Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	punishment_n	sin_n	sin_v	1,923	5	9.5821	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A11015	A treatise of Gods effectual calling: written first in the Latine tongue, by the reuerend and faithfull seruant of Christ, Maister Robert Rollock, preacher of Gods word in Edenburgh. And now faithfully translated for the benefite of the vnlearned, into the English tongue, by Henry Holland, preacher in London; Tractatus de vocatione efficaci, quae inter locos theologiæ communissimos recensetur, deque locis specialioribus, qui sub vocatione comprehenduntur. English	Rollock, Robert, 1555?-1599.; Holland, Henry, 1555 or 6-1603.; Bèze, Théodore de, 1519-1605.	1603 (1603)	STC 21286; ESTC S116145	189,138	276

for it is deriued either by the soule or by the body of the parents or through their default It cannot bee said that the propagation of this sin is by the soule for the soule of the Father or Mother is not deriued by propagation to the children in whole or in part as is very euident wherfore this sin coms not by the soule of the parents But it may not vnfitly be said that there is some deriuation How sin is deriued from parents to their children of this sin by the body of the parents to the body and soule of the child begotten by them This propagation of sinne by the body of him which begetteth into the bodie of him which is begotten is easily discerned for the seede of the parents being in the child is corrupted infected with sin whence it followeth necessarily that the bodie which is begotten of such corrupt vncleane seede must also be corrupt and vncleane in like manner The propagation of sinne by the body of him which begetteth into the soule of him which is begotten is more hardly expressed yet I deliuer what seemes most How sin infefecteth the verie soule probable vnto me on this manner After that by the bodie of him which begetteth sinne is deriued into the bodie of him which is begotten now the body begotten being corrupt infected with sin this bodie I say infecteth and poisoneth the soule created euen then of God before and infused into it that very moment of time wherein it was created Here you demaund whether the soule were pure and cleane the time it was created and so Quest infused into the bodie and then afterwards so defiled by the contagion of the bodie I answer it is not like to bee so for that the soule is created infused and corrupted in Ans the very selfe same moment of time This corruption of the soule is partly by reason of the desertiō of God partly by reason of the contagion of the body whereinto it is infused for God the very same moment of time wherein he createth infuseth the soule in his iust iudgment forsakes it and giues it ouer to the body to bee so defiled with sinne wherefore this I auouch that the soule is created infused forsaken of God and defiled by the bodie the very same moment of time The manner of the propagation of this sinne which is said to be through the default of the parents followeth and this I expresse on this wise Adam by that his first offence did deriue as by a certaine conduit whatsoeuer corruption was in him to his posteritie for this cause the Apostle Rom. 5. 12. saith By one man to wit sinning sin entred into the world Here it may be demaunded whence proceedes this efficacie or power of that first sin to ingender as it were and to deriue sinne into all and euerie one of Adams progenie I answer this efficacie of that sinne is by reason of that word and couenant which God made with Adam in his creation as it were in these words If man wil stand and persist in that his innocencie which he had by creation he shall stand for his owne good and for his progenie but if he do not stand but fall away his fall shall turn The Couenant of God in the creation as to his owne dammage so to the hurt of his posteritie and whatsoeuer euill shall be tide him the same shall ensue to all his off-spring after him And this last way of the propagation of originall sinne pleaseth me best and ought to content all sober wits for that this is grounded on the authority and words of the Apostle And thus far our iudgement concerning originall sinne Now let vs briefly see what the old hereticks and late aduersaries of Gods truth say concerning this sinne First The opinion of the heretikes cōcerning originall sinne heere wee be to meete with the heresie of Pelagius the Monke and Caelestius his Disciple which said there was no originall sinne that Adam by his fall did hurt himselfe only and not his posteritie excepting onely by his example They said his posteritie sinned not by propagation of his sinne but by imitation of their father Adams preuarication When it was obiected against them that young infants died which could not be but that they are infected with originall sinne They answered that Adam himselfe also had died by the law of nature albeit he had not sinned And this was the Pelagians principall argument against The Pelagians argument against originall sinne originall sinne If sinne be by propagation then it must needs be deriued to the posteritie by the soule or by the body but not by the soule for that it is not by traduction and it is not by the bodie because it is void of reason neither can sinne be said to bee first and properly seated in it and not by both vnited because it is not by the parts therefore there is no originall sinne at all The answere is easie of that which hath beene before set downe in this chap touching the forme or manner of the propagation of this sinne First their proposition Answer doth not