Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A52090
|
A copy of a letter written by T. M. in the year, 1699
|
T. M.
|
1699
(1699)
|
Wing M81A; ESTC R223719
|
6,902
|
16
|
acceptable as proceeding from Love Neither doth the ill Consequences Men draw from my Doctrine prove it Erroneous The Third Charge against my Doctrine is BLASPHEMY IT is impossible to unite the Scriptures in Sense one with another except we say Sin is Ordain'd and that God is the Author of it but to good Ends and Purposes and he that cannot unite the Scriptures in Sense one with another cannot be a Minister of them because besure then he doth not understand them They who charge another's Doctrine with Blasphemy need look back to their own I do not say my Lord that you charge it with Blasphemy but some have done it and I am thereby oblig'd to clear it from that Aspersion Predestination which is Divinity the Ministers in their Pulpits own they do not understand Let that Doctrine be what it will that shall from Sciptures or otherwise endeavour to prove God Tyrannical and the cause of Sin to bad Ends is a Blasphemous Doctrine in my Judgment I say no more than what you say that God is the cause of Sin not to bad Ends but to good Ends as the Crucifixion of Christ St. Peter's Denying him c. And I make Sin Ordain'd to set forth God's Hatred to it not loving Sin by punishing Men with Temporal Punishments for it which not only sets forth his hatred to Sin but also sets forth his other Attributes and renders Man Satisfaction through Christ for this by Gloryfication See my Second Addition pag. 21. where you have the full Meaning or Mystery of Sin Ordain'd Had I said that God ordain'd Sin to bad Ends and that he lov'd Sin and delighted in the destruction of his Creatvres then I had rendred him Tyrannical or Unjust Unholy Unmerciful to the highest Now to pass by what I have said as to the Common-prayer-Book and Articles of the Church of England I will examine a Doctrin that hold a certain number are ordain'd and that from all Eternity as I have heard to Hell-fire unavoidably and do conclude also that God is Glorified by this But for my part I cannot think Tyranny and Injustice Cruelty and the worst of Cruelties can add Honour and Glory to any Being So that you see there are worse Doctrines than mine in the World And this Doctrin which is downright Blasphemy in my Judgment is taken little Notice of when a Mercifull Doctrine is call'd into Question which promotes Good or at least never so ill Consequences as this hath done viz. Despair and Self-Murder Can that be a Blasphemous Doctrine where Grace can apply it as a means to love God and our Neighbour on which Christ saith Hang or depend all the Law and Prophets in that such a Doctrine is the foundation of all Good flowing from such Love Now if as I have prov'd that my Merciful Doctrine through Grace applying it promotes love to God which none can deny and if I deny Free-will I conclude my Neighbour can't help his Infirmity and so I am in the greater Charity towards him All which things would far more appear true if a Discourse were ventur'd concerning a Definition of a Saving Faith But we 'll suppose that which is not that both Blasphemy and promotion of Sin were in my Doctrine was not the Original Copy shew'd to Dr. Stillingfleet and others and I could have no Answer from them My Clavis Aurea hath been Printed about four Years and no Divine hath Answer'd it only Dr. C. a Physician hath written something against it which Mr. P. and others say is Orthodox but hath left the most material part of my Book Unanswer'd If you allow his Answer true Divinity and a sufficient Answer to my Book I have Printed an Answer to it Some say I ought not to have printed my Judgment in Divinity I Answer I can't see People in Despair and not relieve them and there may be many such I never heard of that may see my Book If this be against Law 't is not against Reason which ought to be the foundation of Law Our Laws were made by Christians and so not intended against Spiritual Men But 't is Ignorance like the Grand-Jury who I suppose never read my Book so as to Consider it which they ought to have done nor can Discourse it yet they found a Bill against me that Persecuted a Spiritual Man by those Laws Therefore Natural Men cannot be Lawful Judges of Spiritual Men. Until a Definition of a Saving Faith be throughly Discours'd your Preaching can give