Classic Audiobook Collection - A Booke of Christian Questions and Answers by Theodore Beza ~ Full Audiobook [religion]

Episode Date: May 10, 2025

A Booke of Christian Questions and Answers by Theodore Beza audiobook. Genre: religion Written at the height of the Reformation, A Booke of Christian Questions and Answers presents Theodore Beza's clear, disciplined guide to the core teachings of the Christian faith in a brisk question-and-answer format. Originally composed in Latin by Beza (1519-1605), a leading Genevan theologian and successor to John Calvin, this work was translated into English by Arthur Golding and published in 1574. Each exchange builds a compact framework of belief, moving from foundational topics like God, Scripture, creation, and human sin to the person and work of Jesus Christ, the way salvation is received, and the shape of a faithful life marked by prayer, worship, and perseverance. Beza writes with both pastoral urgency and sharpened argument, aiming to steady ordinary believers and to equip readers to meet the objections and controversies of his day without losing sight of devotion. Whether listened to as a historical window into early Reformed theology or as a structured refresher on Christian doctrine, this little book offers a steady cadence of questions that press for understanding and answers designed to train conviction. Source note: based on descriptions and records from the Oxford Text Archive (A68610), UW-Madison Libraries catalog, and contemporary audiobook listings. For ad-free listening try our premium subscription Chapters (Approximate) (00:00:00) Chapter 01 (00:30:16) Chapter 02 (01:08:39) Chapter 03 (01:50:57) Chapter 04 (02:15:06) Chapter 05 (02:45:59) Chapter 06 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A book of Christian Questions and Answers by Theodore Beezer, translated by Arthur Golding. Question. Who hath set us in this world? Answer, God of his own singular goodness. Question, to what end? Answer, to the end that we should serve him and that he should be glorified by giving eternal life unto us. Question, which is the way to worship him a right and consequently to attain eternal life and to glorify him duly? answer to know and acknowledge him after the same manner that he hath disclosed himself unto us in his word question what callest thou the word of god answer that which the prophets and apostles have received by god's spirit and committed to writing which book we term by the name of the old and new testament question who then is the author of those books answer god himself and the writers or pens thereof were the prophets and apostles question How knowest thou that? Answer, the things themselves that are treated of in those writings, the majesty of God shining forth in that homeliness of speech,

the heavenly pureness and singular holiness that uttereth itself everywhere in them, the most sure steadfastness of the principles whereupon that doctrine is grounded, and the laying together of the foresayings and of their fallings out, do enough and more than enough show these writings to be altogether divine and heavenly, and that the same is the most perfect doctrine of truth, though all the world should say never so much to the contrary. To the confirmation hereof maketh also the orderly success of things done, and the record of godly men delivered from hand to hand, and that I know these things in such wise as I fully agree to matters which men are want, partly to despise and laugh to scorn, and partly so to embrace as yet notwithstanding they what not all what they believe, I imputed wholly to the Holy Ghost,

who hath opened my heart that I may both hear and understand these secrets. Question, is all that we must believe to salvation comprehended in those writings? Answer, altogether. What is it then that the writings of the prophets and apostles do teach us chiefly to believe concerning God himself? Answer, that the essence of God is one and the persons three, the father, the son and the Holy Ghost. Question, what meanest thou by essence? Answer, I mean the nature that is common to those three persons. Question, what meanest thou by persons? Answer, I mean the very parties themselves that have their being in that nature.

Question, these three persons then, are they three gods, like as there be so many men as there be persons endued with human nature? Answer, no, not so, for these three several persons are all but one self-same god. Question, why so? Answer, for in. as much as God's essence is most single, infinite, and unable to be parted. Therefore, these three persons are not separated, one from another, but only distinguished. So as the father is not the son or the Holy Ghost, but the Father only, nor the Son, the Father, nor the Holy Ghost, the Father or the Son, but the Holy Ghost only. And yet all those three several persons be one self-same, perfect God of one everlastingness, of one essence, and of one equality. Howbeit that

in order, though not in degree, the father is first, who is of none, the son is second, who is of the father, and the Holy Ghost is third, who is of the father and of the son, both of them unspeakably by the everlasting communion of the whole essence of the godhead, the son begotten, and the Holy Ghost proceeding. Question, truly, as far as I see, the depth of this mystery is impossible to be uttered. Answer, it is so indeed, if a man will seek a reason how that should come to pass, but we be sure it is so by the express word of God, and therefore we must believe and reverence the mystery that God hath opened unto us, and not search for the thing that He hath hidden from us, and which

we be not able to conceive. Question, doth this knowledge of God's essence suffice to save a man? Answer, no, for besides many other things whereby God's nature is, after a sort, painted out unto us, lest we might surmise him to be like the things that are created, it standeth us chiefly on hand to know how he is minded towards us. Question, that thou mayest know this, what considerest thou chiefly in God? Answer, perfect justice and perfect mercy. Question, what callest thou justice and what callest thou mercy? Answer, these things are not in God as qualities, but by God's justice, I mean that God's nature is so pure and sound of itself.

that he utterly hateth and most severely punisheth all unrighteousness. And by the name of perfect mercy I mean that whatsoever he bestoweth upon us, and especially the benefit of everlasting life, proceedeth wholly of his mere free gift and grace. Question, but these things agree not together, for how is he a most sore punisher for those things which he giveth of his mere grace? Answer, that these things do very well agree the father hath well showed in his son, who hath made full satisfaction for our own.

sins and is given unto us freely by the Father. Question. Did not the Father then, or the Holy Ghost, by the death for us? Answer. No, truly, none of them both, but a lonely the Son whom the Father sent, and whom the Holy Ghost teacheth and sealeth fast in us. Question, is not the Son very God by nature, and consequently the immortality itself, as well as the Father and the Holy Ghost? Answer, yes, neither were He our Saviour if he were not God. Question, how then could he die? Answer, where, as by his godhead, he was the eternal life itself, he became man that he might die in the flesh?

Question, but the sun is God unchangeable, how then is he become man? Answer, not by mingling the natures or properties together, nor by any changing of God into man or of man into God, of which things none of both is possible, but by so straight and familiar knitting of the sun's godhead to the nature of man taken unto it, that the Son of God, being very God and very man, is henceforth one person, Jesus Christ. Question, and what manner of union is this? Answer, in Greek it is called hypostatical and in English personal, and so it is indeed. Question, I pray thee describe it that it may be understood, at least

wise after a sort. Answer, the things are said to be united in nature which come together into one nature, whether the same be done without any growing together, mixing together, or turning one into another, like as the three persons of the godhead are most single substance, or whether it be done by only knitting together, like as the soul and body meet together, as essential parts in making that which is man, or whether it be by means of some mixture or turning of the one into the other, like as befalleth in the interchange of the elements and in things that be mixed. And things are said to be united personally which are joined in such wise, as there riseth thereof but one self-same person, like as the body and soul are so united to make the one

nature of man that they close together in one person or particular. Of this sort is also the union of the two natures in Christ, which join together, not to make some one third thing as Utiquis miswined, but to make both one person without any confusion either of the natures that themselves or of the essential properties. And I said an union of natures, but not of persons, lest it might be surmised that two persons were grown into one, whereas in Christ there is one nature which a man may see is peculiar to the word itself, and in that nature resteth also the other nature that was taken to it, that is to it the nature of man. For the person of God took not to it the person of man, but the divine nature, and that in the only person of the sun that is to

say, in respect that the same Godhead was the Son, and not in respect that it was either the Father or the Holy Ghost, took unto it, man's nature, destitute of own personship, as I might term it. Therefore, to be short, like as in the Godhead, there be three persons coming together in one self-same nature, even so in Christ, there be two natures joined together in the one person of the son. So as the three persons are not three gods but one God, by reason of the most single uniting of the three persons into one self-same nature. Neither are there two Christs but one Christ, by reason not of two perfect persons, but of two perfect natures joined together, not to make some one-third nature, but united into the person of the sun, in which person both the natures are

upheld. Question, neither comprehend I this secret. Answer, then yet again reverence thou the thing that thou comprehendest not, for all the whole scripture crieth out that it is most true, and if it would not so, he should not be a Jesus, that is to say, a saviour to us, nor yet Christ, that is to say, anointed as our sovereign and everlasting king, prophet and priest. Question, but could not God have saved man by some other means, less removed from our capacities? Answer, cert as he could, but this was the most convenient means for him to show, as well his singular justice as his singular mercy. Question, how so?

answer, because that if he had either saved us without full satisfaction or exacted the same satisfaction by any other than of the nature that was indebted, he might have seemed to have been unmindful of his justice, and therefore it was requisite that our saviour should be a man. But had he been but only man, he should never have discharged God's wrath, and so consequently he should not have been able to wind himself out of it, and much less to deliver us. and therefore it behooved that the flesh which was taken should be sustained and borne up by the nature of the godhead, most perfectly united unto it. Furthermore, as concerning mercy, there could be given any surer, evidenter, yea, or more divine assurance of the most perfect mercifulness, than that the father hath given his only son for his enemies, and the son likewise given his own life willingly for us that are most unworthy.

question it is even so but was not christ himself guiltless answer yes for sooth and therefore he was conceived by the holy ghost in the virgin mary not only without any spot of uncleanness but also endued with most singular soundness and pureness in his flesh for otherwise he should have need of another to be his saviour neither could his ablation have pleased god neither truly could god have found in his heart to have united himself to so unclean nature question could it then stand with the nature of the sovereign justice to exact punishment for other folks sins at the hands of a man that was most guiltless yea and also most holy answer indeed the father might have seemed to do his son wrong if he had punished him as an offender he struck him therefore not as an offender but as one that of his own accord was willing to yield himself as a borrow or surety for the unrighteous, and therefore the father did nothing that might not well stand with his justice. Question. But why was he condemned at the bar before the judge, and also executed by the death of the cross, seeing he could have died otherwise also for us? Answer. To the end,

it might thereby the better appear that he became accursed for our sakes, and that he took upon him the whole wrath of his father against our sins to set us at full liberty. Question, but death is incident to the body only, and therefore by this death of his, he seemeth to have discharged but only our bodies, and yet notwithstanding, all of us die still, whereupon it seemeth to follow that he saveth neither body nor soul. Answer, it was requisite that Christ should take unto him both soul and body together, that he might both die, for the first death is the separation of the soul from the body, and also that being become perfect man, he might deliver men whole and perfect.

meanest thou then that he suffered also the pains whereunto our souls are subject? Answer, yea verily, for it is even the chiefest part of Christ's sufferings, that besides the extreme torments of most cruel death, he also endured for our sakes the most horrible weight of God's wrath, than the which nothing can be more dreadful, during which time his godhead did as it were rest in him all the while, to the intent that the manhood which he had taken unto him, although it quite quailed not under the burden, which otherwise had been intolerable to the very

angels, might notwithstanding, most sharply feel and finally bear out God's whole wrath, unutterably inflamed against all the sins of all the chosen, even till satisfaction were made to the full. Therefore, at what time he hung upon the cross, he was also in the midst of the torments of hell that he might fully deliver us from both the deaths. Question, but I pray you, if he came to deliver us from death, why did he himself die? Answer, because that else the said sovereign justice of God, which it behoved to be satisfied, should not appear in our redemption, and therefore the most glorious is Christ's victory, even in this respect, that he overcame death by dying.

Question, why then, do the chosen sort die, seeing Christ hath vanquished death for them? answer, because Christ is not come to restore us into the same state of this world which we have lost in Adam, but to remove us into far better immortality, the thing which cannot be done, except we depart out of this world. Therefore, albeit that this separation of the soul and body, which is called the first death, sprang of sin, the remnants whereof are even in the holiest men, yet notwithstanding, if he mark well the purpose and drift of God, he strikes not the chosen with it properly as a judge, but sends it to them as a most loving father that calls away his children home to himself, and therefore it not only freeth not the believers, but also refresheth and cheereth them.

Question, why then did not that power of his utter itself out of hand against death? Answer, verily it uttered itself out of hand, inasmuch as his body suffered not any corruption. Nevertheless, it was his will to have it lie buried for a space, both to the intent that his being dead indeed and his death being confirmed also by the seals of his enemies might prove his resurrection which was to ensue anon after, and also to the intent he might, like a conqueror, pursue death fleeing away before him into his innermost dungeon and consequently perfume our graves with the quickening scent of his own death. Question, is his resurrection then a witness that he undertook to die willingly to purchase immortality for us?

answer it is so for he is risen by his own power never to die any more to the end that we also should be quickened in him forevermore question but why went he up into heaven and not rather tarried still with us answer in body he is verily and indeed gone away from us among whom he was and is mounted above all heavens where he was not a foreign body both to the intent that he being the first that is risen from death might first take possession of the heaven heavenly kingdom, triumphing over his vanquished enemies, and also to teach us to high us thitherwood where he hath prepared a place for us, and yet is he all the while present with us by his spirit, governing his church as the head governeth the members that be joined unto it. Question, then hath he shifted his place to go thitherward, whereas is no place? Answer, it is so, he hath changed place, according as the thing done witnesseth, and according as the veriness of a body, yea, though it be glorified, requires. But his changing of place is according to that nature which is bounded, and that is done not to forsake us, for inasmuch as Christ is one

person, God and man together, he is nevertheless still present with his servants by his whole power, because he is very God, but to withdraw us from the earth and to teach us to seek heavenly things, and whereas thou sayest there is no place, whether as he is ascended, it is a fond imagination, Let this suffice thee, namely that the Godhead only is infinite, and that all other things, either in heaven or above heaven, or in earth, or in the bottomless deeps, and consequently his body. Which, though it be a glorified body, is notwithstanding still a man's body, are according to the nature of them, finite and bounded with place,

and how they be contained in that eternal glory, we shall then perceive when we come thither ourselves. Question, thou seemest then to divide Christ, or to make two Christs, of whom the one is present and the other is away? Answer, when I say that Christ is absent as concerning his flesh, and yet avouch him to be verily present, both as concerning his godhead, and also if he be considered as a whole thing,

that is to say, as one person, God and man, I divide him not, but take away the confounding of his natures. Question, what is meant by his sitting at the right hand of the father? Answer, that he having laid aside not the veriness of his flesh, but all infirmity and frailty of the flesh is now advanced to such a state of glory as surmounteth all name. That is to it that his flesh is already glorified by the godhead, which dwelleth bodily in it without bereaving it of the own essence or essential properties, and that it ordereth and ruleth all things in heaven and earth with full power, saving him that hath made all things

subject unto it. Question, what meanest thou by essential properties? answer, that which being taken away, the thing must of necessity no more be that which it was afore, as for example if a body be bereft of quantity, it must of necessity cease to be a body. Question, but God is almighty? Answer, who denies that? Question, ergo, he can bring to pass that one self-same body may either be in many places at once, or somewhere as in a place, or other somewhere not as in a place, but after, some other incomprehensible manner.

Answer, that God can cause a thing that is not to be anymore, as well as he hath caused the thing to be, which was not. No man doubteth except to be stuck mad. And therefore a much less likelihood is it that he should not be able to alter the shapes and qualities of things at his pleasure. But to bring to path that a thing should at once both be and not be, or at once be of such sort and not a such sort, God cannot do because he cannot lie. not to be able to lie is not a sign of weakness, but of invariable mightiness.

Question, then do you conclude that Christ is now absent from us as concerning his manhood? Answer, yea, and so far off from us, as the earth where we be is distant from the place which is above all the heavens, whither that flesh of his is carried up. Question, yet hath he himself said that he was then in heaven when he talked with Nicodemus upon earth? answer this and such other things are meant by communicating of properties question what callest thou property answer that which logicians call proper after the fourth manner as for example to be infinite is a property in the nature of the godhead and quantity is a property in all things created and specially in bodily

things question then is this communicating false for as much as such manner of property ceaseth to be propere or peculiar as soon as it becomeeth common? Answer, this latter part I simply grant unto, but not unto the other. Question, but these two things seem to stick inseparably together. Answer, then take you the case to stand thus, either of Christ's natures, that is to say, his godhead and his manhood, keep still their essential properties to themselves, without communicating them one to the other. according as I have said already which thing unless we grant infinite and utterly wicked absurdities will ensue for if his godhead should receive into itself the properties of his manhood it should be transformed into manhood and contrary wise if his manhood should admit into itself the properties of

his godhead it should become a certain counterfeit godhead so as Christ might be said to be neither very God nor very man and so consequently he should not be our saviour and therefore there is not any intercommuning either of natures or of essential properties. For look how false and wicked are these propositions. Flesh is the godhead and the godhead is flesh. Even so false and wicked are these also Christ's flesh is everywhere as touching his flesh and Christ's godhead is not everywhere or Christ's not everywhere as touching his godhead. Most false of all then are these the godhead was crucified or died and Christ's flesh is infinite. Now although these two natures, together with their essential properties, cannot communicate each with other,

as I said afore. Yet are they united in such sort, as they make but one self-same party, or one person only. Therefore, look how false are the said speeches, the godhead is flesh, and flesh is the godhead. So true and catholic are these, God, that is to it the word, is a man, and a man is God. And that is by reason of the unity of the persons which springeth not of the communicating of natures, for, as I told you, there is no such thing, unless you take communicating for union which were too improper, but of the uniting of natures, for God is not a man in that he is God, which thing must notwithstanding needs follow, if the nature of the very essences, that is to say, of the godhead and of the manhood, communicated each with other, that is to it, were the one as well as

the other. But in another respect, that is to it, in that he hath united a man unto him, neither is a man God, in that he is a man, but in another respect, namely, in that he is united under God. And look what I have said concerning the natures, the same must also be understood concerning the essential properties, which are uncommunicable as well as the other. Most true, therefore, are these speeches, and they must be laid forth in former wise. God, that is to it the word, was conceived, born, suffered, was crucified, died, was buried, and rose again, namely in that he was united a man unto him, and not in that he is God.

