Chapter 2

IN your exceptions to the first Chapter of the Animadversions pag. 20. I wish I could find any thing agreeable to Truth, according to your own Principles. It was ever granted, that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉]; but always to fail, and feign at pleasure, was never allowed so much as to Poets. Men may oftentimes utter many things untrue, wherein yet some principles which they are persuaded to be agreeable to Truth, or some more general mistakes from where their particular assertions proceed, may countenance their consciences from a sense of guilt, and some way shield their reputation from the sharpness of censure: But willingly and often for a man practically to offend in this kind, when his mind and understanding is not imposed upon by any previous mistakes, is a miscarriage, which I do not yet perceive that the subtilest of your Casuists have found out an excuse for. Two Exceptions you lay against this Chapter, in the first whereof, by not speaking the whole Truth, you render the whole untruth; and in the latter you plainly affirm that which your eyes told you to be otherwise. First you say, I proposed a dilemma to you for saying you had concealed your method; when what I spake to you was upon your saying, first that you had used no method, and afterwards that you had concealed your method; as you also in your next words here confess. Now both these being impossible, and severally spoken by you, only to serve a present turn, your sorry merriment about the Scholler and his eggs, will not free your self from being very ridiculous. Certainly this using no method, and yet at the same time concealing your method, is part of that civil Logic you have learned no man knows where: You had far better hide your weaknesses under a universal silence, as you do to the most of them, than expose them afresh to public contempt, trimmed up with froth and trifles. But this is but one of the least of your escapes; you proceed to downright work in your following words. Going on you deny (say you) that Protestants ever opposed the merit of Good works; which at first I wondered at, seeing the sound of it has rung so often in my own ears, and so many hundred Books written in this last Age so apparently witness it in all places, till I found afterwards in my thorough perusal of your Book, that you neither heed what you say, nor how much you deny; at last giving a distinction of the intrinsic acceptability of our works, the easier to silence me, you say as I say. Could any man, not acquainted with you, ever imagine, but that had denied that ever Protestants opposed the merit of Good works; you positively affirm I did so; you pretend to transcribe my own words; you wonder why I should say so; you produce testimony to disprove what I say, and yet all this while you know well enough that I never said so: have a little more care, if not of your Conscience, yet of your Reputation; for seriously if you proceed in this manner, you will lose the common privilege of being believed when you speak truth. Your words in your Fiat Lux, p. 15. ed. 2. are, that our Ministers cull out various Texts (out of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans) against the Christian doctrine of Good works, and their merit; wherein you plainly distinguish between the Christian Doctrine of Good works, and their merit, as well you may. I tell you pag. 25, 26 that no Protestant ever opposed the Christian Doctrine of Good Works. Here you repeat my words as you pretend, and say, that I deny that any Protestant ever opposed the Merit of Good works; and fall into a feigned wonderment at me, for saying that which you knew well enough I never said: For Merit is not the Christian, but rather as by you explained, the Antichristian Doctrine of Good works, as being perfectly Anti-Evangelical. What Merit you will esteem this Good work of yours to have, I know not, and have in part intimated what truly it does deserve. But you add, that making a distinction of the intrinsic acceptability of works, you say as I say: What is that I pray? Do I say, that Protestants oppose the Christian Doctrine of Good Works, as you say, in your Fiat; or do I say, that they never opposed the Merit of Good works, as you feign me to say in your Epistle? Neither the one nor the other: but I say that Protestants teach the Christian Doctrine of Good works, as revealed in the Gospel, and oppose the Merit of Good works, by you invented, and as by you explained, and now avowed. And while you talk at this rate, as if you were perfectly innocent, you begin your story as if you had nothing to do but to accuse another of fraud, like him that cried, — Nec si me miserum fortuna Sinonem Finxit, vanum etiam mendacemque improba fingit. when you know what his business was. But the truth is, when you talk of the merit of Good works, you stand in a slippery place, and know not well what you would have, nor what it is that you would have me believe. Your Tridentine Convention has indeed provided a limber Cothurnus to fit if it were possible your several statures and postures. But general words are nothing but the proportion of a Cirque or Arena for Dogmatists to contend within the limits of. The ancient ecclesiastical importance of the word Merit, wherein as it may be proved by numberless instances, it denoted no more than to obtain, you have the most of you, rejected, and