Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	faith_n	obtain_v	remission_n	5,364	5	9.8043	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86378	A dissertation with Dr. Heylyn: touching the pretended sacrifice in the Eucharist, by George Hakewill, Doctor in Divinity, and Archdeacon of Surrey. Published by Authority.	Hakewill, George, 1578-1649.	1641 (1641)	Wing H208; Thomason E157_5; ESTC R19900	30,122	57

unto the Fathers of the Primitive times which now as then is to be done onely by the Priest Then the Priest standing up shall say as followeth to whom it properly belongeth and upon whom his ordination doth conferre a power of ministring the S●crament not given to any other order in the holy Ministry Had the Book said Then shall the Priest stand up and offer Sacrifice it had been to the Doctors purpose but then shall the Priest stand up and say makes little for him unlesse he had been injoyned to say somewhat which had implyed a Sacrifice which I do not yet finde words indeed of consecration I finde and those proper to the Priest but any words of Sacrificing in that act I finde not yet had our Church conceived that to have been a Sacrifice there indeed had been the proper place to have expressed her self That the ordination appointed by our Church conferreth upon the person so ordained a power of ministring the Sacrament not given to any order in the Ministry I shall easily grant but that his ordination giveth him not any power of Sacrificing which is the point in question hath already out of the form it self established by authority been clearly shewed From the words of consecration the Doctor goes on to the prayer after the Communion and here indeed he findes a Sacrifice but such a one as all things considered he hath very little reason to triumph therein The memory or Commemoration of Christs death saith he thus celebrated is called a Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving a Sacrifice representative of that one and onely expiatory Sacrifice which Christ once offred for us all the whole Communicants beseeching God to grant that by the merits and death of his Sonne Jesus Christ and through faith in his bloud they and the whole Church may obtain remission of their sinnes and all other benefits of his Passion Neither stay they there saith he but forthwith offer and present unto the Lord themselves their soules and bodies to be a reasonable holy and lively Sacrifice unto him And howsoever as they most humbly do acknowledge they are unworthy through their manifold sinnes to offer to him any Sacrifice yet they beseech him to accept that their bounden duety and service In which last words that present service which they do to Almighty God according to their bounden duties in celebrating the perpetuall memory of Christs pretious death and the oblation of themselves and with themselves the Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving in due acknowledgement of the benefits and comforts by him received is humbly offred unto God for and as a Sacrifice and publikely avowed for such as from the tenour and coherence of the words doth appear most plainly Hitherto the Doctor as if now he had spoken home and full to the point indeed whereas if we take a review of that which hath been said we shall soon finde it to vanish into smoak That prayer then af●er the Communion beginning in this manner O Lord and heavenly Father we thy humble servants entirely desire thy fatherly goodnesse mercifully to accept this our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving I would demand of the Doctor first of what kind this Sacrifice of thanksgiving is and then by whom it is offred for mine own part I never heard that the Eucharisticall Sacrifice of Christians was other then spirituall improperly termed a Sacrifice and I presume the Doctor himself will not stick to grant as much as he doth that the people joyn with the Priest in this prayer From whence it will infallibly follow That either the people together with the Priest offer unto God a S●crifice properly so called or that the Sacrifice thus offred by them both ●s so called improperly let him take which he please of the two and then tell me what he can make of this Sacrifice Now that which hath been said of this Eucharisticall Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving is likewise to be understood of the obedientiall Sacrifice if I may so call it which follows after consisting in their offring to the Lord their selves their souls and bodies as a reasonable holy and lively Sacrifice unto him And in truth I cannot but wonder that the Doctor should insist upon this considering he requires a materiall Altar for his Sacrifice derives his Priesthood from Melchisedech appropriates it to the Apostles and their Successors makes it stand in commemoration or representation and lastly every where with scorn enough excludes the people from any right thereunto but thus we see how a weak cause is driven by all kinde of means be they never so poor to fortifie it self And yet as if now he had made a full and finall conquest he concludes this argument drawn from the authority of our Church Put all together saith he which hath been here delivered from the Book of Articles the Homilies and publike Liturgy and tell me if you ever found a more excellent concord then this between Eusebius and the Church of England in this present businesse And then goes on to parallell the words of Eusebius with those of our Liturgy which I confesse agree very well but neither the one nor the other speak home to his purpose or mention any Sacrifice properly so called to be offred in the Church of Christ as he hath been sufficiently shewed CHAP. VII Of the Testimony of some Writers of our Church alleaged by the Doctor WIll you be pleased saith he to look upon those worthies of the Church which are best able to expound and unfold her meaning We will begin saith he with Bishop Andrews and tell you what he saith as concerning Sacrifices The Eucharist saith Bishop Andrews ever was and is by us considered both as a Sacrament and as a Sacrifice A Sacrifice is proper and applyable onely to Divine worship The Sacrifice of Christs death did succeed to the Sacrifices of the Old Testament which being prefigured in those Sacrifices before his coming hath since his coming been celebrated per Sacramentum memoria by a Sacrament of memory as Saint Augustine calls it Thus also in his answer to Cardinall Bellarmine Tollite de missa transubstantiationem vestram nec diu nobiscum lis erit de Sacrificio The memory of a Sacrifice we acknowledge willingly and the King grants the name of Sacrifice to have been frequent with the Fathers for Altars next if we agree saith he about the matter of the Sacrifice there will be no difference about the Altar The holy Eucharist being considered as a Sacrifice in the representation of breaking the Bread and powring forth the Cup the same is fitly called an Altar which again is as fitly called a Table the Eucharist being considered as a Sacrament which is nothing else but a distribution and application of the Sacrifice to the severall receivers so that the matter of Altars make no difference in the face of our Church Thus farre the Doctor out of Bishop Andrews For answer whereunto if we

