Canterburys Doom, Branch 1 · Evidence 2 · Section 40 – Section 41
40. Paſſages deleted, that the Law of God is poſſible to be fulfilled by men, as the Papists hold; and That men are damned for Originall ſinne as well as Actuall.
IN Maſter Ward's Comentary on Matth. 11. 5. page 227. this is obliterated.
How is the fulfilling of the Law impoſſible?
Anſw. Firſt negatively, not becauſe the works therein contained in their owne nature tranſcend the power of the mind or body, or Organs; for man in Paradiſe had ſtrength enough to obey the whole Law, and the Saints in Heaven doe perfectly fulfill it. Secondly affirmatively, the Law is impoſſible for man to fulfill: Firſt, the judgement of the mind is ſo depraved, that we know not how to doe any ſpirituall or morall work aright, ſo as we ought to doe it: and Secondly, becauſe the affections are ſo corrupted, that we are not able to governe them, or to curb or reſtraine the malice and depravation of them.
Queſt, 2. Why are ſo many, or any damned perpetually?
Anſw. Not onelyonly for their actuall ſinnes, but even alſo for their originall corruptions, and depravation of nature, Epheſ. 2. 1, 2. for ſinners ſhall be beaten with ſtripes, and with more ſtripes, Luke 12. 47. &c. that is, Firſt, they ſhall have plura verbera, more ſtripes, and more grievous torments in hell for their actuall ſinnes. But Secondly, they ſhall alſo have verbera, ſtripes, eternall condemnation and torments (though not equall with the former) who never committed actuall ſinne, but onelyonly dyed in their naturall eſtate, their originall corruption not being waſhed away by, or in the blood of Chriſt.
Obſerv. Secondly, by grace in Chriſt we are enabled to walk in the wayes of God, and to work his work, for Chriſt doth give unto all thoſe whom he cals power (in ſome meaſure) to obey him; for he gives not onelyonly velle, power to will and deſire, but alſo poſſe, power to doe that which he commands, Phil. 2. 13.
Queſt. 3. How doth this appeare, for none ſeem (and that eſpecially to themſelves) more weak then the children of God?
Anſw. It moſt evidently appeares by theſe particulars, viz. Firſt, becauſe we are called unto the glory of God, Phil. 2. 15. &c. and to hold forth the Lamp of a pure life, Mat. 5. 16. and therefore certainly thoſe whom God cals, ſhall from him receive grace and power to performe good works. Secondly, becauſe Religion is the path-way to Heaven, and therefore undoubtedly thoſe whom the Lord cals unto that inheritance he will enable in ſome meaſure to walke in the wayes of Religion, and to giuegive unto him religious worſhip; read Deut. 5. 33. Joſh. 22. 5. Mat. 3. 8. 10. & 7. 20. Luke 11. 28. Rom. 2. 7. Gal. 5. 16.
Thirdly, becauſe Chriſt (unto thoſe whom he cals) gives the holy comforter, even a bright ſhining light, whereby we are aſſured of the love of God; which love of his worketh a threefold effect in us; namely, Firſt, it makes us love the Lord againe, and to returne love for love; and although we cannot love him in that meaſure and degree that he loveth us (his love to us being perfect, ours to him imperfect) yet we labour and deſire to love him above all things in heaven and earth: Hence ſecondly, we deſire to doe all things which are pleaſing unto him yea and to performe them cheerfully and with delight. Thirdly, the love of God of the holy ſpirit which aſſures us thereof, doth teach us how to obey God; namely in ſincerity of heart, yea with our whole heart and life, and that for the Lords ſake onelyonly, not for any baſe or by ends of our owne; and in faith, hoping that our works ſhall be acceptable unto God for Chriſts ſake, &c.
Ibidem on Matth. 19. 18. page 289. manuſcript Copy, this diſcourſe is purged out by the Licenſer.
Queſt. Whether is the morall Law of God poſſible to be kept, or perfectly to be obeyed with, or by an actuall obedience?
Anſw. Firſt, the Law is poſſible to be obeyed, in regard of that relation which is betwixt our nature or out mind, or the faculties of the ſoule, and the actions themſelves, which are enjoyned in the law, for whatſoever is commanded in the law, whether internall or externall, may be performed by the faculties and parts of our bodies and ſouls; yea the obedience which is there required of us is to be performed by thoſe faculties: The Lord in his law doth not require of us impoſſibilia, impoſſible things; either firſt, in ſe, in themſelves; or ſecondly, respectu facultatum, in regard of the faculties of the ſoule; that is, the Lord in his law doth notcommand us to raiſe the dead, or to remove mountaines with, or by our vvords, for theſe are impoſſible things in themſelves for us to doe; neither doth he command us to flye in the ayre or to vvalk upon the vvater becauſe theſe are impoſſible in regard of us and our faculties; but he commands ſuch things as our faculties are capable of.
