Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	justification_n	remission_n	sin_n	2,805	5	5.4403	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13155	An abridgement or suruey of poperie conteining a compendious declaration of the grounds, doctrines, beginnings, proceedings, impieties, falsities, contradictions, absurdities, fooleries, and other manifold abuses of that religion, which the Pope and his complices doe now mainteine, and vvherewith they haue corrupted and deformed the true Christian faith, opposed vnto Matthew Kellisons Suruey of the new religion, as he calleth it, and all his malicious inuectiues and lies, by Matthevv Sutcliffe.	Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629.	1606 (1606)	STC 23448; ESTC S117929	224,206	342

the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets and therefore we may not thinke that they taught that Christ had a bodie inuisible or inpalpable or that his body was in heauen and earth at one time and yet not continued to it selfe or that his soule was omnipotent or omniscient or that Christians were to beleeue that dogges and hogges did eat Christs body and yet that all the communicants saue the Priest were to be excluded from the cup of the new Testament or that Christ is onely the meritorious cause of our iustification and saluation and that formally we are iustified and saued by our owne workes or that remission of sinnes cannot be obtained vnlesse we come to auricular confession and haue the Masse-priests absolution or that the Pope by his indulgences out of superfluous merits of Saints is able to deliuer soules from purgatory or other popish heresies and wicked doctrines before mentioned for these doctrines are contrarie to the holy scriptures in which the summe of the Apostles preaching is conteined Gregory the first lib. 4. epist 32. doth dislike the title of vniuersall bishop and calleth it sacrilegious and prophane he doth also condemne the worship of images lib. 7. epist 109. and lib. 9. epist 9. and commendeth Serenus the bishop of Massilia for reproouing the adoration of images neither doth he allow any more than the historicall vse of them that Purgatory which Gregory the Dialogist speaketh of differeth much from popish purgatory being rather designed for veniall sinnes than for satisfaction for temporall paines after the fault remitted lib. moral 19. c. 16. hee sheweth that the bookes of the Machabees are not canonicall scriptures and lib. 14. moral c. 32. that Christs body is solide and not like a spirit and lib. 4. dial c. 55. that things aboue in the eucharist are vnited to things below summa imis consociantur of which it followeth that there is no such presence as the Papists imagine nor any transubstantiation for if the bodie of Christ residing aboue be vnited to things below then is not Christs body included within the accidents of the host nor is the bread and wine abolished Augustine the Monke brought with him a crosse and the image of our sauiour in a table and did sing litanies as Bede testifieth lib. 1. hist Angl. c. 25. but we doe not read that hoe filled Churches with images or that hee worshipped Christs image or the crosse with latria or that in his litanies he called vpon Saints or Angels Bede saith they praied to God litanias canentes c. domino supplicabant If then we cannot find the points of popery which we refuse in the writings of the Apostles or in any record mentioning the doctrin of Ioseph of Arimathaea Eleutherius Gregory or Austen but rather find them to bee opposite to their doctrine and denised afterwards then vnlesse we meane to remooue the ancient limits and bounds set downe to vs by our fathers and to refuse the counsell of the holy ghost Prouerb 22. wee may not returne to popery forasmuch as the first conuerters of the inhabitants of this land were no authours nor fauourers of popish superstition heresies impieties and blasphemies CHAP. XV. That popish religion is most falsely termed Catholike religion and Papists Catholickes CAtholicke religion as Vincentius Lirinensis in his commonitory chap. 3. doth teach vs is that which alwaies hath beene beleeued and of all Christians wee are to hold saith he that which alwaies hath beene beleeued of all Christians for that is properly Catholicke but the faith of the Romish church conteined in the Popes decretales and disputes of the canonists and schoolemen hath not alwaies beene beleeued of all Christians their faith therfore is not catholike the assumption is proued not onely by the nouelties of the decretales glosses of Canonists and summes and resolutions of the schoole diuines but also by the falsehood and contrarieties of the doctrine therein conteined Nicholas in his decretale ego Berengarius de consecrat dist 2. teacheth that Christs body sensually is handled with the hands of Priests and torne with teeth but this is contrary to scriptures fathers and truth Innocent in the chapter firmiter de sum trinit fid cath saith that the bread is transubstantiat into Christs body which is false for Christ saide of bread which hee tooke this is my bodie The Canonists honour the Pope as a God on earth as the head foundationmonah rcand spouse of the Church the schoolemen brabble one with another and sometimes change their owne opinions Bellarmine lib. 2. de purgat c. 3. confesseth