Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	good_a	sin_n	transgression_n	4,384	5	10.5404	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A19460	A iust and temperate defence of the fiue books of ecclesiastical policie: written by M. Richard Hooker against an vncharitable letter of certain English Protestants (as they tearme themselues) crauing resolution, in some matters of doctrine, which seeme to ouerthrow the foundation of religion, and the Church amongst vs. Written by William Covel Doctor in Diuinitie, and published by authority. The contents whereof are in the page following.	Covell, William, d. 1614?	1603 (1603)	STC 5881; ESTC S120909	118,392	162

hath wil is righteousnes only mans transgression sin For euen to doe that which nature telleth vs we ought howsoeuer we know it must needs be acceptable in Gods sight How this vttered out of great iudgment to another purpose namely that good things are done and allowed whereof we haue other direction then Scripture is by you wrested against the articles of our Church either concerning the perfection of works which are with faith or the goodnes of works without faith to say plainly I cannot yet vnderstand Therfore as the dealing is vnequall to make him say what you list so the aduātage is too great to make him an aduersary to a cause of your own making when the whole scope of his speech is to another purpose For there is no indifferēt reader but had he considered what M. Hooker speaketh to what end in those places by you alleaged he must of necessity haue wondered at your sharpe and acute iudgements that would without blushing aduenture to alleage him to that end But an opiniō doubtlesse that these things wold neuer be examined gaue that cōfidence to your first motion which consideration would haue hindered if you had but once dreamed to haue bin called in question Wee should not therfore need in this much to defend him but briefly resolue you what our Church holdeth and fitly in this point The articles of our Church which ye thinke are oppugned are two first that the fruits of faith cannot abide the seuerity of Gods iustice that man out of faith doth good workes which though they make vs not iust yet are both acceptable and rewardable I doubt not but it is a truth wherof if yee had not bin perswaded this letter of yours profitable as you think to the Church and pleasing to God as all the rest of your writings in that kinde had lien buried vnborne in those rotten sepulchers from whēce into the world they did first come whilest we are by that intermediat iustice of Christ made righteous and haue obtained a free remission of our sins that we are tearmed iust there is with this mercy ioyned the Holy-ghost which dwelling in vs maketh vs fruitfull to good workes this reuiuing all parts from our naturall corruption reformeth vs to a pure and willing obedience vnto that reuealed will which is the rule of all that we ought to doe yet seeing we are clothed with corruption there are euen in our best actions those remainders of imperfection which serue to teach vs thankefulnes and humility both arising from the consideration of our own weakenes And I doubt not but euen in this poynt many of the Church of Rome whose humiliation in their penitēcy of heart seemeth far to exceed ours are of this opinion that euen the best action performed in their whole life as there are yet some few monumēts spared from the couetous hand if all points of it were considered with a streight view sifting euen the least circumstances which closely insinuate thēselues out of our corruptiōs into our actions they would I say confesse that there is something which tasteth of the flesh which corruption if either for want of a strict consideration we see not or through a selfeloue could pardon yet it is not able in the feeblenes of his owne nature to abide the exact triall seuerity of Gods iudgement That law the least transgression wherof is sin is sayd to be fulfilled three waies first in Christ and so all the faithfull are said to fulfill the lawe hauing his obedience imputed to them Secondly it is fulfilled by a diuine acceptatiō for God accepteth our obediēce begun as if it were perfect seeing what imperfections are in it are not imputed to vs. For it is al one not to be not to be imputed blessednes being the reward of both And we know that there is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Iesus Thirdly it is fulfilled by vs an error I thinke scarce any do hold sauing only the Anabaptists For that eternall wisdome which hath ledde man by the law vnto Christ hath set those bounds which all men haue broken the first commandement and the last to include all as guilty of the breach of the whole law For our knowledge being but in part it is not possible saith Saint Austen that our loue can be perfect And therfore we conclude the first point according to the article of our Church from which there is no sillable in Master Hooker that is different that our workes though they be good and so esteemed and rewarded yet they cannot abide the iustice of the lawe and the seuerity of Gods iudgement The second point is