Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	child_n	die_v	sin_n	5,554	5	5.1473	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A61117	Scripture mistaken the ground of Protestants and common plea of all new reformers against the ancient Catholicke religion of England : many texts quite mistaken by Nouelists are lay'd open and redressed in this treatis[e] by Iohn Spenser.	Spencer, John, 1601-1671.	1655 (1655)	Wing S4958; ESTC R30149	176,766	400

are here excluded from ordinary sermons to common people and all curiosities forbidden The Protestant Position That the soules of the faithfull in theyr departure are happy wee often read but noe newes of Purgatory This is proued by Scripture mistaken Blessed are the dead who dye in the Lord from hence sorth saith the spirit that they may rest from theyr labours and theyr workes follow them The first mistake The text saith not they rest presently after theyr death They are not sayd here to rest presently after theyr departure but that they may rest and yet they may be termed blessed as our Sauiour calls the pore in spirit blessed in this world and in theyr misery because the Kingdome of heauen belongs to them as it does to those in Purgatory The second mistake The word labours misapplyed They are not sayd to rest from all labour but from their labours that is such labours persecutions afflictions sorrowes temptations mortifications troubles anxietyes as they suffered in this world from all which they rest after death By theyr labours also may be fitly here vnderstood theyr good workes and patience in suffering the miseries of this life with hope of eternall reward so that they are sayd to rest from their labours because the recompence and crown of their former labours are alloted to them as certainly to follow as the next words declare opera enini eorum sequunturillos for their morkes that is their labours follow them and yet in some of them it may happen that they may not presently receiue the reward of them which hinders not the resting of their labours because they are not to haue any reward for what they suffer after this life The second proofe out of Scripture mistaken For wee know that if the eartly house of this tabernacle were dissolued wee haue a building of God a house not made with hands eternal in heauen This text is mistaken These words say not that presently after death they shall goe into that heueauenly house How follows it hence that so soone as they depart they must goe into this house prepared for them seeing that many may haue houses that are hindred to liue in them especially in these distracted tymes and our Sauiour saith Blessed are the pore in spirit for theirs is the kingdome of heauen euen whilst they are liuing in this world And the Apostle Now therefore yee are no more strangers and furainers but fellow citizens vvith the saints and of the houshold of God And yet more clearly S. Iohn these things I writte vnto you that yee may know that yee haue life euerlasting yee who beleeue in the name of the sone of God That is in full hope and expectation not in actual possession which yet i● sayd more clerely to belong to those in Purgatory who haue an infallible certainty of life eternall The third proofe from Scripture mistaken But the soules of the righteous are in the hands of God and no torment shall touch them Mistake The word torment misvnderstood The Latin hath it non tanget illos tormentum mortis the torment of deach shall not touch them which is most true of all the iust departed because they shall liue eternally but Protestants regard not the vulgar Latin translation The greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which according to Scapula particularly signifyes a torment to which malefactours or suspected to be so are put to make them confesse the truth or to try whether they be guilty or no as are the racke or such like Now no such torment as this shall tuch the soules of the iust departed because God hath sufficiently tryed them and approued of them in this life as apeares v. 5. and hauing beene a little chastised they shall be greatly rewarded for God proued them and found them vvorthy of him selfe Which is a playne place for merits but when it is against Protestants it is only apocryphal If any shall demand whether the word Purgatory be expressed in Scripture I answer that it is as much expressed as the word trinity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 diuine Petson which not withstanding are beleeued by Protestants If it be replied that at least the substance or meaning of those words are expressed in Scripture I answer the same of Purgatory which I demonstrate in this maner Purgatory is nothing else according to the Council of Trent now cited but a place where temporall punishments are suffered by iust persones after death vvich they deserued in this life Now if any iustified soul be and often is liable after death to suffer such punishments then certainly there must be some certaine place where they must be suffered But iustified soules may be and often are liable to suffer such punishments after death ergo there must be such a place where in they are to suffer them That iustified soules may be and often are liable to such punishments I proue thus Iustified persones yet liuing after the remission of theyr sinnes and consequently of eternall torment are liable to some temporall punishment therefore souls departed of iust persones may and often are liable to the like I proue the antecedent out of the 2. Sam. 12. v. 13.14 And Dauid said vnto nathan I haue sinned against the Lord and Nathan said vnto Dauid the Lord also hath put away thy sinnes thou shalt not dy Howbeit because by this deed thou hast giuen great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme the child also which is borne vnto the shall surely dy whete for that very sinne which was put away and forgiuen Dauid was punished by the death of his child because thou hast giuen by this deede c. the child shall dy The same is proued by the example of Adam whoe after his sinne was forgiuen him was notwithstanding liable to the punishment of death which is the wages of sinne as are also all iust persones for the same reason The antecedent therefore being clere I proue the consequence by this argument Seeing God is noe respecter of persones and that he rewards euery one according to theyr workes whosouer deserues the like punishmēt that Dauid deserued shall surely be punished as Dauid wa●slet vs therefore put this case that at the same time with Dauid there had been an other Person guilty of sinnes as greate as were those of Dauid who should haue also repented with the same degree of sorrow and consequently obteyned pardone of his sinne as Dauid did this sinner must haue been liable to the same temporall punishment that Dauid was now suppose that this other sinner● should haue died the very instant after his sinne was forgiuen him according to the doctrine of the Romane Church he should haue been punished temporally in the other world with a punishment correspondent to that of Dauid and soe God should not haue been a respecter of persones but haue rewarded euery one according to theyr workes but according to Protestants he should

