Of Nature and Grace, Book 2 · Part 5
Of the regenerate mans imperfection, yet remaining, and of an impoſsibilitie of the exact keeping of the law.
Ovr Sauiour preferreth common ſtrumpets,Mat. 25.31 Luc. 15.3. prophane Publicanes, and groſſe ſinners before proud Phariſaicall boaſters. Yea the very Pelagiā in ſhew is better thē the hauty Phariſey, though alſo ſomuch the worſe, becauſe in words he is more modeſt confeſſing his vnworthines, & yet in harte beleeuing the contrarie, and recknoning of a naturall perfection, and of a fautleſſe integritie. But who taught him to make a diuorſe betwixt his tung & his harte? if his hart be pure, why diſſemble his lips? if his lips ſpeak truth, why doth his hart diſſent? The Lord reſiſteth the proude in hart, and the lying lipps he will deſtroy.Pſal. 12.3. This fine tricke of hypocriſie, the Papiſt hath borowed of the Pelagian. For they be of great familiaritie, and neare kinne, and therfore may be bold one with an other.
Aske any Papiſt, one or other, whether he thinke himſelfe righteous or no: he wil ſay no, and deny it with open proteſtatiō. Aske him what he thinketh of an other, he wil anſwer if a man will contend, & endeuour thereunto, the Lawe is not ſo harde, but it may be done and fulfilled:VVorkes of ſupererogation. Rhem. not. 1. Cor. 9.16. nay he will go farther and defend a greater perfection to be in Friers, Monkes, Ieſuits &c. then God either of his wiſedom could, or of his iuſtice would commaund in his law. But aske the Prophets, Eſaie, Daniel, and Dauid,Pſal. 31.6. Daniel. 9.7 Eſa. 64.6. what their iudgement is, and theſe becauſe they are of an other ſpirite, will make a diuerſe aunſwer: that there is not a Sainte, but doth pray to be pardoned, ſhame and confuſion belongeth to all, the verie righteouſnes of man is as a ſtayned cloth.
VntoUnto theſe laſt wordes out of the Prophet Eſaie,Lib. 6. cap. 22. Maiſter Stapleton agnizeth, that: Now adayes the writers of his owne ſide, hauehave aunſwered, admodum varie, very variouſly. But is it poſſible? I had thoght Papiſts could not hauehave iarred, or varied on iot one from an other: for ſo they can falſly brag. I graunt the ſpirit of an interpreter may be examined, & iudged by others.1. Cor. 14.32. For men are men, and being diuerſe, becauſe all hauehave not all truth in ſuch meaſure and knowledge of eueryevery circumſtance, they may write diuerſlly. But what is the cauſe of this their ſo great varietie in a matter not hard? Verely,Bert. de pro pri. verb. lib. 18. cap. 68. no meruaile if you run ſidelong, and a ſlant (like a hare down an hill) or, to and fro, ſome one way, ſome an other, and not furth out right and directly all, when you come near a text, that maketh after you, and in purſuit can not but ouertake, and quite ouerthrow your errors.
To omit all others, becauſe you omitte them to, how take you, M. Stapleton, the Prophets meaning to be? Marry, that their former righteouſnes in the corrupt times vnderunder Achaz & Manaſ. was ſtayned with their latter vnrighteouſnes, thē aboūding, not that the wordes concerne the workes of the Iewes, that were good then, or may be applyed to the righteouſnes of Chriſtians now, and that the Prophet ſpeaking as of himſelfe among others withall, doth but after the maner of Preachers reprehē ding the peoples vices ſeeme to include them ſelues with the reſt, howbeit, they be free from ſuch popular enormities.
So you ſay maiſter Stapleton, and a mā would thinke to the purpoſe altogeather, if he ſee no more then you doe, or no farther then you are diſpoſed to ſhew him. The Prophet doth not preache but pray in this place, and he giueth furth the confeſſion of the whole Churche, as may clearly appeare by theſe wordes.Eſai. 64. verſ. 8.9. &c. O Lorde we are all thy people, &c. It is true, that they had not onelyonly ſtained, but changed their righteouſnes into vnrighteouſnes, the place of iuſtice into a lodge of murtherers, their wine into water, their goulde into droſſe, &c. Yet in the Prophetes prayer there was more then this. For the Lorde being prouoked to iuſt wrath, by vniuſt dealinges, as he will puniſh their groſſer faultes, ſo will he not pardon, the imperfections of their beſt vertues, except they be content in humilitie to proſtrate themſelues, & confeſſe their own vnworthines, not onelyonly when they openly ſinne, but alſo when they ſeeme to do well, & to ſerue him moſt.Iob. 9.28. So Iob a iuſt man, yet feareth nothing more thē his works: & Eſay knoweth with how true wordes, he conceiueth his prayer.
Let not M. Stapleton reply herein alſo, that Eſay includeth himſelfe generally in tearmes, and not in truth. For a man cannot abide a falſe rich begger, ſpecially if he knew him to be rich, and yet heare him to proteſt his pouerty, & crauing reliefe, & nedeth none. But howſoeuer man may be deceaued, or perſwaded with the hypocriſie & fained teares of importunate diſſemblers, certainly God will not be mocked. As we beleeue, ſo muſt we pray, & ſo did Eſay, whoſe praier is therfore written, that it might be a pattern to all poſterity, to beleeue, pray & confeſſe in like maner.
Neither doth the exāples, of Noe, Iob, Zac. & the like diſproue that which we auouch, that the righteouſnes of the beſt being exactly tried at the touchſtone of the Lawe, ſhalbe found droſſie, impure, and euen as a defiled garment, which is not cleanſed, but with that ſope which purgeth all. And woe worth them who euer, that ſeek to admixe their own ſweat, with the blood of Chriſt.
