Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	act_n	sin_n	will_n	1,889	5	6.7849	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00759	A defence of the liturgie of the Church of England, or, Booke of common prayer In a dialogue betweene Nouatus and Irenæus. By Ambrose Fisher, sometimes of Trinitie Colledge in Cambridge.	Fisher, Ambrose, d. 1617.; Grant, John, fl. 1630.	1630 (1630)	STC 10885; ESTC S122214	157,602	344

appointed by God to indure some horrible death if you notwithstanding should not pray against it were you not worthy to be sowed in a sacke with a Cocke an Ape a Dogge and a Snake and so forthwith to be cast into the Sea N. But I speake of Gods reuealed will not of his secret Now God hath reuealed in his word that Rom. 9. 21. 2. Tim. 2. 20. some are vessels of dishonour and cannot be saued I. Hath God reuealed that hee will not haue all men now liuing to bee saued As for prayer for the dead it is repugnant to the doctrine of our Church N. Howsoeuer this point shall bee more fully tried in the Catechisme yet it seemes you pray for the Dead in your second Intercession wherein you say remember not the offences of our forefathers I. Through the sides of the Letanie you strike at Baruch and the writer of the Macchabees Baruch 3. 5. 2. Mac. 12 42. N. Wee thinke they all erre alike seeing they defend Popish Prayers for the Dead I. What thinke you of the Prayer in the Psalme Remember not against vs the former Psal 79. 8. iniquities That is as Baruch expoundeth it the wickednesse of our Fathers which God oftentimes visiteth vpon the children And so Iudas Macchabeus prayed that the sinne of the slaine men might not bring destruction vpon the whole Army as the sacriledge of Achan did vpon the hoast of Ioshua and as the sinnes of Saul Ieroboam and Achab brought forth ripe punishments in the dayes of their successours For God punisheth the transgression of the fathers in the children two wayes First with eternall punishment when hee deliuereth the children into a reprobate sense that they may imitate their fathers fault which fault notwithstanding is their owne in regard of action howsoeuer it be imputed to their Parents in respect of example Secondly with temporall Chastisement although the Children be godly N. The former iniquities mentioned in the Psalme may bee expounded of those sinnes which men that are here brought in praying had committed before the time of this punishment and not of the sinnes of their Ancestors I. But is this interpretation against the analogie of faith Doth not God indeed punish the sinne both of the Fathers vpon the children and of the Dead vpon the Liuing N. Though this be granted yet Iudas Macchabeus 2. Mac. 12. 43 44. cannot be iustified who both prayed and offered a sinne offerring for the Dead I. Howsoeuer you trust not vs yet beleeue some of whose skill and good intention herein you cannot doubt The summe of the answere Reynolds de Idololatria is this Iudas prayed for two things First that the offence of the slaine men might not be imputed to his Army Secondly Hee intreated for their ioyfull resurrection charitably hoping that they had in the act of death repented of their sinne Againe the sinne offering for the dead may be vnderstood Causally not Subiectiuely For their sinnes were the cause why it was offered yet were they not subiects capable of the benefits arising thereby N. This shift is cut off by the last wordes of the Chapter which are these that they might bee freed from sinne And this clause can be referred to none but the slaine men I. These words if they bee not corrupted as the same author coniectureth for you know that wee neither hold them Canonicall nor reade them in our Churches must be referred to the men in his Armie which were aliue Againe some haue not doubted to answere that sinne may bee forgiuen after this life Because Sir Edward Hobbie against Higgins the full pardon thereof is not declared till the generall iudgement But now to return to the Letany do you thinke that our prayer is popish N. I suspect that according to the Papists you thinke the guilt to be taken away by death and yet the punishment in Purgatory to remaine I. The Papists imagine the guilt of Veniall sinne only to bee remoued by death Now this sinne wherein the Souldiers of Iudas died was mortall as cannot be denied Wherefore wee gratifie not the Papists in allowing this Historie Againe where is your Charitie when you charge vs with purgatorie seeing the streame of our Churches Doctrine runneth against it N. I care not for your streame For you looke Eastward and row Westward I will now passe to the third Intercession I. Before you passe let mee know what you meane by this word Intercession N. What should I meane but a Prayer which we make for other men I. When we pray for all men doe wee not pray for our selues And when wee pray that God would not remember against vs the sins of Our Forefathers is not this Prayer made in behalfe of our selues that God would not inflict punishment vpon vs for their transgressions N. I had thought when you