Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	ghost_n	holy_a	sin_n	3,325	5	4.9847	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65796	Mr. Blacklovv's reply to Dr. Layburn's pamphlet against him	White, Thomas, 1593-1676.	1660 (1660)	Wing W1836A; ESTC R219979	25,125	33

Austin's yet of a Saint and speaketh clearly of the day of judgement and what passeth then and so is a clear Testimony for Mr. Bl. his opinion For the Homily it self is de resurrectione Domini and begins thus Resurrectio glorificatio D. nostri Jesu Christi ostendit nobis vitam quam accepturi sumus cum venerit retribuere d●gna dignis mala malis bona bonis Which manifests that the whole Scope of the Homily is in order to that day to wit the day of judgement Thence he proceeds Interim donec veniat ILLA DIES that is the day of judgement studeamus c. And so goes on showing what shall happen to the three sorts of Christians at that day nor in his transition to those that are to passe through the purging fire hath he any the least expression in order to any other circumstance of time but on the contrary avouches it to be then by making those words Fluvius igneus curreba● ante eum signify the fire of Purgatory now when can a fiery floud be said to run before our Saviour but when he himself is coming that is at the day of judgement at which time St. Paul teacheth us that fire shall go before him Again this place affirms that the multitude of lesser sins that is by-affections and ill thoughts illic exudabunt shall be purged out in that fire which cannot agree to the opinion of the intermediate fire for this opinion puts no by-affections remaining there at all nor that this fire purges them or works any change in their thoughts at all but onely penally afflicts them So that the whole intent and sense of this place is quite opposite to the Doctors Tenet and for Mr. Blacklow's though produced against it But the Doctor makes no reckoning of such small differences Another thing Mr. Blacklow occasionally noted and 't was this that though both this Testimony and others objected by him particularly those of Pope Benedict and the Council of Florence be objected by himself in his own books and solutions there given to them yet the solid Doctor onely transcribes the objections and urges the raw places against him never taking notice of his solutions there given much lesse disanulling them The next calumny of the Doctors was his affirming without limitation or restriction that Mr. Blacklow sayes Visions are old wives tales pag. 39. and afterwards in his Letter to two makes it one of the heads against him whereas he never spoke of more than one which he conceives to be a dream not a Vision For Visions in general Mr. Blacklow acknowledges many to be true but sayes that many reputed such are uncertain because they depend on the credit of some one person the which is often weak and not to be trusted in such difficult matters to judge of This finished I told Mr. Blacklow there was a short Letter behinde the which though written onely to two Persons and so might easily have been twice transcribed yet the Doctor thought worth the printing When I had read it Mr. Blacklow said he had little to answer it being but a bundle of untruths grounded upon his own word He accuseth the Consult of seven or eight of the gravest of his own body of what they never did and aims to bring them into contempt amongst their brethren and so to destroy the little Union he hath left amongst them Secondly he thanketh two whereof the first did as much as any of his fellows the other was absent and heard nothing of the businesse and in a private Letter accuseth another who was not in the Kingdom His invectives against Mr. Blacklow are already shown to be calumnies And so God forgive him and me both our faults Then intreating me to have for awhile the Pamphlet at the restoring it he brought me this Paper BEcause the Doctors Partials vaunt his Pamplet as very modest and censure my answer to his former Letter very hardly I shall set down a list of his fair dealing in the following heads Neither will I touch his accusing me of prophane Novelties upon his own words or of some interessed Regulars and such as follow their Authority whereas they are no Novelties but the contrary and still tend to take away prophanenesse in Doctrine which corrupts piety in the Church but onely his consciencelesse calumnies his plain falsifications his Taunts and Jeers c. Consciencelesse Calumnies 1. Against the Consult which never meddled in this businesse pag. 3. 2. Of my Lord Bishop's command to suppressing Doctrine pag. 8. 3. Of my decrying him in companies pag. 10. 4. Of his writing a civil Letter unto me and my being incensed with it pag. 10. and 11. 5. Of my sending a Letter to Paris against him and its being remitted to Brussels pag. 11. 6. How that Letter was occasion'd by one he wrote to the Assembly of 1653. pag. 14. 7. That my Letter to the Nuncio at Paris was sufficient to confirm a calumny against the Assembly the Doctor had made to my Lord pag. 23. 8. He charges me with hainous Crimes upon inconsiderable grounds from pag. 25. to pag. 34. 9. Against the Sub-dean-ship of the Chapter pag. 41.42 In the second part 1. That it was onely his design in his first Letter to awake Mr. Blacklow pag. 4. The Letter it self shews the contrary as appears in the List set down hereafter 2. That he is assured Mr. Bl. hath corrupted his first Letter pag. 7. 3. That Mr. Bl. elevates the happinesse of the damned above the happinesse of this world pag. 7. 4. He accuses me of Heresie or something next to Heresie for denying material fire in Purgatory pag. 19. 5. That I made a Doctors conclusions in Paris containing dangerous opinions pag. 30. 6. That terrified at the Inquisitions proceedings I fled out of Portugal pag. 31. 7. That my Disputation with Chilling-worth was a great disadvantage to the Catholick cause pag. 32. 8. That a man named by him was either Counsellour or Secretary in my answer to his first Letter ibid. 9. That he accuseth me of committing an unpardonable sin against the holy Ghost pag. 37. 10. That he sayes I call Visions generally old vvives tales pag. 39. 11. In his Letter to two he repeats diverse of these Calumnies His FALSIFICATIONS 1. That Mr. Bl. sayes the Scripture is not fit ad refellenda falsa dogmata pag. 25. 2. His interpretation of the Council of Florence Benedictus his Bull pag. 26.27 3. His applying of Benedictus his Bull and Johannes 22th his Errour which are concerning Saints to Mr. Bl. his Doctrine which is about when the purgation of Souls ends pag. 30. 4. And 5th His attributing to holy Scripture that sentence that zelus animarum is divinorum divinissimum pag. 35. as also the words non es amicus Caesaris to be spoken as a reproach against Christ pag. 5. 6. That the wit of Serpents is to passe through little holes according to Christ pag. 36. In the second part

