Selected quad for the lemma: love_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
love_n	affection_n	love_v	see_v	4,893	5	3.4092	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41506	The six book-sellers proctor non-suited wherein the gross falsifications, and untruths, together with the inconsiderate and weak passages, found in the apologie for the said book-sellers, are briefly noted and evicted, and the said book-sellers proved so unworthy, both in their second beacon-fired, and likewise in their epistle written in the defence of it, that they are out of the protection of any Christian, or reasonable apologie for either / by John Goodwin.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1655 (1655)	Wing G1203; ESTC R8425	15,328	24

prophecied but in part But they are afraid of the reproach of Scepticism unless they profess to know all things and this without hesitancy or the least regret in their judgement about any thing Their manner is to lay on load and strength of confidence on their conclusions even where their premises are weak and contemptible Item p. 6. 7. 8. he reasons most absurdly from the loose Sect. 12 ground of his distinction of a two fold love in God a love to righteousness a love to persons For speaking of that love about which only the question sticketh between the Apologist and his opponents viz. a love of complacency and delight in the persons of men God loves no mans person materially or simply considered but onely as qualified with righteousness as on the contrary he hates no mans person with an hatred opposite to this love simply considered this being the workmanship of his own hands but onely as corrupted with sin and unrighteousness So that when God loves a righteous person he doth not love him with a twofold love as the Apologist weakly supposeth with one in respect of his righteousness another in respect of his person but he loves the person mediante justicia or because of that rightteousness which he findes in him and would not love him I still mean with that kind of love mentioned if righteousness were not found in him The reason is because this love of his to righteous persons formally i. e. as righteous and concretely considered is uniform and unchangeable neither is there any other object of it but onely a person or persons so qualified From hence likewise it evidently appears how impertinent the similitude is upon which the Apologist for want of better supports statuminates his cause A Prince saith he that loves a Loyal and faithful subject but when he proves disloyal he hates him Will any man deny that the Princes affections are changed And yet he continues to love loyalty and hate disloyalty Who with half an eye seeth not but that if this Prince were like unto God in his love to a loyal and faithful subject i. e. could love no subject but him that is faithful and Loyal nor hate any but him that is contrary it were unproper to say that his affections in this kind either were in the case put or could be in any other changed And that there is a sence wherein the Love of God to men may be said in some cases to be changed viz. such a sence as that wherein he is said to repent is I suppose the sence of all that understand themselves in these controversies But this sence doth not suppose any change or changeableness in the Nature or Essence of God which is really the same with his love but onely a change and changeableness in his dispensations in reference to such and such persons which all divines with one mouth affirm may be varyed and changed and this in reference to the same persons without the least shadow of variation or change in his Essence And if 1. the love of the Prince in the Apologists fable were his nature and essence And 2. This essence of his simply and absolutely unchangeable though he should express himself according to the different manner of love and hatred towards his subject specified under the different deportments of Loyalty and disloyalty yet could not his affections at least in any proper sence be said to be changed which is the sence wherein I constantly deny any change of affection in God although he should one while love a person with a love of complacency and afterwards viz. upon his turning aside from righteousness unto sin not love him but hate him with an hatred contrary to his former love But these things are argued to the satisfaction of all ingenuous and unprejudiced men in the pages and passages of my Book of Redemption lately directed unto But the Apologist stands declared on the left hand and there is little hope of bringing him over to the right unless his company were willing to come along with him How can ye beleeve saith Christ who receive honour one of another Joh. 5. What the Apologist adds p. 7. 8 and part of the 9. sibi et muses canit or however it passeth my intelligence Onely this I understand p. 9. he citeth a passage from my Letter to Mr. Ca●yl Book-seller-like I mean with the omission of these Emphatical words in it and I cannot but presume regularly enough And thus the Apologist hath done his good will to cover the nakedness of his six Friends the Beacon-Firers But he may cry out H●i mi i quod nullis scelus est medicabile verbis He hath indeed tryed his skill if it were possible to make with Cacus of old Candida de nigris et de candentibus atra i. e. Black things look white and white to look like black And they may do well to accept of his will for the deed But the Black-amore is never the whiter for his washing onely the Launderer hath blacked his fingers with handling him Item p. 9. He chargeth me with scurrilous language towards the learned and reverend Mr. Walker and in particular with my bitter recipe which he saith I prescribe for him as for one that is not compos sui He falsifies egregiously in saying that