quad for the lemma: cause_n
snippets containing the quad
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)
A revision of Doctor George Morlei's judgment in matters of religion, or, An answer to several treatises written by him upon several occasions concerning the Church of Rome and most of the doctrines controverted betwixt her, and the Church of England to which is annext a treatise of pagan idolatry / by L.W.
Warner, John, 1628-1692.
Wing W912; ESTC R14220
you say of Miracles Miracles when done in Confirmation of Faith are designed to giue credit to a man who speakes in God's name whome otherwise we should not beleiue they are by a metaphore proper enough called God's Broade-seale Now as a Broad-seale is indifferent to all deeds authenticates any to which it is annext so a Miracle myght confirme any Truth but is determined by circumstances to some one rather then others For example the man sicke of the Palsy myght haue beene cured in Confirmation of the Trinity or Incarnation but was determined to testify that Christ had power to remit sins by those words That you may know that the son of man hath Power to forgiue sins then he sayd c. 2. I say when Miracles are done in Confirmation of Faith for all Miracles are not done for that end A Miracle is an effect of God's Power acting contrary to second causes Natural effects are conformable to their inclinations as that fire heates Supernatural are aboue them as that water justifyes the soul Preternatural are besides them as motion of parts of water within themselues Miraculous or contra- contra-natural are contrary to them Such was the cure of Ezechias raysing of Lazarus for second causes required the death of the first the corruption of the second Soe S. Austin l. 26. Cont. Faustum c. 3. Cum Deus aliquid facit contra cognitum nobis cursum solitumque naturae magnalia vel mirabilia nominantur When God doth any thing against or contrary to the knowne vsual course of nature we call that thing a miracle Wherefore when S. Thomas some other Divines say Miracles are Praeter besides the course of nature they are to be vnderstood as J sayd Praeter in them is equivalent to Contra. That no Miracles are done but visible in publick you say but can never proue because it is false S. Austin proues this Epist 3. ad Volusianum by Christ's coming into the world without violating the virginity of his Blessed mother his coming out of his sepulcher this remaming shut See S. Thomas 3. p. q. 29. a. 1. ad 2. Of which more hereafter S. 14. Indeed were no miracles done in private it were in vaine for men in deserts to implore God's assistance against a Lyon or serpent which would devoure or sting them But the contrary errour of Protestants in Brevint Burnet Morley is grounded on another erroneous opinion that no Miracles are done but in Confirmation of Faith Whereas it is certaine they are done for other intentions For 3. Whatsoever can moue God to vse his absolute Power in thwarting the ordinary course of Nature may be the Final cause of a Miracle Pharaoth refusing to dismisse the Israelits Miracles were done to shew it was God's will they should be dismist Exo. 7. A doubt being raysed whither the Preisthood were to be confined to Aaron's family God decided it by the miraculous budding of his rod. numb 17.3 Gedeon wanting resolution to vndertake the war against the Madianits was encouraged by the dew on his furre Iud. 6.4 The encrease of Oyle to releiue a poore widow distressed by her creditours 4. 2. Reg. 4.5 Waters causing a curse to ease a husband of his Jealousy numb 5.6 That there were no ill smells in the Temple notwithstanding all the Burnt offrings nor flyes where so much bloud was spilt was in respect to that Holy place The cure of Ezechias for his comfort or the good of the Royal family which wanted an heyre And who can tell how many other even private things may haue moved Almyghty God to dispense in the common law of nature act contrary to second causes How often are miracles done in consequence of that prayer of the Church Ad te nostras etiam rebelles compelle propitius voluntates drawing those to a pious life who had a perfect aversion to it This you will say is no Miracle But S. Anselme says it is S. Thomas 1.2 q. 113. a. 10. reason proues it to be such because it is contrary to the inclination of the will Antecedenter thÃ´ Consequenter the will consents being brought ouer strongly thÃ´ sweetely by the Grace of God And without all doubt on The greate day we shall see an infinit number of other Accidents wholy miraculous done either for the spiritual or temporal good of both private publicke persons which are at present entirely hidden from the eyes of all men even those in whose favour they are done Whence I inferre that this conversion in the B. Sacrament may be Miraculous yet be observable by no Senses 4. D. M. pag. 10. Moses his Rod turned into a serpent ceased to looke like a rod in all things was like a serpent which the Magicians rods which were not turned into serpents did not water