Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	church_n	day_n	remission_n	4,096	5	10.5817	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34082	The right of tythes asserted & proved, from divine institution, primitive practice, voluntary donations, and positive laws with a just vindication of that sacred maintenance from the cavils of Thomas Elwood, in his pretended answer to the friendly conference.	Comber, Thomas, 1645-1699.	1677 (1677)	Wing C5488; ESTC R39378	85,062	252

done which hath been done a thousand times and that by the approbation of all Christian Laws And the Quaker in saying these things are ridiculous and unreasonable doth call all the Christian World Fools and pass his Censure upon Kings and Nobles Parliaments and Judges who have allowed such Grants to be just and reasonable and either made them or confirmed and approved them divers times It seems all these were a company of ridiculous and unreasonable Men or else T. E. is such an one himself and whether be the more likely let the Reader judge But it is no great wonder he should call all Men Fools whenas this blasphemous Argument flies in the face of God himself who even by the Quakers own confession in the Levitical Law did assume a Power to enjoyn all the Owners of Canaan to pay to the Priests the Tenth part of those Profits which did arise from their Sweat Pains Charge Care and that from one generation to another God did make over to his Priests these Tenths of the Profits of many Mens Sweat and Labour c. many hundred years before they were born Now this the Quaker saith is a ridiculous and unreasonable thing O bold Blasphemer If he saith the thing be ridiculous and unreasonable in it self then this Quaker chargeth God with Folly and Injustice who doth enjoyn it Nor can he be excused by saying God hath more power than Men for in evil foolish and unjust things God hath no power at all God cannot lie He cannot do any thing ridiculous or unjust And because God once made this Grant we dare be confident the Act is lawful and wise and just and that T. E. is a blasphemous Wretch to censure it by this wicked and silly way of reasoning which condemns Almighty God as much as it doth King Ehtelwolph I will not insist now upon the Atheistical denial of Providence which is couched in this Argument also for I shall shortly have occasion to shew how the Quaker supposes his Husbandman deserves all the Profits for his Labour and as if God contributed nothing he excludes him from any share of them when they are produced But this false and impious Argument is sufficiently exposed already to make any Man recant it that hath any spark of Grace or Understanding in him § 31. In the next place he affirms pag. 326. The Consideration on which Tythes were given is taken away for Ethelwolph gave them for the Health of his Soul and the Remission of his Sins which he believed might be obtained in that Church by the help of that Ministry to whom he gave his Tythes and the Mediation of those Saints in honour of whom he granted the Charter I have already proved That T. E. falsly supposes King Ethelwolph to have held all the Opinions of the present Church of Rome and particularly That he did not expect Pardon of his Sins by the Merits of his Good Works Alcuinus gives us the sense of the English Church in those days who saith He onely can deliver us from sin who came without sin and was made a Sacrifice for sin (a) Alcuin l. 4. in Joh. 8. The Saxons believed that Pardon was merited onely by Christ's Death onely they did esteem Good Works a good evidence of their Repentance and a Motive to God to accept them to that Pardon which was merited onely by Christ's Death which Opinion is much favoured by those Scriptures Prov. xvi 6. Dan. iv 27. Mat. iii. 8. Luke xi 41. and maintained by the most Orthodox Fathers For instance Lactantius no Papist for certain as living An. 310. saith Great is the reward of Mercy to which God hath promised the Remission of all sins (b) Lactant. Inst l. 6. And for obtaining this Remission by the help of that Ministry viz. the Saxon-Ministry to which he gave his Tythes no wise Man will deny but that there was a True Church in England in those days and if in that Church and by that Ministry no Pardon could be had from God then there was no Salvation to be had in this Nation at all in that Age no nor in any Nation in Christendom which is a strange Assertion As for the Saints we have shewed T. E. is mistaken in thinking they then did believe the Saints usurped Christs Office Ethelwolph honoured the Saints and so do we now but neither he nor we worship them or expect Pardon by them But we need not plead thus since T. E. falsly makes this a Consideration for which he gave Tythes Did that good King covenant with God or his Priests that they should give him Remission or else this Gift to be of no effect Was it inserted as a Condition or Proviso He hoped indeed Remission of Sins might follow through Christs Merits Gods Mercy and the Churches Prayers but he did not Indent with God for it And indeed the main Consideration was That the Clergy might pray for the whole Kingdom without the hinderances of Want and Worldly Care as the words of the Charter shew And this Consideration is not taken away but observed to this day Again If the King did fail of his Hope and could not finally get Remission in that Church which is a malicious Supposition this will not make his Charter void For if a Father in consideration of his affection to his Son and for his Provision settle part of his Estate on him being inwardly moved thereto by the hopes he will be dutiful the Sons undutifulness may disappoint the fathers hopes but doth not vacate his Settlement unless it were expressed and provided That the Deed should be void upon the Sons disobedience Finally If we suppose Ethelwolph as much a Papist as King Stephen mentioned by T. E. pag. 332. yet his Donations to Pious Uses must stand good even though the Opinion of Merit had been the Motive to him to make them or else T. E. revokes all the Charters and Donations made in those really Popish Times to never so good and pious Uses which all Men will confess is most absurd So that let us grant the Quaker all his own asking and still his malicious Conclusions will not follow § 32. I hope by this time the Reader will see how little truth is in that Saying pa. 327. If Tythes were ever due to any by vertue of this Gift it must be to the Popish Priests for to them they were given This we have shewed to be a gross mistake before § 17. and we will onely note That King Ethelwolph's Clergy agreed with the Protestant Church of England in more Points than with the modern corrupt Church of Rome And since the Donors gave them not to a Popish Clergy but to God and his true Ministers our Kings and Parliaments that took them away from the corrupt Clergy who were fallen into Popery and setled them on the true Protestant Ministry did observe therein the Intention of the Donors and did apply Tythes to the right use for which