Noah was a iuſt man,No…. that is, was iuſtified in expectation of the Meſſias to come, and very iuſt was he in compariſon of the iniquities of the old worlde, vntounto whom he was a preacher of righteouſnes and godly life,Geneſ. 6.8. but the Arke that he made was a tipe of his ſaluation to be ſought for in Chriſt, for whoſe ſake he founde grace & fauour in the eyes of God.
Likewiſe Iobs confidence was not in him ſelfe,Iob. but in that he certainely knew that his redeemer liued in whome alſo he ſhould be reuiued, & whereas ſomewhere he pleadeth his innocency, what ſicke mā being extreamely affected hath not now and then an extraordinary pang? Yet Iob, as he complaineth of his griefe and heauy ſorowe, ſo withall he maketh confeſſion of his greeuous ſinnes, (which are, we know aſwell the cauſes often of ſorow & ſickneſſe, as the inſtruments of triall) and in plea of his innocencie he doth it not againſt God, but againſt his enemies, as likewiſe in reſpect of the foly of his vnwiſe frinds, who like miſerable & vnskilful Phiſitians, miſapplied their phiſik, otherwiſe good enough, he tearmeth them, as they well deſerued. And whē he appealeth to the holy throne of God. What doth he? he laieth furth the ground of his harte vnfained, becauſe he defied the hypocriſie wherewith they falſly charged him.
Zachary & Elizabeth.So Zachary & Elyzabeth a iuſt couple, paterns of godlines to all, and namely to all, that are in holy ſtate of wedlocke, and a moſt faire example, for miniſters, & miniſters wiues, both for the lawfulnes of their mariage, and alſo for their vpright liuing therein, notwithſtanding that condition of life. For theſe both though maried, yet were they,Rhem. not. in Luc. cap. 1. verſ. 6. Stapl. lib. 6. cap. 13. Iuſt before God and walked in all the commaundementes and iuſtifications of the Lord without repoofe. Which is as great a commendation as may be attributed to man. Iuſt before God: walking in all the cō maundements (morall) and ordinances (ceremoniall) without reproof. And verely at the firſt bluſh theſe wordes cary a great ſhew of an abſolute perfection againſt all, that hetherto hath bene auouched. For, theſe two are ſaide to be iuſt, and we hold ſpeaking ſtrictly, no man is iuſt. Theſe ar tearmed iuſt before God, and we teach that no fleſh ſhalbe iuſtified in his ſight of right in it ſelfe. Theſe are here commmended to hauehave walked in all the heſtes of God without reproofe, & we ſhew that this much was fulfilled onelyonly and ſolely of Chriſt.
The ſolution and ful aunſwer of all this, hath bene well made of many, and not verie long ſince in writing by ſundrie learned,Fox. Ser. de Chriſt. cruc. L. Tomſon against Feck. &c. and godly men. I will but dippe the ſame cloth in the ſame die againe, becauſe ſtill our aduerſaries ceaſe not to obſcure & deface the true colour thereof as much as in them lieth. And firſt, theſe were iuſt before God, not becauſe God could not, but becauſe God would not find fault with them.Pſa. 130.3 For if thou obſerue what is done amis, O Lorde, who ſhall abide it? ſhall iuſt Zachary? or is not Zacharies diſtruſtfulnes recorded, and therfore the vſe of his toūg taken away for a time? or may we thinke diffidence & diſtruſtfulnes to be no faulte? or if he offended but in this one fault alon, was he not euen for that one faulte in the rigour of iuſtice made an offender of the whole law?Iam. 2.10. but how then ſaith the ſcripture, that Zachary was iuſt? no doubt, not if God ſhould hauehave meaſured the righteouſnes of Zacharie, by the rule of the law, and yet no doubt was he a iuſt mā as Iob & ſo accepted,Iob. 1.1. Gen. 5.22. and walking with God as Enoch in the Lordes ſight, in ſinglenes of minde and not in an harte, and an hart: but in ſinceritie, that is to ſay, before God, and that in all the commaundementes, endevouring the obſeruation of all without exception, and not ſpecially keeping ſome and omitting the reſt, as if a man woulde warde a gate of the city, and ſuffer all other places els voide without their watch: neither is (all) ſo taken, as if al had ben ſim…ly perfourmed to the full: For he offended in parte, as is plaine, in not beleeuing the meſſage from God, and it is ſaid, they walked, which doth ſomewhat argue that they were but in the way, and not at their journeyes ende, whereunto they con…ended one warde, reuerentlie before God, and carefullie before men without reproofe.
