Answer to Assertions of Fecknam, Body of L.T.s answer · Part 3
3 That onelyonly fayth doth not iustifie.
MAster Gough likewise in few wordes, woulde vehemently hauehave persuaded, lyke as others heretofore him, that sole fayth or onelyonly fayth doth iustifie vsus. So did long agoe teache Eunomius of that fayth which he professed, as S. Augustine reciteth in his 6. Tom. de Haeresibus.Haeres. 54.
In so doyng as others hauehave done before him▪ as Moyses, as Christ, as Paul, as all the Prophetes and Apostles in teaching the Iustification of fayth onelyonly, yf you expound him not amisse, he did the part of a faythfull Minister and preacher of Gods woord. But you are disposed in this matter, as in others, to carpe and cauill, euill construing that which is wel spoken. You ioyne your woordes in this sorte, sole faith or only fayth. There is great difference in these two kindes of speaking:What a sole faith is. a sole fayth is a barren, an vnfrutefull, a wicked, a diuelish fayth: which in déede is no fayth, it hath but the glistering and shew of fayth, it is but a lippe fayth: and where so euer it is, I warrant you, there is Corde non creditur, no beléef in hart. Fayth only is an other manner of thing, it is that which the Hebrewes cal Emunah that is, a faith stable and sure,Exod. 17. as it is sayd of Moyses, foreign, & manus eius erant firmae & stabiles vsus que ad occasum solis, & his handes were steady and stable vntill the goyng downe of the sun.Hebr. 11. So doth Paule terme it vaiehi iadan emunah the cōmon translation hath substantia: it is that quod facit vt extent quae sperātur, which maketh those things to exist which are hoped for. This fayth can bée no more withoute fruytes, than can the body bée without the soule, to be a liuing body, so that ther be time: for wée knowe that vocation is diuerse, some in the morning, some at noone, some at night are called, and these laste because they are so soone cutte of, that they could not but beleeue, and not glorifie God before vsus, wée muste not therefore condemne them. This fayth I say most florishing and decked with gorgious workes, as shining both before God and man as the lilie, doth only iustifie, doth only apprehend the iustification of God giuen in Christ Iesus oure Sauiour, doth trulie bring Christe into vsus, and vsus into him. So the faithfull man séeing himselfe purged from all his former sins and offences, walketh in newnesse of lyfe in the wayes that God hath ordeyned for him: that before men he may glorifie his father which is in heauen. This faith Eunomius did not teache: he was in his opinion a naughtie and wicked man, as were many moe in the time of S. Augustine, & are now: God make them fewer. He writeth of him and others in this wise. I wil laye his wordes before you, that you your selfe may iudge, whither you do rightly burdē vsus with Eunomius or no. Apostolus predicans iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus, non bene intellectus est ab eis, qui sic dictum acceperunt, vt putarent cùm semel in Christū credidissent, etiāsi malè operarētur, & facinerosè, flagitiose que viuerent, saluos se esse per fidem posse, that is, The Apostle preaching that a mā is iustified by faith without workes, was not well vnderstoode of them which tooke his saying in this sorte,Lib. ques. 83 that they thought they might be saued by faith, whē they had once beléeued in christ, although they did wickedly, although they liued most detestably and villenously. And in an other place,De fide & op. Cap. 16. Tom. 4. Non cogimur dicere iniustis, non subditis, scelestis, contaminatis, parricidis; matricidis; homicidis, fornicatoribus, masculorum concubitoribus; plagiarijs, mendacibus, periuris, & si quid aliud sanae doctrinae aduersatur, quae est secundum Euangelium gloriae beati Dei, si tantum in Christum credatis & sacramentum Baptismi eius accipiatis etiamsi vitam istam pessimam non mutaueritis, salui eritis. We are not constrayned to say to the vniust, to the rebellious, to the wicked, to the defiled, to the murderers of father & mother, to manslayers, to fornicators, to buggers, to mē stealers, to lyers, to ye periured, & if there be any other thing which is contrarie to the wholsome doctrine whiche is according to the glorious Gospell of the blessed God, if you beléeue onelyonly in Iesu Christe, and receyue his Sacrament of Baptisme, althoughe you chaunge not this wicked lyfe, you shal bée saued. This was Eunomius opinion and his fellowes, it is not oures. Our Preachers teach that faith only iustifieth, & yet not that a sole faith iustifieth, therefore in so expounding his woordes as you do, you do deceyuablie commit an Eleuche which we cal fallatia accidentis. For whereas we say fayth iustifyeth only, that is, no other thing doth apprehend the iustice which GOD doth giuegive vsus, but oure faith: you turne it and make this sense, a bare faith voyde and destitute of all goodnesse doth attayne to the mercies of God. Which in déed is an heresie. For as the other is good & allowable, according to the scriptures, There is no condemnation to them whiche are in Christe Iesus,Ro. 8.1.13. whiche walke not after the fleshe, but after the Spirit: so is this wicked and naught. For if we liue after the fleshe, we shall dye. And thus much to shewe that we are no Eunomians. Now to your Arguments.