So also are these speeches. A man is eternal, infinite and invisible son of God, filling all things, etc. Not as in himself, that is to say, not in that he is man or by any communicating of properties, but in that he is taken into one person by the son of God. Question. But these manner of speeches seem hard and very strange. Answer, nay truly, if thou wast cast away thy misconceived and prejudicial opinion, thou shouldst find them to be exceeding fit to set forth the union of the natures, which is so great that look what thing cannot be said of the several, that is to it of the godhead by itself, or of the manhood by itself.

The same may very well be attributed to either of both jointly, that is to it, either to God or to the man, and that is because that of the two natures there is not made one nature but one person. And therefore we avouch that in the natures there is an union and not in unity, and the unity is of the person only. Whereupon it cometh to pass that the whole person not only is signified by the name of the whole person, that is to say by Jesus, which comprehendeth both the natures united together, but also is meant by the name of either of both the natures, that is to say by the Son of God

and the Son of Man, how be it as considered jointly and not severally. So also, whereas the name Christ, that is to say, anointed, agreeeth properly but to the manhood only. for the Godhead was not anointed, but did anoint, yet doth it betoken the whole person. And it is a common ordinary matter in all things to speak of persons after the like manner, to show the uniting of the parts of which the unity of the person consisteth. So this manner of speech, Peter is an apostle, is as proper as may be, agreeing to Peter's whole person and to the several parts thereof.

That is to it both to his soul and his body. But this manner of speech, Peter is the son of Jonas, agreeeth to him as he is whole together, and as he is considered to be some whole thing, that is to it as he is considered by unity of person, and not to both the several parts of him, saving in respect of the one part only, namely of the body, except perhaps thou thinkest that the soul also is begotten. It is a like form of speech when we term any man a mortal creature or a reasonable creature, which termed doubtless do fitly agree to the whole man as he is whole, by reason of the unity of his person, and yet that is but in respect of some one of his parts only. Yea, truly the force of this personal union is so great that a man may speak of it in the same phrases of speech still, even after it is dissolved, as if a man should say Peter lieth buried at Rome,

for we will put the case to be so. The proposition shall be true, and yet but in respect of his body only, albeit that Peter, that is to say the whole person be named. Question, wherefore dost thou then terminate? a communicating of properties, if there be no communicating of natures and essential properties indeed. By communicating of properties, we mean not the very personal union or the manner of the union, but the report that is made by reason of the personal union of the two natures,

in which report the essential property or the operation that agreeeth to some one of the natures is attributed to the person in jointness and not in severalness. And for as much as this report is true, There must needs also be truth contained under it, howbeit in the aforesaid respect, that is to say, of the whole person considered jointly together. Question. Then concludeest thou again that Christ as concerning his flesh,

is departed verily and indeed out of the earth, up above all the heavens, and therefore is absent from us that are upon earth? Answer, so is it, and yet I grant that Christ being man is still present with us, howbeit in another respect than of his manhood, that is to wit, in that the self-same Christ which is man is God also, yea, and if thou wilt, I grant thee thus much more that Christ's manhood also is present, howbeit in other respect, that is to wit, not in itself or in its own substance, but in respect that it cleaveth by personal union unto the word, which is everywhere, and therefore also is in very deed in his supper.

Question, what doth Christ then avail us now as touching his flesh if he have forsaken us? Answer, Nay, he hath not forsaken us inasmuch as, even now also in his glorified flesh, he disposeth all things both in heaven and earth, and hath received a name that is above all names at his father's hand. By virtue of which authority, he quickeneth, cherisheth, and governeth his church by his word by his secret and unutterable power. and therewithal reigneth in the midst of all his enemies, and in heaven he maketh intercession to his father, until the time that the last enemy, namely death, be utterly put to flight. Question, I pray you, what manner of intercession is this that you speak of? Answer, he maketh intercession first in pacifying the father towards us by the continual freshness

of his own innocency and obedience, and secondly, because we cannot call upon the father a right but in his name. So as he stepeth evermore as an atonement-maker betwixt us and the father, to the end that whatsoever we offer to the father may be well accepted. As for the suit that some men dream that Christ should make with kneeling down at his father's feet, it is but fond device of such men as have no skill to put a difference betwixt Christ when he was in weakness, and Christ being now in glory, nor finally to discern heavenly things from earthly things. Question, what thinkest thou then of them which do so willfully maintain that Christ is not a mediator in respect of both his natures? Answer, I think them to be the devil's instruments prepared to hinder the work of the Lord, which thing experience itself hath taught us.

Question, but to be a means betokenedeth a place beneath the highest, and it belongs to the lesser person to make means to the greater person. Hereupon I gather that they seem to be Ariens which hold opinion that Christ is a means and a meansmaker or mediator as touching his godhead also. Answer, I should wonder that in so great light of the gospel there could be any found that would suffer themselves to be beguiled with so trifling toys if the deed itself berate not that they never followed God's gospel with a right zeal. I speak of the willful sort and of such as are condemned by their own judgment. Question, but this is no answering.

Answer, the shamefulness of the matter compel of me to brust out of these words because I see so many have shrunk away upon so small occasion, or none, first unto the heresy of Arias, afterwards to the surmised opinion of three gods, and finally to the devilish dotages of Samasata. Go to, therefore, and let us inquire of them severally in order.

End of section one. Section 2 of A Book of Christian Questions and Answers by Theodore Beza, translated by Arthur Golding. This Librevalch's recording is in the public domain. Question. Thinkest thou then, that to be a means is another thing than to be a mediator or a mean maker. Answer, yea, truly, for the word mean may be token but the quality or state of a person, and so the thing that is betwixt two other more things may be deemed a mean or a middle thing, but a mediator or mean-maker,

betokineth an umpah or atonement-seeker, which are things so far diverse that one may be a mediator or means-maker, which notwithstanding is not of a mean or middle degree. That's when we seek to set men at one, and contrary-wise one may be of a mean or middle degree, and yet it shall not follow of necessity that he is a mediator.

Question, but Christ is both a mean and a mediator? Answer, I grant it. Question, if he be a mean in that he is the word or the son, then it followeth that the son is inferior to the father, namely as if he were endured with some kind of godhead that were a mean between the godhead of the father and the nature of man. Answer, then wilt thou have Christ to be a mean as touching the one of his natures only, that is to wit,

as touching his manhood, or else to be no means. mean at all? Question, nay, but answer me first to my demand. Answer, I answer then, that, have thou an eye to whither of his natures, thou list alone by itself, Christ cannot be said to be a mean, for in that he is the son, he is equal with the father, and in that he is man, he is equal with the residue of men. Therefore stood the manhood on hand of necessity to borrow this effectual working at the hand of the divine nature that took unto it. Therefore, in this work of mediation, that is to say, of reconciliation or atonement, some doings are attributed to the whole person of Christ,

that is to say, to both his natures working together, some to his godhead severally by itself, and some to his manhood severally by itself, but to conclude, none of both his natures hath the mediatorship by itself alone. Question, but what shall we believe concerning the office of intercession? For surely he that maketh intercession for another is inferior, unto him to whom the intercession is made? Answer,

Nay, that is untrue. For what should let, but that one equal may entreat another his equal, or the superior, may entreat his inferior for another man, and therefore it should not follow that the son were lesser than the father, although he had taken this charge upon him or his own will, even without taking any flesh unto him. But I have showed already how the things that are written of Christ's intercession must not be restrained to the reason that agreeeth with the sovereignties and degrees of this world.

Moreover, how the word is a mean between the father and us, in repeat of the union of the two natures, and how he is the mediator between the father and us in respect of his office, I have showed even now. Question, they say also, it should seem that the godhead maketh intercession to itself, if Christ should be called an intercessor in respect also that he is God? Answer. They say so indeed, but very unskilfully, for although the Godhead being a thing undividable, be whole and perfect as well in the Son as in the Father and in the Holy Ghost,

yet notwithstanding, when we consider the Godhead of the persons, we consider it not without relation of one person to another. And therefore put the case, which thing is most true, that Christ maketh intercession for us to the Father, even in his godhead united to the manhood, which he took unto it. Yet shall it not follow that he maketh intercession to himself, seeing that the father is one and the son is another, in several person thoroughly distinct,

albeit that the father and the son be both one thing and one God, if the essence of them be considered without their persons. For like as in Christ incarnate there be several things and not several persons, so in the godhead there be several persons but not several things. Question. What opinion hast thou of praying unto angels and saints deceased? Answer, that is wicked idolatry. Question. Yet it may be that they which pray unto angels and saints deceased cannot away with the making of any images. Again, you should have made a distinction between such as pray to the true and blessed angels

or to the souls of them that were godly and holy men indeed and such as worship counterfeit angels, that is to say fiends, or which worship such manner of gods as although they were gods, yet should they, even by their own confession, be but wicked gods? Answer. I grant, not only, that some sins are more heinous than others, but also that such as are guilty of one self-same sin are not always alike guilty. Nevertheless, he that sinneth the grievouslyer, discharges not him that sinned less heinously, out of the number of offenders, and therefore let us suffer all this gear to slip,

whereof there is no question betwixt us. Idols are conceived in fond fancy, and brought forth by the hand, therefore are they idolaters also, whose idol lurketh like a shapeless conception in the womb of their imagination, neither is there any kind of idol more ugly than this which is set up in the very bowels of the mind. Question, but why callest thou that thing idolatry which leaneth upon good reason? Answer, Fye on that reason which not only leaneth not to God's word, but also fighteth fully against it, and yet I see not what good reason may be alleged to defend so gross a wickedness. Question, I pray thee, show me why thou sayest so.

Answer, to call upon one that is absent, whom thou canst not make privy to the meaning of thy mind, it is a point of extreme blockishness, and to suppose that the soul's of such as be deceased, either be present everywhere, or if they be absent and hear men's words, do nevertheless perceive the thoughts of their minds. I say that both of them are manifest and horrible sins of idolatry, at least wise if it be idolatry to father that thing upon the creature, which is proper or peculiar to God alone. And whereas they make exception that God discloseth our petitions under the saints, or else that these saints behold all things, in I Wote Not Wart, wonderful glass of the Trinity. Look how easy a matter it is for them to say it, so easy is it for us

to shake it off as a foolish and gross forgery. Moreover, as concerning the angels, we hear indeed that the Lord useth their service in defending his children, and no doubt but they execute their charge as is enjoined them, and are careful after their manner for the welfare of the godly. But what makes this that we should pray to them? For how may that be done in faith, seeing we know not neither when they come nor when they go, nor when they be present, nor when they be absent, nor find any word or example of it in the Holy Bible, but rather that the angels have not admitted so much as any outward religious reverencing. Finally, seeing there is none in the whole world to be compared, either in power or love

towards us, unto Christ, God and man, which sitteth at the right hand of the Father, making intercession for us, as the only mediator between God and men, whereupon sprang the rabble of petty intercessors, but of manifest distrust in him. And as for the unfailing love of the saints, which many men harp upon, although it be true, yet notwithstanding, it is so awfully applied for the proof of praying to saints as it needeth no disproof at all. Question. Yet notwithstanding we pray one for another, and desire one of us the prayers of another, and in so doing the appellation, the appellation. apostle hath done before us by his own example. Ogo, to require the intercession of some others besides Christ,

it no wit impeacheth the office of the only mediator, and to whom we say not pray for us, but have mercy upon us. Answer. First, we are sure that the maintainers of this praying to angels, and dead folks hold not themselves within those bounds, but do crave their help in their dangers and distresses no less than the openness idolaters that ever were, did in old time crave help at the hand of the petty gods that were under the throne of their Jupiter,

again for the members of one body to request one of us to pray for another, so long as we may be able to advertise one another of our affairs in this life, is truly no point of praying unto men or of thrusting mediators in Christ's stead as they do, but rather a calling upon our common father together with our brethren, in the name of the one mediator aforesaid, the which one-mindedness is a most acceptable sacrifice under God. Question. But the Holy Ghost himself is said to make intercession for us with unspeakable groanings.

Answer, that is because he teaches us to groan and to pray a right according also as the same apostle maketh him to cry out. Question, but when shall this intercession be at an end? Answer, truly never. For even at such time as it shall appear that we be with God, Our cleaving unto him shall not be but by the stepping in of our mean and mediator, and consequently of our head Jesus Christ, whose reigning and person are everlasting in the same respect.

Yet, notwithstanding the whole manner of ruling and governing the church that is now used shall utterly cease. After that the last enemy, that is to it death, is put away, and all the chosen are taken up with their head into everlasting life, and so God shall be all in all. Question, but Paul saith that this kingdom or reigning shall be yielded up to the Father, and that Christ shall become subject unto him. Answer, Paul verily having an eye unto Christ as to the Son of God indeed,

howbeit as manifest in the flesh, and joined with his members, doth worthily attribute the chief glory to the Godhead, which shall at that time be most of all disclosed when all enemies be overcome. And truly this subjection betokenedeth something inferior to the Godhead, for the creature shall never be made equal with the Creator, no, not even in Christ, but yet it doth us to understand that the chief blessedness, next to that, which is peculiar to the Godhead, consisteth in this point that God accepting us, and our head together in respect that he is man, for his dear and faithful subjects, will then at length give us the fullness of

felicity and punish the rest as rebels with endless pains. Question. But whereas it is said that he will come at the last time, day to judge both the quick and the dead. There is some hardness in that saying, for it appearseth by many places of the scriptures, and especially by the story, or parable of the rich glutton, that every man's judgment lighteth upon him immediately after his departure out of this life, whether he be godly or ungodly. Answer, God doth after a sort, execute his judgment even then, in so much as it is not to be doubted, but that the souls of the godly whom Christ

doth gladly receive, have a foretaste of the eternal happiness, and contrary wise that the souls of the ungodly have a forefeeling of the horribleness of eternal death. Notwithstanding, besides, that the said four judgment hath respect only to their souls while their bodies lie still asleep in the dust. The full declaration and executing of the judgment whereby the whole man shall either be made owner of eternal life or else be cast into endless torment is delayed to the last day of the general resurrection. Question. By the dead then, thou meanest not them that shall be dead at such time as they shall be judged, but such as have been dead before and shall rise again, which then be the quick ones that thou matchest against the dead ones.

Answer, they be those whom Christ shall then find still alive in this world, at the second coming of his which shall be most glorious, the sudden changing of which men into the one state or the other of the life to come, that is to wit either of endless death or of everlasting life shall be unto them instead of bodily death and rising again, as the apostle teacheth. Question, how are they said to be damned to endless death, who notwithstanding are risen again, never to die any more? Answer, because that to live in so horrible torments both of soul and body deserveth not the name of life, but rather of death. Question, but the resurrection, is it not in general of God's goodness, yea, and that in Christ,

who is the first fruits of them that rise? answer, like as the father created all things in the sun, so also shall the wicked receive life again in him, that is to say, by the operation of his power, and yet, for all that the blessing of life shall turn to a curse in the ungodly, like as all other things do. The wicked therefore shall not rise again by the benefit and virtue of Christ's resurrection, for this resurrection is knit unto blessed life with an inseparable knot, and therefore none but only such as believe in Christ, and are truly grafted into him are made partakers of that, but by the power and authority of the son, as he is a judge,

who, at the same time that he pronounced the sentence of double death, and especially of eternal death against all mankind, did even then condemn all men in the penalty of rising again, saving those whom he should preserve from death. For how should the punishment of the wicked be everlasting, as it must needs be, if their bodies should continue forever in the dust, utterly void of all feeling? Question.

nevertheless, seeing that the body moveth not of itself, but only is the instrument of the soul, it seemeth to stand with equity that the whole punishment of sin or the whole glory of righteousness should have cleaved to men's souls. Answer, the whole scripture spiketh against it, as often as it maketh mention of the resurrection, which doubtless agreeeth not properly to the soul. Again, although the body sin not of itself alone, yet doth the whole man's sin, and therefore he is justly punished whole, and Christ were not a perfect redeemer if he should let the bodies of his servants lie still in rottenness.

Neither had he needed to have taken a body unto him if he had come to deliver no more but our souls. Question, but what manner of life shall that eternal life be and what manner of death shall that eternal death be? Answer, it is to no purpose to search for these things, not only because such curiousness is to be condemned, as driveeth men to demand the things that the Lord hath as yet hidden from us, but also because it is a point of extreme madness to be desirous to comprehend that which a man is not able to conceive. If we were now able to conceive that blissfulness, we should already, after a sort, possess it. In as much as the understanding of man doth at least wise so far forth enjoy the thing that is to be understood, as it conceiveth it in understanding.

The like also is to be thought of the everlasting pains, whereof we see that even a very light conceit of them doth now and then drive men to despair, and two horrible facts. Now then, that men feel not as yet the horribleness of the fire any fuller, it is to be imputed to God's forbearing, who as yet delayeth his wrath. Therefore, let us rather seek, by what way we come to it, that we may hold the way of life, and let us settle ourselves in the things that the Lord hath opened unto us concerning those matters in his word, namely, that the happiness of the godly and the unhappiness of the ungodly shall be so great, that the manner and measure of none of them both can be comprehended by us as now.

Question, then which is the way to eternal life? Answer, even Christ, as he himself witnesseseth, neither is there any other way that leadeth unto life. Question, and yet he quickeneth not all men. Answer, I grant that he quickeneth none but those that walk in this way, and to walk in this way is to join a man's self unto Christ, yea, and after a sort to incorporate himself into him by believing. Question, what callest thou faith?

Answer, the faith or belief whereby the children of light differ from. from the children of darkness is not simply that insight which the devils have as well as they, whereby it cometh to pass that a man acknowledgeth the things to be true, which are contained in the writings of the prophets and apostles, but moreover, it is a steadfast assent of the mind accompanying the same insight, whereby it cometh to pass that each man applies particularly to himself, the promise of everlasting life in Christ, in case as if he were in full possession of it already. Question, whither doth nature yield us this faith, or doth grace give it, or whether doth partly nature and partly grace give it?

