Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	death_n	sin_n	sin_v	3,797	5	9.4651	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A73382	The portraiture of the image of God in man In his three estates, of creation. Restauration. Glorification. Digested into two parts. The first containing, the image of God both in the body and soule of man, and immortality of both: with a description of the severall members of the body, and the two principall faculties of the soule, the understanding and the will; in which consisteth his knowledge, and liberty of his will. The second containing, the passions of man in the concupiscible and irascible part of the soule: his dominion ouer the creatures; also a description of his active and contemplative life; with his conjunct or married estate. Whereunto is annexed an explication of sundry naturall and morall observations for the clearing of divers Scriptures. All set downe by way of collation, and cleared by sundry distinctions, both out of the schoolemen, and moderne writers. The third edition, corrected and enlarged. By I. Weemse, of Lathocker in Scotland, preacher of Christs Gospel.	Weemes, John, 1579?-1636.	1636 (1636)	STC 25217.5; ESTC S123320	207,578	312

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Essentially thus God is onely immortall 1 Tim. 6.16 Secondly Ex dono creationis by creation as the Angels and the soule of man Immortale multiplex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex dono creationis ex hypothesi ex dono novaecreationis Thirdly Ex hypothesi by condition as Adams body had beene immortall if hee had stood in Innocencie Fourthly Ex dono novae creationis by the resurrection as our bodies and the new Heavens shall last perpetually after the resurrection The Physitians observed three estates in man Illust 2 First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cum plus accedit quam decedit when more nourishment remaines with the body than goeth from the body this should have beene in Adams posterity if hee had not fallen The second estate is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cum quantum decedit per pugnam nutritio tantum apponit When as much nourishment remaines as decayeth The third estate is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Declinans aetas Cibos assumimus ut corruptio quae posset accedere ex consumptione naturalis humidi evitetur ubi accedit minus quam deficit this is the decaying estate of man when lesse nourishment remaineth than decayeth and this was not in Adam before his fall When wee put water into wine at the first the wine converts the water into it but put often water to it then all turnes to water The body of man before the fall should not have turned to corruption but still should have turned the nourishment to wholsome food It is true there was some contrariety here for otherwaies hee could not have beene nourished but this was without the hurt of the whole which remained whole and perfit so that his body should have beene aequivalenter incorruptibile licet non videretur eadem numero materia It should still have remained that selfe-same body although in it there was some alteration for even as Theseus Shippe after that he had scoured the Sea from Pirats by her they hung her up as a memoriall to the posterity and the Athenians Plutarchi Moral when any planke or board decayed in her they put a new planke or board in place of it so that she was still eadem numero navis that selfe-same Shippe shee was before So should the body of man have beene still the same body by supplying new and equall strength for that which failed The Church of Rome holds The tenet of the Church of Rome concerning the immortality of the body that the body of man before the fall was mortall of it selfe and that the immortality of it came onely from without from that supernaturall righteousnesse which God cloathed Adam with and that death is onely but by accident from sinne because it removeth the bridle originall righteousnesse which held backe death and they say that the soule required a fit body to exercise her functions Bellarm. de grait primi hominis cap. 9. but it could not have such a body except made of contrary humours hence it received a body joyned to it by accident mortall which defect they say is supplied by that supernaturall righteousnesse Againe they hold that this necessity of death which was in nature before the fall is now turned since the fall into a punishment of sinne It was naturall before the fall say they for a woman to beare children but after the fall it was painefull and a punishment of sinne It was naturall before the fall for the Serpent to glide upon her belly but after the fall she was to glide with paine upon her belly this was the punishment of sin So say they death was naturall to man before the fall in his Pure naturals but now it is turned to him unto punishment of sinne and as the beasts which sinne not yet die so should man in his Pure naturals have died although he had not sinned if supernaturall righteousnes had not restrained his death In sensu coniuncto non poterat mori sed in sensu diviso poterat mori But wee hold that Adams body in his innocent