To confirme his opinion out of the scriptures, he brought the saying of the Apostle: Rom. 3.Arbitramur iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus Legis. We thinke or determine that a mā is iustified by faith without the workes of the Law. Concluding by this testimonie of S. Paule, that workes do in no manner of wyse iustifye vsus, not onelyonly those which go before fayth, but also those which do folow faith: for touching any iustification of works, he maketh the like cō dition of them both.
His allegation was good and his argument good. For it foloweth wel, we are iustified by faith: Therfore workes done before do not iustifie, neither workes after. This consequēt you wil not deny simply, for all your allegaciōs you bring, do proue that workes before do conferre nothing to iustification.Beda. For the Apostle preaching to the Gentiles, saith: When he sawe them that came to the lord iustified by faith, that now they which did beleue, should worke, and do good dedes, and not because they had done well, they deserued to beleue, he cried out and said boldly, That man may be iustified by faith, without the workes of the law. Your sticking is vpō workes that folow: as in déede, not knowing what difference is betwixt iustification and sanctification, you should doubt whether sanctification were a piece of iustification, or an effect of iustification. Let vsus then sée, whether workes that follow doo con…erre any thing to the Iustification. Marke I pray you the controuersie betwixt you and master Goughe. The question is not whether good woorkes are necessarie to walke in? Whether we are. bound to walke in the feare of GOD, after that he hath manifested vntounto vsus his election, and called vsus to embrace his frée mercy and Iustification? I say, the question is not, whether we ought to do well that GOD may be glorifyed by vsus? But whether a man being already iustified, his woorkes afterward may giuegive encrease of Iustice? I pray you Sir after that Quéene Marie had made you Abbot of Westminster, dyd you the office of an Abbot, that you would be a more Abbot, or to do your duetie, to the which the Quéene of hir grace hadde called you. For therefore shée bestowed it vponupon you, that you should doe the duetie, and not dy doing the duetie to become a more Abbot.
So fareth it with the children of God: Of this whole lumpe of earth which he made of this masse, which we call Adam: he of his free merciemercy and goodnesse hathe chosen some whereby he will bée glorified in this world, by the good woorkes which they shall do before the face of men. When this election of his beginneth to be manifest to euerye chosen, when he moueth the hearts of his after they hauehave long slept in sinne, to remember that they are hys, that he hathe slayne hys Sonne for them, that they are deliuered from the whole cursse of the lawe: Is it not requisite thinke you, that they walke worthie his vocation? That they make sure their vocation? Naye doe they in this their course, in any parte delyuer them selues from the cursse of the lawe? Doe they pay that raunsome which was paide before? What is the iustice or Iustification of GOD? Redemption and remission of sinnes in the bloud of Christ. Was then the bloud of Chryst answearable to all the Lawe, did there remaine no parte vnpayde? For whome then did he all this? Not for him selfe, for there was no guile found in his mouthe: For whome then? For the faithfull, to whome God dothe giuegive this Faith,Act. 18.17. not of merite, but of grace. HaueHave they then all the iustice of Christe, hauehave they that, which Christe dyd in his bodye, put vppon them? May they say, as he sayde, Death where is thy sting, Hell where is thy victorie? May they say, death is swallowed vp in victorie? May they say, there is no condemnation to vsus whiche are in Christe Iesus? what remayneth then? that they walke according to the Spirite, not according to the fleshe: that they glorifie God before men, whiche hath already made them the children of God. Not to do ageyn y• which is done alreadie, for that is impossible: not to ioyne a piece to Christes, as thoughe it were not perfect. For he left no piece vnpayed. But to receyue by faith that iustification that God doth giuegive them, without the workes of the lawe. For workes sequuntur iustificatum, non praecedunt iustificandum: they followe a man iustified, and goe not before him that is to be iustified: Effectus autem non praeiudicat causae as you knowe: The effect neuer preiudiceth the cause. Thorough al the course of our liues we worke, bicause we are iustified: and we do not worke that we may be iustified. And this is the meaning of the Apostle in this place: not as thoughe workes were to be ioyned with faith, to deserue some thing: For then should wée receyue reward due, and not grace. And thus much touching M. Goughe his argument. Now to your Obiection.