number all the formes meanes of the propation of this sinne for there is besides those meanes a deriuation of sinne which is through the default of the parents Next the Assumption is false for albeit there be no propagation of sinne by the soule yet it may well bee by the bodie as is afore shewed And thus farre of Pelagius and Caelestius heresie Next the Schoole-men had diuers opinions of originall Schoolemens opinion of original sinne sinne for some said that originall sinne consisted only in the guilt of Adams apostasy others said it was but the want of original iustice But Peter Lombard reiecting these opinions auoucheth it to be also a positiue euill qualitie contrarie to that first originall iustice Albertus Pigghius Ambrosius Catharinus said that it was nothing els but that first transgression of Adam And out of this conclusion they drew forth three other opinions the first was this Originall sinne is one and the selfe same onely Three grosse opinions of papists concerning originall sin in all men 2. This sin in Adam was reall and actually his but it is ours only by imputation the third that infants in verity haue nothing in them that hath any appearance of sinne for they said that guiltinesse want of iustice and the spots of nature and such like things seeme rather to be punishments then faults if ye speake not happily improperly as when ye apply the name of the cause to the effect Bellarmine following all these first blames Lombards conclusion concerning his positiue qualitie and next Bellarm. obiect against Lumbard Answer condemnes Pigghius assertion as hereticall One of his principall arguments against Lombard is this God is either the cause of that positiue quality or not the cause if the cause then is he the cause of

quality or action belongs not to euery creature but only to the reasonable creature Angell or Man for God gaue his law vnto these only Of this being which we say is the matter of sinne God himselfe is the author and principall efficient for it is he alone that calleth those things which are not as if they were and that createth all things both substances and accidents But the creature neither is nor is called the principall efficient of any being Therefore that being which is the matter of sinne seeing God is the principall efficient thereof necessarily in and by it selfe is good for that whatsoeuer God createth or maketh hath an ingrafted forme of goodnesse in it Gen. 1. 31. When God saith he saw whatsoeuer he had made behold it was very good This forme of goodnesse is so naturall and essentiall to Being whether quality or action which God made that there from it can neuer be separated But now I graunt that this same Being hath put on another forme to wit * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cause of sin Lawlesnesse the cause whereof is an euill instrument as we shall shew hereafter for this Lawlesnes is from another cause neither doth it destroy that essentiall forme of the goodnesse of being it selfe which proceedeth from God the creator and maker thereof For as for the being which God maketh nothing can be put to it or taken from it that in it selfe it may be better or worser So much concerning the matter of sin Now as touching the forme The forme of sinne is called Lawlesnes that is the want of conformitie with the will and law of God 1. Ioh. 3. Sinne by his forme is thus The forme of sin defined Sinne is the transgression of the law This Lawlesnesse or transgression which wee call the forme and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manner of sinne is not a beeing or a thing positiue but a thing meerely priuatiue to wit a priuation and want of conformitie with the law of God This trangression happeneth through the cause and fault of an euil instrument which God vseth in that being or in doing his owne worke and this instrument is either the Deuill or an euill man and vnbeleeuer For when the Diuell or an euill man concurreth with God to bring forth his work he is not the principall efficient of the being it selfe or of the worke done but only an instrumentall or ministeriall cause but the Deuill or man is the principall efficient cause of the transgression or of the deformity or sin of that action And this transgression the efficient whereof is an euill instrument is euill either for that the action it selfe or Causes of sinne worke is contrarie to the law of God as when a man committeth murther the action of murther is expresly Causes of sinne condemned by the lawe Thou shalt not murther or for that the fountaine and beginning of the action or worke is against the law of God although the action in it selfe be conformable to the law for as the law of God commandeth the action or worke it selfe so hath it regard of the fountaine and beginning of the action commanding that the whole worke which is commanded by the law proceed from a pure holy and beleeuing heart of that instrument which God vseth in doing his worke An example of this kind of transgression may be this When any man giueth almes which worke indeed is commanded of God and yet not done of charitie it is reiected see 1. Cor. 13. Or lastly it falleth out to be a sinne for that the end which the euill instrument in doing or working together with God proposeth to it selfe is against the lawe of God For as the law of God commandeth the worke it self and the fountaine and beginning of the worke euen so it commandeth the end as the chiefe and principall to wit the glorie of God himselfe Whether yee eate or drinke or whatsoeuer ye do do all to the glorie of God 1. Cor. 10. And in this