estate was naturally incorruptible ex hypothesi that is so long as hee stood in holinesse there was such a harmony amongst the qualities of his body that they could breed no distemperature or bring death to him his body before the fall might have died but this power should never have beene reduced into act so long as he obeyed his maker but it is otherwise mortall now for now of necessity hee must die then it was in potentia remotissima in a most remote power to death now it is in potentia propinqua in a most neere power Angeli non poterant mori neque necesse erat eis mori Ad●●● poterat mori sed non necesse erat ei mori sed Ada●● corrupt necesse est ei mori The Angels could not die neither was it necessary that they should die Adam might die but it was not necessary that hee should die but Adam being corrupted it is necessary that he should die Our reasons to prove the immortalitie of Adams bodie before the fall are these Our reasons to prove that the body was naturally immortall and not supernaturally First the soule desireth naturally alwayes to be in the body therefore naturally it might attaine to this end Reason 1 for naturall desires before the fall were not frustrate so that it behoved the body naturally to be immortall and not supernaturally as they hold for the further clearing of this we must consider the soule either in the separation from the body or as it exists after the separation In the separation from the body it is contrary to the desire of the soule to be separate from the body therefore the naturall desire of it is to remaine in the body Againe Aliquid est contra aliquid praeter naturam animae when the soule exists out of the body est praeter naturam ejus it is beside the nature of the soule although it be not contrary to it therefore it must naturally long to be in the body againe Esth lib. 2. dist 19. They answer that the understanding creature desires naturally some things which it cannot attaine to but by supernaturall meanes as the soules of the blessed naturally desire to be joyned to their bodies againe yet they cannot attaine to this but by a supernaturall power to wit by the resurrection So say they the soule naturally desires the eternitie of the body although by nature it cannot attaine to it but there must be some supernaturall righteousnesse to cause it attaine to this Answer The case is not alike after hee hath sinned and before for after hee had sinned and the soule separate from the body naturally it cannot be joyned to it againe but by the supernaturall power of God but before the fall the soule should naturally have attained to that desire to have enjoyed an immortall body for it had no desire in it before the fall which it should shun

and flee as repugnant to the nature of it to remaine a little while in the body and afterward to remaine still without the bodie De summo bono lib. 1. sect 68. Secundum vegetativam sensitivam facultatem habuit actum naturalem sed secundum superiorem facultatem habuit actum super naturalem Secondly Lessius the Iesuite answers after this manner that there are three faculties in the soule the vegetative sensitive and understanding facultie he saith that the soule should have had an inclination and desire to the body naturally according to the vegetative and sensitive faculties but not according to the understanding or supreme which required a supernaturall power to worke this desire The soule saith hee being satisfied in her naturall desires in her vegetative and sensitive faculties cannot long for those againe by a supernaturall desire for it longeth now to be like the Angels of God neither marrying nor giving in marriage Matth. 22.30 But supernaturally in the estate of blessednesse shee desireth such a body which shall not hinder the body to attaine to her supreme and last end Answer It is true that after the fall the vegetative and sensitive faculties hinder the intellectuall facultie to attaine to the supreme end God but before the fall and in the conjunction of the soule with the body againe these inferiour faculties were subordinate and shall be subordinate to the superior facultie and did no wayes hinder or shall hinder the superior facultie therefore the soule naturally before the fall desired according to all those faculties the conjunction with the body and so it shall in the resurrection These be Lessius words Non abhorret a corpore nisi tale sit quod libertati functioni intelligentiae officict It abhorres not a body but such a body which hindereth the libertie and function of the understanding But so it was that the body of man was such before the fall therefore the soule desireth naturally the conjunction with the body in the estate and likewise shall doe in the life to come Hence wee may gather Consequence that the soule after the resurrection shall enjoy a greater measure of blessednesse and joy then it did before and that the body shall not be a hinderence to it as it is now for now when it begins to thinke of God and spirituall things it must be abstract from the senses as the Prophets had their heavenly visions intellectuall and not by sense but after the resurrection the senses shall not be a hinderance