body
that
it
be
coupled
with
the
●oule
,
so
't
is
necessary
to
the
being
of
a
liuing
true
Christian
Faith
,
that
it
bring
forth
Workes
of
Obedience
.
SECT.
7.
CHAP.
I.
None
can
be
iustified
by
their
owne
satisfaction
for
the
transgression
of
the
Law
.
A
briefe
summe
of
Popish
doctrine
,
concerning
humane
satisfactions
for
sinne
.
THus
we
haue
the
resolution
of
the
dispute
of
S.
Iames
,
together
with
such
Cauils
,
as
our
Adversaries
make
vpon
the
seuerall
passages
thereof
.
By
the
whole
order
whereof
it
appeares
sufficiently
that
Saint
Iames
disputing
against
Faith
,
meanes
thereby
that
false
and
bastard
Faith
which
hypocrites
pleased
themselues
withall
insteed
of
a
true
Faith
:
and
that
disputing
for
workes
,
he
meanes
nothing
but
a
working
Faith
.
And
it
appeares
also
that
the
drift
of
the
Apostle
is
not
in
this
place
to
dispute
directly
of
Man's
Iustification
:
but
only
to
bring
that
in
,
as
an
argument
to
proue
his
principall
Conclusion
.
That
Faith
without
workes
is
dead
,
because
it
will
not
iustifie
.
In
summe
it
's
euident
,
that
neither
these
Apostles
doe
disagree
between
themselues
,
nor
ye●
either
of
them
doe
agree
with
our
Adversaries
in
teaching
Iustification
by
the
the
Workes
of
the
Morall
Law
.
Of
the
impossibility
of
Man's
Iustification
by
which
meanes
,
Hitherto
.
The●r
ex●
Proposition
is
,
None
can
be
iustified
by
their
owne
safisfaction
for
the
transgression
of
the
Law
]
For
this
is
this
is
the
only
way
〈◊〉
for
an
Offender
to
obtaine
Iustification
and
Absolution
:
vi●
:
to
alleage
that
he
hath
satisfied
for
his
offence
committed
,
by
doing
or
suffering
so
much
as
the
party
offended
could
in
justice
exact
of
him
.
Which
satisfaction
being
made
,
he
is
no
longer
debter
vnto
him
,
but
deserues
his
absolution
and
his
fauour
,
as
if
he
had
not
offended
at
all
.
Now
then
the
Question
is
.
Whether
a
Sinner
may
,
by
any
thing
done
,
or
endured
by
himselfe
,
satisfie
the
Iustice
of
God
,
&
so
obtaine
absolution
at
the
Barre
of
God's
Iudgment
.
We
defend
the
Negatiue
.
That
it
is
impossible
for
a
Sinner
,
by
any
Action
or
Passion
of
his
own
to
doe
so
much
as
shall
be
aequivalent
vnto
the
wrong
which
he
hath
done
vnto
the
glorious
Iustice
of
God
:
that
there
with
he
may
rest
satisfied
and
exact
no
further
paenalty
.
Which
point
is
so
euident
vnto
the
Conscience
of
euery
one
that
knowes
himselfe
to
be
,
either
a
Creature
,
or
a
Man
,
or
a
Sinner
:
that
it
needes
not
any
confirmation
.
If
we
be
considered
as
Creatures
,
there
's
nothing
that
a
finite
strength
in
a
finite
time
can
performe
,
which
can
hold
proportion
with
the
offence
of
an
infinite
goodnes
and
Iustice
,
Angell
hath
troden
the
Winepresse
of
the
fiercenesse
of
God's
wrath
,
bearing
our
Sinnes
in
his
Body
on
the
Tree
,
suffering
the
vtmost
,
whatsoeuer
was
due
to
the
punishment
of
them
.
Our
Adversaries
in
this
busines
are
at
a
stand
,
mistrusting
their
owne
,
yet
not
daring
wholly
to
trust
to
Christ's
satisfactions
.
They
will
giue
him
leaue
to
haue
his
part
:
but
,
by
his
leaue
,
they
will
haue
one
share
too
in
satisfying
for
Sinnes
.
For
they
are
a
generation
of
Men
that
are
resolued
to
be
as
litle
beholding
to
God
,
as
may
be
,
for
grace
,
or
for
glory
.
And
if
there
be
any
article
of
Religion
wherein
Scripture
and
Reason
would
giue
the
honour
of
all
vnto
God
,
they
looke
at
it
with
an
Euill
Eye
,
and
cast
about
which
way
to
thrust
in
themselues
for
copartners
.
'T
is
strange
to
see
to
what
passe
Pride
and
Couetousnesse
haue
brought
the
doctrine
of
Satisfaction
,
as
it
is
now
taught
and
practised
in
the
Romish
Church
.
With
you
patience
I
shall
take
a
short
survey
of
it
,
that
you
may
see
whether
of
v●twaine
rest
our
Consciences
vpon
the
surer
and
more
stedfast
anchor
:
we
that
trust
onely
to
Christ's
satisfactions
;
or
they
that
joine
their
owne
together
with
his
.
The
summe
of
their
doctrine
,
as
it
is
deliuered
vnto
vs
by
the
Councell
of
Trent
.
Sess.
6.
cap.
14
,
16.
&
Sess
14
cap.
8.
9.
with
the
Romish
Catechisme
.
part.
2.
cap.
5.
quaest.
52.
&
seq.
and
explained
at
large
by
Bellarmine
in
his
two
bookes
De
Purgatorio
in
his
4th
Booke
De
Poenitentia
,
and
his
Bookes
De
Indulgentijs
:
is
this
.
Sinnes
are
of
two
sorts
.
1.
Sinne
committed
before
Baptisme
:
as
Originall
Sinne
in
all
that
are
baptized
Infants
:
and
actuall
sinnes
in
those
that
are
baptized
at
yeares
of
discretion
.
2.
Sinne
committed
after
Baptisme
,
when
after
the
Grace
of
the
holy
Ghost
receiued
in
Baptisme
;
men
fall
into
Sin
,
polluting
the
Temple
of
God
,
and
grieuing
his
Spirit
.
Touching
the
former
sort
of
Sinnes
,
they
are
agreed
that
Men
are
freed
from
them
both
,
the
fault
and
punishment
,
by
the
Merits
and
satisfaction
of
Christ
only
without
any
satisfaction
on
our
part
.
But
now
for
Sinnes
after
Baptisme
,
in
obtaining
of
Remission
of
them
,
Christ
and
we
part
stakes
.
Which
copartnership
is
declared
vnto
vs
in
this
manner
.
In
〈◊〉
Sinnes
(
we
must
know
)
there
are
three
things
considerable
.
1.
The
fault
in
the
offence
of
God's
Maiesty
,
and
violation
of
our
friendship
with
him
.
Here
they
grant
also
,
That
Man
can
not
satisfie
for
the
fault
,
doing
any
thing
that
may
appease
God's
displeasure
;
and
procure
his
loue
.
Christ
onely
hath
done
this
for
vs
,
for
whose
onely
satisfaction
.
God
of
his
mercy
freely
returnes
into
fauour
and
friendship
with
vs
.