Firste, I maruayle that M. Goughe will allowe this terme, Only: when it is not expressed in Canonicall scripture. Next I am sure that there is nothing equiualent vntounto it: for faith without the workes of the lawe and fayth onelyonly, or fayth simplie withoute workes, be not of one like condition.
You néede not maruayle much, if you would rightly consider it: Paules whole disputation standeth vponupon twoo Subiecta, & one Praedicatum, as the people are twoo to whō he addresseth his doctrine, and must agrée in one. The subiecta are these, works or the Law, fayth or Christ: The Praedicatum is Iustification. If then reasoning à diuisione, the one be put away, what remayneth? If I reason thus, Of all liuing creatures there is one that is risibile, apte to laugh: it is not Brutum any brute beast: Therefore it is Homo, man. If I reason thus I say, is not this consequent comprehended in Consequenti: Therefore onelyonly man is risibilis. So likewise Paule reasoneth: there is one thing which iustifieth. It is not works, therfore it is fayth. Doth it not nowe folow that being but one, and that one faith: that we may wel conclude that faith only iustifieth? And so adde we nothing to the scripturs, which you séeme to lay to M. Goughes charge, by a taunte, but finde it in ye verie letter although not literallie. And in so doing we make no new inuentiō. So taught before vsus Theophilact:Theoph. in Cap. 4. ad Rom. whose wordes are these, vt autem haberi pro comperto queat, posse hunc deum, qui impiè vixerit, non solum à tormentis eximere, sed iustum reddere, illud subdit, credenti autem in eum qui iustificat &c. Num igitur est & hic quippiam allaturus? Fidem duntaxat: that is, But that it may be certaynely knowen that God can not onelyonly deliuer frō torments, but also iustifie him which liued wickedly, he addeth that, but to him that beléeueth in him which iustifieth. &c. Must he therfore also bring some thing?Origi. Ro. 3. Faith onelyonly▪ And Origenes vppon this same place whiche M. Goughe alleaged, sayeth thus: Nunc tam velut conclusionem suarum assertionum ponens, in hoc loco dicit: Vbi est ergo gloriatio tua? Exclusa est▪ per quam legem? operum? Non, sed per legem fidei: Arbitramur enim iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus legis: & dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem, ita vt credens quis tantummodo iustificetur, etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum. Nowe, making as it were a conclusion of his assertions sayeth in this place, where is then thy reioysing? it is excluded. By what law? of workes? No, but by the lawe of faith: for we suppose or conclude that mā is iustified by faith without the workes of the Law: and he sayeth, that the iustification of only faith is sufficient, so that a mā beléeuing onelyonly may be iustified although that no work be don of him. I will not alleage here Hierom on ye 4. of this Epistle:Hierome. Conuertentem impium, and agein, vt omnes qui ex Gentibus. Ambrose.&c nor Amb. j. Cor. xj. hoc constitutum est à Deo. &c. nor Bernard. ser. 22. super Can. Bernard.Quamobrem quisquis pro peccati… … in all which you find these wordes, Sola fides ad iustitiam reputatur: per solam fidem iustificat▪ Deus, saluus fit sine opera, sola fide, et solū iustificatus per fidem, that is, only fayth is accompted vntounto rightuousnesse: By only faith God iustifieth, that he may be saued without worke, through onelyonly fayth, and beyng iustified only by fayth. As for the works which follow, as I sayd before, we condēne them not, we prayse them, as God did in Abraham, Abraham beléeued God, and it was imputed to him for righteousnes, and he was called the friend of God. In that he beleued God, within in his harte, it consisteth in fayth onelyonly, concerning that he lead his sonne to sacrifise him, in that without feare he armed his right hande, in that he would hauehave stricken had he not bin witholden, surelie it was a great fayth, & the worke also was great, & God praysed the worke when he sayd, bycause thou obeyedst my voyce. Wherfore then sayth the Apostle Paule, wée conclude that man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the law: and in an other place. It is fayth whiche worketh by charitie? how doth fayth worke by charitie? & how is a