## A Reformed Catholic

## by William Perkins

## Separation from Rome Commanded in

## Scripture

And I heard another voice from heaven say, Come out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and receive not of her plagues. Revelation 18:4

In the former chapter St. John sets down a description of the whore of Babylon, and that at large as he saw her in a vision described unto him. In the sixteenth verse of the same chapter, he foretells her destruction: and in the three first verses of this eighteenth chapter, he goes on to propound the said destruction yet more directly and

plainly; withal alleging arguments to prove the same, in all the verses following. Now in this fourth verse is set down a caveat serving to forewarn all the people of God, that they may escape the judgement which shall befall the whore: and the words contain two parts: a commandment, and a reason.

The commandment, Come out of her my people, that is, from Babylon. The reason, taken from the event least ye be partakers of her plagues. Touching the commandment, first I will search the right meaning of it, and then set down the use thereof and doctrine flowing thence.

## The Right Meaning of the Command

In history therefore are three Babylons mentioned: one is, Babylon of Assyria standing on the river Euphrates, where was the confusion of languages, and where the Jews were in captivity: which Babylon is in Scripture reproached for idolatry and other iniquities. The second Babylon is in Egypt standing on the river Nilus, and it is now called Cayr; of that mention is made 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. (as some think) though indeed it is as likely and more commonly thought, that there is meant Babylon of Assyria. The third Babylon is mystical, whereof Babylon of Assyria was a type and figure; and that is Rome, which is without question here to be understood. And the whore of Babylon, as by all circumstances may be gathered, is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome and appertain thereto.

This may be proved by the interpretation of the Holy Ghost: for in the last verse of the 17th chapter the woman that is the whore of Babylon is said to be a city which reigneth over the kings of the earth: now in the days when St. John penned this book of Revelation, there was no city in the world that ruled over the kings of the earth but Rome; it then being the seat where the Emperor put in execution his imperial authority. Again in the seventh verse she is said to sit on a beast having seven heads and ten horns which seven heads be seven hills, v. 9. whereon the woman sitteth, and also they be seven kings.

Therefore by the whore of Babylon is meant a city standing on seven hills. Now it is well known, not only to learned men in the Church of God, but even to the heathen themselves, that Rome alone is the city built on seven distinct hills, (called Caelius, Aventinus, Exquilinus, Tarpeius or Capitolinus, Vi ∣ minalis, Palatinus, Quirinalis). Papists to help themselves, do allege that old Rome stood on seven hills, but now is removed further to the plain of Campus Martius. I answer, that howsoever the greatest part of the city in regard of habitation be not now on seven hills, yet in regard of regiment and practise of religion it is: for even to this day upon these hills are seated certain churches and monasteries & other like places where the Papal Authority is put in execution: and thus Rome being put for a state and regiment; even at this day, it stands upon seven hills. And though it be come to pass that the harlot in regard of her later days even changed her seat, yet in respect of her younger times in which she was bred and borne, she sat upon the seven hills.

Others, because they fear the wounding of their own heads, labour to frame these words to an other meaning, and say, that by the whore, is meant the company of all wicked men in the world wheresoever, the devil being the head thereof. But this exposition is flat against the text: for in the second verse of the 18th chapter, she is opposed to the kings of the earth with whom she is said to commit fornication: and in the last verse she is called a city standing on seven hills and reigning over the kings of the earth (as I have said,) & therefore must needs be a state of men in some particular place. And the Papists themselves perceiving that this shift will not serve their turn, make two Romes, heathenish Rome, and that whereof the Pope is head: now (say they) the whore spoken of, is heathenish Rome, which was ruled by cruel tyrants, as Nero, Domitian, and the rest: and that Rome whereof now the Pope is head, is not here meant. Behold a vain and foolish distinction: for Ecclesiastical Rome in respect of state, princely dominion, and cruelty in persecuting the Saints of God, is all one with the heathenish Empire: the See of the Bishop being turned into the Emperor's court, as all histories do manifest.

