Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	eternal_a	sin_n	temporal_a	8,837	5	8.6794	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59834	A papist not misrepresented by Protestants being a reply to the Reflections upon the Answer to (A papist misrepresented and represented.)	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1686 (1686)	Wing S3306; ESTC R8108	38,154	74

Attrition which is but an imperfect degree of Sorrow for fear of Hell and can produce only some faint and sudden thoughts of Amendment does qualifie Sinners for Absolution and we say whatever the Doctrine of their Church teaches the constant Practice of absolving all that confess without any apparent signs of Repentance and purposes of a new Life and that after many and repeated Relapses is apt to teach Men to place their Confidence in the Priest's Absolution without any serious intention to forsake their Wickedness VIII Of Indulgences WE charge the Church of Rome with teaching the Pope's Power to grant Indulgences not to commit Sin for the future but for the Pardon of those Sins which are committed that is for the remitting those Temporal Punishments which are due to Sin in Purgatory The Absolution of the Priest remits the Eternal Punishment of Sin and keeps Men out of Hell but still the Temporal Punishment in Purgatory remains due and this must be taken off either by humane Satisfactions and Penances of which presently or by the Pope's Pardon which surely is a differently thing from the Relaxation of Canonical Penances as the Representer states it for I never heard before that Purgatory Fire was a Canonical Penance enjoyned by the Church for sure the Decrees of the Church did not kindle Purgatory and it is strange the Church should grant so many thousand Years Pardon of Canonical Penances if they concern this Life as some Indulgences contain when few Men live an hundred Years in this World and then have no need of all the rest We say the Popes have and do to this day sell these Indulgences at different rates according to the nature of the Crime and Men who have Mony need not fear the Purgatory Fires and Men who have none must be contented to endure them this we grant with the Representer to be a great Abuse but it is an Abuse of their Popes and hardly separable from the Doctrine and Practice of Indulgences IX Of Satisfaction WE charge them with making human Penances necessary to satisfy for the Temporal Punishment which is due to Sin in Purgatory when the Eternal Punishment is pardoned for the Merits and Satisfaction of Christ which we say is injurious to the Satisfaction of Christ for all Men must grant that Christ had been a more perfect Saviour had he by his Death and Passion delivered us from the Temporal Punishment of Sin in Purgatory as well as from the Eternal Pains of Hell Yet we do not say that they believe very injuriously of the Passion of Christ that his Sufferings and Death were not sufficiently satisfactory for our Sins and therefore think it necessary to make Satisfaction for themselves but that they believe as their Church teaches them that they must satisfy themselves for the Temporal Punishment of their Sins and this is injurious to the Satisfaction of Christ. We do not charge them with evacuating Christ's Passion by relying on their own penitential Works but that they rely on Christ to satisfy for the Eternal Punishment of Sin and on their own Satisfactions for the Temporal Punishment which ascribes indeed the better half but not the whole to Christ and all this the Representer owns X. Of reading the Holy Scriptures WE only charge them with denying the People the use of the Bible in the vulgar Tongue as every body knows they do and as the Representer owns and defends it And to justify this Practice we say many of their Divines have charged the Scripture with being a very dark obscure unintelligible Book and that it is of very dangerous consequence to grant a liberty to the People to read it and this we think is not much for the Credit and Reputation of the Holy Scriptures But we do not as the Misrepresenter says charge the Papist with believing it part of his Duty to think meanly of the Word of God and to speak irreverently of the Scripture Whether denying the People the use of the Bible in a Language they understand be an Argument of their Respect or Disrepect to the Scriptures let any Man judg but for whatever reason they do it the Effect is plain that it keeps People in great Ignorance and as we fear occasions the eternal Damnation of many Souls though we do not say as the Misrepresenter does that they do it with this design That Men may be preserved in Ignorance and damned eternally But they know their own Designs best XI Of Apocryphal Books HEre can be no pretence of misrepresenting unless it be in the first clause which he usually takes care shall contain some Misrepresentation That he believes it lawful to make what additions to Scripture his party thinks good For as for their receiving such Apocryphal Books as Tobit Judeth Ecclesiastious Wisdom and the Maccabees into the Canon of Scripture which is all we charge them with the Representer owns and defends it This indeed we think to be making Additions to the Scripture but we don't charge them with believing that they may make what Additions to the Scripture they please for we believe they have so much Wit as to know it safer to do it than to say it may be done XII Of the Vulgar Edition of the Bible ALL that we charge them with here is that they make the Vulgar Latin Edition of the Bible so Authentick as to allow of any Appeals to the Originals for the Interpretation of doubtful places and we know not what Authority can make a Translation more Authentick than the Original That this is truly charged on them the Representer cannot deny though the Misrepresenter makes tragical work with it as any one may see who will divert himself with reading that Character which though in some parts it may have too much Truth in it was never before made the Character of a Papist but we must give them leave to speak some blunt and bold Truths of themselves XIII Of the Scripture as the Rule of Faith XIV Of the Interpretation of Scripture WE do not charge them with denying in express words the authority of the Scripture to be a Rule but with saying that which is equivalent to it That the sense of it is so various and uncertain that no man can be sure of the true meaning of it in the most necessary and fundamental Articles of the Faith but by the Interpretation and Authority of the Church which does effectually divest it of the authority of a Rule for that is my Rule which can and must direct me which it seems is not the Scripture considered in it self but as interpreted by the authority of the Church which makes the Faith and Interpretation of the Church not the Scriptures my immediate Rule But why does he now complain of Misrepresentation When the Representer owns and justifies every particular of it except it be those goodly Introductions That he believes it lawful nay that it is his Obligation to undervalue the Scripture and take from