respect a man sinneth when he doth ought not for God nor for his glory but for himselfe his owne profit and only for his owne glorie Here it is to be noted that whosoeuer sinneth as touching the fountaine and originall of the action the same man alwaies sinneth touching the end and so contrarily Wherefore these two last wayes of transgression are alwayes ioyned together Againe it is to be noted that he who sinneth touching the original and the end doth not alwayes sin in the action it self For the action or work of any instrument how euil soeuer in it self may be good The person must please God otherwise the worke shall displease conformable to the law Wherfore the first way of transgression the two last are not alwaies conioined Now then this transgression which we cal the maner forme of sinne comming or put to that Being the author wherof is God and which in it selfe is good whether it be a qualitie or an action maketh vp that which we call sinne and which is so called of the forme thereof and not of the matter seeing all things haue their denominations from their formes These things thus declared it shall bee easie to gather some definition of sinne That sinne is a quality or action of a reasonable creature lawlesse or contrarie to the law of God The generall proprietie of sinne or the consequent thereof is guiltinesse and guiltinesse is that which meriteth or deserueth punishment as therefore guiltinesse followeth after sin so after guilt followeth punishment both temporall and eternall Let this suffice concerning sinne in generall which being knowne it is easie to answer those questions which are wont to be made touching sin and namely to this Three questions concerning the causes of sin which they aske If Sinne be of God or if God be the author of sin Answ In sin there are two things a Being and a transgression God is the Author and principall efficient of that Being but of that transgression God is not the author but the euill instrument is Againe it is asked whether this transgression be any way from God Answ It is from God not effecting but permitting it for he suffers it to be done by an euill imstrument Thirdly it is demanded if God permit sin in as much as it is transgression of his law Answ Not so which euen by this one reason may be shewed He permitteth it vnto his glory and all the meanes of Gods glory so farre as they haue such respect are good and darknes it selfe as it is permitted of God vnto the glory of his name becōmeth light Againe if here it be asked If therfore the transgression of Gods lawe in so farre as a transgression bee not permitted of God doth it not of necessity follow that sin in respect or as it is a transgression is done against * Deo inuito whether he will or no. Gods will Ans It followeth not for that

which is done against Gods will is said properly to be done against Gods decree and not against his reuealed wil or expresse law but sinne as it is a transgression of the law is not done against any decree therefore sinne as it is a transgression of the lawe is not done against Gods will The Assumption is shewed because God decreed not from euerlasting that sinne as it is a transgression of his law should not be done of an euill instrument Therefore thou saist hee decreed that it should be done Answer It followeth not 1 For both these are true concerning God God hath neither decreed that transgression as it is transgression 2 should not be done neither hath he decreed that transgression in so farre as it is transgression should be done For there is no decree of God extant either in this or that respect touching sinne as it is a transgression or breach of the law of God But thou maist aske is not sinne effected as it is transgression some way by the permission of God Answ A thing is said to be done two wayes by Gods permission either by it selfe or by accident That which by Gods permission commeth to passe by it selfe must of necessitie respect and put on the nature of good seeing God proposeth and directeth the same vnto a good end but that which by an accident is done God permitting it or forsaking the creature nothing hindreth but that as it is such it is euill for God leauing the creature and euill instrument to it selfe the creature doth that which is euil as it is euil neither can it otherwise do being left of him who is the Author of al good But now in respect of God permitting and leauing that euill as it is euill is done by accident not by it selfe because God in forsaking purposed not euill as it is euill but on the contrarie so farre forth as it respecteth good and is a meane of his glorie of that especially which is the consequent of his mercie for all meanes whether wrought by God himselfe or suffered to be done of euill instruments in the first place are both ordained of God himselfe and directed to the glorie of his mercie arising from the saluation of the creature God hath shut vp all vnder sinne that he might haue mercie on all And in the second place for the hardnesse of man and because of the heart that cannot repent sinnes and euils which are done by an euill instrument serue to that glory which God getteth vnto himselfe by his iustice and iust punishments If on the contrarie thou obiect God suffereth sinne that he may punish the same but he punisheth sinne in Or I would answer the maior That God suffereth not sin to punish it for that he respecteth not but for that be hath a purpose to manifest his owne glorie in the punishment of sinne that it is sinne or transgression therefore he permitteth sinne as it is sinne I answer vnto the Assumption