Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	wont_a	work_n	work_v	53	3	6.5182	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A12211	A friendly advertisement to the pretended Catholickes of Ireland declaring, for their satisfaction; that both the Kings supremacie, and the faith whereof his Majestie is the defender, are consonant to the doctrine delivered in the holy Scriptures, and writings of the ancient fathers. And consequently, that the lawes and statutes enacted in that behalfe, are dutifully to be observed by all his Majesties subjects within that kingdome. By Christopher Sibthorp, Knight, one of his Maiesties iustices of his court of chiefe place in Ireland. In the end whereof, is added an epistle written to the author, by the Reverend Father in God, Iames Vssher Bishop of Meath: wherein it is further manifested, that the religion anciently professed in Ireland is, for substance, the same with that, which at this day is by publick authoritie established therein.	Sibthorp, Christopher, Sir, d. 1632.; Ussher, James, 1581-1656.	1622 (1622)	STC 22522; ESTC S102408	494,750	610

he speaketh of the whole Booke of the Law saying that It is written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that be vvritten in the booke of the Law to doe them doth not this extend to the Morall Law or can these words be restrained only to the Ceremoniall Yea when he further saith thus I had not knowne sinne but by the Law for I had not known lust or concupiscence to be sinne except the Law had said Non concupisces Thou shalt not covet or Thou shalt no lust doth not everie one hereby most plainly perceive of what Law it is that he chiefly speaketh meaneth namely that it is principally of the Morall Law that is of the Decalogue or Law of the Ten Commandements For to what other end else is it that he there expresly and by name rehearseth and bringeth in one of those ten Commandements But yet further he sheweth that there be but two waies of righteousnesse namely the righteousnes that is of the Law and the righteousnes which is of faith and saith that Moses describeth the righteousnesse which is of the Law in this sort viz. That the man vvhich doth those things shall live by them But the righteousnesse vvhich is of faith speaketh after another manner and he sheweth it to consist not in anie doubtfull questioning but in a firme beleeving in Christ vvho is the end of the Law for righteousnesse to every one that beleeveth When therefore he here againe saith touching the vvorkes of the Law and the righteousnesse compassable that way That the man that doth those things shall live by them is it his meaning thinke you that hee that observeth the workes of the Ceremonial Law only without observing or doing anie of the workes of the Moral Law shall live thereby and enioy everlasting happinesse I presume none can be so absurd or unwise as to thinke it It is then a thing verie manifest that hee speaketh not onely of the workes of the Ceremonial Law but of the workes also of the Morall Law and of these chiefly excluding aswell the works of the one as of the other from being anie cause of our Iustification in Gods sight And this is so much the more evident because S. Paul yet further in that his dispute of Iustification excludeth not only the Iewes but the Gentiles also from all hope of Iustification by the Law teaching that they both are to expect iustification in Gods sight Not by the vvorkes of the law but by faith in Iesus Christ. Now yee know that the Gentiles be not bound to the observation of the ceremonial law as the Iewes were but the Gentiles aswell as the Iewes bee bound to the observation of the moral law of the ten Commandements When therefore S. Paul teacheth that aswell the Gentiles as the Iewes are to expect Iustification not by the workes of the law but by faith in Christ it is apparant that he must needes meane to exclude herein aswell the workes of the Moral law whereto the Gentiles are bound as the workes of the Ceremoniall law whereto the Iewes onelie were bound and not the Gentiles for otherwise you will make him a verie vaine and idle disputer in this point as in respect of the Gentiles 5 Howbeit being thus repulsed from this hold they then retire and returne to their old wonted and ordinarie nold wherein they seeme to repose their greatest strength and that is the same which is before mentioned namely that S. Paul when he excludeth workes from being anie cause of Iustification in Gods sight meaneth it of vvorkes done before faith received and whilst a man is an unbeleever and not of workes done after faith received Which works done by a beleeving person doe as they suppose Iustifie before God and in his sight This hath beene before sufficiently answered yet because they so often and usuallie urge it I hope it will not be offensive that I also here once againe make answer unto it First therefore it might suffice to call to your remembrance that which hath been spoken concerning those two faithfull godlie men Abraham and David who albeit they had after faith grace received from God lived well and done sundrie good workes for which they might deserve praise and glorie amongst men yet for al that they deserved no praise nor glorie with God as S. Paul witnesseth nor were thereby iustified in his sight Yea as