But
this
must
be
vnderstood
in
a
catholique
sense
,
viz:
for
fault
of
Mortall
Sinnes
;
as
for
Veniall
Sinnes
God
is
but
slightly
angry
with
them
,
and
so
we
may
satisfie
him
for
the
fault
thereof
,
both
in
this
life
,
and
in
Purgatory
2.
The
staine
or
corruption
of
Sinne
,
called
the
Reliques
of
Sinne
abiding
in
the
Soule
.
For
the
purging
out
of
which
,
there
is
great
force
in
such
satisfactions
,
as
are
made
by
Prayers
,
Fastings
,
Almesdeed●s
,
and
other
laborious
workes
,
although
the
Heretiques
say
otherwise
.
That
the
abolishing
of
inhaerent
corruption
is
by
the
gift
of
grace
freely
bestowed
on
vs
by
degrees
,
in
the
vse
of
all
godly
meanes
.
3.
The
punishment
of
Sinne
,
which
after
the
fault
is
pardoned
,
remaines
yet
to
be
suffered
.
For
although
it
be
true
that
God
in
some
causes
doth
pardon
both
fault
and
punishment
wholy
,
as
in
cause
of
Martyrdome
,
which
sweepes
all
cleane
,
and
makes
a●
l
reckonings
euen
;
and
although
God
might
,
if
it
had
so
pleased
him
,
alwaies
for
Christ's
sake
haue
pardoned
the
whole
debt
:
yet
Holy
Mother
Church
hath
d●t●rmined
,
that
he
doth
not
so
vse
to
doe
.
But
after
that
in
mercy
he
hath
forgiuen
the
faul●●
yet
there
's
an
after
reckoning
,
and
we
must
come
to
Coram
for
the
punishment
,
by
which
his
Iustice
is
to
receaue
satisfaction
.
But
(
ye
must
know
)
the
punishment
of
Sinne
is
two
fold
.
●
.
Eternall
▪
in
the
destruction
of
Soule
and
body
in
Hell-fire
to
endure
for
euer
.
Heere
now
Christ's
satisfaction
comes
in
againe
.
By
whose
merits
alone
they
grant
,
we
are
deliuered
from
the
eternity
of
the
punishment
of
Sinne.
Which
must
be
noted
,
that
Christ's
satisfaction
hath
not
eased
vs
of
the
substance
of
the
punishment
it selfe
:
but
only
in
the
continuance
of
it
.
2.
Temporall
;
to
endure
onely
for
a
time
,
whereof
there
are
also
two
degrees
.
1.
One
in
this
life
,
as
namely
all
calamities
and
afflictions
vpon
the
Body
,
Soule
,
Name
,
Goods
,
&c.
together
with
death
the
last
and
greatest
of
euills
.
All
which
are
inflicted
vpon
m●n
;
as
punishments
of
●inne
.
Of
these
some
come
vpon
vs
inui●●bly
as
death
vpon
all
men
,
or
as
death
in
the
wildernes
on
the
Children
of
Israel
,
with
the
like
punishments
,
certainly
and
irreuocably
denounced
.
Now
here
's
no
remedy
but
patience
,
and
that
's
an
excellent
remedy
too
.
For
(
as
the
ghostly
Fathers
of
Tre●t
informe
vs
)
If
they
be
borne
willingly
with
patience
,
they
be
satisfactions
for
Sinnes
:
but
if
vnwillingly
they
be
God's
just
revenge
vpon
vs
.
Other
some
come
,
Euitably
.
And
heere
such
a
course
may
be
taken
,
that
we
need
not
suffer
the
punishment
it selfe
:
but
we
may
buy
it
out
and
make
satisfaction
for
it
vnto
God
by
other
meanes
.
Which
meanes
are
principally
foure
.
1.
By
the
vehemency
of
Contrition
,
or
inward
sorrow
.
Which
may
be
so
intensiue
as
to
satisfie
for
all
punishments
,
both
in
this
life
and
also
in
Purgatory
.
2.
By
other
outward
laborious
workes
.
Whereby
we
may
buy
out
the
obligation
to
temporall
punishments
.
Such
Workes
are
these
.
1.
Praier
with
Confession
,
Thankesgiuing
.
&c.
For
,
if
we
beleeue
the
Cathol●que
Doctors
't
is
a
very
good
satisfaction
to
a
Creditour
,
if
the
debter
pray
vnto
him
for
the
forgiuenes
of
his
dept.
According
to
that
text
.
Psal.
50.
15.
Call
vpon
me
in
the
day
of
trouble
and
I
will
d●liuer
thee
.
Ergo
,
Praier
is
a
satisfaction
for
the
punishment
of
sinne
.
2.
Fasting
,
vnder
which
is
comprehended
the
sprinkling
of
Ashes
,
wearing
of
haire
cloth
,
whippings
,
goeing
bare-foote
and
such
other
paenall
workes
.
These
also
satisfie
for
sinnes
as
't
is
written
2.
Sam.
12.
Dauid
fasted
,
lay
vpon
the
ground
and
wept
all
night
.
Therefore
he
satisfied
for
his
Sinnes
of
Murther
and
Adultery
.
And
againe
.
Paul
saieth
1.
Cor.
9.
27.
I
beat
downe
my
body
.
That
is
,
I
whippe
and
cudgell
my selfe
to
satisfie
for
my
sinnes
.
And
againe
.
Luk.
18.
13.
The
Publican
smote
vpon
his
breast
.
Ergo.
Corporall
chastisement
is
a
good
satisfactions
for
sinnes
.
3.
Almesdeedes
:
comprehending
all
kind
whatsoeuer
workes
of
mercy
.
These
also
buy
out
the
punishments
of
sinne
according
to
the
text
Dan.
4.
24.
Breake
off
thy
sin
by
Righteousnes
:
and
thine
iniquity
by
mercy
towards
the
poore
.
that
is
.
By
almesdeeds
satisfie
for
the
temporall
punishmens
of
thy
Sinnes
.
And
againe
.
Luk.
11.
41.
Giue
almes
of
that
which
you
haue
and
behold
all
things
shall
be
cleane
vnto
you
.
That
is
to
say
(
in
the
language
of
Babell
.
)
The
temporall
punishment
of
sin
shall
be
taken
away
.
Now
all
such
workes
as
these
are
either
.
1.
Voluntarily
vndertaken
of
our
owne
accord
,
as
voluntary
Pilgrimage
,
Scourgings
,
Fastes
,
Sackloth
,
Weepings
,
and
Praiers
of
such
a
number
and
measure
,
with
the
like
rough
punishments
,
which
we
take
vpon
our selues
to
pacifie
God
.
All
which
being
done
with
an
intent
to
satisfie
for
the
punishment
of
our
Sinnes
;
must
needs
be
accepted
of
God
almighty
for
good
payment
:
because
in
so
doeing
,
we
doe
more
then
he
hath
required
of
our
hands
.
Now
't
is
very
pleasing
to
God
to
doe
what
he
bids
vs
not
:
or
what
he
bids
vs
,
to
doe
to
another
end
of
our
devising
.
He
therefore
that
voluntarily
vndertakes
such
needlesse
paines
,
giues
God
high
satisfaction
.
According
to
the
Text.
1.
Cor.
11.
31.
If
wee
would
iudge
our selues
,
we
should
not
be
iudged
.
2
Inioyned
by
the
Priest
.