do urge it in a strict legal sense, denoting working for a reward, and performing that which is proportionable to it, as the labor of the Hireling is to his wages, according to the strict rules of Justice. See your Rhem. An. (1 Corinthians 3; Hebrews 6:10). So is the judgment I think of your Church explained by Suarez, Tom. 1. in Thom. 3. d. 41. A supernatural work, says he, proceeding from Grace in its self, and in its own nature, has a proportion to, and condignity of the reward, and [〈◊〉] of sufficient value, to be worth the same. And you seem to be of the same opinion in owning that description of Merit, which Protestants reject, which I gave in my Animadversions; namely an intrinsical worth and value in works arising from the exact answerableness to the Law, and proportion to the reward, so as on the rules of Justice to deserve it. Of the same mind are most of you; See Andrad. Orthodox. Explic. lib. 6. Bagus de Merit. Op. Lib. 1. cap. 9. Though I can assure you, Paul was not (Romans 6:23; ch. 8:18), so that you must not take it ill, if Protestants oppose this doctrine, with testimonies out of his Epistle to the Romans, as well as out of many other portions of the holy Writ; for they look upon it as an opinion perfectly destructive of the Covenant of Grace. No, I must tell you, that some of your own Church and way, love not to talk at this high and lofty rate. Ferus speaks plain to you on Matthew 20: If you desire to hold the Grace and favor of God, make no mention of your own merits. Durand sticks not to call the opinion which you seem to espouse, temerarious, yes blasphemous, Quest. 2. d. 27. In the explication of your distinction of congruity and condignity, how woefully are you divided? As also in the application of it: there is no end of your altercations about it; the terms of it being horrid, uncouth, strangers to Scripture and the ancient Church, of an arbitrary signification, about which men may with probabilities contend to the world's end, and yet the very soul and life of your doctrine of Merit lies in it. Some ascribe Merit of Congruity to works before Grace, and of Condignity to them done in a state of Grace; some, Merit of Congruity to them, done by Grace, and Merit of Condignity they utterly exclude: Some give Grace and the Promise a place in Merit; some so explain it, that they can have no place at all therein. Generally in your Books of Devotion, when you have to do with God, you begin to bethink your selves, and speak much more humbly and modestly, than you do when you endeavor to dispute subtilely and quell your Adversaries. And I am not without hope, that many of you do personally believe as to your own particular concernments, far better than when you doctrinally express your selves, when you contend with us: As when that famous Emperor Charles the first, after all his bustles in and about Religion, came to die in his retirement, he expressly renounced all merit of works, as a proud figment, and gave up himself to the sole Grace and Mercy of God in Jesus Christ, on whose purchase of Heaven for him, he alone relied. Toto pectori in Deum revolutus sic ratiocinabatur, says the renowned Thuanus, Hist. lib. 21. se quidem indignum esse qui propriis meritis regnum Caelorum obtineret; sed Dominum Deum suum qui illud duplici jure obtinuit, & patris haereditate, & passionis merito, altero contentum esse, alterum sibi donare, ex cujus dono illud sibi merito vindicet, hacque, fiducia fretus minime confundatur; neque enim oleum misericordiae, nisi in vase fiducia poni: hanc homines fiducium esse à se deficientis & innitentis Domino suo, alioqui propriis meritis fidere non fidei esse, sed perfidiae; peccata remitti per Dei indulgentiam, ideoque credere nos debere, peccata deleri non posse, nisi ab eo, cuisoli peccavimus. & in quem peccatum non cadit, per quem solum nobis peccata condonantur. Words worthy of a lasting memory, which they will not fail of where they are recorded. Casting himself, says that excellent Historian, with his whole soul upon God, he thus reasoned; That for his part he was on the account of any merits of his own, unworthy to obtain the Kingdom of Heaven; but his Lord and God, who has a double right to it, one by inheritance of his Father, the other by the merit of his own passion, contented himself with the one, granted the other to him; by whose grant, he rightly (or deservedly) laid claim thereunto; and resting in this faith or confidence, he was not confounded; for the oil of mercy is not poured but into the vessel of faith: this is the faith or confidence of a man fainting or despairing in himself, and resting on his Lord; and otherwise to trust to our own merits, is not an act of faith but of infidelity or perfidiousness; that sins are forgiven by the mercy of God, and that therefore we ought to believe that sins cannot be blotted out or forgiven, but by him against whom we have sinned, who sins not, and by whom alone our sins are pardoned. This Sir is the faith of Protestants in reference to the merit of works, which that Wise and Mighty Emperor, after all his Military actings against them, found the only safe Anchor for his soul in extremis, his only relief against crying out with Hadrian — Animula vagula, blandula, Hospes, comesque corporis, Quae nunc abibis in loca? Pallidula, frigida, nudula Nec, ut soles, dabis jocos. The only Antidote against despair, the only stay of