Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	aaron_n	king_n	see_v	52	3	3.4104	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65197	A lost sheep returned home, or, The motives of the conversion to the Catholike faith of Thomas Vane ...	Vane, Thomas, fl. 1652.	1648 (1648)	Wing V84; ESTC R37184	182,330	460

do good profitable as our Saviour saith Mat. 25.21 well done good and faithfull servant because thou hast been faithfull over a few things 〈◊〉 place thee over many things enter 〈…〉 the joy of thy Master And the 〈…〉 servant cast ye into utter darkness 〈…〉 if all Protestants be unprofitable 〈…〉 they must expect the sequele there 〈…〉 darknesse that is damnation § 4. Thirdly many Protestant Ministers teach and the people ordinarily believe that Catholiques hold that there is nothing required to the remission of sins but only to confesse them to a Priest and the businesse is done Whereas indeed they teach that not only Confession to a Priest but also Contrition and sorrow for their sinnes which is all that Protestants require as also Satisfaction for the temporall punishment due to sin is requisite and so make it a matter of far greater paine than the Protestants do who reproach it for the easinesse thereof Now all these parts of Penance are plainly expressed in Scripture our Saviour saith to the Priests whose sinnes ye shall forgive they are forgiven and whose sinnes ye shall retain they are retained Joh. 20.23 and S. James bids us confesse our sins one to another Jam. 5.16 and if to another to whom but to him that hath power to forgive The Jewes did object against our Saviour as Protestants do now against Priests saying who can forgive sinnes but God only Mark 2.7 which error of theirs to confute he miraculously cured the man sick of the Palsie That ye may know the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sinnes as our Saviour faith to them which had been no crossing of their erroneous conceipt as the word But doth intimate it was unlesse he had pardoned him as man with Commission from God and not as God immediate for otherwise he should have said why I am God and so I pardon him but he did it as man doubtlesse with delegation from God as another Evangelist expresseth it saying that the multitude glorified God which had given such power to men Mat. 9.8 Nor need the simplest Protestants wonder that men should forgive sinnes seeing Catholiques teach that they do it not by their own power but by power given them from God to whom it belongs originally and by his own power to forgive sins and to them but derivatively and ministerially from him So it is said that God only doth wondrous things Psal 72.18 and yet we read in Scripture of many men that wrought Miracles 3 Kings 8.39 So it is said that God only knowes the hearts of men 4 Kings 5.16 and yet we read of others that knew the secrets of the heart Nor can this forgivenesse of sinnes the power whereof God hath given to men be interpreted of power only to declare forgivenesse as Protestants would have it for this a child or an Infidell may do aswell as any other they may tell them that if they repent God will forgive them nor needed such a power as this onely be ushered by Christ by breathing on them and saying Receive the Holy Ghost Joh. 20.22 nor by these words As my Father sent me so I send you for surely his Father sent him to do more than barely to declare and tell them they were forgiven if they repented and our Saviour should have changed the form of his words and not have said whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted but whose sins ye remit they were remitted before by God And that this power should be given only to the Apostles if it be taken for absolute power of forgivenesse as some Protestants affirme is unreasonable For seeing the reason and use of it which is to reconcile God and man together after mans offending him by sin will remain to the worlds end therefore to the worlds end is committed to them the Ministry of reconciliation 2 Cor. 5.18 19.20 For this power of forgiving sinnes was not given to the Apostles as a particular priviledge wherewith to dignifie their persons above other Priests but for the use and benefit of Christs Church which will alwaies in this world stand in need thereof therefore doth he in their Successors alwaies continue the power § 5. As for Satisfaction which Protestants are taught to believe is needlesse it is plaine in Scripture as first that after the sin is pardoned which is in regard of our reconciliation to God and freedome from eternall punishment yet there remaines a lyablenesse to temporall punishment as appears in David whom after he had repented and God pardoned his sinnes yet he punished one sin with the death of his child another with three daies pestilence 2 King 12.13.14 24.10 12 13. Nor can this punishment be only for admonition not of justice seeing the Text saith it was because he had made the enemies of God to blaspheme Moses and Aaron died both in Gods favour yet were punished with death before they entred into the land of Canaan for their offence at Meribah now where death is the punishment it cannot be intended for their admonition and amendment in time to come but as a scourge for their offences And the Psalmist saith plainely Thou forgavest their sins and didst punish their inventions Psal 98.8 If he forgave them why did he punish them If he did punish them how did he forgive them He forgave the eternall punishment and inflicted the temporall Also the Apostle saith whom ye forgive any thing I forgive also for if I forgave any thing to whom I forgaue it for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ 2. Cor. 2.10 Which words cannot concerne the remission of the fault seeing that was pardoned before by the parties great sorrow mentioned in the 7. verse but must be meant of the temporall punishment which was imposed in the name of Christ This truth Calvin doth not deny nor Beza upon this place who saith that the abatement of this rigour was afterwards called Indulgence And wherefore I wonder do Protestants when they would divert some present or near approaching danger fast and pray and preach and give almes when yet by their contrition they think their sinnes forgiven if they did not hope by these meanes to prevent or remove their temporall evills which in their prayers they confesse to be inflicted for their sinnes Thus doth the force of reason drive them to the practise of that which out of opposition to the Church of Rome in their doctrine they contradict And though Christs satisfaction was sufficient for all the punishment due to our sinnes yet if he hath appointed that we shall also satisfie as knowing it in his wisedome a thing most meet who shall gainsay it His praiers also and his obedience was sufficient to obtain heaven for us shall we therefore neither pray nor obey You will say we shall because we are commanded so also are we commanded to satisfie as the Prophet Daniel saith Redeem thy sinnes with almes and thine iniquities with mercy towards the poore