touching Abraham he saith that notwithstanding all that he did not his vvorkes but his Faith vvas imputed to him for righteousnesse before God And as touching David though he were a man likewise verie faithfull and godly and did manie good workes yet by his godlie life and good workes he never thought to be iustified before Gods tribunall but found all the godlines and goodnes that was in him to bee too defective and to come too short for that purpose and therefore also he crieth out thus unto God saying Enter not into iudgement vvith thy servant for in thy sight shall no man living be iustified Yea hee discribeth the blessednesse of everie man even of the holiest man that liveth to consist not in his owne sanctitie or righteousnesse but in this that His sinnes be forgiven or not imputed to him And so doth S. Paul inferre and teach out of this example of David That God imputeth righteousnesse vvithout vvorkes So that neither the workes which David did nor the workes which Abraham did nor consequently the workes that anie other godly or holie man doth after grace and faith received be sufficient to Iustifie in Gods presence For I knovv nothing by my selfe saith S. Paul yet am I not thereby iustified I might here further desire you to call to your remembrance that holie man Iob and that holy Prophet of God Daniel yea all that godlie companie and Church of God in Daniels time and Esaies time who all did as themselves testifie renounce all their owne inherent righteousnes as too insufficient and unmeet to stand before Gods most pure eies to claime Iustification thereby in his sight Yea if God should looke narrowlie to see what is said done amisse and to recompence it in the rigor and severitie of his Iustice according to mens merits and deserts VVho as the Psalmist speaketh should bee able to stand or to abide it Yea I might here moreover desire you to remember whatsoever is conteined in the former Chapter touching this matter For not the workes even of a iust man doe iustifie in Gods sight as S. Paul prooveth by an expresse testimonie out of the Prophet Abacuk where he saith even of the iust man that He liveth by his faith and not by his Workes And this he urgeth and enforceth againe in his Epistle to the Galathians saying thus But that no man is iustified by the lavv in the sight of God it is evident for saith he The iust shall live by

it So likewise is Antichrist described under the name figure of a Beast as is also confessed even by the adversaries themselves and therefore neither can hee be supposed one singular and particular person but a State and Dominion wherein a succession of sundrie persons one after another is admitted For whereas Bellarmine answereth that in the Prophecie of Daniel sometimes by Beasts are signified whole States and Kingdomes and sometimes particular persons as in the eighth chapter he saith that by the Ramme is understood one particular King namely Darius the last King of the Persians hee is much deceived and the Text it selfe directly confuteth him affirming this Ramme to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reges not one particular King but the Kings of the Medes and Persians So likewise by the Goate in Daniel is not meant one singular person namely Alexander as Bellarmine againe mistaketh but the verie Kingdome or kingly state of Grecia and the great horne betweene his eyes is in the Text it selfe expounded to be the first King of that Empire or Kingdome of Grecia which was Alexander which horne being broken off foure other stand up in the stead of it So that by every Beast in Daniel you see that not any one particular person but an whole State Empire Kingdome or Dominion is signified and intended and consequently Antichrist being in the Revelation of S. Iohn described under the name of a Beast must needs likewise be supposed not one singular and particular person but an whole State Kingdome or Dominion which admitteth manie persons to rule and raigne in it one after another in succession A third argument to prove this is the exposition and acknowledgement of the Rhemists themselves for touching the seven heads of the Beast that is of the Latin or Romane State the sixt head thereof is as themselves doe shew not one singular and particular person but a State Kingdome or Empire namely the Romane Empire wherin were divers that ruled and raigned in succession one after another Now then if the sixt head of the Beast be not one singular and particular man which themselves declare and affirme but a State and succession of men why should they not grant Antichrist whom themselves also affirme to be the seventh head of the Beast to be likewise not one singular and particular person but a State and succession of persons for they are both called Heads alike and there is no reason of difference that can be shewed more for the one then for the other A fourth argument is out of Revelation the 20 where the Divell being bound for a thousand yeares S. Iohn saw in Vision the soules of them that vvere beheaded for the vvitnesse of Iesus and for the vvord of God and vvhich had not vvorshipped the Beast nor his Image nor had taken his marke upon their foreheads nor in their hands and they lived and raigned vvith Christ those thousand yeares But the rest of the dead lived not againe untill the