Selected quad for the lemma: knowledge_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
knowledge_n	law_n	sin_n	transgression_n	3,416	5	11.8881	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68554	A brief censure vppon two bookes written in answere to M. Edmonde Campions offer of disputation; Briefe censure uppon two bookes written in answere to M. Edmonde Campions offer of disputation.	Parsons, Robert, 1546-1610.	1581 (1581)	STC 19393; ESTC S106078	31,137	90

the virgins which were rauished by vyolence in the Primatiue Church did it were no sinne Lastly he should haue added done wittingly for although Iacob laye with Lya which was not his wife yet because he knew it not but thought her to be Rachel his wyfe he sinned not Soe that the perfect definition of sinne is not that which Monhemius did put down and the Protestantes folow but rather that which Iesuites together with S. Austen and other learned Fathers haue set doune to wit Sinne is a humane acte voluntarilye and wittingly commited against the law of God And this is to be vnderstood of actual sinne properly But now how doth M. Charke ouerthrow this doctrine forsooth thus Contrarye to this saythe he is the woord of God 1. Iohn 3. the transgression of the lawe is sinne You séeme to haue made a vowe M. Charke not to deale playnlye in anye one thing Can you not aledge one litle sentence without falsifyinge The woords of S. Iohn are these Euerie one that sinneth committeth iniquitie and sinne is iniquitie Or as you will perhapps séeme to enforce it out of the gréeke woorde Anomia Sinne is transgression of the law But why haue you fraudulently turned it backward you knew well the force of transposition out of Sophistrie that it changeth all the meaning of the sentence For if I saye Euerie man is a liuing creature it is true but if I turne it backward and saye Euerie lyuinge crature is a man it is false Soe these woordes as S. Iohn vttereth them are most true Euerie sinne is iniquitie or transgression of the law but as you vtter them they are false to wit That euerie iniquitie or transgression of the lawe be it neuer soe little or donne without ether consent or knowledge or by a madd mā or brute beast should be properlye a mortal sinne Soe that this firste blasphemye of the Iesuites commeth not to be soe haynous as you would make it but rather to confound your ignorance which vnderstand not soe cléere doctrine but huddle vp matters as M. Campion telleth you alsoe to note your vntruthe in misreporting their woordes and the Scriptures against them And of this first depend the other two that folow 2. You report the Iesuites to saye Concupiscence remayning in the regenerate although it be against the law of God yet is it not sinne properlye in it selfe or of his owne nature Cens. fol. 38. You wil néedes helpe the Iesuites out with that which maketh for your purpose Wher finde you in them the wordes Although it be against the lawe of God They saye that albeit this Concupiscence doe sturre or moue a man some times to doe things whiche are repugnant to the lawe of God yet if no consent of harte be yelded vnto it it reacheth not to the nature of a mortal sinne woorthye of eternal damnation And albeit S. Paul doe some times cal it sinne yet meaneth he not properlye but by a figure wherby the name of the cause is often tymes atributed to the effect as the latine spéeche is called the latine Tongue because spéeche is the effect of the tongue Soe Concupiscence being the effect of original sinne is called some times sinne but not properly but only figuratiuely as also S. Paul calleth Christ him selfe Sinne because he was the sacrifice for sinne And all this is S. Austen his note whose playne woords in the same place are Concupiscence is not sinne in the regenerate if consēt be not yelded vnto her for the accomplishing of vnlawfull woorkes The same teacheth not only S. Augustine in dyuers other places but also all other Fathers of the Primatiue Church as Nazianzenus orat de S. Lana Pacianus orat de bap Clemens Alexandrinus Li. 1. Pedago cap. 6. Cyprian ser. de lot pedū et Li. 2. ep 2. Ambro. Li. 1. de vocat gentiū capit 5. Soe that al these good Fathers are partakers with the Iesuites of this blasphemie which you enforce vppon them But how doe you proue it to be blasphemie marie because Christ saythe Whosoeuer shall see a woman to luste after her he hath alredye committed adulterie with her in his harte But are you soe ignorant M. Charke doe you not sée that Christ by adding the woords in his harte meaneth onlye of him which geueth consent of harte to his luste and concupiscence and would put it in execution if he had tyme and place and abilitie but this is your common alleaging of Scripture 3. You reporte the Iesuites to saye That the first motions of lust are without hurt of sinne Cens. 54. 89. It is most true and playne as they deliuer it but you by clipping their woords make euerie thing to séeme a paradoxe They saye the first motions of luste if they come of natural instinct only without anye cause geuen by vs are no sinnes so longe as we geue no consent of hart vnto them And the reason is because it lyeth not in vs they being natural to prohibit them to come no more then it dothe to prohibit our pulse from beating And therfore séeing no sinne can be cōmitted without our will and consent of hart as I haue shewed before these first motions can be no more sinnes in vs then they are in beastes for the like reason Nether is the ten the commaundement alleaged by you for the contrarie doctrine to wit Thou shalt not couet anye waye repugnant to this For this commaundement forbiddeth consent to these motions and not the verie motions which are not in oure power as the Scripture it selfe signifieth when it saythe This commaundement which I doe geue the this daye is not aboue thee And as S. Austen learnedlye prouethe out of an other place of scripture wher this commaundement is expounded to wit Goe not after thy concupiscence That is consente not to them or followe them not 4. You reporte the Iesuites to say The holye Scripture is a doctrine vnperfecte maymed lame not contayning all thinges necessarie to fayth and saluation Cen. fo 220. You are tooe shameles M. Charke in setting for the these for the Iesuites woordes Lett anye man read the place and he shall finde noe such thing but rather in contrarie manner the holy Scripture with reuerente woordes most highlye commended Notwithstanding they reprehend in that place Monhemius for sayinge that nothing is to be receaued or beleued but that whiche is expreslye founde in the Scripture For reproofe of which heresie they geue examples of manie thinges which bothe we and our aduersaries also doe beleue which neuerthelese are not set downe expres●ye in the Scripturs although perhaps ●educed therof As the perpetuall virginitye of our Ladye after her childe-birth two natures and two willes in Christe the procéedinge of the holye Ghost equally from the Father and the Sonne with out generation the vnion of the worde vnto the nature of mā and not vnto the personne That