no Satisfaction in Salvation neither can you be a competent Judge what is Blasphemy in what I have writ And truly I am fully satisfied that Men would not have had recourse to Persecution disgracing the Church with such a resemblance to the bloody Church of Rome if Ministers were able to Confute me How Sin was compell'd by way of a lively Representation to set forth unto us the knowledge of Sin the more lively is a deep Discourse beyond a Natural Man's finding out See my Second Addition pag. 21. And if Sin be an Infirmity as the Common-Prayer-Book allows of it consequently follows there 's no Free-will in Man Hence 't was a Sin for Joseph's Brethren to Sell him but Joseph saith It was not you but God that sent me hither This very Mystery hath confounded the Wisdom of World in Divinity and can never be throughly reach'd by any without a Disputation or Satisfaction in a Definition of a Saving Faith How highly then then it concerns us to search into that Faith and its Circumstances I need not farther urge only to say thus There 's no Satisfaction can be had in Preaching without it The words of the Common-Prayer-Book which make Sin an Infirmity are these Lord incline our hearts to keep this Law Hence our very Desires must be mov'd in us to Good Again Though we be ty'd and bound with the chain of our Sins yet let the pitifulness of thy Mercy losen us c. Hence 't is evident that Men bound in Chains cannot act as Men at Liberty and are forc'd to betake themselves to God's Mercy to losen them they not being able to help themselves And in another Place the Church prays for the continual Dew of God's Blessing or Grace And the Tenth Article of the Church saith that Man cannot turn and prepare himself to Faith and Prayer without the Grace of God by Christ first moving us thereto that we may have a good Will and Working with us when we have that good Will Who can't every day see that to those who are harden'd or Grace not given them 't is neither the Mercies of God can allure them nor the fear of Hell deter them from Sin Now if we can't but acknowledge such Power nor that we can proceed in Good the least step farther than Grace assists us it will give us to understand that we may wholly and only trust in God which is not to lye in a Ditch and cry God help for then he will
A COPY of a LETTER WRITTEN BY T. M. In the Year 1699. My LORD WAS it ever known that the Doctrine of a Persecuting Church was True Did St. Paul order any Corporal Punishment meerly for Opinion in Religion Did it ever destroy Truth And doth it not rather establish an Error A Fallen Brother at first at least ought to be restor'd in the Spirit of Meekness 'T is Worldly interest and blind Zeal brought in Perfection I have receiv'd an Answer from Hicks's 〈◊〉 to my Question of a Definition of a Saâ—â—â—g Faith which I propos'd to Mr. P Mr. Mr. whom I am inform'd you â—â—â—er'd to Discourse me but they flatly deâ—â—d to do it in Writing The Ignorance of Natural Men or Menot taught of the Holy Ghost have charged Three things against my Book viz. 1st That it promotes Sin 2ly That it is Seditious 3dly That 't is Blasphemy As to the first or the Promotion of Sin THE very same Consequence that Natural Men drew from St. Paul's Preaching in those days you your selves draw now from my Doctrine for when Paul said As Sin had abounded so Grace did super-abound they retorted Let us commit Sin that Grace may abound they not knowing the Mystery of these things Whereby they made God's Mercy ungratefully the cause of Sin Doth not Paul also say Let the Mercies of God move you to please him the more The greater the Mercy then the greater the Love and they to whom much is forgiven they love much Hence the Doctrine of the Salvation of all Men may be made a means to love God which Love rooted in the Heart is the Fountain of good Works But the Doctrine of Hell-Fire can't be made a Means to love God for threatning to Burn me can't make me Love and Hell-fire is often the means of hard thoughts of God Despair and Self-Murder But this might strike the World Dumb if they did but seriously consider that Means signify nothing in themselves excepâ— Grace apply those Means Hence a good Consequence or an ill Consequence may be drawn from the same Doctrin as from St. Paul's Doctrine of Mercy before Whereby we see ill Consequences drawn from a Doctrine proves not the Doctrine to be Erroneous And what then have I to do with