professing any Canonical obedience to the Pope which was first done by Ralph Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Anno 1115. and therefore they cannot justly be called a Popish Clergy But suppose again the Saxon Priests had been Papists that would not have made a Donation of Tythes invalid because Tythes are God's Right and the Grant was intended to God (g) Ad serviendum Deo soli Ingulph Deo contulit Math. West The Clergy of that Age were God's only publick Ministers and the Quaker's private Teaching was not then invented the Donors supposed them a good Ministry and as such endowed them for they esteem'd them to be God's Receivers and since there is no fault in God if there had been a fault in the Servant that could not prejudice the Master's Title Besides Almighty God hath now provided himself of Ministers that are no Papists but the most considerable Enemies to Popery in all the World so that if they had been a Popish Clergy and forfeited their own Right they could not forfeit ours and yet it is from a Protestant Clergy that the Quakers would take the Tythes Again T. E. must know that erroneous opinions in the Clergy do not make void the Rights which they have by the Laws of God or Man For the Jewish Priests in Christ's time were very erroneous in judgement and yet Christ pronounces they had a Right to Tythes even to those small Tythes not expressed in God's Law but Dedicated by the Pharisees for saith he These things ye ought have done Matth. xxiii 23. so doubtless we may say Though that Clergy were erroneous yet Ethelwolph ought to have given them God's due and the People ought to have paid it to them If they were erroneous neither Prince nor People knew it and they did not give these to maintain their Errors as T. E. maliciously insinuates but to maintain that which they believed to be a good Ministry and the true Worship of God and therefore the Donation remains good If I give alms to a poor Turk Papist or Quaker he is malicious who sayes I do it to maintain his Errors when I do it to relieve his wants (h) Misericordia solet juvare paup●rem non examinare justitiam Ambros de Nabeth However will any plead if I endow an Alms-house and suppose the Beads-men to be good Men but am mistaken and after my decease it appears the Persons which were chosen were of evil Principles or wicked Life that this makes my Donation to be wholly void We may say such evil Persons ought to be put out and better put in but be the Persons good or bad the Gift given to God stands good and is irrevocable § 18. Thirdly The Quaker objects ibid. That he did it upon evil motives For the good of our Souls and the forgiveness of our sins are the words of the Charter which shews it to be an effect of that Popish Doctrine of meriting Salvation by Good works and that he gave this as an expiation for his sins 'T is somewhat strange that T. E. should reckon both these for evil motives and it is the first time that I ever heard it called an evil motive to be moved to do a good work For the good of our Souls Again the desire of Remission of his sins was a good motive in it self onely he took an ill course to obtain it if he sought Expiation by Good works to merit pardon and salvation by good works is now a Doctrine of the grosser Romanists and I fear of some Quakers also who slighting the merit and necessity of Christ's death ascribe Salvation to the following the Light within yea T. E. himself pleads that there is no Salvation unless we have a sinless perfection and as if Christ had never died positively affirms Wheresoever there is sin there is also condemnation p. 97. Now he that looks for Salvation by his perfection doth hold that Popish Doctrine of meriting Salvation by Good works and he that proudly says he hath no sin to be remitted renders Christ's death as useless as he that believes he shall obtain remission by his Good works And therefore I doubt the Quaker will be found to be more a Papist than K. Ethelwolph For this Popish Doctrine of Merit and Expiation by Good works is not so old as that Age yea the learned Bishop Vsher proves that this Doctrine was not received here in Alselm's days for in his Directions to those who visited the Sick are these Questions and Answers A. Brother dost thou believe thou canst not be saved but by the death of Christ B. Yes A. Give him thanks for this with all thine heart B. I do A. If the Lord would judge thee say O Lord I set the death of my Lord JESUS between me and thy Judgement otherwise I cannot stand before thee (i) Vsher de Succes Eccles c. 7. §. 21. Yea Pope Adrian our Country-man calls Merits a broken Reed on which if we lean it will pierce our hand (k) Adrian in 4. Sent. And 't is evident from S. Bernard Durandus and others that the Church of Rome it self was not for Merits in this gross sense of 300 or 400 years after Ethelwolph's time And for his words in this Charter and some such like as are to be found among the most Orthodox Fathers they mean no more than that they hoped these good fruits meet for Repentance would be acceptable to God so that he perceiving their purposes of well-doing might of his great mercy bestow that pardon on them which Christ alone merited And hence the good King adds that they gave these also That the Priests might so much the more fervently pour out their Prayers to God without ceasing for them So that we may perceive they did not think this good work alone could expiate their sins or merit Salvation without God's mercy and to that end they desired the daily and importunate Prayers of the Church for them since they had learned from S. James That the Prayers of God's Ministers were a good means to obtain Remission James v. 14 15. But let us here also suppose they were led by those evil motives which T. E's malice falsly lays to their charge will he say that all the Donations of Papists who really are led by these Motives are invalid to those to whom they are made If so then all the Schools Hospitals and other charitable Gifts of Popish Donation are void which is a ridiculous Assertion The giving any thing to a pious use upon evil motives may endanger the Giver's losing his Reward in Heaven but it will not deprive the Receivers of the benefit of such a Gift on Earth and if we might not lawfully enjoy a Gift unless the Giver were moved by just and good motives to give it we could scarce enjoy any Donation of Papist or Protestant since we cannot certainly know whether they were induced to it by good or bad motives We conclude therefore That the Quaker falsly