Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	imputation_n	justification_n	righteousness_n	3,015	5	7.9076	4	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

wishing him rather to make choise of some other both nearer at hand and of better abilities the City affoording such not a few yet at his instant request the rather pressing it upon me because he had as he said so happily light upon me unexpected and notwithstanding that he knew before my judgement in some particulars to differ from his having both by word of mouth and in writing also sometime at his own request manifested to him as much yet making no reckoning thereof I was at length induced to condescend thereunto The persons nominated by M r Walker were M r Stocke M r Downame M r Gouge and M r Westfield whereof three is yet living M r Stock onely is deceased Those that were nominated by M r Wotton because M r Mason by occasion of an extraordinary employment by his Majestie suddenly enjoyned of surveying a book of D r John Whites ready to be published could not attend the businesse another therefore being substituted in his stead were these M r Balmford M r Randall M r Hicks Chaplain to the Earl of Excester and my self who alone I suppose of all the foure now survive and am the rather induced to affoord this Christian office to so worthy a deceased friend It was thought not so fit to meet in a private house which at first we had done but found therein some inconvenience as in some Church that stood out of the way of ordinary concourse By occasion hereof D r Baylie afterward Bishop of Banghor came in as one of us and made up a ninth because we desired to make use of his Church There accordingly we met and some time being spent or if you will wasted rather in loose invectives then in orderly disputes I made bold to propound a course to the rest of the company because time was precious and my self came farthest for the better expediting of the businesse undertaken by us which was also generally approved of by the rest and by both parties agreed unto The Proposition was this That M r Walker should in a Parallel consisting of two columns set down Socinus his hereticall and blasphemous errours and positions on the one side and M r Wottons assertions wherein he charged him to concurre with Socinus over against them on the other side upon view whereof it might the sooner appear how the one suited with the other M r Walker undertook so to do and M r Wotton required onely to have M r Walker's said writing delivered unto him some two or three dayes before the set time of our next meeting that he might against that day prepare a brief answer thereunto in writing then to be exhibited The motion was on either side deemed equall nor did M r Walker himself mislike it Now by this means God in his providence so disposing it which at the present in likelihood was little dreamed of M r Wotton as Abel though deceased is inabled to speak in his own defence and to plead now his own cause as well as then he did M r Walkers Parallel and therein his Evidence produced for the proof of his charge above mentioned you shall have in his own words as it was then given in those pieces of it onely that were conceived in Latine being faithfully translated word for word as near as could be into English because in English M r Walker's book with the renewed Charge is abroad M r WALKER 's evidence THat it may plainly appear that Socinus Servetus Ostorodius Gittichius Arminius and M r Wotton do in the doctrine of Justification hold one and the same opinion in all points I shew by the parts and heads of their doctrine set down in order and by their own sayings and testimonies paralleled and set one by another The first errour of Socinus and his followers is That Justification is contained onely in Remission of sinnes without imputation of Christ his Righteousnesse SOCINUS His own words 1 For as oft hath been said by us in remission of sinnes which is the same w th not-imputation of sins is our righteousnesse contained and therefore with Paul not to impute sinnes and to impute righteousnesse or to account righteous are the same And with this imputation as we have said the imputation of anothers righteousnesse hath no commerce Treatise of Christ the Saviour Part. 4. chap. 4. pag. 463. column 2. near the end 2 There is no one syllable extant in holy writ of Christs righteousnesse to be imputed unto us Chap. the same pag. 462. 3 It is the same with Paul to have sinnes covered to have iniquities remitted to have sinne not imputed that it is to have righteousnesse imputed without works And this manifestly declareth that there is no cause why we should suspect mention to be made of anothers righteousnesse since we reade that Faith was imputed unto Abraham for righteousnesse or unto righteousnesse pag. the same col 2. 4 God delivered the Lord Jesus unto death that by him rising from the dead we might hope to obtain justification that is absolution from our sins Pag. 463. col 2. 5 That is first to be considered that this imputation can in no wise be upheld In the same place WOTTON 1 Albeit with Piscator I willingly acknowledge that the justification of a sinner is wholly comprehended in the alone pardon of sins yet I find no where in Holy writ that there is need of the Imputation of Christs passive obedience unto the attaining of it Theses in Latine 2. That Christs obedience is imputed by God to the justification of a sinner doth not appear by any testimonie of Scripture or by any argument or by any type or ceremonie in the Law or by any signification in the Sacraments of the Gospel In the same arg 1. 3 No necessary use or end can be assigned of the imputation of the obedience of Christ to the justification of a sinner In the same arg 4. 4 I renounce the Law both in whole and in part performed by our selves or any other in our stead to the justifying of us in the sight of God 5 I assent to Piscator that justification consisteth wholly in remission of sinnes For so doth the Apostle Rom. 3. 4. propound and dispute the question without any mention or inckling of Christs righteousnesse These are his words in a little English Pamphlet first published briefly and secondly by him enlarged The second point or errour is That Faith is a condition appointed by God to be performed on our parts for obtaining of Justification SOCINUS 1 The promise was made to Abraham not without a secret condition to wit that he should walk before God and be perfect that is he should not refuse to obey him Now to walk before God and to obey him are included in faith and cannot be without it yea they flow from it alone as he himself teacheth after in the same chapter 2 The confidence saith he which he had before affirmed to be faith is the cause of