Who
by
vertue
of
the
Keies
committed
vnto
him
might
iudicially
absolue
the
paenitent
from
the
whole
debt
,
were
it
not
thought
fit
vpon
speciall
considerations
to
keepe
backe
a
part
.
Wherefore
when
he
hath
absolued
him
from
the
fault
and
aeternall
punishment
,
he
binds
him
vnto
satisfaction
for
the
temporall
punishment
,
and
therefore
he
enjoynes
him
what
he
shall
doe
to
buy
it
out
.
Let
him
goe
visit
the
shrine
of
such
and
such
a
Saint
,
say
so
many
Aues
&
Paternosters
before
such
an
Image
,
whip
himselfe
so
many
times
,
fast
so
many
daies
,
giue
so
much
almes
with
such
like
paenalties
.
And
when
he
in
humble
obedience
hath
done
these
things
commanded
by
the
Preist
:
then
't
is
certaine
his
sinnes
be
satisfied
for
.
For
't
is
to
be
noted
that
in
enioyning
this
Canonicall
satisfaction
,
as
't
is
called
,
the
Priest
and
God
almighty
be
just
of
the
same
mind
.
Looke
how
much
the
Preist
enioynes
for
satisfaction
,
God
must
be
content
to
take
the
same
,
or
else
the
paenitents
conscience
will
not
be
quiet
,
because
,
it
may
be
,
God
expected
more
to
be
done
for
satisfaction
:
then
the
party
hath
done
by
the
Priests
iniunction
.
But
it
is
to
be
supposed
,
that
as
the
Pope
,
so
euery
Priest
in
his
Chaire
of
confession
hath
an
infallible
spirit
,
whereby
he
is
able
exactly
to
calculate
the
just
propo●tion
betweene
the
sinne
and
the
punishment
,
and
the
price
of
the
punishment
,
that
so
he
may
enjoyne
just
somuch
penance
,
as
will
buy
it
out
;
neither
more
lest
the
paenitent
be
wronged
:
nor
lesse
,
lest
God
be
not
satisfied
.
All
which
is
trimly
founded
vpon
that
text
which
saieth
.
Whatsoeuer
yee
binde
on
Earth
shall
be
bound
in
Heauen
,
and
whatsoeuer
yee
loose
on
Earth
shall
be
loosed
in
Heauen
.
Mat
:
16
,
19.
&
18.
18.
That
is
.
Priests
may
forgiue
the
fault
and
retaine
the
punishment
,
and
what
satisfaction
they
enioyne
on
Earth
to
expiate
the
punishment
,
that
will
God
accept
in
Heauen
:
Or
else
they
be
deceaued
.
This
is
the
second
meanes
to
satisfie
for
temporall
punishments
.
The
3.
Meanes
is
by
Pardons
and
Indulgences
.
Wherin
the
superabundant
merits
of
Christ
and
the
Saints
are
out
of
the
treasury
of
the
Church
granted
by
speciall
grace
of
the
B●
.
of
Rome
vnto
such
as
are
liable
to
suffer
the
temporall
punishment
of
their
Sinnes
.
So
that
they
hauing
got
by
his
grant
a
sufficient
portion
of
satisfactory
workes
,
out
of
the
common
stocke
,
they
are
fre●d
thereby
from
satisfying
Gods
Iustice
,
by
their
owne
workes
.
Which
is
a
rare
priviledge
no
doubt
.
4.
The
fourth
meanes
is
by
another
liuing
mans
satisfaction
for
them
.
For
not
onely
the
superabundant
works
of
Christ
and
Saints
departed
:
but
the
good
workes
of
iust
men
aliue
will
satisfie
for
another
,
being
done
with
that
intent
.
So
great
is
God's
clemency
towards
good
Catholiques
,
that
,
though
one
man
cannot
confesse
,
nor
be
contrite
for
another
;
yet
satisfie
he
may
the
Iustice
of
God
for
his
sinnes
.
Both
these
meanes
are
grounded
vpon
pregnant
places
of
Scripture
.
Gal.
6.
2.
Bea●e
yee
one
anothers
burthen
,
that
is
,
satisfie
one
for
another
.
Againe
2
Cor.
12.
15.
I
will
most
gladly
bestow
and
be
bestowed
for
your
sakes
:
that
is
,
to
satisfie
for
your
sinnes
.
Againe
2
Tim.
2.
10.
I
suffer
all
things
for
the
Elects
sake
:
that
is
,
that
my
sufferings
may
be
their
satisfactions
.
So
Col.
1.
24.
I
reioyce
in
my
sufferings
for
you
and
fulfill
the
rest
of
the
afflictions
of
Christ
in
my
flesh
,
for
his
bodies
sake
,
which
is
the
Church
.
That
is
.
My
sufferings
with
Christ's
sufferings
make
vp
a
Treasurie
for
the
Church
,
that
such
as
want
of
their
owne
,
may
make
vse
of
his
satisfaction
and
mine
.
Againe
Rom.
12.
15.
We
being
many
are
one
anothers
Members
Ergo
,
We
may
impart
sati●factory
workes
one
to
another
,
as
one
member
doth
heate
to
another
.
To
conclude
.
'T
is
in
our
Creede
,
I
beleeue
a
communion
of
Saints
.
Ergo
,
There
is
a
communion
of
satisfactions
.
And
so
the
point
is
very
fitly
proued
.
Whereby
it
appeares
that
the
Ch●l●ren
of
the
Romish
Church
are
reasonable
well
prouided
of
Meanes
to
recompense
God's
,
Iustice
,
and
redeeme
the
Temporall
punishment
of
their
sinnes
in
this
life
.
The
other
degree
of
the
temporall
punishment
is
in
the
life
to
come
,
namely
,
in
●urgatory
,
whereinto
all
they
drop
who
die
in
Veniall
Sinnes
,
the
fault
whereof
was
not
forgiuen
in
this
Life
;
or
in
Mortall
Sinnes
,
the
fault
whereof
was
forgiuen
in
this
Life
;
but
full
satisfaction
was
not
made
for
the
punishment
before
death
.
Such
must
fry
awhile
in
Purgatory
longer
or
shorter
time
according
as
their
Sinnes
are
more
or
lesse
haynous
;
or
as
Mens
hearts
on
Earth
be
more
or
lesse
pitifull
towards
them
.
But
howeuer
there
they
must
be
till
the
Temporall
Punishment
of
their
Sinnes
be
fully
suffered
:
or
bought
out
by
something
else
that
may
satisfie
God's
Iustice
.
This
Punishment
of
Sinne
inflicted
in
Purgatory
,
is
twofold
.
1.
Poena
Damni
.
of
Losse
(
viz.
)
of
the
beautifull
vision
of
God
,
and
ioyes
of
Heauen
.
2.
Poena
sensus
.
of
sense
or
smart
.
viz.
The
bitter
paines
of
God's
wrath
sensibly
tormenting
the
Powers
of
the
Soule
,
inflicted
vpon
them
either
immediatly
by
God
himselfe
,
or
by
the
ministery
of
the
diuels
as
his
Instruments
.
For
't
is
a
doubt
not
yet
resolued
among
the
Patrons
of
Purgatory
,
whether
the
Diuels
haue
not
to
doe
there
also
as
well
as
in
hell
.
