Answer to a Popish Pamphlet, Article 3
Article. 3.
Papiſt.
The Protestants either hauehave no faith at all, or lie moſt damnablie, in denying that a man aſsisted by Gods grace, can keepe the commaundements.
Proteſtant.
It may appeare by my anſwere to the former Article▪ that a true Chriſtian both can, and doth performe acceptable obedience vntounto God, by keeping his commaundements. But this obedience is vnperfect: our workes being good in the ſight of God, not by their owne value, but by Gods acceptation. Our Papiſts, that are ſett vponupon magnifying themſelues, more then glorifying God, cannot abide to heare of any imperfection in their workes, which may impeach or impaire the merite of them. Therefore they raile at vsus, as this Author here doth, becauſe we ſay it is not poſſible for aman, compaſſed about with naturall corruption, to keepe the Commaundements of God fully, and perfectly: vponupon which Doctrine of ours we are charged, in this Article, either to hauehave no faith at al, or to lie moſt damnably, in denying, that a man aſſiſted by Gods grace can keepe the Commaundements.
Papiſt.
Whoſoeuer knoweth God, keepes his commaundements. But Aall true Proteſtants know God.
Ergo All tru… Proteſtants keepe his Commaundements. TheB. Ioh ep. …. Chap. 5. 4. Ma…or is expreſſe Scripture. Qui …icit ſe noſſe Deum, & mandata eius non cuſtodit, mendax eſt, & in eo veritas non eſt. Hee that ſaieth he knoweth God, and heepeth not his commaundements, is a liar, and Truth is not in him.
The Minor no Proteſtant doubteth of. For this knowledge of God is nothing els, but a liuely faith, wherewith all Zealous Proteſtants (as they ſay) are indued. Hence from manifeſtly it followeth, that either the moſt Zealous Proteſtants lack a liuely faith, and ſo are Infidells: or, if they hauehave a liuely faith, and deny that they keepe, or can keepe Gods commaundements, they are damnable liers; If they chooſe the firſt, they are Pagans, Hereticks, or Iewes: if they take the ſecond, they are damnable ſeducers, and impoſters in religion; and conſequently their faith is falſe.
Proteſtant.
It is more troubleſome to apply this ſyllogiſme to theA. queſtion, then hard to anſwere it: but wee muſt needs do both. The ſyllogiſme, for the proofe of the Article, muſt be thus framed.
If all, that hauehave a liuely faith keepe Gods commaundements, either the moſt Zealous Proteſtants lack a liuely faith, becauſe they keepe not Gods commaundements; or if they hauehave a liuely faith, and keepe them they lye damnably, in denying that a man can keepe them.
But all, that hauehave a liuely faith, keepe Gods commaundements.
Therefore the moſt zealous Proteſtants either hauehave not a liuely faith, becauſe they keepe not Gods commaundements, or, if they hauehave a liuely faith, and keepe them, they lie damnably, in denying that a man can keepe them.
I deny the Conſequence of your propoſition: becauſe this diſiunction followes not, vponupon that antecedent. For though it be true, according to Saint Iohns meaning, whereof in the aſſumption, that all, which hauehave a liuely faith, keepe Gods Commaundements: Yet neither do the Proteſtants lacke a liuely faith (for they keepe the Commaundements) neither do they lie in denying, that a man can keepe them perfectly; which it is your purpoſe to proue: But let vsus put the caſe, that they could, and did keepe Gods commaundements moſt perfectly, and withall denied, that either they did, or any man could keepe them; might they be iuſtly charged with lying damnably? I will not ſay, noA. charitable, but no reaſonable man would ſo gather. For it is not a damnable lye to be deceiued, in iudging what belongs to the perfect keeping of the commandements; or, vponupon that error to affirme, that no man can keepe them perfectly. You cannot be ignorant, that the reaſon of this our denyall, ariſes from the perſwaſion, that the defect, and diſorder of ſome circumſtances, which alwayes (as we thinke) accompany our actions, doth make our obedience vnperfect. And ſhall we herevpon be charged with lying damnably? For example; ſuppoſe that the idle fancies which ariſe in a mans heart, while he is praying, being preſently miſliked, and ſuppreſt, did not, in truth, make the performance of his duty vnperfect, but that, onelyonly in his opinion, that doth ſo pray, the duty be ſtained with imperfections: might we charge him to lye damnably, for auouching, in the error of his iudgement, that his prayers are vnperfect? Yet Proteſtants will not be ſo vncharitable, as to ſay, that a Papiſt lyes damnablie, who affirmes, though vponupon a falſe perſwaſion, that a man aſſiſted by Gods grace can keepe the cōmandements.
But all that hauehave a liuely faith, keepe Gods commaundements.