Answer, only the mere grace of God which begetteth us anew. Question, are there not common insights and feelings of God in the nature of man, though he be corrupted? Answer, yes, verily there be, howbeit even as some rubbuses of a very princely building. Again, I say thus much that this faith is not grounded in natural insights, but there must further be added the things that God hath disclosed to the world, peculiarly by his prophets and apostles, which things flesh and blood could never have once thought of. Lastly, this thing also is to be marked

wherein consisteth as it were the special and peculiar difference of faith, namely that each man must apply the promise of eternal life in Christ peculiarly to himself by believing, which testimony the scripture calleth assured persuasion. Question, I pray you, let us step a little aside to discourse of man's corruption. First, I demand what thing thou think us to be corrupted in the nature of man, and secondly, what manner of corruption the same is,

and lastly, what remedy there is against it? Answer. To the first demand, I answer, that the whole man is corrupted, yea, and so corrupted, that St. Paul's saying, namely that we be dead in our sins, is to be understood of either part of man. Question, doth this corruption touch the very substance of him? Answer, yea, indeed doth it as concerning the body, which even therefore is become mortal, of the soul we must think otherwise. Question, what shall we think then of the corruption of the soul? Answer. That it is corrupted in qualities, which, for instructions sake, I make to be two, namely reason

and will. Question, dost thou then place qualities in the soul? Answer, I do so, albeit agreeable to a spiritual and single nature. Otherwise, if a soul or a spirit be nothing else but a substance, then let us make as many undergods as there be souls of men. but to the end we may assume any cramped school points at once. You shall understand that I admit but one soul in a man, for I read not that there were any more created, and I deem it an absurdity that any one body should be endued with any more souls than

one. Also, by the qualities of the souls I mean two things. That is to it. First, the powers grounded in the soul, which I say are no less to be distinguished, albeit by such distinction as agreeeth to a spiritual nature, from the very substance of the soul itself, that the power of drawing steel is distinguished from the substance of the adamant, and secondly, the soundness or the rightness, or, as Moses termeth it, the goodness of the same powers, which I said to be too. Question, well then, considering that the fall of man can never be

sufficiently understood and described, they that avouch original sin to consist only in accidents or qualities seem to take it but for some superficial blemish that sticketh, as it were but to the skin. Answer. These be fond conceits of foolish men, and after the same sort did Satan in times past beguile some men, that would needs rest the Christian principles to the ragged rule of their own most foolish reason. By those qualities, I mean not some accidents or by-falls, but things that stick in the

very nature itself, and yet may be dissevered from the very substance, and, as it were, from the groundwork itself wherein they be, not in very deed, but by reason and in thought. question your saying then in effect is that the qualities of the soul are corrupted and not the substance of it answer i say so and i say further that the contrary opinion is the certain and the open way to epicureousness that is to say to maintain the mortality or dying of the soul for grant we once never so little corruption of the substance of the soul we must needs confess that the soul itself is in danger of dying again if the whole soul be corrupted then must the whole soul needs die out of hand. But if the corruption be in some part of the soul, how can there be any division of parts in a single substance such as the soul is? Therefore, whosoever will maintain this so-awk and wicked opinion, had need to be stark mad, and no less blind than they need be, that should give ear to him. Question, let us leave this gear for those to

delight in, upon whom the Lord shall execute his rightful judgments. Now proceed and tell me what the same corruption is. answer. Neither reason nor will is taken away, as I said even now, for had they been taken quite away, the soul of man must needs have perished, or utterly been none at all. But both these powers are so sore defaced that whereas the eye of understanding ought to have been most clear, according as it was before the fall. Now especially in matters pertaining to God and concerning right conscience, it partly seeth nothing at all, no, not even when the light of the creator is set before it, according as it is to be seen in the chief points of the true religion,

The witch, man's reason, not only loatheth, but also fighteth against them as fond and false with tooth and nail, and partly, if it see, it seeth very dimly, so as those small sparks of glimmering light that were left in man to the end, he should be utterly inexcusable. Of which sparks, there is no man, but he hath some bread in his mind, and many more have been found out by men in bending themselves to the considering of higher things. do by and by leave a man at his first step into the gate of truth, and therefore are far unable so to foreguide him as he may attain to the privities of truth. And furthermore, as concerning uprightness, to be maintained between man and man, although the eyesight of man's mind be somewhat less dull in those matters,

verily because God so moderateth his just judgment, as the fellowship of mankind, out of which be gathered his church, might the easier be preserved, which otherwise would perish out of hand according to the desert of man's fall, if all discerning of right and wrong and of virtue and vice had been taken quite away out of men's minds, yet notwithstanding, right great is the blindness of men, both in discussing of general grounds, but especially in discussing of matters debatable, which thing is manifestly proved by the repugnancy, which is found not only in the opinions of the common people, when there be as many wits as there be heads, but also even in the judgments of

wise philosophers and lawmakers, wherein many have wearied themselves of late to no purpose, to make them agree together. Now come I down to the other power of the mind, which is the seat of the affections, and whereas the same ought to be ruled by reason as by a wagon-guider, yet notwithstanding, how often doth it harry him headlong away, and no marvel, seeing that sometimes it carryeth always even the very soul itself. I forbear to speak of the heavy unrulyness of all the natural affections, which inconvenience, reason fighting against it, doth after a sort see and find fault with, but only God's law doth utterly discover it. And to the increase of that darkness wherewith the power of understanding and willing is overcast, yet is there another

worseer inconvenience, namely that reason sucketh upon untruth, and wrestlet willfully against God's wisdom, even when she is convicted, and the will is carried willfully into vice, even against the reprehensions of reason, such as they be, and is not, able either to seek or to shun anything aright, because she is wholly a slave unto sin. Question. Are we blocks, then? Answer, no, for when I say that man's understanding and will are blind and froid, I do not utterly bereave him of the power of understanding and willing. Question, ergo, thou takest away free will. Answer, if by free, you mean willing or unconstrained, I am so far from taking that away, that contrary-wise, I say the whole mind is willingly,

and of its own accord carried unto evil. But if thou take freeness to be never so small an ableness of itself, either of both, that is to say, to be inclined of itself as well to the thing that is good indeed, as to the thing that is evil, I do flatly deny, upon warrant of the testimonies of the whole scripture, which in manner are infinite. Considering that, of all the whole number of men, the saints only accepted, he cannot bring me one that hath known the true goodness and much less coveted it. Question.

In what case then dost thou make the philosophical virtues to be? Answer, first I say that many of the true virtues never came in the minds of the philosophers if they were not Christians. Secondly, the same virtues which they knew are not described fully enough by them. And finally, that there was never any man found in any age that was endued so much as with the philosophical virtues, except he were regenerated. Question, but surely the philosophical virtues are not sins. Answer.

Yes, truly, even sins, if sin be an unlawfulness, that is to say, any manner of thing that stepeth never so little aside from the law of the Lord. Question, but if thou infer necessity of sinning, as needs thou must infer it, if thou take away consultation and election, thou seemest thereby to take away sin. Answer, this consequence is many ways false. For necessity excuses not sin, if a man have willingly cast himself into the fetters of it. And as for this necessity, whereof I now treat, it is not of nature but of man's own willful fall.

Again I take away neither deliberation nor choice, but I say that the man which is not regenerated cannot but misconsult or misadvise himself, and also miselect or mischuse, by reason that his power of understanding and willing is utterly corrupted. question but it seemeth a mockery to think that there is a choice except ye admitted as a mean betwixt good and evil answer nay rather it is a mockery which thou speakest for there is a kind of choice also even between evil and evil and therefore look when reason counselleth that which is less evil and will either embraceth that which is the worse as commonly it is wont to do or else suffereth itself to be ruled by reason then doubtless doth it choose howbeit always

evil. Question, nay, surely it is not the nature of reason to counsel evil. Answer, Sooth reason bear herself in hand, for evil puteth upon it the countenance of good to make reason to like of it, but the true rule to discern good and bad by must be searched out of God's law and not out of man's corrupted understanding. Therefore, even the very same thing which the natural man, as the apostle termed him, thinketh to be good and coveteth as good, is by God's spirit termed evil, as always

stepping somewhat aside from that which is rightly good. For surely, as for the thing that gusheth out of so unclean a sink, although now and then it be not altogether so foul as the very filth of the sink itself, yet must it needs be unclean? Question, yet do I not perceive how the thing may be called free, which of necessity is carried but to the one part only? Question, yet do I not perceive how the thing may be called free which of necessity is carried but to the one part only? Answer, then remember thyself that there is a difference between compulsion and necessity, for many things that are of necessity, are also willingly, of which sort I think thou will not deny that Christ's death was one. But nothing can be both of compulsion and of willingness together,

no, not even in those things which we are most unwilling to do, as when seamen suffer loss. Again, I pray thee look a little neelier, how thou mayst define freeness, for whether of these thinkest thou is more free, he that is in such state, as he may be either free or bound, or he that is so free as he can by no means so much think of being bound. Truly, if thou take that to be free will, which may be led either to good or to evil, thou shalt quite bereave both God and the angels, yea, and us also, after we be taken up into heaven of that freeness. Yea, and it seemeth that this also may be doubted whether the first man were endured with the said freeness of debating on either part, before he had given ear to Satan,

for how could evil come in question, seeing it was not yet entered into the world? So as it seemest to me that before that time, Adam was of his own accord, with his whole mind and body disposed to good only without any contrary thought or debating at all, and much more without any purpose, all which things Satan hath brought into man's disposition by putting concupiscence or lust into us. rightly therefore was that tree called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil inasmuch as before the eating thereof man neither knew nor coveted anything but only good the forgetfulness whereof is so overspread by eating of that tree that ever since men have not ceased to debate of the ends of good and bad though they themselves be shut up within the bound of evil the conclusion is this that they only are

endued with free will which are set free from the bondage of sin, and of this freedom, which shall never be thoroughly perfect till we be utterly sinless in the other life eternal, they have the spirit of God for an assured pledge. Question, then in the receiving of the first grace, men do but suffer the grace of God to be wrought in them and are not joint workers with the grace. Answer, truly, if ye have an eye to the order of the causes and the first entrance of the grace, whereby the Lord shapeth us new again, ye must needs grant that the same, proceedeth holy of God, who loveth us first, when we be yet his enemies, and that we be but only receivers of it. But if he consider the very instant of the time wherein God worketh

in us, ye shall find that the ableness to be willing to receive is given unto us, and also that we be willing to receive both together in oneself at the same moment. For otherwise the grace were in vain, therefore as many as impugn this manner of working, as though it were repugnant to the grace of God. They beray their own unskilfulness many ways, considering that this self-same together working is the gift of God's grace, and worketh in such wise together with it, as that in order of causes it is indeed the latter, like as it followeth immediately after the cause that worketh the effect. By reason whereof all things are fathered wholly upon the only grace of God, and yet notwithstanding God at once, and in one

self-same moment bringeth to pass, both that through grace we may know, and through grace we do know indeed, that through grace we may will and through grace we do will indeed, and finally that through grace we may do, and through grace we do indeed, for the efficient cause in possibility cannot be called efficient in working until it be performed in very deed. Moreover, since there is not taken from man, neither the ability of understanding nor the ability of willing, as I have said afore, but only the ability to understand rightly and to will rightly, it cannot be denied, but that at least, at least, leastwise there is in him a natural together-working because that whereas the first disposing grace

is not received but of one that hath understanding and will and men by nature do generally understand and will, man receiveth the offered grace not as a block but as one that is endued with understanding and will, and so far forth as he doth but understand and will he worketh together with God his maker, at whose hand he hath received those natural powers. but in respect that he understandeth well and willeth well that must be wholly attributed to the new comeeth to pass that he prepareth to make himself ready to understand a right to will a right and to do a right when he hath received the grace and also that he understandeth willeth and doth rightly indeed question and what is it to be thought of the effects of the first grace

answer that the first grace is effectual it is to be imputed to god's second second grace, for we should straightways fall from the first, if they followed not another immediately after, to make the former effectual, and so must ye proceed on still from grace to grace. Question, but it could hardly be denied, but that as soon as we have received the first grace, we work together with the rest of the grace's following, and so consequently that the later graces are bestowed for merit or dessert of the former grace. Answer, away with the names of desert and merit, which fight full.

but against grace. How much so ever the half-Pallagian sophisters prate to the contrary. He that denieth us to work together with the first grace, denieth the efficacy of the first grace. And look what I have said of the first grace. The same do I say of the graces that ensue. For that the first grace is so effectual as that we use it well, we may thank the second grace for it. For were not the second grace present, yea, and both freely given and freely over, effectual. We hold not only not go forward, but also go quite back again, into a far worse state than we were in before. Then, as for this together working, which, as I have said, precedeth wholly of the ensuing grace, what hath it in it that may merit or deserve any recompense at all?

Nothing at all, for even then, when we, after a sort, do use it well, which thing also, if the matter be well looked upon, is thought grace, we do rather use it amiss, which thing also, if the matter be well looked upon is thought grace. We do rather use it amiss. I confess, then, that the faithful servants have talents committed unto them, but yet again it is of mere grace that the working of those servants is allowed, and that they be taken for faithful servants, and finally that reward is given unto them, which is not due unto them in any other respect, than because it was freely promised and is freely performed. Question, but I would fain learn this of you also, how this is,

corruption is spread into mankind, namely whether it be by nature or by imitation. Answer, for as much as ye be sure enough that it is come in, you should rather have asked how it might be driven out again. Nevertheless, because of many noisome errors, I will endeavour to satisfy you in this behalf also. I answer, therefore, that the malady is first spread abroad by nature and afterwards confirmed by imitation. Question, how can you prove that? answer by many texts of scripture, when he will, especially by Paul's argument grounded upon effects, for even they also do die, which could not imitate Adam, by reason they are not of years of discretion, but death is the reward of sin, Ogo, all men are in original sin.

What, if I should say, that the first death, which is the separation of the body and the soul, and the loosening of the same body again into his first grounds, is natural, for all compounded things are naturally subject to disillusion. Answer, God himself speaking by Moses will disprove you. Besides this, your argument holds not of necessity. For although the thing that is compounded may of its own nature be dissolved, yet notwithstanding it is not dissolved in very deed until the cause that compounded it do first cease to maintain it together. What absurdity then is there in my speech when I say that man was in such a created of soul and body, yea, and that man's body was in such wise compounded or compacted together

with the elements, as the creator of them would have maintained them together, forever, had not sin stepped in by the way. Question, I grant then that mortal bodies are begotten of mortal bodies, but what is that to the corruption of the soul, unless thou think that the souls also are conceived over from one into another? Answer, what opinion many, of the old writers have had concerning this matter, I pass not, neither will I greatly strive about it, so it be agreed upon that original infection is spread into us by nature, yet I think that it is not good to dissemble this, that the doctrine of the conveying over of the soul seemeth very awkward to me, for either must the whole soul, or at least some piece of it,

be conveyed over. Now, if the whole be conveyed, then doubtless must the parts of it needs be quite dispatched out of hand. But if there be but some piece of it conveyed, how can any piece of it be cut away from an essence that is most single? Question, if the soul come not of the corrupt father, but of him that is the father and maker of spirits, how comes it by that corruption? Is it by infection of the body that is knit unto it? Like as an ointment, the better it is, the sooner it takes the tang of the unclean vessel? Answer, truly methinks your reason is sufficient to satisfy all modest wits. But howsoever the case standeth, let this suffice, that like as Adam received the image of God for himself and his, so lost he it from him and his, and God, according as he

had threatened, forsakes their souls as soon as he hath created them, and shedded them into the body, whereby it comes to pass that all of them are born the children of wrath, namely as heirs of corruption and of their forefather's guiltiness. End of Section 2 Section 3 of a book of Christian questions and answers by Theodore Beza, translated by Arthur Golding. This Librevox recording is in the public domain. Question. Now then, let us return to the only remedy of this mischief, that is to it, to Christ,

taken hold upon by faith, which is the gift of God. Therefore, I would have you to declare unto me what you mean by taking hold, ingreffing, incorporate, and communicating with Christ. Answer, that they imagine there is any joining or linking together of the substances after what manner soever they dream it to be, they be utterly deceived and judge fleshly of spiritual and mystical things. Again, they, that avouch Christ's only operation or efficacy, to be the thing whereof we be made partakers, seem not to have weighed sufficiently the expressed texts

of the scripture, wherein Christ himself is plainly said to be given unto us, and also his workfulness in us is described, to the intent, therefore, that this communicating may be understood, we must set down two things, whereof the first is this, that Christ himself is made ours by the benefit of the Father, so as all believers may say, this thing, that is to it Christ, the Son of God, manifested in the flesh, is mine by the grant and free gift of the Father that I might enjoy it. Question, here I pray you give me leave to say a little by the way, surely he that so speaketh his owner or master of the thing that was given him are we then owners or masters of christ and not rather he the owner and master of us answer seeing that the father hath given unto us jesus christ and that christ hath redeemed us by giving himself for us if any man deny jesus christ to be the owner and master of us yea and that of very good right accursed be he therefore when i say he is ours that is to it which believe i mean not Not that there is given unto us any superiority over him, but I say that he is given and born

unto us for our sakes, as for example a man takes a wife, which must obey him and be serviceable to him, and yet on the other side the wife may say, like as I am this man's wife and my father hath given me unto him to have authority over me, so on the other side he is my husband, and hath given himself to me to enjoy him. Verily, to the end he may love me and cherish me as his wife, which similitude thou knowest well enough that the prophets and the apostles do ordinarily use to betoken this communicating of Christ. The other point of this communicating is that he is ours in such wise, as no conjunction of bodies, whether it be natural or artificial, may be compared with it. Yet notwithstanding it tendeth not to this end, that there should be made but one substance of here's and ours, or but one person of hears and ours, all which things are most gross forgeries and utterly wise, from the kingdom of heaven. But it tendeth to this end only, that his spiritual workfulness should be