them opis impetrandae causâ as the Council of Trent directs This is Matter of Fact and owned by the Representer Now we think this is to ascribe Divinity to them if Religious Worship signifies any Divinity in the Object of Worship This the Misrepresenter puts into the Character of a Papist which we never did and the Representer on the other hand denies that they believe any such thing which for ought I know may be true but the Question is Whether they do not give a Divinity to them by worshipping them And this we assert they do and this they may do without believing any Divinity in them V. Of the Eucharist AS for worshipping the Host we only charge them with worshipping the Consecrated Bread which we say is Bread still but which they say is the natural Body of Christ which was born of the Virgin and suffered on the Cross and for so doing some Protestants charge them with Idolatry in worshipping a Breaden God and some Papists acknowledge it would be Idolatry if what they worshipped were only Bread and not the natural Body of Christ but no Protestant ever gave such a Character of a Papist That he believes it lawful to commit Idolatry that he worships and adores what he believes only to be a Breaden God and the poor empty Elements of Bread and Wine The Question is not what a Papist believes but what the truth of the thing is not whether he believes the Host to be only Bread but whether it be so or not not whether he believes Idolatry to be lawful but whether he be not guilty of Idolatry in worshipping the Host and therefore this ought not to be put into the Character of a Papist for those who believe that he worships nothing but Bread and Wine and is guilty of Idolatry in it do not charge him with believing so And therefore the Representer who acknowledges the worship of the Host might very truly deny all the rest As for Transubstantiation we charge them with believing no more than what they themselves own That the Consecrated Bread and Wine is changed into the natural substance of Christ's Flesh and Blood which the Misrepresenter very fallaciously calls Christ's being really present under those appearances that our People may not perceive the difference between Transubstantiation which the Church of England denies and a real presence which she owns not under the appearances of Bread and Wine but in the use of the Consecrated Bread and Cup which differ as much as a Bodily and Sacramental presence Now if this Doctrine of Transubstantiation be true besides many other Absurdities we say Christ must have as many Bodies as there are Consecrated Hosts and that his Body must be on Earth and that in fifty thousand distant places at the same time though the Scripture assures us That he ascended in his Body into Heaven and is to continue there till he come to Judgment But we do not charge the Papists with believing these Absurdities for we cannot guess what they believe much less do we charge them with believing that there are as many Christs as many Redeemers as there are Churches Altars or Priests For there is we grant some little difference between Christ's having many Bodies and there being many Christs What an easy Task has the Representer to take off such Characters as these VI. Of Merits and Good Works HEre we only charge them with saying as the Council of Trent does That the Good Works of justified Persons are truly meritorious of the increase of Grace and of Eternal Life And though we think this is too much for any Creature especially a Sinner to pretend to Merit and know not how to reconcile Grace and strict Merit together yet we never charged a Papist with believing Christ's Death and Passion to be ineffectual and insignificant and that he has no dependance on the Merits of his Sufferings or the Mercy of God for attaining Salvation For it is plain the Council of Trent owns both the Grace of God the Merits of Christ and the Merits of Good Works The Representer indeed qualifies this by saying That through the Merits of Christ the good Works of a just Man proceeding from Grace are so acceptable to God that through his Goodness and Promise they are truly meritorious of Eternal Life The Answerer alleages the 32 d Canon Sess. 6. of the Council of Trent where no such Qualification is used which yet is the Canon purposely designed to establish the Merits of goods Works This the Reflecter grants pag. 8. and refers us to the 26 th Canon of that Session where there is not one word of the Merit of good Works and therefore how we should learn from that Canon in what sense good Works are said to merit I cannot tell but in the sixteenth Chapter of that Session this Doctrine is explained at large and there we may expect the fullest Account of it which in short is this That that Divine Vertue which flowes from Christ into justified Persons as from the Head to the Members and from the Vine to the Branches makes the good Actions of such Men acceptable to God and meritorious and that such good Works which are done in God do satisfy the Divine Law and truly and properly merit Eternal Life That this is called our Righteousness because we are justified by its inhering in us and the Righteousness of God because it is infused into us by God through the Merits of Christ and that the Goodness of God as to this matter consists in this that he will have his own Gifts to be our Merits And therefore in the 32 d Canon they pronounce an Anathema against those who shall say that the good Works of a justified Man are so the Gift of God as not to be his own Merits So that though they do indeed own the Grace and Promise of God and the Merits of Christ as the Cause and Foundation of their own Merits yet they do assert that the inherent Righteousness and good Works of a justified Man have that intrinsick Vertue as to satisfy the Divine Law and to be truly meritorious of the increase of Grace and Eternal Life This we think injurious to the Grace of God and the Merits of Christ they think it is not and we never said they did VII Of Confession WE charge them with making a particular Confession to a Priest of all our Sins committed after Baptism necessary to obtain Pardon and Forgiveness and with attributing a Judicial and Praetorian Authority such as is exercised by Judges and Magistrates to the Priest to forgive Sins And tho we do not say that he believes it part of his Religion to make Gods of Men yet we say and prove it too that this is a Power which God has reserved wholly to himself We do not charge them with saying that the Absolution of the Priest is valid without any thoughts or intentions of Amendment in the Penitent but they do say that