And in this their iorneie to paſſe away the way, and the tediouſnes thereof Zachary ſingeth a ioyfull ſong concerning the Lordes mercifull viſitation and his deliuerie from the handes of our enemies, & of remiſſion of ſins, & of a ſtrong ſaluation in the houſe of Dauid to be purchaſed by Chriſt, to Chriſtians, & not by Chriſtians to thē ſelues. And Zachary was verie well exerciſed & skilfull in ſuch ditties, & in none other but theſe. For whereas he was a Prieſt, his vſe and dewty was to offer for ſinnes, both for the peoples, and for his owne firſt.Epiſt. 95. ad Sext. Which thing (ſayth Auguſtine) ſome ſeeme little to conſider, who vrged Zacharies example in like ſorte, as the Papiſtes doe, vntounto whom he aunſwered then,Rhem. not. Rom. cap. 3. verſ. 10. as we do to the Papiſtes nowe adding withall, as Auguſtine doeth, that the ſacrifices of Chriſtiane prayers: Forgiue vsus treſpaſſes, importeth remnāts of imperfections in Chriſtians, euen as the old oblations did in the Iewes, both prieſt and people, till this our imperfection in this world be chaunged into perfection in the world to come. And although ſome be iuſter thē ſome, as gold cōpared with droſſe, or ſiluer with tinne, or gold with golde, or ſiluer with ſiluer, that is to ſay the good with the bad, or the good with the good, … or the beſt among thēſelues, or though all in commō whom God vouchſafeth fauor & pardō may be called iuſt, becauſe they are iuſtified, and reputed ſo, & acquited in Chriſt, yet this being well conſidered, that men after grace receaued, they hauehave receaued but a meaſure of grace, is it not a folly to dream of perfection? The Philoſopher could tell them, that that is perfit,Ariſt. lib. 1. de coel. cap. 1. which wanteth nothing. But how many and how great are the defects euen of the beſt? And then if the ſtrong men faile what ſhall the weake do? If the horſemē yeeld & fly, ſhal the footmen vndertake the battle, & win the field? If God finde imperfections in his chiefeſt Saincts, & deereſt frinds, & louing …eſt children, in Abel, Enoch,Auguſt. de Natur. & Grac. cap. 36. Rhem. not. Mat. 19.21 Lib. 6. cap. 6 Melchiſedeck Abrahā, & the like: a great number of whō ar reckned vp by name in Auguſtine. Shall a begging frier, or an idle monke, or a ſeditious Ieſuit vaunt of perfection before the Lord. To help out the matter M. Stapleton doth diſtinguiſh of perfectiōs, though not perfit, yet perfit in ſuo genere, & ſuo modo, in their kinde & after their owne maner. In deede ſo may they be perfit in the hieſt degree, in their own kinde, & after their own faſhion, that is to ſay, perfitly bad, & ſo much the worſe, as they more preſume of a good perfection. But that imperfection in one kind, ſhould naturally be a true perfection & yet vnperfit in the ſame, is verie ſtrāge & a monſtrous ſpeach in our eares. What? not after a ſort? nor in his kinde? no ſouthly. For Pelagius might thē, euē as truly hauehave anſwered with ſuch kind of diſtinctiōs for the perfectiō of his pure naturals, that they were perfit in their kinde. So mā gle a man, & cut of the chief parts, head & all, & yet you may ſay it is a perfit body in that kinde, as in ſuch a caſe it may be. But where is Ariſtotels definitiō: there is nothing perfit, that wāteth his parts? Yet becauſe we build not vpō mē, what doth the word of God require? all our ſoule, all the body, all the powers & faculties of both. If ought be wāting in either, there wanteth that perfection, that the law requireth and Chriſt commaundeth: Be you perfit euen as your father is perfit. This is the mark, endeuoring toward it, ſhooting faire, or comming neare is no perfectiō, except by way of compariſon to thē that are ſtark naught, or worſe then they. For the lawe requireth more, & our duty is greater then ſo, they reply, no, not ſo, as though no more were exacted, then perſonally of our ſelues can be performed, or elſe that there is an exēption from ſuch exactnes.
The ſick womā in the Goſpell,Mar. 5.26. the more ſhe went to phyſick, the worſe ſhe was: ſo an error, the more it is defēded, the bigger it groweth. And ſo it fareth, with theſe that would be their owne ſauiours & ſhut out Chriſt. Firſt they ſtriue for a perfectiō: when that is diſproued, they would be perfit with an imperfectiō at the leaſt, & whē we ſhewe, that that is a meere toy, as they meane it, then they ſay God requireth no more at our handes, then we can do. Now whether God doth ſo, or no, in proceſſe yet a litle further ſhalbe conſidered, albeit hereof hath ben ſufficiētly debated before.
Our Sauiour Chriſt, that iuſtly coulde, vniuſtly would not, & neuer falſly vpbraided, the people whom he loued ſo tenderly,Ioh. 7.19. obiected vntounto them, the breach of the Lawe: Did not Moſes giuegive you a Lawe, but none of you kept the Law? and leaſt he ſhould ſeeme to touch ſom & thoſe of the wickedder ſort onelyonly, & not all in generall the beſt amongeſt them are not excepted: None of you doth the lawe. None. Or be it (which I take …pperly to be the meaning of the place) Chriſt ſpeaketh onelyonly to the iuſt reproch of the vngodly, and no meruail. For the godly agnize their imperfections moſt willingly, but the godles ſtād at ſtaues end with God, & plead, not guiltie, againſt their own conſcience. Wherefore in ſpeciall were ſuch rather to be conuinced of ſin, then thoſe that in humblenes of minde, confeſſed, they were ſinners, and craued pardon for their ſins. Yet in reſpect of either the voluntarie confeſſion of one ſort, or the pretended hypocriſie of the other, reprehended of Chriſt, it is more then manifeſt, that the law was trāſgreſſed of al.
But this was De non facto: they did it not: but might they not hauehave done the law? or if they being naught, could not doe well, coulde not their betters, or can not the beſt performe the law?
I woulde be loth to call that, or them impure or polluted,Act. 10.15. or any way imperfite, whom God hath ſanctified, and perfited in his ſonne. But this is not the queſtion, what we are reputed to do in Chriſt: neither ſhoulde this be the queſtion, whether by the ſpirite of God and grace through Chriſt, we can fulfill the Lawe.Rom. 11. For the Lawe exacteth full obedience proceeding as from our ſelues, if we once ſeeke to be iuſtified thereby. Yet becauſe our aduerſaries cal that now only into controuerſie, what man can do by the helpe of grace, thereby at leaſt to maintaine ſomewhat in them ſelues, as if they would ſay, that they could ſwimme if they were held vp by the chinne, and they can keepe the law,Rhe. notes Ro. c. 8. v. 4. by the grace of Chriſt, and ſpirit of God. I confeſſe by the grace of God we are that we are, & the grace of God is not in vaine in his own children: yet not in ſo full meaſure, or rather without meaſure, as it was in Chriſt, who onelyonly was able to vndertake that, that no man euer hath done elſe, or ſhall do herafter, or can do at any time. For if it were otherwiſe, what ſinguler thing aſcribe we more to him, then to ſom other? A greater matter then the fulfilling of the Law is hardly found. Therfore they ſet the birth, and life, & paſſion, & perſon of Chriſt, at a very ſmall, & vile priſe, that make no more accompt therof, then to be as it were but a paire of oares to conuey vsus ſomewhat the eaſilier thither,Auguſt, de verb. Apoſt 13 whither happely with more leaſure, and ſom greater laboure wee might come at length, wherunto in deede we can neuer attaine, but by him, and by him alone, as an wholy agent therin.