the more certain, the more nearer, and the more effectual in us. And yet, by the way, this is certain that he and such-wise becometh ours, that he becometh one thing with us indeed, and the head and members of anybody cleave not so fast together by nature, as this conjunction of Christ's is fast and straightened it unto us, inasmuch as we be flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones, howbeit it is holy spiritual and mystical. Question, I pray you show me why you call it spiritual. Answer, I call it spiritual not in respect of the thing that is communicated, for it is certain that Christ is communicated unto us not only in spirit,

but also in his whole manhood, nor also as though this communication were imaginative and consisted only in thought without the thing itself to settle upon, nor finally as though he were said to become one thing with Christ, only in respect of consent, after which manner Luke saith, that the believers were all of one heart and mind, but because all this taking hold is done altogether by the mind and by faith, and because the Holy Ghost is the party,

by whose linking these things are knit together, which are so far asunder in respect of distance of place, and that in such wise as that in this spiritual copulation, Christ is as the head, and the church is as his body, drawing spiritual life from him her only head, and therefore all the whole real growing together of the very substances into one about the which so many men have strived now long ago with so much ado, and by means whereof that monster of transubstantiation and consubstantiation

was afterwards brought into the Lord's Supper, is a gross forgery of man's fondness, by no means agreeing, either with the spiritual life or with the veriness of Christ's body, or with the proportion of faith. Question, I hear well that Christ, himself is received of the faithful by faith. I hear that the church is spiritually coupled to her head by the bond of the Holy Ghost, but yet, perceive I never the more how these things that are so far asunder should be united. Question, I grant so, for it is not for naught that Paul

cryeth out that it is a great mystery. Rightly, therefore, doth one give warning that we should rather labour to feel Christ living in us than to be made privy to the reason of this communion, as which surmounteth our capacity, although we be sure that it is spiritual and that faith is the instrument in doing of it. Question, what if we should say that Christ is communicated unto us only as touching his force and efficacy, and that we should refer this place of Paul's, we be members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones, unto Christ's incarnation? Answer, concerning Christ being one with us, so as we may afterward draw life out of him, being united with us, the scripture speaketh more manifestly of it than that it may be applied to his only operation or working in us,

inasmuch rather as it is the foundation both of the effectual intercommunicating and of the benefit of imputation, which thing appeareth even by the proportionableness that is between it and bodily nourishment, whereof Christ himself is the author, for like as if a man will receive the nourishment of bodily food in such wise as may be to the sustenance of his life, it behoveth him to have it so far forth his own as he may even eat it. So also to the intent we may suck the juice of the spiritual and endless life out of Christ, it behoveth us to take hold of him with the mouth of faith and spiritually as it were to digest him into us. As for Paul's place concerning Christ's taking of man's nature unto him, it cannot be fitly applied to this matter, for according to that,

all men without exception might say that they be Christ's member. Which thing the Apostle seteth down as peculiar to the church alone, and so also doth the resemblance of bodily wedlock import. For every man and every woman are not one flesh, but each man is one flesh with that woman whose husband he is, and each woman is one flesh with that man whose wife she is. And therefore this coupling into one flesh is not of nature but of covenant, and so also is our conjunction with Christ into one spirit. To conclude, if the Apostle had meant, so as you say, namely that Christ hath knit himself unto us but by his incarnation, and that we be joined unto him but by faith, he should rather have said that Christ is of our flesh and of

our bones. Question, on forth I pray you, and show me what we receive by being spiritually made one with Christ through faith, as you have said. Answer, again we enter into a how great gulf whose wideness, length and depth, whereas otherwise it surmounteth our capacity, according as the apostle witnesseseth we know so far forth as the Holy Ghost, wherewith we be endued, searcheth the depth of God. He that hath not spared his own son, saith the apostle, but hath given him for us all. How should he not also give us all things with him? Wherefore, I answer that all things needful for salvation flow into us out of Christ, when we take hold of him by faith. Question, but if it may be, I would have you show unto me particularly which those things be.

I answer, that some things are Christ's own in such wise, as they cleave always to himself alone, and become not ours but by imputation, of which sort be the things that he hath performed for our sakes, namely that by becoming subject to the law he fulfilled all righteousness, and suffered the punishments due for our sins, both which things the apostle compriseseth under the name of obedience, and some things do so rest in Christ, as yet notwithstanding the force and operation of them is spread into us, of which sort is the singular pureness of the manhood in Christ, garnished with all gifts without measure, which pureness not only becomeeth ours by imputation, but also is the headspring and original of our new birth, and of all the

spiritual gifts that accompany the same. Question, what callest thou imputation? Answer, that benefit of God the Father whereby he vouchsafeth to account Christ's obedience as ours, in as ample wise as if we ourselves had fulfilled. filled the law and made full satisfaction for our sins. Question, but standeth this with God's nature that he should accept any man as righteous for another man's righteousness? Answer, indeed, it is another man's righteousness inasmuch as it is without us, and resteth in another subject or person that is to it in Christ. Yet, is it not in others in as much

as the same subject that is to it Christ is ours, yea, and also is spiritually become all one thing with us by faith? Question. Nay, truly, if he be become all one thing with us, now it seemeth that whatsoever he hath in him the same as ours in very deed, and not only by imputation. Answer, certain were at once granted that the very substance of Christ were become our substance by real copulation and uniting, which thing followeth of their opinion that account Christ's death and blood to be eaten with the very mouth, and so to be conveyed into us. Then should your saying follow of consequence also, whereby it may be perceived how greatly the doctrine, as well of transubstantiation as also of consubstantiation, fighteth against the doctrine of righteousness

by imputation, besides that it also taketh away the veriness of Christ's flesh. I said afore that Christ and we be verily made one indeed, howbeit that the same is a mere spiritual mystery, the band whereof is the Holy Ghost, and that the might be very much, the might mark, whereat it aimeth, is not the growing together of the substances of the persons into one, for to what purpose were that, but that the spiritual life should by that means flow from Christ the mystical head into his mystical body underneath it. Question, let us return to imputation. Answer, contented, and I say that like as whatsoever want of righteousness and whatsoever spottyness of sin is in us, the same is without Christ, and yet,

yet is imputed to Christ. So, on the other side, I say that Christ's obedience is out of us, as sticking in Christ, the only ground of it, and yet notwithstanding, is imputed unto us. And the foundation of this imputation is that he is one with us and we one with him, after spiritual way and manner, as I said afore. So as he was accounted a sinner not in himself but in us,

and we be reckoned for righteous, not in ourselves, but in him. question but it is said that Abraham's faith was imputed to him for righteousness and not this obedience of Christ's answer you know this that the things which go in order one under another are not contraries faith is said to be accounted unto righteousness because it is the instrument whereby the said obedience whereof the imputation maketh us righteous is taken hold upon after which manner also we be said to be justified by faith namely inasmuch as it taketh hold of Christ Christ's obedience, by imputation whereof we be made righteous. Question, there is yet one doubt behind how you're saying that Christ is taken hold on by

faith, agreeeth with that which you said afore when you have vouched that all gifts do flow into us from Christ taken hold upon by faith. For it seemeth to follow, either that faith is not of the father's gift in Christ, or else that this your latter saying is untrue. For needs must faith go before taking hold if Christ be taken hold. on by faith. Answer, the beginning of our salvation cometh of God, who first chose us in Christ, ere we were born, yea, and ere ever the foundation of the world were laid, and also first loveth and knoweth us in the

time of our being born, when as yet we were not given unto Christ, and grafted into him in very deed, but are to be given and grafted. Therefore, if you have an eye to the very instant of the time, we do both believe and also take hold of by belief upon Christ offered unto us both at once, for the cause of a thing cannot be working in very deed, unless the effect of it come forth together with it. But if he look to the order of causes, I grant that the trainment of faith, yea, of true faith, goeth before the taking hold upon Christ, and so consequently is given, not to them that are already grafted, but to them that are at the point to be grafted into him. Yet followeth it not there are, there are

upon that faith is not given unto us in Christ, considering that the heavenly father, setting his determination in his only son, doth not then first behold us in Christ when we be given unto him, but hath chosen us, known us, and loved us in him, yea, even before the foundations of the world were laid, and much rather when as yet we hated him. Like as Christ himself also took hold of us first, to the end, that we might take hold of him afterward. Again, look what is begun in us by grace, that we might thereby be grafted into Christ, and therefore as in respect of the order of causes, is done before our taking hold upon Christ. The same is increased and strengthened in us afterward by the same grace in Christ whom we have

now taken hold of by faith. Question, what then are the things that we attain in Christ? Answer, Paul concludeeth this whole matter most plainly and also most briefly when he saith that God the Father hath made Christ our wisdom, justification, sanctification and redemption. Question, what mean you by being made our wisdom? Answer, the self-same thing that Zechariah meaneth when he saith, that his own son, John Baptist, is sent to show the knowledge of salvation, that is to say, to show Christ himself.

For the only true wisdom is this which Christ teaches, to men, namely when he disclosed himself unto them, which thing the father also hath testified with loud voice from heaven, saying, hear ye him? Question, reckon you this among the gifts that we receive by Christ? My meaning is that Christ himself is so given unto us as to be the only teacher of that true and native wisdom, as that he teacheth himself unto us, for he is both the teacher and the thing that is taught. And therefore, among Christ's gifts, the very foremost and chiefest, is that he giveth himself unto us, when he furnisheth us with the knowledge of himself. Question, what doth Paul call justification in this place? Answer, that whereby we be made righteous,

that is to say, so far forth perfect, sound, foldless, and unblamable, as not only there is quite wiped out of us, whatsoever uncleanness is in us from top to toe, whereby, God, who is singularly pure, may by any means be offended, but also there is most plentiously found in us whatsoever may so much delight him in this human nature, as he of his goodwill may vouch safe to crown with everlasting life. And of that righteousness whereby a man is accounted righteous before God, the certain square and invariable rule is God's own law, and the law not only forbideth the things that are not to be done, threatening everlasting death for a penalty, but also enjoineth the perfect loving of God and our neighbour.

Therefore, that a man may be accounted righteous afore God, there be two things required of necessity, that is to say, the utter absence of all sin, and the fulfilling of all right according to the law. Question, but this was never found in any mortal white. Answer, saving Christ, who not only never sinned, but also performed the whole law to the full. Question, tell me, I pray you, was not Christ perfectly righteous, even from the very moment of his conception.

Answer, in respect of his godhead, he not only was righteous from everlasting, but also the very righteousness itself, that is to say, the sovereign and most perfect pureness, and in respect to his manhood, he was endued with singular holiness, yea, even far above the angels, even from the very instant of the conception of his flesh. But now by the name of righteousness, we mean that which followeth upon the perfect performing of God's law, which righteousness, Christ, had not in effect. effect, until he had finished the whole work that was enjoined him. For this is the righteousness by the imputation whereof we be justified, or made righteous, and not the foresaid essential

righteousness which is proper to the godhead, nor yet the other natural pureness of Christ's flesh, whereof we will entreat severally by itself, for want of which distinction Ossiander hath overshot himself to folly. Question, but I see not yet how this righteousness may suffice, For inasmuch as we not only perform not the law, but also are overcome with innumerable sins, how shall we be accounted as though we had never sinned, that is to say, to be undefiled of our sins, if the spots of our sins be not first washed out, and that cannot be done without suffering of the punishments due to them? Answer, thou sayest right, therefore, whereas I said that Christ not only break not the law,

but also did most fully and perfectly perform the law, thou must take his so doing to comprehend in especially a satisfaction for all the sins of them that believe, for every man is bound by the law to love God and his neighbour perfectly, not indefinitely, but definitely, that is to say, as having regard of his own peculiar calling. As for example's sake of a magistrate love God, but as some other private person doth, he cannot be said to have done his duty because he is bound to love God as a magistrate, which manner of dealing is to be understood of all other kind of callings. And Christ was sent to suffer for us the punishments due for our sins, which thing he performed all his life long, but especially in that sacrifice of his, wherein he became

obedient to his father unto death, even the death of the cross. Therefore, by working in suffering and by offering himself for us, he both fulfilled the law for us, and also made satisfaction for our sins. Question, but in respect that Christ is become man, it seemeth he was bound by nature to perform the righteousness of the law, that is to say, to love God and his neighbor perfectly, because the said law is laid upon the very nature of mankind, and therefore it seemeth that his fulfilling of the law was not for us, but for himself, that he might purchase himself life, which thing cannot be said of the punishments that were to be endured by him for our sins. Answer, although we should say that Christ, as touching his flesh, purchased himself eternal

life by fulfilling the law, whereunto he was bound. Yet were it no absurdity to say also that the force of this desert is so great, that it flowereth also even under the believers, but the former part cannot well be justified for seeing that this manhood of his was joined to the word by personal union, yea, and so joined, as it was most holy in itself, who can think, if the said human nature be considered without the charge of mediatorship, which is not of itself coincident to the manhood, but enjoined to the son by the father of his own goodwill, and willingly undertaken by the son. I say, who can think that there was any default in his manhood which he had taken unto him? So as it should not forthwith have been

most worthy of the everlasting life, even from the very first moment of the said union. Therefore, this is being bound to the performance of the law, is not properly by nature but of goodwill, nor simply for that Christ is a man but because he became man for our sakes, which condition he undertook off his own accord, and performed it not in his own behalf, for by good right he was most blessed already, but in our behalf, for whom it was his will to become subject to the law, to the intent to redeem them that were under the law. Furthermore, see how uncertainness saying, that is, which thou spakest last of all concerning thee satisfying for our sins, for that is, for that is even the chiefest part of his obedience or fulfilling of the law, as we have proved

a little afore. So then, if he fulfilled the law in his own behalf, you must needs confess that he died for his own sake also. Question, you say then that we be justified before God, that is to say that we be counted and denounced righteous, because Christ's obedience is imputed unto us, which consisteth chiefly of two parts, namely of satisfaction for our sins, and of full performance of all righteousness of the law? Answer, I say so. Question, to what purpose then is Christ, furthermore, made our sanctification, for doubtless,

he that is accepted for righteous is also accounted for holy. Answer, whosoever is righteous must also of necessity be holy, but not contrary wise, except there come new grace to the former graces, after the manner that we have avouched the term righteous to be taken in this present matter, that is to wit, for such a one as not only is not held for a transgressor of the law, because his sins be cleansed away in Christ, but also have fulfilled the righteousness of the law in him. To be short, I say, that this holiness is the goodness and uncorruptness of his person, and that this righteousness, whereof we entreat now, and whereof the believers are termed righteous in themselves, is not the righteousness

that cometh by impetation, but the imp of that holiness. So as, the former is as the tree, and this other is as the fruit of it. After this sort was Adam created holy, that is to say, good and faultless, and he had also become righteous if he had kept the law which his creator had appointed him. Question, but all men are corrupt by nature. Answer, again except Christ, the second Adam, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, to the end that the nature of man might in him not only recover the cleanness which it had lost, but also be advanced to a degree of goodness far higher without measure. For the first Adam was but created after the image of God,

but the latter Adam is also God because he is upheld by the everlasting Son of God, who hath by unutterable means sanctified the nature that he hath taken unto him, and that is done to the intent the same should also make us holy. Question, and wherefore do you call Christ the second Adam? Answer, because that, like as Adam was created to the end, that all men should be born of him by natural generation, so Christ hath taken man's nature upon him, to the end that all such as believe in him should be spiritually born and new in him by grace. Question, was it not enough for us to be born once by natural means? Answer, yes, as evertaining to this life, in respect to which it were a folly to think we be born,

any oftener. But for as much as Adam hath put himself in danger of double death, both for himself and for his offspring, it behoved us either to perish or to be born again into everlasting life after a far other sort, and therefore this other Adam is given us that both holiness and everlasting life might flow spiritually out of him into us by grace, like as sin and death were spread into us from the first Adam bodily and by nature. question lay forth yet more plainly this sanctification of ours in Christ answer that thing is said to be sanctified or made holy which is sorted out from the common uncleanness that it may be most pure and wholly consecrated unto God the utter enemy of all uncleanness after this sort is our nature sanctified or hallowed in Christ even from the very instant of his conception and that to the intent to sanctify us which thing is done two ways for first, like as I said, that we be accounted thoroughly righteous for God by imputation of Christ's righteousness, not in ourselves, but in him to whom we be united by faith. Even so, also I say that by the imputation of his perfect holiness and soundness, our persons are accounted thoroughly holy and sound, and so consequently are acceptable to the Father, not in ourselves but in Christ.