Secondly, the obedience of the law is impoſſible in regard of ſome circumſtances; that is, firſt, respectu extentionts, in regard of the extenſion; for firſt, although vve might performe ſome one particular action commanded in the law, yet not all and every ſuch action vvhichwhich is therein enjoyned, and yet this the law requires of us: and ſecondly, although vve might performe ſome one action or other, vvhichwhich the law enjoines, yet vve are not able alwayes to abide firme and immoveable in this our obedience, and yet the Lord threatens us vvith a curſe, if vve both doe not doe all, and abide therein alwayes, Gal. 3. 10. and thirdly, although we might performe many duties which the law commands, yet we could not performe them all alwayes in that ſufficient degree, and ample, and perfect meaſure which the law enjoynes; and thus Andradius himſelfe confeſſeth, that the firſt Commandement cannot be kept, vve cannot love God in that manner, meaſure and degree vvhichwhich the law commands.
Secondly, respectu intentionis, in regard of the intention, becauſe vve can doe nothing vvith a perfect mind, for whatſoever is not of faith is of ſinne, Heb. 11. 6. and therefore vvithout ſaith, no true or acceptable obedience.
Thirdly, respectu infirmitatis, in regard of the infirmity of our nature, becauſe all the gifts and faculties of our nature are vitiated and corrupted, Job 4. 8. 19. & 15. 15. 16. Rom. 3. 10, &c. Pſal. 14. 12. Chryſostome (ſup. Matth. fol. 614.) ſaith That by nature we are blind, lame, taken with the palſie and incarcerated, and therefore no wonder, Legem non eſſe poſſibilem, if the law be unpoſſible unto us.
Queſt. 2. Is not this unjuſt for God to require of us that which is impoſſible unto, or for us to doe?
Anſw. No not at all: God may juſtly command a blind man to walk, if his blindneſſe come from himſelfe: if maliciouſly, he hath plucked out his owne eyes: A man may juſtly require his debt of a Prodigall: Rent is due unto the Land-lord, though the Tennant have waſted all his eſtate and ſubſtance; and God may juſtly require that obedience of us, which once from and by him we had power to performe, although now by our ſinnes we have loſt that power.
Queſt. 3. What may we learne from hence?
Anſw. Firſt to acknowledge that the duties enjoyned by the law are poſſible in themſelves; and Secondly, that they are become impoſſible unto us by ſinne, and the infirmity of the fleſh, Rom. 8. 3. and Thirdly, to confeſſe that God is true, and we lyars, he juſt, but we wicked.
Ibid, on Mat. 11. 29. The Papiſts generally object this place to prove the poſſibility of the laws fulfilling; What is this light burden and ſweet yoke (ſay the Rhemiſts) but the Commandements of God? and therefore they are poſſible to be kept, Bellarmine de juſtific. lib. 4. cap. 11. and Vaſques, and Alphonſus, and Salmeron, and the Trent Councell: and Becauus urgeth this place to prove, that actuall obedience to the whole law is not onelyonly poſſible, but alſo very eaſie to the regenerate and juſtified perſon: They argue thus:
That burden which is light may be carried without ſhrinking under it, that yoke which is eaſie is worne without paine, and thoſe Commandements which are not burdenſome, may be obſerved without difficulty: But ſuch is the morall law, My Yoke ſaith Chriſt here, is eaſie and my burden light; therefore the morall law may be eaſily obſerved.
I will for the ſatisfying of this Objection, give onelyonly a double anſwer, viz. Firſt anſwer to the point which they endeavour to prove, and then to the place which they alleage for their proofe.
Firſt, to the ſubſtance or matter, or ſubject matter of the Objection, viz. That the law is poſſible and eaſie to be obſerved by the regenerate: I anſwer; the law of God is impoſſible to be kepr in ſuch perfection as God requireth, and therefore no man can be juſtified by the works of the law, Gal. 2. 16. & 3. 11. Here obſerve theſe particulars, to wit, Firſt, the old Pelagians did wreſt this and the like places for this end, to prove the poſſibility of the fulfilling of the law, as appeares by Hierom (adverſ. Pelagian lib. 1. cap. 1. & lib. 2. cap. 2. & 4.) and Auguſtine (de Perfect. Juſtific. contra Coeleſtium, & de Natura & Gratia contra Pelagian cap. 69.) and therefore we may note by the way, from whence the Papiſts and thoſe amongſt us, who hold this erronious tenet, took or learnt it, &c.
Ibid. on Mat. 19. 21. If thou wilt be perfect, &c. this is purged out; The Papists hold that a man may perfectly obey, and fulfill the Law of God, and for the proofe hereof argue thus. If a man may doe more then the Law requires, then certainly he may doe as much. But a man may doe more then the Law requires; therefore he may doe as much. The minor Bellarmine proves by the example of this young man, who telling Chriſt, that he had obſerved all the Commandements, and that from his youth, our Saviour bid him doe one thing more, and then he ſhould be perfect (if thou wilt be perfect, goe ſell that thou haſt and give it to the poore, and follow me.) Now if the yong man had done this. he had done more then the Law required, in as much as whatſoever the Law required he had formerly obſerved, as he ſaid himſelfe; Hac omnia ſervavi a juventute, All theſe things have I obſerved from my youth up &c.