our Sauiour witnesses that the holy Apostle S. Paul in this place writes against these heretikes S. Epiphanius alsoe witnesses that Simon Mahus excluded our Sauiour from the office of mediatour and put the Angells in his place as the Apostle seemes here to say The Third mistake This text is made contrary to other texts of Scripture THirdly the Religion or worship of Angells here forbidden cannot be all kinde of worship exhibited to them for then this place of Scripture would be contrary to the other which I cited before Gen. 19. v. 1. Iosua 5. v. 14. where Angells were lawfully worshipped and so this place cannot conclude any thing against vs for if some worship may be lawfully giuen to Angells notwithstanding this place it can neuer be proued from hence that the worship we giue them is forbidden vnlesse it be first proued to be vnlawfull which can neuer be deduced from this generall prohibition And if any one should obiect here that seeing this word threskeia signifyes religion and vvorship thence may be gathered that all vvorship appertayning to Religion or all religius worship is forbidden to be giuen to Angells I answer that if wee take religion and religious worship as it is strictly and presly taken amongst the Doctours in its prime and formall acception for a vertue whereby due honour is giuen immediately to God it is true that all such religion or religious worship is there forbidden to be giuen to Angells and in this sense noe Catholike teaches that religious worship is to be giuen to Angells or any creature but only to the creatour of all things because he only it true God but if by religion or religious worship be vnderstood in a larger sense a vertue or reuerence belonging to religion and exceeding the bounds of nature and ciuill worship then religious worship to Angells is not forbidden in this place Now that religion may be taken in this larger sense is cleare as I haue allready shewed out of S. Iames now cited chap 1. v. 26. and 27. If any man amongst you seeme to be religiouus and bridleth not his tongue but deceiueth his owne hart this mans religion is vaine Pure religion and vndefyled before God and the father is to visit the fatherlesse and widowes in their afflictions and to keepe himselfe vnspotted from the world Where wee see that actions performed to creatures of piety and mercy are called religion and are religious actions and so this worship though it be done to creatures may according to the phrase of Scripture be called religious worship at least in this large sense that workes of piety and mercy are called religion or religious actions here by S. Iames. And thus much for the second place Wee are commanded to pray vnto God therefore no presumption but a bounden duty Proofes out of Scripture mistaken Come vnto me all yee that labour and are heauy loaden and I will giue you rest When you pray say our father which art in heauen And what soeuer yee shall aske the father in my name he will giue it you Aske and yee shall haue seeke and yee shall finde knocke and it shall be opened vnto you If the opponent meane here that wee are to pray to God without all presumption of our selues or our own workes for the words are obscure wee most willingly admit this whole obiection and all the proofes of it as most consonant with the doctrine of the Romain Church and only against Pelagian and Semipelagian Heretikes For shee teacheth that the good workes of Gods children are truly good and pleasing to God and meritorious of the increase of grace and eternall glory yet she teaches also that all good workes are the free gifts of God proceeding from his grace and not to be ascribed to any naturall force of ours left to it self which is not able to doe any thing at all pleasing to Allmighty God and so wee cannot glory in our selues but in God only as S. Paul teacheth vs Againe she teacheth that though the good workes of God's children be meritorious as is declared where they are yet no man can be in this life without a particular reuelation infallibly assured that he is the child of God or that he euer did any one worke truly good and pleasing to God and so liues and dyes wholy relying vppon the mercies of God and merits of our deare Sauiours bitter death and Passion of which he is assured by a firme and stedfast hope not presumptuously relying vppon his owne workes whereof he hath no sufficient assurance whereon to found his saluation and so he is kept in a most humble and low esteeme of himselfe and all he euer did through his whole life for it is not the beleeuing that good workes where thy are are meritorious but the beleeuing that wee haue such meritorious workes which can giue any shew of reason to rely vppon them I say beleuing with an infallible faith which Reformers teach for wee may and ought to haue a stedfast hope that through the grace of Christ wee haue done some good workes and meritorious as it is not the assurance that the abundance of mony and gould where it is is able to purchase great possessions but the assurance that one hath such an abundance of gould which makes one confide that he is able to compasse such a purchase and yet though a iust man should infallibly know that he had done workes truly pleasing to God he would not be presumptuous because he knowes they proceede from the grace of God If therefore this be all that is intended by this obiection that wee are commanded to pray to God without all presumption and vppon bounden duty wee haue nothing against it but if hereby be intended that wee are commaunded to pray to God vppon boundē duty and therefore it is noe presumption to pray to him yet so that wee are to pray to him alone as the insuing obiections and proofes seeme to insinuate then wee giue our reasons for the contrary in the insuing answer which will be alsoe common to this only à word or two vnto these fower places cited for proofe of this difficulty thus vnderstood The text of Mat. 11. v. 28. mistaken Come vnro me all yee that labour and are heauie loaden and I will giue you rest THis text is in the mouth of euery ignorant Protestant to proue that wee are neither to pray to saint nor Angell but to Christ alone Come vnto mee saith our Sauiour he bids vs not come vnto Saints ot Angells say some illiterate Scripturistes therefore wee must neither come to Saints nor Angells according to our Sauiours command But how far this discourse is from common sense euery vnderstanding person will easily discouer for to say that our Sauiour bids vs not here come to Saints or Angells expressly is most true but that shewes only that coming to Saints or Angells is not here commanded which no man makes