that Thomas Aquinas changed his opinion concerning the merit of soules in Purgatorie most schoole-men build doctrines of faith vpon Philosophicall grounds and vary both from scriptures and fathers in their doctrine of the diuine attributes of Christs body and soule of merits of sacraments and diuers other points how then can we repute these doctrines to be catholike It is the Property of Catholikes saith Vincentius Lirinensis commonit c. 34. to keepe the doctrine committed to them and left with them by the auncient fathers and to auoid profane nouelties but the doctrine of schoolemen concerning the diuine attributes concerning the examples of the persons of the Trinitie brought by the master of sentences the eating of Christs body by brute beasts and diuers other points is ful of profanenesse and nouelties their reasons also are more philosophicall and sophisticall then Apostolicall all the points in controuersie betwixt vs and them are mere nouelties as the decretales whereon they depend declare Leo epist 81. saith that there is one true only perfect and inuiolable faith whereto nothing can be added and from which nothing can bee taken but vnto this faith the Popes haue added their determinations concerning traditions the carnall reall presence of Christs body and blood in the sacrament of the Lords supper transubstantiation the communion vnder one kind the Popes vicarship generall and vniuersall power purgatory indulgences the worship of images and diuers other pointes of doctrine doth it not then appeare that popery is nothing else but a corruption of doctrine comming in after the publication of the Christian Catholike faith and added vnto it Furthermore as the Apostolike doctrine is catholike and vniuersall so hereticall opinions are particular and peculiar to certaine sects and persons and times but wee haue shewed that Popery is nothing else but a packe of old and new heresies Lastly by many particulars it may be proued that the doctrine of Papists hath neither beene taught at all times nor imbraced of al christians nor spred ouer al the world which doth plainly declare that neither the doctrine is catholike nor the professors thereof truely termed Catholickes First they teach that the scriptures are an imperfect rule and vnsufficient without traditions and speake lewdly of them calling them a nose of waxe a killing and dead letter a matter of strife and what else they list to deuise in their

which they seeke greedily in Caluin but finde not 18. Certein Papists as the Master of the sentences sheweth lib. 3. dist 12. § 5. suppose that the sonne of God might haue assumed our nature in the sexe of a woman quidam arbitrantur saith he deum potuisse assumere hominem in foemineo sexu vt assumsit in virili and he doth not deny it but this inconuenience would haue followed that the sonne of God should haue been the daughter and not the sonne of man such absurdities are they which haue sounded in time past in Christian mens eares 19. Thomas Aquinas 3. q. 49. art 1. assigneth three means by which Christ hath wrought our saluation whereof the first is for that by his example he hath prouoked vs to charitie tribus modis saith he causauit nostram salutem primùm per modū prouocationis ad charitatem but the scriptures shew that he is therefore called a Sauiour because he hath saued his people from their sinnes and if for this cause hee might be called a Sauiour then euerie one that prouoketh vs to charitie might be a Sauiour 20. Commonly they teach that Christ is only the meritorious cause of our iustification saluation and redemption and Kellison p. 261. assigneth this for a reason because he deserued grace for vs at Gods hands by which together with our cooperation wee may bee saued and redeemed but if he be the meritorious cause only of our iust●●●cation saluation and redemption then is he not properly our Sauiour and redeemer nor doth he iustifie vs. for not he that meriteth at our friends hands that wee should be ransomed out of the hands of our enemies but our friend that paieth our ransome is our redeemer so this blasphemous wretch denieth Christ to be properly our redeemer and Sauiour and next he maketh euery man his owne Sauiour and redeemer 21. Likewise the same surueior pag. 262. telleth his followers that Christ hath therefore freed vs from the tyranny of the diuell and captiuity of hel because he hath procured vs grace by the which when the diuell by him selfe or the world or the flesh prouoketh vs wee may resist mauger all the force of hell which is as much as if he should say that Christ hath not ouerthrowne or triumphed ouer our enemies but hath procured vs grace to ouerthrow the diuel and to triumph ouer him our selues that he is not the strong man that hath bound vp the Diuell that had vs in possession but that he hath made vs strong and able to binde the Diuell of the deliuerance from sinne and from the curse of the law by Christ he maketh no mention and if you aske him what he meaneth by grace he will tell you of charitie or a habit not distinct from charity such is the blasphemous doctrine of these impostors they ascribe the worke of their redemption immediatly to themselues and a farre off to Christ 22. He telleth vs further pag. 336. that Christes death was sufficient to haue redeemed the Deuils and damned also but