said all men you meant all but your selues And that in the other Prayer you had beene Suppliants for the dead Now your third Intercession is Illuminate all Bishops c. Pray you herein for true or for false Bishops I. In your opinion we cannot pray for true Bishops For you imagine true Bishops to bee only ordained by your Discipline which wee haue not Also you thinke that you are not bound to pray for men of a contrarie Religion to your owne But the truth is wee pray for both namely that God would giue the beginning of light to the false and the increase thereof to the true Bishops N. It is vnseasonable now to tell what wee thinke in this point For I will not at this present bee enwrapt in this question Only wee thinke that you pray for Popish Bishops Against which I thus reason For Antichrist we may not pray But Popish Bishops are the seruants of Antichrist therefore not to be prayed for I. First your Maior is doubtfull to mee For I beleeue by Antichrist you meane the Pope N. I meane so what scruple is there in it I. A scruple which you can neuer remoue As I will thus confirme Antichrist is not one man But a state or succession of men Now the Pope is only one man and therefore cannot bee Antichrist The Maior is affirmed by all Protestants the Minor is confirmed by common sense N. By the Pope I meane the Papacie or Succession of Popes not this or that indiuiduall Pope I. What then May we not pray that this Pope that now sitteth at Rome may bee conuerted although hee bee in in the seat of Antichrist May we pray for a Pope and not for the Popish Bishops Againe in your Minor you change the Medium and turne the state of the question For from Antichrist you run to Antichrist his seruants N. Betweene him and his seruants there is as much difference as betweene Hell and Gehenna I. Your charitie is too hote and smels of the Brimstone of that place whereof you speake Thinke you that Antichrist can bee saued N. I thinke hee cannot No more

it 1. Sam. 6. 9. not found in Scriptures taken vp by the Godly And no maruell seeing by this word the Prouidence of God is denied and our ignorances of second Causes proclaimed I. This tearme is taken vp by Christ himselfe Compare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 10. 31. with the verse of Empedocles cited by Aristotle Phis Lib. 2. cap. 4. where hee saith that by chance there came a Priest Now for the denying of God's prouidence it is vntrue Chance being either meere or mixt Meere Chance derogateth from the all-seeing prouidence of God so doth not mixt chance For although all things bee most certainly appointed and foreseene by God yet he ordaineth some second causes to bee vnfallible some to be mutable and contingent This is most manifest in the will of man which though it bee not free from the necessitie of infallibilitie whereby the secret operation of God doth bow it to what side of the ballance he will yet is it most free from the necessitie of Coaction So that our actions howsoeuer conditionally they bee necessary namely in regard of God's Decree yet absolutely in their owne nature they proceed from a cause contingent and changeable N. By this you perceiue that by GODS Decree there can bee no Chance I. There are two degrees of Gods Decree First generall whereby hee decreeth things in their owne absolute nature to be contingent and free Secondly more speciall whereby he determineth the indifferencie and contingencie of things enclining them according to his owne good pleasure In regard of the former Chance may and must be allowed not only in respect of the second causes as the common opinion runneth but euen in regard of Gods Determination the first cause of the being of all things N. Besides words we blame Doctrine intimated in your Collects The first whereof is the Doctrine of Merit insinuated in these words vpon Ashwednesday or the First Day in Lent that we worthily lamenting our sinnes and knowledging our wretchednesse may obtaine of thee the God of all mercie perfect remission and forgiuenesse Here the cause of the pardon of sinnes is made to bee our lamentation for them and acknowledgement of them I. It is not the cause but the concurrent concomitant or rather antecedent thereof and that not for the purchasing of it but of the assurance of the same to our consciences For although the forgiuenesse of our sinnes be in nature before repentance whereof the things named in the Collect are effects and signes Neuerthelesse in regard of apprehension thereof which some call Certioration it doth oft times follow the same Tell me when Christ said Many sinnes are forgiuen her because she loued Luke 7. 47. much Did he make her loue the cause of the remission of her sinnes N. No but rather the contrary For he maketh her to loue much because her manifold sins were pardoned So that her loue was an effectuall signe not an efficient cause of the condonation of her iniquities I. The like may bee said of those thinges which are mentioned in the Collect. N. Nay but you make forgiuenesse of sinnes to be obtained by these things I. Did not Elias obtaine the restraint of raine 1. Kings 17. 