Against Popery, Treatise · Argument 9
THE NINTH ARGVMENT touching the oppoſition and enmitie of true religion to the nature of man.
THe ſame that hitherto hath bi… concluded of poperie is further euident, becauſe poperie is ſo agreeable and well-pleaſing the nature of man. This reaſon is very firme and good, becauſe that in our fleſh naturally dwelleth no good, Rom. 7. 18. and, the fleſh luſteth againſt the ſpirit: and, the wiſdome of the fleſh is death and enmitie againſt God, neither ſubiect to the law, neither can be: and, they that are of the fleſh cannot pleaſe God, Rom. 8. 6, 7, 8. and, the naturall man doth not ſomuch as perceiue the things of God: for they are fooliſhnes vntounto him, neither can be know them, 1. Cor. 2. 14. and, no man can ſo much as ſay (that is, in any good and true meaning) that Ieſus is the Lord, but by the …oly Ghoſt, 1. Cor. 12. 13. For to confeſſe that Ieſus is Chriſt the ſonne of the liuing God, is not reuealed to fleſh and blood, but by the Father in heauen, Math. 16. 17.
2 Yea, but how is it prooued, that poperie is agreeable vntounto and wel▪ pleaſing the naturall man? ſurely becauſe it requireth nothing but that which the naturall man may wel performe, and doth performe without any ſpeciall grace of God, and without any nevv worke of regeneration, as both beene ſufficiently ſhewed by other in larger treatiſes ſpecially ſpent in that theame. And who ſeeth it not to be ſo? For doth not poperie teach (as we hauehave heard before) that ignorance is the mother of deuotion? and doth it not from hence follow that men neither neede, nor ought to take paines in the ſtudie of the word of God? doth not the naturall man well like of this? Doth not poperie bidde men onelyonly to beleeue as the Church beleeueth? can any thing be more eaſie? and doth not eaſe pleaſe the naturall man? doth not poperie extoll and magnifie the meere naturall diſpoſition of man, both denying it to be ſo throughly corrupt as we teach, and commending it to be willing and able to conceiue, and to practiſe much good of it ſelfe? Is not this a pleaſant ſong for the eares of a naturall man? and is not his heart tickled with ſuch commendation? Againe poperie offereth forgiuenes of ſinnes, releaſe from hell, the whole kingdome of heauen, &c. to ſale for money. What naturall man will higgle to giuegive any money for purchaſe of ſuch things? What ſhal I ſay more? Poperie biddeth men not to take to much paines about their hearts, neither to be at all carefull for reſiſting the firſt thoughts and motions vntounto euill, for that theſe by popiſh doctrine are no ſinnes: it teacheth that God looketh not ſo much to the inward man, but regardeth the worke wrought, howſoeuer it be done, and that he in iuſtice cannot deny a good reward to ſuch merits. Can the naturall man diſlike of all this? Further, what naturall man is not readie, & apt to worſhip images, to inuocate Saints, to ſweare, to profane the Lord his daie, or at leaſt to obſerue any holiday appointed onelyonly by man more exactly, to be proud, to reſiſt magiſtrates, &c. what naturall man, I ſaie, is not willing enough to theſe and the like?
3 Yea but it is obiected, that our religion teacheth faith onelyonly to iuſtifie without works, and that therefore our religion is a doctrine of eaſe and libertie, and ſo conſequently more pleaſing the naturall man then poperie, which requireth many numbers of praiers, no… to God onelyonly, but alſo to Saints, many great iournies in pilgrimages, many offerings to the church, many almes, many good works, many merits, &c. I anſwer, firſt acknowledging that we teach indeede that faith onelyonly iuſtifieth euen without any workes whatſoeuer: yet is this faith more hard to the naturall man then all before mentioned, to be taught and required by poperie. For this ſaith that we teach, muſt hauehave knowledge of God, & of him whome he hath ſent, as alſo of the holy Ghoſt, and that as they are reuealed in the word, and likewiſe of the promiſes of God in his word particularly taught: it muſt alſo applie theſe things particularly to eueryevery man his particular ſelfe. Secondly, though we ſay that good works are not neceſſarie as cauſes of iuſtification, yet we doe vtge true good workes (not ſuch as the Papiſts commend) more ſtraitly then they doe, & teach them to be more neceſſarie, as effects & fruits of iuſtification, and ſuch as without which there is no ſaluation. For we ſay that he that hath not eternall life begunne in him heare, that is, in whome the olde man is not crucified, and ſinne mortified, in whome the new man is not reſtored, and the life of godlines wrought, that man ſhal neuer hauehave eternal life in the world to come, neither ſhal euer enter into the kingdome of heauen. This the Apoſtle ſaith, and this we ſaie, that fleſh and blood cannot inherit the kingdō of God, neither corruption inherit incorruptio. 1. Cor. 15. 50.
