Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	faith_n	justify_v	work_n	8,100	5	7.4187	4	true

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

is righteous be righteous stil. For the doers of the law are iust And therefore it is as much as yf it should bée sayd The doers of the law shall be created not because they were but that they may bée You go foreward against M. Gough An other place he brought to expresse by scripture this worde Onely that fayth onely doth iustifie alleaging the saying of Christe vnto Iairus Prince of the Synagogue Crede tantùm Beleeue onely A place verie fitly applied as yf Christe there had spoken of the Iustification of Iairus and not rather of the corporall reuiuing of his daughter As for M. Goughes alleaging of the place I do not thinke but he sawe what was principally done in that place and that Christ was reuiuing of his daughter yet not withstanding he might note vnto you in what sorte wée ought to béehaue our selues towardes the receyuing of Christes benefites and graces that although things séeme vnto vs desperate voyde of all hope and comforte yet wée should not cease but to beléeue in Christe that he is able to doo whatsoeuer wée demaunde in feare and truth And this hope and fayth is sufficient and he requireth nothing els at our handes This I say why might he not note vnto you touching onely fayth hauing twoo suche notable examples before his face as the woman with the flux Iairus with his dead daughter And so might he make his argument As fayth onely is sufficient to the curing of an vncurable sore and the raising of the dead so is it sufficient to the remission of sinnes Neyther is he voyde of authoritie for his interpretation Theophilacte sayth thus Ne timeas tantùm crede respice ad mulierem hanc quae sanguinis profluuio laborauit illam si imitatus fueris non aberrabis Feare not onely beléeue Behold this Woman whiche was sicke of the fluxe yf thou followe her thou shalt not doo amisse Neyther is Iames cleane contradictorie as you say to Master Gough in this sense where he sayeth Videtis quoniam ex operibus iustificatur homo non ex fide tantùm You sée that of workes man is iustified and not of fayth onely There is you knowe Oppositio in terminis opposition in woordes and oppositio realis opposition in matter As for the first ye knowe also it is nothing and so may these two be fides tantum iustificat fides tātum non iustificat fayth only dothe iustifie ●ayth only doth not iustifie As for the other there must be vniuocatio in terminis the Subiectum and the Praedicatum must be taken in one sense in both Otherwise there is no opposition For both may be true As in this fayth only iustifieth the woord Iustifieth is taken in this sence Iustifieth before God. In the other Fayth only doth not iustifie the woord Iustifieth is taken hauing respect to men And so they be not opposite Of the sense of the place I spake before Likewise of the place of Luke viij I haue sayd my mind what M. Gough his meaning was I was not at his Sermon I promisse you I haue not talked with him therin I skant know the person S. Augustine in his booke de fide operibus sheweth the beginning and foundation of this muche like heresie to haue bin in the Apostles time vpon the misconstruing of Paules Epistles saying Quoniam haec opinio tunc fuerat exorta aliae Apostolicae epistolae Petri Iohannis Iacobi Iudae cōtra eàm maximè dirigunt intentionem vt vehementer astruant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse That is bicause this opinion was then sprōg vp other Apostolicall epistles of Peter Iohn Iames Iude do bend their drift and purpose most of all against that opinion that they may boldely and vehemently affyrme faith without workes to auaile nothing If it be fayth only it is fayth without works If faith only auaileth nothing faith only can not iustifie What opinion that was M. Fecknam how vnlike vnto our assertion I shewed you before out of the same place and it was this as you haue it in the beginning of the chapter Bene autem viuere bonis operibus viam dei tenere neglexerint and they contemne to liue well and to kéepe the way of God in good works He sayth not bonis operibus incrementum iustitiae addere and with good woorkes to giue encrease of iustice ▪ Which péece you stand for which you shal neuer be able to shew out of Augustine and so we deny it As for your collection if faith only auaileth nothing faith only can not iustifie we deny the consequēt For as I said before ther is not vniuocatio in terminis We say true that nothing else but faith doth iustifie and yet say the faith which is dead sole is nothing worthe for it is not that which we say doth iustifie Likewise he saith in his boke de trinitate very briefly and pithily sine charitate fides quidem potest esse sed non prodesse Without charitie faith may be but without charitie it can nothing auaile This is very wel said we graūt al this he speaketh according to the scriptures you néed not haue gon so far S. Iames s. Paul could haue taught you the same But to your purpose it serueth very little yea nothing at al. Now touching your tretise of works done in