Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	apprehend_v	faith_n	justification_n	2,613	5	9.8731	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67122	Mr. Anthony Wotton's defence against Mr. George Walker's charge, accusing him of Socinian heresie and blasphemie written by him in his life-time, and given in at an hearing by Mr. Walker procured ; and now published out of his own papers by Samuel Wotton his sonne ; together with a preface and postcript, briefly relating the occasion and issue thereof, by Thomas Gataker ...	Wotton, Anthony, 1561?-1626.; Wotton, Samuel.; Gataker, Thomas, 1574-1654.	1641 (1641)	Wing W3643; ESTC R39190	28,259	78

end he denieth Satisfaction 4 Also Chap. 4. pag. 84. col 2. That there is no need of any satisfaction when the offense is not imputed to him that hath offended by the party against whom he hath offended or the debt is by the creditour remitted WOTTON In the paper written in Latine 1 Neither that I speak freely what I truly think can I understand what place is left for pardon if by payment of pains in Christ we be deemed to have satisfied the wrath of God and to have born the punishment due to our sinnes for Pardon and Punishment are contraries 2 Also in his English paper enlarged the same words are rehearsed and the same reason given even Because Pardon and Punishment are contraries Thus have you the evidence by M r Walker then given in for the justifying of that his charge which for the effect and substance of it is in as broad and odious terms in print now again renewed some six and twenty years after the cause according to his own request heard and some fourteen years after M r Wotton's decease May it please you now to heare M r Wotton's answer in his own defense as it was in writing by him then exhibited Mr. Wotton's Defence A. W. in the doctrine of Justification holdeth one and the same opinion in all points with Socinus and therefore is justly charged by G. W. to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy That he doth hold the same in all points is shewed by these seven Errours following The first Errour of Socinus and his followers is That Justification is contained onely in Remission of Sinnes without Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse 1. If you mean without Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse as the meritorious cause of Justification I grant the Proposition to be hereticall and blasphemous And so doth Socinus deny Imputation I. Christ saith he did not satisfie for our sinnes Treatise of Christ the Saviour Part 1. chap. 1. pag. 1. part 2. chap. 17. pag. 245. col 1. part 3. pag. 306. beginning and chap. 1. pag. 307. col 1. II. He could not satisfie Part 2. chap. 24. pag. 288. col 2. part 3. in argum chap. 6 pag. 406. III. He did not pacifie God Part 2. chap. 2. pag. 120. col 1. Part 1. chap. 7. pag. 76. col 2. IV. There was no need of any satisfaction to be made Part 1. chap. 1. pag. 1. V. God would not that any satisfaction should be made Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 317. col 2. and pag. 324. col 1. But I do not so deny Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse for I acknowledge it to be the meritorious cause of our Justification and that for it we are accepted of God as fully as if we had fulfilled the Law perfectly Treatise of the Justification of a Sinner in explication of the definition of Reconciliation and in the definition of Adoption and in the Conclusion 2. If you mean without Imputation of Christs Righteousnesse as the formall cause whereby we are made formally righteous by having fulfilled the Law and satisfied the Justice of God in Christ I say the Proposition is neither hereticall nor blasphemous And that I must be so understood my writings shew For first I professe that I speak of the formall cause of Justification Treat of Justific of a Sinner in the State of the Question in Answer to Argum. for Position 1. and to Arg. 1. for Position 3. and in the Conclusion Secondly I expresse that manner of formally righteous Treat of Justific of a Sinner where I expound what it is to impute to a Sinner Christs Obedience and of Justification where I deliver mine own opinion Sect. 2. which is the very place that M r Walker alledgeth against me out of the English Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this first Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The second Errour is That Faith is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for obtaining Justification 1. Socinus defineth believing on Christ to be nothing else then to yield ones self obedient to God according to the rule and prescript of Christ and by so doing to expect from Christ himself the crown of life eternall Treat of Christ the Saviour Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 321. col 1. 2. He maketh Faith to be indeed as M r Walker saith a confidence in Christ but he addeth immediately which M r Walker leaveth it that is an obedience to Christs precepts with a firm hope of obtaining those things which he hath promised to those that obey him Part 4. chap. 11. pag. 559. col 1. and in the same page he laboureth to prove That Faith doth signifie obedience to Christs Commandments Sect. Hinc factum est 3. He maketh Repentance and Amendment of life the means to obtain that forgivenesse of sinnes which Christ hath brought Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 321. col 1. 