a soul when once entering the lists of Eternity. And I am persuaded, that many of you fix on the same Principles, as to your hope and expectation of Life and Immortality. And to what purpose, I pray you, do you trouble the world with an opinion, wherein you can find no benefit, when, if true you should principally expect to be relieved and supported by it. But he that looks to find solid peace and consolation in this world, or a blessed entrance into another, on any other grounds than those expressed by that dying Emperor, will find himself deceived. Sir, you will one day find, that our own works or merits, Purgatory, the sufferage of your Church, or any parts of it, when we are dead, the surplusage of the works or merits of other sinners, are pitiable things to come into competition with the blood of Christ, and pardoning-Mercy in him. I confess, the Inquisition made a shift to destroy Constantine who was confessor to the Emperor, and assisted him to his departure. And King Philip took care that his Son Charles should not live in the faith wherein his Father Charles died; whereby Merit, or our own Righteousness, prevailed at Court: but, as I said, I am persuaded that when many of you are in cold blood, and think more of God than of Protestants, and of your last account than of your present Arguments, you begin to believe that Mercy and the Righteousness of Christ will be a better plea, as to your own particular concernments at the last day. Seeing therefore that Protestants teach the necessity of Good works upon the cogent Principles I minded you of in my Animadversions, I suppose it might not be amiss in you to surcease from troubling them about their Merit, which few of you are agreed about, and which, as I would willingly hope, none of you dare trust to. You have, I suppose, been minded before now of the conclusion made in this matter by your great Champion Bellarmin, lib. 5. de Justificat. cap. 7. Propter (says he) incertitudinem propriae justitiae, & periculum inanis gloriae, TUTISSIMUM est, fiduciam totam in sola Dei misericordia & benignitate reponere: Because of the uncertainty of our own righteousness, and the danger of vain-glory, it is the safest course to place all our confidence in the alone mercy and benignity of God: Wherein, if I mistake not, he disclaims all that he had subtilely disputed before about the merit of Works; and he appears to have been in good earnest in this conclusion; seeing he made such use of it himself in particular, at the close of all his Disputes and Days; praying in his last Will and Testament, That God would deal with him, not as aestimator meriti, a judge of his merit, but largitor veniae a merciful Pardoner; Vit. Bell. per Sylvestr. à Pet. San. Impress. Antuerpiae 1631. And why is this the safest course? Certainly it must be, because God has appointed it and revealed it so to be; for on no other ground can any course towards Heaven be accounted safe. And if this be the way of his appointment, that we should trust to his mercy alone in Christ Jesus; let them that will be so minded, notwithstanding all persuasions to the contrary, as to trust to their own merit, take heed lest they find when it is too late, that they have steered a course not so safe as they expected. And so I desire your excuse for this Diversion, the design of it being only to discover one reason of your failing in morality, in affirming me to have said that which you knew well enough I did not; which is this, that you stood in a slippery place as to the point of faith which you were asserting, being not instructed how to speak constantly and evenly to it. And to take you off from that vain confidence, which this proud opinion of the Merit of works, is apt to ingenerate in you; whose first Inventors, I fear, did not sufficiently consider with whom they had to do, before whom sinners appearing in their own strength and Righteousness will one day cry, Who among us shall dwell with devouring fire, who among us shall inhabit with everlasting burnings? Not the purity, perfection and severity of his fiery Law, judging, condemning, cursing every sinner for every sin, without the least intimation of mercy or compassion; if you would but seriously consider, how impossible it is for any man to know all his secret sins, or to make compensation to God for the least of them that he does know, and that the very best of his works come short of that universal perfection which is required in them, so that he dares not put the issue of his eternal condition upon any one of them singly, though all the rest of his life should be put into everlasting oblivion; and withal would diligently enquire into the end of God in giving his Son to die for sinners, with the mystery of his Love and Grace therein, the nature of the New Covenant, the importance of the Promises thereof, the weight that is laid in Scripture on the Righteousness and blood of Christ with the Redemption that is purchased thereby; or to the whole work of our Salvation, and the peremptory exclusion of the merit of our works by Paul from our Justification before God; I am persuaded you would find another manner of Rest and Peace to your soul, than all your own works, and your other pretended supplements of them, or reliefs against their defects, are able to supply you withal. And this I hope you will not be offended at, that I have thus occasionally minded you of.