Further I say that the force and efficacy of this most pure holiness, which is in the flesh of Christ, floweth even into us, by the working of the Holy Ghost in us, so as we be hallowed in ourselves, that is to say, we be segregated from the defilings of this world, and serve God both in spirit and body, which benefit is everywhere in the scriptures called sanctification, or holiness, regeneration, or new birth, illumination or enlightening, the new man, the new creature, and the spirit or spirit, question you say then that this latter sanctification is not a thing without us nor ours by imputation only but a new endowment perfectly grafted and sticking in us bestowed upon us in christ by the mere grace of the heavenly father and wrought in us by the virtue of the holy ghost answer so say i question what need then have we of the other sanctification of our nature which is imputed to us answer forasmuch as this holiness that sticketh in us is but only begun in us, according as it appeareth by the continual debate between the flesh and the spirit, even in the best sort of men. Therefore, to the intent our persons may be acceptable unto God,

and so consequently the thing that precedeth from us may please him, for the life of holy men is, as it were, a continual offering up of themselves, whereunto the apostle exhorteth us. There had need to step in a far other holiness, namely the same which is most full and perfect in Christ, at the sight of whom our most gracious. father, who notwithstanding is a continual enemy to all uncleanness and filthiness may hold himself appeased, as he that is both singularly just and singularly merciful. Question, but why doth he not sanctify us fully out of hand? Answer, nay, rather you must marvel at his goodness, in that he drippeth any little drop of

regenerating grace into any man, and yet why he should delay the full sanctifying of us unto another world. There be many causes whereof the chief are too, the one is, for that we be but of a weak faith, and therefore, as much as in us lieth, we hinder the effectualness of the Holy Ghost. The other is that, inasmuch as we be saved by mere grace and not by works, he that glorieth should glory only in the Lord. For if this holiness were perfect in us, then should our righteousness also be perfect or cleaving in us, and so consequently Christ should not substantially and properly be our saviour, but only an instrument to dispose us after such manner as we might afterwards justify ourselves by our own righteousness, which is flatly the

foul and detestable era of the half-Palajian sophisters. Question, you say then, that between our sanctification and our righteousness, there is such a proportionable resemblance that, look how great the one is, so great also is the other. Answer, yea, indeed, for true sanctification. cannot be idle, and such as a fruitful tree is, such also is the very fruit of it. Wherefore, inasmuch as our understanding is partly enlightened with the promise of the true God, we do also partly know him, forasmuch, also, as we partly ascend to God's promise and apply the same to ourselves, therefore we do partly believe, and because our will is partly

changed, therefore we partly will well and work well. Question, what mean you by this partly? Answer, that is to say, not perfectly, but only so far forth as we be born anew, so as in one self-same ground, albeit in diverse respects, there is cleanness and uncleanness, light and darkness, belief and unbelief, goodwill, and will declining from good, and spirit and flesh. Question, what mean you by spirit? Answer, all the powers in man, as well superior as inferior, so far forth as they be sanctified or regenerated.

Question, and what call you flesh? Answer, in a man that is not regenerated, I mean thereby the whole man, even as much as is of him within and without from top to toe, and in a man that is regenerated, I mean, again, all his powers so far forth as they be not sanctified or regenerated. Question, but John saith that the children of God sin not. Answer, the same saith also that they are liars which say they have no sin. therefore they be said not to sin because that although sin dwell in them yet it reigneth not in them for the spirit fighteth in them against the flesh and at length shall get the upper hand and in consideration hereof the regenerated only may rightly say the evil that i would not do that i do and the good that i would do that i do not question even the natural reason that is in

any man unregenerated doth oftentimes strive against his life and thou knowest that virtue consisteth in subduing the unreasonable part of the mind unto reason. Answer, what is to be thought of the philosophical virtues I have answered afore, I grant there is a certain wariness and a certain conscionableness left in man to reprove, and after a sort also to restrain the headiness of the affections, to the intent that every man may be unexcusable, and therefore, as for the philosophical distribution, as it were, of the parts of the soul and the things that the peripatetics write concerning meanness. I not only reprove them not of any untruth, but also praise and commend them as remnants of

the image of God. Nevertheless, I say that the distribution of man's parts which the Holy Ghost teacheth us is far after another sort, matching the natural man and the spiritual man, the inner man and the outer man, the new man and the old man, and the flesh and the spirit, one against another. And in those names, by which vice is noted, he betokenedth also even the sovereign and overruling part of the mind, which the philosophers make so great account of, and finally whatsoever man hath of nature without the grace of regeneration. Question, is not reason, reason, then? Answer, yes, undoubtedly, and it always be better-sighted by searching, but yet it is always faulty till it be regenerated, for first and

foremost, even when it understandeth and discerneth the good, it understandeth it not, nor discerneth it not, as it ought and should do, by reason of the original corruption, which the philosophers could not so much as once mistrust. Moreover, in many even of the weightiest matters, it not only seeth not the truth, but also utterly, and of set purpose, fighteth against the truth. Question, I beseech you confirm these things with examples. Answer, I will, although the philosophers write many things notably and very excellently concerning God the sovereign good, yet notwithstanding, which of them all hath by his natural insight perceived the one substance of the godhead in the three persons, and yet there is none other knowing of the sovereign good

that is either true or that worketh salvation. Question, but yet it is said that Trismegistus, and especially the disciples of Plato, taught some such-like thing. Answer, It may be that some men have come to some dark knowledge of this mystery delivered over by the patriarchs and written in holy writings, but always with the toys of those men that seeketh for the truth of these things in the writings of the philosophers. For when they come to the point to lay forth the nature of God, after they have said many things according to truth, suddenly do the cunningest of them slide away to fondness as the apostle right they saith, for from whence cometh their multitude of gods,

from whence cometh their dividing of the godhead into great gods and lesser gods, from whence comes the franticness of the epicures, from whence comes the stoical necessity to bind even the godhead itself, from whence hath Aristotle his dotages, dreaming that the world is without beginning and without ending, and taking away all particular providence. And yet I will overslip other toys innumerable, confuted in so many places by Aristotle himself,

to whom, I pray you, may we wit the coming in of all superstitions, but to this nobler overruler. Furthermore, if we come down unto man, which of the philosophers could know himself, seeing he knew not the original of the first man and his fall. Yea, truly, what can be imagined more ork, more brain-sick, or more monstrous, than the saying which many men cease not to father upon Aristotle the wittiest of all philosophers, namely that in all mankind there is but only one's soul. Besides this, these wise men are not even yet agreed upon the immortality of the soul, and what quarrelling is there among them about the affections?

And if we come down to the mutual duties between man and man, how many things not only fondly, but also wickedly and shamefully, have the best commended lawmakers of all nations ordained? Which of them did even bethink him of the true remedy against the headiness of affections, and no marvel, seeing they knew neither the causes nor the effects of that deadly disease. You see, therefore, that even very reason itself, so long as it continueth but natural, is stark blind in the matters of greatest weight. And how many things be there, wherein it not only is blind, but also stark mad,

for besides that each of them defended those few errors which I have reckoned out of a great sort more, so willfully as they cannot abide to be taught righter things, that the world should be created of nothing, that the word should be created of nothing, that the word become flesh, that any man should be born of a virgin, that we should be counted righteous for another man's righteousness, that the dead bodies should rise again and many other things, reason not only admitteth them not, but also loathethethetheth, and scorneth them. Yea, and if ye press over far upon her, at length, like a bedlam, she trampleth all the whole heavenly wisdom under her feet, except she be made spiritual by the grace of God.

yea, and even then also, she ceaseth not to wrestle against the known wisdom, so far forth as she is not changed, and therefore, I true you see the things to be true which I spake. Question, but you divines also, be ye never so spiritual, agree not thoroughly amongst yourselves in all things? Answer that cometh not to pass through the fault of the scriptures, wherein the points of true religion are set forth plainly and manifestly enough, but we may have. blame the self-same reason for it, which is both blind and also stubborn. Neither said I that we be regenerated thoroughly, but only in part, for, were we regenerated thoroughly, we should all of us agree fully to the truth in all points, and therefore I deny not, but there remain the remnants of that ignorant and stubborn nature, but they shall be done away by little and little. Question, well then, let us grant that whatsoever pure knowledge or right judgment or just desire

there is in us the same proceedeth of the mere grace of the heavenly father in his son, but wilt thou not grant that this righteousness which sticketh in us is righteousness, and therefore also acceptable to God? Answer, I grant it is righteousness, for a good tree bringeth forth good fruit, howbeit, but by way of comparison, that is to it, if it be compared with such fruits as are rotten indeed, but if the very best works, even of the holiest men, should be tried by the rule of God's will, that is to say, by the law. they be sins, and albeit they be not such as fight full, but against the law, such as

adultery, stealing, lying, and such like be, yet are they sins because they shrink from that degree of goodness which the law doth just the exact at man's hand? And therefore, as I have said afore, we must rest ourselves upon the only obedience of Christ imputed to us by faith, as the only righteousness that is absolutely perfect and full in all points. Question, nay, rather by what right should God exact anything at men's hands, whom he knoweth to be unable to make payment even by nature, whereof he himself is the author? Answer, that we be not able to make payment is not of nature, which both would and could yield unto her creator, after whose image she was made, the thing that both he required and she owed inasmuch as she was created to the same

purpose. But it sprang of the willing corruption of the same nature, which bringeth to pass that no man either will or can acknowledge that debt, and much less pay it. Nay, rather, all of us do nothing else but increase that debt. But to speak even after the manner of men, doth any man cease to be a debtor, which through his own fold is not able to pay. Furthermore, where the creator may, of very good right and duty, require at our hands, that which he doth, yea, and peradventure somewhat more too, if he take the same in so good worth at our hands that believe in his son Christ, whom he hath

given unto us most liberally and freely, that of his like liberality he gives us faith also, whereby to take the gifts that he offereth us, who would not rather honour the father's so infinite goodness than stand in contention with him? Question, to God therefore the sovereign good be glory and praise everlasting. Nevertheless, give me leave to ask you thus much. At least this righteousness that cleaveth unto us, so far forth as it hath regard of righteousness, must needs please God who delighteth in righteousness. Answer, I perceive the whiliness, not of you as I think, but of Satan, for inasmuch as he cannot bereave Christ, quite and clean of the glory of our salvation,

therefore he goeth about at leastwise to nip off some pieces of it, which thing would surely come to pass, if he could make men believe that thing which the filthy sophisters bear folk in hand, namely that Christ's righteousness doth but simply that which is wanting in our righteousness. Thus, therefore, standeth the case. God beareth such a love towards righteousness that whatsoever hath any spark of righteousness and cleanness at all. He alloweth it after a sort, but that is of his own infinite goodness, and not for any desert of such manner of righteousness, which is but shadowish. So allowed he the repentance of the Ninevites and of Ahab, although it were no true

repentance, but a certain shrinking of themselves under the mighty hand of God. For he is so exceeding good, that he doth good even to them that be most unworthy, and much more to such as be by any means touched with the feeling of his majesty, then delighteth he much more in the works of them that be regenerated, although they be unperfect. But first I say that these works of the regenerated do please him, not for any worthiness of them, but of the mere grace of the father, who pardoneth that which is missing of righteousness, and accepteth that which precedeth of his own spirit.

Again I deny that our justification, and so consequently, that life everlasting shall be given to these works, after one manner, that is to it, as the cause of them, please they God never so much through his mere grace, for this is a sure ground that the righteous shall live by faith, and everlasting life is the gift of God. Question, but if they please, they seem worthy to please at leastwise in some behalf. Answer, most false is this conclusion. for God cannot, no, not even of covenant, allow any other righteousness as worthy of that name, than such is fully answerable to the law in all points, except he will be repugnant to himself,

which thing were a sin to say. Thus, therefore, oughtest thou to have gathered. The works of the regenerated do please God, though they be imperfect. Ogo, God is exceeding merciful. Question, besides this, there is mention made everywhere of higher wages, reward, requiting, and recompense. Answer, the name of wages have a larger scope than the name of everlasting life. And it is certain that God of his passing liberality rendroth temporal blessings even to the ungodly, be they never so unworthy. Again, whether you refer the name of wages to everlasting life or to other benefits, yet doth it not follow that the same is paid as due debt, but rather this doth most of all commend God's mercy that he vouch saith to give the name of wages or

higher to the undue reward which he bestoweth upon us of his own mere grace in Christ, to the end that we, although we be but unprofitable servants, for who is able to bestow anything upon God, might notwithstanding perceive that we have not lost our labour. Finally, although this wages be promised freely and given freely, yet is it given to him that worketh and therefore is called a wages or higher. End of Section 3 Section 4 of A Book of Christian Questions and Answers by Theodore Beza

translated by Arthur Golding. This Librevonk's recording is in the public domain. Question, if it be given to him that worketh, ergo it is given him for his works. Answer, nay rather, if it be given, we be sure it is not paid as a duty. Again, there is a far difference between giving to a worker and giving for works. I may well say, therefore, that eternal life is given to them work, because faith shall be esteemed by the fruits of it, and righteousness by faith, but not paid

them for their work's sake. And after this manner, must that text be expounded, where it is said every man shall be judged according to the things that he hath done in his body, and such other like sentences. Question why so? Answer, because good works make not men righteous, but follow him that believeth, and that is already become righteous in Christ, like as good fruits make not a tree to be good, but a tree is known to be good by the good fruits of it. Question, but a little afore you fetched good works not out of justification, but out of sanctification. Answer, I grant it, for there is no man justified by imputation of Christ's righteousness, but he is also sanctified by his spirit. Question, say you then,

that good works be needful to salvation? answer, if faith be needful to salvation and works do of necessity accompany true faith, as which cannot be idle. Surely the other followeth also that good works be needful to salvation, howbeit not as a cause of salvation, for we be justified and therefore also do live by faith only in Christ, but as a thing that of necessity cleaveth unto true faith. So saith Paul that those be God's children which are led by God's spirit, and John saith, that those be righteous.

which work righteousness. And James, also declaring, not by what means we be justified, but whereby true faith and instigation are discerned, proveth by Abraham's example, that those are not justified which utter no works of faith, for in such wise must James be made to agree with Paul, to the end it may plainly appear how they be but babblers which condemn the necessity of good works for false doctrine. Question, what if a man should never be endued with faith till the last instant of his death, for so it seemeth to have happened to the thief that hung by Christ. What manner of good works shall such a one be able to bring forth? Answer, verily the faith of that thief was unspeakably workful in that short time, for he rebuked

the blasphemies and wicked doings of the other thief. He detested his own crimes, with an assured and passing wonderful faith. He acknowledged Christ for the everlasting king, even in the reproachfulness of his cross when all his disciples held their peace. He called upon him as his savior, and finally he openly reproved the merciless cruelty and wicked speeches of the Jews. But the acknowledging of sin, the calling upon God the Father in Christ and Thanksgiving, are the excellentest works of the first table which cannot be utterly separated from faith in no man, and admit that some man being prevented with death is able to show no works of the second table, yet is not the faith in him therefore to be counted idle because that although it have not charity in actual deed, yet is it accompanied

with it in possibility? Question, I have yet one more doubt behind. Why any man should be damned for evil works if no man be justified for good works? Answer, the reason is manifest, namely, because that even the lightest sin that is deserveth, although not the extremest pains in everlasting death, yet everlasting death itself, which generally is the higher of sin. But no righteousness can worthily deserve eternal life, except it be such a righteousness as the law requirth, that is to wit, a perfect and sound state. Therefore show me one that fulfilleth the

law, as there is none found which is not a breaker of the law, and I will grant the foresaid argument. Question, say you then that there shall be odds in the punishments of the damned sort? Answer, although this matter be to be inquired of very soberly, yet have I not spoken it unadvisedly, for besides that the order of justice requireth, that he which hath sinned more grievously, should be more grievously punished, considering that all sins are not alike he-ness, saving so far forth as they match in generality, for it is a paradox of the Stoics and not of Christians to avouch that all sins be equal. Christ himself witnesseth the same thing expressly, saying that the case of the Sodomites shall be more tolerable in the day of

judgment, than the case of them that had rejected him. Question, then shall there be odds in the glory of those that shall be saved? Answer, verily, so doth the reason of contraries require, and whereas the apostle saith that such as have sown sparely shall reap sparely, it seemeth not that the same should be restrained to temporal blessings only. Question, but of sewing, cometh reaping, ergo righteousness and life, proceed of good works. Answer, truly similitudes must never be racked further than the nature of the things that are treated of, and the purpose of him that useth the similitudes will bear.

For else there will ensue most fond and false things out of number, which thing, when unskilful interpreters mark not, they must need set forth many foolish and false things. But in the foresaid place, the apostle seteth forth the proportional resemblance of works and glory, and not the cause of glory. for in all places he steadfastly defendeth that righteousness is the mere gift of God without the works of the law and is not paid as a due debt but bestowed upon the believers as a grace. Question, he meaneth but the works of the ceremonial law. A fond answer, for his matching of duty and grace one against another cannot stand

unless all the works of the law be excluded without exception, and yet I will overpass other arguments of Pauls, which are bent directly, against the very law of the ten Hests, bent, I say, not to deface the law, which is the madness of the manichies, but to take away from it, the power of justifying. Again, I beseech you, if works may be

thanked for any manner of righteousness, why should ye exclude the ceremonies that be rightly used, for truly they be comprehended in the seventh commandment of the ten Hest's, and as long as they were rightly used, they were most excellent works. Question, but ceremonies be abolished by

the coming of Christ? Answer, I confess they be abolished because they be fulfilled in Christ, but the matter itself declares, that where Paul disputeth in the causes of justification, his reasons tend not to prove that these ceremonies be abolished, but to show that salvation rested always in the only righteousness of Christ, imputed to them that believe, and for confirmation thereof, among other things, he allegeth the examples of Abraham and David. Question, then may we say that Paul excludeth but only the good works that go before the grace of justification. Answer, no less fond is this answer also. For besides that the apostle

allegeth manifestly the examples and testimonies of them that were justified, namely of Abraham and David, to the intent I may yet pass his other reason grounded upon the very nature of the law. What a madness were it, to busy a man's self about the excluding of those things which are not at all. For why, to deem that they which are not justified can do any good works. It is no less folly than if a man should say that a tree can bring forth good fruit, before it be good itself. Question, but although the hire of eternal life be not due for the worthiness of the very works, yet it is due at least wise by covenant. Answer, what covenant mean you, I beseech you? Question the covenant of the law, which is do this and thou shalt live, and if thou wilt enter

into life, keep the commandments. Answer, how this covenant is to be understood, is to be seen by the threatening which is set against the promise, and that is this by the witness of the apostle, cursed is everyone that abideth not in all the things that are written in the book of the law that he may keep them. But the law requireth perfect love, and no man but only Christ hath ever performed the law to the full, therefore life is due to none by the covenant, but only unto Christ. As for us, we have it given us by mere grace, from out of him who also is himself given unto us by mere grace. Question, wherefore call you them good word, then, if they deserve not eternal life? Answer, surely the Latin divines, yet even the ancient sort of them,

have improperly used the word merit or deserve instead of obtain, and the word desert, or deserting, or merit for a good work, which thing ye shall never find in the Holy Scriptures. Now, although the works of the regenerate are not so good as they should deserve eternal life, yet are they good so far forth as they proceed from the good spirit of God, and from a heart that is cleansed by faith, and again they be good because that by them the Lord is glorified. Our neighbour helped. We ourselves also reap this excellent fruit of them, that they be witnesses unto us of our faith and consequently of our election.