turned into wine ceased to tast or smell like water Therefore all Miracles are perceptible to sense Revisor A false illation out of an insufficient jnduction as if I should conclude that all men walke because Peter Paul walke D. M. pag. 10. There cannot be a change of one thing into another without a mutual change of Accidents as well as of substance because every thing consists is made vp of Accidents as well as of substance Rev. What stuffe is this J perceiue your Metaphysicks are equal to your Divinity Every thing consists of is made vp of Accidents as well as of substance I hope you will say a man is made vp of his cloths too And not be much out of the way if you speake of those of your degree who are compounded of lawne sleeues c. in lieu of the interiour character How grossely are silly Phylosophers mistaken when they define Accidents by their separability from substance without its decay Quod adest abest sine subjecti interitu what cannot a man become swarthy by being exposed to the sun in the summer or cold in the winter but his Substance his Body or soul must be changed Excellent Doctrine And very fit to make vs fall out with Transubstantiation As vnexpected is that other saying There cannot be a change of one thing into another without a mutuall change of Accidents as well as of substance Vnexpected I say from so learned a person it being so far from Truth so contrary to experience that to confute it nothing is necessary but to shew you any newly dead Corps of one knowne to you before Is there no change In substance when the soul is separated from the Body And do not many Accidents remaine so as it seemes rather a sleepe then dead Do not beleiue me beliue your owne eyes for which you pleade so earnestly Js there not the same quantity The same situation of patts The same organization The same colour moles warts skars c. as before How then can you say There is no change in substance without one in Accidents too Do you not see that by
an Ismael in Abraham's family an Esau in Isaacs a Ruben in Iacob's an Absalom in David's an Adam in the terrestrial Paradice a Lucifer in the Celestial All which bad men did nether excuse a separation from the Church in which they lived nor prejudice the rest who did not approue or abette the sins as the Church hath long since declared against the Donatists We professe we beleiue the Sanctity of the Catholick Church which consists in her Doctrine her Laws her Rites many of her children not all And it is the goodnesse of God to make vs partakers of all the good workes which any one doth but not of the bad For we beleiue a Communion of Saints not of sinners of merits not of offenses So the guilt of sin is confined to the person sinning but the merits of vertuous actions spreades to all the faithfull who are in the state of grace Wherefore we ought not to think the worse of the Church for any fault committed by any of her children seing she nether teaches nor commands nor approues it But the Protestant Church cannot so easily cleare her selfe from such spots as the sins of her children leaue her Doctrine of the impossibility of God's Commandments that we are nether the better for good nor the worse for bad actions which are nether meritorious nor demeritorious in the praedestinate of Evangelical liberty the roote of all Sedition Rebellion in Church State c. These I say the like having beene taught by same of her children never condemned by her make her answearable for all sorts of sins which are but the natural sequels of those Premisses effects of those causes fruits of that tree which the first Protestants planted their followers water cherish In Catholicks a bad life is contrary to Catholick Doctrine laws in Protestants it is a natural sequel of both J do not say this to excuse any fault with reason charged vpon the persons mentioned except the gun powder plotters or to forestall my Readers judgment in favour of the Church if those accused should be really found guilty There is no cause for such an Apology The faults alleadged against Mr. Cressey are at the worst indiscreete expressions of edjous things which he thought tru D. M. thinks not so And her R. H. did shew in effect that no Wordly consideration should moue her to professe a Religion of which in her conscience she was not Of which more hereafter Who but Atheists Libertins can blame this Which is only a preferring Heaven to Earth Eternity to time the soul to the body God to man the Peace of a good conscience before the reproach of some bad men Those who think all Religions indifferent that the King is to determine which we are to follow the Hobbians may blame this but not a Disciple of Christ his Apostles SECTION XVII Mr. Cressey excused 1. Whither the Kingdome may be sayd to haue taken the Covenant 2. Whither the K. was the only sufferer for his Religion 3. Many of the Protestant Clergy renounc't their Dignityes 4. Whither the Clergy suffred for their Loyalty or their Religion 5. Of the Actings of the English Protestant Clergy in the troubles 1. D. M. p. 7. It is false injurious to say that the Presbiterians did constrain the whole kingdome to forswear their Religion for it must be the whole Kingdomes taking not the Presbiterians imposing generally of the Covenant that must proue this assertion Revisor You take Mr. Cressey's words in a very strict sense that you may accuse them condemne him Yet I think in good Phylosophy divinity too Propositions In materiÃ¢ contingenti althÃ´ they seeme Vniversal are not such but only Indefinite For example Philip. 