the ill Consequences of this Doctrine My Doctrin it self ought to be prov'd from Scripture True or False Vain then is that Expression of J. P viz. If all Men are Sav'd we 'll live as we please Upon that Consequence he judg'd my Merciful Doctrine Erronious and Seditious If Mr. P or others shall bring any Evidence that my Doctrine is the promotion of Sin in some to whom Grace is not given I question not besides what I have said before but to ballance that with sufficient proof of such that have been drawn from Despair and Murdering themselves and not only so but hate Sin through love to God much more than when they were ignorant of my Book Certainly Self-Murder is accounted one of the worst of Sins and in this Particular that it can admit of no Repentance for it on this side the Grave which is never the effect of a Merciful Doctrine But if I hold Free-will and Hell-fire and yet by Experience I find not a sufficient Free-will to save me being of a tender Conscience I fall into Despair as Thousands for ought I know have done And many Ministers of such a Doctrine have Destroy'd themselves through Despair But we 'll suppose I deny Free-will as doth the Common-Prayer Book and Articles of the Church of England and yet own a Hell-fire I am in as bad a condition for this renders God to me Tyrannical I don't say such a Doctrine is Blasphemous yet it hath the same effects as the other viz. Despair and Self-Murder Pray My Lord judge Impartially whose Doctrine then promotes Sin the most yours or mine Or whose promotes the greatest Sins Or whose Doctrine then is most Seditious When Men of my Judgment also are as ready not so much fearing Death to venture their Lives cheerfully in his Majesty's Service And the more there are of this Judgment the more and better Subjects his Majesty will have in that this Doctrine as it doth not diminish from Loyalty so it adds to Valour Dr. Tillotson late Arch-Bishop of Canterbury his Book comes very little short of mine in this Saying That Hell-fire may be Threatned and not Intended So that this Great Prelate being not sure of a Hell-fire is a sufficient Argument for me to enquire whether you my Lord are certain there is such a Place which you ought to be sure of otherwise another cannot be safely Persecuted for disowning that which your Church Doubts of The next Charge against my Book is SEDITION I have said enough to this in proving that the ill Consequences Men draw from a Doctrine proves it not Erronious and so not Seditious The Doctrine then itself ought to be Disputed by the union of the Scriptures All Doctrines we find are Seditious one to another but may not be to the King and Government It was not the Doctrine of the Apostles that was Seditious but the Ignorance of the People made it so and said If we suffer these things the Romans will come and take our Land from us And now how can my Doctrine be prov'd Seditious when Men of my Judgment own it their Duty to be obedient to the Powers that are knowing All Power is of God And the more there are of this Judgment the more and better Subjects his Majesty will have in that this Doctrine as it doth not diminish from Loyalty so it adds to Valour I know Men say that many commit Sin the more freely because of my Book but it may be in their Hearts if not in Act they have committed the same Sins or at least loved those Sins before which is Sin and so cannot be said but to be guilty of those Sins before as our Saviour said He that lusteth after a Woman commits Adultery in his Heart If for fear of Punishment only as every â—n carries its own Punishment with it they have avoided the committing in Act those Sins yet it they lov'd those Sins and would commit them but only for fear of Punishment may be in the sight of God as guilty of them as he that actually commits them 'T is not from Love to God but only from Self-love that he acts them not to avoid Punishment and such Service is not worth accepting 'T is Love or the Heart the Lord delights in and what Service proceeds from that adopts us to the title of Sons and not Slaves But whilst I thus Argue my best Plea is that Means in themselves signify nothing for the avoiding of Sin except Grace apply the Means Nor can any thing be made a Means for the commission of Sin where Grace preserves not forgetting my Doctrine excells others in this that it can't be made a means for Despair and Self-Murder and its Service is the more