1. Iames 5. 17. by Prayer N. Not by the merit of his owne Prayer but for that his Prayer issued from faith which apprehended CHRIST vpon whose merit all the efficacie of Prayer doth depend I. So our Lamentation c. proceedeth from Repentance Repentance issueth from Faith Faith layeth hold vpon Christ of whose onely merit all the force of our lamentation and Confession of sinnes dependeth And what is all this to Popish Merit If your iealousie did not prouoke you to coine vnthought of errours in our Liturgie N. The second is the Doctrine of Despaire which you manifest in two Collects First in that vpon the twelfth Sunday after Trinitie in these words giuing to vs that that our prayer dare not presume to aske Secondly in the fift Collect after the Offertorie Those things which for our vnworthinesse we dare not and for our blindnesse we cannot aske vouchsafe to giue vs In both which wee espie a double fault First a contradiction for you pretend that you dare not aske and yet doe aske I. What thinke you of that contradiction I beleeue Lord helpe my vnbeliefe Marke 9. 24. N. It is only in appearance For he might in a confused generalitie beleeue that the Messias was able to performe this Miracle and yet in distinct specialtie did not beleeue that this Iesus was the Messias Or else he might doubt because he had no particular promise howsoeuer he beleeued Gods Vniuersall Power and Goodnesse Or lastly he might distrust in regard of his owne vnworthinesse and yet conceiue no scruple of Christ's potent mercie I. So may we aske that of God through Christ which wee dare not craue when wee consider our owne vnworthinesse looking downe like the Swan or Peacocke to our foule feet N. The second fault offensiue is that you Pro. 28. 1. Ephes ● 12. Heb. 4. 16. renounce that boldnesse and confidence which Salomon Saint Paul and the Authour to the Hebrewes doe commend I. Why was not Saint Paul the Authour to the Hebrewes N. We shall reason of that in Matrimonie returne therefore to your argument I. The same Salomon then that ascribeth the boldnesse of Lions to righteous men doth elsewhere pronounce him blessed that feareth Prou. 28. 14. alwayes And the same Apostle which exhorteth vs to confidence doth charge vs to finish our saluation with feare and trembling for wee Phil. 2. 12. may bee bold in regard of God's endlesse mercie and yet feare in a double respect First with the feare of reuerence which causeth the Angels to couer their faces with their wings Secondly with a feare of Gods displeasure Jsa 6. 2. vpon the deepe consideration of our owne indignitie in regard of our manifold transgressions partly secret partly breaking out vpon the least occasion By the first wee doe weigh our owne infirmitie as wee are creatures by the latter our vilitie as we are Sinners and haue the flesh mingled with the spirit Besides this caution which is plainly expressed in the latter Collect in these words which wee for our vnworthinesse dare not whereby wee intimate that yet we dare through the Dignitie of Christ There is yet an other clause in the former Collect namely in these words which our Prayer dare not presume whereby all scruple is remoued For you that talke so much of the spirit of Prayer will you reckon Presumption among the vertues thereof N. No but we reckon it among your vices that make confidence presumption For to craue what God in Christ hath promised is no presumption but confidence and to doubt thereof is Diffidence not Humilitie I. To doubt in reguard of Christ is diffidence but to make a demurre in reguard of our owne imbecilitie is true lowlinesse N. From the Peoples

you not against the rule of Pythagoras digged in the fire with a sword But now to reuisite your argument First I might denie your Maior and render foure reasons for it First the Epistle written from a Coll. 4 16. Laodicea was read in the Church and yet it was out of the Canon vnlesse you thinke it was some Epistle of Saint Paul which is lost some thing therefore not Canonicall may be read in the Church N. I thinke no Canonicall Epistle could bee lost For it were to derogate too much from Gods prouidence and the faithfulnesse of the Church which should bee the Keepresse of the Volumes of the Couenant I rather suppose that it was some Epistle written from the Laodiceans to Paul to the demands whereof this Epistle to the Colossians did answere And therefore that it might more plainly be vnderstood it was meete that the other of the Laodiceans should bee read in the Church also For such a like thing is probably collected to haue beene done by the b 1. Cor. 7 1. Corinthians I. To sift the ground of your assertion were now vnseasonable But you haue giuen in a faire euidence against your owne Maior as shall hereafter appeare My second reason is this Nine Chapters of the Booke of Iob wherof foure were vttered by c Iob 4. 5. 15. 22. Eliphaz three by d Chap. 8. 18. 25. Bildad two by c Chap. 11. 