but a furtherance to the soule Adam after his fall lived 930. yeares Gen. Reason 2 Methusalem 960. yeares wanting this supernaturall 1 righteousnesse what made this nothing but the reliques of that naturall immortalitie which was in man before the fall Therefore it was not supernaturall righteousnesse that made him immortall God made the Israelits cloathes last forty yeares in the Wildernesse Deut. 29.5 And Manna in the golden pot Reason 3 Heb. 9.4 corruptible in it selfe yet to last so many hundred yeares And if Iosephs bones lasted 215. yeares Iosh 24.31 And if the Egyptians could embalme bodies artificially that they could continue without corruption for so many hundred yeares how much more could God make Adams body to have continued without corruption naturally if hee had stood in innocencie The fourth reason is taken from the cause of death Reason 4 which is sinne there was no sinne in his naturall body and therefore no death There are three things which follow sinne First Dominium peccati the dominion of sinne Secondly Sensus peccati the sense of sinne Thirdly Vltinum consequens peccati the last consequent of sinne upon his body when it is turned to dust The dominion of sinne is taken away by regeneration the sense of sinne is taken away by death the last consequent of sinne when the body is turned to ashes the body all this time being neither Purum nor impurum but non purum this is taken away by the resurrection Corpus consideratur ut est purum impurum non purum There was no dominion of sinne in Adam before the fall therefore hee had no need of regeneration there was no sense of sinne in him therefore hee could not naturally die the last consequent of sinne was not in him therefore his body stood not in neede of the resurrection Man before the fall A collation betwixt the innocent and old Adam his body was immortall naturally Christ the second Adam his body was mortall willingly but not necessarily for he tooke our infirmities upon him Esu 53. Ioh. 10. therefore Augustine saith well Traxit quidem mortalitatem sed non contraxit non fuit necessitas in Christo respectu peccati sed respectu paenae Hee tooke our mortalitie upon him but hee contracted it not by sinne there was no necessitie whereby Christ should die in respect of sinne Triplex necessitas illata innata assumpta but in respect of the punishment But man now necessarily dieth It is appointed for all men to die Est illata necessitas Adamo est innata necessitas nobis est assumpta necessitas in Christo Necessitie of death was layd upon Adam for his sinne necessitie of death is inbred in us but death was willingly assumed by Christ But yet when he had once willingly taken upon him our nature and infirmities hee must die for it is appointed for all who have taken our naturall infirmities to die A man gives his word willingly for such a summe for his friend but when hee hath willingly given it a necessitie is laid upon him to pay it So Christ willingly tooke this debt upon him and now must of necessitie pay it The first Adam before his fall his body was immortall A collation betwixt the innocent old and glorified Adam Ex hypothesi that is if hee had stood in obedience to God there should have beene no contrarietie betwixt the humors of his body to have bred corruption there should have beene no deformity or defect in his bodie But since the fall the body is a mortall body a deformed body and corruptible Dos But in the life to come the soule shall be satisfied in all her desires 1 Immortalitatis sive impassibilitas Duplex malum actuale poientiale and all evill shall be removed from it both actuall and potentiall there shall be no actuall evill because grace being consummate in them it excludes all sinne there shall be no potentiall evill in them because they being confirmed in goodnesse they cannot sinne Now the body in the life to come shall be fully subject to the soule not onely in respect of the being of it but also in respect of the actions and passions the motions and corporall qualities of it and then it shall be free from corruption both actuall and potentiall it shall be free from actuall corruption because there shall be no deformitie or defect in it and from potentiall corruption because then

their judgement made man such that concupiscence did necessarily follow Before the fall there was no reluctation nor strife betwixt the superiour and inferiour faculties in man That there was no concupiscence in man before the fall and therefore no concupiscence our reasons are these First our first parents were not ashamed when they were naked Gen 2. but after that Adam had sinned and saw himselfe naked hee fled from the presence of God and hid himselfe even for very shame it is the rebellion betwixt the superiour and inferiour faculties that makes men ashamed Secondly in Iesus Christ the second Adam there was no rebellion and yet he was like to us in all things sinne excepted taking our nature upon him and the essentiall properties of it As to bee tempted Mat. 4.1 Iesus was carried by the Spirit into the desert to bee tempted So to feare Hebr. 5.7 he was heard in that which hee feared So to be angry Mark 3.5 Hee looked round about on