Aſſuredly they doe; but not in perfection. For proofe whereof I appeale to you Papiſts; who dip your workes in the bloud of Chriſt, to make them meritorious, which eyther you would not, or at leaſt, ſhould not doe, if you held them to be perfect of themſelues. For life euerlaſting is due to the perfect obedience of the law by couenant; This doe, Rom. 10. 5.and thou ſhalt liue. So that he, which can fulfill the lawe, needes not the bloud of Chriſt, to make his obedience acceptable vntounto God. And indeed if we hauehave ſufficient grace from Chriſt to keepe the lawe, and vſe this grace to perfect obedience, though the grace be wholy, and onelyonly from Chriſt; yet the merit is altogether from our workes; to which heauen is due of right, as wages to a hired labourer, that hath done his taske. This perfection we dare no… aſcribe to our workes: for we know that the moſt righteous men, euen after iuſtification, diſclaime their owne righteouſneſſe. Our deſire, and endeuour is to keepe all Gods commandements, in thought, word, and deed: but we faile many wayes of this purpoſe. Sometimes (as in running of a gole) being turned out of the way: ſometimes fainting in the way; yet, as Dauid was ſaid to be a man after Gods heart, becauſe his ſoule was ſet vponupon obedience to God, though he fell many times, and that grieuouſly: ſo is eueryevery true Chriſtian ſaid to keepe Gods commandements, becauſe his intent, & reſolution is to keepe thē, & his practiſe anſwerable thereto, howſoeuer with manifold & great infirmities.
The principall ſyllogiſme being anſwered; we muſt come to that, which is ſ…t downe in this article, but it is vnpoſſible to make that ſerue for proofe of the former, as it is apparant; becauſe it concludes neither the propoſition, nor aſſumption thereof. And, to make ſhort, we graunt him the whole ſyllogiſme. For all true Proteſtants doe indeed keepe Gods commandements, in ſuch ſort, as before I ſhewed. If therevpon he will inferre that diſtinction, which is in the title of this article, he muſt reaſon thus.
If all true Proteſtants keepe Gods commandements, either the most zealous Proteſtants lacke a liuely faith, or, if they hauehave a liuely faith, and deny that they keepe Gods commandements, they lye damnablie.
To which, the ſame anſwere will ſerue, which was ſhaped to the former ſyllogiſme; that the diſiunction followes not vponupon the antecedent, for the reaſons there deliuered: further we muſt adde, that the former part of this conſequence is abſurd, becauſe vnpoſſible: for it preſumes that all true Proteſtants keepe Gods commaundements, and yet that ſome be deſt…tute of a liuely faith. Whereas there is no obedience eyther acceptable, or poſſible, without a liuely faith.
Whoſoeuer knowes God, (ſaith he) keepes his commaundements.B
But all true Proteſtants know God. Ergo.
All true Proteſtants keepe his commandements.
If we will, in any reaſonable ſort, apply this ſyllogiſme to the purpoſe, it muſt be a proofe of the firſt aſſumption, not as it is here formed, but after this maner.
Whoſoeuer knowes God keepes his commaundements.
But all, that hauehave a liuely faith know God.
Therefore all, that hauehave a liuely faith, keepe Gods commandements.
To the propoſition whereof I anſwere, as before, concerning the truth, but imperfection of obedience; and to1. Ioa. 2. 4. the proofe I adde further, that the holy Apoſtle ſpeakes of no other keeping, then that, which I hauehave granted. For his ſpeech is generall of all Chriſtians whatſoeuer, that know God to euerlaſting life; and that not of their abilitie, what they can doe, but of their practiſe, what they doe; and I hope no Papiſt thinkes, that eueryevery true Chriſtian keepes all the commaundements wholy, and perfectly. For then what ſhall become of the Sacrament of penance, and extreame vnction? But you will ſay, they may keepe them, though they doe not; I would beleeue it, if you could ſhew me an example of any that euer did it. But theſe places, I alledged a little before, manifeſtly proue, that they, that are renowned for holineſſe, were priuie to their owne vnrighteouſneſſe.
Nay, what Saints ſtory hauehave you, any thing largely ſet downe in the Scriptures, whoſe life is not tainted with ſome diſobedience? did thoſe worthies faint ſometimes, and can we ſtand without ſnaking? It is more honourable to God, and comfortable to Chriſtians, truely to acknowledge the imperfection of their owne workes, and the perfection of Gods mercy, who vouchſafes a reward to thoſe poore endeuours, which, of themſelues, by reaſon of the corruption, wherewith they are defiled, deſerue, in the rigour of his iuſtice, euerlaſting condemnation.
There needs no farther examination of the proofe of his ſyllogiſme.