Question, let thus far then suffice concerning both parts of sanctification. Now remaineth that which the Apostle saith also, namely that Christ has become our redemption. Answer, by the word redemption, the Apostle meaneth in that place, not the very act of redeeming, but the effect of it. that is to say the end whereunto the said justification and sanctification lead us, the which is this, that being redeemed from sin and death by Christ, we should also be made partakers of eternal life in him, whose pledge and earnest penny we have even in this life,

that is to wit, the Holy Ghost, by whom we be sealed up. Question, but David groundeth this redemption and blessing in the release of sins, why then add you also the imputation of the sanctification that sticketh in Christ, and his fulfilling of the law? Answer, what if I should encounter thee with these texts? Blessed are the clean in heart, blessed are the blameless in the way and such other like, wouldst thou gather hereupon that the release of sins is excluded? I think not.

So now and then sanctification is meant by the term justification because these two go never asunder, and why may I not make answer thus also, that sometimes there is mention made but only of the releasing of sins, not to the end to exclude all other pates that make men blessed, but by cause the rest are covertly comprehended under it. And if thou wilt urge me yet further, I may also fitly answer that all the other are meant by the releasing of sins. For who can deny, but that even original sin hath need of cleansing, ergo it is comprehended in the releasing of sins. Also who can say that he only is to be taken for an offender, that doth some thing which he is forbidden, and not

he also which performeth not that which is enjoined him. Ogo, not to have fulfilled the law is also sin, which also hath need to be released. Now remain the sins, that is to say, the deeds that are done against the law, whereof there is no question, but they have need to be satisfied for. All these are released by Christ's satisfaction which is imputed to us all. Now let us come to the name of release. That man is properly said to release a debt, which freely, yea and utterly discharges, his debtor, so as he reserveth no action to himself against it. Now then, we be all of us,

the children of wrath, not only because we be corrupted, or because we fulfil not the law, or because we do the things that are forbidden us, but also because we ought to appear pure before God, such as he made us, and not only not to be transgressors of the law, but also to be performers of the law. Therefore, to the end that we, who else must perish, may have full and perfect release of all sins. This foresaid release must of necessity match with the other release whereof we spake afore, which taketh away but the one part of our sins. And we have found both these releases in Christ, whom we have taken hold on by faith, who not only have suffered for all those sins of ours, but also have fully sanctified our nature in himself

for us, and fulfilled all righteousness therein for us, so as we not only be set free by him from death, but also obtain the reward of everlasting life in him. Question, you conclude then that all things necessary for our salvation are found in Christ alone, to whom we cleave by faith, so as there is no damnation for them that be grafted in Christ. Answer, I conclude so indeed, yea, and also that the same is the only knowledge of salvation. Question, you say also that this faith is the gift of God bestowed upon us by his own mere grace, and therefore that the first entrance of it is of God and not of ourselves. Answer, I say so.

Question, then I pray, let us search to whom it is given, for the thing itself witnesseth, that it is not given unto all men inasmuch as the believers have always been so few. Answer, yet doth it not follow, but that it is offered unto all men, and therefore it seemeth that we should first seek, whether it be offered to all or no, which demand will lead us to the very headsprings that is to it to providence and predestination. Question, be it so, and therefore I pray you, show me what you call providence. Answer, I mean by it, not only that unspeakable power whereby it cometh to pass, that God hath foreseen all things from everlasting, and most wisely provided for all things

beforehand, but also that eternal decree or ordinance of the most wise and righteous God, whereby everything that have been have been, and everything that is is, and everything that shall be, shall be, according as it is liked him to appoint from everlasting. Question, say you then, that this providence is the bringer to pass and the disposer of all things? Answer, it is so, and that in such wise as it deserves some excellent name, than to be called a cause, for this is it that ordereth all causes, and ruleth even the particularest fallings out of them, so as they may be guided to their appointed ends. Question, but there be some angels evil and men are evil by nature, and whatsoever

proceedeth from either of these, except it be from men that be regenerated, must needs be evil, as the thing that precedeth from an evil beginning. But God cannot be the author of evil things. Ogo, he is not the author of all things, considering that so many evil things are to be exempted. Answer, as well each one of the angels, for there can no offspring be granted in a spiritual nature, as also the first persons of mankind, that is to which Adam and Eve, were created good, and therefore none of them both are to be displaced out of God's ordinance.

Question, admitted be so as touching that original and first state of theirs, but seeing they be now corrupted and full of lewdness, how can you bring them within the compass of that eternal ordinance of God which is so workful, but you must wrap God up in their naughtiness? answer, do you suppose it could stand with equity even by the judgment of themselves, be they devils, or be they the wickedest sort of men, that they should therefore be exempted from subjection to their maker, because they have been stubborn against him, and yet must this needs follow upon your saying? But thus standeth the case, I pray you, did you never behold, a clock wherein a certain wheel greater than the rest, turneth to the right hand,

and carryeth all the rest about with him, some to the right hand, and other some, to the left hand, with a mere contrary motion one to another. Question, yes, and truly I have wondered oftentimes that man's cunning should be able to represent to mine eyes, the thing that man's mind is scarce able to attain unto the compass of the skies. Answer, assure thyself that the same is a true image of the divine providence, so thou accept this thing whereunto nothing can be found fully like. No, not even in the compass of the skies, and much less in those hand-wrought instruments, because nothing is equal, no, nor to speak properly, like unto the highest, namely that God

Almighty, whom I now compare to the greatest wheel, which is the mover of all the rest, is in such wise in the world, as that he is no part of the world, and yet hath given self-moving to each of the wheels that move themselves, and that in such wise, as he himself is by no means moved, and yet moveth all things according to his eternal providence. And this mystery of God's providence was represented to us by God's appointing. in the vision of Ezekiel, wherein we have this to mark further that those fourfold images were over-covered with wings, and the wheels folded one within another, and that God was placed highest above all things, lest we might surmise the mover himself to be moved together with the

causes, or lest we might over-curiously imagine ourselves able to perceive the reason of those several movings. This foundation being laid, I answer three things. The first is that the instruments which have life and are endued with reason, of which sought be angels and men, are so stirred by God their maker as that they also stir themselves by an inward self-moving of their own, and therefore that in the bringing to pass of one action there meet two causes, that is to wit God, who is dissevered from the instrument, and yet giveth the instrument beginning to move itself, and the very instrument moving itself. Another is that these instruments are so moved by God, as that he himself stirreth always

well, but the instruments, if they be evil, go a contrary motion, that is to say, always amiss. But if they be good, so as the first author who moveth always well, and the instrument which moveth it do agree, then followeth a good and commendable work. The third is that God so moveth the evil instruments, for it is they only, whom we have now in question, and they on the other side are so moved by themselves that by reason of the double-moving beginning, there is also a double work, which seemeth notwithstanding to be but all one, and the same is good in respect of the good beginning, and evil in respect of the evil beginning. Question, I would have these things enlightened with some examples.

Answer, I will so, and that with assured and evident examples, but first I will put to this distinction, that God, the notable workmaster, using the evil instruments well whatsoever they be, doth either match the one against another. or benefit the good by the service of them, and whither of these two things soever he doth, no man that is in his right wits will deny, but it is good, namely either to punish the bad or to benefit the good. Now let us allege examples, that Joseph came by God's providence into Egypt, and was advanced there unto great preeminence, and that he might be the preserver of the church, but he himself saith it, and the matter itself declares it, and what instruments

did the Lord use to the compassing of the matter. Even Satan who stood his brethren against their most innocent brother, the very wicked intent of the same brethren, the covetousness of the merchantmen, and the lust of a most mischievous woman. All these sinned most grievously inasmuch as they were the beginners of their own doings. But God, using well those most ungracious instruments, which thought upon no such things,

defended his servants from the famine, settled them in a fruitful soil, nurtured his faithful servant Joseph and finally advanced him to the highest degree of honour. Is it not a most rightful work of God's justice that naughty persons should fordo themselves, so punished he the Midianites, using thereunto the spirit of discord in the ungracious willfulness of the murderers themselves, so as they made assault one upon another, doubtless with a wicked mind, but yet by the rightful justice of God? It was good that David should be chastised even after his sin was acknowledged and forgiven.

It was good also that Ahitafel's treachery and Absalom's traitorous mind should be discovered and sorely punished. To the performance of these matters, the Lord useth the outrage of Satan, Ahitafel's own false-heartedness, and Absalom's own traitorous ambition, horrible letchery and unnaturalness, by which evil instruments the Lord executed many things exceeding well. For he showed how much he misliketh hordom and craftiness. He chastised David fatherly, he punished Ahithel by his own hands, and finally he made Absalom cast away himself. The scripture beareth witness that our being tried, and consequently our chastisement is of the goodwill of our heavenly father,

that thereby he may be glorified and his power made perfect in our weakness, and except we be of that mind what comfort is there for the godly in so great miseries, for in the trial of Job after this manner there is used the spitefulness of Satan and the covetousness and excessive cruelties of the robbers. Satan therefore did sin in heaping so many miseries, upon the servant of God, and the robbers did wickedly in stealing away another man's goods, but the Lord did exceeding well in trying his servant, and in showing that all Satan's attempts against the Church are in vain. Finally, you will not deny but that the excellentest of all God's

works was the redemption of mankind, for the Father delivered his own son for our sins, by his fore-determined purpose, and by the fore-appointment of his eternal ordinance, according as Peter and the Church of Jerusalem say, And the father is he that hath not spared his own son for our sakes. And what manner of instruments hath he put to the performing of so great a matter? Surely the worst that could be. For no good man could have found in his heart to pursue a guiltless person, and much less to betray him, condemn him and crucify him.

Namely even the malice of Satan, who was entered into the heart of Judas, the cursed covetousness and treason of Judas himself, the most desperate envy and unrecoverable malice of the Jews, and finally Pilate's niceness and unto ordealing. So is there none of these which sinned not most heinously, and all of them were paid afterwards with most sore punishment at God's hand for the same, and yet in the meanwhile, by this self-same work, he saved us from sin and death. Question, but hereby there seemeth not any other thing to be gathered than that the purposes of evil persons are turned by God to a contrary end? Answer, yes, hereby also it is concluded that God moveth even the evil well and effectually

to bring his own work to pass by them. But you must bear in mind that which I have said, namely that God doth in such wise move evil persons well to bring his own good work about, not as a hammer or a hatchet in a workman's hand, which are tools that can do nothing at all of themselves. but in such wise as the evil persons do also move themselves ill, to will amiss and to do amiss, because that they themselves are the working cause of their own evil doings. Now also this must be added that God truly worketh in the good and by the good, and that he works by the evil and not in the evil.

Question what difference is there in these little words? Answer, undoubtedly great for God useth both the one and the other as instruments as oft as he listeth, and therefore he is rightly said to work his work as well by the one as by the other. But God worketh in those only whom he breatheth upon with his Holy Spirit, and whom he ruleth with His Holy Spirit, either strengthening them in goodness, namely the angels and the men that be regenerated, or else in doing them with new goodness as when he sanctifieth his servants first of all. But as for the rest, he worketh not in them by doing anything within them himself,

but giveth them up to be moved and misruled partly by their own lusts and partly by the devil, howbeit in such wise as their lewdness can neither will nor work anything, but that which he hath most rightly ordained. End of Section 4 Section 5 of a book of Christian questions and answers by Theodore Beza, translated by Arthur Golding. This Librevonk's recording is in the public domain. Question, what think you then of the name of

permission or sufferance? Answer, if by the name of sufferance there be meant that difference which I spake of even now, namely that God worketh not in the evil persons but leaveth them up to Satan and to their own lusts, I mislike it no wit. But if sufferance be matched against willingness I rejected, first as false and secondly as utterly against reason. That it is false, it is manifest by this, that if God suffer anything to be done against his will, then sure,

he is not God, that is to say Almighty. But if he be said to suffer a thing, as though he were reckless, how far are we from the opinion of Epicure? It remaineth then, that look what he suffereth to be done, he suffereth it willingly. Willingness, therefore, is not to be matched against sufferance. Again, if it be false, it must needs also be against reason. And I say that this absurdity may appear sufficiently to any heedful person by this, that the authors of the distinction whereby sufferance is matched against willingness, do by that means not only not attain to that which they would, that is to it that God should not be accounted the author of evil, which thing we acknowledge with all our hearts, but also bring the flat contrary to pass,

for who is more in fault than he, which a great way off, foreseeing a mischief that is to come and being able to disappoint the same with his only beck, not only disappointeth it not, but also suffereth it, that is to say, giveeth leave to execute the mischief, for not even they that be of that opinion do deny, but that Satan, and much rather wicked men, have not any power to do any mischief but by appointment. In case as if a man having a cruel lion shut up in a cage might with ease keep him in from hurting folk, and yet not only would not, but also would let him loose and suffer him to run upon this man or that man, perchance thou wilt say that so men's sins deserve, I grant it,

yet, notwithstanding it remaineth still that God's willingness matcheth with his sufferance, like as when a magistrate delivereth an offender into the executioner's hand, appointing him the manner of his punishment, and therefore that there is no reason to say that sufferance striveth against willingness. Question, what then do evil persons perform God's will? Answer, if you take will in his general signification, that is to it, for that thing which God hath willingly determined to have come to pass, and refer the word do, not to the intent and purpose of the wicked, but to the very falling out

of the matter, then surely God executeth his will, that is to say, that he hath determined from everlasting, even by the wicked also, according to this saying, who shall resist God's will? But if, if that by the name of will, ye mean the thing that of itself is acceptable unto God, and will have the word do to import a right affection of obeying, then truly I answer that the wicked sort, not only do not God's will, but also are carried wholly to the contrary part. Question, surely I have not anything to allege against it. Notwithstanding, I come back again to that which you have answered, namely that God created all things good at the beginning. From whence then comes their faultiness, for if it entered without God's appointment, then is your saying

impeached, namely that nothing at all is exempted from God's providence, no, not even from his working providence. But if God's appointment forewent it, a spigot not of purpose to blaspheme him, how is he not the author of all evil? Answer, the cause of the faultiness of the angels and of the first man was the willing inclination of their own wills unto evil, for God had created them but changeably good, for to be of itself unchangeably good is peculiar only unto God alone. Question, then, both the angels that never fell, nor never shall fall, and or never shall fall, so all they that shall be gathered up into everlasting life should be gods. Answer, I deny the consequence, for that the blessed angels never fail nor never shall

fall, and that there shall not be any end of their everlasting blessedness, it cometh not of their unchangeable nature, for that is peculiar unto God alone, but because they be continually underproped with the power of the unchangeable God, which power, if it should forsake them, as forsake them it might, if God would, then doubtless might they not only be changed but also utterly banish away and be brought to nothing. And therefore I have said that the cause of faultiness is the willing inclination of the will, which was made good indeed, howbeit yet able to be changed unto evil. For the said will was changeable by God's ordinance who created it so,

because that otherwise look how many unchangeable natures he had made, so many gods had he made. And changed it was at God's. God's forsaking of it, for to whom is he bound, but yet by changing itself of its own accord, so as the cause of faultiness may seem to be imputed, rather to forsaking than to enforcing. Question, but if this change happened not without God's fore determination, verily it may seem that all this inconvenience is to be fathered upon him. Answer, that followeth not for as much as God's determination took not away the will of the first

man, and so also neither his advisement or choosing, but only ordered it. For he was changed by falling utterly of his own accord, which thing is to be understood much more of the falling of the angels, whose faultiness crept upon them from at home, and perhaps that was the cause that moved God to have pity upon men, which fell by the stepping in of the devil, and not to have pity of the devil and his angels. Question, but otherwise it could not come to pass than God had ordained should come pass. Answer, I grant both, for neither were it reason that the said everlasting ordinance, wherein I showed a little erst that all things and everything without exception are comprehended should be shut out from the changing of the chief piece of work, and to avouch that such manner

of ordinance were changeable it were a point of wickedness. Let both of them, therefore, be most true, yet doth it not thereupon follow either that the fault is in God, who, as I said, doth always well, yea, even then also when his instruments offend, or that man is without fault, as who hath not offended but willingly. For this necessity, where through the thing that God had ordained, must needs come to pass, hath not taken away either will or happening, but rather hath ordered and disposed them, considering that among the causes of men's doings even the chiefest cause is will. Question, your meaning then is that the necessity of choosing that which God hath ordained

from the beginning, repuneth not against will. But happening is said to be that which may either fall out or not fall out. Answer, yea, and I say more plainly, that willingness or happening are not taken away by necessity but by compulsion, as for example it was of necessity that Christ should die in the age, time, and place for ordain from everlasting, for else the prophets might have lied. And yet, if he have an eye to the natural disposition of Christ's flesh by itself without the full determination of God, there is no doubt, but by nature he might have lived longer, and therefore that in that respect he died by Hap. Christ's bones might have been broken, if he look upon the nature of bones by themselves, but if he look unto God's ordinance,

they could no more be broken than it is possible that God should alter his determination, and therefore the unchangeable necessity of God's ordinance doth not take away the happening of the second causes, but dispose it. Also, it was of necessity that Christ died by the ordinance of his father, and yet he died willingly, yea, and God forbid, that ever we should die unwillingly, who, notwithstanding, must of necessity die once. And what more, God himself is most freely, yea, and most willingly good, and yet is it utterly impossible that he should not be good? Ogo, willingness and necessity are not repugnant, for, whereas it was of all the of necessity, that of two repugnant things Adam must choose but the one,

although none of them both was within the compass of his own will, yet surely the one of them was set down in the everlasting ordinance of God, which ordinance was both out of Adam's will and above his will, and yet compelled not his will, but rather forasmuch as his will could not take both of them, it willingly, and of its own accord, inclined finally to that part, which the ordinance of God had foreset. Question, but surely that necessity which, is entered in together with lust into man's heart, in such wise as he cannot but sin,