man iustified by fayth without the workes of the lawe? This séemeth hard that a man shall bée iustified by fayth onelyonly, and yet that fayth must worke by charitie. Not at all: for in that, yt it is sayd to iustifie, it sheweth what thou haste receyued of God, in that it is sayd to worke by charitie, it sheweth what thou owest to God. For so muste iustification stand, that it may bee applyed vntounto all men, whether they be called in ye morning, or at noone, or at night? There is one that beléeueth, he hath receyued the sacrament of faith, and is dead, he hadde no time to worke, what shall wée say? that he is not iustified? we say playne that he was iustified, because he beléeued in him whiche iustifieth the wicked. Therefore this man is iustified, & did not worke. The sentence of the Apostle is fulfilled: I conclude that a man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the law. The théef which was crucified with Christ beléeued in hart to Iustice, and confessed by mouth to saluation. For fayth which worketh by charitie, although it hauehave not wherein it may worke externally, yet is it kept feruent in the harte. If then fayth in these & such like doth iustifie, why shall it not in others? Because one man lyueth longer than an other after his vocation, shall therefore the rightuousenesses of God be changed? shal therefore▪ man be made fellowe with God in the worke of his saluation, bicause he hath bestowed a greater benefite of longer lyfe vppon him? Is this the thank that GOD shall hauehave at oure hands, for giuing vsus space to glorifie him, to vse it as a meanes that we oure selues may glorie? For surely if we deserue any thing, we hauehave wherein to glorie. But when all is done, it is but an euil fauored glorie, for it is not with God. But let vsus goe farther.
S. Paule excluding workes of the Lawe, meaneth workes that goe before fayth; which do not iustifie. S. Iames in the example of Abraham forbidding that fayth only doth iustifie, speaketh of workes that folowe fayth, whiche doe also iustifie, that is, giuegive encrease of iustice. Abraham pater noster nónne ex operibus iustificatus est, offerens Isaac super Altare? Abraham our Father was he not iustified by workes, when he offered his sonne Isaac vppon the Altare?
If workes before fayth do not iustifie, much lesse works after fayth: before man had néede, and after he hath no néede: then is a benefite requisite, when a man is in pouertie: but when he is riche, it is not néedfull. To be shorte bycause I hauehave handled this before, workes do neuer goe before iustification.Rom. 11. For the Scripture is playne. If it be grace, then not of works, otherwayes were grace nowe no grace. And this is as well for youre workes after as before.Aug. de spir. & lit. 26. ca. Tom. 3. As for that that is sayde often tymes, and you alleage it before, Factores legis iustificabuntur, the dooers of the lawe shall bée iustified. It is so to be vnderstanded, to wit, that they could not otherwise be dooers of the law, vnlesse they be iustified. So that Iustification cōmeth not to the dooers, but iustification goeth before the dooers of the Law▪ For what other thing doth this meane, Iustified, but made iust? that is to say, of him which iustifieth ye wicked, that he may become iust of wicked. For sanctification goeth not before Iustification, but Iustification before Sanctification. Touching the place of S. Iames, there is no such matter in it as you make. You maye sée by the whole course of the chapter, that he speaketh not how man is iustified before god, but how they ought to shew before men, that they are iuste before God. So that he beateth downe the vayne opinion of them, which thought that yf they beléeued, it belonged not to them to do well, and therefore contemned good workes, as who would say they were not bound to glorifie God before men, who had glorified them with him self. And touching the example of Abraham, yf you conferre the scriptures togither, as Genesis with Iames: you shall sée that Abraham was iustified before, and this is but the shew of his obedience vntounto God, yt all the worlde might know he nothing misdouted the promise of God, although his onelyonly sonne must go to bée offered, and this do your doctors teach, which you heare recite.