But
whether
their
Tormentours
be
Diuels
or
not
,
this
is
agreed
vpon
,
that
the
Torment
and
Punishment
which
the
Soules
do
suffer
in
Purgatory
,
is
for
the
Substance
of
it
the
very
same
with
the
Torments
of
Hell
,
differing
only
from
it
in
continuance
.
Those
of
Purgatory
be
temporall
,
these
of
Hell
aeternall
.
Well
now
,
such
as
haue
not
bestirred
themselues
then
,
well
in
this
Life
to
make
all
euen
by
full
satisfactions
,
such
must
be
arrested
in
the
mid
way
to
Heauen
,
and
cast
into
this
Prison
.
Out
of
which
two
Meanes
there
be
to
be
deliuered
.
1.
By
suffering
all
this
temporall
punishment
for
so
many
yeares
and
dayes
as
't
is
to
continue
.
How
many
that
is
,
you
must
inquire
of
St
Michael
,
the
Church
knowes
not
that
.
But
yet
sure
shee
is
,
that
many
Soules
shall
continue
in
Purgatory
till
the
day
of
Iudgement
,
so
there
shall
be
the
same
period
of
the
World
,
and
of
their
Torments
.
These
haue
a
hard
time
of
it
;
't
is
easier
haply
with
others
.
But
be
it
as
't
will
be
,
such
as
these
pay
the
vtmost
farthing
,
where
they
endure
in
the
flames
of
Purgatory
,
so
long
till
the
time
of
their
whole
punishment
be
runne
out
.
Then
God
is
satisfied
,
and
they
deliuered
.
2.
By
buying
out
this
punishment
by
some
other
satisfactory
price
.
For
although
God
could
so
haue
ordered
it
,
that
euery
Soule
being
once
in
Purgatory
,
should
suffer
all
the
Temporall
punishments
due
:
yet
he
is
content
to
bee
intreated
to
commute
poenance
,
and
take
some
other
valueable
consideration
by
way
of
satisfaction
for
this
punishment
.
But
this
satisfactory
payment
cannot
be
made
by
the
Soules
themselues
:
it
must
be
made
by
some
on
Earth
for
them
.
which
is
done
.
1.
Either
by
laborious
workes
of
any
one
iust
and
godly
Catholique
,
whether
he
be
a
friend
of
the
deceased
,
or
other
touched
with
a
charitable
pitty
toward
a
poore
soule
.
Who
by
store
of
deuout
prayers
,
Almes
,
Masses
,
Pilgrimages
,
founding
of
Coue●ts
and
Hospitals
,
&c.
may
procure
a
gaole-deliuery
for
that
soule
for
which
he
intends
those
good
workes
.
2.
Or
by
the
Pope
who
is
purse-bearer
to
the
Church
,
and
hath
the
Treasurie
thereof
vnder
Lock
and
Key
.
He
now
,
though
he
cannot
directly
absolue
the
Soules
in
Purgatory
from
their
punishment
,
as
he
can
Men
liuing
on
the
Earth
,
yet
he
may
helpe
them
another
way
by
bestowing
on
them
so
much
of
the
superfluous
sufferings
of
Christ
and
of
the
Saints
,
that
thereby
God's
Iustice
may
be
satisfied
,
for
the
whole
punishment
,
which
otherwise
they
should
haue
endured
.
Yea
such
is
the
power
of
his
Indulgences
to
infuse
a
vertue
into
such
and
such
Alt●●
▪
Shrines
,
〈◊〉
&c.
that
whosoeuer
shall
frequent
such
places
,
or
vse
such
prayers
,
all
Complements
duely
obserued
:
he
may
at
his
pleasure
free
one
,
two
,
three
,
or
more
soules
our
of
Purgatory
.
Nay
did
not
Couetousnes
coole
the
heare
of
his
Apostolical
Charity
,
he
might
so
bountifully
powre
out
the
Treasures
of
the
Church
vpon
these
prisoners
in
Purgatory
,
that
they
should
all
haue
enough
to
weigh
down
the
feales
,
&
deserue
a
passe-port
for
Heauen
.
Such
efficacie
there
is
in
that
spirituall
Picke
locke
which
the
Pope
hath
in
keeping
.
All
which
is
very
properly
proued
by
the
former
places
of
Scripture
,
and
others
also
,
were
it
needfull
now
to
alleage
them
.
But
thus
we
see
the
Catholiques
are
euery
way
furnished
for
satisfactions
,
that
what
Christ
hath
not
done
for
them
,
they
can
doe
for
themselues
,
either
to
suffer
and
ouercome
the
Temporall
punishments
of
their
Sinnes
,
or
else
,
which
is
the
easier
course
,
to
buy
out
that
punishment
at
a
valuable
price
of
other
satisfactionary
workes
,
wherewith
Gods
Iustice
shal
be
abundantly
contented
.
Now
whereas
those
whom
they
terme
Heretiques
,
cry
out
aloud
that
such
satisfactions
to
God's
Iustice
be
indeed
no
Satisfactions
at
all
,
because
they
are
no
wayes
equall
vnto
the
offence
committed
:
and
so
no
full
recompence
of
wrong
offered
vnto
God
:
for
the
assoiling
of
this
doubt
,
they
giue
vs
this
distinction
very
necessary
to
be
obserued
.
Satisfaction
is
double
.
1.
Iustitiae
:
ex
rigore
Iustitiae
,
ad
absolutam
&
perfectam
Aequalitatem
Quantitatis
.
That
is
.
There
is
a
Satisfaction
of
Iustice
consisting
in
a
perfect
aequality
between
the
offence
and
wrong
,
and
the
recompence
made
,
when
so
much
is
done
,
or
suffered
,
as
the
offended
party
can
in
iustice
exact
.
Now
they
grant
that
Man
cannot
satisfie
God
in
this
sort
in
rigour
of
Iustice
.
Only
Christ
hath
satisfied
so
;
for
vnto
such
a
satisfaction
it
is
required
that
it
be
done
.
1.
Ex
proprijs
.
By
that
which
is
our
owne
.
2.
Ex
indebitis
.
By
that
which
is
not
debt
of
it selfe
.
3.
Ad
aequalitatem
.
By
that
which
is
of
aequall
worth
and
value
.
Now
none
of
these
wayes
can
our
satisfaction
passe
in
strict
Iustice
Because
whatsoeuer
we
haue
,
't
is
God's
free
gift
:
whatsoeuer
we
can
doe
,
't
is
our
due
Obedience
,
&
when
we
haue
done
all
,
yet
we
cannot
by
any
finite
act
doe
such
honour
to
God
,
as
shal
be
equall
to
that
iniury
we
haue
offered
to
his
infinite
Maiestie
.
Euen
the
right
of
Nature
teacheth
.
as
Bellarmine
grants
,
That
Man
cannot
parca
reddere
Deo
,
giue
him
quid
pro'quo
.
2.
Acceptationis
facti
ex
Gratiâ
donante
ad
imperfectam
Aequalitatem
Proportionis
&
ex
Condigno
.
i
,
e.
There
is
a
satisfaction
of
fauourable
acceptance
,
wherein
there
is
a
kinde
of
imperfect
Proportion
betweene
the
offence
and
the
recompence
,
when
so
much
is
done
or
suffered
,
as
God
is
content
in
gentlenes
to
take
for
good
satisfaction
.
