Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	enable_v	general_a	great_a	21	3	2.0960	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52414	The charge of schism continued being a justification of the author of Christian blessedness for his charging the separatists with schism, not withstanding the toleration : in a letter to a city-friend.	Norris, John, 1657-1711.	1691 (1691)	Wing N1245; ESTC R40651	37,244	145

promulgated To this I answer First That the Fate of the present Cause is not concern'd in the issue of this Question our Laws being sufficiently promulgated But suppose it were concern'd it need fear no danger from it For the Question proceeds upon a contradictory Supposition It supposes the Law to be promulgated and not promulgated at the same time For if the Sanction be necessary as a Sign then it must make the first discovery of the Law which till then must not be supposed to be known And yet it must too and that before the Sanction can pretend to be a Sign For the Sanction cannot pretend to that Office till 't is known and it cannot be known till after the Law is known For to know the Sanction is to know that such a Penalty is by the Law annexed to such an Action which presupposes the Law to be known And how then can the Sanction be necessary as a Sign where the Law is not promulgated The very Supposition implies a Contradiction Whence I further conclude That 't is impossible that a Sanction should ever be necessary as a Sign to the Obligation of the Law which as it receiv'd not its Obligation from it so it may and will oblige without it since from what has been discours'd it clearly appears that it is no way necessary to the Obligation of the Law either as a Cause or as a Condition I say to the Obligation of it For I do not deny but that a Sanction is very necessary to the Inforcement and better Success of the Law and that therefore 't is very expedient that all Laws should have their Sanctions partly that by them the greatness of the Obligation may be rated and estimated it being the general Prudence of Law-givers to annex greater Penalties to more concerning and important Precepts and partly that by them Men might be the more easily and securely contain'd within the Limits of their Duty which without some Penal Restraint every little appearance of Interest would tempt them to transgress And yet even this is only an Accidental Necessity introduc'd by the badness of the World For were Men as they shou'd be Wise and Good which till the Millennium I despair to see they would discern and be satisfy'd of the Reason and Equity of the Law and that alone would be a sufficient motive to Order and Obedience But when they are either so stupid as not to see the good end of the Law or so profligate as not to regard it then comes in this Expedient of the Sanction arming the Laws with Penalties whereby they may be inabled to revenge themselves upon those unconsidering disingenuous Persons that do them violence And indeed considering the great and general Bruitishness and Degeneracy of Men how very alienated they are not only from the Life of God but even from that of Natural Reason too 't is very fit it should always be thus and that all Laws as well as those of Mount Sinai should have their Thundrings and Lightnings to awake and alarm the Passions of such Men who having lost their Reasons have now nothing else to be taken hold by But this I say only proves a Sanction necessary to the better Inforcement and not to the Obligation of the Law To which if any one shall yet think it necessary I shall only further press him with one sensible Absurdity which perhaps may signifie more with some Apprehensions than an abstracter way of reasoning It is this That upon this Supposition it would follow that if God himself shou'd impose any Command upon a Creature without annexing a Penalty in case of Disobedience he would not be able with all his Authority and Divine Supremacy to oblige that Creature And will any Man can any Man have the Impudence or Impiety to say so Suppose that when God gave that Command to Adam concerning the not eating of the Tree of Knowledge he had not added that other Clause which was the Sanction of the Law In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Will any Man presume to say that Adam would not have been obliged by that Divine Command but might have tasted of the forbidden Fruit without Sin He must have but very little reverence for the Majesty of God and as little sense of the sacredness of his Authority who would adventure to say so And yet thus he must say if it be true what is contended for by some that the Sanction is necessary to the Obligation of the Law For whatever is necessary to the Law as such is necessary to every Law whether Human or Divine He therefore that holds the necessity of the Sanction to the Obligation of the Law must say if he will be consistent with himself that the Command of the Great God would not have obliged Adam in case there had not been a Penalty annex'd to it If he does not say so I should smile at his Inconsistency and if he does I should tremble for his Impudence and Irreverence But from a Supposition to descend to a Matter of Fact what will such a one say to the Tenth Commandment to which as the Author of the Christian Blessedness has rightly observ'd there was no Sanction annex'd Will he say that this Precept stood as a Cypher in the Decalogue without passing any Obligation upon the Jews This indeed wou'd make much to the honour of the Divine Wisdom and represent God as a very notable Law-giver to Usher in a Law with so great Solemnity and afterwards write it with his own fingers upon Tables of Stone when it could signifie nothing but only the filling up of a Number And yet this as absurd as it is he must say that will make the Sanction necessary to the Obligation of the Law If this be true then the Tenth Commandment did not oblige But it seems the great Apostle was of another Judgment when he said I had not known Sin but by the Law For I had not known Lust except the Law had said Thou shalt not Covet It seems then that Lust was a Sin and that by vertue of the Tenth Commandment which is here alledged by the Apostle to prove it so which therefore did oblige since without Obligation as well as where there is no Law there can be no Transgression If it be said that although the Tenth Commandment had no Temporal Sanction or Civil Penalty annex'd to it like the other Nine yet it had an Eternal Sanction namely the Rewards and Punishments of a future Life and that 't was by vertue of that Sanction that it became Obligatory I answer that this could not be any Sanction to the Jews to whom it was not plainly reveal'd though it be now to us Christians who have a full and express Revelation of it A Sanction not Publish'd is no Sanction as much as a Law not published is no Law that is to any real Effect or Purpose of Government Indeed of the two Publication seems