faith wheras you are misgréeued with M. Gough so far that you cal it a preposterous way and a blasphemous doctrin to say that our workes are as filthie cloutes vnto which Christ promiseth a rewarde so great as euerlasting life if you would iustly consider with your self the duetie that god requireth of vs the default that is in vs the integritie the puritie that we are bound to by his commandement the imperfection the impuritie that is in vs you coulde not iustly cōdemne him god cōmaundeth vs to serue him with all our harts with all our soule with al our strēgth what is he vpon the earth that doth employ these wholy that hath not alwayes the flesh pricking against the spirit then the work that is done of such is it not as a menstruous cloth could it be acceptable before God were it not for his mercy If it please him of the same mercy to giue me lyfe euerlasting for my halfe dayes nay for my one houres worke doth it folow that my worke is worthy of it when all the workes of the world be not worth lyfe euerlasting Chrystes death excepted Then touching your other cauil of faith only How only without baptisme without repentance without feare without hope without charitie You may vnderstand of that I haue sayd before howe all these must folow and an hundreth more and yet fayth only must iustifie what so euer he be that casteth these away in that respect that he is iustified by faith he deceiueth him selfe and he is not iustified He is a dead trée he is a thorne

in Moses seate but do not as they do And thus much touching this question God giue vs eyes to sée and hartes to vnderstande that if you be out of the way as you shewe your selfe to be you may come in If I my selfe as I am perfectly persuaded I am not that he will giue me grace to conuert And so pray I for vs both 3 That onely fayth doth not iustifie MAster Gough likewise in few wordes woulde vehemently haue persuaded lyke as others heretofore him that sole fayth or onely fayth doth iustifie vs So did long agoe teache Eunomius of that fayth which he professed as S. Augustine reciteth in his 6. Tom. de Haeresibus In so doyng as others haue done before him ▪ as Moyses as Christ as Paul as all the Prophetes and Apostles in teaching the Iustification of fayth onely yf you expound him not amisse he did the part of a faythfull Minister and preacher of Gods woord But you are disposed in this matter as in others to carpe and cauill euill construing that which is wel spoken You ioyne your woordes in this sorte sole faith or only fayth There is great difference in these two kindes of speaking a sole fayth is a barren an vnfrutefull a wicked a diuelish fayth which in déede is no fayth it hath but the glistering and shew of fayth it is but a lippe fayth and where so euer it is I warrant you there is Corde non creditur no beléef in hart Fayth only is an other manner of thing it is that which the Hebrewes cal Emunah that is a faith stable and sure as it is sayd of Moyses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manus eius erant firmae stabiles vsque ad occasum solis his handes were steady and stable vntill the goyng downe of the sun So doth Paule terme it vaiehi iadan emunah the cōmon translation hath substantia it is that quod facit vt extent quae sperātur which maketh those things to exist which are hoped for This fayth can bée no more withoute fruytes than can the body bée without the soule to be a liuing body so that ther be time for wée knowe that vocation is diuerse some in the morning some at noone some at night are called and these laste because they are so soone cutte of that they could not but beleeue and not glorifie God before vs wée muste not therefore condemne them This fayth I say most florishing and decked with gorgious workes as shining both before God and man as the lilie doth only iustifie doth only apprehend the iustification of God giuen in Christ Iesus oure Sauiour doth trulie bring Christe into vs and vs into him So the faithfull man séeing himselfe purged from all his former sins and offences walketh in newnesse of lyfe in the wayes that God hath ordeyned for him that before men he may glorifie his father which is in heauen This faith Eunomius did not teache he was in his opinion a naughtie and wicked man as were many moe in the time of S. Augustine are now God make them fewer He writeth of him and others in this wise I wil laye his wordes before you that you your selfe may iudge whither you do rightly burdē vs with Eunomius or no. Apostolus predicans iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus non bene intellectus est ab eis qui sic dictum acceperunt vt putarent cùm semel in Christū credidissent etiāsi malè operarētur facinerosè flagitioseque viuerent saluos se esse per fidem posse that is The Apostle preaching that a mā is iustified by faith without workes was not well vnderstoode of them which tooke his saying in this sorte that they thought they might be saued by faith whē they had once beléeued in christ although they did wickedly although they liued most detestably and villenously And in an other place Non cogimur dicere iniustis non subditis scelestis