M. Stapleton demaundeth thus much: whether grace & power diuine, hauehave not that force, as to remoue that our olde corruption, which was contracted and drawn from Adam, and likewiſe to reſtore againe the perfection that was at the firſt? whereunto his own ſimpering anſwer is ſuch that it ſeemeth to burn his lips in the vtterance of certaine allegations out of Auſtine and Ierome. For both of theſe are more for vsus, he knoweth full well, then for him in all their diſcourſes hereof, if they be wel wayed and wiſely conſidered. Who diſputing to and fro, do rather preciſely teach the omnipotent ability of God, then exactly define, that man is or may be, or certainly euer ether was or ſhal be of ſuch a perfectiō in this life. M. Stapleton him ſelfe, doth but ſay,Hierom. Non abhorret Ieronimus ab iſta ſentētia: Ieromes ſtomake doth ſcant ſerue him to taſt of M. Stapletons corrupt viandes.
The Law is poſſible, and the Law is impoſſible, two contrary ſentences in ſound, and yet they both true in ſom ſence, as the two cherubins ſitting oppoſit ech to other yet both looking into the propitiatory: ſo theſe ſentences though ſeeming contrary, yet reſpect either, a known truth in diuinity. If we cōſider man either in his firſt creation, or in his glorified eſtate after this life,The ſubſtāce of the Law remaineth in force euē in the next life. the Law was poſſible, and ſhalbe eaſie. By the way if any aſke whether Moſes Lawe ſhall ſerue in the world to come, I am of opinion in ſubſtance, as of louing God aboue all things, and others as our ſelues, it ſhalbe the ſame, though not in circumſtances which muſt needes ſuffer alteratiō, with the change of the whole world. Then againe the Law is poſſible to be done, for it was done of Chriſt. And againe in ſome ſort it may be ſayd to be poſſible, and done of Chriſtians, for God deputeth all to be done, when he forgiueth all that is not dōe. But the Pelagian thought him ſelfe a trim man, when he could ſay as the Papiſt doth ſay, God doth not commaund impoſſible things. Yes (ſayth Auguſtine,) and ſheweth the end why, to hūble men, & to teach thē the goodnes of the forgiuer, & alſo their duty in crauing forgiueneſſe of the Lorde.
The ſame Auguſtine ſome where doth alſo in as expreſſe words as may be,Auguſtine auouch that the Lawe is poſſible. True. But withall it is woorth the laboure the while to obſerue in ſo learned a doctour ſome certaine circumſtances, the better to attaine to the true meaning of his doctrine, that the bare name of ſuch a father cary no mā away. If he did ſimply ſay ſo, yet the foundation of our beleefe is not grounded on man,Ep. ad Hier 19. ad Vincen. Don. 48. as Auguſtine him ſelfe ſheweth full well in nombers of places. But concerning the preſent queſtion, Auguſtine was farre enough from a Papiſticall pride in an imagined ability of humane perfection. When his auditors waxed ſlack, & weary of well doing, & yet becauſe ſinne is neuer without a ſhift, they vſed to ſay: that they wold do this or that, but could not do according to Auguſtins exhortations. For example. I can not louelove mine enemies, ſayth one, I can not refraine my ſelfe from drinking, ſayth an other, I muſt needes be drunke, eſpecially when ſuch or ſuch a perſonage enforceth me: Auſtin replieth: Nolle in cul pa eſt noſtra, Serm. de Temp. 232& non poſſe praetenditur. O ſinfull man whē thou wilt not, thou pretēdeſt that thou canſt not do thy duety, either in louing thy neighbour, or in forgoing thy luſts. God that giueth more grace then ſo to his children, knoweth beſt, what thou canſt do, and that ſo idle, and friuolouſe excuſes wil not ſerue. Neither doth Auſtin argue the plenarie fulfilling of the whole Law exactly in all points, but onelyonly endeuouring to perſwade to charitable dealing, ſayth, though thou canſt not do this or that, faſt, ſell all, &c. Yet canſt thou not louelove? canſt thou not hauehave charitie? whereby I gather, as out of him ſo elſewhere out of other writers,The Law is not impoſſible in part, but in perfection. that this word impoſſible is not taken for an impoſſibilitie in euerie kinde of degree, which no wiſe man will yeeld vntounto. For albeit we can not poſſibly be ſo perfit in the ſame equality as is required, yet a deſire by imitation, and in ſome degree by grace may be and is in vsus:Clem. Alex. poedag. lib. 1 cap. 6 Virg. aen. l. … as it is in the Poet of the ſonne that followeth his father, though he could not keepe pace with him: Sequitúr que Patrem non paſsibus aequis: we may follow, though we can not or runne cheeke by cheeke, (as the prouerb is) iumpe ſo faſt, or iuſt ſo farre, as is commaunded: yet no wiſe man dare call this that perfection that the Papiſt would hauehave.
But the nature of man is like the lazie houſwife, that when ſhe had more to do thē ſhe knew ſhe cold wel diſpatch, taketh and ſitteth her down, & letteth al vndone. page missing farther, from meriting. For imperfection meriteth nothing, but craueth pardon, becauſe of default.
