Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	flesh_n	sin_n	sinful_a	2,809	5	9.4946	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13812	An ansvvere to certein assertions of M. Fecknam, sometime abbot of Westminster which he made of late against a godly sermon of M. Iohn Goughes, preached in the Tower the xv. of Ianuarie. 1570. Seen and allowed.	Tomson, Laurence, 1539-1608.; Feckenham, John de, 1518?-1585, attributed name.; Gough, John, fl. 1561-1570, attributed name.	1570 (1570)	STC 24113; ESTC S113017	63,134	174

indetted or endaungered by this meanes vnto God thus much we get sayth he that we must néedes say euery day forgiue vs our trespasses And he sheweth not in this place what it is in it selfe but what it is in the electe S. Augustine in an other place calleth these leuia peccata light sinnes not simplie but comparatè by comparison Of the sinnes of this lyfe sayth he Quaedam grauia mortifera sunt quae nisi per vehementissimam molestiam humiliationis cordis contritionis spiritus tribulationis poenitentiae non relaxantur Haec dimittuntur per claues Ecclesiae Some are greiuous and deadly which are not released but by most vehement sorowe of humilitie of the harte and contrition of the spirit and tribulation of repentāce These are remitted by the keyes of the Church Sunt autem leuia peccata minuta quae deuitari omnino non possunt quae quidem vidētur minora sed multitudine praemunt There are light sinnes and small whiche can be eschewed by no meanes whiche trulie séeme to be lesse but they ouercharge by reason of the multitude And marke this by the way a most playne contradiction to your first question Quae deuita●i non possunt which cā not be eschewed and sine quibu● non potest ista vita duci without the whiche this lyfe can not be lead and yet you say the cōmaundements may be fulfilled Posse implere Legem to be able to fulfill the Lawe is Posse non concupiscere to be able not to couet or lust Nō potes non ●oncupiscere thou art not able not to couet or lust Ergo non po●es Legim implere therefore thou arte not able to fulfill the Lawe And so might you haue had regard to Christes wordes ●uae apud homines impossibilia sunt apud Deum possibili● sunt those things whiche are impossible with men with GOD be possible And a little after Sic ergo quàmuis minuia sunt ist a peccata tamen quia multa sunt vt congregata aceruum faciant quo te pr●mant bonus est Deus qui etiam ipsa dimittat sine quibus non potest ista vita duci So then although these be little sinnes yet bycause they be many that thei being gathered togither make a heape to ouerpresse thée God is good who forgiueth thē also without which this lyfe can not be passed You sée by this place that remission is giuē to them both and debtes they are both But bicause he is more readie to forgiue the one than the other he calleth them in this place grauia leuia grieuous or weightie and lighte in other places venalia laetalia venial and deadly I wis you know that these wordes be of comparison and not de simplici existentia as the Philosophers call them that is to declare what those smaler faults be of their own simple existence or proper nature I can not tell how little you make of remissiō of sinnes But by his similitude he bringeth they would kill you if remission came not the sooner And in the ende as I alleaged before of his sermon he concludeth that bycause they destroy the temple of God they should take héed and be readie to cry and call Forgiue vs our trespasses Ageyne in his Booke de Spiritu litera he writeth thus of veniall sinnes Sicut non impediunt à vita aeterna iustum c. Lyke as some veniall sinnes doe not let a iust man from lyfe euerlasting withoute the which this life is not led So some good workes do nothing profite a wicked man vnto life euerlasting without the which the lyfe of euery naughtie mā is hardly found You may sée by this place and by the cōparison he maketh that bothe this place the other you alleaged before are so to bée expounded and taken as I haue sayde For surely no sinne is able to cast the childe of God whom he hath elected chosen out of the fauour of God out of the kingdome of heauen which is his inheritance gotten giuen him by Christe For the counsels of God are without repentance So likewise it shall auayle the wicked nothing at all that he hath some good workes For he is the child of wrath the sonne of perdition As for the faulte of youre reasoning I let it passe you may thinke with your self how well you deale making such Arguments these sins are not deadly to the elect iust Therfore they are not deadly à secūdo ad●acēte ad primū negatiuè Socrates nō est Ph●losop academicꝰ ergo nō est Philosophus Socrates is no Academical Philosopher therfore he is no philosopher or M. Feknā was not Abbo● of Osne therfore he was no Abbot for you haue brought neuer a place directly prouing what they are in thēselues What you