do yea and more commanding things impossible and then punishes us for not doing them which is most tyrannicall Now if God do not require all but only thus much to do well then the doing better than well is a stock which God of his great bounty gives us to improve for our selves in a higher measure and to offer him liberalities beyond the bond of duty And what pride is it for man to acknowledge this sweet providence of his creator to praise his merciful indulgence in not exacting so much as he might but giving him a way means to shew his voluntary unexacted love to him Especially believing that this divine favour not to exact the uttermost of mans performance and consequently mans ability to present to God more perfect and excellent service than he requires is given through the merits of Christ § 8. But above all the Reall presence is the prodigie of opinions in the conceipt of Protestants whose playnnesse in Scripture notwithstanding leaves not where to adde to it with cleerer proofe as appeares by Christs words of institution This is my body so often repeated Mat. 26.26 Mar. 14.22 Luc. 22.19 They fight against it therfore with arguments drawn from the power of nature think because it exceeds the power of nature therfore it cannot be To whom it may be said as our Saviour said to the Jews who thought that mens bodies in heaven were like their bodies here on earth ye erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God Mat. 22.29 And why then do Protestants believe that God was in the form of a man a thing as impossible in nature as for God man together to be under the form of bread or wine And because they would make sure work if they could the former objection being in the opinion of many of them insufficient they say that it doth not only exceed the power of nature but of God also in that it implies a contradiction but this the most learned of them have never been able to prove nor never will I hope they will all take Luthers judgement herein whom they will not deny to be learned enough to discerne a contradiction Tom. Wittemb 1557. defens verb. Coenae fol. 388 and he saith what Scripture have they to prove that these two Propositions be directly contrary Christ sitteth in heaven Christ is in the Supper The contradiction is in their carnall imagination not in faith or the word of God They also fright the people from this belief by presenting to them the uncomlinesse and inconveniences that may ensue which objections are but raked out of the ashes of the old Heathen and Heretiques who made the like against Gods taking our flesh upon him as that it was undecent that God should lie in a womans womb nine moneths that he should be circumcised whipt and spit upon and finally suffer a most shamefull and painfull death But seeing Protestants doe believe that Christ when he was on earth was subject to all humane infirmities except sin why should his liablenesse to such infirmities make them forbear to believe that he is in the Sacrament But to acquit them of that trouble they may take notice that Christs body in the Sacrament is not subject to those inconveniences that it was before his death because it is now a glorified body and not subject to suffer any thing For as the Sun shining on a dunghill is not defiled therewith and as the Deity it selfe is every where and yet suffers no infection from the foulnesse of any place So the body of Christ being immortall and impassible cannot be defiled or hurt with the touch or impression of any unclean or hurtfull thing more than a man can hurt or defile a Spirit for of that nature are all glorified bodies as the Apostle saith It is sowen a naturall body it shall rise a spirituall body 1. Cor. 15.44 So that in this respect Protestants have more reason to believe the reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament than that he once had a reall body conversant here on earth But some of them againe do acknowledge as they say themselves the Reall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament and therein seem to be Catholiques and please themselves in seeming to be so and think we can desire no more but they do but cozen both themselves and us for when their Presence is sifted we find no reality in it They say that Christ is really present in the Sacrament but not corporally or bodily by which bodily they mean either that his body it selfe is not there or that it is not there with the circumstances and accidents of a body as quantity and the like If they mean the former to wit that he is really there and yet his body is not there I would faine know how this may be For a body to be really in any thing must fignifie to be bodily or in body there or nothing Therefore to say that Christ is really there who is a body and yet not there bodily is the contradiction they speak of and is in their reall presence not in the Catholiques For it is as much as if they should say his body is there and it is not there If by not bodily they mean not with the accidents of his body as quantity figure and the like and that so Christ is not bodily in the Sacrament but spiritually that is after the nature of a Spirit then they agree with Catholiques who say the same and in this sense he may be and is both corporally and spiritually present in the Sacrament Now if by really they mean in regard of his Deity which is every where this is true but is not the true meaning of really for he is no more there in this sense than he is every where else so their confession of a reall presence imports nothing distinctly and is but a delusion For Christ being a man as wel as God the body of a man as wel as the Godhead concurring to the making of his person he that is whole Christ and unseparated cannot be said to be any where really unlesse he be there also bodily and if his body be there his body is by us received and that not only spiritually that is under the conditions of a Spirit or spiritually by receiving the grace of his holy Spirit into our Spirits and souls but also corporally in regard of himselfe who is a body and in regard of us who receive his body into our bodies and this not by faith but with faith that is not by an imaginary conceipt that he is there or that the benefits of his passion are conveyed to the receiver that thinks so which is the Protestant saith in this case but with faith that is faith and charity also abiding in our souls without which though we doe receive him truly really yet we do not receive him worthily profitably But according to the Protestant