contaminatis parricidis matricidis homicidis fornicatoribus masculorum concubitoribus plagiarijs mendacibus periuris si quid aliud sanae doctrinae aduersatur quae est secundum Euangelium gloriae beati Dei si tantum in Christum credatis sacramentum Baptismi eius accipiatis etiamsi vitam istam pessimam non mutaueritis salui eritis We are not constrayned to say to the vniust to the rebellious to the wicked to the defiled to the murderers of father mother to manslayers to fornicators to buggers to mē stealers to lyers to the periured if there be any other thing which is contrarie to the wholsome doctrine whiche is according to the glorious Gospell of the blessed God if you beléeue onely in Iesu Christe and receyue his Sacrament of Baptisme althoughe you chaunge not this wicked lyfe you shal bée saued This was Eunomius opinion and his fellowes it is not oures Our Preachers teach that faith only iustifieth yet not that a sole faith iustifieth therefore in so expounding his woordes as you do you do deceyuablie commit an Eleuche which we cal fallatia accidentis For whereas we say fayth iustifyeth only that is no other thing doth apprehend the iustice which GOD doth giue vs but oure faith you turne it and make this sense a bare faith voyde and destitute of all goodnesse doth attayne to the mercies of god Which in déed is an heresie For as the other is good allowable according to the scriptures There is no condemnation to them whiche are in Christe Iesus whiche walke not after the fleshe but after the Spirit so is this wicked and naught For if we liue after the fleshe we shall dye And thus much to shewe that we are no Eunomians Now to your Arguments To confirme his opinion out of the scriptures he brought the saying of the Apostle Arbitramur iustificari hominem per fidem sine operibus Legis We thinke or determine that a mā is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Concluding by this testimonie of S. Paule that workes do in no manner of wyse iustifye vs not onely those which go before fayth but also those which do folow faith for touching any iustification of works he maketh the like cōdition of them both His allegation was good and his argument good For it foloweth wel we are iustified by faith Therfore workes done before do not iustifie neither workes after This consequēt you wil not deny simply for all your allegaciōs you bring do proue that workes before do conferre nothing to iustification For the Apostle preaching to the Gentiles saith When he sawe them that came to the lord iustified by faith that now they which did beleue should worke and do good dedes and not because they had done well they deserued to beleue he cried out and said boldly That man may be iustified by faith without the workes of the law Your sticking is vpō workes that folow as in déede not knowing what

burden your self with an heauie yoke I could alleage vppon this same place of Mathew Theophilact and Glossa ordinaria whiche neyther of them take the place as you do but I passe them ouer because I would be short You your self may read them Your second argument is of like force Where you say thus S. Iohn to this effect sayth Quod mandata eius grauia non sunt That his cōmandements be not heauy yf they be not heauy they be far vnlike M. Goughs lump of lead impossible to be taken vp and remoued It is I say of like sorte as Nicholas de Lyra interpreting the place of Mathew doth alleadge out of Augustine where he sayth thus Mandata gra●ia non sunt quod exponens Aug. dicit s. amanti The commaundementes are not heauy which S. Augustine expounding sayth that is to the louing S. Iohn sayth so him self in effecte 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For all that is borne of God ouercometh the world For in déede the commaundements beyng tempered with the mercie and goodnesse of our heauēly father accepting then all donne when that is pardoned which is not done and as Dauid sayth c. Chy immecha haselichach For with thée is pardon that thou mayst bée feared Then to the child of God to him that hath the victorie of the world that hath Emunah a sure and a stable faith that beléeueth in Christ Iesus the son of God to him the commādemēts are not gréeuous nay they are hamnechmadim mizahab more desirous than gold vinethukim middebasch ▪ and swéeter thā honie this is the true sense of the place Your third is this S. Paule in rebuking these idle hearers of the law which say that they can heare it but not doo it and fulfill it writeth Non enim auditores legis iusti sunt apud Deum sed factores legis iustificabunt●r For not the hearers of the lawe be iust with God but the doers shall be iustified If they doe the law then it may be done then it is possible Ab esse ad posse is a good argument They do works of the law therfore they may be done First touching the scope of the Apostle you are deceiued Pardon me I speake it not of malice or to taunt I protest but for the truth of the matter The Apostles purpose is not there to rebuke idle hearers of the law say that they can heare it but not fulfil it But he goeth about to conclude al vnder sinne and shew that euery one hath néede of