the Recipe bound in some of the copies of that book contrary unto order from me nor is it in any the copies in my hand was prescribed by me for him as if c. It was as much prescribed for Mr. Pool Mr. Jenkin or any other man as for Mr. Walker it was ●ather prescribed from him or out of his papers then to him But when he tells me of using scurrilous language towards him if he would tell me what he means by scurrilous language for High Presbyterians as I somewhere take notice in my Animadversions upon the Booksellers letter are much given to a kind of canting dialect I should better know how to entertain his charge If he understands the words in the common and best known signification I may reasonably suppose he onely read Mr. Walkers piece against me and not my answer to him and by the far worse then scurrilous-language against me which he found there presumed that somewhat scurrilous at least would be drawn from me thereby in case I should make any reply to him But Mr. Walker it seems inherits the praises of learned and reverend notwithstanding any super-scurrility of language in his writings In promptu ratio est Presbyteralis erat Hereof the Reason is not far He was a Grand High Presbiter Howeuer if there were any unbeseeming word one or more which in the heat and hast of writing either in answer to him or Mr. Jenkin or any other for I think I am certain that I never began any fray with any man may possibly have escaped my pen although I know nothing at present in any of my writings that deserves the black

Francis Nethersole or Mr. Jenkins inasmuch as I made not silence my Refuge when I answered them Yea and that it is no arduous case to answer his Apologie since I have not made silence my Refuge from the face of it Yet I confess there is a strain of prudence in the saying For in case I should answer him as I have done either Sir Francis Nethersole or Mr. Jenkin as perhaps I now have done it is his wisdome to arm himself with a resolution against troubling himself with a reply because in such a case it is like to be a trouble indeed to him and this to little purpose A Postscript BEcause the man of no name chargeth me pag. 9. with speaking in favour of all cursed and damnable Doctrines meaning as he saith for the toleration and against the suppression of them besides what I have already answered to this charge that He and His may understand that long before either his daies or mine there were men both wiser and learneder and I fear more conscientious and pious then either of us that speak as much or more then ever I did for a toleration in such a sence as ever I pleaded for any of such Doctrines which he I doubt not will call as well he may accursed and damnable I shall supply part of the vacant paper with some passages which he may read as I have done in Hugo Grotius De Jure Belli Lib. 2. cap. 20. 50 c. First he transcribes out of Salvianus Bishop of Marseilles these words declaring his tendernesse about the punishing or rather for the non-punishing even of Arrian Heretiques Haeretici sunt sed non scientes denique apud nos sunt haeretici apud se non sunt nam in tantum se Catholicos esse judicant ut nos ipsos titulo haereticae pravitatis infament Quod ergo illi nobis sunt hoc nos illis Nos illos injuriam divinae generationi facere certi sumus quod minorem Patri filium dicunt Illi nos injuriosos Patri existimant quod aequales esse credamus Veritas apud nos est sed illi apud se esse pr sumunt Hono● Dei apud nos est sed illi hoc arbitrantur honorem Divinitatis quod credunt In officiosi sunt sed illis hoc est summum Religionis officium Impij sunt sed hoc putant summam esse pietatem Errant ergo sed bono animo errant non odio sed affectu ' Dei honorare se Dominum atque amare creden●es Quamvis non habeant rectam fidem illi tamen hoc perfectam Dei aestimant charitatem Et qualiter pro hoc ipso falsae opinion●● errore in die judicij puniendi sunt nemo potest scire nisi judex Interim idcircò eis ut reor patientiam Deus commodat quia videt evs etsi non recte credere affectu tamen piae opinionis errare i. e. They are Heretiques but against their knowledge they are so in our opinion but not in their own for they think themselves so far to be Catholique or Orthodox that they defame us with the title of Heresie Therefore what they are in our opinion we are in theirs We are sure they do wrong to the divine generation in saying The Son is lesse then the Father They beleeve that we do wrong unto God the Father in holding that the Son is equal to him The truth is with us but they presume it is with them The honour of God is with us but they are of opinion that by their beleef they honour the God-head They are officious amisse but what they do they judge to be the chief duty of Religion They are impious but they think it to be true piety They erre but they erre with a good mind not out of hatred but out of affection unto God beleeving that by this they honour and love their Lord Though they have not the right Faith yet they think this is the perfect love of God and how they are to be punished at the day of judgement for this errour of a false opinion none knows but the judge himself In the mean time as I think God lendeth them his patience because he sees that though they do not beleeve aright yet they erre out of an affection to a pious opinion By the way the Christian equanimity of this man being a Bishop towards poor creatures who in the simplicity of their minds shall turn aside into by-waies of errour though very dangerous in things appertaining unto God may make Mr. Anonymus his cheeks to change colour as his own phrase is when he breaths out fines imprisonment banishment fire sword gibbet and what not against poor weak and foolish men onely for not being as quick-sighted to discern the truth from errour as he presumes