whether the workes which are done before the grace of Christ are not only not acceptable to God but also haue the nature of sinne In this we must vse some care for whilest men iustly disagreeing haue equally laboured to be differēt one from another both in the end haue bin equally distant frō the truth That there are excellent graces in the heathen no man doubteth and he must needs be far from reason and sense who maketh no difference betwixt the iustice moderation and equity of Titus and Traian and the fury violence and tyranny of Caligula Nero and Domitian betwixt the vncleane lusts of Tiberius and the continency in this respect of Vespasian in one word betwixt the obseruation and the breach of lawes For there is that difference betwixt iust and vniust that euen the frame of nature where sense wanteth acknowledge a well being by the obseruation of what it ought and therfore much more in those good works which because they missed of the right scope wee dare not call by the name of true perfect Christians vertues yet for their very action we are content so long as they swarue not from the righteousnesse of the lawe of nature to giue them leaue to be called by a better name then only sinnes and yet for all this no man taketh them to be much better in the true seuerity of a hard construction for those that are not regenerate although they sin in their best obseruation of the morall lawe yet it is much better to performe those offices then to performe them not seeing a part of that indeuour though it be not meere righteousnesse yet it is lesse sinne We must therefore remember that a worke is considerable either in respect of the substance or in regard of the manner of doing In respect of the worke all the actions of infidels are not sin seeing they performe those things which are commanded by the law of nature of nations of God nay they are so far in this respect from beeing sins that as Saint Austin saith God doth plenteously reward them But concerning the manner of working all their actions are sin as proceeding from a corrupt fountaine a hart that wanteth true faith and directed to an ende of lesse value then he is whose glory ought to be

say that the wicked who haue not the two last being captiues to sin in this life and to misery in the life to come yet for all this want not the freedome of will Now this freedome of nature as Aristotle noteth is two fold that which is opposite to a simple coaction and that to which not only a coaction but a necessity is opposite The first is of those thinges which cānot by any meanes but be willed of vs yet freely and voluntarily are willed as to be happy which none can chuse but will though most doe faile in the meanes the second when we can either will or not will as to walke speake sit or such like Now because nothing is the proper or the chiefe obiect of the will but that which either is or seemes to bee good as all learned men affirme therefore in our wils there is this vsuall error that our vnderstandings are deceiued by the inferior appetite of the flesh which maketh that seeme good in the particular proposition which it pronounceth to bee euill in the generall And therefore beeing by nature to will good willeth that which is directly opposite because reason growing idle in the slouth of an inferior appetite wanteth diligence to search it out Fewe men but think drunkennes in generall to bee euil which notwithstanding themselues do imbrace because in particular they thinke it good This being the difference in all sinne that then it seemeth to be none when it is this sin Thus the conclusion by the rules of Logicke being from the particular wherein reason corrupted hath failed the will hath reason enough to follow that and therfore saith S. Austin man vsing amisse the freedome of this wil hath both lost it and himselfe not in respect of the naturall libertie from coaction but in respect of the libertie which is from sinne as Aquinas answereth Saint Ambrose or whosoeuer was the Authour of that booke of the calling of the Gentiles saith that in man there is a threefold will sensitiue animal spiritual the two first he holdeth to bee 〈◊〉 the last to be the worke of the holy Ghost For as one 〈◊〉 there is in man an vnderstanding of earthly things and of heauenly earthly things as of policie gouerning of families arts liberall and mechanicall and such like which pertaine not directly to God to his kingdome to the righteousnesse of it to eternall happinesse heauenly as the knowledge of the diuine will and framing our liues according to it Of the first we say that because man is a sociable creature naturally inclineth to all that concerne the preseruation of that there are left in him certain vniuersall impressions wherein in all ages wise men haue conspired for the making of good lawes Which in my opinion is not much lesse then that which you reprehend being affirmed by M. Hooker But the vnderstāding of heauenly things we confesse by the corruption of original sin wholy to be taken from vs. For natural things are corrupted supernaturall taken away For we think not as some of the ancient Fathers did especially the