20. Zophar are read in the Church But these Chapters are not of the Canon seeing no doctrine can be establisht by them forasmuch as Go himselfe disallowed the f Iob 42 7. saying of Iobs three friends wee may therefore in the Church reade some thing which is not of the Canon N. The generall positions of Iobs friends are true howsoeuer they erred in the application of them to Iob himselfe as if hee had beene an hypocrite I. That is but a shift for the maine maxime of all the Dispute is taken from Iob's wiues g Iob 2. 9. speech The summe whereof may thus bee demonstrated He that fals into great miseries is an hypocrite But Iob is so falne He is therefore an hypocrite So then let him not continue in defending his vprightnesse but blesse h Ios 7. 19. God in the acknowledgement of his hypocrisie and so let him die with repentance and patience By this it is plaine that the Maior Proposition was false and not the Assumption onely as you pretend N. I hope you will not exclude these nine Chapters out of the Canon considering they containe an historicall though not a positiue truth For it is true that these men so spake though they erred in their speech I. You haue made a faire distinction whereby you will cut off your owne arguments made against the Apocryphall Bookes as shall bee shewed in due place My third argumēt is this Sundrie Bookes of Traditions were read in the Church of the Iewes and yet were neuer of the Canon Or else how could the names of i 2. Tim. 3. 8. I●●nes Iambres the k Heb. 12. 21. foure of Moses the time of the famine in the dayes of l James 5. 17. Elias the combat of Michael with the m Iude 9. Deuill the prophesie of n Iude 14 15. Enoch haue bin rehearsed as things vulgarly knowne My fourth last reason is this Set Prayer may bee read in the Church and yet is no part of the Canon as was proued in the first o Lib. 1. Chap. 2. conference Besides this your Maior admits of a distinction which is this Whatsoeuer is read in the Church must either bee the Canon of faith or manners To this latter kinde we may referre the Apocryphall Bookes N. This is a rotten deuice They cannot bee the Canon of manners seeing that in the Doctrine of manners they may erre I. This answere shall bee sifted in your Minor But now wee tell you further that things may be read in the Church for the explanation of the Canonicall Scriptures For as you remember you said the Epistle of the Lacdiceans was read for the explanation of Saint Paul's Epistle to the Colossians N. But the Bookes Apocryphall doe rather obscure then explaine the Canon I. The Booke of Wisdome doth open the Storie of Exodus concerning the ten p See Wisdome 16. 17. plagues of Egypt Ecclesiasticus is a Commentarie to the Prouerbs The Sixt of Baruch is a most famous epitome of sundrie things in Moses the Psalmes and the Prophets against Idolatrie The first Booke of Maccabees is a key to the mysteries q Especially to the 8. 11. Chapters thereof of Daniel N. Because you cauill so much at my Maior I will change both it and my whole reason Whatsoeuer is read in the Church ought either to be Canonicall Scripture or agreeable thereunto But the Bookes betweene Malachie and Matthew are neither And therefore may not be read I. As the change of your Maior is to the better so is that of your Minor to the worse whereof wee desire the first part to bee explained the latter to be confirmed N. That these Bookes are not Canonicall it is plaine because they are Apocryphall I. Some Serpent lurketh vnder this grasse why call you them Apocryphall N. First because they containe sundrie errours I. How many errours thinke you there be in the Booke of the Petition to the Parliament defended by T. C N. Wee suppose no errour can bee found therein I. A Booke Apocryphall hath errours But this Booke hath none and therefore is not Apocryphall and is by consequent Canonicall N. It may be Ecclesiasticall and so neither Canonicall nor Apocryphall I. You see then that your reason is infirme These Bookes are not Canonicall because Apocryphall and therefore Apocryphall r Non causa pro causa because they containe errours N. Secondly then they are tearmed Apocryphall because they are capable of errours as being the writings of men I. This is to make them Apocryphall in possibilitie not in act Now euery possibilitie is reducible to some act Tell then what is the actuall cause why they are Apocryphall N. Can a priuation haue an actuall cause I. The cause may be actuall though rather deficient then efficient N. Thirdly then They are deemed Apocryphall because their Authour is not knowne I. No more is the Authour of Ioshua Iudges Ruth Samuel Kings no nor of the Epistle to the Hebrewes in your opinion N. Their Authour is knowne to bee Gods Spirit though we doubt of the Penman I. But how is that knowne N. The Propheticall Church receiued the Bookes as from God and hath deliuered them to vs by Succession Fourthly then these Bookes are Apocryphall because the Iewish Church neuer receiued them For neither were they written in any tongue which the Iewes vnderstood neither doe the Iewes at this day admit of them but as of Interludes I. You haue at the last stumbled vpon the true cause