4. And whereas Faith is added to Repentance Act. 20.21 It is not saith he because Faith in Christ is required unto the obtaining of remission of sinnes as working somewhat more in us besides repentance it self that doth hereunto appertain but because this Repentance cometh not but by Faith in Christ In the same columne Sect. Manifestum 5. He saith that whereas John sent the people to Christ and warned them to believe in him it was not as if they should find any other thing besides Repentance in Christ that was requisite unto the obtaining of pardon from God but first that they might be exactly taught of Christ what that Repentance ought to be Besides that from Christ they might understand that that was wholly so indeed which he delivered onely as a messenger Lastly that they might not be washed with water onely but have the holy Ghost poured upon them Part 3. pag. 320. col 1. But I never writ spake nor conceived so of Faith to the obtaining of Justification Nay it is evident that I make Faith not a believing of that which Christ taught and an assurance of obtaining that he promised upon our Repentance and Obedience which is Socinus his confidence Part 4. chap. 11 pag. 559. col 1. but a resting and relying upon Christ a trusting to Christ for salvation Serm. 6. upon John pag. 286. and Serm. 8. pag. 386 389 398. yea a means and if you will an instrument to apprehend and receive Christ to our Justification Treat of Justific in explicat of the Definition of Reconcil So that for ought I hold of Faith Christs Righteousnesse may be even the formall cause of our Justification Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this second Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The third Errour is That Faith doth not justifie us as it apprehendeth

and applieth Christ and his Righteousnesse but by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense This third Errour hath two Propositions which shall be answered to severally The former is That Faith doth not justifie as it apprehendeth and applieth Christ and his Righteousnesse I hold this Proposition to be false acknowledging and confessing that Faith doth not justifie us but onely as it apprehendeth and applieth Christ and his Righteousnesse the very condition of the Gospel being That by Faith we apprehend and apply Christ and his righteousnesse to be justified thereby Treat of Justifie in explic of the definit of Reconcil The other Proposition is That Faith doth justifie us by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense I never said or thought that Faith doth justifie us by it self This onely I say that in this Proposition Faith is counted for Righteousnesse the word Faith is to be taken properly not tropically the question being in such Propositions not of the meritorious or formall cause of our Justification but of the condition required on our part instead of keeping the Law Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this third Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The fourth Errour is That for Faith properly taken and dignified and made worthy not of it self but in Gods acceptation and of his mercy a man is justified and may lay claim to remission of sinnes Neither Socinus nor Servetus in the words you bring out of them affirm that a man is justified and may lay claim to remission of sinnes for Faith any way dignified c. Nay Socinus avoucheth that Repentance and Amendment of life is that by which that forgivenesse of sinnes which is brought by Christ is obtained Part 3. chap. 2. pag. 322. col 1. How then am I proved to agree with him in that Errour which he is not proved to hold Especially seeing that I never said that we are justified for Faith and do renounce all dignity and worth in Faith and give the whole merit of our Justification to our Saviour Christ and his obedience That which is alledged out of my papers is no more but this That the condition of the Gospel being Faith as the condition of the Law is Keeping of the Law he that believeth in Christ hath done as much that is performed the condition of the Gospel as well as he that keepeth the Law hath fulfilled the condition of the Law so that on his part God requireth no more to his Justification And that this is certainly my meaning the words going before in that English paper and those also that follow in the other English paper and in the Latine do manifestly shew Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this fourth Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemie for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The fifth Errour is That Faith is no firm perswasion by which we apprehend and lay hold upon Christ and his Righteousnesse and apply them to our selves as of right belonging to us by our spirituall union but that it is a trust and confidence in Christ for salvation joyned with obedience to Christs precepts or to speak plainly a confidence that Christ having obtained by his obedience the kingdome and all power will certainly give us salvation if we rely on him and obey his counsels Whether the three Propositions set down in this Errour be rightly gathered from the words alleaged by M r Walker out of Socinus or no I leave to other mens judgement