this assertion supposeth a contradiction viz. that the same Persons may be both saued and damned it supposeth also that the Deuils and the damned may be saued which is an assertion direct contrary to the decree of God concerning their damnation would not then such impostors with their vaine supposals be chased from among Christians and placed among the damned crew of which he himselfe sometime talketh I doe the rather make mention of his contemptible fellow albeit he deserue no place among the learned because he gaue vs the first occasion to make this Surueie 22. Clement the sixth in the chapter vnigenitus extr com de poenit remiss doth apply these words from the sole of the foote vnto the head there is nothing whole vnto Christ as if Christ had nothing whole in him whereas the Prophet Isay c. 1. doth speake of the sinfull people of the Iewes for a little before he said ah finfull nation is not then this a proper comparison to match the immaculate lambe of God with an impure and finfull people and is not this a plaine abuse of scripture 23. The same man in the same place saith that the shedding of one drop of Christs blood would haue been sufficient for the redemption of all mankind his words are pro redemtione totius humani generis suffecisset but Kellison in his suruey pag. 256. goeth much further and saith that Christ with one teare or one word and not only with one drop of blood might haue redeemed vs. thus these impudent wretches euacuate the crosse of Christ and make his death superfluous which wee would the rather maruell at but that they are teachers of Antichrist and opposite to Christ and enemies of his crosse 24. For the most part they ioin the merites of Christ and his mother and other Saintes together and of them they make a treasure out of which the Pope may bestow indulgences to such as neede them or desire them but it is absurd to thinke that the Pope or any mortall man hath power to dispose or dispence Christes merites For he himselfe hath formerly disposed of them beside that it is a great disparagement to Christes merites either to supply them with the merits of Saints or to make Saints and mortall men redeemers and Sauiors and deliuerers from sinne 25. Bellarmine lib. 1. de indulgentijs affirmeth that Christ had superfluous merites as if Christ had not knowen how much was sufficient or left others to discerne of his merits better then he did himselfe 26. The scriptures teach vs that by the merits of Christs death only we haue remission of sinnes but Thomas Aquinas p. 3. q. 49. art 1. saith that by charity wee obteine remission of sinnes Caritate consequimur veniam peccatorum saith Aquinas 27. Of the virgin Mary most of them say that she was conceiued without originall sinne and of Hieremy and S. Iohn Baptist that they were sanctified in their mothers wombe of which it followeth that Christ is not the redeemer of all mankind for what needed they a redeemer that were not borne sinners nor subiect to the curse of the law 28. But nothing is more blasphemous then that they teach that dogs and hoggs mise and birds and other brute beastes doe eate the true bodie of Christ when they eat the Sacrament nay that such beasts doe eat their God but this is the opinion of Alexander Hales of Thomas Aquinas and the schoolemen best reputed of and the master of sentences holding the contrarie lib. 4. sent dist 13. is therefore censured now herein they passe the idolatrous gentiles for the Aegyptians did not eate those creatures which they adored as Gods these deuoure their God and Sauiour like bread 29. They say that Christs true body is in the sacrament and yet he hath neither flesh nor bone that can bee felt or seene there this therefore is not farre from the heresie of Valentinus and destroieth the verity of

wormes to be engendied if it be long kept and that both the kinds are corrupted but it is blasphemous to say that either Christs body and blood are corrupted or that wormes can issue and be engendred thereof to auoid this inconuenience they say they are engendred of the accidents or of the bread and wine returning againe For the engendring of wormes of meere accidents is absurd and for the returne of bread and wine they can bring foorth no words of scripture 29. Thomas Aquinas p. 3 q. 77. art 7. confesseth that Christs body is not broken in the Sacrament and gladlie would he shew how the accidents there may be broken but he traueileth with vanitie and bringeth foorth nothing but foolerie 30. Commonly Masse-Priests say that Christ at his last supper did eat himselfe and drinke his owne blood before it was shed matters that imply manifest contradiction and dissolue rules of reason 31. Now the spaniards will not denie but they are canibals and eaters of mens flesh that eate the same whether rosted broiled baked or otherwise dressed why then should not the Masse-priests be auoided as eaters of mans flesh and drinkers of mans blood as they say themselues albeit they eate Christs flesh and drinke his blood prepared vnder other formes 32. The fathers say that Christs bodie is meate for the soule and not to be eaten with the teeth but Nicholas the second will haue it torne with teeth as his words import c. ego Berengarius de consecrat dist 2. others will haue it swallowed into the belly 33. Christians abhorre to heare that Christs