Lib. 83. q. 9.76.To this effect S. Augustine reconcileth these two Apostles. Non sunt contrariae duorum Apostolorum sententiae Pauli & Iacobi…cum dicit vnus iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus, & alius dicit, inanem esse fidem sine operibus, quia ille dicit de operibus quae praecedunt fidem, iste de his, que fidem sequuntur. These sentences of the two Apostles, Paul and Iames, be not contrarie vntounto them selues: when the one saith, that a man is iustified by fayth without workes. The other sayth, that fayth is vayne and ydle without workes, for Paule speaketh of workes that goeth before faith, Iames speaketh of those that follow fayth.
I doe not sée to what great purpose this place is alleaged, bée it that this reconciliation is good, can you cōclude that Augustin teacheth or Iames eyther,De side & ope. cap. 14. De sp. & lit. ad Marcel. cap. 26. that workes iustifie before God? that can you neuer prooue. The place you bring, he hath in many places, yet in none of them doth he conclude as you do. But in eueryevery one he teacheth this, yt therefore Iames writte this Epistle and likewise, Peter his, to shewe that after sayth receyued, works of rightuousnesse ought not to be contemned: & that what soeuer workes they doo, they are of a iustified man, and not to iustifie a man. For when it is sayd that the doers of the law shall bée iustified, what other thing is sayd, than this? Let … that is righteous, be righteous stil. For the doers of ye law are iust. And therefore it is as much as yf it should bée sayd. The doers of ye law shall be created, not because they were, but that they may bée. You go foreward against M. Gough.
Luk. 8.An other place he brought to expresse by scripture this worde, OnelyOnly, that fayth onelyonly doth iustifie: alleaging the saying of Christe vntounto Iairus Prince of the Synagogue. Crede tantùm, Beleeue onelyonly. A place verie fitly applied: as yf Christe there had spoken of the Iustification of Iairus, and not rather of the corporall reuiuing of his daughter.
As for M. Goughes alleaging of the place, I do not thinke, but he sawe what was principally done in that place, and that Christ was reuiuing of his daughter: yet not withstanding he might note vntounto you, in what sorte wée ought to béehaue our selues towardes ye receyuing of Christes benefites and graces, that although things séeme vntounto vsus desperate, voyde of all hope and comforte, yet wée should not cease, but to beléeue in Christe, that he is able to doo whatsoeuer wée demaunde in feare and truth. And this hope and fayth is sufficient, and he requireth nothing els at our handes. This I say, why might he not note vntounto you touching onelyonly fayth, hauing twoo suche notable examples before his face as the woman with the flux, Iairus with his dead daughter. And so might he make his argument. As fayth onelyonly is sufficient to the curing of an vncurable sore, and the raising of the dead, so is it sufficient to the remission of sinnes. Neyther is he voyde of authoritie for his interpretation.Theo. in Luk. 8. Theophilacte sayth thus: Ne timeas, tantùm crede: respice ad mulierem hanc, quae sanguinis profluuio laborauit, illam si imitatus fueris non aberrabis. Feare not, onelyonly beléeue: Behold this Woman whiche was sicke of the fluxe, yf thou followe her, thou shalt not doo amisse. Neyther is Iames cleane contradictorie (as you say) to Master Gough in this sense, where he sayeth, Videtis quoniam ex operibus iustificatur homo, non ex fide tantùm. You sée that of workes man is iustified, and not of fayth onelyonly.
There is you knowe Oppositio in terminis, opposition in woordes, and oppositio realis, opposition in matter. As for the first ye knowe also it is nothing, and so may these two be, fides tantum iustificat, fides tā tum non iustificat, fayth only dothe iustifie: …ayth only doth not iustifie. As for ye other, there must be vniuocatio in terminis, the Subiectum and the Praedicatum must be taken in one sense in both. Otherwise there is no opposition, For both may be true. As in this, fayth only iustifieth, the woord (Iustifieth) is taken in this sence, Iustifieth before God. In the other, Fayth only doth not iustifie: the woord (Iustifieth) is taken hauing respect to men. And so they be not opposite. Of the sense of the place I spake before. Likewise of the place of Luke. viij. I hauehave sayd my mind what M. Gough his meaning was: I was not at his Sermon, & I promisse you I hauehave not talked with him therin, I skant know the person.