Greekes who were loth to dissent too much from the Philosophers that man was corrupted only in his sensuall part and that hee hath reason found and his will also for the most part For saith Saint Austin Adam had that he might if he would but not to will that he could And therefore in supernaturall things which are the workes of pietie pleasing and acceptable to God of which is vnderstood all that you alleage out of the tenth Article of the Church of England we say the will of man hath not obtained grace by freedom but freedome by grace yet for all this neither doth the will want in his owne nature a potentiall freedome in all things nor an actuall powerfull freedome in some things for the blow that sinne gaue made not an equall disabilitie to all actions seeing all actions are not in equal distance from mans nature For the thoughts and the actions of man wee know are of three kindes naturall morall supernaturall nowe there are manie truths theoricall and mechanicall contained in naturall and humane arts which by man may bee comprehended onely by the light of nature for though some diuines are of opinion that no morall truth can be knowne of the vnderstanding of man in the state of nature corrupt without the special help of God others contrary as Albertus Bonauenture Scotus Aqumas and diuers others yet all agree in this that man can know a morall truth in generall without any speciall grace but that good that directly belongeth to eternall life he cannot Now what I pray you doth our Church say lesse when saith that without the grace of God which is by Christ preuen●ing vs that we will and working together while we will we are nothing at all able to doe the workes of pietie which are pleasing acceptable to God Or what in your opiniō doth M. Hooker say more when he saith that there is in the will of man naturally that freedome wherby it is apt not able to take or refuse any particular obiect whatsoeuer being presented to it or when hee saith there is not that good which cōcerneth vs but it hath enough for euidēce in it selfe if Reason were diligent to search it out the fault of mans errour in election arising out of the slouth of reason not out of the nature of the good And this slouth being nothing els but that heauie burthen wherwith we are loden by our first corruption And therefore in mine opinion the accusation is directly false whereby you would make him to say contrary to his words that reason by diligence is able to find out anie good concerning vs. For hee that saith that there is vertue enough in the poole to heale if a man had power enough to put himselfe in doth not affirme that man hath strength enough to doe it but that the poole had vertue if hee were able to do it But doubtlesse we are dead in our sinnes and trespasses we are not sufficient of our selues to thinke anie thing and yet as Seneca saith it is the gift of God that we liue for that he hath done without vs but it is an act of our owne not simply but of our selues helped that we liue well For many other things may vnwillingly be done by vs but the act of beleeuing as it must be done in vs so it must be done willingly and with vs. And therefore saith Saint Austin there are three things necessarie that supernaturall mysteries may bee perceiued by vs first a diuine reuelation from the Scriptures a perswasion of that truth by miracles or some other meanes and last of all the rule of the will For saith he a man may enter into the Church vnwillingly he may receiue the sacrament vnwillingly but no man can beleeue but willingly Now there is no difference betwixt the will and

that naked faith c. In these assertions which in my opinion are repugnant to our Church and in the best construction make but a harsh sound what do you else but discouer y e error which they of the Church of Rome by a mistaking haue thought vs to hold as though it were our doctrine that wee could be iustified by a faith that were meerely naked Luther striuing to shew how litle our works did in the merit of mans saluation speaketh somewhat harshly when he saith Faith without before we haue charitie doth iustifie And in another place both which are not vniustly called in question by those of the Church of Rome he saith Faith vnles it be without euen the least good works doth not iustify nay it is no faith But M. Calum speaketh in this better then either Luther or you Faith alone iustifieth but not that faith which is alone For if our Church held a naked faith which none that were wise euer did might not all the world iustly accuse vs as enemies to good works The most of the learned in Germany held a necessitie of good works not a necessitie of effecting but a necessitie of presence for we are saued doubtlesse by grace but hauing yeers we cannot ordinarily be saued vnles we haue good works For faith which we teach to iustifie is not void of good works as Doctor Fulke answereth to the Rhemes obiection And therfore in another place he saith the elect are alwayes fruitfull of good works From hence seeing faith hath no assurance for itselfe either to God or to mā we exhort in our sermons to good works we perswade