But whatsoever Socinus held I have nothing to do with any of these Propositions Onely of the first I say That the perswasion whereof I speak in the place he bringeth is that particular assurance that every man as some define Faith must have to Justification viz. that his sinnes are forgiven in Christ Whereas Faith being the condition required on our part must go before Justification at least in nature But this perswasion followeth it and is bred in us by the Spirit of God after we believe and are justified For it is given to us being already adopted Sons Gal. 4.5 and Adoption is a Prerogative vouchsafed us upon our believing John 1.12 Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this fifth Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The sixth Errour is That Christs whole obedience and Righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and authority with God and secondly onely for us Not that it might be communicated to us in him to make us truly and formally righteous but onely that it might serve for our use in that it maketh him gracious with God and so both able to obtain that Faith might be accepted for Righteousnesse and we for it and also powerfull to give those blessings which are promised to those that trust in him The words you alledge out of Socinus prove no more at the most but the first point of this Errour That Christs whole Obedience and Righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and authority with God There is nothing in this sixth Errour that toucheth me All that I say in the former place alledged by M r Walker is no more but this That whatsoever maketh Christ beloved of God is some cause of Gods love to us who are beloved in and for him Ephes 1.3 4 6. Now among other things for which Christ is beloved his holinesse and obedience have no mean place Whereupon it followeth that they may be reckoned in the number of those causes that make us beloved of God in and for his Sonne our Saviour Jesus Christ Treat of Justific of a Sinner in explic of the Definit of Reconcil In the latter I say That we are not accounted to be Formally Righteous by having fulfilled the Law and satisfied the Justice of God in Christ And yet I acknowledge that we are for his obedience accepted of God as righteous no lesse then if we had indeed performed those things And this was determined in the first Errour to be neither heresie nor blasphemy Therefore I agree not with Socinus in this sixth Errour but am unjustly charged to be guilty of heresie and blasphemy for holding one and the same opinion with him in all points in the doctrine of Justification The seventh Errour is That Christ did not satisfie the Justice of God for us in such sort that we may be said when we truly believe to have satisfied the Justice of God and his wrath in him And that God of his Mercy without Christs satisfaction made ours doth pardon our sinnes and justifie and redeem us Socinus denieth all satisfaction by Christ

himself He hath put down this in his Parallel for an hereticall and blasphemous assertion That Faith in Christ for so he must needs mean is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for the obtaining of Justification Now should any man hereupon enter an action against M r Walker accusing him as guilty of Judaisme Paganisme and Mahumetanisme would he not think we make grievous complaint yea with open mouth cry out and exclaim of extreme injury done him Yet is it as clear as the light at noon-day that whosoever shall deny Faith in Christ to be a condition appointed by God to be performed on mans part for the obtaining of Justification shall have all Jews Paganes and Mahumetanes concurring therein with him as in a point naturally flowing and necessarily following from what they hold To go yet a step further Suppose a man do concurre with such hereticks as have been spoken of in some point be it a truth or an errour that is held and maintained by them will it thence follow that he consenteth to them and agreeth with them in all things or in such blasphemous opinions as they otherwise hold And here M r Walker's candour may well a little be questioned To prove M r Wotton to hold one and the same opinion with Servetus in all points concerning the doctrine of Justification he produceth onely this one saying of Servetus For one act of Faith was Abraham righteous Whether he have proved M r Wotton to have said the same or no is not now materiall and I leave it to be judged by what himself hath spoken for his own defence in way of answer thereunto But should a man putting in a crosse interrogatorie demand of M r Walker Whether he hold that Christ hath fulfilled the Law for us or no I doubt not but he would answer in the affirmative That he hath And the very same thing in the very same words is found by Calvin related out of Servetus The carnall people saith he might glory in their deeds but we may not but in the crosse of our Lord Jesus Christ We may onely relate the facts of Christ who hath wrought all our works for us by fulfilling the law for us when we could not do it our selves Yet I suppose M r Walker would take it in very ill part and well he might if any should thence conclude That M r Walker therefore doth in all points hold one and the same opinion with Servetus concerning the doctrine of Justification Again