Thousand yeares vvere finished This is the first Resurrection Blessed and holy is hee that hath part in the first resurrection for on such the second Death hath no power c. In which wordes you see mention made of a Thousand yeares expressely in which this Antichristian Beast was in Esse some all that while lying dead in their sinnes and Antichristian Errors and othersome rising from their sinnes and errors to newnesse of life and to true Christianitie which is there called the first resurrection and these are said to live and not to be dead and to raigne with Christ subduing and getting victorie over themselves and over this Antichristian Beast like Kings Conquerors during all that time When therefore there is expresse mention made of a Thousand yeres in which this Antichristian Beast had to do who doth not perceive that Antichrist cannot be one singular and particular man that shall raigne onely three yeares and an halfe but that hee is and must needs be a State and succession of persons that is thus directly discovered to have had a continuance in the world for at least a Thousand yeares A fift argument is this that S. Iohn saith thus It is the last time and as ye have heard that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Antichrist commeth even now there be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many Antichrists whereby vvee Know that it is the last time Where you may easily observe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Antichrist is not one particular person but manie and that manie Antichrists be this Antichrist for so the Text it selfe declareth In like sort he speaketh in his second Epistle Many Deceivers be entred into this vvorld which confesse not that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh This is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the deceiver and the Antichrist Where againe you see that not onely One but many Deceivers be this Deceiver and the Antichrist Whereunto adde also the opinion of diverse of the ancient Fathers as of Irenaeus Origen Chrysostome Hierome Ruffinus Primasius Augustine expounding that place of Matt. 24. which speaketh of manie false Christs and false Prophets that should arise and shew great signes and wonders so that if it were possible they should deceive the verie Elect as spoken of Antichrist for thereby also they give us to understand that Antichrist is to be conceived to be manie and not one singular person A sixt argument is taken from the Apostasie it selfe which S. Paul speaketh of which Apostasie whether you expound it of the revolt and departure of so manie multitudes of people from the right faith and religion of Christ or of a revolt from the Romane Empire by the Kings and Princes of the earth or from both it cannot be otherwise intended then the worke of manie ages Bellarmine saith that thereby wee may rectissimè most rightly understand Antichrist himselfe and he cyteth diverse ancient Fathers for the proofe of that opinion Now then if by the Apostasie Antichrist himselfe be most rightly understood as Bellarmine teacheth and that this Apostasie cannot in reason be otherwise supposed then the Worke of Manie ages as hee also sheweth especially considering that the Mysterie of that Iniquity or Apostasie began to vvorke even in S. Pauls daies how can Antichrist bee rightly conceived to be one singular man that shall raigne onely three yeares and an halfe and no longer Yea it is manifest that even in the false teachers and heretickes which were in the Apostles daies and which were helpers and workers in this Apostasie and Mysterie of Iniquitie Antichrist was for so hath S. Iohn before assured us Neither indeed could he afterward have beene revealed disclosed detected or discovered unlesse he had bin in Esse before in som secret hidden close covert sort For which cause Theodoret also saith that Defectionem appellat A ntichristi praesentiam S. Paul calleth The Apostasie or defection the presence of

Antichrist In that Apostasie then or Mysterie of Iniquitie which began to vvorke even in S. Pauls and S. Iohns time it is apparant that Antichrist was and consequently even then had his beginning And therefore whilest you suppose that Antichrist is not yet come and that all this while namely for the space of above 1600 yeares there hath beene but a preparation made for him and who when he commeth shall also continue but iust three yeares and an halfe doe yee not perceive the unlikelyhood and utter incredibilitie of these conceits Yea the premisses considered do you not perceive the manifest falsehood and evident untruth of them Why then should anie be anie longer deluded with them CHAP. III. Where the Pope is further shewed to be Antichrist out of the thirteenth chapter of the Revelation THere be two Beasts mentioned in this thirteenth chapter of the Revelation and what those two Beasts be must be enquired Wherein the knowledge of the one will give a great light for the understanding of the other First therefore by a Beast in this place according to the like phrase and manner of speech in Daniel is not anie singular or particular man but a State Kingdome or Dominion to be understood as I said before for so are the foure Beasts mentioned in Daniel expounded in the Text it selfe to be foure Kings and those Kings