Firſt, this word More, may two manner of wayes be underſtood; namely, either, firſt ſimply it ſignifies ſomething which is not commanded; and in this ſenſe the conſequent is naught, viz. if a man may doe any one thing which is not enjoyned by the Law, then he may doe any thing which the Law enjoynes and commands; this followes not, for it is not neceſſary that that be done which is commanded, becauſe ſomething is done which is not commanded: as for example, the Sonne which was bidden to goe into the Vineyard, went not, and yet might at that time be doing ſome houſhold worke. Adam brake the Commandement given unto him, and yet ſewed figge-leaves to cover his ſhame, which he was not commanded to doe. Secondly, this word More may ſignifie ſome good thing over and above that which is commanded in the Law, or, after the fulfilling of all theſe things which are preſcribed in the Law, to doe over and above ſome other good worke which is not preſcribed. Now in this ſence we grant the Major, but as abſolutely falle we deny the Minor, viz. That a man may performe whatſoever is commanded in the Law, and other good things beſides which are not commanded. For there is no good thing at all beyond that good is commanded in the Law; otherwiſe the Law ſhould not be perfect, which is falſe by the very letter of the word, Pſal. 19. 7, 8 9. yea thoſe things which are not contained in the Law, are in themſelves neither good nor bad but indifferent; and where they are made good, it is by thoſe things which are in the Law. As for example, to Faſt is not in it ſelfe a morall good worke, but it is good if it be done for the love of God, and for the hatred of ſinne, or both, which are commanded in or by the Law. And therefore it is utterly falſe, That a man may performe a greater good worke then the Law enjoynes. Secondly to the proofe of the Minor, we anſwer two things: firſt, the yong man ſpeakes of a part not of the whole Law; that is, of the ſecond Table, not of the firſt, as appeares by the text: He demands of Chriſt, What he muſt doe to be ſaved? Chriſt anſwers, keep the Commandements, verſe 17. He demands againe, Which? Chriſt anſwers, Theſe, ver. 18. and recites the precepts of the ſecond Table onelyonly; whereunto the Phariſee replies in this ſort; all theſe precepts (viz. of the ſecond Table) have I kept from my youth. Now ſuppoſe a man could abſolutely and perfectly fulfill the ſecond Table, yet it followes not therefore he fulfils the whole Law, for he may faile in his duty towards God; and he onelyonly fulfils the Law, who performes his duty abſolutely both to God and Man. Secondly, the Cardinall playes the Sophiſter, committing the fallacy, called petitio principit, taking that for granted which is to be proved, viz. that the young man kept the whole Law, for without proofe we neither can nor may beleeve it, either upon the Jeſuites or Phariſees word: We (I ſay) doe not beleeve the teſtimony of this vaine young man touching his owne righteouſneſſe, vvho boaſted of keeping the ſecond Table in the outvvard duties thereof, vvhen as yet he vvanted inward charity towards his neighbour, and love towards his God; He avouched that he had kept all perfectly, and fulfilled that Commandement, Thou ſhalt love thy neighbour as thy ſelfe: and thereupon is ſo bold as to aske Chriſt what lacke I yet? Chriſt to convince him of his pride and wants, puts him thus to the triall, If thou haſt ſuch perfect charity tovvards man, then certainly if God command thee to beſtovv, not a part, but all thy goods upon the poore, upon promiſe of better things to thy ſelfe, thy duty unto God, and thy ſingular charity unto men vvill make thee do ſo; Goe then ſell all that thou haſt and give to the poore, &c. upon vvhichwhich ſpeciall command his covetous minde ſhevves it ſelfe: nay, it is plaine, he loved not his neighbour ſo vvell as his riches, neither is ſo dutifull to God, or charitable to the poore, as for either of their ſakes to part vvith his poſſeſſions; by vvhichwhich he proclaime his heart to be full of covetouſneſſe, and void of faith in God and true charity tovvads his neighbour; and conſequently vvas farre from the obſervation of the vvhole Lavv.
41. Paſſages deleted againſt the Constancy of Gods Love and friendſhip to his Children.
IN Doctor Jones his Comentary on Heb. 4. 16. page 141. this is raſed out: A friend is borne for adverſity, & will be a friend when we need him: he is a friend indeed that keeps with us in a time of need: ſuch a friend is God Almighty through Jeſus Chriſt; be will help us at our need in this life, and at the length, take us up into that place where we ſhall need nothing any more. Strange, that ſuch a paſſage ſhould be obliterated as heterodox.