4 As for all other things required by poperie, the naturall man can well brooke and beare ſo long as the inward may be diſpenſed withal; yea what is there ſo coſtly, though it come to the plucking off the earings, and giuing the ordinarie iewells and ornaments that men vſe to weare, though it be the offering thouſands of bullocks and rammes, or ten thouſand riuers of oyle, what is ſo pretious though it be the firſt fruits of a man his owne bodie? what is ſo laborious & painful, though it be the cutting of himſelfe with knives & lancres as the prieſts of Baal did, or the whipping of himſelf til the blood follow, or the pining of himſelfe by long faſting, or at leaſt by liuing onelyonly of bread & water, and by lying in woollen & vponupon bare boards, or taking no reſt many years togither, but onelyonly ſtanding as many old Monks mentioned by Socrates and Sozomen were wont to doe, & ſome fooliſh papiſts yet doe: what, I ſaie of all theſe is ſuch, that a natural man wil not willingly vndergo, ſo it be repugnāt to Gods word & deuiſed only by mā? Againe, what though poperie require all theſe things? what alſo though nothing thereof be performed whilſt a man liueth here? ſhall he therefore to hell? No, ſaie the Papiſts, there is remedie for that. When he dieth, and needeth no more to vſe his goods himſelfe, let him but giuegive liberally to the poore, eſpecially to the Church, and to prieſts for ſinging and ſaying of maſſes, dirges, trentalls, and other ſuch pleaſant ſongs for his ſoule, and then all ſhall be well enough. He ſhall not go to hell, but onelyonly to purgatoriekitchin, and there either to be a rafter, or a little to turne the ſpit, and then after a few yeares he ſhall be remooued from thence, and preferred euen to God his owne parlour in heauen. In the meane time who ſeeth not that the hope of this maketh any man, eſpecially of wealth and abilitie, to giuegive liberally, if all the daies of his life he may liue in all licentious manner?
5 But as for our religion it is farre otherwiſe therewith. For by abaſing the whole man and all that is in him, and teaching thoſe things which before hauehave bin ſpoken of, and ſhall not neede now to be repeated, it is altogether vnpleaſant and vnſauorie to the naturall man, euen as ſmoke vntounto the eyes, and vineger to the teeth: yet to God, yea therefore to God it is ſweete & pleaſant. Certenly in this reſpect there is ſuch difference betwixt our religion and poperie, that if both were offered vntounto the naturall man, he would make much ſooner choiſe of poperie then of ours. And this indeede is the cauſe why of long tim,e and of moſt parts in the world, poperie hath beene ſo generally receiued; & why there hauehave beene more Papiſts then Proteſtants, namely becauſe our religion is altogether repugnant to nature, and poperie altogether agreeable thereunto. Further let eueryevery man examine his owne heart, how it ſtandeth naturally affected, and he ſhall finde himſelfe rather inclined to poperie, wherein he may for a money matter, hauehave both pardon of any ſinne alreadie committed, and alſo a diſpenſation to commit what he will, though it be inceſt with his owne ſiſter, then to our religion which condemneth all ſuch pardons and diſpenſations. Sith therfore this is now ſo euident, that poperie is ſo ſutable to our corrupt nature, and that our religion is altogether ſo harſh thereunto, why may I not againe conclude as before I hauehave done, both againſt poperie and alſo in behalfe of our religion?