But let the distinction be as they suppose, yet by their leaves, here by the whore must be understood not only heathenish Rome, but even the Papal or Ecclesiastical Rome: for vs 3. of this Chapter the Holy Ghost says plainly, that she hath made all nations drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornication: yea it is added, that she hath committed fornication with the kings of the earth, whereby is signified that she hath endeavoured to entangle all the nations of the earth in her spiritual idolatry, and to bring the kings of the earth to her religion. Which thing cannot be understood of the heathenish Rome, for that left all the kings of the earth to their own religion and idolatry: neither did they labour to bring foreign kings to worship their gods. Again Ch. 18. v. 16 it is said, that the ten horns, which be ten kings, shall hate the whore, and make her desolate and naked, which must not be understood of heathenish Rome, but of popish Rome: for whereas in former times all the kings of the earth did submit themselves to the whore, now they have begun to withdraw themselves, and make her desolate; as the king of Bohemia, Denmark, Germany, England, Scotland, and other parts: therefore this distinction is also frivolous.

They further allege that the whore of Babylon is drunk with the blood of the Saints and Martyrs, Ch 17. v. 6 shed not in Rome, but in Jerusalem: where the Lord was crucified: and the two prophets being slain lie there in the streets, Revelation 11:8. But this place, is not meant of Jerusalem, as Jerome hath fully taught, but it may well be understood of Rome: Christ was crucified there, either because the authority, whereby he was crucified was from the Roman Empire, or else because Christ in his members was and is there daily crucified, though locally in his own person he was crucified at Jerusalem. And thus, notwithstanding all which hath been said, we must here by the whore understand the State and Empire of Rome, not so much under the heathen Emperors as under the head thereof the Pope: which exposition, besides the authority of the text, hath the favour and defence of ancient and learned men. Bernard saith, They are the ministers of Christ, but they serve Antichrist.

Again, the beast spoken of in the Apocalypse, to which a mouth is given to speak blasphemies, and to make war with the Saints of God, is now gotten into Peter's chair, as a lion prepared to his prey. It will be said, that Bernard speaks these latter words of one that came to the Popedom by intrusion or usurpation. It is true indeed: but wherefore was he an usurper? he renders a reason thereof in the same place: because the Antipope called Innocentius was chosen by the kings of Almaine, France, England, Scotland, Spain, Jerusalem, with consent of the whole clergy and people in these nations, and the other was not. And thus Bernard has given his verdict, that not only this usurper, but all the Popes for this many years are the beast in the Apocalypse; because now they are only chosen by the college of Cardinals. To this agrees the decree of Pope Nicolas the second, 1059AD that the Pope shall afterward be created by the suffrages of the Cardinal bishops of Rome, with the consent of the rest of the clergy and people, and the Emperor himself: and all Popes are excommunicate and accursed as Antichrists, that enter otherwise, as all now do. Joachimus Abbas saith, Antichrist was long since born in Rome, and shall be yet advanced higher in the Apostolic See. Petracrh saith, Once Rome, now Babylon. And Ireaneus book 5. chap. last, said before all these, that Antichrist should be Lateinus, a Roman.

## The Use

Again, this commandment must not so much be understood of a bodily departure in respect of cohabitation & presence, as of a spiritual separation in respect of faith & religion. And the meaning of the Holy Ghost is, that men must depart from the Romish Church in regard of Judgment and doctrine, in regard of their faith and the worship of God.

Thus then we see that the words contain a commandment from God, enjoining his Church and people to make a separation from Babylon. Whence I observe, That all those who will be saved, must depart and separate themselves from the faith and religion of this present

Church of Rome. And whereas they are charged with schism that seperate on this manner; the truth is, they are not scismatikes that do so, because they have the commandment of God for their warrant: and that party is the schismatic in whom the cause of this separation lies: and that is in the Church of Rome, namely the cup of abomination in the whore's hand, which is, their heretical and schismatical religion.

## On Free Will

## 1. Our Consent with Rome

Free will both by them and us, is taken for a mixed power in the mind and will of man; whereby discerning what is good and what is evil, he does accordingly choose or refuse the same.

## Conclusion 1

Man must be considered in a four-fold estate: (i) as he was created; (ii) as he was corrupted; (iii) as he is renewed; (iv) as he shall be glorified.

In the first estate, we ascribe to man's will liberty of nature in which he could will or nill either good or evil: in the third, liberty of grace: in the last, liberty of glory. All the doubt is of the second estate: and yet therein also we agree, as the conclusions fol ∣ lowing will declare.