himself to be or for not having possibly obtained from God the like grace and means for his comming to the knowledge of the truth which himself hath done The fore-mentioned Author rehearseth likewise in the place directed unto these words out of Austin Tom. 6. Cnntrà Epistolam Manichaei cap. 2. though he nameth not the place where this worthy Father disclaimeth all severity of proceedings against the Manichees though a most vile and pernicious sect of Hereticks Illi in vos saeviant qui nesciunt cum quo labore verum in veniatur quà difficile caveantur errores Illi in vos saeviant qui nesciunt quàm rarum arduum est carnalia phantasmata piaementis serenitate superare Illi in vos saeviant qui nesciunt cum quantâ difficultate sanetur oculus interioris hominis ut possit intueri solem summum non istum quem vos collitis coelesti corpore oculis carreis hominum et pecorum fulgentem atque radiantem sed illum de quo scriptum est per Prophetam Ortus est mihi justitiae Sol et de quo dictum est in Evangelio Erat lumen verum quod illuminat omnem hominem venientem in hunc mundum Illi in vos saeviant qui nesciunt quantis suspirijs gemitibus fiat ut ex quantulacumque parte possit intelligi Deus Postremo illi in vos saeviant qui nullo tali errore decepti sunt quali vos deceptos vident Ego autem saevire in vos omninò non possum quos sicut me ipsum illo tempore ità nunc debeo sustinere tantâ patientiâ vobiscum agere quantâ mecum egerunt proximi mei cum in vestro dogmate rabiosus caecus errarem i. e. Let those be fierce or cruel to you that know not with what labour truth is to be found and with how great difficulty errours are avoided Let those be cruel to you who know not how rare and of how difficult an attainment it is to overcome carnal phantasms and conceits by the serenity and clearnesse of a pious mind Let those again deal cruelly with you who are ignorant with how great difficulty the eye of the inner man is healed that it may look uponand behold the highest Sun not that which you worship as subsisting with an heavenly body which shines with his beams in the fleshly eyes both of men and beasts but that Sun of whom it is written by the Prophet The son of righteousnesse hath risen unto or upon us and of whom it is said in the Gospel He was the true light which inlighteneth every man that commeth into the world Let those yet again cruelly handle you who know not with what deep sighings and groanings of soul even a little true understanding of God is obtained Lastly let those exercise cruelty towards you who never were themselves deceived with any such errour as now they perceive you deluded with But as for me I can at no hand be fierce or cruel towards you whom I ought now to bear with patiently as I did with my selfthen when I was one of you yea and to intreat you with as much patience as my neighbours Orthodox Christians shewed to me when I wandered like a mad and blind man in your opinion The fore-named Author in the place specified to these two large transcriptions out of the two renowned Fathers mentioned subjoyneth upon the same argument as followeth In Arrianam haeresin acriter invehitur Athanasius Epist ad soli●ari●s quòd prima in contradicentes usa esset judicum potestate quos non potuisset verbis inducere eos vi plagis carceribusque ad se pertrahere amniteretur Atque ita inquit seiqsam quàm non sit pia nec Dei cultrix manifestat respiciens in fallor ad illud quod legi ur Gal. 4. 29. Similia habet Hilarius ad Constantium In Galliâ jam olim damnati sunt Ecclesiae judicio Episcopi qui ut Priscillianistas gladio animadvertere●ur curaverant in Oriente damnata Synodus quae in Bogomili exustionem consenserat Sapienter dixit Plato errantis paenam esse doceri i. e. Athana●…us sharply inveigheth against the Arrian Heresie in his Epistle to the Solitarians because they made use of the chief power of the civil Judges against those who contradicted their opinion and indeavoured by force stripes prisonsto draw them over unto them whom they could not induce or perswade by arguments And so saith he it manifesteth it self not to be truly pious nor reverential of God herein respecting if I mistake not that which is written Gal. 4. 29. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the spirit c. Hilary hath the like writing to Constantius In France those Bishops were long since condemned by the judgement of the Church who procured the Priscillian Heretiques to be punished with the sword And that Synod was likewise damned in the East which had consented to the burning of Bogomilus It was wisely said by Plato that he that erreth is to be punished by being taught ERRATA Page 4. l. 25. r. with the l. 26. r. High-Presbyterian p. 6. l. ult. after knowledg insert p. 10. l. 21. r. musis p. 14. l. 1. r. sheweth p. 16. l. 28. r. wisdemeanors FINIS a Harpocrates was worshipped by the Egyptians as the God of silence

and to deny any unchangeableness though somewhat different in words is yet in sence the same Doth it evidently appear by the affirming of an untruth inconsiderately and not maliciously that to affirm a truth and an untruth is in sence the same and only somewhat different in words Is not this of that kind of demonstration which maketh it evident that white is black because it is something Item towards the foot of the same page why the denying 8 of such an unchangeableness and any unchangeableness should be in sence the same he adds in the second place this reasonless reason The true reason saith he why the word such was left out was because it was a relative term and was not this an offence deserving the punishment of being banished from the sentence and so if it had been expressed it would have necessitated the Transcription of a far larger proportion of Mr. Goodwins words c. But first this reason is not at all relative to the