But we will go on in preciſe tearmes to ſpeake of merites. As grace is free, & can not ſtand with merits, ſo merites deſerue, and need not grace, if they be merits. The Eaſt and weſt, will ſooner meete together, then grace and merits wil meete together and agree in one in the ſaluation of man. For if thou wilt be ſaued by the one, thou canſt not by the other. Neither maiſt thou part ſtakes betwixt them both. For the Apoſtle taketh away deſert, before he eſtabliſheth fauour and grace.
M. Stapleton ſingeth in a quite contrary tune to this:Lib. 10. c. 2 and telleth vsus in plaine and ſhrill wordes, that the inheritance of ſaluation (albeit the very word inheritance might hauehave taught him an other leſſon) is giuen to the ſonnes of God, not becauſe they are ſonnes (freely by fauour) but becauſe they are his good children: neither yet becauſe they are good, but (withall) becauſe they are children and good. As if partly we inherit by fayth, wherby we are his children, and partly by workes, which muſt make vsus good, and whereby in great part we deſerue, which Auſtin ſheweth to be no ſafe way.
I aske this queſtion by the waie: maie we be good, & yet not his children, or can we be his children, and yet conſequentlie not good? What God hath coupled, why doeth M. Stapletons vaine ſtrength endevour to hale, and rent a ſunder? If wee be not ſonnes, then are we naught, nether poſibly can we be good by any working. For all good works, before they deſerue the name of good, are firſt halowed in Chriſt, ſprinkled with his bloud, wrought by his Spirit, and offred in his name vponupon the alter of faith, as proceeding from his deare children, or elſe they be naught, and being naught, they can make nothing better.Act. 15.9 But we be once his ſonns by faith, which pufieth the hart, and indueth with his ſpirit, which ſanctifieth the ſoule, how can we be but good? And now being his ſonnes by a vouchſafed priuiledge, not of deſert but of adoptiō, thē ar we alſo heirs, coheirs with Chriſt, in this life here both to do wel, that … graciouſe a father may be glorified in his children, and many times to ſuffer euill … the worlds hands,Rhem. notes Rom. 8.17 that we may be glorified with Chriſt in heauen, which is a condition expreſſed in S. Paule not as a cauſe precedent to make vsus ſonnes, and ſo heirs, but as a conſequent of duetie, becauſe we are ſonnes, and heires, that therfore we ow all duety, and in reaſon muſt, being members be correſpondent, & aunſwerable to the head, that in the ende we may enioye moſt freely the performance of what ſo euer was in moſt free maner before promiſed. For as the promis was fre at the firſt, ſo the performance being greater and more comfortable in the effect, can not be leſſe free in the end, then was the promiſe at the firſt offered.
The greatneſſe of ſaluation in our ſtate to be glorified after the conſummation of all thinges cometh afterward in due place to be ſpokē of. In the meane time to ſhew how litle ſuch ſo infinit a bleſſing can be worthely and of deſert attained vntounto, is thereby manifeſt, becauſe that glory is infinit, and the deſert, if it were deſert, yet were it finit. For the glorie is eternall, and the merit temporall, the one ended in a ſmall momentary time, the other euerlaſting without end, in ſo much that wheras there is with out all dout, no proportiō nor compariſon of equality betwixt the deſert and the thing deſerued, who can auouch that he can deſerue, or who dare ſay, I merit, or I purchaſe with the ruſtie monie of mine owne fraile workes, the glorious crown of euerlaſting ſaluation, euen as a hireling or a iourney man doth his wages?
As in bargains there is no euen buying or ſelling, but where a peny worth is to be had for a penie, and a peny is a peny worth: ſo properly there is no deſert, but where there is an aunſwerable rate in deſeruing, which becauſe it can not poſſibly be betweene vsus men & God, betweene God & mans ſaluation, farewell merites, as they are properly taken. Improperly howe the word may be taken in ſundry of the fathers is not directly to the point of the queſtion concerning the priſe, deſert, woorth and valour, of workes and the nature of merites,Rhem. not. 1. Cor. 3.8 as the Papiſtes take the name of merites.
Wherfore with much a do M. Stapleton againſt the haire, and perforce, can not chuſe but graūt, that in deede there is no equality in the former reſpects as we be mē, but yet as we be Chriſtiā mē, he ſaith there is an equalitie and his reaſons be theſe: becauſe the adopted ſonns heritage be it neuer ſo great,Stap. lib. 10 cap. 2 (as he thinketh) exceedeth not the worthineſſe of the perſon adopted: and againe he imagineth that the Sonne is no farther bound then the Father will require: & being once ſonnes by grace, thē De noſtro meremur, we merit of our ſelues.
There is neuer a true worde in all this proud folly: for what ſhould I call it elſe?
Firſt, the adopted ſonne, as before his adoption he deſerued not the inheritāce be it neuer ſo litle, ſo being adopted into a large inheritance, his No-deſert is thereby the more manifeſted, and ought a great deale the more openly of the adopted ſon to be proclaimed. Moreouer if the father would not require ought, but could contēt him ſelfe with ſlender thanks, what then? becauſe the father is thus content, is the ſon the leſſe bound, & not rather the bond doubled, & the ſonne the deeper indetted & his dutie increaſed in the higheſt degree of al thankfulneſſe? The naturall ſonne can yeild no equall recompence to his naturall parents: how much more then is the adopted child beholding? As for that vile and preſumptuouſe ſaying, that men ar ſonnes by grace, & then de noſtro ſaued, by works, be it farre frō Chriſtian, & hūble minds. For ſhal a man begin with Chriſt & end in him ſelf, or begin with the Goſpell & end with Moſes?Ariſt. The end of eueryevery thing is the perfectiō therof: but are our works ſo perfit, perfiter then grace? doth God but the firſt, & leaſt part, and are our ſelues authors, cauſers, & finiſhers, of the chiefeſt, the lateſt, & the greateſt partes? who would think that the cloth of righteouſneſſe were thus patched vp of ſome ſmall peece of purple died in the bloud of Chriſt, and all the reſt to be made of mans own ragges? Coſt it ſo litle to redeeme ſinners? why did the holy man feare his workes as nothing more? was he like the ſimple bird, that ducketh at the barn door, where the door is high enough, and no feare of hurting her head? No. Iob was well aduiſed in his ſaying. For might or did he merit, why did he feare? But therfore he feared becauſe he knewe that he could not merit, demerit he could a iuſt cō demnation, if he ſhould relie vpō the worthineſſe of his owne workes. And therfore he feared the lightneſſe and inſufficiencie therof, and leaned onelyonly to a better ſtay, to the mercy of God, and to the merites of Chriſt his Redeemer, which ſhould buie out and pay for the vnworthineſſe that otherwiſe was in his workes.