according as thou hast declared afore, seemeth to take away happening. Answer, although I should grant it to be so, yet cannot men be exempted from blame, first because this necessity of sinning, wherewith mankind is now overwhelmed, cometh not of the creator but of the willing inclination of man's natural will unto evil, as I said afore. And who will think it's strange, that he should be burned, which hath willingly cast himself into the fire. Again, although it be not of hap, but of necessity, that man is now carried unto evil, considering that since he is corrupted by sin, he is, as the apostle saith

become the bond-slave of sin, and so remaineth till he be set free by the son of God, yet notwithstanding, that which he doth, he doth it willingly, and unconstrained, for like as he cannot but do evil, so also he delighteth not in any other than evil, albeit that the evil lurking sometime under the colour of good to make him take it for good, and therefore not even this necessity, which was brought in by willing fall, taketh away the willing moving of the will. Which thing being granted, it followeth that man is verily the cause of sin inasmuch, as although he sin of necessity, yet he sinneth willingly,

and yet say I not that happening is taken away by this necessity neither, for although that in man which is held bound under necessity of sinning and is not yet regenerated, there remaineth now no deliberating whether he may choose the true good or the evil, as there was in man's nature afore his fall, yet notwithstanding there remaineth a deliberating between evil and evil, for where the case standeth not upon choice of this or that, there is no deliberating or debating. Now then, even the headiest and hastiest men that be do deliberate, but neither can they understand anything or think anything, and therefore much less deliberate of anything, but either with

straying from the good, or else plainly against their conscience. Ogo, all their deliberating is busied about the choosing between two evils or more, and their preferring of the one or the other cometh altogether by HAP as in respect of their own voluntary will, which happening, the unchangeable ordinance of God, doth no more take away now in men corrupted than it took away in old time in mankind uncorrupted. Question. The sum then of the things which thou hast spoken concerning providence is this, that nothing in the whole world cometh to pass against God's will or without his knowledge, that is to say rashly

and casually, but altogether in such wise as God himself hath ordained them from everlasting, disposing all the mean causes most mightily and effectually, so as they be carried on to their appointed end of necessity, as in respect of his ordinance, and yet that he is not an author or allower of any evil, because he dealeth always most rightfully, with what instruments soever he execute his work? Answer, so it is. Question, this is yet again the thing that troubleth me, for although I see that God worketh rightfully by the evil sort, yet notwithstanding if all and everything be done by God's eternal ordinance, so as nothing at all may be excluded. Then it remaineth that the evil doings of the evil persons, even in respect that they be evil,

are not exempted from God's ordinance, which thing methinks cannot be said without wickedness. Answer, needs must he be sore troubled, and to no purpose, which labroth to comprehend God's wisdom within the bounds of his own reason. For I pray you, if you would go about to contain the whole ocean in a drinking cup, what should you else do but only lose your labour and be counted a fool for so doing? And yet more tolerable, though not to be talked of, is the proportioning between the main sea and the least cup that can be, than between God's wisdom and the foolishness of man's most corrupt wit.

Nevertheless, I suppose, that this which thou objectest may also be fitly answered unto. Therefore I grant the even this also, that the evil works of evil men, even in that they be evil in respect of themselves, are not done against God's will or without his knowledge, for were it so, then should either godlessness, or else epicurishness, follow of necessity. But I say further, that if thou have an eye to God's ordinance, the very evil itself, hath a respect of goodness,

although it be evil in itself. So as this paradox of Augustans is very true, namely, that it is good also that there should be evils to the end that God should not suffer evils to be, and truly in not suffering, he is not unwilling but willing. Question, what then shall we say that God willeth iniquity? Answer, God forbid, for it is the horriblest of all blasphemies to say so. But stay thyself a while, I beseech thee, that I may expound that which I have said so truly, and godlyly as cannot be denied, but God must also be avouched not to be the judge of the world.

The name of will is taken sometime in the largest signification for that which God ordaineth or appointeth, in which signification we must utterly say either that God willeth all things, that is to say that nothing cometh to pass which God will not have done, or that God is not almighty, if never so small a thing, come to pass which he would not have done, or else that God regardeth not all things, if anything come to pass he cares not how. And sometime, by the name of will, there is meant only that which liketh him, because it is good of its own nature, and after this manner the faithful only are said to obey God and to execute his will, because that, in this sense, God is said to will, that is to say, to allow and accept,

only that which is good, and not to will iniquity, which will of his is uttered fully unto us in his law, but his other will is not so, but in part, for who knoweth what shall befall, but this one day. And nothing shall befall but that which God hath from everlasting both willed and ordained to befall. Question, can God be thought to have willed or ordained anything which he misliketh, and so consequently which is evil? Answer, truly it must needs be confessed that whatsoever God hath ordained, it is ordained altogether willingly. But even herein also appeareth rightly his infinite wisdom, that with him even the darkness hath a respect of light. Yay, and that, in such wise as it nevertheless both is and continueth darkness still, that is to say,

it is good that there should be also some evil, because God findeth the reason how it may come to pass that the thing which both is and continueth evil still of its own nature may nevertheless have a respect of goodness before him, and how the thing that is against his will, that is to say, which of its own nature is unrighteous, and therefore pleaseth not God, may not come to pass without his will, that is to say, without his ordinance, as for example's sake, that God saveth his elect by redemption, freely given in his Son Christ. It is to his own exceeding great glory, which otherwise should not have shone forth. But man should not have needed redemption from sin and death, except there had been sin and death.

Ogo, in respect of God's ordinance, it was good that sin and death should enter into the world. And yet the same sin both is, and continueth, so sinful of its own nature, as amends could not be made for it, but by most terrible punishment. Again we recover much more in Christ than we forewent in Adam. Ogo Adam's fall was the best and profitableness thing that could be for us, as in respect of God, who by his wonderful means preparereth a kingdom of everlasting glory for us in Christ. And yet this fall is so evil of its own nature that even we that believe and are justified do feel many mysteries and mischances which spring of it, even to the death.

Also it is greatly to the glory of God that he showeth himself, a most sore punisher of all sin. But if there had been no sin, there had been no gap open for this judgment to come in at. Ogo, in respect of God's ordinance, it was good that there should be sin, and that the same should afterwards be spread abroad, to be punished with everlasting pains in the devils, and in all that be set without Christ. Also, St. Peter saith, it is the will of God, that is to say it is his ordinance, that when we do well, we should be mistreated. But he that doeth well cannot be hurt but by sin, Ogo, in respect of God that willeth it,

that is to say, which ordaineth it, it is good that there should be persecutors of the church, whom, notwithstanding, he justly punisheth afterward, most severely as offenders against his will, that is to say, as doers against that which he alloweth. Therefore, even by the express words

of the apostles, the thing that is against God's will, that is to say against that which he alloweth and commandeth, cometh not to pass without his will, that is to say without his will, that is to say, without his ordinance, and yet, can it not therefore be said that God is contrary to himself, or that he willeth iniquity? According as Augustine doth rightly conclude against Julian out of the word of God. Question, therefore it seemeth right that sufferance should be distinguished from

willingness. Answer, what I deem meet to be thought of this distinction I have spoken a little afore. Truly if sufferance be matched against will, that is to say against ordinance, such oversetting is not only false but also foolish and fond, considering that even in such actions as are not a free choice by themselves, as for example when merchantmen that be in a danger do cast out their goods, and generally as often as men choose the less evil to avoid the greater inconvenience, even the heathen men acknowledge free will to bear sway. But if sufferance be matched against willingness, that is to wit against that which God is willing with all, as well liked and accepted of by itself, and of its own nature.

So as the thing that is good of itself may be matched against that which is good, but by well falling out, and which hath some respect of good in it, not of its own nature, but in respect of the end that it is guided unto by God, through whose incomprehensible wisdom, even the darkness doth service unto the light, then truly I admit it, so that this also be added to it, namely that the same is not a vain and idle sufferance as a number dream, but a most workful, and yet nevertheless, a most rightful sufferance, for the better understanding whereof, take the matter in few words to stand thus. I think thou wilt not say that a judge is but an idle looker-on,

when upon the hearing of a transgressor case he delivereth him to the sheriff to be put to this kind of punishment or that, for surely the sheriff doth not so much put him to death, as he is the instrument of the judge that putteth him to death, so as if any cruelty be extended in that behalf by the sentence of the judge, the same may be imputed not so much to the executioner as to the judge that commanded him. Question, I grant all this, but how many unlikely hods be there between these and the other things that we entreat of? Answer, I confess that, for else there should be no difference, or at least wise, very small,

between a like thing and a same thing. Nevertheless, I would have you reckon up, at least wise, the chief of them, that I may answer to them one by one. Question, in the sentence of judges, they goeth trial before, but in these things whereof you entreat there is oftentimes no such thing perceived. Answer, how many things are done justly by the magistrates of this world? The trial whereof is not seen of their subjects, it will thou attribute less unto God,

who searcheth thoroughly all things that lie hid even in the bottom of men's hearts, as well past as to come. Question The sheriff doth nothing but by commission received But where have the wicked men received Any such commandment As to kill one another or to hurt good men Answer, in this thou art deceived

That whatsoever God appointed to be done Thou imaginest him to give knowledge of it With some loud voice Unto those whose service he purposeth To use in the doing of it But experience itself teacheth That that is not always true In neither of the cases

that is to say, whether he have determined to use mercy or to use justice, no, not even then when he useth instruments to have understanding. For who doubteth but that Pharaoh was ordained of God to entertain Joseph, and to prepare harbor for his church, and yet he received no such commandment outwardly, no, nor so much as thought of any such thing in himself. Nevertheless, that was ordained of God, and the covert motion of Pharaoh's heart tended to the exescent,

executing of that which the Lord had ordained. That the Caldys were ordained to punish the evil Israelites and to nurture the good, the prophets had foretold it a thousand times, yea, and that in such wise as Nebuchadnezzar had received express commandment concerning the same thing. Inso much as the Lord doth also call him his servant, yet did not the Lord command the Caldys any such thing by name, but as Ezekiel writeth, giving over the king's heart partly to Satan and to his soothsayers and partly to his own lusts, he inclined him of his own sway to perform that which God had determined.

How much more must we believe the same to be done, as oft as the Lord useth for things that want reason, or also that be utterly without life as his executioners, for so did he call the flies, frogs, grasshoppers, hail and death, to punish Pharaoh. So also saith the wisest of all men, even the very lots fall not out at adventure. For all things serve by a secret motion to execute God's ordinances. But this difference there is that the good instruments do nothing but through faith. That is to say upon assurance that they be called to that which they do, and with a mind settled to obey. But as for the evil instruments, for as much as they be led by a blind-beard by Satan and their own lusts, and have an eye to nothing less than to the obeying of God.

against whose express word they either know or ought to know that all their intents and purposes do fight. Therefore they serve not the Lord, although God do secretly use the travail of them, even against their wills in such wise as they do not anything else than that which the wonderful workmaster himself hath ordained. Question, then let us stay here concerning God's eternal providence. From the which I see not that anything at all may be exempted, and let us, if you please, proceed to predestination, which I would first and foremost have described unto me. Answer, predestination being considered in general is nothing else but the same thing that we have called God's determination or ordinance, howbeit as having regard to the end or work of the very ordinance,

for there is nothing which the wise creator of all things, who doubtless hath neither made anything unadvisedly, nor can be deceived or alter his purpose, hath not ordained both to middle ends and especially to some one uttermost point of all. But custom hath won that predestination is considered chiefly in the governing of mankind. Thus therefore do I describe it. I say it is God's everlasting and unchangeable ordinance, going in order before all the causes of salvation and damnation, whereby God hath determined to be glorified,

in some by saving them of his own mere grace in Christ, and in other some by dampening them through his rightful justice in Adam, and in other some by damning them through his rightful justice in Adam and in themselves. And after the custom of the scripture, we call the former sort the vessels of glory and the elect or chosen, that is to say, folk appointed to salvation from before all worlds through mercy. And the other sort we call reprobates or castaways and vessels of wrath, that is to say, appointed likewise to rightful damnation from everlasting. either of both which God hath known severally from time without beginning. Question, but it is a hard case to say that there be some foreappointed to damnation, and therefore thou knowest that many refer the word predestination only to the chosen, and that they say rather that the reprobates are foreknown.

Answer, I know what that meaneth. Many were afraid, lest they should make God the cause of the destruction of the reprobates, and also report him to be cruel if they should confess that the reprobate also are predestinated of God, but they needed to have feared none of both, as shall be showed in due place. Again, that is but a fond starting-hole, for if foreknowledge, as they call it, carry the force of a cause, no less than predestination doth, then say they that which they would not say. But if it have not, then may they also say that God is not the cause of the salvation of them that be predestinated. For why, the apostle in reckoning up the causes of the salvation of the chosen

seteth down prognosis, which these men interpret foreknowledge in the first place, yea, and Luke seteth down the same foreknowledge as the groundwork of our redemption. Rightly, therefore, doth Augustine acknowledge predestination on both sides, although he do now and then shoal out the predestinate sort from the foreknown. But let us away with this strife about terms, my meaning was only to show that I had done a right in setting down predestination for a general term, whereof there be two particular sorts, which, notwithstanding, do meet together, and that is a thing in especially to be marked, no less in the end than in the head and original beginning, for the headspring of them both is the ordinance of God, and both the ways which are, as it were, cut out from the head, do meet again in the utterance. most point, that is to it in the glory of God. These things being set down, to the end I may answer to that exception of thine, namely that it seemeth a hard case that there should be some predestinated unto death.

I say that these things ensuing seem unto me much harder, namely that God should not have for-purposed some certain end with himself in creating men, albeit that, even as the unwiseest workmen of them all do rightly witness, the end is the first thing in the intent of the doer. that God, in creating men, purposed an end to himself, which afterwards should fall out in certainly, that is to wit in such sort, as it should rest in the power of the clay, and not in the power of the potter, to make the things come to pass, or not come to pass which the workmaster had purposed, that God, knowing the will of his own handiwork, should alter his own purpose, so that, whereas he had determined to save all in Christ, yet notwithstanding he should alter

his mind and destroy all such as would not incline to that purpose. For all these things, say I, do of necessity follow their opinion which uphold that such as perish do perish contrary to God's appointment. And lest we may seem to wander without our lists, that is to say, not to deal by only consequences of reason. First, I say that all opinions which strive against the just proportion of faith, of which sort this must needs be one, the granting whereof is accompanied with so many wicked things are plucked in pieces by the Holy Scriptures. Secondly, I say that, as oft as the scripture maketh mention of the predestination of the chosen sort, so often is the predestination of the reprobates confirmed likewise, inasmuch as the cause itself requireth, that, whereas some be chosen unto

life, the residue must be understood to be appointed unto death. Furthermore, seeing that the vessels of glory be said to be predestinated to glory, the oversetting of flat contraries doth utterly require, that we should consider the vessels of wrath to be such as are predestinated under death. Question, but here it is noted that when the apostle entreateth of the vessels of glory, he useth a word that importers doing, and when he speaketh of the vessels of wrath, he useth a word that importeth suffering. Answer, I grant that if it be demanded of the middle causes whereby the vessels of wrath are carried to the wrath that is appointed for them, they themselves are the only cause

of their own damnation. but truly this destructionist toyish, for Luke entreating of the elect, useth a participle of the passive voice, saying, as many as were ordained to everlasting life. What was that of themselves, and not rather of the mere grace of God? Besides this, it is nothing to the matter. For we entreat not of salvation or damnation, but are the ordinance to salvation or damnation, which disposeth and ordereth the very causes of executing them, and therefore in no wise hangeth upon them. that is altogether above the skies, as the old proverb saith. To be short, whither is it harder to say that some be predestinated to damnation than to say they be

registered to damnation long ago as St Jude speaketh, or to say that they be appointed to wrath as Paul speaketh. Lastly, I say not that the damnation of the reprobates is the end that God purposed upon his foreordinence, but his own glory. Neither also did I simply say that the Reprobates were appointed to damnation, but I said they were ordained to just damnation, showing thereby that although no man be damned, but such as the Lord hath ordained to damnation, for otherwise therefore said blasphemies that I spake of would follow of necessity, yet are none damned, but such as are found to have in themselves just causes of damnation. What falseness then, or what roughness hath my foresaid saying in it?

End of Section 5 Section 6 of a book of Christian questions and answers by Theodore Beza, translated by Arthur Golding. This Librovon's recording is in the public domain. Question, you seem to be disproved by this saying, God will have all men saved, and by such other like universal sentences. Answer, then say thou that some be damned whether God will or no, or else confess that the said text must be taken otherwise, which thinks the promises all. also do show, namely, which thing even the schoolmen themselves have espied, that thereby must be meant, not the particulars of all kinds, but all kinds of particulars, to speak more plainly, so as it may be not an universal, but an indefinite proposition, which ought to be interpreted

thus, rather. That is to it, that God will have any manner of men to be saved, which, self-kind of speech Matthew useth, when he saith that the Lord healed all sicknesses and diseases, that is to say all sorts or kinds of diseases, according as both Latin men and Englishmen do now and then speak. For I pray you, dare any man say that God will have all men saved, yea, even though they continue in unbelief to the very last gasp, truly no. For if it be the Father's will, that he which believeth in the Son should not perish, it followeth that it is His will also, that which believeth not in the Son should perish,

and therefore those two things, namely to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth, must be yoked together, so as it may be understood that God will have those only to be saved, whom he vouchsafeth to come to the knowledge of the truth. But faith, which is this true knowledge, lighteth neither upon all men, nor yet upon the runner or willer as the apostle witnesseth, but cometh of God's mercy and lighteth upon them only, which, as Luke saith, are ordained to everlasting life, and whose hearts, as the same Luke writeth, God openeth, so as they take heed to his word. Then must we understand that God's predestination extendeth to all

sorts of men, that is to wit, both Jews and Gentiles, private persons and magistrates, men and women, old men and young men, slaves and gentlemen, such as be guilty of many sins, and such as be guilty of fewer sins. For these only, and such other like, are the circumstances that are included in the foresaid sentence. Question, will you then make election to be particular? Answer, and I would fain know if the man be in his right wits that imagineth election to be universal, for truly he that taketh all maketh no choice, and he that chooseth a thing out from two other things or more, must needs be said to refuse or forsake

the things that he chooseth not. Question maturely the calling and promise are universal. answer, understand them to be indefinite, yea, and that in respect of certain circumstances of which I have spoken, and thou shalt think the right layer. And so altogether are those things also to be taken which diverse learned men of our time have written about this controversy, or else see how very reason of necessity confuteeth that universal calling. For if ye mean it of the calling by the preaching of the word, it is not true that

all men are or ever were, yea, or ever shall be. called severally hereafter. For how many have died, do die, and shall die before they have heard ought at all of this word. But if you take it to be meant of the other calling which hath a much larger scope, namely of the beholding of nature whereby is understood that which may be known of God, not even this neither, is so universally true as that it comprehends every several person, for how many have died and daily do die in such an age as is utterly unfit for that contemplation. there cannot nor may not any calling, and much less any election be warranted to be universal, but only to be indefinite, and that must also be only with an exclusion of these certain circumstances aforesaid.