framing their lives and actions according to the law of nature Which Words saith the Doctor relate not onely to their morall conversation as good men but to their carriage in respect of Gods publike worship as religious men But by this glosse I doubt he corrupts the text of the Author sure I am the words he alleageth out of him do not reach home to his interpretation neither do I think it can be maintained or that it was the minde of Eusebius that the Patriarchs before Moses worshipped God according to a voluntary kinde of piety Which is by the Apostle in expresse terms condemned Col. 2. 23. and if their worship had relation to the Messias that was to come wherein all Divines I presume agree I do not see how he can affirm that they framed their religion according to the light of nature which without the help of a supernaturall illumination could not direct them to the Messias It is indeed said of Abraham that he saw the day of Christ and rejoyced no doubt but the same might as truly be verefied of all the other beleeving Patriarcks as well before as after him But that either he or they saw Christs day by the light of nature that shall I never beleeve and I think the Doctor cannot produce me so much as one good Author who ever affirmed it but on the other side with one consent they teach that as in morall actions they lived according to the light of nature so in religious they were in a speciall manner inspired and directed by God himself If that of the Apostle be true That whatsoever is not of faith is sin and again that without faith it is impossible to please God Faith being grounded upon the Commandements and promises of God it cannot be that their worship should be acceptable unto him without speciall command from him From the worship of God in generall the Doctor descends to the particular by way of Sacrifice affirming that it is likewise grounded upon the light of nature which if it be so undoubtedly it binds all men the law of nature being common to all and consequently to us Christians as well as to the Patriarcks before Moses Now that some kinde of Sacrifice is f●om all men due unto Almighty God I do not deny but that outward Sacrifice properly so called which is the point in controversie should be from all men due unto him by the light of nature that I very much doubt It is the conclusion of Aqu●nas Omnes tenentur aliquod interius Sacrificium Deo offerre devotam videlicet mentem exterius Sacrificium eorum ad quae ex praecepto tenentur sive sint v●rtutum actus sive certae d●term●natae oblationes and farther for mine own part I dare not go The Doctor instanceth in the Sacrifices of Cain and Abel which he seemeth to say were offred by the light of nature whereas of Abel we read that by faith he offered unto God a more excellent Sacrifice then Cain Now faith there cannot be without obedience nor true obedience without a precept and if perchance it be said that the excellency of the Sacrifice was from faith not the Sacrifice it self for then Cain should not have offered at all I thereunto answer that although Cain did not offer by faith or inspiration from God yet it may well be that he did it by instruction from his Father who was inspired from God And besides his Sacrifices being of the fruits of the earth might rather be called an offring as in the Text it is then a Sacrifice properly so termed according to Bellarmines definition And for Abel it is the resolution of the same Bellarmine which for mine own part I take to be sound Deus qui primus sine dubio inspiravit Abeli aliis sanctis viris usum Sacrificiorum voluit per ea Sacrificia Sacrificin̄ omniū ficiorum praestantissimum adumbrari The Doctors next instance is Noahs Sacrifice touching which the same may be said as formerly of Abels neither indeed can we with reason imagine that God should in other matters by divine inspiration so particularly instruct him and leave him onely to the light of Nature in the worship of himself or that Adam in the state of incorrupt nature was instructed by God in the duties of his service and his posterity therein left to the light of corrupt nature Besides this somethings there are by the Doctor affirmed of this Sacrifice not so justifiable I doubt as were to be wished as first that it was an Eucharisticall Sacrifice not typicall whereas all Divines that I have seen make all the Sacrifices commanded by God as well before the law as under the law to have been typicall That is some way significant of Christ to come they being all as so many visible Sermons of that all s●fficient Sacrifice through which God is onely well pleased with those which worship him And again the text making it by the Doctors own confession an Holocaust or burnt offring which Noah offred I see not how he can onely make it Eucharisticall in as much as Philo the Jew who should know what belonged to the distinction of Sacrifices in his Book purposely written of that Subject thus writes of them Sacrificia omnia ad tria redegit legislator Holocaustum pacifica sive salutare Sacrificium pro peccatis Noahs Sacrifice then being a burnt offring it could not be meerely Eucharisticall but I rather beleeve it might participate somewhat of all three kindes and as little doubt but that it was in all three respects significative of Christ to come The Doctors third instance is in Melchisedech who indeed is said to have been a Priest of the most high God and that being a Priest he offred Sacrifice I make no doubt but very much doubt whether he offred Sacrifice or were a Priest by the light of nature especially considering that Christ himself was a Priest after the order of Melchisedech Now whereas the Doctor confidently makes Sem to have been the eldest sonne of Noah he hath therein against him not onely the learned Iunius but Lyranus Tostatus Genebrard and the Hebrew Doctors And again whereas he seemes to follow the common opinion heretofore received that Melchisedech was Sem I think he cannot be ignorant that both Paraeus and Pererius have proved the contrary by so invincible arguments as there needs no further doubt to be made thereof The Doctors conclusion of this argument drawn from the light of Nature is this That there was never any nation but had some religion nor any religion if men civilized but had Altars Priests and Sacrifices as a part thereof or dependents thereupon The former part of which position I will not examine though our planters in Virginia and New-England can not as they report finde any acts of religion exercised by the natives of those Countries but for the latter part thereof I know not why he should exclude the