I neuer find the aduerſary without ſom ſhift.Rhem. not. 1. Cor. 3.8. But of all trickes, that is moſt fond, & an impudent folly,Quicquuid in rei veritate habeāt tamen &c. whereby they ſay that Iob, and Iobs like did merite, yet would they not glorie in their merites, profeſſing euer in wordes the contrarie, as who wold ſay in plaine ſpeech man might glorie,Sta. l. 5. c. 17. hauing ſufficient matter of merites to glorie in, yet of curteſie would not, but was content to yeild the glory to God: to whome forſooth otherwiſe in full right, & in whole it did not ſo directly, & duly appertain: ſo that if good men were not beneficiall and fauorable in this behalfe, the glory of God were and might be much diminiſhed, and greatly impayred, if eueryevery one would but chalenge his owne and take his due.
Our Sauiour Chriſt ſchooleth his diſciples after an other faſhion,Luc. 17.7. telling thē, that when they had done all (if yet they could) that was commaunded them, yet ſhould they ſay that they were improfitable ſeruants.Sta. l. 5. c. 17 What? ſay ſo, and not think ſo? that were hypocriſie. Say ſo, & it were not true? that were a ly, & therfore ſinne. Say ſo, for modeſties ſake? There is no modeſtie, no humilitie againſt and without the trueth, yet ſay ſo. Why?Pſal. 16 doth God ſtand in neede of mans glozing? No. he needeth not our beſt workes. But why do not the Papiſtes then ſay ſo much? Why ſay they not flat, without ſtāmering that they ar vnprofitable ſeruants? Nay, why ſay they that they ar deſeruers? what they are, they wil not redily ſay: what they are not, they bragge, or at the leaſt pretend that they are.
As things (eſpecially ſpirituall) are in their owne nature, ſo muſt we conceaue of them, or elſe we conceaue amiſſe.Eſay 5.20 And as we conceaue, ſo muſt we confeſſe of thē and ſpeake by them. Wherfore doubtleſſe of our ſelues (what euer boaſters patter in pride to the contrarie) we muſt both conceaue humbly, and confeſſe truly & plainly that we are in reſpect of meriting, but vnprofitable ſeruants.
It is graunted of all partes, that God hath ordayned, that man ſhould be profitable to man, and one commodiouſe to an other, ech man lending his help, & helping hand to his neighbour, wherin yet becauſe fraile fleſh ſomtimes in the duties & many times in the degrees of charity offēdeth, we ar to craue pardon, euen in this reſpect alſo. But when we ſpeake of meriting with God,Rhem. not. Luc. 17.10. we muſt ſhew that we are profitable to him, or elſe of him we merit not profitably to our ſelues, as our new notes would hauehave it, but that is impoſſible. For what profit taketh the ſpring by him that taſteth of the waters that iſſue from the ſpring,Aug. de ciu Dei. l. 10. c. 5 or the Sunne by the eye, that ſeeth by the Sunnes light? Or God by our works, which proceede from him ſelfe, and therefore if yet they be profitable to him, yet are they not properly ours, and ſo not profitable to him as from vsus deſeruing of him, but as his owne to him ſelfe:Rhem. notes 2. Tim. 4.8. and therefore not woorth thankes at our handes, much leſſe vailable to merit truly & properly as they ſpeake, and truly in that they but paſſe thorough vsus, they take ſome kinde of our imperfection along with them, in ſo much, that albeit God the giuer be perfit, and his giftes clean, notwithſtanding mans vncleane and leprouſe hand in the verie receauing and vſage of them doth after a ſort ſoile them, ſo that there can be no claime of worthineſſe by them at all. Now as for ſeruāts to be profitable to thēſelues, is a ſtrange ſhift, and I wil not ſpend labor to confute that which common experiēce doth deteſt. For who will count him a profitable ſeruaunte, that is profitable to him ſelfe and not to his maſter.
It were better for man to enter low into him ſelfe, and to common with his own ſoule in theſe, and to common with his own ſoule in theſe caſes eſpecially that ſo nearly concerne the ſoule,Iud. 16.5. and as Dalila relied in Samſons boſome to knowe where his ſtrength lay, euen ſo neuer to leaue of till he hath traced & foūd out, his own weaknes in good things, & his ſtrength in ſinne, and then ſhall he the better be able to ſit in iudgement, and giuegive ſentence vponupon him ſelfe, no dout againſt the merites of man with the merciemercy of God, in whoſe ſight otherwiſe no fleſh euer ſhalbe iuſtified, or profitable vntounto him ſelfe in that reſpect.