## Conclusion 2

The matters where about free will is occupied are principally the acti ∣ ons of men, which be of three sorts, natural, human, spiritual. Natural actions are such as are common to men with beasts, as to eat, drink, sleep, hear, see, smell, taste, and to move from place to place: in all which we join with the Papists, and hold that man has

free will, and even since the fall of Adam by a natural power of the mind does freely perform any of these actions or the like.

## Conclusion 3

Human actions are such as are common to all men good and bad, as to speak and use reason, the practise of all mechanical and liberal arts, and the outward performance of civil and ecclesiastical duties, as to come to the Church, to speak, and preach the word, to reach out the hand to receive the sacrament, and to lend the ear to listen outwardly to that which is taught. And here we may refer the outward actions of civil virtues; as namely, justice, temperance, gentleness, liberality. And in these also we join with the Church of Rome, and say (as experience teaches) that men have a natural freedom of will, to put them or not to put them in execution. Paul says Rom. 2. 14. The Gentiles that have not the law do the things of the law BY NATURE, that is, by natural strength: and he says of himself, that before his conversion touching the righteousness of the law, he was blameless, Phil. 3. 6. And for this external obedience, natural men receive reward in temporal things. Matt. 6. 5, Ezech. 29. 19. And yet here some caveats must be remembered:

(I) That in human actions, man's will is weak and feeble, and his understanding dim and dark; and thereupon he often fails in them. And in all such actions with Augustine I understand the will of man to be only wounded or half dead.

(II) That the will of man is under the will of God, and therefore to be ordered by it; as Jeremiah says, chap. 10. v. 23. O Lord I know that the way of man is not in himself: neither is it in man to walk or direct his steps.

## Conclusion 4

The third kind of actions are spiritual more nearly concerning the heart and conscience, and these be two fold: they either concern the kingdom of darkness, or else the kingdom of God. Those that

concern the kingdom of darkness are sins properly: and in these we likewise join with the Papists and teach, that in sins or evil actions man has freedom of will. Some peradventure will say, that we sin necessarily, because he that sins can not but sin: and that freewill and necessity can not stand together. Indeed the necessity of compulsion or co-action, and freewill can not agree: but there is another kind of necessity which may stand with freedom of will: for some things may be done necessarily and also freely. A man that is in close prison, must needs there abide and cannot possibly get forth and walk where he will; yet can he move himself freely and walk within the prison: so likewise, though man's will be chained naturally by the bonds of sin, and therefore cannot but sin: and thereupon sins necessarily, yet doth it also sin freely.

## Conclusion 5

The second kind of spiritual actions or things, concern the kingdom of God; as repentance, faith, the conversion of a sinner, new obedience, and such like: in which we likewise in part join with the Church of Rome and say, that in the first conversion of a sinner, man's freewill concurs with God's grace, as a fellow or coworker in some sort. For in the conversion of a sinner three things are required: the word, God's spirit, and man's will: for man's will is not passive in all and every respect, but hath an action in the first conversion and change of the soul. When any man is converted, this work of God is not done by compulsion, but he is converted willingly: and at the very time when he is converted, by God's grace he wills his conversion. To this end said Augustine, He which made thee without thee, will not save thee without thee. Again, that is certain, that our will is required in this, that we may do any good thing well: but we have it not from our own power but God works to will in us. For look at what time God gives grace, at the same time he gives a will to desire and will the same grace: as for example when God works faith, at the same time he works also upon the will causing it to desire faith and willingly to receive the gift of believing. God makes of the unwilling will a willing will: because no man can receive grace utterly

against his will, considering will constrained is no will. But here we must remember, that howsoever in respect of time the working of grace by God's spirit, and the willing of it in man go together: yet in regard of order, grace is first wrought, and man's will must first of all be acted and moved by grace, and then it also acts, wills, and moves itself. And this is the last point of consent between us and the Roman church touching free will: neither may we proceed further with them.