could bring oute of Luther I know not when I see it I will answer it if I cā Non iurau● in verba Lutheri I haue not sworne to credit euery woord that Luther writeth And sure it is some thinges he writte extāt in print before he was well persuaded in many points of soūd doctrine Now touching the austeritie of M. Gough GOD make vs all ageinst vice austere and not to flatter our selues in our concupiscences we can not hate sinne to much nor cōdemne sinne to grieuously I would I might I by the worde of God persuade my selfe that sin were no sinne mē might liue more at libertie But yet I think my selfe blissed that he hath called me to the libertie of his Gospell which is frée remission of my sinnes sinful lyfe in the bloud of Christ Iesus and a calling to walke after the spirite and not after the fleshe It is time and highe time for vs M. Fecknam to beate downe sin and not to séeke meanes howe we may cloke sinne Let it appeare in his owne nature that we may be ashamed of him put not a Lyons skin vppon an Asse Call white white and blacke blacke good good and bad bad So shall we take héede that we fall not to often and if it can not otherwise be but we must fall seuen times yet that we may learne to feare thereby and not to make a fleabyting of it If we do so we shall bée more like to Abell than Cayne to Isaac than Ismaell to Iacob than Esau to Iohn than to the Pharisies to Simon Peter than to Simon Magus to Iohn than Iudas in no miserable state in no euill condition in state of saluation not perdition Christ of his mercie releasing our infirmities If the iuste man did fall only if there were no more but so that he sinned sinned deadly then were he no iust man thou were he in as euill case as Paynimes and heathen people But in that he falleth and ryseth vp ageyne as Dauid teacheth vs he is better than Paynymes better than the Heathen as good as Habel as Isaac as Iacob as Iohn as Simon Peter

frailnesse of the flesh is one and the strength of the spirite an other For the fleshe desireth against the spirite and the spirite ageynst the flesh and these do so striue and contend eche with other that wée can not doo such things as wée would doe You shall neuer heare of me that nature is naught but how the fragilitie of the flesh is to bée reasoned of let vs learne of him whiche teacheth Aske him why he sayde for that whiche I would do that I do not but the euil which I hate that do I. What necessitie hindreth his will what force commaundeth him to do things so hatefull so that not that which he would but that which he hated and would not he is constrayned to doo He wil aunswer● you O man what art thou that so aunswerest God shall the clay say vnto the potter why hast thou made me so hath not the potter power ouer his claye to make of one lumpe a vessell to honour and an other to dishonour Concerning iustice and grace it may bée well sayd of the giltie whiche is absolued and of the giltie whiche is condemned Take that whiche is thine and go thy wayes I will giue this man that which is not due vnto him Is it not lawfull for me to do what I liste Is thy eye naught bycause I am good Héere yf he should say and why not to me he shall worthely heare O man what art thou that so aunswearest God whome thou séest towardes one of you to bee a moste bountifull bestower and towardes thée a most iust exactor and yet in nether of you vniust Seing that he should be iust yf he punished eyther he whiche is deliuered hath to giue thankes he which is condemned hath not to reprehend Sure it is that our flesh is frayle that our nature is corrupt and so corrupte that it letteth vs that we can not do our dutie let vs not séeke howe it is so but as S. Paul him self did how ye may be deliuered from it and still cry with our selues Quis me liberabit de corpore mortis huius who shall deliuer me out of the body of this death you stand vppon the possibilitie of the law there are diuersitie of gifts as you knowe can you attaine to all of them there are many sciences as Grammer Rhetoricke Logike c. Who is he of all vs bée he neuer of so excellent a wit that can bee a perfect Gramarian a perfect Logician a perfect Rhetorician a perfecte Philosopher a perfect lawyer a perfecte Phisician the excellent orator lawyer he sayeth There are few which attayne one but both no man can You sée then that God hath commaunded a possible thing and yet that whiche is possible no man can performe by reason of our nature He hath giuen therfore diuers precepts and diuerse vertues which wée can not haue all togither To bée shorte and to make an ende of this parte the olde saying is true non omnia possumus omnes there is none of vs all can doo all things and there is none or very rare is that riche man whiche in all his substaunce possesseth all thinges equallye God hath commaun●ed possible things I graunt it But all these possible things wée can not euery one haue not for