Thus
then
a
man
may
satisfie
God's
Iustice
,
because
God
giues
him
grace
to
doe
so
much
as
he
will
accept
for
satisfaction
.
Which
Grace
is
threefold
.
1.
The
Grace
of
Iustification
,
whereby
the
Holy
Ghost
dwels
in
vs
and
we
are
made
Members
of
Christ
,
and
Christ
is
become
our
Head
.
By
meanes
of
which
vnion
with
Christ
,
and
inhabitation
of
the
Spirit
,
it
comes
to
passe
that
our
workes
haue
a
singular
vertue
.
For
Christ
communicates
vnto
vs
his
satisfaction
▪
and
by
merits
of
them
,
makes
our
Workes
meritorious
and
satisfactorie
vnto
God
.
So
that
whereas
all
things
whatsoeuer
we
could
haue
done
,
where
of
no
worth
at
all
in
the
sight
of
God
:
now
Christ
hath
deserued
such
a
Grace
for
vs
that
the
spotted
ragges
of
our
righteousnes
and
good
workes
being
tincta
Christi
sanguine
(
i.
e.
)
died
in
the
bloud
of
Christ
receaue
such
a
colour
,
that
they
will
passe
for
reasonable
good
cloth
.
In
a
word
,
our
money
is
now
good
siluer
which
before
was
but
brasse
.
Againe
,
because
the
holy
Ghost
dwels
in
the
just
,
Ergo
(
as
Bellar
:
profoundly
argues
)
their
Workes
proceeding
from
the
Holy
Ghost
haue
[
quandam
infinitatem
]
a
kind
of
infinitenes
in
them
,
and
thereby
,
quandam
aequalitatem
,
a
kind
of
aequality
with
the
injury
which
by
sinning
we
offered
vnto
God
.
Euen
as
a
man
may
say
,
that
a
fly
or
a
spyder
is
a
kind
of
infinite
Creature
because
't
is
of
Gods
making
:
and
God
you
know
is
infinite
.
This
is
the
first
Grace
of
Iustification
.
The
2
ye
may
call
.
2
The
Grace
of
Euangelicall
Counsailes
.
For
although
God
might
of
right
challenge
all
our
workes
as
due
vnto
him
:
yet
so
it
is
that
he
commands
not
all
,
but
onely
persuades
and
exhortes
vnto
some
▪
By
which
bounty
of
God
,
it
comes
to
passe
that
we
haue
certaine
workes
Propria
&
indebita
,
of
our
owne
which
we
owe
him
not
;
and
by
these
we
onely
make
satisfaction
.
Yea
such
is
the
bounty
of
God
that
he
suffers
vs
to
merit
by
those
things
which
be
of
his
free
gift
,
and
is
willingly
content
that
what
we
receaue
at
his
hand
,
we
giue
it
him
backe
againe
for
a
satisfactorie
payment
to
his
Iustice
.
Which
is
very
strange
I
tell
you
.
3
Lastly
one
Grace
more
God
giues
vs
.
Namely
.
When
hee
pardons
the
fault
he
remoues
the
aeternity
of
the
Punishment
,
and
makes
it
Temporall
that
so
it
may
be
more
easily
satisfied
for
.
All
which
particulars
and
Priuiledges
are
sure
and
certaine
,
because
the
Catholique
Doctors
haue
firmely
proued
them
out
of
their
owne
heads
without
the
helpe
of
the
Scripture
.
So
then
they
are
agreed
.
That
our
workes
are
not
satisfactorie
in
Rigour
of
Iustice
:
but
only
in
favourable
acceptance
,
by
grace
giuen
to
doe
them
,
and
Gods
clemency
in
accepting
them
being
done
.
CHAP.
II.
All
sinne
is
remitted
vnto
vs
wholy
in
the
fault
and
punishment
.
For
the
onely
satisfaction
of
Iesus
Christ
.
THus
I
haue
somewhat
largely
set
forth
vnto
you
the
popish
Doctrine
of
humane
satisfaction
for
sinne
:
wherein
it
is
plaine
to
all
that
can
see
any
thing
,
that
their
aime
hath
bin
to
lay
a
plot
to
delude
mens
Soules
and
pi●ke
their
Purses
.
It
would
require
a
large
discourse
to
prosecute
their
Arguments
,
whereby
they
seeke
to
couer
their
Fraud
.
But
they
are
not
of
that
Moment
as
to
spend
time
about
them
,
being
too
hasten
to
other
matters
.
The
summe
of
them
all
comes
vnto
this
.
1.
That
those
afflictions
and
Temporall
chastisements
which
God
hath
laied
vpon
his
Children
(
for
the
Triall
of
their
Faith
and
patience
,
for
their
humiliation
for
sinnes
past
by
hearty
Repentance
,
for
their
admonition
for
the
time
to
come
,
for
the
example
of
others
.
&c.
)
they
must
needs
be
,
in
these
Mens
Imaginations
,
true
satisfactions
to
Gods
Iustice
to
expiate
their
sinnes
past
.
2.
That
such
good
workes
as
the
godly
haue
performed
for
declaration
of
their
piety
;
testification
of
their
thankfulnes
vnto
God
;
for
to
expresse
the
sorrow
of
Heart
;
for
to
bring
themselues
to
a
greater
measure
of
true
humiliation
by
much
Praier
,
fasting
,
&c.
for
to
obtaine
victorie
ouer
some
Corruption
,
and
temptation
;
for
to
get
some
grace
which
they
wanted
;
for
to
preuent
or
fit
themselnes
for
some
Iudgement
feared
;
&c.
All
this
now
must
be
conceaued
presently
to
be
meritorious
and
satisfactorie
to
Gods
Iustice
for
Sinne.
3.
That
such
Pennance
,
as
in
the
Primitiue
Church
was
enjoyned
vnto
those
that
after
their
Conversion
and
Baptisme
,
relapsed
againe
to
Heathenisme
;
or
otherwise
for
such
as
for
scandalous
offences
were
excommunicated
:
I
say
that
such
Pennance
enjoyned
to
these
for
testification
of
their
hearty
sorrow
for
their
offence
,
and
for
satisfaction
to
the
Congregation
,
before
they
might
be
againe
admitted
into
it
:
must
now
be
turned
into
a
direct
and
proper
satisfaction
for
the
sinne
it selfe
.
4.
That
such
indulgence
or
fauour
as
was
then
sometimes
vsed
toward
such
relapsed
and
excommunicate
persons
(
in
remitting
vnto
them
some
part
of
their
enioyned
Pennance
vpon
euident
tokens
of
their
vnfained
repentance
)
this
is
now
by
these
men
turned
quite
to
another
vse
.
Namely
,
to
the
freeing
of
men
from
further
satisfaction
to
Gods
Iustice
by
applying
vnto
them
certaine
phantasticall
supererogations
treasured
vp
in
the
Popes
Cabbinet
.
These
are
the
maine
Issues
and
Errors
of
their
disputes
,
wherein
I
will
proceed
no
farther
:
but
onely
lay
downe
one
generall
Conclusion
opposite
vnto
their
Doctrine
,
and
so
end
this
point
with
a
few
Reasons
,
for
the
confirmation
of
the
Trueth
and
confutation
of
this
Error
.