the glory of God and therfore maketh this occupation The Iewes can not exempt them selues from this sentēce bicause they had the law amongst them Nō enim qui audiunt legem c. For not they which heare the law are iust with god c. And they did not the lawe as it appeareth in the same place Therefore I maruaile how you conclude out of these words your so strong argument Ab esse ad posse If you wil néedes folow your owne sense muse vpon these wordes Factores legis iustificabuntur the doers of the law shall be iustified Heare what you haue in Glossa ordinaria Iustificabuntur .i. iusti deputabuntur vel iustifient a Deo vt sint factores Non qui ante erant factores post iustificabuntur vt si diceretur homines creabuntur quia ipsa creatione sit vt sint homines Sic ipsi non qui ante erant factores iustificabuntur quia etiam gentes They shal be iustified that is they shal be accompted iust or they shal be made iust of God that they may be doers not which were doers shal be iustified As if it should be sayd men shal be created bicause by the creation they are made men So likewise not they which were doers before shall be iustified bicause the gentiles also This would I repeat vnto you as a thing which you know well inoughe bicause I thinke you haue often read it for that he sayeth wel and truely and according to the scriptures although not verye fit to this place to the end that you may see how litle it serueth for you if you be not mynded to folow my first answer which I thinke and hope you will if you will looke vppon the place And here I beseech you in the mercies of Christ Iesus to consider with your selfe your owne state I thinke the best of you I think you haue not the Bible and other books about you If you had you would neuer alleadge places in such sorte so farre from the purpose of the holy ghost so little to purpose I speake it with griefe of hart the Lord knoweth I am sorie to sée you in such blindnesse right glad would I be to sée the glorie of god appéere in you to your health and saluation ● not to your destru●ction Wel the Glosa interlinealis goeth farther Non enim auditores legis .i. pro auditu legis sed factores .i. gratia iustificat eos vt adimpleant legem quia non faciunt vt iustificētur sed iustificantur vt faciant For not the hearers of the law that is for the hearing of the law But the dooers that is Grace iustifieth thē that they may fulfill the lawe bicause they do not the law that they may be iustified but are iustified that they may do it I shall not néede to stand vpon these wordes vt adimpleant legē that they may fulfill the Lawe for by that whiche I haue sayde before I trust you vnderstand howe they are to be taken Well let vs go to your fourth Argument The Euangelist Saint Luke of these doers of the Lawe bringeth a full example writing thus of Zacharie and Elizabeth Erant ambo iusti ante Deum c. They were both iuste before God walking in all the commaundementes and iustifications of the Lorde without blame If S. Luke had the Spirit of truthe when he sayd that those twoo walked in al the commaundements then M. Goughe by his deniall and impossibilitie put thereof must needs haue the Spirite of erroure and lying Saint Iohn sayeth Qui dicit se nosse Deum mandata eius non custodit mendax est Hee that sayeth he knoweth God and keepeth not his commaundements is a lyer No doubt M. Fecknam but Sainct Luke had the Spirite of truthe and yet hath not M. Goughe the Spirit of errour and lying He teacheth no contrarie doctrine why you should so conclude Well let vs examine the woordes and so shall wée sée They were both iust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before God. Not the god had nothing to lay to their charges putting Christs deliuerāce a syde not that he had nothing in their liues to find fault withal his mercie being put a parte Nō est qui faciat bonum non est vsque ad vnum there is not one that doth good in such sorte not one I truste you will not so say Well how then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉

an example or facte but authoritie I demaūd no more of you than you may iustly of mée of our rest and certeyntie I gyue you these Inuoca me in die tribulationis cal on me in the day of trouble And oure Sauiour Chryst when you will praye praye thus Oure father c. Not that no other forme of prayer may be vsed but shewing to whom the prayer must be directed And ageyne whosoeuer calleth be schem Iehouah vpon the name of the Lord he shalbée saued And howe this is to be taken if we neither lerne of Christe nor Christian an old Iewe will teache vs Rabbi Iodan god giue vs al this cōfessiō His words recited in Midrasch tillim be mizmor 4 are these Basar vadam iesch lo pitron higiay lo yeth tzarah eno nichnas lephanau pithom ella ba veyamad al pethach pitrono ve kore le abdo vehu omer peloni al happethah ve hacchadosch baruch hu eno chen higia eth tzara le Israyl lo iehe kore lo le Gabriel ve lo le Michael ella kore otho veh one otho hare hu daamar colascher ikra be schem Iehouah immalet That is flesh bloud hath a patron in the time of his necessitie he will not streightway go into his presence but commeth