them angerly So forgetfulnesse of his office by reason of the agonie astonishing his senses Father if it bee possible let this cup passe from me Mat. 26.39 Wherefore if this strife betwixt the superiour and inferiour faculties was the consequent of nature in our whole estate then Christ should not have beene blamelesse which is blasphemy for concupiscence is sin Rom 7.7 Thirdly if there had been rebellion betwixt the superiour and inferiour faculties before the fall then man in his whole estate had not beene happy for Paul in respect of this concupiscence is forced to cry out Rom. 7.11 O wretched man that I am who shall deliver mee from this body of death and originall iustice had not beene such an excellent gift in that estate but only a restraint to restraine this concupiscence that it bursted not forth Fourthly if this rebellion flow from nature how can God be free from sinne who is the authour of nature qui est causa causae est causa causati in essentialiter subordinatis he who is the cause of a cause is likewise the cause of the effect in things essentially subordinate but God is the author of mans nature and concupiscence therefore according to their position Of mans originall justice according to the Church of Rome he must bee the author of sinne this is blasphemie The Church of Rome holds that this holinesse was a supernaturall thing to man and not naturall in his first creation and they goe about to shew the matter by these comparisons They say mans righteousnesse in his innocent estate was like a garland set upon a virgines head the garland is no part of the virgins body and although the garland be removed yet she remaines still a virgin So this originall righteousnesse they make it as it were a garland which being taken away from man no naturall thing is blemished in him Secondly they compare it to Sampsons lockes which when they were cut off nothing was taken from Sampsons nature Thirdly they compare it to a bridle in a horse mouth which is no part of the horse nor naturall to him but serves to bridle the horse and keepe him in So say they this originall righteousnesse was no naturall thing in man before the fall but served onely as a bridle to restraine concupiscence and they put a difference betwixt a naked man and a robbed man Duplex homo nudus spoliatus Man before his fall say they he was naked but God did cast his cloake of supernaturall righteousnesse about him to cover him but since the fall say they hee is not homo nudus sed spoliatus a naked man but spoyled of the graces of God Hence is that division made by the Iesuites of the estate of man Perer. lib. 5. in Gen. disput de excellent pag. 118. the first estate saith he is of man considered without grace or sinne as they terme it in his pure naturals the second estate is of man in his purenaturals cloathed with supernaturall righteousnes the third estate is of man degenerate and sinfull the fourth estate is of man regenerate and the last is of man glorified But to consider a man both voyde of grace and sinne such a man was never nor never shall be neither did the Iewish or Christian Church ever divide the estate of man thus The Iewish Church taketh up the estate of man in these three the first they call Adam ratioue creationis because hee was made out of the red earth the second they call Enosh man subject to all miseries the third they call Ish man restored to blessednesse and happinesse The orthodoxe christian Church divides the estate of man thus the first estate is gratiae collatio the bestowing of grace the second is collatae amissio the losse of that grace bestowed the third is instauratio amissae the restoring of lost grace and the fourth is confirmatio instauratae the confirmation of restored grace We will shew that his originall righteousnesse Of mans originall justice according to the reformed Church was naturall to man and not supernaturall where we must consider that nature is take five wayes First a thing is naturall by creation as the soule and the body are naturall to man because they give a being to him Secondly for that which floweth essentially and naturally from a thing as the faculties from the soule Thirdly for that which cleaveth most surely to nature as sinne doth to the soule now Fourthly for that which beautifieth nature and helps it as grace doth Fiftly for that which by generation is propagate to the posteritie as originall corruption Originall justice was not naturall to man in the first sense for it was no part of his essence It was not naturall to him in the second sense for it flowed not from the understanding essentially as the faculties of the soule doe but it was naturall to him in the third sense because hee was created in holinesse and was the subject of holinesse it was naturall to him in the fourth sense because it made his nature perfect It was naturall to him in the fift sense for he should have transmitted it to his posteritie by generation if he had stood in holinesse as man doth sinne now which is come in place of it Originall righteousnesse to the first Adam was naturall to the renewed Adam grace is supernaturall A collation betwixt the innocent renewed and old Adam to the old Adam it is against his nature so long as hee continues in sinne Our reasons proving that originall righteousnesse was naturall to Adam and not supernaturall are these First Reason 1 as are the relickes of the image of God in man since the fall such was the image of God in man before the fall but the remnants of the Image of God in man since the fall are naturall Rom. 2.13 For by nature they doe the things contained in the Law 2 Cor. 11. Doth not nature teach you this therefore the image of God