The Papiſtes do but daly and play with Gods iudgements. The Prophet is plaine, and ſpeaketh from a conſcience well enformed, that in the ſight of God none ſhalbe iuſtified: None, that is to ſay, none before grace, ſaith a chiefe Papiſt. But Hoſius, and out of him Stapleton, and others like not that: For Dauid a man according to Gods own harte, and therfore in ſtate of grace, yet ſayd he of himſelfe, and that none in the Lords ſight ſhalbe iuſtified. For that which is right in the ſight of man (becauſe his eyeſight may be deceaued) yet therein Gods ſight can not be deceaued. He ſeeth the inwards, ſearcheth, and ſoundeth the bottome of ſecreat,1. Ioh. 1.8. and vnknowen ſinnes. Wherein if fleſh will flatter it ſelfe, and lie, and ſay it hath no ſinne, yet God hath an eye that perceth farther, and a ſtretched out arme, and he will reach his hand into the cocatrice neſt, and plucke thence, and diſplay abroade the ſerpent that lurketh and lodgeth in the den of a dead and rotten conſcience, that hath no feeling nor ſence of ſtinging ſins. For in his ſight hidden faultes ſhall not ſo ſcape, and therefore it is good praying euer: Clenſe vsus, O Lorde, euē vsus they people, from our ſecrete offences: we know & confeſſe, that no fleſh can be iuſtified in thy ſight.
But I know not what M. Sapleton and Hoſius meane to labour to proue that this ſaying of Dauid,Stapl. lib. 6. cap. 1. Hoſ. lib. conf. ca. 73. is ſpoken by waie of compariſon, and that in his ſight, is in cōpariſon of God him ſelf. For doth God in iudgemēt meane to compare vsus to himſelfe, and ſo to condemne vsus? Yet what gaine they by this? we confeſſe this is true, whether it be the natural meaning of this text or no. For in compariſon of the ſunne in his ſtrength, what is a candle or a ſtarre, or all the ſtarres of the skie? in cō pariſon of the almighty what is man? at his preſence the mountaines melt, the earth doth ſhake, the verie Angels are not clean in his ſight, how much leſſe fleſh & blood, that dwelleth in houſes of clay, and whoſe foundation is but morter? All this is true. But one truth is not contrarie to an other. None ſhalbe iuſtified before grace. It is true. None ſhalbe iuſtified in compariſon of God, it is true to. And it is moſt true alſo that Dauid ſayeth, & Ierome expoundeth, that not onelyonly in compariſon,Hierom. in Ier. 13. cap. VVhere he termeth this their expoſition the expoſitiō of heretiques and of the patrons of heretiques. but alſo in the knowledge of God in his ſight, no fleſh ſhalbe iuſtified. And all theſe truthes proue this one truth, that none ſhalbe iuſtified by their merites neither before nor after grace, but altogether by grace, which worketh not onelyonly at the firſt all and afterward ſomewhat, but beginneth all, continueth in all, and endeth all in all if they wilbe iuſtified in deede.
This is S. Pauls doctrine throughout all his Epiſtles, who ſheweth that God worketh in vsus both to will and to worke to the ende that we may will effectually,Phil. 2.13. and all for his owne good will he worketh in vsus to will. I aske then where is free will? he worketh in vsus to worke: thē I aske where are merits? he worketh in vsus to will and to worke, and all: and thē I aske, where is any thing in man?
It is not in the willer, nor in the runner, but of God that taketh merciemercy.Rom. 9. It is not in the willer, and then I aske once againe, where is free will? it is not in the runner, and then where are workes, and worthines of workes? If it be replyed that therefore the Apoſtle, ſaith it is not in the runner nor in the willer, but in the merciemercy of God,Rhem. not. Rom. cap. 9.16. verſ. becauſe it is not onelyonly in either of both theſe, but in them and withall in the merciemercy of God to: then ſee, if it be ſo, the ſentence will be true, if we turne it backward thus by the ſame reaſon: It is not in the merciemercy of God, but in the runner, and in the willer, becauſe as the Papiſt ſaith: al is not in merciemercy, but part in merciemercy, and part in fee will, part in workes, part in merits, and therefore they may aſwell ſay: it is not in merciemercy but in merits, in workes, will, and well deſeruing.
The aduerſaries would ſeeme to fauour much catholicke wordes, and catholicke manner of ſpeaking. Was there euer Catholicke or Chriſtian vnderunder heauen that ſpake thus, as they in effect doe, that our ſaluation is not of God, that taketh mercy, but in deſerts?
The name of merit in Canoni. ſcripture is not only not cōmonly vſed (as they now can ſay) but no where found,Rhem. not. 1. Cor. 3.8. the nature of meriting is flat againſt all ſcriptures. And muſt yet merits be ſet vp in euē place, with mercy? or rather diſplace mercy quit? For S Paul teacheth,Rom. 11. that works & mercy cā not ſtand togeather in reſpect of glory: trulie no more then could Dagon and the Arke in the temple of the Philiſtines. Eſtabliſh merciemercy, and let fall, (I ſay not the vſe) but the glorie of workes: ſet vp works, & what neede merciemercy? ſet them vp I meane in the throne of meriting.
Auſtine mentioneth the name of merits:Aug. epiſt. 105. Barnard ſaith he is not without his merits, but both in an other meaning, thē the Papiſt meaneth. For a merit with Auguſtine is no other matter, thē good works, meerly proceding from the ſpirit of God, done in faith, and onelyonly accepted by merciemercy, & then rewarded, and ſo crowned, and neither as iſſuing out of free will, nor as equall mate, conioyned with grace, neither in working perfite, not in value deſeruing Bernard ſaith that he hath merites:Bar. in Pſ. Qui habitat. de 14. ver. Serm. 15. Eſai. 50.1. for the Lord hath mercies. Other merites Bernard hath none, that is, no merites in deede, but as it is ſaid in the Prophet, that we muſt come and buy the waters of life freely, & that without mony: which is in truth no buying, no more is the other meriting. The ſtipende of ſinne is death properly: that is true, but is life euerlaſting, the ſtipend of merits?Rom. 6.23. no: the Apoſtle altereth the courſe of his ſpeach. Yet might he as eaſely hauehave ſo ſaide, and moſt aunſwerable to the tenour of his former ſaying if it had bene ſo, but he ſaith, euerlaſting life is the gift of God, Rhem. not. 2. Tim. 4.8.a gift, ergo not the ſtipende of deſerte, as they expreſly terme it in theſe wordes: good workes done by grace after the firſt Iuſtification, be properly, and truely meritorious fully worthy of euerlaſting life. And therupon heauen is the due ſtipend which God oweth to the perſons ſo working by grace. But S. Paul calleth euerlaſting life a gift, & not a ſtipend as Auſtine well noteth: theſe mē call it a iuſt ſtipend. Now let the indifferent reader compare theſe contraries together & he ſhall ſoone diſcerne the truth of them.