Question, but what if we say that all men are called universally to salvation under condition that they believe, and therefore that salvation is offered universally as in respect of God which calleth, and that the fault why this calling is not universally of effect is not in God, but in the stubbornness of the unbelievers which refuse the good turn that is offered them. Answer, this doubtless is true in some respect, for no doubt but the stubbornness of the unbelievers is the thing that disappointeth the application and efficacy of the promises that be offered. No doubt also, but calling have a larger scope than election. But yet your supposals are neither truly enough nor fitly enough spoken.

For first we have showed that not even the outward calling, whether ye look to that which is or to that which is done by the word of the gospel, pertaineth to every several person. Wherefore, as touching those that we speak of, there is found in them no stubbornness against the gospel, but only original corruption, which notwithstanding is even of itself alone sufficient to damn the reprobates. Besides this, although the condition of believing be annexed, yet doth not the ordinance hangeth upon that, but rather that hangeth upon the ordinance, as which goeth in order before all other inferior causes. Else see how false and unreasonable things ensue,

for it will follow that God, in devising with himself, did first set before him his whole work as already finished, and that according as he saw his work should be disposed of itself, and not by him that made it, he should thereupon take occasion to determine, that is to say, to a point, either to salvation or damnation. Or, if you like better that God himself was uncertain, how the performing or not performing of the condition would fall out.

Then must it be concluded that God's ordinance hangeth in suspense, and that the determination of a case, as Augustine trimly saith, is not in the power of the potter but of the clay? And hereupon will be grounded another false opinion, namely that faith hath not his beginning of God, but of the will of man. If it be so that God's foresight gave him cause to determine upon his choice, neither is it to the purpose to object that faith is not foreseen for as much as it is a gift of God that cometh in by the way, but that corruption and unbelief are foreseen, which are natural in man after his fall.

For the reason of the contraries requireth in any case, that look in what degree faith is placed in the ordinance of election, even in the same degree must faithlessness or unbelief be placed in the ordinance of reprobation. Therefore, if you make faith foreknown to be the cause of the ordinance of election, which is utterly a point of a Pelagian, and therefore repealed by Augustine, you must needs deem the same also of unbelief in the contrary ordinance of reprobation. And on the other side, if he submit faith unto the said ordinance, as you needs must, for we be chosen to the intent to believe, and not because we would or should believe, you must needs also in the contrary member, submit unbelief to the ordinance of reprobation.

Question, will you then make the ordinance of reprobation to be the cause of unbelief as well as you make the ordinance of election to be the cause of faith? Answer, no, for the ordinance of election is indeed the efficient cause of faith, but corruption or unbelief with the fruits thereof are in such wise put under the ordinance of reprobation, as that the will of man is the first efficient cause of them, and yet notwithstanding they be subject to the ordinance, because that although it be not through the ordinance, yet is it not besides the ordinance, nor without the ordinance, that those things happen, whereof the failing cause and not the efficient cause is grounded in God, as I said afore. For like as they only believe in whom God created faith,

even so through God's forsaking of man's will, sin is crept into mankind and there abideeth, yielding ill fruit as many as God listeth to leave up to their own lusts, that they may be the cause of their own damnation, whereunto they are also enregistered and appointed from everlasting. Furthermore, that I may retire unto the other question whatsoever is said of the fornamed condition which is annexed to the ordinance, as who should say that the ordinance depended upon the condition, it is unfidly spoken, for the ordinance of saving the elect sort is another thing than the very glorifying of the elect, and the ordinance of damming the reprobates is another thing than the very damning of them, insomuch as the ordinance itself must needs be distinguished from the execution of it.

The execution, then, of the ordinance of election, that is to it, the salvation of the chosen, dependeth upon faith that taketh hold of Christ, and the execution of the ordinance of reprobation, that is to it the damnation of the castaways, dependeth upon sin, and their fruits thereof, according to this saying of the prophet, thy destruction o Israel, comeeth of thyself, and of this ordinance of choosing some men to be saved by grace, and of refusing other some to be damned through their own sins, we know none other cause, but this one, namely that the Lord, who is both incomparably merciful and incomparably rightful, will be glorified in that wise. He that holds not himself contented with, this, for as much as he seeketh some higher thing and some rightfuler thing than God's will,

he is worthily reproved by the apostle for a babbler. Question, ergo God hateth some not for their sins' sake, but because he listeth so to do. Answer, this is a slanderous objection, for it is certain that God hateth no man but for sin, for otherwise he had hated his own work. But it is one thing to hate and another thing to ordain one to just hatred. for the cause of the hatred is manifest, namely even sin, but why God appointeth whom he listeth unto just hatred, though the cause be hid from us, saving to the end he may be glorified, yet cannot it not be unrighteous, considering that the will of God is the only rule of rightfulness.

For if we speak of this sovereign will of God which ordereth and disposeth the causes of all things, we must not say that a thing ought to be rightful before God should will it, but contrary wise that God must first will the thing before it can be rightful, which whoso considereth not shall reason not confusedly in this matter. Question, but yet for all this God seemeth to be a regarder of persons if he yield not alike unto all that have done alike, for in this point all men are like that they be corrupted by nature spread into them from Adam. Answer, nay truly it followeth not of necessity that whosoever yieldeth not alike unto like should be an acceptor of persons, but he only which yieldeth not alike unto like,

because he is partially moved by some circumstances that accompany the person itself, as if two men were offenders alike, and the judge should acquit the one of them because he is rich, or his kinsmen, or his countrymen, for these be the persons that may not be regarded of him that will judge uncorruptly. But I pray you let us put the case that two men be indebted unto you, both in like some and both upon like conditions. Now, if of your liberality you forgive the one his debt and exact the other man's debt according to extremity of law, shall there be any accepting of persons in this behalf? What if some sovereign, having a couple that offend alike, do of his mere grace, pardon the one man's offence and punish the other, according to

his deserts? Shall there be any partiality in the matter? Nay, truly, if there be any fault in such dealing, it is not towards him that is punished, but towards him that is born with all, and that is but a gentle fault. Much less, therefore, can any partiality or regard of persons be deemed to be in the case which we have now in hand, considering how God acquitteth not the elect, but by the imputation of Christ's satisfaction, and if anything may be called in question as scarce indifferent in this behalf, men may seem to cavil rather upon the mercy towards the elect, than upon the rightful rigour towards the castaways. Finally, to what end is all this? For in order of causes, God's ordinance goeth before the very creation of mankind, unless thou

will make God so unwise a workman as to create mankind before he had determined with himself to what end he would make him. And what could he see in them that, as yet, had no being, whereby he might be moved to determine this or that concerning them? Therefore this discourse also pertaineth not to the ordinance, but to the execution of the ordinance, wherein notwithstanding, as I said even now, there can no partiality or accepting of persons be found. question dost thou not then by the term lump which the apostle paul useth understand the created and corrupted mankind where out of god ordaineth some to honour and some to dishonour Answer, there is no doubt, but God taketh both the swords out of the same lump, ordaining them to contrary ends. Yet do I say, in plainly avouch, that Paul in the same similitude mounteth up to the said sovereign ordinance,

whereunto even the very creation of mankind is submitted in order of causes, and therefore much less doth the apostle put the foreseen corruption of mankind before it. For first by the term lump, there is manifestly betokened a substance, as yet unshapen, and only prepared to work upon afterward. Again, in likening God to a potter and mankind to a lump of clay, whereof vessels are to be made afterward, out of all doubt the apostle betokeneth the first creation of men. Furthermore, he should speak unproperply to say that vessels of wrath are made of that lump,

for if that lump betokened men corrupted, then they were the vessels of dishonour already, and the potter should not be said to make them, other than such as they had made themselves already. Finally, so should the cause as well as the ordinance of reprobation, as of the execution of the same ordinance, that is to it, of the damnation of the reprobate, be manifest, for men should see it were corruption, but why then should the apostle mount up to that secret will of God which is rather to be honored than searched, if he had seredian answer at hand, especially which might carry a likelihood of truth with it, even in the reason of man? Question, truly thou compelledest me to agree unto thee even in this point also, but yet this is another thing that troubleth me, if this ordinance be of necessity and unchangeable as it is indeed, to what purpose do men disquiet themselves, for whether they do well, they must nevertheless

perish if they be ordained to damnation, or whether they do ill, they shall be saved if they be ordained to life. Question, certainly it is a fond objection to surmise that thing which never shall, nor can come to pass, for from whence comes repentance and the fruits thereof, truly even from regeneration through the spirit of Christ, taken hold on by faith. But true faith is given to the chosen sort only, ergo only the elect do repent and give themselves to good works. The rest have not so much as they will to think of anything aright, and much less to do it, considering that to will a right and to do a right cometh of God's grace, which is peculiar only to the chosen.

And therefore, as fond also is the saying of them which hold opinion, that they shall be saved if they be chosen, what kind of life soever they give themselves unto. For as many as be chosen are the children of God, but if they be God's children, then also, as the Apostle saith, they be led by God's spirit, and therefore the elect truly cannot perish, for then should God's ordinance fail, or else at leastwise God should be changeable, but like as they cannot perish, so also are they in their seasonable time endued with faith, and engrafted in Christ, in whom they be justified, sanctified, and glorified? Question, but yet, must they needs perish that are ordained to damnation? Answer, I grant, but yet, is it because they be sinners? For ever more, between the ordnance and the execution of the ordinance, they stepeth in sin, which will stop the mouths of any men, be they never so captious. For what is more rightful than that God should punish sin, and to whom is he bound to show mercy?

therefore I am not want to marvel that any man perisheth, but I marvel that God's goodness can be so great as that all do not perish. Question, because thou hast so often distinguished the middle causes from the ordinance that disposed them, I would also have them rehearsed on either part. Answer, forasmuch as God, as it may be perceived by the falling out of things, and determined from everlasting to set forth his glory chiefly in mankind, which glory consisteth partly in extending mercy, partly in extending hatred against sin. He created man, sound, both within and without, and endued him with right understanding and will, but yet he made him changeable. For he himself, being singularly good, could not create and will any evil, and yet except evil had entered into the world, there had been no room, neither for mercy nor for justice. Man, therefore, being changeable, brought himself and all that should be borne out of him in bondage of sin and of God's wrath,

willingly and altogether by mishap, as in respect of the beginning that sticked in man himself, that is to say in respect of his own will, albeit that it were of necessity, if he consider God's ordinance and the sequel of the matter. From thenceforth the Lord, according as he had determined from everlasting, bringing forth now some and then some, doth so lead them forth to their appointed ends to be glorified in them on either side, that of them in whom he will have his glory to appear by their salvation. Some he removeth out of hand to eternal life as freely composed within his covenant, and other some whom it pleaseth him to have to continue longer in this life, he calleth by the effectual word of the gospel, sometime earlier and sometimes later,

at what time he listeth, and grafteth them into Christ, in whom he justifieth them, sanctifieth them, and finally rewardeth them with eternal life. And as for the residue which are appointed to his rightful vengeance, for to whom is he debtor, either he destroyeth them, and, and he destroyeth them, and them out of hand or else patiently giving them respite, that they may not be altogether without taste of his goodness, either he vouchsafeth not to call them at all, or he calls them no further, but to make them the more unexcusable. Hereupon it cometh to pass that being left up to their own lusts they harden themselves, until they have filled up the full measure of wickedness, and then they pass away under judgment. In what wise these causes of the damnation of the

reprobates do come to pass besides the ordinance of God, who forsaketh the reprobates and delivereth them up to Satan and to themselves, as that the whole blame doth notwithstanding stick altogether in themselves, I have showed already in due place. Question, then must the vessels of mercy praise the Lord, and the vessels of wrath blame themselves? But whither may I flee for succour in the perilous temptation of particular election? Answer, unto the effects whereby the spiritual life is certainly discerned, and so consequently our election, like as the life of the body is perceived by feeling and moving. For we that wallow, as yet in the puddle of this world, are not able to lift up ourselves unto that sovereign light, except we mount up by those steps whereby God draweth his chosen unto him,

according to his foresaid everlasting ordinance, as whom he hath created to his own glory. Therefore, that I am chosen I shall perceive first by the holiness or sanctification, begun in me, that is to say, by my hating of sin and by my loving of righteousness. Hereunto I shall add the witness of the Holy Ghost comforting my conscience, like as David said, why art thou heavy, O my soul, and why dost thou grieve thyself, but thy trust in the Lord. Here too, pertaineth the earnest minding of God's benefits, which, though it rather fraith us, than comforteth us for a time, while we think therewithal, upon our own unthankfulness, yet at the length it must needs lift us up for as much as therein are always to be

seen the manifest tokens of his free and unchangeable fatherly love towards us, not shadowed but plainly expressed. Upon this sanctification and comfort of the Holy Ghost, we gather faith, and thereby we rise up unto Christ, to whomsoever is given, is of necessity chosen in him from afore all worlds, and shall never be thrust out at the doors. Question, what if those witnessings be faint? Answer, then it behoveth us to know that we be tried, and therefore, that our sluggishness is then most to be found fault with. Yet notwithstanding, our hearts must not in any wise shrink, but we must strengthen them with those indefinite promises and throw darts at our adversary again, for although the encounter of the flesh against the

spirit, do cumber our consciences with great doubtings to the trueness of our faith, especially as oft as the spirit seemeth to quail and in a manner to be quite quenched. Yet notwithstanding it is certain that this spirit which setteth itself truly, though but faintly against the assaults of the flesh, is the spirit of adoption, the gift whereof is not to be repented of,

for otherwise the elect might perish, and they that be once justified might fall away from Christ. Whereupon it would follow either that God is changeable, or that the salling out of his ordinance is uncertain, whereof none of both can be imputed to God without blasphemy. Question, but the garland is given to those only that hold out. Answer, I grant so, and therefore whosoever is elected, craveth perseverance, and obtaineth it. Question, think you then that the spirit of adoption is never shaken off?

Answer, I confess that the spirit is now and then interrupted in sore temptations, and that the testimonies of his dwelling in us are oftentimes so broad asleep that he seemeth to be quite gone from us for a time. But yet for all that, I say he is never quite taken away, for needs must God's determination of saving his servants stand sure, and therefore, when time serves at length the mists of the flesh are chased away, and the gladness of the Lord's saving health always restored, which shineth as the sun into the troubled consciences of the elect. Finally, I say that true faith and the effects thereof are in likewise interpreted in the elect as the powers of the mind be hindered in them that have the sleepy disease, or in drunkenness,

men, in whom the soul is not taken away, for there is great odds between the sleepy disease, or drunkenness, and very death, and yet that they which have the spirit of adoption have an assured pledge of eternal life. Therefore, in this most dangerous encounter the same thing, wherewith Satan assaileth us, both can and must warrant us assured victory. For except the spirit of adoption, which is also the spirit of holiness, righteousness, faith, and life, were present in us. there should be no striving in us, but sin should reign quietly at his pleasure. For the man that is not endued with that spirit, saith thus, I do the evil that I have a mind unto, I do no good, nor have I no list to do it. But the man that is regenerated and so consequently

elected, howbeit as yet still wrestling, saith thus, I do the evil that I would not, and I do not the good that I would do. Woe is me who shall deliver me out of the body of this death. and in crying out in this wise the elect person casteth his anchor in the very throne of God the Father, whom he beholdeth in the preached word and in the sacraments. Finally, when the elect shall have gotten the full victory in the other world, he shall say thus, I do the good that I would do, and I do none evil, nor none I list to do. Question, what if a man never feel the testimonies of such a spirit in himself? Answer, yet must it not be deemed that he is one of the number of the number of

the reprobates, for the Lord calleth those that be his, at what time he himself listeth, and therefore such manner of men must be sent away to the word and the sacraments, where they may hear God speaking and alluring sinners unto him. For although they receive not the fruit and operation of those things for a time, yet must they encourage themselves and also be diligently stirred up by others to continue in hearing the word of God even against their wills, and then one time or other they shall obtain that which the Lord as yet deferreth, not to the intent to cast them off, but contrary wise to sharpen their desire and earnestness. Question, I would, therefore, that we might talk among ourselves concerning the sacraments also,

about the which, and especially, there is nowadays so great strife between the churches. Answer, truly I refuse not so to do, notwithstanding as I think we shall do that more conveniently another time. In the meanwhile, if you be satisfied in the things you have demanded, I am very glad, and would wish you to mind these things earnestly night and day. All honour, glory, praise and thanks be only unto God the Father through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. End of Section 6. End of a book of Christian questions and answers by Theodore Beza, translated by Arthur Golding.