## 2. Our Dissent or Difference with Rome

The point of difference stands in the cause of the freedom of man's will in spiritual matters, which concern the kingdom of God. The Papists say, man's will concurs and works with God's grace in the first conversion of a sinner by itself, and by its own natural power; and is only helped by the Holy Ghost. We say, that man's will works with grace in the first conversion, yet not of itself, but by grace. Or thus; They say, will has a natural co-operation: we deny it, and say it has co-operation only by grace, being in itself not active but passive; willing well only as it is moved by grace, whereby it must first be acted and moved, before it can act or will.

And that we may the better conceive the difference, I will use this comparison: The Church of Rome sets forth the estate of a sinner by the condition of a prisoner, and so do we: mark then the difference. Rome supposes the said prisoner to lie bound hand and foot with chains and fetters, and withal to be sick and weak, yet not wholly dead but living in part: it supposes also that being in this case, he stirs not himself for any help, and yet has ability and power to stir. Hereupon if the keeper come and take away his bolts and fetters, and hold him by the hand and help him up, he can and will of himself stand and walk and go out of prison: even so (say they) is a sinner bound hand and foot with the chain of his sins; and yet he is not dead but sick, like to the wounded man in the way between Jericho and Jerusalem. And therefore does he not will and affect that which is good; but if the Holy Ghost come and do but untie his bands, and

reach him his hand of grace, then can he stand of himself and will his own salvation, or any thing else that is good.

We in like manner grant, that a prisoner fitly resembles a natural man, but yet such a prisoner must he be, as is not only sick and weak but even stark dead; which cannot stir though the keeper untie his bolts and chains, nor hear though he sound a trumpet in his ear; and if the said keeper would have him to move and stir, he must give him not only his hand to help him, but even soul and life also: and such a one is every man by nature; not only chained and fettered in his sins but stark dead therein; as one that lies rotting in the grave, not having any ability or power to move or stir: and therefore he cannot so much as desire or do any thing that is truly good of himself, but God must first come and put a new soul into him, even the spirit of grace to quicken and revive him: and then being thus revived, the will begins to will good things at the very same time, when God by his spirit first infuses grace. And this is the true difference between us and the Church of Rome in this point of free will.

## 3. Our Reasons

Now for the confirmation of the doctrine we hold, namely, that a man wills not his own conversion of himself by nature either in whole or in part, but by grace wholly and alone; these reasons may be used.

## First Reason

The first is taken from the nature and measure of mans corruption, which may be distinguished into two parts. The first is the want of that original righteousness, which was in man by creation: the second is, a proneness and inclination to that which is evil, and to nothing that is truly good. This appears Gen. 8. 21. The frame of man's heart (saith the Lord,) is evil even from his childhood: that is, the disposition of the understanding, will, affections, with all that the heart of man devises, forms, or imagines, is wholly evil. And Paul

says, Rom. 8. 7. The wisdom of the flesh is ENMITY against God. Which words are very significant: for the word φρόνημα translated wisdom, signifies that the best thoughts, the best desires, affections, and endeavours that be in any natural man, even those that come most near to true holiness, are not only contrary to God, but even enmity itself. And hence I gather, that the very heart itself, that is, the will and mind, from whence these desires and thoughts do come, are also enmity unto God. For such as the action is, such is the faculty whence it proceeds; such as the fruit is, such is the tree; such as the branches are such are the roots. By both these places it is evident, that in man there is not only a want, absence, or deprivation of original righteousness, but a proneness also by nature unto that which is evil, which proneness includes in it an inclination not to some few, but to all and every sin; the very sin against the Holy Ghost not excepted. Hence therefore I reason thus:

If every man by nature do both lack original justice, and be also prone unto all evil, then lacks he natural free will to will that which is truly good.

But every man by nature wants original justice, and is also prone unto all evil.

Ergo: Every man naturally lacks free will, to will that which is good.

Second Reason

1. Cor. 2. 14. The natural man PERCEIVETH NOT the things of the spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him, neither CAN HE KNOW them, because they are spiritually discerned. In these words St. Paul sets down these points:

(I) That a natural man does not so much as think of the things revealed in the Gospel.

(II) That a man hearing, and in mind conceiving them; can not give consent unto them and by natural judgement approve of them, but

contrariwise thinks them to be foolishness.

(III) That no man can give assent to the things of God, unless he be enlightened by the spirit of God. And hence I reason thus.