Sinne as punishment followes thereupon which in it selfe is good and turnes to the glorie of God in this sin I say hath not respect vnto euill but vnto good producing a good effect for an euill cause as it is euill cannot bring forth a good effect But if that cause which in it selfe is euill be also considered as the cause of a good effect it must needes in some sort take vnto it the nature of good I confesse indeed that sinne as it is sinne is the cause of punishment and the punishment as it is the effect of an euill cause must needs it selfe be euill And indeed punish ment Punishment in it selfe is euill which is inflicted is considered two wayes first as a thing in it selfe euill for there is some transgression How punishmēt is euill in euerie punishment and euery punishment after a sort is also a sinne Againe it is considered as a thing that is good to wit as a meane of Gods glorie This I say in a word that all meanes which in and by themselues are euill in respect of God propounding and of the end which is the glorie of God in some sort are good And that whole chaine of meanes which is betweene God propounding as the head and beginning and the glorie of God as the end is the order of things which either by themselues are good or at the least in some sort may be so accounted For those two extremes chaunge all darknesse after a sort into light CHAP. XXV Of Originall Sinne. THVS farre of sinne in generall the first diuision of sinne is into originall and actuall To speake of originall sinne first we be first to obserue the reason why it is so named It is called Originall sinne why so called original because it is in vs with vs from our first being conception and natiuity for it comes by propagation and is deriued from parents to children as an hereditary disease as a leprie the stone or any such like malady of the body And that there is such a kind of sinne it is most manifest for there is none so fottish and so voide of all sense that he feeleth not this hereditarie sicknes in himselfe as the infection and corruption of his nature But the holy Ghost who best knoweth what is in man doth cleerely auouch this in many scriptures Gen. 5. 3. When as Adam saith he begat a sonne according to his owne image Note heere the propagation of that corrupt image which was in Adam into his sonne Sheth Iob. 14. 5. Who can bring forth a cleane thing of an vncleane not one Behold here the propagation of vncleannes Psalm 51. 7. Behold I was formed in iniquitie and in sinne did my mother cherish * Tremel fouit kept me warme in hir bed mee Behold the sin which we haue from our mothers wombe Ioh. 3. 6. What is borne of the flesh is flesh Behold the propagation of flesh that is of our corrupt nature Rom. 5. 12. Like as by one man sinne entred into the world and by sin death c. Obserue here the propagation of sinne Eph. 2. 3. We were by nature the children of wrath Note here our corrupt nature and therefore how subiect it is to the wrath of God And thus far we see that there is a sin which we call originall Now let vs consider what the subiect thereof is The subiect of originall sinne is the whole man body and soule which thing is taught vs cleerely by that one name Soule infected with Orig. sin which is giuen it Ro. 6. 6. as els where that old man whereby nothing els is signified but the whole man corrupted or the corruption of the whole man That the minde is infected with this sin first we be taught it by very sense it selfe next by many testimonies of scriptures Genes 6. 5. When the Lord saw all the imaginations that is all the thoughts of his heart were only euill continually Gen. 8. 21. Albeit the

that distinction of temporall and eternall punishments to be allowed for it is certaine that whosoeuer are punished temporally for their sinnes and in that respect and for that cause such also without repentance shall be punished for their sinnes eternally for temporall punishments of the vngodly in this life are the very beginnings of eternall punishments to be suffered in another life And thus farre of repentance CHAP. XXXVII Of mans Free-will AFter the doctrine of Faith Hope and Repentance the doctrine of Free-will is to follow because the Aduersaries do attribute Faith hope repentance or as they call it Penance to the liberty of our will as to the principall agent or cause but they assigne to grace the second place in the worke of Faith hope and repentance for they say after that Free-will is stirred vp by a preuenting grace man by the benefit of his free-will doth of his owne strength beleeue hope and repent him of his sinnes And as for grace that is only a fellow-worker say they and a helper of mans Free-well which principally worketh in faith hope and repentance But to this we haue answered before in the doctrine of repentance we shal hereafter answer it a little more plainely Now hauing thus far shewed the occasion why after the doctrin of Faith hope and repentance we speake of Free-wil let vs come to the point it selfe and discourse of it The will of man is a facultie The wil described of the reasonable soule following next after the facultie of reason for the mind first vnderstandeth and thē iudgeth The function and vse thereof is in willing in nilling in choosing in refusing and in doubting of those things which were before concealed and considered of in the vnderstanding The obiects therof are things simply good and euill and things indifferent I call those things simply good which are commanded by some expresse Things simply good law of God I call those things simply euill which are forbidden by the some expresse