Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	work_v	world_n	wrought_v	86	3	7.2904	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15082	A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*	White, Francis, 1564?-1638.; Laud, William, 1573-1645.; Baylie, Richard, b. 1585 or 6, attributed name.; Cockson, Thomas, engraver.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641.	1624 (1624)	STC 25382; ESTC S122241	841,497	706

which it can comprehend Now the vse of Reason is verie generall and man doe what he can is still apt to search and seeke for a Reason why he will beleeue though after he once beleeues his Faith growes stronger than either his Reason or his Knowledge and great reason for this because it goes higher than eyther of the other can in this life In this particular the Bookes called the Scripture are commonly and constantly reputed to be the Word of God and so infallible Veritie to the least Point of them Doth any man doubt this The World cannot keepe him from going to weigh it at the Ballance of Reason whether it be the Word of God or not To the same Weights he brings the Tradition of the Church the inward motiues in Scripture it selfe all Testimonies within which seeme to beare witnesse to it and in all this there 's no harme the danger is when a man will vse no other Scale but Reason for the Word of God and the Booke containing it refuse not to be weighed by Reason But the Scale is not large enough to containe nor the Weights to measure out the true vertue and 〈◊〉 force of either Reason then can giue no supernaturall ground into which a man may resolue his Faith That Scripture is the Word of God infallibly yet Reason can goe so high as it can prooue that Christian Religion which rests vpon the Authoritie of this Booke stands vpon surer grounds of Nature Reason common Equitie and Iustice than any thing in the World which any Infidell or meere Naturallist hath done doth or can adhere vnto against it in that which he makes accounts or assumes as Religion to himselfe The antient Fathers relyed vpon the Scriptures no Christians more and hauing to doe with Philosophers men verie well seene in all the subtleties which naturall Reason could teach or learne they were often put to it and did as often make it good That they had sufficient warrant to relye as much as they did vpon Scripture In all which Disputes because they were to deale with Infidels they did labour to make good the Authoritie of the Booke of God by such arguments as vnbeleeuers themselues could not but thinke reasonable if they 〈◊〉 them with indifferencie And it is not altogether impossible to prooue it euen by Reason a Truth infallible or else to make them denie some apparant Principle of their owne For example It is an apparant Principle and with them That God or the absolute prime Agent cannot be forced out of any possession for if hee could be forced by another greater he were neither Prince nor Absolute nor God in their owne Theologie Now they must graunt That that God and Christ which the Scripture teaches and wee beleeue is the onely true God and no other with him and so denie the Deitie which they worshipped or else denie their owne Principle about the Deitie That God cannot be commanded and forced out of possession For their Gods Saturne and Serapis and Iupiter himselfe haue beene adiured by the name of the true and onely God and haue beene forced out of the bodies they possessed and confessed themselues to be foule and seducing Deuils And their confession was to be supposed true in point of Reason for they that were adored as Gods would neuer belie themselues into Deuils to their owne reproach especially in the presence of them that worshipped them were they not forced This many of the vnbeleeuers saw therefore they could not in verie force of Reason but they must either denie their God or denie their Principle in Nature Their long Custome would not forsake their God and their Reason could not forget their Principle If Reason therefore might iudge among them they could not worship any thing that was vnder command And if it be reasonable to doe and beleeue this then why not reasonable also to beleeue that the Scripture is his Word giuen to teach himselfe and Christ since there they find Christ doing that and giuing power to doe it after which themselues saw executed vpon their Deuill_Gods Besides whereas all other written Lawes haue scarce had the honour to be duly obserued or constantly allowed worthie approbation in the particular places where they haue beene established for Lawes this Law of Christ and this Canon of Scripture the container of it is or hath beene receiued in almost all Nations vnder Heauen And wheresoeuer it hath beene receiued it hath beene both approoued for vnchangeable Good and beleeued for infallible Veritie This persuasion could not haue beene wrought in men of all sorts but by working vpon their Reason vnlesse wee shall thinke all the World vnreasonable that receiued it And certainely God did not giue this admirable facultie of Reasoning to the Soule of man for any cause more prime than this to discouer or at least to iudge and allow of the way to himselfe