2.21 All seeke their owne not the things which are of Iesus-Christ T it 1.12 The Cretans are always lyars evil Beasts slow bellyes These Propositions are as to their forme Vniversal the first with a distributiue particle to Persons All the second with alike particle of time Always Yet nether are truly Vniversal not the first for nether S. Paul nor several of the Apostles then aliue Sought their owne In alike manner amongst the Cretans some were very good sincere vertuous men Such Propositions are frequent in common discourse v. c. All Spainards are Graue All French men civil All Italians cautious All young men rash All women talkatiue All old men morose c. Which are taken as tru because commonly they are so taken IndefinitÃ¨ But taken as Vniversals they are false seing several instances can be brought in which they are not tru greate warinesse is necessary in applying any one of them to particulars This is my first Answer Another is that the Kingdome by an ordinary figure is taken for the governing part of it so what is decreed by that may be sayd to be decreed by the Kingdome Which is tru thÃ´ some of this part oppose it Thus a Peace or Truce is sayd to be made by the Republick Of Venice v. c. when the Senate decrees it or when the major part of Senators resolue it althÃ´ some Senators oppose it are for war Livy Vbi semel decretum erit omnibus id etiam quibus ante displicuerat pro bono atque vtili foedere erit defendendum Plinius l. 6. Epist 13. Quod pluribus placuit omnibus tenendum Dionisius Halicarnassaeus Parendum his quae pars maior censuerit Even those who dislike a decree before it be made are bound to approue it after it is made Provided it containe nothing against Conscience Indeed we see in all Assemblyes where things are carryed by plurality of votes all even the NOES are bound to approue the order vnlesse in some cases when they are admitted to a Protestation Now the major part of the then Gouvernours of the Nation or Kingdome decreed the taking of the Covenant the major more conspicuous part of the subjects may be sayd to haue admitted that decree althÃ´ very many considerable both for number quality by some industry shifted off the taking of it so the Kingdome may in some sort be sayd To impose the Covenant also To take it Thus we say that England changed its Religion such a yeare thÃ´ a very greate number at that time did not admit of any change And we may say that the Oaths are imposed vpon taken by the Kingdome thÃ´ several refuse them Were not Mr. Cressey a Papist I beleiue either of these answers would suffice 2. D. M. p. 8. His second crime is his saying The King was almost the only man who remained so constant to his Religion as to hazard for it the losse of his estate life too This is false say you for many thousands did the same Revisor In the ruin of others there was a complicancy of causes which procured it loyalty to their King hatred to their persons for fyghting against them their
Evangelists in recording the Miracles of Christ was that men Should beleiue that Iesus is the Christ Iohn 20.31 seing they could not record all his Miracles they chose out cheifely such as were publick most convincing the veracity of the Tru Catholick evidence Iesus Christ So Catholicks to proue the Falshood of the Tru Protestant evidence Oates make vse of such vntruths as are publicke confirmed by Oath leaving out very many vntruths vented by him in private D. M. p. 4. The onely end of all Miracles is to make men beleiue some Truths This end failes in such as are not Sensible Therefore there are none such Rev. Your first proposition is absolutely false I haue often acquainted you with several other Ends for which God may do hath done Miracles 3. D. M. p. 5. Aquinas contradicts himself when he says some Miracles are invisible For he says else where that name comes from admiration now how can a thing imperceptible to Senses be the cause of Admiration Rev. Answer 1. words in definitions signify not the actual Being but the aptnesse to be Non significant Actum sed aptitudinem say Sophists soe if the worke be such as when knowne it would cause Admiration that is enough to conclude that it is admirable Ans 2. Arguments drawne from the Etimology of words are frivolous insignificant Pontifex was named from making or mending a Bridge Praesul from leading a sacred dance of the salij Preists of Mars Senatus as an Assembly of old men Will you thence conclude that no man ought to be called Pontifex or Praesul or Senator