in man before the fall was naturall Secondly Reason 2 supernaturall gifts are not hereditary nor propagate by generation no more than a colt to use their owne similitude is brought forth with a bridle in his teeth but man before the fall should have begotten children in his image in originall justice therefore originall justice was not supernaturall to him Thirdly Reason 3 by nature we are now the children of wrath Ephes 2.3 therefore originall justice should not have beene supernaturall to man but naturall by the rule of contraries Bellarmine De grat prim hom cap. 5. although he grant that there might have beene a man created as well without grace as sinne yet hee is inforced to acknowledge that this point of erroneous doctrine did never generally prevaile in the Roman Church for there were some saith hee excellently learned that thought as wee doe that man must either be in the estate of grace or sinne and that there is not a middle estate and that originall righteousnesse was required to the integrity of nature and consequently that being lost nature was corrupted and deprived of all naturall and morall rectitude So that man after the fall of Adam can doe nothing morally good or that truely can bee named a vertue till he be renewed by grace as likewise Adam before his fall was not able to doe any thing morally good by natures power without the assistance of speciall grace from God But we must hold for our part this to be the ground of no small errour which the Church of Rome layeth that man in his pure naturals was voyde both of grace and sinne this is the ground of many other errours which they maintaine First that concupiscence is naturall to man following alwayes his creation Secondly that naturall gifts both in men and divels remaine unblemished since the fall Thirdly that the corruption of nature consists not in any corrupt qualitie but onely in the losse of supernaturall grace Fourthly that death is not an effect of sinne properly but it is from nature and it is onely accidentally from sin because sin removes that bridle of originall righteousnesse which held backe death Fiftly that concupiscence is not sinne in the regenerate Sixtly that man now after his fall is in the same estate wherein hee was before the fall in his pure naturals for Adams sinne hath diminished nothing from that which is naturall and the body they say since the fall is no more passible than it was before in the pure naturals So they say the minde of man being considered by it selfe without this supernatuall holinesse is no more weakened by the fall than it was before the fall in things naturall Seventhly that man hath free will left in him after his fall which grounds are all false Here we must doe as Elisha did when hee cured the waters of Iericho 2 King 3. he went to the spring heads and there cast in salt so must we goe to this as one of the springs from whence many errours in popery proceed and cure it first This popish platforme of mans estate before his fall is taken from the schooles of Philosophie but not from Moses and the Prophets The Philosophers were ignorant of the nature of man in his whole estate so were they ignorant of his fall and therefore they tooke up man in a middle estate So these Sophists following the Philosophers and not the Scriptures as though they had never heard of mans creation nor yet of his fall imagine him to be a middle sort of man such a man as never was neither in his whole estate nor after his fall but they ought to have remembred that of the Apostle Colos 2.8 Take heed lest any spoyle you by Philosophie CHAP. XVIII Of the consequents of Gods image in man in his societie with the Angels THe third consequent that followeth upon the image of God being placed in man in his creation is concerning the societie and fellowship that he had with the Angels so long as hee stood in innocency Adam in his first estate was little inferiour to the Angels Prop. It shall bee the greatest perfection of man in glory Illust that hee shall bee like the Angels of God and bee loved of them as they love one another So it was mans great happinesse before the fall that hee conversed with the Angels and they loved him The Angels did neither minister unto A collation betwixt the innocent second renewed and old Adam nor keepe the first Adam before his fall they onely loved him The Angels ministred to Christ the second Adam and loved him but did not keepe him The Angels minister now to the renewed Adam they love him and keepe him but they neither minister to the wicked love them nor keepe them First the Angels neither did minister to Adam before his fall nor did they keepe him because hee was in no danger onely they loved him they ministred to Iesus Christ but they did not keep him for he was comprehensor as well as viator Christ is the head of the Angels therefore hee is not kept by them but they minister to the elect and keepe them by Christ which priviledge Adam had not of them before his fall Object It may seeme that they did keepe Christ Psal 91. they shall keepe thee in all thy wayes Answ This is to be understood de Christo mystico of Christ in his members that is they shall keepe thy members in all their wayes But this part of the Psalme was misapplyed by the Divell to Christ in proper person Matth. 