the weaknesse of nature that is as it was firste made of God least you slaunder God but for the wearinesse of minde which can not haue all vertues togither and alwayes And thus much touching these twoo partes wherby you may vnderstande how wee say that the kéeping of the law is possible And how it is vnpossible This considered I come to your argumentes Your first is taken out of the eleuenth of Mathew and your woordes are these Contrarie to this doctrine is our Sauiour Christ where he willeth vs to take his yoke vppon vs because it is light Tollite iugum meum super vos iugum enim meum suaue est ▪ onus meum leue Take my yoke vppon you for my yoke is sweete and my burden is lighte If it bee a light burden M. Goughs heauy example hath not a peny worth of good skill This is neyther contrarie to his doctrine M. Fecknam neyther is his heauy example voyd of skill But that which causeth you to thincke it to bée contrarie is that you deceyue your selfe and make a Paralogisme as the Logicians call it à fallacia accidentis which I shall bée able to shew you by your doctours For you doe not reason with M. Gough in sensu vniuoco and in his proposed matter He taught you in his sermon that to fulfill the law was impossible you oppose and lay for an aunswere that the yoke of Christe is easie S. Ierome vppon the same place teacheth you that here bée subiecta diuersa therfore in your disputation there is no vniuocatio Your subiectes are Lex and Euangelium the lawe and the Gospell of which two he sayeth thus Quo modo leuius lege Euangelium quum in lege homicidium in Euangelio ira damnetur Qua ratione Euangelij gratia facilior quū in lege adulterium in Euangelio concupiscentia puniatur In lege multa precepta sunt quae Apostolus non posse compleri plenissime docet How is the gospell lighter than the law séeing the murder is condemned in the law and anger is condēned in the gospel How is the grace of the gospell easier seeing that in the law adulterie and in the gospell concupiscence is punished Many things are commaūded in the law which the Apostle sheweth most plainly that they can not be accomplished In the law works are required which who soeuer doth shal liue in thē In the Gospel the will is required which although it haue not the effect yet it léeseth not the reward So that by this Doctor here is a comparison betwixt the law and the gospel and as farre difference there is betwixt your two arguments as is betwixt velle and facere And marke then is this a good argument Non possum facere ergo nō possum velle I am not able to do therefore I am not able to will or this Possum velle ergo possum facere I am able to wil therfore I am able to do Take which you wil these are your arguments I am sure you sée how little holde there is in them therfore cōfesse the truth giue glorie to God and be not ashamed to haue erred but be ashamed to remayne in your error The gospel sure is easier than the law the grace of Iesus Christ forpasseth surmounteth the letter If you will cōsider your heauy burden and come vnto Christ craue pardō for your sins haue a mind to walke in his pathes and where you fall downe desire him to lift you vp to cloth your nakednesse with his garmente you shall find reste and refreshing and this is an easie yoke But yf you will néedes doo when he requireth the will you will

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .i. Before God You knowe M. Fecknā which are learned in tongues that this phrase is borowed of the Hebrewe tongue biphne Iehouah and that is so to walk in the sight of the Lord as in the eyes of god As he sayd Si Deos hominesque celare possum If I could or might hyde this from Gods and men c. meaning that hée and she walked vprightly not as dissembling Hipocrites not in a faire shewe to the world as others but their iustice was such as which is done in the sight of God playn and sincere without al dubblnesse And that is be leb hatum and not ▪ be leb tahur And this doth partly note vnto you both Theophilactus and Lyra vpon this place I referre you to the places I néed not to recite the words Let vs goe forward Walking in all the commandements Non quod nō procauerint sayth your Glossae interlinaris c. Not bicause they sinned not but bicause that thei being washed with the grace of God left to sinne I trust you wil not stumble here neither as though they sinned no more For if we say so veritas Dei non est in nobis the truth of god is not in vs the last word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inculpate blamelesse How this is to be vnderstanded I refer you to Iustinus Martyr in Solu●q 141. where he hath in effect these words Iustus ex lege dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui cùm p̄cauerit in ijs quae possunt cōdonari sàcrificiorū oblatione delicti redemtione remissione accepta mundus efficitur a crimine liber He is said to be iust by the law who after he hath