The
Position
is
this
.
All
Sinne
whatsoeuer
;
Originall
or
Actuall
is
remitted
vnto
vs
wholy
in
the
Fault
and
Punishment
,
aswell
Temporall
as
Aeternall
for
the
only
satisfaction
of
Iesus
Christ
:
and
not
any
satisfaction
made
by
vs
vnto
the
Iustice
of
God
.
For
confirmation
of
this
sacred
Trueth
deliuered
vnto
vs
in
the
word
and
generally
embraced
by
the
Reformed
Churches
(
yea
by
our
Aduersaries
themselues
when
the
Agonies
of
Consciences
;
the
app●ehension
of
Death
and
of
Gods
Iudgement
doe
cleere
vp
their
eyes
,
a
litle
to
behold
the
vanity
of
their
poore
satisfactions
.
)
obserue
we
these
Reasons
.
First
the
innumerable
Testimonies
of
Scripture
ascribing
the
Remission
of
Sinne
,
onely
to
the
mercy
of
God
in
Christ
crucified
.
That
Christ
hath
borne
[
a
](A09274-e47860-b)
a
1
Pet.
2.
24.
our
Sinnes
;
His
bloud
hath
purged
[
b
](A09274-e47880-b)
b
Heb.
13.
vs
of
all
Sinne
;
His
death
[
c
](A09274-e47900-b)
c
Tit.
2.
14.
redeemed
vs
from
all
iniquity
;
His
[
d
](A09274-e47920-b)
d
Isa:
53
:
5.
1
Pet
2
24.
Stripes
healed
vs
;
That
he
hath
[
e
](A09274-e47940-b)
e
1
Tim.
2.
6.
paied
the
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
price
of
our
Ransome
;
That
God
for
his
[
f
](A09274-e47980-b)
f
Coll.
2.
13.
sake
hath
for
giuen
vs
our
trespasses
;
Blotted
out
[
g
](A09274-e48000-b)
g
Ibid
v.
14.
our
sinnes
;
Cast
them
[
h
](A09274-e48020-b)
h
Isa
38.
17.
behind
his
backe
;
Forgotten
[
i
](A09274-e48040-b)
i
Ier.
31.
34.
them
;
with
store
of
the
like
sayings
,
ascribing
the
doeing
away
of
all
Sinnes
to
the
Grace
of
God
through
the
Satisfaction
of
Christ
without
limi●ing
it
to
any
Sinne
,
or
mentioning
any
satisfactorie
workes
of
ours
.
Now
what
say
our
Aduersaries
to
this
?
By
a
shift
they
turne
of
all
Scriptures
tending
to
this
purpose
.
Thus
Christ
hath
satisfied
for
the
fault
of
our
Sinnes
;
and
so
reconciled
vs
vnto
God
,
and
for
the
aeternity
of
the
Punishment
:
but
he
satisfied
not
for
temporall
punishment
:
We
must
endure
Torment's
though
but
for
a
while
.
This
is
a
meere
Cavill
without
any
apparant
ground
from
such
Texts
of
Scripture
;
or
necessary
deduction
from
other
.
We
deny
it
therefore
as
they
affirme
it
.
And
that
it
may
appeare
to
be
but
a
forged
devise
.
Let
vs
inuert
the
distinction
and
we
shall
hold
it
with
as
good
probability
the
other
way
.
Christ
satisfied
for
the
fault
,
not
for
the
punishments
(
say
they
.
)
We
will
goe
contrary
and
say
,
Christ
satisfied
for
the
punishment
:
but
not
for
the
fault
.
We
by
our
owne
satisfaction
must
procure
Gods
fauour
.
Now
let
them
object
what
they
can
against
this
:
if
we
list
to
ca●ill
as
they
doe
:
it
may
be
shifted
off
with
as
faire
probabilitie
;
as
they
doe
our
Arguments
on
the
other
part
.
Let
them
name
all
the
places
that
say
,
Christ
hath
[
k
](A09274-e48160-b)
k
Coll.
1.
10.
reconciled
vs
to
God
his
Father
.
This
is
easily
put
off
.
Christ
hath
reconciled
vs
.
that
is
,
Christ
deserued
such
Grace
for
vs
:
that
we
by
our
workes
may
reconcile
ourselues
.
Iust
as
they
say
.
Christ
hath
satisfied
.
that
is
.
procured
Grace
for
vs
:
that
we
by
our
workes
might
satisfie
.
Let
them
object
,
Our
workes
can
be
of
no
worth
to
appease
Gods
anger
.
We
will
say
.
True
.
Of
themselues
they
are
not
:
but
Christ
hath
merited
that
they
should
be
of
sufficient
worth
.
Iust
as
themselues
say
vnto
vs
objecting
,
that
our
workes
be
not
of
value
to
satisfie
Gods
Iustice
.
True
,
say
they
.
Of
themselues
they
be
not
:
but
Christ
hath
deserued
for
them
to
make
them
satisfactorious
.
Thus
if
euery
idle
distinction
not
fortified
by
necessary
deduction
from
Scripture
might
passe
for
a
good
answere
,
the
certainty
of
diuine
Doctrine
were
soone
shaken
to
pieces
:
and
no
Position
so
absurd
,
but
would
be
defended
with
much
facility
.
2.
That
Assertion
of
theirs
.
Namely
.
That
the
fault
is
forgiuen
and
the
punishment
required
,
is
most
false
and
absurd
;
euen
in
common
sense
.
To
pardon
a
fault
and
be
friends
and
yet
require
full
satisfaction
;
to
forgiue
the
debt
,
yet
to
exact
the
payment
,
be
not
these
trimme
kindnesses
?
[
a
](A09274-e48300-b)
a
Bell.
de
poen
.
lib.
4.
cap.
1.
Bellarmine
tels
vs
,
there
be
some
offences
of
so
grieuous
Nature
:
that
satisfaction
cannot
be
made
,
but
in
a
long
time
.
Now
in
this
case
the
partie
wronged
may
pardon
the
other
,
and
be
reconciled
to
him
:
yet
the
offender
remaine
still
bound
to
make
entire
satisfaction
for
the
wrong
.
But
now
the
Iesuite
doth
not
name
any
such
case
:
neither
indeed
can
doe
.
For
suppose
a
subject
hath
offended
his
Prince
and
the
fault
deserued
7.
yeares
close
imprisonment
for
satisfaction
.
If
the
Prince
should
say
vnto
him
I
pardon
your
offence
,
you
haue
my
loue
;
but
yet
you
shall
lie
by
it
to
the
last
daie
:
were
it
not
a
mockerie
,
would
any
man
thank
him
for
such
a
kindnes
?
It
is
to
be
thought
the
Iesuites
,
the
incendiaries
of
Christendome
would
not
thanke
Christian
Princes
for
such
a
courtesie
,
if
they
should
pardon
them
their
fault
,
and
hang
them
vp
.
The
like
absurditie
there
is
in
this
,
when
they
say
;
That
after
the
fault
pardoned
;
yet
in
this
Life
and
in
Purgatory
,
the
temporall
punishment
must
be
suffered
.
For
wherefore
must
it
be
suffered
?
For
satisfaction
say
they
,
To
what
?