4. for the Angels keepe not Christ but minister to him but they both keepe and minister to his members the elect Object But it may be sayd that the elect have greater priviledges then than Christ hath seeing they both keepe them and minister to them Answ This argueth not any prerogative that the Saints have above Christ but onely their weakenesse and wants that they have need of the Angels to preserve them as young children stand in need of nurses to waite upon them Object It may seeme that Angels are not ministring spirits in respect of the elect but in respect of Christ because the Angell Revel 19.22 calls himselfe not our servant but our fellow servant So the Angels are not called the servants of the kingdomes but The Princes of the Kingdomes Dan. 12. Thirdly the Apostle proves Christ to be God Heb. 2. because the Angels are servants to him A shepheard is not the servant of his sheepe although hee keepes them but his Masters servant So although the Angels keepe us yet they seeme not to be our ministers but Christs Answ The Scripture Heb. 1. calls them ministring spirits sent for them that are elect and although they be more excellent creatures in themselves than the elect yet in Christ and by Christ they become ministring spirits to us Christ himselfe is not ashamed to call himselfe a servant to the elect Mat. 20. I came not to

and some of them we are but to looke upon here and there some meates we cut first then we chew them then we digest them other meates we swallow them and other meates wee taste onely of them So wee should use these Schoolemen some of them we should reade distinctly others of them we should swallow as it were and run over lightly and others of them wee should tast and looke but upon them here and there Againe prudency should teach us what wee should observe as impertinent in them and what to reject their questions for the most part are idle and curious as the most of their hypotheticall propositions and the manner of their disputations for other times they dispute ex alienis principijs out of the grounds of other sciences they confound Divinity and Philosophy and the Me●●s which they use oftentimes are impertinent They bring innumerable arguments and disputations oftentimes probable on both sides and they trust too much to the testimonie of men they goe very rashly many of them and speake not soberly enough of the great mystery of the Trinity and Incarnation bringing in philosophicall reasons whereas these mysteries should rather be adored than searched after and herein Athanasius sayd well Eti●● verade Deo loqui est periculosum And last of al they distinguish where the law distinguisheth not The third judgement is the judgement of charity when wee reade them and finde many grosse errours in them wee are not for that to reject them for we shall finde sometimes points notably well cleared in them The Iewes have a proverbe Comede dactylos projice foras duritiem Eate the Date and cast away the stone so should wee in reading of them take that which is good and cast away their errours The Toade although it bee a loathsome creature yet we will take a stone out of the head of it and use it the Muske-kat is an il-favoured creature and yet we will take the muske of it to perfume things with The Raven was an uncleane creature under the Law yet Elias was fed by it so wee may get many profitable helpes by these Schoolemen although they have great errours but we must take heed that we fawningly flatter them not The flatterers of Dionysius were so grosse that they would licke up the spittle of Dionysius protesting that it was sweeter than nectar we must not so doate upon them as to licke up their excrements but onely follow them in so farre as they follow Christ We must not give to them glorious titles for then as Iob saith We must give titles to men as Jacobus de Voragine as though he had eaten up the whole Booke of God in reading it and to Thomas Aquinas they gave the name doctor Seraphicus angelicus to Scotus doctor subtilis to Durandus doctor irrefragabilis to another venerabilis incoeptor to another doctor fundatissimus to another illuminatus to another doctor resolutus and a thousand such Among the Iewes when the holy Ghost was not revealed unto them then they tooke glorious titles upon them as one was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lux mundi R. Iude his title was Rabbonu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctor noster sanctus Saddaas was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illustris Abenezra was called lapis auxilij they were