bodie should be eaten and his blood drunken of brute beastes but Papists teach and confesse both 34. Christ gaue his disciples the cuppe of the new testament the Pope and his complices sacrilegiously take the same from Gods people 35. Christ said take and cate the Masse-priests suffer them that haue them to gape and gaze and giue them often nothing to eate 36. Christians beleeue that they receiue the same Sacrament that Christs disciples receiued at his last supper but Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 81. art 3. saith the disciples receiued it passible and such as it then was but now no man can receiue his true body but he must receiue it as it is in heauen that is as it is glorified and impassible 37. They say that the eucharist is both a Sacrament and a sacrifice and for those two ends instituted but that implieth a plaine contradiction for as the sacrifice is offred to God so the Sacrament is ordeined and giuen to men 38. If poison after consecration be mingled in the Sacrament Thomas Aquinas 3. p. q. 83. art 6. will haue the same kept among Saints reliques but what Christian will rescrue poison for a relique 39. The Apostle saith Christ was once offred the Masse-priests say he is offred continually and that for quicke and dead a matter vnknowen to Christs Apostles 40. Our Sauiour instituted this Sacrament for a remembrance of his death and passion but the Masse-priests offer the Sacrifice of his bodie and blood for quicke dead for sicke for hole for sailers for trauellers in the honor of Sainte and Angels for peace and good successe in all things which bee matters neuer thought vpon in the institution of this Sacrament Finallie they haue no lesse strange false and contrary positions in their doctrine of matrimony order penance and extreme vnction which they make Sacraments but by this it may appeare sufficiently how litle they regard either the institution of Christ or the doctrine of the ancient catholicke church in the matter of Sacraments I shall also haue occasion otherwhere to touch these pointes particularlie CHAP. VIII That poperie is a mixture of old and new heresies IT were long to insist vpon euery article of Popish doctrine I will therefore rather in a generality shew the qualities proceedings and practises thereof running through the whole then dilate the absurdities and falsities of euery particular standing vpon euerie small point now then that I haue touched the grounds and certaine principall doctrines of Popery I haue thought good to shew that the rest is nothing but either old or later heresies They glory in their workes and hope to bee iustified by the law as may be gathered out of Bellarmines disputes de iustificatione and also out of diuers of their treatises of good workes the Iebusites of Collein censur fol. 22. say that all their life and saluation consisteth in the precepts of the law whose fulnesse is loue they doe also extoll the merits of their workes but the Apostle Rom. 2. taxeth them that glory in the law and Galat. 3. condemned those false Apostles that taught iustification by the law 2. They make Gods law void by their traditions of worshipping images maintaining publike stewes banks of vsury and such like practises the which is noted as an error in the scribes and pharisies reprobastis mandatum Dei saith our Sauiour Marc. 7. per seniorum vestrorum traditionem and as they had their Talmud so haue the Papists their decrees and decretales which they follow as the law of God 3. The Monks and Iebusites are also like to Pharisies dicebantur pharisaei saith Epiphanius haeres 16. ante Christum co quod separati essent ab alijs propter spontaneam superfluam religionem apud ipsos receptam the Pharisies were so called for that they were separated from others for voluntary and supersluous religion receiued by them they compassed also sea and land to make Proselytes and when they had won them they made them twise more the children of hell then they were themselues as our Sauiour Matth. 23. teacheth vs. so likewise for a spontaneous and superfluous shew of religion these irreligious Iebusites and Monkes do separate themselues from others and take great paines to winne Proselytes to the synagogue of Rome and in the end abuse many and make them much worse than themselues 4. In their supersophisticall exposition of the law and their often washings and affectate holinesse they imitate the scribes who for this cause by Epiphanius haeres 15. ante Christum are enrolled in the catalogue of heretickes 5. By their often washing in holy water the Papists hope to wash awaie sinnes as the Hemerobaptists among the Iewes which for this were reputed heretiks as Epiphanius sheweth haeres 17. ante Christum but there he telleth them that neither drops nor riuers of water nor the whole ocean can wash awaie sinnes 6. The Dositheans were reputed heretickes for their affectation of virginity and abstinence from mariage and punishing their bodies why then should not the like accompt be made of those Papists that runne into the same errors not sparing their bodies more than they did whom the Apostle Coloss 2. reprehendeth 7. Iohn the 23. was condemned in the councell of Constance for denying the immortality of the soule the like opinion as Zegedinus in spec pontif and others report had Alexander the sixth Leo