to humiliation by fasting weeping which are if they be truly penitent meanes to blot out sin thorough Gods vnspeakable and vndeserued mercie For as Saint Paul saith Godly sorrow causeth repentance vnto saluation not to be repented of And therefore saith Saint Hierom fasting and sackcloth are the armor of repentāce And y e men please God by fasting saith D Fulk as Anna Tobie Iudith Hester we doubt nothing at all while we vse it to the right end allowed of God that is hūbling of our selues chastising of our bodies that it might bee more obedient to the Spirit and feruent in prayer Nay our solemne fasts are as M. Hooker saith the splendor and outward glorie of our religion forcible witnesses of ancient truth prouocations to the exercise of all pi●tie shadowes of our endlesse felicitie in heauen and euerlasting records and memorials vpon earth which it is great pitie it is so much neglected because euen therein they which cannot be drawne to harken vnto what we teach might onely by looking vpon that we do in a maner reade whatsoeuer we beleeue Now that he saith the attainement vnto anie gratious benefit of Gods vnspeakable and vndeserued mercie the phrase of antiquitie hath called by the name of Merit this is that wherein you desire to be resolued And surely he hath read little who is ignorant that the heathen Masters of the Latine tongue and the Fathers for antiquitie nearest vnto those times haue vsed the word Merit far in another sence then that whereunto the violence of some cōstructions haue wrested it at this day And Aquinas himselfe vnderstandeth by the name of ●urit not a worke not due which should deserue a reward but a worke which mercifully and by the goodnes of God a reward followeth The phrase of the Latine doth properly make one to merit of another and as it were to bind him to him who doth any thing which pleaseth and delighteth him for whom it is done Thus that place in the epistle to the Hebrues To do good and to distribute forget not for with such sacrifice God is well pleased Where they of Rhemes following the Latine promeretur say promerited shewing that they meant nothing els in ancient time by merit but that delight allowance and contentment which God taketh in those good things we do and so rewardeth them And Doctor Fulke confesseth that Primasius who was Saint Austins scholler vsed the same word promeretur as it was taken amongst the vulgar at that day farre differing from the sense wherein it is nowe vsed Thus much briefly may serue for answer in this point that faith is not alone though alone it iustifie that though a man sinne if he repent his faith may saue him that there are vses nay excellent vses of good works though they do not saue vs and last of all if posteritie had not corrupted the word merit that we would not be afraid to speake in the phrase of antiquitie and call our vertuous attainment by mercie of grace by the name of merit ARTICLE VII The vertue of works AS goodnesse so truth being but one whatsoeuer is opposite be it neuer so carefully obserued in the course of a long streame at the last foldeth it selfe in a contradiction For falshood hath no more strength to proue a truth then truth hath weaknesse to beget a lie Then the ground of all true assertions concurring immoueably in that one first truth of which all other inferior are but branches whatsoeuer goeth about to disproue that must of necessitie in his owne parts bee diuers and imply a contrarietie seeing it laboureth to infring the certainty of that which eternally and vnchangeably is but one Hence commeth it that vnskilfull men the grounds of whose opinions are but the vncertainties of their owne ignorance are thought to want memorie whilest they contradict themselues when indeed the defect is in iudgment which cānot make truth the ground of their knowledge from which if they swarue neuer so little they doe not sooner oppugne others then crosse themselues truth admitting no coherence of contrarieties seeing it selfe is but onely one From this hath proceeded that ouersight of a great number who speaking first against a truth vttered by others come at length to speake euen directly against themselues Thus you that in the former Article disputed of faith naked and destitute of all good works make your next step to those good works that do accompany faith Where I vnderstand not but perhaps you do why you call them good if they arise not naturally out of faith or why you call that faith naked which is accompanied with these good works But doubtlesse there being a morall goodnes euen where there is want of supernatural light and the most certaine token of that goodnes being if the general perswasion of all men do so account it it can not chuse but seeme strange that the approbation of these should in your opinion be applied to those works that are done out of faith after man is iustified seeing there is a good as M. Hooker saith that doth follow vnto all things by obseruing the course of their nature yet naturall agents cannot obtaine either reward or punishment for amongst creatures in this world only mans obseruation of the law of his nature because he