but who hath made or mended a Bridge lead a dance or is an old man In Englisk Alderman comes from Age yet who regards old Age in the Creation of that Magistrate A Bishop hath his name from Vigilancy a Deacon from serving yet the first is giuen to some who are drowzy enough the second to such as never served Some men haue transmitted to their successours in Bloud names taken from offices which no way belong to them such are Smith Tayler Butler Warner Fryer Preist Monk Deane Bishop Cooke c. Why may not some others do the like to their successours in Dignity Ans 3 cannot we admire things imperceptible to Senses Js not the Vnion hypostatical an object of Admiration to all Christians Is not God's birth of a Virgin admirable Can we sufficiently admire the loue of Gnd towards man declared by the Passion of his only son And is not the Divine Essence Trinity of per fons in one nature admirable both to men Angels And are these or any one of them perceptible to Sense But enough of this childish Argument SECTION XV. 1. Accidents without a subject 2. Extention of quantity in a place 3. A Body in two places 1. D. M. p. 9. Thomas contradicts himself in other places For 1. p. q. 90. ar 2. C. he sayth An accident hath no being but as something is denominated by it That it rather belongs to than is an entity That its whole being is to be in something Yet he teaches that in the Sacrament Accidents are without a subject Revisor What difficulty is there that God should do what nature cannot And how greate soever is the dependance of Accidents on Substance why can not God separate them supply by his omnipotency the want of a subject as the Protestants owne he can preserue Substance without Accidents althÃ´ it needes them very much The being of an Accident is to Informe inesse that of a Substance is to recerue information Subesse Now if God can preserue a Substance without receiving Accidents why not Accidents without being received These two are correlatiues t is tru but Relatiues may haue a being without their terme You will say they cease to be relatiues when the terme is gon retaining only an aptnesse to a new relation when it hath a new terme J reply this is just what passes in our case For the Accidents after Transubstantiation haue no actual Relation to Substance but an aptnesse to one when occasion is presented And for this reason Accidents in the Sacrament are sayd to haue an ex stence like in some sort to substance Habent modum existendi substantiae Yet it is distinguisht from all Substance by that expresse natural propension it hath to denominat substance it suffers violence till it be restored to its innate manner of being in a substance as a stone doth when it is suspended in the Ayre D. p. q. Aquinas teachs that quantity hath extension of parts in respect of place yet in the sacrament he sayth it hath none In which he contradicts himself Revisor Quantity hath two effects one in the Substance which it informes the other in the place which it fills The first is In genere causae formalis as a forme this effect of quantity is in Christ's Body in the sacrament very perfectly for his sacred Body being aliue or animated with his rational soul it must be Corpus organicum which imports a distinction of parts from one another The other effect as to the place it fills is In genere causae efficientis as an efficient actiue cause by a certain elasticity springinesse of the parts of a body which thrust backe such bodyes as on all sides presse vpon it which by moderne experiences is evident in the Ayre in alike manner may be proved of other things Hence the same Quantity hath sometimes a greater sometimes a lesser extension in order to place according as the ambient bodyes do more or lesse presse vpon it its elasticity is more or lesse actiue Thus in the top of a very hygh hill in Auvergne askin well stopt seemed full of Ayre at the bottome of it where the Athmosphere prest much it wanted much of seeming full Also a ball of Brasse with a little pin hole being halfe fild with water containes it all very well till by being to a certain degree heated in afire its elasticity is encreased for then the water Ayre mingled will breake through that narrows passage fill the chamber with a kind of mist Now if a Quantity of fiue foote for example by diminishing its Elasticity or encreasing the pressures of ambient Bodys be brought to four or three feete why may it not be reduced to two or one Or by Divine Power quite suspending its Elasticity be brought to an vnconceivable littlenesse of place which would scarce deserue that name If fire the most actiue cause knowne had no effect on the three children in the Babilonian furnace God suspending its vertu why cannot God suspend the actiue vertu of a little Quantity Which I do not say to demonstrate fully the whole mysterious manner of the existence of the Body of Christ in this Divine Sacrament that being a thing to be beleived by faith not to be proved or even comprehended perfectly vnderstood by naturall reason but