also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aperti the men that saw for they reckoned the people but blinde Rom. 1. and the leaders of the blind then they disdained the people Joh. 7.49 this people who know not the Law they called also the people populus terrae So when these glorious titles were given to the Schoolemen then the holy Ghost withdrew his presence mightily from his Church Wee should in charity judge their errors for they lived in the houre of darkenesse and few these were then to oppose against them and what marvaile if they did oftentimes stumble so that this was but infirmity in them and not malice But if they could now behold from heaven the Church of Rome who brags that shee succeeds to them with her new plots as her equivocations mentall reservations allowing the killing of Princes absolving subjects from loyaltie towards their Prince wives from their husbands children from their parents and giving to images not onely cultum respectivum which the schoolemen granted to them but also cultum conjunctum or coadoration would they not bee ashamed of these their children and blush if they could behold them A Cardinall upon a time caused a Painter to paint the twelve Apostles the Painter painted them looking somewhat reddish the Cardinall asked the Painter whether the Apostles looked so when they were here alive no said the Painter why dost thou then so paint them said the Cardinall the Painter replyed They blush so now when they behold the corruptions of you who take upon you to bee leaders of the Church If the Schoolemen could behold the grosse and innumerable corruptions which are maintained now in the Church of Rome which were not then would they not blush and be ashamed and disclaime them for their children When Moses was upon the mount hee brought a patterne of the whole frame of the tabernacle from the Lord and erected it according to the patterne received but the Church of Rome hath erected another patterne framing religion by the mould of humane reason If ye will take a view of severall points professed in Poperie ye may easily perceive whence they have taken the patterne of them not from Moses on the mount but from scholasticke speculations First because the Mathematickes consider lines figures circles points abstracted from bodies therefore they gather that accidents may be in the Sacrament without the subject Secondly because morall Phylosophy establisheth neyther punishment nor reward unlesse the free will of man goe before hence they inferre that there is free will in man againe because morall Philosophy knoweth no vertues but inherent habites and vertues therefore it is that they set themselves so against the inputed righteousnesse of Christ the morall Philosopher cals vice a voluntary evill therefore they inferre that concupiscence is not sin because it is not altogether voluntary Thirdly from the Politickes in policie the best sort of government is monarchicall therefore the Popes government must bee monarchicall Againe in Princes Courts men use mediators to goe to their Prince therefore they conclude that we must use the intercession of the Saints to God In policie no lawes are given but which the subjects may fulfill therefore man is able to fulfill the law of God Fourthly from the Physickes Physicke teacheth us that the body turnes to corruption and dissolves upon this they inferre that man before his fall his body should have dyed naturally as it doth if supernaturall righteousnesse had not kept backe corruption so that they make God as well the author of death as well as of nature considering man here onely after the principles of nature and not according to his first creation Againe

naturam volebat that is his divine will willed justice his reasonable will willed obedience and the wil of his flesh willed the preservation of his nature Answ How saith Luke 22.44 that he being in his agonie hee prayed a long space that the cuppe might passe then it might seeme that there was a contrarietie betwixt his wils Answ Nulla erat contrarìet as inter voluntates Christi sed inter voluntat es mortem This strife was not properly betwixt his two wills but betwixt his naturall will and death which nature shunned as contrary to it this fight wee see in children and in brute beasts in children who have not the act of reason this is no other thing then the feare of imminent evill Christ desired this cup to passe Duplex voluntas absoluta conditionalis There is a double desire or willing in the will either an absolute will or a conditionall will absolute as when I wish a thing without any condition as happines Conditionall when I will it with a condition as a man would not give his purse to the robbers if he could escape death hee wils this conditionally onely to escape the danger So our Lord willed not absolutely to drinke this cuppe but seeing that God his Father had determinate this way that mans salvation should bee purchased Christ would drinke this cup. In Christs desires there was no reluctation A collation betwixt the second renned and old Adam but subordination but in the regenerate their desires are with some reluctation and they are not fully subordinate When