lawe of God And those things I count indifferent which are neither expresly commanded nor expresly forbidden in the law of God And if they be commanded or forbidden by anie law of God that is by accident to wit so farre forth as they further or hinder the edification of our neigbour These obiects of the will I subdiuide again into their final causes or ends and into those meanes which tend and leade vs to the ends And thus I apply the functions of the wil to the ends and to the meanes We be said as well to will and nill the meanes as the ends vnto which they serue for to will and nill are things generall but we are said onely to accept and to reiect and to doubt of the meanes for these things are speciall And thus farre of the will according to our present purpose There is ascribed vnto the will a certaine propertie which the Latines call Libertie the Greekes a Power as Libertas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 9. 20. where the Apostle speakes of the power the Potter hath ouer the clay And 1. Cor. 7. 37. He that hath power ouer his owne will As if he should haue said hee that hath libertie or power of his will in our vulgar tongue it is called Soueraingtie This libertie of the will is as it were a royall power and the Greeke word is vsed to set forth the power of a king or some supreme Magistrate Rom. 13. 27. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher power For this cause the will in the soule of man is receiued as a Queene and in that respect is said to haue as it were the iurisdiction in her owne hand But to come to some description of Free-will This freedome of will is a libertie whenas a thing being offered to the wil as to a certain Queene whether it be good or euill or indifferent the will euen then can by it own A descripttion of free-will proper right and power either will it or nill it reiect or receiue it or hold a man in suspence For which cause commonly in schooles it is defined to be a power or facultie to like or dislike things that are directly opposite that is to incline to either part of the contradiction to receiue or reiect the one or the other and thus commonly they describe it Yet I like best this descriptiō to wit that libertie of will should bee in respect of good and euill things for concerning them the controuersie is it is I say a power of the will or a certaine right it hath whereby of it selfe and of it owne inward and naturall motion without constraint it wils onely that is good it chooseth the good it wils not that is euill it reiecteth that is euill In one word libertie of will is a power vnto good not to euill I am induced to like best this definition of libertie by the example of the libertie of God himselfe who by the confession and grant of all men most freely wils and Gods free-will doth all things notwithstanding the libertie of God is not so defined that it should be a certaine power whereby he doth so will good as though he might nill it or doth not so will euill as though he might will it but the liberty of God is this of his owne right without constraint onely to will that which is good and nill that is euill Againe the same is plaine by the example of the blessed Angels who haue liberty to that is good onely and not vnto good and euill that is they do not so will good as if they might nill it for they are so gouerned Freedome of Angels strengthened of God that their will onely is inclined to good doth abhor from euill To conclude the same is shewed in the example of Adam of his state before his fal for then truly the liberty of his will was to will good Adams freedom in his innocencie only not both good and euil that is he did not so will good as if he might nil it except you vnderstād a remote power wheras we by this word Liberty to speake properly do vnderstand a more neere faculty of the soule I call that a remote facultie which is incident to the matter as is the power or propertie of laughter in the bodie of a man before it hath either forme or life I call that Remota potentia a neere facultie which is incident to the forme as laughter Propinqua potentia in a man that hath life So in the will of man there is a remote power as appertaining to the matter and there is a neere power as pertaining or consequent to the forme but we as a little before we spake by liberty vnderstand not that remote power which is incident to the matter but that neere power which is consequent to the forme and by the forme we vnderstand that sanctitie which is according to the

attained the temporary faith whose sorrow also doth arise from the Gospel and the acknowledgment of the mercy of God in Christ and the change of the mind vnto good is in some sort for the good it selfe for they tast after a sort the sweetnes of God in Christ and are delighted in it And as concerning the amendment of outward life that also is in them a little longer then in those before described They do also returne and relinquish many sins Of this kind it seemes Herod was of whom it is written Mar. 6. 