and standeth at the dore of his patrone and calleth his seruant he telleth his Maister that there is one at the dore But with God we must not so do At what time Israel is in affliction or necessitie he must neither call to Gabriel nor to Michael but he must call vppon God and he heareth him and this is if that is sayd whosoeuer calleth on the name of the Lord he shal be saued But as I sayde I will not be long herein bicause it were but Actum agere to do that is already done my purpose is but to run ouer your Arguments Youre firste is this To this opinion is cleane repugnant the saying of our Sauior Christ when he teacheth that more ioy shal be in heauen before the Angels of God vpon one sinner doing penance than vpon nintie and nine iust men which neede no penance First not to medle with the sense of the place whiche Christe expresseth by these wordes of ioy applying his doctrine vnto our capacitie I may wel answer you with a simple denial The cōsequent is naught Angels shal reioyce vpon the conuersiō of a sinner ergo Angels do heare and knowe whatsoeuer we aske and pray A futuro ad praesens in meris contingentibus you knowe non valet argumentum And it is not a consequentibus as you take it For those Argumentes must be in pari tempore As for Example Haec mulier pariet ergo concipiet this woman shall bring foorth therfore shée shall conceyue And it is naught to saye pariet Ergo concepi● she shal bring foorth therefore she hath conceyued vnlesse there be limitatio temporis a limitation and restrainte to the certayne time in which she conceyued and that in ijs quae sunt ex necessitate materiae But in ●erè cōtingentibus they must be always ●iusdem temporis ▪ at one selfsame time as ●ras pluet ergo ●ras nubes erunt to morowe it shall rayne therfore to morowe there shal be cloudes But to saye ●ras pluet ergo hodie nubes sunt to morow it shal rayne therfore there are clouds this day this is no reasō For agréement of time being set posito antecedente sequitur cōsequens etiam in contingētibus If one reioyce it is a consequent that he heareth or hath heard but to say he shall reioyce to morow ergo he heareth to day I can not tell how this consequent hangeth togither What if I answer you facta reuelat● Deus nō facienda that is to say God reuealeth things done not to be done What cā you then say Your place imporeth the God wil make manifest to Angels how a sinner hath repēted not that he wil shewe to them that they shall repent And so had youre Argument ben good He will make them reioyce for the cōuersion of a sinner therfore he wil shew thē the conuersion of a sinner I say vnto you your place doth importe this that facta reuelat Deus non facienda They shall reioyce for a sinner retourned not for a sinner that shall retourne I knowe that God hath reuealed vnto his seruaunts things past and things to come but when he doth it or whether he doth it alwayes I say you knowe not and therefore your collection is naughte Where you say neyther yf they knowe our penaunce shall they bee ignoraunt of our petitions I saye your collection is naught although I touch not the false kind of reasoning which is à conclusione hypothetica ad categoricam in materia cōtingēti And therfore you are mad men in praying vnto thē vnlesse you haue some more sure and certaine groūd than this and they are no mad men which make them so ignorāt for vnlesse god doth reueale it vnto them they know in a manner no more than we do and when he doth reueale it vnto them and how muche and in what cases when you can certifie me and others we wil beleue it In the meane season if we suspend our faith vntil we haue a better rest for it I pray you do not call vs mad men But now for the sense of the place Doth he not in those thrée parables set forth vnto vs the ●are that he hath of his churche in that he of his singular loue séeketh vs whē we go astray from him He laboreth to finde vs when we be lost and is ready to receyue vs when we turne vnto him and thereby also aduertise vs of our duetie to seeke the helpe and safetie of eche other not to condemne the wāderers which go astray but by his example to séeke meanes to bring them vnto Chryst that in so doing being members bothe of one body we may reioyce togither and glorif●e God we may haue that cōsolation comfort which brethren ought to haue and especially those which are the childrē of God To moue vs to this duetie he setteth before vs the doing of that part of the church which is better which is in heauen he setteth before vs I say the doing of the Angels who as they be mēbers of this body so do they reioyce when they see that cōsent and conformitie in the members which ought to be in so pretious a body If then they be ioyous and glad that sinners do repēt what ought we to do which are present with them seeing their infirmities may cōsider our own and by mercy shewed to them be more cōfirmed in the graces of God This I say is the sense of the place Now then bicause we are here instructed of the charitie and loue which is and ought to be in the churche of God and members of Christes body bicause there is a true ioy and gladnesse eche with other when