Cap. 14.S. Augustine in his booke de fide & operibus, sheweth the beginning and foundation of this muche like heresie to hauehave bin in the Apostles time, vponupon the misconstruing of Paules Epistles, saying: Quoniam haec opinio tunc fuerat exorta, aliae Apostolicae epistolae Petri, Iohannis, Iacobi, & Iudae, cōtra eàm maximè dirigunt intentionem, vt vehementer astruant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse. That is bicause this opinion was then sprōg vp, other Apostolicall epistles of Peter, Iohn, Iames & Iude, do bend their drift and purpose most of all against that opinion, that they may boldely and vehemently affyrme faith without workes to auaile nothing. If it be fayth only, it is fayth without works: If faith only auaileth nothing, faith only can not iustifie.
What opinion that was (M. Fecknam) & how vnlike vntounto our assertion I shewed you before out of ye same place, and it was this, as you hauehave it in the beginning of the chapter. Bene autem viuere & bonis operibus viam dei tenere neglexerint, and they contemne to liue well, and to kéepe the way of God in good works. He sayth not, & bonis operibus incrementum iustitiae addere, and with good woorkes to giuegive encrease of iustice ▪ Which péece you stand for, & which you shal neuer be able to shew out of Augustine, and so we deny it. As for your collection, if faith only auaileth nothing, faith only can not iustifie: we deny ye consequēt. For as I said before, ther is not vniuocatio in terminis. We say true, that nothing else but faith doth iustifie: and yet say, ye faith duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page which is dead & sole is nothing worthe: for it is not that which we say doth iustifie.
15. cap. 18Likewise he saith in his boke de trinitate very briefly and pithily: sine charitate fides quidem potest esse, sed non & prodesse. Without charitie faith may be, but without charitie, it can nothing auaile.
This is very wel said, we graūt al this, he speaketh according to ye scriptures,2.20.…1.13. you néed not hauehave gon so far. S. Iames, s. Paul, could hauehave taught you ye same. But to your purpose it serueth very little: yea nothing at al. Now touching your tretise of works done in faith, wheras you are misgréeued with M. Gough so far, that you cal it a preposterous way, and a blasphemous doctrin, to say that our workes are as filthie cloutes, vntounto which Christ promiseth a rewarde so great as euerlasting life, if you would iustly consider with your self the duetie that god requireth of vsus, & the default that is in vsus, the integritie, the puritie yt we are bound to by his commandement, & the imperfection, ye impuritie yt is in vsus, you coulde not iustly cōdemne him: god cōmaundeth vsus to serue him with all our harts, with all our soule, with al our strēgth: what is he vponupon the earth, that doth employ these wholy, yt hath not alwayes ye flesh pricking against the spirit? then the work yt is done of such, is it not as a menstruous cloth? could it be acceptable before God, were it not for his mercy? If it please him of the same mercy, to giuegive me lyfe euerlasting for my halfe dayes, nay for my one houres worke, doth it folow that my worke is worthy of it, when all the workes of the world be not worth lyfe euerlasting, Chrystes death excepted?
Then touching your other cauil of faith only: How only? without baptisme? without repentance? without feare? without hope? without charitie? You may vnderstand of that I hauehave sayd before, howe all these must folow and an hundreth more, and yet fayth only must iustifie, what so euer he be that casteth these away in that respect that he is iustified by faith, he deceiueth him selfe and he is not iustified: He is a dead trée, he is a thorne that bryngeth forth grapes, he is a thistle that bryngeth forth figges, and when the Lord commeth, he shall cut downe this trée, and cast it into the fire that shall neuer be put out. But hée that hath a true fayth, hath a these frutes, they follow him as his handmaydes, he serueth himselfe of them, and serueth his léege Lorde with them: he is baptized, he is penitent, he stādeth in awe, he hopeth, he loueth, and all for the glorie of his Maister: and yet not without his owne profit. He deserueth nothing, yet shall he hauehave great reward: he meriteth not a myte, yet shall he hauehave thousandes: So standeth fayth amongest her damsels, and yet she is singular: She walketh with great companie, and yet is she alone. And this to your third question.