unbeseeming the fact he proved against the Doctor and he would do him satisfaction Otherwise he understood not that accusers used complements in their accusations or spake not the Crimes by their own names As for his holy acceptance of them which he so like a Saint professe he wish't his actions were conformable to his words For holy words with contrary actions is Hypocrysie added to misdeeds I read on the Doctors reply to what Mr. Bl. had excepted against his first Objection concerning external sin without consent of the minde It began with the Doctors asseveration that he had added nothing to the Regular's words Mr. Bl. answered that he expected either the Regular's own subscription or at least some bodies that had heard him speak and that it was a weak conceit to ground and propose a calumny of that nature to all our brethren upon no other Authority to make it good than meerly his own bare asseveration which ought to be of no value in his own cause especially against an Adversary both renouncing and detesting the wicked sence the Doctor objects it in and showing in his books publick and extant that they ground the quite contrary Doctrine The next part of the Doctor's answer was that he would make it clearly appear that to commit an external sin remaining in charity and yet to go to heaven which Mr. Bl. acknowledged and called the body of the report doth necessarily require the circumstances of destructive of Religion and morality which he called the Vesture Mr. Bl. drew out his Answer and shewed me these words For dressing he adds Mr. Bl. pretends that the Soul may do well when the flesh does ill and added is this to use common honesty thus manifestly to change the plain words and sence of the Writer For it was the Doctors false and groundlesse imposing this pretence now mentioned which Mr. Bl. called the Vesture or dressing not those other words he dissemblingly substitutes The like fraud he uses concerning the Regular's report For Mr. Bl. having said the Regular would spit in his face if he should say he had told him that Mr. Bl. pretended the body might do ill and the soul well He in common sayes that Mr. Bl. affirms the Regular would spit in his face for venting a report the Regular himself had spread We came afterwards to the Doctors proof which was no better than his own bare asseveration that Mr. Bl. assertion imports so sweet an agreement betwixt charity and exteriour sin that it would infallibly invite frail nature to sin exteriourly Mr. Bl. replied he was ashamed to have to do with a man who had so little understanding in Divinity as not to know the general Tenet of Divines Lawyers and Mankinde to be that an exteriour sin may be committed without knowledge or consent much lesse without sweet harmony with charity The next part of the Answer was that Lot had lost his charity by being twice drunk and that the blessing of progeny was no Argument because Thamar had a greater and the Midwives who saved the Jews Children were likewise rewarded though they told a ly Mr. Bl. said he admired the Doctors boldnesse to censure a Saint and sirnamed just in the Scripture as Lot is for being cozen'd into drunkennesse if so much be true for mebriari amongst the Hebrews doth not still signifie so much and his shortnesse of understanding as not to see he yields the whole question if Lot sinned not the first time which he grants when he sayes that at least he lost his charity the second bout Nor is his rashnesse much lesse in censuring Judah and Thamar whereof Thamar had the testimony from Judah to be juster than he being freed from all punishment as soon as her fact was understood and plainly sought by her action what God granted her to have the Messias spring from her and to raise a family to her first husband which was then a custome and afterwards enacted for a Law by God and Moses and therefore it must be supposed she proceeded in an innocent ignorance and consequently that she should not be temerariously censured Judah's action whatsoever it was in his heart was not of that quality as in those times God took notice of to hinder blessings deserved by other services or titles and is esteemed a Saint as the rest of his brethren Patriarchs amongst whom were greater sins than his He added he had reason to expect no other at the Doctors hands than the Saints did finde The example of the Egyptian Midwives he neglected saying the Doctor could not be so simple as not to see that the saving of the Children for which they were rewarded was a different action from their lying to excuse themselves Lesse to the purpose was St. Austins speech of the Romans being rewarded for their moral vertues there being in the testimony no sin objected which is all our question There follows in the Doctor his Reply to Mr. Blacklow his charging him with calumniation for saying he knows his accusation to be true and that it is verbatim in his writings that the happinesse of the damned exceeded all the happinesse of this life the contrary to which he show'd him out of his writings in expresse terms His first excuse is that he doubts Mr. Blacklow hath not cited the place truely because in another place there is corruption Secondly he sayes that the sence is there though the words be not that the particle verbatim could not mean more than that onely the sence was there so that the plain adverb verbatim must quite lose it's signification to save the Doctor innocent from an other-wise unavoidable falsification Thirdly the Doctor would club his opinion into an Heresie pretending still most shamelesly against plainly contrary words brought to his face that his opinion is the happinesse of the Devils is greater than any worldly happinesse And that to say their pains were pure volitions was again an Heresie Nay that to deny material fire in Purgatory is next to Heresie if not Heresie Mr. Bl. reply'd with a sigh Oh how irksome it is to have to do with one who throws his verdicts at random without ever considering how easily they are convinced nor understands the question he talks of As for his suspicions he may know that I have his own hand to shew for what I say and why doth not he produce that place of mine which he thinketh himself sure to be corrupted This a solid and sincere man should have done and not ground all things thus upon his own bare word Mr. Bl. added that the Question being whether the possession of goods without having content in them makes one happy the Doctor is so wise as to say Mr. Blackl affirms the Devils are happy because they have great goods which is wilfully or ignorantly to misse the question yet this is the substance of his answer and particularly he takes without proof that the damned notwithstanding their perversnesse enjoy the goods they