when and howsoeuer it should be discouered One great thing that troubled Rationall men was that which stumbled the Manichee an Heresie it was but more than halfe Pagan namely That somewhat must be beleeued before much could be knowne Wise men vse not to beleeue but what they know And the Manichee scorned the Orthodox Christian as light of beleefe promising to lead no Disciple after him but vpon euident knowledge This stumbles many but yet the Principle That somewhat must be beleeued before much can be knowne stands firme in Reason still For if in all Sciences there be some Principles which cannot be prooued if Reason be able to see this and confesse it if almost all Artists haue granted it Who can iustly denie that to Diuinitie A Science of the highest Obiect God himselfe which he easily and reasonably grants to inferior Sciences which are more within his 〈◊〉 And as all Sciences suppose some Principles without proouing so haue they almost all some Text some Authoritie vpon which they relye in some measure and it is Reason they should For though these make not their Texts infallible as Diuinitie doth yet full consent and prudent examination and long continuance haue woon reputation to them and settled reputation vpon them verie deseruedly For were these Texts more void of Truth than they are yet it were fit to vphold their credit that Nouices and young beginners in a Science which are not yet able to worke strongly vpon Reason nor Reason vpon them may haue Authoritie to beleeue till they can learne to conclude from Principles and so to know Is this also reasonable in other Sciences and shall it not be so in Theologie to haue a Text a Scripture a Rule which Nouices may be taught first to beleeue that so they may after come to the knowledge of those things which out of this rich Principle and Treasure are deduceable I yet see not how right Reason can denie these grounds and if it cannot then a meere naturall man may be thus farre conuinced That the

speciall Promise of Diuine assistance and grace is annexed to the Sacramentall signes vsed and receiued according to Christs Institution which belongeth not to other signes and figures therefore it is inconsequent to say one Element receiued alone signifies as much in substance as both Ergo the vse of one Element is as profitable and effectuall as the vse and reception of both But if the obiection be reduced to forme the defect will be more apparent If there is the same signification of one single Element which there is of both then there is the same benefit obtained by receiuing one which is obtained by receiuing both But there is the same signification of one single Element which there is of both to wit spirituall Food vnion of the Faithfull and Christs passion Ergo There is the same benefit obtayned by receiuing in one kind as in both I answer First denying the consequence of the Maior Proposition For although there were the same signification in one Element which is of both yet there is not equall benefit reaped by receiuing one as is reaped by receiuing both because the promise of Grace is annexed to the receiuing both and not to the receiuing of one without the other for when a promise is made vpon condition of a duty to be performed the promise is not fulfilled but vpon obseruing the condition Now Christ hauing instituted the Sacrament as a seale of his Couenant and appointed the same to be receiued in both kinds as his Institution shewes the Church cannot expect that Christ should fulfill his promise in giuing his flesh and blood by the Sacrament vnlesse the Church obserue his ordinance and doe that which he appointed Also obedience is better than Sacrifice 1. Sam. 15. 22. but when we administer and receiue in both kinds we obey Christ saying Drinke ye all of this and we disobey when we doe otherwise Therefore although there were the same signification of one Element which is of both yet the same benefit is not reaped by receiuing one which is obtained by receiuing both Secondly to the assumption I answer that there is a more perfect and liuely representation of spirituall feeding and refection and of coniunction of the faithfull and of Christs death and Sacrifice vpon the crosse by both the signes than by one and pouring out of the wine doth in a cleerer manner represent and signifie the effusion of Christs bloud and also the separation of his body and soule and there is a more perfect similitude of nourishment in Bread and Wine together than in Bread alone Eccles. 4. 