20. Herod feared Iohn knowing that he was a iust and an holy man and he receaued him when he heard him he did many things and heard him gladly And thus far of these 3. steps of impious men in repentance here also I end the doctrine of sound repentance CHAP. XXXVI What the iudgement of Papists is of Repentance IT followeth now that we consider what the Papists do thinke of their Penance for they reiect the very name of Repentance T heir errours are manie which they hold we will take view of some few of them briefly confute them first they say that Repentance is a Sacrament But A Sacrament I aske if it be a Sacrament what sensible signe hath it They answer that the signe is partly the act of y e penitent person partly the words of the Priest whereby the penitent is absolued But I answer in a sacrament there must be not only an audible signe but also a visible there must be also a certaine element and not a ceremonie onely as in Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord. Besides the ceremonies and rites there are elements water bread and wine Concerning this errour this shall suffice Secondly they affirme that the vse of Repentance is this to abolish mortall sinne committed after Baptisme 2. Errour and to make him who of a friend through sinne was become Gods enemie the friend of God againe that is a iust man To this I answer To the restoring and repairing of man who hath sinned after Baptisme we haue no need of any other Sacrament then Baptisme the force and vertue whereof is perpetuall and effectuall throughout the whole life of man for the washing away of sinne to regenerate men for it is false that in Baptisme these sinnes onely are washed away which were committed before Baptisme seeing Baptisme reacheth to the whole life of Baptisme effectuall to the regenerate all his life man and the remembrance thereof is effectuall for the remission of sinnes and our regeneration euen then when a man giues vp the Ghost and departs this life Thirdly they say that the Repentance which was in the old Testament and before the resurrection of Christ 3. Errour is not the same with the repentance which followed the resurrection of Christ for that was no Sacrament but this is I answer that the doctrine of Repentance and of our conuersion to God is one and the selfe same which all the Prophets Iohn Baptist Christ before and after his incarnation and the holy Apostles haue preached Fourthly they say that the principall efficient cause of Repentance is free-will and the strength of nature stirred 4. Errour vp by a preuenting grace and that grace is but onely our helper working together with nature or free-will I answer that it is cleane contrarie for the Spirit or grace of God is the principall efficient cause of Repentance but the instrument are the faculties and powers of the mind not such as they are by nature but as they are sanctified by the Spirit which may appeare euen by this testimonie Ier. 31. Conuert me O Lord I shall be conuerted where the principall efficiencie cause of the work is giuen to the Lord himselfe and to his grace But of vs it may well be said that we become actiue in repentance being acted and moued by the holy Ghost Fiftly they diuide Penance essentially into the act of the Penitent as the matter and absolution of the Priest 5. Errour as the formall cause I answer that there is no necessitie why repentance should be so parted betweene the penitent or confessing sinner and the Priest absoluing For the sinner who doth repent him of his sinne may priuately confesse vnto God and of him also bee absolued without any conceiued or set forme of absolution by the Priest We repent daily and yet there is no need that the matter should be dayly so perfourmed by the sinner repenting and the Priest or minister absoluing Wherefore repentance is not to be restrained to this forme and dialogue or communication which must passe as they say betweene the sinner repenting and the Priest absoluing Sixtly they diuide Penance materially into Contrition 6. Errour Confession and Satisfaction for these three parts doe as it were appertaine to the acts of their Penitents which be the matter of their Sacrament of Penance I answer concerning Contrition which is nothing els but a sorrow of heart we verily admit of it but without anie opinion of merit which they attribute thereunto And as touching Confession first we say that it is not Signes of Repentance properly any part of Repentance but an outward signe of Repentance which is wrought inwardly in the mind for amongst the signes these are numbred confession of the mouth teares humbling of the bodie and other actions of like kind Againe we say that their auricular Confession wherein all euen the priuate sinnes of a man must be numbred as neere as they can remember and whispered into the eare of the Priest we affirme I say that such a Confession is the inuention of mans braine wherof there is no commandement or example extant in the whole Scripture Yea verily the will of God is that manie priuate sins vnto which we alone are priuy should bee concealed not vttered euen as God doth couer the multitude of our priuate sinnes of his free will and mercie wherewith he embraceth vs in Christ Iesus Notwithstanding this he requireth of vs that we priuately repent of them so oft as we shall remember them To conclude concerning Satisfaction we vtterly condemne and renounce it for by it as they teach we satisfie of ourselues the wrath and iustice of God and that by temporall punishments which we willingly suffer for our sinnes This we do vtterly condemne as an opinion which doth derogate from the merit and satisfaction of Christ whereby alone the wrath and iustice of God is satisfied for our sinnes And as for these temporall afflictions of the godly they are not truly satisfactions for their sinnes but by them God doth mortifie the remnants of sinnes and by that meanes prouoke vs to earnest repentance hereby curbing and keeping vs from falling into sinne againe Finally as all things worke for the best to them that loue God so these things which are not so much punishments as crosses do worke together for the best for the godly Neither is