sinned in those things which may be forgiuen hauing remission by the offering of sacrifice redemption of the offence is made cleane frée from fault and so are Elizabeth Zacharie said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blamelesse Touching your last place of s. Iohn chap. v. I haue sayd sufficient before in the place of the .j. Iohn chap. v. This wil I adde by the way that in déede the knowledge of God can not be without efficacie and therfore they that brag them selues to be the childrē of God and to haue a fayth and walke not in his commaundementes are but lyers Nowe to your authorities of S. Hierome and Augustine S. Ierom wryting of these teachers which sai that it is impossible to kepe the law hath these words Execramur eorū blasphemiā qui dicunt impossibile aliquid homini à Deo praeceptum esse et mandata eius non a singulis sed ab omnibus in communi posse seruari That is we detest their blasphemie which say that God hath commaunded man to doe any thing impossible and that the commaundements of God may be kept not of euery one in particular but of all in generall He witnesseth that Gods commaundementes may be obserued of euery one in particular and that God commaundeth nothing impossible for he detesteth the contrarie doctrine and calleth it blasphemie and therfore I haue little cause to like it I will not say as other do as I might wel that this is suspect I haue his mind in the same question when he was vrged with the same argument of the Pelagian Possibilia inquit mandata dedit Deus Et quis hoc negat Sed quomodo haec intelligenda sit sententia c. God gaue sayth he cōmaundementes which are possible and who denyeth it But how this sentence is to be vnderstode the chosen vessell dothe plainly declare That which was impossible to the law in as much as it was weak bicause of the flesh God sending his owne sonne in the similitude of sinful flesh c. and in an other place he sayth Possibilia praecepit Deus c. God commanded things possible and I graunte it but all these possible things we can not euery man haue Not for the weakenesse of nature least thou slaunder God but for the wearinesse of the minde which can not haue al vertues togither and always Therefore if these be both Ieromes and Ierome be not contrary to him selfe you muste thus vnderstand youre place that he is to be detested which sayeth that God hath commaunded mā to do any thing that was impossible in it self to be fulfilled had not the frailnesse of mans nature other wayes bin a let and them also that say that euery one in particular beyng a true beleeuer can not fulfill them in him of whose fulnesse wée all receyue and whose Iustice is ours by his gifte and grace And in thus taking of it I trust you will neyther reiect my aunswere neyther condemne M. Gough as one of that sort Now to your place of S. Augustine S. Augustine likewise to the same ende sayth Deus neque impossibile aliquid potuit imperare qui iustus est nec damnaturus est hominem pro eo quòd non potuit vitare qui pius est That is God neyther could commaund any thing that is impossible who is iust neyther will he condemne any man for that which he could not auoyd who is mercifull The contrarie whereof to mayntaine doth blasphemously argue God both of iniustice and impietie VVhen he commaundeth vs to do which M. Gough saith is impossible and condemneth vs For that which he sayth we could not auoyde This place of Augustine is easie enough and hath in it self sufficient to answere you not swaruing a whitte from the state which I haue made you and the true meaning of M. Gough He exhorteth them ther vnto charitie and reprehendeth withall the folish tergiuersations and resistances which they made against the scriptures But a man will say sayth he I can by no meanes loue mine enimies In all the Scriptures God sayth vnto thée that thou canst thou on the contrary part answerest that thou canst not Marke nowe whether should a man beléeue thée or god And therefore bicause the truthe can not lie let mannes frailenesse now leaue his vain excuses Quia nec impossibile c ▪ Bicause he could neither cōmaund any thing which is impossible who is iust neyther will condemne man for that that he could not eschue who is mercifull it foloweth Why dost thou resist in vaine Nemo enim quantum possumus For no man knoweth better what we can do or may do than he that hath giuen vs ipsum posse that we may Therefore if the commaundements in themselues are not impossible but by reason of our weakenesse and God dothe giue vs abilitie in this our defect in suche sort as I haue declared before it must néedes follow that his iustice ageinst those that do it not is good and iust and this M. Goughe teacheth He saith also in the beginning of his Epistle In reliquis operibus bonis c. In other good works a man may sometimes pretend some maner of excuse but in hauing charitie no man can excuse him selfe A man may