9. so likewise two Elements represent more than one and nourish more than one and vnite more than one Otherwise if the representation of one Element were equall to the representation of both to what purpose should our Sauiour institute a Sacrament in two kinds which according to Papists who will seeme wiser than God is as sufficient in one kind as in both IESVIT The fourth thing required to the substance of a Sacrament is Causalitie to wit to worke in the soule the Spirituall effects it signifies This Causalitie cannot be wanting to the Sacrament vnder one kind wherein is contayned the fountaine of Spirituall life For the cause why the Sacrament in both kinds giueth grace and refresheth the soule is That Christ is assistant vnto them bound by his promise at the presence of sensible signes to worke the proportionable spirituall effects in disposed soules But Christ is in the Sacrament vnder the forme of Bread and he is able through infinite power and bound by inuiolable promise to worke the effect of grace preseruing vnto life eternall the worthy participant of this Sacrament vnder the forms of Bread Qui manducat hunc panem viuet in aeternum Not any doubt then may be made but the Sacrament in one kind is full entire compleate in substance and by participation thereof prepared consciences doe receiue the benefite of celestiall fauour that conserueth the life of the soule with daily increase in perfection ANSVVER The summe of this obiection is There is the same power of causing Grace in one signe receiued alone as in both because Christ the Fountaine of Grace is receiued in one signe alone Ioh. 6. 51. Therefore the receiuing of one signe alone is as sufficient and profitable as the sumption of both The Antecedent of this Argument is denyed And the Scripture Ioh. 6. 51. saith not Whosoeuer eateth Sacramentall Bread without Wine shall liue for euer but if any eat this Bread which came downe from Heauen to wit Christ Iesus incarnate shall liue for euer And then it followeth Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall not haue life in you Ioh. 6.53 Now let the Romist chuse which Exposition hee pleaseth If our Sauiour in these last words speaketh of Sacramentall and Spirituall eating ioyntly then Communion in both kinds is necessarie to life eternall and if he speake of Spirituall eating only by Faith then this Scripture prooueth not the necessitie of receiuing eyther Bread or Wine and much lesse prooueth it that there is the power of causing Grace in receiuing Bread alone IESVIT §. 4. Communion vnder one kind not against Christ his Precept ALthough Communion vnder both kinds pertaine not to the substance of the Sacrament yet if Christ did specially command the same we are bound to that obseruance and should by Communion vnder one kind sinne not against his Sacrament and Institution but against a speciall Diuine Precept ANSWER WHen Christ instituted the Sacrament he prouided and prescribed two materiall Elements and not one onely or none and he sanctified and distributed both and with his Institution and Practise he conioyned a Precept Doe this in remembrance of me Drinke ye all of this Saint Paul likewise saith Let a man prooue himselfe and so let him eate of this Bread and drinke of this Cup and the practise of the holy Apostles in their dayes and of the successours of the Apostles and Saint Pauls owne practise appeareth 1. Cor. 10.16 cap. 11.26 and he describeth Communicating by taking the Cup as a most noble part saying Yee cannot drinke the cup of the Lord and the cup of deuils 1. Cor. 10.21 Iustin Martir who borders vpon the Apostles saith That Christians in his age distributed the sanctified Bread and Wine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to euery one present and he addeth further that the Apostles taught That Iesus commanded them to doe thus Saint Chrysostome saith That whereas in the old Law there was a difference betweene Priests and Laicks in communicating of Victimes in the New Testament it is otherwise for one Bodie and one Cup is ministred to all This practise continued as a Law more than a thousand yeeres after Christ. And Haimo who liued in the yeere 850. saith That in his dayes all the people receiued out of the

onely by making them susceptible of a free and liberall reward and by placing them in the state and order of causes impetrant or dispositiue conditions S. Paul saith Rom. 8.18 I thinke that the Passions of this time are not condigne to the glorie to come that shall be reuealed in vs. First the passions here expressed were Martyredomes sanctified by grace Phil. 1.29 and spirituall sacrifices of a sweete smelling sauour 2. Tim. 4. 6. most pretious in Gods sight Psalm 116.15 Secondly Condignitie or Worthinesse equall in desert or value to the reward of glorie is denyed vnto them but where there is inequalitie betweene the worke and the reward and where the reward is of Grace and the worke of debt there is found no proportion of Condignitie Origen saith I can hardly persuade my selfe that there can be any good worke deseruing as a debt the reward of God S. Augustine Thou shall not receiue eternall life for thy Merit but only for Grace Andreas Vega saith That many Schoole-men to wit Gregorie Arimine Durand Marsilius Waldensis Burgensis Eckius c. reiect the Romish doctrine of merit of Condignitie Dionisius Cistertiensis doth the like Brulifer saith It is a verie deuout opinion established by many authorities that no man in this life how pure and perfect soeuer can merit coelestial glorie by 〈◊〉 but that by 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 the Iesuit 〈◊〉 That the Roman Church hath not hitherto determined expressely the question of 〈◊〉 of condignitie and the same author with others 〈◊〉 That Merit of congruitie is not truly properly simply Merit but 〈◊〉 quid nomine tenus