If a man by nature does not know and perceive the things of God: and when he shall know them, can not by nature give assent unto them: then has he no power to will them.

But the first is evidently true. Ergo.

For first the mind must approve and give assent, before the will can choose or will: and when the mind has not power to conceive nor give assent, there the will has no power to will.

## Third Reason

The Holy Ghost avouches, Ephesians 2:1, and Col. 2. 13. that all men by nature are dead in sins and trespasses: not as the Papists say, weak, sick, or half dead. Hence I gather, that man lacks natural power not to will simply, but freely and frankly to will that which is truly good. A dead man in his grave cannot stir the least finger, because he lacks the very power of life, sense, and motion: no more can he that is dead in sin, will the least good nay if he could either will or do any good, he could not be dead in sin. And as a dead man in the grave, cannot rise but by the power of God; no more can he that is dead in sin rise, but by the power of God's grace alone, without any power of his own.

## Fourth Reason

In the conversion and salvation of a sinner, the scripture ascribes all to God, and nothing to man's free will. John 3. 3. Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Eph. 2. 10. We are his workmanship CREATED in Christ Jesus to good works. And Ch 4. vs 24. the new man is CREATED to the image of God. Now to be born again, is a work of no less importance than our first creation; and therefore wholly to be ascribed to God as our creation is. Indeed

Paul, Philip. 2:12, 13, bids the Philippians work out their salvation with fear and trembling: not meaning to ascribe unto them a power of doing good by themselves. And therefore in the next verse he adds, It is God that works both the will and the deed: directly excluding all natural free will in things spiritual: and yet in addition he acknowledges, that man's will has a work in doing that which is good, not by nature but by grace. Because when God gives man power to will good things, then he can will them: and when he gives him a power to do good, then he can do good, and he does it. For though there be not in man's conversion a natural co-operation of his will with God's spirit, yet is there a supernatural co-operation by grace, enabling man when he is to be converted, to will his conversion: according to which St. Paul says, 1. Cor. 15. 10. I have laboured in the faith: but least any man should imagine, that this was done by any natural power: therefore he adds yet not I, that is, not I by any thing in me, but God's grace in me, enabling my will to do the good I do.

## Fifth Reason

The judgement of the ancient Church.

## Augustine

The will of the regenerate is kindled only by the Holy Ghost: that they may therefore be able because they will thus: and they will thus, because God VVORKS IN THEM TO VVILL (August. de correp. & grat. c. 12.)And, We have LOST OUR FREEWILL to love God by the greatness of our sin. (Epist. 105.)

## Fulgentius

Serm. 2. on the words of the Apostle. Man when he was created, received a great strength in his free will: but by sinning HE LOST IT (Fulgent. lib. Brad.)

God gives grace freely to the unworthy, whereby the wicked man being justified is enlightened, WITH THE GIFT OF GOOD WILL,

and with a FACULTY OF DOING GOOD: that by mercy preventing him, he may BEGIN TO WILL WELL, and by mercy coming after he may doe the good he will.

## Bernard

Bernard saith, it is WHOLLY THE GRACE OF GOD that we are created, healed, saved (Council. Arausic. 2. cap. 6). To believe and to will is GIVEN from above by INFUSION, and inspiration of the Holy Ghost. (Bernard. l. de libiro arbitrio)

More testimonies and reasons might be alleged to prove this conclusion, but these shall suffice: now let us see what reasons are alleged to the contrary.

## Objections of Papists Answered

## Objection 1

First they allege that man by nature may do that which is good, and therefore will that which is good: for none can do that which he neither wills nor thinks to do, but first he must will and then do. Now (say they) men can do good by nature, as give alms, speak the truth, do justice, and practise other duties of civil virtue: and therefore will that which is good.

That a natural man may do good works for the substance of the outward work: but not in regard of the goodness of the manner: these are two divers things. A man without supernatural grace may give alms, do justice, speak the truth, &c, which be good things considered in themselves as God has commanded them; but he cannot do them well. To think good things and to do good things are natural works: but to think good things in a good manner, and to do them well, so as God may accept the action done, are works of grace. And therefore the good thing done by a natural man is a sin, in

respect of the doer: because it fails both for his right beginning, which is a pure heart, good conscience, and faith unfeigned; as also for his end which is the glory of God.