To
God's
Iustice
.
For
what
now
?
Is
it
for
the
fault
and
offence
committed
?
No
,
That
's
pardoned
.
For
what
then
?
For
just
nothing
.
Againe
,
this
Assertion
is
contrary
to
good
reason
.
For
God's
Friendship
,
and
his
Iustice
may
not
be
diuided
in
this
sort
,
as
if
he
were
reconciled
and
well
pleased
with
that
Creature
,
which
hath
violated
his
Iustice
,
and
not
made
satisfaction
for
it
.
God's
friendship
with
Man
followes
satisfaction
to
his
Iustice
:
euen
as
his
Enmity
with
Man
is
a
consequent
of
the
breach
of
his
Iustice
.
His
righteous
will
is
transgressed
,
therefore
he
is
offended
.
His
righteous
will
must
be
satisfied
before
he
be
pleased
.
So
that
it
is
a
vaine
speculation
to
thinke
.
Christ
hath
appeased
God's
anger
,
but
not
satisfied
his
Iustice
,
for
as
much
as
his
fauour
is
purchased
onely
by
satisfaction
to
his
Iustice
offended
.
3.
This
doctrine
of
humane
satisfactions
,
obscures
the
dignity
,
and
ouerthrowes
the
Force
of
Christ's
satisfactions
.
If
we
haue
a
share
,
he
hath
not
all
the
glory
.
Nay
,
he
hath
scarse
any
at
all
.
For
aske
wee
.
For
what
hath
Christ
satisfied
?
They
say
,
to
procure
God's
Loue
to
vs
.
But
that
cannot
be
,
vnlesse
he
hath
satisfied
his
Iustice
.
Hath
he
done
this
,
or
no
?
Yes
,
he
hath
satisfied
for
the
Aeternity
of
the
punishment
.
Yea.
But
how
know
they
that
?
What
if
we
vpon
their
grounds
say
,
That
he
hath
not
satisfied
for
the
Aeternity
of
it
:
but
only
merited
,
that
our
sufferings
and
satisfactions
should
be
aequivalent
to
the
aeternity
of
the
Punishment
?
Especially
considering
that
our
Workes
according
to
Bellarmine
,
haue
a
certaine
kinde
of
infinite
value
in
them
.
Againe
,
Aeternity
is
but
an
Accident
of
punishment
of
Sinne
:
the
Essentials
of
it
are
the
Losse
of
Ioy
,
and
the
sense
of
Paine
:
if
therefore
Christ
haue
satisfied
only
for
that
,
he
hath
done
but
the
least
part
.
Neuerthelesse
our
Adversaries
will
needes
perswade
vs
,
that
humane
satisfactions
doe
not
so
much
eclipse
as
illustrate
the
glory
of
Christ's
satisfactions
:
in
as
much
as
thereby
he
hath
not
only
satisfied
himself
:
but
made
vs
able
also
to
satisfie
.
A
great
matter
doubtlesse
.
But
where
saith
the
Scripture
any
such
matter
,
that
Christ
hath
merited
that
we
might
merit
and
satisfie
.
And
moreouer
by
this
Tricke
,
whilest
Christ
makes
vs
able
to
merit
and
satisfie
:
his
owne
satisfaction
is
plainly
excluded
.
For
come
to
the
point
,
and
aske
.
Who
is
it
satisfies
God's
Iustice
for
Sin
?
Christ
,
or
wee
?
Heere
[
b
](A09274-e48580-b)
b
Bel.
Lib
1.
de
Purga●
:
cap.
14.
§.
quarta
Ratio
.
Bellarmine
stumbles
like
a
blind
horse
,
and
of
three
answeres
takes
the
very
worst
.
Some
say
't
is
Christ
,
and
he
only
satisfies
Properly
:
but
we
Improperly
.
Our
works
being
only
a
Condition
without
which
Christ's
satisfaction
is
not
applied
vnto
vs
.
But
such
smell
of
the
fagot
.
For
't
is
a
perilous
Haeresie
to
say
,
Christ
onely
satisfies
for
Sinnes
.
Well
others
say
,
That
both
Christ
and
we
our selues
doe
satisfie
,
&
also
there
's
two
satisfactions
for
the
same
offence
.
But
this
mettall
clinketh
not
well
neither
.
Wherefore
others
are
of
opinion
,
and
Bellarmine
likes
it
.
That
Wee
only
satisfie
,
not
Christ
.
Tertius
tamen
modus
probabilior
videtur
[
Quòd
una
tantum
sit
actualis
satisfactio
,
&
easit
nostra
.
]
Yea
this
is
as
it
should
be
,
thrust
out
Christ
,
and
let
vs
only
satisfie
while
he
stands
by
and
holds
the
Candle
.
Yet
the
Iesuite
will
not
doe
Iesus
so
much
wrong
:
for
marke
,
to
mend
the
matter
hee
adds
.
[
Neque
tamen
excludit●r
Christus
,
vel
satisfactio
eius
.
Nam
per
eius
satisfactionem
habemu●
gratiam
,
vnde
satisfacimus
.
Et
hoc
modo
nobis
dicitur
applicari
Christi
satisfactio
;
non
quòd
immediatè
ipsae
eius
satisfactio
tollat
poenam
temporalem
nobis
debitam
:
sed
quod
mediate
eam
tollat
,
quatenùs
gratiam
a●
ea
habemus
,
sine
qu●
nihil
valeret
nostra
satisfactio
.
]
Which
wordes
they
may
vnderstand
that
can
;
For
I
cannot
.
The
Iesuite
.
walkes
in
the
darke
:
seeking
to
hide
this
shamefull
Injury
to
the
Merits
of
Christ
,
but
it
will
not
be
.
'T
is
too
apparant
that
Christ
is
to
them
of
no
account
.
Only
for
a
fashion
they
make
vse
of
his
Name
,
when
they
haue
reckoned
vp
a
bedrol
of
their
own
Merits
,
&
Sts
Merits
,
and
such
other
trash
,
then
to
conclude
all
with
a
[
Per
Iesum
Christum
Dominum
nostrum
.
]
That
's
the
burden
of
the
Song
,
and
the
oyle
that
seasons
all
the
Salet
:
as
[
a
](A09274-e48800-b)
a
Tabula
de
differentia
4
part
.
Tom.
2.
cap.
15.
16.
Marnix
merily
.
4.
That
distinction
of
Satisfaction
in
Strict
Iustice
,
and
satisfaction
in
fauourable
acceptance
is
vaine
in
this
businesse
.
We
grant
indeed
that
our
good
workes
done
out
of
Faith
,
are
pleasing
to
God
,
and
graciously
accepted
of
him
:
but
can
it
appeare
,
that
God
accepts
them
as
satisfactions
to
his
Iustice
?
No
Scripture
intimates
any
such
thing
,
That
God's
fauour
doth
thus
dispense
with
his
Iustice
,
and
make
that
satisfaction
acceptable
,
which
is
in
it selfe
no
full
satisfaction
of
his
Iustice
.
Shall
we
thinke
that
God
in
this
case
is
put
vpon
those
termes
of
Necessity
,
and
complement
which
fall
out
in
humane
satisfactions
,
betweene
Man
and
Man
?