comparatiuely and in appellation only And they deliuer a good reason of this assertion for if for a small labour and seruice or if for a seruice and obedience due of right by other titles a liberall and immense gift shall be bestowed there is no Merit in the receiuer but the reward is meerely of 〈◊〉 in the bestower So likewise when God Almightie bestoweth vpon his children an incomparable weight of glorie for a small and imperfect seruice and for that which is due vnto himselfe in right by many other titles this reward is not a wages of debt neither is God obliged in iustice to bestow it but it is a reward of Grace and bountie and man is indebted to God for promising and bestowing the same Now from hence it is apparent that the doctrine of Merit taken properly is not Catholicke or infallible and therefore if Popes pardons depend vpon the same a worme-eaten post is made the pillar and supporter of this moath-eaten rag of supererogation wherwith the Romists would gayly cloath their children IESVIT The first grace is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because God out of his owne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and his actions 〈◊〉 a without which Ordination no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or correspondencie with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ANSWER By Diuine preordination vertuous actions haue reference not of desert but of disposition and instrumentall efficiencie or manuduction to beatitude or the last supernaturall 〈◊〉 and according to Saint Bernard they are Via regni non causa regnandi The way to the heauenly Kingdome but not the meritorious cause of raigning IESVIT The second is the Grace of Redemption by Christ Iesus without whom wee and our workes are defiled wee being by nature the children of wrath and should bee so still had not hee by his Passion and Death appeased God 〈◊〉 vs the inestimable treasure of his merits so that In illo benedixit nos Deus omni benedictione spirituali in caelestibus in quo habemus redemptionem per sanguinem eius secundum diuitias gratiae suae quae superabundauit in nobis ANSVVER The grace of Redemption appeaseth God and purchased for vs the fruit and inestimable benefit of Christs Merits both for remission of our sinnes and for our Sanctification But that Christs Merits make mans actions meritorious and that his satisfaction inableth man to satisfie Gods Iustice is all one as if one would inferre saying Christ Iesus hath redeemed vs by his Passion and he communicates to vs the grace of Redemption Ergo Christ Iesus hath made vs Redeemers IESVIT The third is grace of Adoption in Baptisme whereby soules are supernaturally beautified by participation of the diuine nature whence a triple dignity redounds vnto Works one by the grace of Adoption from God the Father who in respect of this Adoption regards good works as the works of his children Another is from God the holy Ghost dwelling in vs by whom Good workes are honoured as by the principall Author of them so that he rather than we doth the works who therefore is said to pray for vs with vnspeakable groanes The last dignitie is from God the Son Christ Iefus whose members we are made by Grace so that the works we doe be reputed not so much ours as his as the worke of the particular members is attributed principally vnto the head ANSWER By the grace of Regeneration and Adoption the diuine Image is imprinted in the soule 2. Pet. 1. 4. Ephes. 4.24 and a dignitie of goodnesse redounds to vertuous actions from the three persons of the Trinity But hence it followeth not Ergo Good workes merit in condignitie for although Christ Iesus and the holy Ghost worke in righteous People and the vertuous deedes of these Persons are in some sort reputed the works of Christ yet because the diuine Persons worke in them according to a certaine degree and measure of grace and not according to the fullnesse of Power and the vertuous deeds of men are attributed to Christ not as the cause Elicitiue or as immediately producing them it is inconsequent to say Good workes are produced originally by the holy Ghost and they are reputed Christs works in regard of Influence Approbation and Acceptation Ergo they haue the totall Perfection to wit of meriting and satisfying which Christs owne Personall workes had The foot of man is vnited to the head and the head maketh influence into it neuerthelesse the whole perfection of the head is not in the foot and the foot doth not vnderstand because the head vnderstandeth nor seeth heareth or smelleth although these senses are 〈◊〉 in the head So likewise euery iust person is vnited to Christ and is spiritually sanctified by the Grace of the holy Ghost but this motion and influence is finite in it selfe and limited to the estate of our weakenesse 〈◊〉 distributed according to the necessitie of the Receiuer and the wisedome and good pleasure of the moouer and therefore it imparteth not the whole vertue of the moouer but so much onely as is necessarie and conuenient for the Subiect to receiue but it is not necessary for men to receiue power of meriting properly and it is most honourable for God to bestow life eternall