be againe expressely expounded to be Kingdomes in the 23 verse of the same chapter The next thing then to be enquired of is what Kingdome State or Dominion that is which is here meant by the Beast with seven heads and ten hornes The most certaine and undoubted exposition whereof wee must fetch as I shewed before from the seventeenth chapter of the Revelation where this Beast with seven Heads and ten Hornes is expounded declared for there the seven heads be expounded to be seven Hills or Mountaines whereupon Rome is seated They be further also there affirmed to bee seven Kings not ruling all at once but successively one after another as appeareth by the Text which saith that five of these were fallen one is and another is not yet come These seven Kings be those seven sorts of supreme or Princely governement wherewith Rome hath beene governed namely Kings Consuls Decemvirs Tribunes Dictators Emperors and Popes whereof five were fallen in the daies of S. Iohn namely Kings Consuls Decemvirs Tribunes Dictators One is that is the governement of Rome by Emperors which was then in Esse in the daies of S. Iohn And another is not yet come that is the governement of Rome by Popes for the governement of Rome by Popes was not then come to passe in the daies of S. Iohn but came in afterward Which governement by Popes is there said to be of a short continuance both for the comfort and encouragement of all Gods children against their fraudes and persecutions as also in respect of Gods account with whom a thousand yeares are but as one day as S. Peter saith and in respect also of eternitie and everlasting happinesse which Gods children doe chiefly regard and in comparison whereof they make little or no reckoning of the continuance of anie time in this world how long soever otherwise it seeme The ten Hornes be likewise there expounded to be ten Kings which at that time namely in the daies of S. Iohn had not received a Kingdome but should afterward receive absolute power as Kings Which ten Kings howsoever they had formerly given their helpe strength and power to the advancing maintenance and defence of the Whore of Babylon that is of Popish Rome yet should they afterward be alienated from her abhorre her and make her desolate and naked and consume her with fire And it is said to be the Beast that vvas and is not and yet is in respect of the diverse changes and mutations whereto that Citie of Rome hath beene subiect being in several times ruled by several heads and sundrie sorts of governors The description then of this Beast with the seven heads sheweth it to be the State of Rome or the Romane State which is there purtrayed and decyphered But because the Text it selfe saith that five of those were gone and past in the daies of S. Iohn so that there needed to be no further medling with them and that onely one was in Esse and being in that time namely the gouernement of Rome by Emperors and that another was to come which was the governement of that Citie of Rome by Popes it must therefore here be more specially and more strictly conceived and taken namely in respect of that one Head then present and of that other which was afterward to come The then present governement of the Citie of Rome all men know was by Emperors and the governement of it after the Emperors was by Popes So that the Beast there more specially intended is the Romane State considered in the two last Heads thereof viz. the Emperors and the Popes And therefore the Text saith that One of these Heads that is the sixt Head of it viz. the governement of Rome by Emperors was as it were wounded to death but his deadly vvound vvas healed and so healed as that all the Earth vvondred or was in admiration after the Beast That the Romane State governed by Emperors received a wound is apparant not onely by that which the Gothes Hunnes Vandals and others did unto it but especially by that which was done unto it afterward in the time of the Lombards So that at last the Romane Empire was as it were vvounded to death but yet afterward that deadly wound was healed againe namely in the Popes viz. when the Popes had gotten the Headship Imperial Maiestie and Monarchical and Soveraigne rule of that Citie and therein were set and stablished above all Emperors Kings Princes and people For then was the time when all the Earth had this Beast in so high admiration and then did they say VVho is like unto the Beast vvho is able to vvarre with him Yea of this Beast it was then further said That to him vvas given power over every kinred and tongue and nation and that all that dwelt upon the earth did vvorship him vvhose names vvere not vvritten in the booke of life of the Lambe c. Which speeches voices and admirations so great and so general and in that maner and sort produced doe not so well and fitly agree to Charlemaigne or to anie other whosoever as to the Pope of Rome as may appeare by further examination of it in the particulars For although the Beast here as it is taken specialius more specially comprehendeth the Romane State as it was governed both by Emperors and Popes successively one after another yet being taken as sometime it is specialissimè that is most specially and most restrictively it betokeneth the Romane State onely as it was at last translated and setled in the Popes First then