for Socinus he maintaineth that To justifie is a term of judicature that it signifieth not to make a man inherently righteous or to infuse righteousnesse into him but to deem him repute him pronounce him righteous that they do amisse that confound justification and sanctification the one with the other that That faith whereby we are justified is not a bare belief or assent unto the truth of Gods word that Neither faith nor works believing in Christ or obeying him are the meritorious causes of justification or do or can in regard of any worthin them merit ought at Gods hands nor doth faith it self justifie by any force of its own And all these points do our writers generally maintain against the Papists yet never that I know was any Papist so shamelesse and yet shamelesse enough are they as to condemn them therefore for Socinian hereticks or to charge them to agree with Socinus and his followers in all points concerning the doctrine of justification Again it is by Socinus held and maintained that justification consists in remission of sinnes which for my part I deem erroneous and suppose that elsewhere I have evidently shewed it so to be howbeit Calvine Beza Olevian Ursine Zanchie Piscator Pareus Musculus Bullinger Fox and divers others of great note and name yea whole Synods of ours are found so to say and yet were these men never yet that I ever heard or read for so saying condemned as hereticks much lesse as blasphemous hereticks but had in high esteem as their worth parts and works well deserved by those that therein dissented from them I will adde but one instance more Socinus in the very entrance into his Treatise of Christ the Saviour affirmeth that God might if he had pleased without breach of his justice have pardoned mans sinne freely without any satisfaction required and the same he after again presseth and prosecuteth in his ensuing discourses Whether this be an errour or no I stand not now to discusse Vorstius herein concurred with Socinus and is for the same reproved by Tossanus Grotius likewise for affirming the same is taxed by Ravenspergerus defended by Vossius who citeth Divines not a few both old and new saying the same And it is maintained to passe by all others by Calvine Musculus Zanchie Grineus Faius Casman Tilenus Franzius Smiglesius and our reverend D r Twisse yet I am perswaded that no wise or discreet man at least will hence conclude any of these to be therefore Socinian Hereticks And M r Walker might do well to be better advised before he charge his Christian brethren and fellow-labourers in the work of Gods Ministerie with these odious imputations of heresie and blasphemie then which what can be more hainous more hideous being taints of the deepest die upon such weak and unjustifiable grounds as these are To conclude if any shall demand of me why I have undertaken this office which from some I know I shall have small thanks for and why I thrust my finger needlessely into the fire the answer is ready from what already hath been said I am the onely surviver for ought I know for Whether M r Hicks be still living or no I am not certain of those that were on M r Wotton's part entrusted and employed in this businesse and I could not therefore do lesse for so worthy a servant of God and mine ancient acquaintance whom I alwayes reverenced while he lived as a man deserving singular respect for his pietie and learning and zeal for Gods cause which his works left behind him do sufficiently manifest and will testifie to ensuing posteritie and both do and shall still honour deservedly the memorie of him now deceased and at rest I doubt not with the Lord enjoying the reward of his religious pains taken in his Masters work then to testifie what I then heard and saw was a party in and subscribed to with others and to second the pious intents of his sonne who treadeth carefully in his fathers commendable steps desirous to publish what in his fathers papers he found for the vindicating of his postumous name and reputation as dear unto him as his own with this Preface and Postscript adjoyned thereunto I say no more but wish onely Veritatem cum Charitate

our obedience Therefore a man believeth because he trusteth And it is perfected by obedience because no man is truly said to have trusted before he do indeed obey Part. 4. chap. 11. pag. 555 556. And a little after 3 Whereby that appeareth to be most true which we even now strove to prove that that faith which of it self so far as concerneth what is in us doth justifie us is confidence in Christ 559. WOTTON 1 The condition to be performed on our part to justification is to believe Sermon 8. upon John pag. 352. 2 The act of faith or believing bringeth justification and adoption onely and merely by the place and office which the Lord of his own mercie hath assigned it to be the condition required on our parts for the atchieving of these favours and honours Serm. 9. pag. 452. The third errour is That Faith doth not justifie us as it apprehendeth Christ and his righteousnesse but by it self in a proper not metonymicall sense SOCINUS 1 We are justified by faith in Christ so farre forth as we trust in Christ Part. 4. chap. 11 pag. 558. col 2. 