Christ sayd to Peter They shall carry thee whither thou wouldest not Ioh. 21.18 meaning what death he should die there was some sinfull reluctation here betwixt Peters spirituall desire and his naturall desire although hee gave his life in the end for the truth But the wils of the unregenerate are no wayes subordinate to the will of God When Christ saith Volunt as indiger explicatione subjections Let this cuppe passe yet not my will be done but thine Luk. 22.42 here is not a correction of Christs desire but onely an explication of it But when Peter gave his life for the truth there needed a correction of his desire because there was some unwillingnes in him But the wicked their desires have need of subjection to the will of God Conseq 1 Christs natural will sought the preservation of it selfe which his divine wil would not hence it followeth that a man may naturally will that without sinne which his spirituall will wils not We should learne by Christs example to subiect our wils to the will of God Conseq 2 and to seek the things of this life but with condition If Christ submitted his naturall will to the will of the Father which was not sinfull Conseq 3 much more must wee learne to submit our sinfull desires to his will The desires of the regenerate are moderate Acollation betwixt the renowed and old Adam the desire of the unregenerate are immoderate Agur prayeth Prov. 30. Da mihi lechem chukki panem dimensi mei as the Israelites had their Manna measured out to them in a gomer Exod. 16. so Agur desires that God would give him the measure that is fit for him They are content with that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 12.42 which signifyeth a mans stint where he alludeth to the care of governours of families or stewards who doe allow to every one in the house their portions see Iames 2.15 They having meate and cloth they are content 1 Tim. 6.8 nature taught some men to be content with little grace can teach them to be content with lesse The Prophet Esay in his fourteenth chapter and fourth verse noting the insatiable desire which men have to riches cals Babel gold-thirsty Babel and Habaccuk 2.6 saith Woe be to you who load your selfe with thick clay meaning gold and riches The desires of beasts are finite but the desires of unregenerate men areinfinite when they come to the measure what will suffice them The Philosopher saith the cause of this is to live but not to live well the beasts when they are satisfied for the present content the mselves neither seeke they any more the Lyon when he hath killed the Bull satisfieth his hunger but hides not up the rest in the ground neither doe the fowles lay up any thing Math. 6.26 onely creeping things and most imperfect lay up as the Pismire hordes up in Sommer against the Winter Prov. 6. but man is not satiate for hoording and treasuring up for the time to come his desires are so infinite The ancient Philosophers compared the first matter to an infamous strumpet who is never glutted with present pleasure but still doth meditate upon new imbracings for it still desireth new formes But wee have more reason to compare our desires which are insatiable to this strumpet Quest Whether are mans desires infinite or not Answ They are not actually infinite Duplex infinitas actualis persuccessionem because nature tends alwayes to some finite thing for no man desireth infinite meate yet his desires are infinite by succession Leo Hebraeus because these bodily things which wee desire are not permanent Nam pereunte unodesiderio succedit alterum One desire being gone another comes in place of it Christ saith He who drinkes of this water shal never thirst again So he that hath true desire after righteousnesse shall be satisfied but hee that thirsts after the things of this life shall bee in a continuall thirst like the Horse-leach which hath two daughters crying continually Give give Prov. 30.15 The remedies to cure these sinfull desires That we may cure these sinfull desires First wee must take heed that these desires of ours be not suffered to gather strength but we must choke them in the very beginning and dash the heads of the young ones against the wal Psal 173. crush this Cocatrice egge in the beginning lest it come to a Serpent Esai 30.6 In confinibus est arcendus hostis the enemy is to be beaten back while he is in the borders Secondly we must thinke often how neere we are to death and this wil restraine our covetous desires parum viae multum viatici To have a short way and much provision is a foolish thing Thirdly to remedy our covetous defires we should marke that there is no passion so much to bee detested as it because this monstrous passion draweth no contentment from that which it gathereth together Wee abhorre more the Cantharides than Lyons Tigers or Beares for they kill men and reape no fruite of their death whereas the savage beasts when they kill any feede themselves and satisfie their hunger So these covetous desires when they have scraped much together they make no use of that which they have gathered Of the passion of abomination contrary to desire Abomination is a passion which is opposire to desire for it is the same whichmakes