conclusion the apparent eviction whereof it pretends unto For what is there in it to prove that to deny such an unchangeableness and any unchangeableness are in sence the same 2. It grosly contradicteth his former reason For there he affirmed on the behalf of his Beacon-Firers that the word was not wilfully left out and here he affirmeth that it was left out upon consideration and debate Now what is wilfulness but the fulness of the will and when is the will fuller then when a thing is willed or resolved to be done upon consideration and in order to the effecting or procuring of some beloved end 3. and lastly if the nature of their work of Beacon-firing would not permit the transcribing of such a proportion of my words as was sufficient to explain my sence and meaning in that unchangeableness which I deny unto God they had provided better both for their consciences and credits if they had left out the whole sentence out of their book instead of leaving out the word Such with others out of the sentence For is it reasonable or Christian to represent a mans saying as erroneous without declaring unto the Reader in what sence that word wherein the error is supposed to lye is meant or understood by him in case it be ambiguous Item page 5. he saith that that assureance of the unchangeableness 9 of Gods love which the Beacon-Firers implici●ely assert and with the denial whereof they charge me is very well known to the Lord Protector and Parliament and all intelligent men to be that very same which I oppose c. If the Beacon-Firers do assert such an assureance of the unchangeableness of the love of God as I there describe and oppose I cannot beleeve that either my Lord Protector or the Parliament or many if any other intelligent men have any knowledge of such their assertion For how should it ever come into the mind much less into the steady and certain knowledge either of the Lord Protector Parliament or other intelligent man that men pretending to the true knowledge and honour of God as the Beacon-fires do by the Apologists high testimony of them should ascribe any thing unto him so abhorring to his nature so inconsistent with his holiness so destructive to his great end and design for the advancement of godliness amongst men as such an unchangeableness of love to men which I there describe and deny unto him As for the unchangeableness asserted by my adversaries if it be such which opposeth the unchangeableness which I in twenty places some of them pointed to in my Fresh Discovery do assert it is more then yet I understand If it be such which I reject and this with indignation and abhorrencie of soul as I and all intelligent men have good cause to doe neither the Beacon-Firers nor their Proctor can with truth charge me with rejecting any other nor consequently with rejecting all whatsoever Therefore the mans Dilemma is impertinently frivolous Item p. 5. he chargeth me that my whole dispute is levied 10 against the unchangeableness of Gods love A most horid bould and broadfac'd slander For the main designe of that dispute of mine he speaks of is to explain vindicate and assert the unchangeableness of Gods love and withal to demonstrate that to ascribe unto him such an unchangeableness of love as the Apologist it seems and some others very inconsiderately do is above all contradiction to render him mutable in his affection and consequently that unchangeableness of love which they ascribe unto him is felo de se falls foul upon and destroys it self Upon this account the Reader desirous of satisfaction may please to peruse p. 63. 64. and p. 205. 206. 207. of my book of Redemption Therefore how importune and un-clerk-like is he in his Parenthesis following I am not ignorant saith he he confidently tells us that in his judgement Gods love is unchangeable as it is no new thing for a spirit of error to be accompanied with a spirit of contradiction Most true it is that a spirit of error is very frequently accompanyed with a spirit of contradiction And hence it is that the Apologist and other Ministers and Preachers of his judgment about the unchangeableness of the love of God c. seldom preach but that their Sermons are yea and nay the doctrinal part a Samaritan and the applicatory part a Jew But whereas he would insinnuate me a self-contradictor because I somewhere deny his unchangeableness of love in God and elsewhere assert such an unchangeableness of love in him which with the salvage of the glory and truth of all his Attributes is competent to him he declares himself to be the firstborn son of disingenuity unless to salve this dishonour he will be content to plead an Ignoramus The passages he transcribes out of my book are palpably irrelative to his cause They only prove that I deny such an unchangeableness of love in God as he it seems fancyeth in him which certainly whilest God spareth me my wits and the use of my reason and understanding to consult the Scriptures I always shall deny but they have no face or colour of proof that I deny the unchangeableness of Gods love simply or of any such unchangeableness herein which is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or by the Scriptures anywhere ascribed unto him Item p. 5. He terms it Scepticism in me that I am not 11 positive and assertive in the highest but express my self modestly and with acknowledgement of some stond in my judgment where the matter is difficult and the grounds of the truth not so evident to me Yet p. 9. he profoundly taxeth me with want of modesty even where I have ground of confidence in abundance But want of modesty and abundance of modesty are alike taxable when they do not serve high-Presbyterian turns It seems High-Presbyterians pretend to a line of knowledge far higher then Pauls For he professed that he knew but in part and accordingly