2 The faith of Christ doth justifie us by it self or to speak more rightly God doth justifie us by himself pag. 559. col 1. WOTTON 1 Faith in that place to wit Rom. 4.5 is to be taken properly unlesse peradventure it be used for to believe or to trust For that which is by some alledged of a trope whereby they suppose that Christs obedience apprehended by faith is signified I doubt how I may grant And a little after 2 What trope should there lie hid I see not 3 Also Serm. 9. on John Abraham believed God and it that is his believing was counted to him for righteousnesse pag. 453. 4 Also in his Purgation I think that faith in Christ without a trope in proper speech is imputed to all believers for righteousnesse The fourth errour is That for faith properly taken and dignified and made worthy not of it self but in Gods acceptation and of his mercie a man is justified and may lay claim as it were to remission of sinnes SOCINUS 1 For faith we are deemed perfectly just And a little after 2 Abraham believed God and for that cause he was accounted of him for righteous Part. 4. chap. 4. pag. 462. col 2. 3 For one act of faith was Abraham righteous Servetus Book 2. of Law and Gospel as Calvine reciteth in his refutation of Servetus pag. 903. WOTTON 1 He that believeth is accounted by God to all purposes concerning eternall life to have done as much according to the covenant of the Gospel as he should have been accounted to have done according to the covenant of the Law if he had perfectly fulfilled it In his first English paper The fifth errour is That faith is no firm perswasion by which men apprehend and lay hold upon Christ and his righteousnesse and apply them to themselves as of right belonging to us by our spirituall union but that it is a trust and confidence in Christ for salvation joyned with obedience to Christs precepts or to speak plainly a confidence that Christ having obtained by his obedience the Kingdome and all power will certainly give us salvation if we relie on him and obey his counsels SOCINUS 1 Faith in Christ which maketh us righteous before God is nothing else but to trust in Christ Part. 4. chap. 11. in the beginning and in the same page 560. col 2. 2 To believe in Christ is nothing else but to trust in Christ to cleave to Christ and from the heart to embrace his doctrine as heavenly and healthsome And a little before 3 This your apprehension of Christ is a mere humane device and a most empty dream And towards the end of the chapter 4 He calleth our perswasion of righteousnesse already obtained and gotten by Christ vain WOTTON 1 As for that perswasion wherein some would have faith to consist it followeth him that is justified not goeth before as faith must needs do Ser. on John p. 392. also p. 338. and 448. 2 To believe in Christ is to trust in Christ and to rest on him to have his heart settled and to relie wholly and onely on him And what this trust is he describeth more particularly pag. 390. where he saith 3 It is such a Faith as maketh us rest upon God for the performance of his promise The sixth errour is That Christs whole obedience and righteousnesse serve first and immediately for himself to bring him into favour and autoritie with God and secondly onely for us Not that it might be communicated to us in him to make us truly and formally righteous but onely that it might serve for our use in that it maketh him gracious with God and so both able to obtain that faith might be accepted for righteousnesse and we for it and also powerfull to give those blessings which are promised to those that trust in him SOCINUS 1 As Adams offense made him and all mankind procreated by him guiltie of death so Christs righteousnesse and obedience procured life eternall to Christ himself Whereby it cometh to passe that so many as shall by procreated by him become partakers of the same life Part. 4. chap. 6. and 2. part 2. Chap. 8. p. 178. col 2. and 3. part 3. chap. 3. in the end WOTTON In a paper written in Latine 1 All the good will wherewith God embraceth us proceedeth from that grace that Christ is in with God Now that is in these things for the most part contained that he is by nature the Son of God that he is perfectly holy that he hath performed obedience exact in all respects both in fulfilling the Law in performing all things belonging to the office of a Mediatour from whence it followeth that those that believe are for Christs righteousnes gracious with God And in the same paper 2 If question be concerning the formall cause of justification I exclude from it either obedience of Christ If of the efficient by way of merit I maintain it to depend upon both The seventh errour is That Christ did not satisfie the justice of God for us in such sort that we may be said when we truly believe to have satisfied the justice of God and his wrath in him and that God of his mercie without Christs satisfaction made ours doth pardon our sinnes and justifie and redeem us SOCINUS 1 Reade over all the places of the New Testament in which mention is made of redemption and you shall find none in which there is evident mention of the paiment of any true price or of satisfaction Part. 2. chap. 1. pag. 109. col 2. And a little after 2 As we are said to be sold under sinne that is enslaved to it without any true price intervening so are we said to be redeemed from the same by Christ that is freed though no price hath truly and properly intervened 3 Likewise Part. 1. chap. 7. in the