It
may
so
fall
out
that
a
Creditor
(
to
whom
1000
Crowns
are
owing
)
may
be
content
if
the
debtor
will
yeeld
vp
his
whole
Estate
,
though
not
worth
50.
Because
no
more
can
be
had
.
So
in
case
of
offence
,
Christ
for
vs
.
And
therefore
't
is
without
ground
to
imagine
such
a
facility
and
partiality
of
his
Iustice
,
as
to
be
satisfied
with
a
few
poore
complementall
Formalities
.
Satisfactions
to
God's
Iustice
wee
acknowledge
none
;
but
such
as
are
in
Iustice
sufficient
.
Such
are
Christ's
satisfactions
.
But
as
for
vs
,
we
haue
nothing
to
doe
with
satisfactions
,
but
with
free
Pardons
.
5.
This
Doctrine
of
humane
satisfactions
taught
in
the
Church
of
Rome
is
altogether
full
of
vncertainty
,
and
ergo
,
brings
no
rest
and
peace
vnto
mens
Consciences
,
at
all
.
God
pardons
the
fault
:
but
requires
the
punishment
say
they
.
But
when
is
this
?
Is
it
alwaies
?
No
,
sometimes
he
pardons
both
.
But
can
they
tell
certainly
when
he
doth
?
when
not
?
At
Martyrdome
he
pardons
all
.
How
know
they
that
?
or
how
know
they
he
doth
it
not
at
other
times
too
?
Contrition
(
say
they
)
if
it
be
vehe●nen●
,
satisfies
for
all
.
But
can
they
tell
vs
the
i●st
asure
of
that
Contrition
which
is
satisfactorie
?
It
may
be
the
partie
is
contrite
enough
:
yet
the
Pre●st
enioynes
Penance
when
't
is
needlesse
.
It
may
be
he
is
not
co●●●ite
enough
:
yet
no
penance
enioyned
.
Where
's
the
certainty
,
what
's
to
be
done
in
such
a
case
?
Christ
(
say
they
)
hath
satisfied
for
the
Aeternity
of
Hell
punishments
.
Well
.
But
can
they
tell
how
many
yeares
or
daies
are
left
vnsatisfied
for
;
that
so
all
things
may
be
fitted
according
to
the
Race
of
time
?
Laborious
workes
,
of
Praiers
,
Fastings
,
Almes-de●ds
,
satisfie
for
temporall
Punishments
in
this
life
(
say
they
)
Sup●ose
it
be
so
.
Are
they
sure
they
can
also
satisfie
the
paines
of
Pu●gatorie
?
The
Priest
enjoynes
satisfactorie
penance
.
But
is
he
sure
he
enioynes
iust
so
much
as
will
doe
the
Feate
?
Is
he
certaine
that
God
will
take
that
for
paiment
,
which
he
decrees
to
be
paied
?
What
if
there
be
not
Aue-Maries
enough
&
c
?
Againe
suppose
there
were
Evangelicall
Counsailes
,
as
Vowes
of
Chastity
,
Pouerty
&c.
and
that
to
doe
these
things
were
pleasing
vnto
God
.
Are
they
sure
they
shall
passe
for
satisfactions
presently
?
thou
saiest
I
giue
this
Almes
,
I
vow
Poverty
,
I
doe
this
and
that
to
satisfie
Gods
Iustice
for
such
or
such
a
sinne
.
What
?
Is
it
a
Match
presently
,
that
God
must
doe
as
thou
desirest
:
and
take
what
thou
offerest
for
paiment
?
Soft
there
,
a
while
.
Where
's
the
warrant
for
that
?
Those
that
are
in
Purgatory
,
when
haue
they
satisfied
enough
?
who
brings
word
,
when
they
are
deliuered
?
How
knowes
the
Pope
when
he
hath
bestowed
vpon
them
sufficient
supererogatiue
Money
to
pay
the
Fees
of
the
Prison
?
Or
doth
S.
Michael
that
hold's
,
the
Scales
send
him
word
,
when
their
satisfactions
weigh
downe
their
Sinnes
?
Not
to
reckon
more
vp
;
there
is
in
all
this
Doctrine
no
firme
ground
whereon
a
distressed
Soule
may
cast
anchor
:
But
when
it
hath
once
let
slip
that
maine
Cable
,
wherevpon
it
might
rid
it
out
in
all
stormes
(
the
satisfaction
of
Christ
)
afterwards
it
is
carried
a
d●ift
vpon
all
hazards
of
Windes
and
Seas
.
6.
The-●rpractise
betraies
their
Opinion
.
Did
they
indeed
thinke
that
there
were
any
seueritie
in
Gods
Iustice
,
any
necessitie
or
sufficiencie
in
such
their
satisfactions
,
't
is
not
possible
,
they
would
prostitute
such
thing
's
in
so
base
a
manner
,
as
they
doe
.
But
when
an
Aue
Maria
,
a
Pater
noster
before
such
or
such
an
Altar
;
a
wax-Candle
to
such
a
Saint
;
a
kisse
of
such
a
cold
stone
;
a
pilgriamage
to
Compostella
for
cockle-shels
;
a
lash
or
twaine
vpon
the
Bare
;
two
or
three
meales
meat
forborne
;
a
pardon
purchased
at
a
few
Deniers
;
yea
when
the
roughnes
and
meanesse
of
Adams
figgleaue
breeches
shall
be
accounted
a
worthy
matter
to
satisfie
for
his
sinne
,
as
[
a
](A09274-e49660-b)
a
De
po●nit
.
lib
4.
cap.
9.
sect.
5.
Irenaeus
.
Bellarmine
most
ridiculously
doates
;
I
say
,
when
such
base
trifles
shal
be
reckoned
to
be
valuable
satisfactions
to
Gods
Iustice
:
they
must
pardon
vs
if
we
guesse
at
their
meaning
.
They
may
dispute
and
talke
while
they
will
in
big
wordes
and
faire
glosses
of
Bridles
against
Sinnes
,
and
I
know
not
what
:
but
in
fine
all
proues
but
Gins
to
catch
money
:
But
such
as
serue
themselues
thus
,
vpon
God
;
and
play
with
his
Iustice
,
as
the
flie
with
the
Candle
;
let
them
take
heed
,
lest
in
the
end
,
they
be
consumed
by
it
.
To
leaue
then
these
vaine
Inuentions
.
Let
vs
giue
to
God
the
glory
that
's
due
to
his
name
:
and
so
we
shall
well
provide
for
the
peace
of
our
Soules
.
Trusting
entirely
and
onely
vnto
that
Name
of
[
b
](A09274-e49850-b)
b
Acts
Apost
,
cap
,
4.
v.
1●
.
Iesus
Christ
.
besides
which
,
there
is
not
in
Heauen
,
or
in
Earth
(
in
Man
or
Angell
)
any
name
,
Merit
,
Power
,
Satisfaction
,
or
whatsoeuer
else
,
whereby
we
may
be
saued
.
And
thus
much
touching
the
first
maine
branch
of
the
matter
of
our
Iustification
,
namely
Our
owne
Righteousnes
,
Whereby
,
it
appeares
sufficiently
,
that
we
shall
neuer
be
justified
in
Gods
Sight
.
Μόνῳ
τῷ
Θεῷ
δόξα
.
FINIS
.