M. Harding a man that could ſet a faire ſhew vponupon a foule cauſe, preſſeth,Har. detect. lib. 5. cap. 12. Mat. 20.1. & diſputeth the parable mentioned in S. Matthew, where the kingdome of God is likened to a mā that wēt out early in the morning, to hyre ſeruauntes into his vinearde: ſome he hired at one houre, ſome at an other, ſome at the third, others at the ſixe, ſome at the tenth, and others at the eleuenth. When euening came he gaue euerie one alike, & then they which came firſt, and had borne the heat of the day, & the burden of the whole labour, murmured, becauſe of the inequality of their pay. One of thē was anſwered, that he ſhould take his peny, wherefore he was hyred, & if the houſholder would be more liberall to them that laboured leſſe, what was that to him, that wrought more and longer time, and yet perchaunce leſſe then of dutie he ſhould, may not a man doe with his owne, which way he will? out of this M. Harding reaſoneth in ſence this: (I will ſpin his argument as far as it can run). The houſholder is God, the laborer is working in our vocation, the penny is life euerlaſting, the houſholder bid the murmuring laborer to be content with his hyre, and take that, which was his: then was it his: the price of his hyre is the penny for his labor, and the penny is life euerlaſting, here is ſufficient proofe, for meriting, I trow,Rhem. not. 1. Tim. 4.8. Mat. 25.27 Luc. 16.8. and ſo doth the Rhemiſh notes tell vsus. But ſoft, eueryevery part of a parable is not a good proof for a doctrine in beleefe. For ſo can I proue vſurie to be lawfull, vnfaithfulnes to be laudable, and all moſt, what not? In proper wordes, without parable this is plaine, we ought to ſerue the Lorde withall our ſtrength, and powers both of body and ſoule, all the houres of the day, that is, all the dayes of our life, and when eeuening is come and our life ended, after all our labours in the vineyarde of the Churche militant, We hauehave done but the duty that we ought, and dew debt is no deſart: quae debuimus facere, Luc. 17.10.fecimus. This is plaine and true, and ſhall we force ſome partes of a parable to proue it falſe? But the houſeholder ſaieth: Take that is thine: wherfore it was his, what? his that murmured, his whoſe eye was naught? repiners, and enuious perſons ſhall not inherite the kingdome of heauen, the peny of ſaluation is not for ſuch. For ſuch I ſay, without repē tance, much leſſe for ſuch as call for it of preciſe deſert. Nay the equalitie of a peny giuen a like to all, doth euidentlie declare,Ambroſ. de vocat. Gēt. lib. 1. cap. 5. that though their are diuerſities in time of vocations, which is the chief ende of the parable, yet the reward ſtandeth only vponupon merciemercy, which gaue to the laſt as to the firſt. If all had gone by deſert, then the greateſt labourer, might duely hauehave required the greateſt wages. But I pray you, are we hirelings? naye, we are ſonnes and heires: we looke not for a peny, as of hire, but yet we expect our penye, and that of meere gift, euen becauſe our God may do with his owne what him pleaſe: and he will in time beſtow it vppon vsus his owne, euen for his Chriſtes ſake, in whome alone we onelyonly truſt, and not in our ſelues.
O, this opinion will decay good workes meruelouſly, and greatly encreaſe either idlenes, or ſwarmes of euill liuers. Why? It was meruele then that Chriſt foreſawe not the inconueuience, when he gaue to the laſt as he gaue to the firſt. In deede if we be vagabondes, or lazy drones, or if …ke the greedy Zuytzer that will not fight but for his guilt, it is an other matter. But if we be ſonnes and children, we obey our father not to the end to merit but to ſhew all duty, and becauſe we are ſonnes.
The difference then betwixt vsus & the aduerſaries ſtandeth on theſe points, both they and we worke, they to merit, we to ſhew our duty: they for hyre, we for louelove, they as ſeruāts, we as ſonnes, they to purchaſe, & we becauſe Chriſt hath purchaſed for vsus life euerlaſting, they worke and ſeeke glory in their works, we worke and glory only in Chriſt, they worke & talk of perfectiō, we worke, & agnize our imperfections in working. They if they do but a good deede, if it be once done, they ſtande vponupon it, walke and iet thereon, though it be but the ice of one nights freezing, we when we hauehave done all, we ſay we are vnprofitable ſeruauntes.Ioſ. 7.21. We dare not burie our ſinnes like Acham in the earth, nor wrappe them in a ſort of faire greene figleued diſtinctions: we ſpeake with the wordes and in the ſence, that Chriſt hath taught vsus, and in none other. We runne, we labour, we fight, we keepe the faith, and yet not we, but Chriſt in vsus. And when we hauehave done all, yet hauehave we done but our dutie, and not deſerued. And this is our iudgement in few and plaine words concerning meriting: wherein if we hauehave ſpoken euill, let them conuict vsus of error,Ioh. 12.48. Act. 17.11. let the world bear witnes, and the word be iudge.